.■'. "^':.;:a^^ 
 
 ^S'- 
 
 •Stt' 
 
 ': \.' 
 
 ffTli 
 
 ^imm- 
 
 
 ^«vis 
 
 
 
 ;^^i\H^ 
 
 f^ 
 
 r^^ t. 
 
 ^, 
 
 Ah 
 
 .^^^: 
 
 W€ 
 
 it^^ 
 
 !^ 
 
 •% 
 
 ^^/i'l'^:^^ 
 
 
 m^ 
 
 :<'■-' 
 
 Vii'i 
 
 f 
 
 ^;-^'.^'^-5r 
 
 '<,.:/:'■ 
 
 ■:A'''\''\ 
 
 '•y >/; ;,5-: 
 
 
 iS*,v 
 
 ^m- 
 
 -"•^ij*. 
 
 '^fH: 
 
 
: ■ / 
 
 Lj f iy i k l^j ^ly^.t . I " ft-. * w I ? ■ ■ " ^j» .l,. i Jlt ^a p fp ii w i L-l -jnujn .JJ. 11! m jLUi. ■ i p j Ul l l)j 
 
 SwMimiiLjt 
 
 
/. a' 
 
 
 f 
 

 
 '^•-^: /l^-«> 
 
 A ./:^ 
 
 
 
§n 
 
 THESES SABBATICjE 
 
 The Dodrine 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SABBATH: 
 
 . J^A-,' WHEREIN ^«*r<^4 
 
 # '^' (l- Morality. ) , , S 
 
 ^ ^, .,, , )ll- Change. (are clearly ^ 
 
 1 • The Sabbaths ^„i ^^^.^.^^ .aUbuffed. § 
 
 ^ {lY.^au&iJicamn.) # 
 
 ^ Which were firft handled more largely in ^ 
 
 m 
 
 as 
 
 fundry Sermon s in Cambridge in NeTr-England 
 in opening of the fourth Commandment. 
 
 In unfolding whereof many Scriptures are cleared, divers Cafes of Con- 
 
 r^ fciencerefolvcd,andthe MorallLawzs a rule of life to ^^^^^^^^^>^^ 
 
 ^ occafionally and diftindly handled. ^ 
 
 — — ff ' 
 
 ^By Thomas Shepard^ Paftor of the Church of 
 ^^ Chrift at Cambridge in New^Rngland. 
 
 ^h at evil thin j^ ii this that ye do, and prop hane the Sabbath Hay, did not yot/r fathers 
 thus J and did not our Godb/mgall this eviUnpon us, and upon thit City? yUye bring 
 more math «/?o» Ifrael by piophamrrgihe Sabbath. Nehcm. 13. 17,18. 
 Ifyc hallow the Sabbath to do no woyI;^ "lerdn^thcn [hall the}e enter into the gates of this 
 C'ityKjngsand Princes. Jer. 17. 24,1^. 
 ^ Pray that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath dap Matt6. 24.20. 
 
 -^ — 
 
 .5^ ioWow, Printed by T. R. and E. M. for "^ohn Rothwell at Sun and 
 ^ra Fountaine in Prf«/^ Church-yard. 1649. 
 
The Preface of the Autho r to 
 the Reader. 
 
 Hat a feventhpart of time hath been rellgioufly and mU 
 V erf ally ohftrved both under the Law and under theGo" 
 /pe/,uViHthofit all contr over fe; the great doubt and difji' 
 cult J Vchich now remains concerning this Time^ the Mo- 
 rality of ity whether it wof thus unlverfally obferved in 
 the Chrifiian ^hurches by un\Witten Tradition , or by 
 ^Divine (^ommijfion ; Whether from the Qhurches Cu- 
 flome or Chrifls Command? whether as a Moral Duty ^ or as a Humane 
 La'^ y for although fome ^ould make the obfervation of fucha portion of 
 time the fowre fruit of the Ebionites fuperflitiotis doElrines, yet all the An- 
 cient andbeH writers in the purefl times do give fuch honour to it, that 
 W^hoever doubts of it mufi either be utterly ignorant, or wilfully blinded 
 in the knowledge of the Hiflories and ^ollrinesofthofe times; and mufi 
 defire a (^andle to Jhew him the Sunneat noon day : Clemens only feemes 
 tocafi/ome fialneupon it by making all day e s equall^and every day a Sii,b' 
 bath ; but upon narrow fearchjbis meaning may appear, not to deny the ob^ 
 fervation of the day, but only to blame the froth and vanity offundry Chri» 
 fiians, who If they externally obferved the day, they cared not how they //- 
 ved every day after : nor is it to be vfondredat, if Grigcn turne this day 
 femettme into an n^llegory and a continual f^iritual Ref-day, who mlfe^ 
 rably transformes {many times) the plainefi Scriptures into fuch fhapeSy 
 andturnes their fubflance into fuch Jhado\\>es, and beating out the bf^fl 
 of the Kernels, feeds his guefls with fuch chaffc and husks ; ^nd although 
 many other Feflivals were obferved by thofe times , which may make the 
 Sabbath fu/peLted to he borne out of the fame wom^'> of humane cufion^e 
 \\>ith the reft, yet We fiall finde the fe.venth daye f Refl to have another 
 (frowne of glsry fet upon the head of it by the L)iy men of god in thofe 
 times y then upon thofe W^hich Juperjl'tlon fo foone hatcht and brought 
 forth ^ fo that they that read the Hifiories of thofe titles in obferving 
 two Sabbaths in fome places , Bafler , t-VhltCmdayy yra divers Bi'hnick^ 
 and heathcitifh d%yes.^ Vf^ill need no other comment oft thofe texts of V2i\x\, 
 
 (L/f 2 "therein 
 
The Preface to the Reader^ 
 
 "therein he condemnes the ohfervat'wn of Dajes *y ^hich beginmng to flic 
 abroad in the day light of the Apoftles , might well ottt-face the [uc 
 ceeding ages^ a»d multiply rvith more authority in darker times ; yet foy 
 Oi that the jeventh dayes reft {caH it what you mll^ fiill l^pt its place 
 and ancient glory y a^ in the fe quel pjall appear^ 
 
 When therefore the good will of him \\^ho dt^elt in the hurninghujh 
 of the ajjii^ed primitive (^hurches^ gave Princes and Emperoursto he 
 their nurftng fat hers; pioPtiCon{{^niinQ am<mg other Chriflian Edic^Sy in^- 
 joynes the obfervation of the Lords Day : therein ( if he W'os hound 
 by hi6 place to be a nourijhing father ) he ^'ent mt beyond his Com- 
 mijjion , in fjvadlingandcherijhing this truth and appointment ofChrifl^ 
 and not fufring it to dye and perijh thoroVo the \>i;ick^dnefe of men; 
 the power of Princes extending to fee Chrifls Lawes ohferved^ though 
 not to impofe any humane inventions and Church conftitutions of their 
 owne. Its true indeed that this princely Edili W^ mixed rviih fome 
 imperfeEiion and corruption , it following too fhort in fome things , and 
 extending too farre in others ; but there is no jufl caufe for any to 
 fiumhle much at this^ that knowes the Jick^ head and heart by the )^eal^ 
 and feeble pulfe and crafie temper of thofe clouted^ though otherwife tri' 
 fimphing times. 
 
 The Succejfffurs of this man-child ( boms out of the long and we Jry 
 throwes of the poor e travelling (^hurch) Were inlarged' generally in their 
 care and confcience to preferve the religious honour due to this day, 
 ^ntill the time of Q\\2il\GS the Great , who in the latter end of his reign 
 obferving how greatly the Sabbath Was profaned {e\^ecially by the con- 
 tlnuance and leaudneff^ of Church- men) did therefore call five Nati' 
 enall Conncels ( Which I need not here mention ) in all Which the 
 Sabbath is advanced to as ^rlB obfervation to the full , as hath been 
 of late yeers condetrmed by fome in the Sabbatarian Reformers', that it ii 
 a Wonder how any m.in Jhould cafl off all Jham^r and fo farre forget 
 himfelfe, as to make the Sabbath a device of Faico, or Peter Briiis, 
 Euftachius, or the Book^at Golgotha, and put the Vifor of Novelty 
 upon the aged face of It^ as if it were farce knowne to any of the Martyrs 
 in ^4een Maries time , but rec^Vmg firength and growth from Ma- 
 fter Perkins, was firft hatcht and received life fromj under the wings 
 ef a few late "DifcipUnarian Zelots, 
 
 z^yidit cannot be denied but that the Sabbath (lik£ wany other precioPiS 
 appointments and truths of God) didfhak^ off her duft,a»dpHt on her come- 
 ly and beautifull garments, and hath been much honoured and magnified 
 } nee the times &f the Reformation-^ the do^rlne and darknejfe of Popery 
 inks that of the Pharifej}: mt onely. obfimng- phe'DoUrine oflaith,^ 
 
The Vreface to the Readerr 
 
 hm dlfo of tie Lan> and obedience of Faith , and fo hath ohfcuredthU 
 of the Sabbath \ onely herein they did exce II their forefathers the Scribes, 
 and Pharifees , for thefe added their owne fuperflitiom refling from 
 things needfull and lawfull to their meerely externull obfervation of the 
 day ; btit they ( Hnto thetr ext email obfervation of the name of the 
 Day) added their abominable prophanai ions to it, in May- games and May 
 poles, in jports and paflimes, in dancing and revelUngs, and Jo laik it level, 
 and made it equall {in a manner) tcPt he reft of their Holy day es; that as 
 they came to Jhufjle out the fecond (Commandment almofl ont of the 
 Vecalogfte , fo in time they came to be blinded with that horromr 
 ef darkle ffe , as to tr an fate the words of the Commandment into 
 fome of their Catechifmes, Remember to keep the Holy Feftivals, 
 and therefore thofe Worthies of the Reformation who have contended 
 for all that honour which k due to this day^ are unjuflly afperfed 
 for pleading for a femfh and fnperftitiom flriBnejfe , vihen the caufe 
 they handle ii no other in truth , then to vindicate the Sabbath both 
 in the DoEhine and obfervation •f it from Tapifts prophanejfe ; and 
 therefore all the world may fee that under pretence of oppoftng in O' 
 thers a ki^d of fudai^ing upon th^s day , the adverfaries of it do 
 Tiothing elfe but maintaine a groffe point of pratHcall Popery ^ who are 
 by Law mo ft ignorant ani grolfe prophaners of this day^ and there* 
 fore n'hen many of (fhrifts fervants are branded and condemned for 
 placing fo much of Religion in the obfervatio'2 of this day , and yet 
 Bifhop White and fome others of them jhaU ackno^' ledge as much as 
 they plead for ^ if other Feflivals be taken in with it ordained by the 
 Church, (as that they are the Nurfery of Religion and all vcrtue, 
 a meanes of planting Faith and faving knowledge , of heavenly 
 and temporal bleflings; and the prophanation of them hateful to God 
 and all good mea that feare God , and to be puniihed in thofe 
 v;hich" fhall offend J- they do hereby plainly hold forth^ "^h^t market 
 they drive tooy and, what ^Wit aas them, in fetting up mans f oft s 
 by Gods Miliars y and in giving equall honour to other Feflivals ared 
 Mody dajesywhich thtfe whom they oppofe do maintaine as due to- the Sab- 
 hath alone yUpon better ground^.^^,.^ ^ 
 
 The Day ft ar from on high viftttng the fir ft Reformers j';i Germa- 
 ny enabled them to fee many> things , and fo to fcatter much ^ yea 
 mo ft of the H^opifh and horrible darhneffe tvhicB generally over-fpread' 
 the face of all Europe at that day ; but diverfe of them did not {as- 
 T»ell they ?mght not ) fee all things with tl?e like clearneffe , where- 
 of this of the Sabbath hath feen»ed to be one i their chief difficulty 
 hy hre-y they; f^r^a MoraJl comrmnd. for 4. feventh. d^y , and yet 
 
The Preface U the Reader. 
 
 ^iihali a Change of that firfi [eventh dav , and hence thought that 
 fomething in it was Morall in refpeEi of the (^ommand , and yet 
 fomething (^eremonlall hec ^ufe of the Change : and therefore they if" 
 fued their thoHghts here , that it ^m partly Morall and partly Ce^ 
 remoniall^ and hence their ohfervation of the day hath heen( anfwer- 
 able to their judgements ) more lax and loofe • ^hofe arguments to 
 •prove the day partly Ceremonial , have ( upon narraw examination ) 
 ■made it wholly Ceremonially ; tt king the ttftiall unhappineffe of fuch 
 argume-fits as are produced in defence of a lejfer erronr^ to grdw big 
 Vcith fome man-child in them^ ^hich m time grovpes up ; and fo ferve 
 only to maintaine a farre greater ; and hence by that part of the 
 controverjie they have laid foundations of much loofenejfe upon that 
 day among themfelves , and have unawares laid the corner flones of 
 fome grojfe points of Famillfme , and flrengthned hereby the hands of 
 ^rminians y Malignant s and Prelates , as to prophane the Sabbath ^ 
 fo to make: ufe of their Principles for the introdu^ion of all humane 
 inventions under the name and Shadow of the Church ; which if it hath 
 power to authorise and eflablijh fuch a day of worfhip : let any man 
 i\vtnq then name ^hat invention he can, but that it may much more 
 tafilyhe ujhered in upon the fame ground : and therefore though pofle* 
 rity hath caufe for ever to admire Gods goodnejfe for that abundance 
 of light and life powred out by thofe vejfels of glory in the firft be- 
 ginnings of Reformation yyet in this narrow of the Sabbath it is no won^ 
 der it they fiept a little befide the truth ; and it is to he charitably 
 hoped and beleevedy that had they then forefeene what ill ufe fome in 
 after ages would make of their principles , the} '^ould have beene no 
 other or ife minded then fome of their followers and friends , ejpecially in 
 the Churches of Scotland and England , who might well fee a little 
 farther ( as they ufe to (peak^) when they flood upon fuch tall mens 
 Jhoulders, 
 
 Its eafie to demonflrate by Scripture and argument as '^ell as by 
 experience, that religion is jufl as the Sabbath is, and decay es nnd 
 growes as the Sabbath is efteemed : the immediate honour and wor- 
 pip of God which is brought forth and fwadled in the three firft Cow 
 mandemcnts , is ntsrfl up and fuckle^ in the bofome of the Sabbath : 
 if Popery will have grojfe ignorance and blinde dcvot'i&n continued ^- 
 mong its miferahle captives , let it then be made ( llh^ the other Fe-- 
 ftivals ) a merry and a Jporting Sabbath ; if any State )X>ould reduce 
 the people un^er it to the Romifl) Faith and blinde obedience againe^ 
 let them ercB {for la^full paflimes and jports) a dancing Sabbath; 
 if the god of this "^orld vpould have all Trofcjfours enjoy a tot all im" 
 ..:t munity 
 
The Preface to the Reader. 
 
 munityfiom the Law of Gody and all manner of Llcemioufneffe alloys 
 ed them r^UhoHt cheeky of Confcience , let him then make an e* 
 very-day ^abhath : if there hath beene more of the porter of godli" 
 rtejfe appearing in that fmall inclofure of the *BritiJh Nation then in 
 thofe vafi continents elfswhere , ^here Reformation and more exaEi 
 Church-'DifcipHne have taken place , it cannot well be imputed to a" 
 ny outward meanes more , then their excelling care and confcience of 
 honouring the Sabbath : and although Mafier Rogers in hid preface 
 to the 39. ArticUs injurioujlj and Wretchedly mdk^s the firi^i obfer^ 
 vation of the Sabbath the lafi refuge of lies by which ftratagem the 
 godly Minifters in former times being driven out of all their other 
 firong holds i did hope in time to drive out the Prelacy and bring in 
 againe their Difiipline ; yet thus much may be gathered from the 
 mouth of fuch an accufer that thevporfhtp and government of the King^ 
 dome and Church of Chrifl jefus is accordingly fet forward Oi the 
 Sabbath Is honoured^ Prelacy^ Popery. Troph'aneffe mufi downe and Jhali 
 downe in time , if the Sabbath be exaSlly kept^. 
 
 But why the Lord Chrijl Jhould keep his ferv ants in England and 
 Scotland to cleare up and vindicate this point of the Sabbath , and 
 to welcome it n ith more Love then fome preciom ones in forraigne 
 Churches , no m(^ can imagine any other caufe then Gods owne Free 
 Cjr ace and tender Love ^whofe Wind blowes wh^re and When it Will; Deus- 
 nobis hsBC otia fccic, and the times are coming wherein Gods rvorke 
 will better declare the reafon of this and fome other difcoveries by the 
 Britijh Nationy which mode fly and humility would forbid all foher mindi 
 t4> maks mention of now. 
 
 That a feventh dayej reft hath ( therefore ) beene of univerfall 
 obfervation is without controver/te; the Morality of it (as hath been 
 J aid) is now the controverjie; in the Primitive times When the ^e* 
 fiion was propounded Scrvafti Domtntcum ? haft thou kept the Lords 
 Day ? their anfwer was generally this , Cbriftianfls fum , intcrmitce- 
 re non pofliun ; i, 1 am a Chriftian, I cannot negleEl it : the obfcr* 
 vation of this day was the badge of their Chrijlianity, This was their 
 praSiffe; but what their judgment Was about the Morality of it is not 
 fafeto enquire from the traHates of fome of cur late Writers in this 
 controverjie 5 for it is no Wonder if they that thruft the SMath out 
 o/Paradife, and baniflt it out of the Worlk untill Moks time, and then 
 make it a meere ceremony all his time till Chrifts Afcentiony iffince 
 that time they > bring it a peg lower, and make it to be a humane fonftitU' 
 tion of the Church J rather then any Divine Jnftitution of Chrift Jefus; and 
 
 herein 
 
The Preface to the Reader. 
 
 herein , thofe that oppfe the Morality of it hj dint of argument , a fid 
 out of candor and confcience propofe their grounds on "^hich they re* 
 maine unfatufed^ I do from my heart both highly and heartily honour <f 
 and ejpecial/y the labours of Af after Primrofe and Mafler Ironfide, 
 many of whofe ay^rguments and Anfwers to what is ufually faid in 
 defence of the A^orality of the ^ay^ Vcho ever ponders them.Jhall find 
 them heavy ; the foundations and Jtnewes of rvhofe difcourfes I have 
 therefore had a fpeciall eye to in the enfuing Thefes , \^uh a mofl -free 
 fubmiffion of what i4 here returned in anfvoer thereto^ to the cenfure of 
 hetter minds and riper thoughts , being verily perfwaded that W'hoever 
 finds no Knots or Difficulties to humble hii Jpirit herein^ either knows 
 not himfelfe , or not the fontrover/ie : but as for thofe Whofe chiefe 
 arguments are reproaches and revilings of embittered and corrupt hearts 
 rather then folid reafens of modefi minds ; / Wholly decline the purfuit 
 of fuch creatures Whofe Weapons is their fwell , and not any flrength^ 
 and do leave them to his tribunal who judgeth righteoufiy , for blearing thff 
 eyes of the world y and endeavouring to exafperate Princes , and make 
 wife men beleeve that this Do6irine of the Sabbath is but a late No- 
 velty , a VoElrine tending to a high degree of Schifme , a phanatick^ 
 Judaiz.in(r , //% his at Tcwksbury Sabbata fandla colo. i,e, a feece of 
 DijcipUnary Policy to advance Presbytery , a fuperfiitious feething o* 
 ver of the hot or Whining Jimplicity of an over-rigid, crabbed, pre^ 
 cifcy crack:braind Puritanicall party : the righteous god hath his lit- 
 tle dayes of judgement in this life to cleare up and vindicate the righ. 
 teous cauff- of his innocent fervants againfi all gainfayers , and Who 
 fees not ( but thofe that will be blinde ) that the Lsrd hath begun to 
 do fometh'mg this Way by thefe late broyles ? the contr over fie Cjod hath 
 v^ith a Land , is many times in defence of the controverjtes oj hii 
 faithfull fVitneffes ; the fword maintaines argument , and makes way 
 for that which the Word could not ; thofe plants Which ( not many 
 jeares fince ) mofl men would not beleeve not to be ofGo^s planting) 
 hath the Lord puld up : the three innocent Fire-brands fo fafl tyed 
 to fome Foxes tayles^ are now prety VPell quenchty and the tayles al^ 
 mofl cut off ; th^s caufe of the Sabbath alfo the Lord Jefus is now 
 handling ; God hath caft downe the Crownes of Princes y flained the 
 Robes of Nobles with dirt and blood; broken the Crox^ierSy and tome 
 the Miters in peeces for the controverjie of his Sabbath, Jcr. 17, 27, 
 he hath already made way for his DifcipUne alfo {which they feared 
 the precife Sabbath Would introduce againe ) by fuch a Way 06 hath 
 made all hearts co ake, )///? according to the words never to be for- 
 
 gotten^ 
 
The Preface to the Reader. 
 
 gotten of Mr. Udal in hid preface to the Demonftration of Difclpline. 
 Ihe Councel of Matifcon imputed the irruption of the Goths into the 
 Empire^ to the prophanation of the Sabbath* Gcrmzny may noVp fee^ 
 (orelfe one day they fhall fee) that one great caufe of their troubles id^ 
 that the Sabbath wanted its Reft, in the dayes of their quietneffe. England 
 u'oi at reft, till they troubled Gods Sabbath. The Lord Jefm muft r eigne ; 
 the Government of his Houfe^ the Larves of his Kingdome^the Solemn dayes 
 ofhisworjhip muft be eftablijhed; the , caufe of hu fujferingand affilEied 
 fervants (not of our late religious fcorners at Ordinances^ Latves and Sab" 
 baths) \^'ho are noV^ at reft from their labours , but informer times wepty 
 and prayed and petitioned, andpreacht and writ , and fujfered, and dyed for 
 thefe things, and are now crying under the altar , muft and [hall certainly 
 he cleared before men and Angels : Heaven and earth fhall pajfe away.y 
 lefore one tittle of the Law (much lejfe a whole Sabbath) jhall perijh, 
 
 *BHt while I am thm mufingy me thinks no meafure of tears are fujfcient 
 to lament the prefent ftate of times , that when ths Lord Jeft^ woi come 
 forth to vindicate the caufe and controverfie of S ion, there fhould rife up 
 other Inftrumentsoffpiritual wickednejfes in high places , to blot out the 
 name and f wee t remembrance of this Day from off the face of the earthy 
 The enemies of the Sabbath are novp not fo much negligent time-ferverSy 
 and ajpiring brambles whom preferment principally byaffed to k»ock^ at 
 the Sabbath', but thofewho have eaten bread mth Chrift, (a generation of 
 pr of efpng people) do lift up their heele againft hii Sabbath : fo that n'hat 
 conld not formerly be done againft it by dngels of darkneffe^the old Serpent 
 takes another c our fe to effeth it by feemmg Angels of light ; n ho by a ne^ 
 device are ra'tfed up to build the fepulchres of thofe who perfecuted the Pro^ 
 phets informer times ^ and tojuftifie all the 'Bookj ofjports, and the reading 
 of them , yea all the former and prefent prophanations , yea feoffs and 
 fcorns agninfl the Sabbath day. 
 
 For as informer times thy have Ceremoniali^ed it out of the Deca- 
 logue, yet by humane conftitutton have retained it in the Church ; fo thefe 
 of later times have Spiritualized it out of the Decalogue, yea out of all the 
 ^Churches in the world. For by making the Chriftian Sabbath to be only a 
 ^/pirituall Sabbath in the bofome ofgod,out of Heb. 4 they hereby aboliflj 
 ^afeventh dayes Sabbath^and make every day equally a Sabbath to a Chri- 
 ftian man,'} This I hope ^ill be the laft/but it is the moft fpeciom & fair eft 
 colour and banner that ever was ereBed to fight under againft the Chri- 
 ftia^i Sabbath I and is mo ft fit to deceive not only fomefndden men ofloofe 
 <fr r^anton witSybut ejpecially men ofjpirituafbut too /hallow minds. In times 
 of Light {as thefe are reputed to be) Satan comes not abroad ufually to 
 
 B deceive 
 
The Prepce ia the Reader^ 
 
 deceive "^ithflefhly and groffe forgeries, and hid cloven foot , (for every 
 one aln^ofl ^onldthen dijcern his baitings ) hu-t with more myftical^ yet 
 ftrong delujions , and inviftble chaines of darknejfe, whereby he hinds his 
 captives the f after to the jndgment of the great day, <ij/€nd therefore the 
 ViPatchword given in the bright and Jhining times of the tsy^poftlej was^ to 
 Try the Spirits; ^;^(^,Bclieve not every Spirit ; And take heed of Spirits^ 
 who indeed ^^ere only f.ejhly and corrupt men, yet called Spirits, becaufs 
 the J pretended to have much of the Spirit, and their d§Brines feemed only 
 to advance the Spirit ; thefittefl andfaireft cobwebs to deceive and intangle 
 the rvorld in thofe difcerning times', that pofftbly could be [pftn out ofthefoy* 
 jonfull bowels of corrupt and ambitiotu w$t. 
 
 The times are now come , "therein by the refined myflical divinity of 
 the old Monks, not only the Sabbath^ but alfo all the Ordinances of Chrifi 
 in the Ne'^-Tefiament are allegorized and fpiritualized out of the world: 
 And therefore 'tt4 no marvel when they aholifh the ontw or d Sabbath be* 
 canfe of a fpirituall and inward Sabbath in (^hrifl , if {through Gods right* 
 ecm judgment blinding their hearts') they be alfo left to rejefi the outward 
 Word, becaufe of an Inward word to teach them\ and outward Baptifme 
 and Lords Supper^ becauje of an inward Baftifme by the Holy Ghojt 
 and fpirituall Bread from Heaven the Lorh. Chrift fefus; and all out'^ 
 ward Ordinances i Miniftries y Churches y becaufe of an inward King^ 
 dome and Temple : and the ^Argument mil hold ftrongly ^ that if be^ 
 caufe they have an Inward Sabbath of Reft in the hofome of Chrift 
 ( "^hich I deny not ) that they may therefore caft a^ay all externall 
 Sab bath Sy they may then very ^ell rejeSi all outrfard'B apt ifme^ Lords 
 Supper , all Churches , all Ordinances , becaufe herein there ii alfo the 
 Inward "Baptifme , jpirituall feeding upon Chrift and inward King* 
 dome and Temple of God, *But thus they wickedly feparate and fever 
 what God hath joyned and may Well ft and together ^ through the mad* 
 nejfe of Which hell'ijh praBife I have long obferved afmoft all the late 
 and mo ft pernicious err ours of thefe times arife ; and thofe men who 
 have formerly Wept for Gods precious Sabbaths and Ordinances , and 
 have prayed fvr them, and pleaded for them, and have offered their lives 
 in facrifice for them, and fought for them, yea^ that have felt perhaps the 
 -comfort^fweetneffe, and blejjing of gods fabbaths , yea, the redeeming and 
 faving power of Cjods ordinances to their own foules ; yet throu^ pre* 
 tences of more fpiritual enjoyments above ^ and beyond ^ and without all 
 thefe, they can pan with thefe their old friends Without Weeping, and' 
 reyeSi them as polluted rags , and fiefbly formes , and dark^vailes and 
 €ur tains which muft bedraWnafide, that fo they maj not hinder the true 
 Might fi.omflininginthemo TJm 
 
Tke Preface to the Reader. 
 
 This therefore ii the reafon nhy the love of many at thu day u grtmn 
 told toward the externall Sahl^ath; becanfe the internall andjpirituall 
 SMath is noTV all in all : And therefore many men vpail^ either Tvith 
 holdconfciences^ and mil obferve no Sabbath; or el/e with loofe con- 
 fciences, thinking it laWfull to obferve it (if men WHll injoyn it) but not 
 thinking that they are tyedand bound thereunto fom any precept cfGod^ 
 That place of Hebrews 4. which they fo much ftick^ to, wants not light 
 to demonfirate that the^ Sabbatifme there may Well agree not only with 
 the inter nall,bftt the outward Chrifiian fab bath : ^titjome of the enfuing 
 Thefes will ferve to clear tip thefe thingi. This only I fear ; that becaufe 
 cfthefe indignities done thns to Godsfahbaths even by the under-vp or kings 
 offome of Gods own people , that the time haftens Wherein if no man 
 pjofild (peak i y^t the right hand of the fore dljple afire of a prove k^d god 
 by plagues andconfufion upon the glory of all fie Jh, will plead for his own 
 Name , and for that injpeciall which is engraven upon the forehead of hii 
 holy Sabbatls, Jerufalem remembred with regret of heart y in the 
 day es of her affliciion and mifery, all her pie af ant things y and ef^eciallj 
 this of the Sabbath, Lam. 1.7. If the duyes of our refl and quietne^e 
 cannot make tis to relifo the good things of his temple in the fruition ef 
 our Sabbaths ; then doubt not of it , but that the dayes of our affliciion 
 JhMl make a remnant to remember that they were pleafant things. Of 
 aU the mercies of God to ffraely this is reckoned to be one of the greatefl^ 
 that he gave hts Lanes to Ifrael^ Pfal. 147. 19, 20.' Andofall Lawes, 
 this of the Sabbath ; (Forfo the remnant of the Captivity acknowledged 
 «/■, Nehem p. 14. who perhaps had far lor&er thoughts of it before their 
 bondage,^ iAnd if the very making of it k^^&'i^'n be fuch a fweet mercy% 
 what then i$ the reft and peace of it , the blefftng and comfort of it ? 
 for which / doubt not but many thoujands are admiring God in heaven 
 at this day. And jhall a [hady imagination of an Every-duy -fab bath , 
 mak^ pu fell an^ayfor nothing fuch a heavenly and precious feafon ^^ mah^ 
 it common ? The Lord jefus wifht his Difciples to pray that their flight 
 fiom ferufalem might not be in winter, nor on thefabbath-day, Mat. 24.2c* 
 accof-mting it a great m:fery,that his people Jhould lofe the publike benefit 
 {through the dlfturb nee of any) of one Sabhath-day ; {for be it JeWiJh or 
 (fhriftianfabbathyl now dijpute not; fure I am it was a Sabbath-day .which 
 itfeemi was to continue after Chrifls afcenfion to the Father , and there' 
 fore not wholly ceremonial ) /ind jhai We account it no afiiEiion or miferj 
 to fight or flie, to ride or go, to rvork^or play , to heare the Word in pub- 
 like, or flay at home upon theSabbatlj'day ^ Is it no mercy in thefe days to 
 i^ joy many Sab baths y which was fo fore ami fery in (fhrifts account ^ and 
 
 b 2 m 
 
The Preface ie the Reader. 
 
 in the Afoftlcs days to lofe bnt one ? if mans heart he lofi in the necejfa^ 
 ry cumbers oftheweeky (upon the Sabbath) the Lord is Voont to 7'ecall 
 it d(rain to him ; if any fear e that the time of grace is pafi, the continuance 
 of the Sabbaths, {the fpeciallfeafons of grace) confutes him i if a mans 
 foul be wearied with dat/y griefs and outward troubles^ the bofome offefus 
 Chrift (which is infpeciall mfe opened every Lords day) may refrejh him ; 
 andflMliwe have and prof effe fo little love tojuch a time, (more precious 
 then gold to humbUd hearts) as to cafi away fuch a rich portion of precious 
 time^ and make it common under a pretence of making every day a 
 Sabbath y \\>hlch is either impojjible to do , or fnfull : the lowdefi voice 
 ( one of them of the love of Chrifi, which noW founds in the world con* 
 tinually in the ears of his People, is this. Come into my bofome ye wea- 
 ry finners and enjoy yGmtt{!tyand the next voice to that is this of the 
 Sabbathto call us off from alloccafons, and then to fay to us, Comc 
 to me my People, and reft in my Bofome of fweeteft mercy all this jday,- 
 y/hich call would not be a mercy ^ if it were every day ; for then our on>n 
 occdjtonsmufl be neglelied , r/hich theWife and fatherly providence of God 
 forbids ; and fpirituall Vi^ork only- minded and intended , which God did 
 njever command : Norjhoutdany marvel that the voice of the Law fiould 
 containfuch a voice of Love , and th&refore Jhould mt thinks that this con- 
 troverjie about the- Law ( or for this one Law of the Sabbath) is unfit 
 And unfutableto thefe Evangelical and Gofpe I times : for although the 
 Lawii dreadfullandfullofterrour as conjidered without Chrift., and is 
 to man fallen a^voice of words and avoice of terror and fear e, which gen-^ 
 ders unto bondage y yet as it is revealed V^ith reference to thrift , and a 
 people in Chrift , fo every Commandement doth fpirarc amorem (as he' 
 fpodl^s) and breathes out Chrift s love , for which the Saints cannot^ but 
 blep the Lord With ever lafling Wonderment that ever he made them ta 
 k^o'^X' jhefe heart-^fecrets of his good will and love ^.efpecially then when- 
 he writes them in their hearts, and thereby gives unto them the comforts 
 thereof Afid verily if it be fuch afWeet voyce of love to call us in to this 
 Ref}.ofthe day ^.certainly if ever the EngYl^i Nation be deprived of thefe , 
 feafons ( which God in mercy forbid } it \vilibeablack^appearanceofgod 
 • agai?ft them in the dayes of their dlftreffe, when he fyillfeim to fhut them- 
 ottt of his Reft in his bo fume by depriving them of the Reft of. this 1>ay. 
 What will ye do in the folemn day, in the day of the feaft of the Lord ? 
 For lo they are gonebccaufe ofdcftnicflion i' Egypt fhall gather them, 
 Memphis iLall bury them , their filvcr (hall be de^red , nettles fiiall 
 poifeiTe them, thorns fhall be in their Tabernacles; the dayes of. 
 vi&ation are come, the dayes of recompence are come^ Ifrael fliall 
 
 knowv 
 
the Preface io the Redder. ^ \ 
 
 know it; the prophetis a fool, thefpintual man is mad, for the muff 
 titudeof thine iniquity , and the great hatred. HGfip.<^y6,'j, But let 
 men yet make much of Cjods Sabhaths , and begin here; and if it ' 
 be too tediep^ to draW^ neere to Cjod every ddf^Jet them but make 
 ' confcience of trying and tafiimg how good the Lord is but thii one 
 day i» a.jveek^f and the Lor^ \^ill yet referve mercy for hid people ^ 
 Jer. 17. 24. 25, 26, for keep thii , keep all; lofe thii ^ lofe all: which 
 ieaft I JhoHld feeme to plead for out of a frothy and groftndlejfe af- 
 feiiion to the Day , and leafl any in thefe times fhould be "^orfe then 
 the Crane and the Sicvallow who know their times of returne ^ I have 
 therefore endeavoured to cleare up thofe foar^ great difficulties about 
 this Day in the Thefcs here following, i, Concerning, the Morality. 
 2. The Change. 5. The Beginning. 4. The Sandification of the 
 Sabbath. Being fully perfwaded that whofoever (hall break one of 
 the Icaft Commandments, and teach inen fo , (Lall be called Ieaft 
 in the Kingdome of God-. / do therefore defire the Reader to take a* 
 long with him thefe two things, 
 
 I. Sufp ending hii judgment concerning the fruth and validity ofa^ 
 ny part or of any particular Jhc(]SyUntill he hath read over the \ipholei 
 for they have a dependauce one upon another for mutuall clearing of 
 one another ; and leafl 1 fhould bis co^lum- apponere, and fay the fame 
 thing twice J I have therefore furpofely left out that in one part^ and 
 one Thefis ^hich is to be cleared in another^ either for proof of it ^ or 
 rofolution of ObjeBions ^gainft it ; and although this dependance may 
 not fo eaftly appeare (becaufe I have not fo exprejfelyfet down the me^ 
 thod) yet the wife-hearted I hope ^ill eaftly finde it out , or elfe plck^ 
 out and accept What they fee to be of God , in- fuch a confufed heap; 
 for it ^\'a^ enough to my ends if I might lay in any broken pieces of 
 timber to forward this buildings Which thofe that are able to wade 
 deeper into this controverjie ^ may p leaf e to make ufe of {if there be 
 any thing in them ^ or in any of them) in their owne better and more 
 orderly frame ; for it hath- beene, and flill is my earneft defire to heu" 
 ven that God Would raife up fome or other of his precious fervantt to 
 cleare vp thefe controverfies more fully then yet they h^ve heene, that 
 the zjeale for Gods Sabbaths may not be fire rvithout light ^ Which per- 
 hinps hath hitherto beene too little through the wickednejfe of former 
 times ^ encouraging the books one way , and fupprejfing thofe of mofl weight 
 and worth, for the other. 
 
 1>, To confider that I do mofl vpillingly give way to the puhlifijing 
 ^f thefe things y. Which 1 could in many rejpeBs have much more rea- 
 dily 
 
Tk Preface to the Reader. 
 
 dily committed to thg fire then to the light ; when I confider the great 
 abilities of others ; the need fuch as I am have to fit down and learn*^ 
 the hazards and k^^ockj men get onely £>y coming but into the field in 
 Polemic all matters , and the unufefnlm^e of any thing herein for thofe 
 in remote f laces ^here k»on>ledge abounds , and \Here to cafi any thing 
 of this nMttre , is to caft Water into the Sea ; Iconfejfe I am ajhamed 
 therefore to be feene in this garment \ and therefore that I have thtu 
 far re yeeldcd , hath beene rather to fleafe others then my felfe , "^ho 
 have many "^ayes compelled me hereunto ; the things for fub fiance con-^ 
 tamed htrein Were firfi preached in my ordinary courfe upon the Sab- 
 hath dayes in opening the Commandments; the de fires of feme Stu- 
 dents in. the Colledge , and the need I faw of refolving fame doubts 
 arifing ahout theje things in the hearts offome ordinary hearers among 
 the people , Qccafioned a more large dijcuffing of the controvcrfie ; to 
 Which I nas the more inclined , becaufe one among tu ( Who Wanted 
 not ahllities ) Was taken away from us^ Who had promifed the clear^ 
 tng up of all thefe matters ; when therefore thefe things vpere more 
 plainly and fully opened and apply ed to the consciences of fome more po- 
 pular capacities as well as others^ I Was then put upon it to reduce the 
 docirinall part of thefe Sermons upon the fourth Commandment , in^ 
 to certaine Thefes for the ufe of fome Students defirous thereof ; which 
 being fcattered and coming to the view of fome of the Elders in the 
 Country , 1 Was by fome of them de fired to take off fome obfcurity 
 ^^ifii^g from the brevity and Uttleneffe of them by greater enlarge" 
 ments and a few more explications of them which promifing to do, and 
 then comming to the hearing of many ; / was then defired by all the 
 Elders in the (fountry then met together to commit them to publike 
 view ; which hitherto my heart hath oppofed , and therefore fijouldfiill 
 have fmothered them^ but that fome have fo farre compelled me y as 
 that \ feared I fhould refifh and fight againft God^ in not Uftnlng to 
 them; in which many things are left out ^ which perhaps might be 
 more ufefull to a plaine people , which then in the application of mat' 
 ters of DoElrine were pub likely di liver ed ; and fome few things are ad- 
 ded , cfpecially in that particular wherein the dlreSlive power of the 
 Moral Law is cleared againfl the loofe wits of thefe times. We are 
 fir angers herd {for the mofl part ) to the books and writings Which 
 are now in Europe , but its much feared that the increafe and growth 
 of the many Tares and Err ours in England, hath beene by reafon of 
 the fiee nine Jfe .of fome of the hone ft husbandmen \ and that thofe Who 
 are beji able to plucky them up , have not feafonably ftood in the gapy 
 
 and 
 
The freface to the Reader r 
 
 and k^pt them out by a, zealous conviWmg and puhllhe hearing wit" 
 nejfe againfi them by word and writing , and that therefore Jnch as 
 have with too much tenderneffe and compljance tolerated Err our s^ Er- 
 rour \^ill one day grow up to that head that it will not tolerate or fuf^ 
 fer them to Jpeak^ truth i We have a Proverb here, Thzt the Devi I lis 
 not fo foon rifen, but Chrift is up before him; and if any of his precious 
 fervants havejlept and lien longer a bedjhen their Majler hath done,, and 
 have not jpoken or printed foone enough for *^efu$ Chrifl in other mat"- 
 ten , "^et oh that in thii matter of the Sabbath God "^ould betimes a- 
 wak£n ; and that tbefe y^eakneffes might fiir up their firength : for I 
 mach fear And fore fee that if it be not done , there is an houre and a 
 nick^ of temptation in fuch a juncture of times approaching, wherein the 
 enemy will come in like a flood y and rife up from all quarters againfi the 
 DoElrine of the Sabbath^ and then farewell all the good dayes of the 
 Sonne of man , if this be lojly which then men Jhall dejtre to fee and Jhall 
 not fee them* I have therefore been the more willing to let my own 
 fhame and Wea^nejfe appear to the ^orld {if fo it be found) if this might 
 be any means of doing the leafl good for keeping up the price of Gods 
 Sabbaths in the hearts of any ; 1 have thereforeljpent the more time about 
 the Morality of the Sabbath ^becaufe the clearing up of thisy gives light 
 t4) all the refi. 
 
 Tho. Shepard. 
 
 Im^nmatur^ 
 Jofeph Caryl- 
 
-v'^ 
 
The generall Contents of thtthefes con- 
 cerning the Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 O D IS the fupciiour difpofer of mans time. Tbef, 4 
 
 2. Manwhoisniade next to God, and to rtturn to his leftac 
 the end of the larger circle of his life, is to return to him at the 
 end of the lefler circle of every week. Thef-r 
 
 3 . What a Moral Law is not. Thef.10,1 1 
 
 4. How a Divine Law may be faid to be MoraL Thefi^ 
 J. What a Moral Law is ftriaiy taken. 16 
 
 IT.. AMoralLawconfideredinaftriftfence is not good meerly becaufe comraand- 
 cd> but is therefore commanded becaufe it is good. 17 
 
 7. What is that goodnelfe in a Moral Law for which it is commanded. 21 
 
 8. By what Rules may that goodnefle be known, which are foure S4>iy 
 ^. Divers confcftaries flowing from the defcription of a Moral Law, 
 
 1. That Divine determination of fomething in a Law doth not alvvay take away 
 the morality of it, i6 
 
 2. That thofe are not Moral Lawes only, which are known to all men by the 
 light of corrupt nature Z9 
 
 5, That the whole Decalogue in all the parts ©fit is the Moral Law of God : 
 Thef 50. where Objcdions arc anfwered to 38 
 
 10. Three forts of Lawes which were among the Jewes, Moral, Ceremonial, Judi- 
 cial. 38 
 
 11 , The true ftate of the Queftion whether the Sabbath be a Moral or Ceremonial 
 Law. 45 
 
 1 ». The agreement on all hands how far the Law of the Sabbath is Moral. 44 
 
 13. Something general is agreed on, and whether it lies under thh general, vi\. a 
 feventh day. 4^ 
 
 14. Thechiefmeansof refolvingthisconirovcrfiein opening the meaning of the 
 fourth Commandment. 47 
 
 I s . The things which are Moral in the fourth Commandment, are either primarily 
 orfecundarilyAforaL 4*? 
 
 i6i Thofethings which are primarily and generally i^ioral in the fourth Com- 
 ri. A lime of worlhip. 
 mandmenr, are threes s. A day% 
 
 C3. A feventh day determined. 
 
 17. Nottheworftiipitfeife but only the Sqlempe tinie of it is required in the 
 fourth Commandment. 53 
 
 18. How holy d u tics arc for time. . ': i $ ^ 
 i^, Infticuted worlhip is not direftly required in the fourth, but in the fecond 
 
 c Com* 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Commandment, wherein the meaning of the fccond Commandment is occa/?o» 
 
 nally cleared againft^rtf/Zx-w*, ^ Thef,^-^ 
 
 lo. If the morall worlhipitfcif be not required herein, much leflc isihe whole Ce- 
 remonial worfhip. The/,6^ 
 2T. Neither the publike worfliip only, nor Jewifli holy daycsrC'tjuircdin this fourth 
 
 Commandment. 64 
 
 22. Not a part of a day, but a whole day is moral by the fourth Commandment. c% 
 Z^v Gods wifdomc did rather choofc a whole day together for fpecial worfnip then 
 
 borrow a part of every day 66 
 
 24 The finne of Familijts and others who allow God no fpecial day,^ but make all 
 
 dayes equal 68 
 
 2U How any day is faid to be holy, and that though all [;laccs are alike holy, yet 
 
 all dayes arc not therefore alike holy, 69,70 
 
 16. Anlwer to fuch Scriptures as fcem to make all dayes alike holy under the Nevf 
 
 Teftament. 7ij73./<»7^ 
 
 17* rhcchief reafon whyfome abolifli the day of the Sabbath in the fourth Com- 
 
 mandmcnt , is becaufe they abandon the whole Decalogue it felf as any Rule of 
 
 life unto his people, 79 
 
 i8. An inward Sabbath may well confift with a Sabbath day. So 
 
 i^ . The great controvcilie whether the Law be a rule of life to a.belcevcr, i^^cuKtd 
 
 in fundry 7 fcf/ej-. 81 
 
 ?©• The Spirit is not the rule of life. 8tf 
 
 31 Not thewillofGods Decrecjbutthewillof hiscommandisthc ruleoflife 91 
 3'i. The fundamental Errour o£ Antinomians, 93 
 
 33. The rule of the Lawis keptinChriftas^mat^rofoUr Juftification, not Sanfti- 
 
 fication. 94. 
 
 34-Ho^Chriftisour Sanftificationaswellas our Juftificatiom ^5; 
 
 3 5. Duties of Chfiftian thankfulnelie to God were noroerformcd by Chiift Ibr be 
 
 leevers under that notion ot thankfulnefle, but by way of merit ^7 
 
 3^.Whethcra beleeveris toadin vertueofaCoramand. ^8 
 
 37' The fin of thofe who affirme that Chriftian obedience is not to be put forth by 
 
 vercue of a Command. 100 
 
 58. To aft by vertue of a Commandment, and by vertuc of Gods Spirit, are fubor- 
 
 dinatconc toanoiher^ lOi 
 
 39* Whether the Law is oUr rule as given by Afs/^i oil mount SinaiyOi only as it is 
 
 . given by Chrift on mount Sitf;?. lox 
 
 40, How Works and Law-duties arc foractimc commended and fbmetime condemn- 
 ed toj,io5 
 
 41 . The new creature how it is under the Law, i c 7 
 4z. Hov/ the children of God under the Old Tef^amenr were under the Law as a 
 
 Schoolmafter,and not thofe of the New, 108 
 
 4^. How the Gofpcl requires doing, and how not, and about conditional promifee in 
 
 theGofpeli. lis 
 
 44. Various motives to obedJencefrom the Law and Gofpcl,from God as a Creator, 
 and from Chrift as a Redeemer, do not vary the Rule. all 
 
 45. Unbeliefis not the only fin. irz 
 4/?^ Three evils arifing from ih«ir Do^rinc who deny thcDireftivcufe of the moral 
 
 Law, fi^, 
 
 47. The /Inoffuchasdcny thehumblingworkoftbci^w under Gofpel miniilra- 
 
 tions* u^- 
 
 48. T/ieiir 
 
The Contents. 
 
 48. Their Errour who will not have z Chriftian pray for pardon of fin, or mournc 
 for fin. Thef.lis 
 
 49 Whether Santtification be a doubtful evidence, and may not be a firft evidence, 
 and whether the Gofpel and all the promifes of it belong to a (inner av a finnerj 
 and whether fight of corruption be (by the Gofpelj the fettled evidence of falva- 
 tion as fome plead for, 1 17 
 
 f.o» Whether the firft evidence be without the being, or only the feeing of grace. 1 1 8 
 51. The true grounds of evidencing Gods love in thrift, clearedi lip 
 
 52» Not only a day, nor oiily a Sabbath day, but a fefenthday determined is thelaft 
 ihinggenerally moral in the fourth Commandment. li?,!!* 
 
 ^^. That which is particularly moral herein^ is this or thai particular 7*'' day. 125 
 54. The morality of a Sabbath may be as ftronglyandeafily urged ^rom the Com- 
 mandment ofobferving thar particular fcvcnth day from the Creation,as the mo- 
 rality of a day laj 
 J 5". It is not in mans liberty to cakeany one of the fevcn dayes in a week to be the 
 Chriftian ^ albith. 1 26 
 J tf . A Jeccrmined time ishere requircd,but not what Naturc,but what Counfel ihall 
 determine, andconftquently this or that fevenih day. 130 
 57. The forceof Gods cxampleinreftingthefeventh, and working fix dayes, how 
 fari^cjttends.. jji 
 5 a. Korcalon that God muft have a fcvcnth yccr, b?caufe hewilfhavc a feventh 
 day. 134, 
 J 9. How a drcumftancc of time is capable of morality. 137 
 f o. The Law of the Sabbaihis a Homogeneal part of the Moral Lavi^, and is therforc 
 Moral : and whether it be Moral in rcfpeft of the letter. 15 8 
 61^ Wh ihjr the Decalogue is faid tobc the J^foral Law jn refpeA of the greater 
 part only. J 39 
 £1. The Law ofthe Sabbath hath equal glory with all the other nine ^forals, and 
 hath therefore e<j«al morality. 140 
 ^j. The Sabbath was given a* a Moral Law to man ininnoccncy. 1 5 1 
 *4. The Sabbath faid to be fan£tified,Gf».2.not raecrlyinaway ofDcftinaiionor 
 Anticipation. i^t 
 6i • Adam in innoccncy might need a Sabbath. 174 
 66, No types of Chrift given to man in innocency. 177 
 67- The Sabbath wa« no type in rcfped of its original inflitution. X78 
 58. The Heathens by the light of corrupt nature bad fome kind of knowledge of the 
 Sabbath, ig^ 
 6^. The Law of nature diver fly taken, and what it is. 194 
 70. No argument to prove the Sabbath Ceremonial, bccaufc Chrift appointed no 
 fpe ial day for the LordsSuppcr. 1^8 
 71 No argument to prove the Sabbath Ceremonial, becaufe it is reckoned among 
 the Ceremonials. lyo 
 72. Chrift is not faid to be the Lord of the Sabbath, becaufeit'was Ceremonial, zoo 
 7J. Though the Sabbath be made for man,)et it is not therefore Ceremonial loi 
 J 4. A fond diftinftion of the Sabbath injenfu myflko ^ literalU loi 
 75* Although we are bound to reft, every day from fin, yet we are not therefore to 
 make everyday a Sabbath, 205 
 7^i The Sabbath was not proper to the Jewcs, becaufe they only were able (as fome 
 Viy) to obferve the cxaft time of it. 104 
 77, An anfwer to Uv.Carpenms and Hejlim new invented argument agamft the mo- 
 i-alityoftheSabbaih. ta6\ 
 
Part. I. 
 
 The Morality of the Sahhath. 
 
 W herein the chief Arguments u(ed by Go^ 
 
 warHSy Mr. Primroje^ Mr. Ironfide^ Mr. Broad^ 
 with fundry others againft it^are briefly anfwer- 
 ed^ the reafons for it more fully cleared: 
 
 'Wherein alfo the great Controverfxe , whether th? 
 whole Morall Lavp contained in the Decalogue be 
 a Rule of life to a Beleever, is occafionally 
 and diftinftly handled. 
 
 "ST ^ ^ ^ ^ :Sl 
 
 
 
THE 
 
 MORALITY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 S A B B A T H. 
 
 Thesis i. 
 Jgr2!^feJ.^^^^Ime is one of the moft precious bleflings, which worth- 
 kfie mm in this world enjoies, a jewel ot intftimable 
 Worth, a golden ft ream dKToIvmg, and as it were, 
 continually running down by us, out of one eternity 
 into another ; yet feldom raKen notice of onrill it is 
 quicc pafted away from usj Man (faith So/omon) 
 knows not his time, £rr/tf/; p. 1 2. It is therefore mofl 
 juft and meet, that he who hath the difpofing of all 
 other things lefTe precious and momcatous, (hould alfo be the fupream Lord 
 anddifpofcrof all our times. 
 
 Thtfs 2. 
 He who is the difpofer of all our times, is the fovereign Lord of our per- 
 form alfo, and is therefore the utmoft and laft end of both : for if our perfons 
 an J all our times be of him, they arc then to be improved for him, as he fees 
 moft meet. 
 
 Tlfejt, 3. 
 
 Now although all creatures in the world, arc of God, and for God, fo 
 
 2# 
 
 ?• 
 
 that being of him, they receive their being from him as their firft, efficient, *^^f -JjJ 
 and being for him, are therefore * preferved and governed by him, as their r/^^IT^ 
 ucmo(V end j yet no other inferiouf vifible creature is fet fo near to God, and k^'*t^^ 
 confequently is not in that manner for God, as man is. tm^\ cSH 
 
 Thefts 4. U^lUfiK 
 For although all inferiour creatures are made laftCj for God, yet they arc 'f *'*^ 
 made ntxttj for man 5 but man havmg nothing better then himlelf, between ^ 
 _ J^___. him 
 
Z The Mcraihj of the Sahbatk 
 
 him and God, is therefore made, both laftly and nextly for God, and hence 
 it is, that no inferiour creature, which comes out and iffucth from God, hath 
 fiich a reflux and return again back unto God, as man haih; becaufc, in and 
 by this refluii and return into him, mans immortall being is eternally prc- 
 fei ved, like water running into the fea again, from whence it firft came. 
 
 Thefij 5. 
 -^ For whatever is fet nexr, and as it were contiguous to cternall, iseter- 
 nall ; Om»e centhuum aterno Ifirifua/i eft diurnum ( fay fomc ) and hence it 
 is that the foul is cternall, becaufe it is made nextly for God, and as it were 
 contiguous to him. The bodyairofl^ali be eternall, becaufe contiguous to 
 the eternall foul: But no ofherinferiour creatures are thas cternall: For 
 although they be made nextly for man, yet fo, as that ihcy are fi ftly for rhc 
 body, which is of it felf mortall, and not erernall, and therefore not being 
 contiguous to that which is fpiritually eternall, are not fothemfclves; and 
 the reafon of this is, becaufe all infeiiou* creaiurc5, as theycomq out from 
 God, fo their motion is toward man, for whom they are nextly made, and 
 F;>/Jofth they gooutftrait forward from God, as it were in a ftrait line toward man, 
 church, to the lait end and term of which ftrait line w hen thty are come, in ihe fc r- 
 <6rt/»j,a. vice of man, they cannot then proceed any further, and doe therefore pe- 
 rifliandceafetobe, without refleding or returning back again immediatly 
 unto God. But man being made immediatly and nextly for God, hath there- 
 fore his motion fo toward God, asthat he returns immediitly unto him j^- 
 gain, and is not led in a ftrait line, but led (as it were) about in a circular 
 motion, and hence returning immediatly to him, he is hereby eternally pre- 
 ferved in htm, for whom he is immediatly made, and unto whom he is nextly 
 contiguous, as hath been faid. 
 
 Thefts 6. 
 ^^ Now although in this return of man to God ( fuppofmg it to be internal!, 
 regular and fpintuali) mansblefled being once loft is hereby recovered and 
 prefcrved in God, yec when man is left unto himfelf, the motions of his (oul, 
 out of this cirde,in itraying from God, are innumerable, and would be ind- 
 IclTe, ifGod who fet him next unto himfelf, did not fome time orother,re- 
 call, return, and lead him back again ( as it were in a heavenly circle ) into 
 himfelf. 
 
 Thefisj, 
 7. Look therefore as when man hath run his race, finiflied his courfe, and ' 
 pa^Tcd through the bigger and larger circle of his hfe, he then returns unto 
 his eternall reft; fo it is contrived and ordered by divine uifdom, as that he 
 ftiall in a fpeciall manner return unto and into his reft once at leaft within 
 the Uffcr and fmaller circle of every week, that fo his perfed blefl'vdneflc to 
 come, might be foreuftcd every Sabbarhday, and fo be begun here ; that 
 Ipokas man ftandingin innocency, had ^aut thus to rccurn from the plea- 
 fane 
 
7 he Morality cf the S Math J 
 
 fant labours of his weekly paradife imptelments (as fliall be lliewn indue ^^^^.^ ^ 
 place) fo man fallen much more from his toilfame add weirifome labours, ^^^^e^v^wj?-^ 
 ro this his reft again : And therefore, a-sbecaufe all creatures were made fot f^";^^!'L. ' 
 man, man was therefore made in the laft place after thtm ; fo manbeing^[""/;o».,«r, 
 made for God and his worfliip, thence \t is that the Sab^baih ( «^ herein man '^"^^^f^ *"* 
 was to draw moH: near un^co God) was appofntc dafcc^the creaCfon of man, 'homL* 
 as * Peter IvUrtjr obfcrves : For although man is not made for the Sabbath ^^l^ y'"*^ 
 meerly in refpect of the outward reft of ir, as the Pharifccs dreamed, yet k« "uw/deo^l 
 is made for the Sabbath in refpe^l of God in ir, and theholincfreofic, tovrnpcfliUiat 
 both which then the foul is to have its weekly revolurion back again, as into ^sabba"hib€* 
 that Rtft, which is the end of all our lives, labour, and in fpeciallof all our l"^*^^.^^^ 
 weekly labour and work, miucuuf. 
 
 Thefts 8. P«.Matr.ig 
 
 As therefore our bleffed reft in the fruicion of God at the end and period ^"^^^^"^ 
 of our lives, is no ceremony, but a glorious privikdge, and a morall duty, 
 it being our clofing wifh our ucmoft end to which we are called : foiccannoc 
 be that (uch a Liw which cals and commands man in this life to return to the 
 fimc reft for liibftance every Sabbath day, fliould bea ceremoniall, but ra- 
 ther a morall and perpctuall law: unlclTditiliouldappear that this weekly 
 Sabbath like the other annuall Sabbach, hath been ordained and infiituted ^ 
 principallyfor fome ceremonious ends,rather then to be a part,and indeed the 
 beginning of our reft to come ; there beisg little difference between this and 
 tViUt to come; but only thisjthai here our reft is but begun,there it is perfeded; 
 here it is interrupted oyour weekly labours, there Jt is continued, here we 
 are led into our relt by means and ordinances, but there we fhall be pofTeffed 
 with ir, without our need of any help from them; our God who is our reft, 
 being then become unco us iramediatly /^// in AU, 
 
 Thefts 9. 
 
 Were it not for mans work and labour ordained and appointed for him 9, 
 in this life, he ftiould enjoy acontinuall Sabbath, a perpetuall Reft. And 
 therefore we fee, that when mans life is ended, his fun kt, and his work 
 done upon earth, nothing t\k remains for him, but only to enter into his 
 pcrpcfuall and eccrnali Reft: All our time ftiould be folemn and facred to 
 ch- Lord of time, if-therc wereno common work and hbour here, which' 
 nc cedanly occasions common time j why then ftiould any chink that a week- 
 ly Siij^ath is ceremonial), when, were it not for this Ifes labour, a perpe^ 
 iti'jii and continaall Sabbslth would (fhen be undoiibttdly accounted moral!. 
 Irs haid for any to thinks fervants awfull atcetiJance on hi:»Lord and Mafter 
 at certain fpeeiitli times not to be mv3rally due ixtm him; who but fot 
 im\t more private and perfonali occaftons allowed km to attend untOj 
 Ihouk ai ail times continually be fcrving of him. 
 
4 rSeMriUtjiffhSMsth. 
 
 ^ Thifis lOc 
 
 It, The word \Aou\Vis^*^^f, and no Scripture phrafe, and therefore noc 
 proper, litJy and fully to exprefc the quedion in controverfic, to wir, whc^ 
 iher the fourth CommaRdment be a morall precept. The beft friends of this 
 word finde it Hippery, and can hardly cell what it is^ and what they would 
 have to beunder(lood by it, and hence it is become a bone of much conten* 
 tencion, a fit tx{\% and (wamp for fuch to fighc in, who dcfirc fo tacontend 
 with their adverlarics, asthac thcmfelvcs may not be known, either where 
 > thev are, or on whatgroand they ftand : Yet it being a word genei ally taV.cn 
 up and commonly ufed, it may not therefore be amide, to follow the market 
 rncafure, and to retain the word with juft and meet explications thereof. 
 
 Thejis 1 1 • 
 
 I X, They who defcribe a morall law^ to be fuch a law as is nor typically cere- 
 moniall, and therefore not durable, do well and truly txpreil'e whit it is not, 
 butchey do not poiicively expreflb what it is»^ 
 
 Thefts 12. 
 
 12. Some defcribe and* draw out the proportions of the mora'! lawj by the 
 law of nature, andfomakeittobe thatLaw, which every mams laughc by 
 
 «ofe '^^ ^^^^ of nature. ** That which if morally and univerfally juli (fay omc ) 
 
 vufx ** which reafon,when k is not mifled, and the inwardlaw of nature diditeih,' 
 "by common pnnciplesofhonefty,. or ought codidite unto all men with- 
 "outanyoHtwarduQicr: It is that (fay others) wnich mav be proved not 
 '* only juft but neceifaryp by principles drawn from the light ofnacure, which^^ 
 ** ail reafonable me^, even in nature corrupted, have ftill in their hca(tf> 
 •* which cither they do ackno wlcdgo, or may at leaft be conviFiCed of with- 
 "out Che Scriptures, by principles ftill left, in the h^^arts of all men, 
 Biit this defcription feems too narrow : For i. Although it be true that the 
 lawnatwrallispartof the law morall, yet if the law morall be refolved mto 
 the law of nature only, and the law of nature be fhrunk up and drawn into 
 fo narrow a compafie, as what the principles left in corrupt man only luggcii' 
 anddidare; then it will necellariiy follow,, that many of ihofe holy rules 
 and principles are not the law of nature, which were themoft peife>(5tim-. 
 prefli JUS of the law of nature, in mans firft creation and perfe(5l<on, but 
 now by mans apoftacy are obliterated and blotted ouc, unlefle any Ihall thmk, 
 worfe then the blinde Papifts, either that mans mindc is.notnow corrupred 
 by the fall, in loofing any of the firft imprcffions of innocent nature ; or Ihali 
 maintain wuh ihcm^.that the Image ot God (of whichthofefiift mprclU- 
 oos were a pare) was not naturall toman in thaceftate. a. It will then follow 
 that there is no mtrtU^ dijcifhne { as they call it ) that is, nothing morall by 
 difciplinc informing^ or pofitively. morall, but only by nature didating. 
 Which is crofle not only to the judgements, but folid Arguments of men ju- 
 dicious and gioft indifferent, 3. if thaic jonly is co be accounted morall wUich 
 
7ht Uordiij eft he Sahbuth. J 
 
 fs (o eafiiy known of all men, by the light of nature corrupted, then the im- 
 pcrftd light of mans corrupt mindc muft be the principal! judge of that 
 which is morall, rather then the perfed rule of morality contained in the , 
 Scripture, which aflertion would not a little advance corrupt and Windc 
 nature, and dethrone the perfedlion of the holy Scripture. 
 
 Tkcfis 13, 
 
 They who define a morall law, to be lucn a law as is pcrpetuall and oniver- 13. 
 fall, binding all perfons in all ages and times, do come Ibmewhamearer to . 
 the mark, and are not far off from the truth, and fuch a Oefcription is moft 
 plain ard obvious to futh as are not curious : and in this fcnfc our adverfarics 
 in thiscaufe affirm the Sabbach not to be moral!, meaning, thacitisnota 
 lavvperpctuiliaRd univcrfall. Others on the contrary affirming that it is 
 morall, mttnd thus much, that it is perpetuall and univcrlall, a law which 
 b ndts all perfons, allfimts, and mall ages, and hercm lies the chief matter 
 of contrcveinc at thisdav. N«>w m what refpe<^ and how far forjh ifee 
 law of the Sabbathis pe:pc«ual', lliall behertafttf ffiewn; mean whileit 
 may not be amifle to cnquuT mure narrowly into ihe nacure of a morall law. 
 Forthougha lawprmauly ni« rsll ^^ perpctwall, yet perpvtuity fetmstobe 
 an 3cf jund rather then of iheefTcnce of a rnorall law, and the difficulty will 
 (till rcmi!! untoucht, vi^ to Know wne: a law is perpetuall, and what is 
 int rnall and iiKrinfuall to fuch a law as mues ic perprru .11 or moral! ^ 
 vvhcrcinto I wou d nut fearch, leaft i fhouM fccm toaftld cunofity, but 
 that cu crittcall aa vtrfafies put us upon it, with wh6m there is nothing loft 
 in cafe we Lain no;h n? by wralU'ng a little with chem upon their own 
 groui)di», whtre for a whiiC we (hall come up to thtm. 
 
 Thejif i^* . 
 
 Adivinelawmaybefiidtobe \ I. M<:yie largely and generally morall. j^ 
 
 morall two waivs, ^ ?. More ftndl) and ff <ci Jiy morall. 
 
 Thfts 15.- 
 
 Alavy generally morall is thf?, i//* that the whole fovereign will of the ^5* 
 L )rd be done and lubmicted ui ti> by every creature ; and in tKi$ lar^e fenfe- 
 every law of God whether ccrcmomall, judiciall, or foripecii'hryaH, may- 
 be U'd to : >e morall, brcaufc the tovercign will of God is tn all f h. fc laws to 
 b. adorta: itisaniorall duty that^Gods will be done, andhenc: itts that - 
 lotar forth as the wnlof God ism them, fofar fortbto yield obcdienct to 
 them 1$ a morall duty, but the qucftion is not about this morality, nor what ' 
 thm^s arc thus moralL 
 
 Thffij \6. 
 
 A law more, ftriaiy and fpecially morall, which conceros the manners of 
 all men, and ot which wc now (peak, may be thus, defcribed, t/i;^. h is luch a 
 law, whch IS -herefbre commanded tcrcaufeitisgood, and is not therefore 
 gooameerJybecaufeitis commanded. 
 
 B^ __xhi£i. 
 
 16 
 
g T/je Morality of the Sabbat L 
 
 Thf/is 17. 
 17. This is v^/rf/F/^J/defcriptionofitlongfince, whom moft of the Schoolmen 
 ^y^'g.dJuK f;_)llovv, \\h'ch learned ^ Cameron wuh fundry late writers confirm, and 
 -cimer/j which our adverfarics in this eontroverfie plead hard for, and unto which 
 Ma:ib!i<5. (he evidcHce of Scripture and reafon (ceras to incline : for laws me^rrly judi- 
 ciall-and ceremonial! are good lavvs/^>^^^6.i8?:4. but this was meetly bc- 
 caufethey were commanded, and therefore it had been fimpijcvil to burn 
 incenfe, offer facxKice, or pctfarmany ceremoniall dury mthe worfl-iip of 
 God un'.t iT' they had h^^n, commanded. "What is there therefore in morall 
 laws which is not inthofe laws ? vcnly this inward goodneflc in them v;hich 
 Others have not, and bccjufe of vvhich goodncHe they are therefore com- 
 manded : Tor to love God, to honour parents, to pref rve the life of man, 
 to be merciful! and bountiful! and juft m all our dealings, e^r. are inwardly 
 oocd, and are therefore commanded, and are therefore moi'all lav^s-, and 
 hence we fee that when the Apoftle would fst forth (he glory snd excellency 
 of the moralllaw ( for of no other law can he fpeak, Rom.jq^^ 2.) he gives 
 thefe tides toir,that it is kolj.jtifi andge^id: which holineflTcjjuftice an<^» good- 
 ncfle, heoppo'ethtohisown mor^U (not ccremonUll) wickedhefTe : i am 
 Cdryiall ( iaiih he ) but the law is holj.jufl ayidj^ood. And look as it was evil 
 iti it fdf for to have a nature contrary to the law, fo the law which was con- 
 trary to that nature, was good in it kit" and was therefvxre commanded, and 
 therefore in this thing morall laws are in a higher degree good, thenfuchas 
 were only ceremoniall, vvhich were therefore good meerly becaufc com- 
 manded. The Prophet Micalo therefore perceiving how forward many 
 were in ceremoniall duties and facrifices, in oppo(i:ion hereunto, he tels 
 them, The Lord hath pjevf-d thee. O man. What t^s good ( fpeakingof morall 
 duties, of {l"is:wing mercy, and walking humbly with God, Mtcah 6.8.) Was 
 not facnfice and offerings good, as well as mercy and walking humbly ? Yes 
 verily, but herein lies the difference (as our moli Orthodox generally make 
 It ) facrifice and offerings were not lerfe and in themfelvcs good, but only 
 as commanded for higher ends, and to further morall obedience, Jer^y.ii^ 
 33, and6. 19,20. //^ 1.14,16. /y^/.5o,i3,i4,i5, but fuch morall obedience 
 as the Prophet mentions, 'z^/^. to fliew mercy and to walk humbly, were 
 good in themfclves, and were therefore commanded of God, and here cal- 
 led by the Prophet good. The liimme of morall obedience is love to God 
 and man, ^.<rr^.22. But whar love is this ? furely tis in fuch things as are in 
 themfelvcs lovely, and conllqucncly in themfeWes good, for otherwifc ce- 
 remoniall obedience fliouid be a part of morall obedience, becaufe in per- 
 forming fuch ODedience as is meerly ceremoniall, we {hew our love to God 
 alfo, X being a branch of love to have reaped uato all Gods Commadments, 
 Z)'.«r.6.i,2 3,with 5,6. Orvly herein our love toward God appears in cere- 
 moniiiU duties, becaufe chefe laws arc commanded, oar love appears in 
 
 the 
 
Ihe Moral jy of tie SMath. 
 
 the other, becaufe the things commanded arc alfo lovely in themselves. The 
 Image of God is good in it felt", as God himfcjf '\% good in himfdr, now the 
 morali law is an exadliuleof nothing elfe but Gods Image, as is evident, 
 ^pk^,%^, vsherethe Imageof God ismadetoconfift in hc/mfewdn^htem 
 0ufm(fe, the firfl Table being the rule of the one, the fecond Table being the 
 rule of the other; and hence it follows undeniably, that morall laws, refpc- 
 fling only Gods Image, have refped only to fuch things as are good in 
 themfelves, and wherein we refembie and are made like tmto God. Some 
 things (faith (^amtron) are good in themfelves, viz. fuch things wherein 
 Gods Image fhines forth, as he is holy, juft and good, Ccl. ^.lo, Eph ^^.2^, 
 Some things are indifferent, neither good nor bad-in themfelves, but mcerly 
 as commanded or forbidden, which alfo bear not Gods Image, unlefle it be 
 flihratiorieentU, hwt noz fubratione boyji morali^^ i,C. they refcmblc God as 
 he is a bemg, but not as he is holy, jud and good in himfjf, the rule of which 
 refemblanceis the morall law, which therefore commands things becaufe 
 they are good. 
 
 Tkefis I 8. 
 
 God out of hisabfolure fovereignty could have made law^s binding all x8, 
 perfons inallages (and in this refpcd morall) wi:hour having any more 
 goodneflc in them, then mcerly his own will, but ic is his will and good 
 pleafiire to make all laws that are morall to be firD: good in themfelves for 
 all mer, before he will impofe them upon all men. And hence it is a weak- 
 ViQ{['c for any to affirsi, that a morall law is not fuch a law which is therefore 
 commanded becaufe ic is good, becaufe (fay they) tis not the goodntfl'j 
 of the thing, but the fovercign will of God which makes all things good ; 
 for it IS the fovereign will of God (as is proved) to make every morall 
 law good, and therefore to command if, rather then to make it good by a 
 mecr commandmgof it. 
 
 Thefts 7 9. 
 
 The will of God is indeed the rule of ail goodncfTe, and confcquently of ip. 
 all morall laws, but we know there is voiuKtas dfcreti, and vclMm^ts wandati, 
 ihefiiilt of which, ^'/^. the will of Gods decree (as it appears in the execu- 
 tion of it) makes a thing to be good, whether it be creature or law; the 
 fecond of thefe, vi^. the will of Gods command, en/oins the pradife of fuch 
 a duty, the rule and law to guide which is fi^ft made good ( if it be a morall 
 law ) by the wifdom and power of the will of Gods decree : fo that the will 
 of God appearing in both thefe {viz, Gods decreeing a^d commanding 
 will) IS the compleat rule of every moralllaw: So that as no law is morally 
 good meerly becaufe it is commanded, foneitherisit thus good unlefle alfo 
 itbecommanded> Gods willm all morall laws, isfirfttomake thtmgood, 
 and-chen to command them, when they are thus far made good : both which 
 tt>gcther make up a morall la w, 
 
 Thefii 
 
8 7he Moralitj of the Sabbatk 
 
 Thefis 20. 
 ao. 'tis true that dti Is the tranfgreffijn of Gods law ; there isiioching there- 
 fore finfull but ic is the cranfgrellljn of Tons law, and hence there is no o- 
 bcdience good, but what is conformable anco feme law. But wc muft know 
 thacascranfgrelllonofanylaw doth not make a thing morally (infull (for 
 then to break a cere (Tioniall law would beamorallfin,) fo alfo obedience 
 to every law doth nor make a duty morall) lawfjll and good (fortheno- 
 bcdiencctoacercmonialliiw, mullbc aaiorali obedience;) morall tranf- 
 greilion therefore is a breach of fuch a liw, which forbids a thing bccaufc 
 in«evil, as morall obedience is our conformity to fiicha hw which com- 
 mands a tamg becaufe it is good ; not that any :hing is morally evil in it fclf 
 before it be forbidden, for then chore lliouli be amorjll (in before, and 
 without any liw to forbid it, which is moft abftird ; but bccaufe a thing is 
 evi in it f If and is chercf >rc forb;ddcn, it is therefore morally cv 1 : God 
 may and doch mik? it fitnd^imtntatiy ::vu b fore it be forbdden, but it is not 
 wi>r*iiyj' tft/iVunill It be forbiddcii. The Ikemay belaid concerning morall 
 obedience according to any m )rall l.ws No man flio.ld therefore think, 
 that this defcription given of a morall law, rtioulJ giveoccaiion to any to 
 imagine, that feme things are morjily good orevl, before any law palfe 
 upon chem, and that fhcrcfore there are fome dunes, and Tome Cm'iy which 
 ire fo withou' and before any law of Godv For we fee that things good in 
 themfclves muft be commanded, tlfe thev arc not morall duties, yet withall 
 they are therefore commanded becaufe they arc good in th^fmklves. Its crue 
 that by the verd.d of tome of the Schoolmen, lome duci;:^5 are morally good, 
 before any law commands them (as to love and magnirteGod) and that 
 Tome fins (astocurfe and bhfpheam God) arc morally evil, before any 
 law forbids them; but (co omit other anfwers) if fuch fuppofitions m ly 
 be rationally made (which fomedeny) yet it may be upon good grounds 
 denied, that any duty can be morally good, or any (in morally evl, uncill 
 fomc law pifTe upon them either to command or forbid the fame. 'Tis in- 
 deed futablc and nitet in naw, c for man to love God, and unfutable and un^ 
 meet to blafpheam and hate God; but fuch futablenefTc or unfutablencffe, 
 as chcy make things fundamentally good or evil, fo they cannot make any 
 thing morally good or evil, unKie wefuppofc fome hw; foric would be 
 in thiscali: with mar. as 'tis in brute creatures, who do many things unnatu- 
 rall ( as to eat up and dt;ftroy their own young) which yet are not morally 
 *^*"^j''^^ fmfull, becaufe they are no: under any morall law; and* one of the moll| 
 .^f*i'.,^J ancient and beft of the Schoolmen, though bethinks that the obfervance of 
 the Sabbath before MofesiwcvQ was not fecHndum rat ionem prdtcepti, or delfiul 
 fia^i, u was not actually commanded ; yet that it wis fccundumrathttemj^ 
 hfiefti, hocefi dig efiiri, i, it was congruous, and a thing meet andworthj 
 to be obferved even from the firft creation : But will any of our advcrfaric 
 
 heno 
 
7ht Morditj of the ^ sMath. ' ^l 
 
 hence fiay, that becaufe ir was meet and worthy to be obftr'rved, that- fhere-' 
 fore it was a morallUvv from th'e beginning of the world, while it had nO' 
 command ( as is by ihem fuppofed ) to be obferved ? For it muO: be fome- 
 thin^ meet and congruous, andwotihyto beobfcrvedof man,' which when 
 k is commanded milits k to be a morall lavv, for then the law commands a 
 thing that is good, and bccaufc 'cis good it is therefore comniandtd, which 
 goodnefle wc mult a little more narrowly now enquire mco. 
 
 Thejij 2U 
 If it be demanded therefore, What is that goodnelTc in amoral! law for. ^^^ 
 which ic is therefore commanded? The anfwcr isg-'venby Fafejuej^SuArez, 
 Smifm^a, and moft of the Schoolmen, and fundry of our own writer*, thsLE, 
 ic is nothing el(e, but That comely fltmiie»€Jfe tusdmietnfjfeirtthet'ingeomw 
 man.ied unto humane n.^.tPtre as rattonali^ or unio mafias ratisnali, andeonfe'" 
 ijHfntly unto everj mm. When I fay, ai Ratier.all, I underftand as M*" Iron^ifonf^Q^u 
 Jia do[h, viz, as right reafon neither blmded nor corrupted doth require, "P'^* 
 When I fay, as fuuble to man, and confequcntly to every mm; I hereby 
 exclude all laws meerly Judiciall and Evangelieall from being morall, the 
 firft of which are ilitable to fome men only, the other are not futable tomen 
 as men, but to n:ian as corrupt and fallen ; and therefore bindc not all men, 
 bu: only thole among whom they arc futiiciently andadually prom^^lgated, 
 as IS evident, Rom jo. 14. fohn 15.22. Bu: morall laws are fucablc to all men, 
 " and have an inward meetnelte and congruity to be obferved of all men : For 
 look as when the Lord givesUws to any particular nation, whether immedl- 
 atly by himfelf, or mcdiarly by man, he ever makes them futable to the peo- 
 ples peacj and good of chat nation ; fo when he makes laws binding all man 
 kinde in all Nations, he makes them futable to humane nature or all man- 
 kinde therein. And look as nacionall laws bind^ notmecrly by the mecr 
 will of the Lawgiver, bur from the * goodneffe and futableneile in the thing * nti<ao, 
 unto their common good; fo here morall laws which concern all Nations, ^»*'^^'(/?»'»*' 
 binde not meei ly becaufe of the will of God ( which of i: k If is fufficient to Yafq^'.-Vo, 
 binde allmen, if hehadpleafed toput no more in morall laws) but alfo be* ». ^^'''•»»« 
 cau^e of fome goodncifc in the things commanded, which is nothing elfe but 
 fuch futaUhnefTe as is mentioned unto the common good of man. What 
 this futabLnede to humane nature is, we fhall fliew in due place, mean 
 .while, Ido no: underfUnd by furableneff:^ to humane nature, the inclination 
 of humane nature novv corrupted by fin ; for infuled and fupernatwr;?ll- ver-^ 
 tuts and graces ( to which therefore humane nature is not inchned) arc 
 {zsVafcjiies truly and ftron|ly maintains) in fome fcnfe naturall and good 
 in ihemlvlvcs, not becaufe humane nature isirxlined to them, but becaufe 
 ihcy are very congruous and confentaiieous thereunto, and perfecting hu- 
 mane mature, as fuch^and confequcntly futable thtreunto: A good is iaid to be 
 »/i/tf ^ ^r/f (^j^//p m rcrpe(ft of fome profit or delight which comes to man 
 
 c bij 
 
10 Tf^ MtfMlltj 0/ the SMatk 
 
 by it, but y*fmm k§Mftumin^€ntre maris (as SHdrtK. and his fellows call it ) 
 »*riv •»*- confifts in a kinde of decency, comlineffe and fweet proportion between fuch 
 '^li.^***' an ad, and fuch a nature as ads by right reafon; to which nature icisex- 
 tfijinis,dt ceedingconaely and futable whether any profit or delight come thereby yea 
 Ifp!f?fel! ^ "<>• A$ now in the divine naturc,it*6 exceeding beautifull and comely for re 
 5*. (and therefore good in it ft If) to be bountifuli and mercifull, andtod^e 
 good unto the creature, although no profit could come to him thereby, Iciy 
 Gods good natHrc, as I may fofay, fotd^oe j fo 'cis in humane nature, ii's 
 a comely thing to honour parents, reverence Gods Name, to be loving and 
 mtrcifiill to all men, in heart, word and deed; to give God a fie and the 
 moft meet proportion of time for folemn ferviceof him, who allows us 
 many daies to fervc our own good : this is good nature, and being thus 
 feemly and fucablcto.it, this and fuch like things arc therefore good in 
 themfdvcs, though perhaps neither profit or pleasure fhould come unto 
 man hereby : And hence it*s well obferved by fome of the Schoolmen, that 
 right reafon doth not make a thing morall, but only judgcth and difccrneth 
 what is morall; for right reafon doth not make a thing futable, but only 
 iecth whether it be fo or no> a thing may be futable before right reafon fee 
 it, yet when 'tis prcfented to reafon it fees it futable^, as the wall is white 
 before the eye fee it, yet when the eye doth fee hy it appears white alfo ; It 
 may be a meet and comely thing to give God a fcventh part of our time, 
 though no mans reafon can of it fclf findeout luchara et proporcton, yet 
 when reafon fees it, it*$ forced to acknowledge a comelinrfl'c of equity, an4 
 futablene/Te therein, as (hall hereafter appear. 
 
 Thejis 22. 
 
 22. But here let it be obferved, that although all morall laws are thus futable 
 
 to mans nature, yet they are not all alike futable thereunto, and confequent- 
 
 ly not equally good in themfelves: for fome laws are more immediatly fu- 
 
 Te^ll%"!* tabic and good, others mediatly : And as WaU^tta well obfervcs ovt of Sco- 
 
 f*f*i * ttUy that there is a double morality, " the firft is, c^e/ef/ natfira/Jr.nt^fhntpm, 
 
 ** i, fuch laws as are fo deeply engraven upon nature, as that thefe principles 
 
 *' cannot be blotted out, bnt by aboliihing of nature. The fecon d is, ^r /f^e 
 
 **tt4tur4 /atefitmpm^ and thefe laws do much depend upon the will of the 
 
 "Lawgiyer, but yet they are very congruous and futable to humane nature 
 
 •* even from the light of thofe principles of nature. And hence I fuppofe it 
 
 will follow, that the law for a feventh part of time to be dedicated to God^ 
 
 nay well be a morall law, aUhotighit depends much upon the will of the 
 
 Latwgiver, and is not fo immediatly written upon mans heart, nor fo equal* 
 
 tMh^At, Ij^futablcto IttJflnanc nacur«, as the law of love and thankfulneffe to God 
 
 MXtfV>)#.ottr Creator is: For {%sC^mirin well obfcrves ) that fome things which 
 
 arc good k chcmfclves have more of Gods Image ftampcd upon them, fome 
 
 hm tadieof it : and hcnoe ic ii iha|riiOHgh all morali laws are sood in them- 
 
7he mralitj pf tbt Sdhdth* XJ 
 
 fdves, yet not equally fo: there is more unfpubleneffc to Jute and curfc 
 God, then to Uift after another mans houfe or fervant, and yetbmbaxcevd 
 in theraftlves and breaches of morall rules. 
 
 Thefis 23. 
 
 Hence therefore it follows, that becaufc motatt precepts are of fuch things J?» 
 asaregoodin ikemfclvcs, they arc therefore perpetaaJl and tinchangeable, 
 anii b^caufethcy are in thisrefp^d^ood in thcmfclvcsi, to wit, be<:aufcihey 
 are iuttblc aod conicly to mans nature as jationall; htncealfo ihey ate 
 Bniverfail : fo that perpcttiity and univcrfiiity feem to be the infeparable ■ 
 
 adjuod.srarhcr then thecifenceofamorall law: yet when they are called | 
 
 perpctuall and unchangeable, we muft underftand them in rcfptd: of Gods II 
 
 Ordinary difpeiifat on; for he who is the great Lawgiver, may and doth 
 fometimc excraordmar \\ difpenfe with morall laws. Abraham might have 
 kiird hs fon by excraordinary difpenfation ; AcUms fons and daughters did 
 marry one anoiher by fpeciall commiflion, which now to doc ordinarily 
 would be inceftuous, and conftqUvntly agaipft a morall law, as is evident, 
 Ltvit.i%, Only let it be here remembred th;it when I call morall laws per- 
 peruall and univeifall, thatlfpcak of fuch law^ as arc primarily moral!, 
 which do firftly and originally fuce with humane nature : for laws as are at 
 fecund hand morall and as it were accidentally io^ may be changeabk as 
 hereafter ilia II appear. 
 
 Thefts 24, 
 
 How theic things may evince the morality of a feventh part of time,will he ^^^ * 
 difficult to conceive unlefTe further enquiry be made, to wit, when and b,y * \ 
 what rules may it be known that any la w is futable and agreeaole unto hii* 
 mane nature, and confqoendy good in k felf ? For refokition of which 
 doubt, there is great (ilcnce gencraliy in moft Wnccrs: Rifliop fVhitetrX'- 
 deavours it by giving rhrre ruks to clear up this mift ; but {^ce mmt$ viri ) 
 I much fear that he much darkens and obfcures the truth herein and muis 
 the ftrea#ns. For i. Becaufc the Sabbath is not (imply morall, but hath ^^^-W^Tieaf. 
 foraethingpofiiiveinit, he therefore makes it temporary, as appears in hiSp^^^^^^^ 
 conclusion of that dilcourfe : when as 'tis evident oy his own confeffioni 
 that fomelavvs pofitively morall aregenerall and unrveriall. "For laws po- 
 *^Titively morall (he Ikith) arc either pcrfonall only^ as was A^r^mi 
 •* coming out of his own country, (y^« 12.1. Some are for oneNactimat 
 "Rcpublick only, ^;¥«/^.22.i,3>7. Some are common and gcnwraii for all 
 " nuiiikinde, as the law of Polygamy. 2. He A:ems to in Ke laws limply and 
 rntirely morall to be (uch asarc .n their inward nature morally^gooa» bf tote 
 and without any extccnall impcfiiioo of the LawgHier ; Now it ^y txttm?!) 
 impofiuon he means thcextetnallmanperof Mofiucall adminiftratioi of the 
 Jaw, (here is then fomc truth m what hr ^lii 4n« ; for doubcUfic before 
 Mo/gsitmc the Patriarchs had the law reveakUaiirrramiihet maoucff^ »t^ 
 
I i The Mordity ef the SMath^ 
 
 ifbyextcrnallimpofitioH be meant extcrnall revelation, whether imm^r^i- 
 atlyby God himfclf unto mans coRfcience, or mediacly by man, thtn it's 
 moft falfc that any thing can be morally good or evil, much lelTe entirely and 
 (imply fo, before and wichouc fome fuch law : for though it may be good and 
 fatable to man before a law pafTe upon itjyet nothing can be morally good or 
 evil wichouc fome law, for then there {hbuldbefome fin which is not the 
 tranfgrcdian of a law, and fome obedience which is not dire(fted by any 
 law, both which are impofliblc and abominable. 3. He makes moralllaws 
 **by excernallimpoficion and conftituciononly, to be fjch, as before the ex- 
 'vcernall impoficio.iofthem, are adiaphorous, and good orcvilonly by rca- 
 '' fon of fome circumftance. Whenas we know thic fome fuch laws as are 
 moft entirely morall, yet in refpcdof their inward naiure generalK conli- 
 dered,they are indifferent alfo: for not tokifl and take away man. Ifeisa 
 morallhwintirelyfo, yet, in thegenerall nature of it it isind ff^renc, and 
 by circumftance may become either lawfull orunlawfullj h.vfull ?itjf:?of 
 warrc or pu;r>lick execution ofjullicej unliwfull, out o-^ a private fpirt<tnd 
 perfonall revenge. In one word, the whole drift of h s dilc' ui f h rc:jft; is 
 CO fliew that the Sabbath is not morall, and this he wovd ■! pr^v;' Decaufc the 
 Sabbath is ROC fimply and entirely morall (which is a ma<\ feeble and weak 
 confequence) and this he proves, " becaufe the Sabbath day har.h (in re- 
 *'fpedof its inward nature) no more holinenTeandgoodnelle then any o* 
 "therday, all the daies of the week being equally good 0/ creation. But 
 he-mighc well know that the day is not the law of the fourth Gumauudmenr, 
 but the keeping holy of the Sabbath day, which isathmg nwir:?! :;;ooii 
 '• amientirel/moraliif wefpeakof fome day : Nay ( faith the Biihop ) the 
 law of nature teacheth that fome iufficient and convenient time be let ipart 
 for Gods worOiip^j if therefore fome day be m;>rall, al hough all daies by 
 creation be indifferent and equal!, according to his own cont fliun, v.hat 
 ihenfbould htnderihe ijuompars, or the fevench p.vrt of time hom b^'ng 
 morall ? Will he fay bccaufc ail daies are equally hoi; and go« d f>y crcacion I 
 then why lliould he grant any day at all to oe entirely morall in refped'of a 
 fufficient and convenient time to be let apart tor God ? U he laith the will 
 and impofition of the Lav/giver aboliilieth its morality, becau^ he biodes 
 to a feventh part of ti&ie^ then we iliall il^ew that this ismollulic and 
 fccbJe in the (equd. 
 
 Thfis 25. 
 25. There ar^ therefore four rules to guide our judgements aright herein^ 
 whereby we may know whenalawisfucable and agreeable to humane na* 
 cnrei and confequcncly good iniE fclf ; which will be fu&ient to clear up 
 the law of the Sabbath, to be truly morall ( whecherinahigher or lower 
 degree ofmorality it makes ao maicer) and chacit is not a law meerly cem'* 
 |K>rafy aB4 cercm^mall. 
 
 I. Such 
 
The Marality 0f the SMath. 1 3 
 
 ''■ 1. Such laws as necefTarily flow from natiirall relation, both between 
 •God and man, as well as between man and man; thefe aregood in thcm- 
 felves, bccaufefutable and congruous tohumane nature: for there isade- 
 cency and fwcet coraelinefTe to attend to thofe rules to which our relations 
 binde us. For from this ground the Prophet Ma/achy cals for fear and ho- 
 nour of God as morall duties, becaufe they are fo comely and feemly for us, 
 in rcfped of the relation between us, If I be your Lord and Maflcr and Fa- 
 ther, where is my fear? where is my honour? Ma/ach.i,6, Love alfo be- 
 tween man and wife is prefled as a comely duty by the Apoftle, from that 
 near relation between them, being made one p/h.Eph 5 28,29. there arc 
 fcarceany who queftion the morality of the duties of thefccond Table, be- 
 caufe they are fo evidently comely, futable and agreeable to humane nature, 
 confidcred relatively, as manftunds in relation to thofe who are or (l^iould 
 be unto him as his own fiefb ; and therefore he is to honour fuperiours, and 
 therefore muft not kill, nor Ileal, nor lie, ixor covet, nor defile the Bd'b.^&c, 
 but the morality of all the rules of thefirft Table is not fcen fo evidently, 
 becaufe the relation between God and man, which makes them comely and 
 h a le to man, is not fo vvcU confidcred : for if there be a Gpd, and chiS 
 God be our God, according to th:^ f r i Commandment, then it's very come- 
 iy and met for man to honour, love, fear him delight, truftin h\n\&c, 
 an 1 if this God muft be worlhiped.of man, in refpe^otihe mticuaii relation 
 between diem, then 'as comely and meet to worili p hitn with his ovyn wor- 
 fliip^ according to che fecond Ojmm^ dm nt, and to w.^rlliiphim vvihall 
 holy revf^rence according .0 the thnd Commandment; aad if hemuft be 
 chus woriliiud, and yet at all tiaies (in relj ecli-f our neceilary worldly 
 imploimciUi) cannot be fo folccnniy honoured and vvorrhiped as is comely 
 and meet tor fo great a God, then ' .s very fit and comely for ail men to 
 have fome fet and ftated time of worfhip, according to fome fi: proportion, 
 which the Lord of time oiily can bell make, and therefore a feventh part of 
 time which ht' doch make, according to the fourth Commandment. 
 
 2. Such laws as are drawn from the imirable attributes and woiks of God, 
 are congruous and futable to mans nature: For what greater comeliniHe 
 can there oe, or what can be more futable to that nature, which is immedi- 
 atly made for God, then Co be like unto God, aad to attend uno. thofe 
 rules which guide thereunto ? Hence to be mcrcifull to men in milery, to 
 forgive our enemies and thofe that do us wrong, to oe bountiful! to thofe 
 thai be in want, to be patient when we luffcr evil, arc all morall duties, 
 becaufe they are comely and futable to man, and that becaufe herein he re^ 
 fcmbies and i* made like unto God : Hence Co labour fix daies and r^ft a 
 fevcoth IS a morail, becaufe a comely and futable duty, and rhat "bccaafc 
 heietn mjR ^oUows the example of God, and becomes moft like unto hirn* 
 Andhciict-u i$ that a Icvcnch year of reli cSirinot be urged tipon man co be as 
 ' " C 3 much 
 
l^ The M^rditj ^fthe SMaih. 
 
 much moralUsafcvemhdayofrcft, becaufe man bath Gods example and 
 pattcfQ in refting a fevcnth day, but not in rcfting any fcvenih year; God 
 never made himfelf an example of any certmonialldiity, it being untkable 
 to his glorious excellency fo to do, but onK of morall and fpiricuall holi- 
 nefl'e ,• and therefore there is fomewhat elfe in a fcventh day that is n©t in a 
 fcvcnthyear; and itisuctcrly falfe to think (as fome do) that there is as 
 much equity for the obfcrvation ©f thconc as there is of tnc other. ** And 
 P*^** ''J^'** " here by the way may be fcen a groflc miftake of M^ Primr^fe, who would 
 «j.Mi»j» ' ** make Gods example herein not to be morally imitabk of us, nor man ne- 
 *'cc{Tanly bound thereunto, it oeing nor natu-ally and in rc'pcd of itfelf 
 " imitable, but only becai^f it pleafcd God to command man {oto do • as 
 "alfo becaufe this adior? oi: God did not flovv rn)m Uich attributes of God 
 "as are in their nature imitablr, as mcrcv, b(;uni v,«2^r brnt from one of thofe 
 *^ attributes as is not imitabK, and which we ought not to imitate, vi^. his 
 ^^emnipoterkcj. But Uippofc it did floW from nis oainipotency, and that 
 weou^ht not to imitate his omnipoccncy, and that we vthoare weakntiTe 
 it felf cannot imitate otDPfpotent adions, yet it's obvious to common ftnfe, 
 that fuch a<fls which arifc from fuch atiriouies as cannot bf imitated of us, tn 
 re<ptdof theputicular cifcds which are produced by them, vet m the ad- 
 ingsof fuch a tributes there may be tomethtng morally good which is imita- 
 felc of us. As tor example, though we are not to imitate GoJ in his mira- 
 culous works (as in the btirning oi Sodom and futh like) yet ihcre may be 
 that juftice and wifdom of God iLining there n which we ought to imitate, 
 for we ou^ht to lec before we cenlttre and condemn, as God did in p;o- 
 cecdingagainft Sodem: So 'cis in this extraordinary work of making the 
 word, wherein although we are not to go about ro make another viold 
 w.'thin that time as God did, yet therein the labour and rtft of God was 
 feen, which is imitable of man ; which labour and reft as they are m( rail 
 duties, fo they are confirmed by a morall example, ard therefore moh Ic « m- 
 ly and comely for man to imitate from iuch an example : * And whereas he 
 ** affirms that this example was not morall, b.caufe it was not in itfelf imi- 
 ** table, being grou.ided only upon Gods free will : The reafon is weak ; 
 for to labour in ones calling is without controverfie a morall duty (as idle- 
 nefle is a morall fin) yet if one would ask why manistolarour here, and 
 n-^trarhcrto lead ac^mtemplative Iifeinthe vi(ionandf»uition of Godim» 
 mediatly ? 1 fuppofe no rtalon can be given, but the good plcafuic of God, 
 w lo iritiis deep w>fi jm favi/ it moft meet for nun to Ipend Ibmc propotvio- 
 nablc timcm labour for hiraklf, and lomcin reft for God, wheiennto he 
 gave man luch an cmment tximple fr(»m rhc beginning of r he world M* 
 rw, ^ri^r'^f cannot deny but that a convenient time for labour and reft in gc» 
 ncrall, t>mor;dl: "Bu: (faith he) it God haanoi d tlartd hi^ will oyai 
 f'^comaiiQdmcnc parttcuUrl^jo lawjour uxiaicsaod reft ih^ ky^t^y the 
 
 "Jews 
 
The Morality tf the SMdth. 1 5 
 
 "Jews would not have thought themfelvcs bound to this obftrvation from 
 '*^God8 example only ; which fliews thtt there is no morality in it to bindc 
 " the confcicnce forever. But it may be as well do&ked whether ads of 
 boanty and mercy (to which he thinks we are bound mecrly from Gods 
 example) in rcfpecfl of the particular application of ihcfe acfh, to enemies 
 ofGodandof our fcl vcs as well as to friends, be of binding vertue mecrly 
 by Gods example, unlefTe wc had a commandment thereunto : for in mo- 
 ral preceprs, as the thing is commanded becaufcitis good, fo'cis not mo- 
 rally good *uakflreitbe commanded: But fuppofc: that Gods example of *^^,v/r/;f/:j/ 
 labour fix daies and reft thcfcvesth, ftiould not have been binding as other 
 examples, unlefle there had been a commandment for fo doing, yctlh/sis 
 no argument that this example is not morall at all, but only that it is not fo 
 * equally morall and known to be fo, as fome other duties be; for marimay *Pucepteni 
 fpend too much time in labour, and give God too ftiort or too little time J'"^j/i''7/7 
 forreft, ifthcrefore he wants the light of a commandment or rule to diredl r-w/w.&c 
 and guide him tothefitteft and moft meet proportion of time for both, is ^,^e7«w». 
 henotapthereby to break the rule of morality, which confifts (as hath been 
 fhevvn) in that which is moft furable, comely and convenient for man to 
 givjtoGodorman;^ The commandment therefore in this cafe meafuring 
 out and declaring fuch a proportion, and what time ismoft convenient and 
 comely for man to take to himlelf for labour, or to give to God for re ft, it 
 doth not abolillj the morality of the example, but doth rather eftablifti and 
 make ic : It fets out the moft comely and meet proportion of time for labour 
 and reft, and therefore fuchatimeas ismoft good in it (elf, becaufc moft 
 comely and proportionable, which being therefore commanded is a morall 
 dttty in man, and the example hereof morally binding in God. 
 
 3. Such laws which mans reafon may fce, either by innate light, or by any 
 other externall help and light to be juft and goodandEt for man to obfcrve, 
 fuch laws are congruous and futable to humane nature. I fay by any txtnnaii 
 htlf, as well as by i««4^f/i[^^, for neither internal 1 nor extcrnall light doc 
 make a thing juft and futable to man, no more then the light of the fun or 
 the light ofalanrhorn doe make the Kings high-way to the city, but they 
 only declare ard manifeft the way, or that which was foinitfelf before: 
 Hence it comes to pafTe that although mans reafon cannot fee the equity of 
 fome laws, antecedenter by innate light, before it be illuminated by fome 
 extcrnall lighr, yctif by this externa 11 light the minde fees the equity, juftice 
 and holineffc of fuch a law, this may fufficiently argue the morality of fuch a 
 law, which was juft and good, before any light difcovered it, and is now 
 difcovertd only, notmade to be fo, whether by intcrnall or externail light : 
 **Andh€nec-/f^*iV<«wcllobfervcs^ that morall laws (whkhhcmil&estabc ^^•jj;,]'^ 
 *^fuch as are congruous to right reafon) fometimesare ftaci), asnotonly «i«o,ui^% 
 ^ command fuch tbiogs which fcafoa doth readily ice eo be ^m^S^ as d meet, 
 
1 5 7he Morality of the SMath. 
 
 *'but alfo fuchliwsiboiic which mans rcafon may readily and cafiiyerre and 
 '^ go aftray from thit which is camely and meeti And hence ic is that al- 
 though no reafon or win of man could ever have found oucthc moft juft and 
 equ ill proportion of time, or what proportion is moO: comely and (ucable, 
 or that a fevench pare ot time Hiould hive been univerfally obferved as holy 
 to God ; ycc if any externall light and teaching from above, lliall reveal this 
 time,and the equity and rucabkncfleofirjfo that reafon lliall acknowledge it 
 cquill and good, thatif wehavcfix daies for our felvcs, God Hiould have 
 one for himfelf, this is a ftrong argument that fuch a command is morall, bc- 
 caafe reafon thus illuminated cannot but acknowledge it moft meet andc- 
 qiiali: For though reafon may not by any naturall or innate light readily lee 
 that fuch a divifion of time is moft fucable, and yet may readily erre and mif- 
 conceivechem ft fucabjeand convenient proportion and dividon of rim.^, 
 \Li then a iufficient proof of the morality of fuch a command, if the coi- 
 gruity and equity of it be difcerned conjequinier only (as we fay) and by 
 txccrnall light. 
 
 4. What ever law was once wiic upon mans heart in fure nature is full 
 fucabU and congruous and convenient to humane nature, and confcquently 
 good in it felf and moralh For whatever was fo writ upon Ad^ims heart, 
 was not writ there as upon a private perlbn, but as a common perfon, ha- 
 ving the common nature of man, and ftandingintbe room of allmankinde : 
 Henceasnoihing was writ then but what was common to all men, fo fuch 
 things thus writ were good for all men and intable to all men, ic being moft 
 injurious to God, to think that any thing evillhould be imprinted there: \^ 
 therefore it be proved that the law of the Sabbath was then writ upon mans 
 hearr, then it undeniably follows that it is meet and futable to all menftill 
 to obferve a Sabbath day ; and indeed to the right underftandiflg of what is 
 futable to mm as man, and confequent'y morall, there is no.ching more 
 helpfull, thentoconfiderof ourpr.mitive eftate and what was futable to 
 our nature then ; for if chat which is morall in marriage is to be fearched for, 
 in the firft and ancient records of our fi^ft creation by the appointment of 
 our Saviour; 1 then know no reafon (whatever oihers objed) but mo- 
 rality ia all other laws and duties is there to be fought alfo; for although 
 ouroriginallperfcaion is now defaced and loft, and in that reipcd is aw?- 
 rtimftmem ( as fomj call it ) yet it had once a being, and therefore in this 
 controverfie we may lawfully enquire after ir, confidermgefpeciaUy that this 
 being whch once It had, may be iufficientlyknown by the contrary beingof 
 univerfall corruption that is in us now, as alfoby the light of the Scriptures, 
 in which the fearcher and maker of all hearts dedarcs-itumo us, and indeed 
 there are many .morall duties which wdl never appear good and futable to 
 man, but rather hard and unreafonable ( becaufe impofliblc ) untill we ice 
 aod xemcmber fcom wheace .we are fallcn,and what once wt had. ^ 
 
rhe Morality of the S Math. • 17 
 
 Thefis 16. 
 if therefore a morall law command chat which is futable to humane na- i6* 
 ture, and good m ic fclf, then it follows from hence (which was toiichc 
 before) that d^mv.c determination of ibaiething in a law, doth not alway 
 take away morah'ty from a law, for divine determiytatien is many times no 
 more but a plam and poficivc decinration of that which is fucable, juft and 
 MOod and eqiiall for man to obfervc : now that which points out and de- 
 clares unto lis the morality of a law, cannot pofli'aly aboUQi and deftroy fuch 
 a law. For a morall law commanding chat which is fucable and good (as 
 hath been ihewn ) it is impoillble thac the commandrntiu vvh;ch dctermineth 
 and direcfteth to that which is good, thac by this determina:ionit fhoiild 
 overthrow the beingof fucha good law , nay verily particular deterwinathn 
 and poficivenefle (as fome call it) isfo far from abolifhing, as that ic ra- 
 ther adds to the beings as well as to the clearing up and manifeftation of 
 fuch a la w. For '\i it be not fufficient to make a morall hw, that the thing be 
 good in ic felf, but that alfo ic muft be commanded ; then the eommaRdmenc 
 which many times only determines to thatvvhichisgood ( andconfcquently 
 determination ) doth add nnto the being of a morall law. 
 
 Thefts 27. 
 There isfcarce any thing but it is msra/ijiindiff^nfj^ untill it fals under 27, 
 (ome divine decermination : but divine determination is twofold, i. Qivid^comh 
 (uch things which are not good, fie or needtlill for man to obferve without t°v?pfl^aH*'* 
 a command, as Sacrifices and Sacraments, and fuch like: now herein, in ' 
 fuch laws, polltive determination may be very well inconfiftent wichmora- 
 luv ; and ic may be fafcly faid that fuch a law is not morail, buc rather pofi- 
 tive, and thus the learned fometimes fpeak, 2. Of fuch things as are equal!, 
 good in themfelves, needful! and futable for man ; and here particular de- 
 termmacion and morality may kilTe each other, and are not to be oppoi'd 
 one to another J and hence it is that if Gods commandment poOcivcly de- 
 term i^es us to obferve any part of inftitured woriiiip (fuppofe Sacraments 
 or Sacrifices) yet fuch laws are not morall (although it be morall in gene* 
 rail to woriliip God after his own vf ill j ) becaufe the things themfelves are 
 not good in themfelves nor needfull : but if God ilial! determine us to ob- 
 ferve a6abb3th day, this determination doth not takeaway thi: morality of 
 the command ; becaule it being good in it felf to give God the meeceft and 
 fictefi: proportion of time for holv Reft, and the commandment dexlaring 
 that this feventh parr, or fo, is fuch a time, hence it comes to pa(]e that this 
 time is good in it kif, and therefore deter mm^tio-^ by tW commandment in 
 this cafe, doth not abolifh the morality hereof. Ic is a morall duty to pay 
 tribute to C^far, to give to C'^far that which is C^/Srj ; hence becaule a 
 man may give too much or too little to him ; That determination which du 
 reds us to that particular which is C<^(ars due and moft meet for him to re- 
 
 I) ceive. 
 
1 8 The Mcrahty of m SMath. 
 
 ceive, and us to give, that is bcft in it felf, and is therefore moraJl ^ fo prai- 
 ef is a tnorall duty, but bccaufe a man may be tempted to pray too oft or 
 elfe too feldom, hence determination of the fitteft and this fittcft feafon, 
 makes this or that mortll. So 'cis here in the Sabbath ; I doe willingly and 
 freely prof(^fle thus far with our adverfarics of the morality of the Sabbath j 
 that it is a moral! duty to give God fome time and day of holy Refl and wor- 
 Ihip, as 'tis moral! to give Cafir his due, and to pray to Cod ! but becaufe 
 we may give God toomaHy daicsor too few, hence the determination of 
 the moll meet and ficteft proportion of time, and particuhrly of this time, 
 makes this and that to be alfo moral!. If no day at all in general! was good 
 and fi: for man to give to God, and God fliovild notwithftanding command 
 a feventh day, then the commandment of fuch a day, with fuch politive de- 
 termination could not be moral! any more then the determination of facri- 
 fices and fuch like. But eve rj day (fay fome of our adverfaries) (ome cIaj 
 ( fay others of them ) being acknowledged to be equal!, juft and good, and 
 raoft meet to give to God, hence it is that determination of a fcvcntb day 
 doth not aboliil=i but clear up that which is moral!, becaufe it points out 
 unto man that which is mod: meet and equal! : Hence therefore it follows, 
 that a feventh day is therefore commanded becaufe it is good, and not good 
 meerlybecuife commanded. Determination alfo, declaring what is moft 
 meet, dcdareth hereby that this commandment is alfo morall, and not 
 mcerly poficive and ceremonial! : which not being well confidered by (omc, 
 this fourth commandment (having fome more policivencfle and determi- 
 nation then divers of the reft) hath therefore been the chief (lumbling 
 ftone and rock of ofi^ence to many againft the morality of it, by which they 
 have miferably bruifed themfelves, while they have endeavoured to deftroy 
 ir,upon fo grofie a miftake. 
 
 Thefts 28. 
 •28. It is irue that God out of his abfolute foverc'ignty and good pleafiire of 
 his will, might have determined us to obfrve a fourth, aninch, a twentieth 
 pare of our time in holy reft more or lefle, as well as to a feventh ; yet let 
 us confider of God as ading by counfel, and weighing and confidering with 
 himfelf, what ismoft meet and equall, and what p<?p(?r//<?«oftimeis moft 
 ficforhmfelfj and then (with leave of better thoughts when liee better 
 rcafon) Ifuppofe no man can prove (unleflfe he be made privy to the un- 
 known fecrets of the wifdom of God) that any other proportion had been 
 as meet as this now made by the aduall determination of God ,• there was 
 not therefore the meer and fovereign will of God which thus determined of 
 this feventh part ot time, but alfo the wifdom of God, which confidering all 
 things faw it moft meet and futable for man to give, and God to receive 
 from man, and therefore being commanded, and thus particularly deter- 
 mineo, becomes mor«lI«, . ^ 
 
 Tkefs . 
 
Jht Morality of the SMaih. • 
 
 Thejfs 25>. 
 
 IfchitcoiTimandmentbefnorall which is therefore commanded becauic 20< 
 it is good, then hence it follows in the fccond place, thac fucK laws only are 
 not mor^ll laws, which are known to ail men by the light of corrwpc nature . 
 For as hath been already faid, a law may be holy, juft, good, futable and 
 meet for all men to obferve, whether the light of corrupt nature, by awake- 
 ning orfleepingprinciples (as fome call them) know it or no, and fucha 
 comelinefTe and fiicableneiTe in fuch a law is fn^cienc co make ic moral!. 
 There were many fccret morall fins in PattC which bene v«r law, nor could 
 have feen by the light of corrupt nature, untill the law fell upon him with 
 mi'^hcy efficacy and power, Rom.j, for God is not bound co crook his mo- 
 rail laws CO what our corrupt mindes are aflually able of themfelves to fee, 
 any more then to vvhat our corrupc wils are aduaily ableto dec: If the 
 light of nature be imperfe(fl in us fince the fall (which no wife man doubts 
 of) then there may be many things tuily morall, which the light of nature 
 now fees nor, becaufe *tis imperfecfl, which in irs perfedion ic did fee, and 
 th's confideration of the great imperfedion of the light of nature, is alone 
 fiifficient for ever to flop their mouths iwi filence their hearts, who go abouc 
 to mike an imperfccfi light and law of nature, the perfcdl rule and only 
 meafure of morall duties; and who make fo narrow a limitation of thac 
 which is morall to that which is thus imperfedly naturali ; 'tis not now lex 
 nath but UxdAta, which is the rule of moraii duties: The holy Scriptures 
 contain the perfed rule of all morall anions, whether mans corrupted and 
 imperfcd light of nature fee them or no. It is a common, btic a moft perilou?, 
 a'nd almofl: groundlefTe miftake of many in this concroverfie, who when they 
 wo'ild know what is morall and what is not fo, of fuch things as are fet down 
 in the Scriptures, they then fly to the light of corrupc nature, making it to 
 be the fupream Judge hereof, and there fall to examining of them, whether 
 they are feen by the light of nature or no, which is no leile fidy then to fet 
 up a corrupt and blindc judge to determine and declare that which is morall, 
 to make the perfe(5t rule of morality in Scripture to bow down its back to 
 the imperfedion and weaknefleof natiarc, to pull out the fun in heaven from 
 giving I'ghr, and to walk by the light of a dimme candle, and a ftinking fnuf 
 inc';\efockctalmoftgoneout; to make the hornbook of naturall light, the 
 perfedion of learning of the deepeft matters in moraii duties; to make 
 AriflotUs Ethicks as compleat a teacher of true morality, as Adams, heart 
 ininnocency; andinaword, to make man fallen and in a manner perfedly 
 corrupt and miserable, to be as fufficiently furnifhed with knowledge of 
 morall duties, as man (landing, when he was perfedly holy and happy: 
 Imagine therefore that the light of nature could never have found out one 
 dav in k.\tn to be comely and moft meet for man to give unto God, yet if 
 fueh a prcporfion ^f time be moft meet for man to gwe to God, and ic 
 
 D 2 appears 
 
2 The Morality ef the Sabbaih . 
 
 appears fo to be when God reveals it ; It may and Qiould then be accounted 
 a morall law, although the light of nature left in all men could never difcern 
 ic, Ths Schoolmen and cnoft of the popilh generation not coniidering thefe 
 things (which notwithftanding are fome of their own principles) have 
 digged pits for themfelves, and made fnares for fonie of their followers, in 
 abolilliing the fourth Commandment from being (in the true fenfeofit) 
 morall, bccaufe they could not fee how fuch a fpeciall pare of time, vU, a 
 fevsnth parr, could be nacurall, or by the ligh: of corrups: nature difcernable ; 
 which things fodifcernable they fomscimcs concluiecobe only morall. But 
 how far the light of corrupt nauire may difccrn this proporcion,iliali be Ipo- 
 ken torn its proper place. 
 
 Thefts 30. 
 
 OQ, If lallly thofe things which are thus commanded bccaufe they are good,, 
 be moral!, then the whole Decalogue may hence appear to be the morall 
 law of God, becaufethereis no onelaw inic, which is therefore good only 
 becaufe 'tis commanded, but is therefore commanded, becawfe it is good 
 and futable to humane nature : When I fay, fumble to humane natuYe^ I do 
 not mean humane nature confidered abfo]u:eiy, but >(elacively, either in 
 relation to God, or relation unto man : for not only the light of nirure, but 
 of common fenfe alfo, bear witneflc that every precept of rhe fecond Table, 
 wherein man is confidered in relation to man, is thus far good : for how 
 comely and good is it to honour parents, tobe tender of other mens lives 
 and comforts, to prcferve ones felf and others from fikhy pollutions, to do 
 lio wrong buc all the good we can to other mens eQatcs? &c. Nor do I think 
 that any will queftion any one Commandment of this Table to be good and 
 futableto humane nature, unle/!^ it be fome NlmrodoK Erenna (thatpro- 
 ^^zdi he knew no greater jultice then for the Wronger, like the bigger filhes 
 of the fca, to Avallow up the leflcr in cafe chef be hungry ) or fome Turkifh 
 Tarmr or Oannihaly or fome furfetted profeflbr, transformed mto fome 
 licencious opinioniil:, and fo grown mafter of his own confcience, and that 
 can audaciouHy outface the very light. of nature and common fenfe, through 
 t>he righteous judgement of God blinding and hardning his heart.: And if 
 the Commandments of the fecond Table be thus far good in themfelves, are 
 not thofe of the firft Table much more? Is love toman (when drawn out 
 into all the fix Rrcams of the fecond Table) good in it felf, and fliallnoc 
 love CO God, drawn out in the four precepts of ihefirft Table, as the ^prmg 
 from whence all our love to man fliould flow, much more ? Arc the ftreams 
 morally fweet, and is not the fpring it felf of the fame nature ? Love to God, 
 
 ^'f.io and love to man are the common principles (faith Anuina4tn\\)') of the 
 
 *'' law of nature; and all particular precepts ( faith he perhaps unawares) 
 
 are conclufions flowing from thefe principles, o\xi o^ M^tih ii. And are the 
 
 rhcipk? good in thefQrelves, and futable to humane nature, and, do not all 
 
 the 
 
The U6rahy of the Sabbath. 11 
 
 the condufions participate of their nature? For what arc a 11 particular pre- 
 cepts, butparticularunfoIdiDgsoflovcroGod, and love to man ? If all the 
 precepts of the fccond Table be morall, which do only concern raan, why 
 fl:iould any of the firfl fall (liort of that glory, which do immediacly concern 
 God? Shall man have fix, and all of them morally good, and God have buB 
 four, ard fome one or more of them not fo ? Is it comely and good to havo 
 God tobeour God in the fird Commandment, ro woiiliip him afctr his 
 Gun minde in thefecond, to give him this worlTiip with alUhe highcft rcfped 
 and reverence of his Name in the third, and is it not as comely, good and 
 furable, that this great God and King fhould have fome magnificent d'^yof 
 ftate to be attended on by his poor fervants and creatures, both pubhkely 
 .and privately with fpeciall refpedland fervice, asoft as himfeif fees meet, and 
 which we cannot but fee and confelle to be moft equill and jufl-, according 
 to \)^Q fi'^rth Comnjundmeytt f If mans life muft be &m<i(:d into labour and 
 red, isitnotequall and good if we have fixdaies, that God fhould have a 
 feventh ? If the bruit bruit bcafts could fpeak [hey would fay that a fcventh 
 daiesreU is good for ihctn, Exod 2-^.12. and llrall man (who hath more 
 caufe and more need of rell, even of holy reR) fay that ic is not good for 
 him even to rell in [he bof^:im of God himfeif, to wh'ch he is called this day ? 
 Take away a Sabbath, who can defend us from Atheifin, Barbarifme and all 
 m.anner of devilifm and prophanefle ? And is it evil thus to want it, and Oiail 
 it not be good to haveic? I confefVe if God had commanded a perpetual! 
 Sabbath, it had not then been good but finfull to obferve any fee Sabbach : 
 bu: if Gjd wt\\ have man co labour for hirr.(elf fix daies, and this labour be 
 morally good being now commanded 5 why is it not then as good to obferve 
 a fcventh in rei^ to God, lining alfo commanded of him ? 
 
 Thejis 3 I . 
 It is therefore at leafl: an indigefted aifertion of tliofe who affirm that the - j ^ 
 Decalogue lets out the precepts of the law of nature, and yec withal! doth Aquin'f.vy^ 
 £iperad certain preccpcs proper to the Jewifbpeople; in which bft refped ^^•'^^,''^- 
 they fay ail men s re not bound to the obfervance thereof ( and they produce ^r^ld '"* 
 the fourth Commandment for proof.) but in refped of the firft they are : * 
 But although in the applicatioa of a law, fomething may be proper to the 
 Jewiili people, yet (wuh leave of the learned) there is never a law inic 
 buc ic is moral! and common to all: for to make any law in the T^ecahgue 
 proper, is an ailertionfpringing from a faiie and blinde principle, viz. That: 
 that lav;- only is morail which is natural! ; not natural!, as futable to humane 
 nature, but which is feen and known by the common li,ght of corrupt nature 
 without the help ofany external! uiher or teacher. If alfo any laws inthe 
 Decalogue be proper, how will any tinde out and difcern morail laws which 
 concern a!!, from proper-laws which appertain only to fome ? For if God 
 hach made fuch a. minglingj and not fevered morail lawsby tbemfeives, then 
 
 D 3 man 
 
2 2 the Morality of the SMm h. 
 
 man hath no taw or revelation by any diftincfl and rcvere\i laws Icfc unto him 
 to difcern laws proper and peculiar, from laws morall and common, which 
 how pernicious it may be to mens fouls to be left to fuch uncertainty, as 
 alfo how injurious to God and croiTetohiimain endsin difcovering morall 
 laws, let the wife confiJcr; for if they fay that we muft Hy for help herein 
 to the light of corrupt nature, then as hath been fliewn, pnimperfedl light, 
 and a blinde guide, and a corrupt judge muft be the chief rule of difcerning 
 that which is morill, from that which is peculiar and proper 5 for doubtlefl'e 
 fuchakindeoflightis the light of corrupt nature. 
 
 Thefs 32. 
 5'^' Some think that thofe commandments only arc morally good, which the 
 Gofpel hath declared and confirmed to be lo : and by this lliift they think 
 to avoid the abfurdity of flying to the blinde guide of corrupt nature to 
 judge of thefe colours viz, what is morall and what is not. M^ PrtPr.rofs 
 therefore excludes the fourth Commandment from being morall, the other 
 ninebeingratifiedby the light of the Gofpel, vvh?chthis (hcfaich) is not: 
 but if his meaning be that there mu[\ be a generall r^<ttification of laws morall 
 by the verdidl of the Gofpel, ihcn the fourth Commandment cannot be ex- 
 cluded from being morall, becaufe k\Mi\id.r^tificatioji in generall from the 
 Gofp^^l : for therein we reade chic the morall law is ho/j,jf4fl a?id ^ood^ 
 Rom.j, andthat Chrift came not todtftroy the lead: jot or tittle of the law, 
 Matth,'^, much leffj a whole law of the fourth Commandment. In the 
 Gofpel affo God promifeth to write his law upon our heart?, wherein the 
 fourth CoiTimandment is not excepted. But if his meaning be this, that the 
 Gofpel muft pardculaily mention, and fo make a p<irticyJ<ir ratificathn (as 
 it were) by name of every morall law, thenhisalfcrrion is unfound ; there 
 being many judiciall laws of J^/o/^/, of which fomeare wholly morall, o- 
 thers containing in them fomethingof common and morall equity, which 
 we have no exprelTe mention of in the bkiTcd Go^p?l : and let him turn 
 over all the leaves of the Gofpel, hefhall not finde that proportion of time 
 which himfelf affirms to be morall in the fourth Commandment, to be ex- 
 prefTely and particularly mentioned in the Gofpel; and therefore thataUo 
 muft be excluded from being morall upon his own principles, as well as what 
 we contend for in this Commandment fo to be. 
 
 Thfts 33. 
 
 33. Some of thofe who maintain the law of the Sabbath to be ceremonial), 
 
 ^^p^*g'^'»''affirm that every law in the Decalogue isrot morall upon this ground, to 
 
 iFonrlfif/z. *'wit, becaufe the law is called Gods Covenant, which Covenant theyfhew 
 
 a.c4^.^ «< from fun dry inftances, not only to comprehend morals, butalfo ceremo- 
 
 *'nials : for they make it the excellency of the Decalogue to comprehend, 
 
 <'asa fliort epitome, all Gods Ordinances, boih morall and ceremoniall, 
 
 "which cpicome is more largely opened in the writings of Mofes, where 
 
 "not 
 
Ik Mordiy of the Sdbath, 23 
 
 "not only moral!, but alfo ceremoniall laws are exprefled and difperfcd. 
 **Andhencethey think that as the othernine are thefummary and epitome 
 •*of all morall ordinances, io the fourth Commandment which was kepc 
 •' with the pradife of ceremonies, was the rummary and epitome of all the 
 *' ceremoniall ordinances, and hence the fourth Commandment becomes 
 "ceremoniall But for anfwer to this wily notion, unjuHly fathered upon 
 jliiftin and Cahtn byfome, it may thus far be granted, that as the word 
 Law is fometimes taken more (Iridiy for the Decalogue only, Rom,'^,20, 
 ?^w.3.8. and fometimes more largely, for the whole dodrine contained in 
 all the writings of the old Teftamenr, wherein the Gofpcl alio is compre- 
 hended, /y^/.ip.y. P/^/. up. 1,5 1,5). fo the word Covenant is fometime 
 taken more ftridly for the covenant of works, which is contained compen- 
 dioLiflyinthe Decalogue only, writ by the finger of God, in two Tables, 
 £)^^r,4.i5,T4. Exod.T,^.'^^, and fometime more largely for all the holy 
 writings of cJIff?/«f/,^AW. 24.7,8. and 34.10, Levit.iC.i^. 7^^.34-13* Now 
 although ail the writings o^Mofes may be called the covenant, as it is hrgely 
 taken ; and fo the covenant comprehends not only moral), but ceremoniall 
 laws; yet they are nev::r called That Covenant which was writ by the finger 
 ofGod in two Tables of (lone, and giv^n to Al of es : and in this (Irid fcnfe 
 the word Covenant comprehends no other lawsbu: morall, nor can the 
 placesand texts which they alkadge evince the contrary, for in that place 
 of ^'aW. 24.7. icisnotfaid that the Tables of the Covenant, but the Book 
 of th J Covenant was read in the audience of all the people; which book we 
 readily acknowledge to comprehend ceremonials as" well as morals, but not 
 the Tibles of the Covenant, of which the qucfiion now is : fo alfo when the 
 Lord faith, £,v5i 3 4.10. that he will make a Covenant, his meaning is that 
 he Will revive his Covenant by wricing ( as ic is there kt down in the fame 
 chaprer ) in which writing it is very true that there is mention made of many 
 ceremoniall laws; but fuppofe this covenant written by ^/^/?/ compre- 
 hends fundry ceremoniall laws, will ic therefore follow that the Tables of 
 the Covenan: wricten with the finger of God did the like } No fuch matter 
 and therefore there is an * exprefle difrerence put in the fame chapter, vtr/e * ^"^ ^«'^«^» 
 27,28. between the covenant written by Mofes, and the ten Command- ^^'^''*'" ''**^ 
 ments written by the finger of God. But fecondly, Let it be granted that 
 the Decalogue comprehends fummarily all the laws which are "particularly 
 difperfed here and there in the writings of Mofes^ yet it doth not follow 
 that there muft be one ceremoniall law written by the finger of God, and 
 hfted up in the Decalogue to be the epitom.e a?;d fummary of all ceremoniall 
 laws elfewhete explained in the writings oi Mojes: For all laws, whether 
 ceremoniall or I'udiciall may be referred to the Decalogue as appendices to 
 it or applications of it, and foto comprehend all other laws as their fum- 
 mary. Beit fuch a (iimmary will no way cn-forcs a necefficy of making any 
 
 .^1 
 
24 "The Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 one of chern the epitome of eeremonial?, and the other nine of them of the 
 morals, for we know that many jadiciall hws are comprt:hendcd under 
 morall laws, being referred as appendices thereunto by C^/'2/i;j, Ma^tyr^ 
 Chemnitini, zy^meSy and fundry ochers, and yet i: will not follow from 
 hence that one of the laws in the Decalogue mull oe a jadiciall law as the fum^ 
 mary of all juiieials, which arc branches of the covenant as well as W Prim* 
 r^/e" his ceremonials, 
 
 Thcfis 34. 
 34* It Qiould not fecm ftrange that that law which in the gencrall nature of ic 
 is morall, may in the particular application of it be unto a thing ceremoniall, 
 and in this refpet^ it cannot be denied but that the morall law may compre- 
 hend all ceremoniall laws; but it will not hence follow (as W Trimrofe 
 infers ) that one lavv in the Djcalogue mud: be ceremoniall as ihe head and 
 fuiTimary of all ceremonial! laws, becaufe we fay ceremoniall laws may be 
 comprehended under fome morall law, as fpjciall applications there- 
 of: cx,^r. Ic is a morall law to worQ^ip God according to his own will, 
 and not after mans inventions, as the fecond Commandment holds it forth ; 
 Now in the application of this law the Lord points out his own inlHtuted 
 worlliip in fundry fignificant ceremonies, facniices, facramenrs, g^^. which 
 particular inPiitutions (though ceremoniall) are to be referred unto, and 
 are comprehended under the fecond Commandment which is a morall law : 
 for if God will be worOiiped with his own woriliip according to this Com- 
 mandment, then its necclfjiry for the Lord to fl:iew (and that under his 
 CommanJmenr) what thole ii^ilitutionsbe; whereio he will be worfi^iped, 
 manyofwhi:h are ceremonial), which arc therefore direcflly comprehended 
 here. 
 
 Thefts 55. 
 55. There is therefore no nccefiity ofmakingonelawin the Decalogue to be 
 ceremoniall, that it may be the fummary head of all ceremonials, viz. be- 
 caufe ceremonials are branches of the Covenant, which is rhe Decalogue; 
 for upon the like ground there muH be one jLidiciall law alio as the fummary 
 of all judicials, nay one Evangelicall law alfo as the head of all Evangelicals, 
 fprinkled here and therein /^i?,^fj his writings, of which wereade, ?^^.5 45. 
 i^f^.10.6,7,8. wich Deti:.7,oAi^\'i,. dl.'^.S, with gen.n.i. for judicials 
 and Evangelicals are branches of the Covenant, as- well as ceremonials, if 
 M'^ "Pr/wr^^/tf his principle be true; but if by his own confeilion nine of them 
 are morals, and oae of them only the head of teremonials, how fhali judiciall 
 and Evangelicall fummaries come in ? which cither he mu(\ make room for in 
 the Decalogue, or acknowledge his foundation to be rotten, upon which he 
 hath built up one cereraonia»ll law among the nine r^^iorals, 
 
 Thefis 36. 
 3<^« It is true, that among men, the fame body of laws may be framed up of 
 
 divers 
 
The Morality of the sMath. 25 
 
 divers article?, as W Primrofe pleads, but that the Decalogue was fueha 
 body as had ceremonials mixt with morals, it can never be made good by 
 any colour of proof, except it be that which wc have flievvn v\ill asftrong- 
 \^ enforce an introducflion of fomeone judiciall and another Evangelical! 
 law into the Decalogue, as well asone ceremoniall • but fuch a eonfufion of 
 law and Gofpel, Evangelicals and jiiiicials, ceremonials arr.d morals, the 
 blcfTedGod abhors: for ic neither luces with Gods wifJom and eni in gi- 
 ving the law, nor yet vviih mans weakncfle (which God picics) to make 
 fuch a jamming and eonfufion of things together : for who can then tell 
 what law is moral} and what Evangclicall, and what ceremonial!, unlcfTcic 
 be ( as was (liewn ) by flying for light to the didates and inftird of nature, 
 to lliew unto poor dcceipifuU man, what laws are moral! and what not, 
 wh?rcia the remedy would have been as bad as the difeafc ? 
 
 Thefts 37. 
 * If there mull be one law in the Dialogue, ceremoniall, that fo the more pJ/'„^ 
 *^aiithoricy maybe procured hereby ( as M^7'y/w»'f>/e pleads) unto all Gods caj».ft.s.8,' * 
 ''Ordinances, and therefore one of the. ceremonials was written in the 
 '*D:calo«u3 with Gods own fingfrjand honoured with the like prerogatives 
 **a^ the mofiU laws vvere, which were immediarly fpoken by God himfclf : 
 Then (if this reafoningbc folid ) why was not one judiciall and another 
 Evangelical! precept alike honoured alfo ? For was there not as much need 
 to procure authority to this as well as to ceremonials? and yet we fee their 
 authoricy was fufficiently procured without being fhujlidmQ the Decalogue^ 
 and fo mighc ceremonials alio, 
 
 Thefis 38^ 
 There were three fort of laws, which are com-fi. Moral!. 3§. 
 
 monly known, and which vvcremollemi-<2. Ceremonial!. 
 ncnLly appearing among the Jews, C3, Judicial!, 
 
 Thefis 3 p. , 
 
 The moral! refpedled their manners as they were men, and are th«refore -^p, 
 called moral!. The ceremoniall refpedled them as a Church, and as fuch a 
 kinde of Church. The judiciall as a Common wealch, and as that particular 
 Commonwealth. Moral! laws were to govern them as a humane fociety, 
 Ceremoniall as a facred fociety. Judiciall as a civil fociety : Thus the Learned 
 fpeak, and being candidly understood, are1:roe. 
 
 Thtjis" 40. 
 The mofal! law contained in the Decalogue, is nothing elfe but the law v^^ 
 of nature revived, or a fecond edition and impreffion of that primitive and 
 perfedl law of Nature, which in the ftate of mnocency was engraven upon 
 mans heart, but now again written upon Tables of ftone, byihe finger of 
 God, For man bemg made in the Image of God, he had therefore chelaw 
 ofholineffeand righteoufncffe, in which Gods Image confided^ written m 
 
 E his 
 
rhe Morality of the Sahhath. 
 
 his heart: but havirtg by his fall broken this Table, and loft this Image, nei- 
 ther knowing or doing the will of God throagh the law of fin now engraven 
 on it:Hence the Lord hath in much pity made known his law again,and given 
 US a fair copy of it in the two Tables of ftone, which are the copy of that 
 which was writ upon mans heart at firft, becaufe the firft Table contains 
 Lovi to Qodi» holiuefe ; the fecond. Love toman in righteoufne^e : which 
 holinefleand righteoufnefl'c are the two parts of Gods Image which was 
 once engraven upon mans foul, in his primitive and perfcd eftace, Eph,j^,2^, 
 Nor indeed do I fee how that popifh argument will be othcrwife anfwered, 
 pleading for a poffibility in man to keep the law perfedly in his lapfed and 
 and fallen eftatc in this life, for, fay they, God makes no laws of impoffi- 
 ble things, it being unjuft for God to require and cxad that of a man which 
 he is notable to do: To which it is commonly and truly anfwered, That 
 man had once power to keep the law in his innocent eftate, and hence 
 though man be not able to keep it now, yet God may require if, becaufe he 
 once gave him power to keep it; and that therefore 'tis no more unjuft to 
 cxad fueh obedience which he cannot perform, then for a creditor to re- 
 quire his money of his broken debtor or fpendthrift, who is now failed ( as 
 they fay ) and not able to repay. Mm therefore having once power to keep 
 the law, and now having no power, this argues ftrongly that the law of the 
 Decalogue contains nothing but what was once written as a law of life upon 
 his heart in his innocent eftate : for I fee not how Gods Judice can be clear- 
 ed ifheexadsfuch obedience in the Decalogue which is impoflibie for man 
 to give, unlefle the very fame law and power of obedience was written upon 
 his heart at firft : and therefore it is a wiide notion of theirs who think chat 
 the Covenant of works which God made wich Adam, is not the fame for 
 matter with the Covenant of works espi eft in the morall law; for we fee 
 that there is the fame Image of holincfle and righteoufneite required in the 
 Tabks of ftone, as the condition of th s Covenant, which was ot\ce written 
 upon mans heart, and required in the fame niJinner of him. NoW this law 
 thus revived and reprinted is the Decalogue, becaufe moftnarurall and fu* 
 tabic to h.imanc nature, when it was mide moft perfed, therefore it is 
 Mniverfall and perpetuall, the (ubftance alfoof this law being love to God 
 and man, holmciTc toward God and righteoufneffe toward nun^Matik 
 22.37,35). Z,^.i. Hence alfo this law muft needs be morall, univerfall and 
 pcrpetuall, unlefle any ftiould be fo wicked as to imagine it to be no duty 
 of univerfall or perpetuall equity, either to love God, or to love man, to 
 perform duties of holincflc toward the one, or duties of righteoufneffe to- 
 ward the other : Hence again, the things eommjinded in this law are there- 
 fore commanded becaufe they are g<r>od, and arc therefore morall ; unltfle 
 any ftiall think that itis not good inu elf to love God or man, tobckoly 
 Qi: tighteousj and which is ftiU oblctvable, there is fuch a love required 
 
 " herem. 
 
The Morality of the SMath. %7 ^ 
 
 herein, and fuch a lovelinefle put upon thefe laws, as that by vertuc of thcfe 
 all eur obedience in other things which are not morall, becomes lovely; 
 for there were many ceremoniall obfervanccs in which and by which the 
 people of God expreft their love to God, as WPrimroJe truly concludes 
 from ^>^«^6.1, 2,3,4,5,6. and 3/w«A. 22.37,38,40. but yet this love did *''♦* *^^p*^ j 
 arifeby vertueofamorallrule, for therefore ic was love to wor(hip God 
 in ceremoniall duties, becaufe it was lovely to worfhip God with his own 
 worfliip (of which thefe were parts) whioh is the morall rule of the fe- 
 cond Commandment. "And hence M"^ Primrofe may fee his grolTe miftake 
 *' in making one law of the Decalogiae ceremoniall, bccaufe the fummary 
 "of the Decalogue being love to God atid love to man, and our love to 
 " God beingfhewn in ceremoniall as well as in morall duties, becaufe our 
 «* IcDve If feen and ftie wn in our obedience to all the Commandments of God, 
 ''ceremoniall as well as morall. For though there be love in ceremoniall 
 duties, it is not fo much in refpcfl of themielves, as in refpedt of fome morall 
 rule by vertue of which fuch duties are atcended. 
 
 Thefts 41. 
 
 The ceremoniall law conHfting chiefly of types and fhaddows of things ^t. 
 to come, H£i^,S.$. and therefore being to ceafe when the body was come, 
 CohiA^, was not therefore perpetuall (as the law morall) but tempora- 
 ry, and of binding power only to the nation of the Jews and their profelytes, 
 and not putting any tie upon all Nations, as the morall law did. Every ce- 
 rcm)ni5ll law was temporary, but efery temporary law was not ceremo- 
 nall (as fome fay) asisdemonftrablefromfundry judicials, which in their 
 determinations were proper to that Nation, while that J ewiOi polity con- 
 tinued, and are not therefore now to be obferved. 
 
 Thefis 42. 
 
 The JudlcialtUws fome of them being hedges and fences to fafcguard aj; 
 both morarll and ceremoniall precepjts, their binding power was therefore 
 mixt and various, for thofe which did fafeguardany morall law (which Is 
 P'^rpecuail ) v^ hether by juft puniiimentsor otherwife, do ftiUi-norally binde 
 ail Nations ; For as Pifeator argues, a morall law is as good and as prcciows ^'^j^^'*/*" 
 now in thele times as then, and there is as much need of the prefervation of ^° 
 thefe fences to preferve thefclaws, in thefe times and at all times, as well 
 as then, there being as much danger of the treading down of thofe laws by 
 the Wilde beads of the world, and bruuQi men (fometimcs even in Churches) 
 niow,asthen; and hence God would have all Nations preferve thefe fences 
 for ever, as he would have that lawprefetved for ever which thefe fafc- 
 guard: but on the other fide thefe judicials which did fafcguird ceremoni- 
 all laws, which we know were not perpetuall, but proper to that Nation, 
 hence thofe judicials which compafle thefe about arc not perpetuall nor 
 univerfallj thcecremonialsbdngpluckcupby their roots, to whatpurpofe 
 
2§ The Morality fif tk SMath. 
 
 iheafliould ttxic fences and hedges ftand? As on the contrary the marafs 
 abiding, why ihoEiId not their judicials and fetices remain > The LeaiEcd gc- 
 Bcrally doubt not co a&m, tSiat M-sfts |Lidkia£s bindc allEadon?, io far 
 forth as they contain any moral! tqmty in thcia, i^hsch tiaorall cquky doth 
 appear, not only m refpcd of the end of tht hw^ when ic i^ ord^rtd tor 
 \id PiCc *^^^"^^" ^"^ luiiverfill good, but chiefly in refped ofche law which theAy 
 fLfjnix. fafeguard and fence, which if it be morall, it'smoi^ juO: and equal', ihac 
 p'^'mo^'^* cither the fame or the like judiciall fence ( according to fome fie proportion) 
 {hould prcfervc it ftill, bccaufe 'cis but juft and equall, that a moral! and 
 univerfall law inould be univcrfally preferved : from whence by the way, the 
 vvcaknefieof their rcafonings may be obferved, who that they might take 
 away the power of the civil Magiftrace in matters of thefiift Table (which 
 oncehchadin the Jewifh CommoR-wealth) affirm ihat fuch civil power, 
 ;ihen, did arife from the judicial/, and not from any morall law: vvhenas 
 it's m^nifeft that this his power in prcfetving Gods worilvip pure from Idc- 
 latroiis and prophane mixtures, according to the judicial! laws, was no 
 more but a fence and fafeguard fee about morall Commandments; which 
 fences and prefer vatives arc therefore (for f^bRanec) to contmu^ in as 
 much power and authority now, as they did in thofe daie^ as long as (uck 
 Jaws continue in their morality, which thele prcferve : the duties of the fitO: 
 Table beingaifo as much morall as thofe of the fecond, to th^ prefervmg of 
 whichiater from hurt and fpoil in refpcd of their morality, no wife man 
 quedions the extent of his power. 
 
 Tkefu 43. 
 43* If therefore the queftion be now made, whether the law of the f^jurch 
 Commandment be morall or no, wc mull then remember chat the true iiate 
 of the quedion is not in thi«^,-to wir, fi^'hc-thtr the taw of the S\ii?^dih Os a 
 frincifUef the lhh$ of nature, iq^own And evident vf it jelf. or at Icafl fuch as 
 ^ ^ every man that hath chetife gf reafon may readily fi»de o'At^ without fimeixter^ 
 cap^i »alIrev^/atio?i ( 2isW fronjtde injurioufly ftates itwrallling herein with his 
 own (haddovV, with many others of his fellowniip in this controverfie.) 
 ¥ot moraiity ( as hath been declared ) is of larger extent then fuch naiftra" 
 litj. But the qucft.on is, whether it is one of th^fe laws which is therefore 
 commanded, bccaufe it is holy, juft and good in it feif, whether man fee it 
 by any previous light of corrupt nature, I or na ; and ocing chiis command- 
 ed as fuch a law, whether '\t be notth-rtfore of perpetual! and univerlail 
 obligation, binding all Nations and ptrfons in all ages, in i\\^\v M^Arts, lives^ 
 manners y to the obfervance thereof, as a part of that holwc^e we owe to 
 God, and which God requires of all men according.to rule s of morall equi- 
 ty : or on the contrary whether it be not rather a typicalK ceremoniall, figu- 
 * rativc and temporary precept, binding only fome perfons, or that one 
 l^aupnof the Jews foi fome time, from the obedience of whrchlaw, Chri- 
 
 ftians 
 
The mrality ^f tk SMaih. 7 9 
 
 ilrans (in refped of any law of God) are now exempted? 
 
 Thejis 44. 
 
 For^Ieariogup whereof, it may not be ami(Te to take notice of the a^rcc- 44. 
 meoc (aj leaft in words) hereto, on all hands, even byihofe who oppofe 
 that n^sraliiy of the Sabbath w hkh ^e p!ead for. All fides agrf e m thi?, % iz. 
 That the law of this fourth Coir-mindmLTit concerning fhe Sabbathj-s mandf, 
 Butasti-e Ciffcrentes abcu: the meaning of Ti^es Peiryjs are many, ^0 here 
 thcdilificiiK'y lits toknow, how, and \n\\\\ix.,(hfi^ndr(fp ^ ir may be called 
 morall ; for M"" /^<?»yWtf expretfely confcnis in (his, viz. '^That all the Com- ^''"^ ^^* 
 "mandments of the Decaiogu6'>^re rTiOiall, but every cneinhis proportion ' 
 "and degree, and fo (faith he) isthatof the Sabbath, ic is morall for fub- 
 " ftance, but not fur circumOanee. 
 
 "M' F^imroit alfo ( when he is awake ) exprefTJy confefleth thus much, P''-'^'- ra^^ 
 "z;.-^. That the Sabba h is morall in its foundation, end, marrow and princi- "l***;^ ^^ 
 "pall fubfiance ; and ilutsi fit fste^i time Is moraIl,and grounded on theprinci- 
 "pies of nature; andthirefore the Gentiles (faith he) had their y^r^^rV/ 
 *« of religion? and this (hetelsus) is ratified bythcGofpel, which com- 
 " mendeth CO the faithful 1 the AfTemblingof themfelvcs together for Word 
 ^* and S?craments, and conftqtiently ihac they have aj>fotntsdtim s to attend 
 ^Vtipon them, wherein the Word of God be read and preached as under tf,e 
 " 0I4 Tffianr.ent ever) Sabbath day r nay he yields yet more, viz. That noc 
 ''only filmed ti^ts, but that alfo there fhould be a c^nvenicm proportion and 
 ^^fimhlefie^fiencyoftimeioiGoiskiy'iC^^ now under the Gofpcl, asunder 
 "the law; and therefore affirms, that the Jewifhannuail Feafts, and new 
 "Moon?, being biic once a year oronceamoncch, and fo being rare and 
 " lcld( me, could not tesch us the convenient and moft futable frequency of 
 **Gods piiblick fervice, as the Sabbath did, which returned weekly, and 
 '^^fhercforehc'faith that the Commandment runs noc thus, viz. Remember 
 "to keep (he »€^-> Moons ^ but Rtmemh r to k^(p holj the Sahhath day. So 
 "rhatb) Mr /*?'jvjv©y'tf conctflion, noc onlyan/su^*, but 1 fii?9fed rime^ noc 
 ^^only afiificd^- but alfo Huh a cohvehi-^nt proportion g^nd /Hmi>/e frequency 
 ^^ of time, asisonte in feven daies, is morally holy by veitue of the fourth 
 ^Commandmcnr. 
 
 ^g<,marm alfo conclude* that the publiek worfliipof God required in the <^om.ittvejf, 
 ^'fourth Commandment, cals for obfeivation, not only ofrf^m/», but alfo ^/pfj. '^*'*'' 
 " of fiijf>cie>3t ddi\t% for woilhip; and what thefe fufficient daies be, is to be 
 "gathered from the fourth commandment, liz, that they be not more 
 ^^rare^nd/ fefie^u.nfi then the weekly Sabbaths of the Ifraelice?, bccaufe 
 "if Gud (as he llitws) chiiilenged a weekly Sabbath of a ftifnecked people 
 "iaden with the burden of many other Feftivals and ceremonies, how thm 
 "fliould Chriftians, freed from their yoaks and burdens, have themlcflc 
 "frequent? 
 
 E 3 U.Breer* 
 
30 T/je' Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 5rw,pj.i7» U.^r^ermodsiKotothcWkQ purpofe profefleth, That Chriftians fliotiUl 
 ^'' not be leffc devout and religious in celebrating the Lords day, then the Jews 
 were in celebrating their Sabbath, and his reafon ( labouring with fome 
 fiice of a contradid:ion ) is this, viz, becaufe the obligation of our thank- 
 fulneflc to God is more then theirs, although the obligation of his Com- 
 mandment to us in that behalf is Icfle : for I confcflTe it's beyond my (hallow- 
 nefle to conceive, how the thankfulreTc rtiould be more and the Command- 
 ment lefle; unle/Iehe will imagine fome fuch popilli work, as exceeds tt.e 
 command. 
 
 ivaii^jjfer, JValUui comes almoft quite over thethrefliold unto us, and maintains 
 
 *'^^'"*4,' "P^" ^^^'^ arguments, ''that by the force and analogy of chis fourth Com- 
 **'mandment, all the ttue worlbippcrsof God, arc bound to the exacfl ob- 
 " fervation of one day in the circle and compafle of feven ; and then he pro- 
 ducethacloud ofwirnedcs, both ancient Fathers, and the chief of our late 
 reformers, teftifying to the fame morality of one day in ieven, which hirafelf 
 mainrains ; that whoever Hull reade him herein, would wonder how ic 
 fliould ever enter into the hearts of learned men {^%ivhite, Rogtrs.DoWy 
 
 *HeyU>i, the * Hiftorian, and many others) to imagine and go about to "befool the 
 world, as if the morality of a fevcnth day was the late and foure fruir grow- 
 ing out of the crabbed and rigid ftock of fomeEnglifli Pur'tans and refor- 
 mers, v\ herein they are forfaken of all their fellows, whom in all other 
 things they fo much admire in other reformed Churches. It being therefore 
 confefTedon all hands that the Sabbath ismorall (though Iconfcfle at other 
 times our adverfaries unfay this at kaft in their argumenrs;) theconrro- 
 verfie therefore only lies in this, viz. Hoiv and in Vpkat rejpe^ it jlould 
 be p!' 
 
 Tloefs 45. 
 45. The gcnerall confent herein alfo is this, to wit. That the morality of the 
 Sabbath chiefly 15 in refped of fome generality, or in refped of fomething 
 which is more generall in this Commandment, rather then m refpcdof that 
 particular day which the Commandment doth alfo point at : for [^ the mo- 
 rality of it did lie in obferving that particular day only, how could there be 
 a change of that day to another ? For if the morality of a Sabbath was limi- 
 ted unto a particularity, or to that one particular day, it is then impoflible 
 that any other day to which that firft is changed, fhould be morall by vertuc 
 of the fame Commandment : but we fliall &ew in fit place, that the day is 
 lawfully changed and morally obferved, and therefore that which is in this 
 Commandment firftly morall, muftofneceflity beforaewhatmore generall. 
 
 Thefii 46. 
 4i5, Ihz generall which wc acknowledge to be morall in this command (right- 
 ly iindcrftood ) is a Jeventh %. Our adverfaries would make i: more ge- 
 neral), andrefoiveitintoa<%or fome day forfolemn worfcip, yec when 
 
 they 
 
7 he Morality of the SAbhath. jX 
 
 they ars forced to fee and acknowledge by the dint of argument, that this is 
 too general!,becaufe thus the commandment may be obferved,if one day in a 
 thoufand, or oqce in ones life it be fandificd ; they doe therefore many times 
 come nearer CO us, to fomewhat lerfe gencrall then a day, vtz., toaftinted, 
 fixed and appointed ii^)\ and to fuch an appointed day as contains a fuffici- 
 ent proportion of time for God, t\ ith convenient frequency, no leffe fre- 
 quent then theirs in the old Tcftament, which was every fevenchday, as may 
 be feen, T/^r// 44. and truly thus much being acknowledged by them, one 
 would think that th^ controverfie ( with this fort of men ) was brought unco 
 a comfortable and quiet iflue and full agreement, but it is ftrange to fee 
 how contrary the language isofthcfe men fleeping, from what ic is when 
 they arc awake : They ftnke fiercely at a feventh day, and a determined time, 
 as impoflible to be morall, when they meet with them in the dark, and yec 
 we fee, acknowledge them ( in effcd ) to be morall, when they meet with 
 them fometimes in the light. 
 
 Thefts 47. 
 But becaufe a feventh day may be accounted convenient by fome, and 47. 
 morall by others and becuufe the drtermination of it may be made by fome, 
 ci. her more h-xeornarrovp, ziz. either to anvday in feven, which man or 
 the Chuvch may appoint; or to inch a fcventh day as God fliall determine. 
 It IS therefore need fu'l for the clearing up of this controverfie, to feek out 
 w til an impaitiall and fober mindc, the true meaning ofthfiurth Command" 
 men'\ and to enquire more particularly andexadly what is required in ir, 
 and whacis command, d by verrue of ir, wlich fome able men not taking 
 a right obfervation of in the dark and tempeftuoi s rimes of cGncroverfie,havc 
 therefore made miferable fhipwrack, not only ot the truth, but alfo of chcm- 
 felves, and fouls of others, 
 
 rhcfti 48. 
 The things which arefi. Some things are /^Ww^Wo; /. Primaril)', firftly a%^ 
 morally enjoined in^ and more generally moral!, 
 this Commandmenc,j2. Some things are [ecmdarto*^ u Secondarily, 
 are thefe two, % derivatively and confequently morall. 
 A time, a day, a feventh day of reft arc in the firft refped morall, but in the 
 other refpefl this or that particular feventh day may be faid to be morall : 
 Th'ngipri.iiar ly morall are perpetualljthings lecondarily moraira're notnc- 
 ccfrariiyfo; As tor example, To honour fuperiours and fathers, whether of 
 Common, weukh or fam Jy, is primarily morall, but to honour thsfe or thofe 
 particulai fupeiiours is fecondarily morall, becaufe our honouring of them 
 ariieth from that primary and generall law of morall equity, vi^.^ that if 
 our fathers are to be honoured, then in the fecond place it follows, that 
 ihef and rhofe particalarperfons being our lawful! fathers.^ are to be ho- 
 noured alfo : To honour ovir fathers whom.God hath frt ovtr us, is pcrpc- 
 
 tuall; 
 
js 7he Moralitf of the Sabbath. 
 
 tmll J to honour thefe or thofe particular fathers, is not perpetuall, becaufe 
 themfelves arc not perpecuall biit changeable. It wasamorail du.ytoho 
 nour this particular King David, buc it was not p.^rpermll, for when David 
 was taken away, they were no: bound to honour King David any more, 
 whenKing *y<?^z?37« his fun became his fucceflour: norvvas ic aceremoniall 
 duty to honour this or thi't parcicular King, becaufe it was changeable from 
 one to another, bur it was a moral! du:y f) to do; wherein the hvv and rule 
 is not chaagcd( it being primarily morall) but only the ohjeEl, which wc 
 are bound to honour frcondarily in refpcd of thegenerall rule; So 'tis in 
 this law of the Sabbath; To keep a day, a feventhdaies Sabbath, is perperu- 
 ^ all, ic being primarily morall, buc to obferve this or that pariicular day, is 
 
 of it felf changeable bemgfecondarily morall : For if it be a morall duryro 
 fandifie a fevcnth day which Goil flull appoint, then it's morall (as it 
 were) inthefecond place t) fand iie this or that feventh interchangeably 
 which God doih appoint, and yet ic doth not follow that this or that par- 
 ticular fjvcnth is in it fclf ceremontall, becaufe it is changeable : for in fjch 
 a change the morall rule is not changed, but the morall objed only to whxh 
 ic is morally applied ; the duty is nor changed, buc only the day r and in this 
 refped ic Ihould not feemhard to make fomechings morall wh ch are not 
 pcrpetuall; for laws primarily moral! are properly perp.tual!, but laws 
 Jecondatily morall, not nccelTarily io^ buc changeable, becaufe, as hath 
 been faid, herein there is no change of the rule, but only of the objed 
 or a[fplicatioa of the rule, which may be va/ioufly and yet morally ob- 
 fsrved. 
 49, . Thefis 49. 
 
 Tnis diftindionof things primarily and fecondarily morall is taken from 
 
 the truch of things, and which thofe who ftudy this conrrov^rfie will fee 
 
 themfelves forced unro by the fliifcs and fallacies of the adverfaries of the 
 
 truth herein ; the Commandments of God are exceeding broad according 
 
 to Davids m^^afurc, ^/afAig.^S. and very comprehenfive, and hence the 
 
 generals include many particulars, and fometime the particulars have a fpe- 
 
 Tm^? ^**^^ relped co things more general(,as is evident in the fecond and fiffh Com- 
 
 de'sab.M* Hiandment, which Synechdoche, M. -^r^^iacknowledgechtobein all other 
 
 commands except the Sabbath, wherein he will have no general! underRood, 
 
 but only a commindment to obferve that particula r diy only, that \o he may 
 
 go one ftcp further then fome of his betters, and utterly aboliQi the morality 
 
 ofthis command ; buc whether this Commandment is fo narrowly reftrain- 
 
 ed, will appear more fully infhewingthc truth of this diftindion out of the 
 
 CommaRdmenc, more particuhrly. 
 
 50. T^^ejfs 50. 
 
 Thofe things firft which are frimmlj and more ^enerallj morall, and mo- 
 rally commanded, arc thcfc three, 
 
 i.That 
 
The Morality of the S^hbatfu 33 
 
 I. That there be fome folemn convenient time fee apart for Gods worfhlp. 
 
 2 That this time be not any fmall pittance of time, but a foltmnday of 
 vvorA^^ip, bearing the moll meet proporcion to thofe dales man hath for 
 himfelf. 
 
 g. That this day be not aoy day indefinitely which man fees meet, but ( as 
 'tis in the Commandment ) the Sabbath or ReflUaj,, which God hirafelf in- 
 terprets and determines to a feventh day. 
 
 Some of our adverfaries in this controvcrfic, will not acknowledge any fee 
 time or davto be moral! by vertue of this Command menr, becaufe they 
 think thac Ti^at parciciiiar feventh day from the creation is enly commanded 
 but now abolillied under the Gofpel ; and it only is commanded ( they fay ) 
 becaiifrritisonly expre^ed and made mention of in the ComraaadmenC; 1 
 confede thit Tnac p^rcicular feventh is exprefl'ed and poirjced at, but not 
 only cxpreffei (aswelliill fhew in fie place) but fuppofcic were granted 
 that That fevcnih only is exprcikd, yet ic will not follow chac tht^reforea 
 feventh day, and confequcntiy a day, and confcqiiently a time of woilTiip is 
 cxcUidcd : for look as *cis in the fecond Commandment, we fee the worfliip 
 ofa^>'^t/?;a /«.ij/^MS particularly forbidden, and yet that which is more ge- 
 ncrall, is alfj herein forbidden, t//^. the worliip of God by hnwane in^ 
 vefjtioyij : and why miy not the like general! be enjoined by commanding 
 that particular f(:vcnth in the fourth Commandmcnc ? Ochers of our adver- 
 faries on the concrary, acknowUdge therefore, that in this particular fe- 
 venth ( which they make ceremoniad ) fomcthing more generall and morall 
 is herein rcq::iired, but this generall they limit to a time or fome dayofwor- 
 fhip, butai(^venthday which is more generall then that particular feventh, 
 yet leilc generall then a day or a time : they fiy from this as from fome fer- 
 pcnc or bugbear, and will not admit it as any thing generally morall in this 
 Commandment: But it is very obfervable in this controverfie, that upon 
 the fame grounds on which they would exclude this generall of a feventh 
 from being morall, they miy as well exclude their own generals, viz, a time 
 or a day from being morall: for if they think ic irra:ionall, chac becaufe a 
 partic-ilar feventh dayris required, thac therefore a feventh day more gen-e- 
 rall cannot be commanded; why isjc not as irrationill upon the lame 
 ground to exclude a time, a day alfo? Surely a feventh day lies nearer the 
 bofom of a particular feventh, and is of nearer kin to ic then a day. And I 
 marvel! thac chey lliould gaiher afolcmn timeand day of worlliip, which 
 is more general!, rather then a feventh out of thac particular day, as not 
 poflibly CO be intended, although in a manner expreiled in the Command- 
 mencitfelf. I know there are fome who think chat there ^s nothing gene- 
 rally morall in this Commandment, buca feventh d.^y; which uulelleicbe 
 well and wanly explicated, Ith^n crave leave to concurre thus farre wth 
 our adverfaries, vi^^ Thac a Ibkmn cime, and a day of worlli'p arc gcne- 
 
 E rally 
 
 ^ 
 
54 The Mormt'j of the Sabbath. 
 
 rally morall in this command, but not only morall> but that a feventh day alfo 
 which God (hall determine is generally, yea prmcipally moral! alfo in this 
 Commandment, 
 
 Thefts 51. 
 
 51. Firft therefore. That v\hich is r*ioft generally merall in this command, t's 
 that which is calkd 7'empw cf*ltw or the time of vvorfkip; now this time 
 mufl either be indetermincue time, which ncccduily actends all adi of wor- 
 fliip, anddiuics of p^ety, orelfe dfterminate^ri<i folemn time, inditermi- 
 fiAU time is not required -here, becaiife to make a fp. ciall commindmenc 
 about fiich a time, would be both needlefTc and ridiculous, for if it b< im- 
 poflible that any duty Ihould be performed without fuch time, then vvh.re- 
 everthatduty is required, the time which neccflirsly attends it ir? till: be fup- 
 pofed and enjoined in the fame commandment : Some dcuYn.nsits and lo- 
 lemn time is therefore herein generally, though not only coma=iandcd. 
 
 Thtfu 52. 
 
 52. *ris a fcruple to fome to know' to whit commandment folerrn time flriould 
 be referred ; to which the anfwer is eafie ; that r he iame thtr^gs may be 
 referred in fevcrall refpedsunto feverall commandments, and fo rj.^ay this : 
 Solemn time maybe referred to the fecond Commandmenr, vvhcrc fi/l< mn 
 vvordVip ( in rcfped of the means of worlliip ) is required, in fomc refpcd: 
 to the firll Commandment, which requiring us to actsnovvledgeGod as our 
 fovereign Lord and happmefle, he would have us therefore to have fome 
 full fcope of time to be ferious and (olemnly taken up in the wodliip of h:m : 
 But it's referred to this fourth Commandment as ic Hands in a gcnerall re- 
 ference and relation to a feventh daies Sabbath, wherein this gencrall of 
 folemn time isfwallowed up and prcferved ; and verily if the fix dales la- 
 bour be required in the fourth Commandm nr, in cafe it be done in reference 
 to the feventh daies reR, much more all fokmn timeofwortliip, as it (lands 
 in reference to a Sabbath day, 
 
 Thefii 53. 
 55. The "^ orjhip it felf thtrdore is not required in this Commandment, if only 
 the time of worfhipbe enjoined: and if ignorance or prejudice did not 
 byafle and fwav mens judgements from the naked and genuine meaning of 
 each Command iiient, it would foon appear that the whole worfbip of God 
 St felf, is contained in the three firft Commandments, and therefore nothing 
 left that could poflibly be enjoined by the fourth, but only the time : I 
 know a time of worftiip may in tome refpec^ be called worship, but th^^ wor- 
 fbip it felf in all other refpeds is not required in this but in other Command- 
 ments • for if in the firft Commandment we are to have God to be our God, 
 by love of him, truft tohim, delight in him, &c ( which nature, as it were, 
 cals for, if God be our God > then all that which we call naturall worfhip, 
 !$ required here; and if deviled forms of worfbip be h>n>idatn inthele- 
 ^ cond 
 
rhe Morality of the Sdbbaih. '35 
 
 coni Commandment, which are of humane invention and inftitutionv then 
 ail Gods inftitiiced worfhip muft be commanded herein : and if vain and 
 irreverent manner of worthip be forbidden in the third Commandment, 
 then 2.\\ common'^ or (J^tp as fome call ir, or rather all ilnth/y and reverend 
 manner of X>^ofpjip which we owe to God is required in the fame command ; 
 andif alinatLirall, inftituted and common worihip orhoiy manner of v\or- 
 fliip be required in the three firft commands, I marveil then how any worfliip 
 (any further then as a time of worfhip, may be called worftiip, ) can be 
 required m th-s fourth command. The time therefore, and not the worfliip 
 it fdf is required herein: for if any worfliip be requirtd, it's either the 
 whole wonhip of God, or fomelpeciall kinde of ivorihip; if the whole 
 vvorft-iip, then therefliouldbcnoworlliipof God required diredly in the 
 three firft Commandments, but the very fame which is commanded in the 
 fourth alfo, which grofle Tautology ismoft abfuid to imagine in the (horc 
 fumme o'i ihcfe ten words ; but if any fpeciall kinde of worfliip (hould be 
 required and not the whole, then the Sabbath day is fandified to fome one 
 kmdc of worQ^ip, ra:her then to the exercife of all kinde of worfhip, which 
 is moft falfe and prophane : for who will affirm that the Sabbath is to be 
 fi.^dified, fuppoie by that kinde of vvorfliip which is publick, and not pri- 
 vate alfo, by exrcrnail, and notbyinternall vvorfliipaifo ; by naturall wor- 
 fhip in loveaiid fear of God,d"f. and not with inftituted in the ufcof all 
 God.Oidmances, and that with all holy preparation and reverence alfo ? 
 
 TheJJj 54, . L » • 
 
 TheexTCifeofwordiipisone thing, the worfliip itfelf is another j tis 54. 
 moil true that the holy excrcife of ^fi Wor/hip is here required, but moft falfe 
 that che wori"hip iz felf is fo : The woril:iip it felf is required in the three firft 
 commands, but the fpeciall exercife of all this worihip at fuchatime, is 
 required in che fourth command : the exercife of holinefl'e and holy duties is 
 here required as the end, and a holy reft as a means thereunto, and ia this 
 refped it is true which vvalkm obferves, viz. That it is not a bare and na- Y,^^'^'£^* 
 kedctrcumftarceofcimc, but the reft it felf from labour, and the applicati- j.^^;'^f "^^^ 
 on of che day 10 holy ufes which is here enjoined 5 but doch it cherefore 
 fohowthat the worftiipit felf, and the holy duties themlelves arehere di- 
 rediy commanded ? which he feems to maintain: no verily, no more then 
 that works of mercy m the fecond Table, are required in this fourth com- 
 mand of the firft Table, becaufe the exercife of mercy and love as well as of 
 piety and necelficy is requited alfo in this command. 
 
 It is generally and frequently affirmed by thofe wbofeek to fupportthe ^^' 
 morality of the Sabbath, to wit, that the exercife of vrc^yST^and holy duties 
 at this time, is required for the times fake, as at other times, the time is re- 
 quired for the duties fake 5 by which words they fecm to make the bare 
 
 F 2 eiicuffl&aBCO 
 
j6 The Mordlitj ef the sMath. 
 
 circundince of timstobc required here; but this alTertion had need be 
 ufiderftood with much candor, and the true explication of it; for in fomc 
 fenfeic'smoft true which oar Saviour affirms, that mm is not made for the 
 Sabbath or the time of it, Mark^i.ij. 
 
 Thefts 5^. 
 5^. This time therefore miy be confidered two waies i. Abftradly. 2 Con- 
 cretely, I. Abftracfll^", for the bare circu.nftince of time, abftrad'd and ftrlpt 
 from all other confideracions, and foicis very abfurd coimig?ne all the holy 
 duties of the Sabbath to be for the cim:, a? if G A an i all his holy worllvp 
 fliould give homige unto, and attend upan.anak.d empty circumflance : 
 Time in this refped^ is rather for the worilitp fake. 2. Goncretcly, as it is 
 wholly fandlified and f:;capart for God, or as it is a holy time, fee apart for 
 holy re n, that fo man might attend upon God: andm this refped all holy 
 duties are for this tim?, becaufein this refpec^chey are for G)d who is all 
 ijj,i^ in all in holy time : And therefore JVa'-Unt need not pat us upon fcarch to 
 fee whether the holy reft of the day be required in the fccond or any other 
 command, far'cis not affirmed oy any, that the n^kid circ;im(lanceof time 
 is here only required, without any holy itft; but that a holy time of reft is 
 herein commanded, and therefore to be referred to ch^s command: hence 
 alfo It h moft falfc which fome affi m, viz, " That the reft from ordinary \z^ 
 *"* " bours on this day, as it is connedcd with holy duties of woi lliip wfciAouc 
 "which they cannot be performs d, is as necelTiry now, as when the Jnv ili 
 "Sabbaih wasio being-, but otherwife out of thefe duties there is no holy 
 " time of reft commanded. For fuch a reftraint of time to holy duties as 
 makes the time holy for the duties fake, fo that no time is holy but in ihe 
 performance of holy duties, and thefe du-.ies. (upon narrow ex imination ) 
 only publick duties, do h but op^rn a gap for licencioufrelTc, volup-uoufiiclle, 
 fports, Mi^-poles and dog-markets, and fuch like prophantft^, out of the 
 timeof holy p'jblick worilaip; or what private woifhip each man inill think 
 moft meet. For in this knfe holy duties arc for the time, becaufe the whole 
 day being iandificd, holy duties arc therefore to attend, and in thisrefpeit 
 are for this time; and not the time for them, viz. That when the rime of 
 theexercife of fome holy duties doth ceafc, the time of holy reft or holy time 
 muft then ceafc alfo. 
 
 Thefts 57, 
 57. Nor(houldicfecmftrange that holy duties fliould attend holy time, and 
 be for the fake of fuch time; becaufe, although it be true that this time is 
 fandified, that man may perform holy duties, yet man is now called to the 
 performance of all holy duties, that he may laftly hv.>nour God inallholinelTe 
 in fuch a fpeciall time ; Wucb tjmeif any huaiat^e power only fhould pue 
 any holmelfein, and it therefore fhould be attended on, what, would it be 
 clfti^a; anvulaving of dales and limes, jcondcmned by ihe Apoftle,iJ<^/».l4.^ 
 
The Mera^ty $f the sMath. 37 
 
 g4/.4. which dirty ditch of ehfervitig tmes, they unawares fall into who 
 plead a^ainft a ^^r^r»i/W Sabbath, fandlifiedof God, and yet would have 
 feme time and day obferved by the appointment of men : for the obfeiva- 
 tion of fuch daies which God ftiail appoint, cannot be condemned as an ob- 
 ferving (ftf times : but the obfetvation of ^^-fVj which bimane wifdom fl^all 
 think fit may be quickly reduced to fuch a tranfgrcflion. 
 
 Thtfis 58. 
 If any think that there is a peculiar manner of holineile, and of worftiip- 5^' 
 ping God herein rcejuired, which is not required in anyorhcr Command- 
 ment; irmay bertadily granted, if by peculiar manner of fandification, be 
 mea ta morefpeciall degree and manner of (Xtrojin^ the whole worfhip 
 of God, inrefpetlof fuch atime : buc it doth not therefore follow, that any 
 new kinde of "^orjlip ( wlV*ch iValUm hence pleads for ) is required herein i ^^ , ..^t- 
 for this higher degree and fpeciall manner of woiflitp is not the fwbftance del'pS^^ 
 of any new word ip, it being only a peculiar degree of wotiliip, and there- 
 fore varies not the kinde : And if the three firft Commandments enjoin the V^'r^r^T 
 worfliipit felf, then they do command the highcft mcafures and degrees falw'/aK^' 
 alfofcverallv, for where any duty is required, theh'pheft degree and exten- ^''"^ ^''.'"^'• 
 hon ot It )s alio therewithall requipeo. Heiice therefore it [till follows, that du aiaad^ri 
 thispecuii^irmanneroftJiercilini^ holy duties upan this day, is chiefly with^*' ^'' *^5^* 
 rek^renceand relation to the time v^hich God hath fandmed, that herein mandatar, k 
 he mighrbe in a fpcciali manner worlli pped and fcrved : And verily WAll<t'44 ^^^^ ^"'^ . 
 forcfc;eini4 the blow, had no ocher way to expedite hsmfelf from making the 'x/rUmLn 
 three fiifl Comma idmtnts, either to be meet ciphers, or the fourth Com- ^'^'^y*'^ 
 mandmentfroi-n labouring with a needlefle Tautology, but by flying for re- UrA^r^wT. 
 fugeto this pecu'.iir manner of holmelk which he th'P.ks is required herein, '*''''* f^per* 
 and not in any of the rtft, but what hach been faid may be fufficient to clear "^clmmtxZlr, 
 uptheungroundcdneileofchisniift-.ke. Wiliw^t 
 
 Thefu 5p. 
 A'licrleerrour is a great breeder, and Degers miny more; aod hence ic is 5^' 
 thocf^^//^^ among many orhers, thn he might make the worlliipitfelf to 
 be required in the fourth Commandwicnr, difpuces therefore againft thofe 
 who place the inftituted woribipof God, d»redly under the fecond Com- 
 nTandmenrj which if he could make good, he hid ihenrhe fairer probabili- 
 ties to llicw that the ^srfhi^it Je/fwds required diredly in the fourth Com- 
 mand ; which principle if it was granted, would expofe the morality of the 
 Sabbath to forer blows and bruifesthen perhaps appears at firft bltifh : Ic' 
 may not therefore be amifle, but be rarher of Ipcciall ufe for the clearing up, 
 both of the meaning and morality of the fourth con^imand, to demonftratc, wai. dijp'i' 
 that the infiitnted^orjhp oi God ( which fTwi^^w cals, C^/^w externw& ^-ftM^tf^f^s,. 
 inflrHmenmliS (aimunoftrd^ ptr audit Hmverk & jmcrami^forumhfum.^Q*) 
 i$ dircdJy ttquiredin the aifitmative part of the fecond command. 
 
 F3 Thtfw J 
 
38 the Moralny of the Sabbath, 
 
 7'hejh Co* 
 
 ^o. The clearing up of this, depends much upon a right and true underftanding 
 
 r. *!.• • ,.^r. ^1' What the sravv^n Image and likenede is, 
 of two thmps m the le- ) .... • .s yS^ c a r t j 
 
 J /- ,.A^c.r.<. '^2• ^^"^t is meant by. thole words T Love me and 
 
 cond Commandment: ) /,„ ^ - , -i 
 
 Tkfis 61. 
 '6I0 Firft, Graven Images, afcer which the whole world ali-noG: hath been en- 
 ticed, and gone a whormg from the true vvorOiip of God \ were worfhipped 
 two waies: i. Terminative, L When p<:opie terrninated their wori'bip 
 upon the dumb Idols themfelves, as if they "^^ere gods, without looking any 
 further to any God morefu^^ream and glorious: This is the On of many of 
 the ignorant fort of Papiib by "BilUrmna's own confetlion, as alfo of many 
 of the bfuitifli fort of the blmde heathens : And this kinde of worfliip and 
 Idolatry is dircdlly forbidden, not in the fecond, but in the firfl Command- 
 ment; and that appears upon this undiniable ground, to wit, that if the 
 firft Commandmcnc cxprcdcly enjoins us to have no other God but Jehovah, 
 coir-iftin, pray to, love, fear no other God but Jehovah, then for any to 
 have and worflip fuch Images as their gois which are not Jtrhovah, is dil" 
 redly forbidden here: Hence therefore it undeniably follows, that by 
 the making to our fclvcs a graven Image, in the fecond Commandment, 
 fomewhateife muft beunderftood thenthc "^orfhiffing ox Imigts termina- 
 tively as ^^j^/, 2. Orclfe they were worihipped r^/ //ii/^, i. Relatively or 
 in reference to the true God, as nna^s and helps, In wh'ch, Ac which and 
 by which, the true God was worll-^ipped : And thus the learned and well 
 inftrufled Papifts maintain their abominable worilup of Images, whether 
 graven or pamred, erodes, cruciH^es, <^c. to be good and iavvfull- for fay 
 they, we do not worfiiip, nor are we fo fenfeleffe as to honour the Image 
 or crucifix it felf, but only as helps to devotion, to carry our heartstoGod 
 and Chrift, refembled by thefe Images : Thus alfo ihe Jews of old, hey did 
 never worfnip'the Images themftlves, but God in them and by them : They 
 were not grown fo foon, fi>cxtreamiy lottifl^, as to chink that the golden 
 Calfi was the true God himfclf which brought tbcm a few weeks before ouc 
 of the land of Egjpty butic*vasavi(ibk help to carry their hearts to God 
 only, and therefore the Feaft was pr claimed to Jehovah, £><?^.3 2.4,5. 
 Mtihahs Idolatrous mother profedeth that llie had dedicated the eleven 
 hundred (hekclsof filver to Jehovah to make a molten Image, ?«^^. 17.3. 
 Ihe was not fo fimple ( no not in thofe confufed and bhnde times ) to thmk: 
 thz^t the Image was Jehovah, nor d«d her fon Micah thmk fo, and therefore 
 he doth not fay. Now Ik^iowthatths Teraphim "^i// l^epme, but that Jeko- 
 vah ^illno-p? hlejfe me, having fet up an Image for his fervice. Nay verily,ihe- 
 wMcft and beft inftruded among the Heathens did never chif k that the Idols 
 and images thcmfclvcs were God, but they only woribipped God by them 5 
 
 which 
 
ih Uerd:tj of the Subhaih. i^ 
 
 which if any doubt of, let him but read 'O^Rainolds^ who by pregnant and Vid.'^»\nM 
 men evident proofs deraonftratcs, that neither the Jews, nor the Heathens f^^f^;,^^*^; 
 in their deep; ft apoftacies, did ever worfhip their Images any other waies, 
 then rdati'veij, as helps and means of the worfhip of the true God; and 
 hereby fees forih the abominable Idolatry of the RomiHi Church, fcr luch a 
 worfhip of fheir Images, which even thcmf ivcs condemn rn the Idolatrous 
 Jews and Heathens, who had as much to -fay for their Imagc-worfliip as the 
 Papifls have : Hence therefore it follows, that if the graven Image in the 
 fecond Command mcnr, was not ^orfidpped oa CJod, but only as a means de- 
 vifedand invented by man to carry the heart unto God, then ( by a ufuail 
 Sjneckdche in every command ) all humane wvr/itions and ififtitutioffs^ and 
 devifed me:^7is of veerfhtf, or of carrying the heart the better unto God, are 
 forbidden rn this Commandment ; and if all humane inflitmioHs ard devifid 
 fnsans rf ^crfnp be herein dirtdly forbidden, thencertamly AUDivinein* 
 flittitions and means of \»$rfl}iy^ and Con(t qucntly Ali God.: n:fiittited ^orjhips 
 in Allniftrj, Sacrdme^ts, &c. is diredly tommanded in the affirmative part: 
 of ths fecond Command; and confequcntly not in the fourth Command : 
 And if ill 0:thodoxDivines condemn the Popiili relative worfiiip of Images, 
 asdiredly croffeand contrary to the fecond Command, I thenfeenoreafon 
 why any fl^ould queftjon, but that all the inftituted means of worfhip ( Ima- 
 ges as it were of Gods own d^viGng ) fl^.ould belong to the affirmative part 
 of the f^me Command. The fecond thing to be explained in this Com- 
 mandment is, What is love to God and keeping of his Commandments, 
 which we reade of in the claiife of the Commandment ? Love to god is here 
 oppofcd to Hatred (f god, and chofe that Lozehim, to thofe that /^.i/f him : 
 Now this f-/»$^7Wi^^o:ha^ng^f God at lirge ( for there is a hatred of God 
 in every fin, f^i^'fr'. 1,29. and 8.3^.) but in particular, when ie appears in this 
 pariicnlarfin of facing up of. Images and mens inventions, forbidden in this 
 Commandm-nr, which therefore fets down the proper punifhment for this 
 fin : So by love of God, \s not meant love of God at large ( which is feen 
 in keeping every Command ) but in particular, when we love God in-his 
 own Ordinances and infliturions. Look therefore as hatred of God in fet- 
 tingupmans inventions and mft tutions (which fuperftitious pcrfons think 
 to be much love to God) is here condemnedin the negative part of the 
 •Commandment; fo on the contrary, love to God in clofing with him and 
 feeking of him in hi& cy»n Iiiftitttti0ns , whether IVord or Sacraments ^c. 
 is here enjoined intheaffirflia^ivepartof this Command, and confequencJy 
 not ( as tValUkh would have it ) in the affirmative part of the fourth Gom- 
 fliand, Keeping mj Comviandments being fee down as a fruit of this love, 
 and DOih together being oppofed to hatred of God : Hence by C^mmAnd* 
 memss cannot be meant ingenerall, all the ten Commandments (asfome 
 imagine upon jmierabk weak giounds, which*! lift nocto mention ) 4>utin 
 
 li)ccial). 
 
40 The Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 fpeciall, Gods Inftiturions and Ordinances commanded in fpcclall by h'm, 
 to which humane invencionsand Images of mens heads and hands, areccm- 
 monly in Scripture oppofcd, and are therefore condemned, becaufe not 
 commanded, or becaufe none of his Commaytdmsnts, Jer,j,'3^\, Deuf.ii, 
 30,31. AUtth,i^,^, If therefore (again) Gods Inftitiicions and Com- 
 mandments are here enjoined in this lecond Commandment, they cannot 
 bediredly required in the fourth Command. Thele things being thus clear- 
 
 Ob'j, I . ^^» ^^^ objedions of fVaiUits are eafily anfwered : For firlt, he faith, " That 
 "from the negative part of this fecond Commandment cannot be gathered 
 **ruch an affirmative part as this is, t/i^. That God will be vvorllaipped by 
 " the ^^r^ and Sacra-rents, Bu: chat this allcitijn thus fearely propounded, 
 but not proved, isfalfe, appears from what hath been faid concerning the 
 true meaning of the nega'.ivc part of this Comn.and : For if humane inven- 
 tions, under the name of jy^^rw IrriAge be forL>iddcn, then D.vine Infticxici- 
 otis, fuchas^ori and S^^cramentsbQ^ are heie commanded, and from that 
 negative any ordinary capacKv may readiiy lee what the affirmative is. He 
 
 Oh'i f, faith again fecondly, *'Tnat if initicuccd worlliip was contained under the 
 ^*''* "affirmative partof the fccond Comnandmenr, then this Commandment 
 "is mutable, becaufe God was thus wocfliipped one way before Chrill, and 
 *■ another way fincc Chrifl ; but (faith he) the fecond Gommandment is 
 '*morall, and thertforc immutable, and therefore fuch mutable worlliip 
 " cannot be enjoined herem. But we have * formerly llaewn that although 
 
 *^''''"^^*^'' this Commandment be morall and immutable in refped of it felf, yet in re- 
 
 '^* fpedofthe application of ittothis or thatobjedor thing commanded, :c 
 
 maybeint'iat refped mutable: For ic is an immutable law tkat God muft 
 be worilaippcd withhis own worlliip, fuch as he fliall infticute (and this is 
 thefumnii of the fecond Commandment it felf) yet the things inftituted 
 ( wherein there is only an application of the command) may be mutable : 
 the fecond Commandment doth not immutably binde unto the obfervance 
 o^thU or r4?4r particular mftitutcd worflaip only: But to obferve Gods in- 
 ftitJtcd worllaip, and to attend his appomtnients, which is the only morall 
 law and rule in the affirmative part of this Command. He thirdly objeds, 
 
 Ohj^l* "That the \X>or/hippi»g of God in f^yord and Sacraments, &c. is never oppo- 
 " fed in all the Sctipcure to the worlhipping of Images. But this is falfe ; for 
 Gods Inftitutions (of which Word and Sacraments are a part) are fre- 
 quently oppofcd to humane inventions, theworiliip appointed by God to 
 the worship devifed by man ; Images of Gods deviling, arc oft oppolcd to 
 Images of mens own invcntmg: the voice of God which was only heard 
 with the ear, is oppofed to ah Image or fimilitude which might be Icen, 
 1>eut./\,i2, A giaven Image, a teacher of hcs, is oppofed to the Lords 
 teaching of truth, and alio to his prefence in his Temple, which was the 
 featof infticutcd worfiiip, Hab4k,2.iSijp,20. The vvorihip of Images which 
 
 God 
 
7he Morality of the sMath. 41 
 
 God would have aboliHicd, is oppofed to the worfhipof God by facrificcs 
 and ceremonies, in the place which God (Imild choofev1>tf»M2.i.t0 20. 
 but yet he tcls us, That to "^or/hip Qod in Images and to Vcorfbip him in 
 ^irtt and trttth ( Vchich is iftward '^orflAp ) are oppofite : M alfi the 
 lifting t4p of pure havds in every pUce, John 4.38. I Tim.2.8. He tils iu 
 fitfi th^:t acknoTv/iJ^ipg of god in his Imwenfiiy and infinite Majefly, are 
 oppofed to Image-^orfhtp, Rom. 1.20,21,22. ira.40.22. Be it fo : But will 
 it therefore follow, that to worfhip God according to his own Inftitutions, 
 is not to "^firflAp htm in fpirit a^d in trnth f Is it rather a carnal! then a fpiri- 
 tuullworfrjp, to attend on God xv\iVord and Sacramey,ti'. May we not lift 
 up pure hands in the uie of Gods own inftitutions ? Is not Gods Immenfity 
 and Mij'efty acknowledged and fern in the ufe of his own Ordinances, as 
 Will as creatures and providences? iconfede the blinder fort of heathens 
 mighc worthip (locks and ftoaes and Imigesof creeping things, and fonr- 
 footcd bcaits, in the place ofGod himfelf termmatively, and God might 
 account of all iheirlma^e-vvorihipas fuch, though ufed relatively, and hence 
 the oppoficion may well be made becween worLhipping them as God, and 
 an infinite Gad; and this worfhip (aswasfaidj fals then under the firfl: 
 Commandment: butaflfuredly this Image worfliip which the Apoftle con- 
 demns, i?^«?.i. 21,23. in debaiing the infinite Majeily, and limiting it to this 
 and that Image wherein they did worfhip it, is forbidden (being only rela- 
 tive worfhip) inthefecond Command: Forlthink the Apoftle in Rom.i, 
 hath an eye principally at the moftlafcivicus Idolaters in the world, t^/-c. the 
 E^yptiAns^ among whom principally we readeof thofe Images of creeping 
 thiiij^s and four-footed beafts, in their Hierogliphtckj : and yet we know 
 that ad that bafe worih'p. did fee out fomething or other of the ^Jyi^ty, which 
 therein (and fo relatively) they did woriliip. But I muft not enter into 
 the difcourfe of thefe things here : lufficient is faid to clear up this point, viz. 
 That Gods Inftitated worlhip fals diredly under the fccond, not fourth 
 Command. 
 
 Tkejis 62. 
 It is true, that the exercife of pHbiick^'^orffiip o^ many together, is to be ^j, 
 at this time upon the Sabbath, but doth it follow that therefore this /?/i^/iVi^ 
 ^itihip it felf fals diredly under this command ? For if publick Aflerablics 
 be (as (ome think) a partof naturall worfhip, fo as that the light of na- 
 ture direcfls all men dwelling together as creatures, to wordiip God toge- 
 ther publickly as Creator; then this v^orQiip fals diredly under the firft 
 (nocrourth) Commandmenr, where naturall worfliip is diredly com- 
 manded; \>K\t\i pHblick^ A ffemklies becorifidered as diftind Churches foliti- 
 *<»//7 united and combined, publickly to worfhip God ; thm fuch Churches 
 confidered thus as poHticall, not myfticall Aflcmblies, do fall drredly unden 
 the fcc&nd Commaad, as parts of inftitutcd worfliip: for as all dcvifcd 
 
 G forms 
 
42 The Moraiity 0f ihe Sahhtk 
 
 forms of Churche?, whether Diocefan, Provincial!, NationalJ, Univerfali 
 ( being the inventions of man to further the worfliip of God ) are condemn- 
 ed diredly in the fccond Command : So all iieh Qiurchcs as are framed into 
 a fpiritKall polity, after the falhion and pattern of the Word and primitive 
 infticution, arc ( with leave of Eraftns and his difciples ) enjoined in the 
 fame Commandment, and therefore not in the fourth, gomxriu and M*" 
 /S or^.' Vrmrofc therefore do much miftake the mark, and fcope of the fourth Com- 
 Sabxaps. mandmenc, who affirm, Thaf as irt the three fir fi Cofnmandments, God 
 cap^6[s!ii»'oyd(imed the inward a»d om ward fir vice, ^hich he VeiU h/ive every p<irti' 
 chIay man to yield to him i» private and fever ally from th^ jo istj ef men 
 every day, fi in the fittrth CommandwefJt he enjoinfth a fervice common 
 And pHhliek i ^hich all muft yieli to^ethir finto him, fir(?earing in the 
 wean ^hile all other l?ujinejfe. But why (hould they think that publick 
 worfliip is more required here then private ? Will they fay that the Sa bath 
 is not to be fandified by private and mward worlliip, as well as by publck 
 and externall vvorfhip? Is not private prcparacion, meditation, fecrer prai- 
 erand converfc with God, required upon this day, as well as pubMck pray- 
 ing and hearing the word? If they fay that thefe are recj^iircd indeed, but 
 'tis m reference to the publiek, aid for the publick wor.hip iukc, it may be 
 then as eafily replied, that the publiek worilup is alfo for the fake of the pri- 
 vate, that each man fecretlyand privately might mufe and fed upon she 
 good of publiek helps; they are mutually helnfuii one ro another, and 
 therefore are appointed one for anoth r, unlelTe any Wiif rhmk that no 
 more holineffe IS required upon this day then while pu'.Iitk wordiip conti- 
 nues; which we hope fhall appear to be a piece of profclfcd prophantik ; 
 In the mean wh)le, look as chey have no reafon to tmnk that privite wo jfhip 
 is requited in this command, bcaufc the exertife of prv.it e woifliip is at 
 this time required; fo they have as little reafon to think chat the publiek 
 worfhip fli. leif is herein enjoined, becaule the exercife of ic is to be alfo 
 atfuchatime. It is theretorc the timf, not the ^at/hip k felf, either pub- 
 liek or priv;ite, which is here dire<^ly commanded : although it be true 
 that both of them are herein indircdly required, vtz, in relation to the 
 Timf. 
 
 Thefis (53. 
 ^2^ If therefore the iw^r^iSf^orfhip kfilf, whether publiek, externall or pri- 
 vate, be not diredly required m this fourth Command, much Idle is the 
 Ps'mpart,.ic whok ccrcmoniall worfhip here enjoined, as W.Ffimrofe maintains, for 
 "••*^'^*^'^' the whole ceremonial! worflup, both in facrifices, ceremonies, types, e^r, 
 was iignificant, and were, aslmay (0 fay, Gods Images, or tnediaeultWt 
 means of worfhip, by carrying the minde and heart to God, by their (pe- 
 iiali fignifications, and therefore were inftituted worQiip, and thereJore 
 dircftly contained under the fwcond, and therefore not under the fourth 
 
 Commands 
 
7he Morality of the Sdhbath. 4J 
 
 Command : And if there be hm nine Cowm^ndntents ^hich Are morAll, 
 and thii one (by his reckoning) uto he ceremonially and the he ad of ^Uce- 
 remoyaals, and ihat therefore unto it all ceremo^iall Vc or/hip h to appertnin, 
 then the obfervacion of a Sabbach is the greateft ceremony, according as 
 we fee in ail other Commandments the leHcrCns are condemned under 
 thegrofTer, as anger under murder, and Juft underadiiktrv; and inferiour 
 duties under the chief and principall, as honouring the aged, andMafters, 
 &c. underhonoaringof Parents 5 and fo if all ceremonials are referred to 
 this, then the Sabbach is the grofleft and greateft ceremony one of them; 
 and if fo, then 'tis a greater fin to fandifie a Sabbath at any time, then to 
 oofeivenew moons and other feftivals, which are left ceremonial), and 
 are therefore wholly cafhered, becaufe ceremoniall; and if fo, why then 
 doth W'Primrofe tell us, Thit the SabhAth ii morall fir f^bfiance, pri«^ 
 cipAli fcope and end , and that it's ur>mtet for Hi ta ohferve fewer dates 
 thcn^the fiws, in rejpe^ of ^eehly Sabbaths? Why is not the name and 
 mcmoriallof the Sabbath abandoned wholly and wcterly accurfed from off 
 the face of the earth, as vvtil as new moons and oth;!r Jewilli feftivals, 
 which upon his principles are lefle ceremoniall then the weekly Sabbath? 
 It mrj be an audacious Familift-, whofe confcience is grown iron, and whof? 
 brow u bra if:, through a conceit of his immunity from, a; d Chnftian liber- 
 ty in refpecl ut any thiag which hath the fuper fcription of law or works 
 upon it, may abandon all Sabbaths together with new moons equally ; buc 
 thofelnow aim ar, Ifuppofe dare nor, nor I hope any pious miiade elfe, 
 who Gonfiders out this one thing, viz. that when the Lord commands us to 
 R^7}umbcr to k^ep the Sabbath hoiy, he muft then (according to this inter- 
 pvecation) command us, that above all other commandments we obferve 
 his cr remoniall worfliip (which they fay is hete enjoined ) rather then his 
 morall .vorihip which they acknowledge to be enjoined in all the other nine 
 Commands, at the gate of none of which Commmands is written this word 
 Remember*^ which undoubtedly implies a fpeciall attendance tobelliewn 
 unto this, above any other; for as we {hail (hew, keep this, keep all, break 
 this flight this, flight all; andcherefore no wonder if no other Command 
 hath rhis word Remember writ upon the portall o^' ir, which word ol^ fence, 
 denotes fp<:ciall affedion and adion in the Hebrew language : but 1 fuppoie 
 itmayftrjkethehardtftbrowand heart with tcrrour and horrour, tg go v" : 
 about to affix and impure fueh a m aning to this Commandment, viz^ That 
 principally above ail other ducies we remember to obferve tkofe things which 
 are ceremoniall : for although the obfervationof ceremonies be urged and 
 required of God a^ M' Primrofe truly obfervcsfrom Pfalw 8 27. )er i-j.^e. imse0,4. 
 foeli 9,1^, ^W. 1,7,8= 1 0,13,14. yet chat God (houid rcqjire and u«*ge 
 the obfervaiion of thtfe above aay other woifhip, is evidently erofle to 
 reafon, and aprcffdy cruffc to Scripture, i^^. 1.1 1,1 2,1 3,14,1 J. //a.t6*3^ 
 
 G 2 /'M 
 
44 The Morditjef the sMath. 
 
 Pfaf,$o,j^, Jirem.6.io. Amos '^,21. MicahS^j* To remember therefore 
 to keep the Sabbath,is not to remember to obferve ccremoniall duties. 
 
 Thefts ^4 
 ^4. Nor fhould it feem ftrange, that Jewifh holy daics are not here enjoined 
 where a holy time, a Sabbath day is commanded ; for thofc Jewifli holy daies 
 vvai «/»ir"<' were principally inftituted {^sH^MUm well obferves ) for fignificarion of 
 'inprKCy_. Chrift and his benefits (as may appear, from i Cnr 5.7. Luk,^,i<^. Eeb. 
 10.5.) and therefore being fignificant were pares of inftituted wordirp, be« 
 longing to the fecond, not fourth Command, but the Sabbath day (asdiall 
 be fl^ewn) is in its original! infticutionand confectation of aRother nature 
 and n(5t fignificant : yet this may be granted, th:it cercmoniall hr)ly daies 
 may be referred to the fourth Command, as appendices of it ; and \i Calvin, 
 Vrjln, /)^»<€w and others aiffi at no more, ic may be granted, buc it will 
 not follow from hence that they therefore belong to the ftxond Command 
 indiredly, and dircdly to the fourrh ( which Mr Primrofe contends for ) 
 but rather dircdiy to the fecond, and redudively and indiredlly, as appen- 
 dices to the fourth: which appendices, asihey may be put to, fo they may 
 be taken off again, the morail Commandment remaining entire : even as 
 we know C^/z//« refers many ceremonial! duties as appendices to furhcom- 
 mands.conccrning the morality of which M^ Prin^ oft doubts noi . rod there- 
 fore for him to thmK that the Sabbarh compreh, nds all Jewifh feftivall diie?, 
 upon this ground, vi^, becaufe the Sabbath is joined with, and put ia a- 
 mong the reckoning of fuch ftftivaU, L^vi^i'^. //^.I.i3,i4. hath no more 
 force in it, then by retorting the argumc^nt, and upon the 1 ke ground pf ovi 
 it to be morail, becaufe it is joined with inorall Commandments, as honour- 
 ing of Parents, Z^<rt^/M 9. 3. andpraier, //^i.ip andby hisown conf.fllon 
 With the other nine which are all of them morail alfo. 
 
 Thefij 6>. 
 6$. Secondly, NotonVa folemn time, but more particularly a folemn day, 
 a whole day ofworQ-iip 15 here alfo required by vertue of this fourth Com- 
 mand ; and the Lord gives us good realon for it,that if he gives us many Whofe 
 eiaiesiotom own work, then ( not fome part of a day ) but a day, a whole 
 day, according to the reafon and expreffc words of the Commandment, 
 fhould be marked out and] fet apart for his work and fervice : if that place 
 7/^.56.6,7. will not demonftrate a (eventh daies Sabbath under the new 
 Teftamcnt, yet it fufficiently and 'fully clears the point in hand, t'i<., that a 
 Sabbathday istobeobfervedby the fons of the ib anger or Gentiles who 
 are called ftrangcrs to the Common-wealthof lfra€l,£/)^.2.i2. and indeed 
 Wiidif in pyail^Hs freely confclTeth and proveth that a whole day is here required ; and 
 *'''*'*^''''*^*ifawholcday, I hope none will think that the time out of public k^AiRm- 
 p^i„ .^,^ blies is common and prophane, if-a whole day Deholy : and therefore W 
 ^p,(.s.ts* . Mmrfffi tcls us, that the Gentiles having no other law but the light of 
 ^ nature 5, 
 
The MeraJitJ ^f the Sakbath. 45 
 
 nature,havc appointedy^f dales, for the exercifc of their religion, and that as 
 the Jews had their ^^^^^/W, (which we knov^ yNa^^hoie dates ) fo fhould 
 Chriftiaos have theirs,for their publick AfTemblies under the Gofpel ; which 
 1 hope muft be therefore whole dales alfo : it is alfo confidcrable, that if the 
 three firft Commandments requiring Gods worfhip, do confequcntly re- 
 quire fome lime for that worllup ( as being a neceflary ad jundl to all adions 
 whether morall or civiland without which ihey cannot be performed ) then 
 the fourth command, muH: require fomewhat more particularly then a time 
 of worfl^ip: and therefore they that place thcmoraliry of the fourth com- 
 mand in rcquirmg only a time of woifhip ( bcccufe fay they a time of^orfiip 
 is nccelTary,) may upon this ground wholly and perfeflly abolifh the fourth 
 commsnd as fuperf nous and ncedkfle, bccaufe fuch a time of worlLip is re- 
 quired in all other commandments ncceffarily.They may alfo imagine as great 
 a morality in the command of buJding ihe Temple the place of worihip, bc- 
 ctiu e a place of worfhip is ncccUary as well as a time : it is not therefore a 
 t m y^i\t fuch a liuic as is preferved in a day even m a whole day for worfbip 
 which is here commanded* 
 
 nefis C6. 
 
 The wife God could have appointed fome part of every day to be kept ^^^ 
 ho!y rather then a whole day together; but his ^ifaome faw this proportion 
 of time ivcry day to be more unmeet, in refpedlof mans daily cumbers, 
 which do foeafily intarglemans thoughts and aflld:ions, (o as within fome 
 fmall puce of a day h.^ cannot ordinarily nor foeafily recover andunloofe 
 himfjf CO finde tht end of a Sabbath fervice, which is moft fweet and full reft 
 inthe boforn of hisGod, as he may within the compafTe of a whole day fee 
 Sparc for that end : or fuppofe he could fo do in a piece and part of a day, 
 yttGodsName ll.ould loleby it, if hefliould norhave the honour of fome 
 fokmn day, which we fee do ferve to advance the names of idoll gods, and 
 men on earth : it*s meet and juft that Gods Name fhould be magnified by us 
 commonly every dav, by fetting apart fome time which we may well fpare 
 (as whet to the lithe) out of our callings for God, and this doth honour 
 him,but a day.much more. 
 
 Thefts e-j, . 
 
 They therefore who maintain that a feventh day is not morall,becaufe it is Cj- 
 but a circumftance of c me, may as well abolifh tims to be morall, or any day 
 to be morall, becaufe a day (let ic fallout when ic will) is but acircum- 
 ftance of time; which notwithftanding they account to be morall in this 
 command ; but we know that much morality lies in circumftanccs, and why a 
 day fandified may not be as much morall as a duty,I ycc fee not, 
 
 Thcfis 68. 
 
 TheFamilifts and Antinomiansof late, like l\itManichees o^oUydiomzkt 6%, 
 ^//fl'^/V/ equally holy under the Gofpel, and none to be obfcrved more then 
 
 G 3 another 
 
i^g ' ^Tk Morality of the sMath. 
 
 another by Vcrtue of any command of God, unlefTeit be from fome com- 
 mand of man to which the outward man they think ftioiild not//r;^to con- 
 form, or nnleffc it be fro re mm, or upon fevcralloccafion?, which fpeciall 
 occafions are only to give x^aoy^Urums for Church meetings and publick 
 Chriflian Ajfemblies: an audacious afTertion, crofTe to the very light of na- 
 ture among the blinde Heathens, who have univerfally allowed the deity 
 whom they ignorantly worshipped, the honour of fome folemn daies ; crofiTe 
 to the verdid of popifli Schoolmen & Prelatifts, whofe (tomacks never ftoed 
 much toward any Sabbath at all ; crolT. to the (cope of the Law of tht Sab- 
 bath, which if it hath any generall morality (not denied Scarce to any af 
 cJ]f«>/^j]iidicijils,) fuiely one would think it Qk-uU lye in the obfcrvation of 
 fome day or daies, though not in a feventh day, fur which now we do not 
 contend, Croffe alfo to [he appointment of the Gofpd, foj tt<'ld by IfaUh 
 and Bzekiel, ifa^S ^,6» Ez,\a^\.i']. made mention of by our Saviour 
 to continue longafctr theabolillningof ail c. remi^nies b^ hi? dearhj.4</fjf.24. 
 ao.who therefore bids them pray, that their fltght wrt) h- 1 u u^ ike "iKintcr^mr 
 on the S Math day, v^\\\q\\ whether it be the Jcvvifh or ChriQian lubbath I dif- 
 futenot, only this is cvdent, thit he hath an eye to fonu fpeciall/ r^^j, 
 and which was laftly ordaintd by Chrif^, and otfeivcd in the Piimitiv. Chur- 
 ches, commonly called the i^(>^<3'/^*»;, as Hall be fhewn in duep!icej and 
 which notion und^r pretence of Oiore fpiritu^L^fe in m-king c v, ry c'ay a 
 Sabbab ( whith is utterly «»/^w//// and mpoffiNe, ur-letfe i be lawful] to 
 negltd ourown work all the wetK long arid without vvh ch there can be no 
 trucSaboaih) dothieally undeim rech. trueSabbath> in fptc'.aP fetdaies 5 
 and look as to make every mjn aKmg and Judge in aChrvflian Commcn- 
 wcalib,would be the introdidoncf confuOon, and conf^quently the dedru- 
 dionofa civil government, foto crown every day with tquall honour unto 
 QoAsfet dai:s mndSahh.Mhs which he hath anointed and iM^Ued (tbove the rejly 
 this ^tjATchy and confufion oid^tej, doth utterly fit^-^ert the true Sabhath: to 
 make evtry day a Suhbmh^M a read deb ^ipng anddethro^ing^ oJQods SM^^, 
 
 7 hefts 69* 
 £q^ Tis true that every day confidered materially and phyfically, as a day, is 
 equally holy, but this is no argument to prove that therefore every day is 
 morally and theologically holy • for thofe things which of themfclves are 
 common,mav by divine appointment fuperadded to them become holy, wit- 
 mfle the dedicated things of the Temple, and fo 'tis in daies and times; 
 under the old Teftament we fee fome daies were mure holy by Gods ap- 
 pointment then others, and yet all daies then were materially and alike 
 hoiy. 
 
 Thefs 70. 
 70. 'Tis true that under the new Teftament, all places (in afafefencc) are 
 equally holy ; but it doth not follow from hence ( as our Adveifaries would 
 
 infer) 
 
7 he Morality of the SMath. Mm 
 
 infer) that therefore ^/Sr /;>»^/ are (5-, and JVaLUns himfdf confefleth the 
 argiimf nt to be invalid : for it was not eafic nor meet, but very diflbnant 
 from divine and heavenly wifdom, to appoint in his word aJl particular pla- 
 ces where his people (hould meet, their meetings being to be in fomany 
 ihoufand feverall countries and various (ituations, which places are indeed 
 for their generall nature commanded and neceffary, but in rcfped of appli- 
 cation to circumftances of this and that place and countrey, the variation of 
 thtm is almoft endlelTe, and therefore very incongruous and ufelefTe to fee 
 them down in the word : but it was not fo in refpedof folemn time, or a 
 folemn day of worfhip, for herein the Lord might eafily appoint a particular 
 ^^; to be oblerved, aceordmg to therifingandfectingof cheSun propor- 
 tiooabiy thorowoLit all the world: and the Scripture hath exprcfly fore-- 
 told in refped of place, that neither in Jernfilem, Jadea nor Sam^ina, I5ut 
 that in every place incenfefhould be offered up to God, Mj/.iaj. but it 
 hath not Co [poken,buc rather the contra . y in refped of time. 
 
 Nor is any time morally holy,in this fence, viz. inftrumentally holj', or as 71. 
 an inftrwmenc and means by wh!ch God will convey any fpirituall and fuper- 
 naturallgrace (as Sacraments nu^ do, andT^r^-i^r^j of old did ) bat being 
 fanc^ned oiGodttkey ae h^/yfiafoKj^ in v^hich, God is pleafed to meet and 
 >k{fe his people rather then at other times and daiesof our owndevifiog, 
 or of more eommoo ufe -, r. fervmg only the Lords Prerogative to himfelf, to 
 work at other times alfo more or lelfe as he fees meetJndeed it's true,that by 
 our improvement of our time, and of fuch times, the Lord fweetly conveyes 
 himfelf to us, yet ftill 'tis not ifj timt itfeifnor hj the day itfelf, but as he con- 
 vejeskimfeljtoHo hj^lj thingi^^tyid^t hvly places {as the Ari^andtemp/eJ/o U 
 holj times, 
 
 Thefis 72. 
 
 There are indeed fundry Scriptures, which to one who is willing to have 72» 
 alidaiesequall, may carry a great bredth, and make a fpecious fiiew ; and! 
 ingcnioufly confefle, that upon a ri^idumexamen of them, they are more 
 weighty and heavy thtn the difputers in this controverfieufually feel them, 
 and therefore they do more lightly caft them by and paile them over : and 
 it is to be wi(hed,that thofe who do not think that all daies arc equall,yct will 
 not acknowledge a feventh day to be morall, had not put weapons unawares 
 into the hands of others, ftrengthening them thereby to dcftroy the morality 
 of any day, and fo to lay all daies level), for I fcarce know an argument or 
 Scripture alledged, by any germane writer, agatnft the morality of a feventh 
 day, but it ftrikes dircdly againft the morality of any day, which yet they ac- 
 knowledge to be morall. ■ 
 
 Thefis 73. 
 
 The faireft colour and ftroDgeft force from G4f.^.io, aad CoU,i6* lies ??• 
 
 in ••• 
 
4$ The Morality of the SMath. 
 
 in the gradation which fome fuppofe to be intended in both ihofe places. 
 Te obferve (faith the ApoftJc ) dds's: and monetks, a»i\ times, and years, 
 Gal.^. I o. Wherein the Apoftle feems to afcend from the Idler to the great- 
 er, from daies ( which are lefle then moneths, and therefore Weekly Sabbath 
 dales) to moneths, from moneths or new moons, to time?, which are higher 
 then moaeths, and by which is i-neanc their annuall feaftsand fafts, ordered 
 according to the y^A^ot or fitteft feafons of the year; and from times he 
 afcendsytt higher to years, viz, their Sahhaticall years, becaufe they were 
 celehrAud oncQ, in many years, fometime fevcn, fometime //r/ j<?4rj : by 
 which gradation ic ftems evident, that the obfcrvation of daies ( which are 
 kffe then moneths ) and therefore of weekly Sabbaths, arc hereby con- 
 demned. The like gradation is urged from O/2.16. where the Apoftle 
 feems to defcend from condemning the greats rro the condemnation of the 
 lefl'er : Let no man'pidgeyou ( faith the Apoftlc ) in re'^eEh of a holy d^j, neiv 
 moon, or Sabbath diies : there holy daies Teem to be thti-r anniiail or Sab- 
 baticall daies, their new moons are leflc then them, being every moneth; 
 and therefore by Sabbath daies ( th?y infer) mud needs be meanc the 
 X>ceekiy Sabbaths lefife then r.ew moons : Indeed fome underftand by daies and 
 times ( in ^^^Z^.) heathenifl^ daies, but he fpeaking of fiieh daies as are beg- 
 gerly rudiments, under which not the Heathens, but the children of the 
 old Teftament were in bondage, verf-^, he mufl: therefore fp^ak not of 
 HeatheniQi but of Jewilli daies, Iknowalfo that (ome underftand that of 
 CoLi.-i6» to be mtant of Jewifh and cercmoniall Sabbaths, which were an- 
 nuall, but this, the Apoftles gradation feems to overthrow. 
 
 T^jefij 74. ^ '' 
 
 j^. To both thefe places therefore, a threefold Anfwer may be given; Firft, 
 Admit the gradation in them both, yet by daie?^ g^iL^AO, is not necedarily 
 meant, all weekly Sabbach daies, for there were other daies ccremoniall 
 which the Jews obferved, and which the Jewifh teachers urged, bcfidcs the 
 Sabbath; to inftance only in circumcifion which they zealoufly preft, G^^/. 
 5,3. which we know was limited unto the eight day, and which they might 
 urge as well as circumcifion it felf. However, look as the Apeftle when he 
 condemns them for o^ferving times, ^^iLyt which fignifies Fit feafins^ he 
 doth not therein condemn them for obferving all fit feafons ( for then we 
 muft not pray nor hear the word in fit feafons ) but he condemns the Jewi(b 
 eeremoniall times and feafons ; fo when he condemns the obfervation of 
 daies, the Apoftle doth not condemn the obfervation of all daies (for then 
 daies of faftmg and feafting muftbc condemned, as well as daies of refting, 
 under the new Tcftament ) but the obfcrvation of ccremoniall daies, which 
 the Jews obferved, and falfc teachers urged ; and indeed the Apoftle fpcaks 
 of fuch daies as were beggerly elements and rudiments : now James fpeak- 
 ing of the morall law, which comprehends Sabbath daies, he dotfe not call 
 
 ic 
 
rhe Moralitj of the SMath. 49 
 
 ic a beggeily law, but a royall law, 7^w.2.8,t 2. nor doth he make fubjedlion 
 thereuiKo, to be the bondage of fcrvants ( as that was, G*;*/. 4. 9.) but the 
 liberty of children, and therefore called a royall law of liberty. 
 
 Secondly, Su.^po'e the weekly Sabbath be here comprehended under 
 dale?, as alfo that by Sabbaths is meant weekly Sabbaths/.Ce/ 2.1 6. yet here- 
 by cannot bg meant the Chriflian Sabbath, but the Jewifh Sabbath : for the . .^ 
 Apuftle condemns that Sabbath and thofe Sabbath daies, vvhxh the Jewifh- - 
 teachers pleaded for, among the Coloffians; now they never pleaded tor 
 the obfcivition of rhe Chriflian Sabbath, but were zealous and itrong Pro- 
 dors for that particular fevench day from the creation, which the Jews thar 
 forefathers for many years before obfervcd, and for the obfeivation of 
 which, fome among us of late begin to ftrugglc at this day : Now, as^iis 
 faid,admicthe gradation ;we do nocobfcrve the Jewilli Sabbath, nor /lidge 
 others in rcfpcft of that Sabbath, no more then for obferving new moon?, 
 or holy dates, we do utterly condemn the oblcrvation of that Sabbath: If 
 ic be faid, why, do we not obfervenew moons and holy daies as well, by 
 fubft tilting other daies in their room, as wcdoa Chriftian Sabbath in the 
 room of tnac Jewifli Sabbath ? we Hiall give the reafon of it in its proper 
 p!ac»% which I mention not here, kaftJlliould ^u cod^m append re, Thefe 
 places therefore are ftrong arguments for notobfcrving thatftventh day 
 which was JewiQiand certmomall, but they give no futficicnt ground for 
 abandoning all Chriftian Sabbaths under the Gofpel. 
 
 Tnirdiy, There is ad^uible obfervation of daies (^sfP'atU^ znd Dave^^^f^^**** 
 y^tnt well obferve) i. Morall. 2. Ccremoniall. Now the Apoflle in the ^aiLi«4. 
 places alleadged, fpeak? againfl: the Ccremoniall and pharifatcall obferva-^'"'^'"* 
 cion of daies, bucnotmorall : For daies of fading are tobeobferved under 
 th- Gofpel (the Lord ChriO: our Bridegroom being now taken from ns, 
 when our Saviour expreflely eels us that then his Difciplc?, evtn when they 
 had the greateft meafures of * Chnfts fpiiituall prefence, ihould faft, Mattlf. *roh.i^7- 
 p.i5,i(^.) Butwearecoobfetvc thefe daies, with morall, not ceremonial! 
 obf<irvation^ fuehasthe Jews had, in fackcloch, afhes, tearing hair, rend- 
 ing garments, and many other ceremoniall trappings; we arc to rend our 
 hearts, and cey mightily to God upon thol«e daiec, which is the morall ob- 
 servance of rhem : So'tisinrelpedof the Sabbath, no Sabbath day under 
 the Gofpel is to be obfervcd with ceremonial! orpharifliieall obfervation, 
 with JewJth preparations, facrifices, ncedlelTe abftincncc from lawful! woik, 
 arndluchlike formalities; but doth ic h«ncc follow that no daies are to be 
 obfervcd under the Gofpel with morail obfervation, in hearing the Wo rJ, 
 receiving the Sacraments, finging of Pfalmes ? d^r. There was no morality 
 in the new moons, by vertueof any fpcciall commandment, and therefore 
 icisin vain to ask, v\hy new moons may not be obfcrved ft'll, as well as 
 Sabbaths? provided that it be slffervationemorali^ for there is a morality in 
 
 H obfctving 
 
JO The Morality $/ the SMath. 
 
 obfcrvingthe Sabbath, and ihit by a fpcciall command, which is not in ncvr 
 moons and holy daies; and therefore as wc utterly abandon alJ that which 
 was in the Sabbath ceremonial I, fo we do and (liould heartily retain and ob- 
 fcrvc that which \s raorall herein, with morall obfervance hereof. 
 
 Thefis 75. 
 75. There were among the Jewf, daies ceremonially holy, as vvcll as meats 
 ceremonially unclean, now m that other place which they arge againft ihc 
 obfervation of any daies under the Gorpel,i?^«».i4.5. therein daies cerc- 
 moniallare compared with meats ceremonial!, and not morall daies with 
 ceremoniall meats. It is therefore readily acknowledged that it was an er^ 
 rour and weaknefle in fome, to think themfelfcs bound to certain ceremo- 
 niall daies, as well as it was to abftaia from certain ceremoniall meats; but 
 will it hence follow that it isapartof Chriflian liberty and ftrength to aban- 
 don all daies as ceremoniall ? and that it is a part of Chnftian weaknclTc to 
 obfervc any day under the Gofpel ? this verily ha*h not the face of any reg- 
 ion for it from .this Scrtpru;;e, when n he Aptftle (dcuitlcllc) fpc aks of 
 ceremonial), not morall diies, as (iliall appear) our Chiilban Saboatbs 
 be : And look as it is dury (rot wcaknelk ) Ibrnecime to abftain fami iomc 
 meats, as in the cale of extraordinary humiliation, aswcfceinZ^^A/V ,Dan. 
 p. and 11. foit maybeducy (not weakncile) ftill ro obfcfvefomr daicG ; 
 I fay not the feventh day, foi: that is not now the qucftion, but fomt dii^i are 
 or may be neccfl'ary to be obf^rved now. 
 
 Thefis 75. ^ 
 7da If any man flialj put any holinefTe in a day which God doth not, and fo 
 think one day more holy then another ; this is moft aoominable fuperititior, 
 and this is indeed to obferve daies ; and of this the Apoftle feems to fpcak, 
 when he faith, Te objtrveddies : But when the Lord Hull put holintffv upon 
 one day more then upon another, we do not then put any holincilc in the 
 day, but God doth it, nor do we place any holinc flc in one day more then in 
 another, bat God placcth it firft, and this is no obfervation oi daits,whit h th& 
 Apoft le condemns in thofe that were weak ; but of the ^ill «f God which he. 
 every where commands, 
 
 Thejti 77, . 
 77» ^ There is ( as fc«n« call it ) SM^tkHm iHterf!i4m& exurmwr i- an inter- 
 nall and an extcrnall Sabbath ; the firft ( tf I may lawfully call it a Sabbath ) 
 is to be kept every day in a fpcciall reft from (in; the fecond is to be obler- 
 ved at certain times and on fpeciall daies- now if that other place, //S.^'i^. 
 23. ( which \6 much urged for the equality ef all daies ) be meant of a con- 
 tinuall Sabbbath, fo that thofc words, fi^im SMathtg SuhUthy if they figr 
 nifiea conftant contiiiUall worfliipof God indcfiiienily, then the Prophet 
 fpcaks of an intcrnall Sabbath, which flhall infpteMhe^lffervednndtT the 
 gpfUii but this doth not abolife the obfervatioa of an extcrnall Sabbath 
 
 alloj, 
 
The Mcrality of the SMaih. ^5* 
 
 atfo, no more then in the times before the Gofpel, when the people of Gad 
 were bound co obfcrve a contlnuali Sabbath and reft from fin, and yet were 
 noc exempted hereby from cxternall Sabbaths, only becaule more ^Ace is 
 poured out npon the people of God under the new Ttilament then under 
 the old, and under feme times and feafon* of the rew Tcftament, andfome 
 people, more then ac and upon others : hence this prophcfie points at the 
 times of the Gofpc!, wherein Gods people iliall worfl-kip God more fpiri- 
 tually and concmually then m former times : But if by this phrase FromSab^ 
 hAthio Sabhath, be meant, fiicceffion, u one S.4hth af;er ai»otber /«c<;e/^ 
 Jively, wherein Gods people fhall enjoy bfelTed fellowdiip v\i.h God from 
 Sabba'.h to Sabbath, fiicct fiivtly in theworfl-iip of him, one Sabbath after 
 another ; Then this place is Ihch a weapon in their own Ifands agai-oft them- 
 feiv<.s,as tha ic wounds lu r'^x heart that accurftd conceir,that all daics fhoi.ld 
 be abandorstd by fhoic und^r fe nevy Teft jrr.CiK : fi.ii: fuppofe that by Sab- 
 bath, is not meanr, the vveskl}' Sabbath ( fot then, fay fom *, what will you 
 pndrrfland by new moons which are con;oinedvvith them?) vet thefe two 
 things are evident, i. That Saobatn? and rew moons were ft ftmes oi 'jvot' 
 fh-ppiug God fcindcr the old Tcltam^nc. 2. That ic isufu-ill with the ?ro- 
 pheiscovaii ( and not alwayto type cut) th^ vvorfliip, and fo the times 
 of woiil.ip vhith were to be under the new T ftamenr, under the Ordinarir 
 ces of God obfeiv d.in the old, as may appear, //^ ip.157. /^/^/.i.ii. as 
 alfo by £-^'^>/. Tcinpie, and fuch like : hence then it follows, that although 
 this place iliould not e vid a fc venth daies Sa >bath,yec it demonftrates at leaft 
 thus much, thac fjme fet times and daies fliiddowed out under the name of 
 new moons and Sabbaths, arc to be obferved upidcr th"^ new Tcftamenr, acid 
 Vthisisfutiicisncto prove the point in hand, That all daies arc not equillun- 
 4er the Gofpd. 
 
 Thefij 78. 
 The kingdom of heaven indeed doth not confift in meat and drink, as the ^g^ 
 Apoftie faith, Rom 14,17. i, in the ufe of excernall mdiflfcrcnt things, as 
 thofe meats and drinks, and fome kindc of daies were, or if in feme fenfc it 
 did, yet not chiefly in them, as if almoft all religion did chiefly confift in 
 them : but doth ic from hence follow, that itconliftsnot in things comman- 
 ded,nor in any Cti daies of worfliip which are commanded ? If becaufe the 
 kingdom of God conlifts in internall peace and right eoufnefle, and ;oy of 
 the holy Gkoft, that therefore all extemalt obfervancesof times and duties 
 ef woi(l:»tp are not neeeilary to be attended byGofp.l-worl'hippers (as 
 fome fecretly imagine) then farwell all cxternall Preaching, Sacramcpts, 
 rrortflivjnandConfcffionofthcNameof Cbiift, as well as Sabbaths: and 
 let Cuch .itt.^s of licentioufflcfle bring in all p^-ophaneffe into the world a- 
 gain, by a law from heaven, not condemning the a^flsofche outward man, 
 though never fo abominable, in abftineoce from which (Dy this rule) the 
 
 H 2 kingdom 
 
52 The M^TAlity $f the sMath. 
 
 kingdom of heaven doth not confift. 1$ it no honour to the King of glory (as 
 ic is to earthly Princes) to be ferved fometimes upon fpcciall Feftivals, In 
 fpeciall ftate, with fpeciall and glorious attendance by his people, as well 
 asaftera comman and ufuall manner everyday ? VVehavc fecn feme who 
 have at firft held commuiicy of dales only,to fall at laft (through therigh- 
 teous judgement of God blinding their hearts ) to maintain community of 
 Wives; aad that becaufc the kingdom of God hith (as they have thought) 
 eonfifled no more in outward relations ( as that is between Husbands and 
 Wives ) then in ciie obfervjcion of exccr i^li circum.lances and daies. 
 
 Thejif yp. 
 yp. But this is not the ordinary principle by which many are led to maintain 
 anequility of daics under the Gofpcl; but this ch;cily, t//^, that the morall 
 Utp ts not to be aCkriftians ruU &f lifi '^ iox. we ackiiOAledge it to be no 
 Covetanf of /ifr to lackey cVy that eit-her by the keeping oF if he fliould be 
 )uftified,orthatforthe breach of ithcil^ould be condemned; but they fay 
 that when a Bcleever hath life by the Covenant of grace, the law is now 
 not fo much as a r/d/eof /ift to fuchaone; and then 'tis no wonder if they 
 who blow out the light of the whole morall law from being a light to their 
 feet and a hmp to their paths, if they hereby utterly' extinguillv this part of 
 ifj viz. the Commandment of the Sabbath : This daUVingagainft the whole 
 law, is the very myftery of this iniqairy, why fomc do cafhtc^r this law of the 
 Sabbath: and they do but hide ihemf^lves behinde a thread, wheniheyop- 
 pofcric by their weapons who therefore abandon it becaufeic alone is cere- 
 iKOniall, above any other law. 
 
 So. The SMath (faith one) is per petti ^l! and mor all, i^Htr.otthe Sahhatlj d^y^- 
 
 a.Den, (Ijg SaHath ( ^hich fimemnks contl/j^All and iyivj-^don/f ) i^ p-irpetHally to hs- 
 obftYved^ hut not the Sabbath day '^ a Sabbath i-j by T)ivine ordlrjatioyi, btit 
 A Sabbath day is To be obferved only a£ a humane CQnftiiutiQn, But they ihould 
 do well to confider whether, that which t!:ey call an Invra^d conVnuatlSah^' 
 ^^if^beinconfUkn: withafpeciiil day; for I am fure that they under the- 
 old Teftament were bound equally with us to obfervea continuall Sabbath' 
 in refting from all fin, and refting in God by Jefus ChriO, Heb.^jyZ. yet this 
 did notexempc them from obferving a fpeciall day : A fpeciall day is a moft- 
 powerful! means to Sabbatize every day; Why then aiay not a Sabbath^ 
 and a Sabbath day confift together ? An everj-day Sabbath is equally oppo- 
 fite to a time occafionally (ct^ as to a fet day, which the Commandment en- 
 joins; and therefore if it exempts a Chriflian from obferving a (etday, iz 
 fcts him free alfo from all obfervation of any fuch fet time ; for if becaufe a 
 Chriftian Sabbath ought to be continuall, and that therefore there ougkt to - 
 be no kt daics, ihen there (hoRld nor be any occafionally fet times for the 
 vvoi:(hip of God, becauk thde neither caa be eontinft^tl 5 and if there oughc ^ 
 
 to 
 
The Morahij of the sMath. 53 
 
 to be no fuch fet times, we may then h\A goodnioht ro all the publike worfl^.ip 
 and glory of God in the u orld, like the man with en" eye to him who put his 
 other eye quite out : And if any here reply that Jhere is not the like rtafon, 
 becanfe holy time and dales arc not neced'iry, but holy' duMes are ncctflary, 
 and therefore require Tome cc^fi^nali fee time for them : 1 anfwer, That 
 let thed.ftcrencc be granted, yet that whith I nowdiif U'eon is, this ground 
 and fiippolirion only, vtz. I hat if all fct d jits are to be abandoned, because 
 a' Chriltians Sabbath ought ro becontinuall and inward, then all occafionall 
 fet tim^s alfo are to be abandoned upon the lamt- ground, becauie thcfccan- 
 not becontinuall and inward no more ch n the other: a*: for them v\ho 
 think no holj day nccefl'jry, but holydu'ies lawfu'l every day, wchaveal- 
 ready and (irxW hereafter char up morcr fu'ly in:t> proper place: Mean 
 while it IS yet doubtfull to m ', whether thoft wh ) follow M"^ Sattmfirjhzx\& , ^ - 
 f(>me oxher^-, will acknowledge the lawfulncd". of any occafionall fet timrs j^M/fj of 
 forpujlitk worfliip, of hearing the word and praier, (^6\ Forke mjkfsthe VI^'^^'S- 
 hnfim of the Fctth r to he the Chrtfli^n SAb(?i"io, typtfi^^j in the fe vend: day of 
 thfi-fl cre.itio'^, en i h" m '\es the fix dn-i of "^^ork^ to be 4 tjfs^ not only of the 
 Lord J^iw in hii A-^Hve atj4 fulfilii»^ admin fjr.it io^s "dohle he "^M ih the h-fh, 
 hut a'(o :e '">€ af^nre of ihr Chrfjit in in hondtge, nr ( to u^c his own words ) 
 oj at Chiftian p,ftd^.r aRive a<d ^crl^i^i^ admin^flraiionsj as thife of the l.iv^ 
 ("nd G fpelarp^ a,i a'furms ef ^or/Jjip^ Duties ^ CJraces, Praier^ OrditaKces &c. 
 I rom whence it will follow (from h s Drinc'plc?,far Iknow not his pradict) 
 that aliform^ of worllvp, Duties, Graces, Praier, Ordinances, are then 
 to ceafc, as typt's and iliadows and figures, when once the fubftance is come, 
 tiwic, when thr^v come in this 1 f e to rhehighef} attainment, which is the 
 bo^omofche Father, which bof^m isthetru- Sabbathof a Chriflian man.^ 
 Now I confe J: that the boiom of God in Chrift is our reft^and our A/Jin All 
 in heaven, and our fvveet confolation and rcfl on earth, 2.nii that we are 
 not tore ft in anyrriean?, Ordinances, Graces, Duties, but to look beyond 
 them all, and to be carried by them above them all, to him that is better 
 then all, loGod inChrift Jefus; but to make this bofomof God akindeof 
 canker Aorm to fret and eat out the heart and being not only of all Sab- 
 baths and Ordinances of wotfbip, but alfo of ail Duties and Graces of 
 Gods Spirit, nayofChriftJefushimfelf, asheijmanifefted in theflefli, and ^ 
 is an extentall Mtdiaor, whom * fome lately have alfo caft into the fame*^*"^' 
 box with the reft, Bein^fent only (as they think ) to reveal, hut not to fro- 
 curt the Fathers love oj delight, and tkerefpre « Itttle elfe then a meer form^ 
 and fi to ceafe Vphen the Father comes in the room of all firms y ^nd(oii A:tiin All, 
 This I dare fay is fuch a hi^h affront to the precious bloud of Chrift, and his 
 glorious Name andbleffed Spirit of grace, that he who hath his furnace in 
 Zton, and his fire in f rr^yS/fw, will not bear it long, without maKmg their 
 judgements and plagues (at leaft fpirituall) exemplary and wondcifull, 
 
 H: 3 and 
 
54 Tk Morality of the Sahbaih» 
 
 and leading them forth in fiich crooked waies, with the workers of iniquity', 
 when peace il^adbe iipan Ifratl : Are thtTe abftraded notions of a Deity 
 ( into the vifion and contemplation of whofe amazing giory (without fee- 
 ing him as he is in Chrift) aChriftian (they fay) muft be plunged, loft, 
 and fvvallovved up, and up to which he mijflafcend,even to the unapproach- 
 able light) the true and only Sabbach ? Are thefe (I fay) the new and 
 glorious light breaking out in thefe daies, which this age muft wait for ? 
 which are nothing elfe (upon narrow f-arth) chen Monkifn imaginations the 
 goodly cobwebs of the brain- imagery of thofc idolatrous and fjperftirious hy- 
 pocrites the Anchorite5,Monks and Fryars; who to make the blindc and (im- 
 pie world admire and gjzeupon [hem, gave it out hcrcby,like Simon Adag^^y 
 thacthey were fome great ones, eveniht^vtrv poiver and familiars of God. 
 Surely in thefe times of diftradion, v^arre and bloud, if ever the Lord cal.'cd 
 for (ackcloch, humiliati:)n , repentance, faith, graces, holintHi-', precious 
 edeem of Gods Ordinances, and of tha: Gofpci which hidi been the power 
 of God to the falvacion of thoufands, now is the time, and muO: Gods 
 people rejcd thefe things as their A. B. C ? and muQ the new light of thefe 
 times be the dreams and vidons and flavorings of docing and deluded old 
 Monks? Shall the fimpliaty of Gofpel-miniltry be rejeded, as a common 
 thing, and lliall Harphifti his Theol"gi<i Aljftica^ /iup4ftintu Ehttkeriw, 
 facoh Bahrmrj, (^u [anus , R imund^ Schnndy Theohgia Q<^rm.iH!ca , and 
 fuch like Monk admirers, be fet up as the new lights and beacons on the 
 mountain of thefe elevated times? Surely (iffo) God haih his time and 
 waies of putting a better rclilli to h:s precious Golpcl, and the erode of 
 Chrift, which was wont in Pau/j time to be plainly preached, vvithoucfuch 
 popiil^paintmgs, and wherein Cods people knew how to reconcile their 
 fweet reft in the bofom of the Father, and iheir Sabbath day. 
 
 7he^s 8 1. 
 8i. Iffin (which is the tranfgreffion of the law) be the greateftcvil, then 
 holtncftc ( which is our conformity to the law ) is our greatcft good. If fin 
 be mans greateft milery, then holineife is mans greatcft happinefle : It is 
 therefore no bondage fora Ghriftian to be bound to theoblervance of the 
 law as his rule, becaufeit only binds him faflto his greateft happincfTe, and 
 thereby dired- and keeps him fafe from falling into the greatcit mifery and 
 woe ; andifthegteacd.fign of Chrift in coming into the world, was not 
 fo much to fave m^n from afH dion and forrow ( which are iefler evils ) but 
 chiefly ftomfin ( which is the greateft evil ) then the chief end of his coraing 
 was HOC ( as fome imagine ) to life his people up into the love and ab- 
 ftraded fpecalation of the Father above the law of God : but into his 
 own bofom only, where oaly^ we have fellowlliip with the Father above 
 the law of fin. 
 
7he Miirdtj of the SMath. j j 
 
 Thefts 82. 
 ThebloudofChrift was never llied to deftroy all fen fe of fin and fight of 82. 
 fin in Beieevers, and confequently all attendance to any rule of the law by 
 which means chiefly fin comes to be feen : but he died rather to make them 
 fcnfible of fin, for if he died to fave men from fin ( as is evident, 1 fokn 3.5. 
 Tit.-^.ij^.) then he died to make bis people fenfibleof fin, betaufe hereby 
 his peoples hearts are chiefly weaned and/everd from itand favedouf of ft 
 (as by hardiicfl'e and unfenfibltntfTeof heart under it, they chiefly cleave to 
 it and it to them) and thcrtforc we know that godly forrow works re- 
 pentance never to be repented of, iCory.io. And that P harsh hardnffTe 
 ofheartftrcngthenedhiminhisfinagainftGoduntothelaft gafp, and hence 
 it is alfo chat the deepcft and grearelt fpirit of mourning for fin is pourfd out 
 upon Brleevers, aiccr God hach poured our upon them the fpirit of grace, 
 as is evident, 2ach 12.10,11. becaufe thebloudof Chrift which was Qied 
 for the killing of their fin, now makes them lenfibie of their fin, becaufe it's 
 nowfprirkled and applied to them, which it was not before, for they now 
 fee all their fins aggravated, being now not only fins againft the law of God, 
 bur againft the bloud and love of the Son of God : Ic is therefore a moft 
 accu: fed dodrine of fome Libertines, who imagining that (throngh the 
 bloudfcd and righrtoufneire of Chrift in their free juftification) God kc$ 
 no fin in his jiiftificd peopls, that therefore themfelves are to fee no fin, be- 
 caufe now tht^y arc juriificd and wafhed with Chrifts bloud; and therefore 
 leafhhey fliouldbcf undout tobegroflcliars, they mince the matter, they 
 conft fife that they may iec fin by the eye ojf fenfe and reafon, but (faith 
 being erode to reafon ) they are therefore to fee the quite contrary, and Co 
 to fee no fin in themfelves by the eye of faith; from whence it follows that 
 Chnft fbed his bioud to deftroy all fight and fenfe of fin to the eye of faith, 
 though not to the eye or reafon, and thus as by the eye of faith they fliould 
 kcpofn, fo (it will follow) that by the fame bloud they are bound to fee 
 no law, no not fo much as their rule, which as a rule is iftdfx fii ^ ohli<\ui^ 
 and in revealing mans duty declares his fin. I know that in beholding our 
 free jufiificationbythebloudofChnft, we aretoexdnde all law fromeur 
 conieknces as a covenant of life, nor to fee or fear any condemnation for 
 fin, or any fin able to take away life: But will it hence follow thatajufti*- 
 fied perlon muft ice no fin by the eye of faith, nor any law as hi:s rule to 
 walKDy,todifcoverfin ? and is this the end and fruit of Chrifts death too? 
 Surely this dodrinc, if it be not blafphcmous, yet it may be known to be very 
 falfe and pernicious by the old rule of judging falfc dodnnes, viz. if either 
 they rend to exrcnuue fin in man, or to vih6c the precious gcacc of Icfws 
 Cferift, as this doftrinc doth* . 
 
 If fin b« ih^ tranfgreffiwj •f the law (which is a truth written by the ^Jr 
 
 Apoftle 
 
55 - ' 7he Mcraliifof the SMath. 
 
 Apoftle with the beams of the fun, i John 34) then of necedicy a Bclecver 
 is bound CO attend the law as his rule, that (o he may not (in or tranfgreile 
 that rule, Pfti 119.11. for whoever makes confcience cf fin, cannot biic 
 make confcience of obfervmg the rule, chac fuhL^maynot fin, and confe- 
 quencly who ever make no confcience of obferving the rule do openly prc- 
 fcff^^ thereby that they make no confcience of committing any fin, which is 
 palpable and down right Arheifm and prophaneile ; naf ic is fuchpropha- 
 nefle (by fome mens principles) which Chnft hath purchafcd for them by 
 bisbloud; for they make the death of Chriif f he foundation of this liberty 
 and freedom from the lavv as their rule; 'h-: very thought of which abo- 
 minable dodrine may fmite a heart, who hath the leaft tcnderneffc, with 
 horrotirard trembling. Porqaim therefore a great Libertme, and theBeel- 
 'Adv. 2ebub i>fthofeflics in Cuhws time, thucs his fore eics agairJl; (his definition 
 of fin, delivered by the Apoftle, and makes this only to be fin, v^. to fee, 
 kno.v, or fed fin, and that the great fin of man is to chink that he sioth fin • 
 and that this is Co ptii offihe old nun, 'viz. N--n (€rner>d-> ampl/ns O'lcvatum, 
 /. bvnotfeeingfin. So that when the Ap^»Ule tels us chat hn is the rra^-f 
 grcflionofthelaw, Porqtiim telsu>That (in is she feeing and taking notice 
 ofany fuchtranfgreflion ,• furelyif ihey char confciTe finHiilinndc niecv, 
 then they that will not {^ much as fee ^\\\ ih ill findc none 3c ail : A SJ.cvcr 
 indec d is to d^\t mto the hw, and to fee no fin in himfeif in point ot impu- 
 ticion (forfohe fees rhctiuch, there beir?^^ no condrmnacion to them in 
 Chrift Jcfus) but thus to- die unto che law, fo as co fee no (in inhercncin 
 himfell-, againfl the law, this is impious ( for (o co fee no ^\^ and die unto the 
 law is an untruth, if the Apoftle may be beleeved, i 7^^wi.io.) Thvfe ihat 
 fi eiitmkiUtea Chrlflian, ^.ndmake hinj nothing and God all, fo that a Chiftit^n 
 njttfl neithr ['c'l^i^scWcor fenfire ^aw/ thing oj himft if ^ hut h.e mffft be meiis} 
 into Qodt and die to ihefe ( for then they fay he is out of the flefii ) a>^d live 
 in Cfod, and God ntfdfl he himfeif, and fuch like hngugge, which in truth is 
 nothing elfe but the (welling leaven of che devout and proud Monks, laid up 
 of lace in chat little peck of meal o^Theologia Germanic n owe of which fome 
 rifcn up of late have made their cakes,for the ordinary food of their deluded 
 bearers : I fay thcfcmen had need take heed how chey fland upon this pre- 
 cipice, and that they deliver their judgements warily, for ahhoughaChri- 
 ftian is CO be nothing by feeing and Koaching him fe If for fin, that fo C hrifk 
 may be all in aJl to him ; yet fo co be made nothing, as to fee, know, think, 
 feel, will, defire nothing in refped of ones felf, doch inevitably lead to fee 
 no fin m ones felf, by feeing which the foulismoftof all humbled, and fo 
 Godand JefusChnftjs moft of all exalted ; and yet fuch a kinde of annihi- 
 lation the old Monks have pleaded for, and preached alfo ( as I could (hew 
 abundantly from out of cheir own writings ) in fo much that fomecimc they 
 counfdl men not co pray, bccaufc they muftbefo far annihilated^ as nihil 
 
 vfUet 
 
rhe Morality of the sMath. 57 
 
 veUe ; and fometimes they would feign thcmfelves unable to bear the burden 
 of the fpecies of their own pitchers in their ceis from one end of them unto 
 another, bccaiifc forfooth they were fo far Annihilated ( as neither to velle ) 
 fo neither to y?*>^ or know any thing befide God, whom they pretended to , 
 
 be 4// unto them, and themfclves nothing, when God knows thefe things ^//;^^*^^^" 
 were buc brain bubbles, and themfclves in thefe things as arrand hypocrites 
 as the earth bore, and the moft fubtlc undcrmincrs of the grace of Chr»ft,and 
 the falvacion of mens fouls. 
 
 Thcfis 84. 
 
 A true Beieever, though he cannot keep the law perfedly as his rule, j et 84. 
 he loves it dearly, he blames his own heart when he cannot keep it, but 
 doth not findc fault with the law as too hard, but cries out with Panl, The 
 Uwiihly and ^00 a, hm I am camall : he loves this copy though he can but 
 fcribbleafceritj when therefore the qucftionis made, vi<„ Whether a Be- 
 ieever be bound to the law as his rule? the meaning is not whether he hath 
 power to keep it exadly as his rule, or by what means he is to feek power to 
 keep ir ; but the queftion is, whether it be in it felf a Beleevers rule ; for to be 
 a rule is one thing, buc to be able to keep it, and by what means we lliould 
 keep ir, whether by our own ftrength or no, or by power from on high, is 
 another. 
 
 Thefts 85. 
 
 If the Apoftle had thought that all Bcleevers were free from this dire- 85. 
 dl.ve power of the law, he would never have perfwadcd them to love, 
 upon this ground, vi^. becaufeall the law is fulfilled in love, g^^/. 5. 13,1 4» 
 for they might then have caft off this argument as weak and feeble, and 
 have truly faid ( if this principle were true ) what have we to doe with 
 the law? 
 
 Thefts 8dJ. 
 
 There is the inn>ardlarv written on the hearty called the /aw of the fpirit of 26, 
 /ji/?.Rom.8.2. andthcre is the ^/^f»^r/s//<«w revealed and written in the holy 
 Scriptures, now the cxternall and outward law is properly the rule of a 
 Chriftian life, and not the incernall and inward law (asfome conceive) 
 for the outward law isperfed;, in that it pcrfedly declares what is Gods 
 will and whatnot; but the inward law (as received and writ in our hearts) 
 is imperfed in this life, and therefore unfit to be our rule: The inward law 
 isouraduall (yet imperfed) conformity to the rule of the law without, ^ 
 
 it is not therefore the rule it felf: The law within is the thing to be ruled, ^ 
 
 PfaLij,^. P/^/.ii9.4,j. The outward law therefore is the rule: The law 
 ofchefpiritoflife (which is the internail law) is called a law, notinrefpedl 
 of perfed diredion (which is edentiall to the rule) but in relped of 
 mighty and efFeduali operation, there being a power in it as of a ftrong 
 laweffeduallyandfweetly compelling to the obedience of the law: For as 
 
 I ihc 
 
!. The MotaUI'j <^f the SMath. 
 
 the law offin within us (which the Apoftle cals, the law of cur members, 
 and is contrary to the law of our mindcs, or the law of the fpiric of life 
 within u$) is nor the rule of knowing and judging what fin i$, but the law 
 of God withour, Rom.qq, and yet it is called a law, becaufe it hath a com- 
 pul'five power to a<^ and eneline to fu^ Itke a mighty and forcible law ; fo 
 the law of the fpirit of life, the law of oor niindes, is called a law, not that 
 it is the rule of a Chriftians life, but that it compels the hearr, and forccth ic 
 like a living law to the obedience of that diredmg rule (v\hcn it is made 
 known to it) from without: It is therefore a grt^at miftake to think, that 
 becaufe God tranflates the law withour into a Belccvcrs hearr, that there- 
 fore this hearc-law is his only or principal! rule of life, or to imagine that 
 the fpirit without the externall law is the rule of life ; the fpirit is the prm- 
 ciple indeed of our obedience, whereby we conform uato ihe lule, but it is 
 not therefore the rule it felf Icis true indeed, i.Thac the fpint enclincs 
 the heart to the obedience of the rule; 2. It illuminates thcminde alfo ma- 
 ny times to fee ic by fccret fliinings of preventing li-hr, as well as brings 
 things to their remembrance, which they knew before : 3. Ic ads them alio 
 fometime, foas that when they know not whattopraj^, ic prompts them, 
 i?<?jw.8.26. When they know not what to fpeak before cheir advcrfanes, in 
 that day it's given to them, A/^f.io.ip. When cbcy know not whether to 
 go nor how to go, it's then a voice behinde them, and leads them ro foun- 
 tains of living waters, 7/^.30.21. Rivelq^n, But all theie and ftich like 
 quickning ads of the fpirit, do not argue it to be our rule, according to 
 which we oughc co walk, but only by which or by means of which we come 
 to walk, and are en^Uned, dii^eiled andinAhteclto "^alk^accordm!^ tothernle, 
 which is the law of God without. For the Piloc of the lliip, is not the com- 
 palfe of the (liip, becaufe that by the Pilot the Hiip is guided: nor doth ic 
 srgue that the fpirit is our rule, becaufe he guides us according to the rule : 
 It isnotelTentiallto the rule to give power to conform unco it, bur to be 
 thatj according to which we are to be conformed: And therefore it's a 
 crazy argument to prove the law of the fpirit to be the rule of our lifejbecaufe 
 it chiefly gives us power to conform unto the rule i for jf the law be that 
 according to which we are to be guided, akhough it fliould give us no power, 
 yet this is fufficient to make i& CO be our rule. 
 
 Thejis 87. 
 ^7° The Spirit of God which writ the Scriptures, and in them this rule of the 
 holy law, is in the Scriptures and in that law, as well as in a Beleevcrs he an 5 
 and therefore to forfake and rejed the Scriptures or this written rule, is to 
 forfike and rej-d the holy Spirit fpeakingin it as their rule; nay, 'tis to 
 forfake that Spirit which is the fupream judge, according to which all p t- 
 vatcfpirits, nay all the ad'ngs, didates, movings, fpeakmgsof Godsown 
 Spirit in us, arc to be tiied, ejiamincd and judged. Tothelawandchetefti- 
 
 monyj 
 
The Meralhy of the SdbhatL 59 
 
 mooy, was the voice of the Prophets ia their dales, //4.S.20, Tht Lotd ^ 
 Chrilthimftlfrefcrsthe Jewstothe fcarching of Scriptuies conccrnmghim- 
 felf, fehn^ z^^. The men of Bereah areeommended for examining the holy 
 and infallible didaces of Gods Spirit, in7^^»//Minifl:ry, according to what 
 was written in the Scriptures of old. Ic is therefore but a crackling noife 
 of Windy words foraay to fay that they openno gopto iicentiourneffe by 
 renouncing the written and c xccrnall law as their rule, confidenng that they 
 cleave to a more inward and better rule, ^iz. The law of the fpirit with» 
 in: for (as hath been flievvn) they do indeed renounce the holy Spirit 
 fpeakinginthe lule, viz, the law without, whichithoughitbenonileof the 
 fpiric (as fome objtd) 5 et it is that rule, according to uhich the fpirit guides 
 ns to walk, and by which we are to judge v\htther the guidance be the fpirits 
 guidance or no. 
 
 Thefts %%. 
 Some fay Th^t the difctence ktwsen tkeold Tijf^f^enf di^nfation afid 88. 
 the nerv, or fH*€ CJ'lp I ^xd neve covekam^ pj t^ii, ,to ^HP^^Th^t theoney or ^p^^lu 
 that ^/Mofts ^^^i wlmflrj fijm X^ithcM-, i^nd thdi of Ch*^*:T fiom Witkh: fag.i^i, 
 a'4Ujence t- eyfy that the meer comm.ivdmenfs @r l^tiercf Serif tu^e^ ts not a 
 Ui^ to a Chrfltan ^hj ke [kouid \xalk^ in kd/y duties, f'fit the live "^rvtm on ou^ 
 hrarts the i^vo of hfe. But if thi^ be ch^ d.tfaence betv^t^cn the old and new 
 Tcflamenrdifpenfa-'o^, th^. miniftry otth«? old, and the m JnlOry of the new, 
 then let all BJcevf rs burn their B jles, and caft all the facred writiivgs of ihe 
 new Ttftament and old, unto fpiders and cobweb^^ in old holes and corners, 
 and never be read, fpoktnor meditated on, for thefe externall thingsare 
 noneof Chiiftu miniflry, onwhichnow Belecvers are to attend ; and then 
 I mafvell why the Apoftles preached, or why they writ the Gofpel for after 
 times (for .hat vvasrhc chief end of their writing, as it was of the Prophets 
 in their times ^i^ 30.8.) that men might bcleeve, and beleeving haveeter- 
 nail lire, and know hereby that they have eternall life, foh,20<'^i\ 1 foh.^AS* 
 For either their writing and preaching the Gofpel was not an external! and 
 outward miniftry (which is croffe to common ft nfe) or it was not Chnfts 
 Mmiftry, which is blafphcmous to imagine: and it is a vain fhift tor any to 
 fay That although it was ChrirtsMm'lJry, yet it was his Miniftryas under the 
 lawandintheflcflii and not in meer glory and fpirit: for it's evident that 
 the Apoftks preachings and writings were the efJ.d of Chrifts afcenfion and 
 glory, ^^^.4.8,1 1, when he was moft m the fpi/k, and had received the 
 fpirit that he might pour icout by this o«<ward miniftrj^ y^^.2.33. and it is 
 a meer New-nothing and dream ^fW Sa/cmarfl and others, to diftinguifh 
 between Chrift in the fl- fh ana Chrift in the f nric, as if the one Chrift had a 
 divers Miniftry from the other: For when the Comforter is come (which 
 is Chrift in the Spirit) what will he do? he will lead (it's laid) into all 
 Uuih^Joh,i6,i^. But what trucb will be guide as into? Verily no other 
 
 I 2 (for 
 
^o The Mor/ditj ${ the Sabhth^ 
 
 ' ( for fubftance ) but what Chrift in the flefti had fpoken, and therefore it's 
 faid that he ftiall Hng ati things to your remembrance ^ "Ophatjoever I have faid 
 unto you,]o\\A^.i6. andtherefore ( if I may ufe their phrafc) Chriftintbe 
 Spirit leads us to what Chrift in the flelli faid ; inward Chrift leads the faith- 
 full to the outward Miniftry of Chrift; Chrift in the Spirit to Chrift fpeak 
 ing in the letter, the Spirit of truth to the Word of truth, the Spirit withii 
 tothe Word without, by which wefiiallbejudgedatthe laftdayj^^.12.48 
 and therefore certainly are to be regulated by it now. 
 
 Thefts 8p. 
 Sp, It is true, that the faithfull receive an undion or an anointing of the Spi- 
 rit, which reacheth them all things; but is this teaching immediate or medt- 
 ate f If immediate, why doth foh» tell them that he writ to them that hereby 
 they might know they had eternal! life, i f^h.^.i^. but if it be mediate, 
 viz. by the word externally preacht or writ, then the externall word ftill 
 is to be our rule, which the anointing of the Spirit helps us to know: It is 
 true, the Apoftle faith, ifoh.i.ij. that they being taughc of the Spirit, did 
 not need that any man fliould teach them ; what then? was their teaching 
 therefore immediate? No verily, for the Apoftle explains his meaning in 
 the words following, viz, otherwife, and after another way and manner, 
 then as the fpirit taught them, for fo the words run, To^ need not that any 
 manfliOuldteachjoHy hnt Oi the anointing teaehech yoti all things, and is truth. 
 For if Minifters are to preach and write in demonftration of die Spirit, then 
 thofethat hear them and are taught by them, need no man to teach them 
 otherwife, then as the fame Spirit in the fame demonftration tcachech them 
 all things : It might be truly faid that the men of^Bereah dii need no man 
 loteach them otherwife then as the Spirit in comparing and fearching the 
 Scriptures did teach them. the things which Paul fpake. And Calvin \n^\\ 
 obfervcs upon this place, that the fcope of the Apoftle in thefe words, is to 
 confirm his dodrine which he writtothem, it being no unknown thing, bi^ 
 athing known to them bythe anointing of the Spirit, which either they had 
 icceivedby former Miniftry of the word, or which now they might receive 
 by this wriciag: As therefore the Spirit leads us to the word, fo the word 
 leads us to the Spirit, but never to a ipirit without and beyond the word^, I 
 mean fo far forth as that the outward adminiftrationof Chrift in the fiefti or 
 in the word or letter muft ceafe, and be laid aftde, when the inward admi- 
 sijftratioH of Chrift in the Spirit, comes. 
 
 Thefis go, 
 10. It*s as weak an argument to imagine, That '^e are nott» he led and guided 
 hj any oMtward commands in our obedience unto Qod (becAnfe God is to ^ork^ 
 aU ot/r ^orkifir tu, a^dbecanff ^e are not to Itve^ bftt ^/ rifi is to live in us) 
 as CO chink that we ar^not to look co any promi&s without us to dired and 
 ftipporcour fgith) becaufe Chrift is alfoco fulfill and accompliftxalUhe pro- 
 
 mifes 
 
The M6ralitj of the SMath. 6l 
 
 mifcsforns: For if the queftion be, By vvfeat are we to Jive ? The Apoftles 
 anfw«risfull,^^/.2.i5?,2o. that as he did not Hvebut by the faith of the 
 Son of God, foarewe: But if the queftion be, According to what'rule are 
 we to live, and wherein are we to live? The anfwer is given by Davi^y 
 /^/^/,iip.4,5. Jhouhafi commanded tu to keef thy precepts dili^emly. Oh that 
 my heart "^ere direHed to k(ef thy ftatntes, Tfe^l bountifrHj ^ith thy fervnnt 
 that I waj live and k£ep thy ^ord^ verf. 1 7. Let thy mercy come to me that I may 
 Ihe, firihy Urviimj de!l^h,\Q\^r/j, So that if the qucQion be, What is 
 the rule cf faith by which'we live ? The anfwer is, the Gorpei^PW.3.i<5. But 
 if the queftion be, What is the rule of life it felf ? The anfwer is, the morall 
 law ; and of this later is the controverfie. 
 
 Thefis pj. 
 The ccmmafiditig ^i/i of god, called VolHtttas mandatl^ is to be our rule, 91. 
 and not the working will of God, Voluntas decretit or the will of Gods 
 decree, for we cannot fin by fulfilling the one, but we may fin in fulfilling 
 the other : Gods fccret and forking ^i/l was fulfilled when Jofep'^jj brethren 
 fold him into Egypt, and when Nehtichad?tiZr<,ar aiHidled Gods people 
 fevcnty years, as alfo when the Scribes and Pharifees caufed Chrift to be 
 crucified : yet in all thcfe things they finned and provoked Gods wrath a- 
 gainftthem, How? Was it in crofling and thwarting Gods working will 
 or the will of Gods decree? No verily, for it's exprcfiely faid, that Chrift 
 was crucified according to the determinate counfel and will of God, /^^.4. 
 ^28. It was therefore by crofllngGods commanding will. It is therefore a 
 helhili devTc of Libertines to exempt men from all law, and from the fcnfe 
 of all fin, ^B canfe ( fay they) all things good and evil come fiom G^ds Wi^, 
 and all things that are dona are bought ty him, a^d all that he dotl^ ii goody and 
 therefore aHfi-zifiill anions a^e good, hicaufc Cj^d ^ori^j them^ for ^hat have 
 ^c to do to take the meAftire of onr \>caies by b^ forking MI? Gods will is his 
 own rule to work with, notour rule to work by : Our actions maybemoft 
 finfull when his working in and about thefemay be moft juft and holy j for 
 though God purpofeih to leave the creature to fail and fin, yet he fo purpo- 
 kd it, as that it fliould be only through their own fault that fo they fin : And 
 alrhough aChriftianis to fubmit humbly to the jufl difpenfations of God 
 when he leaves it to any evil, yet Gods working will in all fuch difpenfations 
 muftnot be our rule, for then we muft will not only our own fin, but our 
 own afRidion and perdition for ever, for all thefe are contained under his 
 working will : It is therefore a moft fubtle and pernicious pradice in many, 
 who when they are overtaken with any fin, or hamperd with fin, they wa{h 
 all o£from themfelves, and lay all the blame ( if any be ) upon God him- 
 fclf, faying. The Lord left me and he doth not help me, and he mu^ do all and 
 hAth H»dertal{en to do aU- if therefore Ifin, upon him he the blame, or if there 
 he snyupon them it ii but little : But why fliould any judge of the evil or their 
 
 I 3 fia 
 
6i the Morditj of the SMaih. 
 
 fin by Gods working will, for that is not your rule, but the commandin^ 
 will of God, according to v\hich Sa;f?uet convuiccd Saul (uhcnhe was 
 lcfcof<jod to fpare ^l^^tg) that his disobedience againftthe command 
 ment was rebellion, and as the finne of Witchcraft in the eyes of God, 
 I Sam.i'^.ii* 
 
 Thefts gi, 
 
 P2. It is a great part of Chrifts love to command us to do any thing for him, 
 as well as to promife to do any thing for u> : When the King of glory hath 
 given us our lives by promife, it*s then the next pirt of hisipeciall grace 
 and favour to command us toftand before him and attend uponhis great- 
 ncde continually. They that fee how juil:!y they defcrvetobe forfik^n of 
 God and gtv-n over to ?heir own hc:irts kif^s, and to be for ever finning and 
 blafpheamingGodin hell, where God will never command chenvio thmk 
 of him, fpeakof him, do for him. pray to him more, can?.ot but account 
 it a high and fpeciall favour oFjcru? Ckfil to command (hem any thing, or 
 bid them do any thing for him , a poor humolcd prodigall will- account it 
 great love to be made a hired fcrvani; f^hr.Uipnik will count it a high fa- 
 vour if he may but uncie Chriftsilioelacchec, and be commindedby him to 
 do the meaneft work 4^'or him : ^David wondered at Godb grice toward him, 
 that God fhouid command him, and in fjme meafure enalTle htmco cfUr 
 Vi'illingly, Lcrd (faichhe) W^.^^* arc W; f I do therefore marvel! how any 
 can pretend that they are aded by the love of Cirift, and not by . the law of 
 commands, confidermg that there is fo much love in thss, for Chnft o com- 
 mand, and how they can profclTc their rcliih of preaching Gods free grace 
 andh)ve, and yet cannot away with fweet and gracious exhorrations prcf- 
 fingtoholneffeand holyducies, in the revealing and urging of which there 
 isfo much free-grace and heart-love of Chiift J fus; lur-ly if the love of 
 Chriftisto lead us, then the commands of l.hnft (wherem he difco-vers 
 one chiefpartof his love ) are to guide us and be a rule of life unto us. The 
 man who in his cool and deliberate thoughts imagines that a ChriRian under 
 the rule of the law, is a Chriiliaa under bondage, may be juftJy feared that 
 himrelfisftill under the bondage of fin and Satan, and never yet knew wha: 
 the true love of Chrift Jefus is to this day. 
 
 . Thefis P3. 
 
 °3' The fundamental! errour of Antinomiaos arifcth from thi«, in imagining 
 the great difference between the law and Gofpclto be this, ziz. That the 
 law requires doing, but the Gofpe! no doing, and that all beletvers being 
 under the Gofpel are therefore underno law of doing: bur we malt know 
 that as the Gofpel exads no doing that thereby we may be juft, fo it requires 
 doing al(o when by Chrift Jefus we are made juft: For if the Gofpel com- 
 mand us to oe holy as God is holy, iF<rM.i5. and peifcd as our heavenly 
 F4ther»spcrfta:, AIa(,y^2, then the Gofpel doth not ooly require doing, 
 
 but 
 
■ l:he Morality ef the Sabbath. ^j 
 
 but alfo as much perfecflion of doing as the Law doth, the Law and the 
 Gofpel require the fame perfedion of hol-neflfe ; only here is the difi^crence 
 ( which many have not obfcrved ) the Gofpel doth not urge this perfcflion 
 nor require ic oftnas the Law doth? for the Law caljing and urging of it 
 that fo hereby we may be made juft, it therefore accepts of nothing buc 
 pLrfe(5l;on, but ihe Gofpel r quiring it becaufe we are perfcdiy juft already 
 in Chrift, hence though ;t commands as much as the Law, yet ic accepts of 
 IcOe, even the leaft meafure of ijncerity and perfedion mixed with the great- 
 eft meafure of imperfedion, 
 
 Tkefis p4. 
 
 The Law ( fay.fome of the Antinomians ) is to be kept as an eternall rule ?4» 
 of right oufncffe, but their meaning then is, That bcleevcrs are thus to keep 
 inn I hrid who hath kept it for rhem, and if they meant no more ,bu: that 
 Chnfthach krpr it for righteoufncffe to their juft fication, they fpeak truly : 
 bu: their meaning hetein isnotonly in rcfpcd ofih- ir juifificacion, buc alfo 
 in rjrp.doF thtir iar:d'ncati*>n, for they make Chrifts righteoufneile to be 
 mita.ally and formally their fandification : hence they fay, A behcv^r hath 
 rep-^Kteitrt Chrif}, andmortifie'^ [in in Chrlft. andthjt mortfication And t/i" 
 V fie ..ion k r}othi'^ but a hccetViK^j, '^^^ Chrifl h^^th mortifiei fir.'/ie for them, 
 a/id b^ffi cjuiikyi^^fh^ them, and that 7 htU fay^Bfication which is inherent in 
 ChriFl, and no: that ^hch is inhcxnt in it-i ^ u an evidence of optr mffification. 
 But this principle wh ch confounds a ( hrifiians juflification and fandifica- 
 tion, a> It cafis the feed oFdenying all inherent graces in a beUever, fo ic 
 Jaitsthu bails of reUifing to do any duiy, or conform to any Law in cur own 
 fir(cns : for if this principle bt true ( which no Orthodox writer doubts of) 
 viz. Tnat we are to feck for no nghceoufnedii in our felves to our juftifi- 
 cation, beciiule we are perfedly jiift and made righteous for that end in 
 Chrift, then i: will undeniably follow that we are not to fcek for any holi- 
 neffe and fandification in our felves, becaufe we are perfectly fandified alfo 
 in ChnftJ fu^, who hath repented, and bvleeved, and mortified fin perftd- 
 ]y fonis in his own perlon ^ Look therefore as the perfedion of Chrfts righ- 
 teouf.eif' foour juftificacion, fhould makea Chr ftian abhor any perfonall 
 rightcoufnelTeofhisowntohisjuftification, fo ifwc be perfedly fandified 
 in Chrift; then ptrfedon of Chrifts holinefle to our fandification fhould 
 make a beleever not only renounce the Law, but to abhor all perfonall ho- 
 lincfle through the Spirit to our fjRdification, and then a bekever muft ab- 
 hor to fek any love or fear of Goain hishearr, which is not painted buc 
 profefled prophanefle, and the ivAunoifraccidens t\^i ptnje^ to all man- 
 ner ot ioofenelfe and wickednefle in the world. 
 
 7/ieJIs pT' 
 
 We deny not but that Chrift is out findification as well as our tighteouf- 95^: 
 nefle, i OM.30, but hovv? not materially and formally, but virtually 
 
 and 
 
6^ The Morditfof the SabbMh* 
 
 and mcritonoufly, and (widi meet explications) cxemplanfy : our righ- 
 ccoufneileto our juftification is inherent m tiifii, but oar findifieactoa is in- 
 herent in our felves, yet it is derived from him, and therefore it is virtually 
 and meritoriouOy only in him : and hence ic is that we arc never command- 
 ed to Juftiiie our felvcs, unlcfleit beinftrumentally and facramentaliy, when 
 as vvearecommaneedby faith to wafli our felves, Jfi,ui6* and as Pauldit 
 hisbaptifme was commanded to wafli away his fins, A^. 22.16. but weare 
 frequently and abundantly exhorted to repent, bcleive, mortifie our affeHi^ 
 onsfipon earfh, to ^all^^ tn nenne^e cf lifi^ to be kclj in Ml manner ojf covt' 
 vtrfition.^Q, becaufe thcfe things are wrought by ChriO: in us to our fandHii- 
 cation, and not wrought in ChriCt for us as our righteoufnelle co our jullifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Thfis 95. 
 
 96* xhey that are in ChTift are faid to be compleat in Chrift, Col.2,10. and 
 that they receive all grace from his fullneile, Joh, i 16. fo chat it fetms 
 that there is no grace in thcmfelves, but it is firR in him, and confe- 
 qaently that their fandification is perftdcd in him : but we muft know that 
 though the perfcdion and fulinefie of ail grace isfirftin ChriO:,yct that be- 
 ieevers have not ali in him after one and the (ame manner, nor for the fame 
 end : for our righteoufnede to our juftification is fo in him as never to be in- 
 herent in us, in this or in the world to come, but our righteoufneiTe to our 
 fandification is fo far in him, as that it is to be derived ^nd conveyed unto 
 us, and hence it is formally in our felves, but meretorioufly and virtually only 
 in him: even as our refurredion and glorification at laft day, arc not fo in 
 Chrifi: as never to be derived to tis ( for then the refurredion were pafl: alrea- 
 dy) bucthey are fo in him as that they are to be conveyed to us, and there- 
 fore they are mreitorioully and virtually in him, and weare meritorioufly 
 and virtually rifen in him : aGhridian therefore may be compleat in Chrift, 
 and yet not be perfedly formally fandified in Chnft, our fandification being 
 complcaced in him after another manner, and for other ends then our juftifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Thejis py. 
 
 ^7, Th€ chief end ofChrlftsfiift coming was to lay down his life a ranfome 
 for many in way of fatisfadion and merir, ThU.i.S. ^^f. 20. 28. now by 
 this fatisfadion he did two things, i. He brought in fuch a ri^hteoufneflc 
 before God as might merit mercy and make us juft : now this is wholly in 
 Chrift out of our felves ; buc becaufe there was a righteoufneffe of new obe- 
 dience and thankfulnefle to be wrought in us for this love, therefore 2. By 
 the fame fatisfadion he hath merited (not that this new obedience might 
 juftifie us or make us accepted ) but that ic might be accepted though imper- 
 fed and polluted with fin, 1 7'<?r.2,y,6. as alfo that it might be crowned and 
 recompenfed ; Now hence it follows that the Lord Jefus hachnot performed 
 
 our 
 
The Morality of the Sabbath. "^5 
 
 oac duty of thankfulncflTe and new obedience for us (pih hceformaii) or as 
 of thankfulneflfe i for though Chrift was thankfull and holy for us, yec ic 
 was not under this notion of thankfulnefle for his own love to us, for this 
 is perfonally required of us, and it founds very harfli to fay that Chrift 
 walked in all holy thankfulneffe to himfelf, for his love to ns; but he 
 was thus thankfull for us, fiilf rmone merifi, or in way of merit, it being 
 part of that fatisfadion which juftice exaded. All that which might fatisfie 
 juftice and merit any mercy, Chrift did for us in himfelf, bu: he did not be- 
 Jeeve and repent, and perform duties of thankfulneffc for u«, bccaufe thefc 
 and fuch like are not to fatisfie juftice, but follow as fruits of chat fatisfadi- 
 on, and therefore are wrought within us, and fo are perfonally required 
 of us, and therefore when a Chriftian findes a want of thefe things in himfelf, 
 he is nor to comfort himfelf with fond thoughts of the imputation of thefe in 
 Chrift only unco him, but he is to lookup to Chrift Jefus for derivation of 
 thefe out of Cferift into himfelf; othervvife by miking Chrift his fandlification, 
 only in way of imputation, he doth really deftroy Chrift from being his 
 fandification ; for if Chrift be our righteoufnefTe only by imp^itation, then if 
 Chrift be our landifieation,it muft be by derivation from him,whi€h they muft 
 needs deftroy v\ho make him their fole fandificatioa by meer imputation. 
 
 Thefts p8. 
 Spirituall errours like ftrong wine make mens judgements reel and ftagger, 
 who arc drunken therewith: And hence the Antmomians fpeak fo varioufly pg^ 
 in this point that we know not where to finde them, or what they will ftand 
 to: for fom'Ctime they will fay that a Beleevcr is free from the law in all its 
 authority and offices, buc this being too grofle, at other times they fpeak 
 more warily, and afSrm that a Chriftian is to obfcrve the law as his rule per- 
 fonally, thus far forth, viz.. To do 1>^hat is commarJ.ed, hHtnotin verttteof 
 ^command', theffirity fay they, ^illl?inde andcomform their hearts to the taw^ 
 hut they are not bound hy any authority ef the law to the direSfions thereof; the ^^^"'^"f* 
 Spirit, they fay, ts free, and they are under the government of the J}irif, ^hieh '^^ ' 
 u not to be controledand ruled by any law. Now if by vertnc of a command 
 they meant, by vertue of ourownnaturallftrengthand abilities looking to 
 the command; fo it's true that aBelcever is not fo bound toad by vertue 
 of the law, for then he was bound to conform to the law pharifaically, for 
 what is our ftrength but weaknefTe and fin ? but if by vertue of a command 
 they mean thus much, viz. that a Beleever is Bot bound by ths cowmmtding 
 power of any law to conform thereunto, only the fpirit will conform his 
 heart thereunto, fo that he ftiall do the things (perhaps) which the law 
 requires, but not becaufe the law requires or commands them to be done : 
 If this, I fay, be their meaning ( as furely it fecms to be ) then the myftery 
 of this iniquity is fo plain, that he that runs may read it : For hence it unde- 
 niably follows, that in cafe a Bcicever fall into any fin, of whordom, marder, 
 
 K theft, 
 
^^/ rhe Moralhj of the Sahbath. 
 
 theft, witchcraft, d-^. Thefe wicked adls though they be fins in themfelves 
 (becaufe they are againftthelaw) yet they arc not fins unto him, becaufe 
 he is now fet free from the law, and not bound to the obedience of it by 
 vertue of any command : for where there is no law, there is no tranfgreifion; 
 and if there be no law which bindeshim, there is no tranfgreifion then at 
 kaft unto him : They are fins indeed in tbentfelves, but nH unto him, they are 
 fins (asfomefay) tofenfe, bm not to faith, fins in the eonverfation, but not 
 to coftfci nee, fins before men ( becaufe they may croffe their Uws ) but not fins 
 before God, ^ho exempts them from all law : And it is in viinhcrcto reply, 
 that they may be fins To him, becaufe they may be againft che law of the fpi- 
 rit which is his rule, for we have already (hewn, that although the fpiiicbe 
 the principle by which we obey, yet it is not our rule according to which 
 we are to obey: Indeed it is an high aggravation of fin when ic '\% againft' 
 thefpiric, buttocrofic the fpirit doth not firitly make thcfe things finfull, 
 nor could they be fins unlefle they croflc fuch a fpirit as fpeaks in and by feme 
 holy law, the very efience of fin lying in the tranfgreflion ( not of any law } 
 but of The law, i, the known morall or Evangtiicall law. Again, ifthefe 
 and (tich like be fins, becaufe they are only againft che law of the fpirit, then 
 it is no fin to bow down before an Image, to commit fikhinede, theft, &c^ 
 fuppofing that the fpirit fliall feifpend his ad and not reftrain ; nay then ic 
 will follow that fins of ignorance ( of which the fpir't hach not corvinced a 
 Chriftian) are no fins, nor to be repented of, which is expreficly crofie to 
 the holy pra-dice of 1>avid, Who k^ows hi4 err ours ? Lordctawje me from my 
 naiip.i2. fecret finsi If fin therefore be the tranfgreflion of che law ( whether the 
 fpirit work upon a Chriftian or no) then cer ainly, if he be under nocom- 
 mandmg power of the law, he eaneot be guilty or be faid to commit any fin, 
 and then the condufion is this. That every Beleevcr neither hath fin, or 
 Aiould fay he doth fin, no not when he commits murder, adultery, and the 
 foukft enormities in the world: Which dodcme, though iodirediy and 
 cxpreflely againft the light of Scripture, the confeflionsofall the Saints, yea 
 of the light of nature and common fenfe, and is the very filch of the troth 
 ofthefumeofthebottomkflepit; yetfome there arc who are not afiiamed 
 to own itj the very Mas and depth of a perfcd Famihft confiftmgin this, 
 ^ ^i«. when a man can fin and never feel ir, or have any remorfe or forrow for 
 ir, and when one harh attained to this meafure, He u then "Deified and then 
 they profefe the Godhead doth }^excvQ hndum animse ( as they call it) ^hen 
 htieeving that he hath no fin, be can there fire neither (ee it or fie/ it. From 
 which depth of darkneffe the God and father of mercies deliver his poor 
 people in thcfe corrupting times, and I wifb that thofe who defend this 
 kindcof a Bcleevers immunity from the law, did not lay this corner ftone 
 of hell and perdition to their followers ; I am fare they leads them hereby 
 to the mouth of this pit, who upon thie principle, refufc either to mourn for 
 
 fin, 
 
The Meralitj of the SMath* ^7 
 
 Cm, or pray for pardon of fin, or to imagii^e that God affli(?l:s for fin, being 
 now freed from the mandatory power of any law of God, they being now 
 not bound to ad by vertae of any command. 
 
 Thefij pp. 
 
 ]fGod did work upon Beleevers as upon blocks or bruit creatures, they 
 might then have feme colour to caft off all attendance to the d iredive power 99* 
 ofthelaw, and lo leave all to the fpirits omnipotent and immediate' ads, as 
 the ftars who being irrationail and uncapable of adingby any \u\c, they are 
 therefore aded and run their courfe by the mighty word of Gods power, 
 and therefore attend no rule; but Beletvers are racionall creatures, and 
 therefore capable of ad ng by rule, and they are alfo fandified and de- 
 livered from thepo-vver of their coriupt nature, and therefore have fome 
 inherentpovver foto ad, for if they be not now dead in trefpades and fins, 
 they have then fome new life, and therefore fome inherent povver to ad, 
 according to the rule of life; the Image of God renewed in them, is (in 
 part) like to the fame Image which they had in thdr firft creation, which 
 gave man fome liberty and power to ad according to the will of him that 
 created him : And ifthefirft /^^^tw by his fall conveies to us, not only con- 
 demnation, but alfo an inherent power of corruption, then the lecond 
 Adam, the Lord Jefus much more conveies unto all his pofterity, not only 
 juRifitarion/but alfo fome inherent power of ^race and holinefle, which is 
 begun here and perfeded in glory, for as fin hath abounded, fo grace a- 
 boundeth rriuch more : and yet fuppofe they had no inherent power thus to 
 ad, yet they have an adherent power, the Lord Chrift Jefus, by faith in 
 whofe Name they may and iliail receive power to ad : And therefore, 
 although God works in u'?, both to will and to do of his good pleafure, yet 
 this hinders nor, but that we are to work out our (alvation with fear and 
 trembl ng, by attending the rule, by vertueof which we are bound to work, 
 both by pLictuig forch that power which we have already received from God, 
 as alfo in fetching in that power we have not yet received, but is referved dai- 
 ly m Chrifts hands for us, to enable us thereunto, 
 
 Thep loo. 
 
 IftheythatfayaBeleeverisnot toadby vertueof a command, domeati lOO, 
 this only, t//^. That heis notto ad by vertue of the bare letter and exter- 
 nall words and fyllables of it, they then fpeak truly, for fuch kinde of ading 
 is rather witchery then Chriftianity, to pla^e power and vertue in barecha- 
 raders and letters, which though mighty and powerfull by the fpirit, yet 
 are empty and powerlefle without it: But if their meaning be that we are 
 not to ad by vertue of any command in any fcnfe, then the affertion is both 
 pernicious and perilous J for the Lord Jefos being ^t '^^nv <kiKWJ>v ot Cix^ 
 fubjedofall grace and gracious efficacy and power; hence it's true we are 
 not to make the command of God the firft principle of our obedience, for 
 
 K 2 this 
 
rhe Morality of tk Sabbath. 
 
 this is proper unto Chrift by the fpirit, fohn 5.40. foh, i^.i 3 ,14. 2 Tim a.i 
 £ph,6AO. Rom,2.2, But becaufe the Lord Jefus conveys by his Spirit vertiie 
 and efficacy through his word, not only words of promifc, but alfo words 
 of command (as is evident, ^^^3. 2 2. -/^<^// 2,38,41. Mat.p.p. TfaUp.S) 
 Hence itisthataBeleevcris bound to a6^ from a command, though not as 
 from a firft, yet as from a fecond principle, though not as from the firft effi- 
 cient, yet as from an inftrument in the hand of Chrift, who in commanding 
 of the duty works by it, and enables to it ; and therefore we fee Jf^raha^i^ 
 comes out of his own countrey, becaufe called and commanded of God to 
 follow him he knew not whither, Htf^. II. 8. And Peter caftin his net to the 
 fea, Hieerly becaufe he was commanded, Z»^ 5. 5. And David d<:Cucd, Oh 
 that my heart weredirctflcd to keep thy precepts, becaufe God had com- 
 manded, /S/.119.4.5. There is avertue, at^^ or tfficacyin the final! caufc, 
 as well as in the efficient to produce the eff^d, and every wife agent is bound 
 to a(fl by vertue or for the fake of his utmoft and laft end. Now the naked 
 commatidment of the Lord, may be and fliould be the chief motive and laft 
 end ofour obedience to his highneffe; for what ever is done meerly becaufe 
 of Gods command, is done for his glory ( which glory fliould be our ut- 
 moft end in all our obedience:) And hence it is th it That obedience ismoft 
 abfolute and fincere ( whether it be in doing or fuffcring the will of God ) 
 which is done meerly in refpec^ of commandment and will of God : When 
 the foul can truly fay, Lord^ I ihould never fubmit to fuch a yoke but mrerly 
 iov thy fake, and becaufe it's thy will and thou doft command it : What is 
 it to love Chrift? but to fecktopleafe him.and to give contentment to him 5 
 What is it to feck to give contentment to him, but to give contentment to 
 bis-hcart or his will ? and what is his will, but the will of his commandment ? 
 Ifthereforeitbcunlawfull toa(flbyvertus of a command, then itisuulaw- 
 full, I. To love Chrift, 2. To be fmccrc before Chrift, 3. Or to ad for the 
 glory of Chrift. And hence k is that let a man do the moft glorious things 
 in the world out of his own fuppofed good end ( as the blinde Pap fts do in 
 their will works and fuperftitions ) which God nvercommandcd^ nay let 
 him do all things which the law of God requires, give his goods to the poor 
 and his body to be burnt, and yet not do thefe thmgs becaufe commanded, 
 let him then qw t hiralelf from hypocrifie and himfttf from being a deep hy» 
 pocrite in all chefe if be can : Surely thofc who ftrain at this gnar, v^^^'^. not 
 lado a duty becaufe commanded, will make no bones of fwallowing down 
 this caracll, vi^ not to forfake fin, becaufe 'tis forbiddenj and whofocvcr 
 ftiall forfake fm from any other ground, {hews manifeftly hereby that he 
 kath littlc.confcience of Gods command^ I kaow the lov^ of Chrift (bould 
 make a Chriftian forfake every fm^ but the laft refolution and realoathcrec^ 
 is becaufe his love foibidsusto continue in.fin; for to adiby iN^rtue of a 
 i;«>mmand, isnot toaSoniy as a creature to? Cq& conGder4td a$ aXreator, 
 
Tk Morality of the SMath. ^ 
 
 but by vertue of the will and commandment of God in a redeemer, with 
 whom a Beleever hath now to do. 
 
 Theps I or. 
 
 To ad therefore by vertue of a command, and by vertue of Chrifts Spirit, loi, 
 are fubordinarc one to another, not oppofite one againft another, as thefe 
 men carry it. This caution being ever remtmbred, that fuch admg be not 
 tomakeourfelvesjun:, bur becaufe we are already jufl: in Chrift; not that 
 heiebv we might get life", but becaufe we have life given us already, not to 
 pacific Gods juflicc, but to pleafe his mercy, being pacified toward us by 
 Chnil: already ; for as JftntHs weil obferves a great difference between ;>Ai-jy^ ^^^^ 
 care^cHm, and pUcereDeo, i between pacifying God and plcafing God,rferf9».cfffr. 
 for Chrifts bloud only can pacifie juftice when it is provoked, but when re- 
 venging juftice is pacified, mercy may be pleafed with the fincere and humble 
 obedience of Tons, C<7/. I. to. Heb i '^,21. When a Beleever is once juftified 
 he cannot be made more juft by all his obedience, norleffejufl: by all hislins 
 in point of juflificacion, which is pcrfeded at once: but he who \s perfectly 
 juftificdisbuc imperfedly fandified, and in this refped may more or lefTc 
 pleafe God or difpleafe him, be more juftorleflfe juftand holy before him-. 
 It is I confefTe a fecret but a common fin in many, to fcek to pacifie God 
 (when they perceive or fear his anger) by feme obedience of their owir, 
 and fo to feck for that in themfelves chiefly which they fhould feek^for in 
 ChrifV, and for that in the Law which is only to be found in the Gofpcl; 
 but corrupt pradifes in others (hould not breed (as ufually they do) cor- 
 rupt opinions in us, and to caft off rhc law from being a rule of pleating God; 
 becaufe it is no rule to us of pacifying of God : For if we fpeak of revenging' 
 ( not fatherly) anger, Ghrilh bloud can only pacifie that, and when that 
 is pacified and God is fatisficd, our obedience now pleafeth him and his 
 mercy accepts it as very pleafing, the Ciile of which Is the precious law 
 of God. 
 
 Thejis 1D2\ 
 
 They that fay the law is our rule as it is given by Chrlft, but not as it was 102. 
 given by Mefs. do fpeak niceties, at Icaft ambiguities- for if the Lord 
 Ghrift give the law to a Beleever as his rule, why (hould any then raife a duft, 
 and afftrm that the law is not our rule ? For the law may be confidered ei* 
 liier mareriallj oixn it ftlf, as it contaias the matter of the Covenant of 
 works: andihus confidered, a Beleever is not to be regulated by it, for he 
 is wholly free from it as a covenant of life, or it may be confidered fiftaUy^ 
 or rather rg/4/n^^/f, asitdood in relation and reference unto the people 
 of the God oi Ahraham^ who were already under Ah (thorns Covenant, 
 which was a Covenant of free-grace, v*^* To bt hti- god and the GoJ of hk 
 fecdt Gen.17,7. And in this latter rcfp< d the iaw, as-it was given by Mojts^ 
 was given by Cbnft-in J-Z^y^-/, and therefore the rnleof love tQAardman 
 
 K 3 (corn;; 
 
■o "^^^ Merality of the Sabbath, 
 
 (commanded by Mofes) is called the iaw of Chrift, gal 6*2. For the law 1 
 as it was applied to this people, doth not run thu?, viz* Do all thisyand then I 
 I rvill he your God a>id redeemer (for this isaCovcnant of works ) but thus, 
 vi^ /<<»J the Lord thy god (viz,hy Ahrdhams Covenant) ^ko hrongh 
 theeoHtofthsUfid of E^jpt, and honfe of bondage ^ 7'herefire thcpt fialt do ali i 
 this. If therefore the law delivered h>^^ Mofcs, was delivered by Chriftin \ 
 Mofes, then there is no rcafcn to fet Chrift and Mofes together by the ear?, 
 in thisrcfpecfll now fpeak of, and to affirm tbac the law, not as delivered by 
 Mc^fes, but as given by Chiirtj is our law and rule, 
 
 Thejis 103. 
 103. The law therefore which contains in it felf abfolutely confidered ( which 
 Jaiither cals Adofes Aiojiffimiu ) the Covenant of works, yet relatively con- 
 fidercd as it was delivered by C^^cjes to a people under a Covenant of grace 
 ( which the fame Author- cals Mnfes A^ronkus ) fo it is not to be confider- 
 €d only as a Covenant of works, and therefore for any to affirm that the 
 law is no Covenant of work?, as it is delivered on mount Sion, and by Jcfus 
 Chrift, and that icis a Covenant of works only, as it is delivered on Mount 
 Sinai and by ^/«/<? J, isabold affertion both unfafe and unfound : For if as 
 it was delivered en Mount Sinai, it was delivered to a people under a Co- 
 venant of grace, then it was not delivered to them only as a Covenant of 
 works, for then a people under a Covenant of grace, may again come under 
 a Covenant of works, todiianull that Covenant of grace, but the Apoftle 
 exprefftly affirms the quite contrary, and H^ews that the Covenant n.ade 
 with AhrAham and his leed (which was to be a God to thcmj gen.i':.']*) 
 "^nd which was confirmed before of God in Chrift, the law which was four 
 hundred and thirty years after cannot difanullj^^/. 3.1 y.Now tBat rhe people 
 were under a Covenant ofgrace when the law was delivered onmouni Smai, 
 kc the preface of the ten Commandments determine, wherein Gods firft 
 words are words ofgrace, /<3«3'f^<fZr<)r^/^j' G^/^&c.and therefore thou (halt 
 have no other Gods but me, &c. I know TarAm, Z^nchj a id others affirm 
 that the law is abrogated as it was in the hands of Mofes. but not as it is in 
 the hand of Chrift, but their meaning is at fometime in refpedofthe manner 
 of adminiftration of the law under Mofes, and when they fpeak of the mo- 
 rall iaw fimply considered, yet it never enterd into their hearts, that the law 
 as delivered on Mount Sinai was delivered only as a Covenant of works, as 
 lame would maintain. 
 
 Thefis 104. 
 
 104. But there is a-greater myftery intended by fome in this phrafe, ^ j;*^^^ ^j 
 
 Chrift^ for their meaning is this, to wit, AsChriflhj.hu Spirif Writes it iff 
 
 Saltm Over- cHf hearts t not atij V^ay a rule as "Written by Mofcs : A beleevers heart ( faith 
 
 fb^)^lmdM' ^^^f^^^^) ^ -^^^ ^^^7 ^^^ of commands, and the t'^o tables ofUofes^ 
 
 \ndinthisrejpe^it-kc9m€smt (faith he) the glory of Chrift to be Molding 
 
 to 
 
7^ 
 
 7he Morulitj of the SAhUth. 
 
 tdanyofthelight uponYAoksface, Itfeemsthcn chat the law Written is not 
 to be a Chriftians rule, but only fo far as it is written in the heart, a moft ac- 
 cwrfed afTertion ; for how and why did Chrift Jefus himfclf refift temptation 
 CO fin ? was it not by cleaving to the written word ? Mat,^ 4,10. and was 
 not this done for our imitation ? why did "jyavUznd Chrift Jefus delight to 
 do Gods will? was it not this, becaufeit was written of them that fo they 
 {hould do? P/S.40.7,8. Did not the Law in their hearts make them thus 
 cleave to the written Law without ? why did P^iw/pcrlvvade children to ho- 
 nour their parents? was it nor, bccaufe this was the firfl: Commandment 
 withpromife? Eph.6.2. had it not been more evangelically fpoken to per- 
 fvvade them rather to look to the law o^ Mofes written on their hearts with- 
 in, to dired them hereunto, rather then to be beholding for any light upon 
 Mo/cj face to dired chem herein ? how comes it to palfe that Patil preach- 
 eth no other thingbut what wasin theold Teftamentof y^«?/^jand the Pro- 
 phets, who were only the interpreters of i^<9/^j? /^^.22,2o. how is it that 
 Cht id himfc If borrow slight from A/ fi»/^/, Pfalmes and all the Prophets, to 
 ckar up his refurrcd^on and fufferings? Z«^.24.27,32. if no light muft be 
 borrowed from the face of y^^/?, if indeed we were p.^rfed in this life as 
 weflianbeinhcaven, there would then be no need of the writings of the 
 ApoftieSjProphetSjOr Mofes, of Law or Gofpel, but we being but imperf d- 
 lycnlightned, it's no kfle then excream ingratitude and unthankfullnefTe to 
 prefer our own imperfcd and impure light, before chat perfecl, fpotlefle 
 and heavenly Law and counfels of God without us; which when the mod 
 perftd beleever doth ke he may cry out with f* <=?»/, th Laxv ii holy hut I am 
 carmil \ what is this bur painted popery, to make the fpiric within to be the 
 fupream judge and fuptriour to the fpirit of God in the written word with- 
 out ? only they fniine it up in the Popes private conclave and kitchin, of 
 fomewhac worfe, but thele in a company of poor, imperfed, deluded, and 
 perhaps corrupted men ; it's true the covenant of grace ( ftridly taken ) in 
 the Gofpel, needs not to borrow any light from the Covenant of works in 
 theLavv, but yet for all this the grace of God appearing in the Gofpel, will 
 have us to walk worthy of God unto all well pleaiing according to the Law, 
 Z/> 2.1 2,13. and to mourn bitterly that we are fo unlike the will and image 
 of God revealed in the Law, Rom.j.i-i^^i^, 
 
 The (is 105. 
 TheApoRle PWashe fomctimes condemns works aodfometime com- 105 
 mends them, fohefometimerejedstheLavr, and fometime commends the 
 Law, fometime he would have beleeversdie to the Law, acid fometime he 
 exhorts them to live in all holy obedience to it ; the Apoftle therefore muft 
 fpeak of the Law under various conftderations, or elfe muft fpcak daggers 
 and fiat contradidions, and therefore of ncctflity we arc to confidcr the 
 Law not aiway under onerefped, but vanoufly, for conlider the Law as a 
 
 Covenant 
 
jX 7 he MordliiJ of the Sabbath. 
 
 Covenant of works, or as the way unto or matter of our juftiEcatlon, and 
 fo works are condemned and the Law is rcjcded and abrogated, and fo we 
 are to die to the Law, but confidcr the Law as a rule of life to a perfon jufti- 
 fied already, and fo the Law is to be received, aiad works arc to be com- 
 mended, and we are to live thereunto. 
 
 Thefts io<5. 
 ic^. When the Gofpel nakedly urg^th belecvers to good works and obedience 
 to the Law, it is then confidered only as a rule of life, but when we meet 
 with fuch Scriptures as fetthe Law and Chrifl, the Law and grace, the Law 
 andpromife,theLawand faith, ct-^. at oppofuion one againft another, then 
 the Law in fuch places is ever confidered as a Covenant of life, from which 
 we are wholly freed, and unto which we fliouid be wholly dead, that we 
 may be married unto Chnft, Row,j,^, knee therefore their arguings are 
 feeble and weak, who would prove a Chnftian to be wholly free from the 
 diredlve power of the Law, bccaufe a Chriflian is faid not be under the Law 
 but under grace, i^«»9 6.14. and becaufe the Law was given by Mofes, but 
 grace and truth came by JefusChrift, foki.ij. and becaufe the inheritance 
 is not by the Law, but by promife and by faith, ^rf/.3.i2.i8. for thefe and 
 fuch like Scriptures fpeak of che Lawas (landing m oppofition to Chrift, and 
 therefore fpeak of ic as of a Covenant of life, by which mea feck to bz jufti- 
 fied: from which (we grant) abeleevcr is wholly freed, and unro which 
 he is not bound, nay he is bound to renounce it, and call out this bond- wo- 
 man, but all this doth not prove that he is free from it as his rule of 
 
 life. 
 
 Tke/ts 107. 
 
 107, The Law and mans finfuU heart are quite oppofite one to another. Row. 
 7.5^,10,1 1,1 3. but when (through the grace of Chrift) the heart is changed, 
 So as there is a new nature or new man in a beleever, then there is a fweec 
 agreement between this new nature and the Law, for (faith Paul) I de- 
 light in the Law of God w my inKerman-. itis therefore a moft falfe allertion 
 taiky, thattheoldmanofabeleeveris to be kept under the Law, but the 
 new man or new nature is above all Law, for though the new nature be a- 
 bove it as a legall covenant, yetit never comes to be willingly under it as a 
 rule untill now: animperfednew nature is infinitely glad of the guidance 
 ofa holy and moft perfcdLaw, P/2»iip.i4o. 
 
 Thefts 108. 
 
 ro8 It is very evident that the children and fons of God under the new Tefta- 
 ment are not fo under the Law as the children and fons of God were under 
 jthe old Tcftament, for the ApoHle cxprefly tcls, GaL'^.2^, that before the 
 faith came, we (i. the children of the Old Tcftament) were (hut up and 
 kept under the Law, and were under ic as under a Schoolmafter, ^fr.24 .and 
 xhefe of whpm the Apoftlc thus fpeaks are not only wicked and carnal! Jews, 
 
 but 
 
The Morality of the sMath. 73 
 
 but the dear children of God and heirs ofeternall life in thoft times, as is 
 evident from C74/.4.i,2,3. but the Apoftle fpeaking of the fons of God in 
 Gofpel times, fince faith is come and revealed, i'peaks as cxprefly that we 
 are now no longer under the law as under a Scboolmafter,^<«/.3.2 5, and 
 that now ^hen the filne^e oj time u come, Godfent lotsftn, to redeem them thst 
 Xeere mdtr the Law, that^e mi^ht receive the adoption of (§»s,Gdil^,'^y^i$. 
 which though ic be true of all men by nature, viz. that they are under the 
 law, yet an impartiall clear eye will eafily dilcern that the Apoftles difpute 
 is not ofour being under the law by nature meerly, but of being under the 
 law by peculiar difpenfation, which was the ftate not only of the Jewifk 
 Churchjbucofthe children of God, heirs of the promife (and confequently 
 fuchaswere beUevers) in this i.hurch, in thofe old Teftamcnt times, wc 
 are not therefore now in thefe new Teftimcnt times under the law as they 
 were, the great difficulty therefore remains to know how we are not undec 
 the law as they were. Thofe who fay we are not under the eeremoniall law 
 as they were, do fpcak truly, but they do not refolve the difficulty m this 
 place; for certainly the Apoftle fpeaks, not only of the eeremoniall law, 
 but alfoot that law which was given becaufeoftranfgreflionSjg^^/.j.ip and 
 which {hue up ( not only the Jews ) but all men under fm^verf,!!, which 
 being the power of the morall law chiefly, the Apoftle muft therefore intend 
 the morall law, under which the old Teftament Beleevers were (hut up, and 
 wc now are not: The doubt therefore ftill remains, viz. How arc wc not 
 now under the morall law ? Will any fay that we are not now under the 
 maledidlion and curfe and condemnation uf it, but the Jews under the old 
 Teftament were thus under it, even under the curfeof ic? This cannot be 
 the meaning, for although the carnall Jews were thus under it, yet the faith- 
 full ( whom the Apoftle cals the heir and Lord of all, g^L^^i.) were not 
 thus under it, for Beleevers then were as much blefted then with faithfull 
 Abraham, as B leevers noWjC^/j.^.p. How then are we not now under it 
 as they were ? Is ic m this, that they were under it as a rule of life ro walk 
 by, and fo arc not we ? Thus indeed fome ftrain the place, but this cannot 
 be it ; for the Apoftle in this very Epift !e prefterh th^. m to Love one aymhsr, 
 upon this ground, becaufe /lU the hri> ii fulfHiedin /<?v<?, cap.5.13 14. and 
 this walking in love according to the law, 's walking in i\\c{^mt,verf\6n 
 and they that thus walk in thefpirir, accord ng to the law, are not ( faith 
 the Apoftle) under the law, which cannot, without flat contradidion, be 
 meant of not being under the rule or diredive power of it ,• and it would 
 be a miferable weaK motive to preflfe them to love, bccaafc all the law is ful- 
 filled in love, if the law was not to be regarded as any rule ot' lite or of love 5 
 for they might upon fuch a ground ealily and j'uftly objcd, and ray,What have 
 we to do with the law? If we therefore as well as they,are thus under the law 
 as a rale of life, how are we not under ic as they were ? Is it becaufe they 
 
 L were 
 
The Morality of the Sahbath. 
 
 were under: it as a preparative means for Chrift, and not we? They were 
 under the humbling and terrifying preparing work of it, but not we: There 
 arc fome indeed who think that this ufc of the law under the Gofpel is but 
 a back-door, or an Indian path, or a erookt-way about, toleadcto Jcfus 
 Chrift ; but certainly ihefe men know not what they fay, for the text cx- 
 preflely tels as, that the Scripture hath concluded (not only the Jews) but 
 Jl& under fifty th^t (o tbs fromife by faith, might be given to them that beleeve^ 
 gAl.'^.ii. So that the law is fabfervient to faith and to the promifc, that fo 
 hereby not only the Jews, but all that God faves might hereby feel their 
 need, and fiy by faith to the promife made in Jeftis Ghrift ; and verily if 
 Chrift be the end of the law to every one that beleeves, i?5w,io4. then the 
 law is the means (notof itfclf, fo much as by the rich grace of God ) not 
 only to the Jews, but to all others to the end of the world, to leade them to 
 this end Chrift Jefus: If therefore the faithfull under the new Teftamcnr, 
 are thus under the preparing work of the law, as wellasthofe under the 
 old, How were they therefore fo under the law, as we are not, and we not 
 tinder it as they were? I confefTe the place is more full of ditficulties then is 
 ufually obferved by writers upon it, only for the clearing up of this doubt, 
 omitting many things, I anfwer briefly, That the children of theoldTefta- 
 ment were under the law and the pedagogie of it^ two waies, after which 
 the children ofche new Teftament are not under it now, but are redeemed 
 from it. . 
 
 I, Asthe moralllaw was accompanied with a number of burdenfome 
 ceremonies, thus we are not under it, thus they were under it; For we 
 know this law was put into the Ark, and there they were to look upon it 
 in that type, if any man then committed any fin againftir, whether through 
 infirmity, ignorance or prefumption, they were to have rccourfe to the Sa- 
 crifices and High Priefts yearly, and to their bloud and oblations: They 
 were to pray ( which was a morall duty) but it muft be withincenfc and 
 in fuchaplace: They were to be thankfull ( another morail duty) but it 
 muft be tcilined by the offering up of many Sacrifices upon the Altar, &c. 
 They were toconfefle their fins (a morall duty alfo) but it muft be over 
 theheadof thefcape"Goat,c^^. Thus they were under the law, but we are 
 Hot : And as \*is ufuall for the Apoftle thus to fpeak of the law in other pla- 
 ces of the Scripture, fo furely he fpcaks of it here, for hence it is that in the 
 beginmgof this difpute,r4/}.3.ip, he fpeaks of the moral) law which was 
 given beeaufc of tranfgreffions; andyetin theclofeofit, C7^/.4.3. he feems 
 to fpeak only of the ceremoniall law, which he cals the elements of the 
 world, under which the chilldrcn were then in bondage, asunder Tutors 
 and Governours; which implies thus much, that the children of the old 
 Teftament were indeed under the morall law, but yet withall As thus ac- 
 CQmpaaied with ceremoniall rudiments and elements fit to teach children in 
 
 their 
 
The Morality of the Sdbbath. 75 
 
 their minority: But now in this elder age of the Church, ahhough we are 
 under the morall law in other refpeds, yet wc arc not under it as thus ac- 
 companied. 
 
 2. In refped of that manner and meafure of difpcnfation of the morall 
 law, which although it had the revelation of the Gofpel conjoined with ic 
 (for A/c/^tf/ writ ofChrift, 7^^.5.46. and v^^r^^^w had the Gofpel preached 
 tohim,g.?/.3.8. and the unbcleeving Jews had the Gofpel preached, H^^. 
 42.) yet the law was revealed and prefTed more clearly and ftrongly, with 
 more rigour and terrour,, and the Gofpel was revealed more obfcurely and 
 darkly in refpea of the manner of externall difpenfation of them in thofe 
 times; there were three things in that manner of difpenfation, from which 
 ( at leaft, (x parte Dei rcvelmtU) we are now freed. 
 
 I. There was then much lawurged, externally, clearly, and little Gofpel 
 fo clearly revealed, indeed Gofpel and Chrifl: Jefus was the end of the mo- 
 rall law and the fubflance of all the (iiadows of the ceremoniall law, but 
 the externall face of thefe things was fcarce any thing elfe but Doing and 
 Law, by reafonof whichthcreisavailfpread over the hearts of the Jews in 
 reading the old Teftamcnt unto this day, as is evident, 2 Cor.3.13. fo that 
 the infidc or end of the morall law being Gofpel, and the outfide arid means 
 appointed to this end being hw, hence the Gofpel was then leflc clearly, 
 and the law was more clearly revealed in thofe times; to fay that Jefus Chrift 
 and his benefits, or etcrnall life were then difpcnfed under a Covenant of 
 works, or fub conditione fsrfiB^ obedientU ( as fome eminent Worthies 
 affirm ) i: (lich an errour which wife and able men might eafily fall into by 
 feeing how much law was revealed and urged in thofe times ; for though the 
 law (imply confidered in it felf contained the matter of the Covenant of 
 works, yet confidered relatively in refpea: of the people of God, and as 
 they were under y^^^-^^^^j Covenant of grace, fo it was given to them as a 
 rulcofperfearigbteoufnefre, by both which they might the better fee their 
 own weaknedc and unrighteoufnefle and fly to Chrift, and therefore the 
 Apo(tie,C74/.3.i7. cals the promife which was made to Abraham, the Co- 
 venant, and gives not this title to the law, but cals it the law which (he 
 faith) could not difanuli the Covenant confirmed in Ghrift; and although 
 It be propounded to them in way of Covenant, Exod.ip.$. yet this is to be 
 underftood (as fome think) of Evangelicall keeping Covenant not of le- 
 gall ; orifof legalJ, yet then it is not propounded fimply as a Covenant of 
 works to convey Chrift to them, but ex hypothefi or upon fuppofition, that 
 It they did think to be Gods people and have him to be their God, by doing 
 ( as fnm^ obferves the earnall Jews did think and hope fo to have him, 
 and as that young man thought, i^^^M p. 17.) as Chamier obferves) that 
 thcTi they muft keep all thefe commandments perfeaiy, and to be accurfed 
 ir they did not continue therein : I dare not therefore fay, that Chrift and 
 
 ^ ^ ctgrnall 
 
j6 The Morality of the Sakhath* 
 
 ctennll life were dl^p^nftd in a Covenant of works, under which Covenant: 
 rhe J ws werefhuc mold TcftafDcnr times : but rather this, that the Law 
 was iT/ore ftrongly prefTcd as a yoke upon cheir (houldcrs, and ihu this Law 
 which contains the Covenant of woiks was more plencifuUy revealed and 
 infilled on, and theGolpcl morefparlngly and darkly ; but now in Gofpel 
 times the day. ftar is rifen ( though in few mens hearts) yet in the docflrine 
 and clear revelation ot ic therein, and chereFore the Gofpel is called the 
 my fier J hidden pm ages a»d generations pafi^ but now is made manififi to 
 hidSatnfs,Co\.i.26, whic'n cannot be meant as it they had no knowledge 
 ofic, fora^^r^wifaw Chrifls d^y, and there is a cloud of witneflesin the 
 Old Tsftament who died in hich, Heh,\v ) but not fuch cleat knowledge 
 of it as now .« they were therefore then under the Law as (ervants ( becaufe 
 io much working and doing was urged and chiefly revealed) but indeed 
 werefons and heirs : but we now are not founder ic, but are as Ions having 
 the Lord Jefus ard our fathers face in him clearly revt aled, and faith in hicn 
 chiefly and mod abundantly urged in his blefled Golpel : and thus the A- 
 poftletelsus in this text, G/«/. 4.1. with 4.5. that the heiriofthc promife 
 under the old Teftament were as fervants, but by Cnrifts coming we arc 
 ROW as Tons ; lookaUo as they are (aid to be under the Law, not as if they 
 had no Gofpel revealed or no ufe of the Golpel, but only becaufe the Gofpel 
 was more darkly revealed, and the Law more plentifully urged, (o we are 
 faid net to be under the Law, not as if there was no Law or no ufe of the 
 Law belonging to us, but becaufc now the Golpel is more clearly reveal- 
 ed, and the Law rot exccrnally lo propofcd and impoied as it was upon 
 them. 
 
 2. The Law was a Schoolmafter, Tutor and Governour to leade them 
 unto Chrift to come, forlothe Apoftletelsusin this place, GaLi^i^, that 
 heforefaith camey }X'c were Jhut up under the Law, unto the fsith, vphicb 
 Jbonld afterward be revealed : Thus the Ccrcmoniall Law pointed to Chnft 
 to come, themorail hw difcovercd mms fia and mifery, and nccdofChrift 
 who was to come, nay, all the promif s were made witn rderencc to Je- 
 fus Chrift to come : but now the fullneffe of time being conte, that the Son 
 ©f God is come, now we are no lo^g^r under the Law a^ter ihjs manner, nei- 
 ther cercmonjailor morall law arc of any u<e to us to leade us unto Chrift 
 to come, foiCarift IS already come: and hence it is that Beleevers nowar* 
 faid to be rather under the 1 joipel then under the Law, and BacwVers uoder 
 theOldTeftamcnttoberacherunderthe Law then under the Gofpel : be«» 
 caulc although thele had the ttficacy ofChrifts redemption, yet they were 
 not yet adually redeemed, becaufe the redeemer was not yet come into 
 tbe f^efli, and in this refpcd ihcy were under the rigour of the law, and 
 hence it was fit that they (hoaldbe bandied as lervanrs, and the law and 
 curfe thereof pnncipally revealed: bi^cnowChcift b^iogcomPi and having 
 
The Morality of the sMath. 77 
 
 a(!l:aa!!y redeemed us, having been (not only virtually but adually) made 
 righceoufnefleandacurfe fonis; now chc^r fore isdif pine that we (hould 
 fceCfcriftJerus with open hce, and hear principilly concerning faith and the 
 fathers love in him : now Chrift is revealed chiefly ( being cooje ) the end 
 of the Law, then the Law was revealed chiefly ( Chrifl bcmg not yet come ) 
 as the means to this end: look therefore as the promilc before Chrift, of 
 which theApoftle lpcaks,(7.^/' 3. 17.18, ip 31,22. was fullfillcd in Chrift 
 being come (as Divines (peak) rather tticn aboliihcd, and yet abollhcd 
 asit wasapromile of grace to come : foihe morall law is rather tBllfiiied 
 then abolifhed m Chnft being come, and yet as it did leadc unto Chnft to 
 come, itisaboliHicd tous nowundcrtheGofpcl. 
 
 g. The Law being principally revealed, and yetfo revealed as to leide 
 unto Chrift Jcfus to come, hence arifeth a third thing of the law from which 
 we are now delivered, •z//^, they were therefore under more terrour ar.d 
 fear of the Law thra we are (on Gods part revealing the Gofpcrl more 
 clearly) intheietitnes; and therefore faith the Apoftlej G*^/.4.4,5,6. that 
 TPhenth^ fulinejfe of time camty Cjodfent his fon to redeem ta fro7n under the 
 Lavfy that we might receive the adoptioft offons, and therthj the Spirit of 
 fans crying, Ahh*^ Fathers could not they who Were Ions under the Law 
 Cull God Father? yes verily, doubtlefle thou art our father iay they, //S, 
 69,17. bu:th-y having Itflc light tftey had more fear and leffcof the Spirit 
 of AdopMon, I fav ftill (ex pa^te Del reveUnti^) then We have in zh^iQ 
 da-cs : We are not therefore lo nodcr the law, L the fear and terrour of the 
 LiW as they were: the lumiiicofall this is, that although we are not fo 
 under the Law, i. fo accompanied, and a. lo diipenfed, as chty Were under 
 the old Ttftamcnt, yet thib hmdcrs not but that wc arc under the directive 
 power of the Law as well as they. 
 
 Theps 105. 
 
 The Apoftle fpeaks of a law written and engr^^ven on ftones, and there* ibp. 
 fore of the aioraU Law, whtch is now abolilhcd by Cfr»ft in the Goipel, 
 a Cor,;,.6 7. 1 1 i^. U the HiorallLiw therefore abolah:d as a vulc of life 
 now? n< vcnly, buc the meaning of this place is ( as the ^brmet 6^^/3,75. ) 
 for the Apolfk (peaking ot the mor4ll law by a Synecdoche, cumpvehends 
 the ceremonial Uw alio, both which the falie t^-af htrs in thole times urged 
 as nectffjry to r4lvation and juftifijation acleaft to-ether with thrifty a» 
 gainft whoin tnc A '»oftic heredilputcs : the morall Law therefore is abeliih- 
 cd firft as thus accompanied with a yoke of ceremonies, fccondly, as it was 
 formerly dilpcnicU, the glorious and greater l%nc of the Goipel now ob- 
 fcu ing tbatleffcr light under the hw, and therefore the Apoftle ver,\o, 
 doth not (ay that there was no glory (hining in tiu Law, but it bad no com- 
 parative glory in this reiped:, by rcaion ot the glo/v w<iicb cxCelletb: and 
 iaftly (he Apoftle may fpeak of the motali Law cJii&der<^4 as a Cuyeuaut 
 
 L3 of 
 
yS The M&ralky of the Sabbat L 
 
 of life which thefalfe teachers urged, in which refpedhecals it the Mini- 
 . ftry of death and the letter which kiileth, and the Mmifters oi it ( who wers 
 Buying. »« ^^\\q^ T^^areiand Minsid^s Btillinger thinks) the Minifters oFthe letter, 
 which although it was virtually abohllsed to the belecving Jews before Gof- 
 pel times (the vcrtueof Chrifts death extending to all times ) yet it was 
 not then abolifhed af^ually unrill Chrift came in the flefh, and adually un- 
 dertook to fuUfill this Coyeninc for us totheutmon: farthing of doing and 
 fuff.ring which is exaded^ and now it is abolifhed both virtually and adu- 
 ally; that now we may with open fice behold the glory oJ the Lord as the 
 end of the law for rightcoufn.de to every one that doch bekeve, 
 
 Thejii IiO. 
 l^loe Golf el undfr which B^leevers noro are^ reejuires fto doing f fay 
 no, (ome) for doing ij proper to the Law, the L4r» fromifeth lifi ^ and requires 
 ccnditionsy but she Gofpel (fay they) promifv-th to^'orl^the condition^ bttt 
 recjuires none, and there fire a beleever u nov^ wholly free from ali Law : but 
 the Gofpel and Law are taken tv\ o wales, i . Largely, the Law for the whole 
 dodrine contained in the Old Teftament, and the Gofpel for the whole 
 docflrine of Chrift and the Apodles in theNtw Teftaaient. 2, Stridly, the 
 Liw pro Irge opert/m ( as C^^w?>r diftinguiilicch ) and the Gofpel pro lege 
 chamiet de fidei^u for the Lawof faith : the LaWef works ftridly taken is that Liw 
 cper. ^ecejf. ^; j^h rcvcals the favour of God and eternall life, upon condition of doing 
 "^^* or of perfed obedience: the Law of faith ftrtdly taken is that dodrine 
 which reveals re million of (ins, reconciliation with God by Chrifts righ- 
 trouinefl'e only apprehended by faith : ntow the Gofpel in this latter fence 
 excludes all works, and requires no doing in point of juflificatfon and re» 
 minion of (ins before God, but only belceving : but take the Gofpel large- 
 ly for the whole dodrine of Gods love and free grace, and fothe Gofpel 
 requires doing, for as 'cis an ad of Gods free grace to juftificaman with- 
 out calling for any v;orks thereunto, fo'tis an ad of the fame free grace, to 
 require works of a perfon /uftified, and tbatfuch poor (inners fhould ftand 
 before the Son of God on his throne, to minifterunto him, and ferve hioi 
 in righteoufnefTe and holinefle allthedaics of our llvcs,TVr.2.i4, and for 
 any to think that the Gofpel requiiesno conditions, is a (udden dream a- 
 gainft hundreds of Scriptures, which contain conditional! yet evangelicall 
 promifcs, and againft the judgement of the moft judicious of our Divines, 
 who in difpute agamft PopiQi writers cannot but acknowledge them, only 
 thus, vU. conditions and promifes annexed to obedience are one thing 
 (faith learned Pemble ) and conditions annexed to perfed obedience are an- 
 other : the firft are in the Gofpel, the other not : works are neceffary to falf 
 ^rr !5f/'*^ vation ( faith Chamier ) necefitate fr^tfema not e^cientU^ and hence he 
 \ll\u makes two fort of conditions, (ome antecederdes which work or merit (iilva- 
 tton^ and chefe arc abandoned in the Gofpel, others (be faith; ^xt confer 
 
 qusJttes 
 
The Morality of the Sabiath. -p 
 
 ^«<f«^«f/ which follow thcftateofamin juftified, and thcfc arc required of 
 one already juftified in the Golpel : there are indeed no conditions required 
 of us in the Golpel, but thofeonly which the Lord himfelf fliallorhath 
 wrought in us, and which by requiring of us he doth work in us, but will 
 it therefore follow that no condition is required, bccaufc evcty condition 
 is promifed? no verily, for requiring the condition is the means to work 
 it (as might be plentifully demonftrared) andmean^ md end fhould not 
 befeparatcd. Fiith it felf is no antecedent condition to our juftification or 
 falvation, take antecedent in the u^uall fence oflome Divines for (ffcding 
 or meriting condition, which Jpinim cals effentialu conditio : but take 
 antecedent for a means or inftrumeotof jtiftification, and receiving Chrifts 
 rightcoufnede, in this itnce it is the only antecedent condition which the 
 Gofpel requires therein, becaufc it doth only aritecedere or go before our 
 juftification ( at kaft in order of nature) not to merit it but to receive '\t^ 
 not to make it but to make it our own, not as the matter of our righteouf- 
 ncdeoranypart ofir, but as the only means of apprehending Chrifts righ- 
 teoufnciTe, wnich is the only cau(e why God the Father juftificth, and 
 therefore as Chrifts righteoulnefle muft go before, as the matter and mo- 
 ving caufeof our juftification, or that for which we are juftified; fo faith 
 mull go before th s ughteoufnellc as an inftrument or applying caufe of 
 it, by which we are juftified, that is, by means of which we apply that 
 righteoufncfle which makes4is juft. 'lis true God juftifies the ungodly, but 
 how? not immediatly without faith, but mediatly by faith, as is mod 
 evident from that abated text, Rom.^.^, When works and faith are oppo- 
 fed by th;^ A poftle in point of jaftitication, affirming that we arc juftifi.^d 
 by faith no: by workSj he dorh hereby plainly affirm and give that to faith 
 which he denies to works, look therefore as he denies works to be ante- 
 cedent conditions of our juftification, he affirms the contrary of faith, 
 which goes before our juftificacion, as hath been explained : and therefore 
 as doe and live hath been accounted good Liw, or ihw* Covenant of works, 
 fo heleeve and live hath been in former times accounted good Gofpel, or 
 the Covenant of grjce, uncill now of late this wilde age hath found 
 out new Gofpcls that l^anl and the Apoftles dtd never dream or. 
 
 Thefis III. 
 A fervant and a fon may be fct to do the fame work and have the fame joj^ 
 rule given them co d^ Dy, but the motives to this their work, and the (tripts 
 and punifi ments for negled of their work, may be various and divers, a fon 
 may be bound to it, becaufe he is a fon and beloved, a feivanc may be bourd 
 to do the fame work, becaufe he is hired ar^d (hall have wages ; if the fon 
 negled his work his gHtiifnment is only the .chaftiiement of a father for his 
 good, if a fervant be faulty, he is turned quite out of doors : So althou;^li 
 Belecversin Chrift, and ihofc that are out of Chnlt have divers and various 
 
 motives 
 
So The Moralifj of the Sahbath. 
 
 motives to the obedience of the law of God, yet thcfe do not vary the rule ; 
 the law of God is chc rule co them both, although they that be out of Chrift 
 have nothing but fear and hope of wages to urge them, and thofe that are 
 in Chrift fhould have nothing but the love of a Father, and the heart-bloud 
 mercy of attendee Saviour and Redeemer to compel them : the one maybe 
 bound CO dc>, that fo they may live, the other may be bound to do, becaufe 
 they do live; the one may be beund todo,or elfethey fhall be juftly plagued, 
 the other may be bound to do the fame, or elfe they (hall be mercifully cor- 
 reded : Ic is therefore ameer feeblenefle to think (as fomedo) that the 
 law or rule is changed, becaufe the motives to the obedience of it, and pu- 
 nifhment for the breach of it, are now ( unto a Belcevcr ) changed and al- 
 tered, for the ( ommandment urged from Chrifts love, may binde ftrongly 
 yea moft ftrongly to do the fame thing which the fame Commandment pro- 
 pounded and received in way of hire, may binde alfo anto. 
 
 Thtfis 112. 
 112. Some thiy\that there 14 rio fin but unbelief ( "^hich is a fin agAwfi the 
 Go^el only ) and there fire there being no fin againfi 4nj Uvf ( Ckrifi having by 
 his death abolijhed all them) the lawca^inot be a rule to them. An adulterous 
 and an evil generation made drunk with the cup of the wine of the wrath 
 of God, andftrongdeludon, do thus argue: Are dr^nkenefle, whoredom, 
 lymg, cheating, witchcraft, oppreflion, theft, buggery, no fins, and confe- 
 qutntly not :o be repented of, nor watcht againft, but only unbelief? Is 
 there no day of judgement wherein the Lord will judge men (not only for 
 unbelief) but the fecrets of all hearts, and whatever hath been done in the 
 body, whether good or evil, according toT^w/iGolpel? Rom,2A6* 2 Cor, 
 5. TO, How comes the wrath of God to be revealed from heaven, not only 
 agamft unbelief, but againft all unrighteoufneflfe and angodhncffe of man ? 
 Eom 1. 18. If rhere was no im but unbelief, how can all fleQi, Jlws and 
 Gentiles become guilty before God, that fo they may beleevc in ihc Gofpel 
 (as 'tis, i<:^»w.3. 21, 22,23,24) if they are all guiltlcfleuncill unbelief comes 
 in? There is no tin inaeed which fhall condemn a man in cafe he fliall be- 
 leeve, but will it follow from hence that there is no fin in a man Dut only 
 unbel.cf? Afickraanfhallnotdie in cafe he receive the Ph fick which will 
 recover htm, but doth it follow from hence that there is no (icknefle in him, 
 or no fuch (icknrfle which is able to kill him, but only hts wilfull refufing of 
 the Phyfick ? furely his refufing of the Phyfick is not the caufe of his fickneife 
 which was before, nor the naturall (for that his fieknefteis) but only the 
 morall caufe of his death. Sin is before unbelief comes, a (ick finncr before 
 a healing Saviour can be rejedcd; fin kils the foul, as ic were, naturally, 
 tinbelief morally; nofinfliaillsillor condemn. us if we beleeve, but dothic 
 follow from hence that there is no fin before or after faith, becaufe there is 
 flo condemning fin unleile we fall by unbelief? No fuch matter, and yei fuch 
 
 is 
 
J he Merality of the SahUth. 8i 
 
 is the madnciTe of fomc prophets in thefe times, who to abandon, not only 
 the directive Life of the law, but alfo all preparing and humbling work of the 
 law, and to make mens finning the firfl: foundation and ground of their be- 
 keving, dothereforeeitherabolifli all the being of any fin, befide unbelief, 
 or the condemned eftateof aman for fin, yea for any fin, uncill herefufe 
 Chrift by unbelief, for publiiliing which pernicious dodrines it had been well 
 for them if they had never been born. 
 
 Thefti 113. 
 One would wonder how any Chrillians fhould fall into this pit of perdi- 1 1 •> ^ 
 tion, to deny thedirtdive ufe of the law to one in Chnft, if either they read 
 P/S/.119. with any favour, or thcEpiftlesof ^^^^T^and /^/k^j with any faith ; 
 iR which the law is highly commended, and obedience thereto urged as the 
 happineile and chief evidence of the happinefieof man; but that certainly 
 the root of this accurfed dodrine is either a loofe heart, which is grown 
 blinde and bold and fecretly glad of a liberty, not fo much from the law of 
 fin as from the law of God; orif thehrarc be fincere in the main, yet it 
 flieghts the holy Scriptures at prefenr, and makes little confcience of judging 
 in the matters of God accoi dmg unto them ; for if it di\A^ it could hardly 
 fall into this dirty ditch, out of which the good Lord deliver, and out of 
 which I am perf^ aded he will deliver in time all (hofe that are his own : for 
 J muchqueftion thefalvation of that man, who lives and dies with this opi- 
 nion ; and as every errour is fruiif.iil, fo this is in fp:ciall, for from this 
 darkningthc dirediveufe of the morall law, arife ( amidft many others) 
 thefe enfuing evils, which are almoft-, if not altogether deadly to the foulsof 
 men, they are principally thefe three. 
 
 Thefts 114. 
 The firft is a (hamefuU neglect (infome affcdingfooliilily the name of 114; 
 new Teftamcnt Minifters ) of a wife and powerful! preaching of the law, to 
 make way by the humbling work of it, for the glorious Goipel, and the 
 affedionate entertainment thereof: for through the righteous judgement 
 of God, when men once begin to abandon this ufe of the law as a rule, they 
 aboli{h much more readily this ufe of the law to prepare men thereby for 
 the receiving of Chrift. iknow there ate fome who acknowl.dge this ufe 
 of the law to be our rule, but not to prepare; but how long they may be 
 orthodox in the one, who are heterodox in the other, the Lord only 
 knows; for I finde that the chief arguments againft the one, do ftrike 
 flrongly againft the other alfo : It's an eafie thing to caft blocKs before the 
 blinde, and to call mills before the face of the cleared truth, and to make 
 many fpcc'ous ihews of new Teftamcnt Miniilry, free-grace and Covenant, 
 againft this fuppofcdlegall way and preparing work, butaftiirediy they that 
 have found and felt the fruit and comfort of this humbling way ( for which 
 I doubt not but that thoufands and thoufands are bkfling God m heaven 
 
 M that 
 
7he MorJ'ty of the SdhatL 
 
 that ever they heard of ic ) do certainly and afllsredly know, that thefe men 
 (acleafl: their dodrines in this point) are not of God: The word in thefe 
 mens mouths being flat contrary to the mercifiill, and the forever to be 
 adored work of God in their hearts : When the Spirit comes, his firft work 
 (ifChrift may bebcleeved) even when he comes as a Comforter, is, Te 
 convince ths'^orU of fin,]o\\,i 6 9.10, which we know is chiefly by thciavi/, 
 Kom-^.io, andilialitheMiniders (not of the letter but of the Spirit ) re- 
 fufe to begin here ? Efpeciaily in thefe times of wantonnefTe, contention, 
 confulion, famine, fvvord and bloi.d, wherein every thing almofl: cries aloud 
 for lackcloath, and therefore not for tiffany and filken Sermons : As if this 
 corrupt and putrifying age fiood only in need of fugar to preferve and keep 
 them fwcet from fmelling : As iffublime notions about Chrift and free-grace, 
 Covenant of gracr, loveof the Father, the kingdoms within, and Chrifti- 
 an excellencies and priviledges, were the only things this age ftood in need 
 of, and not in any need of feirchings with candles, terrours, fhakings,fenfe 
 offin, or forewarningsofwrath tocome : Asifthisold world did need no 
 Noah to foretell them of flouds, of fire and wrath to come : Or as if the 
 mtno'i Sodom and Princes of Cjomorah^ fliould do well to mock at Lot (ot 
 bidding them tohaften ou: ofrhecityjbecaufc God would dcftroy it: As if 
 the Ipirit of P^^/m thefe times fl-iouldnot know the terrourof the Lord, 
 and therefore perfwade men, 2 C^'?'. 5,10,1 1. but only the love and free- 
 grace of the Lord Jefus, and therefore to exhort men, nay rather therefore 
 to relate to men ftories and notions about free grace, gcnerall redemption^ 
 the myftery of the Fathers loYc", and theChriftin you and in the fpint (not 
 theperfonof Chriftor Chnft in the fleili) the hope of glory : What will 
 the Lord Jefus one day fay to thefe fleepy vvatchmen,th2C n iVcr tell the fecure 
 world of their enemies at the door ? 1 dnde divers colours and pretences for 
 this courfc of daubmg. 
 
 I. Some fij this favoftrs of an old Tefidment jplrh, ^hich VOM ^ottt to 
 "^ound and then to hea/, to humljle and then to raije^ to preach Uy» and then 
 go[pe/; hht now "^e are to be Miniflers of the new Teflamsnt, and let no lavf 
 h h-^ardof: I confede thofe that preach the law as the means of our juftifi- 
 cation, and as the matter of our righreoufnefTc without Chrift, or together 
 with Christ, as the falfe teachers did, 2 Cor,'3^6* may well be called (as 
 T^i«/calsthem) Miniftersof the letter not of the Spirit, of the old left a- 
 ment,not oftheNew ,• but to preach Chrift plainly and with open face the 
 end of the law, and to preach the law as the means to prepare for, and ad- 
 vance Chrift in our hearts, can never be proved to be the old Teftiimcnt 
 Miniftry, ortoputa vailupon mens hearts that they cannot fee the end of 
 the law ( as the old Teftament vail did, 2 Cor.-^,!/^) but it is to take away 
 the vail of all conceit of mans own ftrength and righteoufneffe, by feeing his 
 curfe, thacfo he mayfly to the end thereof the Lord Jefus, and embrace 
 
 him 
 
The Morality of the Sabbath. 83 
 
 him for righteoufnede ; For the Apoftle doth not call them Minlfters of the 
 letter and of the old Ttftamenc, becaurc they did preach ihc law to humble 
 and leade unto Chrift; bHcbccaufe they preached the law for righteoufnellc 
 without Chrift, whomhecalsche fpirit, t/^r/iy. and therefore calsthem.the 
 Mmiftcrs of the letter, and cheir Miniftry, of death and condemnation, 
 there is r3mething in the law which is of perpctiiall ufe, and fomething which 
 is but foratime^ the vUcoaUival gis ( as fome call it) #. the force of the 
 lavv to condemn and curfe, to hold a man under the curfe, ana to hold a 
 man under the power of fin, which the Apoftle cals \.Vt ftrength cf thelaw^ 
 I C<7r.i5 56. is but for a time, and is but accidentall to the law, and may 
 be feparated from it, and is feparated indeed from it as foon as ever the 
 foul is in Chritl,i?<?;».8.i. he is then free from the obligation of it to per- 
 form perfonail and perfed: obedience to it, that fo he may be juft ; alfo from 
 the malcdidlon and curfe of ir, if he be not thus juft : But th-^.c which is of 
 perpetuallufcin it, is not only the diredive power of ir, but this preparing 
 and humbling vertue of ir, for if all men by nature, Jews and Gentiles are 
 apt to be puft up with their own righreoufnelle, and to bleffe themfelves in 
 their own righteoufnede, and fo to feel no fuch need of Chrift, then this 
 humbling work of the law to flay men of ail their fond conceipts and roolifli 
 confidences in their own righteoufncfle, and to make men feel the horrible 
 nature of (in by, by revealing the curfe and maledidion dueto ic isof mo- 
 rall and perpetuail ufe : And hence ic is that though the Gofpel ftridly taken 
 ( as is intimated r/^f// 110) hathnoterrour properly in it, becaufe thusic 
 reveals nothing but reconciliation through Chrifts righteoufnede applied by 
 faith, yet the Gofpel largely taken^ for that dodrine which reveals the glad 
 tidings of Chrift already come, fothereis terrour in ic, becaufe in this re- 
 fped the Gofpel makes ufe of the law and confirms what is morall and per- 
 petuail therein: The fm and terrour which the Gofpel (largely taken) 
 makes ufe ofouc of the law, are bucfubferviencco the Gofpel ftridly taken, 
 or for that which is principally and moft properly Gofpel, for thereby the 
 righteoufnede and free-grace and love of the Lord Jcfjs, and pretioufnefTe 
 and greatnefle of both are the more clearly illuftrated : The lavv of ic lelf 
 wounds and kils and rather drives from Chrift then unto Chrift, but in the 
 hand of the Gofpel, or as Chrift handles it, fo it drives the foul unco Chrift, 
 and (as hath been lliewn) is the means to that end, and 'tis a moft falfc 
 and naufeous dodrine to affirm that love only draivs the foul to Chrift, un- 
 ledc ic be underftood with this caution and notion, vi^. love as revealed to 
 a fifiner, and condemned for dn ; which fin and condemnadon as the law 
 makes known, fo the Golpel makes \\\t of to draw unco Chrift : If indeed 
 the Gofpel did vuherare mvttlmrArety i, wound that ic may wound and ch^rn de 
 terrifieonly (which the law doih ) then it (faith Chamier) was all one l^^^/''^* 
 with law (which :2^//*2ym/«tf pleads for ) but when ic wounds thacic may 
 
 M 2 ^ heal, 
 
8^ "^ht MoraUty of the Sahhih. 
 
 heal, this is not contrary b-at agreeable to the office of a good Phyfitian 
 ivhofc chief work is to heal, and may well fiire with the healing Miniftry of 
 the Lord JcTli'?; and hence wefec chit although Chrift was fent to preach 
 the Gofps!, yeche came to coniirni the law in thcMiniftry of theGoipel, 
 and therefore fniws the rpirituillllnsagainn: the law more clearly, and the 
 heavy plagues for the breach of it more fully then the Scribes and Pharifees : 
 he that is angry with his brother is a murderer, and he that caJs him fool is 
 in danger of hell fire, Mat. ■^.22» T^ter was no Minifler of the oldTeQa- 
 menr, becaufe he Firil: convinced and prickt the Jews to the heart for their 
 murder of Chrift lefus. P^^/ was nofuch Minifler, neither (when as he 
 would evince t)ur juftifieation by Chrifts righteoufnefle only ) in that he be- 
 gins and fpendsfo much time in proving Gentiles and lews to be under fin 
 and wrath, notwichftanding all the excufes of the one and priviledges of the 
 other; as appears in his three firft chapters to the Romayjs : b^ herein they 
 were Gofpel preachers. Nor cao it with any colour of reafon be thought 
 that the Prophets in the old Tcftaraent were herein Minifters of the letter, 
 ri?:, when they did firfl wound and then heal, firft humble by the law and 
 then revive by the Gofpel. M"" Snltmarfh hath been fo blinded with this 
 notion of the old Tefi:ament Miniilry, that to make this ufe of the law in 
 preaching the Gofpel, or to hold forth the promifes of grace to them that 
 are qualified with the grace of the promife ( as the old Teftament Prophets 
 did) is to give (as he thinks) the wine or the Gofpel burning hot, as the 
 covetous gentleman did to his gutfts, and another ( whom I fparc to name) 
 profclTeth, Tk^t tke old Tejlumer,t {hecapife it urgeth the law to hftmi^le) 
 csntaineth little good news bnt mnch had news, but now "Oohen Chri^ faith ^ Go 
 preach the Gofpel, theyehy he ^auld hjive them (he faith) Minijiers of 
 the nerr'Tt [I ame}2t to preach glad tidiT}gs {nothing hnt Cjofpsl) but nohadti- 
 dinqs ( not a jot of the law ) untillmen pojttivel) rejeclthe glad tidings of the 
 Gofpel, Ifthefe men fpeak true, then neither Teter'm his preachmg> nor 
 P<«^/ in his writing?, nor Chnfthimfelf in his Miniilry were MiniHers of the 
 new Teftament, but did overheat their wine and preach much bad tidings 
 to the people of God : Verily if this ftuff be not repented of, the Lord hath 
 a time to vifit for thefe inventions. 
 
 2. Someobjcc%5''^/.3.24,2)« That the children of the oldTefiament ^ere 
 under the law, a£ thiir pedagogae to lead them toChrifi, but now {the Apo file 
 faith) Vce are no longer under this Schoolmjifler, )X'ho are fons of God in the 
 new TeUawent. Be it fo that the fons of God under the new Teftament are 
 paft the tcrrouring of this Schoolmafter, is it not therefore the work of the 
 new Teftament M'niftry to preach the law unto fervancs and flavcs to (M[i and 
 Satan in new Teftament times ? No ( faith the fame author) pr thu it to 
 freash bad news, this ii no good new i to fay Thou art condemned fir thefe things, 
 fir the Qo^fel faith thit^, Thou poor drtmk^rd, thou frond ^omatt here is a 
 
 eraciom 
 
. The Morality of the Sdhath, 
 
 gyaciom Cjed that hath hved thee. And fcr,t Chr'tfi todv jor tkcy ay.dMimfiers 
 to make it krioivn to thee, anihere u cverlafthg fdvmon by hint cniy, because 
 then Art a [inner j thon art now fee fiom d^m>^atio» ; f^ar not that, Chrift bath 
 loved thee^ there fire obcj him, if not^ thofi fhalt not bs damned, that u done 
 awAj already, &c. I would know whether a proud woman, or a poor drunk- 
 ard, a villain, who never yec belecved^ are in a ftace of condemnation, lor 
 no? I have read indeed that There is no condemnation to them that arein 
 /f.6W/?,Pvom.8.i. buc never of any fuch freedom to them that are out of 
 Chrifi-, unlefle it was only in deftination and merit; and I have read that 
 >^'e are by nature children of "^rath, while dead in fin, £'/ji?>. 2.1,2,3. buc never 
 of this, z'/^. that we are in favour while we be in our (in, much lefle that wc 
 are tobeleevethis, becaufe we are fuch ; If therefore fuch perfons be in a 
 ftate of wrath and death and condemnation, is not this like the old falfe 
 prophets, ( rying peace, peace and falvation, where there is no peace ? There 
 unofeticeto the ys'icked faith mj God,l(i.^^»tiltAh,'^'j»ult» This is truth be- 
 fore they rejedthe Gofpel, is it not? This the law faith (fay fome ) true, 
 Buc is not this confirmed by theMiniftry of the Gofpel alfo? /<?A'.3.ult. He 
 that beleeves nor, the wrath of God abides upon him, f^V^^ vst'c^utoV, ic was 
 upon him before he did beleeve, and when he beleeves not it abides where 
 it did; MuHthcMinifters of the new Teftaraenc therefore preach lies and 
 falfehoods, and tell proud women and poor drunkards and viiians before 
 ihey refufe the Gofpel by unbelief, that the Lord Jefus loves them, and that 
 they need not fear condemnation, when the Scripture hath fliuc up'all men 
 under it, that the promife by faith might be given to thofe that beleeve, 
 and chem only ? What is this Gofpel Miniftry but to cell men they are whole, 
 andnotlick to deach, but healed and wounded before they come to the 
 Phyfitian, the Lord lefus: furely that is Gofpel Miniftry which advanceth 
 Chrift not only in word, but in power, and in the hearts of poor finnerss, 
 but doth thisMiniftry advance the Phyiitians cuftooie and honour? which 
 where ic comes muft firft tell all the crue of wretched drunkards, proud 
 perfons and villains, tbacthey are already well and whole, loved and par- 
 doned, bleded and faved, before ever they come to the Lord Jefus ? fup^ 
 pofe therefore ( as fome may (ay ) that iervants and Aivc;s to fin may have 
 chcLawpreachttothem, yec the Ions and children of God have no'ufeoF 
 it in that reaped now, *^tis true, I grant not as the Arvants hsve under the 
 newTeftamenr, nor yec as the Tons of God had under the old, for the chil- 
 dren of God under the old Teftament had need of this Schoolmalter to leads 
 them to Chrift to come^ and ad Chrinttmtjficumfv, to Chrift typed cue 
 in facr^ficcs and oblations, high Prieft and Aicar, and fo it led chem to Chrift 
 afar off, and asicwereagreac way about, but doth it not follow that there 
 is no ufe of the Law therefore, to be a Schoolmafter ftill to leade unto Chrift 
 immediatly and already come,tho(e that arc ferv^nts to/m under the new Te- 
 
 M 3 ftamenc 
 
8^ I'he Morality of the Sahhth^ 
 
 ftiment have need of the law to fhcw chem the condemnation and curfe un* 
 der which they, lie by naciire,3nd art now adlually under: but the Ions of God, 
 ( for whom Chrid is nude a curfe ) are not thus under ir, and therefore have 
 not this u'c; oritj but only to (hew that r.urle and condemnation which they 
 (fooFthemfelves delcrv-.^ and therefore the holy ApoQle, when he was in 
 ChriO:, and did live unto Gwd, he fl:iews us how he did live unto God, 
 'Viz.* by dying to the Law, and how he did die to the Law ? and that was 
 by the Law, i. as it did iliew him his condemnation, he did live to God 
 in his JLirtificacion, asitdidihew him his (in, and wants, and weaknelTe, 
 it made ti in die unroir, aud expert no life from it, and lo live unto God 
 in his fan^ification, for ie the words are, / through the Law am dead to 
 the Law y that I way live nnto God^ Gal.2.19. the itluc therefore is this, 
 that if the dodrine be taken ftriclly fro lege fidei (as Ch^mler caJsit) or 
 ihstdodrine which (hews the way of mans righteoufnefll^ and /uftification 
 only, thete indeed all the works or che law, all terrours and threacnmgs 
 are to be excluded, and nothing elfe but peace, pardon, grace, favour, e- 
 terBall reconciliation to be beleeved and received, and therefore it's no new 
 Teftament Mimftry to urge the Liw, or to thunder out any terrour here, 
 for in this fence ii*s true (which is commonly received) that in the Law 
 there are terrours, but in the Golpel nones bur- il the Gospel be taken large- 
 ly for all that dodiine which brings glad tidings of Chrift already come, 
 and Ihews the love olGod in the lirgeft ex*ent of ic, and the illuftrations 
 and confirmations of it from the law, then luch icrvants of Jelus Chnft, 
 who hold forth the law co make way for grace, and to iiiuitrate Chnlts 
 Iove> mufteirherbcacccunccdNcW Telhmcnt ^4Jnl■iers3 or elle (as faach 
 been (hewn ) Chrift Jdus^and his Apoftles were nene. 
 
 Thefis II). 
 
 115. The fecond i% a profeff^^d negled:, and caftiug off the work of repen- 
 tance and mourning for (in : nay of asking pardon of lin, for if the Law 
 benoruletoQiewman his duty, why fhould any man then trouble him- 
 felf with forrow for any fin? fonf it be no rule to him, how ihould any 
 thing be (in to hun? and if (0, why then (houldany ask psrdon of ir, or 
 mourn under it? why iliould not a inan rather harden bis heart like an 
 Adamant, and make his forehead bralTc and iron, even unco the death, 
 againft th^ feeling of any (in ? but what dodrine is more crofle to the 
 Spirit of grace in Gofpd timesj, then this ? which is a Spirit oj mourning, 
 Zac.l 2.10,11. what dodrinc more crofle to the exprefle command of C-hrUt 
 from heaven then this ? who writes from heaven to the Cnurch oif' Ephefia 
 to remember from whence ilie is fallen and repent, R^v,!."^^, whacdodrine 
 more crofTe to the example of holy men then this ? who after they were 
 converted, thenrcpcnted and lamented mod oFall, Jer.T.ii'^Ag. 2 Cor. 
 7.^,10,1 1» whacdodrine more crofle CO thclalvacion of fouis, the mercy 
 
 of 
 
The Morality of the SMath, g- 
 
 of God, and forgivenefle of /ib? for fo the promife runs, if^e confife 
 ourfinneSy h u faith full and jufl to forgive ut out //;?/, I Job.«.p, what 
 doflrine focroffe to the Spine ok the love of Chrift (hed abroad m the 
 hears, that when a mans fins are greateft { which is after converfion, be- 
 came now againft more love and mere nearnefle to ]e(us Chrift ) that 
 nowabcleevcrs forrow (hould beieaft monkish and macerating: lorrdw 
 indeed is loathfome, bac godly forrow is (weec and gloricus, doubrleffc 
 thole mens blindtnellc is exceeding great, who know not how to recon- 
 cile joy andiorrow in the lame iubjcd, who cannot with one eye behold 
 their free juftifieacion, and therein daily rejoice, and the weaknede and 
 impcrfedion of their fanftiricacion with aaothcr eye , and for thac 
 mourn, 
 
 Thefs 1 1(5. 
 The third thing is, a denying fandification the honour of a faithfull if 6. 
 and true wrtnefle, or clear evidt^ncs of our juftification : for ii a beleever 
 be not bound to look unto the Law as his rule, why (hould he then have 
 any eyetohisfandification, which is nothing cKe but oar habit nail con fir- 
 mitj to the Law, as inherent corruption is nothing elfebut habitnall difa^ 
 greemsnt with it : although landification be no part of our righteouf- 
 ncfle before God, and in this fence is no evidence o\ our juftifieacion, yet p^^,^^ 
 there is Icarce any clearer truth in all the Scripture then this, i/i^. that it is iich!'ll!*i 
 an evidence that a man is in a )uftificd cftate, v^d yet this levcn which de- f J'.*'*' ^ 
 nies the Law to be aChriftians rukof life, hath fowredlome mensfpirits 14. ifaj'?'^ 
 againft this way of evidencing. Itis^ depiitfiiU evidence ( faith D^ Criff ) ^ Tb.M,5,5. 
 4« argumtfit not an ev'dence,it « a carnaU and an infsriour evidence, the la ft 
 and the Uafi, not thefi^ji evidence^ it ii i^n evidence if jufl^i faction befi} ft evi- 
 dent ( UyDen and Saltmar/h) iome menmay be led to rhtfe opinions from 
 other principles, then a plain denyall of the dereSive ufeof the Liw, but 
 llfeislfearliesundermoft, however let thefe two things be examined. 
 I . Whether iandification be a doubtfuU ev.dence. 
 a. Whetheritbcacarnail,infcriour, and may not be a firft evidence. 
 
 Thejts XI7. 
 
 If to be under the power and dominion of fin and Originall corruption ii?* 
 
 be a fure and certain evidence of aduall condemnation, fo that he that 
 
 i faith he knows Chrift and hath fellowOiip with him, ^nd yet walks 'n datk- 
 
 jncflej and keeps not his Commandments, is a lyar J i Job 16. & 2,4 why 
 
 i may not fandtifieation then ("whereby we are <ti free from th-. poi»8.'er of 
 
 I fin) be a fure and certain evidence ot our ac^uail juft»fi:atir;n? for hereby 
 
 I "^e^norv that ^ e knew him, if^i'e keep hu CommandmetnSf I J-h.S.g. vchc-re- 
 
 by it is raanifeft that theApoIUe isnotci their mindts who rhink the ne« 
 
 gitive to be true, viz., that they that keep not Chrifts Commandmerts 
 
 arc in a ftatc of perdition, but they will not make she affirmative iiuc, c^**. 
 
 that. 
 
88 ihe Mordlnj of the Sabbath. 
 
 that tbey that keep his Commindmcnts may thereby know that they are in 
 a ftate of (alvation ! U JsfusChriftbefent LQ^/ff<? his j>eoflelf. tnrmngthem 
 ^om their imquities^ i\di.'^.t^lc. then they that know they are turned froai 
 their iniquitic;s by hio), may know certainly that (:hey are bkfled in him, and 
 if fbey be not thus turned they may know certainly that they are yet accur- 
 fed ; If tiodUncflc hath thepromifes iA this life, vA that which is to come, 
 1 Tim.^^.m<i if the free grace and aduallloveof God be revealed clearly to 
 us only by lo-nc promife^how then is faijd iication (io near akin to godline-s) 
 excluded from being any evidence ? Is there no inherent grace in a beleever 
 thacno inherenc fandificuioncanbe a true evidence? verily thus tome do 
 think, but what is this but an open gracekfTe profelfion, that every beleever is 
 under the power of inherent lin, if he hath not thebemg of any mherent 
 gract ? or if there be any inherent grace, yet it is ( fay (oine) (o mixt with 
 corruption, and isfuchaipoaed andblurd evidence, thac no man candif^ 
 cern it ; 1 confede fuch an aniwer would well become a blindc Papift who 
 never knew where grace grew ( for lo they dilpute agaiuft certitHdofahais 
 csrtitudinefJei^ wh^n the conclulionof faith arilethfron fueh a propofi- 
 tion as is the word of God, and the alTumpcion the tcftimony of (lods 
 Spirit to a mans own experience of the work of God in his heart) but it ill 
 befeems a Minifter of the Gofpel of Chrift to plead for fuch popiih igno- 
 rance in a Chriflian as can fee no further then his own buctons, and that 
 cannot dilcern by the Spirit of God the great and wonderfull chinge from 
 darkntfTe to light, from death to life, from Satan to God, the vifible 
 work of God, and graces of rhe Spiric of God, tne things ( which love 
 the Apoftlecals J are freely given to them of God, I Cor> 2. 12. Peters 
 wasimperfed, blotted and mixed, and yet he could lay, Loyd, thon knoW' 
 eft- 1 lovethee^ Joh.21.17, the poor doubting mourning man m the CjoI- 
 p.l hid lomc faith, and was able to (ce it and fay certainly, Lord, I heUeve^ 
 help my mbeleef. Could Paul difcern ( wicfaout extraordinary revelation 
 becaufe he (peaks as an ordinary Chriftian) an inner man and a Law in his 
 minde, dilighting in the Law of God, yet naixed with a Law in his mem- 
 bers, leading him captive into the Law of fin, and cannot we? and yec 
 the Do^or doth caft fuch (trains upon (incerity,-univerfall obedience, love 
 to the brethren, c^c. and heaps up the fame cavils againft the truth of them 
 in the fouls ©f the Saints, as theDevill himklf uiually doth by finfull lu(- 
 pitions and fuggeftions, when God lets him loofe for a (calon to buffet his 
 people, that fo they may never know ( if it were pollible ) what great 
 things the Lord hatk done for their fouls : and whoever rcades his book Ihall 
 findc that he makes a Beleever luch a creature, as cannot tell certainly whe- 
 ther he be a fincere- hearted man or an arrand hypocrite, whether he be 
 coder the power of (in and Satan or not: whether one man can be difcern- 
 cd kom another to be a Saint oradevill, or whether he hath any charity 
 
 relates 
 
The Morality of the SMath. 8^ 
 
 and love to them that are Saints from them that are not : and fogoes a- 
 bcut to befool ard non-plus and puzzle the people of God ( as the ftory 
 relates of the German woman desirous to rid the houfe ok her husband ) who 
 firft making him drunk, and calling him into a deep did (o fhave him, and 
 dreflehim, and cut and clip him, that when he awakened, he knew not 
 wnan to think of himlclf, or to fay who he was .• for by looking upon and 
 in himfelF, he thought he wasthc woman5 husband, and yet by his new cut 
 and habit, he almoft belceved that he was a Fryar as his wife affirmed; 
 Sandification is an evidence alwayinit fclf of a juftified cftate, although it 
 be not allway evident unto us, and therefore what though aChriftian fees 
 his fandlification and graces to day, and cannot fee them, but is doubtfuil 
 about them, fuppole to morrow ? fliallhe therefore rejed it as a doubtfull 
 evidence ? which is ever clear enough in it k\i^ though not alway to ouc 
 difcerning? for I would know what evidence can there be of a juftified 
 eftate? but partly through dimnelTeand vveaknefleof faith (which is but 
 imperfcd and therefore mixt with feme doubtings all a mans life, fomc 
 time or other ) and partly through the wife and adored providences of God 
 t« exercife our faith, but that fome time or other it cannot be difcerned ? \% 
 the immediate teftimony of Gods Spirit ( which fome would make the only 
 evidence ) alway evident, and the fhinings, fheddings and adings of ic 
 never fufpended, but that by fome means or other they will be at a loffe ? 
 why then (hould fandification be excluded as a doubtfull evidence, be- 
 caufe fometime it is, and at other times not difcerned ? I know there are 
 fome who perceiving the conceived uncertainty of all fuch evidences, have 
 therefore found out a ftrange catholicon for thefe fick times, a fure way of 
 evidencing and fetling all mens confciences in a way of peace and unftiaken 
 afllirance of the love of Chrifl, and therefore they make ( which I name 
 with horrour ) the fight of corruption and finfull pollution, through the 
 promifeofthcGofpel, the certain and fetled evidence of life and falvatior, 
 which opinion the Icaft I can fay of it, is that which Calvin faid in the like 
 cafe, to be exmdantU in mundnm furoris l^ei flagellum. Wo to the dark 
 mountains of fTaUs^ and the fat valleys, towns and cities in EngUnd^ 
 and feacoaftsand Hands in America, if ever this delufion take place: and 
 yec thb flame begins to catch, and this infedion to fpread, and there>» 
 fore I finde M. Saltmarfi and ^. ^. to fpeak our, and openly to own that 
 which the Familifts in former times have either been a{hamed or afraid to 
 acknowledge, and that is this, visu, 7 hat the promifes of the qoI}el do h* 
 longtoAjinneYy q\^ijifiner, or as ajtnuer, and that the Law ^eakj good fJ ere t 
 to arighteoHd Man, quatenus <2 righteopu man, but the Go^el quite contrary^ 
 stts to a wan quatenus 4/«»fr, not 04 a regenerate man^ or 04 an humileman, 
 or as a Saint y or a£ a hie ever, but as afinner/ and hence the j in fir ^ That 4 
 Chrifiian^ill never have anjfetUd feace, but beojfandon^ at a bone out of 
 
 N joint 
 
The MorJ/tj of the Sahhath. 
 
 jaifsty ifi a»dout, in and out, areedtojfed ^ith thrdPirJe, never k»lt to Chrifi^ 
 if they lay hold &nChrifl andGo<is love mitr any other confidermonthen 06 to 
 JJmerSy a»\ thers^'re thofiq^h thej fee ko good tn themfelves, thongh thtj he not 
 humbled, brcken^harted finrnrs ( ^ one Preacher tels them) nor hsletving 
 fmrnrs {a6 another Preacher tels thrm) yet if they fee them/elves ftnners, th.j 
 'mufl kKoroa finner oa a fimier Pi thsyrever ehieH of the golfei, and therefore 
 this u eromid enough to b^lesvt\ (o that if the devil teii d m^n that heii no 
 Sainti^ifthefvHlcm jay, lam afmer, if the devil fay tkoH art an hypocrite 
 Ihtan hypocrite a but a finner fMh though I be not a broken-hearted finner , 
 tki^ Will be ( they fay ) a refuge of peace to retreat fosto in all temptations, and 
 Vpheu men have learnt this l^ffon, their fotils t>cill not be in andout any more^ 
 bm have cor flant peace, for thop^gh they have no imcrefi in C^rifl as Saints^ 
 yet they have reallimerefi in the prowifes of Chrifi oifinners: hence alfo they 
 lay, that no Afmifter is to threaten or declare the curfe ^niWath of God a- 
 (raiwfl drmk^rds andfiimers oa fuch ; uniilfrfl Chrifl be offered in the Gcffel^ 
 'dfidtheyrefiifehim, andthatifany do thj , they are Minifiers oftheOldTeft^^ 
 went net of the new. Sk definit rt pifcem tnullcr firmofa, iec ii^ therefore fee 
 what chafif and what corn, what truth and v^hac falfehood there isin this 
 nevv divinity. It is true, i» That the Gofpel reveals the free grace and 
 love of God, the death of ChrlH and falvation by him for (inners, and thac 
 all thofe that are or null befived, are to acknowledge and aggravate Gods 
 love toward them, in calling his eye upon them when they were finners, 
 notwichftanding all their (in?j this the Scripture every where holds forth, 
 Ilom,<y 6i7* I Tiw.iA'y^ 2. 'lis true alfo, that the Gofpel makes an offer of 
 Chrift, and falvation, and remtdion of fins co all (inner?, where it comes, 
 yea, to all finners as Tinners and as miferable, yea, though they have finned 
 long by unbelcef, as is evident, Hcfii^A. Rev,^,ij. fer.^,22. //rf.55.1. 
 all are invited to come unco thefe waters freely without money or price: 
 thefe things no man doubts of ihat knows the Gofpel: but the queftion is 
 not whether Remifilon of fins and reconciliation in the Gofpel belong to 
 finners ? but whether they belong to fmners inmediatly as (inners ? not whe- 
 ther they are merited by Chrifts death, and offered out of his rich grace Im- 
 mediatly to (inners? bat whether they are adually and immediatly their 
 own, fj as they miy challenge them thus as their own, from this as 
 fiomafull and fui'ficient evidence, viz. becaufe they are finners and be- 
 C3ufe they fee them(elves (inners? for we grant that ]efusChrift came into 
 the world aduaily to fave finners, yet mcdiatly by faith, and then they may 
 fcefalvation: that he juftifieth alfo the ungodly, but how? immediatly ? no, 
 but mcdiatly by faith,i^«»».5.5/and that where fin abounds grace abounds,to 
 whom ? to all finners, no,but mediatly to all thofe only who by faith receive 
 this grace, Rom.'^, 1 7X0 that the Gofpel reveals no adtiall love and reconci- 
 liation immediatly co a finneif as a finner, but mediatly to a finner as a bc- 
 
 Ieevin2 
 
The Morality of the Sdbbath. 9^ 
 
 leeving and broken-hearted finner: and the Scripture is ^o clear in tfels 
 point, that whoever doubrsof ir, muft cactttire eftmfole^ and we may fay 
 to l\itm 2^% P^l to X.\itGiiatkUns^ O fiolip) mcn^X'ho hath hevritchedjou that 
 joH fhouldnotfeethi^trHth! For though Cbrift came to favefinners, yet he 
 profedeth that he came not to call the righteous, but the Hck finners, A^at^ 
 .9,13. though God juftifieth the ungodly, yet 'tis fuch an ungodly man as 
 beleeveth in him who^e faith is imputed unto righteoufneflc, /?<?»». 3. 5. though 
 grace abounds where fin abounds, yet 'tis not to all finners (for then all 
 (hould befaved) but to fuch as receive abundance of grace by faith, Rom, 
 5. 171 although God holds forth Chrift to be a propitiation for finners, 
 yet it'srxprcfly faid to be mediae ly r/:''^^^^/? faith inhts bloud^ Rom. 3. 24,25. 
 although the Scripture hath concluded all under fin, that the promifc mighc 
 be given, yet it is not fijidto be immediatly given to finners as Tinners, but 
 raediatly to allthatbeleeve, and in one word, though it be true that ChriO: 
 died for finners and ent^mies, that they might have rem'fTion of fins ( J-hen 
 procured and merited for them ) yet we never adually have, nor receive 
 this remi (lion ( and confequendy cannot fee it) as our own, untill we doe 
 beleeve, for unto this truth (faith Teter) do all the Piophets witneffe 
 that vahofoever beUcveth in hm fhall rec ive remijjicn ofpns^ Ad.lo.4v ^"^ 
 hence It is that as all the Prophets preached theaduall favour of God only 
 to finners as bcleevers, (o the Apoftles never preached it in New Ttftament 
 times otherwife, and hence Fff^r, .^^^.2.38. doth not tell the forrowfull 
 Jews that they vvere finners, and that God loved them, and that Chrift 
 had died for them, and that their fins were pardoned becaufc they were 
 finners, but he firft exhorts them to repent, that fothey might receive re- 
 m.ffionoffins, nor doth P^/// tell any man that falvation belonged to him, 
 becaufc he is a finner, but if thou beleeve with all thy heart thou Oiilt be 
 faved, /?«'!». J 0.5,6,7. iftheloveofGod be revealed to a finner as afinner, 
 this muft be either, i. by the witneflcof the Law, but this isimpoffi Ic, for 
 ifthecurfeof God be herein revealed only to a finner as a finner, then the 
 loveotGodcannoi, but the Law curfeth every finner, Goii.iAo* or 2 By 
 theL^ghtand witnefieoftheGofpelj but this cannot be, for it reveals life 
 and faivacion only toabeleever, and confirms the fentence of the Law a- 
 gainft (uch a finner as beleeves nor, ^0^.3.17,36. he that heleeves not u con* 
 demned already^ not only for unbeleef (as iome fay) for this doth but ag- 
 gravate condemnation) but alfofor fin, by whichman isfiift condemned 
 before he beleeves, if the Apoillemay bebeleeved^ Rom^.ig. and if a man 
 be not condemned for fin before he beleeve, then he is not a finner before 
 he beleeve, for look as Chnft hath taken away any mans condemnation in 
 his death, jurtfo hath betaken away hss fin. 3, Or elle by the wttnede and 
 teftimonyofGods fpint : butchisis flat contrary towhatthe Apoftlefpeaks, 
 Gal.-^.ie. with 4.6. ye are all the Jons oj q ad by fmthtfi Cbrtfif^Jw^ and be- 
 
9i The Mof-ality ef the Sahhth* 
 
 caufeycarefons (notfinners) hehAthfentths fflntofbis fonerym^y AH^a^ 
 
 Father^ Gal.4 4,5,e^, and verily if the love of God belong tofinncrs as fin- 
 
 *prt\. That ners, then all finpiers (hall certainly be faved (for^ f]siAtenmad omne ^valet 
 
 tt\o^^ll^^ ^^"fi^^^*^^^^ ) fo that by this principle, as finne hath abounded aftiially to- 
 
 finncrs as condemn all, fo grace hath abounded adlaally to fave all, which is moH: 
 
 finncrs. pemicious : nor do I know, what {hould make men embrace * this principle, 
 
 unlefle that they either fecretly think that the ftrait gate and narrow way 
 
 to life is now fo wide and broad, that all men fliall in Gofpcl times enter 
 
 in thereat, which is prodigious, or clfe they mud imagine fome Arminian 
 
 univerfall Redemption and reconciliation, and fo put all men in a falvablc 
 
 and reconciled eftace ( fuch as itis ) before faith, and then the evidence and 
 
 ground of their aiTurance muftbebuilcon thisfalfe and crazy foundation, 
 
 vi:^, Jcfus Chnft hath died to reconcile ( and, fo hath reconciled ) all (inners. 
 
 But I am a (inner, 
 
 Sn redimp* "^"^ therefore I am reconciled : If this be the bottome of this Gofpel- 
 
 lion tbc ' Miniftry and preaching free grace ( as doubtlcffe 'tis in fome ) then I would 
 
 fZ^ ""^ % thefe things only. 
 
 1, That this dodrine under a colour of free- grace doth as much vilifie 
 and take off the price of free grace in Chrifts death, as any I know, for 
 what can vilifie this grace of Chcift more, then for ChrifV fo to (hed his 
 bloud as that Teter and Ahaham in heaven (hall have no more caafe to 
 thank Jefus Cbrid for his love herein, then Jtidas and Cain in hell : it be-* 
 ing equally (bed for one as much as for the other. 
 
 2, That this is a falfe bottom for faith to reO: upon, and gather evidence 
 from: for i. if Chrifi hath died fir <j//, he will then certainly fave all, 
 for fo Tnul reafons, Rom, 8. 52* and 6. K). he kath ^ive» hU Sonne to 
 death fir^ us, how Jhall he not hut with him give m all other things^ and 
 therefore he will give faith, and give repentance, and give perfevcrance^ 
 and give eternali life alfo, which is moft falfe. 2. If he did not pray for 
 all, then he hath not died for all, 7^^. 17.9. which Scripture never yeS 
 received fcarce the fhewof a rationall anfwer, though fome have endea^ 
 voured it with all wilineiTe. 
 
 3, That whereas by this dodrine they would clear up the way to a 
 full and felled evidence and Chriftian afTiirance, they do hereby utterly 
 fubvertthe principal! foundation of all fetcledneffc, and affurance of faith, 
 which is this, z//:^. that if Jcfus Chrift be given to death for me, then he 
 will certainly give all other things to me, if we were reconciled to God 
 by the death, of his fon, much more fhall we be faved by his life, %} Chrifi 
 hath died and rife m fir us, ^ho then fiaS condemn! ^bofia/i then fepar ate us 
 fi$m GedsUve? Rofn.8.32. Rom.5.9,10. But if they hold no fuch princi- 
 plesjiwoHld then know how any man can have evidence of this, -y/^. thac 
 God Ipyes him^ and that Chrift hath died for him while he is a finner, and a^ 
 
TheMdrality of the SMatL P3 
 
 he is afinner? or how any MIniflcr of the New Teftamentcan fay to any 
 man (ander the power ofhis fins and the devil) that he is not condemned 
 for his fins, but that God loves him and that Chrift hath died for him ) with- 
 out preaching falfehoods, and lies, and dreams of their own heart ? for 
 I. God hath not loved nor ekded all finner?, nor hath Chrifl died for 
 allfinncrs. 2. If every man be in a ftate of condemnation before he beleeve 
 theGofpcl, then no man can be faid to be in a ftate of reconciliation, and 
 that God hatb loved him until! he refufe the Gofpel : but every man 
 is in a ftate of condemnation before he beleeve, becaufe our Saviour ex- 
 prcfly tclus, thatby faith we pafTe from death to life, 7^^.^. 24, and^f? ihar 
 hath not the fon hAth i^st lifh, i ^ok'^Ai* and therefore ifthofe be Miniftcrs 
 of the New Tcftament who firft preach to all the drunkards and whoremon- 
 gers and villains in a parifli, that God loves them, and chat they are recon- 
 ciled by Chrift death, and that they may know it becaufe they are finners, 
 then let the heavens hear^ and the earth k»ow that all fuch Minifters are 
 falfe Prophets, and cry Peace, Peace, where God proclaims wrath, and 
 that ihey acquit them whom God condemns : and if they be Minifters of 
 the Old Teftament fpirit, who firft fiiew men their condemned eftate, 
 aad then prefent God as wroth againft them, while they be in their fin, 
 that fo they may prize and fly to favour and free grace, then fuch 
 are Minifters of the old Teftament and not of the new, becaufe they 
 preach the truth, and if preaching the truth be an old Teftament Mini- 
 ftry^ no wife man then I hope will defire the new wine, for the old is better : 
 while the lion deeps and God is filent, and confcience flumbers, all the beafts 
 and wilde finners of the world (and many preachers too) may think that 
 thereis noterrourinGod, no curfeor wrath upon themlelvesinthemidit 
 of the rage, incrcafe, and power of all their fins ; but when this lion roars, 
 and God awakens, and confcience looks above head, they ftiall then fee 
 how miferably. they have been deceived, they may flight fin, aboliil:i con- 
 demnation, talk of and wonder at free-grace now, and beleeve eafily be- 
 caufe they are finners, bat certainly they (hall be otherwife minded then i 
 Some men may have good ends in preaching Gods free-grace after this man- 
 ner in the Gofpel, and make the Gofpel a revelation of Gods aduall love 
 to finners as finners; and make a Chriftians evidence of it nothing elfe but 
 i\iz.Jtghtofkiifw, and of his being under thcpowerof it, butlittledo they 
 think what Satan the father of this falfe dodrinc aims at, which are thefe 
 four things chiefly. 
 
 I. That fandification, faith, ^r. might be no evidence at^all toaChri- 
 ftian of a good eftate, for this they fay is a doubtfuU evidence and an unfet- 
 Jmgwayofaflurance, becaufe they will hereby be as bones out of joint, in 
 and out, humbled to day and then comforted^ but hard-hearted to morrow, 
 and then at aloffe, whereas to fee ones fclf a finner, that tsaconftant evi- 
 
 N 3 dence, , 
 
P4 'J^t>c Morality of the SMath. 
 
 dence, for we are alway (inner?, and the Gofpel proclaims peace to (innet* 
 aslinners. 
 
 2. That fo men may keep their lufts and fins and yet keep their peace too, 
 for if pc ace be the portion of a man under the power of fin and Satan, look 
 thei5 as he may have it, why may he not keep it upon the fame terms : And 
 therefore IV. C, fairh, That if confcience ohjeSi thou art an hypocrite ( perhaps 
 tr^ly ) )€t a hjpocrite ii but afinner, and ^ods love he longs tofiKners ^ (inner s ? 
 And iFthis be thus, what doth this doflrine aim at, but to reconcile God aid 
 Bt'lial, Chrifl: and Mammon? not only to open the door to all manner of 
 wickcdnelli', but to comfort men therein. 
 
 3. That fo he may bring men in time purpofely to fin the more freclvsthac 
 fothcy may have fhe clearer evidence of the love of God ; for if Gods love 
 be revealed to finnersasfinners, then the more finfull the more clear evi- 
 dence he hath of Gods love ; and therefore one once intangied with thefe 
 dclufions, was enticed to commit agrode wickednefle, that more full aiTu- 
 rance might be attained. 
 
 4. That fo the true preaching and Miniftry of the Gofpel of Gods free- 
 grace might be abolillied ( at leaft defpifed ) which is this, viz. Thou poor 
 condemned finner, here is Chrifl: Jefus, and with him eternall remiflion of 
 fins and reconciliation, if th<>u belceve and receive this grace offered hum- 
 bly and thankfully;, for this is Gofpel, ^^^28.19. Mark 16.16, Rom 10. 
 5,^,7.8. Rom ^,2^,2'^. J^j^.^j. And hence M' ^.C. hath thcfe words, 
 That if the Cjof^elhold firti) Cbrifi and falvation upon bele viag ( 04 may, 
 faith he, preach) it^ere then little (setter tidinp then theUw, Ah wretched 
 and unworthy fpeech, that when Jefus Chrift himfelf would lliew the great 
 love ofGod unto the world, 7<?^.3 16. he makes it out by two exprtfllons 
 ofir, I. That the father fent hisonlySon; 2. That whofoever did htleeve 
 in him (or if they did beleeveinhim) they (hould have eternall life ; The 
 Lordfiiews wonderful! love, that whoever beleevemay have Chrift and 
 eternall life by beleeving, but this doiftrine breathing out Gods deareft 
 lovej by this mans account is little better then law, which breaths out no- 
 thing but wrath: But why doth he fpeak thus? 'B^caufe (faith he) itu as 
 tafietokeep the ten CGmmandmems as to kl eve of ones f elf : Very true, a^ts 
 beleeve of ones [elf, but what is this againft the preaching and holding forth 
 ChriO: and falvation upon condition of beleeving? Foris not this preaching 
 of the Gofpel the inftrument and means of workmg chat faith in us, which 
 the Lord requires of us in the Gofpel? And muft nor jefus Chrift ufe the 
 means for the end ? Were not thole ibree thousand brought mto ChdA by 
 faithj by i^*^<rrjpromile ofrcmjdionof finsuponcheir reptncance? Were 
 not many filled with the holy Ghoft ^'hen they heard ihis Gofpd thus 
 preachedupon condition of bTetving? z^^io 4^. Doth not the Apoftlc 
 U"! that the Ooipel is clie power of God to ialvatioo, becauie therein /s 
 
 Chrifts 
 
The Morality of the Sabhath. ^^ 
 
 Chrifts righceoufnefle revealed (not to finners asfinners) hut from faith 
 to faith? The condition of works isimpofliblc tobe wrought in us by the 
 Spirit, but the condition of faith (though izb^ impoflible for us to work 
 it in our hearts) ycc itispoflible, ealk and ur.ufuail for God to work it by 
 requiring ©F it, fer^^.22. which is no prejudice toGods free-grace, becauie Po™-4« 
 faith is purpolely required and wrought, becaufe it chicfiy honours and ad* 
 Vincechfree-graccj^<?w.4,i5, Thepromife is of faith that it raightbe by 
 grace: IfMr^^.C will not preach Chrift upon beieeving, how will he or 
 any man elfe preach it? Will they tell all men chat God loves them and that 
 Chrift hath died forchem, and that he that gives grace and fslvstion will 
 work faith in them ? Truly thus fV.C, feeois to affirm ; bat if they fliall 
 preach fo to all (inners as (inncrs, and tell them abiolutely God will work 
 faith in them alfoj Ifuppolethac the Church wals and plentiful! and abun- 
 dant expcnence would teftifie sgainft this fallehood, and the Scripture tefti- 
 facsfuiiiciently, that every man lliallnot have faith to whom theGofpelis 
 preached : Now I do bskech the God and father of lights to pity his liray- 
 ingfervants whoare led into thcle deep and dangerous delulions tlwrowa 
 feeble miftakeof the trus difference between old and new Teftament Mini- 
 ftries, and that he would pity his people for whofe (ins God bath let loofe 
 thcfe blinding and hardningdodtines, by means of which they are tempted 
 to receive that as the Gofpelor truth, which is but ameer licj and to take 
 tbac as an evidence of falvation, which is in truth the evidence of perdition ^ ^7* 
 and condemnation as hath been Ihewn. 
 
 T^ep iiS. 
 
 The fecond thing remains to be cleared, whether fan(5lific3tion may not 
 be a nrft evidence and therefore more thenacarnallinfericur and lad evi- 
 dence, 2islM Sa/£mar/hcdi\sk% For if it be ( notadoubtfull) but a clear 
 and certain evidence initfelf (as hsth been proved) why may it not be a 
 firft evidence ? why may not the Spirit of God who works it in a pcrton ju- 
 ftified, firft reveal it as an evidence thcit he is juftificd? What mortall mm 
 can limit the Spirit of God, to what evidence he iliall firft bring into the 
 confcienceof ajui^ificdeftate? For let (andificition be taken in the hVgeft 
 fcnie, (or afiy Worl^of /avir;^ grace \Nroi\ght in the Ekd (whither in vo- 
 cation to faith, or infandtificationwhich (ftridly taken) ! olio ws our jufti- 
 ficationby faith) and cake evidence not tor evidence of theobj.d: (for 
 Chrift Jdus in his free-grace muft be (een firft as the ground on which iaidi 
 refts) but for evidence of teftimcny to the fubject, and then! thus argue, 
 that this firft evidence of fpeciall aduall love in beholding Gods free^ grace 
 C I. Without the being of faith and other graces. Or 
 £0 a finner, iiis either < 2. Without the feeing of them only, the eye looking 
 C uponly to Chrift and free-grscc. 
 
 But this firft evidence is not without the hi»^ of taith and holintfle, for 
 
 then 
 
gS " The Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 then ft (bpuldbe to a man adctjlly under tK'2 power o^ fin and his filthy 
 lulls and the devil ; which hath been already proved in the former Thefts 
 to be a mecr dclufion : there bJng no i'uch word oF the Golpel which 
 reveals Gods Free love and aduall reconciliition toafinner asafinncr, and 
 as under the power oF his fins, bucthe8o[p;il rather rcvesls the quite con- 
 trary ; aadto aftirm the witnefle of the Spirit clears thisap, is to pretend 
 a teftimony of the Spirit contiary to the teftimony oi the word 3 and yet I 
 ftrongly fear and do fully bekcve that this is the hrft evidence which lome 
 men plead for, ^i^, to fee Gods love toward them, While they neither fee 
 grace or any change of heart in them, or have grace, but are ftill under the do- 
 minion of their fin. 
 
 And on the other fide if any affirm that this evidence is not without the 
 being of grace but only w^ithout the feeing of it, fo thata Chriftians firft 
 evidence is the feeing of Gods free-grace out of himfelf, without feeing any 
 faith or grace in himfclF, and feeing nothing clfe but fin in himfelf, this I 
 confeflc is nearer the tiuth, but it is an crrour which leads a man to a pre- 
 cipice and near unto the pit, for if this be lo then thefe thing? will unavoida- 
 bly follow. 
 
 1. ThataChriftianmuftfcethelove of God toward him in Chrift, and 
 yetmuft not fee himfelf to be the perfonto whom this love only belongs : 
 for (according to this very opinion it felF) it belongs only to a Bdeevec 
 and one that hach the being of ^race, and not to a finner as a finner. 
 
 2. ThenaChriftian muftnot(eethcloveof Chriftand free grace of God 
 by that propofition ortcftimonyof the Spirit which rcvcalsit, and thatis 
 this, Tti fidelity [hou Bcleever called and fandified art freely beloved : 
 and thus a min muft not fee his eftatc good by the light of the fpirir, nay 
 thu^ a Chriftian muft receive the teftimony of the Spirit which affures 
 him that he is loved without underftanding the meaning of the Spirit, 
 which is (not thou finner asfuch) but thou Brlecver art beloved: 
 not thou that haft no grace, but thou that haft the being of it, arc 
 beloved. 
 
 g. Then the firft evidence is built upon ameer weakneffe, nay upon an 
 uatruthand falfchocd.j for it is a meer weakneffe not to fee that which we 
 fliouldfee, "jU, the being of faith and grace in the heart, in which relped 
 the promil'c is fealcd^ and if any man by not feeing it (ball think and fay 
 there is no grace, no faith, no (andification, and now he fees Gods love to 
 fuchaonc, and he thinks himfelf to be fuchaonewhcn he fees Gods free 
 grace and hath this firft evidence, it is a falfchood and an untruth, for it is 
 fuppofedtobe there in the being of \t all this while; luppofe therefore that 
 feme Chriftians at their firft return and converfion to Godot afterward, 
 have grace and faith, but fee it not in their afturancc of Gods love (the 
 cmincncy of the ob/ed and good of ic fwallowing up their thoughts 
 
 and 
 
The Merality of the Sabbnth. py 
 
 fiid hearts from attending thcmfeJves) )itt tfce queflion is quojure^ they 
 do not fee, nay (hould not Ice and take notice of the being of them in them- 
 felves? Is not this a mcer weakneffe and falfehood which h now made the 
 myftery of this firft evidence ? and indeed fomewhac like Cnfanm his (um- 
 tn^fapiemia^ which he makes to bj this, viz., ^ttim^ereiUftd^uodejl: in^ 
 uttingibiU inattingibilker. That a Chriflian mufl: fee and touch Gods deep 
 love, andyetneither fee nor tcuch nor Feel any change in himfcir, or any be- 
 ing of grace, when in truth ic is there, in which refped alfo Gods free- grace 
 andloveisreveakd, 
 
 4. If this be the firft evidence, then no Minifter, no nor any Apoftle of 
 Chrift Jefus, can give any firft evidence of Gods lov« by the ordinary d\£- 
 penfation of the Gofpel, for akhough a Minifter may fay, Thou arc a (inner, 
 therefore the Lord Jefus njaj fave thee, yet he cannot fay upon that ground 
 that therefore the Lord Jefus tt'/// fave him, for then every (inner (hould be 
 faved: No Minifter can fay to any unbeleever, Chrift hath redeemed thee, 
 therefore beleeve, or fay abfolutely Thy (ins are pardoned,for then he (liould 
 preach contrary to the word which expredely tels us, That he that beleeves 
 not is already condemned. No Minifter can fay God will work faith in all 
 you that are finners, as hath been (hewn ; but they can fay, Thou Beleever 
 art pardoned, thou that art fandified art reconciled, (^r. It is therefore an 
 evil fpeech of one lately in print, who cals That a hafiardajfarancearifin^us, 
 fiema Ijittg ff?mt, ^bieh^rfk proceeds from the fight of any grace^ and thence 
 concludes they are jtifiified and Jh^/l he faved. For I would thus argue, that 
 this work of grace (fuppofe love to the Saints, hunger and thirft after 
 rightcoufneffe, univerfall refped to all G#ds Commandments, &c.) it is 
 either common to hypocrites and unfoand, orelfe it is peculiar to the eled: 
 and (incere : If the fiifl, then it cannot be either firft or fecond evidence, ic 
 can be no evidence at all either without or with feeing, firft, Gods free love 
 to finners as finners ; if the fecond, then cither Gods promife ( made to fuch 
 as are hungry and humble, and have a work peculiar to Gods'eled in them) 
 muft be falfe ( which is blafphemous to imagine ) or elfe whenfoever it is 
 fcen, whether firft or laft, it muft needs be a raoft ble(red and fweet and fure 
 evidence : for when we fay that fuch a work of grace may be a firft evidence, 
 we do not mean, as if the work (imply confidered in it ielf could give in any 
 evidence, but only as the free promife of grace is made to fuch as have fuch 
 a work of grace; this promife wc fay to fuch perfons, whenfoever they fee 
 this work, gives in full and clear evidence of their bleffed eftate • And if the 
 word of grace to a finner asafinner, may give in a firft evidence (asfome 
 imagine) then much moremay icgive in evidence, where there is not only 
 the word of grace, but alfo the (pirit of grace, yea tbe work of grace 10 
 a/Ture the confcicnce : and for any to affirm that faith and fandification are 
 good evidences, if juftification be firft evident, is but a quirk of frothy wit, 
 
 O for 
 
^^ 7ht MOfahty Of the Samth. 
 
 for ic may be as fefely affirmed on the contrary, that Juftifieation is a good 
 evidence, iffaithand fani^ificationbe firft evident, for 'ti« not thefe (imply, 
 but Che promife which is our evidence, which is never to a finner as fuch : I 
 fliall therefore conclude thefe things with (hewing the true grounds of effc- 
 <f^uall evidence of ihe love of Chrift. 
 
 Thefis up. 
 lip* The fiee-grace of God in Chrifl: (not works ) is the only fure founda- 
 tion of )uftifying faich, or upon which faith is built, /?<?w.3.24,25. i Pep,2. 
 4,5,6. c^4M6.i8. This free-grace therefore muft ^r/? be revealed by the 
 Spirit of God in theMiniftry of the Gofpcl in order unto faith, iKtfw.io. 
 14,15. Efh.i.i^, which generall revelation of free-grace, fomc make to 
 be the firft evidence on which faith refts, and thus far k is true, but now 
 this free-grace is revealed two waies, 
 
 1. In the free ojfn 9f it to hour own by receiving it, A^ao.^'^, Cjd.1,16, 
 
 2. In the free promife of it revealing it as our own alre^dj^ having aflually 
 kndcffe(flualiyrcceivcdir,7<?^,i.l2. Kom.%.\^z, ifoh,$,i2. 
 
 The free offer of grace ( containing Gods call, commandment and be- 
 feechings to belceve and be reconciled) gives us right to this pofTeffion of 
 Chriftorto come and take and fo poffefeChnft Jcfus by faith, fer,^,22. 
 1 Cor.1.9, Rom,i.%6^ The free promife of grace (containing revealed 
 immutable parpofes and ad:uall afllirances of prefent and future grace) 
 gives us n^^KO the fruition of Chrift, or to enjoy Chrift by faith, as a free 
 gift when 'tis offered, the command and defire of the donor to receive it 
 to be our own, gives us ri^ht and power to poffeffe it: and when it is re- 
 ceived, his promife to us ailtmng us that it is and (hall continue our own, 
 gives U5 right and priviledge to enjoy it and make ufe of it. For by two 
 immutable things ( the promife confirmed by oath ) we have ftrong confo- 
 lation who have fled for refuge to the hope before us, H>^.d.i7,i8,ip* 
 Jhcfreeoffer is the firft ground of our faith, why we receive Chrift to be 
 our own : but the free promife is the fir^ ground of the ajfura»ee of faith, why 
 we are aflured and perfwaded that he us our own already : for the Gofpel 
 containing three things, i . The revelation ©f Chrift : 2. The offer of Chrift : 
 5* The promife of Chrift to all ihofe that receive this offer: Hence faith 
 (which runs parallell with the Gofpel, the proper objed of it) firft fees 
 Chrift, kcovidly receives Chrift, thirdly is aflured of the love of Chrift ha- 
 ying received him. 
 
 The free offer ofgrace being made to the foul beeaufe it is poor and (in- 
 full, curfed and miferable, OiViAih^t there fire it would receive Chrift, hence 
 tt is that in this refpe(51: the foul is not bound firft to fee fome good in it felf 
 tad fo to receive him, but rather is bound ( at firft breathings of God upon 
 k) rather to fee no good, i, nothing but fin and perdition, death and 
 iarkuefle, enmity arjd weakneffe, and therefore to receive him, i^i^fc 14-21 • 
 
 RtveU 
 
rhe Morality df the SMatl). 99 
 
 Reve^.ijyi^. Gal.T,,!^. /?m. 11.33. 7^(7/14.3, Bat the promifc of frCC- 
 grace, being adually given to the foul (and not declared only as it is in the 
 free offer, becaufe it hath received Chrift already by which he is a^ually Mi 
 own ) hence it is that in this rerped*, the foul is bound to fee fome good or 
 favingworkof graccin itfelffiifl:, and fo embrace and receive the promifc 
 andChrift Jefus in it : So that although in receiving Cbrift to be our own, 
 we are to fee no good in our felves wherefore we fhould receive him or be- 
 leeve in him; j^et in receiving \i\m as onr crvn already , we muftfirft fee fome 
 good ( the work of free grace in us ) or elfe we have no juft ground thus 
 to receive him : No man can challenge any promife belonging to him with- 
 out having a part in Chrift the foundation of them, no man can have Chrift 
 but by receiving of him or beieeving in him, foh.i,i2* Hence therefore they 
 that fay that the firft evidence of Gods love and free- grace or aduall favour, 
 is to a (inner as a finner, had need confidcr what they fay, for is it to a finnct 
 as pofleft with Chrift and receiving of him, or as difpofleft of Chrift not ha- 
 ving of him, but rather refufing and rejeding of him ? If they fay the firft, 
 they then fpeak the truth, but then they raze down their own pernicious 
 principle, that Chrift and Gods love belongs to them As [tnners: If thcf 
 affirm the latter, then they do in/urioufly deftroyGods free-grace and the 
 glory of Chrift, who think to poflefTc promises without poffcffing Chrift, 
 or to have promifes of grace, without having Chrift the foundation of them 
 all. For though the common love of God (as the bare ^jf<r of grace is ) 
 may be manifefted without having Chrift, yet fpeciall a<5laall love cannot 
 beadually our own, without having and firft receiving of him : And if the 
 Spirit of God convince the world of fin ( and confcqucntly of condemna- 
 tion ) while they do not beleeve, foh^e^p. I wonder how it can then con- 
 vince them of pardon of fin and reconciliation, before they do beleeve ? 
 unlcfle we will imagine it to be a lying fpirir, which is blafphemous, Thefe 
 things not confidered of, have and do occafion much errour at this day ia 
 the point of evidencing, and hath been an inlet of deep dclufion, and open 
 gaps have been made hereby to the loofe waies and depths of Familifm and 
 groflc Arminianifm, and therefore being well confidered of, are fufficient 
 to clear up the waies of thofe faithfull fervants of the Lord ( who dare not 
 fow pillows, nor cry peace peace to the wicked, muchleffe to finners as 
 finners) both from the (landerous imputation of Icgall miniftrations after 
 an old Teftaraent manner, as alfo of making Vcorks the ground of faith, oC 
 thecaufes of a£hra»ce ef faith, the free offer being the groand of the one, 
 and the /r«;)ro;»i,^<f the caufe and ground of the other: Briefly therefore. 
 
 1. The free ofFcir of grace is the hi ft evidence to a poor loft finner that he 
 may be beloved. 
 
 2. The receiving of this offer by faith ( relatively confidered in refpedl 
 of Chrifts fpotlc/Ie righteoufncffe ) is the firft evidence O^cwing ^^7 he is 
 
 O 3 beloved.. 
 
100 7he Meralitj ef the Sabhath. 
 
 beloved, or what hath moved God adaally to love him. 
 
 3. The work of fanfHfication (which is the fruit of ocr receiving this 
 offer ) is the firft c^vidence fhewing that he is beloved. 
 
 If therefore a condemned (inner be asked wheth?r God may love him, 
 I and why he thinks fo ? he may anfwcr, Becaufe Jefus Chrift is held forth and 
 
 offered to fuch a one ; If he be further asked, why or what he thinks Oiould 
 move God to love him ? he may anfwer, Becaufe I have received Chrifts 
 righteoHfneffe offered, for which righreoufneffe fake only I know I am belo- 
 ved, now 1 have received it : If he be asked laftly, how he knows certainly 
 that he is beloved ; he may anfwer fafely and confidently, Becaufe I am fan- 
 flified : I am poor in fpiric, therefore mine is the kingdom of heaven : I do 
 mourn, and therefore I fhall be comforted : 1 do hunger and third:, and 
 therefore Ifhall be fatisfied, ^r. We need in time ofdiilrefle and tempta- 
 tion all thefe evidences, and therefore it is greateft wifdom to pray for that 
 fpirir, which may clear them all up nnto us, rather then to contend which 
 fcould be the firft. 
 
 And thus we fee that the ^hole moraU law u our rule of lifi, and con- 
 fequcntly the law of the Sabbath , which is a branch of this rule : We 
 now proceed to flaew the third branch, of things generally and primarily 
 mora/l. 
 
 Thejis 120. 
 120; Thirdly, Not only a day, nor only a reft iiay, but the reft day or Sabbath 
 jhefcf«nth ^j^y (whtchis espreffed and expreffely interpreted in the Commandment 
 Sabbath! tO be the feventhdAj, or afeventh day of gods daermihing^ and therefore 
 called The Sabbath of the Lord our God) is here alfo enjoined and com- 
 manded, as generally morall. For if a day be morall, what day muft it be ? 
 If it be faid;, that any day which humane wifdom fhall determine, whether 
 oncday inahundredor a thoufand, or one day in many years, if this only 
 btgeneratly morally then the rule of morality may be broken becaufe the rule 
 of equality may be thus broken by humane determimtton : For it may be very 
 unequall and unjuft to give God one day in ahu-ndred or a thoufand for his 
 worfhip, and to affume fo many befide to our felves for our own ufe. There 
 is therefore fomeching elfe more particularly, yet primarily morall in this 
 Command, and that is The Sabb^hday, or fuch a day wherein there ap- 
 pears an equa'l divifion, and a fit proportion between time for reft and time 
 for work, a time for God and a time for man, and that is afeventh day 
 which God deter oiines : A fit proportion of time for God is morall becaufe 
 equal, m-an cannot determine nor fct out this proportion, God therefore 
 only can and muft, A day therefore that he fliall determine is morall, and if 
 he declares his determination to a feventh, A (evench day is therefore mo- 
 rall. gpmaffu eonfeffeth that by f he Analogy of this Commandment, not 
 •nejday in a thoufand or when m^n pleafetb, but that one day in feven is 
 
 paorall, 
 
 w. 
 
The Morality of the sMath. 10 1 
 
 morall, at leaft equal fie and congruous to obferve the fame : and if the Ana- 
 logy he fpcaks ©f arifeth vinutemandrndivini, or by vertuc of Gods Com- 
 mandmenr, the caufe is in cfFcd yielded ; but if this Analogy be made 
 virtHte libertatis humanity lb that humane liberty may do well to give God 
 one in feven, becaufe the Jews did fo, and why fhould Chriftians be more 
 fcant? then I fee not but humane liberty may afTumc power to it felfto 
 impofe monthly and annuall holy daies as well, becaufe the Jews had their 
 new moons and yearly feflivals, and by Analogy thereof, why may non 
 Chriftians who have more grace poured out upon them and more love 
 fhewn unco them under the Gofpelj hold fome meet proportion with them^ 
 therein alfo, as well as in Sabbaths? But it can never be proved that God 
 hath left any humane wifdom at liberty to make holy daies, by the rule of 
 Jewifh proportions : Befide, if humane wifdom fee it meet and congruous 
 to give God at leaft on day in feven, this wifdom and realbn is either regu- 
 lated by fome law, and then 'tis by vcrtue of the law of Gody that he (l70uld 
 have one day in feven, or 'tis not regulated by a law, and then we are \dt 
 to a loofe end again, for man to appoint what day he fees meet in a fhorter 
 or a longer time, his own reafon being his only law; and this neither Qe* 
 marm nor the words of the Commandment will allow, which fees and 
 fixeth the day, which we fee is one day in feven, which not man but God 
 ftiafl determine and therefore called The SMath of the Lordenr God, 
 
 The fix 121. 
 
 The hardeft knot herein to unloofe, lies in thiss to know whether a fe* 121. 
 venthday in gcnerall which God iTii 11 determine, or that particular Seventh 
 day from the creation be here only comn:ianded, the firft (eems (in M^ 
 y W/wr<?/^ apprehenfioD ) to writheand wrack the words of the Command- 
 ment, the Iccpnd ( if granted ) aboliftiethour Chriftian Sabbaths. 
 
 Thefis 111, 
 
 For clearing up of this difficulty therefore, and leaving the difpute of the Hi^ 
 change of the Sabbath to it's proper place, it may be made good, that not 
 that kventh day from the creation, fo much as a feventh day which God 
 fhaU determine (and therefore called the feventh day ) is primarily mo« 
 raU, and therefore enjoyned in this Commandment, for which end let thele 
 things be conftdered and laid together. 
 
 I. Becaule the exprefle words of the Commandment do not run thns, 
 viz. Rememhtr to kecf holy That feventh day^ but more generally, the Sab* 
 b^thday^ 'tis in the beginning and f© 'tis in the end of this Commandmeoc, 
 where it is not faid that God blejfed That Seventh dajy but The Sabbath 
 dayy by whichexprefliontbewildomofGod, as it points to that particular 
 feventh day that it ftiould be fandificd : fo it alto opens a door of liberty 
 for change, if Godihallfee meet, becaufe thefubftance of the Command- 
 ment doth not ou\y QOJ^WnThat fevemb daj^ bntThc Sabbath d^jy which 
 
 O J may 
 
jQg The Merditj of the Sabbath* 
 
 tnay be upon another Ceventh, as wcU as upon that which God appointed 
 firft: and thac the Tubftance of the cotnmand is cc^taieed in thole firfl: 
 words, Rcmemhr the Sahbad) day to ks^p it helj, may appear fram the 
 repetition oi the (ame Cotamandcncnti Dem,<^, is. where the(e words,^ 
 As the Lord rhv God commanded thee, are icntnediady inferted before the 
 reft of the words ot the Commandment be fet down, to fliew thus much i 
 thac therein is contained the fum and Inbftance of the fourth command: 
 the words following being added only to prefle to the duty, and to point 
 out the particular day, which at that time God would have them to ob- 
 ferve. 
 
 a. Bccaufe in the explication of thofe words {^ the Sahha.^ 3 it is not 
 called That feventh, hnt The feventh 9 forfo the words runne. Six ddies 
 Jhalt thou Ubopir^ hut thefeven^ day « the Sabbath of the Lord thy God^ 
 the meaning oi which is thus much^ to wit, that man taking (ixdaies to 
 bimfeU tor labour, that he leave the feventh to be the Lords ; now unlcffe 
 * any can (hew that no other day but that Seventh could be the feventh for 
 refti nor no other fix daies but thofe 6x daies going before that feventh could 
 be the fix daies for labour, they can never prove that this fourth Command- 
 ment hath only a refped to That particular Seventh, and it is no fmall bold* 
 neffe neceflarily to limit where God hath left free: for we know that if 
 God will, man may take other fix daies for labour, and leave another 
 Seventh for God, then thofe fix daies and that Seventh day only. 
 
 3. The change of the Sabbath undeniably proves thus much (if it can 
 be proved) that the morality of this command did not lie in chat particu- 
 lar day only: for if that only was morall, how could it be changed ? and 
 if it did not lie only in that Seventh, wherein then did it more generally lie ? 
 was it in a day more largely or in a Seventh day more narrowly ? now let any 
 indifferent confcience be herein judge, who they be that come neareft to 
 the truth, whether they that fiy (o tar from the name Seventh, which is ex- 
 prefly mentioned in the Commandment, or they that come as near it as 
 may be? whether they that plead for a Seventh of Gods appointing, or 
 they that plead for a day ( but God knows when ) of humane inftitution ? 
 and it's worth confidering why any (hould be offended at the placing of the 
 morality of the command in a Seventh, more then at their "own placing of 
 it in a day, for in urging the letter of the Commandment to that particular 
 Seventh, to abohih thereby the morality of a Seventh day, they dowithall 
 therein utterly abandon the morality of a day, for if That Seventh only be 
 enjoyned in the letter of the Commandment, and they will thence inferrc, 
 that a Seventh therefore cannot be required, how can they upon this ground 
 draw out the morality of a day ? 
 
 4. Bccaufe ( we know ) that rutio legii efi anima legi^^ L the reafon of 
 a law is the foul and life of the laws nowkt it be confidered, why God 
 
 fhould 
 
The Morality of tk SMath, 
 
 fliould appoint the Seventh rather then the ninth or tenth or twentieth 4ay, 
 for fpirituall reft ? and the reaCon will appear not to be Gods abfolutc will 
 meerly, bucbecaufe divine wifdom having /uft mcafures and ballanccs in 
 itshand> in proportioning time between God and man, it fawa fevcnth 
 part of time (rather then a tenth or twentieth) to bemoftcqiiall for him- 
 felf to take, and for man to give: and thus much the words of the Com- 
 mandment imply, viz. that it is moft equafil if man hath fix, that God 
 (hould have the (eventh; now if this be the reafon of the law, this muft 
 needs be che foul and (ubftance of the morality of the law, viz. That a Se- 
 vcnth day be given to God, man having (ix, and therefore it conlifts not 
 in That Scvench day only : for the primary reafon, why God appointed 
 this or that Seventh, was not becaufe it was thatfeventh, but becaufe a Se- 
 venth was moftequallin the eye of God for God to take to himfclf, man 
 having the full and fitted proportion of fix daies together for himfelf , and 
 becaufe a fcventh was the ficteft proportion of time for God, hence this or 
 that individual! and particular fcventh in the fecond place fall out to be mo. ' 
 rail, becaufe they contain the moft equall and fitteft proportion of a Se- 
 venth day in them, there was alfo another reafon why That Seventh was 
 fandified,i/f^. Gods reft in it, but this reafon is not primary as hath been 
 j6id| andofwhichnow wefpeak. 
 
 5. Becauie if no ©tber Commandment be in the Decalogue, but it is 
 comprehenfive, and looking many waies at once, why (hould we then pi* 
 nion and gird up this only to the narrow compafle of that Seventh day 
 only? 
 
 6, Becaufeouradverfaries in this point are forced fometime to acknow- 
 ledge this morality of a Seventh with us : we have heard the judgement of 
 Gomarui herein, Thef, 44. and liU^nmrofe who fpeaks with moft weight Prim. />«r. a. 
 and fpirit in this cootroverfie, profefleth plainly, That if God give us fix •''^7•/•1» 
 dates for our own affairs, there is then good reafin to confecrate a Seventh 
 
 to his fervicey and that in this reafon there is manififi jtifiice and equity 
 Vphich abideth for ever, to dedicate t9 god frecifelj a [eventh day after rve 
 have be^owedfix d^ies upon onr f elves : it cannot be denied ( faith he) but 
 that it ts moftjuft.Novj if it be by his confcffion, l.jfifl, 2,mofljuft,^.mani' 
 filily juH* 4. perpetually jufiy to give God precitely one day in feven : the 
 caufeis thenyeelded : the only evafion he makes is ik'is^viz, that though 
 it be mofl JH§} to give God one day in [even y yet it' snot morejufi^ then to 
 give God one in fix^ or five, or fiury there being no nattiraU juBice in the 
 numt?€r of feven more then in the number of fix or four, but the anlwer is 
 t!\{\^y that if man may give unto God fuperftitioufly too many or prophane- 
 ly too few: and if the appointmenc of God hach declared ic ielf for a fe- 
 yenth, and:thattfae giving of this lev€nth fee moft juft and equall, then let 
 ilbe jpi^idered, whether it be not moft (atisfadory to a fcrupling confci- 
 ""^■^ ' " ' '~'^' "" " cnce, , 
 
i©4 
 
 7he Morality of the sMatk 
 
 ence, to allow God a fevcnth day which he hath appointed, which is con- 
 feffedtobe moftjuft and perpetually equall and confequently morail : and 
 i! there be a merall and perpetusll cquicy to give God one day tnfeven, 
 then 'tis no matter whether there beany n^ore niturall equity therein, then 
 in one in fiveor fix: thedifputersofthis world may pie ale themrelves with 
 fuch fpeculations and (hiks, but the wifdom oi God which hath already 
 appointed one day in feven rather then in fix or ten, iliould be adored here- 
 in by humble mindes, in cutting out this proportion of tiaie,with iar greater 
 equity then man can now readily fee, 
 
 7. Becaufe deep corruption is the ground oF this opinion, the plucking 
 up of Gods bounds and land-marks of a feventh, is to put the (lakes into, 
 the Churches hands, tofet them where llie pleafeth, or if fhelet them ac 
 a feventh, where God would have them, yet that this may b:^ (ubmittcd 
 to, notbecauleGod pleafeth, but becaule the Church fo pleafech, not be- 
 caufe of Gods will and determination, but becaufe of the Churches will and 
 determination, that (o it being once granted, that the Church hath liberty 
 to determine of fuch a day, (he may not be denied liberty of making any 
 other holidaies or holy things in the worfhip andfervicc of God, and that 
 this is the main fcope and root of this opinion is palpably evident from mod 
 of the writings of our engliOi advcrfaries in thiS controvcrfie. 
 
 Thejis 123. 
 A feventh day therefore is primarily morail, yet (as was formerly faid 
 ^^^' Thef,^2.) there is fomcthing elfe in this commandment which is fecun- 
 darily morail, mz.. This or that particular feventh djijy I will not (ay that 
 it is accidentally morail (as Come do) but rather fecuiidarily, and confe- 
 quently morail, for it is not morail firftly, becaufe it is this particular fe- 
 venth, but becaufe it hath a feventh pare of time, divinely proportioned 
 and appointed for reft, falling into ir, and of which it participates ; to give 
 alms to the needy is a morail duty and primarily morail, but to give this 
 or that quantity maybe morail alfo, but icis lecundatily morail, becaufe 
 it flows excanfequenti only from the firft, for if we are to give alms ac- 
 cording to our ability and others neceffity, then this or that particular quan- 
 tity thus futing their neceflity muft be given; which is alfo a morail duty, 
 lo'tis in this point of the Sabbath, 
 
 Thefts 124. 
 ... Hence it follows that this Commandment enjoins two things, i. More 
 generally a (eventh, 2. More particularly this or that feventh, and in fpe- 
 eiall that Seventh from the Creation, this or that feventh are to be kepc 
 holy, becaufe of a Seventh part of time appointed falling into them : A 
 (eventh diy alfo is to be kept holy by vertue of the Commandment, yet 
 notingencrall, but with fpeciall eye and reipeA to chat particular feventh, 
 wherein this generall is involved and prelcrved. That Seventh from the 
 
 Creation 
 
 1 
 
rhe Morality of the Sdiatk XCj 
 
 Creation is commanded becai/eof a feventh falling Into it, and a feventh 
 alfo is commanded, yet with a fpeciall eye to that feventh wherein it is in* 
 volvcd; And therefore 'tis a vain obje<flion to affirm, that if a feventh be 
 commanded, that then no particular feventh is, or if any particular feveRth 
 be fo, that then a feventh is not ; for. the Commandment we fee hath re- 
 fpefttoboth ; for what is there more frequent in Scripture then for gene- 
 ral! duties to be wrapt up and fet forth in fomc particular things, inftances 
 and examples, and confequcntly both commanded together ? and after nar- 
 row fearch into this Commandment we ftiall findc both thegencrall and 
 particular feventh, not only inferring one the other, botbotb of themin.^ 
 manner cxpreflely mentioned. ♦' ,.!*' 
 
 TkeJtJ 125, 
 
 When thofc that plead for the morality of the fourth Command, in re- -^j^; 
 fpeflof a feventh day, would prove it to be morall, becaufc it is part of the 
 Decalogue and fet in the heart of it, with a fpeciall note of remembraocc 
 affixed to it, &c. M^ Ironfide and others do ufually daih all fuch reafoaiigs 
 out of countenance, with this anfwer, viz,. That bj this argument^ That 
 particular feventh from tht creation is morall, ^hich )»e fee h changed ; fir 
 \(ay the J ) thtit alp is fet in the heart <?/ the Decalogue, ^itk a ^cciaUnote cfrer 
 memhrancealfo. But the reply from what hath been faid is ealie, ^/«. that 
 That alfo is indeed morall, only 'tis fecondarily morall not primarily, and 
 therefore (as we have (hewn) was mutable and changeable, the primary 
 morality in a feventh immutably remaining ; the morall duty of obferving 
 a feventh day is not changed, but only the day. IfWTrimrofe could 
 prove that there is nothing elfe commanded in this fourth Command, but 
 only That particular feventh from the creation, he had then enough to (hew 
 that (this day being juftly changed ) the Commandment is not morall or piim pdrt.t: 
 perpetuall, but ont of this particular feventh which now is changed ; himfelf ^«M"^'»4« 
 acknowledgeth that out of it may be gathered the morality 0f a day, and 
 why iiotofa feventh day alfo as well as of a day? He faith that it is a bold 
 affcrtion to fay that this genns of a feventh is herein commanded : But why 
 is it not as bold to affirm the fame of a day? for out of that particular fe- 
 venth whence he would raife the genus of a day, wc miy as eafily, and far 
 more rationally colled thcgenw of a feventh day, 
 
 Thefis 126. 
 
 Nor will it follow that becaufe a feventh is morall, that therefore any one 116* 
 of the feven daies in a week may be made a Chriftian Sabbath : For i. We 
 do not fay that it is any feventh, but A feventh determined and appointed of 
 god fir holy re fi, which is herein commanded. 2. The Lord hathinwifdora 
 appointed fuch a feventh as that man may have /at Vt?W<? dai^s together to 
 labour in, and hence it follows that divine determination without crofling 
 .thatwifdom, could not poflibly fall upon any other daies in ihQ Cycle of 
 ^f- P (even. 
 
j^ Ifhe Moralitj of the Sahbath 
 
 fevcD, but cither upon the laft of feven which was the Jewifli, orthefirftof 
 fevcn which now is (as (hall be ibcwn) the Chriltian Sabbath. 5. Ar 
 God hath appointed one day in feven for mans reft, fo in his wifdom he fo 
 orders it, as that it (hall be alfo a day of Gods reft, and that is not to be 
 found in any day of the week, but either in the laft of fcven, wherein the 
 Father reftcd, or in the firft of feven wherein the fon rcftcd from his 
 livoik alfo. 
 
 Thefis 127. 
 ii> 'Tis trttethat the Sabbath day and that fcventh day from the creation, 
 arsindiflferently taken fometimes the one for the other, the one being the 
 exegefis or the explication of the other, as gsft.i.Zy^, ^j#W.¥<5.2p, and elfe» 
 where, but that it fhould be only fo underftood in this commandment; 
 Cre^t Iud4m afeUa-^non ego, as he faid in another cafe ;. I fee no convi- 
 ffing argument to clip the wings of the Seripture fo lliort, and to make the 
 Sabbathday and that feventh day of equall dimenfions : Although it can- 
 not be denied, but that in fome fenfe the Sabbath day is exegetkalt of the fe- 
 irenth dayjbecaufe the commandment hath a fpcciall eye to that feventh from 
 the creation, which is fecundarily morall, yet not excluding that which i& 
 more generally contained in that particular, and confequently commanded, 
 -ii%aftveritiidAjotThcSi^yba^day. 
 
 Thefij T2S. 
 lis. M^^nmrofe would prove the exegefis, That ^j the SMdth day is me Am 
 JjSUIt''*' that feventh d4y only fiom the creation, becaufe Goda^naHy bleged and finEli* 
 ^^ * fed that Sabbath day, becanfe god eannot a^fiallj blejfe a feventh, bemgan 
 Unlimited, indefinite and Hncert^in indeter mined time : The time ( faith he ) 
 only "therein he refied, he only aEitsally blefed, '^hieh'^as not in a feventh day 
 inJ^termined, but in that determined feventh day : But all this may be readily 
 acknowledged and yet the truth remain firm, for that particular feventh 
 being fecundarily morall, hence as it was expreflfely commanded, fo it was 
 3i(5taally and particularly blcffed ; but as in this feventh a generall of a feventh- 
 is included, fo a feventh is alfo generally blefledand fandified : Otherwife 
 iiow will M. Primrofe maintain the morality of a day of worfiiip out of this 
 commandment ? for the fame objedlion maybe made agaiiftaday, which 
 himfelf acknowledgeth, as agwnft a feventh day which we maintain; for 
 it may be faid, that That day is here only morall wherein God adiually rc«- 
 (led, but he did not reft in a day indefinitely, and therefore a day is not 
 norall 5 let him unloofe this knot, and his anfwer in defence of the mora- 
 lity of a day will help him to fee the morality of a feventh day alfo: That 
 particular day indeed wherein God adually and particularly re^ed, he par* 
 ticularly blelTed, but there was a feventh day alfo more generall which he 
 
 {enerailybielfedalfo^ he generally bleft the Sabbathday, he particularly 
 kft dm Sabbath day, andinbte^gof tim bedid vertually andbyAna- 
 
The Morality of the SMath. i«7 
 
 iogyblefle oor particular Giriftian Sabbath alfo, whidi was to come: As 
 Mofes'xti hisa(^uallbleffingof thetribeof Ztfw,Deut.33.7,io. he didvcr- 
 tually and by Analogy blefle all the Miniftcrs of the Gofpel not then in 
 being : And look as when God coram andcd them to keep holy the Sabbath 
 in ceremonial] duties he did therein vcrtually command us to keep k holy in 
 Evangelicall duties, To when he commanded thera to obferve that day becaufc 
 It wa^ adlually appointed and fandified and bleflcd of God, he comn^ .(i^^A 
 us vertually and analogically therein to obferve our feventhday alfo if ever 
 iie (hould arflually appoint and blelTc this other, 
 
 Thefis i2p. 
 The diftribution of equity and juftice eonfifts not alway, \vifmUeindivi' i%^l 
 fiiUi, h in an indivifible point, and a fet meafure ; fo as that if more or lefle 
 be done or given in way of juftice, that then the rule of juftice is thereby 
 broken, ex.^r.k's fuftto give alms and pay tribute, yetnotfojaft, as that 
 if men give more or leflc, that then they break a rule of juftice ; fo 'tis in this 
 point of the Sabbath, afeventh part of time is morall, becaufe itisjaftand 
 equallfor all men to give anto God, who have fix for one given them to 
 ferve their own tttrn, and do their own work in, yet it is not fo juft but that 
 if God had required the tribute of a third or fourth part of our time, but it 
 might have been juft alfo to have given him one day in three or two or four, 
 for in this cafe pofitive determination doth not fo much maks ^^ i(ecUre only 
 that which is morall : And therefore if M' Primrofe thinks, that a feventh 
 part of time is not morall, upon this ground, t it. Becaife it is as equall and 
 juft to dedicate more time to God, and that a third or fourth day is as equal! 
 as a feventh, it is doubtlcfle anungt^undedaffcrtion, for fo he aifirms, T'A^^ p^^.j/*^.; 
 altkottghit be moft JHfit^ give God one day in feven^ jet H9more\tifi thento^ni* 
 dedicate to him one day in three or fix : And fuppofe it be fo, yet this doth 
 nof prove chat a feventh day is not morall, becaufe itis as equall to give fix 
 asfeven, no more then that it is no morall duty to give an alms, becaufe it 
 miy be as equall to give twenty pence as thirty pence to a man in want: If 
 furchcrmore he think that it is as equall and juft to give God more daies for 
 his fer? ice, as one in feven, out of humane wifdom and by humane confc- 
 cration, not divine dedication, then it may be doubted whether one day in \ 
 
 two or three or fix is as equall as one day in feven, for as humane wifdom, 
 ifleft to it felf, may readily give coo few, fo it may fuperftitioufly give too 
 maay (as hath been faid : ) But if four or three or fix be alike equal] in 
 thmfelves to give to God, as one in feven, then if he thinks it a morall duty 
 to obferve any fuch day in cafe it fhould be impofed and confecratccJ by hu- 
 mane determination, 1 hope he will not be offended at us if we think it a 
 morall duty alfo to obferve a feventh day, which wc arc certain divine wif- 
 dom hath judged moft equall, and which is impofed on us by divine determi- 
 nation : we may be uncertain whether the one is as equal! as wt arc certain 
 that a feventh day is, Pa Thefii 
 
The Morality ef the Sahhath. 
 
 Thefts 130. 
 Aflions df WorjGbip can no more be imagined to be done without fome 
 time, then a body be without fome place, and therefore in the three firft 
 Commandments, where Gods worftiip is en/oined, feme time together 
 with it is neceffariJy commanded; if therefore any time for worfhip be re- 
 quired in the fourth command (which none can deny) itmufl: notbefuch 
 a time as is connaturall and which is necefTarily tyed to the ac^ionj but it maft 
 be fome folemn and fpeciall time, which depends upon fome fpeciall deter- 
 mination, not which «4r»rif but which Cc«»/?/ deternjines; Determination 
 therefore by Comfii of that time which is required in this command doth 
 not abolifh the morality of it, but rather declares and eftablifheth it. God 
 therefore who is Lord of time, may juftly challenge the determination of this 
 time into his own hand, and not infringe the morality of this command, 
 confidering alfo that he is more able and fit then men or Angels to fee, and 
 fo cut out the moft equall proportion of time between man and himfelf; 
 God therefore hath fequeftrcd a feventh part of time to be fandified, rather 
 then a fifth, a fourth, or a ninth, not (imply becaufe it was this feventh, oc 
 a feventh, but becaufe in his wife detcrminatioii thereof, he knew it to be 
 the moft juft and equall divifion of time between man and himfelf, and there- 
 fore I know no incongruity to^affirm, that ifGod had feen one day in three 
 •r four or nine, to be as equall a proportion of time as one day in fevcn, 
 that he would then have left it free to man to take and confeerate either the 
 one or the other ( the Spirit of God not ufually reftraining whtre there is 
 a liberty ) and on the other Mc^ if he had feen a third or fift or ninth or 
 twentieth part oftime more equall then a feventh, he would have fixed the 
 bounds of labour and reft out of a feventh ; but having now fixed them to 
 a feventh ; a feventh day is therefore morall, rather then a fourth or fixt or 
 ninth day, becaufe it is the moft equall and fittcft proportion of time ( all 
 things confidered ) between God and man ; the appointmrent therefore 
 of a feventh rather then a fixt or fourth, is not an ad of Gods meer WiiSf only 
 (as our adverfaries affirm, and therefore they think it not morall) but it 
 was and is an ad of his wifdom alfo according to a morall rule of juftice, viz» 
 to give unto God that which is moft fit, moft juft and moft equall ; and there- 
 fore although there is no naturall juftice (as WTrimrofe calsit) in a fe- 
 venth fimply and abftradly confidered, rather then in a fixt or tenth, yet if 
 the moft c^uali proportion of time for God be lotted out in a feventh, there 
 is then fomething naturall and morall in it rather then in any other par- 
 titioa of time, vU* to give God that proportion of time which is 
 moft juft and moft equall, and in this refped a feventh part of time is com- 
 manded becaufe it is good ( according to the defcriptlon of a morail law ) 
 ' ML enly good becaufe it is commanded. 
 
 Thefis 
 
Tk MdraHtj ^f tht SahbatL 1 o^ 
 
 Thefis 131. 
 
 'Tis true, that in private duties ofworfhip, as to reade the Scriptures, 131, 
 meditate, pray, c^<r. the time for thefe and the like duties is left to the will 
 and determination of man according to general! rules of conveniency and 
 kafonablenelTc kt down in the word ; mans will ( in this fence ) is the 
 meafureoffuchtimesof worflaip, but there is not the like realon here, in 
 determining time for a Sabbath, as if that fhould be letc to mans liberty 
 alfo; becaule thofe private duties are to be done in that time, which is ne- 
 ceflarily annexed to the duties themlclvcs, which time is therefore there 
 commanded, where and when the duty is commanded : but the time for 
 a Sabbath is not (uch a time as naturally will and mvSk, attend the. adion, 
 but it's (uch a time as Counfell ( not nature ) lees moft meet, and efpc^ 
 cially That counfell which is meft able to make the moft equal 1 proportions 
 of time, which we know isnot in the liberty or ability otmen or Angels, 
 but of God himfclf, for do but once imagine a time required out of the 
 limits of what naturally attends the adion, and it will be found neceffarily 
 to be a time determined by counlell: and therefore our adverfaries fhould 
 not think it as free for man to change the Sabbath fcafons, from the fe- 
 venth to the fift or fourth or tenth day, &c,. as to alter and pick out times 
 for private duties, 
 
 Thefis 132.. 
 
 There is a double reafon of propofmg Gods example in the foarch Com- 132* 
 mand, as is evident from the Commandment it felf : the firft was co per* 
 fwade, the fecond was to dired. i. To pcrfwade man fo to labour fix: 
 daies together, as to give the feventhora feventh appointed for holy reft 
 unto God, fc^ fo che example fpeaks, God laboured fix daies, and refted 
 the feventh, therefore do youdo the like. a. To direft the people of God 
 to That particular Seventh which for that time when the Law was givea 
 God would have them then toobferve, and that was that Seventh which 
 did fucceed the fix daies labour: and therefore for any to make Gods exam- 
 ple of reft on That Seventh day, an argument that God commanded the 
 obfervation of that Seventh day oniy, is a groundleffe aflertion, for there 
 was (omething more generally aimed at by fetting forth this example, t/^'^. 
 tQ perfwade men hereby to labour ^\% daies, and give God the («ventb, 
 which he Should sppoint, as well as to dire^to that particular day which 
 for that time (it's granted) it alfo pointed unto, and therefore^ lee the 
 words in the Commandment be obfcrved, and wc fhallfir.de mans duty 
 I. More generally fet down,i//*. to labour fix daies, and dedicate the fe- 
 venth unto God, and then follows @ods pcrfwafion hereunto from his 
 own example, who when he had a world to make and work to do, he did 
 labour fix daies together, and refted the feventh, and thus man is bound 
 tedoftill, bulk doth not follow, that he muftreft that particular feventh 
 
 P 3 only, 
 
tto 
 
 the Morality of the SMati. 1 ^ 
 
 only, on which God thcnrefted, or that That fcvcnth (though we gr»«it 
 it was pointed unto) was only aimed at in this e^aaipie : the binding ^w« 
 er of all cwwnplcs wkatfoevcr ( and thertfore of this ) being ad fpeeiem 
 ^tu ( as they call \i ) to chat kinde of adt, and not ro the individuHm 
 MSiiot$ii only, oc to every particular accidentall circamftaBce therein. If 
 indeed man was to labour (ix daies in tneaaortall only of the (ix daies of 
 •reation, 4nd to reft a Seveatl) day in memortall only of Gods reft and 
 ccflationirom creation, it might then carry a fair face, as if this examflc 
 pointed at the obfervation of that particular Seventh only, but look as our 
 fix daies labour is appointed for other and higher ends, then to remember 
 theHx daies work of God, it being a mersdl duty to attend our callings 
 therein, fo the Seventh day of reft, rs appointed for higher and larger ends* 
 (as DidocUviw obferves ) then only to remember that notable reft o( 
 God from all his works, it being a moral! duty to reft a Seventh day in all 
 holine^e* 
 
 Thefis igf. 
 133, Ic was but accideittall and not of the e^ence of the Sabbath day, that 
 That particular Seventh from the creation &ould be the Sabbath, for the 
 Seventh day Sabbath being to be mans reft day, it was therefore fucable to 
 Gods wiCdom to give man an example of reft from bimfelf , to encourage 
 him thereunto ( for we know how ftrongly examples pcrfwade ) now reft 
 being a ceffation from labour, it therefore fuppofetb labour to go before, 
 hence @od could not appoint the firft day of the creation to be the Sabbath^ 
 becaufe he did then but begin his labour, nor could he take any of the o« 
 ther daies , becaule in them he had not ^ni^ed his work , nor refted 
 from his labour, therefore Gods reft fell out upon the laft of (even fuccecd- 
 ingfix of labour before, fo that if there could have been any other day as 
 fit then for exemplary reft as this, and as afterward it fell out in the tiaifhing 
 oftheworkof redemption, it might have been as well upon fucba day as 
 this,buc it was not then To: and hence the reft-day fell as it were accidentally 
 upon this : and hence it is that Gods example of reft on That particular day 
 doth not neceflfarily binde us to obferve the fame feventh day : morall exam- 
 ples not alway binding in their accidentals (as the cafe is here) although it be 
 true that in their eflentials they alway do. 
 
 Thefa 134. 
 
 Thereisnoftrengthinthatreafon, that because one day in fcvenis to be 
 
 134^ confecrated unto God, that therefore one year in feven is to be (© alio, 
 
 ivai.diflc«. asofolditwasamongthe Jews, torbefide what hath been faid formerly, 
 
 [?n.\nnai. ^^'^* that ouG year in levcn was mccrly ceremoniall, one day in feven is not 
 
 Jixpite, i« ' (o (faith pyailAM ) but morall, God gave no example ( whole example 
 
 Lc?>j, isoaiyin morall things ) of reft ing one year in feven, buthe didef refting 
 
 onedayiafeveni 1 fay beGde all this, it h obfervable what Junius notes 
 
 herein, 
 
Ill 
 
 7he Mifralitj of the SMatL 
 
 terein, The Lord ( faichhe j challcngeth one day ia fcvcn jure cresti^^ 
 h^ right of creation, and hence requires it of all men created, but he chal- 
 lenged one year in fcvcn, jttre peculUris ffejftonis^ i, by right of peculiar^ 
 pofcflion, the land of^4»^4« being the Lords land in a pecuHsr manner, 
 even a type of heaven, which every other eoantrey is nor, and therefore 
 there is no reafon that all men (hoold give God one feventh year, as they 
 arc to give him oneicvcnth day: by the obfcrvation of one day in (even 
 (faichhe) men profcfle ihemklves to be the Lords, and to belong unto 
 him, whocreatedaod made them, and this profeflion all men are bound 
 unto, but by obfcrvation of one year in feven, they prefeiTcd thereby that 
 their covantrey was the Lords, and themfelves the Lords Tenants therein, 
 which all coiintrcys (not being types of heaven) cannot nor ought to do, 
 and therefore there is not the likerealon urging to the obfervation of a fe- 
 venth year as of a feventh day, 
 
 Theps 1^5. 
 
 Look therefore as 'tis in thefecond Commandment, although the par- j^^^ 
 ticolar inftituted worOiip is changed under theGofpeJ, from what it was 
 under the Law, yet the generallduty required therein of obferving Gods 
 own inflituted wor^ip is morall and unchangeable,(o 'm in the fourth com- 
 Eiand, where though the particular day be changed, yet the duty remains 
 morall and unchangeable in obferving a feventh day, there is therefore no 
 reafon to imagine that the generall duty contained in this precept is not 
 morall, becaule the obfervance of the particular day is mutable, and yet this 
 is the fairefl colour, but the (Irongeft refuge of lies which their canfe hath, 
 who hold a feventh day to be meerly ceremonialU 
 
 Tkefis 136. 
 
 If it be a morall duty to obferve one day in feven, then the oblervation i^^, 
 effnchaday, no more inf ringeth Chriftian liberty, then obedience to any 
 other morall Law, one part of our Chriftian liberty conlifting in our con- 
 formity to it, as our bondage conHfts in being left to Hnagainft it, and there* 
 fore that argument againd the morality ofDne day in (even is very feeble, as 
 if Chriftian liberty was hereby infringed. 
 
 Thejis 157. 
 
 It was meet that God ftiould have fpeciall fcrvice from man, and there- 1 ^-7, 
 fore meet for himfelf to appoint a fpeciall time for it : which time though 
 iebeacircamffance, yetit^sfnch a circumftance as hath a fpeciall influence 
 into any budnefle, not only humane but alfo divine, and therefore if it be 
 naturally, it may be alfo ethically and morally good, contributing much 
 alfo to what is oiorally good : and therefore the determination of fucb a 
 time ior length, frequency and holinede, may be jadly t^iken in among 
 the morall laws: he that fhall doubt offuch a powerfutl influence of fpeciall 
 time, f«r t^efurthcric^^f whatis fpecially good, may look back upon the 
 
 arc. 
 
II J 'ihe Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 art, skill, trade, learning, nay grace it (elf perhaps, which he hath got by 
 the help of the icnprovecnent of time : a prophane and religious heart are 
 fecn and accounted of according to their improvements ottime more or 
 ie^c inholy things : Time is not therefore iuch a circumdance as is good 
 only bccaule comina«dcd ( as the place of the temple was ) but it is coih-- 
 manded becaufc it is good, bccaufc time, nay much time, reiterated in a 
 weekly (eventhparc ot time> doth much advance and fet forward that 
 which is good. 
 
 Thefis 138, 
 That Law which is an homogeniill pare of the morall Liw, is morall i 
 13S. but the fourth Commandment is fuch a part of the morall Law, and there- 
 fore it is morall \ I do not fay that that Law which is fet and placed among 
 the morall laws in order of writing (as our adverfaries coo frequently mi - 
 flake us in) that it is therefore moral!, for then it might belaid as well 
 chat the Sabbath isceremoniall, becau(e itts placed in order of writing a- 
 mong things ceremonially Lev,%%. but it it be one link of the chain, and 
 ane/lentiallpart of the morall Law, then 'cis undoubtedly morall, but lo 
 it is, for 'tis part of the Decalogue, nine parts whereof all our adverfaries 
 we now contend with confeile to be moral!, and to make this fourth cere- 
 moniall, which God hath fet in the heart of the Decalogue, and command- 
 ed us to remember to keep it above any other Law, feems very unlike to 
 truth, to a fercne andiober mindc, not diftutbed with fuch mud, which 
 ufually lies at the bottomeof rbe heart, and turns light into darknefle : and 
 why one ceremoniall precept flaould be (huffled in among the reft, which 
 are of another tribe, lineage and language, hath been by many attempted, 
 but never foundly cleared unto this day : (urely if this Commandment be 
 not morall, then there are but nine Commandments left to us of the m©- 
 rall Law, which is cxprefly contrary to Gods account, D enu^, 
 J. ^a» ^^ affirm that all the commands of the Decalogue are m9rall^ jet every 
 9> one in his proportion and degree, and that this of the Sabbath is thtu morally 
 Yiz. in reffteliof the furpofe and intent of the Lav& giver ^ viz. That (0 me 
 time he fet apart^ but not morall in refpe^ of the letter in ^hich it is exfreft : 
 it is in (omc fence formerly explaioed, true, but in his fence who endeavours 
 to prove the Sabbath ceremoniall, while he (aithic is morall, is both dark 
 and faUe : f ob if it be f aid to be morall only in refped of fome time to be fee 
 apart, and this time an individntim vagum an indeterminate time beyond 
 the verges of afevcnth part of time, then there is no more morality granted 
 to the fourth Commandment, then to the Commandment of building 
 the teniplc and obfcrving the new moons, becaule in Gods command to 
 build the Temple : the generall purpofe and intention of the Lawgiver 
 was that fome place be appointed for his publike worfl:iip, and in command- 
 ing to obfcrvc New Moons, that fome lime be fee apart for his worffeip, and 
 
The M^rdlity of the SaUatk Uj 
 
 fo there was no more Decefficy of putting Remember to keep the Sabbath 
 holy, then to remember to keep holy the new moons : And look as the 
 commandment to obfeivc new moons, cannot in reafon be accounted a 
 moral! commandment, becaufe there is lome generall morality in it, viz. for 
 tooblerve fometimeof worfhip, fo neither {hould this of the Sabbarhbc 
 upon the like ground of fome general! morality mixed in it, and therefore 
 for M^ Ironfide to fay that the law of the Sabbath is fee among the reft of the 
 morall precipes, becaufe it is mixdy ceremonial!, having in ic fomething 
 which is morall, which other ceremonial! commands (he faith) have not, 
 is palpably untrue; for there is no ceremoniall law of obferving JewifK 
 moons and fcftivals, but there was fomething generally morall in them, 
 viK,, That (in refped of the purpofe and intention of the Law-giver) 
 fome time be fee apart for God , juft as he makes this of keeping the 
 Sabbath. 
 
 The lis 139. 
 To imagine that there are but nine morall precepts indeed ; and that they j « p, 
 are called ten, in rcfped of the greater part according to which things are 
 ufually denominated, is an invention of M. Trimroje, which contains a 
 p.'rniciou5 and poyfonfull feed of making way for the razing out of the De- J^SJ*''"*'' 
 calogue more laws then one: for the fame anfwcr will ferve the turn for 
 cafhiering three or four more, the greater pare (fuppofe fix) remaining 
 morall, according to which the denomination arileth : For although it be 
 trae that fometime the denomination is according to the greater part, viz., 
 when there is a necellicy of mixing dirc^rs things together as in a heap of 
 corn with much chafE or a Butt of wine where there be many lees, yet there 
 was no necellicy of fuch a mix:ure and jumbling together of morals and ce- 
 remonials here : M. Pnmroje tels as that he doth not readc in Scripture, 
 that all the Commandments are withoac exception called morali, and there- 
 fore why may there not (iaithhe) be one ceremoniall among them? But 
 by this reaiofl he may as well exclude all the other nine from being morall 
 alib, for 1 reade not in Scripture that any one of them is ftiled by that name, 
 Mtfrali: And although it be true which he faith, That covenants among 
 men conlift fometime together of divers artiGles,as alfo that Gods Covenant 
 ( taken in fome fenle) fometimesdidfo; yet the Covenant of God made 
 ^id) all men ( as we fhall prove rhe Decalogue is ) ought not to be fo ming- 
 led, neither could it be fo without apparent contradidion, viz>. That here 
 fhould be a covenant which bindcth all men m all things to obferve it, and 
 yetibme part of it being ceremoniall, fhould not binde all men in all things 
 it commands: nor is there indeed any need of putting in one ceremoniall 
 law, confidering how eafily they are and may be reduced to fimdry pre- 
 cepts of the morall law as appendices thereof, without fuch iluffling as is con- 
 tended for here, 
 
 Q^ Thefts 
 
|.jj^ 7$e Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 Thtfts 140. 
 lAQt If this law be not morail, why is it crowned with the fame honour, that 
 the reft of the morail precepts are ? if its dignity be not cquall with the reft, 
 Why hath it been exalccd fo high in equal! glory with them ? Were the other 
 nine fpokcn immediatly by the voice of God on mount Sinai with great ter- 
 rour and majefty before all the people ? Were they written upon Tables of 
 ftone with Gods own finger twice ? Were they put into the Atk as moft holy 
 and facred > fo was this of the Sabbath alfo : Why hath it the fame honour, 
 if it be not of the fame nature wiih the reft ? 
 
 Tkifis 141. 
 
 141 . Our adverfaries turaevery ftone to make anfwer to this known argumenr, 
 and they tell us that it's diiputable and very queftionable whether this law 
 was fpoken immediatly by God and not rather by Angels : But let it be how 
 it will be, yet this law of the Sabbath was (poken and written, and laid up 
 as all the reft were, and therefore had the fame honour as all the reft had 
 which we doubt not to be morail; and yet I think it eafie to demonftrate 
 that this law was immediatly fpoken by God, and the reafons againft it arc 
 
 [umPitr^i. longfinceanfweredby JftniuSy on H^^.2.2,3. but it's ufelefle here to enter 
 into this controveifie. 
 
 Thefis 142. 
 
 142, Nor do I fay that becaufethe law was fpoken by God immediat/y, that 
 therefore it is morail ; for he fpake with Abraham, Job, Mo/a in the mount, 
 immediatly about other matters then morail laws ; but becaufe he thus fpake 
 and in fuch a manner openly and to all the people young and old, Jews and 
 Profelyte Gentiles then prefent, with fuch great glory ^nd tcrrour and ma- 
 
 d, ^««rf • j^Qy^ Surely it ftands not ( faith holy 'Brightwan ) with the ma;efty of the 
 univerfall Lord who is God not only of the Jewsbutalfo of the Gentiles, 
 fpeaking thus openly ( not privately ) and glorioufly and moft immediatly, 
 to prefcribe laws to one people only which were fmall in number, but 
 whetewith all nations alike (hould be governed: W Ironftde indeed thinks 
 that the Lord had gone on to have delivered all the other ctremoniaU in the 
 like manner of fpeech from the mount, bu£ that the fear and cry of the 
 ^people (that he would fpcakno more to them) ftopt him ; but the con- 
 trary is moft evident, vl^. that before the people cried out the Lord made 
 aftopofhimfelf, and therefore is faid to add no more,i3^/^/.5.22. It wasa 
 glory of the Golpel above all other mcfTages in that it was immediatly fpo- 
 ken by Chrift, iVf^.i.2.&2.3. and fo Gods immediate publication of the 
 morail law puts a glory and honour upoR it above any other laws, and 
 therefore while M*" Ironfide goes about to pat the fame honour upon cerc- 
 fieK>niall laws, he doth not a little obfcure and caft difiionour upon thofe that 
 are morail, bymakingthishonourtobe commow wt:h cercmoniall andnos 
 
 ^ proper oaly to mvrall laws, , 
 
The M0rdHj of tk SabbMh. *^J 
 
 Tkeps 143. 
 
 Nor do I fay that the writing of the law on (lone argues it to be morall 143, 
 ( for fome lavvs not morall were mediatly writ on ftone by ffffi^/th, Jofli.S. 
 3 2.) but becaufe it was writ immediatly by the finger of God on fuch Tables 
 of Hone, and that not once but twice, not on paper or parchment, but on 
 ftone, which argues cheir continuance, and rot on ftone in open fields,but Q« 
 fuch ftone as was laid up in the Ark a place of raoft fafecy, being mod facred, 
 and a type of Chrift who kept this law, and upon whofe heart it was writ, 
 7^/S/.4c.6,7. tofacisfie jufticeand to make juft and righteous before God, 
 all th^c fliall be faved, of all whom the righteoufncfic of this law according 
 to jnftice vA^as to be exadled ; what do thefe things argue, but at leaft thus 
 much, that if any law was to be perpetuated, this liirely ought fo to be: 
 M. Trimrefe tels us that the writing upon ftone did no: fignifie continuance ^'frut^^M* 
 of the law, but the hardneffe of their ftony hearts which the law writ upon 
 them was not able to overcome ; and 'tis true that the ftony Tables did 
 fignifie ftony hearts, but it's falfe that the writing on ftone did not fignifie 
 continuance alfo according to Scripture phrafe : For all the children of God 
 have ftony hearts by nature, now God hath promifed to write his law upon 
 fuch hearts as are by nature ftony, and his writing of them there implies the 
 continuance of them there, fo that both thefe may ftand together, and the 
 Rmilitudc is fully thus, viz. The ^holeUrv of God was writ on Tables of 
 ftone to continue there, fo the ^hoUlaw of God is writ on ftony hearts by 
 nature to continue thereon. 
 
 Thefis 144. 
 
 Only morall laws and all morall laws are thus fummarily and generally 144. 
 honoured by God ; the ten Commandments being Chriftian pandeds and 
 common heads of all morall duties toward God and men; Under which 
 generals, allthe particular morall duties in the Commentaries of the Pro- 
 phets and Apoftlcs, are virtually comprehended and contained, and there- 
 fore M Vrtmrofe argument is weak, who thinks that this honour put upon 
 the Decalogue doth not argue it to be morall, Becaufe then man) 6therfartU 
 cular moraR Umfet down in Scripture er in Tallies of ft one ^ bnt in parchment t 
 if the Prophets and Apo^les fhonld not be movAUi For we do not fay that all 
 morall laws particularly were thus fpecially honoured, but that all and only 
 fnorall laws fummarily were thushonouredjin which fummaries,all the parti- 
 culars are contained and in that refpe<5l equally honoured : It may affecflones 
 heart with great mourning to fee the many inventions of mens hearts to blot 
 out this remembrance of ihe Sabbath day, thcyfirft caftitout of Paradife 
 ^nd fhut it out of the world untill Mofes time ; when in M9(es time it^s 
 pjblifhed as a law and crowned with the fame honour as all other morall 
 kws, yet then they make it to be but a ccremoniall law, continuing only 
 untill the coming of Chrift, after which time it ceafethto be any law at alj, 
 
 Q 2 nnleffc 
 
^ l5 7k Morality of the Sabhtk 
 
 unleffefehe Churches conftitution ftiall pleafe to make it fo, which is worft 
 of all. 
 
 Tkep 145. 
 X4^ Every thing indeed which was pubiiOned by Gods immediate voice in 
 promulgating of the law, is not morall and common to all, but fome things 
 fo fpokcn may be peculiar and proper to the Jews, becaufe fome things thus 
 fpoken were fromtfes or motives only, annexed to the law to perfwade to 
 the obedience thereof, but they were not Uws, for the queftion is whether aH 
 /4»j fpoken and wric thus immediatly were not morall, but the argument 
 which fome produce againfl chis is From the promife annexed to tke fifr Com- 
 WAnd, eonctrmnglonglifii and from the motxvt of redemption mi of the keufe 
 honda^e in the preface to th Commandments, both Vahich ( they fay ) X>cere 
 MfokinimmedtAtly, hutyet^ere hth of them proper mtQtbe fews; But fup- 
 pofe the promife annexed to the fife Commandment be proper to the jews 
 and ceremoniall, ^ilX.Trimrofe pleads ( which yet many ftrong reafons, 
 firom Eph.6.2> may induce on to deny) what is this to the qutftion, which 
 is not concerning /'r.^w?//^/ but commandments and laws: Suppofe alfo that 
 the motive in the preface of the Commandments literally underftood is 
 proper to the Jews, yet this is alfo evident, that fuch reafons and motives as 
 ^xtproperioiom^y and perhaps ceremoniall, may be annexed to morall laws 
 which are common to all, nor will it follow that the lav^s are therefore ndt 
 common, becaufe the motives thereto are proper : VYc that dwell in Ame- 
 nV^maybe perfwaded to love and fear God (which are morall duties) 
 in regard of our redemption and deliverances from out of the va(l fea-ftorms, 
 we once had, and the tumults in £»r<7;?tf which now are, which motives are 
 proper to our felves. Promifes and motives annexed to the Commandments, 
 come in as means to a higher end, viz., obedience to the laws themfclves, 
 and hence the laws themlelves may be morall and thefe not fo, though 
 immediatly fpoken, becaufe they be not chiefly nor laftly inteoded herein : 
 ^n^%% I know fT^i^^'^ makes the preface to the Commandments a part of the firft 
 " Commandment, and therefore he would hence infer, that fome pare (at 
 leaft) ofa Commandment is proper to the Jews; but if thefe words con- 
 ' tain a motive prefliag to the obedience of the v^hole, how is it poffible that 
 they fhould be a part of the /41?? or of any one law ^ For what force of a 
 lawcantherebeinchat which only declares unto us, \i^ho it is that redeem- 
 ed them ouc of Egypts bondage ? For it cannot be true ( which the fame 
 author affirms ) that in thefe ^'ords is fet forth only who that God is whom 
 we are to have to be our God in the fir ft Commandment; but they arc of 
 larger extent, (hewing us who that God is whom we are to worihip, ae- 
 €ording to the firft Commandment, and that with his own worfhip accord- 
 ing to the fecond, and that reverently according to the third, and whofe 
 day we are to fanfttfie accosding to the fourth, and whofe will we are to do 
 ' ■ '. ........ m 
 
The Morality of the SAhbath. \\m 
 
 m all duties of love toward man according to thefeverall i)^ik% of the fe- 
 cond Table ; and therefore this declaration of God is no more a part of the 
 firft then of any other Commandment, and every other Commandment may 
 challenge it as a part of themfelves as well as the firft. 
 
 Thefis 146. 
 It is a truth as immovable as the pillars of heaven, That God hath given ^^^^ 
 to all men uriverfally a rule of life to condiwfl them to their end : Now if the 
 whole Decalogue be not it, what (hall ? The Gofpel is the rule of our faith, 
 but not of cur fpirituall life, which flows from faith, C^/. 3.20. 7<^^'5*24» 
 The law therefore is the rule of our life ; Now if nineof thefe be a compleac 
 rule without a tench, exclude that one, and then who fees not an open gap 
 made forali thertfttogooutatalfo ? For where will any manftop, if once 
 this principle be laidj vi^, Thacthe whole law is not the rule of life? May 
 not Papifts blot out the fecond alfo, as fomeof Cafznders followers have 
 done all but two; and as the Antinomiansac this day do all? and have 
 they not a good ground laid for \x.^ who may hence fafely fay that the De- 
 calogue is not a rule oflife for all ? M. Primrofe that he might keep himfclf 
 from a broken head here, fends us for falve to the light of nature, and the 
 teftimony of the Gofpel, both which (faith he) maintain and confirm the 
 morality of all the other Commandments, except this one of the Sabbath : 
 But asit (hall appear that the law of the Sabbath hath confirmation from 
 both (if this diredion wasfufficient and good) foic may be in the mean 
 time confidered, why the Gentiles who were univerfally Idolaters and 
 therefore blotted out the light of nature (as M. Primrofe confe{r;ith) a- 
 gainft the fecond Commandment, might not as well blot out much of 
 that light of nature about the Sabbath alfo ; and then how fhall the light of 
 nature be any fuiicient difcovery unto us of that which is morall and of that 
 which is not. 
 
 Thep 147, 
 
 There is a Law m»de mention of,^4/».2.io.whofe parts are fo infeparably 1*470 
 linked together that whofoevcr breaks any one is guilty of the breach of all, 
 and confequently whofocver is called to the obedience of one, is called to the 
 obedience of all,and confequently all the particular laws which it contains are 
 homogenial parts of the iame Tctum or wholelaw : If it be demanded,What 
 is this Law? the anfwer is writ with the beams oi the Sun, that 'cis the 
 whole morall Law contained in the Decalogue : For i. The Apoftle fpeaks 
 offucha Law which not only the Jews but all the Gentiles are bound to 
 oblerve : and for the breach of any one of which, not only the Jsws but the 
 Gentiles alio were guilty of the breach of all, and therefore ic cannot be 
 meantof the ceremoniall Law which did neither binde Gentiles or Jews at 
 that time wherein the Apoftk. writ, 2. He fpeaks of (uch a Law as is called 
 a royali LaWy and a Law of libertyi verf, ^.iz, which cacnot be meant 
 
^jg the Morality of the SdhhAtlu 
 
 of the cetetfloniall Law in whole or in part, which is called a Law ©f bon- 
 dage, noc worthy the royall and kingly (piric of a Chriftian to ftoop to, 
 G'<i/.4.9. 3. 'tis that Law by the works of which all men are bound to 
 manifeft their faith, and by whxh faith is made petfe(3:, verf^ii, which 
 cannot be the Ceremoniall nor EvangdiCall, for that is the Law offjich.* 
 and therefore it's meant of the Liw morall. 4. 'Tis that Law of which, 
 Thou fialt ftot i^V/nor commit ndultcrj are parts, verf.ii. Now thcle 
 Laws arc part of the Decalogue only, an<i whereof it maybe (aid, he that 
 (aid, Thou Jhalt not commit adultery^ faidalfo. Remember to k^ef the SaB' 
 ^ath holy : and therefore the whole Decalogue, and not lomc parts of it 
 Ptiffi. /)«r. ». only, is the morall Law, from whence it ismanifcft that the Apoftle doth 
 f.»/.io,/.iy, oocfpeak ( as M. PW^^r^Ttf would interpret him) of offending againft the 
 pyovdat large, and of which the Ceremoniall Laws were apart, but of of- 
 fending againft that part of the W«>r^, to wir, the mor^iU Law^ of wh/cb, 
 he that ojfends againh Any one if guilty of the breach of ally hence aUo, his 
 other antwerfals to the duft, vi<.. that the fourth command is no part of 
 the Law, and therefore the not obierving of it is no finnc under the New Tc- 
 ftamenc, becaufe it was given only to the Jews and not to us : for if it be 
 a part of the Decalogue, of which the Apoftle only (peaks, thcn'cis a meer 
 begging of the queftion to affirm that it is no part of the Law to ChrilVians : 
 but we fee the Apoftle here fpeaks of the Law, and the RojaU Lavp, and the 
 Royall Law of Liberty : his meaning therefore muft be of (bene (peci^ll Law 
 which he berecals ^^t sfox^j' The Law : now if he thus fpeaks of iQmcfpeci- 
 all law, what can it be but the whole Decalogue, and not a part of it only ? 
 as when he (peaks of the Gofpel >t:t7' i^^^x^v^ be means not(ome part but the 
 whole Goipel alfo; and if every part of the Decalogue is noc morall, hoW 
 (hould any man know from any Law or rule of God what was morall, and 
 whatnot, and confcquently whatisfinfull,and whatnot? if it be faid, the 
 light of nature, we have proved that this is ablinde and corrupt Judge as 
 it exifts in corrupt man : if it be (aid by, the light of the Gofpel, this was 
 then to (et up a light unto Chriftians to di(cern it by, but none to the Jews 
 while they wanted the Go(pel as di(penred to us now : many morall laws 
 aUo arc not mentioned in the Gofpel, it being but accidental! to it to let 
 forth the Commandments of the Law. 
 
 Thep 148. 
 g If Chriftcameto fullfill and not to deftroy the Law, /!/<«/. 5.17. then 
 ^ • the Commandcment of the Sabbath is noc aboliftied by Chrifts com- 
 ing, if not one jot, prick or tittle of the Law (hall perifh, much lefTe^aU 
 a whole La w pcrilh or be deftroy ed by the coming of Chrift. 
 
 Thep 149. 
 if\9, 'lis true indeed that by Law and Prophets is fomctimes meant their 
 whekdodrine both ceremoniall and morall and propheticall, which Chrift 
 
 fuUfillcd 
 
Jhe M&rdit*) of the SMath. 
 
 f unfilled perfonally, but noc fo in this place of Matthew, bat byLjw is 
 meant the morall Law, and by Prophets thofe Propheticali illuftrationsand 
 interpretations thereof, in which the Prophets do abound ; for i. The Lord 
 Cbrift fpeaks oFthat Law only which whofoever fhould teach men to break 
 and caft off, he (hould be called lead in the kingdome of heaven, Mat, 
 5.i^, but the Apoftles did teach men to caftoffthe Ceremonial! Law, and 
 yet were never a whit lefle in the kingdome of heaven.- 2. H- Ipcaks of 
 that Law by conformity to which all his true difciples (liould exceed the 
 righteoufnelle of Scribes and Pharifccs : but that was not by being exter- 
 nally ceremonious or morall, but by incernall conformity to the fpiritu- 
 allncfle oi Gods Law, which the Pharisees then regarded not. 3. Chrift: 
 /peaks of the leafl: Commandments, and ot cheie lead Commandments, ^* 
 TviyhvnKa,vrk7Zd'jT^viKa,Kt'<^v, now What ftiould thole leaft Commandments 
 be, but thofe which he afterward interprets of ra(h anger, adulterous eye?, 
 unchaft thoughts, love to enemies ? drc. which are called lead, in oppofi- 
 tion to the Pharifaicall Dodors coRceics in thofe times, who urged the 
 grofle duties commanded, and condemned men only for groffe fins for- 
 bidden} as if therein cenfifted our compleac conformity to the Law of 
 God, and therefore by the leaft of thole Commandments is meant no o- 
 ther then thofe which he afterward fcts down in his (pirituall interpre- 
 tation of the Law, i^fr/,2 1 . never a oneof which Commandments are Cc- 
 remoniall but morall Laws: and although M. Primrofe thinks that there 
 is no connexion between the feventcen, and the other expofitory verfcs 
 of the Law which follow, yet whoever ponders the Analyfis impartially, 
 (hall finde it other wife; even from the I7.verfe to the end, the conclufion 
 of which is, to heperfiB as guy heavenly Father u ferfiBy who is never 
 made a pattern ofpcrfedion to us in cercmoniall, but only in morall mat- 
 ters : *tis true indeed ( which fome objeft ) that there is mention made of 
 Altar and Sacrifice, verf.2^, which were ceremonials: but there is no law 
 about them, but only a morall law of love is thereby prtft with allufion to 
 the ceremoniall practife in thofe timts : he Ipeaks alfo about divorce, but 
 this is but accidentally brought to (hew the morality of the Law of adul- 
 tery, theLawof retaliation wants not good wicneffcs toteftificto the mo- 
 rality of it, but I rather think 'tis brought in tofct forth a morall Law a- 
 gainft private revenge: Our Saviour indeed doth notfpfak particularly a- 
 boutthe Lawof the Sabbath as he doth of killing and adultery, d^^^bu: if 
 therefore it be not morall bccaufe not fpoken of here, then neither the firff, 
 fecond or fift command are morall, becaufc they are noi exprtfly oprncd 
 in this chapter, for thefcope ofeur Saviour was to fptikagamft the Pha- 
 rifaicall ifiterpraations of the Law, in curtailing of ii^ in making gto(k 
 murder to be forbidden, but not angtr, adultery to be forbidden, but roe 
 luft| >vbich evillthcy \^crc notfo tnuch guilty of in ^^oint of thtSablhitb^ 
 
 119 
 
j^Q 7he M0ralitj of the Sahbath. 
 
 but they ratto made the Phyladcrics of it too broad by overmuch ftrid« 
 ncffi, which our Saviour therefore elfewhere condemns, buc not a word 
 tending to abohfli this Law of the S:.bbich. 
 v' ' Thejis 150. 
 
 jro. If therefore that Commandment is to be accounted morall, which the 
 Golpel rcinforceth and commends unco us { according to M. Primrofe 
 principles ) then the fourth Commandment may well come into the ac- 
 count of (uch as are morall ; but the places mentioned and cleared out 
 of the New Telbmcnc evince thus much; The Lord Jefus coming not 
 to deftroy the Law of the Sabbath, but to eftablil^ it : and of the 
 breach of which one Law, he that h guilty, is guilty of the breach 
 of all. 
 
 Thefts l%\. 
 
 15 r. If ^^s obfervation of the Sabbath had been firft impofcd upon man fince 
 the fall, aad in (peciall upon the people of the Jews at mount i'/w^i, there 
 might be then lome colour and reafon to cloth tiie Sabbath with rags, and 
 the w^orn-out garments of ceremonialnefie ; but if it was impofed upon 
 in innoceHey not only before all types and ceremonies, but aUo before 
 all fin ; and upon liAdam as a common perfbn, as a Commandment not 
 proper to thatcftate, nor as to a particular perfon and proper to himfelf: 
 then the morality of it is moft evident: our advcrfaries therefore lay about 
 them here, that they might drive the Sabbath oucof Par;3tdi(e, and make it 
 a thing altogether unknown to theftate ofinnocency : which if they can* 
 not make good, their whole frame againft the moriliiy of the Sabbach, 
 fals flat to the ground: and therefore it is of no Ismail ccnkquence 
 to clear up this truth , vi^. That ^Adam in innoceocy , and in 
 him all bis pofterity were commanded to landific a vveckly Sab- 
 bath. 
 
 Thefts 152. 
 
 152. One would think that the words of the text, Gen.i.i,'^, were fo plain 
 to prove a Sabbath in that innocent eftate,tuac there couid be no evafion 
 made from the evidence of them; for it'i cxprtfly laid, that the day the 
 Lord refted, the fame day the Lord blcffedand ia.id^fid : but we know 
 hcreftedthe Seventh day immediatly after the Citation, and therefore he 
 immediatly bleflcd and iindified the fame day alfo: tor the words run co- 
 pulatively, he refted the Seventh day, andhe bluffed apd fan Ei. fed that day^ 
 but It's ftrange to fee not only what odd evafions men make from this clear 
 truth, j|jtallo what curious Cabalifmes and fond mterpretations men make 
 of the Hebrew text,the anfwer to which learned Rivet hath long ftncc made^ 
 which therefore 1 mention not. 
 
 Thefs 153. 
 
 153. Thewordsarenotthuscopulativeinorderof ftory, but in orderoftiffie : 
 
The Morality of the SaUdth. 12 1 
 
 ifay cot in order of (lory and difcourfc, for fo things far diftant in time, 
 may be coupled together by this copulative particle ^»^: as W Primrofe 
 truly flicvvs, (fAr. 16.3 2,33. 1 Sam.ij.^^^ but they arc coupled and knit to- 
 gether in refped of time, for it is the like phrafe which cJ^f<?/<?j immediatly 
 after ufeth, 6'<?».5.ij2. where 'tis faid, God created man in his Image, and 
 blefTcd them,and called their names, &c. which were together in time, fo 'tis 
 here, the time God refted that time God bkiled ; for the fcope of the 
 words, (7^«. 2. 1, 2, 3. is to rhew what the Lord M That feventh day, after 
 the fin idling of the whole creation in fix daies, and that is, HehUJfedand 
 finEiifiedit. For look as the fcope of Mo/es'm making mention of the fix 
 dates orderly, was to fhew what God did every particular day • fo what 
 elfefhoJild be the fcope in making mention of the feventh day, unleffe ic 
 was to fhew what God did then on that day ? and that is, he then refted and 
 h\t((cd. and fandified \z, even then in that ftate of innocency. 
 
 Thefis 154. 
 God is faid, G^^«.2.i,2,3. toblefle the Sabbath as he blefTed other crea- IH» 
 tares, bat he blelfed the creatures at that time they were made, ^y'^^. 1,2 2, 2 8. 
 and therefore he blefTed the Sabbath at that time he refted : Shall Gods 
 work be prefcntly blefTcd, and ftiall his reft be then without any? Was 
 Gods reft a caufe of fandifying the day many hundred years after (as our 
 adverfaries fay ) and was there not as much caufe then when the memory of 
 the creation was moft frefli, which was the fitteft time to remember Gods 
 works in? M. TnWfli/^ tels us that the creatures were blefled with a pre- ?«»». m ? 
 fenc benedidion becaufc they did inftantly need it, but there was no ne- •''^•^•/•-4» 
 cefficy (he faith) that man fhould foiemnizc the feventh day as foonas'tis 
 made: bucas we fliali fhew that man did then needafpeciall day of bleP 
 fing, fo 'tis a fufficicnt ground of beleeving thit then God blefTed the day 
 when there was a full and jufl and fufifieient caufe of bleffing which is Gods 
 rcfting ; ic being alfo fuch a caufe as was not peculiar to the Jews many hun- 
 dred years after, but common to all mankinde. 
 
 Thefis 155. 
 The Reft of God ( which none queftion to be in innocency immediatly 155; 
 after the creation.) was either a naturall reft (as I may call it} that is a 
 bare cefiation from labour, or a holy reft, ^ a reft fee apart inexemplumy or 
 for example, and for holy tifes ; but ic was not a naturall reft raeerly • 
 for then it had been enough Co have faid,thacat the end of thefixt day 
 God refted, but we fee God fpeaks of a day, the feventh dsy, God hathr 
 rtftcd with a naturall reft or ceftation from creation ever fince the end of 
 the firftfixt day of the world untill now; why then is it faid that God refted- 
 the feventh day ? Or why is it not rather faid that he began his reft on that 
 day, but that it is limited to a day ? Certainly this argues that he fpeaks not 
 ©f naturall reft meerly or that which ex namra rei follows the finifhingof his 
 
 R work, 
 
Tfk Morahty of the Sahhath. 
 
 work, for it's then an unfit and improper fpeechto limit Gods reft within 
 the circle of a day; and therefore he fpeaks of a holy reft then appointed 
 for holy ufes as an example for holy reft ; which may well be limited within 
 the compaO'cofaday; and hence it undeniably follows, that if God refted 
 in innoccncy with fuch a reft \ then the fevcnth day was then fandificd it be « 
 ing the day of holy reft. 
 
 The (Is 15(5. 
 It cannot be fhewn thut ever God made himfelf an fxatrj^eo? any adl, 
 but that in the prefcnc example there was and isaprefenc rule, biiiiding im- 
 mediatly to follow that example: if therefore from the foLindaiion of the 
 world, God made himleif ^« example ^\v\{\ii dsics labour and in a fcventh 
 tflaiesreft, why fliould not this example then and at that time of innocency 
 be binding ? there being no example which God fees before us but it fup- 
 pofeth a rule binding us immediatly thereunto > The great and moft high 
 God could have made the world inamoment-or inahundered years, why 
 did he make it then in fix dales and refted the feventh day, but that it might 
 be an example to man? Itsevident that ever fmce the worlj began, mans 
 life was to be fpent in labour and adion which God could have ap- 
 pointed to contemplation only ; nor will any fay that his life fhould be fpenc 
 only in labour and never have any fpeciall day of reft f unlefle the Antino- 
 mians who herein fin againft the light of nature ) if therefore God was 
 exemplary in his fix daies labour, why fliould any think bu: that he was thus 
 alfo in his (eventh daies reft ? Pointing out unto man moft vifibly (as it were) 
 thereby on what day he ihouldreft: Am-et time for labour wasamorall 
 duty fince man was framed upon earth, God therefore gives man an example 
 of it in making the world in fix daies : A meet time for holy reft the end of 
 sllholy andhoneft labour, was much more morall (the end being better 
 then the means ) why then was not the example of this alb feen in Gods 
 reft? U^.IronJide indeed isataftand here, and confcfieth his ignorance /» 
 conceivitig how Gods ^^crkJK^ fix dus jh^uld bs exemfUrj to mJtn in intiocencjy 
 it being not preceptive hut p*rmi[pve o/s/y to wan in h s apo^afie* Bux let a pla n 
 analyfis be made of the motiv.-s ufcd to prefte obedience to the fourth com- 
 mand and we ftiall finde (according to the confcnt of all the Orthodox 
 nor prejudiced in this controverfie, that Goas example of working fix daies 
 incrcatingtheworldjis held forth as a motive to prefix Gods people to do 
 all their work within fix daies alio, and the very reafon of our labour and 
 reft now, is the example of Gods labour and reft then, as may alfo appear, 
 ^£^^.31.17. And to fay that thofe words in the Commandment {mz,Six 
 daies thoHjb^it Uhour ) are no way preceptive but meerly prom'ffive, is both 
 crofletotheexprefls letter of the text, andcontrary to morall equity toal- 
 k)W any part of the fix daies for finfull idlenefte or neglc<fl of our weekly 
 work, fo fiir forth as the reft upon the Sabbath be hindered hereby. 
 
rhe Morality affbe SMmh. - ^^ 
 
 Thefn 157. 
 The word S^nFllfiedh varioudy taken in Scripture, and various things are 15^. 
 varioufly and differently fanaificd: yet in this place when God is faid to 
 /2«^/j?<?the Sabbath, C/^^. 2.3,3. ^^ f""^ be one of thefetwowaies: either, 
 I. By infiifion of holir.eflc and fandification into it, as holy men are faid 
 to be fandified: Or, 2. By reparation of it from common ufe, and 
 dedication of it to holy ufe as the Temple and Altar are faid 10 be fan- 
 aified. 
 
 Thfis 158. 
 God did not fandific the Sabbath by infufion of any habituall holinefle in- 1 5 S. 
 to it; forthecircumdanccofafeventh day is not capable thereof, whereof 
 only rationall creatures men and Angels are. 
 
 Thefts 1 5 p. 
 It muft therefore be faid to be fandificd in refpe^ of its feparation frora 1 59, 
 common ufe and dedication to holy ufe, as the Temple and Tabernacle were, 
 which yet had no inherent holinefle in them. 
 
 Thtfis 1 60. 
 Now if the Sabbath was thus fanc^ified by dedication-^ it muft be either 160* 
 for the ufe ofGod or of man, i. either that God might keep this holy day, 
 or that man might obferve it as a holy day to God, but what difhonour is 
 it to God to put him npon the obfervation of a holy day > and therefore it 
 was dedicated and eonfecrated for mans fake and ufe,that fo he might obferve 
 it as holy unto God. 
 
 Thefis 161, 
 This day therefore is faid to be fandified of God that man might fandlific i^i« 
 k and dedicate it unto God, and hence it follows,that look as man could ne- 
 ver have lawfully dedicated it unto God,without a precedent inftitution from 
 God ; fo the inftitution of God implies a known command given by God 
 unto man thereunto. 
 
 Thefis 162. 
 'T\s therefore evident that when God is faid to fan<5lifie the Sabbath, Ge». 1 6u 
 2.2,3. that man is commanded hereby to fandifie it, and dedicate it to the 
 holy ufe of God: S^nBifieare eft finBlficari mandnre, faith fffnifes : And l«« »«<?«* 
 therefore if M. Primrofe and others defire to know where God commandeth 
 the obfervation of the Sabbath in ge». 2.2. they may fee it here ncceflarily im- 
 plied in the word SmBifi^ : And therefore if God did fandlifie the Sabbath 
 immediatly after the creation, he commanded man to fandifieitthen,forib 
 the word SanEiifiedis cxpreffely expounded by the holy Ghoft himfclf, Deptt* 
 5.15. We need not therefore feek tor wood among trees, and enquire where 
 and when and upon what ground the Patriarchs before Mofe s obkiyc6, a 
 Sabbath, when as it was famouOy dedicated and fandificd, u commanded 
 tobc fandified from the ftrft foundation of the world. 
 
 R 2 Thefis 
 
i^ 7k Morality of the Sahhth. 
 
 Thefts 16^, 
 52, Our advcrfarics therefore dazled with the clearnefTe of the light fliining 
 forth from the teKC, Qen.i.i, to wit, that the Sabbath was commanded 
 Eo be faniflified before the fall, do fly to their (hifcs and feekfor refuge 
 from feverall anfwersj fometimes they lay 'tis fandified by way of defti- 
 nation, fometimes they tell us of anticipation, fomecime they think the 
 Book of Gemfuw2i%yNnt after Exo^m, and many fuch inventions; which 
 becaufe they cannot poflibly (land one with another, are therefore more fit 
 to vex and perplex the minde, then to fatisfie confcience ; and indeed do 
 argue much uncertainty to be in the mtndes of thofe that make thefe and the 
 like anfwers as not knowing certainly what to fay, nor where to ^tand : yet 
 let us examine them. 
 
 Thefis 164. 
 .>4 To imagine that the Book of Genejis was writ after Exodtu, and yet to 
 affirm that the Sabbath in genefts is faid to be fandified and bleft, only in 
 way of defiination, i, becaufe God deftinated and ordained that it (hould be 
 fandified many years after ; feems to be an illfavoured and mifliapen anfwer, 
 and no way fit to ferve their turn who invent it : for if it was writ after 
 Exodus^ what need was there to fay that it was deftinated and ordained to 
 be fandified for time to come? when as upon this fuppofition the Sabbath 
 was already fandified for time paft, as appears in the ftory ofExodt^ ip.20. 
 And therefore M. "Frimrofe tranflates the words thus, that God reftcd, and 
 hathb\Q^cd and hath fandified the feventh day, as if Mofes writ of it as a 
 thing paft already, but what truth is there then to fpcak of a deftinat ion for 
 time to come > I know fftnifu fo renders the "Hebrew words, as alfo the word 
 Refied, but we know how many waies fome of the Hebrew tenfes look, nor 
 is it any matternow to trouble oar felves about them, this only may be con- 
 fidered ; That it is a meer uncertain (liift to affirm that genefis was writ d^^' 
 t^t Exodus I M. Ironfide tcls us he could give ftrong reafons for it, but he 
 produceth none ; and as for his authorities from humane teftimonics, we 
 know it is not fit to weigh out truth by humane fufftages ; and yet herein they 
 do not caft the fcale, for Gemfis to be writ after Exodus, for although Bed^ 
 AMenfisy and divers late Jefuites do affirm ir, yet Eufebim^ CathArinuSy 
 AkmnPtSyLapidey and fundry others, both Popiili and Proieftant writers, arc 
 better jadgmented herein;and their reafons for genefis to be the firft-born as 
 it is firft fct down, feem to be moft ftrong : The cafting of this cauie there- 
 fore depends not upon fuch uncertainties; and yet if this diforder were gran- 
 ted it will do their eaufe no good, as, if need were, might be made manifeft. 
 
 Thefs 1^5. 
 M. /^'^^w/^tf confeffeth, That Gods refiing a»d fanSiifyhgtke Sahl/Ath^ are 
 r S' coemneaw, and acl^owl/doeth the connexion of them together at the fame time, 
 bj the copfiUtive And^ andthat as GodaBmdy refiei, fo he aUnally fanBi" 
 
 fed 
 
 iC^t 
 
The Morality ef^the Sdhath. X25 
 
 fiedtheday : but this fandificarion which he means is nothing elfe but de- 
 ftination, or Godspurpofe and intention to (andifieit afterward: fo tha: 
 in e^ed this evafion ainonnts to thus much, viz. that God did aflually pur- 
 pole to fandifie ir, about 2500. years after the giving of the Law, but yet 
 did not adually (andjfie it, and if this be the meaning it is all one as if he 
 had r^id in plain terms, i/i^, that when God is faid to fandifie the Sabbath 
 he did not indeed (andlifie it, only he purpofedfo to do, and alttioughM. 
 Primrofe and himlelFtels us that the ys/ord/kfsElifie fignifies in the Originall 
 fome time to prepare and orddni fo it may be (aid that the word fig- 
 nifies (omctime io ffihlijh and proclaim x if they (ay that this latter can- 
 not be the meaning, becaufe we readcnot in Scripture of any fuch procla- 
 mation that this (houid be the Sabbath, the like may be faid (upon the 
 reafons mentioned) concerning cheir deftination of it thereunto : Again, 
 if tofandifie theday be only to purpofe and ordain to fandifie it, then the 
 Sabbath was no more (andified fince the Creation, then ah aterno^ and 
 before the world began, for then ^od did purpofe that itfhould be fandi- 
 fied i but this fandkification here fpoken of leeras to follow Gods refting, 
 which was in time, and therefore it muft be underftood of another fan- 
 dification then that which Teems to be before all time : again as God 
 did not blefls the Sabbath in way of deftination, fo neither did he fan- 
 difie it in way of deftination, but he did not blelfe it in way of deftina- 
 tion, for kt them produce but one Scripture where the word blefled is 
 taken in this fence, for a purpofe only to bleUe : indeed they think they 
 have found out this purpole to fandifie in the word fandified, Ifa, 13. 
 3. but where will they finde the like for the word blefled alfo ? for as 
 the day wasbleffed foit was fandified, and yet I think that the Medes 
 znd Per^ans in J fa.i^*^, are not called Gods fandified ones, becaufe they 
 were deftinated to be fandified for that work, but becaufe they were Io 
 prepared for k as that they were adually fcparaied by Gods word for the 
 accomplifhment of fuch work: but our adverfarres will not fay that God 
 did thus fandjfie the Sabbath in Paradife by his word : and yet luppofc they 
 are called bis fandified ones in way of deftination, yet there is not the 
 likereafon io to interpret it here, for in//S,i3.3- God himfelfis brougbc *: 
 inimmediaily fpeaking, before whole eternall eyes ail things to come arc 
 as prefent, and hence he might call them his fandified or.es, but in this 
 place of (7tf«, 2.3, Mofes fnotGodiiiamediacly ) f peaks of this fandifying 
 inwayof hiftoricall narration only, this deftination which is ftoodiomuch 
 upon is but a meet imagination. 
 
 The fa \66, 
 Itcannot be denied but that it is a uluall thing in Scripture to fet down i^^, 
 tbings in way of Prole ffis and Anticifatiott^ as th^y call ic, *. to fet down 
 things aforehaad inthe hi&oryi which many year&hapaed and came after 
 
 R 3_ '-' m 
 
^ J g the Morality of the ^Mitth* 
 
 in wderoftmie, bot there is no fuch ProUpfis or Ant^iclpaTton here f «€ oar 
 advcrfarics dreana ) fo that when God is faid to fand-fie the Sabbath in 
 Genefts^ the meaning fliould be, that thtshe did 2500. years afecr the cre- 
 ation, for this affercion wants all proof, and hath no other prop to bear 
 it lip, then fotnc inftances o\ Ancicipitions in other places of Scripture : 
 the Jefuites from fome unwary expreflions of locnc of the Fathers, firft 
 ftarred this anfwer, whom Gomarm followed, and after him fundry o- 
 thers prelatically minded : but Rivet j ^mss\ and others have fcattered ^, 
 this mift long fince, and thertfore Khali Icavebuc this one confideracion 
 againft it, vtz,. That throughout all the Scripture we (hall not finde 
 one ProlepftSj but that the hiftory is evidently and apparently falie, unlefle 
 we do acknowledge a ProUpfis and Anticipation to be in the ftory : (o 
 that necelTity of cftabliQiing the truth of the hiftory, only can eftablifti the 
 tx\M\ioiz ProUpfis \vi the hiftory: 1 forbear togive atafte hereof by any 
 particular inftances, but leave it to triall ; but in this place alledged of Gen. 
 2.a. can any fay that the ftory is apparently talfe, unkfle we imagine a 
 ProUpfis? and the Sabbath to be firft fan(^ified on mount Sinai, Exo.ao. 
 for might not God fandific it in Paradife, as (oon as Gods reft the caufc 
 and foundation of fandifying of it was firft cxifting? will any fay with 
 ?°JJ!"^^"o.C7tfw^r^ that the Sabbath was firft fandified, Exoa6. becaufeGod blef- 1 
 ri^,/4*.;,i:5 fed them fo much the day before with Manna^ whenas in the Command- 
 ment it felf, Exo,i(h the rexfon of it is plainly fet down to be Gods reftfng 
 on the feventh day, and fandifying of it long before ? 
 
 Thefis 16 J. 
 T 67, There is not the leaft cobur of Scripture to make this blcfling and fandi- 
 * fyingoftheday, to be nothing eKebuc Gods mignifying, and liking of it 
 in his own mindcj rejoicing and as it were glorying in it, when he had reft- 
 Prim, p«r.i.ed from his works, and yet M. Primrofe caits this block in the way for 
 ^«^»/»'• theblindeto ftumbleit, luppofing that there ftiould be no fuch Anticifam 
 tion as he pleads for: for lurely if God Wefled and fandified the day, ic 
 was a reallandancffcjduall fandificacion and blefllrig, but this magnifying 
 and glorying in ir, inGodsminde, is no reallxhing in theblefled God, he 
 having no fuch afcdions in him, but what is faid to be in him that way ^ 
 iscverbyfomefpcciall cffeds: the (imple and pure effence of God admit- * 
 im^noiifcdiGnsper modar/t afe[ins fedejftBm, as is truly and commonly 
 HKimtain'd, 
 
 Thefis 168. 
 168. If God (andified and commanded /^^^watofandifiithe Sabbath, it was 
 either that he himielt Ihouid ot:jrve ic pcrfoqillyor fucceflively in his po- 
 fterity alfo : now there is no reafon to think that this is a command pecu- 
 iiarly binding v^</<i)whimtelf only, there being the fame cauk for histpoile- 
 rity to oWetve a Sabbath, as himfclf had> which was Gods example of la- 
 bour 
 
Iht Mmibty of the SAbhath. j ^ 7 
 
 bour and reft, and if this wasgivenco hispofterity alfo, then it was a mo- 
 rallduty, and not a point of meer order proper to Adam to attend unto: 
 yet M. Primrsff for fear left he fhould (hoot fhort in ©ne of his anlwers, p«'""* f^*** 
 wherein he tclsus, that it dU derogate mnch from the exce&encj of Adams '^i\m/fll.%. 
 condition^ to have any one daj fir God appointed unto him : yet here not- f'*/'.i'/>J'' 
 withftanding he tels us, that if God had appointed fitch adij, it^as no mo» 
 raU things nor j^t a ceremony dire U; in f^ to C^Jrifly but only as a point of order y 
 ^pjtch Gcd "^06 pleafed then to ftibjetl him unto : and that a man may as ^tH 
 conclude that it Veoi a mord/i thing to fcrve God in Eden, becanfe it ^as 
 aploice^hich Gcd had appointed Ad-iii\ to/erve him in^ 04 thsfevenih day 
 to be meroM becinfe it W^ the time thereof ^^ but this allercion is bm a Qjeec 
 <i^i:^^ov^ for the text tels us exprtfly, that Gad did both bkfle and iand;i- 
 fie the Seventh dsy in a ipeciall manner, as a thing of common concern- 
 menr, bui is never liid tobkfl'i and iandVifie the plice oi Sden ; Ali men 
 in t^d^m wercniadein the iauge of God, and was there but one thing 
 in innocency wherein God made himlelf eminently exemplary in labour 
 and reft, and (hiW we think that that one thing, was rather a point of 
 order proper to Adam, then a part of Gois image common to all ? the 
 appointment of that royall ka^toiSdsyf, was an ad of htavenly bounty, 
 and therefore might well be proper t© him in that tftate, but the appoint- 
 ment of the time for Gods fpeciiU honour, was an ad of juftice, made and 
 built upon a rule of common equity, as may appear ouc of th^ (ccond 
 edition of this Law in the fourth Commandment, and therefore might well 
 be morally binding unto ali, and not a point of meer order only for Adam to 
 oWerve. 
 
 Thejij l6p. 
 
 If Adam had ftood,alI mankinde might, and perhips fhoald have obfer- ^ ^9» 
 ved that particular feventhday forever on^earth : but look ^s\^dam ob- 
 ierved it not meerly becaule it was That Seventh ( as hath been fhewn ) 
 which wss bu-t (ecundariiy and as it were accidentally morall : but becaulc 
 it was the Seventh ddy appointed oF God, which is firftly and primarily 
 morall: foalthough wen^ow<io notobfervc ihnSeventh day vfhkh Adam 
 did, yet the fubftanceof the morality of this command given unto him is 
 obferved ftill by us, in obfer ving the Seventh day ^hich god hath appoint edy 
 to which the equity of this command bindes generally all mankinde : hence 
 therefore it is of little force which fome ob/cd, that if the Commandment 
 tomanininnocency be morall, tbitthen we are bound tooblerve the fame 
 Seventh day, v^hkh Adamin innoccncy did i this is oft laid in our difti, but 
 ikcanfweriseafiefrom what hithbcenfaid. 
 
 The/is 170. 
 
 If bccaufe we reade not any exprefle mention that the Patriarchs before lyo, 
 Mo/ej tmt did fandifie a Sabbath, that therefore the Sabbath was not 
 
 fandifieu 
 
j^§ The Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 fan61:Ified, all that time, we may as well argue that it was not obiervedall 
 the time of the Judges, nor of the books o^ Samtisly becaufeno expreffc 
 mention is made m chofe books ok any fuch thing : for if it be faid that 
 there is no doubt, but that they oblerved it b^caufc it was publiQied on 
 Mount Sinaiy ihe like we may fay concerning the Patriarchali riines, who 
 had lucb a famous manifeftation of Gods mindc herein, from the known 
 ftory* Commandment and example of God in the firO: creation, Gen,i,%. 
 St is not laid exprefly that Abram kept the Sabbith, but he is commended 
 for keeping Gods Commandments, G^;«. 26.5. and is not the Sabbith one 
 of thofe Commandments, the breach of which is accounted the breaking 
 of all? Exod,\6.i'jt%2t, and may we lawfully and charitably think that 
 ^^r^w^ ncglcded other morall duties becaufe they are notexprefly menti- 
 oned ? again it may bz as well doubted of, whether the Patriarchs obferved 
 any day at all ( which our adverfaries confefle to be morall) becaufe it 
 neither is exprefly mentioned s again it may b t faid with as good reafon, that 
 the lacrifices which they offered were without warrant from God, becaufe 
 the Commandment for them is not exprtfly mentioned ; but we know that 
 e^W by faith offered, and faith muftarife from a precedent word : fo that 
 as the approved pradlife of holy men doth neceffarily imply a command, 
 fothe command given (as hath beeniliewn) to Adam^ doth as neceffa- 
 rily mferre a pradile : agam if no duties to God were performed by the Pa- 
 triarchs, butfuchas are exprefly mentioned and held forth in their exam- 
 ples, wefliould then behold a ftrange f ace of a Church for many hundred 
 years together, and neceffarily condemn the generation of the juft, for li- 
 ving m groffe negleds and impieties, there being many finguhrand (peciall 
 duties which doubtlefle were done that A^ere not meet particularly to be 
 mentioned in that fhort epitome of above 2000. years rogecher, in the book 
 of Gemfis ; and therefore for M. Iron fide and Primrofs to conclude that 
 the keeping of the Sabbath had certainly been mentioned if it had been ob« 
 Iront Shu ^"^^^> is very unfound. M, Frimrofe thinks that if the Sti^bath had been 
 eap*t, obfcrve-d, it hadbeen then mentioned^ becaufe le^er things then the Sabbath 
 
 Vt^ur'^' a^^*^^^^^^^^ionof^ there being alfo frequent occafion to if ea^ of the Sab' 
 ^athy and that MoCes and the Prophets ^otfidkave prejfdthe obfervatsot of 
 it from the ^Patriarchs example if thej had fi praStifed. But what is 
 this kindc of arguing, but to teach the holy Ghort, what and when and 
 bow to ipeak ? for there be many kffer matters expreft in many other hifto- 
 ricall parts of the Scripture, and good occalionas man may fancy to fpeak 
 ©f the Sabbath, and yet we fee it ispaft by in filencc: but it is no wonder 
 if he who queftions whether there were any daiesof fading and praier for 
 2000. years together, becaufe they are not exprefly mentioned, if that he 
 doubts alfo whether there were any Sabbath all that time upon the fame 
 groimd ; but can any queftion that confiders the forrows of chofe evill times, 
 
 which 
 
The Merality fif the Sabbath. ^25 
 
 which in all ages have put men to feek God in fuch dutks, but that they had ' 
 fuch daies of fafting, as well as their betters in Evangelicall times, when the 
 Pridegroom was gone. 
 
 The/is ly I, 
 
 It is not improbable bui that the facrifices of C4<« and -/^^f/, Gen. 4. 3. 171* 
 were upon the Sabbath day, the ufuall ftaced time then for fuch fervices, for 
 that whkh our Tranfiation renders, Inproceffeoftimty the Hebrew calsif, 
 tJDO^n tr\2 i. The tndofdAtesi and why may not this be the end of the 
 daies of the week ( a known divifion of time and moft famous from the be- 
 ginning ©f the world, as Rivet demonftrates out of the beft Antiquaries) 
 rather then at the end of the moaeths of the year } But 'tis not good to wra- 
 ftle with probabilities, of which many are given, which do rather darkca 
 then clear up this caufe : This only may be added, that fuppofe the Patriarchs 
 obferved no Sabbath from mans fall to Mofes time; yet it will not follow 
 thatmanininnocency wasaftranger to it, beeaufc man in his apoftafy for- 
 got or did not regard to keep it, 
 
 Thefit 172. 
 
 If therefore it was a duty which ^d^m and his pofterity were bound to ly^* 
 keep by a law given them in innocency ; Then it undeniably follows that 
 the obfervance of a Sabbath doch not depend upon great numbers of people 
 to fandlifie it ; for atfirft creation the number was but two, and yet they 
 both were bound to obferve it then : nor yet is it to be caft alide through 
 anymaisfreedom from worldly incumbrances whereby he hath liberty to 
 ferveGod more frequently everyday; for thus it was alfo in the ftate of 
 innocency, and yet the Sabbath to be obferved then : It is therefore un- 
 found which M. Pr/wny^ affirms herein, viz ThM ths conftcrAthnof acjSY" 
 tain day for godt fervkeu not necefa^y^ bni thenonljy ^henm^ny troop ts-' 
 getberAndmakjftpthebodjofagreat Ajpm^Iy -^ a»d that there fire ii m^y be 
 dotibted whether the 'Tatrhrchs having bnt fntitH fdmlliei and little cnmber^ 
 obferved any Sabbsfh^ but rather ferved god alike every day ^ith great eafe 
 and<4jfidu!tjy and that there fire there ^as no need y»or caufe of a Sabbath tiH 
 they bee time a fiumerovu people at mount Sin ^i,- But befide what hath been 
 faid, how will it appear thit the pofterity of Seth called the Tons of God, 
 <7r».6.i,2. were not a numerous people ? Gr that Abrahams family was fo 
 fniall ? out of which he could gather three hundred fighting men to purfue 
 five mighty Princes in battell? But fuppofe they were few, yet have not 
 fmall companies and particular perfons as much need of the blefling of a 
 Sabbath? and <peciall communion with God therein, as great numbers and 
 troops of people? Is not the obfervation of the Sabbath built upon better 
 and iurer groundswientioned in Scripture, then bignefle of number and free- 
 dom from cumbers, not mentioned at all ? 
 
 t S Thep 
 
f j^ The M(^ality of the SMath. 
 
 Thefis 173. 
 J73. If Admms fall was before the Sabbath (as Vi.'Broad and fome others 
 othcrwiTc orchodox in this point of the Sabbath, conceive, by too ranch 
 inconfiderate wrefting of P/al.^p. 12. foh»2,^^) yet it will not hence fol- 
 low that he had no fuch command in innoccncy to obferve the Sabbath be- 
 fore his fall : For whether man had fallen or no, yet the thing it felf fpeaks 
 that God vvas determined to >s>ori^fix dAttsm n?iaking the world, and to reft 
 andfo to(an(^ifie the/^t/f»iA, that he might theiein be exemplary to man, 
 andconfcquefKly God would have given thiS law, and it ihoufd have beea 
 ji rule to him whether he fell or no; and indeed the fevench daies reft de- 
 pends no more upon mans fail, then the fix daies work of creation, which 
 W€ fee were all fini(hcd before the fail; the Itventh daies holmeffe being 
 more futable to that eftace then the fix Axics labour, to which we fv^e he was 
 appointed if Gods example had any force to dire(fl and lead him thereunto* 
 Agaioj ifthc law of labour was writ upon his heart before he was adually 
 called forth to labour, t/«.To dreflfs^and keep the garden, (7^/1. i.i5> why 
 might not alfo the law of holy reft be revealed unto him by God, and fo 
 anfwerably writ upon his heart before he fell, or came adually to reft upon 
 the Sabbath ? Liitle of Adams univerf^ll obedience to the law of works, was 
 as yet atfluall while he remained innocent 5 and yet all his obedience m time 
 to come was writ upon his heart the firft moment of his creation in the Image 
 of God, as it were aforehand, and why might not this law of the Sabbath 
 aroadrr^^ be Wfit fo aforehand? And therefore M. Broad need not trouble himfclf 
 ^ ^' or others in cnqviiting whether God fandified the Sabbath before the firft 
 or after the firft fcventh day wherein God refted ; and if before it, how 
 AdamzowM know of the Sabbath before Gods compkat reft upon the firft 
 feventh day, the caufe of it ? for God was as well able to make Adamfii^ 
 Vy to his counfel aforehand concerning that day, before Gods reft on it 
 which was a motive to the obfervance of it, as he was to acquaint his people 
 wkh his purpofe for a holy Paflfcovcr before the occafion of 11 fell otw: j 
 **'< M.'S''<w^ indeed tels as that its moft probable that God did not t>lelle and 
 
 fandifie the firft Sabbath or ieventh day of reft, becaufe it is not fafd that 
 God bledid the Sabbath becaufe he would, but becaufe he bad rcftc^d in it j 
 but by his leave it is moft proper to fay chat God at the end of the lix daies 
 work had then refted from all his works, and thence God is faid lo fand t>e 
 and reft the feventh day, his ccffation from work which is the natural] reft 
 betrtg thecaufe of refttng t4ic feventh day with a holy re(t (as we have 
 fcewn ) and therefore there is no reafos to ftay till the feventh day was paft 
 and then to famftifieit againft the nejct feventh day, tke firft fevenihd^yi 
 upon the ground mentioned, being firft fan^ified, and which Adam niijghc 
 Jbe well enough acquainted with aforehand, as hath bcenibewii. 
 
 Thefii 
 
The Mwdkj eftbe SMdiL ^3^ 
 
 Thefij 174. 
 If the Scriptures may be judge of the time of roans fall ( which yet is not 
 momentous to caft the balance either wajfin this controverfie ) it will be 
 found that neither Angels nor men did fall the fixt day before the Sabbath, 
 for then God looked upon all his works, and they were very good, <y<».i. 
 3 1 . and therefore could not as yet be bad and evil by any (in or fall ; aqd 
 now bccaufe it's more then probable that if Jt^am had compleatly findified 
 and ftood one Sabbath, he had flood immutably, as I think might be de- 
 mon(^rated, he therefore not ftanding a whole feventfa day, for then fac 
 could not have fallen, and yet not being fallen the iixt day, he therefore 
 ftllupon the Sabbath day, that as the breach of every otiier command was 
 wrapt up in that firft fin, fo this of the Sabbath : The ob/edions again^^ this 
 from ?*^* 8.44. that Satan was a murderer from the beginning, and fcooi 
 Pfii/.^pA2» that man in honour did not f'*?! or abide one night in that 
 cftate, with fome other conjedurail reafotis taken from fomc of the Schoal- 
 mens Oh and So/s areeafily anfvvcrcd byaferiousand fober mind^, an4 
 therefore I leave them. 
 
 The/Js 175, 
 Adaais /?»/( fay fomc ) tiU not needa SaUath, hecaufe every elaj Wdta x^^, 
 SahhAth (0 him*, nor did hUkodjneed it, heeanfe it wds imfaffibU, fayfomc; ^^"S-^jJ;. 
 no^ ful9](n; to >^earfnfffe in its \^orl^, fay others truly : f^ ^hat purpo/e then ^"^l ^' 
 firifUd any Sa^hath ke afpsinted unto him in thctt eflate f But we muft know, h\tx,Mef. 
 that the Hebrew word for Sabbath, (ignifies holjrefi, and therefore as Rivn ^^,!;^;y^ ^ 
 wellfhews, it*s called n3r not nniJO MenuchAh, which fignifics common c«»».|, 
 reft from wcarinefle; hence it follows that the Sabbath being originally 
 fandified for holy reft, not for common reft or reft from naturall wcarineffc 
 in labour; «^^4W might therefore ftandin need of a Sabbath, though his 
 body was not fubjed to any wearincfTe in or after his labour. Hence alfo 
 although he was to live hoMy every day, yet this hinders not but that his foul 
 might then have need of the holy reft of a Sabbath : For i . t^dam was to 
 ferreGod in a particular calling then, as is manifeft from, ^<f«. 2.15. for he 
 was then to keep and drcfle the garden, and to ad with and und r God in 
 the government of many inferiour creatures, 5"^/?. 1,26. And thws his rime 
 beingfilled in ferving God with all holineffe in his calling, he mghc necda 
 Sabbath, nor was it lawfull for him to turn dales of work in his calling into 
 daiesofreft, and fo to Keep a Sabbath every day, no not in that innocent 
 cand happy eftate : for if it was contrary to *Adam$ holy t^\\,t to work fij: 
 •dates, how could it be agreeable or futable to chc ho'intfTe of God to work 
 fix daies ? If God did labour fix daies and refted a fcvcnth without any need 
 of a reft in rcfped of any wcarinefle in his work, why might nor, nay why 
 ihould not man imitateand be like to his God in labour and rtft, although 
 he was not fabjed to any wcarinefle in his holy work ? 2. Though every day 
 
 5 3 was 
 
jja 7Ih Morality cfthe SaUith. 
 
 was to be fpcnttnholinefrc mecHatiy, both in feeing God in the creatures 
 andmcetingwiihGodinhis labour and calling, ycc it was not unfucable, 
 nay it was very needfull in that cftate to have one day in the week for more 
 immediate mdCfcchW converfe with God, afld for God more imraediatly 
 and fpecially to converfe with him: Nor indeed was it (utable to Gods 
 wifdom to confine mans holmefle either then or now, either to holy labour 
 only, or to holy reft only, for then he fhould not have been fo hke unco 
 God who Was exemplary holy unco man in both, Speciall rim^: for a^ioa 
 wherein he clofed with God more mediatly throughout the fix dales labour, 
 might well ftand withfpeciall time for contemplation of God upon the Sab- 
 bath, wherein he was to enjoy God moreimmediatly. ^i^amdld not need a 
 Sabbath upon the fame ground of '^eak^ejfe that we do, vi^, Becaufe wc 
 im^jr».» cannot be earncft enough (uLsU.Prmrofe objeds) in holy fcrvices toGdd 
 I, /.i^,«7. ^Q^ ^[^Q vyeek daies, but we fee it did not futc Gods wifdom nor mans holy 
 eftate, then to be intent and earneft only in the enjoyment of his reft, to 
 which his intention on his calling and labour then, could not beany hinde- 
 rance when the Sabbath came, being free from fuch clogs of fin then as we 
 are now preft down withall : and therefore it is an unworthy exprcffion, but 
 ni,S.p» oft ufed by the fame suthor and others : vi^. That it did derogate from the 
 exceHenej 0/ Adams condition to ohferve a fevemh dmes Sabbath^ and that 
 the determination of a time then ^ did argue Adams /W1///7, or ^ant ff in' 
 iUnation and ajfeBion to ferve God ordinarily, and thm the ob'ervAnce of a 
 SabhAth U am<itrkj>f afervile condition, as of other hUj dates under the law, 
 4»dthatif Adsim^'ts ab/eto firve godcoKtinualip that it ^as then netdkfe 
 to limit him to a particular day, and that if a dry Uvr/ need fill God ^ould have 
 left the choice thereof to hU ovon freedom^ canftdering the wifdom and gedlineffe 
 therewith god had endomd him : Thefe and fuch like expreflions are but 
 hay and ftubble, which the light of the truth delivered may eafily con- 
 fume. 
 
 Thefis 17^. 
 > 'Xis true the Saints and Angels in heaven have nofet Sabbath; but doth 
 "^^ k therefore follow that the ftate of innocency on earth, fhould have been in 
 all things Ike (and particularly in this) to the ftace of glory in heaven? 
 No fuch matter, For fliould there have been no marriage, no drelTing of the 
 garden, no day nor night, ^f*. in Paradile? becaufe there is no marriage 
 nor dreflSng of gardens, nor weeks, nor reckoniP'gs of day and night m 
 heaven? If God hath work for Adam to do, not only upon the Sabbath, 
 but upon the week daies alfo, why might he not be faid toglonfie God 
 witho.it ftint or ceafing, as the Angels do m heaven, unkfTe U.Tnmrofe 
 will fay that /^i4>»/ marriage and drefli.ig the garden, was a ftinting and 
 ceafing from glorifying God ; which either he muft affirm, or elfe his ar- 
 gtfmeatfalsjaat upon all four, who thinks that t/^Mm could not have any 
 
The Uonlitj ef tk Sdbaih. IJJ 
 
 let day for a Sabbath, becaufc then he {honid not be like the Saints arid 
 Angels in heaven, who glotific Gad continually without fliRt;drccafit>g, ibid,^a«. 
 
 Thifis 177. ■'-'.- 
 
 They that think that the Sabbath was not given to Ad4m, becaufc it was 177. 
 given as a peculiar preiogative and priviledgc to the Jews: and they that I'onf.^i, 
 think that it was the Jews prerogative and priviledge btcaufeof fnchScri- '''^** 
 pturcsas affirm that God gave unto ihemhis Sabbaths, £jv^^.i^.2p, N^hem, 
 p. 14,^*^^20.1 2. and foch like; they may as well imagine ihac neither the 
 whole Decalogue or any part of it did belong to A((Am\ bccaufe the very 
 fame thing is affirmed of if, t/*. That he gave his laws to Jacob, his statutes 
 and judgements to IfraeijP/Si/. 147. ip. to them alio it's ^x\i ^ere comit- 
 ud the Oracles of god^ Rem, ^,2, The Sabbath therefore is notfaidtobe 
 given to them as a peculiar propriety to the Jews no more then other parts ' 
 oftheDccalogne, but as a fpeciall mercy, yea as a fweeter mercy in fomc 
 rcfpedth^n the giving of any other laws,, it being the fwccteft mercy upon 
 earth to reft in the bofom of God (which the law of .the Sabbath calsto) 
 and to know that it is our heavenly Fathers minde that we (l:iould do fo upon 
 every Sabbath day in a fpeciall manner, without the knowledge of which 
 law we havtUffe light ofnature to hold the candle fous, to the obfervance 
 of if, then from any other law to dircd us to the obedience of them. 
 
 Thefis 178. :»• - 
 
 It is affirmed ( but unwurily ) by (ohk, that the tree of life in Paradife ^7^» 
 wasatypeof Chrift, and thence fooie would infer, that it was not tmfuta- 
 ble to ^dams eftate and (rendition in innocency, to be taught by types, and 
 that the Sabbath might therefore be ceremoniall, (uppofing that it was ob- 
 ferved by a dam in his innocent eftate ; but although ene tree oflife ai>d fun- 
 dry other things in Paradife, are made Similitudes to itt forth Chrift Jt^us 
 in his Church by the holy Ghoft,/?tfz/.22. yetit's agroffemiftakeand moft 
 ablurd to makeevtry metaphor or fimilitudc and allufion, to be a type : for 
 the husbandman fowing of the feed is a fimilitude of preaching of the word, . 
 ii/4f. 13, and yet it^s no type of it, an affedionace lover and husband is in 
 fundry Scriptures a fimilitude and reiemblancecf Chriftsaff^dioTi and love 
 toiiis Cfcnrch andfponfe, the head and members of mans body arefimili- 
 tudes of Chrift the head and the Church his mtmbets, but will any affirm 
 that thefe are alfo types otChrift ? and juft thus Was Paradiic and the Tree 
 ©f life in it, they were fimilitude'^ to which the holy Ghoft alludes in ma- 
 king mention of Cbnft and his Church, butthfcy were no types of them t 
 there was typwfi^m it) them or arhitrarim ( which is all one with a fimi- 
 litude) but thtre was no Tjfti* d'fiittAtw therein, being neVcr purpotely 
 ordained to flaadow out Chrift : for the Covenant of works by which 4dam 
 Wastolive, isdireftlycontrary to the Covenant of grace by faith in Chrift, 
 Kvma 1.6. by which weare to live, Cbtift is revealed only in the Covenant 
 
 S|^ of 
 
t34 The Morality of the SMath. 
 
 tol grace, and therefote could not be fo revealed in the Covenantor Work^ 
 dircdly concrairy thcf cuniQ I Adawn^^ttioxt was net cupableol^ anycypcs 
 then to reveal Chrift to hkn .• o( whom the firft Covenant cannot fpcak, 
 and of whom AdAi» ftood in no need, no not lo much Is to Cot^itnn hioi in 
 that eftate, for ( with leave) I think that look as ^4am brt:sking the firft 
 Covenant by (inoc, be is become iaitnucibly tviU and miserable tnhimkl'^, 
 according to th^ ruk oi jaftice in that Covenant, io ^fup^oie \\\m co have 
 kept that Covenant, all his poftcrity had been immutably nappy and holy, 
 ( not meerly by grace ) but by the fame equity and juftice of rhac fi ft Cov«- 
 mnt, and hence ic follows that be ftood in no need of Ct^nll or any Keve- 
 ifttionof him by types, no not to confircn hira in that Covenant; I know 
 In {bme fence whatever God conitnunicates to his creature in way of jullicc 
 may be Caid to be conveyed m a way of grace, tf grace be taken largclv tor 
 chat which is conveyed out of Gods free will and good plcaiurc, as aS things 
 in the world arc even to the acceptance of that wherein there is moft merit 
 and that is Chrids death and fatisf adton for linne s but this is but to piay 
 with words, for it's clear enough by the Apoftles verdid that grace ftric^ly 
 taken is opposite to works, R^m.ii .6. the law of works W; ich only reveils 
 doing and life, tothelawof faith which only reveals Chhll and lite, undcT 
 which Covenant of grace A^am was not, and therefore had no types thtn 
 to ll^adew oat Chrifl; to fay that Paradife and the Tree of life were typ'S 
 by way of anticipation (as fome lately atfirm ) is as much as to fay that 
 they were not types then : and therefore neither thefe nor the Sabbath 
 were Ceremoniall then, andthatisfutiicientfor whatwe aim at, only 'tis 
 oblcrvable that this unfound cxpreflion leads into more palpable crrours, 
 forastheymake the Tree of life Typicall by Anticipation, lo they make 
 the cwrriage of v^<!/4« and Eve^ and confequently the marriage of all man- 
 kinde typicall, and then why (houldnotah marriages ceafe, when Chrift 
 the Antitype is come? nay they make the rivers and precious ftones and 
 gold in Paradife thus Typicall of Chrift and his Chmch.Rev 2i» and then 
 why may they not make the Angels in heaven Typicall, becaule men on 
 earth who pour out the Vials are retembkd to them ? and why may not 
 men riding upon white Horfes be typicall, becaufe Chrift is fo resembled? 
 R€V,i9 1 1 . Bfrerim who eolledsout of Ht*go de viEh. a type of the whok 
 new Creation, in all the works of fix daics firtt Creation : may plcsfc him- 
 (elf fas other PopiilaProdorsdo j with fuch like ftiady fpcculations and 
 Phantafmcs, and fo bring 'm the Seventh dz^ for company co be Typicall 
 alio, but a good and healthf ull ftomack fhould be exceeding fearfull of « 
 little feedk^ on fuch windy meat : nor do I chink chat fir«^«*/new crea- 
 tion is any more Antitypicall to the fi'-ftfix daies Creation, then Vam^f- 
 ^Tont^' ^^**^^ types in the fourth Commaadment, who makes, Thett^tky ^«, '^/ 
 #<<^.a4. * danghttr^ thy fcrv^^t, the Granger ^ to be types of our (infttll a^dions 
 
 of 
 
7he McTAlitf &f the SMiUk ,^- 
 
 of the Spirit, »Rd the oxe andtke 4 ft figures of thcflefla andfcHfiwll part, 
 both whidi he iaich mull reft uppn the Sabbtth day< 
 
 If therefore the Sabbath was given to ^dam in innGce«C)i before all- 
 types, nay bctorc the leaft promifeof Chrift, whom fiach types muft Sha- 
 dow forth, then it cannot be in its firft and native infticiKion typicall and 
 eeremoniall, but morall : and therefore in it's firfi 2nd ori^inaS inUitutioyt^ 
 of which wcfpeak, it did not typifie either cur reft in Chrrft fropi flnne 
 in th(S life, or our reft with God in heaven m another life, or any other 
 icBagincd reft, which oisns wit can eafily invent and inveft the Sabbath 
 with: but look as our Saviour in reforming the abufes in marriage cals us 
 CO the firft mftitucion, (o to know what \s perpetuall ia the Ssbbat h, it's 
 moft (afe to have recourfe birther, which when it v/as firft obferved we fee 
 was no way typicall, bucmorall, and if finanno way dogg'd with fin and 
 earth had cben need of a Sabbath, have not w^ much more ? 
 
 Thffis 180, 
 
 As before the Fall, the Sabbath was originally and effentiaily moralJ, fo 1804 
 after the fall, it became accidenm^y typicziU <*• it had a type a&ed to ir, 
 though of it's own nature it neither was nor is any type at all: God af- 
 fixed a farther end unto it after the Fall, tobe of farther iife to type out lome- 
 what toGods people, whilein tbefubftance ofit itremaineth moiall, and 
 hence It is that a Seventh day remains morall and to be observed, but not 
 that Seventh day which was formerly kept, nor have we that end of rett- 
 ing which was under the Law, but thiserid only, that we m^ghtmore im- 
 naediatlyaadfpeciailyconverfe with C^od, which was the main end of the 
 Sabbaths reft be fore mans fall, for if the Sabbath had been efiemially typi- 
 call, thenitftiould beaboUQicd wholly, and no more rememlaraoce of it 
 then of new moonsand Jubilecj, but becatvfe it was for fubftancc morall, 
 being extant before the fall, and yet had a type affixed to it after the fall, 
 hence a Seventh day is ftill prefer ved, but that Seventh day is now aboli(h- 
 €4: and hence new rooo^ and other Jewiih Fcftivals as they are wholly 
 Orerooniall in their birth, lo they are wholly abolifhed (withota: any 
 change of them imo other daks, as this of the Sabbath is) in their vcty 
 being. 
 
 Tkefis l8f . 
 
 There are fundry Sciiptures a Hedged t© psrove the Sabbath tobe typi- 181. 
 call 2ndcer€m«nkU, outof cheoldandncwTeftament, as //Gt.^6,2g. Go/, 
 ^.^fiOk 72fl»».i4.4,j,0/.2.i6. butif we (uppofc that theie places be meant 
 ©i cbe weekly SabbwK (which lome deny ) and rigidly urg« them, wtmay 
 c[uickly prcflebloud infteadof milk out of them, and wholly aboliih (as 
 ^^^*w well oblcrvcs ) theobleivationof any Chriftian Sabbath: bur this 
 •necenfideratiouof atypeaiiixed toit tomake it lb fas forth ceremoniall 
 
 and 
 
l^g The Mirdliiy of the sMath, 
 
 and therefore alcerable, wiiicb for fuVftuice is moral!, mty be as a right 
 thread to leade us inco a wiy of cnich in this greic coacrov^rfie, and to uacf 
 many knocs which I fee nochav pofliily they can bcotherwi(e unloofed, 
 and tiicrefore wc miy (if ;ly fav, thit Th« Seventh day is aboliflicd^ be- 
 cau(e it hid a type afBted to ic, but that a.Seventh dales, S abba ih is Mi conti- 
 nued wherein there is no type at all. f rti;iiij '^diQQLii^ li :t-'^-^ fku 
 
 Thefts 182. 
 182. ^f^^lf^h ^h ^^ ^^^ ^^* ceremonj affixed j ^Aj^t eff'dud removed after 
 Chrtfis eommg.^ andfo that Seventh daj ftm continned x asvpe fee fu^Uck^ 
 fraieriiflm ufedy hut the type of incenfe removed, and the firfi-born fiiU 
 retain that ^hich if miraU, the type affixed to them being now abolifhedf 
 The reafon of this is becaufc there is a neceflity of the being of both, both 
 praier and firft. born, for publike praiermuft be, and firft born mud be, and 
 they cannot be changed inco any other, bu: there was no ncceffity of the 
 continuance of that firft Seventh day tobe the Sabbath, nay there was lome 
 caufe to change it, and another day aoight be our Sabbath asweiUs that 
 firft: look therefore as the Lord could have kepc the Temple at JemfaUm^ 
 meerly as a place of wbrftiip, which at this day in the generall is neceffary, 
 and have wallied and wiped off the typicall u(e of it in relpcd of Chrift, yet 
 the wifdom of the tird aboliilied tbe very being of the Temple, bccaufe 
 that place might be as well changed in:o another, and icaft through the 
 typicallncfle of \x, mans corrupt heart fliould sbufe it, lb I may lay concern* 
 fng the Sabbath, it did not iute with the wifdom of God to wipe off the 
 ceremony atixcd tothatSevench day when it might well be changed, and 
 io keep that day, confidering how apt menseeremoniou'j and luperfticious 
 hearts arc to abuleiuch times or phccs unlc^ethc very types be abolifhed 
 with the things themidves. ::..:; 
 
 :■:■••■, •.i.,^;rs,- v;i?*W ri/.T^'// lEg»:iif2?fJ ?>n£c,:;oo;r? W^Ki.: 
 1S3. 'Tis trne the Sabbath ts Called a iign between God and us, Exod.^i.t 5. 
 £z,ek 20.20. but it doth not follow that thereforeit is originally fignifica- 
 tive and lypicall, for it may be only accideotiilly io, by reafon of a type 
 andfign affixed, yet upon narrow Icarchof chispiace fomuch ftood upon, 
 notype atall can hence be proved, becaufe a (ii>o is men;ioned : for it is 
 not ncceffary to think that it is a typicill andiacramentall fign as circuml- 
 cifion and thePaffeover were, for it might be oniy an tndicant fign and de- 
 clarativeas 2{jtmhA6.^2. &i7.io. and as thetruits of Gods regenera- 
 ting Spirit are ligns of our tcarfluion from death CO life, i 7^^.3.14. which 
 figns ftill continue : and ifitbe (uch afign, icisr rath.r a ftrpng argument 
 for the continuance of the 6 abba ih, then for , any abolition or change 
 thereof. » 
 
 Xhffis 
 
The Moralky of the sMath. 137 
 
 Thtfis T84. 
 
 The Sabbath being no vifiblefign of invifiblc grace, ic cannot therefore ^g^ 
 beanySacramentallfignor typicall, 'tis therefore an indicant and decUra- 
 r#V^(ign of cur communion with God, and God with us, of our intereftin 
 him, and of his in as : and therefore in thofe places, fW.i 3.31. and £^(?^. 
 20.20. where 'tis called a fign, it is not made a fign (imply and nakedly con-^ 
 fidered in it felf ( as all Sacramentall and typical! (rgns be ) but it is fo called 
 in refpc(5l of our ksfpi»g of lie, or as it is objerved afid{ept ; and therefore it 
 rwns in way of promife, Ezek,- 20.20. If ye hallow my Sabbaths they (hall 
 then be a (ign between me and you, and yon (Ifiall know (hereby) that I 
 am the Lord your God ; and although the Sabbath ^'r/tf/f be calledafign, 
 Exod.-^i, yet it is explained ver/,j^, tobcfoch a (ign as to know hereby 
 that the Lord our God fandifies us, and in Ezekioao. that we may know 
 hereby that he is the Lord our God : for we know he is the Lord our God 
 if he fan<5lifies us, and that we are his people, if we fan^ifie or be fanflified 
 of him; and in this refpcdit becomes, not only a [fign, but zmf/tHall fign~ 
 between God and us, and in no other refped {^sWalUw would (tretch it) 
 and hence ic is that whoever make a confcience of fanftifying the Sab- 
 bath^ aright, (hall not long want affurance of Gods love, by this bleflcd 
 figne. 
 
 Thefts 185. 
 
 What type (hould be affixed to the Sabbath, and of what it is thus typicall 185. 
 and (ignificative, is not a little difficult to finde out, and being found out to 
 prove it fo to be ; in handling the Change of the Sabbath I fhall pofitively fet 
 down what I apprehend, only atthcprefencitmay not beamiffe to caft in a 
 few negatives of what it is not, for mens wits in imagining types and alle- 
 gories are very finfully luxuriant, unlefTe God check them in fach kinde of 
 divinity. 
 
 Thefts 186. 
 
 The type lies not in the day of wor(hip, for the greatcft adverfaries of i%6* 
 the Sabbath place a morality therein; nor doth it lie in a feveath day, for 
 though feven be made ar number of pcrfedion, yet what fober minde ever 
 made atypeof feven, more then of (ix or ten ? Some have made the week a 
 fhort fummary and epitome and refemblance of that old prophefie of the 
 worlds continuance for 6coo. years (athoufand years being with God but 
 as one day) and the feventh thoufand the great day of reft and peace to 
 the weary world, but this is a doubcfull affertion at beft, or if true, yet ic 
 is not therefore properly a type, or if ic be, yet noc fuch a type as was 
 to ceafe at the coming of Chrift (as our adverfaries would have the Sabbath) 
 but when the Aacity pe is come of that feven thoufand years : If therefore it 
 iics any where, it is in it as in a reft day, or a day of reft. 
 
 T Thefts 
 
rjS The Morality of the Sahbath. 
 
 ThefiJ ti'f. 
 
 187, Some make the reft of ch^ Sabbath, a type of Chrifts r^ft in the grave, and 
 if ic could be provsdldurft not oppofe it, buc it is but gratis ditinnu, 
 affirmed by fome godly learned, who herein fymbolize with popiQi poftiU 
 lers, vvho/pieafe themfelves much in this and fuch like allegoncall fig- 
 nfications oF che Sabbaths reft : For if Chrift did neither enter inco 
 the ftate of reft till his refurredion, nor into the place 6f reft iintill his 
 afcenfion, hovv then could the reft of the Sabbath cype out his reft in the 
 grave, which was part of his moft heavy labour of humiliation, /f^.2.24. 
 aod'no part of his reftjiiolcireit was in refped of cedition therein from 
 JidSons of natural I life ? hot the reft of one day is very unlic to refcmble and 
 type out the reft <>f three daies in the grave 5 and why may not Chrifts reO: 
 ff om labour in his fleep be as well the antitypejas Chrifts reft from the adlion^ 
 ofth« hfein bis giave ? 
 
 ;:.:;.-^:;,;:^,.\ ^ ; ' ■■ ■-\,--^ 'T^^P i^^- . 
 
 188. Why miy not our labour in the fijidaies be made a type of our labouring^ 
 infia, a« well as the Sabbath a type of our fahdification and reft from Im >- 
 as fome would have it; Why may not our Libertines make abftinence 
 from adultery forbidden in the feventh Command, a type of our Ipi- 
 rituall chaftity (as the Gnofticks did of old) as well as the reft fronv 
 labour on the Sabbath a type of our reft from fin? And by this liber- 
 ty how eafic is it for frothy allegorizing wits, which my heart abhor?^ 
 to typifie (asicwere) and allegorize all the commandments out of the 
 world. 
 
 Thefts i8p. 
 180. The reft on the Sabbath may be confidercd either in refpecl of Gods ex- 
 ample in himfelf, or his commaad to lYian out of himfelf : Now the reft of 
 the Sabbath as it is exemplary in God cannot be a type of any thing, becaufc 
 God never made himfelf an example of any ceremoniill thmg, Gods 
 own immediate ads cannot without much injury to God be made types 
 and eeremonies J if therefore there beany ihingof the reft of the Sabbath 
 typicall, icisfoinrefpedof mans reft on it commanded unto him of God s 
 *cbangcofb.at whether and what it doth typifie we ftiall fpeak to in its * proper 
 
 Sabbath, placC. 
 
 Tln:fn 190. 
 
 190. There wants nor fufficient proof that the Gentiles generally pradifed and 
 approved a feventh daies Sabbath, and that it was highly honoured among 
 ilfJi^'^'^'^lkcm as very faered : This trutli both Tertufiian, Eufebim, pje^htu and Phi^ 
 Rivet/ w /<? have formerly affirmed; Aretim alio, efpecially learned Rivet, have 
 %ffert t **'c^y vindicated and made good againft all the exceptions of Gowarits and 
 •ng,sab, others: iafomuchasthatthelaft refuge both of Gomarm aad Primrofi is 
 
 thi«. 
 
The Merditj of the SMdth. tjp 
 
 this, viz T^^ all thofe Heathen j ^ho ^rif ahout the SMath and in hoH&ur of p .^ ^^ 
 it, received Kot their light from nature^ hut (r^m the ^ittrt^s &f the fewificap.i^s.p* 
 Ccmmoju-weaith, ail th^fe heAthemfh xte^imenies ahoiH the Sdyhath, hei^g 
 ■ptthlijhed and ^rit lone after the delivering of the Uw upsn mount Sinai: An4 
 therefore they chink this no argument to prov-e that this law was praf^iled 
 ever (ince the world began, or that it was known by the light of nature, by 
 which it might be evinced to be raorall:bfcit bythisanfwer we lliall fcafce 
 know any tning to be according to the light of flamre by the writings of the 
 Hcathens/or all their writings are fincc A^ofis time, if they beof any credit ; 
 but fuppofe they did not know it by the working power of the light of na- 
 ture, yet jf they approved of a«d honoured this day when it was made 
 knovvn by other means, fo that they knew it by the approvin^g light of na- 
 ture, as the authors alleadged make good, it's theft Efficient tQ prove tht 
 feventh day morall even by the light of nature t And although Seneca 
 and fome others fcoft at the Jewi/h Sabbaths as if they loft the feventh 
 part of their time thereby 5 yet we know that mens Infc will give them 
 leave to feoff at that which yet their confciences chaftife them for; be- 
 fide I think thofe feoffs were not fomuch at the feventh day as at their 
 ftrd and ceremonious obfervance thereof, as alfo of their feventh years, 
 wherein it's no wonder if that the light of nature fhould i?oc fo clear- 
 
 Thefis i^i. 
 The light of nature in the Gentiles efpecially In ntatters of thefirJl ipi. 
 Table was very imperfed and dim and corrupt ; Heace it is that we cannot 
 cxpeato(indeanyperfcd:lightof nature in matters of the Sabbath^ fome 
 glimmerings and dark pradiks herein are fufficient to prove that this law is 
 naturall, although theexadprop./rtionoftinie for reft ftiouldnot or could 
 not by any reafonings of corrupt nature be pcrfedly found oat j their ob- 
 fervation of holy daies and feftivals did argue fom^ i in perfed light 6f nature 
 left, concernjng the Sabbath, which once natui^c had nrtore perfedly, as 
 old wak and riabbifl^ do argue old and great bu'ldmgs in former times 5 but 
 fuppofe they could not finde out exadly the feventh pare of time, and fo de- 
 dicate it to God for his Sabbach ; yet the want of fuch light argues only, the 
 want of the perfcdion of the light of nature, %hidv wc Hiould not a- 
 ped to finde in the prefent light of nature m matters of the firft Tabk, arid 
 in this of the Sabbath, and therefore ft*s no argument to prove the Sabbath 
 Rot to be of the law of naiture, becaufe the pcrtctfl knowledge of the exad 
 lime dhejeofis not left in corrupt naturtnpw. . .. .;j„;e> v. 
 
 Sufpofe the Gent?iles did neither %;^'n*, nor were ever reproved particu»-' 16^ 
 krly by any of the prophets fot breaking the Sabbath; yet this doth not 
 
 T 2 argue 
 
140 The MarAUty ef the SMath. 
 
 argue that they were not bound to fanaifie a Sabbath, and that It was no fin 
 for them to negled the Sabbath : for as it was a priviiedge of the Jews to 
 have Gods Oracles revealed to them and efpecially this of the Sabbath, 
 Nchem^.i^, Rom,^»z, (o it was a curfe upon the Gentiles to live without 
 God and Chrift, and Co alfo without Sabbaths, Eph.iA 2, The times of which 
 ignorance God is faid to ^i»k, atjs^^.iy.go. not bycxcufingthemfor the 
 breach of Sabbath or other fins, but by not,rq)roving them for ir, as neither 
 he did for many other morall tranfgrcflions, which notwithftanding were 
 ftm.pMru, fi'is. The Patriarchs were not condemned cxprcflely till Mofes time ( by 
 e'M'S'S' M. ?rimrofe account ) for thdr Polygamy, that we reade of, and yet it was 
 a fin ail that time, againft the very firft inftitution of marriage; and why 
 might not the breach of the Sabbath be a fin much more longer among the 
 Gentiles, and yet none of the Prophets reprove them particularly for the 
 fame? And therefore M. Trimrofe hath no caufe to mark this argument 
 with chalk, and with all attention as he calsic; -fi*. That the breach of the 
 Sabbath among the Gentiles was no fin, becaufe it was not any where par- 
 ticularly reproved by the Prophets of God : for we fee by what hath been 
 faid upon what weak crutches it ftands. 
 
 Thejis ip5. 
 J^3. The Gentiles (hall not be condemned only, for what they did adually 
 know, and did not pradlifc; but alfo for what they did not adually know, 
 yet might and ftiould have known ; The Gentiles did know that fome daies 
 were to be kept holy to God (faich lA.Trimrofe) and they fhould'have 
 known the fitttcft proportion and moft fucable frequency of fuch daies, 
 which the iame author acknowledgeth to be morall ; therefore they fhould 
 have known the fcventh daies Sabbath, and pofSbly might have known it 
 if they had not held the truth in unrightcoufnefle, but made improve- 
 ment thereof; for in this fcnfe habenti d^hitur, to him that hath llaall 
 be given, to wit, more of the lame kinde of light, whether naturall, mo- 
 ral! or Evangelicall ; if common light in all thefe, more common light, 
 if fpeciall light in them, they fhall then have more fpeciall and faving 
 light. 
 
 Tkefis Ip4.. 
 5^4, As it is no argument that That law is according to the light of nature 
 which the Gentiles generally pradifcd ( for then PoLytheifme and Sacrifi* 
 cing of beafts, yea will-worfliip (hould be according to the light of nature^ 
 becaufe thefe fins were generally pradifed) foit is no argument that That 
 law is not according to the light of nature which they generally negleded ; 
 and therefore fuppofethe Gentiles never obferved a Sabbath, yet this is 
 ^*;5*jl''* no argument that it is therefore no morall law^; I know Vi.'Pnmrofethxnks 
 shat the Sacrifices were by an inftinj^ of nature, Becatife it diUatcs that a!^ 
 
 Jim 
 
The Mcrafity ef the Sabhth. 1 4 1 
 
 fins'^heuof mortal men are guilty, are to he expiated Ij fieri fice and offerings 
 to God fended: Which aflertion hath fome truch in it, if thofc words By 
 ficrifieesatdoferings be lefc out, for what light of nature could make men 
 think that an infinite Deity offcndcdj could be pacified by fuch carnall ob- 
 fervances as the facrifices ot brute beafts and their bloud which never offen- 
 ded: This cuftom the Gentiles might retain as a relique of former in- 
 ftru6lion and inftitution, by their firft Fathers after the Floud : which 
 being matters meerly ceremonicus , might be retained more firmly 
 then other morall duties ok great coniequtnce .• however we fee that the 
 pradife cf the Gentiks is no fit guide to dired to that which is according to 
 the law and light of natare. 
 
 Thefts IP4. 
 > ' If more narrow enquiry be made, what the Law ©f nature is ? thcfc di- i^^ 
 ftindions muft be obferved, 
 
 r. The Law of nature is either of ^P"'^^'®^ nature. 
 
 ^corrupc^ 
 
 The Law of pure nature was the Law of God writ on Adorns heart in in- 
 Bocency, which was nothing elie but that holy bene and inclination oi the 
 heart within, to ad according to the holy Law of God revealed, or Cove- 
 nanc aaade with him without, and. thus Aqmnas places the law of nature A^"' •'' *'•• 
 in this inclination. ^ 
 
 The Law of corrupt nature is that dimme light left in the minde, and 
 morair inclination left in the will in reCpecl: of fome things contained in the 
 Law of God, which the Apoftle cals Confcience^ Rom^i.i^, which natu- 
 rall confcience is nothing but the remnants and generall principles of the 
 law of pure nature, left in all men fince the fall, which maybe incr afed 
 by mere knowledge of the Law oi God, or more diminiflied and defaced 
 by the wickedncffe ol man, T/>. i . 1 5 . . 
 
 3. The Law of corrupt nature is taken either "^o^^Sft a/'^^ 
 
 As it is taken more largely, fo it comprehends all chat which is agree* 
 able and futable to naiurall reaion, and that from a naturall innate equity 
 in the thing, when it is made known, either by divine inftradion or hu- 
 mane wifdom, although it be not immediatly known by the light of nature, 
 and thus many judiciall laws are naturall and morall ( chough pofitive ) and 
 of binding nature unto this day. 
 
 Asitistakenftriflly, (o it comprehends no more bat what nature imme* 
 diatly knows, or may know without externall inflmdion, as parents to be 
 honoured, mans life to be prefer ved, 
 
 3. TheLawof nature ftridly^ principles of nature, or 
 
 takO| are either 5 conclufions from luch principlci . 
 
 ' T 3 Tfet: 
 
j.^ The Morality of the Sabbath. \ 
 
 The principles of the law oi nature are in feme refped many, yet aiay be 
 Tcduccd to this one hsadi vU. Ih^t §Ood is to be followed, evili to be a- 
 voided* 
 
 ConclafioDS are dedudions from tbcfe principles, like {evertil ftreams 
 from the tame spring, which though kfle cvidenc then the principles, yet 
 may be readily found out by diicourle and iadn.2rcb^ 
 
 ',.4. Conclufions arifing from their principles are more<*°^^^.^'^^^' ^ 
 
 :i:-Ioa mediate are made {by A(jsiisfas ) tobe two, i.Love God with all tby 
 hearty ». Love thy neighbour as thy ielf. 
 
 Mediate are (uch as arife from the torraer principlesj by means of thote 
 two more immediate concliifieas: and of this kinde are fome (as he thinks) 
 yea, ail the laws of the Decalogue, if ri§Kcrealon may be judge. Now to 
 apply thefe. 
 
 Thefis ip6. 
 ip6. If the queftion be whether the Sabbath be known by the light of pure 
 nature ? the anfwer is, yea, for ^^damj mmde ki e^ of it, and his heart 
 Was kidtned and bent to the keeping of it, although it be true that now this 
 light in corrupt nature ( ss in many other morall durics ) is almoft wholly 
 €xtin<^ and worn out, as hath been formerly (hewn ; And to fpeak plainly, 
 this great and firft imprelTlon left on mans heart in pure nature, is thefirft 
 rule according to which we are now to judge of, what is the law of nature, 
 and it (erves to dafh to peeces and grinde to powder and duft moft effectu- 
 ally and {Wrongly, the dreams and devicc^s of itich as would make the Sab- 
 bach non morall, becaule not naturaU, or not eafily known by the prefent 
 light ofcorrupt nature : whenas corrupt nature is no perfed copy, but a 
 blotted discovery offome partof the light of nature, wh'ch was fully ini- 
 printedat large in pure nature: and therefore it is no wonder, ifouradver- 
 fariesfo muchoppafe the Commandment of the Sabbath ia theftate^f in- 
 nocency, (uch therefore as are other wife Orthodox in this point, and yet 
 mtkexhisdefcriptioo of the Law of nature (viz. which was written on 
 mans heart in his firft Creation ) to be both uncertain and impertinent, doe 
 wawarily pulldown one of the flxongcft bulwarks, and the firft that ever 
 God made to defend the morality at the Sabbatii ; there is indeed no ex- 
 preflc Scripture which makes this detcription of the Law of nature 
 (as they o:)jcdl) and lo ic is of many ocher things which are virtually 
 and for fubftance contained in the Scripture, althoagh there be no for- 
 malljdefenpciQaletdoMiQdf Che fame, and thelikel by ofchisdekript4oa 
 here. . < 
 
 ':■! :>7ii;i,'t oTbefis 197, : 'iiiR UiUV'Ho v^:.itK:I • 
 If wefpcafcefihcLtUJfafiwture ftrtdiy taken, f or tlwt 'Which fti^ime- 
 
 diatly 
 
The Moralitf of the SAbbath. 14 j 
 
 diatly and readily knovvaby the commen light of nature in all men, then 
 it may be fafely affirmed, that although the Sabbath (beuld not be in thb 
 fence naturall, yet it will not follow that it is not therefore morall: for 
 the morall law once writ on mans heart in pare nature is almoft blortcd our,' 
 only lome ruder a and old rubbifh is left of it in a perverfe minde and a cor- 
 rupt heart, Eph.^. 1 8, wc fee the wiCeft of the heathens making thofe things 
 to be morall Ftrcues ( Jpimpts inftanceth in the Law of private revenge, and 
 we know they magnified will worfhip ) which the Scripture condemns 
 as morall vices and (ins ; God would have common-wealths preietved in 
 all places oF the world, from the inundation and deluge of mans wkkcd- 
 nefle, ind therefore he hath generally printed the notions of the fecond Ta* 
 bit upon mens hearts to fct bounds ( as by (ea-banks^ unto the ©ver^wings 
 thereof, and hence it is that they are generally known: but he would not 
 have Churches every where* and therefore there is but little known con- 
 cerning matters of the firft Table, and confequently about this Law of che 
 Sabbath, which nocwiihftanding may be morall although it be not foimme- 
 diatly known, ^ ^ 
 
 rhefis 19%. 
 
 If we Tpeakof the law of corrupt nature largely taken, for that law which ip8, 
 when'cis made known by divine determination and declaration is both fu- 
 table and congruous to naturall reafonand eq^jity, we may then lay that 
 thcLawof theSabbith is according to the light oFnature,evenof corrupt 
 nature it felt; for debut fuppale that God is to be worshipped, and then 
 Chele three things appear tobecnoft equall. i. That he is not only to have 
 atime,but a ipeciall time and a fie proportion of time for worOaip. 2. That 
 it'smoft meet that he fkauld make this proportion. 5, The Lord having 
 given man fix dales and t <iken a Seventh to himfelf, mansreafon cannot but 
 conftflfethac it is moftjuft to dedicate that time to Godi and for my own 
 parti think that in this refpedl the law of the Sabbath was as fairly writ 
 on mans heart in innocency as many other morall laws, which none quCi- 
 ftion the morality of at this day : but dilpuus about this are herein per- 
 haps ulelc^e. 
 
 Thejis ipp, '• 
 
 The Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be adminiftred ( meet circum* 199* 
 fiances concurring ) every Loras day, nay upon the week dales often as 
 ihty did in the primitive perfecutions : and hence our Saviour limits na 
 time for it, in the firfl inftitution thereof, as he did for the Paflcover of 
 old, but only this. As i>ft as joh doit, do it in remembrance of me : hence 
 it will not follow, that now under theColptl .hereis no let Ssbbath < as 
 M. Primrofe Would ) becaufe our Saviour at the firft loiHtution of tbe Lutds prj„, ^,y.,i 
 Supper limits no particular day for the celebratiea thereof, as once he did f«M/ 
 
 for 
 
 Ik:.. 
 
144 '^^ Morality of the Sabbath. 
 
 for the PaffcoYcr,for though there is an appointed fpeciall time (as (laall here- 
 after appear) fw the pablike cxercifecf all holy duties, and confequently 
 of receiving the Lords Suppar, yet thefe duties not being limited tothoic 
 times, but enlarged to other times alio, hence there is no reafon why our 
 Saviour flaould inftitute a fee Sabbath, when he inftituted the Lords Sup- 
 per, as the proper time of the celebration thereof, as it was in cafe ot the 
 Pafleover. 
 
 Thefts 200. 
 400. It is no argument to prove the Sabbath to be ceremoniall, becauleit is 
 Prim. f<tM. reckoned among ceremonials, f/«. (kew-bread and faerifices,asM. Pn»»- 
 waLdiff. de ^^A ^"^ WaU<ztt6 Urge it out of M'at^\ 2. 1,2,3. for I . upon tha fame ground 
 ♦•^r/,c«/> 3. fornication and eating of idolothytes are ceremoniall, becaulc they are 
 ranked among ceremonials, viz.. bloud and things ftrangled, AB. 1J.29. 
 2. upon this ground the Sabbath hath no morality at all in it, no more then 
 ftiew-bread and facrifices which were wholly ceremoniall. 5. The Sabbath 
 is in the fame place reckoned among things which are morall, as pulling a 
 Oieep out of a pit upon the Sabbath day, an ad of humanity, why may it 
 not then be as well accounted morall. 4. One may as well argue that the 
 not keeping company with Publicanes and (inners was a ceremoniall thing, 
 becaufe the Lord Jelus ufeth the fame Proverbiall fpeecb, I'^ill hisLDe mercy 
 fjot facrifice,}A2ii'9»i^> upon which he defends the lawfullneffe of pulling 
 the earsofcorn upon the Sabbath day, in this MatA2»i5* the fcope there- 
 fore of this place is not to (hew the nature of the Sabbath day, whether 
 it be ceremoniall or morall, but the la wfull lefle and morality of his ad in 
 eating the ears of corn upon this day ; and thus the arguments of our Savi- 
 our are very ftrong and conviding to prove the morality offuch an ad, but 
 no way to prove the ceremoniality of the Sabbath : for that is the fcopc 
 of our Saviour, thdit mercj to the hfen^ry is to be preferred before the Sacri- 
 ficc of bodily rcfting upon the Sabbath, M. Primrofe indeed replies hereto 
 Priiii. fAuu and tels us, that mercy U to he preferred be fire [acrijice or ceremoniall dn* 
 c^.y./j. ^i^^ ^^f not he fire morall duties , and there fire ^hrifi frefirring it he fire 
 the refl on the Sahhath, the Sahhath could not he morall : but we know that 
 mercy in the fecond table is fometimes to be preferred before morall duties 
 in the firft table : a man is bound to negled folemn praier (ometime to at- 
 tend upon the (ick. it's a morall duty to fandifie (ome day for a Sab- 
 bath ( faith M. Primrofe ) and yet fuppofe a fire be kindled in a town 
 upon that day, or any (ick to be helped, mud not mercy be prefet'd before 
 bearing the word ? which bimfelf will acknowledge to be then a morall 
 duty. 
 
 Thefis 201. 
 201. WhcnChriftisfaidto be Lord of the Sabbath, MatA^.^. th^ meaning 
 
 IS 
 
The Morality of the Sdbath, 145 
 
 IS ml as if he was fuch a Lord as had power to break ic, but ra- 
 ther Tuch a Lord as had power to appoint it^ and coniequentiy 
 to order the work of it for his own fervice. M. Frimroft thinks p.in,. pxt.u 
 That he u (aid to be Lord of it, becaufe he had power to diffenf^ with f«/'T /.<^«7«^* 
 thek^efingof it, hy rvhomand when he ^ould : And that Chrifl did 
 chuje to do fiicb work^s upon the Sabbath day, which were reitker 
 "^orks of mercy orneceffity, nay^ which were fervile^ which 'he Law 
 firbad : fir Chrifi ( iaich he ) Of medatour had no f^^.er to di* 
 §fenfi with things morall, but he might with matters ceremoniali, 
 and therefore with the Sabbath. How Far Chriil Jefus might- and , ,^^ 
 may difpenfe with morall laws, 1 difpute not now, I think Biei/^n!!diji%. 
 Gomcs neareft the truth in this controverfie; only thi^ is cor- ^^'•'^'?*^» 
 fiderable, fuppofe the Sabbath vks ceremoniall, yet it's doabc- 
 fuU whether Chrift Jefus who came in the daks of his fiefli to 
 fulfill all righteoufncflfe, could aboIilTj or break the law cere- 
 monial] untill his death was paft , by which this hand-writing 
 of Ordinances was blotted oat, Colof^ 2»i^. and this middle wall 
 of partition was brokca down, Ephef, 2,1^,1^,16. But let it be 
 yeclded that Chrift had power to break ceremonialJ laws then 
 before his death, yet in this place there is no fuch matter, for 
 the words contain a clear proof for the right obfervance of the 
 Sabbath againft the over-rigid conceptions of the fuperftitiotis and 
 proud Pharifccs, who as they thought ic unlawful! for Chrift to 
 heal the fick upon the Sabbath, fo to rub out, and eat a few 
 corn ears upon it, although hunger and want (and perhaps more 
 then ordinary in the Difciples here) fhould force men hereunto, 
 which was no fervile work (as WTrimrBfe would) but a work 
 of neceflity and mercy in this cafe ; and our Saviour proves the 
 morality of it, from the example of David eating the Shew-bread, 
 and thofe that were with him, preferring that ad of mercy before 
 faerifice and abftinence from Shew-bread ; and hence our Saviour 
 argues, That if they attending upon Z)4i/i^ might eat the Shew-bread, 
 much more his hungry Difciples might eat the corn while they atten- 
 ded upon him that day, who was Lord of the Sabbath, and that they 
 might be the better ftrengthened hereby to do him fervice : Thefe 
 things being thus; where now is there to be found any reall 
 breach of the Sabbath, or doing of any fervile work, or maintc- 
 nance of any unneceffary work which the fame learned and acute 
 writer imputes to oar Saviour? which I had almoft faid is almoft 
 bJaiphemous. 
 
jAg 7k M0raUtj $ftk Sahhth. 
 
 Thefis 202. 
 ^02 It's no argument that the Sabbath is doc moral!, bccaufe it's 
 * faid, LMiityk^i>2j. that man is not made for it, but it for man; 
 for faith M"^ Iro»ltde, man is made for morall duties, not they for 
 man : For let the Sabbath be taken for the bare reft of the Sab- 
 bath, as the Pharifees did, who placed fo much Religion in the 
 bare reft, as that they thought it tinlawfuU to heal the fick on 
 that day, or feed the hungry; fo man is not made as laftly for 
 the bare reft, but rather it for man and for his good ; but i^ 
 by Sabbath be meant the SmSiificatton of that reft, fo man is 
 Prim Mil. made for it, by U^ I'rimroft own confeffion : Now our Savi- 
 «f.7.^'4>5«©Hr fpeaks of the Sabbath in the firft refped, for the rtft of it 
 ts but a means to a further and a better end, viz. The true fan- 
 aification of it which the Pharifees little lookc unto, and there- 
 fore he might well fay that the Sabbath was made for man, the 
 reft of it being no further good then as it was helpful! to man 
 in duties of piety Or mercy required of man, in the! fandification 
 thereof: U.^Primrofi ^onfeffing that man is made for the fa&- 
 ^^''^' aification of the Sabbath , would therefore winde out from this, 
 by making this fandification on the Sabbath to be no more then 
 what is equally required of man all the week befide : but he is 
 herein alfo much miftaken, for though works of piety and mercy 
 are required every liay, yet they are required with a certain emi- 
 nency and fpecialty upon the Sabbath day, and thence *lii that Cod 
 . cals men to reft from all worldly occafions (which he doth aot on the 
 week daies ) that they might honour God infpeciall upon the Sab- 
 bath, as (hail hereafter appear. 
 
 It's a monklfc fpeaitation of M. ^>^<w^ tcl diftmgiiifli fo if tt«S 
 ^^^* Sabbath m fexju mjftko , and fin/n literAli, as that the myftieall 
 jfenfe like the lean and iil-faveiired kine in 7^A4r4(?^i dream (ball 
 eat up the literal! fenfe, and devour Gods bleffed and fweet Sstb- 
 baths; for the Lord never meant by the Sabbath fueh ii ttiyikii 
 call thing as the refting from the wOrks of the old man ontf 
 every day, no more then when he commands us to labour fix 
 daies, he permits us to labour in the works of the old man ail fhe 
 fixdaics, ^-'^-* •. - '..■■•■■. • "-'''^'' 
 
 sb4. For though it be tree ihftt we iare to reft every day ft^m S% 
 yet it will not hence follow , that every day is to be a Ghri- 
 
 ftians 
 
7 he Morality of the SahUtk xaj 
 
 ftlans Sabbath, and tbac no one day in fcven is to be Ctt apirt 
 for it: For i. Upon the fame ground yid^m (hould have had no 
 Sabbath, bccaufe be was to reft from fin every day. 2. The Jews 
 alfo before Chrift, fnould have rcjeded all Sabbaths, becaufe 
 they were then bound to reft from fin as well as Chriftians now. 
 5. Upon the faiue ground there muO: be nodai^ of fafling or 
 fcafting under the Gofpel. becaufe wc arc to faft from finne 
 every day, and to be joyfull and thankful! every day. I know 
 fome Libertines of late fay fo, but upon the fame ground there 
 (hould have been none under the law neither, for they were then 
 bound as well as we to faft from fin. 4. Hence neither llioufd 
 any man pay his debts, becaufe he is bound to be paying his dcbc 
 of love to God and all men every day. 5. Hence alfo no man 
 Should pray at any tirae in his family, nor alone by himfelf fo- 
 lemnly, becaufe a Chriftian is bound to pray continually: And 
 indeed I did not think that any forehead could be fo bold and 
 brazen as toi make fuch a conclufion; but while I was writing this 
 came to my 'hearing, concerning a fea-man who came to thefc 
 coafts from London, miferably deluded with principles of Farai- 
 lifrae, who when an honeft New-Englifh man his Cabbin-matc in- 
 vited him to go alone and pray together, eonfidering their ne- 
 ce^ties, he would profeflcdly refufe to doe it upon this ground, 
 viz. 1>ofi not pray continHalij ? fvhy then Jhould Wtf pray together 
 now? 6, The Commandment of the Sabbath doth not therefore 
 prefTc us to reft only from fuch works as are in themfelves evil, 
 which God allows at no time • but from the works of our cal-i 
 lings and weekly emploiments which are m themfelves lawfulland 
 of neceffity to be attended on at fomc time. It is therefore a loofe 
 and ground lefle aflertion to make every day under the Gofpei to be a 
 Chrrftians Sabbath day. 
 
 Tkejrj 205. 
 To think that the Sabbath was proper to the Jews, becaufe 20?, 
 they only were able to keep and cxaflly obferve the time of it, 
 bemg &}uz up ( as M. Trimrofe faith ; within a little corner of the 
 earth, and that the Gentiles therefore are not bound to \i^ be- 
 caufe they cannot exadly obferve the time of it, in feverall qaar- 
 tcrs of the earth fo far diftant, is a very feeble argument: For' 
 why might not all nations exadly obferve the rifing and the fct-' 
 ting of the fun according to feverall climates by which the natu* 
 rail day and fo this of a Sabbath is exadly meafured ? and which 
 
 U 2 God 
 
^^g 7he Morality of the Sahbath. 
 
 God hath appointed (withouc limitation to any hour)to be the bounds 
 of the Sabbath as it fooncr or later ri(es or lets? were not the mari- 
 ners ohhe men oijudah bound to oblerve the Seventh day in all the 
 feverallcoafts where thty made their voyagts? did Gad limit them 
 to the riling or fetting (an of /«^^4 only ? what colour is there 
 to think thus of them ? indeed it's true that in fome habitable 
 Northern coads, the San is not out oF fight feme moneths toge- 
 ther, but yet this is certain, if they know how the year fpends in* 
 to moneths, they can exaflly rtckon the weeks of thofe raonechs, and 
 therefore can cxadly tell you the daies of which thofe weeks confift, 
 and therefore they have their exad rules and mealures to knowEaft 
 and Wcftjthe place of the (un-rifing and (un-letting, andconfequently 
 to know the Sabbath daies, and yet if they (liould not exadly know it^ 
 their will to do it is herein ( as in other things ) accepted of God. 
 
 Thefts loSs 
 
 %x>6. I^ this truth concerning the morality of the Sabbath did depend 
 upon the teftimony of ancient writers, it were eafie to bring them 
 up here in the rear, notwithftanding the flouriihcs of the great Hi- 
 ftorian i but this hath been done lufficiently by others, nor doth 
 it lute ©ur fcope who aim at only the clearing up of the meaning 
 of the fourth command, which muft (land firm, the heaven and 
 earth fhallfall afunder, the Lord will rather wafte kingdomes and 
 the whole Chriftian world with fire and iword, then let one tit- 
 tle of his Law perifh, the land muft reft when Gods Sabbaths 
 Cannot, Lev, 2-6. g4. and although I with the Miniftry of Chrift 
 Jefus a comely and comfortable maintenance, as may richly tefti- 
 6e bis peoples abundant thankfullnefle, for the feet oE thofe bis 
 meffeqgers as preach peace, yet me thinks it argac^s great blind^ 
 nefle in thofe men who plead for a. morality in a tench pigge or 
 ftieaf of corn, and yet wjU acknowledge no morality in a Seventh 
 day. 
 
 Tkejts lOq, 
 
 207. I fl^all therefore conclude and Ihuc up thefe things with anfwcr 
 to M. C^rf enters and Hejltns h^-'V-'cf., an argument againft the Sab- 
 bath, which they have gone compaCTing the whole earth and hea- 
 vens about to finde out, nevsr heird of till their dues, and now 
 it*s brought to light. I would not make mirth with it (as fome 
 have done and left th« fcrupie untoucht J but in words of fobri- 
 cty, aodlerionfueffe, and plainneffe. Iftioe S-ubbath or Lo ds day 
 ^(ay they) he morull^ then the morail l,^v9 u fi^fyU to manifild' 
 
 mittntion 
 
The Moralitj cf the SMath, i^j 
 
 mttmtion, beeaufe the natiem ijfuirtg^ out of Noaht Ar\ Itrend 
 themf elves frcm thence over the face of the Vfihole earthy finJe fur* 
 ther fome At * Jhorter dOiAnce, ^her.hj changing the longitude 
 ^ith their hahitatien, thej muft of neceffity alter the differences 
 of times^ neither can any exaEily and }recifelj obferve anj one 
 day^ either as it ^od appointed hy Moles, or as it "^as inHttfited 
 by Chrifis ApoFlles afterwards^ by reason of the ma»ifbld tranfpor. 
 fation of Colonies^ and traTiftnigration of nations, from one region^ 
 into another^ "thereby the times mn^ neceffarily be /uppofed to vary. 
 Tfee anfwer is ready and ea£e, 'viz. Although the nations iflued 
 outoi Noahs ark, andfpread cheixiidves over the face of the whole 
 earth, foins farther, lom^ at a fhortcr diftanee, and thereby chan- 
 ging their longitude altered the differences of time, fome begin- 
 ning the day (ooner, (ome later, yet they might obfctve the lame 
 day, for the day is regulated and mealured by the Sun, and ihe 
 Sun comes to one meridian fooner or later then to another, and 
 hence the day begins in one place fooner or later then in another, 
 and (o the beginning of the day is f relpeaively ) varied, but yec 
 the day it felf remains unchangeably the fame : what though our 
 countreymen in old England begin their Sabbath above 4, hours 
 before us in new, they beginning at their evening we st our e- 
 vening, yet both may and do obferve the fame day: all nations 
 arc bound to keep holy a Seventh part of time, but that time 
 muft be regulated by the Sun, neither is ic ntccfliry that the 
 fame individuall 24^ hours (hould be obfcrvcd by all, but the 
 fame day as it is mieafured by the Sun in this or that place, which 
 may begin in places more eaffcrly many hours fooner then in o- 
 tber places more wefterly ; a day is not properly time but agiea- 
 {pre of time, and theiciore the maniJo^ld trarfportation of Colo- 
 nics, and tranfmigration of nations from one region uato ano- 
 ther, hinder not at all, but that they may cxadly and precsicly 
 obferve the Same day, which was infticuted and appointed.- for 
 alchuugh the i.me of the beginning of the day be varied, yet the 
 day it lelf is nor, cannot be varied or changed. Now whereas 
 they fay, that ifa^y mm fhould travel the "^^arld about^ a VQhole 
 day mtifi ncedi be varied^ and if txvo mtn from the fime place tra* 
 veil, the one Eafiivard the other JVeflward^ round about the earthy 
 and meet in tht jame place again, they jhag finUe that he )»hg 
 hath gone Safiw.^rd hath gotten, and the other going TVefiward 
 hath lafi A day in their account^ yea, the HuiUndcrs after their 
 
 ^ 3 difcoverj^ 
 
J JO The Morality of the SMath. 
 
 iifeovtrj tf/Fretatnde Miyre, comlngkometo their countrey^ pumi 
 hj comp4riitg their acconnts with their countrejmen at home, that 
 they had lofi a day^ having gone PTefirvardj and fg computed the 
 et^th romd» I antwer, what though a traveller varyjng perpe- 
 tuilly the quantity of the day, by realbn oF his continuall mo- 
 ving with or againft the Suns motion, in time get or loofc a day 
 in his account? is the day therefore of it's own nature variable 
 or changeable ? God hath placed the Sun in the Tirmaoaenr, and 
 appointed it for times and (eafons, and in fpcciall for the regu- 
 lating of the day, and as the motion of the Sun^is conftant, lo 
 there is an ordinary and conftant fucceflfion of daies without va- 
 riation, for unleffe the Suns courfc be changed, the day which is 
 regulated by it, is not changed, Now i^ any lliill travell round a- 
 bout the world , and (o anticipate or fccond the diurnall motion 
 of the Sun, and thereby varying continually the quantity of the 
 day, at length gain or loofe a day, according to their reckoning, 
 they may and ought then to corred their accounts : ^regsrj the 
 13. having found the Julian year to be too great for the motion 
 of the Sun, cut off ten daies by which the Equinoxes and Sol- 
 ftices had anticipated their proper places, that io the year might 
 be kept at it's right periods ; and is it not as good reafon that 
 a traveller who oppofing the Suns diurnall courfe continually 
 (hortens femewhat of his day, till at laft in compafling the earth 
 round he gains a whole day, (houldcutoff in his accounts that day 
 which he hath gained by anticipating the Suns courfe, and fo 
 redtifie his account of the day ? For in every region and countrey 
 whatloever and howfoever fcicuate, as men are to begin the day 
 at that time when the day naturally begins in that place, (o like- 
 wift they arc to reckon and count the daies as they are there 
 regulated and ordered by the Sun, and that (hould be the firft or 
 fccond day of the week to them, which is naturally the firft or 
 fccond day of the week to that place where they are : and thus 
 their doubts are ealily fatisfied when they return to the place from 
 whence they firft came. Bnt if any fh^ill fay it's very dl^cult for 
 men thm to reSiifie their account Sy atd t§ obferve that time in 
 ever J place ^hich ^af at firfi InflitHted, and it's probable that the 
 nations in their feverall tranfmigrations and tranfpormtions never 
 . fffed any pich ceurfe. The an(wer is obvious, mens weaknefle, 
 or negled and cardeffencfle to do what they ought, is not a futfi- 
 cicnt argument to prove that not to be their duty, bclides *cis not 
 
 probable 
 
The Morality of the Sahbdth. 15 1 
 
 probable that any nations were thus put to it to travell round 
 about the whole earth ( although fomf particular perfons in thig 
 later age have failed round about it) and therefore could noe 
 vary a whole day polTibly, but going (ome Eaftward, fooie Weft- 
 ward, fooae Southward, fome Northward, they fpread themfelves 
 over the face of the whole earth, fome at a fhorter, fome at a 
 farther diftance, and (o fome began the day fooncr fome later^ 
 and^yet all (as hath been fhewn) might oblerve the (ame 
 day: the morality of the Sabbath is not builc 
 upon Aftronomieall of Geometricall princi- 
 ples, and therefore it cannot 
 tall by any (hady fpecului- 
 ons fo far fctcht. 
 
 * * 
 
 

 Here ends the aShd'orality of the fourth 
 Com nandmctit, The Change of the Sab^ 
 hath follows. 
 
THE 
 
 CHANGE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SABBATH 
 
 ^ W herein the true Grounds of the Change '^ 
 W of the Day are plainly opened ^ 
 
 ^Sundry Scriptures airoCufuallyalleclged)^ 
 
 for this Change are more fully cleared and ^ 
 
 vindicated from what Mr. Brabokrne ^ 
 
 and Matter Primrofe have alledged 
 
 againfttheftme* 
 
 "The fecond Fart. 
 
 m 
 
 L N D Ny 
 
 Printed {otJohnKothvpeU.i6^^. ^ 
 
The general Contems zhout the change of the Sabbath 
 
 Vfficlem Light in the Scriptures for the Change of the SAh* 
 
 hath. Thef. f. 
 i,ApofioIicalI Unwritten tr^iditions no ground for the ^hange 
 \ of it Thef. a. 
 
 3 . Neither Churches cuflome nor any Imperial Law the 
 ground of the change of it. Thef. 3. 
 
 4. How the ohfervation of the (fhriftidn Sabbath arlfeth fom the 4 Com, 
 > Thef.4. 
 
 5. Ho7v thefirfiday in the "^eekjnaj he c ailed the feventh day, Ther.7,8. 
 
 6. 1 he will of God the Efficient caufe. the Re^urreiJion ofChriJi ths moral 
 - caufe of the change of the Sabbath, T hef. ; o 
 
 7* The Qy^cention no ground of the change of the ^a^'bath. Thef, T^, 
 
 8. The Refi ofgodheing ^oyledin his firft Creation by the fm ofmanjbence 
 
 the ^ ay of Refi may ' be W^ell changed. Thef, 1 6. 
 $. Neither the three dayes-refting ofChrift in the grave nor the 3^. jeers 
 
 ofChrifls labour, the ground of our labour and refi now.Th^f, 1 8. 
 
 10, Not only Chrifis RefarreEiton, but an affixed Type to thefirfi Sabbath 
 is the ground of the abrogation of ;>.Thef. 20. 
 
 1 1 . what the affixed Type to the Sabbath ps. Thef. 21. 
 
 J 2. The TTreer exercifes of holy duties tipon a day are not any true ground t& 
 
 mahefuch a day the (^hriHian Sabbaths 1 hef. 2 5 , 
 i^.Hovp holy duties on a day may evince a Sabbath day. Thef. "^6, 
 ,14 The frfi day of the week hononr'dby the primitive Churches from the 
 
 Commandment of the Lord jefui, Thef. 27. 
 1 5 -The Apofiles preaching on the Je^ifh Sabbath^ doth not argue It to be 
 
 the Chriftian Sabbath. Thef 30. 
 :i6,The firfi day of the Wee Improved to be the ^hrifiian Sabbath by divine 
 
 Infiitution. Thef. 34. 
 X J, The firfi place alledgedfor the (^hrifiian Sabbath, A<^s icy .cleared by 
 
 nine confederations, Thcf. 35. 
 l2, The fecond place fyomi Gor. t6.l,2, cleared from 7. confider. Thef. ^6^ 
 1 9The third Scripture, Key, hio cleared by tVco general branches.ThcC'^'j 
 2o.H<7^ the Chrifiian Sabbath arifethfrom the fourth Qommandment ^al' 
 
 though it he not particularly named in it, Thcf vO. 
 21 . The error ofthofeyeffecially in the Eafiern Churches ^ivho ohfervedi^f^o. 
 
 Sabbaths, Thcf, 4 . / 
 
 I'^oHoVfi the workj>f&eAemfHon may he a ffomdfdr allmin to obferve the 
 
 Sabbath. Thcf. 42. 
 ^^ Horff'far the judgement of Godupor} profhanersofheLordsDay ii ^f 
 Jercsfi evmuhe holineffe of the Sabbaths The* 44^* 
 
<3; 
 
 THE 
 
 CHANGE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Sabbath. 
 
 Th E S I S. I. 
 
 ^ H E change of this day from the laft to the firft of 
 the week although it be confirmed by an anci- 
 ent cuftome,yet the true reafon and grounds of 
 fo great a change are not fo fully known .- ^^^ 
 cred writings not foexpreflcly fettingdown (as 
 it doth in fome things of lefle concernment^ the ^. , . 
 caules heieof. And many of the Arguments q^*5j^j!|j! 
 heaped up , and n ultiplyed by fome for the ,onfides 
 change of \t^ which may fcem of great weight, Anfw, to 
 while they want an adver&ry at the other end of the Scale to ballance ^o-^'-g'^""- 
 them : Yet upon fad examination and fearch into them, they prove ^*^''^^* 
 too light, and confequcntly occaGon the temptation of fcruplingthe 
 trath and validity of others more clear. We are therefore with more 
 warineiTe and humility of mind to fearch into this Concroverfie, and 
 with much thankfulnerfc and modefty to accept that little light which 
 God gives us in greater, as well as of much light which he is pleated to 
 lend us in fmaller matters Pafctnmr afertis^ exercemm ehfcuris, was his ^^P^* 
 fpeech Ipng fince concerning the Scriptures. There is no truth fo clear, 
 but mans ioof^ wit cajn invent and nunc many pc rnicious Cavils againft 
 it.; and therefofieJH thole things wlvich ihioe torth with leffe evidencei 
 it is no wonder if it cafts fuch blots iUfvd ftaincs upon them as that they 
 can icarcely be diiicerned. NU np^gU mmicHtn verttaUy dGnmy^e vimio, 
 
 A3L z Wc 
 
4 The change of the Sabbath. 
 
 We fliould therfore be wife with fobriety, & remember that in this and 
 fuch likeControverfieSjtheScriptures were not written to anfwcr all the 
 fcruples and objedions of Cavillers, but to fatisfie andftabliOi the con- 
 fciences of poor beleevers. And verily whenlmeet with fuch like fpeech- 
 es and objedions as thefe, viz*JVhere it u expre^elj (aid that the old Saif" 
 fath is abrogated ? and Vchat one Scriptftre u there in the N.Tefiament de^ 
 claring expreffely that the Lords day Isfabfiituted andpm in its roome ? I 
 cannot from fuch expreflions but think and fear that the ignorance of 
 this change in feme doth not fpring I'o much from deficiency and want 
 of light on Gods part, ut rather from perverfnes on mans part,w*^^ will 
 not fee nor own the truth jbecaufe it is not revealed and difpenfed after 
 that manner and fafhion of exprelfion as mans wit and phantafic would 
 have it : Like Naaman^ who, becaufe the Prophet went not about the 
 cure of his Leprofie in that way and fafhion which he would have him, 
 did not therefore (for a time j fee that way of cure which God had re- 
 ' vealed to him. For the Holy Ghoft is not bound to write all the prin- 
 ciples of Religion under Common-place headsj nor to fay expreflely. In 
 th 16 place of Scripture you may fee the old Sab hath abrogated^ and the neis? 
 infiituted', for wc find no fuch kind of exprcllions concerning Pauls E- 
 piftles and many books of Scripturej that this or that Epiftle or book 
 is Canonical ; which yet we know to be fa by other evidences. Wc 
 know alfo that the Holy Ghoft by brief hints of Truth, gives occafion 
 of large Comments ; and by writing about other matters tanquam or 
 liud agenst it brings forth to light by the By revelations of great con- 
 cernment,which it faw meet purpofely in that manner to make known. 
 And as in many other things it hath thus done, fo efpeciallyin this 
 of the Sabbath. So that if our hearts like Locks were fitted to Gods 
 Key, they would be foon opened to fee thorough the difficulties of this 
 point; whichlconfefl'eofallpradical points hath been moil full of 
 knots and difficulties to my own weakneffe. 
 
 'X hefts 2, 
 
 To make Apoftolical unwritten infpirations notified and made 
 
 ^* known in their dayes to the Churches, to be the caufe of the change of 
 
 the Dajy is to plough with a Popifli Heifer, and to cafl that Anchor on 
 
 which deceivers rely, and by which they hope to fave themfelves when 
 
 they know not how otherwifeto defend their falftvoods. 
 
 Thefts^. To make EcdcfiaflicalCuftome.eftablifhedfirfl by the Imperial Law 
 
 o^ Conflantine,tobt the foundation of the change^^to make a prop for 
 
 Prim.part.Pifclacy, and a flep^o Popery, and to open a gap to all humane inventi- 
 
 cap i.H^j' ons.For if k be in the Churches power to appoint the greateflHo/; day^ 
 
 A«Jiift.l.2 why may not any other Rite and Ceremony foe impofdi alfo^ and if it 
 
 ' ^ ' he 
 
The Clfange of the Sabbaik 
 
 be free to obfcrve this day or not .in refpei^l ofit felfe, becaufe it wants a 
 divine inftitution, and yet necefiary to obferve it in rerpe(f^of the Chur- 
 ches Cuftomc and conftitution(as fome pretendjwhy may not the Chur- 
 ches Commandment be a rule of obedience in athoufand things elfe as 
 well as in this ? and fo introduce ^f^/VA^F^rT^ip, and to ferve God after 
 the tradition of men which God abhors?- 
 
 Ihejfs 4. 
 
 Theobfcrvationofthefirftdayof the week for the Chriflian Sab- 4« 
 bath arifeth from the force of the fourth Commandment, as flrongly as 
 the obfervation of the media cHltw,OT means of worfliip now under the 
 NewTeftamenc, doth from the force of the fecond Commandment; 
 only let this be fuppofed, that the day is now changed (as we (hall here- 
 after prove) asalfo that the worQiip it felf is changed by divine inftitu^ 
 tion; for Gofpel-inftitutions when they be appointed by divine and fo- 
 veraign Authority ,yet they may then be obferved & pradifed by vertue 
 of fome morall Law. The Gofpel appointed new Sacraments,but we are 
 to ufe them by venue of the fecond Commandment : fo here the Gofpel 
 .appoints a new feventh day for the Sabbath,but it ftands by vertue of the 
 fourth Commandment : and therefore the obfervation of it is not an 
 A(^ of Chriflian Liberty, but of Chriftian duty impofcdby divine Au- 
 thority and by vertue of the moral Law. 
 
 Thefis 5. 
 
 For the morality of the fourth Commandment (as hath been proved) j^ 
 being preferved in obfcrving not that Sabbath only, nor yet a Sabbath 
 mcerly when man fees meet: but in obfcrving f/?^ ^S'^^/r^^/?, i. e. fucha 
 Sabbath as is determined and appointed of God, (which may therefore 
 be either the firft or laft of the feven daycs) Hence it is that the firft of 
 the feven, if it be determined and inftituted of God under the New Te- 
 {lament, arifeth equally from the fourth Commandment, as the laft Ic- 
 venth day did under the old Teftament; and therefore it is no fuch//Vi- 
 tf/*/w// nor delufion of the common People, as Mr. Brabonrne would 
 make it, to pur the Title of the Lords Sabbath upon the Lords day, and 
 to call it the Sabbath day; for if it be borne out of the fame wombe the 
 firil feventh was, if it arife (I mean) from the fame Commandment, Re- 
 member to l{eep holy the Sabbath day ; why may it not beat the name of 
 the Sabbath now, as the firft-born did informer times ? 
 
 Thefis- 6. 
 
 If the Lord would have man to worke £\yL dayes together,^ according 
 tohisownexampic,andthe morality of the fourth Comraandement, 
 that fo a feventh day determined by himfelte might be obferved; 
 Hence it i$ that neither two Sabbaths in a week can ftand with the mo^ 
 
 Aa 3 raJit^ 
 
 6. 
 
The ChA^ge of ike SdbhMh* 
 
 raltty of the fonrth Commandemcnc, tior yet could the former Sabbath 
 be juftly changed imo any other day then into the firft day of the week. 
 Vox ftippofe he had changed it to the fecond or third day of the week, 
 the firil day could not belong to the week before ;for then there fhould 
 be eight days in a week ; and if it did belong to the week following^then 
 (if we fuppofe that the fecond day had been the Sabbath) there muft be 
 one working day, z'iz. the firPcda.; to go before it, and five working 
 dayes after it, and fo there fliould not nor could not be fix working 
 dayes continued together, that the feventh might be the Lord,s accord- 
 ing to the morality of the fourth Commandemenr. And hence it is that 
 no Humane or Ecclefiafticall power can change the Sabbath to what 
 day of the week they pleafe, from the firft, which now is. 
 
 Thefis 7. 
 
 It ilicmld not feem an uncouth Phrafe, or a hard faying, to call the firft 
 day of the week a feventh or the feventh day .• for though it be the firfl 
 abloJutely in order of exiftencc from the Creation, yet relatively in way 
 of relation, and inrelped of the number of fcven in a week, it may be 
 invefted with the name and title of a feventh, even of fuch a feventh as 
 may lawfully be crowned and annointed to be the Sabbath day; for look 
 visNoah^ though he was the firft in order of yeares and dignity of en- 
 trance into the Ark, yet he is called the eight, 2 Pet, 2. 5, in that he was 
 one of them (as the learned obferve) ^m oEionariMmnHmerumperficie^ 
 hdnt^ or who made up the number of eight : fo it is in refped of the firft 
 day, which in divers rcfpeds may be called the firft, and yet the feventh 
 alfo. Mr. 5rdi^tf^r/!<?j Argument therefore is of no folidity, who goes 
 about to prov5 the Chriftian Sabbath to be no Sabbath, Becaufc, ** Tha.t 
 ^^ SMiith^lnch the fourth Commandement wjoytis is called the f event h 
 ?* .^^)i;but all the Evangelills cal the Lords day thefirfi day of the week^not 
 ^'thefeueuthday* For he iliould remember that the fame day in divers 
 refpeds may be called the firft day; and yet the feventh day, for in ref- 
 ped of Its naturall exigence and being, it may be and is called the fiill 
 day. and yet in refptd of divine ufe and application, it maybe and is 
 called the ieventh day, even by vertue of the fourth Commandemi^nt, 
 which injoyns u& to kef p holy that feventh day , which is the tords day, 
 which is coafellisd to be the firft day. 
 
 Thefts 8. 
 
 YoV2i\l^O\x^innameronHmerdnte (as they call it,) i e. in number 
 numbring, there can be^but one feventh,. which immediately follow&the 
 number tix,: yet m numeno Jtit&m?jfau. . k a* in number nuo's^bred , or 
 things which are numbreii, (as arc the dayes of the week) any of the 
 fcven may be fo in way of relation and proportion. As fuj>pofc 
 
 ievcn 
 
The Change of the Sahaihc< 7 
 
 fcvcn men ftand together, take the laft man in order from the other fix, 
 who ftand about him, and he is the feventh : fo againc take the firft in 
 order, and fet him apart from the (ix who (land below him, and i^ the 
 number of them who are taken from him make up the number of (ix, 
 he then may and muft neeeflkrily be called the feventh. Juft thus it is in 
 the dayes of the week, the firft Sabbath from the Creation might be cal- 
 led the Seventh diy in refpeft of the (ix dayes before it ; and this- firft 
 dayof the week may be called the feventh day alfo, in rerpe<5t ofthefix 
 working dayes together after it. That may be called the iaft feventh; 
 thikthc firft feventh, without any abfurdity of account which fome 
 would imagine: and if this firft day of the week is called the eight day 
 according to £^^)^V/jProphe(ic of Evangelicall times, and his reckon- 
 ing onward from the Creation, E^k^^^. 27. why may it not then in 
 other rcfpcds put on the name of a feventh day alfo? 
 
 Thefts 9' g 
 
 The reafonwhy the Lord fliould depofe the iaft feventh, and exalt ^* 
 andcrownethefirftoffeventobetheday of the Chriftian Sabbath, is ■'* 
 not fo well confidered, and therefore to be here narrowly examined. 
 For as for thofe Eafterne Chriftians, who in the primitive times obfcr- 
 ved two Sabbaths in a week, the Jewifh and the Chriftian, doubtleffe 
 their milke fod over, and their zeak went beyond the Rule. The num- 
 ber of Jewes who were beleevers, and yet too too xealous of their old 
 cuftomes, we know; did fill thofe places in their difperfion and before, 
 more then the Wefterne and more remote parts, and therefore they 
 might more powerfully infeftthofe in the Eaft; and thef^to gaine or 
 keep them, might mor^ residily comply with them, Let us therefore fee 
 into the reafons of this change from one feventh unto another. 
 .f . • Thefts 10. 
 
 The good witl of hitii who is Lord of the Sabbath, is the firft efficient 
 and primary caufc of the inftitution of a new Sabbath ,• but the Refur- 1 0. 
 redion of Chrift being upon thehrftday of the week, Mark, 16. g, is 
 the f€eondary,moraH or moving caule hereof: thedayofChriltsrefur- 
 rcdion bemg Chrifts joyfullday for his Peoples deliverance, and the 
 worlds rcftitution and new Creation, it is no wonder if the Lord Chrift 
 appoint it, and the Apoftles preach and publi(h it, and the primicive 
 Chriftians obfcrvcit as their holy and joyfull day ofreftand confolati- 
 €>n For fome notable work ef ^ od upon a day; being ever the morall 
 caufe of fan<flifying the day .hence the work of redemption being fini- 
 ftiedupon thedayof ChriftsRefwrre^lion, and it being the moft glo- 
 rious work that ever was, and whcrcm Chrift was firft moft gloiioutly 
 manifeftedaa have refted from it, Rom, i. 4. hence the Lord Chnft 
 
 mignt 
 
? The Change of the Sabbath: 
 
 might have good caufc to honour this day above all others : and what 
 other caufe there (houW be of the pubiike folemnc Affemblics in the pri- 
 mitive Churches, upon the firft day of the week, then this glorious work 
 of Chrifls Rcfurreftion, upon the fame day which began their great joy 
 for the rifing of the Sun of righteoufned'e, is fcarce imaginable. 
 
 Thefis II, 
 ^j^ No aaionof Chrift doth of it fdfe fanaifie any time, for if it did, 
 why (hould we not then keep as many Holy dayes every year as we 
 find holy a(flions ofChrift recorded in «S'cripture, as the fuperftirious 
 Crew of blind Papifts do at this day ? But if God who is the Lord of 
 time dial! fandifie any fuch day or time wherein any fuch adion is done, 
 fuch a day then is to be kept holy; and therefore if the will of God hath 
 fandified the day of Chrifts Refurredion, wc may lawfully fandify the 
 fameday, and therefore Mr. !5/"^^o//r«f doth us wrong, as it we made 
 the Refurredion of Chrift, meerly to be the caufe of the change of this 
 day. 
 
 Thef/s 12. 
 1 2. Why the Will of God fliould honour the day of ChriAs Refurredi- 
 on as holy, rather then any other day of his Incarnation, Birth, Padion, 
 i^fcenfion ? It is this ; becaufe Chrilts rifing day was his refting or Sab- 
 bath day, wherein he firft entred into his reft, and whereon his reft be- 
 gan. For the Sabbath or Reft-day of the Lord our God, only can be our 
 Reft- day according to the fourth Commandement. Hence the day of 
 Gods reft from the work of Gods Reft from the work of Creation, and 
 the day of Chrifts Reft from the work of Redemption, are only fit and 
 capable of being our Sabbaths. Now the Lord Chrift in the day of his 
 incarnation and birth did not enter into his reft, but rather made en- 
 trance into his labour and forrow,who then began the work of Humili- 
 ation, Gal. ^. 4, 5. and in the day of hispaflion, he was then under the 
 forcft part and feeling of his labour, in bitter Agonies upon theCroffe 
 and in the Garden. And hence it is that none of thofe days were confe- 
 crated to be our Sabbath or reft-days, which were days of Chrifts labour 
 and forrovf ; nor could the day of his Afcenfion be fit to be made our 
 Sabbath, becaufe although Chrift then and thereby entred into his place 
 of Reft (the third Heavens) yet he did not then make his firft entrance 
 into his eftate of reft, which was in the day of his Refurredion; the wifc- 
 ^ dome and will of God, did therefore chofe this day above any other 
 to be the Sabbath day. 
 
 Thefis 13. 
 ^' Thofe that go about (as fome of late have done) to make Chrifts A- 
 fcenfion-day the ground of our Sabbath'day, had need be fearfull left 
 
 they 
 
The Chaf^ge of the SMatk ^ 
 
 they lofe the truth and go beyond it, while they affcfl fome new difco- 
 veriesofit, which feems to be the cafe here. For though Chrift at his A- 
 fcenfionentred into his place ofReft,yct the place is but an Accidental 
 thing to Chrifts Reft it felfe, the State of which was begun in the day of 
 his Refurredion ; and therefore there is no reafon to prefer that which 
 is but accidental above that which is moft fubftantiall; or the day of 
 entrance into the place of his Reft in his Afcenfion, before the day of 
 Reft in his Rellirredion : befide, its very uncertain whether Chrift a- 
 fcended upon the firft day of the week, v^^e are certain that he arofe 
 then; and why wc fliould build fuch a va(t change upon an uncertainty,! 
 know not. And yet fuppofe that by dcduJ^ion and ftrengthofwicit 
 might be found out, yet we fee not the Holy-Ghoft exprefllly fetting it 
 down, 1/i^. That Chrift afcended upon the firft day of the week, which 
 if he had intended to have made the ground of our Chriftian Sabbath, he 
 would ftirely have done : the firft day in the week being ever accounted 
 the Lords day in Holy Scriptures ; and no other firft day do we find 
 mentioned on which he afcended, but only on that day wherein he arofe 
 from the dead. 
 
 Thefis 14. 
 And look as Chrift was a Lambe flatn from the foundation of the 14, 
 world meritorioufly, but not adually : So he was aifo rifen again in the 
 likemannerfrom the foundation of the world meritorioudy, but not 
 aduilly. Hence it is that look as God the father adually inftitnted no 
 Sabbath dayjuntill he had adually finillied his work of Creation, fo nei- 
 ther was it meet that this day fhould be changed, untill Chrift Jefus had 
 adually finillied, (and not meritorioufly onlyjthe work of Redemption 
 orReftoration : And hence it is that the Church before Chrifts coming 
 might have good reafon tofandifiethat day, which was inftituted upon 
 the aduallfinifhingof thework of Creation, and yet might have no 
 rcafontoobferve our Chriftian Sabbath, the work of Reftoration and 
 new Creation, and reft from it, not being then (o much asadualiy 
 begun. 
 
 Thefts i<. 
 • Whether our Saviour appointed that firft individual! day of hisrefur- 
 rcdionto be the firft Chriftian Sabbath; islomewhat difficult to deter- ^^ 
 mine ; and I would not tie knots and leave them for others to unloofe; 
 This only I aime at, that although the firft individual I day of Chrifts Re- 
 furredionChould not poflibly be the firft individuall Sabbath, ya ftill 
 the RefurredionofChrift is the ground of the inftitutionof the Sab- 
 bath, which one confideration daQieth all thofc devices of fome mens 
 Heads, who puzzk their Readers with many intricacies and difficulties, 
 
 B ia 
 
lo tk€hsnge cf the SMath. 
 
 infhewingthatthefirft day of Chrifts Refnrre^ion could not be the 
 firft Sabbath, and thence would inferre that the day of his Rcfurrecfli- 
 on, was not the ground of the inftkution of the Sabbath, which infe- 
 rence is moft falfe ; for it was eafie with Chrifl to make that great work 
 on this day to be the ground cf the inftitucton of it/orae time afcerthat 
 work was part* 
 
 Thefts 16. 
 i£. The fin and fall of man having defaced and fpoiled (de jme though 
 *' Lake not de fatio) the whole work of Creation, as that learned * Bi(hop well 
 Thsfes, obfervts. It was not to meet therefore that the Sabbath fliould be ever 
 kept in refped of that work, but rather in refped of this new Creation 
 or Refloration of all things by Chrift, after the aduall Acconiplilhment 
 thereof in the day of his Refurredion, But look as God the father ha- 
 ving created the world in fix days, he reftcd therefore and fandified the 
 feventh •' So this work being (poiled and marred by mans fin , and the 
 newCreation being finifhed and endedjthe Lord thcrfore reftcd the firft 
 day of the week, and therefore fandified it, 
 
 Theps 17. 
 The fourth Commandment givesin thereafon why God fan^ified 
 ^'7' the feventh day from the Creation, viz.. becaufe God reftcd on that 
 day, and as it is in Bxod, 31.17. was refreflied in it, that is, took a com^ 
 placency and delight in his work fo done and fo finifhed. But the fin of 
 man in tailing from his firft Creation, made God repent that ever he 
 made man. Gen, 6. and confcquentiy the world for man, and therefore 
 It took off that complacency or reft and refrelhing in this his work ; if 
 therefore the Lord betake himfelfe to work a new work, a new Creati- 
 on or Renovation of all things in and by his Son, in which he will for 
 ever Reft,, may noc the day of his reil be then juftly changed into the 
 firft of fcven, on which day his reft in his new work began, whereof he 
 will never repent ? If the Lord vary his reft, may not he vary the time 
 and day of it ? nay muft not the time and day of our reft be varied, be- 
 caufe the ground of Gods reft in a new work is changed ? 
 
 7hefis 18. 
 jo As it was no necefifary duty therefore, perpetually to obferve that fe- 
 venth day wherein God firft refted, becaufe his reft on that day is now 
 changed ; fo alfo it is not neceftary orderly to obferre thofe fix days of 
 labour ,wherein He firft laboured and built the world, of which for the 
 {k of man he is faid to have repented ; yet notwithftanding, though ic 
 be no ncceffary duty to obferve thofe particular fix day es of labour, and 
 that feventh of Reft, yet it is a morall duty (as hath been proved) to ob- 
 lexye fix days for labour, and a feveuth for Reft j.^ and hence ic follows 
 
 that 
 
The Change of the SMath. II 
 
 that although the Lord Chrifts Reft on the Day of his Refiirreflion (the 
 firft day of the vveek)might and may juRly be tiken as a ground of our 
 reft on the fame day ; yet his labour in the woik of Redemption three 
 and thirty yeers and upward, allthedayes of his life and humiliation, 
 could not nor cannot juftly be made the ground or example of our 
 kbour,fo as we muft labour and work :3. yccrs top/thcr before we 
 keep a Sahhath the Day of Chrifts Reft» BecAufe although God 
 could alter & change the Day of Reft without infringment of the M<T' 
 rdity of the fourth Commandment; Yet he^could not wake the example 
 of Chrifts labour thirty three yeers together, the ground or example of 
 our continuance in our work, without manifeft breach of that MoraU 
 Rule^viz,, That man {hall have fix dayes together for labour, and the 
 feventh for Reft. For man may reft the firft day of the week, and with- 
 all, obferve fix dayes for labour, and fo keep the fourth Commandment; 
 biit he cannot labour 3 5. yeers together, and then keep a Sahhath with- 
 out apparent breach of the fame Commandment; and therfore that^r- 
 (T/^»?<?;?^of Mafter ^r<2^o//r»(?againft our Chriftian SMath melts into 
 Vanity, wherein he urgeth an equity of the Change of the Dayes of ouc 
 \dbouty either three ^ ayes only together (4/ Chrifl did lie in the grave) 
 or ^^, yeers together (as he did all the dayes of hU Humiliation) in cafe 
 Tve rvillrnake a Chinge of the Sabbath^ from the Change of the Day of 
 (^hrifis Refl. And yet I confeffe ingenuouQy with him, that if the Lord 
 had not inftituted thefirftDayof the week to be our Chriftian 5^^* 
 i>ath^ all the fe, and fuch like arguings and reafonings were invilid to 
 prove a Change^ for mans rcafon hath nothing to do to Change dayes 
 without Divine appoiotmcnt and inftitution : thefe things onely I 
 mention why the wifdomeof God might well alter the Day» The 
 proofs that he hath changed {t,fhall follow in due place. 
 
 Thefis 19, 
 -The Refurredion of Chrift may therefore be one ground, not onely rp. 
 of the Sandification of the Chriftian Sabbatk, but alio a fuificienc 
 ground of the abrogation of the \t^\v\^Sal?bath, For,firft,the greater 
 light mav darken the Icfle, and a greater work (as the Reftoration of 
 the world above the Creation of it) may overftiadovv the k(Te, Jerem, 
 23. 7, 8. Exod. 12. 2. Secondly, M-ms fmne fpoyled the firft Reft, and 
 therefore the day of it might be juftly abrogated. For the horrible 
 wrath of God had been immediatly poured out upon man (as might be 
 proved, and as it was upon the lapfed Angels) and confequencfy upon 
 all Creatures for mans fake, if Chrift had not giv.:n the Father Rd\, for 
 whofe fake the world was made. Revel. 4. 1 1 . and by whole means and 
 mediation che world continues as now it doth, f oh ^22^ 
 
 Bb 2 Thefs 
 
tl The change of the Sabbath. 
 
 Theps 20. ' 
 
 Yet although Chrifts Refurredion be one ground not onely of the 
 ^' Inftitutionof the New Sabhath , but alfo of the Abrogation of the 
 Old, yet it is not the Oneiy ground why the Old was abrogated ; Por^ 
 (as hath been fhewen) there was fome type affixed to the jewifh Sab- 
 hath, by reafon of which there was juftcaufc to abrogate, or rather 
 (as Calv'm calk it) to tranflite the i'^^^^^^Ato another Day. And there- 
 Vi<f. mo- fore this dafheth another of Mr* BraboHrnes dream^s, who argues the 
 ral.of Sab. continuance of the J ewifh i'^^^*;2rA,-becaure there is a poffibility for 
 all Nations ftill to obfcrve it. For ( faith he J cannot \\>e in En- 
 gland oi well as r^e-y ^/ Jerufalem remember that Sabbath? Secondly, 
 reft in it. Thirdly, 7C^£;p it holy, VourM/, k^ep the whole day ho/j» 
 Titthlyythe laft offeven Sixih\y,andali th^J in imitation of God, Conld 
 BraUpg. ^0 Nation (hkh he) fefides the ^ e\'>oes obferve rhefe fix things ? Yes ve- 
 2.Q1. rily that they could in rcfpcd of natural ability; but the qucftion is not 
 what men may or might do, but what they ought to do, and fhould dOi. 
 For befides the change of Gods Reft through the work of the Sonne, 
 there was a Type affixed to thatjewifh Sabbath^ for which caufe it 
 may juftly vani(h at Chrifts death, as well as other types, in refpedof 
 the affixed Type, which was but accidental! ; and yet be continued and 
 prefer^fedin another Day , being originally and eflentially Moral .- A 
 i'^^^^r/? was inftituted in Paradife, equally honoured by God in the 
 Decalogue with aH other Moral Lavves foretold to continue in the 
 dayesof theGo'pelby£-?:,e^^Wand /y^/<«^, Ezek,43.0/r. Ifa,^6 4,6.. 
 and commended by Chtift, who bids his people pray , that their flight 
 may not he in the winter or Sabb-ath-daj, ^^itv/trc cafie to open thefe 
 places againft all Cavils ; and therefore it is for iubftance Moral. Yet 
 the word Sabbatifme, Hcb. 4. p. and the Apoftles gradation from yecr- 
 iy Holy daycs to monthly New-moons, and from them to weekly Sab- 
 baths, which are called Jhadowes of things to come, Colof, 2* 16 » feemes 
 ftronglyto argue fome type affixed to thofc individual Sabbaths , or 
 Jewilh fcventhdayci;and hence it is perhaps that tht Sabbath is fet a^ 
 mong Moral Lawes in the Decalogue, being originally and cfTentially 
 Moral , and yet is fet among ceremonial teaft-daycSjXf'z/i^.23. 2, 3.bc- 
 caufe it is accidentally typical. And therefore Mr. "Brabonrne need not. 
 raife fuch a duft, and cry out, Oh monftrom \.very flrange, what a mingle* 
 mangle ! what a hotch-potch have we here 1 what aconfufion and jumbling 
 of things fofarre diftant^as when Morals and (^eremoniaLs are here mingled 
 together. No verily, we do not make the fourth Commandment eflen- 
 tiajly Ceremonial, bwt being accidentally fo, why may it notwithftand- 
 ing this be mingled among the reft of the Morals I Let one folid reafoa 
 be given, butawaj^ with wordsi ?^#: 
 
rk change ofihe Sabaih. 1 3 
 
 Thefts 21. 
 If theqneftion be, what Type is affixed and annexed to the Sabbath} ir. 
 I think it difficult to findc out', although mans wanton wit can eaGly al- 
 legorize and readily frame imaginations enough in this point. Some 
 thin:< it typified Chrifts Reft in the grav^, but I feare this will not hold, 
 no more then many other Popifhconjedlurcs, wherein their allegori- 
 zing Poftiilers abound. 'BulUnger and fome others think thar it was Ty- Bull, Dc- 
 peal m refpect of the peculiar Sacrifices annexed to it, which SacriHccs cad. 
 were Types of Chrift, Numb. 28, 9. And although much might be faid 
 for thisagainft that which Mr. "Brabonrne replies, yet I fee nothing co- 
 gent in this; for the multiplying of Sacrifices (which were partes cultm 
 inflittiti) on this Day proves rather a fpeeialty oFworfhfpping God 
 more abundantly on this Day, then any ceremonialnefife in it; for if the 
 offering of Sacrifices mcerly, fhould make a day Ceremonial,why did it 
 not make every Day Ceremonial in refpe£t of every dayes offering of 
 the Morning and Evening i'acrifice? Some think that our Reft upon the 
 Sabbath (notGod the Fathers Reft, as I^T.BraboHrneimn^s ii) was 
 made not onely a refemblance, but alio a Type of our Reft in Chrift, of 
 which the Apoftle fpeaks, H^^. 4. 3. which is therefore called a Sabba- 
 /;y5»^, ver. 9. or a keeping of a Sabbath, as the word fignifies. What 
 others would inferre from this place to make the Sabbath to be meerly 
 Ceremonial ; and what Mr. Brabonrne would anfwer from hence, that 
 It is not at all Ceremonial, may both of them be eafiiy anfwered here 
 again , as already they have been in fome of the former Thefes, Some 
 fcruples 1 fee not yet through about this text, inforce me herein to be 
 Clcnt, ?nd therefore to leave it to fuch as think they may defend it , as- 
 one ground of fome affixed Type unto the Jewilh Sabbatk 
 
 The fa 22. 
 , . Learned jHnlpts goes before ns herein, and points out the Type af- 
 fixed to that ^^^^^rX ; For, befidestheiirftinftitution of it in Para- 
 dije, he makes two other caufes which he calls Acceffory, or affixed and 
 added to it. 1. One was Ciz/iZ/ij or Civil , that men and beafts might 
 reft from their toilfom labor every week.2 ,(^eremonialU or Ceremonial, ^^"' .^"* 
 for their folemne Commemoration of their deliverance out of Egjpt^ (>n.T. 3. 
 which we know typified our deliverance by Chrift, Df«r. 5. 15. Some 
 think indeedchat their deliverance out of Egypt wa? upon the Sabbath 
 dayj but this I do not urge; becaufe though it be very probable, yet it is 
 not certaine; only this is certain, that they were to fandihe this 
 Z>^7 becaufe of this their Deliverance; and 'tis certain this Deliverance 
 was Typical of our Deliveranceby Chrift : and hence 'tis certaine that 
 diere was a Type affixed to this Sabbath; and becaufe the Scripture is 
 
 Bb 3 fo. 
 
 22, 
 
14 '^be Cbjffge of the Sabbatk 
 
 fo plain and exprefle in it, I am inclined to think the fame which ffiftifts 
 dothj that this is the Type rather then any other I have yet heard of; 
 againll which I know many things maybe objedled; only itmay be fuf- 
 hcient to dear up the place againft that which Mr. Brabourne anfwerf 
 to it. 
 
 1 hefts 23. 
 2 ^ , The Deliverance out ^/Egypt , faith he , /^ »<?? /^^ down as the ground of 
 the Infiitut'ton of the Sab hath , but only as a motive to the obfervatioH 
 thereof I as it mas more generally in the Preface to the Decalogue to the 
 obedience of every other command , which notwithjianding are not Cere^ 
 monial ; for God j'aithyl am the Lord who brought thee ont of Egyft^ 
 therefore k£ep thou the firjiythe fecond^the third, the fithy the fix thy a^s 
 Well as the fourth Commandment) affdiherefore(i2i\th hQ)we may mal^ e* 
 very (fommandment (feremsnial oi well 04 the Sabbathjfthe motive of deli-* 
 verance ^/^f^/Egypt makes the Sabbath to be fo. This is the fubftance 
 and finewes of his difcourfe herein ; and I confefle its true, their Deli- 
 verance out of £^7/>f was not the firft ground of the inftitution of it, 
 but Gods Reft after his fix daycs labour; yet it was fuch a ground as we 
 contend for, viz,, a fecondary and an annexed or affixed ground. And 
 that it was not a Motive only to obferve that day (as it is in the Preface 
 to the Decalogue)but a fuperadded ground of it, may appear from 
 this one confideration, viz^ bccaufe that very ground on which the 
 Lord uroeth theobfervation of the Sabbath in Exod, 20. ri. it is wholly 
 left out in the repetition of the Law, Dent, 5. 15. and their deliverance 
 out of Bgjft put into the roome thereof : for the ground in Exod, 20, 
 II, is thi ,1^/^: dajesGod made Heaven and Earthy and refted the J event h 
 day and fan^ified it ; but inftead of thefc words, and of this ground we 
 finde other words put into their roomc.Deut 5 1$, Remember that 
 thou wafi a fervant in the Land of Bgy piy^nd that the Lord brought thee 
 out thence with a mighty hand, therefore the Lord thy God commandeth 
 thee to keep theSabbath.WhiQh feems to argue llrongly that thefe words 
 are not a meer Motive but another ground of the obfcrvation of the 
 Sabbath, And why might not the general Motive in the Preface of 
 the Decalogue, ferve as a fufficientMotive to the obedience of thisCom- 
 mandment, if there was no more but a Motive in thefe words of Deutr. 
 and therefore 1 fuppofe this was alfo the ground and affixed Type unto 
 the Jevvifti Sd^bath. 
 
 Thefts. 24. 
 But ftill the difficulty remains; for Mr. Brabourne will fay thatthofc 
 ^ , are but humane reafons ; but what ground is there from Scripture for 
 the inflitucion of another Sabbath, as well as of the abrogation of the 
 
 oldf 
 
The change of ihe Sahbaib. I5 
 
 old? which if itbenotcleiredjconfeffcthiscaufefinks; here there- 
 fore let it be again obferved, that we are not to expetfl fuch evidence 
 from Scripture concerning this Change (as fond and humorous wit 
 fometimes pleads for) in this Controverfie, nameljs That Chrifi fiould 
 come ^nth Drum and trumpet, as it were upon Mount Zion, and pro- 
 claime by word or writing in fo many exprefle words, That the Je^ifh 
 Sabbath is abrogated, and the fir ft day of the week, iufiitHtedin its rootne 
 tobeobferved of all Chriflians to the end of the World, For tis not the 
 Lords manner fo to fpeak in many other things which concerne his 
 Kingdome,butasitw€reocca{ionally,orin way of Hiftory, or Epi- 
 ftle to fome particular Church or people ; and thus he doth concerning 
 the Sabbath : and yet wifdomes mind is plaine enough to them that un- 
 derftand. Nor do I doubt but that thofe Scriptures, which are fome- 
 times alledged for the C/;^;?^^ of Xkiz Sabbath, although at firft blufli 
 they maynotfeeme tobeareup the weight of this caufe, yet bein^ 
 throughly confidered, they are not onely fufiBcient to ftabUrh modcft 
 minds, but are alfo fuch as may hm^ixi^tiv or ftop the mouths even of 
 1 wranglers themfelves. 
 
 Thefts 25. 
 
 I do not think that the exercifc of holy duties on a Day argues that 25. 
 ftch a Day is the Chriftian Sabbath Day ; for the Apoftles preached 
 commonly upon the Jewifh Sabbath, fometimeupon the firft day of the 
 weekalfo: and therefore the bare exercife of holy duties on a day is 
 no fufficient Argument that either the one or the other is the Chriftian 
 Sabbath ; for then there might be two Sabbaths^ yea many Sabbaths in 
 a weekjbecaufe there may be many holy duties in feverall dayesof the 
 week, which we know is againft t^^ Morality oi the fourth Com^ 
 mandment. 
 ; c>j TheJiS 26, 
 
 Yet notwithftanding although holy duties on a Day do not argue 26. 
 fuch a Day to be our i".*^^^//?, yet that Day vyhich is fet apart for ^/i^- 
 bath fervices rather then any other Day, and is honoured above »ny o- 
 ther Day for that end, furely fucha day is the Chriftian Sabbath : Now, 
 it it may appea r that the firft Day of the week was thus honoured, then 
 certainly it is to be accounted the Chriftian Sabbath, 
 
 Thejts 27. 
 
 The Primitive pattcrne Churches thus honoured the firft Day of the 27. 
 week; and what they pradifed without reproof, that the Apoftles 
 (who planted thofe Churches) enjoyned and preached unto them lo to 
 do ; at leaft in fuch weighty matters as the Change of Dayes , of pre- 
 ferring one before that other which the Lord had honoured before s 
 
 and. 
 
^6 The change of the Sabhath 
 
 and whac the Apoftles preached , that the Lord Jefws comcnanded 
 Mattk 28.20. go teach all Natlens that ^hich I command you : un- 
 leffe anjr flia II chink that the Apoftles fometime went beyond their 
 Commi[fion to teach that to others which Chrift never commanded, 
 which is blafphcmoas to imagine; for though they might erre in pra- 
 dife as men , and as Peter did at Antiochy^ind Paul znd Barnaboi in 
 their contention; yet in their piiblike miniftry they were infallibly and 
 extraordinarily allifted, efpecially in fuch things which they hold forth 
 as patterns for after times: if therefore the k^rimitive Churches thus 
 honoured the firft day of the week above any other diy ^oz Sabhath 
 fervices,thencertainly they were inftituted and taught thus to do by 
 the Apoftles approving of them herein; and what the Apoftles taught 
 the Churches, that, the Lord Jejpis commanded to the ^foftles. So that 
 the approved pradife of the Churches herein fhewes what was the 
 Dodrine of the Apoftles ; and the Dodrine of the Apoftles Oiewes 
 what was the command of Chrift : fo that the fandification of this 
 Firft Day ofthe week is no humane tradition but a Divine inftitution 
 from Chrift himfelf, 
 
 Thefis 28, 
 '18, That the Churches honoured this Day above any other, (hall appear 
 in its place, as alfo that the Apoftles commanded them fo to do. Yet 
 Mr. Primrofe faith that this latter is doubtful ; and Mr. Ironftde ( not 
 qucftioning the matter) fals oft' with another evafion, viz,, That they 
 aEled herein not 06 Apoflles, but as ordinary Pafionrs, and confequently as 
 IronfOu fallible men, not only in commanding thU Change of the Sabbath, but in 
 leap, jo! all other matters of Church' government (among which he rec'i{ons this 
 of r/;^ Sabbath to be one) which he thinks ^^^^^ imp fed according to their 
 private ^ifdome as mofi ft Jor thofe times , but not by any Apoflolicall 
 Comm'iffionasconcernmgalltimes. Biit' to imagine that matters of 
 Church-government in the Apoftles dayes were coats for the Moon in 
 refped of after-times, and that the form of it is mutable (as he 
 would have it) I fuppofe will be di^efted by few honeft and fober minds 
 in thefe times- unlefTc they be byafled for a feafon by politick ends, and 
 therefore herein I will not now contend; only it may be confidercd 
 whether any private fpiric could abolifh that Day, which from the bc^ 
 ginning of the world God fo highly honoured , and then honour and 
 advance another Day above it, and fandiiieic too (as fliall be proved) 
 for religious ferviccs* Could any dochis juftly but by immediate difpen- 
 fation from the Lord Chrift J ckis ? and if the Apoftks did thus receive 
 it immediately from Chrift,and fo teach the obfervatioii of it,they could 
 not then teach it as falUbie men, and as private Paftors^as he would have 
 
 it: 
 
the change of the Sabbatk 17 
 
 it ; a pernicious conceit, enough to undcrnninc the faith of Gods elefl 
 in many matters more weighty then this of the Sahhatk 
 
 Thefis 29. 
 
 To know when and where the Lord Chrift inftru^fled his Difcip'.es ^p^ 
 concerning this ^/7^??^^ is needlefl'e to enquire. It is fufficient to be- 
 leeve this, that what the PrimitiveChurches exemplarily praL^ifed, thac 
 was tauijht them by the Apoftles who planted thcm;and that wbatfoe- 
 vcr the Apoftks preached, the LordChrift commanded, as hath been 
 (he wen. Yet if the Change of the Sabbath be a matter appertaining 
 to the Kingdome of God, why fhould v;e doubt but that wichinthc 
 fpace of his forty dayes abode with them after his Refurredion,he then 
 taught it them, for 'cis exprcflely faid that He then taught them fuch 
 things, ex^^i I 3. 
 
 Thep 30. 
 
 When the Apoftles came among the Jewes they preached ufually 30^ 
 upon the JewiQi Sabbaths,but this was not bccaufe they did thinK or ap- 
 point it herein to be the Chnftian Sabbath, but that they might take 
 the fitteft opportt^nity and feafon of meeting with , and lo of preach- 
 ing the Goipel to the Jewes in thofc times For, what power had they 
 to call them together when they faw meet ? or if they had, yet was 
 it meet for them thus to do , before they were fufficiently inftiucled 
 about Gods mind for fetting apart fome other time ? and how could 
 they be fufficiently and leafonably inftruded herein without watching 
 the advantage of thofe times which the Jewes yet thought were the 
 only Sabbaths ? The dayes of Pentecofl, Pajfeover and houres of pray- 
 er in the Tempie,are to be obferved ftill as well as the Jewilli sabuack, 
 if the Apoftles preaching on their Sabbaths argues he concuiuance of 
 them, as Mr. !2?r^^<?//r«^ argues ; tor we know chat they pleached al- 
 fo and went up purpofely to ferufa/em at luch tim s to preach among 
 them as well as upon the Sabbath dayes : look therefore as they hid 
 hold upon the dayes of T^entecofi ^nd Fa;jeoverds ihc fittelt fcalons to 
 preach to the- J ewes, but not thi'^ktov. chu luch FcaftsfnoUidftill be 
 continued, io it is in their preathtng upon tlic jewiLii SaDba b. 
 
 Ihfjis 31 
 
 Nor did the Apoftles (infully Judaizeby preachigto the Jewes up- 31^ 
 on their Sabbaths, (^as Hr. Brabot^me would inuirc) Jf^ppojmg that 
 their 'abb^hs fhouU not be ftill obferved they Jhonld thtn p/daiz and 
 obferve Cercmomes , faith he, and jo bttild Hp thojC things which thty 
 lahouredto deftroj : For, fuppofe they did ooferve luch Day.s and 
 Sabbaths as were Ceremonial for a time, \ et it oemg done not in c-ju- 
 fcienceof che Day, but in conlcicncc oi caku-g io nt a lealan to prt ach 
 
 C c the 
 
i8 rhe change of the Sabbath\ 
 
 the Gofpel in, it could not nor cannot be any finful Judaizing, efpeciaily 
 while then,the Jews were not fufficiently inftruded about the abolidiing 
 of thofe things.ForjMr.Z^r^^wy/i could not but know that all the Jewifh 
 Ceremonies being once the appointment of God , were to have an 
 honourable burial , and that therefore they might be lawfully obfer- 
 vedforatime among the /ewes, untill they were more fully inftru- 
 fted about them ; and hence Panl Circumcifed Timothy becaufe of 
 the Jewes,*^(^j i6. 3. and did otherwife conforme ta them , that 
 fo he might winne andgaine the more upon them : and if Paul ob» 
 ferved purpofely a Jewilh Ceremony of Circumcifion, which was not 
 necelTary , nay which was not lawful to be obferved among the Gen- 
 tiles, 6'^/.$^. 5. 2. and yet he obferved it to gaine the Jewes : why 
 might not Vaul much more preach the Gofpel, which is in it felfe a 
 Heceflfary Duty , upon a Jewifh Sabbath which fell out occafionally 
 to him , and therefore might lawfully be obferved for fuch an end 
 among the Jewes, which among the Gentiles might be unlawful? 
 Suppofe therefore that the Apoftles might have taught the Jewes from 
 • houfe to houfe ( as Mr. Braboume argues againft the necefTity put 
 upon the Apoftles to preach upon the Jcwifh Sabbath ) yet what 
 Reafon or Confcience was there to lofe" the opportunity of publike 
 preaching for the more plentiful gathering in of foules, when many 
 are met together , and which may lawfully be done , and be con- 
 tented onely to feck their good in fuch private wayes f and what 
 although Paul did affemble the cheife of the Jewes together at Rome 
 when he was a priloner, to acquaint them with Civil matters about 
 his tmprifonment, ^Bs 28. 17. Yet had he power to do thus in all 
 places where he came ? or was it meet for him fo to do> Did not he 
 fubmit the appointment of a facred Afl'embly to heare the word ra- 
 ther unto them, then afliime it to himfelf, ABs 28 23. It is there- 
 fore falfe and unfound which Mafter "Braboume affirmes , vU. That? 
 Paul did f reach on the Jewijh Sabbath in conjcienceof the *T>aj ^ not 
 meerely with refpeU: of the opportunity he then took^from their o'^ne 
 publike meetings then to preach to them\ For, (faith he ) TauL had 
 power to affcmble them together upon other dayes : This, I fay, is both 
 falfe; for he that was fo much fpoken againft among them , might 
 not in all places be able to put iorth fuch a power; as alfo'tis un^ 
 found ; for , fuppofe he had fuch a power , yet whether it was fo 
 meet forhimtoput it forth in appointing other times, may be eafily 
 judged of by what hath been faid, 
 
 Thejis. 32* 
 B.2"' Nor is there a foundation hereby laid of making all other anions 
 
 - of: 
 
The Change of the Sabiatk T9 
 
 of the Apoftles unwarrantable or unimitable (asMafler 'Brahurne 
 faith) becaufe we are not to imitate the Apofiles herein, in preach- 
 ing upon the Jewidi Sabbaths. For no acflions either of Chrift 
 •or the Apoftlcs which were done meerely in rcfpec^ of fome fpe- 
 cial occafion , or fpecial reafon, are, e^tenm ^ or in that refpedj 
 binding to others : For , the exampie of Chriil eating the Lords 
 Supper onely with men , not women, in an upper chamber, and 
 coward the dark evening, doth not binde us to exclude women, or 
 not to celebrate it in other places and times; becaufe we know that 
 thefc adions were meerely occafional in reiped of fpecial reafons 
 (as the eating of the Pajfeover with ones owne family, Chrifts fami- 
 ly not confiding of women) fo it is here in refpeft of the Sabbath; ^ 
 TheApoftle-s preaching upon the Jewifl^ Sabbaths was meerly occafi- 
 onal, by occafion of the publike meetings (their fitted time to do good 
 in) which were upon this and on no other day. 
 
 lhe[ts 33. 
 Now although the Jewes obfcrving this Day, the Apoftles ob- 3 3, 
 ferved it among the Jewes by preaching among them; yetwefhall 
 finde, that among the Chriftian Gentile Churches and beleevers 
 (where no Judaifme was to be fo much as tolerated for a time) 
 not any fuch Day was thus obferved, nay another Day, the firft 
 Day in the week is hononred and preferred by the Apollles above 
 any other Day in the week for religious and Sabbath Services. For, 
 although Holy Duties do not argue alway a Holy Day ; yet when 
 we iLall finde the Holy Ghoft fingle out and nominate one parti- 
 cular Day to be obferved and honoured rather then any other Day, 
 and rather then the JewiQi feventh Day it felf for Sabbath Servi- 
 ces and Holy Duties , this undeniably proves that day to be the 
 Chriftian Sabbath : and this wee Qiall make evident to bz the 
 firft day of the week. Which one thing feriouQy minded ( ii pro- 
 ved ) doth utterly fubvert the whole frame and force of Maftct 
 Brahournes (hady difcourfe for the obfervation of the Jewidi Sab- 
 bath, and moft effcdually eftablifheth the Chriftian Sabbacb. Ma- 
 tter Brabourne therefore herein beftirs his wits, and tels us on the 
 contrary that P^/// preached not onely to the Jewes, but even un- 
 to the Gentiles upon this Jewifti Sabbath rather then any other 
 Day; and for this end brings a double proof, one is <j4Bs 13. 
 42, 44. where the Gentiles are faid to defire Paul to preach to 
 them s/f TO |us7rtfu^aa'^^.4roj/, u e, the week between, or any D^y 
 between till the next Sabbath ( as fome tranflate it ) or (if Mafter 
 Brabourne will ) the next Sabbath , or fewifi Sabbath wheti almofi all 
 
 Cc 2 the 
 
2x5 the change of the Sabbath* 
 
 ihe ^ity CAtne out to heareVvA^ vpho \Kieremofl of themCentiles^ not 
 Je^xfes, Beit f o , they were Gendlcs indeed, but as yet no Church 
 or Chriftim Church of Gentiles adually under Chrifts Government 
 and Ordinances , among whom (I fay) the firll day of the week 
 was fo muth honoured above any other Day tor facred AlTemblies, 
 For, 'cis no wonder if the Apoftlesyeeld to their defircs in preach- 
 ing any time of the week , which they thought the bcft time, even 
 upon the Jewifh Sar)bath; among whom the Jewes being mm- 
 gled , they might have the fitter opportunity to preach to them 
 alfo, and fo become all things to all men to gaine fome. His fecoiid 
 proof is ABsi6, 12,13 and here he tels us that Fanl and Timo- 
 thy ^reached not to the fe\\>es , hut to the Gentiles upon the Sabbath 
 day, I confefTe they are not called Jewes no more then "'tis faid 
 that they were Gentiles ; but why might not Lydia and hir com- 
 pany be Jewes or Jevtfh 1 rolclytes who we know did obferve 
 the Jewifh Sabbjth ftridly till they were better inftrudted , as they 
 did all other Jewifli Ceremonies alfof For Lydia is exprelTely laid 
 to be one who worfhipped God before Paul came. Mafter Bra- 
 bourne tels us 5 Ihej fpere no Jewijh Profelytes , becaufe they had 
 no Jewijh Synagogue , and therefore they w^re faine to go out of the 
 City into the fields befide a River to fray. I confefTe the Text faith 
 that they went out to a River-fide where prayer was wont to be 
 made; but that this was in the open fields, and that there was no 
 oratory, houfe or place of fhelter to meet and pray in , tbisisnoc 
 in the Text , but its Mafter 'Brabournes comment and glofie on it* 
 JBut fuppofe it was in the open fields, and they had no Synagogue.- 
 yet will it follow that thele were not Jewes? migut not the J ewes 
 be in a Gentile City for a time without any Synagogue , efpeci* 
 ally if their number be but fmall, and this fmall number confift chiefs- 
 Jy of women as it feeras this did , whofc hearts God touched, lea-» 
 ving their husbands to their owne wayes? If they were not Jews 
 or rather ]ewi(h Profelytes, why did they choofe the Sabbath day 
 ( which the Jewes fo much fet by ) rather then any other, to pray 
 and . worfliip God together in ? But verily, fuch anfwers as thcfe 
 wherewith the poor man abounds in his freatife, make meextream-t 
 ly fear that he rather ftretcht his Confcience, then was acted by a 
 piaine deluded Confcience in this point of the Sabbath. , 
 
 Thefis ;4. 
 3^»': It remains therefore to prove that the firft Day of the weekiS' 
 the.Ghriftian Sabbath by Divineinftitution; and this may appearc. 
 ftom thofc three texts .of .iiicrvpcure ordinarily allcdged for this end. 
 
\ 
 
 < 
 
 The Chaff ge of the Sabbathc a I 
 
 T. (t^ar/20.7. 7v7hichbclng taken joyntly together, hold forth 
 II 1 Cor. 1 6, %, ? ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ . 
 III. Revel, u\o.^ ^ 
 
 '"iw That the firft Day of the week was honoured above any other 
 day for Sabbath Services in the Primitive Churches praftife, as is 
 evident, AEis 20.7. 
 
 2. That the Apoftles commanded the obfervation of this Day 
 rather then any other for Sabbath- fervices, as is evident, 1 Cor. 
 16.1,2. 
 
 3. That this day is holy and fandified to be holy to the Lord above 
 any other day ,. and therefore it hath the Lords name upon ic 
 ( an ufuall (igne of things Holy to him j and therefore called 
 the Lords Day, as is evident, Revel, i» 10. bur thefe things need 
 more particular explication. 
 
 Thefts 35; 
 
 Fn the firft of thefe places, Aas 20,7. thefe particulars are ma- 
 fiifcft. ^>- 
 
 i» That the Church ofTroa^ ("called Difciples^ publikely and gene- 
 rally now met together, fo that it was no private Church- meeting (as 
 fome fay ) but generall and open , according as thofe times would 
 give leave, 
 
 2. That this meeting vvas upon the firft day of the week, cal- 
 led si' t? fX4(£ T^ auCCctrav ; y^hkh T^hn^c SikhoughGowarfi^, Primrofey 
 Hejlifj, and many others gO about to tranflate thus , vU. upon one 
 af the dayes of the week. Yet this is fufficient to dafh that Dream 
 (befides what elfe might be Lid ) viz. That this phrafe is expoun- 
 ded in other Scriptures to be the firft day of thewee.<, Luke .>4, t. 
 lohnio, I. but never to be found throughout all the Scriptures ex- 
 pounded of one day in the week. Gomarm indeed tels us of \v yu3: w>2. ^ ^ j . 
 ^m Luke%, 17. & 8. 22. 8c 20. 1, which is tranflated cjuodam die ^ot veft.Tcn". 
 a certain day ; but this will not help, him, for this is not ivt rn (^d r}S & ulig. 
 cm.CCd7vv as 'tis in this place. Sab.cap p 
 
 3. That the end of this meeting was Holy Duties, z^i^ to break 
 bread, or to receive the Lords aupper,as the phrafe is expounded, /df^7i 
 2, 4>. which was therefore accompanied with preaching the word 
 and prayer , Holy preparation and ferious medication aoout thofe 
 great myfteries. Nor can this breaking of Bread be interpreted of 
 their Love-feallsor common Suppers, as gom.tr^ii iuC^cSis. Forthek 
 Lovcrfeafts and common :>uppers were not of the whole Church to- 
 gether r 
 
a a The Change of the SaUmth 
 
 gether(asthis was) but in feveral houfes , as Mt. Cart>^>right^tovti 
 from Ath i. 46. And although the Corinthians ufed their Love- 
 Feaftii in publike , yet they are fadly reproved for it by the Apo- 
 ille, I Cor.iu 12. and therefore he would not allow it here. 
 
 4. Tis not faid that Paul called them together, becaufehe was 
 to depart the next day , or that they purpoTely declined the Lords 
 Supper till that day , becaufe then Paul was to depart ( as Mafter 
 
 Pilm'-.psiu pfipjyofe urgeth ) but the text fpcaks of it as of a time and Day 
 3.c3p.$. iifuaiiy oblerved of them before, and therefore it is faid th^it when 
 they came together to break breaci ; and Paul therefore took his op- 
 portunity of preaching to them , and feemes to ftay purporely,and 
 wait feven dayes among them » that he might communicate with 
 them , and preach unto them in this ordinary time of publike meet- 
 ing, and therefore though he might privately inftru(^ and preach 
 to them the other feven dayes , yet his preaching now is menti- 
 oned in regard of fome fpeciall folemnity of meeting on this 
 Day» 
 
 5. The firft Day was honoured above any other Day for thcfe 
 Holy Duties ; or elfe why did they not meet upon the laft Day of 
 the week, the J ewilli Sabbath for thefe ends? For if the Chriftian 
 Churches were bound to obfervc the Jewifh Sabbath, why did they 
 not meet then and konour the feventh Day above the firft day ? con- 
 fidering that it was but the day before , and therefore might eafi- 
 ly have done it, more fitly too, had that feventh day been the Chriftian 
 Sabbath* 
 
 6. Why is the firft Day of the week mentioned which is attributed 
 onely in the New Teftament to the Day of Chrifts refurreftion , 
 unleife this day was then ufually honoured and fandified for Holy 
 Duties called here breaking of bread by a Synecdoche of a part for 
 the whole, and therefore comprehends all other Sabbath Duties? 
 For there is no more reafon to exclude prayer , preaching finging 
 of Pfalfmes, &c, becaufe thefe are not mentioned then to exclude 
 drinking of Wine in the Sacrament, fastheblinde Papiftsdo) be- 
 caufe this neither is here made mention of. Mafter Prmrofe indeed 
 tels us that it may be the firft Day of the week is named in re- 
 fped of the Miracle done in it upon Eutkhm : But the Text is 
 
 Priwr.par.plaine, the time of the meeting is mentioned, and the end of it 
 3 tap 5. to break Bread, and the Miracle is but brought m as a particular 
 event which happened on this day, which was fet apart firft for higher 
 ends. 
 
 7. Nor is it faid in the Text that the Church of Tthm met p- 
 
 verj 
 
7 he change of the Sabbath. 23 
 
 very day- together to receive the Sacrament ( as Mafier Primrofe fug- ,, . , 
 gcfts ) and that therefore thU aEtlon of breaking *Bread wa£ done with- 
 out rejpeB to any fartictilar or fpeciall Day , it being performed every 
 Day. For , I do not finde that the Primitive Church received the 
 Lords Supper every day: for though it be faid, A^s 2.42. That 
 the Church continued in the Apoftlcs Fellowfliip and breaking of 
 Bread ; yet it is not faid that they brake Bread every day : they are 
 indeed faid to be daily in the Temple, verfe 46. but not that they 
 brake Bread every day in the Temple , or from houfe to houfe; or 
 if they (hould, yet the breaking of Bread in this verfe is meant 
 of Common not Sacred Bread, as it is, ver(e 42. where I think the 
 Bread was no more Common , then cheir continuance in the Apo- 
 ftles Dodrine and Fellowfliip was Common ; and therefore in this 
 46. verfe, the phrafe is altered , and the * Original word proper- * rsy»d^Rf. 
 ly fignifies ordinary Bread for common nourifbmenr. And yet fup- 
 pofe they did receive the Sacrament every day, yet here the break- 
 ing of Bread is made mention of as the ofw dtei , or the fpeciall 
 bulineflc of the day; and the day is mentioned as the fpecial time 
 for fuch a purpofe; and hence no other day ( if they break Bread 
 in it ) is mentioned , and therefore its called in effedt the day of 
 meeting to breal^ bread. Nor do I finde in all the Scripture a day 
 diftindtly mentioned for holy duties ( as this firft day of the week 
 is) wherein a. whole people or Church meet together for fuch endS| 
 but that day was Holy : the naming of the particular day for fuch ends, 
 implies the HolinefTc of it , and the time is purpofely mentioned, 
 that others in after times might purpofely and fpecially obferve that. 
 Day. 
 
 8. Nor is it faid that the Difciples met thus together, the night 
 after the firft day 5 but its exprelfely faid to be upon the firft day 
 of the week : and fuppofe (as yix. "Brabonrrt faith)that cheir meeting was 
 not together in the morning, but onely in the evening time to ce- 
 lebrate the Lords Supper a little before the fhutting in of the day: 
 yet its a fufficient ground for confcience to obferve this day above 
 any other for holy fervices , although every part of the day be not 
 filled up with publike and Church Duties ; for fuppofe the Levites on 
 the JewiQi fabbath Giould do no holy publike duty on their own Sab-> 
 bath untill the day was farre fpent; will yiv.Brahourrje argue (rom 
 thence, that the Jewifh Sabbath was not wholly holy unto God ? But 
 againe , fuppofe the latter part of the day was fpent in breaking 
 of Bread, yet will it follow that no other part of the day was 
 Igent before , either, in any private or publike holy duties ? poflibly 
 
 they 
 
24 The change of the Sabbath^ 
 
 they might receive the Lords Supper in the evening of this Sabbath 
 (for the time ofthisadion is in the g<!ncral indifferent) yet might 
 thpy not fpcnd the reft of the morning in pubHke Duties, as Wc 
 know fome do now in fome Churches , who are faid to meet to- 
 gether CO break Bread the latter part of this day, and yet fandli* 
 fie the Sabbath the uhole day before? Suppofe it be not expreflcly 
 faid that they did fhiit up (hop-windowes at Troas and forfake 
 the Plough and the Wheele, and abftaine from all fervile work; 
 yet if he bcleeves thn no more was done this day but what is ex- 
 preiTely fet downe , M -. Brahonme muft needs fee a pitiful face of 
 Chrift in the Lords Supper, and people coming ruQiing upon it 
 without any ferious examination or preparation or (ingingof P/^//»/, 
 becaufe no fuch Duties as thcle are mentioned to be upon this 
 
 9. Laftly, Mafter Primrofe like a ftaggering man knowes not 
 what CO fatten on in anfwer to this place, and therefore tels us that 
 fuppofe it was a Sabbath, ycc that it might be taken up from the 
 Churches Lioerty and Cuftome, rather then from any Divine infti- 
 tucion : But belide that which hath been faid to dalh this Dreame, 
 Thef, 27 the fallencflfc of this common and bold affertion will ap- 
 peare more fully m the explication of thefecond texc,i Cor. i6.i,2. 
 which now foUowes, wherein it will appeare to be an Apoftoli- 
 cal ( and therefore a Divine) Inftitucion from Jefus Chrift. 
 
 Thefts ^6. 
 o^Cf In the fecond of the places therefore alledged, i Qor. \6 i, 2. 
 Thefs things are confidcrable to prove the firft day in the week co 
 be che Chriftian Sabbath and that not fo much by theChurches pradife, 
 as by the Apoftles pacepc. For, 
 
 1. Although It be true , that in fome cafes Collcdions may be 
 made any day for the poore Saints, yet why dorh tht^ Apoftle 
 here limit them to this day for the performance of this Duty? 
 They that iranflate yr^ (juafi cmCCdrcop upon one day of the week, do 
 mlferably miftake the phrafe, which m Scripture phrafc onely ligni- 
 fies the firft day of it , and beat their foreheads againft the maine 
 Scope of the Apoftle, vU» to fixe a certaine day for l«ch a Dur.y 
 as required a ccrcaine time: For, they niighc ( Dy this tranflacion) 
 Colled cheir Benevolences one day in foure or ten yeeis, for then 
 it fhould be done one day in a wteL 
 
 2. The Apoftie doth not onely limit them to this time, butal- 
 fo all the Churches of gaUtiay verje i. and confe4uent.v all other 
 Chinches if that be true\ 20r,8, 13, 14, wherein the Apoftle pro- 
 
 felTeth 
 
The Cbdtfge of the Saihtk af 
 
 fetTeth he prciTcth not one Chnrcli,thacfe« may eafc another Church, 
 bat that chere might be an c-quality : and although I kc no ground 
 from this Text, that the maintenance of the Miniftry fiiould be 
 raifcd every Sabbath day ( for Ghrift would not have them reckon- 
 ed among the poore , being Labourers woithy of their Hite) and 
 although this Colledion was for the poore Saints of other Chur- 
 ches, yet the proportion ftrongly hoUs , that iF there be ordina- 
 ry caufeof futhColIedions in every particular Church, thefe Collc- 
 dions fhould be made the firft day of the week , much more care- 
 fully and religioudy for the poore of ones own Church ; and that 
 in all the Churches of Chrift Jefus to the end of the world. 
 
 3, The Apoftle doth not limit them thus with wiflies and 
 counfels onely to do it if the]^ thought mofl: meet, but «Ws^ <hi-n^A, 
 verfe i, as I have ordaineAy or inftitnted ; and therefore bindes 
 cheir confciences to it; and if P^^/ ordained it, certainly he had 
 it from Chnft Jeiiis who firft commanded him fo to appoint it;; 
 who profcfltth, that what be had received of the Lord, that 
 only he commanded unto them to do, i (^or, 1 1. 23. 
 
 ^. If this day had not been more holy and more ^t for this 
 work of Love then any other day, he durft not have limited them 
 to this Day , nor durft he have honoured this Day above any o- 
 ther in the week , yea above the Jewifli feventh Day. For we fee 
 the very Apoftle tender aUvay of Chriftian Liberty, and not to bindc 
 where the Lord leaves his people free : for thus doing he (liould 
 rather make fnarcs then Lawes for Churches, i Cor, 7, 27. 35. and 
 go exprefl'ely againft his owne Dodrine , Gdat 5 j. who bids them 
 fltiitd fafi in their Liberty , and that in this very point oF the ob- 
 fervation of dayes CyaUt. 4. lo. But what fitneflb was there on this 
 Day for liKh a fervicc ? Confider therefore, 
 
 5, That the Apoftle doth not in this place immedady appoint p,.:^^ -j^j. 
 snd inftitute the Sabbath, but fuppofeth it to be fo already (as Mr, ^.^^p.^f. 
 Primrofe is forced to acknowledge ) and we know Duties of Mer- 
 cy and Charity , as well as of nccedity and piety arc Sabbath Du- 
 ties ; for which end this Day ( which 'Be^ui rinds in an ancient Ma- 
 nufcript to be called the Lords Day ) was more fit for thofe Col- 
 ledions then any other day ; partly becaufe they ufualiy met toge- 
 ther pubiikely on this day, and (o their Colledions might be m 
 greater readinefle againft PaHlsQomTig -, partly alio that they might 
 give more liberty , at Jeaft freely , it being fuppoled that upon this 
 Day , mens hearts are more weaned from the world, and are warm- 
 ed by the word and other Ordinances with more lively faith and 
 
 Dd hope 
 
 / 
 
a6 The Chsnge of the Sabbath. 
 
 hope of better things to come , and therefore having received fpi- 
 ritual things from the Lord more pWntifnlly on this Day , every 
 man will be more free to impart of his temporal good things there- 
 in for the rcfrefhing of the poor Saints, and the very bowels of 
 Chrid Jefus. And what other reafon can be given of Limiting this 
 Colledlion to this D y? I confdk I cannot honeftiy (though I 
 could wickedly ) imagine. And certainly if this was the end, and 
 withall the Jewifli Day was the Chriltian Sabbath, the Apofth: 
 would never have thus limited them to this Day, nor honoured and 
 cxaiced this firit Day before that Jewidi fevcnth ; which if it had 
 been the Chriftian, Sabbath had been more fit for fuch a workasthi^, 
 then the firft Day (if a working day) could be. 
 
 6. Suppofe therefore that this Apoftolical and Divine Inftituti- 
 on is to give their Colledions, but not to inftitutc the Day (as 
 Mafter Primrofe pleads) fuppofealfo that they were not every Lords 
 Day or firft Day , but lometime upon the firft day : Suppofe alfo 
 that they were extraordinary, and for the poor of other Churches, 
 and to continue for that time onely of their need : Suppofe alfo 
 that no man is in/oyned to bring into the publike Treafury of the 
 Church , but ('snef' sxuTaf ri^iTw) privately to lay it by on this Day 
 by himfelfe (as Mr. Bnibonrne urgeth againrt this Text ; yet fti4l 
 the queftion remaines unanrfwered, vl^ why fionU the Apofile //- 
 mlt them to this "Day /either for extraordinary or private Collecfli- 
 ons , and fuch fpecial a(fls of Mercy, unlefle the Lord had honoured 
 thisday for adsofmercy (and much moreof Piety) above any other or- 
 dinary andcommon day ? What then could this Day be but the Chrifti- 
 an Sabbath impoled by the Apoftles, and magnified and honoured by all 
 the Churches in thafe daye^? I know there are fome other Replies made 
 Jiothis Scripture by Mafter'Sr.i^^/^r;?e?, but they are wind-egges (as 
 Plmarch calls That Philofophe.s notions) and have but little in them, 
 and therefore I pafle them by as I do many other things in that book as 
 aot worth the time ta name them- 
 
 7. This hftly I adde, this firft Day was thus honoured eithee 
 hj Divine or Humane Inftitution : If \>^ Divine, we have what we 
 pleadfor; If by Humane euftomeand tradition then the Apoftleaffu^ 
 redly would neverhwecommendedchcobfervationo^f this Day, who 
 cUtwhere condcmnes the obfervation of dayes, though the dayes 
 were formerly by Divine Inftitution. TV objerve ( faith he) Dayes 
 ■and times : and would he then have commended the oWervatioa 
 or theic dayes above any other which are onely by humane, buE 
 fflsivcE by Diymc inituutiofl .' Its Urang^e that the Churches ot C?^* 
 
the change of the Sabbath. $7 
 
 UtUzrt forbidden the obfervation of dayes, Calat,^, to. and yet 
 commanded, i Cor, i6. 1,2. a more facred and folemne obfervati- 
 on of the firft Dayes of the week rather then any other I Surely 
 this could not be unlefle wc conclude a Divine Infticution hereof. 
 For we know how zealous the holy Apoftle is every where to 
 ftrike at Humane cuftomes , and therefore could not lay a ftiim- 
 bJing block (to occafion the grievous fall of Churches) to allow 
 and command them to obfervc a Humane Tradition, and to ho- 
 nour this above the feventh Day for fuch holy fcrvices as are here 
 made mention of. But whether this Day was folemnely fandified 
 as the Sabbath of the Lord our God,vve come now to enquire. 
 
 Thefts 37. 
 In the third Text, 7?^z/f /. 1. 10 Mention is made of the Z<7r^/ ^^Ji 37* 
 which was ever accounted the firft day of the week : It feems therefore 
 to be the Lords Day^and confequently the Sabbath of the Lord our 
 God. Two things are needful here to be conlidered and cleared. 
 
 ;i. That this day being called the Lords Day, it is therefore feta- 
 part and fandified by the Lord Chrift as holy. 
 1 2. ] hat this Day thus fandified is the firft day of the week, and 
 }- therefore that firft Day is our Holy or Sabbath Day. 
 
 Thffij, 38. 
 : The firft Difficulty here to prov-e and clcare up/is, that, This 38. 
 Day which is here called the Lor^s Day y is a day inftituted and 
 fandified for the Lords honour and, fervice above any other Day. 
 For, as the Sacrament of *Bread and pviae h called the Lor Js Sup- 
 per , and the Lords Table , for no other reafon but becaufe they 
 were inftituted by Chrift , and fanftified for him and hii honour ;^ 
 fo what other reafon can be given by any Scripture-light why this 
 is called the Lords Day, but becaufe it was in the like manner in- 
 ftituted and fandified as they weref Mafter "Brahoume here ihifts 
 away from the light of this Text, by affirming that it might be 
 called the Lords Day In rejpe^ of. God the Creator y not Chrifi the 
 Redeemer y and therefore may be meant of the Jewijh Sabbath which 
 is called the Lords holy 1) ay ^ Ifaiah ^^, 3. But why might he not as 
 well fay that its called the Lords Supper and- Table m reiped of 
 God the Creator confidering that in the New Teftamenc fince 
 Chrift is aclually exalted to be Lord of all , this phrafe is ofieiy ap- 
 plyed to the Lord Chrift as Redeemer ? Look therefore as the 
 Jcwilli Sabbath being called the Lords Sabbath, or the Sabbath of 
 Jehovah y is by that title and note certainty known to be a Day 
 fandihed by Jehsvahy as Creator- fo thts Diy being called ;he' 
 
 D d 2 Lords 
 
2& The change of the Sabbath 
 
 Lords Day, \s by this note as certainly known to be a Day fanfti;. 
 fied by our Lord Jefus as Redeemer. Nor do I finde any one di- 
 ftinft thing in alfthe Scripture which hath the Lords Superrcriptt- 
 on or name upon it (as the Lords Temple, the Lords Offerings, the 
 Lords people , the Lords Pricfls &c.) but it is fanftified ot Ciod 
 and holy to him : why is not this Day then Holy to the Lord. if 
 it equally bears the Lords name ? Mafter Primrafe indeed puts us 
 off with another fliift, vU J hit this Daj hemg called fo ^j the- 
 (^htirches cuftome ; John therefore c^Us. it fo in re^eEt of that cph 
 ?r%mr.^:ix, fiome which the Church then ufedy wit ho fit Divine inftitutiort. But' 
 3 cap.7. why may he not as well fay that he calls it the Lords Table in rc- 
 fped of the Churches Cuftome alio? the Dsfignation of a Day, 
 and of the firft times in the Day for Holy putxiike fcrvices is in- 
 deed in the power of each particular Church { Suppofe it be a. 
 Letflure, and the houres of Sabbath-meetings > but the SanEiific^ 
 tion of a Day, if it be Divine worfliip^ to obfcrvje it, if God com-r 
 mand and appomt it; then furely it is wil-worfbip fo-r any Hu- 
 mine cuftome to inftitutc it» Now, the Lords name being ftamp- 
 ed upon this Day, and fo fet apart for the honour or Chnft, it 
 cannot be, that fo it fhouid be called in refped of the GhurcheSv 
 cuftome; for furely then they fl^ouldhave been condemned for wii- 
 worfhip by fome of the Apoftles; and therefore it is in relpe^lof 
 the Lords inftitution hereof. 
 
 Thefts 5^ 
 2^^ The fecond Difficult^ now lies in clearing up this particular,, 
 viz. lha.t this Day thm janBified rem thefirji^ay of the rreeJ^y rphich 
 PS therefore the Holy Bay of the Lord our god ; axd confec^entlj, 
 the Chrifiian Sabbath :■ for this purgofe let thefe enfuing particu^ 
 iars be laid together. 
 
 1. That this. Day of which John Ipeaks , is a known Day, and 
 was; generally known in thofe dayes by this glorious name of the Lords 
 Bayy and therefore the Apoftle gives no other title to it but the Lords. 
 Day , as a known day in thoic times ; for the Scope o( j&hn in this 
 Vilion is as in all other Prophetical Vifions when they fet down the day 
 and time of it to gainc the more credit to the certainty or it when eve- 
 ry ooe fees the 1 ruth circuoiltaatiated, and they hear of the particu- 
 lar time; and ic may feem moft abfurd to fet down the day and time 
 for fuch an end, and yt^t the day is not particularly kno»vn. 
 
 2. if it was a known Day, what Day can it be either by evi-»- 
 deuce of Scripture or any nntHjuuy but the firftDay of the week ^ 
 Eor, 
 
 I, There. 
 
The change of the Sabbatk ^S 
 
 i^ There is no other Day on whkh mention is made of any o- 
 iher work or aftion of Chrift which might occafion a Holy Day, 
 biit only this of the Refurrcdion which i^ exadly noted of all the 
 Evangelifts to be upon the hrlt Day of the week , and by which 
 work heisexpreflely faidtohaifeall power given him in heaven 
 andearth,yi^^^M8. »8. andtobe a<5luallyLord of dead and li^ 
 ving, Rom, \^, g. and therefore why fhould any other Lords Day 
 be dreamed of? why fliould Mafter "Braboume imagine that this 
 day might be fome fup. rftitious Eafter Day, which happens once 
 ayeer; the Holy Ghoft on the contrary, not fcttingdown the 
 month or day ot the yeer, but of the week wherein Chrift arofe, 
 and therefore it muft be meant of a weekly Holy Day here called 
 the Lords Day, 
 
 2*. We do not read of any other E>ay (befides this firft Day of the 
 wcek> which was obfcrMd for Holy Sabbath Duties, and honou- 
 red above any other day for breaking of Bread, for preaching the 
 Word(whichwerea(a$ of piety) nor for Colle^ions for the 
 poor (the moft eminent adl of mercy J why then (hoild any ima- 
 gine any other day to be the Lords day,but that firft day > 
 
 J, There feems to be much in that which ^^i^ obferves out of an an* 
 cient Greek Manufcript wherein that firft Day of the weck,i Cor^ 
 16, 2. isexpreffely called the Lords Day, and the Syriack Tranfla* 
 tion faith that their meeting together lo receive the Sacrament, 
 iC(?r. 1 1. 2-0. was upon the Lords Day; nor is there any Antiqui- 
 ty but expounds this Lords Day of the firft Day of the week as 
 learned Rivet makes good againft Gomarus profefling, that ^ot- Kivet^j^iC" 
 qnot Interfretes haBenm fftermty hue verba de dit Refftrrcciionis ^crt.De o- 
 ^Domini intelUxcrmty folm e^md e^mdem fciartfy Ci. D. Gomarus ^^^^ ^*°- 
 contradixit, 
 
 4 . Look as 'ehovahsy or the Lords Holy Day, Ifmah jr 8. 1 3 ► was the 
 feventhDay in the week theninutc in the Old Icftamcnt , fo 
 why Qiould not this Lords Day be meant of fome feventh Day. 
 (the Hrft of feven in the week . which the Lord appointed, and the 
 Church oDlerved under the New Tcftament, and therefore called 
 fas that W3is)[he Lords D^y ^ 
 
 5, 1 here can oe no other Day imagined but this to be the Lords 
 Day; indeed G(7W4r«^ atfirms that Its calk d the L rds Day , be- 
 caule ot the Lord Jcfus apparition m Vilion to^ ohn, and therefore • 
 tciis us that m Scripture pnrafe, the Day of the Lord ufaehaDay 
 l^htrin the Lord m^tnifefis himfeif either in wrath or in favour, Oi here 
 lu John. But ihere's a great ditierence.betwecn thoie pnraics. The 
 
 '^ Lordis i 
 
so The change of the ^abhath' 
 
 Lords Ty^j, and the Day of the Lord , which it is not called here. 
 For fuch an interpretation of the Lords Day^ as if it was an uncer- 
 tain time, is diredly crofHr to the Scope of *fohn in fctting downe 
 this Vifion, who to beget more credit -to ir, tels us, Firft,of the 
 perfon that faw it, / Johrt^ver, i (^. Secondly, the particular place, 
 in Patmos. Thirdly> the particular time, the Lords *T>ay, 
 Thefe confiderations do utterly fuavert Mr. 'Brahoumes difcourfe to 
 prove the jewifh Sabbath to be the Lords^ajy which we are ftiU to 
 obferve, and maybe fufficient to anfwerthe fcruplesofmodeft and 
 humble minds ; for if we aske the Time of it ? it is on the firll Day 
 of the week. Would we know whether this time was ipent in holy Du- 
 ties and Sabbath fervices ? this alfo hath been proved. Would we know 
 whether it was fanclified for that end ? Yes verily, bccaufe its called 
 the Lords Day, and confequently all fervile work was and is to be 
 laid a(ide in it. Would we know whether 'tis the Chrillian Sabbath 
 Day? VcrilyifitbetheDay of theLordour God (the Lords Day J 
 why is it not the Sabbath of the Lord our God ? If it be exalted 
 and honoured by the Apoftles of Chrift above the Jewifli Sabbath 
 for Sabbath duties, why fhould we not beleeve but that it was 
 our Sabbath Day? And although the word Sabbath Day, or fcventh 
 day be not expreffely mentioned, yet if they be for fubftance in this 
 Day, and by juft confequence deduced from Scripture, it is all one as if 
 theLord had exprefTelj' called them fo, 
 
 Ihefs 40. 
 ^0. Hence therefore it followes, that although this particular feyenth 
 * day, which is the firft of feven, be not particularly made mention of 
 in the fourth Commandment ; yet that laftof feven being abrogated, 
 and this being inftituted in its roome, it is therefore to be perpetu- 
 ated and obferved in its roome. For though it be true ( as Mr. Bra" 
 hoptrne urgeth)' That New Inftitutions cannot be fomidedt no not .by 
 Analogy of proportion meerly upon* Old Inftitutions ; as becaufe chil- 
 dren wei»: (^ircurncifed y itW'ill not JoIloW that they are therefore to be 
 baptiz^ed: and fo becaufe the ^ ewe 5 kept that feventh day, that w^ may 
 threfore keep the firft day. Yet this is certaine, that when New things 
 are inftituted not by hsm^ne Analogy but by Divine appointment, the 
 Application of thefe may ftand by vertue of old prcccpis and geneial 
 Rules, from whmcethe Application even of old inftitutions former- 
 ly arofe. For we know that the Cultm inftitutm in the New 1 efta- 
 ment in Miniftry and Sacraments, ftands at this day by vertue of the fe- 
 cond Commandment, as well as the inftituted worfhip under the Old. 
 And though Bapcifme ftands not by vertue of the inftitucion of;Cir- 
 
 cumcifion. 
 
The Change of the Sabbathr 31 
 
 cumcidon, yet It being D: novo inftituted by Chrift as the Seale of Ini- 
 tiation into Chriftsmyftical Body i Cor. 12. r 2 it nowftands by ver- 
 t\xc of that general Rule by which Circumcifion it felfc was admini- 
 ftred,i;/<. That the Seale of imciition into Chrifts Body be applyed to 
 all the vifible menibers of taat Body : and hence children are to be 
 now Baptized as once they were Circumcifed being members of Chrifts 
 Body So the firft day ot the week being inftituted to be the Lords Day 
 €r Lords Sabbath, hence it followes that if the firft feventh which i« 
 now abrogated, was once obferved, becaufe it was the Lords Sabbath 
 or the Sabl>ath Day which God appointed ; by the very fame Rule,and 
 on the very f.-me ground we alio are bound to keep this rirft day be- 
 int^alfotheSabbatn of the Lord our God, which he hath now appoint^ 
 ed anew under the New Teftament. 
 
 Jhefis 41. 
 ' . It is tnie, that fome of the Primitive Churches in the Eaftern part?^ .j 
 did for fome hundred of yeers obfcrve both Sabbaths, both Jewifh and 
 Chriftian. But they did this without warrant from God (who allowcs 
 but one Sabbath in a vveek)and alfoagainft the Rule of the Apoftles ; 
 for I think that /'^//Z forefedng this obfervation of daycsand Jewifh 
 $ahbaths to be ftirring and ready to creep into the Church, that he 
 did therefore condemne the fame in his Epiftks to the Galatims and 
 ColoJJidns ; and that therefore Chriftian Emperours and Councels in 
 after-times did well and wifely both to condemn the obfervation of 
 the one,and withal to honour the other. 
 
 Thefts ^1. 
 Although the work of Redemption be applyed unto few in refpe^ 41, 
 of the fpecial benents of it ; yet Chrift by his death is made Hcire 
 and Lord of allthing^s, being now let down at the right hand of 
 God, and there is ibme benefit which befals all the world by 
 Chrifts Redemption ; and the Government of all things is not now 
 in the hand of God as Creator , but m the h^nd of a Mediator, Heb^ 
 1. 1, >. Heh, 2, 8, 9, foltn 5. 2 . Co/of, I . I6 17. I Tiw,^. o. }oh».^,. 
 35, and hence it is no wonder it all men as well as a few elected, fele- 
 ded and cahed , be commanded to fanclifie the Lords Day , as once 
 they wereche Jewifti feventhday • the work of Cariftoeingin lome 
 refped of as great extent through all the work of Creation as the 
 work of the Father.. And therefore it is a great feealenerre in Mafter 
 *Brabourne to go about to vi.ifie tne vvork.ot Redempc:on,.and extol 
 that of Creation above it ; and r hit therefore the ^aDbacii ought ftiU 
 to be kept in reference to tn^ wor^ of Creation whicii conccmes all 
 men, ratncr then in refpea of Kedemption,vvhicii he im^gmcs.concer- 
 aeth only feme kW:* Theftt 
 
yr Th Cbinp o{ the Saihsk 
 
 Thefis 4;. 
 The Lord Chrfft relied from the woik of Rcdcmprion hv fnc^, op- 
 en the day of his Refurre^on ; but he is not yet at reu from the 
 work of Redemption by poweryuntiW the day of our Rcfurredion and 
 Gtorybeperftded. But it doth. not hence follow (asMaftcr Primrofe 
 imagines) that there is no Lords day inftitutcd in refpedof Chrifts 
 Rclurredion, bccaufehe hath not, nor did not then reft from Redem- 
 ption by power ; for look as the Father having reftcd from the work* 
 of Creation might therfore appoint a Day of Reft,aIthoughhe did nor, 
 nor doth not yet reft from Providencejc/;^ 5 . 1 7. So the Lord Chrift ha- 
 ving iiniftjed the great work of Redemption, he might juftly appoint a 
 day of Reft, although his redeeming work by power was yet behind, 
 
 Ihefis 44. 
 The heavie and vifible judgments of God revealed from heaven a- 
 gainft prophaners of this our Lords day Sabbath will one day be a 
 convincing Argument of the Holinefle of this Day, when the Lord him- 
 felf (hall have the immediate handling and preffingofit. Meanwhile 
 I confefle my weaknefle to convince an advcrfary by it ; nor will I con- 
 tend with any other Arguments from Antiquity for the obfervation of 
 this Day; but thcfe may fulfice , which are allcdged from the Holy 
 Word, 
 
 THE 
 
J Ibe third Tart. 
 
 «§ — __.!♦ 
 
 JbeginningI 
 
 ♦i OF THE 
 
 ^ SABBATH, t 
 
 ^Wherein five fe verall Opinions aboutp 
 
 ^ the beginning of the SABBATH are fet §♦ 
 
 down^the Arguments commonly ufed for the four 
 
 firfl: of them are anfweied ^ and the truth of 
 
 the fifth, for its beginning in the 
 
 Evcningj confirmed. 
 
 *l BY !♦ 
 
 Thomas Shepard, Pador of the Church of 
 
 Chn{)i2LtCar;;br7dgemNcw'England. ^ 
 
 ^^_ __._ _.__ ^ 
 
 LONDON, I* 
 
 [^Pr'mtecl for John Kothwdl, and are 'to be fold at thef* 
 % Sun and Fountain in Tads Church-yard. T 
 
The general! Contents concerning the 
 
 Beginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 I* in Ivefeverall Opni&ns concerning the bsginning efthe Sai^ 
 JL hath^ThcCn 2. /:^dir3rii ,^\v\'a 
 
 2. The tzmfir bsginmngef the Sahh^cttfd n&f adci^'tiffrg-f^ tl^e 
 
 various cujioms of divers Nations^TheRs ^, 
 §. The time of the artificial! day n^t the beginning and end of tk 
 
 Sdbbath^as it begins and ends^ TheUs l^, 
 
 4. The beginning of the Sabbath n&t midnighi, Thefis 28. "^ ' - '^ 
 
 5. The morning doth not begin the Sabbath ^Thcfn^S. ' '^ < ^ 
 
 6. That place of Mat.28.1. ufually all edged for the beginning of 
 itinthemorning^cleared^ThQCn 1^0^ 
 
 7. The RefurreSion of Chriji not aymed at by the Evangelijls to 
 be made the beginning of the day^ although it be of the change 
 ofit^Thtfis 58. 
 
 8. John ac.i 9. cleared^ Thefis 59. 
 
 (^.p2iuh preaching tiU midnight no argument ofth^ beginning of 
 
 the Sabbath in the morning ^Thefis 64 > 
 IG.The various deception of the word Day and Morrew^to anfwer 
 
 many proofs aU edged for beginning the Sabbath in themor- 
 
 ning^Th^Rs 68. 
 
 1 1 . Some that hold the beginning of the Sabbath r? as from Even 
 to Even untillchrifts RefurreSion^ and then the time was 
 changed.^ confuted^ T hefi s 69 , 70. 
 
 12. There is not the like reafonfor the Sabbath to begin at th flrji 
 moment of Chrifis entrance into his reji, ^ps for the firji Sab- 
 bath at the beginning of the Fathers rr^/^Thefis 72. 
 
 1 5 The reafens for th^ change of the day are not the fame for the 
 change of the beginning of the day ^ Thefis 73. 
 
 A a i±,rhe 
 
The Contents. 
 
 14. The conceived fitnejfe for the beginning efthe Sahbath in the 
 morning rather then in the evening is a vanity ^liYiQii^ 7 ^^ 
 
 15. The Evening begins the Chrijiian Sabbath ^Jh^fis y6. 
 1 6.The place Gtn. 1. 2, cle ar ed^Thtds 78. 
 ly.TheDarkneffe mentioned G^ii. 1.3. was /;^/ punftum tem- 
 poris^ Thciis 8 1582. 
 
 1 8. Thefeparation of Light and Darknejfe , Gen. 1,2. cleared^ 
 Thefis 86587. 
 
 19. Levit.25.32. f roves the beginning of the Sabbath at Eve* 
 ning^ Thefis 90. 
 
 20. Nehemiah 4» exemplary pattern beginning the Sabbath at 
 Evening^Thcds 94. 
 
 21. Thfffe that prepared for the burial/ ofchriji began their Sab- 
 bath in the Evenings Thefis 97398. 
 
 22rChriJis lying three daies in the grave ^Th^ds 100. 
 Q3. Thofe 'Northern Countries vcho have the Snn in viert> divers 
 weeks together in a yeeryet know when to begin the day^\iv^ 
 
 llSIOI. 
 
 The 
 
I. 
 
 The beginningof the Sabbath - 
 
 \ 
 
 Thefts I. 
 Ts a holy labour ('(aith one) to enquire after the 
 Beginning of holy Rcfr. The Sabbath cannot be 
 fo (wectly fanftitied unleiTe we know the time 
 when to begin and end it ; the different apprchen- 
 iions of (iich as have enquired after the Truth in 
 this particular, have made way for the more clear 
 and diftinft knowledge of it ; it being the privi- 
 ledge of truth to be more purified and fhine the 
 brighter by palling thorough the heats & fires of mens contentions and 
 difputations. Thejis2, 
 
 There being therefore Five feverall opinions concerning this parti- 2, 
 cular 5 it may not be unu(efull to bring them all to the Balance and 
 Touchftone^that fo by (huffing the Candle , and rejecting that which is 
 fal(e, the light of truth may (hine the brighter at laft. 
 
 rhefis 3- 
 Some there be who make the Time mutable and various 5 affirming, 
 that God hath not fixed any fet time, or that he (lands upon 5 or would ?• 
 have his people troubled with (uch Niceties ; fo long as the day be ob- Opn. i 
 lerved ((ay they) it is no matter when it be begun : nor doe they make 
 this variation to be according to that which God allows (fuppofe from 
 Sun to Sun, fooner or later as the time of the yeere is; but according to 
 the civil! caftoms of ieverall Nations , as they varioufly begin or end 
 their daies among whom they live; as fuppofe they live among Ro- 
 mans^Cthcy think} they may begin it at midnight j if with Babylonians, 
 at Sun-riting ; if among Grecians, at Sun-fets if among Umbrians and 
 Arabians,at mid-day. ' 
 
 7hefs 4. 
 If the Scripture had left us fuch a liberty as this, viz. to meafiire the 4, 
 beginning of the day according to humane cuilome j a fcrupulous con- 
 fcience (I think)might have a moft rendy and quieting an fvver here : but 
 it will be found too true, that though Civill and common Time may 
 admit of fiich variations as may bed fuit with their manner and occa- 
 
 ficn?^ 
 
2 The Beginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 fions, yet facred and holy tia^e is not dependent upon humane cuflomSj 
 Inn upon divine inilitutions - for which purpoleGod hath made the 
 lights otKcavcntobe ^ov^tZL^onsfienA^i^- to be guides and helps to 
 begin and end the fcafons and daics which he fhall appoint. 
 
 thefts 5. 
 5« 1 is true , that it fuits not wii h Gods wi(dom to determine all parti- 
 
 cular circumitanccs of things ("which arc alnioft innumerable and inii- 
 nitej by the cxpreife letter of the Scripture; and therefore he hath left 
 us a fev7 generall Rules to dire6: us therein ^yet for the Lord to leave the 
 determination of fomecircumilances to humane libertyj would be very 
 perilous^ The Temple was but a circumfiance ox place^ and King Vz-- 
 2,iah in Qtfering Incenie, varied onely in acircimii-ance of Perfon, yet 
 ^ we know that the ten Tribes were carried away captive for not facrifi- 
 dm at the Tempie^and Vzziah fmitten with Leprofie till his death : fo 
 the Lord having determined the Seventh day to be hisjwhat now ihould 
 hinder but that he fnould determine the Beginning alfo thereof? 
 g r^ep 6. 
 
 If God hath been accurately carefull to fix the beginning of other 
 Feails and Holy dales, far inferiour unto this, as appeareth Levit.2^^^ «. 
 Exod. 12.6. why fliould we think that the Lord is Icte carefull about the 
 beginning of his Sabbath > 
 
 Thefis 7. 
 J, If the Lord hath not left it to humane wifdom to (et down the bounds 
 
 and limits of holy places (as appears in the Tempi CaTabernaele, and all 
 their appurtenancesj why (hould we think that he hath left it to mans 
 wifdom to limit and determine holy Time ? 
 
 thefsS. 
 
 If the Lord will have a fpeeiall Time of worfhip once within the 
 
 ©• 0rcle of Seven daies , and not appoint the Time for the beginning and 
 
 end of it, might he not lofe much of the beauty of tht holinefle of the 
 
 day;, every thing being bcautifull in its feafon > may not man begin the 
 
 day at fuch a feafon as may not be beautifull ? 
 
 'Thefis 9- 
 
 The Deputation of Time for holy ufcs upon occaiion is allowed to 
 
 ^ man -, yet ianfti(ication of Time^and to fet the bounds and limits of it,i$ 
 
 left to no man 5 San£lincation not onely pofitive , but relative (as here 
 
 in the Sabbath J being as proper to the Holy Ghoil,as Creation to the 
 
 r ather^ and f Icdemption to the Son . 
 
 Ihefif 10. 
 10. Application of holy Time to the performance of holy duties on the 
 Sabbath 3 (as to fix what hourestomect in upon that day) is left to 
 
 humane 
 
The beginning oft he S^hhafh. 5 
 
 humane prudence from general! rules of Conveniency, Order, Come- 
 linefle ; but Confecration of conftant and hxed Time is the Lords pro- 
 priety5not onely of the middle, but of the beijinning and end thereof. 
 
 Uefis II. 
 
 The Scriptures have left the determination of the Beginning of the 1 j . 
 Sabbath no more to civill Nations and their cufloms^then to particular 
 Churches , and each particular perfon ; for they may all equally plead 
 againft the Lords ftriftnefle to any exa(!l beginning of time j but if fuch 
 a loofeliberty was granted^a world ofconfufion^fcandalljand divifion 
 would fbon appeare ^forfbmeperfons might then begin it atmidnight^ 
 fo me at mid-day ; (bme might nicafurethe beginning of the Sabbath 
 according to their deeping (boner or later on the Sabbath day morning, 
 fome might be plowing,or dancing and drinking,when others are pray- 
 ing and hearing of the word , and who could reftrain them herein ^ for 
 they might plead the Sabbath is not yet begun to them. 
 
 Ihefis 12. 
 
 If therefore God hath fanftihed a fet Time, he hath fet and fan6tified 1 2. 
 the bounds and limits of that Time : and to begin the time when we 
 Iift,it may fomctime arife from weakneflcjbut ufually tis a fruit of loo(^ 
 nefle of heart , which fccretly loves to live as it lifts, which would not 
 conform to Gods rule5and therefore will crook and bend the rule to its 
 humour 5 which will not come up to Gods time^ and therefore make 
 God to come down to theirs. 
 
 T^hefis 13. 
 
 Others there be who give God the honour of determining the begin- ^5* 
 ning and ead of the day,but they cut him ihort of one halfe oFit,in that ^P^"-'^' 
 they make the Artihciall day,or the Day- Light.from Sun-rifing to Sun- T* ^'^* 
 lettingjto be the day of his Sabbath. Thus (bme affirm downright. O- j^^^ 
 thers more modeftly (ay , that mans con(cience ought not to be fcrupu- 
 lous, nor trouble it (elf, if it confciencioufly give God the honour of 
 the Sabbath day-light , having fome generall preparations for it the 
 night before, and good afFe6tions the night after. 
 
 7hefis 14. 
 
 But if the Day-light be the meafure of the Sabbath, thofe that live in ^4' 
 (bme parts of K«/}i<j and Eail- land mufi have once a yeereavcry long 
 Sabbath 5 for there are fome times of the ycere wherein they have day- 
 light a moncth together. 
 
 7kjtf 15. 
 
 If God give us nx naturall dales to labour in , is it not fit that the (e- j -^ 
 venthd'iy fhould bear anequall proportion with every working day? 
 and therefore ic is not an Artiiiciall , but a Naturall day , coniifting of 
 
 twenty 
 
^ TheBeginniffgoftheSabbxth. 
 
 twenty four houres,which we niuft in confciencc allow unto God to be 
 the Sabbath day. 
 
 Ihefis 1 6. 
 jg ^ It is true that the n igh t is jgiven to man to reft in, it being moft fit for 
 
 thitendi but itisnot neceflary that all the weekly nights befpentin 
 llecp/or we then do labour 5 and Gods providence puts men generally 
 upon it to labour in their callings earlv and latethofe nights, and the 
 Lord allows it 5 nay it would be iin and idlenefle in many not to do it 5 
 beiideSjthat ileep and relt which is to be taken in the nightjit is in ordine^ 
 or in reference to Day-labour, and is as a whet thereunto j and in this 
 rvipeft the whole weekly night as wcl as the day is for labor^as the fleep 
 we take on Sabbath night is in ordim^ov with relpe^l to fpirituall red^S: 
 fo that whole naturall day is a day of fpirituall rell.It is therefore a vain 
 thing for any to make the nights of the fix working daies to be no 
 part of the fix working daies3becaufe(they fayjthey are j^iven to man to 
 reft and Deep in/or upon the fame ground they may make the Artificial! 
 daies no daies of labour neither, because there mull be ordinarily fome 
 time taken out of theni^ to eat, drink,and refrefh our weak bodies in. 
 
 Ihefis 17. 
 *7* IfN.'bemiah fluit the gates of the City when it began to be dark, leaft 
 
 NehcoR.ij that night time (hould be prophaned by bearing burdens in ic,then cer- 
 tainly the time of night was (anftified of God as well as the day ; to (ay 
 that this aft was but a juft preparation for the Sabbath,is faid without 
 proofe : for,if God allows men iix daies and nights to labour in,what 
 equity can there be in forbidding all (ervile work a whole night toge- 
 ther^which God hath allowed man for labour? and although we ought 
 to make preparation for the Sabbath, yet the time and meafure of it is 
 left to each mans Chriilian liberty; but for a civill Magiflrate to impofe 
 twelve hourcs preparation for the Sabbath, is furely both again ft Ghri* 
 ftian lib?rty,and Gods allowance aKb : Again, Nihemiah did rhis^ left 
 the n>enof !Z)re fhould occafionihe Jews to break the Sabbath day by 
 bringing in wares upon that night ^fo as if that night therefore had not 
 been part of the Sabbath, they could not thereby provokethe Jews to 
 prophane the Sabbath day^by which Ndnmiah tels them they had provo- 
 ked the wrath of God. 
 
 T:hefis\^, 
 18. A whole naturall day is called a day though it take in the night alfa, 
 becaufe the day- light is the chiefeft and beil part of the day , and we 
 know that the denomination of things is ufually according to the bet- 
 ter part ', but ^ovNiw'Brczboume to nffirm,thatthe word I>^>,in Scripture, 
 is never taken bin for the Aitinciall day or time of Light, is utterly 
 
 falfe, 
 
 19 
 
the hcginning dfthe Sabbath. ^ 
 
 falfe^as might appcarc from fundry inPances ; it may fufficctofeea 
 clufter of fevcn dayes which comprehend their nights alfo^EW, 12,1 5, 
 185I9.4T542. thefts l<p. 
 
 To afiirme that the Sabbath day onely comprehends the Day- light, 
 becaufe the firft Day in Gen. i. began with morning Light : is not only °' 
 a bad confequence ( fuppofing the ground of it to bee true ) but the 
 ground and foundation of it is as certainly falfe, as to lay that Dai k- 
 neffeisLight; for its evident that the lirit day in Genefis began with 
 that darkncfTe which God calls Night, rfal,^.<^. and to affirnie that the 
 fiv^kDay in Genefi J I, begins with morning Light,is as groffelytalfe, as 
 tis apparently true that within fix Dayes the Lord made Heaven and 
 Ea«h, Ex20.11. for before the creating ofthat Light which God calls 
 Day, the Heavens and with them the Angels,and thp Earth or firft mat- 
 ter called the Deepe , which was overfpread with Darknefle, were crea^ 
 ted ; either therefore the Lord did not create the World Iu/a: Vayesy or 
 tis untrue that the firft day in Genefij began with morning Light : and I 
 wonder upon what grounds this notion fhould enter into any mans 
 head : for though God calls the light Day and the darkencfle Night, 
 ( as weftilldowhen WG fpeake of the artihciall Day ) yet withallhe 
 called the Evening of the morning the firft day 5 and what was this 
 Evening and Morning ? Surely its all that fpace of time wherein the 
 LorddidhisfirftdayesworkeTnow its evident that part of the firft 
 Days worke was before God created the light: and what though evening 
 be oftentimes taken for the latter part of the Daylight ? yet its too well 
 knowne to thofe who have waded the deepe in this controvedy, that it 
 is oftentimes taken not only for the bound betweene Light and Darke- 
 nefTe, i.theend oflight and beginning of darknelTe, 7^/ 10.26,27. 
 Ffal. 104 23. but alfo for the whole time of darknefle,as tis here itt 
 this firft of ^ewf/i/, and as we fhall prove in due place. "And therefore 
 '^ to affirme that the Hebrew word u(ed by Mefes for Evening, not to be 
 ^« naturally applyable to the Night, becaufe it figniiies a mixture of 
 'Might and darknefle in the Notion of it, is a grofle miilake 5 for the 
 ^^ Hebrew word Gnersb^ doth not fignify a mixture of light anddarkc- 
 neflTe, but onely a mixture , becaufe it is the beginning ofdarkeneflc 
 wherein all things feeme to be mixed and compounded together, and 
 cannot be clearly and diftinftly difcerned in their kinds and colours, if 
 Bwx/er^w^ may be believed; as is alfo evident, IA9. 15. and to affirme 
 that the Day is before the Night even in this firft of Ge»f/?/, becauft 
 Ji^ofa fometimes fets the Day before the Night ; it may ff em as feeble aa 
 Argument as to fay that the Evening is before the Morn ing, becaufe 
 Mefej here fets the Evening before the Morning j but this will uot fctm 
 
 B ratioaall 
 
g) the leginwng of the Sahhath. 
 
 radonall to them who make the Evening to comprehend the latter pare 
 of the Day-light ^ and the Morning the firil: part of it ; Ladly , to 
 *^ make the Light to begin the day^becaufe the time of light is a certaine 
 " principle of computation f the fpace of darknefTe before that light 
 " was created being unknown ) is all one 5 as if one fhould afirmc that 
 the time of Day-light was not the beginning of the Day, becaufethe 
 (pace of that is alfo as much unknown. For if we know that darknes 
 was before light, though we may not know how long it continued^yet 
 we do know certainly that the firit Day began with darknefTe, and that 
 this darknede and light nude up the fpace of 2 4 houres^or of a natural! 
 day ( as in all other dayes worKS of Creation)and which is (ufficient tO; 
 break down this principle, viz, that the firft Day in Genefis began with 
 Morning Light. 
 
 Ihejis 20. 
 
 ^^* Some fay the Sabbath is figniticative of Heaven , and therefore it 
 
 only comprehends the day light , which is fit to fignifie the lightfbme 
 Day of Heaven,which darknefle is not ; but why may not Night-time 
 fignify Heaven as well as Day-tim€?for Heaven is a place of reft, and the 
 night is the fitted time for reft, after our weary labours in the day : who 
 teacheth men thus to allegorize ? how t^(y^ a thing is it thus to abule all 
 the Scripture > and yet fuppofc it fhould lagnify Heaven , yet why may 
 not the Sabbath continue the fpace of a naturallas well as of an artifici- 
 al! Day, confidering that the natural! Day ofthe World o' of both 
 Hemispheres confifts only of lightjwhich thefe men fay is fignificative of 
 Heaven^ 
 
 Ihefis 21. 
 2 1 • We may and do fancftify time by deeping on the Sabbath night , as 
 well as by fbewing workes of mercy,and doing workes of necedity upon 
 the Sabbath Day , or as we may do by eating a'-id drinking j for to take 
 moderate fleepe is a worke not onely of neceftity but alfo of mercy to 
 our felvcs j and therefore to abolifh the Sabbath Night from being any 
 part of the Sabbath, becaufe we cannot(as fome think) fan^ify time by 
 fleeping no more th^n by working5is very unfound. 
 
 7htfis 22. 
 
 2 2. jidofes indeed tells the people, £:«. 1 6.2 3 .that to morrow is the Lords 
 Sabbath h but he doth not fay that the day time only was the onely time 
 of the Sabbath, or that the Day light begins and ends the Sabbath ; but 
 he mentions that time,becau(e on that Daylight of the feventh Day they 
 wereapt and incljnedto go out fas in other dayes ) to gather manna, 
 and fo to breake the Sabbath ; and it is as if we (liould fay to one who 
 was ready to ride out on the Sabbath morning about worldly occaCons, 
 
 Do 
 
23' 
 
 rhe beginning of the Sahbath. 7 
 
 Do not fiir out , for to morrow is the Sabbath ; that fo we iray hereby 
 prevent the breach of the Sabbarh in that things efpccialJy at that tin:e 
 wherein one is moll inclined (b to do. 
 
 'Ihefif 23. 
 To imagine that the Sabbath mud be contained within the bounds of 
 Daylight, bccsiii(eChrifi Jefm arofe at bre:,ke ofday^ MaU22. i. is of 
 nomoretorce then as if one flionid conchide the containment of it 
 within the bounds of feme darknefl'c; and twy light, for its evident that 
 he arofe about that time. 
 
 Jhefis 24. 21. 
 
 There is no more neceility of fanftifying a day and a haJfc by begin- 
 ing the day at Evening, then by beginning it at Morning light(for thus 
 fonie argue ) for what is faid of the Evening of both Hemifphers, that 
 the (econd Evening would begin 12 houres afterthefirft^iftheSabboth 
 was fanftilied to begin at the Evening of both Hemifpheres , and fb 
 there would be a day and halfe fandified ; the like (I fayjmay be averred 
 of the morning, fuppoling that both Hemifpheres ihould begin theii' 
 Sabbath at the Morning of both Hemifpheres 5 but we know , that the 
 Sabbath Day is fan^rified to begin and end according to the letting and 
 riling Sun in each Hemifphere and Longitude of places refpeftively. * 
 
 rhefis 25. > ^ 
 
 IfEveningjMorningjIight and night, made up everyday of theCrea- ^' 
 tiouj why Ihall we thinke but that the Sabbath day alfo confifted of 
 the fame parts ?and if the whole World was made inijxDayeg, and 
 thefe Dayes be only fuch as confift of Daylight,when then was the third : ^ 
 Heaven and Chaos made which did exil^t before Light ? thofe Fathers 
 and Schoolemen who fet fuch narrow bounds to the Day,had need con- 
 fiderofit, lea ft their an fwer be like his who hearing a iimple Preacher 
 defiring the continuance of the life of the King fo long as Sun and 
 Moone endured;and being askt,if that fhouid be fo,when ihould his fon; 
 raigne>he replyed, it may be the Preacher thought that he mightt^k by 
 Gandle-light. 
 
 'thefts 26. ^6 
 
 Suppofe therefore that there was no publick worfhip in the Temple 
 fas one obje^ieth ) amon^ the hives in the Night-time, yet it will not 
 follow from hence that the Sabbath was to continue no lone^er then 
 Day-light, for the Sabbath might be fan6:i{ied privatly in the Night, as 
 well as more publickly in the Day; and thus the lenses were wont to 
 fandify their Sabbaths, and fo ihould wee, ir.^o,2Q,FjaL6:^,y. PfaL 
 
 5>2.253, 
 
 B :^ Thefis 27.' 
 
8 Thebeginningof the Sabbath. 
 
 27. . 'I^^'f^^ 27. 
 
 Tis true that its very goDi to prepare for, and end the Sabbath with 
 holy afFeftio:is; yet if a feveiuh part of weekly time be due to God^as fix 
 
 Earts of it are due to us^thorough the goodneffe of God 5 then let God 
 e glorified aS God,and the whole day allowed him as his Day^let C^far 
 have his due^and God his. 
 
 28. 7hefis 28. 
 
 Opin,^^ Others allow the Lord his whole time 5 but they thin ke thathehath 
 feed the beginning of it at the gates of midnight 5 which Mdmght 
 '•they call morning 01c Morning Midnight^ or midnight Morning. 
 *^ and therefore they imagine out o^Gen, i. that the Morning was haUe 
 *^ Night wherein time began, andhalfe. Day ; fix houres Night from 
 *^ midnight to fix y and fix houres day from fix to midday : and by the 
 ^ fame proportion^the Evening to begin at midday, and lo to continue 
 ^^ fix houres Day from 1 2 to fix, and fix houres Night from fix to mid- 
 "night, and therefore they fay that God isfaid to ftretch the North 
 "upon the emptyj lo^.ad/.becaufe the firft beginning ofthenotion of 
 " time began from the North point, when darknelfe was firft upon the 
 ** face of the deepe, and from this North point in the Revolution of the 
 *^ Heavens we do account it midnight, as being oppofite to the South 
 "which in the courfc of the Sun it at midday : and therefore alfo (they 
 *^fay ) that Evening is never taken in all the Scripture for the whole 
 ** Night : but as Evening begins at Midday fo Morning begins at Mid- 
 « night. 
 Sj. ^ Thefts 2(^, 
 
 But if the firft day ,and consequently the Sabbath day ihould,bcgin at? 
 midnight, it were meet to give a demon (Iration that this firftdarknefle 
 fhould continue juft (ly. houres , or halfe the time of fuch a night when 
 the Sun is in the i^lquinoftiall 5 but although it be certaine that the firft 
 timebeganindarknefie, yet its wholly uncertaine whether this dark- 
 ncfle continued but (ry: houres. Zsnchius andmany others have very 
 good cards to (hew that this firft darknefle continued a compleat night 
 of 1 2 houres ; others on the other hand make it far lelfe 5 certaine it is, 
 it continued fome confiderable fpace of time , in that it hath the name 
 of Night put upon it 5 but that it fhould be juH: ^ix houres, neither can 
 mans rearondemonftrateit,nor hath God in any Scripture revealed it, 
 but it is a meere uncertain ty,and therefore an ill foundation for (etling 
 the beginning of the Sabbath upon. 
 ap* Ihefis 3 c. 
 
 Some would prove the Sabbath to begin at Midnight becaufeChrift 
 arofe at Midnight , and he aroie at Midnight becaufe Samffou a Type 
 
 of 
 
The legmnifjg of the Subbath, 9 
 
 ofChrift carried away the gates of Gj;s:i at midnight:, jH(dg.i6,^. but 
 fiich allegoricall reafonings were fit toolcs for blind Munkes in former 
 times to deluJe the limp[e people with > I Hippofe men are wifernow 
 then to be fed with wind and chaffe, and to build their faith upon co- 
 zening allegories ofhumane wit, by which as the bjind IVIonkes of old 
 did fecde the people 5 fo the Faniiliils now deceive the World; both 
 which are th^ fruits of Gods heavy curfe upon their hearts,whobecau(e 
 they did not love the truth to feed upon itjare therefore fed with vanity 
 of mind. 
 
 Tis true PWPrcachcd till midnight , ADt 20 7. but doth it hence ^ 
 follow that the Sabbith was to end at midaJi, : r ? no verily ; for the be- 
 ginning and end orcheSabbaih is ^not mealund by mans Preaching a 
 longer or a (liorter time : Faul might have rnntinued Pregching longer 
 then the Sabbath or midnight , the ca<^ being extraordinary in reipeft 
 of his departure the next day never to fee their faces more. And he might 
 have continued a (horter time then the Sabbath continued, as ouf Sa- 
 viour himlelfe did before Su:i-fet,i^</^^//'^ i .2 2. 32. for the bounds of con- 
 tinuance of the Sabbath are not ict accoidingto the beginning and end 
 of any mans Preaching, which is fo exceeding uncertaine : P^»// long 
 Sermon was not continued and ended at Midnight purpofely , and be - 
 caufe fo long the Sabbath continued ; but occafionally, in regard of his 
 finall departure from them the next day3and hence in refpe(J^ of this ex» 
 traordinary cau(e he continued fb long at it, which in ordinary course 
 had bin very unfealbnable. 
 
 Th.j?j 5-2. j.2v 
 
 Itisnotfaydin the fir{{ofGef7eJ^s that the Morning and the Evening 
 v;ere the firfl day^ as if the day (honld begin at Morning Midnight ; but 
 the Evening and the Morning were the lirft Day ; and therefore its 
 ftrange that any ihould derive the beginning of the Sabbath from Mor- 
 niJig Midnight out of this Text ; The Grecians because they begin the 
 day at the Evening of Sunfet did therefore orderly call their natural! 
 day "^ ifMX^^m^'' , and is it probable that Mcfes would fpeake diforderly, *- j Qq^^ 
 ^ ordine rttrngrado htVQ ? and not rather accordingtotheinterpretati- ii.z5. 
 on ofVaniely who calls 2300 dayes by the name o{Gbnereh Bolder ^whkh 
 fignines Evenings-Mornings, becaufe the Evening, not the Morning, 
 much lefTe MidnifihfMorning is to begin the day^Pjs.S ii|.2 6» 
 
 1'hefif ;?3. . 33r 
 
 k is true that Sometimes thofe things which are firft in order of time 
 arefpoken oflafrin order of iiory. and therefore its no folid Argument 
 to grove that the Evening is before the Morning, meerlybecau^ the 
 
 h^ Evening; 
 
: I o The Beginmng efthe Sahhath. 
 
 Evening is fit dowrie firll before the Morning, unkfle it can be proved 
 that the ftory fets down flich things ( and fo this in particular J order- 
 ly ;wh*ch I fiippofe is evident. 1. Bfcaiife the firddarkneiJe is called 
 Nightjand alio comprehends the whole Time of night, as light compre- 
 hends the whole Time of the Day, Goi. i . 4,5 . now 1 do not iind in all 
 the Scripture, nor is any man I think able to [l:ew that the whole Night 
 is taken for the Morning, and therefore the tirft darkneffe could not 
 pollibly begin at the Morning or Midnight Morning, 2, Becaufethe 
 icopc o{ Miffs in this C hapter is to (et downe not onely the worke of 
 Creation, but the exa8: order of it, and confequently of the order of 
 Time, which was confccrated with the World j firft the beginning of it, 
 then the fuccedion and vicifljtude of it5firft in the darke night, then in 
 the light day, and ( which is all one) firit in the Evening,then in the 
 Morning, 3 .Becaufe the Evening may be the end of the Artificiall day 5 
 Lilt I know no proofe from any inrance in Scripture to m.ake it the end 
 of the Naturall day , of which Mnfes here fpeakes ; and therefore as E^ 
 vening cannot end the day , fo Midnight Morning cannot be- 
 gin it. 
 
 34. / fhej^j 34. 
 
 To affirm that the Evening is never taken in Scripture for the whole 
 Night^and that therefore by the Evening we are to underfland fix hours 
 Day, and f]x houres Night , as the confequence is moft weake , fo 
 the aflertion is moft fal(e, as may appeare to any who (erioufly ponders 
 thefe and fuch like ScriptureSj Hab. i.%.?f.^2,2.Job.j j\/Deut,2%.66^6f^ 
 Zach.i^.j .Ifa.2i.i2» 
 
 2<. , Iheps 35. 
 
 Nor can it be proved that theEvening begins at mid day^ which is their 
 principall Argument to prove that the Morning begins at midnight. 
 
 36. Ihefis §6. 
 
 Forthoughitbefaid,Ex29.38,39.Ex.i2.6. That theLambewasto 
 be flainebetwecne the two Evenings (as tis in the Hebrew') yet neither 
 thefe, or any fuch Scriptures are able to prove that one of thofe Even- 
 ings mud necedarily begin at mid-day ; but onely this that fome part of 
 the aftcrnoone when the Sun was in his declining , was one of thefe E- 
 venings 5 and though fome of the Jer^ifh Kabbivs^ begin it at Noone, 
 yet tis without warrant from Scripture, and they are overwhelmed 
 with crolfe Tcfiimonies from w.oil of their fellowes,who begin it fome 
 about onc/ome about two of the Clock in the afternoone,and jofephm 
 (whoknewbed hisCountreymens manners;and who is oneof moft cre- 
 dit in his writings, tells iis that they began their fidi Evening about 
 three of the Clock in the afternoone. 
 
 rhefif 
 
The beginning of the Sabbath. 1 1 
 
 • 7hefis3y. 2- 
 
 We read indeed of the fliadowes of the Evening, Jer.6.^Jbiit it doth 
 not hence follow that the Evening begins at mid day 5 but rather fome 
 time after it 3 the fhaddowes of the Evening being the (hadowes of 
 the day declining, which therefore grow long , but mid-day is no time 
 of declining (hadowes. 
 
 Jhefzf 38. 23^ 
 
 Although the Evening may be called by humane cuftome all thatpart 
 of the day wherein we wi(h men good- Even from n^one till Sun-fet, 
 yet its then called the Evening in refpeft of the Artificial! not Natural! 
 day, of which Mofes fpeakes when he divides the day into Morning and 
 Evening, part of which afternoone is alfo called Evening by the Holy 
 Ghoft in Scripture 5 becauic it is either approaching or haftning to- 
 ward the Evening of the natural! day, or contiguous to it ; even as part 
 ofthedarke Night is fometime called Morning, becaufe it is either 
 contiguous or not far from the Morning light^and men are then afually 
 up, and preparing for it. 
 
 tkfs 39. ^ 2fl 
 
 And as no Text can be produced to prove that the Evening begins 
 at mid-day ; Co neither can any be alkdged to prove the Morning to 
 begin at mid-night. The Scripture ( (peaking properly ) putting an 
 exprefledifferencebetweene Mid-nigh t,Cock-crowing, and Morning, 
 Mark^ 1 3 • 3 5 • 
 
 Ihefrs 40. ,^0. 
 
 And therefore to Tranflate the words in Gen. i .(6 was the Evening,(b 
 ^^ was theMorning the firft day^and then add this gloffe and interpreta- 
 "tion,'i^i«.That out of the premises of Night and Day/o was the Eve- 
 ^^ ning mixed of them both ; fo was the morning alfo compounded of 
 "bothjto wit of Night and Light : this I fay is but words ; here is no 
 ^^ proofe for fuch an interpretation. 7»«/ji# Trandation is beft and mo(l 
 ^^ cleare, and rationall, viz. So was the Evening and the Morning of 
 •^^ the firil: day : for as liath bin fayd the whole time of Night is never 
 calledby thenamcofMorning;Iet any man fhew the lead Tittle in any 
 Scripture for it,and I will yeeld to them in this caufe. 
 
 7hefis 41. -j^ 
 
 To affirme that the divifion of the natural! dd.yfien. i . into Day and 
 Night, was for civil! u(e, and into Evening and Morning for Religious 
 u(e, in refpefi: of the Evening and Morning facrifice along time after, is 
 juft fuch a device as his, who would nttd^ thinke that the firft day of the 
 weeke was called fAa g-dli^xTav ^ becaufeGod foresaw and ordained the 
 ckange of the Sabb4tli unto that firft Day j for we know, God fpeakes 
 
 of 
 
1 2 The beginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 of things as they were then in their nature when they did firH exift , be- 
 fore Sacfitices were thought of, Adan: called the names of things ac- 
 cording to their natures and fpeciali n(e ; and is it credible that before 
 his fall where there was no ulc of Sacrifices, that hee (hould know of 
 Morning and Evening Sacrilices^in which refpe^ it was called Evening- 
 morning '-, and yet fuppofe it was in refpe(B: of Fveligious ufc that thele 
 names are given to each day , yet why muH: not the Evening begin the 
 day rather then the Morning > it being as hath bin proved, firli: in being 
 asitistirft in naming. 
 
 Thefif 42. 
 4^' Tis true, the time before day, Marke i .3 5 .is called early Morning, 
 and we read of the Morning watch before day light, E.v. 1 4. 24. yet thele 
 places no way prove that which they are produced fovyviz. That Mor- 
 ning begins at midnight : that Chrift went to Prayer at midnight be* 
 caule he went to it in the early Morning , or that the Morning watch 
 began at midnight j for wc know it was fometimc after it; thefe places 
 Indeed ihew thus much> That fome time before Day-light is fometime 
 called Morning , which is readily acknowledged in the refpc^ts fore- 
 mentioned. 
 
 ^* The Angells indeed were created together with the third Heaven, 
 
 Gen, 1. 1 .in the beginning of Time,for being incorruptible ( as the third 
 Heaven is ) they could not be afterward created out of the hrll matter as 
 all this vilible and corruptible World was ^ therrfore the Earth is faid 
 to be darkeand voyd (i.e. of all Inhabitants and beautifull formes ) in 
 oppolition to the third Heaven which was made with it, which was 
 lightfome and full of Inhabitants, viz. the Angels *, and if it was a 
 Kingdome prepared from the foundation of the World , furely this 
 Kingdome had a King then, and this King had his (ubjefts \ how could 
 they then be but Angels? but to infer from hence that this Time of dark- 
 neffe wherein the Angels were created , fhould be Mornings and that 
 thercforethey are called by lob the Morning ftars, lob. 3S. 6 7. as fome 
 imagine, wil follow no more then as if one fhould affirme that the King 
 
 of Babeli (called Lucifer ) ivas certainly borne in the Morning, becaufe 
 he alfo is called a Morning ftar, I/i.14. ' 3 for who fees not but that the 
 fpeech is mctaphoricall in both ? glorious excellency above others 
 being beftowed en them,as Ipeciall brightnefle and lufter is given to the 
 Morning ftar. 
 
 7hefTs 44. 
 ^^' 3el[hazar is faid to be flayn in the night,Pjw. 5 .3o.which the Prophet 
 
 Jfdiah has foretold (hould be in the Morning, //.47. 11. but will it fol- 
 low 
 
T^ebeginningeftheSahbath* 13 
 
 low hence that this Morning is the time of midnight > might it not bee 
 after midnight as well > for the Tt xt is fiknt ^ and yet I doe not thinke 
 that the ward Morning in Ifay is me.jnt of midnight nor any part of any 
 night, but by a metaphor the apparent time of the beginning of his mi- 
 fcry f the light of the Morning nianifeiiing all thing;s apparently J the 
 Lord alfo alluding to the manner of humane Judicatures ; who were 
 wonttopaflethefentenceandiniiidt it in the Morning as the Scripture 
 frequently holds forth*:; J . 
 
 Though alfo it be true that the Lord fiuote theEgyptians at midnight, ^^' 
 and that the Ifraelitet were prohibited from ftirring out of dorts till 
 Morning, Eac. 12.22,29,30. and yet that they did I;ir up on another to 
 depart before morning light ; yet it will not hence follow ( asfome 
 would inferj that midnight was the be ginning of their Morning : for 
 then, I. They might have riien at midnight juft then when God wasde- 
 ftroying the E^^^/ij«j Hrft borne, for that was part of the Morning by 
 this account. 2. They are prohibited from llirringout ofdoorestill 
 Morning as of thcmfelves ; yet ifGod and Pharnah and A^ofes will force 
 them out, there is no rule broken by ftirring out in fiich a cafe before 
 day -light morning. 3 .Tis more then probable "that there was fome good 
 fpace after midnight before they frird out, which is fayd to bee in the 
 Morning watch j for the Deaths ftroake was at midnight after which 
 Fharo ih and his councell muft lit and conl7ilt,and concluvfc what to doe, 
 and fend for Adofes ; after which there n\i\i\ be fome time for M-jh to ac- 
 quaint the Ifiaelhes to make them fit and ready to depart th-ir departure, 
 therefore i« theMjrmn^w^s not at midnisjht which began this Mor- 
 ning, 4.PWo^^ fends for -^/7/e/ after midnight, yet this Time is called 
 NightP/i/.30.3i.and not Morning ; and indeed properly it was not foi 
 only called fo by an impi oper fpeech. 
 
 ihefif 46. A 6. 
 
 When Job faych that God ftretcht out the North upon the empty, 79^. 
 26^ 7 as not fpoken of ths empty Chaoj , for Job hath no occaiion to 
 fpeake thereof nor is it his fcope, but of the places ncare the North P<SIc 
 which are voyd and empty of Inhabitants, none being able now to dwell 
 in that frigid Zone. 
 
 thefij 47. f^. 
 
 r If God hath Ca any time to begin the Sabbath, furcly 'tis fuch a time 
 as may be ordinarily and readily i^nown, that fo here ( as wtl\ as ih all 
 .Q^hqr Ord^nancef)theSabbath may be begwn with Prayer,and ended with 
 prayfc : but i^ it [hou Id begin at raidmght, what man of a thoufand can 
 readily tell the certain time when it begins, that fo they may in a holy 
 
 manner 
 
49« 
 
 manrtei* fegin t<h6 Sabbath with dod?aII mew h*^c not Iht iWidniglit^* 
 Cl^ks and Bdl^ to awaken them, nor can the crowing of Goefcs here- 
 in give a cettaine (blind ; apdore Ghriilian man had need bfe a good and 
 watchfiill Mathematician that holds this opinion^ gf clfe I fee not how 
 h^e will know when midnight is come : and if he cannot , then its very 
 cdnifiderable and to me unqueftionable^that that cannot be the beginning 
 of holy Time which cann ot be fcdgtin in a holy manner: th^re wa^ never 
 any Ordinance of God but it was fo ordered as that it might ordinarily 
 be begun and ended with God , "si^hich makes me quefiion thai the begin- 
 irig of it at xMorning midnight cann dt be" of God; 
 
 Ihefis 48. 
 Others there be who do not begin the Sabbath at Morning- midnight, 
 btitbtgin and end it at Morning- lights at the rifing of the Sun and the 
 Mght of it : who indeed are adifted with bettiEfr proofes and fironger argu- 
 t^^ti then any of the reft, and therefbre need tryall^and wee have need 
 to know what Weight they are of. As alfo to be accurately wary leaft the 
 rule oflove be broken towards fuch gracious and learned ftrvants of 
 God 5 confiderlng how much they have to fay in this point , in which 
 cafejmuch love, re(pe£^ahd indulgence hath bin ever accounted neceflary 
 by men of nioderate and fober minds. 
 
 The fi5c V^cft*kittg dayes being confidered abfolutely in themfelves , in 
 thisre(pe£\j it is no matter whether they begin at Evening or Morning, 
 orMidnight,orMid-day J norisitinthisrefpe^l afin tobegin andehd 
 the dayes according to the curtome of the civill Nation where wee live ; 
 btit becau^ thefe dayes are to be confidered relatively in refpe^l of the 
 fevertth Day^ hence the weeke dayes are fo to be begun , as that their re- 
 lation to the feventh be not diflurbcd , fo as that the bounds and limits 
 of the Sabbath be not impaired or tranfgreffed : for there is no religious 
 neceflity to begin and end civill time with facrcd : nor is it fb uncomly 
 as it may feeme at firft biufli to give God and C<efsr their due ; civill ac- 
 compts to the one , arid facred to the other i for when the lenses were 
 ftbdued by the Romsm , they might and did begin their reckonings of 
 dvill Time as the Kom^nj did, and yet referve the bounds of facred Time 
 wholly unto God. They did the like in England many yeares fince,faith 
 Mf,FdX^ and that their civill diyes began in the Morning, and Religi- 
 ous d^€S in the Evening ; And when they did thus varioufly begin 
 theirdaves, there was no (uchundecntdifproportion of Times as Re- 
 verend fAv.Cle^er imagine8,in the like ca(e 5 if holy Time (hould not be- 
 gin with Mbrning which he pleads for. 
 
 fbefij '^04 
 
Tkefis ^p. . 
 
 Theprincipall Fotindation of this Opinion^re the words of the foi^wj ^ ' 
 Evanpliu03^^^28.I.A^.r^,6i,2. I4..4.,. M^.^.i. Among all 
 ivhich that of iX/.// 28.1. hah nioic weight.wherein 'cisfiyd, Imhee^d 
 of the Sahhathaj It began io dawnt tna^ard liye jirjl Hrji of the xveeke &c 
 from whence k ieemcs to follow that if the Sabbath Day did end at the 
 dawning ot the hrft day of the weeke, that theq the dawning of theday- 
 hght of the hrfl: day,mu(lbe the beginning of the Sabbath Day ;or of the 
 Chriilian Sabbath. /^viw^v: 
 
 ThcconfideratioH of this Scripture hath caufedfome,veryjudiciou$ 
 {viz.BeZ:i Jumm and othersjwho conceive the Sabbath tobeain at even 
 to aftirnie upon very probable grounds, that there was among the Jemf 
 at this time under their Kcman bondage a double account^and reckoning 
 ofthedayesoftheweekc. i.Civill. 2. Sacred account. According tofa^ 
 cred account ( they fay J the Church of God began their Sabbath at E- 
 -vening, not Morning, which they demon firate from fundry pregnane 
 Texts in the old and new Teftament; but according to the civil] aGcoqnt 
 of the Komsns who gave xhe precedency to the Morning before the Even- 
 ing,they begimit therefore in theMorning, andacc jrding to thisktter 
 account they fuppole the Evangelids to fpeak. ^ ' . ' V 
 
 But if the feverall Texts be duly examined, rightly compared and fe- 
 cerely interpreted , there will not appeare a neceffity of uich an account 
 from this place, but rather that thele Texts which are ordinarily pm. 
 duccd to tw'mct the beginning of the Sabbath at Moriiing, will bring ia 
 ilrong evidence to demonirrate its beginning rather on the Evening 
 before. ^ 
 
 For this dawning tow.|rfl$h^|Ir.l day of the weeke is mc^nt of'tlie Ar- ^^ 
 tiiiciali Day, orfhcLiahtqfihefirlt Day of the weeke, as the word 
 dawning implies.^nd the evidence of their faftin comming to theSepuI- 
 cher demonstrates as much ; for it is nottbrfcnpe oftheEvangdi^ to 
 fet downe when the hr/t day .oFth- w.eke bsgan, but at what timeof ih^ 
 firif day ofthe weeke fuch and fuch ^.aions^^-eil out : any thin,c> done in 
 a iy Time of the day, whether ariix,or nine , or two of the Clock may 
 tjefayd to be done that Uiy, h^M hmW not follow chatthey aic rbert- 
 tore done in the beginning of chat Day : I meetc with two Ejcceptions 
 
 i.Some Ciy that it mi^rht bee meint of the Ar^i^ciall day ifthe words 
 had run thu5,z/i^.at the J)aiv7ii^g qfwe Vjy 5 or the ijru Day of the wee^e 
 
 C 2 about 
 
f^ The beginningof the Sabbath. 
 
 about the dawning of the d^y ; but the dawning toward the firfi: day, 
 
 'Xhispk^ife(t\\ty fay J feemes tj defcribe the beginning offuch a day as jiandf 
 
 in KeUtimto the n?ba!e weeJ^'^ and aUth^ oth^r diy^s of the weehf^ which are 
 
 id h? t i^enfor natura'J dajes : But, i . There is I hope a firft Artiiiciall day 
 
 ofcheweekeaswellas a Natural! , 2. This ArtiticiaJI daydoth notin 
 
 this account exclude the Night before as part of this fir(t Day, and coii- 
 
 fequently the Natarall Day conilfling ot Night and light, therefore 
 
 it may well fe«ad in relation to the other dayes of the VVceke which 
 
 were naturall \ for although th'^Evangeliil fets downc particularly whew 
 
 thefe things about the Refurreftion of Ch rift happened to be, viz. at the 
 
 dawning towards the firft day of the Weeke, yet we rhat begin the Sab- 
 
 ^bath at Evening may and do ufe the fame phrafe, and yet (o (peakcof 
 
 the Artiiiciall day upon which lonie event begins , as not to exclude the 
 
 Night before upon which the Naturall Day begins^ 3. Compare the 
 
 Evangelifis , and the dawning in Mmhew towards the lirft day, will be 
 
 found to be all one with this phrafe, viz. The firft day about or at the 
 
 dawning of it : for that which Matthctp calls dawning to the firft day , 
 
 Marh^ calls, early in the Morning,the firft day of the VVeeke at the riiing 
 
 of the Sun*, and L«i^ calls , upon the firft day of the Weeke very early 
 
 in the Morning ; whence it is evident that Matthewes dawning to the firft 
 
 day is all one with about the rifingofthe Sun upon the firft day : ib 
 
 that this difference betweene dawning toward the firft day, and dawning 
 
 upon the firft day iecmes to be an Englifti Cahalifme^ and a meere curiofi- 
 
 ty exhaled and extra^ed out of the words, rather then any folid Truth 
 
 which the Text holds forth or the Spirit of God aimed at. 
 
 2. A (econd exception is 5 that though the word Day in Scripture be 
 taken for the Artificial! day, yet never when the word fir'^ , /econd or 
 third Day 8cc. are joyned together ; and they poynt us to the firft of 
 Genejify where when the firft or fecond day is mentioned, its confiantly 
 meant of a Naturall and not an Artiticiall.Day But i.Thisis a great mis- 
 take, for the Day for the Lvites Travell f'^j4iiGh was not in the Night 
 but upon the Artificial! day) is called the fourth Day,J»^^, 1 9- 5 • And 
 the 5^^ day,i;er/.8. 2. This Artificial! day may bee called the firft day as 
 thatit may involve the Night before, ( where we make the Sabbath to 
 begin ) as well as the Night after, onwhichthey make the Sabbath to 
 end ; and thus the Naturall day may be here comprehended alfo C which 
 they plead for) the fame day which Artificially begins at day-light^may 
 natarally begin the night before. 
 
 ^^ If we (hould (Iippo(c that this Day is meant of the Artificiall Day, yet 
 there is a liarder knot to be unlooftd in the words jof Maubix» , who af- 
 
 firmes 
 
Theleginningofthe Sahhatk 1 7 
 
 firraes that this Day.light or Day-da wne was the End of the Sabbath* 
 Whereby it fcems that the Sabbath began at the dawning of the day be- 
 forehand therefore it ends at the dawning of the firft day following ; and 
 hence they infer that the day-light of this tirft day cannot belong to the 
 night of the Jewifh Sabbath , which immediately went before. And I 
 confefle the argument is ftrong and undeniable ^ as the words lie under 
 the glolTe. We mull: therefore enquire more narrowly into the true tran- 
 flation of the words^and their meaning. 
 
 7befis 55. 55, 
 
 That therefore which we tranflate the end of the Sabbath 3 is in the 
 Originall o^\ Vi tm.S0x7utf» V\ hith words are varioufly translated 5 we (hall 
 onely obferve that the Greek word o^^ hath a double (Ignification, in fre- 
 quent uCe among Greek writers. 
 
 t . Some while it iignifiesLate Time 5 or the cxtream and lafl time of 
 the continuance of any thing ; as^o^g 7^5 n^ie^$^ i. the late time^ or latter 
 time of the Day. 
 
 2 . Sometime it fignifies, a Long Time after : as, o4^ t^'^ikjS^^ i, a long 
 time after the Trojan war / Now in this place it is to be tran(]ated and 
 in this latter fence, thus y A long tinte, or a gocd nubile after the Sabbath wss 
 ended ^ at it began to dawn to thefirfi day of the rved^ey e^e-which interpreta- 
 tion if it be made good will clear up this dii^culty, viz, that the Jewifli 
 Sabbath did not end at the dawning of the Fidlday oftheweek, but 
 long before : nor indeed duril 1 incline to this interpretation , if I did 
 not fee the Evangelifls (the beft interpreters one of another) making the 
 fame to niy hand. 
 
 Thefif 5^. 
 For firH: , Mari^y who writ^after Mattbert? and is beft able to interpret 5 6. 
 his words/xprefly faith, that th" Sabbath was pafr when the women came 
 to the Sepulchre j his words ace J^nyi--'oijAy« ot^SCxnt. The Sabbath hei^gpafi, 
 Mark^ 1 6. 1. Hcncethereioie, \{ MatthervfyNovds ihould be t ran 11 at d, 
 Late on the Sabbathjor towards the end of the Sabbath, then the Sabbath 
 was not already part ( as Marke affirmes ) but drawing toward an tnd. 
 lidarkjh^^^iovQ telling us^that the Sabbath was endcdjand yet not telling 
 us when it ended, why ihould we not Harmonize the Evangelifls by • 
 Mattherpj wOrds , which tels us that it was long before? 2, The time 
 of the coming of fbme of the wonit-n to the Sepulchre, as it was upon 
 the fir A day of the weekjfa it was fome time within rhe night: and hence 
 Marke tels us it was very ear ly^ Afar^ 1 6.2 . whlcli cannot be at the ri/ing 
 of the Sun onely when tis faid alfo that they came to the Sepulchre ; for 
 that is not Mat :rP«i, valde maney or very early Again, Luke teJs us that it 
 was op V ^«^'3^^ D very early or in the depth of the night 3 for fb the 
 
 word 
 
i3 iheBegimingefthe Sabbatk 
 
 word •p>p@' freqaently iignifies the time of the night )«then Cocks crow. 
 „I i;orbear/e to Initaiice in Greek Writers^becaiife the Evangelift John clears 
 
 ' iip this niOil fuJly^ who exnieily fiith, that It was rjwita^ Wt B.r»t<, 2> ^'^^""j^ 
 je^ d^rk.: and though it be faid A/jri( 16.2. that the woiBen canie to the 
 Sepulchre about the riling of the Sun h yet Pifcjtor and others interpret 
 that of their laft aftuall coming to it; their preparation for it being 
 very early^whilc it was yet d.irk night h and it feenis there was two com- 
 ings byfevcrall ofthtm to the Sepulchre : for its evident that Mary 
 (who had moil: affeftion ) came to the Sepulchre while it was yet dark, 
 the reft of them polfibly preparijig thereunto. However the Evangelills 
 l^e riconclled, this is evident 5 that the firft ftirring of tlie women about 
 that works from which they abdained upon the Sabbath day , was very 
 early in the depth of the morning Darkneflej before the Day-light, when 
 (bme would begin the ChriiJlan Sabbath: and from hence it follows, 
 i-ThatiF the Sabbath was not palt even before this dark^time of the 
 night began , but rather ended when the firft day of the week began to 
 dawn : then it will follow, that the(e holy women did not reft the Sab- 
 Jbath according to the Conimandement ? for we fee they arc this nighe 
 buS^e about thofe things which they did forbear to doe bec^ulc of the 
 Sabbath, Li</^e 2 3.5 2. 2.Hf nee it will alfo fpKoWjthat if the Sabbath was 
 not ended before this dark time of the night , but onely at the dawning 
 of the Day-lightjthen our Saviour could not ari(e from the dead the Firft 
 day of the week , but within the dark night of the Jewilh Sabbath : for 
 Mary came when it was dark , and the Lord Chi ift was ri(en before fbe 
 came, and how long before no man can tell 5 but its evident th.it Chrift 
 arofe the iirit day of the W€ck^Mark^i6.^. and therefore the Sabbath was 
 ended long before. 3 . If therefore the Sabbath was paft at the dark tin .e 
 oUhe ni^',ht, how then can the Sabbath begin at morning Light ; and if 
 it was pall: when it was thus dark^when then could the Sabbath end , but 
 when this night did firft begin > and if this was foy it was then truly o-i* 
 mC^ATvp , a good while after the Sabbath was ended when this dawning 
 toward the firft day began,according to the interpr tstion given. 
 
 TAJ?/ 57. 
 57* It is true indeed that this time of darknefle is called morning; and 
 hence fome would infer that the Sabbarh begins inthetnorning : but 
 fuppofe it be fo called, yet it is not called morning Light, at which time 
 they plead the Sabbath fliould begin; and it is improperly called Mor- 
 ning, becaufe (as hath been fonrjcrly fnev/n ' it is prepar?tively Co , men 
 ufually preparing them for the work of the Day light followinsj ; Mor- 
 ning is ahb f equuicly taken in Scripture for any early time^E^^. 3 5 .Sc fo 
 this night ot thefirit day of the week,whcrein the women aro(e to their 
 
 work 
 
tkthe^itiftingefthesMath. ig 
 
 WOrt^iraf Jirt c^dy time,atnd therefore called morning. Again, fiippofe' 
 a double n^Orning be acknowledged (^ there was a doable evening) yet 
 k will not follow that this morning belongs oncly to the day following, 
 for it may belong to the night before 5 for as , where there are two eve- 
 nings fpoken ofjthe fof-met belongs to the dciyjthe latter td th^ riight : fo 
 if we grant two fftornings, the latter morning may belong to the day 
 ^nfuing, and the former to the Night preceding ; if therefdre any plead 
 for the beginning of the Sabbath at th^ liiorhing lights thefe pfaces of 
 the Etrarig^liit '^Wl not bear them out in it , It beirtgflark morning when 
 Chrift ardil ; if ^Hey % it begins in the dark fnornirtg,then let them (et 
 exaftly the time of that dark morning tvhet-ein Chrift aroft , and when 
 they would begin it, but no wit of man I feare is able to denionftratd 
 this. 
 
 And (iirely its of deep confidcration to all thofe who Would h ave the r g. 
 beginning of the Sabbath to be jitft at the time of the Refurreftion of 
 Chriftjon the morning,That not any one of the Evangelifts do (et forth, 
 or ayme to (et forth the exa^ time of Chriils Refurredtion ; they tell lis 
 indeed the exaft time of the women s preparation, and comming to the 
 Scpulchrejand of the Earthquake and fear of the Souldiers^and that the(e 
 things were done in the morning , but none of them point out the time 
 of Chrifts rifing ; nor is it their (cope to (hew exaftly when he rofe^ but 
 onely to fhew that he was ri(en5 and that he appeared to many being 
 rifen, who came to (eek for himt Now aduredly, if it had been the mind 
 of God that his people fhould begin the Sabbath when Chrift began his 
 refurrt^tion 5 he would have pointed out the exa£l time when he did 
 ^Sriie, that (b they might exaftly begin the Sabbath ; but none of the E* 
 varigelifts^oint out the time , nor is it their (cope tK^dilj (b to do ; nay, 
 they do exadly point out when other matters hapned about the womens 
 comming to the Sepulchre 3 but this is not made mention of ; onely we 
 may gather by laying many things together about what time it fhould 
 be : and therefore I niaiTell at them who would prove the beginning of 
 the Sabbath at the time ofChrifts Refurre^ion from the four Evange- 
 lifts (peaking exa6l:ly to the time of the womens rifing in the morning to 
 viht Chrifts Sepulchre , but not a word of the main thing this drives at 
 • which is the e^a6l time of Chril^s rinng. 
 
 T:befis 59^. 
 
 Tho(e that would have the Sabbath begin at morningjallecfge J^hn 20. ^^ 
 1 9. where tis faid, 'that tly^fsme day at evzn , r^hich vpsk the firjl day pf the 
 jveekejefttf ami among hit Difcipks , nphen the doors nrere fhttt . t^hich ((ay 
 xhty ) was mthin night J and therefore the night foUovPing belongs to the d^y 
 
 hefm^ 
 
20 l^hc beginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 before^ which was the ^hrifiian Sabbath : vhi.hplace compared with Luke 
 2 4. 5 3 -does furtbtr cleave up as they (ay) this truth , fer the tx»o Vijcipkj vpbe 
 went to Emails and met Chrip , arejaiil to r^.ium to the Difcipks when they 
 4re thus met isgether'y which iv-niTsg cannot (S^ylhty) be pnfibly m'>ant af 
 the Firfi (venhig before Stta- light was fttybecjttfe the day beii^g farjpent, vcr 2 9. 
 and they con^ramed him tg abide with them (which argues that it was late) 
 and the dijiance if Emaus from Jerufalem being Jixty furkngs , or eight 
 miles excepting a half j f that it was impojsible for themio tr^vell folong a 
 jmrmy info (hart atime^mthin the compajfe ofthefirfi Eyening : Hence there* 
 fore its meant of the feemd evening^which was with a nighty which yet we fee 
 belongs to the diy btfot(. Biat there are many things coniider^ble to evacuate 
 the firength otthcle reafonings* 
 
 Ihefis 60. 
 60. For firft, this invitation our Saviour had to ftay by the two Difciples, 
 was probably to iome repaft^ fometime after high noon; poffiblyto a 
 late Dinner rathtr then a late Supper toward the latter evening 5 and if 
 fb, then the Diiciples might eafily come from Emms to lemfikm before 
 Sun-let within the former evening, for the word toward evening ^7rpo(i(mpdf 
 may be as well underllood of the hrft evening toward two or three of the 
 clockjas of the (econd ; and i: it be objcfted, that before the tirfl evening 
 the day could not be faid ro be Far fpcnt ; yet if the words be well ob(er- 
 ved no ftich tranflation can be forced from them 5 for the woi ds are 
 %iKKtKif i tlfxipet, i. the ddy hath declij^ed'-, which is truely faid of any time 
 after high noon^ and therefore might be a fit (eafbn to preiTe our Saviour 
 to eat h as may appear by comparing this with a paralell Scripture.jJ^d'^w 
 19.8,9. whrch i? almoit word for word with this place oiLuk^e : for the 
 Levites father invites him to eat fomething after his early rifing, verf 8. 
 which was too foon for (upper , and therefore (eems to be rather to a 
 Dinu' r >^^hich th^v rarri d for until after hiph noon^or as 'tis in the Ori- 
 giiu lljCDV'n niDp ty .until the day decIinedjOuff as it is here in Luk^s) 
 and then when dinner was ended he perfwades him to flay flill , bccaufc 
 the day was weake^ and (as we tranflate it toward evening j fas here the 
 Difciples tell our Saviour) and yet after thefe perdvafions to tarry^as late 
 as it was he departed & came to Jerufalem before night, & from thence to 
 Gii->eah(yi]thout anyMiracIe too)bcfore Sun was (et^or the latter evening; 
 and verily if we may give credit to Topographers, Gibeah was almoit as 
 far from Btthlrm ^ from whence the Levite camej as Jetufilem was from 
 Emaus : and therefore if the Levite came with his cumber and conciibine 
 fo many miles before the fecond evening, notwithftandingall the Argu- 
 mens u ed from the day dccliningjand that it was toward evening ; why 
 nvay we not imagine the like of theie Difciples at Emaus much more, 
 
 who 
 
The beginning of the Sahiath. ^ % 
 
 who Had no cumber ^ and whofe joy could not biit adde wings to a very 
 fwift returne to the eleven before the fecond Evening , notwithdanding 
 the like arguments here ufed in Lu7 4.2^ And yet fecondly fuppofe that 
 they invited our Saviour to Supper^yct the former Evening beginning a- 
 bout two or three of thcClock in the after noone jOur Saviour might Ihy 
 fome time to eat with them, and yet they be timely enongh at Jerufjlem 
 before the fecond Evening : for fuppofe our Saviour flayd'an houre with 
 thcmormorcj after two or three ofthe Clock, yet if a ilrong man may 
 waike ordinarily three mile an houre^why might not the tydings of this 
 joyful news make them double their'pace jwhe'ther on foot or hprfeback, 
 no mention is made of either-, and fo be there within an houre and halfe 
 or thereabout before the fecond Evening could come? 
 
 rhffif 61, 
 
 And although our Saviour appeared to them when the dores were (hut 
 yet it is not fayd that the dores were ihut becmfe it was Night, but for 
 Feare of the Jems and their Purfevants 5 that they might not 1 u(h In fud- 
 denly upon them , which they might do in the Day as we] I as in the 
 Ni^^ht 5 and though this was a poore fafeguard from their enemies yet it 
 was fome, and the bci\ which they had or at leafr could thinke of at ftch 
 a time •, and if our Saviour came to them when they were at Supper^il/^ri. 
 16.14. and if the ordinary time of the Je^^s fupper was a little after or 
 about Sunfet (asmight bedemonilrated) then the fecond Evening was 
 not as yet begun, no not when Chrifr came, much ]e(k before theother 
 two came,who were there from Emam before. 
 
 IheJ^f 62. 
 
 It iff lid hjjome thtt if it w^ njt very late, then the Argumems of the mf" 
 eiples topi'tfrvade Chrifl tofljy rvcre weake, hnt iifeemei (fay they) they wtrt 
 firongbecanfi rtj fiid they conflrained him ] but wee know that much af- 
 feaionwillfometmieurgea weake argument very far, for the/lory of 
 fjme fpeciall friend and when arguments will notprevaile, it will hold 
 them and conrtrainc themby force, and thus it feemes the Difciple dealt 
 With o&r Saviour their conh[r.nning him was not fomuch by force of 
 Argument as violence and force of love,for fo the words in the Ori^inall 
 (vra,. i2.^..no) properly iigniF.es ; and hence it feemes that there wa"s day 
 enough aoove lu^ad to travaile farther in ; otherwife what need fuch 
 violent periwafions to flay with them : andfira.yto f^ythatth^Var^kU 
 
 mthihu.beca^sfehM A^gumcnts might f^^ u hginal.^, j~ 
 
 perfirade nnt to^ofarth^ r^hen a .n .n is in a jo.r.cy .Ww/r which is he 
 caieherelfaythisanfwei'isagainrrthePraaireoflove in com!!^n ex! 
 
 ^ pciience 
 
^2 TheheginntngeftheSahbath. 
 
 periencs ; men weary in their journey may ftand in more need of pcrfwa- 
 fions to (lay then they that have not begun to travaile iit all ; nor was the 
 Levites lourney Ions from Bethlem to Gibeah* 
 
 rhefif 63. 
 Nor is it an Argument of any weight from John 39.1. becaufe the two 
 Difciples are fayd to abide with Chrift that Day^ that therefore the night 
 following did belong to that day ( they (laying as it is fuppofcd all 
 night) and confequently that the Day begins in the Morning; for thefe 
 Difciples commingto Chriftatthe tenth houre or foure of the Clock in 
 the afternoone, there were then two houres remaining untill Night(the 
 jFgttJe/ artificall Day continuing from fixto fix ) within which time our 
 Saviour (who can do much worke in a fmail time ) might fufSciently 
 in(lruft them (for that timej within the fpace of two houres ; and why 
 might they not depart before the night came , and fo ftay with him only 
 fo fbort a time > And yet if they did (lay that Night^they might notwith- 
 Handing be fayd to day that arti(iciali day onely , without reference to 
 any Night before or after, or to any part of the Morning following that 
 Nightjwhen 'tis probable they departed if they did fiay with him all that 
 
 Night. 
 £. Ihefis 6^. 
 
 ^ Thofe who thinke that Tatt! would never have Preached till midnight 
 ji[is20^y. ifthat night had not bin part of the Sabbath which began 
 the Morning before^ much IcfTe would hee after this long Sermon have 
 communicated with them in the Sacrament, verfe 1 :. tmlcs it had bin the 
 Sabbath Day, may do well to confider the(e things, i . That the caufe of 
 taking in fo much of the Night following for Preaching till midnight 
 was extraordinary 3 viz. Tauh early departure never to (ee their faces 
 ^lore 5 and to fa,y that if this Night was no part of the Sabbatb^it was then 
 unreafonableta hold them fo long at it, is an affertion which wants 
 i^eafon, if we do but confider thefhortnefle of histinie^the largeneffe of 
 r^uU heart , fpeakingnow for his laftjand the fweetnefTe of their affe^ii^ 
 ons as might eafily enable them to continue till midnight and upward, 
 with cheereful neflfe, and without thinking the duty tedious, and unrca- 
 fonable long. Prf«/ therefore might begin his , Sermon fome part of the 
 Day-light ; which was part of the Sabbath Day, and eontiniieit till mid- 
 night following5and yet this night bee no part of the Ghriftian Sabbath, 
 because it was an extraordinary caufe which preft him hereunto. 2. That 
 ^here is nothing in the Words which will evince the Sabbath to continue 
 fp l^ng as F^hIs Sermon did : for fuppofe thofe who begin the Sabbath 
 atEvening.thatitfhouldbefaid orTuch, that being met together the firft 
 day of £he%eeke to breake Bread ^ their Teacher being to depart on the 
 
 morrow^ 
 
rhe heginniffg of the Sabbatk ^ 3 
 
 morrow. Preached unto them and continued his fpcech till- midnightj 
 tvill this argueacontiniianceofthe fame day > No verily^ and the like 
 reafon is here. 3 .That the Lords Supper might be and was adminiilred bc-i 
 fore ?auls Sermon , for there is a double breaking of bread in the Text : 
 the one is of common breadjFer/e 1 1. after FW had Preached, the other 
 is of holy bread in the Euchtrifiy verfe 7 for the Sj>ial{caUs That breaking 
 of the bread which is mentioned verfe 7. the Encharijl or Lords Supper; 
 but that which is mentioned5X/?r/e i uCommon bread -^ and the Greeke word 
 ywTi'^f^^ implies as much^ and hence alfo its fpoken of one man prin- 
 cipally, viz. That whea he had broken bread and eaten5and talked a 
 long time till breake of the day, he then departed, it being (bme ordi- 
 nary repaft for Panl after his long Preaching and before his long journey, 
 and is not therefore any Sacramentall eating ; the manner of which h 
 wont to bee expreft in other words then as they are here (ct downe j if 
 therefore Fatils eating verfe 1 1. was common Bread,it cannot be then af- 
 firmed that the Eucharift was then adminif^red after Sermon at midnight, 
 and yet they pertaking of the Sacrament this day ^Verfe 7. it feemes there- 
 fore that it was adminiftred fome time before this extraordinary courfeof 
 Preaching began. 
 
 fbep 6$. " 6^ 
 
 Nor it will follow that the Sabbath begins in the Morning, becaufe 
 the Morning is fet before the Night in the Pfaime for the Sabbath, Tfah 
 92. 1,2. for i.The fcope of the Pfalmift is not to fet forth when the Sab- 
 bath begins : but how it is to be fanftified, and that is,not only by (hew- 
 ing forth the loving kindeffe of God every Morning or day time ( ft^ 
 that perhaps,many will readily do ) but alfo in the Night , when meri 
 may thinke it too unfeafonable or too late : and therefore in a holy gra- 
 dation from the lede to the greater, hefirft makes mention of the Mor- 
 ning. 2.The Hf^rexj? word for every Night,is, In the Nights; and there- 
 fore ( fuppofe that this Pfaime is fpecially applyable to the Sabbath, 
 which we know fome queftion ) yet this place will as (bone evince the 
 Sabbathtobegin in the Night before the Morning, and to be continued 
 in fweet affe(Sions the night after, as that it (hould begin in the Mornmg 
 and be continued the night after ; fo that this place will not cleare this 
 caufe,nor is there any weight in fuch kind ofreafonings. 
 
 Thefis 66, g^ 
 
 NorwilIitfollowfromLej;i/7.i5. JV/V622.29, 3'^. and Ex'.i2.io, 
 that bccauie the flefhofthe peace OfiPrings was tobe eaten the fame day, 
 and nothing to be left untill the Morning ( fomething like this being 
 fpoken alfo of the PaiJcover ) that the day therefore begun in the Mor- 
 ning : for in Uvltkm there is a double Commandement, i . To eatc the 
 
 D 2 flcfli 
 
24 ^^^ heginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 flefh of their p^.ace offerings the fame day; but yetbecaufe when they have 
 eaten, foms bones and offalls might remaine , hence, 2 . They are com- 
 manded to leave nothing till the Morning , which doth not argue that 
 they had liberty to eatc it as long as they might keepe it, but that as they 
 / had liberty no longer then the fame day to eateit, fo nor liberty any 
 longer then the next Morning fo much as to keepe any of the relicks of 
 it : Aud as for the PaiTeover a place much (urged by fome) they were 
 to kill it on the fourteenth day^Ejci 2*6. which they might eate the night 
 following,K(er'.8*yet fb as to leave nothing of it till the Morning, Fer/!io» 
 This night following is not therefore any part of the fourteenth , but 
 of the 15 th (Jay ; for at midnight there was a cry Verfe 30, 3 1. and this 
 night they went from K^/we/ij- to i5/<cc0^/[7, Ker/^37. with ^6* and this 
 time is exprcflely called the morrow after the Patfcover, Numb.^^ 3. nor 
 is there any inconvenience or rule broken to kill the Pafleover upon one 
 day and continue eating of it fome part of another, the Pafleover being a 
 Fcaft of more dayes then one. 
 57. Ibefij 67. 
 
 Nor doth it follow that bccaufe our Saviour tells Peter , MarJ{,i 4.3 o. 
 L«i^e 22.34, ^^^^ thisl!>ay, even this Night ('^^z^.of the Pafleover) hee 
 fhould deny him, that this Night therefore was any part of the precedent 
 day, for it may be as fairly interpreted to belong to the day following 
 that Night. Nor is it neccflary to determine th is word Day always to a 
 detemiinate time of 24 houresj of which the Night was a part,but onely 
 of a (peciall ieafon of time : for fo tis frequently figuratively taken 
 without any relped to a day of 2 4 or 1 2 houres, viz. for a (peciall feafbn 
 of Time wherein fome Ipeciall providence of God doth appeare and is 
 putintoexecution,asIyi)'29.i8 8c 2$.9.&27»i. Ex*i^.i^>i Sam.^*']^^. 
 2SJW.4.5.73. thefis 68. 
 
 zg Itanfwcrs many obje6lions produced againfl: the beginning of the day 
 
 in the Evening, for the Morning, to confider, that the word Vaj is 
 frequently taken in Scripture for an artificial! day^ and that the word 
 Merrow frequently fignifies a new artificiall Day , which in refpeft of, 
 and reference unto , the artificiall day ^oing before or following after, 
 is no part thereof ; but as the Proverbe is to morrow is a new day : and 
 thus tis taken, 7<?^« 12.12. J/^^» 6.22. y^<^.2 1.7,8. \ Sam.i^,2^ABs 2^. 
 3'. 32.2 54^.11.12,13. E:!c.io.4.i3. Pt'/i^2i.22,23. J^/S 29 & 10 26. 
 £ac.7.4.il,T2.i7,n7iJ;.8.6./.7 ^^.txA^.uUrpith ^^^.2,^,2 2. Vettt.^^ 11. 
 Whence ondy let this be noted that to argue from hence, that to morrow 
 Morning or to morrow day light is the beginning of the natural! day,^ 
 because its called a new or another Day is not folid : nor alio that 
 although the Night following the artificiall day, bee not fo frequently 
 
 called 
 
The beginning of the Sabbath. 35 
 
 called to mmow^ yet (bmctiaie it is fo called^ i Sam, 30. 17. where the 
 evening of their morrow ftopt Vavid^l that night. 
 
 7'hefis 69- 
 
 There are fome who confefle that the Jewifh Sabbath began at the eve- ^n, 
 ning ever fince the Creation unto the time of Chrifis refurreftion; but 
 now they telJ us that it begins in the morning,becaufe of Chrids Refurre- 
 ffcionf the cau(e of it)which began then^ fo that as this makes the change 
 of the dayjfb it makes a change of the beginning of the day from evening 
 till morning when the Refurre^lion of Chrift began : but the feeblenefle 
 of this opinion will appeare from thefe enfuing confiderations. 
 
 7hefis 70. 
 
 I .Cenfid. That the foundation of this opinion is exceeding votttn^viz, ' ' 
 That the day rauft not begin , untill that worke which occafions the 
 change doth aftually exiil. But we know that the PafTeover began before . 
 the work which did occafion it, did aftually cxii\yviz. the Angels pading 
 overtheIfraelitesatmidnight3E:e5^.i2.29. with 12313314. and 5.8. in- 
 deed theChrirtian Sabbath day is not before the day of Ch rifts refurre- 
 ffcion j yet the beginning of this day may be before the beginning of the 
 Refurredtioujas it was in thePaflcover. 
 
 i.Confid.Th^t if any of the Evangelifts had intended a new beginning 
 of the Sabbath at morning, that they would then have fet down the exali 
 time of the Lords Refiirreftion j but none of them do this^they fct down 
 the time of other things to prove that Ghrift was rifen> but not the exaft 
 time of the Refurreftion, for its wholly uncertain , certaine it is, that it 
 was before Daylight began , for Miry came and found him rifen while 
 it was yet dark, phn 2 o.i. and how long he was rifen before , who can 
 determine ? 
 
 :^. Con fid That ifChrifts Refurreftion began the Sabbath,^ that in that 
 moment and point of time wherein Chrift arofc theChriftian Sabbath 
 began , then Chrift could not lie three dales in the grave ; for either he 
 lay three dales according to the Jewifh account , beginning the day at 
 evening ; and then the third day on which Chrift arofc (which alfo was 
 the firft dayj muft begin at evening as we plead fori or elfe he muft lie 
 three dales according to the new account , which begins the third dav in 
 the morning , leaving out the night before as not appertaining to any 
 part of the week before or after j but according to this reckoning its im- 
 poflible that Chrift ftiould lie three dales in the grave, he may be then in- 
 deed (aid to arife the third day , but not to lie an ; part of the third day, 
 bccaufe lying in the grave implies (bme time of continuance therein upon 
 the third day 5 but how could this be, when they fay that the moment of 
 Chrifts Refurredion began the day of our Chriftian Sabbath ? 
 
 d^.Confid', 
 
76 The heginning efthe Sabbath. 
 
 ^.Confid. If the Jewifti Sabbath was the laft day of the weck,and began 
 and ended at evening , then the Chrifliaq Sabbath niuft either begin at 
 evening when the Jewifh Sabbath ended, or the firll: day of the week can- 
 not be theChriilian Sabbath, but onely a part of the firft day, and part of 
 the (econd day ; for the night which goes before the Chridian Sabbath, 
 either i . they mnft make it to belong to the Jewilh Sabbath^and then that 
 Sabbath muft be ianftiiied 3 6 houres , and fo it niuft be more then a day 
 which is fanftified , which is abfiird ; or 2. they muft make it belong to 
 the Chriftian Sabbath, and then they cannot make it to begin in the mor- 
 ning 5 or 3 . they muft leave it out from all weekly account , and fo take 
 in the night following (which is part of the (econd day) as part of the 
 Sabbath. 
 
 5 , Cffnfid, That the Seventh part of time cannot be orderly given to 
 God,but it muft be either the firft or laft feventhCas hath been fhewn)and 
 the morality of the fourth commandment cannot be obferved without 
 giving to God either of thefe ; if therefore the Jewifti Sabbath ended at 
 Even 5 the Chriftian Sabbath muft immediately (iicceed it, and begin it 
 then5or elfe a morall rule is broken. 
 
 6. IftheJewiQi Sabbath began and ended at Even , and the Ch rill ian 
 Sabbath began at morning, what muft become of that night which is 
 between them both, and to what day of the week muft it belong ? if any 
 fay, that 'tis no matter whet her it belong to avy orno ^ fi long as time runs on 5 
 this anfwer will not fuffice : for though time runs on , yet what orderly 
 time is there here which is running on ^ Time coniifts of ycers,and yeers 
 of monethsjand moneths of weeks^and weeks of daies , to what day or 
 what week then muft this night belong ^ they that maintain this opinion 
 do roundly affirm,that its no abdirdity to leave that one Night out from 
 Weekly, nor as pertaining to any week before or after, but iay itwas 
 loft: alaj; poor torlorn Night that art thus ftrangely forfaken ; what a 
 ftrange kind of night is this which belongs to no day ? what a miftiapen 
 lump of time art thou, and yet how can ft thou be part of time , that art 
 part of no day,but onely fas they fay) of Time flowing and running on, 
 without head or fooi:,week or day > 
 
 71. 'Ihefis 71. 
 
 They tell us, that in Joftiua's timi^rpknthe Sunne ftill^and in He2ekiah's 
 time when the Sunne went back^. thit there was as great a perverting^/ the 
 order of lime as this comes to ; and that there is as good reafon to alter the time 
 upon fitch afpeciall and wonderfull occafion as Chrifis B^efiirreUion , as there 
 i^as to dijo^der the courfi of time then : but the wcaknefTe of this anfwer may 
 appeare from thefe things. 
 
 I. That in the dales oijofhuah and Mezekiak^ there was no fiich mon- 
 
 ftrous 
 
rh hginnifsg of the SaobatL 1 7 
 
 rous mifbapen piece of time cut out^as here is imagined ; for though the 
 -unnc flood (lill/uppole about twelve hours in Joints timc^and Co made 
 a day of 5 6 houres ; yet thefe twelve hours were part of that day, and of 
 that which ordinarily makes the day^^i^.ths motion oFthe Sun about the 
 EarthjWhich is ordinarily once in 24 hours , onely the Lord ftopt it a- 
 while 3 and fo made it a longer day , and ycc meafurcd by the ordinary 
 meadjre of a day, viz. the Sunne compalling th^ earth , which this night 
 is not. 
 
 2. Though fbme part of weekly time was changed in fome refpeft; 
 yet no part of /acred and Sabbath time was perverted by either the Suns 
 /landing ftill^or its going back, becaufe though thefe things were longer 
 then ordinary, yet they -were but ordinary daies in this fence, z/isr because 
 there was no more to either day then that which ordinarily makes a day, 
 to wit that fpace of time wherein the Sunne circularly compafleth the 
 whole earth. For though a feventh part of time be morally due to God, 
 man having fix daies for himfelfe ; yet this is to be underftood , as each 
 day is mcafured by^Sc made up of the whole and compleat motion of the 
 Sun circling the earthjnow though thefe daies were longer then ufuall in 
 thole famous times , yet they were onely fuch daies as were made by this 
 motion , and hence there was no change or perverting of the time of the 
 Sabbath , but God hath his due then orderly. But here we muft make a 
 new and Grange beginning of time , by leaving out a ivhole night, and 
 denying God a (eventh day according to ordinary , account, and recko- 
 ning,and muft fall to a disorderly begisning, upon pretence of a more 
 then ordinary occalion ^ which yet we fee was not fo in thofe extraordi- 
 nary times ofHezekiah and Jojkab. 
 
 3 . In the dayes o^Jofuah and Hiz?kiih there was fome necedity of pro- 
 longing thofe dayes and that in a courfe of providence , fuppoling that 
 God would worke wonders by his providence^ but what n eceflity is there 
 to begin the day when Chrift did firft arife ? for this a^on falling out 
 upon the firfl: day,might fan^ify the whole day which in ordinary courfe 
 fhould have begun at Evening : wee fee the whole fifth of Noiemher h 
 (anftifiedj upon an occahon which hapned about nine or ten of the 
 Clock : and the Evening of the PafTeover was fanrtified before the Angell 
 pafled over the Ifraeliter at midnight, which was the occafion of the fan- 
 dincation of that day ; what neede or neceffjty was there to leave a 
 whole Night out of weekely account, and loofe fuch a part of precious 
 Trcafiire ? 
 
 4. It was for the manifeftation of the marvellrws glory of God in the 
 eyes of all the World^good and bad :; to make that violation ( as it were) 
 of the courfe of Time in the dayes othfuzb and Hez-kjjh-^ but what glory 
 
 doth^^ 
 
2 8 T"^^ beginning of the Sabbath. 
 
 doth Chrift gaine in the eyes of others , by making the Day to begin at 
 the Time of his Refiirre^ion by tlie lofTe of the whole Evening before, 
 out of the account of weekely Time > or what glory doth Chrid loofe if 
 he (lioiild begin the day at Evening when the lei^i^j Sabbath ended, when 
 as the whole day thus , is celebrated and fanftified for his glory in 
 refpe^i: of his R.efIirre£iion upon this Day > and therefore 'tis a great 
 millakcjto imagine as much reafon for the violation of the courfe ofTime 
 in refpe^t of Chi iPis Refurre6):ion(which makes fo li* tie for the glory of 
 Chriil:) as there was for the variation of Time in thedaycs o^Iojk=ih and 
 , Hez^ktdh^i which made ib apparently and evidently and exceedingly for 
 the glory of God and the honou»' of thofe who were Types oFChriic ? 
 
 To fay that there is a neceffityof beginning the Chrinian Sabbarhj 
 72* when Chrirtfirfi: entered into his Rell ( the firll moment of his Refur- 
 re8:lon ) becaufc the Father began the Jewiili Sabbath the firft moment 
 of his Red after his Ijx dayes Labour^ is notfolid nor found : For there 
 was a ncceflity for God the Father to begin his Reft at the end of his 
 wprke: otherwise a morall rule had not bin obferved^'S'z^s. - hat a leventh 
 part ofTime be fan^tified^ for fix dayes being finilhed in creating the 
 Worldjchere was now a neceflky of fanclifying the feventh Day wherein 
 his reft beganjieaft a morall rule lliould be exemplarily broken 5 but there 
 was no fuch neceility here ; for the whole Evening of the firft day may 
 be fan^Hfied upon occaiion of Chrifls Reft on fome part of thatday, and 
 no morall rule broken hereby : nay there had bin a morall rule broken if 
 the Chriftian Sabbath had not begun upon this Evening 5 becaufe here- 
 by God ftiould have loft a Sabbath Day within the compalle of icven 
 dayes as they are mea&red by the Sun j and this is dire£i:ly crofle to the 
 morality of the fourth command > for if A whole night be loft (as ihefe 
 men reckon) only Timeflowcs on ("they fayjthen it muft be full feven 
 day es and a halfe before God have a Sabbath to begin : and this abfur- 
 dity in the courfe ofTime , 1 believe will not be ^oimd , in lojmhs time 
 nor in altering the beginning of the yeere in M.ifis time Exod. 12. for no 
 morall rule was intrencht upon by thefe and fuch like alterations. 
 
 ^2, It Is an ungrounded a fertlm f^ fay that the Keafons of thi change of the 
 
 Day are ihcf/me for the change rfthe beginning of the Day . for I . There was 
 a Type altxcd (as hath bin fliewcn ) to that Jewifti Sabbath but I never 
 yet heard ofany Type in rc(pe(^ of the beginning of the Sabbath. 2. Di • 
 vine will andln litution changed the Day and that according to a mo- 
 rall nile, viz. That God hath one day in fevcn given him : but God 
 could not begin the Sabbath with c-xcluding the Evening before Chrift 
 
 aro 
 
The Segifffiwg of the Sabkath. 29 
 
 arofc without breach of this Rule, as hath binfhcwen r'the day might 
 be kept and changed without breach of that rule, but the beginning 
 could not be changed but there would neceflfarily follow fome breach 
 thereof. 
 
 To thml{e that the Sabbath mufi needs begin in the Mernifi^^beeaHfe rre read ^ 
 not ep(pr^jfely after Chrifis 'RefHrreUi(in^ that the "Night (Ijould belong to the day 
 following^ nor is there any inflance thereof as in the Old Tefianient and before 
 Chrifts iefurrection it may be (jbey confjfe ) undeniably fo found ] I fay^to 
 thinke the Sabbath muft begin in the Mocning upon thisground5is fome- 
 whatlike to his conceit who finding in the Old Telt amen t that the 
 ^venth day is to be fan6:ified but not finding this cxprefiion^after Chrifts 
 Refrirre^tion, hence hee thought there wasnow nofeventh Day to be 
 fanftified. Thole who can anfwer this ObjeftioUjinay know how to an- 
 Aver thereby their owneargument, for the beginning of itat Morning, 
 which is juft like unto it ; if indeed there were clcare Scriptures for the 
 beginning of it at Morning in the new Tellament, and none to fliew the 
 beginning of it at Evening 3 the Argument hadmuch weight ; but this 
 hath not yet appeared : old Tedanient evidences are not Apocrypha 
 proofes in morall matters^in the(c mens conlciences, who thus argue for 
 the Morning. 
 
 thefis 75. 
 'To argue the beginning of the Sabbath at Morning, from the congru- 7J 
 ityandfitnefleofthefeafon for holy Time rather then Evening , is no 
 way faire nor rationall : for i .There may be as much faid(perhaps more} 
 for the fitneife and congruity of the Evening 5 if this arguing were evi^- 
 ing ; but we know the ground of all (uperftition hath bin humane wi(^ 
 dom, which puts out the Eagles eyes when it goes about to mend them j 
 and when it would better Gods worfhip by goodly feemings and trap- 
 ings, it then deftroyes it, at lead corrupts it; this only may be fayd thac 
 juit as we lie downe with our hearts over 11 ight, fo we finde them com- ' 
 monly in the Morning , the beginning of the Sabbath at Evening will 
 force us in confcience to lie down over night with Sabbath heartSjwhich 
 marvelloudy prepares for the receiving of Sabbath bleflings the day en- 
 fting, 
 
 Ihcfis ^6. y6. 
 
 If therefore the Sabbath doth not begin , neither according to the cu- Ofin.'^i 
 fiome of clvill n ations, cor at midnight, nor Morning, what Time then 
 mud it begin at ( from any colour of Scripture ) , but onely in the 
 Evening ? at Evening therefore after the fctting of the Light O'- the body 
 of the Sun, wherein darknefle begins to be predominant over the L'frht 
 
 E the 
 
AO Thebeginnmgofthe Sabh/tth, 
 
 the S Abath bfgias nowy^is the Imlfh Sabbath began in former TimcSjand 
 
 here lee ni-*iay\hir old Tertaniep.t proo'fes may be in this as in many o ♦ 
 therthineis.NewTcflament riilec. 
 
 Ifthe Jewl'li Sabbath did b>-i^lfi and ''c',\i a: Evening, which was the laft 
 day ofths We-ke, then the Chri iian S.ibbath the Fii-:!: day of the weeke 
 which inimediatlyffcceedsche Ulan:) begin at Evening alfo ; if the 
 Sabbath in the firll: inriitution began at EvenirFg, why (hould not the 
 Chriftian Sabbath be conformed as neere as may be to the firft infiituiion? 
 butwefeeoutofG^^. i. That as all other dayes began at die Evening or 
 darke night , fo it was not orderly or potlible according to the moral! 
 rule God a8:ed by 5 that the Sabbath fhould begin upon any other Time 
 then the Evening, nor is it improbable but that Es?^>/ fortells this that 
 in the Chriftian Church, as the Gate for the Sabbath (hould not be (buG 
 uatili the Evening, Es^i^. 45.1^2X0 by ju=^ proportion the time for open- 
 ini^ of it. was the Evening before w^hen the Sabbath began. 
 
 Now although fome deny the beginning of the Sabbath in Gen^i. tt) 
 be in the Evening ( deceiving themfelves and their readers with the am- 
 biguity and various acceptation of the words Evtnhg and Morning.') yet 
 this is moft evident , That the Firft day began with Night or darkencffe 
 which is called Night, G^n 1.4,5. and confequently ended with day- 
 light jlet Evening and Morning therefore be taken how they will^ yet its 
 fufhcient to prove that which we aime at, viz. that as the lirll: day began 
 with Night and ended at the end of Day-li2;ht , fo by juft confequence 
 every other day did, even the Sabbath it felfe, which ftill begins the be- 
 ginning of Night, which is all that which we meane by Evening, when 
 we fay that itbegins then, which alfo the holy Ghoft calls darknelfe which 
 darkneffe^Ge^. 1.2. he calls Night^z^.rr/.^ . and which Night is all one with 
 Evening. 
 7f^ "^^pp 79- 
 
 And ifthe Naturall { which fome call civill, others the compound^ 
 day began firft in the Evenins^, then furely iccontinued fojor if not^then 
 this diforderlypra^ife fhould have bin regulated againe^ according to 
 theiirft pattern e, as the abufes crept into the Lords Supper were by VauL 
 iC?r.ii.a3.and aserrorsabout Marriage were by our Saviour, telling 
 them that ah initio nmfuitfic. 
 80. ^^^^ 80. 
 
 Nor (hould it be a wonder why the wife Creator ^ould begin Time 
 with darkenefe, or the lefTe noble partoftheD.iy no more then why the 
 Lord til 3:ili begin the World with a rude and confufed C^^ax before a 
 
 glorious 
 
The hginmng of the Sabhatk 51 
 
 glorious World ; the progrefTe of his wifdome in making the whole 
 World being for the nioft part from more imperfcft things topcrfe^^ 
 from the ChMs to beauty h from the fervants, and furniture, to man the 
 Lord and Mailer of this great houfe; andfo here, from darkenefTeto 
 light 5 the Sabbath alfo being a day of Reft was it not moit proper to 
 begin it then when man begins his reft which is the Night? when al/b 
 God began R^eft from his work in the firft Cre^^tion. 
 
 Some convinced by the evidence oftheText^thatdarkenefTe was be- ^^cwe/ 
 fore light^yet ivrafrle with their wits tf> make it neither part ofthe njght ^^ fcm 
 nor part oTcime but only pm&ftm tempiris^ and by this ftjift would mak« ^^"^^^^ 
 thcfirftday to begin in the morninj^-iight* 
 
 But ivas ever ^nyfun&um temf^ru (which is thought to be nti part of 
 time) called by the name of Night as this darkefvede h ? Gen.i,^^'^,r^hh 
 2. Was the World made in fix dayes and is there a Heaven and Earth 
 made within ths time of this darkenelTe , and yet this time of darkenefle 
 to be no part of time, but onely a Mathematical! point, but no real] part 
 of fucceeding Time > Z^nchy long lince hath largely confuted andcrufht 
 this Egge- Ihellj where tlie Reader may looke ; there was not indeed any 
 Celeftiall motion ofthe Heavens to meafure this Time by, ( for Mafter 
 Weerms obje^ls iempuf ejl menjnra mom) but by this Argument there was 
 no Time till the fourth day, when the Sun and Starrs were created^ nor 
 is Time properly menfiira mntu^ but as Eternity is the indeterminate du- 
 ration of a thing together/o Time is the determinate duration of things 
 by fuecedion : which was evidently fince Time began on the firft moment 
 ofCrcation. 
 
 Ikefif 83. Sj 
 
 Others who acknowledge this firft darkenefle to be part of Time, yet 
 will not have it to be part ofthe Night-time^ becaufe light ( the habit ) 
 they fay muft go before DarkenefTe (the privation) becaufe alfo this firft 
 darkeneffe is not fo called Night, hat the feparated darkenefle, Gen,i,!^. 
 when God feparated the light into one Hcmifphere, and darkeneffi int6 
 another. 1 
 
 But this arguing is almoft againfl the expreffe Letter of theTeXfy 
 Gen.i.wh^Ttmit is moft evident that light was created, ffter d a rknefle 
 had bin fome time upon the face ofthe deepe ; which darkeneffe cannot 
 be part ofthe Day-light, no more then blindnefle is a pai t of iigfit ; and 
 therefore is a part ofthe Night, before this ccnceiv^d feparated darke- 
 nefle could exlll. Befide the fcparation of darkenefle fi^ora lightiioth not 
 
 E 2 make 
 
•a I'heBeginningoftheSahhath.' 
 
 makeany new darkea^fle which is a new denonainated darkenelTe, but 
 is the fame darkcnefife which was at firO: , onely the (eparation is a new 
 placeing of ic, but ic gives no new bn\\2, to it. 
 ^ Ihefif %%. 
 
 Suppo(eal(b that light and darkenefle are contraria prhantia y yet 'tis 
 not true either in Philofophy or Divinity , that the habit mail alway 
 aftually goe before the privation in the lame fubje^: ; for the privation 
 maybe ^i^ii if it be in (uhjuto capici j i. In a fiibjcft capable of the habit ; 
 for filence may be before fpeech in a man 5 and blindnefle and dcafenefle 
 in a man who never faw nor heard a word:,becau(e man is a fubjefi: capable 
 of both^and Co here darkcneflfe might be before light , becaufe this fubje^l: 
 of the firil matter was capable of both. 
 
 Iheftf S6. 
 
 Nor is it true in Divinity that the darkenelTe and light were at firft 
 feparated into two Hemiipheres ; or if they were, yet what orthodox 
 Writer affirmes that the fiippofed feparated darkcnefle onely is called 
 Night ? 
 
 Tbefis 87. 
 
 For looke as the darkenefle did overfpread the whole Chaos , and all 
 the dimenSons of it at the fame time ; why might not the light the habit 
 be extended as far as was the privation before, and that at the fame time ^ 
 there being no globe or denfe body of earth and waters (exiting as now 
 theydoej at that time created , and confcquently no opake and folid 
 body to divide betweene light and darkenefle and fo to feperate them in- 
 to two Hemifpheres, as by this meanes it is at this day, unlcfle wee ima» 
 gine miracles without neceflity ; and that God then miracuioufly did it 
 when there was no neceffity of it. For the Element of fire being figurative- 
 ly called light, it being (zsjnniiifihevj'^s^ proprietasefent talis ignis -y 
 being alfo created in the fuperiour part of the vai^Chjos h might therefore 
 bee caff downe by a mighty hand of God ( there being no ordinary 
 meanes of Sun or Stars yet created to do it j into all the inferiour Chaos y 
 and fo make day.And the afccnding of this light upwards againe might 
 make it to be Night : and therefore although God feparated betweene 
 light and darkenefle, yet this (eparation feemes to be rather in refpeft of 
 time, then in refpe^ of place , or two Hemifpheres : for the light when 
 it was caft downe feparated and fcattered the darkenefTe , and fb exclu - 
 ded it, fb that when there was light there was no darkenefle; when dark- 
 ne{re,there was no light '■> and thus they fucceeding and excluding one a- 
 nOther,the Lord is faid to feparatc them one from another , but not into 
 two imagined Hemifpheres, by which imagination of two Hemifpheres 
 it will be alfo very difficult to fet downe when it was day and when it 
 
 wa$ 
 
ihebeghmJngof the Sabbath, 53 
 
 was nigbt^at this time of the Creation ; becaufe in refpe^i: of one part of 
 the Chaos it might be called day , in tcC^tSk of the other Hemifpherc of 
 the Chaos it might be called night ; and therefore it (ecms more fuitable 
 to the truth, that thedefcending of the Light made day thorowout the 
 whole Chaos remaining, and the afcending of it to its proper place (iic- 
 celTively made night ; which as it anfwers many curious queftions about 
 the nature artd motion of this light , foityeelds a more then probable 
 argument, that if the day-light continued twelve houres f which none 
 quc[lion)whyfbouId not each night continue as long,and therefore that 
 the firft darkneile did continue fuch a time before the creation of the 
 Light. 
 
 -n^efis 88. 
 
 But fuppofe this locall (eparation into two Hemifpheres was granted, "^' 
 yet it will not follow from hence that this leparated darknefle onely is 
 called night, and that the darknefle before was no part of it : for if the 
 day and night began at the imagined divifion of light and darknefle,then 
 (this divilion being in an inftant of time) neither could the day be before 
 the night , nor the night before the day , but both exift and begin toge- 
 ther ; and then it will follow that the beginning of the firft day was nei-» 
 ther in the morning nor evening, in darkneffe nor light, in night or 
 day; but that it began in the morning and evening, day-light and dark 
 nightjtogether^ which Istoogroife for any wife man to affirm, nor 
 would the God of Order do it. Agjain, if the firft darkuefle which was 
 praeexiftent to this Hcmifphericall light and darknefle was no part of 
 the night, then muchlefle was it any part of the firft day -light 5 aud fo 
 no part of the nattirall day 5 which if any (honld affirm, they muft deny 
 the creation of the world in fix dales, for its evident that the Heavensand 
 Earth were made in the ti;ne of the firft darknefle. 
 
 Thefis 8p. 
 
 To fay that this firft darknefle was part of the morning , and did be- 
 long to the morning-light , as now fome time of darkneffe in the mor- 
 ning is called morning, and therefore is called the womb of the mor- 
 ning P/i/. if o#2. isameerftiift to prove the beginning of time to beia 
 the morning, and an evafion from the evidence of truth. For i.This firft 
 darknefle mufl either be the whole night , confifting as the light did of 
 about twelve hours 5 and then it cannot podibly be called morning or 
 belong thereunto, or it muft be part of the night, and thatwhichcame 
 after the light another part of it , and then we may fee a monarous day 
 which hath part of its night before it,and part after it ; bciide its contrary 
 to the Text, which makes the whole morning together , and the whole 
 evening together,thc whole day-light together, and fo the whole ni?ht 
 
 89. 
 
 togc- 
 
34 ^-^^ heginning of the sMath. 
 
 togsth^r. 2. Thattlarkne^whicnby an improper fpccch we make to 
 belong to the niorningjin our ordinary account, is the latter part of the 
 night or of the darkneire 5 but we read not in ^\\ iht Scriptiire, nor is ic 
 futabfe to any ToJid reafon , to make thcfiril beginning of Night or 
 darkneife as part of the morning : Now this firft darkneffe (which is the 
 beginning of darkneffe) is called night, at Icaft is the beginning of night ; 
 and therefore cannot be called morningjbut evening rathcr,as we ufually 
 call the firft beginning of darknefTe after day light. 
 
 1heJ7s po. 
 
 5^' That expreffeCommandcment LevU.2:^.:^2. to celebrate the Ceremo- 
 nial! Sabbath from Even to Even doth ftrongly prove the beginning of 
 the moral 1 Sabbath at the fame time 5 for why elfe is it called a Sabbath 
 of reftjbut becaufe it is to be (pent in duties of humiliation 5 as the other 
 Sabbath in duties futable to the nature of it ? and hence the Lords care iz 
 greatly exai^ herein, i.that no (ervile work be done, becaufc it is a Sab- 
 bath, verf^ 1,32* 2. That it be fpent and fan^ified from Even to Even, 
 (meaning) like as you doe your weekly Sabbths. And hence the Lord 
 faith not,You fhall celebrate your day of Atonement from even to eveny 
 but (the Lord nfually wrapping up argument in hhwords^Tour Sahhatk: 
 as if he fhould fay , You would account it a prophane thing not to cele- 
 brate your ordinary weekly Ssbbath from even to even^ or to doe any 
 fervile work on that day : this day is a Ssbbath , and therefore yon mull: 
 fanftifie it from even to even, and theiefore doc no fcrvile worke 
 herein. 
 
 91. ' . . T'hefis^i, 
 
 To imaghie ("as fome doe) that the ordmary Sahhath began at another 
 time, becaufe here Ged mak^es anew command^ that it he from even to e^en in rp • 
 pofition to thz ether Sabbaths beginning 5 and that otherr^ife it had been enough 
 to fay ^ ICou fhall celebrate thif day as a Sabbath : one may from the fame 
 ground imagine,that in other Sabbaths they might doe any (ervile work, 
 becaufe here alfo they are forbidden it; for it may be as well faid , that 
 otherwise it had been enough to fay , Yon fhall fanftifie this day as yon 
 do other Sabbaths: here thcreforeisno new infritution of time from 
 the beginning of the Sabbath, but of a new Ordinance,together with the 
 application of time accordmg to common and ordinary account ? and 
 the Lord exprefleth from even to even ("which makes up a naturall day) 
 lelr mans heart (which is foon weary of duties of Humil iation) fhould 
 interpret it of an artificial! day ^ to prevent which miftake the Lord had 
 good reafbn to (et the diflinft bounds of it from even to even. 
 
 92. . ^^'^-^^ ^^' 
 
 ■^ * Nor can this Evening, be fairly interpreted of the former even before 
 
 Sun 
 
The hginnitfg of the Sabbaths g % 
 
 Suii^ictjas taking in that alfo ; fo" this evening is to begin at the evening 
 of the ninth ddij^verf.^i* which evening of the ninth day is not the eve- 
 ning of that day aboat two or three of the clock, (for the tenth day only 
 is called the day of Atonementj^^r/^27. and therefore p^rt of the ninth 
 day is no pai t of the Atonement day) but as Jiwiits well expouFids it , at 
 the evening of the ninth day , putj qi^2 timm dies (hfimt , at that nick of ;//^jy^^y^ 
 timca which is thtccmmHnU terini?mf of the end of the ninth day and be- Isc. 
 ginning of the tenth, you fhall then celebrate your Sabbath ; which cu« 
 rious exadnefie of the Lord^is partly to exprefle his zeale for the full and 
 plenary obfcrvation of the day, that he may not Io(c a moments time of 
 honour^as alfo to fhew what care they (hould have of holding cut from 
 the firil point to the hd period of that Sabbath. 
 
 rkftf9^. 
 And therefore it is a grbundlcffe deduftion from theText^to ma ke this " 5* 
 day to be of extraordinary length , and Co an unfit meafurc for our ordi- 
 nary Sabbath. And to fay that there was a ceremony in beginning this 
 day at even^is but gratpf di&nm^ and can never be made good, unlede it be 
 by iiich fetches of wit which can mould the plainefl Hiiloryinto the 
 Image of a goodly Allegory', a moft impudent courfe of arguing in Ja- Aagufi.ef* 
 ftins |udgenflent>and in his time. 4^. 
 
 7btfif 04. 
 If the Sabbath do not begin at evenings why did Nekmhb (an exem- 94r* 
 plary Magi Ih-ate) command the Gat^s to be (hut, when the Gates ofjern^ 
 filem began to be dark before the Sabbath , Mehem.i^. ip. was it not left 
 the Sabbath (hotild be prophaned that night, by bringing in of wares and 
 burdens thorow the Gates , as well as in the cnfuing day ? is it not ex- 
 prefly faid , that he Cet his (ervants at thele Gates that there might be no 
 burden brought in upon the Sabbath day > is it not exprefly (aid that he 
 fet the Levitts to keep the Gates to fandifie the Sabbath day ? verf 1 ^,2 2 . 
 Now if this evening was no part of the Sabbath, hew could they then be 
 faid to fan6\:itie the Sabbath thereby ? 
 
 Thefis 9^, 
 To imagine that Nebemtab did this to prevent the prophaning of the ^^ 
 Sabbath day after, is as if a man fhould fhut his doors at noon againft 
 fuch Thieves as he knows will not come to hurt him untill mid-night be 
 paft. It would be weakneiTe in a (Vlagidrate to take away any conlidera- 
 ble part of the week which God allows for labour to prevent that evil on 
 the Sabbath which he knows he is fufficiently able to prevent at the ap- 
 proach of chfi day it ielfe : for Nebpmhb might eaiily have fhut the Gates 
 in the morning . if the Sabbath hi! not begun before ; and might have 
 better dojie k.^ th mi to cue To large a Thong out of the week time to pre- 
 vent fuch deiilcniient of the Sabbath d ay. Jbefis' 
 
5 6 The beginning of the Sahhafk 
 
 thfis 96, 
 
 9 6. When therefore the Gates of Jimfakm began to be dark, or as Jmim 
 renders the words, qnum obumbrarentttrpertx^u when they were lliad- 
 dowed by the defcenc of the Sun behind the mountains which conipafled 
 Jerufakmy and (b did eaft a fhadow of darkneile upon the Gates of the 
 Cicy/oniewhat Iboner then in other places lefle mountainous j this (ha- 
 dow 3 being no part of the dark night, is truly faid to be before , or fas 
 the Hebrew is) before the face or looking out of the Sabbath; for al- 
 though the Sabbath be faid to begin at Sun-(et , yet tis to be underftood 
 not of the fetting of the body of the Sun vifibly , bat of the light of the 
 Sun when darknefle begins to be predominant over the light, and men 
 are forced to forfake their work : now juft before this Nehemiah fliut the 
 gates , at the common term and end of the fix dales labourgand the Se- 
 venth dales reft ; and therefore tis a weak objeftion which Come make, to 
 fay that this evening was not part of the Sabbath, because the Gates are 
 (aid to be (hut before the Sabbath. 
 
 97« thejij P7. 
 
 Its faid the women who prepared (pices for our Saviours body , that 
 they re(}ed the Sabbath, which is evident to be In the evening ; and this 
 they did not fuperftitioufly (asfomefayj but according totheCom- 
 mandement, L«i?e 23.53,54555,56. ifthereforc thcfe women began to 
 reft according to the commandment of God upon the evening, then the 
 evening by the lame Commandment is the beginning of the holy Keft of 
 the Sabbath.Tt is not only the commandment of God, that one day in Se- 
 ven be fanftifiedabut alfo that it be fan^iitied from even to even. 
 
 Ih'^fis 98. 
 
 q8« Now that they began to reft in the evening is evident from thefe confi- 
 derations : 
 
 I . That our faviour dyed the N inth houre.L^^e 23.4 4,4^. which was 
 about three of the dock in the afternoon. A little after, this lofepb begs 
 his body and takes it down bccau(e it was 's^g-aCCo.top or preparation for 
 the Sabbath Mjrk^i^» 42. in which preparation its fayd that the Sabbath 
 did «7rs>*<^x«, draw on, or (Line forth Lzfi^ :?3. 54 now thisfhiningor 
 breaking forth of the Sabbath cannot be meant of the day light morning 
 (liining forthjfor its a meare dream to think,that Jsfifh (hould be fo long 
 a time in doing fo little worke,from Saturday in the afternoon until! the 
 next morning lightjOnely in taking of Chrift from the Crolle, wrapping 
 him in Linnen,and laying him in his own Sepulchre, which was nor far 
 off, but neer at hand alio John 1 9.42. The Ihining forth oFthe Sabbath 
 alfo ftopc the wonun from proceeding to annoint Chrifts Body , sfter 
 they had broughc their Spices s and therefore if thefniningforthofthe 
 
 Sab- 
 
The hegtnnwg of the Sahhath, ^ ^ 
 
 Sabbath had been the morning after, they might certainly have had fiif- 
 iicient time to doe that worke in; the (hining forth therefore of this 
 Sabbath was in the latter evening in which the Sabbath began; and its 
 faid CO Oiine forth by a metaphor , bccaufe it did then tirit appeare , or 
 draw on 5 or^as P//c«/tyr and fundry others think, becaufe about that 
 time the Stars in Heaven , and the Lamps and Candles in houfes began to 
 (bine forth ; which is jiid then when darkneffe is predominant, which h 
 the beginning of the Sabbath at evening time. 
 
 2* If that evening had not begun the Sabbath, why did not the women 
 (who ivanted neither confcience nor affciSlion, nor opportunity) anoync 
 his body that evening 5 but defer it umill the night after? what could 
 flop them herein, bnt onely the confcience of the Commandment, which 
 began the Sabbath that evening. 
 
 3. Either the Sabbath miift begin this evening, or they did not reft the 
 Sabbath according to the Commandment 5 for if they began to keep the 
 Sabbath at morning light, then if they refted according to theComman- 
 demcnt , they miift keep it untill the next morning light after, but its 
 manifeft that they were ftirring, and in preparing their Oyntments lone 
 before that, even in the dark night before the light did appeare, as hath 
 been formerly fliewn. 
 
 Why the women did not goe about to embalme Chrifts body the be- 
 ginning oi the dark evening after the Sabbath was paft, but ftaid fo Ions 
 a time after till the dark morning, cannot be certainly determined 5 per- 
 haps they thought ic not fuitable to a rule of God and prudence to take 
 fome reft and fieep firft, before they went about that fad work; and might 
 think the morning more fit for it then the dark evening before when 
 their forrowfull hearts and fpent fpirits might need mercy to b^ ftiewn 
 them, by takmg their reft awhile firft. They might alfo poifibly think ic 
 oftenfive to others prefently to run to the embalming of the dead as 
 foon as ever Sabbath was ended , and therefore ftayed till the dark mor- 
 ning, when ufually.every one was preparing and ftirring toward their 
 weeKly work. 
 
 Tkxfis 100, 
 
 The Lord Chrift could not lie three dales in the grave, iftheSabbath 10 
 did not begin at evening; and for any to affirm , that the dark morning 
 wherein he arofewaspartot this firft day and did belong thereunto , ^l 
 not onely to overthrow their own principIe5,who begin the Sabbath at 
 '^' Q !L"T^ l!H \t^ "^^''^^^"g. but they alfo make the beginning of 
 the Sabbath to be wholly uncertainjfor who can teli;at what time of this 
 dark morning our Saviour arofe? 
 
 ^ Thfis 
 
2 o ' tr/>e beginmng of the Sabhtth, 
 
 Jhefis 101. 
 Tis trvtB ^ there are Come pares of the habitable worlds in ^Piffia^, and 
 thofe Norch'rrn GoiiiitiieS;, wherein for about a inontths time the Sun is 
 never out of fight ; now although they have no dark evening at this 
 time, yet doubtleHTe they know how to meafure their naturall daics by 
 the motion of the Sun ; if therefore they obferve that time which is equi- 
 valent to our dark eveningSjand (an^^ifie to God the fpace of a day.as tis 
 Bieafured by the circling Sun round about them, they may then be faid to 
 fanftiiie the Sabbath from even to even/if they do that which is equivalent 
 thereunto ; they that know the Eaft, Weft, South, North points,do cer- 
 tainly know when that which is equivalent to evenhig begins , which if 
 they coald not do , yet doubtleffe God would accept their will for the 
 deed in fuch a cafe. 
 
 fhffis I0 2. 
 If therefore the Sabbath began at evening from Adams time in inno- 
 ccncy till Nehemiahj time , and from Nehemhbj time till Chrifts time, 
 whylhould any think but that where the Jewilh Sabbath the lafl: day 
 of the week doth end, there theChriftian Sabbath thefirftday of the 
 week begins ? unlefTe any can imagine fome Type in the be^^inning of the 
 Sabbath at evening j which muft change the beginning of the day, as the 
 Type affixed did change the day : or can give demon ftrative reafons that 
 the time of Chrlfts Refurreftion mud of necedity begin the Chriftian 
 Sabbath, which for ougfet I fee cannot be done. And therefore it is a 
 tTOiindlcflfe affertion , that the rtafons of the change of the day are the fame 
 for the change of the kginning efit j and that the chief e cf the re^fm fir the 
 reeningy may be ^ mil apply ed agaiaft the change of the day itfelfe , at of the 
 time of it : But fufficient hath been faid of this. I (hall onely adde this, 
 that there is no truth of Chrift but upon narrow fearch into it, hath fome 
 fecret knots and difficulties, and fo hath this about the beginning of the 
 Sabbath; tis therefore humility and felfdeniall to follow ourclearefi: 
 light in the fimplicity of our hearts j and to wait upon the Throne of 
 ^race with many tears for more cleare difcoveries until! all knots be un- 
 loofed. 
 
 F I N I S. 
 
<^^(^t^<^(^«^<^)'^^«^«^(^*^^*^^'^*^^^ 
 
 1 THE 
 
 1 be fourth Tart. | 
 
 II- 
 
 *| OF THE I 
 
 J SABBATH. I 
 
 WHEREIN --'It 
 
 4 The true Reft of the Day^ togelfer 
 
 *i with the right manner of San6lifying of 
 ♦§ the Dayjare briefly opened. 
 
 '4 BY I 
 
 Thomas Shepard, Paftor of the Church of g 
 
 Chrift at Cambridge in New-England. W 
 
 I 
 
 LONDONy I 
 
 "^ Printed for 7ofc»Ko^toe^,an<l are to be fold at the I 
 "^ Sun and Fountain in Pauls Church-yard. | 
 
ijhe generall Contents about the 
 
 San&ification of the Sabhath. 
 
 1 . nn He word Sabbath what Ujgnifief^ThcfiS I . 
 
 X "l.dll weekly labour for the Refi of the Sabbat h^Thc(is7. 
 
 ^,Thc Kefl of the Sabbath^the meanesfor a higher eW^Thefis 5. 
 
 ^.AsJiriS a Refi now required as was formerly among the 
 lewes^ andthofe f laces cleared which feeme contrary ^ Thcfis 
 
 ;• what work§ forbidden on the Sabbath Day^ Thefis i o. 
 6 Servile worke forbidden^ and what is a fervile work§^ 
 
 7, *ihe hoHneffe required upon the Sabbath in five things^ 
 
 Thcfis I4» 
 
 8..^ lamentation for prophanationrfthe Sabbath. 
 
 The 
 
33 
 
 
 *'s.> c^ 4^^ «s^ e';;i^> 4i{^ cif^ «^'^ «0* -i"- 'C^o €j^ «^« vi'^^ «^ «i^» *■'?- -v -^'^ 
 
 Ti&^ SanBification of the Sabbath ♦ 
 
 He word Sabbath properly fignifies, not common, but 
 Sacred or Holy Kifi. The Lord therefore enjoynes 
 this reft from labour upon this day, not fo much for 
 the Reft fake, but becau(e it is a Mtdium or meanes of 
 thatholincfle which the Lord requires upon this day r 
 otherwifethe Sabbath is aday ofidlcnelle, not of 
 holinefle ; our cattell can reft but a common reft/rom 
 labour asvvelJ as we;and therefore its mans fin and (hame, if he improve 
 the day no better then the beafts that periQi. 
 
 ^hefis 2. 
 And as the reft of the Day is for the holineffe of it, fo is all the labour 
 of the Weeke for this holy reft ; that as the end of all the labour of our 
 lives is for our reft with Chrift in Heaven , fo alfo of the Hx dayes of 
 every weeke for the holy Reft oFthe Sabbath, the twilight and dawn- 
 ing of Heaven^ For the eighth Commandement which would not have 
 usfteale, commands us therefore to labour for our Families and com- 
 forts in all the (ealbns of labour. This fouth command therefore which 
 not onely permits but commands us to labour fix dayes, muft have ano* 
 therrefpeA in commanding us to Iabour,and a higher cnd,which caunoc 
 be any thing elfc but with re(pe6t to the Sabbath h thst as we arc to watch 
 unto Prayer , fb wee are to worke unto the Sabbath , or fo worke all 
 the Weeke day that wee may meete with God and fanftifie the Sab- 
 bath Day. 
 
 "thefts 3. 
 As therefore the holinefle of the Sabbath is morall , becaufe it is the 
 end of the day ; fo is the Reft of the Sabbath ( the immediate meanes to 
 that end Jmorall alfb. Looke therefore what ever holy duties the Lord 
 required of the Jei^es which were not ceremoniall , the (ame duties hes 
 requires of us upon this day 5 fb what ever Reft he required of them foe 
 this endjhe exa^ of all Chrift ians alfo. 
 
 Ihefif 4. 
 Thole that make the Sabbath ceremoniall, imagine a ftri(3:cr Reft im- 
 pofcd upon the Jewes then Chriftians ace n^w bound unco i becaufs 
 
 they 
 
54 ^-^^ SanSificaljon of the Sahhath. 
 
 they place the ceremonialneiTe of the Sabbath in the Ori^ Reft of it ; but 
 we are bound to the fame P^ed for fubftance of it ; and the ground for 
 a driver reft then wee are bound unto j will be found too light if well 
 pondered. 
 -; 'the^u 5. 
 
 For though it be fayd that the hvp£s might not bake ^ nor feeth meat 
 nponthisday, E.W.i6.23.nonorniakeatireuponit5 ^x.y^ ^.nonor 
 gather fticks upon it without Death. Numb 6. 1'^.^o. (all which thiwgs 
 Chriftans now^may lawfully do)yet noneofthefc places will evince that 
 for which they are alledged. 
 
 6. rhefis 6. 
 
 For tirft it is not ^dX^^^xod, 1 6. 23 .bake and feeth that to day whch may 
 (erve you next day:but, that which remaines f z;i^which is not fod nor 
 baked ) lay it up untiil the Mornings and conlcquently for the morrow 
 ofthenexcday, which being thus layd up, 1 doe not finde that they are 
 forbidden to bake, or feeth that which remaines upon the next day ; but 
 rather iftheymuftufe it the next day^thcy might then bake it or feeth it 
 that day alfo, as they did that of the iixt day , and without which they 
 could not have the comfortable ufe ofit upon the Sabbath day : indeed 
 it was as unlawfull to grind and beate the Manna in Mills and Morters, 
 mentioned 'Rumh, \ iiSTupon this day, as now to thrafh and grind Corne 
 this day 5 the meale therefore which did remaine^ is not forbidden to be 
 baked or fbd upon this day ; nor would Gods fpeciall and miraculous 
 providence appeare in preserving it from wormes and ftinking y if there 
 had beene any baking of it the day before 3 andnotrathcr upon the Sab- 
 bat Day. 
 
 7. ^-^^i^^ 7- 
 
 ^ Although alfo they were forbidden to kindle fire upon this day, E.W. 
 
 3'). 3. in re(pe6^ of (bme ufe^yet they are not forbidden fo to do in reipe^l: 
 of any u(e whatibever. For there was fire kindled for the Sabbath facri- 
 iices 5 and it would have bin a breach of the rule of mercy, not to kindle 
 afire for the (ick and weake in the wiMernefTe. Ngk^wi^^ alfo a man 
 moft rrri<3: and zealous for the Sabbath , yet had fuch provilion made e- 
 very day as could not be dreil: nor eaten without fome fire upon the Sab- 
 bath day, Nim.<i .18. and the Sabbath not being a faft but a feaft in thole 
 times as well as thefe 5 hence its not unfutable to the time to have com- 
 fortable provifions made ready, provided that the dreffing of meat be not 
 an ordinary hindrance to publike or private duties of holinefle upon this 
 day, Ex96/.i2.i6. this kindling of the fire here forbidden muft therefore 
 be underfiood in refpe^i: of the fcope of the place^-yr^. not to kindle a fire 
 for any fervile worte, no not in reipe6l of this particular ufe ofit, viz. 
 
 to 
 
The S^wffjfcaiTon of the Sabbath* 55 
 
 to further the building of the Sanituary and Tabernaclcj made mention 
 of in this Chapter ; for irsfaid whofoever fhalldoany worke therein, 
 (i.any fervile worke which is more proper for the weeke time ) fhall be 
 put to death, verfe 2m there is there 'b re either no dependence of thefe 
 words in the third verfi with thofe in the fecond, or elfe we muH: under- 
 iiand it of kindling fires refti i^ively/or any fervile worke which is there 
 forbidden not only the lewes but usChriftians aifb. 
 
 Jhefij 8. g^ 
 
 The man that gathered fticks on the Sibbath 5 Nifnb.i'^.^^o. Was put 
 to death 5 what for gathering of fcicks onely ? why then did not the juft 
 God put them to death who were the lirft offenders ( and therefore mofl 
 fit to be made exampIes)who went out to gather Manna upon this day ? 
 Exod.16, This gathering of flicks therefore^though little in it ftlfe , yet 
 feemes to bee aggravated by 'prefumption ; and that the mandidpre- 
 fumptuoufly breake the Sabbath, and therefore its general ly obferved 
 that this very example foIl(<)wes the Law of puai(hing a prefumptuous 
 tranlgreilor with death in this very Chapter ; and though it be faid that 
 they found a man gathering flicks, as if itweredone fecretly, and not 
 p;?efiimptuouily; yet we know that prefumptuous (ins may be committed 
 fecretly as well as openly, though they are not in fo high a degree pre- 
 fumptuous as when they are done more openly ; the feare of the Law a- 
 gainft Sabbath breakers5might refi-raine the man from doing that openly, 
 which before God was done pi oudly;, and prefumptuoufly 5 and though 
 Mafes doiixed what to do with the mm, who had that capitall Law 
 given him before again fl Sabbath breakers, yet they might be ignorant 
 for a time of the full and true meaning of it, which the Lord here feemes 
 to expound, viz. that a Sabbath breaker (inning prefumptuoufly is to be 
 put to death : and although it be doubted whether fuch a Law is not too 
 rigorous in thefe Times , yet wee do fee that where the Magistrate neg- 
 lefts to reitraine from thisfinne, the Lord takes the Magillrates worke 
 into his owne hand , and many times cuts them off fuddenly who pro- 
 phane his Sabbath prefliniptuoufly : and tis worth enquiring into whe- 
 ther prefumptnous Sabbath breakers are not fiill to bee put to Death : 
 which I doubt not but that the Lord will either one day cleare up , or 
 elfedifcoverfomefpecialty in the application of this judiciall Law to 
 that Polity o£ the Jetves^ as mofl fit for them and not founiverfaliyf^t 
 for all others in Christian Common-wealths ; but this latter I yet fee no 
 proofe for ; nor do I cxped the clearing up of the other while the temper 
 of the Times is loofe and Luke v/arme" 
 
 Tv&e/Fi* 9. 9:* 
 
 Confidering therefore that fome worke may be done upon the Sab- 
 bath 
 
10 
 
 ^6 rhe SafJ&ification of the Sabbath. 
 
 bath, and fome not, and that mans heart is apt to run to extreames, ci- 
 ther to grofle prophancfle or Pharifaicall llriftaefTejWe are thcrfore to en- 
 quire 5 what workes wee muft reft from , and what not from, upon ihe 
 Sabbath Day. 
 
 Ibefis 10. 
 If the Scriptures may bee judge herein^ wee fhall finde that when they 
 forbid all manner of worke , they interpret this of Servile U^ork^, The 
 worke forbidden in the annual! Sabbaths^ ( which did but (haddow out 
 the reft on this Sabbath) it is fervilc worke Lez/zV.23 .7,8. and hence the 
 reft on the Sabbath(in this fourth command)is oppofed to the labour on 
 the weeke dayes which is properly lervile , lawful! to be done then 5 but 
 unlawful! upon the Sabbath Day. 
 If. Ihefu II, 
 
 The Schoolmen, and fome of their late Idolizers ( like the Pharifcs 
 of old) ever blind in interpreting the fpiritualnefle of the Law of God, 
 defcribea fervile worke in that manner, fo as that the grinding of water- 
 mills and windmills, as alfo the counfells of Lawyers to their Clients, 
 the Herring Trade of Fiftiermen are with them no lervile workes on this 
 day j and indeed they (earce make any worke (ervile , but what is (lavifti 
 and external! bondage and burden, 
 
 'thefis 12, 
 But if wee confult with Scriptures and the very words of this fourth 
 Commandement, wee (hall finde two things concurring to make up a 
 (ervilc worke. i . If any worke be done for any worldly gaine prolit or 
 livelyhoodto acquire and purchale the things of this life hy 5 ( which is 
 the principal! end of weeke day labour, E;?k 4.28. i 7he£l^.i2 .)thiSiis a 
 fervile worke, allone with what the Commandement calls 7hyn>or\e: 
 Hence buying, felling, (owing, reaping, which are done for worldly 
 gaine are unlawful! on this dayjbeing therefore (crvile works : hence alfb 
 worldly Iports and paftimes ( which are ordained of God to whet on 
 worldly labour, not heceflary every day but onely at fome (eafons J src 
 therefore moft proper appurtenances unto dayes of labour, and are there- 
 fore unlawful! upon this day : holy Times are no more to bee fported 
 on, then holy places, hence alfo on the other fide, to rubtheeares of 
 CornCjto drefJe meat for comfortable nouriftimcntof man, becaulethey 
 refpeft not worldly gaine, are no fervile workes nor yet unlawfull, but 
 may be more lawfully done for the comfort of man then to lead his horfe 
 to the water this day 3 L»i^6.2.Sc 13,15 & 14.5. hence alfo fuch works 
 as are done onely for the prelcrvation of the Creature as to pull a fhecpe 
 out ofa ditch , to quench fire in a Towne, to faveCorne and Hay from 
 ihefudden inundation of Water, to I^eepc Fire in the Iron mills, to fit 
 
 at 
 
 12 
 
The SanU'ifi cation of the Sabbath, 37 
 
 at frem and guide the (hip , and a thoiifand fuch like anions , bcing'not 
 done properly for worldly gain Jare not unhwFuJli God himfelfe not 
 cea;ing from works of preicrvation^ when he did from thofe of creation : 
 hence alfo fuch works as are not works of immediate worlhip, but ojiely 
 required necerHirily thereto, ns killing the Sacrhiccs in the Temple, 
 travelling a Sabbath daies journey to the publique afTemblics, being np 
 fcrvile workes for outward gainc5are not unlawfuiJ upon this day. 
 
 2. Such worldly works , which though they be not done for worldly 
 gaine or profit,yet if by a provident care and toreiight they might be done 
 as well the weeke before . or may as well be done a week after the Sab- 
 bath, thefe alfo arc fervile works : for thus the Commandment exprelTeth 
 n^Six djus thou rmyft dtz aU thj rvnrk^ (meaning which can be dune as wel 
 the week before) and if all cannot be done, if it may therefore be as well 
 done the week after*Hence the building of the Tabernacle(wch was not fo 
 much for mans proht as Gods honourjb^caufe it might bedone upon the 
 fix daics feafonably enough. Hence it is prohibited upon the Sabbath day, 
 E.W 3 1, if a man hath Corn in the feld^though he may pretend that the 
 weather is uncertaiujand it is ready to be brought in to the Barn^yet he is 
 not to fetch it in upon the Sabbath day, becaufe there is no eminent dan- 
 ger of fpoyle the Munday after , and then he may fetch it in as well ns 
 upon that day : the like may be faid concerning Sea- mens fetting fayle 
 upon the Sabbath da jthough they be uncertaine of a fairegale upon the 
 day after. Yet we muH: tmilGods providence,who almoft in all fuch mat- 
 ters keeps us at uncertainties : hence alfo the fv/eeping oi the houle ought 
 not to be done now, if it may as well be done the day before : fo alfo to 
 buy any things at (hopSjor to wafh clothes ; if they may be done the week 
 before or after, they mull: not be done upon this day : hence on the other 
 ikic works of neceluty, which cannot be fo convenieniy done the day be^ 
 tOi'Q or after, are not unlawfull upon this day.as to fiie in perfecutionjto 
 watch the City,to fight with the enemy,/^/ t'y.2^.2^, 2 Khjgs 1.2 Hence 
 alfo works of necefhty, not onely for preferv.ition of life , but alio for 
 comfort and comelineile of life , are net unlatvfull ; for tis a grofle ni- 
 ftake to thinke that works onely of abfoluce neceility are allowed onely 
 upon this day : for to k-ad an Ox to wat:r , which in the frri«^c!l times 
 was not difallowed of, is not ofabfolute necelljty , for it may live more 
 then adayivithout it; onelyicsncceilary for t'^e comfort of thclihcoi: 
 the bcali: how much more is allowed to the comfort of the lire of man > 
 the Difciples podibly might have lived longer then the Sabbath w'/JiouC 
 rubbing Corn eares, and men may live on Sabbath daics generally with- 
 out warm meat, yea they may fafi: perhaps all that day •, yet it is not un- 
 lawful! to cate fuch meat , becaufe its neceffary for the comfort of life. 
 
 G Hence 
 
5 § The ^Amf ideation of the Sabhath. 
 
 Hence ilCo to put on comely garments, to wadi hinds and fAc?.jmd tiiinf 
 fiich things as are neceffary for the comelineffi as Well as the coniFort of 
 life, are not unlawful! now : there is fonietime an inevitable neceffity by 
 Gods providence , andConvt'im^ a contra8:ed necelllty through want of 
 ca!fe and foreiig^ht -, in this c lie the work may fomctime be done^provided 
 that oar negle6t beforehand be repented of : in a word.he that iball con- , 
 fcientiouOy endeavour that no more work be done on the Sabbath then 
 whr^t miiO: be done for the ends mentioned, that fb he may have nothing 
 tlfc to doe but to be with God thacday, fhall have much peace to his own 
 confcience herein, againllSatans clamours: hence lalljy, notonelyout* 
 ward (ervile work , butfervile thoughts, afFeftionSj and carcs^ are to be 
 caft off this day from the fight of God, as others are from the eyes of 
 Ebett V fervile thoughts andatfedions being as much againfl the fourth 
 Command^mcnt as unchafte and iikhy thoughts againft the feventh. 
 
 Thefis 13. 
 
 That wt are to abflaine from all iervile work , not fo much m regard 
 of the bare abftinence from work , but that having no work of our own 
 to mind or doe ^ we might be wholly taken up with Gods worke, being- 
 tvholly taken off from our own , that he may fpeak with us, and reveale 
 himfelfe more fully and familiarly to us ( as friends doe when they get 
 alone) having called and carried us out of the noyfe and.crowd of all. 
 Worldly occalions and things. 
 
 Ihefis i^. 
 
 Holy red: therefore being for holy work, it may not be amilJe to en- 
 quire what this work is , "and wherein it confiils : for which er\d I (hall 
 not inftance in any the particular (everall duties m publique and private, 
 of holinefle and mcrcy^becaufe this is to be found in all who write upon 
 thisfubjc^:: I (hall on«lyfpeake of that kind of holinelTe which the Lord 
 requires in all publique and private duties, and is to run thorough them, 
 and as it were animate them ; and in truth to (mdt out this , and obferve 
 this, is one ofthegreateft difficulties (but yet the greateil excellency) of 
 aGhriiiian life. It coniifts therefore in thefe five things . 
 
 The firR; The Holinefle upon this day ought to be Immediate : I doe 
 not meane,without the u(e of publique or private mean?,but in re{pe(^ of 
 worldly things : for we are commanded to be holy in all manner of con- 
 verfationall the week in our worldly affaires,! ?et. i 17. Holineffeisto 
 be writ upon our cups and pots,and horf.brid{es,and ploughs, and fickles 
 Zi^. 14. 20.21. but this holineffe is more niediate weenjoyGodby 
 and. in the creature , and. in onr weakly occaiions and providences :. but 
 
 do 
 
The San&ificatian of the sMath. 45 
 
 PfOphfartc Che Sabbath dut pretends Confcicnce, ) why then doth Jfrf- 
 iMjr call opon Princes to fee that it bee not prophaned, with promifcof 
 having their Crowncs and Kingdomes preierved from wrath if thus 
 thcydoj and with threacning the burning up and confuniing of City 
 andKhigdomeif this they do not leremy ly. 19. 25. 27. ifcivill Ma- 
 glth'ates have nothing to do herein , thcyr then have nothing to doe to 
 pfeicTve their Crownes, Kingdomes 5 Scepters^ Subjefts from fire and 
 Blond and utter mine : Ne^f^fwf^/j^was no Typeof Chrilr, nor were the 
 Kings of ifrael bound to fee the Sabbath kept as Types ofChrifc •, but as 
 tmrijng Fathers of the Common- Wealth, andbecaufe their owne Tub - 
 jefts were within their Gates and under their power; and therefore ac- 
 cording CO this moral! Rule of the fourth Commandement , they were 
 bound not onely to keepe k themselves, but to fee that all others did Co 
 alfo. 'Tis true^civ ill Magiiirates may abufe their power, judge amide, 
 and thinke that to b? the conmiand of God, which is not jbut wee muft 
 not therefore take away their power from them , because they may per- 
 vert it and abufc it ; wee muft not deny thatpoiver they have for God, 
 i)ecau(c they may pervert if and turne the edge of it againfc God : forif 
 upon this ground the Magi'frate hath no power over his Subjefts in mat* 
 ters of the firft Table, he^^ may have alfo all his feathers pui'd from him, 
 and all his power taken from him in matters of the lecond Table ; for we 
 kr.ow that hee may worke llrange changes there and pervert Jufl ice, and 
 Judgement exceedingly ; wee nrjil not deny their power bccaufe they 
 may turne it awry and hurt Gods Church and people by it, but fas 
 the Apoitle exhorts, i T'im 2. i.?. J to pray foj- them the njore^that un- 
 der them we may live a peaceable life in all GodlinefTe and Honeily .* its 
 a thoufand times better toHifFerperfecution for RighteouffielTe fakeand 
 for a good Confcience , then to dciire and plead for toleration of all 
 Con(cience?, that foCby this cowardly device and lu kewarme principle) 
 our owne may be untoucht ; it was never heard of untill now of late 
 that any of Gods Prophets, Apoitles, Martyrs faithfull WitnefTes, &c. 
 that they ever pleaded for libdrty in errour , but onely for the Truth, 
 which they preacht and prayd for^Scfiiffered for unto the death^and their 
 fiifcings for the truth with ZealCjPaticncejFaith, Conilancy have done 
 more good, then the way of univerfali toleration is like to doe, which- 
 is purpofejy invented to avoyd trouble. Truth hath ever ipread by op- 
 poution and perfecuti' >n , but errour being a Child of Satan hath lied, by 
 a zealous re ing of it. 
 
 Sick and weake m^n are to be tender 'd much,but Lunatick and Phran- 
 tick menare in belt cafe when they arc well fettcrcdand bound ; a weake 
 
 Cnofci- 
 
^^ Th Sa^^SiJiCAtion of the Sahhath. 
 
 Confcience is to be tendered, an hnnible Confcience tolerated ; errors of 
 weakenefie.ofwickednes-are with all gentleneifeto be handled:the liber.-y 
 
 given in the raign oi Fpifcopacy lor Spoils and Fc'liimeSjand May.ganies 
 upon the Lords Day, was once loathibmc to all honefr minds 3 but now 
 to allow a greater Librrty, to BuyjSe.ll 3 PloWsGart^Thrafli^SportjUpon 
 the Sabbath day^to all thole who pretend Confcience 3 or rather , that 
 they have no Coni'cieticc of one day more then an other , is to build up 
 Jerichoy and Bj^tr/againe, and to Jay foundations of wrath to the Land*, 
 forGod will certainly revenge the pollutions of h.s Sabbaths : if God 
 be troubled in his Re' ^no wonder if hee diilurbcs our peace h fome of the 
 Ancients thinke that the lord brought the flood of Waters upon the 
 Sabbaih day as they gather from Gen 7 lo.becaufe they weregrownc to 
 be great pro[ haners of the S.]bbath;and wee know that Prafin; was taken 
 upon this day. The day of their linnc ^ began all their forrowes which 
 are<:ontintied to this day to the amazement of the World : when the 
 time comes that the Lords piccions Sabbaths are the dayes of Gods 
 Churches Red 5 then flail come in the Churches pcace^ P/"^/.*^ 2. 13 14, 
 The free grace of Chrirt mult tirft begin hereinwith us^that wee may iind 
 atlad that ReiUvhich this evill World is not yet like to fee, unleileit 
 Ipecdily love his Law morejand his Sabbaths b ttcn 
 
 I could therefore delire to conclude thisdoftrine of the Sabbath with 
 teares, and I Vv^iili k might be matter of bitter lamentation to the mour - 
 mrsmShn^ everywhere to behold the univerfall prophanation ot thefe 
 precious times and ff.afonsof refrelhing, toward which, through the 
 abounding of iniquity , the iove of many who once feenied zealous for 
 them/is now grown cold : the Lord might have fuffered pooie , worth- 
 leiTe forrowfull man to have worne and wafied oi)t alj his ddks in this 
 life in wearinefiejgriefejand labour, and to have filkd his dales with no- 
 thing elfe but work,and minding of his own things, and bearing his 
 own ncceifary cumbers and burdens here, and never have allowed him a 
 day of ref imtill he came up to heaven at the end of his life ^ and thus to 
 have done would have been iniinite mercy and love^ though he had 
 made him grind the Mill onely of his ow^i occaiions, and feelc the whip 
 and the lafh onely of his daily griefs and labours,untill dark night came ; 
 but fuch is the overflowing and abundant loveot ablelJedGod, that it 
 cannot containe it Cdk (as it wcrej fo long a time from fpcciall fellow- 
 fhip with his people here in a ih-ange land , and in an evill world , and 
 therefore will have fomc fpeciall times of fpeciali fcilowfhip and iweeteft 
 niucuallembracings', and'thistimemu;! notbeamoment, anhoiirCj a 
 littlejand then away againe h but a whole day, that there may be time c- 
 
 nough 
 
The beginning of the Sabbath, ^5 
 
 nough to have their fill of love in each others bofomc before they part ; 
 this day mull: not bee niecrly occalionall at humane Liberty and now 
 and then, lea ft it be too (kldome^ and fo (Iranges grow bctwtcne thcni • 
 but the Lord ( who excells and txcecdi poorcman in Love ) therefore 
 to make all fure hee fets and fixeth the Day and appoints the Time, 
 and how oft to meete, meerly out of love, that weary man may >. njoy 
 his reft , his God , his love, his heaven as mueh and as often as may 
 be here, in this Life, untill hce come up to glory to reft with God ; and 
 that becaufe man cannot here emoy his dayes of glory, hee might 
 therefore foretafte them in dayes of grace ; and is this the requitall and 
 all the thankes hee hath for this heart-breaking love ? to turneback 
 upon God, and (light thcfe Times , to grow weary of them , znd the 
 £weetc prefence and fellowfnip and love of God in them , to di(pute 
 away thefe dayes with fcorne and contempt , to fmoke them away 
 with Prophannefle, and madde mirth, to Dreame them away with 
 Vanity, toDrinke* toSweare, to Ryot, to Whore, to Sport, to 
 Play, to Card, to Dice, to put on their beft Apparrellthat they may 
 diftionouF God with greater pompe and bravery , to talke of the 
 World, to bee later up that day then any other day of the Weeke,when 
 their owne Irons are in the fire , and yet to fleepe Sermon , or fcorne 
 the Miniftery, if it comes home to their Confciences , to tell Tales, 
 and breake Jefts at home, or fat beft) to talke ofForraigne or Do- 
 mefticall newes onely to pafJe away the time , rather then to fee God 
 in his Workcs and warme their hearts thereby , to thinke God hath 
 good meafiire given him , if they attend on him in the Foore-noone, 
 although the After-noone bee given to the Devill , or fleepe, or vanity, 
 or foolifh paflimcs 5 to draw neere to God in their bodies , when 
 their Thoughts , and Hearts and AfFeftions are gone a Hunting or 
 Ravening after the World the Lord knowes where, but farre enough 
 off from him ; doe you thus requite the Lord for this great love, oh 
 foolifh people and unwife t doe you thus make the dayes of your reft 
 and Joy , the dayes of the Lords forrow and trouble ? doe you thuar 
 weary the Lord when hee gives reft unto you ? was there ever (uchi 
 mercy fhewen,or can there bee any greater love upon Earth , then for 
 the Lord to call to a wicked finfull Creature, which defer ves to bee 
 baniftit for ever out of his Prefence, to come unto him, enter into 
 his Reft , take his fill of love , and refrcfti it Ctiic in his Bofbme in 
 Si. fpeciali manner all this day ? And therefore can there be a greater 
 finne above ground committed out of Hell then thus to finneagainfl 
 this love ? I do not thinke that the fingle breach of the Sdbbath C as 
 
 H to 
 
^6 The SmUification of the Sabbath. 
 
 to rport or feaft inordinately ) is as great a finne as to murthcr a 
 man ( which fome have caft out to the reproach of fome zealous for 
 the obftrvation of the Sabbath Day, truly the Lord knowes) for I 
 believe their Milke ibd over if thus they fayd ; but I fpeakeof the 
 Sabbath under this notion andrefped, and as herein God<? great love 
 appeares to weary/mfuUa refticfle man , as a day wherein all the trea* 
 fares of his mo ft rich and precious Love are fet open , and in this 
 refpeft let any man tell mee what greater ^nnQ hee can ima8;ine, then 
 fmnes againd the greatcH: Love ? The fame finnes which are com- 
 mitted upon other dayes in theWeeke are then provoking finnes, but 
 to commit theic finnes upon the Sabbath Day , is to double the evill 
 of them j Drinking and Swearing, and Rioting, andvaineTalkingj 
 Scc.are linnes on the Weeke-day , but they are now but fingle finnes ; 
 but the(e and fuch like finnes on the Sabbath Day are double finneS5 
 becaufe they are now notonely fmnes againO: Gods command, but 
 al(b againft Gods Sabbaths toojwhich much aggravates them j and yec 
 men mourne not for thefe finnes ; had the Lord never made knowne 
 his Sabbaths to his Churches and People in thefe dayes , they might 
 then have had fbme excule for the ir fmne •, but now to prophane them 
 fince God hath made them knowne to us ? efpecially the Englifh Na- 
 tion and People to do it , upon whom the Lord hath fiiined out of 
 Heaven with greater light and glory in this point of the Sabbath , a- 
 bove any other places and Churches in the World , what will they 
 have to fay for them(elves, with what Fig-leaves will they hide this 
 nakednefl[e before the Tribunall of God? 
 
 The Lord might have hid his Sabbaths from us atid gone to another 
 People, that would have been e more thankfull for them, and 
 glad of them then wee have bcene ; and yet hee hath beene loth to 
 leave us ; and doe wee thus requite the Lord > furely hee hath no need 
 of the beft of us, or of our attendance upon him upon thefe dayes ; its 
 onely his pitty , which feeing us wearied with forrowes and weary- 
 ing our felves in our finnes, makes him call as back to a Weekly 
 reftinhisBofome, who might have let us alone and tyred out our 
 hearts in our owne folly and madneffe all our dayes ; and do wee thns 
 req!iite the Lord > Certainly the time will come wherein wee fliall 
 tliinke ( as once J^rufskm did in the dayes of her affliftion ) of all our 
 pleafant things wee once had in the dayes of ourprofperity i certain- 
 ly men (hall one day mourne for the lolfe of all their precious' time, 
 wh(.^ nifp'iinditnow, and (above allTimesJ for the loffe of their pre- 
 cious pleafant Sabbach feafons of refrefhing, which once they had given 
 
 them 
 
The San&ificathn of the Sahbatk 47 
 
 them to finde rePc and peace in s when the fmokc of thfir tormrnt in 
 cverlafiing burning (hall a(cend for ever and ever, wherein they (hall 
 have no reft day nor nighc , you (hall remember and thinke then 
 with teares trickling duwnt your dry cheekes now of the Sabbaths, 
 thepleafant Sabbaths, that onCe you had^and fhall never fee one of 
 thofedayesof theSonneof man more : you (hall mourne then to fee 
 Abr^hims bofome afarre otf and ihoufand chou(ands at red in it, where 
 you alio might have bin as well as they if you had not d.fpiled the 
 refi 01 God here in the bofome of his Sabbaths. 
 
 You (hall then mourne and wrine; your hands, and tearc your haire, 
 and ilampe and i^row mad ^ and yet weepe to thinke that i't you had 
 had a heart to have (pent that very time ofthe Sabbath in fecking God, 
 in drawing nearetoGod, in rellinginGod, which you did fpend 
 in idle Talke, and Idlenefle, in Rioting and VVantonnede, in Sports 
 and Foolifhnede upon this day, you had then been in Gods Eternall 
 Reft in Heaven , and for ever ble(red in God. Its fayd Jemjdem re- 
 membred in the day of her airliftion all her pleafant things , when the r^^ j 
 Enemy did mock at her Sabbaths , and io will you remember with 
 fad hear(s the lolTe of all your pretious (eafons of grace,efpecially then, 
 when the Devills and Heathens and damned Outcafts, who never had 
 the mercy to enjoy them, (hall mock at thee for the lo(?e of thy Sab* 
 baths : Verily I cannot thinke that any men that ever tafted any fweet- 
 nefle in Chrift or his Sabbath, and felt the unknown refre(hingi 
 of this (wcete Ref , but that they will mourne for their cold affecti- 
 ons to them and unfruitful! fpending of them before they die ; other- 
 wife never goe about to bleare mens eyes with Difcourles and In- 
 ve^ives and Difputes againft them , or with earn all Excuies for youi: 
 licentious (pending of them ; for doubtlefic you tafte not, and there- 
 fore know not what they are 5 and you will one day bee found to 
 befuch as (peakeevill of the things you know not. Hezre ye dejpi* 
 firs atid ivonder^ and perifh , is the infinite Majefty and glory of 
 God , (b vile is your eyes that you do not thinke him worthy of 
 fpeciall attendance one day in a Weeke ? doth hee call you now to 
 Reft in his Bofome, and will you now kick his Bowells, de(pi(e 
 this Love, and (pit in his Face ? doth hee call upon you to (pend this 
 day in holinede , and will you (pend it in Mirth 5 and Sports and 
 Paftlmes and in all manner of licentiou (he(re ? Haft thou wearied God 
 with thine iniquities, and thy felfe in thine iniquities all the weeke 
 long, ( for which God might juftly cut thee off from (eeing any more 
 Sabbaths J and doth the Lord Jedis ( inftead of recompencing thee 
 
 H 2 thus) 
 
^8 Tk SdnUification of the Sabbath, 
 
 thus ) call you back againe to your reding place ? and will you now 
 weary the Lord againe, that hee cannot have relt or quiet for you 
 one day inaWecke ? Oh that wee could moiirne for thefe things : 
 and yet walA:e abroad the face of the whole Earth at this day, and then 
 fay where (hall you finde almoft Gods Sabbaths exaftly kept ? viz. 
 with meete preparation for them, delight in them , with wonder- 
 ment and thankfulnefTe to God after the enjoyment of them ? all the 
 World knowes to whom the barbarous Turkes do dedicate their Fry- 
 dayes, the Jewes alfo how they fanftify their Satnrdayes, to the Lord 
 Jehovah indeed, but not unto the Lord their God. What account 
 the Papifts put upon the Sabbath's not oncly their writings ( which 
 levill it with all other Holy dayesj but alfo their loofe pradiiCe in 
 Sports?and Revellings upon this day bearc fufficient witneffe : and oh 
 that wee had no caufe to wa(b oif this fpot with our teares from the 
 beautifull and pleafant face of the glorious grace and peacejWhich once 
 {hined in the German Churches, by whofe Graves wee may (land 
 Weeping and fay, this is your mifery for this your provoking finne : 
 Scsthnd knovjcs bellherown integrity, whofe lights have bin burning 
 and fhining long in their clearntfTe in this particular. But E?2g- 
 land h2t\\ had the name, and worn this Garland of glory^^, where- 
 with the Lord hath crowned it above all other Churches. But how 
 hath that little flock of flaughtcr, which hath wept for it, andpreacht, 
 and printed, and done and fuffercd for it, been hated and perfccuted ? 
 who have been the fcorne and fhame, and reproach of men , but a com- 
 pany of poore weaklings , for going out a few miles to heare a faith- 
 full painfull Preacher , from thofe idle Qiepheards , who either could 
 not feed them with knowledge and underftanding at home , or elfe 
 would not doe it through grofle prophannelle , or extreame idlenefTe > 
 And now , llnce God hath broken the yoke of their oppreflbrs, and fee 
 his people at liberty to returne to Sion and her fblemne aflemblies as in 
 dales of old , and hath given to them the defires of their hearts , that 
 they may now be as holy on the Sabbath as they will , without any to 
 reproach them, at Icall: to countenance fuch reproaches of them ; Now 
 I (ay,when one would think the precious Sabbaths f which Co many of 
 Gods Servants in former time have brought down to this generation, 
 fwimming in their teares and prayers , and which many in thefe dales 
 have fo much looked and longed for) that every eye fhould be looking 
 up to Heaven with thankfulnelle for thefe, and that every heart (liould 
 embrace Gods Sabbaths with tears of joyfuInefTe, and bid this dcare and 
 precious friend welcome, and lieandreftintheirbofomej and fo I 
 
 doubt 
 
the SAnUificatien of S Math. ^« 
 
 doubt not but that England hath yet many a corner full of fiich preci- 
 ous Jewels 5 to whom Gods Sabbaths are yet moft precious and glori- 
 ous, and who cannot eafily forget fuch blelTed fcafons and means in 
 them 5 whereby (if ever the Lord did good unto them ) they have been 
 (b oft refrefhed , and wherein they have fo oft feen God, wherein they 
 have fo oft met with him , and he with them j but whofe heart will it 
 not make to relent and iighjCO heare of late a company (not of igno- 
 rant deboflit perfbns , malignants^ prelaticall, and corrupt and carnal! 
 men) but of (iich who have many of them in former times given great 
 hopes of fome feare of God , and much love to Gods Ordinances and 
 Sabbaths ; and now (what hurt the Sabbaths or Ordinances of the Lord 
 Jefus therein haue done them, I know not, butj it would break ones 
 heart to fee what little care there is to fanftifie the Sabbath , even by 
 them who think in their judgements that the day is of God. What poor 
 preparation for it,either in themfelves or families ! what little care to 
 profit by it, ortoinftru^ and catechize their families, and to bring 
 themalfo in love with it! what fecret wearinefle and dcad-hvarted- 
 nelTe (almoft wholly unlamented) remains upon them I what earthly 
 thoughts , what liberty in fpeech about any worldly matter, pr jfently 
 after the moft warning Sermon is done / that the Lord Jedis hath fcarcc 
 good carcaflfes and outiides brought him, which cannot but threaten 
 more crows to pick them unleflc they repent: and yetthisisnot|fb 
 fad as to fee the loofenefle of mens judgements in this point of the Sab- 
 bath, whereby fome think a Sabbath'lawfull , but not neccfTary ( in re- 
 fpeftof any command of GodO nay fbnie think it fuperftition to ob- 
 ferve a weekly Sabbath , v;hich (hoiild be every day (as they imagine^J 
 they have allegorized Gods Sabbaths, and almoft all Gods Ordinances 
 out of tlie world , and caft fiich pretended Antichriiiian fJth and pol- 
 lution upon them,that fpirituall men mufi not now meddle with them; 
 nay verily, all duties of the morall Law, and fruitful! obedience and 
 holy walking, and fanftification,graces,and humiliation, and <Iichlike, 
 are the fecret contempt of many, and the bafe drudgery for a mii-hor/e 
 and legal! Chriftian , rather then for one that is of an Evangelical! 
 frame ^ and herein Satan now appears with the ball at his foot , and 
 feems to threaten in time to carry all before him , and to kick and carry 
 Gods precious Sabbaths out of the world with him , and then farewell 
 deare Lord Jefus with all thy fvveet love and life , if Sabbaths be once 
 taken from us by the blind and bold difpntings of wretched men ; au- 
 thority as yet upholds them (which is no i ma 11 mercy) and the favour 
 of Chrifts fweetnede i\\ them,and the external! brightneffe of the beauty 
 of them^do flill remaine on many with thatlh engtli and glory , that it 
 
 is 
 
j[0( The San3iji cation of the Sahhath. 
 
 is not good policy for the prince of darkneffe now to imploy all his 
 fords; againft the gates of the Sabbath : but the time halkne wherein 
 the alfaultwill be great and fierce and I much feare that for the fecret 
 contempt of thefe times ^ the Lord in dreadfull jufticc will ilrengthcn 
 delufions about this day to break forth and profper j and then pray you 
 poor Saints of God and hidden ones, that your fiigbt may mt be in the 
 Winter^ nor /?«' th Sahhath day: hutv^oe then ta them that give Jkeke, 
 woe then to the high Miniftry that (hould have kept thefc Gates , woe 
 then to that loofe and wanton generation rifing up, who thinkefiich 
 outward formes and obfcrvation of dales to be too coarfe and too low 
 and mean a work for their enobled (pirits which are now rai/ed higher 
 and neerer God then to look much after Sabbaths or Ordinances, graces 
 or duties^ or any ftich outward forms 5 for I doubt not but if after all 
 the light and glory (hining in England concerning Gods Sabbaths^ if 
 yet they are not thereby become precious 5 but that the Lord will make 
 them fo by his plagues , if this lin once get head , God will burn up the 
 whole world J and make himfelFc dreadfull toallflefh, untill lie hath 
 made unto himiclfe a holy people^ and a humble people, that ihall love 
 the duft 5 and tah^ pkafure in the very fimes of his houfe, and love the 
 place where his Honour dwels , and long for the time wherein his pre- 
 fence and blelUng (hall appeare and be poured out upon the Sabbath day. 
 Its matter of the greateft mourning 3 that they above all other (hould 
 trouble Gods red, wherein perhaps their fbules have found fo nuich reft, 
 or might have done ; that in thefe times ^ wherein the Lord Jefus was 
 comming out to give unto his houfc his Ordinances, and unto his peo- 
 ple his Sabbaths and dales of reft every way 5 that now they above all 
 others fhould offer to pull them out of his hand^ tread them under foot, 
 and hereby teach all the prophane rout in the world to doe the like with 
 a quiet coniciencejand without any check by their realbningsj that now 
 when God is wafting the Land^and burning down its glory, for the fins 
 againft his Sabbaths, that juft at this time, more then ever fhould rife 
 up to pollute and prophane this day. The Lord grant his poor people 
 to fee caufeat laft to mourne for this fin, that the reft of the Sabbath may 
 be reft to their fbules , elpecially in this weary houre of Temptation, 
 which is (haking all things, and threatens yet greater troubles unto all 
 flefti. The Lord Jefus certainly hath great bleffings in his hand to poure 
 out upon his people in giving them better dales, and brighter and more 
 beautifull Sabbaths, and glorious appearances ; but I feare,and therefore 
 I defire that this unwife andunthankfull generation may not ftand in 
 their own way,leaft the Lord make quick work, and give thofe things«to 
 a remnant to enjoy, which others had no hearts to prize. 
 
 FINIS, 
 
1 
 
•r,i.. 
 
 
 y-