SECT. I. That the Law of the Sabbath in the fourth Com­mandement, is Morall, and therefore per­petuall.

FOr the evidencing of this truth, 1 The first Argu­ment, it was given to the whole nature of man in Adam. our first Argument shall be drawn from the Institution of this day of holy Rest, immedi­ately upon mans creation, recor­ded Gen. 2.3. which upon the examining thereof, will appeare so strong and cleare in it selfe, that it might be suffi­cient to convince any man, that is not fore­stalled before-hand by too much prejudice. And it may be thus framed. What Law so­ever was given to our first Parents in the be­ginning without relation to their present state bindes all mankind to the worlds end. But such was this Law of the Sabbath.

It is true that there happened upon the fall of our first Parents, a change in the Law, 2 Two changes of the Law given to Adam, occasioned by his fall. which was given them by God in the begin­ning. The First change happened to the whole Law, in respect of the conditions, and in part of the use of it. For whereas of man in the state of innocency and perfection, full and perfect obedience to the whole Law was re­quired, [Page 214] 1. In respect of the whole Law, perfect obedi­ence thereunto being then possible, to be performed by him in his own Person, whereunto he was sufficiently ena­bled by the perfection of his nature, in which he was created, but by the fall of Adam that ability was so farre weakned, that such obedi­ence was made impossible to him, or any of his posterity after him: But by his fall made now im­possible, the righteousnesse of Christ is ac­cepted for us. now in stead of our personall obedience, the Righteousnesse of Christ, who in our nature fulfilled the whole Law, is imputed to us for our justification, and our obedience is required, only as a fruit of that faith, by which we are justified. This makes so great a change in the Covenants made betweene God and man, before, and since the Fall, that they are usually esteemed to be two diverse Covenants, the former before the Fall we call the Covenant of workes, and this lat­ter, since the Fall, we tearme the Covenant of Grace.

The Second change which happened in the Law, 3 2. In respect of some Laws gi­ven Adam in respect of his condition ra­ther then of his nature. by occasion of Adams fall, was in re­spect of some duties commanded in the Law, the Sacramentall tree of life, and the whole use thereof, were of necessity taken away, because the promise whereof that tree was the Seale was voide, by Adams breach of the Co­venant, to which it was annexed. And the charge of keeping, and dressing Paradise, was by like necessity utterly voide, when man for his rebellion was cast out of that Garden. Other commandements, as those concerning mans labour, and womens subjection to their hus­bands, [Page 215]were made straighter then they were before, but the substance of these Laws remain­ed still. And these changes happened only in such particulars, as respected rather the state of mans innocency in which he then stood, then the nature of man in generall; and are therefore excepted in the Major proposition, wherein is asserted no more but that these laws are perpetuall, which were given to Adam as a man, not as to perfect man.

This proposition thus understood is foun­ded upon this ground of truth, 4 God made his Covenant with Adam in re­spect to his nature, not to his person. that God esta­blished his Covenant with Adam principally in respect of his nature, and not so much in re­spect of his person; so that by consequent it must follow, that all who are partakers of that nature are bound by that Covenant. Of this faith we have an evident demonstration, in the punishment which light upon the whole nature of man for Adams transgression, which of necessity supposeth the sinne of mans whole nature, in Adams person, in whom it was then included: seeing otherwise we know the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father, Ezek. 18.20. So that the argument holds strongly and convincingly in this manner. As appeares because the nature of man becomes guilty of the breach of that Co­venant. If Adams breach of Covenant made between God and him, brought guilt upon all his posterity, that is, upon the whole nature of man, then it must needs follow that the Covenant obliged the whole nature of man, it is utterly impos­sible that one should become a guilty person by [Page 216]breach of a Covenant to which he was never bound. But the punishment inflicted upon the whole nature of man, makes it evident that the whole nature of man was made guilty by Adams transgression; wherefore the whole nature of man was bound in the Covenant which God made with Adam, and consequent­ly is obliged by the Law which was given in that Covenant.

Unto this argument, 5 Secondly, Christ urgeth the Law of ma­riage given in Paradise as then in force: may be added another proofe taken from our Saviour Christs reason­ing with the Scribes and Pharisees, Mat. 19.48. about their question concerning divorce, which they pretended to be permitted by Moses his Law, Deut. 24.1, 2. For in disputing with them our Saviour grounds his argument against the divorce pretended to be permitted by the Law of Moses, because it crossed that Law gi­ven unto Adam. So that all the strength of our Saviours argument against their divorce must rest upon this Maxime. Implying that the Law given in the beginn­ing is unalte­rable. That which the Law given to Adam in the beginning did not allow, that ought not to be allowed: which is all one as if he had said, that the Law given to Adam from the beginning is unalterable, and there­fore remaines still in full force, so that all men to the worlds end are bound to yeeld obedi­ence thereunto.

Some perhaps may object, Objection. 6 that this answer of our Saviour Christ unto the Pharisees is applied by him to that particular case alone, which was then proposed, but extends not [Page 217]farther, and therefore determines no more but that the law of marriage, which was given to Adam in the beginning, stands still in force, but resolves nothing concerning the Obliga­tion of the rest of the Laws which were given to Adam at the same time, whether they be of force still or no. Answer. To which exception two things may be answered: First, we say that seeing our Saviour resolves that the divorce supposed to be permitted by the law of Moses is therefore not to be allowed, because it was contrary to the law of marriage given by God to Adam in the beginning, then by all the rules of Logick and reason, it must necessarily follow, that whatsoever is contrary to any Law established in the beginning must needs be un­lawfull, because the reason of disallowing that kind of divorce, is not drawn frō any thing that is peculiar to the Law of marriage, but from that which is cōmon to all the rest of the Laws which were given at the same time, as well as to that particular, namely, that the Law given by God from the beginning did not permit it.

Secondly, if our Saviours answer to the Pha­risees, wherein he condemnes the divorce pre­tended to be permitted by the law of Moses, 7 be restrained to Marriage only, and extend not to the rest of the Lawes given at the same time, it leaves unto the Pharisees a faire ground of exception against such a resolution of the question proposed. For they might easily have replied that this law was not in force any more [Page 218]then the rest of the Laws given at the same time to our first Parents: now it is absurd to imagine that our Saviour who knew their cavilling humours by experience, would leave them that starting hole. Wherefore when he condemnes the divorce pretended to be permitted by Moses, for that only reason because it was contrary to the Law given to Adam in the be­ginning, he must necessarily inferre that the Laws which were then given are still in force, both unto us, and unto the end of the world.

The major proposition of that syllogisme that concludes the morality and perpetuity of the Sabbath (namely, 8 that all laws given to A­dam, which had respect to his nature, and not to his present condition, are morall and per­petuall) being thus fully cleared and confir­med, there remains only the minor or second proposition to be made good, which consists of two branches: Now the law of the Sabbath was given from the beginning. The first that this law of the Sabbath was given to Adam in Paradise. The second that it was given to him in respect of his nature, and not of his person; that is, to him as a man, not as an innocent or perfect man. Of these two branches, the opposers of the mo­rality of the Sabbath, meddle not with the latter, but oppose only the former: affirming that the institution of the Sabbath by God was not from the beginning. The reasons of which opposition we shall examine after we have given our reasons for the proving of the con­trary; namely, that the Sabbath was instituted [Page 219]by God from the beginning.

The dispute concerning the day in which Adam fell, whether it was on the sixth day on which he was created or on the next day; (which seems more probable if all things be duly weighed) as also of the time when the Sabbath day was first instituted, whether it was before Adams fall, while he was yet in Paradise; or after his fall, when he was driven out of Para­dise; is not of any great moment to the point which we have in hand; (although seeing in the series of the history written by Moses, we find the giving of this, and diverse other laws, re­corded before Adams fall, we have reason to think all things to have been done in the same order in which they are related; unlesse we had better arguments then meer surmises to induce us to judge otherwise) it is enough to our pre­sent purpose to have that acknowledged, which no man denies, that the law was given, while the whole nature of mankind was in our first Parents, upon that ground therefore sup­posed and granted by all, we thus argue.

That which Moses relates God to have done, Proved by the series of the history, Gen. 2. that he did in the manner and order that he relates: but Moses relates that God insti­tuted the Sabbath from the beginning, as well as marriage, and some other Laws: therefore it was so and then done. The words of Moses his relation of the Institution of that day of rest, Gen. 2.3. are these. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. Now that these [Page 220]words Blessed, and Sanctified, in the most proper and ordinary construction signifie in­stituted and annexed a blessing to the obser­vation of it, I conceive no man will denie. Wherefore seeing this is the most usuall and proper signification of these words, and seeing no incongruity with other clauses and ex­pressions in the letter of that text, no contra­diction to any other place of Scripture, nor repugnancy to any principle of faith, enforce us to seeke out any other more unusuall signifi­cation of them, we have sufficient warrant to construe, and interpret them according to their usuall, literall, and proper sense in this place.

Now that Blessing and Sanctifying the Sab­bath was from the beginning (besides the series of the history, And by the tearmes blessed and sanctified, which is a stronger & more con­vincing argument to prove that it was so, then any that is, or can be alleadged, to prove the contrary) may be evineed and farther made good by these reasons. First, we find the Lord himself in the fourth Commandment affirm­ing that he had blessed and sanctified the Sab­bath day (for so all the Interpreters render these words according to the most proper signification of them in the originall tongue) as remembring and referring unto an act done before the giving of the Law. Repeated in the fourth Com­mandement, and pointing at an act past. Now we find in no place of Scripture, any mention of the Lords blessing, & sanctifying the Sabbath day, before the publishing of the Decalogue upon [Page 221]Mount Sinai, but in this only, Gen. 2.3. Nei­ther doe those that deny the Morality of the Sabbath, mention or suppose any time, pre­cedent to the delivery of the Law by Moses, wherein God blessed and sanctified the Sab­bath day, neither if any such thing had been done by God, would the Scripture have o­mitted the recording of it, being a matter of so great importance; neither lastly, 3. Neither was any time so fit for giving this Law of the Sabbath as in the beginning: was there any time so fit for the giving of this Law, as when the ground of the Institution of this holy Rest, which was Gods manifesting of the per­fecting of the worlds creation by his resting on that day, was new and fresh in memory.

This reason taken from the fitnesse of the time for the enacting and publishing of this Law, carries with it the greater weight, 12 be­cause we know how carefull God is to make every thing beautifull in its time, Eccl. 3.11. and consequently, we have no reason to ima­gine, that God would omit the fittest time for the giving of this Law, and defer it to a time lesse seasonable: As appeares in instituting o­ther Feasts. especially seing we see that in the Institution of the Feasts of lesse impor­portance, as Easter, and Pentecost, of lesse frequent observation, and to last but for a time, he tooke care to ordaine them, when the mercies were yet fresh and new, for the pre­serving of the memory whereof they were ap­pointed. The same course the Church tooke afterwards, in the ordaining of the Feast of Purim, wherein both the occasion and Institu­tion [Page 222]of the Feast went both together. Nay even the Heathen themselves by the very light of nature were directed to follow the same rule, as all men know.

But the strongest and clearest argument to prove the Institution of the Sabbath by God from the beginning, 13 is the testimony of the A­postle, The Apostle affirmes it, Heb. 4.3, 4. Heb. 4.3.4. in these words. Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world, for he spake in a certaine place (namely, Gen. 2.2.) of the seventh day on this wise. And God rested the seventh day from all his workes. To shew the force of the argument, which is to be drawne out of this place, we must in this whole disputation of the Apostle's, begun chap. 3.12. and ending, chap. 4.11. consider what he chiefly aimes at, and intends to prove, which is to disswade men from unbeleefe; to which purpose he sets before them the dangerous consequents thereof, namely, that it excludes men out of heaven. To prove this he alleadgeth the testimony of the Prophet David, Psal. 95.11. who threatens the people of his time to be shut out of Gods rest, as their Fathers by hardening their hearts through unbeleefe were shut out of Canaan, (a Type of heaven) if they proved unbeleevers, and hardened their hearts thereby, as their fa­thers had done. If it should be replied unto the Apostle, that David in that place alleadged out of the Psal. meant not heaven by the rest which he there mentions, the Apostle demonstrates [Page 223]plainly that David in these words, which he relates, could not possibly by the name of Rest, meane any thing else but the rest of heaven.

The Apostle's argument by which he demon­stratively proves, 14 that the Prophet in the words which he cites out of him, could meane no o­ther rest, but the rest of heaven, is this in briefe. The rest, which David mentions in that place, must needs be such a rest, as the men to whom he speakes had not entred into; (for then it had beene a vaine thing, to threaten to shut them out of that, which they had already in posses­sion) but had a possibility to enter in it (or else it were a like folly to threaten that as a judgement upon them, to deprive them of that, which they should never have any possibility to obtain.) But (saith the Apostle) there was no such rest to be entred into by them in Davids time, but only the rest of heaven, therefore David in that place, cited by the Apostle, could meane no other rest, but the rest of heaven. To make good this argument he gives a sufficient enumeration of all the kindes of rests, which were possible to be meant by David, in the place alleadged, (which must all of them have this condition, that they might be entred into by men) which were three, the rest of the Sab­bath, the rest of Canaan, and the rest of heaven: into all which men had a possibility to enter. Now the rest out of which they are threatned to be excluded, must be a rest which they had not already entred into; But (saith our Apo­stle) [Page 224]into two of these Rests men had entred before Davids time, into the rest of the Sab­bath, from the foundation of the world, in which God rested, after he had perfected his workes, and into the rest of Canaan, in the daies of Ioshua; therefore David could not threaten them to be excluded out of either of those rests; there could therefore be no other but the rest of heaven, out of which they might be excluded, because there was no other, but the rest of heaven, to be entred into in Davids time, from which yet they might, and were in danger to be shut out by unbeleefe.

That the Rest of the Sabbath was entred in­to from the foundation of the world, the A­postle expresly affirmes in these words, And God rested the seventh day from all his works. But (say our opposits) the Apostle here affirmes no more, but that God entred into that Rest of the seventh, or Sabbath day, but he speakes not one word of mans entring into rest on that day. Nowun to this we answer, that these particulars which follow cannot be denied. First, that the conclusion, which the Apostle intends to prove, is, that unbeleefe, shuts a man out of heaven. Secondly, it is as manifest, that to prove this he produceth the Prophet Davids testimony, threatning men to be shut out of Gods Rest, if they hardned their hearts by unbeleefe, as their Fathers had done. Thirdly, it is evident that the Apostle assumes, that David by this rest could meane nothing else but heaven. Fourthly, [Page 225]it is as cleare, that he proves that the Psalmist by the Rest which he mentions in that place, could meane no other Rest but heaven, be­cause there was no other rest left, out of which men might be excluded, but heaven, in Davids dayes. In the Fift place, to make that good the Apostle proceeds by way of enumeration or induction, and reckons up three severall sorts of Rests, which might be called Gods Rests, namely, the Rest of the Sabbath, the rest of Canaan, and the Rest of heaven. Sixtly, the Apostle farther assumes, that the rest which David mentions, could not be the rest of the Sabbath, nor the rest of Canaan. Seventhly, it cannot be denied, but that he affirmes that the people had many yeares, ages before Davids time, entred into Canaan, under the conduct of Ioshua. Every one of these particulars is so cleare in it selfe, that no man with any colour of reason can deny any of them. The question is only, by what argument the Apostle proves, that by the Rest mentioned by David, he could not meane the rest of the Sabbath, for that only branch was left to be made good, to make up the full demonstration of the conclusion, that the Apostle tooke on him to prove, that by that rest, out of which David threatens them to be excluded by unbeleefe, the Psalmist could not mean Canaan, all men will acknowledge that the Apostle reasons thus. The Prophet David could not threaten them to be shut out by unbeleefe, from that rest which they had [Page 226]in their own possession: but of the rest of Canaan they had been possessed long before even from the dayes of Ioshua. Now it remain­ing upon the Apostle's hand to prove, that Da­vid by Gods rest could not meane the Sabbath, he must of necessity take up the same argu­ment, by which he had before proved, that he could not mean Canaan by Gods rest, that is, because they had entred into that rest many yeares before. In like manner, if he will make good his argument, he must prove that David could not mean the rest of the Sabbath, because they had entred into that rest long before. The opposites tell us, that the Apostles words can import no more, but that God entred into the rest of the Sabbath, from the foundation of the world, but there is no mention made of mans entring into that rest at that time. But how vain this exception is, we are now to shew.

If we understand these words Heb. 17 4.4. only of Gods entring into his rest on the seventh day, (as the letter of the Text at the first view seemes to carry it) the Apostles argument, if it be brought into form, must be thus framed. That rest which was entred into already, could not be the rest which David meant, because he speaks of a rest yet to come: But the rest of the Sabbath was entred into long before Davids time, even by God himselfe, from the foundation of the world; Therefore the rest of the Sabbath could not be the rest that David meant in that place. I grant indeed [Page 227]that the conclusion necessarily follows out of these premises. But I affirm withall, that the major proposition is utterly false, and no way futes with the scope of the Apostle in this dis­putation. For it is true, that notwithstanding Gods entring into the rest of the Sabbath, Da­vid could not mean that rest in this place, be­cause it is possible, that men might not enter in­to that rest, although God did, & it is only mens entring into that rest, that makes it impossible to be meant by David here, who speaks of ex­cluding men from entring into that rest which he there means, from which they could not be shut out, if they had entred already, and there­fore, if they had entred into the rest of the Sabbath before, David could not mean that rest in that place. So then the opposition lies not between mens excluding, and Gods en­tring, both which might perhaps stand toge­ther; but between mans excluding and mans entring, upon which the whole weight of the disputation lies, and that so evidently that it may be justly wondred, that any man that de­sires to submit to the truth, should not ac­knowledge it. If therefore we frame the ma­jor proposition so, that it may sute with the Apostles scope, which best interprets the mea­ning, it must be composed in this form, or at least to this purpose. That rest into which the Jews had entred already, could not be the rest out of which David threatens that they should be excluded by unbeliefe. Whereunto if we [Page 228]adde this minor, or second proposition; But into the rest of the Sabbath God had entred from the foundation of the world; there could follow no conclusion at all. But if we adde our minor proposition, and so form our syllogisme thus: That rest, into which the Jews had en­tred from the beginning, cannot be the rest, out of which those that harden their hearts by un­beliefe, are threatned to be excluded: But in­to the rest of the Sabbath men had entred from the beginning: Therefore, the rest of the Sabbath could not be that rest out of which they are threatned to be excluded, that harden their hearts through unbeliefe: This conclu­sion naturally and necessarily follows out of the premises, and fully sutes with the whole course of the Apostles disputation, and with the scope at which he aimes.

If there were no other Argument, 18 but this which we have already produced, to prove thta the Apostle, although he names onely Gods resting on the Sabbath day, yet must ne­cessarily imply mans resting on that day as wel as Gods, and that mans entring into the rest of the Sabbath, sutes most fully with the A­postles scope, but Gods entring into that rest makes nothing to his purpose, in this disputa­tion, unlesse it be to shew the ground of mans rest at the same time; it might sufficiently sa­tisfie any man that is willing to be guided by reason. Notwithstanding as we have taken notice of the main drift, at which the Apostle [Page 229]aims in this disputation, so it will not be a­misse to consider the grounds, which the A­postle laies, for the raising of his argument: To prove then, that David threatens unbe­lievers to be shut out of heaven, which he here calls by the name of Gods rest, he laies this for his ground, that this name of Gods rest can be applied onely to three things, the Sabbath, Canaan, and Heaven. Now these three being all members under one generall head, and di­stinguished one from another, must needs have something common to them all, and some­thing proper and peculiar, wherein they differ. That which is common to them all, is first, that they are Gods rests, that is, rests which God ordains for, and bestowes upon men. Secondly, that they are therefore rests into which men may enter. The difference between these rests is, that two of them were possessed by men al­ready, and one of them was yet to come. Now the Prophet Davids words expresly mention a rest to come, and to conceive and affirm, that the Apostle building his argument upon this distinction, as it plainly appears he doth, should impertinently intend to bring in Gods resting in his own person, is to confound this distin­ction of rests, which the Apostle lays for the ground of his Argument, and by consequence his whole disputation that is built thereupon.

To conclude, 19 the Apostle not only laies downe a distinction of the severall kinds of Gods rests, in that dispute, Heb. 4. but farther [Page 230]in applying it to his purpose insists most strongly upon the opposition between the words in Gen. 2. and the words of David, Psal. 45. by which he makes it manifest, that David could not mean that rest of the Sabbath, that Moses speaks of, Gen. 2. For Heb. 4.3. thus he reasons: David speaks of a rest to come, but Moses speaks of a rest past, therefore David cannot mean the rest of the Sabbath of which Moses speaks, which was entred into so long before. And again, v. 5. he takes up the same opposition, in these words. And in this place (of David) again, If they shall enter: both in the 3. and 5. vers. the Apostle insists upon Da­vids expressions [If they shall enter] which he shews cannot refer to the rest of the Sabbath which was entred into (as Moses relates) long before. Now wherein stands this opposition between the relation of Moses that [God re­sted] the seventh day, & Davids intermination [they shall not enter?] there is no opposition between these two expressions, God hath en­tred, and, They shall not enter, but between these two, They have entred, and, They shall not enter, there is a manifest opposition; where­as therefore the Apostle presseth strongly this opposition, ver. 3. & ver. 5. it must be granted, that though he expresseth only Gods resting on the seventh day, yet he specially intends mans resting, which was grounded thereupon.

Some amongst the opposites grant that the Apostle may in the 3. & 4. verses of Heb. 4. [Page 231]though he mention Gods resting too, as being instituted and grounded upon Gods resting upon the same day. But this (they say) was in­tended only indirectly and by consequence. Neither (say they) doth the Apostle limit Gods resting, and mans resting unto the same time, but mentions only Gods rest, which was in­deed from the foundation of the world, but not mans rest, which began only from the de­livering of the Law by Moses. To this we an­swer, that it must needs be that mans resting is principally and directly intended in that place by the Apostle, although it be not expresly mentioned, & that Gods resting is only named as the ground of the institution of mans rest: so that when he affirmeth that God rested from the foundation of the world, he implies, that man rested with him at the same time; seeing (as we have shewed) the whole weight of his Argument lies upon mans, and not upon Gods resting. And when he affirms that man had al­ready entred into that rest, it was fit for him to assigne the time when he entred into that rest, as he doth afterwards set down the time when he entred into the rest of Canaan: be­cause the expressing of the time of entring in­to that rest, is that which gives most strength to his Argument. Besides, if mans resting up­on the giving of the Law by Moses, were meant by the Apostle, it was easie for the A­postle to have named that time, as it was to name the other.

But what may be the reason (may some say) why the Apostle in this place, principally in­tending and meaning mans resting on the Sab­bath, mentions notwithstanding only Gods re­sting on the Sabbath day, but speaks not a word of mans resting on that day; and proves that out of Gen. 2.2. when he might as easily have proved the other out of the verse follo­wing? To this we answer, that the whole course of the Apostles dispute, shews evident­ly what he means. Secondly, we say that Gods rest sufficiently implies mans resting at the same time, as being the very ground and foundation upon which the rest of man on the Sabbath day was grounded. Thirdly, why the Holy Ghost was pleased rather to imply mans resting on the Sabbath day, under the phrase of Gods resting, then to expresse in plainer tearms, we can no more give a reason, then we can tell why the same spirit of God sets downe di­vers disputations in such broken expressions, that need the supply of many clauses to make up the sense cleer and full, or why in other pla­ces of Scripture he shadows out many things, under obscure phrases, which might as easily have been expressed in clearer and plainer forms.

SECT. II. Answer to the Arguments against the Institution of the Sabbath in Paradise.

TO avoid the Institution of the Sabbath, 1 re­corded Gen. 2.3. Exceptions a­gainst this ar­gument from Gen. 2. in expresse and plaine tearms, (and so distinctly related in that place, that any man may justly wonder, that any one endewed with reason should oppose so cleer an evidence) the opposites have invented strange interpretations of these words [Blessed and sanctified] which carry the Institution. 1. There is re­lated onely, what God did, not what he ordained. Some interpret them as relating an act of God, what he did, not as his command what he appointed men to do, as if the words signified no more but this, That God honoured and advanced the day by his resting thereon. This absurd interpretation the very letter of the text suf­ficiently and plainly confutes, which relates Gods resting, and his sanctifying that rest, Answer. as two distinct Acts, Gods resting and sanctifying are related as two distinct acts. the one grounded on the other, vers. 3. That he sanctified the day, be­cause he had rested therein. Besides, men, be­cause they are most employed in secular af­fairs, are said to sanctifie a day by leaving of their labours in secular things that they may spend their time in holy duties. And how can God sanctifie a day by his act of resting? But how God can be said to sanctifie one time above another; seeing he is holy in all his works, ( Ps. 145.17.) who can imagine?

Others interpret the words, 2 Sanctified and [Page 234]Blessed, 2. Sanctified means that he decreed to do it only, as Jer. 1.5. to expresse, not what God did at pre­sent, but what he decreed then to act and do afterward, viz. when he gave his Law to his people by the hand of Moses, upon mount Si­nai. And to give the better countenance to this interpretation they parallel it with another place, Jer. 1.5. where God tels Jeremiah, that he sanctified him before he came out of the womb. In which place, Sanctified, can signifie no more, Answer. then he decreed to sanctifie. Now to forbear all other exceptions against that parallel place in Jeremiah; Where doth Blessed, signifie Decreed to blesse? admit the word Sanctifie, signifie decree to sanctifie, where doth the word Blessed signifie decree to blesse? But admit such an instance might be found for that also: Again it is ta­ken so in one, proves not that it must be so in this. This were a mad form of reaso­ning. The words, Sanctified and Blessed, in one place signifie, Decreed to sanctifie and blesse, where the circumstances of the Text ad­mit other interpretations: therefore the same words, where they may have a better constru­ction, according to their usuall and proper signification, must be interpreted in a sense lesse proper and usuall, though no necessity urge us thereunto. If such a liberty as this were admitted, we should never be able to draw a­ny certain conclusion out of any place of Scrip­ture whatsoever.

A third sort there are, 3 who acknowledge that these words, 3. It is related in Genesis by anticipation. Gen. 2.3. import an institu­tion, but that is (say they) related in that place by way of anticipation, referring and [Page 235]pointing out unto us, a time when this was done more then 2400 years after, when the Law was given by Moses upon mount Sinai. Now this interpretation must suppose the whole third Verse, Gen. 2. to be inserted there by a Parenthesis, and then some clause must be added by way of supply, to make up some such sense as this: But what en­forceth to ad­mit an antici­pation? This resting of God upon the seventh day, was the reason and ground of Gods sanctifying and blessing the seventh day, in the Law which God gave unto his people, by the hand of Moses upon mount Sinai. But first what incongruity with the scope of this place, or with any circumstances of the Text, in which this is related; or with any other place of Scripture, or with any principle of faith, en­forceth us to allow such an anticipation in this place, as we are forced to admit in some o­ther places; because we cannot otherwise find how they may agree, either the words with themselves, or with some other place of Scrip­ture, without which necessity to admit antici­pations were to confound all order of Scrip­ture.

For the countenancing of this anticipation, 4 they say, that Moses ( Gen. 2.) having mentio­ned Gods rest ( vers. 2.) upon the seventh day, had thereupon a fit occasion to point at the Law, which being given afterwards, It cannot be proved that the Law was given before Genesis was written. was groun­ded upon that rest of God, which is here rela­ted. To which we answer; First, this conceit supposeth, that which no man in the world [Page 236]shall be ever able to prove, that the book of Genesis was written by Moses after the giving of the Law (otherwise how could Moses in this place give a reason of that Law which was not then in being?) but it seems more probable (if conjectures may have any place in reasoning) that the book of Genesis, as it is placed first in order, The contrary seems more probable. so was first written. For it is manifest by Saint Stephens words, Act. 7.25. that God had revealed himself to Moses before he went out of the land of Aegypt into Midian, and had designed him to be the deliverer of his people. Again, that Moses, during his abode in Midian, had leisure enough to pen that hi­story, it is evident in it self. Lastly, that the penning and reading of that history might be of singular use to stir up the children of Israel to go up out of Aegypt to take possession of the land of Canaan in which their Fathers had been so long a time sojourners, and so blessed and advanced by God, that they were estee­med as Princes amongst those with whom they lived, especially God having so freely and fully given that land to them and their posterity, is so evident that no man can with any colour deny it. So that it must needs follow that in setling their anticipation upon such a suppo­sition they build at the best upon a very uncer­tain ground. 5

Besides, 2. The pointing at the Law in Genesis had been super­fluous. it had been meerly superfluous to have pointed at the ground of instituting the Sabbath in this place in Genesis, seeing it is [Page 237]cleerly expressed in the body of the Law given by Moses. Now whosoever considereth, what brevity Moses useth in penning the history of the world, allowing but 6 Chapters to the set­ting out of an history of 1650 yeares, must needs judge it to be very improbable that he would lengthen it with needlesse and uselesse repetitions. Lastly, all that can be inferred on it, the fairest that are produced to countenance this fained anticipation, proves no more but this, (if all were granted that they alleage) that there may be an anticipation; but how will they prove that it must be? and that is it which it concerns them to make good, especially see­ing there are so many strong, if not convin­cing arguments which prove the contrary, as we have shewed already.

Hitherto there appears (for ought that we see) no great occasion, 6 Arguments a­gainst the gi­ving of the Law of the Sab­bath to Adam. or use at all of this pre­tended anticipation, Gen. 2.3. which notwith­standing we must be enforced to acknowledge, if it can be proved, that the Sabbath was not Instituted before the giving of the Law by Mo­ses upon mount Sinai, or till the first intermis­sion of the raining of Manna, which was not long before it. Wherefore they endeavour to prove that the Law neither was, nor could pos­sibly be given to Adam in Paradise: This main­tainers of that opinion labour to make good by three Arguments. First, 1. It was im­possible for A­dam to observe the Sabbath. that it were absurd to conceive that God would give Adam a law, which was impossible for him to observe. Se­condly, [Page 238]that he should give him a law, 2. It was need­lesse. which to him in the state of innocency, 3. The Patri­archs till Moses his time never kept the Sab­bath. was altoge­ther needlesse and superfluous. Thirdly, they insist strongly upon this, that if God had given Adam such a law at that time, then had the Patriarchs been bound to the observation of that law. Now (say they) if the Patriarchs had been bound to the observation of that law, they had certainly kept it: but that nei­ther all or any of them observed any such, is manifest by the history of their lives written by Moses, wherein there is no mention of any such thing.

For the first of these three arguments, 7 which is, Answer to the first. that it was impossible for Adam in Para­dise to keep a Sabbath, they reason thus: The Sabbath (say they) was appointed for the pub­like worship of God, 1. That suppo­seth publick worship to be the whole duty of the Sabbath. as all men must needs ac­knowledge: But Adam and his wife could not make a publike assembly, nor consequently worship God publikely, nor by the same ob­serve a Sabbath according to the Law. To this we answer in the First place, Though publike worship be the principall, yet it is not the sole duty of the Sabbath. Honoring God, forbear­ing to do ones own waies, or to find his own pleasure, or to speake ones own words are du­ties of such an holy day of Rest, as God delights in, Isa. 58.13. as well as publike worship. And the Fourth Commandement, which sets apart an whole day unto the Lord entirely, and commands therein a totall cessation from all [Page 239]our employments in our ordinary calling, makes it evident. The sequestring of our selves from our ordinary secular affaires for reli­gious duties is the full scope of that fourth Commandement, which if a single person shut out by sicknesse, or any other casuall accident from publike Assemblies perform, he keeps an acceptable Sabbath unto God, though he can­not joyne with the Congregation in the duties of publike worship.

Againe, 8 why may not two persons where there are no more, 2. Two, where no more are, may be esteem­ed a publike assembly. be esteemed to be a publike Assembly? It is cleare that our Saviour esteems the meeting of two or three for prayer a ga­thering together, Mat. 18.20. And then it's plaine that Adam and Eve, meeting together in Paradise, and employing the whole day in prayer and other holy, and religious exercises, may in a true and proper sense be said to wor­ship publikely: so that in this argument brought against possibility of keeping a Sab­bath by Adam and Eve in Paradise, 3. It is no good argument, Adam could not then keep the Sabbath, therefore he had no Law for it. the propo­sitions are both faulty. Besides, this is no good argument, Adam and Eve could not at that present keep a Sabbath, therefore they had no Law given them by God to command it. The fifth Commandement prescribing the duties of Parents to their Children, is questionlesse a Law of nature, shall we say that this Law was not at the least written in Adams heart from the beginning, because he had then no child? We think it wisdome to make laws for warres [Page 240]in time of Peace, although there can be no ex­ecution of them for the present.

The Next Argument against the Institution of the Sabbath in Paradise, 9 Answer to the second. is, that then Adam needed no Sabbath, neither for his body, nor for his mind. For his body (they say) he needed no Sabbath, because that he being exercised in no painfull or toylsome labour, but exercised only in such work as might be accounted ra­ther a recreation then a labour, needed no rest at all or refreshing of his body thereby. 1. Ease by rest, though it be a consequent, is not the scope of the Sabbath. To this we answer, that the ease of man, and beast from labour, although it be a consequent of the rest of the Sabbath, yet was it never the scope of it, seeing the moderation of labour belongs properly to the same commandement, which enjoynes labour, that is, unto the Eight, as the Apostle also interprets it, Eph. 4.28. The Fourth Commandement forbids labour indeed, but not so much for mercy, as for Piety, nor so much for easing of the toyle of the body, as for the preventing of the distraction of the mind by labour, seeing we know the body can­not labour, but the mind must needs be more or lesse employed withall, which therefore at that time cannot so freely be wholly exercised in Spirituall duties, as it ought. So that Adam might have use of a Sabbath in Paradise, 10 al­though he needed it not for the ease of his body. 2. Adam might make use of the Sabbath in re­spect of his minde.

Yea, but (say they) Adam much lesse needed a Sabbath in respect of his mind, then he did [Page 241]in respect of his bodie, because his mind in that state of Innocency being continually fil­led with heavenly thoughts, he could not choose but keep a perpetuall Sabbath. To this Objection we have answered in part already, that the Sabbath requires of us not only the filling of the mind with heavenly Medita­tions, but besides a totall sequestration of the whole man to the exercise of all holy duties; forbidding us to finde our own pleasure, or our own waies, Isa. 58.13. that is, take up any employment either of body, or minde, about any of those affaires which may properly becal­led our own, such as are all our secular affaires. Now although Adam in Paradise had not in that ease and pleasure of his in keeping the Garden, his minde so wholly taken up with that businesse, as ours are now in our more toyl­some works; yet it must needs be and was his duty too to attend, and to have his minde ex­ercised in the thoughts of those things that he tooke in hand, which on the Sabbath ought to be wholly laid aside. In one word, Adam was and ought on other dayes to be wholly hea­venly minded in the use of earthly things, but on the Sabbath day, he was to be wholly hea­venly minded in the use of heavenly things.

All then that can be made good in this par­cular is only this, 11 that Adam in some respects lesse needed a Sabbath then we doe, whence cannot possibly be inferred that he therefore needed none at all; nay, upon the same ground [Page 242]it will follow, that because he being riper in knowledge, stronger in faith, and more quick­ned and fervent in affection, lesse needed the Sacraments, or other like helps as we doe, it was not fit for him to have any Sacrament at all. As well as of the Sacra­ments, &c. Rather we may conclude, that because Adam infinitely excelled us in all these abilities, therefore, though he lesse needed, yet he was more fit to keep a Sabbath then we are, having more leisure, and being more heavenly minded then we are. All this while we speake of the Sabbath as if it were given to man only for his own good, whereas the principall scope of it is the honouring of God, which was Adam duty as well as ours: So that in respect of the principall end of the Sabbath Adam needed that Law for the observation thereof, as well as we.

In the last place it is urg'd that if the Sab­bath had been instituted in Paradise, Answer to the third. then had the Patriarchs been bound to the observation of it, and had certainly observed it. Now that the Patriarchs did not observe it, it is evident (say they) because we find no mention, upon record, of the observation thereof by any of them either before, or after the Flood, till Exod. 16. immediately before the giving of the Law. We answer, that if they can make it ap­peare that none of the Patriarchs did observe the Sabbath, we will be willing to grant them that they had no Law that bound them to any such observation: But it will be a very hard [Page 243]matter to make that appeare by any con­vincing argument. Yes, (say they) if they had observed it there would have been left some record of it by Moses, who wrote their lives; as (say they) he hath left us instances of their ob­serving of the other Nine Commandements, but for their observation of the Sabbath day he makes not so much as the least mention at all. To this we answer divers things. First, 1. It followes not; we have no recording of the Patriarchs observing the Sabbath, there­fore they ob­served it not. we except against this form of arguing from Nega­tive authority, which according to the sentence of Logicians proves nothing at all; and here­of, though we might give other instances, we will content our selves with one only con­cerning the point which we have in hand. In all the Books of Ioshua, Iudges, Ruth, For 550 years after Moses we have no record of keeping the Sabbath. the two books of Samuel, and the first booke of Kings, (containing the history of the Church, for 550. yeares, and written much more largely then the books of Genesis, and the beginning of Exodus) we finde not upon record so much as the very name of the Sabbath; shall we therefore con­clude from thence that the holy men of those times, especially Ioshua, Samuel, and David, kept not the Sabbath, when we know they had a Law that bound them thereunto? and yet we have instances enough out of the same books of their keeping of the other nine Commande­ments. It will not be sufficient to except a­gainst the instance produced by us, that we know these holy men kept the Sabbath, though there be no record of their keeping of it, be­cause [Page 244]we are sure that they had a Law, that bound them to keep it, but the Patriarchs had no such law; this I say is no just exceptiō against our instance, for it is to beg the point in questi­on. All that they can gaine by this Allegation is, that it is not so certaine that the Patriarchs kept the Sabbath, because it is not so certaine that they had a Law that bound them to ob­serve it. Now this is a wild form of arguing. It is not certaine, (though we prove it is) or at least not so certaine that the Patriarchs had a Law that bound them to keep the Sabbath, therefore it is certaine that they kept it not. As for that colour that they make use of for the strengthning of their exception against our instance, that Moses records the Patriarchs keeping of the other nine Commandements: It were enough that we have said already, that we have the like evidences in the books of Ioshua, Objection. Iudges, &c. of those holy mens keeping of the other nine Commandements. We have re­cords of the Pa­triarchs keep­ing the other nine Comman­dements. But to give a fuller answer, I conceive they will not say, that in the book of Genesis, there be in­stances of the Patriarchs observing of every duty required and prescribed in those Nine Commandements, Answer. but will name us some du­ties only which they performed in obedience to every one of them. Not of all the duties of all those nine. 4. And we have records of the Patriarchs pub­like worship. And we say that we finde instances of the Patriarchs observing of the Fourth Commandement, for we read that they worshipped God publikely, Gen. 4.26. chap. 12.8. (which that phrase of calling upon [Page 245]the name of the Lord implies, as I conceive they themselves will not deny.) And I am sure they acknowledge that publike worship is a duty of the Sabbath. But hereunto they will reply, that the performing of this publike wor­ship proves not the observation of the Sabbath, or seventh day for that worship. To which we answer: that using of publike worship necessa­rily supposeth a time, a fit time, and a time of Rest for that worship, for so much themselves acknowledg to be of the Law of Nature, And it is pro­bable on the seventh day. Adde hereunto what is recorded of the sending out of Noahs dove just at the distance of seven daies, Gen. 8.10, 12. Surely this could not be done casually that they should accidentally light just upon the distance of seven daies, so many times together: If then it were done purposely, why was that number chosen above all others? was there any mysterious holinesse in that number? If conjectures might take place, we might with great probability con­ceive that Noah and his children had upon those daies dedicated to his worship been suing for peace, and sent out to see whether there might be any tydings of a comfortable answer to their prayers. These I confesse are no infal­libly-concluding arguments to prove the Pa­triarchs observation of the Sabbath, or seventh day, but seeing it is possible, nay more, very probable, that Moses in this relation points at some such thing, it is enough to overthrow the opposites conclusion which must be this; [Page 246]That it is certaine that Moses makes no menti­on of the Patriarchs observation of the seventh or Sabbath day.

Secondly, 15 we answer that the place, Exod. 16.23. 2. It appeares Exod. 16.23. that the Sab­bath was known before the Law was given. proves evidently that the observation of the Sabbath was a thing sufficiently known to the children of Israel before the Law was delivered unto them upon Mount Sinai. For when the Elders of Jsrael wondering that the people had gathered twise so much Manna on the sixth day, as they had done each of the five daies going before, come to Moses to en­quire of him what the reason of that strange e­vent might be, ver. 22. he answers them pre­sently, To morrow is the holy Sabbath of the Lord, &c. which is all one as if he had said (as he doth afterwards in expresse termes, ver. 29.) that the Lord gave them on the sixth day a suf­ficient portion of bread for two daies, that no man might breake the rest of the Sabbath, by going out to gather food upon that day. In that place you see Moses speaks of the Sabbath as of a thing which the children of Israel well knew beforehand, (or else he had spoken Parables to them in naming a day, and referring the in­to an Ordinance of which they had never heard before) yea neither the Elders nor any of the people so much as enquire of Moses, what he meant by that name of a Sabbath, as they would have done, if the name had been new unto them, but depart satisfied with Moses his answer, without any farther scruple or en­quiry. [Page 247]Besides, the Lord by Moses rebuking those that contrary to Gods Commandement went out to seek food on the Sabbath day, expresseth himselfe to them in this manner: How long will ye refuse to keep my Comman­dements, and my Laws? implying that this was a continued breach of the Sabbath, as well as of other Laws of God. By all those circum­stances laid together, and duely weighed, it will appeare that the observation of the Rest of the Sabbath, was well known to the Church of God, by a long continued Law, delivered from hand to hand to posterity, although in pro­cesse of time, much disused and neglected by men in the course of their practise, especially in the Aegyptian bondage.

To elude the force of this Argument, Objection. 16 The Sabbath was not institu­ted till Exod. 16. And upon oc­casion of a double miracle. 1. The giving of a double portion of Manna on the sixt day. 2. And preser­ving it un­corrupted till the next day. there are that affirme that Moses, Exod. 16. menti­ons not the Sabbath as a thing formerly known, but delivers it at that time as a new Ordinance from God himselfe, instituted by him by occasion of giving them a double por­tion of Manna upon the sixth day, and con­sequently, being a Commandement then first given, it was impossible to be known before. Thus they make this declaration of Moses, Exod. 16.23. to be the first institution of the Sabbath, whereunto (they say) God prepares the people by a double miracle. The First, the giving a double portion of Manna on the sixth day: The Second, the preserving of that Manna, which was left on the sixth day, un­corrupted, [Page 248]that it might serve them for food on the seventh day, whereas upon other daies that which was reserved and kept till the next morning stanck, and was full of wormes, Exod. 16.20. And besides the words [To morrow shall be the Sabbath] carry the forme of an institu­tion. And that it may carry the full form of an Institution, they render that clause, ver. 23. not as we doe, To morrow is the Sabbath of the Lord, but as it best suites with their owne purpose, To morrow shall be the Sabbath of the Lord, that the whole sentence joyned together in this form, [This is that which the Lord hath said, to morrow shall be the Rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord] may carry with it the compleat forme of an Insti­tution.

To begin, Answer. 17 first, with the double miracle; the for­mer of them which was the giving of a double portion of Manna on the sixth day, 1. The first mi­racle 1. Perhaps was none at all. may be questioned, whether it were a miracle or no, it is out of question that the stinting of the ga­thering of Manna upon the other daies, was by the melting of it through the heate of the Sun, ver. 21. Now if it were longer before the heate of the Sunne did breake out upon the sixth day, and by that meanes they had more time for the gathering of their Manna upon that day then they had upon other dayes, what miracle was that, that the same persons in a longer time gathered twise so much, as they had done in a shorter time before? 2. If it were, it honoured the sixth day, not the seventh. Besides, if it should be esteemed a miracle, it honoured the sixth day on which it happened, and not the seventh [Page 249]day which succeeded it. 2. The second was certainly no miracle at all. The second pretended miracle was questionlesse none at all. For Man­na being so pure a food might easily without a miracle be kept uncorrupted a day and an halfe, as our ordinary provisions are preserved much longer without any corruption at all. Nay rather the corrupting of that food so sud­denly-upon other daies, that being sweet at night it should not only stinck, but be full of wormes too by the next morning, seemes, if any thing to be miraculous.

As for the formality of the words of this pretended institution, 18 which they make out of them by translating them according to their own phantasie. First, the Originall no more fa­vours their interpretation then ours; 3. The words in the Originall are only [to morrow the Sabbath] with­out [is, or, shall be.] the words translated exactly are these; To morrow the Sabbath of the Lord, without is, or shall be. Secondly, the context, if it be well examined, seemes rather to favour our, then their inter­pretation: neither can it be proved, that there lies any command at all in that clause, which they take for the institution, And are a rea­son, not acom­mand. which seems more probably to be a reason of the command it selfe. It is true, the clause prefixed, gives no­tice of a command to follow, but of what Commandement? Not of any command ex­pressed in the clause immediately following, but of that which comes after: Bake that which ye will bake, &c. Which is indeed an expresse command, & seems to be the only direction gi­ven by Moses from God to the Elders, the for­mer [Page 250]words expressing only the reason of that which they enquired after, why God had given them a double portion of Manna on the sixth day. Namely, because he would not have the Rest of the holy Sabbath, violated by gathering of Manna upon the seventh day.

To examin things somewhat more distinctly. 19 First, we have instructions given by God unto Moses, and appointed to be delivered by him unto the people, containing a promise of giving them Quailes and Manna, and of Manna a double portion on the sixth day, Reasons why those words. Exod. 16.23. can be no in­stitution of the Sabbath. that they might not be put to the labour of gathering any upon the seventh day, and withall a directi­on to prepare that overplus which they should gather, that it might serve for provision for the day following; but in these instructions which God gives to Moses, there is not a word of the Sabbath, 1. God menti­ons not the Sabbath in his directions to Moses. but only upon the by. Againe, in Moses his directions which he gives unto the people from God, all that he commands them is concerning Manna, the Sabbath is menti­oned only occasionally. If God had minded to give this charge to Moses to deliver this Law for the observation thereof to his people, he would not have given him such exact rules concerning the use of Manna, and passed o­ver the Sabbath almost in silence. But it ap­peares plainly that only the direction of God concerning Manna, and the use thereof, was that new Commandement which he was to de­liver to the people, and therefore is fully and [Page 251]cleerely expressed, whereas the Sabbath as be­ing mentioned by him occasionally is passed o­ver in few words.

Again, 20 for three reasons we cannot con­ceive that in this Exod. 16. there is any insti­tution of the Sabbath at all. For, first, 2. There hap­pened at that time no me­morable event to ground an institution. here is no ground of instituting a festivall day, seeing that must needs be some memorable event which dignifies that day, that is to be conse­crated above other days, which is a rule which God and the Church, and even heathen men by the light of nature guided themselves by. Secondly, here is no convocation of the people, 3. The people are not conve­ned as they ought to have been to receive this law. who ought to have been assembled to hear that law that they must all obey, as they were not only Exod. 20. when God himself delivered them the morall law upon mount Sinai, but also when Moses his servant delivers unto them from God the Ceremoniall and Judiciall Laws, Exod. 34.32. & 35.1. whereas here we find only a meeting of the Elders, But only the Elders, and that occasionally only. and that too occasionally, not by the call of Moses, but their voluntary recourse to him, to enquire the reason why the people had gathered a double portion of Manna on the sixth day, and what should be done with it. Thirdly, 4. Here is no direction for the observation of this new feast. here is no direction for the observation of this new feast, and without it the law is not only im­perfect, but in effect no law at all: Whereas there is a full direction for the use of their double portion of Manna, which makes it e­vident that the ordering of their Manna must [Page 252]needs be the only charge which the Lord sent by Moses to the people.

Others therefore there are who go not so far as to plead for the institution of the Sab­bath in this Exod. 16. Objection. 21 Though the words amoun­ted to an insti­tution, yet they are a prepara­tion to a follo­wing institu­tion. but will have these words of Moses to be only in the nature of a preparation to an institution which was to follow. To this also we answer; First, that this opinion is pressed with the same difficul­ties that the former is, if things be duly weigh­ed. Answer. 1. The same reasons are against that too. 2. There is no like instance in giving any o­ther law. 3. What needs it? 4. Why is this ground omit­ted in the fourth Com­mandement? Secondly, let them but give us one instance of any such kind of preparation used before the giving of any other law. Thirdly, let them shew us what need there is of any such prepa­ration at all, when the people were almost im­mediately after to be prepared in so solemn a manner for the receiving of that and the rest of the laws. Lastly, if the giving of a double portion of Manna on the sixth day, or the ceasing of Manna on the seventh, were such great means to win credit to this new Sab­bath, how is it that neither the one nor other is so much as once mentioned in that whole fourth Commandement wherein notwithstan­ding, is so fully and largely laid down the ground of the institution of that law, especi­ally, this mercy being so new and fresh in me­mory, whereas God in the fourth Commande­ment goes back to the beginning of the world to seek out another and firmer foundation of instituting the Sabbath, without mentioning of this at all. Thus when all circumstances are [Page 253]duly weighed, it will easily appear to any not forestalled by prejudice, that in this Exod. 16. Moses speaks of the Sabbath to the Elders of Israël, Whence it ap­pears that Mo­ses mentions the Sabbath to the Elders, Exod. 16.23. as a thing known. as of a thing well known unto them before-hand, and by consequent which the Jewes were wel-acquainted with before the Law was given to Moses on mount Sinai, whereupon it must needs follow, that they re­ceived it from the Patriarchs, delivered from hand to hand as other truths and laws of God were, and consequently by that the Patriarchs in their generations observed the Sabbath, al­though their observation thereof be not left upon record by Moses, whose task was not to write a diary of the Fathers lives, but to leave to posterity the remembrance of the most me­morable examples both of their actions, and of the events that befell them, both for Gods ho­nour and our instruction.

SECT. III. The morality and perpetuity of the Sabbath pro­ved out of the fourth Commandement.

IF this principle (which will at last appear to be an undoubted truth) were generally re­ceived and acknowledged, that the whole De­calogue is morall, and consequently immu­table; this question concerning the morality of the Sabbath were at an end. Now the gene­rall opinion wherewith most men are posses­sed [Page 254](but without any firm ground, either out of reason, or Scripture) that it must needs be granted, that there is something ceremoniall in the fourth Commandement, either the set day, or the strict rest of the Sabbath, or both, hath been a great occasion of begetting and che­rishing this errour, that there is something mutable in the Decalogue, and consequently that it is neither morall nor perpetuall. If therefore upon a due and thorough examina­tion of all the severall clauses and expressions which we meet with in the fourth Comman­dement, we can make it appear that there is nothing in that fourth Commandement that is any way ceremoniall, and therefore mu­table; we shall remove a great scruple which hath long troubled the minds of many men, divers of them much esteemed both for their learning and piety.

Before we begin to take this task in hand, 2 it will be needfull to premise this one thing by way of caution, That in this case we are not bound to prove that the phrases and expres­sions which we meet withall in this Comman­dement, The words of of the fourth Commande­ment in a fair construction enjoyn no­thing ceremo­niall neither in the day nor rest: can have no other sense then that in which we take them. It will be sufficient for us to make it appear that according to the u­suall course of grammaticall construction, and without any incoherence or incongruity with other parts of the law, they may be taken in such a sense as we give them. For if we can but make this appear, that our construction of [Page 255]the words is as fair and proper as any other that is given by others, the consequent of esta­blishing the immutability of the Decalogue is of that weight, that I conceive any man of two probable interpretations will be willing to embrace that which most makes for the esta­blishing of the morall law. Which is as much as needs to be proved. It must therefore be our care to make it appear that the sense, which we give of the words of this law, may stand according to a fair and usuall manner of grammaticall construction, and those that will oppose us, must prove on the other side that it cannot stand.

That we may proceed methodically in the interpretation of the Commandement, 3 we must, first, enquire what the scope is at which it aimes. The appoin­ting of a day of rest cannot be the scope of the fourth Commande­ment. For all Laws being rules directed to some end proposed, cannot so well be inter­preted any way, as by the end unto which they are directed. Now the appointing of a day of rest, cannot possibly be the last scope of this Commandement, seeing we know rest from la­bour is enjoyned to give us freedome for holy duties, and the exercising of our selves therein, But of rest for holy duties, which consequently must be the principall thing intended in the fourth Commandement. But then it will be questioned, to what kind of holy duties this day is consecrated. For there are many that imagine that God hath set it a­part only for duties of publike worship. Publick and private. But this opinion seemes not to agree with the let­ter of the Law, which in expresse tearms gives [Page 256]the whole day unto the Lord, for his own im­mediate service in religious worship. Now we know publike worship takes not up the whole day. It must needs be granted therefore, the Lord appointed that day of holy rest for the performance of something more unto God then publike worship, and so much is expresly affirmed, Isa. 58.13. where we are forbidden to find our own pleasure, or speak our own words upon that day, which, as all men must acknowledge, must needs extend to the order­ing of our carriage in private, as well as in publike, so that the setting apart of a whole day of rest unto God, for his publike, and pri­vate worship, seemes to be the full scope of this fourth Commandement.

Next to the scope of this Law, 4 3 Parts of the fourth Com­mandement, the 1. Summe. 2. Explication. 3. Reason. we are to consider advisedly the frame and composure of it, and therein we are first to take notice of the principall parts of the Law, which we shall find to be three. First, we have laid down unto us the summe of the Law, Exod. 20.8: Secondly, we have the explication of that sum, ver. 9. Thirdly, we have the reason of all, v. 11. Each of these two first parts containe three heads of duties pointed out in the summe, and opened and unfolded in the explication, and confirmed in the reason of the Law. The first duty is Preparation, intimated in the word Re­member: The second, the Sequestration from ordinary employments, implied in the word Sabbath. The third is, Sanctification of that [Page 257]rest, expressed in the phrase, to keepe it holy. All these are explained in their order. Our Preparation must be by the dispatch of all our Secular affaires in six daies: Our rest must be a cessation by all persons from our usuall la­bours and imployments in secular affaires. The Sanctification of our rest, must be by employ­ing our selves in holy duties. The confirmation of all follows in the reason of the Law; of Pre­paration and rest from Gods own Act of Cre­ating the world in sixe daies, and ceasing from his work on the seventh, and the Sanctifying of that rest from Gods Commandement, and ordaining the seventh day to be a day of rest unto us for ever. Now wherein the strength of that Confirmation lies, will be the maine point in question, of which hereafter.

To come now to the Explication of the words and phrases in this Commandement. 5 The first word in the summe of this Law, Re­member, is diversly interpreted, some conceive that it implies the importance of the duty commanded, as that word is used many times to intimate some matter of speciall observa­tion, as Deut. 9.7. Others there are that think it points at the Antiquity of that Law, given ma­ny ages before, and therefore to be called a­fresh to minde, as the Psalmist saith, he will re­member the works of the Lord, his wonders of old, Psal. 177.11. and 143.5. and withall some conceive that he taxeth the peoples forgetful­nesse of that Law, and neglect of the observa­tion [Page 258]of it in the time of their bondage in Ae­gypt. Some or all of these senses may be im­plied in this word Remember, but beyond all these we may probably conceive that it may import. Remember im­plies [Think upon, and by dispatching of thy busines, provide for the Sabbath] Think upon, and accordingly before­hand provide for the observation of this holy rest by dispatching of all the works of thy cal­ling, that nothing may be undone, which pro­vidence and diligence might prevent, that might hinder thy rest on the seventh day. As for those which conceive that in this Law la­bour upon the sixe daies is commanded, as well as rest upon the seventh, they are much mista­ken. The precept for labour is delivered in the eight Commandement, as the Apostle inter­prets that Law, Eph. 4.28. In this place is com­manded the dispatch of our secular affaires be­fore the Sabbath, whether it be done in six daies or fewer it is not materiall, as to this Law.

The next tearme to be explained, 6 Sabbath is a day of rest, which only, and not seventh, is ex­pressed in sum and conclusion of the Com­mandement. is the name of the Sabbath or day of rest, and easing from labour, (as that word properly signifies) which is repeated againe in the conclusion of the Commandement. And it is not to be passed by without observation, that whereas the old Sabbath from the beginning till Christ came was the seventh day, or last of the weeke, and both in the explanation, and reason of the Commandement is appointed to be one of the seven, yet God mentions not the name of seven either in the Summe or in the Conclusion of the Commandement. We have therefore [Page 259]reason to conceive that seeing God in this Law was to prescribe something of the Law of Na­ture, The day of rest being of the law of nature, & the set day of positive insti­tution. which is the appointing of a day of holy Rest to be consecrated unto God for his wor­ship, which the very light of nature teacheth, and in the explanation and reason of the Law, to adde something which is of positive Institu­tion, namely, the proportion of the time, and the set day wherein this rest was to be obser­ved, he first settles that which is of the Law of nature, and afterwards establisheth that which is Positive. God purposely makes choise of such fit expressions (especially in his Law, in which he is most exact) as may best acquaint us with his minde. Wherefore seeing this is a fit Method to be observed by him, and seeing the composure of this Law agrees with it, we have reason to conclude that the Lord himselfe intended it in this place.

The last phrase in the sum of this Commande­ment remains, which is, To keep it holy. 7 To keep holy, is to employ the day in holy duties of Gods immediate worship. Now to keep a day holy, is to employ it in holy a­ctions, directed to the immediate service and worship of God in the use of such ordinances as he hath left unto his Church, and to passe our time therein in holy speeches and medita­tions. Actions may be holy, either in the man­ner of doing them, as when we performe du­ties either to God or men in obedience to Gods will, in a reverend and holy fear of his name, in thankfulnesse for mercies received, and for the advancement of his glory, which [Page 260]ought to be our maine scope in all things, 1 Cor. 10.31. And so we are redeemed out of the hands of our enemies, that we might serve him in holinesse all the daies of our lives: as Zachary tels us, Luke 1.75. which reacheth to all our ways and actions. Or else actions are holy besides in the matter or subject of them, In meditations, conferences, prayer, hearing, reading, &c. as divine meditations, conferences, prayers, reading, or hearing Gods word &c. These du­ties or the most part of them must have a place in our daily employments, but must be so our whole work upon the Sabbath day, as the works of our ordinary callings ought to be on the other six days.

This then is the brief sum of the law: 8 after which there follows a larger explication there­of, describing more fully and cleerly what God means by that day which he calls the Sabbath, what manner of rest it must be, and within what compasse and revolution of time it must be observed; In the explica­tion is assigned the proportion of time for this rest, a day of seven. namely, that it must be one day in seven, or one day in every weeke. And in the li­miting and assigning of that proportion of time, that he may shew unto us at once, not only the meaning, but also the equity of this Law, he makes a distribution of the week into seven parts, whereof he allowes unto us sixe for our ordinary labours and employments in our severall callings, and contents himselfe with the seventh day only, which he appoints to be a day of holy rest for his owne immedi­ate worship, which is notwithstanding not a [Page 261]day lost unto us, but indeed a day of bles­sings, a day of thriving in grace, and a day of enjoying an holy Communion with our God, and rejoycing in him; a day of enjoying hea­ven upon earth, if it be observed as it ought to be.

To take up the words themselves in order as they lie before us, 9 Sixe daies al­lowed for la­bour, whether the sixe first, or last, is not expressed. it followes [sixe daies shalt thou labour,] which sixe daies those daies of la­bour shall be he expresseth not, whether the sixe first, or the sixe last, but speaking indefi­nitely he leaves the words to be understood in­definitely: Questionlesse the maine thing that he prescribes in this explication is the propor­tion of time to be set apart for this holy rest, the order to be observed therein he sets down afterwards, in the reason of the Commande­ment, wherein he leaves a rule to direct us which of the seven daies we are to set apart for this holy rest: But in this explication the chie­fest thing that God sets before us is the equity of reserving this proportion of time, that is, In this propor­tion of time the equity of the Law ap­peares. one day of seven, for his own worship, which will be sufficient for that use, and yet lea ves suffi­cient time for the dispatch of our own affaires. Day here is a naturall day, such as the o­ther sixe are. By a Day he means a naturall day consisting of foure and twenty houres, which is the seventh part of the week. Shalt, is as much as Maiest, a word rather of permission then command; God in this place having no purpose to order any thing concerning our secular affaires far­ther, then they have relation to his own wor­ships [Page 262]and to the making way for the better observation of this holy day of rest.

It follows, 10 And doe all thy work, in which, if in any clause of this Law, Doe all thy work, is, dis­patch thy work that thou maist be free to keep the Sabbath. lies the force of a command, but that command is not so much to require us to labour, as by labour to dis­patch all the businesse of our secular employ­ments, leaving no needfull thing undone, that by care and diligence might have been fini­shed in the sixe daies precedent, the neglect whereof might be an occasion of violating the rest of the Sabbath. Our works are the works of our secular cal­lings, excluding businesses which our cal­lings lay not upon us. By all our work he meanes all the work that our particular callings lay up­on us, in which God hath placed us, and which alone are properly called our own works. So that by this clause he excludes all businesse that cannot properly be called our own, as not imposed on us by God in the callings assigned us by him, and by consequent prohibits in­termedling with unnecessary businesse, Three things layed before us in this expli­cation. 1 A command to dispatch our works. 2 A promise implied that we shall be able to do it. 3. The mani­festation of the equity of this Law. and overlading our selves with many employments which may be more then sixe daies labour can dispatch. So that in this clause we have three things laid before us. First, a direction or com­mand expressed to dispatch our works in sixe daies: Secondly, we have a promise implied, that by Gods prospering hand assisting us we shall be able to compasse our works; for he saith we shall doe, &c. a word that includes a pro­mise, as well as it expresseth a command. Thirdly, we have Gods equity in the com­mand, who requires no more time of us, then we may spare without prejudice,

God then having allowed us a sufficient proportion of time for our own employments, 11 in the next place takes order for his own wor­ship, in the words following. But the seventh day, &c. Seventh is an ordinate num­ber signitying one of seven. Now the word Seventh being indeed an ordinate number, may either signifie one in seven. and so note out only the proportion of time which God reserves to himselfe, (as the tenth part of an Ephah, Exod. 16.16. and the third part of an Hin, Numb. 15.6, 7. signifie no more but such a proportion of either measure.) Or it may note the seventh in order, (as when David is named the seventh Son of Jesse, 1 Chro. 2.15. we are to understand the last & youngest of seven) & in this sense our opposites generally take it in this place; but in whether of the sen­ses it must be taken here, we are now to exa­mine, the determination of this point being of great importance to guide us aright in the in­terpretation of this Commandement. 12 Objection 1

Those who take Seventh in this place, Ha prefixed before Seventh notes a parti­cular day. for the seventh in order, or the last of seven, strengthen their opinion with a double reason. First, (say they) here is Ha Notificative, prefixed before Shebigni, Answer. of purpose to point out a particu­lar day, Ha doth not alwaies notifie. 2. Where it doth, it points out things by their eminency as well as by their particu­larity. of purpose to point out a particu­lar day, as that particule usuall restraines an in­definite signification to a particular. To this we answer. First, though this particle ha doe often notifie or put an Emphasis to the word to which it is prefixed, yet very often it hath no notification nor Emphasis at all. Secondly, when it does notifie it notes out things by their emi­nency [Page 264]as well as by their particularity: as if we should translate it in English, That seventh day; why may it not signifie that eminent Se­venth day, Objection 2 as well as that particular seventh day? Ha added to a Numerall notes alwaies a particular. Yea, (they replie) but Ha added to a Numerall notes alwaies a particular of that number. We answer, divers instances may be given to the contrary where ha prefixed to a Numerall notes nothing at all. Answer. Not alwaies▪ Instances to the contrary. The foure branches of the River of Paradise, are recko­ned up by the names of, first, second, third, and fourth, Gen. 2.11.13, 14. where ha is prefixed to them all, yet signifies indefinitely with­out Emphasis, or respect to order. The Pillars in the Temple, Jachim, and Boaz, are numbred the first, and second, 1 King 7.16. and have ha prefixed, yet signifie no more but one, and the other, without reference to order. Iosephs brethren answer him concerning themselves and their brethren, One is not; the particle ba, which is prefixed notes not which of their brethren, whether eldest, or second, or sixth, or eleventh it was that was not. But suppose ha, Objection. 13 in this place notifies a particular, why may it not note a partibular in proportion as well as in order? Seventh in the reason of the Commande­ment implies seventh in or­der, therefore it is so to be un­derstood here.

The Second reason, which they bring to prove that Seventh in this place, must necessa­rily signifie seventh in order, or the last of seven, is this. The same seventh day, (say they) must be meant in this place in the explication of the Commandement, which is meant afterwards [Page 265]in the confirmation of it. But in that confirma­tion the seventh day mentioned is the last of seven, therefore it must be so taken here. Answer. To this we answer, It will appeare when we come to the reason that it is not so taken there. that admitting that the tearme seventh is so taken in the next verse, that proves not that it is so to be taken here, unlesse it be manifest withall that the force of the reason of the Commandement lies in the taking of the tearme Seventh in that sense; which will ap­peare to be otherwise, for we shall shew that the strength of the confirmation of the argu­ment lies in the tearme Seventh taken indefi­nitely, not taken particularly, that is, for se­venth in proportion, not for seventh in order.

All words and phrases used in Arguments are not argumentative, 14 All tearms in an argument, are not [...]rgu­menttaive. some of them serve only to fill up the sense, but prove nothing at all. As for example, Moses, Deut. 4.15, 16. to dis­swade the people from making any resem­blance of God, reasons in this manner. Some are ad­ded to fill up the sense only, and have no force of rea­son in them. You saw no manner of similitude when the Lord spake unto you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire, take heed therefore lest you corrupt your selves. In this argument the naming of the place where, and the fire in which God appea­red to his people, only fill up the narration, the whole force of the argument lies in this, that because they saw no similitude, therefore they should make none: So it is in Gods mentioning his Rest on the seventh day. In this Cōmandement which we have before us, Gods manifesting of the perfecting of the worlds Creation by his resting on the seventh day, could not be clearly expres­sed [Page 266]without mentioning the day in which he rested, which was indeed the seventh day from the Creation, but the Lord proves nothing from the order but from the proportion of the time wherein he rested. In arguing, the tearms of the proporsion to be proved, must (where there is any Ambiguity) interpret the tearmes of the argument, because the argu­ment is brought for the proporsition to be proved, not the proposition for the argument. The proposition to be proved then being that one day in seven must be consecrated unto God, and the arguments brought to prove it, being taken from Gods resting one day in seven: although that happened to be the last of the seven daies, yet the proportion of the time of rest, being the only thing intended to be proved, is the only thing to be respected both in the argument, and in the tearms where­in it is expressed. So then hitherto we see no reason why the tearme Seventh in the explica­tion of the Commandement may not be taken indefinitely for one in seven, as well as particu­larly and strictly for the last in seven.

Yea, 15 if all circumstances be duly weighed, the taking of the tearme Seventh indefinitely best sutes with the principall scope which God aimes at in this Law, and with the coherence of the Text. The strongest of those arguments which evince this truth it will be most conveni­ent to forbeare till hereafter. In the meane time we may take notice of this by the way, [Page 267]that the very clause precedent to these words directs us to take the tearme Seventh in this place indefinitely, The allowing of sixe daies for labour in­definitely di­rects to take the seventh indefinitely. as pointing only at the pro­portion, and not all at the order of the time, wherein we are to rest. First, this is evident and unquestionable, that God dividing the whole week into seven parts, allowes unto us sixe daies for the dispatch of our businesse in our secular affaires, and reserves the seventh for himselfe for his own worship. In the next place it is as cleare, that as the sixe daies allow­ed for labour are to be taken, so we must take the seventh which is set apart for this holy Rest. Now that these sixe daies allowed unto us for our labour are to be taken indefinitely, and to be respected only according to the propor­tion of the time, I conceive no man with any colour of reason can deny, seeing the maine thing that God insists on, and labours to cleare unto us, is, that sixe daies are sufficient for the dispatch of our secular affaires. Now if the pro­portion of time be all that God respects in the sixe daies of labour, then the proportion of time must needs be all that God can intend in the seventh day, which he sets apart for a day of rest.

The next clause in the Law followes, 16 Is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, that is, Sabbath of the Lord thy God; that is, conse­crated, and de­dicated to him. a day of holy rest consecrated to the Lord thy God. Now things are said to be Gods for the pecu­liar interest that he hath in them, whether by Creation, as Psal. 100.3. He made us, and there­fore [Page 268]wee are his people; By redemption or purchase, so the children of Israel God chal­lengeth to be his own, because he had bought them, Isa. 43.1. By deputation or designation, as Christ is called Gods king, Psal. 2.6. and David a Type of Christ, Psal. 89.19, 20. Or by advancing or honouring, so a day may be cal­led Gods, because he hath advanced or honou­red it above other daies, Psal. 118.24. Or lastly, by consecration and dedication to God; so the Priests are the Lords, Levit. 20.26. the tythes, vessels, &c. the Lords, for his service. Now in both these latter respects, the day of holy rest is the Lords day, as he calls it, his Sabbath, Exod. 31.13. Both because his works have advanced that above any other day; and besides, because upon that ground it is conse­crated to him and set apart for his service. To restrain men from violating of the holy rest of the Sabbath, it is sufficient that it is the Lords, but to make a deeper impression of it upon mens hearts, he thought fit to adde, The Lord thy God, a dreadfull name to his people, Deut. 28.58.

This foundation being laid, 17 that the Sab­bath is the Lords, No manner of works, that is, of thy calling, not excluding, he hath a sufficient ground to take upon him to dispose of it, and there­fore in the next ensuing clause, strictly enjoyns, In it thou shalt do no manner of worke, he means none of the works mentioned before, properly called our own works, 1. Works about Gods service. or works of our particu­lar callings. As for works about Gods service, [Page 269]such as were those about the service of the Ta­bernacle, justified by our Saviour, Mat. 12.5. Works of necessity for the creatures preserva­tion, which also Christ allows, Mat. 12.11. 2. Works of necessity. (from which also God himself ceaseth not, Joh. 5.17.) Works of mercy, 3. Works of mercy. though not of ab­solute necessity, such as was the restoring of the mans withered hand, Matth. 12.12, 13. yea though it be to our selves, vers. 7. they are not to be accounted among the works forbidden upon this day. If there were any stricter rest then this enjoyned the Jews, (which perhaps will not so easily be proved) it is not required by any restraint in this Commandement, and therefore not exacted upon us Christians. As for the forbidding of the kindling of a fire, and dressing of meat, Exod. 16.5.13. & 35.3. they were inhibitions which determined (as it is most probable) with the Israelites peregrina­tion in the wildernesse, and laid upon them by other laws; so that hitherto we meet with no­thing ceremoniall in this fourth law.

The last main branch of this law is the rea­son or confirmation of it. 18 No reason an­nexed to any law but only to this fourth Comman­dement. But before we un­dertake the opening of the phrases and tearms in which it is penned, we cannot but take no­tice of one thing by the way, that we find no reason annexed to any other Commandement of the Decalogue but to this alone. We find in­deed some Sanctions annexed to the second, third, and fift Commandements, but none save this fourth is confirmed by a reason. The cause [Page 270]hereof can be no other but this, because where­as the duties commanded in other laws are ei­ther laws of nature, or at least approvable by naturall reason as soon as they are delivered, Because the grounds of o­ther laws are e­vident in them­selves, but the ground of this law could not be known un­less it had been revealed. because the grounds upon which those lawes are founded, are evident in themselves; the grounds of this fourth Commandement could not have been known, unlesse they had been revealed by God himself. Indeed that God must be publikely worshipped, That a set time must be appointed, and that it must be a time of rest from private employments, are dictates of naturall reason. But why we must observe a weekly Sabbath and not a monthly, and why the seventh or first day of the week rather then the third or fourth, no man could have found out the reason unlesse God had revealed unto us the Creation of the world in six daies and his resting upon the seventh, by the conside­ration whereof the equity of this law clearly and manifestly appears, and upon the mani­festation thereof is as easily approved and as­sented unto even by the light of naturall rea­son.

So then the reason alledged in this Com­mandement shews us not why God ordained a Sabbath, 19 (which the very light of nature taught even the very heathen, as we know) but why he commands a weekly Sabbath, and why upon such a day of the week rather then upon any other. That therefore which we are to search after in the examining of this rea­son, [Page 271]is, how the equity of these two particulars is discovered therein, that we may acknow­ledge this Commandement also to be just and good, as S. Paul speaks of all the rest. Rom. 7.12. yea equall and right concerning all things, as the Prophet David speaks, Psal. 119.128. and thereupon submit unto it, not by con­straint, but by a willing mind, 1 Pet. 5.2. Now concerning the former of those two particu­lars, why God allots out such a proportion of time, as one day weekly for his Sabbath, we have already in a great part discovered the e­quity thereof in the explication of this law, wherein it appears that so much time may be spared, without prejudice to our particular callings, which if it should be denied, God makes farther manifest by this reason annexed, which we have before us.

To make it appear that six daies in the week are sufficient for the dispatch of our secular af­fairs, one ground must be supposed, 20 Why we may spare one day of seven for this holy rest. which is unquestionable, that mens labours about the things of this world, are onely for the conser­vation of the creatures, and fitting of them for mans use. That ground being laid, this reason for the strengthning of our faith laies before us the example of God himself, who created the world and all things therein in six daies: from whence we may strongly reason, that he that without the help of mans labour, created the world in six daies, can easily by mans labour of six daies support and conserve the world. [Page 272]If it be questioned whether he will do it; reason will easily conclude, that the same goodnesse that moved God to give a being to things that were not, will much more move him to conserve and provide for the things that are, being all the work of his own hand, seeing we know him to be a faithfull Creator, as the Apostle calls him, 1 Pet. 4.19. Where­fore we find that the godly for the strength­ning of their faith, and dependence on God upon any incident occasion, usually have re­course to the creation of the world, as the means to assure themselves of his protection, or supply in any thing that they need, as Psal. 119.73. Jer. 14.22. unto which God himself directs us, Isa. 45.11, 12. Our help stands in the name of the Lord which hath made heaven and earth, Psal. 121.2.

The Lord having made it appear that the consecrating of a day weekly unto God for his worship, 21 will be no prejudice to our secular affairs, Why we must observe such a particular day. gives us next a reason, why he makes choice of the seventh day rather then any o­ther to be this day of holy rest, even because himself rested from all his works of creation upon that day. Now that this rest of God is the ground of appointing this to be the day of rest, all men acknowledge, but how the reason must be drawn out from this ground, and wherein the force of it consists, is all the que­stion: For whereas in Gods rest there is a double consideration, the one of the act it self [Page 273]simply, the very resting of God from his work, the second of the consequent of it, If we draw the reason from Gods act of re­sting, it must be the seventh day. If from the ho­nouring of that day thereby, it enforceth the observation of the first day as well as of the seventh. the advan­cing and honouring of that day above other daies thereby: If we draw the reason of the instituting of this day from Gods simple act, it necessarily inforceth the observation of that very seventh day from the creation after Gods example: But if we draw it from the conse­quent of his rest, the advancing and honouring of that day thereby, it binds us as well to the observation of the first day of the week now, as it did the Jews to the observation of the seventh day heretofore.

Those that oppose the morality of the Sab­bath, 22 labour to draw the reason which is laid down in this fourth Commandement, for the observing of this day of rest, Wee cannot make Gods act of resting the ground of in­stituting the Sabbath. from Gods bare act of resting himself upon that day: which if they do, they must form their argument in this manner, That day in which God himself rested from his works, he appointed to be a day of mens resting from their works: but that was the seventh or last day of the week: therefore God ordained that to be the day on which men should rest from their works. Now a­gainst the argument framed in this manner there lie two main exceptions; 1. Gods ex­ample is not the ground of any Comman­dement. the first of them is, the example of God neither is, nor can be any warrant to us to do the like, nei­ther do we ever find it proposed unto us as a rule which we must follow. This is true, that Gods or Christs examples are are set before us [Page 274]sometimes as incitements to stir us up to the performance of such duties as are required of us by the law, as Luke 6.36. Be mercifull as your heavenly father is mercifull, and Phil. 2.5. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ: but we never find any act of Gods or of Christs proposed unto us as a rule to teach us what we should do. Gods actions declare that it is his will, that it should be done, but when he directs us what he will have us to do, he sends us unto the law and to the testimo­ny, Isa. 8.20. Neither do we ever find that the meer act of God was ever the ground of any law. Although as in this particular case, (and in the institution of some other feasts) some consequent, or something that accompa­nies that act, may be an occasion of an insti­tution.

Perhaps to this some may reply, Objection. 23 that in this fourth Commandement we have, first, a law given in these words, We have the precept first, and then Gods example to en­courage us to observe it. [The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God] and then we have Gods example to stir us up to the pra­ctice of that duty required in that law. To this we answer, that we have a law indeed that commands the observation of an holy day of rest unto God, Answer. We have no precept for the particular day of rest before the reason. and a second branch of that law, which appoints the proportion of the time of that rest, that it shall be one day in the week, but concerning the third branch, (without w ^ch the law it self is not perfect) that is, which day of the week shall be the day of that rest [Page 275]is not expressed (as we have partly already shewed in opening the explication of this Commandement) but only in the reason an­nexed unto this law.

Unlesse therefore it can be proved, 24 that the tearm [seventh] mentioned in the explication of this Commandement, signifies the last day of seven; we have no law precedent to Gods example here mentioned, that commands the observation of the last day of the week for the day of rest. As hath been shewed already that [seventh] in the explica­tion of the Commande­ment notes not the particular day. Now the weaknesse of the reasons alleaged, to prove that this tearm [seventh] used in the explication of this law, signifies the last day of the week, we have shewed already. And by one reason have made it more then probable, that this tearm [seventh] in that place signifies only indefinitely one of seven, and not particularly such a certain day of the seven. The second reason which farther ma­nifests that truth, and makes it evident, And is further proved, because God mentions it not at all in the conclusion of the Com­mandement. we have deferred untill now, and it is this; If God had intended to command that the last day of the week should be observed for the Sabbath, he must and would have mentioned it in the conclusion of that reason by which he shews us the equity of the observation of that day rather then any other. Now he is so far from doing that, that he forbears the mentio­ning of that name of [seventh] in the conclu­sion at all.

That this which we alleage may have the greater sway with us, 25 take speciall notice that [Page 276]the conclusion of this Commandement hath the very same words which we find in the first giving of this law, Gen. 2.3. whether the words themselves were taken out of that history I will not peremptorily define, though it seems most probable. Whereas he precisely names it in the Law given to Adam, Gen. 2. This is cleer, the words in both places are the same in every title else, save on­ly that in stead of the tearm [seventh] in Ge­nesis, God useth the name [Sabbath] in this Law. This questionlesse he doth not without reason (for God neither forgets, nor mistakes, nor speaks unadvisedly, as men do too often:) now what may be the reason why God makes choice of this word [Sabbath] in the conclu­sion of this Commandement? This is evident that by changing the word Seventh into Sab­bath, which is of larger signification, the day of rest is not so precisely tied to the last day of the week in this fourth Commandement, as it is in the Law given to Adam, Gen. 2. why then should we not think that God intended in this law given by Moses, to leave the set day of this holy rest more at large, then he had done in the Commandement given to Adam? 26

Why God might think it fit to do so, And might do, because till Christ came the Creation of the world was Gods greatest work, and fit­test to ground the law of the Sabbath upon. we see manifest reason; for untill the fall of man, there could be no day fitter for the observa­tion of an holy rest unto God then the last day of the week, in which by the rest of God from creating the creation of the world was decla­red to be fully perfected, which was the grea­test work then done, or to be done, if man had [Page 277]not fallen. But now when man was fallen, But mans re­demption by Christ being a greater work, required the altering of the Sabbath to the First day of the week. and therefore to be redeemed and created anew, which was a greater work then his creation at the first, so that a greater work and mercy of God to men was to be remembred, there was in a sort a necessity of changing the day of rest from the last to the first day of the week, on which mans redemption was to be perfected. And consequently it was fit that the law given to man fallen, and to be redeemed, should be so penned in generall tearms, that when this glorious work of mans redemption should be perfected, there might be a change of the day of rest without any change of the law.

A second exception that we take against the drawing of the reason of this fourth Commandement, 27 1. To urge the keeping of the Sabbath from the act of re­sting, shews not the equity of the law. from the example of God resting on the Sabbath day, to bind us there­upon to the observation of the same day, for the day of our rest, is this; A law we know is a rule of equity, and to give a reason of a law is to make it appear to be so. God then in giving this for a reason of this Commande­ment, could have no other aime before him, but by this reason to shew the equity of this law, both in appointing the proportion of time for an holy rest, and in limiting it to such a particular day. Now to draw the reason of our resting from Gods resting, Because Gods condition and ours is not a­like. shews no equi­ty in the law at all. We cannot make good this position, It is equal and just that we should rest because God rested. There is infinite odds [Page 278]between Gods condition and ours. God might rest as long and as often as he pleased, seeing he hath al-sufficienty in himself, and is not sup­ported by labour, as men and their estates are, who if they should cease from their labors too long or too often, must necessarily perish. So that by reasoning in this manner, that we must rest because God rested too, cannot make the equity of this law appear at all.

Seeing therefore the equity of the law can­not be evidenced by reasoning from Gods meer act of resting upon that day; 28 let us now trie whether the other way of deducing the reason of the law from Gods advancing and honouring the seventh day by his resting there­upon, and establishing the rule of our rest thereupon, do not more cleerly manifest the equity of this law in that particular. But drawing the reason from Gods honouring of that day by his rest, the equity of the law is evident. If we draw the reason of the law from the honou­ring of the seventh day, by Gods resting upon that from all his works, we may conceive that he argues in this or that manner. That day which is honoured by God above other daies, by his most eminent works of mercy to man­kind, shall be the day of holy rest, to be con­secrated to him for his worship; but the day in which God ended and perfected the crea­tion of the world, is the day honoured and ad­vanced above all other daies by that wonder­full work, therefore that shall be the day of your holy rest. In this syllogisme the minor or second proposition only is expressed in the [Page 279]words of the law, and that too only in part, for there is no more said, but that God rested that day, not that he honoured that day by his rest, which notwithstanding is necessarily im­plied; for he that saith that Christ rose the first day of the week, must mean as much as if he had said, Christ made the first day of the week honourable & memorable by his resurre­ction on that day. As for the major or first pro­position in this syllogisme, it is a principle ac­knowledged by all men by the light of nature.

It is evident that daies and times in them­selves are all equall, 29 that which advanceth one day above another must be some memorable event that hath happened on that day. Again, that such memorable events ought to be the ground upon which such daies as God hath marked out by them, Laying down a ground upon whcih God in­stituted other feasts. And the Church. and advanced above o­ther daies, ought to be observed above other daies, is as cleer and evident. Wherefore we see that God himselfe hath taken that for his ground of justifying the feasts of Passeover and Pentecost, and in imitation of him the Jews upon the same ground took upon them the observation of the feast of Purim, Hest. 9.21, Yea the very heathens led thereto by the light of nature. 23. Yea the very heathen themselves, as all histories testifie, have alwaies made the daies of their birth, of founding their Cities, of ob­taining memorable victories, and the like to be daies of annuall observance in joy and feasting. So that to consider the day of Gods rest, as a day advanced above other daies, and thereupon [Page 280]to ordain that to be a day of holy rejoycing in God in remembrance of his great and glorious works, is to shew an equity acknowledged by light of nature in the institution of the Sabbath.

Now whereas God both in all his waies, 30 God therefore purposing to shew the equity of this law, could not but set down the reason so as that might best appear: but more especially in his laws, takes speciall care to make it appear unto men that they are all equall and just in all things, (as the Prophet Da­vid acknowledgeth, Psal. 119.128. both for his own honour, and withall to draw us the more cheerfully to obey and serve him) we cannot imagine that he being to give a reason of this law, and having so fair a ground, by which he might manifest the equity thereof e­ven to naturall reason it self, should conceal that, and propose another reason in which the equity of the law could not be manifested at all. Nay farther, whereas God insists so much upon that ground, especially in the institution of the Passeover, Especially see­ing he doth it in ordaining other feasts of lesse impor­tance. Exod. 12.42. it seems very strange that he should against his custome neglect or passe by that ground upon which he instituted other feasts, in the institution of the greatest of all feasts that ever was ordained in the Church. It seems therefore more then pro­bable, that this reason drawn from Gods re­sting upon the seventh day, must be deduced, not from Gods act in resting on that day, but from the consequent of that rest, the honou­ring of that day by his resting therein.

Some man perhaps may reply, 31 that whether the very act of Gods resting, Objection 1 or the honou­ring [Page 281]of the day wherein he rested be made the ground of appointing that the day of our rest, Which way so­ever we draw the reason, it still enforceth the observation of the seventh day. it is all one, because either way it binds us still to the observation of the same seventh day. We answer, that although to the Jews it was all one, which way soever the reason was deduced, yet it makes a wide difference in the Commandement, to ordain the day to be ob­served, because God rested upon that day, or to command it to be observed, because God honoured that day by his resting therein: Answer. for Gods resting being a particular act, Not so, for the act of Gods re­sting is appli­able only to that day: But the honouring of the day thereby is ap­pliable to other daies. cannot be communicated to any other then that very day wherein he rested: but the honouring of that day being of a speciall nature, may be communicated to any other day that shall be honoured in like manner. So that if the reason be drawn from Gods act of resting upon that day, if we change the day we alter the law, but if we draw the reason from Gods advancing of the day by his resting therein above other daies, we alter not the law when we observe another day upon the same ground.

It may be objected yet farther, 32 that this rule by which this holy day of rest is assigned in this generall way, is both uncertain and ob­scure; Uncertain, Objection 2 because if the advancement of one day above another by some eminent mercy bestowed on that day, The rule thus laid down is, 1. Uncertain. 2. Obscure. be our rule for the observing or altering the day of holy rest, it may fall out that divers daies being made re­markable by such events, it will be hard to [Page 282]judge which of them is most eminent, and con­sequently pointed out unto us by God to be observed. Answer. To this we answer, that the Sabbath day must needs be esteemed the highest of all consecrated times, 1. Not uncer­tain, as being perpetually, univer­fally and more frequently to be observed then any other festival day. Because it is grounded up­on the honou­ring of the day by the greatest, most universall and perpetuall mercy besto­wed on the Church. Whence it must needs follow that the work of mercy, upon the me­mory whereof that day is founded, must be such, as not only brings an universall and per­petuall benefit, but besides, the greatest of all benefits unto the Church. Now that the works of creating the world by Gods word in the beginning, and since of the redemption of it by Jesus Christ, are the most eminent of all the mercies bestowed by God upon man; and in­deed the fountain and foundation of all the rest, the benefits whereof remain to the worlds end, is more evident then the light. And of these two the later being in all respects the far greater mercy, and therefore deservedly carrying the observation of this holy day in re­membrance thereof, yet hath the wisdome of God so ordered it, that in the consecrating this day of rest, both should be remembred; the creation in the proportion of the time by set­ting apart one day of seven, and the redempti­on by changing the Sabbath from the last day of seven to the first, in which our Saviour by his resurrection from the dead perfected that glorious work. So then the rule for the obser­vation of the day of this holy rest, is not un­certain, as is pretended.

Neither is this rule so obscurely laid down un­to us, 33 2. Nor obscure, because the light of naturall reason may dis­cover it. but that it may be understood of as many as desire seriously to search into it. For whereas the light of nature acknowledgeth & teacheth (as we have shewed already) this principle, that the observation of festivall daies, is most fitly grounded upon the remembrance of some me­morable event or other, which hath hapned upon those daies which are to be observed, when we read in this Commandement, that God appoints his Sabbath to be kept upon the day on which he finished the Creation of the World, even naturall reason will suggest, that in this institution God observes the rule of na­ture in ordering that for the day of this solemne Feast, on which the greatest generall benefit which (till the Redemption of the world by Je­sus Christ) had been wrought for mankind from the beginning, was accomplished. Now that rule which the very light of nature approves being observed by God, in appointing the day for this holy rest, naturall reason will lead us on to conclude, that when a more eminent work then the Creation of the World is per­formed, it must carry the observation of the Sabbath unto that day on which it was accom­plished, upon the same ground, and by the same rule, by which it was first ordained to be observed upon another day. Reason easily drawes particular directions out of generall rules, when it finds the grounds of that rule appliable to more then that particular. For [Page 284]instance, the command for Circumcising In­fants, because they were within the Covenant, quickly taught the Church of God the Bapti­zing of Infants upon the same ground, because they are within the same Covenant.

It may be farther objected, 34 that the rule for the observation of the Sabbath had been much plainer, 3. The rule had been plainer if God had said, you shall keep theseventh day in memory of the Creation, till I perform the greater work of your Redemption, if God had laid it down in expresse tearms, as thus, You shall keep the Sabbath upon that day which you shall finde most ho­noured above other daies by my most eminent Work, which I shall accomplish upon that day, or yet more clearly, till the coming of Christ, you shall observe the last day of the week for your Sabbath, in remembrance of the Creation of the world, and after Christs resurrection you shall celebrate the first day of the week in memory of the redemption of mankind, Answer. which was perfected by him. We answer, 1. So might the second Com­mandement have been plainer. we grant that the rule had been plai­ner, if it had been so expressed. And questionlesse the second Commandement had been plainer, if it had been expressed in some such manner as this, Thou shalt not worship me with any worship of thine owne devising, but in such manner, and in the use of such ordinances, as I shall prescribe. 2. And the Commande­ment for bapti­zing of Infants. And it had been plainer, if our Saviour in giving commission to his A­postles to baptize, had exprefly named the In­fants of beleeving Parents, as he did in com­manding them to be Circumcised. Many passa­ges in Scripture might have been expressed in [Page 285]plainer tearms then those in which they are delivered. It is enough to satisfie any sober mind, that God who was at liberty to expresse himselfe as he pleased, thought it fit to speak to us in this manner.

We may adde farther, if we observe it well, 35 God manifests great wisdome in penning the second, The discovery of such changes to follow, had brought the services into contempt. and fourth Commandements in this obscure manner, for if God had in the second Commandement expressed himselfe at full, that the Iews should for the present worship him according to the ordinances which Moses gave them, but after the comming of the Messiah they should in stead of them use such Rites as he should ordaine. And if in the fourth Comman­dement he had thus expressed himselfe; Your Sabbath for the present shall be the last day of the week, but after the Resurrection of Christ you shall change it to the first day of the week, the discovery of the changes to come in the Rites and form of Gods worship, had in all probability bred in Gods people, a contempt of those duties which they were to perform, at present, as being temporary and imperfect, and such as were to give place to better or­dinances, that were to succeed them, which they could not endure to heare of, Acts. 6.14. It pleased God therefore to pen the Law in such a form, that his people might understand out of it, as much as concerned them to practise at present, and yet we Christians might find in it farther directions when there should be occa­sion [Page 286]to make use of them. Gods wisdome in concealing these changes illustrated by the policy of Princes. Thus Princes some­times, to keep their Counsells secret, send out their commands with sufficient instructions what to doe at present, and with farther Com­missions sealed up, and not to be opened till they come to the place where those farther di­rections, which are contained therein, are to be put in execution.

Having now examined the reason of this Com­mandement, 36 [For] in the Law shews the equity of the proportioning of the time set a part for this rest. and shewed how it must be dedu­ced and applied, let us next consider the words wherein it is expressed. This particle [For] re­ferres both to our labour of sixe daies, and rest upon the seventh, & manifests the equity of the Law, in requiring such a rest of us, as if we deale providently in managing our affaires, needs not to hinder them, seeing God allows as much time to us for the dispatch of our business, as he took up in the Creation of the world, requiring no more of us but the setting apart one day in se­ven to be kept holy in remembrance of the Cre­ation of the world, and that too for our own comfort & improvement in grace, and for the farther quickning and strengthening of our souls, 37 In sixe daies God made all things, and therefore by sixe daies la­bour, can, and will assist thee to dispatch all thy work. as well as for his own honour and glory.

In sixe daies God made heaven, earth, &c. and therefore both is able, and as a faithfull Creator, will be ready to assist and prosper thee so in all thy labours, that all thy businesse shall be dispatched in sixe daies, namely, what­soever thy calling and needfull occasions shall require to be done, as God in sixe daies created [Page 287]whatsoever was needfull, as is implied in these words; All that in them is. It hath been before observed, that Gods creation of the world is often mentioned, as a meanes to move men to depend upon him; and it may be probably con­ceived, is remembred here to stay our murmur­ing at the sparing of one day weekly from our implomyments.

And rested the Seventh day: 38 which must not therefore be the last day of the week, And rested, &c. And 1. there­by established his work. 1. And rejoy­ced in it. but is mentioned here only as one of seven, not as the last of seven. This was not a totall ces­sation (whereof God being a continuall Act is uncapable) but only a resting from works of Creation, and implies two acts of God. The first, the establishing and setling all his works to continue in himselfe according to his own Ordinances, Psal. 119.89, 90, 91. The other, his rejoycing and delighting himselfe in the work of his hands. This Rest of God was not as ours for a day only, for he never wrought in the work of Creation any more, and may perhaps point at our eternall Rest, wherein we shall cease from all our labours for ever.

Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, 39 Therefore the Lord blessed, &c. as declaring by his rest that the Creation was perfected. and sanctified it: because he had by his resting on that day, manifested the perfecting of the Creating of the world, all things being made that were needfull, so that there was no cause to goe on with that work of Creation any longer; wherefore in memory of this great work of the Creation of the world, God sancti­fied [Page 288]this day, as being dignified above other daies, by perfecting of so glorious a work. Gods blessing of the day is the ordaining of it to be a day of blessing, a day of thriving in Grace, and abounding in spirituall comforts, a day of rejoycing in God, and his goodnes, and encou­raging our selves by the remembrance there­of to serve the Lord with chearfulnesse and gladnesse of heart. Sanctifying is a setting apart of the day unto God to be imployed in holy exercises, as preaching, hearing, reading, pray­ing, &c.

Thus farre then we find in examining the phrases, 43 and expressions of the fourth Com­mandement, nothing that may enforce us to ac­knowledge any thing to be Ceremonious in this Law, nor consequently mutable, seeing the set day of rest being not commanded there in particular, but onely assigned by a gene­rall rule, which is appliable to the Sabbath of the Christans as well as to that of the Jewes, in changing of the first day of rest, there is no­thing altered in the Law. It remaines only that we examine whether we finde any Ceremo­ny in the rest, which if we doe not, we must ac­knowledge that the Church of God is for ever bound to the observation of this, 41 Objection 1 as much as to any other of the Morall Laws. The rest of the Sabbath was a type of Christs rest in the grave, and therefore abolished.

It is objected that the Rest commanded in the fourth Commandement, was a figure of Christs rest in the grave, and therefore is now banished with the rest of those shadowes. [Page 289]We answer: this typicall relation to Christ, Answer. was accidentall to the Sabbath, not essentiall; That was acci­dentall to the Sabbath, it was a Sabbath be­fore it was a Type. for it was a Sabbath before Christ was looked upon as a sacrifice for sin, that is, before man had fallen, and consequently before there was any need of our Saviours resting in the grave. Seeing therefore it was a Sabbath before it was a type, it may remaine a Sabbath though the type be taken away.

They will, it may be, 42 grant that there must be a rest from labour upon the Sabbath day, Objection 2 but the strictness of that rest, such as the Jews observed, The strictnesse of the rest en­joyned the Jewes is taken away. is ceremonious and abolished. The rest (say they) to be observed of us Christians, is only for publike worship, and no longer, so that the remainder of the day after publike duties are ended is free, and then men are at liberty to make use of the time remaining for recrea­tions, or for any secular affaires as occasion shall required.

In answer hereunto we have shewed alrea­dy, 43 that although publike worship be princi­pally, yet it is not solely provided for in this Law, which as we have proved out of Esay 58.13. reacheth to our private carriage also. And the Law calls the whole day the Sabbath, or rest of the Lord, that is, both commanded by him, and consecrated to him. For the whole week being distributed into seven parts, sixe are allowed for labour, and the seventh is con­secrated unto God, which therefore must be a naturall day, as the other sixe are. To replie, [Page 290]that we are not bound by that Law, is to begge the question.

But why should not Christians be bound to rest the whole day as well as the Jews? 44 The Jews not bound to rest but for holy duties. Surely if the Sabbath were a type of Christs rest in the grave, yet there could be no type in a whole day, as there was in Jonas his three daies: So the rest of the whole day having no type in it, is not abolished for that cause. What then? was it a part of the burthen of those ceremonious ob­servances from which Christ hath freed us? To give the fuller answer hereunto, let us examine what rest was enjoyned the Jewes, that we may discover wherein the burthensomenesse of that rest consisted.

First, 45 I conceive no man will think that the Jewish rest was a totall cessation from all acti­on, like that in the Aegyptian darknesse, Exod. 10.23. as if men after the publike exercise were to sit still and to do nothing. Was it then a ceasing from labours to follow sports, that the Sabbath might be like the feast of the Calfe? Exod. 32.6. or was it rest from worldly la­bours, to fit men & give them the more leisure to attend holy duties? Such a rest indeed the Law requires, For which we have as much need of rest as they. and the Sabbath to be kept holy. Now if this were all that God required of the Jews to rest, that they might be exercised in hearing, reading, praying, &c. Is this the liber­ty Christ hath purchased unto us, that we may be lesse godly then they? lesse frequent in prayer and other holy duties then they? For [Page 291]if we are bound at least to equall, if not to go beyond them in our exercise in those holy du­ties, we have as much need of rest from ordi­nary employments as they had.

This will be made more evident unto us if we lay before us these five particulars. First, 46 1. As having a more weighty ground for ob­serving this holy rest. our ground of consecrating the Sabbath is as great and weighty, and more cleer and evident to us then it was to the Jews, seeing Gods mercies towards man, are more cleerly repre­sented us in mans redemption, then they could be to them in the worlds creation and conser­vation. Secondly, 2. And are as much bound to advance Gods majesty as they. 3. And more helps then they. 4. And as much need to pre­vent distracti­ons as they. 5. And our du­ties are as ma­ny or more then theirs. the majesty and greatnesse of God to whom we consecrate this day, is as ful­ly manifested to us as to them. Thirdly, our helps and means for the raising up of our spi­rits to an holy rejoycing in God, are greater and more effectuall then they were unto them. Fourthly, we need as much as they, all helps to prevent the distraction of our minds, and to the quickning of our spirits. Lastly, our exer­cise in spirituall and holy duties, is in all re­spects as much or more then theirs. So that if all be laid together, the observing of a whole day of rest for our exercise in holy duties, is as usefull and as needfull to us Christians as it was heretofore to the Iews.

To cleer this point yet more fully, 47 1 Private pray­er and reading. let us lay before us the right manner and order of per­forming the duties in which the Sabbath day is to be sanctified. First, therefore all men must needs grant that the private exercises of pray­er, [Page 292]reading Gods word, and meditation, which are constantly to be used on other daies, are not to be neglected, but ought rather to be enlarged on the Sabbath day. 2. Recordation of Gods mer­cies, generall and, Particular. Again, as the Sabbath ought to be a day of gladnesse and rejoycing in God, Psalm 118.24. for all his mercies to man in generall, so it is a time of recounting his extraordinary favours to our own souls in particular, which will be of spe­ciall use to quicken and fill our hearts with the love of God by tasting the sweetnesse of his goodnesse, and to carry us on with more cheer­fulnesse and life of spirit in the performance of all the duties of that day, both private and pub­like.

Thirdly, 48 3. Preparation to publique duties. for the publike duties themselves, they can never be rightly performed without precedent preparation: David will wash his hands in innocency, and so compasse Gods Al­tar, Psal. 26.6. and Solomon tels us we must take heed to our feet when we enter into Gods house, Eccles. 5.1. and bethink our selves of the majesty and greatnesse of that God before whom we present our selves, and of our own vilenesse, that are but dust and ashes, Gen. 18.27. nay, which is worse, unclean and filthy persons, Isa. 64.6. unworthy to stand be­fore a God that hath pure eyes: and the Apostle tells us of superfluity of naughtinesse that must be laid aside, when we come to hear, that we may receive the word with meeknesse, Jam. 1.21. into an honest and good heart, Luk. 8.15. [Page 293]Meditations by which we must prepare our hearts in our private exercises of reading Gods word and prayer, much more in these which are more solemn and publike. Again, 4. Recordation and application afterward. hearing of the word without recordation, meditation, and particular application after we have heard, profits not much more then our meats do without digestion. Adde unto all these, 5. Instructions to the family. 6. Works of mercy. in­structions to the family: Works of mercy in visiting of the sick, comforting the afflicted, re­lieving the poor, &c. and we shall find little spare-time left on the Lords day, for other then religious and holy employments.

As for the objection that the Jews are pre­cisely restrained from going out of their places to gather Manna on the Sabbath day, 49 or kindle a fire throughout their habitations on that day, Exod. 35.3. For the restraint from going out to gather Manna, we know that must needs be taken away when Manna ceased, and bound the Jews no longer, who had liberty other­wise not only to go out of their places, but to go small journies on the Sabbath daies, as ap­pears, Acts 1.12. As for the inhibition to kindle a fire on the Sabbath day, some con­ceive it respected only the building of the Ta­bernacle, which work though God would have hastned, yet he would not have the rest of the Sabbath violated for the furthering thereof, nor so much as a fire kindled in any of their tents about that work, to which they alleage, that charge of building the Tabernacle, and of [Page 294]forbidding work on the Sabbath day, go both together, both Gods direction to Moses, Exod. 13.11, 13. and in the delivery thereof to the people, Exod. 35.2, 3, 4. Howsoever that inhi­bition of kindling fire was but temporary du­ring the Israelites peregrination in the wilder­nesse.

The reasons by which it appears that this restraint of kindling a fire on the Sabbath day was only temporary, 50 Restraint from kindling a fire on the Sabbath was but tempo­rary. 1. It hath not the form of a continuing or­dinance. 2. It crosseth our Saviours rule, The Sab­bath was made for man. 3. The loosing of a beast on the Sabbath, allowed. 4. Christ was at a great feast on the Sabbath, which could not be without a fire. are these. First, we find not the usuall clause which is added in most ordinances, which were to continue, added in this restraint, that it should be observed throughout their generations. Secondly, this seems to crosse our Saviours generall rule, Mark. 2.27. That the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; he means for mans comfort and refreshing, for which kindling of fire and dressing of meat may be, and are in a sort necessary. Thirdly, our Savi­our allows the loosing of a beast from the stall, and leading of him to the water on the Sab­bath day: now we know, the beast might be provided for by setting water in the stall over­night, which would refresh it sufficiently, and better then meat dressed overnight could com­fort many men. Fourthly, we find our Saviour present at a great feast, Luk. 14.1. where many, and it seems persons of quality, vers. 7.12. were bidden: now it is very unlikely that the pro­visions for that feast were dressed over night; and if it were dressed on that day, neither [Page 295]would the Pharisee have permitted, nor our Saviour have countenanced the dinner with his presence, if dressing of meat, kindling of fires on the Sabbath day, had been forbidden by the law, Now why the dressing of Manna, while the Israelites were in their peregrinati­on in the wildernesse was forbidden, though the dressing of other meats might be allowed afterwards, there may be some reason given. For Manna it may be might be as good and comfortable eaten cold as hot, and the prepa­ring overnight, might be no inconvenience at all; howsoever it is out of question that in that unsetled condition of the Israelites wandring in the wildernesse, when they were enforced to pick up fewell, where they could get it, ba­king and boyling must needs be more trouble­some and laborious then it was afterwards in Canaan, where being setled in their dwellings, they had all things whereof they were to make use for such works provided and ready at hand.

But to conclude, 51 suppose the strictnesse of the rest unto which the Iews were bound, Howsoever such strictnesse of rest was not required of them by the fourth Com­mandement. to have been as great as they imagine, it must needs be granted that there is no clause in the fourth Commandement that enjoyns it, which requires no more then a rest from our ordinary secular employments, that we may be at lei­sure to attend wholly upon the duties of re­ligious worship, that we consecrate the whole day unto God, as the words of that law do [Page 296]cleerly expresse it. So the rest of the laws that enjoyn such strictnesse of rest being taken a­way, the fourth Commandement may remain fully in force in every clause of it. And (as it hath been already intimated) it concerns us to take speciall notice of Gods expression, [Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work] by which he can mean nothing else but the works of our particular callings, which only may be properly called our works: for there be generall works which be proper to all cal­lings, and subordinate thereunto, as to eat and drink, and to cloath our selves, and to make use of the rest of the comforts of this life, by which we are strengthned and enabled to la­bour in our particular callings. These cannot properly be called our works, and are as well to be done on the Sabbath as on other days, with this difference only, that whereas they are done on other days to enable us to labour, they are to be done on the Sabbath to streng­then us to holy duties.

These reasons which we have laid down be­fore, 52 amount to little lesse then a Demonstra­tion, that the rest of the Sabbath must be the rest of a whole day, or the seventh part of the week, which we Christians have both as much cause, and as much need to consecrate unto God as ever the Iews had in times past. And that we may do it with as little detriment to our selves in our secular affairs, and with as much assurance to have our labours of six days [Page 297]so blessed, that they shall be sufficient for the dispatch of our needfull employments, is evi­dent by the reason which is annexed to that Commandement, which proves it by the crea­tion of the world by God in six days, a ground of faith which concerns us as well as the Iews. Wherefore seeing we have as great reason, as great helps, and as great encouragements by the assurance of Gods blessing upon our six days labour, to sanctifie an entire day of holy rest unto God, as the Iews had; And seeing the expresse words of the law appoint the whole day to be consecrated unto God, why should not we take our selves to be as strongly bound as the Iews were to the keeping of the holy rest of this whole day, which we call the Sab­bath, seeing there appears no sufficient reason why we should judge any jot or title of this law to be taken away? For as for those alle­gations, that the rest of the Sabbath was a type of Christs rest in the grave, and a part of the Iewish bondage, how little force they have, we have shewed before.

Now then if it evidently appear to all that will consider things with any indifferency, 53 by all that we have said, that neither the resting from our labour one day in seven, nor the con­tinuing of that rest for the whole day, nor yet the strictnesse of any rest enjoyned by the fourth Commandement, are either as ceremo­nious, or upon any other ground to be alte­red: neither that the particular day of rest [Page 298]which now by Christs resurrection is altered from the last to the first day of the week, is there commanded, otherwise then in a generall rule equally communicable both to the Iewish and Christian Sabbath, there appears no necessity of granting any thing to be mutable in this fourth Commandement more then in any of the laws of the Decalogue.

It hath been intimated before, 54 that mens mistake of the right interpretation of the fourth Commandement, hath been a great oc­casion of questioning the perpetuity and im­mutability of the morall law; and of how dan­gerous consequent it is to admit that there is any thing mutable therein, experience tea­cheth us, when we find how ready men are to embrace and hold that dangerous errour of casting aside the whole law, and that so far as to deny it to be a rule of direction unto us Christians in the course of our practice, where­by they open a wide gap to all licentiousnesse, and by that means overthrow the very life and power of godlinesse, to the high dishonour of God, and to the extream perill of their own souls: so that we see how neerly it con­cerns all such as have any true zeal for the fur­thering of Gods honour and their own salva­tion and their brethrens, to endeavour by all the means that they can, the establishing and maintaining of this truth, that the morall law given by God to Adam in the beginning, and renewed afterwards by Moses upon mount [Page 299] Sinai, is an everlasting rule left by God unto his Church for the right ordering and guiding them in all their ways.

The premises then being duly weighed and layed together, 55 we have a sufficient ground to argue in this manner:

And so much concerning the morality and perpetuity of the fourth Commandement in the Decalogue by way of digression.

SECT. IV. A continuation of the consideration of the rest of the Laws recorded in the Scripture, with such instructions as may be drawn from them.

HAving now established the perpetuity of that Law which we call Morall, 1 in all the Commandements thereof, it is time to re­turne to that from which we digressed; namely, the delivering of rules for our direction in drawing out observations from the Laws re­corded in Scripture for our instruction, and there being three kinds of these Laws, Morall, Judiciall, Ceremoniall, (as we have shewed be­fore) of these the Morall law comes first to be considered. Now, that Law being given to A­dam, the roote of mankind, and that not so much to his person, as to the nature of man, which was wholly in him, when he received this Law from God; and consequently binding all those who are partakers of that nature, it must needs be acknowledged that whatsoever commands we find therein, we must guide our selves by, as the rule of our practice. Which that we may the better doe, it will be needfull to lay before us some rules, 2 All duties to God, and man are comman­ded in the Morall Law. that may direct us in the right interpretation of these Comman­dements.

Before we give these rules it will be necessa­ry to lay before us this evident ground of truth, [Page 301]that these ten words, (as they are called) com­prise all the heads of duties to be performed both to God, and man. This is clearly mani­fested by our Saviours answer to the Lawyer that tempted him, Luke 10.26. enquiring what he might doe to inherit eternall life, to whom Christ replies, that whatsoever duty was need­full to the attaining thereof, was to be found in the commandements, where he wils him to seek it. Now these precepts being delivered in such briefe expressions, as they are, it must needs follow that every one of the tearms in them must needs be of exceeding large compre­hension.

First therefore, 3 Rules for inter­preting the Law. whereas we find these Laws of the Decalogue penned, some in the form of a command, and most of them in the forme of a prohibition, Rule. 1 we must conceive that under every command there is implied a prohibition of whatsoever is contrary to what is comman­ded, All the Com­mandements forbidding any sinne command the contrary duty, and com­manding the duty forbid the opposite sin. and in every prohibition a command of all duties opposite to that which is forbidden. For example; in the second Commandement, which under the name of Images, forbids the inventing or using of any form of worship of mans devising, there is withall commanded the worship of God according to his own will in the use of the ordinances prescribed, and war­ranted by his Word, as prayer, and hearing of the Word, receiving the Sacraments, &c. And in the third Commandement, under the prohi­bition of taking Gods name in vaine, is com­manded [Page 302]the taking up of it with all holy reve­rence and feare.

Secondly, 4 Rule. 2 under the name of any duty com­manded there is required not only the perfor­mance of the outward act of that duty, The Law be­sides the out­ward act re­quires the obe­dience of the heart; but withall the inward obedience of the heart to the Law which requires it, Rom. 6.17. and the letting out of all the affections of the soule in the performance of it, as Psal. 119.167. the Prophet professeth that his soul had kept Gods Testimonies, and that he did love them exceed­ingly: whence it is that both our Saviour Christ, and his Apostles after him, both comprise all duties commanded in the Law under the name of Love, being an affection of the heart, and tell us that the holy affection of love is the ful­filling of the Law, Rom. 13.10. implying that whatsoever the act be, which we perform, yet if it proceed not from that holy disposition of the heart, And the use of all helps to any duty comman­ded; it is not answerable to the Law. A­gaine, together with the duty commanded in any Law, there is required the use of all helps, and meanes which may further us thereunto; on the other side, where any sinne is forbidden, there the inward roote of that evill, And forbids the originall corruption of the heart with all motions flowing from thence. even as far as the originall corruption and Propension of the heart thereunto, with all the evill thoughts, and motions of the minde that flow from thence, are forbidden. Thus our Saviour interprets murther to reach not only to the outward violence done to the person of our neighbour, but to the hating of them in­wardly [Page 303]in the heart, yea, even to rash, and unadvised anger towards him. And he extends adultery as far as the lusting after a woman in ones heart, Mat. 5.22, 28.

In the Third place take speciall notice of the names which God gives unto every sinne for­bidden in the Law, 5 3. We must judge of sins as God in his Law judgeth of them; anger is murther; lust, adultery, &c. by which we may easily judge, both how God himselfe values it, and how he would have us to value it. As in the sixth Commandement, where he forbids anger, and malice, he calls them murther: In the se­venth, where he forbids lust, and wantonnesse, he calls them adultery: In the eight, where he forbids idlenesse, fraud, mercilesnesse to the poore, he names them all theft. Now God we know is the only impartiall Judge of all things, and we are sure he speakes of things as he iudg­eth of them, and consequently seeing he calls the thoughts and motions to sinne, by the names of the acts of it, we learne so to judge of our sins, not as the world judgeth of them, but as they are weighed out unto us by the balance of the Sanctuary, not small, and scarce worthy the observation, but foule, and abominable. Thus whereas men think vaine thoughts scarce worthy the least censure, David hates them, Psal. 119.113. and whereas we take no notice of idle words, our Saviour tells us we shall an­swer to God for them, Mat. 12.36. This va­luing and esteeming of sinne according to the foulnesse of it, as it is just in it selfe, so is it of singular use unto us, as well to make sinne so [Page 304]hatefull unto us, Which will move us, 1. To tremble at motions to sinne. that we may flie from it as from a Serpent, trembling at every motion, or allurement thereunto; as also to bring us to an abhorring and loathing of our selves, Ezek. 36.31. 2. Loath our selves. 3. To esteem and embrace Christ. and lastly to raise up our hearts to an high esteem of Jesus Christ, hungring and thirst­ing after him, and admiring and adoring the riches of Gods mercy in giving him out of his free love to be a meanes of purchasing our peace, and taking away from us the guilt of so many foule and abominable transgressions.

A Fourth direction for the making a right use of the Morall Law, 6 Rule. 4 is to consider the force, and weight of every Commandement thereof, 1. In respect of the authority, all Comman­dements are equall. wherein we are to take speciall notice of three things. First, that in respect of the autho­rity that commands, all the Laws are equall, as S. James tels us, 2. In respect of the object, the Commande­ments of the first Table are groatest. James 2.11. upon which ground he infers in the same place, that whosoever of­fends by transgressing of any one of these Laws, is guilty of the breach of all the rest, be­cause he offends against that authority by which all those Laws are established. In the second place, in respect of the objects of the duties commanded in that Law, the Commande­ments of the first Table are of grcatest impor­tance, according to our Saviours owne deter­mination, Mat. 22.38. because the services therein required are more immediately direct­ed unto God, and consequently his honour is more immediately concerned in them, then in the duties of the second Table, in the observ­ing [Page 305]whereof, although we honour and serve God, yet our services therein are immediately directed to men. Consequently, infidelity, love, feare, and dependence on the creature, we are to abhorre as the sins of the highest nature, by which above all others God is most dishono­red, although the world judge of them farre otherwise. Lastly, 3. The nega­tive binds more strongly then the affirma­tive. the negative Commande­ments bind us more strongly then the affirma­tive, in this respect, because the negative ob­lige us alwaies, and to all times (as a man is not to commit Idolatry, to blaspheme Gods name, &c. at any time) whereas the affirmative Commandements, although they bind us al­waies, yet they bind us not to all times, as though one is still bound to pray, heare, &c. yet he is not found to perform them at all times.

Fifthly, Rule. 5 although we find not the promises of rewards and mercy, The promises and curses be­long to every Law, although they be not ex­pressed. and threatnings of wrath, and vengeance expressed in every Com­mandement, and annexed thereunto, yet that which we find expresly set down in some of the Laws, we must understand, and conceive to belong to the rest of the Laws, in which there is no such thing expressed, even a curse denoun­ced against every one that confirmes not all the words of the Law, (that is, every Commande­ment, and every duty required in any one of them) to doe them: And a blessing promi­sed to the keeping, and yeelding obedience to the whole Law. Both which we must not li­mit [Page 306](as some doe) to outward and temporary blessings, And are not only tempora­ry, but spiritu­all and eternal. and curses, but must extend beyond them to those which are spirituall, and eter­nall, even the powring out of the full measure of the wrath of God upon the body and soule of every person who is a transgressour of the Law, and that to all eternity; and the reward­ing of every man that yeelds sincere and con­stant obedience in every thing which the Law requires, with all manner of blessings upon soule and body for evermore.

Sixthly, Rule. 6 all those premises of blessings and threats of curses, Yet they must not be the ground of obe­dience; be annexed to the whole Law, yet our ground of yeelding obedience to that Law must not be so much either the hope of the one, or feare of the other, (although by reason of the infirmity of the flesh, both for the awing, and quickening of our hearts, we may make profitable use of both, But subjection to the authori­ty that com­mands. with the Pro­phet David, Psal. 119.120, 166.) as the submit­ting of our selves to the righteous, and holy will of God, whose we are wholly, and there­fore owe unto him, all that we can doe with our best abilities, whence the Psalmist pre­sents his earnest request unto God, to teach him to doe his will, Psal. 143.10. that is, both what God wills, and because he wills it. And the way to interest our selves in Gods Promises, is (as the Apostle tells us, Heb. 10.36.) The doing of his will. Indeed as the Lord is our God, by the strongest, and justest of all titles, both be­cause we are his creatures, and beyond that, [Page 307]his redeemed ones, so the manifesting of his will unto us, either in his Law, what he would have us to doe, or in his dispensations towards us, what he would have us to be, ought to be the ground of our submission, both to doe what he commands, and to be what he ordaines con­cerning us, in the course of his Providence. Up­on this ground it is that as well those glorious works, For want whereof all works though never so speci­ous are abo­minable. done according to the rules of morall honesty, by the heathen, who neither knew God, nor his Law; As also, the like actions done upon the same grounds by many amongst us, that carry the name of Christians, cannot possibly be accepted by God, because though those things done, be the same that he com­mands in his Law, yet the will and command of God, is not the ground upon which they are done, but rather a respect to civill honesty, and often a desire to honour our selves by con­forming thereunto, so that (to speak truth) we doe therein not so much the will of God, as our own will.

Seventhly, 9 the method and order in which God delivers his Law unto us must not be neg­lected. For instance, in the preface of the Law, Rule. 7 Take notice of the method of the Law. God before he gives any one Commandement, laies before us the interest that he hath in us, that he hath purchased us to himselfe, and there­fore we are his, and consequently to be orde­red and disposed by him, according to his own will. This method teaches us a leston, without which no service of ours is accepted, that all [Page 308]our services must be tendred unto God as du­ties, as we are taught to doe by our Saviour himselfe, Luk. 17.10. which as it reserves unto God the honour of his free grace, when he re­wards our services, for which he owes us no­thing, seeing they are all but debts, and duties, so withall it takes away all our boasting, even in our best services.

Againe, 10 when God begins his Law with that Commandement to have the Lord for our God, it teacheth us to lay that for the founda­tion of all duties of obedience, that we have avouched the Lord to be our God. This me­thod Joshua observes in renewing the Cove­nant betwixt God and his people, immediately before his death, Iosh. 24.15. putting them first to choose what God they will serve, which when they had done, then he presseth them with the duties of his service, verse 22.23. And indeed this is the most effectuall of all motives, both to draw us on to all duties of obedience, and to hold us fast to continue therein, that they are services to that God whom we have chosen and set up to our selves for our God. Neither can there be an higher aggravation of any sinne against God and his Law, then this, that we have thereby in a sort cast off Gods yoke, and denied the Lord to be our God.

This foundation being once laid, 11 that we have advanced, and set up the Lord to be our God, the Lords next care was in the second Commandement, to prescribe the meanes by [Page 309]which we may hold communion and fellow­ship with him, which he appoints to be only in such ordinances as himselfe hath established, and no other way expecting blessings from him, and rendring our services to him in them alone. In the third Commandement, God re­quires us to make publike profession of this Covenant that we have made with God, but still in sincerity and uprightnesse of heart, al­waies mentioning his name, whether by way of attestation in an oath, or upon any other occasion, with such reverence and feare as be­comes the Majesty of so great and holy a God. The fourth Commandement appoints the time, not only of meeting together in publike, for Gods worship, but besides that of seque­string our selves from al worldly employments, that we may enjoy an holy communion with God, in those things that are spirituall and heavenly.

The same method that the Lord useth in set­ting down the Commandements of the first Table, 12 he observeth in ranking the Laws of the second. First, he establisheth authority, which is the bond, and foundation of civill society, in the fifth Commandement. Secondly, he pro­vides for the safety of mens persons, forbid­ding murther, or any wrong or hurt tending thereunto, in the sixth. Thirdly, in the seventh Commandement, under the name of adultery, besides the prohibiting of all uncleannesse in the propagation of posterity, the Lord forbids [Page 310]the inordinate use of any creature, as meats, and drinks, &c. Fourthly, the eight Comman­dement provides for the support of communi­ty by honest labour, and discreet and charita­ble distribution (after the necessities of our selves, and ours are supplied) of the profits of our labours for the reliefe of our neighbours wants. Fifthly, in the ninth Cōmandement God establisheth truth among men, without which commerce in civill society cannot stand. Lastly, in the tenth he settles propriety in such things as God by his dispensation hath shared and allotted out unto every man apart, so that no man may so much as in his thoughts reach out after any thing that an other man possesseth by a just title, but may content himselfe with his own portion.

Eightly, 13 whereas the Laws of men bind us only by the power of the authority that com­mands, (or though to that indeed for conscience sake of that Law of God, Rule. 8 by which authority is established) the Laws of God bind the consci­ence immediately by themselves, The Laws of God, and they only, bind the conscience. and not only by the power of the commander. So that those Laws which are given by God, being once made known unto us, we are bound to acknowledge them to be just & holy, (as the Psalmist doth,) Ps. 119.39.128, 140. as manifesting the will of God which is the rule of righteousness and holi­nes, & upon that ground to embrace them, and submit unto thē, & to esteem our selves unrigh­teous, and wicked, if we swerve from them. But [Page 311]as for the laws of men, though we are bound to submit unto them, because they have upon them the stampe of that authority, which God hath established and set over us, yet neither are we bound to judge the Laws themselves to be righteous, and holy, nor consequently to esteeme our selves unholy and wicked if we yeeld not obedience unto them, unlesse withall we despise that authority that commāds them, or be an occasion of disturbing the publike peace, for the conservation whereof the au­thority, and power of the Magistrate was or­dained.

Lastly, 14 the obedience which the Lord re­quires of us unto this Law of his which we call Morall, Rule. 9 Our subjection to the law must be, 1. Voluntary. 2. Upon know­ledge. must necessarily have these foure con­ditions. In the first place our subjection therun­to must be every way free, and voluntary, such as the Prophet David professes his was, Psal. 119.30, 173. In the second place that it may be so, this free choice of ours must bee firmely grounded upon the cleare, and distinct know­ledge, of the justice and equity, Psal. 119.128. of the purity and holinesse, Psal. 119.140. of the absolute perfection, Psal. 19.78, 119, 96. yea, farther of the goodnesse of those Laws, and judgements, Rom. 7.12, 16. Psal. 119.39. Thirdly, this obedience must be constant, 3. Constant and perpetuall. both in the duration of it for ever, Psal. 119.112. and in the continuation of it without interrup­tion, Psal. 119.117. and that not onely in our steps, (which yet we must desire to have [Page 312]well ordered, Psal. 119.133.) but in the whole course of our waies, 4 Exercised, 1. With all our strength. 2. Mixed with faith, and spring from love. Psal. 119.5, 59. Fourthly, our obedience to this Law if it shall be accep­ted, requires two qualifications: first, that in the practice thereof we put forth the uttermost of our strength and abilities of our soules, with holy David, Psal. 119.34, 106.131. which God requires, Deut. 10.12. & 11.13. Secondly, that we mixe it with faith, without which, it is impos­sible to please God, Heb. 11.6. and love, which is the fulfilling of the Law, Rom. 13.10.

Now let all that we have spoken be laid toge­ther: 15 first, that the Law is of so large extent, that it regulates not only mens outward actions, but besides the very inward thoughts of the heart, and that so far that it prescribes a rule to the very first motions that arise therein, though they be not seconded either with deliberation, or consent; nay, beyond all that it exacts recti­tude & uprightnes in the very frame and dispo­sition of the heart, commanding not only con­sent unto the law, but withall practice answe­rable to the rules thereof. Secondly, that it strictly requires the putting forth of all the strength, and the utmost ability of all the facul­ties of soule, and that in every part of obe­dience, yea and so far that it requires, that both in the substance of the duty, and in the manner of performance, and in the end at which we aime, we come fully home to that measure of perfection, that the law requires. And lastly, that it laies an everlasting curse upon every one [Page 313]that comes short of the full performance of every thing contained in the law. Let (I say) all these be laid together, and seriously pon­dered in the heart, and it will easily be discove­red, that, considering the weaknesse of our present condition, by which the fulfilling of the law is made utterly impossible to us, one of the principall uses of the law must needs be that which the Apostle saies before us, Gal. 3.24. to be a Schoolmaster to lead us and drive us to Christ, to seek from him that righteous­nesse which may justifie us before God, which we have not in, or of our selves, and that sa­tisfaction by which he fully discharged our debt, which he took upon himselfe, when he made his soule a sacrifice for our sinnes, and thereby wholly freed us from that curse of the law, which our disobedience thereunto had brought upon us.

So then wee see that the morall law hath a double use unto us: 16 A double use of the morall law. 1. To be our guide, and rule to walk by. The first to serve for a rule to guide us in the whole course of our practice, (in which respect holy David used it as a lanthorn to his feet, and a light unto his steps, Psal. 119.105.) unto which we are to come as neare as possibly we are able, conside­ring our waies that we may turne our feet to Gods testimonies, Psal. 119.59. and using our uttermost endeavours to make our practice fully conformable thereunto, laying those judgements alwaies before us, Psal. 119.30. calling our selves daily to account, and laying [Page 314]all our actions to that perfect rule which will easily discover unto us our errours and failings in all the course of our conversation, which when we have bewailed in the bitternesse of our spirits, and taken shame to our selves for our grosse and manifold neglects, our hearts are kept in a low frame, and we are fitted to walk humbly before our God with reverence and holy feare, and in all meeknesse towards our brethren, and are withall moved to engage our selves by new purposes and promises, to walke more faithfully, and watchfully with God for time to come. 2. To shew us the great need of Christ, and to drive us to him. The second use of the Morall law unto us, is, to shew us the great need of Christ by whose righteousnesse only (and not by our own) we are justified before God, and by his satisfactions and sufferings are delivered from the wrath to come: By the consideration whereof we are brought to prize and value Christ above all things in the world, to use all endeavours to get a sure interest in him, although it should be with the losse of all things besides, and to cleave fast unto him who is our life, living in him by faith, (as the Apostle speaks, Gal. 2.20.) giving up our selves to live wholly to him, who hath died for us, and re­deemed us unto himselfe, that we might serve him in holinesse all our daies.

Thus farre then of the Morall law, 17 and the use thereof; Of Laws cere­moniall. the next kind of laws which we are to consider, are those which we call Ceremoni­all, because they prescribed the rules of those [Page 315]ceremonies, which God appointed to be used in his worship by the Jews untill the coming of Christ, of whom many of them were sha­dows. Now wholly taken away in use of them. Now although all those rites and ordi­nances are by Christs cōming wholly taken a­way, so that we are no longer obliged to ob­serve any of them in the worship of God, nor indeed can use many of them, without the denying of Christs comming in the flesh: not­withstanding seeing it hath pleased the Lord to leave both them, and the Judiciall laws upon record, amongst those holy writings which he hath thought fit to preserve, and to commit unto the Church to be kept for posterity, to the end of the world; we cannot conceive that he hath taken so much care to preserve them in vaine, nor indeed for any other end then that which is the scope of the rest of the Scriptures, Yet may they be of use to us in reading them. that they might be for our learning and in­struction. What instructions therefore we may gather to our selves by reading these laws, we are now to consider. And that the rather, be­cause many men upon this opinion and suppo­sition, that these laws are now utterly aboli­shed to us Christians, 18 either totally neglect the reading of those books, 1. In that they were shadows of Christ, it proves that from the begin­ning there was no salvation but in his name. as containing those things that concerne them not, or at least read them in such a perfunctory manner, without searching into them, that they receive no profit, nor instruction by them at all.

That we may therefore shew what instru­ctions the reading of the ceremoniall law may [Page 316]yeeld us, we must first take notice that these ceremonies may be ranked under two heads; For they are either figures that represented to the Jews Christ to come, as did their Passeover, sacrifices, scapegoat, &c. or they were outward shadows of inward sanctification, such as were many of their washings, separating, and clean­sing of leapers, &c. As for the former sort of these, which under divers types point us out Christ to come, we are more particularly to observe that they represent him as a sacrifice for sin, a lamb slain from the beginning of the world; the scape-goat sets out the fruit of his suffering, the utter removing from us, carry­ing away our sins into the wildernesse, that they may never appear nor be remembred a­gainst us any more: the like representations we have in many of the rest. By which we learn that as from the beginning there was no o­ther name by which men might be saved but only the name of Jesus Christ, promised to our first Parents, expected by the Patriarchs, and both to them after they were formed into a state, represented many ways although under figures and shadows, so they were to expect salvation by him no other way but by his death, nor any other salvation then by taking our sins upon him, and thereby making our peace with God his Father. This considera­tion is a great means to strengthen our faith, when we are compassed with so great a cloud of witnesses, testifying that truth which we [Page 317]believe, in all ages from the beginning.

The second sort of ceremonies are such as are under the figures of washings, 19 2. As under le­gall washing sanctification is shadowed, we are taught to cleanse our selves in draw­ing neer unto God. legall sepa­rations and purifications, and the like repre­sented to the Iews, that inward purity and cleansing of the heart, which God requires in all his people, especially those that draw neer unto him in the performance of such duties of his worship as he hath commanded: unto this the Psalmist alludes in that expression of his, Psal. 26.6. as likewise doth the Prophet, Isa. 1.16. Now although we are freed from those outward ceremonies & the observation there­of; notwithstanding, seeing we are every way as much bound as the Iews ever were, to la­bour after inward holinesse, and the cleansing of our selves from all filthinesse both of the flesh and of the spirit, and the keeping of our hearts and consciences pure and undefiled, we may and ought by the reading of these laws to be stirred up to the practice of that inward duty of sanctification, which those outward ce­remonies represented; especially when we draw neer unto God in those holy exercises of prayer, that we may lift up holy hands, as we are exhorted, 1 Tim. 2.8. and in hearing, pur­ging out of all naught inesse and superfluity of malitiousnesse, as we are warned, Jam. 1.2. that we may receive the word with meeknesse, in­to honest and good hearts, Luk. 8.15. in which only it is fruitfull, and so in other like duties.

In generall all those ceremonies of what kind soever, 20 3. The burthen­somnesse of those ceremo­nies may en­courage us to more cheerful­nesse in our more easie services: whether types of Christ, or sha­dows of inward holinesse, being every way so burthensome, as Saint Peter affirms, Act. 15.10. both in respect of toilsome labour, and of the great charges and expence about them: And when all was done, being so dark and obscure that the Children of Israel could not look un­to the end of that which is abolished, (as the Apostle speaks, 2 Cor. 3.13.) that whole frame of service and worship wherein the Iews were exercised, being compared with those ordi­nances which Christ hath left unto us, so easie, so cheap, so few in number, and yet so plain, that now we behold as with open face the glory of the Lord, 2 Cor. 3.13, 14. the reading of that law of ceremonies, and the comparing of their manner of worship in them with ours, may teach us two things: Acknowled­ging thankfully the liberty pur­chased to us by Christ; First, to raise up our hearts to a thankfull acknowledgement of Gods great mercy to us, who hath been plea­sed by Iesus Christ, to take off that heavy yoke from our shoulders, and to set us at liberty in comparison of them, Galat. 5.1. which should be a great inducement unto us, not only to bear, but to take up that easie yoke (as he him­self calls it, Matth. 11.29.) and to be con­stant in the cheerfull use of those holy and quickening ordinances, which Christ hath left unto his Church, and that without any wea­rinesse at all, or any murmuring at our condi­tion.

Secondly, 21 seeing those laws had no more but shadows of good things to come, And bewailing our blindnesse in this cleer sunshine of the Gospel, but had not the things themselves, as the Apostle speaks, Heb. 10.1. and even those shadows too, but in carnall ordinances, as they are called, Heb. 9.10. whereas we now have the things them­selves, and those also represented unto us in a more spirituall way: Let it be in the reading of those ordinances, and comparing them with the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles (wherein both Christs himself, and the things freely given us by God in him, are so fully and cleerly set before us, that he that runs may read them) be an effectuall means to move us to reflect upon our selves, that bewailing our blindnesse in so clear a light, shining out unto us like the Sun in his strength, and our dead­nesse of heart in the use of these spirituall and quickning means which the Lord hath so gra­tiously afforded unto us, May be stirred up to labour for more know­ledge as having more effectuall means to ob­tain them. we may with all ear­nestnesse and constancy labour to attain to a greater measure of knowledge, faith, and of e­very other grace, and unto more fruitfulnesse in every good work, especially unto more life and fervency of affection in the duties of Gods worship. 22

One thing more it may be fit for us to take into consideration in the reading of the cere­moniall law, which is this; 5. Though we use not the ce­remonies themselves, yet we may draw rules from them for our direction. Howsoever those ceremonies be abolished, yet wheresoever they are directed to an end, which is common to us with them there, though we observe not the [Page 320]ceremony it self, yet we from them draw a rule which may be of use unto us in the duties of our worship: As for example, our Ordinan­ces and the Jewish agree in this, that as they are holy, so they ought to be kept holy, and free from pollution, by excluding unclean per­sons from the use of them. The care of this un­der the law was committed to the Priests who had the charge of the holy things, and are therefore justly taxed for neglect of their duty in not keeping strangers and uncircumcised persons from the sanctuary, & from those holy things that were offered therein, Ezek. 44.7, 8. Now seeing our ordinances are in all respects as holy as those of the Iews were, the charge of keeping their holy things undefiled, cannot but extend unto us that are Christians. And seeing that charge was part of the office of the Leviticall Priesthood, unto which our Ministe­ry under the Gospel succeeds; how can we deny that the care of keeping our Sacraments, and other ordinances from pollution by the promiscuous admission of unworthy persons to partake of them with us, ought to be a spe­ciall part of the care of the Ministers under the Gospel, as it was of the Priests under the law?

Having then hitherto discovered what in­structions we may draw out unto our selves from the consideration of the ceremoniall Law in generall, 23 we shall forbear to descend to the scanning of the particular ceremonies prescri­bed [Page 321]therein, as being a work not altogether so necessary, nor altogether sutable to that bre­vity that we aime at in this short Treatise. Thus much only is fit to be intimated by the way, that where the signification of those ce­remonious shadows is plain and evident, it will be both a delightfull and profitable ex­ercise, to take speciall notice both of the things signified by them, and of the shadows themselves that represent them.

In the last place we are to take into consi­deration those laws which we call Judiciall, 24 Of the Judicial laws given by Moses, given by God unto the Iews for the ordering of their civill State, which are but deductions out of the morall law applied and fitted to the present State of the Iews, and by conse­quence binding no other State to the observa­tion of them, but that alone; yea now, Which by the dissolution of the Jewish State are made void: that State to which they were given is utterly dis­solved, quite made void and taken away. Not­withstanding, seeing these laws as well as the ceremoniall, are left upon record unto the Church of God, Yet being left upon record unto us, we may draw from them some di­rections for our selves. we are to judge of those as well as we have done of them, that they are preserved unto us for some speciall use (as the Apostle tells us, that whatsoever things were written before time were written for our lear­ning, Rom. 15.4.) the rather, because we know that God hath suffered some writings of holy men, as Iddoes History, 2 Chron. 13.22. and Henochs Prophesie, Jude 14. to perish, as not esteeming them so necessary for the use of the [Page 322]Church, as those books which are preserved and left unto us to this day.

Let us therefore enquire what instructions we may gather unto our selves, 25 out of the rea­ding and considering of those laws, which we call Iudiciall, or rules for the ordering of the civill state of the Iews. 1. We must ac­knowledge that God hath a spe­ciall hand in civill govern­ment. Not to insist upon par­ticulars, out of the consideration of them in generall there will arise these foure observati­ons: First, in that God took so much care for his own people, as not only to give them rules for his own worship, but besides to leave with them directions and laws for the ordering of their civill affairs, we may take notice that e­ven the disposing of civill government belongs unto the Lord himself, by whom Kings reigne and Princes decree justice, Prov. 8.15, 16. and the Apostle tels us, that the powers that be are ordained of God, Rom. 13.1. Neither are the rulers onely from him, but the government al­so; as they judge by him, so he judgeth among them, Psal. 82. and howsoever men seek the Rulers favour, yet every mans Iudgement comes from the Lord, Prov. 29.26.

It is true that in this the Jews had a pecu­liar priviledge above any nation on the earth, 26 that they had the whole frame of their Civill government laid out unto them by God himselfe, they had not only his Laws, but his Statutes, and his Judgements too, Psal. 147.20. under which name Moses compre­hends both the Judiciall, and Ceremomiall [Page 323]Law, Deut. 5.31. Notwithstanding we have sufficient warrant, that the Lord hath the same care of his Church in any State, that he had of the Jews then; so that the Laws in any Nation, as farre as they are just and equall, are to be esteemed the Laws of God, and the judgements executed by them, come from the Lord. Whence we are taught, as to pray unto God for those that are in authority, that we may lead a peaceable life under them, 1 Tim. 2.2. So when Rulers so governe, that the righteous may flourish in abundance of Peace, (as it shall be in Christs Kingdome, Psal. 72.7.) that they that doe well may have praise, and wrath may be executed upon those that doe evill, Rom. 13.3, 4. the honour and praise for such agree­ment must be returned to God alone. 27

A Second Rule that we may frame unto our selves out of the consideration of the judiciall Law, 2. All law­makers must ground their laws upon Mo­rall Precepts as God doth his. ariseth from the precedent that God him­selfe hath given us, in the framing of that Law; the precepts whereof are but so many deducti­ons out of the Morall law, applied unto that state of the Jews. Whence all law-makers may take a patterne in making their laws, to square them out by no other rule, then that which God himselfe observed in the making of his Laws for his own people. So that although States in making their Laws may make use of Christian Prudence, in applying them to times, places, persons, and emergent occasions; yet we must be sure that all such laws must have the [Page 324]Morall law for their foundation, which being right and equall in all things, Psal. 119.128. is withall the fountaine of all justice and equity. 28

A Third use which we may make of the con­sideration of the Judiciall Law, 3. Though those laws bind us not in par­ticular, yet they doe in the ge­nerall grounds of equity on which they are founded. is to set it be­fore us as a Rule to guide us by, although not in the particulars thereof in which it is applied to the Jewish state, yet in the generall grounds of equity, whence those particulars are dedu­ced, and whereat they aime. For example, the Lord commands his people to make battle­ments about their houses, Deut. 22.8. the rea­son whereof he expresseth in the same place, was the preventing of danger to mens lives, if any should fall from thence in walking upon the roofe thereof, unlesse there were some such meanes to prevent it. Now although we have no cause in building our houses to build such battlements about them, seeing our houses being not slat-roofed as theirs were, have no such walkes on the tops of them, from which men falling might endanger their lives, yet we are by the scope and end at which the law aimes, taught in generall to use the best meanes to prevent all danger to our neighbours per­son, which our care and providence might foresee.

Lastly, 29 seeing we must needs acknowledg that there cannot be found so exact a Pattern to follow, in establishing Government, as is that which the Lord himselfe framed for his own [Page 325]people, we can doe no lesse then endeavour, to bring our Civill Government as neere as may be unto that, in all Cases wherin our State, 4. We must en­deavour to bring our civill government as neere as we can to that pattern. and theirs agree. As for instance, whereas the Lord thinks it sufficient to punish simple theft with restitution of double or foure fold, Exod. 22.1. we may doe well to consider whether our laws be not too strict in punishing bare theft, (at least in women) with death without remedy. On the other side seeing God appoints death to be the punishment of adultery, Levit 20.10. Deut. 22.22. we have just cause to think our laws defective that passe it over with a lighter censure. For who can better judge of the qua­lity of offences, and punishments fit for the restraint of them, then God himselfe? Neither can we excuse our selves by this, that those laws being Judiciall are now taken away and made voide unto us, seeing where our case is the same (as adultery and theft are the same in what state so ever) there our rules of judge­ment in all equity ought to be the same.

In generall it will be very needfull to ob­serve carefully the equity and righteousnesse of all these laws, as well Judiciall as Morall, 30 5. In those as well as in the Morall laws, we must take notice of Gods equity and justice. as the Psalmist acknowledgeth that all the Testi­monies which God hath commanded are righ­teous, and very faithfull, Psal. 119.138. Right concerning all things: ver. 128. that we may thence conclude that he is a righteous God whose judgements are upright, Psal. 119.137. a God without iniquity, just, and upright, [Page 326] Deut. 32.4. and may with the more care and diligence endeavour to bring both our hearts and practise to a full conformity to those just, and equall Commandements, both in our generall and particular callings, seeing the Lord in all his ordinances aimes only at that end, as is evident by all those Laws wherein there is nothing prescribed but equity and justice.

Of those subjects or matters which the Scripture handles, 31 we have hitherto conside­red, what observations we may gather unto our selves out of the works and laws of God which are recorded therein: The rest of the matters which these holy writings hold out unto us, are either principles of faith, or Pro­phesies of the events which were to befall the Church, or histories either of the state of the Church in generall, or particularly of mens lives and actions, either good or evill. All which we are to take notice of, and of the in­structions which may be gathered out of them for use.

Now for the first of these, 32 which are the principles of faith, The principles or faith are plaine. they describe unto us both God himselfe, and his Sonne Jesus Christ, and the things which are freely given unto us by God in him, as the Apostle tearmes them, 1 Cor. 2.12. and are for the most part of them expressed in so cleare and plaine tearmes, and therefore so easily understood, according to the literall sense of them, that being in [Page 327]themselves rules of faith, as the Commande­ments are rules of practise, any man that reads and observes them carefully, may easily without further direction discover what they teach us. Only because they are in themselves of a spiri­tuall nature, things that neither eye hath seene, nor eare heard, neither have entred into the heart of man, 1 Cor. 2.9. (he meanes a naturall man, who can neither comprehend, nor much lesse approve them, 1 Cor. 2.14.) they need a light above nature, to enable us to comprehend them as we ought. But being spi­rituall, in read­ing them we must 1. Deny our own wisdome; Wherefore we are seriously to be exhorted, to come to the reading of them with humble minds, wholly laying aside, and denying our own wisdome, and with earnest prayers begging at Gods hand the light of his Spirit, for the revealing unto us those wonderfull Mysteries, (as David prayes that God would open his eyes, 2. Beg the help of the Spirit to reveale them to us spiritu­ally. that he might behold wondrous things out of his Law, Psal. 119.18.) and that not only to discover them unto us in a rationall way, but to manifest them unto us spiritually, that we may tast, and see the things that God hath given us (as the Psalmist speakes, Psal. 34.8.) which is the only means to affect the heart, as the sight of Christs day filled Abrahams heart with joy, John 8.36.

In the next place for the Prophesies, 33 In the Prophe­sies observe, (in which the Law with the Sanctions thereof is ap­plied to the state of the Church, as it was in the times of those Prophets) the first thing [Page 328]to be observed in them is the answerableness of Gods dispensations in the Government of his people, 1. That Gods dispensations to his Church are answerable to his Law. to the Law that he gave them, where­of the Prophet Daniel takes speciall notice, Dan. 9.13. This observation both justifies God, when he is found, not to goe beyond the con­ditions of the Covenant, which he hath made with his people, and consequently to be just even in his chastisements and judgements which he brings upon his own, Neh. 9.33. And be­sides is a great means to awe the hearts of his servants the more with the terror of Gods judgements, when they observe that Gods threatnings are not vaine words, but are made good in reall performances, as the treading down, and putting away of the wicked like drosse, caused David to be afraid of Gods judgements, Psal. 119.118, 119, 120.

Secondly, 34 in reading those Prophesies, take speciall notice of Gods care of his people, 2. Gods unwil­lingnesse to grieve his peo­ple, forewarn­ing them of the evils to come; and tendernesse of their good, and unwillingnesse to grieve them, Lam. 3.33. Hos. 11.8, 9. ma­nifested by sending his Prophets both to reduce them to obedience, by counsell and faire means, from their wicked waies, wherein they walked contrary to God, (as Moses tearmes it, Levit. 26.23, 40.) and withall to warne them of the danger that hung over their heads, if they per­sisted in their rebellious courses. And indeed upon this ground God justifies both his com­passion towards his people, and the righte­ousnesse of his judgements in taking vengeance [Page 329]even upon his own people for their rebellions, from which neither experience, nor advice and counsell could reclaim them, nor any other means, but the powring out of the fury of his wrath upon them, 2 Chron. 36.15, 16, 17. And aiming at their good in the judgements that he brings upon them. which yet withall he doth both in respect to their good, and purging out of their drosse in the furnace of afflictions, Isa. 1.15. as also to his own honour, much impeached by his peoples evill courses, 2 Sam. 12.14. for which if he should forbeare to take vengeance on them, he might be judged partiall, or an approver of evill like unto wicked men, as God himselfe speaks, Psal. 50.21.

Thirdly, 35 the Lord by his Prophets not only denounceth in generall, 3. In pointing out particularly the kinds, the time, and in­struments of such judge­ments God manifests. 1. That they come not ca­sually, but were the stroaks of his hand. 2. That they were certaine and already prepared. his judgements against his people for their rebellions against him, but withall foretells the times, the instruments, the manner and measure of these calamities, which he threatens to bring upon then; partly, that they might acknowledge those sad events to be not so much the effects of the power and rage of men, as of the righteousnesse of a just God, rewarding them (as he doth all men) according to their deeds: and partly to assure his People of the certainty of those judgements threatned against them, set out before their eies with the whole manner and order of Gods proceeding therein, with all the events that should follow, as being prepared and decreed by God already. These Prophesies then thus answered with proportionable effects give us [Page 330]sufficient ground to conclude, that in the judge­ments executed by God upon his Church, no­thing is left to chance or second causes, but the work is ordered by the wisdome and counsell of God beforehand, (as it was in the crucifying of our Saviour Christ, Acts 4.18.) the considera­tion whereof may both keep us from murmur­ing either at the instruments, or events of whatsoever befalls us, as it did David, Ps. 39.9. 2 Sam. 16.10. and besides may raise up our hearts to expect a comfortable issue of the work, how unpleasant soever it seemes at pre­sent, because God hath the managing of it, who cannot faile in bringing any work that he takes in hand to a good issue in the end.

Fourthly, 36 we may observe out of these Pro­phesies, that in the middest of the Churches sharpest afflictions, 4. In these ge­nerall afflicti­ons yet God takes speciall care of his faithfull ser­vants, 1. Either spar­ing them; wherein God seems to powre out the fury of his wrath upon his peo­ple, yet he takes special care of such as are faith­full in his Covenant, whom he makes up a­mongst his Jewels, Mal. 3.17. either sparing them in the generall destruction, Ezek. 9.4. or preserving them like the three Children in the middest of the fiery furnace of affliction, as he did the godly in the Babylonish Capti­vity, 2. Or preserv­ing them in the middest of those afflictions that come up­on the Church. whom he carried out of their own country for their good, Ier. 24.5, 6. and was a little Sanctuary to them when they were scattered among the Heathen, Ezek. 11.16. So that by their own experience they found that promise made good unto them, [Page 331] Rom. 8.28. That all things shall work toge­ther for the good of all those that love God.

Fifthly, 37 in the Prophesies of Gods judge­ments threatned against his people, 5. Gods scope in these afflicti­ons is only the purging of his Church. we must especially observe what scope the Lord aimes at in the chastisements of his Church, which we shall find to be, not to destroy it, but to purge it, Isa. 27.9. That when the Drosse and Tinne are taken away, and purged out, by casting his people into the Furnace of af­fliction, that is, when the wicked are consu­med out of the middest of them, by the wrath of God, he may restore the Iudges as at the first, and the Counsellers, as at the beginning, that they may be called a City of righteousnesse, Isa. 1.25, 26. For which cause when he smites his Church, he debates with it in measure, and staieth his rough wind in the day of the East­wind, Jsa. 27.8. destroying not his Church, as he doth her enemies, verse 7. Her he smites with rods, but them with Scorpions. So that his people out of experience may truly acknowledge, that God punisheth them far lesse then their deserts. Ezra 9.13.

Sixthly, 38 after God by those sharp afflicti­ons hath throughly purged his Church, 6. Which when he hath done he returnes to them in mercy. and humbled his peoples uncircumcised hearts, (in such manner as is expressed, Jer. 31, 18, 19.) the Lord will remember his Covenant, Levit. 26.44, 45. and be jealous for Zion, Zach. 8.2. and rejoyce over his people to doe them good, Ier. 32.41. not only in outward bles­sings, [Page 332]but more especially in cleansing them from their sinnes, Ier. 33.8. and changing their hearts, Ezek. 11.19. and planting his feare, and writing his Law in them, Ier. 31.38, that they shall not depart from the Lord, Ier. 32.40. and shall at last be able out of their owne experience to say with David, I know that thou in very faithfulnesse hast afflicted me, But not for their sakes, but for his own Names sake. Psalm 119.75. And all this he will doe not for their sakes, Ezek. 36.25.26, 32. but for his own Names sake, ver. 22.

Seventhly, 39 when God hath made use of the enemies of his Church, 7. And when he hath used the Churches enemies to purge it, he poures out his wrath upon them to the uttermost. as the Rod of his Anger, Isa. 10.5. and hath by their hand per­formed his whole work upon Mount Zion, verse 12. those Prophesies assure us, that God will not faile to call them to account for their pride and cruelty, Isa. 47.6, 7, 11. and their plagues when they light upon them shall not be like the chastisements of Gods people, but shall be like the breaking of a Potters vessell, even a totall and finall destruction, Isa. 14.21, 22. Ier. 90.39, 40. and that in favour of his people to avenge them upon those that have ruled over them with rigour, and used them without mercy, 40 Ier. 51.35.

Eightly, 8. He supports the spirits of the godly by happy times to follow, especi­ally under the Gospel. the Prophets intermix the threat­nings of Gods Judgements, with many sweet and gracious promises of happy times to fol­low after those sharp trialls that they were to undergoe, for the supporting and staying up of the hearts of the godly, which though few [Page 333]of those to whom they were uttered should live to see, yet if their zeale unto Gods ho­nour, and tender love unto his Church where­of themselves were members, could not but raise up their hearts, to embrace and rejoyce in those sweet comforts of Gods gracious promises to his Church, supporting their drooping spirits, by carrying on their thoughts to look beyond the present sad condition, which they were to undergoe, to fixe them up­on that happy estate which was to follow, as the Apostle supported his spirit, in those mani­fold afflictions, wherewith he was exercised, by looking not at the things which are seen, but at the things which being to come, are not seen, 2 Cor. 4.16, 18. But above all this, the Prophets most insist upon, and labour to set out that glorious enlargement of his Church by the calling in of the Gentiles, with the blessed and happy estate thereof, under the government of Iesus Christ, whom with the fruits of righteousnesse and peace, which he shall establish in his kingdome, both the Psalmist, and the rest of the Prophets describe, and set out unto us at large.

These which we have mentioned, 41 are some of the speciall things, How to affect our hearts in the reading of these Pro­phesies. whereof we are to take notice, in reading the writings of the Prophets, wherewith if we mean throughly to affect our hearts, we must not only be perswaded, that these things which were written beforehand were written for our learning, as Saint Paul [Page 334]speaks, Rom. 15.4. but must besides set them before our eyes, as precedents and examples, as he represents and applies them, 1 Cor. 10.6. So that in reading of these Prophesies delivered to the Iews, we must represent them to our selves, not so much as the people of such a Nation, but under the notion of the Church of God, which now claime to be as they were at that time. So that not only any people, that is owned and esteemed to be a Church of God, but besides any particular person, that is a member of that Church, ought so to heare, and read the words of these Pro­phesies, as to apply them to themselves in particular, to take themselves taxed in their reproofes, threatned in the judgements de­nounced against them, and comforted in their promises; seeing we know, that all these are directed to, and executed upon the Iews as not being such a Nation, but as being the people and the Church of God. So that in them as in a patterne, there is laid before us, the course and rule of Gods administra­tion towards his Church, in what Nation of the world soever it be planted.

Having now in briefe considered what use may be made of the reading of prophesies, 42 How to make use of examples recorded in Scripture. we have now left us in the last place, to be considered, only the examples of the actions of men, what use we may make of them for our own instructions, and how farre we may fol­low them by way of imitation in the course [Page 335]of our practice. Now it must be remembred, that we have already taken notice of the acti­ons of men, in relation to the Providence of God, dispensing either in mercy, or judge­ment to every one according to his deeds. We are now to consider the actions of those which are godly, how far they may be of use to us for instruction. 43

First, Examples are not the rule of our practice but the Law. we must lay down this an evident truth, that we have no rule, but the Law onely, that can warrant us in any thing that we doe. That is our righteousnesse, if we ob­serve to doe all the Commandements of the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us. Deut. 6.25. The things that are revealed be­long to us, and to our children, that we may doe them, Deut. 29.29. As for the Apostles exhortations to us to be followers of him, 1 Cor. 4.16. Phil. 3.17. they must be under­stood with the limitation expressed, 1 Cor. 11.1. Be followers of me, as I also am of Christ. Now these examples which we are to take notice of, are either the examples of Christ, or of holy and godly men.

Concerning the examples of Christ, 44 In the exam­ples of our Sa­viour that we may know what to imitate in them, we must confider in him his Deity, his Offices, and his humane nature, in which he was made under the Law, Gal. 4.4. What he did by the power of his Deity we cannot imi­tate. In respect of his Deity, he did many things unimitable by us, [...]s all his Miracles, which were wrought by his Divine power, of which men are un­furnished, [Page 336]and and some other acts of his which he did by his Soveraigne powre, And what he did by his So­veraigne power we may not. as Lord of all. As when he sent his Disciples to fetch away another mans Asse, Mat. 21.2. this was just in him, which was Lord of all things, to command that which was his own; but leaves no warrant for us to imitate it, being for­bidden in the Law to meddle with that which is another mans.

As for those things which were acted by our Saviour, 45 What he did by vertue of his Offices, they may imitate that are called to those offices: by vertue of his Offices; some of them may by fitly proposed for imitation, to as many as are called unto the same offices, so farre as those offices are communicated to men. For it is true, that unto the offices of a Priest and Prophet God hath left a succes­sion of men in his Church, but not to doe and execute all that Christ himselfe did, and might doe by vertue of those offices; Unlesse in the office of his Priesthood, when he offe­red himselfe a sacrifice for sinne. espe­cially in that office of Priesthood, wherein he offered up himselfe unto his Father a Sa­crifice for the sinnes of his people, which none could do but himselfe alone. As for the offering up of Prayers unto God, the teach­ing and instructing of the people in all the Counsells of God, reproving of mans wicked lives, clearing the truth of God from the corrupt glosses of false teachers, they are duties wherein all that are called by God unto those publike offices of instructing the Church, not only may and ought to imi­tate Christ, but are bound withall to striv [Page 337]as much as they may, to come up to those holy examples, that he hath left unto them.

But wheresoever amongst our Savious acti­ons we find recorded unto us, 46 The examples of his obedi­ence to the law we must make use of: any example of his obedience unto the Law, there we have not onely sufficient warrant to imitate him therein, as going before us in the way of Gods Commandements, but besides may draw from such actions of his a strong motive to double our endeavours, To stir up our selves to the like obedience having him for our pattern. to tread in the steps wherein he walks before us, and to submit with all readinesse to those duties, which we find practised by the Sonne of God himselfe, in obedience to his owne Law, which seeing he gave unto his Church, he might by all right have dispensed with at his pleasure, which himselfe allead geth, Luk. 6.5. in defence of his Disciples, challenged by the Pharisees for breaking the Sabbath, that if it had been a breach of the Sabbath, he being Lord of the Sabbath had power to dispence with it.

In the next place for the examples of godly men, 47 Mens exam­ples must be followed no farther then they are war­ranted by the Law. we have no warrant to follow them far­ther then they are warranted by the Law, which (as we have shewed already) is the only rule which we must follow. And even in such acti­ons of theirs, we have many cautions, which we must take with us for direction, that we may not misapply their examples, as we shall see by and by.

First therefore, we must consider, 48 that [Page 338]some things which the Scriptures approve in them, And that only in the body of the action, not in the circum­stances also. they approve in the body of the acti­on, but not in the circumstances thereof. For example, the Hebrew mid-wives are com­mended for saving alive the men-children of the Israelites, yea, and rewarded too by God himselfe, Exodus 1.20, 21. But whether they are approved in their defence, which they make unto Pharaoh, (which can hardly be excused from a lie) it may be very questi­onable. Rebecca did well in endeavouring to establish the blessing upon the head of Jacob, to whom it belonged by the decree of God, that settled it upon him before he was borne, Gen. 25.23. But it is not so cer­taine, that the way by which she brought her husband to give him the blessing, by delu­ding him, was to be justified. At least, if Iacob did well in desiring the blessing, and may be some way excused in following his mothers counsell for obtaining it, he cannot be com­mended, much lesse imitated, in telling his father a flat lye, Gen. 27.19. that he was Esau the first borne. In such examples we may lawfully imitate the faith both of the mid­wives and of Rebecca, 49 but must take heed, that we follow not the errors of their waies in doing that, 2. We may not imitate actions approved in men, if they were done up­on speciall command. which in it selfe was com­mendable, in an unlawfull way.

Secondly, some actions in Scripture are ap­proved which yet we may by no meanes imi­tate, as being justifiable by a particular com­manded [Page 339]from God, to do what they did, though it were not according to the generall rule of the Law. As the Israelites borrowed Jewells of Gold, and Jewells of Silver, of the Aegyptians by Gods expresse command, Exod. 11.2. which they never paid againe; yet we know, that to borrow and not pay againe is the Character of a wicked man, Psal. 37.21. Yea where there is no outward and verball command from God, yet some times men by a secret instinct of the Spirit are warranted to do that which without it had been unlawfull, as it was not lawfull for the Apostles to call for fire from heaven to consume those Samaritanes, that refused to receive Christ, Luk. 9.54. because Elijah had done the like, 2 Kings 1.10, 12.

Thirdly, 50 in imitating warrantable exam­ples we must wisely compare our case with that which we set before us for our pat­terne, to see, 3. Where we follow exam­ples of good men, we must consider whe­ther our case and theirs be alike in all things. whether they be alike in all circumstances. For circumstances in actions doe much vary the nature of them, as we know. Wherefore our Saviour to justifie his Disciples rubbing the eares of Corne on the Sabbath day, by Davids example of eat­ing the shew-bread, shewes the case of his Disciples to be the same with Davids, that they did it to relieve their hunger, as David had done, Luk. 6.3. Otherwise we have no warrant to disobey Magistrates commands, in lawfull or indifferent things, because the A­postles refused to obey the rulers at Ierusalem, [Page 340]in a case where they had a command from Christ to the contrary, Acts 4.19.

Fourthly, 51 4. Where we imitate a good action we must withall strive to imitate the faith, zeale, &c. wherewith it was acted. in taking precedents from the actions of godly men, it is not enough to set before us the act done by them, but we must with all strive to imitate their faith, zeale, and other holy affections, which they manifested in doing it, and the right end at which they aimed therein. For we know that the works of men have their just estimation from the in­ward disposition of the heart, from whence they spring, and from the end to which they are directed. The end of the Commandement (saith the Apostle) is Charity out of a pure heart, and a good confidence, and faith un­fained. And the scope of all our actions ought to be Gods glory, Mat. 5.16. 1 Cor. 10.31.

Lastly, 52 when we follow the examples of holy men in those things wherein they walked ac­cording to the rule of the Law, 5. Lastly, we may not make the example, but the Law the ground of imitating the best men. we must not make their example, the ground of our action, but the Law only, which they were guided by, and which is the only rule, that must be our di­rection, as we said before. The only use which we are to make of examples is, to provoke and stirre us up and to encourage us to such duties of Obedience as we see godly men have been enabled to performe, assuring our selves that if we put to our endeavours, the same power of the Spirit of grace, that wrought in them, will be present with us to assist us in the like performances.