other Festivals whatsoever it is yet greater boldness without proof to exclude the principal part from whence the rest did receive the name 3. Besides the Feasts and New Moons being here named as distinct from the Sabbath are like to include so much of the other separated dayes as will leave it still more unmeet to exclude the weekly Sabbath in the Explication of that word Sabbaths when so many Feasts are first distinguished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incuit Grotius hic sunt Azyma dies omer scenopegia dies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Obj. But the Sabbath mentioned in the Decalogue could not be included Answ. This is spoken without proof and the contrary is before proved Obj. By this you will make the Christian Sabbath also to be excluded Is not the Lords day a Sabbath Answ. I am here to speak but of the name of which I say that the common sense of the word Sabbath was a Day so appointed to Rest as that the bodily Rest of it was a primary part of its observation to be kept for it self and such the Jewish Sabbaths were Though spiritual Worship was then also commanded yet the corporal Rest was more expresly or frequently urged in the Law and this not only subordinately as an advantage to the spiritual worship but for it self as an immediate and most visible and notable part of Sabbatizing Even as other Ceremonies under the Law were commanded not only as doctrinal Types of things spiritual but as external Acts of Ceremonious operous obedience suited to the Jews Minority which is after called the yoke which they and their Fathers were unable to bear Acts 15. Whereas the Lords day is appointed but as a seasonable time subserviently to the spiritual work of the day And the bodily Rest not required as primary obedience for it self but only for the spiritual work sake and therefore no bodily labour is now unlawful but such as 〈◊〉 hinderance to the spiritual work of the day 〈◊〉 or accidentally a scandal and temptation to others whereas the breach of the outward Rest of the Jews Sabbath was a sin directly of it self without hinderance of or respect to the spiritual Worship So that the first notion and sense of a Sabbath in those dayes being in common use A day of such Ceremonial Corporal Rest as the Jewish Sabbath was the Lords day is never in Scripture called by that name but the proper name is The Lords day And the ancient Churches called it constantly by that name and never called it the Sabbath but when they spake Analogically by allusion to the Jews Sabbath even as they called the holy Table the Altar and the Bread and Wine the Sacrifice Therefore it is plain that Paul is to be understood of all proper Sabbaths and not of the Lords day which was then and long after distinguished from the Sabbath And this Ceremonial Sabbatizing of the Jews was so strict that the Ceremonicusness made them the scorn of the Heathens as appeareth by the derisions of Horat. li. 1. sat 9. Persius sat 5. Juvenal sat 6. Martial lib. 4. and others whereas they derided not the Christians for the Ceremonious Rest but for their Worship on that day The Lords day being not called a Sabbath in the old sense then only in use but distinguished from the Sabbath cannot be meant by the Apostle in his exclusion of the Sabbath Obj. But the Apostles then met in the Synagogues with the Jews on the Sabbaths Therefore it is not those dayes that he meaneth here Col. 2. 16. Answ 1. You might as well say that therefore he is not for the cessation of the Jewish manner of Worship or Communion with them in it because he met with them 2. And you may as well say that he was for the continuance of Circumcision and Purification because he purified himself and circumcised Timothy 3. Or that he was for the continuance of their other Feasts in which also he refused not to joyn with them 4. But Paul did not keep their Sabbaths formally as Sabbaths but only take the advantage of their Assemblies to teach them and convince them and to keep an interest in them And not scandalize them by an unseasonable violation and contradiction 5. And you must note also that the Text saith not Observe not Sabbath dayes but Let no man judge you that is Let none take it for your sin that you observe them not nor do you receive any such Doctrine of the necessity of keeping the Law of Moses The case seemeth like that of things strangled and blood which were to be forborn among the Jews while they were offensive and the use of them hindred their conversion Obj. But the ancient Christians did observe both dayes Answ. 1. In the first Ages they did as the Apostles did that is 1. They observed no day strictly as a Sabbath in the notion then in use 2. They observed the Lords day as a day set apart by the Holy Ghost for Christian Worship 3. They so far observed the Jews Sabbath materialy as to avoid their scandal and to take opportunity to win them 2. But those that lived far from all Jews and those that lived after the Law was sufficiently taken down did keep but one day even the Lords day as separated to holy uses except some Christians who differed from the rest as the followers of Papias did in the Millenary point 3. And note that even these dissenters did still make no question of keeping the Lords day which sheweth that it was on foot from the times of the Apostles 〈◊〉 whoever it was and whenever he wrote saith that After the Sabbath we keep the Lords day And Pseudo-Clemens Can. 33. saith Servants work five dayes but on the Sabbath and Lords day they keep holy day in the Church for the Doctrine or Learning of Godliness The Text of Gal. 4. 10. is of the same sense with Col. 2. 16. against the Jews Sabbath and therefore needeth no other defence And I would have you consider whether as Christs Resurrection was the foundation of the Lords day so Christs lying dead and buried in a Grave on the seventh day Sabbath was not a fundamental abrogation of it I say not the Actual and plenary abrogation For it was the Command of Christ by his Word Spirit or both to the Apostles before proved which fully made the change But as the Resurrection was the Ground of the new day so his Burial seemeth to intimate that the day with all the Jewish Law which it was the symbolical profession of lay dead and buried with him Sure I am that he saith when the Bridegroom is taken from them then shall they fast and mourn but he was most notably taken from them when he lay dead in the Grave And if they must fast and mourn that day they could not keep it as a Sabbath which was a day of joy Therefore as by death he overcame him that had the power of death Heb. 2. 14. and
as he nailed the hand-writing of Ordinances to his Cross so he buried the Sabbath in his Grave by lying buried on that day And therefore the Western Churches who had fewer Jews among them did fast on the Sabbath day to shew the change that Christs burial intimated Though the Eastern Churches did not lest they should offend the Jews And that the ancient Christians were not for sabbatizing on the seventh day is visible in the writings of most save the Eastern ones before mentioned Tertull. cont Marcion li. 1. cap. 20. Chrysost. Theodoret Primasius c. on Gal. 4. expound that Text as that by Dayes is meant the Jewish Sabbath and by Moneths the New Moons c. Cyprian 59. Epist. ad Hidum saith that the eighth day is to Christians what the Sabbath was to the Jews and calleth the Sabbath the Image of the Lords day Athanasius de Sab. Circumcis is full and plain on it See Tertullian Advers Judae c. 4. Ambros. in Eph. 2. August Ep. 118. Châ—ysâ—st in Gal. 1. Hâ—m 12. ad pop Hilary before cited Prolog in Psalm Origen Hom. 23. in Num. Item Tertull. de Idol c. 14. Epipban l. 1. num 30. noting the Nazaraei and Ebionaei Hereticks that they kept the Jews Sabbath In a word The Council of Laodiâ—aea doth Anathematize them that did Judaize by forbearing their Labours on the Sabbath or seventh day And as Sozomen tells us that at Alexandria and Rome they used no Assemblies on the Sabbath so where they did in most Churches they communicated not in the Sacrament Yea that Ignatius himself true or false who saith as aforecited After the Sabbath let every lover of Christ celebrate the Lords day doth yet in the same Epistle ad Magnes before say Old things are passed away behold all things are made new For if we yet live after the Jewish Law and the Circumcision of the flesh we deny that we have received Grace Let us not therefore keep the Sabbath or sabbatize Jewishly as delighting in Idleness or Rest from labour For be that will not labour let him not eat In the sweat if thy brows thou shalt cat thy bread I confess I take the cited Texts to have been added since the body of the Epistle was written but though the Writer favour of the Eastern custom yet he sheweth they did not sabbatize on the account of the fourth Commandment or supposed continuation of the Jewish Sabbath as a Sabbath For bodily labour was strictly forbidden in the fourth Commandment Dionysius Alexandr hath an Epistle to Basilides a Bishop on the Question When the Sabbath Fast must end and the observation of the Lords day begin Biblioth Patr. Graec. Lat. Vol. 1. p. 306. In which he is against them that end their Fast too soon And plainly intimateth that the seventh day was to be kept but as a preparatory Fast being the day that Christ lay in the grave and not as a Sabbath or as the Lords day I cite not any of these as a humane authority to be set against the authority of the fourth Commandment But as the certain History of the change of the day which the Apostles made Qu. How far then is the fourth Commandment Moral you seem to subvert the old foundation which most others build the Lords day upon Answ. Let us not entangle our selves with the ambiguities of the word Moral which most properly signifieth Ethical as distinct from Physical c. By Moral here is meant that which is on what ground soever of perpetual or continued obligation And so it is all one as to ask how far it is still obligatory or in force To which I answer 1. It is a part of the Law of Nature that God be solemnly worshipped in families and in holy assemblies 2. It is a part of the Law of Nature that where greater things do not forbid it a stated time be appointed for this service and that it be not left at Randome to every mans will 3. It is of the Law of Nature that where greater matters do not hinder it this day be one and the same in the same Countreys yea if it may be through the world 4. It is of the Law of Nature that this day be not so rarely as to hinder the ends of the day nor yet so frequently as to deprive us of opportunity for our necessary corporal labour 5. It is of the Law of Nature that the holy duties of this day be nâ—t hindered by any corporal work or fleshly pleasure or any unnecessary thing which contradiâ—teth the holy ends of the day 6. It is of the Law of Nature that Rulers and in special Masters of families do take care that their inferiours thus observe it In all these points the fourth Commandment being but a transcript of the Law of Nature which we can yet prove from the nature of the reason of the thing the matter of it continueth not as Jewish but as Natural 7. Besides all this when no man of himself could tell whether one day in six or seven or eight were his duty to observe God hath come in and 1. By Doctrine or History told us that he made the world in six dayes and rested the seventh 2. By Law and bath commanded one day in seven to the Jews by which he hath made known consequentialâ—y to all men that one day in seven is the fittest proportion of time And the case being thus determined by God by a Law to others doth consequentially become a Law to us because it is the determination of Divine Wisdom unless it were done upon some reasons in which their condition differeth from ours And thus the Doctrine and Reasons of an abrogated Law continuing may induce on us an obligation to duty And in this sense the fourth Commandment may be said still to bind us to one day in seven But in two points the obligation even as to the Matter ceaseth 1. We are not bound to the seventh day because God our Redeemer who is Lord of the Sabbath hath made a change 2. We are not bound to a Sabbath in the old notion that is to a day of Ceremonial Rest for it self required but to a day to be spent in Evangelical Worship And though I am not of their mind who say that the seventh day is not commanded in the fourth Commandment but a Sabbath only yet I think that it is evident in the words that the Ratio Sabbati and the Ratio diei septimi are distinguishable And that the Sabbath as a Sabbath is first in the precept and the particular day is there but secondarily and so mutably as if God had said I will have a particular day set apart for a holy Rest and for my Worship And that day shall be one in seven and the seventh also on which I rested from my works And thus I have said as much as I think needful to satisfie the considerate about the day Again professing 1. That I believe that
exercise but on one only which was the first 2. Because as is said it was not a family or by-meeting but a Churchâ—meeting The Disciples came or assembled togetherâ— 3. Because it said that they assembled for this very end to bâ—â—â—k bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. The great length of time which was spent in the holy exercises Besides the rest of the Worship and breaking of Bread Paul Preaching till midnight which intimateth that such work took up the day 5. Because it is mentioned as a matter of their custome They did not assemble because Paul called them to hear him only as being to depart on the morrow But Paul assembled with them at the time of their assembling to break Bread And it seemeth that he deferred his journey for that opportunity 6. Because other Texts as joyned with this and infallible Church History following do prove past all doubt that it was the constant custome of all the Churches so to do Obj. 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. The first day of the week c. gr one of the Sabbaths It is an ordinance to lay aside for charitable uses but not one word about changing of the Sabbath Answ. The abolition of the Sabbath we prove not by this Text but by others All that we bring this for is but to shew in conjunction with others as part of the Sacred History that the first day was the Churches separated day And I pray mark the strength of the proof that the Apostle did give order that all the Churches of Galatia as well as the Corinthians should deposite their Almes on one and the same day viz. on the first day Was it not enough to tie them to the contribution but he must tie them all to one set day to lay it by or deposite it if it had not been because the Churches used to assemble on this day and not to appear before God empty as Dr. Hammond noteth on the Text Whoever heard else that God or man tyed several Countreys to one set day for the private depositing of their own moneys afterward to be distributed With such Sacrifices God is well pleased And therefore it was ever accounted by Christians a fit work for the sanctified day But no other day was ever appointed peculiarly for the set time of laying by mens gifts of Charity Obj. Rev. 1. 10. John was in the Spirit on the Lords day Compare Exod. 20. 10 c. Esa. 58. 13 c. Luk. 6. 5. Mark 2. 28. Mat. 12. 8 c. And if the Scriptures be the rule to judge resolve whether that day be not the Lords day of which day and of which only as distinguished from the other dayes of the week the Son of man is Lord. Answ. We are not upon a Controversie of title or propriety whether God be Lord of other dayes For so no doubt he is Lord of all and therefore no more of one than another because his propriety in each one is absolute And it can be no more in any Thus also he is absolute Lord of all things all places all persons c. And yet some things some places some persons have been separated to his service by a peculiar Dedication and Relation and thence have been peculiarly called The Lords And the Texts cited by you out of the old Testament prove that such was the seventh day Sabbath then But not that it is so now or was to be so for perpetuity And the words of the new Testament cited The Son of man is Lord also or even of the Sabbath day shews no more then that it was in his power He giveth it as a reason for his doing that which the Pharises counted Sabbath-breaking By which he oftentimes offended them and not as a reason of his astablishing it And it seemeth plainly to mean that being but a Positive Law and a Law of Moses he had power to change it and dispense with it as well as with other Positives and Mosaical Laws As it is said Ephes. 1. 22 23. he hath made him Head over all things to the Church not Head to all things so he is Lord over or of all dayes But all are not separated to his Worship As it is said Joh. 17. 2. As thou hast given him power over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him so it may be said he hath power over all dayes that he may sanctifie one to his peculiar service and use the rest in more common works But that which we bring this text for is but to know what day is notified to the world by this title of The Lords day and consequently was then accounted his separated peculiar day Now the signification of words is known but by use They are not Natural signes but Arbitrary You know not the sense of one word of Hebrew Greek or Latine but by the History of their use by Dictionaries Authors or other Tradition Now it is unquestionable to any man verst in antiquity that all the Churches and Authors Greek and Latine Syriack Aethiopick Persian Arabick that have been known among us and speak of such things do unanimously call the first day of the week by the name of the Lords day as being so called from the beginning even from the Apostles And all old expositors so interpret this present Text. And you may as well question what day the word Sabbath signified in the Old Testament almost as what day the name of The Lords day signified in the new Or what sort of people they were that were called Christians first at Antioch when only one sort hath ever since been notified by that name Even the Disciples of Christ. The Greek with the Syriack Translation the Arabick the vulgar Latine have all The Lords day and the Ethiopick as equipollent hath the first day And Dr. Heylin who would find something against it if any thing were to be found speaking of some of late that otherwise expound it is so ingenious as to say Par. 2. cap. 1. p. 37. Touching this we will not meddle Let them that own it look to it The rather since St. John hath generally been expounded in the other sense Aretas and Andr. Caesariensis on the place and by Bedae de rat temp c. 6. and by the suffrage of the Church the best expositor of the word of God wherein this day hath constantly since the time of the Apostles been honoured with that name above other daies And I know no one man nor many that at 1600 years distance almost is so worthy to be believed for the bare sense of a word as the constant use and universal testimony of all ages from that time till now As Christ is the Lord of all our Suppers yet all are not named The Lords Supper so is it in this case I must needs conclude therefore that if I should cast off the evidence of this Text upon no greater reason than you offer me I think I should resist the
the Apostles actual settlement thereupon was the Promulgation 3. The gradual notification by the Preachers to the Churches and finally the destruction of the Jewish Policie and Temple and Priesthood were the fuller proclamation of it and the way of bringing the change that was made by Command into fuller Execution 10. The seventh day Sabbath was observed by the Apostles after the Resurrection and Ascension Act. 13. 14 15 16 42 44. 16. 13 14. And constantly Act. 17. 2. the same Greek phrase with that Luk. 14. 16. for Christ constant keeping the seventh day Sabbath as before Act. 18. 1 4. c. 10 A. 1. But withal in this time they stablished the Lords day as soon as on that day the Holy Ghost came down upon them 2. So all that while they kept other parts of the Jewish Law They scrupled yea refused a while Communion with the Gentiles as Act. 10. shews They so carryed it to the Jews that Paul made it his defence that he had not offended any thing at all either against the Law of the Jews or against the Temple Act. 25. 8. And when he Circumcised Timâ—thy purified himself shaved his head for his Vow c. Do you think that all these are duties to Believers 3. None of the Texts cited by you do prove that the Apostles kept the Sabbath at all as a Sabbath that is a day on which it was their duty to Rest But only that they Preached on that day in the Synagogues and to the people For when should they Preach to them but when they were Congregated and capable of hearing They took it for no sin to Preach on the Sabbath no more than I would do to Preach Christ on Friday which is their Sabbath to the Turks if they would hear me But Sabbatizing according to the Law was something else than Preaching 4. And it is most evident that for a long time the Christian Jews did still keep the Law of Moses And that all that the Apostles did against it then was but 1. To declare that Christ was the end of the Law and so to declare the keeping of it to be unnecessary to Salvation but not unlawful laying by the opinion of necessity 2. That the Gentile Christians should not be brought to use it because it was unnecessary For the Apostles Act. 15. do not forbid it to the Jews but only to the Gentiles who were never under it Therefore the Apostles who lived among the Jews no doubt did so far comply with them to win them as to keep the Law externally though not as a necessary thing that is not as a Law in force obliging them but as a thing yet lawful to further the Gospel And therefore no wonder if Peter went so far as to withdraw from the Gentiles when the Jews were present when even Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles who speaketh so much more than all the rest against the Law doth yet as aforesaid Circumcise Timothy shave his head purifie himself c. and as he became all things to all men so to the Jews he became a Jew But when the Jews Policie and Temple ceased the change was executively yet further made and the Jewish Christians themselves were weaned from their Law In the mean time Paul and John Rev. 2. 3. do openly rebuke the Judaizing Hereticks the Ebionites and Cerinthians and Nicolaitans and shew the perniciousness of their conceits 11. The Holy Spirit calls the seventh day and no other day the Sabbath throughout the Scriptures before and after the Death Resurrection and Ascension of the Lord Jehovah Christ Gen. 2. 2 3 4. Exod. 20. 10 c. Act. 13. 14 15 16 42 44. 16. 13 14. 17. 2. 18. 1 4. 11. A. Though it be not true that the seventh is called the Sabbath Gen. 2. and though others deny the sufficiency of your enumeration yet I grant your assertion as true And therefore am satisfied that it is the seventh day which is put down when Sabbatizing was put down and that it could be none but the seventh day which Paul meant Col. 2. 16. Let no man judge you in meaâ—s c. and Sabbaths which were Shadows of things to come For the first day is never called a Sabbath as you truly say therefore it was not put down with the Sabbath See Dr. Youngs Dies Dom. on Col. 2. 16. 12. The seventh day Sabbath was prophaned by the Church heretofore and reformed Neh. 10. 28 29 31. 13. 15 17 18 22. See Belg. Annot. on Dan. 7. 25 c. as prophesied who would change it 12. This is all granted Sacrificing also was then Prophaned and Reformed and polluted and destroyed by Antiochus And yet we are not still under the obligation of Sacrificing We are not under the Law but under Grace CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law IT is but few that I have any Controversie with on this point But yet one there is who objecteth and argueth as followeth God hath put this into nature Ex. 20. 10. Thy Stranger Deut. 5. 14. The three first Chapters of Romans Particularly Chap. 2. 14 15 26 27. 3. 9. 21. 1 Cor. 11. 14. Nature hath its teachings The humane Nature in the first Adam was made and framed to the perfection of the ten words some Notions whereof are still retained even in the corrupt state of fallen man Gen. 1. 26 27. Eccl. 7. 29. Eph. 4. 20. Col. 3. 10. The Law of the seventh day Sabbath was given before the ten words were proclaimed at Sinai Exod. 16. 23. Even from the Creation Gen. 2. 2 3. Given to Adam in respect of his humane nature and in him to all the world of humane creatures Gen. 1. 14. Psalm 104. 19 Lev. 10. 23. Numb 28. 2 9 10. 'T is the 〈◊〉 word in the Original Seâ— times of Divine appointment fâ—r solemn asseâ—â—â—ing and for Gods instituted service are directed to and pointed at by those great Lights which the Creator hath set up in the Heavens Psal. 19. with Rom. 10. 4 5 6 7. 8 18 19 20. Deut. 30. 10 15. John 1. 9. Every man hath a Light and Law of Nature which he carrieth about him and is born and bred together with him These seeds of truth and light though they will not justifie in the sight of God and bring a soul throughly and safely hâ—me to glory Rom. 1. 20. Yet there are even since Adams fall those reliques and dark Letters of this holy Law of the ten words to preserve the memory of our first created dignity and for some other ends though these seeds are utterly corrupted now Titus 1. 15. Natural reason will tell men that seeing all men in all Nations do measure their Time by Weeks and their Weeks by seven dayes they should besides what of their time they offer up as due to God every day give one whole day of every Week to their Maker who
g. If the second Command say Thou shalt perform all Gods instituted Worship Or Thou shalt Worship me as I appoint thee This bindeth no man to Baptism the Lords Supper c. till another Law appoint them Therefore there is not so much in the general Law alone as is in that and the particular also 2. All that is presupposed in a particular Law is not part of that Law 3. It is not so much to inferr a duty indirectly and by far fetcht Consequences as to command it directly Now I prove the assertion by instances All these following are Natural duties and commanded also in other parts of Scripture and yet are not in the Law of Moses as Written in Stone 1. To believe that the soul is Immortal 2. To believe that there is a Heaven where we shall be perfectly blessed in the Knowledge Love and Fruition of God 3. To believe that there is a Hell or life of future punishment for all the impenitent 4. To Love ourselves with a just and necessary Love as such 5. To take greatest care to save our souls above our bodies 6. To tame and mortifie all our fleshly lusts in order to our own Salvation 7. To deny all bodily pleasure profit honour liberty and life for the securing of our salvation 8. To forbear all outward acts of Gluttony Drunkenness Sloth c. as they tend to our own damnation 9. To rejoice in persecution because of our great reward in Heaven 10. To pray constantly and servently for Heaven as the means of our obtaining it Let none say that many of these same things are commanded in order to God and our neighbour For I grant that the same material acts be so as they are expressions of Love to God and Man But to do them in Love to our selves and for our own Salvation is another principle and end not contrary to but necessarily conjunct with the former two And indeed all the duties of self-love as such are past by as supposed in Moses Decalogue because they are deeply written in mans Nature and because the Law was Written as Political for another use Obj. But these are all supposed in the first Command of Loving God and in the second Table Thou shalt Love thy Neighbour as thy self Answ. 1. These last are not the words of the Decalogue but a part of the summary of all the Law 2. Both Tables indeed suppose the Love of our selves but that which is supposed is not a part of them Obj. But it is the Socinians that say the Old Testament speaketh of no reward or punishment but in this life Answ. True But Camero de tripl faed and others that rightly understand the matter affirm that 1. The Law of Nature containeth future rewards and punishments in another life 2. And so doth the Covenant of Grace made with Adam and all mankind in him and renewed to Noah Abraham and the Israelites which by Paul is called The Promise as distinct from the Law 3. But the Law of Moses in its own proper Nature as such was only Political and spake but of Temporal Rewards and Punishments 4. Though yet all the faithful were bound to take the Law and Promise together and so to have respect both to Temporal and Eternal things For the Law it self connoted and supposed things Eternal as our great concernment III. There is more of the Law of Nature in other parts of Moses Law conjunct with the Decalogue than is in the Decalogue alone I will stay no longer in the proof of this than to cite the places as you do Exod. 23. 13 32. 22. 18 20. Lev. 20. 1 4 6. Deut. 13. 17. Exod. 23. 24. Deut. 12. 23. Lev. 24. 23. 3. Exod. 12. 16. Deut. 23. 18. Exod. 22. 28. 23. 20. 21. 15 17. Lev. 19. 32. Deut. 21. 1. 16. 6. 11. Exod. 21. 12 13 18 20 22 c. 22. 2 3. Lev. 13. 14. 17. Deut. 21. Exod. 22. 19. Lev. 18. 19. 29. 20. Deut. 22. Exod. 21. 16 21 32 35. 22. 1. 4. to 17. Lev. 19. 30 35. Deut. 24. 29. 14. 21. 25. Exod. 23. 1. to 9. Deut. 23. 24. Lev. 19. 11 15. Exod. 22. 21 22. 25. 26. 23. 4. Lev. 19. 14 16 18 c. By all this I shew you why 1. I allow not of your making the word Law in the New Testament to signifie the Decalogue only or taking them for equipollent terms 2. Why I take not the Decalogue and the Law of Nature for equipollent termes or their matter to be of the same extent And consequently why I take it for no proof that all things in the Decalogue are perpetual because all things in the Law of Nature are so CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ IT is here further objected that the seventh day Sabbath hath the truest testimonies of Antiquity that it is controvertible when and how the Lords day came in but the Antiquity of the seventh day Sabbath is past Controversie that the Eastern Christians long observed it and Antichrist in the West did turn it into a Fast that the Empire of Abassia keepeth it to this day Answ. There is enough said of this before were it not that some Objectors causlesly look for more I answer therefore 1. That it is true that the Sabbath is more ancient than the Lords day And so is Moses more ancient than Christ Incarnate and his Law than the Gospel as delivered by Christ and his Apostles and Circumcision than Baptism and the Passover than the Lords Supper And so every mans Conception Nativity Infancie and Ignorance was before his Maturity and Knowledge And what can you gather from all this Thus the Papists say that their way of Religion was in England before ours and that the reliques of it in our Monuments Orate pro animabus c. is their standing witness which we cannot totally deface And its true if by our way they mean the Reformation of theirs as such For the Cure is ever after the disease Though its false if they speak of our Religion it self which was here before their errours as Health is before sickness But they should consider that by this prerogative the Heathens excell us both And that they may say you have yet many Monuments of our more ancient Religion which you have not been able to obliterate You still call your Week dayes by our ancient names Sunday Munday c. Your adoration towards the East was fetcht from us and so were abundance of your Customes Which we hope may recover the reputation of our Religion 2. I have shewed you already how and why the Eastern Christians kept the Sabbath 1. They kept it not as a Sabbath but only met on that day as they did on the fourth and the sixth dayes Wednesdayes and Fridayes as it is used in England to this
day And for the most part they Celebrated not the Lords Supper on that day And they abhorred the keeping it as a day of Rest. 2. They met on that day for all these Reasons 1. Because having been used in the beginning to meet every day in the Week when they had all things common and were to shew the power of the Evangelical Doctrine to the height Act. 2. 44 45 46. 4. 33 34 35. as they found cause to retrive their community so did they to meet seldomer and yet not so seldome as once a Week And therefore as we now keep other meetings for Lectures and Prayers besides the Lords day so did they then on Wednesdayes Fridayes and Saturdayes 2. Because the Conversion of the Jews was a great part of their work and hope And therefore to win them they would with Paul become Jews that is not affect an unnecessary distance but come as neer them as Lawfully they could 3. Because Converted Jews were no small part of the Eastern Churches who could not easily be quite brought off from Jewish Customes And the rest were unwilling to offend them being taught not to despise the weak that observed meats and days Rom. 14. 15. Gal. 2. 4. Because the Assemblies on the seventh day were taken as fit preparatories to the sanctifying of the Lords day on which account the Church of England now appointeth them These things one that is acquainted with Church History needeth no proof of And they are sufficiently proved before Ignatius words before cited are full And those of the Council of Laodicea Can. 29. are more full who do at once appoint meetings on the seventh day and yet Anathematize them that Judaize thereon by bodily rest and would have men labour on it and preferr the Lords day before it Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho doth largely shew that Circumcision and the Sabbath are ceased by the coming of Christ and his Institutions and are not now to be used by Christians And what writer have we of full reputation and credibility more ancient than Justin from whom any testimony in this case might be sought Tertullian one of the next li. 2. against Marcion saith that the Sabbath was for that Time and present occasion or use and not for perpetuity Athanasius was one that was for meeting on the Sabbath And yet writeth his Book de Sab. Circum purposely to prove that the Sabbath is ceased with Circumcision as a Shadow and that now the Lords day is the sanctified day And the like he hath most expresly in Homil. de Semente as is cited before saying that The Master being come the Vsher was out of use and the Sun being risen the Lamps are darkened Basil Ep. 74. Writeth against Apollinaris for holding that after the Resurrection we should keep Sabbaths and Judaizeâ— As if that were the perfection to which Christ would restore men See Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 43. And Chrysoft Hom. 19. in Mat. 12. against the use of the Sabbath Cyril Hieros cat 4. Epiphan against the Nazaraei condemn them for keeping the Sabbath and Circumcision though withal they kept the Lords day The same doth Epiphanius li. 1. Haer. 30. nâ— 2. and before him Eusebius Hist. li. 3. say of the Ebionites Augustine oft telleth us that the observation or keeping of the seventh day Sabbath is ceased and not to be done by Christians Qu. ex N. Test. 69. Ad Bonif. l. 3. Contr. Faust. Manich. li. 6. c. 4. De Genes ad lit l. 4. c. 13. de spir lit c. 14. de util Cred. c. 3. 3. And as for the Abassians keeping the Sabbath It s true they keep that day in some sort But it is as true that they use Circumcision and many other Jewish Ceremonies besides oft Baptizings And that they profess not to use these as the Jews do but only as ancient Customes and as Paul did while he complyed with them using the outward action for other ends than Judaizers do And the rather because they think their Emperours descended from Solomon But the Lords day they keep on the same account as other Christians And if this instance make any thing for Sabbatizing it will make as much for Circumcising and other Jewish rites but nothing against the Sanctifying of the Lords day 4. And as for the matter of Fasting on the Sabbath the Churches greatly varyed in their Customes The Eastern Churches and Millan in the West were against Fasting on the Sabbath on two accounts 1. Because as is said they would not offend the Jewes Even as many peaceable Non-Conformists who are against many Holy dayes now established do yet forbear labouring and opening their Shops on those dayes because they will not give offence Yea and go to hear the Sermons on those dayes though they keep them not Holy as such dayes 2. Because there were many sorts of Hereticks in those times who held that the World was made by an evil God and thence came evil and so they Fasted on the seventh day on that reason Which made the Christians avoid it lest they should Symbolize with those Hereticks And therefore the real or pretended Ignatius speaketh so severely against Fasting on the Sabbath as well as on the Lords day And so do the Constitutions called the Apostles yea and the Canons called theirs Can. 65. But in the Western Churches as is aforesaid both Jews and Hereticks were more distant or less considerable for numbers and therefore they fasted on the seventh day and that the rather lest they should seem by Sabbatizing to Judaize Which was before Antichrists appearing unless you think all the holy Doctors before cited and all the Western Churches to be Antichristian Having gone thus far I here add two more Scripture Arguments to prove the abolition of the Jewish Sabbath The first is because it is frequently made as Circumcision is a sign of the particular Covenant between God and that Nation as they were a political body and peculiar people Therefore if their Policy cease and Gods relation to them as a Political body and peculiar people and so that Political Covenant with them then also the signe of the Covenant and Relation ceaseth And though the word for ever is sometime added it is no other than is oft added also to the Jewish Law and Ceremonies 2. From Act. 15. Where the case is determined by a Council of Apostles Elders and Brethren yea by the Holy Ghost V. 28. It appeareth by V. 24. that the thing asserted by the false Teachers was that the Gentiles must be Circumcised and keep the Law that is of Moses V. 1. Now the seventh day Sabbath was part of that Law As Sacrificing was though it was a Law before But the Holy Ghost determineth the case to lay on them no greater burden than these necessary things after named where the Sabbath is none of them and therefore hereby shut out The precepts given to Noah are named of which the Sabbath was not
confesseth that its no doubt but the Religious observation of the day began in the Apostles age with their approbation and Authority and hath since continued in the same respect And what needs he more for confutation And as to his allegations of the Judgement of the Reformed Lutheran and Roman Church 1. We take none of them for our Rule so impartial are we But 2. He himself citeth Beza Mercer Paraeus Cuchlinus Simler Hospinian Zanchius c. as holding that It was an Apostolical and Truly Divine Tradition that the Apostles turned the Sabbath into the Lords day that it was an Apostolical custome or a custome received in the Apostles times c. And whereas afterward he would perswade us that they spent but a little of the day in holy worship he himself cited Mr. George Sandys Travels saying of the Copties that On Saturday presently after midnight they repair unto their Churches where they remain well nigh till Sunday at noon of the Evening he speaketh not but of their first meeting during which time they neither sit nor kneel but support themselves on Crutches And they sing over the most part of Davids Psalms at every meeting with divers parcels of the New Testament This is like the old way And such a Liturgie we do not contradict nor scruple Sandys also informeth us of the ArmenianChristians that coming into the place of the Assembly on Sunday in the afternoon no doubt they had been there in the Morning be found one sitting in the midst of the Congregation in habit not differing from the rest reading on a Bible in the Chaldaean tongue That anon after came the Bishop in a hood or Vest of black with a staffe in his hand That first he prayed and then sung certain Psalms assisted by two or three After all of them singing joyntly at interims praying to themselves the Bishop all this while with his bands erected and his face towards the Altar That Service being ended they all kissed his hand and bestowed their Almes he laying his other hand on their heads and blessing them c. And of the Abaffines he reciteth out of Brierwood and he from Damianus a Goes that they honour the Lords day as the Christian Sabbath and the Saturday as the Jews Sabbath because they receive the Canons called the Apostles which speak for both And King Edgar in England ordained that the Sabbath should begin ou Saturday at three a Clock Afternoon and continue till break a Day on Munday These Laws for the Sabbath of Alfred Edgar c. were confirmed by Etheldred and more fully by Canutus But of these things I shall say more anon under the Proposition following In the mean time only remembring you 1. That it is well that we are required after the fourth Commandment to pray Lord have Mercy upon us and encline our hearts to keep this Law And we accept his Concession that this includeth all of that Commandment which is the Law of Nature Though I have told you that it reacheth somewhat further 2. That we approve of the plain Doctrine of the English Homilies on this point and stand to the Exposition of sober impartiality Prop. 10. It hath been the constant practice of all Christs Churches in the whole world ever since the daies of the Apostles to this day to assemble for publick worship on the Lords day as a day set apart thereunts by the Apostles Yea so universal was this judgement and practice that there is no one Church no one writer or one heretick that I remember to have read of that can be proved ever to have dissented or gainsaid it till of late times The proof of this is needless to any one that is versed in the writings of the ancients And others cannot try what we shall produce I have been these ten years separated from my Library and am therefore less furnished for this task than is requisite But I will desire no man to receive more than the Testimonies produced by Dr. Pet. Heylin himself which with pittiful weakness he would pervert And he being the Grand Adversary with whom I do now contend I shall only premise these few Observations as sufficient to confute all his Cavils and Evasions 1. When his great work is to prove that the Lords day was not called the Sabbath unless by allusion we grant it him as to a Jewish Sabbath as nothing to the purpose 2. Whereas he strenuously proveth that the Lords day was not taken for a Sabbath de re we grant it him also taking the word in the primitive Jewish sense 3. When he laboureth to prove that Christians met on other daies of the week besides the Lords day though not for the Lords Supper we grant it him as nothing to the purpose So Calvin Preached or Lectured daily at Geneva and yet kept not every day as a holy day separated to Gods worship as they did the Lords day though too remisly So we do still keep Week-day Lectures and the Church of England requireth the Reading of Common Prayer on Wednesdayes and Fridays and holy day Evens Do they therefore keep them Holy as the Lords day 4. When he tells us that Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen plead against them that would hear and pray on that day only we grant it him and we are ready to say as they do that we should not confine Gods Service to one day only as if we might be profane and worldly on all other daies but should take all fit opportunities for religious helps and should all the week keep our minds as near as we can in a holy frame and temper Of the rest of his Objections I shall say more in due place 5. But I must note in the beginning that he granteth the main cause which I plead for acknowledging Hist. Sab. l. 2. page 30. it thus So that the Religious observation of this day beginning in the age of the Apostles no doubt but with their Approbation and Authority and since continuing in the same respect for so many ages may be very well accounted amongst those Apostolical Traditions which have been universally received in the Church of God And what need we more than the Religious Observation in the Apostles time by the Apostles Approbation and Authority and this delivered to us by the universal Church as an Apostolical Tradition But yet he saith that the Apostles made it not a Sabbath Answ. Give us the Religious observation and call it by what name you please We are not fond of the name of the Sabbath 6 And therefore we grant all that he laboriously proveth of the abolition of the Jewish Sabbath and that the Ancients commonly consent that by the abolished Sabbath Col. 2. 16. is meant inclusively the weekly Jewish Sabbath Epiphan l. 1. haeres 33. n. 11. Ambros. in loc Hieron Epist. ad Algus qu. 10. Chrysost. Hom. 13. in Haebr 7. August cont Jud. cap. 2. cont Faust. Manich. l. 16. c. 28. I recite the
places for them that doubt of it Now let us peruse the particular Testimonies 1. I begin with Ignatius though Dallaeus have said so much to prove the best Copy of him of latter date and spurious because others think otherwise and that Copy is by him thought to be written Cent. 3. who saith Let us not keep the Sabbath in a Jewish manner in sloth and idleness but after a spiritual manner not in bodily ease but in the study of the Law not eating meat drest yesterday or drinking warm drinks and walking out a limited space but in the contemplation of the works of God And after the Sabbath let every one that loveth Christ keep the Lords day Festival the Resurrection day the Queen and Empress of all daies in which our life was raised again and death was overcome by our Lord and Saviour Either these Epist. of Ignatius ad Philip. c. are genuine or spurious If genuine than note how clearly it is asserted that the Lords day was to be observed as the Queen of all daies by all that were lovers of Christ. And that the seventh day Sabbath was kept with it then and there in Asia so near the Apostles daies no wonder when it was but the honourable gradual receding from the Mosaical Ceremonies with an avoiding the scandalous hinderance of the Jews Conversion And Dr. Heylin well noteth that it was only the Eastern Churches next the Jews that for a time kept both daies but not the Western who rather turned the Sabbath to a fast But if Ignatius Ep. be spurious written Cent. 3. then as Dallaeus would prove they were written by some heretical or heterodox person And so it will be no wonder that holy dayes are pleaded for when as Dr. Heylin observeth Cerinthus and his followers in the Apostles times stood up for the Jewish Sabbath and Ceremonies and so were for both daies But it will be our Confirmation that even the Hereticks held with the universal Church for the Lords day 2. The great Controversie about the Day of Easter which spread so early through all the Churches is a full Confirmation of our matter of fact For when the Western Churches were for the Passover day the better to content the Jews saith Heylin the Eastern thought it intollerable that it should not be kept on a Lords day because that was the weekly day observed on the same account of the Resurrection The Eastern Churches never questioned their supposition of the Lords day And the Western after Victors rash excommunicating the Asian Bishops never rested till they brought them to keep it on the Lords day Pius Anicetus Victor c. prosecuting the cause 3. The Book though perished which Melito wrote of the Lords day Euseb. l. 4. c. 25. by the title may be well supposed to confirm at least the matter of fact or usage 4. All those little Councils mentioned by Heylin p. 48. held at Osroena Corinth in Gaul in Pontus in Rome prove this The Canons of them all saith Heylin being extant in Eusebius ' s time and in all which it was concluded for the Sunday But saith Heylin by this You see that the Sunday and the Sabbath were long in striving for the Victory p. 49. Answ. I see that some men can out-face the clearest light Here was no striving at all which day should be the weekly day set apart for holy worship but only whether Easter should follow the time of 〈◊〉 or be confined to the Lords day 5. Justin Martyrs Testimony is so express and so commonly cited that I need not recite the words at large Vpon the Sunday all of us assemble in the Congregation Vpon the day called Sunday all within be Cities or in the Countrey do meet together in some place where c. He proceedeth to shew the worship there performed Now 1. Here being mention of no other day no man can question but that this day was set apart for these holy assemblies in a peculiar manner as the other week dayes were not 2. This being the writing of one of the most Learned and antient of all the Christian Writers 3. And being purposely written to one of the wisest of all the Emperours as an Apologie for all the Christians 4. And being written at Rome where the matter of fact was easily known deserveth as much credit as any Christian History or Writing since the Apostles can deserve Nor hath Heylin any thing to say against it 6. The next remembred by Heylin is Dionysius Corinth who lived 175. cited out of Eusebius Hist. l. 4. c. 22. To day we keep the Holy Lords day wherein we read the Epistle you wrote to us c. Against this Heylin saith not a word 7. The next is Clemens Alexander who expresly asserteth the matter of fact that the Lords day was then kept by Christians Yea Heylin derideth him for fetching it as far as Plato Strom. l. 7. But Heylin thinks he was against keeping any dayes But he that will examine his words shall find that he speaketh only against them that would be Ceremonious observers of the day more than of the work of the day and would be religious on that day alone And therefore he saith that He that leadeth his life according to the Ordinances of the Gospel doth keep the Lords Day when he casteth away every evil thought and doing things with knowledge and understanding doth glorifie the Lord in his Resurrection This is not to speak against the Day but to shew how it ought to be sincerely kept But if he had been against it it s all one to my cause who only prove that de facto all Christian Churches kept it 8. The next witness is Tertullian who oft asserteth this to be the holy day of the Christians Church-Assemblies and holy Worship His testimony in Apolog. cap. 16. is so commonly known that I need not recite it It is the same in sense with Justin Martyrs and written in an Apology for the Christians purposely describing their custom of meeting and worshipping on the Sunday as he calls it there as Justin did And that it was not an hours work only he shews in saying that The day was kept as a day of rejoicing and then describeth the work And de Idolol c. 14. he saith that every eighth day was the Christians festival And de Coron Mil. c. 3. and oft he calleth it the Lords day and saith it was a crime to fast upon it And the work of the day described by Justin and by him Apolog. c. 39. is just the same that we desire now the day to be spent in we plead for no other But most grosly saith Heylin pag. 55. But sure it is that their assemblies held no longer than our Morning Service that they met only before noon for Justin saith that when they met they used to receive the Sacrament and that the service being done every man went again to his daily labours Answ. Is this a proof to conclude a
customs taken up upon reasons proper to those times and places Obj. But by the reason aforesaid you will prove the continuance of the seventh day Sabbath as grounded on the Creation rest Answ. This is anom to be answered in due place I only prove that it continued till a successive dispensation and Gods own change did put an end to it but no longer Obj. But to commemorate the Creation and praise the Creator is a Moral work and therefore ceaseth not Answ. True but that it be done on the seventh day is that which ceaseth For the same work is transferred to the Lords day and the Creator and Redeemer to be honoured together in our Commemoration For the Son is the only way to the Father who hath restored us to Peace with our Creator And as no man cometh to the Father but by the Son and as we must not now worship God as a Creator and Father never offended but as a Creator and Father reconciled by Christ so is it the appointment of Christ by the Holy Ghost that we commemorate the work of Creation now as repaired and restored by the work of Redemption on the Lords day which is now separated to these works That the Sabbath was appointed to Adam Wallaeus on the fourth Commandment cap. 3. and Rivet dissert de sab c. 1. have most copiously proved And Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 5. out of Homer Hesiod Callimachus and others proveth that the Heathens knew of it We may therefore summ up the prerogatives of the Lords day as Leo did Ep. 81. c. 1. On this day the world began on this day by Christs Resurrection Death did receive Death and Life its beginning on this day the Apostles take the trumpet of the Gospel to be preached to all Nations on this day the Holy Ghost came from the Lord to the Apostles c. See more in Athanas. de Sab. Circ August Serm. 154. de Tempore Therefore saith Isychius in Levit. l. 2. c. 9. The Church setteth apart the Lords day for holy Assemblies And in the times of Heathenish persecution when men were asked Whether they were Christians and kept the Lords dayes they answered that they were and kept the Lords day which Christians must not omit as you may see Act. Martyâ— apud Baron an 303. n. 37 38 39. They would die rather than not keep the holy assemblies and the Lords dayes For saith Ignatius After the Sabbath every lover of Christ celebrateth the Lordâ— day 〈◊〉 to or by the Lords resurrection the Queen and chief of 〈◊〉 dâ—yes as is afore cited For saith Augustine The Lords Resurrection hath promised us an eternal Day and consecrated to us the Lords day which is called the Lords and properly belongeth to the Lord Serm. 15. de Verb. Apost And saith Hilary Prâ—leg in Psalm Though the name and observance of a Sabbath was placed to the seventh day yet is it the eighth day which is also the first on which we rejoyce with the perfect festivity of the Sabbath Of the fâ—â—l keeping of the whole day and of the several Exercises in which it was spent and of the more numerous testimonies of Antiquity hereupon Dr. Yâ—ung in his Dies Dominica hath said so much with so much evidence and judgement 〈◊〉 I purposely omit abundance of such Testimonies because I will not do that which he hath already done The Learned Reader may there find unanswerable proof of the matter of fact that the Lords day was kept in the Apostles dayes and ever since as by their appointment And for the unlearned Reader I fear lest I have too much interrupted him with Citations already I only tell him in the Conclusion that If Scripture Hiâ—tory interpreted and seconded by fullest practice and History of all the Churches of Christ and by the consent of Heathens and Heretickâ— and not contradicted by any Sect in the world be to be believed then we must say that the Lords day was commonly kept by the Christians in and from the Apostles times Prop. 11. This evidence of the Churches universal constant usage is a full and sufficient proof of the matter of fact that it was a day set apart by the Apostles for holy Worship especially in the publick Church-assemblies 1. It is a full proof that such Assemblies were held on that day above others as a separated day For if it was the usage in Anno 100. in which the Apostle John dyed it must needs be the usage in the year 99. in which he wrote his Revelations where he calleth it the Lords day For all the Churches could not silently agree on a sudden to take up a new day without debate and publick notice which could not be concealed And if it was the universal usage in the dayes of Ignatius or Justin Martyr it was so also in the dayes of St. John and so before For the Churches were then so far dispersed over the world that it would have taken up much time to have had Councils and meetings or any other means for agreement on such things And it is utterly improbable that there would have been no dissenters For 1. Did no Christians in the world so neer to the Apostles daies make any scruple of superstition or of such an addition to Divine institutions 2. Was there no Countrey nor no persons whose interest would not better suit with another day or an uncertain day or at least their opinions when we find it now so hard a matter to bring men in one Countrey to be all of one opinion 3. And there was then no Magistrate to fâ—rce them to such an Union And therefore it mast be voluntary 4. And they had in the second age such Pastors as the Apostles themselves had ordained and as had conversed with them and been trained up by them and knew their mind and cannot soberly be thought likely to consent all on a sudden to such a new institution without and contrary to the Apostles sense and practice 5. Yea they had yet Ministers that had that extraordinary spirit which was given by the laying on of the Apostles hands For if the aged Apostles ordained young men it is to be supposed that most of those young men such as Timothy overlived them 6. Yea and the ordinary Christians in those times had those extraordinary gifts by the laying on of the Apostles hands as appeareth evidently in the case of Samaria Act. 8. and of the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 14. and of the Galathians Gal. 3. 1 2 3. And it is not to be suspected that all these inspired Ministers and people would consent to a superstitious innovation without and against the Apostles minds 2. Therefore this history is a full proof that these things were done by the consent and appointment of the Apostles For 1. As is said the inspired persons and Churches could not so suddenly be brought to forsake them universally in such a case 2. The Churches had all so high an esteem of the Apostles
not obliged to the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath by any Law of God The Minor I must prove by parts For I think none will deny the sufficient enumeration in the Major And 1. That the Law of Nature bindeth us not to the seventh or any one day of the seven more than other appeareth 1. In the nature and reason of the thing There is nothing in nature to evidence it to us to be Gods will 2. By every Christians experience No man findeth himself convinced of any such thing by meer nature 3. By all the Worlds experience No man can say that a man of that opinion can bring any cogent evidence or argument from nature alone to convince another that the seventh day must be the Sabbath Nor is it any where received as a Law of Nature but only as a Tradition among some few Heathens and as Law positive by the Jews and some few Christians I am not solicitous to prosecute this argument any further because I can consent that all they take the seventh day for the Sabbath who can prove it to be so by meer natural Evidence which will not be one II. That the Positive Law made to Adam before or after the fall or to Noah bindeth not us to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath is proved 1. Because we are under a more perfect subsequent Law which being in force the former more imperfect ceaseth As the force of the Promise of the Incarnation of Christ is ceased by his incarnation and so is the precept which bound men to believe that he should de future be incarnate and the Law of Sacrificing which Abel doubtless received from Adam though one of late would make it to be but will-worship so also is the Sabbath day as giving place to the day in which our Redemption is primarily commemorated as the imperfect is done away when that which is more perfect cometh 2. Because that the Law of Christ containeth an express revocation of the seventh day Sabbath as shall be shewed anon 3. Because God never required two dayes in seven to be kept as holy Therefore the first day being proved to be of Divine institution the cessation of the seventh is thereby proved For to keep two dayes is contrary to the command which they themselves do build upon which requireth us to sanctifie a Sabbath and labour six dayes 4. And when it is not probable that most or many Infidels are bound to Adams day for want of notice at least For no Law can bind without promulgation though I now pass by the question how far a promulgation of a positive to our first Parents may be said to bind their posterity that have no intermediate notice It seemeth leÃs probable that Christians should be bound by it who have a more perfect Law promulgate to them 5. Nor is it probable that Christ and his Apostles and all the following Pastors of the Churches would have passed by this Positive Law to Adam without any mention of it if our universal obligation had been thence to be collected Nay I never yet heard a Sabbatarian plead this Law any otherwise than as supposed to be implyed or exemplified in the fourth Commandment III. And that the fourth Commandment of Moses Law bindeth us not to the seventh day Sabbath is proved 1. Because that Moses Law never bound any to it but the Jews and those Proselites that made themselves inhabitants of their Land or voluntarily subjected themselves to their policy For Moses was Ruler of none but the Jews nor a Legislator or deputed officer from God to any other Nation The Decalogue was but part of the Jewish Law if you consider it not as it is written in Nature but in Tables of Stone And the Jewish Law was given as a Law to no other people but to them It was a National Law as they were a peculiar people and holy Nation So that even in Moses daies it bound no other Nations of the World Therefore it needed not any abrogation to the Gentiles but a declaration that it did not bind them 2. The whole Law of Moses formally as such is ceased or abrogated by Christ. I say As such Because Materialy the same things that are in that Law may be the matter of the Law of Nature and of the Law of Christ of which more anon That the whole Law of Moses as such is abrogated is most clearly proved 1. By the frequent arguings of Paul who ever speaketh of that Law as ceased without excepting any part And Christ saith Luke 16. 16. The Law and the Prophets were untill John that is were the chief doctrine of the Church till then Joh. 1. 17. The Law was given by Moses but grace and truth cometh by Jesus Christ. No Jew would have understood this if the word Law had not contained the Decalogue So Joh. 7. 19 23. Act. 15. 5 24. It was the whole Law of Moses as such which by Circumcision they would have bound men to Gal. 5. 3. The Gentiles are said to sin without Law even when they broke the Law of Nature meaning without the Law of Moses Rom. 2. 12 14 15 16. In all these following places its not part but the whole Law of Moses which Paul excludeth which I ever acknowledged to the Antinomians though they take me for their too great Adversary Rom. 3. 19 20 21 27 28 31 4. 13 14 15 16. 5. 13. 20. 7. 4 5 6 7 8 16. 9. 4 31 32. 10. 5. Gal. 2. 16 19 21. 3. 2 10 11 12 13 19 21 24. 4. 21. 5. 3 4 14 23. 6. 13. Eph. 2. 15. Phil. 3. 6 9. Heb. 7 11 12 19. 9. 19. 10. 28. 1 Cor. 9. 21. 2. More particularly there are some Texts which express the cessation of the Decalogue as it was Moses Law 2 Cor. 3. 3 7 11. Not in Tables of Stone but in fleshly tables of the heart But if the Ministration of death written and engraven in stones was glorious so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his Countenance which was to be done away or is done away They that say the Glory and not the Law is here said to be done away speak against the plain scope of the Text For the Glory of Moses face and the glorious manner of deliverance ceased in a few daies which is not the cessation here intended But as Dr. Hammond speaketh it that Glory and that Law so gloriously delivered is done away And this the eleventh verse fullyer expresseth For if that which is done away was glorious or by Glory much more that which remaineth is glorious or in glory so that as it is not only the Glory but the Glorious Law Gospel or Testament which is said to remain so it is not only the Glory but the Law which was delivered by Glory which is expresly said to be done away And this is
Text Though I know some say otherwise to the injury of their own cause 8. How many years together the Churches had been in possession and consequently in the undoubted knowledge of the true established day of holy Worship before a word of the New Testament was Written And therefore that it was not written to be the first enacting of this day or change but for other uses 9. And yet how much evidence of the fact there is in the Scripture it self that really such a day was used for the ordinary Church-assemblies as a peculiar separated day even by the Common order of the Apostles in the Churches as 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. speaks 10. And how impossible it is that all the Churches in the World should from their beginning keep this as the separated day even by the Apostles and from their times if it had not been so ordered by them indeed And whether it be possible that in no age neer the original hereof no Pastor no Christian no Heretick no Enemy would have detected the fraud or common Errour or once have written that this day was not separated or used by the Apostles or Apostolical Churches no nor any one that I know of that denyed not the Resurrection ever to have scrupled or opposed the day 11. Whether they that can reject such Historical evidence as this is do not unwittingly cast away the holy Scriptures what zeal soever they pretend or have for their honour and perfection 12. Whether they that can reject all this evidence and yet can find in the second Commandment the prohibition of all formes of Prayer Sermons Catechismes all modal inventions of men as Images if not Idols are without partiality or do not walk as men by very different measures and partial conceptions I would on my knees intreat some most dear and worthy friends on their knees to ponder these twelve particulars But because by their preterition of the Text Act. 2. 1 2. I perceive they observe not that the Holy Ghost came down on the Lords day Let them consider that the Passeover was on the Sabbath day that year and therefore it must needs be just fifty dayes to that Lords day and it must be the day of Pentecost And it is not a trifle that the first Sermon to 〈◊〉 people was Preached by Peter on that day and â—000 Converted by it and Baptized Dr. Heyliâ—s own words are these Part. 2. p. 13. The first particular passage which did occâ—â—â— in holy Scripturâ— touching the first day of the week is that upon that day the Holy Ghost did first come down on the Apostles and that on the same day St. Peter Preached his first Sermon to the Jews and Baptized such as believed there being added to the Church that day 3000 souls And to prove the day he saith p. 14. The rule being this that on what day soever the second of the Passover did fall on that also fell the great Feast of Pentecost as Scaliger de Emend Temp. l. 2. So that as often as the Passover did fall on the Sabbath as this year it did then Pentecost fell on the Sunday The last part of our Objections are from History and it is said Obj. Qu. Whether the observation of the first day was not brought into this Island by Antichrist about 408 or 409 years agoe Roger Hoveden about an 1202 above 1200 years after Christ mentioneth a Council held in Scotland for the initiation or first bringing in that which he calls the Dominical day see this testimony mentioned by Binius in his Councils and somewhat enlarged by Matth. Paris the old impression fol. 192 193. and the last Edition fol. 200 and 201 And how the King of England and the Nobility would not then receive this alteration I conceive that in the first Centuries the great Controversie relating to this was about translating the keeping the Passover which they now call Easter from the fourteenth day of the first Moon c. under the colour of honouring Christ to the first day of the Week as the Dominical day which the Popes first set themselves with great vehemency to introduce And as the Pope obtained his purpose for one day in a year so by degrees in some places came in one day in a week the first day to be observed and the seventh day by one of the Popes turned from a Festival 〈◊〉 Fast whilest many of the Eastern and some of the Western Churches did still retain withall the observation of the seventh-day Sabbath together with the first day and others of the Churches in the East and West kept only to the seventh day as the Christian Sabbath c. Answ. How much more desirable an Adversary is Heylin by his acquaintance with History 1. Were any of the Authors I before cited either Antichristian or 1200 years after Christ Ignatius if genuine was about an 102. If not as Dalaeus thinks then he was about 300. The Canons called the Apostles and the Constitutions called the Apostles very ancient Justin Martyr wrote his Apol an 150. about 50 years after St. Johns death where his testimony is as plain as can be spoken To which Plinyes who wrote about 107. some seven years after St. Johns death may be joyned that he may be understood of the day Clemens Alexand. about 94 years after St. John an 194. Tertullian who is most express and full and frequent about 198 that is 98 years after St. John Origen about 206 began his Teaching Cyprian about an 250. Athanasius who wrote largely of it about an 330. To what purpose should I mention again Eusebius Greg. Nazianzen Nyssen and all the rest It was but about an 309 that Constantine began his raign who made Laws for the Lords day which other Christian Emperours enlarged But how much earlier were all those Synods which Eusebius mentioned which in the determination of Easter owned the Lords day And that of Nice was but about an 327. The Council of Laodicea but about an 314 or 320. The Council of Eliberis about an 307. Can. 21. saith If any that live in the Cities shall stay from Church three Lords daies let him be so long suspended from the Sacrament till he be sensible of his punishment After this how many Councils and how many Imperial Laws take care of the Lords dayes It is tedious to cite them To these may be added 1. The common agreement that it is founded in the Resurrection and was from that time 2. The early contest for keeping Easter only on that day which you note as being a day by all Christians received 3. The common detestation of Fasting on that day 4. And the universal custome of not kneeling in adoration on that day which all shew that the day was specially observed Athanasius saith de sab Circ Even as at the first it was commanded that the Sabbath should be observed in memory of the finishing of the World so do we celebrate the Lords day as the commemoration
of the beginning of a new Creation And Hom. de Sem. The Lord transferred the Sabbath to the Lords day Though Nannius question the Hom. de semente so do few others and none that I know of question that de Sab. Circ Greg. Nyss. Orat. in s. Pasc. saith As God rested on the Sabbath from all his works which he had done in the Creation so did the only begotten Son of God rest in truth from all his works c. August Epist. 119. The Lords day was declared to Christians by the Lords Resurrection From that time or thence it began to have its Festivity Maximus Taurinensis saith Hom. 3. de Pentec The Lords day is therefore set apart because on it our Saviour as the rising Sun discussing the infernal darkness did shine forth in his resurrection And for Fasting Tertul. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. saith We account it unlawful to fast on the Lords day And though the Montanists fasted excessively they excepted the Lords day Tertul. adv Psych c. 15. Ignatius and the Apost Const. Can. are forecited of this Austin saith Ep. 86. It is a great scandal to fast on the Lords day Which the Manichees were accused of The Concil Gangr Can. 18. saith If any on pretense of abstinence fast on the Lords day let him be Anathema The Concil Caesar-august c. 2. is against fasting on the Lords day either for the sake of any time as Lent or perswasion or superstition whatsoever So the Concil Agath c. 12. Concil Aurel. 4. c. 2. And the Concil Carth. an 398. Can. 64. Let him be taken for no Catholick who purposely fasteth on the Lords day And the prohibition of kneeling in adoration I have opened before ex Concil Nic. c. 20. Concil Trulâ— Epiphan c. To which I adde Collect. Can. Johâ—n Antioch sub titulo L. Tertul. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. now cited Hieronym adv Lucifer cap. 4. Die dominico per omnem Pentecosten nec de geniculis adorare jejunium solvere multaque alia que non Scriptâ— sunt rationabilis sibi observatio vindicavit yet Paul kneeled Act. 20. in that time vid. Justell ad Can. 20. Conc. Nic. Question ad Orthod inter Justin. opera qu. 115. p. 283. Die Dominico genua non flectere symbolum est Resurrectionis c. Germanus Constantinop in Theoria Eccles. p. 149. Our not kneeling on the Lords day signifieth our erection from our fall by Christs Resurrection c. see also Basil de spir Sanc. c. 27. To. 2. p. 112 113. Balsamon theron p. 1032. Zonari in c. 20. Conc. Nic. p. 66. see Casp. Suicerus de bisce sacr observ c. 6. 2. Your Historical observations are utterly mistaken The observation of the Lords day was in all the Churches past all Controversie from the beginning while the time of Easter was in Controversie as I have proved Why would you not name those Churches in East and West which I never read or heard of yea or that person that was for the seventh day alone I am confident because you could not do it Indeed all Churches called the seventh day alone by the old name Sabbath while they maintained the Sabbath to be ceased But under the name of the Lords day the first was solemnly observed 3. In Hoveden and Mat. Paris there is not a word of what you say so much do you mis-cite History There is indeed an 1201. which as I remember is Hovedens last the story that many Authors talk of and Heylin mentioneth of one that sound a Letter pretended from Heaven upon the Altar reproving the crying sins of the times and especially the prophanation of the Lords day and requiring them to keep it strictly for the time to come which was so far from being the initiation of the Lords day that it was about 1167 years after it And how could men pretend such a Divine reproof for such a sin if the day not been received before I pray read Heylins History against us which will set you righter in the matter of fact And there is no mention of any such Council as you talk of for the initiation of the Lords day nor any resistance of the Kings or Scots There is nothing of all this in Hoveden or Mat. Paris 4. But what if England had been ignorant of the Lords day till then which is utterly untrue it followeth not that they kept the Sabbath on the seventh day Nor would a Barbarous remote corner of the World prejudice the testimony of all Christs Churches in every age 5. But that you may see how greatly you mistake the case of England read but our eldest English Historian Beda Hist. Eccles. As l. 1. 26. he mentioneth an old Church named St. Martins built in the Romans time and cap. 33. a Church built by the ancient faithful Romans And by the way I think it most probable that the Roman Souldiers first brought Christianity into Brittain so he oft describeth the Worship as agreeable to other Churches And l. 2. c. 2. he begins his reproof of the Britains for not keeping Easter on the due Lords day but never reproveth them for not keeping the Lords day it self And though the Britans and the Scots had so little regard of the English Bishops sent from Rome that they awhile refused so much as to eat with them yea or to eate in the same Inne cap. 4. li. 2. yet about the Lords day there was no Controversie Lib. 3. c. 4. he tells you that the Scots difference about Easter day continued till an 716. for want of intelligence from other Churches though Columbanus and his followers were very holy persons And that you may see you errour he there tells you that they did not keep Easter day with the Jews on the fourteenth day still as some thought but on the Lords day but not in the right week For saith he they knew as being Christians that the Lords Resurrection which was on the first day of the week was alwaies to be celebrated on the first day of the week But being Barbarous and Rusticks they had not yet learned when that same first day of the week which is now called the Lords day did come Here you see that it was past Controversie with them that the Lords day must be Celebrated in memorial of Christs Resurrection and the Scots kept not Easter on any other Week day And that they had not been like Christians if they had not owned and kept the Lords day only they had not skill enough in Calculating the times so as to know when the true Anniversary Lords day came about but kept Easter on a wrong Lords day The same he saith again in the praise of Fâ—nan lib. 3. cap. 17. that though he kept not Easter at the due time yet he did not as some falsâ—y think keep it on any week day in the fourteenth Moon with the Jews but he alwayes kept it on the Lords day from the fourteenth Moon to the
CHAP. IV. Christ performed all these Promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them to all their commissioned work p. 11 CHAP. V. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for Holy Worship especially in Church Assemblies Which is explained in several subordinate Propositions And proved 1. By Scripture 2. By unquestionable History And the validity of this proof evinced and the denyers of it proved to subvert the Churches certainty of greater matters p. 12 CHAP. VI. This act of the Apostles appointing the Lords Day for holy Worship was done by the especial inspiration and guidance of the Holy Ghost p. 69 CHAP. VII Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. proved Where is shewed how far the fourth Commandment is abrogated and all the Law of Moses p. 71 CHAP. VIII Of the Beginning of the Day p. 91 CHAP. IX How the Lords Day should be kept Of the length of the time and the Objection about weariness p. 93 CHAP. X. How the Lords Day should not be spent or what is unlawful on it Of worldly business Of recreations of Idleness c. p. 108 CHAP. XI What things should not be scrupled as un lawful on the Lords Day p. 129 CHAP. XII Of what importance the due observing of the Lords Day is Many great Reasons for it p. 139 CHAP. XIII What other Church Festivals or separated Dayes are lawful p. 148 THE CONTENTS OF THE Appendix CHAP. I. An Answer to certain Objections against the Lords Day p. 157 CHAP. II. An Answer to more Arguments for the seventh day Sabbath p. 180 CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law p. 202 CHAP. IV. Whether every word in the Decalogue be of the Law of Nature and of perpetual obligation And whether all that was of the Law of Nature was in the Decalogue p. 214 CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ p. 220 The Divine Appointment of the LORDS DAY proved as a separated Day for holy Worship especially in the Church-Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath CHAP. I. Though the principal thing desired by the Enquirers is That I would prove to them the Cessation of the Seventh-day Sabbath yet because they cast off the Lords day which I take to be a far greater error and sin than the observation of both dayes and because that when I have proved the Institution of the Lords Day I shall the more easily take them off the other by proving that there are not two weekly dayes set apart by God for holy Worship Therefore I will begin with the first Question Whether the Lords day or first day of the week be separated by Gods Institution for holy Worship especially in publick Church-conventions Aff. And here for the right stating of the Question let it be noted 1. That it is not the Name of a Sabbath that we now meddle with or stand upon Let us agree in the Thing and we shall easily bear a difference about the name Grant that it is A day separated by Gods Institution for holy Assemblies and Worship and then call it a Sabbath or the Lords day as you please Though for my self I add That the Lords day is the name that the Holy Ghost hath set upon it and the name which the first Churches principally used and that they call it also sometimes by the name of the Christian Sabbath but that is only Analogically as it is resembled to the Jewish Sabbath and as they used the names Sacrifice and Altar at the same time for the Christians Commemoration of Christs Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and for the Table or as Dr. Young saith pag. 23. As in Scripture Baptism is called Circumcision And that very rarely too 2. That the Question of the manner of observing the Lords day and what exercises of Worship it must be spent in and what Diversions are lawful or unlawful as also when the day beginneth are not to be here medled with in the beginning but afterwards when the Divine Institution of the Day it self is first sufficiently proved Which is done as followeth Arg. That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son The Minor only needeth proof among Christians That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost The Minor which only needeth proof is thus proved That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles who had the Holy Ghost promised them by Christ and given them to lead them into all truth and to bring all his Doctrines to their remembrance and to teach the Churches to do all his Commands and to feed and guide and order them as his principal commissioned Church-Minister was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost But such is the first day of the Week Therefore the first day of the Week is separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost I have five Propositions now distinctly to be proved four for the proof of the Major and one for the proof of the Minor The first Proposition is That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches The second Proposition is That Christ promised them his Spirit to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them as his Churches Guides The third Proposition is That Christ performed this promise and gave his Spirit accordingly to his Apostles to enable them to all their commissioned work The fourth Proposition is That the Apostles did actually separate or appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies The fifth Proposition is That this act of theirs was done by the Guidance or inspiration of the Holy Ghost which was given them And when I have distinctly proved these five things no sober understanding Christian can expect that I should prove any more towards the proof of the Question in hand Whether the first day of the Week be separated by Gods
one Obj. By this Exposition you may say that the rest of the Decalogue is excluded For Idolatry Murder c. are not here forbidden by name Answ. I have fully proved that the Decalogue as written in Stone and part of the Law or Covenant of Moses is not at all in force especially to the Gentiles nor yet as part of the Covenant or promise of Works made with Adam in Innocency For the form of the Promissory Covenant of Works ceased upon mans sin and the promise of a Saviour And the form of the Mosaical Law or Covenant never reached to the Gentile Nations and is ceased to the Jews Therefore the Matter must cease as it constituted the same Covenant when the forme ceased And Paul saith expresly that this Law Written in Stone is done away But 1. The Law of Nature as a meer Law never ceased 2. And Christ hath taken it into his Covenant as part of the Matter of it So that it is wholly in force though not as part of the Covenant of Works either Adamical or Mosaical But the Sabbath as to the seventh day was no part of the Law of Nature as is proved And Paul expresly saith that it was a shadow of things to come and is therefore vanished away Col. 2. 16. Had it been part of the Law of Nature it had bound us as such and as Christs Law or had it been one of the Enumerated particulars Act. 15. it had bound the Neighbour Gentiles pro tempore at least But being neither that Council dischargeth Christians from the observation of it as far as I can understand the Text. FINIS Postscript IT is long since the foregoing Treatise was promised to a Person of Honourable Rank who was enclined to the Jewish Sabbath but before it was finished or well begun I had a sight of a Treatise on the same subject by the late Reverend Worthy Servant of Christ Mr. Hughes of Plimouth which enclined me to take my promised work as unnecessary But yet some reasons moved me to reassume it Near two Moneths after it went from me to the Press the said Treatise of Mr. Hughes first and after another on the same subject by Dr. I. Owen came abroad Yet do I not reverse mine because many Witnesses in an Age of Enmity and Neglect can be no injury to a truth so serviceable to the Cause of Christianity and the prosperity of the Church and the good of souls Though if I were one that took the Churches prosperity to consist in the Riches Grandeur Ease and Domination of Empire of Papal Pastors rather than in the humble holy heavenly self-denying imitation of a Crucified Christ I would have forborn a subject which is all for our preparation for a Heavenly Sabbatism and carrieth men above the sensual Rest of Fleshly men and therefore is so much disrelished by them Rom. 8. 6 7 8. But supposing it my duty to do what I have done I think meet to advertise the Reader that when several men treat of the same subject though they speak the same things in the main yet usually each of them bringeth some considerable light which is omitted by the rest And as the same Spirit sets them all on work so all together give suller evidence to the truth than any one of them alone And I hope the Concourse of these three Tractates doth prognosticate that though the Devil hath so contrived the business for the Prophane that like Papists they will hear and read none but those that are not like to change them yet God will awaken the sober and serious believers of this Age to a more holy and fruitful improvement of his day which will greatly tend to the encrease of real Godliness and consequently to the recovery of the dying hopes of this apostatizing and divided Age. But that which moveth me to write this Postscript is to acquaint thee for the prevention of scandal by any seeming differences in our Writings 1. That it cannot be expected that all who plead the same Cause should say just the same things for it for matter and manner of argumentation 2. That if I own the Name Sabbath less than some others and adhere more to the name of the Lords Day I do not thereby oppose the use of the name of Sabbath absolutely nor is that in it self a Controversie about the Matter but the Name which though not contemptible yet is of far less moment than the Thing 3. That if I make not use of so many Old Testament Texts as some others I do not thereby deny the usefulness of them nor call you off from the consideration of any argumentation or evidence thence offered you 4. That if I seem to be more for the cessation of Moses Law than some others even of that part which was written in Stone yet no part of the Law of Nature is thereby denyed by me any more than by any of them And they that are angry with me for writing so much against the Antinomians should not also be angry with me for going no further from them than the force of Truth constraineth me 5. That you must pardon me for my purposely avoiding the name of the Moral Law Mr. Cawdry and Mr. Palmer who have written most largely of the Sabbath have told you the reason I love not such names as are not fitted to the nature of things but are fitted to signifie almost what the Speaker pleaseth I know no Law which is not formally Moral as being Regula actionum Moralium And men may if they will as well confine the signification of the word Law it self as of a Moral Law Nor doth use it self sufficiently notifie the distinguishing signification of it For one meaneth by that name all the Law of Nature as such Another meaneth only so much of the Law of Nature as is common to all mankind Another meaneth all Positive Laws of supernatural Revelation which are perpetual and universal as well as the Law of Nature Therefore without finding fault with others it sufficeth me to distinguish Laws by such names as plainly signifie the intended difference And though by the Law of Nature I mean not formally the same thing that some others do I have sufficiently opened my sense and the reasons of it in my Reasons of the Christian Religion 6. That they who say that the Old Covenant or the Covenant of Works made by Moses with the Jews is abrogate or ceased and the Decalogue as a part of or belonging to that Covenant do say the same thing that I do when I maintain that the Decalogue and whole Law as Mosaical is ceased but that all the Natural part is by Christ assumed into his Law or Covenant of Grace For it is the same thing which is denominated the Law of Moses or of Christ from the preceptive part and and a Covenant from the terms or sanction especially the Promissory part Nor is there any part of the Law of Moses which was not a