THE DOCTRINE OF THE SABBATH VINDICATED In a confutation of a treatise of the Sabbath written by M. Edward Breerwood against M. Nic. Byfield wherein these five things are maintained First that the fourth Commandement is given to the servant and not to the master onely Secondly that the fourth Commandement is morall Thirdly that our owne light workes as well as gainefull and toilesome are forbidden on the Sabbath Fourthly that the Lords day is of divine Institution Fifthly that the Sabbath was instituted from the beginning By the industrie of an unworthy labourer in Gods Vineyard RICHARD BYFIELD Pastor in Long Ditton in Surrey Verily I say unto you till heaven and earth passe one jot or one title shall in no wise passe from the Law till all be fulfilled Matth. 5. 18. LONDON Imprinted by Felix Kyngston for Philemon Stephens and Christopher Meredith at the golden Lyon in Pauls Church-yard 1631. To all that loue the LORD IESVS in sincerity DEare Christian bought with a price most happy in this that thou art not thine owne for thy sake I have undertaken to answer this Treatise to thee doe I Dedicate it who mayest of right challenge all that I am or can Thou whether noble wise mightie learned unlearned weake or meane neare or farre off art interessed in all that maketh for the Truth and in all that is done against it Paul Apollo Cephas are thine 1. Cor. 3. all thine for thou art Christs and Christ is Gods In the broaching of Heresies thou art wounded in the making of schismes thou art racked in every lie thou art layed at nothing commeth against a painefull Minister but reacheth to thy heart through his sides nothing from a laborious Minister but aymeth at thy setling stablishing comforting perfecting Wert thou the meanest that ever lived who can thinke this too much for thee seeing God withholds not himselfe as a Father his Sonne as a Redeemer and Brother his Spirit as sanctifier Comforter and the Spirit of Sonne-ship in thy heart and thy very body also hee ownes as his Temple For a recompence bee inlarged give thy selfe to God receive nothing against but all that is for the Truth Let the reproaches wherewith Christ and his Ministers are reproached fall on thee owne the Ministers gifts and labours as thine reigne but not without them be honourable but not when they are despised When I first received this booke intituled A learned Treatise of the Sabbaoth a little before November last though I was utterly ignorant of any such controuersie to haue passed betweene my Brother and Master Edward Breerwood and had not yet cast mine eye on the base language of the reply in the end of that Treatise yet the very noveltie and dangerous vilenesse of the Doctrine without any reference to things personall strucke me My spirit was stirred in me when I saw the whole right of the Law for the time of Gods worship alleviated the consequence whereof must needs be this the whole kingdome wholy given to Atheisme and prophanenesse The zeale of Gods glory and thy good began to eate upon me I throw my selfe into the open field that thou mayest be nourished I resolved what I was or am or may be should be Christ strengthning mee Gods and thine that God the Lord of Heaven might have his Royaltie untouched man his dutie laid out Superiors directed to stand for God and Men in the things of God and Inferiors be Gods while mens and mens in and for God Now knowing that there are none but are flesh as well as spirit and that the unregenerate part will catch at the most excellent truths to sucke thereout advantage to it selfe by tearing a sunder things inseparably united and taking to things hand over head in a wrong application fearing thy miscarriage I could not but advertise thee a little in that part that concernes thy duty The superiour or master may conceite his power intrenched upon the inferiour or servant may suppose some unwarranted liberty granted him all may thinke of an over-rigid construction of the unchangeable precept This Dâ—spute yeelds none of those neither prejudice to the master nor occasion of liberty to the servant nor other then a received and allowed sense to the never-failing law as will appeare to him that thorowly peruseth it But for prevention of over-hasty conceits in all behold thy way-markes before thou reade or receive any thought to fore-stall thee take what I set here before thee which hath beene seene and heard and allowed and received Blessed be Gods holy Name and I doubt not but shall be maugre the malice of contradicting spirits For I admonish thee of no other things then what are already received in the printed Bookes of Mr. Nich. Byfield Consider I say what that Master of Assemblies hath left in his writings as stakes to bound out the way of both master and servant superiour and inferiour in running the race of this fourth commandement and as goades to quicken thy heart in the embracing of that divine Law For the Doctrine of the Sabbath he thus explaineth himselfe in two places First God hath provided by his unchangeable law that one day in seven servants shall rest from their labour M. Byf. on 1 Pet. 2. 18. pag. 723. Secondly Servants must shew their feare of God in their callings by carefulnesse to doe Gods service as well as their masters not onely by spending the Sabbath in the duties of religion but in redeeming the time in the weeke dayes as may bee without hinderance of their worke or offence to their masters to imploy themselves in prayer reading conference c. And the reason is because as servants must doe their masters worke as they are servants so they stand bound in the common obligation to do Gods service as they are men and no man but is subject to the law of God who hath given all his commandements to servants as well as to masters Byf. in 1 Pet. 2. 18. pag. 734. For the servant he layeth downe these godly and savory limitations as Caveats First the subjection of servants is of Divine institution to which God hath bound them by the fift Commandement and so is a morall and perpetuall ordinance in 1 Pet. 2. 18. p. 721. Secondly no faults in Superiors can free inferiors from their subjection in matter or manner in 1 Pet. 2. p. 742. Thirdly if the matter bee onely inexpedient and unmeete thou must obey in Col. 3. 23. p. 130. Fourthly thou must bee sure that it bee sinne that thou refusest if thou must needs doubt it is better to doubt and obey than doubt and disobey Id. ibid. Fiftly thou must in unlawfull things yeeld to obey by sufferings Id. ibid. Sixtly the servant must avoide inquisitivenesse the servant knoweth not what his master doth Ioh. 15. 15. in 1 Pet. 2. p. 735. For the master he giveth these heavenly admonitions First the master must give account of all hee doth to God though he be not bound to doe
the servants executing I affirme that were given more to servants than to others and crosseth your former words where you say their labour is forbidden for if they labour is it not their labour and so on the contrary Or to the words directly and immediately you yeeld then that servants labour is forbidden indirectly and immediately The truth is that which is nakedly forbidden is directly forbidden and that which is immediately forbidden is sinfull to be done though mediately mediately or immediately takes not away the edge of the precept or power of the commander Thirdly you say The other commandements were imposed without specification or exception of any person whatsoever and therefore hold all men under an equall obligation but this not so Answ What arguing is this This commandement is with specification and the servant is specified and his worke of service to his master on the Sabbath specified and prohibited therefore it bindeth him not it is not his sinne Nay the specification maketh it the more his sinne and God provided by this enumeration of the persons as all have and will agree unlesse any should use your false glasse that this rest might by no meanes be violated Master Attersoll * Vpon Numb chap. 28. vers 11 12 13. p. 1142. saw in this enumeration not a freeing of the servants and subjects from the obligation because a charge is laid on the Governours to see that others keepe the day but a reason to perswade the inferiour the more chearefully to keepe it thus he saith The charge is laid on Governours that inferiours might yeeld chearefully to Gods will considering how strait a charge God hath given to all Governours And that he meant by Gods will the commandement here imposed upon and binding servants from doing their masters worke though commanded is apparant by his words in the same place which runne thus Many fathers urge their children many masters command their servants to goe about their owne businesse and send them from place to place at that time when they should attend to the holy Commandement of the Lord whereas both of them might well and lawfully reply to their fathers and masters and say with Christ our Saviour Luk. 2. 49. Wist yee not that I must be about my Fathers businesse That word exception is venemous as if some persons were excepted by that specification of persons in the fourth Commandement these are cankred words and evill that will quickly corrupt good manners Therefore Christian Reader I give thee this note as an Antidote and that it may be the more strong to expell poyson know that the specification of persons in a precept negative cannot be an exception of those parties from under that precept if specified in the prohibition not excepted And for the equall obligation that holds all men alike under the other Commandements it is the same also in this for if you say the commandement more obligeth Governours I answer It doth so in respect of their politicall observing of the command as they are Governours and so ought to see this Law kept and not violated and thus they are bound more and otherwise than other men to every of the other nine Commandements For the Magistrate is the keeper or preserver of both m Custos utriusque tabulae Tables of the Law But in respect of their personall observance hereof it is equally charged on them as on the servant and subject and so it is also in the rest of the precepts Fourthly you say this commandement is of a different sort from others therefore it otherwise obligeth and you give three things to shew this difference first the nature of it secondly the matter prohibited thirdly the command it selfe First for the nature of this Law you say It is a Law ingraven in the Tables of stone but not on the Tables of mens heart nor any Law of nature You make this distinction that there are revealed Lawes in the Decalogue which are not the secret Lawes of Nature the Lawes ingraven in stone by the singer of God were not all of them the Lawes of Nature Against this I presse you with reasons authorities and of the other Commandements in the nature and property of the things as you say and so you give three instances two of them have been already answered namely that the labour of the servant is wholly subject to another mans command and that the commandement only forbiddeth the master his servants worke The third difference which now we will God willing scanne is this That the thing forbidden viz. servile worke and so the servants worke is not evill materially and ex suo genere as the matter of other commandements is nor evill of its owne nature but onely because it is prohibited and therefore you hold it is no Law of nature Here first consider how farre wide this is to your scope and the question in hand for what if the matter prohibited be evill but onely by prohibition would not that prohibition make it sinfull of lawfull and that to the servant I le give you an instance in a precept ceremoniall God commanded that no leaven should be in their houses during the Feast of unleavened bread suppose the master should command his servant to make in those dayes leavened bread if the servant did it the servant sinned as well as his master Secondly the proposition it selfe is faulty for the matter of the second Commandement is not evill materially any more than the matter of the fourth to make an image or likenesse of any thing in heaven earth or sea is not evill but onely circumstantially as to make it to bow to it If you say to make it to bow to it is the matter of the Commandement as indeed it is then I say to worke on the Sabbath is the matter of this Commandement and as to make an image to bow to it is evill materially and of its owne nature so to spend the Sabbath I say not that seventh day but the Sabbath the consecrated time of Gods worship in our labour is evill materially And therefore the masters command cannot excuse the servants worke that day And now hence I further reason against you thus Though the second Commandement forbid to make images which is not evill in it selfe but onely with this circumstance added to make them to bow to them yet he that maketh them for another that he knoweth will worship them breaketh the second Commandement therefore in this Commandement the servant that worketh at his masters commandement whom he knoweth to abuse his labour in this kind breaketh this Commandement Now by your Rule the servant commanded to make an image which he knoweth his master would abuse to worship it ought to make it because to make a likenesse or image is not simply evill Thirdly when you hold that the Law of Nature is of those things only that are evill by their property and nature this passage received thrusts out the second
separation from Gentiles and consecration to God therfore it was meerely ceremoniall and obliged not the Gentiles which it had done if it had beene a Law of Nature First here your consequence is weake and fallacious for every marke and signe of separation from others and consecration to God is not ceremoniall Baptisme is such a marke betweene Persian and Heathens yet no ceremony so is the Sacrament of the Lords supper Such was the Sabbath then and is at this day Neither doth every marke of separation and sanctification oblige only those that have that marke for the duty was no lesse necessary to men before the Law given than after and examples are not wanting of the Majesty of God himselfe g Gen. 2. 2. 7. 4. 8. 10 12. Exod. 16. 6. of Noah and of the Israelites before the Law by whom the dayes were gathered into weekes which sheweth that the observation of the Sabbath was not unknowne Lastly you urge us with an absurditie that will follow on this doctrine that if it bee of Nature to keepe the Sabbath it bindeth us Christians to keepe the seventh day Sabbath and so the first changers of the day to the first day of the weeke sinned grievously This argument is of no consequence for the first day of the weeke is now the Lords Sabbath as the seventh day from the Creation was then And thus neither Law of Nature broken nor sinne incurred and therefore all absurditie avoided the first day of the weeke is also the seventh though not that seventh day This accommodation also of the fourth precept to the Iewes in the determination of the day maketh not the commandement ceremoniall nor yet the change of it to our Lords day no more than the fifth Commandement is made ceremoniall by this promise respecting Israel in Canaan That thy dayes may bee long in the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee And this change in the application of the precept by the Apostle that it may bee well with thee and that thou mayest live long on earth h Ephes 6. 3. It standing firme then that the Commandement in every part thereof as it is contained in the Decalogue is morall and of the Law of Nature and the breach thereof a sinne your conclusion taketh place against you namely that the servant may not in any case worke on the Sabbath at prohibited workes because it is sinne at the commandement of any master on earth For it is better to obey God than man To the Answer whereof I leave you or others that in pride of spirit and a spirit of contradiction dare to attempt it in your behalfe All that followeth in this part of your Discourse seeing it is but by way of Recapitulation by the former Answers is found to be of no force CHAP. 17. Breerwood Pag. 28 29 30. BVt there is another objection for admit the servants worke upon the Sabaoth be the Masters sinne that imposeth it Is it not sinne to give consent and furtherance to another mans sinne But this servants doe when they execute their Masters commandements and consequently it is unlawfull so to yeeld lawfull therefore it is to resist and reject such commandement I answer first touching the point of consenting that in such a worke is to be considered the substance and the quality that is the worke it selfe and the sinfulnesse of it servants may consent to it as it is their masters worke not as it is their Masters sinne for except these things be distinguished God himselfe can no more avoide the calumniation of being the author than poore servants of being the ministers of sinne for that God concurreth with every man to every action whatsoever as touching the substance of the action is out of all question seeing both all power whence actions issue are derived from him and that no power can proceede into act without his present assistance and operation but yet to the crime the faultinesse the inordination the unlawfullnesse of the action wherein the nature of sinne doth for malice consist hee concurreth not But it wholly proceedeth from the infection of the concupiscence wherewith the faculties of the soule are originally defiled the actions themselves issuing from the powers and the sinfulnesse of the actions from the sinfulnesse of the powers like corrupt streames flowing from filthier springs It is not therefore every concurrence of the servants with the Master to a sinfull action which causeth the staine and imputation of sin upon the servant as when he consenteth and concurreth only to the action not to the sinne namely likes and approves it as his masters worke yet utterly dislikes it as it is his masters transgression likes of the worke for the obligation of obedience wherein touching worke he standeth to serve his Master and yet dislikes of the sinne for the great obligation wherin every one standeth toward the honour of God But yet to answer secondly to the point of resisting the servant ought not for any dislike or detestation of the annexed sinne to resist or reject his masters commandement touching the worke for in obeying hee is at most but the minister of another mans sinne and that as they say per accidens namely as it is annexed to such a worke but in resisting hee is directly the author of his owne sinne by withdrawing his obedience about bodily service from I say for the master doth not sinne onely in commanding his servant to worke but in working him and so bringing his command into execution which thing the servant knowing to be unlawfull must that he may not partake therein not onely not touch it with one of his fingers but also perswade the contrary and modestly rebuke it Again hee ought to attend on holy workes which directly will hinder that unlawfull worke and to these is he bound as Gods servant that day Thirdly by approving and this the servant doth really by his worke and by his example Your second solution is found by this that hath been set downe to be vaine and frivolous the servant must refuse to sinne in any kinde And his refusall in this kinde is not against the Law of nations as we have heretofore shewed nor against his owne covenant for his covenant though without limitations expressed doth not exempt him from the service of his Prince and Country the Prince may presse him to the warres much lesse from the service of his God when his Lord and Saviour presseth him to his warres as he doth in the day of assembling his army in holy beauty It is therefore wicked and injurious to God man nations lawes and covenants that you say that the Servant standeth bound to his master in all bodily service without any exception of the Sabbath more than other dayes Your phrase you use of the Servants resisting is your owne we teach the servant may refuse and must all such workes which God hath forbidden to be done that day but not resist no hee must acknowledge
us both from dishonour and from death Are we not bound to keepe it singular and inviolable well contenting our selves with so liberall a grant of the rest and not incroaching upon that one which God hath chosen to his honour Were it not wretchlesse neglect of Religion to make that very day common and to thinke we may doe with it as with the rest The title of this Constitution is this u Iustin tom 3. p. 459. Leon. Iraper constit 54. Vt Dominicis diebus omnes ab operibus vacent That all men should cease from workes on the Lords dayes This Constitution of Leo is approved by Master Hooker x Hooker eccles polit l. 5. sect 71. pag. 385. and that of Constantine called an over-great facility under pretence of the miscarriage of the fruits of the earth by unseasonable weather Yet this may bee said for that renowned Emperour hee gave that as a concâ—ssory Law which proves nothing unlesse it bee the hardnesse of mens hearts So Moses permitted men to put away their wives and Aaron agreed to it and yet none can reason thence that they were not of Christs mind in that matter Say the same for Constantine The Councell of Laodicâ—a is abused by you in your Allegation thereof for the Canon of that Councell according to the Greeke is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Christians y Concil Laod. Can. 29. ought not to Iudaize and to rest on the Sabbath as they are Christians but if they be found to Iudaize let them be Anathema from Christ or with Christ The Annotation upon it is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deest Of this Originall I find three Latine Translations The first Quod non oportet Christianâ—s Iudaïzare ociari in Sabbato sed operarieos in eodem die preferentes autem in veneratione diem Dominicum si vacare voluerint ut Christiani hoc faciant quod si reperti fuerint Iudaïzare Anathe ma sint à Christo Thus in English z Translat Dionysâ—i exigui That Christians ought not to judaize and rest on the Sabbath but worke on that day and preferring the Lords day in reverence if they will bee vacant as Christians doe this thing but if they bee found to Iudaize let them be Anathema from Christ The second Non oportet Christianos Iudaïzare in Sabbatho vacare sed operari eos in eadem die Dominicam preponendo eidem diei si hoc eis placet vacent tanquam Christiani quod si inventi fuerint Iudaïzare Anathema sit In English a Translat Isidori Mercatoris Christians ought not to Iudaize and to surcease labour on the Sabbath but worke on that day preferring the Lords day before that day if this please them they may be vacant as Christians but if they be found to Iudaize let him be Anathema The third Quod non oportet Christianos Iudaïzare in Sabbato ociari sedipso eo die operari diem autem Dominicum preferentes ociari si modo possint ut Christiâ—â—os quod si inventi fuerint ut Iudaïzantes sint Anathema apud ChristuÌ„ b Gentianus Hervetus That Christians ought not to Iudaize and rest on the Sabbath but worke that day but preferring the Lords day they ought to rest as Christians if so be they can and if they bee found as Iudaizing let them be Anathema with Christ Here note three things first that the Sabbath here spoken of is Saturday which was the Iewes Sabbath Secondly that the last is by all acknowledged for the worst translation indeed they are all rather paraphrases and glosses than translations Thirdly the two first plainely carry this sense that provided they preferre the Lords day in honour and reverence above the Iewes Sabbath and that they doe not Iudaize if this please them they may rest the Saturday too And the last translation in my opinion and according to the pointing thereof as I find it in the Author foundeth thus preferring the Lords day they must rest if so be they can do it as Christians not as Iudaizers Now how the Iewes did rest on their Sabbath in those primitive times is cleare in Ignatius and others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In English as followeth Therefore saith that blessed Martyr c Ignat. epist ad Magnes let us not Sabbatize after the Iewish manner as rejoycing in idlenesse for he that doth not labour let him not eare for in the sweat of thy face thou shalt eate thy bread say the Oracles but let every of us keepe Sabbath spiritually rejoycing in the meditation of the Law not in the remission of the body admiring the workmanship of God not eating things of the day before nor drinking things lukewarme nor walking measured spaces nor rejoycing in dancings and mad shoutings and clappings of the hands and feet Now was it not needfull to say if they can they should rest the Lords day like Christians and not like Iewes in an idle wanton luxurious and lascivious rest which was rather idlenesse and sloth than rest rather madnesse like those that kept Bacchus Feast than rest But this Alleager taketh to the worst Translation and fasteneth upon that clause which by no meanes will bee admitted to your Tenet is no breach of any divine commandement What by freely May he doe it so he doe it with reluctancy What by every man Are some priviledged As the Tempter said to Eve Yea hath God said Ye shall not eate of every Tree of the Garden Some need no priviledge for some will not labour any day these need no such liberty to worke extraordinarily the Lords day your liberty were their bondage on any day or may some freely prophane it though not every man Or ordinary labour in none will prophane it Or will ordinarily labour in some prophane it but only extraordinary labour in other How too shall one know this ordinary and extraordinary labour apart What meane you to say Would I set at liberty because in your opinion there is no command of God to bind therfore can you bind and loose Secondly it is meet say you that all worldly affaires be abandoned that day and that it be dedicated wholly to the honor of God What meet to doe that which no Law of God of Apostles of universall Synods did ever require as you spake but now What is it meet for a present purpose To distill your poyson closely which shall runne like oyle into the bones of Church and Common-wealth and none stay it while the devout heart shall be put off with this flappe It is meet indeed It is meete that Christians should bee as devout in rest and sanctity on the Lords day as the Iewes on their Sabbath That is all one as to say according to what you have taught before that a man should be as devout in the commands of his owne heart as in Gods command for so you make it and in the precepts of men as in Gods what deifying is here of men
the former words weigh the Words of the precept from which I thus reason First The servant eo nomine as a servant is commanded to remember the day therefore as a servant the Commandement is given to him to cease from his servile work or the worke of a servant For is hee to remember a part and not all the precept Or may hee earth himselfe in forgetfulnes and put all on his masters memory Againe the servant as a servant is commanded to keepe the day holy If any deny this then God and Caesar cannot have their due God callings cannot stand together God and societies must subvert each other and is this your quiet peaceable doctrine that ruines all and brings confusion Yeeld the Antecedent and then this conclusion will follow that hee is a a servant commanded not to worke For rest on the day is injoyned that holinesse may be followed and cessation from worke forbidden to whom holinesse is commanded as the words runne Remember the Sabbath or resting day to keepe it holy Besides That permissive mandate is not onely given of but to the servant sixe daies thou shalt labour and do all that thou hast to do therefore the command for the seventh daies rest is not only given of but to the servant for the commands of both respect the same persons Likewise this Command Thou shalt not do any work is given to him that is contained in the word Thou but the servant as thy servant is contained in the word thou and is it not given to him then For the words following expound the first Thou Thou shalt not Who meane you by this Thou who but thou master thy servant thou father thy sonne thou mother thy daughter c. Further the Commandement is given to them to whom the reasons of the Command reach but they reach alike to thy servant as to thee therefore the Command reacheth alike to thy servant as to thee And if you say yea the reasons reach to all alike to perswade to sanctifie but not to all alike to forbeare work It is false for besides that there can be no sanctification without cessation from servile workes the reasons do equally and strongly bend to perswade cessation from worke as the reason from the right of the Law-giver appropriating it to himselfe and his worship the equity of the Law which giveth sixe for worke and restraines but for one day the example of God and the speciall blessing given to the day To come to handy-gripes with you you yeeld the servants worke is forbidden I demand Is it forbidden because it hinders the master onely from sanctifying the day or the servant also Surely because it hinders the servant cheifly and not the master or not chiefely his worke crosseth the end of the Sabbath in him if therefore the command of sanctifying the day bee to him as a servant the command of ceasing from worke is to him as a servant Let mee againe reason with you from the command if the negative bee of the servant and not to the servant then also is the affirmative which is this Thou shalt doe the workes of holinesse that day and from hence will follow this grosse absurdity that if the servant goe not to the assemblies nor apply himselfe to workes of holinesse and the master also doe not bid him his master onely sinneth and not the servant because according to your new learning the master is charged with the servant for the workes of holinesse and the servants holinesse that day is the matter only of the Command the master and not the servant is the subject person commanded This Command Thou shalt doe the workes of holinesse is of the servants holy worke but no precept to the servant It may be you will flee off here-from but you are caught in your owne net as sure as the negative precept hath his affirmative every way proportionable Thirdly and seeing store is no sore where each apart will make a party good b Quae prosâ—nt singula multa juvant I adde He that gave the Law knoweth best the meaning of his owne Law let us see from his Word in other Texts the persons that stand expressely charged To whom is it given In Ier. 17. 20. to the Kings of Iudah to all Iudah to all the Inhabitants of Ierusalem that entred in by those gates was this Command given of ceasing from work of bearing no burden on the Sabbath day Were the Iewish servants none of Iudah none of Ierusalems inhabitants none of those that entred in and went out by Ierusalems gates To whom is the Command of the Sabbath rest given In Exod. 34. 21. to him that serves these are the words of the Text Sixe dayes thou shalt serve c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but on the seventh day thou shalt rest in eating time and in harvest thou shalt rest Now who serveth so properly as a servant and is not the originall word the same that notes is that serving and a servant d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 save that one is the Verbe and the other the Noune And what serving doth it signifie No other than that service of servants e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of houshold servants of such as till the ground There can bee no way to Servitus ministerium samulatus cultura exclude the servant at all from the charge of this precept Fourthly besides all this how is your doctrine built on the words of this Commandement the Law saith Thou and thy servant shall doe no worke you say it onely saith Thou shalt not command thy servant to worke Againe take your saying the Law bindeth the Master from commanding and will this follow therefore it binds the servant to obey his master if he should be so wicked as to command what God prohibits him This is a plaine non-sequitur and can not hold together by all the Geometry in the World nor can any Carpenter make this joyne but such loose reasonings hold best for them that would goe in a broad way Now weaken these following arguments if you can Fifthly hee that is circumcised is bound to keepe the whole Law and none is bound by your owne confession but he to whom the Law is given the Iewish servant then being circumcised was bound to keepe this Law as given to him The circumcised saith the Apostle is a debtor to doe the whole Law f Gal. 5. 3. Sixthly he that wrought on the Sabbath being a stranger was not fit for communion and ordinary conversing with the Iewes as appeareth by the words of the Commandement that charged the stranger within the gate to rest that day and by the practice of Nehemiah that drave such from within and without the Citie Ierusalem and by a like instance of leaven at the Feast of the Passeover and of unleavened bread For if the stranger that sojourned onely and was not borne in the Land did this while eate that which was leavened he was
Disciples appearing to them through forty dayes space and speaking the things that concerned the Kingdome of God and fully instructing them and teaching profound Theologie not so much with words as with the efficacie of the Spirit He so rested from both workes that hee ceased not yet to teach men and instruct them in the true worship The time would faile me to tell of our English worthies famous Westerne Lights that teach all this Truth as Willet Perkins Greenham Babington Bownd Gibbens Dod Scharpy Esty Williams with many more Behold what a cloude of witnesses doe compasse us about For further confirmation consider that place in Exod. 16. For first before all mention of Moses Law concerning the Sabbath it is storied that the People gathered on the sixt day twice as much bread two Omers for one man which Vers 22. 23. thing was observed by the Rulers of the Congregation who came and told Moses of it To what end was this but that they might apply themselves wholy to the observation of the Sabbath the day following Secondly the very phrase and words of Moses in giving admonition about the Sabbath in vers 23 is such as clearly sheweth that Moses spake not of the Sabbath as some new thing unheard of but cals to minde the ancient sanctimonie of that day which they had beene compelled to neglect of late in Egypt through Phâ—raohs cruell taske-masters This is that which the Lord hath said Tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord. Thirdly the very command of Moses appointing them for after times to gather twice as much every sixth day as they did other dayes and giving this reason on the seventh day which is the Sabbath in it there shall bee none Vers 26. 29. sheweth that Moses himselfe was mindefull of the Law of the Sabbath delivered from Adam to the Fathers Out of this Text then it is evident that the Sabbath was from the beginning The third Section answered Vnto the Argument of Master Byfield for the mortalitie of the Sabbath taken from the manner of giving this Law by lively voyce on Sinai and by divine ingraving in Tables of stone by the finger of God and therefore differenced by the Lord from a ceremoniall Law which were all given mediately by Moses and from Gods owne testimonie by Moses that it is one of the Tenne words or Tenne Commandements you make here such an answer as doth not once come neare the force of the argument It became say you one of the Tenne perpetuall words then when it was given on Mount Sinai for the morall part perpetuall Thou shalt sanctifie the Sabbath for the ceremoniall part not perpetuall Thou shalt sanctifie the seventh day for the Sabbath If it became so because ingraven by the finger of God in Tables of stone then that part thou shalt sanctifie the seventh day for Sabbath is so because so ingraven If it became so but then that sufficeth us that have lived ever since and those that shall arise after us to the end of the world But this that you affirme that then when it was delivered on Sinai it became one of the perpetuall words hath no warrant in Scripture alledge the place nor in reason for as the other nine Commandements became not then first perpetuall though then first delivered in forme of lawes no more did this Were they perpetuall because written in Tables of stone and not rather because perpetuall so written This also is strange that you say that the morall part of the commandement Thou shalt sanctifie the Sabbath as you will have it became but then on Sinaia perpetuall word Was not obliging from the beginning and written in the heart that there should bee a vacant time for the worship of God If you deny it See your owne confession in pag. 24. of the Treatise The fourth Section answered That place in the fifty sixth Chapter of Esay vers 4 5. Vers 2. affords a strong argument against you for there the Christian Sabbath is prophesied of as that which every mortall man every sonne of Adam that would bee blessed must keepe in obedience to God It is therefore an ordinance of God charged in the fourth Commandement and no Command of men The strangers and Eunuchs there spoken of were not such as became proselytes under the law but Christians under the Gospell You object that the priviledge of Sonnes and Daughters was not tendered to strangers and so Master Byfield mistooke the Text. This is but a cavill the intent of the Prophet is to shew that the legall rules about strangers and Eunuchs shall not in Christs Kingdome where they are abolished hinder their election and choise into the number of his people but any of all sorts are accepted with God that thus take hold of his Covenant The Prophet expresly pronounceth them blessed v. 2. therefore it can be no wresting of the Text to say the stranger shall be a Sonne and the Eunuch made joyfull in the house of prayer nay if you take the Promise applyed in v. 5. to the Eunuchs exclusively shutting out the stranger how doth it answer so well the strangers objection who said The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people vers 3. You object further that the burnt offerings and sacrifices mentioned in vers 7. have no place in the New Testament therefore the Text must bee understood of the time of the Old Testament You might as well say that that place in Malach. 1. 11. is not spoken of the New Testament though it bee said Gods Name shall bee great among the Gentiles from the rising of the Sunne to the going downe thereof Because it is added In every place incense shall be offered and a pure offering Christians have their burnt offerings and sacrifices Rom. 12. 1. Heb. 13. But you say that then all the chapter must be understood in a mysticall sense and so of a mysticall Sabbath This consequence is utterly infirme as may be seene by that Text in Malachi forecited and that conceit of a mysticall Sabboth cannot have place here for these are made distinct to keepe the Sabbath from polluting it and to keepe the hand from doing any evill verse 2. To speake fully there is no one word in Scripture that speaketh of a mysticall Sabbath for what is spoken of a * Heb. 4. Spirituall Sabbatisme concernes our rest in Heaven and not a Spirituall Sabbath on earth and to say that servile workes condemned in the fourth Commandement are no other than sinnes or sinnes at all is nothing but an Allegoricall sporting with Gods Word for sinnes are not unlawfull on the Sabbath onely but alwayes and in all places nor doth the fourth Commandement intend to give a prohibition of all sinnes though it is true that in some sense sinnes receive an high aggravation when they are committed on so holy a day Esai 58. 4. Now how this mysticall and spirituall Sabbath of yours should serve to this