the hearte why may not the prophane man cauill against the Sabbath day because t is said In it thou shalt doe no worke what not any manner of worke vvhat not feede our children nor cut our owne meate this Commandement is Iewish Againe Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe vvho is able thus to doe vvherfore this Commandement pertained only to the seruitude of the Jewish nation saith the vncharitable person and againe Thou shalt not couet thy neighbours vvife nor any thing that is his that is thou shalt not haue the least desire to the least thing of the neighbours Oh saith the lawlesse Protestant these things are partly Morall partly Ceremoniall this same liuing so accuratly and so strictly pertained to the Iewes t is to vs a yoke nor we nor our fathers could beare c. if I say an exception be once made from this generall truth for you for the 7th day vvhy may not euery of these come in also with his exception too Yet farther since this is that generall truth vvhich all Ministers both in pulpit and in their bookes doe vphould vvhatsoeuer they say or vvright that it must be so and so because God had commanded it in the Morall Law vvhich particular flowes from this generall that whatsoeuer God hath commanded in his Morall Law 〈◊〉 now in force since I say they pay out such coyne to others why should they not be willing to be paid in the same coyne by others vvhy therfore should I be put to proue this principle and fundamentall truth vvhich in other cases themselues make no scruple of If so be that this be not sufficient that vvhatsoeuer is commanded in Gods Law the 10. Comm is now in force to bind vs our very principles shall become disputable and doubtfull If they shall answere by any distinction wher by they empaire the full force and virtue of any branch of this Law of God they offend against a plaine texte Deut. 12.32 whatsoeuer I command you you shall take nothing therefro yea they falsify Christs words and predication Mat. 5.18 vvho confirmed the Law and euery iote title in it to abide in such force as it was in when he preached that sermons in Mat. 5.18 thence forwards vnto the vvorlds end yea they side it vvith these Priestes Zepha 3.4 who wrested the Law or vvho did violence to the Law of Scripture vve haue but two parts left vs the one is the Law Morall the other is the Gospell now whosoeuer shall enfring or deny any iote or title of eighther of these portions of holy writt he is no freend to God 2. Neuerthelesse some thing may be said to proue that whatsoeuer God hath commanded in the 10. Commandements the same is now in force as 1. because all the 10. Commandements were all and euery one equally and a like deliuered by the same God by the same voice at the fame tyme and wrote vpon the same tables of stone therfore one should bind aswell as thother and one should last as long as any other they should haue the same duration in common reason 2. Our Sauiour Christ himselfe ratified the Morall Law and euery iote and title of it vnto the vvorlds end Matt. 5 17.18 which is to the full as much as can be desired I should proue 3. If some thing commanded in the Morall Law doth not binde now then are there not 10. Commandements for there is but 9. Commandements and an halfe or but 9. Commandements and three quarters or there abouts but sure I am tenne fully there is not for there wants the tyme of 7th day commanded in the 4th Comm if you except it now Moses telde Iewes and consequently vs that God wrote in the Tables tenne Commandements Deuter. 10.4 if therfore we haue not tenne commandements compleat then haue we Christians not the Law of God as it was deliuered at first intirely but defectiuely and maimedely and some peeces only of it 4. If that reasoning of S. Iames Iam. 2.10.11 be sound and good vvhere by he proueth that whosoeuer breaketh but one Law is guilty of all the other precepts by this reason because he that commanded one Law he commanded the other Lawes also Then so may I reason and proue whosoeuer shall violate the 7th day is guilty of all the other precepts by this reason because he that commanded vs to beepe the Sabbath day proue it from a like phrase in Scripture as in Genes 14.21.23 said Abraham to the King of Sodome I will not take so much as a threed or shoolatchet of thee c. and as in Matth. 5.26 said our Sauiour Christ thou shalt not come out thence till thou hast paid the vtmost farthing both vvhich phrases intimate thus much that if the debtor should not come out of prison till he had paid euery farching thē should he not come out till he had paid euery penny euery shilling and euery pownd if Abraham would not take a threed or shoolatchet of the King then would he not take of him raiment cattell siluer or gould thus you see it the manner of Scripture by mentioning and denying of the very least to intimate ther by a deniall of all any the whole and euery part and parcell of that thing wher to that least belonged a like phrase you haue Mat. 10.30 yea and the haires of your head are numbred c. if the haires vvere numbred may we reason then were the hands eyes eares the teeth and the fingers numbred also just so is my atguing aboue if euery title of the Law be in force then so also are thes letters words in force to wit the 7th day is the Sabbath so you see the consequence proued good and sound I proue the Minor to wit that euery title of the Law is in force to the worlds end by Mat. 5.18 where our Sauiour prophecied of the duratiō of the Law of euery iote and title of it to last to the worlds end saying Amen or verily Isay vnto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 donec vntill Heauen Earth passe one iote or one title of the Law shall not passe c. vvhere you see Christ did ratifie this prophecy by a vehement assueueration prefixed to it Amen or verily said he c. Farther note vvhat learned Chemnitius saith vpon this Text by way of exposition saith he Iote is a letter of the Hebrew Alphabet and a letter of the least value of all the rest in the Alphabet and title saith he is as a pricke to a letter or as a comma to a sentence so you see Christ did stablish for euer the very least things of moment in the law and thus is the minor made good Neuerthelesse against this Text many answeres are brought as 1. that by Law here is not only meant the Law Morall but also the Law ceremoniall Here vnto I say 1. that it is a growndlesse answere it hath no foundation in the Text or context for since all the Lawes
Gods Rest on the same day after the vvork of creation and as it is a day for the benefit of both our bodies for rest and our soules for holinesse Thus none of those former textes you see can proue that the 7th day Sabbath vvas euer ceremoniall or yet abolisht but yet they haue two textes more behinde vvherein they put great confidence and especially in the former of the two and if they faile in these two as I trust in God they shall then are they quite gone and for euer to hould their peace for speaking more against the Lord Gods Sabbath 6. The 6th text is that Colos 2.16.17 let no man condemne you in meate and drinke or in respect of an holy day or of the new Moone or of the Sabbath dayes vvhich are a shaddow of things to come but the body is of Christ Loe say they here you haue Sabbath dayes forbidden the very point in question they are counted a shaddaw of Christ and therfore abolisht I answere 1. as there is two Lavves a morall Lavv consisting of 10. Comm all vvritten by the finger of God vpon Tables of stone and a ceremoniall Law vvritten by Moses and deliuered to the people so are there Sabbaths morall that is such as God engraued vpon the Tables of stone vvith other 9. preceptes and there are Sabbaths ceremoniall that is such as you finde no mention of in the Decalogue but such as you finde recorded by Moses dispersed here there in the 5. bookes of Moses specially in Leuit. 23.4 c. to the end of the chapter Novv as vvhen you reade Heb. 7.12 Ephes 2.15 If the priesthode be changed then must there be a change of the lavv you vvill not here permite any man to iumble confusedly together the lavv morall and Law ceremoniall and say both these lawes are here changed but you vvill distinguish of Lawes granting them the ceremoniall Law to be meante here but not the morall so doe I in answere to this text Col. 2.16 distinguish of Sabbaths granting them here is meante only ceremoniall Sabbaths denying that here is meante the Morall Sabbath of 7th day That this distinction is good and that by Sabbaths here is meant only ceremoniall Sabbaths doe beare witnesse to me euen vvorthy diuines of their owne side as Greenham in his vvorke vpon the Sabbath day and Perkins in his cases of conscience booke 2. chapt 16. Sect. 3. and Dod vpon the 4th Comm pag. 133. and Elton vpon the Colossians 2.16 and Ames in his Thesis touching the Sabbath 2. That here is meante only ceremoniall Sabbaths is plaine by the context and that by two reasons the former in that these Sabbathes are ranked vvith other things all vvhich be ceremonies as meates and drinkes and new Moones and holy dayes so that all other things in this text vvhich the Apostle abolisheth being ceremonies it giues vs cause to thinke the Sabbaths placed and ioyned vvith them be only ceremoniall Sabbaths as M. Dod vvell obserueth vpon the 4th Com the latter reason is for that this 16th verse is as you may see by the vvord of inference Therfore a conclusion vvhose premise you haue in the 14th verse and here the Apostles discourse is on this wise If the hand wrighting of ordinances which is the Law that commanded meates drinkes and Holy dayes new Moones Sabbath dayes be put out and taken away Then let no man condemne you in meates and drinkes in Holy dayes new Moones or Sabbaths dayes But the handwrighting of ordinances is put out and taken away Therfore let no man condemne you in meates and drinkes in Holy dayes new Moones or Sabbath dayes The minor you haue v. 14. the conclusion in v. 16. Now for asmuch as it is a rule vvith Logicians that there should not be more in the conclusion then vvas in the premisses Hence it followeth that if by the vvord Sabbathes in v. 16. you vvill vnderstand the morall Sabbath of the 7th day then by handvvrighting of ordinances in v. 14. you must vnderstand at least that parte of the Morall Law vvhich is the 4th Com the vvhich commanded that Sabbath The vvhich if you doe then you rune vpon this absurdety that you make the Apostle to abolish in this text a branch of morall Law as the vvhole or at least a parte of the 4th Com and so wheras the Lord wrote vpon the Table tenne commandements Deut. 10.4 you make by this interpretation but nyne commandements or at most but nyne and an halfe or but nyne and three quarters or there abouts for tenne compleate there is not I am sure Against my distinction they say by Sabbaths in this text of necessity must morall Sabbaths be meante because vnder the name of Holy dayes is comprised all ceremoniall Sabbathes so that then the word Sabbaths must meane the morall Sabbath whereto I answere that I vvill lay you out for euery word its proper day it signifies and yet the morall Sabbath excepted 1. by nevv Moones is meante only the first day of month Numb 28.11 2. Holy day is in the originall feast day or a feaste or in parte of a feaste 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now the Lord had commanded the Jewes a feast of 7. dayes Leuit. 23.34.39 of vvhich feast the first day and also the last day were Sabbaths now the dayes goeing betwene the first and last day these vvere the parte of a feast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and these the Apostle aimed at by holy day and then 3d. and lastly by Sabbaths are meante those annuall Sabbaths vvhich vvere on the first and last day of the Feast of 7. dayes now least ye think this distinction and application but a conceipte see Leuit. 23.37.38 where the Lord himselfe distinguisheth twixt Feastes and Sabbathes vvhen he said These are the Feastes c. besides the Sabbathes c. Or if by Holy day or Feast you vvill vnderstand all these 7. dayes with the first and last dayes which were Sabbathes then by the vvord Sabbathes in Col. 2.16 may be vnderstood these Sabbathes Leuit. 23.24.32 which were feastes but of one single day a peece and eighther of them called Sabbathes and these vvere the Sabbathes vvhich Paul abolished so you see there is no necessity by Sabbathes to vnderstand the Morall Sabbath at all I answere 2. to the text Col. 2.16 that hereby vve ought not to vnderstand the Morall Sabbath as if that were abolisht for this vvere to set Paul against Christ the seruant against his Lord for Christ established the morall Law and euery iott and title of it to the vvorlds end Math. 5.18 now the 7th day Sabbath vvas not lesse than a iott or title of the Law and did Christ please to ratifie it to the vvorlds end and shall vve make Paul with in a fewe yeeres after to abolish it vvhat necessety is there of such large vnderstanding of the vvord Sabbathes is there any besides mens pleasures so to haue it that they might throw downe the
Tables of stone to notify its perpetuity they hauing no plaine and direct Text of Scripture necessarily abolishing it it can be nothing then but their bare vvilles and pleasures to haue it abolisht and this grownded vpon the custome of the church because shee hath abolisht it now a long tyme. They haue not thus done vvith it though for they haue also certain reasons argumēts more vvhich vve novv come to my minde against the tyme and day where by they would proue the Sabbath day abolisht The first is taken from Christ himselfe Say some men vvhy Christ himselfe abolished the Sabbath day and that euen in his owne tyme whilst he vvas vpon the earth for He gaue leaue to vvork vpon the Sabbath as to leade beastes to water to toile about lifting a beast out of a ditche yea himselfe made clay on the Sabbath to open the eyes of the blinde man in so much as the Pharises taxed him for a breaker of the Sabbath and for a godlesse man for it saying This man is not of God because he keepeth not the Sabbath day Ioh. 9.16.14 Hereto I answer 1. what matters it what those superstitious Pharises censured of Christ vvho were the blind leaders of the blinde and of enuy could not endure Christ should doe any thing but they would carpe and cauill at it if possiblie they could though here they would not endure Christ so much as to cure a blinde man on the Sabbath yet it appeareth it was but enuy but superstition in them for Christ approued his owne facte of healing on the Sabbath day by a common practise among the Jewes themselues at that day of the like saying what man among you if his sheepe fall on the Sabbath into a pitt doth not take it and lift it out Mat. 12.10.11 yea it appeareth the Pharises and Doctoures of the Law euen vnder the Law allowed other men though not Christ nor his Disciples to doe works of charity and necessity on the Sabbath as to lift a sheep out of the ditch and for the Priest to kill the Sacrifices on the Sabbath Matt. 12.5.11 I answere 2. let not vs attend to the Scribes and Pharises censures but hearken we to Christ the true expounder obseruer of the Law now he allowed workes of mercy and workes of necessity to be done on the Sabbath day as those instances afore mentioned doe proue but for any to suppose Christ meante hereby to abolish the Sabbath is a simple conceipte for Christ saith of the Morall Law vvhereof the Sabbath day is a branch He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Mat. 5.17 But suppose the Sabbath had beene a branch of the ceremoniall Law why yet t is absurde to think that Christ would abrogate any thing of it so long as he liued for the ceremoniall Law was equally in force with the Morall Law vntill Christs death So then these things did not argue any abolition of the Sabbath day then but rather giues vs to vnderstand how we Christians are to keepe the Lords Sabbath to the worlds end not in any superstitious strictnes as if vve might not on that day doe works of mercy and necessity but the contrary for if Christ allowed it to the Jewes euen before his death whilst no man doubtes but all Lawes morall ceremoniall were in force why should vve thinke but that he allowed as much libertie to Christians to the vvorlds end 2. A 2d reason is fetcht from that phrase Mat. 12.8 The Sonne of man is Lord of the Sabbath day whence it is thought that since Christ is called the Lord of the Sabbath that therefore Christ may change the Sabbath day secondly that Christ as Lord of the day did abolish the day I answere first to the former Say I should graunt that Christ the Lord of the Sabbath may or might change the Sabbath what 's that to our question vve dispute not of what Christ may or might doe but what Christ did doe I answere to the latter that neither the context nor yet the phrase of Christ being Lord of the Sabbath will afforde any such matter see the absurdety of such collections from a like phrase Rom. 14.9 Christ died and rose againe that he might be Lord both of the deade and of the liuing can any hence collect that because Christ is called Lord of the liuing that therfore Christ might or did abolish or destroy the liuing 2. to suppose Christ here did abolish the Sabbath day as a ceremony is altogether growndlesse for both at this tyme when Christ spake these vvordes all ceremonies vvere in full force and also so they remained euer after vntill the day of his death and passion for not vntill then was the handwriting of ordinances taken out of the vvay Col. 2.14 nor vntill his death did Christ euer abolish any ordinance formerly in vse in the Iewish church To conclude no more can be gathered out of this text Mat 12.8 but the right vse of the Sabbath Christ freeing it from the superstitions of the Pharises who held that no worke might be done in no case vpon the Sabbath day but Christ shewed that in a case of necessity his Disciples might plucke and rubb a fewe eares of corne to satisfie present hunger Christ did beare them out in it allowing a dispensation in such a ease for as he vvas Lord of all the commandements as touching his Godhead so of the Sabbath day also and therfore he might dispense vvith that law and that day or rather he might therfore be betrusted to haue giuen the true sense and exposition of the commandement and to haue showne them the right vse of a Sabbath day as if he had thus said since I am Lord of the Sabbath doe not you Pharisies think that I vvill giue way no not to my Disciples to doe any vnlawfull facte on this day nor suffer them to prophane this sacred tyme for it is myne I am Lord of it if therfore their plucking eares of corne had bene blame worthy you should haue found me so farre from defending them as I vvould haue bene the first that would haue rebuked them for it but herein I see they haue done no more then I doe allowe them to doe the Lord of a corne field vvill allow his seruants to make a footpath through his corne in case of a necessity 3. A 3d reason is because all things are become new now in the Kingdome of Christ 2. Cor. 5.17 and therfore the ould Sabbath is abolished say they Where vnto I answere 1. if all things be become new now in Christs Kingdome I pray shew me then vvhere you haue a new commandement for the 8th day or first day of the weeke or for the Lords day in steade of the ould 4th commandement for the 7th day or Sabbath day and where the Israelites vvere commanded in the first comm to serue the true God only shew me vvhere now we are commanded to serue any
yea remoued the building must fale if Apostles neighther left precept for the Lords daye no nor their owne practise vvhoe can imagine it shold be a Sabbath by Gods appointment I answere lastly vvhereas they builde vpon the practise of the Apostles preaching so as on all is because there is not in all the newe nor ould Testaments any commandement to set vp any other Sabbath then that 7th day from the creation no nor ought else that hath the force of a commandement as no practise of Christ nor his Apostles as haue beene showne afore nay we haue Gods apointement to the contrary that no day of the 6. can be Sabbath day for in the 6. dayes vve may labour Exod. 20.9 Sixe dayes shalt thou labour c. I answere 2. Be it that Saturday Sabbath being abrogated an other Sabbath must rise vp in its roome yet it followeth not that Sunday or the Lords day on first day of the vveeke must necessarily be the new day for there may be a Sabbath though none vpō the first day of the weeke if there be one kept vpon any of the 6. dayes Moneday Tewsday Wensday or Thursday c. But hereto it vvill be said though the newe Sabbath may be on any of the 6. dayes yet we ought to choose the first day of the weeke before all others because on it vve receiued a greater a greater blessing then one any other of the 6. dayes since on that day our Lord Christ rose from the dead and therfore it is caled the Lords day I answere 1. be it so that in choosinge a day vve ought to take that day which hath neere relation to the greatest blessing yet vvold we imitate God in instituting a Sabbath at Creation we shold not set a parte for a Sabbath that very day vvhereon vve receiued that blessing or whereon Christ performed it but the day after it so God hauing finished his vvorke of creation on the 6th day he then sanctifyed the day after the 7th day so it seemeth the beleeuing Iewes learned of God to set a parte the day after a deliuerance not the very day see Ester 9.17.18 vvhere the Iewes that conquered their enemies on the 13th day of the moneth they rested on the 14th day of the month and keept it a day of feasting and ioye and those Iewes that conquered on the 13th and 14th dayes they rested on the 15th daye But vve immitate neither God nor those Godly Iewes for vve rest vpon the very day where on we receiued that great blessing that is vpon the first day of the weeke wherein the Lord rose and we shold rest rather on the second day of the vveeke which is Moneday I answere 2. be it so that the Lords day were to be kept of vs aboue any other day in memory of the resurrection of our Lord yet it followeth not that vve shold count and keepe euery first day of the vveeke and one day in 7. for a Sabbath for this were Iewish as it is caled and to imitate God in the creation but we Christians haue an other patterne that is Christ the Lord and Redemer to imitate and that in respect of the worke of Redemption So as if we hold it best to sanctify the very day whereon Christ rose why then must we sanctifye euery third day for our new Sabbath and cale and counte euery third day since the first Lords day vvhereon Christ rose The Lords day let it fale vpon the first day of the weeke or on the 2th or 3th or 4th c. one any day of the weeke my reason is because the Scriptures telleth vs that our Lord Christ rose vpon the 3th daye as God rested on the 7th day so then Christ being crucified one good Friday and riseing againe one our Suneday it appeares he was but 3. dayes vpon the worke of redemption Now if vve Christians must imitate Christ in the worke of redemption as did the Iewes God in the worke of creation Then looke as God working 6. dayes and resting the 7th the Iewes also wrought 6. dayes and rested the 7th So as Christ was 3. dayes or 3. partes of 3. dayes in the worke of redemption and rested from the same sufferings on the third day In like manner shold we Christians in imitation of Christ worke 3. dayes or 3. partes of three dayes and rest on the third keeping it for a Sabbath So we shold not then keepe these we now call Lords dayes for our Sabbath but others nor keepe a Sabbath once in 7. dayes but on t once euery 3. dayes I answere now to the reason whereby they wold choose out the Lords day afore any other of the 6. dayes for a Sabbath because on that day we receiued the Lord from the dead the greatest worke and mercy that euer we receiued c. here vnto I answere if the greatest worke shall determine the day which it shall be Then in myn account as farr at yet I can see good Friday shold be our new Sabbath day for on that day Christ performed the greatest work of any other day let vs therefore compare these 3. dayes vvorkes on good Friday not to mention the the particulares of his grieueousse passion Christ vpon the crosse hanging there in our roomes bare that most intollerable and insupportable wrath of God which was due for the sins of all Gods elect from beginning to the end of the world vvhich wrath was so hote as caused him to vtter these words My God my God why hast thou forsaken me and then as hauing borne the vtmost of his fathers wrath for sins of his elect he yeelded vp his Spirit with these words It is finished Ioh. 19.30 as for the next day the 2d. day of his passion our Saturday and so also for the 3d. day of his passion our Sunday vntill he rose what cold he suffer his soule vvas in paradise his body in the graue dead and senselesse now judge vvhither of these 3. dayes had the greatest worke done in in which of them but Friday was the greatest passion or if you vvill compare Christs resurrection with his passion I trust it vvill be fond a greater vvorke for his Deity to supporte the Humanity vpon the crosse then to send his soule from heauen into his dead body in the graue to quicken and raise it vp But you will say on the 3d. day Christ rose with out which all the former had beene insufficient 1. Cor. 15.14 if Christ be not risen our preaching and your faith is in vaine c. and Christ died for our sines and rose againe for our justification Rom. 4.25 so that it is rather the day wherein all was perfectly finished then the day wherin the greatest worke was done that we shold keepe for our Sabbath where to I answere 1. Christ vpon the crosse on good Friday said then it is finished Ioh. 19.30 secōdly if you will stay for a day where in euery complement vvas fulfilled then must
you make your Sabbath on Ascentiō day being Thursday or rather you must tarry till the worlds end till Christ hath conquered sines death 1. Cor. 15.26.56 if therfore by reasons we shall institute Sabbathes it may be thought good Friday is the only day for our new Sabbath or else to tarry till this worlds end 4 A 4th maine reason of all is to this effect If the Iewes kept a Sabbath in memory of Gods Creation Then much more ought Christians keepe an other Sabbath in memory of Christs Redemption and the common reason hereof is because the worke of Redemption is a greater worke then the worke of Creation I answere 1. the reason is not the same and therfore it followeth not for the Iewes they did not set vp a Sabbath on their owne heads with out a precept for their direction only to commemorate the creation if they had it had beene no better then will worship but they stayed for a Commandement from the God of the creation to command them a Sabbath by his 4th Comm and to tell them which day of the 7. to keepe it was Gods Commandement principally that set them one worke to keep a Sabbath novv this which is the maine for the keeping of a Sabbath day is left on t in their argument as if Gods Comm were but a by thing and not necessarily presupposed in euery Sabbath wherfore let them put into their argument the main and principall thing mouing the Iewes to keepe the Sabbath that is Gods 4th Com and then I fault not their argument as novv I doe but I bide them proue likewise that we Christians haue such strong reasons to keep our Lords day a Sabbath as Jevves had for their day that is I require to shew me where Christ or his Apostles left vs an expresse Commandement to sanctify the Lords day as God did to the Iewes to sanctify the 7th day and then I say indeed If the Iewes kept the 7th day vve Christians ought keep the 8th day Or thus is greater then the worke of creation if it be greater the answere vvill be to the elect and to the redeemed it is greater vvell be it so but what is this to our question which is generall of all Christians that liue vvith in the pale of the Church affirming that if Iewes that is all Iewes kept a Sabbath for the creation then ought Christians that is all men vvith in the pale of the Church keep a Sabbath for redemption so the question being generall of all men with in the Church you bring a reason to enforce all these men to keepe a new Sabbath which reason is proper to some of these men only as if you wold thus argue all men are bound to keep the Lords day for a Sabbath because the Lord died for some of these men this arguing is much like absurde to this If the Iewes vnder King Ahashuerosh Ester 9.17 did solemnize a day euery yeere with feasting and ioye in memory of their deliuerance from Hamans conspiracy Then so ought Christians both English French Dutchmen and Spanyardes c. that is all Christians solemnize a day euery yeare with like feasting and ioye in memory of our deliuerance from Spanyardes in the yeare 88. or from Papistes powder treason on 5 th Nouember and here to may be added a like reason as that our deliuerance in 88. or on 5 th of Nouember vvas as great as that of the Iewes from Haman now vvho doth not see the vanity of this kinde of arguing yet just thus doe they argue to set vp the Lords day for a Sabbath as here t is argued from a particular deliuerance of some Christians as English men to all Christians as French Dutch and Spanyards vvhoe had no share in that deliuerance of 88. and 5th of Nouember just so doe they argue from a particular deliuerance of some Christians as Gods elect vnto all Christians both elect and reprobate beleeuers and vnbeleeuers what reason is it that such as haue no parte in Christ as a Redeemer shold weekely celebrate on whole day neglecting their proffit and callings in memory of Christ the Redeemer of right therfore only such a day shold be a Sabbath as bindes all and euery man one as well as an other and such is the 7th day Sabhath in memory of the creation for in the creation we all beleeuers and vnbeleeuers haue our share not so in the redemption I conclude therfore that though the worke of redemption be greater then the worke of creation and therfore doth require a Sabbath as well as the creation yet doth it not require so generall universall a Sabbath as did the work of creation all men are not bounde to the one as they are to the other Nor can I conceiue how any more men shold be bound to keep this Sabbath by this reason then only a fewe which doe actually beleeue in Christ an handfull of most free Agentes so as they eighther of thē produce effectes at their pleasure by Counsaile so as they be not tyed euer to produce the same effectes the one as doth the other that this is so will appeare euen in these pointes in question it pleased God to create the vvorld by action but it pleased Christ to redeeme the vvorld by passion 2. it pleased the Father to be 6. dayes in creation but it pleased the Sonne to be but 3. dayes in redemption 3. it pleased the Father to rest on the Sabbath day but it pleased the Sonne not to rest on the Lords day but to trauaile 15. miles to Emmaus and backe againe 4. it pleased God to leaue a commandement in wrighting to posterity to keepe the Sabbath day but it pleased not our Sauiour Christ to leaue any commandement for the keeping the Lords day if therfore God Christ be so variouse in their actions how will it follow that if God kept a Sabbath or instituted one in creation then Christ must necessarily institute an other like Sabbath at redemption 5 A 5th reason seemes to ground on the 4th Com thus The 4th Comm enioynes a 7th day for the Sabbath now our Lords day is a 7th day for we keepe it euery 7th day for a Sabbath I answere 1. the 4th Comm enioyneth such a 7th day for a Sabbath as is and vvas amongst the Jewes called by his proper name the Sabbath day also now our Lords day vvas called vvith them eighther the first day of the vveeke or the first day after the Sabbath so it can not be that 7th day there meante 2. if we call our Lords day the 7th day vve departe from all churches vvhich call it the 8th day or the first day of the vveeke as doe all the 4. Euangelistes in the Gospell 3. if you call the Lords day a 7th day I pray vvhere or at what day vvill you begin to reckone for your first day of the 7 you must begine at some renowmed day as at the first day of vvorlds
a signe and the thing signified vvhich euer vvere together as vvas the Sabbath keeping and Gods sanctifying them for if presence of a signe and thing signified then together had caused an abolition of the signe vvhy then the Sabbath day because a signe of Gods present sanctifications had beene abolisht euen then vvhen Moses vvrote these vvordes Exod. 31.13 if presence of the thing signified could not then abolish the Sabbath why should it now since God is euer the same to them that keepe his Sabbaths then or now he sanctified them then he sanctifieth vs now there is no reason therfore that such as are signes of things present as is the Sabbath Exod. 31.13 should be abolisht My 2d distinction of signes is that there be signes of things future as hath bene showne Genes 17.11 and signes of things past as the Sabbath is made a signe of the creation and of Gods Rest at the begining of the world vvhich is a thing past Exo. 31.16.17 keep the Sabbath c. it is a signe betwene me and the children of Israel for or that in 6. dayes the Lord made heauen c. in the 7th day he rested The word for is and may be translated that as Deuter. 29.6 now though signes of things future vanish when the thing signed comes in place yet is there no cause why vve should thinke a signe should vanish as the Sabbath day whose thing signified is long since past as Gods Rest at the creation why may not the Sabbath day signify and commemorate Gods Rest and Sabbath day at the creation euen to the vvorlds end as vvell as in Moses his tyme and vvhy should vve thinke the coming of Christ in the flesh should haue more force to abolish the Sabbath day if it had beene a signe of Christ to come then the work of creation vvhich is eternally to be remembred hath force to perpetuate and eternalize the Sabbath since that the Sabbath was a signe of its remembrance I confesse I heare them produce one Text to proue that all signes be abolisht and that is written in Colos 2.16.17 vvhere the Apostle seemes to giue a reason vvhy meates and drinkes and Holy dayes Sabbath dayes are abolisht namly because they were shaddowes of things to come vvhence they collect that all shaddowes be abolisht and all signes be shadowes ergo all signes be abolisht Here vnto I answere 1. t is true that it is commonly taken that these things being shadowes vvere therfore abolisht but vvhither this be a necessary or but a contingent truth I vvill not novv question 2. Whereas they suppose all signes to be shadowes this is false for the word shadowe being but thrice as I take it vsed in the New Testament as in this Text Col. 2.17 and Heb. 8.5 and Heb. 10.1 vvith reference to Christ it euer signifieth a shadow of things to come now a signe is vsed to signifie and signe out some tyme a thing past as Rom. 4.11 some tyme a thing present as Exod. 31.13 some tyme a thing future as Genes 17.8.11 now all signes then be not shadowes since some signifie things past some typifie things present 2. Shadowes still hane reference to Christ Col. 2.17 vvhich are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ so a shadow aimes at Christ but a signe often hath reference to God to Jehouah as in Exod. 31.13 Isa 38.7 Thus as a shadow and a signe differ in vvordes so you see they differ in vse and application therfore they be not both one as they vvould But when they see this profe thus vvill not hould then they fetch about the bushe an other vvay laboring to make the vvord signe in Exod. 31.13 to be a signe of a thing future and that of Christ too and then they thinke this done the word signe in this text and the vvord shadow in Col. 2.17 vvill be both one and so their propose become good againe To this end they add these vvords By and through Christ to the Text Exod. 31.13 and vnderstand the text as if thus reade The Sabbath is a signe c. that I the Lord doe sanctifie you by and through Christ and the reason of this addition they say is because God doth all that he doth to his Church by and through Christ as in Eph. 1.3 Blessed be God vvho hath blessed vs vvith all spirituall blessings in Christ Hereto I answere 1. admit that God did sanctify by and through Christ how vvill it followe and be soundly proued that because God and Christ doe sanctify man together that therfore also vvhat God made to be a signe of his vvork of sanctification the same also must necessarily be a signe of Christs work of sanctification proue I say that it vvas Gods pleasure to make the Sabbath here a signe of Christ as vvell as a signe of himselfe for though it vvas a signe by Christ yet vvas it a signe of Christ we must know signes are not applied to God or Christ naturally but voluntarily euen according as it pleased the Author of those signes to appointe them to one or more persons to himselfe or to other I answere 2. if Christs coworking vvith God causeth that vvhich is a signe of Christ Then it followes too that the Ministers of the Gospell coeworking vvith God and Christ in the worke of sanctification that therfore if the Sabbath be a signe that God sanctifieth his people the Sabbath must be a signe also that vve of the Ministry doe sanctify Gods people and such an vse of the Sabbath vvas neuer heard of before I answere 3. if they vvill conioyne any of the persones in the Trinity vvith the vvork of God the Father in sanctifying vs it vvere most proper to ioyne the Holy Ghost and so Piscator vpon Ezek. 20.12.20 applieth it and say God sanctifyeth vs by the Holy Ghost rather than by Christ since sanctification is more properly attributed to the Holy Ghost than to Christ for the Father createth the Sonne redemeth the Holy Ghost sanctifieth But I will not stand vpon this I come to the Text Eph. 1.3 God hath blessed vs with all spirituall blessings in Christ if you vnderstand these vvordes so as if vvhatsoeuer blessing the Church enioyeth Christ doth equally equally and a like with the Father dispense effectuall and bestowe it on the church you misvnderstand them doth not Piscator vpon this text that the word all must haue a limitation Justification is an acte solely of God the Father not of God the Redeemer absoluing and acquiting a penitent beleeuing sinner likewise Election is an acte of God the Father not of Christ the Re-Redeemer Also the donation of the elect vnto Christ Joh. 6.37 is of like nature can it be said here God the Father gaue the elect vnto Christ in Christ by Christ or through Christ vvhereby you see Christ is so farre from effecting equally and a like all vvorkes vvith the Father that some vvorkes he hath no
hand or stroke in and yet if they vvill haue this text to make for them they must proue by it that not only Christ doth effect all vvorkes the vvhich his Father effecteth but also that Christ doth them euery way equally and a like as God the Father doth them for else how vvill it follow by like reason that the Sabbath being a signe of Gods sanctification it must also be a signe of Christs sanctification too vnlesse it be from this grownd that God his sanctification and Christ his sanctification be both performed equally and a like in all respectes but since the former cannot be proued the latter can much lesse be proued But there vnto it may be said though the generall cannot be proued yet the particular in question may Heb. 10.10 wher t is said we be sanctified by the offring vp of Iesus Christ c. so that Christ doth sanctify as well as God the Father Herevnto I answere whither sanctification here importeth any more then a washing vs from the guiltinesse of our sines or not I will not dispute but let it goe for granted that by sanctification here is meant that inherent new quality of Holines yet it will not follow that because Christ sanctifyeth vs as well as God the Father sanctifyeth vs therfore vvhatsoeuer is made a signe of God the Fathers sanctifying vs is necessarily must be a signe of Christ his sanctifying vs to so as if God made the Sabbath a signe of his sanctification he must also make the Sabbath a signe of Christs sanctification how by force of our feeble reason we dare put such a necessity vpon God I cannot see nay rather the cōtrary appeares to mee that for so much as Gods sanctifying vs and Christs sanctifying vs be farre vnlike each other therfore they should not by force of reason obtaine a like preuiledges and relations to this purpose see how they differ 1. God sanctifyeth by virtue of his Godhead and Diuinity Christ sanctifyeth by the offering of his body Heb. 10.10 now great is the difference twixt the Deity and the Humanity 2. God the Father sanctifyeth vs of himselfe by himselfe originally but Christ his death and sufferings or Christ his body offred vp sanctifyeth not of and by it selfe but of from and by God and by his blessing vpon it so you see there is not so strong reason that Christ should haue the Sabbath made a signe of his worke as there is that God should haue it made a signe of his and so much of his answere wherein you see they put me to much nedlesse busines by shewing themselues too to busy with humane reason for as by bare force of reason without any precept they vvill erect and vphould new Sabbathes as the Lords day so by meere force of their reason they vvill make new signes or else will make those signes to appertaine to such persons as to Christ newly the which Gods word is deeply silent in I can but wonder that discreete men who woll know the defects in our reason dare there withall wade into the deepes of God thus farre yea I vvonder the more when I consider the ende thereof which is to defeate God of his chosen sacred tyme for his worship and to thwarte a morall precept I answere 5. admite that God doth all by Christ and so euer did and also admit the Sabbath vvas a signe of Christs sanctification no lesse then of Gods yet though I may truely and soundly distinguish of Christs workes and sanctification some are euer present with the signe some are future whose signe goeth long before the thing signified of Christs present sanctification was the Sabbath a present signe Exod. 3.13 keepe ye my Sabbath for it is a signe c. That I the Lord doe sanctify you where the signe and the thing signified are together of Christs future sanctification you haue the Sacraments of the ould Testament circumcision and the Passeouer and also as they would those meates drinkes and Holy dayes and Sabbath dayes vvhich are a shaddow or signe of things to come Col. 2.16.17 vvhere the signes and things signifyed are farre distāt in tyme tone long before thother Note farther Christ may be said to sanctify virtually or really as I may say virtually and as thus he is the lambe slaine from the begining of the world the virtue of whose death did saue the Patriarkes so the virtue of Christs incarnate may be said euer to sanctifye as in dayes of Moses Exod. 31.13 and thus although I grante Christ did sanctify with God Exod. 31.13 and that perhaps also the Sabbath was a signe that Christ did then sanctify the people yet this signe being present with the thing signifyed could not be abolisht by the presence of the body or thing signifyed for if it could then had the Sabbath beene abolisht euen in Moses dayes when he wrote thos wordes Exod. 31.13 since the Sabbath vvhich was the signe and sanctification which was the the thing signifyed were then both together present 2. Christ may be said to sanctify really and that is whilst he was God man Incarnate thus he is considered of only as to come afterwards as Col. 2.27 which are a shadow of things to come that is of Christ to come then and here I deny not but signes of things to come may be abrogate but yet here I deny that the Sabbath Exod. 31.13 was made any signe of any thing to come afterwards So then vntill they proue the Sabbath Exod. 31.13 was accounted and called by God a signe to come of Christs sanctification they cannot proue it abolisht The Text saith not The Sabbath shall be a signe c. that I the Lord will hereafter sanctifie thee but it saith The Sabbath is a signe c. that I the Lord doe sanctifie thee now we must not confound tymes the present tense with the future tense and so ouerthrow Grammar I answer 6. and lastly I haue cause to reiect that which is their summe and scope out of this text Exod. 31.13 namly to proue this conclusion and assertion That the Sabbath day is not abolisht it being brought in direct opposition to Gods commandement Exod. 35.2 The 7th day shall be vnto you the Holy Sabbath c. God said the 7th day shall be your Sabbath and they say The 7th day shall not be your Sabbath now I reiect this because these two are not of equall authorities tone is an expresse plaine infallible word of God tother is but a collection by man liable to error in his collections now if Paul so sleited mens contrary judgments of him I passe not to be judged of mans judgment 1. Cor. 4.3 may not I sleite mens contrary judgements of Gods Law saying I passe not what censure and collections men bringe against Gods Law shall mans collections conclusions beare equall authority with an expresse Commandement of a God or countermaunde it Neuer with me I trust to God Finally to giue