The law and the Gospell reconciled. Or the euangelicall fayth, and the morall law how they stand together in the state of grace A treatise shewing the perpetuall vse of the morall law vnder the Gospell to beleeuers; in answere to a letter written by an antinomian to a faithfull Christian. Also how the morality of the 4th Commandement is continued in the Lords day, proued the Christian Sabbath by diuine institution. A briefe catalogue of the antinomian doctrines. By Henry Burton.

THE LAVV AND the Goſpell reconciled. The Euangelicall fayth, and the Morall Law how they ſtand together in the State of Grace. Vpon occaſion of a letter written by an Antinomian to a faithfull Chriſtian.

THat which holy Iude deemed ſo needfull to write,Iude: 3: and to exhort vnto; all true Chriſtians ſhould bee ready to intertaine; that is, earneſtly to contend for that fayth, which was once deliuered to the Saints. This was that, which the Apoſtle gaue chiefely in charge to the Philippians, Phil. i. 27. Onely let your conuerſation be ſuch, as becommeth the Goſpell of Chriſt, that whither I come and ſee you, or elſe be abſent, I may heare of your affaires, that yee ſtand faſt in one ſpirit, with one minde, ſtriuing together for the fayth of the Goſpell. This is indeede that onely thing, worthy to bee contended for, and that with earneſtneſſe. And if thoſe two mothers before King Solomon, did ſo plead about the liuing child, which yet was mortall, and a ſinfull brood: how ſhould the true Church of God plead her titles to that which brings immortality, the bleſſed fruit, and iſſue of the liuing fayth. But how ſhall we know who hath beſt right to this liuing fayth? One ſaith, Mine is the liuing fayth, and thine the dead fayth; another ſayth, No, but thine is the dead, and mine the liuing. As therefore Solomons ſword deciding the quarrell, gaue the liuing childe to the true mother: So the ſword of the ſpirit, Chriſts word, a greater then Solomon, onely can determine who is the true mother, the true Church, to which the liuing fayth of right belongeth, ſith it is deliuered to none, but to the Saints.

Nor were it a matter of wonder to heare the whore of Babylon, the old Romiſh beldame, to make claime to the liuing fayth, as her naturall child, which now long agoe by ouerlaying it in the night of blacke ignorance, and ſupine ſecurity, with her vnwealdy body (become ſo groſſe and monſtrous with the infinite additions of humaine Traditions, ſtanding in ſtead of her many ſubtractions and purloynings from the diuine truth) is ſtrangled, and become ſtone-dead; and on the other ſide, to charge the reformed Church of hauing the dead fayth, becauſe ſhe teacheth iuſtification by faith onely, with outworkes: but behold a wonder, that any ſonnes of this our deare mother Church ſhould proue ſo vnnaturall and vnreaſonable, as (and that moſt impudently, though withall cunningly, euen pretending the doctrine of the Church of England to be for them, and they for it; a thing too vſuall) to impute vnto her the dead fayth, as whereof ſhe is the teacher, while vnto the doctrine of iuſtification by fayth onely ſhe addeth and preſſeth the doctrine and practiſe of ſanctification, not onely as a frute, but as a duty ſpringing from the ſame. From which impious and ſenſeleſſe reproach while we ſhall purge our mother, wee ſhall with one buſh ſtop two gapps: both the wide mouth of Mother Babell, crying out againſt vs, that by teaching Iuſtification by faith onely, we deſtroy ſanctification, and the impudent mouthes of the misbegotten homebred bratts, that exclaime, we deſtroy the iuſtification of the true liuing fayth. And this done, we ſhall by Gods grace eyther ſo conuince theſe men, as to pull them from their dead fayth; or make it ſo euident to all men, as they ſhall confeſſe the dead fayth of Belial, or of Baal to be with theſe men, and the liuing fayth to be onely on our ſide.

Now the occaſion of our taking this taske vpon vs, is this: there is a new ſprung-vp opinion, which not onely in this City, but in ſome parts of the Country ſpreading like a Cancer, or gangrene, hath infected many, poyſoning them with a ſchiſmaticall ſpirit, and not only alienating their minds from, but opening their mouthes againſt our Congregations and Miniſters, ſo as they ſcoffe, and ſcandalize euen the ſoundeſt and ſinceareſt preaching of the word of God. They deny any vſe at all of the morall law, ſo farre as to be a rule of life and chriſtian conuerſation, after that a man is once brought to be a beleeuer in Chriſt. They allow the law no further vſe, then as to bee a Schoolemaſter to bring vs to Chriſt, and then farewell law. And if Miniſters Preach and preſſe the duties of ſanctification, theſe Antinomians ieare at them, yea and rayle on them to their very faces, calling them Anabaptiſts, and telling them, that they preach the dead fayth, and that ſuch goodly doctrines are good for nothing, but to carry men to Hell.

And for my part, I ſhould not haue beleeued there had bene ſuch mouthes of blaſphemy in the world, had not mine cares bene witneſſes of them. And for a further proofe hereof, to make it euident to others alſo (beſides other writings, which the ringleaders of this Antinomian or lawleſſe ſect of Belial conuey and ſcatter among their Diſciples) a letter, written with the chiefe ringleaders own hand (for ex vngue leonem) but conſigned or ſubſcribed with the name of one of his prime ſhe-Diſciples, and ſent to one Mr. T. may ſuffice to manifeſt their virulent ſpirits to all the world. The copie whereof is here affixed verbatim; onely I haue forborne to ſet downe the parties name at large, but onely the firſt letters of her name; concealing the Maſters name, who is the inditer and writer, altogether. And I follow therein the example of holy Ierom, who writing to Cteſiphon againſt the Pelagians, Hieroinmus ad Cteſiphontem aduerſus Pelagianos: ſayth, No mans name is particularly touched in this ſmall worke: wee haue ſpoken againſt the Maſter of a peruerſe opinion, who if he ſhall be angry, and ſhall write againe, hee ſhall like the mouſe bee bewrayed by his owne diſcouery, and expoſe himſelfe to receiue yet greater wounds in a ſet pitcht field. And let me alſo aduertiſe the reader concerning this letter (as alſo of others of the like kinde, which I haue ſeene) that howſoeuer it hath poyſon enough in it, yet it is ſo miniſtred in a goulden cup ſo couered ouer with clowdy and obſcure words, and ſo tempered with ſugared phraſes of ſcripture, as that both his Diſciples may with the leſſe ſuſpition and more delight drinke it downe, and his iuſt aduerſaries may haue leſſe cauſe to caſt it in his diſh, or to quarrell him, and bring him in Quorum for it.

And that this was the ancient guiſe of Hereticks, the ſame Hierom tels vs in the ſame place where ſpeaking to the Pelagian, he ſaith: Noſti &c. Thou knowſt what thou teacheſt thy Diſciples priuately, expreſſing one thing with thy mouth, and concealing another in thy conſcience: and to vs who are ſtrangers, & none of thy Diſciples, thou ſpeakeſt by Parables, but to thine owne ſcholars thou vnfoldeſt thy myſteries: and this thou boaſteſt thou doſt, according to the ſcriptures, becauſe it is ſayd, Ieſus ſpake to the people abroad in parables, and to the Diſciples within dores hee ſayth, To you it is giuen to know the myſteries of the kingdome of heauen, but to them it is not giuen. And againe, Sola haec haereſis, &c. This onely is hereſie, which bluſheth to ſpeake in publike, what it feares not to teach in priuate. The rage of the ſchollars vttereth the ſilence of the Maſters. That which they haue heard in the chambers, they preach on the houſe tops; that if they ſhall pleaſe their hearers, it may bee attributed to the praiſe of their Maſters: if it diſpleaſe, the fault may bee the ſcholars, not the maſters. Ideo creuit &c. Thus hath your hereſie increaſed, and you haue deceiued many, becauſe you alwayes teach and alwayes deny.Sententias veſtras prodidiſſe ſuperaſſ eſt &c: Hieron. It is the Churches victory, when you ſpeake plainely, what your opinion is. To ſhew your opinions, is to ſubdue them. So Hierome. Now let me appeale to the conſciences of the Diſciples of ſuch Maſters as we ſpeake of, whither they doe not deliuer their documents and leſſons in plainer termes, and more perſpicuous amplification in their priuate ſchole or chamber by word of mouth, then they do, or dare do publikly in their looſe papers and pamphlets? Let them tell me wherein they differ or come ſhort of the Pelagians, in the guiſe of broaching and venting their opinions, noted by Ierome. And this is the nature and practiſe of all hereſie, which ſerpent-like walkes with a doubled gate, and like the ſnaile puts forth her hornes ſlowly to proue her way, but vpon the leaſt reſiſtance quickly puls them in againe, or iugler-like, playing faſt and looſe with his ſpectators, or like lying Fame, which for feare is ſparing at firſt, till ſpreading it ſelfe, it finde credit and intertainement in the world.

Yet the quicke ſighted Reader ſhall finde this letter to be not altogether ſo euen ſpun, but that it hath many knobbs and knots of groſſe errour, which is euer vneuen, and neuer but vnlike it ſelfe, ſufficiently bewraying a poyſonous minde, and virulent ſpirit in the author,2 Tim. 3.5. &c. being of the number of thoſe, who hauing a forme of godlineſſe, deny the power thereof; from ſuch turne away. Of which ſort are they which creepe into houſes, and lead captiue ſilly women laden with ſins, led away with diuerſe luſts, euer learning and neuer able to come to the knowledge of the truth. And as Iannes and Iambres withſtood Moſes; ſoe do theſe alſo reſiſt the truth, men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the fayth. But they ſhall proceede no farther: for their folly ſhall bee manifeſt to all men, as theirs alſo was. All which, how fully it is verefied and exemplified in the Author we haue to deale withall, this little diſcourſe ſeconded with the ſubſcription of his owne handy worke, will abundantly teſtifye.

Now becauſe the letter is teadious, ſo as to anſwere to euery circumſtance would clogge our diſcourſe with many vnneceſſary and vnprofitable matters: therefore I will epitomize or contract the whole into one briefe view, and pitch vpon ſuch points, as the Author ſtands moſt vpon, and wherein he placeth the maine ſtrength of his battalion, And firſt I will muſter vp his ſcattered skirmiſhes and brauadoes, And thoſe I finde to be diuided into two ſpeciall companies. The firſt is a brauado, ſetting forth his cauſe with many ſpecious and glorious titles; as his aſcribing it to Gods gratious calling; that it is the true liuely iuſtifying faith which he maintaineth; (which words hee often repeateth) that it is of the houſehold of true faith; the moſt holy and heauenly calling into the true liuely iuſtifying fayth; that it is the gracious leauening of the Goſpell; that it is the effectuall calling to true chriſtianity, and aſſured free ſaluation; that this leauen is the wedding garment of Chriſts perfect holineſſe and that this is the good and old way which Abraham walkt in; that it is the eſtabliſhed proteſtant doctrine of our Church of England, grounded vpon the word of God, which euery one ought to imbrace, if hee will be a loyall ſubiect to his Proteſtant King; againe, This is the Proteſtant fayth, this is the eſtabliſhed doctrine of our Church; that he is as one true Prophet to a great number of falſe Prophets; that he with a few more goe with a right foot to the truth of the Goſpell; ſuch as call the people to a chearefull, zealous, godly life, onely for and by the ioy and excellency of free iuſtification (but marke how) deepely conſidered; onely thoſe few doe apply the law purely and truely; that theſe are the few foreſayd true miniſters of Chriſt, and (ſuch as follow them) the true beleeuers; that they onely bring in the true meanes of true ſanctification, and of doing all good workes; that theſe are the true teachers, who doe truely eſtabliſh the law; that theſe are the onely true miniſters, and their followers the onely true people of God; that this doctrine is and may bee proued in euery point with two or three plaine ſcriptures, and two or three plaine teſtimonies of Orthodox Proteſtant writers. Theſe and the like bee the glorious guildings, wherewith hee doth ſo fairely inammile his leaden cauſe, which anon will come to the Teſt.

The ſecond company, wherewith he skirmiſheth all along, is of ſuch reproches, as hee caſts vpon all thoſe that are aduerſaries to his opinion. I take them in order as they lie. That to auouch the contrary is a ſinfull preiudice of Gods truth; that it is a blaſpheming of the true liuely iuſtifying fayth; ſuch are too much leauened with the ſowre leauen of the deuouter ſort of Phariſees, which with the falſe brethren among the Galatians leauened and corrupted the faith of the Galatians; Thus the pentificians, where they find certainety of Saluation, they call it preſumption, &c. and that with a conceited holineſſe of doing and keeping the morall law; this is a dangerous leauen of the Phariſees, which vnder the viſour, and conceit and opinion of ſincerity and obedience to God, and zeale of God, is but hipocriſie; Chriſts marriage garment is now a dayes eagerly oppoſed, and ſubtilly betrayed with a Iudaſſes kiſſe; in this regard theſe are the perilous times, wherein men and women are euer learning, and neuer able to come to the truth of the aſſurance of their free ſaluation, and that there is in a manner now no fayth on the earth, becauſe the dead fayth, before God, is no fayth; although it be varniſhed and guilded ouer with a blinde prepoſtrous zeale, and opinion of obedience, and walking in all gods commandements, as Paul before his conuerſion was in this blind zealous dead fayth (which phraſe is very frequent with him) that it is another Ghoſpell; that the blinde zealous dead faith thinkes it knowes ſomething, when it knowes nothing as it ought to know, that they are not ſome few teachers among vs that trouble the people of God by Preaching another Goſpell: but (eſpecially when God meanes to puniſh an vngratefull Church and Nation) many falſe teachers;This great prophet, Iwis. as of old, there are many hundred falſe Prophets to one true Prophet; hanging, relying, and depending, yea bragging of their obedience, workes, and weldoings, and keeping of the law; theſe bad miniſters and teachers that trouble the people of God are, and for the iuſter iudgement and ſcourge of the great vnthankefull multitude euer haue beene the greateſt multitude; and theſe are deuided into two ſorts: the firſt ſort are ſuch, as are euill beaſts, ſlow bellies, that vſe to preach a little for their liuing ſake, and for their bellie, but care not for the ſauing of ſoules, but for their eaſe, their pompe, and worldly eſteeme; and thoſe miniſters make onely Hoggschriſtians; that trampling free iuſtification and the Pearles of the Goſpell vnder the feete of their durty affections, doe care for nothing, but rooting in the earth, and filling the belly: but the other ſort of bad teachers, although their right eye alſo of true fayth bee out, and doe more deepely delude themſelues and others in the dead fayth, yet they haue the light of nature more ſtrongly ſtirring in them, deſcribed Rom. 2.14.15. where it is ſayd, that the Gentiles which haue not the law doe by nature the things conteined in the law, which ſhew the effect or worke of the law written in their hearts, their conſciences alſo bearing witneſſe, and their thoughts accuſing them, that is, with feare of puniſhment, when they doe ill, and will preach it, as the true Goſpell I warrant you: and excuſing them, that is, hoping to ſpeede well, when they doe well; and this light of nature they varniſh ouer with titles of the Goſpell, whereby eſpecially young Miniſters being carryed with a prepoſterous zeale of Gods glory, Rom. 10.2.3. in workes and conceited weldoings, they ſlight ouer fayth, and free iuſtification with a wet finger, thinking with the Papiſts by a carnall vnderſtanding of them, that they are quickly, or rather learned too faſt, and ſo doe preach neyther true law, nor true Goſpell, but a corrupting, blending and marring of both law and Goſpell; whereby they put out the right eye of the greateſt multitude of zealous profeſſors, they drowne them with themſelues in the dead fayth, and inſtead of a true fayth in Chriſts righteouſneſſe, doe make them to rely and hang vpon their owne holineſſe, workes, and well-doings, whereby people are euer troubled in conſcience; or elſe glory with the Phariſes Luke. 8.11. in a prepoſtrous, falſe, baſtard ſanctification, and Anabaptiſticall mortification, and obedience, in doing the law of God, flowing from no true loue or charity; and ſo, as the former profaine Miniſters doe make dogg-chriſtians; ſo greedily feeding vpon the fifthy pleaſing carrion of the ſecret lurking vaine glory of their owne holyneſſe, obedience, workes, and well-doings; that theſe moſt Iudas-like and traiterouſly trample the pearle of free iuſtification, and free grace vnder the feete of their Phariſaicall affections, and doe not onely fall a barking like doggs at the fewMeaning thoſe of his Antinomian and lawleſſe ſect. foreſayd true Miniſters of Chriſt, and ſo trouble the true beleeuers with all manner of caluminations, raylings, and ſlanderings, as that they are againſt ſanctification, and good workes, whereas they onely bring in the true meanes of true ſanctification, and of doing all good workes; and that thoſe true teachers deſtroy the law, when they truely ſtabliſh the law; & with ſuch-like innumerable caluminations; but alſo ſticke euen violently like doggs to fly in the true Miniſters and people of Gods faces, and are ready (if they can) to teare out their very throats, with bitter hatred, and cruell perſecution; are not theſe truely Chriſts dogg-chriſtians? the Diſciples of ſuch falſe maſters plainely declaring, that whilſt they contend for the law, they are both in words and deedes the greateſt deſtroyers of the law, and that their bragging obedience is moſt grieuous diſobedience, all their holy ſanctification is dubble ſin and iniquity, and that their whole worſhip of high eſteeme with men is idolatrous and abomination before God, traiterous to their King, and dangerous to the betraying and deſtruction of their whole Country and Kingdome, wherein ſuch liue. Therefore in my hearty loue, and in the ſincerity of my bettered affections, I pray you take heed of this blinde, zealous, dead fayth, and content not your ſelues in the carnall knowledge of free iuſtification, &c.

Thus farre of his skirmiſh. Wherein thou mayeſt (good reader) obſerue how he magnifieth himſelfe as the onely true Prophet oppoſed by many hundred of falſe Prophets; thoſe hee rankes together with their hearers, and ſeuerall congregations, into two companies: the one a heard of hoggs, the other a kennell of doggs: and of theſe two he makes vp the vniuerſall body of the Church of England, as which God hath giuen vp to bee plagued with ſuch miniſters of the blind dead fayth, as his vſuall manner of language is to call it. So as in ſumme he makes the Church and nation of England to be an accurſed Iſle of hoggs, and doggs. Againe, for all this, note how ſliely, like the ſubtile ſerpent, hee ſeekes by inſinuation to patronize his doctrine vnder the authority of the Church of Englands eſtabliſhed doctrine, as grounded thereon, and conſonant thereunto, and ſo conſequently vnder the Kings protection: (a peſtilent peece of policy and practice) though by neceſſary conſequence, hee makes the Defender of the fayth no better, (that which my very thought abhorreth) then one of his hogg, or dogg-chriſtians: and on the other ſide labours to make all his aduerſaries odious, as being in their doctrines enemyes to the King and State; (a notable practiſe of heretickes in all ages) and ſuch are all Miniſters in Court, City, Country, all Courtiers, Citizens, Country-men, that follow not this man in his conceited true liuely fayth.

Come we in the next place to his maine battalion, which hee rangeth into 3 ſquadrons. Namely hee ſets downe the ſtate of the doctrine in 3 Propoſitions, which he cals his 3 Proteſtant poſitions. The firſt is: that the horrible filthineſſe of ſin is ſuch to Gods infinite, pure, and righteous nature, that God cannot but abhorre, curſe, and deteſt the creature, that hath any ſin in his ſight: as theſe, and ſuch like ſcriptures teach: Deut. 27.26. 2. Pet. 2.4. Rom. 5.12.15. Eſa. 59 2. Iob. 15.16.

The ſecond is: I beleeue, that for remedy of this my miſery by ſin, God by the power of his imputation doth, though myſtically, yet ſoe truely cloth mee with the wedding garment of his ſons perfect holineſſe, and righteouſneſſe, Eſa. 61.10. that all my ſins, both of my perſon and works being truely aboliſhed, not out of me, 1 Ioh. 1.8. that there may be place for fayth, Heb. 11.1. Rom. 4.18.19. to 21. but yet vtterly aboliſhed out of Gods ſight Col. 1.22. I and all my workes are of vniuſt made iuſt before God, that is perfectly holy & righteous from all ſpot of ſin in the ſight of God freely by faith only without works. And I ſay, By fayth onely without workes, becauſe onely true fayth ſeeth this, and onely true fayth inioyeth this. And thus by Chriſts ſtripes am I healed, Eſa. 53.5. And ſo God is well pleaſed and at peace with mee. For being iuſtified by fayth, we haue peace with God, Rom. 5.1. And am truely bleſſed, Rom. 4.6. For as many as are of this fayth of free iuſtification, are bleſſed with faithfull Abraham, Gal. 3.8.9. and ſhall be certainely glorified: for whom God iuſtifieth them he alſo glorifieth, Rem. 8.30. All which Proteſtant poſition of free iuſtification is abundantly and clearely taught by theſe and ſuch like ſcriptures: Eſa. 43.25. Eſa. 44.22.23. Ioh. 1.29. Heb. 1.3. Heb. 9.26. 1. Ioh. 1.7. Reu. 1.5.6. Dan. 9.24. Rom. 3.21.22. Rom. 5.17.18.19.21. Eph. 5.26.27. Reu. 3.18. Col. 1.22.23. Rom. 8.4. Col. 2.10. Rom. 9.30. Heb. 10.14. Eſa. 62. Phil. 3.8.9. Tit. 1.15. Heb. 11.4.

The 3 is: my third poſition is, that this true fayth of free iuſtification doth infallibly inflame the heart with true loue, Gal. 5.6. which makes the true beleeuer to breake off from; and mortifie his former corrupt and profane conuerſation, and brings forth a declaratiue obedience, and redineſſe to euery good worke, and a free and cherefull walking in all Gods will and commandements declaratiuely to manward, which is true ſanctification: as theſe, and ſuch like ſcriptures teach, Tim. 2.11. to 15. 1. Ioh. 3.5.6.9. Eph: 2.10. Rom. 6. Eph. 4.22.23.24. Math. 5.16. This is the Proteſtant fayth; this is the eſtabliſhed doctrine of our Church: theſe are the 3 poſitions, that (here hee makes the woman-Diſciple to ſpeake) I haue too lately receiued, and which haue ſo changed mee out of the blinde zealous dead fayth, into the true liuely iuſtifying fayth.

Thus you haue his 3 Proteſtant poſitions (as hee calls them) ſet downe word for word. which an indifferent reader, yea a ſound Proteſtant peruſing, and knowing no more of the authors minde, then what is here expreſſed: hee would at the firſt ſight perhapps take all for harmeleſſe and ſound doctrine. But when he ſhall conſider how all theſe poſitions (as Proteſtant as they bee) ſtand in oppoſition to all that doctrine, which is generally taught by the moſt ſound, learned, and orthodox Diuines in England, and ſo (I may ſafely ſay) in all the world: then hee may well ſuſpect a Pad in the ſtraw, and a ſerpent to lurke vnder the greene leaues, and ſome thing more in it, then at the firſt appeareth.

For touching the firſt poſition: What one Proteſtant Diuine doth not hold and teach, that ſin is moſt deteſtable to God, which his pure eyes cannot behold, and that it makes a man odious in Gods ſight? Witnes the bitter and curſed death of the ſon of God himſelfe, which hee ſuffered for ſin; otherwiſe wee had all remained vnder the curſe, left to eternall perdition, the iuſt puniſhment and reward of ſin, if it had not bin remoued by Chriſt. So as herein the author hath no colour of accuſation againſt his hoggs and doggs, his aduerſaries: but this firſt Poſition ſerueth onely as an vſher to lead in the reſt, or as a harbinger to take vp the beſt rome in mens conceit for the reſt of the traine by prepoſſeſſing the readers minde with an expectation of ſutable doctrine in that which followeth.Num, 23.8. Wherein we ſhall finde, that he playes but the cheater, who ſhowing one peece of good gold out of his purſe would perſwade his gull, that his purſe is full of ſuch, when all the reſt is but counters, or counterfet gold double guilt.

For the ſecond poſition: what Proteſtant Miniſter of the Church of England, of what ranke ſoeuer, bee he reckoned among his hoggs, or among his doggs, that holdeth not, and teacheth not, that the onely remedy to remooue mans miſery by ſin is Ieſus Chriſt, his death and paſſion, his obedience actiue and paſſiue, his whole righteouſneſſe freely imputed of God to euery true beleeuer? What Proteſtant, Diuine, or other, but holds iuſtification to be by fayth, freely without workes? And that thoſe whom God iuſtifyeth, hee ſo acquiteth them in aboliſhing their ſin, that hee remembreth it no more, but caſts it behinde his backe, ſeeth it not any more, in asmuch as he doth graciouſly for his ſonnes ſake not impute it to them. So as what needes all that heaping vp of places of ſcripture? as if none but the Author tooke notice of them: or as if his doctrine were ſo vnknowne or doubted of, as it needed ſuch a cloud of proofes.

Yet ſome particulars in this poſition would bee a little talked with all. As 1. where hee ſayth, That all ſins in the beleeuers are vtterly aboliſhed out of Gods ſight, by being not imputed. This is moſt true. Yet it puts mee in minde of that which I heard long agoe ſcattered abroad by this very Author, that God ſeeth no ſin in his children. Which Aphoriſme taken vp of the vulgar, may breede in them, that beleeue not, preſumptuous thoughts, and reſolutions voyd of the conſcience of ſin. Therefore this poynt would be a little opened. True it is, God ſeeth no ſin in his beleeuing children, for which hee inflicteth the curſe, or any ſatisfactory penalty vpon them. Thus when Balack would haue had Balaam to curſe Gods people, hee anſwered, How ſhall I curſe, where God hath not curſed? And v. 19. God is not as man, that hee ſhould lye, or repent; hath he ſayd, and ſhall hee not doe it? Behold I haue receiued commandement to bleſſe; and hee hath bleſſed, and I cannot reuerſe it. And hee renders the reaſon: He hath not beheld iniquity in Iacob, neyther hath he ſeene preuerſeneſſe in Iſraell; the Lord his God is with him, and the ſhout of a King is among them. Surely there is no inchantment againſt Iacob, nor diuination againſt Iſraell. For Christ hath borne Iſraels ſin, in him hath God, the Iudge, fully puniſhed it, his iuſtice is fully ſatiſfed for all Iſraels debts. So that all being ſatiſfied and diſcharged in our ſurety, Chriſts righteouſneſſe and ſatiſfaction made ours, now God ſeeth not ſin in his beleeuing children, as a iudge to puniſh them: yet he may be ſayd to ſee as a father, to chaſtiſe them. Or when he chaſtiſeth his childe, hee ſeemeth to ſee his ſin, though done away in Chriſt, and pardoned in Gods Court, to the end his childe may come to ſee it, and ſo haue the euidence of pardon ſealed vnto him in the Court of his owne conſcience, And this is that, which all ſound Proteſtant Miniſters teach and beleeue.

A ſecond thing I note in his ſecond poſition, is, if not an abſurdity, yet an obſcure ſpeech: his words are, All my ſins both of my perſon and workes are truely aboliſhed, not out of me: that there may be place for fayth. Why? Are ſins aboliſhed actually by imputation, before fayth bee wrought, that the aboliſhing of ſin makes way to fayth? True it is, Chriſt hath taken away our ſins, and by death aboliſhed death, before we haue fayth to apply it; for our fayth is from the merite and vertue of his death. Otherwiſe, I know not what ſenſe to make of his words; vnleſſe hee meane that fayth alone takes place in the beleeuer, working and doing all infallibly and freely, (as elſe where he expreſſeth himſelfe) without the Law of the ten Commandements:

3 I note a falſhood in it: for he ſayth, All my workes are of vniust made iuſt before God. What theſe works are, I finde in other of his ſcatered pamphlets: to wit all naturall, ciuil, religious, ſanctified actions, which being in themſelues (as he ſayth) foule and filthy, are made perfectly holy and righteous by free iuſtification. Now this is a thing both impoſible, and were alſo vniuſt, for God to doe it. It is impoſſible for God to make a worke, that is vniuſt to bee iuſt. Indeed Antichriſt arrogateth this omnipotent, or rather impotent power, as deriued from God, to make ex iniuſtitia iuſtitiam, righteouſneſſe of vnrighteouſneſſe: but Gods omnipotency ſtretcheth not to make an vniuſt worke to be iuſt. For then he might ſeeme to be both improuident, and vniuſt, in appointing his ſonne to take away ſin by the ſacrifice of himſelfe, in caſe God could haue made of ſin no ſin by his meere omnipotency. Indeede God can make a thing to ceaſe to bee, or hee can make a thing to bee, which had not a being, as hee did all the world: but hee cannot ſo aboliſh a thing, as to cauſe the former being of it not to haue bene a being after it hath once actually bene. So of a wicked worke; God is ſo powerfull, ſo good, ſo iuſt, as that hee cannot make the wickedneſſe to bee good: for that implies a contradiction; but hee can and doth ſo aboliſh the wickedneſſe of our workes by Chriſt, by not imputing of them; as if it had neuer bin. But to ſay, our workes are of vniuſt made iuſt, this as it is a phraſe not vſed in ſcripture, ſo in the Antinomians ſenſe it tends to the bringing in of a heauenly ſtate of perfection in this life. For he would inferre herevpon that a man once in Chriſt, iuſtified, is altogether without ſin in Gods ſight; abuſing that place of Iohn, 1, Ioh. 3.6, 9. Where he concludes, that the iuſtified man not onely cannot ſin, but alſo abſtaineth from all appearance of euill. Theſe are his very words. And hence is that curſed hereſie of the Pelagians, and Pontificians reuiued by the Antinomians, that there is ſuch a prefection in this life, as a man may liue altogether without all ſin: for all his ſins of vniuſt are made iuſt, ſaith he. The nomination whereof is a ſufficient confutation. For in many things we ſin all, Iam. 3.2. And if we ſay wee haue no ſin, wee deceiue our ſelues and the trueth is not in vs. 1 Ioh. 1.8.

4d I note another falſehood, where he ſayth, By fayth onely with out workes, freely, I am perfectly holy and righteous from all ſpot of ſin in the ſight of God: (and why? (becauſe only true faith ſeeth this, and only true fayth inioyes this. How? are we iuſtified by faith freely, becauſe only true fayth ſeeth this? What if true fayth, while during the time of ſome temptation the exerciſe of it is ſuſpended, do not ſee, nor inioy the fruite of iuſtification? muſt we therefore paſſe ſentence vpon our ſelues, that we are not iuſtified? nay certainly we are therefore iuſtified from all ſin, becauſe God not imputing ſin ſeeth no ſin in vs: and not becauſe we ſee and inioy our reconciliation and peace with God. For though God be continually pacified towards his faithfull children in Chriſt, yet doe not they allwayes by the act of fayth ſee and inioy Gods fauour towards them. This was Dauids caſe; and is, and may be the caſe of euery child of God. Yet whenſoeuer wee doe ſee and enioy our iuſtification, by hauing peace with God through Chriſt, we doe by the eye and apprehenſion of fayth ſee and enioy it. But our ſeeing and enioying is not the cauſe that wee are iuſtified, but the conſequent effect and fruit of it, being apprehended by fayth.

3ly For his 3d Poſition, therein ſtand his Triarian forces; here his files are ſo doubled, and the rankes are ſo cloſſe, that it ſeemes to be impregnable, impenetrable. But howſoeuer they ſtand thicke without, yet they are thin and hollow within, ſo that being but once by a wedge diuided, they are able no longer to abide the field. Therefore obſeruing it well, I finde ſundry aduantages to bee taken. Firſt, from his commending of fayth in the efficacy of it, that it infallibly inflames the heart with true loue, making the true beleeuer to breake off his former corrupt conuerſation, &c. Secondly, that hee vſeth one word twice, to wit, Declaratiue, obedience Declaratiue, and a free and cherefull walking in all Gods will, and Commandements declaratiuely to manward. Which may ſeeme to ſome to be eyther idle, or a riddle; but we ſhall declare the myſtery of it by and by. In the meane time, all this hitherto in his 3d poſition hath no other appearance, but of ſound and orthodox doctrine; agreeable to the Scriptures, and ſo to the doctrine of our Church, if there bee no more in it, then what the outer rinde makes ſhow of. For what Proteſtant Church, or what one ſound Proteſtant of our Church doth not teach, or beleeue, that that moſt noble and diuine Lady grace of true ſauing and liuing fayth, doth infallibly (to vſe his owne word) inflame the heart with loue, which makes the true beleeuer to breake off from, and mortifie his former corrupt, and profane conuerſation, and brings forth a declaratiue obedience, and redineſſe to euery good worke, and a free and cheerfull walking in all Gods will and Commandements declaratiu • to manward, which is true ſanctification. Herein we all agree. Whereis the difference then? Yea but the author comes afterwards in the ſame poſition, and (although he proteſt theſe his poſitions to be the Proteſtant fayth, and the eſtabliſhed doctrine of our Church) he proclaimes a defyance againſt the blind zealous, dead fayth, as meerely oppoſite to this his true liuely iuſtifying fayth, And this dead fayth, whoſe is it? by whom is it taught? by whom intertained? Euen by the vniuerſall bulke and body of our Church, which he deuides into two ſides, the left ſide conſiſting of profane ſenſuall hoggs, and the right ſide of zealous Anabaptiſticall Doggs, as he ſtiles them. Now if the caſe ſtand ſo, that all thoſe proteſtants generally, whom he calls doggs, and hoggs doe hold the ſelfe-ſame doctrine in truth, as the author ſetts downe in words, and yet theirs is the blind zealous dead faith, and his the truely liuely iuſtifying faith: it concernes vs a little more narrowly to examine his words, to ſee whither ſome myſticall ſenſe bee not couched in them; or whither hee hath dealt not ſo candidly, nor ſo ingeniouſly (as by his roauing and rauing language may iuſtly bee ſuſpected) but hath kept vp ſome reſeruations as precious pearles; which if hee ſhould vent among ſo many hoggs and doggs, as he liues amongſt, hee might iuſtly feare, leſt the one ſort ſhould, and that worthily, trample them vnder their feete, and the other turne vpon him, and all to teare him. But now it being brought to the vpſhot, whither hee, or we haue, the true liuing iuſtifying fayth: hee muſt permit vs perforce (we bringing our warrant from God) to mak • a priuy ſearch, and to rifle his Cabbinet, to ſee whither hee haue this Pearle of the Kingdome, yea, or no. Nor are wee ingaged to doe this in regard onely of our faith towards God, as wee are Chriſtans, but alſo of our fidelity and loyalty to our King the Lords Annoynted, as wee are ſubiects, for asmuch as hee challengeth all men, that hee that will bee a loyall ſubiect to his Proteſtant King, ought to embrace this doctrine of fayth, which he onely, the A per ſe Doctor, doth teach.

Wherein then is the maine difference betweene vs, that makes his the onely true liuely iuſtifying fayth, and ours the blinde, zealous, dead fayth? Surely in this; that his fayth is ſo liuely, actiue, vigorous, and potent, perfect, and compleat, that of it ſelfe it produceth all the fruites of ſanctification, without hauing any thing to doe with the word of God, eſpecially the morall law, as a rule of our actions, or as a glaſſe of our imperfections: when as wee on the other ſide acknowledge, that our fayth at the beſt eſtate during this life, is not ſo perfect, and euery way compleat, but as a lampe it needeth the continuall ſupply of the holy oyle of Gods ſpirit of grace, to cauſe it to flame forth the more in the workes of ſanctification, which grace of the ſpirit is miniſtred and ſupplyed vnto vs by the Miniſtry of the word of God, as the Oyle-pipe through which it runneth: and for as much as in the ſtate of grace and fayth, we know but in part, and propheſie in part, and conſequently our fayth is imperfect, being mingled with much ignorance; therfore we haue need of the Morall law, wherof both the old and new Teſtament are a large commentary, both as a rule whereby to frame our thoughts, words, and workes, and alſo as a glaſſe, wherein looking the face of our ſoules, and beholding our ſpeckes and imperfections, we may get them waſhed in the fountaine of Chriſt blood, and may make ſtraight pathes vnto our feete,Heb. 12, i3: leaſt that which is lame be turned out of the way, but rather that it bee healed. This is that perfect law of liberty, wherein who ſo looketh, and continueth therein, hee being not a forgetfull hearer, but a doer of the worke this man ſhall be bleſſed in his deed: Iam. 1.25. This is that glaſſe,2 Cor. 3.18. wherein wee beholding the glory of the Lord, are changed into the ſame Image from glory to glory, euen as by the ſpirit of the Lord. So farre are we from holding a ſtate of perfection of faith in this life, as though our faith could doe all things of it ſelfe, and did not neede a dayly ſupply of grace, which muſt bee procured by the word of God, eyther preached, or read, or meditated and conferred vpon, and that alſo by the meanes of prayer, Lord increaſe our fayth. But this our Aduerſary ſhutts out the law quite, as out of date to a true beleeuer, and of no vſe at all, not ſo much as to be a rule of life and conuerſation; his liuely faith doth all, and hath noe neede of the word of God to direct or aſſiſt it.

Now that this is the ſumme of his doctrine concerning his liuely faith, yee may gather from his owne words, ſaying, fayth infallibly inflames the heart with true loue, making the true beleeuer to breake off his former corrupt conuerſation &c. This word Infallibly, implies, that faith doth by a continued and vninterrupted act inflame the heart with loue to doe all workes of ſanctification, and ſo it hath no neede of Gods word as a rule to bee guided by, but the ſpirit, is inſtead of the word. But you will ſay, So much is not expreſſed in the letter. True. But you muſt know that this is the doctrine, which he priuately inſtilleth into his Diſciples. As in one of his ſcattered writings I find theſe words, that this fayth of free iuſtification doth cauſe vs to walke infallibly in the ſteps of the workes of our father Abraham, whereby like Abraham, freely without the law of the ten Commandements, wee walke holily, righteouſly, and ſoberly in all Gods Commandements declaratiuely to manward. Yea comming ſometimes to conteſt with mee, and to charge mee for preaching the dead fayth, himſelfe did vtter ſo much to mee by word of mouth, that after a man is once inlightned by fayth, the ſpirit guides him, ſo as he hath no need of the word, or of the Morall law for a rule to direct him. This Doctrine is ſo familiar among his Diſciples, as they profeſſe it, and are prowd of it, ſo farre are they from making ſcruple or dainety of it, as once to deny it. So that this is one of the markes and properties of his liuely fayth, that it hath no neede of the Morall Law to bee a rule vnto it in poynt of conuerſation, or in the workes of ſanctification; otherwiſe neyther is it the true liuely fayth, nor this the true ſanctification.

A ſecond property and prerogatiue of this his liuely fayth is this, that it oweth no obedience to the Morall Law in poynt of duty. Hee denyeth the works of ſanctification to bee duties. What are they then? Fruits, ſayth he. So ſay we too; fruits they bee, yet duties too. Here is the difference then. Becauſe wee ſay the fruits of fayth are duties, therefore hee ſayth ours is the dead fayth. Al this hee hath auouched, and that moſt vehemently (as his manner is) to my face. And howſoeuer he hath not in plaine words expreſſed ſo much in this his letter, as being more ſhy and cautelous what hee publiſheth abrode, hauing bene hampered by me and others, and puzzled with ſome arguments which hee could not anſwere, but ſayd hee would anſwere them when they were written: Yet ye may eaſily gather ſo much out of his writing. For he cals the obedience of a beleeuer onely declaratiue, and to bee done declaratiuely to manward. Note it well. This declaratiuely to manward excludes all duty to Godward. For elſe what vſe is there in this place eyther of Declaratiue, or much leſſe, To manward? For all obedience in conuerſation is declaratiue: and all declaratiue is to manward. So as all this mans obedience is to manward, in poynt of declaration, but none to Godward in poynt of duty. For if it bee of duty in obedience to Gods law, then his fayth alſo ſhould be the dead fayth. But herein ſtands the prerogatiue of his true liuely fayth, that as it doth not ſo much as reflect the eye vpon the morall Law, as to learne obedience from the rule thereof: ſo much leſſe doth it acknowledge it oweth any obedience thereunto as a duty to God.

On the contrary we for holding and teaching, that the Morall Law, and ſo Gods word ſtands not onely for a rule of direction for ſanctified obedience, but alſo requireth of the faythfull a cheerfull yet dutyfull conformity thereunto: we (I ſay) for this very cauſe muſt heare, Hoggs, or Doggs, Hogg-chriſtians, or Dogg-chriſtians, as holding the blind, zealous, dead fayth. So thus ſtands the ſtate of the queſtion betweene vs about the liuing and the dead fayth, and herein we come now to ioyne yſſue.

Firſt then wee are all agreed on both ſides, that the true liuely fayth is no other, but that whith the ſcriptures teach and allow for the true liuely fayth, which promiſed, and granted, I argue thus.

That fayth,Propoſition. which the Scriptures teach and allow for the true liuely iuſtifying fayth, that, and no other, is the true, liuely, iuſtifying fayth.

But the Scriptures teach and allow that, and no other,Aſſumption, for the true, liuely, iuſtifying fayth, which reſting only on Chriſt for iuſtification by the onely imputation of his righteouſneſſe, doth notwithſtanding looke vpon the Morall Law of God as a rule of Chriſtian conuerſation, and ſanctification, acknowledging the conformity thereunto as a duty which God requireth of euery true beleeuer: according to that, Luk. 1.74.75. That we being deliuered from the hands of our enemies, ſhould ſerue him, &c.

Therefore this fayth and none other is that, which the Scriptures teach and allow for the true liuely iuſtifying fayth.

The Propoſition is vndeniable. The Aſſumption I proue. And firſt from the very giuing of the Morall law in mount Sinai. For it was giuen in, and by, and vnder Chriſt the Redeemer.Deut. 18.18. As the Apoſtle ſayth, It was giuen in the hand of a Mediator: which Mediator was perſonally Moſes: but typically Chriſt, of whom Moſes was a type and figure. And Chriſt was that heauenlyExo. 25.40. Heb. 8.5, Patterne or Antitype, according to which were all thoſe things deliuered to Moſes in the Mount; yea not onely the Ceremoniall Law, but alſo the Morall Law giuen by Chriſt himſelfe, where hee ſayth, I am the Lord thy God, which hath brought thee out of the Land of Egypt, out of the houſe of bondage? wherevpon followes, Thou ſhalt haue none other Gods before me. Thou ſhalt not make &c. For theſe words (I am the Lord thy God, whicb brought thee out of the Land of Egypt, out of the houſe of bondage,) are a preface to the whole Decalogue or ten Commandements, ſetting forth the Author of them vnto us, not onely by his name Iehouah, but by that neere relation of Confederacy, or Couenant of grace made to vs in Chriſt, ſaying, Thy God. And that this is the very Couenant of grace made to vs in Chriſt, vnder which the Law is giuen, appeareth by this, that the words of the Preface containe not onely a hiſtory of that peoples temporall deliuerance from the Egyptian bondage: but alſo, and eſpecialy the myſtery of the Redemption of all the true Iſrael of God by Chriſt, or their ſpirituall deliuerance from the bondage of ſin and Satan. This is a thing moſt cleare, though few obſerue it. For was not the Paſchall Lambe ſlaine, and the blood ſprinckled vpon all Iſraels doore poſts, and the Angell paſſed ouer them, and Egypts firſt-borne were ſlaine, and Gods firſt-borne deliuered? And was not Chriſt prefigured thereby, as the Lambe ſlaine from before the foundation of the world? Yea all thoſe paſſages of Gods people from Egypt to Canaan came to them in Types, as the Apoſtle ſayth.1. Cor. 10: Beſides other types, obſerue here two notable ones, which ioyntly are pregnant to our purpoſe: firſt of Chriſts aſcenſion: ſecondly, of ſending the Holy Ghoſt. 1. the hiſtory in Exodus well obſerued makes it plaine, that vpon the 40th day after their comming out of Egypt, Moſes, Aron, and Hur, went vp into the Mount, where Moſes hands are by Aron and Hur ſupported, while Ioſhuah with Gods people fight againſt Amaleck. Now Moſes the Prophet, Aron the Prieſt and Hur ſignifieth a Prince, and he was of the family and tribe of Iuda. Hur the Prince (for ſo was his name by interpretation) all put together, were a type of Chriſt, who on the fortith day after his reſurrection, aſcended into the Mount of Heauen, where, as our Prophet, Prieſt, and Prince, hee holds vp the hands of his interceſſion for his Church militant, while ſhe fights with ſpirituall Amaleck, Sin, Sathan, Antichriſt, the World, the Fleſh, &c. The other Type I note, was iuſt 10. dayes after, which from Egypt makes 50. dayes, and that was the giuing of the Law in Mount Sina, Acts. 2, and therefore called the Iewes Pentecoſt, and we know, that on the day of Pentecoſt iuſt 50 daies after Chriſts Reſurrection, and 10 daies after his Aſcention, did the Father and Chriſt ſend downe the Holy Ghoſt in his manifold gifts and graces, to lead his people into all truth, and to reueale fully the Law of Chriſt vnto them. Now therefore the as the type, & thing typed are (for their vſe to the faythfull people of God) one and the ſame thing: So as the ancient Iſralites did all eate the ſame ſpirituall meate, and did all drinke the ſame ſpirituall drinke, 1. Cor. 10.3.4. for they drank of that ſpirituall rock that followed them; and that Rock was Chriſt: So that giuing of the Law in Mount Sina, being a type of the comming down of the holy Ghoſt bringing & reuealing the Law of Chriſt to his Church both of them in ſumme and vſe are to the faithfull one and the ſame law; for though they differ in the manner of adminiſtration, and in the meaſure of manifeſtation, yet not in the matter it ſelfe, Chriſt being the ſumme and matter of both. And thus we clearely ſee, that the Morall Law giuen in Mount Sina, being giuen by Iehouah our God in Chriſt the Redeemer, and that vnder the couenant of grace, being giuen to the Iſrael of God in the old Teſtament, to which the comming downe of the Holy Ghoſt in the new Teſtament fully anſwereth; that it remaines as a perpetuall rule of a holy life to all Gods people to the end of the world. So that here, by the way an inuincible argument is hence drawne, to proue the perpetuall morality of the ſabbath to the end of the world, againſt all Antiſabbatarians, becauſe it was giuen vnder the couenant of grace to be kept. But wee will reſerue the further diſcuſſing of this poynt to the choiſe of all, leaſt the intermingling of it here ſhould interrupt the maine matters in hand.

Obiection. But the Apoſtle ſayth, The law is not of fayth, How then comes the Law to bee giuen vnder fayth?

Anſwere. The Law, in that place, is to bee taken for the firſt Couenant, to wit, of workes, giuen to Adam in Paradiſe in the ſtate of innocency; which hath no communion with fayth belonging to the ſecond couenant, namely, of grace. But the Law, as it was giuen in Mount Sina, the literall veile being remooued, was not deliuered as the firſt Couenant, but as a rule of conuerſation to the faythfull vnder the ſecond Couenant.

Obiection. But the Apoſtle calls the giuing of the Law in Mount Sina the firſt Couenant in oppoſition to the ſecond. as Agar to Sara, the bond-woman to the free, Sina to Sion and Hieruſalem.

Anſwere. The Apoſtle compares it ſo onely in regard of the literall killing ſenſe, to which the Carnall Iew was captiuated, and thereby ſlaine, while not looking vnto Chriſt the Redeemer, that brought his people out of the ſpirituall Egypt and bondage, they ſought to bee iuſtified by the workes of the Law, which Saint Paul beats downe the to ground in that Epiſtle to the Galatians. But to the belieuing Iewes the Morall Law was none other, but the ſweete yoake and light burthen of Chriſt, while they behold him as it were on the top of Iacobs ladder a Redeemer of his people by his owne innocent blood, whereby hee expiated all their breaches of the Law, fulfilling the Law for them. And in no other regard doth the Law in Mount Sina, and that in Mount Sion ſtand oppoſite, but as the letter to the ſpirit, 2 Cor. 3.6. while the carnall Iewes could not diſerne the pith of the ſpirit vnder the barke of the letter: or by way of compariſon, the one excelling the other in the manner and meaſure of mynifeſtation, as 2 Cor. 3.10. Wherevpon the learned and iudicious Caluin vpon thoſe words, Gal. 4.24 fayth, that the Iewes liberty was hidden vnder the vaile of ceremonies, and of the whole economy, or diſpenſation of the Law, by which they were then gouerned: So that in externall ſhew nothing but ſeruitude appeared. Yet the ſeruile generation of the Law hindred not, but that the godly fathers, who liued vnder the old Teſtament, had for their mother the ſpirituall Ieruſalem, which is free. • o that it was partly the Iewes blindneſſe, and partly the veile couering thoſe Moſaicall myſteries, which made that Law in Sina ſeeme to bee no other, but the Couenant of workes made with Adam in his Innocency.

Queſtion. But here by the way it may bee asked, wherein doth the firſt Couenant, and the ſecond chiefly differ?

Anſwer. There are ſundry oppoſite differences betweene the two Couenants.

1 The firſt Couenant was of mans works: the ſecond of Gods grace, and theſe two in the poynt of iuſtification are oppoſite one to the other. Rom. 11.6.

2ly The firſt couenant was made with Adam, and all his poſterity vniuerſally: the ſecond onely with Abrahams ſeede, called the womans ſeede. Gen. 3.15. to wit, Chriſt, and all the Elect. ſo Rom. 4.1.

3ly The firſt couenant ſtood vpon mans owne righteouſneſſe, the ſecond ſtands vpon anothers righteouſneſſe, to wit, Chriſts rigteouſneſſe, made ours by imputation.

4ly The firſt couenant ſtood vpon the mutability of mans will, ſo as it was quickly broken: but the ſecond ſtands firme vpon the ſure foundation of Gods immutable will, good pleaſure, and eternall purpoſe in himſelfe, ſo as it can neuer bee broken, being an euerlaſting Couenant.

5ly The firſt was a couenant of iuſtice without mercy: the ſecond a couenant of iuſtice and mercy together, iuſtice fulfilled by Chriſt, and mercy extended in and for Chriſt to all the Elect.

6 The firſt Couenant had no other reward reuealed to the firſt Adam (from the Earth earthy) but what was confined to the earthly Paradiſe: but the ſecond hath the Kingdome of Heauen ſet open in Chriſt (the ſecond Adam, the Lord from Heauen) vnto all the Elect.

Theſe and the like differences betweene the firſt Couenant and the ſecond well conſidered, and conferred together, will plainely ſhew, that the Law giuen vnder Chriſt the Redeemer in Mount Sina, was not that firſt Couenant of workes. For beſides the fore alledged reaſons, there is mention made of Gods mercie in the ſecond Commandement; and of the promiſe of the land of the liuing, the Kingdome of Heauen tiped in Canaan, in the fifth Commandement. Which mercy and kingdome were not comprehended in that firſt Couenant of workes. But ſo much of the firſt proofe of our Aſſumption, which was, that true iuſtifying fayth though it reſts vpon Chriſts righteouſneſſe onely for iuſtification, yet it lookes vpon the Morall law as a rule of Chriſtian conuerſation, and acknowledgeth the obedience thereunto as a duty, which God requireth of euery true belieuer.

The ſecond proofe is in Math. 5.Reade for this from the 16. verſe to the end of the chapter. Where our Maſter Chriſt in his diuine ſermon vpon the Mount, expounddeth to his diſciples, and all faythfull hearers, and doth as it were giue them a Commentary vpon the Morall law, which the ſame Chriſt deliuered to Moſes in the Mount; which hee ſets before his ſcholars as a rule of the duties of ſanctification, and chriſtian conuerſation,Math. 5.20. in which their righteouſneſſe they muſt exceede the righteouſneſſe of the Scribes and Phariſees, otherwiſe they could not enter into the Kingdome of Heauen. But how ſhall Chriſt eſcape the cenſure, as one that preacheth the dead fayth? ſurely I know not, while his faythfull Miniſters preaching the ſame doctrine, are cenſured as preaching the blinde, zealous, dead fayth, and are called doggs for their labour.

But becauſe Chriſt preached and preſſed the Morall Law as a rule of Chriſtian obedience, and called that alſo their righteouſneſſe: therefore did he teach, or meane, that this was their righteouſneſſe in the ſight of God? Nothing leſſe. For he that ſaid,Math. 5.20. Except your righteouſneſſe exceede the righteouſneſſe of the ſcribes and Phariſes, yee ſhall not enter into the Kingdome of Heauen: ſayd alſo, VVhen yee haue done all theſe things that are commanded you, ſay wee are vnprofitable ſeruants, we haue done that which was our duety to doe. Marke, he cals our obedience to the Law of God our duty: yet ſo, as wee are not thereby iuſtified. And yet wee preach the ſame doctrine of our Maſter Chriſt, muſt bee rated as Doggs, as preaching the dead fayth.

The 3d proofe is from that exquiſite forme of Prayer preſcribed by Chriſt, in the fifth petition, Math. 6, 12. Forgiue vs our debts, as wee forgiue our debters. All ſins are debts to God. All ſins are breaches of the Morall Law: therefore the keeping of the Morall Law is a debt that wee owe to God. The Propoſition is Chriſts. The Aſſumption is the Apoſtles. So as nothing remaines for the Aduerſary to deny, but the Concluſion.

The fourth proofe is from the Apoſtles words, Gal. 5.6. (that which the aduerſary alſo alledgeth for the proofe of his third poſition) In Ieſus Chriſt, neyther circumciſion auaileth anything, nor vncircumciſion, but fayth which worketh by loue. Loue to God, and to our neighbour is a duty we owe to God, and to our neighbour. But the Morall Law is the rule of this loue. Therefore fayth working by loue lookes vpon the Morall law as a rule of thoſe duties of loue we owe to God and our neighbour. That loue is a debt, the Apoſtle prooueth, Ro. 13.8. Owe no man any thing, but to loue one another; ſo that is a debt, that we owe one to another. And if loue be a debt to man, then much more to God. Againe, that the Morall Law is a rule of this loue, the ſame Apoſtle prooueth in the ſame chapter, v. 9. For this, Thou ſhalt not commit adultery: Thou ſhalt not kill: Thou ſhalt not ſteale: Thou ſhalt not beare falſe witneſſe: Thou ſhalt not couet: and if there be any other Commandement: it is briefely comprehended in this ſaying, namely, Thou ſhalt loue thy neighbour as thy ſelfe. Loue worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore loue is the fulfilling of the Law So that the concluſion remaines firme, that fayth working by loue lookes vpon the Morall Law as a rule of thoſe duties of loue we owe to God, and our neighbour.

The fifth proofe is from the Apoſtles words Rom. 12.1. &c. I beſeech you therfore brethren, by the mercies of God, Propoſition, that yee preſent your bodies a liuing ſacrifice, holy acceptable to God, which is your reaſonable ſeruice: And bee not conformed to this world, Aſſumption, but bee tranſformed by the renewing of your minde, that yee may proue what is that good, and acceptable, Concluſion, and perfect will of God, &c. Now from this generall exhortation hee deſcendeth to particular duties, as ſo many branches ſpringing from our reaſonable ſeruice of God. From thence to the very end of the Epiſtle. Whence I argue thus.

All Chriſtian duties of loue to God, and to man are branches of our reaſonable ſeruice of God.

But the Morall Law containes all chriſtian duties of our loue to God, and to our neighbours.

Therefore the keeping of the Morall Law is our reaſonable ſeruice of God.

The Propoſition is euident by the whole context of the Apoſtle in the foreſayd part of his Epiſtle The Aſſumption is vndenyable, proued before.

The ſixt proofe is from 1. Theſ. 4, 1. &c. Further more then we beſeech you brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Ieſus, that as yee haue receiued of vs, how yee ought to walke, and to pleaſe God: ſo yee would abound more and more. For yee know what commandements wee gaue you by the Lord Ieſus. For this is the will of God euen your ſanctification, that yee ſhould abſtaine from fornication. The exhortation is very forcible, and full of waight. Hee preſſeth it by the authority of the Lord Ieſus: he mindeth them of it, as one of thoſe leſſons he had deliuered formerly by word of mouth, and they had receiued: hee calls it a duty, How yee ought to walke: yea a duty to God, How yee ought to walke, and pleaſe God: hee calls it a ſpeciall commandement which hee gaue them by the Lord Ieſus as which the Lord Ieſus gaue him in charge to deliuer to them: hee calls it the will of God: he calls it their ſanctification.

Now what is all this which the Apoſtle here aymeth at? What, but this: That yee abſtaine from fornication? Whence I argue thus:

Propoſition,Abſtinence from fornication is a part of keeping of the Morall Law.

Aſſumption:But this abſtinence from fornication is a duty acceptable to God, is a doctrine to be taught by the Miniſters of Chriſt, to be receaued by the people of God, is a commandement of the Lord Ieſus, it is the will of God, it is our ſanctification, or a fruite and effect of it.

Concluſion.Therefore the keeping of the Morall Law is commanded of God, of Chriſt, as a duty to all true beleeuers.

To what part of this Argument will the aduerſary anſwere? To the Propoſition? That hee dare not: for the Law ſayth. Thou ſhalt not commit adultery. To the Aſſumption? That he cannot; for that is the Apoſtles, in the fore alledged place. Therefore I will conclude with this concluſion, That the keeping of the Morall law is commanded of God and of Chriſt, as a duty to all true beleeuers. When I vrged this argument, or theas rhis. What ſoeuer is Gods will we ſhould doe, is our duty to doe: But the doing of Gods Law is Gods will wee Should doe, therefore it is our duety to doe Gods law, ſo farre as we are able. Now all this is plainely concluded by the Apoſtle. This is the will of God euen your ſanctification, that ye ſhould abſtaine from fornication. To abſtaine frō fornication is a part of keeping the Moral Law, and what is true of a part, is true of the whole, as Iam. 2.10, 11. like in forme ſyelogiſticall, out of this very place of the Apoſtle, to this our aduerſarie occaſionally face to face, and had, to ſatiſfie his demande repeated it ouer twice or thrice: hee could not giue a preſent anſwere, but deſired to haue it written downe. But I expect not an anſwere, becauſe none can be giuen to this which is here written.

No, can he not in all his budget finde an anſwere? doth hee not (as I heare hee was wont to doe at leaſt) carry his trunk-hoſe full farſed & ſtuffed with Proteſtant Authors, as Luther, Zanchee, Paraeus, with ſundry others of good note, that with their graue authority and reuerend names he may the more eaſily impoſe vpon his credulous and ignorant Diſciples, who admire that moſt, which they vnderſtand leaſt: cannot he out of all theſe beate out an anſwere to theſe things; For of theſe he braggs much in the concluſion of his letter. But till hee can bring ſome, I will content my ſelfe to bring his belweather Author, euen Luther, whoſe no leſſe puiſſant, then elegant, and heauenly ſpeech (wherewith I will for this time conclude this ſhort diſcourſe) ſhall run full butt vppon, and puſh downe all that he hath ſayd for his pretended, counterfet, falſe, hereticall, ſcandalous, Anabaptiſticall, libertine fayth: Luthers words are: Admittimus quidem Moſen legendum, & audiendum a nobis, vt predictorem & teſtem Chriſti. Deinde vt petamus ab eo exempla optimarum logum & morum Cetaerùm dominium in conſcientiam nullo modo concedimus ei; ibi mortuus et ſepultus eſto; nemoque ſciat vbi ſepulchrum eius ſit: we indeede admit of Moſes to bee read & heard of vs as a Prophet & witneſſe of Chriſt: Againe, that wee may fetch from him examples of good lawes and manners. But dominion ouer the conſcience (to a man in the ſtate of grace, as Rom. 6.10.) wee by no meanes yealde him; there, let him bee dead and buried; and let no man know where his ſepulchre is. So Luther. And in his argument vpon the Galatians: Sum quidem peccator, &c. I am indeed a ſinner according to this preſent life, and the righteouſneſſe of it, as the ſon of Adam where the Law accuſeth me, death raigneth and will deuoure mee: but aboue this life I haue another righteouſneſſe, another life, which is the Sonne of God, who knoweth not ſin and death, but is righteouſneſſe and life eternall: for which alſo this dead body of mine ſhall be rayſed vp againe, and freed from the bondage of the Law and of ſin, and together with the ſpirit it ſhall bee ſanctified. So both theſe remaine while we liue here, the fleſh is accuſed, exerciſed, made ſad and contrite with the actiue righteouſneſſe of the Law: but the ſpirit raigneth, reioyceth, and is ſaued by paſſiue righteouſneſſe; becauſe it knoweth it hath the Lord ſitting in heauen at the fathers right hand, who hath aboliſhed the Law, Sin, Death, and hath t • ampled vnder feete all euill things, hath led them captiue, and tryumphed ouer them all. So he.

Now God forbid, that I ſhould glory, but in the croſſe of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, by whom the world is crucified vnto me, Gal. 6.14. and I vnto the world.

For in Chriſt neyther Circumciſion auayleth any thing, nor vncircumciſion, but a new creature.

15 And as many as walke according to this rule, peace bee on them, and mercy, and vpon the Iſrael of God.

I thought here ſhould haue bin an end. But as the Prouerbe is,16 One abſurdity begets a thouſand; as one of Lerna his 7 heads being cut off, 3 grew in the place thereof.Parua m • tu primo, mox ſeſe attollit in auras, Ingred túrque ſolo, et caput inter nubila condit. Monſtrum horrendum ingens, &c. Virgil. Aenead. Such is the nature of hereſie, which of a ſmall ſeede growes to be an hiddeous monſter, if it bee not ſtrangled in the firſt conception. Like Fame, which for feare at firſt is ſmall: but finding entertainment with Dame Credulity and loquacity, growes bold and big vpon it. Or like a ſmall leprous ſpot in the beginnig, which quickly runneth ouer the whole body. Or like a drop of ſweet poyſon, which at firſt goes pleaſantly downe, but in a ſhort time inſinuateth it ſelfe to the infecting of the vitall ſpirits, and ceaſſeth not, till it hath wrought its mortall effect. Or like a Gangreene, or like a Canker, as the Apoſtle compares it. This Antinomian leproſie doth ſpread, and get ſtrength, and boldneſſe euery day, euen vnto impudency & madnes.

And the reaſon it finds ſo many diſciples to imbrace it, becauſe cutting off ſanctification, denying it to be a duty, (as one of their Diſciples ſaide, Away with this ſcuruy ſanctification.) and putting all vpon an imaginary fayth, and perfection in Chriſt: it becommeth ſo much the more plauſible to fleſh and blood, which is ſo prone and ready to liſten after any doctrine, that giues liberty to their vntamed luſts. So that when ſuch Diſciples heare their teachers ſay, Beleeue onely, and ſo be merry in Chriſt, ſing care away to the duety of ſanctification, away with mortification, Repent no more, for yee are perfectly iuſtified, God ſeeth no ſin in you, yee are perfectly ſaued, and the like: no maruell if being carnall, and they hypocriticall perſons, they catch at ſuch doctrines, as may nuzzle them in their carnall luſts, as is too apparent by the fruite which groweth neceſſarily from ſuch a roote of bitterneſſe, whereby many are defiled.

For perſwade a man once, that being in Chriſt, and ſo iuſtified from all his ſins,Montaniſtae omnem panitentiae virtutem è medio ſuſtulerunt. Hieronead Marcellinam. Et lib. 2. adu • rſus Iouinianum. ſe Centuria: 2. c. 5. hee hath no more neede of repentance: and what a flood-gate is opened to all impiety, when there is noe more conſcience of ſin? Thus they reuiue the hereſie of the Montaniſtes, who denied repentance to be needefull. This they ground vpon Heb. 6.11. Not laying againe the foundation of repentance from dead works. Whence they conclude, that beleeuers haue no more to doe with repentances, where as the Apoſtle there ſpeakes of the Doctrine, not of the practiſe of repentance, reprouing thoſe Hebrewes, that they were no better proficients i • Chriſts ſchoole, when inſtead of being able to teach others, they were ſtill A B C darians, hauing need to be catichized in the very common rudiments & knowne Principles of Religion, as Heb. 5.12. Againe they ſay, that they are as pure from all ſin in Chriſt, and as perfect in righteouſneſſe and holineſſe, as Chriſt himſelfe is: alledging that in Iohn. 1 Iohn. 4.17. Herein is our loue made perfect, that we haue boldneſſe in the day of iudgement: becauſe as hee is, ſo are we in this world. Hence they conclude ſuch abſolute perfection to bee in the beleeuer, as in Chriſt now glorified in heauen. And therefore when they ſay, that a beleeuer is perfectly ſaued in this life, they expreſſe themſelues in plaine words to meane, that a beleeuer is perfectly glorified in this life, and that there is noe difference betweene our ſtate here and in heauen, but onely in our ſenſe and apprehenſion. I ſhould not (I confeſſe) haue beleeued, that euer any man, endued with common ſenſe and reaſon, would haue ſo much as once conceiued, much leſſe uttered ſuch a ſenſeleſſe and monſtrous Paradox, had I not my ſelfe heard one of their Antinomian Miniſters affirme ſo much to me and others together. For I asking him what difference there was betweene the ſtate of grace here, and that of glory here after: hee anſwered, none at all, but in our ſenſe and apprehenſion. And thereupon another Miniſter asking him, whither we were perfectly glorified in this life: he anſwered, wee were; whereupon I, abhorring ſuch an inſolent and Luciferian ſpeech, preſently auoyded his company and further ſpeech. To this height of pride are they come, who teach the empty and windy faith of Iuſtification againſt Sanctification, the fruit of a true liuely fayth. But are wee perfectly glorified in this life, ſo as it differs not from that in heauen, but in our ſenſe and apprehenſion? Then when a iuſtified man ſinneth, it is but in his ſenſe and apprehenſion, if that; or rather, they are in this poynt without ſenſe & apprehenſion of ſin. Then when wee are afflicted, diſeaſed, and the like, it is not ſo indeede, but onely in our ſenſe and apprehenſion; becauſe a man perfectly glorified can neyther ſin, nor ſuffer any ſorrow, diſeaſes, or death. Yea our fayth is no more the foundation of things hoped for, and the euidence of things not ſeene, we haue no longer hope of eternall life, but in our ſenſe and apprehenſion; For wee are already poſſeſſed of the thing hoped for, we are already perfectly glorified. O ſenſeleſſe ſtupidity! But they vrge, As he is, ſo are wee in this world; he is pure, perfect, vndefiled, therefore are we ſo to. Therefore, ſay they, wee are ſo perfect, as wee cannot be more. But St Paul ſheweth plainely the meaning of St Iohn, ſaying:2 Cor. 3, 8. But we all with open face beholding as in a glaſſe the glory of the Lord, are changed into the ſame image from glory to glory, euen as by the ſpirit of the Lord. Now though from hence they would inferre, that we haue the ſame image of Chriſts glory in full perfection: yet the next words (Frō glory to glory) plainely ſhew, that though the ſtate of grace bee a glorious eſtate, as being an initiation of glory, being begun here in the ſoule: yet wee goe from one degree of glory and grace vnto another, and neuer attaine to full perfection, till this mortall ſhall put on immortality, and this corruption ſhall put on incorruption. 1 Cor, 15. Rom. 8.29. So that the image of Chriſt which wee beare vpon vs here, is a conformity vnto Chriſt our Head in the participation of his glorious graces, but in ſuch a proportion, as here we are capable of, and as God hath diſtributed to euery man the meaſure of fayth. And the ſtate of grace is in a perpetuall growth here, as 2. Pet. 3.18. Ephe. 4.12.13. Pſal. 84.7 The path of the righteous being a perpetuall progreſſe, like to the morning light, ſhining more and more vnto the perfect day: Prou: 4..18. But why doe I ſpend arguments againſt ſuch as deny vndeniable Principles?

But thus wee ſee, how a falſe and imaginary faith, whereof theſe men doe dreame, begets in them ſuch damnable imaginations, & high preſumptions, euen to the deſtruction of grace, while they would ſtretch it beyond the line. No maruaile therefore if they aboliſh quite any further vſe of the morall law, ſyth they deny Sanctification it ſelfe, as a duty preſcribed and commanded in the law. Exo. 19.5.6. So that if the Doctrines of theſe men might preuaile, what could bee expected, but a deluge of Atheiſme and profaneſſe, and all lawleſſe licentiouſnes and diſſoluteneſſe to ouerflow and drowne the world? For they cry downe and aboliſh all duties contained and commanded in the Morall Law, both towards God, and towards men. Doe we thinke theſe men can be good ſubiects to their Prince, who deny they owe him any honour in the way of duety enioyned by the commandement,1 Pet, 2, 17, Honour thy Father and Mother; whereof one maine branch is, Honour the King? And if they doe not of duety honour their King on earth, how ſhall they honour their King in heauen? To inſtance in the fourth commandement: they quite abrogate the Morall Law to beleeuers, and conſequently the fourth commandement, which is the ſanctification of the ſabbath-day.

But they reply, that the Iewiſh Sabbath-day is aboliſhed, and therefore Chriſtians haue nothing to doe with the commandement, no more then the reſt of the Decalogue. I anſwere: It followeth not: for though the Iewes ſabboth day be aboliſhed, yet there remaines a ſabboth to bee kept of Chriſtians, ſeeing that the commandement of the ſabboth is Morall, and ſo no leſſe perpetuall, then all the reſt. For if none of the reſt of the commandements be aboliſhed: then neither the fourth And ſo though the ceremoniall part of the Iewes ſabboth be abrogated, yet not the morality of it.

Ob. But how, or wherein was the Iewes Sabbath day ceremoniall?

Anſw. In two regards; firſt, becauſe it was appoynted them to bee a memoriall of their deliuerance out of Egypt, as Deut. 5.15. where the Lord ſayth. And remember that thou waſt a ſeruant in the Land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand, and by a ſtretched out arme: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keepe the Sabbath day. So that the Iewes were commaunded to keepe the ſabbath day in a thankefull remembrance of their deliuerance from the Egyptian bondage; therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keepe the Sabbath day.

Ob. But in Exo. 20.11. the Sabbath day hath relation to the Creation.

Anſw. True, yet herein Deuteronomy Moſes tells them, that euen then, when this commandement was giuen the Lord had a ſpeciall reſpect to the deliuerance from Egypt; and therefore hee ſayth, the Lord commanded thee, as referring to the time paſt, when the Law was giuen. And in that reſpect the Sabboth day was to them ceremoniall. Secondly in regard of ſome ceremonies proper (as ſome ſay) to that Nation, being inhabitants of the Land of Canaan, a hot climate; as the not kindling of a fire on the Sabboth, as alſo the not dreſſing of their meat in that day, which was in remembrance of the Manna in the deſert: whereof they gathered enough for the ſabboth on the day before, God miraculouſly and plentifully prouiding it for them. But in very truth, & (ſo farre as I can yet conceiue, till I be conuinced otherwiſe by better reaſons, then I haue yet ſeene) that obſeruance of not kindling a fire, nor dreſſing of meate on the ſabboth (which was lawfull & allowed vpon all other feſtiuall dayes) was not ſo much proper to that people in regard of their hot Country and climate, as in regard of that Moſaicall Pedagogie and diſpenſation, vnder which that onely people and Church was ſubiugated and ſubiected, ſo as this not kindling a fire, & not dreſſing of meate, was a meere Ceremony Moſaicall, a type of the eternall ſabbath, brought in by Chriſt in his reſurrection, which puts an end to all ſabbaticall ceremonies, as theſe are, which typed the eſtate of the euerlaſting ſabbath, wherein is no need of bodily prouiſion. For in heauen, there ſhall bee neyther kindling of fire, nor dreſſing of meat, nor the like. Whereupon Iſychius in leuit. lib. 6. cap. 19. ſpeaking of the Omer of Manna, which euery one was to gather euery day, and two before the ſabboth, An Omer (ſayth he) was ſo much, as could feede one man. Hereby he would teach and instruct them of the intelligible reſt, and end of the world, becauſe then it was impoſſible to boyle, or worke, or gather. Some againe limit the not dreſſing of meate ro the time of their trauell in the Deſart 40 yeares, during the Manna, and not to extend to the Land of Canaan, where the Manna ceaſſed. And this lis not improbable, ſith their iourney in the wilderneſſe was to type out the time of out heauenly Country, where all the prouiſion for the body ſhould ceaſſe. Some alſo reſtrayne the not kindling of a fire to the worke of the Tabernacle onely (as Vatablus in Exod. 35.3.) but I ſee no probabillity hereof, ſeeing the Prieſts about the Tabernacle had liberty on the ſabbath to performe their rites, as ſacrificing, and the like. Yet (by the way) the abrogation of theſe ceremonies ought not Chriſtians to turne into ſurquedry and exceſſe of feaſting, (as too many doe) ſo abuſing their chriſtian liberty: but to bee vſed with all ſobriety, ſuch as may not hinder, but helpe the holy ſpirituall dueties of this day by a due refreſhing of the body, for neceſſity, not for ſuperfluity.

Now theſe Ceremonies dying together with the whole Moſaicall economy, which ſtood in types and Ceremonies, yet the Morality remaines a perpetuall ſuruiuer in, and with, and vnder the Goſpell. For elſe, if the Morality of the Sabbath were antiquated and aboliſhed, then alſo the whole Decalogue. But the Decalogue, or ten Commandements remaine ſtill in force, not onely in their curſe and full rigour to all tranſgreſſing Infidels, ſuch as are out of Chriſt, but alſo as a rule of holy conuerſation to all true beleeuers. And that the Morall Law ſtill remaines as a rule of Chriſtian obedience to euery true Iſraelite, appeareth by the very manner of giuing of it in Mount Sinai. For it was giuen by the Lawgiuer Chriſt the Redeemer of his people, who ſayth, I am the Lord thy God, which haue brought thee out of the Land of Egypt, out of the houſe of bondage: and thereupon inferreth, Thou ſhalt haue no other Gods before me, &c. Now the deliuerance out of the Egyptian bondage what was it, but a type of our ſpiritual deliuerance from ſin and ſathan by Chriſt? And therefore by his owne argument it followeth, that the ſame Morall Law giuen by and vnder Chriſt to the Iewes in the old Teſtament, is propagated and perpetuated to all chriſtians in the new Teſtament, and ſo conſequently the Sabbath, as touching the morality of it.

Thus the Morall Law is no leſſe a rule to beleeuing chriſtians then it was once to the beleeuing Iewes, all one ioynt ſpirituall ſeed of Abraham, to whoſe poſterity this Law was giuen. And thus alſo by the ſelfe ſame reaſon, the fourth Commandement for the ſanctification of the ſabbath is ſtill in force with the Chriſtian Church, as well as the other 9. vnleſſe (as the Papiſts haue by their ſacrilegious practiſe nimmed away the ſecond Commandement out of their vulgar Catechiſme, and by their corrupt gloſſes guelded the maſculine ſenſe of it in their Doway Bibles) wee will take their part in the polluting and profaining the Sabbath, by denying the perpetuall morality of it, and ſo leaue but two Commandements for God (according to the Popiſh acompt) in the firſt Table; or rather none at all, when by this meanes there is noe day allowed for his ſeruice, no nor meanes to teach vs the true worſhip of the onely true God, & the honour due vnto his name, which meanes is the publique Miniſtry of his word, together with publique and priuate inuocaſion.

So that the whole worſhip and ſeruice of God, and his ſauing knowledge for mans ſaluation (to ſpeake nothing of bodily refreſhing, and workes of Charity, for the reliefe of the poore) hauing a neceſſary dependance, as touching the externall meanes, vpon the due obſeruation of the fourth Commandement in the Morality o • it: who can deny the keeping of the Sabbath to be Morall, but he muſt withall procliame open enmity to Gods worſhip, and mans ſaluation;

Ob. But the Sabbath day of the Iewes being wholy ceaſſed, as being buried in Chriſts graue, wherein hee reſted all that day, and ſo fully kept it: of what force is it with chriſtians any longer? or what morality remaines of it to bee obſerued by vs?

Anſw. As the Iewes Sabbath day was a preciſe ſeauenth day, which no doubt was by ſucceſſiue reuolution obſerued by Adams generations from the ſeauenth day of the Creation, ſanctified by Gods owne reſt, (for we reade of it, in Exo. 16. which was before the giuing of the Law in Sinai,) but with all had an addition of a new relation to the typicall Redemption from Egypt, as we noted before, in which regard it was ceremoniall: So (as ceremoniall) it was ſubiect to be abrogated, and changed from a Legall, into an Euangelicall Sabbath, which the Scripture calleth the Lords day. Although ſome are bold to deny, that the Sabbath was at all obſerued by the Old Church, vntill Moſes time, and ſo till the Law was giuen in Sinai. But this ſeemes to bee a groundleſſe opinion, if not alſo Godleſſe. For though the Scripture makes no mention of the keeping of the Sabbath, vntil Exod. 16.5. &c. yet both that mention goes before the ſolemne bidding of it in Mount Sinai, and doth alſo ſufficiently inferre, that the Sabbath was in vſe before that time, as being fiiſt inſtituted in Paradiſe. For elfs, as a learned Diuine of our Church hath noted vpon this very occaſion: It is abſurd for any man to prepare a thing 2000 yeares, before the vſe thereof. And Exod, 20.11. the very reaſon and ground of mans obſeruation of the Sabbath is there giuen to bee Gods owne inſtitution of it, which was his actuall ſanctifying and bleſſing of it by his owne reſting on that day from the workes of Creation. Though otherwiſe the fourth Commandement, being a part of the Law written in Adams heart, needed not any expreſſe Commandement, more then the reſt did; ſauing that this hath a Memento ſet vpon it, as being moſt ſubiect to neglect and prophanation: and that the Lord himſelfe was pleaſed to aſſigne his owne ſeuenth day for reſt and ſanctification to thoſe former ages. But to proceed: Here it may be demanded, what is that morality of the fourth Commandement, which yet is in force with chriſtians? For anſwere: None will queſtion (but the Antinomian, who altogether denyeth the whole Morall Law to be in force, ſo much as a rule to beleeuers vnder the Goſpell, the morality of the Sabbath to bee yet of force and vſe with Chriſtians. Onely ſome differ both about the manner of it, how it is impoſed, and how exacted of chriſtians, and about the matter of it. For firſt, they denie that the fourth Commandement hath any thing to doe with the Lords day, which is the chriſtian Sabbath. Againe they deny that the fourth Commandement reacheth further, then to maſters of families, exempting ſeruants from imputation of ſinne, in caſe they worke at their maſters command. Thirdly they deny the Lords day is by any diuine inſtitution, humane onely, and therefore not of the ſame force with the fourth Commandement. Fourthly, (for the matter) they deny that the vacation and abſtinence from ſeruile labour, or the ordinary workes of a mans worldly calling, is any part of the morality of the fourth Commandement, but a meere ceremony, and ſo abrogated. Yea they goe further, and ſay, that howſoeuer the generality of that Commandement to keepe a Sabbath, wherein God might bee honoured, was Morall: Yet the ſpeciality of it, namely to keepe, Firſt, one day of ſeauen: Secondly, the ſeauenth: Thirdly, one whole day: Fourthly, with preciſe vacancy from all worke, was meerely ceremoniall, and ſo the ſpecialities of the Commandement are vaniſhed, though for the generality of it, it is a law of nature and remaineth. So they. Here then be ſundry things, which offer themſelues to bee ſcanned. And to make way, Firſt where they call the bodily reſt, obſerued once by the Iewes, a poynt of exact and extreame vacation from euery kind of worke, & which chriſtians haue nothing to doe with all: This is but a buggbeare, or ſcarcrow to fright Childiſh chriſtians from ſo much as looking backe to the fourth Commandement, in the keeping of the Lords day. For firſt an extreame vacation was not exacted of the Church of the Iewes; as in caſe of extreamity, or vrgent neceſſity, they might worke, yea for the ſauing of a poore Aſſes life, by pulling him out of the pit on the Sabbath day; as our Sauiour conuinceth the carping Iewes.

How much more in extremities of more importance, as the quenching of a ſcath fire, or defending of their City, or Country, by repelling the inuading, or beleaguring enemy? yea in ſuch caſes not to beſtirre themſelues, and to vſe their vtmoſt labour and skill, not onely turned into ſuperſtition, but many times proued their bane and ruine. Among ſundry inſtances in this kinde, Ioſephus Antiq. of the Ieases, lib. 12. c. 8 ſoli. 14. 8. this is one: that the Iewes on the Sabbath being aſſailed by their enemyes, would neyther make reſiſtance, nor yet ſo much as cloſe vp their caues mouth to defend themſelues, and ſo their liues became a ſpoyle to their enemyes cruelty. So ſuperſtitiouſly obſeruant were they of the Sabbath, as if God had made it to be a ſnare for them, whenſoeuer the crafty enemy ſhould take that oppertunity to inuade them ſo as in caſe of extreme neceſſity, as to ſaue life, yea a beaſts life, the Commandement was not ſtrictly obligatory; much more in ſpirituall obſeruance, touching Gods worſhip, as the Prieſts ſlaying of beaſts for ſacrifice, and the like. Extreame vacation then was not exacted of the Iewes in their keeping of their Sabbath.

Againe, we ſhewed before, how the prohibition to the Iewes of kindling a fire, and dreſſing of meate on the Sabbath was peculiar to that Nation, or rather Church, and was a type and ceremony. Nor was it extreame, becauſe they liued in an hot climate, wherein their was no extreame neceſſity of fire for one day, which they were to ſupply: by their ſpirituall fire of holy zeale in a due obſeruation of the Sabbath. Though ſome are of opinion, that this prohibition of kindling a fire reached onely to ſuch fires, as were vſed about ſeruile workes, and not about their neceſſary food. But I will not blowe the coales of this controuerſie in this poynt at this time, hauing ſhewed ſufficient reaſon already of this reſtraint. Onely this I adde, if it were a burthen, layed vpon the ſhoulders of that Pedagogy of Moſes: it was to teach them and vs, to put a difference betweene that hard yoake of the Ceremoniall Law. Acts. 15.10, and that ſweete yoake, and light burthen of Chriſt, Matthew, 11.30.

In the next place, where they ſay, that one whole day for the Sabbath, or one ſeauenth day, or one day of ſeauen, was meerely Ceremoniall: I would aske them how the memoriall of the Commandement could bee kept, without a ſpeciall time or day? vnleſſe they will ſay, that the morality, being perpetuall, is not tyed to any one day. But ſeeing the Morall Law cannot be kept by the Church in this world, without time (for as the Preacher ſaith,Eccle 3.1. There is a time for euery purpoſe vnder the Sunne) and this time of keeping the fourth Commandement is limited by God to the 7th day: how can this day be ſeparated from the Sabbath, as being an inſeparable circumſtance of the ſubſtance of that Commandement? Yea, ſo inſeparable by diuine appoyntment, as Gods wiſedome did beſt know the Sabbath cannot be ſolemnely kept, vnleſſe it be one of the ſeauen, I ſay not, one fixed day of ſeauen to laſt for euer from the Creation to the end of the world without alteration; for ſo it was ceremoniall in the old Teſtament: but the proportion of a ſeauenth part of our time decreed by Gods owne inſtitution and perpetually annexed to the morality. And the Lord who limited a ſeauenth day for reſt, and to bee kept holy, hath noe where left it arbitrary to man, to allow what day or proportion of time liketh him for that purpoſe beyond the number of ſeauen. For as God hath reſerued a tenth of our goods (though we owe him all that we haue) as ſacred to himſelfe, and by meanes whereof hee ſanctifies all the 9 parts to our vſe: ſo alſo a ſeauenth of our time (though- the whole time of our life is to be ſpent to his honour) for the ſanctification of our whole life. And both theſe ſerue ioyntly for the more commodious, compleate, and ſolemne adminiſtration of his worſhip and ſeruice, which alſo redounledeth not onely to our temporall, but ſpirituall and eternall good. Nor is it now in mans power to alter the Lords day into any other ſeauenth day of the weeke, ſith it is Chriſts owne Ordinance, and therefore vndiſpenſable.

Inuij Praelect: in Gene 2.2 The learned Iunius on Gen. 2.2. concerning the Sabbath thus ſpeaketh: Haec lex, &c. This Law (of the Sabbath) is naturall, hauing a ceremoniall deſignation of one day affixed vnto it. This ſeauenth day, added of God, is not naturall, but poſitiue. A ſeauenth day is naturall, and remaineth, but the ſeauenth from the creation appoynted of God, is poſitiue, inſtead whereof the Lords day ſucceedeth in the chriſtian Church, called the firſt day of the weeke, and the Lords day, Reu. 1.10. celebrated, Acts. 20.7. &. 1, Cor, 16.2. Cauſa mutationis, &c. The cauſe of this mutation is Chriſts reſurrection, and the benefit of reſtoring the Church in Chriſt: the commemoration of which benefit ſucceeded the memory of the creation, not by humane tradition, but by Chriſts owne obſeruation and inſtitution; who both on the day of his Reſurrection, Et octauo quoque die, and on euery eight day, vntill his aſcenſion into Heauen, appeared to his Diſciples, and came into their aſſembly. And the ſame was done by the conſtant obſeruation of the Apoſtles and Diſciples, and of the Church of Chriſt, to which by the inſtitution and example of Chriſt the Apoſtles deliuered the obſeruation of the Lords day which is well ſet forth by Cyril. lib. 12. in Iohan. cap. 58. by Auguſtine ad Caſulanum, Ep. 86. et ad Ianuarium Ep. 119. cap. 13. And therefore Chryſoſtome in his fift ſermon of the Reſurrection writteth, that of old in the Primitiue Church this day was called by three names, The Lords day, The day of bread, and the day of light. The Lords day, becauſe in it, being a ſolemne memoriall of Chriſts reſurrection, they attended to his word and worſhip: the day of bread, becauſe in it the Sacrament of the Lords ſupper was adminiſtred: and the day of light, becauſe on it was obſerued the adminiſtration of Baptiſme, For the ancients called Baptiſme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , illumination and the day of Baptiſme diem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the day, of lights; and the Baptized were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , New illuminates. Wherefore ſith the Lords day by Chriſts Act, example, and inſtitution, by the moſt conſtant obſeruation of the Apoſtles and the auncient Church, and by the teſtimony of Scripture, hath bene obſerued, and put in the place of the Iewes Sabbath: ineptè faciunt, &c. They doe abſurdly, who affirme that the obſeruation of the Lords day continues in the Church by Traditiō, and not by authority of the holy Scripture, that by theſe helpes they may (ſi Deo placet) ſupport the Traditions of men. So he.

Thirdly, where they ſay, that the generality onely of keeping a Sabbath, was Morall: this generality or morality muſt either now bee quite loſt: or elſe doth neceſſarily import ſome ſpeciall day for chriſtians, wherein ſolemly to keepe this morality (vnleſſe we be bound euery moment or day of our life to keepe it) as well as for the Iewes of old, by Gods owne limitation.

But fourthly they ſay that the vacation and abſtinence from ſeruile labour, or the ordinary workes of a manes worldly calling, is not any part of the morality of the fourth Commandement, but a meere ceremony, and ſo abrogated. This is a ſtrange Paradox. For then the whole obſeruation of the ſabbath as touching the reaſt of it, was a Ceremony: and where is then the morality of it? ſtands not the morality of it in corporall reſt, and ſpirituall exerciſe? Or elſe tell us wherein? Nay certainely that cannot bee a meere ceremony, which laſteth for euer. But vacation and reſt from bodily labour laſteth for euer, euen in Heauen, in the keeping of the eternall Sabboth; as the. Apoſtle ſaith, Heb: 4.9.10. And Reuel: 14.13. And in heauen there is noe pleace for meere ceremonies. Therefore vacation from labour on the Sabboth is no meere ceremony, but one ſpeciall part of the moralitie commanded in the Sabbath. So that to reſt from labour is of the very eſſence of the Sabbath, which is therefore called Sabbath or reſt, becauſe one cheife part of the obſeruation of it ſtands in reſt.

Ob. But they obiect: That the Commandement of the Sabbath is not morall becauſe it bindes not to all times and to euery day, as well as one in the weeke.

Anſw. Though the externall ſolemne reſt of it binds but for one day in the weeke, yet the due Sanctification of it is ſuch, as it reatheth to the Sanctification of the whole time of our life, yea to the Sanctifying of our perſons, acſions, affections, &c. by the right vſe of the meanes, as the Word and Prayer. For (as wee ſayd before) as God by reſeruing and conſecrating the tenth of our goods, thereby ſanctifies all the 9 partes vnto vs: So by ſetting apart and hallowing the ſeauenth of our time to his ſeruice, he extendeth ſanctification to euery day of our life, that therein wee might bee holy. Againe, affirmatiue precepts ceaſſe not to be morall, becauſe they bind not, ad ſemper, to all times: it ſufficeth they binde ſemqer, all wayes, in their due time and place.

Fiftly, they deny, that the Lords day, the chriſtians Sabbath, hath any relation to the fourth Commandement, of the Sabbath day, as ſucceeding in the place of it. And their reaſon is, becauſe (ſay they) the Lords day is not by any Diuine inſtitution, but humane onely, and therefore not of the ſame force with the fourth Commandement. This aſſertion, & reaſon is noe leſſe vnreſonable and peremptory, then the former. How? The Lords day not of Diuine inſtiutiō, but humane onely? Eccleſiaſticall they grant, though Apoſtolicall they name not; but in no caſe diuine; that they expreſſely and ſtiffely deny. Firſt therefore wee will proue, that the Lords daye is of diuine inſtitution: Secondly, that it ſucceeds in the place of the Sabbath, and ſo beitng of deuine inſtituiton, hath the force of a Commandement. Firſt, that it is of deuine inſtitution, thouigh wee haue no expreſſe Word of Chriſt, yet we haue his Act, & worke for it, Which is euer as good as his word. We ſhewed before, how Gods Act in his reſting in bleſſing and ſanctfying the Sabbath or ſeauenth day, was his inſtitution. For to what end did he bleſſe and ſanctifie it? For, himſelfe? what needed hee? No ſurely for man, for whom the Sabbath day was made to reſt in, as well as the ſixt to labour in. For the Sabbath was made for man, ſaith the Lord of the Sabbath.

This inſtitution was in Paradiſe. It ſtands indeede, Gen. 2.2. before the fall of Adam. But if Adam fell the ſame day of his Creation, being the ſixt day, as the beſt Diuines thinke: then it is ſet by way of anticipation, or Hyſteron Proteron; and ſo this ſeuenth day began next after the Fall. when the ſon of God incarnate was cleerely promiſed, in which reſpect the Sonne of man Chriſt, was Lord of the ſabbath day being the Inſtitutor of it, vnder whom Adam began his ſpirituall life in the obſeruation or ſanctification of the Sabbath. And then (I doubt not) he began to Sacrifice, as hee taught his ſonnes afterwards, as wee ſee Gen. 4. it being not vnprobable, that thoſe ſkins, wherewith God cloathed Adams ſhamefull nakednes, were of the Sacrifices, which God taught him now vnder Chriſt to offer, as a type of Chriſt cloathing vs with the robe of his righteouſnes imputed to vs, and merited for vs by the ſacrifice of his death, which ſacrificing ſhall wee deny to bee of diuine inſtitution, becauſe wee find it not there expreſſely commanded? Otherwiſe it had beene will-worſhip, and ſo abominable, whereas God had reſpect to Abel and to his offering. And that he reſpected not Cain, it was on Cains parte for want of faith. Heb 11, 4 And why ſhould not man then in the ſtate of inocency haue a Sabbath to reſt ſolemnly in, and to be vacant for Gods worſhip, as hee had a taske (though not toyleſome) layed vpon him to dreſſe the garden, and ſo much the more, being now caſt out, hauing a hard and ſore toyle impoſed on him to till the ground, whence hee muſt eate his bread with ſowre or brackiſh ſauce, to wit, the ſweat of his face? Other wiſe, if hee had had no Sabbath to reſt in, his ſtate had bene moſt miſerable, as attended with inceſſant toyle and trauell. And when (in moſt likelyhood) did Cain and Abell bring their ſacrifices? Moſt likely on the Sabbath. For the text ſayth Mikets iamim in the end of the dayes, which ſome referre to the end of the yeare,Gene. 4.3. as Ex. 22.16. and why not alſo may it be ment of the end of the weeke dayes? But I will not contend. Thus Adam no doubt, had the Sabbath, not onely before his fall, written in his heart, but after his fall a ſpeciall day euen the ſeauenth aſſigned him vnder Chriſt the Redeemer, the Lord of the Sabbath And Gods owne act in reſting from the worke of Creation, and in bleſſing and ſanctifying the Sabbath day for mans vſe and comfort, was warrant enough to make it of diuine inſtitution, without any other expreſſe Commandement. The like wee ſay of the Lords day. That which gaue it a ſtampe of diuine inſtitution, was the Lords owne Act in bleſſing and ſanctifying this Lords day with his bleſſed and glorious Reſurrection, when now hee ceaſſed from the worke of Redemption, a greater and more glorious worke then that of Creation; now beginning alſo, and conſecrating the eternall Sabbath. So that this very act of Chriſt was a ſufficient conſecration of this day, as the Sabbath of our Redemption; and therefore iuſtly ſtyled by the Holy Ghoſt, the Lords day, becauſe conſecrated not onely to him, but by him as the author of it. Therefore alſo is he rightly intitled Lord of the Sabbath day of the Iewes, as alone hauing a power to abrogate that, and to initiate this day. For in like manner the Sabbath is called Gods owne Holyday, (Iſay. 58.) and the Sabbath of the Lord our God, (Exod. 20.) which hath relation to Chriſt the Redeemer. Exod. 20.2. to ſhew, that hee is the Lord, and inſtitutor of it. So that it belonged to him alone to cancell the old, and to conſecrate a new Sabbath to Chriſtians, in memoriall of a better Creation, and as the entrance & iniatition to the eternall Sabbath. Againe, obſerue how he honours this day. For the very day of his Reſurrection, his Diſciples being aſſembled, hee preſents himſelfe perſonally vnto them, comforting and confirming them with the ſenſible euidence of his Reſurrection, and breathing on them the gifts of the Holy Ghoſt. And, becauſe they ſhould take ſpeciall notice further of this day, iuſt eight dayes after, when this day came about againe, hee appeared to them the ſecond time where they were aſſembled, and ſtanding in the midſt of them, as Lord of his Church, ſalutes them with his peace, and ſhewes them many ſignes for the fuller confirmation of his Reſurrection. And yet for the more abundant confirmation of the conſecration of this day, after his Aſcention hee ſends the Holy Ghoſt on this very day 50 dayes after his Reſurrection, whoſe powerfull preſence was an euident ſanctification of this day by his manifold giftes & graces to his Church vnto the end of the world. And, it is ſpecially to be noted, that on thoſe dayes, wherein Chriſt appeared to his Diſciples, and the Holy Ghoſt deſcended, they were all aſſembled ſolemnly together in a holy communion in prayer, and other ſacred duties: So that Chriſts twice appearing vnto, and the Holy Ghoſt deſcending viſibly vpon his Diſciples when they were aſſembled, and all vpon this day, was warrant ſufficient for the Apoſtles, and ſo for the ſucceeding Churches, to continue the ſanctification of this firſt day of the weeke by their holy aſſemblies, and exerciſes, as Prayer, Preaching, adminiſtring the Sacraments, Almes &c. They ſaw, that this was the ſpeciall day ſelected and ſealed by Chriſt, and the Holy Ghoſt (For in the mouth of 2. or 3. witneſſes ſhall euery word be eſtabliſhed) for publique ſacred aſſemblies, wherein they might expect Chriſts preſence, by his ſpirits influence, in ſanctifying his people in their holy exerciſes on that day. Herevpon it grew a perpetuall Ordinance, not firſt conſtituted by Apoſtolicke authority, but ſeconded and followed by them in their practize, as Acts. 20.7. and 1 Cor. 16.2 vpon which place Maſter Perkins iudiciouſly obſerueth, that Paul commanded nothing as an ordinance to bee obſerued by the Church, but what hee had from Chriſt. But to make collection for the poore euery Lords day, or firſt day of the weeke, as a conſequent or concomitant fruite of other Sabbath-duties, as Preaching, Prayer, Sacraments, was (ſayth he) a conſtitution Apoſtolicke, and ſo of diuine authority; and therefore no meere humane inſtitution. And wee ſay, that the ground and cauſe hereof was Chriſts Reſurrection. So as it is a groſſe Solecime in Diuinity to admit an Inſtitution to be Apoſtolicke, & yet to denie it to be of diuine authority. Thus the firſt day of the weeke, the Lords day grew to be the day of holy aſſemblies for Chriſtians, from that firſt day of the weeke, wherein Chriſt roſe againe, and appeared to his Diſciples, as wee haue touched. And from this ſpring did the auncient Fathers deriue the ſanctification of this day, as by ſo many continued ſtreames of ſucceſſion. Saint Auguſtine ſayth, Dies Dominicus, &c. The Lords day was not to the Iewes, Aug: Ianuario Epis. 119. c 13. but to Chriſtians declared by Chriſts Reſurrection, and from that began to bee kept holy. And elſewhere Proepenitur dies Dominicus Sabbato, &c. The Lords day is preferred before the Sabbath, by the fayth of the Reſurrection, Aug. Ca ſulano Preſbytero Ep. 86. not by the faſhion of refection, or licentiouſnes of drunken mirth. And againe, Domini Reſurrectio, &c. The Lords reſurrection hath promiſed us an eternall day, and conſecrated to vs the Lords day; And Ambros, Dominica nobis &c. De verbis Apoſt ſer: 15- To vs the Lords day is ſo honourable and ſacred, becauſe in it the Sauiour, as the ſun ariſing, diſpelling infernall darkneſſe, hath ſhined forth in the light of his reſurrection. And for this cauſe, Ambros: ſer: 61: this day of the men of the world is called Sunday, becauſe Chriſt the Sunne of righteouſneſſe ariſing, did enlighten it. But what neede we ſeeke a cloud of witneſſes, of men, when we haue diuine Sarrs in Scriptures (though ſhining in a darke place, till the day did dawne) which may giue vs ſufficient light to direct vs to this day? For firſt it is apparent that the ſeauenth day which was commanded the Iſraelites of the old Teſtament to celebrate for the Sabbath, was giuen them in memoriall of their deliuerance from the Egyptian bondage, as we noted before out of Deu. 5, 15, And thus it was ceremoniall and ſubiect to be changed into another day, to wit, the Lords day, which ſhould ſucceede in memoriall of our Redemption and deliuerance from our ſpirituall bondage, whereof that corporall was a type, which Redemption and deliuerance was finiſhed in Chriſts Reſurrection; and therefore who ſhould haue power, but Chriſt, the Lord of the Sabbath, to change the Sabbath into the Lords day?

Againe, another remarkeable place we finde in Leu. 23.10, &c. where the ſheafe of the firſt fruits was to bee waued by the Prieſt before the Lord the day after the Sabbath. This ſheafe of the fruits was a pregnant type of Chriſts riſing againe,2 Cor: 15, 20. Leui: 23.11. the firſt fruits from the dead. This ſheafe was to bee waued the next day after the Sabbath, and not elſe. This was fulfilled in Chriſts reſurrection, wh • ch was the day after the Sabbath, and becauſe this Sabbath was chiefely ment of the Paſſeouer, which was a high Sabbath, to be ſure, it was a double Sabbath, (the Sabbath of the Paſſeouer concurring together) wherein Chriſt reſted in the graue. The very next morning was Chriſt, the firſt fruites, waued before the Lord, when in the Earthquake hee roſe from the dead the firſt fruites of them that ſleepe. This was the ſheafe of the firſt fruites, which was accepted for vs,Rom: 4, 25 Rom: 11.19. for he roſe againe for our iuſtification? And if the firſt fruites be holy, the lumpe is alſo holy. And the meate offring of this day was twice as much, as vpon any other day, euen two tenth deales; whereas the reſt had but one, which is a matter worthy of heedefull obſeruation. This typed and ſignifyed ſome thing extraordinary as touching this dayes oblation. And the offering was made by fire vnto the Lord for a ſauour of Reſt, as the Hebrew hath it. This prefigured the Reſt of this day of the ſheafe of firſt fruites, of Chriſts reſurrection. And this reſt had relation not onely to Chriſt, who now had finiſhed the worke of Redemption: but alſo to all the Redeemed. For from this very day of the ſheafe of firſt fruites, they were (Leuit. 23.15.16.) to reckon 7 Sabbaths or weekes compleate, which incluſiuely containeth 50 dayes, and ſo the ſeauenth firſt day of the weeke next after the Sabbath, they muſt offer a new meate offering vnto the Lord. This was the feaſt of Pentecoſt, which being fully come (Act. 2.) the Holy Ghoſt came downe viſibly vpon the Church, ſo fulfilling that typicall propheſie,Leuit. 23.17: or Propheticall type. And this meate offring of loaues, and the like, being called alſo a firſt fruites vnto the Lord, ſignifyed and prefigured that Firſt fruits of the Church of the new Teſtament, offered, conſecrated, and ſanctified vnto God that very day, wherein the Holy Ghoſt deſcended. For behold two waue loaues, moulded vp of ſo many graines, the one of the Iewes, the other of the Gentiles, both one offering, being a collection of all the Nations vnder Heauen, euen the Catholike Church repreſentatiue, were the firſt fruites vnto God, and vnto the Lambe, ſanctified in Chriſt the firſt fruites. Theſe are thoſe waue-loaues,Iſychius Praeſbyt, Hirroſol. in Leuit 23, Planius ergo Legiſlator ſuam demonſtran volens mentem ab altero die Sabbati numerari praecipit 50 dies, Dominicum Diem proculdubio volens intelligi. Hic enim eſt altera Dies Sabbati. that are holy to the Lord, for Chriſt eur High Prieſt: Leuit. 23.20. and this offering became a ſauour of reſt, v. 18. as wee ſhewed v. 13. noting ſtill the reſt of this day. So as this ſelfe ſame day is ſolemnely proclaimed to bee an holy Conuocation; Therein no ſeruile worke is to bee done: & this to ſtand as a ſtatute vnrepealable. Hereupon Iſychius ſaith: Therefore the Lawgiuer willing more plainely to expreſſe his minde, commanded them to reckon from the next day of the Sabbath 50 dayes, thereby willing without doubt the Lords day to be vnderſtood. For this is that next day after the Sabbath. For which cauſe (ſayth he) the Holy Ghoſt came not downe in any other day of the weeke, but in that day of the Reſurrection, wherein the ſheafe of firſt-fruits was waued before the Lord. Thus we ſee how the day of Chriſts Reſurrection, is made ſolemne and ſacred not onely by Chriſt himſelfe, but by the Holy Ghoſt ſent downe from heauen, ſanctifying this day for holy Conuocations, or publicke aſſemblies of Gods people for his publique ſeruice, and this to ſtand as a perpetuall ſtatute to the end of the world; hauing alſo euident and ample teſtimony from the Moſaicall Law, and thoſe Euangelicall types. whence we conclude with M. Perkins his argument, in his Caſes of conſcience, pag. 113. That which is prefigured, is preſcribed. But the Lords day was prefigured, Leuit. 23.10. therefore it is preſcribed and inſtituted of God.

A third place wee haue Pſal, 118.24: where the Prophet ſpeaking (v. 22.23) of Chriſts Reſurrection, he addeth, This is the day, which the Lord hath made, we will reioyce, and be glad in it. This is a plane Propheticall inſtitution of this day to bee ſolemnized vnder the new Teſtament. For firſt, the Lord hath made it, that is, appointed, and ſet it a part, by marking it out with a glorious worke. And ſecondly, it is ſo taken of the Church of God, who ſaith, We will reioyce and be glad in it, which ſheweth the feſtiuity, & gratefull ſolemnity of the Lords day. And although many take this day for the whole time under the Goſpell (as 2. Cor. 6.2:) yet none doe exclude or deny the particular acception of it for the Lords day. St. Ambroſe vnderſtands this to be the Lords day, the day of the Lords Reſurrection; which day (ſaith hee on Pſal: 47, Titneus) hath its holines from the Lords Reſurrection. What ſhall I ſay of Circumciſion, which was limited to the eighth day; loking vpon Chriſts Reſurrection, which was the eighth day; Circumciſion, being a ſinge of that hollines Chriſt brought vnto vs in the day of his Reſurrection, who roſe againe for our Iuſtification. But let this ſuffice. Thus hath the Lords day not onely reall inſtitution by Chriſt himſelfe, but alſo teſtimony from the Law and the Prophets. And thus, as Hugo ſaith, The fathers of the old Teſtament obſerued the ſeptenary number, or the ſeuenth of Dayes, Wekes Moneths: Yeares wee of the New, the octonary number, or the eight day, to wit the Lords day, for the reuerence of the Lords reſurrection, and of the ſending of the Holy Ghoſt, Hugo in Pſal. 1 • 9.

Ob. But here it is obiected, that the Lords day hath noe diuine inſtitution, but meerely an hamane and Eccleſiaſticall. For elſe how came it to bee inſtituted by Conſtantine the Great, who made a Law, and preſcribed limits for the keeping of it? The like alſo did other Emperours, Princes, and States, Councels, and Synods in ſeuerall ages.

Anſw. This is no good argument, that becauſe pious Princes make Lawes for the keeping of the Lords day, therfore it is not of diuine inſtitution. For ſo good Princes make Lawes againſt Adultery, &c. Therfore the forbidding of theſe ſinnes is it not of diuine inſtitution? King Darius makes a decree, that in euery Nation of his Kingdome men tremble before the God of Daniell, &c. therefore is not this Law of diuine inſtitutiō: Thou ſhalt worſbip the Lord thy God, and him onely ſhalt thou ſerue? And becauſe Tyberius Caeſar would haue the Romane Senate paſſe a Decree for the deifying of Chriſt, or ranking him among their Gods, therefor Chriſt was not God? whereupon ſayth Tertullian, Ergo niſi homini placucurit, Deus non erit Deus: therefore if it doe not pleaſe man, God ſhall not be God.

But it became Chriſtian Princes, when they ſaw how ſubiect the Lords day was to bee profaned with all licenciouſneſſe, and how prone carnall men were to leape ouer all the bankes and bounds, which God had ſet to keepe them in: for to helpe to make vp the breaches againe, and to ſtrengthen the diuine ordinance by their humane and penall conſtitutions, as wee ſee our noble Kings of England haue done, by name, our pious King Charles, whoſe raigne hath bene honoured with a religious Law for the better keeping of the Lords day, if lawes were as well kept, as they haue bene wiſely, piouſly, and iuſtly enacted by our Progenitors.

Yet becauſe, notwithſtanding all Lawes, diuine and humane, this holy day of the Lord is for the generality of men little regarded, as not requiring the like ſanctification of vs, which the Sabbath did of the Iewes: let vs further ſhew what a reuerend eſteeme the ancient holy men in former ages had, and what pious rules they gaue, concerning the religious keeping of this day. Wee haue noted ſome of their excellent ſayings a little before: wee will adde a few more. And firſt wee obſerue, that they euer did vſe to call the Lords day, by the name of the Sabbath, Obſeruamus ſabbatum, Aug, Contra Adamantum. c. 15 hoc eſt Dominicam, in ſignum nempe aeterni ſabbati: We obſerue the Sabbath, that is the Lords day, for a ſigne of the eternall Sabbath. The ſame Auguſtine in his 95 ſermon de Tempore, ſayth, They which in the obſeruation of the Sabbath, doe not apply themſelues to good works and prayer, which is to ſanctifie the Sabbath, (and ſanctification is where the Holy Ghoſt is) are like to the ſmall flies bred of the mud, which diſquieted the Egyptians. And elſewhere (vpon thoſe words,Aug de Conſeuſu Euang. lib: 1. c. 77. Math. 24.20) Pray that your ſlight be not in the winter, nor on the Sabbath day, hee ſayth, by winter is ſignified the cares of this life, and by the Sabbath gluttony and drunkenneſſe; which euil is therefore ſignifyed by the name of Sabbath, becauſe this was, as now it is, the wicked cuſtome of the Iewes on that day to ſwimme in delicacies, while they are ignorant of the ſpirituall Sabbath, For the Iewes doe ſeruilely obſerue the Sabbath day vnto ryotouſneſſe. and drunkenneſſe. How much better were it for their women to ſpin, then on that day to daunce. And thus while they carnally kept the Sabbath, they knew it not, ſayth hee. And Melius tota die foderent, &c. The men were better to digg all that day, then to tread is out in daunces and meaſures, Againe, the Sabbath (to wit, the Lords day) is more commaunded vs, then the Iewes. They celebrate the Sabbath ſeruilely, but we ſpiritually? And how ſpiritualy not in chambering & wantonneſſe, not in gluttony & drūkenneſſe. For theſe are forbidden Chriſtians any day, much more on the Lords day, For it were better to plough & harrow, to ſpin & card wooll, which in themſelues are lawfull, then to doe thoſe things on the Sabbath or Lords day, which chriſtians ſhould bluſh at, and be aſhamed of to do at any time, as to dance, to reuell, to heare playes, to goe to masking and mumning, and the like, which are exerciſes fitter for heathen, then chriſtians, for Bacchanalls, then ſuch as celebrate the Lords Feſtiuall. How then is this day of the Lords to be kept? Neyther as the Eneratites, Aeriancs, and Aerians, who faſted all the Lords day but madly reueld on other feſtiuals. Theſe are extreames and therefore to bee auoyded. How then? As the chriſtians did in Iuſtin Martyrs dayes of old, who ſayth, Die ſolis, &c. On the Sunday, or Lords day, Iuſtin Martyr Apol. 2. are the chriſtians aſſemblies of Citizens and Countrmen, where the writings of the Apoſtles and Prophets are firſt reade; then when the Reader hath done, the Maſter of the aſſembly the chiefe Miniſter vſeth words of exortation, his inuiting them to the imitation of things honeſt. The richer ſorte, who are willing, do contribute to the reliefe of the poorer, euery man according to his mind and meanes, and the Collecta, or collections are depoſited with the chiefe Miniſter; he therewith ſuccoureth the Orphans and poore &c. This is that day, wherein God created the world, and Chriſt roſe againe from the dead. So hee. And Saint Chriſoſtom vpon the Apoſtles words, 1 Cor. 16.1, Behold (ſayth he) How fitly the Apoſtle rayſeth his exhortation from the conſideration of this day of the weeke, as being the fitteſt day, wherin to exhort vnto almes; as if the Apoſtle had ſayd, Remember what things yee haue obtained this day, vnutterable good things, yea the very roote and ſpring of our life ſtands in it. Not that it is a fit day onely for giuing of almes, but that it hath a reſt, and is free from worldly affaires, and the mind being vacant from moleſtations is the apter & more inclinable to mercy, and it brings with it a great efficacy in the vſe of the celeſtiall Ordinances. And Saint Auguſtine: Omni Die Dominico, &c. Euery Lords day come to the Church, and ſpend not the day in pleading, and brabbles, and idle chat, but with ſilence hearken to the word of God, and pray for the peace of the Church, and for the pardon of your ſinnes, &c. And Bernard ſayth. out of Eſay. 58.13. He calleth the Sabbath (ſayth hee) not onely a delight, but he addeth, holy and gloryous to the Lord. Nor let the Sabbath ſlipt away with ſloth, but in thy Sabbath worke the workes of God. And in the Synodal Epiſtle of the ſecond ſynod of Matiſcon, wee haue theſe words: Cuſtodite Diem Dominicum, &c. Keepe the Lords day, which hath a new brought you forth, and hath freed you from all ſinnes; as being that day wherein Chriſt roſe for our iuſtification. Let none of you bee vacant to miniſter fewell for ſuites in Law, let none plead cauſes, let none draw vpon himſelfe ſuch a neceſſity, as to compell the cattell to beare the yoake.. Be all of you taken vp with hymmes in prayſing of God, being content in minde and body. Let euery one haſten to the next Church, & their humble himſelfe on the Lords day with prayers and teares. Let your eyes and hands be all that day open to God. For that is a perpetual day of reſt, that is made knowne in the law & the Prophets, being inſinuated vnto vs by the ſhadow of the ſeauenth day. Iuſt it is therefore that wee doe vnanimouſly celebrate this day, by which wee are made that which before wee were not. Let vs performe to the Lord a free ſeruice, &c. Not that the Lord requires of vs, that wee ſhould celebrate the Lords day with bodily abſtinence; but hee requireth our obedience, by which, trampling all terrene actions vnder our feete, hee may mercifully lift vs vp euen vnto Heauen. If therefore any of you ſhall ſlight or contemne this our wholeſome exhortation, let him know that for the quality of his demerit hee ſhall bee puniſhed of the Lord, and henceforth implacably vnder the ſacerdotall indignation. If hee bee a Lawyer, hee ſhall bee diſmiſſed of his pleading without recouery; if a Countryman or ſeruant, hee ſhall bee ſore beaten with clubs: if a Clearke, or ſo, hee ſhall bee ſuſpended ſix months from his Fraternity, &c. And in the Councell of Dingelfing On the Lords day let men bee vacant for diuine reſt, and abſtayne from worldly and profane buſineſſe. Hee that this day ſhall doe any worke about the Cart, or otherwiſe, let his oxen bee confiſcate. If he ſhall proceed on obſtinately, let him be made a bondſlaue. And Charles the great in his conſtitutions forbiddeth markets to be kept any where on the Lords day; nor any ſeruile workes to be done therein. We might bee infinite in ſuch like inſtances of pious conſtitutions for the ſolemne and ſacred keeping of the Lords day; but let theſe ſuffice by the way.

Onely one thing remaines to bee reſolued, whether the fourth Commandement reach vnto ſeruants, as well as vnto Maſters of Families, ſome would reſtraine the Commandement onely to Maſters excluding ſeruants thus farr, that in caſe a Maſter command his ſeruant any ſervill worke on the Sabbath, or Lords day, the ſeruant therein obeying his Maſter, is not anſwerable to God, as a trangreſſour of Gods Commandement, but his Maſter onely is in the tranſgreſſion for ſo commanding. This is a ſtrange piece of Logicke: A Maſter in commanding his ſeruant tranſgreſſeth Gods Commandement: and yet the ſeruant obeying his Maſter therein, tranſgreſſeth not. Doth not the caſe hold a like in other relations, as betweene Prince and ſubiect, ſpirituall Paſtours and People? yes ſay they. But how? Thus: God (ſay they) hath commanded all men to honour their Parents, & the Parents of their Country ſtands in the firſt, ranke-True who denies it? But what followes there vpon? This, ſay they: The Sonne of God hath commanded all Chriſtians to heare the Church, and vnder forfeiture of communion of Saints; but they that deny the Canons of the Church, or Edict of the Prince, heare not the one, honour not the other: therefore they that tranſgreſſe eyther of theſe Conſtitutions, tranſgreſſe alſo conſequently, though not immediately, the commandements of God, yet neyther of both are tranſgreſſed by ſeruants, if they worke by their Maſters commiſſion, and not of their owne electon; for neyther doth the one Law, or the other, neyther the Canons of the Church, nor Edicts of Princes giue liberty and warrant to ſeruants to bee rebellious to their Maſters touching poynt of ſeruice that day, more then others. To this purpoſe they argue, that deny the keeping of the Lords day to haue any dependance vpon the morality of the fourth Commandement. Here be prege reaſons, which would not lightly be paſſed ouer. Therefore a little to examine the mettle of theſe mens reaſons: firſt we muſt remember, that not only on the Lords day; ſeruants obying their Maſters, in deoing ſeruile worke therein, are guiltles (for ſo they haue euation for it, by denying the Lords day to bee of diuine inſtitution, and reſt therein to be any morall duty) but they deny alſo, that the fourth Commandement did binde any Iewes, but onely Maſters of familyes, and not thoſe vnder them. For (ſay they) the Commandement was giuen onely to maſters, and not to ſeruants ſtanding in relation to their maſters, in caſe they ſhould impuſote any ſeruile labour vpon them. It is true the Commandement was giuen principally and immediately to maſters, that not onely themſelues ſhould keepe it, but they ſhould looke their whole family kept it. Yet in caſe the Maſter ſhould neglect his duty herein, and inſtead of commanding his family to keepe the Sabbath, ſhould inioyne them ſeruile worke: doth not the Commandement take hold of the ſeruant? What? Is the ſeruant an Aſſe, or ſott, to yeald blinde obedience to his maſter commanding againſt God? Or is he ſuch a ſlaue, as hee hath not a ſoule to anſwere for to God, as well as his maſter? Or being his Maſters ſeruant, is hee thereby, exempted from being Gods ſeruant? ſayth not the Apoſtle, Hee that is called in the Lord being a ſeruant, is the Lords freeman? Likewiſe alſo hee that it called being free, is Chriſts ſeruant? Indeede the Maſters ſin is double, not onely in permitting, and communing but compelling, or commanding his ſeruant to worke, when God commands to reſt: but yet the ſeruant obeying his maſter herein vniuſtly commanding, committes a ſingle ſin at leaſt againſt God, if not alſo double, while he preferreth his earthly, maſters Commandement, before his heauenly maſters. But this (ſay they) is Petitio Principij, if Gods Commandement reach not to ſeruants. But we ſhew it doth, if ſeruants be not vnreaſonable beaſts, or blinde Aſſes. Nor ought the Maſters Commandement to bee of force, yea it hath a meere nullity, if it bee contrary to Gods expreſſe Commandement. So that in ſuch a caſe for a ſeruant to obey his Maſter, is againſt and aboue God to ſet vp an Idoll, which is nothing in the world, and ſuch ſeruants ſlauiſhly obſeruing Sabbatum Aſinorum the Sabbath of Aſſes, do iuſtly deſerue the whip for the Aſſes backe: or that cenſure forementioned in the ſecond ſynod of Matiſcon, If a ſeruant or ruſticke doe breake the Sabbath, let him be ſoundly dry baſted with clubs. But (ſay they) the ſonne of God hath commanded all chriſtians to heare the Church, not to deſpiſe hir Canons, or Princes Edicts.

True. But is Chriſts command abſolute, and without limitation, namely to obey Superiours actiuely, whatſoeuer they command right or wrong, for or againſt God? what if the Canons of the Church doe by mans Traditions diſanull the Commandement of God, as of old the Iewiſh Synagogue, and of latter times the Romiſh? Are ſuch Canons to be obeyed againſt Gods expreſſe Commandement? If the Phariſees and chiefe Prieſts make a Canon to puniſh with Excommunication, or Suſpention, thoſe that ſhall confeſſe Chriſt, or profeſſe or preach his truth and fayth frely & faithfully: is it not diſobedience to God herein to obey them, and through ſlauiſh feare rather to renounce Chriſt, then not ſubmit to ſuch wicked Canons.

The Iewes Corban freed Children fom honouring their Parents: and doe not they as well make voyd Gods Commandement, who in binding ſeruants to obey their maſters commanding againſt Gods Commandement, doe thereby free them from Gods Commandement? And for Princes Edicts we all reuerence, and willingly imbrace and obey them. But without limitation? what if they command againſt God? what if they ſhall forbid by publicke Edict the free preaching of the word of God in any part of it, as ſuch and ſuch points of fayth and ſaluation not to bee handled, ſuch and ſuch hereſies not to bee medled with by way of confutation? Are we not to anſwere in ſuch a caſe, as the Apoſtle did, Whether it be meete in the ſight of God to obey you, rather than God, iudge you; for we cannot but ſpeake the thinges wbich we haue ſeene and heard? And Peter tels the Rulers boldly and plainely, Wee ought rather to obey God, then men. What? becauſe Nebuchadnezzer erected his Image, and commanded all to worſhip it, and forbad to pray to any God, but to the King onely, for thirty dayes: muſt this Edict therefore bee obeyed? Noe ſurely. And why? Becauſe it was againſt God; and therefore it ought to haue beene of no force to exact obedience of any. But what (will you ſay?) Muſt we be rebels, in diſobeying our ſuperiours? No, it is one thing not obey, & another to bee rebellious; ſuperiours ought not to bee obeyed, if they command againſt God; Yet this is no rebellion, where men are ready to yeald paſſiue obedience to their vniuſt cruelty, by not reſiſting it, though they derect and deny actiue obedience to their vniuſt commands. Thus Daniel, thus the three Children did; the one deſires rather to bee caſt into the Lyons denne, the other into the hott fiery fornace, then to diſhonour God, by bowing to the Kings Image. Thus all Gods true bred children haue, and will doe; they neyther dare obey vniuſt command contrary to Gods word, and a good conſcience; nor yet rebelliouſly reſiſt vniuſt punniſhments; in both which they obey God.

But enough of this poynt, at leaſt in this place, where we haue as it were by the way occaſionally met with it, not purpoſely minded throughly to handle it, but onely as a branch of that morality of the Law of God, the whole bulke and body whereof is hewed at by the Antinomians, to cut it downe by the very rootes.

Onely let vs adde here a few reaſons and motiues,Reaſons why the Lords day is to bee ſanctfied. the more to ſtrengthen, and prouoke vs to the more diligent obſeruation of this great holy day of the Lord. One reaſon may bee taken from the compariſon betweene chriſtians vnder the new Teſtament, and the Iewes vnder the Old.

How exactly were the Iewes bound to keepe the Sabbath, as a memoriall of their deliuerance from Egypt, in token of their perpetuall thankefulneſſe? How much more then are we thus bound to ſanctifie the Lords day, in a perpetuall thankefull remembrance of our ſpirituall deliuerance from the bondage of ſin, ſathan, and hell, ouer which Chriſt triumphed manifeſtly in the day of his Reſurrection? Secondly,Exod: 31.16.17. as the Sabbath day was giuen to the Iewes as a ſigne and meanes of their ſanctification. So the Lords day in the due ſanctifying of it in the vſe of the meanes is a pregnant occaſion of our ſanctification, and that not only in regard of the ſame Ordinances attending vpon it, but as it is a perpetuall memoriall of Chriſts Reſurrection and in the faith and fact whereof is begun here not onely our ſanctification, but alſo our glorification and eternall Sabbath.

Ob. But if the Eternall Sabbath began in Chriſts Reſurrection, then what further vſe is there of a ſeauenth day weekely to keepe Sabbath in? Euery day now, yea our whole life time is a Sabbath vnto vs; therefore to keepe a ſeauenth day ſtill, is againſt the nature of the eternall Sabbath hath begun in Chriſts Reſurrection. And thus to keepe a ſeauenth ſtill is to goe backe to the Iewiſh ceremony againe, which is aboliſhed in Chriſts Reſurrection.

Anſw. Though the Eternall Sabbath began in Chriſts Reſurrection, and is now eternally kept of Chriſt and of the Church triumphant: yet during the time of this life, which is meaſured by times and dayes, and in regard of the many corporall neceſſitys of it muſt bee maintained by the labours of euery mans particular calling in which regard the externall condition of chriſtians differeth not from that of Gods people in the former Teſtament: our ſolemne keeping of the Sabbath is no leſſe limited to certaine circumſtances of time, as one day of ſeauen, then theirs was. Nor is this a complying with Iewiſh ceremonies againe. For their Sabbath was in part typicall: but ours is now the true eternall Sabbath, kept of chriſtians according to Chriſts owne Ordinance, attempering it to the condition of our preſent neceſſity, who muſt as well worke for the good of our bodies,Exod: 31.13.7. as ſolemnely reſt for our ſoules good. And therefore Chriſts wiſedome, being the ſame with his Fathers and his owne in the firſt inſtitution of a ſeauenth day keeps ſtill the ſame proportion, not altering the Commandement which ſayth, Six dayes ſhalt thou labour, Only he hath altered the day becauſe the typicall Sabbath muſt giue place to the true and eternall Sabbath which we now ſolemnly keepe on the firſt day, of the weeke, as it were the firſt fruites of our eternall Sabbatiſme, in heauen with Chriſt, though our whole life otherwiſe is the true Sabbatiſme begun.

Againe it is the market day of our ſoules, wherein wee come to Gods houſe the market place,Eſay 55.2: to buy the Wine and Milke of the word without money, or money worth.

How is that? By hearing and harekning to Gods word, that truth whereby wee are ſanctified, Iohn. 17.17. and to pray vnto him; thus by the Word and Prayer weare ſanctified. Eſay. 55.32: Harken diligently to me, and eate that which is good, and let your ſoule delight it ſelfe in fatnes; Incline your eares, and come vnto me, & heare, & your ſoule ſhall liue, & I will make an euerlaſting couenant with you, euen the ſure mercies of Dauid. Loe, the ſanctifying of the Sabbath, or Lords day in a diligent vſe of Gods Ordinances, is the meanes whereby the mercies of Dauid are made ſure vnto vs. And it is remarkeable, how the Holy Ghoſt doth poynt out Chriſts Reſurrection, by alledging and applying this place of the Prophet, Act. 13.34. as thereby not obſcurely inſinuating the ſanctification of the day of the Lords reſurrection by a diligent harkning to the word of God, and reuerend vvſing of other diuine Ordinances & duties of that day. And were it not, that the Lords day did ſucceede in place of the Sabbath, the Sabbath day of the Iewes being aboliſhed: what time for the meanes of our ſanctification & ſaluation were left vnto vs? were it not for the Lords day, we ſhould bee in a far worſe caſe, then the Iewes of old, as being left without opportunity & meanes of ſanctification, all which the Lords day miniſtreth vnto vs; without this, wee ſhould haue no market day for our ſpirituall prouiſion, & merchandize of our ſoules, wherein to buy the pearle of the kingdome, and to ſupply all our ſpirituall wants. And therefore the not well imploying and improuing our prouidence and diligence vpon this market day, doth expoſe vs to that cenſure, Why ſtand ye idle in the market place all the day long? Such are they, that eyther idle or trifle out the Lords day impertinently, or ſuch as prophane it with carnall pleaſures, as feaſting and banketing (a too common abuſe eſpecially among our greater Citizens) alſo reuelling and ryoting, playes and enterludes, idle chat and communication, dicing, carding, & many ſuch vnchriſtianlike prophane paſtimes, which Chriſtians ſhould beware of & avoid all the dayes of the weeke, yea all the dayes of their life, much more on the Lords day, wherein the foot of our carnall affections ſhould be turned away from doing our pleaſure on the Lords holy day, calling the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord honourably, honouring him, not doing our owne wayes, nor finding of our own pleaſure, nor ſpeaking our own words. This is to delight our ſelues in the Lord, and ſo ſhall he cauſe vs to ride vpon the high places of the Earth, & feede vs with the heritage of Iacob; for the mouth of the Lord hath ſpoken it.

Otherwiſe, if the due ſanctification of this day be neglected, farewell all true chriſtianity. If the ſpirituall prouiſion of this day be not carefully lookt after, and brought in, and locked vp, and fitly diſpoſed and diſtributed for all the weeke, we ſhall with the Prodigall bring our ſoules to feed one empty huskes. And for men to heare the word that day, and when they haue done, to goe home, and not ruminate and conferre of it, but to ſpend the reſt of this day in idle, or godleſſe exerciſes: what is this, but as if a man ſhould buy prouiſion at the market to ſerue himſelfe and his family, all the weeke, and goe preſently the ſame day, and calling idle companions together, ſpend and ſquander all vpon them at one ſitting, and ſo come empty home? What ſhall we ſay then of the Papiſts, that allow of their profaine markets this day, and for ſpirituall commodities they haue none, but ſuch as are painted, or giue an empty ſound, as their long Latine Matiens and Maſſes, whereby they haue quite ſhouldered out the preaching of the word of God; a faire pretence by long prayers to keep out preaching, that ſcarce Sermons may take place in the forenoone, muchleſſe any at all in the afternoone, leaſt there ſhould not bee time enough to make vp a Sabbath for Sathan, which they conſecrate to him in all kind of exorbitances and profuſe carnality; that ſoe they may be vacant for theaters, and dancing as Aug, ſpeaks; or for Cards, Tables and reuelings, as Leo ſpeakes, which is to keep the Sabbath of the golden Aſſe, as Aug. cals it, yea Sabbatum Satana, Satans Sabbath, for if it be not lawfull to doe the workes of our calling, which on the ſixe dayes are lawfull: With what warrant can we do thoſe things, which are ſinfull, and therefore on noe day lawfull, as not comming within the compaſſe of any Calling at all? And if wee do any thing, to which wee haue not a lawfull calling, we are out of Gods Protection, according to that Pſ. 91.11. who cōmands his Angels to keepe his Saints in all their lawfull wayes: but if men goe aſtray in the by paths of carnall and vnchriſtian courſes, then Gods Angell is as ready with his ſword drawn to cut them off; as Ex. 4.24. Num. 22.23.

A third reaſon and motiue to ſtirre vs vp to the more carefull and diligent ſanctification of the Lords day, may bee taken from the evill fruits and conſequents, which we ſee do grow from the neglect thereof. For it is eaſie to obſerue, and it is an obſeruation infallible, that where the greateſt profanation of the Lords day raigneth, there all kinde of iniquity and impiety doth moſt abound among ſuch a people. Now where is this profanation greater, then when Prayer, together with the powerfull Miniſtery and preaching of the word, and adminiſtration of the Sacraments are moſt neglected, and ſcanted? what maruell then, if in ſuch places, where the bankes of the publike Ordinances, together with the fruite thereof, to wit priuate familie-duties are wanting an vniuerſall deluge of all licentiouſnes doe not ouerflow al? whereas on the contrary, where the Lords day is moſt duely and dutifully obſerued and ſanctified in a conſcionable frequenting the holy aſſemblies in publick prayer, hearing the word faythfully preached, the Sacraments duely adminiſtred, and the like: there is not onely a- beautifull face, but a ſound body of religion to bee ſeene. Eſpecially where a good Miniſtry and Magiſtracy are the ioynt pillars of the Corporation. So as from the right ſanctification of the Lords day doth ſpring all holynes, and power of religion, where by God is honoured, the commonwealth it ſelfe is made glorious, as being eſtabliſhed and combined with the moſt firme bonds of pure religion, the Crowne and ſecurity of Kings and Kingdomes.

I might hereunto adde many more motiues, which though they bee neceſſary for theſe licentious times (if as well the remedies could bee indured, as the maladies cannot) yet I forbeare at this time, as not ſo ſutable to this ſhort diſcourſe, wherein I feare already I haue bene too tedious; though occaſioned, if not rather inforced by the inportunate Antinomians, the enemyes of all true piety.

But to ſhut vp all in a word, let mee here giue the Reader one ſummary view of their abſurd and impious Tenets.

Poſitions, that the Antinomians and ſuch like Libertines and ſectaries hold with their vſuall euaſions and diſtinctions.

THeſe Antinomians teach, that God ſees no ſin in his iuſtified Children, and though he know ſin to be in them, yet he ſees it not; thus making God like to a blinde man, who ſeeth not thoſe thinges, which he knoweth. And where wee obiect, God ſees ſin in his iuſtified Children, for hee reproues, and corrects them for it: they anſwere, that particular congregations conſiſt of a mixed multitude, ſome belieuers, ſome not, and vpon the vnbelieuers onely are the corrections and reproofes, and not on the other. And when tis obiected, God ſaw ſin, reproued and corrected it in Dauid a belieuer in Chriſt, who ſayth Pſa. 69.5. Thou knoweſt my fooliſhneſſe, and my ſins are not hid from thee: they anſwere with mayntaining that the iuſtification of the Saints before Chriſts death, and ſince, is not alike, but becauſe there is great difference in the manifestation, to them before, and vs now: therefore there is a difference in their iuſtifying. God did ſee ſin thorough the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt imputed vnto Dauid, but not through that which was imputed to Paul. ſo they.

Obiect. But Paul himſelfe prooueth, that the iuſtification of all the Saints, both before and ſince Chriſts death, is alike. But this they will not allow of, but ſtill will haue euaſions. Ob. But he ſees their Sinnes daily, becauſe dayly hee commands them to pray for pardon. To this they anſwere that that Petition is to be ſayed eyther onely for modeſtie, or elſe for the further manifeſtation of their iuſtification, Ob. But doth iuſtification aboliſh Sin cleane out of a belieuer? No, for then we ſhould lye, 1 Ioh. 1.8, 10. Ob. But do you ſee ſin in you, and doth not God ſee it? No God ſees it not, for hee lookes vpon vs onely in the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt; in that greene glaſſe all he lookes on in it, is greene. And to this purpoſe they miſapplie many ſpeeches out of Luther on 〈◊〉 and others. Ob. But we are indeede perfectly iuſtified, but not perfectly ſanctified in this life: becauſe the righteouſneſſe whereby we are iuſtified is Perfect, inherent in Chriſt, and onely imputed vnto vs; but our ſanctification is from Chriſt, and inherent in vs, not perfect in this life, but ſtill imperfect. For that they anſwere, firſt, that the Scripture ſpeaking of ſanctification, meaneth it in a large ſenſe, comprehending iuſtification vnder it; and ſo they will not admit, or very hardly, of that diſtinction betwixt iuſtification, and ſanctification, but iumble them together. And ſecondly they ſay, that a belieuer, is as perfect here, as euer hee ſhall bee hereafter, but onely in regard of manifeſtation, and to that purpoſe they alledge this text, Becauſe as he is, ſo are wee in this world. Ioh. 4.17.

Ob. But the Scripture euery where excites vs to grow in ſanctification, and the more wee grow therein, the more aſſurance wee haue of our iuſtification. But this they deny, for they will not haue our ſanctification to prooue our iuſtification, but that muſt bee manifeſt vnto vs onely by fayth.

Ob. But ought not a belieuer to walke in an holy courſe of life? That word,One of the • writ in a lett • to an orthodo • Miniſter, It is vayne babling when men are caſt downe to rayſe them by duties, and fl • daubing, to bu •• men on doeings though duties dyed in the blood of Chriſt Then Paul was a babbler in deed a • the Athenians called him, who thus raiſed by duties: as Heb. 12.12.13.14 Then Peter was a daw who built by duties, 2 Pet. 15: to 15 we accordingly teach duties but diſclame merits, as Chriſt teacheth vs Luc: 17.10 he there commendeth duties but condemneth merits; So wee. ought, they cannot brooke, but they ſay that he cannot but walke in an holy life.

Ob. But what then is the rule of that holy life?

Anſw The matter of the Law, ſay they, but not the Law, as it is a Law; for they are not vnder the Law; but vnder grace, and the Law is not giuen to a righteous man 1 Tim. 1.9. The Law of loue onely now ſetteth them a worke to walke in an holy life, for they are free now, not onely from the curſe of the Law but alſo from it, as it is a command, or rule of life.

And therefore they ſay, They muſt bee farre from any thought of diſpleaſing God at all by any thing they faile in; So as they muſt take heede of being caſt downe for any failings. Flat contrary both to the Apoſtles precept, and to the Corinthians practiſe, 1 Cor. 5.1, 2.3.4.5. and 2 Cor. 7.9, 10, 11.

Againe: Neyther (ſay they) muſt we thinke of •• a • ſi •• God at all in whole, or in part, by any thing at 〈…〉 ſet vp a calfe of our owne works to dance abou • 〈…〉 like is their Rhetoricke, whereby they pe •• 〈…〉 poſe vpon their Simple Diſciples, who are like Reeds eaſily ſhaken with euery wind of nouell doctrines, ſuch as tend to carnall liberty, & to poſſeſſe the ſoule with ſpirituall pride. But the Scriptures do not ſo teach vs Chriſt. Read 1. Theſ. 4.1. Col. 1.10. 1 Cor. 7.22. Heb. 12.5. o • ha • 〈◊〉 which our pleaſing of God (there commended) by weldoing, the fruite of a liuely fayth is not meant of pleaſing by way of ſatiſfaction, for ſo Chriſt onely pleaſed God: but of acceptation in and through Chriſt. But if we ſhall once bee poſſeſſed with this conceit, that neyther our Sins diſpleaſe God, no • our beſt ſanctified actions do pleaſe him; what ſhall 〈…〉 and falſe fleſh to become eyther as ſenſeleſſe, ſtockes and ſtones, or as ſenſuall beaſtes: putting no difference, not 〈◊〉 conſcience of good and euill, when (I ſay) wee 〈◊〉 per •• aded, that neyther our beſt actions pleaſe God 〈…〉 worſt diſpleaſe him? This is right Stoicall doctrine, to bee 〈◊〉 with nothing at all, to repent of nothing, and 〈…〉 •••• rence betweene the ••• ling of a coc •• and of 〈…〉 •• ctrine which nature it ſelfe abhorr 〈…〉 • o Orat ••• condemnes. The ſecond ſuch lik • 〈…〉 that they hold. And who 〈…〉 ſame, they •••• me and 〈…〉 th • dead fayth.

FINIS.