those his messengers as preach peace yet me thinks it argues great blindnesse in those men who plead for a morality in a tenth pigge or sheaf of corn and yet will acknowledge no morality in a Seventh day Thesis 207. I shall therefore conclude and shut up these things with answer to M. Carpenters and Heylins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an argument against the Sabbath which they have gone compassing the whole earth and heavens about to finde out never heard of till their daies and now it 's brought to light I would not make mirth with it as some have done and left the scruple untoucht but in words of sobriety and seriousnesse and plainnesse If the Sabbath or Lords day say they be morall then the morall Law is subject to manifold mutation because the nations issuing out of Noahs ark spread themelves from thence over the face of the whole earth some farther some at a shorter distance whereby changing the longitude with their habitation they must of necessity alter the differences of times neither can any exactly and precisely observe any one day either as it was appointed by Moses or as it was instituted by Christs Apostles afterwards by reason of the manifold transportation of Colonies and transmigration of nations from one region into another whereby the times must necessarily be supposed to vary The answer is ready and easie viz. Although the nations issued out of Noahs ark and spread themselves over the face of the whole earth some farther some at a shorter distance and thereby changing their longitude altered the differences of time some beginning the day sooner some later yet they might observe the same day for the day is regulated and measured by the Sun and the Sun comes to one meridian sooner or later then to another and hence the day begins in one place sooner or later then in another and so the beginning of the day is respectively varied but yet the day it self remains unchangeably the same what though our countreymen in old England begin their Sabbath above 4. hours before us in new they beginning at their evening we at our evening yet both may and do observe the same day all nations are bound to keep holy a Seventh part of time but that time must be regulated by the Sun neither is it necessary that the same individuall 24. hours should be observed by all but the same day as it is measured by the Sun in this or that place which may begin in places more easterly many hours sooner then in other places more westerly a day is not properly time but a measure of time and therefore the manifold transportation of Colonies and transmigration of nations from one region unto another hinder not at all but that they may exactly and precisely observe the same day which was instituted and appointed for although the time of the beginning of the day be varied yet the day it self is not cannot be varied or changed Now whereas they say that if any man should travell the world about a whole day must needs be varied and if two men from the same place travell the one Eastward the other Westward round about the earth and meet in the same place again they shall finde that he who hath gone Eastward hath gotten and the other going Westward hath lost a day in their account yea the Hollanders after their discovery of Fretum de Mayre comming home to their countrey found by comparing their accounts with thtir countreymen at home that they had lost a day having gone Westward and so compassed the earth round I answet what though a traveller varying perpetually the quantity of the day by reason of his continuall moving with or against the Suns motion in time get or loose a day in his account is the day therefore of it's own nature variable or changeable God hath placed the Sun in the Firmament and appointed it for times and seasons and in speciall for the regulating of the day and as the motion of the Sun is constant so there is an ordinary and constant succession of daies without variation for unlesse the Suns course be changed the day which is regulated by it is not changed Now if any shall travell round about the world and so anticipate or second the diurnall motion of the Sun and thereby varying continually the quantity of the day at length gain or loose a day according to their reckoning they may and ought then to correct their accounts Gregory the 13. having found the Julian year to be too great for the Motion of the Sun cut off ten daies by which the AEquinoxes and Solstices had anticipated their proper places that so the year might be kept at it's right periods and is it not as good reason that a traveller who opposing the Suns diurnall course continually shortens somewhat of his day till at last in compassing the earth round he gains a whole day should cut off in his accounts that day which he hath gained by anticipating the Suns course and so rectifie his account of the day For in every region and countrey whatsoever and howsoever situate as men are to begin the day at that time when the day naturally begins in that place so likewise they are to reckon and count the daies as they are there regulated and ordered by the Sun and that should be the first or second day of the week to them which is naturally the first or second day of the week to that place where they are and thus their doubts are easily satisfied when they return to the place from whence they first came But if any shall say it 's very difficult for men thus to rectifie their accounts and to observe that time in every place which was at first instituted and it 's probable that the nations in their severall transmigrations and transportations never used any such course The answer is obvious mens weaknesse or neglect and carelessenesse to do what they ought is not a sufficient argument to prove that not to be their duty besides 't is not probable that any nations were thus put to it to travell round about the whole earth although some particular persons in this later age have sailed round about it and therefore could not vary a whole day possibly but going some Eastward some Westward some Southward some Northward they spread themselves over the face of the whole earth some at a shorter some at a farther distance and so some began the day sooner some later and yet all as hath been shewn might observe the same day the morality of the Sabhath is not built upon Astronomicall or Geometricall principles and therefore it cannot fall by any shady speculations so far fetcht Here ends the Morality of the fourth Commandment The Change of the Sabbath follows THE CHANGE OF THE SABBATH Wherein the true Grounds of the Change of the Day are plainly opened Sundry Scriptures also usually alledged for this Change are more fully cleared and vindicated from
these things because commanded let him then quit himselfe from hypocrisie and himselfe from being a deep hypocrite in all these if he can Surely those who straine at this gnat viz. not to doe a duty because commanded will make no bones of swallowing down this camell viz. not to forsake sinne because 't is forbidden and whosoever shall forsake sinne from any other ground shewes manifestly hereby that hee hath little conscience of Gods command I know the love of Christ should make a Christian forsake every sin but the last resolution and reason thereof is because his love forbids us to continue in sinne for to act by vertue of a command is not to act onely as a creature to God considered as a Creator but by vertue of the will and commandment of God in a Redeemer with whom a Beleever hath now to doe Thesis 101. To act therefore by vertue of a command and by vertue of Christs Spirit are subordinate one to another not opposite one against anotherâ— as these men carry it This caution being ever remembred that such acting bee not to make our selves just but because we are already just in Christ not that hereby wee might get life but because we have life given us already not to pacifie Gods justice but to please his mercy being pacified toward us by Christ already for as Iunius well observes a great difference between placare Deum and placere Deo i. between pacifying God and pleasing God for Christs bloud onely can pacifie justice when it is provoked but when revenging justice is pacified mercy may be pleased with the sincere and humble obedience of sons Col. 1.10 Heb. 13.21 When a Beleever is once justified hee cannot be made more just by all his obedience nor lesse just by all his sins in point of justification which is perfected at once but he who is perfectly justified is but imperfectly sanctified and in this respect may more or lesse please God or displease him be more just or lesse just and holy before him It is I confesse a secret but a common sinne in many to seek to pacifie God when they perceive or feare his anger by some obedience of their own and so to seek for that in themselves chiefely which they should seek for in Christ and for that in the Law which is onely to be found in the Gospel but corrupt practises in others should not breed as usually they doe corrupt opinions in us and to cast off the law from being a rule of pleasing God because it is no rule to us of pacifying of God For if wee speak of revenging not fatherly anger Christs bloud can onely pacifie that and when that is pacified and God is satisfied our obedience now pleaseth him and his mercy accepts it as very pleasing the rule of which is the precious law of God Thesis 102. They that say the law is our rule as it is given by Christ but not as it was given by Moses doe speak niceties at least ambiguities for if the Lord Christ give the law to a Beleever as his rule why should any then raise a dust and affirme that the law is not our rule For the Law may be considered either materially or in it selfe as it containes the matter of the Covenant of works and thus considered a Beleever is not to be regulated by it for he is wholly free from it as a covenant of life or it may be considered finally or rather relatively as it stood in relation and reference unto the people of the God of Abraham who were already under Abrahams Covenant which was a Covenant of free-grace viz. To be his God and the God of his seed Gen. 17.7 And in this latter respect the law as it was given by Moses was given by Christ in Moses and therefore the rule of love toward man commanded by Moses is called the law of Christ Gal. 6.2 For the law as it was applyed to this people doth not run thus viz. Doe all this and then I will be your God and redeemer for this is a Covenant of workes but thus viz. I am the Lord thy God viz. by Abrahams Covenant who brought thee out of the land of Egypt and house of bondage Therefore thou shalt doe all this If therefore the law delivered by Moses was delivered by Christ in Moses then there is no reason to set Christ and Moses together by the eares in this respect I now speake of and to affirme that the law not as delivered by Moses but as given by Christ is our law and rule Thesis 103. The law therefore which containes in it selfe absolutely considered which Luther cals Moses Mosissimus the Covenant of works yet relatively considered as it was delivered by Moses to a people under a Covenant of grace which the same Author cals Moses Aaronicus so it is not to bee considered onely as a Covenant of workes and therefore for any to affirme that the law is no Covenant of works as it is delivered on Mount Sion and by Jesus Christ and that it is a Covenant of works onely as it is delivered on Mount Sinai and by Moses is a bold assertion both unsafe and unsound For if as it was delivered on Mount Sinai it was delivered to a people under a Covenant of grace then it was not delivered to them onely as a Covenant of workes for then a people under a Covenant of grace may againe come under a Covenant of works to disanull that Covenant of grace but the Apostle expressely affirmes the quite contrary and shewes that the Covenant made with Ahraham and his seed which was to be a God to them Gen. 17.7 and which was confirmed before of God in Christ the law which was foure hundred and thirty yeares after cannot disanull Gal. 3.17 Now that the people were under a Covenant of grace when the law was delivered on Mount Sinai let the Preface of the ten Commandments determine wherein Gods first words are words of grace I am the Lord thy God c. and therefore thou shalt have no other Gods but mee c. I know Paraeus Zanchy and others affirme that the law is abrogated as it was in the hands of Moses but not as it is in the hand of Christ but their meaning is at sometime in respect of the manner of administration of the Law under Moses and when they speake of the morall law simply considered yet it never entred into their hearts that the law as delivered on mount Sinai was delivered onely as a Covenant of works as some would maintain Thesis 104. But there is a greater mystery intended by some in this phrase as given by Christ for their meaning is this to wit As Christ by his Spirit writes it in our hearts not any way a rule as written by Moses A Beleevers heart saith Master Saltmarsh is the very law of Commands and the two Tables of Moses and in this respect it becomes not saith he the glory of
a sinner as a sinner had need consider what they say for is it to a sinner as possest with Christ and receiving of him or as dispossest of Christ not having of him but rather refusing and rejecting of him If they say the first they then speak the truth but then they raze down their own pernicious principle that Christ and Gods love belongs to them As sinners If they affirm the latter then they do injuriously destroy Gods free grace and the glory of Christ who think to possesse promises without possessing Christ or to have promises of grace without having Christ the foundation of them all For though the common love of God as the bare offer of grace is may be manifested without having Christ yet speciall actuall love cannot be actually our own without having and first receiving of him And if the Spirit of God convince the world of sin and consequently of condemnation while they do not beleeve Ioh. 16.9 I wonder how it can then convince them of pardon of sin and reconciliation before they do beleeve unlesse we will imagine it to be a lying spirit which is blasphemous These things not considered of have and do occasion much errour at this day in the point of evidencing and hath been an inlet of deep delusion and open gaps have been made hereby to the loose waies and depths of Familism and grosse Arminianism and therefore being well considered of are sufficient to clear up the waies of those faithfull servants of the Lord who dare not sow pillows nor cry peace to the wicked much lesse to sinners as sinners both from the slanderous imputation of legall ministrations after an old Testament manner as also of making works the ground of faith or the causes of assurance of faith the free offer being the ground of the one and the free promise the cause and ground of the other Briefly therefore 1. The free offer of grace is the first evidence to a poor lost sinner that he may be beloved 2. The receiving of this offer by faith relatively considered in respect of Christs spotlesse righteousnesse is the first evidence shewing why he is beloved or what hath moved God actually to love him 3. The worke of sanctification which is the fruit of our receiving this offer is the first evidence shewing that he is beloved If therefore a condemned sinner be asked whether God may love him and why he thinks so he may answer Because Jesus Christ is held forth and offered to such a one If he be further asked why or what he thinks should move God to love him he may answer Because I have received Christs righteousnesse offered for which righteousnesse sake only I know I am beloved now I have received it If he be asked lastly how he knows certainly that he is beloved he may answer safely and confidently Because I am sanctified I am poor in spirit therefore mine is the kingdom of heaven I do mourn and therefore I shall be comforted I do hunger and thirst and therefore I shall be satisfied c. We need in time of distresse and temptation all these evidences and therefore it is greatest wisdom to pray for that spirit which may clear them all up unto us rather then to contend which should be the first And thus we see that the whole morall law is our rule of life and consequently the law of the Sabbath which is a branch of this rule We now proceed to shew the third branch of things generally and primarily morall Thesis 120. Thirdly Not only a day nor only a rest day but the rest day or Sabbath day which is expressed and expressely interpreted in the Commandment to be the seventh day or a seventh day of Gods determining and therefore called The Sabbath of the Lord our God is here also enjoined and commanded as generally morall For if a day be morall what day must it be If it be said that any day which humane wisdom shall determine whether one day in a hundred or a thousand or one day in many years if this only be generally morall then the rule of morality may be broken because the rule of equality may be thus broken by humane determination For it may be very unequall and unjust to give God one day in a hundred or a thousand for his worship and to assume so many beside to our selves for our own use There is therefore something else more particularly yet primarily morall in this Command and that is The Sabbath day or such a day wherein there appears an equal division and a fit proportion between time for rest and time for work a time for God and a time for man and that is a â—â—venth day which God determines A fit proportion of time for God is morall because equal man cannot determine nor set out this proportion God therefore only can and must A day therefore that he shall determine is morall and if he declares his determination to a seventh A seventh day is therefore morall Gomarus confesseth that by the Analogy of this Commandment not one day in a thousand or when man pleaseth but that one day in seven is morall at least equal fit and congruous to observe the same and if the Analogy he speaks of ariseth virtute mandati divini or by vertue of Gods Commandment the cause is in effect yielded but if this Analogy be made virtute libertatis humanae so that humane liberty may do well to give God one in seven because the Jews did so and why should Christians be more scant then I see not but humane liberty may assume power to it self to impose monthly and annuall holy daies as well because the Jews had their new moons and yearly festivals and by Analogy thereof why may not Christians who have more grace poured out upon them and more love shewn unto them under the Gospel hold some meet proportion with them therein also as well as in Sabbaths But it can never be proved that God hath left any humane wisdom at liberty to make holy daies by the rule of Jewish proportions Beside if humane wisdom see it meet and congruous to give God at least one day in seven this wisdom and reason is either regulated by some law and then 't is by vertue of the law of God that he should have one day in seven or 't is not regulated by a law and then we are left to a loose end again for man to appoint what day he sees meet in a shorter or a longer time his own reason being his only law and this neither Gomaras nor the words of the Commandment will allow which sets and fixeth the day which we see is one day in seven which not man but God shall determine and therefore called The Sabbath of the Lord our God Thesis 121. The hardest knot herein to unloose lies in this to know whether a seventh day in generall which God shall determine or that particular Seventh day from the creation be
a spirituall Sabbath in Christ if through Gods righteous judgment blinding their hearts they be also left to reject the outward Word because of an inward woâ—d to teach them and outward Baptisme and Lords Supper because of an inward Baptisme by the Holy Ghost and spirituall Bread from Heaven the Lord Christ Iesus and all outward Ordinances Ministries Churches because of an inward Kingdome and Temple and the Argument will hold strongly that if because they have an inward Sabbath of Rest in the bosome of Christ which I deny not that they may therefore cast away all externall Sabbaths they may then very well reject all outward Baptisme Lords Supper all Churches all Ordinances because herein there is also the inward Baptisme spirituall feeding upon Christ and inward Kingdome and Temple of God But thus they wickedly separate and sever what God hath joyned and may well stand together through the madnesse of which hellish practise I have long observed almost all the late and most pernicious errours of these times arise and those men who have formerly wept for Gods precious Sabbaths and Ordinances and have prayed for them and pleaded for them and have offered their lives in sacrifice for them and fought for them yea that have felt perhaps the comfort sweetnesse and blessing of Gods Sabbaths yea the redeeming and saving-power of Gods Ordinances to their owne soules yet through pretences of more spirituall enjoyments above and beyond and without all these they can part with these their old friends without weeping and reject them as polluted rags and fleshly formes and dark vailes and curtaines which must be drawne aside that so they may not hinder the true Light from shining in them This therfore is the reason why the love of manâ— at this day is grown cold toward the external Sabbath because the internall and spirituall Sabbath is now all in all And therefore many men walk either with bold consciences and will observe no Sabbath or else with loose consciences thinking it lawfull to observe it if men will injoyn it but noâ— thinking that they are tyed and bound therunto from any precept of God That place of Hebrews 4. which they so much stick to wants not light to demonstrate that the Sabbatisme there may well agree not onely with the internall but the outward Christian Sabbath but some of the ensuing Theses will serve to cleare up these things This onely I feare that because of these indignites done thus to Gods Sabbaths even by the under-workings of some of Gods owne people that the time hastens wherein if no man should speake yet the right hand of the sore displeasure of a provoked God by plagues and confusion upon the glory of all flesh will plead for his own Name and for that in speciall which is engraven upon the forehead of his holy Sabbaths Jerusalem remembred with regret of heart in the dayes of her affliction and misery all her pleasant things and especially this of the Sabbath Lam. 1.7 If the dayes of our rest and quietnesse cannot make us to relish the good things of his Temple in the fruition of our Sabbaths then doubt not of it but that the dayes of our affliction shall make a remnant to remember that they were pleasant things of all the mercies of God to Israel this is reckoned to be one of the greatest that he gave his Lawes to Israel Psal. 147.19 20. And of all Lawes this of the Sabbath For so the remnant of the Captivity acknowledged it Nehem. 9.14 who perhaps had far lower thoughts of it before their bondage And if the very making of it known be such a sweet mercy what then is the rest and peace of it the blessing and comfort of it for which I doubt not but many thousands are admiring God in heaven at this day And shall a shady imagination of an Every-day-sabbath make us sell away for nothing such a heavenly and precious season and make it common The Lord Iesus wisht his Disciples to pray that their flight from Jerusalem might not be in winter nor on the Sabbath-day Matth. 24.20 accounting it a great misery that his people should lose the publike benefit through the disturbance of any of one Sabbath-day for be it Iewish or Christian Sabbath I now dispute not sure I am it was a Sabbath-day which it seemes was to continue after Christs Ascension to the Father and therefore not wholly ceremonial And shall we account it no affliction or misery to fight or flie to ride or go to work or play to heare the Word in publike or stay at home upon the Sabbath-day Is it no mercy in these dayes to injoy many Sabbaths which was so sore a misery in Christs account and in the Apostles dayes to lose but one if mans heart be lost in the necessary cumbers of the weeke upon the Sabbath the Lord is wont to recall it again to him if any feare that the time of Grace is past the continuance of the Sabbaths the speciall seasons of grace confutes him if a mans soul be wearied with daily griefs and outward troubles the bosome of Iesus Christ which is in speciall wise opened every Lords day may refresh him and shall we have and professe so little love to such a time more precious then gold to humbled hearts as to cast away such a rich portion of precious time and make it common under a pretence of making every day a Sabbath which is either impossible to do or sinfull the loudest voice one of them of the love of Christ which now sounds in the world continually in the yeers of his people is this Come into my bosome ye weary sinners and enjoy your rest and the next voice to that is this of the Sabbath to call us off from all occasions and then to say to us Come to me my people and rest in my bosome of sweetest mercy all this day Which call would not be a mercy if it were every day for then our owne occasions must be neglected which the wise and fatherly providence of God forbids and spirituall work onely minded and intended which God did never command Nor should any marvel that the voyce of the Law should containe such a voyce of Love and therefore should not think that this controversie about the Law or for this one law of the Sabbath is unfit and unsutable to these Evangelicall and Gospel times for although the Law is dreadfull and full of terrour as considered without Christ and is to man fallen a voyce of words and a voice of terrour and feare which genders unto bondage yet as it is revealed with reference to Christ and a people in Christ so every Commandment doth spirare amorem as he speaks and breaths out Christs love for which the Saints cannot but blesse the Lord with everlasting wonderment that ever he made them to know these heart-secrets of his good will and love especially then when he writes them in their hearts and thereby gives
or evill without some law for then there should bee some sinne which is not the transgression of a law and some obedience which is not directed by any law both which are impossible and abominable 3. He makes morall lawes by externall imposition and constitution onely to be such as before the externall imposition of them are a diaphorous and good or evill onely by reason of some circumstance When as we know that some such lawes as are most entirely morall yet in respect of their inward nature generally considered they are indifferent also for not to kill and take away mans life is a morall law intirely so yet in the generall nature of it it is indifferent and by circumstance may become either lawfull or unlawfull lawfull in case of warre or publick execution of justice unlawfull out of a private spirit and personall revenge In one word the whole drift of his discourse herein is to shew that the Sabbath is not morall and this he would prove because the Sabbath is not simply and entirely morall which is a most feeble and weake consequence and this hee proves because the Sabbath day hath in respect of its inward nature no more holines and goodnes than any other day all the dayes of the week being equally good by creation But he might well know that the day is not the law of the fourth Commandment but the keeping holy of the Sabbath day which is a thing inwardly good and entirely morall if wee speak of some day Nay saith the Bishop the law of nature teacheth that some sufficient and convenient time bee set apart for Gods worship if therefore some day be morall although all dayes by creation be indifferent and equall according to his owne confession what then should hinder the quota pars or the seventh part of time from being morall will he say because all dayes are equally holy and good by creation then why should hee grant any day at all to bee entirely morall in respect of a sufficient and convenient time to bee set apart for God If hee saith the will and imposition of the Law-giver abolisheth its morality because he bindes to a seventh part of time then we shall shew that this is most false and feeble in the sequell Thesis 25. There are therefore four rules to guide our judgments aright herein whereby we may know when a law is sutable and agreeable to humane nature and consequently good in it selfe which will bee sufficient to cleare up the Law of the Sabbath to be truely morall whether in a higher or lower degree of morality it makes no matter and that it is not a law meerly temporary and ceremoniall 1. Such lawes as necessarily flow from naturall relation both between God and man as well as between man and man these are good in themselves because sutable and congruous to humane nature for there is a decency and sweet comlinesse to attend to those rules to which our relations binde us For from this ground the Prophet Malachy cals for feare and honour of God as morall duties because they are so comely and seemly for us in respect of the relation between us If I be your Lord and Master and Father where is my feare where is my honour Mal. 1.6 Love also between man and wife is pressed as a comely duty by the Apostle from that near relation betweene them being made one flesh Ephes. 5.28 29. there are scarce any who question the morality of the duties of the second Table because they are so evidently comely suitable and agreeable to humane nature considered relatively as man stands in relation to those who are or should bee unto him as his owne flesh and therefore he is to honour superiors and therefore must not kill nor steale nor lye nor covet nor defile the flesh c. but the morality of all the rules of the first Table is not seen so evidently because the relation between God and man which makes them comely and suitable to man is not so well considered for if there be a God and this God be our God according to the first Commandement then it 's very comely and meet for man to honour love feare him delight trust in him c. and if this God must be worshipped of man in respect of the mutuall relation between them then 't is comely and meet to worship him with his owne worhsip according to the second Commandment and to worship him with all holy reverence according to the third Commandment and if he must be thus worshipped and yet at all times in respect of our necessary worldly imploiments cannot be so solemnly honoured and worshipped as is comely and meet for so great a God then 't is very fit and comely for all men to have some set and stated time of worship according to some fit proportion which the Lord of time onely can best make and therefore a seventh part of time which he doth make according to the fourth Commandment 2. Such lawes are drawne from the imitable Attributes and Works of God are congruous and suitable to mans nature For what greater comelinesse can there be or what can be more suitable to that nature which is immediately made for God then to be like unto God and to attend unto those rules which guide thereunto Hence to be mercifull to men in misery to forgive our enemies and those that doe us wrong to be bountifull to those that be in want to be patient when we suffer evill are all morall duties because they are comely and suitable to man and that because herein hee resembles and is made like unto God Hence to labour six dayes and rest a leventh is a morall because a comely and suitable duty that because herein man followes the example of God and becomes most like unto him And hence it is that a seventh yeare of rest cannot be urged upon man to be as much morall as a seventh day of rest because man hath Gods example and patterne in resting a seventh day but not in resting any seventh yeare God never made himselfe an example of any ceremoniall duty it being unsuitable to his glorious excellency so to doe but onely of morall and spirituall holinesse and therefore there is somewhat else in a seventh day that is not in a seventh yeare and it is utterly false to thinke as some doe that there is as much equity for the observation of the one as there is of the other And here by the way may bee seen a grosse mistake of Mr. Primrose who would make Gods example herein not to be morally imitable of us nor man necessarily bound thereunto it being not naturally and in respect of it selfe imitable but onely because it pleased God to command man so to doe as also because this action of God did not flow from such attributes of God as are in their nature imitable as mercy bounty c. but from one of those attributes as is not imitable
the Decalogue onely Rom. 3.20 Iames 3.8 and sometimes more largely for the whole doctrine contained in all the writings of the Old Testament wherein the Gospel also is comprehended Psal. 19.7 Psalme 119.1.51 55. so the word Covenant is sometime taken more strictly for the covenant of works which is contained compendiously in the Decalogue onely writ by the finger of God in two Tables Deut. 4.13 14 Exod. 34.38 and sometime more largely for all the holy writings of Moses Exodus 24.7 8. and 34.10 Levit. 26.14 Ier. 34.13 Now although all the writings of Moses may be called the Covenant as it is largely taken and so the covenant comprehends not onely morall but ceremoniall lawes yet they are never called That Covenant which was writ by the finger of God in two Tables of stone and given to Moses and in this strict sense the word Covenant comprehends no other lawes but morall nor can the places and texts which they alleadge evince the contrary for in that place of Exodus 24.7 it is not said that the Tables of the Covenant but the Booke of the Covenant was read in the audience of all the people which Booke we readily acknowledge to comprehend ceremonials as well as morals but not the Tables of the Covenant of which the question now is so also when the Lord saith Exod. 34.10 that he will make a Covenant his meaning is that he will revive his Covenant by writing as it is there set downe in the same chapter in which writing it is very true that there is mentioned made of many ceremoniall lawes but suppose this covenant written by Moses comprehends sundry ceremoniall lawes will it therefore follow that the Tables of the Covenant written with the finger of God did the like No such matter and therefore there is an expresse difference put in the same chapter verse 27 28. between the covenant written by Moses and the ten Commandments written by the finger of God But secondly Let it be granted that the Decalogue comprehends summarily all the lawes which are particularly dispersed here and there in the writings of Moses yet it doth not follow that there must bee one ceremoniall law written by the finger of God and lifted up in the Decalogue to be the epitome and summarie of all ceremoniall lawes elsewhere explained in the writings of Moses For all lawes whether ceremoniall or judiciall may be referred to the Decalogue as appendices to it or applications of it and so to comprehend all other lawes as their summary But such a summary will no way enforce a necessity of making any one of them the epitome of ceremonialls and the other nine of them of the morals for we know that many judiciall lawes are comprehended under morall lawes being referred as appendices thereunto by Calvin Martyr Chemnitius Ames and sundry others and yet it will not follow from hence that one of the lawes in the Decalogue must be a judiciall law as the summary of all judicials which are branches of the Covenant as well as Master Primrose his ceremonials Thesis 34. It should not seem strange that that law which in the generall nature of it is moral may in the particular application of it be unto a thing ceremoniall and in this respect it cannot be denyed but that the morall law may comprehend all ceremoniall lawes but it will not hence follow as Mr. Primrose inferres that one law in the Decalogue must be ceremoniall as the head and summary of all ceremoniall lawes because we say ceremoniall lawes may bee comprehended under some morall law as speciall applications thereof ex gr It is a morall law to worship God according to his owne will and not after mans inventions as the second Commandment holds it forth Now in the application of this law the Lord points out his owne instituted worship in sundry significant ceremonies sacrifices sacraments c. which particular institutions though ceremoniall are to be referred unto and are comprehended under the second Commandment which is a morall law for if God will be worshipped with his owne worship according to this Commandment then its necessary for the Lord to shew and that under his Commandment what those institutions be wherein he will bee worshipped many of which are ceremoniall which are therefore directly comprehended here Thesis 35. There is therefore no necessity of making one law in the Decalogue to bee ceremoniall that it may be the summary head of all ceremonials viz. because ceremonialls are branches of the covenant which is the Decalogue for upon the like ground there must bee one judiciall law also as the summary of all judicials nay one Evangelicall law also as the head of all Evangelicals sprinkled here and there in Moses his writings of which we read Iohn 5.43 Rev. 10.6 7 8. with Deut. 30.12 13. Gal. 3.8 with Gen. 12.3 for judicials and Evangelicals are branches of the Covenant as well as ceremonials if Mr. Primrose his principle be true but if by his owne confession nine of them are morals and one of them only the head of ceremonialls how shall judiciall and Evangelicall summaries come in which either he must make room for in the Decalogue or acknowledge his foundation to be rotten upon which he hath built up one ceremoniall law among the nine moralls Thesis 36. It is true that among men the same body of Lawes may be framed up of divers articles as Mr. Primrose pleads but that the Decalogue was such a body as had ceremonials mixt with morals it can never be made good by any colour of proof except it be that which we have shewn will as strongly enforce an introduction of some one judiciall and another Evangelicall law into the Decalogue as well as one ceremoniall but such a confusion of Law and Gospell Evangelicals and judicials ceremonialls and morals the blessed God abhorres for it neither suits with Gods wisedome and end in giving the law nor yet with mans weaknesse which God pitties to make such a jumbling and confusion of things together for who can then tell what law is morall and what Evangelicall and what ceremoniall unlesse it be as was shewn by flying for light to the dictates and instinct of nature to shew unto poore deceitfull man what lawes are morall and what not wherein the remedy would have been as bad as the disease Thesis 37. If there must be one law in the Decalogue ceremoniall that so the more Authority may bee procured hereby as Mr. Primrose pleads unto all Gods Ordinances and therefore one of the ceremonials was written in the Decalogue with Gods owne finger and honoured with the like prerogatives as the morall lawes were which were immediately spoken by God himselfe Then if this reasoning be solid why was not one judiciall and another Evangelicall precept alike honoured also For was there not as much need to procure Authority to this as well as to ceremonials and yet wee see their Authority was sufficiently procured without
ever as hee would have that law preserved for ever which these safeguard but on the other side these judicialls which did safeguard ceremoniall laws which wee know were not perpetuall but proper to that Nation hence those judicials which compasse these about are not perpetuall nor universall the ceremonialls being pluckt up by their roots to what purpose then should their fences and hedges stand As on the contrary the morals abiding why should not their judicials and fences remaine The learned generally doubt not to affirme that Moses judicials binde all nations so farre forth as they containe any morall equity in them which morall equity doth appeare not onely in respect of the end of the law when it is ordered for common and universall good but chiefely in respect of the law which they safeguard and fence which if it bee morall it 's most just and equall that either the same or like judiciall fence according to some fit proportion should preserve it still because 't is but just and equall that a morall and universall law should bee universally preserved from whence by the way the weaknesse of their reasonings may bee observed who that they may take away the power of the civill Magistrate in matters of the first Table which once he had in the Jewish common-wealth affirm that such civill power then did arise from the judiciall and not from any morall law when as it 's manifest that this his power in preserving Gods worship pure from Idolatrous and prophane mixtures according to the judiciall lawes was no more but a fence and safeguard set about morall Commandments which fences and preservatives are therfore for substance to continue in as much power and authority now as they did in those dayes as long as such lawes continue in their morality which these preserve the duties of the first Table being also as much morall as those of the second to the preserving of which later from hurt and spoil in respect of their morality no wise man questions the extent of his power Thesis 43. If therefore the question be now made whether the law of the fourth Commandment be morall or no we must then remember that the true state of the question is not in this to wit Whether the law of the Sabbath be a principle of the light of nature knowne and evident of it selfe or at least such as every man that hath the use of reason may readily finde out without some externall revelation as Mr. Ironside injuriously states it wrastling herein with his own shadow with many others of his fellowship in this controversie For morality as hath been declared is of larger extent then such naturality But the question is whether it is one of those lawes which is therefore commanded because it is holy just and good in it selfe whether man see it by any previous light of corrupt nature I or no and being thus commanded as such a law whether it be not therefore of perpetuall and universall obligation binding all Nations and persons in all ages in their hearts lives manners to the observance thereof as a part of that holinesse we owe to God and which God requires of all men according to rules of morall equity or on the contrary whether it be not rather a typicall ceremoniall figurative and temporary precept binding onely some persons or that one Nation of the Jews for some time from the obedience of which law Christians in respect of any law of God are now exempted Thesis 44. For clearing up whereof it may not be amisse to take notice of the agreement at least in words herein on all hands even by those who oppose that morality of the Sabbath which we plead for All sides agree in this viz. That the law of this fourth Commandment concerning the Sabbath is morall But as the differences about the meaning of Tu es Petrus are many so here the difficulty lies to know how and in what sense and respect it may bee called morall for Master Ironside expressely consents in this viz. That all the Commandments of the Decalogue are morall but every one in his proportion and degree and so saith he is that of the Sabbath it is morall for substance but not for circumstance Master Primrose also when he is awake expressely confesseth thus much viz. That the Sabbath is morall in its foundation end marrow and principall substance and that a stinted time is morall and grounded on the principles of nature and therefore the Gentiles saith he had their set dayes of religion and this he tels us is ratified by the Gospel which commendeth to the faithfull the Assembling of themselves together for Word and Sacraments and consequently that they have appointed times to attend upon them wherein the word of God be read and preached as under the old Testament every Sabbath day nay he yields yet more viz. That not onely stinted times but that also there should be a convenient proportion and suitable frequency of time for Gods service now under the Gospell as under the Law and therefore affirmes that the Jewish annuall Feasts and new Moons being but once a yeare or once a moneth and so being rare and seldome could not teach us the convenient and most suitable frequency of Gods publick service as the Sabbath did which returned weekly and therefore he saith that the Commandment runs not thus viz. Remember to keep the new Moons but Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day So that by Mr. Primrose concession not onely a time but a stinted time not onely a stinted but also such a convenient proportion and suitable frequency of time as is once in seven dayes is morally holy by vertue of the fourth Commandment Gomarus also concludes that the publick worship of God required in the fourth Commandment cals for observation not onely of certain but also of sufficient dayes for worship and what these sufficient dayes bee is to bee gathered from the fourth Commandment viz. that they bee not more rare and lesse frequent then the weekly Sabbaths of the Israelites because if God as he shewes challenged a weekly Sabbath of a stiffe-necked people laden with the burden of many other Festivals and Ceremonies how then should Christians freed from their yoaks and burdens have them lesse frequent Master Breerwood also to the like purpose professeth That Christians should noâ— bee lesse devout and religious in celebrating the Lords day then the Jews were in celebrating their Sabbath and his reason labouring with some spice of a contradiction is this viz. because the obligation of our thankfulnesse to God is more then theirs although the obligation of his Commandment to us in that behalfe is lesse for I confesse it s beyond my shallownesse to conceive how the thankfulnesse should bee more and the Commandment lesse unlesse he will imagine some such popish work as exceeds the command Wallaeus comes almost quite over the threshold unto us and maintains upon solid arguments
Commandment which therefore sets down the proper punishment for this sin So by love of God is not meant love of God at large which is seen in keeping every Command but in particular when we love God in his owne Ordinances and institutions Look therefore as hatred of God in setting up mans inventions and institutions which superstitious persons thinke to be much love to God is here condemned in the negative part of the Commandment so on the contrary love to God in closing with him and seeking of him in his owne Institutions whether Word or Sacraments c. is here enjoyned in the affirmative part of this Command and consequently not as Wallaeus would have it in the affirmative part of the fourth Command Keeping my Commandments being set downe as a fruit of this love and both together being opposed to hatred of God Hence by Commandments cannot be meant in generall all the ten Commandments as some imagine upon miserable weake grounds which I lift not to mention but in speciall Gods Institutions and Ordinances commanded in speciall by him to which humane inventions and Images of mens heads and hands are commonly in Scripture opposed and are therefore condemned because not commanded or because none of his Commandments Ier. 7.31 Deut. 12.30 31. Matth. 15.9 If therefore againe Gods Institutions and Commandments are here enjoyned in this second Commandment they cannot bee directly required in the fourth Command These things being thus cleared the objections of Wallaeus are easily answered For first he saith That from the negative part of this second Commandment cannot be gathered such an affirmative part as this is viz. That God will be worshipped by the Word and Sacraments But that this assertion thus barely propounded but not proved is false appeares from what hath been said concerning the true meaning of the negative part of this Command For if humane inventions under the name of graven Image bee forbidden then Divine Institutions such as Word and Sacraments bee are here commanded and from that negative any ordinary capacity may readily see what the affirmative is Hee saith again secondly That if instituted worship was contained under the affirmative part of the second Commandment then this Commandment is mutable because God was thus worshipped one way before Christ and another way since Christ but saith he the second Commandment is morall and therefore immutable and therefore such mutable worship cannot be enjoyned herein But we have formerly shewne that although this Commandment be morall and immutable in respect of it selfe yet in respect of the application of it to this or that object or thing commanded it may be in that respect mutable For it is an immutable law that God must be worshipped with his owne worship such as hee shall institute and this is the summe of the second Commandment it selfe yet the things instituted wherein there is onely an application of the command may be mutable the second Commandment doth not immutably binde to the observance of this or that particular instituted worship onely But to observe Gods instituted worship and to attend his appointments which is the onely morall law and rule in the affirmative part of this Command Hee thirdly objects That the worshipping of God in Word and Sacraments c. is never opposed in all the Scripture to the worshipping of Images But this is false for Gods Institutions of which Word and Sacraments are a part are frequently opposed to humane inventions the worship appointed by God to the worship devised by man Images of Gods devising are oft opposed to Images of mens owne inventing the voice of God which was onely heard with the eare is opposed to an Image or similitude which might bee seen Deut. 4.12 A graven Image a teacher of lies is opposed to the Lords teaching of truth and also to his presence in his Temple which was the seat of instituted worship Habak 2.18 19 20. The worship of Images which God would have abolished is opposed to the worship of God by Sacrifices and Ceremonies in the place which God should chuse Deuter. 12.1 to 20. but yet he tels us That to worship God in Images and to worship him in Spirit and Truth which is inward worship are opposite as also the lifting up of pure hands in every place John 4.28 1 Tim. 2.8 Hee tels us also that acknowledging of God in his Immensity and Infinite Majesty are opposed to Image-worship Rom. 1.20 21 22. Isa. 40.22 Bee it so But will it therefore follow that to worship God according to his own Institutions is not to worship him in Spirit and in Truth Is it rather a carnall than a spirituall worship to attend on God in Word and Sacraments May we not lift up pure hands in the use of Gods own institutions Is not Gods Immensity and Majesty acknowledged and seen in the use of his owne Ordinances as well as creatures and providences I confesse the blinder sort of Heathens might worship stocks and stones and Images of creeping things and four-footed Beasts in the place of God himselfe terminatively and God might account of all their Image-worship as such though used relatively and hence the opposition may well bee made between worshipping them as God and an infinite God and this worship as was said fals then under the first Commandment but assuredly this Image-worship which the Apostle condemnes Rom. 1.21 23. in debasing the infinite Majesty and limiting it to this and that Image wherein they did worship it is forbidden being only relative worship in the second Command For I think the Apostle in Rom. 1. hath an eye principally at the most lascivious Idolaters in the world viz. the Egyptians among whom principally we read of those Images of creeping things and foure-footed beasts in their Hierâ—gliphicks and yet we know that all that base worship did set out something or other of the Deity which therein and so relatively they did worship But I must not enter into the Discourse of these things here sufficient is said to cleare up this point viz. That Gods instituted worship fals directly under the second not fourth Command Thesis 62. It is true that the exercise of publick worship of many together is to be at this time upon the Sabbath but doth it follow that therefore this publick worship it self falls directly under this command For if publick Assemblies bee as some think a part of naturall worship so as that the light of nature directs all men dwelling together as creatures to worship God together publickly as Creator then this worship fals directly under the first not fourth Commandment where natural worship is directly commanded but if publick Assemblies be considered as distinct Churches politically united and combined publickly to worship God then such Churches considered thus as politicall not mysticall Assemblies do fall directly under the second Command as parts of instituted worship for as all devised formes of Churches whether Diocesan Provinciall Nationall Universall being the
say he doth sin no not when he commits murder adultery and the foulest enormities in the world Which Doctrine though so directly and expressely against the light of Scripture the confessions of all the Saints yea of the light of nature and common sense and is the very filth of the froth of the sume of the bottomlesse pit yet some there are who are not ashamed to owne it the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and depth of a perfect Familist consisting in this viz. when a man can sinne and never feele it or have any remorse or sorrow for it and when one hath attained to this measure He is then Deified and then they professe the Godhead doth petere fundum animae as they call it when beleeving that he hath no sinne he can therefore neither see it or feele it From which depth of darknesse the God and Father of mercies deliver his poore people in these corrupting times and I with that those who defend this kinde of a Beleevers immunity from the law did not lay this corner stone of hell and perdition to their followers I am sure they lead them hereby to the mouth of this pit who upon this principle refuse either to mourne for sinne or pray for pardon of sinne or to imagine that God afflicts for sin being now freed from the mandatory power of any law of God they being now not bound to act by vertue of any command Thesis 99. If God did worke upon Beleevers as upon bloâ—ks or brute creatures they might then have some colour â—o cast off all attendance to the directive power of the law and so leave all to the Spirits Omnipotent and immediate acts as the Starres who being irrationall and uncapable of acting by any rule they are therefore acted and run their course by the mighty word of Gods power and therefore attend no rule but Beleevers are rationall Creatures and therefore capable of acting by rule and they are also sanctified and delivered from the power of their corrupt nature and therefore have some inherent power so to act for if they be not now dead in trespasses and sinnes they have then some new life and therefore some inherent power to act according to the rule of life the Image of God renewed in them is in part like to the same Image which they had in the first creation which gave man some liberty and power to act according to the will of him that created him And if the first Adam by his fall conveyes to us not onely condemnation but also an inherent power of corruption then the second Adam the Lord Iesus much more conveyes unto all his posterity not onely justification but also some inherent power of grace and holinesse which is begun here and perfected in glory for as sinne hath abounded so grace aboundeth much more and yet suppose they had no inherent power thus to act yet they have an adherent power the Lord Christ Iesus by faith in whose Name they may and shall receive power to act And therefore although God works in us both to will to do of his good pleasure yet this hinders not but that we are to work out our salvation with feare and trembling by attending the rule by vertue of which we are bound to worke both by putting forth that power which we have already received from God as also in fetching in that power we have not yet received but is reserved daily in Christs hands for us to enable us thereunto Thesis 100. If they that say a Beleever is not to act by vertue of a command do mean this only viz. That he is not to act by vertue of the bare letter and externall words and syllables of it they then speak truely for such kinde of acting is rather witchery than Christianity to place power and vertue in bare characters and letters which though mighty and powerfull by the spirit yet are empty and powerlesse without it But if their meaning be that wee are not to act by vertue of any command in any sense then the assertion is both pernicious and perilous for the Lord Iesus being the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first subject of all grace and gracious efficacy and power hence it s true wee are not to make the command of God the first principle of our obedience for this is proper unto Christ by the Spirit Iohn 5.40 Iohn 16.13 14. 2. Tim. 2.1 Ephes. 6.10 Rom. 8.2 But because the Lord Iesus conveyes by his Spirit vertue and efficacy through his word not onely words of promise but also words of command as is evident Ier. 3.22 Acts 2.38 41. Mat. 9.9 Psalme 19.8 Hence it is that a Beleever is bound to act from a command though not as from a first yet as from a second principle though not as from the first efficient yet as from an instrument in the hand of Christ who in commanding of the duty works by it and enables to it and therefore we see Abraham comes out of his owne Countrey because called and commanded of God to follow him he knew not whither Heb 11.8 And Peter cast his net into the 〈◊〉 meerely because he was commanded Luke 5.5 And David desired Oh that my heart were directed to keep thy precepts because God had commanded Psa. 119.45 There is a vertue a vis or efficacy in the finall cause as well as in the efficient to produce the effect and every wise agent is bound to act by vertue or for the sake of his utmost and last end Now the naked commandment of the Lord may bee and should be the chiefe motive and last end of our obedience to his highnesse for whatever is done meerely because of Gods command is done for his glory which glory should be our utmost end in all our obedience And hence it is that that obedience is most absolute and sincere whether it be in doing or suffering the will of God which is done meerely in respect of commandment and will of God when the soule can truely say Lord I should never submit to such a yoke but meerely for thy sake and because it 's thy will and thou dost command it What is it to love Christ but to seek to please him and to give contentment to him What is it to seek to give contentment to him but to give contentment to his heart or his will and what is his will but the will of his commandment If therefore it bee unlawfull to act by vertue of a command then it is unlawfull 1. To love Christ 2. To be sincere before Christ. 3. Or to act for the glory of Christ. And hence it is that let a man do the most glorious things in the world out of his owne supposed good end as the blind Papists doe in their will-works and superstitions which God never commanded nay let him doe all things which the law of God requires give his goods to the poore and his body to bee burnt and yet not doe
Christ to be beholding to any of the light upon Moses face It seemes then that the law written is not to be a Christians rule but onely so farre as it is written in the heart a most accursed assertion for how and why did Christ Jesus himselfe resist temptation to sinne was it not by cleaving to the written word Matth. 44.10 and was not this done for our imitation why did David and Christ Iesus delight to doe Gods will was it not this because it was written of them that so they should doe Psa. 40.7 8. Did not the law in their hearts make them thus cleave to the written law without Why did Paul perswade Children to honour their parents was it not because this was the first Commandment with promise Ephes. 6.2 had it not been more Evangelically spoken to perswade them rather to look to the law of Moses written on their hearts within to direct them hereunto rather than to be beholding for any light upon Moses face to direct them herein how comes it to passe that Paul preacheth no other thing but what was in the old Testament of Moses and the Prophets who were onely the Interpreters of Moses Acts 22.20 How is it that Christ himselfe borrowes light from Moses Psalmes and all the Prophets to cleare up his resurrection and suffering Luke 24.27 32 if no light must bee borrowed from the face of Moses if indeed wee were perfect in this life as wee shall bee in heaven there would then bee no need of the writings of the Apostles Prophets or Moses of Law or Gospell but we being but imperfectly enlightned it 's no lesse than extreame ingratitude and unthankfulnesse to preferre our owne imperfect and impure light before that perfect spotlesse and heavenly Law and counsels of God without us which when the most perfect beleever doth see he may cry out with Paul The Law is holy but I am carnall what is this but painted Popery to make the spirit within to be the supreame Iudge and superiour to the Spirit of God in the written word without onely they shrine it up in the Popes private Conclave and Kitchin or somewhat worse but these in a company of poore imperfect deluded and perhaps corrupted men it 's true the Covenant of grace strictly taken in the Gospel needs not to borrow any light from the Covenant of works in the Law but yet for all this the grace of God appearing in the Gospel will have us to walk worthy of God unto all well pleasing according to the Law Tit. 2.12 13. and to mourne bitterly that we are so unlike the will and image of God revealed in the Law Rom. 7.23 24. Thesis 105. The Apostle Paul as he sometimes condemnes works and sometime commends them so he sometimes rejects the Law and sometimes commends the Law sometime hee would have Beleevers dye to the law and sometime hee exhorts them to live in all holy obedience to it the Apostle therefore must speak of the Law under various considerations or else must speake Daggers and flat contradictions and therefore of necessity wee are to consider the Law not alway under one respect but variously for consider the law as a Covenant of workes or as the way unto or matter of our justification and so works are condemned and the Law is rejected and abrogated and so we are to die to the Law but consider the Law as a rule of life to a person justified already and so the Law is to be received and works are to bee commended and we are to live thereunto Thesis 106. When the Gospel nakedly urgeth Beleevers to good workes and obedience to the Law it is then considered onely as a rule of life but when wee meet with such Scriptures as set the Law and Christ the Law and grace the Law and promise the Law and faith c. at opposition one against another then the Law in such places is ever considered as a Covenant of life from which we are wholly freed and unto which we should be wholly dead that weâ— may be married unto Christ Rom. 7.4 hence therefore their arguings are feeble and weak who would prove a Christian to be wholly free from the directive power of the Law because a Christian is said not to be under the law but under grace Rom. 6.14 and because the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ Iohn 1.17 and because the inheritance is not by the law but by promise and by faith Gal. 3.12.18 for these and such like Scriptures speake of the law as standing in opposition to Christ and therefore speake of it as of a Covenant of life by which men seek to be justified from which we grant a Beleever is wholly freed and unto which hee is not bound nay hee is bound to renounce it and cast out this bond-woman but all this doth not prove that he is free from it as his rule of life Thesis 107. The Law and mans sinfull heart are quite opposite one to another Rom. 7.9 10 11 13. but when through the grace of Christ the heart is changed so as there is a new nature or new man in a beleever then there is a sweet agreement between this new nature and the Law for saith Paul I delight in the Law of God in my inner man it is therefore a most false assertion to say that the old man of a Beleever is to be kept under the law but the new man or new nature is above all Law for though the new nature bee above it as a legall covenant yet it never comes to be willingly under it as a rule untill now an imperfect new nature is infinitely glad of the guidance of a holy and most perfect law Psalme 119.140 Thesis 108. It is very evident that the children and sonnes of God under the new Testament are not so under the Law as the children and sonnes of God were under the old Testament for the Apostle expressely tels Gal. 3.23 that before the faith came we i. the children of the Old Testament were shut up and kept under the Law and were under it as under a Schoolmaster verse 24. and these of whom the Apostle thus speaks are not onely wicked and carnall Jewes but the deare children of God and heires of eternall life in those times as is evident from Gal. 4 1 2 3. but the Apostle speaking of the sonnes of God in Gospel-times since faith is come and revealed speakes as expresly that we are now no longer under the law as under a Schoolmaster Gal. 3 25. and that now when the fulnesse of time is come God sent his sonne to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the Adoption of Sonnes Gal. 4.3 4 5. which though it bee true of all men by nature viz. that they are under the law yet an impartiall cleare eye will easâ—ly discerne that the Apostles dispute is not of our being under the Law by nature meerely
law but the externall face of these things was scarce any thing else but Doing and Law by reason of which there is a vaile spread over the hearts of the lewes in reading the old Testament unto this day as is evident 2 Cor. 3.13 so that the inside or end of the morall law being Gospel and the out-side and meanes appointed to this end being law hence the Gospel was then lesse clearly and the law was more clearely revealed in those times to say that Iesus Christ and his benefits or eternall life were then dispensed under a Covenant of works or sub conditione perfectae obedientiae as some eminent Worthies affirm is such an errour which wise and able men might easily fall into by seeing how much law was revealed and urged in those times for though the law simply considered in it selfe contained the matter of the Covenant of works yet considered relatively in respect of the people of God and as they were under Abrahams Covenant of grace so it was given to them as a rule of perfect righteousnesse by both which they might the better see their owne weaknesse and unrighteousnesse â—nd flye to Christ and therefore the Apostle Gal. 3.17 cals the promise which was made to Abraham the Covenant and gives not this title to the Law but calls it the law which he saith could not disanull the Covenant confirmed in Christ and although it be propounded to them in way of Covenant Exod. 19.5 yet this is to be understood as some thinke of Evangelicall keeping Covenant not of legall or if of legall yet then it is not propounded simply as a Covenant of works to convey Christ to them but ex hypothesi or upon supposition that if they did think to be Gods people and have him to be their God by doing as Iunius observes the carnall Jewes did thinke and hope so to have him and as that young man thought Mat. 19.17 as Chamier observes that then they must keep all these Commandments perfectly and to bee accursed if they did not continue therein I dare not therefore say that Christ and eternall life were dispensed in a Covenant of works under which Covenant the Iewes were shut in old Testament times but rather this that the law was more strongly pressed as a yoke upon their shoulders and that this law which containes the Covenant of works was more plentifully revealed and insisted on and the Gospel more sparingly and darkly but now in Gospel times the day-starre is risen though in few mens hearts yet in the doctrine and cleare revelation of it therein and therefore the Gospel is called the mystery hidden from ages and generations past but now is made manifest to his Saints Col. 1. â—6 which cannot bee meant as if they had no knowledge of it for Abraham saw Christs day and there is a cloud of witnesses in the Old Testament who dyed in faith Heb. 11. but not such cleare knowledge of it as now they were therefore then under the Law as servants because so much working and doing was urged and chiefely revealed but indeed were sonnes and heires but wee now are not so under it but are as sonnes having the Lord Iesus and our fathers face in him clearely revealed and faith in him chiefely and most abundantly urged in his blessed Gospel and thus the Apostle tels us in this Text Gal. 4.1 with 4.5 that the heires of the Promise under the Old Testament were as servants but by Christâ— comming we are now as sonnes look also as they are said to be under the Law not as if they had no Gospel revealed or no use of the Gospel but onely because the Gospel was more darkly revealed and the Law more plentifully urged so we are said not to be under the Law not as if there was no Law or no use of the Law belonging to us but because now the Gospel is more clearely revealed and the Law not externally so proposed and imposed as it was upon them 2. The Law was a Schoolmaster Tutor and Governour to lead them unto Christ to come for so the Apostle tels us in this place Gal. 3.23 that before faith came we were shut up under the Law unto the faith which should afterward be revealed Thus the Ceremoniall law pointed to Christ to come the morall law discovered mans sinne and misery and need of Christ who was to come nay all the promises were made with reference to Iesus Christ to come but now the fulnesse of time being come that the Sonne of God is come now we are no longer under the Law after this manner neither ceremoniall or morall law are of any use to us to lead us unto Christ to come for Christ is already come and hence it is that Beleevers now are said to be rather under the Gospel than under the Law and Beleevers under the Old Testament to be rather under the Law than under the Gospel because although these had the efficacy of Christs Redemption yet they were not yet actually redeemed because the Redeemer was not yet come into the flesh and in this respect they were under the rigour of the law and hence it was fit that they should bee handled as servants and the law and curse thereof principally revealed but now Christ being come and having actually redeemed us having been not onely virtually but actually made righteousnesse and a curse for us now therefore is the time that we should see Christ Iesus with open face and hear principally concerning faith and the fathers love in him now Christ is revealed chiefely being come the end of the Law then the Law was revealed chiefely Christ being not yet come as the meanes to this end looke therefore as the promise before Christ of which the Apostle speaks Gal. 3.17 18 19 21 22. was fulfilled in Christ being come as Divines speak rather than abolished and yet abolished as it was a promise of grace to come so the morall law is rather fulfilled than abolished in Christ being come and yet as it did lead unto Christ to come it is abolished to us now under the Gospel 3. The law being principally revealed and yet so revealed as to lead unto Christ Jesus to come hence ariseth a third thing of the law from which we are now delivered viz. they were therefore under more terrour and feare of the Law than we are on Gods part revealing the Gospel more clearely in these times and therefore saith the Apostle Gal. 4.4 5 6. that when the fulnesse of time came God sent his Sonne to redeeme us from under the Law that wee might receive the adoption of Sonnes and thereby the Spirit of Sonnes crying Abba Father could not they who were Sonnes under the Law call God Father yes verily doubtlesse thou art our Father say they Isaiah 63.17 but they having lesse light they had more feare and lesse of the Spirit of Adoption I say still ex parte Dei revelantis than we have in these dayes We are not
heard of it do certainly and assuredly know that these men at least doctrines in this point are not of God The word in these mens mouths being flat contrary to the mercifull and the for ever to be adored work of God in their hearts When the Spirit comes his first work if Christ may be beleeved even when he comes as a Comforter is To convince the world of sinne Iohn 16.9.10 which we know is chiefly by the law Rom. 3.20 and shall the Ministers not of the letter but of the Spirit refuse to begin here Especially in these times of wantonnesse contention confusion famine sword and bloud wherein every thing almost cries aloud for sackcloth and therefore not for tiffany and silken Sermons As if this corrupt and putrifying age stood only in need of sugar to preserve and keep them sweet from smelling As if sublime notions about Christ and free grace Covenant of grace love of the Father the kingdome within and Châ—istian excâ—llencies and priviledges were the only things this age stood in need of and not in any need of searchings with candles terrours shakings â—ence of sin or forewarnings of wrath to come As if this old world did need no Noah to fortell them of flouds of fire and wrath to come Or as if the men of Sodom and Princes of Gomorah should do well to mock at Lot for bidding him to hasten out of the city because God would destroy it As if the spirit of Paul in these times should not know the terrour of the Lord and therefore perswade men 2 Cor. 5.10.11 but only the love and free-grace of the Lord Jesus and therefore to exhort men nay rather therefore to relate to men stories and notions about â—ree-grace generall redemption the mystery of the Fathers love and the Christ in you and in the spirit not the person of Christ or Christ in the flesh the hope of glory What will the Lord Jesus one day say to these sleepy watchmen that never tell the secure world of their enemies at the door I finde divers colours and pretences for this course of daubing 1. Some say this savours of an old Testament spirit which was wâ—nt to wound and then to heal to humble and then to raise to preach law and then Gospell but now we are to he Ministers of the new Testament and let no law be heard of I confesse those that preach the law as the means of our justification and as the matter of our righteousnesse without Christ or together with Christ as the false teachers did 2 Cor. 3 6. may well be called as Paul cals them Ministers of the letter not of the Spirit of the old Testament not of the New but to preach Christ plainly and with open face the end of the law and to preach the law as the means to prepare for and advance Christ in our hearts can never be proved to be the old Testament Ministry or to put a vail upon mens hearts that they cannot see the end of the law as the old Testament vail did 2 Cor. 3.14 but it is to take away the vail of all conceit of mans own strength and righteousnesse by seeing his curse that so he may sâ—â— to the end thereof the Lord Jesus and embrace him for righteousnesse For the Apostle doth not call them Ministers of the letter and of the old Testament because they did preach the law to humble and leade unto Christ but because they preached the law for righteousnesse without Christ whom he calls the spirit vers 17. and therefore cals them the Ministers of the letter and their Ministry of death and condemnation there is something in the law which is of perpetuall use and something which is but for a time the vis coactiva legis as some call it i. the force of the law to condemn and curse to hold a man under the curse and to hold a man under the power of sin which the Apostle cals the strength of the Law 1 Cor. 15.56 is but for a time and is but accidentall to the law and may be separated from it and is separated indeed from it as soon as ever the soul is in Christ Rom. 8.1 he is then free from the obligation of it to perform personall and perfect obedience to it that so he may be just also from the malediction and curse of it if he be not thus just But that which is of perpetuall use in it is not only the directive power of it but this preparing and humbling vertue of it for if all men by nature Jewes and Gentiles are apt to be puft up with their own righteousnesse and to blesse themselves in their own righteousnesse and so to feel no such need of Christ then this humbling work of the law to slay men of all their fond conceits and foolish confidences in their own righteousnesse and to make men feel the horrible nature of sinne by revealing the curse and malediction due to it is of morall and perpetuall use And hence it is that though the Gospell strictly taken as is intimated Thesis 110. hath no terrour properly in it because thus it reveals nothing but reconciliation through Christs righteousnesse applyed by saith yet the Gospel largely taken for that doctrine which reveals the glad tidings of Christ already come so there is terrour in it because in this respect the Gospell makes use of the law and confirms what is morall and perpetuall therein The sin and terrour which the Gospell largely taken makes use of out of the Law are but subservient to the Gospel strictly taken or for that which is principally and most properly Gospel for thereby the righteousnesse and free-grace and love of the Lord Jesus and pretiousnesse and greatnesse of both are the more clearly illustrated The law of it selfe wounds and kils and rather drives from Christ then unto Christ but in the hand of the Gospel or as Christ handles it so it drives the soul unto Christ and as hath been shewn is the means to that end and 't is a most false and nauseous doctrine to affirm that love only drawes the soul to Christ unlesse it be understood with this caution and notion viz. love as revealed to a sinner and condemned for sin which sin and condemnation as the law makes known so the Gospel makes use of to drawn unto Christ If indeed the Gospel did vulnerare ut vulneraret i. wound that it may wound and terrifie only which the law doth then it saith Chamier was all one with law which Bellarmine pleads for but when it wounds that it may heal this is not contrary but agreeable to the office of a good Physitian whose chiefe work is to heal and may well sute with the healing Ministry of the Lord Jesus and hence we see that although Christ was sent to preach the Gospel yet he came to confirm the law in the Ministry of the Gospel and therefore shews the spirituall sins against the law more clearly and
the Law but the hardnesse of their stony hearts which the Law writ upon them was not able to overcome and t is true that the stony Tables did signifie stony hearts but its false that the writing on stone did not signifie continuance also according to Scripture phrase For all the children of God have stony hearts by nature now God hath promised to write his Law upon such hearts as are by nature stony and his writing of them there implies the continuance of them there so that both these may stand together and the similitude is fully thus viz. The whole Law of God was writ on Tables of stone to continue there so the whole Law of God is writ on stony hearts by nature to continue thereon Thesis 144. Only morall Laws and all morall Laws are thus summarily and generally honoured by God the ten Commandements being Christian pandects and common heads of all morall duties toward God and men Under which generals all the particular morall duties in the Commentaries of the Prophets and Apostles are virtually comprehended and contained and therefore Mr. Primrose's argument is weake who thinks that this honour put upon the Decalogue doth not argue it to be morall Because then many other particular morall Laws set down in Scripture not in Tables of stone but in parchments of the Prophets and Apostles should not be morall For we doe not say that all morall Laws particularly were thus specially honoured but that all and only morall Laws summarily were thus honoured in which summaries all the particulars are contained and in that respect equally honoured It may affect ones heart with great mourning to see the many inventions of mens hearts to blot out this remembrance of the Sabbath day they first cast it out of Paradise and shut it out of the world untill Moses time when in Moses time it s published as a Law and crowned with the same honour as all other morall Laws yet then they make it to be but a ceremoniall Law continuing onely until the comming of Christ after which time it ceaseth to be any Law at all unlesse the Churches constitution shall please to make it so which is worst of all Thesis 145. Every thing indeed which was published by Gods immediate voyce in promulgating of the Law is not morall and common to all but some things so spoken may be peculiar and proper to the Jews because some things thus spoken were promises or motives only annexed to the Law to perswade to the obedience thereof but they were not Laws for the question is whether all Laws spoken and writ thus immediately were not morall but the argument which some produce against this is From the promise annexed to the fifth Command concerning long life and from the motive of redemption out of the house of bondage in the preface to the Commandments both which they say were spoken immediatly but yet were both of them proper unto the Iews But suppose the promise annexed to the fifth Commandement be proper to the Jews and ceremoniall as Master Primrose pleads which yet many strong reasons from Eph. 6.2 may induce one to deny what is this to the question which is not concerning Promises but Commandements and Laws Suppose also that the motive in the Preface of the Commandments literally understood is proper to the Jews yet this is also evident that such reasons and motives as are proper to some and perhaps ceremoniall may be annexed to morall laws which are common to all nor wil it follow that laws are therefore not common because the motives thereto are proper We that dwel in America may be perswaded to love and feare God which are morall duties in regard of our redemption and deliverances from out of the vast sea storms we once had and the tumults in Europe which now are which motives are proper to our selves Promises and motives annexed to the Commandements come in as means to a higher end viz. obedience to the Laws themselves and hence the Laws themselves may be morall and these not so though immediatly spoken because they be not chiefly nor lastly intended herein I know Wallaeus makes the preface to the Commandments a part of the first Commandment and therefore he would hence infer that some part at least of a Commandment is proper to the Jews but if these words contain a motive pressing to the obedience of the whole how is it possible that they should be a part of the law or of any one law For what force of a law can there be in that which only declares unto us who it is that redeemed them out of Egypts bondage For it cannot be true which the same Author affirms that in these words is set forth only who that God is whom we are to have to be our God in the first Commandement but they are of larger extent shewing us who that God is whom we are to worship according to the first Commandement and that with his own worship according to the second and that reverently according to the third and whose day we are to sanctifie according to the fourth and whose wil we are to doe in all duties of love toward man according to the severall duties of the second Table and therefore this declaration of God is no more a part of the first then of any other Commandment and every other Commandement may challenge it as a part of themselves as well as the first Thesis 146. It is a truth as immovable as the pillars of Heaven That God hath given to all men universally a rule of life to conduct them to their end Now if the whole Decalogue be not it what shall The Gospel is the rule of our faith but not of our spirituall life which flows from faith Gal. 2.20 Ioh. 5.24 The law therefore is the rule of our life now if nine of these be a compleat rule without a tenth exclude that one and then who sees not an open gap made for all the rest to goe out at also For where wil any man stop if once this principle be laid viz. That the whole law is not the rule of life May not Papists blot out the second also as some of Cassanders followers have done all but two and as the Antinomians at this day do all and have they not a good ground laid for it who may hence safely say that the Decalogue is not a rule of life for all Mr. Primrose that he might keep himselfe from a broken head here sends us for salve to the light of nature and the testimony of tbe Gospel both which saith he maintain and confirm the morality of all the other Commandements except this one of the Sabbath But as it shall appeare that the Law of the Sabbath hath confirmation from both if this direction was sufficient and good so it may be in the mean time considered why the Gentiles who were universall Idolaters and therefore blotted out the light of nature as Mr. Primrose confesseth
against the second Commandment might not as wel blot out much of that light of nature about the Sabbath also and then how shall the light of nature be any sufficient discovery unto us of that which is morall and of that which is not Thesis 147. There is a Law made mention of Iam. 2.10 whose parts are so inseparably linked together that whosoever breaks any one is guilty of the breach of all and consequently whosoever is called to the obedience of one is called to the obedience of all and consequently all the particular Jaws which it contains are homogeneall parts of the same Totum or whole law If it be demanded What is this Law the answer is writ with the beams of the Sun that 't is the whole morall Law contained in the Decalogue For 1. The Apostle speaks of such a Law which not only the Jews but all the Gentiles are bound to observe and for the breach of any one of which not only the Jews but the Gentiles also were guilty of the breach of all and therefore it cannot be meant of the ceremoniall Law which did neither binde Gentiles or Jews at that time wherein the Apostle writ 2 He speaks of such a Law as is called a royall Law and a Law of liberty vers 8.12 which cannot be meant of the ceremoniall Law in whole or in part which is called a Law of bondage not worthy the royall and kingly spirit of a Christian to stoop to Gal. 4.9 3. 'T is that law by the works of which all men are bound to manifest their faith and by which faâ—â—h is made perfect vers 22. which cannot be the Ceremoniall nor Evangelicall for that is the Law of faith and therefore it 's meant of the Law morall 4. 'T is that Law of which Thou shalt not kill nor commmit adultery are parts vers 11. Now these Laws are part of the Decalogue only and whereof it may be said he that said Thou shalt not commit adultery said also Remember to keep the Sabbath holy and therefore the whole Decalogue and not some parts of it only is the morall Law from whence it is manifest that the Apostle doth not speak as M. Primrose would interpret him of offending against the Word at large and of which the Ceremoniall Laws were a part but of offending against that part of the word to wit the morall Law of which he that offends against any one is guilty of the breach of all hence also his other answer fals to the dust viz. that the fourth command is no part of the Law and therefore the not observing of it is no sinne under the New Testament because it was given only to the Jews and not to us for if it be a part of the Decalogue of which the Apostle only speaks then 't is a meer begging of the question to affirm that it is no part of the Law of Christians but we see the Apostle here speaks of the Law and the Royall Law and the Royall Law of Liberty his meaning therefore must be of some speciall Law which he cals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Law now if he thus speaks of some speciall Law what can it be but the whole Decalogue and not a part of it only as when he speaks of the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he means not some part but the whole Gospel also and if every part of the Decalogue is not morall how should any man know from any Law or rule of God what was morall and what not and consequently what is sinful and what not if it be said the light of nature we have proved that this is a blind and corrupt-Judge as it exists in corrupt man if it be said by the light of the Gospel this was then to set up a light unto Christians to discern it by but none to the Jews while they wanted the Gospel as dispensed to us now many morall Laws also are not mentioned in the Gospel it being but accidentall to it to set forth the Commandements of the Law Thesis 148. If Christ came to fulfill and not to destroy the Law Mat. 5.17 then the Commandement of the Sabbath is not abolished by Christs comming if not one jot prick or tittle of the Law shall perish much lesse shall a whole Law perish or be destroyed by the comming of Christ. Thesis 149. 'T is true indeed that by Law and Prophets is sometimes meant their whole doctrine both ceremoniall and morall and propheticall which Christ fulfilled personally but not so in this place of Matthew but by Law is meant the morall Law and by Prophets those propheticall illustrations and interpretations thereof in which the Prophets do abound for 1. The Lord Christ speaks of that law only which whosoever should teach men to break and cast off he should be least in the Kingdom of Heaven Matth. 5.19 but the Apostles did teach men to cast off the Ceremoniall Law and yet were never a whit lesse in the Kingdom of Heaven 2. He speaks of that Law by conformity to which all his true Disciples should exceed the righteousnesse of Scribes and Pharisees but that was not by being externally ceremonious or morall but by internall conformity to the spiritualnesse of Gods Law which the Pharisees then regarded not 3. Christ speaks of the least Commandements and of these least Commandments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now what should those least Commandements be but those which he afterward interprets of rash anger adulterous eyes unchaste thoughts love to enemies c. which are called least in opposition to the Pharisaicall Doctors conceits in those times who urged the grosse duties commanded and condemned men onely for grosse sins forbidden as if therein consisted our compleat conformity to the Law of God and therefore by the least of those Commandments is meant no other then those which he afterward sets down in his spirituall interpretation of the Law vers 21. never a one of which Commandments are Ceremoniall but morall Laws and although Mr. Primrose thinks that there is no connexion between the seventeen and the other expositors verses of the Law which follow yet whosoever ponders the Analysis impartially shall finde it otherwise even from the 17 Verse to the end the conclusion of which is to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect who is never made a pattern of perfection to us in ceremoniall but only in morall matters 't is true indeed which some object that there is mention made of Altar and Sacrifice vers 23 which were ceremonials but there is no Law about them but only a morall Law of love is thereby prest with allusion to the ceremoniall practice in those times he speaks also about divorce but this is but accidentally brought to shew the morality of the Law of adultery the Law of retaliation wants not good witnesses to testifie to the morality of it but I rather thinke 't is brought in to set forth a morall Law against private revenge
if speciall light in them they shall then have more speciall and saving light Thesis 194. As it is no argument that that Law is according to the light of nature which the Gentiles generally practised for then Polytheisme and Sacrificing of beasts yea wil-worship should be according to the light of nature because these sins were generally practised so it is no argument that that Law is not according to the light of nature which they generally neglected and therefore suppose the Gentiles never observed a Sabbath yet this is no argument that it is therefore no morall Law I know M. Primrose thinks that the Sacrifices were by an instinct of nature Because it dictates that all sinnes whereof mortall men are guilty are to be expiated by Sacrifice and Offerings to God offended Which assertion hath some truth in it if those words By Sacrifices and Offerings be left out for what light of nature could make men think that an infinite Deity offended could be pacified by such carnall observances as the Sacrifices of brute beasts and their blood which never offended This custome the Gentiles might retain as a Relique of former instruction and institution by their first Fathers after the flood which being matters meerly ceremonious might be retained more firmly then other morall duties of great consequence however we see that the practice of the Gentiles is no fit guide to direct that which is according to the law and light of nature Thesis 195. If more narrow enquiry be made what the Law of nature is these distinctions must be observed 1. The Law of nature is either of pure or corrupt nature The Law of pure nature was the Law of God writ on Adams heart in innocency which was nothing else but that holy bent and inclination of the heart within to act according to the holy Law of God revealed or Covenant made with him without and thus Aquinas places the law of nature in this inclination The Law of corrupt nature is that dimme light left in the minde and morall inclination left in the will in respect of some things contained in the Law of God which the Apostle cals Conscience Rom. 2.15 which naturall conscience is nothing but the remnants and generall principles of the law of pure nature left in all men since the fall which may be increased by more knowledge of the Law of God or more diminished and defaced by the wickednesse of man Titus 1.15 2. The Law of corrupt nature is taken either more largely or strictly As it is taken more largely so it comprehends all that which is agreeable and sutable to naturall reason and that from a naturall innate equity in the thing when it is made known either by divine instruction or humane wisdom although it be not immediatly known by the light of nature and thus many judiciall laws are naturall and morall though positive and of binding nature unto this day As it is taken strictly so it comprehends no more but what nature immediatly knows or may know without externall instruction as parents to be honoured mans life to be preserved 3. The Law of nature strictly taken are either principles of nature or conclusions from such principles The principles of the law of nature are in some respect many yet may be reduced to this one head viz. That good is to be followed evill to be avoided Conclusions are deductions from those principles like severall streames from the same spring which though lesse evident then the principles yet may be readily found out by discourse and sad search 4. Conclusions arising from these principles are more immediate or mediate Immediate are made by Aquinas to be two 1. Love God with all thy heart 2. Love thy neighbour as thy selfe Mediate are such as arise from the former principles by means of those two more immediate conclusions and of this kinde are some as he thinks yea all the laws of the Decalogue if right reason may be judge Now to apply these Thesis 196. If the question be whether the Sabbath be known by the light of pure nature the answer is yea for Adams minde knew of it and his heart was inclined and bent to the keeping of it although it be true that now this light in corrupt nature as in many other morall duties is almost wholly extinct and worn out as hath been formerly shewn And to speak plainly this great and first impression left on mans heart in pure nature is the first rule according to which we are now to judge of what is the law of nature and it serves to dash to peeces and grinde to powder and dust most effectually and strongly the dreams and devices of such as would make the Sabbath not morall because not naturall or not easily known by the present light of corrupt nature when as corrupt nature is no perfect copy but a blotted discovery of some part of the light of nature which was fully imprinted at large in pure nature and therefore it is no wonder if our adversaries so much oppose the Commandment of the Sabbath in the state of innocency such therefore as are otherwise Orthodox in this point and yet make this description of the Law of nature viz. which was written on mans heart in his first first Creation to be both uncertain and impertinent doe unwarily pull down one of the strongest bulwarks and the first that ever God made to defend the morality of the Sabbath there is indeed no expresse Scripture which makes this description of the Law of nature as they object and so it is of many other things which are virtually and for substance contained in the Scripture although there be no formall description set down of the same and the like I say of this description here Thesis 197. If we speak of the Law of nature strictly taken for that which is immediatly and readily known by the common light of nature in all men then it may be safely affirmed that although the Sabbath should not be in this sence naturall yet it will not follow that it is not therefore morall for the moral law once writ on mans heart in pure nature is almost blotted out only some rudera and old rubbish is left of it in a perverse minde and a corrupt heart Eph. 4.18 we see the wisest of the heathens making those things to be morall vertues Iunius instanceth in the Law of private revenge and we know they magnified will-worship which the Scripture condemns as morall vices and sins God would have common-wealths preserved in all places of the world from the inundation and deluge of mans wickednesse and therefore he hath generally printed the notions of the second Table upon mens hearts to set bounds as by sea-banks unto the overflowings thereof and hence it is that they are generally known but he would not have Churches every where and therefore there is but little known concerning matters of the first Table and consequently about this Law of the Sabbath
which notwithstanding may be morall although it be not so immediatly known Thesis 198. If we speak of the law of corrupt nature largely taken for that law which when 't is made known by divine determination and declaration is both sutable and congruous to naturall reason and equity we may then say that the Law of the Sabbath is according to the light of nature even of corrupt nature it self for do but suppose that God is to be worshipped and then these three things appear to be most equall 1. That he is not only to have a time but a speciall time and a fit proportion of time for worship 2. That it 's most meet that he should make this proportion 3. The Lord having given man six daies and taken a Seventh to himself mans reason cannot but confesse that it is most just to dedicate that time to God and for my own part I think that in this respect the law of the Sabbath was as fairly writ on mans heaâ—â— in innocency as many other morall laws which none question the morality of at this day but disputes about this are herein perhaps uselesse Thesis 199. The Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be administred meet circumstances concurring every Lords day nay upon the week daies often as they did in the primitive persecutions and hence our Saviour limits no time for it in the first institution thereof as he did for the Passeover of old but only this As oft as you doe it doe it in remembrance of me Hence it will follow that now under the Gospel there is no set Sabbath as M. Primrose would because our Saviour at the first institution of the Lords Supper limits no particular day for the celebration thereof as once he did for the Passeover for though there is an appointed speciall time as shall hereafter appeare for the publique exercise of all holy duties not being limited to those times but enlarged to other times also hence there is no reason why our Saviour should institute a set Sabbath when he instituted the Lords Supper as the proper time of the celebration thereof as it was in case of the Passeover Thesis 200. It is no argument to prove the Sabbath to be ceremoniall because it is reckoned among ceremonials viz. shew-bread and sacrifices as M. Primrose and Wallaeus urge it out of Mat. 12.1 2 3. for 1. upon the same ground fornication and eating of idolothytes are ceremoniall because they are ranked among ceremonials viz. bloud and things strangled Act. 15.29.2 upon this ground the Sabbath hath no morality at all in it no more then shew-bread and sacrifices which were wholly ceremoniall 3. The Sabbath is in the same place reckoned among things which are morall as pulling a sheep out of a pit upon the Sabbath day an act of humanity why may it not then be as well accounted morall 4. One may as well argue that the not keeping company with Publicanes and sinners was a ceremoniall thing because the Lord Jesus useth the same Proverbiall speech I will have mercy not sacrifice Mat. 9.13 upon which he defends the lawfullnesse of pulling the ears of corn upon the Sabbath day in this Mat. 12.15 the scope therefore of this place is not to shew the nature of the Sabbath day whether it be ceremoniall or morall but the lawfullnesse and morality of his act in eating the ears of corn upon this day and thus the arguments of our Saviour are very strong and convicting to prove the morality of such an act but no way to prove the ceremoniality of the Sabbath for that is the scope of our Saviour that mercy to the hungry is to be preferred before the Sacrifice of bodily resting upon the Sabbath M. Primrose indeed replies hereto and tels us that mercy is to be preferred before sacrifice or ceremoniall duties but not before morall duties and therefore Christ preferring it before the rest on the Sabbath the Sabbath could not be morall but we know that mercy in the second table is sometimes to be preferred before morall duties in the first table a man is bound to neglect solemn praier sometime to attend upon the sick it 's a morall duty to sanctifie some day for a Sabbath saith M. Primrose and yet suppose a fire be kindled in a town upon that day or any sick to be helped must not mercy be prefer'd before hearing the word which himself will acknowledge to be then a morall duty Thesis 201. When Christ is said to be Lord of the Sabbath Mat. 12.8 the meaning is not as if he was such a Lord as had power to break it but rather such a Lord as had power to appoint it and consequently to order the work of it for his own service M. Primrose thinks That he is said to be Lord of it because he had power to dispense with the keeping of it by whom when he would and that Christ did chuse to do such works upon the Sabbath day which were neither works of mercy or necessity nay which were servile which the Law forbade for Christ saith he as mediatour had no power to dispense with things morall but he might with matters ceremoniall and therefore with the Sabbath How far Christ Jesus might and may dispence with morall laws I dispute not now I think Biell comes nearest the truth in this controversie only this is considerable suppose the Sabbath was ceremoniall yet it 's doubtfull whether Christ Jesus who came in the daies of his flesh to fulfill all righteousnesse could abolish or break the law ceremoniall untill his death was past by which this hand-writing of Ordinances was blotted out Colos. 2.14 and this middle wall of partition was broken down Ephes. 2.14 15 16. But let it be yeelded that Christ had power to break ceremoniall laws then before his death yet in this place there is no such matter for the words contain a clear proof for the right observance of the Sabbath against the over-rigid conceptions of the superstitious and proud Pharisees who as they thought it unlawfull for Christ to heal the sick upon the Sabbath so to rub out and eat a few corn ears upon it although hunger and want and perhaps more then ordinary in the Disciples here should force men hereunto which was no servile work as Mr Primrose would but a work of necessity and mercy in this case and our Saviour proves the morality of it from the example of David eating the Shew-bread and those that were with him preferring that act of mercy before sacrifice and abstinence from Shew-bread and hence our Saviour argues That if they attending upon David might eat the Shew-bread much more his hungry Disciples might eat the corn while they attended upon him that day who was Lord of the Sabbath and that they might be the better strengthened hereby to do him service These things being thus where now is there to be found any reall breach of the Sabbath or doing of any
pray that their flight may not be in the winter or Sabbath-day as it were easie to open these places against all Cavils and therefore it is for substance Moral Yet the word Sabbatisme Heb. 4.9 and the Apostles gradation from yeerely Holy-dayes to monthly new-moons and from them to weekly Sabbaths which are called shadowes of things to come Colos. 2.16 seemes strongly to argue some type affixed to those individual Sabbaths or Jewish seventh dayes and hence it is perhaps that the Sabbath is set among Moral Lawes in the Decalogue being originally and essentially Moral and yet is set among ceremonial Feast-dayes Levit. 23.2 3. because it is accidentally typical And therefore Mr. Brabourne need not raise such a dust and cry out Oh monstrous very strange what a mingle-mangle what a hâ—tch-potch have we here what a confusion and jumbling of things so farre distant as when Morals and Ceremonials are here mingled together No verily we do not make the fourth Commandment essentially Ceremonial but being acidentally so why may it notwithstanding this be mingled among the rest of the Morals Let one solid reason be given but away with words Thesis 21. If the question be what Type is affixed and annexed to the Sabbath I think it difficult to find out although mans wanton wit can easily allegorize and readily frame imaginations enough in this point Some thing it typified Christs Rest in the grave but I feare this will not hold no more then many other Popish conjectures wherein their allegorizing Postillers abound Bullinger and some others think that it was Typical in respect of the peculiar Sacrifices annexed to it which Sacrifices were Types of Christ Numb 28.9 And although much might be said for this against that which Mr. Brabourne replies yet I see nothing cogent in this for the multiplying of Sacrifice which were 〈…〉 on this Day proves rather a specialty of worshipping God more aboundantly on this Day then any Ceremonialnesse in it for if the offering of Sacrifices meerly should make a day Ceremonial why did it not make every Day Ceremonial in respect of every dayes offering of the Morning and Evening Sacrifice Some think that our Rest upon the Sabbath not God the Fathers Rest as Mr. Brabourne turnes it was made not onely a resemblance but also a Type of our Rest in Christ of which the Apostle speaks Heb. 4.3 which is therefore called a Sabbatisme vâ—r 9. or a keeping of a Sabbath at the word signifies What others would inferre from this place to make the Sabbath to be meerly Cermonial and what Mr. Brabourne would answer from hence that it is not at all Ceremonial may both of them be easily answered here again as already they have been in some of the former Theses Some scruples I see not yet through about this text inforce me herein to be silent and therefore to leave it to such as think they may defend it as one ground of some affixed Type unto the Jewish Sabbath Thesis 22. Learned Iunius goes before us herein and points out the Type affixed to that Sabbath For besides the first institution of it in Paradise he makes two other causes which he calls Accessory or affixed and added to it 1. One was Civill or Civil that men and beasts might rest from their toilsome labour every week 2. Ceremoniall or Ceremonial for their solemne Commemoration of their deliverance out of Egypt which we know typified our deliverance by Christ Deut. 5.15 Some think indeed that their deliverance out of Egypt was upon the Sabbath day but this I do not urge because though it be very probable yet it is not certaine onely this is certaine that they were to Sanctifie this Day because of this their Deliverance and 't is certaine this Deliverance was Typical of our deliverance by Christ and hence 't is certaine that there was a Type affixed to this Sabbath and because the Scripture is so plain and expresse in it I 〈◊〉 inclined to think the same which Iunius doth that this is the Type rather then any other I have yet heard of against which I know many things may be objected onely it may be sufficient to clear up the place against that which Mr. Brabourne answerâ— to it Thesis 23. The Deliverance 〈◊〉 of Egypt saith he is not 〈…〉 as the ground of the Institution of the Sabbath but onely as a motive to the observation thereof as it was more generall in the Preface to the Decalogue to the obedience of every other command which notwithstanding are not Ceremonial for God saith I am the Lord who brought thee out of Egypt therefore keepe thou the first the second the third the fifth the sixth as well as the fourth Commandment and therefore saith he we may make every Commandment Ceremonial as well as the Sabbath if the motive of deliverance out of Egypt makes the Sabbath to be so This is the substance and sinewes of his discourse herein and I confesse its true their Deliverance out of Egypt was not the first ground of the institution of it but Gods Rest after his six dayes labour yet it was such a ground as we contend for viz. a secondary and an annexed or affixed ground And that it was not a Motive only to observe that day as it is in the Preface to the Decalogue but a superadded ground of it may appear from this one consideration viz. because that very ground on which the Lord urgeth the observation of the Sabbath in Exod. 20.11 it is wholly left out in the repetition of the Law Deut. 5.15 and their deliverance out of Egypt put into the rome thereof for the ground in Exod. 20.11 is this Six daies God made Heaven and Earth and rested the seventh day and sanctified it but instead of these words and of this ground we finde other words put into their roome Deut. 5.15 Remember thou wast a servant in the Land of Egypt and that the Lord brought thee out thence with a mighty hand therefore the Lord thy God commandeth thee to Keepe the Sabbath Which seems to argue strongly that these words are not a meer Motive but another ground of the observation of the Sabbath And why might not the generall Motive in the Preface of the Decalogue serve as a sufficient Motive to the obedience of this Commandment if there was no more but a Motive in these words of Deutr. and therefore I suppose this was also the ground and affixed Type unto the Jewish Sabbath Thesis 24. But still the difficulty remains for Master Brabourne will say that those were but humane reasons but what ground is there from Scripture for the institution of another Sabbath as well as of the abrogation of the old which if it be not cleared I confesse this cause sinks here therefore let it be again observed that we are not to expect such evidence from Scripture concerning this Change as fond and humorous wit sometimes pleads for In this controversie namely That Christ should 〈◊〉
particular precepts saith hee perhaps unawares are conclusions flowing from these principles out of Matth. 22. And are the principles good in themselves and suitable to humane nature and doe not all the conclusions participate of their nature For what are all particular precepts but particular unfoldings of love to God and love to man If all the precepts of the second Table be morall which doe onely concerne man why should any of the first fall short of that glory which doe immediately concerne God Shall man have six and all of them morally good and God have but foure and some one or more of them not so Is it comely and good to have God to be our God in the first Commandment to worship him after his owne minde in the second to give him his worship with all the highest respect and reverence of his Name in the third and is it not as comely good and suitable that this great God and King should have some magnificent day of state to be attended on by his poore servants and creatures both publikely and privately with speciall respect and service as oft as himselfe sees meer and which we cannot but see and confesse to be most equall and just according to the fourth Commandment If mans life must bee divided into labour and rest is it not equall and good if wee have six dayes that God should have a seventh If the bruit beasts could speake they would say that a seventh dayes rest is good for them Exod. 23.12 and shall man who hath more cause and more need of rest even of holy rest say that it is not good for him even to rest in the bosome of God himselfe to which he is called this day Take away a Sabbath who can defend us from Atheisme Barbarisme and all manner of Devilisme and prophanesse And is it evill thus to want it and shall it not be good to have it I confesse if God had commanded a perpetuall Sabbath it had not then been good but sinfull to observe any set Sabbath but if God will have man to labour for himselfe six dayes and this labour be morally good being now commanded why is it not then as good to observe a seventh in rest to God being also commanded of him Thesis 31. It is therefore at least an indigested assertion of those who affirme that the Decalogue sets out the precepts of the law of Nature and yet withall doth superad certaine precepts proper to the Jewish people in which last respect they say all men are not bound to the observance thereof and they produce the fourth Commandment for proof but in respect of the first they are But although in the application of a law something may bee proper to the Jewish people yet with leave of the learned there is never a law in it but it is morall and common to all for to make any law in the Decalogue proper is an assertion springing from a false and blinde principle viz. That that law onely is morall which is naturall not naturall as suitable to humane nature but which is seene and knowne by the common light of corrupt nature without the helpe of any externall usher or teacher If also any lawes in the Decalogue be proper how will any finde out and discerne morall lawes which concerne all from proper laws which appertaine onely to some For if God hath made such a mingling and not severed morall lawes by themselves then man hath no law or revelation by any dictinct and severed lawes left unto him to discerne lawes proper and peculiar from laws morall and common which how pernicious it may bee to mens soules to bee left to such uncertainty as also how injurious to God and crosse to his maine ends in discovering morall lawes let the wise consider for if they say that wee must flye for help herein to the light of corrupt nature then as hath been shewn an imperfect light and a blinde guide and a corrupt judge must be the chief rule of discerning that which is morall from that which is peculiar and proper for doubtlesse such a kinde of light is the light of corrupt nature Thesis 32. Some thinke that those commandments onely are morally good which the Gospel hath declared and confirmed to be so and by this shift they thinke to avoid the absurdity of flying to the blinde guide of corrupt nature to judge of these colours viz. what is morall and what is not Mr. Primrose therefore excludes the fourth Commandment from being morall the other nine being ratified by the light of the Gospell which this he saith is not but if his meaning be that there must be a generall ratification of lawes morall by the verdict of the Gospell then the fourth Commandment cannot be excluded from being morall because it hath a ratification in generall from the Gospell for therein wee read that the morall law is holy just and good Rom. 7. and that Christ came not to destroy the least jot or tittle of the law Matth. 5. much lesse a whole law of the fourth Commandment In the Gospel also God promiseth to write his Law upon our hearts wherein the fourth Commandment is not excepted But if his meaning beâ— this that the Gospell must particularly mention and so make a particular ratification as it were by name of every morall law then his assertion is unsound there being many judiciall lawes of Moses of which some are wholly morall others containing in them something of common and morall equity which we have no expresse mention of in the blessed Gospell and let him turne over al the leaves of the Gospell hee shall not finde that proportion of time which himselfe affirmes to be morall in the fourth Commandment to bee expressely and particularly mentioned in the Gospell and therefore that also must be excluded from being morall upon his owne principles as well as what we contend for in this Commandment so to bee Thesis 33. Some of those who maintaine the law of the Sabbath to be ceremoniall affirme that every Law in the Decalogue is not morall upon this ground to wit because the Law is called Gods Covenant which Covenant they shew from sundry instances not only to comprehend moralls but also ceremonialls for they make it the excellency of the Decalogue to comprehend as a short epitome all Gods Ordinances both morall and ceremoniall which epitome is more largely opened in the writings of Moses where not onely morall but also ceremoniall lawes are expressed and dispersed And hence they thinke that as the other nine are the summary and epitome of all morall Ordinances so the fourth Commandment which was kept with the practise of Ceremonies was the summary and epitome of all the ceremoniall ordinances and hence the fourth Commandment becomes ceremoniall But for answer to this wily notion unjustly father'd upon Austin and Calvin by some it may thus farre be granted that as the word Law is sometimes taken more strictly for
the heavy plagues for the breach of it more fully then the Scribes and Pharises he that is angry with his brother is a murderer and he that cals him fool is in danger of hell fire Mat. 5.22 Peter was no Minister of the old Testament because he first convinced and prickt the Iews to the heart for their murder of Christ Iesus Paul was no such Minister neither when as he would evince our justification by Christs righteousnesse only in that he begins and spends so much time in proving Gentiles and Iews to be under sin and wrath notwithstanding all the excuses of the one and priviledges of the other as appears in his three first chapters to the Romans but herein they were Gospel preachers Nor can it with any colour of reason be thought that the Prophets in the old Testament were herein Ministers of the letter viz. when they did first wound and then heal first humble by the law and then revive by the Gospel Mr. Saltmarsh hath been so blinded with this notion of the old Testament Ministry that to make this use of the law in preaching the Gospel or to hold forth the promises of grace to them that are qualified with the grace of the promise as the old Testament Prophets did is to give as he thinks the wine of the Gospel burning hot as the covetous gentleman did to his guests and another whom I spare to name professeth That the old Testament because it urgeth the law to humble containeth little good news but much bad news but â—ow when Christ saith Go preach the Gospel thereby he would have them he saith Ministers of the new Testament to preach glad tidings nothing but Gospel but no had bidings not a jot of the law untill men positively reject the glad tidings of the Gospel If these men speak true then neither Peter in his preaching nor Paul in his writings nor Christ himself in his Ministry were Ministers of the new Testament but did overheat their wine and preach much bad tidings to the people of God Verily if this stuff be not repented of the Lord hath a time to visit for these inventions 2. Some object Gal. 3.24 25. That the children of the old Testament were under the law as their pedagogue to lead them to Christ but now the Apostle saith we are no longer under this Schoolmaster who are sons of God in the new Testament Be it so that the sons of God under the new Testament are past the terrouring of this Schoolmasters is it not therefore the work of the new Testament Ministry to preach the law unto servants and slaves to sin and Satan in new Testament times No saith the same auâ—hor for this is to preach bad news this is no good news to say Thou art condemned for these things for the Gospel saith thus Thou poor drunkard thou proud woman here is a gracious God that hath loved thee and sent Christ to die for thee and Ministers to make it known to thee and here is everlasting salvation by him only because thou art a sinner thou art now free from damnation fear not that Christ hath loved thee therefore obey him if not thou shalt not be damned that is done away already c. I would know whether a proud woman or a poor drunkard a villain who never yet beleeved are in a state of condemnation I or no I have read indeed that There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Rom. 8.1 but never of any such freedom to them that are out of Christ unlesse it was only in destination and merit and I have read that we are by nature children of wrath while dead in sin Eph. 2 1 2 3. but never of this viz. that we are in favour while we be in our sin much lesse that we are to beleeve this because we are such If therefore such persons be in a state of wrath and death and condemnation is not this like the old false prophets crying peace peace and salvation where there is no peace There is no peace to the wicked saith my God Isa. 48. ult Isa. 57. ult This is truth before they reject the Gospel is it not This the law saith say some true But is not this confirmed by the Ministry of the Gospel also Iob. 3. ult He that beleeves not the wrath of God abides upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was upon him before he did beleeve and when he beleeves not it abides where it did Must the Ministers of the new Testament therefore preach lies and falshoods and tell proud women and poor drunkards and villains before they refuse the Gospel by unbelief that the Lord Iesus loves them and that they need not fear condemnation when the Scripture hath shut up all men under it that the promise by faith might be given to those that beleeve and them only What is this Gospel Ministry but to tell men they are whole and not sick to death but healed before they come to the Physitian the Lord Iesus surely that is Gospel Ministry which advanceth Christ not onely in word but in power in the hearts of poor sinners but doth this Ministry advance the Physitians custome and honour which where it comes must first tell all the crue of wretched drunkards proud persons and villains that they are already well and whole loved and pardoned blessed and saved before ever they come to the Lord Jesus suppose therefore as some may say that servants and slaves to sin may have the Law preacht to them yet the sons and children of God have no use of it in that respect now 't is true I grant not as the servants have under the new Testament nor yet as the sons of God had under the old for the children of God under the old Testament had need of this Schoolmaster to leade them to Christ to come and ad Christum typecum i. to Christ typed out in sacrifices and oblations high Priest and Altar and so it led them to Christ afar off and as it were a great way about but it doth not follow that there is no use of the Law therefore to be a Schoolmaster still to leade unto Christ immediatly and already come those that are servants to sin under the new Testament have need of the law to shew them the condemnation and curse under which they lie by nature and are now actually under but the sons of God for whom Christ is made a curse are not thus under it and therefore have not this use of it but only to shew that curse and condemnation which they do of themselves deserve and therefore the holy Apostle when he was in Christ and did live unto God he shewes us how he did live unto God viz. by dying to the Law and how he did die to the Law and that was by the Law i. as it did shew him his condemnation he did live to God in his justification as it did shew him his sin and wants
and weaknesse it made him die unto it and expect no life from it and so live unto God in his sanctification for so the words are I through the Law am dead to the Law that I may live unto God Gal. 2.19 the issue therefore is this that if the doctrine be taken strictly pro lege fidei as Chamier cals it or that doctrine which shews the way of mans righteousnesse and justification only there indeed all the works of the law all terrours and threatnings are to be excluded and nothing else but peace pardon grace favour eternall reconciliation to be beleeved and received and therefore it 's no new Testament Ministry to urge the Law or to thunder out any terrour here for in this sence it 's true which is commonly received that in the Law there are terrours but in the Gospel none but if the Gospel be taken largely for all that doctrine which brings glad tidings of Christ already come and shews the love of God in the largest extent of it and the illustrations and confirmations of it from the law then such servants of Jesus Christ who hold forth the law to make way for grace and to illustrate Châ—ists love must either be accounted New Testament Ministers or else as hath been shewne Christ Jesus and his Apostles were none Thesis 115. The second is a professed neglect and casting off the work of repentance and mourning for sin nay of asking pardon of sin for if the Law be no rule to shew man his duty why should any man then trouble himself with sorrow for any sin for if it be no rule to him how should any thing be sin to him and if so why then should any ask pardon of it or mourn under it why should not a man rather harden his heart like an Adamant and make his forehead brasse and iron even unto the death against the feeling of any sin but what doctrine is more crossâ— to the Spirit of grace in Gospel times then this which is a Spirit of mourning Zâ—c 12.10 11. what doctrin more crosse to the expresse comand of Christ from heaven then this who writes from heaven to the Church of Ephesus to remember from whence she is fallen and repent Rev. 2.5 what doctrine more crosse to the example of holy men then this who after they were converted then repented and lamented most of all Ier. 31.18.19 2 Cor. 7.9.10 11. what doctrine more crosse to the salvation of souls the mercy of God and forgivenesse of sin for so the promise runs if we confesse our sinnes he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins 1 Joh. 1.9 what doctrine so crosse to the Spirit of the love of Christ shed abroad in the heart that when a mans sins are greatest which is after conversion because now against more love and more nearnesse to Jesus Christ that now a beleevers sorrow should be least monkish and macerating sorrow indeed is loathsome but godly sorrow is sweet and glorious doubtlesse those mens blindenesse is exceeding great who know not how to reconcile joy and sorrow in the same subject who cannot with one eye behold their free justification and therein daily rejoyce and the weaknesse and imperfection of their sanctification with another eye and for that mourn Thesis 116. The third thing is a denying sanctification the honour of a faithfull and true witnesse or cleare evidence of our justification for if a beleever be not bound to look unto the Law as his rule why should he then have any eye to his sanctâ—fication which is nothing else but our habituall conformity to the Law as inherent corruption is nothing else but habituall disagreement with it although sanctification be no part of our righteousnesse before God and in this sence is no evidence of our justification yet there is scarce any clearer truth in all the Scripâ—uâ—e then this viz. that it is an evidence that a man is in a justified estate and yet this leven which denies the Law to be a Christians rule of life hath sowred some mens spiritâ— against this way of evidencing It is a doubtfull evidence saith Dâ— Crisp an argument not an evidence it is a carnall and an inferiour evidence the last and the least not the first evidence it is an evidence if justification be first evident say Den and Saltmarsh some men may be led to these opinions from other principles then a plain denyall of the directive use of the Law but this I feare lies undermost however let these two things be examined 1. Whether sanctification be a doubtfull evidence 2. Whether it be a carnall inferiour and may not be a first evidence Thesis 117. If to be under the power and dominion of sin and Originall corruption be a sure and certain evidence of actuall condemnation so that he that saith he knows Christ and hath fellowshâ—p with him and yet walks in darknesse and keeps not his Commandments is a lyar 1 Ioh. 1.6 2.4 why may not sanctification then whereby we are set free from the power of sin be a sure and certain evidence of our actuall justification for hereby we know that we know him if we keep his Commandements 1 Joh. 2 3. whereby it is manifest that the Apostle is not of their mindes who think the negative to be true viz. that they that keep not Christs commandments are in a state of perdition but they will not make the affirmative true viz. that they that keep his Commandments may thereby know that they are in a state of salvation If Jesus Christ be sent to blesse his people in turning them from their iniquities Act. 3. ult then they that know they are turned from their iniquities by him may know certainly that they are blessed in him and if they be not thus turned they may know certainly that they are yet accursed If godlinesse hath the promises of this life and that which is to come 1 Tim. 4.8 and if the free grace and actuall love of God be revealed clearly to us only by some promise how then is sanctification so near akin to godlinesse excluded from being any evidence is there no inherent grace in a beleever that no inherent sanctification can be a true evidence verily thus some do think but what is this but an open gracelesse profession thrr every beleever is under the power of inherent sin if he hath not the being of any inherent grace or if there be any inherent grace yet it is say some so mixt with corruption and is such a spotted and blurd evidence that no man can discern it I confesse such an answer would well become a blinde Papist who never knew where grace grew for so they dispute against certitudo salutis certitudine fidei when the conclusion of faith ariseth from such a proposition as is the word of God and the assumption the testimony of Gods Spirit to a mans own experience of the work of God in his heart but it ill beseems a