The Christian Sabbath Vindicated, Part 1 · Chapter 10 (3 of 3)

The Christian Sabbath Vindicated · Part 1 · Chapter 10 (3 of 3)

p. 2952. But we ſhall alſo be as much at a loſſe, if not more,LXI. 2. With reſpect to the Continuance, for a whole day: For, about the Continuance, In which we diſagree moſt, and is (as we have oft intimated) the maineſt thing in diſpute which we plead for, and they moſt oppoſe. But if they come not home to us, and to the fourth Commandement for a whole Day, they will be farther to ſeeke for a Rule to direct them and us in this determination then in the former. To which purpoſe;

1. We obſerve,1. They doe not expreſſe how much time is neceſſarie and ſufficient. that our diſputers in this point of the Continuance (that is moſt of them) doe not ſo much as offer to expreſſe, how neer we Chriſtians muſt neceſſarily, and may ſufficiently, come to a whole Dayes Continuance, which was determined to the Jews, and by them obſerved, when they made any conſcience of the Commandement. Only they ſometimes vouchſafe to grant, [That they doe not ſinne who obſerve the whole Day for Religion, rather that p. 296they do well and commendable] And now and then they even ſay, [They doe beſt who ſo obſerve it.] But they will not yeeld that it muſt neceſſarily be ſo obſerved, (for this were to yeeld all) [That they ſay, is ſuperſtition to thinke, and judaizing, and tyranny to urge others unto.]

2. Nor can, if it be not for a whole day.2. Therefore we make bold to u…ge them, to tell us at laſt, what Continuance of Time, on the Lords day is certainly neceſſary, and certainly ſufficient: To convince the unwilling, to whom a very little while together is irkeſome and tedious; and to ſatisfie the godly, who may be apt to thinke, leſſe then the whole Day too little? And that for all the pretence of Chriſtian liberty, the reſpect to Gods Honour, and their owne ſouls good, (which undoubtedly concerne Chriſtians as much, at leaſt as the Jewes) The Continuance of a whole Day ſhould have been kept, as well as the number of one Day in Seven. Let them venture upon any proportion of Continuance that they will, or can, and what can the example of a whole Day in the fourth Commandement direct them to, If they refuſe a whole Day? Will they leave out, an houre at night, and as much in the morning? Or only at night? Or two houres? Or halfe an houre? How will they argue ſo much as they determine to be neceſſary, and not the reſt which they leave out? Or how will they prove ſo much ſufficient; and yet not to be more then neceſſary? Both wayes they will be toſſed from poſt to pillar, or betweene two rockes, either of which will ſuffice to ſplit this aſſertion, whenſoever they lanch it forth.

3. Nor can they ſatisfie all with any determination.3. Nor will they be able to helpe themſelves, if we ſhould grant them what we never muſt, becauſe we have proved the contrary as of neceſſity to Religion, [That the Continuance of this chiefe Time is only to be extended to the publike Worſhip.] And that if it be wiſely determined for them, It is well enough determined for the chiefe Time of Religion. For even upon this ſuppoſition, take but the two houres (that the author of Sunday no Sabbath vouchſafes to name as the juſt allowance) or any other proportion more or leſſe; And they ſhall never be able to avoyd daſhing either againſt the Scylla, of the unwilling, [That ſo much is not neceſſary] or againſt the charitie of the zealous, [That ſo much is not ſufficient.] And whatſoever they would put forth to ſave themſelves from the one, will thruſt them on the other. What neceſſity p. 297(will the one ſay) of ſo much Prayers, or Reading, or Singing, or ſo long Sermon? Specially when mens minds are upon the World, buſineſſes or ſports, which would detaine them or call them off from the publike, How ſhall ſuch be convinced, that ſuch a proportion is neceſſary? Here it muſt be remembred, that there is no helpe to be had, from any pretence of the Churches authority to command the proportion, for that we have already abundantly confuted. But we are now, upon the point of wiſdome, by what Rule to make the neceſſary proportion, of which we ſay, there is none, nor can there be, to ſuch as refuſe a whole Day. Or if there ſhould be ſomewhat imagined, yet then come the other, and they pleade. [What ſufficiencie in ſo ſudden or ſhort a diſpatch of the whole?] Specially ſince there is no Time determined wherein our ſoules can have liberty, (being ſervants, or men of buſineſſe) after the publike? Is not God worthy of more Time then thus? Are our ſoules of ſo little regard, that ſuch a pittance once in a week ſhould ſuffice them? Here againe the Churches authority cannot be pretended: But we are upon a Rule of wiſdome, which is no where to be found, no not for the publike; if there be no more Time to be determined, but the publike Time only. We foreſee an objection concerning this, which we ſhall meet with anon in a place no leſſe fit.

4. But this difficulty about the Continuance, 4. Vnleſſe there be Time ſufficient, for family, and ſolitary worſhip.will be much more encreaſed, when we tell our diſputers againe, [That the Continuance of our chiefe ſolemne Times, is not ſufficient, if it extend not beyond the publike, even to family Worſhip where it may be had; and infallibly to ſolitary Worſhip, both before and after the publike, for preparation for it, and improvement of it; and further gaine in ſpirituall matters beſides] as we have formerly proved at large. And then what can ſatisfie, that ſuch a proportion (as is leſſe then the whole of that Day) is ſufficient for the chiefe Time for Religoin? They cannot deny, but it is as poſſible for us to obſerve a whole Day as it was for the Jewes; themſelves confeſſe we have more helpes then they, clearer Scriptures, a greater meaſure of Grace powred on Chriſtians. They acknowledge alſo, it is not a ſinne to obſerve a whole Day, but lawfull, commendable, beſt. How then can leſſe then the whole be ſufficient to be determined for the Continuance? What rule or reaſon p. 298can abate any of it? and if any, how much? And how is it demonſtrated then, that ſo much is neceſſary and no more, and ſo much ſufficient and no leſſe? Is it not ſtrange that the Church ſhould have (if the Church have done it, as they ſay) retained the number of one in ſeven, which there is nothing for in nature and reaſon: but all againſt it, being made voide by Chriſt: And refuſe the Continuance of a whole day, for which there is ſo much even in nature, and nothing rationall againſt it; nor for any other proportion of Continuance imaginable ſo much as for it? We doubt not then to ſay, that all is impoſſible to be ſatisfied by any thing they can alledge; and that while they deny Gods determination perpetuall for one whole Dayes Continuance in the Frequency of ſeven, expreſt in the fourth Commandement, [They bring themſelves (and all that adhere to their opinion) into an inextricable labyrinth of uncertainty and confuſion.]

Hitherto we have oppugned the Churches determination of the neceſſary ſufficient chiefe ſolemne Time for Religion, and withall, all other mens, both in point of authority; and in point of wiſdome; and by both have aſſerted it to God alone. But for its belonging onelyonly to God, as alſo the particular Day for it, we have yet ſome other arguments behind; which we muſt alſo produce for the further propugnation of our poſition, and ſo a complete diſcharge of all men from pretending to it any more. Our next argument proceeds in this manner.LXII. The ſecond generall: It belongs to God alone, to determine the chiefe time. Aug. 1. This is the ſcope of one Commandement of the decalogue.

[If it be the generall meaning, or part of the generall meaning of a Commandement, of the decalogue, that theſe Times, and thoſe only ſhould be obſerved as neceſſary to Religion which are appointed by God Himſelfe: Then the Determination of the chiefe Time neceſſary to Religion for all men, belongs to God alone and His peculiar appointment. But it is the generall meaning or part of the generall meaning of a Commandement of the decalogue: That theſe Times and theſe only ſhould be obſerved as neceſſary to Religion, which are appointed by God Himſelfe: Ergo, The Determination of the chiefe Time neceſſary to Religion for all men, belongs to God alone, and His peculiar appointment.] The Conſequence of this argument cannot reaſonably be denyed. The generall meaning and ſcope of every Commandement of the decalogue, is without controverſie perpetuall and morall. Our Adverſaries every where p. 299ſpeake to that purpoſe, when they fly from the words of the fourth Commandement to a generall meaning and morall equity, and the like; Which ſometimes they make to be ſufficient Time (to be determined by the Church) and uſually, Publique Worſhip. That neither of theſe is it, we ſhall prove hereafter. But we take in the meane Time their grant of a generall meaning morall and perpetuall, Though this be no great liberallity of theirs: For it is no more then they (and all Divines beſides) uſually aſcribe to the Feſtivall Sabbathes which are in their particularities undeniably ceremoniall. And uſually alſo even all the reſt of the ceremonialls (and ſo of the judicialls too) are acknowledged to have ſome generall morality in them, which is perpetuall. Now this generall meaning & moral ſcope, we are ſpeaking of, reſtraining all Times neceſſary to Religion, to Gods own appointment, it doth by a ſure inference, from the general to the particular, reſtraine the chiefe Time neceſſary to Religion for all men, to Gods appointment, and peculiar determination, infallibly.

The Antecedent, that ſuch is the generall meaning, or part of the generall meaning of a Commandement of the decalogue, we thus make good. Namely by a twofold inſtance of ſinne charged upon the obſervation of Times appointed by men as neceſſary to Religion. 1. The Scripture charges upon Ieroboam ſin for determining to Iſrael, and ſo obſerving a Feaſt like the Feaſt that was in Iudah. That in Iudah was the Feaſt of Tabernacles appointed on the fifteenth day of the ſeventh: Ieroboams was on the fifteenth day of the eighth monethmonth; The monethmonth (ſaith the text,De corde ſuo mentitus eſt. Pet. Mart. in Locun pag. 95. noting thereby his ſinne) which he had deviſed of his own heart; and ordained a feaſt unto the children of Iſrael (1 Kings 12.32, 33.) ſo making it neceſſary to Religion among them, as the Feaſt in Iudah; appointed by God, unqueſtionably was, So then his fact is plainely condemned to be ſinne. Now every ſinne is a tranſgreſſion of the law, of ſome commandement or other of God: either of a particular command, concerning the particular fact, or ſome generall command, within the generall meaning, of ſome or other of the Commandements of the decalogue. But againſt this particular fact or day of Ieroboams, there was no particular command forbidding it; It muſt then be a tranſgreſſion of the generall meaning of ſome Commandemnet of the decalogue, or part of the generall meaning of ſome Commandement reſtraining all Times neceſſary to Religion to Gods p. 300own peculiar appointment, which is the thing to be proved. 2. A… other inſtance may be, That our Divines uſually charge ſin upon the Papiſts for their Holy-dayes, not only as ſome of them are Idolatrous, being intended to the honour of Saints and Angels, and ſo to the worſhip of Creatures; or as their number is exceſſively burdenſome to the common ſort; But as ſuperſtitious, as they make all of them matters of neceſſity to Religion, upon the Churches command; and ſo their Canonicall houres to ſome men: which, we ſay, only the command of God can doe. Now if theſe Dayes and Houres thus determined and obſerved as neceſſary to Religion, be ſin in them; It muſt alſo be againſt ſome commandement of God: Particular command there is none, forbidding thoſe Dayes and Houres to be obſerved as neceſſary to Religion. It muſt then be againſt a generall commandement, againſt the generall meaning, or part of the generall meaning of ſome Commandement of the Decalogue. Importing thoſe Daies and Times to be only neceſſary to Religion, which God himſelfe appoints. Which is our Antecedent to be proved.LXIII. An Exception anſwered.

If now our Diſputers, or any for them, ſay, That the Papiſts ſin is not againſt any Commandement of the Decalogue, but againſt the New Teſtament; which making all Dayes and Times equall now, allowes none to be appointed or obſerved as neceſſary Sol. 1 to Religion. To this we anſwer many things—

1. This Exception reaches only the ſecond inſtance of the Papiſts ſin in appointing and obſerving their ſuperſtitious Holy-dayes, and Canonicall houres, as neceſſary to Religion: and touches not the former ſin of Jeroboams deviſed Feſtivall; which muſt needs be againſt ſome Commandement of the Decalogue, not only for his rejecting the Feaſt-day appointed by God, (which is not mentioned in the Text, though it may be gathered from thence) but for his poſitive ordaining a day by his own authority, as neceſſary to Religion: And this were ſufficient to prove our Antecedent Sol. 2 alone, if the other inſtance were not.

2. We ſuppoſe (and ſo doe ſome of our Adverſaries, if not all of them, ſpecially the forraigne Divines) that all the practicall precepts of the New Teſtament are reducible to the generall-meaning of ſome or other of the Commandements of the Decalogue; and that the Decalogue is the ſumme and ſubſtance of all Gods Morall p. 301and Perpetuall Law. And if any would deny it, we thinke it may be evinced by the Decalogues being called originally and emphatically, and every where, The Covenant, and the Teſtimony: and from thence the Tables in which it was written, The Tables of the Covenant, and the Tables of the Teſtimony: and the ſacred Ark wherein it was kept, The Ark of the Covenant, and the Ark of the Teſtimony. Which titles, what can they note, but that therein was contained the whole ſumme and ſubſtance of Gods Covenant with His people, and the whole Teſtimony of His will toward them, in reference to what He would have them doe, or not doe, in all Ages to come. And ſo generally all Divines that expound by way of Comment or Sermons, the Decalogue, doe include within the compaſſe of the Commandements of it (of one or other) all Gods Morall and Perpetuall Law, even the Moralities of the Judicial's and Ceremonials, and all; and ſo bring all ſins to be within the compaſſe of the prohibitions contained in one or other of the Commandements. Whence it followes that the making of Times neceſſary to Religion, which God hath not appointed, being ſin, both of old, as appeares in Ieroboam, and now in the Papiſts; It muſt be againſt a Commandement of the Decalogue, as was ſaid before. And ſo ſtill our Antecedent ſtands firme, & our whole Argument with it.

3. Whatever might be ſaid of other ſins (in the Papiſts, or any) Sol. 3 yet this appeares to be againſt a Morall and Perpetuall Law within the Decalogue; For being, in Ieroboam, againſt a Commandement of the Decalogue, and the ſin being the ſame in the Papiſts, the generall meaning is declared to be Perpetuall and Morall in either Age of the Church, in the Old Teſtament, and in the New; Namely, [That thoſe Times, and thoſe only, are to be obſerved as neceſſary to Religion, which God himſelfe appoints.] The Papiſts ſin therefore is properly againſt a Commandement of the Decalogue, whatever the New Teſtament ſay againſt it beſides. And this is as much as our Antecedent ſayes, or our Argument needs. It is to no purpoſe then to alleadge, that the Papiſts tranſgreſſe againſt the New Teſtament, unleſſe there had been no ſuch ſin at all under the Old Teſtament.

4. Beſides all this, we muſt tell them that their Aſſertion, [That Sol. 4 the New Teſtament makes all Dayes and Times equall now, and allowes none at all to be obſerved as neceſſary to Religion,] is a falſe p. 302and fallacious aſſertion, if underſtood generally, as we ſhall expreſly and fully ſhew in the next Chapter, where we ſhall take that Poſition to task, and anſwer what they bring to prove it: Mean time, we ſay in a word, 1. that we having already in the former chap. proved a neceſſity of the determination of a chiefe Time neceſſary to Religion for all men; they apparantly beg the queſtion, if they only anſwer, that there is now no Times neceſſary to Religion: And ſo in ſtead of anſwering our Argument, which proceeds on that ſuppoſition, they wholly pervert the ſtate of the queſtion now between us. 2. That this Aſſertion of theirs is expreſly contradictory (as we conceive) to their own Tenets, ſo often ſet down in their Books, [That ſome ſufficient Times, a Day, or Dayes, to be obſerved and even determined for Religion, is Morall-Naturall:] that is, neceſſary to Religion for all men by the Law of Nature. How they will reconcile theſe two, let them conſider, till we have leiſure to ſpeak more of it in the promiſed place.

LXIV. A Queſtion anſwered.If any now ask, What Commandement we mean all this while, within whoſe generall meaning this is which we have ſpoken of? We anſwer, 1. If we could not aſſigne directly and certainly the particular Commandement; yet would the thing, upon the foregoing grounds, be no leſſe certaine; There being divers other matters which are undoubtedly within the Decalogue, about which Divines differ, in what Commandement they are; as appeares by comparing the Expoſitions of the Commandements in almoſt any two Authors. 2. Yet we ſay, that for our parts, we ſuppoſe, [That this is properly belonging to the fourth Commandement, and is indeed the whole and entire generall meaning thereof.] The words proclaime, That the object of the Commandement is Time neceſſary for Religion, and Gods honour. And therefore we are perſwaded, that the generall meaning and ſcope of it is as we have expreſt, [That thoſe Times, and thoſe only, ſhould be obſerved as neceſſarie to Religion, which God himſelfe appoints.] And ſo, though we prove (as we doubt not but we ſhall in the next Part) [That the words of the 4^th. Commandement are only for one whole Day in ſeven, and not for the particular Day of the ſeven, laſt or firſt▪ ] Yet the particular Day (both of old the ſeventh in order from the creation, and now the firſt of the ſeven) come within the compaſſe of the fourth Commandement, within this generall meaning, becauſe p. 303they were appointed by God, though elſewhere, and not in the formall words of the Commandement. And ſo alſo the other Jewiſh Feſtivals appointed by God, ſhall properly belong to the ſame fourth Commandement, falling under the generall meaning mentioned. And indeed they are uſually by Divines reduced thither; Who yet can no wayes defend their aſſigning them to that (predicament or) place, if this be not aſſigned to be the generall meaning of the fourth Commandement.

3. Yet if any will not admit this, then we ſay, we know not how they will be able to deny, but that this is, [Though not the whole, yet a part of the generall meaning of the ſecond Commandement:] Which under the prohibition of Worſhipping God by an Image, and promiſe of a bleſſing to them that keepe His Commandements, (namely that Worſhip Him with that Worſhip, that He hath commanded) carries this generall meaning certainly, [That God ſhould be Worſhipped with thoſe things, and actions, and thoſe only, which Himſelfe hath appointed.] And ſo, as under this, all the Ceremoniall Worſhip of Old, Sacrifices, and other Rites and Lawes belonging to Gods Worſhip; and our two Sacraments now are compriſed; (and ſo the prohibition of all ſuperſtition and will-worſhip invented by men) by the uſuall vote of Divines, and cannot indeed come properly under any other. So, the obſervation of any Times as neceſſary to Religion, and Gods Worſhip, and of thoſe Times and thoſe only, as ſo neceſſary which God Himſelfe appoints, muſt needs fall under the ſame Generall meaning of the ſecond Commandement, if it belong not peculiarly to the fourth, as was ſaid before. And perhaps how ever, if an exact inquiry be made into the Latitudes of the Commandements of the firſt Table, they will all be found in an ſubordination, the latter more particular then the former, and partly at leaſt included in it. Undoubtedly the firſt, concludes with in it the three latter, even all the ſecond Table alſo; and we thinke the ſecond contains ſome part of the third, and fourth alſo; and againe that the third, doth containe part of the fourth; namely the manner of the obſervation of the holy Time, that it be not in vaine, &c. But we leave this Notion to the juditious Readers conſideration, and maintaine our Argument ſufficiently without it, whether the generall Law about Time we are now ſcanning, be in the fourth, or part of the p. 304ſecond, or even belong to the firſt, (as ſo much as is Morall Naturall difinitely, concerning Time for Religion, we have formerly aſſerted to be within the firſt Commandement) ſtill as long as it is within the Decalogue our cauſe is ſafe. And if it be referred to the ſecond Commandement, then we ſhall have gained this particular advantage certainely, and clearly (though we ſuppoſe we ſhall anon prove, it will follow from any of the reſt of the Commandements of the firſt Table, within which it unqueſtionably comes;) That then the neceſſary Times of Religion, and Gods Worſhip are not meerly circumſtances or adjuncts of Worſhip; but proporly parts of Worſhip, and are to be obſerved as parts of Worſhip;] as all other ſpecialties of the ſecond Commandement are. But we muſt now proceed to another Argument in our preſent buſineſſe. Thus we frame it—

LXV. Arg 2. All Time is Gods to diſpoſe of.[If all Time is Gods, and none mens owne for worldly buſineſſe but by Gods indulgence, Then the determination of the neceſſary ſufficient chiefe ſolemne Time for Religion, cannot belong to men but it is Gods owne peculiar: But all Time is Gods, and none mens owne for worldly buſineſſe; but by Gods indulgence. Ergo, The determination of the neceſſary ſufficient chiefe ſolemne Time for Religion, cannot belong to men but is Gods peculiar.] The Antecedent cannot reaſonably be denied by any conſcience that acknowledges God, the Creatour of all men, and all Time, and ſo the undoubted, and abſolute Soveraigne and Lord of all; and that conſiders that, even the moſt neceſſary worldly Times, as for ſleeping, eating, and the like, are no otherwiſe, Ours but by His indulgence, granted indeed in Nature ordinarily, and ſo manifeſted ſufficiently by the Light of Nature. Yet can it not be denied, but even theſe Times are ſtill ſubject to His pleaſure which may make exceptions againſt them, as indeed He ſundry times doth: enjoyning men (as we formerly noted) by His providence (and by generall Rules of His Word) to watch whole Nights and Dayes; and to Faſt likewiſe, in Religious references to Him, and their owne, and others ſoules, to performe ſolemne and extraordinary Duties of piety and charity; and ſometimes even with reſpect to the bodily lives and comforts of themſelves or others. Moreover, it cannot againe be denied, but if it pleaſed Him, He might command men altother to forbeare their meat, and waite upon Him for a miraculous preſervation, p. 305(like that of Moſes and Elias, and our bleſſed Saviour, for whole forty Dayes, and forty Nights together, and as it ſhall be with us all eternally in Heaven;) and even appoint men to die, for very want of meat or ſleepe; rather then intermit, or interrupt their ſolemne attendances upon Him. So that it is every way cleare [That no Time at all is ours for any worldly buſineſſe, but by Gods indulgence,] which is our Antecedent of the preſent argument.

Now for the Conſequence, that thence it followes,LXVI. Confirmed by 4 reaſons. [That the determination of the neceſſary ſufficient chiefe ſolemne Time for Religion, is Gods owne peculiar, and belongs not to men.] This, we ſuppoſe, will be manifeſt, by conſidering, 1. That the determination of this Time for Religion, doth in the Nature of it, carry along an allotment of the reſidue of mens Time mianly for worldly buſineſſes. (We ſay, mainly, becauſe ſtill, according to what hath been before diſcourſed, God in the very Law of Nature, calls for ſome Times every Day, even out of the Work-dayes; beſides all extraordinary Times for Religion; but the determination of the chiefe Time for Religion being ſet, the reſidue is mainly for worldly buſineſſes, even allotted to them by that very determination of ſuch Time, as ſufficient ordinarily for the chiefe Time to Religion.) 2. Therefore to aſcribe to men the determination of this chiefe ſufficient Time to Religion, is to aſcribe to them the allotment of their owne Time for worldly buſineſſes: As contrarily to aſcribe to God the allotment of mens Times for their worldly buſineſſes, is to aſcribe to Him, the determination of this ſufficient chiefe Time for Religion. 3. Now that it is not in men, but in God (not only originally, which the Adverſaries cannot deny, though perhaps they thinke not enough of it, nor ſpeake enough of it; but alſo Practically) to allot to men the main Time for their worldly buſineſſes, (whether they be Inferiours, or Superiours, Pagans or Chriſtians, worldly or godly) may be made good by foure Demonſtrations, as we conceive them to be, drawne from the Light both of Nature and Scripture. Although we cannot here forbeare to ſay, (and referre to the Readers to judge what cauſe we have for it) [That our diſputers in this whole controverſie about religious Time, ſeeme abſolutely to be of the mind; that however all Time be originally Gods, and He may ſtill challenge what He pleaſes by an expreſſe Law; Yet in practiſe, He hath rather given over Time p. 306into mens hands; and made all Time ours, rather then His owne] (except only what He challenged from the Jews by expreſſe Law) even from the beginning of the world, and ſo ſince the Goſpel, referring to men (the ſuperiours at leaſt among them) the allotment of their owne Times for their worldly buſineſſes; and conſequently they to allot to Him back againe, (and to their ſoules) ſome pittances to be ſpent in religious Duties, according to their affections and diſcretions; there being only Generall remembrances, and Rules in Scriptures of not neglecting God, and their Soules, but none obligatory, deſcending to particular proportions, dividing betweene worldly buſineſſes and Religion. Now this kind, of making all Time ours chiefely and principally for worldly buſineſſes; We take to be their capitall and fundamentall Errour, in the whole diſpute about the Sabbath and Lords-day. And cannot ſufficiently wonder how it ſhould ſettle in the minds of conſiderate Divines. But the greatneſſe of the Errour of this conceit, we hope to repreſent to all Readers; and even to our diſputers owne conſciences by theſe foure Arguments following.

LXVII. 1. Otherwiſe no Time ſhould be Gods, but by mans indulgence.1. Is not this to reduce all Time from being Gods originally, and none ours for worldly buſineſſe but by His indulgence; to no Time being Gods practically, but by mens indulgence, as we may ſay? And againe all inferiours Times for their Soules, to be neither at Gods appointment, nor their owne diſpoſe, but at their ſuperiours; (how prophane and godleſſe ſo ever) and by their indulgence? Which although we grant, that if God had any where ſaid in His Word, expreſly, or by undeniable conſequence, [I will leave all Times to you, and ſo I did before Moſes his Time to all mankind.] There had been no reaſoning againſt it, nor finding fault with it; Yet without any ſuch ſyllable or ſhadow (either in the New or Old Teſtament) of leave, and Generall indulgence from God, to conceit and conclude thus, [Our Times to be generally ours,] We cannot but judge a high preſumption; not paralelled by any child or ſervant among men towards their Maſters, or Parents; who further then they can pleade their ſuperiours allowance of ſuch Times for themſelves, dare not challenge, any Dayes or Houres as theirs; and much leſſe the principall of their Time to be their owne; and their attendances on their ſuperiours, to be but when, and how long, and how often they themſelves, (who are p. 307inferiours) doe or ſhall appoint, or tender voluntarily. Even retainers, though no ordinary ſervants, have ſome ſet Times, by their ſuperiours appointment, to preſent themſelves, and all is not meerly at their diſcretion. And we are ſure, we are, or ſhould be, more then retainers to God.

2.LXVIII. 2. Elſe man ſhould be his owne end, even in worldly reſpects. To aſſert Time to be generally Ours (without expreſſe generall indulgence from God) for worldly buſineſſes, is it not to ſavour too ſtrongly, of [Making man, even in worldly reſpects, and as imployed in worldly buſineſſes the principall end of man] that is, man himſelfe to be the end of his owne being, even in an earthly conſideration, and not God? And againe, ſuperiours among men, to be the principall end of their inferiours being, and not God? (much leſſe the ſouls of the one, or the other, which are poore contemptible things, and very ſeldome mentioned by our diſputers in all their diſcourſes about neceſſary and ſufficient Times?) and ſo Religion, Gods Honour, and mens Soules, as meane and ſecondary things, of an inferiour Nature, to have no other Times, then what men can ſpare (or determine to ſpare) from their worldly buſineſſes and pleaſures, &c: And ſo notwithſtanding, that God, tooke an other order with His Jewiſh Church, exacting from them for Himſelfe (and their ſoules together) a weekely Sabbath, beſides ſundry other Times: Yet to imply, there was no need of His doing any ſuch thing either before or ſince, Notwithſtanding mans fall, and all mens corruption (even under the Goſpel) and their miſdevotion, to Religion, and their owne, and others ſoules good; but all Times to be referred to men wholly, to give backe what they ſhould thinke fit unto Religion, like a poore ſecondary inferiour, indifferent matter, as we ſaid before? Which how repugnant it is to the high honour of Almighty God, our Soveraigne Lord, and Creatour, and to the welfare and dignity of mens eternall Soules, We dare appeale to the very Light of Nature, even before a Pagan Judge, deliberately pronouncing, and according to thoſe undeniable principles of Gods Soveraignty, and the Soules immortality.LXIX. 3. Scripture ſeemes to leave very little to mens worldly buſineſſes.

3. But we beleeve, we ſhall put it paſt a reply, ſpecially, by taking into conſideration, ſome generall ſentences of Scripture, which call for ſo much Time for Religion, and ſo often, and with ſuch Arguments; as ſeeme to leave then ſo little for worldly buſineſſes; p. 308as the wiſeſt among men cannot tell which way to ſatisfie thoſe ſentences, and his worldly occaſions both; unleſſe he have the helpe, of a particular indulgence from God, for ſo much, and ſo often Time ordinarily for His worldly buſineſſes; which expreſly, as we ſaid, involves Gods particular determination of the chiefe Time for Religion, neceſſary and ſufficient for the chiefe Time, and ſo a diviſion of every Time (or the maine part of it) diſtinctly betweene Himſelfe, and worldly matters. Conſider, we ſay, the great Commandement [To Love God with all our hearts, with all our ſoules, with all our minds, with all our ſtrengths. (And how love commands the Time every one hath to imploy, ſpecially ſuch a high love as this.) On the other ſide, the charge, of not loving the World, nor the things that are in the World; and that upon this ground, If any man love the World, the love of the Father is not in him. (Such an one hath not a jot of love to God; ſo farre is he from loving him with all his heart, and ſtrength, as before) againe the precept of Chriſt is, not to labour for the meat that periſhes, but for the meat that endures to eternall Life, (doth not this call for our Time for the Soule, much beyond the Body, and worldly matters?) Alſo lay not up for your ſelves treaſures on earth, but in heaven: And ſet not your affections, on things on the earth, ſaith the Apoſtle; They are enemies to the Croſſe of Chriſt, and their end is deſtruction, who mind earthly things; To be carnally minded is death: And he that ſowes to the fleſh, ſhall of the fleſh reape corruption; our Saviour ſeemes to go yet further, when He allowes not to take thought ſo much as for the morrow, even what we ſhall eate, or drinke, or wherewith we ſhall be clothed, but to ſeeke firſt the Kingdome of God, and ſpeakes of praying alwayes, and ſo doth His Apoſtle often, even of praying without ceaſing, and continuing in prayer, and watching thereunto with all perſeverance:] And many more ſuch like places. All which though we abundantly acknowledge, that they muſt not be interpreted ſtrictly according to the expreſſe letter and phraſe of them. For then they would wholly ſhut out all worldly buſineſſes, and turne us altogether into an angelicall manner of devotion, and to waite for miraculous ſuſtentations (as we toucht before,) which croſſes divers other ſentences of Scripture, ordering about worldly buſineſſes; and particularly charging Servants p. 309to be diligent in their earthly Maſters work; Yet for all that, they do undeniably preferre in dignity, and commend to all mens care, the honour of God, and the reſpect to mens ſoules, to be attended upon in Religious duties, above the reſpect that men are allowed to have to the world, or worldly matters, or even their bodily lives. And this would neceſſitate undeniably the greateſt part of every man by far, if there were no particular indulgence of ſuch proportions, to be (ordinarily and for the maine of them) allotted by God Himſelfe, to our worldly occaſions.

For it would be nothing to ſay, in generall,LXX. An Exception anſwered. God hath allowed me Time for worldly buſineſſes; and appointed me (by His providence) to ſuch a worldly imployment of a lawfull kind, and profitable for men; and it is not poſſible for the generality of mankind to ſubſiſt without miracle, (which God now allowes not to expect, and it were to tempt him, to expect any, in a neglect of a worldly calling,) unleſſe the greateſt part of mens Time be imployed about worldly buſineſſes, and ſo it is neceſſary, that the greateſt part of Time be ſo allotted and determined. For to all this,Sol. from the ſentences forecited, an invincible reply might be made. God hath commanded, His own ſervice and the good of mens ſoules to be looked after, as matters of infinitely more abſolutely neceſſity, to look after them: We ſay, firſt, and far above the other, in a manner wholly rejecting and forbidding the other in compariſon of theſe; and the neceſſities of the ſoul (as was in part urged before) cannot, according to reaſon, be ſatisfied with leſſe then the greateſt part of our Time: (or even with leſſe then all) And in the compariſon, between the ſoul and the body, earth and heaven, this world, and that to come for eternity; Theſe alledged Texts do incomparably prefer the ſoul, heaven, eternity, the world to come, as the things to be loved, cared for, purſued, waited upon; and ſo the greateſt part of Time (to be ſure) muſt be alloted to Religion for theſe ends, unleſſe we ſay, a particular indulgence of God Himſelfe, and ſo a particular ditermination of a ſufficient chiefe Time for Religion be to be found and acknowledged. Here then we appeale again to the conſciences of all that will conſider God, and mens ſoules in one ballance, and mens worldly buſineſſes in another: How hath the Chriſtian Church dared to take ſix Dayes ordinarily, to themſelves, and leave God but one of ſeven? how hath it dared p. 310to take ſix dayes ordinarily for the world, and leave but one of ſeven for the ſoules of men? We adde, how dare our diſputers quarrell with that one Day of ſeven? and ſcarcely yeeld to the number, but only from cuſtome? but ſpecially quarrell with our challenge of the whole Day for God and mens ſoules, as though it were too much; and a heavy yoke, which Chriſt muſt dye to free us from? We aske them, how can they, or any conſcience ſay, ſo much, ſo often is enough? Sufficient for the chiefe Time, but by Gods indulgence in the fourth Commandement of ſix Dayes (ordinarily and for the maine) for worldly buſineſſes? And what could Adam or any of the Patriarkes even according to the law and light of nature, without ſuch indulgence particularly expreſt to them, conclude, lawfull for them to imploy in worldly buſineſſes, and count the reſidue ſufficient for God and their ſoules? For thoſe ſentences named, though recorded in the New Teſtament; yet cannot be denyed to be dictates of the very law of nature, in Adams heart, and all others, that acknowledge a God to be worſhipped, and ſoules to be immortall. Who then might dare of old, (or may now be ſo hardy) to take ſix Dayes of ſeven for worldly occaſions, or five, or foure, or three, or two, or one of ſeven without out Gods expreſſe leave? and where is there any ſuch leave but in the fourth Commandement, and the paralell places to it, Gen. 2. and elſewhere? Let our Diſputers now turne themſelves which way they will or can, we cannot for our parts imagine, how they can wind themſelves out of the cords of this argument: But that inſtead of one Day in ſeven for Religion, and ſix of ſeven for the world, we muſt rather yeeld God and our ſoules ſix of ſeven, (or more, even all) then reſt in ſuch a ſcanty proportion, and give the world ſo much; but by vertue of the Indulgence in the fourth Commandement, which without all queſtion cannot be longer lived then the Commandement it ſelfe; let them conſider it, and tell us their mindes when they are reſolved of an anſwer: Meane while,LXXI. 4. There is a bleſſing of God required, to make any proportion of Time ſufficient. we intreate them to take a fourth conſideration along with them, or a further confirmation (as we may call it) of this laſt, though it hath ſomewhat diſtinct, as will appeare. For—

4. Beſides the Commands requiring the maineſt part of our Time for Religion, and God, as we have ſeen; There is to be conſidered [a Bleſſing, neceſſary to make any proportion (and diſtribution) p. 311of Time, leſſe then all, to be ſufficient for mens ſoules.] And this we are put in mind of by the very firſt mention of Gods determining a particular Time, Gen. 2. under the terme of Bleſſing: which alſo the Commandement emphatically repeates, and Eſay particularly comments upon, as we ſhall ſee. We ſay, whatſoever Time is taken out of the whole, and allotted by Indulgence to worldly buſineſſe, doth not (nor cannot) leave the reſidue, how great ſoever the proportion be, ſufficient for mens ſoules, but by vertue of ſpeciall bleſſing upon that proportion of Time which is determined for ſoules, be it more or leſſe. And this Bleſſing comming only from God, the determined proportion muſt be alſo from Him for Religion, which of it ſelfe gives aſſurance of an anſwerable bleſſing according to the intendment of that Time, even though there ſhould be no diſtinct mention of a Bleſſing; which yet (as we ſaid) God hath annexed to His determination of a Weekly Sabbath for the chiefe Time for Religion, even from the beginning. But without ſuch expreſſe and particular determination from God, (or an expreſſe promiſe of Bleſſing on the proportion which men, or the Church ſhall determine, whatever it be; which is no where to be found in Scripture:) We have no manner of ground to conceit a Bleſſing on any proportion of Time that can be determined by men for Religion, to make that ſufficient for mens ſoules. A Bleſſing, we ſay, beyond the proportion of that which might be expected from ſo long and ſo often attendance on Religion; a multiplying Bleſſing, in the nature of Chriſts bleſſing the five loaves, and two fiſhes, to feed more (by many) then the naturall proportion could poſſibly give hopes of. So that the attendance on God one Day in ſeven (which is the Time in queſtion) ſhall be bleſſed beyond an ordinary Dayes ſervice, (if it were not ſpecially appointed by God) and have a ſtronger influence on all the other ſixe Dayes of the Week following, then could be expected from ſo much Time ſpent in Religion, ſimply conſidered, as ſo much Time. And without ſuch a Bleſſing, (upon the conſecrated ſolemne Time) the ſoule would ſtill be leane, hungry, and even ſtarve for want of a ſufficient proportion of Time, by reaſon of its manifold continuall neceſſities, faintings, decayes, and temptations. So that whatever our Adverſaries diſpute againſt the Commandement of God, we conceive they diſpute againſt their p. 312own participation of a Bleſſing upon whatſoever Time is determined and obſerved by men, themſelves or others; And that a certainer Bleſſing may be reſted on, in the obſervation of one Day in ſeven, as from Gods determination, then in two Dayes in ſeven, three Dayes, nay ſixe Dayes in ſeven, at mans appointment. For here ſtill would be uncertainty, whether this proportion were ſufficient: But Gods command (which in all His Ordinances hath eternally a Bleſſing annexed to the right obſervers) is ſure and certaine to convey a Bleſſing, and make a ſufficiencie for the chiefe Time; in which Conſciences may abundantly reſt and ſatisfie themſelves. And this we are fully perſwaded, God meant to ſignifie to us, when, Gen. 2. at the firſt mention of His conſecrating a ſolemne Time, He ſaith, [The Lord bleſſed the ſeventh Day, and ſanctified it.] A Day, (or any other ſuch creature) is capable of no other Bleſſing, then to be made a meanes of Bleſſing to the right uſers of it according to Gods command. And obſerve, that becauſe God ſaw, that the encouragement of a Bleſſing was greatly neceſſary in this matter, He ſaith not, [the Lord ſanctified the ſeventh Day, and bleſſed it; But, the Lord bleſſed and ſanctified:] Firſt bleſſed, and then ſanctified. Though we cannot tell how to conceive the Bleſſing, without the Sanctification going before, or at leaſt concurrent: yet God to ſhew more abundantly his goodneſſe and graciouſneſſe both in challenging this proportion to himſelfe of one Day in ſeven, and allowing by His indulgence ſixe Dayes of ſeven for worldly occaſions, He puts the Bleſſing foremoſt; and ſo He doth alſo remarkably in the fourth Commandement: where having expreſly allowed the indulgence of ſix Dayes for worldly work; after He had challenged a ſeventh Day for a Sabbath for Himſelfe, He repeats His own example of ſixe Dayes work, and then His bleſſing a Sabbath (a ſeventh Day) and ſanctifying it. Why ſo? but to aſſure us, that a happy Bleſſing ſhould attend the conſcionable obſervation of this Sabbath of one Day in ſeven, that though it were ſo little a proportion, yet it ſhould be ordinarily ſufficient for the chiefe Time; And all the ſixe Dayes between the revolutions of this Sabbath one Day in ſeven, ſhould taſte of the good gotten on that Day; The ſtrength of it laſting in mens ſoules from Sabbath to Sabbath, (with a little of each Day beſides, as was ſaid formerly:) and they ſhould by it principally p. 313grow in grace, and ſpirituall comfort in God towards eternall life; notwithſtanding all their ordinary and great interruptions of worldly buſineſſes on the Working Dayes.

And upon this, we have, as it ſeems to us,LXXII. The Text of Iſa. 56.2. expounded.Isa 56:2 the Evangelical Prophet Iſa. a clear & pertinent commentator & interpreter (as we toucht before) and that in two Chapters of his Propheſie, towards the latter end; where he is much, if not altogether, upon the Times of the Goſpel. Let us ſee what he ſaith to our purpoſe, c. 56. & 58. In the former place, calling all ſorts to Gods Covenant, and particularly to the obſervation of the Sabbath, he begins with [Bleſſed is the man that doth this, and the ſon of man that layes hold on it, that keeps the Sabbath from polluting it, v. 2.] Then encouraging the Eunuchs, though perſons under a kind of legall curſe in thoſe dayes, to this obſervation; he promiſeth them from God, [an everlaſting name, (better then of ſons and of daughters) a name which ſhould not be cut off:] that is, a ſpirituall bleſſing on their ſoules, and an owning them for His true and faithfull ſervants, v. 3, 4, 5. And againe, encouraging the ſtrangers (the Heathen, outwardly as yet without the Covenant of Grace) to come in, and ſanctifie the Sabbath; he promiſes (in Gods name) [That they ſhould be made joyfull in Gods houſe of Prayer, and their ſervices accepted by Him, v. 3, 6, 7.] So that ſpirituall comfort in God, and His gracious acceptation of their ſervices, is the bleſſing promiſed to the faithfull obſervance of this Time appointed by God for the chiefe ſolemne Time of His Worſhip.

Neither can this be eluded by our Diſputers, (as they offer to Except. 1 throw off all the places of the Old Teſtament) by ſaying, that this Except. 2 was typicall of Chriſt, and our ſpirituall reſt in Him from ſinne; or elſe that it belonged only to the ſeventh-day Sabbath, which the Jewes obſerved; and ſo either way (and both wayes) we have nought to doe with it. For we have proved ſufficiently,Solut. that a ſolemne proportion of Time determined for Religion, for the neceſſary and ſufficient chiefe Time, (as the Weekly Sabbath then was undeniably) is no typicall matter, but a ſubſtantially-neceſſary thing to Religion, and that there is need of a Bleſſing upon ſuch Time, whatever the proportion be, (unleſſe it were all our Time) or elſe it will not be ſufficient. And ſo the Bleſſing here cannot be to the Sabbath in any typicall reſpect; but as that proportion of p. 314Time determined by God for the chiefe Time for Religion, His worſhip, and mens ſoules.

Inſt.And though they may happen to object the mention of Gods accepting of their burnt offerings and ſacrifices upon His Altar, which,Sol. if referoed to our Times, muſt needs be meant typically. 1. This will not hurt our interpretation of this place, ſince the difference is apparant enough, between His calling for the obſervation of that which is ſo ſubſtantially neceſſary (in the kind of it) to Religion; that is, either this Proportion determined for the chiefe Time, or ſome other; and that which is plainly a figure and a type, as all burnt offerings and materiall ſacrifices were, Of which kind there are now none ſuch under the Goſpel. So that in this the Prophet only ſpeaks in the language of the preſent time, that while ſacrifices were offered and burnt upon Gods altar, by the conſcientious obſervers of His Sabbath, according to His command; thoſe ſervices ſhould bee accepted; and after they were ceaſed, their ſpirituall ſervices of prayers and thankſgivings, which are in ſtead of them under the Goſpel. Like unto that of David, Pſal. 51. who firſt ſaith, God would have no ſacrifices from him, but a broken and contrite heart: yet afterward he ſaith, God would accept young bullocks from him, Sol. 2.v. ult. And as for the ſeventh Day they urge ſo much, we deny the emphaſis to lie at all upon that, (though it were the particular Day then to be obſerved) but wholly upon the Proportion, though taking in that ſeventh Day, becauſe then in being, and then only commanded by God. But we have ſhewed our grounds of difference, enough, between theſe two, in point of ſubſtance and neceſſity to Religion, one Day in ſeven, and that ſeventh Day. And what needs more to be ſaid, we ſhall adde, when hereafter we ſhall come to ſhew (as we have promiſed it, and are forced to repeat it, oftener then we would) that the ſeventh Day was not directly commanded in the words of the fourth Commandement, nor at all as the ſubſtance and particular matter of them. But only within the generall ſcope, as then appointed by God (elſewhere) and ſo our Lords-day comes equally within it, and is now become ſucceſſour to it in the particular title to the Bleſſing, as we ſhall ſee. So that this place ſtands good for our having a Bleſſing on Gods determined Time, His Sabbath, obſerved both by Jew and Chriſtian.

p. 315The other place is Iſa. 58. Where,LXXIII. Another text, Iſa. 58.13. expounded.Isa 58:13 after he had called to a moſt carefull obſervation of the Sabbath, both negative and affirmative, and that both outwardly in deed and word, and inwardly in thought, v. 13. he promiſes in Gods name a remarkable ſpirituall Bleſſing, v. 14. [Then ſhalt thou delight thy ſelfe in the Lord:] that is, God will ſo afford thee His divine Bleſſing upon thy conſcionable imployment, with joy and cheerfulneſſe, (calling the Sabbath a delight) of that Day of Gods ſolemne appointment for the chiefe Time of His worſhip; that all the week after thou ſhalt find a delight in the Lord; thou ſhalt have a heart oft to think of Him even in the midſt of thy worldly buſineſſes; and to redeeme Time alſo ever now and then from thy worldly buſineſſes, to converſe voluntarily with Him, and be glad of all opportunities ſo to doe; not willingly miſſing any time any day, when thou canſt have freedome to converſe with Him, and attend upon Him. And that this is the meaning of this Promiſe and Bleſſing, (underſtanding it Evangelically, and not to an abſolute perfection of delight in God, in this world, which is not to be found in ſinfull man:) We deſire no other proofe, than the Conſciences of Chriſtians that keep the Lords day as Gods Sabbath by Him commanded; and their very manifeſtation of it in the eyes of their very adverſaries: Namely, that ſuch as delight in the ſtrict and exact obſervation of the Sabbath, doe anſwerably delight (or ſeem at leaſt to delight) in converſing with God at other times, and every Day gladly wait upon God ſome time, morning and night, even they and their families too, and at extraordinary times: they delight to heare and pray publikely, and to converſe with Chriſtians in a ſpirituall manner privately, and to attend upon God by themſelves alone, when they can get leiſure: Which is, (unleſſe men will ſay, that all ſuch are wilfull and groſſe Hypocrites) a reall Comment upon this Promiſe of the Prophet of delighting in God, increaſed in men by the Sabbaths obſervation. And on the contrary, it is more then evident, that the moſt of thoſe that make no conſcience of the Sabbath, of the Lords day, doe expreſſe very little or no delight in God, or any true ſpirituall converſe with Him, at any other Time; They care little for any other Opportunity of hearing His word; they worſhip Him, not at all, or ſeldome, or very ſlightly with their families; and leſſe perhaps p. 316(if the truth were known) in their own ſolitary devotions. In a word, the one ſort, though Gods commandement and indulgence together, ſatisfie them, that one Day in ſeven is ordinarily ſufficient for the chiefe Time for God and their ſoules, yet they cannot ſatisfie themſelves, their conſciences towards God, nor their longings after Him, unleſſe they beſides both daily and extraordinarily redeeme what Time they can poſſibly, or at leaſt conveniently, redeeme to waite upon Him, and ſatiate their ſoules more and more in enjoying a ſpirituall converſe with Him, like a friend, or lover, whoſe felicity is to be with the party loved as much and often as may be. The other ſort, though they have no ground to think that Time ſufficient, (not regarding the Commandement) yet they hardly or not at all allow it in their minds, to be neceſſary; ſpecially not the whole Day in any wiſe; but even ſcarcely the publique houres of it, and much leſſe do they thinke any other Times to be neceſſary, or ſcarcely ſo much as convenient to be ordinarily beſtowed upon Religion, as not delighting in God; and ſo the Time they attend upon Him, is rather a Penance then a delight, a torment then a comfort to them. As their language and carriage do more then enough proclaime. The bleſſing then of this Text, is happy, and cleare alſo, as we ſuppoſe. Let Conſciences judge.

LXXIV. An exception anſwered.But ere we part with this laſt place, beſides the former cavill of a typicall, myſticall, or ſpirituall ſence; and that ſeventh Day-Sabbath, (which from the former anſwer may be ſufficiently ſatisfied, conſidering ſtill the nature of the chiefe ſolemne Time,) we muſt not miſſe taking notice, that ſome even of our Orthodox Divines, in point of the Sabbath, do interpret this place Eſay. 58. of a Faſt which they ſay hath the nature of a Sabbath, (and indeed the yearly faſt of Gods appointment, Lev. 23. the Day of Expiation, is called a Sabbath,) and they give this reaſon, that in the beginning of the Chapter the Prophet ſpeakes of a Faſt, and ſo they judge he doth here at the latter end.D. Ames Medul. Theol. lib. 2. c. 15. Sect. And one (of chiefe note in this matter of the Sabbath) ſeemes ſomewhat ſtrangely to enervate the ſtrength of that 13. ver. which we have alledged for the ſtrict obſervation of the Sabbath, leaving doubtfull whether it be meant of the ordinary Sabbath, or a ſolemne Faſt; and as far as we can underſtand, even contradicting himſelf within a few lines, in the explicating p. 317that thirteenth verſe, as the judicious Reader may obſerve.

But to anſwer to all this briefly. We ſay 1. That theſe Divines, Sol.though they think the Sabbath ſecured, for all this interpretation of this Text by a Faſt: (and even by it) For ſay they, [Such ſtrictneſſe belongs to a Faſt, but as it is a Sabbath, and ſo if it be to be ſo obſerved; a Sabbath much more;] Do yet afford a wrangler too much advantage, in that they wave the cleareſt place againſt worldly words and thoughts on the Sabbath, that is any where in Scripture. And if an oppoſer ſhould ſay, (as they will) that a Solemne Faſt is to be more ſtrict then a Sabbath (that very faſting being a ſtrictneſſe which includes divers things in it, from which eating, and ſpecially dreſſing any meate on the Sabbath, looſens a man;) they would not ſo eaſily convince ſuch, as they think, that all this belongs to an ordinary Sabbath, but only an extraordinary, which is alſo a Faſt. Although for our parts we hold that the nature of Religious Time, as the Sabbath was, doth infallibly extend both as words and thoughts. But this is not uſually taken notice of.

2. But further, for the thing it ſelfe, as it is no argument,Sol. 2. that becauſe the Prophet ſpeakes of a Faſt in the beginning of the Chapter, therefore he doth ſo in the end alſo. For it is moſt uſuall in Scripture, and particularly in the Prophets, to go from one matter to another, without any ſolemne preface: So,

3. It ſeemes to us to be cleare,Sol. 3. that the contents of our laſt tranſlation of the Bible, doe rightly and diſtinctly analiſe this Chapter, and lay out the parts of it, to be evidently foure ſeverall matters. 1. A reproofe of Hypocriſie, verſ. 1.2. 2. An expreſſion of a counterfeit faſt, and a true, verſ. 3. to 8. 3. Promiſes to godlineſſe, in generall, verſ. 8. to 13. 4. Laſtly, Promiſes to the keeping of the Sabbath, verſ. 13.14. Or if any liſt to extend the promiſes in the former verſes to a right Faſting, Yet is there no reaſon to confine theſe two laſt to that matter; For,

4. It is not likely,Sol. 4. that having before vilified a Dayes Faſting verſ. 5. even though with outward ſtrictneſſe and afflicting the ſoule too; he would make ſuch ſplendide promiſes, as verſ. 14. containes againe to that Dayes obſervance, ſpecially not intituling it by its ordinary Name, but borrowing the Name Sabbath for it.

p. 318Sol. 5.5. But above all; if it be rightly conſidered, what glorious promiſes are here made (as we ſaid) and that emphatically to the keeping of a Day, named Gods holy Day, (or a weekly Sabbath uſually bearing the title of Gods Holy Sabbath, and Gods Sabbath every where) and to the calling it (the Day) a delight, the Holy of the Lord, honourable, &c. It is no way probable, that this can be meant of a Day rarely comming about, when there was a weekely Day, to which all theſe Titles properly belonged; and that it is ten times, twenty times, more ſigne of godlineſſe to ſanctifie the Sabbath conſtantly weekly, then to obſerve an extraordinary Faſt Day once in a yeere, (and God had appointed no more) and if in Time of ſpeciall feare or danger, Gods providence (or Prophets alſo) called to another Day, yet ſtill this was but a ſmall matter, compared with the piety and devotion of a conſtant weekely Sabbath. A worldling, in feare and diſtreſſe, may poſſibly call one ſuch Faſt-day a delight, &c. but not a weekely Sabbath; whoſe ſudden revolution (over-ſuddaine a great deale for worldly minds to delight in its comming) will try the beſt ſpirit that is: And while worldlings language, at leaſt in their hearts, is, When will the Sabbath be gone, He had need be a godly man in earneſt, that can in the preſence of God conſtantly call it a delight, wiſh it come, and delight in it being come, and obſerve it as is here expreſt: (with ſuppoſition too of humane frailties) And therefore there is much more reaſon, to take it properly for the weekely Sabbath, then improperly for an extraordinary and ſeldome obſerved Faſt.

Sol 6.6. Whereunto we may in the laſt place adde, that the 14 verſe doth not only continue the ſpirituall bleſſing forenoted upon particular perſons; but a moſt high, and rich, and full promiſe unto the whole Nation, that ſhould obſerve the Day there ſpoken of. Now what likelihood is there that a whole Nation ſhould be ſo remarkably encouraged to obſerve one particular ſingle Day in a yeere, or ſo, (for ſtill, we ſay, the emphaſis in the 13. verſe is clearely to obſerve the Day ſpoken of, what ever it be;) and not rather to obſerve the weekely Sabbath; Of which both our Prophet, and Jer. c. 17. and Ezek. c. 20.22, 23. and other places of Scripture ſpeake ſo much, with all earneſtneſſe of promiſes, and threatnings, and mentions of judgements even relating to the whole Nation; as we have formerly toucht in our Epiſtle Dedicatory; where alſo we p. 319have given a memorandum of Gods moſt gracious fulfilling this promiſe to our Nation, ever ſince we held forth the Doctrine of the Sabbath profeſſedly: Which bleſſing we truſt (and heartily pray) we ſhall never be ſo unwiſe and unhappy as to forfeit by our forſaking the doctrine or practiſe of this Day of bleſſing, as we there ſaid.

And now the errour imputed by the Author,Sol. 7. quoted in the objection, will fall upon himſelfe, who can no way make good his owne aſſertions of the Holy obſervation of the Lords day, the Sabbath, unleſſe he grant, all actions, words, and even thoughts, meerly humane, which are not neceſſary, (for of neceſſities we have, as all agree, granted reſervations) to be ſinnes ſo farre forth. For that, this were to take ſo much, (how little ſoever) from God, whoſe Day it altogether is, and from the ſoule for whoſe good it is; to beſtow it, and that (we ſay) unneceſſarily, upon the World, and a mans ſelfe in earthly reſpects. And then alſo, how ſhall the magnificent promiſe be fulfilled to thoſe, that allow not God the whole of His owne (twice called holy) Day. We would not have toucht this ſlip of ſo reverend an Authors pen, but that we have met with it objected againſt us; and his teſtimony againſt us might ſway with others, if we had wholly paſſed it over in ſilence. But now we are perſwaded, we have made good this text alſo for the ſecuring of happy bleſſing, both perſonall, and nationall, to the obſervers of Gods determined chiefe ſolemne Time or Sabbath. And ſo our whole Argument, taken from His indulgence of the Time for our worldly buſineſſes.

And ſo we paſſe on to ſome ſpeciall Arguments,LXXV. God muſt determine the particular day. Arg. 1. for Gods determination of the particular day, all time and dayes are his, none ours but by his indulgence. vindicating the determination of the particular Day for the chiefe ſolemne Time, as well as the chiefe Time it ſelfe. But in a very few words, in compariſon of our former great length. Thus we reaſon:

[If all Time be Gods, and none ours for worldly imployments, but by His indulgence; Then the particular Day (or Dayes) for the chiefe Time to Religion, belongs to Gods peculiar determination, and not to mens. But all Time is Gods, and none ours for worldly imployments, but by His indulgence. Ergo, The particular Day (or Dayes) for the chiefe Time to Religion, belongs to Gods peculiar determination, and not to mens.]

The Antecedent cannot be denyed, and hath been ſufficiently p. 320illuſtrated in the foregoing Parallel Argument.

The Conſequence of this may alſo be cleared: If we conſider, 1. That how ever this be no ſuch matter of importance in Religion in the eſſentiall part of it, as the former was; yet even this concernes in ſome ſort the Soveraignity of God, ſo far as we can conceive of it: Unleſſe He had fully and clearely expreſt himſelfe (which we no where find in His Word) to have put over the determination of this Particularity to men. 2. That an indulgence to men, of ſo much Time, ſo often for their worldly imployments, (as of ſixe Dayes in ſeven) doth not yet, in the nature of it, allow them to be their own Carvers in the particular Dayes: But they muſt wait upon Gods particular allowance of the particular Dayes, before they may preſume to imploy any of them at all to their own worldly occaſions. The order, as well as the proportion, is in Gods hand originally, and He puts not the diſpoſition of that out of His hand, without an expreſſe declaration of ſo much, particularly, or at leaſt generally. (As Lawyers ſay of the King, that He paſſes away none of his rights, in any grant, by doubtfull and ambiguous words.) If but a maſter ſay to his ſervant or ſcholar, or a parent to his child: I will allow you ſo many houres for your ſelfe, (your own buſineſſe, or ſport, &c.) and ſo much Time you ſhall attend your booke, and my buſineſſe, this Day, or any Day: Will any conclude, that ſuch ſervant, ſcholar, or child, may take thoſe houres to himſelfe, when he liſts himſelfe; though he ſhould attend on this maſter or parent the reſt of the Time? For this would ſhew, that himſelfe, rather then his ſuperior, were the Lord and commander of his Time; and ſo be an act of preſumption; as if alſo his ſuperior were rather beholden to him for affording to give ſuch attendance upon him at all, then he to his ſuperior for his indulgence of ſo much Time, (when he could have challenged none at all; all being his ſuperiors, none his own) for his private occaſions. Let this be thought upon, and it cannot well be denyed, but it is a proper peece of ſoveraigntie, (even of all ſuperioritie) to retaine the appointment of the particular Times for the chiefe attendance of inferiors upon them, in their own hands; and a part of the naturall homage ſuch owe to their ſuperiors, to depend upon their expreſſe pleaſure for the particularities of the chiefe Times of ſuch attendance, as well as for the proportion of ſuch Times. A Lord even p. 321of a Manour uſes to reſerve this authority in his own hands, That his Courts, when all his homagers ſhall be bound to doe their ſuit and ſervice to him, ſhall be at his calling, and not at the Tenants pleaſure, either extraordinarily or ordinarily. How much more is this a Royaltie beſeeming the LORD-Paramount of Heaven & Earth! We conclude then this Argument with this admonition, That our Diſputers would but root out that pernicious thought, which we feare they are deeply tainted with, That Time is now rather our own, than Gods. And then we make no doubt but they will readily yield both the chiefe Time for His Worſhip, and the particular Dayes for it, to belong eternally to His determination, and all diſputes between them and us will ſuddenly be at an end.

We confirme this Argument by a ſecond,LXXVI. Arg. 2. Upon that determination depends Gods bleſſing. neere of kin to the former, ſutable alſo to our foregoing diſcourſes for the chiefe Time.

[If we ſtand in need of a Bleſſing from God upon the proportion of Time which we obſerve for the ſufficient chiefe Time for Religion: Then the determination of the very particular Day belongs to God peculiarly, and not to men. But, we ſtand in need of a Bleſſing from God upon the proportion of Time which we obſerve for the ſufficient chiefe Time for Religion. Ergo, The determination of the very particular Day belongs to God peculiarly, and not to men.]

The Antecedent hath been ſufficiently confirmed before. The Conſequence may be proved, by conſidering, 1. That the Proportion cannot be regularly obſerved, but by the determination of a particular Day for it. 2. That men have no power to annexe Gods bleſſing to any determination of theirs. That comes freely from Gods own will and pleaſure, from His meere grace, which men cannot ſo much as know, without He reveale it himſelfe by way of Promiſe or Covenant; which He doth to His own ordinances, but no where to mens ordinances, that is, to any ſuch determinations of men, as are intended obligatory to others,N. B. or for any permanencie. We adde this explication, becauſe we find, that God did, for a ſingle act, allow His people, even after His own Altar was made, to build an Altar for ſacrifice to Him upon a ſpeciall occaſion, of earth, or of whole ſtones. But they were not to make a cuſtome of uſing that Altar, and therefore the materials p. 322of it were to be looſe. Alſo in the Paſſeover, Exod. 12. God allowed particular perſons (according to their ſtore) to take a Lambe, or a Kid; but not that He allowed the Elders to enjoyne all to one ſort, nor was he that now uſed a Kid obliged to it the next turne. But here the particular Day in queſtion is to be determined for many, (indeed for all mankind, as the next Argument will offer proofe of) and ſo to be oligatorie, and accordingly to be at leaſt for ſome while permanent; For it were both altogether ridiculous, & would bring forth manifold confuſions, to be every 2^d. or 3^d. turn or revolution, changing the particular Day. Therefore we ſay, no ſuch permanent and obligatorie determination hath any promiſe of Bleſſing, unleſſe it be the determination and ordinance of God himſelfe. Now upon the particular determination of the Day, or the particular Day determined, the Bleſſing doth fall (though not properly for the particular Dayes ſake, but for the Proportions, to make that ſufficient to be obſerved for the chiefe Time, as hath been ſaid.) Accordingly then, that particular Day, to make it capable and ſuſceptible of the Bleſſing; that is, that the obſervers of that particular Day may enjoy the Bleſſing promiſed to the obſervers of the chiefe Time, that particular Day muſt not be determined by men, but by God.

LXXVII. Arg. 3. It is very fit, all the world ſhould have one and the ſame day, as neere as may be.A third Argument to like purpoſe, (of which alſo touches have been formerly given, but we conceive it convenient to be here expreſly handled) is from the more then conveniencie, (neere to a neceſſitie, if not altogether ſo) that there ſhould be one particular Day, as neere as may be, according to the variation of Climates, even the ſelfe-ſame Day, all the world over, for the Honour of God generally from all His ſervants together at the ſame time; and for the generall exerciſe of the Communion of Saints alſo all the world over. Thus we propound it:

[If all the world over there is to be, as neere as may be, one and the ſelf-ſame particular day for the chief time to Religion: Then the determination of this particular Day belongs to God peculiarly, and not to men. But there is to be all the world over, as neere as may be, one and the ſelfe-ſame particular Day for the chiefe Time for Religion. Ergo, The determination of this particular Day belongs to God peculiarly, and not to men.]

The Conſequence of this Argument is evident, 1. By the conſtant p. 323neceſſity of having a particular Day determined for the chiefe Time to Religion; ſo as, if any ſuch particular Day which was once determined for it be abrogated (upon any grounds whatſoever) there muſt without delay be a new particular Day determined, as without which the chiefe Time neceſſary to Religion cannot be obſerved by all thoſe whom it concernes, by all Chriſtians. 2. By the Impoſſibilitie, that without a Divine determination, or at leaſt a divine revelation, all Chriſtians could ſo much as come to know what Day, particularly, were determined by all, that know of the abrogation of the former particular Day before them: As ſuppoſe, the Apoſtles going into ſeverall Countries, and preaching the abrogation of the old ſeventh Day, and that a new Day was to be determined by the Church: and that Matthew goes firſt, and Thomas after him, and Bartholomew after him; how can the Chriſtians, to whom Thomas or Bartholomew preach thus, know, without divine revelation, what Day is determined by the Churches that made the firſt determination, namely thoſe to whom Matthew preached. 3. By a like impoſſibilitie of their knowing what the Churches that ſhould receive the Goſpel after them, would determine concerning the particular Day; as namely, to whom (ſuppoſe) Philip, and Andrew, and Simon ſhould preach, after the others. 4. The impoſſibilitie, that they would all agree upon the ſame Time, though they did know one anothers minds; unleſſe ſome command from God did neceſſitate the latter converted Churches to conſent to the determination of the firſt Churches; and this ſuppoſed, would to them be in the nature of a divine determination, and would ſuppoſe an inſpiration from God to have aſſiſted the determination by thoſe Churches. 5. Of this, the great and violent difference, even preſently after the Apoſtles times, about the keeping of Eaſter day, (upon the particular Day of the Week, or the particular Day of the MonethMonth) between the Weſtern and Eaſterne Churches, ſhewes proofe ſufficient, namely, how little hope or poſſibilitie there would have been even in the Primitive Times, of the agreement about the particular Day for the chiefe Time to Religion, (and ſo much rather now) if wholly left to the determination of men, of the Church, Particular, or Nationall Churches, or any. 6. Finally, if it may be imagined,Except. that an Vniverſall Councell (repreſenting the whole Church) might ſufficiently p. 322duplicate page p. 323duplicate page p. 324have agreed upon the particular Day for all Churches, and ſo for all Chriſtians all the world over: We deſire it may be conſidered. Sol. 1 1. that there was no ſuch thing as any ſuch univerſall or generall Councell repreſenting the whole Church in the firſt Times, when the Lords day, Inſt. Sol.the firſt Day of the Weeke came firſt to be practiſed. 2. If any ſhall ſay, that of Act. 15. was ſuch an one, he muſt yet remember; there was no ſuch determination made, For if it had, the Holy Ghoſt would have recorded it, being ſo neceſſary a thing: Sol. 2 And againe the determinations there, were the determinations of the Holy Ghoſt, as is expreſly ſaid in the Synodicall Epiſtle v. 29. Sol. 1 3. Neither could there be any ſuch, ſo ſoone, as this needed to be (and was) determined for the practiſe of particular Churches, and Chriſtians. For we ſaid before, there could be no delay, after the abrogation of the old ſeventh Day Sabbath preached. And the converſion of Churches ſo late, one after another, made a generall Councell of all the Churches in ſeverall Nations of the World impoſſible, till the Goſpel had beene planted in all Nations. From all which, it followes undeniably, that if one and the ſelfe-ſame Day were, or were to be determined, in the Apoſtolike and firſt Times; for the particular Day unto the chiefe Time for Religion unto all Chriſtians, all the World over, it could be no otherwiſe then by a Divine determination, either by Chriſt himſelfe while He converſed with His Diſciples after His reſurrection; or elſe by the Apoſtles divinely inſpired, and commanding in the Name of God and Chriſt, which comes all to one paſſe, for the point in hand.

The Antecedent, [That there is to be all the World over, as neer as may be, One and the ſelfe-ſame particular Day, for the chiefe Time to Religion, among all Chriſtians,] hath been declared in the former Chapter. To which may now be added, That we remember not to have ever read or heard, in any Religion, but thoſe that profeſſed the ſame Religion, obſerved the ſame particular Dayes for the chiefe ſolemne Times belonging to their Religion. It was ever ſo in the Jewiſh Religion, and is ſo ſtill; and the like was done by all that became proſelites to their Religion. Alſo, all Chriſtians, at this Day doe; and have ever done ſo farre as any records lead us, obſerved actually the ſame particular Day for the chiefe Time to Religion, the Lords day the firſt Day of the Weeke: even thoſe that joyned ſome other dayes with it, as ſome did a p. 325while the Old Sabbath, and others, other Dayes, yet this was ever the chiefe Day, as is learnedly ſhewed by a late Author, in his elaborate collections from Antiquity, expreſly concerning the Lords day. Neither did ever the Church of Rome, as preſumptuous as ſhe hath been in other matters, even to controll the undoubted Lawes of God and Chriſt: (as about inceſtuous marriage, and the Cup in the Lords Supper) dare to try or practiſe her authority upon the Lords day, in changing it to any other Day; Which is alſo ſo much the more remarkable, becauſe of the impetuous fierceneſſe of the Romiſh Victor even in the ſecond Century after Chriſt, (and hard after the Apoſtles Times) about the particular Day for Eaſter, mentioned before. And that in the very Councell of Trent, ſome alledged (upon ſome occaſion) that the Lords day ſtood but by the Authority of the Church: Yet for all that, The Romiſh Church never durſt venture upon it, to alter it to any other. (The more impudent ſlander therefore we eſteeme it to be, and without all ſhadow or colour, which Barclay (as the Tranſlator of Doctor Prideaux his Lecture quotes him, with an accent of credulity) reports, that Maſter Calvin ſhould conſult of changing it into Thurſday. To which we only ſay thus much, If to accuſe without proofe ſhall be ſufficient, who can be innocent? And the World hath been enough abuſed with notorious untruths concerning that man of God, both ſince he is dead, and even when he was alive: which alſo have been ſufficiently refuted by undeniable proofes. Therefore we wiſh alſo the relatour of this ſleeveleſſe tale, to conſider whether he be any better then the delatour, If thoſe ſentences of Solomon be true, Prov. 10.18. and Pro. 17.4. But we have ſomewhat more to ſay in the matter in hand: that is, the very Profeſſours of the Mahometane Religion, though ſome of them differ among themſelves (even to an abhorring one of another) in ſome other matters, as the Turkes, and the Perſians, Yet they all agree in the keeping of the ſame particular Dayes for the chiefe Times of their Religion, namely the Friday, as we noted before. And ſo it was alſo among the Heathens, they had multiplicities of Religions: But we find not among thoſe that profeſſed the ſame Religion with others, any diſagreement, or variety, about the particular Dayes of their chiefe Times of ſolemne Worſhip. So that it ſeemes a kind of conſent in Nature; and very agreeable p. 326(to ſay the leaſt of it) to the very Law of Nature that it ſhould be ſo. Which makes us the more admire, at ſome (at leaſt) of our Adverſaries diſputing, as if the preſent Church had power to alter the Lords day, to any other day of the Weeke, And what Church they meane, Nationall? or Vniverſall? (which, to be ſure, will never meate ſo much as repreſentatively, if we include all Chriſtians of Europe, Aſia, Africa, and America within the univerſall Church) Or what they intend by it? And whether they would be glad to ſee any Nationall Church (or all the Weſterne Churches together) to take in hand ſuch a thing, to ſhew their authority; as Lords of the Lords day, and ſilence all future diſputes by whoſe authority the particular Day ſtands? What ever their thoughts be, We for our parts hope, we ſhall never live to ſee, any Nationall Church, much leſſe ours, and leaſt of all many Nations to ruſh upon ſo deſperate an adventure. And ſo we conclude this argument, with this note, That as we ſuppoſe, the ground that hath made all the World thus conſent in the ſame particular Dayes according to their ſeverall Religions, was immediately their perſwaſion, That thoſe Dayes are determined to them by their gods, and that it was ſo delivered by thoſe that commended to them, thoſe particular Dayes: So this perſwaſion was built upon another originall principle, that the determination of them did properly belong to their gods.

LXXVIII. Arg. 4. from the conſent of the heathen.And this may make up another argument, (briefly) of great probability, (at leaſt) not only for the particular Dayes: but alſo and principally for the chiefe Time to Religion: namely, The univerſall conſent of Heathens, and misbeleevers, (whoſe practiſe is, by ſome of our adverſaries, delivered us, as the beſt Comment upon the Law of Nature or Morality of the fourth Commandement) practiſing and obſerving their chiefe Times for their Religion, as determined to them by their gods; and ſo owning the determination of them to belong to their authority only. This we ſay, hath not only ſeemed reaſonable to the Mahometans, as we ſhewed, but to the very Heathen of old. Among whom, as their Prieſts, or Law-givers, the immediate inſtitutours of their Religion, feigned the other matters of their Religion and Worſhip to be preſcribed by their gods, in Oracles, Viſions, Dreams, and the like, according to that naturall principle, which is the generall, affirmative, part of p. 327the ſecond commandement [God, every God, is to be worſhipped with His own preſcribed Worſhip] So, according to the generall meaning of the fourth Commandement or at leaſt according to part of the generall meaning of that ſecond forementioned: They ever aſcribed the inſtitution of their chiefe and ordinary Holy-dayes, and ſolemne Times for their Religion, and the ſervice of their gods,Dij miſerati laborioſum a natura genus humanion, remiſſiones laborum ipſi conſtituerunt. de leg. 2. LXXIX. The 5. generall Arg. from confeſſion of the very adverſaries. C. D. pag. 21. unto their gods themſelves. Hear Plato ſpeake for them all. [The Gods compaſſionating the labourſome life of mankind, themſelves, appointed remiſſion of their labours] that is, Dayes, or Times, of remiſſion from their labours, which were their Holy-dayes. Specialties of theſe may be found in other Authors.

But now, after all, what will our Readers ſay, if ſome of our greateſt adverſaries in this queſtion, have themſelves confeſſed, as much as will neceſſarily inferre, All this determination about the chiefe Time and particular Day for it, to belong to God, without peradventure or long diſpute? Heare them ſpeake. Thus one delivers his opinion [Men may by the Light of Nature from the Creature; climbe up to the knowledge of the Creator; and from the Nature of God, conclude His Worſhip; and from the Nature of His Worſhip, conclude a Time (as to all other things) to be due to it. But to goe further, and determine, what part of our Time (is due, he means) we cannot: For it will not follow, that becauſe ſome Time is due, Ergo. The ſeventh more then the eighth of every MonethMonth, or any other Day, above or under that number,] So he. Whence we inferre our former concluſion, [If men cannot determine what is due, (ſome being due) God muſt determine it. Except.] If he ſay, he only meanes, men cannot determine it by the Light of Nature; but by other Rules they may. We reply. 1. Then God Sol. 1 by this confeſſion muſt determine it for all the Heathen, for all that have no other Rules then the Light of Nature. 2. Beſides that we Sol. 2 have diſproved all other Rules as unſufficient, let him try if he can preſcribe any ſufficient Rules for it. Till when we muſt ſay againe; ſince man cannot determine it, God muſt, that is, God hath. But heare another. [To offer ſacrifice Abel might learne of Adam,Hiſt. ſab. part. 1. pag. 35. or of naturall reaſon, which doth ſufficiently inſtruct us that we ought to make ſome publike Teſtimony of our ſubjection to the Lord. But (ſaith he) neither did Adam obſerve the Sabbath, See Prim. p. 8. ſect. 3.nor could Nature teach it.] Now marke what followes, If Nature could not teach p. 328it, then Adam could not determine it; and if not Adam, much leſſe, any man,Except. or men now. Therefore againe, God muſt, and did. If he ſay, Adam might determine another Time, but not this. We Sol. 1 reply, 1. If he might without a Rule, he might ſtumble upon this number, and day, (for any thing this Author knowes) as well as any other; and ſpecially ſince we heare ſome notice taken of a Weeke, or ſeven Dayes, before Moſes was borne, (of which more Sol. 2 hereafter.) 2. If he might not without a Rule, and had no Rule, nor could have any certaine (as hath been proved) then he might not determine any. Yet ſome Time muſt be determined. Therefore it was by God himſelfe; Prim. p. 3.adde but one more. [Adam neither had, nor ſhould have had any knowledge of keeping a ſeventh Day, if God had not enjoyned it to him hy a particular Commandement.] And yet,Pag. 127. None can inſtitute a day as Morall, but God alone. Prim. p. 160. ſee. p. 249. It is Gods prerogative, excluſively to men and angels, to ſanctifie a thing, to be an eſſentiall part, and properly ſo called, of Gods ſervice. ſaith he, [A ſtinted Day is neceſſary.] Ergo, ſay we, God muſt determine it. For what could Adam have more, for any other time or Day, then for a ſeventh Day, without Gods particular Commandement? And conſider but the Similitude between the ſecond and the fourth Commandements; the Matter and the Time of Worſhip. [Adam, (ſay they) or naturall reaſon might teach Abel to Sacrifice. But what? Whether a Sheep rather then a Lion, or a Swine? and how much? Whether one Sheep, or two Lambs? a quart, or pecke of fine flower, &c? Neither Adam knew, nor could Nature teach either Abel, or himſelfe, Therefore God muſt direct them.] So ſay we, of the Time of Worſhip, (the chiefe ſolemne Time) That ſome Time be ſo ſet apart for Gods Worſhip Adam knew; and Nature might teach both him and us. But how much at once? or how often? or when? that is either the length, number, or order, (the Continuance, Frequency, or particular Day) Neither Adam, nor Nature, nor all the men in the World could, or can, determine without Divine authority; we ſay, not any one of theſe, (unleſſe they will yeeld the Continuance of a whole Day, to be the determination of Nature, as we diſcourſed before) and much leſſe all of them: Therefore we ſay ſtill, it muſt neceſſarily belong to God. Which things being thus evinced in reaſon, and from their owne confeſſions in part; We cannot but wonder, they ſhould ſo ſoone forget themſelves, as to reſolve upon the contrary.C. D. pag. 39. [That however it be neceſſary that ſome Time be dedicated to Gods ſervice: Yet the determination to this, or that p. 329particular Day is not neceſſary to be deſigned by Scripture.] And they ſay the like with more earneſtneſſe, for the Continuance and Frequency of the Dayes, which they will have now left to the Church. The cleane contrary whereunto doth neceſſarily follow from their owne grants, as we have ſhewed. That ſome ſufficient Time being neceſſary to be determined for Religion; and ſome particular Dayes alſo, that the ſufficient Time determined may be conſtantly obſerved; And that no man can determine, what is that ſufficient Time, or what Day will pleaſe God; all muſt neceſſarily be deſigned by Divine authority: And that now in the Scripture: Or elſe he muſt needs run upon the ſame abſurdity, that he would put upon us, That the Scripture is deficient in things neceſſary; and ſo forſake his colours of Reformation; and paſſe over into the Campe of the Romaniſts. If he be aſhamed of this, let him learne and confeſſe, that it is neceſſary, That God in Scripture, doe define the chiefe Time of His owne Worſhip, in all the reſpects of it; and accordingly that He hath certainly ſo done, for Chriſtians now, as well as for the Jewes of old.LXXX. The 6. generall Arg. from confeſſion of the Romaniſts. Al. Halenſ. Sum. Theolog. p. 3. q. 32. n. 2. Aquin. 1.2. q. 91. a. 4. c. ſecundo, &c.

And why ſhould he, or any of his fellowes, be aſhamed to confeſſe that which ſome of the Romaniſts themſelves have ingenuouſly confeſſed? Who yet are knowne to be men not apt to offend in over much modeſty, where the authority of the Church comes in competition. One hath thus reſolved plainly, [When we muſt reſt to God, it belongs not to man to determine.] And againe, [By the written Law it ought to be determined, when men muſt reſt to God.] And even Aquinas himſelfe, though he yeeld not the particular Thing in queſtion, Yet he layes downe a generall Truth which is juſtly applyable to the very caſe in hand, He gives this for one reaſon, why it was neceſſary, that beſides the Naturall and Humane Lawes, we ſhould have a Divine Law: [Becauſe (ſaith he) of the uncertainty of mans judgement, ſpecially about things contingent and particular; It happens that men are of divers judgements concerning humane acts: Therefore that man might without any doubting, know what he was to doe, and what to avoyd; It was neceſſary that in his proper acts, he ſhould be directed by a Law Divine, which cannot erre.] Now ſeeing the obſervation of the chiefe Time for Religion, is a thing of ſo great moment, as hath been demonſtrated; and that the judgements of men are ſo different; and p. 330ſo unable to determine, what is neceſſary, and what is ſufficient, for the chiefe Time, and which particular Day is fitteſt, It was therefore, and is ever, very neceſſary, that God by His own Law & Word, ſhould determine all; and ſo without all doubt, then He hath.

And now it remaines that we ſhould examine the Arguments or pretences for the Churches Power to determine this chiefe Time for Religion in all the reſpects, or in any. But we can find none particular, and proper to the matter in hand; but only generall preſumptions, upon the ſuppoſition (which they will needs ſuppoſe) [That God hath made voyd all His owne former determinations, and ſo left in His Word all Times and Dayes equall under the Goſpel.] As alſo that aſſertion comes moſt frequently forth, [That Time and Place are equall circumſtances in Religion.] And ſo Place being left to the Churches determination, Time is ſo too, in like ſort. All which we ſhall encounter more particularly in their proper ſtation, and namely in the next Chapter, by way of corrollary to our whole diſcourſe about religious Time, we ſhall endeavour to manifeſt diſtinctly. 1. That all Times and Dayes are not equall in Religion under the Goſpel. 2. That Time and Place are not equall circumſtances in Religion. And therefore the leaving of the one, that is Place, to the Church, will inferre nothing at all for the Time to be ſo left. And then we ſhall conclude all our generall diſcourſe, and firſt part with aſſerting, That this chiefe Time, thus determined by God, is not a meere circumſtance or adjunct of Worſhip, but a proper and eſſentiall part of it, a part of Religion, to be obſerved with the ſame mind, that any other part of Religion is: which will helpe (we hope) not a little to the conſcionable and carefull obſervation of it.

LXXXI. An objection anſwered.Only one Objection, though of two branches, we have met with, againſt the neceſſity of the determination to be made by God, which we muſt give a particular ſatisfaction unto, leaſt ſome Readers ſhould yet ſtumble, or be gravelled at them; but briefly, for many 1words will not now need. Thus it is ſaid, [It ſeemes to be neceſſary that God ſhould determine the ſufficient Time for His publike 2Worſhip, even on the ſolemne Dayes; And again, the ſufficient Times for family and ſolitary Worſhip every Day: as well as the determinations we have all this while been arguing for. And ſeeing it is cleare He hath not done thoſe; it may ſeeme not neceſſary He ſhould doe the other.]

p. 331We anſwer. 1. Suppoſing that God hath determined the chiefe Sol. 1 Time of Worſhip: There is no ſuch neceſſity, that out of that He ſhould determine particularly a proportion for the publike Worſhip: For when men know they muſt ſpend the whole Continuance of the Time, the whole Day, in Religious Worſhip, either publike or domeſticke, or ſolitary, The Governours of the Church may now be well enough truſted to determine the houres for the publike Duties. Their wiſdome (unleſſe in perverſe ſpirits, that would purpoſely ſhut out ſome of the Ordinances, of Prayer, or Preaching, or the like, or curtall them, that men might be ſure to have no benefit by the publike) will eaſily ſuffice to allot convenient proportions for theſe, from experience how long men may ordinarily hold out in ſuch Duties, whether Miniſters or People with edification; and herein alſo to referre it partly to the diſcretion of Miniſters; There being a poſſibility of variety in ſeverall particular Churches, in the ſame Church at ſeverall ſeaſons of the yeere, and the like, without any remarkable prejudice to Religion, Gods honour, and the good of mens ſoules any where: Becauſe ſtill the reſidue of the Day, before and after the publike, remaines devoted to Religion: Whereas there would be manifeſt and certaine danger of prejudice to Religion, (even the ruine of it) as we have ſhewed, if the whole of the chiefe Time were left to mens diſcretion, to any number of men whatſoever.

2. We ſay the like for the Continuance of Time for Religion on Sol 2 the working Dayes, either in domeſticke, or ſolitary Worſhip: That God having ſtrictly determined the chiefe Time (namely one whole Day in a weeke according to the fourth Commandement) there was no ſuch neceſſity that He ſhould determine, beſides, the Continuance of the Week-dayes devotions. He might have done theſe alſo, we confeſſe, if it had ſo been His pleaſure. But we have intimated formerly faire reaſons which we may conceive, why He would not; namely. 1. His gracious indulgence, to try mens affections, and zeale, and ſpirituall wiſdome, in redeeming of Time ordinarily, and extraordinarily, on thoſe Week-dayes, for their families, and themſelves to waite upon God, and their Soules: with which they might be conveniently truſted, if they conſcionably obſerved the chiefe Time (the Sabbath) of Gods owne peremptory determination. Specially remembring what we ſaid a while p. 332agoe, of the Bleſſing made over to ſuch, that they ſhould thereby come to delight more and more in the Lord: and ſuch then will not be wanting to God and their ſoules, (or others ſoules) even on the Week-dayes, when they conveniently can redeeme any Time. 2. As alſo, To make evill men the more inexcuſable, who being not tyed ſo ſtrictly on the Week-dayes, will yet rob God, and their ſouls, and the ſoules of others under them, of the Time of the Sabbath, the Time that God himſelfe hath made to be the neceſſary and ordinarily ſufficient chiefe Time for Religion to all men. Such, we ſay, would never have obeyed any determination on the Week-dayes for any Continuance, if they ſhould have been tyed to that alſo; which thinke the Sabbath, one day in ſeven, ſo intolerable a burden, now that they are ſo much at libertie on the other Dayes: For alſo ſuch on the Week-dayes doe ſcarce give God any Time at all, many, or moſt of them, with their families, or alone. Therefore, we ſay, we can ſee reaſon why God was pleaſed not to tie men in all the parcells of Time, when yet He would, and hath in ſome, in the chiefe. And like unto this, He hath done (at leaſt in the opinion of all (or moſt) of our Engliſh Adverſaries) in another Point, namely in matter of our goods. All our eſtates and goods are His, as well as our Time. Therefore out of them, out of the increaſe of Corne, and Cattell, and the like, He hath by an expreſſe determination challenged to himſelfe a portion, by way of tribute or homage, namely the Tithe, the tenth part, It is the Lords, Lev. 23. (which afterwerd Himſelfe divers yeeres after beſtowed upon the Levites ond Prieſts, His Miniſters; to whom He ſaith, Himſelfe would be their portion and inheritance, Num. 18.) Now this Law, we ſay, our Engliſh Diſputers beleeve to be perpetuall. Notwithſtanding which ſtrict tie for that part of our goods, a tenth part; All acknowledge ſomewhat more to be due to God, for pious uſes, and for the maintenance of the poore: and yet in neither of theſe hath God made any particular determination; but left it to every ones diſcretion and affection, according to occaſions ordinary and extraordinary.**When (without all controverſie) God determined to the Iewes the chiefe ſolemne time, the weekly Sabbat…, yet He did not the h…ures of publike morall worſhip: much leſſe the continuance on weekdayes. And it was ſo even of old, when that Law of Tithes was undeniably in force. So there is no manner of neceſſity or reaſon, to inferre, That if it pleaſe God (and it appeare neceſſary to us for Him ſo to doe) to determine one thing, a chiefe thing, the chiefeſt in the kind: Therefore He muſt alſo doe all of the p. 333kind: Or that, becauſe He hath not determined all of the kind, or not this, or that; Therefore we have no need that He ſhould determine at all any of the kind, not ſo much as the chiefeſt. For—

3. We adde, that Gods not determining the Continuance of Sol. 3 the Time for the Publique Worſhip on the Solemne Dayes, nor yet of Family or Solitary Worſhip on the Work-Dayes, is ſo far from arguing that He hath not, or need not (for our ſakes) determine the chiefe ſolemne Time for Religion, His own Honour, and mens ſoules generally; that it rather ſtrongly confirms that He hath, and that we needed He ſhould; As being the only certaine and ſufficient obligation to hold men to neceſſary, ſufficient, juſt, and profitable attendance upon God and their ſoules; and to ſupply the defects that are, or may be, in ſcanty performances on the Week-Dayes, and to ſcoure off the ruſt and filth then contracted by much handling of worldly matters; and to make up a full advantage, beyond that which the nature of the Publike Services, whether ſhorter or longer, could of themſelves meerly reach unto. God, we ſay, ſaw it neceſſary, (and we can, by His ſhewing, ſee it too) that He ſhould not leave all Time to mens determinations; and yet convenient, He ſhould leave ſome undetermined ſtrictly. Therefore accordingly ſo He hath done, determining the chiefe Time, with the particular Day for it, expreſly in His Word, (and ſomewhat of each Day by the very Law of Nature, as we have ſhewed) and leaving the reſt undetermined to all men, in regard of any ſtrict determination; and referring it to the various occaſions and affections of every one for themſelves apart, and of ſuperiors for themſelves and their inferiors, both ordinarily and extraordinarily, according to generall rules of the Scripture, ſpeaking of His Honour, and the good of ſoules. And all this moſt wiſely and graciouſly; as we truſt, hereafter, every Conſcience that duely waighs the premiſſes, will confeſſe with us. Unto which acknowledgment yet, all our following Diſcourſes will not be unprofitable, for the fuller removing of all objections and ſcruples in any part of the whole Queſtion; and the ſetling of mens judgements in all the maine matters belonging to this great Controverſie; as we hope will appeare in the ſequel.