§ 2. First. It is agreed by all that God alone is the supreme, original, and absolute cause of the Sabbath. Whenever it began, whenever it ends, be it expired, or still in force, of what kind soever were its institution, the law of it was from God. It was from heaven, and not of men; and the will of God is the sole rule and measure of our observance of it, and obedience to him therein. What may, or may not be done, in reference to the observance of a day of holy rest by any inferior authority comes not here under consideration. But whereas there are two sorts of laws, whereby God requires the obedience of his rational creatures, which are commonly called moral and positive, it is greatly questioned and disputed, to whether of these sorts doth belong the command of a Sabbatical rest. Positive laws are taken to be such, as have no reason for them in themselves, nothing in the matterof themis taken fromthe things themselvescommanded, but do depend merely and solely on the sovereign will and pleasure of God. Such were the laws and institutions of the sacrifices of old; and such are those which concern the sacraments and other things of the lke nature, under the New Testament. Moral laws are such as have the reasons of them taken from the things themselves, required in them. For they are good, from their respect to the nature of God himself, and from that nature and order of all things, which he hath placed in the creation. So that this sort of laws is but declarative of the absolute goodness of what they do require; the other is constitutive of it, as unto some certain ends. Laws positive, as they are occasionally given, so they are esteemed alterable at pleasure. Being fixed by mere will and prerogative, without respect to any thing that should make them necessary, antecedently to their being enacted, they may by the same authority at any time be taken away and abolished. Such I say are they in their own nature, and as to any firmitude that they have from their own subject-matter. But with respect to God's determination, positye divine laws may becomeeventually unalterable. And this difference is there between legal and evangelical institutions. The laws of both are positive only, equally proceeding from sovereign will and pleasure, and im their own natures equally alterable. But to the former, God had in his purpose fixed a determinate time and season wherein they should expire, or be altered by his authority: to the latter, he hath attached a perpetuity and unchangeableness, during the state and condition of his church in this world. The other sort of laws are perpetual and unalterable in themselves, so far as they are of that sort that is moral. For although a law of that kind may especially enjoin such circumstances as may be changed and varied, as did the whole Decalogue in the whole commonwealth of Israel, yet so far as it is moral, that is, as its commands or prohibitions are necessary emergencies, or expressions, of the good or evil of the things it commands or forbids, it is invariable. And in these things there is an agreement; unless sometimes, through mutual oppositions, men are chaffed into some exceptions or distinctions.
§ 3. Unto these two sorts do all divine laws belong, and unto these heads they may be allreduced. And it is pleaded by some, that these kinds of laws are contradistinct; so that a law of one kind, can in no sense bea law in the cther. And this doubtless is true reduplicatively, because they have especial formal reasons. As far, and wherein any laws are positive, they are not moral, and as far as they are purely moral, they are not formally positive, though given after the manner of positive command. Howbeit, this hinders not but that some do judge that there may be and are divine laws of amixed nature. For there may be in a divine law, a foundation in, and respect unto somewhat that is moral, which yet may stand in need of the super-addition of a positive command, for its due observance to its proper end. Yea, the moral reason of things commanded, which ariseth out of a due natural respect to God, and the order of the universe, may be so deep and hidden, as that God, who would make the way of his creatures plain and easy, gives out express positive commands for the observance of what is antecedently necessary by the law of our creation. Hence alaw may partake of both these considerations, and both of them have an equal influence into its obligatory power. And by this means sundry duties, some moral, some positive, are as it were compounded in one observance, as may be instanced in the great duty of prayer. Hence the whole law of that observance becomes of a mixed nature, which yet God can separate at his pleasure, and taking away that which is positive, leave only that which is absolutely moral in force. And this kind of laws which have their foundation in the nature of things themselves, which yet stand in need of farther direction for their due observance, which is added unto them by positive institution, some call moral positive.
§ 4, According to these distinctions of the nature of the laws, in and by which God expresseth his will, are men’s apprehensions different about the immediate and instrumental cause of the Sabbatical rest. That God was the author of it, is, as was said, by all agreed. But, say some, the law whereby he appointed it, was purely positive, the matter of it being arbitrary, stated and determined only in the command itself; and so the whole nature of the law, and that commanded in it, changeable. And because positive laws did, and always do respect some other things besides and be-. yond themselves, it is pleaded that this law was ceremonial and typical; that is, it was an institution of an outward present religious observance, to signify and represent something not present, nor yet come: such were all the particulars of the whole system of Mosaic worship, whereof this law of the Sabbath was a part and an instance. In brief, some say that the whole law of the Sabbath was, as to its general nature, positive and arbitrary, and so changeable; and in particular, ceremonial and typical, and so actually changed and abolished. But yet it has so fallen out, that they who are most positive in these assertions, cannot but acknowledge, that this law is so engrafted into, and so closed up with somewhat that is moral and unalterable, that it is no easy thing to hit the joint aright, and make a separation of the one from the other. But concerning any other law expressly and confessedly ceremonial, no such thing can be observed. They were all evidently and entirely arbitrary institutions, without any such near relation to what is moral, as might trouble any one to make a distinction between them. For instance, the law of sacrifices hath indeed an answerableness in it to a great principle of the law of nature; namely, that we must honour God with our substance, and the best of our increase; yet that this might be done many other ways, and not by sacrifice, if God had pleased so to ordain, every one is able to apprehend. It is otherwise in this matter; for none will deny but that it is required of us in and by the law of nature, that some time be set apart and dedicated unto God, for the observance of his so- Jemn worship in the world. And it is plain to every one, that this natural dictate is inseparably included in the law of the Sabbath. It will therefore surely be difficult to make it absolutely and universally positive. I know some begin to whisper things inconsistent with this concession. But we have’ as yet the universal consent of all divines, ancient and modern, fathers, schoolmen, and casuists, concurring in this matter. For they all unanimously affirm, that the separation of some part of our time to sacred uses, and the solemn honouring of God, is required of us in the light and by the law of nature. And herein lies the fundamental notion of the law now inquired after. This also may be farther added, that whereas this natural dictate for the observance of some time in the solemn worship of God, hath been accompanied with a declaration of his will from the foundation of the world, that this time should be one day in seven, it will be a matter of no small difficulty to find out what is purely positive therein.
§ 5. Others building on this foundation, that the dedication of some part of our time to the worship of God, is a duty natural or moral, as required by the law of our creation, (not that time in itself, which is but a circumstance of other things, can be esteemed moral, but that our observance of time may be a moral duty,) do add, that the determination of one day in seven, to be that portion of time so to be dedicated, is inseparable from the same foundation, and is of the same nature with it. That is, that the Sabbatical observance of one day’s holy rest in seven, hath a moral precept for its warrant, or that which hath the nature of a moral precept in it; so that, although the revolution of time in seven days, and the confining of the day to that determined season, do depend-on revelation, and a positive command of God for its observance, yet on supposition thereof, the moral precept prevails in the whole, and is everlastingly obligatory. And there aré some divines of great piety and learning, who do judge that a command of God given to all men, and equally obligatory to all, respecting their manner of living unto God, is to be esteemed a moral command, and that indispensable and unchangeable; although we should not be able to discover- the reason of it in the light and law of nature. Nor can such a command be reckoned amongst them that are merely positive, arbitrary and changeable, all which depend on sundry other things, and do. not first affect men, as men in general. And it is probable, that God would not give out any such catholic command, which comprised not somewhat naturally good and right init. And this is the best measure and determination of what is moral, and not our ability of discovering by reason what is so, and what is not; as we shall see afterwards.
§ 6. Moreover, there are some who stay not here, but contend, that the precise observance of the seventh day in the hebdomadal revolution, lieth under a command moral and indispensable. For God, they say, who is the sovereign Lord of us and our times, hath taken by an everlasting jaw this day unto himself for his honour and service. And he hath therein obliged all men to a holy rest, not on some certain fixed and stated time, not on one day in seven originally, as the first intention of his command, but on the seventh day precisely, whereunto those other considerations of some stated and fixed time, and of one day in seven, are consequential, and far from previous foundations of it. The seventh day, as the seventh day, is, they say, the first proper object of the command; the other things mentioned of a stated time, and of one day in seven, do only follow thereon; and by virtue thereof belong to the command of the Sabbath, and no otherwise. Herein great honour indeed is done unto the seventh day, above all other ordinances of worship whatever, even of the gospel itself; but whether with sufficient warrant we must afterwards inquire. At present I shall only observe, that this observance of the seventh day precisely, is resolved into the sovereignty of God over us and our times, and into an occasion respecting purely the covenant of works; on which bottoms, it is hard to fix it an absolute unvariable station.
§ 7. It is the second opinion, for the substance of it, which I shall endeavour to explain and confirm; and therein prove a sacred Sabbatical res¢ unto God of one day in seven, to be enjoined unto all that fear him, by a law perpetual and indispensable, upon the account of what is moral therein. The reason, I say, of the obligation of the law of the Sabbath is natural, and thence the obligation itself universal; however the declaration and determination of the day itself depend on arbitrary revelation, and a law merely positive. These things being explained and confirmed, the other opinions proposed will fall under our consideration.;
To obtain a distinct light into the truth in this matter, we must consider both the true notion of the sacred rest, as also of the law of our creation, whereby we affirm that fundamentally and virtually it is required.
§ ὃ. The general notion of the Sabbath is, a portion of time set apart by divine appointment, for the observance and performance of the solemn worship of God. The worship of God is that which we are made for, as to our station in this world, and is the means and condition of our enjoyment of him in glory, wherein consists the ultimate end, as unto us, of our creation. ‘This worship therefore is required of us by the law of our creation, and it is upon the matter all that is required of us there- by, seeing we are obliged by it to do all things to the glory of God. And therefore is the solemn expression of that worship, required of us in the same manner. For the end of it being our glorifying him as God, and the nature of it, consisting in the profession of our universal subjection unto him, and dependence upon him, the solemn expression of it is as necessary as the worship itself, which we are to perform. No man therefore ever doubted, but that by the law of nature we were bound to worship God, and solemnly to express that worship; for else wherefore were we brought forth in this world? These things are inseparable from our natures, and where this order is disturbed by sin, we fall into another, which the properties of God on the supposition of transgressing our first natural order, do render no less necessary unto his glory than the other, namely, that of punishment.
Moreover, in this worship it is required by the same law of our beings, that we should serve God with all that we do receive from him. No man can think otherwise; for is there any thing that we have received from God, that shall yield him no revenue of glory, or whereof we ought to make no acknowledgment unto him? Who dare once so ta imagine? Among the things thus given us of Gog, is our time. And this falls under a double consideration in this matter: First. As it is an inseparable moral circumstance of the worship required of us, so it is necessarily included in the command of worship itself, not directly, but consequentially. Secondly. It is in itself a part of what is vouchsafed to us from God, for our own use and purposes in this world. So upon its own account, first and directly, a separation of a part of it unto God and his solemn worship, is required of us. It remains only to inquire what part of time it is'that is, and will be accepted with God. ‘This is declared and determined in the fourth commandment, to be the seventh part of it, or one day in seven. And this is that which is positive in the command, which yet, as to the foundation, formal reason, and main substance of it, is moral. These things are true, but yet do not express the whole nature of the Sabbath, which we must farther inquire into.
§ 9. And first, it must be observed, that wherever there is mention of a Sabbatical rest, as enjoined to men for their observance, there is still respect unto a rest of God that preceded it, and was the cause and foundation of it. In the first mention of it, God’s rest is given as the reason of his sanctifying and blessing-a day of rest for us, whence also it hath its name, Gen. ii. 2, 3. ‘God blessed and sanctified the seventh day, NAW 12 *D, because he sabbatized thereon himself’ And so it is expressed, and the same reason is given of it in the fourth commandment. God wrought six days, and rested the seventh: therefore we must rest, Exod. xx. 1]. The same is observed in the new creation, as we shall see afterwards, and more fully in our exposition of Heb. iv. Now that God may be said to rest, it is necessary that some signal work of his do go before. for rest, in the first notion of it, includes a respect to an antecedent work or labour.,And so it is everywhere declared. God wrought his works and finished them, and then rested. He made all things in six days, and rested on the seventh. And he that is entered into rest, ceaseth from his work. And both these, the work of God, and the rest of God, must in this matter be considered. For the work of God, it is that of the old and whole creation, as is directly expressed, Gen. ii; Exod. xx; which I desire may be borne in mind.
And this work of God may be considered two ways. First. Naturally or physically, as it consisted in the mere production of the effects of his power, wisdom, and goodness. So all things are the work of God.
Secondly. Morally, as God ordered and designed all his works to be a means of glorifying himself, in and by the obedience of his rational creatures. This consideration, both the nature of it, with the order, and end of the whole creation, do make necessary. For God first made all the inanimate, then animate and sensitive creatures, in their glory, order, and beauty. In, and on all these, he implanted a teaching and instructive power; for the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handywork,’ Ps. xix. ], 2, and all creatures are frequently called on to give praise and glory to him. And this expresseth that in their nature and order, which revealeth and manifesteth him, and the glorious excellencies of his nature, which man is to contemplate in their effects in them, and give glory unto him. For after them all was man made, to consider and use them all, for the end for which they were made; and was a kind of mediator between God and the rest of the creatures, by and through whom he would receive all his glory from them. This is that which our apostle discourseth about, Rom. 1. 19, 20. The design of God, as he declares, was to manifest and show himself in his works to man. Man learning from them the invisible things of God, was to glorify him as God; as he disputes. The ordering and disposal of things to this purpose, is principally to be considered in the works of God, as his rest did ensue upon them.
Secondly. The rest of God isto be considered as that which completes the foundation of the Sabbatical rest inquired after; for it is built on God’s working and entering into his rest. Now this is not a mere cessation from working. It is not absolutely so; for God worketh hitherto: and the expression of God’s rest is of a moral, and not a natural signification, for it consists in the satisfaction and complacency that he took in his works, as effects of his goodness, power, and wisdom, disposed in the order, and unto the ends mentioned. Hence it is said, that upon the fmishing of them, he ‘looked on every thing that he had made, and behold it was very good,’ Gen. i. 31, that is, he was satisfied in his works and in their disposal, and pronounced concerning them, that they became his infinite wisdom and power. And it is added, that he not only rested on the seventh day 3 but also, that ‘he was refreshed, Exod. xxxi. 17, that is, he took great complacency in what he had done, as that which was suited unto the end aimed at; namely, the expression of his greatness, goodness, and wisdom, to his rational creatures, and his glory through their obedience thereon; as on the like occasion he is said to ‘rest in his love, and to rejoice with singing, Zeph. ii. 17.
Now, in the work and rest of God thus stated, did the whole rule of the obedience of man originally consist; and therein was he to seek also his own rest, as his happiness and blessedness. Jor God had not declared any other way for his instruction in the end of his creation, that is, his obedience unto him, and blessedness in him, but in and by his own works and rest. This then is the first end of this holy rest. And it must always be borne in mind, as that without which we ‘can give no glory to God as rational creatures, made under a moral law in a dependence on him; for this he indispensably requireth of us, and this is the sum of what he requireth of us, namely, that we glorify him according to the revelation that he makes of himself unto us, whether by his works of nature or of grace. To the solemnity hereof, the day inquired after is necessary. To express these things, is the general end of the Sabbatical rest prescribed to us, and of our observance of it; for so it is said, ‘God wrought and rested,’ and then requires us so to do. And it hath sundry particular ends or reasons. Jirst. That we might learn the satisfaction and complacency that God hath in his own works, Gen. ii. 2, 3; that is, to consider the impressions of his excellencies upon them, and to glorify him as God on that account, Rom. i. 19—21]. For hence was man originally taught to fear, love, trust, obey, and honour him absolutely; even from the manifestation that he had made of himself in his works, wherein he rested. And had not God thus rested in them, and been refreshed upon the completing and finishing of them, they would not have been a sufficient means to instruct man in those duties. And our observance of the evangelical Sabbath, hath the same respect to the works of Christ, and his rest thereon, when he saw the travail of his soul, and was satisfied; as shall afterwards be declared.
Secondly. Another end of the original Sabbatical rest was, that it might be a pledge to man of his rest in and with God. For in and by the law of
-his creation, man had an end of rest proposed unto him, and that in God. This he was to be directed to, and encouraged to look after. Herein God, by his works and rest, had instructed him. And by giving him the Sabbath, as he gave him a pledge thereof, so he required of him his approbation of the covenant way of attaining it, whereof afterwards. Hence Ps. xcll. whose title is, Naw ord ay iat, ‘A Psalm, a Song for the Sabbath day,’ which some of the Jews ascribe to Adam, as it principally consists in contemplation of the works of God, with holy admiration of his greatness and power manifested in them, with praises unto him on their account; so it expresseth the destruction of ungodly sinners, and the salvation of the righteous, whereof in that day’s rest they had a pledge. And this belonged to that state of man wherein he was created, namely, that he should have a pledge of eternal rest. Neither could his duty and capacity be otherwise answered, or esteemed reasonable. His duty, which was working in moral obedience, had a natural relation unto a reward. And his capacity was such, as could not be satisfied, nor himself attain absolute rest, but in the enjoyment of God. <A pledge hereof therefore belonged unto his condition.
Thirdly. Consideration was had of the way and means, whereby man might enter into the rest of God proposed to him. And this was by that obedience and worship of God, which the covenant wherein he was created required of him. The solemn expression of this obedience, and exercise of this worship, was indispensably required of him and his posterity, in all their societies and communion with one another. This cannot be denied, unless we shall say, that God making man to be a sociable creature, and capable of sundry relations, did not require of him to honour him in the societies and relations whereof he was capable, which would certainly overthrow the whole law of his creation, with respect unto the end for which he was made, and render all societies sinful and rebellious against God. Hereunto the Sabbatical rest was absolutely necessary. For without some such rest, fixed or variable, those things could not be. This is a time or season, for man to express and solemnly pay that homage, which he owes to his Creator. And this is by the most esteemed the great, if not the only end of the Sabbath. But it is evident, that it falls under sundry precedent considerations.
§ 10. These being the proper ends and reasons of the original Sabbatical rest, which contain the true notion of it, we may next inquire after the law whereby it was prescribed and commanded. ‘To this purpose, we must first consider the state wherein man was created, and then the law of his crea— tion. And for the state and condition wherein man was created, it falls under a threefold consideration. For man may be considered either, 1. Absolutely as a rational creature; or, 2. As made under a. covenant of rewards and punishments; or, 3. With respect to the special nature of that covenant.
First. THe was made a rational creature, and thereby necessarily in a moral dependence on God. For being endowed with intellectual faculties in an immortal soul, capable of eternal blessedness or misery, able to know God, and to regard him as the first cause and last end of all, as the author of his bemg and object of his biessedness, it was naturally and necessarily incumbent on him, without any farther considerations, to love, fear, and obey him, to trust in him as a preserver and rewarder; and this the order of his nature, called the image of God, inclined and enabled him to. For it was not possible that such a creature should be produced, and not le under an obligation to all those duties, which the nature of God, and his own nature, and the relation of the one to the other, made necessary. ‘Under this consideration alone, it was required by the law of man’s creation, that some time should be separated unto the solemn expression of his obedience, and due performance of the worship that God required of him. For in vain was he endued with intellectual faculties, and appointed unto society, if he were not to honour God by them in all his relations, and openly to express the homage which he owed him. And this could not be done, but in a time appointed for that purpose, the neglect whereof must be a deviation from the law of the creation. And as this is generally acknowledged, so no man can fancy the contrary. Here, then, do we fix the necessity of the separation of some time to the ends of a Sabbatical rest; even on the nature of God and man, with the relation of one to the other: for who can say, no part of our time is due to God, or so to be disposed?
Secondly. Man in his creation, with respect to the ends of God therein, was constituted under a covenant. That is, the law of his obedience was attended with promises and threatenings, rewards, and punishments, suited unto the goodness and holiness of God. For every law, with rewards and recompences annexed, hath the nature of a covenant. And in this case, although the promise wherewith man was encouraged to obedience, which was that of eternal life with God, did in strict justice exceed the worth of the obedience required, and so was a superadded effect of goodness and grace; yet it was suited to the constitution of a covenant meet for man to serve God in, unto his glory. Andon the other side, the punishment threatened unto disobedience, in death and an everlasting separation from God, was such as the righteousness and holiness of God, as his supreme governor, and Lord of him and of the covenant, did require. Now this covenant belonged to the law of creation; for although God might have dealt with man in a way of absolute sovereignty, requiring obedience of him without a covenant of a reward infinitely exceeding it, yet having done so in his creation, it belongs to, and is inseparable from the law thereof. And under this consideration, the time required in general for a rest unto God, under the first general notion of the nature and being of man, is determined unto one day in seven. For as we shall find, that in the various dispensations of the covenant with man, and the change of its nature, yet so long as God is pleased to establish any covenant with man, he hath, and doth invariably require one day in seven to be set apart to the assignation of praise and glory to himself; so we shall see afterwards, that there are indications of his mind to this purpose in the covenant itself.
Thirdly. Man is to be considered with especial respect to that covenant under which he was created, which was a covenant of works. For herein rest with God was proposed to him, as the end or reward of his own works, or of his personal obedience to God, by absolute strict righteousness and holiness. And the peculiar form of this covenant, as relating to the way of God’s entering into it upon the finishing of his own works, designed the seventh day from the beginning of the creation, to be the day precisely for the observance of a holy rest. As men, then, are always rational creatures, so some portion of time is by them necessarily to be set apart to the solemn worship of God. As they are under a covenant, so this time was originally limited unto one day in seven; and as the covenant may be varied, so may this day also, which under the covenant of works, was precisely limited to the seventh day; and these things must be further illustrated and proved.
§ 11. This was the state and condition wherein man was originally created. Our next inquiry is after the law of his creation, commonly called the law of nature, with what belongeth thereunto, or what is required of us by virtue thereof. Now, by the law of nature, most understand the dictates of right reason, which all men, or men generally, consent in and agree about. For we exclude wholly from this consideration the instinct of brute creatures, which hath some appearance of a rule unto them. So Hesiod of old determined this matter, speaking of them:
‘They devour one another, because they have no right or law amongst them.—Hence the prophet, complaining of force and violence amongst men, with a neglect of right, justice, and equity, says, ‘Men are as the fishes of the sea, as creeping things that have no ruler over them, Hab. i. 14. They devour one another without regard to rule or right. As he in Varro:
Natura humanis omnia sunt paria. Qui pote plus, urget; pisces ut sepe minutos Magnu’ comest, ut aves enecat accipiter.
§ 12. First. The law of nature is a constant and perfect law. It must be so, because it is the fountain and rule ofall other laws whatever. For they are but deductions from it, and applications of it. Now, to a complete law it is required, not only that it be instructive, but also that it have a binding force, or be coactive. That is, it doth not only teach, guide, and direct what is to be done, persuading by the reason of the things themselves which it requires, but also it must have authority to exact obedience, so far as that those who are under the power of it can give themselves no dispensation from its observance. But thus it is not with these dictates of reason. They go no farther than direction and persuasion. And these always have, and always will have, a respect to occasions, emergencies, and circumstances. When these fall under any alterations, they will put reason on new considerations, of what it ought to determine with respect to them. And this the nature of a universal law will not admit. Whatever, then, men determine by reason, they may alter on new considerations, such as occasioned their original determination. I do not extend this unto all instances of natural light, but to some only, which suficeth to demonstrate, that the unalterable law of nature doth not consist in these dictates of reason only. Suppose men do coalesce into any civil society, on the mere dictates of reason, that it is meet and best for them so to do; if this be the supreme reason thereof, no obligation ariseth from thence to preserve the society so entered imto, but what is liable to a dissolution from contrary considerations. If it be said, that reason dictates and commands in the name of God, whence an indissoluble obligation attends it, it will be answered, that this introduceth a new respect, which is not formally included in the nature of reason itself. Let a man, indeed, use and improve his own reason Without prejudice; let him collect what resolutions, determinations, instructions, and laws have proceeded from the reason of other men, it will both exceedingly advance his understanding, and enable him to judge of many things that are congruous to the light and law of nature. But to suppose the law of nature to consist in a system or collection of such instances and observations, is altogether unwarrantable.
§ 13. The event of things, in the disagreement of the wisest men about the dictates of reason, utterly subverts this opinion. The law of nature, whatever it be, must in itself be one, uniform and unalterable, the same in and unto all. For by these properties it differs from all other laws. But if it have no higher nor more noble original to be resolved into, but mere human reason, it will be found, if not in all things, yet in most, fluctuating and uncertain. For about what is agreeable to reason in things moral, and what is not, there have been differences innumerable from time immemorial, and that amongst them who searched most diligently after them; and boasted themselves to be wise upon their self-pleasing discoveries. This gave the greatest occasion, to the two hundred and eighty-eight sects of philosophers, as Austin reports them out of Varro, who was ‘ disertissimus Nepotum Romuli,’ lib. 19, de Civit. Dei. Yea, and some of the most learned and contemplative authors, did not only mistake in many instances of what natural light required, but also asserted things in direct opposition to what is judged so to be. The saying produced out of Empedocles by Aristotle before mentioned, is to prove that the killing of any living creature, is openly against the universally prevailing law of nature. Others maintained such things to be natural, as the most did abominate. Incest in the nearest instances, and sodomy, were asserted to be lawful by the Magi, and by some of the most learned Greeks, as Zeno and Chrysippus. And it was the judgment of Theodorus, that a wise man ought καὶ κλέψειν τε και μοιχεύειν, καὶ ἱεροσυλησειν ev Kapp, μηδὲν yap TovTwY φύσει αἰσχρον εἰναι, as Hesychius Illustrius reports in his life, he thought that neither theft, nor adultery, nor sacrilege, had any thing evil or filthy in them in their own nature, so that a wise man ought to have respect unto them, according to circumstances and occasions. Plato's promiscuous use of wives, was confirmed by law at Sparta. And Archelaus at once determined, cat ro δικαιον ειναι, καὶ TO αἰσχρον, οὐ φύσει. αλλα νόμῳ, as Diogenes, in his life, who likewise reports the same of Aristippus and Carneades. ‘ Naturally, they thought, ‘nothing just or unjust, good or evil, but by virtue of some arbitrary law.’ And there are yet those in the world, partakers of human nature, in common with us all, who know no other rule of their actions towards others, but power, as the cannibals and those Indians, who suppose they may justly spoil all that are afraid of them. Yea some who of late have pretended to make a severe inquisition into these things, seem to incline unto an opinion, that power and self-advantage, are the rule of men’s conversation among themselves in this world. So it was the principle of Brennus, in his time the terror of Europe, that there was no other law of nature, but that ‘the weaker should obey the stronger.” And the commander of the Gauls who besieged the Roman Capitol, when he was on a composition to depart upon the giving to him such a weight of gold, threw in his sword into the scale against it, giving no other reason for what he did, but vee victis. Neither will another rule which they had, of assigning things to the law of nature, hold firm, namely a general usage of mankind from time immemorial. Thus Antigone pleads in Sophocles for her burying of Polynices.
‘This’ (right) ‘arose not to-day nor yesterday, but was in force ever of old nor doth any man know from whence it arose.’ For all ia from UU beyond the records of the original of things, had consented to practices directly contrary to the light of nature, as is now acknowledged. And hence were all the disputes of old, about the nature, bounds, and ends of good and evil, duty and vice, honest and filthy, just and unjust, that could never be determined. This Plato observing, affirms in his Phedo, that if ‘any one name either silver or iron presently all men agree, what it is that is intended; but if they speak of that which is just and good, presently we are at variance with others, and among ourselves. So great uncertainty is there in human reason, under its best natural improvements, in its judgment what doth or doth not belong to the principles and condition of our nature, so far is it from being comprehensive of the whole law thereof.
§ 14. When, therefore, we plead any thing to belong unto, or to proceed from the law of nature, it is no impeachment of our assertion, to say, that it doth not appear so to the common reason of mankind, or that right reason hath not found it out or discovered it, provided it contain nothing repugnant thereunto. For it will never be universally agreed, what doth so appear to the common reason of all, nor what is, hath been, or may be discovered thereby. And although it should be true, which some say, that moral and natural duties depend on, and have their formal reason from the nature of God and man, yet it doth not thence follow, that we do, or may, by the sole light of nature, know what doth so arise, with the due bounds and just consequences of it. But there is, as we shall see, something yet farther required, in and unto the law of nature, which is the adequate rule of all such duties. I shall not, therefore, endeavour to prove, that the mere dictates of reason do evince a sacred hebdomadal rest; as knowing that the law of nature, unto which we say it doth belong, doth not absolutely consist in these dictates; nor did they ever since the fall steadily and universally, as acted in men possessed of reason, either comprehend or express, all that belongs thereunto.
§ 15. By the law of nature, then, I intend, not a law which our nature gives unto all our actions; but a law given unto our nature, as a rule and measure unto our moral actions. It is ‘lex nature naturantis,’ and not ‘nature naturate. It respects the efficient cause of nature, and not the effects of it. And this respect alone can give it the nature of a law, that is an obliging force and power. For this must be always from the act ofa superior; seeing par in parem jus non habet, equals have no right one over another. This law, therefore, is that rule which God hath given unto human nature, in all the individual partakers of it, for all its moral actions, in the state and condition wherein it was by him created and placed, with respect unto his own government of it, and judgment concerning it; which rule is made known in them and to them, by their inward constitution and outward condition, wherein they were placed of God. And the very heathens acknowledged, that the common Jaw of mankind was God's prescription unto them. So Tully, 2. de Legib. Hane video sapientissimorum fuisse sententiam, legem neque hominum ingeniis excogitatam, neque scitum aliquod fuisse populorum, sed zternum quiddam quod universum mundum regeret, imperandi prohibendique sapientia. Ita principem legem illam et ultimam, mentem dicebant omnia ratione cogentis, aut vetantis Dei. Take this law, therefore, actively, and it is the will of God commanding; take it passively, and it is the conscience of man complying with it; take it instrumentally, and it is the inbred notions of our minds, with other documents from the works of God proposed unto us. The supreme original of it, as of all authority, law, and obligation, is the will of God constituting, appointing, and ordering the nature of things. The means of its revelation is the effect of the will, wisdom, and power of God, creating man and all other things wherein he is concerned, in their order, place, and condition. And the observance of it, as far as individual persons are therein concerned, is committed to the care of the conscience of every man, which naturally is the mind’s acting itself towards God as the author of this law.
§ 16. These things being premised, we shall consider what light is given unto this sacred duty from the law of our creation. The first end of any Jaw is to instruct, direct, and guide them in their duty unto whom it is given. A law which is not in its own nature instructive and directive is no way meet to be prescribed unto rational creatures. What hath an influence upon any creatures of any other kind, if it be internal, is instinct, and not properly a law; if it be external, it is force and compulsion. The law, therefore, of creation comprised every thing whereby God instructed man im the knowledge of his own creation, and of that of the universe; to fit him for his works or obedience, and for his rest or reward. And, whatever tended unto that end, belonged unto that law. It is then, as hath been proved, unduly confined ynto the ingrafted notions of his mind, concerning God, and his duty towards him, though they are a principal part thereof. Whatever was designed to give improvement to those notions, and to his natural light to excite or direct them, I mean in the works of nature, not superadded positive institutions, doth also belong thereunto. Wherefore, the whole instruction that God intended to give unto man, by the works of creation, with their order and end, is, as was said, included herein. What he might learn from them, or what God taught him by them, was no less his duty, than what his own inbred light directed him to, Rom. i. 18—20. Thus, the framing of the world in six days, in six days of work, was intended to be instructive to man, as well.as the consideration of the things materially that were made. God could have immediately produced all out of nothing, ἐν arouw, ev pity οφθαλμου, in the shortest measure of time conceivable. But he not only made all things for himself, or his glory, but disposed also the order of their production unto the same end. And herein consisted part of that covenant instruction which he gave unto man in that condition wherein he was made, that through him he might have glory ascribed unto him, on the account of his works themselves, as also of the order and manner of their creation, For it is vain to imagine that the world was made in six days, and those closed with a day of rest, without a special respect to the obedience of rational creatures, seeing absolutely, with respect to God himself, neither of them was necessary. And what he intended to teach them thereby, it was their duty to inquire and know. Hereby then, in general, man was taught obedience and working before he entered into rest. For, being created in the image of God, he was to conform himself toGod. As God wrought before he rested, so was he to work before his rest; his condition rendering working in him obedience, which in God was an effect of sovereignty. And by the rest of God, or his satisfaction and complacency in what he had made and done, he was instructed to seek rest with God, or to enter into that rest of God, by his compliance with the ends intended.
§ 17. And whereas the innate light and principles of his own mind informed him, that some time was to be set apart to the solemn worship of God, as he was a rational creature made to give glory unto him; so the instruction he received by the works and rest of God, as made under a covenant taught him, that one day in seven was required to that purpose, as also to be a pledge ot his resting with God. It may be, it will be said, that man could not know that the world was made in six days, and that the rest of God ensued on the seventh, without some special revelation. I answer, 1. That I knownot. He that knew the nature of all the creatures, and could give them names suited thereto, upon his first sight and view of them. might know more of the order of their creation, than we can well imagine. For we know no more in our lapsed condition, to what the light of nature directed man as walking before God in a covenant, than men merely natural do know of the guidance and conduct of the light and law of grace, in them who are taken into a new covenant. 2. However, what God instructed him in, even by revelation, as to the due consideration and improvement of the things that belonged unto the law of his creation, that is, to be esteemed as a part thereof. Institutions of things by special revelation that had no foundation in the law or light of nature, were merely positive; such were the commands concerning the trees of life, and of the knowledge of good and evil. But such as were directive of natural light, and of the order of the creation, were moral, and belonged to the general law of obedience. Such was the special command given to man to till and keep the garden, Gen. ii. 15, or to dress and improve the place of his habitation. For this in general the law of his creation required. Now, this God did, both as to his works and his rest. Neither do I know that any one has as yet questioned, whether Adam and the patriarchs that lived before the giving of the law, knew that the world was created in six days. Though some seem to speak doubtfully hereof, and some by direct consequence deny it, yet I suppose that hitherto it passeth as granted. Nor have they, who dispute that the Sabbath was neither instituted, known, nor observed before the people of Israel were in the wilderness, once attempted to confirm their opinion with this supposition, that the patriarchs from the foundation of the world, knew not that the world was made in six days; which yet alone would be effectual unto their ‘purpose. Nor, on the other side, can it be once rationally imagined that if they had knowledge hereof, and therewithal of the rest which ensued thereon, that they had no regard unto it in the worship of God.
§ 18. And thus the Sabbath, or the observance of one day in seven as a sacred rest, was fixed on the same moral grounds with monogamy, or the marriage of one man to one woman only at the same time; which, from the very fact and order of the creation, our Saviour proves to have been an unchangeable part of the law of it. For because God made them two single persons, male and female, fit for individual conjunction, he concludes that this course of life they were everlastingly obliged not to alter nor transgress. As, therefore, men may dispute that polygamy is not against the law of nature, because it was allowed and practised by many, or by most of those who of old observed and improved the light and rule of nature to the uttermost, when yet the very factum and order of the creation is sufficient to evince the contrary: so, although men should dispute that the observance of the sacred rest of one day in seven, is not of the light nor law of nature, all whose rules and dictates, they say, are of an easy discovery, and prone to the observation of all men, which this is not; yet the order of the creation, and the rest of God that ensued thereon, is sufficient to evince the contrary. And in the renewing of the law upon Mount Sinai, God taught the people not only by the words that he spake, but also by the works that he wrought. Yea, he instructed them in a moral duty, not only by what he did, but by what he did not. For he declares, that they ought to make no images of or unto him, because he made no representation of himself unto them, ‘they saw no manner of similitude, on the day that the Lord spake unto them in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire, Deut. iv. 15, 16.
§ 19. But now, to shut up this discourse; whereas the covenant which man originally was taken into was a covenant of works, wherein his obtaining rest with God, depended absolutely on his doing all the work ke had to do ina way of legal obedience; he was during the dispensation of that covenant, tied up precisely to the observance of the seventh day, or that day which followed the whole work of creation. And the seventh day, as such, is a pledge and token of the rest promised in the covenant of works, and of no other. And those who would advance that day again into a necessary observance, do consequentially introduce the whole covenant of works, and are become debtors unto the whole law. For the works of God which preceded the seventh day precisely, were those whereby man was initiated into and instructed in the covenant of works; and the day itself was a token and pledge of the righteousness thereof; or a moral and natural sign of it, and of the rest of God therein, and of the rest of man with God thereby. And it is no service to the church of God, nor hath any tendency unto the honour of Christ in the, gospel, to endeavour a reduction of us unto the covenant of nature.
§ 20. Thus was man instructed in the whole notion of a weekly sacred rest, by all the ways and means which God was pleased to use in giving him an acquaintance with his will, and with that obedience to his glory which he expected from him. For this knowledge he had partly by the law of his creation as innate unto him, or concreated with the principles of his nature, being the necessary exsurgency of his rational constitution; and partly by the works and rest of God thereon proposed unto his consideration, both confirmed by God’s declaration of his sanctification of the seventh day. Hence did he know, that it was his duty to express and celebrate the rest of God, or the complacency that he had in the works of his hands, in reference unto their great and proper end, or his glory, in the honour, praise, and obedience of them, unto whose contemplation they were proposed for those ends. This followed immediately from the time spent in the creation, and the rest that ensued thereon, which were so ordered for his instruction; and not from any other cause or reason taken either from the nature of God, or of the things themselves; which required neither six days to make the world in, nor any rest to follow thereon. For that rest was not a cessation from working absolutely, much less merely so. Hence, did he learn the nature of the covenant that he was taken into; namely, 10w he was first to work in obedience, and then to enter into God’s rest. in blessedness. For so had God appointed, and so did he understand his will, from his own present state and condition. Hence was he instructed to dedicate to God, and to his own more immediate communion with him,. one day in a weekly revolution, wherein the whole law of his creation was consummated, as a pledge and means of entering eternally into God's rest which from hence he understood to be his end and happiness. And for the sanctification of the seventh day of the week precisely, he had it by revelation, or God’s sanctification of it, which had unto him the nature of a positive law, being a determination of the day suited unto the nature and tenor of that covenant wherein he walked with God.
§ 21. And by this superadded command or institution, the mind of man was confirmed in the meaning and intention of his innate principles, and other instructions to the same purpose in general. All these things, I say the last only excepted, was he directed unto, in and by the innate principles of light and obedience, wherewith the faculties of his soul were furnished, every way suited to guide him in the whole of the duty required of him; and by the farther instruction he had from the other works of God, and his rest upon the whole. And although, it may be, we cannot now discern, how in particular his natural light might conduct and guide him to the observance of all these things, yet ought we not therefore to deny that so it did, seeing there is evidence in the things themselves, and we know not well what that light was which was in him. For although we may have some due apprehensions of the substance of it, from its remaining ruins and materials in our lapsed condition, yet we have no acquaintance with that light and glorious lustre, that extent of its directive beams, which it was accompanied withal, when it was in him as he came immediately from the hand of God, created in his image. We have lost more by the fall, than the best and wisest in the world can apprehend, whilst they are in it; much more than most will acknowledge, whose principal design seems to be, to extenuate the sin and misery of man, which issueth necessarily in an undervaluation of the love and grace of Jesus Christ. Butif a natural or carnal man cannot discern how the Spirit or grace of the new covenant, which succeeds in the room of our first innate light, as unto the ends of our living unto God’s glory in a new way, directs and guides those in whom it is, unto the observance of all the duties of it; let us not wonder if we cannot easily and readily comprehend the brightness and extent, and guidance of that light, which was suited unto a state of things that never was in the world since the fall, but only in the man Christ Jesus; whose wisdom and knowledge in the mind and will of God, even thereby, without his superadded peculiar assistances, we may rather admire, than think to understand.
§ 22. Thus, then, were the foundations of the old world laid, and,the covenant of man’s obedience established, when all the sons of God sang for joy; even in the first rest of God, and in the expression of it by the sanctification of a sacred rest, to return unto him a revenue of glory, in man’s observance of it. And on these grounds, I do affirm that the weekly observance of a day to God for Sabbath ends, is a duty natural and moral, which we are under a perpetual and indispensable obligation unto; namely, from that command of God, which being a part of the law of our creation, is moral, indispensable, and perpetual. And these things, with the different apprehensions of others about them, and oppositions unto them, must now be farther explained and considered. For we now enter upon the consideration of the judgment and opinions of others about these things, with the confirmation of our own.
§ 23. In the inquiry after the causes of the Sabbath, the first question usually insisted on, is concerning the nature of the law, whereby its observance is commanded. ‘This, some affirm to be moral, some only positive, as we have shown before. And many disputes there have been, about the true notion and distinction of laws moral and positive. But, whereas these terms are invented to express the conceptions ‘of men’s minds, and that of moral at least, includes not any absolute determinate sense in the meaning of the word; those at variance about them cannot impose their sense and understanding of them upon one another. For, seeing this denomination of moral applied unto a law, 1s taken from the subject-matter of it, which are the manners or duties of them to whom the law is given, if any one will assert that every command of God which respects the manners of men, that is, of all men absolutely as men, is moral, I know not how any one can compel him to speak or think otherwise, for he hath his liberty to use the word in that sense which he judgeth most proper. And if it can be proved that there is a law, and ever was, binding all men universally to the observance of an-hebdomadal sacred rest, I shall not contend with any how that law ought to be called, whether moral or positive. This contest, therefore, I shall not engage in, though I have used, and shall yet further use, those terms in their common sense and acceptation. My way shall be plainly to inquire, what force there is in the law of our creation unto the observance of a weekly Sabbath, and what is superadded thereunto by the vocal declaration of the will of God concerning it.
§ 24. And here, in the first place, it is generally agreed, so that the opposition to it is not considerable, nor any way deserving our notice, that in and by the light of nature, or the law of our creation, some time ought to be separated unto the observance of the solemn worship of God. For be that worship what it will, merely natural, or any thing superadded by voluntary and arbitrary institutions, the law for its observance is natural, and requires that time be set apart for its celebration; seeing in time it is to be performed. When there was but one man and one woman, this was their duty; and so it continued to be the duty of their whole race and posterity, in all the societies, associations, and assemblies whereof they were capable. But the first object of this law or command is the worship of God itself; time falls under it only consequentially and reductively. Wherefore the law of nature doth also distinctly respect time itself. For we are bound thereby to serve God with all that is ours, and with the first-fruits of our substance in every kind. Somewhat of whatever God hath given unto us, is to be set apart from our own use, and given up absolutely to him as an homage due unto him, and a necessary acknowledgment of him. ‘To deny this, is to contradict one of the principal dictates of the law of nature. For God hath given us nothing ultimately for ourselves, seeing we, and all that we have, are wholly his. And to have any thing, whereof no part as such, is to be spent in his service, is to have it with his displeasure. Let any one endeavour to assert and prove this position; ‘No part of our time is to be set apart to the worship of God and his service, in a holy and peculiar manner, and he will quickly find himself setting up in a full contradiction to the law of nature, and the whole light of the knowledge of God in his mind and conscience. Those who have attempted any such thing, have done it under this deceitful pretence, that all our time is to be spent unto God, and every day is to be a Sabbath. For whereas, notwithstanding this pretence, they spend most of their time directly and immediately to themselves, and their own occasions, it is evident, that they do but make use of it, to rob God of that which is his due, directly and immediately. or unto the holy separation of any thing to God, it is required, as well that it be taken from ourselves, as that it be given unto him. This therefore the law of our creation requires, as unto the separation of some part of our time unto God. And if this doth not at first consideration discover itself in its directive power, it will quickly do so in its condemning power, upon a contradiction of it. Thus far then we have attained.
§ 25. Moreover, men are to worship God in assemblies and societies, such as he appoints, or such as by his providence they are cast into. This will not be denied, seeing it stands upon as good, yea better evidence, than the associations of mankind for ends political unto their own good by government and order, which all men confess to be a direction of the law of nature.
For what concerns our living to God naturally, is as clear in that light and conduct, as what concerns our living among ourselves. Now, a part of this worship it is, that we honour him with what by his gift is made ours. Such is our time in this world. Nor can the worship itself be performed and celebrated in a due manner, without the designation, and separation of some time unto that purpose; and thereby, secondly, this separation of time becomes a branch of the law of nature, by an immediate, natural, and unavoidable consequence. And what is so, is no less to be reckoned among the rules of it, than the very first notions or impressions that it gives us concerning the nature of any thing, good or evil. For whatever reason can educe from the principle of reason, is no less reason, than those principles themselves, from whence it is educed. And we aim no more from this discourse, but that the separation of some time to the worship of God, according to the ends before insisted on, is reasonable, so that the contrary in its first conception is unreasonable and foolish. And this I suppose is evident to all, Tam sure by most it is granted. Could men hereupon acquiesce in the authority and wisdom of God, indigitating and measuring out that portion of time in all seasons and ages of the church, there might be a natural rest from these contentions, about a rest sacred and holy. However, I cannot but wonder at the liberty which some men take positively to affirm and contend, that the command for the observance of the Sabbath, when or however it was given, was wholly umbratile and ceremonial. For there is that in it confessedly as its foundation, and that which all its concernments are educed from, which is as direct an impression on the mind of man from the law of creation, as any other instance that can be given thereof.
§ 26. Upon this foundation therefore we may proceed. And 1 say, in the next place, that the stated time directed unto for the ends of a sacred rest unto God, by the light and law of nature; that is, God’s command impressed upon the mind of man in and by his own creation, and by the creation of the rest of the works of God, intended for his direction in obedience, is, that it be one day in seven. For the confirmation hereof, what we have discoursed concerning the law of creation, and the covenant ratified with man therein, is to be remembered. On the supposition thereof, the advancement or constitution of any other portion of time in the stead and to the exclusion thereof, as a determination and limitation of the time required in general in the first instance of that law, is, and would appear a contradiction unto it. God having finished his works in six days, and having rested on the seventh, giving man thereby and therein, the rule and law of his obedience and rewards, for him to assign any other measure or portion of time for his rest unto God in his solemn worship, is to decline the authority of God, for the sake of his own inventions; and to assign no portion at all unto that end, is openly to transgress a principal dictate of the law of nature, as hath been proved. Neither this direction nor transgression, I confess, will evidently manifest themselves m the mere light of nature, as now depraved and corrupted. No more will sundry instances of its authority, unless its voice be diligently attended unto, and its light cultivated and improved in the minds of men, by the advantage of consequential revelations, as given unto us for that purpose. For, by the assistance of Scripture light, and rational considerations thence arising, we may discover many things to be dictates of, and to be directed unto by the law of nature, which those who are left unto the mere guidance and conduct of it could not discover so to be. This may be easily proved from the open transgression of the law of nature in sundry instances, which they lived and approved themselves in, who seemed most to have lived according unto it, and professed themselves to be wise in following the light and conduct of reason in all things, as was before at large discoursed. The Polytheism that prevailed amongst the best of the heathens, their open profession of living unto themselves, and seeking after their happiness in themselves, with many other instances, make this evident. And if revelation or Scripture light contributed no more to the discovery of the ‘postulata, of the law of nature, but by a removal of those prejudices, which the manner and fashion of the world amongst men, and a corrupt conversation received by tradition from one generation to another had fixed on, and possessed their minds withal; yet were the advantages we have by it unto this end, unspeakable. Let then this help be supposed, and let a judgment be made of the injunctions of the law of nature, rather by its condemning right and power, than by its directive light, (for that in our lapsed estate is a better κριτήριον of its commands, than the other,) and we shall find it manifesting itself in this matter. For on this supposition, let those who will not acknowledge that the observance of one day in seven, is to be separated unto God for the ends declared, allowing the assertion before laid down of the necessity of the separation of some stated time to that purpose, fix to themselves any other time in a certain revolution of days, and they will undoubtedly find themselves pressed, with so many considerations from the law of their creation, to the contrary, as will give them little rest, or satisfaction in their minds, in what they do.
§ 27. Farther to manifest this, we may inquire what is necessary unto any duty of obedience towards God, to evince it to be a requisite of the law of our creation. And here our diligence is required. Tor it must be said again expressly, what was before intimated, that it is a childish mistake to imagine, that whatever is required by the lawof nature, is easily discernible, and always known to all. Some of its directions, it may be, are so, especially such as are inculcated on the minds of men, by their common interest and advantage. Such are ‘neminem ledere, and ‘jus suum cuique tribuere.’ But it is far from being true, that all the dictates of the law of nature, and requisites of right reason, are evident and incapable of controversy, as they would have been unto man had he continued in his integrity. Many things there are between men themselves, concerning which, after all helps and advantages, and continued observation of the course of the world unto this day, it is still disputed, what is the sense of the law of nature about them, and wherein, or how far, they belong unto it. The law of nations among themselves with respect unto one another, on which is founded the peace and order of mankind is nothing but the law of nature, as it hath been expressed in instances by the customs and usages of them, who are supposed to have most diligently attended unto its directions. And how many differences, never to be determined by common consent, there are in and about these things, is known. For there are degrees of evidence in the things that are of natural light. And many things that are so, are yet in practice accompanied with the consideration of positive laws, as also of civil usages and customs amongst men. And it is not easy to distinguish in many observances, what is of the law of nature, and what is of law positive, or of useful custom. But of these things we have discoursed before in general. We are now to inquire what is requisite to warrant the ascription of any thing unto this law.
§ 28. And 1. It is required that it be congruous unto the law of nature, and all the other known principles of it. Unto us 1t may be enjoined by law positive, or otherwise made necessary for us to observe. But it must in itself, or materially, hold a good correspondency with all the known instances of the law of our creation, and this mamifested with satisfying evidence, before its assignation thereunto. It is of natural right that we should obey God in all his commands; but this doth not cause every command of God to belong to the law of nature. It is, as was said, moreover required thereunto, that it be in itself, and the subject-matter of it, congruous unto the principles of that law, whereof there is nothing in things merely arbitrary and positive; setting aside that general notion, that God is to be obeyed in all his laws, which belongs not to this question. Now, when this congruity te the law of nature, or right reason in the matter of any law or command, is discovered and made evident, it will greatly direct the mind in its inquiry after its whole nature, and manifest what is superadded unto it by positive command. And this will not be denied unto the Sabbath, its command and observation. Let the ends of it before laid down be considered, and let them be compared with any other guidances or directions which we have by natural light concerning our living to God, and it will not only appear that there is a harmony amongst them, but also that they contribute help and assistance to one another towards the same ultimate end.
§ 29. 2. It is required that it have a general principle, in the light of nature, and in the dictates of right reason, from whence it may be educed, or from which it will necessarily follow, supposing that principle rightly and duly improved. It is not enough that it be at agreement, or that it no way interfere with other principles; it must also have one of its own, from whence it doth naturally arise. So doth the second commandment of the decalogue belong to the law of nature. Its principle lieth in that acknowledgment of the being of God, which is required in the first. For therein is God manifested to be of that nature, to be such a being, that it is, and must be an absurd, unreasonable, foolish, and impious thing in itself, implying a renunciation of the former acknowledgments, to make any images, or limited representations of his being, or to adore him any way otherwise than himself hath declared. So is it here also. The separation of a stated time unto the solemn worship of God, is so fixed in the mind of man by its own inbred light, as that it cannot be omitted, without open sin against it, in those who have not sinned away all the efficacy of that light itself. However, that this is required of us by the law of our creation, may be proved against all contradiction. Hence whatever guiding, directing, determing positive law, may ensue, or be superadded about the limitation of this time so to be separated, it being only the application of this natural and moral principle, as to some circumstances of it, it hinders not, but that the law itself concerning it, is of the law of nature, and moral. For the original obligatory power of such a superadded law, lies in the natural principle before mentioned.
§ 30. 3. What all men are taught by the works of creation themselves, by their order, harmony, and mutual respect to each other, with reference to their duty towards God, and among themselves, is of the law of nature; although an absolute distinct notion of it inbred-in the mind, be not discoverable. It is enough that the mind of man isso disposed, as to be ready and fit to receive the discovery and revelation of it. For the very creation itself isa law unto us, and speaks out that duty that God requireth of us towards himself. for he hath not only so ordered all the works of it, that they should be meet to instruct us, or should contain an instructive power towards rational creatures, made in that state and condition wherein man was created, which was before described, which hath in it the first notion of a law; but it was the will of God that we should learn our duty thereby, which gives it-its complement, as alaw obliging unto obedience. And it is not thus in general with respect unto the whole work of creation in itself; but the ordermg and disposal of the parts of it, is alike directive and instructive to the nature of man, and hath the force of a law morally and everlastingly obligatory. Thus the preeminence of the man above the woman, which is moral, ensues upon the order of the creation, in that the man was first made, and the woman for the man, as the apostle argues, 1 Tim. ii. 12, 13. And all nations ought to be obliged hereby, though many of them, through their apostasy from natural light, knew not that either man or woman was created, but it may be, supposed them to have grown out of the earth like mushrooms; and yet an effect of the secret original impression hereof influenced their minds and practices. So the creation of one man and one woman gave the natural law of marriage; whence polygamy and fornication became transgressions of the law of nature. It will be hard to prove, that about these and the like things, there is a clear and undoubted principle of directive light in the mind of man, separate from the consideration of the order of creation. But therein a law, and that moral, is given unto us. not to be referred unto any other head of laws, but that of nature. And here, as was before pleaded, the creation of the world in six days, with the rest of God on the seventh, and that declared, gives unto all men an everlasting law of separating one day in seven unto a sacred rest. For he that was made in the image of God was made to imitate him, and conform himself unto him; God in this order of things, saying as it were unto him, ‘ What Ihave done, in your station do ye likewise.’ Especially was this made effectual, by his innate apprehension that his happiness consisted in entering into the rest of God, the pledge whereof it was his unquestionable duty to embrace. |
§ 31. 4. In this state of things, a direction by a revelation, in the way of a precept, for the due and just exercise of the principles, rules, and - documents before mentioned, is so far from impeaching the morality of any command or duty, as that it completes the law of it, with the addition of a formal obligatory power and efficacy. The light and law of creation, so far as it was innate, or concreated with the faculties of our souls, and completed our state of dependence on God, hath only the general nature of a principle, inclining unto actions suitably unto it, and directing us therein. The documents also that were originally given unto that light from without, by the other works and order of the creation, had only in their own nature the force of an instruction. The will of God, and an act of sovereignty therein, formally constituted them a law. But now man being made to live unto God, and under his conduct and guidance in all things, that he might come to the enjoyment of him, no prejudice ariseth unto, nor alteration is made in the dictates of the law of creation, by the superadding any positive command for the performance of the duties that it doth require, and regulating of them, as to the especial manner and ends of their performance. And where such a positive law is interposed or superadded, it is the highest folly to imagine, that the whole obligation unto the duty depends on that command, as though the authority of the law of nature were super> seded thereby; or that the whole command about it were now grown positive and arbitrary. For although the same law cannot be moral and positive in the same respect; yet the same duty may be required by a law moral, and a law positive. It is thus with many observances of the gospel. We may, for example, instance in excommunication, according to the common received notion of it. There is a positive command in the gospel for the exercise of the sentence of it, in the churches of Christ. But this hinders not, but that it is natural for all societies of men, to exclude from their societies those that refractorily refuse to observe the laws and orders of the society, that it may be preserved unto its proper end. And according to the rule of this natural equity, that it should be so, have all rational societies amongst men, that knew nothing of the gospel, proceeded for their own good and preservation. Neither doth the superadded institution in the gospel derogate from the general reason hereof, or change the nature of the duty, but only direct its practice, and make application of it, to the uses and ends of the gospel itself.
§ 32. I do not plead, that every law that God prescribes unto me is moral because my obedience to it is a moral duty. For the morality of this obedience, doth not arise from, nor depend upon the special command of it, which it may be is positive and arbitrary; but from the respect that it hath unto our dependence in all things which we have to do, absolutely and universally on God. ΤῸ obey God in all things, is unquestionably our moral duty. But when the substance of the command itself, that is, the duty required, is moral, the addition of a positive command doth no way impeach its morality, nor suspend the influence of that law, whereon its morality doth depend. It is therefore unduly pretended by some, that because there is a positive command for the observance of the Sabbath, supposing there should be such a command for the whole of it, which is nothing else but an explanation and enforcement of the original moral precept of it, (as in every state ef the church something relating unto it, namely, the precise determination of the day itself in the hebdomadal revolution, depended on a law positive) that therefore the law of it is not moral. It is not so indeed, so far and in that respect wherein it is positive; but it is so from itself, for the substance of it, and antecedently unto that positive command. The whole law therefore of the Sabbath, and its observation, may be said to be moral positive, which expression hath been used by some learned divines in this case, and that not unduly. For a law may be said to be so on a double account. First, when the positive part of the law is declarative, and accumulative with respect unto a precedent law of nature, as when some additions are made to the duties therein required, as to the manner of their performance. Secondly, when the foundation of a duty only is laid in the law of nature, but its entire practice is regulated by a positive law. From all the instances insisted on, itis manifest that the law of the Sabbatical observance is moral, a branch of the law of nature, however it be enforced, directed: and that the special day in seven be limited and determined by positive commands.
§ 33. These things by many are denied. They will not grant, that there is any rule or direction in the law of creation, for a sacred rest unto God, on one day in seven. For they say that no'such can be made to appear with that evidence, which the common anticipations of the minds of men are accompanied withal. But this objection hath been sufficiently obviated, by stating aright the meaning of the law of nature which is not to be confined to inbred natural anticipations only. And it is certain also, that some say the very same concerning the being of God himself, and concerning the difference between good and evil; namely, that there are no manifest and steadfast presumptions of them in the mind of man, which yet
Besides, the law of nature as to an obligatory indication of our duty, is not to be considered only by itself in this matter, no not in the extent insistedon as comprising the objective documents that are in the worksand order of the creation; butis to be considered in conjunction with the covenant that it was the rule of. For whatever was required of man by virtue of that covenant, was part of the moral law of God, or belonged to the law of his creation. For all which the vest pleaded for to be moral doth arise. And considering the nature of this duty, with the divine positive direction whereby its first practice was regulated, as it was necessary that it should, when God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; and it is marvellous, that the remaining light of nature about it, should put forth itself by so many intimations, as it doth; and in so many instances to express the first impressions that it had from God in this matter. For I think we have manifested, that there are many such impressions, and those of such a nature as may be pleaded against any probability of contradiction. Ina word, we may in all ages find the generality of mankind, feeling, and as it were groping in the dark, after a stated sacred rest to be observed unto God. And however the most of men destitute of divine revelation, missed the season, the ends, and the object of this rest, yet they were plainly influenced unto all their stated, sacred, or religious solemnities, both feasts and abstinencies, by the remainders of an innate persuasion, that such a rest was to be observed. Besides, we know, that the present indications of nature as corrupt, are no just rule and measure of its original abilities, with respect unto living to God. And they do but woefully bewray their ignorance and impudence who begin to plead, that our minds or understandings, were no way impaired or worsted by the fall; but that the principles or abilities in them in reference unto God and ourselves, are the same as they originally were, and that unimpaired. Either such men design to overthrow the gospel and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, or they know not what they say, nor whereof they do affirm. But hereof we shall treat elsewhere by God's assistance. At present we know, that the light of nature is so defective, or so impotent in giving indications of itself, that many nations, left destitute of divine revelation, or wilfully rejecting it, have lived and approved themselyes in open transgressions of the law of it, as hath been shown. The apostle gives sundry instances of that kind, amongst them who most boasted themselves to attend to the dictates of right reason, Rom. i. ΑἸ] idolaters, polygamists, fornicators, and those who constantly lived on spoil and rapine, approving themselves, or not condemning themselves in what they did are testimonies hereof. That alone then is not to be pretended to be of the law of nature, which all men acknowledge to be a part of it, nor is every thing to be rejected from having a place therein, which some have lived in a secure transgression of. And others say, that it gives no indications of itself; but that is to be understood to belong to the law of nature, which, by the diligent consideration of all means and advantages of knowledge, may be found to be congruous to all the other known and allowed principles and maxims of it and to have its foundation in it, being what origimally God by any means instructed our nature in, as that which belonged unto our living to him. And it may be, a man may sooner learn what is natural duty to God, in and from corrupted nature, by the opposition that it will make unto its practice, as it is corrupted, than by the light and guidance it will give unto it, as nature. It is also, as we have observed, more discernible in its judging and condemning what is done contrary unto it, than in directing to what it did originally require.
§ 34. Having given evidence unto the morality of the Sabbath from the indications of it, and directions unto it in the light and law of nature, which will be found to be such, as not to be by any modest or sober man contemned; we proceed to add those other consequential confirmations of the same truth which God hath given us in the following revelations of his will about it. And first, this gives no small countenance to an apprehension of an unchangeable morality in the law of the Sabbath; that in all estates of the church, from the foundation of the world, under the several covenants wherein it hath walked with God, and the various dispensations of them, there is a full evidence, that in them all God hath still required of his people, the observance of a sacred rest unto himself, in a hebdomadal revolution of time or days. A full confirmation hereof, with its proofs and illustrations the reader will find at large in our exposition of the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, so soon as God shall give an opportunity to have it communicated to him. At present, I shall touch only on the heads of things.
§ 35. That any religious observance hath heen required through all estates of the church, which had no foundation but only in arbitrary institution, cannot be proved by any one single instance. The institutions of the state of innocence, in the matters of the garden, with the trees of life, and of the knowledge of good and evil, ceased, as all men confess, with that estate. And although God did not, immediately upon the sin of man, destroy that garden, no nor it may be until the flood, leaving it as a testimony against the wickedness of that apostate generation, for whose sin the world was destroyed; yet was neither it, nor the trees of it, of any use, or lawful to be used as to any significancy in the worship of God. And the reason is because all institutions are appendages, and things annexed unto a covenant; and when that covenant ceaseth, or is broken, they are of no use or signification at all.
36. There was a new state of the church erected presently after the fall, and this also attended with sundry new institutions, especially with that concerning sacrifices. In this church-state some alterations were made, and sundry additional institutions given unto it, upon the erection of the peculiar church-state of the Israelites in the wilderness, which yet hindered not, but that it was in general the same church-state, and the same dispensation of the covenant, that the people of God, before and after the giving of the law, enjoyed and lived under. Hence it was, that sundry institutions of worship were equally in force both before and after the giving of the law on mount Sinai; as is evident in sacrifices, and some other instances may be given. But now, when the state of the church, and the dispensation of the covenant, came to be wholly altered, as they were by the gospel, not any one of the old institutions was continued, or to be continued, but they were all abolished and taken away. Nothing at all was traduced over from the old church-states, neither from that innocence, nor from that which en- sued on the fall in all its variations, with any obligatory power; but what was founded in the law of nature, and had its force from thence. We may, then, confidently assert, that what God requireth equally in all estates of the church, that is moral, and of an everlasting obligation unto us, and all men. And this is the state of matters with the Sabbath, and the law thereof.
δ 37. Of the command of the Sabbath in the state of innocence, we have before treated, and vindicated the testimony given unto it, Gen. 11. 2, 3. It will, God assisting, be farther discoursed and confirmed in our exposition of the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews. The observance of it by virtue of its original law and command, before the promulgation of the decalogue in Sinai, or the first wilderness observance of the Sabbath, recorded. on the occasion of giving manna, hath also been before confirmed. Many exceptions, [ acknowledge, are laid in, against the testimonies insisted on for the proof of these things; but those such as, I suppose, are not able to invalidate them in the minds of men void of prejudice. And the pretence of the obscurity that is in the command, will be easily removed, by the consideration of another instance of the same antiquity. All men acknowledge, that a promise of Christ for the object and guide of the faith of the ancient patriarchs, was given in those words of God immediately spoken unto the serpent, Gen. iii. 15, ‘I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise its heel.’ The words in themselves seem obscure unto any such end or purpose. But yet there is such light given into them, and the mind of God in them, from the circumstances of time, place, persons, occasions, from the nature of the things treated of, from the whole ensuing economy, or dealing of God with men revealed in the Scripture, as that no sober man doubts of the promissory nature of those words, nor of the intention of them in general, nor of the proper subject of the promise, nor of the grace intended in it. This promise, therefore, was the immediate object of the faith of the patriarchs of old, the great motive and encouragement to, and of their obedience. But yet it will be hard, from the records of Scripture, to prove that any particular patriarch did believe in, trust, or plead that promise, which yet we know that they did, all and every one. Nor was there any need for our instruction, that any such practice of theirs should be recorded, seeing it is a general rule, that those holy men of God did observe and do whatever he did command them. Wherefore, from the record of a command, we may conclude unto a suitable practice, though it be not recorded; and from a recorded approved practice on the other side, we may conclude unto the command or institution of the thing practised, though nowhere plainly recorded. Let unprejudiced men consider those words, Gen. ii. 2, 3, and they will find the command and institution of the Sabbath, as clear and conspicuous in them, as the promise of grace in Christ is in them before considered, especially as they are attended with the interpretation given of them, in God’s following dealings with his church. And therefore, although particular instances of the obedience of the old patriarchs in this part of it, or the observance of the Sabbath, could not be given and evinced, yet we ought no more on that account to deny that they did observe it, than we ought to deny their faith in the promised Seed, because it is nowhere expressly recorded in the story of their lives.
§ 38. Under the law, that is, after the giying of it in the wilderness, it is granted, that the portion of time insisted on, was precisely required to be dedicated to God, although, it may be, for some ages it will be hard to meet with a recorded instance of its observance. But yet none dares take any countenance from thence to question whether it were so observed or not.
All, therefore, is secure to the great alteration that was made in instituted worship under the gospel. And to proceed to that season, there is no practice in any part of God’s public worship, that appears earlier in the records of the New Testament, as to what was peculiar thereunto, than the observance of one day in seven for the celebration of it. Hereof more must be spoken afterwards. Some say, indeed, that the appointment of one day in seven, and that the first day of the week, for the worship of God, was only a voluntary agreement, or a matter consented to by the apostolical or first churches, merely εὐταξίας gratia, or to keep good order and decorum amongst them, without respect to any moral command of God to that purpose. This they say directly with respect to the first day of the week, or the Lord’s day, and its religious observance. But those who appoint the first day of every week to be so observed, do without doubt appoint that that should be the condition of one day in seven. Now I could incline to this apprehension, if, besides sundry other invincible reasons that lie against it, I did not find that God had always before, in all states of the church from the foundation of the world, invariably required the observance ef one day in seven; and I know no reason why what had been observed all along so far upon his own authority, he would have observed still, but no longer on his command, but on the invention and consent of men. Had the religious observance of one day in seven been utterly laid aside and abolished, it would and ought to have been concluded, that the law of it was expired in the cross of Christ, as were those of circumcision, the sacrifices, and the whole temple worship. But to have this observance, which had been continued by the whole church, in and under the approbation of God, whereof none ever doubted, now enjoined by the authority of the church, after God had taken off his own authority from it, is a most vain Imagination.
§ 39. I dispute not of what the church may appoint for good order's sake, to be observed in religious assemblies. But this I dare say confidently, that no church, nor churches, not all the churches in the world, have power by common consent to ordain any thing in the worship of God, as a part of it, which God had once ordained, commanded, and required, but now under the gospel ceaseth so to do, as circumcision and sacrifices. But this is the state of the religious observance of one day in seven. None can deny, but that formerly it was ordained and appointed of God. And it should seem, according to this opinion, that he took off the authority of his own command, that the same observance might be continued upon the authority of the church. Credat Apella. Neither do the footsteps of the occasion of any such ecclesiastleal institution appear any where on record in the Scripture, where all things of an absolutely new and arbitrary institution, whether occasional or durable, are taken notice of. There is, indeed, mention made, and that frequently, of the first day of the week to be set apart for the assembling of believers for the worship of God, and a solid reason is insinuated, why that especial day in particular ought so to be. But why one day in seven should be constantly observed to the purpose mentioned, no reason, no account is given in the New Testament, other than why men should not lie or steal. Nor hath any man a ground to imagine, that there was an intercision of a Sabbatical observance, by the interposition of any time, between the observation of the seventh day, and of the first of the week, for the same ends and purposes, though not absolutely in the same manner. If there be any indications, proofs, evidences, that the first churches continued without the observance of one day in seven, after they desisted from having a religious respect to the seventh day, before they had the same regard to the first of the week unto this purpose I wish they might be produced, for they would be of good weight in this matter; but as yet no such thing is made to appear. For if the obligation of the precept for observing one day in seven, as a sacred rest to God, may be suspended. in any change of the outward state and condition of the church, it cannot be esteemed to be moral. I speak not of the actual observance of the thing commanded, which for many causes may occasionally and temporarily be superseded, but of the obliging force and power in the command itself, — which, if it be moral, is perpetual, and not capable of interruption. Now, testimonies we have that sundry persons, not sufficiently instructed in the liberty of the gospel, and the law of its obedience, observed both the days, the seventh and the first; yea, it may be, that for a while some observed the one day, and some the other; but that any Christians of old thought themselves, de facto, set at liberty from the religious observance of one day in seven, this neither i8, nor can be proved. This practice, then, was universal, and that approved of God, as we shall see afterwards, and farther in another discourse, now more than once directed unto. Now, what can any man conceive to be the ground of this unvariableness in the commanded and approved observance of one day in seven in all states, conditions, and alterations in and of the church, but that the command for it is part of the moral unchangeable law? Hereby, therefore, it is confirmed unto us so to be. And, indeed, if every state of the church be founded in an especial work of God, and his rest thereon, and complacency therein, as a pledge or testimony of giving his church rest in himself, as elsewhere shall. be fully confirmed; a Sabbatical rest must be necessary to the church in every state and condition. And although absolutely another day might have been fixed on under the New Testament, and not one in a hebdomadal revolution, because its peculiar works were not precisely finished in six days, yet that season being before fixed and determined by the law of creation, no innovation nor alteration would be allowed therein.
§ 40. There is yet remaining that which is principally to be pleaded in this cause, and which of itself is sufficient to bear the weight of the whole. Now, this is the place which the command for the observance of a Sabbath unto God, holds in the decalogue. Concerning this, we have no more to inquire, but whether it obtained a station therein, in its own right, or were on some other occasion advanced to that privilege. For if it be free of that society in its own right, or on the account ef its origin and birth, the morality of it can never be impeached; if it had only an occasional interest therein, and held it by a lease of time, it may ere this be long since disseized of it. Now we do not yet dispute, whether the seventh day precisely be ordained in the fourth commandment, and do take up the whole nature of it, as the only subject of it, and alone required in it. Only I take it for granted, that the observance of one day in seven is required in the command, which is so, because the seventh day, or a seventh day in a septenary revolution, is expressly commanded.
§ 41. It is, indeed, pretended by many, that the command first and directly respecteth the seventh day precisely, and one day in seven, no otherwise than as it necessarily follows thereon. For where the seventh day is required, ont in seven is so consequentially. And they who thus pretend S Ree”
have a double design, the one absolutely contradictory to the other. For those do so, who from thence conclude that the seventh day precisely, comprising the whole nature of the Sabbath, that day is indispensably and everlastingly to be observed. And those do so, who, with equal confidence, draw their conclusion to the utter abolition of the whole Sabbath, and the law of it, in the taking away of the seventh day itself. Such different apprehensions have men of the use and improvement that may be made of the same principles and concessions. For those of the latter sort hope, that if they can prove the observance of the seventh day precisely, and not one of seven but only consequentially, to be the whole of what is intended in the fourth commandment, that by virtue of the apostle’s rule, Col. 11. 16, (to which purpose he often elsewhere expresseth himself,) they shall be able to prove that it is utterly abolished. Those of the other sort suppose, that if they can make this to be the sense of the commandment, they shall from thence prevail to fix a perpetual obligation on all men to the observance of the seventh day precisely, although the words of the apostle seem to lie expressly against it.
§ 42. But the supposition itself that both parties proceed upon, is not only uncertain, but certainly false. For the very order of nature itself disposeth these things into that series, and mutual respect, which can never be interrupted. The command is about the separation of time unto the service of God. This he tacitly grants, nor will deny, if he be pressed, who contends for the seventh day. Here, therefore, it is natural and necessary, that time be indefinitely considered and required, antecedently to the designation and limitation of the portion of time that is required. This the order of nature requireth; for if it be time indefinitely that is limited in the command to the seventh day, time indefinitely is the first object of that limitation. And the case is the same with reference unto one day in seven. This also hath, and must have, a natural priority to the seventh day; for the seventh day is one day of the seven. And these things are separable. Some part of time may be separated unto religious worship, and yet not one day in seven; but any other portion in a certain revolution of days, weeks, months, or years, if there be not a distinct reason for it. And one day in seven may be so separated, wherein the seventh day precisely may have no interest. And these things the very nature of them doth assert, distinguish, and determine. Whatever morality, therefore, or obligation to a perpetual observance, can be fancied by any to be in the command as to the seventh day, it is but consequential unto, dependent upon, and separable from, the command and duty for the observance of one day in seven. And this sufficeth as to our present purpose. For I do not yet treat with them, who contend for the precise observance of the seventh day, now under the gospel. It is enough, that here we prove, that the fourth commandment requireth the sacred observance of one day in seven, and that so far as it doth so, it is moral and unchangeable.
§ 43. All men, as we have often observed, do allow that there is something moral in the fourth commandment, namely, that either some part of it, or the general nature of it, is so. I do not, therefore, well understand them, and him of late, who hath pleaded that the seventh day only is required in that command, and yet that this seventh day was absolutely ceremonial and typical, being accordingly abolished. The consistency of these assertions doth not yet appear to me; for if the whole matter of the command be ceremonial, the command itself must needs be so also. For a relief against this contradiction, it is said, that the morality of this command