The Fifth Exercitation: Of the Lord's Day

(1) A Summary of what has been proved, a progress to the Lords-day. (2) The new Creation of all things in Christ, the foundation of Gospel-Obedience and Worship. (3) The old and new Creation compared. (4) The old and new Covenant. (5) Distinct ends of these Covenants. (6) Supposition of the heads of things before confirmed. (7) Foundation of the Lords-day on those Suppositions. (8) Christ the [illegible]uthor of the new Creation; his works therein. (9) His rest from his works the indication of a new day of rest. (10) Observed by the Apostles. (11) Proof of the Lords-day from Hebrews 4. proposed. (12) The words of the Text. (13) Design of the Apostle in general. (14) His answer to an Objection; with his general Argument. (15) The nature of the rests treated on by him. (16) The Church under the Law of Nature, and its rest. (17) The Church under the Law of Institution, and its rest. (18) The Church under the Gospel, and its rest. (19) The foundation of it. (20) Christ his works, and his rest, intended Hebrews 4:10. (21) This farther proved by sundry Arguments. (22) What were his works whereby the Church was founded. (23) His entrance into his rest, not in his Death, but in his Resurrection. (24) The day of rest limited and determined hereby. (25) The Sabbatism that remains for the people of God. (26) The sending of the Holy Ghost. (27) Church assemblies on the first day of the week. (28) The Lords-day, Revelation 1:10. (29) The sum of the preceding discourse. (30) Necessity of the religious observation of one day in seven. (31) Blessing of God on the Church-worship on the first day. (32) Of the seventh day Sabbath, Judaism restored in it; of the Ebionites. (33) Schisms perpetuated by the opinion of the seventh day Sabbath. (34) Penalty of the Law reinforced with it. (35) The whole legal.

§. 1 How the Creation of all things was finished, and the rest of God and Man that ensued thereon, has been declared. It has also in part, and sufficiently as to our present purpose, been evidenced, how the great ends of the Creation of All, in the glory of God, and the blessedness of Man in him, with the pledge thereof in a Sabbatical rest, were for a season as it were defeated and disappointed by the entrance of Sin, which broke the Covenant that was founded in the Law of Creation, and rendered it useless to those ends. For the Law became weak through sin, and the flesh, or the corruption of our nature that ensued thereon (Romans 8:5). Hence it could no more bring Man to rest in God. But yet a continuation of the obligatory force of that Law and Covenant, with the direction of it to other ends and purposes, than at first given to them, was under the Old Testament designed of God, and has been declared also. Hence was the continuation of the original Sabbatical rest, in the Church of Israel, with the especial application of its command to that people, insisted on in the preceding Discourse. In this state of things, God had of old determined the Renovation of All by a new Creation; a new Law of that Creation, a new Covenant, and a new Sabbatical rest, to his own glory by Jesus Christ; and these things are now to be discussed.

§ 2 The Renovation of all things by Jesus Christ is prophesied of and foretold, as a new Creation of All, even of the Heavens and the Earth, and all things contained in them (Psalms 65:17, 18; chapter 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13). Hence the state of things to be introduced thereby, was under the Old Testament called the World to come (Hebrews 2:5). So it is still called by the Jewish Masters, [illegible] and [illegible]. So Kimchi among other expositions of the title of Psalms 92, a Psalm or Song for the Sabbath day, adds this, as that which the most ancient Rabbins fixed on, [illegible]: they interpreted it of the World to come, which shall be wholly Sabbath and rest, and these are the days of the Messiah. A spiritual rest it is they intend, and not a cessation of a Sabbath-day in particular; seeing in the prophecy of the new Temple, or Church-state in those days, there is especial direction given for the service of the Sabbath-day (Ezekiel 46:4).

And this Renovation of all things is said accordingly to be accomplished in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17, 18): old things are past away, behold all things are become new; the old Law, old Covenant, old Worship, old Sabbath, all that was peculiar to the Covenant of Works as such, in the first institution of it, and its renewed declaration on Mount Sinai, all are gone, and antiquated. What now remains of them as to any usefulness in our living to God, does not abide on the old foundation, but on a new disposition of them, by the Renovation of all things in Christ. For in the dispensation of the fullness of times, God gathered to an head all things in Christ, both which are in Heaven, and which are on Earth, even in him (Ephesians 1:10). The whole old Creation, as far as it had any thing in its self, or its order, that belonged to, or communicated any thing towards our living to God and his glory, is disposed anew in Christ Jesus to that end.

But this Renovation of all, which is the foundation of all our acceptable obedience to God, and of his present Worship, consists principally in the regeneration of the Elect, making them new creatures, and the erection of a new Church-state thereby to the glory of God. Now this new Creation of all must answer to all the ends of the old, in reference to the glory of God, and the good of them who are partakers of it; otherwise it would not be so rightly called, nor answer the declared ends of it, which was to gather all things to an head in Christ Jesus. For what was lost by sin, as to the glory of God in the old Creation, in this, was to be repaired and recovered.

§. 3 We may then, as the foundation of our present discourse, consider how these things answer to one another. First, the old creation comprized in it the law of the obedience of all creatures to God. This was therein and thereby implanted on their natures, with inclinations, natural, or moral, to the observation of it. And thus must it be also in the new creation, as to the subject of it, which is the Church. This law of the old creation to man, consisted principally in the image of God in him, and con-created with him. For hereby did he both know his duty, and was enabled to perform it, and was acquainted with his relation to God, and dependance upon him, which rendred it necessary and indispensible. But this law in the state of creation, fell under a double consideration, or had a double use; first of rule, and then as a principle. As a rule, the light that was in the mind of man, which was a principal part of the image of God in him, acquainted him with his whole duty, and directed him in the right performance of it. As a principle, it respected the ability that the whole man was endowed withall, to live to God according to his duty. This law, as to its first use, being much impaired, weakned, and in a great measure made useless by sin, God was pleased to restore it in the vocal revelation of his will, especially in the Decalogue, which with his own finger he wrote in tables of stone. In answer hereunto, a new law of obedience is introduced by the new creation in Christ Jesus. And this principally consisted in the renovation of the image of God in the new creatures, which was lost by sin: for they are renewed in the spirit of their minds, and do put on that new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness (Ephesians 4:23, 24). And this fully answers the first law, as it was a principle of light, and power, to obedience. And in a great measure it supplys the loss of it, as it was a rule also; for there is a great renovation thereof in God's writing his law in our hearts, not here to be insisted on. But in this new creation God designed to gather up all that was past, in the old, and in the law thereof, and in the continuation of it by writing under the Old Testament, to one head in Christ. Therefore he brings over in this state, the use of the first law, as renewed and represented in tables of stone for a directive rule of obedience to the new creature; whereby the first original law is wholly supplyed. Hereunto he makes an addition of what positive laws he thinks meet, as he did also under the old law of creation, for the tryal of our obedience, and our furtherance in it. So the moral law of our obedience is in each condition, the old and the new, materially the same; nor is it possible that it should be otherwise. But yet this old law, as brought over into this new estate, is new also. For all things are become new. And it is now the rule of our obedience, not meerly and absolutely to God as the Creator, the first cause and last end of all, but as to God in Christ bringing of us into a new relation to himself. In the renovation then of the image of God in our souls, and the transferring our of the moral law as a rule accompanied with new distinct principles, motives and ends, does the law of the new creation consist, and fully answer the law of the first, as it was a principle and a rule, each of them having their peculiar positive laws annexed to them.

§. 4 Secondly, the law of creation had a covenant included in it, or inseparably annexed to it. This also we have before declared, and what belonged thereunto, or ensued necessarily thereon. Thus therefore must it be also in the new creation, and the law thereof: yes, because the covenant is that which as it were gathereth all things together, both in the works and law of God, and our obedience, disposing them into that order which tendeth to the glory of God, and the blessedness of the creatures in him; this is that which in both creations is principally to be considered. For without this, no end of God in his works, or law, could be attained, nor man be made blessed in a way of righteousness and goodness to his glory. And the law of creation no otherwise failed, nor became useless as to its first end by sin, but that the covenant of it was thereby broken and rendred useless, as to the bringing of man to the enjoyment of God. This therefore was principally regarded in the new creation, namely the making, confirming, and ratifying of a new covenant. And the doing hereof was the great promise under the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:32), whereby the believers who then lived, were made partakers of the benefits of it. And the confirming of this covenant in and by Christ, is expressed as a part of the new creation (Hebrews 8:9), and it is indeed comprehensive of the whole work of it.

§. 5 Thirdly, the immediate end of the old covenant, was to bring man by due obedience to the rest of God. This God declared in, and to his inbred native light, by his works and his rest that ensued thereon, and the day of rest which he instituted as a pledge thereof, and as a means of attaining it, by that obedience which was required in the covenant. This we have before declared, and this was the true original and end of the first sabbatical rest. All these things therefore must have place also in the new covenant, belonging to the new creation. The immediate end of it, is our entering into the rest of God, as the Apostle proves at large (Hebrews 4). But herein we are not absolutely to enter into God's rest, as a Creator and Rewarder, but into the rest of God in Christ, the nature whereof will be fully explained in our exposition of that chapter. For obedience is now to be yielded to God, not absolutely, but to God in Christ, and with that respect therefore are we to enter into rest. The foundation hereof must lie in the works of God in the new creation, and the complacency with rest which he took therein. For all our rest in God, is founded in his own rest in his works. For a pledge hereof, a day of rest must be given and observed; the reasons and necessity whereof we have explained and confirmed in our preceding discourses. This, as has been showed, originally was the seventh day of the week. But as the Apostle tells us in another case, the priesthood being changed, there must also of necessity a change of the law ensue; so the covenant being changed, and the rest which was the end of it being changed, and the way of entering into the rest of God being changed, a change of the day of rest must of necessity thereon ensue. And no man can assert the same day of rest precisely to abide, as of old, but he must likewise assert the same law, the same covenant, the same rest of God, the same way of entering into it, which yet, as all acknowledge, are changed. The day first annexed to the covenant of works, that is, the seventh day, was continued under the Old Testament, because the outward administration of that covenant was continued. A relief indeed was provided against the curse and penalty of it, but in the administration of it, the nature, promises, and threatenings of that covenant, though with other ends and purposes, were represented to the people. But now that covenant being absolutely abolished, both as to its nature, use, efficacy and power, no more to be represented nor proposed to believers, the whole of it, and its renewed administration under the Old Testament being removed, taken away, and disappearing (Hebrews 8:13), the precise day of rest belonging to it, was to be changed also; and so it is come to pass.

§. 6 We must here suppose what has been before proved and confirmed. There was a day of holy rest to God, necessary to be observed by the law and covenant of nature, or works; neither was or could either of them be complete without it, looking on them as the rule and means of man's living to God, and of his coming to the enjoyment of him. That this day was in the innate right of nature, as directed by the works of God, designed and proposed to it for that purpose to be one day in seven. This was it to learn, and this it did learn from God's creating the world in six days, and resting on the seventh; for God affirms every where, that because he did so, therefore it was the duty of man to labor on six days, as his occasions do require, and to rest on the seventh. This therefore they were taught by those works and rest of God, or it could not be proposed as the reason of their suitable practice; and for this end did God so work and rest. The law therefore of this holy rest he renews in the Decalogue, among those other laws, which being of the same nature and original, namely branches of the law of our creation, were to be to us moral and eternal. For God would no longer entrust his mind and will in that law to the depraved nature of man, wherein, if he had not in the best, often guided and directed it by fresh extraordinary revelations, it would have been of little use to his glory; but committed it by vocal revelation to the minds of the people, as the doctrinal object of their consideration, and recorded it in tables of stone. Moreover, the nature of the first covenant, and the way of God's instructing man in the condition of it by his works and rest, had limited this holy day to the seventh day, the observation whereof was to be commensurate to that covenant, and its administration, however the outward forms thereof might be varied.

§. 7 On these suppositions we lay, and ought to lay the observation of the Lord's Day under the New Testament, according to the institution of it, or declaration of the mind of Christ, who is our Lord and Law-giver concerning it. 1. A new work of creation, or a work of a new creation is undertaken and completed (Isaiah 65:17; chapter 66:22, 23; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1; Romans 8:19, 20; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15). 2. This new creation is accompanied with a new law, and a new covenant; or the law of faith, and the Covenant of Grace (Romans 3:27; chapter 8:2, 3, 4; Jeremiah 31:32, 33, 34; Hebrews 8:8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13). 3. To this law and covenant a day of holy rest to the Lord does belong, which cannot be the same day with the former, no more than it is the same law, or the same covenant, which were originally given to us (Hebrews 4:9; Revelation 1:10). 4. That this day was limited and determined to the first day of the week by our Lord Jesus Christ, is that which shall now further be confirmed; only I must desire the reader to consider, that whereas the topical arguments whereby this truth is confirmed, have been pleaded, improved, and vindicated by many of late, I shall but briefly mention them, and insist principally on the declaration of the proper grounds and foundations of it.

§. 8 As our Lord Jesus Christ, as the eternal Son and Wisdom of the Father, was the immediate cause, and author of the old creation (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2, 10), so as Mediator, he was the author of this new creation (Hebrews 3:3, 4). He built the house of God; he built all these things, and is God. Herein he wrought, and in the accomplishment of it, saw of the travail of his soul, and was satisfied (Isaiah 53:11), that is, he rested and was refreshed. Herein he gave a new law of life, faith, and obedience to God (Isaiah 42:4), not by an addition of new precepts to the moral law of God, not virtually comprized therein, and distinct from his own positive institutions of worship, but in his revelation of that new way of obedience to God in and by himself, with the especial causes, means, and ends of it, which supplies the use and end whereunto the moral law was at first designed (Romans 8:2, 3; Romans 10:3, 4), whereby he becomes the author of eternal salvation to all that do obey him (Hebrews 5:9). This law of life and obedience, he writes by his Spirit in the hearts of his people, that they may be willing in the day of his power (Psalm 110:3; 1 Corinthians 3:3, 6; Hebrews 8:10), not at once, and in the foundation of his work actually, but only in the causes of it. For as the law of nature should have been implanted in the hearts of men in their conception, and natural nativity, had that dispensation of righteousness continued; so in the new birth of them that believe in him, is this law written in their hearts in all generations (John 3:6). Hereon was the Covenant established, and all the promises thereof, of which he was the Mediator (Hebrews 8:6). And for an holy day of rest, for the ends before declared, and on the suppositions before laid down, evincing the necessity of such a day, he determined the observation of the first day of the week.

§. 9 First, on this day he rested from his works, in and by his resurrection; for then had he laid the foundation of the new heavens, and new earth, and finished the works of the new creation, when all the stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy. On this day he rested from his works, and was refreshed, as God did, and was from his. For although he works hitherto, in the communication of his Spirit and graces, as the Father continued to do in his works of providence, after the finishing of the works of the old creation, though these works belonged thereunto; yet he ceases absolutely from that kind of work whereby he laid the foundation of the new creation: henceforth he dies no more. And on this day was he refreshed in the view of his works, for he saw that it was exceeding good. Now as God's rest, and his being refreshed in his work, on the seventh day of old, was a sufficient indication of the precise day of rest, which he would have observed under the administration of that original law and Covenant; so the rest of our Lord Jesus Christ, and his being refreshed in and from his works on the first day, is a sufficient indication of the precise day of rest, to be observed under the dispensation of the new Covenant now confirmed and established.

And the Church of Christ could not pass one week under the New Testament, or in a gospel-state of worship, without this indication. For the Judaical Sabbath, as sure as it was so, and as sure as it was annexed to the Mosaical administration of the Covenant, was so far abolished, as not to oblige really the disciples of Christ in conscience to the observation of it, whatever any of them might for a season apprehend. And if a new day was not now determined, there was no day or season appointed, for an observance of an holy rest to the Lord, nor any pledge given us of our entering into the rest of Christ. And those who say, that it is required that some time be set apart to the ends of a Sabbatical rest, but that there is no divine indication of that time, when, not what it is, or shall be, if we consider what are the ends of such a rest, as before declared, must allow us to expect firmer proofs of their uncouth assertion, than any as yet we have met withal.

§. 10 Accordingly, this indication of the gospel day of rest and worship, was embraced by the Apostles, who were to be as the chief corner-stones, the foundation of the Christian Church. For immediately hereon they assembled themselves on that day, and were confirmed in their obedience by the grace of our Lord, in meeting with them thereon (John 20:19, 26). And it seems that on this day only he appeared to them, when they were assembled together, although occasionally he showed himself to sundry of them at other seasons. Hence he left Thomas under his doubts a whole week, before he gave him his gracious conviction, that he might do it in the assembly of his disciples on the first day of the week. From which time forward this day was never without its solemn assemblies, as shall further be cleared afterwards.

§. 11 Now because I am persuaded that the substance of all that we have laid down and pleaded for, in all the preceding discourses, especially in what we have proposed concerning the foundation and causes of the Lord's-day, is taught by the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 4, I shall present to the reader the sum of his design and scope in that place, from verse 3 to verse 11, with an application of it to our present purpose; referring him yet, for further satisfaction, to our full exposition of the chapter itself. For this place is touched on by all who have contended about the original and duration of the Sabbatical rest, but not yet that I know of diligently examined by any. I shall not fear to lay much of the weight of the cause wherein I am engaged upon it, and therefore shall take a view of the whole context, and the design of the Apostle therein.

§. 12 The words of the Apostle are: "For we which have believed do enter into Rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my Rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh Day on this wise, And God did Rest the seventh Day from all his works. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my Rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached, entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain Day, saying, in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them Rest, then would he not afterwards have spoken of another Day. There remaineth therefore a Rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his Rest, he has also ceased from his own works, as God did from his" (Hebrews 4:3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11).

§. 13 The design of the Apostle in this discourse, is to confirm what he had laid down, and positively asserted in the beginning of the chapter. Now this is, that there is yet under the Gospel a promise of entering into the rest of God, left or remaining to believers; and that they do enter into that rest, by mixing the promise of it with faith. This he declares; and the declaration of it was useful to, and necessary for the Hebrews. For he lets them know, that notwithstanding their present, and ancient enjoyment of the Land of Canaan, with the worship and rest of God therein, which their forefathers fell short of by their unbelief, they were under a new trial, a new rest being proposed to them in the promise. This he proves by a testimony out of the 95th Psalm, the words whereof he had insisted on at large in chapter 3, and does so again in this. But the application of that testimony to his purpose, is obnoxious to a great objection; for the rest mentioned in that Psalm, seems to be a rest long since past and enjoyed, either by themselves or others. They therefore could have no new or fresh concernment in it, nor be in danger of coming short of it. And if this were so, all the arguments and exhortations of the Apostle in this place, must needs be weak and incogent, as drawn from a mistaken and misapplied testimony.

§. 14 To remove this objection, and thereby confirm his former assertions and exhortations thereon, is the design of the Apostle in this discourse.

To this end he proceeds to the exposition and vindication of the testimony itself, which he had cited out of the Psalms. And herein he shows from the proper signification of the words, from the time when they were spoken, and the persons to whom, that no other rest was intended in them, but what was now by him proposed to them, as the rest of God and his people, in the Gospel.

The general argument which to this purpose he insists upon, consists in an enumeration of all the several rests of God and his people, which are mentioned in the Scriptures. For from the consideration of them all, he proves that no other rest could be intended in the words of David, but only the rest of the Gospel, whereinto they enter who do believe.

Moreover, from that respect which the [illegible] of the Psalmist have to the other foregoing rests of God and his people, he manifests that they were appointed of God, to be representations of that spiritual rest which was now brought in and established. This is the general design of this discourse.

In pursuit hereof, he declares in particular, (1) That the rest mentioned in the Psalm, is not that which ensued immediately on the creation of all things. This he evinceth, because it was spoken of afterwards, a long time after, and that to another purpose (verses 4, 5). (2) That it was not the rest of the Land of Canaan, because that was not entered into by them to whom it was first proposed and promised; for they came short of it by their unbelief, and perished in the Wilderness; but this rest which is now afresh proposed is such, as the people of God must and will enter into (verses 6, 7). (3) Whereas it may be objected, that although the Wilderness Generation entered not in, yet their posterity did so under the conduct of Joshua (verse 8), he answers, that this rest in the Psalm being proposed and promised in David so long a time, (above 400 years) after the people had quietly possessed the Land whereinto they were conducted by Joshua, it must needs be that another rest then yet to come, was intended in those words of the Psalmist (verse 9). And (4) to conclude his argument, he declareth that this new rest had a new peculiar foundation, which the other had no interest or concernment in, namely his ceasing from his works, and entering into his rest, who is the Author of it (verse 10). This is his way and manner of arguing for the proof of what he had before laid down, and which he issues in that conclusion (verse 9): There remaineth therefore a Rest for the people of God.

§. 15 But we must yet further consider the nature of the several rests here discoursed of by the Apostle, which will give light and confirmation to what we have before discoursed. To this purpose will the ensuing propositions taken from the words conduce: As,

1. The rest of God is the foundation and principal cause of our rest. Hence in general it is still called God's rest; if they shall enter into my rest; it is on some account or other God's rest before it is ours: not the rest only which he has appointed, commanded, and promised to us, but the rest wherewith himself rested, as is plainly declared on every head of the rests here treated of. And this confirms that foundation and reason of a sabbatical rest which we have laid down in our third Exercitation.

God's rest is not spoken of absolutely, with respect to himself only, but with reference to an appointed rest that ensued thereon, for the Church to rest with him in. Hence it follows, that the rests here mentioned are as it were double, namely the rest of God himself, and the rest that ensued thereon for us to enter into. For instance, at the finishing of the works of Creation, which is first proposed, God ceased from his works, and rested. This was his own rest, the nature whereof has been before declared: he rested on the seventh day. But this was not all, he blessed it for the rest of man, a rest for us ensuing on his rest, an expressive representation of it, and a pledge of our entering into, or being taken into a participation of the rest of God.

3. The Apostle proposes the three-fold state of the Church to consideration: (1) The state of it under the Law of Nature or Creation. (2) The state of it under the Law of Institutions, and carnal ordinances. (3) That then introducing under the Gospel. Accordingly have we distinguished our discourses concerning a sabbatical rest, in our third, and fourth, and this present Exercitation. To each of these he assigns a distinct rest of God, a rest of the Church, entering into God's rest, and a day of rest, as the means and pledge thereof. And withal he manifests that the two former were ordered to be previous representations of the latter, though not equally, nor on the same account.

First, he considers the Church and the state of it under the Law of nature, before the entrance of sin; and herein he shows first that there was a rest of God in it; for says he, the works were finished from the foundation of the world, and God did rest from all his works, verse 3, 4. As the foundation of all, he lays down first the works of God. For the Church and every peculiar state of the Church is founded in the work, some especial work of God, and not merely in a law or command. The works, says he, were finished from the foundation of the world; [in non-Latin alphabet], the works; [in non-Latin alphabet], the work, that is of God, the effect of his creating power, was finished or completed; [in non-Latin alphabet], from the foundation of the world: a periphrasis of the six original days, wherein time, and all things measured by it, and existent with it, had their beginning. This work of God, as has been proved Exercit. 3. was the foundation of the Church in the state of Nature, and gave to it the entire law of its obedience.

On this work and the completing of it, ensued the rest of God himself, verse 4. God rested the seventh day from all his works. This rest of God, and his refreshment he took in his works, as comprising the law and covenant of our obedience, have been explained already.

But this alone does not confirm nor indeed come near the purpose or argument of the Apostle. For he is to speak of such a rest of God, as men might enter into, as was a foundation of rest to them, or otherwise his discourse was not concerned in it; whereupon by citation of the words of Moses from (Genesis 2:2) he tells us, that this rest of God was on the seventh day, which God accordingly blessed and sanctified, to be a day of rest to man. So that in this state of the Church there were three things considerable; (1) The rest of God himself on his works, wherein the foundation of the Church was laid. (2) A rest proposed to man to enter into with God, wherein lay the duty of the Church. And (3) a day of rest, the seventh day, as a remembrance of the one, and a means and pledge of the other. And herewith we principally confirm our judgement, in the Sabbath's beginning with the World. For without this supposition, the mentioning of God's work and his rest, no way belonged to the purpose of our Apostle. For he discourses only of such rests as men might enter into, and have a pledge of. And there was no such thing from the foundation of the world, unless the Sabbath were then revealed: nor is it absolutely the work and rest of God, but the obedience of men, and their duty, with respect to them, which he considers. And this could not be, unless the rest of God was proposed to men to enter into, from the foundation of the world.

§. 17 Secondly, the Apostle considers the Church under the Law of Institutions; and herein he represents the rest of the Land of Canaan, wherein also the three distinct rests before-mentioned do occur.

1. There was in it a rest of God. This gives denomination to the whole: he still calls it his rest; if they shall enter into my rest. And the prayer about it was, Arise O Lord into your rest, you and the Ark of your strength, or the pledge of his presence and rest. And this rest also ensued upon his work, for God wrought about it works great and mighty, and ceased from them when they were finished. And this work of his answered in its greatness to the work of Creation, whereunto it is compared by himself (Isaiah 51:15, 16): I am the Lord your God that divided the Sea, whose waves roared, the Lord of Hosts is his Name, and have put my words in your mouth, and have covered you in the shadow of my hand, that I may plant the Heavens, and lay the foundation of the Earth, and say to Zion you are my people. The dividing of the Sea whose waves roared, is put by a Synecdoche for the whole work of God, preparing a way for the Church-state of that people in the Land of Canaan. And this he compares to the work of Creation, in planting the Heavens, and laying the foundation of the Earth. For although those words are but a metaphorical expression of the political and Church-state of that people, yet there is an evident allusion in them to the original Creation of all things. This was the work of God, upon the finishing whereof, he entered into his rest, in the satisfaction and complacency that he had therein. For after the erection of his worship in the Land of Canaan, he says of it, this is my rest, and here will I dwell.

2. God being thus entred into his Rest, in like manner as formerly, two things ensue thereon: (1) That the people are invited and encouraged to enter into the Rest of God. This the Apostle treats concerning in this and the foregoing Chapter. And this their entrance into Rest, was their coming by faith and obedience into a participation of the worship of God wherein he Rested, as a means and pledge of their everlasting Rest in him. And although some of them came short hereof, by reason of their unbelief, yet others entred into it under the conduct of Joshua. (2) Both these, his own Rest, and Rest of the people, God expressed by appointing a Day of Rest. This he did, that it might be a token, sign, and pledge, not now, as given to this people absolutely of his first Rest at the Creation, but of his present Rest in his instituted Worship; and to be a means in the solemn observation of that Worship, to farther their entrance into his Rest eternally. Hence had the seventh Day a peculiar institution among that people, whereby it was made to them, a sign and token, that he was their God, and they were his people. And here lies the foundation of all that we have before discoursed concerning the Judaical Sabbath, in our fourth Exercitation.

It is true, this Day was the same in order of the days, with that before observed; namely, the seventh Day of the Week. But it was now reestablished upon new considerations, and to new ends and purposes. The time of the change of the Day was not yet come; for this Work was but preparatory for a greater. And the Covenant whereunto the seventh Day was originally annexed, being not yet to be abolished, that day was not to be yet changed, nor another to be substituted in the room of it. Hence this Day became now to fall under a double consideration: First, as it was such a proportion of time as was requisite to the worship of God, and appointed as a pledge of his Rest in his Covenant. Secondly, as it received a new institution, with superadded ends and significations, as a token and pledge of God's Rest in the Law of institutions, and the worship erected therein. So both these states of the Church, had these three things distinctly; a Rest of God on his Works for their foundation; a Rest in obedience and worship for man to enter into; and a Day of Rest as a pledge and token of both the other.

§. 18 Thirdly, the Apostle proves from the words of the Psalmist, that there was yet to be a third state of the Church; an especial state under the Messiah, which he now proposed to the Hebrews, and exhorted them to enter into. And in this Church-state, there is to be also a peculiar state of Rest, distinct from them which went before. To the constitution hereof, there are three things required. First, that there be some signal work of God compleated and finished, whereon he enters into his Rest. This was to be the foundation of the whole new Church-state, and of the Rest to be obtained therein. Secondly, that there be a spiritual Rest ensuing thereon, and arising from there, for them that believe to enter into. Thirdly, that there be a new, or renewed Day of Rest, to express that Rest of God, and to be a pledge of our entering into it. If any of these, or either of them be wanting, the whole structure of the Apostle's discourse will be dissolved; neither will there be any color remaining for his mentioning the seventh day, and the Rest thereof. These things therefore we must farther enquire into.

§. 19 First, the Apostle shews, that there was a great work of God, and that finished, for the foundation of the whole. This he had made way for (chapter 3, verses 4, 5), where he both expressly asserts the Son to be God, and shews the analogy that is between the Creation of all things, and the building of the Church; that is, the works of the Old and New Creation. As then God wrought in the Creation of all, so Christ, who is God, wrought in the setting up of this new Church-state. And upon his finishing of it, he entred into his Rest, as God did into his, whereby he limited a certain Day of Rest to his people. So he speaks: There remaineth therefore a Sabbatism for the people of God. For he that is entred into Rest, has ceased from his works, as God did from his own. A new Day of Rest accommodated to this new Church-state, ariseth from the Rest that the Lord Christ entred into, upon his ceasing from his works. And as to this Day, we may observe: (1) That it has this in common with the former days, that it is a Sabbatism, or one day in seven, which that name in the whole Scripture use, is limited to. For this portion of time to be dedicated to sacred Rest, having its foundation in the light and Law of Nature, was equally to be observed in every state of the Church. (2) That although both the former states of the Church had one, and the same Day, though varied in some ends of it; now the Day itself is changed, as belonging to another Covenant, and having its foundation in a work of another nature, than what they had respect to. (3) That the observation of it is suited to the spiritual state of the Church under the Gospel, delivered from the bondage frame of spirit wherewith it was observed under the Law. And these things must be farther confirmed from the Context.

§. 20 The foundation of the whole is laid down v. 10. For he that is entered into his Rest, is ceased from his works, as God from his own. Expositors generally apply these words to Believers, and their entering into the Rest of God; whether satisfactorily to themselves and others, as to their design, coherence, scope, or signification of particular expressions, I know not. The contrary appears with good evidence to me; for what are the works that Believers should be said here to Rest from? Their sins, say some; their labours, sorrows and sufferings, say others. But how can they be said to Rest from these works, as God rested from his own? For God so rested from his, as to take the greatest delight and satisfaction in them, to be refreshed by them. In six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed (Exodus 31:17). He so rested from them, as that he rested in them, and blessed them, and blessed and sanctified the time wherein they were finished. We have showed before, that the Rest of God was not only a cessation from working, nor principally; but the satisfaction and complacency that he had in his works. But now if those mentioned be the works here intended, men cannot so Rest from them, as God did from his. But they cease from them, with a detestation of them, so far as they are sinful; and joy for their deliverance from them, so far as they are sorrowful. This is not to Rest, as God rested. Again; when are Believers supposed to Rest from these works? It cannot be in this world: for here we Rest not at all from temptations, sufferings, and sorrows; and in that mortification of sin which we attain to, yet the conflict is still continued, and that with severity to death (Romans 7:24). It must therefore be in Heaven that they thus Rest; and so it is affirmed accordingly. But this excludes the Rest in and of the Gospel, from the Apostle's discourse, which renders it altogether unsuitable to his purpose. This I have so fully demonstrated in the exposition of the chapter, as that I hope it will not be gainsaid. Thirdly, there is no comparison in the whole discourse between the works of God, and the works of men, but between the works of God in the creation, and under the Law on the one side, and those in and under the Gospel on the other. And the whole comparison is summed up and closed in this verse.

§. 21 It appears therefore that the subject of the Apostle's proposition in this place has been mistaken. It is another who is intended, even Christ himself, the Son of God, and his Rest from his works, which is here compared with the Rest of God from his, at the foundation of the world, to which end alone the mention of them was introduced (verse 3, 4). For,

First, the conjunction [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], For, whereby he brings in his assertion, manifests that the Apostle in these words gives an account from where it is that there is a new Sabbatism remaining for the people of God. There remains a Sabbath-keeping for the people of God; for he that is entered into his Rest, is ceased from his works. Had there not been a work laying the foundation of the Gospel-Church-state, and a Rest of God in it, and ensuing thereon, there could have been no such Sabbatism for Believers, for those things are required to a Sabbath. He had proved before, that there could be no such Rest but what was founded in the works of God, and his Rest that ensued thereon; such a foundation therefore, he says, this new Rest must have, and it has it. This must be and is in the works and Rest of him by whom the Church was built, that is Christ, who is God, as it is expressly argued (chapter 3, verses 3, 4). For as that Rest which all the world was to observe, was founded in his works and Rest who made the world, and all things in it; so the Rest of the Church under the Gospel is to be founded in his works and Rest, by whom the Church was built, that is Jesus Christ: for he on the account of his works and Rest is also Lord of the Sabbath, to abrogate one day of Rest, and to institute another.

Secondly, the Apostle here changes the manner of his expression from the plural absolutely, We who believe, or virtually in the name of a multitude, the people of God, into that which is absolutely singular; [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], He that is entered. A single person is here expressed, with respect to whom the things mentioned are asserted; and of this change of phrase, there can be no other reason given.

Thirdly, the Rest which this person is said to enter into, is called his Rest absolutely. As God speaking of the former Rest, calls it, My Rest, so this is the My Rest, of another, namely the Rest of Christ: whereas when the entering of Believers into Rest is spoken of, it is called either God's Rest, They shall enter into my Rest; or Rest absolutely, We that believe do enter into Rest, but not their Rest, or our Rest, for it is not our own absolutely, but God's Rest whereinto we enter, and wherein we rest. But the Rest here is the Rest of him whose it is, and who is the Author of ours.

Fourthly, there is a direct parallel in the words, between the works of the old creation, and those of the new, which are compared by the Apostle. For,

1. There are the authors of them, which on the one side is said to be God; as God did from his own, that is God the Creator, or God as Creator; on the other, He, [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], the same with [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], chapter 3, verse 3, that is he of whom we speak, as the Apostle declares himself, verse 13, for in these words a transition is made to his treating of the person of Christ.

2. The works of the one and the other are expressed. The works of the Creator are [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], his proper works, his own works, the works of the old creation, [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]. And there are the works of him of whom he speaks, [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], his works, those which he wrought in like manner as God did his own at the beginning; that is the work of building the Church. For these works must answer each other, and have the same respect to their authors; they must be good and complete in their kind, and such as Rest and refreshment may be taken in, and on them. To compare the sins and sufferings of men with the works of God, our Apostle did not intend.

3. There is the Rest of the one and the other; and these also have their mutual proportion. Now God rested from his own works of Creation, (1) By ceasing from creating, only continuing all things by his Power in their order, and propagating them to his Glory. (2) By his respect to them, and refreshment in them, as those which expressed his excellencies, and set forth his praise, and so satisfied his glorious design. So also must he rest who is spoken of. (1) He must cease from working in the like kind of works; he must suffer no more, die no more, but only continue the work of his grace and power in the preservation of the new creature, and the orderly increase and propagation of it by his Spirit. (2) He takes delight and satisfaction in the works that he has wrought; for he sees of the travel of his soul, and is satisfied, and is in the possession of that glory which was set before him, while he was engaged in this work.

And these things sufficiently clear the subject here spoken of, namely that it is Jesus Christ the Mediator.

§. 22 The works that the Rest mentioned respects have been sufficiently intimated; and I have so fully insisted on them in the Exposition of the third and fourth Verses of the third Chapter of this Epistle, that I shall not here again repeat them. In brief, all that he did and suffered in and from his Incarnation to his Resurrection, as the Mediator of the Covenant, with all the fruits, effects, and consequences of what he so did and suffered, whereby the Church was built, and the new Creation finished, belongs to these works. His Rest that ensued on these works has two parts; (1) A Cessation from his works, which was eminent, and answered God's Rest from his own. (2) Satisfaction in his works, and the glorious product of them, as those which had an impression on them, of his love and grace (Psalm 16:7).

§. 23 It remains only that we enquire into his Entrance into his Rest, both how and when he did so, even as God entered into his on the seventh day; for this must limit and determine a Day of Rest to the Gospel-Church. Now this was not his lying down in the Grave. His Body indeed there rested for a while; but that was no part of his mediatory Rest, as he was the founder and builder of the Church. For, (1) It was a part of his Humiliation: Not only his Death, but his abode and continuance in the state of Death, was so; and that a principal part of it. For after the whole Human Nature was personally united to the Son of God, to have it brought into a state of Dissolution, to have the Body and Soul separated from each other, was a great Humiliation. And every thing of this nature belonged to his Works, and not his Rest. (2) This separation of Body and Soul under the power of Death, was penal, a part of the sentence of the Law which he underwent. And therefore Peter declares, that the pains of Death were not loosed but in his Resurrection (Acts 2:24). Whom God, says he, has raised up, loosing the pains of Death, because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. While he was held of it, he was under it penally. This therefore could not be his Rest, nor any part of it. Nor did he in it enter into his Rest, but continued in his Work. Nor 2dly. did he first enter into his Rest at his Ascension: Then indeed he took actual possession of his Glory, as to the full public manifestation of it. But to enter into Rest is one thing, and to take possession of Glory another. And it is placed by our Apostle as a consequent of his being justified in the Spirit, when he entered into Rest (1 Timothy 3:16). But this his entrance into Rest, was in, by, and at his Resurrection from the dead. For, (1) Then and therein was he freed from the sentence, power and stroke of the Law; being discharged of all the Debts of our sins, which he had undertaken to make satisfaction for (Acts 2:24). (2) Then and therein were all Types, all Predictions and Prophecies fulfilled, which concern the work of our Redemption. (3) Then therefore his work was done, I mean that which answers God's creating work, though he still continue that which answers his work of preservation. Then was the Law fulfilled and satisfied, Satan subdued, Peace with God made, the Price of our Redemption paid, the Promise of the Spirit received, and the whole Foundation of the Church of God gloriously laid on his Person, in his Works and Rest. (4) Then and therein was he declared to be the Son of God with power (Romans 1:4). God manifesting to all, that this was he concerning and to whom he said, You are my Son, this day have I begotten you (Acts 13:33).

§. 24 Thus did the Author of the New Creation, the Son of God, the Builder of the Church, having finished his works, enter into his Rest. And this was, as all know, on the morning of the first day of the week. And hereby did he limit and determine the day for a sacred Sabbatical Rest under the New Testament. For now was the Old Covenant utterly abolished, and therefore the day which was the pledge of God's and Man's Rest therein, was to be taken away, and was so accordingly, as we have showed. As the Rest from the beginning of the World, had its foundation from the works of God, and his Rest which ensued thereon, which was determined to the seventh day, because that was the day wherein God ceased from those works, which day was continued under the legal administration of the Covenant by Moses; so the Rest of the Lord Christ the Son of God, is the foundation of our Rest, which changing the old Covenant, and the day annexed to it, he has limited to the first day of the week, whereon he ceased from his works, and entered into his Rest. And hereby the Apostle completes the due analogy that is between the several Rests of God and his people, which he has discoursed of in this chapter. For as in the beginning of the World, there was first, the work of God, and his Rest thereon, which made way to a Rest for his people in himself and in his worship, by the contemplation of his works that he had made, on whose finishing he rested; and a day designed, determined, blessed and sanctified, to express that Rest of God; from where mention is made of those works in the command for the observation of that day, seeing the worship of God in and on it, consisted principally in the glorifying of him, by, and for those works of his; as also to be a means to further men in their entrance into eternal Rest, whereunto all these things do tend; and as at the giving of the Law, there was a great work of God, and his Rest thereon, in his establishing his worship in the Land of Canaan, which made way for the people's entering into his Rest in that worship and country, and had a day of Rest enjoined to them, to express the one and the other, as also to help them to enter finally into the Rest of God; so now under the Gospel there is a Rest answering all these, in and by the instances which we have given.

§. 25 And this is that which the Apostle affirms, as the substance of all which he has evinced: namely, that there is a Sabbatism for the people of God, v. 9. [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩]: The word is framed by our Apostle from a Hebrew original, with a Greek termination. And he uses it, as that which is comprehensive of his whole sense, which no other word would be. For he would show that there is a Sabbatical Rest founded in the Rest of God, remaining for the Church; and therefore makes use of that word, whereby God expressed his own Rest when he sanctified the seventh day, for a day of Rest thereon. That day of Rest being removed, and another, on a new foundation, namely, the Rest of Christ upon his works introduced, he calls it a Sabbatism, or a Sabbath-keeping. He does not do this only and separately, averring the necessity of a Sabbath-observation in the first place, distinctly from a spiritual Rest in Christ, with an eternal Rest ensuing thereon; but in the manner and order before laid down, wherein the necessity of such a day is included. And besides the evidence that arises from the consideration of the whole context, there are two things which make it undeniably evident, that our Apostle asserts an Evangelical Sabbath, or day of Rest, to be constantly observed in and for the worship of God under the Gospel. For first, without this design, there can be no tolerable reason assigned, why he should mention the works of God from the foundation of the World, with his Rest that ensued thereon, and refer us to the seventh day, which without respect to another day to be introduced, does greatly involve his whole discourse. Again, his use of this word, [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩], a Sabbatism, which is framed, and as it were coined on purpose, that it might both comprise the spiritual Rest aimed at, and also a Sabbath-keeping, or observation of a Sabbath Rest, manifests his purpose. When he speaks of our Rest in general, he still does it by [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩], adding, that there was an especial day for its enjoyment. Here he introduces [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩], a Sabbatism, which his way of arguing would not have allowed, had he not designed to express the Christian Sabbath. Add hereunto, that he subjoins the especial reason of such a day's observation in the next verse, as we have declared. And here do we fix the foundation and reason of the Lord's-Day, or the holy observation of the first day of the week; the obligation of the fourth Commandment to a weekly sacred Rest, being put off from the seventh day to the first, on the same grounds and reasons whereon the state of the Church is altered from what it was under the Law, to what it is now under the Gospel. And the Covenant itself also is changed; from where the seventh day is now of no more force, than the old Covenant, and the old law of institutions, contained in ordinances, because the Lord Christ has ceased from his works, and entered into his Rest, on the first day.

§. 26 Here we have fixed the foundation of the observation of the Lords-Day, on the supposition of what has been proved concerning our duty in the holy observance of one day in seven, from the law of our creation, as renewed in the Decalogue. The remaining arguments evincing the change of the day from the seventh to the first by divine authority, shall be but briefly touched on by me, because they have been lately copiously handled, and fully vindicated by others. Therefore, (1) when the Lord Christ intended conspicuously to build his Church upon the foundation of his works and rest, by sending the Holy Ghost with his miraculous gifts upon the Apostles, he did it on this day, which was then among the Jews the Feast of Pentecost, or of Weeks. Then were the disciples gathered together with one accord, in the observance of the day signalized to them by his Resurrection (Acts 2:1). And by this does their obedience receive a blessed confirmation, as well as their persons a glorious endowment with abilities for the work which they were immediately to apply themselves to. And hereon did they set out to the whole work of building the Church on that foundation, and promoting the worship of it, which on that day was especially to be celebrated.

§. 27 The practice of the Apostles, and the Apostolical Churches, owned the authority of Christ in this change of the day of sacred rest. For hence forward, whatever apprehensions any of them might have of the continuance of the Judaical Sabbath, as some of them judged that the whole service of it was still to be continued, yet they observed this day of the Lord, as the time of their assemblies and solemn worship. One or two instances hereof may be called over (Acts 20:6, 7): We came to Troas in five days, where we abode seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them, ready to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until midnight. I doubt not but in the seven days that the Apostle abode there, he taught and preached as he had occasion in the houses of the believers; but it was the first day of the week, when they used according to their duty, to assemble the whole body of them, for the celebration of the solemn ordinances of the Church, synecdochically expressed by breaking of bread. This they did, without any extraordinary warning or calling together; for in answer to their duty they were accustomed so to do. Such is the account that Justin Martyr gives of the practice of all Churches in the next age; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. On the day called Sunday there is an assembly of all Christians, whether living in city or the country; and because of their constant breaking of bread on this day, it was called Dies Panis (August. Epist 118). And Athanasius proved that he broke not a chalice at such a time, because it was not the first day of the week when it was to be used (Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22). And whoever reads this passage without prejudice, will grant, that it is a marvellous, abrupt, and uncouth expression, if it do not signify that which was in common observance among all the disciples of Christ, which could have no other foundation but only that before laid down, of the authority of the Lord Christ requiring it of them. And I doubt not but that Paul preached his farewell sermon to them, which continued until midnight, after all the ordinary service of the Church was performed. And all the objections which I have met with against this instance, amount to no more but this; that although the Scripture says, that the disciples met for their worship on the first day of the week, yet indeed they did not so do.

1 Corinthians 16:2, the same practice is exemplified; Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store as God has prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. The constant day of the Churches solemn assemblies being fixed, he here takes it for granted, and directs them to the observance of an especial duty on that day. What some except, that here is no mention of any such assembly, but only that every one on that day should lay by himself what he would give, which every one might do at home, or where they pleased, is exceeding weak, and unsuitable to the mind of the Apostle. For to what end should they be limited to a day, and that the first day of the week, for the doing of that which might be as well, to as good purpose and advantage, performed at any other time, on any other day of the week whatever? Besides it was to be such a laying aside, such a treasuring of it in a common stock, as that there should be no need of any collection when the Apostle came. But if this was done only privately, it would not of its self come together at his advent, but must be collected. But all exceptions against these testimonies have been so lately removed by others, that I shall not insist farther on them.

§. 28 That from these times downwards the first day of the week had a solemn observation in all the churches of Christ, whereby they owned its substitution in the room of the seventh day, applying the duties and services of a Sabbath to it, has also been demonstrated. And that this was owned from the authority of the Lord, is declared by John in the Revelation, who calls it the Lords Day (Revelation 1:10), whereby he did not surprize the churches with a new name, but denoted to them the time of his visions, by the name of the day which was well known to them. And there is no solid reason why it should be so called, but that it owes its pre-eminence and observation to his institution and authority. And no man who shall deny these things, can give any tolerable account, how, when, or from where this day came to be so observed, and so called. It is [in non-Latin alphabet], the Lords Day, the day of the Lord, as the Holy Supper is [in non-Latin alphabet] (1 Corinthians 11:20), the Lords Supper, by reason of his institution. [in non-Latin alphabet] the day of the Lord in the Old Testament, which the LXX render [in non-Latin alphabet], no where [in non-Latin alphabet], signifies indeed, some illustrious appearance of God in a way of judgement or mercy. And so also in the person of Christ, this was the day of his appearance (Mark 16:9). So was it still called by the ancient writers of the church: Ignatius in Epist. ad Trall. ad magnes. ect., Dionysius of Corinth. Epist. ad Rom. in Euseb. Hist. lib. 4. cap. 21., Theophilus Antioch. lib. 1. in 4. Evangel., Clemens Alex. stromat. lib. 7. cap. 7., Origen lib. 8. con. Cels., Tertul. de Coron. milit. cap. 3. As for those who assign the institution of this day to the Apostles, although the supposition be false, yet it weakens not the divine original of it. For an obligation lying on all believers to observe a Sabbath to the Lord, and the day observed under the law of Moses being removed, it is not to be imagined that the Apostles fixed on another day, without immediate direction from the Lord Christ. For indeed they delivered nothing to be constantly observed in the worship of God, but what they had his authority for (1 Corinthians 11:23). In all things of this nature, as they had the infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost, so they acted immediately in the name and authority of Christ, where what they ordained was no less of divine institution, than if it had been appointed by Christ in his own person. It is true, they themselves did for a season, while their ministry was to have a peculiar regard to the Jews, for the calling and conversion of the remnant that was among them, according to the election of grace, go frequently into their Synagogues on the seventh day to preach the Gospel (Acts 13:14, chap. 16:13, chap. 17:2, chap. 18:4). But it is evident that they did so, only to take the opportunity of their assemblies, that they might preach to the greater numbers of them, and that at such a season wherein they were prepared to attend to sacred things. Upon the same ground Paul laboured if it were possible to be at Jerusalem at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 20:16). But that they at any time assembled the disciples of Christ on that day for the worship of God, that we read not.

§. 29 We may now look back, and take a view of what we have passed through. That one day in seven is by virtue of a divine law to be observed holy to the Lord, the original of such an observation (Genesis 2:2), the letter of the fourth commandment, with the nature of the covenant between God and man, do prove and evince. And hereunto is there a considerable suffrage given by learned men of all parties. The doctrine of the Reformed divines hereabouts has been largely represented by others. They also of the Church of Rome, that is, many of them agree herein. It is asserted in the Canon Law itself, Tit. de Feriis cap. licet, where the words of Alexander the third are, Tam veteris quam novi Testamenti pagina septimum Diem ad humanam quietem specialiter deputavit; where by septimus Dies he understands one day in seven, as Suarez sheweth, De Relig. lib. 2. cap. 2. And it is so by sundry Canonists reckoned up by Covarruvias. The Schoolmen also give in their consent, as Bannes in 2a. 2a.g. 44. a. 1. Bellarmine contends expresly, decultsanct. lib. 3. cap. 11., that Jus divinum requirebat ut unus Dies Hebdomadae dicaretur cultui divino. So does Suarez, de dieb. sac. cap. 1., and others might be added. We have the like common consent, that whatever in the institution and observation of the Sabbath under the Old Testament was peculiar to that state of the church, either in its own nature, or in its use and signification, or in its manner of observance, is taken away by virtue of those rules (Romans 14:5; Galatians 4:10; Colossians 2:16, 17). Nor can it be denied but that sundry things annexed to the Sabbatical rest, peculiar to that church-state which was to be removed, were wholly inconsistent with the spirit, grace, and liberty of the Gospel. I have also proved, that the observation of the seventh day precisely, was a pledge of God's rest in the Covenant of Works, and of our rest in him, and with him thereby; so that it cannot be retained without a re-introduction of that covenant, and the righteousness thereof. And therefore although the command for the observation of a Sabbath to the Lord, so far as it is moral is put over into the rule of the new covenant, wherein grace is administred for the duty it requires; yet take the seventh day precisely as the seventh day, and it is an Old Testament arbitrary institution, which falls under no promise of spiritual assistance in, or to the observation of it. Under the New Testament we have found a new creation, a new law of creation, a new covenant, the rest of Christ in that work, law, and covenant, the limiting of a day of rest to us, on the day wherein he entered into his rest, a new name given to this day, with respect to his authority by whom it was appointed, and an observation of it by all the churches, so that we may say of it, This is the day which the Lord has made, we will rejoyce and be glad in it, as Psalm 118:24.

§. 30 These foundations being laid, I shall yet by some important considerations, if I mistake not, give some farther evidence to the necessity of the religious observation of the first day of the week, in opposition to the day of the Law, by some contended for. It is therefore, first, acknowledged, that the observation of some certain day, in and for the solemn public worship of God, is of indispensible necessity. They are beneath our consideration by whom this is denyed. Most acknowledge it to be a dictate of the Law of Nature, and the nature of these things does require it. We have proved also, that there is such a determination of this time, to one day in seven, as it must needs be the highest impudence in any person, persons or churches, to attempt any alteration herein. And notwithstanding the pretences of some about their liberty, none yet have been so hardy from the foundation of the world, as practically to determine a day for the worship of God, in any other revolution of days or times, to the neglect and exclusion of one day in seven. Yes, the light hereof is such, and the use of it so great, that those who have taken up with the worst of superstitions instead of religion, as the Mahumetans, yet complying in general with the performance of a solemn worship to God, have found it necessary to fix on one certain day in the hebdomadal revolution for that purpose. And indeed partly from the appointment of God, partly from the nature of the thing itself, the religious observation of such a day, is the great preservative of all solemn profession of religion in the world. This the Law of Nature, this the written Word directs to, and this experience makes manifest to all. Take away from among men, a conscience of observing a fixed stated day of sacred rest to God, and for the celebration of his worship in assemblies, and all religion will quickly decay, if not come to nothing in this world. And it may be observed, though it be not evident whether be the cause, or the effect, that where, and among whom religion flourishes in its power, there, and among them is conscience the most exercised, and the most diligence used in the observation of such a day. I will not say absolutely that it is religion, or other principles, that teaches men exactness in the observation of this day; nor on the other hand, that a conscience made of this observation, does procure an universal strictness in other duties of religion. But this is evident, that they are mutually helpful to one another. And therefore though some have laboured to divest this observation of any immediate divine authority, yet they are forced to supply such a constitution for the observation of one day in seven, as that they affirm, that none can omit its observation without sin in ordinary cases; whether they have done well to remove from it the command of God, and to substitute their own in the room of it, they may do well to consider.

§. 31 Let then the state of things in reference to the first day of the week, with the presence of God in, and his blessing upon the worship of the Church therein, be considered. And this is a consideration, as I think, by no means to be despised. It is manifest to all unprejudiced persons, that the Apostles and apostolical churches, did religiously observe this day. And no man can with any modesty question, the celebration of the worship of God therein, in the next succeeding generations. In the possession of this practice are all the disciples of Christ at this day in the world, some very few only excepted, who Sabbatize with the Jews, or please themselves with a vain pretence that every day is to them a Sabbath. Nor is it simply the catholicism of this practice which I insist upon; though that be such, and has such weight in things of this nature, as that for my part I shall not dissent from any practice that is so attested: But it is the blessing of God upon it, and the worship on this day performed, which is pleaded, as that which ought to be of a high esteem with all humble Christians. On this day, throughout all ages, has the edification of the churches been carried on, and that public revenue of glory been rendered to God which is his due. On this day has God given his presence to all his solemn ordinances, for all the ends for which he has appointed them. Nor has he by any means given the least intimation of his displeasure against his churches, for their continuance in the observation of it. On the other side, not only have the wisest and holiest men, who have complained of the sins of their several times and ages wherein they lived, which procured the pouring out of the judgments of God upon them, constantly reckoned the neglect and profanation of the Lord's-day among them; but such instances have been given of particular severities against them who have openly profaned this day, and that upon unquestionable testimonies, as may well affect the minds and consciences of those who profess a reverence of God, in the holy dispensations of his providence.

Nor can any of these things be pleaded, to give countenance to any other day, that should be set up in competition with the Lord's-day, or the first day of the week. What of this nature can be spoken concerning the seventh day now by some contended for, and that which is grievous, by some persons holy and learned? Of what use has it ever been to the Church of God, setting aside the occasional advantages taken from it by the Apostles, of preaching the Gospel in the synagogues of the Jews? What testimonies have we of the presence of God with any churches, in the administration of gospel ordinances and worship on that day? And if any lesser assemblies do at present pretend to give such a testimony, wherein is it to be compared with that of all the holy churches of Christ throughout the world in all ages, especially in those last past.

Let men in whose hearts are the ways of God, seriously consider the use that has been made under the blessing of God, of the conscientious observation of the Lords-day, in the past and present age, to the promotion of holiness, righteousness, and religion universally in the power of it, and if they are not under invincible prejudices, it will be very difficult for them to judge, that it is a plant which our Heavenly Father has not planted. For my part, I must not only say, but plead while I live in this world, and leave this testimony to the present and future ages, if these papers see the light, and do survive, that if I have ever seen any thing in the ways and worship of God, wherein the power of religion or godliness has been expressed; any thing that has represented the holiness of the Gospel, and the Author of it; any thing that has looked like a Proeludium to the everlasting Sabbath and rest with God, which we aim through grace to come to, it has been there, and with them, where and among whom the Lords-day has been had in highest esteem, and a strict observation of it attended to, as an ordinance of our Lord Jesus Christ. The remembrance of their ministry, their walking and conversation, their faith and love, who in this nation have most zealously pleaded for, and have been in their persons, families, and churches or parishes, the most strict observers of this day, will be precious with them that fear the Lord, while the sun and moon endure. Their doctrine also in this matter, with the blessing that attended it, was that which multitudes now at rest, do bless God for; and many that are yet alive, do greatly rejoice in. Let these things be despised by those who are otherwise minded, to me they are of great weight and importance.

§. 32 Let us now a little consider the day that by some is set up, not only in competition with this, but to its utter exclusion. This is the seventh day of the week, or the old Judaical Sabbath, which some contend that we are perpetually obliged to the observation of, by virtue of the Fourth Commandment. The grounds whereon they proceed in their assertion, have been already disproved, so far as the nature of our present undertaking will admit; and such evidences given to the change of the day, as will not easily be everted, nor removed. The consequences of the observation of the seventh day, should the practice of it be re-assumed among Christians, is that which at present I shall a little enquire into, when we have summed up somewhat of what has been spoken. (1) It was not directly, nor absolutely required in the Decalogue, but consequentially only, by way of appropriation to the Mosaical economy, whereunto it was then annexed. The command is to observe the Sabbath-day, and the blessing is upon the Sabbath-day; God blessed the Sabbath-day. And the mention of the seventh day in the body of the command, fixes the number of the days in whose revolution a Sabbatical rest returns, but determines not an everlasting order in them; seeing the order relating to the old creation, is inconsistent with the law, reason, and worship of the new. And if the seventh day and the Sabbath, as some pretend, are the same, the sense of the command in the enforcing part of it is, but the seventh day, is the seventh day of the Lord your God, which is none at all. (2) The state of the Church, and the administration of the covenant, whereunto the observation of this day was annexed, are removed, so that it cannot continue, no more than a house can stand without a foundation. (3) The Lord Christ who was the Lord of the Sabbath, and by assuming that title to himself, manifested his authority as to the disposal of the day whereon a Sabbatical rest was to be observed, has in his own rest from his works, limited to us another day of sacred rest, called from his appointment of it, the Lords-day, his day who is the Lord of the Sabbath. (4) The day so introduced by his authority, has from the day of his rest been observed without interruption, or any such difference about it, as fell out among the churches of God about other feast days, whose observation was introduced among them, they knew not well how; as of the Pascha, and the like. And whereas the due observation of it, has been enjoined by councils, edicts of emperors, kings, and princes, laws of all sorts; advised and pressed by the ancient writers among Christians, and the practice of its observance taken notice of by all who from the beginning have committed the affairs of Christianity to posterity; yet none of any sort pretend to give it any original, but all mediately, or immediately refer it to Christ himself. The observation then of this day, first, is an evident Judaizing, and a returnal to those rudiments of the world, which the Apostle so severely cautions us against. I know not how it is come to pass, but so it is fallen out, that the nearer Judaism is to an absolute abolition and disappearance, the more some seem inclinable to its revival and continuance, or at least to fall back themselves into its antiquated observances. An end it had put to it morally and legally long ago, in the coming, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And we may say of it, what the Apostle said of idols when the world was full of idolatry, we know that Judaism is nothing in the world; no such thing as by some it is esteemed. The actual abolition of it in the profession of the present Jews, by the removing of the veil from their hearts and eyes, and their turning to God, we hope, is in its approach. And yet, as was said, there seems in many an inclination to their rites, and servile observances.

It is apparent in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles, especially that to the Hebrews, that at the first preaching of the Gospel, there were very many Jews who came over to the faith and profession of it. Many of these continued zealous of the Law, and would bring along with them all their Mosaical Institutions, which they thought were to abide in force for ever. In this weakness and mis-apprehension, they were forborn in the patience of God, and wisdom of the Holy Ghost, guiding the Apostles and Disciples of Jesus Christ. In this state things continued to the destruction of Hierusalem and the Temple, when the chiefest cause of their contests was taken away. In the mean time they carried themselves very variously, according to the various tempers of their minds. For it is apparent that some of them were not content themselves to be indulged in their opinions and practices, but they endeavoured by all means to impose the observance of the whole Mosaical Law on the Churches of the Gentiles. Their Circumcision, their Sabbaths, their Feasts and Fasts, their Abstinences from this or that kind of meats, they were contending about, and thereby perverting the minds of the Disciples. Some stop was put to the evil consequences hereof in the Synod at Hierusalem (Acts 15), which yet determined nothing concerning the Jews own practice, but only concerning the liberty of the Gentile-Believers.

After the destruction of Hierusalem, City and Temple, these professing Jews fell into several distinct ways. Some of them, who as is probable had despised the heavenly warning of leaving the place, took up their lot among their unbelieving brethren; relinquishing the profession of the Gospel which they had made, not it may be with any express renunciation of Christ, but with a dis-regard of the Gospel, which brought them not those good things they looked for; of which mind Josephus the Historian seems to be one. These in time became a part of that apostate brood which have since continued in their enmity to the Gospel, and into whose new and old superstitions, they introduced sundry customs which they had learned among the Christians. Some absolutely relinquished their old Judaism, and completely incorporated with the new Gentile Churches, to whom the promise and Covenant of Abraham was transferred and made over. These were the genuine Disciples of our great Apostle. Others continued their profession of the Gospel, but yet still thought themselves obliged to the observation of the Law of Moses, and all its institutions. Hereupon they continued in a distinct and separate state from the Believers and Churches of the Gentiles, and that for some ages, as some say to the days of Adrian. These it may be were they whom Eusebius out of Hegesippus calls [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Masbothai, whom he reckons as a sect of the Jews (Histor. lib. 4. 21). The Jews call them [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], that is, Sabbatarians, which must be from some observation of the Sabbath in a distinct manner, or for different reasons, from themselves. Buxtorfe, and our late learned Lexicographer, render [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], by Sabbatarii, adding this explanation, Qui secundum Christi Doctrinam Sabbatum observabant, by a mistake; for as they are reckoned to the Jews by Hegesippus, so those who followed the Doctrine of Christ, did not Sabbatize with the Jews, nor were ever called Sabbatarians by them. There was indeed a sort of persons among the Samaritans who are called Sabuaei, whom Epiphanius makes the third sect of them. But these were so called without any respect to a Sabbatical observation. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] the Jews call them, that is Septenarii, from [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; unless we shall think with Drusius, that they were so denominated from Sebaia, who came along with Dosthai to settle the new Inhabitants of Samaria. Epiphanius says no more of them, but that they observed the Feast of Pentecost in Autumn, and the Feast of Tabernacles in the Spring, at the time of the Jews Passeover. But this gives no account why they should be so called. But they got this appellation from their observation of every day in the week, between the Passeover and the Pentecost, that is for seven weeks, which was the same with the second day in the week of unleavened bread, whereon the Omer or Sheaf of first fruits was to be offered. But to return. After this many of them coalesced, and we hear no more of them. In the mean time as there were great disputes and heats between the differing parties, while the occasion of their difference continued, so the Gentile Believers did in many things either condescend to those of the Circumcision, or fell themselves in liking with their observances, and received them into practice. Hence it was that they embraced the Paschal solemnity, with some other Festivals, and also in many places admitted the sacredness of the seventh day Sabbath, though still observing according to the institution of Christ and his Apostles the Lords Day also. And it is not improbable that they might be induced the rather to continue these observations, that they might thereby give a public testimony of their faith against the Marcionites, who began early to blaspheme the Old Testament, and the God thereof; which blasphemy they thought to condemn by this practice. And hence in those writings which are falsly ascribed to the Apostles, but suited to those times, Can. 66. and Constitut. lib. 7. cap. 24. the observation both of the Saturday and the Lords Day are enjoined.

Others of these Jews about the same season constituted a sect by themselves, compounding a religion out of the Law and Gospel, with additions and interpretations of their own. These the Ancients call Ebionites. Circumcision with all the Sabbaths, Feasts, and Rites of Moses, they retained from the Law. That the Messiah was come, and that Jesus Christ was he, they admitted from the Gospel; that he was only a mere man, not God and man in one person, they added of their own, yet in compliance with the sense and expectation of the corrupt and carnal part of the Church of the Jews, whereof originally they were. And this sect is that which in a long tract of time has brought forth Mahumetanism in the East. For the religion of the Mahumetans is nothing but that of the Ebionites, with a super-addition of the interests and fanatical brain-sick notions of the Impostor himself.

And yet so it is that some begin now to plead, that these Ebionites were the only true and genuine believers of the Circumcision in those days. These, they say, and these alone, retained the doctrine preached by the Apostles to the Jews, for they were the same and no other with those which were also called Nazarenes. Thus do the Socinians plead expressly, and have contended for it in sundry treatises published to that purpose. This they do, hoping to obtain from there some countenance to their impious doctrine about the person of Christ, wherein they agree with the Ebionites. But as to their Sabbatizing with the Jews, and the rest of their ceremonial observances, they will have nothing to do with them, as not finding those things suited to their interest and design. But herein do they now begin to be followed by some among ourselves, who apparently fall in with them in sundry things condemned by our Apostle, and on the account whereof they declined him, and rejected his authority, as others seem almost prepared to do, on other reasons not here to be mentioned. In particular some begin to Sabbatize with them, yes to outgo them. For Ebion and his followers, although they observed the seventh day Sabbath with the Jews, yet they observed also the Lords Day with the Christians, in honor of Jesus Christ, as both Eusebius and Epiphanius testify: [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. They in like manner with us observe the Lords Day, in remembrance of the saving Resurrection. How great a scandal these things are to Christian religion, how evidently tending to harden the Jews in their infidelity is apparent to all. For the introduction of any part of the old Mosaical system of ordinances, is a tacit denial of Christ's being come in the flesh, at least of his being the King, Lord, and Lawgiver of his Church. And to lay the foundation of all religious solemn Gospel-worship in the observation of a day, which as such, as the seventh day precisely, has no relation to any natural or moral precept, not instituted, not approved by Jesus Christ, cannot but be unpleasing to them who desire to have their consciences immediately influenced by his authority, in all their approaches to God. But Christ is herein supposed to have built the whole fabric of his worship on the foundation of Moses, and to have grafted all his institutions into a stock, that was not of his own planting.

§. 33 Moreover it is evident that this opinion concerning the necessary observation of the seventh day Sabbath, tends to the increasing and perpetuating of schisms and differences among the disciples of Christ; things in their own nature evil, and to be avoided by all lawful ways and means. It is known how many different opinions and practices there are among professors of the Gospel. That they should all be perfectly healed or taken away perhaps in this world, is not to be expected. For the best know but in part, and prophesy but in part. That every good man, and genuine disciple of Christ ought to endeavor his utmost for their removal, none will deny. For if it be our duty so far as it is possible, and as much as in us lies to live peaceably with all men, in that peace which is the life of civil society; doubtless it is so much more to live so with all believers, in a peaceable agreement in the worship of God. And therefore of all differences in judgment which lead to practice, those are the worst and most pernicious, which occasion or draw after them any thing whereby men are hindered from joining together in the same public solemn worship, whereby they yield to God that revenue of his glory which is due to him in this world. And that many of these are found at this day, is not so much from the nature of the things themselves about which men differ, as from the weakness, prejudices, and corrupt affections of them who are possessed with different apprehensions about them. But now upon a supposition of an adherence by any to the seventh day Sabbath, all communion among professors in solemn Gospel-ordinances is rendered impossible. For if those of that persuasion, do expect that others will be brought to a relinquishment of an evangelical observance of the Lords-day Sabbath, they will find themselves mistaken. The evidence which they have of its appointment, and the experience they have had of the presence of God with them in its religious observation, will secure their faith and practice in this matter. Themselves on the other hand, supposing that they are obliged to meet for all solemn worship on the seventh day, (which the other account unwarrantable for them to do, on the pretense of any binding law to that purpose) and esteem it unlawful to assemble religiously with others on the first day, on the plea of an evangelical warranty, they absolutely cut off themselves from all possibility of communion in the administration of Gospel-ordinances, with all other churches of Christ. And whereas most other breaches as to such communion, are in their own nature capable of healing, without a renunciation of those principles in the minds of men, which seem to give countenance to them; the distance is here made absolutely irreparable, while the opinion mentioned is owned by any. I will press this no farther, but only by affirming, that persons truly fearing the Lord, ought to be very careful and jealous over their own understandings, before they embrace an opinion and practice, which will shut them up from all visible communion, with the generality of the saints of God in this world.

§. 34 We have seen the least part of the inconveniences that attend this persuasion, and its practice; nor do I intend to mention all of them which readily offer themselves to consideration. One or two more may yet be touched on. For those by whom it is owned, do not only affirm that the Law of the seventh day Sabbath is absolutely and universally in force, but also that the Sanction of it, in its penalty against Transgressors, is yet continued. This was, as is known, the Death of the offender by stoning. So did God himself determine the Application of the Curse of the Law, to the breach of this Command, in the instance of the man that gathered wood on that day, and was stoned by His direction (Numbers 45:35). Now the consideration of this penalty, as expressive of the Curse of the Law, influenced the minds of the Jews into that bondage frame wherein they observed the Sabbath. And this always put them upon many anxious arguings how they might satisfy the Law in keeping the Day, so as not to incur the penalty of its Transgression. Hence are the Questions among the Jews, no less endless than those about their Genealogies of old, about what work may be done, and what not, how far they might journey on that day, which when they had with some indifferent consent reduced to 2000 Cubits, which they called a Sabbath-day's journey, yet where to begin their measure, from what part of the City where a man dwelt, from his own House, or the Synagogue, or the Walls, or Suburbs of it, they are not agreed. And the dread hereof was such among them of old, from the rigorous Justice wherewith such Laws with such penalties were imposed on them, that until they had by common consent in the beginning of the Rule of the Hasmonaeans, agreed to defend themselves from their Enemies on that Day, they sat still in a neglect of the Law of Nature, requiring all men to look to their preservation against open violence, and suffered themselves to be slain, to their satiety who chose to assault them thereon. And certainly, it is the greatest madness in the world, for a people to engage in War, that do not think it at least lawful at all times to defend themselves. And yet they lost their City afterwards by some influence from this Superstition. And do men know what they do when they endeavour to introduce such a bondage into the observance of Gospel-worship, a yoke and bondage upon the persons and spirits of men, which those before us were not able to bear? Is it according to the mind of Christ, that the worship of God, which ought to be in Spirit and Truth, now under the Gospel, should be enforced on men by capital penalties? And let men thus state their principles: the seventh Day is to be kept precisely a Sabbath to the Lord, by virtue of the Fourth Commandment, for not one Day in seven, but the seventh Day itself is rigorously and indispensably enjoined to observation; and that the Transgression of this Law, not as to the Spiritual Worship to be observed on it, but as to every outward Transgression, by journeying or other bodily labor, is to be avenged with Death; undoubtedly in the practice of these principles, besides that open contradiction which they will fall into, to the Spirit, Rule, and Word of the Gospel, they will find themselves in the same entanglements wherein the Jews were and are. And as the cases that may occur, about what may be done and what not, what cases of necessity may interpose for relief, are not to be determined by private persons according to their own light and understanding, because they have respect to the public Law, but by them to whom power is committed to judge upon it, and to execute its penalty; so there will so many cases, and those almost inexplicable, emerge hereon, as will render the whole Law an intolerable burden to Christians. And what then is become of the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free? And wherein is the preeminence of the Spiritual Worship of the Gospel, above the carnal Ordinances of the Law?

§. 35 And this introduces an evil of no less heinous importance, than any of those before enumerated. The precise observation of the seventh Day as such, is undoubtedly no part of the Law, naturally moral. This we have sufficiently proved before, as I suppose. That Law is written in the hearts of Believers, by virtue of the Covenant of Grace, and strength is administered thereby to them for the due performance of the duties that it does require. Nor is it an Institution of the Gospel; none ever pretended it so to be. If there be not much against it in the New Testament, yet surely there is nothing for it. In the things that are so, we have ground to expect the Assistance of the Spirit of Christ, to enable us for their right observation to the glory of God, and our own edification, or increase in grace. But it is a mere precept of the Old Law as such. And what the Law speaks, it speaks to them that are under the Law. In all its precepts, [〈in non-Latin alphabet〉], it exercises a severe dominion over the souls and consciences of them that are under it. And we have no way to extricate ourselves from under that dominion, but by our being dead to its power and authority as such, through the Death of Christ; or an interest by Faith in the benefits that through his fulfilling and satisfying the Law, do redound to the Church. But what is required of any one, under the notion of the formal and absolute power of the Law, is to be performed in and by that spirit, which is administered by the Law, and the strength which the Law affords; and this indeed is great, as to conviction of sin; nothing at all, as to obedience and righteousness. Do men in these things appeal to the Law? To the Law they must go. For I know not any thing that we can expect assistance of Gospel-grace in or about, but only those things which are originally moral, or superadded to them in the Gospel itself; to neither of which heads this observation of the seventh Day as such can be referred. It is therefore a mere legal duty, properly so called, and in a bondage frame of spirit, without any especial assistance of grace it must be performed. And how little we are beholding to those who would in any one instance reduce us from the liberty of the Gospel, to bondage under the Law, our Apostle has so fully declared, that it is altogether needless farther to attempt the manifestation of it.