Ans. This place must be afterwards considered; I shall here only briefly speak unto it. And, (1.) It is known and confessed, that at that time all Judaical observations of days, or the days which they religiously observed, whether feasts or fasts, weekly, monthly, or annual, were by themselves and all others called their sabbaths, as we have before evinced. And that kind of speech which was then in common use is here observed by our apostle. It must, therefore, necessarily be allowed that there were two sorts of sabbaths amongst them. The first and principal was the weekly Sabbath, so called from the rest of God upon the finishing of his works. This being designed for sacred and religious uses, other days separated unto the same ends in general came, from their analogy thereunto, to be called sabbaths also, yea, were so called by God himself, as hath been declared. But the distinction and difference between these sabbaths was great. The one of them was ordained from the foun- dation of the world, before the entrance of sin, or giving of the pro- mises, and so belonged unto all mankind in general; the others were appointed in the wilderness as a part of the peculiar church worship of the Israelites, and so belonged unto them only. The one of them was directly commanded in the decalogue, wherein the law of our creation was revived and expressed; the others have their institution expressly among the residue of ceremonial, temporary ordinances. Hence they cannot be both comprised under the same denomination, unless upon some reason that is common to both sorts alike. So when God saith of them all, “ Ye shall observe my sabbaths,” it is upon a reason common to them all, namely, that they were all ecom- manded of God; which is the formal reason of our obedience, of what nature soever his commands are, whether moral or positive. Nor can both these sorts be here understood under the same name, un- less it be with respect unto something that is common unto both. Allow, therefore, the distinctions between them before mentioned, which cannot soberly be denied, and as to what they agree in, namely, what is or was in the weekly primary Sabbath of the same nature with those days of rest which were so called in allusion there- unto, and they may be allowed to have the same sentence given con-
SECT, 58. ] OF THE CAUSES OF THE SABBATH. 383
cerning them; that is, so far the weekly Sabbath may be said to be a shadow, and to be abolished.
(2.) It is evident that the apostle in this place dealeth with them who endeavoured to introduce Judaism absolutely, or the whole system of Mosaical ceremonies, into the observation of the Christian church. Circumcision, their feasts and new moons, their distinctions of meats and drinks, he mentioneth directly in this place. And therefore he deals about these things so far as they were Judaical, or belonged unto the economy of Moses, and no otherwise. If any of them fell under any other consideration, so far as they did so he designeth not to speak of them. Now, those things only were Mo- saical, which being instituted by Moses, were figurative of good things to come; or the things which, being of the same nature with the residue of his ceremonies, were before appointed, but accommo- dated by him to the use of the church which he built, such as sacri- fices and circumcision: for they were all of them nothing else but an obscure adumbration of the things whereof Christ was the body. So far, then, as the weekly Sabbath had any additions made unto it or limitation given of it, or directions for the manner of its ob- servance, or respected the services then to be performed in it, and by all accommodated unto that dispensation of the covenant which the posterity of Abraham were then brought into, it was a shadow, and is taken away by Christ. Therewith falls its limitation to the seventh day, its rigorous observation, its penal sanction, its being a sign between God and that people,—in a word, every thing in it and about it that belonged unto the then present administration of the covenant, or was accommodated to the Judaical church or state. But now, if it be proved that a septenary sacred rest was appointed in paradise, that it hath its foundation in the law of creation, that thereon it was observed antecedently unto the institution of Mosai- cal ceremonies, and that God renewed the command concerning it in his system of moral precepts, manifoldly distinguished from all ceremonial ordinances, so far and in these respects it hath no con- cern in these words of the apostle.
(3.) It cannot be said that the religious observance of one day in seven, as a holy rest unto God, is abolished by Christ, without cast- ing a great reflection of presumption on all the churches of Christ in the world,—I mean that now are, or ever were so; for they all have observed and do still observe such a day. I shall not now dispute about the authority of the church to appoint days unto holy or re- ligious uses, to make “holy days,”—let it be granted to be whatever any yet hath pretended or pleaded that it is; but this I say, that when God by his authority had commanded the observation of a day to himself, and the Lord Christ by the same authority hath