Plowing still through David Dickson's manuscript sermons and this stood out, to me, as a clear typo. Am I wrong; is there any sense it is right? I want to explore all options before noting it as such. Note the context flowing from the prior paragraph. For [against] the sins that are against the second table of the law the natural conscience will chop [strike], as for whoredom, blood and drunkenness, false witnessing, etc., but for breaking of the Sabbath, taking of God’s name in vain, idolatry, neglect of prayer morning and evening, living profanely without thoughts of God in the heart, the natural man will not chop, for it will let a man break all the precepts |325|B of the first table because man has retained more light of the duties he owes to man then of his duty to God. Therefore, if you have not shed blood nor been an adulterer, oppressor, nor sinned openly against your neighbor, fall to and see how you have kept the precepts of the first table. See how you have loved, feared, obeyed, sought, served and delighted yourself in God, and made Him your chief happiness, which is the drift of the first commandment. Then [secondly], search whether you have solemnly prayed morning and evening every day, whether you have used all the means commanded of God to bring you to repentance, faith and a new life, which is the drift of the second table and [sic?] commandment.