The divine appointment of the Lords day proved as a separated day for holy…

2. Therefore this history is a full proof, that these things were done by the consent and appointment of the Apostles. For, 1. As is said, the inspired persons and Churches could not so suddenly be brought to forsake them universally in ⟨p. 59⟩such a case. 2. The Churches had all so high an esteem of the Apostles, that they took their Authority for the highest, and their judgement for infallible, and therefore received their writings as Canonical and Divine. 3. The Churches professed to observe the Lords day as an Apostolical Ordinance, And they cannot be all supposed to have conspired in a lie, yea to have belied the Holy Ghost. 4. The Apostles themselves would have controlled this course, if it had not been by their own appointment. For I have proved that the usage was in their own days. And they were not so careless of the preservation of Christs Ordinances and Churches, as to let such things be done, without contradiction; when it is known how Paul strove to resist and retrench all the corruptions of Church-order in the Churches to which he wrote. If the Apostles, silently connived at such corruptions, how could we rest on their authority? Especially the Apostle John in an. 99 would rather have written against it as the superstition of Usurpers (as he checked Diotrephes for contempt of him) than have said that he was in the Spirit on the Lords day when he saw Christ, and received his Revelation and message to the Churches. 5. And if the Churches had taken up this practice universally without the Apostles, it is utterly improbable that no Church writer would have committed to memory either that one Church that begun the custom, or the Council or means used for a sudden Confederacy therein. If it had begun with some one Church, it would have been long before the rest would have been brought to an agreeing Consent. It was many hundred years before they all agreed of the Time of Easter; And it was till the middle of Chrysostoms ⟨p. 60⟩time (for he saith it was but ten years ago, when he wrote it) that they agreed of the time of Christs Nativity.

2. Therefore this history is a full proof, that these things were done by the consent and appointment of the Apostles. For, 1. As is said, the inspired persons and Churches could not so suddenly be brought to forsake them universally in ⟨p. 59⟩