The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians…

And that it was the good pleasure of God and not of man, only that it should be consecrate to his service. For consider, we have many other days consecrated by the Church unto Divine service, which yet were never called the Lords Days; And the Lords Day and the Lords feasts in the Old Testament, and in the language of the Holy Ghost are no other then such that are of the Lords institution. Secondly, Doctor Rivetus omits the main force of Master Perkins his argument, or at least slightly passeth it over, which is this. As God rested the seventh day after the Creation, so Christ having ended the work of the new Creation rested on this day from his work of redemption. Athanasius of old considers a first and a second Creation; and so accordingly a first and a second Sabbath: our Saviour himself speaks of a Christian Sabbath, Math. 24.20. and w••t should that be but the Lords Day under the Gospel? And Beza and Junius and Bishop Andrewes work upon the same. And I wonder that men should think the Sabbath should be altered, and another brought into the place of it by any ⟨p. 136⟩other authority then of him who is Lord of the Sabbath. And as Bishop Lake observes in all feasts both Divine and humane that we read of in Scripture, the work of the day was the ground of hallowing the day. And never was known to the World a more wonderful work in the way of grace, and mercy, then Christs Resurrection from the dead, manifesting thereby the redemption of the World as then wrought by him How doth Christ take upon him to alter the Sacraments but as Lord of the Sacraments? and apparently he shows that upon the same ground he takes upon him power to dispense or change the Sabbath, as he is Lord of the Sabbath. But what is his ground to deny the parity of reason here? merely his own prejudicate conceit that the obligation of the Lords Day, is not so great as the observation of the Sabbath. The contrary whereunto (saith he) omnes refugimus we all avoid. But who and how many are those all? what one of the ancients can he produce to have thought as he thinks? He may as well say according to the current of his private opinion, that we under the Gospel are not as much bound to the observation of one day in seven as the Jews were under the Law. It is true, that rigorous rest enjoined to the Jews we utterly disclaim as well as he;

And that it was the good pleasure of God and not of man, onely that it should bee consecrate to his service. For consider, wee have many other dayes consecrated by the Church unto Divine service, which yet were never called the Lords Dayes; And the Lords Day and the Lords feasts in the Old Testament, and in the language of the Holy Ghost are no other then such that are of the Lords institution. Secondly, Doctor Rivetus omits the maine force of Master Perkins his argument, or at least slightly passeth it over, which is this. As God rested the seventh day after the Creation, so Christ having ended the worke of the new Creation rested on this day from his worke of redemption. Athanasius of old considers a first and a second Creation; and so accordingly a first and a second Sabbath: our Saviour himselfe speakes of a Christian Sabbath,