Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians…Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians…

Not that the sanctifying of a rest on this day would make us more holy, then the sanctifying of a rest on any other day: but only in reference to some special work of God on that day: upon which consideration the ancient Fathers do generally insist; and Bishop Andrewes, and Bishop Lake after them do jointly rely, and not Beza only. Secondly, That both Ursine and Paraeus call this a probable reason only: now give me leave to insist upon this, and try whether I cannot show that this reason is more then probable. And that first à Posteriori. For let us soberly consider how came it to pass that not only the day whereon Christ rose, but answerably hereunto the Day of the week, to wit, the first Day of the week was accounted by the Apostles, and so commonly called the Lords Day; and generally known to Christians by that name: otherwise S. John had not been so well understood in his Revelation chap. 1. vers. 10. Is it not apparent that Christs rising did ever after give the denomination of the Lords Day, to the first day of the week? Again the day of Christs Passion ⟨p. 96⟩upon the Cross, is not called the Lords day; and why the day of the Resurrection rather? surely because S. Paul saith that Christ was declared mightily to be the Son of God ¹by the spirit of sanctification in his Resurrection from the dead. Hereby then was he manifested to be the Son of God, the very Lord of Glory; and is not this reason more then probable, why it should be called the Lords day? Secondly consider, that day of the month or that day of the year whereon the Lord rose, we no where find that it was usually called the Lords Day, but only that day of the week; not the day of the week wherein he ascended into Heaven, but the day of the week wherein he rose. Now the Jews Sabbath was called the Lords Sabbath, the Lords holy Day, Es. 58. 13. If thou shalt turn away thy foot from my Sabbath from doing thy will on my holy Day. Hath the Lord a Day under the Gospel, but no Sabbath, no holy Day? what an unreasonable conceit were this? that he should have an holy Day, one in every week under the Law; and none under the Gospel? Now if the Lord hath a day that is peculiarly called his under the Gospel, and that day is in the Scripture styled the Lords Day;

Not that the sanctifying of a rest on this day would make us more holy, then the sanctifying of a rest on any other day: but onely in reference to some speciall worke of God on that day: upon which consideration the ancient Fathers doe generally insist; and Bishop Andrewes, and Bishop Lake after them doe joyntly rely, and not Beza onely. Secondly, That both Ursine and Paraeus call this a probable reason onely: now give me leave to insist upon this, and try whether I cannot shew that this reason is more then probable. And that first à Posteriori. For let us soberly consider how came it to passe that not onely the day whereon Christ rose, but answerably hereunto the Day of the weeke, to wit, the first Day of the weeke was accompted by the Apostles, and so commonly called the Lords Day; and generally knowne to Christians by that name: otherwise S. Iohn had not beene so well understood in his