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…

he concludes, that the first day of the week was by the Apostles substituted in the place of the seventh, and commended to the Church, and that potestate singulari, by singular power; and as they were extraordinary Ministers of Christ, put in trust by his Spirit, to be faithful in giving Precepts (mark this well) not only touching faith and manners, but also de Ecclesiae [Greek or Hebrew]. & recto ordine, for the well ordering of the Church, and that in this particular, what day of the week is to be observed by force and analogy of the fourth Commandment, to prevent dissension and confusion among the Churches. And I am verily persuaded, that as many as stand for the Divine institution of the Lords Day would rest fully satisfied with this. Austin, I am sure, who is alleged by Walaeus in the first place, as maintaining it to be of Christs institution, writes thus of it, Serm. de temp. 251. Dominicum ergodiem Apostoli & Apostolici viri ideo religiosa solennitate habendum sanxerunt, quia in eadom Redemptor noster à mortuis resurrexit: this being premised, let us come to the ⟨p. 110⟩consideration of that which he delivers about the justification hereof, from pag. 152. where he acknowledgeth that among the ancient Writers and Doctors of the reformed Church, there have been some who have referred the celebrity of this day to the fact and institution of Christ. At the first, by Christs fact in this place I understood Christ apparitions to the Apostles, as they were assembled together on this day. But upon better consideration and ponderation of the passages alleged by him out of Austine and Cyril, I think rather that by Christs fact he means Christ resurrection, or perhaps, both the one and the other. For the sentence taken out of Austine hath reference to the one, and that out of Cyril, to the other. And Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells in his thes. 36. de Sabbato, referres unto both; this first day Christ sanctified not only by his resurrection, but by sundry apparitions before his ascension, by sending them the Holy Ghost. But the latter seem to depend on the former. And therefore, that learned Bishop in his defence of that Thesis 36. writes thus:

he concludes, that the first day of the weeke was by the Apostles substituted in the place of the seventh, and commended to the Church, and that potestate singulari, by singular power; and as they were extraordinary Ministers of Christ, put in trust by his Spirit, to be faithfull in giving Precepts (marke this well) not onely touching faith and manners, but also de Ecclesiae . & recto ordine, for the well ordering of the Church, and that in this particular, what day of the weeke is to be observed by force and analogie of the fourth Commandement, to prevent dissention and confusion among the Churches. And I am verily perswaded, that as many as stand for the Divine institution of the Lords Day would rest fully satisfied with this. Austin, I am sure, who is alleged by Walaeus in the first place, as maintaining it to be of Christs institution, writes thus of it, Serm. de temp. 251. Dominicum ergodiem Apostoli & Apostolici viri ideo religiosa solennitate habendum sanxerunt, quia in eadom Redemptor noster à mortuis resurrexit: this being premised, let us come to the