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…

Fourthly, he excepts against the argument drawn from Christs Resurrection; denying that therehence it follows that that day was to be consecrated to God. But herein he opposeth all the ancients; neither do I think he can allege any one that doth not hereon build the observation of the Lords Day; which nuiversall concurrence doth manifestly argue to be more then probable: Austin as Waleus allegeth him professeth not as his peculiar opinion, but as he took it generally received without contradiction: that Dies Dominicus Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est; and that resuscitatio Domini consecravit nobis diem Dominicum. And Athanasius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandment; (and analogy Doctor Walaeus grants, and I wonder he takes no notice of it here) by comparing the second Creation with the first Creation; and so Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester professeth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath, especially seeing the old must be abrogated as ceremonial. But the analogy I confess may be differently shaped; Athanasius shapes it thus, that the Jews Sabbath was the end of the first Creation; and that the Lords Day is a beginning of the second Creature; to wit, as the day of Christs resurrection; in reference whereunto the ⟨p. 117⟩Apostle saith, Old things are passed, behold, all things are become new. And I conceive reason to justify Athanasius, in making the beginning of the new creature to be our Sabbath, answerable to the end of the first creation, to wit, because the second creation hath no end in this world: Again, Adam and Eve were made but the immediate day before the seventh, and the seventh he was to spend in rejoicing in Gods works; so Christs death was the worlds redemption; and immediately after, to wit, with Christs rising, it was as fit we should Sabbatize with God for joy of our Redemption. Otherwise the analogy (which Doctor Walaeus grants, but doth not explicate) may be conceived thus. The seventh day of the week was the Lords rest from the work of creation, the first day of the week was the Lords rest from the work of redemption, in the morning thereof rising from his grave; and in respect of Christs resurrection on this day, what colour hath any other day of the week comparable hereunto, to make it fit to stand in competition with this. Yes, saith D.

Fourthly, he excepts against the argument drawne from Christs Resurrection; denying that therehence it followes that that day was to bee consecrated to God. But herein hee opposeth all the ancients; neither doe I thinke hee can alleage any one that doth not hereon build the observation of the Lords Day; which nuiversall concurrence doth manifestly argue to be more then probable: Austin as Waleus alleadgeth him professeth not as his peculiar opinion, but as he took it generally received without contradiction: that Dies Dominicus Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est; and that resuscitatio Domini consecravit nobis diem Dominicum. And Athanasius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandement; (and analogy Doctor Walaeus grants, and I wonder hee takes no notice of it here) by comparing the second Creation with the first Creation; and so Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester professeth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath, especially seeing the old must bee abrogated as ceremoniall. But the analogy I confesse may be differently shaped; Athanasius shapes it thus, that the Jewes Sabbath was the end of the first Creation; and that the Lords Day is a beginning of the second Creature; to wit, as the day of Christs resurrection; in reference whereunto the