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…

Antonius Fayus: 14. Junius: 15. Zepperus: 16. Martinius: 17. Alstedius. The same is justified by Rivetus, who voucheth no less than thirty Writers of note to concur in this; Now let the indifferent judge on whose side is the miracle this Prefacer speaks of, in his rhetorical amplifications, on his side, or on ours. Yet not one English Divine is mentioned, either by Walaeus or Rivetus amongst this number. 2. Then as for Papists: Tostatus indeed disputes against this opinion of ours, but his reasons I have answered; and Catarinus a Popish Prelate, as well as Abulensis, is acknowledged by this Author to oppose Tostatus in this; neither hath he or Doctor Prideaux undertaken to answer him. Only this Prefacer, after his bold fashion, saith, that Catarinus took up arms against Tostatus with ill success, it hath been manifest that for ought doth appear, Catarinus hath had better success than Tostatus; For Pererius takes Tostatus his part, yet all the Rhemists on Apoc. 1. 10. do manifest themselves to take part with Catarinus, and Gomarus acknowledgeth as much of Marius. And Rivetus also allegeth Augustinus Steuchus, Genebrard, Jacobus Solianus, Cornelius de Lapide, Emmanuel Sa, and Ribera, all concurring against Tostatus and all Papists, yea, many of them Jesuits. Hereby let the reader judge of the modesty of this Author; and on whose side the feigned miracle is, on his side, or on ours. For it is manifest hitherto, that the men he speaks of, of several persuasions otherwise, are by far, more for us than for him. But it may be in this particular, his glory is, that the Fathers are rather for his opinion than for us. But upon what ground? Is it from any evidence of Scripture? nothing less, not one of them building hereupon; and as for evidences, they ⟨p. 152⟩bring none, save that the Scripture doth not particulate, that the Patriarchs of old observed the Sabbath. Yet it was not to be held a general rule, that Argumentum non valet ab authoritate negativè; the argument drawn from authority doth not hold negatively in matter of fact. Secondly, not only our Divines, as Hospinian and Walaeus, that the meaning of the Fathers is only this, that the Patriarchs did not observe it after a Jewish manner, but Jacobus Salianus a Papist affirms the same particularly of Tertullian; as Rivetus voucheth him in his answer to Gomarus, pag. 21.

Antonius Fayus: 14. Iunius: 15. Zepperus: 16. Martinius: 17. Alstedius. The same is justified by Rivetus, who voucheth no lesse than thirty Writers of note to concurre in this; Now let the indifferent judge on whose side is the miracle this Prefacer speakes of, in his rhetoricall amplifications, on his side, or on ours. Yet not one English Divine is mentioned, either by Walaeus or Rivetus amongst this number. 2. Then as for Papists: Tostatus indeed disputes against this opinion of ours, but his reasons I have answered; and Catarinus a Popish Prelate, as well as Abulensis, is acknowledged by this Author to oppose Tostatus in this; neither hath he or Doctor Prideaux undertaken to answer him. Onely this Prefacer, after his bold fashion, saith, that Catarinus tooke up armes against Tostatus with ill successe, it hath beene manifest that for ought doth appeare, Catarinus hath had better successe than Tostatus; For Pererius takes Tostatus his part, yet all the Rhemists on