The rest of the second reply of Thomas Cartvurihgt [sic]The rest of the second replie of Thomas Cartvurihgt [sic]

Then he saith, that if it were▪ yet it were but a temporal commandment, ⟨p. 62⟩as the widows, the eating of blood, and washing of feet. Of the widows, hath been answered, the decree of the blood, was never a simple prohibition, after our Sau. Christ (whose blood that did ^ashadow) had finished his oblation: but only to the support of the Ives. So that even then, when that decree was made, the faithful, both of the Ives or Gentiles, might have eat it: so they did it without offence of those which were weak. And if there were now any Jew weak in faith, whom we should by eating of blood, drive from the gospel: I doubt not, but that until he be fully instructed of the liberty I have in Christ, I ought to use the same charitable support towards him. And this appeareth manifestly, both in ^bthe same, and other places: where ^cS. Paul which gave out that decree to be kept, teacheth generally the free use of all meats, so it be without offence.

Then he saith, that if it were▪ yet it were but a temporal commandement, ⟨p. 62⟩as the widowes, the eating of blud, and washing of feet. Of the widowes, hath bene answered, the decree of the blud, was neuer a simple prohibition, after our Sau. Christ (whose blud that did ^ashadow) had finished his oblation: but onely to the support of the Iues. So that euen then, when that decree was made, the faithful, boeth of the Iues or Gentiles, might haue eat yt: so they did yt withowt offence of those which were weak. And if there were now any Iue weak in faith, whom we should by eating of blud, driue from the gospel: I dowt not, but that vntil he be fully instructed of the liberty I haue in Christ, I owght to vse the same charitable support towardes him. And this appeareth manifestly, boeth in