A19142:1048
A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D.…A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D.…
A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgess his rejoinder for D. Morton The first partA fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1633
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
7. Virel (in Catechism. in praecep. 2.) extendeth the second Commandment, unto the forbidding of every humane religious likeness. The Rej. also confesseth, that the same Virel, there condemneth all superstition: to which he if he had added his definition of superstition, viz: that it is a worshipping of God by rites and Ceremonies devised of man, all would have been plain. Neither is ⟨p. 216⟩it material, that Virel pointeth not to Marc. 7. (as the Rej, noteth) seeing he groundeth his doctrine upon Matth. 15.9. where the same words are found, which in Marc. 7.7. are repeated. The Rej. therefore had no show of reason to say, that Virel was abused, in that he was cited as interpreting Mark, because (by his own confession) he doeth interpret the same words which are found in Mark.
7. Virel (in Catechism. in praecep. 2.) extendeth the second Commandement, unto the forbidding of every humane religious likenesse. The Rej. also confesseth, that the same Virel, there condēneth all superstition: to which he if he had added his definition of superstition, viz: that it is a worshiping of God by rites and Ceremonies devised of man, all would have been plaine. Neyther is ⟨p. 216⟩it materiall, that Virel pointeth not to Marc. 7. (as the Rej, noteth) seing he groundeth his doctrine upon Matth. 15.9. where the same words are found, which in Marc. 7.7. are repeated. The Rej. therfore had no shew of reason to say, that Virel was abused, in that he was cited as interpreting Marke, because (by his owne confession) he doeth interpret the same wordes which are found in Marke.