The question (saith he) in that place of Bellarmine disputed, is of Ceremonies meritorious, and binding the conscience, out of the case of scandal. And is this all? Surely then the Rejoinder had no reason to object unto the Abridgers, and the Replier, abusing the Reader. For (to omit that which in the first part of our Dispute, hath been answered, concerning merit & binding) any one that looketh upon Bellarmine, de effect. Sacr. l. 2. cap. 30. may see, that he divideth the controversy betwixt us and the Papists, into six heads, the fourth is about binding the conscience, and the fifth about merit, but the third is whether the Church may appoint new Ceremonies? The Affirmative of this question Bellarmine proveth, from the Feast instituted by Mordecai, and that of Dedication, 1instituted in the Maccabees time, etc. which are the Def. and Rejoyners chief arguments for significant Ceremonies. And professeth plainly (as our men do) Our Proposition is no more but this against heretics, that the church may appoint new Ceremonies not indeed to justify us from mortal sins but to other ends. On ⟨p. 247⟩the Negative part, Bellarmine nameth Calvin, Brentius, and Chemnitius. Now the Rejoinder to darken all, confoundeth the third, & fifth question into one hotch-potch. Who then doeth abuse the Reader? Of Calvin, enough hath been said before as also of Brentius, under the title of Wittenberg Confession, Chemnitius only (being altogether passed over by the Rejoinder though he was not only propounded by the Replier, out of Bellarmine but also in the Abridgement, pag. 32,) is here to be represented, in his own words. Yet concerning Brentius first, a few words may be needful. The words of Wittenberg Confession (before cited) are plain. It is not lawful, to devise new Ceremonies, to shadow forth the trueth already laid open, and brought to light by the Gospel: as in the day light to set up Candles, to signify the light of the Gospel, or to carry banners & crosses, to signify the victory of Christ, thorough his Cross. Of which sort is all the massing attire. Of this Confession Brentius was the penman: and therefore Bellarm. citeth the same as Brentius his sentence about Ceremonies. The Rejoinder answereth 1. that Bellarm. saith only that Brentius reproveth the hallowing of water, oil. &c. consecrated to signify and work supernatural effects:
The question (sayth he) in that place of Bellarmine disputed, is of Ceremonies meritorious, and binding the conscience, out of the case of scandall. And is this all? Surely then the Rejoynder had no reason to object unto the Abrigers, and the Replier, abusing the Reader. For (to omitte that which in the first part of our Dispute, hath been answered, concerning merit & binding) any one that looketh upon Bellarmine, de effect. Sacr. l. 2. cap. 30. may see, that he divideth the controversie betwixt us and the Papists, into sixe heads, the fourth is about binding the conscience, and the fift about merit, but the third is whether the Churche may appoint new Ceremonies? The Afirmative of this question Bellarmine proveth, from the Feast instituted by Mordechay, and that of Dedication, 1instituted in the Machabees time, etc. which are the Def. and Rejoyners cheif arguments for significant Ceremonies. And professeth plainely (as our men doe) Our Proposition is no more but this against heretiques, that the church may appoint new Ceremonies not indeed to justifie us from mortal sins but to other ends. On ⟨p. 247⟩the Negative part, Bellarmine nameth Calvin, Brentius, and Chemnitius. Now the Rejoynder to darken all, confoundeth the third, & fift question into one hoche-poche. Who then doeth abuse the Reader? Of Calvin, enough hath been sayd before as also of Brentius, under the title of Witenberge Confession, Chemnitius onely (being altogether passed over by the Rejoinder though he was not onely propounded by the Replier, out of Bellarmine but also in the Abridgement, pag. 32,) is here to be represented, in his owne wordes. Yet concerning Brētius first, a few wordes may be needfull. The words of Wittenburge Confession (before cited) are plaine. It is not lawfull, to devize new Ceremonies, to shadow forth the trueth already layd open, and brought to light by the Gospel: as in the day light to set up Candles, to signifie the light of the Gospel, or to carry banners & crosses, to signifie the victorie of Christ, thorough his Crosse. Of which sort is all the massing attire. Of this Confessiō Brentius was the penman: and therefore Bellarm. citeth the same as Brentius his sentence about Ceremonies. The Rejoynder answereth 1. that Bellarm. sayth onely that Brentius reproveth the hallowing of water, oyle. &c. consecrated to signifie and worke supernaturall effects:
- 1Nostra propositic solum assarit, contra Haeriticos, nicer Ecclesiae •ns•ituer• novas Ceremonias, non ad just•ficandum a pec•at is mortalibus, sed ad alios fines. cap. 31.Nostra propositic solum assarit, contra Haeriticos, •icere Ecclesiae •ns•ituer• novas Ceremonias, non ad just•ficandum a pec•at is mortalibus, sed ad alios fines. cap. 31.
