To which I answer, that in the words, as they are by the Rej. translated, he expressly condemneth all applying to signification. And if consecration were included therein, I hope the Rej. will not disavow consecrating of Churches, Church-yards, Altars, &c. Secondly, he observeth, that Junius doeth professedly sever the point of signification, from that of efficacy. As if the Repl. had confounded them, and not rather distinctly insisted upon signification only which Junius doeth as distinctly and professedly condemn, as efficacy, Nay it is the Rej. his common fault, that where the Papists speak of efficacy and signification, and our Divines distinctly answer of both, he will have no answer, no not those of Calvin, Brentius, Chemnitius, Daneus, nor this of Junius, to belong unto signification distinctly, ⟨p. 238⟩and by it self. In the third place, he telleth us, that Junius in the two next annotations, doeth allow voluntary significant Ceremonies. Let it therefore be considered, that Junius in the thirteenth annotation, insinuateth at the least his doubt, whether any voluntary significations can proceed from good: a bono, si forte. 2. He saith they proceeded from simplicity, and turned to superstition. Which phrases of his, he so interpreteth other where, that it may easily appear, he did not allow that which here he calleth simplicity. For cap. 5. annot. 15. he calleth it vanity, in opposition to the simplicity of Christ. And in the second book, de reliquijs & imaginibus, cap. 27. annot. 29. he calleth it plainly simple superstition. In the fourteenth annotation, he maintaineth this assertion:1 In divine things no shadows are rightly used in the Church but what God hath instituted. But (saith the Rej.) he doeth by name allow standing in prayer, on the Lords days, as a significant Ceremony, as also holy bread: annot. 10. Whereas Junius testifieth plainly, in the 9. note, immediately before, how he did only excuse, as comparatively tolerable, such ancient Ceremonies of the Fathers. Primum suit tolerabile: Patrum simplicitatem piam excusamus. So that Junius being seen in his own posture, and the reporters in their colours, let the Reader judge, where is the cause of shame and blushing?
To which I answer, that in the wordes, as they are by the Rej. translated, he expresly condemneth all applijnge to signification. And if consecration were included therein, I hope the Rej. will not disavow consecrating of Churches, Churche-yardes, Altars, &c. Secōdly, he observeth, that Iunius doeth professedly sever the poynt of signification, from that of efficacie. As if the Repl. had confounded them, and not rather distinctly insisted upon •ignification onely which Iunius doeth as distinctly and professedly condemne, as efficacíe, Nay it is the Rej. his common fault, that where the Papists speake of efficacie and signification, and our Divines distinctly answer of both, he will have no answ•r, no not those of Calvin, Brentius, Chemnitius, Daneus, nor this of Iunius, to belonge unto signification distinctly, ⟨p. 238⟩and by it self. In the third place, he telleth us, that Iunius in the two next annotations, doeth allow voluntarie significant Ceremonies. Let it therfore be considered, that Iunius in the thirteenth annotation, insinuateth at the least his doubt, whether any voluntarie significations can proceed from good: a bono, si forte. 2. He sayth they proceeded from simplicitie, and turned to superstition. Which phrases of his, he so interpreteth other where, that it may easily appear, he did not allow that which here he calleth simplicitie. For cap. 5. annot. 15. he calleth it vanitie, in opposition to the simp•icitie of Christ. And in the second booke, de reliquijs & imaginibus, cap. 27. annot. 29. he calleth it plainely simple superstition. In the fourteenth annotation, he mainteyneth this assertion:1 In divine things no shadowes are rightly used in the Church but what God hath instituted. But (sayth the Rej.) he doeth by name allow standing in prayer, on the Lordes dayes, as a significant Ceremonie, as also holybread: annot. 10. Wheras Iunius testifieth plainly, in the 9. note, immediatly before, how he did onely excuse, as comparatively tolerable, suche ancient Ceremonies of the Fathers. Primum suit tolerabile: Patrum simplicitatem piam excusamus. So that Iunius being seen in his owne posture, and the reporters in their colours, let the Reader judge, where is the cause of shame and blushing?
- 1In rebus divinis, & sacris ad Ecclesiam pertinentibus, mull te adumbrationes in Ecclesia recte adhibentur, nisi quas instituit Deus.In rebus divinis, & sacris ad Ecclesiam pertinentibus, mul te adumbrationes in Ecclesia recte adhibentur, nisi quas instituit Deus.
