A19142:1142
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.
2. About this inference, many testimonies of great Divines, were alleged in the Abridgement: all which the Def. passeth by, as not worthy answer: for which, he was challenged by the Replier. The Rejoinder answereth 1. that this is wrangling, spoken not out of conscience, but out of a spirit of contradiction, etc. To which I answer nothing. But that which the Def. neglected, the Rejoinder taketh to supply, least we should brag, as it pleaseth him to phrasifie. See therefore how he dischargeth that which he undertaketh. 1. The Nicene counsel (saith he) is twice falsified: first; that it is supposed to condemn significant Ceremonies, by man devised, upon this reason, that God had abolished his own, and secondly, that the Council is affirmed to condemn such Ceremonies at all.
2. About this inference, many testimonies of great Divines, were alleged in the Abrigement: all which the Def. passeth by, as not worthy answer: for whiche, he was challenged by the Replier. The Rejoynder answereth 1. that this is wranglinge, spoken not out of conscience, but out of a spirit of contradiction, etc. To which I answer nothing. But that which the Def. neglected, the Rejoynder taketh to supplie, least we should bragge, as it pleaseth him to phrasifie. See therfore how he dischargeth that which he undertaketh. 1. The Nicen counsel (sayth he) is twice falsified: first; that it is supposed to condemne significant Ceremonies, by man devized, upon this reason, that God had abolished his owne, and secondly, that the Councel is affirmed to condemne suche Ceremonies at all.
It seemeth the Rejoinder hath more skill (about this cause) in multiplying falsities, then in dividing of them from truths. For the Nicene Council was brought in as speaking for one proposition: and the Rejoinder maketh two false assertions of that one simple axiom. Beside the words of that Council, or Constantine, speaking for it, are (in the Abridgement) only brought in as testifying this▪ that the old Ceremonies of the law, being abrogated by God, cannot (without sin) be now continued in the Church for signification. In stead of this, the Rejoinder feigneth two other propositions, and then faith, that they are two falsifications: which if they be, let him (who is the coiner of them) see how he can excuse them. The words of Constantine are: It seemed unworthy to celebrate the