A19142:1163
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.
11. Presently after the Def. had excused Jewish Rites, if they were used without Jewish opinion, he confesseth (without distinction) that all Jewish-Rites are abolished. Wherein the Repl. noted a contradiction. But the Rejoinder (to help at a dead lift) distinguisheth betwixt Jewish Ceremonies, as they were typical or figurative ⟨p. 278⟩and necessary, and Jewish Ceremonies, as they are morally significant, and free. Now for necessity and freedom, enough hath been spoken in the first part. In the other distinction, he disliketh nothing but typical signification: so that (in his imagination) any Jewish Ceremony may be now used, and by our Convocation-house imposed upon us, if typical signification of Christ to come be taken from it. And is not this a Christian doctrine of Ceremonies; that sacrificing of a lam•e to signify Christ already come (as D. Reinolds ag. Hart. cap. 8. div. 4. doeth conclude from the like answer of Hart • is now lawful? It may be he will answer, that he doeth not allow of Ceremonies signifying Christ at all.
11. Presently after the Def. had excused Iewish Rites, if they were used without Iewi•h opinion, he cō fesseth (without distinction) that all Iewish-Rites are abolished. Wherin the Repl. noted a contradiction. But the Rejoynder (to helpe at a dead lift) distinguisheth betwixt Iewish Ceremonies, as they were typicall or figurative ⟨p. 278⟩and necessarie, and Iewish Ceremonies, as they are morally significant, and free. Now for necessitie and freedome, enough hath been spoken in the first part. In the other distinction, he disliketh nothing but typicall signification: so that (in his imagination) any Iewish Ceremonie may be now used, and by our Convocation-house imposed upon us, if typicall signification of Christ to come be taken from it. And is not this a Christian doctrine of Ceremonies; that sacrifying of a lam•e to signifie Christ allready come (as D. Reinolds ag. Hart. cap. 8. div. 4. doeth conclude from the like answer of Hart • is now lawfull? It may be he will answer, that he doeth not allow of Ceremonies signifying Christ at all.