A19142:1219
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
Part › Chapter 3 › SECT. 7. Concerning the Oath-gesture of Abrahams Servant.
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.
Neither is the Repliers observation (that as imposition of hands, in those parts, did always signify some superiority: so this underposi•ion of hands was, by proportion, fit to signify inferiority, or subjection) this I say was not a mere fiction, as the Rejoinder would have it. For, beside that the meaning was, of the usual imposing of hands in blessing, where the lesser is blessed of the greater, as Scripture teacheth: the Rejoinder hath brought but two examples, to infringe the generality of it Act. 13.2. Lev. 1.4. and in both of these it holdeth. For they that laid hands on Paul and Silas, did it not only in the name of the whole society, which in such cases hath some dispensative superiority over particular members; but also by Commission from God, which gave them in that business superiority. And he that brought a beast to be sacrificed, Lev. 1. had certainly power over it. If the Rejoinder could have showed us, where, and when, a servant imposed his hand upon his Masters head, or a son upon his fathers, that had been to the purpose. We on the contrary say with Tostatus on Gen. 47. that the putting under of the hand, was never used, but by an inferior, to his superior.
Neyther is the Repliers observation (that as imposition of hands, in those parts, did allways signifie some superioritie: so this underposi•ion of hands was, by proportion, fit to signifie inferioritie, or subjection) this I say was not a meer fiction, as the Rejoynder would have it. For, beside that the meaning was, of the usuall imposing of hands in blessing, wher the lesser is blessed of the greater, as Scripture teacheth: the Rejoynder hath brought but two examples, to infringe the generalitie of it Act. 13.2. Lev. 1.4. and in both of these it houldeth. For they that layd hands on Paul and Silas, did it not onely in the name of the wholle societie, which in suche cases hath some dispensative superioritie over particular members; but allso by Commission from God, which gave them in tht buisinesse superioritie. And he that brought a beast to be sacrifized,