A19142:1262
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. Yet because not only the Defender named a• Altar, but the Rejoinder also maintaineth it for good let us see, what may be answered unto the Replier hi• collection therefrom; namely, that if man may on hi• own head appoint an Altar (as they say) then man may appoint not only accidental worship, but also such a• is greater then some essential worship; because the Alta• which sanctifieth the Offering is greater, then the Offering Mat. 23.19? The Rejoinder here accuseth the Replie• for want of Judgement, in this allegation: because tha• which our Saviour saith, is proper to that one only Altar ⟨p. 329⟩in the Temple, by reason of the special command of God to use them, and their superadded mystical signification: whereas other Altars were only permitted, and so helps to the Offerings, but not sanctifiers of them; nay they were sanctified by the Offerings; as also the Altars of Gods appointment, in the time of Moses, Solomon, Ezra, and Maccabeus, were first sanctified by the gift that was offered on them, and so installed in their peculiar privilege, of sanctifying the Gifts which were afterwards offered upon them. For all this, no consent is showed of any Divine: Only we are bidden to see Zanchie, de Redem. lib. 1. cap. 16. thes. 2.3. Now 1. Zanchie hath nothing to the Rejoinder his purpose: he doeth not distinguish betwixt Altars commanded and Altars permitted: but saith of the commanded Altars, that they were annexed unto the acts of worship. And so he doeth of the Ark it self, and all the principal & most essential means appointed by God. What can the Rejoinder make of this? 2. The special command of God was as well for the Offerings, as for the Altar: so that cannot be the reason, why the Altar did sanctify the Offering, more then the Offering the Altar.
2. Yet because not onely the Defender named a• Altar, but the Rejoynder also mainteyneth it for good let us see, what may be answered unto the Replier hi collection therfrom; namely, that if man may on hi owne head appoint an Altar (as they say) then man may appoint not onely accidentall worship, but also suche a is greater then some essentiall worship; because the Alta which sanctifieth the Offering is greater, then the Offering