A19142:1274
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. 23.24.25.26. Concerning Love-Feasts.
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.
4. It was added also by the Replier that Danaeus (upon the same place) calleth it a childish distribution. True (saith the Rejoynd.) but he meaneth by Apostolical, things determined by the Apostles, by their ordinary faculty, as ⟨p. 336⟩Pastors, and yet having the same authority with their writings: Now let the Reader mark, that the Defender his charge of unlearned rudeness, depended on this, if Apostolical traditions may be called Divine, as being commanded of God. To talk here of faculty, ordinary, pastors, authority equal to Scripture, &c. it is nothing else, but to bring him unto loss. Neither is, or can this limitation be justified by any other proof then the Rej. his own testimony.
4. It was added also by the Replier that Danaeus (upon the same place) calleth it a childish distribution. True (sayth the Rejoynd.) but he meaneth by Apostolicall, thinges determined by the Apostles, by their ordinarie facultie, as ⟨p. 336⟩Pastors, and yet having the same authoritie with their writings: Now let the Reader mark, that the Defender his charge of unlearned rudenesse, depended on this, if Apostolicall traditions may be called Divine, as being commanded of God. To talke heere of faculty, ordinary, pastors, authority equall to Scripture, &c. it is nothing else, but to bring him unto losse. Neither is, or can this limitation be justified by any other proofe then the Rej. his owne testimonie.
5. When the Repl. spake of more learned men allowing of the foresaid position, and rejecting the distinction made betwixt Divine and Apostolical traditions; the Rejoinder stayeth him, and confesseth that the distinction is ridiculous, in the Papists sense: yet (saith he) in another sense (not telling what) it may stand. And is the great charge of a most unlearned Position come now to this: the contrary words in some sense may stand? Be sparing (my masters) in crying down your poor neighbours, for such extreme want of learning, when you opposite learning can scarce stand in any sense.