A19142:1275
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.
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.
5. When the Repl. spake of more learned men allowing of the foresaid position, and rejecting the distinction made betwixt Divine and Apostolicall traditions; the Rejoynder 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 contrarie words in some sense may stand? Be sparing (my masters) in crying down your poore neighbours, for such extreame want of learning, when you• opposite learning can scarce stand in any sense.
6. After these testimonies, the Replier inquired into the Logic of this distinction between Divine and Apostolical traditions. But the Rejoinder correcteth his interpretation, and saith this distinction is taken chiefly from the different Authors, Christ, and the Apostles. Be it so: yet it were not extreme rudeness, to say that whatsoever the Apostles as the Apostles of Christ, appointed, that Christ himself appointed. But saith the Rejoinder, some things were appointed by Christ himself immediately, and others by the Apostles occasionally. ⟨p. 337⟩Which is true: yet 1. this overthroweth that which was even now alleged, that this distinction is chiefly taken from different Authors: because this is only a difference of manner, as Polanus (Syntag. lib. 1. cap. 47.) doeth clearly manifest, in his large confutation of this self same distinction. 2. By the same or somewhat like reason, a distinction may be made, betwixt the word of God, and the word of the Prophets, 3. It were worth the knowing, upon what occasion these Feasts were ordained by the Apostles?