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.…

4. The Def. objected Jacobs pillar, Gen. 28.18. So ⟨p. 381⟩(•ayth the Replie• he did offer sacrifices, in other manner, and place, then after the Law, was lawful. To this the Rejoinder answereth, 1. that that which Jacob did, was not unlawful by the moral Law. But he is mistaken; not distinguishing betwixt the moral Law forbidding religious Ceremonies of mere human appointment, and allowing the same derived from Divine inspiration. So Tertullian (de Idol. cap. 5.) answereth him that defended Images by the brazen Serpent: Idem Deus, qui lege •etuit similitudinem fieri, extraordinario praecepto, serpentis •imilitudinem indixit. Si eundem Deum observas, habes le•em ejus. Imitare tu Mosem, ne facias adversus legem, simu•achrum aliquid, nisi & tibi Deus jusserit. 1. e. The same God which in his Law forbade images, did extraordinarily command the image of a Serpent. If thou wilt obey that God, thou hast his law. Imitate thou Moses, not making any image (contrary to the Law) except God command thee. So all our Divines in answer of Papists, objecting this & such like examples for will-worship) refer these doings to Divine revelation or instinct. Among these (for this cause) • reckon D. Jackson: who in his Original, pag. 332. giveth us this Catholic remedy and rule, seriously to be considered. Such actions as have been managed by Gods Spirit, suggested by secret instinct, or extracted by extraordinary and special occasions, are then only lawful in others, when they are begotten by like occasions, or brought forth by like impulsions.

4. The Def. objected Iacobs pillar, Gen. 28.18. So ⟨p. 381⟩(•ayth the Replie• he did offer sacrifices, in other manner, and place, then after the Law, was lawfull. To this the Rejoynder answereth, 1. that that which Iacob did, was not unlawfull by the morall Law. But he is mistaken; not disinguishing betwixt the morall Law forbidding religious Ceremenies of meere human appointment, and allowing the same derived from Divine inspiration. So Tertullian (de Idol. cap. 5.) answereth him that defended Images by the brazen Serpent: Idem Deus, qui lege etuit similitudinem fieri, extraordinario praecepto, serpentis imilitudinem indixit. Si eundem Deum observas, habes leem ejus. Imitare tu Mosem, ne facias adversus legem, simuachrum aliquid, nisi & tibi Deus jusserit. 1. e. The same God which in his Law forbad images, did extraordinarily command the image of a Serpent. If thou wilt obey that God, thou hast his law. Imitate thou Moses, not making any image (contrarie to the Law) except God commande thee. So all our Divines in answer of Papists, objecting this & such like examples for will-worship) referre these doeings to Divine revelation or instinct. Among these (for this cause) reckon D. Iackson: whoe in his Originall, pag. 332. giveth us this Catholick remedie and rule, seriously to be considered. Such actions as have been menaged by Gods Spirit, suggested by secret instinct, or extracted by extraordinary and speciall occasions, are then onely lawfull in others, when they are begotten by like occasions, or brought forth by like impulsions.