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.…

5. Tertullian (out of Coron. milit.) was cited in the Abr. thus: We may give nothing to the service of an Idol; nor borrow any thing from it. If it be against religion, to sit at table in an Idols temple; what is it, to be seen in the habit of an Idol. The Defender answered, he spake of habits then dedicated and appointed unto the service of Idols: but our Ministers are not urged, to reverence the Mass-Priests brazen Idol, or to put on the very same Romish Surplice, now used at their Mass, even therefore, because it is Popish. Of this the Replier proveth, that this sameness is vainly alleged, and less then nothing. The Rejoinder for succour, saith that this individual sameness was a straggling soldier, and confesseth it to be taken prisoner. But in an answer grounded on dissimilitude, where the same quality is affirmed of one thing, and denied of another, if that quality be straggling, in either part, and so taken prisoner, the whole answer must needs be held captive. And this captive soldier may easily be taught to fight against him from whom he was taken; as once (by report) it was in this manner: A Minister in Qeen. Ell. her days, was urged by his Ordinary to wear the Surplice, who ⟨p. 435⟩after other delays, alleged, that the Surplice proffered him to put on, was the very same that the Mass-Priest was wont to sacrifice in: the Ordinary admitting that excuse, commanded another to be made: which being done, when it was brought him in the Church, he took it up, and spake thus to those praesent: Good people, the Bishop himself confessed, that the former massing Surplice, was not to be worn by a Minister of the Gospel; and judge you if this be not as like that, as one egg to another? let this therefore go after the other: and so he justly c•st it away.

5. Tertullian (out of Coron. milit.) was cited in the Abr. thus: We may give nothing to the service of an Idol; nor borrow any thing from it. If it be against religion, to sit at table in an Idols temple; what is it, to be seen in the habit of an Idol. The Defender answered, he spake of habites then dedicated and appointed unto the service of Idols: but our Ministers are not urged, to reverence the Masse-Priests brazen Idol, or to put on the very same Romish Surplice, now used at their Masse, even therfor, because it is Popish. Of this the Replier proveth, that this samenesse is vainely alleged, and lesse then nothing. The Rejoynder for succour, sayth that this individual samenesse was a stragling souldier, and confesseth it to be taken prisoner. But in an answer grounded on dissimilitude, where the same qualitie is affirmed of one thing, and denied of another, if that qualitie be stragling, in eyther part, and so taken prisoner, the wholle answer must needs be held captive. And this captive souldier may easily be taught to fight against him from whome he was taken; as once (by report) it was in this manner: A Minister in Qeen. El. her days, was urged by his Ordinarie to wear the Surplice, whoe