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.…

After this, the Rejoinder allegeth, that it cannot be said of these our Ceremonies, (as Tertullian said of the habits ⟨p. 436⟩he opposed) that they were dedicated and appointed to the service of an Idol, from the first, and never used by any godly men. But first, this can be no good explication of those words: we may borrow nothing from an Idol: i. e. nothing which hath not been used by some godly man. Secondly, he saith not, that no godly man had ever used Crowns. Thirdly, Every old usage of godly men, doeth not lessen the Idolatry of it. For then sacrificing of Oxen, should now be less Idolatry, then of unclean Beasts. After these skirmishes, the Rejoinder finding that there was no holding of ground with such soldiers as the Defender had mustered, presseth new▪ at his own charges. And first he bringeth in one persuasion, that Tertullians clear and professed judgement, was directly against our assertion, and for conformity: because he saith▪ Finally those things agree to our, ¹and the use of others above us, and to the things of God, and to Christ himself, which indeed are profitable to the life of man. Meaning the Sun, the Moon, the Stars, Fire, Earth, and such like good creatures of God. If this be against us, then we are also against our selves. For never any Non-Conformist, in England, or (as I think) in the World, dreamed (no not in an ague) any thing to the contrary. And that this may directly make for Conformity, the Rejoinder must show, how our Ceremonies are mere profitable helps unto the necessity of mans life? In the next place he maketh use of Diversion, alleging that Tertullian brought other arguments withal, against the Garland. But we keep our standing upon the argument of borrowing from the service of Idols: let others shift for themselves.

After this, the Rejoynder allegeth, that it cannot be sayd of these our Ceremonies, (as Tertullian sayd of the habits ⟨p. 436⟩he opposed) that they were dedicated and appointed to the service of an Idol, from the first, and never used by any godly men. But first, this can be no good explication of those words: we may borrow nothing from an Idoll: i. e. nothing which hath not been used by some godlyman. Secondly, he sayth not, that no godly man had ever used Crounes. Thirdly, Every olde usage of godly men, doeth not lessen the Idolatrie of it. For then sacrifizing of Oxen, should now be lesse Idolatrie, then of unclean Beasts. After these skirmishes, the Rejoynder finding that ther was no houlding of ground with such soldiers as the Defender had mustered, presseth new at his owne charges. And first he bringeth in one persuasion, that Tertullians clear and professed judgement, was directly against our assertion, and for conformitie: because he sayth Finaly those things agree to our,