A19142:1478
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 4 › SECT. 7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20. Councels, and Ancient… › Kneeling.
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.
In the conclusion, it was asked by the Replier, for what causes many other Ceremonies of the Papists were abolished, if not for these two last named? or if the same causes that abolished them, would not sweep away these, if it pleased them who have the besoms in their hand? About this the Rejoinder first, referreth the Reader to a preface set before the Service-book, and I am contented he should seek if he can find any such reasons there. Secondly, he addeth, that we which have not the besom in our hands, should not shuffle abroad the dust with our feet. No more do we (say I) but only keep it out of our eyes, and throats, so well as we can, giving reasons, why the Sweepers should not thrust it upon us, nor us for it out of the doors
In the conclusion, it was asked by the Replier, for what causes many other Ceremonies of the Papists were abolished, if not for these two last named? or if the same causes that abolished them, would notsweep away these, if it pleased them who have the beezoms in their hand? About this the Rejoynder first, referreth the Reader to a preface set before the Service-booke, and I am contented he should seeke if he can finde any such reasons there. Secondly, he addeth, that wee which have not the bezome in our hands, should not shuffle abroad the dust with our feete. No more doe we (say I) but onely keepe it out of our eyes, and throates, so well as we can, giving reasons, why the Sweepers should not thrust it upon us, nor us for it out of the doores
11. About the Gangren forbidding fasting upon the Lords-Day, many words are spent by the Rejoinder. The sum is, that such fasting is there spoken of, as was performed out of an Heretical opinion, either of necessity so to do, or of contempt of the Lords-Day. But this cannot be proved. For there being divers different editions of that Council, none of them mention opinion of necessity: and in the ordinary greek copy, there is neither contempt, nor contumacy, named, as Binius noteth. Beside, opinions and contempts, as they are inward, cannot be noted by the Church. If they were outward, in word; then not so much the fasting upon opinion, as the opinion it self, was to be condemned. If the act it self was taken for a manifestation