A19142:1490
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
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 third place, he showeth, how Oecolampadius, allowed of the terms of Sacrifice, Altar, and omitted no wonted Ceremonies, but only the latin tongue, in reading the Epistle, and Gospel. But if the Rejoinder had considered, that terms are no Ceremonies; and that Oecolampadiu• allowed and Practised this last mentioned imperfect reformation, ⟨p. 457⟩when he was (in comparison) but a Novice in religion, before he came to Basil, he would not have so exulted in this quotation, as he doeth: The Abridgers (saith he) never (I think) read Oecolampadius his Epistles. But he hath no just reason to think, but some of them had read those Epistles; unless he can show from whence else they had this testimony. I have read them long since, and remember well, that to be true which now I said. How it stood at Basil, with Popish Ceremonies, when Oecolampadius was Minister there, it appeareth out of Zuinglius, his Fellow-Minister (de Baptismo) in these words, worthy to be recited, though somewhat too large for this place:1 I will easily grant the Catabaptists, and confess, that the strife which they made about Baptism, hath not been altogether without benefit: For hence it comes to pass, that those things which the foolish superstition of human reason had added thereunto (as Exorcisms, Spittings, Salt, and such like more) being brought into question, are now become vain & unprofitable in every mans judgment. We deny not but we received those things from our Fathers. — Howsoever it is evident they were not of God, but set up of man; which also it may be, (consideration had to that time) might have been borne; because that as the Israelites heretofore affected with a desire of Egypt, looked back to the delicacies thereof, so they which lately are come over to Christ, were a little propense and prone to Heathenish religion, which contained many such rites. ⟨p. 458⟩And these, 2Christian m•n were wont to turn into other use, that they might in time the bett•r be freed from that superstition. But how much better had it been, if all and every of those things had been abolished at the first.