11. B. Jewell was cited, as approving Tertullians judgement concerning the unlawfulness of Garlands, though not evil of themselves, because they had appearance of evil. Well (saith the Rejoinder) then they were not evil in themselves, by abuse. That is, abuse did not make ⟨p. 469⟩them evil, before they were abused. which is true. But •f B. Jewel allowed Tertullians judgement (as the Rej. granteth) by the abuse they became evil, and unlawful. Appearance of that which is evil in it self, is evil in it self: but the abuse was evil in it self, and the after use was an appearance of that abuse, in Jewels judgement. Ergo. It was also alleged out of Jewels Ap. c. 2. div. 9. that the Papists had so misused sundry Ceremonies, that we may not longer continue them without great conscience. The Rejoinder answereth, 1. That this was spoken of other Ceremonies, not of those in question. 2. That Jewel was a Bishop, and used Episcopal garments. 3. That upon his death-bed, he professed, that he would not grieve any of his brethren, who were of contrary opinion, concerning the Ceremonies. Now 1. If other Ceremonies (among which yet holy Garments were objected by Harding, in that place) may by abuse, become unlawful, what privilege hath the Cross, as much abused as any? 2. As Jewel was a Bishop of England, so Cajetan was a Cardinal of Rome; and therefore as Cajetan condemned many Romish superstitions, in so much as when he died, he refused to be buried in a Church, as the story of his life, prefixed to his Commentaries on Job testifieth, so might B. Jewel condemn some superstitious Ceremonies in England. As for his wearing of Episcopal Garments, let D. Fulke answer in his Repeal of Heskins Parliament, pag. 412. Mr. Heskins girdeth at the proclaimer (B Jewel) as •earing Aaron's garments for a Bishopric. But if the Popish Priests had no more pleasure to say Mass in their vestments, then the Proclaimer to minister in Copes, I think the common ⟨p. 470⟩sort of Papists would have less devotion to the Masses, the• Gods people have to the Communion, when it is ministered without any ceremonial attire. 3. Those words which the Rejoinder allegeth out of his Godly speech, a little before his departure, make much against the Rejoinder, because they show 1. That many then opposed our Ceremonies as unlawful, which the Rejoinder denieth.
11. B. Iewell was cited, as approving Tertullians judgement concerning the unlawfulnesse of Garlands, though not evill of themselves, because they had appearance of evill. Well (sayth the Rejoynder) then they were not evill in themselves, by abuse. That is, abuse did not make ⟨p. 469⟩them evill, before they were abused. which is true. But •f B. Iewel allowed Tertullians judgement (as the Rej. granteth) by the abuse they became evill, and unlawfull. Appearance of that which is evill in it selfe, is evill in it selfe: but the abuse was evill in it selfe, and the after use was an appearance of that abuse, in Iewels judgement. Ergo. It was also alleged out of Iewels Ap. c. 2. div. 9. that the Papists had so misused sundry Ceremonies, that wee may not longer continue them without great conscience. The Rejoynder answereth, 1. That this was spoken of other Ceremonies, not of those in quaestion. 2. That Iewel was a Bishop, and used Episcopall garments. 3. That upon his death-bed, he professed, that he would not grieve any of his brethren, who were of contrary opinion, concerning the Ceremonies. Now 1. If other Ceremonies (among which yet holy Garments were objected by Harding, in that place) may by abuse, become unlawfull, what priviledge hath the Crosse, as much abused as any? 2. As Iewel was a Bishop of England, so Cajetan was a Cardinall of Rome; and therefore as Cajetan condemned many Romish superstitions, in so much as when he died, he refused to be buried in a Church, as the story of his life, prefixed to his Commentaries on Iob testifieth, so might B. Iewel condemne some superstitious Ceremonies in England. As for his wearing of Episcopall Garments, let D. Fulke answer in his Repeale of Heskins Parliament, pag. 412. Mr. Heskins girdeth at the proclaimer (B Iewel) as •earing Aarons garments for a Bishopricke. But if the Popish Priests had no more pleasure to say Masse in their vestiments, then the Proclaimer to minister in Coapes, I thinke the common ⟨p. 470⟩sort of Papists would have lesse devotion to the Masses, the• Gods people have to the Communion, when it is ministred without any ceremoniall attire. 3. Those words which the Rejoynder allegeth out of his Godly speech, a little before his departure, make much against the Rejoynder, because they shew 1. That many then opposed our Ceremonies as unlawfull, which the Rejoynder denyeth.
