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.…

Three wordy exceptions (he useth to call such things quarrels) the Rejoinder here maketh: one that the Replier put in not altogether the same opinion, for not the same: an other, that he mentioned only opinion, whereas the Defender joined to it, intention: the third, that Crosses and Surplices, are wrought upon, as they are material. But the two later of these are now voided, by my repetition of the reason: and the former is the Rejoinder his own interpretation, pag. 575.576. namely, if our opinion be not altogether the same, then it is not simply the same.

Three wordy exceptions (he useth to call such things quarrels) the Rejoynder heer maketh: one that the Replier put in not altogether the same opinion, for not the same: an other, that he mentioned onely opinion, wheras the Defender joyned to it, intention: the third, that Crosses and Surplices, are wrought upon, as they are material. But the two later of these are now voided, by my repe•ition of the reason: and the former is the Rejoynder his owne interpretation, pag. 575.576. namely, if our opinion be not altogether the same, then it is not simplie the same.

14. Instance was made (by the Replier) in the Altar erected by Uriah, 2. King. 16. which was idolatrous, like that of Damascus, though for another intention.

14. Instance was made (by the Replier) in the Altar erected by Vriah, 2. King. 16. which was idolatrous, like that of Damascus, though for another intention.

The Rejoinder answereth 1. that this Altar was not formally the same with that of Damascus. But the formality of that Altar, containing all the idolatrousness that was in it, or belonged unto it, and that Idolatry being in part common to Uriah Altar, with that of Damascus, it must needs be in that part the same, though not altogether. Idolatry against the second Commandment, hath some formal community with that which is against the first. He addeth 2. that if Achaz had intention of offering to false Gods, then his intention was the same with theirs at Damascus. But yet there would be found a difference of intention in Achaz, in that he intended worship both to the true God, and to those false; whereas they at Damascus were only for the false. And Uriah intention might be (as it seemeth to have been) only to satisfy the Kings mind, that he might keep his favour,