A19142:1577
A19142:1577
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.
Where first he interpreteth the garments to be a clean conscience. And secondly that he requireth for the outward garments, is only they be clean without any note of difference between the Ministers garment and the peoples.
Where first he interpreteth the garments to be a cleane conscience. And secondly that he requireth for the outward garments, is onely they be cleane without any note of differe•ce betweene the Ministers garment and the peoples.
To admit these words spoken not of the Priests in the Temple, but of Christian Ministers, this [alter habitus] was a better garment for the time of public duty, as Nepotian had, not any d•fferinge attire from that of the assembly. Thus much for Hi•rome.1
To admitt these wordes spoken not of the Preists in the Temple, but of Christian Ministers, this [alter habitus] was a better garment for the time of publike duetie, as Nepotian had, not any d•fferinge attire from that of the assembly. Thus much for Hi•rome.1
Chrysostom when he saith, [This is your dignity, stability▪ crown, not that you walk through the Church in a white coat. Hom. 83. in Mat. necessarily requireth the same interpretation. For this most white coat was no ⟨p. 510⟩other then the better sort of people did usually wear, as well in other Countries, as at Rome, as hath been showed by the Ambassadors of Rhodes, and the shipmen of Egypt. Only the Bishops in humility thought it too sumptuous for daily use, and reserved it for the time of their public function.
Chrysostome when he saith, [This is your dignity, stability▪ crowne, not that you walk through the Church in a white coate. Hom. 83. in Mat. necessarily requireth the same interpretation. For this most white coate was no ⟨p. 510⟩other then the better sort of people did usually weare, as wel in other Countries, as at Rome, as hath bene shewed by the Embassadours of Rhodes, and the shipmen of Aegypt. Onely the Bishops in humili•ie thought it too sumptuous for daily use, and reserved it for the tyme of their publike function.
And therefore Sisninius a Novatian Bishop; living in Constantinople at the same time with Chrysostom, and clothing himself not only in his Ministry, but for his ordinary raiment, in white, was demanded by one, [Greek or Hebrew] &c. where it is to be observed,1 It was an unwonted garment in ordinary use for a Bishop, no• for other men: and unwonted in ordinary use, not in divine use, in which the Bishop was allowed without any grudge, such dignity of apparel as was then received by men of best place.
And therefore Sisninius a Novatian Bishop; livinge in Constantinople at the same tyme with Chrysostome, and clothinge himselfe not onely in his Ministery, but for his ordinarie rayment, in white, was demaunded by one, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 &c. where it is to be observed,1 It was an unwonted garment in ordinary use for a Bishop, no• for other men: and unwonted in ordinarie use, not in divine use, in which the Bishop was allowed without any grudge, such dignitie of apparall as was then received by men of best place.
That of Chrysostome hom. 6. ad popul. Antioch. is [palea.] I have troubled you with many words, but the truth is so overswayed with prejudice, that to my poor power I would disburden it a little if I can.
That of Chrysostome hom. 6. ad popul. Antioch. is [palea.] I have troubled you with many wordes, but the truth is so overswayed with prejudice, that to my poore power I would disburden it a litle if I can.
1. The Def. his first reason (by the Rejoinder his interpretation) is, that by our assertion, the Church shall loose a part of her Christian liberty: because if she may not use human Ceremonies a•used unto Idolatry and superstition, she may use none at all. Now 1. The Replier granted the conclusion, being understood of human significant Ceremonies. And thereto the Rej. opposeth nothing, but that there is the same reason of all other Ceremonies; and that one Did•clave doeth not grant this of sitting at the Lords Supper, though he confess it to be a human significant Ceremony. But both these answers are void of trueth. For Circumstances of Order and Decency ▪ which are sometime called Ceremonies, and here understood, are neither mere human institutions, nor unnecessary (which is part of the question) but commanded of God, as often hath been showed. Neither doeth Didoclave any where confess Sitting at the Lords Supper, to be a human Ceremony. 2. It seemeth very strange to me, that appointing & using of human significant unnecessary Ceremonies, notoriously known to have been, and be abused unto Idolatry, should be fetched from Christian Liberty.
1. THe Def. his first reason (by the Rejoynder his interpretation) is, that by our assertion, the Church shall loose a part of her Christian liberty: because if she may not use human Ceremonies a•used unto Idolatry and superstition, she may use none at all. Now 1. The Replier granted the conclusion, being understood of human significant Ceremonies. And thereto the Rej. opposeth nothing, but that there is the same reason of all other Ceremonies; and that one Did•clave doeth not grant this of sitting at the Lords Supper, though he confesse it to be a human significant Ceremonie. But both these answers are voyd of trueth. For Circumstances of Order and Decencie ▪ which are sometime called Ceremonies, and heer understood, are neyther meer human institutions, nor unnecessarie (which is part of the quaestion) but commanded of God, as often hath been shewed. Neyther doeth Didoclave any where confesse Sitting at the Lords Supper, to be a human Ceremonie. 2. It seemeth very strange to me, that appointing & using of human significant unnecessarie Ceremonies, notoriously knowen to have been, and be abused unto Idolatrie, should be fetched from Christian Libertie.
I have considered what is spoken of Christian liberty, in ⟨p. 498⟩the Scripture, and what I could find written of it by Divines: and thereout observed much against these Ceremonies (as is alleged in the sixth general Argument, which the Rejoinder was not hasty to come unto, in eight or nine years) but nothing either for their imposing, or their using.
I have considered what is spoken of Christian libertie, in ⟨p. 498⟩the Scripture, and what I could finde written of it by Divines: and therout observed much against these Ceremonies (as is alleged in the sixt general Argument, which the Rejoynder was not hastie to come unto, in eight or nine years) but nothing eyther for their imposing, or their using.
The Rejoinder meaneth by the Church (in England) the Convocation house; and by Christian liberty, their licentiousness, in Abridging Gods people of that liberty which Christ hath left unto them. So that, as in some parts of Germany, and Polonia, the Noble men stand mightily for the Liberty of their Country; And yet when the course of things is well weighed, that liberty is only licence for them to oppress the common people, or Boors; whom they keep under as slaves, or little better; whose goods they take from them upon every slight pretence; whose lives (in some places) can scarce satisfy them for the life of a stag, if they shoot one, spoiling their corn, even so, this Christian liberty is only for our Convocation-house to oppress the Congregations of Christ, as they do.
The Rejoynder meaneth by the Church (in England) the Convocation house; and by Christian libertie, their licentiousnesse, in Abridging Gods people of that libertie which Christ hath left unto them. So that, as in some parts of Germanie, and Polonia, the Noble men stand mightilie for the Libertie of their Countrie; And yet when the course of thinges is well weighed, that libertie is onely licence for them to oppresse the common people, or Boores; whome they keep under as slaves, or litle better; whose goods they take from them upon every slight praetence; whose lives (in some places) can scarce satisfie them for the life of a stagge, if they shoot one, spoiling their corne, even so, this Christian libertie is onely for our Convocation-house to oppresse the Congregations of Christ, as they doe.
2. The Defender his second reason, was such, as the Repl. could find no conclusion in, but that somethings abused, may afterward be rightly used: which he granted. The Rejoinder addeth, that his reason did conclude this of some human Ceremonies, from the Law of shadows. He said in deed, among other instances, that a Man or Woman, legally unclean, might he legally cleansed or purged. And can he conclude from Men and Women, to human unnecessary Ceremonies? He may as well conclude, that because ⟨p. 513⟩in a fretting leprosy, the leprous mans head may not be cut off, nor his body burned; therefore his infected garments were not to be burnt, nor the hair of his head and beard cut off.
2. The Defender his second reason, was such, as the Repl. could finde no conclusion in, but that somethings abused, may afterward be rightly used: which he granted. The Rejoynder addeth, that his reason did conclude this of some human Ceremonies, from the Law of shadowes. He sayd in deed, among other instances, that a Man or Woman, legally unclean, might he legally cleansed or purged. And can he conclude from Men and Women, to human unnecessarie Ceremonies? He may as well conclude, that because ⟨p. 513⟩in a fretting leprosie, the leprous mans head may not be cutt off, nor his body burned; therfor his infected garments were not to be burnt, nor the hayre of his head and beard cutte off.
The Replier also granted that Surplices might be turned into under garments for poor people; and wooden Crosses given them for firing.
The Rejoinder answereth 1. that this is no use of Ceremonies, as Ceremonies. As if he himself did alway speak formally!
The Rejoynder answereth 1. that this is no use of Ceremonies, as Ceremonies. As if he himself did allway speak formally!
The sentence immediately going before, was of things abused: And so this addition was of those things which are made Ceremonies. Yet if that be true, which the Rejoinder affirmed pag. 570. that a Surplice, as a Ceremony, is in the kind of a Garment, then it must needs follow, that this Ceremony may be given to the poor for a garment.
The sentence immediatly goeing before, was of things abused: And so this addition was of those thinges which are made Ceremonies. Yet if that be true, which the Rejoynder affirmed pag. 570. that a Surplice, as a Ceremonie, is in the kinde of a Garment, then it must needes follow, that this Ceremonie may be given to the poor for a garment.
And if he fly to Use as necessary to make a Ceremony, as he doeth in his Definition of a Ceremony, it may be as well questioned, whether a Shirt be a garment out of use when it is off a mans body? For a garment is a Ceremony, by the Rejoinder his Definition. And so it may be questioned, whether any Shirt, or other Garment was made, or washed, when no man had it on? His 2. answer, that M. Parker calleth them Devils, and jarring on the same string, would fright men from burning of Idols, as he did in Germany, who when men were burning of wooden Idols, bored a hole in one, into which he stopped some gunpowder; so that the Idol being in the stove to burn, the gun-powder brake the ⟨p. 514⟩stove together with the windows of the room, in pieces; and that was imputed by some to the Idol, or Saint, and by others, to the Devil. But (saith the Rejoinder) from hence it followeth, that th•re is a change of Law: because the Jews might not convert the matter of Idols to their private use. And so much we grant; urging only the equity of those Laws. Then (addeth he) the Abridgement hath abused the World, in alleging those Laws, as binding Christians now, as much as they did the Jews. But with this out-cry no man will be troubled, that noteth how they are to be understood only according to their question, of human unnecessary Ceremonies, as they are such. For the Second Commandment doeth bind us as much as it did the Jews; and so the equity of particular Laws, as they illustrate the contents of that Commandment, bind us as much, though not in every other particular to so much, as they did the Jews. The sum is; those laws bind us as much from all religious use of human unnecessary Ceremonies, used or abused in Idolatry, as they did the Jews.
And if he flie to Vse as necessarie to make a Ceremonie, as he doeth in his Definition of a Ceremonie, it may be as well quaestioned, whether a Shirt be a garment out of use when it is off a mans bodie? For a garment is a Ceremonie, by the Rejoynder his Definition. And so it may be quaestioned, whether any Shirt, or other Garment was made, or washed, when no man had it on? His 2. answer, that M. Parker calleth them Devills, and jarring on the same stringe, would fright men from burning of Idols, as he did in Germanie, whoe when men were burning of wooden Idols, bored a hole in one, into which he stopped some gunpouder; so that the Idol being in the stove to burne, the gun-pouder brake the ⟨p. 514⟩
3. In the 27. Sect. the Replier could find no show of reason, beside mere affirmations. The Rejoinder findeth this Argument: If two other ways of reforming Ceremonies, beside Abolition, may be used; then abolition is not the only way. But two other ways, (namely changing or correcting) may be used. Ergo.
3. In the 27. Sect. the Replier could finde no shew of reason, beside meer affirmations. The Rejoynder findeth this Argument: If two other ways of reforming Ceremonies, beside Abolition, may be used; then abolition is not the onely way. But two other ways, (namely changing or correcting) may be used. Ergo.