A19142:1654
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.
If determination by superiors were sufficient to take away the sin of a scandal. Then they do very ill that they do not (so far as is possible) determine all things indifferent, that so no danger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them. Then the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined of so many ⟨p. 6⟩indifferents; then Paul with the other Apostles might have spared a great deal of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoid offences about some indifferent things. A far shorter way had been either to determine the matter finally, or else to have given order that the Churches should among themselves determine it at home.
If determination by superiours were sufficient to take away the sinn of a scandall. Then they doe very ill that they doe not (so farr as is possible) determine all things indifferent, that so no danger may be left in giving of offence by the use of them. Then the Church of Rome is to be praised in that she hath determined of so many ⟨p. 6⟩indifferents; then Paul with the other Apostles might have spared a great deale of labour in admonishing the Churches how they should avoyd offences about some indifferent things. A farre shorter way had beene either to determine the matter finally, or else to have given order that the Churches should among themselves determine it at home.
But say that the Archbishop of Corinth (for now I suppose such a one) had called his Convocation, and with consent of his Clergy had determined that men might, and for testifying of liberty should, at a certain time eat of such and such meats which men formerly doubted of: would not yet the Apostle have given the same direction he did? would not good Christians still have had care of their brothers consciences? Can the determination of a superior be a sufficient plea at the bar of Gods judgement seat, for a man that by virtue or force thereof alone, hath done any action that his conscience telleth him will scandalize his brother?