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.…

3. That which is common to all actions, and all things, can not be a form and difference of a Cerem. to make it differ from all other: but thus to be referred ⟨p. 33⟩to another, not as a cause or part is common to all outward actions, natural, civill, religious, yea to all natural artificial things: Thus all acts may be referred one to another, and all other to Divinity, not as causes or parts of Divinity: are they therefore all Cer? Nay all precepts of art are referred the former to the latter, not as causes or parts; ergo are they in this Rej. conceit, and by the verdict of this definition Ceremo? Amongst the examples of this difference, the last is to be attended unto because it hath a remarkable note added unto it? Convening in one set place at an honore appointed unto worship saith the Rej. is in that relation a ceremony of worship: and yet as it is an observance of order it is no Ceremo. Of this there can be no doubt, but the observation of time and place, in reference to another thing, is according to the definition of the Rej. a ceremony: But how an observation of this time and place, can be considered as an order, without reference to some thing to be ordered in that time and place, that so it may be differenced from the same order, as it is a ceremony, this is a metaphysical abstraction, as I cannot conceive of, let others therefore judge: When the Apost. chargeth the Corinth, to do all things in order: could he be so understood, that he spake of order, and of the ceremony of order, and that by doing of things in order, he meant a Cerem: because there is a relation of order to things: but by doing orderly he meant no ceremony, because there is no relation to things: Order without relation to things ordered, is like the accidents in the Popish Sacrament, without any subject after transubstantiation: If the doctrine of human Cerem. cannot ⟨p. 34⟩stand, or be understood, without such miraculous subtleties let it go seek for those that will receive it. The note added to the former example is: that they who oppose matters of order to matters of ceremony, as if the same thing could not be done in double relations, do confound several notions of things, and oppose things coincident. Here first may be marked, how he crosseth that in this conclusion, which he laid for the ground of it:

3. That which is common to all actions, and all things, can not be a forme and difference of a Cerem. to make it differ from all other: but thus to be referred