A19142:298
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.
Yet for more satisfaction sake, let us take a view of the several; but very shortly: The first is, that therefore the same actions one at the same times may in several respects be cere. & no c•re: But if the nature of a cere. doth not consist in reference or relation, as hath been evicted before sufficiently, then the change of the respect or relation, doth not bring-in the change of a ceremony.
Yet for more satisfaction sake, let us take a view of the severall; but very shortly: The first is, that therfore the same actions one at the same tymes may in severall respects be cere. & no c•re: But if the nature of a cere. doth not consist in reference or relation, as hath beene evicted before sufficiently, then the change of the respect or relation, doth not bring-in the change of a ceremony.
Second Consectary is:1 That institution and observation, makes a ceremony not a natural habitude or aptness of any action to express this or that: Now if no natural aptness or habitude make a Ceremo. what will the Rej. say, to things of Decency, Comeliness, and order which are ceremonies in his sense. 42. pag. and in a large sense of the word may truly be so called, do none of these arise out of the natural aptness and habitude of the action? The whiteness and cleanness of the communion cloth, doth not the decency thereof issue from the habitude of the thing, which if it was foul and nasty, would not be decent, let all institution do what it could: That a minister should turn his face to his people in the pulpit when he preacheth, and not his back, is not this comeliness in the natural aptness of the action: That people should stand or sit in hearing the word, and not lie along upon their faces, doth not this issue from the natural aptness of the action, without institution, is there not decency in th•se, or can institution make the contrary decent? If therefore decency and comeliness of some actions, to this ⟨p. 41⟩