A19142:300
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.
The third is: that mystical signification is not necessary to make a ceremony (as some would have it) but relation only as appeareth in diverse observances of the law: though mystical signification added, may make a double and perhaps a triple ceremony. If this be granted no inconvenience followeth to the Repl. because the question still remaineth, about double and triple Ceremon. such as the cross is, whether it be lawful for men, to institute such in Gods worship. And to argue, from a single Cerem. to a double, and triple, this is not from the head of parity. And as for the observances in the law, I deny all of them to have been properly Ceremon. although they be some time so called improperly, and that with Judicious Junius on Exod. 25. Some Ceremo. are taken up to figure the truth of the thing, 1and those appertain properly to the nature of types by Gods appointment, others are taken in, not so much, for the resemblance of the things, but for the nature of the figures: As in these Cerem. there be many things, that make nothing to the nature of a Cerem. as such, but only to the nature of the thing, which thing after the manner of some matter liable to sense, is applied about the Ceremony and the Ceremonial figure.
The thyrd is: that misticall signification is not necessary to make a ceremony (as some would have it) but relation only as appeareth in diverse observances of the law: though misticall signification added, may make a double and perhaps a triple ceremony. If this be graunted no inconvenience followeth to the Repl. because the quaestion still remaineth, about double and triple Ceremon. such as the crosse is, whether it be lawfull for men, to institute such in Gods worship. And to argue, from a single Cerem. to a double, and triple, this is not from the head of parity. And as for the observances in the law, I deny all of them to have beene properly Ceremon. although they be some tyme so called improperly, and that with Iudicious Iunius on Exod. 25. Some Ceremo. are taken up to figure the truth of the thing, 1and those appertaine properly to the nature of types by Gods appointment, others are taken in, not so much, for the resemblance of the things, but for the nature of the figures: As in these Cerem. there be many things, that make nothing to the nature of a Cerem. as such, but only to the nature of the thing, which thing after the manner of some matter liable to sense, is applyed about the Ceremony and the Ceremoniall figure.