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.…

1. Ceremonies in their kind, as they are parts of order, and decency, may be acts of religion. 2. Yet the particulars may not be of the substance of order. ⟨p. 51⟩3. That the particulars are not Divine; which propositions are plainly expressed in the corollary, if they be not contradictious one to another, I must confess, I must bid all reason and logic farewell, or else the Rej. hath a new logic, which yet never saw light: And therefore I reason thus.

1. Ceremonies in their kynd, as they are parts of order, and decency, may be acts of religion. 2. Yet the particulars may not be of the substance of order. ⟨p. 51⟩3. That the particulars are not Divine; which propositions are plainly expressed in the corallary, if they be not contradictious one to another, I must confesse, I must bidd all reason and logick farewell, or else the Rej. hath a new logick, which yet never saw light: And therfore I reason thus.

If every particular have the whole nature of the Genus in it, then the general being divine,¹ the particulars must be divine; but every particular of order and decency are species to general nature of order &c. therefore they have the whole nature of order in the general; & ergo are divine: & to affirm the contrary which here is done, is to say a living creature hath sense, but the species man and beast hath none: Or; the nature of man is reasonable, but the particulars: Thom. or John are not reasonable; and thus the 3. conclusion implies a contradiction to the first conclusion.

If every particular have the whole nature of the Genus in it, then the generall being divine,¹ the particulars must be divine; but every particular of order and decency are species to generall nature of order &c. therfore they have the whole nature of order in the generall; & ergo are divine: & to affirme the contrary which here is done, is to say a living creature hath sense, but the species man and beast hath none: Or; the nature of man is reasonable, but the particulars: Thom. or Ihon are not reasonable; and thus the 3. conclusion implyes a contradiction to the first conclusion.