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.…

that there were no oblations left wholly […] ⟨p. 153⟩the pleasure of men, for though the particulars were not, nor could not be determined by a distinct rule in general, yet they were determined by the circumstances, as our Divines are wont to answer the Papists, about their vows, counsels, superarrogations,¹ Not by a general law, but by concurrence of circumstances. So Deut. 16.10. Moses showeth that the freest offerings were to be according as God had blessed them, from whence it followeth, it had been sin for any Israelite, whom God had plentifully blessed, to offer a pair of pigeons in stead of a bullock, or two, upon his own mere pleasure: 2. where that proportion was observed the choice of a goat, before a sheep, or a sheep before a goat, was no formal worship: 3. That it had been unlawful for the Priests out of their pleasure, to institute any such determinate free offering, either ordinarily to be observed, or upon occasion of a mans forwardness to such a duty, i.e. that every free offering should be a goat, or at the least, that a goat should be one part of it, which is the presumption of our Prelates, about the reductive worship of the cross. 4. It was not left to any mans pleasure, for to appoint an offering not appointed of God, in the special or least kind, but only to choose among those, which God had instituted, that which did best agree, with his condition and occasion, as it is also now of psalms, prayers, doctrines, interpretations, exhortations, let every man offer, according as God hath furnished him: But from hence to infer the free choice of offering now to God, a cross, surplice, holy water, images, this is, as if one should then have concluded ⟨p. 154⟩from that freedom, the free offering of certain butterflies, or such like pretty, odd, vermin not prescribed in the law, nor by name forbidden.

that there were no oblations left wholly 〈…〉 ⟨p. 153⟩the pleasure of men, for though the particulars were not, nor could not be determined by a distinct rule in generall, yet they were determined by the circumstances, as our Divines are wont to answer the Papists, about their vowes, counsells, superarrogations,