A19142:696
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.
As if this were the main question? Or any part of the Proposition! or denied by the Repl. at all. The Rejoinder having little to say that was to the purpose, cacheth hold of one word in the end of the Assumption used by the Repl. seemliness of order (which yet is immediately there differenc•d from other decency, as well commanded as this) and that he maketh the main matter of the proposition: whereas the meaning is, that nothing is left unto liberty in Gods worship, above decency and order, for which these testimonies are brought, and not for the other.
As if this were the maine question? Or any part of the Proposition! or denied by the Repl. at all. The Rejoynder having litle to say that was to the purpose, cacheth hould of one word in the ende of the Assumtion used by the Repl. seemlinesse of order (which yet is immediatly there differēc•d frō other decencie, as well commanded as this) and that he maketh the maine matter of the proposition: whereas the meaning is, that nothing is left unto libertie in Gods worship, above decencie and order, for which these testimonies are brought, and not for the other.
8. For more full support of the foresaid Proposition, a reason is added, from the fullness of a perfect law, which leaveth no more unto Ministerial judges, then needs must.
8. For more full support of the foresaid Proposition, a reason is added, from the fullnesse of a perfect law, which leaveth no more unto Ministeriall judges, then needs must.
For answer, the Rejoinder 1. observeth, that some cases are •f necessity variable, and so left. So the occasions of different Rites and Ceremonies ae so various, that if our Lord had fixed any one certain fashion, he should have made rather snares then lws for his Church. As, if he had appointed sitting at a table in te Communion: or kneeling in prayer. This is strange stuff. 1. So much is granted, as is desired, viz. that God hath left nothing (about his worship) undetermined in his word. 1. e. uncommanded, and unforbidden particularly, save only that which he could not command or forbid. Now let any man think and judge, whether it had not been possible for God in his word, either to have commanded, or forbidden the signing of those that are Baptised with the sign of the cross all so well, as Baptizing of them with water? 2, How can that too too bold and inconsiderate assertion be excused: if our Lord had fixed (or commanded) any one certain fashion of Ceremonies, he had made rather snares, then laws for his Church. If it had pleased God to command or forbid the sign of the Cross in particular, what snare had it been? When God appointed all the Ceremonies of the old Testament, he did not (I hope) make snares for his Church, though he did lay a burden upon it. 3. Whereas the Rejoinder maketh sitting at a table, in the Lords Supper, and kneeling at prayer, to be such things as the Lord could not