A19142:701
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.
After this observation, of which the Rejoinder saith it may be as we will, he answereth, that our Lord hath left nothing absolute to the will of his Officers: but hath left even ambulatory Rites, under general rules, which will try them as perfectly, as if every one had been named, and with less cumber. But 1. this is nothing to the purpose: because so the imperfectest law that is in any nation upon the earth, if it be worthy the name of Law, leaveth nothing ⟨p. 70⟩so absolute to the will of inferior Officers, as that it should be without the general rules of justice, common good, etc. Nay not without the rules of order & decency. 2. Concerning the comparison of perfection, betwixt general and particular rules, though enough hath been said before, upon like occasion, yet this I will add.
After this observation, of which the Rejoynder sayth it may be as we will, he answereth, that our Lord hath left nothing absolute to the will of his Officers: but hath left even ambulatorie Rites, under generall rules, which will trie them as perfectly, as if every one had been named, and with lesse cumber. But 1. this is nothing to the purpose: because so the imperfectest law that is in any nation upon the earth, if it be worthy the name of Law, leaveth nothing ⟨p. 70⟩so absolute to the will of inferior Officers, as that it should be without the generall rules of justice, common good, etc. Nay not without the rules of order & decencie. 2. Concerning the comparison of perfection, betwixt generall and particular rules, though enough hath been sayd before, upon like occasion, yet this I will adde.
If he meaneth, that a general rule if it be perfectly understood and applied, doeth as perfectly try as particulars. I grant it to be a trueth. And so was the old Testament as perfect a rule of Christian faith as the New, thou shalt love thy neighbour, as perfect as the six Commandments of the second Table. But if he mean that a general rule is as fit and full for our direction of us imperfect men, as particulars are, then I think no man conscious of humane frailty, will believe him.