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. The Repl. set down the Def. his plea, with a general answer thus: After all this ado about the Proposition of the first Argument, Now we are told of an Assumption, out of the Abridgement, and Mr. Hy: viz: that Ceremonies have no warrant out of the word of God being humane inventions, For Mr. Hy: I cannot say much (because his reasons are not in print) but for •he Authors of the Abridgement, they have great wrong done them. Whosoever will turn to the place quoted by the Def. in the Abridgement, shall see, that the words which our Def. hath turned into a Proposition, are there but part of an illustration, belonging to this proposition: All Ceremonies that swerve from the Rules given in the Word, for the Churches direction, in matters of Ceremonies, are unlawful. The Assumption of which is: But the Ceremonies in question, do swerve from those Rules. Now all this chief pith, both of Proposition, and Assumption, is by the Def. omitted: A by thing is put in place of the Proposition. A new assumption is formed: and yet all fathered upon the Abridgement. What hath the Rejoinder to say against all this? 1. This demurrer should have come in at the first. But first, or last, ⟨p. 108⟩if it be true which here said, the Def. cannot be defended.

1. THe Repl. set downe the Def. his plea, with a generall answer thus: After all this adoe about the Proposition of the first Argument, Now we are tolde of an Assumtiō, out of the Abridgement, and Mr. Hy: viz: that Ceremonies have no warrāt out of the word of God being humane inventions, For Mr. Hy: I cannot say muche (because his reasons are not in printe) but for •he Authors of the Abridgement, they have great wronge doen them. Whosoever will turne to the place quoted by the Def. in the Abridgement, shall see, that the words which our Def. hath turned into a Proposition, are there but part of an illustration, belonging to this proposition: All Ceremonies that swerve from the Rules given in the Word, for the Churches direction, in matters of Ceremonies, are unlawfull. The Assumtion of which is: But the Ceremonies in question, doe swerve from those Rules. Now all this cheif pith, both of Proposition, and Assumtion, is by the Def. omitted: A by thinge is put in place of the Proposition. A new assumtion is formed: and yet all fathered upon the Abridgement. What hath the Rejoynder to say against all this? 1. This demurrer should have come in at the first. But first, or last,