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.…

As if we had not required a proof, but only an explication. Yet this explication hath no more truth in this large sense, then if one should say, that all circumstances appertaining to the setting out of a man area man.

As if we had not required a proofe, but onely an explication. Yet this explication hath no more truthe in this large sense, then if one should say, that all circumstances appertayning to the setting out of a man area man.

But (saith the Rej.) Ursin, or at least Pareus saith, that the genus commune nature of these Cerem. as well as of civil laws is moral, and therefore worship. What could he have said more to confute both Defendant, and Rejoynder• they are worship, (and that only in their general nature) just as civill things: that is not otherwise then all good deeds are worship. So forbidding, or hindering of false worship (which may be done by Atheists) is worship, in this uncouth manner of speaking.

But (sayth the Rej.) Vrsin, or at least Pareus sayth, that the genus commune nature of these Cerem. as well as of civil laws is morall, and therfore worship. What could he have sayd more to confute both Defendant, and Rejoynder• they are worship, (and that onely in their generall nature) just as civill things: that is not otherwise then all good deeds are worship. So forbidding, or hindering of false worship (which may be doen by Atheists) is worship, in this uncouth manner of speaking.

One argument yet is of the Rejoinder his own invention: Such things done to the honouring of an Idol were idolatry, as to build a temple, to the honouring of an Idol. Therefore the same things done by the rule, to the right end, are some way a worship to God. Wherein there are two ambiguous phrases observable: 1. such things. 2. to the