A19142:936
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.
6. The Def. for proving of his assertion (that Gods institution doeth difference necessary and essential worship, from indifferent and accidental) did bring in the instance of lambs for colour unspotted, which was necessary and essential (as he affirmed) after the law, though before indifferent and accidental.
6. The Def. for proving of his assertion (that Gods institution doeth difference necessarie and essentiall worship, from indifferent and accidentall) did bringe in the instance of lambes for colour unspotted, which was necessarie and essentiall (as he affirmed) after the law, though before indifferent and accidentall.
To this it was first answered, that this law of offering lambs for colour unspotted, is no where extant, and therefore that this instance was alleged either out of ignorance, or for want of due consideration. The Rejoinder being constrained to grant this exception to be just, turneth himself to those last words, either ignorance, or want of due consideration: and for them accuseth the Repl. of flying in the Def. his face, without Christian moderation. But if it be so great a crime, to impute either some ignorance or some inconsiderateness (such as no man alive is wholly free from) unto the Def. and if this be unchristian flying in his face, I am sure the Rejoinder hath gone beyond the face and stabbed deeper into our Vitals, in many passages of his Rejoinder.
To this it was first answered, that this law of offering lambes for colour unspotted, is no where exstant, and therfore that this instance was alledged eyther out of ignorance, or for want of due consideration. The Rejoynder being constreined to grant this exception to be just, turneth himself to those last words, eyther ignorance, or want of due consideration: and for them accuseth the Repl. of flying in the Def. his face, without Christian moderation. But if it be so great a crime, to impute eyther some ignorance or some inconsideratenesse (suche as no man alive is wholly free from) unto the Def. and if this be unchristian flying in his face, I am sure the Rejoynder hath gone beyoynd the face and stabbed deeper into our Vitals, in many passages of his Rejoynder.