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.…

Where he manifestly separateth the essence of worship, from essential worship, as if the essence of a man could exist without an essential man, 2. He gathereth ⟨p. 176⟩from that which was said of respect to the end, in institutions, that thereby their assertion, is cleared: viz. that Cer. respecting the honour of God mediately, are not properly parts of Divine worship. As if here had been any mention or question, of mediately, or immediately, proper, or improper, and not only of essential. But for so much as the Rejoinder would needs here cite D. Abbot, for his term immediately, I would desire him to consider of the whole sentence in that place pronounced by him, viz. Def. of Mr. Perk. pag. 844. Order and comeliness (saith the popish Bishop) is some part of Gods worship. But (saith D. Abbot.) Who taught him this deep point of Philosophy, that an accident is a part of the subject, that the beauty, or comeliness of the body is a part of the body? Order and comeliness properly and immediately respect men, and therefore can be no parts of the worship of God. If this be not a plain refuting of the Def. and the Rejoinder their assertion, then none is attempted in all the Reply.

Where he manifestly separateth the essence of worship, from essentiall worship, as if the essence of a man could exist without an essentiall man, 2. He gathereth ⟨p. 176⟩from that which was sayd of respect to the ende, in institutiōs, that therby their assertiō, is cleared: viz. that Cer. respecting the honour of God mediatly, are not properly parts of Divine worship. As if here had been any mention or questiō, of mediatly, or immediatly, proper, or improper, and not onely of essentiall. But for so muche as the Rejoynder would needs heer cite D. Abbot, for his terme immediatly, I would desire him to cōsider of the wholle sentence in that place pronounced by him, viz. Def. of Mr. Perk. pag. 844. Order and comlinesse (sayth the popish Bishop) is some part of Gods worship. But (sayth D. Abbot.) Who taught him this deep point of Philosophie, that an accident is a part of the subject, that the beautie, or comelinesse of the body is a part of the body? Order and comelinesse properly and immediatly respect men, and therfore can be no parts of the woship of God. If this be not a plaine refuting of the Def. and the Rejoynder their assertion, then none is attempted in all the Replie.