A19142:947
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.
3. He in like manner concludeth, that every respect of the honour of God, doeth not make a thing to be properly religious worship. As if the Repl. had ever spoken, or dreamt of such a fantasy, except it were in the Rejoinder his name! His words are: beside the respect of the end, is also required institution of means to an end. What Paracelsian can draw so wild an assertion, from such a ground as this?
3. He in like manner concludeth, that every respect of the honor of God, doeth not make a thinge to be properly religious worship. As if the Repl. had ever spoken, or dreamt of suche a phantasie, except it were in the Rejoynder his name! His wordes are: beside the respect of the ende, is also required institution of means to an ende. What Paracelsian can draw so wilde an assertion, from suche a grounde as this?
8. It was (in the last place) demanded, whether, if the Temple of Jerusalem had been built, with institution of all the appurtenances, sacrifices, and observances, there used, without any Commandment of ⟨p. 177⟩God, according as they were by his appointment, whether (saith the Repl.) they had not been essential false worship, erected to God? The Rejoinder answereth: Yes no doubt, if we may call (as the manner is) essential disworship, essential false worship: either in respect of the things themselves, or in the opinion conceived in their use. Now mark (all readers that have sense) how this Rejoinder (here in the conclusion of all) is constrained to confess, that to be true, which he hath hitherto striven against as false. 1. The Repl. his assertion was, that Gods institution doeth make that worship, which being used in the same manner and to the same end, were otherwise no worship, or (as it pleaseth the Def. and Rejoinder to speak) no essential worship? The Rejoin-hitherto hath contended against this, as against a great error.
8. It was (in the last place) demanded, whether, if the Temple of Ierusalem had been built, with institution of all the appurtenances, sacrifices, and observances, there used, without any Commandement of