A19142:958
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.
Where did he ever read such a phrase: either love, or charity, either Magistrates, or Governors?
Where did he ever read suche a phraze: eyther love, or charitie, eyther Magistrates, or Governours?
It was also replied, that Mr. Hooker attributed operative holiness to the Cross, in allowing all that the Fathers ascribed to it. The Rejoinder his only material exception is, that the instance was here not of the Cross, but of the Surplice. Yet the question is of our Ceremonies, which is as well concluded from one, as another, and the Rejoinder himself, even now, spoke of holiness in them, as of many, not in it, as of one Ceremony only.
It was also replied, that Mr. Hooker attributed operative holinesse to the Crosse, in allowing all that the Fathers ascribed to it. The Rejoynder his onely materiall exception is, that the instance was here not of the Crosse, but of the Surplice. Yet the question is of our Ceremonies, which is as well concluded from one, as another, and the Rejoynder himself, even now, spoke of holinesse in them, as of many, not in it, as of one Ceremonie onely.
Neither is there any more holiness in one, then in the other, if both be only significative.
Neyther is ther any more holinesse in one, then in the other, if both be onely significative.