A reply to Dr. Mortons general Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the…A reply to Dr. Mortons generall Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the…

SECT. IIII.

But in this fourth Section, more legerdemain is used then •n many other. For when the Def. professeth to answer the testimonies of Protestant Divines found in the Abridgement, he produceth only four, as if there were no more to be found: whereas in the same place of the Abridgement, viz. p. 33. there be many more joined to these, as before I showed by name: and to them divers others are added p. 35. But let us hear what he can say to these four which himself hath chosen to answer. To Calvin he saith, that he speaketh only of those mystical ceremonies which are properly sacramental. And this, say I, was the very point for which this place was alleged, viz. that such significant signs are properly sacramental. Is not this then good answering? Concerning Mystical-moral, I vvill speak something in the next section. Zepperus saith he) hath not a word of mystical signification. The place is lib. 1. cap. 10. where among divers rules, he giveth this for one, that sacramental signs must signify holy things to be sealed up in the heart: from whence he concludeth as against Humane traditions, because God will not by them stir up any grace in the heart of man: so in special by this with some other rules, he concludeth against the sign of the Cross, and other such ceremonies in Baptism. Is this nothing? Jewel insisteth only in sacramental signs; and such saith the Abridgement, are all that signify spiritual graces. As for Beza, he granteth him in a manner to condemn all symbolical signs. But to extenuate his credit herein, he would have the reader believe, that no other Divine doth consent with him herein. But if any man look upon the places quoted in the Abridgement, p 35. viz, Harm. Confess. part. 2 p. 229. 230. Eiusd. Sect. 17. ad Saxon. Confess. obs. 1. Calv. in Es 20. & in Math. 21. 25. Perkins in Gal. 3. p. 231. he shall find that Beza is not alone in this point. Beside, Bellarmine confesseth that Brentius is of this minde, De cult. sanct: lib. 3. cap. 7. and in his 2 book De effect sacr. he joineth herein with Brentius, Calvin and Chemnitius. I vvill add one whom this Def. calleth worthily a judicious refuter of Bellarmine: i. Junius. His words (in his animadversions upon Bell. de cultu sanct. lib. 3. c. 7. an. 12) are these;