A19178:176
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…
A reply to Dr. Mortons general Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the surplice, cross in baptism, and kneeling at the receiving of the sacramental elements of bread and wine.A reply to Dr. Mortons generall Defence of three nocent [sic] ceremonies viz. the surplice, crosse in baptisme, and kneeling at the receiving of the sacramentall elements of bread and wine.
Amsterdam: printed by Giles Thorp, 1622
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.
Secondly, It is as unreasonable (saith he) as if a Patient that hath some drugs prescribed him, should thence conclude he may taste of all. But it is as reasonable, say I, as if a Patient having some drugs prescribed unto him, should thence conclude, he may taste of any which are of the same nature, especially if the same Physician should prescribe them unto him.
Secondly, It is as unreasonable (sayth hee) as if a Patient that hath some drugges prescribed him, should thence conclude hee may taste of all. But it is as reasonable, say I, as if a Patient having some druggs prescribed unto him, should thence conclude, he may taste of any which are of the same nature, especially if the same Physitian should prescribe them unto him.
Thirdly, It is unconscionable (saith he) because there are many abuses mixed with Popish ceremonies. Which answer seemeth merely unconscionable; because it is plainly expressed in the Abridgement, that this inference doth consider the Popish ceremonies only, in regard of that signification which they have of good things.
Thirdly, It is unconscionable (sayth hee) because there are many abuses mixed with Popish ceremonies. Which answer seemeth meerly unconscionable; because it is plainly expressed in the Abridgement, that this inference doth consider the Popish ceremonies onely, in regard of that signification vvhich they haue of good things.
Fourthly, he disproveth the use of oil and spittle, because they were once used miraculously. As if the miraculous using of any thing did forbid, that it should at any time after be used for signification. Surely then the many miracles which histories do record to have been done by the Cross, must needs banish that also out of the Church.