12 The like answer is given unto Tertullian de Orat. 1 in general it is said, that Tertullian doth not condemn these ceremonies merely for resemblance with idolaters: but for opinion of efficacy and necessity: whereas the contrary is plain in Tertullian, for he saith expressly, Propterea in nobis reprehendi meretur, quod apud idola celebratur. Therefore it is to be blamed in us, because it is used before Idols: And B. Jewel Def. Apol. with many other of our best Writers against the Papists do urge these testimonies of Tertullian merely in regard of resemblance. 2 In washing (saith the Def.) some did then hold an opinion of efficacy and necessity. If they did, that is nothing to the purpose; for they might be condemned in that behalf, and yet merely also for resemblance with idolaters. But no such thing appeareth in Tertullian, he telleth us plainly, that the washing before prayer was a significant sign in remembrance of Christs delivering unto the Jews by Pilate, when he had washed. Cum scrupulose percontarer, & rationem requirerem, compe•i commemorationem esse in domini deditionem, c. 11, so that I do not see but that this washing was every way like unto our sign of the cross in regard of the original signification and use of it. 3 In the ceremony of dossing cloaks before prayer, there was an opinion of necessity, because Tertullian saith, si sic oportet, if this ought to be done. As if sic oportet, ought to be done, ought always to be expounded of an absolute necessity. Do not our Prelates now say, sic oportet, we ought to use the ceremonies, and yet disclaim this opinion of necessity? Tertullian only condemneth, Vacua observatio, vanitas, quae sine ullius dominici out apostolici praecepti authoritate fit, atque adeo superstitioni deputanda• All these agree to our ceremonies ⟨p. 66⟩as well as to that. 4 For sitting upon beds after prayer, the opinion of necessity is only condemned by Tertullian (saith the Def.) because he inferreth, otherwaies we ought not to pray but sitting. But that inference is only upon an allegation out of Hermas which Tertullian opposeth to himself about the matter. Concerning the ceremony it self, the grounds of his condemnation are, perinde faciunt nationes: apud idola celebratur. So that the Defendant hath given no colourable answer unto Tertullian.
12 The like answer is given unto Tertullian de Orat. 1 in generall it is said, that Tertullian doth not condemne these ceremonies meerly for resemblance with idolaters: but for opinion of efficacie and necessity: wheras the contrary is plaine in Tertullian, for he saith expresly, Propterea in nobis reprehendi meretur, quod apud idola celebratur. Therefore it is to be blamed in us, because it is used before Idols: And B. Iewel Def. Apol. vvith many other of our best Writers against the Papists doe urge these testimonies of Tertullian meerely in regard of resemblance. 2 In washing (saith the Def.) some did then hold an opinion of efficacie and necessitie. If they did, that is nothing to the purpose; for they might be condemned in that behalfe, and yet meerely also for resemblance vvith idolaters. But no such thing appeareth in Tertullian, he telleth us plainely, that the vvashing before prayer vvas a significant sign in remembrance of Christs delivering unto the Iewes by Pilate, when he had washed. Cum scrupulose percontarer, & rationem requirerem, compe•i commemorationem esse in domini deditionem, c. 11, so that I doe not see but that this vvashing vvas every way like unto our signe of the crosse in regard of the originall signification and use of it. 3 In the ceremony of dossing cloakes before prayer, there was an opinion of necessity, because Tertullian saith, si sic oportet, if this ought to bee done. As if sic oportet, ought to be done, ought alwaies to be expounnded of an absolute necessitie. Doe not our Prelates now say, sic oportet, vve ought to use the ceremonies, and yet disclaime this opinion of necessity? Tertullian onely condemneth, Vacua observatio, vanitas, quae sine ullius dominici out apostolici praecepti authoritate fit, atque adeo superstitioni deputanda• All these agree to our ceremonies ⟨p. 66⟩as well as to that. 4 For sitting upon beds after prayer, the opinion of necessity is onely condemned by Tertullian (saith the Def.) because he inferreth, otherwaies we ought not to pray but sitting. But that inference is onely upon an allegation out of Hermas vvhich Tertullian opposeth to himselfe about the matter. Concerning the ceremony it selfe, the grounds of his condemnation are, perinde faciunt nationes: apud idola celebratur. So that the Defendant hath given no colourable answer unto Tertullian.
