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…

Secondly, he propoundeth, as very observable, that Hezekiah did not abolish the idols which Solomon suffered to be set up, because they were neglected. But 1 it may well be thought that those idols were destroyed by Hezekiah, and set up again before the time of Josiah, as many other superstitions were. 2 It cannot be doubted but they should have been destroyed, even though they were for the time neglected: because either Hezekiah had as good cause to destroy them as Josiah: or else he might have prevented that cause which Josiah had: and to prevent evil, we are as well bound, as to correct it.

Secondly, he propoundeth, as very observable, that Hezekiah did not abolish the idols vvhich Salomon suffered to be set up, because they were neglected. But 1 it may vvell be thought that those idols vvere destroyed by Hezekiah, and set up againe before the time of Iosiah, as many other superstitions were. 2 It cannot be doubted but they should haue been destroyed, even though they were for the time neglected: because either Hezekiah had as good cause to destroy them as Iosiah: or else he might haue prevented that cause which Iosiah had: and to prevent evill, we are as well bound, as to correct it.

Thirdly, he citeth Zanchius to prove, that this is not an universal remedy for all abuses of ceremonies. The place in Zanchie I cannot find: neither skilleth it much. I grant the conclusion, it is not a remedy for all abuses of ceremonies, viz. for such as Gods appointment hath made necessary to be retained. Besides the words of Zanchie here cited by the Def. do only therefore seem to make for him, because they are not full enough against him. But in other places of the same book Zanchius judgement is plain enough, as p. 649 where from this example he reproveth those that keep the relics of superstition in some holy places; though they have removed them out of Churches. And if about this matter the Def. doth ascribe any thing to the judgement of our ⟨p. 63⟩divines, why doth he not answer the testimonies of Augustine, Calvin, Martyr, Wolphius, Lavater, Zanchius, Sadeel, Jewel, Bilson, Fulk, Rainolds, Andrews, Perkins, alleged to this purpose in the Abridgement, p. 24?