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. XXVI. XXVII.

The very same disease is found in his second reason: whereout he can conclude nothing, but that some things abused may afterward be rightly used; which we willingly grant: nay, it may be granted of some human ceremonies also▪ as if the Surplices of England were turned into under garments for poor people: and wooden crosses were given them for firing. But if any conclude from hence, that therefore they may have lawful state in Gods worship, and there have a good use, surely his wit & words might be better used.

THe very same disease is found in his second reason: vvherout he can conclude nothing, but that some things abused may afterward be rightly used; vvhich vve vvillingly grant: nay, it may be granted of some human ceremonies also▪ as if the Surplices of England were turned into under garments for poore people: and vvoodden crosses were given them for firing. But if any conclude from hence, that therfore they may haue lawfull state in Gods vvorship, and there haue a good use, surely his wit & words might bee better used.

SECT. XXVIII.

THE last reason is, because Popery and Popish rites are not to be esteemed of equal abomination with Paganism and Paganish rites. Suppose this were true every way (as it is not) yet in this they may •agrree, that both alike are to be detested and abandoned. Nay, a lesser superstition the authors and countenances whereof are near at hand, doth call for more hasty removal, then a greater, whose authors and users are unknown. Howsoever, when the scriptures bid us fly from Idolatry, and that also particularly, from Popish Idolatries without any distinction, as from Devils, Ap. 18. a few smoothing words cannot satisfy our consciences in this, but, that we are as well and as far to fly from ⟨p. 73⟩Popish Idolatry, as from Paganish. But if the Defendant would have throughly discussed this question, why did he not answer that which Mr. Parker hath to this purpose? p. 1. c. 1. S. 25. or that which is alleged in the Abridgement, p. 24.

THE last reason is, because Poperie and Popish rites are not to be esteemed of equall abomination with Paganisme and Paganish rites. Suppose this vvere true every way (as it is not) yet in this they may •agrree, that both alike are to bee detested and abandoned. Nay, a lesser superstition the authors and countenances wherof are neere at hand, doth call for more hastie removall, then a greater, whose authours and users are vnknown. Howsoever, vvhen the scriptures bid us flie from Idolatry, and that also particularly, from Popish Idolatries without any distinction, as from Divells, Ap. 18. a few smoothing vvords cannot satisfie our consciences in this, but, that wee are as well and as farre to flie from ⟨p. 73⟩Popish Idolatry, as from Paganish. But if the Defendant vvould haue throughly discussed this question, vvhy did hee not answer that vvhich Mr. Parker hath to this purpose? p. 1. c. 1. S. 25. or that vvhich is alledged in the Abridgement, p. 24.

SECT. XXIX.

OUR Witnesses can give the Defendant but small aid, being separated from scripture and reason; yet he catcheth at three, Calvin, Martyr, and Zepperus. Calvin (saith he) teacheth that there is great difference betwixt Turks and Papists, lib. de vitand superst. True, but in the same place he answereth the consequence which you would make from hence, viz. that therefore we need not fly so far from Popish superstition, as from heathen: and in the same place also he argueth from Turks to Papists. Calvins purpose was not to condemn any thing but that which is evil in it self. True, in that discourse wherein he dealeth against those which could swallow down the mass it self: it had been no wisdom to dispute with them about Cross and Surplice. He alloweth of Temples which have been abused to Idolatry. So do we, because they are not religious ceremonies, of mystical signification, without necessary use. And is this all that can be brought out of Calvin? Then surely he doth not contradict the many sentences of condemnation which as other where, so also in that very Tractate, he passeth against Idolatrous relics.

OVR Witnesses can give the Defendant but small aid, being separated from scripture and reason; yet he catcheth at three, Calvin, Martyr, and Zepperus. Calvin (sayth he) teacheth that there is great difference betwixt Turks and Papists, lib. de vitand superst. True, but in the same place hee answereth the consequence vvhich you would make from hence, viz. that therefore vvee need not flie so farre from Popish superstition, as from heathen: and in the same place also hee argueth from Turkes to Papists. Calvins purpose was not to condeme any thing but that which is evill in it selfe. True, in that discourse vvherein he dealeth against those vvhich could swallow downe the masse it selfe: it had been no vvisedome to dispute vvith them about Crosse and Surplice. Hee alloweth of Temples which haue been abused to Idolatry. So doe we, because they are not religious ceremonies, of mysticall signification, vvithout necessarie use. And is this all that can bee brought out of Calvin? Then surely hee doth not contradict the many sentences of condemnation vvhich as other where, so also in that very Tractate, he passeth against Idolatrous reliques.

Zepperus is alleged as allowing of Temples, which have been abused, because they were not immediate instruments of Idolatry. So do we al•o, as before I said, for that and other causes. But altars in the same place he condemneth: which yet are retained in our Cathedral Churches, and I hope the cross being an Idol it self, had as immediate communion with Idolatry, as Zepper or any reasonable Judge would require for the cashiering of it.

Zepperus is alledged as allowing of Temples, which haue been abused, because they were not immediat instruments of Idolatry. So doe we al•o, as before I sayd, for that and other causes. But altars in the same place he condemneth: which yet are retained in our Cathedrall Churches, and I hope the crosse being an Idoll it selfe, had as immediat commu•ion with Idolatry, as Zepper or any reasonable Iudge would require for the cashiering of it.

As for Peter Martyr, howsoever in one epistle to Hooper, he setteth as good a colour upon the relics of Idolatry as he could, because he thought by a little yielding of Hooper and such men, the superstitions themselves might quickly be removed: yet in another Epistle, p. 1125. he giveth this peremptory sentence, Profecto si ex animo superstitiones edissemus, vel ipsa eorum vestigia omnibus modis curaremus extirpanda: 1. If we hated superstition from the heart, we would abolish all the relics of it. To the same purpose he speaketh p. 1127. where he showeth that his conscience would never suffer him to wear the Surplice, when he was Canon of Christ church in Oxford. If this were not his reason, he had some other very much a kin to this. Neither will the Defendant say hastily, I ⟨p. 74⟩hope, that either Peter Martyr, or Hooper, were disorderly exorbitant men in those times, fit to be displaced, that more discreet conformists might come in their places: as now he pronounceth of those that refuse to conform.

As for Peter Martyr, howsoever in one epistle to Hooper, he setteth as good a colour upon the reliques of Idolatry as he could, because he thought by a little yeelding of Hooper and such men, the superstitions themselues might quickly be removed: yet in another Epistle, p. 1125. he giveth this peremptorie sentence, Profecto si ex animo superstitiones edissemus, vel ipsa eorum vestigia omnibus modis curaremus extirpanda: 1. If wee hated superstition from the heart, wee would abolish all the reliques of it. To the same purpose he speaketh p. 1127. vvhere he sheweth that his conscience would never suffer him to weare the Surplice, when he vvas Canon of Christ church in Oxford. If this vvere not his reason, hee had some other very much a kin to this. Neither will the Defendant say hastily, I ⟨p. 74⟩hope, that either Peter Martyr, or Hooper, were disorderderly exorbitant men in those times, fit to be displaced, that more discreet conformists might come in their places: as now he pronounceth of those that refuse to conforme.

SECT. XXX.

When all fail, a contradiction must be found betwixt our conclusions, and our confessions and practises, but I assure my self, there is not any reader so simple, but if he look over this section, will presently see, that he hath not brought one example of any humane ceremony, not necessary, notoriously known▪ to have been abused unto Idolatry, that is allowed by us. Why then should I spend ink and paper in labouring to un•wine such ropes of sand? Only I would ask the Defendant certain questions.

WHen all faile, a contradiction must be found betwixt our conclusions, and our confessions and practises, but I assure my selfe, there is not any reader so simple, but if hee look over this section, will presently see, that he hath not brought one example of any humane ceremonie, not necessarie, notoriously known▪ to haue been abused unto Idolatry, that is allowed by us. Why then should I spend ink and paper in labouring to un•wine such ropes of sand? Onely I would ask the Defendant certaine questions.

1. If a Temple, a Bell, or a Table-cloth have such idolatry put upon them by the Papists, as the cross hath?

1. If a Temple, a Bell, or a Table-cloth haue such idolatry put uppon them by the Papists, as the crosse hath?

2 If his own heart do not tell him, that there is a civill use of such things, which cannot be imagined of the cross?

2 If his own heart do not tell him, that there is a civill use of such things, which cannot be imagined of the crosse?

3 What superstition there was in the mere significations given by Durandus unto Bells, and Bell-ropes, which is not to be found in the Cross and Surplice?

3 What superstition there was in the meere significations given by Durandus unto Bells, and Bell-ropes, vvhich is not to be found in the Crosse and Surplice?

4 Whether the Pagan use of Bay-leaves which was above a thousand years past, doth cast such a reflection upon our civill use of bay-leaves, as the Popish superstition doth upon our ceremonies?

4 Whether the Pagan use of Bay-leaues vvhich was aboue a thousand yeares past, doth cast such a reflection upon our civill use of bay-leaues, as the Popish superstition doth upon our ceremonies?