Among the instances of scandal arising from the ceremonies, that which in the Abridgement hath the third place is set first by the Def. viz, that the superstitions Papist will be hardened in the liking of his abominable Religion, from which he seeth we borrow our ceremonies, and increase in his hope of the full restoring of it again. To this the Def. answereth, that our rites are not the ceremonies of Papists, because they are purged from superstition. But 1 that they are not purged from all superstition hath sufficiently been declared before. 2 This plea of transubstantiating of ceremonies by the breath of our Convocation is a mere shift, contrary not only to the language of all our Divines, and to that which every mans senses do tell him, but also to the public profession of the Church of England, in the preface to our service-book, as it is cited by him p. 127. For there we are told 1 that an abatement is made of the excess of Popish ceremonies: All therefore are not abolished, but some remain. And which be they, if these in question be not? 2 That some of the old ceremonies do remain. What sense can be given of these words, if our ceremonies be not the same with those which were of old among the Papists? if it were meant of old ceremonies not used among the Papists, then they do not remain, nor are retained, but restored. 3 That none are devised anew▪ therefore they must needs be taken from the Papists, or from the Fathers: but of the Fathers surplice or kneeling at the communion, no instance can be given: and as for the cross, the Def. himself will not defend, I think, all that use which the Fathers put it to. 3. The Papists own words do sufficiently manifest how they are hardened by the imposition and use of our ceremonies. For as it is showed in the Abridgement p. 25, they seek to justify their superstition by this, that we have borrowed our ceremonies from them. And some of them thence conclude (as there is showed) that our Governors like well of their superstition. Beside Gretser, a principal Jesuit saith, that in these ceremonies our Ministers are as Apes of Popish Priests, ⟨p. 79⟩Apol. pr• Gregor. 7 pag. 8, and in his defence, t•m. 2 lib. 4 cap. 16 saith, that our Convocation house in imposing these Ceremonies, do cross the judgement of our best Divines.
AMong the instances of scandall arising from the ceremonies, that vvhich in the Abridgement hath the third place is set first by the Def. viz, that the superstitions Papist will be hardened in the liking of his abominable Religion, from which he seeth wee borrow our ceremonies, and increase in his hope of the full restoring of it againe. To this the Def. answereth, that our rites are not the ceremonies of Papists, because they are purged from superstition. But 1 that they are not purged from all superstition hath sufficiently been declared before. 2 This plea of transubstantiating of ceremonies by the breath of our Convocation is a meere shift, contrary not onely to the language of all our Divines, and to that vvhich every mans senses doe tell him, but also to the publicke profession of the Church of England, in the preface to our service-book, as it is cited by him p. 127. For there we are told 1 that an abatement is made of the excesse of Popish ceremonies: All therefore are not abolished, but some remaine. And vvhich be they, if these in question be not? 2 That some of the old ceremonies doe remaine. What sense can be given of these words, if our ceremonies be not the same with those vvhich were of old among the Papists? if it were meant of old ceremonies not used among the Papists, then they doe not remaine, nor are retained, but restored. 3 That none are devised anew▪ therefore they must needs be taken from the Papists, or from the Fathers: but of the Fathers surplice or kneeling at the communion, no instance can be given: and as for the crosse, the Def. himselfe will not defend, I thinke, all that use vvhich the Fathers put it to. 3. The Papists own words doe sufficiently manifest how they are hardened by the imposition and use of our ceremonies. For as it is shewed in the Abridgement p. 25, they seek to justifie their superstition by this, that we haue borrowed our ceremonies from them. And some of them thence conclude (as there is shewed) that our Governours like vvell of their superstition. Beside Gretser, a principall Iesuit saith, that in these ceremonies our Ministers are as Apes of Popish Priests, ⟨p. 79⟩Apol. pr• Gregor. 7 pag. 8, and in his defence, t•m. 2 lib. 4 cap. 16 saith, that our Convocation house in imposing these Ceremonies, doe crosse the judgement of our best Divines.
