A19178:375
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.
SECT. XV.
IN the last place, the Defendant bringeth forth to answer the words of the Apostle, 1. Thess. 5. 22. Abstain from all appearance of evil. But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgement which he citeth, so in the words or sense which he setteth down, I dare say it is not used either of them, or any other against the ceremonies. Yet let us hear his answer. The Apostle speaketh (saith he) of the opinions of private men. But 1. what warrant hath he to restrain a general precept, when the universality of it agreeth with the law? Abstain from all appearance, saith the Apostle: 1. saith the Def. from some private opinions. 2. Why must appearance of evil be needs understood of opinions only? two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly: but the most otherwise; & the word translated appearance, signifying rather an object of seeing then of hearing, leads us rather to the eye, as in actions, gestures, garments, then to the ear in doctrines. ⟨p. 88⟩3. For that which he addeth of private mens opinions, there is no circumstance of the text, nor any reason or authority that doth warrant such a gloss.
IN the last place, the Defendant bringeth forth to answer the vvords of the Apostle, 1. Thess. 5. 22. Abstaine from all appearance of evill. But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgement vvhich he citeth, so in the words or sence vvhich he setteth downe, I dare say it is not used either of them, or any other against the ceremonies. Yet let us heare his answer. The Apostle speaketh (sayth he) of the opinions of privat men. But 1. vvhat vvarrant hath he to restraine a generall precept, when the vniversalitie of it agreeth vvith the law? Abstain from all appearance, sayth the Apostle: 1. sayth the Def. from some privat opinions. 2. Why must appearance of evil be needs understood of opinions onely? two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly: but the most otherwise; & the word translated appearance, signifying rather an obiect of seeing then of hearing, leads us rather to the eye, as in actions, gesturs, garments, then to the ear in doctrines.