Schism detected in both extremes, or, Two sorts of sinful separation the first part…Schism detected in both extreams, or, Two sorts of sinful separation the first part…

What Christ did, I shall speak more anon. Paul hath his [Not the Lord, but I]; signifying, that the thing was not determined by a Law, Rom. 14. He judgeth circumstantial differences such as should not break communion, when yet they that kept days, or kept them not; and they that did eat, or not eat, did it as to the Lord. And did he bid them not judg each other for idolatry? or say, Rom. 14. 17, 18. That Idolaters were acceptable to God, or approved of men? or Rom▪ 15. or bid them receive Idolaters, as Christ received us? He regulateth their Church-Meetings, How many shall speak at a Meeting, and by what course and order; and that women shall be veiled, and not men; and that they salute each other with an holy Kiss, &c. not by a Law that settleth the Particulars, but by the General Law of doing all in order, and to edification; and pleadeth not Institution, but the Custom of the Churches, which is alterable, as the signification of such acts are. And St. James will have the Elders anoint the sick with Oil for recovery, which yet bindeth not us. The Papists use this as an Institution, as they do imposition of hands in Confirmation: They say in Ordination, Receive the Holy Ghost, and breathe on the Person: They wash the feet of one another in imitation of Christ: And yet these men condemn them in this, as superstitious, for imitating Christ and his Apostles, and Scripture-Examples, and cry down Popery, and at the same time call us Idolaters, for going beyond Scripture-institution. The same I say of their keeping Lent, in imitation of Christ's forty days fast, &c. Is it Idolatry both to follow, and not to follow Scripture-Examples?

What Christ did, I shall speak more anon. Paul hath his [Not the Lord, but I]; signifying, that the thing was not determined by a Law, Rom. 14. He judgeth circumstantial differences such as should not break communion, when yet they that kept days, or kept them not; and they that did eat, or not eat, did it as to the Lord. And did he bid them not judg each other for idolatry? or say, Rom. 14. 17, 18. That Idolaters were acceptable to God, or approved of men? or Rom▪ 15. or bid them receive Idolaters, as Christ received us? He regulateth their Church-Meetings, How many shall speak at a Meeting, and by what course and order; and that women shall be vailed, and not men; and that they salute each other with an holy Kiss, &c. not by a Law that setleth the Particulars, but by the General Law of doing all in order, and to edification; and pleadeth not Institution, but the Custom of the Churches, which is alterable, as the signification of such acts are. And St. James will have the Elders anoint the sick with Oyl for recovery, which yet bindeth not us. The Papists use this as an Institution, as they do imposition of hands in Confirmation: They say in Ordination, Receive the Holy Ghost, and breathe on the Person: They wash the feet of one another in imitation of Christ: And yet these men condemn them in this, as superstitious, for imitating Christ and his Apostles, and Scripture-Examples, and cry down Popery, and at the same time call us Idolaters, for going beyond Scripture-institution. The same I say of their keeping Lent, in imitation of Christ's forty days fast, &c. Is it Idolatry both to follow, and not to follow Scripture-Examples?