aegritudo he would have spared an innocent usuall phraze of speech and not markt it with so foule pich or tarre as Scurrilitie 2. Now let us heare how hee can excuse the Def. his allegation from all sicknesse and drowsinesse The observation saith he of the Lords Day in place of the Iewes Sabbath is not a humane institution but the analogicall and allegoricall instructions lawfully raisâ—d from that Day are of humane institution not divine I say againe as the Repl. sayd without feare of the Rej. his Spitte of scurrility this is a sicke or drowsie answer For 1. it maketh all analogicall instructions instituted Ceremonies as if nothing could be gathered from any fact or text in the Scripture by analogie or proportion but it must bee straight a ceremoniall institution 2. These analogicall instructions are as the Def. expresseth them meditation of Christs resurrection and of our eternall rest to come And who ever heard or read that these were humane instiâ—utioÌ„ what maÌ„ instituted them when by what authority upon what necessity Are they ambulatorie or mooveable Ceremonies which our Convocation may change at their pleasure Awake awake both Def. and Rej. and see the vanity and scandall of this allegation 3. As a Parallel of the former example Temples were added by the Defend And to make it agree the Rej. is driven to this issue that if it be lawfull by accommodation to put men in minde of heavenly things by earthly then it is lawfull to institute things to that use Which is as if hee should argue thus if it bee lawfull by accommodation to put men in minde of Gods faithfulnesse in keeping his Covenant of Grace by the constant course of nature which he hath set in heaven and earth or by the faithfulnesse and constancy of men morally honest then it is lawfull for men to institute sacred signes for confirmation of the Covenant of Grace and so new Sacraments properly so called 4. Concerning Ceremoniall Festivals of mans mâ—king our practise cannot bee objected because wee observe none We take occasion of hearing 〈◊〉 sed Ve 〈…〉 aâ—censione 〈…〉 and praying upon any day when occasion is offered Wee say with Hospiniâ—n de Orig. Fest. Christ. cap. 2. Not the day but the Word of God c. puts us in minde of the nativity resurrection and ascension oâ— Christ. And this might be the reason why the Repl. passed over this example as of no moment For we doe not feare as the Rej. imagineth lest all the Churches of God will condemne us herein Those that consent with Geneva nor those of Scotland except some of the new edition no nor any that follow Bucers judgement in Mat. 12. Ferias alias prater diem Dominicum sive Christi c. optarim abrogatas universas Zelus ille quo introductae fuere omni verbo exemplo Scripturae caruit mereque rationem secutus est ut ferias Ethnico rum seu clavum clavo truderet Tantis supâ—rtitionibus contaminata illa festa fuerunt ut mirer si quisquam Christianus fit qui ad nomina corum non exhorrescat c. Dominicum diom resurrectionis Christigaudium festiviorem nobis reddidit c. Nullum prudentem virum audivi quâ— non censeat magnam pâ—râ—m aliorum festorum abolendam Maximè consentaneum est cum princa institutione cum scriptis Aposteliâ— ut unus tantum dies in sâ—ptimana sanctificatur I would to God that every Holy-day whatsoever beside the Lords Day were abolished That zeale which brought them first in was without all warrant of the Word and meerely followed corrupt reason forsooth to drive out the Holy dayes of the Pagans as one naile drives out another Those Holy dayes have beene so tâ—inted with superstitions that I wonder wee tremble not at their very names See the place Occolampadius in Isaiam cap. 1. v. 4. thinketh that no wise Christian will condemne us I never heard wise man yet who did not judge that a great part at least of other feasts beside the Lords Day should be abolished He insinuateth manifestly more then hee speaketh Zanchie how favourable soever hee speaketh of some festivals cannot condemne us by that sentence of his in 4. praec It is most agreeable to the first institution and Apostolicall writings that onely one day in the weeke be kept holy SECT 33. IN this Section which the Repl. thought to require no answer the summe is that we are crosse and contrarie to the Authors of our Seruice-booke who thought our Ceremonies to be the better for being significant Now if this be understood so as if we disliked the significancy of them because those Reverend men did like it then we are uncharitably wronged by rash judgement If so that though such excellent men did thinke so yet wee thinke otherwise then our answere is they were men and though they saw much evill in Popish Ceremonies yet not all and therefore judged some tolerable for a time which were free from some faults that others were guiltie of though they banished divers which were as free from darkenesse and dumbnesse as those they reteyned Why they removed those we see good reason why they retayned or rather tolerated these more then them we see none that experience hath not confuted SECT 34. 1. IN this last section this reason is brought accordding to the Rej. his construction If all Ceremonies properly so called must some way be significant then either all Ceremonies are unlawfull or some significant Cerâ—monies are lawfull To which I answer 1. that all outward actions designed or purposely observed and done in reference to some other thing beside the cause or part thereof which is the Rej. his definition of a Ceremony Manuduct p. 29.30 are not mystically â—ignificant by the Rejoynder his owne doctrine ibid. pag. 32.33 Mysticall signification or the want of it doth not make a Ceremonie or no Ceremonie A character of significancie maketh a double or treble Ceremony Relation without signification maketh a single Ceremonie So pag. 39. Simple Ceremonies are those whose use is onely for order and decencie Double are those which serve also to edÃfication 1. by some profitable signification 2. If all Ceremonies were significant yet it doeth not follow that they all teach a spirituall dutie by their instituted mysticall signification of which kinde of signification all the question is in this chapter as is to be seene in the first section 3. If all Ceremonies be significant then there is no sense in exposing double Ceremonies to significant because none are or can be dumbe Aâ—d yet this opposition is made use of by the Def. and Rej. as other where so in these two last sections 2. The Repl. taking from the Def. this proposition Nothing is properly called a Ceremony if it bee altogether destitute of signification sayth that this convinceth not us at all because if this be true then our tenet is that all ceremonies properly so called of mans invention should be packed
which the times favour and therfore strive to make somthing of that which maketh nothing for them In the former section when Order Decencie and Edification should have been handled as Rules according to the title of the digression the Rejoynder soddainly breaketh off referring them to a fitter place Now here in this place he was constreined to touche upon them but so softly and sparinglie that it appeareth he founde this no fitter place then the former for those reserved considerations When shall we come to the fitter place SECT 17. Concerning the ancient Fathers allowing of Humane Ceremonies 1. OF these the Repl. answered it cannot be proved nor is probable that from the first beginning of the Primitive Churche they brought in any new inventions Vpon this the Rej. accusing not him alone but others also that they can beleive no trueth crosse to their opinion because they seeke honour one of another praesume of their new traditions as if the spirit of trueth had come onely to them or from theÌ„ alone answereth that it is a matter of fact proved by Records of Churches against which nothing can be sayd But if he could keep-in his passion so longe as to hear this onely word that there are no sufficient Records of any suche thing exstant from the beginninge then he might see that sufficient answer is given unto the name of all Fathers allways Yet I will adde one conjecture to shew that those observations which seem to have been universall in the Primitive Churche were not so in deed without exception Praying toward the East hath as ancient testimonie as any other humane Rite Tertullian Apol. cap. 16. witnesseth that that was one cause why the Christians were esteemed to worship the Sunne And yet Socrates lib. 5. cap. 22. doeth witnesse that at Antioche which was the first Churche of Christians by name they used not to place their Mysteries which directed their posture of prayer toward the East but rather toward the West And why may we not conceyve the like of Easter as well as of this East observation 2. It was secondly answered that those Feasts which the Primitive Churche is sayd to have observed were not by Canonicall imposition but voluntarie accommodation to the infirmitie of some as appeareth by the varietie of their observation and Socrates his testimonie Marke now what a Rejoynder is given 1. Hee telleth us of a strange conjecture of his even from this answer viz. that the Churches held it not onely lawfull but also convenient to impose upon themselves suche Feasts As if occasionall accommodation were all one with imposition or voluntarie joining in action for the good that is in it were always a certaine argument of holding that opinion which others doe affixe unto it But if they had thought them so coÌ„venieÌ„t yet that Arg. would be of litle force For many Ceremonies were thought then convenient which longe since are universally thought otherwise of therfor left off though no reason of inconvenience can be shewed which did not agree to those times as well as to succeeding times except further abuse which cannot be denied of our Ceremonies in question as religious use of milke hony absteyning from washing ones hands for certayn days after Baptisme etc. 2. That which was mentioned of infirmitie occasioning this accommodation the Rej. after his manner crieth downe as a fiction boldly delivered without proof or colour meerly for opposition sake Wheras notwithstanding it is so clear that the infirmitie of men newly converted from Iudaisme and Gentilisme did bringe into Christian Churches customes like unto those in use amonge Iews and Gentils that Cardinall Baronius from that ground mainteyneth many Ceremonies Quid mirum si imolitat apud Gentiles adde etiam Iudaeos consuetudines a quibus eos quamvis Christiani effecti essent penipus posse divelli impossibile videretur easdem in Dei cultum transferri sanctissimi Episcopi cineessetunt ad an 58. p. 606. What wonder if the growen customes among the Gentiles and we may add the Iewes also were such as from which tho they were converted to Christianisme they were yet so hardly taken that it might seeme impossible to putt them quite off what wonder I say then if the most holy Bishops have graunted them place in the worship of God Doctor Iackson in his Originall of Idolatrie sect 4. chap. 23. sheweth the first occasion of Superstition in Christians to have been the infirmities wherby it came to passe that heathenish and Iewish Rites wherto men had been longe accustomed could not easily be extirpated Where also about suche accommodations he hath this remarkable observation To outstrip our adversaries in their owne policies or to use meanes abused by others to a better ende is a resolution so plausible to wordly wisedome that even Christians have mightilie overreached and intangled themselves by too muche seeking to circumvent or goe beyond others About the Varietie which was of olde in the observation of these feasts the Rejoynder answereth that it notwithstanding the agreement for the thinges themselves was universall Which if he would take with a graine of salt viz. that after some space of time it was for ought we know universall but not upon any Ecclesiasticall imposition nor upon any knowne groundes out of Gods word it is the same that the Repl. affirmeth and Socrates lib. 5. cap. 22. laboreth to confirme 3. Mention was further made of the mischeife that came in by those humane observations To which the Rejoynder answereth that the Anniversarie solemnities have not obscured but praeserved that simplicitie of the Gospel And if they had so doen by accident Satans malice and mans frailtie that is nothing but what may be affirmed of Divine ordinances But 1. the Def. his position was in generall of universall Ceremonies by humane institution and not Feasts alone Now those first Ceremoniall observations are guiltie of opening that gate for all the humane praesumtions to enter into Gods house which pressed in after them which gate could never be shutte from that day to this 2. Those very Feasts made a composition or mixture of humane institutions with divine and therfore did not praeserve simplicitie They also were from their first rise not onely aequalled unto but also extolled above the Lords day Easter brought in a superstitions Lent to attend upon it made Baptisme wayt for her Moon and conformed our Lords Supper unto the Iewish Passeover in unleavened bread etc. It was the first apple of contention amonge Christians the first weapon wherwâ—â—h the Bishop of Rome played his prises against other Churches after slew so many Briâ—tons with by Austin the monke Holie-days in honor of Christ invited unto them Saints holy Days etc. 4. It is praesumtion to make mens inventions as guiltlesse of evill consequences as Gods holy ordinances They are active efficacious occasions given of evill these are onely passive occasions taken Neyther is ther any corruption of Gods ordinances whose originall
admitted from the highest Court suche as the Convocation is As if eyther the Convocation were the highest court or any court at all for ought that I ever heard of the Court of Convocation as I have of a Court of Parliament or as if so muche libertie were left unto a poor Minister now standing at the Bishops barre as to appeal to the next Convocation The Rejoynder surely did not well consider what he spake 4. Wheras the Def. granted that we have reason perhaps to wish that some poenalties were released the Rejoynder interpreteth this reason to be suche as all men that feel the smart of punishment for whatsoever offence may have Which is nothing else but to looke on with laughter at all the greivous thinges which any Ministers have suffered for this cause And yet every foot the Rejoynder putteth on another person and as I am perswaded hath another heart After this the Rejoynder commeth to the slanders of Puritamisme and Schisme And as for Puritanisme he sayth the Def. slided by it as a terme not imposed upon us by him As if we may not complaine of or inferre a consequence from any terme except it be imposed upon us by D. Morton or D. Burgesse or at the least they were not bound to answer for any termes except suche as they themselves have imposed For Scisme and Separation after some sparkeling wordes of rash-blasphemous and firie Sirs he telleth us 1. 1. that nothing may be established in the Churche which God hath not commanded in his wâ—rd 2. that all formes of worhip and all mâ—re Ecclesiasticall rites not praescribed are will-worship 3. That the calling of our Bishops and consequently of our Ministers is Antichristian 4. That our Ceremonies are idolatrous are the first principles of Separation Now if it would please the Rejoynder eyther to declare what is Separation or what is a principle this question would be easilie decided In the mean time I answer 1. the first principle is from Moses if it be understood as we mean it thou shalt not adde any thing therto 2. The second confounding mere rites with formes of worship is not ours but onely by the Rej. his fiction 3. The third supposeth that which we utterly denie that the calling of our Ministers doeth essentially depende upon the Bishops calling 4. The fourth is made scismaticall by a scismaticall conceyt of the Rej. namely that every Church is to be utterly condemned and so separated from that hath any thinge in it by participation idolatrous His ever being of this opinion may be answered in that fashion which he answereth the like phraze withall pag. 216. He hath not ever been the best Logician His profession of separating this day ere he sleep if he did beleeve these principles is nothing else but a rhethoricall flourish which he would twice recall before he would separate from those that bowe to Altars or even those which worship an ubiquitarie bodie in the Lords supper though these are more palpablie idolatrous in his conscience then the Ceremonies questioned are in ours As for the addition with a yea that Mr. Bradshaws very arguments are pretended for Separtion so as they cannot be denied with any forehead etc. It is not worth a refutation because Mr. Bradshaw himself in a booke intituled the unreasonablenesse of the Separation hath sufficiently shewed how unreasonably they are pretended and abused If the Rejoynder hath any thing to rejoigne therto I would willingly see with what fore-head he can doe it The other talke of this section as also the recounting of a confutation in the 15. section I leave to be counted as it deserveth by him that will compare what hath been sayd with the wordy rejoynder to it so vainely opposed and so often repeated Only in few wordes let it be noted 1. how in the 15. section he slighteth the sentence of D. Covell as not worth any answer who confuted his Apologie and in that writing at the least was a kinde of publick wrighter having had as muche approbation as this Rejoynder hath for his rejoynder as appeareth out of the Rejoynder his Praeface pag. 18. namely of the then L.A. D. Bancroft etc. 2. How he maketh the imposers sentence to be an adequate rule of observance de facto 3. How he denieth some divine worship onely to be unholy in the kinde as if some singular true divine worship may be unholy 4. What a wilde consequence he buildeth upon if the crosse be no part of the Sacrament then it is no part of worship because it may not in the Repl. his opinion be a part 5. How unreasonablie he defendeth this consequence our Ceremonies are changeable and therfore not essentiall worship when yet he confesseth the Popish Ceremonies to be changeable and yet essentiall worship 6. What science ther is for a Rejoynder upon suche groundes to charge the Repl. for violating his conscience CHAP. 3. The third Argument taken from the significant nature of our Ceremonies SECT 1. and 2. Concerning certayn miscelaneall notions and testimonies against humane relegious significant Ceremonies 1. THis Argument pleadeth that no humane Ceremonies appropriated to Gods service ordeyned or instituted to teache any spirituall dutie by misticall signification are lawfull About this the Rejoynder threateneth blowes But we have had now suche experience of his forcelesse indevours in other Arguments that the fear of his blowes is past 2. The first proof of our proposition was taken from the second Commandement which the Def. omitted in this place and the Rejoynder will not have any man to take exception against the sayd omission but with what reason let his reader judge 3. A second proof was that Christ is the onely teacher of his Churche and appointer of all meanes wherby we should be taught and admonished of any holy duty and all Christs doctrine with the meanes therof is perfectly conteyned in the holy Scripture Here sayth the Rejoynder the Def. forgot to tell how absurd this collection is Christ is the onely authentique teacher of his Churche etc. therfore they may be no meanes of teaching or admonishing unto duties but suche as be ordeyned as necessarie As if it were sufficient for the Def. or Rejoynder to tell us any thing as they please how litle ever it be to the purpose He maketh shew of a distinction betwixt an authentique teacher and another what doe you call him to which we cannot say muche untill he remember to tell us the name style and office of that other by-teacher Onely this by the way I would learne how we can acknowlege and receyve any meanes of religious teaching with faith except it appear to be appointed by an authentique teacher and lawgiver And how our Prelates in oppointing meanes of spirituall teaching which Christ appointed not can be accounted therin Ministeriall teachers under him as their and our onely authentique teacher As also if Christ be our Authentique Teacher in all good that we learne about religion who taught
Bishops the Copie bearing this inscription A letter sent to the Bishops from Doct. Laur. Humphrey president of Magdalen College in Oxford and Reader of Divinity lecture there YOur Lordships letters directed unto us by our vice-Chancelour although written in generall words yet hath so hearted our adversaryes that wee are now no more coÌ„pted brethren friends but enimies syth the old masse attyres be so straightly commanded the masse is selfe is shortly looked for A sword now is put into the enemyes hands of these that under Q. Mary have drawn it for Popery under preteÌ„ce of good order are ready without cause to bewreck their popish anger upon us who in this wil use extremitye in other laws of more importance partialiâ—y I would have wished My Lords rather privy admonition then opeÌ„ expulsion yea I had rather have received wounds of my brother then kisses of myne enymye if wee had privily in a CoÌ„venient day resigned then neyther should the punisher have ben noted of cruelty neyther the offender of temerity neyther should the pap have accused in their seditious book protestants of contention Religion requireth naked Christ to bee peached professed Glorifyed that Graviora legis by the faithfull ministrye of feedinge pastours should bee furthered after that orders tending to edification not to destruction advanced finally the spouses friends should by all meanes be cherished favourd defended not by counterfite false intruders condemned overborne defaced But alas a man qualified with inward gifts for lack of outwarde shews is punished a maÌ„ onely outwardly confornable inwardly cleane unfurnished is let alone yea exalted the painfull preacher for his labour is beaten the unpreaching Prelate offending in the greater is shot free the learned man without out his cappe is afflicted the capped man without learning is not touched Is not this directly to breake Gods laws Is not this the Pharises vae It not this to wash the outside of the Cup and leave the inner part uncleansed Is not this to praeferre mint and anis to faith and Iudgement and Mercie Mans tradition before the ordinance of God Is not this in the schoole of Christ and in the Methode of the Gospel aplayn disorder hath not this praeposterous order a woe That the Catechisme should be reade is the word of God it is the order of the Church to preach is a necessary point of a Priest to make quarterly sermons is law to see poore men of the poore mens box relieved vagabonds punished Parishes Communicate Roode lofts pulddowne monuments of superstition defaced service done and heard is scripture is statute that the oath to the Q. Majesty should bee offered and taken is required as wel by ordinance of God as of man These are plaine matters necessary Christian and profitable To weare a Surplys a Coape or a cornerd cappe is as you take it an accidentall thing a devise onely of man and as wee say a doubt or question in Divinitie Syth now these substantiall points are inall places of this realme almost neglected the offendes either nothing or little rebuked and syth the transgessors have no colour of conscience it is sinne and shame to proceede against us first having also reasonable defeÌ„ce of our doings Charity My Lo. would first have taught us equitie would first have spared us brotherlinesse would have warned us pitty would have pardoned us if we had beÌ„ found trespassers God is my witnesse who is the beholder of all faith I thinke of your Lordsh. honourably esteeming you as brethren reverencing you as Lords and Masters of the congregation alas why have not you som good opinion of us why doo you trust knowne adversaries and misttrust your bretkren wee confesse one faith of Iesus we preach one doctrine we acknowledg one ruler upon earth in all things saving in this we are of your judgement shall we bee used thus for a surplus shall Brethren persecute BrethreÌ„ for a forked Cappe devised singularly of him that is our enemy Now shall we fight for the Popish Coate his head and body being banished shall the controversy so fall out in conclusion that for lacke of this necessary furniture as it is esteemed labourers shall lacke wages Churches preaching shall we not teach shall we not exercise our talents as God hath commanded us Because we will not wante that which our enemies have desired and that by the appointement of friends Oh that ever I saw this day that our adversaries should laugh to see bethren fall together to the eares Oh that Ephraim should thus eat up Manasses Manasses Ephraim My Lords before this take place consider the cause of the Church the Crests and triumphs of Anti Christ. The laugher of Satan the sorrow and sighs of a number the mysery and sequel of the tragedie I write with zeale without proofe of my matter at this time present but not without knowledge of it nor without greife of minde God move your spirit at this praesent to fight against Carnem Circumcisionem imo Concisionem against literam et legem which principally is now regarded rewarded Speake I humbly beseech you to the Queenes Majesty to the Chancelour and to Mr. Secretary and the rest that these proceedings may sleepe that England may understande your zealous minde toward the worshippe of God your love toward the poore welwillers your hate towarde the professed enimies your unity in true conformity the other neither be needfull now neither exacted in any good age So shall the little flock be bounde to you so shall the great sheepherd be good to you By this we may judge of some others whome he onely nameth 3. That all allowed some â—ignificant Ceremonies is manyfestly proved false in the former allegations 4. We glory no more of synceritie in refusing the Ceremonies then the Rejoynder doeth in using of them 5. It is no abusing of the world to allege generall sentences of men condemning that which they seeme to allow in their practise If it were I can name one protestant writer who hath more abused the world in this kinde then any or all of us and that is no other then our Def. D. Morton For he hath written many bookes of good use against the Papists the cheif grace wherof is that having a good Librarie and using it with deligence and discretion he hath alleged many thousands of their owne testimonies for the disproving of those errors and superstitions which the same Authors in other places or at least in their practise doe apparently eyther allow or admitte of This is the wordy answer which the Rejoynder giveth unto the testimonies alleged in the Abr. pag. 33.34 for to praevent our bragging now let us trie if the Argument naked of testimonies will not stand 3. The Argument is this If those Ceremonies which God himself ordeyned to teache his Churche by their signification may not be used muche lesse may those which man hath devized The Def. his first answer
these words no such collection can be made any more then some like invention out of these we adore Christ and not crucifie him we should abhorre the example of them that did crucifie him and left a Crosse in the place for a signe and memoriall that he was crucified That washing was a signe immediatly of Pilats washing and so of Christs delivering our Crosse is immediately a signe of Pilats Crosse and so of our Saviours crucifying This is the likenesse which the Replier truely noted Concerning the Ceremony of Dossing cloakes before prayer the Defender put it off to opinion of necessity because Tertullian in condemning it hath these words si sic oporteret i. e. if it must be It was replied that our Prelates say also of our Ceremonies sic oportet i.e. It must be so and yet disclaime absolute necessity But answereth the Rejoynd they held an internall simple necessity of conscience not externall onely for order sake as our Prelates doe Of this distinction see the first part of this Suite The collection of this opinion from Tertullians scoffe nisi si qui putant except there be any so foolish as to have such an opinion is so palpably vaine that any man may see he durst not impute that opinion unto those washers he spake against but onely sheweth that from their practise such a fond and absurd opinion which themselves would condemne might perhaps by some be collected Tertullian spake as we now speake If Crossing ought to be used in Baptisme the Apostles in their doctrine concerning baptizing would have made some mention of it except perhaps some thinke that they did not then know or cared not to use the right or best way of signifying Christian valour and constancy in fighting under Christs banner In oppsition to that which was alleged for Tertullians respect unto opinion of necessity and efficacy in condemning those Ceremonies it was replied that he condemneth them onely that is if they had but this fault alone that they were empty observations Vacua observationes quibus vanitas merito exprobranda est siquidem sine ullius aut Dominici aut Apostolici praecepta authoritate fiunt Mujusmodi enim non religioni sed superstitioni deputantur affectata co acta curiosi potius quam rationalis officij certevel 〈◊〉 coercenda quod Gentilibus ad â—quent and to be worthily upbraided with vanity as being done without any warrant from Christ or his Apostles For such things serve not to religion but to superstition and are affected and forced and rather over-curious then any thing rationall at all and even therefore to be restrained they do so suit the Gentiles Heere the Rejoynder after a little touch upon the particle onely now expounded answereth that this was because of aâ— opinion of necessity which is properly superstition because the same Tertullian de Coron mil. alloweth sundry humaâ— signiâ—â—cant Ceremonies held as free and used for instruction In which answer the first part is manifestly false if Tertullians owne wordes may be heard those Ceremonies are supervacuous and vaine which are usâ—d without any authority of Divine or Apostolicall command and are to be accounted superstious and even therefore to be repressed because they make us in some sort like the Gentiles The second part which containeth a reason is voyd of all trueth For 1. Tertullian did not account those Ceremonies human but of Apostolicall though unwritten tradition Traditio auctrix consuetudo confirmatrix fides observatrix 2. For freedome to allege this is cleane contrary to Tertullians intention because he went about to proove the necessitie of absteyning from the Lawral-Croune by the necessitie of observing these unwritten traditions 3. For instruction I would be informed what instruction ther was in Crossing at every step Adomnem progressum atque prometum ad omnem aditum exitum ad vestitum calceatum ad lavacra ad mensas ad lumina ad subilia ad sedilia and goeing forward and at every turne at clothing ones selfe at washing at bed at board c. 4. D. Abbot whose judgement of Tertullian the Rejoynder commendeth pag. 485. in that very place which he commendeth Def. Perk. pag. 883.884 c. sayth plainly that Tertullian defended those traditions against the Church that therin he contradicted himself and that those traditions were partly heathenish and haeretical devises About Tertullian nothing material followeth 7. Melchiades decreed that no Christian should fast on the Lords day or friday because it was a knowen custome of Pagans to fast on those days The Rejoynder 1. sayth one answer was the incongruitie of fasting unto the Lords day But this not being fetched out of Melchiades the Replier justly passed by and so will I though enough may be sayd against it as the Reader may see in the Altar of Damascus pag. 669. c. 2. He telleth us also of another answer by a distinction betwixt a light Ceremonie and a sacred solemnitie But this neyther is in Melchiades nor holdeth congruitie eyther with Scripture forbidding symbolizing with Idolaters in light Ceremonies nor with it self the light Ceremonie being sacred and also a solemnitie 3. The Rejoynder addeth out of his owne store that the prohibition was onely of open and solemne fasting not appointed by the Church Which is as wreched an evasion as the former because the quaestion is of open and solemne Ceremonies and Melchiades disalowed that any Church should appoint it in condemning the thing without any distinction or limitation for a reason that layeth more fault upon the Churches if they should appoint it then upon privat persons if they should observe it without appointment For he groundeth his condemnation upon 2. Cor. 6. What concord hath Christ with Belial What agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols May the Temple of God have agreement with Idols in Ceremonies if the Church appoint so 4. The Rejoynder addeth a note out of a later Councel being a Iurie of twelve Bishops wherin other phrases are used Much good might it doe them that can make any thing of it The passage being thus cleared let us now come to that which the Replier tooke for the Def. his onely answer Melchiades for bad fasting at the same time with Pagans because they lived in the same Countrie at the same time and place This sayd the Replier could not make the difference because so litle a distance may be betwixt one Countrie and another that it can bring up no difference of moment The Rejoynder answereth 1. that it was a reason of inconvenience onely But Melchiades sayd out of 2. Cor. 6. that it was to make the Temple of God agree with Idols Is that onely inconvenient and not unlawful And if it were nothing but inconveniencie was it not confessed in the beginning of this Chapter that Ceremonies Idolatrously abused if they be not of convenient necessitie are unlawfull If this be so then much more unlawful are they if they be inconvenient