A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part

About this Item

Title
A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part
Author
Ames, William, 1576-1633.
Publication
[Amsterdam] :: Printed [by the successors of Giles Thorp],
anno 1633.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Burges, John, 1561?-1635. -- Answer rejoyned to that much applauded pamphlet of a namelesse author, bearing this title: viz. A reply to Dr. Mortons generall Defence of three nocent ceremonies, &c.
Church of England -- Liturgy -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A19142.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A19142.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 16, 2024.

Pages

A POSTSCRIPT.

SOme Reader may inquire whence came this new writing about Ceremonies? And he may please to be informed, that after the Abrigement was printed, a great silence followed in England, about these matters (as if enough had been sayd on both sides) until D. Morton, then B. of Chester, not thinking it ho∣nest, to silence Ministers, for Ceremonies, before some answer was given unto their reasons they stood upon) undertooke with great confidence to give a full An∣swer to all which was objected.

This answer being printed, was divers years neglec∣ted, as conteyning litle or nothing that had not for∣merly been confuted.

Page 530

But afterward (when silence was interpreted in such sence, as if it had been a yeelding consnt) it was by some thought fitting, that a breif Replie should be op∣posed.

This the Bishop thought not worthy of his owne Re∣joynder; but was contented to put it off unto D. Bur∣ges, as a friend to him, ingaged in the cause, and wanting neyther will, nor witte, nor wordes, nor credit.

And he went about it, with all his might. But fin∣ding more rubbes in the way, then he had thought of, after he had spent about nine years, in Rejoyning to that which was written in some fowre wekes, by Special Command (procured he knoweth by whome) was compelled to thrust forth his imperfect woke, full of such passionate stuffe, as (it may be) upon more de∣liberation, he himself would have recalled.

Vpon these out-cries, it was necessarie to speaka∣gaine for a good cause, lest diffamation should praevayl against it.

But what good (will some say) can be exspected from this writing, when the cause appeareth dsperat•••• Surely litle or none for the publick: Because in our Bishops courses, Will, and Power, have jusled out Reason.

But yet Gods word is not bound. And if we must needes be oppressed by them, is it not worth a litle inke and paper, to demonstrate, that it is in a good cause?

By this meanes, our consciences are justified; our

Page 531

afflictions made more tolerable; our oppressours though more angered, yet must of necessitie be lesse insulting; and our names shall suffer lesse, though our bodies and outward estate endure more: and Poste∣ritie shall not say, that (for our owne ease) we be∣trayed the cause, by leaving it more praejudiced to them, then we receyved it from our Fore-fathers.

FINIS.
Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.