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.

SECT. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.

THE testimonies of Councels and Fathers, alledged in the Abridgement about this point, are largely ranked by the Def. into 14 Sections, as if the maine burden of this Con∣troversie did lye upon their authority: vvheras in the Abridge∣ment they are briefly mentioned as illustrations. I vvill therefore according to the intent of those vvhich alledged them, consider all together.

7. In the fift Councell of Carhage it is true, that he saith, those Altars vvere onely expresly appointed to be abolished, vvhich were set up vvithout reliques of Martyrs. But let the Def. shew any reason, why those also were not to haue the same measure vvhich had reliques of martyrs in them? Surely the Councell▪ seemeth to aime at a perfect reformation: but stayed at this, be∣cause of the superstition vvhich then prevailed among the peoples as they shew in that parenthesis (si fieri potest) if it may be: and in the next Canon.

8 In the next canon (saith the Def.) they would onely haue imme∣diate instruments of Idolatry then brought into publicke use abolished. But how doth he gather this glosse out of the Text? Or wherein doth this glosse excuse our ceremonies, especially as they were in the beginning of our reformation? and since they haue mended as soure Al•• doth in summer.

9 To the decree of the Councell of Bracara, forbidding men to decke their houses &c. in such manner and at such time as ido∣laters did, the Def. answereth nothing that hath any shew of rea∣son in it. For our ceremonies differ nothing from the Papists in place, persons, time, but onely in some opinion: Now the Coun∣cell there doth not forbid the opinion, but the ceremony, even to them vvhich were of a better opinion.

10 The Councell of Affrick doth giue a reason why they con∣demned certaine feasts, because, they were drawn from the errours of the Gentiles. Heerein I am sure it maketh against our cere∣monies.

11 To Tertullian de Coron. the Def. saith lesse then nothing. For he doth not speake of the same individuall habite which was used to idolatry, as the Def. vainely pretendeth: nor of that kind which was onely used in idolatrous worship. For in the same book c. 13, he saith this habit of a garland vvas used in most base places, as playes, stewes, jakes &c.

12 The like answer is given unto Tertullian de Orat. 1 in gene∣rall it is said, that Tertullian doth not condemne these ceremonies meer∣ly for resemblance with idolaters: but for opinion of efficacie and ne∣cessity: wheras the contrary is plaine in Tertullian, for he saith ex∣presly, Propterea in nobis reprehendi meretur, quod apud idola celebra∣tur. Therefore it is to be blamed in us, because it is used before Idols: And B. Iewel Def. Apol. vvith many other of our best Writers against the Papists doe urge these testimonies of Tertullian meere∣ly in regard of resemblance. 2 In washing (saith the Def.) some did then hold an opinion of efficacie and necessitie. If they did, that is no∣thing to the purpose; for they might be condemned in that be∣halfe, and yet meerely also for resemblance vvith idolaters. But no such thing appeareth in Tertullian, he telleth us plainely, that the vvashing before prayer vvas a significant sign in remembrance of Christs delivering unto the Iewes by Pilate, when he had wash∣ed. Cum scrupulose percontarer, & rationem requirerem, compe••i com∣memorationem esse in domini deditionem, c. 11, so that I doe not see but that this vvashing vvas every way like unto our signe of the crosse in regard of the originall signification and use of it. 3 In the ceremony of dossing cloakes before prayer, there was an opinion of necessity, because Tertullian saith, si sic oportet, if this ought to bee done. As if sic oportet, ought to be done, ought alwaies to be expounn∣ded of an absolute necessitie. Doe not our Prelates now say, sic oportet, vve ought to use the ceremonies, and yet disclaime this opinion of necessity? Tertullian onely condemneth, Vacua obser∣vatio, vanitas, quae sine ullius dominici out apostolici praecepti authoritate fit, atque adeo superstitioni deputanda•• All these agree to our ceremo∣nies

as well as to that. 4 For sitting upon beds after prayer, the opi∣nion of necessity is onely condemned by Tertullian (saith the Def.) because he inferreth, otherwaies we ought not to pray but sitting. But that inference is onely upon an allegation out of Hermas vvhich Tertullian opposeth to himselfe about the matter. Concerning the ceremony it selfe, the grounds of his condemnation are, perinde faciunt nationes: apud idola celebratur. So that the Defendant hath given no colourable answer unto Tertullian. Yet one thing he can∣not conceale, though it be nothing to the purpose, viz. that Ter∣tullian in that place condemneth sitting at prayer, which we bring up our Schollers unto. He might surely haue concealed this, as be∣ing a shamelesse slander in regard of us, as all that know us can vvitnesse: and a shamefull practise of our Prelats, generally in all prayers before and after Sermons, except it be vvhen the Lords prayer is repeated: for it is vvell known how little respect they giue unto any prayers, but onely to the Lords prayer, and those that are in the Service-book.

13 Melchiades forbad fasting at the same time vvith Pagans. That was (saith the Def.) because they lived in the same Conutrey, at the same time and place Nothing else he hath to answer. And doth Coun∣trey, time and place, make such a difference, that the same cere∣monies in one Countrey, time and place, shall be Christian, and in another Paganish? What if the Countries be vvithin halfe a daies saile, as France is to England, and the time be the same, as it is in our case? confesse the truth, and shame the devill.

14 Ambrose disswaded Monica from bringing of vvine and cakes to the Church. There is no proportion (saith the Def.) for that was an act of sacrificing performed by women, vvho are forbidden to sacrifice, as well as to preach: devised by private persons: of an ido∣latrous invention. The first of which answeres is Bellarmines de sanct. beat. l. 1. c. 14, but evidently false. For the Papists themselues are not so grosse as to confesse that they offer any proper sacrifice un∣to any creature whatsoever, Bellat. de sanct. beat. lib. 1 cap. 12: and shall I we thinke the mother of Augustine, with other religious wo∣men in those purer times to haue been guilty of so great impiety? Epiphanius may call it a sacrifice in a rhetoricall phrase, because it was an offering: but in disputations we must speake properly, yet Epiphanius doth call it onely an offering. 2 the person or sexe of a woman, maketh no difference. For Monica was not the inven∣ter and appointer, but onely the actor: and a woman may bring her offering and lay it upon the Communion table as well as a man. 3. It doth not appear that this was the invention of private persons: there haue been Bishops vvhich haue fathered as good children as

this was: and I do not know why such a thing, or any significant ceremony may not be lawfully used upon privat devotion, if it bee lawfull for men to impose it. 4. If that vvhich Monica did vvas I∣dolatrous, it is the very thing for vvhich our ceremonies are accu∣sed. 5. Lastly, neither Ambrose, Augustine, or Monica regarded these things in condemning of that act: for the reasons are onely two Ne ulla occasio ingurgitandi se daretur ebriosis: & quia illa quasi paren∣talia superstitioni gentilium essent simillima. The latter of which, viz. resemblance of ••igans, is that vvhich vve urge.

15 To a graue sentence of Augustine, counselling to forsake all the toyes of Pagans, if vve vvould winn them, nothing is answered but that those toyes are not to be used together with Pagans, as if a∣part some of those toyes at the least may be profitably used. Sure∣ly to return his own phrase upon him, de bove & efus caud••, if others wil eat up the oxe, this Def. wil make no bones of the taile, so it be apart.

16 The Councel of Nice decreed that Christians might not keep the feast of Easter at the time, or in the manner as the Iewes did. Not (sayth the Def.) that it was alwayes unlawful so to do, which que∣stion I vvill leave to them that are skilful in human trao••tions, but 1. for hatred of the Iewes. 2. because of the Iewes insultation. 3. for vni∣formitie. The last of these causes doth not agree: for vniformitie might as well haue followed, if all Christians could have been dra∣wen to the same time with the Iewes. The other two agree vvel to our ceremonies. For we are to hate the idolatrous superstitions of the Papists vvith a perfect hatred. And the Papists do insult ouer us for this, that we haue borrowed our ceremonies from them; as is to be seen in the Abridg. p. 25. where much is sayd to this purpose, & by the D. unanswered. And I vvould fain know for what causes other ceremonies of the Papists are abolished, if not these, or for such at the least as would sweep away our ceremonies in controversie, as vvell as them, if it pleased them that haue such bezomes in their hands?

17 The Councell of Gangren forbad fasting on the Lords day onely (sayth the Def.) if it were in contempt of Christian profession. But Au∣gustine Ep. 86. telleth us the true reason vvas because the here∣tickes did reach men to doe so, sacra solemnitate statuta; with religious solemnitie, as the Papists now doe in the Crosse. And whereas the Defen•• asketh, if there be any contempt of any Christian article in our ceremonies: I answer, the crosse cannot be otherwise used, then with proiudice, disgrace, and so some kinde of contempt cast upon baptisme.

18 The 1 councel of Bracar forbad abstinence frō flesh, that Chri∣stians might shew themselves to differ from Priscillianists, the Def.

answer is, that the Papists do not consort with us in the same ceremoniall acts as the Priscillianists did with the Catholicks, at the same ordinaries & banquets. But there is no such reason rendred, or limitation set in the councell, of the same ordinaries and banquets: the same cere∣monie onely is condemned.

19 Thrice-dipping in Baptisme was condemned by a Councel of Toledo, approved by Leo, because it was the custome of Here∣tickes. This was (sayth the Def.) because an hereticall construction was made of it. Even so (say we) a superstitious construction is made of our crosse, not onely by the Papists, but by our owne canons and Canonicall imposers of it.

20 Leo forbidding men to have any thing to do with hereticks, meaneth it onely of doctrinal conference, sayth the Def. But conformi∣tie with them in their ceremonies is a greater fault (for the nature of it) then doctrinall disputing with them. Therefore the testimo∣nie holdeth, from the lesse to the greater.

Thus in briefe I haue examined his particular answers unto our testimonies out of Councells and Fathers. B••t one answer might haue served for all, viz. that they were not brought in by the Au∣thors of the Abridgement for to make an immediat conclusion by against our ceremonies, as the Def. in his answers evermore taketh them: but to illustrate the proposition vvhich condemneth con∣formitie with Idolaters in their ceremonies. And herein wee haue not onely the Fathers, but even the Papists themselues in words many times consenting with us. Suarez. in Thom. p. 3. q. 65. ma∣keth it one rule which the Church is to follow in appointing of ce∣remonies.

Now the Def. passeth from the proposition of this argument, un∣to the assumption. But he should haue done vvell to haue made a little stand at the armie of Protestants vvhich are brought in as giving witnesse to this truth. Abridg. p. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. & 25. why had we not heare one head of Protestant Divines, as vvell as in the former arguments, seeing more are cited here then in them? Surely the Def. could not tel how to giue a colorable answer to so many pregnant testimonies, and therfore thought good to passe them o∣ver in silence, and make his reader beleeve, that none were obje∣cted, because none are answered.