352 Ilae:Ld ófthe forbiddeth therejeáingof them mediately orimmediately, and forbiddeth the'fia. mjngof filchCommands as ball be . meansof the prohibited:Rejeeiion. :.But God in the Text forbiddeth the Rejeáion.offach,fimplyand "antecedently:to the Laws ofMao Ergp . heforbiddeth the .Rejeáing ofthem mediately or imnediatiy, and forbiddeth the framing of fuch Commañds'aslhall+be meansof.theprohibited Re. jeetipn Though we have thus taken offyour Anfwer, we (hail give you fuller proof in the endof what youcan realónably expeá." .Xou next Anfwer this Argument of ours. [Iftberebe no pawn- that may command fah things any farther then may ffandwith the Reception and other Indulgences of the Text, then mu/t you not fuppofe that any Power may atherwif command them : But the Anteee- dent;if true :Ergo --] Here:.yga.denythe Minor which I prove thus. Ifnone have power to break the Laws ofGod, then there is no Power that may commandfuch risings anyfurther than may hand with the Reception and other In- dulgences of .the Text : But none have power to break the Laws of God : Ergo there is no power that maycommand fuck thingsany further than may flandwith the, Receptionand.other Indulgencesof the Text... We had ufed before another Argument to prove the Minor thus , [ ; If Paul and the refident..Pallor., of the Church of Rome had no power to command Bich tbinge further than mayfl-and with the faidReception and Indulgence, thenno others haver flabpowers But Psvl qnd the. refident Paflors of the Churchof Rome had no fuch power Ergo there are mothers that havefneh] Here you deny the Affumption. Which is proved by the foregoing. Medium. If Paul and the refdent Parlors of theCdpurch of Rome had no power to crofs the Will of God, then they had no power to command fach things further titan-may hand with the laid Reception and Indulgence: But Porr/ and the tefident Pallors of theChurch of Rome had no power to croI the Will of God: Yon vainly nail the Explicationofour Enthymeme in plainer words [ thepro- ving of its obfeare Confgueneeby the more obfere Confguence of another ] and hereupon infult : but we lhall take leave to leave you to your humour in fuck things. If it offend you, blot out the Enthymeme, Peeing you have Reply enough without it Orif you wilibe hill tempted to infult till - you are delivered from the Enthy- memo, youhave our fence in this Argument. If the things fpokenof by the:Apoltle were not only not commanded, but-for- bidden tobe tidmmmanded any further than may Rand with the Reception and In- dulgence of the Text, then there is nofilch difparityin the Cafes as may (hake our Confequence, thoughwith us fach things are commanded :But the Antecedent is trtfe -; Ergoio. is the Conlèquenr. .Tp your Lcond Anfwer,we fit ll again endeavoured to bring you to explain your Llif indion, !what Commanding you mean: but have no Return to that but Si- Igme; whichwe take to he tergrverfation. r -íl"hen we argued thus, [ If there be na Bich diffarety of the Cafes as may warrant your dtf ,bgrisy of penalty againg your Brethren, then our Argument lid' !tankgood : but there is na fach dff'nrtty of theCafes of may warrant your diarity of penalty againfi yarn. Brie throe: E,go -- ^Yr,nd.ny the Minor: which we proved thus -- If thofe that Paul fpeaks of tlsdr feint be received and forborn did fin againfl the command of God, in the wtaknefs oftheirFaith and their Erroneous refillingof things as ftnful that werenot revhefo refufed,then there is noluckdefparity in theCafes as,&e. But, &e. Ergo fibre v ou deny the ConfIquehce ; which we prove thus t If the Sin ofchofe that dgré not kneel heno greater than theirs that were weak in the Faith , and refuted Thugs lawful as unlawful, and took Things indifferent as neceffary, and hereby gratified the Jews and other.,Enemies.of the Church, and trelpaffed on the Chur- ¢hm Liberties purgbafedby.Chriffo -. and yet became the Cenfurers of theprong ; aitd f the Scruple. of Kneeling have as fair Exeules as the other, then the Con fet}nence isgood, -and there ismo filch difp:ìrity in the Cafes as may warrant your penalty :. But the Antecedent is-truea Ergo fo is the Conlequent. .0 Wo- hall. ptofhcute the Comparifon further anon. 3[vhaçided here this Reafon in brief. Foryou fuppofe Chafe that refafe to kneel to tart it ehecommand of Man, and zhe/h that Paul,fieke of broke the command ofGod, and yeilwlra.`,ro he-rereiveel and forbore:.urge there is no filch diljaa icy as may warrant ymawtpenalty,. I-ière you add to our words rrhesammand of Mani the word [only], ad ,fay, that elfe.we do buttrifle. We reply t that byy adding your own words, atni,dien peefsuadirrg us toown them left wearifie, you do. :worfe than trifle, and your
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=