kingdom of God ἐυαγγελιζεται is not typified as before, but plainly preached, as a thing exhibited to us, and present with us. Thus we see that to us, in the days of the gospel, the word only is appointed to teach the things belonging to the kingdom of God. _Sect._ 5. If any man reply, that though after the coming of Christ we are liberate from the Jewish and typical significant ceremonies, yet ought we to embrace those ceremonies wherein the church of the New Testament placeth some spiritual signification: I answer, 1. That which hath been said in this argument holdeth good against significant ceremonies in general. Otherwise, when we read of the abrogation of the ceremonial law, we should only understand the abrogation of those particular ordinances which Moses delivered to the Jews concerning the ceremonies that were to endure to the coming of Christ, and so, notwithstanding all this, the church should still have power to set up new ceremonial laws instead of the old, even which and how many she listeth. 2. What can be answered to that which the _Abridgement_ propoundeth(802) touching this matter? “It is much less lawful (say those ministers) for man to bring significant ceremonies into God’s worship now than it was under the law. For God hath abrogated his own (not only such as prefigured Christ, but such also as served by their signification to teach moral duties), so as now (without great sin) none of them can be continued in the church, no, not for signification.” Whereupon they infer: “If those ceremonies which God himself ordained to teach his church by their signification may not now be used, much less may those which man hath devised.” _Sect._ 6. Fourthly, Sacred significant ceremonies devised by man are to be reckoned among those images forbidden in the second commandment. Polanus saith,(803) that _omnis figura illicita_ is forbidden in the second commandment. The Professors(804) of Leyden call it _imaginem quamlibet, sive mente conceptam, sive manu effictam_. I have showed elsewhere,(805) that both in the writings of the fathers, and of Formalists themselves, sacraments get the name of images; and why, then, are not all significant and holy ceremonies to be accounted images? Now, the second commandment forbiddeth images made by the lust of man (that I may use Dr Burges’s phrase(806)), therefore it forbiddeth also all religious similitudes, which are homogeneal unto them. This is the inference of the _Abridgement_, whereat Paybody starteth,(807) and replieth, that the gestures which the people of God used in circumcision and baptism, the rending of the garment used in humiliation and prayer, Ezra ix. 5; 2 Kings xxii. 19, Jer. xxxvi. 24, lifting up the hands, kneeling with the knees, uncovering the head in the sacrament, standing and sitting at the sacrament, were, and are, significant in worshipping, yet are not forbidden by the second commandment.