A01760:1036
A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded upon the Church of Scotland Wherein not…A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded vpon the Church of Scotland Wherein not…
A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded upon the Church of Scotland Wherein not only our own arguments [sic] against the same are strongly confirmed, but likewise the answers and defences of our opposites, such as Hooker, Morton ... Forbesse, &c. particularly confuted.A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded vpon the Church of Scotland Wherein not only our ovvne argumemts [sic] against the same are strongly confirmed, but likewise the ansvveres and defences of our opposites, such as Hooker, Mortoune ... Forbesse, &c. particularly confuted.
Leiden: printed by W. Christiaens, 1637
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But let us examine the ground which Paybody takes for his opinion. He would prove from Luke and Paul, that when Matthew and Mark say, As they were eating, Jesus took Bread: the meaning is only this: After Supper Jesus took Bread: importing, that Christs taking of Bread did not make up one continued action with their eating, & that therefore their gesture of sitting might have been changed between their eating of the preceding Supper, and his taking of the Sacramental Bread.
But let us examine the ground which Paybody takes for his opinion. He would prove from Luke and Paul, that when Mathew and Marke say, As they were eating, Iesus tooke Bread: the meaning is onely this: After Supper Iesus tooke Bread: importing, that Christs taking of Bread did not make up one cōtinued action with their eating, & that therefore their gesture of sitting might have been changed between their eating of the preceeding Supper, and his taking of the Sacramentall Bread.
Whereunto we answer, that there are two opinions touching the Suppers which Christ did eat with his Disciples, that night wherein he was betrayed: And whichsoever of them the reader please to follow, it shall be most easy to break all the strength of the Argument, which Paybody opposeth unto us.
Whereunto we answer, that there are two opinions touching the Suppers which Christ did eate with his Disciples, that night wherein he was betrayed: And whichsoever of them the reader please to followe, it shall bee most easie to breake all the strength of the Argument, which Paybody opposeth unto us.
First then, there are some who think that Christ having kept the Passover according to the Law, (which is not particularly related, Sect. IV but supponed by the Evangelists,) did sit down to an common or ordinary Supper, at which he told the Disciples that one of them should betray him. And of this judgment are Calvin and Beza upon