A01760:105
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.
Now for confutation of this forged exposition of those places of Sect. III the Apostle, we say, 1. If all the days whereof the Apostle condemned the observation, were judaical days prescribed in the Ceremonial Law, then do our Divines falsely interpret the Apostles words against Popish Holy-days, and the Papists do truly allege, that their Holy-days are not condemned by the Apostle. The Rhemists affirm, qthat the Apostle condemneth only Jewish days, but not Christian days, and rthat we do falsely interpret his words against their Holy-days. sCartwright answereth them, that if Paul condemned the observing of Feasts which God himself instituted, then much more doth he condemn the observation of Feasts of mans devising. So tBellarmine alledgeth, loqui ibi Apostolum de judaeorum tantum festis. uHospinian answering him, will have the Apostles words to condemn the Christian Feasts, more then the judaical. xConradus Vorstius rejecteth this position, Apostolus non nisi Judaicum discrimen dierum in N. T. sublatum esse docet, as an Popish error. 2. If the Apostle mean only of judaical days, either he condemneth the observing of their days materialiter or formaliter, i. e. either he condemneth the observation of the same Feasts which the Jews observed, or the observing of them with such a ⟨p. 27⟩meaning, after such a manner, and for such an end, as the Jews did. The former, our Opposites dare not hold, for then they should grant that he condemneth their own Easter and Pentecost, because these two Feasts were observed by the Jews. Nor yet can they hold them at the latter, for he condemneth that observation of days which had crept into the Church of Galatia, which was not Jewish nor Typical, seeing the Galatians, believing that Christ was already come, could not keep them as figures of his coming, as the Jews did, but rather as memorials that he was already come, saith