A01760:136
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.
Mr. Sprint now addeth a third, proving, that to suffer deprivation Sect. IV for refusing to conform to the prescribed Ceremonies, (howbeit 1many ways inconvenient, is contrary to the royal law of love: which he laboureth to evidence three ways. First, he saith, that to suffer deprivation for refusing to conform, doeth by abstaining from a thing in nature in different (such as our Ceremonies (saith he) are proved to be) needlessly deprive men of the ordinary means of their salvation, which is the preaching ministry of the Word, &c. Ans. 1. That the controverted Ceremonies are in nature indifferent, neither he, nor any of his side hath yet proven: they suppose, that they are indifferent, but they prove it not. 2. We deny, that the suffering of deprivation for refusing to conform to the prescribed Ceremonies, doth deprive men of the preaching of the Word. Neither saith Mr. Sprint ought for proof hereof, but that which we have already confuted, viz. that as things do stand, all such as do not conform are to be deprived: whence it followeth only, that the injury and violence of Prelates, (not the suffering of deprivation for refusing to conform) depriveth men of the preaching of the Word. Secondly, he saith, othat the doctrine and practise of suffering deprivation for inconvenient Ceremonies, condemneth both the Apostolical Churches, and all Churches since their times, because there hath been no Church, which hath not practised inconvenient Ceremonies. Ans. It is most false which he saith of the Apostolical Churches, for those Jewish Ceremonies practised by them, were most convenient, as we have said before. And as ⟨p. 6⟩for other Churches in after ages, so many of them as have practised inconvenient Ceremonies, are not herein to be followed by us. Better go right with a few then err with a multitude. Thirdly, phe saith, That the suffering of deprivation for refusing to conform, breedeth and produceth sundry scandals. First saith he, It is the occasion of fraternal discord. O egregious impudency! who seeth not that the Ceremonies are the incendiary sparkles, from which the fire of contention hath its being and burning? so that conforming, (not refusing) is the furnishing of fuel, and casting of faggots to the fire.