A01760:172
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.
Ans. Neither Beza, nor any other, who mislike the English Ceremonies, condemneth such Rites and circumstances in the external worship of God, a• serve only for decency, but those sacred & significant Ceremonies, which admonish men of their duty, are not of this sort. What shall we say then, of such a conjunction as this, que tantum decori serviunt, hominesque sui admoneant officii? Why would not Saravia write a Chronology, I say not Magnarum (as others), but mirandarum conjunctionum, and record, that at such a time he found out the conjunction and compatibility of two things, which were ever thought incompatible in former ages, namely, Rites serving only for decency, and holy significant Ceremonies admonishing men of their duty in Gods worship? Had there been no Moralist (trow we) then to note, that decency and things serving only for decency have place in civility & all moral actions, in which notwithstanding there is no significant nor admonitory sacred signs of mens duty in Gods worship? And thus should these two things be severed, which he hath conjoined and confounded.
Ans. Neither Beza, nor any other, who mislike the English Ceremonies, condemneth such Rites and circumstances in the externall worship of God, a• serve only for decency, but those sacred & significant Ceremonies, which admonish men of their duty, are not of this sort. What shall we say then, of such a conjunction as this, que tantum decori serviunt, hominesque sui admoneant officii? Why would not Saravia write a Chronologie, I say not Magnarum (as others), but mirandarum conjunctionum, and record, that at such a time he found out the conjunction and compatibility of two things, which were ever thought incompatible in former ages, namely, Rites serving only for decency, and holy significant Ceremonies admonishing men of their duty in Gods worship? Had there been no Moralist (trowe we) then to note, that decency and things serving only for decency have place in civility & all morall actions, in which notwithstanding there is no significant nor admonitory sacred signes of mens duty in Gods worship? And thus should these two things be seavered, which he hath conjoyned and confounded.