A01760:203
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.
3. Let the matter be looked to, for which each side contendeth; Sect. IV Brethren saith the eArchb. of Saint Andrews, to contend is not a fault, if so it be for a weighty matter, but to be contentious in a light business this is faulty. Now I wish it may please him to understand, that when we contend about the removal of the Ceremonies, we contend for a very weighty matter, for we prove the removal of them, to be necessary ⟨p. 29⟩in respect of their inconveniency, and unlawfulness. They who urge the Ceremonies, contend for things which are not necessary, and we who refuse them, contend for things which are most necessary, even for the Doctrine and Discipline warranted by Gods Word, against all corruptions of Idolatry and Superstition. That the Ceremonies can neither be purged of Superstition nor Idolatry, I have proved in the 3. part of this Dispute.
3. Let the matter be looked to, for which each side contendeth; Sect. IV Bretheren saith the eArchb. of Sainctandrews, to contend is not a fault, if so it be for a weighty matter, but to be contentious in a light busines this is faultie. Now I wish it may please him to understand, that when we contend about the removall of the Ceremonies, we contend for a very waighty matter, for we prove the removall of them, to bee necessary ⟨p. 29⟩in respect of their inconveniency, and unlawfullnesse. They who urge the Ceremonies, contend for things which are not necessary, and we who refuse them, contend for things which are most necessary, even for the Doctrine and Discipline warranted by Gods Word, against all corruptions of Idolatrie and Superstition. That the Ceremonies can neither be purged of Superstition nor Idolatry, I have proved in the 3. part of this Dispute.
- eSerm. at Perth. Assmb.