A01760:272
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.
5. If an Ecclesiastical decree had commanded Paul at that time ⟨p. 46⟩to take wages at Corinth, the Dr. thinks he had contemned Ecclesiastical Authority in not taking wages, though some should be offended at his taking wages. What? could an Ecclesiastical decree command Paul to take wages in the case of Scandal? or could he have obeyed such a decree in the case of Scandal? We have seen before, that no humane Authority, can make that no Scandal, which otherwise were Scandal: so that Paul had not contemned Ecclesiastical Authority, by not obeying their command, in this case of Scandal which had followed by his obeying: for he had not been bound to obey, nay he had been bound not to obey in such a case, yea further, albeit Scandal had not been to follow by his taking wages, yet he had no more contemned the Church by not obeying a command to take wages, then he had done by living unmarried, if the Church had commanded him to marry. The bare Authority of the Church could neither restrain his liberty nor ours in things in different, when there is no more to bind but the Authority of an ordinance.
5. If an Ecclesiasticall decree had commanded Paul at that time ⟨p. 46⟩to take wages at Corinth, the Dr. thinkes hee had contemned Ecclesiasticall Auctority in not taking wages, though some should be offended at his taking wages. What? could an Ecclesiasticall decree command Paul to take wages in the case of Scandall? or could hee have obeyed such a decree in the case of Scandall? We have seen before, that no humane Auctority, can make that no Scandall, which otherwise were Scandall: so that Paul had not contemned Ecclesiasticall Auctority, by not obeying their command, in this case of Scandall which had followed by his obeying: for he had not been bound to obey, nay hee had been bound not to obey in such a case, yea further, albeit Scandall had not been to follow by his taking wages, yet he had no more contemned the Church by not obeying a command to take wages, then he had done by living unmarried, if the Church had commanded him to marry. The bare Auctority of the Church could neither restraine his liberty nor ours in things in different, when there is no more to binde but the Auctority of an ordinance.