A01760:314
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.
That the Ceremonies are unlawful, because superstitious, which is particularly instanced in holy days, & ministering the Sacraments in private places.
That the Ceremonies are vnlawfull, because superstitious, which is particularly instanced in holy dayes, & ministring the Sacraments in private places.
THE strongest tower of refuge to which our Opposites Sect. 1 make their main recourse, is the pretended lawfulness of the Ceremonies, which now we are to batter down and demolish, and so make it appear how weak they are even where they think themselves strongest.
THE strongest tower of refuge to which our Opposites Sect. 1 make their maine recourse, is the pretended lawfulnesse of the Ceremonies, which now we are to batter downe and demolish, and so make it appeare how weake they are even where they thinke themselves strongest.
My first argument against the lawfulness of the Ceremonies, I draw from the superstition of them. I cannot marvel enough how Dr. Mourtoun and Dr. Burges could think to rub the superstition upon non-conformists, whom they set forth as fancying their abstinence from the Ceremonies to be a singular piece of service done to God, placing Religion in the not using of them, & teaching men to abstain from them for conscience sake. aDr. Ames hath given a sufficient answer, namely, that abstaining from sin is one act of common obedience, belonging as well to things forbidden in the second table, as to those forbidden in the first, and that we do not abstain from those Ceremonies, but as from other unlawful corruptions, even out of the compass of worship. We abstain from the Ceremonies even as from lying, cursing, stealing, &c. Shall we be holden superstitious for abstaining from things unlawful? The superstition therefore is not on our side, but on theirs.