A01760:389
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.
As touching these Laws which forbade the Israelites to make round the corners of their heads, or to mar the corners of their Sect. 5 beards, or to make any cuttings in their flesh, or to make any baldness between! their eyes, gHooker answereth, that the cutting round of the corners of the head, and the tearing of the tufts of the beard, howbeit they were in themselves indifferent, yet they are not indifferent being used as signs of immoderate and hopeless lamentation for the dead; in which sense it is, that the law forbiddeth them. To the same purpose saith hPaybody, that the Lord did not forbid his people, to mar and abuse their heads and beards for the dead, because the Heathen did so, but because the practise doth not agree to the Faith and Hope of a Christian, if the Heathen had never used it. Ans. 1. How much surer and sounder is iCalvines Judgment, non aliud fuisse Dei concilium, quam ut interposito obstaculo populum suum à prophanis Gentibus dirimeret? for albeit the cutting of the hair be a thing in it self indifferent, yet because the Gentiles did use it superstitiously, therefore saith Calvin, albeit it was per se medium, Deus tamen noluit populo suo liberum esse, ut tanquam pueri diseerent ex parvis rudimentis, se non aliter Deo fore gratos, nisi exteris & praeputiatis essent prorsus dissimiles, ac longissime abessent ab eorum exemplis, praesertim vero ritus omnes fugerent, quibus testata fuerit religio. So that from this law, it doth most manifestly appear, that we may not be like Idolaters, no not in things which are in themselves indifferent, when we know that they do use them superstitiously. 2. What warrant is there for this gloss, that the Law forbiddeth the cutting round of the corners of the head, and the marring of the corners of the beard, to be used as signs of immoderate and hopeless lamentation for the dead, and that in no other sense, they are forbidden? Albeit the cutting of the flesh may be expounded, to proceed from immoderate grief, and to be a sign of hopeless Lamentation, yet this can not be said of rounding the hair, marring the beard, and making of baldness: which might have been used in moderate and hopeful lamentation, as well as our putting on of mourning apparel for the dead.
As touching these Lawes which forbade the Israelites to make round the corners of their heads, or to marre the corners of their Sect. 5 beards, or to make any cuttings in their flesh, or to make any baldenesse betweene! their eyes,