A01760:421
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.
aFranciscus à Sancta Clara saith, that Divine worship doeth not agree to the Signs per se, but only per accidens, and he allegeth for himself, that the Council of Trent Can. 6. de Euch. saith not that the Sacrament, but that Christ in the Sacrament, is to be adored with latria. To the same purpose I observe, that bBellarmine will not take upon him to maintain any adoration of the Sacrament with latria, holding only that Christ in the Eucharist is to be thus adored, and that symbola externa per se & proprie non sunt adoranda. Whereupon he determineth, status questionis non est, nisi an Christus in Eucharistia sit adorandus cultu l• triae. Now, albeit Papists understand by the outward sign of Christs body in the Eucharist, nothing else but the species or accidents of the Bread; yet csince they attribute to the same, quod sub illis accidentibus ut vocant sit substantialiter corpus Christi vivum, cum sua Deitate conjunctum, and since dthey give adoration or latria to the species, though not per se, yet as quid unum with the body of Christ which they contain; hereby it is evident, that they worship Idolatrously those very accidents. And I would understand, if any of our Opposites dare say, that Papists commit no such Idolatry, as here I impute to them? Or, if they acknowledge this Idolatry of Papists, how make they hemselvs clean? for we see, that the worship which Papists give to the species of the Bread, is only relative to Christ, and of the same kind with that which Formalists give to the Bread and Wine.
aFranciscus à Sancta Clara saith, that Divine worship doeth not agree to the Signes per se, but onely per accidens, and he alledgeth for himself, that the Councell of Trent Can. 6. de Euch. saith not that the Sacrament, but that Christ in the Sacrament, is to be adored with latria. To the same purpose I observe, that bBellarmine will not take upon him to mantaine any adoration of the Sacrament with latria, holding onely that Christ in the Eucharist is to be thus adored, and that symbola externa per se & proprie non sunt adoranda. Whereupon he determineth, status questionis non est, nisi an Christus in Eucharistia sit adorandus cultu l triae. Now, albeit Papists understand by the outward signe of Christs body in the Eucharist, nothing else but the species or accidents of the Bread; yet