A01760:531
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.
2. If Formalists will make any advantage of the building of Synagogues they must prove that they were founded, not upon the extraordinary warrant of Prophets, but upon that ordinary power which the Church retaineth still. As for the Love-feasts used in the primitive Church. 1. They had no religious state in Divine worship, but were used only as moral signs of mutual Charity. kThe Rhemists will have them called C•nas dominicas. But what-saith Cartwright against them? We grant that there were such feasts used in times past, but they were called by the name of [Greek or Hebrew] or Love-feasts, not by the name of the Lords Supper: neither could one without Sacrilege give so holy a name to a common Feast, which never had ground out of the Word, and which after for just cause was thrust out by the word of God. 2. If it be thought, that they were used as Sacred Signs of Christian Charity, because they were eaten in the Church. I answer, the eating of them in the Church is forbidden by lthe Apostle. what? saith he, have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the Church of God? Aperte vetat saith mPareus, commessationes in Ecclesia, quocunque fueo pingantur. Vocabant [Greek or Hebrew] charitates: sed nihil minus erant. Erant schismatum fomenta. Singulae enim sectae suas instituebant. And a little after. Aliquae Ecclesiae obtemperasse videntur. Nam Justini temporibus Romana Ecclesia [Greek or Hebrew] non habuit. Concerning the kiss of charity used in those times, 2. Cor 13, 22. we say in like manner, that it was but a moral sign of that reconciliation, friendship, and amity, which show it self as well at holy assemblies, as other meetings, in that kind and courtesy, but with all chaste salutation, which was then in use.
2. Jf Formalists will make any advantage of the building of Synagogus they must prove that they were founded, not upon the extraordinary warrant of Prophets, but upon that ordinary power which the Church retaineth still. As for the Love-feasts used in the primitive Church. 1. They had no religious state in Divine worship, but were used only as morall signes of mutuall Charity. k