A01760:546
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.
Then, in his Judgment, order is not to the Rites of the Church a general kind, but only a concomitant circumstance; neither are the Rites of the Church comprehended under order, as particulars under the general kind to which they belong, but order belongeth to the Rites of the Church, as an adjunct to the Subject. And I pray, must not the Rites of the Church be managed with decency and order? If so; then must our Opposites either say, that order is managed with order, which is to speak nonsense, or else that the Rites of the Church are not comprehended under order. But if not; then it followeth that the Rites of the Church are to be managed with levity; confusion, and scandal, for every action that is not done indecently and in order, must needs be done scandalously and confusedly. 2. Order and decency, whether taken largo, or stricto sensu, always signify such a thing as ought to be in all humane actions, as well civill as sacred; for will any man say that the civill actions of men are not to be done decently and in order? dThe directions of order and decency, are not (we see) propria religionis. But as eBalduine showeth out Gregory Nazianzen, order is in all other things, as well as is in the Church. Wherefore sacred significant Ceremonies shall never be warranted, by the precept of order and decency, which have place no less in civility then in religion.
Then, in his Iudgment, order is not to the Rites of the Church a generall kynd, but only a concomitant circumstance; neither are the Rites of the Church comprehended under order, as particulars under the generall kynd to which they belong, but order belongeth to the Rites of the Church, as an adjunct to the Subject. And I pray, must not the Rites of the Church be managed with decency and order? If so; then must our Opposites either say, that order is managed with order, which is to speake nonsence, or else that the Rites of the Church are not comprehended under order. But if not; then it followeth that the Rites of the Church are to be managed with levity; confusion, and scandall, for every action that is not done indecently and in order, must needs be done scandalously and confusedly. 2. Order and decency, whether taken largo, or stricto sensu, allwayes signify such a thing as ought to be in all humane actions, as well civill as sacred; for will any man say that the civill actions of men are not to be done decently and in order?