A01760:58
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.
CHAP. IV.
That the Ceremonies take away our Christian liberty, proved by a second reason, namely, because conscience it self is bound and adstricted.
That the Ceremonies take away our Christian liberty, proved by a secound reason, namely, because conscience it self is bound and adstricted.
Bishop Lindsey hath told us zthat the will of the Law must be Sect. I the rule of our conscience, to that conscience may not Judge otherwayes then the Law determines. B. Spotswood awill have the sentence of Superiors to direct the conscience, and will have us to esteem that to be best and most seemly, which seemeth so to them. B. Andrewes bspeaking of Ceremonies, not only will have every person inviolably to observe the Rites and Customs of his own Church, but also will have the ordinances about those Rites, to be urged under the pain of Anathema. I know not what the binding of the conscience is, if this be not it. cApostolus gemendi partes relinquit, non cogendi auctoritatem tribuit Ministris quibus plebs non auscultat. And shall they who call themselves the Apostles Successors, compel, constrain, and enthral the consciences of the people of God? Charles the 5. as popish as he was, ddid promise to the Protestants, Nullam vim ipsorum conscientiis illatum iri And shall a Popish Prince speak more reasonably then protestant Prelates? But to make it yet more and plentifully appear, how miserably our Opposites would enthral our consciences, I will here show, 1. What the binding of the conscience is, 2. How the Laws of the Church may be said to bind. 3. What is the judgment of Formalists touching the binding power of Ecclesiastical Laws.