A01760:69
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.
We behold the Authority of the Church making laws, as well in unlawful ordinances as in lawful:) not yet is it the lawfulness or expediency of the thing it self, without respect to the ordinance of the Church, (for possibly other times and diets were as lawful, and expedient too, for such exercises, as those ordained by the Church:) but it is the Authority of the Church prescribing a thing lawful or expedient. In such a case then neither doeth the Authority of the Church bind, except the thing be lawful and expedient, not doeth the lawfulness & expediency of the thing bind, except the Church ordain it, but both these jointly do bind.
We behold the Auctority of the Church making lawes, as well in unlawfull ordinances as in lawfull:) not yet is it the lawfullnesse or expediency of the thing it self, without respect to the ordinance of the Church, (for possibly other times and diets were as lawfull, and expedient too, for such exercises, as those ordained by the Church:) but it is the Auctority of the Church prescribing a thing lawfull or expedient. In such a case then neither doeth the Auctority of the Curch binde, except the thing be lawfull and expedient, not doeth the lawfulnesse & expediency of the thing binde, except the Church ordaine it, but both these joyntly doe binde.
I come now to examine what is the judgment of Formalists, touching Sect. VIII the binding of the conscience by Ecclesiastical Laws. Dr. Field, (h) saith, that the question should not be proposed, whether 1humane laws do bind the conscience, but, Whether binding the outward man to the performance of outward things, by force and fear of outward punishment to be inflicted by men, the not performance of such things, or the not performance of them with such affections as were fit, be not a sin againest God, of which the conscience will accuse us, &c. Unto this question thus proposed, and understood of humane Laws, and where no ⟨p. 12⟩[…] ⟨p. 13⟩