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…

^kCartwright hath for the same point, other weighty reasons. It is absurd (saith he) to imagine, that the holy Ghost by Luke, speaking with the tongues of men, that is to say, to their understanding, should use a word in that signification in which it was never used before his time by any Writer, Holy or Profane. For how could he then be understood: if using the note and name they used, he should have fled from the signification whereunto they used it? unless therefore his purpose was to write that which none should read, it must needs be that as he wrote, so he meant the election by voices. And if Demosthenes for knowledge in the tongue would have been ashamed, to have noted the laying down of hands by a word that signifieth the lifting of them up: they do the holy Ghost (which taught Demosthenes to speak) great injury, in imposing this unpropriety and strangeness of speech unto himself: which is yet more absurd, considering that there were both proper words to utter the laying on of hands by, & the same also used in the translation of the 70: which Luke for the Gentiles sake did as it may seem (where he conveniently could) most follow. And it is yet most of all absurd, that Luke which straiteneth himself ⟨p. 166⟩to keep the words of the 70. Interpreters, when as he could have otherwise uttered things in better terms then they did, should here forsake the phrase wherewith they noted the laying on of hands, being most proper and natural to signify the same. The Greek Scholiast also, and the Greek Ignatius, do plainly refer this word to the choice of the Church by voices.

^kCartwright hath for the same point, other waighty reasons. It is absurd (saith he) to imagine, that the holy Ghost by Luke, speaking with the tongues of men, that is to say, to their understanding, should use a word in that signification in which it was never used before his time by any Writer, Holy or Prophane. For how could he then be understood: if using the note and name they used, he should have fled from the signification whereunto they used it? unlesse therefore his purpose was to write that which none should read, it must needs be that as he wrote, so he meant the election by voices. And if Demosthenes for knowledge in the tongue would have beene ashamed, to have noted the laying downe of hands by a vvord that signifieth the lifting of them up: they doe the holy Ghost (vvhich taught Demosthenes to speake) great injury, in imsing this unpropriety and strangenesse of speach unto himself: vvhich is yet more absurd, considering that there vvere both proper vvords to utter the laying on of hands by, & the same also used in the translation of the 70: vvhich Luke for the Gentiles sake did as it may seeme (vvhere he conveniently could) most follovve. And it is yet most of all absurd, that Luke vvhich straiteneth himself