A01760:91
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.
That which hath been said against all the controverted Ceremonies Sect. I in general, I will now instance of Festival days in particular; and prove both out of the Law and Gospel, that they take away our liberty which God hath given us, & which no humane power can take from us. Out of the Law, we frame this Argument: If the Law of God permit us to work all the six days of the week, the law of man can not inhibit us. But the Law of God doth permit us to work all the six days of the week. Ergo. Our Opposites deny not the assumption, which is plain from the fourth commandment, Sixth days shalt thou labour, &c. But they would have somewhat to say against the proposition, which we will hear. sHooker tells us, that those things that the Law of God leaves arbitrary and at liberty, are subject to the positive ordinances of men. This (I must say) is strange divinity, for if this were true, then might the Laws of men prohibit Marriage, because it is left arbitrary, 1 Cor. 7. 36. Then might they also have discharged the Apostle Paul to take wages, because herein he was at liberty, 1. Cor. 9. 11. 12. 13.
THat which hath beene said against all the controverted Ceremonies Sect. I in generall, I will now instance of Festivall dayes in particular; and prove both out of the Law and Gospell, that they take away our liberty which God hath given us, & which no humane power can take from us. Out of the Law, we frame this Argument: If the Law of God permit us to worke all the sixe dayes of the week, the law of man can not inhibite us. But the Law of God doth permit us to worke all the sixe dayes of the week. Ergo. Our Opposites deny not the assumption, which is plaine from the fourth commandemen•, Sixt dayes shalt thou labour, &c. But they would have somewhat to say against the proposition, which we will heare. sHooker tells us, that those things that the Law of God leaves arbitrary and at liberty, are subject to the positive ordinances of men. This (I must say) is strange divinity, for if this were true, then might the Lawes of men prohibite Mariage, because it is left arbitrary,