A01760:94
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.
Yet we must hear what the Bishop can say against our proposition. Sect. IV bIf under the Law (saith he) God did not spoil his people of liberty, when he appointed them to rest two days at Pasche, one at Whitsunday, &c. how can the Kings Majesty and the Church, be esteemed to spoil us of our liberty, that command a cessation from labour on three days, &c. O horrible blasphemy! O double deceitfulness! Blasph my: because so much power is a scribed to the King and the Church over us, as God had over his people of old. God did justly command his people under the Law to rest from labour on other days beside the Sabbath, without wronging them, therefore the King and the Church may as justly, and with doing as little wrong, command us to rest likewise: because God by a Ceremonial Law, did hinder his people ⟨p. 22⟩from the use of so much liberty, as the Moral Law did give them; Therefore the King and the Church may do so also. Deceitfulness, in that he saith, God did not spoil his people of liberty, &c. We know, that by appointing them to rest on those days, God did not take away liberty from his people, simply and absolutely, because they had no more liberty then he did allow to them by his laws, which he gave by the hand of Moses, yet he did take away that liberty, which one part of his laws did permit to them, Viz. The fourth Commandment of the Moral Law, which permitted them to labour six days. The B. knew, that this question in hand, hath not to do with liberty in the general notion of it, but with liberty which the Moral Law doth permit. We say then, that God took away from his people Israel, some of the liberty, which his moral Law permitted to them, because he was the Law giver, and Lord of the Law, and that the King and the Church can not do the like with us, because they are no more Lords over Gods Law, then the people who are set under them.
Yet we must heare what the Bishop can say against our proposition. Sect. IV bIf under the Law (saith he) God did not spoyle his people of liberty, when he appoynted them to rest two dayes at Pasche, one at Whitsonday, &c. how can the Kings Majesty and the Church, be esteemed to spoyle us of our liberty, that command a cessation from labour on three dayes, &c. O horrible blasphemy! O double deceitfulnesse! Blasph my: because so much power is a scribed to the King and the Church over us, as God had over his people of old. God did justly command his people under the Law to rest from laboure on other dayes beside the Sabbath, without wronging them, therefore the King and the Church may as justly, and with doing as litle wrong, command us to rest likewise: because God by a Ceremoniall Law, did hinder his people