A10335:108
Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…
Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections answered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the judgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easily be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not only unlawful to be an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Whereunto are added also and annexed in th'end certain latin letters betwixt the said Master Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections aunswered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the iudgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easelie be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not onely vnlawfull to bee an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Wherevnto are added also and annexed in th'end certeine latine letters betwixt the sayed Maister Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.
Middelburg: printed by Richard Schilders, 1599
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.
not allowed in any case by our law-giver, no not for the defence of the glory of God, much less for the safety of man, a worm. Or, if, notwithstanding all that this could teach you, there might some occasion of doubting still remain: should you not have rather sought to be resolved by me in private conference, then publicly in writing (made common with many, even in the country also, not only in our University) to affirm a point implying flat atheism, that we are no further to keep Gods commandments, then stands with our commodity? and so conclusively to vouch it with an Ergo, as if it did follow necessarily, that all the laws of God (for your reason holdeth by consequent in all) must be set aside, like ceremonial matters, when our own, or other mens, honour, wealth, or life, cometh in question with them? and to add that the equity thereof yet pertaineth to the law moral, and so they are perpetually and simply to be observed? which seemeth by distinguishing their equity from strictness to strengthen them in sound meaning; in deed destroyeth them by teaching their transgressors how to defend most gross iniquity: as idolaters, for example, when, if aNebuchadnezzar do threaten he will burn all who worship not his golden image, they may say, that albeit in Deuteronomy God saith, bThou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them, yet sith the moral law is never contrary to love in forbidding any thing, and the place of Deuteronomy, being taken strictly, would hinder now mens actions of love toward them selves; Ergo in that strictness it belongeth rather to the law ceremonial, though the equity thereof pertaineth to the law moral, and so it is perpetually and simply to be observed. A sentence so ungodly, that when Peter only touched it a far off, or rather less then touched it, speaking of a particular case, no general law; nor Ergoing against it, nor terming the keeping of it strictness, nor plastering the breach of it with equity: but ⟨p. 85⟩when he tended towards it by saying to our Saviour, cMaster, pity thy self, this shall not be unto thee, our Saviour answered him, Get thee behind me, Satan, thou art an offence unto me, because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.