beleue left by tradition here yow bear vs in hand of commandementes I know not how many written not necessary to be obserued but onely to last for a tyme yf vnwritten traditions be perpetual and written cōmandementes be not what wanteth to the vtter banishment of al truth and setling of al falshood in the church of god For as yow may except against this so may other against any commandement of the Apostles whereas the autority of god in them once being shewed ether men owght to shew some place wherby that is called bak or els let yt stand in that autority it was first set in of the lord To that I alledged that god is present in his church vuith the riches of his spirit in knovuledg vuisdome c. and especially vuith those lavufully called vnto office cōfirming it by the exāple of Saul he answereth the church is sometime withowt good Pastor or good gouernour as in Elias tyme which is vntrue for there were a hundreth prophetes kept of one man alone Then he saith that it is Anabaptistical vpon a miraculous change and that of one to make a general rule But yt is his great faut not to know that the miracles wrought vpon certein haue a general doctrine and serue to the confirmation of our faith in al our necessities As the feeding of the people of god in the desert with man c. serueth to this that althowgh the ordinary meanes of norishment fail yet that the lord wil otherwise prouide for vs the feeding of the people in the desert by our Sau. Christ to this that those which seek the kingdome of heauen shal haue al other thinges cast vnto them Yf I had giuen hope of the assistance of god in thinges taken in hand withowt a calling or in a calling withowt vsing the lawful meanes which god putteth in our handes then yt had bene Anabaptistical but to assure the church of the assistance of god in goeing abowt that which I hould for commanded of hym when yt assaieth al lawful meanes it can ys more skilful diuinity then yow can stayn with al the skil yow haue I could haue browght other examples of Dauid Salomon c. but that one of Saul was more pressing the force whereof noted by me yow clean pas by Nether hath the lord doen this in certain particular persons but generally in his whole church For when he would make his tabernacle which was a figure of the church he commanded an exquisite workmanship in yt where albeit there was nothing more gros and rude then the Israelites as those which had bene many yeares houlden in vile slauery occupied in clay and dirt and al other kinde of drudgery yet the lord gaue numbers of such dexterity in working al kinde of broidery and riche workes as if they had bene browght vp in al liberal exercise and norished as Princes children Moreouer when as the lord furnished vnto the church vnder the law able men for this function notwithstanding he vsed not that larges toward yt which he doeth now towards vs they are to iniurious vnto the grace of god towardes the church now which vnder pretence of want of able men would driue this order owt of yt In the city of Athenes as Tertullian reporteth children spake vuhen they vuere but a moneth ould and shal we think that in Ierusalem which the lord wil haue to be the beauty of the world and which he hath set vpon a stage that in yt he might as it were make a shew of al his riches shal we think I say that men of 30 and 40 yeares shal be al such babes that they shal not be able to giue any iudgment of the lawes of that city whereof they haue bene so long Burgesses Ad also that yow to giue the Pastor a pasport to be away from his charge say that there may be diuers found in his absence able to answer al the dowtes that a dowtful and turmoiled conscience can minister which verely althowgh it be not the same yet is a rarer gift then is necessarily required of an Elder of the church such as we require To that I alledged that the common vuealth gouernment must be framed vnto the church and not the church gouernment vnto the common vuealth as the hanginges to the hovus and not the hous to the hanginges he answereth as thowgh I had ment that the form of the gouernment must be changed and made the same with the form of the church gouernment which is an open wresting of my wordes seing al know that to be framed according to another thing is not al one as to be made the same with yt oneles he that commandeth his hanginges to be framed to his how 's commandeth that his how 's and hanginges should be made the same or that the Master which biddeth his seruant frame him self to him biddeth hym to giue commandement for commandemēt chek for chek blow for blow Therfore my meaning could not be such but it was as it is which I also expounded in the example of the Prince the principal part of the common wealth that if there vuere any custome prerogatiue or pomp in the common vuealth before the Prince ioyned him self to the church contrary to the order of a church vuel established that that should be corrected And if I had had any such meaning as he surmiseth yet our common wealth could haue receiued no such change by this considering that I had boeth declared my liking of yt and shewed how the form thereof resembleth the form of the church gouernment wherby also appeareth what a shameful slaunder it is which he surmiseth of me that I would haue Princes throw down their crownes before the Seniors of the church c. which I precisely preuented with plain wordes because I knw with whom I had to doe Albeit that Princes should be excepted frō ecclesiastical discipline and namely from excommunication as he here and otherwhere signifieth I vtterly mislike Now he hath left the point of his slaunderous speach in me in his answer to my argumentes as a bee which hath lost her sting he is altogither vnprofitable For vnto the similitude of the how 's and hanginges he saith that it proueth yt not but reason he sheweth none vnto that also that the church vuas before the common vuealth and therfore that yt should serue the church and not the church yt he saith the argument foloweth not but he saith yt onely whereas if the church and commō wealth were otherwise equal which can not be one onely respecting the lyfe to come the other the cōmodityes of this lyfe yet hauing this preeminence aboue yt that it was before yt it must needes be better then yt and consequently owght rather to be serued of yt then to serue yt the Apostle also vseth the same reason to proue that the woman is subiect to the man. To that I alledged that the
withowt an ordinary calling For if the Minister may not bear ciuil office vntil he be ordinarily called then here is yet no distinction made betwene the respect of a Minister to a ciuil office and the ciuil officer to the Ministery In the end yow are compelled to destroy your own distinction affirming that as a minister may ioyn to his Ministery a ciuil office if he be called therevnto by the Prince so the Prince may ioyn to his office the function of the Minister if he be called vnto it by the Bishop For so yow must needes mean seing yow make him the Stward of ecclesiastical officis which absurdity before this birth of yours I suppose was neuer heard of and it is thorowgh owt the whole discours confuted For as for that yow ad if they be lawfully called it is to open folly seing the question is whether there be any such election lawful Here the D. is taken again in his wordes For if the example of our Sauiour Christes whipping doe proue that a Minister may medle with ciuil affaires then it proueth that he may not onely sit in iudgment of crimes but also be the Tortor himself which he denieth For our Sauiour Christ executed the punishment with his own hand To that also I alledged that the Ministers by the examples of Paul and Peter may be Fishers and Tentmakers if of the D. examples it may be concluded that it is lavuful for a Minister to bear ciuil office he answereth they may doe so vpon like occasion The occasion of S. Paules laboring with his handes was partly that he might not in that point be inferior to the fals Apostels which toke no stipend partly to support the need and pouerty of the churches There being now therfore Anabaptistes which teach withowt wages and diuers churches which are very poor by the D. answer it is conuenient the Bishops should exercise some handycraft which beside other inconueniences is against that which him self hath truly said that they are hinderances vnto the ministery considering that there be no such giftes now a daies as the Apostles had which were able to doe more with one hand then we with boeth And if his answer were trw yet it is nothing to purpose For if by these examples he wil conclude that Ministers may ordinarily be called to the ciuil gouernment then it must also folow that by these examples of S. Paul and Peter the Ministers may ordinarily haue occupations ioyned with their ministeries But if the Ministers may not exercise any handicraft but in like cases as the Apostles did and vpon like callinges then it foloweth also that they may not exercise ciuil offices but in like time and vpon like callinges as those did from whome he draweth his proofes The rest is answered Before the D. said that the Ministers could not exercise any ciuil iurisdiction in tyme of persecution here he saith that Timothy which liued in time of persecution exercised ciuil iurisdiction Thus like a windshaken reed he neuer standeth in one sentence But I pray yow note his reason which is because mention is made of accusers and witnesses as if they were not common to al kinde of iudgmentes For where the thing is not manifest there the trial must needes be ether by confession or witnesses so that if there be an ecclesiastical iudgment there must needes be witnesses and accusers otherwise the Minister in tyme of persecution should take vpon him ciuil iurisdiction withowt the consent of the Magistrate which is absurd and being vrged by me is vnanswered yea the Housemother which vpon accusation and witnes of some of hir children chasteneth other some should by the D. saying break vpon the office of the ciuil Magistrate Vpon diuerse reasons browght to shew that S. Peters killing Ananias and Saphyra with the word which reason was ministred him owt of Pigghius proueth not that the Ministers may haue their prisons he answereth nothing but taking vp the carcase of his argument in steed of burying of it assayeth to blow life into it after this sort Peter punishing with death did nothing repugnant to his vocation therfore it is not repugnant to the vocation of a Minister to punish with temporal punishment which foloweth not For as muche as the vocation of a Minister now is not the same which Peters was at that tyme not onely for that he was an Apostle but also for that withowt a particular motion of the spirit of god it was vnlawful for any or for Peter him self to haue doen so That browght to vphould this with that that which Peter did by extraordinary power the Ministery now may doe by an ordinary is a very cartrope to pul in al confusion into the church and common wealth For thus of that Phinees a priuate man killed and the Israelites borowed which they neuer meant to restore if the Magistrate wil licence men to doe so it shal be lawful by the D. rule If he say that those are thinges forbidden but not this that a Minister should bear ciuil office it is nothing but an asking of that in controuersie wherupon he continually faleth And where he saith he speaketh of the fact of Peter and not of the maner euen the fact of Peter was to kil a man withowt any vnder Minister And therfore of this answer also it foloweth that the Magistrate may appoint the Bishops to be the Tortors and hangmen which the D. hath before denied How commeth it also to pas that he which before compared the politik lawes of god putting Idolaters and adulterers to death in cruelty with the Turkes lawes now maketh it a death matter if a man to conceal some part of his wealth being iudicially demaunded thereof do make a ly For thus much he saith in effect when he affirmeth that it may now be doen ordinarily which Peter did then extraordinarily Vuhere I added that the povuer vuhich S. Peter vsed vuas ecclesiastical and vuithal my reason ovut of the Apostle vuho reckeneth that amongest the church giftes leauing the reason he opposeth the autority of M. Beza whereas if that had bene any lawful kinde of disputing I could haue alledged learned writers that such punishmentes were doen by vertue of that church office But how could S. Peter doe that by right of the ciuil Magistracy when as the ciuil Magistrate had no right to punish that dissimulation which was hid Hetherto also refer that the D. him self in his former book affirmeth that their offence was against no ordinary law of the church or common wealth wherevpon foloweth that there being no transgression against his lawes there could be no punishment due M. Bezas meaning is onely that as the lord when there was no Christian Magistrate did vse corporal punishmentes and those of death against them which resisted the doctrine of the gospel so the Christian Magistrate should doe the same so that althowgh his maner of speach be diuers with that
I propounded yet his iudgment is al one Here Pantaleon and M. Bale are reiected as insufficient to make report of Eugenius doeinges which was so long before their tyme and yet Erasmus is stoutly vpholden for reporting Titus to haue bene an Archbishop albeyt Titus was 600 yeares before Eugenius But if the D. can not shew any that commaunded that the Bishops should haue prisons before Eugenius these writers shal be able easely to maintayn their credit against his bouldnes of affirming and denying what so euer he listeth To that owt of Possidonius that those matters alledged of the Bishop to be doen of Augustin could not be ciuil affaires considering that he immediately opposeth them vnto secular or worldly matters beside wordes he answereth nothing he opposeth other places owt of Augustin wherof the first owt of his book of the workes of monkes can not be vnderstanded as he would haue it of any iudgment giuen by reason of ciuil autority For that which he did he affirmeth that the Apostle commaunded it should be doen by the most contemptible in the church So that oneles he dare say that the Apostle commaunded that the simplest in the church might bear ciuil office when the Magistrat being an enemy would commit no autority vnto him this place is vtterly from the purpose Again when Augustin saith that the Apostle hath tyed him so to doe and laid yt vpon him if the D. wil haue that a ciuil office is there vnderstanded it must folow that the ciuil office is incideÌ„t vnto the office of the ministery and can not be seuered from it The place owt of his epistle 110 is to as smale purpose For in that it appeareth there that the Councels decreed that Augustin should ceas from those busines it is manifest that he dealt with them not by any right of ciuil office For what had the Councel to doe to decre that he should not doe that which the Magistrate had lawfully laid vpon him he owght to haue sowght the releas of that at the Magistrates haÌ„d and not at the Councels likewise in that he obteineth of the people that these matters should be turned from him vpon Eradius and that in an ecclesiastical assembly where they met for chusing of one to succede Augustin in the Bishoprik it is manifest that it was no ciuil office Last of al it is to be obserued that in boeth these places Augustin complaineth of these matters as of hinderances vnto his Ministery as thinges which did more let the cours of yt then if he had vurovught euery day vuith his handes in some occupation that he seeketh to be deliuered from them at the Councels and at the peoples handes whereas our D. saith that they are not onely no hinderances but necessary helpes to doe the Ministery with and not onely seeketh not that the Bishops may be discharged but maketh cordes to binde these offices streighter to theÌ„ I haue reported the truth the Bishops wordes are owt of Clement that it is not lavuful for a Bishop to deal vuith boeth svuordes likewise that he ovught to be remoued that vuil supply the place boeth of a ciuil Magistrate and of an ecclesiastical person These wordes doe not onely coÌ„demn the pulling the sword owt of Princes haÌ„des but al vse of it in eccles ê‘sons I pray god that the custome of shameful denials doe not so harden your forhead that no point of truth how sharp soeuer can perce it Howbeit I trust whatsoeuer yt please yow to say it is manifest to al that doe not willinglie close their eyes against the truth that the scripture teacheth that Ministers owght not to medle with ciuil offices That which yow ad owt of Deut. 17 maketh nothing for yow for they are there biddeÌ„ to resort vnto the Priest as to the Interpreter of the law when the question was difficult and they knew not what to doe which is manifest in that he distinguisheth there the Priest from the Iudges so that in such appeales he placeth the Priests and Leuites office in teaching what is the wil of god and the Iudgis office in giuing sentence accordingly as appeareth yet more plainly in the same chapter The same is to be answered to that alledged owt of Nombers 27. In which matter that the Priest was present and called to consultation for the difficulty thereof to know what was the wil of god in that behalf it is manifest in that he being not able to resolue of the matter Moses was fayn to bring it to the lord To let pas that it was not Aharon which was taken into that consultation but Eleazar onles yow wil haue Aharon decide controuersies after his death The example of Melchisedec boeth king and Priest is more absurdly alledged then the other not onely because he was before the law when this order of separating the priesthood from the ciuil gouernment was not yet established but because he had them boeth that he might be a figure of our Sauiour Christ as the Apostle and Prophet doe declare Yow might much better haue alledged Abraham which was boeth a Priest a Prophet and a noble warrior which notwithstanding yourself doe not permit vnto the Bishop As for the appeal which Constantine graunted from the ciuil Magistrate vnto the Bishops likewise Theodostus and Carolus graunt that men might chuse the Bishops Iudges of their controuersies if either party would they were the wrestes wherwith the Princes scepters were wrung owt of their handes and as I haue before shewed owt of M. Caluin al syncerity ovut of the churches yea vpon that very graunt of Constantin it is noted in the margent that it is repugnant boeth to the doctrine and example of S. Paul. And in deed by the first of these decrees the Bishops ciuil autoritie is made equal with the Emperours And by the other it is at the pleasure of the people whether al the ciuil Magistrates shal be Idoles or no hauing the bare name of the Magistrate withowt doeing any duty For if ether of the parties be affected towardes the Bishops iudgment the Magistrates may goe lay them down to sleep Nether doeth it folow that because the Emperours gaue such liberty or licentiousnes rather vnto the church or because some Bishops vsed it that therfore the practise of the church was such For I haue shewed that the godly Counceles forbad it and that the godly fathers vtterly misliked of it And as I haue alledged some so it is not hard to alledg others to the same effect In his example of Dorotheus his translation is fauty For in steed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a ciuil honour he hath turned it priesthood as if it had bene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the office also which Eusebius noteth he had was to ouersee the purple dyes in Tyre an office to aduance the Ministery I think in the D. own iudgment very vnfit His examples of Philaeas and
of the Apostle For seing boeth that which immediatly goeth before this and which foloweth immediately after be publik offices what extreme bouldnes would it be to say that this in the middest is but priuate If he doe giue him self this licence let him shew example of such an order Further the Apostle here maketh a partition as it is manifest by the wordes and articles which are instrumentes to part with Now if he wil haue one membre in this partition bigger then al the rest and to conteyn them al he maketh the holy gost which is to be detested an euil and an vneuen parter Herevpon it cometh that when he speaketh of the dutyes which belong to al alike he beginneth with another form of speach Last of al yt is not to be omitted that he vseth the word of Distributor rather then the word giuer For althowgh it be taken sometyme for the giuer yet that is but by a trope for somuch as the same is often the distributor which is the giuer so that the proper signification being to dispose that which was giuen of others agreeth vnto the Deacon and not vnto one which giueth of his own His exceptions of Prophesy and widowes office be answered In the next being cōuicted of his vntruth he falleth to iesting albeyt it be manifest that the Adm. towcheth not onely thinges in controuersy but sometyme also the breach of that which is established To proue that the Deacon owght not to meddle with the administration of the word and Sacramentes I alledged first that the Apostle vuilling euery one to kepe him self in his boundes boundeth the Deacons office in distributing of the church treasur and by that separateth him from those vuhich haue the dispensation of the vuord vuhereas if he should preach the vuord as the other the Apostle should haue made an euil partition and pretended a separation vuhere none is His answer hereunto is that it is no reason but why it is not he kepeth to him self The second reason was that for so much as the Apostles hauing such passing giftes did finde them selues vnable to susteyn boeth the ministeries of the vuord and for the poor that therfore there can be much les novu any able to doe them boeth togither His first exception whereunto is friuolous and before confuted his other that they spent no great tyme in prouision for their sermons is vntrue and openeth a gap to Anabaptism For althowgh their giftes were greater in those tymes then now yet they omitted not therefore to study diligently which may appear in that S. Paul is so careful to haue his parchmentes browght in that S. Peter had red S. Paules epistles so diligently Likewise that the Prophetes in tymes past which had extraordinary giftes vsed great diligence in reading as it may appear in Daniel which notwithstanding he was so wise so expert in the tonges and had so oft and so wonderful reuelations yet studied the prophesy of Ieremy And in a word of them al S. Peter pronoūceth that they took great paines in their prophesies vsing wordes most strong to set forth their great labor in prouiding fo◠that they tawght Nether was this of pleasure and a thing which they might ether doe or leau vndoen but a commandement as it is to be seen in the exāple of Timothy which had giftes so much the more excellent then the Deacons as his office of Euangelistship was higher then the Deaconship For he is biddē to read to meditate and to preach ioyning one with another and that not sleightly but with attention yea that he should dvuel in them or be as it were shut vp and enclosed in them thereby noting the great diligence that was to be bestowed as wel in reading and studying as in preachīg And thus went the building of god singulerly forward whē vnto the giftes which came withowt their labor miraculously they labored also after ether encreas of them or getting of nue by the ordinary meanes prouided of god in that behalf Again S. Paul reckoning vp al the ministers of the word the Deacon not being there it foloweth that he is no mininister of the word And here the D. is plainly found at strife with him self For he confessing that there is in that place a complet and perfect diuision of the ministeries of the word and withal that the Deacon is not there conteyned doeth notwithstāding here sing a clean contrary song Moreouer it is diligently to be obserued that S. Paul in describing this office requireth not that they should be able or apt to teach which notwithstanding being by the An. iudgment the cheif point belonging vnto him should haue bene most absurdly left owt Lastly if the Deacons office had bene togither with the Stewardship of the church treasure to haue preached and administred the sacramenres yt must folow that his office must haue bene a greater office then the Pastors as that which requireth greater giftes for executing boeth that which the pastor doeth and more to which being absurd that is also whereof this foloweth That monster which remaineth in this diuision I wil set vpon whē I shal haue run throwgh that which pertayneth vnto this matter as it lieth in the 14 Tract As I did not before deny so now I cōfes him to haue bene Phillip the Euangelist and not Phillip the Apostle which is mentioned Actes the 8 and hould as before that he preached by vertue of his Euangelistship and not by vertue of his Deaconship vuhich vuas then ceased for that the church vuhereunto he serued vuas scattered Against which answer his autority owt of the Actes 21 to proue that he was stil Deacon is quite contrary to him self For it affirmeth of the tyme past that he was before Paules arriual vnto Caesarea Deacō not that he was so when he arriued For then the interpreters would haue turned the participle which serueth boeth for the tyme past and present according to the circumstance of the place which is one of the seuen and not vuhich vuas So that here we haue the common consent of al interpreters flatly against the D. namely that Phillip was not then Deacon when S. Paul came to Cesarea but had bene before That of M. Gualter maketh also against hym which placeth the Deacons office in the disposing of the church treasure and that they preached not but in tymes of necessity So that where M. Gualter permitteth preaching no more vnto Deacons then yow doe baptim vnto wemen yow wil haue it their standing office The difference betwene a Priest and a Deacon browght owt of Augustin and Epiphanius can by no meanes stand considering that that imposition of handes whereby giftes were extraordinarily giuen which Phillip absteyned from he did not absteyn from onely as Deacon but also as he was Euāgelist seing that was a thing peculier vnto the Apostles and a proper note whereby the lord magnified their ministerie
poor in euery church the vse of this office in euery church is manifest For further confirmation of which point the reader may haue recours to that I haue proued before that in euery church according to gods institution there owght to be a Bishop especially when the Ans hym self wil not deny but the Bishop and Deacon should goe togither Likewise vnto that which hath bene sayd of the Eldership in this behalf considering that some of the reasons are common to boeth As for the first of his exceptions that the Deacons of one city may serue al the whole Dioces yt is to far owt of square considering that for one onely church and that within one citie Ierusalem there were seuen His second that in scripture yt can not be shewed that Deacons were placed any where then in cyties is first to reason negatiuely of autority not in the question whether yt owght to be doen or no but whether yt was doen which not we alone but hym self also condemneth Secondly if this be a reason to bar the churches which are not in cities because there are none specified but in great cities thē he shal by the same reason bereue them of their Pastors considering that there is neuer a smal town of which yt is any more said that yt had a Pastor then that yt had a Deacon Thirdly he saith that the same can not be shewed oneles he be greatly deceiued in any auncient writer wherein he giueth suspitiō that he toke not his wares by tale but in gros otherwise he might better haue knowen what he hath suffered his book to be stuffed with For yt hath examples of countrey churches belonging to the church of Alexandria which had boeth Elders and Deacōs And his own Ignatius whom he wil haue Iohn the Apostles scholer affirmeth that euery church ovught to haue this office of Deaconship His comparison of this reason there vuere Deacons at Ierusalē therefore in al churches with this there be preachers in Cambridg therfore in al England is vnaequal For yt was not nakedly so propounded but warranted with reasons in that the Apostles labored after the cōformity of the churches so that the proof that there was such an office in one is proof that there was in al or at least that there owght to haue bene which is al one to the matter in hand his answer wherunto is before confuted Therfore the comparison had bene iuster with this that the men in the city haue two handes a peece therfore they in the countrey haue so to and if any haue not that there is a faut The next is answered so is the next to yt To the reason I alledged that the church may be at as smale charges vuith a Deacon as vuith a Collector seing that yt may make of the Collector a Deacon he maketh no answer onely he couereth hym self vnder colour of the admonit which ironically as I iudg saith that euery parish can not be at cost to haue boeth a Curat and a Deacon considering that yt requireth boeth a Pastor and a Deacon in euery congregation althowgh to cut of occasion abowt their meaning herein I wil not striue The second chapter of this tractat is answered before Seing then the Apostle separateth the office of the Deacon from the ministery of the word making them diuers members of one whole and seing that in the perfect diuision of the ministery of the word he is not remembred seing also the Apostle describing his qualities requireth not that he should be able to teach Again seing that in executing his office towardes the poor togither with the function of preaching he should be charged with more then the Apostles them selues could doe and had need of greater giftes then the Pastor last of al seing boeth by iudgment and practis of the purer churches the Deacons haue bene ether altogither shut owt from preaching or being permitted to preach haue doen yt vpon a nue grace ouer and aboue the calling of a Deacon I conclude that the Deacon hath no calling of god to preach the word and by the same reason that he hath none to administer any Sacramēt which later conclusion shal further appear in the next Tractat THE ELEVENTH TRACTATE AGAINST THE CORRVPTIons in doctrine tovuching the holy Sacramentes The first chapter vuhereof is against the sacriledg of priuate persons and vuemen especially in administring the holy Sacrament of Baptim as it beginneth pag. 503 of the D. book LEaving to the readers iudgment vpon the reasons alledged whether the meaning of the book be to admit baptim by Midwiues for as much as I trust there shal no such horrible profanation be suffered hereafter let him obserue how the An. because he hath once vndertaken this cause couertly as he dare continueth the defence thereof Iwis of folies the shortest are best yt had bene better for him to haue laid his hand vpon his mouth or rather in confessing of his faut to haue giuen god the glory But let vs see what he bringeth To that which was alledged ovut of the place of S. Mathevu that yt maketh as much against baptim by vuemen as against there preaching he answereth that by that reason Pastors may nether preach nor baptiz for that they are no Apostles which foloweth not For the Pastor succeding vnto the Apostles as touching preaching and baptising in their proper churches haue by the same place autority to doe boeth For further answer whereto I refer the reader to that I haue written before And I think there is not so much as one of the godly writers ether ould or nue which speaking of the ordinary ministery vnder the gospel whether it be to stablish or ouerthrow thinges perteyning to it vseth not the places that were first spoken to the Apostles alone As for M. Caluin he vseth this place expresly which the Adm. doeth to proue that wemen owght at no hand to baptise but onely the Ministers ordeyned to preach the gospel the same doeth M. Beza yea the Ans him self to proue the Bishops saying to those he ordeyneth alledgeth these wordes receiu the holy gost which notwithstanding were first said by our Sauior Christ vnto the Apostles alone so that the Ans frowardnes is here vntollerable Nether is it any thing excused by Zuinglius For althowgh baptim be not instituted here which was instituted in the ministery of Iohn Baptist nor here be mentioned any circumstance yet the minister of that institution which is no circunstance but a subordinate efficient cause may wel be appointed For confirmation hereof I alledged that the ministery of the vuord and Sacramentes ioyned of god togither ovught not to be pulled asonder and therfore cyted examples vuherin vue see obserued continually that the same vuere Ministers of boeth togither whereūto fyrst he answereth generally that examples proue not which is before answered Thē vnto the particular example of the Ark
the Doctors book To that of abrogating them for the shameful abuse and superstition crept into mens mindes of them he answereth that thinges of necessary vse owght not for their abuse to be abrogated where first he maketh a necessary vse in the church of thinges which the scripture hath giuen no commandement of Secondly he condemneth in this point the churches that vse them not and thirdly destroyeth the liberty of placing or displacing them which hym self otherwhere ascribeth to the magistrate His other answer that they be meanes rather to withdraw from superstition by reason of reading and preaching diuers tymes after repeated is but an abusing of the tyme For nether doeth he answer any thing to my reply which was that preaching cā not come to al throvugh the scarcity of preachers and that vuhere yt doeth the fruit is hyndered vuhilest the commō sort attend rather to that vuhich is doē thē to that vuhich is said Nether can he make any sufficient reply to my answer which is that that profit is vuithovut danger receiued othervuhere and may be vuith vs vuithovut such solemnities of feastes yf preaching ād prayers being as they are the rest of the day be imployed as other vuorking dayes Against which that which he excepteth page 546 that yf these and other holy dayes were not men should for instruction of their families be driuen to spēd twise or thrise in a week half the day is to simple For they haue the lords day a great part whereof may be bestowed that way and that which is needful for their further instruction may be supplied of the howshoulders whilest their families be in their dayly occupation as also the lord in his law by reckoning vp certein kindes commandeth to be doen in al maner of our exercises The next requireth no answer That the keping of Easter vuas left free at the first wil appear after owt of Socrates That owt of Eusebius maketh against hym self For to let pas the vnlikelihood of the dayes of fast which should goe before wherof there is not a word nether in the ould nor nue Testament yf it were a tradition of the Apostles yet it was vsed of them as a thing indifferent considering that the same story witnesseth that S. Iohn the Apostle togither with the churches of Asia did celebrate the Easter as the Iues were wont vpon the xiiij day of the moneth Now if S. Iohn hym self which departed not from the autority of the scripture did kepe the Iues day he gaue sufficiently to vnderstand that our Easter hath no autority from the scriptures for then he would haue kept yt also Likewise the Heluetian confessiō leauing yt at the liberty of the churches as a thing indifferent maketh against hym but against me yt maketh not which confes that that day may be kept and deny that yt is for our estate and tyme so expedient his answer to the incommodity of restrayning our cogitations to a fevu dayes vuhich should be extended to our vuhole lyfe is nothing worth For althowgh no abuse of men may take away gods institution yet in abuse of thinges which may be chaunged and are indifferent yt is not so His allegation that the lord notwithstanding the liberty of working six dayes made certein other holy dayes is but an abusing of the reader it being preuented by me And not content herewith the very same iudgmēt which he here aloweth in hym self in me he flatly condemneth afterward For where in his former book page 174 he confesseth that god gaue liberty to labour six dayes in this he affirmeth that by making certeyn feastes whereof some fal vpon these six working dayes he hath taken away that liberty I say not a iot more in effect yet my saying is nue and his is ould I am ouershot and he hath hit the mark His reason is because I make god contrary to hym self But how I more then he o haue liberty of god to work six dayes and to be restrayned by him of that liberty be as contrary as any thing which I haue set down And of hym it is said also bluntly withowt any caution whereas I shewed the equity of god in this colour of contrariety Against which hys exception that yt can not be shewed in al the scripture that god hath made any law against his own commandement ys vntrue For not to goe far was it not a law of god that the Iues were bound of necessity to keep the Sabbats and other solemn feastes And is yt not now a law of god that at the least they are not so bound His fear that god should be thus contrary to hym self is causeles no more then the father is to be houlden vnconstant which when his son commeth to mans estate freeth hym of the obedience vnto his seruant vnder which he cast hym in hys tender yeares or then the physition which according to the state of his pacients body prescribeth not onely a diuers but a quite cōtrary diet This ys a catechism matter whereat he could hardly haue stumbled yf his ey had bene simple althowgh to say the truth in this case in hand there is no contrariety but onely exceptions owt of a general law which that the church may doe in likewise as god the lawgiuer hym self which he after maketh his proof is to gros For thereby not onely the question yt self but more also then ys in question is demaunded That those to whome the establishing of the ceremonies doeth belong may appoint that which is conuenient for diuine seruice as often as the church may conueniently assemble ys agreed and euen in the matter of appointing whole holy dayes in certeyn cases yt is also by me confessed But that the Magistrate may cal from or compel to bodily labour as shal be thowght to hym most conuenient ys not measured according to the cubit of the sanctuary I mean of the word of god For what yf the Magistrate shal think yt conuenient that men should labour but one day in the week what yf he should think neuer a one is the Subiectes obedience tyed to this ordinance Yf it be so what shal then become of gods commandement that men shal eat their bread in sore trauail who shal prouide for wife and children with the rest of the family for which notwithstanding vuhoso prouideth not for is vuors then an infidel His reason that this yt no conscience matter deceiueth hym whilest he alwayes restrayneth conscience matters to inward thinges alone whereas yt extendeth yt self as far and to as many matters as there is ether commandement for or prohibition against in the word of god And as this is vnaduisedly put forth so that which soloweth that the word of god doeth not constrein the Magistrate from turning carnal liberty to the spiritual seruice of god ys to fowl an ouersight For thereby he accounteth bodily labour a carnal liberty which is an
the excommunicate vuhich remayn obstinate The eightinth is ansvuered 64 65. The ninetinth 64 c. The tvuentith 164 165 166 167. For ansvuer vnto the one and tvuētith I refer my self partly to that I haue ansvuered in the former part partly to the examination of the D. censures In the second Table For the 38 and 39 I refer my self to the examination of the D. censures The 40 is ansvuered 132 and 219. The 41 is confessed The 42 is ansvuered 230. The 43 p. 67. The 44 p. 85. The 45 p. 85. The 46 p. 87. The 47 p. 90. The 48 p. 96. The 49 p. 157. The 50 in the former part The 51 p. 262. Fautes escaped Page 18 line 30 read may as pag. 255 line 32 read three first pag. 26 l. 23 24 also pag. 27 l. 6. for the smal vnderstand the great running letter Correct the number of the leaf wich is marked beneth with the letter N immediately folowing the number 96. AGAINST CIVIL OFFICES IN ECCLESIASTICAL PERSONS TRActate VII and 23 according to the Doctor HAving in the last Tractate of the former part shewed the vnlawful dominion of certein of our church officers ouer the whole church and especially over their fellow Ministers yt seemeth good to ioyn this next therevnto For thereby shal boeth better appear how vnsufferable this disorder is which ouerspreadeth boeth church and common wealth and the gouernment by the Eldership the tractate whereof shal follow immediatly in yt self iust shal by comparison with this church lordship be more iustified That the moste of the places quoted by the Admonit are vsed of vuriters of that excellency vuith vuhome the D. is not vuorthy to be named the same day hath and further wil appear His exception that by this they are lifted vp aboue god himself is vain For beside that it is a kinde of speach vsed of the best autors to note a great inequalitie he is les worth then I prised him at if he think that he is worthy to be named the same day that god him self is For if he wil so seruilely cleau vnto wordes yet the question is whether he be vuorthy to be named not as he writeth whether he may be named The place of S. Luke is vnderstanded properly of the Ministers of the word and not of al Christians which is manifest for that our Sauiour Christ biddeth him that would haue goen bak for burial of his father to preach the Kingdome of heauen which he neuer commanded to al Christians so that his meaning is of the calling vnto the ministery and not of the calling to eternal life That such ciuil offices as he alloweth in Ecelesiastical persons are helpes for them to doe their duties repeted seuen times is a demaunding of that in question For where after he saith he hath declared yt he saith vntruly he hath onely nakedly affirmed yt which how vntrw it is shal after also appear My reply is that our Sauiour Christes vocation vuas to be a Minister of the gospel but he refused ciuil iudgment because of his vocation therfore he refused it because he vuas a Minister of the gospel whervpon also followeth that Bishops being Ministers of the gospel owght not to receiue any such power See now how iustly he complaineth that I answer not to that he said that Christs refusal in the partition of the inheritans perteyneth no more to Bishops then to Kinges no mervail also if it require further answer it was so wel garded seing his reason ys because the doeinges of Christ be a patern for al Christians then which there can be nothing more absurd For althowgh al his doeinges be instruction to al Christians yet that they are a patern to them al draweth with it that al may preach that none may giue iudgment in civil causes and a number more horrible confusions yt being also a fals ground of popery wherby they would establish the lenton fast and other such corruptions Vvhere also he would giue to vnderstand that our Sa. Christ did refuse this not as a Minister of the gospel but as Redemer he renteth a sunder thinges which can not be separated For one part of his redemership standeth in that he was giuen of god vnto vs for a teacher so that if he would haue answered any thing in this kinde he must haue said that he refused to iudg of ciuil causes not as a Minister of the word but as a Priest or King whereof also the last he in part setteth down saying he refused yt to declare that his Kingdome was not earthly but heauenly as if it were not as necessary for hym to refuse it in respect of his Doctorship that he might declare likewise that his doctrine was not of earthly thinges but of heauenly and consequently as convenient in the same respect for the Ministers to abstein from it But the further confutation of this the reader shal take from thence where is shewed that our Sa. Christ by his own example calleth the Apostels and in them al the Ministers of the word from al pomp and dominion and therfore from these ciuil offices whervnto pomp and dominion are annexed Then he answereth that no man giueth the Bishops autority to iudg in matters of inheritans whereas our Sa. Christ refused it not because he was no Iudg of that cause but simply because he was no ciuil Iudg refusing vpon the same ground to giue sentence of the harlot The Ministers for sooth may not medle with ciuil occupations but with ciuil offices and in ciuil offices not with them of no countenance as the Iailers office c but with those of estate and amongest those of estate not with matters of inheritance but with criminal causes Thus yow take your self licence to say al thinges and to shew none But to leau the rest vnto an other place let the D. shew some reason why the Minister should rather sit in iudgmēt of criminal causes then in pleas of inheritans they boeth belong to the Magistrate alike yf he owght to accept one being committed vnto hym by the Magistrate why not also the other especially when as by criminal causes requiring more search and greater diligence then the other there must needes be greater hinderance from his ministery As for that he saith those are to be decided by law and haue other Iudges appointed for them the criminal causes are likewise And if there were no other Iudges appointed for them yet whether there owght to be is the question so that the D. answer is here an open demaund of the question Vvhere also owt of M. Caluin he alledgeth Barnard that the Ministers power is in crimes it is a shameful abusing of boeth Calvin and Barnard for they speak there of rebuking and punishing syn by ecclesiastical censures which is manifest in that they convey the title of this power to the Minister by the Keies deliuered vnto S. Peter now the very
his wont is he doeth onely say so proof he bringeth none And as I for my part confes that there cometh not to my minde wherby I could precisely conclude yt owt of the ould Testament So I am assured that he is not able to proue that which he saith But that which the D. affirmeth otherwhere that it was onely at Ierusalem is vtterly vntrue For Iosaphat at one tyme set in Iudges in euery vualled citye throvughovut the kingdome of Iuda which of what sort they were namely in part ciuil in part ecclesiastical appeareth by the Iudges placed in Ierusalē And to thē men had recours to in matters of greater difficulty according to the causes if ciuil to the ciuil if ecclesiastical to the ecclesiastical iudgment where owght not to be forgotten the nūbre of cities in one onely tribe as it might be in york sheer to the numbre of a hūdreth and twelue least that the reader should measure the numbre of their cityes with ours So that where the Answ saith that therewas but one Senate in al the twelue tribes it is found that there were in one onely tribe at the least a hundreth ant twelue ecclesiastical Elderships Vuhether it may be cōcluded owt of the nue Testament that euery synagog of the Iues had this Eldership considering that the pollicy of the church now was in this point taken from the Iues church I leau it to the reader to iudg of that which I haue alledged wherevnto aideth the custome of the Iues vnto this day which in euery of their synaguogues haue their Elders Likewise Ieromes testimony of which it may be certeinly collected that he estemed that the Iues had their Elders in euery Synagog For he sheweth that they chose of the vuisest in their cōpany for gouernours vuhich should asvuel admonish those that had any corporal polution to absteyn from the assemblies as to reproue the breakers of the ceremonies of the Sabbat now seing ther was the same vse of these admonitions and reproofes as wel in vplandish synaguoges as in those which were plāted in the cities it foloweth necessarily that there were Elders aswel for them as for the other At the least the nue Testamēt in marking these Elders which it calleth cheif of the Synagog in diuers quarters doeth manifestly ouerthrow the D. which saith that they were onely at Ierusalē vpō al which matter appeareth how extremely bould yow are in your affirmatiōs which beside these two before mētioned say also that the Eldership was not alwaies no not in persecution wherein not to enter a nue field for euery light word yow cast forth what reason I pray yow cā yow assign why sometimes there should be an Eldership vnder pecsecutiō and other some tymes none cōsidering that yow imagin this Eldership to be in place of a Christian Magistrate whereby it must needes folow that his seat being void in tyme of persecution it owght to be occupied by the Eldership which yow fancy to be his Lieftenāt whether the D. pincheth the churches where with a Christian Magistrate the Eldership stil remayneth which he here denieth let the reader iudg of his former book where he affirmeth yt iniurious to the Magistrat and ful of confusion also that it can not nor owght not to be as in the Apostles tymes c. ▪ yea let hym iudg of this diuision For after that he graunteth to Princes to commit their autority to the church if they list then which there is nothing more vntrw he addeth whether it be wel doen I wil not determin wherein I besech yow mark first what contraries he speaketh For he doeth determin precisely that ciuil Magistrates may commit their right and autority to these Elders if they wil and yet he wil not determin whether it be wel doen or no. wheras if he would not haue determined of the one he should haue suspended his iudgment of the other for thus he assureth them they may doe that whereof he wil make them no assurance that it is wel doen. Secondly it is to be obserued that where the question was of the Bishops receiuing of ciuil autority from the Prince he maketh it not onely lawful but conuenient yea necessary that it should be deriued from the Prince to the Bishop but here towardes the Eldership he saith yt can not be practised withowt intollerable contentions and extreme confusion So that the Bishop Archdeacons and Deanes which with vs are the deepest churchministers may exercise yf the Prince wil commit yt vnto them euen the highest ciuil iurisdiction and that to the singular advancement of the church but these Elders whose office in the church is not such but that boeth they haue and may folow some ciuil trade of lyfe may not receiue that power of the Magistrate which he vntrwly affirmeth that they had in tyme of persecution on les al by and by fal vpon heapes In one and the same church the Bishop the Dean the Archdeacon and for a need some of the Prebendaryes may haue beside their ecclesiastical iurisdiction ciuil autority but these Elders althowgh they were but two in numbre may in no wise vse any This difference verely riseth not in the breadth of shoulders wherby they are able to cary al this and the Elders none but vpon the widenes of the throat which as the graue is neuer filled Thirdly it is to be obserued that the D. which for his own profit stretcheth the power of the Prince beyond al boundes here as yf he had to doe with a cheuerel scepter draweth it in For he giueth more liberty herein vnto the Magistrates of smal common wealthes then vnto monarches For to them he seemeth sometime to leau yt at liberty whether they wil communicate their autority vnto these Elders or retayn it with them selues but vnto kinges and Princes he wil in no wise permit yt Vuherein also he is contrary to him self which in another place saith that the office of the ciuil Magistrate may be committed vnto whome soeuer it pleaseth hym best to like of If that be true and this iurisdiction of the Elders were as he vntruly saith belonging to the ciuil Magistrate why might not the Prince commit yt vnto these Elders as for his reason that so euery parish should be a kingdome yt cometh to be answered in another place To that I alledged of the necessity of the Eldership because the Pastor can not haue his ey in euery corner of his parish c. he answereth an able Pastor is able to doe al required of a Pastor which is no answer at al. For that is not the question but this whether he be able to doe whatsoeuer church gouernment belongeth to the wealth of his church which because he durst not affirm or affirming it had nothing to proue yt he slipped away after this sort And now that he vnderstandeth that this reason is confirmed by M. Peter Martyr I trust hereafter he
church aswel in this cause as in diuers other pauncheth so that it is not able to abide the vueight of a fox For thus there is not onely as he obiecteth a seueral gouernment in euery Town but in euery priuat how 's And if the Master of the houshould may and owght to retein his autority withowt preiudice of the Magistrate why may it not be so in the gouernment of the church Vuhat wil he further say to the Scholemaster which he otherwhere affirmeth to be an Ecclesiastical officer may there not be ether two in one Schole vnder a Prince or one in one Schole vnder a common wealth where many haue like autority oneles the common wealth be therby mangled and the magistrates autority empaired But of this matter I haue also spoken otherwhere Howbeit whereas the D. alowing of this Eldership in a common wealth can not abide it in a monarchy I wil say this further that if there were any daunger to a common wealth by this Eldership it should be greater to the smale common wealthes then to great monarchies considering that they should not be able so wel to repres the Eldership ouerreaching and goeing beyond their bowndes And if the Elders hips autority belong vnto the magistrate as he saith then by how much these magistrates haue les power and fewer prerogatiues ouer their peoples then the monarches ouer their subiectes by so much haue they more need then the other to kepe al in their own hand Vpon his own confession that there be more disordered persons now then in tyme of persecutiō I concluded that there needeth so much more asistance for the Pastor to finde them ovut to iudg of the quality of the faut and to correct them with censures of the church Herevnto he answereth that it is better doen by the Magistrate and by corporal punishment which is before answered althowgh yt be vnworthy answer considering that albeit the bodily punishment were more apt to reform thinges amis yet thereof foloweth not but that boeth the ciuil punishment and ecclesiastical togither wil doe more then the ciuil punishment alone I would also know why the Pastor owght not to cary euen priuate offences great or smale vnto the Magistrate if it be so that this ecclesiastical autority be escheted to him As for that he alledgeth owt of Gualter that men wil not set a straw by the autority of the Eldership it serueth aswel against the ecclesiastical censures of al Pastors and of our Bishops as against the Elders and more against them then against these For somuch as if they set not a straw by the Elders and Pastor togither iointly they wil much les esteme the Pastors or Bishops alone And if they set nothing by it whē it is countenāced by the ciuil magistrate they wil much more set them at nawght in persecution when for the contempt of yt there is not onely no corporal punishment but a reward at the handes of the Tyrants The bare names of suspensions and excommunications strike a fear into the heartes of the people whych notwithstanding throwgh an horrible abuse of them for euery trifling money matter are not to be feared according to the wise mans saying acauseles curs shal not come but flyeth avuay as the sparovu or svualovu Seing then thes fray bugges no more to be estemed as towching the conscience or further then they empty the purs then the braying of an Asse strike suche a fear with what power would the lord accompany them when they be executed according to his institutiō for further answer the reader may haue recours vnto M. Bucer who confuteth this very obiection of contempt of the churchis censures And this voice tendeth aswel to the subuersion of al ecclesiastical censures for euer hereafter as to the vtter condemning of that which was vsed by the Apostles heretofore Althowgh if it be the ordinance of god this is no reason against yt considering that the owtrage of men can not put the lord to silence or make his ordinance to giue place In the next where vpon his answer I conclude that ether vue must haue no Pastor at al vuhich is absurd or els an Eldership in as many places as sufficient men may be gotten he answereth nothing beside repetitions and demaundes of that in question In the next where is proued that the hardnes or apparant impossibility may not be considered vuhen there is a commandement to doe any thing he letteth al that defence goe to the ground wherein notwithstanding he placed great force Let him therfore strike owt that obiection or if he moue further debate herein let him not be ashamed to return bak and take his work before hym And for further answer thereunto let hym loke M. Bucer who confuteth also this obiection where he excepteth that it is not commaunded thereof let the reader iudg of that which hath bene written Althowgh it hath bene shewed that the example of the Apostles and general practise of the churches vnder their gouernment euen withowt a commandement draweth a necessity Then he saith that if it were ▪ yet it were but a temporal commandement as the widowes the eating of blud and washing of feet Of the widowes hath bene answered the decree of the blud was neuer a simple prohibition after our Sau. Christ whose blud that did shadow had finished his oblation but onely to the support of the Iues. So that euen then when that decree was made the faithful boeth of the Iues or Gentiles might haue eat yt so they did yt withowt offence of those which were weak And if there were now any Iue weak in faith whom we should by eating of blud driue from the gospel I dowt not but that vntil he be fully instructed of the liberty I haue in Christ I owght to vse the same charitable support towardes him And this appeareth manifestly boeth in the same and other places where S. Paul which gaue owt that decree to be kept teacheth generally the free vse of al meates so yt be withowt offence As for the washing of feet commanded vnto the Apostles it is nothing but a trope or borowed speach wherby our Sau. Christ willeth them and in them vs al not for a tyme but to the end of the world that for help one of an other eche should submit him self to other euen vnto the doeing of the basest offices which may appear in that he placeth perfect blessednes in the obediens to that commandement which he would neuer haue doen in the washing of the feet So that this commandement might wel be of them as of vs fulfilled withowt that particular actiō of washing eche anothers feet But here obserue I pray yow how dangerously yow behaue your self in respect of the common Aduersary Before yow haue made vs thinges necessary to obserue and that as of the Apostles autority which were neuer written but as yow would make vs
the two next chapters be answered The 6 chapter is of the ceremonies in the Solemnization of mariage page 723. where for the mayntenance of the ring with the fond ceremonies thereof and of the vncomely wordes of worshipping with the body taken onely from popery there is likewise nothing worth answer that of the deuising of nw signes to teach by being before confuted THE VII CHAPTER OF THE second part of this Tractate to vuching the ceremonies in burial pag. 727. HOw needful my preface was to preuent vurāglers let the reader iudg Likewise of the reasons the Adm. vseth which he is not affraid not onely to deny to be good but to be any at al. How little Tertullians autority owght to prevail in establishing funeral prayers hereof yt may be knowen not onely that he would thrust diuers fond ceremonies vpon the church as necessary but for that in another book this oblation as he termeth yt for the dead he maketh of the like necessity with those that are commanded in the scripture Vuhether yt mayntein in the mindes of the ignorant an opinion of praying for the dead must be in the readers iudgment putting hym in minde that yf notwithstanding the ordinary prayers so oft red there be some so ignorant to think that Morning and Euening prayer is nothing but the popish Mattins and Euen song in English how much more wil they iudg the same of the funeral prayers which are not so ordinary That there were no such prayers in the Apostles tyme is shewed by a manifest reason of the scripture which setting forth the smalest matters in Burial vuould not haue houlden bak this being so vueighty by which circumstance his exception of negatiue argumentes in autority being ouerthrown he hath nothing to answer And beside that he is neuer able to proue that al the churches vsed yt yt is before shewed what truth Augustins sentence is of which would make al Apostolical that is generally obserued That the Apostles example owght here to haue preuailed is shewed diuis 6 which is that yf funeral sermons had bene so fit as is pretended the Apostles vuould neuer haue lost such an opportunity of preaching whereunto he answereth not Hether also serueth that forsomuch as there vuas no prescript form of funeral prayers vnder the lavu yt is not meet there should be any novu which reason beside an vnmodest triūph receiueth no more answer thē the other where he owght to learn that of al other yt is moste effectual First for that a multitude of ceremonies was more agreable to the estate of the people of god vnder the law then yt is now vnder the gospel Then for that by how much more they had not so clear sight of the resurrection of the dead as we by so much they had more need of these thinges then we To that that the Minister hauing othervuise necessary dutyes as many as he can turn hym to hath notvuithstanding by this meanes anue charge laid vpon hym he answereth yt is no charge but his dutye to preach and to pray which is vntrue For althowgh yt be his duty to doe boeth yet yt is not his dutye to doe them then yf yt be then he must of necessity doe yt nether can this ceremony be abolished and so the Ministers in other reformed churches which doe yt not are thereby condemned where he asketh why he should not doe this aswel as his own busines verely amōgest other reasons this also is one that to the end he may haue some tyme for his own busines the church owght not to charge hym with thinges which are not necessary To that that mourning apparel prouoketh sometyme immoderate sorovu he answereth that so we should not approch the bed nor graue of the dead which is insufficient For yt is one case of thinges dutiful and commanded or whereof we haue great vse and another of those which are not so In the one gods vocation is warrant enowgh against al inconueniences which is not so in those which we take vp of our selues And yt maketh against hym For hauing by reason of our vocation meanes enow to strike the wound of sorow so deep into vs as is needful we owght not to seek others of our own brayn The exāples whereby this was set forth he answereth not And hereof the reader may see also that profitable ceremonies in thinges indifferent may be maynteyned althowgh this fal As for that he saith that Cyprian and Augustine do not so much condemn mourning apparel as immoderate sorow yf they condemn yt at al yt is enowgh to cōuince his extreme bouldnes in al ledging an antiquity for hym which maketh against hym But yf he would thereby insinuat that they misliked not of this ceremony these be their wordes let mē iudg of his dealing vue ovught not saith Cyprian to take blak garments vuhen the faithful vuhich are deceased haue receyued vuhite apparel nether must vue giue occasion that the heathen should iustly blame vs that vue lament those as lost vuhich vue affirm to liue Concerning Augustine he writeth thus By vuhat reason should vue dy blak garmentes for the dead oneles yt be that vue vuould in ioyning them vuith our lamentation declare thereby that the deceased vuere very infidels and miserable These are my brethren vnmeet they be straunge they are vnlavuful And if they vuere not vnlavuful yet they are vndecent As for the continuance of yt with any allowance further then from the tyme of the heresy of the papistes which be not the church of god he sheweth not The rest in this diuision is not worth the naming The first argument against the inconuenience of funeral sermons hath the same mayntenance with the first of the third diuision To the next reason of the sodein and consequently for the most part negligent preaching he opposeth as a contrariety with my self that I preferred a simple sermon made euery day to that which is made onely once in a moneth which is onely to mispend the tyme For althowgh I preferred yt to the other yet I approued not that one onely Minister except he haue rare giftes should preach euery day why he can not haue sufficient warning is manifest yf he refuse he is thereby loden with displeasure of his parishoners in that he doeth not as other which is hurtful to his ordinary ministery To the reason of acceptation of persons in that sermons at the burial of the rich nether be nor are able to be made at the burial of the poor he answereth that yt is alone as if the Minister not able to preach euery day should not therefore preach once a weke Vuhich is vntrue considering that his ordinary ministery is commanded of god where this is but a deuise of men and considering that in the ordinary preaching there is no acceptation of persons whether yt be doen once or often in a week so that althowgh preaching