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
decree they did as it were couertly confes that they had receiued the reward of breaking the order of god in permitting that the Elder should teache in the church For if it had bene of the institution of an Elder to preach Nether Arrius nor ten thowsand moe suche heretik Elders owght to haue giuen cause of such a decree seing the institution of the lord owght not to be broken for any abuse of men Ierome I graunt somewhere doeth reprehend this and some learned of our tyme after him haue estemed the decree of Alexandria fauty herein But that being considered which I haue alledged there is no cause to condemn that decree whether it were of the Nicen councel or of Athanasius and the Eldership of Alexandria And what if Ierome him self althowgh an Elder of Rome giue testimony vnto this cause that is to say that yt belongeth not vnto an Elder of the church to minister the word or Sacramentes Let his wordes be weighed wherby he confesseth playnly that nether Elder nor Deacon had right but vpon the Bishops commandement so much as to baptiz vuhich notvuithstanding saith he is licenced euen to laymen in tyme of necessity Vnhereunto also refer that which Tertullian writeth that it belonged vnto the Bishop onely to baptiz and that the Elder and Deacon could not baptiz but vpon the Bishops licence Now if the Elders had no right to preach c. by reason of their office or as incident into yt if the Bishop onely had right and the other but by indulgence or commandement thus far we haue boeth Tertul. and Ierome agreeing with vs that by the word of god and his institution the Elder hath not to doe with the word and Sacramentes And the same autors we haue also flatly contrary to the D. which houldeth as appeareth by the discours of his book that al Elders and Deacons of the church althowgh not in gouernment yet towching the ministery of the word and sacramentes are equal and haue as much autority as the Bishop him self This difference onely remaineth betwene Ierome and vs whether this being not of gods institution that an Elder may preach or Minister the sacramentes it be lawful for any man to giue licence therof which bouldnes of remouing and changing the boundes which the lord in the tarriers of his word hath limited boeth is before and shal afterward god willing be further handled Last of al for proof of these church Elders which being occupied in the gouernment had nothing to doe with the word the testimonie of Ambrose alledged in my former book is so clear and open that he which doeth not giue place vnto yt must needes be thowght as a bat or an owl or some other night bird to delight in darknes His saying is that the Elders fel avuay by the ambition of the Doctors where by opposing the Elders to Doctors which tawght he plainely declareth that they had not to doe with the word whervpon it is manifest that boeth yt was the vse in the best reformed churches certein hundreth yeares after the tymes of the Apostles to haue an Eldership which medled not with the word nor administration of Sacramentes and that they which wanted it partly complayned of the want partly declining from this institution of god corrected their error at the least they kept this difference that whereas the Bishop preached and ministred the Sacramentes in right of his office the Elder did it not as a thing incident to his office but onely vpon indulgence of the Bishop Another point wherin the D. turneth his tong is that where he confessed before that there was in euery church Seniors now he saith in some onely And to salue this contradiction with him self he saith by euery church he ment euery cheif city Thus yow speak but by what rule and according to whose language when yow expound euery church euery cheif citie as if their were no churches but in cheif cityes But thus must al their tonges be deuided which put them forth against the truth Howbeit to come to that point by what reason can yow shew that the Apostles instituted a seueral Ministery for cheif cities which they did not for vplandish townes what were this but to bring in an inequality amongest the churches which your self otherwhere confes owght not to be Yt is I graunt meet for the furtherance of the gospel that the cheifest cityes when al can not be serued should haue the first the sufficientest and according to their need the greater numbre but that they should haue a seueral Ministery ordeyned for them into the felowship whereof the smaler churches may not be admitted is withowt reason Secondly the gospel which conteyneth the doctrine and discipline went not owt of Ierusalē into the cheif cityes onely but into al the world Thirdly it hath bene shewed that the epistle of S. Paul to Timothy wherein mention is made of the interteinment of these Elders was not a rule prescribed to churches in great cities onely but vnto al churches wherosoeuer Further seing the Elders are continually ioyned with the Bishop it being shewed that the lord ordeyned for euery congregation a Bishop it must folow that he ordeyned for euery congregation Elders finally for as much as the Apostles labored to bring the churches one with another to an vniformity euē in the smalest ceremonies how can they be thowght to haue made so vneuen work in the Ministery of the church I let pas here the place in the Actes before handled where it is said that Elders vuere ordeyned in euery church Likewise the necessity of them aswel in other churches as in churches in the citie which is after to be handled Onely I wil note what hath bene the practise of the churches in this point wherby may appear how the auncient fathers haue vnderstood this order That Ignatius which the An. wil haue S. Iohns scholer affirmeth that there is no church vuhich can stand vuithovut her Eldership or Counsail This is manifest also by the Apologie of Tertullian wherin he defending the gouernmēt of al the churches not of those onely in cityes and shewing for that cause the order obserued in them maketh precise mention of this Senate of Elders as hath bene before alledged The testimony of M. Bucer is also manifest in this point as it is alledged of me before Likewise of M. Martyr who affirming that certeyn of the people vuere ioyned vuith the Pastor in the gouernment of the church assigneth the cause for that the Pastor could not doe al him self thereby giuing to vnderstand that the Eldership was as general as the Pastor For he doeth not say where the Pastor could not doe al there he had assistance of an Eldership but because the Pastor could not doe al c. The onely reason which the An. hath against this is that there was not an Eldership amongest the Iues in euery of their synaguoges But as
of the Emperour being moderator of the Councel beside that yt proueth not his cause considering that the Moderator had not al the autority it is vntrue and contrary to the practis of Councels in al tymes oneles by moderatorship he mean the appointing of the tyme of the Councels assembly and dismission the houers of their sitting the ciuil punishment of them which behaue them selues tumultuously or otherwise disorderly If he doe it is that which we willingly graunt but which maketh nothing for this purpose To that alledged owt of Ambrose vuho refused to haue a church matter before the Emperour Valentinian first he answereth that he was young as thowgh his tender yeares could diminish his right or that a Prince of 18 or 20 yeares ould had not as ample autority as one of 40. Secondly that he was not baptized which was not for that he refused baptim but because the maner then was not to baptiz before the hower of death was supposed to approch For the Arians them selues doe not pretend any enmity or refusal of baptim And howsoeuer some haue alledged yt yow might haue bene ashamed to alledg yt which before affirmed that Ambrose was meet to be chosen Bishop notwithstāding that he were not baptized The last exception is that he was an Arian heretik so that no equal iudgment was to be hoped for at his hand which is no sufficient answer considering that Ambrose denieth the Emperour the determination of the cause not for that he was a wicked Emperour but because it was not red in scripture nor heard of before that any Emperour and therfore nether godly nor vngodly was Iudg ouer a Bishop in a cause of faith which was not his iudgment onely but the iudgment of other Bishops round abowt Therefore it is vntru that Ambrose stayed him self chiefly of a priuiledg graunted by Theodosius not onely for that it was not lawful for Theodosius to haue passed the right of the ciuil Magistrate to the Bishops but because Ambrose fetched his defence from the scripture and auncienter tymes then was Theodosius priuiledg Beside that if Theodosius had graunted that to the Bishops which belonged vnto hym his heir could be no more bound by his graunt herein then the committing of ciuil iudgmentes vnto them should haue hindred him to cal them bak again into his own hand So that when Valentinian had declared that he would haue the hearing of the matter hym self that could not be any iust defence Moreouer if it belong vnto the ciuil Magistrate to iudg in causes ecclesiastical no abuse or disorder of his can depriue hym of yt so long as he remayneth in the ful estate of a Prince no more then men can take away from him the right of iudgment in ciuil causes and erect another court against his because he peruerteth iudgment ether by giftes or fauour Therefore if it be true that the D. houldeth that this right belongeth to Cesar Ambrose owght to haue appeared and to haue waited what the Emperours iudgment would haue bene If it had bene against the truth then to haue answered as the Apostles to the Councel that he vuould rather obey god then man. This may yet better appear for that if the Emperour had sent for Ambrose and giuen hym summonce to shew what was his iudgment withowt pretending to be Iudg in the cause Ambrose could not haue refused yt althowgh the Emperour would after haue said that he was an heretik Last of al thys being obiected by Harding that there is the same right of a Christiā Prince and of a Tyrā is not denied of the Bishop of Sarisbury For the ordinance of god is one euen as there is the same right of a heathen master husband and father ouer a Christian seruant Son and wife as if they were Christian And yt was an error against which the Apostles labored that priuate men might deny vnto Princes and other their superiors which did not their duties thinges which otherwise were due vnto thē Nether owght the D. more to charge me with this saying because Harding hath yt then I charge hym with his opiniō of the same kinde in this behalf with Pigghius who teacheth another right of a Christian and of a profane Magistrate The relation of Athanasius matter to the Emperour was as may appear because the moste part of the Bishops were he retikes ether Coluthans Arians or Miletians That owt of Augustin demaunding why the Donatistes made the Emperour Iudg if it were not lawful for him to giue sentence in a matter of Religion was onely to beat them with their own rod not that Augustin alowed their fact in making the Emperour their Iudg. which is manifest in other places where he doeth precisely reproue them for it and cast yt in their teeth that they preferred the Emperours iudgment vnto the Bishops when notwithstanding the Emperour gaue the same iudgment which the Bishops did and was for his godlines the perl of al Emperours Vuherein it is also to be obserued that Augustin in another place saith that the Emperour not daring to iudg of the Bishops cause committed yt vnto the Bishops and that he did not once but twise Likewise that he was driuen by the Donatistes importunity which made no end of appealing vnto hym to giue sentēce in that matter for the which also he vuas to craue pardō of the Bishopes Hetherto maketh singulerly that Augustin putteth a playn distinction betwene these iudgmentes saying of the Donatistes which of their priuate autority russhed vpō the catholiks that yt vuas nether by ecclesiastical lavu nor by the kings lavu which were ridiculous if as the D. saith the ecclesiastical lawes were also the kings lawes That owt of Sozom. 4. lib. 16 owght not to haue bene alledged considering that boeth the Emperour Constantius which required to haue the ending of the matter and the moste of the Bishops in the Councel of Syrm which agreed vnto his request were infected with Arianism Likewise that owt of Socrates 5 book cap. 10 is idle seing nothing is doen there by Theodosius which is not confessed to belong vnto the Magistrate The next is answered before Vuhere I pressed him with his own wordes affirming that the church hath autority to make ceremonies he answereth that he included the Prince as cheif gouernour of the church which is not sufficient For ether the Prince alone must be the church or els one of his sentences goeth to ground ether that which saith that the church hath autority or this affirming that the Prince hath al the autority to make ceremonies I alledged for further answer against his shameful slaunders of vs as if we were ioyned with the papistes in this cause as foloweth First that the papistes exempt their Priestes from the punishment of the ciuil Magistrate vuhich vue doe not whereto he answereth that Harding and Saunders doe as much which is vtterly vntrw For by the wordes
they may be otherwise quieted when they be tawght not to think that the working of assurance in their heartes is so tyed vnto the sacrameÌ„tes that withowt them the lord nether wil nor can comfort them but rather to consider that euen as when the Iues were depriued of the sacrament of the Sanctuary the lord promised that he hym self would be for a Sanctuary vnto them and supply the want thereof euen so he wil not be wanting vnto them which hauing a desire to be partakers of yt can not so conueniently be receiued thereunto putting them also in remembrance of the horrible abominations of priuate mas which came first in by occasion of these priuate communions as they are called Here let the reader take heed of an error which the D. hath let fal that we haue remission of synnes by communication vnto this Sacrament whereas remission of synnes receiued by faith alone and sealed vp in baptim must be had before we come to the Communion To the Councel vuhich forbiddeth the communion in priuate hovuses he answereth that yt meaneth vsually for that the vse was such in some places which is said withowt al proof or likelihood of truth whereby for a shift he sticketh not to slaunder whole auncient churches notwithstanding that he pretendeth sometyme such reuerence to one onely man as the reader before hath seen Then he opposeth the Nicen Councel which is that I preuented in the 2 diuision and in the fift shewed to make against hym After folow M. Bucers and Martyrs notes which if they weâ—e theirs and had bene for further assurance thereof tawght by them to look vpon the Son yet being the testimonies of men how learned and godly soeuer they are subiect to examination I wil not deny but they might be of that iudgment considering that I see M. Caluin to haue bene of the same which I therefore let the reader vnderstand that he may be diligenter in the examination of the reasons against yt and not to descend into our iudgment onles he be compelled by the matter yt self Althowgh yt is not ours alone but as he hath heard of others yea of diuers reformed churches where this is not admitted putting hym also in minde of boeth M. Caluins and Martyrs iudgmentes in the matter of Baptim that yt owght not to be in a priuate how 's nor withowt a sermon desiring hym further to consider whether certein reasons making against the one doe not strike vpon the other And in deed as in my iudgment ys is vnmeet to administer ether of the sacramentes in priuate howses so that is yet les tollerable in the holy supper which hath a special mark and representation of brotherly communion more then Baptim Here I pas by as a thing political rather then perteining to conscience the skare that may come by these priuate communions when the siknes as often commeth to pas is contagious As for that of Musculus yt is idle seing his approbation of yt is not made to appear and no man denieth but they that vsed yt in tymes past did yt for a good end THE FOVRTH CHAPTER OF this Tractate tovuching the ceremonies in Baptim pag. 607 of the D. book NOw follow the corruptioÌ„s in the sacrameÌ„ts apart and first of those in Baptim where in mayntenaÌ„ce of the questions ministred to young infantes which can not answer he would make vs beleue that the catholik writers as yt were the Gouldsmithes were in dout whether the Denis which he browght were good money or no whereas the contrariety in opinions ys betwene the Papistes and Protestantes His euidence to proue hym legitimat because these bookes be very auncient implieth that a number of horrible abuses are as auncient And therefore in sted of saying some falshood might be thrust in he should haue said some truth might be thrust in to giue credit to the rest considering that the purenes of the tong which he wrote in being set apart there are few thinges worthy ether of S. Pauls Scholer or of the Bishop of AtheÌ„s His defence by the Bishop of Sarisbury is answered The not answering also of my reply against Denis vnder pretence of a flout is before noted To the reasons against Augustines kinde of speaking he can answer nothing onely he mispendeth the tyme in prouing that baptim is the seal of faith which none denieth but that yt is called faith which he owght to haue proued he could not finde a word For that also that Augustin maketh for the interrogatories ministred to infantes beside strong affirmations he can bring nothing As for that alledged by me yt is most manifest in another place where Augustin sheweth yt to haue bene the vse that the minister asked of the parentes vuhether the childe beleued they ansvuering that yt did so that althowgh this were an abuse yet yt is much different from the maner which we haue receyued from the papistes and more simple then yt In the next diuision he answereth nothing to the purpose nor in the next to yt sauing onely a vayn cauil for whereas I meant the true faith he flyeth to that of Simon Magus which was counterfait In the next where yt was alledged that al ovught to be doen simply and playnly in the church he can answer nothing onely yt may serue for a colorable cavil that as the book wil haue the infantes promise by the godfathers so saith he the Adm. wil haue infantes desire by their parentes For albeit the Adm. wordes might haue bene warelier set yet it is but a hauking after syllables when their meaning is playn that there owght to be no such strange and vnwonted kinde of speaches in the common seruice I pas by Musculus autority flat far vs but M. Bucers wherewith the D. often presseth vs so sore must not be forgotteÌ„ which doeth precisely finde faut with our seruice book herein His second chapter requireth no answer For as for his exception that we alow of godfathers deuised by the Pope yt is answered beside that yt was not by his own account deuised by a Bishop of Rome which was Antichrist The contrariety with my self in that page 18 I denying that the vsage of a thing by the whole church can giue yt such autority as that yt may not be abrogated yet here alow of godfathers as of an indifferent ceremony considering that the churches haue generally receiued yt is vnworthy of answer For there is great difference in allowing the churchis autority absolutely or withowt condition and in reuerencing her autority in an indifferent matter in yt self and towching the vse profitable when yt is vsed accordingly so that a blinde man might see how I might iustly improue the first and approue the last In the there first diuisions of his second chapter pag. 614 there is no answer worthy the reply Vuhere he would prefer crossing before milk in baptim he doeth yt contrary to Tertullians autority
But to that alledged that yt hath no ground in scripture he answereth nothing wherein notwithstanding the question consisteth That alledged of the impositiō of hādes vntruly fathered of the Apostles he wil haue me proue whereas yt being affirmed of hym owght to haue bene shewed by hym That yt was not in Iustins tyme may appear in that he describing the liturgy of the churches in his tyme maketh no mention of yt That yt was no tradition of the Apostles left as Ierome al his proof in this behalf affirmeth hath bene before declared Hys exception of the abuse in laying on of handes in ordeyning Ministers against that I browght that this ceremony confirmed an opinion conceyued that yt is a sacrament is idle For that being the ordinance of god may not for any abuse be taken away but this being not althowgh yt were in yt self indifferent for the offence sake owght to be disanulled Hether appertayneth that otherwhere of M. Caluins alowance hereof where the reason I opposed owt of hym that the giftes by laying on of handes ceasing yt also ovught to ceas is vnanswered I graunt he speaketh against the popish imposition of handes but withal in this point he speaketh against ours which pretendeth as doeth theirs that the holy gost is giuen by this imposition of handes whereof there is no promise And therefore his defence that yt is giuen by prayer ys not sufficient considering that the book saith by putting on of hādes and prayers so that althowgh M. Caluin should like of laying on of hādes yet he must needes mislike of ours which presupposeth that the holy gost is giuen by the bishops laying on of handes His answer to the autority of so many reformed churches is fond For that they meant to disalow cōfirmation simply and not the popish onely may appear in that they purged not the popish imposition of handes but vtterly cast yt away And when they say they can vuant yt vuithovut damage they signify that in the best sort yt is vnprofitable To that alledged of the popish opinion that yt is better then baptim confirmed in that that our Bishop onely may confirm vuhere euery Minister may baptiz he answereth owt of Ierom and Bucer that yt is meet yt should be doen by the Bishop which I graunt yf yt were meet at al. But that the Bishop which Ierome and Bucer alow be not lord Bishops but simple Pastors of one onely church or not of the twentith part whereof our Bishops are hath bene before declared The reason of the inconuenience of bringing the children half a score miles vuith charges for that vuhich if yt vuere needful might be doen by the Pastor at home he answereth by calling yt chiledish such is the compassion he hath of the peoples trauail and especially of the necessity of the poor which are compelled thus beside extraordinary charges to lese two or three dayes work That he thincketh yt not worthy once to be considered belike is because they goe not vppon his legges nor spend of his purs There resteth the churching of wemen where this title implying a banishment from the church is defended b◠the common peoples vsage of Christmas a popish name as thowgh this error of the people owght to haue bene confirmed by the book and not rather corrected he might aswel answer that the drawer of the book might haue called the holy Communiō a mas because the ignorāt sort doe so But vnto this answer hath bene further replyed before Of two other pointes in that diuision he talketh but answereth not the next requireth no answer the next hath bene answered the next to yt requireth none To excuse his rashnes in permitting the vail which is a church ceremony to wemens discretion he saith ▪ yt is rather ciuil the vntruth whereof is manifest yt being doen of superstition and opinion that yt owght to be so not for succour against the ayer as he pretendeth beside that in saying rather ciuil he priuily confesseth that there is some part of yt ecclesiastical THE FIFT CHAPTER OF CEREmonies abovut the holy communion in the residu of the D. xv Tractate IN eleuen diuisions whereof to diuers reasons of the great inconuenience of ministring yt with wafer kakes and in kneeling there is nothing alledged worth the rehersal considering that yt hath bene shewed that the churchis power in thinges indifferent is not absolute to doe what she thincketh good but for the moste edifiyng in regard of the persōs and other circumstances and considering that against that we would haue the sitting of our Sa. Christ called again for remedy of the superstition yea idolatry committed of some by kneeling his instans of celebrating the communion in the night is insufficient For that was vpon a particuler occasion which is not in our church nor hath no place in the ceremonies in controuersy seing that for the causes assigned of me the celebrating of yt in the night was for that tyme necessary which is also answer to that of vnleauened bread vsed at the same tyme whereunto he can answer nothing Lastly considering that to shew the inconueniences and humbly to desire redres herein in such sort as for the abuses we doe not withdraw our selues from the holy communion is not as he slaunderously accuseth to make any tumult Therefore not to spend tyme in confutation of his bare sayinges the contrary of certeyn whereof are to be seen as in a playn matter I commit these vnto the iudgment of the reader Onely let hym obserue that M. Bucer doeth improue the kneeling at the communion and in one word al the gestures which the Papistes vsed in this imitation of the supper of the lord For that in the 17 diuision towching this whether yt be meeter to say take ye or take thow to the reason of the example of our Sauiour Christ he can not answer To the reason taken of the maner of preaching he saith that exhortation giuen in the second person singuler moueth moste which is not to the point of the question For yt is not debated here whether the Minister should speak to al at once by thow or by ye but whether yt is meeter that yt should be once onely spoken to al that communicate at one table or rehersed according to the number of persons that communicate Beside that a figuratiue speach as this is when by the word thovu are noted a great number is more fit for preaching and prophetical writing then for the ordinary seruice which owght to be moste simple I confes some difference of the exhibiting of the benefites of Christ in the sacramentes and in the word but how that difference should cause vs to change the form vsed by our Sau. Christ which knowing that difference best did notwithstanding at once speak to al at the table with hym I see not nor he sheweth not nor I am assured can not the rest in this chapter requireth no answer
the common wealth might reap that commodity withowt such iumbling of offices togither which cause I expressed The place of Deuteronomie is faithfully alledged That before the lord in diuers places signifieth before the Ark it is wel knowen that it doeth so here first there is nothing against yt thē the translation of vau by and rather then by that is to say is more vsed albeit whether it be or no it maketh nothing to this matter For the weight of my allegation lyeth in this that the handling of the matter is appointed vnto the Iudges not vnto the Priests whervnto beside his bare affirmation he answereth nothing Likewise is Esra faithfully alleged and that owt of Esr 10. 4. 5. is nothing against it For althowgh that matter of diuorce pertained vnto him first in respect that he should conuince the people of their faut secondly in shewing what was to be doen in such a difficult case where the Israelites had bene so long maried with straunge we men forbidden and begotten diuers children of them and thirdly in the ecclesiastical censure of separation from the congregation there mentioned yet to sit in iudgment of them or by ciuil punishment to driue those which would not willingly is not shewed to pertein vnto him To the next diuision wherein is shewed that those vuhich had onely the light of nature yea and vuere great extollers of mans ability did yet see in part the incommodity of this clapping of many offices vpon one mans bak is answered nothing but that which is confuted before Of the vniformitie of church gouernment partly hath bene and more shal god willing be said afterward Here the D. hath not a word of answer his reason why he wil not answer for that it is a matter of pollicy and not of diuinity doeth as it were with one stroke of a pen cros owt almost his whole book where he hangeth al these church matters of the circumstance of tyme place person and of the form of the common wealth Nether doeth my reason accuse the prince and the councel which is that if it vuere at liberty for Ministers to execute that vuhich perteineth to the Magistrate or the Magistrate to doe that vuhich belongeth to the Minister yet that the later vuith vs ovught rather to be doen then the first for that there is a greater vuant of sufficient church men then of able common vuealth men But as I altogither excuse none from the highest to the lowest of vs which haue continued this popish corruption so long so I accuse especially yow and such as yow are which in steed of refusing them and shewing the vnlawfulnes of mingling them gape after them and are readie to proclaim war as the Prophet saith if yow durst vnles by hurling in some morsel one or other your mouthes were stopped And yt may be said of Princes how godly soeuer other wise which lift the Bishops into this honour that is said of a wicked Emperour which promoted them likewise he honored the Priestes that they should be no Bishops that is that they should be vnable to doe the office of a Bishop This worldly principalitie entred not as yow pretend into the ministery with the Christian Magistrate immediatly after the tyme of persecution but long after For it began first at Alexādria in Cyrils tyme and after entred into Rome your answer also to the canō attributed vnto the Apostles is vain for the canō opposeth the attendance in his ecclesiastical ministery vnto worldly offices beside that your answer is otherwise to homely For it is as much as if yow should answer that the canon is vnderstāded of al worldly offices sauing those which yow defend My reason owt of the Calcedō Councel is for that it forbiddeth to take the charge of an Orphan which requireth not so much attendance as the ciuil offices and which commō charitie would otherwise lay vpō him Again for that it forbiddeth the Minister to receiue vpon pain of excommunication any secular honour and therefore the office of a Iustice of peace of a Iustice of Quorum of hauing iudgment of life and death which the D I wil not say craftely for it is to manifest but fearfully passeth by whereunto ad that decreed in another Councel that the Bishop should onely attend vnto praier reading and preaching where so far it is that it wil suffer him to deal with ciuil offices that it forbiddeth to medle with matters of his own houshould which notwithstanding belong vnto him and therfore I doe not allegd it as that which I altogither allow but to shew how seuere the auncient councels haue bene in this point wherof he would bear vs down that there is not a word For otherwise withowt some fauorable interpretation this canon in this point is owt of rule To the D. which wil not haue the Ministers work in any handy craft occupation c but bear ciuil office I replied that it vuas as much as if he should say that he vuould not be bound vuith yron but vuith goulden fetters c. wherto he answereth that I doe but deride Here I leaue it to the reader to consider whether by this which he calleth derision I haue broken the head of his cause so that if it could it would weep As for that owt of M. Bucer there is no man dowteth of but that one and the same may doe the office of a Minister and of a Magistrate at once he affirmeth not he doeth the clean contrary as I haue shewed and further may be seen M. Caluin doeth not onely invey against the papistes which enter forcibly vpon the Magistrates office but against those also that receiue it being giuē For his reasons that no man is able to sustein boeth those charges c. are general I graunt the D. alledgeth not al the Papistes reasons yet this of the papistes is the same with his yea in this point with grief I am compelled to see him further caried from the boundes of modesty then they are For they as ys alledged by M. Caluin content them selues with this defence that their ministery is not greatly hindred by it but he dare say that these offices are a furtherance to their ministery which trwly withowt miracle wil hardly be doen that a man hauing alreadie a burden as much as he is able to bear should handle the matter so konningly that he should not onely be able to bear another as heauy almost as yt but to bear it also easelier Hether perteineth that he hath afterward where he affirmeth that the necessitie of studying the lawes of the realm maketh him fitter for the ministery that is to say in effect maketh him haue more leasure to studie the lawes of the kingdom of heauen therby to giue the riper iudgment in thinges perteining thereto And as this is straunge in the study of the lawes of the realm so it is
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
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
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
leaf in his book page 521 where this question is yet pursued and examples browght of lay men which preached in Origins tyme. where it is first to be noted that the Ans is contrary to him self which page 139 and last section denieth that any man may preach the word no not so much as to shew a proof of his ability vnles he be at the least admitted into the ministery Yf he haue an admittance to the ministery of the word how is he a lay man As for that he addeth it was vpon occasion I would know what occasion there could be then when the churches were builded and an order set why lay men should preach Or why might not those Bishops which gaue lay men leau to preach haue ordeyned them ministers of the word seing the Bishop onely by his opinion had then the ordeyning of them was it not as easy for them to haue made them Ministers of the word and so to haue kept the order of god as to haue sent them owt in the quality of lay men contrary to that order so that his drift seemeth to be to bring in al disorder and confusion into the church of god Then I answer that althowgh they were not duly chosen yet were they not mere lay men cōsidering that thei had an ecclesiastical calling such as yt was euen the Bishops admission vnles he wil haue al the Ministers with vs lay men which haue onely the same admision The place was browght of me before not that I approued it in al pointes as I also noted but to shew in what estimation that election was had which was made by the Bishop alone Here vpon that I said that Baptim ministred by an heretical Minister is good he thincketh it to be rather good when it is ministred of a lay man that is a member of the church which is a foul error For an heretical Minister so long as he is suffered to enioy his ministery and not deposed therefrom is boeth a member of the church and a Minister of god althowgh boeth and euil member and an euil Minister And it is as much as if he should say that the execution of a malefactor by a priuate man which is honest is rather lawful then by a publik Magistrat which is a briber withal let it be noted that here the Ans boeth contrary to the truth and contrary to that hym self professeth hangeth the effect of the sacrament vpon the goodnes or naughtines of the Minister in that in this respect he preferreth the sacramēt ministred by a priuat mā being good vnto that which is ministred by an euil man althowgh he be a publik Minister The rest in this diuision ether hath had answer or requireth none Yt had bene as I said a gros error if M. Bucer had iudged it meet that wemen should baptiz And whether the Ans would haue had hym so vnderstood or no I leau to the readers iudgment vpon the discours in boeth his bookes Nether can it want some skar of error to alow of the title of priuate baptim for althowgh it were cōueniēt that the childe should be baptized in the how 's when there is danger to bring it to the church yet forsomuch as that owght not to be withowt a conveniēt nombre of the faithful and withowt the publik Minister the baptim is not as also it can not be priuate but publik As for the reasons they haue bene answered and come to be answered further in the treatise of administration of the sacramentes in priuate howses How vnworthy a thing it is that he should charge vs vuith priuate vuritinges vuhich he kepeth in his study leauing his publik vuorkes let the reader iudg I made mention of other gros absurdities of M. Bucers least the excellency of his learning and godlines should cary the simpler sort to beleue any thing contrary to the truth And yf it be iudged of the godly that I might haue spared that speach it is a thing wherin I wil not stand against them in myne own defence Here first he asketh where Augustin disaloweth baptim by wemen althowgh these wordes of myne doeth not alovu be not so ful yet in that talking of this surmised case of necessity he neuer cometh so low as to the baptim by wemē but stayeth in that which is ministred by lay men it is manifest that he disalowed the baptim by wemen For otherwise if he had thowght that wemen in that case might haue baptized it stoed him vpon to haue taught that in defaut of a lay man a woman might be taken seing that in his iudgment the saluation of the childe stoed thereupon when he dowteth also vuhether it ovught to be ministred again vuhich vuas ministred by a lay man he could hardly leau any dout of the vtter misliking of baptim by wemen whereunto serueth the practis of his tymes which was as hath bene shewed in such cases to run to the church vuith their children His other question cometh to be answered afterward Against the fourth Councel of Carthage which forbiddeth vuemen to baptiz he runneth for aid to Gratian the common falsifier of the good canons of whome I haue before spoken Althowgh if the answer be true which he frameth owt of this forger that she may not baptiz in publik forsomuch as al baptim is to be ministred in publik assembly and that euen then when it is ministred in the how 's it foloweth that a woman may neuer baptiz And to the intent the Ans may know his error the better let hym repair vnto M. Bullinger who citeth this canon to condemn al maner of baptizing by wemen Here also let it be noted that albeit the Answ seing such consent of the learned against baptim by wemen dare not flatly meynteyn it yet where he finedeth any thing to defend yt by althowgh neuer so base he forgetteth it not To that alledged that the breaking of the orders of god vuhereof one is that the minister onely should baptiz the other that it be doen publikly confirmeth men greatly in that heresy that al are damned vuhich are not baptized he answereth nothing Likewise to that that if a man could not be saued vuithovut baptim yet vue might not therefore break the order of god he answereth also nothing but wandereth idly in talking of the necessity of baptim which we confes as hath bene before declared Vuhere against his absurd saying that the teaching of this kinde of priuate baptim implieth no more the tying of saluation vnto the sacrament then to teach that children should be baptized before they be able to answer for them selues I replied that the baptim of young children hath ground in the scripture but baptim by lay men or vuemen hath none he answereth that this confirmeth his saying wherein the reproch of triflyng is to easy to set forth his vntollerable abusing of his reader For to haue answered he owght to haue
holy communion beginning pag. 526. diuis vij of the D. book AMongest diuers reasons browght to proue that the whole body of the church should so much as may be communicate â—n the holy supper togither he cauilleth â—t that alledged owt of S. Paul saying that he blameth those which did contentiously separate them selues whereas the Apostle vnder one kinde noteth al needeles sundring of the members one from another in that holy action That owt of S. Mathew 18 of two or three gathered in Christs name ys answered nether ys it denied but that two or three may communicate yf the other wil not at al onely yt ys said that where the other wil althowgh not so often as is conuenient yet that in such a case the three should for the reasons alledged whereunto he answereth nothing tarry for the rest his next diuision is answered in the 9 diuision which he taketh vp before by rending my book asonder that he might seem able to say somewhat which answer of myne vpon how good ground yt standeth let the reader iudg his reply whereunto is senseles where also his mervailing that I say the tvuelue vuere made Apostles after their first calling argueth his want considering that the ordeyning of them to be Embassadors throwghowt the world which is the vocation of their Apostleship was not vntil after the resurrection That which deceiueth hym is for that he considereth not that yt is the vse of the scripture in speaking of the beginninges of thinges to term them by the names which they had at the tyme of the writing and not which they had when that which they wrote was doen as in the names of Babel and Peleg c. the next requireth no answer In the next he accordeth that by ecclesiastical censures and ciuil punishmentes the rest of the church should be browght to communicate with the three where he manifestly forsaketh the book which leaueth yt free three seasons of the year onely excepted And the truth is yf it be conuenient that yt should be celebrated oftener yt is also meet that there should be punishmentes for the breach of that conueniency his exception against the proof of excommunication for want of doeyng this duty that to cut ovut his soul from the people signifieth to put to death and not to excoÌ„municate vttereth his want considering that the same commandement was giuen to Abraham in the gouernment of his how 's which was the church of god And yet that no ciuil sword was put into his hand ys manifest in that being a priuate man in the common wealth he dwelt in he had no power of lyfe and death But of this matter he may learn further other where His obiections against the Adm. and my allegation of canons ascribed to the Apostles are answered That the owtward vncleannes vnder the law may be easlier auoided then the inward which owght to kepe vs from the communion being so generally spoken is vntrue and refuted by me in the case of procuring the funeral of our friendes to which we are bound whereunto he answereth nothing nether can the vncleannes of lyfe which is priuate and not openly knowen hinder any oneles yt be such as men mean not to amend That weaknes of faith owght to withdraw vs from the communion is a manifest vntruth yt being instituted for the strenghtning of the weaknes thereof The examination of hym self is required not onely in the partaking of the communion but also in hearing of the vuord of god as whether he come with minde to be tawght and to folow or whether he come of curiosity or of custome or to please men and such like As for corruption of iudgment want of instruction in the vse of the sacrament open offenses and al such disorder of life as requireth separation by the churches ceÌ„sures they fal not into this case where is disputed not for what causes men owght to be put from the holy communion but for what causes they may withdraw them selues when they be by common and good policy of the church admitted Therfore al this is but an abusing of the tyme which is browght against that which I said that yf being of the church and able to examin them selues they be not fit for the hearing of the vuord nether are they fit for the receiuing of the coÌ„munioÌ„ whereby also may appear how vnworthily he doeth now the second tyme obiect contraryety with my self so openly refuted by expres wordes As for the reasons which I alledged to confirm this sentence with he once towcheth not whereunto I wil ad the iudgment of the auncient writers that he may learn to blush which not contented to haue reprehended yt here setteth yt in the beginning of his book as a dangerous point and palpable error Chrysostom writeth thus of the supper hovu tariedst thovu behynde I am thovu saist vnvuorthy then art thovu also vnvuorthy of the communication vuhich is in the prayers The like sentence he hath in another of his homilies uÌ„to the people of Antioche Ambrose saith he that is not fit to receiu the bread of the supper dayly is not fit once in a year August speaking of this matter sheweth that yf the synnes be not so great that one should be excoÌ„municated for them that then a man ovught not to separate hym self from the daily medicine of the lords body whereunto ad M. Bucer which disalowing the communion which is by the Minister aÌ„d one other and withal shewing that the rest of the church owght to be driuen vnto yt boeth alledgeth and aloweth that sentence of Chrysostom before rehersed In the next diuisioÌ„ of the cause of the superstitious fear of coming to the coÌ„munion let the reader iudg of coÌ„sidering that of the euil beginninges of lenton fast I haue spoken before and wil not suffer the D. to start away by mouing of other questions To this chapter belongeth the rest of the 15 Tracta where in the pag. 590 first diuision for his saying we read not that wemen receiued the supper he pretendeth M. Caluin and Zuinglius but they excuse not his rashnes For althowgh they haue the same wordes yet they match this cause with others which are necessary and which haue certein proof owt of the scripture althowgh not in expres wordes whereas he matcheth yt with those thinges which are by his own confession indifferent and not necessary giuing thereby to vnderstand that there is no better grownd of the one then of the other which reason being alledged to proue the occasion of triumph which he giuith here vnto the Catabaptistes and Anabaptistes he answereth not The three next diuisioÌ„s are answered Next vnto this foloweth another vnchangeable doctrine as yt lyeth pa. 603 of the D. book where althowgh the Answ dare not opeÌ„ly vndertake the defence of driuing of known papistes vnto the lords supper yet partly in trifling with the proofes browght for the
church is sleue rather then in matters of doctrine The determination of the goodnes of them boeth is fetched as hath bene shewed from the word of god if therfore the church is hand may slip in the one yt may doe so in the other And if a priuate man may sometyme in a matter of doctrine wake whē the church sleapeth he may doe the same in a matter of order But yf he vnderstand that the church is iudgment is to be preferred to a priuate mans when hers is framed according to the word of god and not his yt is in deed true but then his reason is a meer daliance and an open demaund of that in question Beside that this iudgment is not the opinion of a priuate man but of thowsandes and of those amōgest which diuers are in publik charge and autority Touching the next diuision I know that god is the autor of al truth and consequently the holy gost but I resisted this that al that speak yt speak yt moued by the holy gost which seemed to me to be your meaning And althowgh the knowledg of god which the wicked haue be his gift yet the vse of yt procedeth not from the spirit of god further then of his general working wherby they liue and are moued and wherby the Deuil hym self knoweth the same therefore that which in this case yow durst not affirm of the deuil yow owght not to haue affirmed of the wicked which are led by his spirit THE SECOND CHAPTER THAT the churches ovught to be conformed to the example one of an other ALthowgh to proue that as the churches of Christ ovught to be most vnlike the sinaguoges of Antichrist in their indifferēt ceremonies so they ovught to be most like one vnto another there were alledged three reasōs one owt of S. Paul tovuching the tyme of gathering for the poor the second of the comparison of the children and seruantes of noble men goyng for order and comelines sake in one liuery the third owt of the great Nicene ▪ Councel of the gesture in prayer yet in his answer he feareth not to say that I speak wtthowt any warrant of gods word as yf S. Pauls autority were no word of god with hym which yf I had abused why did he not conuince me And when he is compelled to confes that the vnity in ceremonies is to be wished I would know of hym why it is to be wished yf yt be not for that the word of god teacheth so Yf it do teach so and not by this place why doeth he not shew some apter but his cause falling here to the ground for want of answer he falleth to accusing that I break vnity If he mean as he owght holy yt is that which is in question Also that we are cause why vniformity is not obserued in our church which is likewise and before answered Then he asketh to what churches ours should conform yt self and why other reformed churches should not aswel frame them selues to ours his reason that we haue as good groundes of our doinges as they yf it be as it owght vnderstood of the ceremonies is stil the demaund of that in question But to leau to the iudgmēt of the reader vpō the allegations whether our ceremonies be as good as theirs for further contenting his question I answer that yf there be any ceremonies which we haue better then they they owght to frame thē selues to vs yf they haue better then we then we owght to frame our selues to thē yf the ceremonies were alike commodious the later churches should cōform them selues to the first as the younger dawghters vnto the elder for as S. Paul in the members where al other thinges are equal noteth yt for a mark of honor aboue the rest that one is called before another to the gospel so is yt for the same causes amongest the churches And in this respect he pincheth the Corinthes that not being the first which receiued the gospel yet they would haue their seueral maners from other churches Moreouer where the ceremonies are alike cōmodious the fewer owght to cōform thē selues vnto the moe forasmuch therfore as al the churches so far as I know of our confession in doctrine agree in the abrogatiō of diuers thinges which we retayn our church owght ether to shew that they haue doē euil or els she is found to be in faut that doeth not conform her self in that which she can not deny to be wel abrogated Nether doeth this bring in any more popedome thē he which teacheth that the younger dawghter should reuerēce the elder doeth teach that the elder hath autority to command the younger That owt of M. Caluin and Gualter onely serueth for filling for we confes that for indifferent ceremonies nether the churches owght to fal owt with them selues nor any member seuer hym self from the church But yf which he can not deny this be the duty of the churches to conform them selues one vnto another then there must be some to inform and admonish thē of this dutye Therefore to let pas the offences which the superstition in them worketh and to presuppose of them as much indifferency in the vse as there is in there nature yet he hath here manifestly condemned hym self For confessing that the churches in ceremonies owght to be like as much as is possible he endeuoreth notwithstāding with might and mayn that they should not onles al other wil conform them selues to ours In steed wherof he owght to haue confessed at the least some imperfection of our church in this behalf and haue addressed these admonitions of his vnto them which for difference in ceremonies make a departure from the church Beside that the froward spirites against which M. Caluin speaketh were those that stuk in the ceremonial Iudaism as the D. doeth now in the ceremonial papism and pressed them as the vnchangeable lawes of god which he cā not shew to be done of vs in any indifferent ceremony M. Gualters place so far as yt concerneth ceremonies hath the same answer THE THIRD CHAPTER of the first part AN other general faut of the seruice book is assigned in that yt mainteineth an vnpreaching ministery partly in appointing so long tyme of prayers and reading vuherby the les tyme can be spent in preaching but especially for that yt requireth nothing to be doen by the Minister vuhich a childe of ten yeares ould can not doe as vuel and as lavufully as that man vuherevuith the book contenteth yt self Here in the first point he gropeth at none dayes asking whether this or that be my meaning which I playnly declared in saying that the deuil vnder colour of lōg prayer draue preaching ovut of the church vnto the which reason he answereth nothing but asketh whether we can spend an hower better then in praiyng and hearing the scripture red whereunto I answer that yf with that hower he allow an other for the
sermon the tyme wil be longer then the age of some and infirmities of other some can ordinaryly wel bear whereūto also if another hower at the least be added for the celebration of the holy communion he may see that ether the preaching must be abbridged or not so due regard had of mens infirmityes Beside this there is to be considered the common infirmity wherby throwgh such continuance the powers of the minde standing so long bent are dulled and often also a moste dāgerous lothsomenes occasioned Against which our church as others haue doen should by a godly policy haue prouided where for this cause the whole Leiturgy or seruice is not ordinarily aboue an hower and a half Nether let any here obiect the papistes long seruice For beside that the rage of Idolaters hath alwayes bene more set on fire in the fals worship then the zeal of gods people in the tru yt owght to be considered that their prayer was more a lip-labour then any exercise of the minde and their churches rather stages to represent gay shewes vnto the eyes pleasant soundes vnto the eares and swete smels vnto the nose then any how 's for the children of god to meet in abowt any earnest work and also that they had respite betwene their Mattins and Mas. In the second reason he asketh whether a childe of ten year ould may minister the sacramentes c. no for sooth but yet as wel as he which can but barely read yf he haue the same calling which being that which I affirmed he is not able to moue with one word of reason After he supposeth of me as yf I had sayd that the book maynteineth an vnpreaching ministery because a childe can read yt adding that so I may say of the Bible because a childe can read yt also which is to open an vntruth For my reason is not because a childe of ten years can read yt but because yt requireth nothing to be doen by a Minister which such a childe can not doe And if the holy Bible which is far from yt should permit that one which can but read yt might be made a Minister or required no more of hym then that he should be able to read yt then I might wel say that the Bible maynteined an vnpreaching ministery Yf the order of the church doe not permit this then the charge lieth vpon the Bishops neckes which withowt any warrant haue so bouldly enterprised such a shameful act part of the next diuision is answered in this part the residue with the two next after yt in the former part of this book THE FOVRTH CHAPTER of the first part TO a third faut assigned in that the fruit that might othervuise be taken of the seruice is not receiued by reason that the minister readeth some in the hether some in the vpper part of the chauncel as far from the people as the vual vuil let hym goe he crieth owt of impudency corruption and falsifying for leauing owt these wordes except yt shal be othervuise determined by the Ordinary of the place Alas how should I be free or what armour may be giuen me against these vntrue accusations which could not escape the here For in the very next diuisiō I expresly mention this exception which he hath mangled and cut of from this diuision belike to the end there might be place to this surmise But vnto the reasons that yt renueth the fashion of the leuitical Priest vuhich vuithdrvu hym self from the people to talk vuith god alone Also that yf it be for the most edification that some part of the seruice should be said in the body of the church that then yt is not so vuhē other some is said in the nether some in the further end of the chauncel and other some in the further end of the same church Agayn that yf yt be expedient that he should haue his face tovuards the people in reading of some yt is vnmeet to haue his bakturned to them in other some last of al to the vndecency in trudging from place to place I say to al these reasons he answereth nothing worth the naming But the sum of his defence is that the Bishop hath power to order yt to the moste edification wherein how vnlawful yt is that he alone should haue the order hereof is before declared and how daungerous it is let the practis in this point be iudg For I am assuredly perswaded that the tenth church in England hath not al the seruice said in that place where the whole church may best hear yt And withal note as I said what a shameful disorder is committed in a matter so easely remedied The place of S. Luke is an vnchāgeable rule to teach that al that which is doen in the church owght to be doen where it may be best heard for which cause I alledged yt his cauil of the place of the font said of me to be at the church dore in steed that I should haue said ouer against the church door is vnworthy the answer especially cōsidering that I spake more fauorably for the book thē he which by this answer sendeth the minister for baptim beneath the church door And so also I leau to the iudgmēt of the reader what was the end of him that penned the book in this behalf seing he could hardly be ignorant that the places vsed customably in Popery were not the aptest for the vnderstanding of the hearers And this boeth separatiō of the Minister by Chauncel as Monckish as also the often shifting of the Ministers place as a thīg very absurd M. Bucer boeth generally in al places and particulerly in our church doeth cōdemn Ambrose hath bene answered as for M. Caluin he sheweth that althowgh our slaknes to beleue be euil which is cause that one sweareth yet that the oth is lawful considering that the vse of many thinges is pure vuhich proceed of an euil beginning whereby the reader may see how shamefully he would abuse hym for the slaknes of beleuīg which is the original of the oth can neuer be pure and the lawful oth occasioned hereon can neuer be but pure So that where M. Caluin referreth the pure vse vnto a thing diuers from the corrupt beginning and simply good the Ans referreth yt to the corcorrupt beginning it self his cauil of my vntrue dealing for changing his word good into not euil is vnworthy any answer THE SECOND PART OF this Tractate THE FIRST CHAPTER VVHEREOF being of holy daies is deuided into tvuo partes THE FIRST PART OF THE FIrst chapter of the ceremony of the Easter Natiuity and Vuhitson holy dayes TTe Treatise of the general fautes being ended I come to the particuler where I pas the eight first diuisions as those which haue no matter ether worth or requiring answer Before I come to the ninth which is of the prayers I wil dispatch the treatise of the holy dayes as it lieth page 538 of
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
saying that yt was no law but a custome and that yt was not penal to those vuhich did not kepe yt Socrates confirmeth the indifferency which I affirmed to haue bene in in the beginning For the alowance of Saintes dayes whereof the question is here althowgh he hath onely M. Bullingers testimony which ys retracted and condemned by M. Bullingers own self yet he marcheth forward stil as bouldly as yf he had a whole legion of learned men of hys side what dealing this ys let the world iudg But they be forsooth his own wordes which he hath alledged so are these yours Basil in his book of offices yet I suppose yow wil be loth that yt should be now accounted your iudgment after yow haue corrected your self Here also to the iudgment of such a number of reformed churches vuhich haue condemned the keping of these dayes as vnlavuful he not onely answereth nothing but walketh stil in his ould path of bould and vntrue affirmation that the custome of the whole church confirmeth them as thowgh the reformed churches now were no churches at al. And that the reader may further know hys importunity in this behalf he may vnderstand that beside M. Bullingers consent in general with the rest of the churches the disalowance of that particular church of Zurich and consequently of hym towching these Saintes dayes doeth appear in a book a part And if the learned reader look the later edition of M. Bullingers commentary vpon the Romanes he may peraduenture finde his former iudgment alledged by the D. corrected Hetherto also commeth Musculus iudgment in particular which affirmeth that there can be no defence for the saintes dayes vuhatsoeuer be pretended likewise M. a Hopers which condemneth them notwithstanding their gray heares yea the very first institution of them and that vpon credit of that which the D. calleth an vnlearned shift that ys to say by opposing the autority of the word of god and the examples of the churches gouerned by the Apostles and Prophetes In the next diuision in Caluins iudgment towching the three feastes dedicated to the lord I wil procede no further considering that yt appeareth in his epistles that he was not the cause of the abrogating them As for the saintes dayes whereof onely in deed the question is in thys place considering that which hath bene alledged I think the D. hym self wil make hym no patrone of Althowgh throwg◠the multitude of our papistes the obseruation of these dayes as of Easter c. amongest vs vuould haue inconueniences vuhich yt should not haue vuith them vuhere there are none as I haue also before obserued The rest in this chapter is answered THE SECOND CHAPTER OF the second part of this Tractate of the fautes touching prayers THE FIRST PART OF THE chapter touching the fautes in the matter TO mayntein that we should pray to be deliuered from al aduersity he falleth fowly and as yt were vpon al fower teaching with great confidence that we pray for thinges whereof we haue no promes For seing our prayers made withowt faith be abominable and no fayth ys able to be grounded but vpon the word of promes yt must needes folow that the praier conceiued withowt promes ys likewise abominable But then sayth he we may not pray to be free from al syn no more in deed we may in thys lyfe because we must alwayes pray forgiue vs our synnes nor yet saith he pray against persecution no nether against al persecutiō because yt ys cōtrary to that word which sayth that euery one vuhich vuil liue godly in Christ Iesu must suffer persecution Hereunto he abuseth S. Iohn 14 13 whatsoeuer yow ask I wil giue which S. Iohn hym self soluteth when he saith that he heareth vs in al that vue ask according to hys vuil and that wil ys in hys word Hether he draweth the example of our Sau. Christ which prayed to haue the cup remoued that he knw he should not obteyn which as he alledgeth yt serueth to proue that we owght to pray for that which we are sure we shal not obtein which ys absurd and not onely to pray withowt but also contrary to faith Nether did our Sau. Christ pray withowt promes For as other the children of god to whose condition he had humbled hym self haue so had he a promes of deliuerance so far as the glory of god in the accomplishment of hys vocation would suffer And I deny that at that tyme he made that prayer to hys holy father he knew he should not obteyn For althowgh he knw that he should suffer yet yf I answer that as towching hys humanity he knw not the most infinite and extreme weight of sufferances which god hys heauenly father had measured vnto hym or knowing them had throwgh the vnspeakable force of the panges which he then was in forgotten them I see not how thys answer may not be maynteyned as a Christian and catholik answer For our Sau. Christ takyng vnto hym togither with our nature our infirmities might withowt al contagion of syn boeth not know some thinges and be subiect to forgetfulnes of that which he knw not to the forgetfulnes which commeth of negligence but which commeth of a sodayn astonishment and shaking of al the powers boeth of body and mynde Al forgetfulnes I graunt ys the punishment of syn but that al forgetfulnes is syn and vpon al occasions I think the Answ hym self wil not affirm As for that he wandereth in abowt the conditiō yt nothyng excuseth hys error For we owght not to desyre to be free from al aduersity yf yt be hys wil considering that he hath already declared hys wil therein but onely of this or that aduersity whereof we know not but vpon the euent what ys hys good pleasure He hath much other fog to this purpose but not worth the naming After he cyteth the 91 psalm that no euil shal come to the where he manifestly ouerthroweth that he hath affirmed before For pouerty and persecution are amongest those euiles of which hym self saith we haue no promes to ground our selues vpon when we pray against them As for the place yt self yt must not be vnderstood that the afflictions shal not touch vs which ys manifest in that assigning the maner of performance of these promises he saith that the lord vuil be vuith hym in hys troble and deliuer hym noting that he shal be in troble which ys contrary to that that he shal be free from al troble So that to accord the scripture with yt self the meaning of of the promise must needes be that he shal not be ouerlayed or oppressed but contraryly that the afflictions shal serue as the Apostle saith to hys good Here therfore a difference must be put betwene euil and aduersity in such sort that althowgh the scripture doe promise to deliuer the faithful frō al euil yet yt foloweth not thereof that yt
antiquitity which he aduoucheth yt wil fal owt that he can fetch yt from not other head then from popery For as for that he alledgeth of the Christians which vsed yt because the Iues abiding other names of god could not abide yt yt ys nothing so considering that the Iues haue that name in great honour althowgh they haue not hym so to whom of right yt belongeth And in regard that yt was giuen to the son of god they hated the name of Christ as much and in some respect more because in sound yt is further of from their word then the name of Iesus That especially this curtesy should be made at the name of Iesus when the Gospel is red which conteineth the glad tydinges c. is a foul ouersight the confutation whereof I haue before noted which serueth also against the standing rather at the gospel then at the Epistle That also of subduing of al our spiritual enemyes by Christ c is friuolous seing that boeth god the father and the holy gost haue their work in our saluation althowgh afrer an other sort as wel as our Sa. Christ How absurd he is aswel in affirming that a Pastor may better haue two benefices to preach at then a Curate two cures to read at as also in his reason thereof let the reader iudg THE III. CHAPTER OF THE SEcond part of this treatise of ministring the holy sacramentes in priuate hovuses beginning pag. 510 of the D. book YT hath bene shewed that the administration of the word and Sacramentes owght to be publik and that they ceas not to be so euen then when for the distres of persecution the church is driueÌ„ to hould her assembly in a priuate how 's Here yt remayneth onely in questioÌ„ whether yt be conuenient that in the churchis peace the sacramentes for siknes sake should he ministred in priuate howses Vuhere to that alledged owt of S. Paul that he opposeth the congregation vuherein the lords supper should be houlden vnto a priuate hovus vuhere men satisfy their hunger he can answer nothing but repeateth that owt of Caluin which he idly alledged before I am content that the reader iudg whether boeth those absurdities which I layd vpoÌ„ hym folow of his rash answer As for that he replieth that our Sau. Christes preaching and S. Iohns baptizing openly proue not that the administring of the word and sacramentes should be publik because examples proue not yt is answered Beside that I haue shewed that yt hath commandement Another reason of his is because our Sau. Christ preached in priuate fâ—milies which is likewise answered That owt of Zuinglius that yt is not necessary to baptiz in the church I graunt for the case may be such that yt may be baptized in the fieldes but in a priuate how 's in this case of siknes where there be set and ordinary meetinges in the church I deny yt conuenient Yf he mean by not necessary that it is baptim althowgh yt be not ministred in the ordinary assembly I graunt yf he mean that yt ys not necessary to decency and good order his own wordes giue me answer enowgh For as the tyme maketh conuenience when yt is ministred so sone as yt may be commodiously or inconuenience when yt is differred longer so doeth the place Albeit S. Paul was a prisoner yet the Iaylor being conuerted would haue accorded hym what place he had iudged meetest for baptim therefore that example had bene more apt theÌ„ the other of Peter althowgh nether of them make any thing for yow As for that owt of Mathew 18 where two or three c to proue that two be enow to make a congregation wherein baptim may be ministred first yf it could come to pas that there were but two persons in the whole church one to baptiz the other to be baptized I dowt whether yt were meet to stay the baptim vntil we saw whether the lord would giue further encreas But that yt is conuenient that in our church yt should be ministred in the presens of two or three onely is a thing most vnworthy of the dignity of the holy Sacrament when as yf the ciuil administration of iudgment should be handled so cornerlike yt should worthely be suspected But what shal then be answered to the place of S. Mathew euen this that our Sau. Christ speaketh not there of the publik administring of the word and Sacramentes but of the proceeding in the church discipline against offences and of that part which was doen priuately For after he had tawght how from the admonition by one we owght to proceed vnto that which is made by two or three and so to the churchis hauing before ratified the proceeding of the church he autoriseth also by thys word the admonition which with inuocation of his name was giuen by those two or three â–ª promising that yt shal not be in vayn but haue effect that way which god hath disposed of whether yt be to conuersioÌ„ of the party or to further making hym inexcusable Yf it be asked why then our sauiour Christ did not also speak of the ratifying of the first admonition by one I answer that he spake of the effect of these two later admonitions not that the other should he withowt fruit but for the excellency of the effect of these before that Vuhich was also therfore needful to be made mention of more theÌ„ the first for so much as otherwise vpoÌ„ experience of the synners hardnes of heart in reiection of the first admonitioÌ„ he which gaue yt with the other one or two appointed for that matter throwgh dispair of his amendement might be beaten bak from proceding any further with hym To me acknowledging that in the tyme of persecution yt may be in a priuate hous as may also the publik preaching he answereth that the same may be doen in this necessity which he repeateth in his 6 diuision where stil he demauÌ„deth that in question For yt is in question whether there is any such necessity of baptim as for the ministring thereof the common decent order should be broken And verely by these kinde of speaches he playnly condemneth those churches ether of neglect or contempt of the holy sacramentes which suffer none to be administred but in the ordinary congregations Here I leau to the readers iudgment whether by this extraordinary administration there be more danger of confirming this error that children can not be saued yf they dy before they haue receiued baptim then the administring yt onely when the infantes may be conueniently browght to the church doeth confirm the error of the Anabaptistes which say that children may not be baptized vntil they come to age seing that by the dayly practis of the church in baptizing them there can not rise the least suspition of this later error In saying that I haue nether scripture reason nor Doctor he kepeth but his wont For scripture and reason
must be necessarily had yet preaching at burials is not meet vnles withal yt be doen withowt inconueniences He denieth yt also to be acceptation of persons houlding forth the obiection which I gaue hym but the answer vnto yt he towcheth not Likewise he saith that there is sometymes more occasion to preach at the rich mans burial then at the poors but he saith yt onely for proof he bringeth none My argument he answereth not which is that the cause vuhy burial sermons vuere brovught in of giuing of famous men their commendation vuas insufficient considering that the same vuas doen by the holy Prophetes moste able and vuilling to doe yt by sermon yf yt had bene conuenient Likewise to the infamous beginninges of these funeral sermons from infidels he saith nothing onely he abuseth the tyme in opposing the autority which I confessed by which kinde of reasoning he may also bring in torches at noon dayes moneth weke and year mindes which haue the alowance of the same tymes that these burial sermons haue The first sect is answered in the 3 diuision My argument which is that as other inuentions of men vse to doe so these sermons haue driuen ovut the necessary duty of particular comforting the partyes vuhich are especially stricken by the death of their friendes he hath vtterly peruerted turning my argument of effectes into that of contraries as he did likewise boeth my argumentes of the final and efficient causes in the 7 diuision which is but vntrue dealing The general sorow of the church in the death of a member may be easely susteyned by the ordinary teachinges but they that be specially wounded owght to haue a special plaster wherein that which he affirmeth of the exhortation giuen generally to be as apt to comfort as when yt is particularly applied is boeth a manifest vntruth and directly contrary to hym self which saith None douteth but that a man is more moued by that which is spoken to hym particularly then he is with that spoken generally aswel to other as to hym self And hereby yt may appear how inconuenient yt is to clog the minister with this voluntary charge of preaching at burials which beside his ordinary ministery hath so necessary a duty cast vpon hym in the death of his parishoners whereunto ad also the travail and care toward the deceased during his siknes The first section is answered in diui 3. To that of tying hereby the meditation of death vuhich ovught to be continual to one onely tyme he answereth as yow see the reply whereunto is before Althowgh this reason owght not to haue bene so whotly pursued seing that althowgh I wrote yt yet I professed that I would not precisely subscribe yt M. Caluins iudgment of these sermons doeth now appear which is that he doeth not greatly disalow them His answer against that I alledged that they might be easelier born in other places then vuith vs vuhere there are such svuarmes of papistes and other ignorant vuhich take occasion of falling thereby is partly replied vnto in the 3 diuision and is further confuted in that the doctrine against purgatory and trentals may be as frutfully tawght at other tymes as yt is in other churches where we see singuler frute of such teaching As for the morosity he talketh of yt is before answered Althowgh the money for preaching be giuen vnasked yet if yt be receiued in that respect the occasion of the papistes slaunderous speach is not taken away The next diuision belongeth vnto the readers iudgment the next is answered Here yt is once to be noted that he not content to wrest my particular argumentes hath peruerted this whole disputation For where my reasons doe neuer conclude the vnlawfulnes of these ceremonies of burial but the inconuenience and inexpedience of them he imagineth me cōcluding that they may not be and that yt is vnlawful to haue them which notwithstanding S. Paul doeth precisely distinguish THE EIGHT CHAPTER OF the second part of this Treatise of the surplice and other apparel taken from popery AGainst their importunacy which may peraduenture say that I leaped the matter of apparel throwgh conscience of the weaknes of our cause yt shal not be much owt of the way to run yt ouer that yt may appear boeth how little there is which hath not bene answered and how little weight yt hath which remayneth to be answered The first diuis is answered so is the second for further answer whereunto I refer the reader to the Bishop of Salisburys book where he shal perceiue how directly the D. is contrary vnto hym in that point As for the last section yt is answered in the first part of this tractate sauing that he misconstrueth my wordes in affirming me to say that monumentes of Idolatry may be vsed in the church yf some manifest profit doe appear Vuhere as my meaning is playn that they owght to haue no entrance into the church not onely for that they are monumentes of Idolatry but because there appeareth no manifest profit of them For althowgh I wil not enter into that question yet I can not see how that which is properly a monument of Idolatry can haue any good vse in the church That thinges ordeyned to good vses and after cōuerted to Idolatry may be profitable I graunt but that a thing shal be profitable in the church especially whose natiuity and first birth was consecrated to an Idol and which the first day yt was inuented was applied vnto Idolatry I think the Answ is not able to shew In the next the first part of the first section the reader hath to iudg of vpon the reasons alledged and vpon the common experience His question is onely to blot paper being afterward precisely boeth moued and answered by me For proof that some think the sacrament better administred with then withowt a surplice I alledged as witnesses them vuhich say I vuil not communicate vnles he vuear a surplice whereunto he answereth that yt may come of iust cause when the Minister by not wearing sheweth an example of disobedience Vuhereby he first aloweth that men should absteyn from the Communion for want of a surplice then in part he giueth the execution of the lawes to priuate men contrary to the law of god and of the realm Vuhereas yf the Minister did euil in not taking a surplice and would not giue place to their admonition yt behoued them to receiue the sacramentes and hear the word at his hand and after to complain of the disorder to those to whome the correction belongeth His reason that none which are perswaded to communicate with vs think the sacrament better or wors for a surplice for that they are disswaded from greater thinges is insufficient For there were Iues which were browght from confidence in them selues and in their own workes to seek for their saluation in Christ which in a peece of a holy day
CoÌ„stan Euseb 3. li. de vita CoÌ„stan Euseb 4. li. de vita CoÌ„stan In lib. ad Constan Amb. lib. 5. Epist. 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 lib cap. 15 a for insted of that Euseb hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yt should hauâ— bene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b Sozâ— 1. li. cap 17. a Tract 7. 1. Tit. Defence of the Apol. 6. part ch 11. diu 11. and 12. ch di 4. M. Novuel Tom. 2. pa. 35. 38. 34. 27. Diuis 4. p. 700. Amb. li. epist. 5. 32. pag. 146. Act 5. part 6. chap. 12. diuis â— Hier. 5. lib. cap. 4. Apolog. 2. a August in psal contra partent Donat. and epist. 68. b epist. 166 c epist. 162 d Li. primâ— contra literas Parmenian ca. 7. diuis 6. pa. 702. c. also the first diu p. 694. a Apolo 6. part cap. 9. diui 1. 2. 1. Tim. 2. 1. Sam. 21. 4â— Lib. epistol Gal. pa. 46 a Ruff 1. li. cap. 3. b 2. Croni 30. vers 20. 4. and 34. vers Act. 11. 2. 4. 15. 22. 21. 22. c 1. Tom. coÌ„cil in praef â— conci Carthag Ambrose epist. lib. 532 Hether beloÌ„geth that vuhich the bishop hath vuritten in defence of the Apologie 6. part chap. 3. diuis 3. a Act. 21. 18 b Cal. Inst 4. booK 11. cha sect 15. 12. sect 7. c Beza Epi. 8. d Bucer lib. de cura anim The first chapter of the first part that the church in indifferent ceremonies ouught â–ª not to becoÌ„formed vnto the popish Synagoges a pag. 256. diui 2. and p. 272. diui 1. p. 475. a Tract 11. di 6 p. 522. b Ro. 12. 2. di 2. p. 474 c In the former part p. 470. d Leuit. 19. 19. 27. Diuis 3. pa. 475. a In the former part p. 184. c. b In the former part p. 470. a pag. 256. 257. 258. also in the former part of this booK p. 403. lin 29 b Diu. 4. p. 476. diuis 5. pa. 476. Diuis 6. p. 477. Lib. de Idolatria a In the first booK and first Tractate Diuis 7. p. 478. b Euseb lib. 3. cap. 17. Socra lib. 1. cap. 9. Diuis 8. p. 478. Zaodicens cap. 38. 2. Tom. Bracar can 73. 74. a In the examination of the D. ceÌ„sures b Apol. first part chap. 2. diui 8. a In the former part of this booK p. 403. pag. 277. et diuis 6. d In this chapter a Math. 15. 2. 16. Marc. 7. 2. 14. â— Rom. 14. 1. Cor. 3. Heb. 5. â— Tract 11. Diuis 6 p. 522. a In the defence of the Apol. 3 part chap. 5. Diuis 1. vpoÌ„ the 18. of S. mathevu Diuis 6. p. 259. b In the former part p. 245. Diui. 7. pa. 260. a In the former part p. 279. Tra. 1. b Tract 7. and â— c In the former part and first Tr. Diu. 11. and 12. 13. pag. 480. 1. Cor. 16. 1. 2. Can. 20. a In my first booK p. 288 lin 37 c. and p. 294. l. 1. a Rom. 1â— 5. 7. b 1. Cor. 14. 37. Diuis 14. p. 482. a Tract 10. chap. 1. b pag. 370. l. 15. c. Diui. 18. 19 20. p. 485. a In the former part Tract 7. 1. Act. â—5 b Bucer in Tract de reformaâ— Colleg Item in CeÌ„sur liturg Anglica recens Basilâ—ae edit cap 1. Diuis 1. pa. â—â—8 a pag. 541. â—ect 2. a diui 4 p. 540. b Deute 60. vers 7. Diuis 3. pa. 539. c lib. 5. cap. 22. Euseb 5. li. 24. 25. Diuis 4. p. 541. a In my former booK diuision 6. p. 542. Cal. 4. a pag. 54â— b Genes 3. c 1. Timo. 5. Tract 7. p. 757. Eccles 7. 18. Diuis 5. pa. 541. Diuis 6. p. 542. a Zach. 8. â— In the former part of this book p. 226. lin 35. Diuis 1. pa. â—43 Diui. 2. pa. 544. a In the first booK p. 61. sect 3. 4. and pa. 62. sect 1. 2. also in the former part of this p. 408. lin 37. Psal 16. pag. 546. In the former part Tract 5. Diuis 3. pa. 545. Augu. Epi. ad Ianuar. â—9 a In the former part p. 400. Leuit. 23. vers 7. 8. c. a pag. 549. Socrat. 5. li. cap. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diuis 6. p. 549. c CoÌ„fess Eccles Tigur aliarum â—cc cap. 24. pag. 545. Lauaterus de ritibus eccles Tigu cap. 8. Muscu common places vpon the 4 commandement Hoper vpoÌ„ the same coÌ„mandemeÌ„t diuis 9. pa. 492. math 6. 2. Tim. 3. 12. a 1. Iohn 5. 14. vers 15. a Roma 8. Psalm 119. vers 71. b diuis 16. p. 497. c 494. l. 14. Diuis 10 p. 493. LuKe 11. a LuKe 18. 13. Rom. 5. 2 8. 15. Heb. 10. 19. Diuis 11. p. 495. â— Math. 6. â— pag. 497. Diu. 12 and 13 pag. 496 a Mat. 6. 7. b pag. 804. a Diui. 14. p. 497. b diui 9 11. Diuis 17. p. 498. a Rom. 6. Diui. 18. 19. and 20. pa. 499. c. a 1. Cor. 2. 1. b Heb. 5. 12. Ioh. 16. 4. c 1. Cor. 14. 40. d diuis 20. p. 493. e Malach. 1. 8. 14. Martyr vpoÌ„ the 1. of Sam cha 1. a Act. 6. 4. b Ioh. 17. 1. Act 2. 42. Act. 1. 24. Act. 20. 36. c In the tract of the Deacons Diuis 21. p. 501. a 1 Cor 14. 26. b Iustin Apolog pro Christ c Exod. 15. 1. 21. Psal 136. 1. 2. c. Esdr 3. 11. d Act. 6. 2. Euse 7. lib. 9. cap. pag. 740. Socra 6. li. 8. cap. a pag. 350. b 2 lib. 24. c pag. 415. pag. 744. a p. 56 sect 3. of my first booK pa. of hys 278. In the former part pa. 320. lin 23. In the former part pa. 71. l. 36 c. â— Cor. 11. 22 Diuis 1. pa. 511. and diuis 2. pa. 2. a In the former part p. 155. lin 28. c. b p. 73. l. 19. c p. 74. l. 11. Diuis 3. p. 513. contra Litter Parm. lib. 2. ca. 13. Socr. lib. 7. cap. 4. Euseb li. 6. cap 43. Iust in Nouel const 57. a Martyr in Ep. Roma cap. 6. Viretus 14. lib. de min â–ª verbi Sacram Beza in his questions of the Sacramentes quae st 151 lib. Epist. Cal. p. 228. and 321. lib. epist. p. 94. p. 179. Diu. 4. and 5 p. 514. Deu. 12. 18 â–ª a Iam. cha 5. b Bulling decad 5. Serm. 9. Ezech. 11. vers 16. Diuis 4. p. 527. Laodic ca. 58. Diuis 6. p. 528. lib. epist. p. 43. a in the former part p. 466. l. 2. b In the Epistle of the former part of this booK Diuis 2. p. 609. August Epist. 23. a Musc common places in treatise of baptim b Bucer in Cens Litu Angli cap. 12. 14. c Diuis 3. p. 475. in the first booK a â—â—â—om â—â—â—ra Lucifer b Bas de sa 〈◊〉 spiritu 〈◊〉 28 c Ambr. lib. de his qui 〈◊〉 coÌ„â—â—â—rantur