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
word of Keies especially with this addition giuen vnto S. Peter telleth al men that the power there spokē of is spiritual and not ciuil And here the D. is directly against him self For before in this very diuision saying that this iudgment in ciuil causes is not incident but added to the ministery here he pretendeth owt of Barnard that ciuil iudgment in criminal causes is of the power and iurisdiction of the Ministers And if it be trw that he saith after the pastor must vse such discipline as semeth good to the Magistrate when the Magistrate ordeineth ciuil discipline onely ether that discipline must be incident to the pastorship or els in such a time there shal be a Pastor of god which hath no discipline incident into his office seing the ecclesiastical discipline which is taken by his iudgment from him laufully is not incident so that this idle distinction goeth flat to the ground I cal it idle be cause it maketh nothing to the question which is not whether a Minister may bear ciuil office in that respect that he is a Minister but whether he may bear it at al. And of this sort also is that our Bishops break not violently into these offices but receiue them of the Princes gift whereas our question is whether he may receiu these offices when they be giuen yet hath he vsed this distinction at the least fiue tymes After is added that it is committed to them by the Magistrate for fuller satisfying of their dutie yf so why should not al the Ministers alike haue this power to the end that al might doe their duties the better Again in saying that it is necessary for this tyme yow openly wrest this power owt of the Magistrats hād For thereby it followeth that the Magistrate of dutie owght to cōmit this vnto them and if he doe not he is giltie of gods wrath in leauing vndoen that which is necessary to be doen. yow doe also open iniury to the holy gost which is thus supposed to haue left that in the liberty of the Magistrate which is necessary for the accomplishing of the ministery whereas if it had bene necessary there had bene also nothing more easy then to haue giuen this general rule that alwaies vnder a Christian Magistrate the Minister should be armed with civil autority But this succour which yow seek in the tyme is Pigghius shift as is also this whole cause and the flower of your arguments For he saith As long as the church vuas in persecutiō al vuere obediēt vnto their Pastors hovu simple or base so euer the Ministers vuere but after that the church came to haue prosperity then it vuas needful that Bishops should be magnifical also to the end they might be more apt to gouern the magnifical Princes and that otherwise his power and autority should not be sufficiently reuerenced To whome as vnto the D. it is easy to answer that if Kinges and Princes being yet in deadly hatred against the gospel were browght by the ministery of the word vnaccompanied with any such pomp or iurisdiction to yeeld them selues vnto the gospel and to giue due reuerence vnto the ministery how much more now being friendes wil they be kept in dutie and convenient estimation thereof withowt this disguising of the ministery That alledged out of Caluin that euery man must respect his own vocation c. beside that it is drawen cleā from the minde of the autor it is absurdly applied For the application affirmeth it meet for the vocatio of the Minister that he should bear ciuil office which is that in question And where he saith Caluin speaketh nothing against these civil offices in ecclesiastical persons and after that nether he nor any godly man can disalow of yt he giueth suspition that he hath sould him self to speak vntruth withowt al chek of conscience For Calvin sheweth that albeit the godly Princes giuing these offices to church men had a good intent yet that they did euil provide thereby for the church considering that by it was corrupted or rather vtterly brovught to no vught al true and auncient sincerity and that the Bishops if they had had a spark of grace vuould vuhen they vuere offered such offices haue ansuuered that the armour of their vuarfare is not carnal but spiritual Here again also he is owt with him self For in the end of his book albeit the shiftes he vseth are to rowgh hewed yet when he commeth to Caluin in this matter void of al shift he is constreined to reiect his autority Yf he haue nothing against him why doeth he make so smale account of him as for nothing to cast him of if he be against him why doeth he here deny it And as I haue alledged M. Caluin and some others so the learned know that a number moe might be browght to the making vp of a book but for him beside the papistes as I am verely perswaded scarce one so bould an enemy of the truth as to commit this to writing Against the plain meaning of the Apostle opened in flat wordes verses 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. of Rom. 12. here is nothing but your suerly and certein which I wil suffer to haue that credit it can get against so manifest light Your argument is the same which I haue said The Bishop must gouern with discipline therefore with ciuil discipline your answer that he must vse discipline prescribed by the Magistrate whether ciuil or ecclesiastical is an asking of that in question The answer to the place of Timothy that it is spoken of al Christians indifferently merely faced out with the name of Caluin is Pigghius answer to the protestants And it is confuted in that S. Paul instructeth Timothy there not as a simple Christian but as a Minister of the gospel in that also he borowed this speach of the law which calleth the ministery a souldiarfare thirdly in that the same Apostle in other places giueth this title of souldiarship and felow souldiarship to those of the ministery Beside that it flatly condemneth Cyprian as an abuser of the place who by vertw hereof forbiddeth a Minister an Executorship which by the D. ether is not forbidden him or els is forbiddē to al Christians alike And not onely Cyprian is condemned but Ambrose and Ierome which vse it as the admonition Beside Bucer and other godly writers of our tyme as appeareth by Pigghius answer The reason whereby Pigghius and he would shew it vnderstanded of al Christians alike is this Al Christians be spiritual souldiars S. Paul speaketh of spiritual souldiars therfore he speaketh of al Christians concluding affirmatiuely in the second figure which is to open a faut where yow should vnderstand that althowgh Christianity be a kinde of spiritual warfare yet it foloweth not that every spiritual warfare is Christianitie Your answer to Cypriā whereby yow would restrein his iudgmēt to the Executorship and not
may meet now it foloweth not For althowgh they might meet before the holy gost by the mouth of the Apost made a seueral office of yt yet they might not so afterward when it was otherwise determined of by the mouth of god There were diuers kinde of mariages with consanguinitie as brother with sister aunt with nevew c lawful in the beginning ▪ which after that the lord had otherwise disposed of in the law were vnlawful As for that owt of Caluin and 2 Corinth 8 it is friuolous For it neuer perteined to the Deacons office to exhort for the contribution of the poor but was and is the Ministers of the word the Deacons office being to receiu and to distribute yt in that church where he is Deacon The causes also which he alledgeth of the casting of of that office and the busines which the Deaconship did draw in that church of Ierusalem are to trifle out the tyme considering that the decree of the Apostles towching the nue office was general for al places and not where there should be many poor or so many thowsand professors what a bouldnes is it also when the Scripture doeth plainly shew the cause of deliuering them selues from this office to haue bene that they should not leau their ministery and that they might be cōtinually vpon it to reiect this cause and to set vp another which the scripture giueth no ynkling of That they ordeined others for because they should goe into the world is also nothing worth seing that in some of them it came not to pas diuers yeates after and in other some neuer as those which were determined there to remain when as notwithstanding al desired this releas Beside that he answereth nothing to the inequality of giftes betwene our Bishops and the Apostles nor considereth not that the Spiritual charge of our Bishop is ouer moe now then there were then in Ierusalem and that they were at that tyme twelu where he is but one had theyr church togither which he hath scartered I shewed that the Papists are not onely condemned for vuringing the ciuil autority ouut of Princes handes but simply for exercising it and there fore this first section is idle To that I alledged that it is as monstrous for the Bishop to goe from the pulpit vnto the place of ciuil iudgment as for my lord Maior to goe to the pulpit he answereth that it is not vncomely to goe from the pulpit to ciuil administration of iustice c which is a mere mockery of his reader For not daring to deny but it is vncomely for the lord Maior he answereth by affirming that in question For if he say it is not vncomely for the lord Maior to goe to the pulpit he runneth in to that which he saith I surmise of him where of notwitstanding I haue not a letter Albeit the truth is that he may aswel say the Magistrate may minister the Sacrament and preach which is the proper dwety of the Minister as to say the Minister of the word may sit in iudgment of ciuil causes which is the proper dwety of the Magistrat For look what difference the lord hath set betwene the office of the ciuil Magistrate and of the Minister the same must of necessity be betwene the office of the Minister and of the Magistrate as there is the self same distance betwene Athenes and Thebes vuhich is betuuene Thebes and Athenes and if there be a mile from the top of the hil to the foot it is as far from the foot to the top And althowgh yt abhorring the eyes and eares of al he is afraid here to affirm it comely that the lord Maior should preach and minister the sacramentes yet as a man whose iudgment wasteth not by litle and litle but is sodenly and at a clap taken away he shameth not a litle after to affirm that the Prince may preach and the Bishop exercise ciuil office if they be lawfully called therunto where if by lawful calling he vnderstand a wonderful and extraordinary from heauen he speaketh altogither from the cause our question being whether a Minister by calling of the Magistrat or a Magistrate by calling of the church may enter vpon eche others office And if he mean by lawful calling the ordinary calling then his answer is absurd For he falleth into that absurdity which the Papistes doe falsly surmise that we giue vnto our Princes power to minister the Sacramentes yea by his diuinitye which giueth the chois of the Bishops to the Prince alone and which maketh it lawful for one to offer him self to the ministery the king of the land may make him self Bishop withowt waiting for the church is consent Vpon that he alledgeth owt of M. Beza which wisheth some of the nobilitie to be of the Eldership compared with that which I affirm that the Eldership is an ecclesiastical office he concludeth that ether I must dissent from M. Beza or graunt that one person may at once bear ciuil and ecclesiastical office I answer that nether is necessary For whereas Lordships Baronryes and Erldomes are often ether by birth or giuen of the Prince as bare degrees of honour such being of the church Eldership doe not therfore bear boeth ciuil and ecclesiastical office considering that they haue no magistracy necessarily ioyned with them further then the same is particularly cōmitted Albeit hauing the Heluetian confession I finde no epistle of M. Bezas so that ether he mistaketh the place or els hath some other edition then I could get Yf the gentry and nobility of the realm be as yow confes fitter to bear these offices then ecclesiastical persons there needed some great causes to haue bene shewed by yow why the fittest should not be taken otherwise the white of expedience that churchmen should bear them which yow threap of them that they see wil be so dim that boeth the Prince and they passing by it wil I hope put down as there calling serueth this vsurped power In the mean season it being so expedient a thing for the churche at yow pretend the church is litle behoulding to yow that doe not make this expedience to appear I said that if there fal a question to be decided by the vuord of god and vuherein the aduise of the Minister is needful that then his help ouught to be required The D. herevpon fathereth of me that the magistrate may determin no weighty matter withowt him as if there were no weighty matter wherein the Magistrat could know what is the wil of god withowt sending for the Minister so that it appeareth that there is no vntruth so open which finedeth not as in a cōmon Inne lodging in the D. tong But els saith he wherfore are these wordes therfore forsooth that where yow and others might vnder colour of the knowledg which he hath in the word of god hould him the stirrup to clime into the ciuil gouernmentes it might appear that
I propounded yet his iudgment is al one Here Pantaleon and M. Bale are reiected as insufficient to make report of Eugenius doeinges which was so long before their tyme and yet Erasmus is stoutly vpholden for reporting Titus to haue bene an Archbishop albeyt Titus was 600 yeares before Eugenius But if the D. can not shew any that commaunded that the Bishops should haue prisons before Eugenius these writers shal be able easely to maintayn their credit against his bouldnes of affirming and denying what so euer he listeth To that owt of Possidonius that those matters alledged of the Bishop to be doen of Augustin could not be ciuil affaires considering that he immediately opposeth them vnto secular or worldly matters beside wordes he answereth nothing he opposeth other places owt of Augustin wherof the first owt of his book of the workes of monkes can not be vnderstanded as he would haue it of any iudgment giuen by reason of ciuil autority For that which he did he affirmeth that the Apostle commaunded it should be doen by the most contemptible in the church So that oneles he dare say that the Apostle commaunded that the simplest in the church might bear ciuil office when the Magistrat being an enemy would commit no autority vnto him this place is vtterly from the purpose Again when Augustin saith that the Apostle hath tyed him so to doe and laid yt vpon him if the D. wil haue that a ciuil office is there vnderstanded it must folow that the ciuil office is incideÌ„t vnto the office of the ministery and can not be seuered from it The place owt of his epistle 110 is to as smale purpose For in that it appeareth there that the Councels decreed that Augustin should ceas from those busines it is manifest that he dealt with them not by any right of ciuil office For what had the Councel to doe to decre that he should not doe that which the Magistrate had lawfully laid vpon him he owght to haue sowght the releas of that at the Magistrates haÌ„d and not at the Councels likewise in that he obteineth of the people that these matters should be turned from him vpon Eradius and that in an ecclesiastical assembly where they met for chusing of one to succede Augustin in the Bishoprik it is manifest that it was no ciuil office Last of al it is to be obserued that in boeth these places Augustin complaineth of these matters as of hinderances vnto his Ministery as thinges which did more let the cours of yt then if he had vurovught euery day vuith his handes in some occupation that he seeketh to be deliuered from them at the Councels and at the peoples handes whereas our D. saith that they are not onely no hinderances but necessary helpes to doe the Ministery with and not onely seeketh not that the Bishops may be discharged but maketh cordes to binde these offices streighter to theÌ„ I haue reported the truth the Bishops wordes are owt of Clement that it is not lavuful for a Bishop to deal vuith boeth svuordes likewise that he ovught to be remoued that vuil supply the place boeth of a ciuil Magistrate and of an ecclesiastical person These wordes doe not onely coÌ„demn the pulling the sword owt of Princes haÌ„des but al vse of it in eccles ê‘sons I pray god that the custome of shameful denials doe not so harden your forhead that no point of truth how sharp soeuer can perce it Howbeit I trust whatsoeuer yt please yow to say it is manifest to al that doe not willinglie close their eyes against the truth that the scripture teacheth that Ministers owght not to medle with ciuil offices That which yow ad owt of Deut. 17 maketh nothing for yow for they are there biddeÌ„ to resort vnto the Priest as to the Interpreter of the law when the question was difficult and they knew not what to doe which is manifest in that he distinguisheth there the Priest from the Iudges so that in such appeales he placeth the Priests and Leuites office in teaching what is the wil of god and the Iudgis office in giuing sentence accordingly as appeareth yet more plainly in the same chapter The same is to be answered to that alledged owt of Nombers 27. In which matter that the Priest was present and called to consultation for the difficulty thereof to know what was the wil of god in that behalf it is manifest in that he being not able to resolue of the matter Moses was fayn to bring it to the lord To let pas that it was not Aharon which was taken into that consultation but Eleazar onles yow wil haue Aharon decide controuersies after his death The example of Melchisedec boeth king and Priest is more absurdly alledged then the other not onely because he was before the law when this order of separating the priesthood from the ciuil gouernment was not yet established but because he had them boeth that he might be a figure of our Sauiour Christ as the Apostle and Prophet doe declare Yow might much better haue alledged Abraham which was boeth a Priest a Prophet and a noble warrior which notwithstanding yourself doe not permit vnto the Bishop As for the appeal which Constantine graunted from the ciuil Magistrate vnto the Bishops likewise Theodostus and Carolus graunt that men might chuse the Bishops Iudges of their controuersies if either party would they were the wrestes wherwith the Princes scepters were wrung owt of their handes and as I haue before shewed owt of M. Caluin al syncerity ovut of the churches yea vpon that very graunt of Constantin it is noted in the margent that it is repugnant boeth to the doctrine and example of S. Paul. And in deed by the first of these decrees the Bishops ciuil autoritie is made equal with the Emperours And by the other it is at the pleasure of the people whether al the ciuil Magistrates shal be Idoles or no hauing the bare name of the Magistrate withowt doeing any duty For if ether of the parties be affected towardes the Bishops iudgment the Magistrates may goe lay them down to sleep Nether doeth it folow that because the Emperours gaue such liberty or licentiousnes rather vnto the church or because some Bishops vsed it that therfore the practise of the church was such For I haue shewed that the godly Counceles forbad it and that the godly fathers vtterly misliked of it And as I haue alledged some so it is not hard to alledg others to the same effect In his example of Dorotheus his translation is fauty For in steed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a ciuil honour he hath turned it priesthood as if it had bene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the office also which Eusebius noteth he had was to ouersee the purple dyes in Tyre an office to aduance the Ministery I think in the D. own iudgment very vnfit His examples of Philaeas and
a great ouersight that he can not put a difference betwene a word that is general and hath diuers formes vnder yt of which sort this word Elder is and betwene that which hath diuers significations Rather I may say that for so much as S. Luke did not vse the particular word of Bishop but the word Elder which conteineth boeth Bishop and other Elders that his meaning was not that the Bishops onely should be meant And suerly when as the word Elder doeth so agree to Bishops that it doeth much more properly as hath bene shewed agree to the Seniors it were hard to vnderstand Bishops and shut owt Seniors to whom that name doeth most properly pertayn especially there being no circumstance in that place whereby that should be of necessity tyed to the Pastor onely Beside that those which haue knowledg in the hebrue tong know that the scripture vseth some tymes equiuocations and yet nothing therby derogated from the simplicity thereof but as it is obserued maketh sometyme to the elegancy and ornament of the speach That the place to the Corinth can not be vnderstanded of ciuil Magistrates as the An. and Papistes would haue it and therfore that yt owght to be vnderstood of ecclesiastical officers I haue shewed whereof also there is the same reason in the place to the Romanes Nether can that owt of M. Gualter maintein any such opinion seing it was not lawful for the church to appoint any ordinary Magistrate to hear ciuil causes nether needed any ether goe to them for iudgment or stand vnto the iudgment giuen further then the parties listed therfore that could not be any gouernment which was withowt autority How true it is that learned men expound the word gouernmentes of ciuil and ecclesiastical at the least to the D. knowledg the reader may therby know that Gualter which he chose to speak for them al doeth not affirm it For in that he saith there is now no need of them seing there is a Christian Magistrate he manifestly opposeth them to a Christian Magistrate Althowgh M. Gualters autority may not be receiued in this question of discipline For beside that his hand is herein against the learned boeth ould and nue which I haue ether red or heard of also against the practise approued in the churches of al ages and amongest them against the practise also vsed in ours it shal appear that the reasons drawen from him are altogither insufficient Then he saith that by that word Gouernours the Pastors may be vnderstanded because hauing spoken of the Doctor before he mentioned not the Pastor which is absurd boeth because it should be a meruailous confusion to haue caried the Pastor so far from his fellowes which are the Ministers of the word and reckened vp in the beginning and for that the Pastor is not seuered from the Doctor in gouerning but onely in the kinde of teaching whereas he by his answer shutteth owt the Doctor from the gouernment of the church Beside that howsoeuer I doe make a Pastor and a Doctor diuers yet for as much as him self maketh them al one S. Paul placing the Doctor before he owght to haue bene ashamed to say that S. Paul may mean this of the Pastor That he addeth that the place being doutful it can not serue to establish the Seniors is daungerously spoken and smelleth of popery as if the scripture should lose her autority because men agree not of the vnderstanding of it Althowgh I suppose there are few places of scripture wherein thinges are spoken of so shortly that haue so ful consent of learned interpreters of our tyme as this place hath for that signification of Seniors which we vse it for And in deed when the Apostle maketh it a distinct office from the Ministers of the word which notwithstanding haue the gouernment of the church it must needes be an office occupied in gouernment alone otherwise it should not be seuered from their office The same reason is of the place to the Romanes against which that which the D. bringeth owt of Caluin is nothing worth For althowgh the precept of bearing rule in diligence may by proportion be caried to al Magistrates yea and to al craftes men ouer their Apprentises yet the wordes of the Apostle are neuertheles vnderstood properly of the Elders in question as M. Caluin declareth boeth there and other where Likewise are M. Martyr c. Bucer idly cited of him For seing they boeth agree that these Elders are comprehended in that word what ether hurteth it vs or helpeth yt him that other beside them are vnderstanded Yf they preached some tyme that was not by vertw of this office and the place of Timothy alledged of M Beza doeth not proue it Nether owght the An. to haue alledged that interpretation against this cause seing him self doeth therin differ from M. Beza as wel as I which by presidentes in the vuord hath before expounded the Bishop as it is in deed and not as M. Beza for a kinde of Elder differing boeth from the Pastor and Doctor But the An. is like that fellow that would haue boeth his eies put owt that his neigbour might lese one For to the end he may doe some scare to the truth he bringeth euē that which is the ouerthrow of his cause namely M. Bezas iudgmēt of an Eldership gouerning beside the Ministers of the word that is beside boeth Pastor and Doctor And of this trweth which we maintein out of this place vnto Timothe emongest others we haue M. Bucers moste plain and moste ful testimony which vpon this sentence of S. Paul flatly confirmeth that there were tvuo kinde of Elders one vuhich together vuith the discipline had the charge of the vuord and Sacraments and another vuhich had charge of the discipline onely I confes there was some faut here in ascribing wordes vnto him which he hath not but it was an ouersight onely not as he maketh yt with minde to forge Here the An. repenteth him of his good deedes For where he had accorded before that there were such Elders as are in questiō now he saith he ment them of Seniors which be Ministers wherevpō it foloweth that it is not meet that there should be any Ministers at this tyme For of the same Elders which he graunted to haue bene in tymes past he affirmeth it incōuenient that they should be now And if he say as he hath said that they were onely Ministers of Sacramētes first he giueth his reading Ministers the wipe which by this iudgmēt of his are clean cut of as vtterly inconuenient for this tyme. Again he affirmeth that the Seniors in tymes past were such as exercised the iurisdiction which the Magistrate doeth now in that he saith that they can not now be withowt iniurie of the Magistrate whereas if this office were ether a Ministery of the word or Sacramentes it could not towch the office of the
yet it is singulerly profitable for instruction of our behauiour in like cases The least part also of S. Peters oration Act. 2 is spent in answer to the accusation of dronckennes and that nether compelled nor iudicial as was S. Steuens I graunt a man may defend hym self against fals accusations in a sermon but that is not whē he standeth iudicially accused like a malefactor as S. Steuen did whose vuhole oration how apt a purgation yt is which he denieth the reader may fetch from M. Caluin vpon that place that I be not cōpelled to lenghthen my book by so long translations Against M. Beza in quoting of whome I failed are opposed Gualter and the Centuries of whose sentēces which is truer let it be iudged of the reasons on boeth sides whether in the two next diuisiōs the Ans shifteth his gros ouersight let the reader iudg especially whē as his pretence that the Adm. assigned the deaconship to be onely in handling the church treasure is vntrue For nether haue they the word onely nor any thing of that value and it is manifest that their drift was onely to shut owt the Deacō from the administratiō of the word and sacramētes so that in taking his wordes in that sens which he now would haue them in effect he cōfesseth hym self to haue but trifled with the Admonition chaunging the prickes which they had set hym to shoot at and roving after a mark of his own finedīg In the next I alledged that if the Deacōship vuere graūted a step to the ministery yet thereof folovueth not that yt is the mynistery but contrarivuise that it is not and therefore ovught not to doe thinges pertayning to the ministers To this he answereth he concluded not so which I confes can not be forcibly won owt of his wordes But he saith he might haue so concluded which is absurd and al one as if he should say that the foot of the stayer is the same with the top whether it in ascending leadeth And how dare he say that he might haue so reasoned when as to the argument which I drw from these wordes of hys he can answer nothing how could he haue hurt vs with this which he suffereth to be driuen so flat vpon the head of his own cause Vuhere afterward to proue it no step to the ministery I alledged that the giftes are diuers and that one may vuel dispence the church treasure vuhich for vuant of vtterance should neuer be fit Minister he answereth that the Bishops and Deacons giftes required 1. Timot. 3 doe not much differ which is a great vntruth For it is required of the one that he should be boeth able to teach and of long tyme in profession of the gospel nether wherof is required of the Deacon when notwithstanding the first onely of them maketh a greater difference as towching the duty of preaching which is in question then if he had made them to differ in an hundreth other thinges he addeth that they may be put by the mynistery for their leud lyfe which is a meer mispending of the tyme for so may the Clokkeper or the Sexten Again that Ambrose with other expound yt so which is likewise that being before confessed by me especially when other learned men by his own confession leauing their exposition take this which I propounded Further that vtterance sufficient for the distribution of the church money is sufficient also for the ministery of the word which must of necessity be his answer if he speak to the purpose And being so it is to absurd the confutation whereof if it deserue any may be fetched from that before handled Althowgh if that were true the argument is not avoided oneles he wil also say that there is as great knowledg and as deep iudgment in the scriptures required for the disposing of the church treasure as for the preaching of the word vnto the other reason which I browght against this that the deaconship should be a step to the ministery raised owt of the same place he answereth nothing Here he abuseth the readers patience again For where before not able to shew one testimony owt of any auncient writing that the Deacons had to doe with the word and sacramentes I confessed notwithstanding frankly that there were some he hath here set them down wherevnto beside the answer before made I ad that those cited owt of Tertullian and Ierom be so far from helping hym that they make against hym For in that the Deacons could not meddle with the word or Sacramentes but vpon the Bishops licence it argueth that yt belōged not vnto their office seing it is absurd that that which they were bound to doe by reason of gods institution should be hanged vpon the Bishops pleasure Likewise that owt of M. Beza is against hym For in saying they supplied the Pastors office he giueth to vnderstand that it belonged properly vnto Pastors and was doen by Deacons but in tyme of necessity And so was the Administration of the supper which saith he he can not read in any autor to haue bene permitted to the Deacon wherein to let pas the Councel of Arles and others which licence this vnto thē in absence of other at the least did he not read M. Bezas sentence which he hath thrust into his own book that they ministred the sacramentes not onely the Sacrament of Baptim althowgh the places quoted 1. Corin. 1. 14. 15. and Iohn 4. 2. proue no such thing no not in the Ans own iudgment as I think For wil he say that the twelue Apostles which baptized were al Deacons or that because S. Paul did not commonly baptize those whome he conuerted that therfore Deacons baptized them as if there were nether Euangelistes nor Pastors to doe yt Nether is yt enowgh for hym thus to trifle except he vse most vile reproches against me as thowgh I striued against a manifest truth But that euen by M. Bezas iudgment the administring of baptim doeth lawfully belong to the Minister alone and not to the Deacon the D. may see otherwhere Now vnto the most certeyn groundes of the word of god let hym hear the testimonyes of the auncient tymes And first of the general Councel which maketh the Deacōs Ministers of the poor whom it calleth Ministers of tables and not of the holy thinges Another Councel decreed that in the Ministers siknes the Deacon should read the homilies of the fathers wherby appeareth that that Coūcel not so much as in the tyme of the Pastors siknes suffred them to preach the word but to read homilies thereby assigning also the greatest honor in doeing any thing which the Minister vsed to doe in the church in that he might read ether the scriptures or homilyes Chrysostom saith that the Deacons had need of great vuisdome althovugh the preaching of the vuord be not committed vnto thē And further sheweth that yt is absurd that they should doe boeth
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
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
of whom onely his reason dependeth which wil haue them alike necessary His reasons that the milk indured not long nor was general besides that they are popish reasons are not proued and may be in part confuted in that yt had not onely place in Afrik but in the west partes not onely in Tertullians but also in Ieromes tyme At the least the anointing in Baptim was as general and of as long continuance as the cros For being in Afrik in Tertullians tyme yt spred yt self into the east and west churches with such continuance as from them yt passed into the pâ—pish synagoges aswel as crossing To this defence may wel be referred that which he answereth pag. 275 vnto my obiection that Sensors Tapers holy bread c are euen of the same coate that the surplice is of and to be measured with the same pole for yf his answer there which is that the surplice is indiffereÌ„t but that these thinges be falsly accouÌ„ted indifferent be good yt wil help to succour his weaknes here and yf yt be shewed nawght here nether wil yt serue hym there Let hym tel vs therefore why the surplice and the cros with their significations should be indifferent and oyl and tapers c with their interpretations falsly counted indifferent Here we must beleue hym of his word for reason he hath none Howbeit page 291 where he repeateth this again he pretendeth this reason that the one haue an opinion of saluation and of worship annexed al which saith he we remoue from these orders which sauing that yt is against hym self is to no purpose For in the first part of his answer he giueth to vnderstand that the papistes shameful abuse of these thinges is cause enowgh to make them now vnindifferent which is contrary to the whole cours of his defence and in the later part of his answer he giueth to vnderstand that their oyl tapers censors holy bread and holy water may be browght into our church so that the opinion of saluation and worship be by a publik and solemn protestation of the indifferency of them remoued Vâ—ho knoweth not also that the abuse of the papistes hath bene as great and rather greater in the cros especially by opinion of saluation and worship then euer were the tapers or sensors whereupon yt is manifest that the D. herein can make no more distinction or difference betwene the cros and the surplice with oyl and tapers c then he vhich chaulketh â–ª as they say a vuhite lyne vpon a vuhite vual Let vs therfore return In the next diuision to diuers reasons against this ceremony in Baptim boeth simply and in respect of the present tyme he answereth not a word onely he passeth the tyme in shewing how the papistes vsed yt otherwise then we doe which is not in question In the next to that alledged of the signification making yt more popish he answereth that the papistes did not declare the signification and that they were therefore dumb with them as thowgh their pulpites rung not oftentymes of such vnsauory voices or that a number of the simpler papistes knw not this popish deuinity To that that yt bringeth in a nue vuord into the church he answereth that there is nothing against yt in the word which is vntrue For althowgh the ceremony of crossing were conuenient yet to rayse a doctrine of yt is vnlawful for asmuch as yt is not enowgh to teach the truth vnles yt be truly tawght and that is onely owt of the word of god Now let hym shew a word of god that two lynes laid croswise signifieth that we should not be ashamed of the passion or cros of Christ Hetherto belongeth that which he hath 291 towching the surplice where yt appeareth that his defence in this cause is spekled and of diuers colours For there in the first section he giueth playnly to vnderstand that he aloweth not that a man should draw any such signification from the apparel as the admonition doeth from sitting at the lords supper Now the signification yt bringeth of rest and of a ful finishing throvugh Christ of al the ceremonial lavu and of a perfect redemption vurovught that giueth rest for euer ys a holy doctrine therefore yt foloweth that he wil not haue so much as an holy and an agreable doctrine vnto the rest of the scriptures fetched owt of the wearing of the apparel which is the same thing which I affirm namely that yt is not enowgh that the thiÌ„g signified be accordiÌ„g to the scripture onles the significatioÌ„ yt self be raised and grouÌ„ded of the scripture So that hereby he hath vtterly ouerthroweÌ„ hym self not onely in the signification of the apparel but also in this of the cros and that after of the ring For by the same reason that he misliketh al such signification in the one he must needes mislike yt in the other I answer the supposed reason of M. Martyr directly For â—eing yt buildeth the wearing of a white surplice vpon that the Ministers are called angels yt must folow that the same cause that moueth the scripture to bring in the Angels clad in white must be the lesson that the Ministers haue to learn of their white apparel which whether yt be purenes or glory or boeth yt being a true representation in them is as I said a lying sign in the Ministers which are miserable and sinful men Herein also to that which I obiected that by the same reason the Ministers should vuear vuinges because the Angels are so described he can answer nothing whereunto ad that hereof there is yet more cause For the white apparel which the Angels wore was no signification of their office but of their pure and glorious nature wherein they were created and wherein they stil remain whereas the winges shadow forth their office which is that they are swift messengers of god in al thinges whereunto they are sent Therefore seing this reason wil haue the coÌ„formity betwene the heaueÌ„ly spirites and Ministers of the gospel to stand in respect of their office their winges being a picture of their office and not the whitenes of apparel yt foloweth that the conformity should be rather in the winges then in the whitenes of apparel To that which I alledged against them which make yt a ciuil matter that by this signification yt is made ecclesiastical he opposeth that a graue apparel putteth vs in minde of grauity Yâ— doeth so and that is no ciuil nor yet ecclesiastical but a diuine order that by how much a man hath obteyned at the hand of god such an estate or dignity as requireth such apparel by so much he is bound in the whole cours of hys lyfe by modesty and grauity to shew hym self thankful whereof euen his table better furnished then other mens owght likewise to put hym in remembrance And these thinges haue a perpetual conuenience which can not be changed As for the seueral habites of degrees