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
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
withowt an ordinary calling For if the Minister may not bear ciuil office vntil he be ordinarily called then here is yet no distinction made betwene the respect of a Minister to a ciuil office and the ciuil officer to the Ministery In the end yow are compelled to destroy your own distinction affirming that as a minister may ioyn to his Ministery a ciuil office if he be called therevnto by the Prince so the Prince may ioyn to his office the function of the Minister if he be called vnto it by the Bishop For so yow must needes mean seing yow make him the Stward of ecclesiastical officis which absurdity before this birth of yours I suppose was neuer heard of and it is thorowgh owt the whole discours confuted For as for that yow ad if they be lawfully called it is to open folly seing the question is whether there be any such election lawful Here the D. is taken again in his wordes For if the example of our Sauiour Christes whipping doe proue that a Minister may medle with ciuil affaires then it proueth that he may not onely sit in iudgment of crimes but also be the Tortor himself which he denieth For our Sauiour Christ executed the punishment with his own hand To that also I alledged that the Ministers by the examples of Paul and Peter may be Fishers and Tentmakers if of the D. examples it may be concluded that it is lavuful for a Minister to bear ciuil office he answereth they may doe so vpon like occasion The occasion of S. Paules laboring with his handes was partly that he might not in that point be inferior to the fals Apostels which toke no stipend partly to support the need and pouerty of the churches There being now therfore Anabaptistes which teach withowt wages and diuers churches which are very poor by the D. answer it is conuenient the Bishops should exercise some handycraft which beside other inconueniences is against that which him self hath truly said that they are hinderances vnto the ministery considering that there be no such giftes now a daies as the Apostles had which were able to doe more with one hand then we with boeth And if his answer were trw yet it is nothing to purpose For if by these examples he wil conclude that Ministers may ordinarily be called to the ciuil gouernment then it must also folow that by these examples of S. Paul and Peter the Ministers may ordinarily haue occupations ioyned with their ministeries But if the Ministers may not exercise any handicraft but in like cases as the Apostles did and vpon like callinges then it foloweth also that they may not exercise ciuil offices but in like time and vpon like callinges as those did from whome he draweth his proofes The rest is answered Before the D. said that the Ministers could not exercise any ciuil iurisdiction in tyme of persecution here he saith that Timothy which liued in time of persecution exercised ciuil iurisdiction Thus like a windshaken reed he neuer standeth in one sentence But I pray yow note his reason which is because mention is made of accusers and witnesses as if they were not common to al kinde of iudgmentes For where the thing is not manifest there the trial must needes be ether by confession or witnesses so that if there be an ecclesiastical iudgment there must needes be witnesses and accusers otherwise the Minister in tyme of persecution should take vpon him ciuil iurisdiction withowt the consent of the Magistrate which is absurd and being vrged by me is vnanswered yea the Housemother which vpon accusation and witnes of some of hir children chasteneth other some should by the D. saying break vpon the office of the ciuil Magistrate Vpon diuerse reasons browght to shew that S. Peters killing Ananias and Saphyra with the word which reason was ministred him owt of Pigghius proueth not that the Ministers may haue their prisons he answereth nothing but taking vp the carcase of his argument in steed of burying of it assayeth to blow life into it after this sort Peter punishing with death did nothing repugnant to his vocation therfore it is not repugnant to the vocation of a Minister to punish with temporal punishment which foloweth not For as muche as the vocation of a Minister now is not the same which Peters was at that tyme not onely for that he was an Apostle but also for that withowt a particular motion of the spirit of god it was vnlawful for any or for Peter him self to haue doen so That browght to vphould this with that that which Peter did by extraordinary power the Ministery now may doe by an ordinary is a very cartrope to pul in al confusion into the church and common wealth For thus of that Phinees a priuate man killed and the Israelites borowed which they neuer meant to restore if the Magistrate wil licence men to doe so it shal be lawful by the D. rule If he say that those are thinges forbidden but not this that a Minister should bear ciuil office it is nothing but an asking of that in controuersie wherupon he continually faleth And where he saith he speaketh of the fact of Peter and not of the maner euen the fact of Peter was to kil a man withowt any vnder Minister And therfore of this answer also it foloweth that the Magistrate may appoint the Bishops to be the Tortors and hangmen which the D. hath before denied How commeth it also to pas that he which before compared the politik lawes of god putting Idolaters and adulterers to death in cruelty with the Turkes lawes now maketh it a death matter if a man to conceal some part of his wealth being iudicially demaunded thereof do make a ly For thus much he saith in effect when he affirmeth that it may now be doen ordinarily which Peter did then extraordinarily Vuhere I added that the povuer vuhich S. Peter vsed vuas ecclesiastical and vuithal my reason ovut of the Apostle vuho reckeneth that amongest the church giftes leauing the reason he opposeth the autority of M. Beza whereas if that had bene any lawful kinde of disputing I could haue alledged learned writers that such punishmentes were doen by vertue of that church office But how could S. Peter doe that by right of the ciuil Magistracy when as the ciuil Magistrate had no right to punish that dissimulation which was hid Hetherto also refer that the D. him self in his former book affirmeth that their offence was against no ordinary law of the church or common wealth wherevpon foloweth that there being no transgression against his lawes there could be no punishment due M. Bezas meaning is onely that as the lord when there was no Christian Magistrate did vse corporal punishmentes and those of death against them which resisted the doctrine of the gospel so the Christian Magistrate should doe the same so that althowgh his maner of speach be diuers with that
I propounded yet his iudgment is al one Here Pantaleon and M. Bale are reiected as insufficient to make report of Eugenius doeinges which was so long before their tyme and yet Erasmus is stoutly vpholden for reporting Titus to haue bene an Archbishop albeyt Titus was 600 yeares before Eugenius But if the D. can not shew any that commaunded that the Bishops should haue prisons before Eugenius these writers shal be able easely to maintayn their credit against his bouldnes of affirming and denying what so euer he listeth To that owt of Possidonius that those matters alledged of the Bishop to be doen of Augustin could not be ciuil affaires considering that he immediately opposeth them vnto secular or worldly matters beside wordes he answereth nothing he opposeth other places owt of Augustin wherof the first owt of his book of the workes of monkes can not be vnderstanded as he would haue it of any iudgment giuen by reason of ciuil autority For that which he did he affirmeth that the Apostle commaunded it should be doen by the most contemptible in the church So that oneles he dare say that the Apostle commaunded that the simplest in the church might bear ciuil office when the Magistrat being an enemy would commit no autority vnto him this place is vtterly from the purpose Again when Augustin saith that the Apostle hath tyed him so to doe and laid yt vpon him if the D. wil haue that a ciuil office is there vnderstanded it must folow that the ciuil office is incideÌ„t vnto the office of the ministery and can not be seuered from it The place owt of his epistle 110 is to as smale purpose For in that it appeareth there that the Councels decreed that Augustin should ceas from those busines it is manifest that he dealt with them not by any right of ciuil office For what had the Councel to doe to decre that he should not doe that which the Magistrate had lawfully laid vpon him he owght to haue sowght the releas of that at the Magistrates haÌ„d and not at the Councels likewise in that he obteineth of the people that these matters should be turned from him vpon Eradius and that in an ecclesiastical assembly where they met for chusing of one to succede Augustin in the Bishoprik it is manifest that it was no ciuil office Last of al it is to be obserued that in boeth these places Augustin complaineth of these matters as of hinderances vnto his Ministery as thinges which did more let the cours of yt then if he had vurovught euery day vuith his handes in some occupation that he seeketh to be deliuered from them at the Councels and at the peoples handes whereas our D. saith that they are not onely no hinderances but necessary helpes to doe the Ministery with and not onely seeketh not that the Bishops may be discharged but maketh cordes to binde these offices streighter to theÌ„ I haue reported the truth the Bishops wordes are owt of Clement that it is not lavuful for a Bishop to deal vuith boeth svuordes likewise that he ovught to be remoued that vuil supply the place boeth of a ciuil Magistrate and of an ecclesiastical person These wordes doe not onely coÌ„demn the pulling the sword owt of Princes haÌ„des but al vse of it in eccles ê‘sons I pray god that the custome of shameful denials doe not so harden your forhead that no point of truth how sharp soeuer can perce it Howbeit I trust whatsoeuer yt please yow to say it is manifest to al that doe not willinglie close their eyes against the truth that the scripture teacheth that Ministers owght not to medle with ciuil offices That which yow ad owt of Deut. 17 maketh nothing for yow for they are there biddeÌ„ to resort vnto the Priest as to the Interpreter of the law when the question was difficult and they knew not what to doe which is manifest in that he distinguisheth there the Priest from the Iudges so that in such appeales he placeth the Priests and Leuites office in teaching what is the wil of god and the Iudgis office in giuing sentence accordingly as appeareth yet more plainly in the same chapter The same is to be answered to that alledged owt of Nombers 27. In which matter that the Priest was present and called to consultation for the difficulty thereof to know what was the wil of god in that behalf it is manifest in that he being not able to resolue of the matter Moses was fayn to bring it to the lord To let pas that it was not Aharon which was taken into that consultation but Eleazar onles yow wil haue Aharon decide controuersies after his death The example of Melchisedec boeth king and Priest is more absurdly alledged then the other not onely because he was before the law when this order of separating the priesthood from the ciuil gouernment was not yet established but because he had them boeth that he might be a figure of our Sauiour Christ as the Apostle and Prophet doe declare Yow might much better haue alledged Abraham which was boeth a Priest a Prophet and a noble warrior which notwithstanding yourself doe not permit vnto the Bishop As for the appeal which Constantine graunted from the ciuil Magistrate vnto the Bishops likewise Theodostus and Carolus graunt that men might chuse the Bishops Iudges of their controuersies if either party would they were the wrestes wherwith the Princes scepters were wrung owt of their handes and as I haue before shewed owt of M. Caluin al syncerity ovut of the churches yea vpon that very graunt of Constantin it is noted in the margent that it is repugnant boeth to the doctrine and example of S. Paul. And in deed by the first of these decrees the Bishops ciuil autoritie is made equal with the Emperours And by the other it is at the pleasure of the people whether al the ciuil Magistrates shal be Idoles or no hauing the bare name of the Magistrate withowt doeing any duty For if ether of the parties be affected towardes the Bishops iudgment the Magistrates may goe lay them down to sleep Nether doeth it folow that because the Emperours gaue such liberty or licentiousnes rather vnto the church or because some Bishops vsed it that therfore the practise of the church was such For I haue shewed that the godly Counceles forbad it and that the godly fathers vtterly misliked of it And as I haue alledged some so it is not hard to alledg others to the same effect In his example of Dorotheus his translation is fauty For in steed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a ciuil honour he hath turned it priesthood as if it had bene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the office also which Eusebius noteth he had was to ouersee the purple dyes in Tyre an office to aduance the Ministery I think in the D. own iudgment very vnfit His examples of Philaeas and
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
Magistrate so that throwgh the nawghtines of this cause in his whole cours of answer he doeth nothing but as it were paue his way with snares to entrap him self And for answer to him this may be more then sufficient Howbeit for the readers sake althowgh this Eldership is manifest in it self of the wordes of the holy scripture yet the same shal receiue some confirmation of the practise of the churches after which kept this order boeth in persecution and peace This I wil doe if I first in a word note how this order of Eldership was taken from the gouernment of the people of god before and vnder the law yt is therfore to be obserued that so sone as there is made mention of any fixed form of church which standing of diuers houshouldes were deuided into particular assemblies so soon is made mention of this office of Elders For Moses to let the churches and assemblies of the Israelites to vnderstand hys Embassage from god assembled the Elders which that they were ecclesiastical officers thereby may appear for that vnder such a Tyrant and such oppression as the Israelites were in it is altogither vnlike that they had the benefite of Magistrates of their own And if a man would say that those Elders were the Taskmasters which Pharao had set ouer the Israelites beside diuers vnlikelihoodes thereof it is flatly confuted in that after the Israelites departure owt of Aegypt before any nue creation of officers this order of Elders is spoken of and as church officers taken to the administration of church matters Another example hereof is where Elizeus is said to haue had the Elders in his how 's to consult with what tyme the king of Israel sent a messenger to take of his head The like is said of other Prophetes which in that state they were in were vtterly vnlike to haue the ciuil gouernours to consult with Likewise in Nehemia there are mētioned certeyn which as they are distinguished from the people in that they are reckened as assistantes vnto Esra boeth on the right and left hand so be they also distinguished from the teaching Leuites in that the Prophet after he had spoken of these speaketh of that sort of Leuites which had the teaching of the people This is also strenghtned by that the nue testament speaking of the ecclesiastical officers amongest the Iues ioyneth with the Scribes which I haue shewed to note those that had the handling of the word the elders which should haue bene withowt reason if there had not bene a kinde of Elders which had not the handling of the word wherby it may appear that it is wntrue which the An. gathereth owt of Caluins wordes that these Elders should haue their beginning after the Iues return owt of the captiuity whereas he onely affirmeth that there was a bench or as some term it a Consistorye of ecclesiastical offices appointed after their rerurn but saith not as he pretendeth that they were then first of al appointed Nether can M. Caluins wordes be drawen to that sens For if by these wordes of his the Sanedrim vuere appointed after the Iues return should be vnderstood that they were then first created and not rather that they were then restored yt must folow that the Priestes and other leuitical teachers which were a portiō of that bench had then their first institution which sentence so absurd and so ful of ignorance of the state of the church no man which hath a spark of equity can ascribe vnto M. Caluin Althowgh if it were so as he pretendeth that these Elders did then begin yet that helpeth him nothing at al. For it should not haue therefore the les autority considering that it were to be estemed that they toke it not vp of their own head but by the autority of the Prophetes of god which liued then and directed the stern of that gouernment And herein howsoeuer the An. misconstrueth him M. Caluin is flat that this estate was lavuful and approued of god Hauing thus spoken of this order of Elders in the Apostles tymes and before I wil now return to that I promised of the practise of the churches after the Apostles tymes to see if this order of Elders can finde any more fauour of thē then of the Answerer Amongest which that of Tertullian before alledged of me is most clear Nether can the D. escape with this that the colledg was likely to be of Ministers of the word c. considering that it is vncredible that al the churches whose defence Tertullian taketh vpon him and whose vsage he describeth had such a colledg Then that of Cyprian commeth to be considered which noteth a peece of the office of these Elders by deuiding the communion bread into equal portions and carying it for the assistance of the Bishop in litle baskets or trayes where by placing their office in this assisting the Minister he doeth manifestly shut them owt from the ministring of the Sacrament especially seing Cyprian in that place noteth the honor of that office to consist in that they had by reason of it acces to this assistance of the Pastor in so great mysteries which should haue bene fondly put if they might also by vertue of that office them selues haue ministred the Sacramentes as wel as the Bishop whereof also it cometh that in another place he calleth them brethren vuhich had care of the basket But towching the vse of the Affricane churches vntil Augustins tyme that one testimony is more then sufficient wherby is affirmed that Valerius Bishop of Hippo did contrary to the custome of the Africane church in that he committed the office of teaching vnto Augustin which was an Elder of that church and that he was checked therfore of the Bishops checked I say nothwithstanding that Valerius is there declared to haue doen it for support of his infirmity because him self was not so apt to preach And howsoeuer Possidonius alow of Valerius fact yet boeth the cōtinuance of that order by the space of 400 yeares and the iudgmēt of other Bishops round abowt is withowt comparison of more weight especially when it appeareth by Possidonius writinges that being a good simple man he was nether of great learning nor deep iudgment where also it is to be obserued that as the discipline was best kept in those churches of Afrik so the doctrine remayned purest in them As may appear not onely by the Councels of Carthage compared with other councels of that tyme but also by Augustins writinges compared with Ieromes and other Doctors boeth greek and latin in the same age In other churches where this discipline was not so diligently looked vnto there are notwithstanding markes wherby we may know that they went owt of the way As at Alexandria where althowgh the Elders did teach yet after Arrius was convicted of heresie it was decreed that the Elders should no more teach by which
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
his wont is he doeth onely say so proof he bringeth none And as I for my part confes that there cometh not to my minde wherby I could precisely conclude yt owt of the ould Testament So I am assured that he is not able to proue that which he saith But that which the D. affirmeth otherwhere that it was onely at Ierusalem is vtterly vntrue For Iosaphat at one tyme set in Iudges in euery vualled citye throvughovut the kingdome of Iuda which of what sort they were namely in part ciuil in part ecclesiastical appeareth by the Iudges placed in Ierusalē And to thē men had recours to in matters of greater difficulty according to the causes if ciuil to the ciuil if ecclesiastical to the ecclesiastical iudgment where owght not to be forgotten the nūbre of cities in one onely tribe as it might be in york sheer to the numbre of a hūdreth and twelue least that the reader should measure the numbre of their cityes with ours So that where the Answ saith that therewas but one Senate in al the twelue tribes it is found that there were in one onely tribe at the least a hundreth ant twelue ecclesiastical Elderships Vuhether it may be cōcluded owt of the nue Testament that euery synagog of the Iues had this Eldership considering that the pollicy of the church now was in this point taken from the Iues church I leau it to the reader to iudg of that which I haue alledged wherevnto aideth the custome of the Iues vnto this day which in euery of their synaguogues haue their Elders Likewise Ieromes testimony of which it may be certeinly collected that he estemed that the Iues had their Elders in euery Synagog For he sheweth that they chose of the vuisest in their cōpany for gouernours vuhich should asvuel admonish those that had any corporal polution to absteyn from the assemblies as to reproue the breakers of the ceremonies of the Sabbat now seing ther was the same vse of these admonitions and reproofes as wel in vplandish synaguoges as in those which were plāted in the cities it foloweth necessarily that there were Elders aswel for them as for the other At the least the nue Testamēt in marking these Elders which it calleth cheif of the Synagog in diuers quarters doeth manifestly ouerthrow the D. which saith that they were onely at Ierusalē vpō al which matter appeareth how extremely bould yow are in your affirmatiōs which beside these two before mētioned say also that the Eldership was not alwaies no not in persecution wherein not to enter a nue field for euery light word yow cast forth what reason I pray yow cā yow assign why sometimes there should be an Eldership vnder pecsecutiō and other some tymes none cōsidering that yow imagin this Eldership to be in place of a Christian Magistrate whereby it must needes folow that his seat being void in tyme of persecution it owght to be occupied by the Eldership which yow fancy to be his Lieftenāt whether the D. pincheth the churches where with a Christian Magistrate the Eldership stil remayneth which he here denieth let the reader iudg of his former book where he affirmeth yt iniurious to the Magistrat and ful of confusion also that it can not nor owght not to be as in the Apostles tymes c. ▪ yea let hym iudg of this diuision For after that he graunteth to Princes to commit their autority to the church if they list then which there is nothing more vntrw he addeth whether it be wel doen I wil not determin wherein I besech yow mark first what contraries he speaketh For he doeth determin precisely that ciuil Magistrates may commit their right and autority to these Elders if they wil and yet he wil not determin whether it be wel doen or no. wheras if he would not haue determined of the one he should haue suspended his iudgment of the other for thus he assureth them they may doe that whereof he wil make them no assurance that it is wel doen. Secondly it is to be obserued that where the question was of the Bishops receiuing of ciuil autority from the Prince he maketh it not onely lawful but conuenient yea necessary that it should be deriued from the Prince to the Bishop but here towardes the Eldership he saith yt can not be practised withowt intollerable contentions and extreme confusion So that the Bishop Archdeacons and Deanes which with vs are the deepest churchministers may exercise yf the Prince wil commit yt vnto them euen the highest ciuil iurisdiction and that to the singular advancement of the church but these Elders whose office in the church is not such but that boeth they haue and may folow some ciuil trade of lyfe may not receiue that power of the Magistrate which he vntrwly affirmeth that they had in tyme of persecution on les al by and by fal vpon heapes In one and the same church the Bishop the Dean the Archdeacon and for a need some of the Prebendaryes may haue beside their ecclesiastical iurisdiction ciuil autority but these Elders althowgh they were but two in numbre may in no wise vse any This difference verely riseth not in the breadth of shoulders wherby they are able to cary al this and the Elders none but vpon the widenes of the throat which as the graue is neuer filled Thirdly it is to be obserued that the D. which for his own profit stretcheth the power of the Prince beyond al boundes here as yf he had to doe with a cheuerel scepter draweth it in For he giueth more liberty herein vnto the Magistrates of smal common wealthes then vnto monarches For to them he seemeth sometime to leau yt at liberty whether they wil communicate their autority vnto these Elders or retayn it with them selues but vnto kinges and Princes he wil in no wise permit yt Vuherein also he is contrary to him self which in another place saith that the office of the ciuil Magistrate may be committed vnto whome soeuer it pleaseth hym best to like of If that be true and this iurisdiction of the Elders were as he vntruly saith belonging to the ciuil Magistrate why might not the Prince commit yt vnto these Elders as for his reason that so euery parish should be a kingdome yt cometh to be answered in another place To that I alledged of the necessity of the Eldership because the Pastor can not haue his ey in euery corner of his parish c. he answereth an able Pastor is able to doe al required of a Pastor which is no answer at al. For that is not the question but this whether he be able to doe whatsoeuer church gouernment belongeth to the wealth of his church which because he durst not affirm or affirming it had nothing to proue yt he slipped away after this sort And now that he vnderstandeth that this reason is confirmed by M. Peter Martyr I trust hereafter he
wil giue it some honester name then my fancy To that I alledged that if the Auncientes should not be vnder a Christian Magistrate yt vuould folovu that the lord should haue les care of his church vnder a Christian then vnder an vnchristian Magistrate he answereth that the Christian Magistrate is in place of the Eldership but nether addeth reason him self nor once towcheth the reason which I browght namely that yt vuas neuer lavuful for the church in persecution to appoint any that should enter vpon any part of the ciuil Magistrates office This also could not be a sufficient recompence in matters pertayning to the soul health that for an Eldership in euery church they should receiue one Prince in a whole countrey For one Prince can not in the spiritual gouernment of the realm bring that to pas which the Eldership in euery church did before althowgh he should doe nothing but attend vpon that So that to make the Magistrates to succede into the office of the Elders and therein to doe al the duties appointed vnto the Eldership in tymes past is to charge the Magistrates with a thing vnpossible and such as must needes kyl their consciences Thus where the Christian magistrate is giuen of god to kepe the order which god hath set in his church yow bring him in as a breaker and changer of the order which god hath appointed by his holy Apostles But the godly Christian Magistrates may vnderstand that as nether our Sauior Christ nor any wise and wel instructed mynistery vnder him wil meddle with any order or form of common wealth lawfully instituted of them for the better gouernment of their people but leau them as they finde them So they owght to leau whole and vntowched that order which Christ hath placed in his church And as the An. saith truly otherwhere that Christ came not to ouerthrow ciuil gouernmentes euen so it is as true that god sendeth not kinges to ouerthrow church gouernment planted by Christ and his Apostles Yea so much more absurd is this later then the first by how much they owght to haue more firmity which were set by the lord him self then which were by men For what son of Adam shal presume to alter that order which the lord hym self from heauen hath set And euen so doeth the Apostle precisely speak of this office with others that god hath set it in the church Yf it be said that he set also Prophetes and workers of miracles which are now no more it is true they are now no more but why are they not Ys it because any man hath remoued them no verely but because the lord him self hath withdrawen them For if the lord had giuen euen vnto these dayes these giftes of healing and working of miracles c. I think there is no man so extremely impudent that would say that the ciuile Magistrate might abolish or put them down Beside that it is vntrue which he saith otherwhere that this office is placed amongest those which be temporal for euen that next before yt noteth the office of the Deacon which is perpetual As for that he crieth owt and so oft repeateth that by this meanes no more is giuen to the Christian Magistrate then to the Turk proceedeth onely of a famyn of reasons to answer which driueth him to this vnrulynes otherwise he can not tel how the establishment of this office should spoil the Prince of her autority S. Paul professeth of him self that he vurote the same that men red that is to say syncerely not pretending one thing and meaning another but al this ialousy pretended for the Prince against the Eldership is in deed for the Bishop So that albeit the name of the Magistrate be houlden owt to draw this cause into hatered yet the truth is that yt is to establish their own tyranny For as towching autority or preheminence there is nothing giuen to be doen by the Eldership ioyntly with the Pastor in one onely congregation al which and more to the Bishop him self alone doeth not vndertake to execute in a whole diocese or prouince Therfore if the exercise of this spiritual iurisdiction in the Eldership spoil the Magistrate of his autority then the Bishops are the chief in this robbery Vuhere he asketh how I shew owt of the scripture that those are the duties of the Elders which I haue assigned I answer that forasmuch as S. Paul appointeth them gouernours of the church togither with the teaching gouernours placing the difference onely in teaching and consequently in publik prayer and administration of sacramentes which are ioyned with yt or comprehended vnder yt that therfore the rest remain commō betwene them to be doen as wel of these as of them That the place of S. Mathew is not to be vnderstanded onely of priuate offences I haue before declared your interpretation of tel the church that is publikly reproue those which admonished priuately repent not is euil nurtured breaking in withowt leau where mark good reader how easy it is for the D. to write answers which being pressed giueth him self this liberty that hauing no key to open the dore breaketh it open after this sort To interpret tel by reproue might haue some colour by that the general is some tyme put for the special but that tel the church should be reproue the offender hath a disease that al the tropes and figures which I haue red of are not able to cure And me thincketh that yow which accuse others for making the scripture a nose of wax if yow wil not put of your shoes at the least yow should wipe them a litle cleaner when yow enter into the lords Sanctuary That which foloweth is not a whit better For after he saith that by the church may be ment one onely so that he be in autority which is not vnlike vnto that which the papistes say that a man may appeal from the Councel vnto the Pope wherof some of the papistes them selues if he doe not repent shal sit in iudgment which leauing vnto the Pope the highest place in the church haue notwithstanding vpon this place preferred the iudgment of the Councel to the Popes But where I require some example of this monstruous speach vuherby one is said to be many one membre a body one alone a company the D. is domb where I shew further that if one onely should be vnderstood by the church that then the going from thre to one should not rise but fal not goe forvuard but bakvuard he answereth that to tel one which hath autority to correct the faut is more then to tel twenty as thowgh the complaint is made to the end he should be corrected and not that he should be admonished For as for correction other then by wordes it owght not to be awarded onles he refuse to hear the church so that here stil the proces is from the admonition which is by many to that
church aswel in this cause as in diuers other pauncheth so that it is not able to abide the vueight of a fox For thus there is not onely as he obiecteth a seueral gouernment in euery Town but in euery priuat how 's And if the Master of the houshould may and owght to retein his autority withowt preiudice of the Magistrate why may it not be so in the gouernment of the church Vuhat wil he further say to the Scholemaster which he otherwhere affirmeth to be an Ecclesiastical officer may there not be ether two in one Schole vnder a Prince or one in one Schole vnder a common wealth where many haue like autority oneles the common wealth be therby mangled and the magistrates autority empaired But of this matter I haue also spoken otherwhere Howbeit whereas the D. alowing of this Eldership in a common wealth can not abide it in a monarchy I wil say this further that if there were any daunger to a common wealth by this Eldership it should be greater to the smale common wealthes then to great monarchies considering that they should not be able so wel to repres the Eldership ouerreaching and goeing beyond their bowndes And if the Elders hips autority belong vnto the magistrate as he saith then by how much these magistrates haue les power and fewer prerogatiues ouer their peoples then the monarches ouer their subiectes by so much haue they more need then the other to kepe al in their own hand Vpon his own confession that there be more disordered persons now then in tyme of persecutiō I concluded that there needeth so much more asistance for the Pastor to finde them ovut to iudg of the quality of the faut and to correct them with censures of the church Herevnto he answereth that it is better doen by the Magistrate and by corporal punishment which is before answered althowgh yt be vnworthy answer considering that albeit the bodily punishment were more apt to reform thinges amis yet thereof foloweth not but that boeth the ciuil punishment and ecclesiastical togither wil doe more then the ciuil punishment alone I would also know why the Pastor owght not to cary euen priuate offences great or smale vnto the Magistrate if it be so that this ecclesiastical autority be escheted to him As for that he alledgeth owt of Gualter that men wil not set a straw by the autority of the Eldership it serueth aswel against the ecclesiastical censures of al Pastors and of our Bishops as against the Elders and more against them then against these For somuch as if they set not a straw by the Elders and Pastor togither iointly they wil much les esteme the Pastors or Bishops alone And if they set nothing by it whē it is countenāced by the ciuil magistrate they wil much more set them at nawght in persecution when for the contempt of yt there is not onely no corporal punishment but a reward at the handes of the Tyrants The bare names of suspensions and excommunications strike a fear into the heartes of the people whych notwithstanding throwgh an horrible abuse of them for euery trifling money matter are not to be feared according to the wise mans saying acauseles curs shal not come but flyeth avuay as the sparovu or svualovu Seing then thes fray bugges no more to be estemed as towching the conscience or further then they empty the purs then the braying of an Asse strike suche a fear with what power would the lord accompany them when they be executed according to his institutiō for further answer the reader may haue recours vnto M. Bucer who confuteth this very obiection of contempt of the churchis censures And this voice tendeth aswel to the subuersion of al ecclesiastical censures for euer hereafter as to the vtter condemning of that which was vsed by the Apostles heretofore Althowgh if it be the ordinance of god this is no reason against yt considering that the owtrage of men can not put the lord to silence or make his ordinance to giue place In the next where vpon his answer I conclude that ether vue must haue no Pastor at al vuhich is absurd or els an Eldership in as many places as sufficient men may be gotten he answereth nothing beside repetitions and demaundes of that in question In the next where is proued that the hardnes or apparant impossibility may not be considered vuhen there is a commandement to doe any thing he letteth al that defence goe to the ground wherein notwithstanding he placed great force Let him therfore strike owt that obiection or if he moue further debate herein let him not be ashamed to return bak and take his work before hym And for further answer thereunto let hym loke M. Bucer who confuteth also this obiection where he excepteth that it is not commaunded thereof let the reader iudg of that which hath bene written Althowgh it hath bene shewed that the example of the Apostles and general practise of the churches vnder their gouernment euen withowt a commandement draweth a necessity Then he saith that if it were ▪ yet it were but a temporal commandement as the widowes the eating of blud and washing of feet Of the widowes hath bene answered the decree of the blud was neuer a simple prohibition after our Sau. Christ whose blud that did shadow had finished his oblation but onely to the support of the Iues. So that euen then when that decree was made the faithful boeth of the Iues or Gentiles might haue eat yt so they did yt withowt offence of those which were weak And if there were now any Iue weak in faith whom we should by eating of blud driue from the gospel I dowt not but that vntil he be fully instructed of the liberty I haue in Christ I owght to vse the same charitable support towardes him And this appeareth manifestly boeth in the same and other places where S. Paul which gaue owt that decree to be kept teacheth generally the free vse of al meates so yt be withowt offence As for the washing of feet commanded vnto the Apostles it is nothing but a trope or borowed speach wherby our Sau. Christ willeth them and in them vs al not for a tyme but to the end of the world that for help one of an other eche should submit him self to other euen vnto the doeing of the basest offices which may appear in that he placeth perfect blessednes in the obediens to that commandement which he would neuer haue doen in the washing of the feet So that this commandement might wel be of them as of vs fulfilled withowt that particular actiō of washing eche anothers feet But here obserue I pray yow how dangerously yow behaue your self in respect of the common Aduersary Before yow haue made vs thinges necessary to obserue and that as of the Apostles autority which were neuer written but as yow would make vs
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
the prebendes c. ovught to be called to a more lavuful vse namely to the fineding of Scholers Ministers and Poor And this is our meaning not that these goodes should be turned from the possession of the church to the filling of the bottomles sackes of their gredy appetites which yane after this pray and would therby to their perpetual shame purchase them selues a field of blud which thing althowgh we haue giuen playnly to vnderstand yet because we haue to doe with so importunat an aduersary that feareth not to charge vs with intent to gratifye such Cormorantes I thowght good in a word to protest yt As for the light account he maketh of those examples of the reformed churches which notwithstanding pretendeth to esteme so greatly of one or two of the auncient writers I leau to vtter what yt argueth oneles he were able to shew by the word of god that they did not wel The rest of this tractate which is a cartlode of vntruthes vttered partly in accusing me partly in maynteyning him self I wil not touch THAT EXCOMMVNICATION BELONGETH NOT TO THE Bishop alone Tractate ix and xviij according to the D. pag. 661. YT hauing bene shewed that in elections and depositions the Bishop can doe nothing withowt the aduise of the whole church nor in the common gouernmēt withowt assistance of the Eldership yt must folow that in excommunication which is one of the weightiest iudgmentes in the church this sole autoritie of the Bishop is vnlawful For as when in ciuil matters the iudgment is of life and death and as in the art of curing when consultation is taken of cutting or burning the bench is fuller and the assistance greater then when matters of les importance be debated euen so if it might be accorded to the Bishop to pas some other matters by him self yet it were not safe to cōmit vnto him the iudgment of excommunication wherevpon I mervail why euen here also yow goe abowt to pek owt our eys For the light of this truth is such that some of the Papistes them selues are ashamed to look against yt as appeareth by Pigghius which seeking al maner of peintynges to hyde the filthines of Rome could finde no colour to disguise this with but is fayn partly to confes her nakednes in this behalf saiyng that it is not lavuful the Bishop of Rome onely excepted for any Bishop to excommunicate by him self alone So that althowgh the weightines of the cause might require a long treatis yet the plaines of it wil be content with a short First whether the word discipline may note the vuhole gouernment or onely the punishmentes as in a disputation of wwordes I wil not striue althowgh it be knowen that the word discipline is vsed in good autors for the whole maner of gouernment ether at home or in war. Secondly charged vuith cōtrarietie he answereth that to ascribe excommunicatiō to the Minister of the word and to the Bishop onely agree because the Bishop is a Minister of the word which might haue bene admitted if it had bene al one to be a Bishop and a Minister of the word But seing by the word Minister with vs is noted a diuers degree and meinteined by him it is but an escape Howbeit I am content he amend his speach if he had yet amended it and not rather vtterly marred al. For pretending that the Bishop onely hath by the word of god the excōmunication committed vnto him he saith notwithstanding that the church if she wil may commit that autoritie vnto other giuig the church autority to make that common which the word of god hath made seueral Thus he enterfeereth at euery step almost cutting him self to pitifully The rest is answered so are the two next diuisions sauing that it appeareth that yow were somewhat hongry of a testimony of great reading which pres myne so sore that may be giuen to the veriest trewand that euer went on two legges which may in half an hower know the minde of twenty commentaries and requireth rather a man wel booked then ether wel red or wel learned To proue that the lord did not borow this form of gouernment of the Iues he assigneth one reason because he neuer appointed it vnto them which beside the vntruth that hath and shal further appear is contrary to that him self hath affirmed where he saith that al euen the least thinges vnder the law were commaunded So that oneles he wil denie that they had euer any Eldership or hauing it had it against the commādement of god it must folow that they had it by the prescript of god Another reason is for that the Iues abused their Eldership then which there can be nothing more disagreing from the D. whole cours of defence which wil not haue so much as a peeld ceremony remoued for the abuse Vnto the reason I alledged why the word Councel in S. Mathew is taken for the Eldership of the church he answereth nothing wherunto ad that in other places of the new Testament where it is oft mentioned it is alwaies so taken The testimonies he citeth are partly to no purpose partly before confessed of me This is a wonderful bouldnes that yow dare say yea and glory in yt that S. Paul kept an other order of excommunication then our Sau. Christ commanded considering that he autoriseth his doeinges in the church of Corinth with this that he gaue that vuhich he receiued who also in this very particular case of the incestuous man alledgeth the autoritie of our Sauiour Christ. That owt of M. Caluin maketh against him manifestly For vpon the places boeth of S. Mathew and Paul he sheweth that the church hath interest in the excommunication onely he noteth that our Sa. Christ applied his form of speach to the estate of the church then which is nothing to our purpose After vpon confidence of M. Caluins autority onely he triumpheth vpon the interpretation I browght of the purging of leuain noting the thrusting ovut of the incestuous person which notwithstāding is proued for as much as that vers is the conclusion of that before where by leuain cā not be denied but the incestuous person is noted vnles we wil say that the Apostle concluded another thing then that which he had before mentioned M Beza also comming after M. Caluin and not easely dissenting from him foloweth the same sens which I haue doen So that althowgh yow take your pleasure of me yet yow should not ride so hard vpon him But mark a litle how vnable your answers be to vphould such a confident insultation For where this here spoken by a borowed speach is playnly vttered yow are compelled to expoūd these wordes of the Apostle take avuay the vuicked man amongest yovu that is shun his cōpany which is not onely a wresting of words but also vnsitting to the cōparisō with the leuained bread which S. Paule vseth to
set forth excommunication by For it was not enough for the Israelites not to touch or vse any leauened bread in the celebration of the Pasouer but they were bound to put it ovut of their hovuses to prouide that no leauened bread vuere found in their hovuses and not to kil the Pasouer before they had rid their hovus of it Like violence he vseth towching the receiuing of the excommunicate For where S. Paul vseth the same word of forgiuing or as it is called absoluing as wel to note his own releas as the churchis he wil haue that the same word in the same vers in one and the same cause to be taken diuersly and that referred to S. Paul it shal haue the proper signification to remit but referred to the church to signifie the effectes and signes of the remission or absolution Vuhere I shew that S. Paules declaration of his good vuil to excommunicate could be no ful excommunication because that that notvuithstanding the Minister and church althovugh vniustly might haue receiued him to the communion of the Sacrament he answereth that he is yet excommunicate in heauen which is a mere abusing of the reader for I expresly preueÌ„ted that And it is most vntrue that it is enowgh to make the ecclesiastical censure of excommunication that a man be bound in heauen when as our Sa. Christ noteth it in that he is taken of the church for a Publican and a Synner and in that there is an actual secluding from the sacrament For otherwise as sone as such wickednes is committed and withal so long as it is vnrepented the synner is bound in heauen and in right shut owt from the communion of the Sacrament althowgh no man excoÌ„municate him which being alledged of me is vnanswered To that I alledged that S. Paul ioyneth the Corinthes vuith him in the excommunication he answereth that they are ioyned as lookers on or as witnesses not as doers in that action But who hath taught him thus to play with the word of god when as S. Paul ascribeth the same cause of the corporal assembly of the church for that action which he doeth vnto that presence wherewith he saith his spirit should be after a sort there If therfore S. Paules spirit were after a sort and as it might there to look on and to be witnes onely then the church was also els let him shew vs with what wordes S. Paul declareth that his spirit should be there for one thing and the Corinthians for an other But what a shameful defence this is that one voice declareth whereby the Apostle giueth vnto the church the iudgment of this matter now to iudg or to giue sentence of malefactors is more I think then to look on or to be witnes And what that iudgment is is yet more clearly declared by that which foloweth where the Apostle saith that the lord iudgeth those that are none of the church giuing to vnderstand that they had onely to vse their censures vpon those of the church and that they should leaue the infidels to the iudgment of god so that if he say that the iudgment of the church is nothing but a looking on c. he must also expound these wordes the lord iudgeth the infidels that is the lord standeth by and looketh on whilest some other punish theÌ„ whereto ad that the Apostle ascribeth to the church the same word of iudging which he taketh to hym self Likewise that the writer to the Hebrewes giueth to the church that they should prouide that no poisoned root remayn amongest them which althowgh it be caried of some from the person to the crime yet it ys certein boeth by the place of Moses from whom it was taken and by the scope of the Apostle that yt is to be vnderstood of the persons For he exhorteth the church first to giue diligence that there be no such amongest them then if there be not to suffer them to remain to the infection of other which is yet also more manifest because according to the custome of the scripture that which he spake before by a metaphore or borowed spâ—â—ch he expoundeth in the next vers when he saith let there be no vuhoremonger or prophane person c. Ad further that S. Iude alluding vnto the prophet Zachary willeth the church in taking pitie of some to saue others as it vuere out of the fire by fearing them which church had no other meanes to strike any fear into persons that were throwgh obstinacy in syn as firebrandes almost half burnt but by ecclesiastical censure To that I asked vuhy S. Paul chideth vuith the church before he had signified that he vuould haue hym excommunicate if it belonged not vnto the church he answereth because they did not coÌ„plain of him whereof there is not a letter to be gathered in the holy Scripture And what a mischeif had it bene for the church to haue had no remedy for such a contagious disease at home but must goe seek for yt in another country and languish al that tyme whilest the messengers went and came I leau to those which haue the bookes to look with what faith he hath cited these autorities seing contrary to hys wont he maketh them not to speak Beside that they are alledged for defence of excommunication by the Bishop alone owt of them which are open enemies to that kinde of excommunication especially the later writers I say leauing that I answer that none of them one excepted is to purpose For albeit the 18 of math be explaned by the other of Math. 16. and Iohn 20 yet it foloweth not therefore that they be al one And althowgh in the 16 of mathew and Iohn 20 togither with the preaching the excommunication were vnderstood yet the place of the 18 of S. Mathew being of the autority of excommunication and not of the preaching the difference doeth stil remain Nether hurteth it that euery seueral Minister of the word hath by these places autoritie to excommunicate being vnderstode of euery one for his portion whych must needes seing in S. Math. 18 the church hath autority likewise so that it can not â—e that one seueral minister can by those places chalendg the sole autority of excommunicating That alledged of Musculus wherin it is said that he confoundeth these three places is vntrue for he exteÌ„deth math 18 to al Christians restrayning math 16 to the Ministers As for his reason to proue them al one because they were al spoken to the Apostles yt is friuolous seing our Sa. Christ did not onely instruct them of thinges belonging to their Ministery but also of those that touched their priuate lyfe and of the duties of the whole church Of the same sort is that the same wordes are vsed in al three places which is al one as when the Prince ordeining that one chest may be opened and shut by one onely one other not so but by others with him he
was ready to help if the other would thereto agree which may better appear by that epistle where the D. saith he can finde nothing of this matter which notwithstanding is most pregnant For Cyprian sheweth there how he trauailed greatly vuith his church to receiue those vuhich hauing fallen avuay repented them declaring thereby that it was not in him alone In the end althowgh he hath vsed such bouldnes as I am ashamed to giue the proper name of yet he feareth not to say that I haue abused the reader which let him vnderstand as touching three of the middle places to be spoken as wel against M. Caluin as me who vseth them to condemn the sole excommunication of the Bishop To the places owt of Augustin noting that he vuould haue this discipline ceas if the more part be infected vuhereby I gathered that he vuas of iudgment that the consent of the church vuas to be required he answereth that those sayinges are to be vnderstanded not of any right they had of excommunication but of the mislikyng of the fact for which the Bishop doeth excommunicate But where hath he in Augustin that interpretation more then I haue that which I set down I am wel assured that Augustins wordes are as fauorable to mine as to his and so much the more fauorable as the schism which he would haue by this meanes auoided riseth soner when one is excommunicate of whome they haue giuen the Bishop to vnderstand that they would not haue hym thrown owt then when no such iudgment hath passed from them For then the vngodly oppose thē selues not onely because they would haue the faut wherwith they them selues be infected vnpunished but also because they wil auow their own sentence Nether did I propound that sentence for Augustins wordes as he surmiseth but as that which I gathered of them As for the medicin which he pretendeth to giue that the people retain sinnes when they separate them selues from the company of the excommunicate it is giuen to him that is not sik For althowgh that may by a borowed speach be so called wherby the effect is put for the cause yet that Augustin meant not that onely it is manifest in that he attributeth vnto the church helping of the Bishop yea and the very word of accursing which he vseth for excommunicating so that the D. hath corrupted the minde of Augustin For Augustin putteth first of al the churches helping of the Bishop in excommunicating as one seueral thing and then the auoiding of his company for another which he expoundeth as al one but if he wil depart from the vsual speach he must shew vs some good autority wherby it may appear that we must needes wring Augustins wordes to that sens which I am assured he can not doe especially when Ierome who liued in the same age with Augustin affirmeth that togither with the Bishop the Elders in other censures of the church and the church yt self haue interest in the excommunication whereupon may appear that my interpretation of the places browght ether before or now towching the Bishop excommunicating vuhich is that he vuas the cheif in the action and had the publishing of the sentence and not the vuhole right of excommunication is soūd and cōformable boeth to the holy scripture and practis of the elder and purer churches That the Canon of the coūcel of Sardis whereof the Answerer glorieth is to be vnderstanded not of the Bishop alone one profe is in the Elders ioynt gouernment with the Bishop generally in al matters which I haue before set down Another shal be that another Councel autoriseth the suspension which the Elders and Clerkes decree against the Bishop and that as yt saith by autority of aunciēt decrees The Councels therfore giuing the Elders remedy at home and with in them selues the rash excommunication which the Coūcel ascribeth vnto the Bishop must needes be vnderstood to haue bene doen by aduise of the Elders For otherwise if the Elders consented not vnto yt they had by the auncient decrees autority to deal with the Bishop thē selues withowt running ether to Metrapolitane or other Bishop yf this answer like him not let him if he had rather take that which M. Caluin giueth that the Bishops vuhen they excommunicated of them selues alone did it ambitiously cōtrary to the decrees of the godly Councels As for that yow be of iudgment that the Bishop may not excommunicate whom he listeth withowt profe c. and therto cite a long sentence owt of Augustin it is wel said but wherfore serueth this wel saying doe yow think the church much behoulding to yow for that which neuer any yet the Popes Cāonistes excepted which giue him absolute power to throw owt and take in whom he list durst deny here therfore yow run fairely but owt of the way altogither If I of the other side should herein set down the iudgment of Bucer Martyr Zuinglius and other godly writers of our age against the sole excommunication by the Bishop it would require a book by it self But as in a thing clear and plain I wil not weary the reader The two next diuisions as meer and oft repeted reproches I omit In the next he confesseth that Chauncelors c. owght not to medle with excommunication The ciuil separation from trafique c. cited owt of Gualter is nothing but a rouing For we meddle not here with ciuil punishment except he peraduenture be of his iudgment that the ecclesiastical discipline of excommunication may be taken owt of the church and this ciuil separation put in place if he be let him speak owt that we may hear him But because these kinde of allegations be daungerous and tend to the shaking of this institution of god and for that alowing sometyme of excommunication as of the institution of god at other some tymes he insinuateth that yt should not be exercised especially against the Prince and nobility leauing M. Gualter I wil take me to hym And to speak in a word of yt yt is nothing but a meer mockery of the lord and to offer hym self as a Baud to al maner of synnes in Princes Yf al were deliuered from this correction as M. Gualter pretendeth then yt were good reason that the Prince should also but to insinuat that others being subiect onely Princes should be exempted I fear commeth from a wors cause then from simple error For who could be ignorant that our S. Christ speaketh generally when he saith yf thy brother c. whereby he cōprehendeth al those that are members of one church and childrē of one heauenly father In which nōber the scripture reckeneth the kyng whilest in yt he is boeth called a brother and calleth his subiectes brethren or who could be ignorant that S. Paul subiecteth al vnto this order sauing those onely which are straūgers from the church So that to say that Princes are not subiect vnto
this order is al one as yf he should say that Princes pertain no to the kingdome of heauen are none of the church haue no part with Christ c. Thus ys boeth Christ robbed of his honor which in cōtempt of his order as thowgh yt were to base for Princes to goe vnder is hym self contemned and Princes defrauded of a singuler ayd of saluation and way to draw them to repentance when they throwgh the common corruption fal into such diseases against which this medicin was prepared Hether belongeth the practise of the church in this and such kinde of censures toward the Emperoures Philip Theodosius and Anastasius on the one side and the godly Emperoures submission thereunto on the other which yf he vpon confidence of M. Gualters autority dare cōdemn of pride in them which exercised those censures or of foly in the Emperours that submitted them selues not to charge hym with Master Nowels autority which saith that the Prince ovught paciently to abide excommunication at the Bishops handes what wil he answer to the example of Mary Moses syster and kyng Vzzias which were subiect to the same law of vncleānes by reason of the leprosy aswel as any of the common people For that the separation commanded in respect thereof was not onely a ciuil policy to kepe the whole from the sik but that there was therein vsed a part of Ecclesiastical discipline yt may appear for that the Priest had the knowledg of the cause the shutting them owt and receiuing them in and for that Azarias the Priest of the lord with other his Assistantes remoued the kyng owt of the temple for the which he is commended in the scripture And if yt had bene onely a ciuil separation yet when the Princes could not be exempted from yt for fear of a corporal infecting of their subiectes how much les owght they to be exempted from that separation which is instituted against the spiritual contagion that which he obiecteth of the drawing this spiritual sword at euery light or no occasion at al thereby to deliuer the Prince from subiection thereto ys vayn for yf they abuse this power the Price needeth not onely to cōtēn yt but also may punish the abusers of yt So that in this respect there is les cause why the Prince should shake of this yoke of Christ then others considering that he hath better remedy against the abuse of yt then others That cōtractes of mariadg appertain not vnto the iudgment of church officers it is manifest considering that it is partly oeconomical and belonging to the right of the parentes partly ciuil in respect that it was in tymes past concluded before the Magistrate For as for the blessing in the church it is no part of the contract but a thing annexed vnto yt which appeareth in that vpon the bare contract before the blessing the parties althowgh not to haue company one with another be man and wife and for that the breaker of that contract is taken for an adulterer wherevpon it foloweth that the iudgment of diuors being meerly publik must be the ciuil magistrates alone For matters of willes it appeareth that they belong vnto the Magistrate considering that they are occupied in the commodities of this life and towch the distribution of goodes or landes As for the An. reason that the Bishop hauing best knowledg in those thinges may best iudg in them it is a hook to get al into their own handes But I deny first that they haue or can by their calling haue best knowledg in such thinges considering that there be diuerse thinges in them which require other knowledg then of the law of god And the case is rare when the question is whether a legacy a contract or a diuors be according to the law of god or no at least which requireth any deep knowledg to dissolue it And if al that which may fal into these matters were to be decided by the law of god yet to sit as iudg in them requireth not onely knowledg but also a calling which Bishops can not haue for the causes aboue alledged Therefore it is manifest that herein the Bishops are vsurpers whereof also the D. may read M. Nowels iudgment that vuhoredomes adulteries slaunders subtraction of tithes cases testamentary c. vuhich Bishops sometyme meddle vuith are no more spiritual then are murthers theftes oppressions and other iniuries Nether wil it help him that they exercise al maner of iurisdiction in the Princes right For first it hath bene shewed that they owght to exercise no ciuil iurisdiction althowgh it were committed vnto them Then how cometh it to pas that in right of their bishoprik withowt further commission from the Prince they take vpon them these iudgmentes of whoredome diuorces c euen as they found them in tyme of popery And as for excommunication and other censures ecclesiastical if they exercise them in the Magistrates right it foloweth that boeth the magistrate may much more exercise them him self and appoint other then ministers to doe thē boeth which as they be absurd so are they ouerthrowen by the D. him self which thinketh it vnlawful for Chauncelors to excommunicate for that as I suppose they be no ministers In the next where the Chauncelors are charged to excommunicate and absolue for money also one man for another c. he saith it is the faut of the man and not of the law which if it were true yet it argueth the Bishops vnsufferable carelesnes of godes glorie whose institution is thus shamefully profaned and neglect of duty towardes the Prince whose subiectes are thus pilled And here it is not to be omitted that where the ecclesiastical cēsures in reformed churches are exercised withowt a penny charge vnto any person our churches partly by reason of the Archbis and Bishops and partly the Archdeacons officers and their hangons which by this meanes liue in al brauery and iolytie of life are sore wrung So that they are therby much les able to contribute to the necessary charges ether of releeuing their poor minister or susteyning the subsidies laid vpon them for defence of the realm Therfore if the Archbishops and Archdeacons wil needes take more vpon them then them selues be able to beweld at the least let them pay their seruantes wages and not thus burden the church But thus the reader may see how vnworthely the Archbishops Bishops and Archdeacons deal with the church which not content them selues to vse tyranny ouer yt and to take vpon them of their priuate autority which belongeth vnto other with them haue also brought it into bondage vnder their seruantes and seruātes seruātes I mean Chauncelors Comissaries c. The next I pas by In the next where I shew that the office of Chorepiscopus alledged for defence of the Chauncelers office vuas far another thing he saith that he onely alledged yt to proue that Bishops had their deputies ▪ which how
of the Apostle For seing boeth that which immediatly goeth before this and which foloweth immediately after be publik offices what extreme bouldnes would it be to say that this in the middest is but priuate If he doe giue him self this licence let him shew example of such an order Further the Apostle here maketh a partition as it is manifest by the wordes and articles which are instrumentes to part with Now if he wil haue one membre in this partition bigger then al the rest and to conteyn them al he maketh the holy gost which is to be detested an euil and an vneuen parter Herevpon it cometh that when he speaketh of the dutyes which belong to al alike he beginneth with another form of speach Last of al yt is not to be omitted that he vseth the word of Distributor rather then the word giuer For althowgh it be taken sometyme for the giuer yet that is but by a trope for somuch as the same is often the distributor which is the giuer so that the proper signification being to dispose that which was giuen of others agreeth vnto the Deacon and not vnto one which giueth of his own His exceptions of Prophesy and widowes office be answered In the next being cōuicted of his vntruth he falleth to iesting albeyt it be manifest that the Adm. towcheth not onely thinges in controuersy but sometyme also the breach of that which is established To proue that the Deacon owght not to meddle with the administration of the word and Sacramentes I alledged first that the Apostle vuilling euery one to kepe him self in his boundes boundeth the Deacons office in distributing of the church treasur and by that separateth him from those vuhich haue the dispensation of the vuord vuhereas if he should preach the vuord as the other the Apostle should haue made an euil partition and pretended a separation vuhere none is His answer hereunto is that it is no reason but why it is not he kepeth to him self The second reason was that for so much as the Apostles hauing such passing giftes did finde them selues vnable to susteyn boeth the ministeries of the vuord and for the poor that therfore there can be much les novu any able to doe them boeth togither His first exception whereunto is friuolous and before confuted his other that they spent no great tyme in prouision for their sermons is vntrue and openeth a gap to Anabaptism For althowgh their giftes were greater in those tymes then now yet they omitted not therefore to study diligently which may appear in that S. Paul is so careful to haue his parchmentes browght in that S. Peter had red S. Paules epistles so diligently Likewise that the Prophetes in tymes past which had extraordinary giftes vsed great diligence in reading as it may appear in Daniel which notwithstanding he was so wise so expert in the tonges and had so oft and so wonderful reuelations yet studied the prophesy of Ieremy And in a word of them al S. Peter pronoūceth that they took great paines in their prophesies vsing wordes most strong to set forth their great labor in prouiding fo◠that they tawght Nether was this of pleasure and a thing which they might ether doe or leau vndoen but a commandement as it is to be seen in the exāple of Timothy which had giftes so much the more excellent then the Deacons as his office of Euangelistship was higher then the Deaconship For he is biddē to read to meditate and to preach ioyning one with another and that not sleightly but with attention yea that he should dvuel in them or be as it were shut vp and enclosed in them thereby noting the great diligence that was to be bestowed as wel in reading and studying as in preachīg And thus went the building of god singulerly forward whē vnto the giftes which came withowt their labor miraculously they labored also after ether encreas of them or getting of nue by the ordinary meanes prouided of god in that behalf Again S. Paul reckoning vp al the ministers of the word the Deacon not being there it foloweth that he is no mininister of the word And here the D. is plainly found at strife with him self For he confessing that there is in that place a complet and perfect diuision of the ministeries of the word and withal that the Deacon is not there conteyned doeth notwithstāding here sing a clean contrary song Moreouer it is diligently to be obserued that S. Paul in describing this office requireth not that they should be able or apt to teach which notwithstanding being by the An. iudgment the cheif point belonging vnto him should haue bene most absurdly left owt Lastly if the Deacons office had bene togither with the Stewardship of the church treasure to haue preached and administred the sacramenres yt must folow that his office must haue bene a greater office then the Pastors as that which requireth greater giftes for executing boeth that which the pastor doeth and more to which being absurd that is also whereof this foloweth That monster which remaineth in this diuision I wil set vpon whē I shal haue run throwgh that which pertayneth vnto this matter as it lieth in the 14 Tract As I did not before deny so now I cōfes him to haue bene Phillip the Euangelist and not Phillip the Apostle which is mentioned Actes the 8 and hould as before that he preached by vertue of his Euangelistship and not by vertue of his Deaconship vuhich vuas then ceased for that the church vuhereunto he serued vuas scattered Against which answer his autority owt of the Actes 21 to proue that he was stil Deacon is quite contrary to him self For it affirmeth of the tyme past that he was before Paules arriual vnto Caesarea Deacō not that he was so when he arriued For then the interpreters would haue turned the participle which serueth boeth for the tyme past and present according to the circumstance of the place which is one of the seuen and not vuhich vuas So that here we haue the common consent of al interpreters flatly against the D. namely that Phillip was not then Deacon when S. Paul came to Cesarea but had bene before That of M. Gualter maketh also against hym which placeth the Deacons office in the disposing of the church treasure and that they preached not but in tymes of necessity So that where M. Gualter permitteth preaching no more vnto Deacons then yow doe baptim vnto wemen yow wil haue it their standing office The difference betwene a Priest and a Deacon browght owt of Augustin and Epiphanius can by no meanes stand considering that that imposition of handes whereby giftes were extraordinarily giuen which Phillip absteyned from he did not absteyn from onely as Deacon but also as he was Euāgelist seing that was a thing peculier vnto the Apostles and a proper note whereby the lord magnified their ministerie
poor in euery church the vse of this office in euery church is manifest For further confirmation of which point the reader may haue recours to that I haue proued before that in euery church according to gods institution there owght to be a Bishop especially when the Ans hym self wil not deny but the Bishop and Deacon should goe togither Likewise vnto that which hath bene sayd of the Eldership in this behalf considering that some of the reasons are common to boeth As for the first of his exceptions that the Deacons of one city may serue al the whole Dioces yt is to far owt of square considering that for one onely church and that within one citie Ierusalem there were seuen His second that in scripture yt can not be shewed that Deacons were placed any where then in cyties is first to reason negatiuely of autority not in the question whether yt owght to be doen or no but whether yt was doen which not we alone but hym self also condemneth Secondly if this be a reason to bar the churches which are not in cities because there are none specified but in great cities thē he shal by the same reason bereue them of their Pastors considering that there is neuer a smal town of which yt is any more said that yt had a Pastor then that yt had a Deacon Thirdly he saith that the same can not be shewed oneles he be greatly deceiued in any auncient writer wherein he giueth suspitiō that he toke not his wares by tale but in gros otherwise he might better haue knowen what he hath suffered his book to be stuffed with For yt hath examples of countrey churches belonging to the church of Alexandria which had boeth Elders and Deacōs And his own Ignatius whom he wil haue Iohn the Apostles scholer affirmeth that euery church ovught to haue this office of Deaconship His comparison of this reason there vuere Deacons at Ierusalē therefore in al churches with this there be preachers in Cambridg therfore in al England is vnaequal For yt was not nakedly so propounded but warranted with reasons in that the Apostles labored after the cōformity of the churches so that the proof that there was such an office in one is proof that there was in al or at least that there owght to haue bene which is al one to the matter in hand his answer wherunto is before confuted Therfore the comparison had bene iuster with this that the men in the city haue two handes a peece therfore they in the countrey haue so to and if any haue not that there is a faut The next is answered so is the next to yt To the reason I alledged that the church may be at as smale charges vuith a Deacon as vuith a Collector seing that yt may make of the Collector a Deacon he maketh no answer onely he couereth hym self vnder colour of the admonit which ironically as I iudg saith that euery parish can not be at cost to haue boeth a Curat and a Deacon considering that yt requireth boeth a Pastor and a Deacon in euery congregation althowgh to cut of occasion abowt their meaning herein I wil not striue The second chapter of this tractat is answered before Seing then the Apostle separateth the office of the Deacon from the ministery of the word making them diuers members of one whole and seing that in the perfect diuision of the ministery of the word he is not remembred seing also the Apostle describing his qualities requireth not that he should be able to teach Again seing that in executing his office towardes the poor togither with the function of preaching he should be charged with more then the Apostles them selues could doe and had need of greater giftes then the Pastor last of al seing boeth by iudgment and practis of the purer churches the Deacons haue bene ether altogither shut owt from preaching or being permitted to preach haue doen yt vpon a nue grace ouer and aboue the calling of a Deacon I conclude that the Deacon hath no calling of god to preach the word and by the same reason that he hath none to administer any Sacramēt which later conclusion shal further appear in the next Tractat THE ELEVENTH TRACTATE AGAINST THE CORRVPTIons in doctrine tovuching the holy Sacramentes The first chapter vuhereof is against the sacriledg of priuate persons and vuemen especially in administring the holy Sacrament of Baptim as it beginneth pag. 503 of the D. book LEaving to the readers iudgment vpon the reasons alledged whether the meaning of the book be to admit baptim by Midwiues for as much as I trust there shal no such horrible profanation be suffered hereafter let him obserue how the An. because he hath once vndertaken this cause couertly as he dare continueth the defence thereof Iwis of folies the shortest are best yt had bene better for him to haue laid his hand vpon his mouth or rather in confessing of his faut to haue giuen god the glory But let vs see what he bringeth To that which was alledged ovut of the place of S. Mathevu that yt maketh as much against baptim by vuemen as against there preaching he answereth that by that reason Pastors may nether preach nor baptiz for that they are no Apostles which foloweth not For the Pastor succeding vnto the Apostles as touching preaching and baptising in their proper churches haue by the same place autority to doe boeth For further answer whereto I refer the reader to that I haue written before And I think there is not so much as one of the godly writers ether ould or nue which speaking of the ordinary ministery vnder the gospel whether it be to stablish or ouerthrow thinges perteyning to it vseth not the places that were first spoken to the Apostles alone As for M. Caluin he vseth this place expresly which the Adm. doeth to proue that wemen owght at no hand to baptise but onely the Ministers ordeyned to preach the gospel the same doeth M. Beza yea the Ans him self to proue the Bishops saying to those he ordeyneth alledgeth these wordes receiu the holy gost which notwithstanding were first said by our Sauior Christ vnto the Apostles alone so that the Ans frowardnes is here vntollerable Nether is it any thing excused by Zuinglius For althowgh baptim be not instituted here which was instituted in the ministery of Iohn Baptist nor here be mentioned any circumstance yet the minister of that institution which is no circunstance but a subordinate efficient cause may wel be appointed For confirmation hereof I alledged that the ministery of the vuord and Sacramentes ioyned of god togither ovught not to be pulled asonder and therfore cyted examples vuherin vue see obserued continually that the same vuere Ministers of boeth togither whereūto fyrst he answereth generally that examples proue not which is before answered Thē vnto the particular example of the Ark
gain the cause where there is so deep silence of reason and where owt of the scripture not so much as one sily reason is once pretended Therefore to cut his comb that he crow not so lowd hereafter he hath flatly betrayed his cause in that not able to alledg one reason owt of the word of god he placeth the strenght of this cause herein that against baptizing by lay men in the tyme of necessity we haue as he saith no scripture and he hath learned men for yt For first in that he can bring no reason owt of the word of god why a lay man or woman in tyme of necessity as he termeth yt may baptiz yt is manifest that he owght not to haue set yt down For this is a matter of doctrine and a matter of faith euen in that narrow signification that he taketh matters of faith this is none of the variable ceremonies which alter by the diuersity of tymes of countreis and of persons and therfore by his own rule here an argument of the autority of the scripture negatiuely is good so that here it is a good argument the scripture commaundeth not that lay men or wemen should baptiz therfore they may not baptiz Beside also that he doeth vs wrong in saying that it is auouched withowt proof It might haue contented him to haue said withowt good proof for proof there is whatsoeuer yt be where that which he affirmeth that the scripture doeth not forbid lay men to baptiz is an vntruth considering it forbiddeth that any should take honor to him self but he vuhich is called as vuas Aaron which senteÌ„ce doeth manifestly shut owt al priuate persons from this administration seing yt is a singular honor in the church of god As for that string which he continually runneth vpon that in tyme of necessity it may be admitted yt is but a plain asking of that in coÌ„trouersy For it being confessed that baptim is necessary wheÌ„ it may be administred according to the order which god hath ordeyned the state of the question is whether there be any such necessity of baptim as for the atteining thereof the order which god hath set in his church of administring it by a publik minister owght to be broken Of the same sort is his ofteÌ„ idle talk of the refusal neglect or contempt of baptim as thowgh there could be any of these in this case If he can shew that wemen or lay men owght to baptiz in such tymes and that god hath ordeyned that in defaut of a Minister they may lay to hand then let him talk his fil But that I am assured he can not the contrary rather may be seen that the lord hath condemned such rashnes as may appear by the examples of Saul and Vzziah For what greater apparance of necessity of sacrificing could there be then when Saul toke vpon him to sacrifice And how probable reasons in the iudgment of men doeth he bring to defend his fact as that the people would otherwise haue forsaken hym that the Philistins pressed hym that Samuel came not within the tyme appointed Likewise what greater apparance of necessity then when Vzziah stayed the ark otherwise like to haue fallen yet these necessityes notwithstaÌ„ding forasmuch as they toke vpon them that wherevnto they were not called they receiued the reward of their bouldnes whereas here there is as I haue said no danger so that the ordinary meaÌ„es be not neglected And verely it is al one as if he should say that if there be no magistrat at hand or none that wil doe his dutie in executing iustice against a murtherer that then a priuate man may take vpoÌ„ him to hang the murtherer Now where he propoundeth to proue two pointes the one that baptim by lay men is lawful the other that althowgh they were no fit nor lawful Ministers yet that the baptim is lawful to the end the reader may haue more light wherwith to iudg of these matters or euer I towch the second I wil rid his argumeÌ„tes of the former point for he hath confusedly blinded and meddled them boeth together His autorities here for the moste part are idly set down as those which I confessed before when I graunted the auncienty of this corruption But seing they are here I wil speak a word with them First owt of Ambrose vpon Ephes 4. is cited that al baptized If this make any thing to proue baptim by lay men it proueth not onely that they may baptiz in this pretended tyme of necessity and priuately but that they may daily aÌ„d publikly baptiz so that he by this meanes wil haue lay meÌ„ ordinary Ministers Then let the reader obserue how vnhonestly he dealeth with hym For in the same place it is conteyned how in the tyme wherein Ambrose liued it was not permitted vnto lay men nor vnto clerkes them selues which were an inferior order of church men to baptize so that this Autor maketh directly against him affirming that althowgh it were so then yet that it is no direction for vs now Augustin foloweth another of his witnesses in this cause whose iudgment is herein flat against hym For when he dowteth whether one baptized by a lay man ovught to be rebaptized it is manifest that he aloweth not that a lay maÌ„ should take vpon him to baptiz but onely standeth in dowt whether that baptim being so vnduly ministred owght to be counted for baptim Otherwise if he had houlden the ministery of a lay man lawful there had bene no place vnto his dowt whether the baptim be good or no. And therefore the D. durst not set down his wordes but caried them thrâ—e or fower diuisions further where they serue hym for the second point in controuersy Hys third witnes is Ierom ad Luciferianos which maketh not to proue what was lawful by the word of god but what was permitted then by the church There remayn therfore Tertull. and Zuinglius which doe affirm yt lawful to whom if the matter should be tried by autority he hath his own Ambrose and Augustin to encounter with Chrysostome also as him self citeth him which wil giue none leau to baptiz but a Priest Ad to these Cyprian who althowgh he erred in rebaptization yet proueth by substantial reasons of the vengeance of god against Chore Dathan Abiram and of the sonnes of Aaron that onely the ministers of the church may baptiz secluding thereby a lay man althowgh he be neuer so catholik I leau his Denys which is here ful for vs and come to the later writers where he hath beside M. Caluin before alledged Beza and Bullinger with others Beside that whatsoeuer or whosoeuer shal be alledged afterward to proue that the Sacramentes owght to be celebrated in a publik assembly serueth to bar al priuate persons and especially by the D. own confession wemen from this administration of Sacraments Now it may please the reader to turn ouer the
tawght a rule owt of the word of god whereby it might haue appeared that a priuate person may take vpon him in this pretensed case of necessity to doe that which god hath not committed but vnto the Minister so that here it is manifest that he had neuer a knee to bow vnto the truth but was like that beast which hauing neuer a ioynt in her leg must rather break then bend To that I alledged of the continual and almost general practis of the church he answereth that lay men from the beginning haue bene permitted to baptiz whereof let the reader iudg In the mean season he is able to shew no practis of baptim by wemen but in the extreme ruines of the church otherwise we should haue bene sure to haue heard of yt Howbeit here he asketh whotly what order of god is broken in priuate baptim euen the same which is broken in priuate preaching So that whatsoeuer hath bene before spoken of the church preaching that it owght to be publik and not priuate serueth in like maner for the holy Sacramentes The next diuision must rest in the readers iudgment Now remayneth the other point which is whether baptim administred by one which is no Minister althowgh against the word as yt is conteyned in his pag 518 c. be yet auailable the D. saith yea his first reason is that otherwise many should goe vnder the name of Christians which were neuer baptized and so saith he I may proue my self to be no Christian where I deny the argument and withal desire the reader to take heed of the venom which he going abowt in other places to hide brake owt here at vnawares In an other place he said that it is a probable sign of reprobation if children dy withowt baptim but here he setteth down flat that they be no Christians which are not baptized So that the children of the faithful by his doctrine are not Christians before they be baptized and consequently condemned whereas the truth is otherwise that if he be not a Christian before he come to receiu baptim baptim can make him no Christian which is onely the seal of the grace of god before receiued And what wil he here say to those in tymes past of Thessalia with whome the sacrament of baptim was celebrated but once a year namely at Easter were al the children paganes al that while what wil he say to that tyme wherein they receiued it not but at their death were they also al the tyme of their life paganes I graunt boeth the customes naught but in the mean season he shal doe the good Emperours and other good men great iniury in saying that they were heathen or no Christians His second reason is that there must be by this mean some general rebaptization which is the flat reason of the Anabaptistes and in deed plain Anabaptism that for a dowt whether some be baptized or no al should be rebaptized For thus they proue that men must be rebaptized because say they they are not assured whether they were baptized or no as it is reported of Zuinglius But it is enowgh for me which am assured of the fauour of god in Christ Iesus the thing it self whereof baptim is the sacrament that I know my self to haue bene born in that people where the common vse is to administer baptim by a publik Minister such as he was So that vnles he can shew assuredly that I was not baptized by such a one the want of baptim shal not hurt me seing that I nether neglect it nor contemn yt And if he could shew that I was not baptized yet the case of rebaptization is not so clear as he maketh yt considering that Dyonisius the great and famous Bishop of Alexandria when one came vnto hym which sware that the baptim he receiued of the heretikes was nothing like the catholik baptim but ful of horrible blasphemies and desired to be baptized of him for that he was trobled in his conscience said that b he durst not baptiz him adding that forsomuch as he had often said Amen vnto the thankes giuing in the church and receiued the holy supper of the lord that he should therevuith content and comfort hym self Yf the Ans had but such an autority vncontraried of other he would quikly shape vs owt a definitiue sentence howbeit I stay not thereupon onely I bring it that whē such a case should befal we come not vnto this remedy withowt inquiring into the matter and that yt be not doen vpon the D. bare word Vuhere I alledged that the Minister is of the substance of the sacrament considering that it is a principal part of Christs institution he answereth that the essential form is to baptise in the name of the father the Son and the holy gost which being kept the Sacrament remayneth by whomsoeuer or howsoeuer yt be ministred This he fathereth of Augustin and Zuinglius whereas nether of them goeth further then to the person by whome yt is ministred so that he hath here falsified them Beside that I haue shewed that Augustin standeth in dowt whether baptim by a lay man be available or no. where by al likelihood he was owt of dowt that that which was ministred by a woman whose vnaptnes herein is dubble to that of a lay man was of none effect he citeth also M. Caluin but vtterly to another purpose then he meaneth For where he sheweth that the goodnes or euilnes of the Minister maketh not nor marreth not the sacrament the D. pretendeth as thowgh it were not to be estemed whether he were a publik minister or no which is a mere abusing For further answer I refer the reader to that already answered so doe I for answer to that of Ministers which crepe in withowt calling vnseasonably spoken of likewise for the cauil of rebaptization Now if the reader compare the answers of his togither he shal see that the Ans him self hath clean ouerthrown his own groundes And first of al this that the being of the sacrament hangeth onely hereof if the form of wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. be kept For to proue that the being of the sacrament dependeth not in any respect of the person which ministreth yt he alledgeth first that so we should be alwaies in dowt whether we be baptized which maketh stronglier against this that the being of baptim dependeth of the vsing of those wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. then against this that yt dependeth vpon a publik Minister for al may vnderstand that yt is easier for a man to know that he was in his infancy baptized of a publik Minister then to know that the Minister then vsed these wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. Another reason is for that the force of the sacrament is not in the mā but in god him self his spirit and free
if he had bene able should haue shewed that I agree in this cause with the Papistes namely in the end of this treatise where I shew how far I stand from them in this behalf Howbeit hauīg beside vntrw surmises little or nothing at al to mayntein him self with he hath to strike a preiudice into the minde of the reader and to set as it were a bias of his iudgment to draw it vnto his side here in the forefront set vp this vntrue accusation whereunto I wil answer when I come to that place Now for better clearing of this matter the distinction betvuene the church and cōmon vuealth vnder a Christian Magistrate denied by him is to be confirmed Vuherin as towching the autority of the word of god boeth owt of the ould Testamēt and the nue I refer the reader to that which I haue writtē sauing that the place of the Cronicles cōmeth after to be towched again In the churches after the Apostles and that vnder godly Princes the same differēce hath bene diligētly obserued by the ecclesiastical writers As when it is said that the church and common vuealth not onely suffer but florish togither keping this distinction as wel in the church is prosperity as in her aduersity Also that the hovuses of prayer being restored to the church other places vuere adiudged to the vse of the commō vueaelth Likewise that there is one cause of the Prouince and another of the church Yf he can not cōceiue how this should be he may be giuē to vnderstand it after this sort that a man may by excommunicatiō be sundred frō the church which forthwith leeseth not of necessity his Burgeship or freedome in the city or common wealth Likewise that the ciuil Magistrate may by bannishment cut of a man from being a member of the common wealth whome the church can not by and by cast owt by excommunication Again when one is for his misbehauior depriued of his priuileges boeth in the church and common wealth albeit the church be vpon his repentance bound to receiu him in again as a member thereof yet the common wealth is at her liberty whether she wil restore him or no. Finally infidels vnder a Christian Prince may vntil such tyme as they refuse instruction be members of the common wealth yet are they not therefore members of the church where if the church and common wealth were as he saith vnder a Christian Prince al one it should folow that whosoeuer is a part of one should needes be a part of the other and contrawise whosoeuer is cut of from one must be cut of from the other His autority pretended against this distinction owt of Musculus that the Christian Magistrate is not profane is to no vse For not onely the high dignity of the ciuil Magistrate but the moste basest handicraftes are holy when they are directed to the honour of god but to conclude thereof that they are not distinguished from ecclesiastical causes is to much vnaduisednes For wil he conclude that for because the gouernment of the how 's and the gouernment of the commō wealth are boeth holy that therfore the gouernment of the how 's is not distinguished from the gouernment of the cōmon wealth or wil he say because the company of a man with his wife in lawful matrimony is holy that therefore it is a church matter This distinction of the church and common wealth vnder a Christian Prince being so apparant in certein cases there is no reason why it should not be so in the rest which shal yet better appear in this discours where commeth first to be considered what he answereth to the place of the Cronicles where vpon that certeyn Priestes and Leuites had the handling of matters perteyning vnto god and certeyn others the matters perteyning vnto the king I concluded that the church iudgmentes ovught ordinarily to be handled by the church officers His answer hereunto is that forsomuch as Iehosaphat the king by his autority committed boeth ecclesiastical and ciuil causes therfore he had power him self of boeth whereunto I reply that he committed not those ecclesiastical matters vnto the Priestes and Leuites as those which he might haue reteyned with him self or as a thing in his own discretiō but vsed onely his princely autority to put in executiō that which the lord had commanded For yt is manifest that the self same thing which Iehosaphat did here was commanded to be doen in the law And if this proue that the iudgment of ecclesiastical causes perteyneth to the king because he confirmed by his autority the ecclesiastical Iudges it proueth also that boeth the ordination of Ministers and the preaching of the word belong vnto hym considering that this very king is said to haue sent forth preachers into al lury But let the reader obserue how he hath here vtterly passed by the weight of my argument which standeth in this that the holy gost maketh this partition that some matters pertayn to god and others to the king whereas if the matters pertayning vnto god pertayned also to the king the partition should be fauty Nether by matters pertayning vnto the king are vnderstanded those which pertayn vnto his own person or his family but matters within the compas of his princely iudgment as appeareth by the example of the cause of blood which the scripture setteth down especially if this place be compared with that of Deuteronomy where this example is put particularly and opposed to the iudgment of leprosy which then belonged vnto the priest To the place in the Hehrues that the high Priest is appointed ouer thinges vuhich appertayn vnto god he answereth that the Apostle declareth that those thinges are to offer giftes c. which is nothing worth For the proposition is general wherupon the Apostle concludeth so much as serued for the present purpose otherwise yow may as wel say that yt belonged not to the high Priest to preach because the Apostle mentioneth not that part of his office in that place Seing then it is apparant owt of the Cronicles that iudgment in church matters pertayneth vnto god Seing likewise it is euident owt of this testimony of the Apostle that the high Priest is set ouer those matters in gods behalf it must needes folow that the principality or direction of the iudgment of them is by gods ordināce pertayning vnto the high Priest and consequently to the ministery of the church And if it be by gods ordinance apparteyning vnto thē how can it be translated from them vnto the ciuil Magistrate That which I said of Leuites vsed to the iudgment of ciuil causes for that they could not al be employed to the ministery considering that so there should haue bene almoste for euery xijmē a Leuite is barely denied and nether the reason which I browght cōfuted nether any of his set down whereunto may be added the reason why the Leuites
not occupied in the church ministery were willingly taken for assistance in ciuil iudgmentes which is because they being better acquainted with the law of god then commonly the rest of the tribes were consequently better seen in the iudicials by which the common wealth of the Israelites was gouerned And that al the Leuites were not applied vnto the ministery may appear by the example of a Banaias the high Priests son high Constable or general of the host Before I come to the Ans arguments I desire the reader to obserue that althowgh he hath owt of the auncient writers borowed certein places to iust with those which I haue taken from thence yet owt of the holy scripture whereof he should haue made the base and foundation of his defence he hath browght nothing But let vs see them such as they are Eusebius saith he calleth Constantine as yt were a general Bishop That maketh no more to proue that the iudgment of ecclesiastical causes belonged vnto him then that he calleth hym a Doctor apointed of god to al nations proueth hym to haue bene a publik preacher of the word Rather as he was called a Doctor because that the doctrine taught by the Bishops was maynteyned by his autority not for that he taught him self so he is called the general Bishop for that he caused them to meet in Councel protected them when they were there kept them in peace maynteyned with his princely autority that which was godlyly decreed not for that he determined the matters hym self This may also appear in his epistle to the churches where willing to draw credit vnto the decrees of that Councel he doeth not say that they were his but the Bishops decrees And in deed yt might more iustly be concluded that he was a minister of the word by the one place then by the other that he made ecclesiastical lawes of his own autority considering that the place browght by him is delaied and laid in water by that he calleth him not a Bishop simply but as it vuere a Bishop where as the other place is not so And it is further to be obserued that the word Bishop is taken some tymes generally for any ouerseer and not onely for the church Minister In which respect Constantyne calleth him self a Bishop but putteth a manifest difference betwene his Bishoprik and theirs namely that the church officers were Bishops and ouerseers of thinges vuithin the church and he Bishop or ouerseer of those that vuere vuithovut the church whereby he clearly also establisheth the distinction of the church and common wealth vnder a Christian Prince Hether also may be referred that of Hillary which exhorteth Constans that he would prouide that the gouernours of his prouinces vnder hym should not praesume to take vpon them the iudgment of ecclesiastical causes where also the same autor further affirmeth that the common vuealth matters onely belonged vnto them Likewise that Ambrose saith That Palaces belong vnto the Emperour but the churches vnto the Minister and that he had autority of the commoÌ„ vualles of the city and not ouer holy thinges That of Constantyne and after of Iustinian making lawes touching godlines as against the worship of Images c. is idle considering that it is nothing but an execution of that which is commanded of god and withowt the compas of thinges which fal into the church is consultation For in thinges which he is assured of to be the vnuariable truth of god who douteth but that he not onely may but owght also to mayntein them with his autority Sauing that if there be a general dowt raised what is the law of god therein to the end that the the truth may haue better cours and that the conscience may be prouided for there is herein great caution to be vsed For least that which is godly should be doeÌ„ vngodlily that is to say ignorantly or doutfully and to the end that the autors of error being conuinced may doe les hurt and finally to the end that the punishmeÌ„t of the obstinate may be boeth more iust and les grudged at yt belongeth vnto the ciuil Magistrate to cal as did the godly Emperour CoÌ„stantine a councel of the ministery by whome as by gods interpreters the people may receiu a resolution warranted by substantial groundes owt of hys word Yet so far it is that we suspend vpon the Councels determination the putting in execution of such as he is assured to be the vnchangeable commaundementes of god that boeth before in and after the Councel yea and howsoeuer they determin we esteme that the Prince owght to procure by al godly and conuenient meanes that such lawes of god haue place at the least that the contrary be not suffered not so much as if it might be one onely hower That owt of the Chalcedon councel that the orders there made were by the Emperours autority because they cried long life vnto the Senate and Emperour is vnsufficient For althowgh it was vnmeet that in such graue meetinges there should be vsed such shoutinges as then appeared to haue bene the maner when they liked or misliked any thing which was more fit for stage playes then for such a graue company yet who seeth not that there was cause enowgh why thanckes should be giuen vnto the Emperour for his care his paynes and his charges in calling and confirming yt althowgh nether the iudgment were his nor apperteyned vnto him Now touching the places alledged by me in the first gros ouersight there is none seing there is not a word in that place which enforceth external buildinges For in steed of that which is turned buildinges the greek hath vuorkes or affaiers also for that of selling the buildinges there is no such thing in the greek nether as I think owght to be For the place which no dowt is corrupt in Eusebius may be restored owt of Theodoret that reporteth the same epistle Howbeit whether it be vnderstood of the owtward or inward buildinges I wil not striue and I rather think that it is of the owâ—ward then otherwise considering that that seemeth to be more simple To the second where the Emperour confesseth the Bishops matters not to pertayn to him he answereth that the Emperour of modesty refused the determination But what modesty is yt to say that which is vntrue or what modesty to affirm that yt belongeth not to hym which is by yow his office and committed to him of god especially vnto his subiectes For it might haue more colour if yow had said that it were modesty for a Bishop to say that to administer the word and sacramentes belong not to hym but vnto the Prince Beside that yf he would haue shewed forth modesty he would haue rather said that he was not worthy then to say that it vuas not lavuful for him to doe yt To that that the Emperour vuould not determin of Arius heresy but committed
he citeth owt of Saunders yt appeareth that he doeth not subiect them vnto the Magistrate in respect of their priesthood Owt of Harding he nether citeth wordes nor quoteth place which his burning desire of coupling vs with the papistes would not haue passed if it could haue bene found And that the reader may better know his great vnfaithfulnes in so weighty a matter let him take Hardings own wordes to the Bishop which are these Yovu teach princes to vse violence against Priestes as thovugh their fautes could not be redressed by the Prelates of the cleargy And after yt is not conuenient that the king should cal Priestes before hym to his ovun seat of iudgment I assigned also another difference that vuhere the papistes vuil haue the Prince execute vuhatsoeuer they conclude be yt good or bad vue say that if there be no lavuful ministery as in the ruinous decayes of religion that then the Prince ovught to set order And if vuhen there is a lavuful ministery it shal agree of any vnlavuful thing that the Prince ovught to stay yt and to driue them to that vuhich is lavuful This difference althowgh he could not deny and althowgh by it we are sundred from the papistes as far as he is frō him that said the kyng of Persia might doe vuhat he lusted yet he continueth his former slaunder that we shake handes with the papistes and feareth not stil to say that he seeth not wherein in this article we differ from them But not able to deny this difference he cauilleth at yt asking first why the prince owght rather to determin of ecclesiastical causes when there is no lawful ministery thē whē there is forsooth because the Magistrate is bound to see the seruice of god maynteined in his dominion which when yt can not be by the meanes which god hath appointed ordinary yet for as much as his bond stil remayneth the next is that yt be doen as nerely vnto that order as may be vntil such tyme which owght to be with al possible speed as the standing and set order be established I say as nere as may be vnto the order prescribed of god least any should think that because that order can not be precisely kept he were by and by at liberty to set vp clean another order which should seem best to hym neglecting vpon occasion of the vnability of obseruing al the obseruation of those thinges which may be obserued For herein owght to be folowed the example of the godly learned Priest Abimelech which admitted Dauid and his company to the participation of the shew bread that was otherwise lawful for the Priests onely to eat of who althowgh to kepe charity which is the end of the law he brake so much of the ceremonye as the present necessity did require yet he ceased not therefore to be careful of the obseruation of the rest as appeareth in that he asked vuhether they had absteyned from the company of their vuiues Again yt is known that the Priestes and Prophetes haue extraordinarily meddled with ciuil affaires in confused tymes wil he therfore say that this power is ordinarily annexed vnto the Bishops office The cases I graunt are not altogither like yet to his question which supposeth that there is no cause why the Magistrate should not iudg of church matters aswel when there is a lawful ministery as when there is none this may serue for part of an answer Moreouer as in siknes there is another diet then in health so the church in her greuous diseas hath an other kinde of gouernment then that which is ordinary and vsed in a good constitution of her body which thing being said of the ruinous estate of the church is to be vnderstood also of her beginninges and as yt were infancy where ether there was no church before or hauing bene yt was rased from the foundations Yf this content him not let him answer me why the Prince must of necessity commit these matters to the ministery when it is learned and godly rather then when yt is otherwise if at the least he wil now at the last haue this the meaning of this broken english And of his answer to this question wil easely rise an answer to his But some sharper Aduersary might here haue obiected that Moses Dauid and Salomō being Princes in the moste florishing estate of the church did notwithstanding make church orders whereunto I answer that they did so partly for that they were not kinges onely and Princes but also Prophetes of god partly for that they had special and expres direction therto from god by the prophete whereby they did euen those thinges in the church which withowt such special reuelation was not lawful for the Priestes thē selues to haue doē And althowgh the truth of this answer be apparant yet that it may haue the more autority especially with the D. that tasteth nothing withowt this sauce he may vnderstand that it is M. Caluins answer of Moses and Dauid and that in this present cause now debated His other quarrel against this answer is that if a lawful ministery determining some thing vnlawful wil not be browght to that which is iust that then the Prince must haue ether that which they wil or no religiō As thowgh such a ministery were a lawful ministery that is obstinate or as if this obstinacy being general or for the moste part the state is not here ruinous so that the Prince may after due meanes assaied to bring them home procure that other be put in their places we herby appeareth that the remedy of this inconuenience which he saith he can not see was comprehended in the first part of the second difference betwene ours and the Papists iudgment But if for that a lawful ministery is subiect to error or doeth er in the decision of ecclesiastical causes he think that yt should not therefore handle these matters he may as wel take from them the preaching of the word considering that an error may as wel be found in the pulpit as in the Councel how 's And look what remedy the Magistrate hath against a ministery teaching falsly or inconueniently in the pulpit the same hath he against yt determining so in Councel And to make the partition wal betwene the papistes and vs in this question one cubite higher that those which wil not open their eys to see it may feel yt in not onely stumbling but running also their heades against yt I wil ad this muche that in ascribing vnto the ministery the decision of matters in controuersy and the making of church ceremonies our meaning is not vtterly to seclude the Magistrate For when experience teacheth vs that often tymes a simple man and as the prouerb saith the Gardener hath spoken to good purpose but especially when in the holy scripture the ould Testament and the nue and thirdly when in the ecclesiastical writers yt is found that there haue bene
of the people admitted vnto these consultations when further it is found that they haue had their consent there and sometyme also their speach with far greater reason may the Christian Magistrate boeth be assistant and haue his voice in such assemblies That then which we giue vnto the ministery in such church consultations which are not of the dayly ministery as Synods be is boeth a fore consultation as we see to haue bene doen in the scripture to the end that the matter being digested and as it were cut owt and prepared a forehand yt might be the better handled in a fuller assembly as also the direction and moderation of that meeting where these matters are defined and concluded of But in the cheef point he is sure we agree with the papistes euen as the godly and learned writers ould and of our age doe agree with them and none otherwise whereof two the D. is him self constreyned to cōfes meaning as I think M. Caluin and Beza whether he doe or no so they are as may appear And how durst he say of those two vpon no ground that in this article of the Magistrats autority they differ nothing from the papistes For so he saith in effect when he saith so of vs whome he is compelled to confes to haue their assistance in this cause Althowgh they are not as he saith alone but haue diuers others bearing them company Amongest whome M. Bucer may seem to be worthy of the cheif place which affirmeth that the magistrate ovught not to administer the discipline of the church So that so far as we consent here with the papistes we doe it as in the article of the holy Trinity where we haue with warrant of the word of god the approbation also of the best we hould with them thinges in common in which respect we are not afraid to confes that we consent in some point with the Iues and Turkes or they rather with vs But yow are foūd in diuers places in their priuate orcheyardes gathering your frute of trees which their handes did first plant and from thence yow bring your stockes which yow would place in the lords vineyard And euen in this question whome haue yow opposed vnto these two which yow cōfes of our iudgmēt yow pretend in deed the Bishops of Sarisbury and winchester with M. Nowel but for two of them I haue shewed that they are in effect of the same iudgment we are assured I am they are further from yow then from vs of the third also albeit I haue not seen hym I perswade my self likewise There remaineth onely Musculus whose saying if I should deny not to be charged vpon vs but on the papistes onely seing we doe not deny altogither as they doe that he hath autority to make church lawes yow se we haue hould which yow can not easely put vs from But because when I confessed some of contrary iudgment I meant him at the least as one which if he thowght as we did not sufficiently expres yt let vs graunt yow this reed to ride vpon and to bear your self vp in this great triumph And let it be graunted yow to make your faut seem so much the les that yow haue one learned man of the same iudgment with yow That I haue no other reasons then the papistes is vntrue at least yow shew yt not And I may holily profes and in the presence of god that I went not to the papistes for them but in reading the scriptures and the autors them selues obserued them Nether could the papistes abusing them to the maintenance of their tyranny ouer Princes and the whole church affray me to vse them as I haue no more then they affraied M. Caluin and others which haue vsed of them in like maner Of al which matter the reader may vnderstand how vnworthy owtcries they be which he so oftē raiseth against vs that we giue no more to a godly Christian magistrate then to the Turk or Nero with such like For who wil communicate the church matters with Nero open to hym the necessity of houlding a Councel desire his confirmation of the church orders pray his aid in the maynteyning them cal vpon him aswel for making them where the lawful ministery faileth as for redres of the euil Yt is trw the Turk and Nero owght to doe al these euen as they owght to doe whatsoeuer belongeth vnto a godly Christian Prince for the leauing of which vndoen much more for doeyng the contrary the wrath of the lord resteth vpon them and theirs But for as much as they profes enmity of the truth as they must want boeth the honour in this world and reward in the world to come which the lord giueth vnto a Christian magistrate so the church must paciently bear the want of these thinges vnder the one which she enioyeth vnder the other To end this matter seing the church and common wealth are distinguished aswel vnder a Christian Prince as vnder an vnchristian and that thereof foloweth the distinctiō one from another not onely of the lower but also of the higher members which are the gouernours in boeth the bodies seing also the lord hath appointed the Ministers to be ouer the matters perteyning to him self Seing further the ministery of the church is by calling and giftes incidēt thereunto the fittest Iudg of the church matters last of al seing the auncient practis of the church houldeth vp her hand hereunto I conclude that as wel in the decision of the doctrine as in the chois of the variable ceremonies of the church the principal autority belōgeth vnto the ministery The rest of the sections in this tractate as those which require no reply I wil not towch but leau them to the readers iudgment THE THIRTINTH AND LAST TRACTATE AND NINTH VVITH THE D. beginning page 474 of the inconuenience of the Ceremonyes vsed in the church of England deuided into tvuo partes the first vuhereof is of the general fautes the other of the particuler THe doctrine and discipline of the church as the weightiest thinges owght especially to be looked vnto but the ceremonies also as mynt and comyn owght not to be neglected For if honest matrones haue regard to the smalest part of the attire of their daughters that yt be nether sluttish nor gawish nor after the maner of harlots much more owght that care to be taken for the church of god that by her comely and maidenlike apparel she may content euē the eyes of al which loue her spiritual chastity And althowgh the corruptions in them stryke not strayt to the heart yet as gētil poisons they consume by little and little which is rather to be takē heed vnto for that the harm they doe is to the moste part so insensible that the church may seem to dy hereon almoste withowt any grief or sens of yt or goe away as yt were in a sleap Hereupon it commeth that this part hath before
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
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
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
pag. 33. Item 1. Cor. 12 28. pag. 37 38. Item Roman 12 8. page 38 39. Lastly Math. 18 17. page 51 52 53. That there be church matters to be doen in the gouernment of the church which the Pastor is not able do doe of hym self 49. That the Eldership beginning as sone as there is mention of any assembly of the visible church standing of diuers families was boeth before and vnder the law 40 41 â–ª That the Apostle wil haue yt continued vnto the worlds end 54. whether refer that obiected of widowes and wine pag. 54 55 also of the blud strangled and wasshing of feet pag. 62. Likewise that the supposed danger of altering the estate of the church gouernment caÌ„ here haue no place pag. 71. That the cheif offices of charity can not be exercised withowt yt 51 52 53. That the supposed impossibility of getting able men to exercise this charge can not hynder the restoring of this order 61 62 63 64. That yt is confirmed by the vse and custome of the elder churches 41 42. Also that degenerating yt reteined notwithstanding certain markes whereby we might come to the knowledg of yt partly open in coÌ„demning the breach of this order 42 correcting their error 43 complaining of the want of yt 44 partly secret whilest they confessed that the administration of the word and Sacramentes belonged not vnto the Elder but by grace and permission of the Bishop 43 44. That it is confirmed by the iudgment of the godly writers boeth auncient as Tertullian 41 Cyprian 42 Ignatius 45 Ambrose 44 68 Ierome 68 and of our age as Bucer 39 68 Caluin 35 41 Martyr 46 Beza 72. That yt owght to be aswel in a kingdome as in smale common wealthes 58 59. That yf this church gouernment were dangerous to common wealthes yt were more dangerous to smale coÌ„mon wealthes then vnto kingdomes 59 60. Aswel vnder a Christian as vnder an vnchristian Magistrate pag. 49 c. because The common wealthes must be framed vnto the church and not contrary wise p. 64 65. The Magistrate can not displace that the lord hath placed p. 50. Otherwise yt should be wors with the church vnder a Christian then vnder an vnchristian Prince 49 50. The punishing of one faut by two iurisditions can not hinder this 70 71. The Elders iontly with the Pastor take not so much vpon them as the Bishop whome the Magistrate doeth permit 51. That Princes owght no more to change the church gouernment then our Sa. Christ and his Apostles changed the form of the common wealth gouernment 50. There is more vse and commoditie of the Eldership vnder a Christian then vnder an vnchristian Magistrate 55 56 57 58 60 61. That yt was vsed vnder Constantine a Christian Prince p. 67. Aswel in vplandish townes as in great Cities page 44. c because The Apostles did institute yt church by church 45. That there is the same vse of yt here aswel as there 45 46 47. The gospel whereof the discipline is a part went owt of Ierusalem into vplandish townes aswel as into cyties 25. S. Paul inioyning this order vnto Timothe instructed hym aswel of the gouernment of the churches in the countrey as in the Citie 45. The Bishop being shewed to belong vnto the churches in the countrey aswel as vnto those in the citie the Eldership which is giuen for his assistance must doe the same 45. The Pastor there can not doe al by hym self alone 49. Otherwise there should be an inaequalite browght in amongest the churches which the D. hym self misliketh 45. The Apostles studying to conform the churches one to an other in smaler matters did yt muche more in this 45. The vse of the elder churches was suche 46 47. Of the reformation of the prebendes and Canons c. which are a part of the ruines of this Eldership and of the applying of their liuings to the erecting of Colledges 73 74 75 76. The ninth Tractate pag. 77. Of excommunication which is a separatioÌ„ from the coÌ„pany of the visible church and not of the excommunication owt of heauen onely Excomunication belongeth to the church because Our Sa. Christ instituted yt to be doen by the church pag. 78 79. whether refer that obiected owt of math 16. and Iohn 20 82 83. whereby notwithstanding the D. cause falleth 83. The Apostles and the holy writers of the scripture communicate the same power with the church 79 81 82. whether refer that supposed of S. Pauls sole excommunicating of the incestuous Corinth 80 likewise of Alexander 83 84 also of Titus auoiding an heretike 84. further that the church is ioyned with the Bishop as a doer not as a looker on or witnes onely 81. The holy gost chideth the church for that yt vsed not this power 82. That Princes subiection vnto this discipline of the church hindereth not any more the excominunication by the church then by the Bishop 92 93 94. The church hath power to absolue 80. Yt belonged vnto the church of Israel to rid their howses of leuen at the Pasover 79 80. Yt was doen by the elder churches and with approbation of their Doctors in Tertullians tyme 87 in Cyprians 87 88 89 90 Likewise in Ieromes and Augustins times 90 91 confirmed by the godly learned of our tyme M. Zwinglius 92. Caluin 90 91. Martyr 92. Not therefore to the Bishop alone especially Vuhen by his sole excommunication he hath prophaned the glory of god browght the church to a miserable servitude not to hym self alone but to his seruantes also 95 96. broken in to the Magistrats office 94. pilled the princis subiectes 95 96. Vuhen he may not pas smaller matters in the church by hym self alone 77. Vuhen for his sole excoÌ„munication there is not so muche as one approued example or writer to be shewed 85 86 89 c. some of the papistes them selues being ashamed of this sole autoritie of the Bishop 77. Tractate the tenth page 99. The Deacons office standeth in the care for the poor and not in the administration of the word and baptim because This office is so instituted Rom. 12 8 99 100 101. The Apostle deuiding the ministeries of the word maketh no mention of the Deacon 102. Hether refer the exceptions of Phillip 103 104. and Steven 106 107. The Apostle describing the qualities of the DeacoÌ„ maketh no mention of his â—ptnes to teach 102. Yf yt were a step to the ministery as yt is not 108 thereof foloweth that yt is not the ministery 107. Yt is an opposite member which togither with the ministery of the word helpeth to deuide one whole 101. In doeing boeth he should haue need of greater giftes then the Apostles or the pastor 101 102. whether refer that the Apostles and other indued with extraordinary giftes labored their sermons 101 102. By the same reason they are barred from the administration of the supper they owght to be likewise from that of baptim 104 105. The iudgment of the
elder church was such 109 110. whether refer that where they meddled with ether the administration of the word or Sacraments they did yt by a nw cōmission and not by vertu of the Deaconship 109. Also of the godly learned of our age M. Bucer Caluin Martyr Beza 99 109 113. The Deaconship owght to be in euery Church 113 114. Likewise vnder a Christian Magistrate 100 111 112 113. Tractate the eleuenth page 116. Of the corruptions in doctrine about the holy Sacraments the first chapter whereof is against the sacriledg of priuate persons wemen especially in administring baptim because Yt confirmeth the error of the condēnatiō of thē which dy withowt baptim 133. when as the want of baptim oneles yt be with neglect or cōtemt is not onely no probable sign of condemnation or cause why we are no Christians but also is in no respect praeiudicial and where that neglect or cōtemt is which can be none when yt is with al conuenient speed browght to be baptized by the publik minister in the congregation yt returneth vpon the parents onely 124 125 134 135. Yt is void which is so ministred 134. because the washing from our synnes coming onely frō our Sa. Christ to haue confirmation of our faith by this sacramēt yt is required that yt be ministred by hym whome he hath set in his place 138 139. As the princis seal stollen and set to by one to whome yt belongeth not bringeth no security c. 139. whether refer that yt is more lawfully administred by a minister which is an heretik then by a priuate person which is a catholik 131. Also that not to haue he rein chois of hym that administreth the sacrament approcheth to the dotage of the papists in the Shepards consecration 138. Hether refer that the keping of the wordes I baptiz the in the name c. are not onely of the substance of baptim 136 137 138. As he that propoundeth the word withowt vocation preacheth not 141 142. As he that taketh part of the wordes of the scripture passing by another part propoundeth not the scripture but a devise of his own brain 141. As the communicatiō in bread withowt the cup is no supper of the lord 140. As a priuate man which killing a murtherer executeth no iustice but is hym self a murtherer 139. As the seal of the same matter and figure with the Princis withowt his autoritie is none of his 139. God hath instituted that those onely should baptiz which haue that wemen can not vocation to preach 116 117. Hether refer the making of the Ark 117 118. Also of S. Paul which hauing commission to preach as a thing annexed to preaching administred baptim 118 119. further that otherwise there should be no commandement in the scripture to hinder that wemen may not aswel be taken to the ordinary administration of the sacramentes as men 118 119. Hether also refer that alledged of the wemens preaching 122 123. of Pauls baptizing and others at the commandement of Peter withowt a calling 119 120 121. Origins example 130 131. None may take honor vnto hym self but he that is called as was Aron 128. No not so much as in priuate howses althowgh they may teach privately 124. Nor in the tyme of the supposed necessity 128 129 130 132. Hether refer that of Sephora 126 127 The iudgmēt of the godly learned boeth aūciēt and of our tyme Coūcel of Carthage 132 Cyprian Chrysostome 130 Caluin 117 Bullinger 133 Beza 130. Infantes of boeth parents Papists owght not to be baptized 142. The second chapter of the corruptions in the sacrament of the holy supper 144. Against the receiuing by two or three with vs 144 145 146. Knowen papists not to be admitted much les comppelled to the supper 147 148. Examination of those whose knowledg in the principal points of religion is douted of is commanded in the scriptures 148 149 150. The tvuelfth Tractate page 151. The administration of the church matters vnder a Christian Magistrate doeth ordinarily and principally belong vnto the church officers because By the word of god the matters perteining vnto god are committed vnto the Priests and Leuites the matters perteining vnto the common wealth being committed to Ciuil persons 152 153 154. Nether maketh yt against this that certein Leuites handled common wealth matters 154 or that certein kinges determined of church matters 166 The church gouernours are by calling the fittest to determinyn of them 158 159. whether refer that the scripture requireth not of the ciuil magistrate that he should be able to conuince an heretik The church lawes are called the Bishops and not the Emperours decrees 155 156. Althowgh yt belong vnto the Magistrate to make lawes for a Christian common wealth yet yt foloweth not thereof that he may make lawes for the church the distinction of the church and common wealth remaining euen vnder a Christian magistrate pa. 151 152. Althowgh in confused tymes yet not in wel ordered 165 166. Yt is one thing to make lawes for the church another thing to put in execution the lawes alredy made whether deuine or ecclesiastical so that althowgh the later belōg vnto the Magistrate yet thereof foloweth not that the former doeth so 153 156 161. The danger of the Ministers erring in the determination of these matters letteth not this right of theirs 167. Nor that the papists hould some point herein with vs from whome notwithstanding euen in this cause we differ manifoldly 164 165 166 167. The learnedest and godliest boeth ould and nw confirm yt Constantine the great 157 163 Hillary 155 156 Ambrose 156 161 and other bishops of his tyme 162 Augustine 163 Bucer Caluin Beza 168 the Bishop of Salisbury 159 162 Nowel 159 euen the D. hym self 164 The thirtinth Tractate Of the indifferent ceremonyes the frute and necessitie whereof is shewed 171. The former part whereof is of the ceremonies in general The first chapter of which former part is that the church of Christ owght not to be like in ceremonies vnto the synagog of Antichrist because The Apostles conformed the Gentiles to the lwes not contrariwise 172 The lord seuered his people from prophane nations in thinges otherwise indifferent 172 Especially from those with whose corruptions in religiō they were entangled and with whome they lyued and had occasiō of conuersation in which respect yt is les danger for vs to be like in this point vnto the Turkes thē vnto the Papistes 172 173 174. The conformitye offendeth the papistes 177 namely in that they take occasion of speaking euil of our religion as if it yt could not stād withowt the ayd of their ceremonies 178 179. Also that thereby they conceyue hope of bringing in again their other corruptions whereby they hardē thē selues in their error likewise that they ascribe holynes to them 79 180. whether refer that yt is no sufficient exception that the people be warned of the abvse by preaching 177 178. Yt bringeth greif of mynde to many that are godly myneded and to the weaker sort occasion of a moste dangerous fal 180. Yt aedifieth not 180 181. The popish ceremonies haue pomp annexed 180 181. Euen as to establish the doctrine and discipline of the gospel the Antichristian must be removed so to remedy the infection crept in by the ceremonies they also owght to be removed 174. The godly and learned boeth ould and of our tyme confirm yt The councel of Laodicea of Braccara 176 177. Tertulliā 175. Constātine the great 175 176. The Bishop of Salesbury 177. Nether is the decree of any church of that autority as to binde vs that euen in the matter of ceremonies her iudgmēt should not be examined by the word of god The second Chapter Of the first part of this tractate that the churches owght to be like one to another in ceremonies pag. 142. As the churches in the Apostles times and after in the primitive church 142. As the children and seruantes of noble men goe in one liuery 142. How this may be doen 142 143. Althowgh the churches owght not to fal owt abowt yt nor men make a departure from the church for want hereof yet the church to the end she may correct yt owght to be tould of her faut in this behalf p. 143 144. The third chapter That the seruice book after a sort mainteineth an vnpreaching ministery 184. Partly throwgh the lenght of prayers 184 185. But especially in contenting yt self with a Mynister which can doe no more thē a childe of ten yeares ould 185. Or els the Bishop ys yet more gilty which maketh such Ministers withowt warrant ether of god or man ib. The fourth chapter That the frute that might be is not receiued p. 186 Throwgh the change of the place and gestures of the minister which hinder the vnderstanding of the people renw the leuitical Priesthood is vncomely ād according to M. Bucer boeth absurd and munkish page 186 187. That the order hereof is dangerously left in the Bishops discretion 187. The second part Of this Tractate of the particuler fautes in our ceremonies The first part Of the first chapter thereof is of abrogating the feastes of the Natiuitie Easter and whitsonday pa. 188. For the superstition crept into mēs myndes of them especially when they are not necessary pa. 185 the superstition also being not so wel remedied by preaching onely 189. They restrain the benefites of Christ vnto the tyme they are houlden in pa. 190. In appointing of holy dayes regard must be had not onely to the riche which may withowt their hinderance abstein from labor but vnto the poorest 192 193. The church may appoint standing tymes for the publik seruice of god and vpon extraordinary causes whole holy dayes yet not therefore ordinarily command suche feastes 191 192. As ordinarily yt can not be ordeyned that men should work the dayes which god hath commanded to rest in so ordinarily yt should not be forbidden to labor in those dayes which god hath licensed to work in 193. The elder church left the feastes free 189 198. The second part Of the first chapter against Saintes dayes pag. 194.