But to that alledged that yt hath no ground in scripture he answereth nothing wherein notwithstanding the question consisteth That alledged of the impositiō of hādes vntruly fathered of the Apostles he wil haue me proue whereas yt being affirmed of hym owght to haue bene shewed by hym That yt was not in Iustins tyme may appear in that he describing the liturgy of the churches in his tyme maketh no mention of yt That yt was no tradition of the Apostles left as Ierome al his proof in this behalf affirmeth hath bene before declared Hys exception of the abuse in laying on of handes in ordeyning Ministers against that I browght that this ceremony confirmed an opinion conceyued that yt is a sacrament is idle For that being the ordinance of god may not for any abuse be taken away but this being not althowgh yt were in yt self indifferent for the offence sake owght to be disanulled Hether appertayneth that otherwhere of M. Caluins alowance hereof where the reason I opposed owt of hym that the giftes by laying on of handes ceasing yt also ovught to ceas is vnanswered I graunt he speaketh against the popish imposition of handes but withal in this point he speaketh against ours which pretendeth as doeth theirs that the holy gost is giuen by this imposition of handes whereof there is no promise And therefore his defence that yt is giuen by prayer ys not sufficient considering that the book saith by putting on of hādes and prayers so that althowgh M. Caluin should like of laying on of hādes yet he must needes mislike of ours which presupposeth that the holy gost is giuen by the bishops laying on of handes His answer to the autority of so many reformed churches is fond For that they meant to disalow cōfirmation simply and not the popish onely may appear in that they purged not the popish imposition of handes but vtterly cast yt away And when they say they can vuant yt vuithovut damage they signify that in the best sort yt is vnprofitable To that alledged of the popish opinion that yt is better then baptim confirmed in that that our Bishop onely may confirm vuhere euery Minister may baptiz he answereth owt of Ierom and Bucer that yt is meet yt should be doen by the Bishop which I graunt yf yt were meet at al. But that the Bishop which Ierome and Bucer alow be not lord Bishops but simple Pastors of one onely church or not of the twentith part whereof our Bishops are hath bene before declared The reason of the inconuenience of bringing the children half a score miles vuith charges for that vuhich if yt vuere needful might be doen by the Pastor at home he answereth by calling yt chiledish such is the compassion he hath of the peoples trauail and especially of the necessity of the poor which are compelled thus beside extraordinary charges to lese two or three dayes work That he thincketh yt not worthy once to be considered belike is because they goe not vppon his legges nor spend of his purs There resteth the churching of wemen where this title implying a banishment from the church is defended b◠the common peoples vsage of Christmas a popish name as thowgh this error of the people owght to haue bene confirmed by the book and not rather corrected he might aswel answer that the drawer of the book might haue called the holy Communiō a mas because the ignorāt sort doe so But vnto this answer hath bene further replyed before Of two other pointes in that diuision he talketh but answereth not the next requireth no answer the next hath bene answered the next to yt requireth none To excuse his rashnes in permitting the vail which is a church ceremony to wemens discretion he saith ▪ yt is rather ciuil the vntruth whereof is manifest yt being doen of superstition and opinion that yt owght to be so not for succour against the ayer as he pretendeth beside that in saying rather ciuil he priuily confesseth that there is some part of yt ecclesiastical THE FIFT CHAPTER OF CEREmonies abovut the holy communion in the residu of the D. xv Tractate IN eleuen diuisions whereof to diuers reasons of the great inconuenience of ministring yt with wafer kakes and in kneeling there is nothing alledged worth the rehersal considering that yt hath bene shewed that the churchis power in thinges indifferent is not absolute to doe what she thincketh good but for the moste edifiyng in regard of the persōs and other circumstances and considering that against that we would haue the sitting of our Sa. Christ called again for remedy of the superstition yea idolatry committed of some by kneeling his instans of celebrating the communion in the night is insufficient For that was vpon a particuler occasion which is not in our church nor hath no place in the ceremonies in controuersy seing that for the causes assigned of me the celebrating of yt in the night was for that tyme necessary which is also answer to that of vnleauened bread vsed at the same tyme whereunto he can answer nothing Lastly considering that to shew the inconueniences and humbly to desire redres herein in such sort as for the abuses we doe not withdraw our selues from the holy communion is not as he slaunderously accuseth to make any tumult Therefore not to spend tyme in confutation of his bare sayinges the contrary of certeyn whereof are to be seen as in a playn matter I commit these vnto the iudgment of the reader Onely let hym obserue that M. Bucer doeth improue the kneeling at the communion and in one word al the gestures which the Papistes vsed in this imitation of the supper of the lord For that in the 17 diuision towching this whether yt be meeter to say take ye or take thow to the reason of the example of our Sauiour Christ he can not answer To the reason taken of the maner of preaching he saith that exhortation giuen in the second person singuler moueth moste which is not to the point of the question For yt is not debated here whether the Minister should speak to al at once by thow or by ye but whether yt is meeter that yt should be once onely spoken to al that communicate at one table or rehersed according to the number of persons that communicate Beside that a figuratiue speach as this is when by the word thovu are noted a great number is more fit for preaching and prophetical writing then for the ordinary seruice which owght to be moste simple I confes some difference of the exhibiting of the benefites of Christ in the sacramentes and in the word but how that difference should cause vs to change the form vsed by our Sau. Christ which knowing that difference best did notwithstanding at once speak to al at the table with hym I see not nor he sheweth not nor I am assured can not the rest in this chapter requireth no answer
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
Epiphanius serue not his turn For nether is it said whether they medled with ciuil affaires before their bishoprik or in yt and if it were considering there is no approbation of their doeing but onely a bare telling that such a thing they did it can not help him For it is one thing to say they were commended for dexterity in such matters and another to say that they did it in dutie and wel euen as if the ciuil officer taking the pulpit and speaking fitly of a text a man might giue him the commendation of dexteritie in handling the text and withal condemn him for doeing it withowt calling Hether perteineth that which he alledgeth in another place of Letoius a Bishop which burned Monasteries but by what autority appeareth not beside that his act seemeth otherwise to haue no ground For if it had any good issw it was more by hap then by good konning The like and vpon like zeal was doen by one Audas a Persian Bishop that burnt an Idoles Temple which act gaue occasion of greuous persecution whereby may appear that Bishops went some tyme beyond their limites and did thinges permitted vnto them nether of god nor man. Of our age he citeth witnesses M. Cranmer Ridly Hoper and in another place Brentius for Brentius seing he hath no reason let him haue that credit which so smale a friend of sincerity deserueth especially against the consent of so many better then he for the other he maketh it not to appear that they were of that iudgment And of M. Hooper it is manifest that he did flatly condemn it which sheweth that the Bishops for the space of 400 yeares after the Apostles althovugh they vuere more able thē ours did meddle vuith no ciuil affaires where he sharply taūteth our Bishop which meddleth with boeth offices when one is more then he is able vuith al his diligence to discharge and impossible that he should doe boeth and that if the Magistrate vuil employ a Bishop in ciuil affaires he ovught to discharge him of his Ministery Yf M. Cranmer and Ridley did exercise boeth that is to be ascribed to the tyme wherein the Sun of the gospel being but lately risen in our climate al the cloudes which popery had ouercast our land with could not be so quikly put to flight Seing therefore the Ministers office is onely in thinges that pertayn to god which for a degree of excellency that they haue in promoting our saluation more then other the holy gost opposeth vnto the Princes and common wealth affaires seing also it is of greater weight then the strongest bak can bear of wider compas then the largest handes can faddam a soldiarfare that wil be onely attended vpon seing also it tendeth to the destruction of the body when one membre encrocheth vpon the office of another and that the ciuil Magistrate may by the same right invade the office of the Minister as he the office of the ciuil Magistrate seing further our Sauiour Christ hauing the spirit withowt measure refused as a thing vnmete for his ministery the office of a Iudg seing also the Apostles indued with such glorious giftes as are not now to be looked for gaue ouer the office of the Deaconship as that which they were not with the Ministery of the word able to exercise and seing for the burden thereof it was easier then the ciuil charge which the Bishops take vpō them and for the kinde of Ministery more agreable seing also the examples in the Scripture of thē which haue born boeth the charges are ether before this order was established of god or being sithens were extraordinary last of al seing this mingling of the estates is contrary to the practise of the elder church vttered boeth in Councels and fathers contrary also to the practise and iudgment of the godly learnedest of our tyme I conclude that it is vnlawful in an established estate of the church that a Minister of the church should bear ciuil office And thus much against the Ministers which haue one foot in the church and an other in the common wealth Now to the treatise of the Eldership for the cause before assigned THAT THE CHVRCH GOVERNMENT BY AN ELDERSHIP IN Euery congregation is by the ordinance of god and perpetual Tractat 8. and 7. according to the Doctor p. 626. THat which a Tully saith of an Oratour ful of wordes that he would make owtcries to get an appetite to drink may be feared somewhat otherwise in the D. who giueth suspition that he hath forced his pen to write not to get but to quench if it might be the thirst of honour And verely if this order of Eldership had not strenght to stand by our defence yet the vertw of it might easely appear in that yt so amazeth and astonieth the aduersary as if he had bene stricken with a thunderbolt from heauen so that beside a multitude of wordes wherwith by oppressing the reader he might make some shew of answer there wil be litle found that can of right chalendg a reply Howbeit to honor him with some answer leauing his disordered handling which I noted aswel for that his defence is fond as for that this is not the place to diduct that matter let vs see what he bringeth in this cause Against that I alledged owt of the Apostle The Elders vuhich rule vuel are vuorthy dubble honor especially vuhich labor in the vuord and doctrine to proue that there were Elders which assisted the teaching Ministers onely in the gouernment of the church he answereth first that the word Elder is the same commonly with Bishop or Pastor wherein partly he confuteth him self For if it be but commonly so taken and not alwaies then it may be taken otherwise in this place His first example likewise out of Peter 1. 5. is plain against him for thereby appeareth that Peter an Apostel and no Bishop is called Elder nether is there any word in that place wherby the exhortation to the Elders should not be applied as wel to the Elders which gouerned onely as to those which labored in the word also considering that the word of feeding respecteth not onely preaching but that gouernment also which is with owt preaching in which respect boeth in scripture and otherwise the ciuil Magistrate is said to feed And it is to great an ouersight to think that because al Bishops be Elders therefore al Elders are Bishops when as the name of Elder is common vnto al which haue gouernment of the church and most properly agreeth to those which haue the gouernment onely withowt further charge of teaching And the name is taken of the vsage vnder the law where they which had onely gouernment ether in church or common wealth were so called Secondly he saith that by those that gouerned and labored not in the word are vnderstanded those which ministred the sacramentes where to let pas that which hath and shal be after
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
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
vnhonest a shift it is may appear in that he maketh no difference betwene the Chauncelor and Chorepiscopus but onely in the name saying to contend for the name when the thing is certeyn is a token of a contentious person Althowgh he had not so gained that the Bishops had deputies seing I shewed that boeth the nature of the word and the autority of certein interpreters lead to the signification aswel of a Bishop in the countrey townes as of a deputie yt is vntrue that I haue any where alowed an ordinary deputy wherof the question is here but contrary wise haue shewed that there owght to be none not onely in the treatise of the Pastors residence but also in this wherunto the D. answereth nothing But if it were graunted that they might haue such as I haue shewed to haue bene Chorepisc yet what a strange conclusion is this that they may aswel haue Chauncelors considering that he is now constreyned to confes the office of the one greatly different from the other The rest is answered so are the two next In the next where he is charged for alowing as necessary the Archbishops court of faculties c which he confesseth he knoweth not what it meaneth He saith he browght better reason for it then is browght against yt which is no defence of his rashnes wherby he affirmed that which he confessed he knew not His reason which he hath learned sithens is that the Quenes prerogatiues are defended there As thowgh the Archbishop were the fittest man to defend her prerogatiues Also that it was set vp when the Pope was put down in deed so yt was which is a good sign that the Archbishop sauing profession of obedience to the king was made Pope in his place For herevpon it cometh that he exerciseth vntolerable and filthy marchandise of which diuers obiected by the Adm. he partly confessed and part throwgh lothnes to confes and vnability to answer were passed by That also of not changing lawes but vpon strong reasons which he other where repeateth hath no place where the question is whether they be against the word of god or no. For here that worthy sentence hath place yf god command any thing against the maner or decree of vuhatsoeuer they be if it vuere neuer doen before it ovught to be doen if it haue bene omitted it ovught to be restored if it vuere neuer before it ovught to be instituted Yf the D. allegation haue place it hath place in variable ceremonies which notwithstaÌ„ding as hath bene shewed the church hath changed according as the circumstances haue required to the most of her comodity Seing therfore our Sau. Christ commandeth that the excommunication should be made by the church Seing the Apostles his faithful interpreters coÌ„municate the same power with yt in commanding yt to thrust owt impeniteÌ„t synners to procure that boeth they may be saued and others also kept from infectioÌ„ seing also the holy gost chideth the church for that it had not vsed this power against the vnrepentant Seing he communicateth with it the power of absoluing those which were thrust owt wheÌ„ they declare their repentance Last of al seing boeth the iudgment and general practise of the elder churches and in a maner of those which are now lead vs hereunto Of the other side seing the Bishop can not pas smaller matters withowt the aduise of the church seing by his sole excommunication he hath browght the church to a miserable seruitude and that not to him self alone but to his seruantes Chauncelors Officials c. seing vnder colour hereof he hath thrust his sickle into the Magistrates office suffred the glory of god to be troden vnder foot the Quenes subiectes to be pilled And finally seing that for his sole excommunicatioÌ„ there is not so much as one ether approued example or writer to be browght some of the papistes them selues being ashamed of it let vs conclude that the excommunication doeth not belong vnto the Bishop alone but that by the ordinance of god the church also here owght to haue her interest THE TENTH TRACT OF THE OFFICE OF DEAcons vuhich conteineth the D. xix and xiiij HIs question where the office of widowes is restreined to the poor which are sik and strangers I pas as impertinent especially when he doeth not assign any other to whom their attendance belongeth that the contrary doeth appear almost in expres wordes is but his accustomed bouldnes of vntrue speaking Let vs therfore come to the Deacons whose office is assigned to be abowt the church money The first proof hereof receiued for answer that it was but daliance with the scripture â—ith which tyme althowgh M. Caluin Bucer Martyr and Beza haue bene shewed to haue so expounded the place yet his accusation is vnrepealed whereby al these learned men with many others stand charged stil by him as daliers with the scripture But what think yow doeth he answer to this whole colledg of godly learned men he opposeth the exposition of certain fathers who would haue looked for this answer at his hand in setting one writer against another withowt a tittle of reason wordes onely excepted which hath so bytingly condemned yt in other These learned men were not ignorant of those expositions nether did they lightly depart from the interpretation of the auncient writers For whome also it may be answered that in interpreting this place of priuate giuing they meÌ„t not to shut owt this office And of M. Bullinger it is manifest that he doeth so alow of that that he wil haue it vnderstood properly of the Deaconship so that yow openly abuse his testimony herein The cause why the auncient fathers folowed this exposition is known wel enowgh to those which haue bene conuersant in them with any iudgment namely a desire they had to draw al to the correction of maners streyning often tymes their textes in hand to draw them to the present vse of their churches by reason wherof whether in steed of milk they sometimes drw bloud I leau it to the iudgment of the learned reader But let vs see if this wrangling of his can be conuinced of the place yt self where first it is manifest that it is an explanation of that similitude which was drawen from the body in which the Apostle shewed that as al the members haue not one office So in the church euery one hath not the same function wherevpon foloweth that if this distributioÌ„ of money which is a part of that explanation should agree to al the church alike and should not be a seueral office he should quite ouerthrow his purpose For he should shew thinges agreeing vnto al alike in steed that he should haue shewed that some thinges be peculiar Yf he reply that he had shewed those before and that here he beginneth to shew the thinges which are common to al Christians alike he is manifestly beaten down by the order
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
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
omit that yow bring in S. Paul Ro. 3 saying that which he hath not The sentence is true but yow owght to make a difference betwene that he saith and that which is concluded of his saying especially seing yow haue althowgh vntruly twise charged me with the like To that of Tertullian commending the Gentiles vuhich vuould not vuittingly kepe any of the feastes of the Christiās and of the other side discōmending the Christians that kept the feastes of the Gentiles he answereth that they cōmunicated with thē in their Idoles which is vntrue there being not a word cyted here by him self importing so much For to ceas frō labors the same dayes they did was not simply vnlawful He chargeth thē also vuith feasting on the same dayes vuhich they did also vuith sending of nueyeares giftes were these not thinges in thē selues indifferēt and onely condēned of Tertullian because they were the ceremonies of prophane nations and doeth he not see how Tertulliā maketh with vs in that he preferreth the vse of the ceremonies of the Iues which are abrogated for that they were sometyme autorized of god to the ceremōies which other prophane natiōs had takē vp of their own brayn This also may be vnderstood by the opposition he maketh of the cōmendatiō of the Gentiles for seing Tert. cōmendeth not the Gētiles for that they worshipped not god with the Christians but for that they would not admit the ceremonies of a religion contrary to their own to make the opposition answerable we must needes say that he rebuketh the Christians for that they vsed the ceremonies of a religion contrary to that they approued For further knowledg of Tertullians iudgment herein I refer the reader to that before written To that of Cōstātin disalovuing for diuers causes that the Christiās ▪ hould hould the feast of Easter at that tyme vuhich the Iues did he saith that the East partes kept yt as the Iues which is no answer seing he sheweth not whether he alow of Cōstantines iudgmēt or no. his secōd answer that he meāt we should haue nothing cōmon with them repugnant to Christian liberty is vntrue seing in it self there was nothing more free then whether a feast should be kept vpon thursday or sonday His third reason that if he had generally misliked their ceremonies he would haue abrogated them cleaueth not togither In steed wherof he should haue said yf he had vtterly misliked ceremonies ād not their ceremonies For as for theirs he abrogated them not onely in propounding another end then they did but also in disanulling a number of ceremonies vsed in the keping thereof At the least this example teacheth that if we wil hould holydayes and fishdayes with the papistes yet in detestation of their religion and for avoiding of superstition which hath crept into mens mindes by them we owght to change the dayes His last answer that as Constantyn changing the day and keping the feast put a difference betwene the Iues and Christians so we greatly differ from the papistes in the ceremonies taken from them ys likewise insufficient For althowgh that the Christians had kept the same day with the Iues yet their keping of the Easter should haue differed from the Iues keping as much as we differ now from the papistes in the ceremonies we haue from them But they thowght yt not enowgh to differ from the Iues in thinges meerly vnlawful onles they were also seuered from them by a ceremony which was in it self moste indifferent To that alledged owt of the Councels that they vuould not haue the Christians communicate in vnleauened bread because the Iues did nor dek their hovuses vuith green bovughes because the pagans did so he asketh to what purpose they be alledged yow know ful wel that these goe to the heart of your cause For what can be in yt self more indifferent then these two forbidden the Christians for that they were vsed of the enemies of the church And being a reason yt must be general of al such as the church may wel want much more of those in place wherof it may haue as good or better As for your often repeating that the ceremonies in question are godly comely decent yt is your ouldwont of dēaunding the thing in question and an vndowted argument of your extreme pouerty That I cyted owt of the Councel of Braccaras is to be found in the councel and Tome I alledged Can. 74. And the 73 can which I cyted is generally against al ceremonies vsed by the paganes for the two next sections I refer the reader to that already answered And that this complaint of ours is iust in that we are thus constreined to be like vnto the papistes in any their ceremonies and that this cause onely owght to moue them to whome that belongeth to doe them away forasmuch as they are their ceremonies the reader may further see in the Bishop of Sarisbury which bringeth diuers proofes thereof directly against the D. and flatly for vs. To this place belongeth as that which is general the reason of the offence c before handled whereunto page 288 he addeth that those which are offended at this apparel take an offence where yt is not giuen which is as he meaneth an offence taken nothing els but a demaund of that in question And yt deceiueth hym that he considereth not that the Apostle teacheth that an offence is not onely giuen when an vnlawful thing is doen but also when a thing in yt self lawful is doen vnlawfully that is owt of tyme and place Howbeit yt is further said that the offence may be taken away by preaching but yt was also replied that yt is not so conuenient that the ministers hauing so many necessary pointes to bestow their tyme in should be driuen to spend it in giuing warning of not abusing them of which althowgh they were vsed at the best there is no profit whereunto his answer that the abuse of meates and costly apparel for Princes c. doeth not take away the vse being of thinges wherof there appeareth a manifest profit is partly before and further commeth to be answered in the diduction of the particulers The vntruth also of his surmise that I would hereby take away owt of the church the doctrine of indifferent thinges is manifest For I spake not of al ceremonies but of such as haue bene shamefully abused and whereof there is no manifest profit nether did I disalow the doctrine against the abuse of them seing I added that one sermon against their abuse ioyned vuith their remouing by them to vuhom that appertayneth vuould doe more good then a thovusand vuithovut as appeareth by the example of our Sau. Christ which for the better rootīg owt of error refused the hurtful ceremonyes and tawght the abuse of them together And what wisdome is yt I pray yow that by cōtinuance of the popish ceremonies the church should reciue a wound to
The rest of the second replie of Thomas Cartvurihgt agaynst Master Doctor Vuhitgifts second ansvuer touching the Church discipline Isay lxij vers j. For Syons sake I vuil not hould my tong and for Ierusalems sake I vuil not rest vntil the righteousnes thereof break forth as the lihgt and the saluation thereof be as a burning lamp Ibid. vers 6 7. Ye that are the Lords Remembrancers kepe not silence and gyue him no rest vntil he repair and set vp Ierusalem the praise of the world Imprinted M. D. LXXVII TO THE READER ACcording vnto my promes yovu haue here the residvu of my reply vnto the Doctors ansvuer Of the late appearing vuhereof yt vuil not be vneasy to coniecture yf boeth the distance vuhereby I am remoued from yovu and the alterations in the place vuhere I remayned be remembred In me verely the cause vuas not vuhich more then a year agoe had brovught yt in a maner to the redines vuhich yt vuas in vuhen yt began to be printed ▪ But considering the great enmytie against the cavuse vuith some displeasure against my self some vuil peraduenture say that I haue rather need to seek excuse vuhy I set yt forth at al then so late To vuhome I vuould yt vuere ansvuered that for the cause yt self I neuer fear least yt should come to often into the field For althovugh throvugh the pouertie of the defenders thereof she come neuer so naked and vnarmed yet the lord hath set such a maiestie in her countenance that as vuith one of her eyes she rauisheth into her loue those vuhich are desirous of the trvuth in this behalf so vuith the other she so astonisheth her enemyes as if they vuere cast into a dead sleap in such sort that the stovutest of them vuhen they come to the fight can not finde their handes Vuhome I admonish and besech also in gods behalf that hovusoeuer they haue hetherto bene ouertaken by the aduersary they vuould novu at the last vuithdravu their foot and those that haue bene Standerd bearers herein not onely to retyre them selues but to blovu the retyre also vnto others Let yt be enovugh for them to haue stumbled at the truth least if they run them selues against yt in sted of thinking that they haue to doe vuith men and vuith vuordes they meet vuith Chryst him self at vhome as at a rok they shal vurake them selues myserably vpon vuhome also yf any come proudly the same stone vuilfal and break them al to fitters to their boeth deepest and moste remediles condemnation For hovu gloriously soeuer men speak of the sun of god yet they al no dovut rush them selues vpon hym that rush them selues vpon his vuord Let them therefore in tyme look vnto yt that they giue place vnto the rok for the rok vuil giue none to them and assure them selues that their heeles vuil sooner ake vuith kicking against the prik then yt in receyuing their broken and strenghtles resistance Vuhich as in assurance of the trvuth mainteyned by vs I propound vnto them so yf in buylding vpon this goulden foundation of the church discipline there hath escaped any stubble or hey of myne I vuil god vuilling not forget the same admonition to be a lavu vnto my self to bring the first fier to consume yt vuith Novu vuhen the truth by this trial getteth ground the displeasure against my self is no sufficient cause to vuithdravu my hand from this defence For vuhen the compas of our loue tovuards god must be moten by the thred of our affection tovuards his truth I see not hovu I could persvuade my self to haue to the quantitie of a grain of mustard seed of trvu loue tovuards hym yf vnto the trvuth laboring and trauailing in this point I should deny my simple help And verily yt vuere a deintynes and dilicacy vntollerable yf I should not afourd the los of a little ease and commoditie vnto that vuhere vnto my life yt self yf yt had bene asked vuas dvu if I should grudg to dvuel in another korner of the vuorld for that cavuse for the vuhich I ovught to be ready altogether to depart ovut of yt finally yf I should think much to vuitnes vuith a little ink and paper that vuhich numbres in other places haue alredy vuitnessed vuith their blood Vuhereunto serveth that yt is not the least part of my comfort that in this vacation from the ministery the lord hath not suffered me to be altogether idle but imployed me if not in griffing and setting vuhich are the mastervuorkes yet in hedging and ditching abovut the Orchyard of his church purchased vuith his moste precious blood Last of al I assure my self that the same cavuse vuhich hath brovught this displeasure is able yf need be to set me in favour again Vuherof I vuould little do vut if yt might come to ansvuer before them before vuhome yt hath bene so vnvuorthely accused Alcibiades vuhē one lifted vp his staf redy to smyte hym yf he vuould not hould his peace trusting vnto the vertvu of the truth Smite saith he so that yovu hear Vuhen therefore these humane trvuthes being propounded notvuithstanding al oppositions by reason of former praeiudices in the end finde fauour and haue a resting place hovu much more the heavēly trvuth sanctified and sealed by the blood of the sun of god shal at the lenght haue the gates opened vnto her I graunt there is greater resistance vnto this holy trvuth then vnto other common and humane but he that is autor and mainteiner of al trvuth dravueth a great deal deeper vuhen he shooteth forth this arrovu then vuhen he sendeth forth the other And thus much for ansvuer to them vuhich not misliking the cavuse may for that ether in their iudgment I stryue against the stream or els for that I depriue my self of cōmodities vuhich I might othervuise enioy esteme my labor ovut of season Sauing the table vuhere the greater letter is the Doctors the varietie of letters is the same and to the same end vuhich yt vuas in the former part of this book vuhere the reader may take his direction Of vuhome as before I craued prayer for the lords assistance so novu I desire that thankes may be giuen vnto hym for al that vuherein he shal vnderstand yt to haue bene vuith me AN ANSVVER TO THE RESIDVE of the surmises as they are comprehended in the D. tvuo tables In the first Table The eight is ansvuered 248 249 250 251. The tenth is ansvuered 173. The eleuenth 138 c. The tvuelfth 145 c. The thirtinth 191 192 193. The sixtinth is vnvuorthy any ansvuer seing yt is manifest that al those vuhich haue right to be baptezed ovught to be houlden of the visible church or family of god vuhere of the question is as yt is further declared by the examination of the D. censures The seuentinth is mainteined touching papists childrē 142. And there is the same reason of the children of
the excommunicate vuhich remayn obstinate The eightinth is ansvuered 64 65. The ninetinth 64 c. The tvuentith 164 165 166 167. For ansvuer vnto the one and tvuētith I refer my self partly to that I haue ansvuered in the former part partly to the examination of the D. censures In the second Table For the 38 and 39 I refer my self to the examination of the D. censures The 40 is ansvuered 132 and 219. The 41 is confessed The 42 is ansvuered 230. The 43 p. 67. The 44 p. 85. The 45 p. 85. The 46 p. 87. The 47 p. 90. The 48 p. 96. The 49 p. 157. The 50 in the former part The 51 p. 262. Fautes escaped Page 18 line 30 read may as pag. 255 line 32 read three first pag. 26 l. 23 24 also pag. 27 l. 6. for the smal vnderstand the great running letter Correct the number of the leaf wich is marked beneth with the letter N immediately folowing the number 96. AGAINST CIVIL OFFICES IN ECCLESIASTICAL PERSONS TRActate VII and 23 according to the Doctor HAving in the last Tractate of the former part shewed the vnlawful dominion of certein of our church officers ouer the whole church and especially over their fellow Ministers yt seemeth good to ioyn this next therevnto For thereby shal boeth better appear how vnsufferable this disorder is which ouerspreadeth boeth church and common wealth and the gouernment by the Eldership the tractate whereof shal follow immediatly in yt self iust shal by comparison with this church lordship be more iustified That the moste of the places quoted by the Admonit are vsed of vuriters of that excellency vuith vuhome the D. is not vuorthy to be named the same day hath and further wil appear His exception that by this they are lifted vp aboue god himself is vain For beside that it is a kinde of speach vsed of the best autors to note a great inequalitie he is les worth then I prised him at if he think that he is worthy to be named the same day that god him self is For if he wil so seruilely cleau vnto wordes yet the question is whether he be vuorthy to be named not as he writeth whether he may be named The place of S. Luke is vnderstanded properly of the Ministers of the word and not of al Christians which is manifest for that our Sauiour Christ biddeth him that would haue goen bak for burial of his father to preach the Kingdome of heauen which he neuer commanded to al Christians so that his meaning is of the calling vnto the ministery and not of the calling to eternal life That such ciuil offices as he alloweth in Ecelesiastical persons are helpes for them to doe their duties repeted seuen times is a demaunding of that in question For where after he saith he hath declared yt he saith vntruly he hath onely nakedly affirmed yt which how vntrw it is shal after also appear My reply is that our Sauiour Christes vocation vuas to be a Minister of the gospel but he refused ciuil iudgment because of his vocation therfore he refused it because he vuas a Minister of the gospel whervpon also followeth that Bishops being Ministers of the gospel owght not to receiue any such power See now how iustly he complaineth that I answer not to that he said that Christs refusal in the partition of the inheritans perteyneth no more to Bishops then to Kinges no mervail also if it require further answer it was so wel garded seing his reason ys because the doeinges of Christ be a patern for al Christians then which there can be nothing more absurd For althowgh al his doeinges be instruction to al Christians yet that they are a patern to them al draweth with it that al may preach that none may giue iudgment in civil causes and a number more horrible confusions yt being also a fals ground of popery wherby they would establish the lenton fast and other such corruptions Vvhere also he would giue to vnderstand that our Sa. Christ did refuse this not as a Minister of the gospel but as Redemer he renteth a sunder thinges which can not be separated For one part of his redemership standeth in that he was giuen of god vnto vs for a teacher so that if he would haue answered any thing in this kinde he must haue said that he refused to iudg of ciuil causes not as a Minister of the word but as a Priest or King whereof also the last he in part setteth down saying he refused yt to declare that his Kingdome was not earthly but heauenly as if it were not as necessary for hym to refuse it in respect of his Doctorship that he might declare likewise that his doctrine was not of earthly thinges but of heauenly and consequently as convenient in the same respect for the Ministers to abstein from it But the further confutation of this the reader shal take from thence where is shewed that our Sa. Christ by his own example calleth the Apostels and in them al the Ministers of the word from al pomp and dominion and therfore from these ciuil offices whervnto pomp and dominion are annexed Then he answereth that no man giueth the Bishops autority to iudg in matters of inheritans whereas our Sa. Christ refused it not because he was no Iudg of that cause but simply because he was no ciuil Iudg refusing vpon the same ground to giue sentence of the harlot The Ministers for sooth may not medle with ciuil occupations but with ciuil offices and in ciuil offices not with them of no countenance as the Iailers office c but with those of estate and amongest those of estate not with matters of inheritance but with criminal causes Thus yow take your self licence to say al thinges and to shew none But to leau the rest vnto an other place let the D. shew some reason why the Minister should rather sit in iudgmēt of criminal causes then in pleas of inheritans they boeth belong to the Magistrate alike yf he owght to accept one being committed vnto hym by the Magistrate why not also the other especially when as by criminal causes requiring more search and greater diligence then the other there must needes be greater hinderance from his ministery As for that he saith those are to be decided by law and haue other Iudges appointed for them the criminal causes are likewise And if there were no other Iudges appointed for them yet whether there owght to be is the question so that the D. answer is here an open demaund of the question Vvhere also owt of M. Caluin he alledgeth Barnard that the Ministers power is in crimes it is a shameful abusing of boeth Calvin and Barnard for they speak there of rebuking and punishing syn by ecclesiastical censures which is manifest in that they convey the title of this power to the Minister by the Keies deliuered vnto S. Peter now the very
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
yet more straunge in the practise by executing the office of a ciuil Iudg. For tel me I pray yow how the care yow owght to haue of the ciuil causes before yow come to iudgment the tyme to be informed of them on boeth sides the examining of witnesses the consultation to what law or to what braunch of the law the crime should be reduced tel me I say how doeth it make yow fitter to execute your ministery then if yow had bestowed that tyme in studie of the word of god if yow say that by the knowlegd of these thinges yow may doe your ministery the better so may yow by knowledg of the Potters the Vueuers the Carpenters occupation from which similitudes being taken the doctrine is deeplier imprinted as we see to haue bene doen by the Prophetes and Apostles But as it is not meet that because the knowledg of these thinges profiteth that therfore Ministers may exercise these craftes no more foloweth it that because the knowledg of ciuil iudgmentes profiteth for the better doeing of the ministery therfore a Minister should exercise them Now if M. Caluin answering the Papistes which onely say that the exercise of this ciuil povuer did not much hynder their spiritual ministery called their answer babling I leaue it to yow to consider how sharply he would haue censured this bouldnes of yours if he had met with al. As towching that which I said of bodily occupations fitter vnto the estate of a Minister then these ciuil offices it may appear for that they are doen withowt pomp or shew which accompaniyng the ciuil offices haue bene shewed to be vnlawful for the estate of a Minister and that glittering shewes and pomp in the Ministers are hinderances to their ministery may further appear by that S. Paul did forbear from al stately wisdom and brauery of wordes to this end that the vertue of the spirite of god in the simplicity of the ministery might shew it self more cleerly when therfore the ey seing this pomp is as wel affected with it as where the ear heareth it and carieth it to the minde as sone and in the common people especially sooner by the same reason that the one the other also must hinder the cours of the gospel Herevpon no dowt Ambrose saith that vuorldly gouernment is the vueaknning of the Priest alluding vnto the Apostles saying that he vuas then strong vuhen he vuas vueak Further when the minde is weried and that he vnbending it wil giue it rest for a tyme it is more apt for him to exercise him self ether in planting or setting somewhat in garden or orchyard by way of recreation then in shooting as it were cōtinually in yt in the end to break yt and to make it vnprofitable ether for the ciuil or ecclesiastical estate And I meruail what steel the edges of their wittes be of which wil not be turned when they cut boeth so deep and in so hard matters whereas it is knowen that men of counsail haue found in the office of a Iustice of peace or Quorum so much to doe that they haue had scarce tyme enowgh to doe the office of a father of a houshould in their priuate families And it must take vp so much more tyme in the Bishops then in them as they for want of being nourished in the knowledg of the lawes and customes of the realm are more vnready in such cases then the nobilitye commonly is onles they wil sit vpon the bench like idols nodding rather to the pleasures of others then vpon any grounded knowledg giuing iudgment them selues His reason of the difference that the Minister can not commit his power to whome he list but that the Prince may is I fear me an endeuour of to open flattery at the least it is to losely spoken For althowgh there be greater libertie in the one then in the other yet the Prince can not commit his power to whome he listeth but is bound first to chuse those which fear the lord then those which are best able to execute yt to the glorie of god and commodity of the subiectes and therefore not the Ministers which haue already as much as they can turn them to when they doe their most Beside that he can not thus escape For if the Prince wil accept the ministery of the Bishops hand then his difference falleth to the ground and thē by his saying the Prince may wel preach as the Bishop bear ciuil office As for his example of Samuel which did Saules office in slaying Agag when as Saul might not doe Samueles in sacrifising it maketh nothing for him For Samuel did it not by Sauls autority but by an extraordinary calling from god so that if this example proue that ecclesiastical persons may bear ciuil offices it proueth that they may doe it withowt any commaundement of the Prince I pas by that it was not Samuels office to sacrifice as the D. imagineth he being not of the race of Aharō to whome onely that apperteyned but a simple Leuite so that where it is said that he sacrificed ether it must be vnderstood that he procured the sacrifice to be made or els that it was doen by an extraordinary calling contrary to the rule that the lord had giuē of offering sacrifices To that I ask vuhy if the Minister be helped by exercising a ciuil office in his ovun person the Magistrate should not be helped by exercising likevuise an ecclesiastical he answereth the Magistrate may doe by corporal punishment which the Minister cā not doe by ecclesiastical so may the Minister doe by ecclesiastic which the Magistrate cā not doe by corporal And this in deed is the ordinance of god that euery one should doe that which properly belongeth vnto him and not that one should doe al. where he addeth that the Magistrate may bridle the most vnruliest where the greatest censures of the church few now a dayes doe regard verely it is no mervail thowgh they be contemned being exercised as they are by those to whom it apperteyneth not and for euery trifling and three halfpenny matter where if being duly executed they be contemned the Magistrate beareth the sword to punish that contempt But the D. would haue the Minister haue that sword in his hand that beside the sentence of excōmunicatiō he might haue also the ciuil sword wherby he might strike a further fear of him self into the peoples hartes In deed thus is fear which the Apostle most properly giueth vnto the ciuil Magistrate because of the sword which he beareth translated vnto the Ministers And thus it commeth to pas that they hauing boeth ciuil and ecclesiastical vengeance in their handes make them selues more terrible vnto the people then the Magistrate him self which hath but the ciuil sword onely Vuhereby hath growen and if it be not in tyme preuented wil grow contempt of Magistrates and other inconueniences wherwith Princes them selues hauing bene before beaten owght so much the
as les necessary vnder a Christian Magistrate then vnder persecution For the word especially is restrayned vnto the gouernment which the Bishop had ouer the Elders so that if there be any thing to be gathered of that it is this that the Bishop should not haue so much preheminence ouer the Eldership when ther is a Christian Magistrate as when there was not And how doeth not he blush to alledg mens sentences directly contrary to their iudgmentes playnly declared in this matter of the Eldership which counteth yt such a faut to set one writer against another I omit other places owt of M. Beza where this cause is confirmed boeth generally in the vnuariable gouernment of the church and particularly in this case of the Eldership The reasons alledged of M. Musculus and Gualter haue bene answered His sixt reason of giuing no more here to the Christian Magistrate then to Nero is but onely said the vntruth wherof shal appear in place Seing therefore the lord hym self hath once set this gouernment by Elders in the church and that no man may displace which he hath placed seing yt is a supply of that in the church which the most sufficient and most diligent ministery of the word is not able to perform by yt self alone seing the churches vnder the law and in the Apostles tymes could not want this help and seing the antiquity which folowed for diuers hundred yeares partly held the same partly lamented the want of yt and partly left markes and footinges whereby being lost yt might be recouered again seing further the liberality of god towardes the church is commended in that for the greater safety of yt he would haue many watchmen of one church Lastly seing the Apostel in the person of Timothe chargeth most straitly al the Ministers of the word with the keping of this order vntil the appearing of our Sa. Christ let vs conclude that the Eldership ordeined for the gouernment of the church onely is the perpetual and vnchangable decree of god and therefore not onely in comon wealthes where many but also in Monarchies where one gouerneth not onely in time of perseqution but also in time of peace to be reteyned Again forsomuch as the Apostel ordeined thes Elders church by church forasmuch as giuing a rule of the gouernment of al aswel of churches in the countrey as in the City he inioyned the praeseruation of this order forasmuch also as the gospel whereof this is a part brake forth owt of Ierusalem into al places not into cities onely and for that the Pastor of an vplandish town is no more able to doe al that is to be doen in his church then the Pastors in the city considering also that the churches as dawghters and coheirs of one father and mother owght to enioy like priuileges seing further the Bishop to whome this Eldership is assistant hath bene shewed to belong aswel to churches in the country as in the city finally forasmuch as the vse boeth of he churches vnder the law and of those after the Apostels tymes lead vs hereūto yt is likewise browght to pas that this Eldership owght to be in al churches not in those onely which are planted in great cities Thus is also ended the question of Cathedral churches whereof the D. hath made a whole tractate wherein there appeareth scarce a step of this institution of god of which when he would brag of and set the highest price he hath valued twelue of the best of them at no more then one poor halin Cambridg or Oxford is able to yeeld yea then they were at Queen Maries tyme when there vuere commonly in euery one some vuhich dissembling for fear vuere not vuithstanding able to confute al Papistes Anabaptistes whereunto he can answer nothing That the offices came from the bottomles pit of hel may partly appear by that which I haue alledged partly in that the names of Prebendaries c. are not to be found in any godly or pure writer but in the dregges of the canon law For further vnderstanding of which disorders I refer the reader to that which M. Caluin writeth of them who peinteth them owt in their colours And where I shewed that to look for any good vnto the church in the Popes inuention is to look to be fed vuith the Cockatrice egges and to be clad vuith the spiders vueb he answereth that the Pope as the Ethnickes may make good lawes which is vntrue in matters belonging to the church especially in so great a matter as the appointing of an office I wil not denie but they may deuise good lawes for the commodity of this life but yt can not be shewed that euer the lordes people fetched their lawes to gouern the church by from the heathen much les from the Pope which is the head of the heathen Therefore al may see what a singuler profit boeth the church and common wealth should haue if they were conuerted into Colledges for the bringing vp of scholers which they would yeeld as I think in greater numbre then boeth the vniuersities doe now with furniture of professions in al good knowledg where now they serue but for the fatting vp of a few and those ether vnworthy to be norished of the Almes of the church or els whose presence is necessary in other places and dutiful by reason of pastoral residence wherein as wel against theirs as against our vniuersitie mens non residence I refer the reader to the special tractate thereof That they should serue for rewardes to those which haue spent much tyme in getting learning is but to fome at the mouth that which is a shame once to conceiue in the minde considering that by reward he vnderstandeth not the honest and sufficient prouision for his competent how should and conuenient hospitality for the poor which is confessed most due but meaneth some surplice beside this which is before cōfuted Nether is any good to be hoped from them whome the excellency of this office before Angels and men doeth not content to whom the fruit which they shal receiue dayly in that by their ministery god is glorified and men are saued doeth not satisfy finally to whom the special crown of glory which remayneth thē in the lyfe to come with sufficient prouision for this present lyfe doeth not make the ministery sauory vnles it be also sauced with these inticementes of wordly wealth and dignity So that this is rather a lure to draw hyrelinges into the church then an honest prouocation to cal in faithful Pastors Hereunto commeth the example of other churches which haue pulled them down and conuerted them to other vses which the D. partly denieth partly maketh no great account of That they were pulled down the experience teacheth at the least of as many as I haue ether seen or could vnderstand of And yt is namely recorded of the church of Zurik yea of al of them M. Caluin teacheth that
should conclude that al haue power alike because Keis with power to lok and vnlok be giuen to al. For this manifest difference is in the maner of speach considering that Math. 16 he speaketh of one in the singuler nombre in Iohn 20 althowgh he speak in the plural yet he vnderstandeth yt distributiuely that ys that euery one of the Ministers binedeth and loseth by preaching But in S. Math. 18 those wordes being added to autorise the churchis excommunication which word church is a noun collectiue they can not be drawen to the particular person of the Minister Here also it is to be obserued that the D. hath quite ouerthrowen his difference of the Bishop and of another Minister in the matter of excommunication For if in S. Math. 16 and Iohn 20 togither with the preaching of the word is vnderstanded power to excommunicate al Ministers of the word hauing by those places autority to preach it must folow necessarily that they al haue power committed vnto them to excommunicate And so falleth his whole cause which is that by the word of god the Bishop onely hath the right of excommunication Vuhere to that of S. Paules excommunicating Alexander c I answered that one is said to doe alone that vuhich he vuas moderator of and vuherein he had assistāce he answereth that it is an imagined shift But now he knoweth at least if he wil not acknowledg it that it standeth of vnfallible reason and is confirmed with moste graue autority of learned men To that I answer towching the place of Titus that to auoid an heritik is not to excommunicate him but to troble him self no more vuith him he opposeth M. Caluins autoritie withowt any aid of reason wherein when I haue shewed the reason which led me so to expound the place let the reader doe as him thinketh good remembring that if he vnderstand it of excommunication yet it helpeth him not the same answer seruing which was giuen to the place of Timothe For so much then as the Apostle willeth that the Minister should avoid him as one vtterly peruerted and notwithstanding willeth otherwhere that the excommunicate should be houlden for a brother vntil such time as it appeareth how that medicine of excommunication wil work with him and for that also yt apperteineth vnto the Minister especially euen then priuately to cal vpon him when he is excommunicate it seemeth that this can not be vnderstanded of one to be excommunicated but of a desperate enemy whom excommunication hath not cured but rather is throwgh the poison in him hardened And hereof I haue the iudgment of Ireneus which saith that the fact of S. Iohn the Apostle which would not goe into the bathes where Cerinthus the heritik was nor once so much as speak vnto him vuas doen according to this rule of S. Paul to Titus And if an heretik be taken in that sens which the D. hath often taken him in saying he mayer but that he wil be no heretik that is to say for one that standeth stif in his fals opinion then we must needes vnderstād that this order which S. Paul prescribeth is vnderstāded of that which is to be doen after excommunication For in such we must not tarry vntil two or three admonitiōs be giuen but assone as one sheweth him self an heretik in that sens the sentence of excommunication lieth against him But if the D. wil needes haue it vnderstanded of excommunication it shal be the bane of his own cause and a confirmation of that answer which he so scornefully reiecteth For S. Paul noting excommunication by the auoiding of the person excommunicate in commanding Titus to auoid him doeth not therefore command him alone where as the D. wil haue these and such like commandementes addressed vnto Titus and Timothe alone But ether the church is not here excluded which yow denie or els it foloweth that the church may kepe company with an heretik and the Minister onely forbidden so to doe which is absurd In the next diuision in steed of Basiles offices cited in the latin and English book he hath set owt a long sentence of Ambrose but which maketh nether whot nor kould it being graunted that it apperteyneth to the Bishop but denied that it doeth onely whether to take one man for an other be so gros a faut as to cite a book which neuer was let al iudg yow should rather haue compared my faut with yours in the next diuision sauing one which yow pas by as yow doe other withowt any confession The next diuision I leau vnanswered In the next I confes I was deceiued in the order of the story which came thereupon that Sozomene telleth that first which was doen after and contrariwise but my answer that the Bishops sole excommunicating vuas but the publishing of the sentence giuen by him and the church standeth Nether is it of any weight that George would not be entreated or that sute was made to him for absolution For it is easely answered that George had numbers of his faction for the gaining of which it behoued to win him first The D. would with wordes bear vs down that Theodoret and Sozom. affirm Ambrose to haue excōmunicated the Emperour alone which is but a facing there being nether the word alone nether any wordes which countervail yt his reason that Ambrose caried away al the commendation is nothing worth seing it is knowen that the chief beareth the name as the general of the field or Captayn is often said to haue won the field whē notwithstanding he vsed thereto the valiancie of the souldiers And to set aside the institution of god it had bene no commendation of Ambrosis courage but a note of rashnes and folish hardines to haue enterprised that of him self against such a mightie Emperour wherein he might haue had the support of others seing therby not onely the danger should haue bene les towardes him but also the fruit greater towardes the Emperour whilest yt should haue had more autority that was doen by him with others then by him self alone And when Ambrose saith precisely that he should be more charged vuith displeasure then the rest he giueth to vnderstād that some of the displeasure would lye vpon the neckes of the other Bishops which with hym determined of that excommunication althowgh not so much as vpon his that should haue the execution of yt whereby yt is yet more apparant that the place owt of Ambrosis epistel towching the Synod and of his answer to the Emperour was cited faithfully withowt falsifying As for his answer that the Bishopes lamented it onely it hath no likelyhood as it is obserued Vuhere he saith that the Synod was assembled before the slaughter there appeareth no such thing althowgh the cause lieth not in that point For yt is al one to vs whether the Coūcel met for that matter or being assembled for other vpon the report of yt decreed of
aboue al other ministeries whatsoeuer So that it is no good reason to say that Phillip could not by laying on of his handes giue the holy gost therfore he was a Deacon considering that nether Euangelistes nor Prophetes them selues meddled with that kinde of laying on of handes which is there mentioned And if Phillip were then Deacon he was Deacon of the church of Ierusalem whereunto he was chosen But it ys manifest he was not Deacon there considering that S. Luke after his departure from thence and preaching in Samaria and certein other places bringeth hym to Caesarea where he leaueth hym as a houshoulder and towndweller so that vnles he dare say of Phillip that he was a continual non resident yt can not be that he was Deacon after his departure from Ierusalem But let vs graunt that Phillip was boeth a Deacon and Euangelist which is notwithstanding absurd seing that the Apostles confessed them selues insufficient to susteyn that burden togither with their preaching ministery I say let vs graunt that yet forasmuch as he can not deny but that yt belongeth vnto the office of an Euangelist to preach how is he able to proue that Phillip preached rather by vertue of his Deaconship thē of his Euangelistship So that onles he be so bould as to deny that Phillip was there no Euangelist he gaineth nothing by al this travail For otherwise it foloweth that Phillipes example wil not warrant the Deacons preaching except he haue some other ministery of the word ioyned with yt Therefore let not him any more pretend the autority of the godly writers but confes as the truth is that this argument was ministred hym owt of Pigghius who vpon this example of Phillip affirmeth as he doeth that the Deacons may preach euen as the Priestes doe As for Augustin he goeth abowt althowgh not so aptly as I haue declared rather to shew that the Deacons might not lay on their hādes then that yt belonged vnto them to preach which may appear in that he doeth not permit them to conceiue the prayers wherunto the people should answer which notwithstanding is les then to preach I shewed that by the same reason they are houlden from the administration of the supper they ovught also to be barred from that of baptim considering that it is not onely a miserable rending in sonder of thinges vuhich god hath ioyned but also giueth occasion or rather being crept in maynteyneth a daungerous error vuhich is that men esteme some holier thing to be in the sacrament of the holy supper then in baptim To this he answereth that the reason of this difference is because yt is mentioned that Phillip baptized and not that he administred the supper where by the way let the reader obserue that vpon two particuler examples which he also vntruly pretendeth he would ground a doctrine that the Deacons owght to preach althowgh he be able to shew no rule nor commandement for yt which notwithstanding he vtterly cōdemneth in vs althowgh yt be shewed to haue bene doen generally Secondly how he reasoneth negatiuely of autority that it was not doen because yt ys not so written yea which is more that yt owght not to be doen another thing also which he reprocheth vs with Now as for his answer yt is to friuolous For althowgh yt be a good reason in the direction of the church to say there is nothing wtitten towching yt therfore it is not to be admitted yet in the practise of that which is prescribed to be doen it is an euil argument to say it is not written therfore yt was not doen much more that yt may not be doen. For when our Sau. Christes actes were not al written is yt any marueil althowgh al that Phillip did be not written And by his reason the Bishops owght not to administer the supper considering that in al the scripture it is not mentioned that a Bishop ministred yt Nether if Phillip did not minister the supper foloweth yt therfore that he had not autority to administer yt aswel as baptim except he think that our Sa. Christ had not autority aswel to administer baptim which he did not as to administer the supper which he did To that wherein I noted the disorder in our church permitting to one that can not preach the administration of the supper and not to the Deacon as they cal hym which can preach he answereth that the one is called thereto the other is not where he must needes mean that the one is lawfully called thereto and the other lawfully shut therefro which is an asking of that in question My reply to his obiection of Steuens oration that yt vuas no sermon but a defence of hym self against his accusations is clear For yt appeareth that the high Priest and Scribes c. were there set in iudgment the fals witnesses were set vp against hym he was demaunded whether the accusation were true and vpon that demaund began his oration now let hym shew such a form of preaching to haue bene vsed in any church Yt is also vnlike that the high Priest and Scribes would permit hym to preach when as they had forbiddē the Apostles before but to giue hym leau to answer to his accusatiōs was needful for thē therby to mayntein that visard of holines whereby they pretended an exact obseruation of the law which was that no man should be cōdemned vnheard And so if he wil haue this a sermō he shal yet gain nothing considering that he had not this power by his ministery of Deaconship but by commaundement of the Councel that had power to require an account of that which he had propounded in disputation with those of the Colledg of Liber tynes c. His proof that it was in the Synagog is first withowt al warrāt there being not a word thereof in the scripture And yet being made in Ierusalem if it had bene a sermon it is liker to haue bene in the temple Nether if yt were in the Synagog hath yt any force to proue a sermon onles he think that euery one which pleaded his cause in Paules Consistory in Queen Maries tyme made a sermon That he also reprehended them sharply is no other thing thē diuers of the Martyrs of god haue doen with vs which I think he wil not say to haue preached by vertue of any ecclesiastical function althowgh I confes that that is not to be lightly doen and withowt some especial directiō whereof the lord in such tymes doeth furnish his otherwise those that are priuate men owght to content them selues with a simple and playn defence of the truth Nether is Paules answer vnto Tertullus accusation Act. 24 any sermō but a simple defence addressed onely to Felix as to his Iudg vttered at the bar as they speak in a ciuil Court and in a ciuil or common wealth cause namely of sedition and hath les of the nature of a sermon then Steuens oration
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
holy communion beginning pag. 526. diuis vij of the D. book AMongest diuers reasons browght to proue that the whole body of the church should so much as may be communicate â—n the holy supper togither he cauilleth â—t that alledged owt of S. Paul saying that he blameth those which did contentiously separate them selues whereas the Apostle vnder one kinde noteth al needeles sundring of the members one from another in that holy action That owt of S. Mathew 18 of two or three gathered in Christs name ys answered nether ys it denied but that two or three may communicate yf the other wil not at al onely yt ys said that where the other wil althowgh not so often as is conuenient yet that in such a case the three should for the reasons alledged whereunto he answereth nothing tarry for the rest his next diuision is answered in the 9 diuision which he taketh vp before by rending my book asonder that he might seem able to say somewhat which answer of myne vpon how good ground yt standeth let the reader iudg his reply whereunto is senseles where also his mervailing that I say the tvuelue vuere made Apostles after their first calling argueth his want considering that the ordeyning of them to be Embassadors throwghowt the world which is the vocation of their Apostleship was not vntil after the resurrection That which deceiueth hym is for that he considereth not that yt is the vse of the scripture in speaking of the beginninges of thinges to term them by the names which they had at the tyme of the writing and not which they had when that which they wrote was doen as in the names of Babel and Peleg c. the next requireth no answer In the next he accordeth that by ecclesiastical censures and ciuil punishmentes the rest of the church should be browght to communicate with the three where he manifestly forsaketh the book which leaueth yt free three seasons of the year onely excepted And the truth is yf it be conuenient that yt should be celebrated oftener yt is also meet that there should be punishmentes for the breach of that conueniency his exception against the proof of excommunication for want of doeyng this duty that to cut ovut his soul from the people signifieth to put to death and not to excoÌ„municate vttereth his want considering that the same commandement was giuen to Abraham in the gouernment of his how 's which was the church of god And yet that no ciuil sword was put into his hand ys manifest in that being a priuate man in the common wealth he dwelt in he had no power of lyfe and death But of this matter he may learn further other where His obiections against the Adm. and my allegation of canons ascribed to the Apostles are answered That the owtward vncleannes vnder the law may be easlier auoided then the inward which owght to kepe vs from the communion being so generally spoken is vntrue and refuted by me in the case of procuring the funeral of our friendes to which we are bound whereunto he answereth nothing nether can the vncleannes of lyfe which is priuate and not openly knowen hinder any oneles yt be such as men mean not to amend That weaknes of faith owght to withdraw vs from the communion is a manifest vntruth yt being instituted for the strenghtning of the weaknes thereof The examination of hym self is required not onely in the partaking of the communion but also in hearing of the vuord of god as whether he come with minde to be tawght and to folow or whether he come of curiosity or of custome or to please men and such like As for corruption of iudgment want of instruction in the vse of the sacrament open offenses and al such disorder of life as requireth separation by the churches ceÌ„sures they fal not into this case where is disputed not for what causes men owght to be put from the holy communion but for what causes they may withdraw them selues when they be by common and good policy of the church admitted Therfore al this is but an abusing of the tyme which is browght against that which I said that yf being of the church and able to examin them selues they be not fit for the hearing of the vuord nether are they fit for the receiuing of the coÌ„munioÌ„ whereby also may appear how vnworthily he doeth now the second tyme obiect contraryety with my self so openly refuted by expres wordes As for the reasons which I alledged to confirm this sentence with he once towcheth not whereunto I wil ad the iudgment of the auncient writers that he may learn to blush which not contented to haue reprehended yt here setteth yt in the beginning of his book as a dangerous point and palpable error Chrysostom writeth thus of the supper hovu tariedst thovu behynde I am thovu saist vnvuorthy then art thovu also vnvuorthy of the communication vuhich is in the prayers The like sentence he hath in another of his homilies uÌ„to the people of Antioche Ambrose saith he that is not fit to receiu the bread of the supper dayly is not fit once in a year August speaking of this matter sheweth that yf the synnes be not so great that one should be excoÌ„municated for them that then a man ovught not to separate hym self from the daily medicine of the lords body whereunto ad M. Bucer which disalowing the communion which is by the Minister aÌ„d one other and withal shewing that the rest of the church owght to be driuen vnto yt boeth alledgeth and aloweth that sentence of Chrysostom before rehersed In the next diuisioÌ„ of the cause of the superstitious fear of coming to the coÌ„munion let the reader iudg of coÌ„sidering that of the euil beginninges of lenton fast I haue spoken before and wil not suffer the D. to start away by mouing of other questions To this chapter belongeth the rest of the 15 Tracta where in the pag. 590 first diuision for his saying we read not that wemen receiued the supper he pretendeth M. Caluin and Zuinglius but they excuse not his rashnes For althowgh they haue the same wordes yet they match this cause with others which are necessary and which haue certein proof owt of the scripture althowgh not in expres wordes whereas he matcheth yt with those thinges which are by his own confession indifferent and not necessary giuing thereby to vnderstand that there is no better grownd of the one then of the other which reason being alledged to proue the occasion of triumph which he giuith here vnto the Catabaptistes and Anabaptistes he answereth not The three next diuisioÌ„s are answered Next vnto this foloweth another vnchangeable doctrine as yt lyeth pa. 603 of the D. book where althowgh the Answ dare not opeÌ„ly vndertake the defence of driuing of known papistes vnto the lords supper yet partly in trifling with the proofes browght for the
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
bene somewhat laboured in and now also shal haue her defence but short especially when as the Ans beside a heap of wordes open vntruthes dissembling and peruerting my argumentes hath almoste nothing worthy the answer For euen in this first diuision what an opē vntruth is yt that it ys one of our principles not to be lawful to vse the same ceremonies which the papistes did whē as I haue boeth before declared the cōtrary and euē here haue expresly added that thei are not to be vsed vuhē as good or better may be established what an abusing also is yt to affirm the mangling of the gospels and epistels to haue bene browght in to the church by godly and learned men not a word of proof being browght therefore which afterward he saith generally of al the Ceremonies in question beside the insufficiency of his answer otherwise to proue them not Antichristian which I haue before obserued what boeth vntruth and abusing the tyme is yt to reason against me as thowgh I had confessed al errors in our ceremonies taken away when I name expresly gros errors and manifest impieties Finally how single so led an argument is yt that we may retayn popish ceremonies because we say the churches are reformed and not transformed seing that as transforming may be in part or in whole so may also reforming and seing that the scripture noting the whole and total restoring of a man setteth yt forth as wel by renuyng as by transforming who can patiently bestow his trauail in such refuse as this is For the mayntenance of this reason that the Apostles in ceremonies conformed the Gentiles vnto the Iues and not contrarivuise the Iues vnto the Gentiles and therfore that the churches in the matter of ceremonies should be instituted rather according to the patern of the churches dressed vp before them then of the popish sinagog I refer the reader to that I haue already written That the lord forbad his people to doe some thinges vuhich in them selues vuere lavuful is manifest in the law That he hath shewed that the Christians haue conformed them selues vnto Idolaters in their church ceremonyes with approbation ether of the word or of Augustin is vntrue onely he shewed that the vse of thinges necessary owght not to be taken away for the abuse which he boeth oft and idly repeateth as that which is confessed Vuhere I shewed that the lord being careful to seuer his people by ceremonies from al straungers vuas so especially to seuer them from the Egiptians and Cananeans emongest vuhome they liued and amongest vuhome they vuent to liue he answereth that the Egiptians nether worshipped nor pretended the true god but the papistes doe which is before answered that the Gentiles had like ceremonies c. which is also answered that hauing certein ceremonies common with those from whome we differ wholy in substance of religion we may much more haue the same with the papistes from whom we differ but in certeyn substātial pointes The one part whereof is answered the other to take yt in the best sens a man can expound yt is vntrue For the Turkes beleue one god and so doe we and therefore we differ not in al substantial pointes from them And althowgh popery houldeth diuers thinges better then they yet the Turkes hould some thinges better then yt Vuhere I affirm yt more safe for vs to conform our indifferent ceremonies to the Turkes vuhich are far of then to the papistes vuhich are so near he chargeth me with diuers reproches boeth here and otherwhere but the reasons in this diuision wherof one is that the lord vsed the same vuisdome to vuardes his people another that there is greater fear of infection from those vuhich are near then from those vuhich are further of he toucheth not As for his reason that the Turk is a professed enemy vnto Christ and his name the Pope pretending the contrary the first is not altogither and in al respectes true For the Turk acknowledgeth our Sauior Christ a prophet and giueth the true Christians more rest vnder hym then the papistes doe vnder them Nether can the pretence of the name of Christ when the effect is contrary diminish the Popes faut seing beside the enmity against Christ the syn is rather increased by his hypocrisy Howbeit I wil not here dispute whether the Turkes or papistes are greater enemies yt is enowgh that they are boeth fallen from Christ the one by errors in the head pointes of his person the other by errors in the head pointes of his office in which respect as boeth their ceremōies are to be auoided so in that the papistes are nearer vs thē the Turkes theirs are more to be avoided then those of the Turkes That we doe not in any kinde of ceremonies conform our selues to the papistes requireth no confutation as that for the proof whereof the Ans must put owt the eyes and stop the eares of al. The rest of the fals pretence of Christian liberty is before confuted To that that contraries are cured by contraries and that as to establish Christs doctrine and discipline yt is necessary to abolish the popish doctrine and gouernment so to heal the infection crept in by the popish order of seruice yt is meet that an other vuere put in place he answereth that as in doctrine and discipline they haue some good so in ceremonies wherein he toucheth not the point of my reason For the cause why that good which is in Popery of the doctrine and discipline can not be changed is for that they are perpetual cōmandements in whose places no other can come but the ceremonies we speak of are changeable so that if ether better or but as good as they can be ordeyned yt is manifest that for the cause assigned those abused in popery owght to giue place Again whatsoeuer good they haue ether in doctrine or in discipline yt is none of theirs but the church is Therefore by his answer as no popish doctrine or discipline is fit for the church of Christ so are no ceremonies browght in by popery And in deed whē the ordinance of cōuenient church ceremonies procedeth of the light and knowledg of the word there being such darknes and ignorance in Popery yt is maruail if yt could shape owt one conuenient ceremony for the church of Christ The second sectiō of this diuision is not to the purpose To that I alledged of the vuay to bring a man from his vice to cary him as far from yt as may be which I made playn by examples of reforming dronkēnes and streightning of a crooked styk he disputeth against me as thowgh I allowed that a man might run from one vice for remedy against the other which is an open vntruth and vntollerable seing I added expresly that I did not alovu yt but onely that of tvuo euiles yt vuas the les whereunto he could not answer I
church is sleue rather then in matters of doctrine The determination of the goodnes of them boeth is fetched as hath bene shewed from the word of god if therfore the church is hand may slip in the one yt may doe so in the other And if a priuate man may sometyme in a matter of doctrine wake whē the church sleapeth he may doe the same in a matter of order But yf he vnderstand that the church is iudgment is to be preferred to a priuate mans when hers is framed according to the word of god and not his yt is in deed true but then his reason is a meer daliance and an open demaund of that in question Beside that this iudgment is not the opinion of a priuate man but of thowsandes and of those amōgest which diuers are in publik charge and autority Touching the next diuision I know that god is the autor of al truth and consequently the holy gost but I resisted this that al that speak yt speak yt moued by the holy gost which seemed to me to be your meaning And althowgh the knowledg of god which the wicked haue be his gift yet the vse of yt procedeth not from the spirit of god further then of his general working wherby they liue and are moued and wherby the Deuil hym self knoweth the same therefore that which in this case yow durst not affirm of the deuil yow owght not to haue affirmed of the wicked which are led by his spirit THE SECOND CHAPTER THAT the churches ovught to be conformed to the example one of an other ALthowgh to proue that as the churches of Christ ovught to be most vnlike the sinaguoges of Antichrist in their indifferēt ceremonies so they ovught to be most like one vnto another there were alledged three reasōs one owt of S. Paul tovuching the tyme of gathering for the poor the second of the comparison of the children and seruantes of noble men goyng for order and comelines sake in one liuery the third owt of the great Nicene ▪ Councel of the gesture in prayer yet in his answer he feareth not to say that I speak wtthowt any warrant of gods word as yf S. Pauls autority were no word of god with hym which yf I had abused why did he not conuince me And when he is compelled to confes that the vnity in ceremonies is to be wished I would know of hym why it is to be wished yf yt be not for that the word of god teacheth so Yf it do teach so and not by this place why doeth he not shew some apter but his cause falling here to the ground for want of answer he falleth to accusing that I break vnity If he mean as he owght holy yt is that which is in question Also that we are cause why vniformity is not obserued in our church which is likewise and before answered Then he asketh to what churches ours should conform yt self and why other reformed churches should not aswel frame them selues to ours his reason that we haue as good groundes of our doinges as they yf it be as it owght vnderstood of the ceremonies is stil the demaund of that in question But to leau to the iudgmēt of the reader vpō the allegations whether our ceremonies be as good as theirs for further contenting his question I answer that yf there be any ceremonies which we haue better then they they owght to frame thē selues to vs yf they haue better then we then we owght to frame our selues to thē yf the ceremonies were alike commodious the later churches should cōform them selues to the first as the younger dawghters vnto the elder for as S. Paul in the members where al other thinges are equal noteth yt for a mark of honor aboue the rest that one is called before another to the gospel so is yt for the same causes amongest the churches And in this respect he pincheth the Corinthes that not being the first which receiued the gospel yet they would haue their seueral maners from other churches Moreouer where the ceremonies are alike cōmodious the fewer owght to cōform thē selues vnto the moe forasmuch therfore as al the churches so far as I know of our confession in doctrine agree in the abrogatiō of diuers thinges which we retayn our church owght ether to shew that they haue doē euil or els she is found to be in faut that doeth not conform her self in that which she can not deny to be wel abrogated Nether doeth this bring in any more popedome thē he which teacheth that the younger dawghter should reuerēce the elder doeth teach that the elder hath autority to command the younger That owt of M. Caluin and Gualter onely serueth for filling for we confes that for indifferent ceremonies nether the churches owght to fal owt with them selues nor any member seuer hym self from the church But yf which he can not deny this be the duty of the churches to conform them selues one vnto another then there must be some to inform and admonish thē of this dutye Therefore to let pas the offences which the superstition in them worketh and to presuppose of them as much indifferency in the vse as there is in there nature yet he hath here manifestly condemned hym self For confessing that the churches in ceremonies owght to be like as much as is possible he endeuoreth notwithstāding with might and mayn that they should not onles al other wil conform them selues to ours In steed wherof he owght to haue confessed at the least some imperfection of our church in this behalf and haue addressed these admonitions of his vnto them which for difference in ceremonies make a departure from the church Beside that the froward spirites against which M. Caluin speaketh were those that stuk in the ceremonial Iudaism as the D. doeth now in the ceremonial papism and pressed them as the vnchangeable lawes of god which he cā not shew to be done of vs in any indifferent ceremony M. Gualters place so far as yt concerneth ceremonies hath the same answer THE THIRD CHAPTER of the first part AN other general faut of the seruice book is assigned in that yt mainteineth an vnpreaching ministery partly in appointing so long tyme of prayers and reading vuherby the les tyme can be spent in preaching but especially for that yt requireth nothing to be doen by the Minister vuhich a childe of ten yeares ould can not doe as vuel and as lavufully as that man vuherevuith the book contenteth yt self Here in the first point he gropeth at none dayes asking whether this or that be my meaning which I playnly declared in saying that the deuil vnder colour of lōg prayer draue preaching ovut of the church vnto the which reason he answereth nothing but asketh whether we can spend an hower better then in praiyng and hearing the scripture red whereunto I answer that yf with that hower he allow an other for the
sermon the tyme wil be longer then the age of some and infirmities of other some can ordinaryly wel bear whereūto also if another hower at the least be added for the celebration of the holy communion he may see that ether the preaching must be abbridged or not so due regard had of mens infirmityes Beside this there is to be considered the common infirmity wherby throwgh such continuance the powers of the minde standing so long bent are dulled and often also a moste dāgerous lothsomenes occasioned Against which our church as others haue doen should by a godly policy haue prouided where for this cause the whole Leiturgy or seruice is not ordinarily aboue an hower and a half Nether let any here obiect the papistes long seruice For beside that the rage of Idolaters hath alwayes bene more set on fire in the fals worship then the zeal of gods people in the tru yt owght to be considered that their prayer was more a lip-labour then any exercise of the minde and their churches rather stages to represent gay shewes vnto the eyes pleasant soundes vnto the eares and swete smels vnto the nose then any how 's for the children of god to meet in abowt any earnest work and also that they had respite betwene their Mattins and Mas. In the second reason he asketh whether a childe of ten year ould may minister the sacramentes c. no for sooth but yet as wel as he which can but barely read yf he haue the same calling which being that which I affirmed he is not able to moue with one word of reason After he supposeth of me as yf I had sayd that the book maynteineth an vnpreaching ministery because a childe can read yt adding that so I may say of the Bible because a childe can read yt also which is to open an vntruth For my reason is not because a childe of ten years can read yt but because yt requireth nothing to be doen by a Minister which such a childe can not doe And if the holy Bible which is far from yt should permit that one which can but read yt might be made a Minister or required no more of hym then that he should be able to read yt then I might wel say that the Bible maynteined an vnpreaching ministery Yf the order of the church doe not permit this then the charge lieth vpon the Bishops neckes which withowt any warrant haue so bouldly enterprised such a shameful act part of the next diuision is answered in this part the residue with the two next after yt in the former part of this book THE FOVRTH CHAPTER of the first part TO a third faut assigned in that the fruit that might othervuise be taken of the seruice is not receiued by reason that the minister readeth some in the hether some in the vpper part of the chauncel as far from the people as the vual vuil let hym goe he crieth owt of impudency corruption and falsifying for leauing owt these wordes except yt shal be othervuise determined by the Ordinary of the place Alas how should I be free or what armour may be giuen me against these vntrue accusations which could not escape the here For in the very next diuisiō I expresly mention this exception which he hath mangled and cut of from this diuision belike to the end there might be place to this surmise But vnto the reasons that yt renueth the fashion of the leuitical Priest vuhich vuithdrvu hym self from the people to talk vuith god alone Also that yf it be for the most edification that some part of the seruice should be said in the body of the church that then yt is not so vuhē other some is said in the nether some in the further end of the chauncel and other some in the further end of the same church Agayn that yf yt be expedient that he should haue his face tovuards the people in reading of some yt is vnmeet to haue his bakturned to them in other some last of al to the vndecency in trudging from place to place I say to al these reasons he answereth nothing worth the naming But the sum of his defence is that the Bishop hath power to order yt to the moste edification wherein how vnlawful yt is that he alone should haue the order hereof is before declared and how daungerous it is let the practis in this point be iudg For I am assuredly perswaded that the tenth church in England hath not al the seruice said in that place where the whole church may best hear yt And withal note as I said what a shameful disorder is committed in a matter so easely remedied The place of S. Luke is an vnchāgeable rule to teach that al that which is doen in the church owght to be doen where it may be best heard for which cause I alledged yt his cauil of the place of the font said of me to be at the church dore in steed that I should haue said ouer against the church door is vnworthy the answer especially cōsidering that I spake more fauorably for the book thē he which by this answer sendeth the minister for baptim beneath the church door And so also I leau to the iudgmēt of the reader what was the end of him that penned the book in this behalf seing he could hardly be ignorant that the places vsed customably in Popery were not the aptest for the vnderstanding of the hearers And this boeth separatiō of the Minister by Chauncel as Monckish as also the often shifting of the Ministers place as a thīg very absurd M. Bucer boeth generally in al places and particulerly in our church doeth cōdemn Ambrose hath bene answered as for M. Caluin he sheweth that althowgh our slaknes to beleue be euil which is cause that one sweareth yet that the oth is lawful considering that the vse of many thinges is pure vuhich proceed of an euil beginning whereby the reader may see how shamefully he would abuse hym for the slaknes of beleuīg which is the original of the oth can neuer be pure and the lawful oth occasioned hereon can neuer be but pure So that where M. Caluin referreth the pure vse vnto a thing diuers from the corrupt beginning and simply good the Ans referreth yt to the corcorrupt beginning it self his cauil of my vntrue dealing for changing his word good into not euil is vnworthy any answer THE SECOND PART OF this Tractate THE FIRST CHAPTER VVHEREOF being of holy daies is deuided into tvuo partes THE FIRST PART OF THE FIrst chapter of the ceremony of the Easter Natiuity and Vuhitson holy dayes TTe Treatise of the general fautes being ended I come to the particuler where I pas the eight first diuisions as those which haue no matter ether worth or requiring answer Before I come to the ninth which is of the prayers I wil dispatch the treatise of the holy dayes as it lieth page 538 of
Vuhat force there ys in the name of saintes dayes to make men beleue that they are instituted to their honour let the reader iudg of that which I haue written How much more doe they confirm this when boeth the corrupt custome and doctrine in popery hath forestalled the peoples mindes with that opinion whereunto his answer that I might much better reason against the names of Sonday and Moneday ys vntrue For first the vse of such thinges is not so free in ecclesiastical matters as in ciuil affaires Secondly our people hath not bene nusled vp in that filth of worshipping the Sun and Mone as they haue bene of the saintes in so much as the learned set apart there are few which know that there were euer any dayes obserued in the honour of the Sun or Mone Yf they had bene so nusled who seeth not but that yt had bene moste cōuenient for the rooting owt of that Idolatry to haue made a change of these names Thirdly yt ys knowen that good men after the example of Dauid which would not once defile his lippes with naming the Idols or Idolatrous thinges except yt were with detestation boeth absteyn from such names as much as the common vse wil suffer and desire the abolishment of them To my reason that as the lordes holy dayes are taken to be instituted to his honour so the saintes holy dayes may easely be thovught of the ruder sort to be instituted to their honour he answereth that the lords holy dayes are so called especially because the scriptures concerning hym are then red which is no answer For yf hys answer were true yet yt confessing by the way that they are taken in part to be instituted to the lords honour graūteth forthwith that there ys occasion giuen to the ruder sort to think that the Saintes dayes are in part instituted to their honour As for hys sentence owt of Augustin yt ys a meer abusing of the tyme as yf euery thing instituted to the honour of god were a sacrament or that a thing doen in remembrance of the lord may not or rather ys not doē to hys honour And here yt is to be noted that the D. ys taken in hys own nettes For he defendeth the keping holy of these Saintes dayes as they were vsed in the elder churches and as Ierome and Augustin mayntein thē Now hym self hath for hys defence alledged owt of Ierome that these dayes are obserued to the Martyrs and owt of Augustin that in them we honour the memoryes of martyrs Therefore hys escape that no man ys so mad as to think that by these dayes we doe any honour vnto the Saintes ys not onely an opē vntruth but directly contrary to that hym self maynteyneth Vuhat ignorance is in the land for want of teaching I leau to the readers iudgment of that which hath bene said To that I alledged that althowgh there vuere teaching yet yt vuere good that these names should not help to vnteach he answereth not Howbeit he goeth further asking whether for euery particular mans ignorance or abusing of yt the churchis order must be changed He may wel know that yf there be one man which abuseth yt throwgh ignorance there are moe then a thowsand and yf there were but one onely yet seing that man ys in danger to wrake hym self at this rok owght not the church rather to change this name then to giue occasion of destroying hym for whome Christ hath died cōsidering that of naming those holy dayes Saintes dayes there can be no fruit or profit assigned Hys exception against Augustins complaint of the multitude of Ceremonies that he speaketh not of holy dayes ys vnworthy of answer considering that he speaketh generally of al kinde of ceremonies likewise that he saith he speaketh of vnprofitable ceremonies For he disputeth simply against the multitude of Ceremonies vnder the gospel whereas yf they had bene but a few and yet vnprofitable he would therefore haue condemned them As for that he saith that ours are profitable and appoued by the custome of the whole church the first ys an asking of that in question the other ys an vntruth as doeth after appear Now whereas I said that in this ceremony of holy dayes vue excede euen the Iues he maketh hys accountes so that they as he saith had the greater numbre But what Auditor wil alow these accountes of yours First of al therfore yow must strike of the supposed holy day of Iudith for the reason shewed in another place likewise those of the Makabites as those whereof there is no certeinty and boeth Iudiths and the Makabites togither as those which yf euer they were houlden were houlden many hundreth yeares after the giuing of the law For the which cause the two dayes of Hesther althowgh they differ as far from the other as heauen from earth owght not to come into this account For this comparison is not instituted betwene vs and any estate of the Iues vnder the law but with the ordinary estate and with that which was giuen in mount Synay by the ministery of Moses For that is boeth S. Augustins meaning and yt is a fowl wart in the churches face vnder the gospel to be so ceremonius as the ordinary estate of the church was vnder the law There remayn onely three feastes of the Pasouer whitsontyde and the Tabernacles vnto euery one whereof yow ascribing seuen raise the sum of one and twenty holy dayes But here also yow are fowly ouer reckened For the first onely and the last day of euery of those three seuēs were holy in the rest which were betwene them althowgh there were extraordinary sacrifices yet men might after diuine seruice folow their ordinary vocations Oneles therfore yow make a far other rowl of the Iuish holy dayes then yow haue doen hether toward yow see that my saying that vue haue more thē dubble as many holydayes as they ys mayntenable and deserueth no such censure as yow giue yt For any thing that I could euer learn we are by the lawes as much bownd from labour vpon the saints dayes as vpon the lords day wherein I report my self to that which may be knowen hereof the rest ys answered In the next diuision there is nothing but a manifest piller of popery with shameful owtrage vnto the holy gost in that he calleth the appeal to the scriptures and example of the Apostles from certeyn customes of the churches which were more then a hundreth yeares after Christ an vnlearned shift which is before towched In the next the testimony of Socrates ys faithfully cyted of me As for that he answereth that by euery one he meaneth not euery person but euery countrey or people alledging to that purpose another place in the same chapter where saith he ys put euery particuler people he ys abused For there is no more mention of people in that place then in that which I alledged Beside that in
Apostles tyme and after and to apply yt to this wherein first he cyteth Musculus which thincketh yt not vnlikely that the disciples repeated the hymn after our Sa. Christ to whome I answer that there is no likelyhood that the disciples repeated the whole song after him onely as the nature of some hymnes doeth require yt may be there was a common foot of the song wherewith the disciples answered vnto our S. Christ synging first And thys no dout is Musculus meaning That owt of Pliny is nothing to purpose yt being confessed that the whole church may sing psalmes with the Minister where also his obiection of dissent with my self in this point ys easely answered namely that the practis of the Apostolike church hauing bene such in the psalmes and not in the other prayers is cause enowgh why that which ys conuenient in one ys not so in the other Beside that there is no los of tyme in synging the psalmes considering that the people sing togither with the Minister Then he alledgeth Actes the 4 that in praying al the Apostles lifted vp their voices The greek is they vuith one accord lifted vp a voice to god not voices so that S. Luke noteth that there was but one voice amongest them al which because yt was with consent he doeth aptly cal the voice lifted vp of them al and wherewith they al prayed euen as he after attributeth the exhortation made by one of them towching the chois of Deacons vnto them al. Vuhere al must needes coÌ„fes that ether one onely spake in the name of al or which god forbid there shal be ascribed vnto the holy Apostles ether a chiledish folye whilest twelue one after another propounded the same wordes at one tyme and in one assembly or els a barbarous confusion whilest they spake al at once Here also he greatly forgetteth hym self For setting down that that part of prayer which consisted in confession owght especially to be repeated after the Minister his pretended examples are of that part of prayer which standeth in asking and thanckesgiuing so that yt seemeth by hys proofes that these should be especially repeated at the least that they should be as wel as the confession Against that alledged for vs of the practis of the church in Iustins tyme he answereth that I left owt vue al rise and pray togither which is to fond as thowgh our church prayed not with the mynister when yt onely attendeth vnto the prayers albeit yt reherseth them not after hym And this form of church prayer noted of Iustin ys noted also of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria to consist in that the people attending to the prayers sounded Amen togither which may be also an answer to that of Basil The practis cyted owt of Chrysostome owght not to be admitted considering that in the same place he sheweth that as the Minister conceiued one prayer for the people so the people conceiued another diuers from yt for the Minister which how vnmeet yt is in the church of god and publikly hath bene before declared That I vsed that form in my sermons for any thing that I know I learned yt of the book which vse forsomuch as some yeares after whilest I yet preached I corrected in my self yt declareth that I first misliked and condemned my self in that point or euer I found faut with the book The next diuisioÌ„ I leau to the readers iudgment To this treatise belongeth that which commeth after of singing the psalmes syde by side where he requireth proof of that I alledged that yt is not enovugh to pray vuith the heart vuhen a maÌ„ may pray vuith the voice also which is proued by as many places as we are bidden to syng vnto the lord and in that the lord wil be serued with al the strenght we haue so that where nether inconuenience of ecclesiastical pollicy nor want of health or such like hynder there the lord contenteth not hym self with the heart oneâ—es the voice be giuen also And of this the example of Anna which hym self bringeth against me ys a manifest proof which wagged her lippes when for greif she could not speak owt His proof owt of the Corinthes as also whatsoeuer he hath in this diuision of contrariety with my self is a meer mispending of the tyme considering that I boeth added expresly that vue ovught to pray vuith the voice vuhere yt may be and had before declared the inconuenience of doeing so in the other prayers Vuhere I shewed that this kinde of synging ovught so much more to be suspected for that the Deuil hath goen about to get yt autority by deriuing yt partly from Ignatius partly from heauen he answereth that yf yt came from Ignatius as Socrates sayth yt is not the les to be estemed which is to induce the reader to beleue this fable that the Angels were heard to syng so from heauen For Socrates saith that Ignatius toke yt of them so that in this fable he had rather beleue Socrates whome before he accused of heresy then Theodoretus whom he wil not suffer to haue bene euer towched with heresy Hether perteineth that which is page 606 where vnder pretence of indifferent thinges he seemeth to alow of Organes which beside the popish abuse renueth Iudaism and hath now no thing perteyning to edification one of the rules wherby indifferent ceremonies should be squared His defence of his profane prouerb matching mad men wemen and children togither out of S. Paul calling the men of Crete lyars ys a shameful profanation of the scripture For where S. Paul set hys mark of one onely I le he setteth hys vpon the whole boeth sex of wemen and age of children throwgh the world And where S. Paul did yt by reason of hys ministery towardes them he doeth yt withowt Last of al where S. Paul did yt truly he doeth yt vntruly Vnto the vndecency of the scraping at the name of Iesus he answereth that the same is in hauking as yf the case were like the natural necessity requiring the one and no necessity requiring the other Nether ys there any vndecency in hauking yf as yt is meet euery man doe yt seuerally as his need moueth and not as somewhere yt is doen altogither That alledged of ingendring a greater estimation of the Son of god then of the father or holy gost in that his name is curtesied vnto and not the other he derideth but answer he can giue none Vuhere the reason is manifest especially with the simpler which esteme that better to which more honour is giuen so that where this is not beaten down by continual teaching yt can bread no other opinion And althowgh preaching did abownd yet the ceremonies owght to be conformable and not contrary to the doctrine beside the other inconuenience before noted After he saith yt hath continued many hundred yeares so hath popery And I beleue when he shal be driuen to shew the
let the reader iudg for Doctor I marueil what playner testimony can be then that I alledged owt of Augustine which noteth the vse of the church to haue bene to run to the church vuith their children in danger of death and that when some had opinion that their children could not be saued if they were not baptized Verely yf there were euer any tyme when in the peace of the church baptim in priuate howses should haue bene vsed yt was then I would also know of hym what he wil answer to that which is noted of a Christian Iue desperately sik of the palsey that was with his bed caryed to the place of baptim Vuhere nether his greuous siknes nor the inconuenience of the cariadg in his bed could purchase hym baptim in his priuate how 's doeth yt not manifestly appear how contrary the practis of the church was then vnto this which he would here mayntein what wil he answer to this that those which were baptized in their beddes were thereby made vnapt to haue any place emongest the Clergy as they cal them doeth yt not leau a note of infamy in those which had procured that baptim should be ministred in priuate howses For yt can be by no likelihood vnderstood of those which being caried in their beds were baptized in the ordinary place of meeting what vnto the Emperours decree which vpon autority of the auncient lawes and of the Apostles forbiddeth that the holy thinges should be administred in any mans priuate how 's Finally what wil he answer to the practis of the purest and best reformed churches this day in Sauoy Germany Fraunce and diuers other which administer the Sacramentes onely in the ordinary meetinges How dare he say that there is no Doctor of this iudgment when as whole churches ould and nue and therefore their Pastors and Doctors ether al or at least the moste part appear to haue bene of this iudgment Some also of the learnedest of our dayes haue noted their iudgment here of particulerly and to hym that hath the commodity of bookes yt wil not be hard to finde others To this defens he hath added in diuision 7. page 515. that M. Caluin gathereth Iohn Baptist to haue bene circumcised in â—is fathers hous which can not be wel concluded For there is nothing spoken of S. Luke 1. chapter 58 verse c. to haue bene doen in the how 's which is not doen in diuers places with vs and others where the parentes friendes come to the how 's to accompany the childe vnto the church As for the question of the name beside that yt is sometyme talked of in the how 's when notwithstanding the childe is appointed to be caried to the churche yt must be considered that yt was here necessarily moued with the mother which kept the how 's before they went to the synagog for that Zachary the father to whom the naming of the childe by common order doeth belong could not speak And I would gladly know of hym what iust cause there should be to circumcise the childe in the priuate how 's except he wil withowt al ground say that Iohn Baptist was sik which if he doe yt is easely refuted for that then the parentes would haue differred the circumcision which could not be ministred withowt present danger vnto to the childe Yt appeareth therefore that Iohn Baptist was caried vnto the Synagog to be circumcised yf he were not yet for so much as he was circumcised at home withowt any cause of necessity ether iust or pretended by hym this circumcision in the how 's can not help hym Yt is true that M. Caluin doeth not of necessity require a teÌ„ple nether doe we but first he contenteth not hym self as the D with a fevu vuitnesses but wil haue some number of the faithful meet to make a body of a church secondly he wil haue yt doen vuith a sermon and thirdly by hym vuhich is acknovuledged for Pastor And al these he wil haue necessarily Yf the D. like of M. Caluins iudgment in this matter let hym not spare yea he precisely misliked that yt should Be ministred in a priuate how 's euen in the tyme of the supposed necessity Now to return where he affirmeth that the church is election should towching the chusers as wel vary by persecution as the place of administring the word and Sacramentes yt ys fond I confes yt meâ—â— that as the word and Sacramentes euen so the election made â—â—enly in the tyme of peace should in persecution be made in secret But because he draweth me hither he owght to vnderstand that this maketh against the election by the bishop alone For as in persecution althowgh the place be changed yet the same person owght to administer the word and Sacramentes which did administer them in in peace and in peace which did in persecution so althowgh the place of the electioÌ„ change yet as touching the persons which chuse they owght to be the same boeth in the tyme of peace and persecution To the cause I assigned why our Sau. Christ held his holy supper in a priuate how 's that being ioyned vuith the pasouer yt might better appear that yt had an end and that this is in place of yt vuhich consideration can haue no place vuith vs he answereth that thereby appeareth that yt is not of the substance of the sacrament which I confes taking substance for that withowt which yt may be a sacrament and so his answer is nothing to purpose That vpon occasion yt may be ministred in a priuate how 's I graunt if that priuate how 's be the place for the church to meet in Hereto also maketh that the lord to kepe the sacrifices in tymes past in iust estimation would not permit that the flesh should be eaten any where then in the place which god did chuse for his seruice Vue therefore hauing Sacramentes more excellent then they owght by so much more to be careful least throwgh administration of them in such obscure places withowt any necessity we draw them into contempt The next is answered Hetherto belong the 5 first diuisions of the 6 chapter page 526. to the first whereof he can answer nothing sauing that he peruerteth my wordes which desire onely that the antiquity of hovus Communions be not preiudicial vnto the truth considering the like antiquity in other abuses of thâ— supper How the first and second diuision make against his cause is manifestly shewed in the fift diuision which as his wont is he rent in sonder to finde hym talk In which fift diuision his answer which supposeth yt necessary to quiet trobled consciences is insufficient For if it had bene so necessary a thing to the quieting of their consciences the Apostle S. Iames as yt is wel obserued speaking of the visitation of the sik and of their comfort especially vuould neuer haue omitted that And as for the consciences
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.
shutting of thē owt partly castīg in other matter of his own priuily and as it were vnder the ground he maynteyneth his former rashnes of saying that the Admo were good patrones of the papistes for maynteining that papistes owght not to be thrust into the lordes supper There was alledged that the scripture vuhich forbiddeth to haue any familiarity vuith notorius offēders doeth much more forbid that they should be receiued to the cōmuniō To this he answereth owt of M. Caluin his maruelous vnfaithful dealing wherein hath bene before noted I say maruelous because there can be hardly any of so smal perceiuerāce as not to vnderstand the difference betwene the Anabaptistes which thereupon falsly gathered that a man might not communicate when any such open offendor was admitted vnto the communiō and betwene the Adm. which houldeth that the papistes ovught not to be admitted vnto the lordes supper which is iustly concluded of yt To that alledged that our Sau. Christ instituted his supper amōgest his disciples ād those vuhich vuere vuithin he answereth first that Iudas was present yet not of the church but withowt which is a foul error For althowgh in some signification he were not of the church yet he was boeth within and as towching the owtward calling wherof our question is of the church also But vnto this I haue alredy answered Secondly he chargeth me with a gilty conscience for that cyting S. Paul I nether quoted the Epistle nor chapter which how vnworthy an accusation it is let the reader iudg But if yt be a good argument that he hath a gilty conscience which leaueth the testimony vnquoted let the face of his conscience be looked on by the glas which I haue set before hym in an other place How vntrue it is that no papist with vs is admitted to the communion which he affirmeth let the reader iudg To that I sayd that papistes not to be admitted vnto the holy supper ovught to be compelled to hear the vuord of god he obiecteth as contrary that I had said before that if they be not meet to receiu the communion nether be they to hear the vuord which is a meer mispending of tyme For I added expresly and that twise As many as be of the church from which I had before shut owt the papistes In that the Admo vuil not haue men come constreynedly to the holy Communion they take not away the punishment against those which owght to present them selues And their saying hath an easier defence then his otherwhere that the book wil not haue men compelled to come to the communion For the punishment of such is therfore taken that afterward they may come in diligence and good wil. But if notwithstanding that punishment yt be manifestly perceiued that they come with no affection but constreynedly then the Adm. would haue such put by which is their meaning and a iudgment agreable to the word of god to the rest in this chapter I answer not Hereunto ad that of the examination of those whose knowledg of the mistery of the gospel is douted of as yt standeth in his book page 592. which examination he is not affraid to deny to be necessary or commanded by the word of god his first reason is because that in the Apostles tymes no such would offer them selues which is a manifest vntruth as may be gathered of that I haue said and by that the seed of the vuord of god is taken ovut of the heart of diuers that profes the gospel which notwithstanding ether throwgh hypocrisy in desire to be counted to haue the same knowledg with others or insensiblenes of not feeling their want wil offer them selues And if there were none such then yet forsomuch as there be such amongest vs that answer is insufficient considering that the scripture conteyneth remedy not onely against the corruptions in the tyme of the Apostles but in al tymes His second reason that offering them selues so it is their own onely faut is a crauing of that in question For that it is onely their faut and that the gouernours of the church haue no commandement to look to yt are the same in effect His third reason that if yt had bene so necessary S. Paul would haue spoken of yt here especially is to fond considering that the Apostle writeth onely ether of such fautes as were in that church or of matters whereof his iudgment was asked That also owt of M. Caluin is meerly idle For it is one question whether a priuate man vnder coulor of an vnmeet person admitted to the supper owght to withdraw hym self and another whether such a one should be admitted by the gouernours of the church his answer maketh also as much to proue that knowen whoremongers should not be driuen to repentance before they come to the communion as knowen papistes considering that it belongeth not to priuate men to take in hand the correction of them when they present them selues Against that alledged of the commandement to the Leuites to prepare the people to the receiuing of the Pasouer vuhich vuas the same vuith them that the holy supper is vuith vs he excepteth and that confidently and with reproches that it is abrogated whose shameful dealing herein let al the world iudg of considering that by how much our sacrament is excellenter then theirs by so much owght there to be greater care and diligēce in preparing the people thereto But of this more hath bene said otherwhere After he excepteth that the text is that they should prepare not examin which is friuolous and preuented in that I added that examination is a part of preparation So that he that commādeth the whole must needes doe the part whereunto he answereth not but affirmeth yt manifest that the Leuites vsed no such examination of which manifestnes there is not a letter in the text The contrary by al likelihood is to be intended considering that diuers of the people nue come owt of ignorance and Idolatry had need of particular trial against which the marginal note maketh not seing exhortation may wel stand with examination and the nature of a note is not to lay owt thinges at large That the papistes may as wel vse this for auriculer confession is so placed that yt may be taken that the Iues vsed auricular confession as a ceremony vnder the law which is vntrue and so yt is propounded as if there were as good ground in the word of that as of thys which beside the vntruth is ouerturned of his own wordes confessing that examination may be vnles he wil say that auriculer confession may be likewise his argument which he renounceth is as I haue framed yt whereof let the reader iudg as also of the Admo meaning OF THE AVTORITY OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE IN CAVSES ECclesiastical Tract the tvuelfth and tvuentith according to the D. page 694. THere ys a proper place where the D.