the two next chapters be answered The 6 chapter is of the ceremonies in the Solemnization of mariage page 723. where for the mayntenance of the ring with the fond ceremonies thereof and of the vncomely wordes of worshipping with the body taken onely from popery there is likewise nothing worth answer that of the deuising of nw signes to teach by being before confuted THE VII CHAPTER OF THE second part of this Tractate to vuching the ceremonies in burial pag. 727. HOw needful my preface was to preuent vurāglers let the reader iudg Likewise of the reasons the Adm. vseth which he is not affraid not onely to deny to be good but to be any at al. How little Tertullians autority owght to prevail in establishing funeral prayers hereof yt may be knowen not onely that he would thrust diuers fond ceremonies vpon the church as necessary but for that in another book this oblation as he termeth yt for the dead he maketh of the like necessity with those that are commanded in the scripture Vuhether yt mayntein in the mindes of the ignorant an opinion of praying for the dead must be in the readers iudgment putting hym in minde that yf notwithstanding the ordinary prayers so oft red there be some so ignorant to think that Morning and Euening prayer is nothing but the popish Mattins and Euen song in English how much more wil they iudg the same of the funeral prayers which are not so ordinary That there were no such prayers in the Apostles tyme is shewed by a manifest reason of the scripture which setting forth the smalest matters in Burial vuould not haue houlden bak this being so vueighty by which circumstance his exception of negatiue argumentes in autority being ouerthrown he hath nothing to answer And beside that he is neuer able to proue that al the churches vsed yt yt is before shewed what truth Augustins sentence is of which would make al Apostolical that is generally obserued That the Apostles example owght here to haue preuailed is shewed diuis 6 which is that yf funeral sermons had bene so fit as is pretended the Apostles vuould neuer haue lost such an opportunity of preaching whereunto he answereth not Hether also serueth that forsomuch as there vuas no prescript form of funeral prayers vnder the lavu yt is not meet there should be any novu which reason beside an vnmodest triūph receiueth no more answer thē the other where he owght to learn that of al other yt is moste effectual First for that a multitude of ceremonies was more agreable to the estate of the people of god vnder the law then yt is now vnder the gospel Then for that by how much more they had not so clear sight of the resurrection of the dead as we by so much they had more need of these thinges then we To that that the Minister hauing othervuise necessary dutyes as many as he can turn hym to hath notvuithstanding by this meanes anue charge laid vpon hym he answereth yt is no charge but his dutye to preach and to pray which is vntrue For althowgh yt be his duty to doe boeth yet yt is not his dutye to doe them then yf yt be then he must of necessity doe yt nether can this ceremony be abolished and so the Ministers in other reformed churches which doe yt not are thereby condemned where he asketh why he should not doe this aswel as his own busines verely amōgest other reasons this also is one that to the end he may haue some tyme for his own busines the church owght not to charge hym with thinges which are not necessary To that that mourning apparel prouoketh sometyme immoderate sorovu he answereth that so we should not approch the bed nor graue of the dead which is insufficient For yt is one case of thinges dutiful and commanded or whereof we haue great vse and another of those which are not so In the one gods vocation is warrant enowgh against al inconueniences which is not so in those which we take vp of our selues And yt maketh against hym For hauing by reason of our vocation meanes enow to strike the wound of sorow so deep into vs as is needful we owght not to seek others of our own brayn The exāples whereby this was set forth he answereth not And hereof the reader may see also that profitable ceremonies in thinges indifferent may be maynteyned althowgh this fal As for that he saith that Cyprian and Augustine do not so much condemn mourning apparel as immoderate sorow yf they condemn yt at al yt is enowgh to cōuince his extreme bouldnes in al ledging an antiquity for hym which maketh against hym But yf he would thereby insinuat that they misliked not of this ceremony these be their wordes let mē iudg of his dealing vue ovught not saith Cyprian to take blak garments vuhen the faithful vuhich are deceased haue receyued vuhite apparel nether must vue giue occasion that the heathen should iustly blame vs that vue lament those as lost vuhich vue affirm to liue Concerning Augustine he writeth thus By vuhat reason should vue dy blak garmentes for the dead oneles yt be that vue vuould in ioyning them vuith our lamentation declare thereby that the deceased vuere very infidels and miserable These are my brethren vnmeet they be straunge they are vnlavuful And if they vuere not vnlavuful yet they are vndecent As for the continuance of yt with any allowance further then from the tyme of the heresy of the papistes which be not the church of god he sheweth not The rest in this diuision is not worth the naming The first argument against the inconuenience of funeral sermons hath the same mayntenance with the first of the third diuision To the next reason of the sodein and consequently for the most part negligent preaching he opposeth as a contrariety with my self that I preferred a simple sermon made euery day to that which is made onely once in a moneth which is onely to mispend the tyme For althowgh I preferred yt to the other yet I approued not that one onely Minister except he haue rare giftes should preach euery day why he can not haue sufficient warning is manifest yf he refuse he is thereby loden with displeasure of his parishoners in that he doeth not as other which is hurtful to his ordinary ministery To the reason of acceptation of persons in that sermons at the burial of the rich nether be nor are able to be made at the burial of the poor he answereth that yt is alone as if the Minister not able to preach euery day should not therefore preach once a weke Vuhich is vntrue considering that his ordinary ministery is commanded of god where this is but a deuise of men and considering that in the ordinary preaching there is no acceptation of persons whether yt be doen once or often in a week so that althowgh preaching
his wont is he doeth onely say so proof he bringeth none And as I for my part confes that there cometh not to my minde wherby I could precisely conclude yt owt of the ould Testament So I am assured that he is not able to proue that which he saith But that which the D. affirmeth otherwhere that it was onely at Ierusalem is vtterly vntrue For Iosaphat at one tyme set in Iudges in euery vualled citye throvughovut the kingdome of Iuda which of what sort they were namely in part ciuil in part ecclesiastical appeareth by the Iudges placed in Ierusalē And to thē men had recours to in matters of greater difficulty according to the causes if ciuil to the ciuil if ecclesiastical to the ecclesiastical iudgment where owght not to be forgotten the nūbre of cities in one onely tribe as it might be in york sheer to the numbre of a hūdreth and twelue least that the reader should measure the numbre of their cityes with ours So that where the Answ saith that therewas but one Senate in al the twelue tribes it is found that there were in one onely tribe at the least a hundreth ant twelue ecclesiastical Elderships Vuhether it may be cōcluded owt of the nue Testament that euery synagog of the Iues had this Eldership considering that the pollicy of the church now was in this point taken from the Iues church I leau it to the reader to iudg of that which I haue alledged wherevnto aideth the custome of the Iues vnto this day which in euery of their synaguogues haue their Elders Likewise Ieromes testimony of which it may be certeinly collected that he estemed that the Iues had their Elders in euery Synagog For he sheweth that they chose of the vuisest in their cōpany for gouernours vuhich should asvuel admonish those that had any corporal polution to absteyn from the assemblies as to reproue the breakers of the ceremonies of the Sabbat now seing ther was the same vse of these admonitions and reproofes as wel in vplandish synaguoges as in those which were plāted in the cities it foloweth necessarily that there were Elders aswel for them as for the other At the least the nue Testamēt in marking these Elders which it calleth cheif of the Synagog in diuers quarters doeth manifestly ouerthrow the D. which saith that they were onely at Ierusalē vpō al which matter appeareth how extremely bould yow are in your affirmatiōs which beside these two before mētioned say also that the Eldership was not alwaies no not in persecution wherein not to enter a nue field for euery light word yow cast forth what reason I pray yow cā yow assign why sometimes there should be an Eldership vnder pecsecutiō and other some tymes none cōsidering that yow imagin this Eldership to be in place of a Christian Magistrate whereby it must needes folow that his seat being void in tyme of persecution it owght to be occupied by the Eldership which yow fancy to be his Lieftenāt whether the D. pincheth the churches where with a Christian Magistrate the Eldership stil remayneth which he here denieth let the reader iudg of his former book where he affirmeth yt iniurious to the Magistrat and ful of confusion also that it can not nor owght not to be as in the Apostles tymes c. ▪ yea let hym iudg of this diuision For after that he graunteth to Princes to commit their autority to the church if they list then which there is nothing more vntrw he addeth whether it be wel doen I wil not determin wherein I besech yow mark first what contraries he speaketh For he doeth determin precisely that ciuil Magistrates may commit their right and autority to these Elders if they wil and yet he wil not determin whether it be wel doen or no. wheras if he would not haue determined of the one he should haue suspended his iudgment of the other for thus he assureth them they may doe that whereof he wil make them no assurance that it is wel doen. Secondly it is to be obserued that where the question was of the Bishops receiuing of ciuil autority from the Prince he maketh it not onely lawful but conuenient yea necessary that it should be deriued from the Prince to the Bishop but here towardes the Eldership he saith yt can not be practised withowt intollerable contentions and extreme confusion So that the Bishop Archdeacons and Deanes which with vs are the deepest churchministers may exercise yf the Prince wil commit yt vnto them euen the highest ciuil iurisdiction and that to the singular advancement of the church but these Elders whose office in the church is not such but that boeth they haue and may folow some ciuil trade of lyfe may not receiue that power of the Magistrate which he vntrwly affirmeth that they had in tyme of persecution on les al by and by fal vpon heapes In one and the same church the Bishop the Dean the Archdeacon and for a need some of the Prebendaryes may haue beside their ecclesiastical iurisdiction ciuil autority but these Elders althowgh they were but two in numbre may in no wise vse any This difference verely riseth not in the breadth of shoulders wherby they are able to cary al this and the Elders none but vpon the widenes of the throat which as the graue is neuer filled Thirdly it is to be obserued that the D. which for his own profit stretcheth the power of the Prince beyond al boundes here as yf he had to doe with a cheuerel scepter draweth it in For he giueth more liberty herein vnto the Magistrates of smal common wealthes then vnto monarches For to them he seemeth sometime to leau yt at liberty whether they wil communicate their autority vnto these Elders or retayn it with them selues but vnto kinges and Princes he wil in no wise permit yt Vuherein also he is contrary to him self which in another place saith that the office of the ciuil Magistrate may be committed vnto whome soeuer it pleaseth hym best to like of If that be true and this iurisdiction of the Elders were as he vntruly saith belonging to the ciuil Magistrate why might not the Prince commit yt vnto these Elders as for his reason that so euery parish should be a kingdome yt cometh to be answered in another place To that I alledged of the necessity of the Eldership because the Pastor can not haue his ey in euery corner of his parish c. he answereth an able Pastor is able to doe al required of a Pastor which is no answer at al. For that is not the question but this whether he be able to doe whatsoeuer church gouernment belongeth to the wealth of his church which because he durst not affirm or affirming it had nothing to proue yt he slipped away after this sort And now that he vnderstandeth that this reason is confirmed by M. Peter Martyr I trust hereafter he
can doe any thing in the gouernment of the church but the Pastor alone he must needes confes that that wchich may be owght to be for support of the Pastor his other answer is before confuted Secondly yt was alledged that S. Paul so loeth to lay any vnnecessary charge vpon the church yet enioyned this ministery vnto the poor and persecuted churches The strēght of which reason lyeth in this that some contributiō vuas necessary to their mayntenance then vuhere as novu in tyme of peace this ministery may be vuithovut al charges vnto the church To thys in sted of answer he frameth other argumentes of his own wherewith he dalieth skowreth vp his ould stuf of widowes and the ciuil Magistrate before answered alledgeth the pouerty of some parishes the vnwillingnes of other some to contribute which is a meer trifling For seing the pouerty of the churches could not exempt them from this charge when they were much poorer as appeareth by S. Paul seing also yt may be now withowt the charge of the church as appeareth by the practise of the churches which are so gouerned in these dayes where there is not a penny alowed to any Elder ether he owght to confute this or blush to set down that for answer yet he is not afraid after to put yt for a reason against the Eldership whervnto may be added that the churches in persecution nether those now nor other in tymes past could haue such helpes of howses or landes appropriated to the fineding of their ministery as the churches with vs but were driuen to pay for al of their own purs And not that onely but cōstreyned to pay their tythes or other exactions to the Idolatrous priesthood of that place where they abode which we are freed from vnder a Christian Magistrate To the third reason that the declyning of a popular rule or that of the best hath not so easy redres vnder a Tyrant as vnder a Christian magistrate he saith men in persecution are not desirous of honor c. which in a maner is as much to say as men in persecution ceas to be men and is vntrue as appeareth boeth in the Apostles tymes and after as I haue shewed Secondly he answereth that the gouernours thē were but during the pleasure of such as ppointed them wherof he bringeth no profe at al and is likewise vntrue considering that they were chosen to remayn so long in their office as they behaued them selues vnblamably or at the least vntil a certeyn term before which they could not by any equity but vpon their faut or their own desire be put owt In the first of which two cases they are somewhere now as they were then and in the later they may if it seme expedient euen now as wel as then so that here is no difference at al betwene those and these tymes Nether doeth he consider that the gouernours being corrupt the greatest part of the church is commonly led away with them In which case the church is withowt remedy vnder persecution when notwithstanding she hath an easy remedy vnder a Christian Magistrate Thirdly he saith that this graunted the argument foloweth not reason he sheweth none but open askinges of that in question And whether it folow wel that for so much as there ys les inconuenience in the gouernment of the Eldership vnder a Christian magistrate then vnder a Tyrant therfore it may be better vnder hym then vnder a Tyrāt let al the world iudg his owtcourses as also his open vntruth that I confes the church gouernment to be a monarchy I pas by I onely said that it is a monarchy in respect of our Sau. Christ which is nothing to that purpose he alledgeth yt for In the fourth that the Elders could not then meet vuithovut danger vuhich they may doe novu and therfore that the gouernment by one onely as of the Bishop had bene if euer then most conuenient he answereth that it was not so dangerous which is contrary to al reason and experience Then he saith the church must be subiect to the ciuil magistrate whereby as appeareth boeth in this diuision and in the next he meaneth nothing els but that yt owght to allow of that church gouernment which the Magistrate wil appoint althowgh yt be diuers from the Apostles which is a fat begging of that in question his first and third answers also towch not the cause at al. Vuhere against his distinction that this gouernment of Elders may be in a Cytie but not in a Realm I alledged that it hath had place by his ovun confession in a vuhole Realm he saith that that is true where euery church is as yt were within yt self a common wealth as in Fraunce and other persecuted churches wherein he doeth shameful iniury to al those churches of god and to the Apostles them selues which vsed that order in ascribing vnto them as thowgh they made new common wealthes or liued not vnder the same form of ciuil gouernment were not obedient vnto the same ciuil lawes and to the same Magistrates which the Idolatres them selues were what one ether action or property can yow assign in an Eldership vnder a kingdome which should cause this rent that there should be so many common wealthes and so many kingdomes as there are Elderships why also doeth this Eldership make a greater rent in a monarchy where one gouerneth then in a common wealth where many gouern If yow think therfore because a monarchy is greater then a common wealth wherby there must be moe Elderships in the one then in the other beside that the argument is nawght that also wherevpon it is grounded is vntrue For there are common wealthes where many rule greater then the monarchies where one onely gouerneth as Rome in tymes past Venys within our remembrāce and such like Vuhere I alledged also that by his reason a monarchy should not be good in the common vuealth because the gouernment of one is good in a hovushould c. He answereth that the autority of the Master of the howshould derogateth not from the Princes but the Eldership doeth which is his accustomed beggery where in deed the autority of a Master of a howshould approcheth nerer vnto the kinde of gouernment of the Magistrate as that which hath corporal punishment annexed vnto yt then the autority of the Eldership which meddleth not that way And because I am entred into that example I would know of hym which wil haue other gouernmentes fashioned to the form of gouernment of the common wealth whether in a common wealth where many haue equal autority the magistrate may ordeyn that the father of the houshould shal not rule his own how 's alone or be cheif in yt but shal haue his wife of like autority or some of his seruantes quarter Master If he be ashamed of this then he seeth that the wal of al his defence against the discipline of the
poor in euery church the vse of this office in euery church is manifest For further confirmation of which point the reader may haue recours to that I haue proued before that in euery church according to gods institution there owght to be a Bishop especially when the Ans hym self wil not deny but the Bishop and Deacon should goe togither Likewise vnto that which hath bene sayd of the Eldership in this behalf considering that some of the reasons are common to boeth As for the first of his exceptions that the Deacons of one city may serue al the whole Dioces yt is to far owt of square considering that for one onely church and that within one citie Ierusalem there were seuen His second that in scripture yt can not be shewed that Deacons were placed any where then in cyties is first to reason negatiuely of autority not in the question whether yt owght to be doen or no but whether yt was doen which not we alone but hym self also condemneth Secondly if this be a reason to bar the churches which are not in cities because there are none specified but in great cities thē he shal by the same reason bereue them of their Pastors considering that there is neuer a smal town of which yt is any more said that yt had a Pastor then that yt had a Deacon Thirdly he saith that the same can not be shewed oneles he be greatly deceiued in any auncient writer wherein he giueth suspitiō that he toke not his wares by tale but in gros otherwise he might better haue knowen what he hath suffered his book to be stuffed with For yt hath examples of countrey churches belonging to the church of Alexandria which had boeth Elders and Deacōs And his own Ignatius whom he wil haue Iohn the Apostles scholer affirmeth that euery church ovught to haue this office of Deaconship His comparison of this reason there vuere Deacons at Ierusalē therefore in al churches with this there be preachers in Cambridg therfore in al England is vnaequal For yt was not nakedly so propounded but warranted with reasons in that the Apostles labored after the cōformity of the churches so that the proof that there was such an office in one is proof that there was in al or at least that there owght to haue bene which is al one to the matter in hand his answer wherunto is before confuted Therfore the comparison had bene iuster with this that the men in the city haue two handes a peece therfore they in the countrey haue so to and if any haue not that there is a faut The next is answered so is the next to yt To the reason I alledged that the church may be at as smale charges vuith a Deacon as vuith a Collector seing that yt may make of the Collector a Deacon he maketh no answer onely he couereth hym self vnder colour of the admonit which ironically as I iudg saith that euery parish can not be at cost to haue boeth a Curat and a Deacon considering that yt requireth boeth a Pastor and a Deacon in euery congregation althowgh to cut of occasion abowt their meaning herein I wil not striue The second chapter of this tractat is answered before Seing then the Apostle separateth the office of the Deacon from the ministery of the word making them diuers members of one whole and seing that in the perfect diuision of the ministery of the word he is not remembred seing also the Apostle describing his qualities requireth not that he should be able to teach Again seing that in executing his office towardes the poor togither with the function of preaching he should be charged with more then the Apostles them selues could doe and had need of greater giftes then the Pastor last of al seing boeth by iudgment and practis of the purer churches the Deacons haue bene ether altogither shut owt from preaching or being permitted to preach haue doen yt vpon a nue grace ouer and aboue the calling of a Deacon I conclude that the Deacon hath no calling of god to preach the word and by the same reason that he hath none to administer any Sacramēt which later conclusion shal further appear in the next Tractat THE ELEVENTH TRACTATE AGAINST THE CORRVPTIons in doctrine tovuching the holy Sacramentes The first chapter vuhereof is against the sacriledg of priuate persons and vuemen especially in administring the holy Sacrament of Baptim as it beginneth pag. 503 of the D. book LEaving to the readers iudgment vpon the reasons alledged whether the meaning of the book be to admit baptim by Midwiues for as much as I trust there shal no such horrible profanation be suffered hereafter let him obserue how the An. because he hath once vndertaken this cause couertly as he dare continueth the defence thereof Iwis of folies the shortest are best yt had bene better for him to haue laid his hand vpon his mouth or rather in confessing of his faut to haue giuen god the glory But let vs see what he bringeth To that which was alledged ovut of the place of S. Mathevu that yt maketh as much against baptim by vuemen as against there preaching he answereth that by that reason Pastors may nether preach nor baptiz for that they are no Apostles which foloweth not For the Pastor succeding vnto the Apostles as touching preaching and baptising in their proper churches haue by the same place autority to doe boeth For further answer whereto I refer the reader to that I haue written before And I think there is not so much as one of the godly writers ether ould or nue which speaking of the ordinary ministery vnder the gospel whether it be to stablish or ouerthrow thinges perteyning to it vseth not the places that were first spoken to the Apostles alone As for M. Caluin he vseth this place expresly which the Adm. doeth to proue that wemen owght at no hand to baptise but onely the Ministers ordeyned to preach the gospel the same doeth M. Beza yea the Ans him self to proue the Bishops saying to those he ordeyneth alledgeth these wordes receiu the holy gost which notwithstanding were first said by our Sauior Christ vnto the Apostles alone so that the Ans frowardnes is here vntollerable Nether is it any thing excused by Zuinglius For althowgh baptim be not instituted here which was instituted in the ministery of Iohn Baptist nor here be mentioned any circumstance yet the minister of that institution which is no circunstance but a subordinate efficient cause may wel be appointed For confirmation hereof I alledged that the ministery of the vuord and Sacramentes ioyned of god togither ovught not to be pulled asonder and therfore cyted examples vuherin vue see obserued continually that the same vuere Ministers of boeth togither whereūto fyrst he answereth generally that examples proue not which is before answered Thē vnto the particular example of the Ark
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.
yt to the Synod he answereth that yt letteth not but that he had autority sauing that therby he shewed his wisdome in committing matters of doctrine to them which are moste fit to entreat of them A straunge kinde of wisdome to put ouer that which belonged vnto his office to them to whose office that did not belong verely this is not the wisdome which commeth from aboue For althowgh it be lawful for a Prince to discharge part of his burthen vpon others for the more commodity of his subiectes yet if this belong vnto him as he is appointed of god the ciuil Magistrate he can not put yt vnto any other thē vnto a ciuil Magistrate as I haue before shewed Here also I would ask of him how the Councel of Nice was fitter to iudg of the matter then the Emperour was it by some singuler case or by reason of their office of being Bishops Yf as needes he must he answer that they are by calling and by office fitter to iudg of such causes how must not that pertein vnto them which are hereof by calling the fittest Iudges For althowgh there be found sometymes some ciuil gouernour which hath more skil to iudg in church matters then some Bishop as also some Bishops to haue more skil in common wealth matters then some ciuil gouernour yet notwithstanding nether the one nor the other hath this kunning by any gift incident into his office which he exerciseth So that the Answerer in reputing it for wisdome in the Emperour to commit these matters vnto the Bishops as vnto the most able Iudges maketh a deep wound in the wisdome of god whilest he supposeth that god hath committed that to be doen by the Magistrate whereof by office he is not the fittest doer which is a voice vnworthy of a very sukling much more of a D. in diuinity And that this is most properly belonging vnto a Bishop it appeareth in that the Apostle requireth that he should be able to conuince the gainsayers which he neuer required of the ciuil Magistrate and notwithstanding would haue required yt if the decision of such causes had apperteyned vnto him For the lord calleth no man to any thing of whome he requireth not giftes meet to furnish his calling Not vnlike to this reason is that in the 5. diuision page 701 which is that for so much as the Ministers are moste able to decide of church matters that therfore the decision belongeth vnto them whereunto he answereth first that it is Hardings reason but sheweth not where it is to be found where I alledging it as his own reason pointed hym the place wherunto he answereth not a word Secondly he saith that yt proueth onely that it is most conuenient and necessary that the ministers while they be godly and learned may haue the deciding of matters in religion Here if the Answ had not fumbled and faultered in his speach we had had hym if not altogither yet very nigh consenting with vs therefore let the reader note that whereas he hath borowed boeth his answers and al his auncient autorities from the Bishop and M. Nowel withowt confessing any one onely place owt of the Bishop excepted in this answer wherein the cheif point of the question doeth consist he hath giuen them boeth the slip For they boeth doe flatly confes that as long as the Ministers be godly and learned yt is necessary they should decide these matters that the Prince is commanded to haue recours vnto them in dovutful matters that it belongeth to the Bishops office to decide of such causes but that Christian Princes haue rather to doe vuith these matters then ignorant and vuicked Priestes and that in case of necessity meaning when the ministery is wicked the Prince ovught to prouide for cōueniēt remedy the very self same thing which we maynteyn in saying vuhen there is no lavuful ministery that then the Prince ovught to take order in these thinges Now because he dissenting from them would yet seeme to be at one he also hath set down that it is necessary but how mark I pray yow and yow shal see that in stryuing against a manifest truth he became speachles Forsooth it is necessary that they may decide he durst not say that it is necessary they should but that they may decide where in saying that it is necessary he leaueth no choise again in saying that they may he destroyeth the necessity which he had before put leauing it in the Princis power whether they shal or no. Thus as the mous kleauing fast in the pitchbox in one sentence he affirmeth that a godly and learned ministery must of necessity and not of necessity decide of these causes That which he addeth that the autority doeth as wel stil remain in the Prince when the Ministers decide as when the Iudges determin of ciuil causes is vntrw Yf as he pretendeth it were at the Princis chois whether a godly mynistery should decide of them or no then yt were true he saith but if it be true which the Bishop and M. Nowel say that yt is necessary that a godly ministery should decide of them and that yt belongeth to the the Bishops office so to doe then the comparison is most vnequal For the iudgment of ciuil causes doeth so be long vnto the Magistrate that he is not bound by the law of god to translate yt vnto other Nay the law of god wil haue that Princes them selues so far as they may and are able shal bear their dominion vpon their own shoulders and iudg the causes of their subiectes in their own persons cōsidering that the scripture calleth al princes Iudges and setteth euery one a Throne to iudg the causes of his people Now to return bak where I leaft foloweth his answer to the Councel of Constantinople that it is to late a testimony being other in the year 549 or 681. which might haue place in this case where the question is of the Bishopes iurisdiction as that which in proces of tyme did owtreach were it not confirmed by other testimonies of the former age In the first of which Councels Menna the Patriark being president it is said that the decree of the Bishopes firm in yt self vuas cōfirmed by the Emperour Now seing the Bishops had then this autority how much more by his own confession had they the same in the other which was later And the same Constantine which the D. speaketh of giueth more to the Bishopes then we doe namely that he vuould compel none to the truth oneles they concluded something That yt was said that the Emperour confirmed the decrees of the Councel and not that the Emperour made the decrees serueth also wel for this purpose For if ether he had made them or they had bene made vnder his name they should haue bene said to haue bene made by him as decrees made by the Princis deputies are said to be made by the Prince That which he addeth
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
verses at the least are no more to be dayly said of vs then the salutation of the virgin Mary So that boeth for this cause and the other before alledged of the psalmes yt is not conuenient to make ordinary prayers of them Nether doeth the respect that they contein the mistery of our redemption serue to make them ordinary prayers no more then infinite other places of the scripture yt proueth rather that they should be the ordinary textes to preach on The two next be answered To the defaut of the book assigned for that there are no formes of thankes giuing for the releas from those common calamityes from vuhich vue haue petitioÌ„s to be deliuered althowgh he can here answer nothing yet as his maner ys he blotteth paper Howbeit page 536 he goeth abowt to return this vpon my head because taxing the want of thanckes giuing here doe there finde faut with the solemn thanckes giuing at wemens churching whereunto I answer that I doe not simply require a solemn and expres thancksgiuing for such benefites but onely vpon a supposition which is that yf yt be expedient that there should be expres prayers against so many of these earthly miseries that then also yt is meet that vpon the deliuerance there should be an expres thaÌ„ckesgiuing But whereas he saith that thanckes are then giuen for encreas of godes people and deliuerance from syn the first ys here owt of tyme as that which belongeth to baptim and not to churching nether is there any such thing conteyned in the book The other is spoken first dangerously to the simple reader as that which hauing no good sens giueth also manifest suspitioÌ„ that ether the company in mariage or the bringing forth of children boeth which are commendable is syn Then yt is spoken slaunderously in respect of the book which hauing no such thing is browght into suspition of yt Here also yow should haue learned to mend your speach of our subiection vnto syn For althowgh the daungerous trauail of wemen with childe be a testimony of syn which we committed yet it is not a testimony of subiection vnto syn in vs which are sanctified coÌ„sidering that althowgh syn dvuel in our mortal bodyes yet it reigneth not ouer vs nether are we subiectes vnto yt THE II PART OF THE II chapter of this Tractate of the fautes in the form of our prayers TO that against the prayers shred into so many and smal peeces vuhere as in doctrine so in prayers regard ovught to be had not onely to the matter but also to the form he answereth that so the doctrine be the same the form is left free which is vnrrue For yt owght to be doen withowt al pomp and owtward shew also to the capacity and moste aduantage of the hearers memory and that which towcheth this point cheifly yt owght to be doen comely and orderly al which thinges as they pertayn to the form of preaching so doe they to the form of prayer To this vncomelines set forth by similitude of a supplicatioÌ„ made vnto an earthly Prince he answereth that the dealing with god herein is far other then with men except I wil admit the popish reason of praying to saintes which is nothing worth For boeth hym self hath vsed this kinde of reason before and the Prophet in the matter of sacrifices doeth vse the same Peter Martyr also vseth the same in the case of prayer where the word of god hath determined the contrary there this kinde of reasoning drawen from the vsage of men is shut owt but where the lord hath not prescribed the coÌ„trary there yt hath a place Of which kinde is the matter of comelines and decency wherein we must haue regard to the comely vsage and conuersation of men vpon which grownd we say that yt is comely that the lords table should then onely be spred when the holy supper is to be ministred and rather with a fayer cloth then with a fowl Also that yt is not against order that many should sing togither but yet a disorder that many should speak togither My answer to the short prayers obiected owt of the Actes that S. Luke setteth dovun onely the sum of the prayers ys manifest seing in sermons as needful to be reported at large as the prayers he hath vsed the same shortnes Althowgh towching those which are priuate prayers for particular necessityes they owght to be no rules in this point of publik prayers To that that euen those prayers as they are set dovn vuere continued and not cut into peeces he can answer nothing whether the form of prayer which we haue in this point taken of the papistes be as good as that which I towched and which is vsed of other reformed churches let the reader iudg That al or the moste part of them haue alowed our order is vntrue as may yf need were be shewed by recordes of the difference for yt in Queen Maryes dayes Diuers other rouing sayings he hath whereof that of our Sauiour Christes and the Apostles vsual preaching withowt textes hath no ground That of their preaching withowt prayer before or after their sermons is a shameful vntruth For prayer being assigned for a peece of the duty of the ministery althowgh yt had bene neuer as sometyme yt is expressed yet yt must of necessity be intended Oneles peraduenture he wil say they prayed as the papistes in the middest of thir sermons as yf gods assistans were needles for the first part of their preaching That the Apostles did not labour and study for their sermons is another vntruth before confâ—ted Beside the confusion and wast of tyme in that the people rehears word for word after the Mynister certeyn prayers which they may as wel doe by consent and affection of minde was alledged that thereby is engendred an opinion that the other prayers doe not so much pertein vnto them whereto he answereth that there is special cause why they should be vsed because they contein a general confession which al Christians must euen with their voice confes as yf the desiring of thinges which are necessary and giuing of thanckes for benefites which we haue receiued were not boeth as general and as necessary to al Christians and a thing which concerned the glory of god as much as the confession of our synnes Yf yt be so what cause can he assign why the people should with their voice pronounce one and not the other My reason which is that as in the publik liturgie the Minister is onely the mouth of god from hym to the people so he is the onely mouth of the people from theÌ„ vnto god he corrupteth leauing owt onely in one place and taking yt in the other that the strength of the argument of payers might the les appear For answer whereunto he ys fayn to take the answer seruing to the last reason which is of the practis of the church in the
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
the common wealth might reap that commodity withowt such iumbling of offices togither which cause I expressed The place of Deuteronomie is faithfully alledged That before the lord in diuers places signifieth before the Ark it is wel knowen that it doeth so here first there is nothing against yt thē the translation of vau by and rather then by that is to say is more vsed albeit whether it be or no it maketh nothing to this matter For the weight of my allegation lyeth in this that the handling of the matter is appointed vnto the Iudges not vnto the Priests whervnto beside his bare affirmation he answereth nothing Likewise is Esra faithfully alleged and that owt of Esr 10. 4. 5. is nothing against it For althowgh that matter of diuorce pertained vnto him first in respect that he should conuince the people of their faut secondly in shewing what was to be doen in such a difficult case where the Israelites had bene so long maried with straunge we men forbidden and begotten diuers children of them and thirdly in the ecclesiastical censure of separation from the congregation there mentioned yet to sit in iudgment of them or by ciuil punishment to driue those which would not willingly is not shewed to pertein vnto him To the next diuision wherein is shewed that those vuhich had onely the light of nature yea and vuere great extollers of mans ability did yet see in part the incommodity of this clapping of many offices vpon one mans bak is answered nothing but that which is confuted before Of the vniformitie of church gouernment partly hath bene and more shal god willing be said afterward Here the D. hath not a word of answer his reason why he wil not answer for that it is a matter of pollicy and not of diuinity doeth as it were with one stroke of a pen cros owt almost his whole book where he hangeth al these church matters of the circumstance of tyme place person and of the form of the common wealth Nether doeth my reason accuse the prince and the councel which is that if it vuere at liberty for Ministers to execute that vuhich perteineth to the Magistrate or the Magistrate to doe that vuhich belongeth to the Minister yet that the later vuith vs ovught rather to be doen then the first for that there is a greater vuant of sufficient church men then of able common vuealth men But as I altogither excuse none from the highest to the lowest of vs which haue continued this popish corruption so long so I accuse especially yow and such as yow are which in steed of refusing them and shewing the vnlawfulnes of mingling them gape after them and are readie to proclaim war as the Prophet saith if yow durst vnles by hurling in some morsel one or other your mouthes were stopped And yt may be said of Princes how godly soeuer other wise which lift the Bishops into this honour that is said of a wicked Emperour which promoted them likewise he honored the Priestes that they should be no Bishops that is that they should be vnable to doe the office of a Bishop This worldly principalitie entred not as yow pretend into the ministery with the Christian Magistrate immediatly after the tyme of persecution but long after For it began first at Alexādria in Cyrils tyme and after entred into Rome your answer also to the canō attributed vnto the Apostles is vain for the canō opposeth the attendance in his ecclesiastical ministery vnto worldly offices beside that your answer is otherwise to homely For it is as much as if yow should answer that the canon is vnderstāded of al worldly offices sauing those which yow defend My reason owt of the Calcedō Councel is for that it forbiddeth to take the charge of an Orphan which requireth not so much attendance as the ciuil offices and which commō charitie would otherwise lay vpō him Again for that it forbiddeth the Minister to receiue vpon pain of excommunication any secular honour and therefore the office of a Iustice of peace of a Iustice of Quorum of hauing iudgment of life and death which the D I wil not say craftely for it is to manifest but fearfully passeth by whereunto ad that decreed in another Councel that the Bishop should onely attend vnto praier reading and preaching where so far it is that it wil suffer him to deal with ciuil offices that it forbiddeth to medle with matters of his own houshould which notwithstanding belong vnto him and therfore I doe not allegd it as that which I altogither allow but to shew how seuere the auncient councels haue bene in this point wherof he would bear vs down that there is not a word For otherwise withowt some fauorable interpretation this canon in this point is owt of rule To the D. which wil not haue the Ministers work in any handy craft occupation c but bear ciuil office I replied that it vuas as much as if he should say that he vuould not be bound vuith yron but vuith goulden fetters c. wherto he answereth that I doe but deride Here I leaue it to the reader to consider whether by this which he calleth derision I haue broken the head of his cause so that if it could it would weep As for that owt of M. Bucer there is no man dowteth of but that one and the same may doe the office of a Minister and of a Magistrate at once he affirmeth not he doeth the clean contrary as I haue shewed and further may be seen M. Caluin doeth not onely invey against the papistes which enter forcibly vpon the Magistrates office but against those also that receiue it being giuē For his reasons that no man is able to sustein boeth those charges c. are general I graunt the D. alledgeth not al the Papistes reasons yet this of the papistes is the same with his yea in this point with grief I am compelled to see him further caried from the boundes of modesty then they are For they as ys alledged by M. Caluin content them selues with this defence that their ministery is not greatly hindred by it but he dare say that these offices are a furtherance to their ministery which trwly withowt miracle wil hardly be doen that a man hauing alreadie a burden as much as he is able to bear should handle the matter so konningly that he should not onely be able to bear another as heauy almost as yt but to bear it also easelier Hether perteineth that he hath afterward where he affirmeth that the necessitie of studying the lawes of the realm maketh him fitter for the ministery that is to say in effect maketh him haue more leasure to studie the lawes of the kingdom of heauen therby to giue the riper iudgment in thinges perteining thereto And as this is straunge in the study of the lawes of the realm so it is
withowt an ordinary calling For if the Minister may not bear ciuil office vntil he be ordinarily called then here is yet no distinction made betwene the respect of a Minister to a ciuil office and the ciuil officer to the Ministery In the end yow are compelled to destroy your own distinction affirming that as a minister may ioyn to his Ministery a ciuil office if he be called therevnto by the Prince so the Prince may ioyn to his office the function of the Minister if he be called vnto it by the Bishop For so yow must needes mean seing yow make him the Stward of ecclesiastical officis which absurdity before this birth of yours I suppose was neuer heard of and it is thorowgh owt the whole discours confuted For as for that yow ad if they be lawfully called it is to open folly seing the question is whether there be any such election lawful Here the D. is taken again in his wordes For if the example of our Sauiour Christes whipping doe proue that a Minister may medle with ciuil affaires then it proueth that he may not onely sit in iudgment of crimes but also be the Tortor himself which he denieth For our Sauiour Christ executed the punishment with his own hand To that also I alledged that the Ministers by the examples of Paul and Peter may be Fishers and Tentmakers if of the D. examples it may be concluded that it is lavuful for a Minister to bear ciuil office he answereth they may doe so vpon like occasion The occasion of S. Paules laboring with his handes was partly that he might not in that point be inferior to the fals Apostels which toke no stipend partly to support the need and pouerty of the churches There being now therfore Anabaptistes which teach withowt wages and diuers churches which are very poor by the D. answer it is conuenient the Bishops should exercise some handycraft which beside other inconueniences is against that which him self hath truly said that they are hinderances vnto the ministery considering that there be no such giftes now a daies as the Apostles had which were able to doe more with one hand then we with boeth And if his answer were trw yet it is nothing to purpose For if by these examples he wil conclude that Ministers may ordinarily be called to the ciuil gouernment then it must also folow that by these examples of S. Paul and Peter the Ministers may ordinarily haue occupations ioyned with their ministeries But if the Ministers may not exercise any handicraft but in like cases as the Apostles did and vpon like callinges then it foloweth also that they may not exercise ciuil offices but in like time and vpon like callinges as those did from whome he draweth his proofes The rest is answered Before the D. said that the Ministers could not exercise any ciuil iurisdiction in tyme of persecution here he saith that Timothy which liued in time of persecution exercised ciuil iurisdiction Thus like a windshaken reed he neuer standeth in one sentence But I pray yow note his reason which is because mention is made of accusers and witnesses as if they were not common to al kinde of iudgmentes For where the thing is not manifest there the trial must needes be ether by confession or witnesses so that if there be an ecclesiastical iudgment there must needes be witnesses and accusers otherwise the Minister in tyme of persecution should take vpon him ciuil iurisdiction withowt the consent of the Magistrate which is absurd and being vrged by me is vnanswered yea the Housemother which vpon accusation and witnes of some of hir children chasteneth other some should by the D. saying break vpon the office of the ciuil Magistrate Vpon diuerse reasons browght to shew that S. Peters killing Ananias and Saphyra with the word which reason was ministred him owt of Pigghius proueth not that the Ministers may haue their prisons he answereth nothing but taking vp the carcase of his argument in steed of burying of it assayeth to blow life into it after this sort Peter punishing with death did nothing repugnant to his vocation therfore it is not repugnant to the vocation of a Minister to punish with temporal punishment which foloweth not For as muche as the vocation of a Minister now is not the same which Peters was at that tyme not onely for that he was an Apostle but also for that withowt a particular motion of the spirit of god it was vnlawful for any or for Peter him self to haue doen so That browght to vphould this with that that which Peter did by extraordinary power the Ministery now may doe by an ordinary is a very cartrope to pul in al confusion into the church and common wealth For thus of that Phinees a priuate man killed and the Israelites borowed which they neuer meant to restore if the Magistrate wil licence men to doe so it shal be lawful by the D. rule If he say that those are thinges forbidden but not this that a Minister should bear ciuil office it is nothing but an asking of that in controuersie wherupon he continually faleth And where he saith he speaketh of the fact of Peter and not of the maner euen the fact of Peter was to kil a man withowt any vnder Minister And therfore of this answer also it foloweth that the Magistrate may appoint the Bishops to be the Tortors and hangmen which the D. hath before denied How commeth it also to pas that he which before compared the politik lawes of god putting Idolaters and adulterers to death in cruelty with the Turkes lawes now maketh it a death matter if a man to conceal some part of his wealth being iudicially demaunded thereof do make a ly For thus much he saith in effect when he affirmeth that it may now be doen ordinarily which Peter did then extraordinarily Vuhere I added that the povuer vuhich S. Peter vsed vuas ecclesiastical and vuithal my reason ovut of the Apostle vuho reckeneth that amongest the church giftes leauing the reason he opposeth the autority of M. Beza whereas if that had bene any lawful kinde of disputing I could haue alledged learned writers that such punishmentes were doen by vertue of that church office But how could S. Peter doe that by right of the ciuil Magistracy when as the ciuil Magistrate had no right to punish that dissimulation which was hid Hetherto also refer that the D. him self in his former book affirmeth that their offence was against no ordinary law of the church or common wealth wherevpon foloweth that there being no transgression against his lawes there could be no punishment due M. Bezas meaning is onely that as the lord when there was no Christian Magistrate did vse corporal punishmentes and those of death against them which resisted the doctrine of the gospel so the Christian Magistrate should doe the same so that althowgh his maner of speach be diuers with that
Magistrate so that throwgh the nawghtines of this cause in his whole cours of answer he doeth nothing but as it were paue his way with snares to entrap him self And for answer to him this may be more then sufficient Howbeit for the readers sake althowgh this Eldership is manifest in it self of the wordes of the holy scripture yet the same shal receiue some confirmation of the practise of the churches after which kept this order boeth in persecution and peace This I wil doe if I first in a word note how this order of Eldership was taken from the gouernment of the people of god before and vnder the law yt is therfore to be obserued that so sone as there is made mention of any fixed form of church which standing of diuers houshouldes were deuided into particular assemblies so soon is made mention of this office of Elders For Moses to let the churches and assemblies of the Israelites to vnderstand hys Embassage from god assembled the Elders which that they were ecclesiastical officers thereby may appear for that vnder such a Tyrant and such oppression as the Israelites were in it is altogither vnlike that they had the benefite of Magistrates of their own And if a man would say that those Elders were the Taskmasters which Pharao had set ouer the Israelites beside diuers vnlikelihoodes thereof it is flatly confuted in that after the Israelites departure owt of Aegypt before any nue creation of officers this order of Elders is spoken of and as church officers taken to the administration of church matters Another example hereof is where Elizeus is said to haue had the Elders in his how 's to consult with what tyme the king of Israel sent a messenger to take of his head The like is said of other Prophetes which in that state they were in were vtterly vnlike to haue the ciuil gouernours to consult with Likewise in Nehemia there are mētioned certeyn which as they are distinguished from the people in that they are reckened as assistantes vnto Esra boeth on the right and left hand so be they also distinguished from the teaching Leuites in that the Prophet after he had spoken of these speaketh of that sort of Leuites which had the teaching of the people This is also strenghtned by that the nue testament speaking of the ecclesiastical officers amongest the Iues ioyneth with the Scribes which I haue shewed to note those that had the handling of the word the elders which should haue bene withowt reason if there had not bene a kinde of Elders which had not the handling of the word wherby it may appear that it is wntrue which the An. gathereth owt of Caluins wordes that these Elders should haue their beginning after the Iues return owt of the captiuity whereas he onely affirmeth that there was a bench or as some term it a Consistorye of ecclesiastical offices appointed after their rerurn but saith not as he pretendeth that they were then first of al appointed Nether can M. Caluins wordes be drawen to that sens For if by these wordes of his the Sanedrim vuere appointed after the Iues return should be vnderstood that they were then first created and not rather that they were then restored yt must folow that the Priestes and other leuitical teachers which were a portiō of that bench had then their first institution which sentence so absurd and so ful of ignorance of the state of the church no man which hath a spark of equity can ascribe vnto M. Caluin Althowgh if it were so as he pretendeth that these Elders did then begin yet that helpeth him nothing at al. For it should not haue therefore the les autority considering that it were to be estemed that they toke it not vp of their own head but by the autority of the Prophetes of god which liued then and directed the stern of that gouernment And herein howsoeuer the An. misconstrueth him M. Caluin is flat that this estate was lavuful and approued of god Hauing thus spoken of this order of Elders in the Apostles tymes and before I wil now return to that I promised of the practise of the churches after the Apostles tymes to see if this order of Elders can finde any more fauour of thē then of the Answerer Amongest which that of Tertullian before alledged of me is most clear Nether can the D. escape with this that the colledg was likely to be of Ministers of the word c. considering that it is vncredible that al the churches whose defence Tertullian taketh vpon him and whose vsage he describeth had such a colledg Then that of Cyprian commeth to be considered which noteth a peece of the office of these Elders by deuiding the communion bread into equal portions and carying it for the assistance of the Bishop in litle baskets or trayes where by placing their office in this assisting the Minister he doeth manifestly shut them owt from the ministring of the Sacrament especially seing Cyprian in that place noteth the honor of that office to consist in that they had by reason of it acces to this assistance of the Pastor in so great mysteries which should haue bene fondly put if they might also by vertue of that office them selues haue ministred the Sacramentes as wel as the Bishop whereof also it cometh that in another place he calleth them brethren vuhich had care of the basket But towching the vse of the Affricane churches vntil Augustins tyme that one testimony is more then sufficient wherby is affirmed that Valerius Bishop of Hippo did contrary to the custome of the Africane church in that he committed the office of teaching vnto Augustin which was an Elder of that church and that he was checked therfore of the Bishops checked I say nothwithstanding that Valerius is there declared to haue doen it for support of his infirmity because him self was not so apt to preach And howsoeuer Possidonius alow of Valerius fact yet boeth the cōtinuance of that order by the space of 400 yeares and the iudgmēt of other Bishops round abowt is withowt comparison of more weight especially when it appeareth by Possidonius writinges that being a good simple man he was nether of great learning nor deep iudgment where also it is to be obserued that as the discipline was best kept in those churches of Afrik so the doctrine remayned purest in them As may appear not onely by the Councels of Carthage compared with other councels of that tyme but also by Augustins writinges compared with Ieromes and other Doctors boeth greek and latin in the same age In other churches where this discipline was not so diligently looked vnto there are notwithstanding markes wherby we may know that they went owt of the way As at Alexandria where althowgh the Elders did teach yet after Arrius was convicted of heresie it was decreed that the Elders should no more teach by which
wil giue it some honester name then my fancy To that I alledged that if the Auncientes should not be vnder a Christian Magistrate yt vuould folovu that the lord should haue les care of his church vnder a Christian then vnder an vnchristian Magistrate he answereth that the Christian Magistrate is in place of the Eldership but nether addeth reason him self nor once towcheth the reason which I browght namely that yt vuas neuer lavuful for the church in persecution to appoint any that should enter vpon any part of the ciuil Magistrates office This also could not be a sufficient recompence in matters pertayning to the soul health that for an Eldership in euery church they should receiue one Prince in a whole countrey For one Prince can not in the spiritual gouernment of the realm bring that to pas which the Eldership in euery church did before althowgh he should doe nothing but attend vpon that So that to make the Magistrates to succede into the office of the Elders and therein to doe al the duties appointed vnto the Eldership in tymes past is to charge the Magistrates with a thing vnpossible and such as must needes kyl their consciences Thus where the Christian magistrate is giuen of god to kepe the order which god hath set in his church yow bring him in as a breaker and changer of the order which god hath appointed by his holy Apostles But the godly Christian Magistrates may vnderstand that as nether our Sauior Christ nor any wise and wel instructed mynistery vnder him wil meddle with any order or form of common wealth lawfully instituted of them for the better gouernment of their people but leau them as they finde them So they owght to leau whole and vntowched that order which Christ hath placed in his church And as the An. saith truly otherwhere that Christ came not to ouerthrow ciuil gouernmentes euen so it is as true that god sendeth not kinges to ouerthrow church gouernment planted by Christ and his Apostles Yea so much more absurd is this later then the first by how much they owght to haue more firmity which were set by the lord him self then which were by men For what son of Adam shal presume to alter that order which the lord hym self from heauen hath set And euen so doeth the Apostle precisely speak of this office with others that god hath set it in the church Yf it be said that he set also Prophetes and workers of miracles which are now no more it is true they are now no more but why are they not Ys it because any man hath remoued them no verely but because the lord him self hath withdrawen them For if the lord had giuen euen vnto these dayes these giftes of healing and working of miracles c. I think there is no man so extremely impudent that would say that the ciuile Magistrate might abolish or put them down Beside that it is vntrue which he saith otherwhere that this office is placed amongest those which be temporal for euen that next before yt noteth the office of the Deacon which is perpetual As for that he crieth owt and so oft repeateth that by this meanes no more is giuen to the Christian Magistrate then to the Turk proceedeth onely of a famyn of reasons to answer which driueth him to this vnrulynes otherwise he can not tel how the establishment of this office should spoil the Prince of her autority S. Paul professeth of him self that he vurote the same that men red that is to say syncerely not pretending one thing and meaning another but al this ialousy pretended for the Prince against the Eldership is in deed for the Bishop So that albeit the name of the Magistrate be houlden owt to draw this cause into hatered yet the truth is that yt is to establish their own tyranny For as towching autority or preheminence there is nothing giuen to be doen by the Eldership ioyntly with the Pastor in one onely congregation al which and more to the Bishop him self alone doeth not vndertake to execute in a whole diocese or prouince Therfore if the exercise of this spiritual iurisdiction in the Eldership spoil the Magistrate of his autority then the Bishops are the chief in this robbery Vuhere he asketh how I shew owt of the scripture that those are the duties of the Elders which I haue assigned I answer that forasmuch as S. Paul appointeth them gouernours of the church togither with the teaching gouernours placing the difference onely in teaching and consequently in publik prayer and administration of sacramentes which are ioyned with yt or comprehended vnder yt that therfore the rest remain commō betwene them to be doen as wel of these as of them That the place of S. Mathew is not to be vnderstanded onely of priuate offences I haue before declared your interpretation of tel the church that is publikly reproue those which admonished priuately repent not is euil nurtured breaking in withowt leau where mark good reader how easy it is for the D. to write answers which being pressed giueth him self this liberty that hauing no key to open the dore breaketh it open after this sort To interpret tel by reproue might haue some colour by that the general is some tyme put for the special but that tel the church should be reproue the offender hath a disease that al the tropes and figures which I haue red of are not able to cure And me thincketh that yow which accuse others for making the scripture a nose of wax if yow wil not put of your shoes at the least yow should wipe them a litle cleaner when yow enter into the lords Sanctuary That which foloweth is not a whit better For after he saith that by the church may be ment one onely so that he be in autority which is not vnlike vnto that which the papistes say that a man may appeal from the Councel vnto the Pope wherof some of the papistes them selues if he doe not repent shal sit in iudgment which leauing vnto the Pope the highest place in the church haue notwithstanding vpon this place preferred the iudgment of the Councel to the Popes But where I require some example of this monstruous speach vuherby one is said to be many one membre a body one alone a company the D. is domb where I shew further that if one onely should be vnderstood by the church that then the going from thre to one should not rise but fal not goe forvuard but bakvuard he answereth that to tel one which hath autority to correct the faut is more then to tel twenty as thowgh the complaint is made to the end he should be corrected and not that he should be admonished For as for correction other then by wordes it owght not to be awarded onles he refuse to hear the church so that here stil the proces is from the admonition which is by many to that
beleue left by tradition here yow bear vs in hand of commandementes I know not how many written not necessary to be obserued but onely to last for a tyme yf vnwritten traditions be perpetual and written cōmandementes be not what wanteth to the vtter banishment of al truth and setling of al falshood in the church of god For as yow may except against this so may other against any commandement of the Apostles whereas the autority of god in them once being shewed ether men owght to shew some place wherby that is called bak or els let yt stand in that autority it was first set in of the lord To that I alledged that god is present in his church vuith the riches of his spirit in knovuledg vuisdome c. and especially vuith those lavufully called vnto office cōfirming it by the exāple of Saul he answereth the church is sometime withowt good Pastor or good gouernour as in Elias tyme which is vntrue for there were a hundreth prophetes kept of one man alone Then he saith that it is Anabaptistical vpon a miraculous change and that of one to make a general rule But yt is his great faut not to know that the miracles wrought vpon certein haue a general doctrine and serue to the confirmation of our faith in al our necessities As the feeding of the people of god in the desert with man c. serueth to this that althowgh the ordinary meanes of norishment fail yet that the lord wil otherwise prouide for vs the feeding of the people in the desert by our Sau. Christ to this that those which seek the kingdome of heauen shal haue al other thinges cast vnto them Yf I had giuen hope of the assistance of god in thinges taken in hand withowt a calling or in a calling withowt vsing the lawful meanes which god putteth in our handes then yt had bene Anabaptistical but to assure the church of the assistance of god in goeing abowt that which I hould for commanded of hym when yt assaieth al lawful meanes it can ys more skilful diuinity then yow can stayn with al the skil yow haue I could haue browght other examples of Dauid Salomon c. but that one of Saul was more pressing the force whereof noted by me yow clean pas by Nether hath the lord doen this in certain particular persons but generally in his whole church For when he would make his tabernacle which was a figure of the church he commanded an exquisite workmanship in yt where albeit there was nothing more gros and rude then the Israelites as those which had bene many yeares houlden in vile slauery occupied in clay and dirt and al other kinde of drudgery yet the lord gaue numbers of such dexterity in working al kinde of broidery and riche workes as if they had bene browght vp in al liberal exercise and norished as Princes children Moreouer when as the lord furnished vnto the church vnder the law able men for this function notwithstanding he vsed not that larges toward yt which he doeth now towards vs they are to iniurious vnto the grace of god towardes the church now which vnder pretence of want of able men would driue this order owt of yt In the city of Athenes as Tertullian reporteth children spake vuhen they vuere but a moneth ould and shal we think that in Ierusalem which the lord wil haue to be the beauty of the world and which he hath set vpon a stage that in yt he might as it were make a shew of al his riches shal we think I say that men of 30 and 40 yeares shal be al such babes that they shal not be able to giue any iudgment of the lawes of that city whereof they haue bene so long Burgesses Ad also that yow to giue the Pastor a pasport to be away from his charge say that there may be diuers found in his absence able to answer al the dowtes that a dowtful and turmoiled conscience can minister which verely althowgh it be not the same yet is a rarer gift then is necessarily required of an Elder of the church such as we require To that I alledged that the common vuealth gouernment must be framed vnto the church and not the church gouernment vnto the common vuealth as the hanginges to the hovus and not the hous to the hanginges he answereth as thowgh I had ment that the form of the gouernment must be changed and made the same with the form of the church gouernment which is an open wresting of my wordes seing al know that to be framed according to another thing is not al one as to be made the same with yt oneles he that commandeth his hanginges to be framed to his how 's commandeth that his how 's and hanginges should be made the same or that the Master which biddeth his seruant frame him self to him biddeth hym to giue commandement for commandemēt chek for chek blow for blow Therfore my meaning could not be such but it was as it is which I also expounded in the example of the Prince the principal part of the common wealth that if there vuere any custome prerogatiue or pomp in the common vuealth before the Prince ioyned him self to the church contrary to the order of a church vuel established that that should be corrected And if I had had any such meaning as he surmiseth yet our common wealth could haue receiued no such change by this considering that I had boeth declared my liking of yt and shewed how the form thereof resembleth the form of the church gouernment wherby also appeareth what a shameful slaunder it is which he surmiseth of me that I would haue Princes throw down their crownes before the Seniors of the church c. which I precisely preuented with plain wordes because I knw with whom I had to doe Albeit that Princes should be excepted frō ecclesiastical discipline and namely from excommunication as he here and otherwhere signifieth I vtterly mislike Now he hath left the point of his slaunderous speach in me in his answer to my argumentes as a bee which hath lost her sting he is altogither vnprofitable For vnto the similitude of the how 's and hanginges he saith that it proueth yt not but reason he sheweth none vnto that also that the church vuas before the common vuealth and therfore that yt should serue the church and not the church yt he saith the argument foloweth not but he saith yt onely whereas if the church and commō wealth were otherwise equal which can not be one onely respecting the lyfe to come the other the cōmodityes of this lyfe yet hauing this preeminence aboue yt that it was before yt it must needes be better then yt and consequently owght rather to be serued of yt then to serue yt the Apostle also vseth the same reason to proue that the woman is subiect to the man. To that I alledged that the
church is the foundatiō of the vuorld and therfore the common wealth builded vpon yt must be framed vnto yt he saith that yt is obscure c. But it is for wāt of light in hym self for otherwise the thing is clear And to leau Salomons prouerb which Rabbi Leui Ben Gerson doeth so interpret and whereof in deed the sens may wel be that where the wicked are caried away with the tempest the iust not onely stand fast but be the cause why the world standeth I say to leau that S. Peter playnly confirmeth that the cause why this world endureth is for that the ful number of the elect is not yet gathered so that as sone as they are assembled by the ministery of the church there shal be forthwith an end of the world As for that he bringeth against this yt is vnworthy the rehersal for of the thre first he can conclude nothing and his last answer is no better For yt talketh of a change of that which is laid vpon the foundatiō wherunto the common wealth is likened and is that which I affirm but of changing the foundation wherunto the church is compared not a word the two next diuisions be answered Here he presseth that which he inferreth of the Admo ▪ that if the rule of moe in the church be better then of one because it is easier to turn one then a company from truth and equity it should therfore folow that the moe that gouern the better it should be which he hath now mended by putting for moe moe good men nothwithstāding that this also is but sophistry For by the same form of reasoning it should folow that because two bittes of meat norish more thē one therfore the more a mā eateth the more he shal be norished he should therefore vnderstand that as there is in this gouernment a defect so there is an exces and betwene boeth a mean vuhich is to be houlden and that as the comodity of hauing the church iudgmentes handled by a company is to be sowght after so the inconuenience and confusion of assembling a great multitude for euery ecclesiastical case that may befal is to be avoided Beside that it is not enowgh that they which should gouern be good mē oneles they be of greater counsail and iudgment then the rest of the body of which sort when he wil not affourd vs any iust numbre he might wel haue spared this obiection Yf it were greatly to the matter it were easy to shew moe lavuful formes of common vuealths thē three Likewise that althowgh commō wealthes haue their names of that which beareth the cheif sway yet that they are to their profit tēpered and mixed one with another singularly the monarchy This is to be seen namely in our land where to the passing of diuers thinges the consent of the Parliamēt is so required as that withowt yt those matters can not pas The next is already partly and partly commeth after to be answered Here he denieth most shamefully that he alledged Ambrose to proue that Seniors owght not to be vnder a Christian Prince For boeth the sentence immediatly going before and folowing after driue thereunto yea and that he affirmeth vpon confidēce of Ambrose saying onely for other proof he hath not It is therfore to great bouldnes that he asketh me why I gathered the tyme betwene Phillip and Ambrose Then he denieth that the Eldership florished in Constantines tyme but he is much to blame For the Centuries wherin he hath bene raking so often must needes haue tould hym that the same orders and functions of the church were in that tyme which were before And it is manifest that the churches were gouerned vnder hym as before by Bishops Elders and Deacons by that which is recited of an infinite number of Elders and Deacons vuhich came to the Councel of Nice vuith the 250 Bishops moreouer yt being before declared and in part confessed by him that this gouernment was before Constantines tyme if he be not able to shew that Constantin changed yt the same must be presumed After not denying but that it might be vnder some Christian Prince he saith that it is not the question whether it may be but whether it owght to be which how vntrue it is let the reader iudg of that I haue before noted To Ierom that saith that the Christian church hath her Eldership he answereth they were Ministers of the word and Sacramentes his reason because they were such as S. Paul speaketh of vnto Timothe maketh for vs which haue shewed that S. Paul speaketh there of Elders that gouern onely which may be better vnderstanded in that Ierom compareth them with the Eldership of the Iues which was as hath b appeared a seueral order from the Priestes and Scribes that interpreted the law and offered the sacrifices Duarenus also helpeth him not rather he maketh against him For in that he saith that the Canons succeded into the place of the Elders he declareth that the Canons are of another order then they were As when Ierome saith that the Bishops succeded vnto the Apostles he meaneth not that the Bishops are of the same degre and order of ministery with the Apostles the next I leau to the readers iudgment Vnto Ambrose he answereth yf he misliked the abrogating of this Seignory why did he not labour to restore yt That he misliked yt is manifest when he condemneth the Ministers of the vuord of negligence for suffering it to vuear ovut of the church or rather of pride vuhilest they onely vuould seme to be some vuhat he labored also in part to restore yt in that he reprehended the abolishing of yt whether he did further labour or no is not expressed the best is to be supposed which is that to his power he endeuored to set in that the want whereof he condemneth But Ambrose was no lord Bishop that he could doe in the church whatsoeuer he desired his extreme bouldnes in denying that ether he was abused or would haue abused other let the reader iudg of also in that he saith Ambrose maketh nothing for our cause to whose iudgmēt I also leau the next diuision Yf he denie that church officers which hādle church matters and vuatch ouer the sovules of mē be ecclesiastical officers then let hym deny also that two and two make fower But so gentilmen and handycraftes mē should be ecclesiastical persons why not if they be chosen thereto were S. Paul and Isay the Prophet no ecclesiastical persons because one was a Tentmaker the other of the kinges stok Nether occupations nor dignities haue any such mark of vncleannes or profanation that they may not be coupled with the church ministery when the ministery is such as togither with their professions they may also execute yt in which kinde is the Eldership of the church I omit that the D. hath here patched togither a sentence of M. Caluin before
answered and another of M. Beza which in that sens he pretendeth them are quite contrary one to another yt is therfore meruail if he can make of them one vniform and euen answer Now he hath ranged and roued almost in this whole disputation he must haue leau to run bak the way he came to see whether he hath let any of his peeces fal And first good reader he dasheth the in the face with two open vntruthes in the forehead of this chapter For the order of the church propounded by vs is vniform and standing as it is left vs in the word of god and not as he surmiseth varying according to the numbre of the churches Also for ceremonies variable by circunstance it is frankly confessed that they owght to be determyned of by aduise of the church Synod assembled especially of the flower and most sufficient of the ecclestical gouernours sent by consent of the rest if al as yt happeneth can not be coueniently there Secondly it is nether affirmed nor euer practised in any church where this order is or hath bene vsed that he that is chosen may not refuse yt So that if there be any that thinketh his honour stayned in being ioyned in counsail of church matters with poor men when there ether are not or are not enow of others he hath not to complain seing he is at his choise Albeit if any man should be so myneded to think skorn to hear the sentence of a poor man in that he is a poor mā let the same know that he reprocheth god that made hym poor And if he be lawfully appointed to this office thē he doeth not disdain the man but Christ hym self Therfore if he haue any fear of god before his eyes he wil from hence forth be ashamed to vse this for a reason Beside that he thus ouerthroweth the high court of Parliament where with the nobility are ioyned in consultation the commons of the Realm where also the estates being vnequal the voices notwithstanding are equal I omit how that if there were any inconuenience in this that the sentence of the Pastor and other not so rich or so noble should weigh down the sentence of that noble man he speaketh of yet him self hath deliuered vs of yt which telleth vs that the lord of the town or some other of countenance wil lead away the rest of the church how much more then shal he be able to lead away two or thre Thus he plaieth on boeth handes for there he pincheth at the nobility and here he pretendeth as if he were tender ouer their honour His third reason is answered before likewise his fourth his fift his sixt and a seuēth As for the eight of partial affectiō and contentions which would ensue it is plentifully answered in the question of the church election For if these be friuolous reasons against those ecclehastical actions where the whole church hath interest much more are they against the assemblies of thre or fower onely and those of the choisest the ninth is also answered The tenth that it would be to great extremity to punish for one faut twise is a fals principle taken from the Pelagian herefy For the Magistrate may appoint fower kinde of punishmētes for one faut if he think good to be executed at diuers tymes so that they altogither and ioyntly exceed not the quantity of the faut And by his reason the Magistrate shal be shut owt from his right of punishyng syn if it fal owt that the lord by some punishment laid vpon the offender preuent the Magistrates punishment especially when the punishment is in such sort that it may appear that yt was sent for that special faut for examples sake if of dronkennes he fal into some siknes na thus the lordes sword is wrung owt of his hand For nether may he punish those fautes which the Magistrate punished before and if he punish a man in this life he hath bound his handes for punishing him in the world to come For in deed the church discipline is the punishment or rather the correction of the lord in a far other kinde and to an other end then the ciuil punishment But I haue shewed that boeth these were practised amongest the people of god for one and the same faut And is not this in the Apostles to condemn the holy gost him self For if it be true which he saith when one had stollen or committed adultery it had not bene lawful for them to haue vsed the ecclesiastical censure least the offender being after apprehended and punished according to the lawes of the common wealth where he liued should thereby haue bene wronged Beside that the D. accuseth al our Bishops which for diuers causes punishable by the lawes of the Realm send forth their excommunications yea al the elder churches which did not leau to proceed in ecclesiastical censures against those whom the heathen Princes had iustly punished But hereof the reader may know further in M. Caluins institutions also in M. Bucer who praecisely cōfuteth them which say that the punishment by the ciuil Magistrate is sufficient His eleuenth that alterations are dangerous is vnworthy answer For when yt hath bene shewed that ceremonies otherwise in different owght when they breed offence to be changed how much more owght those to be chāged which are shewed to be cōtrary to the institutiō of god And nether this nor the next clause in thys eleuēth article nor diuers other allegatiōs in this chapter haue so much as a countenāce of reason vnles it be first graunted vnto the D. which is the principal questiō that is to fay that the Eldership of the church is not cōmaunded of the lord his two other reasons in this article are boeth often repeated and vtterly vntrue there hauing bene neuer any Christiā Prince that vsed the spiritual sword which onely is giuē to the Eldership nether any noble mā or gentilmā which in our lād vseth this kinde of correction but onely the Bishop which vsurpeth yt and abuseth yt I omit his often iesting at the Pastor by calling him diuers tymes in contempt Master Pastor which the Angels them selues dare not doe when as him self can not deny but to haue a Pastor in euery cōgregation is the ordinance of god If men wil not look to such disorders I dowt not but the lord wil lay to his hand The first reason to proue no certeyn kinde of church gouernmēt apointed is answered before likewise the second and third the fourth is a gros asking of that in question In the fift M. Caluins and M. Bezas first and last sentences are violently drawen from their meaning as hath bene shewed The middle sentence beareth no such argument as he would gather for there is no word that shutteth owt the necessity of the Eldership vnder a Christian Magistrate no or that maketh it so much
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
the prebendes c. ovught to be called to a more lavuful vse namely to the fineding of Scholers Ministers and Poor And this is our meaning not that these goodes should be turned from the possession of the church to the filling of the bottomles sackes of their gredy appetites which yane after this pray and would therby to their perpetual shame purchase them selues a field of blud which thing althowgh we haue giuen playnly to vnderstand yet because we haue to doe with so importunat an aduersary that feareth not to charge vs with intent to gratifye such Cormorantes I thowght good in a word to protest yt As for the light account he maketh of those examples of the reformed churches which notwithstanding pretendeth to esteme so greatly of one or two of the auncient writers I leau to vtter what yt argueth oneles he were able to shew by the word of god that they did not wel The rest of this tractate which is a cartlode of vntruthes vttered partly in accusing me partly in maynteyning him self I wil not touch THAT EXCOMMVNICATION BELONGETH NOT TO THE Bishop alone Tractate ix and xviij according to the D. pag. 661. YT hauing bene shewed that in elections and depositions the Bishop can doe nothing withowt the aduise of the whole church nor in the common gouernmēt withowt assistance of the Eldership yt must folow that in excommunication which is one of the weightiest iudgmentes in the church this sole autoritie of the Bishop is vnlawful For as when in ciuil matters the iudgment is of life and death and as in the art of curing when consultation is taken of cutting or burning the bench is fuller and the assistance greater then when matters of les importance be debated euen so if it might be accorded to the Bishop to pas some other matters by him self yet it were not safe to cōmit vnto him the iudgment of excommunication wherevpon I mervail why euen here also yow goe abowt to pek owt our eys For the light of this truth is such that some of the Papistes them selues are ashamed to look against yt as appeareth by Pigghius which seeking al maner of peintynges to hyde the filthines of Rome could finde no colour to disguise this with but is fayn partly to confes her nakednes in this behalf saiyng that it is not lavuful the Bishop of Rome onely excepted for any Bishop to excommunicate by him self alone So that althowgh the weightines of the cause might require a long treatis yet the plaines of it wil be content with a short First whether the word discipline may note the vuhole gouernment or onely the punishmentes as in a disputation of wwordes I wil not striue althowgh it be knowen that the word discipline is vsed in good autors for the whole maner of gouernment ether at home or in war. Secondly charged vuith cōtrarietie he answereth that to ascribe excommunicatiō to the Minister of the word and to the Bishop onely agree because the Bishop is a Minister of the word which might haue bene admitted if it had bene al one to be a Bishop and a Minister of the word But seing by the word Minister with vs is noted a diuers degree and meinteined by him it is but an escape Howbeit I am content he amend his speach if he had yet amended it and not rather vtterly marred al. For pretending that the Bishop onely hath by the word of god the excōmunication committed vnto him he saith notwithstanding that the church if she wil may commit that autoritie vnto other giuig the church autority to make that common which the word of god hath made seueral Thus he enterfeereth at euery step almost cutting him self to pitifully The rest is answered so are the two next diuisions sauing that it appeareth that yow were somewhat hongry of a testimony of great reading which pres myne so sore that may be giuen to the veriest trewand that euer went on two legges which may in half an hower know the minde of twenty commentaries and requireth rather a man wel booked then ether wel red or wel learned To proue that the lord did not borow this form of gouernment of the Iues he assigneth one reason because he neuer appointed it vnto them which beside the vntruth that hath and shal further appear is contrary to that him self hath affirmed where he saith that al euen the least thinges vnder the law were commaunded So that oneles he wil denie that they had euer any Eldership or hauing it had it against the commādement of god it must folow that they had it by the prescript of god Another reason is for that the Iues abused their Eldership then which there can be nothing more disagreing from the D. whole cours of defence which wil not haue so much as a peeld ceremony remoued for the abuse Vnto the reason I alledged why the word Councel in S. Mathew is taken for the Eldership of the church he answereth nothing wherunto ad that in other places of the new Testament where it is oft mentioned it is alwaies so taken The testimonies he citeth are partly to no purpose partly before confessed of me This is a wonderful bouldnes that yow dare say yea and glory in yt that S. Paul kept an other order of excommunication then our Sau. Christ commanded considering that he autoriseth his doeinges in the church of Corinth with this that he gaue that vuhich he receiued who also in this very particular case of the incestuous man alledgeth the autoritie of our Sauiour Christ. That owt of M. Caluin maketh against him manifestly For vpon the places boeth of S. Mathew and Paul he sheweth that the church hath interest in the excommunication onely he noteth that our Sa. Christ applied his form of speach to the estate of the church then which is nothing to our purpose After vpon confidence of M. Caluins autority onely he triumpheth vpon the interpretation I browght of the purging of leuain noting the thrusting ovut of the incestuous person which notwithstāding is proued for as much as that vers is the conclusion of that before where by leuain cā not be denied but the incestuous person is noted vnles we wil say that the Apostle concluded another thing then that which he had before mentioned M Beza also comming after M. Caluin and not easely dissenting from him foloweth the same sens which I haue doen So that althowgh yow take your pleasure of me yet yow should not ride so hard vpon him But mark a litle how vnable your answers be to vphould such a confident insultation For where this here spoken by a borowed speach is playnly vttered yow are compelled to expoūd these wordes of the Apostle take avuay the vuicked man amongest yovu that is shun his cōpany which is not onely a wresting of words but also vnsitting to the cōparisō with the leuained bread which S. Paule vseth to
set forth excommunication by For it was not enough for the Israelites not to touch or vse any leauened bread in the celebration of the Pasouer but they were bound to put it ovut of their hovuses to prouide that no leauened bread vuere found in their hovuses and not to kil the Pasouer before they had rid their hovus of it Like violence he vseth towching the receiuing of the excommunicate For where S. Paul vseth the same word of forgiuing or as it is called absoluing as wel to note his own releas as the churchis he wil haue that the same word in the same vers in one and the same cause to be taken diuersly and that referred to S. Paul it shal haue the proper signification to remit but referred to the church to signifie the effectes and signes of the remission or absolution Vuhere I shew that S. Paules declaration of his good vuil to excommunicate could be no ful excommunication because that that notvuithstanding the Minister and church althovugh vniustly might haue receiued him to the communion of the Sacrament he answereth that he is yet excommunicate in heauen which is a mere abusing of the reader for I expresly preueÌ„ted that And it is most vntrue that it is enowgh to make the ecclesiastical censure of excommunication that a man be bound in heauen when as our Sa. Christ noteth it in that he is taken of the church for a Publican and a Synner and in that there is an actual secluding from the sacrament For otherwise as sone as such wickednes is committed and withal so long as it is vnrepented the synner is bound in heauen and in right shut owt from the communion of the Sacrament althowgh no man excoÌ„municate him which being alledged of me is vnanswered To that I alledged that S. Paul ioyneth the Corinthes vuith him in the excommunication he answereth that they are ioyned as lookers on or as witnesses not as doers in that action But who hath taught him thus to play with the word of god when as S. Paul ascribeth the same cause of the corporal assembly of the church for that action which he doeth vnto that presence wherewith he saith his spirit should be after a sort there If therfore S. Paules spirit were after a sort and as it might there to look on and to be witnes onely then the church was also els let him shew vs with what wordes S. Paul declareth that his spirit should be there for one thing and the Corinthians for an other But what a shameful defence this is that one voice declareth whereby the Apostle giueth vnto the church the iudgment of this matter now to iudg or to giue sentence of malefactors is more I think then to look on or to be witnes And what that iudgment is is yet more clearly declared by that which foloweth where the Apostle saith that the lord iudgeth those that are none of the church giuing to vnderstand that they had onely to vse their censures vpon those of the church and that they should leaue the infidels to the iudgment of god so that if he say that the iudgment of the church is nothing but a looking on c. he must also expound these wordes the lord iudgeth the infidels that is the lord standeth by and looketh on whilest some other punish theÌ„ whereto ad that the Apostle ascribeth to the church the same word of iudging which he taketh to hym self Likewise that the writer to the Hebrewes giueth to the church that they should prouide that no poisoned root remayn amongest them which althowgh it be caried of some from the person to the crime yet it ys certein boeth by the place of Moses from whom it was taken and by the scope of the Apostle that yt is to be vnderstood of the persons For he exhorteth the church first to giue diligence that there be no such amongest them then if there be not to suffer them to remain to the infection of other which is yet also more manifest because according to the custome of the scripture that which he spake before by a metaphore or borowed spâ—â—ch he expoundeth in the next vers when he saith let there be no vuhoremonger or prophane person c. Ad further that S. Iude alluding vnto the prophet Zachary willeth the church in taking pitie of some to saue others as it vuere out of the fire by fearing them which church had no other meanes to strike any fear into persons that were throwgh obstinacy in syn as firebrandes almost half burnt but by ecclesiastical censure To that I asked vuhy S. Paul chideth vuith the church before he had signified that he vuould haue hym excommunicate if it belonged not vnto the church he answereth because they did not coÌ„plain of him whereof there is not a letter to be gathered in the holy Scripture And what a mischeif had it bene for the church to haue had no remedy for such a contagious disease at home but must goe seek for yt in another country and languish al that tyme whilest the messengers went and came I leau to those which haue the bookes to look with what faith he hath cited these autorities seing contrary to hys wont he maketh them not to speak Beside that they are alledged for defence of excommunication by the Bishop alone owt of them which are open enemies to that kinde of excommunication especially the later writers I say leauing that I answer that none of them one excepted is to purpose For albeit the 18 of math be explaned by the other of Math. 16. and Iohn 20 yet it foloweth not therefore that they be al one And althowgh in the 16 of mathew and Iohn 20 togither with the preaching the excommunication were vnderstood yet the place of the 18 of S. Mathew being of the autority of excommunication and not of the preaching the difference doeth stil remain Nether hurteth it that euery seueral Minister of the word hath by these places autoritie to excommunicate being vnderstode of euery one for his portion whych must needes seing in S. Math. 18 the church hath autority likewise so that it can not â—e that one seueral minister can by those places chalendg the sole autority of excommunicating That alledged of Musculus wherin it is said that he confoundeth these three places is vntrue for he exteÌ„deth math 18 to al Christians restrayning math 16 to the Ministers As for his reason to proue them al one because they were al spoken to the Apostles yt is friuolous seing our Sa. Christ did not onely instruct them of thinges belonging to their Ministery but also of those that touched their priuate lyfe and of the duties of the whole church Of the same sort is that the same wordes are vsed in al three places which is al one as when the Prince ordeining that one chest may be opened and shut by one onely one other not so but by others with him he
of the Apostle For seing boeth that which immediatly goeth before this and which foloweth immediately after be publik offices what extreme bouldnes would it be to say that this in the middest is but priuate If he doe giue him self this licence let him shew example of such an order Further the Apostle here maketh a partition as it is manifest by the wordes and articles which are instrumentes to part with Now if he wil haue one membre in this partition bigger then al the rest and to conteyn them al he maketh the holy gost which is to be detested an euil and an vneuen parter Herevpon it cometh that when he speaketh of the dutyes which belong to al alike he beginneth with another form of speach Last of al yt is not to be omitted that he vseth the word of Distributor rather then the word giuer For althowgh it be taken sometyme for the giuer yet that is but by a trope for somuch as the same is often the distributor which is the giuer so that the proper signification being to dispose that which was giuen of others agreeth vnto the Deacon and not vnto one which giueth of his own His exceptions of Prophesy and widowes office be answered In the next being cōuicted of his vntruth he falleth to iesting albeyt it be manifest that the Adm. towcheth not onely thinges in controuersy but sometyme also the breach of that which is established To proue that the Deacon owght not to meddle with the administration of the word and Sacramentes I alledged first that the Apostle vuilling euery one to kepe him self in his boundes boundeth the Deacons office in distributing of the church treasur and by that separateth him from those vuhich haue the dispensation of the vuord vuhereas if he should preach the vuord as the other the Apostle should haue made an euil partition and pretended a separation vuhere none is His answer hereunto is that it is no reason but why it is not he kepeth to him self The second reason was that for so much as the Apostles hauing such passing giftes did finde them selues vnable to susteyn boeth the ministeries of the vuord and for the poor that therfore there can be much les novu any able to doe them boeth togither His first exception whereunto is friuolous and before confuted his other that they spent no great tyme in prouision for their sermons is vntrue and openeth a gap to Anabaptism For althowgh their giftes were greater in those tymes then now yet they omitted not therefore to study diligently which may appear in that S. Paul is so careful to haue his parchmentes browght in that S. Peter had red S. Paules epistles so diligently Likewise that the Prophetes in tymes past which had extraordinary giftes vsed great diligence in reading as it may appear in Daniel which notwithstanding he was so wise so expert in the tonges and had so oft and so wonderful reuelations yet studied the prophesy of Ieremy And in a word of them al S. Peter pronoūceth that they took great paines in their prophesies vsing wordes most strong to set forth their great labor in prouiding fo◠that they tawght Nether was this of pleasure and a thing which they might ether doe or leau vndoen but a commandement as it is to be seen in the exāple of Timothy which had giftes so much the more excellent then the Deacons as his office of Euangelistship was higher then the Deaconship For he is biddē to read to meditate and to preach ioyning one with another and that not sleightly but with attention yea that he should dvuel in them or be as it were shut vp and enclosed in them thereby noting the great diligence that was to be bestowed as wel in reading and studying as in preachīg And thus went the building of god singulerly forward whē vnto the giftes which came withowt their labor miraculously they labored also after ether encreas of them or getting of nue by the ordinary meanes prouided of god in that behalf Again S. Paul reckoning vp al the ministers of the word the Deacon not being there it foloweth that he is no mininister of the word And here the D. is plainly found at strife with him self For he confessing that there is in that place a complet and perfect diuision of the ministeries of the word and withal that the Deacon is not there conteyned doeth notwithstāding here sing a clean contrary song Moreouer it is diligently to be obserued that S. Paul in describing this office requireth not that they should be able or apt to teach which notwithstanding being by the An. iudgment the cheif point belonging vnto him should haue bene most absurdly left owt Lastly if the Deacons office had bene togither with the Stewardship of the church treasure to haue preached and administred the sacramenres yt must folow that his office must haue bene a greater office then the Pastors as that which requireth greater giftes for executing boeth that which the pastor doeth and more to which being absurd that is also whereof this foloweth That monster which remaineth in this diuision I wil set vpon whē I shal haue run throwgh that which pertayneth vnto this matter as it lieth in the 14 Tract As I did not before deny so now I cōfes him to haue bene Phillip the Euangelist and not Phillip the Apostle which is mentioned Actes the 8 and hould as before that he preached by vertue of his Euangelistship and not by vertue of his Deaconship vuhich vuas then ceased for that the church vuhereunto he serued vuas scattered Against which answer his autority owt of the Actes 21 to proue that he was stil Deacon is quite contrary to him self For it affirmeth of the tyme past that he was before Paules arriual vnto Caesarea Deacō not that he was so when he arriued For then the interpreters would haue turned the participle which serueth boeth for the tyme past and present according to the circumstance of the place which is one of the seuen and not vuhich vuas So that here we haue the common consent of al interpreters flatly against the D. namely that Phillip was not then Deacon when S. Paul came to Cesarea but had bene before That of M. Gualter maketh also against hym which placeth the Deacons office in the disposing of the church treasure and that they preached not but in tymes of necessity So that where M. Gualter permitteth preaching no more vnto Deacons then yow doe baptim vnto wemen yow wil haue it their standing office The difference betwene a Priest and a Deacon browght owt of Augustin and Epiphanius can by no meanes stand considering that that imposition of handes whereby giftes were extraordinarily giuen which Phillip absteyned from he did not absteyn from onely as Deacon but also as he was Euāgelist seing that was a thing peculier vnto the Apostles and a proper note whereby the lord magnified their ministerie
yet it is singulerly profitable for instruction of our behauiour in like cases The least part also of S. Peters oration Act. 2 is spent in answer to the accusation of dronckennes and that nether compelled nor iudicial as was S. Steuens I graunt a man may defend hym self against fals accusations in a sermon but that is not whē he standeth iudicially accused like a malefactor as S. Steuen did whose vuhole oration how apt a purgation yt is which he denieth the reader may fetch from M. Caluin vpon that place that I be not cōpelled to lenghthen my book by so long translations Against M. Beza in quoting of whome I failed are opposed Gualter and the Centuries of whose sentēces which is truer let it be iudged of the reasons on boeth sides whether in the two next diuisiōs the Ans shifteth his gros ouersight let the reader iudg especially whē as his pretence that the Adm. assigned the deaconship to be onely in handling the church treasure is vntrue For nether haue they the word onely nor any thing of that value and it is manifest that their drift was onely to shut owt the Deacō from the administratiō of the word and sacramētes so that in taking his wordes in that sens which he now would haue them in effect he cōfesseth hym self to haue but trifled with the Admonition chaunging the prickes which they had set hym to shoot at and roving after a mark of his own finedīg In the next I alledged that if the Deacōship vuere graūted a step to the ministery yet thereof folovueth not that yt is the mynistery but contrarivuise that it is not and therefore ovught not to doe thinges pertayning to the ministers To this he answereth he concluded not so which I confes can not be forcibly won owt of his wordes But he saith he might haue so concluded which is absurd and al one as if he should say that the foot of the stayer is the same with the top whether it in ascending leadeth And how dare he say that he might haue so reasoned when as to the argument which I drw from these wordes of hys he can answer nothing how could he haue hurt vs with this which he suffereth to be driuen so flat vpon the head of his own cause Vuhere afterward to proue it no step to the ministery I alledged that the giftes are diuers and that one may vuel dispence the church treasure vuhich for vuant of vtterance should neuer be fit Minister he answereth that the Bishops and Deacons giftes required 1. Timot. 3 doe not much differ which is a great vntruth For it is required of the one that he should be boeth able to teach and of long tyme in profession of the gospel nether wherof is required of the Deacon when notwithstanding the first onely of them maketh a greater difference as towching the duty of preaching which is in question then if he had made them to differ in an hundreth other thinges he addeth that they may be put by the mynistery for their leud lyfe which is a meer mispending of the tyme for so may the Clokkeper or the Sexten Again that Ambrose with other expound yt so which is likewise that being before confessed by me especially when other learned men by his own confession leauing their exposition take this which I propounded Further that vtterance sufficient for the distribution of the church money is sufficient also for the ministery of the word which must of necessity be his answer if he speak to the purpose And being so it is to absurd the confutation whereof if it deserue any may be fetched from that before handled Althowgh if that were true the argument is not avoided oneles he wil also say that there is as great knowledg and as deep iudgment in the scriptures required for the disposing of the church treasure as for the preaching of the word vnto the other reason which I browght against this that the deaconship should be a step to the ministery raised owt of the same place he answereth nothing Here he abuseth the readers patience again For where before not able to shew one testimony owt of any auncient writing that the Deacons had to doe with the word and sacramentes I confessed notwithstanding frankly that there were some he hath here set them down wherevnto beside the answer before made I ad that those cited owt of Tertullian and Ierom be so far from helping hym that they make against hym For in that the Deacons could not meddle with the word or Sacramentes but vpon the Bishops licence it argueth that yt belōged not vnto their office seing it is absurd that that which they were bound to doe by reason of gods institution should be hanged vpon the Bishops pleasure Likewise that owt of M. Beza is against hym For in saying they supplied the Pastors office he giueth to vnderstand that it belonged properly vnto Pastors and was doen by Deacons but in tyme of necessity And so was the Administration of the supper which saith he he can not read in any autor to haue bene permitted to the Deacon wherein to let pas the Councel of Arles and others which licence this vnto thē in absence of other at the least did he not read M. Bezas sentence which he hath thrust into his own book that they ministred the sacramentes not onely the Sacrament of Baptim althowgh the places quoted 1. Corin. 1. 14. 15. and Iohn 4. 2. proue no such thing no not in the Ans own iudgment as I think For wil he say that the twelue Apostles which baptized were al Deacons or that because S. Paul did not commonly baptize those whome he conuerted that therfore Deacons baptized them as if there were nether Euangelistes nor Pastors to doe yt Nether is yt enowgh for hym thus to trifle except he vse most vile reproches against me as thowgh I striued against a manifest truth But that euen by M. Bezas iudgment the administring of baptim doeth lawfully belong to the Minister alone and not to the Deacon the D. may see otherwhere Now vnto the most certeyn groundes of the word of god let hym hear the testimonyes of the auncient tymes And first of the general Councel which maketh the Deacōs Ministers of the poor whom it calleth Ministers of tables and not of the holy thinges Another Councel decreed that in the Ministers siknes the Deacon should read the homilies of the fathers wherby appeareth that that Coūcel not so much as in the tyme of the Pastors siknes suffred them to preach the word but to read homilies thereby assigning also the greatest honor in doeing any thing which the Minister vsed to doe in the church in that he might read ether the scriptures or homilyes Chrysostom saith that the Deacons had need of great vuisdome althovugh the preaching of the vuord be not committed vnto thē And further sheweth that yt is absurd that they should doe boeth
which affirmeth that al men preached in the Apostels tymes he can receiu no benefite of him in this place For if al did preach aswel as baptiz then it is true which I say that none had the ministery of the sacramentes but he which had the ministery of the word withal and vntrue which he affirmeth owt of Ambrose that some were ministers of the word which were not of the sacramentes Likewise is the testimony owt of M. Beza wherto I haue answered before flat against hym in this cause considering that his iudgment is that the Deacons did boeth preach and administer the sacramentes sometyme And as there is no harmony betwene hym and his autorityes so is there none betwene the sentences of his autors which he hath mashed togither For where some say al other say that Priestes onely baptized where he saith Musculus doeth alow that some should minister the sacramentes which can not preach yt is very true and further that he would rather haue yt doen by them then by those that can preach But his ground is vpon the misvnderstanding of Act. the 6 whilest he toke the ministring to tables which is the prouision for the poor for the ministring of the lordes supper The foundation therefore of his assertion being naught the assertion yt self can haue no place The place of the 1. Timoth. 5. is answered so is his question To return again therfore to his demaund where he asketh what point of Anabaptism it is that wemen may preach in the church when there is no other that can nor wil I answer that yt approcheth to that braunch whereby the Anabaptistes hould that meÌ„ may preach withowt an owtward calling of the church onely if they think it needful Vuhere I obiected his building vpon examples of a fevu particular persons vuhich alovueth not ours althovugh they be grounded vpon the general vse of the churches in the Apostels tyme he answereth that he buildeth no necessary rule but onely that yt may be doen vpon like occasion But this is but a vayn shift For those extraordinary actes whych are comendable were doen ether by expres coÌ„mandement or by special direction of the spirit of god the obedience whereunto was not at their chois to doe or to leau vndoen So that if the Ans wil haue these examples to be the directers of baptim by midwiues they not onely may but owght to doe yt And if there were any such case of necessity as he vntruly pretendeth and that yt might in such a case be ministered by wemen it were absurd to leau it in the chois of the Midwife whether she would minister it or no. But note I beseche yow what horrible confusion he bringeth into the world by this saying For if extraordinary examples doe proue that such thinges may be doen in such cases then may priuate men execute malefactors because Phinees did so and men may borow and neuer pay as did the Israelites If he say that he addeth vpon like occasion and circumstance it is true but thereby he meaneth yf like need or necessity be For if he mean as he owght hauing a particular commandement of god by word or a rare and extraordinary instinct by the spirit of god his answer is nothing to purpose considering that he wil not I think say that the Midwiues haue any of these two and if they had they doe it not in respect of the former example but onely by reason of the extraordinary ether commandement or motion His example of the Samaritan woman Iohn 4 is friuolous that she should become a publik preacher which had not yet learned her catechism nor was scarce owt of her Christian A. B. C. where it is manifest that she did nothing which belongeth not to euery one that is that we should exhort one another to goe where the knowledg of Christ is to be had so that she did onely as it were towl the bel to draw the Samaritanes to our Sau. Christ that he might preach vnto them Nether doeth his other example of the wemen Math. 28 which preached the resurrection help him For if that may be called a publik ministery it hath an expres commandement of the lord by the Angel. which commandement as oft as Midwiues can shew we wil acknowledg their ministery lawful otherwise the general commandement which we are bound to folow is direct against their preaching which being shewed of me is vnanswered by hym So that here he merely trifleth often saiyng that there is nothing against the baptim by wemen and neuer answering the scriptures alledged wherby it is generally forbiddeÌ„ theÌ„ to deal in these matters To that I concluded of his wordes wemen may preach if there be no man that ether can or wil that vuemen by that meanes haue his licence to preach in diuers places he answereth it needeth not seing the scriptures are red in al places But that is but an escape considering that althowgh they haue a reader yet they haue no preacher reading not being preaching as I haue a shewed And who seeth not that many with vs for want of teaching ly in horrible ignorance of the truth so that by his rule this is the tyme in which wemen may teach openly with vs. But here again he opposeth M. Caluin which saith there is a tyme wherein a woman may speak Yf he mean in her own how 's or otherwhere priuatâ—ly I graunt if publikly in the church vpon an extraordinary calling I graunt that also otherwise I can not graunt it for the reasons before and after alledged And that M. Caluin had no such meaning as he pretendeth appeareth in that he wil at no hand admit baptim by wemen to whome althowgh he oppose Zuinglius yet he sheweth not nor I think is able to shew that he alloweth of baptim by Midwiues The next diuision which sheweth that godly vuemen neuer toke the ministery of the vuord but by extraordinary calling from god approued ether by miracle or some not able yssu saith he is needles as that wherunto he agreeth which is not so For hereby is condemned the baptizing boeth by wemeÌ„ and other priuate persons whatsoeuer as that which hath no such calling and approbation of god The next to it sheweth his pouerty which endeuoring to defend the baptim by wemen was ignorant of the principal hould of that cause and was needfully met with for their sakes whom that might trouble In he next he would insinuate that they may baptiz in the how 's for that S. Paul biddeth them teach in priuat places where if he had made his argument iust and to clasp wel togither he should haue concluded that they owght to teach their howshold in priuate places therefore they owght to baptiz in priuate places and they owght to teach their families ordinarily therefore they owght to baptiz their families ordinarily thus must the argument be cut owt according to his measure and he
may as wel say that a woman owght to doe the same in the holy supper But the knot is not yet loosed my answer whereunto is that if there were any priuate sacramentes as there is priuate teaching I would accord vnto him that wemen hauing power to teach priuately might also minister the sacramentes priuately But because that the holy sacramentes are publik as is the preaching his argument hath no force For in what place wil he lodg this argument a woman may doe a priuate act therfore she may doe a publik The diuision folowing being euil seuered of him from the next chapter whereunto it belongeth I leau vntil I come vnto that matter Now it may please the reader to turn vnto the 5 chapter pag. 516 which is also of this point in hand towching the person by whom this sacrament should be administred where first mark I pray yow a wily distinction which in effect is that he defendeth not baptim by wemen but improueth the Adm. that disaloweth yt as thowgh one could improue the one and not defend the other And vnles he had browght the example of Sephora to mayntein baptim by wemen it had bene fondly alledged considering that the wordes of the Adm. are of the practis of the Apostles tymes an exception against which fetched from the tyme which was 1000 yeares before might seme to come from him whose wittes were not at home especially when the question is what was doen and not what owght to be doen as he hym self now pretendeth Secondly he saith he wil not contend with me in diuers thinges in this diuision for that he misliketh their error which condemn infantes that be not baptized as much as I which is not so For he saith that the lak of baptim may seme to be a probable token and sign of reprobation which is boeth vntrue and perillous considering that not the want but the contempt or neglect onely of the holy Sacrament can draw any the least apparance of the lordes wrath Nether is that ether neglect or contempt preiudicial to the infant but to the parentes onely whose faut that is which notwithstanding can be none where they seek to thir vttermost that yt may be baptized of the minister of the church orderly and conueniently no more then it was preiudicial ether to the childe or parentes vnder the law when the infant died before the eight day which was the tyme apointed for the administration of the Sacrament of circūcision For as the eight day was to them so is a conuenient and orderly tyme to vs. Yt is therfore a shameful dealing that he maketh vs here to ioyn with the Anabaptistes which reiect childrē from baptim vntil they be able to make profession of their faith whereas we confes it owght to be ministred with al conuenient speed so it be by the minister whome god hath ordeyned for the same purpose In which accusatiō of Anabaptism with vs he windeth vp also as it were in one bottom the reformed churches where it is not permitted that the infant in any case should be baptized but by the minister withal the reader may perceiue how idle he is which translateth a great peece of M. Caluin to proue that which none denieth whom also he goeth abowt to oppose to him self which is of the same iudgment with vs in this behalf althowgh there be not so much as a tittle in the wordes he setteth down bending that way Yt may wel stand that this profanation came from the Gentils from Victor and from the Papistes Victor borowing it of the heathen and the Papistes of hym For boeth popery is like a bundel of corruptions which being picked owt of sundry tymes and places it hath cocked vp togither and the Pope is like a hog which when he cometh into a garden leauing the sweet flowers taketh him self alwaies to that which is most filthy in al the place otherwise the D. might deny any corruption almost to be papistical seing they haue few whereof ether paganism or declinyng from Christianism hath not bene the first founder To that I alledged to proue the vnlawfulnes of the circumcision by Moses wife for that she did it in presence of her husband a Prophet which is M. Caluins reason he opposeth the note of the bible printed at Geneua that he could not doe it because he was sik and that the Lord required it then whether he was able or no I wil not striue but that the lord required circumcision if there were no ordinary minister for it doeth not appear For as it was an order of god that the male childe should be circumcised the eight day so was yt also his order that he should be circumcised by a minister Now how can it be shewed by that the lord strake Moses that he would therefore haue this ordinance changed when as the siknes sent was a correction for the breaking of one of his orders and not a trumpet blown to cal them to the breach of the other And what if as it cometh to pas the lord had as yt were stricken Moses by siknes in the childe or that the childe being of discretion had hym self willingly wanted circumcision owght the childe therfore by and by with the present hazard of his life haue bene circumcised no verely But as this siknes should haue instructed boeth father and son to repent them of the former negligence and to purpose the amendement of yt when the childe should be able to abide the wound so the siknes of Moses was for that end sent that he should repent him of the former negligence and amend it when it might be according to the order appointed To that alledged that she did it in a koler he answerereth not To that that Moses recouery is no proof of the lavufulnes of it considering that vuhen thinges are measured by the euent the good are condemned and the vuicked iustified oftentimes he answereth that the euent oft declareth the thing which is but to wast winde For if it doe oft otherwise it can serue for no reason or allowance of that circumcision And if the iudgment by the euent be to be taken it is there where the causes doe not appear but here the cause of circumcision which is the institution of god is able to try the matter where also appeareth how affamished he is to finde contrarietyes in my book in that he supposeth variance in this that here I cal Moses a prophet and in another place say that the priesthood vuas taken from hym and giuen to Aharon which is to foul an ouersight For boeth there were Prophetes which were no Priestes nor of the race of Priestes and the tyme of the deliuerance ouer of the Priesthood vnto Aharon was long after the tyme here spoken of Against that I affirm it a necessary point of the Sacrament that yt be ministred by a Minister he maketh many owtcryes but they be not these lowd clamours which can
tawght a rule owt of the word of god whereby it might haue appeared that a priuate person may take vpon him in this pretensed case of necessity to doe that which god hath not committed but vnto the Minister so that here it is manifest that he had neuer a knee to bow vnto the truth but was like that beast which hauing neuer a ioynt in her leg must rather break then bend To that I alledged of the continual and almost general practis of the church he answereth that lay men from the beginning haue bene permitted to baptiz whereof let the reader iudg In the mean season he is able to shew no practis of baptim by wemen but in the extreme ruines of the church otherwise we should haue bene sure to haue heard of yt Howbeit here he asketh whotly what order of god is broken in priuate baptim euen the same which is broken in priuate preaching So that whatsoeuer hath bene before spoken of the church preaching that it owght to be publik and not priuate serueth in like maner for the holy Sacramentes The next diuision must rest in the readers iudgment Now remayneth the other point which is whether baptim administred by one which is no Minister althowgh against the word as yt is conteyned in his pag 518 c. be yet auailable the D. saith yea his first reason is that otherwise many should goe vnder the name of Christians which were neuer baptized and so saith he I may proue my self to be no Christian where I deny the argument and withal desire the reader to take heed of the venom which he going abowt in other places to hide brake owt here at vnawares In an other place he said that it is a probable sign of reprobation if children dy withowt baptim but here he setteth down flat that they be no Christians which are not baptized So that the children of the faithful by his doctrine are not Christians before they be baptized and consequently condemned whereas the truth is otherwise that if he be not a Christian before he come to receiu baptim baptim can make him no Christian which is onely the seal of the grace of god before receiued And what wil he here say to those in tymes past of Thessalia with whome the sacrament of baptim was celebrated but once a year namely at Easter were al the children paganes al that while what wil he say to that tyme wherein they receiued it not but at their death were they also al the tyme of their life paganes I graunt boeth the customes naught but in the mean season he shal doe the good Emperours and other good men great iniury in saying that they were heathen or no Christians His second reason is that there must be by this mean some general rebaptization which is the flat reason of the Anabaptistes and in deed plain Anabaptism that for a dowt whether some be baptized or no al should be rebaptized For thus they proue that men must be rebaptized because say they they are not assured whether they were baptized or no as it is reported of Zuinglius But it is enowgh for me which am assured of the fauour of god in Christ Iesus the thing it self whereof baptim is the sacrament that I know my self to haue bene born in that people where the common vse is to administer baptim by a publik Minister such as he was So that vnles he can shew assuredly that I was not baptized by such a one the want of baptim shal not hurt me seing that I nether neglect it nor contemn yt And if he could shew that I was not baptized yet the case of rebaptization is not so clear as he maketh yt considering that Dyonisius the great and famous Bishop of Alexandria when one came vnto hym which sware that the baptim he receiued of the heretikes was nothing like the catholik baptim but ful of horrible blasphemies and desired to be baptized of him for that he was trobled in his conscience said that b he durst not baptiz him adding that forsomuch as he had often said Amen vnto the thankes giuing in the church and receiued the holy supper of the lord that he should therevuith content and comfort hym self Yf the Ans had but such an autority vncontraried of other he would quikly shape vs owt a definitiue sentence howbeit I stay not thereupon onely I bring it that whē such a case should befal we come not vnto this remedy withowt inquiring into the matter and that yt be not doen vpon the D. bare word Vuhere I alledged that the Minister is of the substance of the sacrament considering that it is a principal part of Christs institution he answereth that the essential form is to baptise in the name of the father the Son and the holy gost which being kept the Sacrament remayneth by whomsoeuer or howsoeuer yt be ministred This he fathereth of Augustin and Zuinglius whereas nether of them goeth further then to the person by whome yt is ministred so that he hath here falsified them Beside that I haue shewed that Augustin standeth in dowt whether baptim by a lay man be available or no. where by al likelihood he was owt of dowt that that which was ministred by a woman whose vnaptnes herein is dubble to that of a lay man was of none effect he citeth also M. Caluin but vtterly to another purpose then he meaneth For where he sheweth that the goodnes or euilnes of the Minister maketh not nor marreth not the sacrament the D. pretendeth as thowgh it were not to be estemed whether he were a publik minister or no which is a mere abusing For further answer I refer the reader to that already answered so doe I for answer to that of Ministers which crepe in withowt calling vnseasonably spoken of likewise for the cauil of rebaptization Now if the reader compare the answers of his togither he shal see that the Ans him self hath clean ouerthrown his own groundes And first of al this that the being of the sacrament hangeth onely hereof if the form of wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. be kept For to proue that the being of the sacrament dependeth not in any respect of the person which ministreth yt he alledgeth first that so we should be alwaies in dowt whether we be baptized which maketh stronglier against this that the being of baptim dependeth of the vsing of those wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. then against this that yt dependeth vpon a publik Minister for al may vnderstand that yt is easier for a man to know that he was in his infancy baptized of a publik Minister then to know that the Minister then vsed these wordes I baptiz the in the name of the father c. Another reason is for that the force of the sacrament is not in the mā but in god him self his spirit and free
if he had bene able should haue shewed that I agree in this cause with the Papistes namely in the end of this treatise where I shew how far I stand from them in this behalf Howbeit hauīg beside vntrw surmises little or nothing at al to mayntein him self with he hath to strike a preiudice into the minde of the reader and to set as it were a bias of his iudgment to draw it vnto his side here in the forefront set vp this vntrue accusation whereunto I wil answer when I come to that place Now for better clearing of this matter the distinction betvuene the church and cōmon vuealth vnder a Christian Magistrate denied by him is to be confirmed Vuherin as towching the autority of the word of god boeth owt of the ould Testamēt and the nue I refer the reader to that which I haue writtē sauing that the place of the Cronicles cōmeth after to be towched again In the churches after the Apostles and that vnder godly Princes the same differēce hath bene diligētly obserued by the ecclesiastical writers As when it is said that the church and common vuealth not onely suffer but florish togither keping this distinction as wel in the church is prosperity as in her aduersity Also that the hovuses of prayer being restored to the church other places vuere adiudged to the vse of the commō vueaelth Likewise that there is one cause of the Prouince and another of the church Yf he can not cōceiue how this should be he may be giuē to vnderstand it after this sort that a man may by excommunicatiō be sundred frō the church which forthwith leeseth not of necessity his Burgeship or freedome in the city or common wealth Likewise that the ciuil Magistrate may by bannishment cut of a man from being a member of the common wealth whome the church can not by and by cast owt by excommunication Again when one is for his misbehauior depriued of his priuileges boeth in the church and common wealth albeit the church be vpon his repentance bound to receiu him in again as a member thereof yet the common wealth is at her liberty whether she wil restore him or no. Finally infidels vnder a Christian Prince may vntil such tyme as they refuse instruction be members of the common wealth yet are they not therefore members of the church where if the church and common wealth were as he saith vnder a Christian Prince al one it should folow that whosoeuer is a part of one should needes be a part of the other and contrawise whosoeuer is cut of from one must be cut of from the other His autority pretended against this distinction owt of Musculus that the Christian Magistrate is not profane is to no vse For not onely the high dignity of the ciuil Magistrate but the moste basest handicraftes are holy when they are directed to the honour of god but to conclude thereof that they are not distinguished from ecclesiastical causes is to much vnaduisednes For wil he conclude that for because the gouernment of the how 's and the gouernment of the commō wealth are boeth holy that therfore the gouernment of the how 's is not distinguished from the gouernment of the cōmon wealth or wil he say because the company of a man with his wife in lawful matrimony is holy that therefore it is a church matter This distinction of the church and common wealth vnder a Christian Prince being so apparant in certein cases there is no reason why it should not be so in the rest which shal yet better appear in this discours where commeth first to be considered what he answereth to the place of the Cronicles where vpon that certeyn Priestes and Leuites had the handling of matters perteyning vnto god and certeyn others the matters perteyning vnto the king I concluded that the church iudgmentes ovught ordinarily to be handled by the church officers His answer hereunto is that forsomuch as Iehosaphat the king by his autority committed boeth ecclesiastical and ciuil causes therfore he had power him self of boeth whereunto I reply that he committed not those ecclesiastical matters vnto the Priestes and Leuites as those which he might haue reteyned with him self or as a thing in his own discretiō but vsed onely his princely autority to put in executiō that which the lord had commanded For yt is manifest that the self same thing which Iehosaphat did here was commanded to be doen in the law And if this proue that the iudgment of ecclesiastical causes perteyneth to the king because he confirmed by his autority the ecclesiastical Iudges it proueth also that boeth the ordination of Ministers and the preaching of the word belong vnto hym considering that this very king is said to haue sent forth preachers into al lury But let the reader obserue how he hath here vtterly passed by the weight of my argument which standeth in this that the holy gost maketh this partition that some matters pertayn to god and others to the king whereas if the matters pertayning vnto god pertayned also to the king the partition should be fauty Nether by matters pertayning vnto the king are vnderstanded those which pertayn vnto his own person or his family but matters within the compas of his princely iudgment as appeareth by the example of the cause of blood which the scripture setteth down especially if this place be compared with that of Deuteronomy where this example is put particularly and opposed to the iudgment of leprosy which then belonged vnto the priest To the place in the Hehrues that the high Priest is appointed ouer thinges vuhich appertayn vnto god he answereth that the Apostle declareth that those thinges are to offer giftes c. which is nothing worth For the proposition is general wherupon the Apostle concludeth so much as serued for the present purpose otherwise yow may as wel say that yt belonged not to the high Priest to preach because the Apostle mentioneth not that part of his office in that place Seing then it is apparant owt of the Cronicles that iudgment in church matters pertayneth vnto god Seing likewise it is euident owt of this testimony of the Apostle that the high Priest is set ouer those matters in gods behalf it must needes folow that the principality or direction of the iudgment of them is by gods ordināce pertayning vnto the high Priest and consequently to the ministery of the church And if it be by gods ordinance apparteyning vnto thē how can it be translated from them vnto the ciuil Magistrate That which I said of Leuites vsed to the iudgment of ciuil causes for that they could not al be employed to the ministery considering that so there should haue bene almoste for euery xijmē a Leuite is barely denied and nether the reason which I browght cōfuted nether any of his set down whereunto may be added the reason why the Leuites
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
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
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 Doctors book To that of abrogating them for the shameful abuse and superstition crept into mens mindes of them he answereth that thinges of necessary vse owght not for their abuse to be abrogated where first he maketh a necessary vse in the church of thinges which the scripture hath giuen no commandement of Secondly he condemneth in this point the churches that vse them not and thirdly destroyeth the liberty of placing or displacing them which hym self otherwhere ascribeth to the magistrate His other answer that they be meanes rather to withdraw from superstition by reason of reading and preaching diuers tymes after repeated is but an abusing of the tyme For nether doeth he answer any thing to my reply which was that preaching cā not come to al throvugh the scarcity of preachers and that vuhere yt doeth the fruit is hyndered vuhilest the commō sort attend rather to that vuhich is doē thē to that vuhich is said Nether can he make any sufficient reply to my answer which is that that profit is vuithovut danger receiued othervuhere and may be vuith vs vuithovut such solemnities of feastes yf preaching ād prayers being as they are the rest of the day be imployed as other vuorking dayes Against which that which he excepteth page 546 that yf these and other holy dayes were not men should for instruction of their families be driuen to spēd twise or thrise in a week half the day is to simple For they haue the lords day a great part whereof may be bestowed that way and that which is needful for their further instruction may be supplied of the howshoulders whilest their families be in their dayly occupation as also the lord in his law by reckoning vp certein kindes commandeth to be doen in al maner of our exercises The next requireth no answer That the keping of Easter vuas left free at the first wil appear after owt of Socrates That owt of Eusebius maketh against hym self For to let pas the vnlikelihood of the dayes of fast which should goe before wherof there is not a word nether in the ould nor nue Testament yf it were a tradition of the Apostles yet it was vsed of them as a thing indifferent considering that the same story witnesseth that S. Iohn the Apostle togither with the churches of Asia did celebrate the Easter as the Iues were wont vpon the xiiij day of the moneth Now if S. Iohn hym self which departed not from the autority of the scripture did kepe the Iues day he gaue sufficiently to vnderstand that our Easter hath no autority from the scriptures for then he would haue kept yt also Likewise the Heluetian confessiō leauing yt at the liberty of the churches as a thing indifferent maketh against hym but against me yt maketh not which confes that that day may be kept and deny that yt is for our estate and tyme so expedient his answer to the incommodity of restrayning our cogitations to a fevu dayes vuhich should be extended to our vuhole lyfe is nothing worth For althowgh no abuse of men may take away gods institution yet in abuse of thinges which may be chaunged and are indifferent yt is not so His allegation that the lord notwithstanding the liberty of working six dayes made certein other holy dayes is but an abusing of the reader it being preuented by me And not content herewith the very same iudgmēt which he here aloweth in hym self in me he flatly condemneth afterward For where in his former book page 174 he confesseth that god gaue liberty to labour six dayes in this he affirmeth that by making certeyn feastes whereof some fal vpon these six working dayes he hath taken away that liberty I say not a iot more in effect yet my saying is nue and his is ould I am ouershot and he hath hit the mark His reason is because I make god contrary to hym self But how I more then he o haue liberty of god to work six dayes and to be restrayned by him of that liberty be as contrary as any thing which I haue set down And of hym it is said also bluntly withowt any caution whereas I shewed the equity of god in this colour of contrariety Against which hys exception that yt can not be shewed in al the scripture that god hath made any law against his own commandement ys vntrue For not to goe far was it not a law of god that the Iues were bound of necessity to keep the Sabbats and other solemn feastes And is yt not now a law of god that at the least they are not so bound His fear that god should be thus contrary to hym self is causeles no more then the father is to be houlden vnconstant which when his son commeth to mans estate freeth hym of the obedience vnto his seruant vnder which he cast hym in hys tender yeares or then the physition which according to the state of his pacients body prescribeth not onely a diuers but a quite cōtrary diet This ys a catechism matter whereat he could hardly haue stumbled yf his ey had bene simple althowgh to say the truth in this case in hand there is no contrariety but onely exceptions owt of a general law which that the church may doe in likewise as god the lawgiuer hym self which he after maketh his proof is to gros For thereby not onely the question yt self but more also then ys in question is demaunded That those to whome the establishing of the ceremonies doeth belong may appoint that which is conuenient for diuine seruice as often as the church may conueniently assemble ys agreed and euen in the matter of appointing whole holy dayes in certeyn cases yt is also by me confessed But that the Magistrate may cal from or compel to bodily labour as shal be thowght to hym most conuenient ys not measured according to the cubit of the sanctuary I mean of the word of god For what yf the Magistrate shal think yt conuenient that men should labour but one day in the week what yf he should think neuer a one is the Subiectes obedience tyed to this ordinance Yf it be so what shal then become of gods commandement that men shal eat their bread in sore trauail who shal prouide for wife and children with the rest of the family for which notwithstanding vuhoso prouideth not for is vuors then an infidel His reason that this yt no conscience matter deceiueth hym whilest he alwayes restrayneth conscience matters to inward thinges alone whereas yt extendeth yt self as far and to as many matters as there is ether commandement for or prohibition against in the word of god And as this is vnaduisedly put forth so that which soloweth that the word of god doeth not constrein the Magistrate from turning carnal liberty to the spiritual seruice of god ys to fowl an ouersight For thereby he accounteth bodily labour a carnal liberty which is an
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
saying that yt was no law but a custome and that yt was not penal to those vuhich did not kepe yt Socrates confirmeth the indifferency which I affirmed to haue bene in in the beginning For the alowance of Saintes dayes whereof the question is here althowgh he hath onely M. Bullingers testimony which ys retracted and condemned by M. Bullingers own self yet he marcheth forward stil as bouldly as yf he had a whole legion of learned men of hys side what dealing this ys let the world iudg But they be forsooth his own wordes which he hath alledged so are these yours Basil in his book of offices yet I suppose yow wil be loth that yt should be now accounted your iudgment after yow haue corrected your self Here also to the iudgment of such a number of reformed churches vuhich haue condemned the keping of these dayes as vnlavuful he not onely answereth nothing but walketh stil in his ould path of bould and vntrue affirmation that the custome of the whole church confirmeth them as thowgh the reformed churches now were no churches at al. And that the reader may further know hys importunity in this behalf he may vnderstand that beside M. Bullingers consent in general with the rest of the churches the disalowance of that particular church of Zurich and consequently of hym towching these Saintes dayes doeth appear in a book a part And if the learned reader look the later edition of M. Bullingers commentary vpon the Romanes he may peraduenture finde his former iudgment alledged by the D. corrected Hetherto also commeth Musculus iudgment in particular which affirmeth that there can be no defence for the saintes dayes vuhatsoeuer be pretended likewise M. a Hopers which condemneth them notwithstanding their gray heares yea the very first institution of them and that vpon credit of that which the D. calleth an vnlearned shift that ys to say by opposing the autority of the word of god and the examples of the churches gouerned by the Apostles and Prophetes In the next diuision in Caluins iudgment towching the three feastes dedicated to the lord I wil procede no further considering that yt appeareth in his epistles that he was not the cause of the abrogating them As for the saintes dayes whereof onely in deed the question is in thys place considering that which hath bene alledged I think the D. hym self wil make hym no patrone of Althowgh throwg◠the multitude of our papistes the obseruation of these dayes as of Easter c. amongest vs vuould haue inconueniences vuhich yt should not haue vuith them vuhere there are none as I haue also before obserued The rest in this chapter is answered THE SECOND CHAPTER OF the second part of this Tractate of the fautes touching prayers THE FIRST PART OF THE chapter touching the fautes in the matter TO mayntein that we should pray to be deliuered from al aduersity he falleth fowly and as yt were vpon al fower teaching with great confidence that we pray for thinges whereof we haue no promes For seing our prayers made withowt faith be abominable and no fayth ys able to be grounded but vpon the word of promes yt must needes folow that the praier conceiued withowt promes ys likewise abominable But then sayth he we may not pray to be free from al syn no more in deed we may in thys lyfe because we must alwayes pray forgiue vs our synnes nor yet saith he pray against persecution no nether against al persecutiō because yt ys cōtrary to that word which sayth that euery one vuhich vuil liue godly in Christ Iesu must suffer persecution Hereunto he abuseth S. Iohn 14 13 whatsoeuer yow ask I wil giue which S. Iohn hym self soluteth when he saith that he heareth vs in al that vue ask according to hys vuil and that wil ys in hys word Hether he draweth the example of our Sau. Christ which prayed to haue the cup remoued that he knw he should not obteyn which as he alledgeth yt serueth to proue that we owght to pray for that which we are sure we shal not obtein which ys absurd and not onely to pray withowt but also contrary to faith Nether did our Sau. Christ pray withowt promes For as other the children of god to whose condition he had humbled hym self haue so had he a promes of deliuerance so far as the glory of god in the accomplishment of hys vocation would suffer And I deny that at that tyme he made that prayer to hys holy father he knew he should not obteyn For althowgh he knw that he should suffer yet yf I answer that as towching hys humanity he knw not the most infinite and extreme weight of sufferances which god hys heauenly father had measured vnto hym or knowing them had throwgh the vnspeakable force of the panges which he then was in forgotten them I see not how thys answer may not be maynteyned as a Christian and catholik answer For our Sau. Christ takyng vnto hym togither with our nature our infirmities might withowt al contagion of syn boeth not know some thinges and be subiect to forgetfulnes of that which he knw not to the forgetfulnes which commeth of negligence but which commeth of a sodayn astonishment and shaking of al the powers boeth of body and mynde Al forgetfulnes I graunt ys the punishment of syn but that al forgetfulnes is syn and vpon al occasions I think the Answ hym self wil not affirm As for that he wandereth in abowt the conditiō yt nothyng excuseth hys error For we owght not to desyre to be free from al aduersity yf yt be hys wil considering that he hath already declared hys wil therein but onely of this or that aduersity whereof we know not but vpon the euent what ys hys good pleasure He hath much other fog to this purpose but not worth the naming After he cyteth the 91 psalm that no euil shal come to the where he manifestly ouerthroweth that he hath affirmed before For pouerty and persecution are amongest those euiles of which hym self saith we haue no promes to ground our selues vpon when we pray against them As for the place yt self yt must not be vnderstood that the afflictions shal not touch vs which ys manifest in that assigning the maner of performance of these promises he saith that the lord vuil be vuith hym in hys troble and deliuer hym noting that he shal be in troble which ys contrary to that that he shal be free from al troble So that to accord the scripture with yt self the meaning of of the promise must needes be that he shal not be ouerlayed or oppressed but contraryly that the afflictions shal serue as the Apostle saith to hys good Here therfore a difference must be put betwene euil and aduersity in such sort that althowgh the scripture doe promise to deliuer the faithful frō al euil yet yt foloweth not thereof that yt
pag. 536 against the particuler thankes giuing at the churching of wemen whereunto he answereth that there owght to be for this especially because yt is so dangerous and common yet yt is not so common as siknes which throwgh disobedience befalleth to men and wemen boeth nor so dangerous as a number of diseases owt of which one doeth not so likely escape as wemen owt of their trauail beside that the restoring of some to health towcheth the church nearer oftentymes then this As for his asking after scripture not able to answer the reasons grounded vpon the scripture yt is vnworthy the answering In the example of the Massilian heretikes that held that we should alwayes pray he doeth but abuse the tyme talking much but not towching the point wherefore I alledged yt let vs therefore return I alledged that the original of the Let any brovught in vpon occasion of some general mortality likevuise of certein confessions of the diuinity of our Sau. Christ vpon occasion of the detestable heresy of Arius ovught tovuching the ordinary vse of the church to ceas vuhen those euils vuere appeased whereunto he answereth that we are stil subiect to these mischeifes So were the elder churches before those euiles came and al other churches now as wel as ours yet nether did the elder churches then institute an extraordinary remedy before the mischeif nether doe other churches now continue yt after recouery And in deed herein yt is with the church of god as with mans body whereunto no wise physicion prescribeth an extraordinary diet but vpon some diseas present or apparantly approching other wise why are not there also extraordinary confessions and letanyes against al other detestable heresies and heauy iudgmentes which haue bene from the beginning of the world vnto thys day He answereth further that so the psalme made vpon special occasion should be now vnprofitable which is nothing so for they haue alwaies the same profit to be studied in to be red and preached vpō which other scriptures haue and this for aduantage aboue the rest that they are to be sung as their name doeth declare But to make dayly prayers of them hand ouer head or otherwise then the present estate wherein we be doeth agree with the matter conteyned in them ys an abusing of them For how incōuenient ys yt that our church liuing vnder a godly Prince should in sted of a prayer for yt self say a psalm which complayneth of oppression by a Tyrāt Yea when the estate of the churches should be such as the psalm doeth expres yet considering that the prayers in the churches owght to be framed to the vnderstanding of the moste simplest and the psalmes haue maners of speaches which the learned them selues haue enowgh to doe to vnderstand yt is manifest that they are not the aptest formes of publik prayer That of the repetition of the articles of our belief is alledged to no purpose For yt is a short Sum of the whole Christian profession directed against no particular heresy but alike needful at al tymes To proue that gloria patri c may be oft repeated at one meeting he answereth that a good thing can not be to oft said which that I abyde in the former similitude is as much to say that a man can not take to many purgations And yf yt be so as he saith why is there any other thanckes giuing then this His reason that yt is a good thing ys not enowgh so much as to bring yt into the church much les to cause yt to be so oft repeated vnles also yt be so good that nothing can be for the tyme and place better Hether belongeth that of vayn repetitions in the end of the book where first with what face he denieth that he vnderstood his wordes wickedly wrested of the Geneua translation cyted by the admonition let the reader iudg of his wordes wherein rendring the reason of this charge he saith for the wordes of Christ be not as they translate them but c. Then let hym obserue that of diuers reasons vsed by me to establish that translation he answereth not so much as one To proue that long prayers are not forbidden which none denieth also that the true translation is that we should not bable much which ys in effect the same with that of Geneua he bringeth diuers autorityes but to proue that our Sau. Christ meant to condemn onely repetitions withowt faith or that he condemned not when one thing is ordinarily oft repeated in a smal tyme which be the pointes in question nether the 4 first testimonies nor the 2 section haue one word of As for that owt of M. Martyr yt proueth that multiplying of wordes withowt faith is babling but not that that onely is babling which to put vs from this place of S. Mathew owght to haue bene proued Nether doeth the example of our Sau. Christ repeating the same wordes thrise help hym For first yt appeareth not in how short space this was doen. Then yt is vnmeet of euery example of prayer made in some especial estate ether of exceding ioy or of exceding affliction to make a patern for the ordinary prayers of the church For when this repetition is engendred of a zeal which by this ioy or affliction as by more wood put vnder the furnais is made whotter then commonly yt vseth to be in the best of the children of god yt is apparant that where this strenght of zeal is not to send forth these repetitions and with a strong voice to cause as yt were this Ecco there as hypokritical they can not but displease the lord Therefore the ordinary and vsual prayers of the church owght to be so conceiued as al the children of god by that measure of zeal which the lord commonly departeth vnto them may be able to folow with affection Yf some member can by reason of such particular scholing as is before spoken ouershoot this commō mark he hath his chamber at home alone as our Sa. Christ had his garden here where he may haue further scope But that the prayer of al the church should be framed vnto hys estate is no more conuenient then for that some one laboreth of the diseas of the gout al the whole church should haue an ordinary prayer to be deliuered from that diseas The same reason is of the thankes giuing by magnificat Benedictus and nunc dimittis which were made by occasion of certein particuler benefites no more to be vsed for ordinary prayers then the Aue Maria. whereūto he answereth that that pertayneth to the virgin onely euen so doe certein thinges conteyned in these psalmes ether agree to certein particular persons onely or els are such as can not agree to vs As to haue seen our Sa. Christ with bodily eyes to be called blessed of al generations to haue a son which should prepare the vuay to the son of god And therefore by his own answer these
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
antiquitity which he aduoucheth yt wil fal owt that he can fetch yt from not other head then from popery For as for that he alledgeth of the Christians which vsed yt because the Iues abiding other names of god could not abide yt yt ys nothing so considering that the Iues haue that name in great honour althowgh they haue not hym so to whom of right yt belongeth And in regard that yt was giuen to the son of god they hated the name of Christ as much and in some respect more because in sound yt is further of from their word then the name of Iesus That especially this curtesy should be made at the name of Iesus when the Gospel is red which conteineth the glad tydinges c. is a foul ouersight the confutation whereof I haue before noted which serueth also against the standing rather at the gospel then at the Epistle That also of subduing of al our spiritual enemyes by Christ c is friuolous seing that boeth god the father and the holy gost haue their work in our saluation althowgh afrer an other sort as wel as our Sa. Christ How absurd he is aswel in affirming that a Pastor may better haue two benefices to preach at then a Curate two cures to read at as also in his reason thereof let the reader iudg THE III. CHAPTER OF THE SEcond part of this treatise of ministring the holy sacramentes in priuate hovuses beginning pag. 510 of the D. book YT hath bene shewed that the administration of the word and Sacramentes owght to be publik and that they ceas not to be so euen then when for the distres of persecution the church is driueÌ„ to hould her assembly in a priuate how 's Here yt remayneth onely in questioÌ„ whether yt be conuenient that in the churchis peace the sacramentes for siknes sake should he ministred in priuate howses Vuhere to that alledged owt of S. Paul that he opposeth the congregation vuherein the lords supper should be houlden vnto a priuate hovus vuhere men satisfy their hunger he can answer nothing but repeateth that owt of Caluin which he idly alledged before I am content that the reader iudg whether boeth those absurdities which I layd vpoÌ„ hym folow of his rash answer As for that he replieth that our Sau. Christes preaching and S. Iohns baptizing openly proue not that the administring of the word and sacramentes should be publik because examples proue not yt is answered Beside that I haue shewed that yt hath commandement Another reason of his is because our Sau. Christ preached in priuate fâ—milies which is likewise answered That owt of Zuinglius that yt is not necessary to baptiz in the church I graunt for the case may be such that yt may be baptized in the fieldes but in a priuate how 's in this case of siknes where there be set and ordinary meetinges in the church I deny yt conuenient Yf he mean by not necessary that it is baptim althowgh yt be not ministred in the ordinary assembly I graunt yf he mean that yt ys not necessary to decency and good order his own wordes giue me answer enowgh For as the tyme maketh conuenience when yt is ministred so sone as yt may be commodiously or inconuenience when yt is differred longer so doeth the place Albeit S. Paul was a prisoner yet the Iaylor being conuerted would haue accorded hym what place he had iudged meetest for baptim therefore that example had bene more apt theÌ„ the other of Peter althowgh nether of them make any thing for yow As for that owt of Mathew 18 where two or three c to proue that two be enow to make a congregation wherein baptim may be ministred first yf it could come to pas that there were but two persons in the whole church one to baptiz the other to be baptized I dowt whether yt were meet to stay the baptim vntil we saw whether the lord would giue further encreas But that yt is conuenient that in our church yt should be ministred in the presens of two or three onely is a thing most vnworthy of the dignity of the holy Sacrament when as yf the ciuil administration of iudgment should be handled so cornerlike yt should worthely be suspected But what shal then be answered to the place of S. Mathew euen this that our Sau. Christ speaketh not there of the publik administring of the word and Sacramentes but of the proceeding in the church discipline against offences and of that part which was doen priuately For after he had tawght how from the admonition by one we owght to proceed vnto that which is made by two or three and so to the churchis hauing before ratified the proceeding of the church he autoriseth also by thys word the admonition which with inuocation of his name was giuen by those two or three â–ª promising that yt shal not be in vayn but haue effect that way which god hath disposed of whether yt be to conuersioÌ„ of the party or to further making hym inexcusable Yf it be asked why then our sauiour Christ did not also speak of the ratifying of the first admonition by one I answer that he spake of the effect of these two later admonitions not that the other should he withowt fruit but for the excellency of the effect of these before that Vuhich was also therfore needful to be made mention of more theÌ„ the first for so much as otherwise vpoÌ„ experience of the synners hardnes of heart in reiection of the first admonitioÌ„ he which gaue yt with the other one or two appointed for that matter throwgh dispair of his amendement might be beaten bak from proceding any further with hym To me acknowledging that in the tyme of persecution yt may be in a priuate hous as may also the publik preaching he answereth that the same may be doen in this necessity which he repeateth in his 6 diuision where stil he demauÌ„deth that in question For yt is in question whether there is any such necessity of baptim as for the ministring thereof the common decent order should be broken And verely by these kinde of speaches he playnly condemneth those churches ether of neglect or contempt of the holy sacramentes which suffer none to be administred but in the ordinary congregations Here I leau to the readers iudgment whether by this extraordinary administration there be more danger of confirming this error that children can not be saued yf they dy before they haue receiued baptim then the administring yt onely when the infantes may be conueniently browght to the church doeth confirm the error of the Anabaptistes which say that children may not be baptized vntil they come to age seing that by the dayly practis of the church in baptizing them there can not rise the least suspition of this later error In saying that I haue nether scripture reason nor Doctor he kepeth but his wont For scripture and reason
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
they may be otherwise quieted when they be tawght not to think that the working of assurance in their heartes is so tyed vnto the sacrameÌ„tes that withowt them the lord nether wil nor can comfort them but rather to consider that euen as when the Iues were depriued of the sacrament of the Sanctuary the lord promised that he hym self would be for a Sanctuary vnto them and supply the want thereof euen so he wil not be wanting vnto them which hauing a desire to be partakers of yt can not so conueniently be receiued thereunto putting them also in remembrance of the horrible abominations of priuate mas which came first in by occasion of these priuate communions as they are called Here let the reader take heed of an error which the D. hath let fal that we haue remission of synnes by communication vnto this Sacrament whereas remission of synnes receiued by faith alone and sealed vp in baptim must be had before we come to the Communion To the Councel vuhich forbiddeth the communion in priuate hovuses he answereth that yt meaneth vsually for that the vse was such in some places which is said withowt al proof or likelihood of truth whereby for a shift he sticketh not to slaunder whole auncient churches notwithstanding that he pretendeth sometyme such reuerence to one onely man as the reader before hath seen Then he opposeth the Nicen Councel which is that I preuented in the 2 diuision and in the fift shewed to make against hym After folow M. Bucers and Martyrs notes which if they weâ—e theirs and had bene for further assurance thereof tawght by them to look vpon the Son yet being the testimonies of men how learned and godly soeuer they are subiect to examination I wil not deny but they might be of that iudgment considering that I see M. Caluin to haue bene of the same which I therefore let the reader vnderstand that he may be diligenter in the examination of the reasons against yt and not to descend into our iudgment onles he be compelled by the matter yt self Althowgh yt is not ours alone but as he hath heard of others yea of diuers reformed churches where this is not admitted putting hym also in minde of boeth M. Caluins and Martyrs iudgmentes in the matter of Baptim that yt owght not to be in a priuate how 's nor withowt a sermon desiring hym further to consider whether certein reasons making against the one doe not strike vpon the other And in deed as in my iudgment ys is vnmeet to administer ether of the sacramentes in priuate howses so that is yet les tollerable in the holy supper which hath a special mark and representation of brotherly communion more then Baptim Here I pas by as a thing political rather then perteining to conscience the skare that may come by these priuate communions when the siknes as often commeth to pas is contagious As for that of Musculus yt is idle seing his approbation of yt is not made to appear and no man denieth but they that vsed yt in tymes past did yt for a good end THE FOVRTH CHAPTER OF this Tractate tovuching the ceremonies in Baptim pag. 607 of the D. book NOw follow the corruptioÌ„s in the sacrameÌ„ts apart and first of those in Baptim where in mayntenaÌ„ce of the questions ministred to young infantes which can not answer he would make vs beleue that the catholik writers as yt were the Gouldsmithes were in dout whether the Denis which he browght were good money or no whereas the contrariety in opinions ys betwene the Papistes and Protestantes His euidence to proue hym legitimat because these bookes be very auncient implieth that a number of horrible abuses are as auncient And therefore in sted of saying some falshood might be thrust in he should haue said some truth might be thrust in to giue credit to the rest considering that the purenes of the tong which he wrote in being set apart there are few thinges worthy ether of S. Pauls Scholer or of the Bishop of AtheÌ„s His defence by the Bishop of Sarisbury is answered The not answering also of my reply against Denis vnder pretence of a flout is before noted To the reasons against Augustines kinde of speaking he can answer nothing onely he mispendeth the tyme in prouing that baptim is the seal of faith which none denieth but that yt is called faith which he owght to haue proued he could not finde a word For that also that Augustin maketh for the interrogatories ministred to infantes beside strong affirmations he can bring nothing As for that alledged by me yt is most manifest in another place where Augustin sheweth yt to haue bene the vse that the minister asked of the parentes vuhether the childe beleued they ansvuering that yt did so that althowgh this were an abuse yet yt is much different from the maner which we haue receyued from the papistes and more simple then yt In the next diuision he answereth nothing to the purpose nor in the next to yt sauing onely a vayn cauil for whereas I meant the true faith he flyeth to that of Simon Magus which was counterfait In the next where yt was alledged that al ovught to be doen simply and playnly in the church he can answer nothing onely yt may serue for a colorable cavil that as the book wil haue the infantes promise by the godfathers so saith he the Adm. wil haue infantes desire by their parentes For albeit the Adm. wordes might haue bene warelier set yet it is but a hauking after syllables when their meaning is playn that there owght to be no such strange and vnwonted kinde of speaches in the common seruice I pas by Musculus autority flat far vs but M. Bucers wherewith the D. often presseth vs so sore must not be forgotteÌ„ which doeth precisely finde faut with our seruice book herein His second chapter requireth no answer For as for his exception that we alow of godfathers deuised by the Pope yt is answered beside that yt was not by his own account deuised by a Bishop of Rome which was Antichrist The contrariety with my self in that page 18 I denying that the vsage of a thing by the whole church can giue yt such autority as that yt may not be abrogated yet here alow of godfathers as of an indifferent ceremony considering that the churches haue generally receiued yt is vnworthy of answer For there is great difference in allowing the churchis autority absolutely or withowt condition and in reuerencing her autority in an indifferent matter in yt self and towching the vse profitable when yt is vsed accordingly so that a blinde man might see how I might iustly improue the first and approue the last In the there first diuisions of his second chapter pag. 614 there is no answer worthy the reply Vuhere he would prefer crossing before milk in baptim he doeth yt contrary to Tertullians autority
and estates I graâ—nt also that those which be conuenient and as long as they be so owght likewise to bring to remeÌ„brance the duty which the estate wherof they are markes doeth require And yf he could proue that the surplice were a fit garment for a Minister I would not deny but that he owght generally be therby put in minde of his duty in that behalf But that meÌ„ should run owt into idle speculations of the colour or form I can not agree For no more then yt is meet that vpon the eating of milk syncerity and simplicity should be enioyned no more owght there vpon the white colour of the surplice be raised any such signification of glory and purenes In ciuil respect and where the commodity of this life is onely regarded the vse of significations is freer as in Liuery and Seazon of a how 's by the ring and of land by a clot or turft but where men are called to godlines of lyfe by significations there they nether owght to be withowt warrant of the word of god nor yet can be ciuil For a ciuil ceremony doeth binde vs no further then to the owtward performance of that whereunto the ceremony is vsed which yf we doe althowgh it be with an euil minde yet we caÌ„ not ciuilly be charged So long as the signification of the white in the surplice is as he supposeth and ayd to godlines so long yt is necessary and not indifferent which is that which I said and which he confuteth not Likewise in saying that they are supposed strong to vuork godlines I meant not that the vertue is in the garment as yf yt could cause men to be godly but I meant to ascribe vnto yow that in so speaking of yt yow match yt with the word of god For the word of god yt self throwgh the peruersnes of our nature is not withowt the working of gods holy spirit strong enowgh to work godlines in vs And so my argument yf vuhite haue strenght to moue to godlines then that vuhich is vuhiter hath more is good For nothiÌ„g hath power to moue vnto godlines but that which god hath ordeined for that purpose and that which he hath ordeyned hath of yt self power to work that whereuÌ„to he hath ordeined yt if it light of a fit obiect or matter to work vpon In what sens I cal them Sacramente which are instituted with such significations I haue before declared That which I ad there of our superstitioÌ„ vuhilest vue vuil haue no painted nor grauen but vuouen images agreeth also wel vnto this matter of the cros For yf to set vp a wodden cros in the church with coÌ„mandement that in looking vpoÌ„ yt we should remeÌ„ber not to be ashamed of the cros of Christ be a faut against the first table the same reason is of this cros of flesh whereunto his answer that those are against the expres commandement of god is before confuted where is shwed that they are as vnlavuful vuhich may be gathered or concluded to be forbiddeÌ„ as the thinges which are expresly forbidden And here yt hath bene proued that these significations vpon such groundes are not according to the word of god Beside that yt may peraduenture abuse hym that he taketh the word image to reach no further then vnto the portraiture of a man or of some other liuing thing whereas yt coÌ„prehendeth al representations of mens deuise browght into the church for doctors and teachers therein The rest in this diuision is not to purpose Here leauing the principal matter which is that euery ceremony vuhich vuith an ovutvuard sign had a doctrine annexed vnto yt is in a general signification a sacrament and that consequently they make a Sacrament of the cros he taketh hym self to that I denied the foreskin in circumcision to be an element which is not worth the answering For I confessed circumcision to haue bene gods holy sacrament the questioÌ„ is whether that Augustine did wel define of a sacrament in vsing the word Element which is properly taken for the simple natures onely â–ª wheÌ„ as the law of defining requireth the propriety of wordes coÌ„sidering also that by his maner of speach in calling wine bread or flesh Elementes the common people are not instructed so that boeth in respect of the learned and vnlearned yt seemeth the definitioÌ„ might haue bene better assigned Being charged for reiecting M. Hoopers and Alascos allegory as papistical vuheÌ„ he notvuithstanding allovueth of this he answereth that theirs is dumb and not this which is vntrue for they ad boeth a more witty and likely signification before noted whereof let the reader iudg vuhy anointing vuith oyl vuhich vuas sometyme the lords ovun sacrament and vuhich hath a more ample signification then that of the cros should not asvuel be reteyned as the cros or rather vuhy the cros being displaced yt should not haue place he can answer nothing but that yt is the churchis liberty which is straung that she should haue liberty to doe that whereof she can giue no reason To that that vuodden crosses in high vuayes are as lavuful as those in the forehead and in the church he answereth that they are durable and erected to be worshipped which these be not as thowgh there were no daunger but in gros worshipping Althowgh here he forgetteth that which he alledged owt of M. Bucer who giueth warniÌ„g that yt be not receiued vuith superstition or seruitude of the element which were in vayn if as he saith there were no man so mad as to imagin any such thing of yt That of the smale induraÌ„ce wil not help for if there be dauÌ„ger of Idolatry wheÌ„ yt is loÌ„g before our eyes considering that that Idolatry hath her beginning in one momeÌ„â— yt may as wel haue yt in that momeÌ„t as in another yea so much more likely at this cros theÌ„ at that in the streetes as yt is set in a higher place eueÌ„ in the church and not behinde the dore but in the holy sacrament as yt were in the Ark where the principal iuels of the church are layed vp Ys the fire once kindled ywis our peruers nature hath matter enowgh to make yt flame And beside that the memory of yt is renued at euery Baptim by this example in the church they may easely cros them selues at home at the least the superstitious which think that their crossinges in the forhead and breast is an armour of proof against al tentations of the Deuil take occasion hereon to be confirmed in their superstition THE SECOND PART OF THIS chapter of confirmation of children and vuemens churching TO this chapter pertayn the confirmation of children and wemens churching as thinges supposed to be annexed to the baptim and birth of children In the first whereof his first sect page 726 is no answer to me which alledged yt boeth horribly abused and not necessary That yt is auncieÌ„ter then the feyned decretal epistles I yeeld vnto
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
must be necessarily had yet preaching at burials is not meet vnles withal yt be doen withowt inconueniences He denieth yt also to be acceptation of persons houlding forth the obiection which I gaue hym but the answer vnto yt he towcheth not Likewise he saith that there is sometymes more occasion to preach at the rich mans burial then at the poors but he saith yt onely for proof he bringeth none My argument he answereth not which is that the cause vuhy burial sermons vuere brovught in of giuing of famous men their commendation vuas insufficient considering that the same vuas doen by the holy Prophetes moste able and vuilling to doe yt by sermon yf yt had bene conuenient Likewise to the infamous beginninges of these funeral sermons from infidels he saith nothing onely he abuseth the tyme in opposing the autority which I confessed by which kinde of reasoning he may also bring in torches at noon dayes moneth weke and year mindes which haue the alowance of the same tymes that these burial sermons haue The first sect is answered in the 3 diuision My argument which is that as other inuentions of men vse to doe so these sermons haue driuen ovut the necessary duty of particular comforting the partyes vuhich are especially stricken by the death of their friendes he hath vtterly peruerted turning my argument of effectes into that of contraries as he did likewise boeth my argumentes of the final and efficient causes in the 7 diuision which is but vntrue dealing The general sorow of the church in the death of a member may be easely susteyned by the ordinary teachinges but they that be specially wounded owght to haue a special plaster wherein that which he affirmeth of the exhortation giuen generally to be as apt to comfort as when yt is particularly applied is boeth a manifest vntruth and directly contrary to hym self which saith None douteth but that a man is more moued by that which is spoken to hym particularly then he is with that spoken generally aswel to other as to hym self And hereby yt may appear how inconuenient yt is to clog the minister with this voluntary charge of preaching at burials which beside his ordinary ministery hath so necessary a duty cast vpon hym in the death of his parishoners whereunto ad also the travail and care toward the deceased during his siknes The first section is answered in diui 3. To that of tying hereby the meditation of death vuhich ovught to be continual to one onely tyme he answereth as yow see the reply whereunto is before Althowgh this reason owght not to haue bene so whotly pursued seing that althowgh I wrote yt yet I professed that I would not precisely subscribe yt M. Caluins iudgment of these sermons doeth now appear which is that he doeth not greatly disalow them His answer against that I alledged that they might be easelier born in other places then vuith vs vuhere there are such svuarmes of papistes and other ignorant vuhich take occasion of falling thereby is partly replied vnto in the 3 diuision and is further confuted in that the doctrine against purgatory and trentals may be as frutfully tawght at other tymes as yt is in other churches where we see singuler frute of such teaching As for the morosity he talketh of yt is before answered Althowgh the money for preaching be giuen vnasked yet if yt be receiued in that respect the occasion of the papistes slaunderous speach is not taken away The next diuision belongeth vnto the readers iudgment the next is answered Here yt is once to be noted that he not content to wrest my particular argumentes hath peruerted this whole disputation For where my reasons doe neuer conclude the vnlawfulnes of these ceremonies of burial but the inconuenience and inexpedience of them he imagineth me cōcluding that they may not be and that yt is vnlawful to haue them which notwithstanding S. Paul doeth precisely distinguish THE EIGHT CHAPTER OF the second part of this Treatise of the surplice and other apparel taken from popery AGainst their importunacy which may peraduenture say that I leaped the matter of apparel throwgh conscience of the weaknes of our cause yt shal not be much owt of the way to run yt ouer that yt may appear boeth how little there is which hath not bene answered and how little weight yt hath which remayneth to be answered The first diuis is answered so is the second for further answer whereunto I refer the reader to the Bishop of Salisburys book where he shal perceiue how directly the D. is contrary vnto hym in that point As for the last section yt is answered in the first part of this tractate sauing that he misconstrueth my wordes in affirming me to say that monumentes of Idolatry may be vsed in the church yf some manifest profit doe appear Vuhere as my meaning is playn that they owght to haue no entrance into the church not onely for that they are monumentes of Idolatry but because there appeareth no manifest profit of them For althowgh I wil not enter into that question yet I can not see how that which is properly a monument of Idolatry can haue any good vse in the church That thinges ordeyned to good vses and after cōuerted to Idolatry may be profitable I graunt but that a thing shal be profitable in the church especially whose natiuity and first birth was consecrated to an Idol and which the first day yt was inuented was applied vnto Idolatry I think the Answ is not able to shew In the next the first part of the first section the reader hath to iudg of vpon the reasons alledged and vpon the common experience His question is onely to blot paper being afterward precisely boeth moued and answered by me For proof that some think the sacrament better administred with then withowt a surplice I alledged as witnesses them vuhich say I vuil not communicate vnles he vuear a surplice whereunto he answereth that yt may come of iust cause when the Minister by not wearing sheweth an example of disobedience Vuhereby he first aloweth that men should absteyn from the Communion for want of a surplice then in part he giueth the execution of the lawes to priuate men contrary to the law of god and of the realm Vuhereas yf the Minister did euil in not taking a surplice and would not giue place to their admonition yt behoued them to receiue the sacramentes and hear the word at his hand and after to complain of the disorder to those to whome the correction belongeth His reason that none which are perswaded to communicate with vs think the sacrament better or wors for a surplice for that they are disswaded from greater thinges is insufficient For there were Iues which were browght from confidence in them selues and in their own workes to seek for their saluation in Christ which in a peece of a holy day
this was also the cause no dowt why Iustin Martyr and Hermes after they were called to function in the church are said to haue continued their Philosophers apparel By how much more I mervaile at the D. inconstancy which page 275 citeth a sentence to proue that the chāge of the apparel in the mynistery as wel as in other estates is not material He alledged also one of these examples to wit of Iustin wearing a Philosophers apparel after his receiuing to the ministery which he would neuer haue doen yf there had bene an vniform faschion of apparel appointed vnto the Ministers Vnles peraduenture he wil say that al the rest of the Ministers did wear Philosophers apparel as wel as he which is vntrue seing this is noted of them as of rare examples Vnto the particular reasons of Birrus because he could not answer he hath feyned a nw signification of a thyn plate contrary to the autority of the Calepine that proueth yt to be a garment of cours and heary cloth of no price His Dalmatica also yf yt were as he imagineth with wide sleeues maketh not a whit to proue yt a peculier garment Contrariwise the word signifiyng Slauonish declareth that yt was not proper to any degree of men but to the cuntrey ether because the cloth or faschion came from thens His reason that they were particular kinde of uestimentes because the names be expressed is to shameful as yf there were no other cause to name them whereas the naming of thē maketh to the certeinty of the story And further in Cyprians garmentes yt maketh to his commendation which in giuing his garmentes according to the quality of the persons vsed discretiō and declareth hym to haue bene of a present minde in the very point of death The particular reason of the cloke he hath let fallen flat yet is yt their reason whose names he pretendeth for other aswel as for this To that I replied of the white apparel in Chrisostomes tyme that he rather reprehendeth yt when he saith that ▪ their dignity is not in the vuearing thereof but in taking hede to their ministery he answereth that yt is spoken by comparison but that is onely said I graunt we sometymes speak in that meaning but that is nether the simplest nor vsualest kīde of speach To proue that the white apparel was with thē nothing els then a more honest apparel as blak with vs I alledged Salomon wherein his interpretation of innocency is not innocent as that which ouerturneth the whole sute of the text That of ioy wil not stand considering that that was mentioned before and the scripture vseth commonly to send the figuratiue speaches before rather then to place them after althowgh I graunt yt is a thing annexed with ioy But that yt is to be vnderstanded of the white apparel vsed in those partes yt is manifest by the oyl of the head which is ioyned in the same vers considering that yt ys knowen that the a vse thereof amongest the richer sort especially when they would recreate them selues was commō where he excepteth that this custome might be changed betwene Salomons and Chrysostoms tyme he owght to haue shewed yt for such a custome once proued is stil presumed vntil the cōtrary appear Albeit in Tullies tyme many ages after Salomon yt appeareth that the Romanes which with the East empire translated a nomber of East fashions at bankets when men attire them selues more honestly vsed to wear a white garment But yt shal appear that this white garment had the same estimation in Ieroms tyme and therefore also in Chrisostoms Hether therefore pertayneth that page 282 of the white garment vsed in diuine seruice and alledged owt of Ierom where the D. being required to answer the reasons of the reply to the examiner by which yt is maynteyned that no special mark of apparel in the seruice of god is meāt saith he purposeth not at this tyme which in good english is as much to say as he can not For otherwise he must needes be in damages which arresting so violently and so infamously one that said nothing to hym in calling his proof a chiledish cauil now being called vpon putteth in no declaration against hym His pretence because I set not the repliers reasons down is vayn for he that toke the paynes to read his book to accuse hym should haue doen the same to haue conuinced hym especially seing yt was yet neuer answered But because he saith that the place which he cyteth owt of the councel of Carthage may be a sufficient confutation of al which is said of Ieroms places seing we haue no credit with hym let hym hear Erasmus which affirmeth that vuhite garmentes vuere in Ieroms tyme in great price and that the vuearing of them vuas for honors sake accorded vnto the Priestes but not vnto the Monkes sauing onely in deuine seruice Vuhereby yt is manifest that the white garmentes which Priestes did wear in the deuine seruice was as we say their holyday apparel and vsed of them as wel with owt the church as within So is yt also apparant that the place of the Carthage councel towching the Deacons white apparel ys nothing els but that the Deacon did in the church onely wear that apparel which the Bishops and Priestes as those which were more estemed did wear boeth within an withowt the church Nether is there any necessity that he should translate the wordes of the Councel in maner of a cōmandement vnto the Deacon to wear a white garment feing the word may aswel be turned he may vuear as let hym wear and better also For considering that yt was as hath bene shewed graunted for honors sake yt is more agreable with the nature of honor to leau yt free then to driue hym to the wearing of yt whether he wil or no. whereupon likewise ensueth that there is not like cause in our countrey of wearing a white garment which was in theirs yt beīg stage like with vs which was graue and honorable with them As for Ierōs place owt of Ezechiel the Ans doeth shamefully abuse his reader For he speaketh of the vse of the Iues vnder the law and not of vs which appeareth manifestly in that he opposeth that ceremony of the law vnto the maner of the Aegiptiō Priests vuhich vuore boeth vuithin the church and vuithovut vuhereas the Priestes in the lavu did vuearonely vuithin the church This appeareth again in that which he addeth by and by that this vuhite apparel vuearing is fulfilled in the gospel vuhen vue put on Christ. For further reply herein I refer the reader partly vnto the answer vnto the Examiner which to take away the D. excuse I would haue gathered and set down yf I had had the book partly to the Bishop of Salisbury who sheweth owt of Augustin and Ierom vuith others that the Ministers nether vuere in tymes past nor ovught to haue bene discerned by any special
vnlavuful thing notwithstanding that he protest that yt is for orders sake onely For as for that he addeth withowt any suspitiō of superstitiō yf it be vnderstood that the Magistrate doeth not cōmand yt superstitiously that doeth not heal vp the matter seing he may faut by other wayes thē by superstitiō yf he vnderstand that the subiectes doe not abuse yt to superstitiō yt is that in questiō But here he is fallē again frō him self For before he answereth as thowgh a church ceremony might be comely and not tend to edificatiō inasmuch as to me obiecting that yt ovught to tend to edification he answereth that yt is sufficient yf yt pertayn to order and comelines Here presuming comelines he concludeth thereof that not onely yt tendeth to edification but also that yt edifieth The rest is an open asking of that in controuersy that onely excepted which is before answered Against his reason that the surplice edifieth because those which wear yt edify I alledged the Midvuiues lye whereunto he answereth nothing to the purpose but that which I gaue hym which is not enowgh to mayntein hym seing he propounded generally that those thinges edify which are doen by them which edify And what auantageth yt hym to proue that this apparel may be worn that the lye profited when yt owght not to haue bene doen yf yt might haue saued al the world The similitude of stammering is vnanswered For seing he is browght to that pinch that he cā here assign no other cause why they edify then because the Minister can not otherwise be admitted to preach yf there should be a Magistrate which in contempt of the gospel should ordeyn that none should preach but those which stammer he seeth that the similitude houldeth Yf this example be not graue and sad enowgh to match with the cope which hath bene alwayes estemed so fit for a players garment let hym take the example in oyl c propounded vnder the same conditions The rest is answered In the next to the reasons against his assertion that the wearing of the surplice maketh the wearers to agree in other pointes of doctrine and the not wearing to disagree he partly answereth not and the answer which he maketh hangeth altogither of blinde experience I cal yt blinde because he can giue no reason of yt and therefore as that which hath no light to shew yt by yt must needes be vnuisible As for his vntrue surmises that we imagin a perfection whereby we haue no need of lawes or Magistrate they neuer fail hym as if yt were not emongest other a singuler vse and profite of the Magistrate to procure by lawes and punishmentes that those meanes which god hath ordeyned to mayntein godly vnity with be straytly obserued althowgh he deuise none of his own The next diuision is answered In the next being not able to cary his reason they are signes of good thinges therefore they are good any further he dischargeth yt vpon M. Bucer which hath yt not also vpon the commō vse of speach which he also slaundereth For we doe not cal yt a good sign comonly vnles that as the thing is good so the sign to mark yt owt with be agreable And yf he presume that here in the surplice he openly beggeth the question otherwise what is he that wil say that a wolfs skyn is a good sign of a lamb because the lamb which is good is clothed in yt althowgh his answer is nothing but a shift For he considered not what the thing is in common speach but what yt is in deed and in reason The example of the goulden calf was wel alledged For yt was to the Israelites a sign of the true god but a nawghty and a wicked sign and so yf none but Ministers of the gospel did wear the surplice I would confes that with vs yt were a sign of a Minister of the gospel but yet an vncomely and an inconuenient sign And to the intent the reader may know how vnfaithfully the D. dealeth with him in houlding owt M. Bucers autority for the surplice and the rest of this popish apparel he may vnderstand that he doeth boeth for that it serueth to superstition in many and for diuers other causes require that they should be taken avuay in our church His first section is to no purpose of that which I towched hym for In the next his answer that the abuse of the brasen serpent could not be taken away oneles the superstition yt self were is withowt al proof and may be as wel said of this apparel For althowgh no man worship the apparel by falling down before yt yet he may haue a damnable opinion of yt and as hard to be pulled owt as the other Beside that by how much the abuse of the serpent was greater then of this apparel by so much was the profit of the brasen serpent if yt had bene called to the right vse withowt comparison greater then of these ceremonies And althowgh the necessary and commanded vse of the serpent were but for the tyme wherein yt was a mean to heal those which were bitten yet afterward yt had a notable vse of continuyng the remembrance of gods vuōderful benefite to vuards that people whereūto he answereth not Els I ask of hym why it was continued in the church so many hundred yeares vnder so many boeth good kinges and godly Priestes His answer to that obiected of the loue feastes I receiue so far as concerneth the inconuenience of keping them in that place wherein the lords supper was celebrated Howbeit to that that the church hath for the abuse vtterly taken those feastes avuay notvuithstanding that they vuere likely meanes to norish loue vuith he answereth not That those loue feastes were borowed of the Gentiles is vnlike considering that S. Peter giueth sufficiently to vnderstand that they were vsed in the churches of the Iues which abhorred from the ceremonies of the Gentiles For writyng vnto the churches of the Iues he alludeth plainly vnto that of S. Iude where these feastes are expresly named Yt is much more probable that they were taken from the imitation of the Iues vnder the law who are bidden to feast before the lord in Ierusalem wherein are commended vnto them as gests and partakers of the same blessing of god with them straungers and widowes with other nedy and destitute persons which is manifest to haue bene one of the endes of this loue feast The two first sections are nothing but an asking of that in demaund especially hauing regard to this point whether this apparel be conuenient for the ministery or no or whether being inconuenient yt owght so to be declared in which pointes this question lieth As towching that point whether the Minister should wear yt althowgh yt be inconueniēt the truth is that I dare not be autor to any to forsake his pastoral charge for the inconuenience thereof considering that this charge being an absolute