fufficiēcie of gifts and willingnesse to practise them pag. 45. If M. Penry meane the practise of giftes to Gods glory I say Amen vnto it I confesse that they of Philippos had giftes in some measure but they had not willingnesse to practise those giftes to Gods glorie which willingnesse c. is one of the necessarie branches of an inward calling That they of Philippos had not this willingnesse c. it is manifest for they sought themselues and practised their gifts wholy to increase the Apostles affliction Lastly if your Antecedent be true what say you to this proposition They of whose Magistracie there is a Nullitie before God though they haue an outward calling ought not to bee accompted Magistrates Doe you not thinke this proposition to bee very dangerous I could presse and followe this very farre but I abstaine of purpose Obiection The Sacrament may not bee receiued at his handes which wanteth outward calling Therefore not at his handes who is destitute of the inward graces I. Penry pag. 46. Answere Your Antecedent is true and maketh against the Anabaptists I denie your Argument My reason is Omnia Sacramenta cùm obsint indignè tractantibus prosunt tamen per eos dignè sumentibus August contra epist Parmen lib. 2. cap. 10. That is All Sacraments though they hurt such as doe handle them vnworthily yet they profit such as doe worthily receiue them at their handes Obiection We haue no warrant to receiue an extraordinarie Sacrament But that which is administred by ignorant ministers is an extraordinary Sacrament if it be any Therefore we haue no warrant to receiue it I. Penry pag. 49. Answere I denie your Minor and doe adde this First that it is a Sacrament by your owne confession pag. 50 51. which is administred by ignorant ministers Secondly that it is no extraordinarie Sacrament which is deliuered by them vnlesse you will call Baptisme and the holy Supper extraordinarie Sacraments If any will conclude of these my answeres that I mislike M. Penryes desire of a learned Ministerie in Wales he takes vp that which I neuer let fall for I desire with all my heart and the Lorde for his Christs sake grant it that not onely Wales may be furnished with worthy gouernours and pastours but all other partes of her Maiestics Dominions that Gods graces may be more and more multiplied vpon vs and our posteritie and his holy hand watch ouer vs. 10 THE CHVRCH OF England is the visible Church of Christ THE Church of Galatia which erred in a fundamentall point of doctrine is called the Church of God Gal. 1. therefore the Church of England which erreth not in any fundamentall point of doctrine is the Church of Christ That the Church of Galatia erred in a fundamentall point of doctrine it is manifest for they ioyned Circumcision and Christ together If any do thinke that the Church of England doe hold an errour in any fundamentall point of doctrine let him set downe the particular The Church of England hath Christ for her head and foundation for shee receiueth and reuerenceth the Canonicall Scriptures and confesseth Christes righteousnesse to be hers and that saluation is compassed by Christ alone with whose grace nothing may bee matched Christus aut totus aut nullus Gratia Dei aut tota suscipitur aut tota reijcitur Gratia nullo modo esset gratia nisi esset omni modo gratuita That the preaching of the holy worde and administration of the Sacraments are the essentiall markes of the Church of Christ I haue proued in my Treatise of the Church to which booke I referre you but these essentiall markes of the Church are in the Church of England therefore c. Obiection The discipline vsed in the Primitiue Church is not in the Church of Englād therefore the church of England is not the Church of Christ Answere I denie the Argument My reasons are First S. Luke setting out the extraordinary blessing which God gaue to Peters sermō in Ierusalem hath these wordes Then they that gladly receiued his worde were baptized and the same day there were added to the Church about three thousand soules And they continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and breaking of bread and prayers Acts. 2.41 42. No man endued with Gods spirit wil denie that this assembly which was baptised continued in the Apostles doctrine c. was the Church of God and yet no Deacons were at that time chosē or Consistories of Seniors erected Secondly they which doe vrge the discipline most earnestly doe confesse that the discipline is not an essentiall part of the Church Their reason is The discipline resembles the wall of a Citie and hedge or ditch of a Vineyarde It is a Citie though the wall bee wanting it is a Vineyarde though hedge or ditch be wanting Lastly I woulde gladly knowe whether it bee either possible or safe to plant that discipline in this lande before that Gods holy Trueth be soundly both taught and receiued and that there be fit Churchmen and people to execute the discipline Obiection The Ministers in England are not chosen by the Parishes ouer which they are set therefore they are no ministers and consequently there is no administration of the worde or Sacraments no worshippe of God nor visible Church in England as some Anabaptists haue giuen out of late Answere I denie the Argument My reason is if this Argument of theirs were good these absurdities would follow First that Gods Church is necessarily tyed in all places and times to one forme in the externall calling of the ministers Secondly that the excellent assemblie in the Primitiue Church Actes 2. verse 41 42. was not the Church of God for at that time the Ministers were not elected by the Presbitery people Thirdly that the worthiest Preachers in this land are no Ministers Lastly that very many parts of England are like to haue no teachers because they are vtterly vnfit to make choise of their Pastours If it be saide that some Bishops in ordeyning and some Patrones in presenting ignorant Ministers haue erred as grosly as any Parish can my answere is that I neither dare nor will defend such either Bishops or Patrons I doe rather exhort them to vnfeyned repentance for this great sinne of theirs hath and doth crie very loude for some notable vengeance Cipri de vnitate Ecclesiae Haereses Diabolus inuenit schismata quibus subuerteret fidem veritatem corrumperet scinderet vnitatem Quos detinere non potest in viae veteris caecitate cirrumscribit decipit noui itineris errore Rapit de ipsa Ecclesia homines dum sibi appropinquasse iam lumini atque euasisse faeculi noctem videntur alias nescientibus tenebras rursus infundit c. A DEFENCE OF SVCH POINTS IN R. SOMES LAST TREATISE AS M. PENRY hath dealt against And a refutation of many Anabaptistical blasphemous and Popish absurdities touching Magistracie Ministerie Church Scripture and Baptisme c. conteined
is very like that you haue forgottē it Such trifles are too base for your great spirits Your second reason is The corrupt approbation of vnpreaching Ministers so you name the best outward calling they can haue of the Church is not so forcible to make them Ministers as was the ordinance of God to make the sonnes of Aaron sacrificing at Ierusalē to be priestes therefore an Argument from the Leuiticall priesthood is not forcible for vnpreaching Ministers My answer is I deny your antecedent and do adde this first that it is as lawfull that is to say vtterly vnlawfull to make vnfit Ministers now as it was before to make vnfit priestes Secondly that it was not Gods pleasure that all the posteritie of Aaron without exception that is tagge and ragge shoulde be admitted to the holy priesthood For neither you nor any man aliue may reason thus The Leuiticall priesthoode must rest in the tribe of Leui therefore euery one of that tribe though vnfit for that holy functiō was to be admitted to the priesthoode You might very soundly haue disputed thus The Leuiticall priesthood must be kept within the compasse of the tribe of Leui by Gods expresse commaundement Num. 3. therefore no stranger might come neere the Lords altar You call the best outward calling in the Church of England a corrupt approbation If you meane it is corrupt in admitting ignorant men to the holy Ministerie so was the ordeyning of ignorāt Leuites at Ierusalem If you meane that the best outward calling in the Church of Englād is simply corrupt that is none at al though sufficient men be admitted I detest your Anabaptistical fancie for then the worthiest Diuines in this land are no Ministers Besides it is confessed of all famous learned men that Gods Church is not necessarily tied in all places and times to one forme in the externall calling of the ministers CHAP. 12. I. Penry THE CORRVPT ALLOWance of the Church cannot make our readers to be substantiall Ministers FOr so all men women without or within the Church might be capable of the Ministerie because all may be capable of this outward allowance Secondly and particularly a man not furnished with naturall capacitie thirdly a man that could not reade though he wanted also the gift of interpretation for such a one might recite the liturgie without the booke fourthly the Church might make a man Minister against his will though he should neuer consent thereunto And this is the willingnes that I meane when I say that the inward calling is conteined in the sufficiencie of giftes and willingnes to practise which willingnes I gather vpon the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed of the Apostle 1. Tim. 3.1 Your reason therefore from the malicious Philippian Ministers toucheth not the question Thus Caiphas with his crew of vnworthy and monstrous priestes who within a few pages in your booke haue impudently so often troubled the Reader is answered And I thinke it a great iudgement of God that the ornaments of our English and Welch Ministery for the most part consisteth in the deformitie of such lothsome spots R. Some If by substantial Ministers you meane such as are furnished with giftes in good measure it is the peculiar office of God to make such either miraculously as hee did the Prophets and many in the Primitiue Church or by blessing mens godly studies as in later and our times It passeth the Churches reach by any externall calling to make men furnished ministers which before the external allowance were not furnished by God himselfe therefore to bee of the line of Aaron did make the ignorant Leuites no more to be substantiall priestes then the externall calling nowe doeth make ignorant men to be substantiall Ministers The summe of your reasons may be shut vp briefly in this argument All may be capable as you say of the outward allowance therefore the outward calling of the Church makes not a Minister to vs vnlesse he haue the inward Your antecedent is a speciall one If you were not strangely caried some branches of it might haue bene kept in I trust you do not condemne a prescript liturgie in the Church of God If you do all the reformed Churches dissent from you and their practise doeth apparantly confute you But I leaue that and denie your argument My reasons are first the ignorant Leuites had an outward calling but not an inward yet they were lawful priests by your owne confession Secondly Iudas was called outwardly but not inwardly yet he was an Apostle Lastly the Apostle chargeth Timothee not to lay handes rashly on any 1. Tim. 5. therefore the outwarde allowance is more then you accompt of My reason from the cōtentious Ministers of Philippi c. was a very sure one did ouerthrow your fancie Because you cannot answere it you tell me it toucheth not the question A briefe kinde of answering Caiphas and the Leuiticall priests haue bene alledged no otherwise by mee then by those worthy men Caluine Beza c. before mee The mention of them hath not troubled the godly Reader at al therefore not impudently as you giue out very sawcily I perceiue they haue distempered you for in steade of answering my argument you exclaime vpon them Your gift in answering is very rare You make wash-way of the weightiest argumēts Vnto the lothsome spots in the English and Welch Ministery God graunt either soueraigne medicine to cure them or sounde expulsion to remoue them R. Some Lastly if your antecedent be true viz. that they of whose ministerie there is a nullitie before God although they haue an outward calling ought not to be accōpted ministers what say you to this proposition They of whose magistracie there is a nullitie before God though they haue an outward calling ought not to be accompted magistrates Doe you not thinke this proposition to bee very dangerous I could presse and follow this very farre but I abstaine of purpose I. Penry You demaund what I thinke of this proposition Surely my iudgement is that it is altogether without sense and ouerthroweth it selfe for it is as if you sayd he of whose faith there is a nullitie before God though he be assured of his saluation is not to be accompted a faithfull man Why to be assured of saluation and to haue a nullitie of faith before God can not stand together No more can the outward calling of the magistracy stand with the nullitie thereof For the outward calling maketh a substantiall magistrate But M. Some where is that reason which you could presse so farre is this it they of whose magistracy there is a nullity before God ought not to be accompted magistrates I say your proposition is true assume what you will you know what maner of nullitie I meane R. Some My proposition in your iudgement is without sense You are very peremptory A word I perceiue and a blowe I may say truely that your answere is without sense
A GODLY TREATISE containing and deciding certaine questions mooued of late in London and other places touching the Ministerie Sacraments and Church Whereunto one Proposition more is added After the ende of this Booke you shall finde a defence of such points as M. Penry hath dealt against And a confutation of many grosse errours broched in M. PENRIES last Treatise Written by Robert Some Doctor of Diuinitie Ephes 4. verse 15. Let vs follow the trueth in loue and in all things grow vp into him which is the head that is Christ c. Imprinted at London by G. B. Deputie to Christopher Barker Printer to the Queenes most excellent Maiestie 1588. ¶ To the Reader TWo sortes of Recusantes are in this land the one Popish the other Anabaptisticall They giue out that wee haue no ministery no Sacraments no visible Church These men labour of two diseases the one is great pride the other grosse ignorance Their pride appeares in their behauiour which is voide of humilitie their ignorance in their Arguments which hang together like a sicke mans dreame That her Maiestie may and ought to compell these Recusants to frequent our Church assemblies I make no question There is an other sorte which either deny or doubt whether vnpreaching ministers doe deliuer a Sacrament vpon better aduise some of them confesse that ignorant ministers doe administer a Sacrament but they adde this that such as receiue any Sacrament at their hands doe sinne grossely and pollute thēselues I will hope well of these men for they erre onely for want of iudgement The holy Sacrament is one thing the ministers ignorance is an other thing the Lordes Sacrament brings singuler comfort to the worthie receiuer the ministers ignorance can neither peruert the Sacrament nor pollute the receiuer The Donatistes taught otherwise in the former time and the Anabaptistes in our time but they are notably confuted by two famous men Augustine and Caluine What account I make of ignorant ministers appeareth in this treatise It pleased God to direct my heart and penne in this holy labour therefore I assure my selfe of his gracious blessing London Maij. 6. 1588. R. S. A Table of such points as are conteiin this Treatise 1 A Godly Prince may and ought to compell his subiects if any refuse to the externall Seruice of God 2 A godly Prince may not suffer any Religion but the true Religion either publiquely or priuately in his Dominions 3 Able teachers ought to be prouided so much as can be for the Churches 4 The teachers of religion must haue maintenance 5 Almightie God blesseth those kingdomes with peace which promote and embrace his Religion 6 The childe of God is not polluted though hee be present at and partaker of the publique Prayers Sacraments c. at such time as wicked men are present at and partakers of them 7 They which were baptized in the Popish Church by Popish Priestes receiued true Baptisme touching the substance of Baptisme 8 They are the Sacraments of Baptisme and the holy Supper which are deliuered in the Church of Englande by vnpreaching Ministers 9 The godly are not polluted which receiue the Sacrament at the handes of an vnpreaching Minister 10 The Church of England is the visible Church of Christ 1. A GODLY PRINCE may and ought to compell his Subiects if any refuse to the externall Seruice of God IT is the Princes duetie to prouide able men to teache the Lordes Religion in his dominions So did Iosaphat the king of Iuda 2. Chro. 17. and Artaxerxes the king of Persia Ezra 7. therefore it is the Princes duetie to prouide that his Subiects doe heare and learne the Lords religion Teachers and learners are relatiues Great outrages were committed against both the tables of the commandements as appeareth in the booke of Iudges for euery man did that whih was good in his owne eyes Iudg. 17. 19. cha The reason of these absurdities is set out liuely and often in these words There was no king in Israel Iudg. 17.18 19. Chap. by which words it is manifest that if a religious Prince had bene in place Idolatrie and wicked behauiour had bene suppressed and the Israelites pressed to serue the Lorde That Princes doe not passe their bounds in this it is cleare by that which Augustine reporteth of and commendeth in the King of Babylon Contra Cresc gram lib. 3. cap. 51. The Prince is bound to sanctifie the Sabboth so are his subiects the Lords commaundement is flat for this Remember the Sabboth day to keepe it holy Sixe dayes shalt thou labour and do all thy worke But the seuenth day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God in it thou shalt not do any worke thou nor thy sonne nor thy daughter thy man seruant nor thy mayd nor thy beast nor thy stranger that is within thy gates c. Exo. 20. If none are exempted by almightie God none can be dispensed with by man for all are charged to present themselues in the holy assemblies And least any either prince or subiect should forget this duetie the Lord himselfe is their remembrancer in these wordes Remember that thou sanctifie the Sabboth c. that is the sanctification of my Sabboth is a matter very important it concerneth my honour but thy comfort therfore remember and forget it not If any refuse they may and ought to bee compelled for the breach of the Sabboth is a hainous sinne Iere. 17. Nehem. 13. Faith commeth by hearing of the word Rom. 10. therefore refusall to heare hinders both the beginning and growth of faith The Samaritanes heard Philippe in Samaria they beleeued Actes 8. Lydia heard Paul at Philippos she beleeued Act. 16. Augustine was a Manichee nine yeeres he heard Ambrose the Bishop of Mediolanum and was conuerted August confess lib. 4. cap. 1. and lib. 5. cap. 13. and 14. If any shal aske me why all that heare beleeue not I answere Arcana Deisunt adoranda non scrutanda That is Gods secrets are not to be searched but adored and that vnlesse Gods spirit touch the heart as the worde doeth pearce the eare Gods holy Trueth is a dead letter vnto vs. Asa Iosias were famous kings of Iuda Asa commāded Iuda to seeke the Lord God of their fathers and to do according to the law and cōmandement 2. Chron. 14. Iosias compelled his subiects to serue the Lord their God 2. Chron. 34. So did Manasses after his conuersion 2. Chron. 33. If it were lawfull for these Kings of Iuda to cōmaund and compell their subiects it is not vnlawfull for ours to do the like If it be not lawfull to compell recusants why are Asa Iosias Manasses commended by the holy Ghost for this excellent course Ezra was a learned Scribe he was authorized by the King of Persia to teache them beyonde the riuer Euphrates the Lavve of God vvhich did not knowe it and to punish such as refused to learne Artaxerxes vvarrant is set dovvne in this sort And thou Ezra after
is not mans but Gods baptisme which is deliuered by them If it be Gods baptisme I am sure it is true baptisme Maister Caluin calleth them Catabaptistes which deny that wee are rightly baptized in the Popish Church Institut lib. 4. cap. 15. Sect. 16. Obiection The Popish priestes haue no lawfull calling therefore it is no true baptisme which is deliuered by them Answere The Argument followes not I confesse that the Popish priests haue no lawful calling yet they haue a calling though a faultie one They which are not lawfully called vnto the ministery and yet sit in the chaire of the ministerie are to bee accounted in an other place then they which haue no calling Caiphas was not in deede the lawfull high priest for he entred by money the priesthood in his time was rent in peeces yet because he sate in the high priests chaire he was accounted the high priest A faultie vocation may hurt him that vsurpes an office but it doth not defile those things which are done by that partie This is master Bezaes Iudgement in his 142. question If any shall gather of this that I allowe the Popish priesthood he deserues rather a Censor then Confuter for I confesse that Sacerdotium papisticum est sacrilegium that is that the Popish priesthood is Sacriledge 8. THEY ARE THE SAcraments of Baptisme and the holy Supper which are deliuered in the Church of England by vnpreaching ministers IF such as were baptized in the popish Church receiued true baptisme I trust they are rightly baptized in the Church of England which are baptized by vnpreaching ministers If such as were baptized by popish priests in the popish Church and by vnpreaching ministers in the Church of England receiued no sacrament many grosse absurdities would followe First very many are vnbaptized and if they bee vnbaptized they sinne grieuously in not presenting themselues to the holy Sacrament Secondly a great number haue sinned grossely in partaking the holy supper My reason is None vncircumcised might eate the Passeouer Ezodus 12. verse 48. therefore none vnbaptized may receiue the holy supper Thirdly many excellent men haue vsurped the preachers office My reason is It is vnlawfull for any man to bee a publique teacher in the visible Church which is not by baptisme graft into and so become a member of the visible Church Our Sauiour Christ was baptized of Iohn in Iordane before hee preached Matth. 3. and 4. Chap. The Apostle Paul was baptized of Ananias in Damascus before hee preached Act. 9. The vnpreaching Ministers doe adde the worde vnto the Element in the administration of Baptisme therefore it is the Sacramēt of Baptisme which is deliuered by them Accedit verbum ad elementum fit Sacramentum Aug. Tract 80. in Iohan. that is The worde is added to the Element and it becoms a Sacrament By worde in Baptisme is vnderstanded the word of Institution which is to Baptize in the name of the father the sonne and the holy Ghost c. Of this iudgement are Beza confess Cap. 4. Art 47. and Musculus de sig Sacram. Art 4. Obiection Christ sayde to his Apostles Goe and teach all nations baptizing c. Matth. 28. vers 19. therefore if the word preached be not added to the Element it is no Sacrament of Baptisme Answere The argument is very weake I confesse that Christ commanded his Apostles first to teach such as were of yeeres and alients from his religion and then to baptize them If the Gentiles had not bene first taught they would not haue offered thē selues nor the Apostles haue admitted them to the holy Sacrament of baptisme If any will conclude of this place in Saint Mathewe that none whatsoeuer may bee admitted to baptisme before they bee taught they shut our infants from the holy Sacrament and therefore are Catabaptists The vnpreaching ministers doe adde verbum adificans that is an edifying worde to the Elements in the administration of the holy supper therefore c. That there is verbum aedificans I proue it thus The summe of Christes sermon in the Institution administration of the holy supper by himselfe is the word of Institution in the administration of the holy Supper in the Church of England therefore vnlesse we wil denie the summe of Christs Sermon to be an edifying word which no learned mā wil deny we must confesse that we haue verbum aedificans in the administration of the holy supper with vs. If any will conclude of this that I mislike preaching before the administration of the Sacrament he doth me great wrong Obiection Vnpreching ministers are not apt to teach therefore they are no Sacraments which are deliuered by them Answere The argument followes not My reason is Many Iewish Priestes were both ignorant and dissolute in Esay and Christs time Esay 28. vers 7. Matth. 9. vers 36. But the Sacrifices offered and the Sacraments reached by them were both Sacrifices and Sacraments otherwise the Prophets which were at Ierusalem when the Iewish Church was full of corruption woulde not haue bene present at and partakers of the Sacrifices in Salomons Temple Calu. Institut lib. 4. cap. 1. sect 18 19. Obiection Ignorant ministers are not apt to teach therefore no ministers and consequently they are no Sacraments which are deliuered by them Answere The argument followes not I grant that it is of the substance of a lawful good minister of God to be apt to teach but it is not of the essence of a Minister simply for which it is sufficient to haue the Churches calling This appeareth clearely in the Magistrate The holy Ghost requireth that none shoulde bee chosen a Magistrate vnlesse he were a man of courage fearing God dealing truely and hating couetousnesse Exodus 18. verse 21. When such are aduanced as defile their handes either with filthie bribes as Felix did or with barbarous crueltie as Abimelech and Herode did shall we say that they are no Magistrates I confesse they are not singled out by the electors according to Almightie Gods direction in his holy Bible but they are Magistrates notwithstanding and we are commanded by the Lord to perfourme all duetie vnto them Saluo officio that is our duetie being reserued to the highest Magistrate which is God himselfe If any shall gather of this I haue set downe that I vndertake the defence of Ignorant ministers my answere is that my writings and sermons are not Aiax shielde to couer them but the Lords sworde to cutte them I confesse freely that I am very farre from opening either the Church doore to ignorant Ministers or the Pulpit doore to vnskilfull preachers which vnskilfull preachers giue Gods religion a greater blowe then the ignorant Ministers for in steade of deuiding the worde of trueth aright they speake at al aduentures yet very boldely and as vnskilfull Apothecaries deliuer quid pro quo chaffe for wheate and strange fancies for Gods holy trueth By such absurde fellowes many Churches and excellent men in this lande
page 84. They amongst vs which are vnbaptized doe sinne grienously if they doe not present themselues to baptisme Chap. 8. page 88. They which are once baptized must not be baptized againe Chap. 19. page 156. They which were baptized of Popish priestes in the Popish Church receiued true baptisme c. chap 7. page 79. and chap. 8. page 88 89. and chap. 20. page 156. 157. The false profession of Christ in popery doth not proue that the true Christ is not in popish baptisme cap. 23. pa. 174. Whether infants ought rather to be kept vnbaptized then to be presented to popish baptisme chap. 23. page 180. The infāts of papists may be baptized in a reformed church if some of the religion do present them to baptisme do vndertake the godly education of them cha 17. pag. 150. There hath bene may be true baptisme out of the church chap. 21. page 158. Though true baptisme was amōgst the Donatists out of the Church August did not giue leaue to any of the church to presēt their infāts to be baptized there cap. 21. pa. 159. They are the Sacraments of Baptisme and the holy Supper which are administred by vnpreaching ministers in the church of England chap. 8. page 88. 89. 95. 98. None vnbaptized may receiue the holy supper chap. 8. page 90. 91. 92. It is lawful to administer the holy supper in a priuate house if some cautions be obserued chap. 15. page 141. 142. Euery legall vncleannes was not ioyned with sinne chap. 9. page 113. The regenerate cannot fulfil the law of God cha 26. pa. 199 A TABLE OF DIVERS grosse errours and Anabaptisticall fancies conteined in M. Penryes Treatise c. Master Penry saith That the life of the Magistracie is neither prescribed in the worde for so there could be no Magistrates out of the Church nor any in the Church but such as are prescribed in the word which were impious to thinke nor conteined in the gifts of the Magistracie nor yet separated from his outwarde calling For the very outward calling is it that giueth life vnto the Magistracie though the person susteining it want gifts to discharge the same The reason hereof is euident because the Magistracie being an humaine constitution as the holy Ghost saith 1. Pet. 2.13 is appropriated vnto his possession vpō whomsoeuer man bestoweth the same if hee be capable to possesse though vnfit to execute what is a lotted vnto him In his addition page 48. This speach of M. Penryes is very grosse His first reason is this there may be Magistrates out of the Church therefore the life of the Magistracie is not prescribed in the word M. P. Antecedent is true For Pharao Nero Iulian were magistrates out of the Church I deny his argument My reason is the gifts of courage fearing God dealing truly hating couetousnes which are the life of the Magistrate are prescribed in Gods booke Exo. 18.21 Deu. 1.13 If you say they are not the life of the magistracie you dissent from all the learned and therfore must set downe what God requireth of him that should be his Magistrate His second reason is this There are and may be magistrates within the Church which are not garnished with the aboue named gifts therefore the life of the Magistracie is not prescribed in the word My answere is I confesse that absurd Magistrates haue bene and are many times aduanced in the Church I graunt they should not either by the corruption or errour of the electours But I deny your argument My reason is It is great wickednes to thinke because grosse Electours preferre vnfit men and so faile in their duetie that Almightie God hath failed in prescribing what kinde of men he would haue to be his lieutenants M. Penry addeth that the life of the Magistracie is not conteined in the gifts of the magistracie I dissent from him in this If he had said that the birth of the magistracie is not conteined in the gifts of the magistracie he had hit the white M. Penry writeth that the life of the magistracie is not separated from his outward calling for the very outward calling saith he is it that giueth life vnto the magistracie If this were true then the life and birth of the magistrate are idem tempore that is twinnes and consequently whosoeuer hath the outwarde calling which is the birth hath the inwarde calling which is the life of the magistrate So is Gods furniture tyed to the electours voices as to the chaire and the inward outward calling of the magistrate confounded which is a palpable errour If there bee an outward calling to the magistracie without the which no man howsoeuer furnished within may presume to execute the office of the magistrate I am sure there is an inward calling to the magistracie For the outwarde calling doeth import an inward If there be an inward calling which is by God himselfe what I beseech you is it but such furniture and gifts as are prescribed and required in the holy word The foundation whereupon M. Penry hath built his former absurdities is a very rotten post that is a grosse deprauing of a text of Scripture viz. The Magistracie is an humaine ordinance 1. Pet. 2.13 that is a deuise of man and not an Ecclesiasticall constitution prescribed in the worde That the magistracie is not any deuise of man but Gods ordinance for the benefite of man is a cleare trueth in Gods booke None doubt of it vnlesse they be Anabaptists or extremely ignorant M. Penry saith that the word barely read and to no other purpose then to edifie by reading is not holsome doctrine Chap. 8. pag. 99. This is a blasphemous absurditie M. Penryes reasons for it are most absurd and childish I referre you to my answere Chap. 8. pag. 100. 101. and to a proposition which I haue handled Chap. 4. pag. 62. c. M. Penry writeth that it is false to say that the recitall of the summe of Christes Sermon that is the word of institution c. is an edifying word he saith it mainteyneth charming Chap. 8. pag. 88. 89. This is a blasphemous absurditie If euery part of the Canonical Scripture doth edifie I trust the summe of the Lord Iesus Sermon ought to haue singuler allowance If it ought to haue singuler allowance it may not be indited and arraigned for maintenance of charming M. Penry saith that the people cannot sanctifie a Sabboth without a Sermon His words are these They are no ministers whose flocks by their ministery can not sanctifie the Sabboth our Readers are such c. In his addition pag. 60. M. Penry accounteth the publique reading of the holy Scripture and publique prayers no part of the sanctification of the Sabboth If he had said that the Sabboth is not so well sanctified without as with a godly Sermon I woulde haue agreed vnto him M. Penry maketh the person to giue credite to the holy word His wordes are these The word of God vttered is not an
shall appeare so by Gods grace in this booke These particulars that of Caiphas priesthood and of the contentious ministers of Philippi shall be handled in their seuerall places I. Penry The dissimilitude is in the reasons drawen from the Leuiticall priesthood and the ciuill magistracie with whom if you compare the ministerie of the new couenant you shall finde first that you bring in a similitude to shewe that which is not proued and secondly that you make those to be twinnes which all men must needes graunt to be as vnlike as crooked and straight lines are vnmatchable R. Some My second fault is as you say in drawing an Argument from the Leuiticall priesthood to the ministerie of the newe Testament Is this a fault no no the fault is in your eye not in my pen but why may I not drawe an argument as I did from the Leuititical priesthood to the ministerie of the new Testament Your reason is the Leuiticall priesthood and the ministerie of the new Testament are not twins are vnmatchable they cānot stand together therefore a reason cannot be drawen from the one to the other You take this I am sure to be an inuincible argument but it is as strong as a rope of sand I denie your argument My reasons are first Aaron did not take the priesthood vpō him before he was called therefore none in our time may enter into the ministerie vnlesse he be called This argument is grounded vpon these words of the Apostle No man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but hee that is called of God as Aaron Heb. 5. Secondly the Leuiticall priests ought to be furnished with knowledge therefore the ministers of the new Testament c. The ground of this reason is set downe by the Prophet Malachi in this sort The priests lippes shal preserue knowledge and they shall seeke the Lawe at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hostes Mal. 2. You see nowe I hope that an argument may be framed from the Leuiticall priesthood to the ministerie of the newe Testament if you doe not you are starke blind if you do confesse your ignorance Thirdly the ministerie of death and condemnation and the ministerie of the spirite and righteousnesse that which should be abolished and that which remaineth are things very farre and greatly different yet an argument may be drawē from the one to the other in this sort The lawe which was the ministerie of death of condemnation and which should be abolished was glorious therefore the Gospel which is the ministerie of the spirite and righteousnes and which remaineth is more glorious This argument is as the Logicians call it à comparatis and is soundly gathered out of these wordes of the holy Apostle If the ministration of death was glorious how shall not the ministration of the spirit be more glorious If the ministerie of condemnation was glorious much more doth the ministration of righteousnes exceede in glory if that which should be abolished was glorious much more shall that which remaineth be glorious 2. Cor. 3. What say you nowe master Penry doe you not perceiue by this I haue set downe that an argument may be drawen very aptly from one thing to another wherein there is great dissimilitude which are not twinnes which are vnmatcheable if you doe be wiser hereafter in the name of God Whether an argument may be drawen from the ciuill magistracie shall appeare in an other place I. Penry And thus much I thought needefull generally to set downe concerning your maner of dealing not that I woulde any way disgrace you whom I reuerence for that is no part of mine intent the Lord is my witnesse Nay I would be loth to let that fillable escape mee that might giue you or any the least occasiō in the world to thinke that I cary any other heart towards you then I ought to beare towards a reuerent learned man fearing God And howsoeuer vnlesse you alter your iudgement I can neuer agree with you in these points because I am assured you swarue from the trueth Yet this disagreement shall be so farre from making a breach of that bond of loue wherewith in the Lord I am tyed vnto you that I doubt not but wee shall be at one in that day when all of vs shall be at vnitie in him that remaineth one and the selfe same for euer R. Some It is gently done of you when you haue broken my head you giue me a plaister but I refuse your surgerie You wil not you say disgrace me You reuerēce me Good words A foule hooke vnder a faire bait If you reuerēce your friends on this fashion what shal your enemies looke for Philippides cudgelled his owne father A mōstrous sonne Being asked why he did so his answer was he did it for loue strāge loue I will accompt somewhat better of your reuerence If I swarue from the trueth as you assure your selfe you haue great reason to dissent from me Gods trueth must be preferred It is more excellent then any creature but if I haue any learning you doe toto coelo errare You are strangely wide for you haue set downe absurd errours for cleare trueths and haue condemned sure points of diuinitie for grosse errours I see litle hope of agreement betweene you and me in these particulars I am resolute in my iudgement if you be so in yours I am sory for you God giue you an other minde CHAP. 6. Iohn Penry NOwe I am to come to your booke from the 20. page whereof vnto the 28. laying the foundation of the reasons you vse against me to proue the lawfulnesse of communicating with dumbe ministers you handle two needelesse points First that they which were baptized by popish priests haue receiued true baptisme as touching the substance Secondly that they are the Sacraments of baptisme and the holy Supper of the Lord which are deliuered in the Church of England by vnpreaching ministers In these two points M. Some you haue proued nothing that my writings haue denied but you haue quickened a dead controuersie not vnlikely to giue the wrangling spirits of this age cause to breede greater sturres in the Church I see no other effect which the handling of these questions can bring foorth but this And it is to be feared that the slendernes of the reasons vsed in your booke to proue that which you haue vndertaken to shew will giue occasion vnto many who of themselues are too too ready to iangle to doubt of that whereof before they made no question So that by seeking to stay the course of a needeful controuersie you haue both giuen it a larger passage and opened the doore vnto a question very fruitlesse in our time You knowe I deale in neither of these pointes If you cannot be stayed from entring into controuersies that are very odious and more impertinent vnto the matter in hande it were good that the Church were further and more soundly satisfied by you in
calling at all first Luther which had imposition of handes in the Popish Church had no externall calling at all Secondly in your iudgement either no Baptisme was deliuered by Popish Priests in the Popish Church or Baptisme if any were in the Popish Church was administred by priuate men for they which haue no calling at all are priuate men I neede not driue you to absurde consequents you cast your selfe headlong into them as into a dangerous quauemire Your Treatises wherein you haue sowen grosse errours thicke and threefolde are witnesses ynough of this Are not your disciples most vnhappie which depende on you as on another Pope You aske whether there is a ministery out of the Church What my iudgemeÌ„t is appeareth hereafter In the meane time you deny not that there is true baptisme therefore consequently a ministery in the Popish Church which you say is no Church Caiphas Priesthoode hath both searched and founde you out It bewrayeth your grosse ignorance CHAP. 8. THEY ARE THE SACRAments of Baptisme and the holy Supper which are deliuered in the Church of England by vnpreaching Ministers I. Penry YOu knowe M. Some what I meane by an vnpreaching Minister namely euery one learned or vnlearned that cannot shewe himselfe by the good triall of his giftes to haue that fitnesse to reach whereof we read 2. Tim. 2. 1. Tim. 3. Which abilitie the Lord doeth not ordinarily bestow vpon any in these our dayes without the knowledge of the Artes especially the two handmaides of all learning Rhetoricke and Logique and the two originall tongues wherein the worde was written R. Some If none are to be accounted ministers ordinarily which are not furnished as you prescribe and require many in the primitiue Church after Christes Ascension were no ordinarie ministers Valerius a godly man whom Augustine succeeded at Hippo in Afrique was no ordinarie minister Possid in vita Aug. cap. 5. Samsucius a godly Bishop was no ordinarie minister Aug. epist 168. Augustine which was a famous man was no ordinarie minister Many profitable pastours in this age are no ordinarie ministers Yea M. Penryes ignorant Leuiticall priestes whome hee alloweth and defendeth to bee lawfull Priests were no ordinarie ministers If such as were baptized in the popish Church receiued true baptisme I trust they are rightly baptized in the Church of England which are baptized by vnpreaching ministers I. Penry The rest of your booke is now to be examined Your conclusion pag. 22. that they which were baptized by vnpreaching ministers are rightly baptized as touching the substance of baptisme I doe not gainesay Your reasons are weake for howe could we proue your conclusion if men shoulde denie popish baptisme to be true baptisme as I doe not you knowe and he should doe me great iniurie which would lay that to my charge Were it sufficient for vs to say they were Catabaptists which denie popish baptisme howe coulde this be proued and this shoulde not proue the matter doubted of R. Some Do you answere of this fashion this is as farre off as Yorke from London The summe of your answere is that my reasons are weake that you denie not my conclusion Are my reasons weake because you say so If they were like your senseles answeres they were strange stuffe If you deny not theÌ„ which were baptized by vnpreaching ministers to be rightly baptized it is a necessarie consequent euen in your owne iudgement first that either vnpreaching ministers are ministers or that priuate men may deliuer a Sacrament secondly that it was and is a Sacrament which is administred without a Sermon They which denie that such as were baptized in the popish Church receiued true baptisme touching the substance of baptisme are Catabaptists in the iudgement of all learned writers and reformed Churches I rest in their iudgement R. Some If such as were baptized by popish priests in the popish Church and by vnpreaching ministers in the Church of England receiued no Sacrament many grosse absurdities would followe First very many are vnbaptized and if they be vnbaptized they sinne grieuously in not presenting themselues to the holy Sacrament I. Penry Shall we say that they sinne in not presenting themselues to be baptized To whom should they present themselues who would baptize them R. Some What meane scholer in either of the Vniuersities yea what Russet coate in the Countrey would shape such an answere In steade of answering my reasons you aske me two questions I must be content to answere there is no remedie Your first question is Shall we say that they sinne in not presenting themselues to be baptized My answere is they doe sinne no learned and godly man doubtes of it my reasons are First Baptisme is externus character that is the outward marke and badge of a Christian so writeth that famous man M. Foxe Cap. 14. in Apocal. Secondly the contempt of circumcision was grieuously punished Gen. 17. Yea the Angel would haue killed Moses because his sonne was not circumcised Exod. 4. Thirdly they in the primitiue Church which had excellent graces presented themselues to baptisme which baptisme before they had not So did many in Ierusalem after Peters sermon Act. 2. many in Samaria after Philips sermons Act. 8. many in Corinth after Pauls sermons Act. 18. Your second question is to whom should they preseÌ„t them selues who would baptize them my answere is after a publique profession of their faith in the christian assembly they must present themselues to be baptized of the minister So did Cornelius in Caesarea Act. 10. Lidia in Philippi Acts. 16. Crispus and Gaius in Corinth Act. 18.1 Cor. 1. and a Iewe of late yeeres in London I speake nowe of such as be of yeres and are vnbaptized I hope you wil not gather of this that I shut our infants from the holy Sacrament of Baptisme if you should you deserue rather to be censured by the Magistrate then to be confuted by argument R. Some If such as were baptized by popish priests in the popish Church and by vnpreaching ministers in the Church of England receiued no Sacrament a great number haue sinned grosly in partaking the holy Supper My reason is none vncircumcised might eate the Passeouer Exo. 12.48 therefore none vnbaptized may receiue the holy Supper I. Penry Admit they sinned in receiuing the Lords Supper before they were baptized should they therefore be bereaued of the comfort of baptisme to affirme that this were a going backward is no reason because they were perswaded that they had baptisme otherwise they would not haue bene so farre on their iourney vntill they had bene accompanied therewith But they omitted baptisme of ignorance and not of contempt therefâ—â—e they denie the receiuing of the Lords Supper to haue bene a sinne any more then it would be a sinne in them nowe to receiue the Lords Supper if they could not haue Baptisme Baptisme they would haue if they could orderly come by the same Because men will be so iniurious vnto them as
to deny them the comfort of baptisme which they cannot haue shoulde they denie to themselues the comfort of the Lordes Supper which they may haue Yea but no vncircumcised might eate the pascal lambe Exod. 12.48 True But what shall we say vnto those that were vncircumcised in the wildernesse fortie yeeres almost Ios 5.5 Did they neuer eate the passeouer all that time If they did the place of Exodus will be quickly answered It is plaine that the passeouer was celebrated in the wildernesse once at the least Nom. 9.1 If euery yeere why should the godly of the familie bee excluded from the action the cause why they were vncircumcised not being in them R. Some You answere very strangely Your wittes I thinke were a wooll gathering If they sinned in partaking the Lordes supper before they were baptized there is great reason they shoulde abstaine from the holy table vntill they bee baptized which Baptisme if the case so required might orderly and easily bee come by But they omitted baptisme you say of ignoraunce not of contempt therefore they sinned not which being vnbaptized did partake the holy Supper I denie your argument My reason is Ignorātia excusat non à toto sed à tanto that is Ignorance maketh the fault lesse it doth not make it none M. Penry at the length toucheth one part of my reason but by his leaue I will first set downe my whole reason and then his answere My reason is this None vncircumcised might eat the passeouer Exod. 12.48 therefore none vnbaptized may receiue the holy Supper M. Penryes answere is conteined in these wordes True But what shall we say vnto those that were vncircumcised in the wildernesse fortie yeeres almost Iosua 5.5 Did they neuer eate the Passeouer all that time If they did the place of Exodus will be quickely answered It is plaine that the Passeouer was celebrated in the wildernesse once at the least Nombers 9.1 If euery yeere why shoulde the godly of the familie bee excluded from the action the cause why they were vncircumcised not being in them Call you this answering There was neuer any such I am sure in Cambridge or Oxford It came I thinke out of Barbarie I hope you are ashamed of it by this time You aske mee whether they which were vncircumcised in the wildernesse almost fortie yeeres did all that time neuer eate the Passeouer My answere is that no such thing appeareth in the text and where the holy Ghost stayeth his penne it becommeth vs to stay our tongues Yea it is cleare in Iosue that the Israelites after they were circumcised did keepe the feast of the Passeouer Ios 5.8.10 You adde If the Israelites being vncircumcised did partake the Passeouer that the place in Exodus will be quickely answered You say true If the skie fall you shall catch Larkes When you proue this if of yours I wil accept your answere Till then you shal pardon me You proceed in this sort It is plaine you say that the Passeouer was celebrated in the wildernesse once at the least Numb 9. Will you conclude of this therefore they which were vncircumcised did eate the Passeouer If you doe I denie your argument My reason is If they had admitted any vncircumcised to the Passeouer they had prophaned the holy Sacrament The wordes in the text are manifest If a stranger dwell with thee and will obserue the Passeouer of the Lord let him circumcise all the males that belong vnto him and then let him come and obserue it and he shall bee as one that is borne in the lande for no vncircumcised person shall eate thereof One lawe shall bee to him that is borne in the land and to the stranger that dwelleth among you Exod. 12. An other reason of yours is the cause why the Israelites were vncircumcised was not in them therefore the godly vncircumcised of the family might not be barred from the Passeouer I answere your argument is naught and verie sawcie for you comptroll Almightie God by whome they were barred This is no pride M. Penry I might say to you as the Apostle in another case O man who art thou that pleadest against God hath not the potter power of the Clay c. Rom. 9. I confesse that the Israelites ceased from circumcision in the wildernes and yet were not faultie in omitting and deferring circumcision for they had Gods speciall dispensation to do so because they were in cōtinuall trauaile and people being newly circumcised could abide no labour For the surer proofe of this point vidz that none which are knowen to bee vnbaptized may either present themselues or be admitted to the holy Supper I offer these reasons to the godly Reader First Baptisme is an entrāce into the visible church the holy Supper is a confirmation of this entrance Secondly they which were of yeeres in the primitiue Church were first baptized and afterwarde receiued the holy Supper This is manifest in these wordes of S. Luke Then they that gladly receyued his worde were baptized and the same day there were added to the Church about three thousand soules And they continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and breaking of bread and prayers c. Act. 2. By breaking of bread is vnderstanded the partaking of the Lords Supper Thirdly None may present themselues to the holy table before due examination of themselues 1. Cor. 11. This examination consisteth of faith and repentance which faith and repentance are not in them which either wittingly omit or wilfully contemne the holy Sacrament of baptisme which baptisme is the Sacrament of repentance Matth. 3. Calu. Inst. lib. 4. cap. 19. sect 17. Lastly all famous men and Churches are of my side If maister Penry dissent it is no great matter His writings are not as the lawes of the Medes and Persians c. R. Some If such as vvere baptized by popish Priests in the popish Church and by vnpreaching ministers in the Church of England receiued no Sacrament many excellent men haue vsurped the preachers office My reason is It is vnlawful for any man to be a publique teacher in the visible Church which is not by baptisme graft into and so become a member of the visible Church Our Sauiour Christ was baptized of Iohn in Iordane before he preached Mat. 3. and 4. Chap. The Apostle Paule was baptized of Ananias in Damascus before he preached Act. 9. I. Penry None vncircumcised might minister before the altar True but did none of the Leuites that were borne in the wildernes teach Iacob the law or offer the incense of his God in all those forty yeeres R. Some The truth I perceiue is mightie It maketh the enemie many times to confesse it so doth it you in this place Your wordes are cleare for me and flat against your selfe You grant that none vncircumcised might minister before the altar I thanke you for it Of this I conclude therefore none vnbaptized may be a publique teacher in the visible church Thus
Matthewe that none whatsoeuer may be admitted to baptisme before they be taught they shut our infants from the holy sacrament and therefore are Catabaptists Master Penry answeres nothing to this So am I eased of some labour R. Some The vnpreaching Ministers do adde verbum aedificans that is an edifying word to the Elements in the administratiō of the holy Supper therefore c. I. Penry Vnpreaching Ministers doe adde an edifying worde vnto the Element therfore it is a Sacrament This reason is the same with the former Which sheweth the great nakednes pouertie of the cause that one reason must be thrise periured to proue the goodnes of it which notwithstanding it can not shew I denie the antecedent and consequent R. Some Your eyes are not matches If they were you might haue seene very easily that no reason of mine is periured once much lesse thrise I am perswaded that if you be not well coniured by the Magistrate you wil proue a strange body You are farre gone alreadie Strange fancies haue almost cōsumed you The Magistrates discipline is the fittest medicine for you If that will not recouer you your disease is desperate You denie both my antecedent consequent My antecedēt was that vnpreaching Ministers do adde an edifying word to the Element That there is verbum aedificans I proue it thus The summe of Christes Sermon in the Institution administration of the holy Supper by himselfe is the worde of Institution in the administration of the holy Supper in the Church of England therefore vnlesse we wil denie the summe of Christes Sermon to bee an edifying worde which no learned man will denie we must confesse that wee haue verbum aedificans that is an edifying worde in the administration of the holy Supper with vs. I. Penry Your reason of the antecedent that the recital of the summe of Christs Sermon that is the words of Institution is an edifying worde is falfe and maintaineth charming For doe you thinke that the worde of institution being as you say the summe of Christs Sermon is then an edifying worde whensoeuer it is recited by a prophane person euen in the prophanation of Gods ordinance Looke 2. Tim. 4.3 and you shall finde that the worde barely read and to no other purpose then to edifie by reading is not holsome doctrine The popish priest either without or within the booke pronounceth in his darke Latine the summe of Christs sermon Is that an edifying word which he prophanely breatheth The word of God vttered is not an edifying worde vnlesse it bee vtered according to the ordinance both in regard of the persons that vtter the same and the ende wherefore it is vttered No learned man wil denie the Lords prayer rightly sayd to be an edifying worde And yet by your leaue no learned man vnlesse he fauoureth charming or poperie will say that the Lords prayer pronounced by an ignorant man in a strange tongue or prophaned by a witch is an edifying word R. Some M. Penry is now in his Ruffe His pride and ignorance appeare in their colours They are proclaimed euen by himselfe He denieth that the recitall of the summe of Christs Sermō by an vnpreaching minister is an edifying word he saieth it maintaineth charming Can we thinke that this man is guided by Gods spirit whose heart conceiued and pen broght forth such blasphemie That the reader may be assured that the summe of Christs Sermon is an edifying word I will first set downe the word of Institution which is the summe of Christs Sermon and then proue the point The word of institution in the holy Supper is The Lord Iesus the same night that he was betrayed tooke bread and when he had giuen thanks he brake it and saide Take eate this is my body which is broken for you this doe ye in remembrance of me After the same maner also he tooke the cuppe when he had supped saying this cup is the new Testamēt in my blood this do as oft as ye drinke it in remembrance of me 1. Cor. 11. That this word of Institution doth edifie it is manifest for it teacheth vs first who did institute the holy Supper The Lord Iesus Secondly at vvhat time The same night that he was betrayed Thirdly vvhat the Elements are in the holy Supper Bread and wine Fourthly what our Sauiour Christ did Hee gaue thankes he brake the bread c. Fifthly what the Lorde Iesus saide when hee deliuered the Elements Take eate c. Doeth this maintaine charming Is there not edifying in this If you be not voyde of grace be ashamed and sorie for your blasphemous levvdnes An other particuler vvhich you reache vnto vs is a bird of the same feather viz. that the vvorde barely read and to no other purpose then to edifie by reading is not holsome doctrine For proofe of this grosse and blasphemous errour you vse three reasons The first is out of S. Paul to Timothee The time will come when they will not suffer holsome doctrine but hauing their eares itching shall after their owne lustes get them an heape of teachers 2. Tim. 4.3 Therefore the vvord barely read and to no other purpose then to edifie by reading is no holsome doctrine This reason cleaues together like a broken potsheard I denie your argument The Apostle in that Chapter commaundeth Timothee to attende carefully vpon preaching c. His reason is Many will loath and hate holsome doctrine they will chuse such teachers as wil tickle their eares and feede their humours 2. Tim. 4.3 Such gracelesse people were in the time of Esay and Micheas Esa 30. Mich. 2. Such were they of Anathoth in Ieremies time Ier. 11. Such a one was Amaziah of Ieroboams Court in Amos time Am. 7. Such were in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia in S. Pauls time Such are they of the fantasticall crewe in our time vvhich pike out teachers as rot out of an apple c. Doe you not perceiue M. Penry howe fitly saint Paul to Timothee doeth serue your turne you haue bene verie bold with him You haue vsed the holy Apostle as Cacus did Hercules oxen therefore I may not thinke much that my writings are depraued by you Your second reason is this the summe of Christes sermon pronounced by a Popish priest either without or within the booke in his darke Latin is not an edifying worde therefore the word barely read and to no other purpose then to edifie by reading is not holsome doctrine Your Antecedent might haue bene kept in No man denieth it It is confessed by all of the religion that the scriptures deliuered in an vnknowen tongue doe not edifie The Apostle proueth this notably 1. Cor. 14. In linguis quas non intelligimus surdi sumus Cic. in Tusc that is when vve heare a strange language vve are as deafe men But I denie your Argument it is as strange as the Popish priests latine is darke Euery childe may see the weakenes of it But I must
for money many of the Iewish priestes were ignorant yet Ioseph and the virgine Mary were not polluted Calu. Luc. 2.41 I. Penry The blindnesse of the ignorant Leuites cannot make such a nullitie of their priesthood as they should be no priests vnto the people And therefore great reason why the parents of our Sauiour and the rest of the godly should not leaue the seruice of God for the pollution of the priestes R. Some The ignorant Leuites are deepe in your bookes They find grace with you You allowe them to be priestes vnto the Israelites whom Almightie God neuer approoued yea whom his maiestie hath disclaymed Hos 6. You must of force be as beneficiall to ignorant ministers vnlesse you doe simply condemne the externall calling of the ministers in the Church of England to be none at all If you doe so then in your iudgement wee haue no ministerie no sacraments no visible Church in England R. Some The godly which receiue the holy Supper of an vnpreaching Minister are not partakers of the Ministers vnworthinesse but of the holy Sacrament which is a pillar of our faith therefore the vnworthinesse of the minister doth not defile the Communicant Alterius siue Pastoris siue priuati indignitate non laediturpia conscientia c. Calu. Institut lib. 4. cap. 1. sect 19. that is A godly conscience is not hurt by the vnworthinesse of another either Pastour or priuate man neither are the mysteries lesse pure and healthfull to a holy man because they are then handled of such as be impure Ille qui accipit si homo bonus ab homine malo si fidelis à perfido si pius ab impio perniciosum erit danti non accipienti Illud quippe sanctum malè vtentem iudicat bene accipientem sanctificat Aug. contra Cres gram lib. 2. cap. 28. that is He which receiueth if a good of an euill man if a faithfull of a faithlesse man if a godly of a wicked man it wil bee hurtful to the giuer not to the receiuer for that holy thing he meaneth the Sacrament doth iudge him which vseth it ill but doth sanctifie him which receiueth it well M. Penry answeres nothing to this R. Some Circumcision was one of the Lords Sacraments in the Iewish Church The Iewes which were circumcised of impure priests and apostates receiued no hurt therefore no pollution Calu. Institut lib. 4. cap. 15. sect 16. The Sacraments neither are nor can be the vvorse for the ignorance or vnworthinesse or better for the learning or worthinesse of any man whatsoeuer Whosoeuer thinketh otherwise is a Donatist I. Penry The Sacraments are not the worse for the ignorance of the minister All this I graunt c. R. Some The first part of my reason is passed ouer with silence A breefe kind of answering In this M. Penry resembles yong children Where they cannot read they skippe ouer R. Some Touching this point of the Sacramēt I rest wholy in Augustines iudgemēt his words are these Ego dico melius per bonū ministrum quà m per malum dispensari Sacramenta diuina verùm hoc propter ipsum ministrum melius est vt eis rebus quas ministrat vita moribus cōgruat non propter illum qui etiam si incurrerit in ministrum malum dispensantem veritatem securitatem accipit à domino suo monente ac dicente Quae dicunt facite quae autem faciunt nolite facere dicunt enim non faciunt Addo etiam ad hoc esse melius vt ille cui ministratur ministri boni probitatem ac sanctitatem diligendo facilius imitetur Sed non ideo veriora sanctiora sunt quae ministrantur quia per meliorem ministrantur Illa namque per seipsa vera sancta sunt propter Deum verum sanctum cuius sunt ideo fieri potest vt accedens adsoctetatem populi Dei alium inueniat à quo facilè baptizetut alium eligat quem salubriter imitetur Certus est enim sanctume esse sacramentum Christi etiamsiper minus sanctum vel non sanctum hominem ministratum est se autem eiusdem ipsius sacramenti sanctitate puniri si indignè acciperit si malè vsus fuerit si ei non conuenienter congruè vixerit August contra Cres Gram. lib 4. Chap. 20. The summe of Augustines vvords is that the Sacrament is administred better by a good then by a bad minister yet that the Sacraments of themselues are true and holy c. by vvhat minister soeuer they be deliuered c. If any shall aske me whether it be lavvfull to omitte the partaking of the holy Sacrament in such Churches ouer which ignorant ministers are set and to present our selues and our infantes to the holy Sacrament in other Churches my answere is that I referre them to the Magistrate and gouernours of our Churches c. Nothing is answered to this An obiection of a fantasticall body By whom a thing ought not to be deliuered by another it ought not to be receiued but ignorant ministers ought nor to deliuer the Sacraments therefore c. R. Some The maior is false My reason is An euill man ought not to deliuer the word of God but we ought to receiue it An euill man ought not to giue almes but a poore man may receiue it An absurde minister ought not to deliuer the Sacrament but they are not polluted which receiue it I. Penry The obiection concerning the giuer and the receiuer was neuer mine I could turne it against you but I must be briefe R. Some It was not yours I confesse I doe not charge you with it It was an other mans You must giue some other men leaue to make fond arguments as well as your selfe You could turne it you say against me You are one of the strangest turners that euer I knewe You haue turned out such a deale of grosse diuinity vpon me and other that we are wearie and you may be ashamed of it CHAP. 10. I. Penry THE GODLY DOE SINNE which doe communicate with vnpreaching ministers Reasons Because they communicate with those who are no Ministers R. Some YOu haue bene liberall in charging me to begge the question It is your fault in this place You affirme that vnpreaching Ministers are no Ministers I denie it It is very strange to mee that you will accompt ignorant Leuitical priests lawfull priestes and denie vnpreaching Ministers to haue any calling If you were indifferent you would serue them both alike I. Penry They cannot be assured to receiue a sacrament at their handes R. Some Your selfe denies not that they are the Sacramēts which are deliuered by vnpreaching Ministers If they be the Sacraments which are administred I am sure first that they are the Sacraments which are receiued secondly that they haue a calling which do administer them Besides the ignorance of the Minister cannot pollute the godly receiuer I. Penry They do not examine themselues aright so are not worthy receiuers 1.
there is a nullitie of a ministery before God eyther because the action proceedeth from a corrupt minister as Psalm 50.16 whome God woulde not haue to deale with his ordinances or from a corrupt and euill ministerie which is none of Gods ordinance The action of the former is substantiall in regard of vs of the latter wee knowe no substance it can haue Of the former there is a nullitie onely in the sight of God of the latter both in respect of the Lorde and also of vs. The nullitie of our readers ministerie is of this latter sort namely such as we ought in no wise to account a ministery Whereas therefore you grant that there is a nullitie of our readers ministery before God and yet affirme them to be ministers you swarue from the point and so your answere is nothing to the purpose but a desiring of the question after your vsuall manner As Caiphas then and the rest of the sleepy dogges against whome the prophet cryeth out were wicked men God would not haue such to bee his ministers hither referre Esay 1.13 But as they had the ministery which God allowed of they were ministers vnto the people This ministery our readers want therefore they can be no ministers neyther in respect of the Lorde nor of the Church Shemaiah was a wicked man and a false prophet so were the rest of his stampe The Lord detested both them and their ministerie Zephaniah and Caiphas high priests with their company were as wicked as any of the false prophets the Lorde abhorred the men but their ministery was his ordinance Hence M Some it followeth that neither the briberie of your Caiphas nor the blindnesse of your ignorant Leuites can make such a nullitie of their prietshood as they should bee no priestes vnto the people And therefore great reason why the parents of our sauiour and the rest of the godly wherof you speake Page 28. 29. should not leaue the seruice of God for the pollution of the priests Esay speaketh against blind watchmen Chap. 56.10 but chap. 42.19 20. it shall appeare that they sawe many things but kept them not I pray you conferre the places and it can neuer be prooued that any of them were so blinde as they could not declare by preaching the generall vse of the sacrifices and ceremonies Their wants might be many but not like the insufficiency of our readers Be it they were as insufficient yet their ministerie might be allowable Your answere consisteth of seuerall branches I will handle the chiefest of them so briefly as I can Your first branch is that the ministery of the ignorant Leuiticall priests is allowed of God but that the outward calling of our vnpreaching ministers is not allowed of God Of this you conclude that the Leuitical priests were ministers vnto the people and consequently that Ioseph and the virgine Mary were not polluted by their Sacrifices but that our vnpreaching ministers are not so to vs. If the action of ignorant ministers be as you write not substantiall in regard of vs then you must deny which before you did not that any Sacrament either was or is deliuered by them I would fayne know why the ministery of the ignorant Leuites should be allowed and not the ministerie of ignorant ministers I confesse freely that I take their cases to be like howsoeuer you mince shift the matter But Ismel your meaning Latet anguis in herba there is a padde in the strawe To proceede you stand very much vpon the outward calling of the ministers in our Church If you repell the vnpreaching minister for his ignorance you can not allowe the ignorant Leuiticall priests If you repell the vnpreaching minister because of his outward calling you may by the like reason discharge the worthiest ministers in this land of the holy ministerie for all haue one and the same externall calling in the Church of England If you be so affected the next newes we shall heare of you will be that you shake hands with our Anabaptisticall recusants Vno absurdo dato multa consequuntur that is Euery absurditie hath many attendantes The second branch of your answere is a comparing or rather preferring the ignorant Leuiticall priests before our ignorant ministers Nobile par neither barrell better herring I must a little while examine this second braunch of yours You tell vs that the wants of the Leuiticall priestes might bee many but not like the insufficiencie of our readers For proofe of this you quote two textes in the Prophet Esay The first is contained in these wordes Their watchmen are all blind they haue no knowledge they are all dumbe dogges they cannot barke they lie and sleepe and delight in sleeping Esa 56. Will you gather of these vvordes that the ignorant Leuiticall priests were more learned and better furnished then the ignorant ministers The prophet Esay saieth that these Leuitical priests had neither rem nor spem that is that they were woe begone If you woulde study seuen yeeres you could not deuise to speake worse of the most ignorant ministers in our Church The second place of the Prophet hath these words Who is blinde but my seruant or deafe as my messenger that I sent who is blinde as the perfit and blind as the Lords seruants Seeing many thinges but thou keepest them not opening the eares but hee heareth not Esay 42. Esay in these verses calleth the Leuiticall priests blinde and deafe not in body but in heart because they did see and heare Gods iudgements with their bodilie eyes and eares and did not obserue them with the eyes and eares of their hearts You can not conclude of this place that the ignorant Leuiticall priests were deeper clerkes then the ignorant ministers in the Church of England The thirde branch of your answere is that the ministery of Caiphas was the Lords ordinance I deny it and do dissent from you in this My reason is Caiphas had not the high prieshood alone therefore his high priesthood was not the Lords ordinance The Antecedent is manifest for Annas and Caiphas were high priests together Luk. 3. The argument followes for the Lords ordinance was that onely one should be the high priest Calu Luk. 3.2 You say nothing here of the contentious ministers of Philippi You take and leaue at your pleasure It pleaseth you to cal Caiphas my Caiphas and the blinde Leuites my ignorant Leuites I should bee spedde I perceiue if I would receiue al that you cast vpon me Before you did lade me with reuerence now you throwe Caiphas and the ignorant Leuites as cobble stones at me You are very liberall but I refuse your ghests I disclaime them and returne them to your selfe You are much fitter to entertaine them then I for you haue magnified Caiphas ministery are a hot pleader for the ignorant Leuiticall priests That appeareth in your wordes which follow CHAP. 11. I. Penry VNFITNES TO TEACH made not a nullitie of the Leuiticall Priests office
edifying word vnlesse it be vttered according to the ordinance both in regard of the persons that vtter the same and the ende wherefore it is vttered Chap. 8. pag. 99. This is a Popish errour for the Scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of credite in it selfe Reade my answere Chap. 8. pag. 102. M. Penry saith that there is no Church at all in Popery Chap. 23. pag. 175. 176. This is a grosse errour condemned of very famous men and all reformed Churches If there be no church at all in Popery these absurdities will followe first the Pope is not Antichrist Secondly the infants of Papists may not be baptized in any reformed Church though some of the Religion doe present them to Baptisme and publiquely vndertake the good education of them Reade that which I haue written Chap. 17. pag. 147. 148. 149. and Chap. 23. pag. 176. M. Penry saith that if there be a Church in Popery our Magistrates c. are Schismatiques inasmuch as they haue separated themselues from the Church of Rome Chap. 17. pag. 151. This is a grosse and Popish collection and cannot stand with the duetie of a subiect Reade my answere Chap. 17. pag. 151. 152. M. Penry writeth that men in the Popish Church are not ingraffed by Baptisme into a true Christ His wordes are these Where there is no true Christ whereunto men can be ingraffed by Baptisme there true Baptisme as touching the substance cannot be gotten c. But in Popery there is no true Christ whereinto men may be ingraffed c. Chap. 23. pag. 173. This is a grosse errour condemned of all famous writers and Churches Reade that which I haue written Chap. 23. pag. 173. 174. and cha 20. pag. 156. 157. Maister Penry writeth that if baptisme administred by vnpreaching ministers were denied to be a Sacrament he would wish none to offer themselues to that holy Sacrament for sixe causes First we are already receyued into the bosome of the Church and acknowledged to haue the seale of the couenant in as much as we were once offered and receyued into the number of the godly by the outwarde elemēt though corruptly To what end then should baptisme serue vs againe In his exhort to the gouernonrs c. of Wales pag. 31. If this be true which M. Penry saith the outwarde and bare element deliuered by him which in M. Penryes iudgement is no minister is the seale of Gods couenant Which is a most absurd heresie Secondly the absolute necessitie of baptisme to saluation by this meanes might seeme to be mainteined False They which require men vnbaptized to offer themselues to Baptisme are perswaded that the contempt of the Sacrament is damnable they doe not thinke that all which die without Baptisme if contempt bee absent are damned Besides Baptisme is necessarie in respect of our obedience but what obedience is performed when Baptisme is refused Thirdly least wee should seeme to agree with the heretical Catabaptists If no Baptisme was deliuered by vnpreaching ministers M. Penry is an hereticall Catabaptist if hee dehort any such from holy Baptisme as were baptized by vnpreaching ministers Fourthly other Churches haue not publikely decided the cause They needed not They made no question of it for with one voyce they condemne your Anabaptisticall fancies Fiftly that the practise should not enforce them to bee rebaptized which haue bene alreadie baptized by such as had commission from the Lord to deale in those mysteries If they be already baptized no reason they should desire a second Baptisme for Baptisme may not be iterated I haue prooued this point in my Treatise of the Sacraments and in this booke Chap. 19. pag. 156. Lastly they who being nowe in the age of discretion haue beene baptized by Idoll ministers are either called or not called to saluation If called why should they be rebaptized seeing alreadie they haue bene made partakers of the outward element and accompted in the number of Christians If not called neither should they be baptized vntill they declared by their workes that they were Gods children If they receiued the Sacrament before they neede not If they receiued no Sacrament they cannot absteine from Baptisme without intollerable both sinne and vengeance None that are effectually called either haue or will refuse to offer themselues to Baptisme which Baptisme before they had not Cornelius example doeth teach vs that Acts. 10. Yea I dare be bold to say that her Maiesties subiects which are vnbaptized and do not offer themselues to Baptisme are not as yet effectually called whatsoeuer either they or you pretende The reason is None are effectually called which are not within the compasse of Gods couenant The words of Gods couenant are these I will be thy God and the God of thy seede Gen. 17. Are they within the compasse of this couenant which either wittingly omit or wilfully refuse Baptisme which is the seale of Gods couenant M. Penry sayth that the preaching of the worde is necessarily required in the administration of Baptisme chap. 7 pag. 82. If this were true al such as were Baptized without a Sermon receiued no Sacrament I referre you to my answere Chap. 7. pag. 84. M. Penry sayeth that Baptisme is not out of the Church Chap. 23. pag. 176. This is a grosse errour Reade that which I haue written Chap. 21. pag. 158. c. M. Penryes iudgement is that Queene Elizabeth and many thousandes in England are vnbaptized That his iudgement is such I proue it by his owne wordes He writeth thus c. In Popery there is no true Christ whereunto men may be ingraffed c. And a litle before What Baptisme is that which is not an ingraffing into the true Christ Chap. 23. pag. 173. A litle after he hath these words There is no Church at all in Popery chap. 23. pag. 175. 176. And in an other place c. that Baptisme is not out of the Church If M. Penry shall answere that it was Baptisme in the Popish church yesterday but it is not so either to day or to morowe because the Christ professed now in Popery is not a true but a deuided Christ I must needes tell him that Christ in the Popish profession was diuided as well when her Maiestie c. was Baptized as he is deuided in the Popish profession in this day Besides M. Penry writeth that the Popish church was neuer the Temple of God since Antichrist planted his pestilent chaire therein Chap. 22. pag. 165. To conclude seeing there is in M. Penryes iudgement no Church no Baptisme no Ministery in the Popish church c. I may be bold to affirme that in M. Penryes iudgement her Maiestie and many thousandes more are vnbaptized M. Penry saith that the holy Supper is an extraordinary Sacrament which is deliuered priuately by a Minister Chap. 14. pag. 139. This error is condemned by M. Caluine whose resolution is that it is lawfull to administer the holy Supper priuately if certaine cautions be
obserued I rest in his iudgement I referre you to chap. 15. page 141. 142. M. Penry saith that they which cōmunicate with vnpreaching ministers approue the sinne of the vnpreaching ministerie Chap. 10. pag. 119. This is an Anabaptisticall fancie for S. Paul as M. Penry writeth communicated after his conuersion with those priestes which were as vnlearned as euer any chap. 11. pag. 128. I referre you besides to my answere chap. 10. pag. 119. M. Penry is bolde to control Almightie God for barring the vncircumcised Israelites from eating the Paschall lambe His words are these why should the godly of the family be excluded from the action the cause why they were vncircumcised not being in them Chap. 8. pag. 89. This is intollerable saucinesse It becommeth not dust and ashes to dispute with and to coūtermand the Maiestie of God Reade my answere chap. 8. pag. 91. 92. M. Penries iudgement is that the touching of a dead man which was a legall vncleannes was sinne Chap. 9. page 110. For proofe of this errour he quoteth two textes of Scripture most absurdly I referre you to my answere chap. 9. page 111. 112. 113. M. Penry saith that Caiphas high priesthood was the Lords ordinance Chap. 10. page 122. This is an errour for the Lords ordināce was that only one should be the high priest and it is manifest in the text that Annas Caiphas were high priests together luke 3. M. Penry sayth that he is assured that popish priests are no ministers that is that they haue no calling at all Chap. 22. page 160. 162. 163. If this were true first a great number are vnbaptized Secondly Caluine Beza and other famous men and churches which I do not thinke do erre grosly Lastly only M. Penries iudgement is sound which I am sure is a most absurd iudgement Reade my answere cap. 22. pag. 161. 162. 163. and cap. 18. pag. 154. M. Penry affirmeth readers to be no ministers and for any thing that is reuealed in the worde that they can deliuer no Sacrament and yet that which hath bene done by them may be a Sacrament and what contrarietie saith hee is there in these assertions In his exhort to the Gouernours c. of Wales pag. 32. Then yesterday a Sacrament and to morowe none Goodly diuinitie Such Saint such shrine M. Penry sayth that he hath no ministerie which sinneth in executing the workes of the ministerie as administring Sacraments c. His wordes are these the calling of an vnpreaching minister is not the calling of the ministerie because he sinneth in intermedling with the workes thereof Chap. 25. If this were true the contentious ministers of Philippi were no ministers for they sinned in executing the workes of the ministerie That appeareth in these wordes of the Apostle Some preach Christ through enuie and strife Phi. 1.15 Besides M. Penries ignorant Leuites were no priests in the old Testament for they sinned in executing the priesthood That the outward approbation of the Church doth not make a minister Chap. 12. page 131. If he meane that it doth not furnish a minister with knowledge I graunt it If he meane that it doth not make him a minister to vs then were the ignorant Leuiticall priests no priests in the Iewish Church Which ignorant Leuiticall priests in M. Penries iudgement were lawfull priests though not good priests Chap. 11. page 125. reade my answere chap. 12. page 132. M. Penry sayth that vnfitnesse to teach made not a nullitie of the Leuiticall priests office Chap. 11. page 125. M. Penry sayth in an other place that no ministerie is seperated from a gift Againe whosoeuer preserueth not knowledge in his lippes is no minister in his addition page 57. 58. Againe to make a minister there be two things required First a being or life which the Lord onely can giue Secondly a birth which the Church as an instrument of the ordinance of God is to bestowe vpon him by his outward calling These two things are so essentially to be required in a minister that whosoeuer wanteth either of them he cannot possibly be a minister Againe be it that a man haue the outward calling of the Church yet in deede he is no minister vnlesse the Lorde hath giuen him the life of a minister by committing the word of reconciliation vnto his hands in his addi page 45. 46. M. Penry erreth greatly eyther in his first or last propositions If he can reconcile them hee can worke miracles The toughest glewe that is can not make them cleaue together M. Penry offers disputation Chap. 16. page 143. Inscitia audax none so bold as blind bayard Reade my answere Chap. 16. page 143. 144. M. Penry hath these wordes I dare arrest and attaint of high treason against the maiestie of the Highest all both men and Angels who eyther defend the communicating with vnpreaching ministers lawfull or communicate with them in his addition page 65. Sesquipedalia verba euery worde as bigge as a house Great smoke but no fire thankes be to God Your arrest is like Goliaths curse it is not so fearefull as paper shot Thus M. Penry hath troubled HEAVEN CHVRCH COMMON-VVEALTH and HIMSELFE HEAVEN for he being dust and ashes hath beene too bolde and sawcie with God himselfe CHVRCH for he hath offered vnto it for treasure not coales which had bene very base but poison which is very dangerous COMMON-VVEALTH for he hath vndermined the chaire of the Magistrat I hope such conies will be looked vnto HIMSELFE for he hath contriued and broched many proud blasphemous Anabaptisticall fancies I perceiue it is true which that famous man M. Caluine hath written viz. that an Anabaptisticall head is immensum deliriorum mare a vast Sea of dotages Calu. contra Anabapt CHAP. 1. A DEFENCE OF SVCH points in R. SOMES last treatise as M. Penry hath dealt against R. Some Before that I answere M. Penryes booke I am to desire the godly Reader to consider weightily of this litle which followeth My two first propositions which M. Penry dealeth against are 1. They which were baptized in the Popish Church by Popish Priestes receiued true Baptisme touching the substance of Baptisme 2. They are the Sacraments of Baptisme and the holy Supper which are deliuered in the Church of England by vnpreaching ministers I. Penry YOu handle two needelesse pointes First that They which were baptized by Popish Priests c. Secondly that They are the Sacraments of Baptisme c. In these two pointes M. Some you haue proued nothing that my writings haue denied R. Some I doe see as yet no difference betwene vs. If M. Penry denieth them not to be Sacraments which are administred by Popish priests vnpreaching Ministers hee can not deny Popish priests and vnpreaching Ministers to haue a calling c. For it is a rule in Diuinitie Sacramentum nullum sine ministro that is No Sacrament without a minister My thirde proposition which M. Penry censureth is 3 The godly are not polluted
you see by the way which may not be forgotten that an argument may bee drawen from the Leuiticall priesthood to the ministerie of the newe testament which priesthood and ministerie are not twinnes are vnmatcheable and cannot stand together I confesse my selfe greatly bound vnto you you deale very liberally with me for you reach me arguments as weapons to smite your selfe withall M. Penry a little after in steede of answering my reason asketh a question after his vsuall manner Did saith he none of the vncircumcised Leuites teach Iacob the lawe or offer incense c. I answere First that no such thing appeareth in the text Secondly that it is against the practise of the Leuiticall priefts in the olde Testament Did euer any student deale so childishly as M. Penry doth is not he a very fit man to censure famous men Churches Caluine Martyr Beza Augustine c. are no body with him I did neuer see him that I knowe of but ex vnguibus leonem I see by his answeres what a deepe clarke he is I. Penry Thus many things you see might be obiected against your reasons and I take the obiections to be of some waight It had bene well you had considered of them before you had published your booke And the Baptisme by vnpreaching ministers must haue better proofes then any you haue brought as yet or els I feare me our posterities will not be satisfied therewith R. Some Your wayghtie obiections are inuincible in your eye Suum cuique pulchrum But they haue neither Suczum nor Sanguinem they haue no pith in them they are lighter then any feather and bewray your ignorance You wish I had considered before hand of your obiections Satis pro imperio You are by your leaue a litle too lordly had I nothing to thinke of but of your absurde fancies you imagine very basely of me My arguments for baptisme by vnpreaching ministers are such as you are vnable to stirre for proofe of this I referre the reader to your vnscholerlike answeres Your feare that the posteritie will not rest in my reasons is a vaine feare c. R. Some The vnpreaching ministers doe adde the worde vnto the Element in the administration of Baptisme therefore it is the Sacrament of Baptisme which is deliuered by them Accedit verbum ad Elementum fit Sacramentum August Tract 80. in Iohan. that is The worde is added to the Element and it becomes a Sacrament By worde in Baptisme is vnderstanded the worde of Institution which is to baptize in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost c. Of this iudgement are Beza confess Cap. 4. Art 47. and Musculus de sig Sacram. Art 4. I. Penry Your next reason page 23. is slender Readers pronounce the wordes of Institution with the deliuerie of the Element therefore say you they deliuer a Sacrament You haue once already alledged this to prooue popish baptisme page 20. I haue answered it page 29. 30. 31. And the place of Matth. 28.19 brought in by you page 23. prooueth your consequent to bee false For it sheweth that hee who is to baptize must bee also able to teache which abilitie is wanting in our Readers Goe sayth our Sauiour and teache all nations baptizing c. Therefore if hee that deliuereth the Element be not able to teache we cannot be assured that it is a Sacrament Because the commaundement is not generally to all that coulde pronounce the wordes of Institution being thereunto permitted by the corruption of the time but particularly limitted vnto them that can teache vnlesse you will say that the Lorde biddeth them goe teache who cannot teache which were not once to bee conceiued of his Maiestie R. Some Whatsoeuer passeth from me is slender in your opinion All that you deliuer is ex tripode an oracle at the least You answered before wisely like your selfe So you doe in this place semper idem you are no changeling You deny my consequent and doe adde for your reason an obiection set downe by me a litle after My answere to that obiection is extant and very direct I rest in it I did neuer say or thinke that Almightie God did either command or allow any to be a priest in the old or a minister in the new Testament which had not gifts in some measure It pleaseth you to write in your treatise that vnfitnes to teach made not a nullitie of the Leuiticall priests office If you meane that it made not a nullitie before God you conceiue very basely of Almightie God for you make him to allowe ignorant men to be his priests in the olde Testament which absurde course would haue brought great dishonour to his Maiestie and great hurt to the Church of the Israelites I doe nowe but touch this grosse and blasphemous paradoxe of yours and with the dog of Egypt doe as it were sippe and away but I will examine it more surely hereafter that the reader may see clearely as in a Christall glasse what base ware you commend vnto vs for excellent diuinitie I. Penry The corruption in the Church of Englande that the deliuerie of the Element shoulde be seuered from the preaching of the worde is a breach of Gods ordinance you cannot deny Matth. 28.19 Actes 20.7 and therefore vngodly and intollerable Whether it make the action frustrate or no that is not the question R. Some You meane as I take it by the worde added to the Element the worde preached but you doe not say flatly here though you haue a little before that the want of a Sermon maketh the action frustrate that is the sacrament to be no sacrament I confesse that Paul preached at Troas in the administration of the holy Supper Act. 20.7 and that the Apostles did teach the Gentiles before they baptized them Mat. 28.19 But no learned man will conclude of this that a Sermon is simplie necessarie to the Essence of a Sacrament If you will know what I thinke of sound preaching before the administration of the holy sacramēt my answer is that I do greatly both like and commend it Yea I doe wish with all my heart that all the Churches in Englande had able teachers to performe that dutie This minde was I euer of since I knewe what Gods religion and good diuinitie meant Of this minde are all godly and learned men in the Church of England An obiection of the fantasticall sort Christ sayde to his Apostles Goe and teach all nations baptizing c. Matt. 28.19 Therefore if the worde preached bee not added to the Element it is no sacrament of Baptisme Answere The Argument is verie weake I confesse that Christ cōmanded his Apostles first to teach such as were of yeres and alients from his religion and then to baptize them If the Gentiles had not bene first taught they woulde not haue offered themselues nor the Apostles admitted them to the holy sacrament of Baptisme If any will conclude of this place in saint
he was a papist euer professed the trueth My answere is that they did and doe erre in very many things but yet they did and doe professe some trueth and I doubt not but that many which liued and died in the time of popish darkenesse died Gods seruants If you thinke that a man being wide in many things is wide in all things then because you M. Penry haue deliuered manie blasphemous Anabaptisticall and other errours I might iustly conclude that you hold nothing soundly but I wil not offer you such measure If I did I should deale absurdly with you Howe professed papists are Idolaters appeareth in my second proposition which is newly added to my former treatise Thither I referre you I. Penry Antichrist I grant should sit as God in the temple of God but it was neuer the temple of God since he planted his pestilent chaire therein Poperie in deed hath inuaded the seates and possessions of true religion and began first where the trueth was professed For the mysterie of iniquitie first appeared within the Church and not else-where where true religion flourished and not among the heathen neither could he bee that aduersarie whose beginning shoulde bee in Paganisme But although Poperie tooke roote in the soyle where the true Churche was planted yet it so grewe there that it still continued to be the synagogue of Satan and could neuer as yet be the Church of God howsoeuer it hath ouergrowen the possession thereof And what though their fathers who now are Papists were within the couenant as professing true religion shall it therefore followe that their Idolatrous sonnes should be so too If they returne the Lord hath mercie in store for them I denie not But what is there in this poynt saide for the Papists which the Iewes cannot with farre more shewe of reason pretend for themselues The profaning of Baptisme among the Papistes can make them no more be within the Church then the continuance of the profanation of Circumcision among the Ishmaelites and Edomites could keepe them vnder the couenant And why should popish Baptisme any more tye the Lords couenant to an Idolatrous race then an Ishmaelitish or Edomitish cutting off of the foreskinne linke him to be the God of those adulterous generations Oh but the Lord himselfe hath said in Isaak shall thy seede be called and Iaacob haue I loued and hated Esau Why the same Lorde in respect of his reuealed will for with his secrete election men must not meddle hath sayd the professours of true religion do I loue but the Idolatrous papists my soule abhorreth It will be here demaunded whether I make no more account of popish baptisme then of an Edomitish circumcision I see no reason why I should For a circumcised Edomite being receiued to be a true worshipper at Ierusalem should as well content himselfe with that circumcision circumcision being not a thing inuented by man or done in respect of man but ordeyned by the Lord and done in regard of the couenant made vnto Abraham as we doe with popish baptisme which is not called in question And yet that which is spoken concerning the profession of the trueth by the forefathers is not altogether true in popery for there bee many large regions nowe professing poperie where not so much as the name of Christ was heard vntill they were become grossely popish So that their first step was out of paganisme vnto poperie And this is the estate of all those poore oppressed vassals the west Indians who now in great numbers professe Romish Idolatrie For at such time as the Spanyard inuading their land brought vpon them the most miserable slauerie of the body soule that are vpon any people vnder heauen they had not so much as hearde whether there was any Christ but were most heathnish and sencelesse Idolaters as may appeare by the popish hystoriographers themselues who wrote the stories of those tymes And therefore to omit whose posterities many of the nations within Europe are that haue refused the light of the Gospel though it were granted that the rest of the popish rable were within in the couenant yet these miserable heathen papists can be said to be vnder no couenant but that which is made vnto popery and paganisme I hope M. Some howsoeuer you may be perswaded that other popish shauelings can deliuer a sacrament yet that you will doubt whether any man could be assured to receyue those holy seales at the hands of the heathen massemongers remayning in Cuba Hyspaniola Mexico or any other the Easterne parts And thus much concerning the assumption I am not ignorant that famous and worthie men haue otherwise written concerning the popish Church and therefore I am not to be pressed with their authoritie R. Some If your writings were as sounde as they are absurde they would giue many times great aduantage to the Papist Anabaptist c. If the popish church was neuer the temple of God since Antichrist planted his pestilent chaire there then in your iudgement the Pope is not Antichrist for Antichrist doth and must sit in the Temple of God that is in the Church of God I haue handled this argument before I rest in that I haue written there You say that a circumcised Edomite being receiued into the Church of Ierusalem should content himselfe with his circumcision in Idumea because circumcision was the Lords ordinance c. I agree with you in this If the Edomitish circumcision was the Lords ordinance then it was a seale of Gods couenant to the Idumeans and consequently the Edomites in your iudgement were not Aliens from Gods couenant for the seale of the couenant doth import and presuppose a couenant Besides if the Edomitish circumcision was true circumcision and the Edomitish Church no Church then a Sacrament was out of the Church c. How like you this M. Penry You knowe my meaning You adde that you call not popish baptisme in question Here I grant you doe not but a little after you vse these wordes viz. where there is no true Christ wherunto men can be engraffed by baptisme there true baptisme as touching the substance cannot be gotten c. But in popery there is no true Christ c. mendacem oportet esse memorē Your memory is very short You would neuer I thinke haue vēted such motley stuffe as this if you had thought it would haue bin looked on I can assure you that besides me whom you haue put to a litle paines your treatise hath beene viewed and reuiewed by very many learned men who condemne it for a foolish and fantasticall bable If the west Indians after profession of their beliefe in the holy trinitie were baptized as you say by popish shauelings I assure my selfe that they receiued true baptisme were therfore engraffed into Christ We in the Church of England neede not saile thanks be to God to the massemōgers in Cuba Hispaniola Mexico or any other part of the Indians we haue Gods holy
substaunce of baptisme out of the Church and that by those that are without the Church for then a sacrament might be had out of the Church which were very impious and absurd to be affirmed But popery is out of the Church and so are all popish priests Therfore no man can assure himselfe to haue the substance of baptisme in poperie by any popish priest R. Some Before that I deny any part of your reason I must tell you that I haue proued alreadie that true baptisme hath bene and may be out of the Church Ciprian thought otherwise and therefore would haue such as were baptized by excōmunicated hereticks to be rebaptized But he was and is condemned for that errour by ancient later writers You giue out very peremptorily that it is very impious and absurde to affirme that baptisme either hath bene or may be out of the Church So did the Donatists in Augustines time It is no great matter what you say Your bolt is soone shot Your water is very shallow Many points vvhich you condemne in your Consistorie for grosse absurdities are manifest trueths in the sound iudgement of all reformed Churches So is this present particuler Touching your argument I denie your Minor My reason is the Popish church is a church though an vnsound Church and Popish priestes haue a calling though a faultie one For proofe of this I referre you to that vvhich I haue vvritten before in this Treatise If you like not my reasons confute them I. Penry That there is no Church at all in poperie and that all popish priests are out of the Church besides the former reasons this one doth further shew If there be a Church in poperie or if all popish priests bee not out of the Church then those magistrates that haue separated themselues and their subiects and all others that made this separation from the Romish religion as from that synagogue where saluation is not to be had and consequently where there is no Church are schismatikes to speake the least Because it is a schisme to make this separation from the Church detest the corruptions thereof we may but make such a separation from the Church we ought not vnlesse we would be accounted schismatiks But those Magistrates and their people that made this separation are not schismatickes because in Poperie the foundation is ouerthrowen You say in your booke M. Some page 33. that you could presse the Argument of the Magistracie against me very farre Whether you may or no that shal be cōsidered when I deale with the point but this I am assured of that in this point you shall be driuen either to defend the absurditie that baptisme is to be had out of the Church in a companie estranged from Christ which I thinke you will not do or vrged so farre as to the plaine breach of a Statute which farre be it from me euen in the cause of treason Will ye say that baptisme may be had out of the Church the assertion is absurd Or will you hold that there is a Church in Poperie the assertion is dangerous and I haue prooued it false It is dangerous because it affirmeth our Magistrates to be schismatiks inasmuch as they haue separated themselues from the Church I hope rather then you will fall into either of these points that you will graunt me the cause R. Some I will answere your seuerall pointes very briefly The reason which you vse to prooue there is no Church at all in popery is this viz. If there bee a Church at al in popery the Magistrates and people which are of the religion are schismaticks at the least My answere is that this is a popish argument I haue answered it before and doe rest in that answere If either you or any of the popish sort mislike my answere you may confute it Besides if there be no Church at all in popery as you affirme why should the Churches of England Germany Dēmarke which were sometimes popish be called reformed Churches The very name of reformed Churches doth manifestly import that the Churches of England Germanie Denmarke c. though popish and vnsound were Churches in some sort before the reformation If you thinke that all the popish sorte which died in the popish Church ore damned you thinke absurdly for you dissent from the iudgement of all the learned protestants and doe presume to sit in Gods chaire which is intollerable sawcinesse To say or write that true baptisme hath beene and may bee out of the Church is a true proposition in diuinitie Augustine did maintaine it against the Donatists The most famous mē Churches in our time are of that iudgement I rest in that with all my heart You account it an absurde proposition The best is you are not master of the sentences as Peter Lumbard was If you were which God defend the sounde diuinity which is taught in Cambridge and Oxford should bee cryed downe and your strange fancies should be ruled cases The argument of the magistracy is touched before I perceiue it hath mooued you a litle for you drawe out a statute of Treasō c. What I beseech you good Sir No lesse then Treason you are a charitable man I haue do and will perfourme all dutie by Gods grace to the religion and my gracious Prince so long as I liue therefore treason statutes can take no hold of mee Yea the refutation of your blasphemous Anabaptisticall popish and proude errours by me is I am sure a performance of a speciall duetie to Almightie God my Prince and this Church And I doubt not but that blessing which God hath giuen already to my last treatise and which his Maiestie will giue to this will marre your market Great wordes shal not fray me c. If your ignorāt disciples wil stil magnifie you it shal not be strāge to me they do but their kind Such as bee learned wise haue do find you out Cognoscitur quis sit vt vt laudetur Coruus The most famous orators that euer were in Rome and Athens could not make the rauen to be no rauen Tertullus commended Felix Act. 24. but Felix was an absurde body and stripped of his office by Claudius Caesar The Samaritans commended Simon Magus Act. 8 Libanius the Sophister commended Iulian the Apostate Socr. lib. 3. cap. 22. Eunomius cōmended Aetius which was a pestilent heretike Theodor. lib. 2. cap. 29. You haue protested many times in your treatise that you reuerence me but here you offer me this choise either to defende that which is in your iudgemēt an absurditie but in deede is none or to incurre the danger of treason c. Doe you thinke that I haue any the least cause to beleeue your glorious protestations Ioab pretended extraordinarie good will to Abner and Amasa but he killed them 2. Sam. 3. and 20. chap. Ismael pretended extraordinarie good wil to them of Sichem Silo Samaria the beast shedde teares but they were Crocodiles teares for