Lette vs therefore see youre thyrde: whyche is, that although the Churches consente was then required, yet it is not nowe, and that it is no generall rule, no more than (saye you) that all thyngs shoulde be therefore common nowe, bicause they were in the Apostles tyme.
The authors of the Admenition, with theyr fauourers, muste be counted Anabaptistes, no one worde beyng shewed whiche tendeth therevnto, you muste accuse them, whiche confirme that foundation whereof they buylde their communitie of all things, whiche is one of their chief heresyes. If I shoulde saye nowe that you are lyke to those that row in a boate, which although they looke backewardes, yet they thruste an other way, I shoulde speake with more lykelyhode than you haue doone. For although you make a countenaunce, and speake hotly agaynst Ana∣baptistes, yet in deede you strengthen theyr handes with reasons. But I will not saye so, ney∣ther doe I thynke that you fauour that secte, but onely the whirlewinde and tempest of your af∣fection bente to mayntayne this estate, whereby you haue so greate honour and wealth, driueth you vpon these rockes, to wracke your selfe on, and others.
For I pray you what communitie is spoken of eyther in the two, or three, or fourthe of the Actes, whiche ought not to be in the Churche: as long as the world standeth? was there any communitie but as touching the vse, and so farre foorth as the poore brethren had neede of, and* 1.1 not to take euery man alyke? was it not in any man his power to sell his houses, or landes, or not to sell them? When he had solde them, were they not in euery man his libertie to keepe the money to himselfe at his pleasure? and(a) 1.2 all they that were of the Churche didde not sell theyr possessions, but those whose hartes the Lord touched singularly with the compassion of the neede of others, and whome God had blessed with aboundance, that they had to serue themselues, and helpe others, and therefore it is reckened as a rare example, that Barnabas the Cy∣prian and Leuite didde sell his possession, and broughte the price to the feete of the Apostles.
And as for Ananias and Saphira, they were not punished for bycause they brought not the price of their possessions to the Apostles, but bycause they lyed, saying that they had broughte the whole when they had brought but parte. And to bee shorte, is there any more doone there, than Sainct Paule prescribeth to the Corinthians, and in them to all Churches to the worldes ende? After he had exhorted to liberalitie towardes the poore Churche in Hierusalem, not (say∣eth* 1.3 he) that other shoulde bee releeued, and you oppressed, but vppon lyke condition at thys tyme your aboundance supplyeth theyr lacke, that also theyr aboundance maye be for your lacke, that there might bee equalitie, as it is written, he that gathered muche, had nothing ouer, and he that gathered little, had not the lesse.
Surely it were better you were no Doctour in the Churche, than that the Anabaptistes shoulde haue suche holde to bring in their communitie as you giue them.
In summe the Apostolike communitie, or the Churches in their tyme, was not Anabapti∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ticall.
I haue shewed before in the begynning of my Answere to the Admonition,* 1.4 not onely howe weake, but also howe daungerous a kynde of reasonyng it is, to saye, that the Apostles did it, Ergo, wée muste doe it, or the Apostles didde it not, Ergo we muste not doe it. Zuinglius a notable learned man, dothe especially reproue the Anabaptistes for this kynde of reason, and sayeth that an argumente, à facto ad ius, or à non facto ad non ius, is neuer good, excepte those examples be groun∣ded vppon some lawe or rule. Wherefore, when I thus laboure to ouerthrowe the vitious manner and kynde of the Anabaptisticall argumente, I truste no in∣different man will suspect me of their errors? when I say, that this is no good argu∣ment: In the Apostles time those that beléeued had all things common among them, therefore Christians muste haue all thynges common: doe I confirme theyr