is voyde of them, & not partakers of them. Circumcistō which is a figure of baptisme, had that necessitie ioyned vnto it, that whosoeuer lacked it, was not counted nor rec∣kened amongst the people of God. It is not nothing that Chryst sayth: Qui credide∣rit & baptizatus fuerit &c. But your maner of doctrine is suche, that it maketh men thinke that the externall signes of the sacraments are but bare ceremonies, and in no sense necessarie to saluation, whiche muste in time bring in a contempte of the sa∣craments, and especially of baptisme for Infants.
M. Zuinglius, Bucer, and Caluine as you heard before, although they doe not thinke children without baptisme to be damned, yet doe they iudge the baptisme of children to be necessarie, and that for iust causes, as is before declared. And what Christian would willingly suffer his childe to dye without the sacrament of regeneration, the lacke whereof (though it be not a necessarie) yet may it séeme to be a probable token and signe of reprobation.
What eyther order of God, or commaundement is broken in priuate baptisme? or where hath God appoynted that baptisme muste be ministred in the open congregation onely, and not vpon any cause in priuate families? Will you yet deale on this sorte without ground or proofe? In priuate baptisme vsed vpon necessitie there is neyther order nor commaundement of God broken. If there be, shewe it.