Unto the three next sections conteyned in the. 94. 95. and a peece of the. 96. pages, touching that which is called the Introite, and (*) 1.1 fragments of the Epistles and Gospels, and the rehear∣sall of the Nicene creede, I haue declared before the causes of our misliking, neyther meane I to stand to refute the slanderous surmises, which M. Doctor raiseth of the authors of the Admoni∣tion, whereby he would bring them into the suspition of Arrianisme, to whom all those that feare God beare witnesse, that they are moste farre from. He him selfe notwithstanding once agayne in the laste of these three sections. 96. pag. doth laye the manyfeste foundations of that part of Ana∣baptisme, which standeth in hauing all things common, saying directly against S. Peter, that in* 1.2 the time of the Apostles, Christians hadde proprietie in nothing. And further giuing great cause of triumph of the one syde to the Eatabaptists, and such as denie the baptisme of yong infants, in matching that with those things which the church may (although not without incommoditie, yet withoute impietie) bee withoute: and of the other syde vnto the Papistes, whylest he sayeth that wee reade not of any women which receyued the Lordes supper in the Apostles tyme. For this is that they alleage to proue their vnwritten verities, when as it is easyly answered bothe to the Papistes, and M. Doctor, that forsomuche as the Apostle dothe witnesse, that the Churches of Corinthe consisting of men and women did receyue, that therfore women also did receyue, and were partakers of the Lordes table. Thus it is manifest that M. Doctor onely to displease the authors of the Admonition, sticketh not to (*) 1.3 pleasure three notable heretikes, Anabaptists, Ca∣tabaptistes, and Papistes.
Yet you should here haue excused their ignorance, in certaine poynts and theyr absurd reasoning: but seeing you are content so lightly to passe all this ouer, and lea∣uing the defense of the Admonition, séeke to confute my collections, I am contente also that it stande vntouched, and will answere that whyche you onely séeme to misselyke.
I doe not otherwyse suspect them of Arrianisme, than they haue giuen iust occasi∣on, by dislyking the publike reading of that Creede, whiche was purposely made to ouerthrow Arrianisme. I trust there is a great number of suche as feare God in the Churche of Englande that knowe not them, but yet for their rashnesse in this point, haue them in some suspiition.
By these examples of negatiue argumentes from the Scriptures, I ouerthrow all the Anabaptistes reasons, that they do, or can vse in the defense of their errours, so do I lykewyse yours, vsed against this Church of England, neyther speake I any otherwyse of the baptisme of infantes, or of womens receyuing the Communion, than M Zuinglius doth in his Elench. against the Anabaptistes, and M. Caluine also in his booke written against them.
But this answere sore troubleth you, and therefore you onely replie against it with slaunderous wordes: but least you should by such meanes abuse the Reader, I will set〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e downe bothe Zuinglius and Caluines wordes. M. Zuinglius in his Elench. con∣tra* 1.4 Anabap. sayth thus: You can fynde no hole to escape at. For you foolyshly reason negatiuely from deedes and examples, naye from no deedes and no examples. For what doe you else when you saye, wee reade not that the Apostles didde baptize infantes, Ergo, infantes oughte not to be baptized? Dothe not all the force of youre reasons consyste herein? And again: VVherfore it is to be maruelled at, with what face they dare measure