Chap. 1. the seconde Diuision.
The fourthe. There was then accustomed to bee an examination of the communicantes, whiche nowe is neglected.
Howe proue you that there was then any examination of com∣municantes?* 1.1 If there hadde bene eyther commaundemente or ex∣ample for it in Scriptures, I am sure you woulde not haue lefte it vnquoted in the margent. Saincte Paule sayeth. 1. Cor. 11. Probet* 1.2 bomo seipsum. Lette a man examine hym selfe. &c. But he speaketh of no other examination: wherefore this reason of youres is altogether friuolous and without reason.
And yet I doe not disallowe the examination of communicants, so there be a discreete respecte had of the persons, places, and other circumstances, neyther is it neglected in this Churche of Englande, but by learned and discrete ministers, wyth learnyng aud discreti∣on vsed. But note I praye you the force of this argumente: some ministers neglecte to examine the communicantes, Ergo, the Communion is not rightly and syncerely ministred, as thoughe the examination of the communicantes were of the substance of the sa∣crament. If you woulde reason after your accustomed manner, you should rather conclude thus, the Apostles were not examined when they receyued the communion, neyther is it expressed in Scriptures that they examined others, therefore there ought to be no suche exa∣mination: this is your vsual maner of reasonyng, but it is chyldish, vnlesse it were to conclude damnation or saluation.
M. Doctor asketh howe it is proued that there was any examination of the communicantes. After this sorte, all things necessarie were vsee in the churches of God in the Apostles tymes, but