The defense of the aunsvvere to the Admonition against the replie of T.C. By Iohn VVhitgift Doctor of Diuinitie. In the beginning are added these. 4. tables. 1 Of dangerous doctrines in the replie. 2 Of falsifications and vntruthes. 3 Of matters handled at large. 4 A table generall.

Of Fontes, and crossing in Baptisme.

Chap. 3. the. 1. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 107. Sect. vlt.

You may as well finde fault with Pulpit and Church, as with* 1.1 the fontes, and the reason is all one. In the tyme of the Apostles they did not baptise in Basons, as you doe nowe, but in Riuers and other common waters, neyther was there in the Apostles time any Churches for Christians, or Pulpits to preache in, and therefore you had best to plucke downe Churches, and Pulpits, and to baptise in common riuers and waters.

T. C. Pag. 135. Sect. 2.

As for Fontes I haue spoken of before, both particularly, and in generall. But whereas M. Doctor sayth, in the Ipostles tymes they baptised in no Basons but in ryuers, and common wa∣ters, I would know whether there was a riuer or common water in Cornelius, and in the Iay∣lers houses, where Paule and Peter baptised.

Io. Whitgifte.

And I woulde also gladly learne, howe you can proue that they did baptise in Basons there: I doe not say that they alwayes baptised in Riuers and common wa∣ters, but that they did so and that most commonly, which no man can denie. But I require one sillable in Scripture to proue that they did baptise in Basons, not that I* 1.2 disallowe it if tyme and place doe require, but bycause I woulde haue you to per∣forme, that in your Ceremonies, which you require in ours, that is, to proue them di∣rectly by the worde of God.

Chap. 3. the. 2. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 108. Sect. 1.

Touching crossing in baptisme, I will onely recite vnto you the* 1.3 opinion of M. Bucer, which is this. Signam hoc non tam quod est vsus in Eccle∣sijs antiquissimi, quam quòd est admodùm simplex, & presentis admonitionis crucis Christi, adbi∣beri, nec indecens, nec inutile existimo: si adhibeatur modò purè intellectum, & religiose excipiatur, nulla nec superstitione adiuncta, nec elements seruitute, nec lenitate, aut vulgari consuetu∣dine. I thinke it neyther vncomely nor vnprofitable to vse the signe of the Crosse, not onely bicause the vse therof is very auncient, but also because

it hath an expresse signification of the passion of Christ: so that it be purely vnderstoode and religiously receyued vvithout any superstition or serui∣tude of the element, or leuitie, or common custome.

T. C. Pag. 135. Sect. 3.

To proue crossing in Baptisme, M. Bucers authoritie is brought. I haue sayde before what iniurie it is to leaue the publike workes of Bucer, and to flie vnto the Apochryphas, where∣in also they might driue vs to vse the like, and to set downe likewise his wordes whiche we finde in his priuate letters. But it is first of all to be obserued of the reader, howe and with what name those notes are called, which are cyted of M. Doctor for the defense of these corrup∣tions: they are called by M. Doctors owne confession (Censures) which worde signifieth and implyeth, as much as corrections and controlments of the booke of seruice, and therefore we may take this for a generall rule throughout the whole booke of Seruice, that in whatsoeuer things in controuersie M. Doctor doth not bring Bucers authoritie, to confirme them that those things Bucer mislyked of, as for example in priuate Baptisme, and Communions ministerd in houses, for interrogatories ministred to Infants, and such lyke, for so muche as they are not con∣firmed here by M. Bucers iudgement, it may be thought that he mislyked of them, and no doubt, if eyther M. Bucers notes had not either condemned or misliked of diuerse things in the Seruice booke, we shoulde haue had the notes printed and set forth to the full. This I thought in a worde to admonish the reader of.

Io. Whitgifte.

To your first cauill, I haue answered before, where you made the same. To your seconde of master Bucers Censures (though the booke be not so intituled) the* 1.4 answere is short and plaine, it was his iudgement vppon the first Communion booke, in the time of king Edwarde wherein he misliked some things: but alloweth both priuate Baptisme, and the Communion ministred to the sicke, as I before de∣clared, and you might haue remembred, if your memorie had not fayled you.

Chap. 3. the. 3. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 135. Sect. 4.

Unto M. Bucers authoritie I could here oppose men of as great authoritie, yea the autho∣ritie of all the reformed Churches, which shal also be done afterwarde. And if there were nothing to oppose but the worde of God, which will haue the Sacraments ministred simplie, and in that since∣ritie that they be left vnto vs, it is enough to make all men to couer their faces, and to be ashamed, if that which thy shall speake be not agreeable to that simplicitie.

The reasons which M. Bucer bringeth I will answere, wh〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ch in this matter of crossing are two: first that it is auncient, and so it is in deede: For Tertullian maketh mention of this vsage.* 1.5 And if this be sufficient to proue the goodnesse of it, then there is no cause, why we shoulde mislyke of the other superstitions and corruptions which were likewise vsed in those tymes. For the same* 1.6 Tertullian sheweth that they vsed also at baptisme to taste of milke, and honie, and not to washe all the weeke after they had ministred baptisme.

Io. Whitgifte.

These be but wordes without proofe, Crossing in that maner and forme, that we vse it, verie well agréeth with the simplicitie of the worde of God. If it doe not so, shewe any worde agaynst it.

Your answere to that reason is very base, for it is not onely auncient, but it hath continued, and béene generally receyued: which you allowed before as a sufficient reason for Godfathers. As for milke and honie, the vse of them was neyther continued long, nor yet generall: and therefore the reason of them, and of the other is not lyke.

Chap. 3. the. 4. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 135 Sect. vlt.

But here I will note the cause, wherevppon I suppose, this vse of crossing came vp in the Primitiue Churche, whereby shall appeare, howe there is no cause nowe why it it should be re∣teyned, if there were any why it shoulde be vsed in the Primitiue Churche. It is knowne to all that haue read the Ecclesiasticall stories, that the Heathen did obiect to the Christians in tymes past in reproche, that the God which they beleeued of was hanged vpon a Crosse. And they thought good to testifie that they were not ashamed therefore of the same God, by the often vsing of the signe of the Crosse, which carefulnesse and good mynde to keepe amongest them an open profession of Christ crucifyed, although it be to be commended: yet is not this meanes so: for they might otherwise haue kept it, and with lesse daunger, than by this vse of crossing, and if they thought the vse of the Crosse to be the best meanes, yet they shoulde not haue beene so bolde, as to haue brought it into the holy Sacrament of Baptisme, and so mingle the ceremonies and inuentions of men, with the Sacramentes and institution of God. And as it was brought in vpon no good grounde, so the Lord left a marke of his curse of it, and whereby it might be percey∣ued to come out of the forge of mans brayne, in that it beganne forthwith, while it was yet in the swadling cloutes to be superstitiously abused. For it appeareth by Tertullian also in the same booke de Corona militis, that the Christians had such a superstition in it, that they woulde doe nothing, nor take nothing in hande, vnlesse they had crossed them, when they went out, when they came in, when they sat or lay downe, and when they rose, and as Superstition is alwayes strengthned, and spreddeth it selfe with the time, so it came from crossing of men vnto crossing of euerie thing that they vsed. Wherevpon Chrysostome commendeth the crossing of the Cuppe before a man drinke,* 1.7 and of the meate before it was eaten. But if it were graunted that vppon this consideration which I haue before mencioned, the auncient Christians did well, yet it followeth not, that wee shoulde so doe: for we liue not amongest those Nations whiche doe cast vs in the teeth or re∣proche vs with the Crosse of Christ. If we liued amongst the Turkes it were an other matter, and then there might peraduenture some question be, whether we shoulde doe as they did, and ha∣uing the same sore, vse the same playster. But nowe we liue among the Papistes, that doe not contemne the crosse of Christ, but which esteeme more of the woodden crosse, than of the true crosse of Christ, (which is his sufferings,) we ought nowe to doe cleane contrariewise to the olde Chry∣stians, and abolishe all vse of these crosses, for contrarie diseases, must haue contrarie remedyes: if therefore the olde Christians to delyuer the crosse of Christ from contempt, did often vse the crosse, the Christians nowe to take away the superstitious estimation of it, ought to take away the vse of it.

Io. Whitgifte.

I thinke your supposition in parte to bée true: I am also perswaded that the originall cause of vsing this signe was lawfull and good, and yet the thing if selfe afterwardes abused, and the cause of vsing is cleane altered, and wholy conuerted to superstition: but the abuse béeing taken away, I sée no cause why it may not be vsed in Baptisme, in that manner and forme, as it is in this Churche of Eng∣lande, that is, In token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confesse the fayth of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight vnder his banner, agaynst sinne, the worlde, and the deuill, and to continue Christes faythfull Souldiour and seruant vnto his lyues ende. And though there be no Turkes among vs or Iewes, yet is it lawfull to vse suche Christian ceremonies to put vs in minde of our dutie. And notwithstanding the same might be done by other meanes, yet it hath pleased the Churche to thinke this meanes also conuenient, and therefore hath vsed hir libertie therein. As for Pa∣pistes,* 1.8 we are farre enough off from them, for they pictured the signe of the crosse and did worshippe it, so doe not we: they vsed it to driue away spirites and diuels, so do not we: they attributed power and vertue vnto it, so doe not we: they had it in theyr Churches, so haue not we: they vsed it dayly and nightly for religion sake, we onely in Baptisme for a signe and token, as I haue sayde before: so that their ab∣using of it is sufficiently corrected. Neyther is there any man that knoweth not to what ende and purpose we vse it.

Chap. 3. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 136. somevvhat past the middest.

Concerning the other reason of the profitable signification of the Crosse, I haue shewed that that maketh the thing a great deale worse, and bringeth in a newe worde into the Churche, whereas there ought to be no Doctor heard in the Churche but onely our Sauiour Christ. For 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ese significations be good, then the Papistes haue to answere vs, that theyr Ceremonyes be 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ot dumbe, whiche haue as likely and as glorious significations as these are, and so indeede they 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ay that theyr ceremonyes are not dumbe ceremonies, for so much as they signifie so good things. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ut although it be the worde of God that we shoulde not be ashamed of the Crosse of Christ, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t is it not the worde of God, that we shoulde be kept in remembrance and obseruation of that, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 two lynes drawne a crosse, one ouer another in the childes foreheade, but a fonde toy, and ydle 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uise of mans braine.

Io. Whitgifte.

The signification of the Papisticall ceremonies, was onely knowne to them∣selues,* 1.9 being vsed in the Church without any declaration of suche signification, and therefore they might worthily be counted dumbe, and vnprofitable, but it is not so in this, for the signification is ioyned with the signe, & published in a tongue knowne. The Papisticall Ceremonies were in number many, and they had annexed vnto them an opinion of worship, and a necessitie vnto saluation. &c. whiche made them wicked, but all these be farre from this, and other Ceremonies vsed by vs, and for as much as there is no worde of God agaynst it, and it hath a profitable signification, the Church may vse it though it be not expressed in the worde, as it may doe other rites, according to that that I haue proued before intreating of the authoritie of the* 1.10 church in such matters.

Chap. 3. the. 6. Diuision.

Admonition.

Fourthly, they doe superstitiously and wickedly institute a newe Sacrament, which is pro∣per to Christ onely, marking the childe in the foreheade with a Crosse, in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confesse the fayth of Christ. We haue made mention before of that wicked deuorse of the worde and Sacraments,

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 192. Sect. 3.

Concerning the fourth toy, that is Crossing the childe in the forehead, which you call wicked and superstitious, I haue before declared Maister Bucers opinion: It may be left, and it hath beene vsed in the Primi∣tiue Churche, and maye bee so still, without eyther superstition or wickednesse. Neyther doth it any more make a Sacrament (by∣cause* 1.11 it is in token that hereafter hee shall not bee ashamed to con∣fesse Christ crucifyed) than your sitting doth at the communion in to∣ken of rest, that is a full finishing through Christ of the Ceremoni∣all* 1.12 lawe. &c. I thinke you knowe that euerie Ceremonie betoke∣ning something, is not by and by a Sacrament, and therefore here is as yet no wicked diuorse of the worde and Sacraments, except it be made by you.

T. C. Pag. 134. Sect. vlt.

In the. 192. page, vnto the Admonition obiectiing that by this significafion it is made a Sacramēt.

M. Doctor answereth that euerte ceremonie which betokeneth something is not a Sacrament. I woulde knowe what maketh a Sacrament, if a doctrine annexed vnto an outward signe doth not make a Sacrament. And I am sure there was no outwarde signe neyther in the olde Testament, nor i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the newe which hath a doctrine 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oyned with it, which is not a Sacrament. For if he will take the nature of the Sacrament so straightly as Augustine doth, and that there be no Sacra∣ments but when as to the element, there cometh the word, (*) 1.13 the Circūeision can be no sacrament: besydes that, seeyng that master Doctor hath condemned the allegorie and signifycation of sytting at the Lordes supper, saying that it is Papistieall, I maruell what priuiledge he hath or speciall licence, that he may allow that in him selfe and in his owne assertions, which he sayth is vnlawfull and papisticall in others, especially seeing the allegorie of the sytting was neuer vsed by the Pa∣pists, but this of crossing is. And if the licence of allegories be allowed, I see not why Oyle may not be brought into the Sacrament, as well as crossing, both bicause it hath beone a Sacrament of God before, and for that the signifycation thereof (betokening the giftes of the holy Ghost, and shadowing out the power and efficacie of those giftes) caryeth as great a shewe of wisedome and Christian instruction, as doth the crossing.

Io. Whitgifte.

You are not ignorant, I am sure, that to the making of a Sacrament, besydes* 1.14 the externall element, there is required a commaundement of God in his worde, that it should be done, and a promise annexed vnto it, where of the Sacrament is a seale: so it was in circumcision, and so it is in the Supper and Baptisme. And sure∣ly I maruell at this your saying, If we will take the nature of the sacrament straightly* 1.15 as Augustine doth, and that there be no sacraments, but where as to the element, there com∣meth the worde, the Circumcision can be no sacrament. I thinke you are not well adui∣sed, for what doth Saint Augustine require in a Sacrament? Doth he not requir〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the worde, and an externall element? And are not both these to bée founde in circumcision? The externall element is the foreskinne: it is commaunded in Genesis. 17. And there is the promise annexed, whereof it is a seale and a Sacra∣ment:* 1.16 and what doth Saint Augustine requyre more in a Sacrament? But I will impute this saying of yours rather to some ouersight or lacke of due conside∣ration, than to ignorance, for I thinke it vnpossible that a man of your profession shoulde be ignorant in the nature and definition of a Sacrament. A Sacrament, I meane not in the largest signification, but as it is properly vsed, and as we call the Lordes Supper and Baptisme Sacramentes. For Sacramentes in the proper signification, be mysticall signes ordeyned by God himselfe, consisting in the worde of* 1.17 God, in figures and in things signified, whereby he keepeth in mannes memorie, and sometymes renueth his large benefites bestowed vpon his Church, whereby also he sealeth or assureth his promises, and sheweth outwardly, and as it were layeth before oure eyes those things to beholde which inwardly he worketh in vs: yea by them he strengthneth and increaseth our fayth, by the holy Ghost working in our heartes. And to be short, by his Sacramentes he separateth vs from all other people, from all other religions, consecra∣ting vs and binding vs to him onely, and signifyeth what he requyreth of vs to be done. Nowe euerie ceremonie signifying any thing, hath not these conditions and proper∣tyes,* 1.18 Wherefore euerie ceremonie signifying any thing, is not a Sacrament, and therefore crossing in Baptisme though it signifyeth some thing, yet it is no Sa∣crament.

The allegory of sitting is dombe and speaketh nothing: but to the signe of the crosse is added the signification in expresse woordes, as I haue before declared, wherefore there is more cause to condemne the one, than there is to cōdemne the other: More〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣uer sitting at the Lordes supper hath not bene vsed in the Churche that I can reade of, but crossing in baptising hath, wherefore that were to inuent a newe Ceremonie, and this is to reteyne the olde, so that the reason of their allegorie and of this Cere∣monie is not lyke.

Of refusing 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉yle in baptisme, the Churche hath iust cause: and it vseth hir liber∣tie in reteyning crossing: neyther will it burden the Sacramentes with a multitude of vnnecessary and vnprofitable Ceremonies, and yet reteyne such as shall be thought moste conuenient.

Chap. 3. the. 7. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 137. Lin. 3.

And to conclude, I see no cause why some crosses should be vnlawefull, and other some com∣mendable: and why it should be a monument of Popery in woode and metall, and yet a Christian badge in the forehead of a man, why we should not lyke of it in streates and hyghewayes, and yet al∣lowe of it in the churche.

Io. Whitgifte.

As there is great difference betwixt the paynting of an Image, to sette foorth an historie, and placing of it in the Churche to be worshipped, so is there also as great dif∣ference, or more, betwixt crossing a childe in the forehead at the time of baptisme, with expressing the cause and vse of it, and the placing of crosses in Churches or highways and streates.

The crossing of the childes forehead, is but for a moment, the crosse of wood and stone remayneth and continueth: the crosse in the childes forehead is not made to be adored and worshipped, neyther was euer any man so madde, as to imagine any such thing of it: but the crosses in churches, streates, and highwayes, of mettall and woode, were erected to be worshipped, and were so accordingly, and therefore there is no like perill in the one, as there is in the other.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Of fontes. The Apostles baptised not in Basons.
• * 1.2

  The replyer put to the proofe of his ceremonies.
• * 1.3

  Of crossing in baptisme. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ucer.
• * 1.4

  M. Bucers Censures vp∣pon the first booke in king Edwardes time.
• * 1.5

  Li. de resur∣rect. carnis.
• * 1.6

  Li. de coro∣na militis.
• * 1.7

  Vpon the 1. Tim. 4. cap.
• * 1.8

  Difference betwene cros∣sing in Papi∣strie, and in our church.
• * 1.9

  Difference betwix〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sticall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nies 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.10

  Tract. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.11

  Crossing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacra〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.12

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• (*) 1.13

  A monifest 〈◊〉〈◊〉,
• * 1.14

  What is re∣quired to the making of a sacrament.
• * 1.15

  Circumcision a Sacrament according to Augustines rule.
• * 1.16

  Gen. 17.
• * 1.17

  The proper signification of sacraments
• * 1.18

  Euery signi∣fying ceremo∣nie is not a 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉acrament.