* 1.1VPon the xxv. of February Perciuall Creswell came wt M. Harpsfield Archdeacon of London, and a seruaunt wayting vppon him. After formall salutations, he made a long Oration, of which this is a short summe: That al mē euen the infidels, Turkes, Iewes, Anabaptistes, and Li∣bertines desire felicitie as well as the Christians, and how that euery one thinketh they shall attayne to it by their re∣ligion. To which Bradford answered briefly, that he spake not farre amisse.
Then sayd Harpsfield, but the way thither is not al alike.* 1.2 For the infidels by Iupiter, Iuno, the Turke by hys Alcoran: the Iew by his Thalmod, doe beleeue to come to heauen, For so may I speake of suche as beleue the immor¦talitie of the soule.
You speake truely.
Well, then here is the matter, to know the way to this heauen.
* 1.3We may not inuent any manner of wayes. There is but one way, & that is Iesus Christ, as he himselfe doth witnesse: I am the way.
It is true that you say, and false also. I suppose that you meane by Christ, beleuing in Christ.
I haue learned to discerne betwixt fayth & Christ, Albeit I confesse, that who so beleueth in Christ, the same shall be saued.
No not all that beleue in Christ: for some shall say Lord, Lord, haue not we cast out deuils. &c. But Christ wil an¦swere in the day of Iudgement to these: Depart from me, I know you not.
You must make a difference betwixt beleuing, and saying I beleue,* 1.4 As for example: if one shuld say & sweare hee loueth you, for all his saying yee will not beleue hym when you see he goeth about to vtter and do al the euill a∣gainst you that he can.
Well, this is not muche materiall. There is but one way Christ. How come we to know him? Where shal we seeke to finde him?
Forsooth, we must seeke him by his word, and in his word,* 1.5 and after his word.
Uery good, but tell me now how first we came into the companye of them that coulde tell vs this, but by Baptisme?
Baptisme is the sacrament, by the which outwardly we are engrafted into Christ: I say outwardly, because I dare not exclude from Christ all that dye without Bap∣tisme. I will not tye God, where he is not bound. Some Infantes dye, whose Parentes desire Baptisme for them, and can not haue it.
To those we may thinke perchaunce that God will shew mercy.
Yea, the children whose parentes do contemne bap∣tisme, will not I condemne, because the childe shall not beare the fathers offence.
Well, we agree that by Baptisme then wee are brought,* 1.6 and, as a man would say, begotten to Christ. For Christ is our father, and the churche his spouse is our mo∣ther. As all men naturally haue Adam for their father, and and Eua for their mother: so all spirituall men haue christ for their father, and the Church for their mother. And as Eua was taken out of Adams side, so was the Church ta∣ken out of Christes side: whereout flowed bloud for the sa∣tisfaction and purgation of our sinnes.
All this is truely spoken.
* 1.7Now, then tell me whether this Churche of Christ hath not bene alwayes?
Yea, sithens the creatiō of man, and shall be for euer.
Uery good. But yet tel me whether this Church is a visible Church, or no?
It is no otherwise visible, then Christ was here on earth: that is, by no exteriour pompe or shewe that set∣teth her forth commonly, and therefore to see her wee must put on such eyes, as good men put on to see & know christ when hee walked here on earth: for as Eue was of ye same substaunce that Adam was of, so was the Churche of the same substaunce that Christ was of, flesh of his flesh, & bone of his bones, as Paule sayth, Ephes 5. Looke therfore how Christ was visibly knowne to be Christ when he was on earth, that is, by considering hym after the word of GOD so is the Church knowne.
I do not come to reason at this present, & therefor•• I will goe on forwarde.* 1.8 Is not this Churche a multi∣tude?
Yes that it is. Howbeit, lat••t anguis in herba, as the Prouerbe is. For in your question is a subtiltie. What visible multitude was there in He••ias tyme, or whē Mo∣ses was on the Mount, Aaron and all Israell worship∣ping the Cal••e?
Ye diuert from the matter.
No, nothing at all. For I doe preuent you, know∣ing well where about you go. And therfore f••wer wordes might well serue if that you so would.
Well, I perceaue you haue knowledge, and by a litle perceiue I the more. Tel me yet more, whether this multiude haue not the Ministery or preachyng of Gods worde?
Syr, ye goe about the bushe. If ye vnderstande Preaching for confessing the Gospel, I will go with you: for els if you will, you may knowe that persecution often letteth preaching.
Well, I meane it so. Tell mee yet more: hath it not the Sacramentes administred?
It hath the sacramentes, howbeit the administratiō of them is often letted. But I wil put you from your pur∣pose, because I see where about you goe. If heretickes haue Baptisme and doe Baptise, as they did in S. Cipri∣ans tyme, you knowe this Baptisme is Baptisme, & not to be reiterate. This Bradford did speake, that the stāders by might see, that though the Papistes Church haue bap∣tisme which we haue receiued of them, yet therfore it is not the true Church, neither neede we to be baptised againe.
You goe farre from the matter, and I perceiue you haue more errours then one.
So you say: but that is not enough til you proue thē.
Well, this Churche is a multitude. Hath it not the preaching of the Gospell, & the ministra••ion of the Sacra∣ments? & yet more: hath it not the power of Iurisdiction?
What iurisdiction is exercised in persecution and affliction?
I meane by iurisdiction admonishing one an other and so forth.
Well, go to: what then?
It hath also succession of Byshoppes. And here he made such a doe to proue yt this was an essentiall poynt.
You say as you woulde haue it: for if this parte fayle you, all the Church yt you go about to set vp will fall down.* 1.9 You shall not finde in all ye scripture this your essē∣tiall parte of succession of Byshops. In Christes Churche Antichrist will sit. And Peter telleth vs, as it went in the old Church afore Christes cōming, so will it be in the new church sithen Christes cōming: that is, as there were false Prophets, & such as bare rule were aduersaries to the true Prophets: so shall there be (sayth he (false teachers, euen of such as are Byshops, and beare rule amongest the people.
You go alwayes out of the matter: but I will proue further the succession of Byshops.
Do so.
Tell me, were not the Apostles Byshops?
No, except you will make a new definition of a By∣shop, that is, geue him no certayne place.
In deede, the Apostles office was not the Byshops office: for it was vniuersall, but yet Christ instituted By∣shops in his church as Paule saith: he hath geuē Pastors, Prophetes. &c. so that I trow it be proued by the Scrip∣tures the succession of Byshops to be an essentiall poynt.
The Ministerie of Gods worde, and Ministers, be an essentiall poynt. But to translate this to the Byshops and their succession, is a plaine subtiltie: And therfore that it may be playne, I will aske you a question. Tel me, whe∣ther that the Scripture knew any difference betwene By∣shops and Ministers, which ye call Priestes?
No.
Well, then go on forewardes, and let vs see what ye shal get now by the succession of Byshops, that is, of Mi∣nisters, which can not be vnderstand of such Byshops as Minister not, but Lord it.
I perceiue that you are farre out of the way. By your doctrine you can neuer shew in your Church, a mul∣titude which ministreth Gods word & his Sacramentes, which hath iurisdiction and succession of Byshops, which hath from tyme to tyme beleued as you beleue, beginning