A godly treatise containing and deciding certaine questions, mooued of late in London and other places, touching the ministerie, sacraments, and Church. Whereunto one proposition more is added. After the ende of this booke you shall finde a defence of such points as M. Penry hath dealt against: and a confutation of many grosse errours broched in M. Penries last treatise. Written by Robert Some Doctor of Diuinitie.

CHAP. 6.

Iohn Penry.

NOwe I am to come to your booke: from the 20. page whereof vnto the 28. laying the foundation of the reasons you vse against me, to proue the lawfulnesse of communicating with dumbe ministers, you han∣dle two needelesse points. First, that they which were baptized by popish priests, haue receiued true baptis∣me as touching the substance. Secondly, that they are the Sacraments of baptisme, and the holy Supper of the Lord, which are deliuered in the Church of England by vnpreaching ministers. In these two points, M. Some, you haue proued nothing that my writings haue denied: but you haue quickened a dead controuersie, not vnlikely to giue the wrangling spirits of this age, cause to breede greater sturres in the Church. I see no other effect, which the handling of these questions can bring foorth but this. And it is to be feared that the slendernes of the rea∣sons vsed in your booke, to proue that which you haue vndertaken to shew, will giue occasion vnto many, who of themselues are too too ready to iangle, to doubt of that whereof before they made no question. So that by seeking to stay the course of a needeful controuersie, you haue both giuen it a larger passage, and opened the doore vnto a question very fruitlesse in our time. You knowe I deale in neither of these pointes. If you cannot be stayed from entring into controuersies that are very odious, and more im∣pertinent vnto the matter in hande: it were good that the Church were further and more soundly satisfied by you in these two points, which you alone in our Church haue publiquely called in question. And for mine owne part, when you haue done, I knowe not who will be your aduersarie. I see no reason why I shoulde deale in controuersies of so small gaine. Of this I am assured, that neither Popish priestes, nor any other ignorant guides are Ministers. Whether the Element administred by them, be a Sa∣cramēt or no, looke you to that, which haue in your Treatise debated that, which my writings neuer called into question. If you will needes proue readers to be Ministers, because you cannot get mee to denie that which hath bene administred to be a Sacrament, you shall but presse that which will proue nothing. Your reason is, as if you should say, that either all they which supplie the places of ministers are ministers, or els an inconueni∣ence is likely to followe. A strange maner of demonstration: Gods ordi∣nance must needes be thrust out of the doores, because an inconuenience would be likely to ensue the admitting of it. The cause will not be thus an∣swered at your hands, and I am sory that a man so reuerend in mine eyes, hath dealt so vnsubstantially, in a matter belonging to the seruice of the euerliuing God: the slendernesse of the reason is apparant. In the latter end of the booke I haue further shewed the same: thither I am to referre you and the reader.

R. Some.

You are come at the last to my treatise. In Gods name. You giue out that I dealt in two needelesse points. Not so, by your leaue: for some in London and other places, being seduced by vnskilfull tea∣chers, denied them both. You do not so, your words are as cleare as the day, and are these: In these two poyntes M. Some &c. you haue proued nothing that my writings haue denied. I thanke you for this. You are nowe in a very good moode: but you will not be so long. Virtutes latere nō possunt. Ful vessels wil burst, if they haue not a vent. If you deny not that true bap∣tisme was deliuered by popish priestes and vnprea∣ching ministers, you cannot deny popish priestes and vnpreaching ministers to haue a calling. My reason is: Nullum Sacramentum sine ministro: that is, No Sacrament without a minister. The wrangling spirits you write of, are the more because of your ab∣surde writings: but they are not so many, thankes be to God, as you imagine. They which are so for∣warde in iangling of these points, are either of your humour, which is very bad, or Anabaptisticall recu∣sants, which is somewhat worse. You adde these words, A strange manner of demonstration &c. They do proclaime your ignorance: they doe not answere my reason. I perceiue an argument ab absurdo, is a pille that will not downe with you. The slendernes of my reasons is repeated by you euery handwhile. It is like the Cuckoes song. It pleaseth you againe to reuerence me. You are at more cost then I would haue you. This reuerence is either a burden or a be∣nefit. If a burden, lade some other with it: If a bene∣fit, beneficium non datur inuito, I will none of it.

I. Penry.

Nowe I coulde well ouerpasse these two pointes, because of themselues they contayne nothing that I haue withstoode: but in as much as you haue not onely grounded them vpon false principles, and such as in no wise can be warranted by the Canon of the worde, but also inferre vpon their graunt, that our readers are ministers, and consequently that it is no sinne to communicate with them: I am first to set downe the state of the question, which in deede is and ought to bee decided betweene you and me concerning the Element administred both by popish priestes, and o∣ther vnpreaching ministers: and secondly to examine the grounds where∣by you prooue the Element already deliuered by them to be a sacrament, which you knowe I doe not deny to be so.

R. Some.

Because I haue an ill memory, you tell me againe and againe, that you deny not the sixth and seuenth proposition of my treatise. It is well done of you. I would you woulde keepe you there. Onely you mislike the foundatiō I built on, and some conse∣quents. I am sory for your heauinesse. My grounds, you say, shalbe examined. Spare them not. Arraigne them if you will. But what shall I reason of, or looke for at your hands? To be acquited? no hope of that. To be condemned? It is certaine: for, it hath plea∣sed you to giue sentence before examination. Harde dealing: but I must abide it.

I. Penry.

The question therefore is not whether the one or the other of them haue deliuered a Sacrament in respect of the action done, but whether a Christian going vnto them for those holy seales, may be assured, that hee can receiue the same at their hands. I affirme that wee cannot: M. Some taketh it graunted that we may. My warrant is out of the worde, because there is no promise made to vs therein, that the action celebrated by such men, is a Sacramentall action: and where there is no promise, there can be no assurance, because our assurance ariseth onely of faith, which must be grounded vpon the promises sette downe in the worde. We haue no promise that they can deliuer vs a Sacrament, because they are no ministers. For they onely are enioyned by our Sauiour Christ to deliuer a Sacrament, neither doe we knowe what he can deliuer which is no mi∣nister.

R. Some.

No maruaile though you dissent from me. Conue∣niet nulli, qui secum &c. You are at warre with your selfe. Your wordes agree like harpe and harrowe. One while, you denie not that popish priestes and vnpreaching ministers haue deliuered a sacrament: An other while you knowe not what they can deli∣uer: for, they are, as you say, no ministers. To that ende you depraue Christs speech in S. Matthew &c. What dealing is this? Sacrament, and no Sacra∣ment, and all with one breath? What? can such as are no ministers, deliuer a Sacrament? If you say, No: then popish Priestes & vnpreaching ministers, neither haue nor can deliuer a Sacrament: for they are, as you say, no ministers, that is, they haue no calling at all. Your disciples are fit vessels to receiue any liquor of yours: but men of learning and wise∣dome, are otherwise affected. They see clearely, that your dealing is absurde and dangerous. Absurde: for it is voyde of trueth. Dangerous: for it woulde breede confusion. The magistrates, thankes bee to God, neither doe nor will suffer this bad course of yours. If they should, fancies woulde (as weedes) growe too too fast, and this noble land shoulde re∣ceiue more hurt then your head is worth. I doubt not of their godly wisdome. The miserable estate of Germanie heretofore, by reason of Sectaries, may and will awake them. If you be restrained for your grosse errours, as some other are very iustly: you may not cry, persecution, persecution: your note must be poena perfidiae, that is, that you are iustly met with. Otherwise you sing out of tune.

I. Penry.

So that the question is now growen to this issue, Whether Popish priests and our vnpreaching Ministers, be Ministers or no: whom if I can proue to bee none, then the matter is cleare, that no man going vnto them for the Sacrament, can assure himselfe there to haue the same. And this shall be a generall reason, equally belonging vnto both the pointes handled by you, the particulers whereof shall follow in their places.

R. Some.

If you can proue that, I will commende and pre∣ferre you before Martyr, Bucer, Caluine, Beza, and o∣ther very famous men and Churches. Yea, I will de∣nie her Maiestie and a great number of her excel∣lent subiects to bee baptized, which I am sure are baptized. The marke you leuell at, is (as I take it) ei∣ther to send many thousands to the Font againe, or to make them guiltie of contempt of Baptisme. One of these two must needes fall out, if Popish priestes, and vnpreaching Ministers (without any calling) did administer a Sacrament. You may leuell and le∣uell againe at this marke: but you shall neuer hit it. The Bowe you shoote in, is too strong: and your armes are very weake. Besides, you would faine haue me confesse that either Popish priests and ignorant Ministers, are lawfull and good Ministers of God: or that no Sacrament was or is deliuered by them. I will graunt you neither. Not the first, for I abhorre that defence: Not the second, for I detest your Ana∣baptisticall fancies. The next thing you deale in, is, that neither Popish priestes nor vnpreaching Mini∣sters are ministers. In which Treatise you bewray in∣tollerable both pride and ignorance. What I like or mislike in that discourse, appeareth in the end of this booke. Thither I referre you. I will now set downe that part of my Treatise which you fight against.