H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which novve at length being 70. yeares of age, he caused to bee published in the name of himselfe & his family. Englished in sense agreeable, and in words as answerable to his ovvne latine copie, as in so graue a mans worke is requisite: for the profite of all the vnlearneder sort, of English christians, that desire to know his iudgement in matters of faith.

Aphorisme 6.

Whereas wee saide that Paule baptized a∣gaine those, of whome it is spoken in the 19. of the acts, as being not rightly baptized: we said it without preiudice to any learned interpre∣tor: for we condemne none. Onely we desire the reader, to conster fauourably of that word rebaptize. For we meant not, that they which were rightly baptized, were afterwards bap∣tized againe: but they which were not bapti∣zed with true baptisme, where the true do∣ctrine of God the father, the sonne, and the holie ghost went before it: they, after Paule had taught them the true and sound doctrine of Christ: then they tooke true baptisme: and after baptisme, by the laying on of handes, re∣ceiued the holy ghost, and the gifts thereof: & this, to speake properly, was indeed not to be rebaptized, but to be truely baptized.

Now why I thought so, and do yet thinke: I

was induced by the authoritie both of the fa∣thers, and especially Ambrose, and Hierome so expounding that place: and also by a rea∣son drawne from the text it selfe.

Touching the authoritie: first, neuer any of the fathers did teach that these words, (and when they heard it they vvere baptized) were the words of Paule, spoken of them, which heard Iohn Baptist: but expoūded them as the words of Luke, spoken of them which heard Paule. So Chrysostome Tom. 3. in act. hom. 40. So Oc∣cum in act. ca. 19. So Augustine Tom. 7. cont. Petil. ca. 7. So Gregory Tom. 1. in euang. hom. 20. So Bede in act. ca. 19. So all the rest.

Moreouer most of them do in plaine tearms write that these twelue disciples were bapti∣zed by Paule, or at least by Paules comman∣dement, as hauing not bin rightly baptized before, because they heard not the doctrine of the holie ghost, nor were baptized into his name. Ambrosius Tom. 2. de spi. san. ad Theo. imp. ca. 3.

Lastly they themselues also, which said, wee haue not so much as heard, whether there be an holy ghost, were afterwards baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ. And this a∣bounded vnto grace, because they then by Paules preaching knew the holy ghost, neither must it be thought a contrarietie, because al∣though afterwardes no mention is made of the holy ghost: yet it is beleeued, and that which is omitted in wordes is expressed in

faith. For when it is saide, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, by the vnity of the name is fullfilled the whole misterie: neither is the ho∣ly ghost separated from the baptisme of Christ because Iohn baptized to repentance, Christ in the holy ghost. Thus farre Ambrose.

Hierome, Tom. 6. in Ioel. ca. 2. pa. 66. There∣fore (saith he) the sauing health of God, cānot bee seene, except the holy ghost bee powred downe: and who so saith that he beleeueth in Christ, and beleeueth not in the holy ghost: he hath not the eyes of perfect faith. Whereon, also in the Actes of the Apostles: they which were baptized by Iohns baptisme into him that was to come, that is, in the name of the Lord Iesus: because when Paule asked them, they aunswered, wee know not whether there be an holy ghost: they were baptized againe: yea they receiued true baptisme, because with∣out the holie ghost, and the misterie of the tri∣nitie, whatsoeuer is receiued in the name of the one or the other person, is vnperfect, &c. Augustine cont. Petil. cap. 7. coll. 498. saieth. Paule baptized those twelue, either because they had not receiued Iohns baptisme, but ly∣ed: or else, if they had receiued it, yet they had not receiued Christs baptisme. For he thought with Cyprian, and Tertullian, and other fathers that Iohns baptisme and Christs did differ: of which matter more hereafter. Of our owne writers also, that learned man Wolff. Muscu∣lus, about the place of the Act. 19. thinketh as

Ambrose doth, in his cōmon place, the place of baptisme, whose words, because he hādleth that place very largely, we wil not repeat, and before Musculus, Bucer both on the third of Matth. and on the fourth of the epist. to the E∣phes. vpon Math. he hath these words. To those Ephesians, which had beene baptized with Iohns baptisme, not knowing what it was, be∣cause as then they knewe not the holy gnost: wherewith Paule had preached that Christ should baptize them; wee reade that he said Act. 19. Iohn baptized indeed with the bap∣tisme of repentance, saying vnto the people, that they should beleeue in him, which should come after him, that is, in Christ Iesus. Nowe what do we else, or ought we to do in bapti∣zing? For ours is also the baptisme of repen∣tance: so long as those whome we baptize, we also burie into the death of Christ, that is, we ascribe them into that nūber, which through∣out all there life, must die vnto sinne, and liue vnto righteousnesse: and yet shall not receiue that neither, but by the gift of Christ. There∣fore of such as be of years of discretion, whom we baptize, we require their faith in Christ: & the infants we commit vnto the church to be brought vp to the same faith. Therefore Paule would neuer haue rebaptized those Ephesiās, if they had beene baptized with Iohns bap∣tisme, that is, with that baptisme, wherewith he vsed to baptize, into repentance and the faith of Christ: but seing they were (as Luke

reporteth) onely baptized into Iohns bap∣tisme, which notwithstanding they knew not what it was, and were altogether ignorant of the baptisme of Christ, that is, of the spirit, he baptized them: shewing vnto thē, what Iohns baptisme was: and how he baptized into Christ not into his owne sprinkling or dipping of the water, as though that could be any profite vnto them. He therefore baptized them with this baptisme of Iohn, that is, as Iohn vsed to do, into the name of the Lord Iesus: and by & by after laying on his hands, he baptized thē with the baptisme also of Christ, that is, with the spirit. For immediatly the holy ghost came on them, as it is there read. This there.

And vpon the epistle to the Ephes. chap. 4. the same Bucer writeth thus. Hereby it is also manifest, that the twelue men at Ephesus, which knew not whether there were an holie ghost or no whome Paule baptized, were not baptized with the baptisme of Iohn, that is, with that which he administred: but, as they witnessed themselues, they were baptized in∣to Iohns baptisme. For Iohn preached vnto all whome hee baptized, that Christ should baptize them with the holy ghost: and exhor∣ted them, that they would beleeue in him, and that of him they might receiue the holy ghost. And therefore these Ephesiās could not haue beene ignorant of the holy ghost, if they had bin washed with that baptisme, which might truely be called Iohns: which also the Apo∣stles

words to those men doth sufficiently de∣clare: Iohn verily baptized with the baptisme of repētance, saying vnto the people, that they should beleeue in him, which should come af∣ter him, that is, in Christ. For by these wordes he would teach vs, that they neuer receiued Iohns baptisme, who as yet knew not Iohns preaching of Christ, and the promise. Thus farre Bucer.

Seing then the fathers expound this place in Act. 19. as wee haue nowe declared: who I pray am I, that I should dare, or that I ought to gaine-say, so many and so learned men, in such an exposition of this scripture, which nei∣ther doth any whitt wrest the text, nor contra∣rieth any other scriptures, nor is against the a∣nalogie of faith, nor bringeth with it any ab∣surdities?

For if any man shall obiect out of the text, that same truely and but: it prooueth nothing against the fathers exposition: seing it is no vnusuall thing with the Apostle, where hee saieth first truely, not alwaies to ioyne the aduersatiue particle but: Rom. 3. ver. 2. Coll. 2. ver. 23. and in other places. And vnto this truely, another but, which Luke for breui∣tie sake left out, might bee vnderstood verie fittly, as hereafter we will shew: so that it is no necessitie, with this truely to ioyne that but, which followeth in the 5. verse: in which verse the fathers, will haue, not Paules speach, but Lukes to be continued. Therefore the fathers

exposition is not repugnant to the text: nor yet with any other scripture. For if any man say, Paule writeth to the Corinthians, that he is gladd he baptized none, but the house of Ste∣phana: it may be answered, it is true, namely at Corinth: but these twelue were baptized at Ephesus: and besides, he speaketh of such as were baptized with his owne hand: but these twelue, he might baptise by some other: to dispute no longer about the circumstance of the time. And it is most certaine, it is not re∣pugnant to the analogie of faith, nor bringeth with it any absurdities: because the fathers do not speake of a baptisme rightly administred, as though Paule had repeated that again. This expositiō therefore of the fathers in my iudge∣ment, cannot easily be refelled. And this ther∣fore is the chiefest cause why I haue euer thus thought, and yet thinke of this action of Paule: although indeed I cannot consent vnto them all, in the cause, why Paule baptized them: but onely to Ambrose and Hierome.

That Iohns Baptisme, & Christs Baptisme did differ, the fathers teach, both by this, that Iohn saide, how he baptized (onely) with vvater: but Christ should baptize with the holy ghost, & with fire: and also by this, that the baptisme of Iohn is called, the baptisme of repentance: but Christes baptisme is said to bee giuen for the remission of sinnes. And because that he prepared the waye to this: & (as Tertull. speaketh) that baptisme of repentance, was as it were a sueing for the

remission of sinnes and sanctificatiō in Christ, which was to follow after. Read Tertul. of bap. pag. 707.

So Cyprian also in his sermon of the bap∣tisme of Christ, and of the manifestation of the Trinitie, pag. 430. So August. To. 7. against. Pe∣til. cap. 7. But all of vs doe not knowe, what the fathers mēt, by this differēce of the baptisme. For they ment not, that the one diffred from the other in the matter, or in the signe, or in the doctrine, and forme of baptisine: but one∣ly in efficacie: that namely, although remission of sinnes was giuen to them, which were wa∣shed with Iohns baptisme: yet the same was not of Iohns baptisme, that is, of water, but by the baptisme of Christ, which is the baptisme of the spirite: whereunto that belongeth: I baptize with water, but he with the holy ghost. And with this baptisme of the spirit were they on∣ly baptized, which beleeued in Christ, whome Iohn saide was then come, though all knewe him not. Therefore Iohn in his baptisme did inculcate and often repeate this faith, as Paule witnesseth in that place of the 19 of the Actes. They therefore are deceiued, who for this di∣uersitie, did thinke the baptisme of water was to be repeated.

August. against. Petil. (as we touched a little before) sheweth how some held opinion, that the 12 did lye vnto the Apostle, when being asked vnto what they were baptized, they an∣swered, vnto Iohns baptisme. So by this, that

first those Ephesians saide vnto him, that they had not yet heard, whether there were, that is, whether that holy ghost did exist or not, name¦ly, the giuer of those giftes, whereof the speach was: the Apostle might be said to conuince thē of a lye, by this argument. Whosoeuer haue bin baptized, they haue professed faith in Christ, as the sonne of God, and consequently in the fa∣ther, and in the spirite of them both. For Iohn did require this faith: & according to the same he baptized men: and in baptizing he alwayes vrged that Iesus Christ was he which should baptize in the spirit. But you, by your owne cō∣fession, do not know this spirite &c. and so be∣leeue not rightly in Iesus Christ. Therefore &c.

But surely, to saye that these twelue did lye vnto the church and to the Apostle: it seemes to me, to be to hard and vile a thing in mē which professed Christ. And for this cause we did euer better allow of the opiniō of Ambrose & Hie∣rome: that the 12 did say truely, whē they said, they were baptized vnto Iohns baptisme: but yet not by Iohn himselfe, but by some one of Iohns disciples, who expounded not vnto thē the true doctrine concerning God: and there∣fore baptized them not rightlie. But all the fa∣thers doe hold beyond all controuersie, that they which are not rightly baptized into Iesus Christ, as the naturall Sonne of God, & medi∣atour, and so also into his father, and the spirite of them both: the same must bee rightlie bapti∣zed. And therefore those twelue were not, as

being not baptized, rebaptized: but, as being not rightlie baptized, Paule did baptize them with true baptisme, first teaching them the true doctrine of the trinitie, which also Iohn had preached vnto them.

And thus much of the authoritie of the fa∣thers: from whome, either in their assertions, or in their expositions of Scriptures, especiallie where they all, for the most part doe agree, I dare not decline for my cōscience sake, vnlesse I be cōstrained by most apparant reasons. Thus I freelie cōfesse to the whole church of Christ.

The reason also, (besids the authoritie of the fathers) brought as we saw before, euen by the fathers, out of the verie text, confirmeth me in the same opinion. This reason is partly gathe∣red out of those words, which these Ephesians, being asked by Paule, whether they had recei∣ued the holie ghost, that is, the gifts of the ho∣lie ghost, aunswered, saying: that they had not so much as heard, whether there bee, that is, whether that holie ghost bee existent: whome Paule would haue to bee the author of those gifts: so farre from thē it was, that they should haue receiued him and his gifts: and partlie it is gathered out of the wordes, which Paule v∣sed concerning the doctrine and baptisme of Iohn, saying, Iohn verily baptized with the baptisme of repentance, saying vnto the people, that they should beleeue in him, which should come af∣ter him, that is, in Christ Iesus: as if he had said, you haue not rightlie beleeued in Christ, such as

he is, the sonne of God, God: seing yee know not his spirite. The conclusion followed: that therefore they, although they were baptised, by I knowe not whome, into Iohns baptisme, yet were not rightlie baptized: seing they were not instructed in the doctrin of the person of Christ, in whome they ought to beleeue, namelie, that he was not onelie man and the Messias, but al∣so the sonne of God, God: from whome also & from the father proceedeth the holie ghost, and consequentlie not in the doctrine of god the father, the sonne, and the holie ghost, in the name of all which, baptisme is to be giuen. And therefore that they ought to learne the true do∣ctrine concerning the father, sonne, and holie ghost, and resting therein, to receiue lawfull baptisme: that afterwardes by laying on of hands, they might receiue the gifts of this ho∣ly spirite: which Luke teacheth to bee after∣wardes done, saying, but vvhen they heard it, (namely, those twelue Ephesians:) what whē they heard? euen, when they perceiued Paules doctrine, concerning true faith in Christ the sonne of God, and so in his father, and the ho∣lie ghost: which faith Iohn had also preached, and wherein they resting were baptized &c. This is the interpretation of the fathers: name∣lie, that those twelue were not rightlie instru∣cted in the doctrin of god the father, the sonne & holie ghost, and so neither rightlie baptized: and it may be confirmed, both by the kindred and cuntrie of those twelue: and also by the

cause, for which Paule, letting alone al the rest, peculiarly asked them, whether they haue re∣ceiued the holie ghost, since they beleeued.

By kinde they were Iewes, as appeareth by Iohns baptisme, vnto which they saide they were baptized: and they were baptized by a Iewe. But the Iewes for the most part, neuer rightlie held the doctrine of the three persons subsisting in one essence. And therefore these 12 Iewes also, though they graunted Iesus, to bee the true Messias: yet they seemed to ac∣knowledge but onely two persons: the person of God the father, and the person of the Mes∣sias, euen (as the most thought) a bare mā, but yet such a one, as in whome God the father dwelt: but that they were altogether ignorāt that the holie ghost was an existing thing, & the giuer of those graces, they are conuinced by their owne words.

But surely there was some cause, why Paule comming into Ephesus, where were manie of Christs disciples, asked this question of the 12 Iewes onely. Surelie it is to bee thought, by their aunswer, that the Apostle, either by their owne talke, or by telling of some other of the brethren, perceiued that these twelue did not thinke aright concerning the holie ghost.

Finallie this was the Apostles argument, whereby he would prooue by their owne aū∣swere, that they were not baptized with the true baptisme of Iohn.

Whosoeuer hath bin baptized with the true

baptisme of Iohn: he hath also heard his do∣ctrine, concerning god the father, the sonne, & the holy ghost: and hath professed the same, and consequently hath knowne also the holy ghost. This proposition is not expressed: but the proofe of it, the Apostle bringeth in the 4. verse, saying, Iohn baptized &c. that is, Iohn preached not onely repentance, but also faith in Christ: namely, that he is not onely man the Messias, but also the sonne of God, God: from whome, as also from the father, proceedeth the holie ghost, and that hee shall baptize in the holie ghost: and therefore all which desire to bee saued, must also beleeue in him, as the true Sauiour.

But you haue not heard this doctrine, nor pro∣fessed it, & therfore haue not truely beleeued in Christ, such as he is. For yee your selues say, yee haue not so much as heard whether there bee an holie ghost, (namelie, when yee were baptized). Therefore &c. So consequentlie it remaineth, that professing this doctrine and faith, yee nowe receiue lawfull baptisme: and afterward by the laying on of handes those giftes of the holie ghost. This is the declaratiō of the argument according to the exposition of the fathers: but Luke, as the Prophets and Euāgelists vse to doe, cōprehended the whole summe in few words.

And I praye, what absurditie can followe hereō? or what iniurie is done to the Apostles narration? is the heresie of the Donatiftes & A∣nabaptists

maintained? nothing lesse. For they rebaptize such as are rightlie baptized: the A∣postle baptizeth them, which had not beene rightly baptized: as hauing not heard nor pro¦fessed the true doctrine concerning God, he tooke care they should be rightlie baptized. And such when they come into the catholicke church, (we speake of them that bee of yeares of discretion) all the fathers teach, they must be baptized with true baptisme, instructing them first in the doctrine concerning God, & Christ their Sauiour:

Touching the text it selfe: it is no whitt wrested. That their aunswer. (But wee haue not so much as heard whether there be an holie ghost) cā not bee vnderstood of the giftes of the holie ghost, it appeareth by Paules demaund fol∣lowing, being asked with an admiration: Ʋn∣to what were yee then baptized? For no mā is bap∣tized vnto the giftes of the holie ghost: but vnto the holie ghost it selfe, as also vnto the father, and the sonne. And the Apostles held it for certaine, beyond all doubt, that whoso∣euer were baptized either of Iohn, & his true disciples, or of Christs disciples: they were surelie baptized, with instruction of the true doctrine of the holie ghost also, according to Christs institution. Hereupon was that admi∣ratiō: Ʋnto what were ye then baptized? They an∣swered him, vnto Iohns baptisme: For Paule thought this could not stād together that they should bee baptized with Iohns lawfull bap∣tisme,

and yet should not knowe nay not so much as heare, whether there were, and whe∣ther there did exist an holie ghost: whom Iohn both knewe and preached vnto all that came to his baptisme: neither did he preach Christ without this holie ghost. For he said that he baptized in water, but Christ Iesus should baptize in the holie ghost.

Hereupon was it, that meaning to cōuince them, that they were not baptized of Iohn, nor of his true disciples, he added, saying: Iohn indeed &c. This truely or verely is an aduersatiue particle: wherby he would shew, how it could not agree with the lawfull baptisme of Iohn, that they said, they had not so much as heard (namelie when they were baptized) whether there be an holie ghost or no: Sith Iohn bap∣tized none, without mentioning the same. And to this truely here expressed, doeth a but closelie vnderstood make aunswer: so that the argumēt is such, as before we set downe. Iohn indeed baptized &c: as though he had said: Iohn preached both repentance, and faith in Iesus Christ, such as he is, namely the sonne of god, from whome as also from the father procee∣deth the holy ghost, and who baptizeth in the holie ghost, and into the confession of this do∣ctrine, he baptizeth men. The minor was to be added, which Luke expressed not, because it is contained in the twelues owne confessi∣on, but vvee haue not so much as heard &c. what is plainer then this text?

That therefore which followeth in the fift verse, But when they heard it &c, is Lukes owne words, shewing truelie and brieflie, what fol∣lowed vpon Paules argumentation: But when they heard &c, (namely these 12) whē they heard, what? what it is truelie to beleeue in Christ, & that he baptized men, according to the confes∣sion of this doctrine concerning Christ, & his father, and the holie ghost: and that Christ a∣lone, as the onely Sauiour, baptized men into the holie ghost: when they heard (I saye) these things, not onely with the eares of their bo∣dies, but also of their mindes: and so beleeued and confessed the same: They vvere baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; that is, into Iesus, as he is called and described in the Scriptures, not onelie man, but also the sonne of God, God: from whome, as also from the father procee∣deth the holie ghost: and therefore, as a true and onelie Sauiour baptizeth vs with his holy spirite.

Add this also, that by the new interpretati∣on, there is admitted in a little narration, no smale Battologie or superfluitie of words. For when Paule said, Iohn verily baptized vvith the baptisme of repentance, saying vnto the people that they should beleeue in him, which should come after him, that is, in Christ Iesus: to what ende should the Apostles haue added this concerning thē, whom Iohn baptized, but whē they heard, name∣ly that companie or those men, were baptized. For who could not vnderstand, by the wordes

going before, if Iohn baptized: they therefore, which had heard & professed his doctrine con∣cerning repentance, and faith in Christ, were by Iohn baptized.

To conclude, if I should allow that inter∣pretation, I see not, what Paule could els proue by this whole narration, but that those Ephesi∣ans had beene rightlie baptized: and therefore that nothing else remained, but that by laying on of hands, they might receiue the holy ghost. But this conclusion, I doe not thinke to agree with that which goeth before it, but to bee needelesse.

I haue to my power, declared the expositi∣on of the fathers, vpon this place, and that mo∣destlie, and without preiudice to anie: to no o∣ther end, but that I may by such reasons as I am able declare vnto the brethren, which per∣haps haue tooke offence at that particle in my confession, That Paule did baptize those twelue a∣gaine, vvhich had not bin rightly baptized: that I did not put those words rashlie in my confessi∣on. By the way as I said, we condemne no other mens interpretation.

And this also I freely professe, that my cōsci∣ence is such, that I cannot be easily drawne to dissent frō the auncient fathers, either in their assertions, or in their interpretations of scrip∣tures. Vnlesse I be cōuinced & enforced by ma∣nifest testimonies of holy scriptures, by neces∣sary consequences & plaine demonstrations. For so doeth my conscience rest, and in this

setled stay of minde I desire to die.

And therefore I humbly desire of all the brethren, that if in this behalfe, my opinion, be not altogeather as theirs is: they will by no meanes take offēce: especially, seeing that in all the principall points of Christian faith: we haue a sound agreement.