The rest of the second replie of Thomas Cartvurihgt [sic]: agaynst Master Doctor Vuhitgifts second ansvuer, touching the Church discipline

THE ELEƲENTH TRACTA∣TE, AGAINST THE CORRVPTI∣ons in doctrine, tovuching the holy Sacramentes.

The first chapter vuhereof is, against the sacriledg of pri∣uate persons, and vuemen especially: in administ∣ring the holy Sacrament of Baptim, as it beginneth pag. 503 of the D. book.

LEaving to the readers iudgment, vpon the* 1.1 reasons alledged, whether the meaning of the book be to admit baptim by Midwiu∣es, for as much (as I trust) there shal no su∣ch horrible profanation be suffered here∣after: let him obserue how the An. because he hath once vndertaken this cause (cou∣ertly as he dare) continueth the defence thereof. Iwis, of folies the shortest are best. yt had bene better for him, to haue laid his hand vpon his mouth: or rather in confessing of his faut, to haue giuen god the glory. But let vs see what he bringeth.

To that which was alledged ovut of the place of S. Ma∣thevu,* 1.2 that yt maketh as much against baptim by vuemen, as against there preaching: he answereth, that by that reason, Pastors may nether preach nor baptiz, for that they are no Apostles: wh∣ich foloweth not. For the Pastor succeding vnto the Apost∣les, as touching preaching and baptising in their proper ch∣urches: haue by the same place autority to doe boeth. For further answer whereto: I refer the reader, to that I haue wri∣tten a 1.3 before. And I think, there is not so much as one of the godly writers, ether ould, or nue, which speaking of the or∣dinary

ministery vnder the gospel, whether it be to stablish or ouerthrow thinges perteyning to it: vseth not the places, that were first spoken to the Apostles alone. As for M. a 1.4 Cal∣uin, he vseth this place expresly, which the Adm. doeth: to proue that wemen owght, at no hand, to baptise, but onely the Ministers ordeyned to preach the gospel: the same doe∣th M. b 1.5 Beza. yea the Ans. him self, to proue the Bishops saying to those he ordeyneth c 1.6 alledgeth these wordes, receiu the holy gost: which notwithstanding were first said, by our Sauior Christ, vnto the Apostles alone: so that the Ans. frowardnes, is here vntollerable. Nether is it any thing excused by Zuin∣glius. For, althowgh baptim be not instituted here, which was insti∣tuted in the ministery of Iohn Baptist, nor here be mentioned a∣ny circumstance: yet the minister of that institution, which is no circunstance, but a subordinate efficient cause, may wel be appointed.

For confirmation hereof, I alledged that the ministe∣ry of the vuord and Sacramentes, ioyned of god togither, o∣vught not to be pulled asonder: and therfore cyted exam∣ples, vuherin vue see obserued continually, that the same vuere Ministers of boeth togither. whereūto fyrst he answe∣reth generally, that examples proue not: which is d 1.7 before ans∣wered. Thē vnto the particular example of the Ark, he ex∣cepteth, first that if that were a sacrament, the Minister may make sa∣cramentes, for that Noah made yt: as if it owght to be so straung, that the Minister ministerially and subordinately, accordi∣ng to the institution praescribed of god, should be said, to make the sacrament. For as yt it often tymes said, that the Priestes made the sacrifices: So, the Minister in vsing the wa∣ter,* 1.8 which was common before, vnto that vse, and after that sort, which Christ hath appointed, maketh yt holy and Sa∣cramental water. Nether owght yt to be more straung vnto him, that the minister should after this sort make the sacra∣ment: then that he should e 1.9 saue his hearers, f 1.10 that he should

harden their heartes, close vp their eyes, stop vp their eares, &c. al which thinges, the scripture ascribeth vnto the mini∣ster.

Secondly he saith, it had no promise of eternal life, nor was a seal of any promise: boeth which are vntrue. For it confirmed Noah in the promise that god had giuen, that he should not be drowned, with the rest of the world. And as the promises, made of temporal blessinges vnto the fathers, extended th∣em selues vnto the euerlasting: so the sacramēts to confirm those promises, were sacramentes to confirm thē, in the ho∣pe of eternal life. This doeth S. Peter confirm, which teach∣eth that the preseruation of Noah in the Ark, was the same* 1.11 to him and his, which baptim is to vs: to whome, the Ans. doeth in this point, directly oppose him self.

Thirdly, he addeth, that it was a figure of the church, and therfore no sacrament: which foloweth not. For the bread and wine in the holy supper, are so a Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ: that they are neuertheles, Sacramentes of the ch∣urch represented thereby, in that, a 1.12 as many cornes make o∣ne loaf, and many grapes one cup of wine: so many membe∣rs, make one body of Christ, which is the church. Nether is the example of the miracles, vnaptly alledged: for they be sign∣es to confirm the word of god, as are the Sacramentes. the∣refore whosoeuer can shew, that Ministers of the word ow∣ght onely to be Ministers of the signes, wherby it is confir∣med: sheweth, that they onely must be Ministers, of the Sa∣cramentes.

To proue, that the forbidding of them, from the minist∣ring of the word, is their forbidding from the ministring of the Sacramentes: I browght an argument of contraries, for that S. Paul being bidden to minister the word, as in th∣inges which goe togither, did withowt further commande∣ment, minister the Sacramentes: which was, belike, as a pil, that he could not wel swalow, considering that he answereth nothing. And if this, be not a good argument, then there is no commandement in the scripture, to bar wemen from be∣ing publik ministers of the Sacramentes: for it is no where

expresly forbidden them, to minister the sacramentes, but onely to minister the word. Yf therfore the godly learned, haue iudged them vnmeet, to minister the sacramentes, be∣cause the holy scripture hath disabled them, to minister the word: yt foloweth necessarily, that none may haue power to minister the sacramētes, which hath not also to minister the word. for otherwise, if those might publikly minister the sa∣cramentes, which can not doe the word: wemen by reason of their sex, are not so shut owt, but that they may haue en∣trance into that ministery.

Against this, and to proue, that there may be ministers of the sacramentes and not of the word: he referreth me to his pag. 483, where are cited Chrysostom, Ambrose, Martyr and Caluin v∣pō these wordes, Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach. For answer whereunto, first it must be vnderstanded, that w∣hen S. Paul saith, that he was not sent to baptiz: his meaning is not, that he had no maner of sending at al to baptiz. For so should his own mouth condemn hym: as one which had vndertaken to doe that, wherunto he was not sent: conside∣ring that he confesseth in the same place, that he baptized certein howshouldes. what is then his meaning? Verely eu∣en that, which he declareth by his practis: that he was rather sent to preach, then to baptiz. And of such negatiues by cō∣parison, the Ans. could not be ignorant: seing boeth he hath otherwhere made mention of them, and it is a thing which a yong diuine, and he that hath yet the pap in his mouth, may easely vnderstand. As when it is said, receiu my discip∣line,* 1.13 and not siluer: Likewise that thy name shal be no mo∣re* 1.14 called Iacob, but Israel: that is to say rather discipline, th∣en siluer, rather Israel, then Iacob.

Now, seing S. Paul did boeth preach and baptiz, by autority of god, and vertue of his calling: al may see, that no man can cōclude of this place, that one may be minister of the sacra∣mētes, and not of the word. if any thing cā be cōcluded, it is: that some may be occupied in administring the word, mo∣re thē in the sacramentes. And this is also an answer to that

alledged owt of Zuinglius, towching Christ teaching and his disciples baptising: considering that the disciples preached also althowgh not so much as our Sav. Christ.

Secondly, in so great numbers of men and wemen to be baptized, if to the end that the Apostles cours of preaching should not be stayed, others had that charge to pour on the water, which were no Ministers of the word: that was in the beginning, before any ordinary ministery of Bishop was e∣rected in the churches: and therfore nothing perteyning to our quaestion, which in quire, what owght to be the ordinary and settled gouernment of the church. For is it credible to a man of any iudgment, that ether the Apostle would com∣mit, or these writers would say: that he committed the office of ba∣ptizing, vnto those which were not Ministers of the word, passing by the Pastor him self.

Albeit, where there was no Pastor to assist the Apostles: I see not, why the help that others, which were no ministers of the word, gaue in that administration, should be proper∣ly called baptizing: no more then he which serueth the Pa∣stor, ether in carying abowt the bread, or reaching the cup, can be said to haue ministred the lordes supper. So that, the Apostle S. Peter, hauing preached of the vse of baptim, and pronounced the wordes of the institution: althowgh he po∣wred not the owtward element of water with his own hand, might wel be said, to haue baptized them al. Beside that, no∣thing hindereth, why the wordes Act. 10 he commanded th∣em to be baptized: may not be expounded, that he commā∣ded water to be browght, wherwith they should be bapti∣zed.

Howsoeuer it was, yt could not be, as the D. saith very dangerously owt of Ambrose: for that he would not vouchsafe to doe it him self, other ministers being present: considering that the ministery of the holy sacramentes, being of the same natu∣re with the preaching of the word, is of greater excellency, then any man vpon earth is worthy to handle. Beside that, seing he aloweth of Ambrosis place to the Ephesians, which affir∣meth that al men preached in the Apostels tymes: he can receiu; no

benefite of him in this place. For if al did preach, aswel as baptiz: then it is true which I say, that none had the ministery of the sacramentes, but he which had the ministery of the word withal: and vntrue which he affirmeth owt of Ambrose, that some were ministers of the word, which were not of the sacramentes.

Likewise is the testimony owt of M. Beza (wherto I haue* 1.15 answered before) flat against hym in this cause: consideri∣ng that his iudgment is, that the Deacons did boeth prea∣ch, and administer the sacramentes sometyme. And as there is no harmony betwene hym, and his autorityes: so is there none, betwene the sentences of his autors, which he hath mashed togither. For where some say, al: other say, that Prie∣stes onely baptized. where he saith Musculus doeth alow, that so∣me should minister the sacramentes, which can not preach: yt is very tr∣ue, and further, that he would rather haue yt doen by them, then by those that can preach. But his ground, is vpon the misvnderstanding of Act. the 6: whilest he toke the ministr∣ing to tables, which is the prouision for the poor, for the mi∣nistring of the lordes supper. The foundation therefore of his assertion, being naught: the assertion yt self, can haue no place.

The place of the 1. Timoth. 5. is a 1.16 answered: b 1.17 so is his que∣stion. To c 1.18 return again therfore to his demaund. where he asketh, what point of Anabaptism it is, that wemen may preach in the church, when there is no other that can, nor wil? I answer, that yt ap∣procheth to that braunch, whereby the Anabaptistes hould, that mē may preach withowt an owtward calling of the ch∣urch: onely, if they think it needful.

Vuhere I obiected, his building vpon examples, of a fevu particular persons, vuhich alovueth not ours, alt∣hovugh they be grounded vpon the general vse of t∣he churches in the Apostels tyme: he answereth, that he buildeth no necessary rule, but onely that yt may be doen vpon like occasion. But this is but a vayn shift. For those extraordinary actes whych are comendable, were doen ether by expres cō∣mandement, or by special direction of the spirit of god: the

obedience whereunto, was not at their chois to doe, or to leau vndoen. So that, if the Ans. wil haue these examples, to be the directers of baptim by midwiues: they not onely may, but owght to doe yt. And if there were any such case of ne∣cessity, as he vntruly pretendeth, and that yt might in such a case be ministered by wemen: it were absurd to leau it in the chois of the Midwife, whether she would minister it or no.

But note (I beseche yow) what horrible confusion, he br∣ingeth into the world, by this saying. For if extraordinary examples doe proue, that such thinges may be doen in such cases: then may priuate men execute malefactors, because Phine∣es did so: and men may borow and neuer pay, as did the Is∣raelites. If he say, that he addeth vpon like occasion and circum∣stance: it is true, but thereby he meaneth, yf like need or ne∣cessity be. For if he mean as he owght, hauing a particu∣lar commandement of god by word, or a rare and extraor∣dinary instinct by the spirit of god: his answer is nothing to purpose, considering that he wil not (I think) say, that the Midwiues haue any of these two: and if they had, they doe it not in respect of the former example, but onely by reason of the extraordinary, ether commandement, or motion.

His example of the Samaritan woman Iohn 4, is friuolous: that she should become a publik preacher, which had not yet learned her catechism, nor was scarce owt of her Christian A. B. C. where it is manifest, that she did nothing, which be∣longeth not to euery one: that is, that we should exhort o∣ne another, to goe where the knowledg of Christ is to be* 1.19 had: so that, she did onely, as it were, towl the bel, to draw the Samaritanes to our Sau. Christ, that he might preach vn¦to them. Nether doeth his other example, of the wemen Math. 28 which preached the resurrection, help him. For if that may be called a publik ministery, it hath an expres commandeme∣nt of the lord, by the Angel. which commandement, as oft* 1.20 as Midwiues can shew, we wil acknowledg their ministery lawful: otherwise the general commandement, which we a∣re* 1.21 bound to folow, is direct against their preaching, which being shewed of me, is vnanswered by hym. So that here he

merely trifleth, often saiyng, that there is nothing against the ba∣ptim by wemen, and neuer answering the scriptures alledged, wherby it is generally forbiddē thē, to deal in these matters.

To that I concluded of his wordes (wemen may preach, if th∣ere be no man that ether can, or wil) that vuemen by that meanes haue his licence to preach in diuers places: he answereth it needeth not, seing the scriptures are red in al places. But that is but an escape: considering that althowgh they haue a reader, y∣et they haue no preacher, reading not being preaching, as I haue ^a shewed. And who seeth not, that many with vs, for* 1.22 want of teaching, ly in horrible ignorance of the truth: so t∣hat, by his rule, this is the tyme, in which wemen may teach openly with vs.

But here again, he opposeth M. Caluin, which saith there is a* 1.23 tyme wherein a woman may speak. Yf he mean in her own hows, or otherwhere priuat••ly, I graunt: if publikly in the church, v∣pon an extraordinary calling, I graunt that also: otherwise I can not graunt it, for the reasons before, and after alledged. And that M. Caluin, had no such meaning as he pretendeth:* 1.24 appeareth, in that he wil at no hand, admit baptim by we∣men: to whome, althowgh he oppose Zuinglius, yet he shewe∣th not, nor (I think) is able to shew, that he alloweth, of bap∣tim by Midwiues.

The next diuision, which sheweth that godly vuemen ne∣uer toke the ministery of the vuord, but by extraordinary calling from god, approued ether by miracle, or some not a∣ble yssu, (saith he) is needles, as that wherunto he agreeth: which is not so. For hereby is condemned, the baptizing boeth by wemē, and other priuate persons whatsoeuer: as that which hath no such calling, and approbation of god. The next to it, sheweth his pouerty: which endeuoring to defend the ba¦ptim by wemen, was ignorant of the principal hould of that cause: and was needfully met with for their sakes, whom that might trouble.

In he next, he would insinuate, that they may baptiz in the hows: for that S. Paul biddeth them teach in priuat places. where, if he had made his argument iust, and to clasp wel togither:

he should haue concluded, that they owght to teach their howshold in priuate places, therefore they owght to baptiz in priuate places: and they owght to teach their families or∣dinarily, therefore they owght to baptiz their families or∣dinarily. thus must the argument be cut owt, according to his measure: and he may as wel say, that a woman owght to doe the same in the holy supper. But the knot is not yet lo∣osed, my answer whereunto is, that if there were any priuate sacramentes, as there is priuate teaching: I would accord vn∣to him, that wemen hauing power to teach priuately, might also minister the sacramentes priuately. But because that the holy sacramentes are publik, as is the preaching: his ar∣gument, hath no force. For in what place, wil he lodg this argument: a woman may doe a priuate act, therfore she may doe a publik. The diuision folowing, being euil seuered of him from the next chapter, whereunto it belongeth: I leau, vntil I come vnto that matter.

Now, it may please the reader, to turn vnto the 5 chapter pag. 516, which is also of this point in hand: towching the person, by whom this sacrament should be administred. w∣here first mark (I pray yow) a wily distinction, which in effect is, that he defendeth not baptim by wemen, but improueth the Adm. th∣at disaloweth yt: as thowgh one could improue the one, and not defend the other. And vnles he had browght the exam∣ple of Sephora, to mayntein baptim by wemen, it had bene fondly alledged: considering that the wordes of the Adm. are of the practis of the Apostles tymes, an exception agai∣nst which, fetched from the tyme which was 1000 yeares be∣fore, might seme to come from him, whose wittes were not at home: especially, when the question is, what was doen, a∣nd not what owght to be doen, as he hym self now preten∣deth.

Secondly he saith, he wil not contend with me in diuers thinges in this diuision, for that he misliketh their error, which condemn infantes that be not baptized, as much as I: which is not so. For he saith, that the lak of baptim, may seme to be a probable token and sign of reproba∣tion,* 1.25 which is boeth vntrue, and perillous: considering that not the want, but the contempt or neglect onely of the holy

Sacrament, can draw any, the least apparance of the lordes wrath. Nether is that ether neglect, or contempt preiudicial to the infant, but to the parentes onely, whose faut that is. which notwithstanding, can be none, where they seek to th∣ir vttermost, that yt may be baptized of the minister of the church, orderly, and conueniently: no more then it was pre∣iudicial, ether to the childe, or parentes vnder the law, when the infant died, before the eight day, which was the tyme a∣pointed, for the administration of the Sacrament of circū∣cision. For as the eight day, was to them: so is a conuenient, and orderly tyme, to vs.

Yt is therfore a shameful dealing, that he maketh vs he∣re to ioyn with the Anabaptistes: which reiect childrē from ba∣ptim, vntil they be able to make profession of their faith. whereas we confes it owght to be ministred, with al conue∣nient speed: so it be by the minister, whome god hath orde∣yned for the same purpose. In which accusatiō of Anabaptism, with vs, he windeth vp also (as it were in one bottom) the re∣formed churches: where it is not permitted, that the infant in any case should be baptized, but by the minister. withal, the reader may perceiue, how idle he is, which translateth a great peece of M. Caluin: to proue that, which none denieth. whom also, he goeth abowt to oppose to him self, which is of the same a 1.26 iudgment with vs, in this behalf: althowgh, th∣ere be not so much as a tittle in the wordes he setteth down, bending that way.

Yt may wel stand, that this profanation came from the Gentils, from Victor, and from the Papistes: Victor borowing it of the hea∣then, and the Papistes of hym. For boeth popery is like a bundel of corruptions, which being picked owt of sundry tymes and places, it hath cocked vp togither: and the Pope is like a hog, which when he cometh into a garden, leauing the sweet flowers, taketh him self alwaies to that, which is most filthy in al the place. otherwise, the D. might deny, a∣ny corruption almost, to be papistical: seing they haue few, w∣hereof ether paganism, or declinyng from Christianism, ha∣th not bene the first founder.* 1.27

To that I alledged, to proue the vnlawfulnes of the cir∣cumcision

by Moses wife, for that she did it, in presence of her husband a Prophet, which is M. Caluins reason: he op∣poseth* 1.28 the note of the bible printed at Geneua, that he could not doe it, because he was sik, and that the Lord required it then. whether he was able or no, I wil not striue: but that the lord required circumcision, if there were no ordinary minister for it, doeth not appear. For, as it was an order of god, that the male childe should be circumcised the eight day: so was yt also his order, that he should be circumcised by a minister. Now, how can it be shewed, by that the lord strake Moses, that he would there∣fore, haue this ordinance changed: when as the siknes sent, was a correction for the breaking of one of his orders, a∣nd not a trumpet blown, to cal them to the breach of the o∣ther.

And what if (as it cometh to pas) the lord had, as yt we∣re, stricken Moses by siknes in the childe, or that the chil∣de, being of discretion, had hym self willingly wanted cir∣cumcision: owght the childe therfore, by and by, with the present hazard of his life haue bene circumcised? no vere∣ly. But as this siknes, should haue instructed boeth father and son, to repent them of the former negligence, and to purpose the amendement of yt, when the childe should be able to abide the wound: so the siknes of Moses, was for th∣at end sent, that he should repent him of the former negli∣gence and amend it, when it might be according to the or∣der appointed.

To that alledged, that she did it in a koler: he answere∣reth not. To that, that Moses recouery is no proof of the la∣vufulnes of it, considering that vuhen thinges are measu∣red by the euent, the good are condemned, and the vuicked iustified oftentimes: he answereth that the euent oft declareth the thing, which is but to wast winde. For if it doe oft otherwise: it can serue for no reason, or allowance of that circumcisi∣on. And if the iudgment by the euent, be to be taken, it is there, where the causes doe not appear: but here the cause

of circumcision, which is the institution of god, is able to try the matter. where also appeareth, how affamished he is, to finde contrarietyes in my book: in that he supposeth variance in this, that here, I cal Moses a prophet, and in another place, say that the priesthood vuas taken from hym, and giuen to Aharon: which is to foul an ouersight. For boeth, there we¦re Prophetes, which were no Priestes nor of the race of Prie∣stes: and the tyme of the deliuerance ouer of the Priestho∣od vnto Aharon, was long after the tyme, here spoken of.* 1.29

Against that I affirm it a necessary point of the Sacram∣ent, that yt be ministred by a Minister, he maketh many owtcryes: but they be not these lowd clamours, which can gain the cause, where there is so deep silence of reason: and where owt of the scripture, not so much as one sily reason, is once pretended. Therefore, to cut his comb, that he crow not so lowd hereafter: he hath flatly betrayed his cause, in that, not able to alledg one reason owt of the word of god, he placeth the strenght of this cause herein, that against bap∣tizing by lay men in the tyme of necessity, we haue (as he saith) no scri∣pture and he hath learned men for yt. For first, in that he can bring no reason owt of the word of god, why a lay man or woman in tyme of necessity (as he termeth yt) may baptiz: yt is mani∣fest, that he owght not to haue set yt down. For this is a ma∣tter of doctrine, and a matter of faith: euen in that narrow signification, that he taketh matters of faith. this is none of the variable ceremonies, which alter by the diuersity of ty∣mes, of countreis, and of persons: and therfore by his own rule, here an argument of the autority of the scripture ne∣gatiuely, is good: so that here it is a good argument, the scripture commaundeth not that lay men or wemen sho∣uld baptiz, therfore they may not baptiz.

Beside also, that he doeth vs wrong, in saying, that it is auouched withowt proof. It might haue contented him, to ha∣ue said withowt good proof: for proof there is, whatsoeuer

yt be. where, that which he affirmeth, that the scripture doeth not forbid lay men to baptiz, is an vntruth: considering it forbidde∣th that any should take honor to him self, but he vuhich is called as vuas Aaron. which sentēce doeth manifestly sh∣ut* 1.30 owt, al priuate persons from this administration: seing yt is a singular honor, in the church of god. As for that string, which he continually runneth vpon, that in tyme of necessity, it may be admitted: yt is but a plain asking of that in cōtrouersy. For, it being confessed, that baptim is necessary, whē it may be administred according to the order which god hath or∣deyned: the state of the question is, whether there be any such necessity of baptim, as for the atteining thereof the o∣rder which god hath set in his church, of administring it by a publik minister, owght to be broken. Of the same sort, is his oftē idle talk, of the refusal, neglect, or contempt of baptim: as t∣howgh, there could be any of these, in this case. If he can shew, that wemen, or lay men owght to baptiz in such tym∣es, and that god hath ordeyned, that in defaut of a Minister, they may lay to hand: then let him talk his fil.

But that I am assured he can not, the contrary rather may be seen: that the lord hath condemned such rashnes, as may appear by the examples of Saul and Vzziah. For what grea∣ter* 1.31 apparance of necessity of sacrificing, could there be: th∣en when Saul toke vpon him, to sacrifice. And how probab∣le reasons, in the iudgment of men, doeth he bring to defe∣nd his fact: as that the people would otherwise haue forsa∣ken hym, that the Philistins pressed hym, that Samuel, came not within the tyme appointed. Likewise what greater ap∣parance of necessity: then when Vzziah stayed the ark, ot∣herwise like to haue fallen. yet (these necessityes notwith∣stāding)* 1.32 forasmuch as they toke vpon them, that wherevn∣to they were not called: they receiued, the reward of their bouldnes. whereas here there is (as I haue said) no danger: so that the ordinary meāes be not neglected. And verely it is al one, as if he should say, that if there be no magistrat at ha∣nd, or none that wil doe his dutie in executing iustice agai∣nst a murtherer: that then a priuate man may take vpō him, to hang the murtherer.

Now where he propoundeth, to proue two pointes, the one that baptim by lay men is lawful, the other, that althowgh they were no fit nor lawful Ministers, yet that the baptim is lawful: to the e∣nd the reader may haue more light wherwith to iudg of the∣se matters, or euer I towch the second, I wil rid his argumē∣tes of the former point. for he hath confusedly blinded and meddled them boeth together.

His autorities here, for the moste part, are idly set down: as those which I confessed before, when I graunted the aun∣cienty of this corruption. But seing they are here: I wil spe∣ak a word with them. First owt of Ambrose vpon Ephes. 4. is ci∣ted, that al baptized. If this make any thing, to proue baptim by lay men: it proueth not onely, that they may baptiz in t∣his pretended tyme of necessity, and priuately, but that th∣ey may daily, ād publikly baptiz: so that he, by this meanes, wil haue lay mē ordinary Ministers. Then, let the reader ob∣serue, how vnhonestly he dealeth with hym. For in the same place, it is conteyned, how in the tyme wherein Ambrose li∣ued, it was not permitted vnto lay men, nor vnto clerkes them selues, which were an inferior order of church men, to baptize: so that this Autor maketh directly against him, affirming that althowgh it were so then, yet that it is no di∣rection for vs now.

Augustin foloweth, another of his witnesses, in this cau∣se: whose iudgment is herein flat against hym. For when he dowteth, whether one baptized by a lay man, ovught to be* 1.33 rebaptized: it is manifest, that he aloweth not, that a lay mā should take vpon him to baptiz, but onely standeth in do∣wt, whether that baptim, being so vnduly ministred, owght to be counted for baptim. Otherwise, if he had houlden the ministery of a lay man lawful: there had bene no place vnto his dowt, whether the baptim be good or no. And therefore the D. durst not set down his wordes: but caried them thr••e or fower diuisions further, where they serue hym, for the se∣cond point in controuersy.

Hys third witnes, is Ierom ad Luciferianos: which maketh

not to proue, what was lawful by the word of god, but what was permitted then by the church. There remayn therfore Tertull. and Zuinglius, which doe affirm yt lawful: to whom, if the matter should be tried by autority, he hath his own Am∣brose, and Augustin to encounter with. Chrysostome also, as him self a 1.34 citeth him: which wil giue none leau to bap∣tiz, but a Priest. Ad to these b 1.35 Cyprian, who althowgh he er∣red in rebaptization, yet proueth by substantial reasons, c 1.36 of the vengeance of god against Chore, Dathan, Abiram, and of the sonnes of Aaron: that onely the ministers of the church, may baptiz: secluding thereby a lay man, althow∣gh he be neuer so catholik. I leau his Denys, which is here ful for vs, and come to the later writers: where he hath besi∣de M. Caluin before alledged, d 1.37 Beza, and e 1.38 Bullinger with others. Beside that whatsoeuer, or whosoeuer shal be alled∣ged afterward, to proue that the Sacramentes owght to be celebrated in a publik assembly, serueth to bar al priuate persons and especially (by the D. own confession) wemen, from this administration of Sacraments.* 1.39

Now, it may please the reader, to turn ouer the leaf in his book page 521: where this question is yet pursued, and examples browght of lay men which preached in Origins tyme. whe∣re it is first to be noted, that the Ans. is contrary to him self: which page 139 and last section, denieth that any man may pre∣ach the word, no not so much as to shew a proof of his ability, vnles he be at the least admitted into the ministery. Yf he haue an admittance, to the ministery of the word: how is he a lay man? As for th∣at he addeth, it was vpon occasion: I would know what occasion there could be then, when the churches were builded, and an order set, why lay men should preach. Or why might not those Bishops, which gaue lay men leau to preach, ha∣ue ordeyned them ministers of the word: seing the Bishop onely (by his opinion) had then the ordeyning of them. w∣as it not as easy for them, to haue made them Ministers of the word, and so to haue kept the order of god: as to haue sent them owt in the quality of lay men, contrary to that or∣der: so that, his drift seemeth to be to bring in al disorder a∣nd

confusion, into the church of god.

Then I answer, that althowgh they were not duly chosen, yet were they not mere lay men: cōsidering, that thei, had an ecclesiastical calling, such as yt was, euen the Bishops ad∣mission: vnles he wil haue al the Ministers with vs, lay men, which haue onely the same admision. The place was brow∣ght of me before, not that I approued it in al pointes, as I al∣so noted: but to shew in what estimation that election was had, which was made by the Bishop alone.

Here, vpon that I said, that Baptim ministred by an he∣retical* 1.40 Minister, is good: he thincketh it to be rather good, when it is ministred of a lay man, that is a member of the church: which is a foul error. For an heretical Minister, so long as he is suffered to enioy his ministery, and not deposed therefrom: is boeth a member of the church, and a Minister of god, althowgh bo∣eth and euil member, and an euil Minister. And, it is as mu∣ch, as if he should say, that the execution of a malefactor by a priuate man, which is honest: is rather lawful, then by a publik Magistrat, which is a briber. withal, let it be noted, that here the Ans. boeth contrary to the truth, and contrary to that hym self professeth, hangeth the effect of the sacra∣ment, vpon the goodnes or naughtines of the Minister: in that, in this respect, he preferreth the sacramēt ministred by a priuat mā, being good, vnto that which is ministred by an euil man, althowgh he be a publik Minister. The rest in this diuision: ether hath had answer, or requireth none.

Yt had bene (as I said) a gros error: if M. Bucer had iudged* 1.41 it meet, that wemen should baptiz. And whether the Ans. would haue had hym so vnderstood, or no: I leau to the readers iu∣dgment, vpon the discours in boeth his bookes. Nether can it want, some skar of error: to alow of the title of priuate ba∣ptim. for, althowgh it were cōueniēt, that the childe should be baptized in the hows, when there is danger to bring it to the church: yet, forsomuch as that owght not to be withowt a conveniēt nombre of the faithful, and withowt the publik Minister, the baptim is not (as also it can not be) priuate, but publik. As for the reasons, they haue bene answered: and

come to be answered further, in the treatise of administra∣tion of the sacramentes, in priuate howses. How vnworthy a thing it is, that he should charge vs vuith priuate vuri∣tinges, vuhich he kepeth in his study, leauing his publik vuorkes: let the reader iudg.

I made mention, of other gros absurdities, of M. Buce∣rs: least the excellency of his learning and godlines, should cary the simpler sort to beleue any thing, contrary to the tr∣uth. And yf it be iudged of the godly, that I might haue spa∣red that speach: it is a thing, wherin I wil not stand against them, in myne own defence.

Here, first he asketh, where Augustin disaloweth baptim by we∣men.* 1.42 althowgh these wordes of myne doeth not alovu, be not so ful: yet, in that, talking of this surmised case of neces∣sity, he neuer cometh so low, as to the baptim by wemē, but stayeth in that which is ministred by lay men: it is manifest, that he disalowed the baptim by wemen. For otherwise, if he had thowght, that wemen in that case might haue bapti∣zed: it stoed him vpon to haue taught, that in defaut of a lay man, a woman might be taken: seing that, in his iudgment, the saluation of the childe, stoed thereupon. when he dow∣teth also, vuhether it ovught to be ministred again, vuhich* 1.43 vuas ministred by a lay man: he could hardly leau any do∣ut, of the vtter misliking of baptim by wemen. whereunto serueth, the practis of his tymes, which was (as hath bene shewed) in such cases: to run to the church, vuith their ch∣ildren. His other question, cometh to be answered after∣ward.

Against the fourth Councel of Carthage, which forbid∣deth* 1.44 vuemen to baptiz: he runneth for aid to Gratian, the common falsifier of the good canons, of whome I haue a 1.45 be∣fore spoken. Althowgh if the answer be true, which he fram∣eth owt of this forger, that she may not baptiz in publik: forsom∣uch as al baptim is to be ministred in publik assembly, and

that euen then, when it is ministred in the hows, it foloweth that a woman may neuer baptiz. And to the intent, the Ans. may know his error the better: let hym repair vnto M. a 1.46 Bul∣linger, who citeth this canon, to condemn al maner of bap∣tizing by wemen. Here also, let it be noted, that albeit the Answ. seing such consent of the learned against baptim by wemen, dare not flatly meynteyn it: yet, where he finedeth any thing to defend yt by, althowgh neuer so base, he for∣getteth it not.

To that alledged, that the breaking of the orders of god,* 1.47 vuhereof one is, that the minister onely should baptiz, the other, that it be doen publikly, confirmeth men greatly in that heresy, that al are damned, vuhich are not baptized: he answereth nothing. Likewise, to that, that if a man cou∣ld not be saued vuithovut baptim, yet vue might not the∣refore break the order of god, he answereth also nothing, but wandereth idly in talking of the necessity of baptim, which we confes, as hath bene b 1.48 before declared. Vuhere, a∣gainst his absurd saying, that the teaching of this kinde of priuate baptim, implieth no more the tying of saluation vnto the sacrament, then to teach that children should be baptized before they be able to answer for them selues, I replied that the baptim of young children, hath ground in the scripture, but baptim by lay men or vuemen hath none: he answereth, that this confirmeth his saying. wherein, the reproch of triflyng, is to easy, to set forth his vntollerab∣le abusing of his reader. For to haue answered, he owght to haue tawght, a rule owt of the word of god, whereby it mig∣ht haue appeared: that a priuate person, may take vpon him in this pretensed case of necessity, to doe that which god hath not committed, but vnto the Minister: so that here, it is manifest, that he had neuer a knee to bow vnto the truth,* 1.49 but was like that beast, which hauing neuer a ioynt in her leg, must rather break then bend.

To that I alledged, of the continual, and almost gene∣ral

practis of the church: he answereth, that lay men from the beginning haue bene permitted to baptiz: whereof let the reader iu∣dg. In the mean season, he is able to shew no practis of bap∣tim by wemen, but in the extreme ruines of the church: o∣therwise we should haue bene sure to haue heard of yt. Ho∣wbeit here he asketh whotly, what order of god is broken in pri∣uate baptim: euen the same which is broken in priuate preac∣hing. So that whatsoeuer hath bene a 1.50 before spoken of the church preaching, that it owght to be publik and not priua∣te: serueth in like maner, for the holy Sacramentes. The ne∣xt diuision, must rest in the readers iudgment.

Now remayneth the other point which is, whether baptim administred by one which is no Minister, althowgh against the word (as yt is conteyned in his pag 518 &c.) be yet auai∣lable. the D. saith yea. his first reason is, that otherwise many sh∣ould goe vnder the name of Christians, which were neuer baptized: and so (saith he) I may proue my self to be no Christian. where I deny the argument, and withal desire the reader to take heed of the venom: which, he going abowt in other places to hide, bra∣ke owt here at vnawares. In an other b 1.51 place, he said that it is a probable sign of reprobation, if children dy withowt baptim: but here he setteth down flat, that they be no Christians, which are not bap∣tized. So that, the children of the faithful, by his doctrine, a∣re not Christians, before they be baptized: and consequen∣tly condemned. whereas the truth is otherwise, that if he be not a Christian, before he come to receiu baptim: baptim can make him no Christian, which is onely the seal of the grace of god before receiued. And what wil he here say, to those in tymes past of Thessalia, with whome the sacrament of baptim c 1.52 was celebrated but once a year, namely at Ea∣ster: were al the children paganes al that while? what wil he say to that tyme, wherein they receiued it not, but at their death: were they also al the tyme of their life paganes? I gra∣unt, boeth the customes naught: but in the mean season, he shal doe the good Emperours, and other good men gre∣at iniury, in saying that they were heathen, or no Christi∣ans.

His second reason is, that there must be by this mean; some general rebaptization: which is the flat reason of the Anabap∣tistes, and in deed plain Anabaptism, that for a dowt whe∣ther some be baptized or no, al should be rebaptized. For thus* 1.53 they proue, that men must be rebaptized: because (say th∣ey) they are not assured, whether they were baptized or no: as it is reported of Zuinglius. But it is enowgh for me, w∣hich am assured of the fauour of god in Christ Iesus, the thing it self whereof baptim is the sacrament: that I know my self to haue bene born in that people, where the com∣mon vse is to administer baptim by a publik Minister, such as he was. So that, vnles he can shew assuredly, that I was not baptized by such a one: the want of baptim, shal not hurt me: seing that I nether neglect it, nor contemn yt.

And if he could shew, that I was not baptized: yet the case of rebaptization is not so clear, as he maketh yt. con∣sidering* 1.54 that Dyonisius the great and famous Bishop of A∣lexandria, when one came vnto hym, which sware that the baptim he receiued of the heretikes, was nothing like the catholik baptim, but ful of horrible blasphemies, and desi∣red to be baptized of him, for that he was trobled in his conscience: said that ^b he durst not baptiz him, adding that forsomuch as he had often said Amen vnto the thankes giuing in the church, and receiued the holy supper of the lord: that he should therevuith content, and comfort hym self. Yf the Ans. had but such an autority, vncontrari∣ed of other: he would quikly shape vs owt, a definitiue sen∣tence. howbeit, I stay not thereupon: onely I bring it, that w∣hē such a case should befal, we come not vnto this remedy, withowt inquiring into the matter, and that yt be not doen vpon the D. bare word.

Vuhere I alledged that the Minister is of the substance of the sacrament, considering that it is a principal part of Christs institution: he answereth, that the essential form, is to

baptise in the name of the father, the Son and the holy gost: which being kept, the Sacrament remayneth, by whomsoeuer, or howsoeuer yt be mi∣nistred. This he fathereth of Augustin, and Zuinglius: whereas, nether of them goeth further then to the person, by whome yt is ministred: so that he hath here falsified them. Beside th∣at I haue * 1.55 shewed, that Augustin standeth in dowt, whether baptim by a lay man, be available or no. where, by al likeli∣hood, he was owt of dowt, that that which was ministred by a woman, whose vnaptnes herein is dubble to that of a lay man: was of none effect. he citeth also M. Caluin: but vtterly to another purpose, then he meaneth. For where he she∣weth, that the goodnes or euilnes of the Minister maketh not, nor marreth not the sacrament: the D. pretendeth, as thowgh it were not to be estemed, whether he were a publik minister or no, which is a mere abusing. For further answer, I refer the reader to that b 1.56 already answered: so doe I, for ans∣wer to that of Ministers which crepe in withowt calling, vnseaso∣nably spoken of: likewise for the cauil of rebaptization.

Now, if the reader compare the answers of his togither: he shal see, that the Ans. him self, hath clean ouerthrown his own groundes. And first of al this, that the being of the sacrament hangeth onely hereof, if the form of wordes, I baptiz the in the na∣me of the father &c. be kept. For to proue that the being of the sacrament, dependeth not in any respect of the person which mini∣streth yt: he alledgeth first, that so we should be alwaies in dowt, whe∣ther we be baptized: which maketh stronglier against this, that the being of baptim dependeth of the vsing of those wordes I baptiz t∣he in the name of the father &c. then against this that yt dependeth vpon a publik Minister. for al may vnderstand, that yt is easier for a man to know, that he was in his infan∣cy baptized of a publik Minister: then to know, that the Mi∣nister then vsed these wordes, I baptiz the in the name of the father &c.

Another reason is, for that the force of the sacrament is not in the mā, but in god him self, his spirit, and free effectual operation: and th∣ereto abuseth 1. Corinth. 3. what is Paul &c. which is rather to

proue, that the being of the sacrament dependeth not of the vsing of the wordes, I baptize the in the name of the fa∣ther &c. forasmuch as S. Paul speaketh there, of the voca∣le ministery, whereof this is a part, wherein the D. hym self placeth the being of the Sacrament. And in deed, the drift of his reason is, that there is no owtward thing whatsoeuer, necessarily required in the being of the Sacrament: which is a shameful error.

Howbeit, let it be, that the vsage of these wordes, is the onely essential form: what shal be the material cause? For there must be aswel a matter, whereof the sacrament must consist, as a form whereby it is: and as wel is the material cause of the sacrament a substantial cause, as ys the form. For euē as a thing can not stand withowt the form: so can yt not stand withowt the matter. Now when the one is as ne∣cessary, to the constitution of a thing, as the other: let him shew me, why a faut in the form, or departing from the wor∣des, should more destroy the nature of the sacrament, then a defaut, or departure from the matter, which is the water. And verely for my part, I would rather iudg him baptized, which is baptized into the name of Christ, withowt adding the father and holy gost, when the element of water is add∣ed: then when the other wordes being duly kept, some oth∣er liquor is vsed.

This also is declared by his own example of the ••ue bapt∣ized with sand: in that yt was decreed, that he should haue v∣uater povured on hym. whereby appeareth, that yt is vn∣true which he saith, that the sacrament alway remayneth, what error soeuer be committed, when the form of wordes is retayned. For there the wordes were kept, and yet the sacrament was not suppo∣sed, to be ministred. Althowgh the example otherwise, in my poor iudgment, be vnsound: that a man hauing the wo∣rdes said at one tyme, and the Element powred at another, should be iudged baptized. For it is as much, as if a man re∣ceiuing the bread in the church at Easter, and the cup at the Natiuity: should be therfore said, to haue receiued the holy

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

holy supper of the lord.

Therefore, howsoeuer some learned and godly, giue some liberty in the change of the Elementes of the holy sacramē∣tes, yet I doe not see, how that can stand: cōsidering also that the * 1.57 prophet threatning a general dearth of corn, wyne and oyl, sheweth, that the Priestes should wepe and lament, for that boeth the meat offering, and drink offerīg should ••eas. whereas, nether the offeringes needed to haue ceased, nor the Priestes for that to haue lamēted: if they might for wine and oyl haue vsed water, or for the beastes of the land, taken the fishes of the sea, or other creeping thinges for their off∣eringes.

Hauing thus spoken of the matter, that it must necessarily be such as the institutiō of god hath prescribed: let vs come to the Minister, which is a subordinat efficiēt cause. whome seing I haue also proued (whatsoeuer he say) to be instituted the onely minister of the sacramentes: let him shew me, why the breach of the institutiō in the form should make the sa∣cramēt vnavailable, and not the breach of this part. for if th∣is be not also necessary, and of the being of the sacram: then when two goe togither, if one speak the wordes of the insti∣tution, althowgh no man powr on water, but god onely by rayn from heauen, yt is baptim. And if it be baptim which is ministred of a childe in sport (which thing M. Farel derideth as a mere toy) then if a mad mā, with minde to hurt, doe speak* 1.58 those wordes in powring water vpon his head, which is not baptised, it shal be baptim also. further, if it be administred by him, which is by profession a Turk: it must, by his rule, be a good baptim. so we shal come to the dotage of the papist∣es, which imagin that the Shepard in the field cōsecrated th∣eir host; in saying certeyn wordes of the institutiō of the sup¦per: which was the cause why, afterward, they would haue thē mūbled vp in secret. These thinges beīg absurd, it is certeyn that the D. rule, that it is baptim by whomsoeuer it be ministred: is crooked. But whē none cā wash vs from our synnes but our S. Christ, and none can represent his person in that owtward sacramēt of the inward washing, but he whome our Sav. Ch∣rist hym self hath appointed: if we wil receiu the benefit of

the holy seal of baptim, to assurance of our conscience, that we are washed frō our synnes, we must haue the publik min∣ister. If it be said, that this is to ty men to streight to the owt∣ward meanes, and that for somuch as it is Christ that washe∣th from sinnes, there is les matter who be the Minister: I answer, that as our Sa. Christs bloud, being the spiritual mat¦ter of the sacrament, and that onely wherewith we are purg∣ed, yet we may not therfore lak the water, which he hath or∣deyned: so althowgh he be he which alone washeth vs from our synnes, yet we may not therefore lak that owtward mi∣nister, which he hath appointed.

And if the wil of a Prince, doe make that onely to be his se∣al, which he hath appointed for that purpose, so that altho∣wgh another ether withowt or against his wil be made, of t∣he same matter and faschion, and in al thinges like yt, yet the same is none of his seal: how much more owght the wil of god, which is, that onely those should minister the sacra∣ment, which haue a publik calling thereūto, haue that auto∣rity. And, as by the seal, which the Prince hath set apart to seal his grauntes with, when it is stollen, and set to by hym that hath no autority, there groweth no assurance vnto the party that hath yt: so if it were possible to be the seal of god, which a woman should set to, yet for that she hath stollen yt, and put it to, not onely withowt, but contrary to the cō∣mandement of god: I see not, how any can take any assuran∣ce by reason therof. If it be said, that the Princes confirma∣tion afterward, maketh euen that stollen seal, which was set to, of force: I answer, that where yt can be shewed, that bap∣tim by wemen is confirmed of god, there I wil graunt the li∣ke in yt. hetherto may be referred, the pursuit of the former comparison. For as a priuate man, kylling a murtherer, hath hym self murthered, and executed no iustice, because he ha∣d no calling thereunto: euen so, those which withowt al cal∣ling haue taken in hand to baptize, haue made a prophane washing, and ministred no sacrament of the lord.

That a distinction hath bene kept in names of offices, v∣uhen the offices thē selues haue not bene distinguished, or at

least not so thorowghly as they owght: is an easy thing to shew, if it were to great purpose. But yt is enowgh for vs, th∣at the D. hym self can not deny: but that baptim, which is ministred, by him which they cal a Deacon with vs, is mini∣stred by a Minister of the word: so that there is here, no dan∣ger of rebaptization.

I alledged, that part of the institution (as that vuhich* 1.59 tovucheth the vuordes of the holy Trinity) being obserued, and not this, it is no more baptim, then the papistes com∣muniō is the supper, vuhere one peece takē, the other is left. whereto he answereth, that the cup is of the substance, because it is ex∣presly commanded. So is this of the Minister also commanded: therfore by his own answer, of the substance of the sacram∣ent. But (saith he) I can not shew a commandement, that a Minister on∣ely shal celebrate the Baptim, or els be no Baptim: no more can he in so many wordes, that if the cup be not receiued, it is no sup∣per. But yf his proof be sufficient, because the lord hath cō∣manded that yt should be receiued: my proof is also, that haue shewed the same in the ministring of baptim: especi∣ally seing the breach is not in the circumstance, but in the causes.

He alledgeth further, that circumcision ministred by such as were no Priestes, was good: I graunt, if it were doen by those w∣hich were simple Leuites, if yt were doen also by Prophetes which were no Priestes: But if he can shew it good, doen by those to whom it belonged not, then he saith some w∣hat.

To that I browght ovut of S. a 1.60 Paul, that he can not* 1.61 preach vuhich is not sent: he answereth it is vnderstanded of the extraordinary calling: as thowgh it were not aswel required in ordinary callinges, that one be sent, as in the extraordina∣ry. For althowgh, there be diuers sortes of sendinges: yet th∣at the Minister be sent, is required of al. So that althowgh S. Paul should there draw that disputation, vnto the sending of the Apostles: yet the rule wherby he confirmeth the Apo∣stelship, is general. For a Pastor can no more preach now, in

a particular congregation withowt a sending: then an Apo∣stle could then, in al the world. The wordes I added, no not althovugh he spake the vuordes of the scripture, be no such addition, as he surmiseth: seing they are necessarily conteyned, in the Apostles sentence. For when him self de∣nieth not, but that one which is not sent, may speak the wor∣des of scripture, and the Apostle saith, that the same can not preach: it foloweth, that one not sent, althowgh he speak the wordes of the scriptures, can not therefore be said to preach.

He procedeth further, saying that as it is the word of god w∣hich is preached by minister, or other: so is baptim true baptim, by whom∣soeuer it be ministred. as if he had already gotten, ether that w∣hosoeuer speaketh the word preacheth yt: or that it were al∣ready baptim, withowt the publik minister, boeth which are in demaund. Moreouer, if he can proue, that the washing with the element, withowt any to apply it, is a sacrament, as the word is the word, althowgh no man handle yt, or speak of yt: then I wil graunt, that which he saith. But if it be no Sacrament, but when it is browght into vse, and the vse be defined to be such as is said: then yt is apparant, that there is a great difference, betwene the word and sacramentes, in this respect.

Last of al, as he, which taking one part of the wordes of the scripture, an leauing another that should goe with yt, propoundeth not the word of god, but his own idle fancy: euen so, he that keepeth one principal part of the sacramtē, leauing another behynde, ministreth no sacrament of god, but a deuise of his own head. Now, where he would draw th∣is cause into hatered, in that there is (as he sayth) no learned man of this iudgment: althowgh the reason be weak, and yt vnmeet, that the trwth should be mistrusted, because she can fynde no suertishyp emongest men: yet, if that wil help hym, he hath M. Beza which doeth praecisely affirm, that the baptim* 1.62 vuhich is ministred by a priuate man (much more by a v∣uoman) is vtterly void.

Seing then they onely are bidden in the scripture to administer the Sacraments, which are bidden to preach t∣he word, and that the publik Ministers haue onely this ch∣arge of the word: and seing that the administration of boe∣th these, are so lincked together, that the denial of licence to doe one, is a denial to doe the other, as of the contrary part, licence to one is licence to the other: considering al∣so, that to minister the Sacraments, is an honor in the chur∣ch, which none can take vnto hym, but he which is called vnto yt as was Aaron: and further, forasmuch as the bapti∣zing by priuate persons, and by wemen especially, confirm∣eth the dangerous error of the condemnation of young ch∣ildren, which dy withowt baptim: Last of al, seing we haue the consent of the godly learned of al tymes, against the ba∣ptim by wemen▪ and of the reformed churches now, against the baptim by priuate men: we conclude, that the administ∣ration of this Sacrament by priuate persons, and especially by wemen, is merely boeth vnlawful and void.

There remaineth another quaestion, whether the in∣fantes of papistes, are to be receiued to baptim. Of which, as of a thing more dowtful amongest the godly learned, be∣cause I wrote priuately and more at large: when I came to the confutation of the D. book in that point, I passed by yt, with mynde to take afterward my reply thereunto, more commodiously from the discours I wrote of yt. Howbeyt, the trwth is, vntil I came to the place of the printing, where I had not his book with me: I forgot yt. Yf therefore in ans∣wering, I ether pas by any weight of reason, or ascribe any thing to hym otherwise then trwth: I desire the readers gen∣tle support herein, ether vntil his next answer, or els vnto another opportunity, when the argumentes of boeth sid∣es may be more fully debated. Vnto the reason that I al∣ledged owt of a 1.63 S. Paul (to my remembrance) he answere∣th nothing: but onely opposeth M. Bezas autority in his epistles, which yf they had not come forth whilest his book was in making, yt seemeth, that he had bene vtterly destitute of answer. His reason owt of hym, that the papistes are to be com∣pared with the Israelites, which fel away from the t••w religion, and not

vuith the Idumeans: can not help hym, oneles he first sh∣ew, that the infantes of those Apostatas were lawfully cir∣cumcised. For, if they were not circumcised by gods order and institution, but rather at the lust and pleasure of tho∣se which, being fallen away from the covenant, ceased not to put to the seal, as yf they had bene stil within the coue∣nant: yt foloweth that, in this respect, there is no more suc∣cour for the Papistes in their resemblance with such Is∣raelites, then when they are matched with the Idumeans or Isma∣elites.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Diuis. 1.
• * 1.2

  Math. 28. ••9.
• a 1.3

  In the for¦mer part p. 369. line 30.
• a 1.4

  Inst. booK 4. chap. 25. sect. 22.
• b 1.5

  Quaest. de Sacram. quaest. 136.
• c 1.6

  pag. 227.
• d 1.7

  In the for¦mer part p. 155. &c.
• * 1.8

  Leuit. 9. 7. 22. et 14. 19▪ &c.
• e 1.9

  1. Tim. 4••.
• f 1.10

  Isay. 6••.
• * 1.11

  ••. Epist. 3. 21
• a 1.12

  1. Cor. 10.
• * 1.13

  Prou. 8. 10.
• * 1.14

  Genes. 32. vs. 28.
• * 1.15

  In the Tra∣ctat of the Deacon.
• a 1.16

  In the tra¦ctat of the presbytery.
• b 1.17

  In the for¦mer part p. 371. line 10
• c 1.18

  diu. 3. and 4. pa. 506. 507.
• * 1.19

  Isay 2. 3.
• * 1.20

  Math. 28. 7
• * 1.21

  1. Cori. 14. 34. 1. Tim. 2. 11.
• * 1.22

  In the for••¦mer part Tract. 5.
• * 1.23

  Diui. 5. and 6. p. 507.
• * 1.24

  Inst. 4. bo∣oK. chap 15 sect. 20.
• * 1.25

  p. 524.
• a 1.26

  Inst. 4. bo¦oK chap. 15. sect. 20. Lib. epist. p▪ 179.
• * 1.27

  Diuis. 3. pa. 517.
• * 1.28

  Inst. 4. bo∣oK chap. 15 sect. 22.
• * 1.29

  Dinis. 4. p. 518.
• * 1.30

  Heb. 5. 4.
• * 1.31

  1. Sam. 13. 11
• * 1.32

  2. Samu. 6. 6. 7.
• * 1.33

  2. li. contrae litteras Parm. ca. 13
• a 1.34

  pag. 483.
• b 1.35

  Cypr. ad Iubatanū.
• c 1.36

  Nomb. 16. Leuit. 10.
• d 1.37

  Beza in quaest. de sacr. quaest. ••37.
• e 1.38

  Bulling. 5. Decad. Ser. 8.
• * 1.39

  f In the se∣cond part of the last Tractate and third chap.
• * 1.40

  Diuis. 7. p. 521.
• * 1.41

  Diui 8. and 9 pag 522.
• * 1.42

  Diuis. 10 p. 523.
• * 1.43

  Contra E∣pist. Parm. lib. 2. ca. 13.
• * 1.44

  Diuis. 11. p. 523. Tom. prim. Can. 100.
• a 1.45

  In the for¦mer part p. 285.
• a 1.46

  Decad. 5. ser. 8.
• * 1.47

  Diuis 12. a∣nd 13. p. 523
• b 1.48

  In the 5. and 6. diui¦sions of this chap.
• * 1.49

  Alces. Caesar li. 6. de bel. gall.
• a 1.50

  In the for¦mer part p. 72. &c.
• b 1.51

  pag. 524.
• c 1.52

  Socra: 5. li. chap. 22.
• * 1.53

  Zuing. lib. de baptis. Tractat 2▪
• * 1.54

  a Euseb. 7 lib. cap. 9.
• * 1.55

  pag. 521. 523.
• b 1.56

  In the ex∣aminatiō of the D. cen∣sures.
• * 1.57

  •• Ioel. 1. 9.
• * 1.58

  libr. Episto. Calu. p. 85.
• * 1.59

  Diuis. 5. p. 520.
• a 1.60

  Rom. 10. ••5.
• * 1.61

  Diuis 6. p. 520.
• * 1.62

  Libell. ••e quaest. in Sa¦cra. quaest. 139. &c.
• a 1.63

  1. Cor. 7. 14.