The
defence
.
THE
whole
which
he
speaketh
of
Discipline
,
consisteth
in
two
pointes
,
The
one
against
vs
:
the
other
,
A
defence
of
him selfe
.
Where
the
one
is
not
so
false
and
friuoulouse
,
but
the
other
is
as
vayne
and
feeble
.
To
begin
,
lett
vs
see
howe
he
maketh
vs
charge
the
Church
:
then
his
Defence
he
maketh
for
it
.
Hee
layeth
to
our
charge
,
that
we
make
the
Church
of
Englande
but
a
church
secundum
quid
,
after
a
sorte
.
Where
that
he
slaundereth
vs
in
saying
we
slaunder
the
Church
:
we
proue
it
by
double
witnes
,
on
our
part
our
wordes
and
deedes
:
on
his
part
,
by
his
owne
allegation
in
this
place
.
For
our
wordes
,
our
preaching
and
writings
haue
alwayes
witnes●ed
,
that
we
holde
the
Churche
for
a
true
Churche
of
Christ
,
from
which
no
member
may
separate
him selfe
:
although
he
must
disallowe
the
wantes
in
her
.
We
haue
alwayes
when
subscription
was
vrged
,
bin
readie
to
subscribe
to
the
Article
of
her
Maiesties
authoritie
,
and
to
the
substance
of
doctrine
,
in
as
large
a
manner
as
the
Statut
in
that
behalfe
required
.
This
wee
haue
declared
by
protestation
and
by
writing
,
not
onely
to
them
,
but
to
the
most
honourable
Senate
of
her
most
Excellent
Maiesties
priuie
Counsell
.
Wee
haue
by
writinge
defended
the
cause
of
the
Church
and
our
Prince
,
as
much
as
they
,
that
we
say
no
more
.
From
our
actions
howe
many
Demonstrations
might
bee
broght
to
approue
our
right
judgement
,
reuerend
account
,
and
sincere
affection
toward
the
Church
of
Englande
▪
Haue
we
not
(
yea
when
we
were
vniustly
against
all
law
of
God
and
man
,
depriued
for
not
subscribing
)
adioyned
our selues
to
the
Church
in
all
the
actions
of
the
ministerie
of
the
word
preached
,
of
prayer
,
&
of
the
Sacraments
?
Haue
we
not
by
perswasions
continued
many
in
the
bosome
of
the
church
?
yea
when
through
weaknes
,
because
of
many
abuses
they
would
haue
departed
.
Haue
wee
sought
redresse
by
any
other
meanes
than
by
humble
supplication
towards
our
superiours
according
to
dutie
?
Thus
our
actions
approue
vs
to
the
church
.
His
accusation
hath
bin
heard
,
let
vs
heare
also
his
witnes
:
which
as
we
said
,
ouerthroweth
his
accusation
.
He
maketh
vs
to
say
,
that
as
a
citie
can
not
stande
without
walles
,
no
more
can
a
church
without
Discipline
.
We
replie
,
there
was
neuer
any
that
denied
a
citie
with
out
a
wall
,
to
be
a
citie
,
an
orched
without
defence
,
to
be
an
orchard
,
a
cornefielde
without
a
hedge
to
be
a
cornefielde
.
Neither
will
any
manne
forsake
his
citie
,
cast
away
his
corne
,
destroy
his
vineyard
,
for
lacke
of
a
defence
.
Gualter
.
Is
M.
Gualter
a
more
holy
,
learned
,
&
ancient
Father
then
Peter
Martir
,
Viret
,
Caluin
,
Beza
,
Bullinger
,
and
such
other
,
Who
by
preaching
,
writing
,
&
other
good
meanes
,
haue
mainteined
this
cause
?
We
acknoledge
Gualter
to
be
a
shining
starr
:
but
we
make
not
his
glorie
like
vnto
the
glorie
of
God
in
all
those
men
.
Howbeit
let
the
strength
of
his
light
shine
out
,
and
it
shall
not
hurt
vs
,
but
melt
away
his
assertion
as
waxe
,
and
the
Bishops
authoritie
which
he
maintaineth
as
pitche
.
For
want
of
Discipline
(
saith
he
in
the
first
place
)
no
man
ought
to
departe
from
the
Churche
:
we
confesse
it
,
allowe
it
,
subscribe
vnto
it
.
What
is
the
second
voyce
?
I
thinke
that
the
same
forme
can
not
be
appointed
in
all
nations
.
Lo
it
is
a
thought
,
no
demonstration
.
Wil
you
allow
his
iudgement
in
this
M.
Copquot
?
Dare
you
doo
it
?
Shall
sweete
and
sower
come
out
of
your
mouth
in
one
sermon
?
Haue
you
not
twise
or
thrise
in
this
sermon
made
Discipline
a
note
of
the
Churche
,
in
these
wordes
:
The
notes
of
the
Church
are
three
,
the
first
.
The
word
of
God
truly
preached
.
The
second
,
The
right
administraetion
of
the
Sacraments
.
The
last
,
True
Discipline
.
And
hauing
alleadged
Mat.
28.18.19
.
you
say
,
By
whiche
place
of
Scripture
,
we
may
easilie
perceiue
,
that
these
are
the
true
tokens
of
the
Church
,
where
the
worde
is
preached
,
The
Sacramentes
truly
ministred
,
and
where
is
true
Discipline
.
Now
,
if
Discipline
be
one
note
of
the
Church
,
shal
it
not
be
the
same
in
all
places
as
touching
the
substance
,
as
is
the
doctrine
?
Shall
there
not
be
a
certaine
forme
of
it
,
as
S.
Paule
saith
,
Goe
teache
all
nations
,
baptisinge
them
that
beleeue
,
and
teache
them
to
obserue
all
thinges
,
which
I
haue
commaunded
you
,
proue
your
Diuisions
?
Is
it
not
because
all
men
must
not
onely
be
taught
and
beleeue
the
doctrine
,
as
the
first
and
principal
marke
,
nor
onely
be
baptized
and
vse
the
Sacraments
,
which
is
the
second
,
but
also
must
be
taught
to
obserue
all
constitutions
,
for
elections
,
abdications
,
for
the
essentiall
difference
of
offices
for
the
censures
and
spirituall
corrections
,
which
you
call
true
Discipline
,
the
thirde
marke
?
Howe
then
,
is
not
this
commanded
Discipline
certaine
in
nature
and
forme
?
And
is
it
not
commanded
to
al
that
beleeue
and
are
baptized
?
What
then
,
shall
M.
Gualters
sentence
stand
,
&
yours
fall
?
After
you
haue
seene
this
disagrement
of
M.
Gualter
,
with
him selfe
,
beholde
how
he
disagreeth
in
this
sentence
with
the
Bishops
and
orders
which
you
maintaine
.
In
his
commentarie
on
the
1.
Cor.
5
where
he
hath
the
verie
wordes
you
alledge
:
hee
saieth
,
That
the
Ministers
haue
no
Discipline
further
then
rebukes
by
worde
:
That
there
must
be
no
Ecclesiasticall
suspension
from
the
Sacraments
:
No
excommunication
:
Finallie
,
there
must
be
no
Discipline
but
ciuill
,
at
the
appointement
af
the
Magistrate
,
and
that
by
ciuill
persons
.
Will
the
Bishops
allowe
this
,
that
by
the
worde
of
God
Ecclesiasticall
Gouuernours
haue
no
authoritie
to
suspende
,
to
excommunicate
?
Will
our
lawes
,
will
the
Articles
of
the
Conuocation
house
,
will
the
booke
of
ordayning
Bishops
,
Priestes
and
Deacons
stand
with
this
?
Thus
Gualters
breathe
poysoneth
and
choketh
the
Bishops
sweete
and
pure
Gouuernement
.
Thus
farre
his
accusation
.
His
answere
to
our
reasons
followe
.
Where
firste
I
pray
the
Reader
to
consider
well
the
question
betweene
vs
:
which
is
one
these
worde
of
S.
Paule
in
1.
Tim.
5.
The
Elders
which
rule
well
,
are
worthy
of
double
honour
,
especially
those
which
labour
in
the
worde
and
doctrine
.
We
say
,
this
place
mentioneth
two
sortes
of
Elders
,
one
which
doo
onely
gouerne
in
the
Church
:
the
other
which
also
are
occupied
in
the
ministerie
of
the
worde
.
He
denieth
this
,
and
sayeth
it
mentioneth
onely
two
sortes
of
Preachers
,
some
whiche
preach
well
,
and
some
which
take
greater
paynes
in
it
then
others
.
Thou
seest
the
question
betweene
vs
(
good
Reader
)
wherein
thou
mayest
thanke
Maister
Copquot
(
as
we
also
doo
)
for
making
his
meaning
playne
without
any
feare
.
For
it
argueth
a
good
courage
,
openly
at
Pawles
crosse
to
iustle
out
the
Arch-bishops
interpretation
,
to
bring
in
his
owne
.
Doctor
Whitgift
pag.
626.
The
Arch-bishop
vnderstandeth
it
of
two
sortes
of
Ministers
:
some
that
are
Ministers
but
preache
not
:
some
that
preache
and
labour
in
the
worde
and
doctrine
.
Well
did
Maister
Copquot
consider
that
it
was
farre
from
the
true
meaning
of
the
Apostle
,
which
neuer
would
account
an
ignorant
Minister
,
vnsauerie
salte
,
a
blinde
watchman
,
a
dumme
Dogge
,
and
an
Idoll
shepheard
,
worthie
either
of
double
honor
,
or
the
name
to
rule
well
.
Well
also
did
he
consider
that
it
was
a
small
piece
of
gouernement
,
to
reade
a
fewe
prayers
or
part
of
the
Liturgie
,
and
to
doo
all
as
he
is
prescribed
.
Vppon
good
reason
he
left
that
corrupt
meaning
,
I
would
he
had
as
easilie
receyued
the
full
and
proper
meaning
of
the
holy
Ghost
.
But
let
vs
come
to
the
matter
in
hande
:
Hee
thinketh
him selfe
iniuried
that
he
is
charged
to
haue
learned
his
aunswere
of
the
Iesuites
,
which
he
had
(
he
saith
)
from
holy
Fathers
and
Prophetes
.
If
you
bringe
the
interpretation
of
the
Prophetes
for
you
,
we
will
put
our
hande
to
our
mouth
and
giue
glorie
to
the
trueth
and
to
you
,
although
we
must
still
acknowledge
that
we
redde
it
in
the
Iesuites
papers
,
before
we
heard
it
out
of
your
mouth
.
But
how
is
it
that
we
heare
a
sounde
of
Prophetes
,
but
finde
the
sentences
onely
of
Fathers
?
Lette
vs
examine
them
notwithstanding
,
to
see
if
they
discharge
you
from
being
the
Iesuites
scholler
.
The
sentences
which
are
alledged
,
make
nothing
for
you
,
some
are
expreslie
against
you
.
The
first
2.
are
made
to
say
,
Such
Priestes
are
worthie
of
double
honour
as
do
rule
well
,
admit
they
say
it
:
but
do
they
saye
this
place
maketh
two
sortes
of
Preachers
,
whiche
is
the
question
?
Haue
you
no
other
Fathers
then
these
firste
?
Yes
,
Augustin
,
Ciprian
,
Ambrose
,
Chrisostome
,
these
are
worth
the
hearing
,
let
them
speak
.
S.
Augustin
saith
,
They
onely
non
bene
praesunt
,
whiche
doo
not
labour
in
their
calling
.
Ergo
,
the
place
of
the
Apostle
is
to
be
vnderstoode
of
Preachers
only
not
of
gouerning
Elders
.
I
am
not
worthy
for
learning
to
beare
Doctor
Copquot
bookes
:
yet
I
know
the
man
whom
he
now
seeketh
to
confute
,
would
laugh
at
suche
a
reason
.
For
all
that
I
will
vouchsafe
an
answere
.
Augustine
in
giuing
no
more
for
the
interpretation
of
these
wordes
,
whiche
rule
well
,
then
that
they
do
it
which
labour
in
their
calling
,
doth
applie
it
no
more
to
Preachers
onely
,
then
to
Deacons
,
Kinges
,
yea
Shipmaisters
,
who
all
must
labour
well
in
their
calling
.
Nay
,
by
vsing
so
generall
wordes
in
interpreting
the
first
part
of
the
verse
,
he
manifestlie
declareth
,
that
hee
vnderstood
it
was
general
to
both
sorte
of
Elders
,
both
teaching
and
vnteaching
,
and
so
he
might
applie
it
to
which
soeuer
sorte
of
Elders
he
had
occasion
to
speake
of
.
The
same
answere
may
serue
the
words
which
he
sayeth
are
Ciprians
,
who
yet
can
not
bee
founde
either
so
much
as
to
alledge
that
place
,
much
lesse
fully
to
interprete
it
.
And
if
he
thinke
that
Ciprian
was
such
an
enemie
of
vnteaching
Elders
,
let
him
reade
againe
his
Epistles
,
and
he
shall
finde
almost
in
euery
Epistle
,
that
hee
is
a
great
friende
vnto
them
.
He
will
say
peraduenture
,
those
Elders
were
preachers
:
we
answer
,
it
is
not
credible
that
in
one
Church
there
could
be
so
many
as
hee
there
nameth
and
paynteth
out
,
especially
in
the
time
of
persecution
.
But
to
put
the
matter
out
of
doubt
,
his
owne
wordes
are
alledged
,
where
hee
saith
,
Cyprian
lib.
3.
Epist.
22
He
with
the
Elders
,
Teachers
,
and
Readers
,
gaue
the
degree
of
a
Teacher
vnto
Optatus
:
Or
if
you
will
haue
the
reading
as
it
is
newly
cast
in
a
popish
moulde
,
Quando
cum
praesbiteris
doctioribus
,
lectores
diligenter
probauerimus
,
Optatum
inter
lectores
doctorem
audientium
constituimus
,
when
with
the
lharneder
Elders
wee
diligentlie
tried
the
Readers
,
wee
made
Optatus
amongst
the
Readers
a
Teacher
of
those
who
heare
,
it
shall
make
yet
more
against
you
:
because
here
Elders
are
not
onely
distinguished
from
Ciprian
the
Bishop
of
that
particular
church●
as
from
the
Pastor
,
&
from
the
teachers
and
readers
,
but
also
from
some
other
vnlearned
Elders
,
who
although
for
gouernement
they
were
apt
men
:
yet
were
not
so
learned
as
eyther
they
were
fitt
to
reade
in
the
Church
,
or
iudge
of
those
who
could
reade
and
pronounce
wordes
and
sentences
according
to
their
iust
measure
,
and
proper
grace
.
We
haue
sifted
Ciprian
,
let
vs
looke
in
to
Chrisostome
:
He
is
made
to
say
,
A
good
Pastor
layeth
dewns
his
life
for
his
sheepe
.
He
doeth
so
saye
,
but
the
[
(a)
](A00639-e990-b)
(a)
Num.
27
Actes
20
name
of
shepheard
both
in
holy
and
prophane
write
,
is
common
to
gouernours
,
both
ciuill
and
ecclesiasticall
,
as
well
as
to
Teachers
.
Further
,
if
one
do
wel
marke
the
course
of
Chrisostomes
commentarie
in
that
place
,
he
shall
finde
him
against
you
:
Poimenes
laon
in
the
Poet.
because
when
he
speaketh
of
the
firste
part
of
the
verse
,
he
vrgeth
no
necessitie
of
doctrine
:
but
comming
to
the
second
,
he
sheweth
that
those
kinde
of
Elders
which
are
occupied
in
the
worde
,
are
most
to
be
honored
,
because
they
susteine
great
labour
in
teaching
.
His
wordes
are
:
Quid
est
autem
bene
praeesse
?
audi
dicentem
Christum
:
Pastor
bonus
animam
ponit
pro
ouibus
.
Bene
igitur
praeesse
,
hoc
est
,
nulli
parcere
illorum
regiminis
gratia
:
maximè
inquit
,
qui
laborant
,
in
verbo
&
doctrina
:
vbi
modo
sunt
qui
dicunt
sermone
&
doctrsna
non
opus
est
:
&
hos
omnium
maximè
iubet
honorari
,
causamque
addit
,
dicens
:
Nullum
enim
laborem
sustinent
:
that
is
,
What
is
it
to
rule
well
?
heare
Christ
speaking
or
telling
it
:
A
good
shephearde
layeth
downe
his
lyfe
for
his
sheepe
.
Therefore
to
rule
well
,
is
this
,
to
spore
none
,
or
nothinge
,
for
the
sake
of
their
gouernement
:
especially
(
sayth
he
)
those
which
labour
in
the
worde
and
doctrine
:
where
are
they
nowe
which
saye
,
there
is
no
neede
of
the
worde
and
doctrine
:
and
he
commandeth
that
these
be
chieflie
honoured
,
and
sheweth
the
cause
,
saying
:
because
they
susteyne
much
labour
.
By
all
whiche
is
manifest
,
first
that
the
first
part
of
the
vers.
he
vnderstandeth
onli
of
gouernement
(
for
giuing
the
ful
sense
of
it
,
he
maketh
it
to
be
to
spare
none
in
respect
of
their
gouernment
)
&
so
maketh
with
vs
Elders
which
gouerne
onely
:
and
Elders
whiche
also
teache
.
Secondlie
,
seeing
he
doeth
by
the
seconde
parte
confute
those
who
sayde
,
there
is
no
neede
of
doctrine
:
he
sheweth
that
although
some
are
to
gouerne
onely
,
yet
some
which
must
haue
great
honour
,
must
teache
also
.
Yea
,
if
he
had
vnderstoode
your
sense
of
this
place
,
he
would
haue
saide
vpon
the
first
part
of
the
verse
:
All
must
teache
well
,
therefore
there
is
neede
of
doctrine
in
euerie
place
:
this
argument
could
not
haue
bin
left
out
,
and
had
bin
more
necessarie
,
if
he
had
seene
that
to
be
the
meaning
of
the
Apostle
.
Lastlie
,
in
confutinge
by
this
reason
their
negligence
,
because
they
must
labor
in
the
worde
,
and
not
with
yours
,
because
they
must
labour
more
then
others
:
he
sheweth
your
interpretation
neuer
came
in
his
minde
.
Thus
three
of
his
witnesses
haue
done
him
much
more
harme
then
good
.
What
sayeth
the
last
?
Ambrose
sayeth
,
Presbiters
.i.
Elders
,
and
those
whiche
gouuerne
well
,
both
in
life
and
doctrine
,
deserue
double
honour
,
of
those
who
are
vnder
them
.
Is
this
to
proue
that
Ambrose
vnderstandeth
the
place
of
Preachers
only
:
when
besides
those
which
gouerne
both
in
life
&
doctrine
,
he
speaketh
of
Elders
and
Auncientes
?
If
you
wil
say
that
(
and
)
doeth
not
here
couple
diuers
thinges
,
but
interpret
only
,
what
reason
haue
you
to
proue
it
?
Seeing
he
doeth
alledge
the
texte
expressely
as
we
doo
▪
What
goeth
before
,
what
followeth
after
to
proue
it
?
Nay
,
in
the
last
wordes
he
would
then
haue
saide
.
They
deserue
double
honour
,
of
those
whom
they
teache
,
but
because
hee
woulde
make
it
generall
to
both
,
hee
sayeth
of
those
that
are
vnder
them
:
which
may
haue
relation
to
both
sortes
of
Elders
.
If
Ambrose
had
misliked
this
office
,
or
not
counted
it
perpetual
,
you
had
had
some
reason
to
interprete
Et
(
and
)
by
these
words
that
is
:
But
seeing
he
calleth
for
it
and
complaineth
for
the
decay
of
it
,
as
we
doo
:
seeing
he
proueth
it
by
the
same
places
wee
doo
:
his
interpretation
hath
no
coulor
to
mainteine
it self
.
The
first
is
manifest
by
his
wordes
on
1.
Tim.
5.
Vnde
&
Synagoga
,
&
postea
Ecclesia
seniores
habuit
,
quorum
sine
consilio
nihil
agebatur
in
Ecclesia
.
Quod
qua
negligentia
absoleuerit
,
nescio
,
nisi
fortè
Doctorum
desidia
▪
aut
magis
superbia
,
dum
soli
volunt
aliquid
videri
:
that
is
,
Whence
also
the
Synagogue
,
and
after
the
Church
had
Elders
,
without
whose
counsell
nothinge
was
done
in
the
Church
:
which
,
by
what
negligence
it
is
worne
out
of
vse
,
I
knowe
not
,
vnlesse
perhaps
by
the
slothe
of
the
Teachers
,
or
rather
their
pride
,
whilest
they
alone
will
seeme
to
be
somewhat
.
The
second
is
manifest
by
his
interpretation
of
the
1.
Cor.
12.
which
we
alledge
(
Hee
hath
set
in
his
Church
gouernors
)
of
which
wordes
his
whole
interpretation
(
after
he
had
spoken
vppon
the
former
wordes
of
the
Teachers
)
is
:
Sunt
&
gubernatores
qui
spiritualibus
retinaculis
,
hominibus
documento
sunt
:
There
are
also
gouernors
which
with
spirituall
bridles
order
men
.
Where
,
in
saying
,
there
are
also
,
he
sheweth
besides
the
teachers
,
there
are
also
rulers
:
and
such
as
rule
with
spirituall
bridles
,
not
with
the
ciuill
sworde
.
Thus
the
Fathers
are
heauie
friendes
to
this
interpretation
.
It
may
be
notwithstanding
he
can
so
confute
our
reason
brought
against
his
misinterpretation
,
as
we
must
of
force
yeelde
it
into
his
handes
.
For
triall
sake
therefore
,
we
come
to
his
answere
.
Wherein
obserue
two
faultes
whiche
are
generall
:
then
you
may
the
better
deale
with
the
particular
deceites
of
his
answere
.
The
one
is
,
that
he
cleane
passeth
by
one
principall
reason
,
which
is
made
against
him
,
and
it
is
this
:
If
the
Apostle
had
ment
to
haue
made
two
sortes
of
Preachers
,
hee
should
haue
saide
,
They
which
rule
well
in
worde
and
doctrine
,
are
worthie
of
double
honor
,
especiallie
those
which
labor
in
it
,
or
labor
more
th●n
others
:
but
the
Apostle
hath
no
wordes
nor
circumstance
,
to
make
the
word
&
doctrine
common
to
both
.
For
by
what
law
of
interpretation
,
will
you
doo
it
?
Will
you
interprete
,
Ruling
by
teaching
?
gouernement
by
doctrine
?
One
diuers
thing
by
another
?
Is
that
to
interprete
,
or
to
confounde
?
An other
faulte
is
,
that
hee
repeateth
the
fourth
reason
,
but
maketh
no
aunswere
at
all
vnto
it
.
The
cause
peraduenture
is
,
for
that
it
was
concluded
in
a
connexiue
syllogisme
,
not
a
simple
or
●ategoricall
.
I
will
therefore
doo
so
much
for
the
author
(
or
rather
him
)
as
turn
it
to
his
liking
Thus
:
-
What
soeuer
is
a
common
duetie
of
all
Elders
that
can
not
be
assigned
by
the
Apostle
,
as
a
proper
cause
of
an
especiall
honor
in
some
sorte
of
good
Preachers
.
-
But
Copiazein
to
take
great
paynes
in
their
office
,
&c.
is
a
common
dutie
to
all
Elders
,
1.
Thes.
5.12
.
Heb.
1●
17.
-
Ergo
,
Copiazein
to
take
great
paynes
,
can
not
be
assigned
of
the
Apostle
as
a
cause
of
especiall
honor
in
some
sorte
of
preachers
.
We
will
nowe
expect
his
answere
,
although
without
cauill
he
can
hardly
answere
it
.
Thus
we
haue
beheld
the
common
vertues
of
his
aunswere
,
let
vs
looke
into
the
proper
strength
in
the
particulars
.
To
the
second
reason
his
answere
is
,
that
is
this
interpretation
,
they
doo
nothing
lesse
then
make
the
Apostle
go
backward
and
not
forwarde
.
For
this
is
our
meaning
which
we
giue
(
saith
he
)
That
they
whiche
labour
,
are
worthie
of
double
honour
:
they
which
do●
not
,
are
worthie
of
none
.
A
sounde
answere
,
which
is
contrarie
to
him selfe
,
and
toucheth
not
the
force
of
that
obiected
against
him
.
Shewe
the
firste
.
It
is
manifest
by
that
which
after
he
saith
:
that
this
place
is
ment
of
suche
as
preache
well
and
of
some
that
in
preaching
well
,
take
more
labor
then
other
.
Here
he
vnderstandeth
it
of
those
which
take
any
paynes
,
and
setteth
them
against
those
whiche
take
none
So
he
maketh
the
highest
degree
of
honor
due
to
that
which
if
it
be
not
done
,
he
saith
,
is
worthy
of
no
honor
▪
How
can
that
deserue
or
haue
an
excelencie
of
honor
,
which
is
common
to
all
that
may
haue
any
honor
in
their
office
?
Besides
this
contradiction
which
is
euident
in
his
owne
words
,
he
toucheth
not
the
force
of
the
obiection
.
The
obiection
is
:
Whatsoeuer
sense
maketh
the
Apostle
,
in
the
second
member
of
the
verse
,
giue
more
to
the
part
,
then
in
the
first
to
the
whole
,
maketh
him
go
backward
nor
forward
in
his
word
especially
.
But
this
sense
of
theirs
maketh
the
Apostle
giue
more
to
him
that
laboreth
in
preaching
,
which
is
but
a
parte
,
then
to
him
which
doth
it
wel
,
which
is
to
do
it
with
great
paynes
,
puritie
,
wisdom
,
zeale
,
power
,
soundnes
,
fitnes
,
&
many
other
things
besides
labor
.
Therefore
this
sense
maketh
him
goe
backewarde
not
forwarde
,
in
his
worde
especially
.
This
reason
is
playne
.
What
saith
the
answer
?
Doth
it
distinguish
?
No.
Doth
it
denie
the
first
part
?
No.
What
then
?
It
denieth
the
conclusion
,
against
all
rule
of
reason
.
Yet
by
what
reason
doth
he
denie
it
?
By
giuing
an
interpretation
,
which
doeth
not
make
,
either
two
sortes
of
Elders
,
or
of
sincere
preachers
,
but
only
two
sortes
of
preachers
,
one
good
&
worthie
of
honor
,
an
other
euil
,
whiche
take
no
paynes
,
worthie
of
no
honour
.
So
that
this
hauing
no
degrees
of
comparison
(
which
are
manifestly
expressed
in
S.
Paules
words
)
can
not
so
much
as
resemble
the
sentence
of
the
Apostle
,
much
lesse
interpret
it
.
His
meaning
here
peraduenture
is
as
after
,
that
al
that
do
it
wel
,
shal
haue
double
honor
:
but
they
especially
,
who
take
yet
more
paines
in
doing
it
well
.
This
his
meaning
hath
two
fowle
spots
in
it
,
as
faire
as
he
would
make
it
.
The
first
is
against
the
rule
of
reason
,
because
he
beggeth
the
question
:
for
to
proue
his
denial
of
the
conclusion
of
our
reason
,
he
bringeth
this
meaning
of
his
,
which
is
the
question
we
dispute
about
.
The
second
fault
is
against
plaine
dealing
in
interpreting
the
scripture
,
&
that
in
two
respects
:
one
is
in
interpreting
ruling
well
,
or
being
ouer
others
well
,
by
preaching
well
.
Which
is
to
interprete
the
generall
by
the
especiall
.
If
he
say
,
one
may
do
so
where
there
is
a
Trope
or
an
vnproper
speache
:
he
must
firste
proue
by
euident
reason
out
of
his
text
,
or
other
scripture
,
that
there
,
is
a
Trope
,
else
he
seeketh
a
knotte
in
a
rushe
.
Besides
this
,
a
figure
can
not
stande
here
,
because
the
Apostle
doth
specifie
the
general
,
of
being
ouer
others
,
into
the
speciall
of
being
ouer
also
in
doctrine
:
so
that
he
can
by
no
meanes
enter
here
vpon
such
an
vnproper
speache
,
but
must
be
content
to
reade
,
ruling
wel
,
ruling
wel
,
not
teaching
well
.
After
this
straunge
interpreting
,
before
this
new
coyned
meaning
(
carying
the
very
stampe
of
the
Iesuites
)
enter
,
he
must
(
not
without
great
blame
if
he
look
not
to
it
)
adde
to
the
wordes
of
the
Apostle
.
For
,
all
the
force
of
his
interpretation
standeth
vpon
an
addition
,
to
the
wordes
of
the
holy
Ghost
:
which
is
,
to
make
him
say
,
he
that
taketh
more
great
paynes
then
they
whiche
preache
well
:
All
whiche
wordes
,
more
then
others
which
doo
it
well
,
are
neither
in
the
Apostle
in
expresse
wordes
,
nor
in
any
of
like
force
to
them
,
neither
hath
he
,
or
can
he
With
any
Syllogisme
conclude
it
out
of
his
wordes
.
If
he
can
,
let
him
shewe
his
cunning
.
The
worde
Copiazein
,
whiche
signifieth
,
to
take
great
paynes
,
will
not
here
helpe
him
:
For
it
doeth
not
include
a
comparison
with
others
.
en
copois
,
in
labors
more
aboundant
:
and
so
by
adding
the
worde
of
comparison
to
it
,
sheweth
it
is
not
conteyned
in
the
very
word
it self
.
an
honor
such
as
is
dew
to
Widowes
:
Wherin
first
he
trifleth
,
fleeing
from
the
matter
in
hand
to
another
.
For
he
should
haue
proued
that
his
interpretation
gaue
not
a
single
honor
to
some
whiche
did
not
preache
well
.
Secondly
,
he
is
contrarie
to
him selfe
.
Before
he
saide
,
here
were
vnderstood
only
two
sortes
of
Preachers
,
good
and
euill
:
after
he
saide
,
good
and
excellent
:
Now
,
three
sortes
are
vnderstood
,
single
ones
,
such
as
may
haue
the
honour
of
Widowes
:
double
ones
,
such
as
may
haue
double
honor
:
and
treble
ones
,
which
may
especially
haue
double
honor
.
Wherefore
(
as
the
Author
of
the
Counterpoyson
said
before
,
so
I
say
againe
,
this
is
dallying
,
&
not
interpreting
:
And
What
soeuer
he
saye
,
this
Discipline
of
his
,
is
dissolute
.
●or
if
men
preache
well
,
they
are
worthie
of
double
honor
,
whiche
is
more
then
the
Widdowes
honour
.
if
oteerwise
they
are
worthie
(
as
he
saide
before
)
of
none
.
His
answere
followeth
to
the
last
reason
out
of
Roma.
12.6.7
.
Where
the
Elder
for
gouernement
onely
,
is
made
a
proper
member
of
the
church
,
differing
in
his
proper
action
from
the
Teacher
,
Exhorter
,
Distributer
:
And
out
of
the
1.
Cor.
12.
where
God
is
saide
(
besides
all
other
ministeries
and
giftes
)
to
haue
ordeyned
gouernours
in
his
Church
:
wherevnto
he
saieth
,
he
denieth
the
argument
,
there
were
such
then
,
therfore
there
should
be
such
nowe
Because
(
as
M.
Gualter
saieth
)
We
must
first
proue
they
haue
such
giftes
of
prophesying
,
doing
of
miracles
,
and
diuers
such
like
as
are
there
mentioned
.
To
all
which
we
replie
,
first
with
thankes
that
hee
yeeldeth
to
the
trueth
,
&
graunteth
that
such
were
ordeyned
of
god
.
In
the
second
place
we
wil
proue
they
are
perpetuall
,
and
then
that
it
is
vnreasonable
to
demande
of
vs
,
to
proue
that
now
they
haue
such
giftes
as
he
speaketh
of
.
We
mainteyne
out
of
these
places
,
that
they
are
perpetuall
.
First
,
because
they
are
members
ordeyned
of
Christ
,
hauing
actions
for
the
profit
of
the
whole
body
.
For
vnlesse
he
can
proue
God
hath
repealed
them
,
who
shall
cutt
them
off
from
the
body
?
Secondly
,
the
Apostle
in
the
12.
to
the
Rom.
reckoneth
vpp
none
but
perpetuall
,
as
Teachers
,
Exhorters
,
Rulers
,
Distributers
.
Nowe
,
him selfe
(
I
dare
say
)
will
acknowledge
the
giftes
of
doctrine
,
exhortation
,
abilitie
to
distribute
,
&
gouerne
,
with
the
actions
proceeding
from
them
,
to
be
perpetual
,
&
still
necessarie
If
then
the
proper
actions
(
as
the
Apostle
there
speaketh
)
of
the
members
be
perpetual
,
shal
the
members
be
momentarie
?
Doth
Christ
now
giue
doctrine
,
set
gouernors
in
his
Church
.
Howe
can
any
man
set
them
out
then
?
They
will
saye
,
hee
saieth
,
there
also
hee
hath
sette
Apostles
,
which
yet
are
not
perpetuall
.
It
is
true
:
there
are
mentioned
also
teachers
and
helpers
whiche
are
perpetuall
.
So
this
obiection
ministreth
vs
occasion
of
a
double
reason
:
the
one
by
equal
comparison
,
as
the
teachers
office
(
whereof
the
gifte
&
necessitie
is
perpetuall
)
for
that
cause
remayneth
,
and
the
Church
ought
continually
to
call
for
men
which
are
fitt
for
it
,
because
God
hath
set
them
in
his
Churche
.
So
for
the
Elders
office
,
seeing
their
giftes
of
watchfulnes
,
abilitie
to
admonishe
,
and
to
aduise
and
gouerne
doeth
remayne
,
the
Church
is
continually
to
cal
men
fit
for
the
same
office
into
it
,
because
God
hath
set
them
in
his
Church
.
Further
,
as
no
authoritie
of
men
could
haue
remoued
the
extraordinarie
,
vnlesse
God
had
denied
their
extraordinarie
giftes
and
calling
:
so
no
man
can
remoue
these
where
the
giftes
remaine
,
&
an
ordinarie
way
of
examination
,
&
election
doth
remayne
for
their
calling
.
Thirdly
,
the
Apostle
writing
vnto
Timoth.
doth
giue
as
general
a
charge
for
this
sort
of
Elders
and
their
continuance
,
as
for
the
other
whiche
are
●●aching
:
therfore
if
you
can
proue
one
perpetual
▪
you
may
also
proue
the
other
to
be
so
likewise
.
For
the
precepts
for
their
honor
,
their
reasonable
immunitie
from
accusations
,
their
iust
rebuke
,
their
carefull
ordination
,
are
set
downe
,
as
common
to
both
sortes
,
though
,
as
in
the
first
of
honor
,
so
in
the
rest
the
teaching
Elders
are
especially
to
bee
regarded
.
Lastly
,
they
can
finde
no
commandement
,
reason
,
or
other
ground
in
the
scripture
,
why
the
Pastor
in
his
place
shuld
be
perpetual
,
but
we
will
bring
the
like
for
the
Elder
in
his
.
One
is
more
necessarie
,
wee
graunt
,
but
not
more
perpetuall
then
another
:
as
the
eye
,
or
the
tongue
,
or
the
hand
is
more
necessarie
than
the
foote
,
the
right
ones
more
then
the
left
,
yet
alike
ordinarie
&
perpetual
.
These
are
our
reasons
to
proue
them
perpetual
,
which
being
set
down
for
the
vnlearned
more
grosely
,
we
will
also
set
than
down
with
some
other
in
syllogismes
,
that
he
may
the
better
deale
with
them
,
out
of
Rom.
12.
No
members
of
Christes
body
hauing
actions
for
the
profit
of
the
whole
,
may
be
thrust
out
or
put
to
an
ende
by
any
humane
authoritie
.
The
Elders
and
Deacons
are
such
members
,
Rom.
12.4
8.
Ergo
,
Al
offices
whose
giftes
and
proper
actions
are
ordinarie
and
of
perpetuall
vse
,
they
are
perpetuall
.
The
offices
of
Elders
&
Deacons
ar
such
,
as
whose
giftes
of
abilitie
to
gouerne
,
&
distribut
,
&
actions
of
distribution
and
gouernement
,
are
perpetuall
by
their
owne
graunt
.
Ergo
,
They
are
offices
perpetual
Out
of
the
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
No
offices
whiche
God
hath
once
set
in
his
Church
,
may
be
put
to
an
ende
by
humane
authoritie
.
But
the
offices
of
Elders
&
Deacons
,
haue
bin
once
set
in
the
Church
by
God
,
Ergo
,
they
may
not
bee
putt
to
an
ende
,
and
consequently
are
perpetuall
.
Whatsoeuer
offices
haue
the
same
cause
of
continuance
,
are
alike
perpetuall
,
though
not
alike
excellent
.
The
office
of
teachers
,
&
of
church
gouernors
&
Deacons
,
haue
the
same
cause
,
as
the
ordinance
of
god
,
the
continuance
of
their
gifts
,
&
of
power
of
the
church
to
cal
them
,
1.
Cor.
12
Rom.
12.
Ergo
,
they
are
alike
perpetuall
.
Whatsoeuer
haue
the
like
cause
of
ceasing
and
remayninge
,
the
cause
of
remayning
being
continued
,
they
remayne
,
as
the
cause
being
ceased
,
they
cease
.
But
the
offices
of
Church
gouernors
&
Deacons
with
the
offices
of
Apostles
,
workers
of
miracles
,
haue
the
like
cause
of
ceasing
&
remaining
,
to
Wit
the
wil
&
ordinance
of
God
in
continuing
the
giftes
,
and
the
ordinarie
and
mediat
calling
of
the
Church
for
the
one
,
and
his
will
in
withholding
the
extraordinarie
giftes
,
and
immediat
calling
of
the
other
.
Ergo
,
they
do
by
the
like
cause
remaine
that
the
other
are
taken
away
Whatsoeuer
haue
the
same
general
commandement
,
and
rules
of
examination
,
traill
,
ordination
,
abdication
,
honor
,
reprose
,
without
speciall
exemption
for
any
:
are
alike
perpetual
.
But
the
offices
of
teaching
and
vnteaching
Elders
and
of
Deacons
,
haue
the
same
generall
commandement
,
&c.
1.
Ti.
5.3
,
10.
1.
Tim.
5.17.18
,
&c.
Ergo
,
they
are
alike
perpetuall
.
Whatsoeuer
offices
are
necessarie
in
euerie
congregation
for
Discipline
after
the
seconde
priuate
admonition
:
they
are
perpetuall
:
otherwise
the
remedie
Christ
hath
appointed
for
sinners
,
is
not
perpetuall
.
But
an
assemblie
of
Gouernours
in
expresse
wordes
of
Christ
,
are
necessarie
in
euery
congregation
for
Discipline
,
after
the
seconde
priuat
admonition
,
Mat.
18.17
.
Ergo
,
such
an
assemblie
is
perpetuall
.
Whatsoeuer
offices
were
ordeined
for
ordinarie
and
perpetuall
gouernement
of
the
Church
vnder
the
lawe
,
&
hauing
continued
from
Moses
to
Christ
,
haue
as
the
other
offices
of
teaching
&
exhorting
,
bin
newly
increased
and
augmented
by
Christe
to
the
Church
vnder
the
Gospell
:
those
are
perpetuall
:
because
there
can
be
no
cause
so
great
,
found
of
altering
offices
of
ordinarie
giftes
and
vse
since
Christ
,
as
was
betwene
Christ
and
Moses
.
But
the
office
of
gouerning
Elders
adioyned
to
Teachers
and
exhorters
are
such
.
Ergo
,
the
assumption
is
proued
by
these
places
,
Leuit.
4.13
,
14
,
15.
(
Where
the
Elders
,
as
bearing
the
person
and
sins
of
the
whole
congregation
,
are
distinguished
from
the
Priest
&
the
Magistrate
.
)
Iere.
19.1
.
Where
the
ciuill
and
ecclesiasticall
Elders
are
distinguished
▪
2.
Chron.
19.8.11
.
Where
for
the
matters
of
God
,
to
the
Priestes
and
teaching
Leuites
,
are
adioyned
Elders
,
Hesr
.
10.8
.
Where
the
counsell
of
the
Elders
for
excommunication
is
ioyned
,
though
(
distinguished
from
it
)
with
the
counsell
and
decree
of
the
Princes
touching
confiscation
of
goods
.
Nehem.
8.5.8
.
Where
the
Elders
in
gouerning
the
Assemblie
,
are
distinguished
from
the
Priestes
and
teachinge
Leuites
.
For
counsell
they
are
adioyned
euen
with
the
Prophetes
,
2.
Reg.
6.32
.
Out
of
the
newe
Testament
the
places
are
pregnant
and
many
,
Act.
4.5
.
&
6.12
.
&
5.21
.
Act.
13
,
15.
&
18.8
.
So
that
this
proueth
the
ordinance
and
continuance
of
them
from
Moses
to
Christ
.
That
Christ
continued
them
and
augmented
them
with
giftes
,
as
he
did
the
offices
of
teaching
and
exhortinge
,
the
place
of
Mat.
18.
Tell
the
assembly
,
and
if
he
heare
no●
it
,
lette
him
bee
a
Heathen
and
publicane
,
doth
proue
it
:
for
by
vsing
expresse
wordes
,
proper
to
that
order
of
theirs
,
hee
doeth
manifestly
establishe
it
.
The
places
whiche
haue
proued
them
ordeyned
in
the
Church
,
proue
this
point
also
.
Lastly
,
them selues
graunt
Christe
ordeyned
such
,
only
they
denie
them
to
be
perpetuall
.
Nowe
,
if
they
demande
humane
witnes
,
what
can
they
haue
more
cleare
then
that
Ignatius
,
who
(
as
they
say
,
was
S.
Ihons
Scoller
)
writing
to
seuen
Churches
,
in
euerie
Epistle
speaking
only
of
such
offices
as
were
ordinarie
and
perpetuall
,
Bishopps
,
Elders
and
Deacons
,
doeth
say
(
as
hath
bin
alledged
)
that
No
Church
can
be
without
her
Eldership
.
And
least
any
man
should
say
,
he
ment
teaching
Elders
.
Lette
them
marke
that
hee
defineth
their
office
to
be
a
Senate
of
Counselers
,
and
assistants
to
the
Bishoppe
in
euery
Church
:
ouer
which
Bishop
he
acknowledgeth
no
Church-officer
but
Christ
,
without
which
Bishop
it
is
not
lawfull
to
administer
the
Communion
,
Baptisme
,
or
performe
any
action
in
the
Assemblie
.
His
wordes
are
these·
What
is
the
Eldership
,
but
a
holy
Senat
,
the
Counsellers
and
assistantes
of
the
Bishop
.
And
a
little
before
:
The
Elders
are
as
the
Senat
of
God
,
and
the
hande
and
sinewe
of
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
without
these
the
elect
Church
is
not
,
no
Congregation
of
Saintes
,
without
these
,
Epist.
2.
ad
Tralles
.
Here
the
office
is
defined
,
as
consisting
onely
in
gouernement
.
That
in
the
Sacramentes
they
might
only
assist
the
Bishop
,
and
not
administer
them
,
or
doo
any
publike
action
,
is
manifest
by
these
wordes
:
It
is
not
lawfull
with
out
a
Bishop
,
eyther
to
Baptize
,
or
to
offer
,
or
to
prepare
the
offring
,
(
in
the
Communion
)
or
perfect
the
gifte
or
distribution
,
but
that
which
seemeth
good
to
him
,
according
to
the
good
pleasure
of
God
,
that
what
soeuer
you
doo
,
may
be
safe
and
sure
.
Ignat.
Epist.
2.
ad
Smyrnaeos
,
and
in
the
same
Epistle
,
Therefore
let
all
things
be
done
of
you
,
according
to
good
order
in
Christ
.
Let
the
laye
men
be
subiect
to
the
Deacons
,
●ute
th●sian
proscem
ze
〈…〉
oute
d●chen
epitilem
.
the
Deacons
to
the
Elders
,
the
Elders
to
the
Bishop
,
the
Bishop
to
Christ
,
as
he
to
his
Father
In
the
time
of
Cyprian
,
they
remayned
.
Ambrose
,
when
they
were
fallen
away
,
doeth
complayne
of
it
,
and
doeth
make
the
cause
of
their
falling
awaye
,
not
because
they
were
not
perpetual
,
nor
yet
because
they
might
not
continue
,
but
the
negligence
and
pride
of
the
teachers
.
Nowe
that
wee
haue
proued
that
hee
required
of
the
perpetuitie
of
these
offices
:
lett
vs
come
to
his
reason
,
why
he
denieth
them
to
be
perpetuall
,
whiche
is
,
because
wee
can
not
firste
proue
the
Elders
to
haue
such
giftes
of
prophecying
,
dooing
miracles
,
&c.
But
wee
bidde
him
proue
firste
this
strange
and
monstrouse
assertion
:
that
it
is
necessarie
for
vs
to
proue
it
.
Secondly
,
we
will
shew
him
the
vanitie
and
detestable
absurdities
which
folow
this
his
demande
.
The
vanitie
may
appeare
by
these
reasons
out
of
the
text
.
The
gouernours
and
the
gift
of
gouernement
are
as
much
distinguished
from
Prophetes
&
doers
of
miracles
,
as
they
are
from
teachers
:
therfore
to
require
such
necessarie
for
gouernement
more
then
doctrine
,
is
to
ouerthrowe
the
purpose
of
the
Apostle
,
which
is
to
shew
howe
euery
office
hath
his
seueral
&
proper
gift
.
Secondly
,
if
the
vse
of
such
giftes
as
he
speaketh
of
,
be
no
part
of
gouernement
,
what
necessitie
is
there
of
them
in
Elders
as
they
are
Elders
?
Thirdly
,
we
demaund
of
him
,
whether
he
require
these
giftes
in
al
Elders
or
in
some
,
&
in
whom
he
doth
require
them
,
whether
he
would
haue
all
those
giftes
to
be
in
them
or
some
only
.
If
he
require
them
in
all
,
he
must
proue
first
that
they
were
in
al
the
Elders
in
the
Apostles
time
,
which
he
shall
do
ad
graecas
kalendas
,
that
is
,
neuer
.
If
he
require
all
those
giftes
in
any
,
let
him
proue
that
any
Elder
was
furnished
with
them
al
,
which
he
shal
neuer
do
.
If
some
only
,
let
him
shew
whiche
are
necessarie
,
and
which
not
.
And
let
him
out
of
the
scripture
proue
his
saying
,
and
we
will
yeelde
.
Thus
we
haue
seene
the
vanitie
of
the
demande
,
marke
the
absurdities
following
.
First
,
that
they
make
themselues
wiser
then
the
Apostle
,
who
requireth
no
more
in
the
dutie
of
an
Elder
,
then
to
be
ouer
the
flocke
with
diligence
,
Rom.
12.5.6
.
Secondly
,
they
require
more
in
the
Elders
than
the
Apostle
required
in
a
teaching
Elder
or
a
Bishop
,
when
he
giueth
the
rule
of
his
examination
,
1.
Tim.
3.
Thirdly
they
may
by
the
same
rule
throw
out
teachers
,
seeing
in
this
place
the
Apostle
giueth
such
giftes
no
more
to
the
Elders
then
to
the
teachers
:
especially
this
consequence
is
necessarie
,
because
the
principall
ende
of
those
giftes
,
being
eyther
to
deliuer
doctrine
,
or
giue
credit
to
it
,
is
more
necessarie
for
the
teacher
then
the
gouuernor
.
Fourtly
,
seeing
they
vnderstande
by
Elders
those
who
preach
,
and
will
haue
none
gouerning
only
,
it
remaineth
that
by
his
reason
we
must
first
proue
those
giftes
to
remayne
in
them
,
Acte
.
2.16
,
17
,
18
,
19●
Act.
21.8
.
1.
Cor.
14.26.34
.
Lastly
,
seeinge
these
giftes
were
common
to
priuate
persons
,
yea
to
women
,
euen
to
all
sortes
of
beleeuers
,
we
must
first
proue
(
by
their
reason
)
these
giftes
to
remaine
,
eare
wee
can
proue
there
be
any
church
or
faithfull
men
in
the
world
.
These
are
the
detestable
absurdities
which
followe
vpon
this
reason
of
theirs
,
wherby
the
answer
to
it
is
euident
,
that
the
Apostle
setteth
down
there
,
both
offices
,
as
Apostles
,
Teachers
,
Prophetes
,
Elders
,
Deacons
,
and
also
some
giftes
,
which
were
common
to
all
,
as
ornamentes
to
confirme
for
a
time
,
Christian
Religion
:
Now
,
althogh
these
giftes
are
long
since
ceassed
,
yet
the
offices
may
remayne
without
them
:
especially
the
offices
of
teaching
,
exhorting
,
gouerning
,
which
are
for
their
vse
,
&
the
giftes
required
in
them
,
perpetual
:
euery
part
of
which
answere
hath
bin
before
confirmed
in
the
particulars
.
Hitherto
he
hath
labored
against
the
trueth
,
to
ouerthrowe
it
:
Nowe
,
fearing
that
all
the
instrumentes
he
had
,
would
not
throttle
the
cause
,
so
as
she
should
no
more
open
her
mouth
:
hee
seeketh
to
disguise
her
with
a
slaunder
.
Where
we
will
first
see
what
he
bringeth
:
then
we
will
mainteyne
the
contrarie
.
The
summe
of
that
he
obiecteth
is
,
they
which
stande
for
Discipline
,
are
thought
to
bringe
in
contention
,
and
to
vndermine
the
power
of
the
Magi●trate
.
In
this
accusation
first
you
must
well
obserue
,
hee
doeth
not
,
nor
dareth
not
say
,
it
is
so
,
but
that
it
is
thought
so
.
To
which
it
may
be
answered
,
that
it
is
thought
,
that
the
other
side
seeke
to
driue
out
the
sufficient
ministerie
,
that
they
alone
may
reigne
,
pille
the
people
af
her
Maiestie
;
abuse
them
&
grind
them
,
without
hauing
any
of
their
filthines
discouered
.
It
is
thought
of
some
also
,
that
they
make
a
way
to
Atheisme
,
Poperie
,
and
all
confusion
,
whylest
they
thrust
our
so
many
worthie
and
paynfull
laborers
out
of
the
L.
Vineyard
,
and
bring
in
ignorant
,
vngodly
,
riotouse
,
idle
and
couetous
persons
,
in
their
steede
.
Nay
,
some
of
these
are
not
onely
thought
,
but
manifestly
by
experience
in
manye
places
felt
.
Secondly
,
you
may
obserue
howe
the
light
of
his
conscience
stroue
with
his
affections
against
the
cause
.
His
affection
and
desire
was
to
disgrace
the
cause
it self
,
as
preiudiciall
to
the
peace
of
the
Church
and
ciuill
Magistrate
.
Now
,
When
in
his
conscience
he
found
he
could
deduct
no
such
thing
out
of
the
matter
of
Discipline
,
hee
turneth
from
the
matter
to
the
persons
,
and
sayth
,
they
are
thought
so
to
do
.
Why
doth
he
not
shew
who
they
be
that
so
thinke
of
them
,
vpon
what
groundes
,
by
what
signes
and
tokens
,
by
what
counselles
,
writings
,
examples
or
deedes
they
haue
giuen
likelihood
of
it
?
If
hee
can
neither
conclude
any
suche
matter
out
of
the
cause
it self
,
nor
proue
any
thing
against
the
persons
which
seeke
it
.
How
,
Is
it
not
the
maintenance
of
a
malitious
slaunder
?
We
haue
haue
harde
what
he
sayth
:
will
he
adde
no
ground
of
it
?
Yes
,
An
admonition
to
Scotlande
,
printed
An.
1558.
conteineth
conclusions
as
straunge
against
the
Estate
,
as
D.
Sanders
(
that
traytors
booke
)
doth
.
What
doth
it
?
Doeth
it
conteyne
flat
treason
,
that
the
Prince
by
any
Ecclesiasticall
power
may
be
deposed
or
resisted
?
That
the
Queens
most
Excellent
Maiestie
is
an
heretike
,
or
receyueth
not
Discipline
,
and
therefore
must
be
excommunicated
,
and
after
accounted
no
lawfull
Queene
?
Hath
any
fauouring
Discipline
written
these
things
,
or
the
like
?
If
he
can
not
shewe
any
such
thing
,
what
is
he
but
a
Preacher
of
slaunders
at
Pawles
Crosse
?
The
booke
he
speaketh
of
,
to
my
knowledge
,
I
haue
not
seene
:
neyther
knowe
where
to
haue
it
.
Yet
I
assure
my selfe
,
he
can
bring
foorth
no
suche
conclusions
from
any
which
hath
spoken
or
written
for
Discipline
.
But
be
it
that
some
one
man
had
written
without
ground
or
reason
contrarie
to
the
scriptures
,
shal
that
or
any
mannes
abuse
,
blot
out
the
credit
which
so
many
Churches
in
France
,
Scotlande
,
Germanie
,
the
lowe
Countries
,
hath
brought
to
it
,
as
finding
it
holy
,
peaceable
,
and
no
small
pillar
,
both
of
the
peace
of
the
Church
and
ciuill
gouernement
?
When
we
consider
what
inconueniences
followe
any
matter
,
we
must
not
consider
what
some
(
whiche
hold
the
cause
)
would
haue
,
but
what
the
cause
of
his
owne
nature
will
inferre
.
For
,
as
the
good
meaning
of
a
good
man
will
not
make
a
perilouss
cause
safe
,
so
the
ill
meaning
of
a
noughtie
man
,
will
not
make
a
safe
and
iust
cause
dangerouse
.
I
maruaile
what
cause
may
be
found
out
to
make
Discipline
hurtfull
to
the
common
wealth
:
or
what
reason
why
the
Magistrates
authoritie
and
it
,