A
defence
of
that
which
hath
bin
written
in
the
questions
of
the
ignorant
ministerie
,
and
the
communicating
with
them
.
By
IOHN
PENRI
.
THere
bee
two
thinges
(
M.
D.
Some
)
wherein
you
by
oppugning
that
trueth
which
out
of
the
worde
of
God
I
had
sette
downe
,
concerning
the
two
former
questions
,
haue
beene
wanting
both
vnto
your selfe
and
to
the
cause
;
the
defence
whereof
you
vndertook
.
The
former
want
of
the
2.
appeareth
by
your
spare
dealing
in
a
matter
of
such
great
waight
;
wherein
you
haue
dealt
with
so
illiberall
a
hande
,
that
what
hath
bin
written
by
you
,
might
seem
to
proceed
rather
from
any
,
then
from
a
man
whose
giftes
and
learning
seemed
to
promise
the
affordinge
,
of
greater
and
more
waightie
matters
,
then
any
set
downe
in
that
treatise
.
The
nomber
of
my
resons
were
many
,
you
onely
haue
touched
2.
of
them
,
the
rest
are
not
dealt
with
.
And
therfore
the
cause
as
yet
remaineth
whol
.
For
be
it
you
had
aunswered
these
2.
as
you
haue
not
,
yet
had
you
not
satisfied
the
doutful
conscience
of
those
that
know
not
in
these
points
which
way
to
turn
them
,
as
long
as
any
one
of
my
reasons
remained
vnanswered
.
In
this
point
there
is
also
another
want
,
which
I
would
had
bin
redressed
.
And
that
is
of
two
sorts
.
First
,
a
manifest
going
from
the
controuersie
;
For
the
question
being
,
whether
ignorant
men
,
not
ordained
of
God
for
the
gatheringe
together
of
the
Saints
,
be
ministers
or
no
;
you
leaue
that
,
and
prooue
the
Sacraments
administred
by
them
,
viz.
by
popishe
priests
,
and
our
dumbe
ministers
in
the
daies
of
blindnes
and
ignorance
to
be
sacraments
,
which
is
no
part
of
the
matter
in
controuersie
,
but
another
point
to
be
discussed
(
if
men
will
be
gotten
at
all
to
enter
therevnto
)
when
the
former
is
determined
and
decided
.
Secondly
,
your
reasons
are
so
few
,
&
so
commonly
knowen
vnto
all
,
that
for
their
nomber
,
a
small
deate
of
paper
might
containe
an
answere
vnto
them
,
for
their
noueltie
,
they
coulde
not
put
a
man
that
had
accordinge
vnto
knowledge
,
but
once
allowed
of
the
cause
,
to
anye
great
labour
in
answering
them
.
As
being
things
so
commonly
obiected
by
all
,
learned
or
vnlearned
,
that
holde
our
readers
to
be
ministers
,
and
thinke
it
lawfull
to
communicate
with
them
,
as
by
cours
of
spech
they
fal
vnto
that
discourse
,
wher
al
men
may
easily
see
,
that
there
was
a
great
ouersight
committed
by
M.
SOME
,
in
deeming
that
the
oppugning
of
a
cause
countenanced
by
most
of
the
godly
learned
,
would
be
taken
in
hand
by
any
,
who
could
not
answere
the
reasons
which
he
might
be
sure
would
be
obiected
by
al.
And
who
could
be
ignorant
,
that
the
odious
controuersie
,
concerning
the
profanation
of
baptisme
,
both
by
popish
priests
&
our
dumb
ministers
,
would
offer
it selfe
in
the
forefront
to
withstand
the
trueth
?
that
the
ciuill
magistracie
,
the
ministerie
of
the
dumbe
Leuites
,
the
corrupt
outward
calling
of
our
readers
woulde
require
an
answere
,
which
are
the
reasons
,
and
the
onely
reasons
vsed
by
you
.
The
last
want
I
finde
in
you
,
is
contained
in
the
insufficiency
of
your
resons
,
which
euidently
shew
the
insufficiencie
of
the
conclusion
,
that
would
be
inferred
by
them
.
Your
resons
are
all
of
them
faultie
,
eyther
because
they
desire
that
for
granted
which
is
the
question
,
or
make
those
things
of
like
nature
,
wherin
there
is
a
gret
dissimilitude
.
From
the
first
of
the
2.
falts
it
commeth
to
passe
,
that
you
take
for
granted
,
that
the
writings
of
reuerende
and
godly
men
,
as
of
Augustine
,
M.
Beza
,
&c.
will
prooue
that
,
which
the
word
of
the
eternall
God
doth
not
warrant
.
Hence
you
take
it
graunted
,
that
popish
priests
were
ministers
:
that
the
outwarde
approbation
of
the
Churche
maketh
a
minister
;
that
whensoeuer
the
word
of
institution
is
pronounced
with
the
outward
element
,
ther
must
presently
be
a
Sacrament
,
that
I
take
an
euill
minister
for
no
minister
;
that
there
was
a
nullity
both
of
Caiphas
his
ministerie
,
because
he
came
in
by
briberye
,
and
of
the
litigious
ministers
in
the
Church
of
Philippi
,
&c.
How
soeuer
you
take
those
things
as
granted
principles
,
The
dissimilitude
is
in
the
reasons
drawn
from
the
Leuitical
priesthood
,
and
the
ciui
magistracie
,
with
whom
if
you
compare
the
ministery
of
the
new
couenaunt
,
you
shall
finde
,
firste
that
you
bring
in
a
similitude
to
shew
that
whiche
is
not
prooued
;
and
secondly
that
you
make
those
to
bee
twinnes
,
which
all
men
must
needes
graunt
to
be
as
vnlike
,
as
crooked
&
straight
lines
are
vnmatchable
.
And
thus
much
I
thought
needfull
generally
to
set
downe
concerninge
your
manner
of
dealing
:
Not
that
I
wold
any
way
disgrace
,
you
whom
I
reuerence
,
for
that
is
no
part
of
mine
intent
,
the
Lorde
is
my
witnes
.
Nay
,
I
would
be
loth
to
let
that
syllable
escape
me
,
that
might
giue
you
or
any
els
the
least
occasion
in
the
world
,
to
thinke
that
I
carrye
any
other
heart
towards
you
,
then
I
ought
to
beare
towards
a
reuerend
learned
man
fearing
God
.
And
howsoeuer
,
vnles
you
alter
your
iudgment
,
I
can
neuer
agre
with
you
in
these
pointes
;
because
I
am
assured
you
swarue
from
the
truth
:
yet
this
disagreement
shal
be
so
farre
from
making
a
breach
of
that
bonde
of
loue
,
wherewith
in
the
Lord
I
am
tyed
vnto
you
,
that
I
doubt
not
,
but
we
shal
be
at
one
in
that
day
,
when
al
of
vs
shall
be
at
vnitie
in
him
that
remayneth
one
and
the
selfe-same
for
euer
.
Now
I
am
to
come
to
your
booke
,
from
the
20.
page
whereof
,
vnto
the
28.
laying
the
foundation
of
the
reasons
you
vse
against
mee
,
to
prooue
the
lawfulnes
of
communicatinge
with
dum
ministers
,
you
handle
two
neadles
points
.
First
that
they
which
were
baptized
by
popish
priests
,
haue
receiued
true
baptim
as
touching
the
substance
.
Secondly
that
they
are
the
sacramentes
of
baptisme
and
the
holy
supper
of
the
Lorde
,
which
are
deliuered
in
the
Church
of
England
by
vnpreching
ministers
.
In
these
two
pointes
M.
Some
,
you
haue
prooued
nothing
that
my
writinges
haue
denied
;
but
you
haue
quickened
a
dead
controuersie
,
not
vnlikely
to
giue
the
wrangling
spirits
of
this
age
,
cause
to
breed
greater
sturres
in
the
Church
.
I
see
no
other
effect
,
which
the
handling
of
these
questions
can
bringe
foorth
but
this
.
And
it
is
to
be
feared
that
the
slendernes
of
the
reasons
vsed
in
your
booke
,
to
prooue
that
which
you
haue
vndertaken
to
shew
;
will
geeue
occasion
vnto
mannie
,
whoe
of
them-selues
are
too
too
readie
to
iangle
,
to
doubt
of
that
wherof
before
they
made
no
question
.
So
that
by
seeking
to
stay
the
course
of
a
needful
controuersie
,
you
haue
both
giuen
it
a
larger
passage
,
and
opened
the
doore
vnto
a
question
very
fruitlesse
in
our
time
.
you
know
I
deale
in
neither
of
these
pointes
.
If
you
cannot
be
stayed
from
entring
into
controuersies
,
that
are
very
odious
,
and
more
impertinent
vnto
the
matter
in
hand
:
it
were
good
that
the
church
were
further
and
more
soundly
satissied
by
you
in
these
2.
pointes
,
which
you
alone
in
our
Churche
haue
publikly
called
in
question
.
And
for
mine
owne
parte
,
when
you
haue
done
,
I
know
not
who
will
be
your
aduersarie
,
I
see
no
reason
whie
I
should
deal
in
controuersies
of
so
smal
gaine
.
Of
this
I
am
assured
,
that
neyther
popish
priests
,
nor
any
other
ignoraunt
guides
are
ministers
.
whether
the
element
administred
by
them
,
be
a
sacrament
or
no
,
look
you
to
that
,
which
haue
in
your
treatise
debated
that
,
which
my
writings
neuer
called
into
question
.
If
you
wil
needs
proue
readers
to
be
ministers
,
because
you
can
not
get
me
to
denie
that
which
hath
bene
administred
to
be
a
sacrament
,
you
shall
but
presse
that
which
will
prooue
nothing
.
Your
reason
is
,
as
if
you
shoulde
saye
,
that
eyther
all
they
which
supplie
the
places
of
ministers
are
ministers
,
or
els
an
inconuenience
is
likely
to
follow
.
A
strange
manner
of
demonstration
,
Gods
ordinaunce
must
needs
be
thrust
out
of
the
dores
because
an
inconuenience
would
be
likely
to
ensue
the
admittinge
of
it
.
The
cause
will
not
be
thus
answered
at
your
hands
;
and
I
am
sorie
that
a
man
so
reuerende
in
mine
eyes
,
hath
dealt
so
vnsubstantially
in
a
matter
belonging
to
the
seruice
of
the
euerliuing
God
:
the
slendernesse
of
the
reason
is
apparant
.
In
the
latter
ende
of
the
booke
I
haue
farther
shewed
the
same
;
thither
I
am
to
referre
you
and
the
reader
.
Now
I
coulde
well
ouerpasse
these
two
pointes
,
because
of
them-selues
they
containe
nothing
that
I
haue
withstoode
:
But
in
as
muche
as
you
haue
not
onely
grounded
them
vpon
false
principles
,
and
such
as
in
no
wise
can
be
warraunted
by
the
canon
of
the
word
,
but
also
inferre
vpon
their
grant
,
that
our
readers
are
ministers
,
and
consequently
,
that
it
is
no
sinne
to
communicate
with
them
.
I
am
first
to
set
downe
the
state
of
the
question
,
which
in
deed
is
and
ought
to
be
decided
betweene
you
and
me
concerninge
the
elemente
administred
,
both
by
popish
priests
,
and
other
vnpreaching
ministers
:
and
secondly
to
examine
the
groundes
whereby
you
prooue
the
element
alreadie
deliuered
by
them
to
be
a
sacrament
,
which
you
know
I
do
not
denie
to
be
so
.
So
that
the
question
is
now
growne
to
this
issue
,
whether
popish
priestes
and
our
vnpreachinge
ministers
,
bee
ministers
or
no
;
whom
if
I
can
proue
to
be
none
,
then
the
matter
is
cleare
,
that
no
man
going
vnto
them
for
the
sacrament
,
can
assure
himselfe
there
to
haue
the
same
.
And
this
shall
be
a
generall
reason
,
equally
belonginge
vnto
both
the
pointes
handeled
by
you
,
the
particulars
whereof
shal
follow
in
their
places
.
That
no
popishe
priest
therefore
is
a
minister
.
-
1
Euery
minister
must
be
at
the
least
by
profession
,
a
member
of
the
true
Church
.
No
popish
prist
is
by
profession
a
member
of
the
true
Church
.
Therfore
no
popish
priest
is
a
minister
.
-
2
Euery
minister
hath
an
office
with
in
the
bodie
of
the
Churche
.
No
popishe
priest
hath
an
office
within
the
bodie
of
the
Church
.
Therfore
no
popish
priest
is
a
minister
.
The
propositions
or
first
part
of
both
these
reasons
are
set
downe
euidently
and
plainely
by
the
wisedome
of
God
,
in
these
wordes
.
For
as
we
haue
many
members
in
one
bodie
,
The
place
sheweth
cleerly
,
that
whosoeuer
is
not
a
member
,
is
not
of
the
bodie
,
if
not
of
the
body
,
then
no
minister
.
A
gaine
,
whosoeuer
is
no
member
,
he
hath
no
office
in
the
bodie
;
if
no
office
,
no
minister
.
He
that
should
obiect
that
in
this
place
is
mente
a
member
of
the
bodie
,
by
election
in
the
secret
counsell
of
God
,
and
not
in
the
acknowledgemente
of
the
Church
by
profession
,
would
not
deserue
the
answering
,
Because
it
is
vocation
and
not
election
,
that
maketh
such
a
member
in
the
church
as
may
haue
an
office
therein
;
of
which
sort
the
Apostle
speaketh
in
this
place
.
by
vocation
,
I
meane
that
whereof
the
holy
ghoste
speaketh
,
where
it
is
said
,
Many
are
called
,
but
few
are
chosen
:
Whereas
in
the
assumption
or
second
part
of
both
the
reasons
,
I
deny
popish
priestes
to
be
members
of
the
church
;
my
meaning
is
not
that
there
are
none
of
the
elect
,
within
the
bodie
of
poperie
,
whom
the
Lorde
may
cal
in
his
good
time
:
For
I
would
not
denie
this
vnto
Mahometism
,
or
that
there
are
not
left
in
poperie
certaine
rubishes
and
steps
of
true
religion
,
for
this
difference
I
make
betweene
them
and
other
Infidels
,
though
the
Iewes
also
may
claim
this
vnto
themselues
.
But
I
meane
that
the
popish
religion
is
such
a
religion
as
whosoeuer
liueth
and
dyeth
in
the
profession
thereof
:
he
liueth
&
dieth
out
of
the
Church
,
where
saluation
is
not
possibly
to
be
had
,
for
any
thing
that
is
made
knowen
vnto
man
.
Whence
it
necessarily
followeth
,
that
in
poperie
there
is
no
Church
.
If
it
be
obiected
that
the
papistes
are
within
the
couenaunt
,
inasmuch
as
long
since
they
professed
the
trueth
.
Mine
answere
wil
be
,
that
popery
was
neuer
the
trueth
as
yet
,
that
no
papist
in
that
he
was
a
papist
,
euer
professed
the
trueth
,
and
that
God
made
no
couenant
with
professed
Idolators
,
as
all
papists
are
.
Antichrist
I
grant
should
sit
as
God
in
the
temple
of
God
,
And
yet
that
which
is
spoken
concerning
the
profession
of
the
trueth
,
by
the
forefathers
,
is
not
altogether
true
in
poperye
;
for
there
be
many
large
regions
nowe
professing
popery
,
where
not
so
much
as
the
name
of
Christ
was
heard
,
vntill
they
were
become
grossely
popishe
.
So
that
their
first
step
was
out
of
paganisme
vnto
poperye
.
And
this
is
the
estate
of
all
those
poor
oppressed
vassals
the
west
Indians
,
who
now
in
great
nombers
profes
Romish
Idolatrie
.
For
at
such
time
as
the
Spanyard
inuading
their
land
,
brought
vppon
them
the
most
miserable
slauery
of
bodie
and
soule
,
that
are
vpon
any
people
vnder
heauen
,
they
had
not
so
much
as
hearde
whether
there
was
anye
Christe
,
And
thus
muche
concerning
the
assumption
,
I
am
not
ignoraunt
that
famous
and
worthy
men
,
I
might
in
the
3.
place
vse
agaynst
you
M.
Some
,
a
reason
of
your
owne
thus
concluded
.
No
ministerye
is
sacriledge
,
because
euery
ministerye
is
an
ordinance
of
God
,
which
cannot
be
turned
vnto
sacrileage
.
The
popish
pristhood
is
sacriledg
,
as
you
haue
set
downe
,
page
21.
Therfore
the
popish
priesthood
is
no
ministery
,
and
consequently
popish
priests
are
no
ministers
.
You
may
see
that
you
haue
ouerthrown
your
owne
cause
.
But
this
manner
of
reasoninge
,
although
it
should
be
of
force
against
your selfe
,
inasmuch
as
your
owne
wordes
are
brought
to
expresse
your
owne
meaning
,
yet
I
account
insufficient
,
my
third
reason
therefore
is
this
.
3
They
are
no
ministers
whose
very
ministerye
ouerthroweth
directly
the
priesthood
of
our
sauior
christ
But
the
very
ministery
of
popishe
priests
,
directly
ouerthroweth
the
priesthood
of
Christe
:
therefore
they
are
no
ministers
.
I
know
not
what
can
be
pretended
against
the
proposition
,
vnlesse
men
woulde
dreame
of
a
ministery
,
wyth
whom
the
priesthood
of
the
Lord
Iesus
cannot
stande
.
The
latter
part
of
the
reason
is
true
,
Lastly
,
they
are
no
ministers
who
are
made
,
that
is
,
called
,
elected
&
ordained
by
Idolaters
.
Popish
priests
are
called
,
chosen
and
ordained
by
Idolators
.
Therefore
they
are
no
ministers
.
The
proposition
appeareth
in
that
a
minister
can
be
made
by
none
,
but
by
such
as
vnto
whom
the
Lord
hath
giuen
leaue
to
deale
in
that
action
,
otherwise
the
action
is
frustrate
.
As
if
a
company
of
women
,
though
religious
and
godly
,
shoulde
goe
about
to
make
a
minister
,
the
action
is
nothing
.
Of
the
assumption
that
popish
priests
are
made
by
Idolators
,
I
make
no
question
.
And
when
did
god
giue
Idolators
leaue
to
make
ministers
.
Seing
therefore
that
popish
priests
are
no
ministers
,
I
see
no
shew
of
probabilitie
wherevpon
my
fayth
,
or
the
faith
of
any
can
be
assured
to
receiue
true
baptisme
at
their
hands
:
vnlesse
it
can
be
shewed
by
you
,
M.
Some
,
that
eyther
there
may
bee
fayth
where
there
is
no
promise
,
or
that
there
is
a
promise
to
receaue
a
sacrament
where
there
is
no
minister
,
which
no
man
of
any
christian
modestie
wil
affirme
.
Hence
also
it
followeth
,
that
neyther
the
obstinate
crue
of
recusants
in
this
land
,
who
offer
their
children
to
be
profaned
by
trayterous
&
runnagate
Iesuits
,
nor
any
els
within
the
body
of
the
Romish
Babylon
,
can
assure
themselues
that
their
children
receiue
the
substaunce
of
baptisme
.
My
reasons
besides
that
they
are
no
ministers
,
are
these
.
And
I
desire
that
they
may
be
examined
by
you
,
good
M.
Some
;
where
you
must
remember
that
I
speake
not
of
that
which
hath
bene
done
yesterday
,
but
of
the
assurance
that
may
be
had
of
that
which
to
morow
is
to
be
done
.
Where
there
is
no
true
christ
whervnto
men
can
bee
engraffed
by
baptisme
:
There
true
baptisme
as
touching
the
substaunce
cannot
be
gotten
;
But
in
popery
there
is
no
true
christ
,
wherevnto
men
may
be
ingraffed
,
because
he
is
not
the
true
Christe
,
who
eyther
will
not
,
Therefore
men
can
not
be
assured
to
haue
the
substance
of
baptisme
in
the
popish
Church
.
No
man
can
assure
himself
to
haue
the
substance
of
baptisme
out
of
the
Churche
,
and
that
by
those
that
are
without
the
Church
,
for
then
a
sacrament
might
be
had
out
of
the
Church
,
which
were
very
impious
and
absurd
to
be
affirmed
.
But
popery
is
out
of
the
Churche
,
and
so
are
all
popish
priests
.
Therefore
no
man
can
assure
himselt
to
haue
the
substance
of
baptism
in
popery
by
any
popish
priest
.
That
there
is
no
Churche
at
all
in
popery
,
and
that
al
popish
priests
are
out
or
the
Church
,
besids
the
former
reasons
,
this
one
doth
further
shewe
,
If
there
be
a
Churche
in
popery
,
or
if
all
popishe
priestes
be
not
out
of
the
Churche
,
then
those
magistrates
that
haue
separated
themselues
and
their
subiectes
(
and
all
others
that
made
this
seperation
)
from
the
Romish
religion
,
as
from
that
synagogue
where
saluation
is
not
to
be
had
,
and
consequently
,
where
there
is
no
Churche
,
are
schismatikes
,
to
speake
the
least
.
Because
it
is
a
schisme
to
make
this
separation
from
the
Churche
,
detest
the
corruptions
thereof
we
may
,
but
make
suche
a
separation
from
the
Churche
,
wee
ought
not
vnlesse
wee
would
be
accounted
schismatiks
.
But
those
magistrates
and
their
people
,
that
made
this
separation
,
are
not
schismatickes
,
because
in
popery
the
foundation
is
ouerthrowen
,
You
say
in
your
booke
(
M
,
Some
)
page
33.
that
you
could
presse
the
argument
of
the
magistracie
against
me
very
far
;
whether
you
may
or
no
,
that
shall
be
considered
when
I
deale
with
the
point
,
but
this
I
am
assured
off
,
that
in
this
point
,
you
shal
be
driuen
either
to
defend
the
absurditye
,
that
baptisme
is
to
bee
had
out
of
the
Churche
in
a
companye
estraunged
from
Christe
,
which
I
thinke
you
will
not
doe
,
or
vrged
so
farre
,
as
to
the
plaine
breach
of
a
statute
(
which
far
be
it
from
me
)
euen
in
the
cause
of
treason
.
Will
yee
say
that
baptisme
may
be
had
out
of
the
Church
:
Lastly
,
if
men
might
be
assured
that
they
could
haue
the
true
substance
of
baptisme
in
popery
,
then
they
ought
not
to
keep
their
children
from
popish
baptisme
,
if
there
were
no
other
baptisme
in
the
world
to
be
had
.
For
men
might
come
to
their
baptisme
and
detest
their
corruptions
,
if
it
bee
Gods
baptisme
,
as
you
M.
Some
affirmed
it
to
be
,
page
20.
And
they
can
ad
an
edifying
worde
vnto
the
sacrament
:
if
the
recitall
of
the
wordes
of
institution
be
an
edifying
worde
,
and
that
be
sufficient
to
make
a
sacrament
,
both
whiche
you
haue
written
,
page
23.24
.
But
men
ought
rather
to
keep
their
children
vnbaptized
,
then
to
offer
them
to
be
profaned
by
popish
baptisme
,
both
for
the
former
reasons
,
and
because
wee
ought
to
haue
no
more
felowship
with
papists
in
the
seruice
of
God
,
then
with
pagan
Idolaters
.
M.
Caluin
hath
written
otherwise
in
this
point
,
Seing
therefore
in
popery
there
is
no
Church
,
no
ministery
,
no
Christe
;
seeing
we
ought
in
no
case
to
be
ioyned
with
papists
in
their
religion
,
but
to
bee
separated
from
them
,
as
from
those
that
are
out
of
the
church
;
and
such
as
are
become
a
very
filthy
cage
and
nest
of
vncleane
and
sacriledgious
Idolators
:
therefore
also
it
necessarily
followeth
,
that
neither
our
popish
recusants
,
nor
any
else
,
offring
their
children
to
bee
baptized
in
the
popish
synagogue
,
by
those
polluted
and
vncleane
priests
;
may
assure
themselues
that
they
can
bee
there
pertakers
of
true
baptisme
,
as
touchinge
the
substance
of
baptisme
.
Nowe
to
the
examination
of
your
reason
brought
to
prooue
that
they
which
were
baptized
in
popery
,
haue
receiued
true
baptisme
.
Your
conclusion
you
must
remember
,
I
do
not
deny
,
though
your
reason
prooueth
not
the
same
,
which
is
thus
framed
.
Whosoeuer
deliuer
Gods
baptism
,
they
deliuer
true
baptisme
;
but
popish
priestes
deliuer
Gods
baptisme
:
therefore
true
baptisme
.
You
haue
changed
the
conclusion
from
that
which
was
done
,
vnto
that
whiche
is
done
,
but
this
ouersight
I
omit
the
assumption
you
thus
proue
.
Whosoeuer
baptise
in
the
name
,
not
of
Pope
or
Idols
,
but
of
the
holy
Trinitie
,
they
deliuer
Gods
baptism
;
but
popishe
priests
do
baptize
in
the
name
of
the
holy
trinitie
:
therefore
they
deliuer
Gods
baptisme
.
Your
proposition
in
this
last
syllogisme
,
is
most
false
,
and
such
as
vpon
the
grant
whereof
,
not
onely
the
communicating
with
vnpreaching
ministers
,
might
bee
aduouched
,
but
also
Gods
whole
ordinaunce
in
the
institution
of
his
holy
sacramentes
quite
ouerthrowen
.
For
if
it
were
true
that
ther
were
no
more
required
to
make
substantiall
baptisme
(
as
you
here
require
no
more
)
but
to
baptise
in
the
name
of
the
trinitie
;
then
these
impious
absurdities
would
follow
therof
.
1
That
an
Amalekite
might
deliuer
true
circumcision
,
as
touching
the
substance
.
2
That
true
baptism
might
bee
administred
vnto
a
substaunce
not
capable
of
baptisme
,
but
this
odious
instaunce
I
will
not
vrge
.
3
That
a
woman
,
4
That
any
man
not
being
a
minister
,
as
a
child
of
fiue
yeares
olde
,
a
Turke
or
Iewe
might
deliuer
true
baptism
as
touching
the
substance
.
For
these
pronouncing
the
wordes
of
institution
,
might
reteine
by
your
reason
,
the
essential
form
of
Christes
baptisme
,
and
so
to
vse
your
owne
wordes
;
they
baptizing
not
in
the
name
of
Pope
or
of
Idols
,
but
of
the
holy
trinitie
,
should
deliuer
Gods
baptism
and
not
mans
?
if
Gods
baptisme
,
then
true
baptisme
I
am
sure
,
in
like
manner
,
by
this
reason
they
should
be
Catabaptistes
,
which
denie
men
to
be
rightly
baptized
by
Turks
or
women
.
I
would
be
full
sorie
that
the
errors
of
the
Katabaptists
or
Anabaptistes
,
coulde
not
be
confuted
by
you
withe
sounder
reasons
then
this
you
haue
brought
;
and
I
would
be
also
sorie
that
you
should
defende
such
absurd
consequents
as
I
wil
driue
you
whether
you
will
or
no
,
vnlesse
you
reuoke
(
as
I
hope
you
will
)
that
which
you
haue
written
.
pardone
me
I
pray
you
.
I
deale
as
reuerently
as
I
may
with
you
,
retaining
the
maiestie
of
the
cause
I
defend
;
and
I
deale
not
against
you
,
but
against
an
erroneous
assertion
,
which
I
now
leaue
;
desiring
you
very
earnestly
,
that
you
woulde
consider
how
vnreuerently
the
ordinance
of
God
in
the
holy
sacraments
is
dealt
with
when
the
same
is
made
to
depend
vpon
the
pronouncing
of
a
few
syllables
,
without
any
consideration
eyther
of
the
person
who
is
to
administer
,
or
of
the
substantiall
forme
of
consecration
contained
in
the
exposition
of
the
holy
institution
of
baptisme
,
and
the
inuocation
of
the
name
of
God
,
al
which
are
necessarily
required
in
the
administration
of
baptisme
,
and
could
not
possibly
be
in
Aegypt
,
where
all
was
and
couered
vnder
the
darknesse
of
a
strange
tongue
.
Your
distinction
that
popish
priests
haue
a
calling
,
though
a
faltie
,
is
a
begging
of
the
question
.
For
as
I
haue
shewed
,
popish
priestes
haue
no
calling
at
all
in
the
Church
,
and
therefore
how
can
they
sit
in
the
chaire
of
the
ministerie
?
Is
there
a
ministery
out
of
the
Church
,
Caiphas
his
priesthood
commeth
afterwarde
to
bee
considered
of
.
The
seconde
point
is
to
be
handled
next
.
That
vnpreaching
ministers
are
no
ministers
.
They
are
affirmed
to
bee
no
ministers
,
not
because
they
are
euill
ministers
,
but
because
their
ministerye
is
an
euill
and
profane
mininistery
:
So
that
in
this
pointe
the
faulte
is
not
found
with
the
euil
minister
,
but
with
the
euill
ministery
.
Their
ministery
is
profane
and
euill
,
because
there
is
no
mention
made
of
it
in
the
word
.
And
a
ministerye
not
mentioned
in
the
worde
is
no
ministery
but
a
profane
constitution
.
For
the
Lorde
hath
expressely
set
downe
euerye
ministerie
of
the
new
testament
,
that
should
be
in
the
Church
vnto
the
worlds
ende
;
1
Euery
ministery
is
expressely
set
downe
in
the
word
.
2
Euery
ministery
of
the
newe
testament
is
a
preaching
ministery
.
8
The
ministery
of
our
vnpreaching
ministers
,
is
not
a
preaching
ministerye
.
If
you
can
shewe
eyther
of
these
3.
points
to
be
false
,
I
am
ouerthrowne
,
if
neyther
,
you
must
yeeld
.
The
truth
of
all
three
,
I
haue
shewed
out
of
the
word
,
in
the
last
edition
of
my
book
.
The
two
former
are
confirmed
by
the
places
quoted
on
the
margent
,
the
latter
I
will
briefly
prooue
by
these
reasons
.
1
If
the
ministery
of
vnpreaching
ministers
be
a
preaching
ministerye
,
or
if
their
function
be
a
pastorall
or
doctorall
function
,
then
there
had
bene
a
preaching
ministery
,
a
pastorall
and
doctorall
function
known
in
the
Church
,
though
there
neuer
had
bene
anye
preacher
therein
.
Otherwise
,
howe
can
their
ministerye
bee
a
preaching
ministery
,
or
their
function
bee
a
pastorall
function
,
whereas
the
same
may
bee
in
the
Churche
,
no
preaching
ministery
or
pastorall
function
beeing
knowne
there
?
But
no
Churche
,
much
lesse
a
ministery
had
there
beene
knowne
,
if
there
neuer
had
bene
any
that
coulde
haue
preached
;
because
God
ordained
the
saints
and
so
a
Churche
,
onely
to
be
gathered
together
by
preaching
ordinarily
,
but
not
by
the
ministery
of
readers
,
because
it
might
haue
bene
in
the
world
,
and
yet
no
saint
gathered
thereby
;
which
thing
experience
in
our
Churche
prooueth
to
bee
to
true
.
My
2.
and
3
▪
reasons
are
drawn
out
of
these
words
of
Paule
,
Rom.
13.6.7.8
.
Seeing
then
that
wee
haue
giftes
that
are
diuers
,
acording
to
the
grace
that
is
giuen
vnto
vs
;
whether
wee
haue
prophesie
,
let
vs
prophesie
,
according
to
the
proportion
of
fayth
;
or
an
office
,
let
vs
wait
on
the
office
;
or
hee
that
teacheth
on
teaching
,
or
he
that
exhorteth
on
exhorting
,
&c.
the
2.
reason
is
thus
concluded
.
Whosoeuer
hath
receiued
a
ministerye
,
and
so
a
pastorall
or
doctorall
function
,
he
hath
receiued
prophesie
spoken
of
in
this
place
,
verse
6.
Because
euery
pastoral
or
doctorall
function
,
mencioned
in
the
7.
&
8.
verse
,
vnder
these
words
:
he
that
teacheth
,
hee
that
exhorteth
;
are
contained
vnder
the
word
prophesie
.
verse
6.
Insomuch
as
he
that
hath
not
receiued
that
prophesie
there
set
down
,
wherby
is
ment
the
interpretation
of
the
worde
;
he
hath
not
receiued
the
pastorall
or
doctoral
function
set
down
vers.
7.8
.
But
vnpreaching
ministers
haue
not
receiued
the
prophesie
spoken
of
in
this
place
,
which
is
expresly
set
downe
,
verse
6.
to
bee
one
of
the
diuers
gifts
bestowed
for
the
gouerment
of
the
body
,
which
is
the
church
.
Therefore
also
,
they
haue
receiued
neither
a
pastorall
nor
a
doctorall
function
,
and
so
no
preaching
ministerye
.
3
No
ministery
is
seperated
from
a
gift
,
because
prophesie
spoken
of
in
this
6.
verse
,
vnder
which
as
we
see
,
euery
pastorall
and
doctorall
ministery
is
contayned
,
can
not
bee
seuered
from
a
gift
:
but
the
ministery
of
our
readers
is
seuered
in
them
from
a
gyft
:
therefore
in
them
it
is
no
ministery
.
It
is
no
ministerye
in
them
I
say
,
although
that
ministerye
,
the
generall
name
whereof
they
haue
,
is
not
seuered
from
a
gift
in
preaching
ministers
:
but
what
is
that
to
them
?
what
is
the
ministerye
of
other
men
vnto
them
?
they
are
not
ministers
,
by
the
ministery
wherewith
other
men
are
endued
,
but
by
their
own
,
which
being
seuered
from
a
gifte
,
is
no
ministery
.
Paul
had
bene
no
Apostle
,
and
had
receiued
no
Apostleslip
,
vnlesse
he
coulde
haue
sayde
,
I
am
a
minister
according
vnto
the
grace
giuen
vnto
me
,
Ephe.
3.7
.
and
not
according
to
the
grace
giuen
vnto
other
Apostles
:
the
generall
name
of
whose
Apostleship
I
am
entituled
with
.
A
ridiculous
speeche
it
were
,
to
saye
mine
apostleshipp
hath
receiued
grace
,
but
I
that
am
the
apostle
haue
receiued
none
.
How
then
may
our
readers
claime
a
preachinge
ministerye
vnto
themselues
,
seing
the
ministery
which
they
challenge
is
altogether
in
them
with
out
a
gifte
,
though
it
be
not
so
in
others
?
4
Euery
vnpreaching
minister
sinneth
in
executing
the
works
of
a
pastoral
function
,
as
the
sacraments
.
&c
therefore
he
hath
no
ministery
;
and
so
nyether
a
pastorall
nor
doctorall
function
.
Hee
hath
no
ministery
,
because
,
his
calling
is
not
the
calling
of
the
ministery
,
his
callinge
is
not
the
calling
of
the
ministerye
,
because
hee
sinneth
in
intermedlinge
withe
the
workes
thereof
.
And
this
is
an
infallible
trueth
,
that
no
man
sinneth
because
he
dealeth
with
the
workes
of
his
calling
.
For
this
is
the
duety
that
God
requireth
at
the
hands
of
euery
man
.
Manye
sinne
in
deede
because
they
walk
corruptly
in
their
callings
,
&
haue
no
care
to
glorifie
God
therin
.
Col.
3.17
.
But
leaue
thy
corruption
and
thou
sinnest
not
,
in
keeping
thee
to
the
works
of
thy
calling
.
The
hypocrits
in
the
daies
of
Isayah
.
1.13
sinned
not
because
they
offered
sacrifice
,
but
because
they
did
the
same
through
hypocrisie
.
Their
hypocrisie
they
ought
to
haue
lefte
,
but
not
his
seruice
in
sacrificing
according
to
his
commaundement
;
but
our
readers
though
they
should
with
as
little
corruption
,
and
as
great
zeale
to
Gods
glory
and
the
good
of
his
Churche
as
any
men
,
deale
in
the
workes
of
a
pastoral
ministery
,
yet
they
should
stil
do
that
which
the
Lord
had
forbidden
them
to
doe
,
whence
it
appeareth
,
that
the
works
of
the
ministery
are
not
the
works
of
their
caling
.
For
God
forbiddeth
no
man
to
deale
therewith
,
&
not
the
being
workes
of
their
calling
,
they
are
no
ministers
,
and
haue
neyther
pastorall
nor
doctorall
function
.
5
This
is
farther
shewed
,
forasmuch
as
the
Lorde
doeth
not
commit
vnto
bare
reders
the
charge
of
those
souls
,
ouer
whom
they
are
,
which
he
doth
vnto
euerye
one
that
hath
a
pastorall
function
,
Acts.
20.16.28
.
1
,
thes.
5.12
Heb.
13.17
.
For
to
what
ende
else
,
should
he
commit
a
ministerye
vnto
anye
,
who
haue
soules
vnder
their
charge
?
The
Church
indeed
may
commit
the
souls
of
men
vnto
reders
,
but
certainly
the
Lord
committeth
none
vnto
them
.
And
he
is
no
minister
,
vnto
whom
the
Lorde
doth
not
commite
this
charge
,
as
the
places
before
quoted
do
shew
.
For
the
Lord
hath
in
his
word
,
ordained
not
onely
offices
,
the
executors
whereof
shoulde
haue
the
ouersight
of
soules
,
but
also
the
persons
who
were
to
execute
those
functions
.
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
1.
Pet.
4.10
.
rom
12.6.7.8
.
Ephes.
4.7.11
.
Now
vnpreaching
ministers
are
non
of
those
persons
,
because
the
Lorde
knoweth
them
not
to
bee
able
to
feede
soules
.
And
let
not
men
bee
so
iniurious
vnto
the
Lorde
,
as
to
affirme
,
that
hee
according
vnto
his
reuealed
ordinance
(
for
therof
I
speke
as
of
a
ministery
,
&
not
of
his
secret
iudgments
)
bequeathed
the
soules
of
men
to
be
starued
and
kept
from
saluation
,
As
hee
must
needes
be
conuinced
to
doe
if
he
bequeathed
them
vnto
those
men
,
the
dispensation
of
whose
ministery
is
able
to
beget
none
,
feede
none
,
saue
none
.
you
must
vnderstande
againe
,
that
I
speake
of
the
ministery
whereby
readers
are
ministers
,
that
is
of
their
owne
,
and
not
of
the
ministery
whereby
preaching
ministers
are
ministers
,
wherewith
readers
haue
nothing
to
doe
.
Moreouer
howe
can
the
Lorde
bee
saide
to
commit
the
charge
of
soules
according
to
his
owne
reuealed
ordinance
,
vnto
those
who
may
truely
obiect
vnto
him
,
that
he
dealeth
iniuriously
with
them
,
by
exacting
those
thinges
to
bee
perfourmed
at
their
handes
and
in
their
owne
persons
,
as
necessary
duties
of
their
callings
,
vnto
the
performaunce
whereof
,
they
haue
receiued
no
abilitie
from
him
.
Is
man
to
bee
aunswerable
vnto
the
Lorde
of
that
which
he
neuer
receyued
?
doth
the
Lorde
require
the
vse
of
that
tallent
which
hee
neuer
bestowed
?
doth
he
laye
that
vpon
any
,
whereof
hee
may
haue
iuste
cause
to
complaine
?
when
did
hee
impose
a
charge
vpon
any
,
vnto
whom
he
gaue
not
gifts
to
discharge
the
same
?
now
the
charge
of
soules
whiche
he
committeth
vnto
anye
,
hee
requireth
at
their
handes
vnto
whom
he
hath
committed
it
,
which
he
could
not
doe
,
if
hee
had
not
giuen
abilitie
to
the
discharge
thereof
.
What
then
?
shall
ignoraunt
ministers
be
free
from
the
blood
of
souls
,
in
asmuch
as
the
lord
neuer
committed
any
soule
vnto
their
charge
.
It
were
well
with
them
poore
men
,
if
the
case
so
stood
.
But
alas
it
is
not
so
.
And
yet
the
cause
of
their
destruction
proceedeth
not
from
their
vnfaithfulnesse
in
the
discharge
of
that
vocation
whiche
hee
hath
allotted
vnto
them
,
but
it
commeth
iustly
vpon
them
,
in
that
they
haue
desperatly
thrust
thēseiues
contrary
vnto
Gods
reuealed
will
,
vpon
those
men
with
the
ouersight
of
whose
soules
God
neuer
trusted
such
as
they
are
.
The
Lord
sayth
vnto
them
,
intrude
your selues
and
you
will
,
vnto
the
places
of
pastors
,
and
so
enforce
me
to
bring
heauy
&
swift
damnation
vpon
you
:
but
surely
I
wil
bequeath
no
soule
vnto
your
custodye
.
They
on
the
other
side
in
their
practise
say
,
Lord
whether
thou
committest
vnto
vs
any
charge
of
any
soule
or
no
,
wee
care
not
,
but
rather
then
wee
shoulde
not
haue
the
meanes
to
liue
in
this
life
,
(
for
this
is
their
onely
scope
in
continuinge
in
the
ministerye
)
require
the
blood
of
soules
,
and
what
thou
wilte
at
our
hands
.
And
so
senseles
men
,
they
sell
them-selues
,
body
and
soule
vnto
euerlasting
wo
and
destruction
.
The
pretence
that
the
Lord
committeth
the
chardge
of
soules
vnto
their
ministery
,
and
not
vnto
them
,
is
first
a
desiring
of
that
in
question
;
(
for
they
are
denyed
to
haue
any
ministery
)
and
otherwise
many
wais
vnsufficient
.
1
Because
the
Lord
committeth
not
the
charge
of
soules
there
,
where
the
punishement
of
their
destruction
cannot
take
holde
,
as
it
can
not
vpon
the
ministery
:
Nowe
to
the
conclusion
,
If
vnpreaching
ministers
be
no
ministers
,
and
if
I
cannot
be
assured
to
receiue
a
sacrament
,
but
onely
at
the
hands
of
a
minister
;
both
which
you
see
M.
Some
to
be
prooued
by
me
,
then
cannot
I
assure
my selfe
,
that
an
vnpreaching
minister
can
deliuer
a
sacrament
vnto
me
:
and
therefore
it
is
vnlawfull
for
me
or
any
christian
to
go
vnto
an
vnpreaching
minister
for
the
sacraments
;
if
vnlawfull
,
then
a
sinne
,
if
a
sin
,
them
the
godly
are
polluted
which
goe
vnto
them
for
the
sacramentes
:
you
know
(
M.
Some
)
what
I
meane
by
an
vnpreaching
minister
;
namely
,
euery
one
learned
or
vnlearned
,
that
cannot
shewe
him-selfe
by
the
good
trial
of
his
gifts
,
to
haue
that
fitnes
to
teach
,
whereof
we
read
.
2.
tim.
2.2.1
.
tim.
3.3
.
which
ability
the
Lord
doth
not
ordinarily
bestowe
vpon
any
in
these
our
dayes
,
without
the
knowledge
of
the
artes
,
especially
the
two
handmaydes
of
all
learninge
,
Rhethoricke
and
Logick
,
and
the
two
originall
tongues
wherein
the
worde
was
written
.
And
therefore
I
am
as
farre
from
accounting
the
vnskilfull
preachers
,
which
speake
hand
ouer-head
,
they
care
not
what
;
againste
whom
your
complaint
is
very
iust
to
be
ministers
,
as
I
am
from
acknowledging
many
of
our
absurd
doctors
to
be
apt
to
teach
,
who
can
bring
nothing
into
the
pulpit
,
but
that
which
other
men
haue
written
,
and
that
very
often
,
so
fit
to
the
purpose
,
of
edification
,
as
the
reason
from
the
corner
to
the
staffe
,
is
soundly
concluded
.
In
these
three
sortes
of
supposed
ministers
(
and
there
could
be
a
fourth
added
vnto
them
)
consisteth
the
woe
of
our
Church
.
The
rest
of
your
booke
is
nowe
to
be
examined
.
Your
conclusion
,
page
22.
that
they
which
were
baptized
by
vnpreching
ministers
,
are
rightly
baptized
as
touching
the
substaunce
of
baptisme
;
I
do
not
gainsay
.
Your
reasons
are
weake
.
For
how
coulde
wee
proue
your
conclusion
,
if
men
should
denie
popish
baptism
to
be
true
baptism
,
as
I
do
not
you
know
&
he
shuld
do
me
great
iniurie
,
which
would
lay
that
to
my
charge
.
Were
it
sufficient
for
vs
to
say
they
were
Katabaptistes
which
denie
popishe
baptisme
?
How
could
this
be
proued
?
and
this
should
not
prooue
the
matter
doubted
off
.
Shall
wee
saye
that
they
sinne
,
in
not
presenting
themselues
to
be
baptized
.
To
whome
shoulde
they
present
themselues
?
who
would
baptize
them
?
Admit
they
sinned
in
receauing
the
Lords
Supper
before
they
were
baptized
,
should
they
therefore
bee
bereaued
of
the
comfort
of
baptisme
?
to
affirme
that
this
weare
a
goinge
backward
,
is
no
reason
,
because
they
were
perswaded
that
they
had
baptisme
,
otherwise
they
would
not
haue
beene
so
farr
on
their
iourney
,
vntill
they
had
beene
accompanied
therewith
.
But
they
omitted
baptisme
of
ignorance
and
not
of
contemt
:
therfore
they
denie
the
receiuing
of
the
Lordes
supper
to
haue
bene
a
sinne
,
anye
more
then
it
woulde
be
a
sinne
in
them
nowe
to
receiue
the
Lordes
supper
,
if
they
coulde
not
haue
baptisme
.
Baptisme
they
woulde
haue
,
if
they
coulde
orderlye
come
by
the
same
.
Because
men
will
bee
so
iniurious
vnto
them
,
as
to
denie
them
the
comfort
of
baptisme
which
they
cannot
haue
,
should
they
denie
to
themselues
the
comfort
of
the
Lords
supper
which
they
may
haue
?
Ye
,
but
no
vncircumcised
might
eate
the
pascall
lambe
.
Exod.
12.48
.
True
;
But
what
shall
we
say
vnto
those
that
were
vncircumcised
in
the
wildernesse
fortie
yeres
almost
.
Iosh.
5.5
.
Did
they
neuer
eate
the
passeouer
all
that
time
?
If
they
did
,
the
place
of
Exodus
will
be
quickly
answered
.
It
is
plaine
that
the
passeouer
was
celebrated
in
the
wildernes
once
at
the
least
.
Nom.
9.1
,
If
euery
yeare
,
why
should
the
godly
of
the
family
be
excluded
from
the
family
be
excluded
from
the
action
,
the
cause
why
they
were
vncircumcised
not
being
in
them
.
None
vncircumcised
might
minister
before
the
altar
.
True
,
but
did
non
of
the
Leuits
that
were
borne
in
the
wildernesse
teach
Iaacob
the
law
,
or
offer
the
incense
of
his
God
in
all
those
fourtye
yeares
?
Thus
many
thinges
you
see
might
be
obiected
against
your
reasons
,
&
I
take
the
obiections
to
bee
of
some
waight
,
It
had
bin
well
you
had
considered
of
them
before
you
had
published
your
booke
.
And
the
baptisme
by
vnpreaching
ministers
,
must
haue
better
prooffes
then
anye
you
haue
brought
as
yet
,
or
else
I
feare
me
,
our
posterities
will
not
be
satisfied
therwith
.
Your
next
reason
,
page
23.
is
slender
.
Readers
pronounce
the
wordes
of
institution
with
the
deliuerie
of
the
element
,
therfore
saye
you
they
deliuer
a
sacrament
:
you
haue
once
already
alledged
this
to
prooue
popish
baptisme
,
page
20.
I
haue
answered
it
page
29.
30.
31.
And
the
place
of
Matth.
28.29
.
brought
in
by
you
page
23.
proueth
your
consequent
to
bee
false
.
For
it
sheweth
that
he
who
is
to
baptise
,
must
bee
also
able
to
teache
,
which
abilitie
is
wanting
in
our
readers
.
Go
sayth
our
Sauiour
,
and
teach
all
nations
,
baptizing
,
&c.
Therefore
if
he
that
deliuereth
the
element
bee
not
able
to
teach
,
we
cannot
be
assured
that
it
is
a
sacrament
.
Because
the
commandement
is
not
generally
to
all
that
could
pronounce
the
wordes
of
institution
,
beeing
thereunto
permitted
by
the
corruption
of
the
time
,
but
perticularly
limited
vnto
them
that
can
teache
,
vnlesse
you
will
saye
,
that
the
Lorde
biddeth
them
go
teach
,
who
cannot
teach
whiche
were
not
once
to
be
concerned
of
his
maiestie
.
The
corruption
in
the
Church
of
England
,
that
the
deliuery
of
the
element
shold
be
seuered
from
the
preaching
of
the
word
,
is
a
breach
of
Gods
ordinance
,
you
cannot
deny
,
Matth.
28
19.
act.
20.7
.
and
therefore
vngodly
and
intollerable
.
Whether
it
mak
the
action
frustrate
or
no
,
that
is
not
the
question
.
Your
3.
reason
pag.
24.
is
this
.
Vnpreaching
ministers
do
ad
an
edifying
word
vnto
the
element
,
therfore
it
is
a
sacramente
.
This
reason
is
the
same
with
the
former
,
which
sheweth
the
great
nakednes
and
pouerty
of
the
cause
,
that
one
reason
must
be
thrise
periured
to
proue
the
goodnes
of
it
,
which
notwithstanding
it
cannot
shew
.
I
deny
the
antecedent
,
&
consequent
.
Your
reason
of
the
antecedent
,
that
the
recitall
of
the
sum
of
Christs
Sermon
that
is
,
the
wordes
of
institution
is
an
edifying
worde
is
false
,
and
maintaineth
charming
.
For
do
you
thinke
that
the
worde
of
institution
,
being
as
you
say
,
the
summ
of
Christes
Sermon
,
is
then
an
edifying
word
,
whensoeuer
it
is
recited
by
a
profane
person
,
euen
in
the
profanation
of
Gods
ordinance
?
Looke
2.
tim.
4.3
.
and
you
shall
finde
that
the
worde
barely
reade
,
and
to
no
other
purpose
then
to
edifie
by
reading
,
is
not
wholesome
doctrine
.
The
popish
prieste
eyther
without
or
,
within
the
booke
,
pronounceth
in
his
darke
Latine
,
the
summ
of
Christes
Sermon
,
is
that
an
edifying
word
,
which
he
profanely
breatheth
.
The
worde
of
God
vttered
,
is
not
an
edifying
worde
,
vnles
it
be
vttered
according
to
the
ordinance
,
both
in
regarde
of
the
persons
that
vtter
the
same
,
and
the
end
wherefore
it
is
vttered
.
No
learned
man
will
denie
the
Lordes
prayer
rightly
sayd
to
be
an
edifying
worde
.
And
yet
by
your
leaue
,
no
learned
man
vnlesse
he
fauoreth
charming
or
popery
,
will
say
that
the
Lords
prayer
pronounced
by
an
ignorant
man
,
in
a
strange
tongue
,
or
profaned
by
a
witch
,
is
an
edifying
word
.
Concerning
your
consequent
,
doe
you
thinke
that
euerye
one
that
can
ad
an
edifying
word
vnto
the
element
,
may
minister
a
sacrament
?
it
is
not
so
.
For
Paul
requireth
the
words
of
euery
christian
(
wemen
&
al
)
to
be
edifying
wordes
,
Eph.
4.29
.
euen
in
common
talk
.
Shal
therefore
the
element
administred
by
euerye
christian
be
a
sacrament
?
God
forbid
.
And
yet
euery
christian
can
ad
the
sum
of
Christs
sermon
vnto
the
element
in
the
administration
of
the
supper
;
which
if
it
were
sufficient
,
as
by
your
reason
it
is
,
then
wemen
,
children
,
&c.
idiots
that
coulde
not
read
might
deliuer
a
sacrament
.
The
reason
concluding
vnpreaching
ministers
to
be
non
,
because
they
are
not
apt
to
teache
,
you
haue
twise
repeated
within
one
twelue
lines
,
pag
24.25
.
and
made
two
seuerall
obiections
thereof
.
That
was
an
ouersight
:
The
sufficiencie
of
the
argument
,
I
haue
shewed
to
be
suche
,
as
Caiphas
his
ministery
,
and
Herods
magistracy
brought
in
by
you
,
pag.
25.
26.
will
neuer
aunswer
the
same
.
Both
of
them
with
the
reason
from
the
outwarde
calling
of
readers
,
pag.
25.
I
referre
to
your
next
chapter
,
where
they
are
repeated
:
thyther
nowe
I
am
come
,
where
the
contradictorie
of
the
question
shall
be
set
downe
and
prooued
briefly
;
because
the
nullitie
of
the
vnpreaching
ministery
,
may
be
in
steede
of
a
1000.
reasons
to
proue
the
same
.
By
pollution
,
doubt
not
,
you
meane
sinne
.
The
godly
do
sinne
,
which
do
communicate
with
vnpreaching
ministers
.
Because
1.
they
communicate
with
those
who
are
no
ministers
.
2.
they
cannot
be
assured
to
receiue
a
sacrament
at
their
hands
.
3
they
do
not
examine
them-selues
aright
,
and
so
are
not
worthy
receiuers
,
1.
Cor.
11.28
.
inasmuch
as
they
do
not
acknowledg
it
a
sinne
to
communicat
where
there
is
no
minister
.
4.
because
they
eyther
make
the
element
to
bee
a
sacrament
naturally
in
it selfe
,
and
not
by
the
ordinance
of
God
,
or
els
think
the
ordinance
of
God
in
the
institution
of
the
sacrament
onely
to
consist
in
the
recitall
of
the
words
;
I
baptize
thee
,
&c.
or
rake
eate
,
&c
,
wheras
a
minister
is
a
most
principall
part
of
the
ordinance
.
5
Because
they
make
the
sacraments
to
be
marks
no
more
estentiall
vnto
the
Church
,
then
to
other
idolatrous
synagogues
.
For
the
element
may
be
deliuered
out
of
the
Church
by
a
publike
person
,
euen
as
substantially
,
as
by
our
mere
readers
.
6
They
approoue
the
sin
of
the
vnpreaching
ministery
.
Lastly
,
because
they
are
perswaded
,
that
Christ
doth
deliuer
vnto
them
the
seales
or
their
saluation
,
by
the
hands
of
those
that
are
not
ministers
;
to
wit
,
by
vnpreaching
readers
.
In
al
which
points
,
the
godly
sinne
,
and
therefore
are
polluted
in
communicating
with
vnpreaching
ministers
.
Nowe
let
vs
see
howe
you
haue
proued
the
contrary
.
Where
the
reader
must
againe
be
put
in
minde
,
that
I
you
haue
prooued
nothing
vnlesse
the
question
bee
graunted
vnto
you
:
and
2
that
your
reasons
are
repeated
too
often
.
The
ministers
ignorance
saye
you
,
page
28.
cannot
peruert
Gods
ordinance
:
and
againe
,
page
29.
the
sacramentes
are
not
the
worse
for
the
ignorance
of
the
minister
,
&c.
All
this
I
grant
,
but
bare
readers
are
not
ministers
,
and
the
doubt
is
,
whether
the
action
performed
by
them
be
the
ordinaunce
of
God
,
whether
it
be
a
sacrament
.
These
be
the
questions
which
you
ought
to
haue
prooued
,
and
not
haue
taken
them
as
principles
,
though
you
do
this
:
the
3
and
4
time
,
pag
28.
line
6.
and
24.
M.D.
Some
,
pag.
28.
the
worthy
pertaker
receiues
a
blessing
,
if
a
blessing
no
pollution
.
Iohn
Penri
;
first
it
is
doubted
whether
we
may
be
assured
that
it
is
a
sacrament
;
2
he
is
no
worthye
receiuer
that
receiueth
of
an
Idoll
ministers
:
3
there
may
be
a
blessing
receiued
,
&
yet
pollution
in
the
receiuer
:
Looke
2.
Chronic.
30.17.18.19
.
Nom.
9.7
.
The
obiection
concerning
the
giuer
&
the
receiuer
,
in
your
31.
pa.
was
neuer
mine
:
I
coulde
turne
it
against
you
,
but
I
must
be
briefe
.
Concerning
the
nullity
of
our
readers
ministery
,
we
are
to
knowe
that
there
is
a
nullitie
of
a
ministerye
before
God
;
eyther
because
the
action
proceedeth
from
a
corrupt
minister
,
as
psalm
.
50.16
.
whom
God
would
not
haue
to
deale
with
his
ordinances
,
or
from
a
corrupt
and
euill
ministerye
,
which
is
none
of
Gods
ordinaunce
.
The
action
of
the
former
is
substantiall
in
regard
of
vs
,
of
the
latter
wee
know
no
substance
it
can
haue
.
Of
the
former
there
is
a
nullitie
onely
in
the
sight
of
God
;
of
the
latter
,
both
in
respect
of
the
Lorde
and
also
of
vs
.
The
nullitie
of
our
readers
ministery
is
of
this
latter
sorte
,
namely
suche
as
we
ought
in
no
wise
to
account
a
ministery
.
Whereas
therefore
you
graunt
that
there
is
a
nullity
of
our
readers
ministery
before
God
,
and
yet
affirm
them
to
be
ministers
,
you
swarue
from
the
point
,
and
so
your
answere
,
page
31.
Is
nothinge
to
the
purpose
,
but
a
desiring
of
the
question
after
your
vsuall
manner
.
As
Caiphas
then
,
and
the
rest
of
the
sleepye
dogges
against
whom
the
prophet
cryeth
out
,
Hence
M.
Some
,
it
followeth
,
that
neyther
the
bribery
of
your
Caiphas
,
nor
the
blindenes
of
your
ignoraunt
Leuites
,
can
make
suche
a
nullitie
of
their
priesthood
,
as
they
should
be
no
priestes
vnto
the
people
.
And
therefore
great
reason
whie
the
parentes
of
our
sauiour
,
&
the
rest
of
the
godly
whereof
you
speake
.
page
28
,
19.
should
not
leaue
the
seruice
of
God
for
the
pollution
of
the
priestes
.
Isai
speaketh
against
blind
watchmen
,
56
10
,
but
chap.
42.19.20
.
It
shal
appear
that
they
saw
many
things
,
but
kept
them
not
,
I
pray
you
confer
the
places
and
it
can
neuer
be
prooued
that
any
of
them
were
so
blinde
,
as
they
could
not
declare
by
preachinge
the
generall
vse
of
the
sacrifices
and
ceremonies
.
Their
wants
might
be
many
but
not
like
the
insufficiency
of
our
readers
.
Beit
they
were
as
insufficient
yet
their
ministery
might
be
allowable
.
For
Vnfitnes
to
teach
,
made
not
a
nullitie
of
the
Leuiticall
priests
office
.
Because
1
it
was
sufficient
to
make
him
a
lawfull
,
though
not
a
good
priest
,
Nowe
therefore
M.
Some
to
make
your
argument
from
the
Leuiticall
priesthood
to
bee
forcible
.
For
your
vnpreching
ministers
,
you
must
proue
that
either
our
readers
ministery
is
a
Leuiticall
ministery
,
that
the
continuance
therof
is
vnder
the
new
couenant
or
shew
that
the
corrupt
aprobation
,
for
so
I
name
the
best
outwarde
calling
they
can
haue
of
the
Churche
,
is
as
forcible
to
make
them
ministers
,
as
was
the
ordinaunce
of
God
to
make
the
sons
of
Aaron
sacrificing
at
Ierusalem
to
be
priests
.
Now
,
That
the
corrupt
allowance
of
the
Church
cannot
make
our
readers
to
be
substanciall
ministers
For
so
all
men
and
wemen
,
without
or
within
the
Church
might
be
capable
of
the
ministery
,
because
all
may
be
capable
of
this
outward
alowance
;
2
and
perticularly
a
man
,
not
furnished
with
naturall
capacity
;
3
a
man
that
could
not
read
,
though
he
wanted
also
the
gift
of
interpretation
;
for
suche
a
one
might
recite
the
liturgie
without
the
booke
;
4
the
Churche
might
make
a
man
minister
against
his
will
,
though
he
should
neuer
consent
thervnto
.
And
this
is
the
willingnes
that
I
meane
,
when
I
say
that
the
inward
caling
is
contained
in
the
sufficiency
of
gifts
,
&
willingnes
to
practize
,
which
willingnes
I
gather
vpon
the
wordes
,
Epith
mei
and
oregetai
,
vsed
of
the
Apostle
.
Your
reason
therfore
from
the
malicious
Philippian
ministers
,
toucheth
not
the
question
.
M.D.
Some
page
32.
They
of
whose
magistracie
there
is
a
nullitye
before
God
,
though
they
haue
an
outwarde
calling
,
ought
not
to
bee
accounted
magystrates
.
I.P.
You
demand
what
I
thinke
of
this
proposition
.
Surely
my
iudgement
is
,
that
it
is
altogether
without
sence
,
and
ouerthroweth
it self
.
For
it
is
as
if
you
said
,
he
of
whose
fayth
there
is
a
nullitye
before
God
,
though
he
be
assured
of
his
saluation
is
not
to
be
accounted
a
faythful
man
.
Why
?
to
be
assured
of
saluation
,
&
to
haue
a
nullitie
of
fayth
before
God
,
cannot
stand
together
.
No
more
can
the
outward
calling
of
the
magistracy
stand
with
the
nullity
thereof
.
For
the
outwarde
calling
maketh
a
substantiall
magistrate
.
There
be
three
essentiall
differences
betweene
an
euill
magistrate
and
a
reading
minister
1
The
outwarde
calling
of
an
euill
magistrate
,
maketh
him
a
substantial
magistrate
,
so
cannot
the
outward
alowance
of
readers
make
them
to
be
ministers
.
2
The
magistracie
of
an
euill
magistrate
,
may
be
allowable
before
God
,
so
cannot
the
ministery
of
readers
.
3
Men
may
bee
assured
to
receiue
that
accordinge
to
the
ordinaunce
of
God
substantially
at
the
handes
of
an
euill
magistrate
,
which
concerneth
them
to
haue
from
him
,
so
can
they
not
of
a
bare
reader
;
For
there
is
no
man
that
can
assure
himselfe
to
be
pertaker
of
a
substantiall
sacrament
,
at
the
hands
of
such
,
and
preache
they
cannot
.
I
haue
handled
this
poynte
of
the
magistracie
in
my
former
booke
,
from
page
47.
to
51.
But
M.
Some
,
where
is
that
reason
which
you
could
presse
so
far
?
is
this
it
?
they
of
whose
magistracie
there
is
a
nullity
before
God
,
ought
not
to
be
accounted
magistrates
.
I
say
your
proposition
is
true
,
assume
what
you
wil
,
you
know
what
maner
of
nullity
I
meane
.
My
reason
concluding
the
vnlawfulnes
of
communicatinge
with
readers
hauing
but
an
outward
calling
:
because
it
is
a
sinne
to
communicate
with
them
,
whiche
onely
want
the
same
hauing
fitnes
to
teache
,
is
such
as
I
can
not
but
maruell
that
you
would
thinke
it
could
bee
answered
by
a
desiring
of
the
question
,
which
is
a
fault
in
reasoninge
,
wherein
be
like
you
seeme
to
take
delight
;
you
say
againe
,
that
readers
deliuer
a
sacrament
.
How
can
we
be
sure
thereof
,
&
why
may
not
I
say
as
well
,
that
a
man
indued
with
giftes
to
teach
,
doth
deliuer
a
sacrament
,
though
he
haue
no
outwarde
calling
,
whiche
assertion
would
be
false
.
By
an
extraordinarye
sacrament
,
I
meane
baptisme
or
the
Lords
supper
,
administred
either
priuatly
by
a
minister
,
or
any
way
by
on
that
is
no
minister
.
I
neuer
affirmed
,
the
elements
deliuered
by
readers
to
be
sacraments
.
It
is
one
thing
not
to
deny
them
,
another
thing
to
affirme
them
to
be
sacraments
;
the
former
I
haue
written
,
the
latter
I
neuer
did
;
&
they
doe
my
writinges
great
iniurie
,
that
report
the
contrary
.
Thus
M.
Some
I
haue
run
through
the
pointes
in
your
booke
that
concerned
me
,
I
haue
beene
driuen
to
deale
briefly
therein
.
I
had
determined
,
and
I
am
inforced
to
ende
,
and
to
omit
that
,
which
page
9.
line
11.
I
promised
to
handle
in
the
latter
end
,
with
diuers
other
I
haue
not
the
like
libertie
for
printing
that
you
M.
Some
doe
inioy
.
Let
me
but
haue
the
fauor
to
bee
iudicially
heard
according
to
the
word
,
and
I
will
personally
vpon
the
perill
of
my
life
,
defend
these
two
points
against
all
men
.
I
am
sory
that
you
whom
I
reuerence
,
should
be
the
instrument
to
oppugne
a
trueth
.
The
Lord
respect
the
cause
of
his
owne
glorie
,
and
pardon
our
sinne
.
Amen
.