Of
conformitie
to
the
state
Ecclesiasticall
.
MAy
it
please
the
wisedome
of
this
honourable
assembly
,
to
weigh
our
reasons
,
not
onely
in
the
ballance
of
mans
wit
,
but
also
in
the
skales
of
the
sancturarie
,
why
this
conformiture
is
required
.
The
Apostle
1.
Cor.
1.
10.
beseeching
vs
as
brethren
in
the
name
of
our
Lord
Iesus
Christ
,
that
wee
all
speake
one
thing
,
that
there
bee
no
dissentions
among
vs
,
that
wee
bee
knit
together
in
one
minde
and
iudgement
:
commendeth
it
vnto
vs
as
a
necessary
rule
of
Ecclesiasticall
politie
,
for
the
better
establishing
of
this
consent
in
doctrine
,
the
speedy
cutting
off
of
all
iarres
and
discensions
,
the
fast
knitting
and
vniting
of
mindes
and
iudgements
:
vppon
this
ground
and
warrant
other
states
haue
vrged
their
Preachers
to
conforme
themselues
to
the
State
vnder
which
they
liued
.
And
seeing
by
this
rule
apostolicall
it
cannot
stand
with
the
peace
and
good
estate
of
any
Church
whatsoeuer
,
to
permit
such
among
them
as
are
not
of
them
,
and
to
tollerate
such
in
their
Ministerie
as
are
aduersaries
:
to
their
lawes
and
constitutions
:
much
more
then
is
conformitie
so
grounded
vpon
Scripture
,
and
strengthened
by
example
of
other
Churches
,
deemed
by
the
godliest
,
and
approued
by
the
wisest
,
to
be
no
lesse
needfull
in
this
present
scisme
and
rent
of
the
Church
of
England
,
then
was
pitch
for
the
Arke
of
Noah
floating
vpon
the
water
,
and
morter
for
the
ruines
of
the
Temple
exposed
to
the
iniury
of
wind
and
weather
,
without
which
the
one
could
not
but
presently
sinke
,
and
the
other
not
long
continue
.
And
,
for
as
much
as
some
fewe
among
vs
in
their
priuate
opinions
dissent
from
vs
,
not
onely
godly
politie
teacheth
,
and
Christian
humilitie
requireth
,
but
also
the
Lawe
of
God
which
is
of
highest
authority
prescribeth
and
commandeth
,
that
these
fewe
should
submit
themselues
to
the
wisedome
of
the
State
,
rather
then
the
whole
state
should
yeelde
,
and
giue
place
to
the
contradiction
of
those
priuate
spirits
.
When
certaine
brethren
at
Antioch
varied
about
circumscision
,
Act.
15.
1.
they
were
ouerswayed
by
the
censure
of
the
Councell
helde
at
Ierusalem
to
whom
the
hearing
of
such
differences
,
and
disciding
of
such
coutrouersies
,
did
of
right
belong
,
but
the
sentence
of
the
Councel
gaue
no
way
at
all
to
those
brethren
.
And
Saint
Paule
hauing
spoken
of
the
ceremonie
deuised
by
1.
Cor.
11.
the
Church
,
and
vsed
in
his
time
,
in
prayer
and
prophesie
,
that
men
should
be
bare
,
and
women
couered
:
noteth
them
for
contentious
persons
which
oppose
themselues
against
this
ceremonie
,
alledging
:
that
it
once
being
approued
,
and
receiued
into
the
Church
,
ought
not
to
bee
called
into
question
,
vel
to
nomine
,
because
the
Church
had
receiued
it
,
when
hee
saith
:
If
any
man
list
to
bee
contentious
,
wee
haue
no
such
custome
among
vs
,
nor
the
Church
of
God
.
For
the
better
inlarging
of
this
point
,
that
I
may
not
instance
in
the
Turkish
Gouernment
,
which
suffereth
no
question
to
be
moued
against
Ecclesiasticall
rises
,
but
endeth
all
such
controuersies
by
the
sword
,
neither
yet
in
the
Lutheran
Church
,
which
admitteth
none
to
any
place
in
the
ministery
without
subscription
and
oath
to
the
reformation
of
Angsburge
;
nor
in
the
Church
of
Rome
,
which
inioyneth
their
Clergie
to
maintaine
the
doctrine
concluded
in
the
councell
of
Trent
:
the
Church
of
Geneua
,
whose
lawes
See
the
laws
of
the
booke
of
Geneua
.
Chap.
1.
and
gouernment
our
brethren
would
impose
vpon
vs
,
as
●he
onely
paterne
of
holinesse
,
and
example
of
a
true
Christian
reformation
,
inioyneth
all
their
Ministers
before
their
admition
,
not
onely
to
make
open
protestation
,
that
they
doe
receiue
and
maintaine
the
doctrine
approoued
in
Geneua
,
but
simply
,
and
absolutely
to
sweare
,
that
they
will
keepe
the
Ecclesiasticall
ordinances
,
which
are
passed
and
Chap.
2.
in
the
forme
of
their
oath
.
ordeined
by
the
small
,
great
,
and
generall
councells
of
that
Citie
.
By
which
law
and
practise
of
theirs
,
it
is
a
cleare
case
,
that
with
them
there
is
no
respect
of
priuate
mens
opinions
,
no
satisfaction
to
bee
yeelded
to
particular
persons
,
no
conference
or
disputation
granted
with
men
of
contrary
iudgements
.
But
,
it
must
be
held
pro
concesso
,
for
a
conclusion
or
principle
already
proued
,
that
all
their
ordinances
are
according
to
Gods
word
,
and
of
that
vndoubted
truth
,
that
they
may
not
be
argued
,
sifted
,
or
controuerted
.
Chap.
2.
Finally
,
if
there
arise
any
difference
concerning
doctrine
,
which
hath
not
beene
already
reconciled
,
it
is
inacted
by
their
lawes
,
that
the
Ministers
shall
be
called
to
a
conference
;
if
then
it
cannot
receiue
an
end
,
the
Magistrates
shall
interpose
their
authority
,
and
so
proceede
to
a
finall
decision
.
And
for
the
better
strengthening
of
their
proceedings
,
it
is
further
inacted
,
that
all
opposition
against
their
ordinances
,
shall
be
held
for
an
hainous
crime
,
called
by
the
title
of
rebellion
against
Ecclesiastical
lawes
:
&
it
is
set
down
as
punishable
among
the
notorious
crimes
of
heresie
,
scisme
,
blasphemy
,
simony
,
bribery
,
periury
,
and
drunkennesse
,
The
punishment
to
be
inflicted
vppon
Ministers
thus
rebelling
,
is
deposition
from
their
ministery
,
and
all
contempt
against
Ecclesiasticall
orders
,
in
what
persons
soeuer
,
after
three
admonitions
,
is
censured
by
excommunication
.
Yet
I
desire
that
no
sinister
or
vncharitable
construction
should
be
made
hereof
,
as
if
a
state
should
vrge
them
which
feele
any
the
smallest
check
in
their
tender
consciences
with
shipwrack
of
conscience
,
rashly
to
subscribe
vnto
that
which
they
doe
not
approue
,
or
for
worldly
respects
,
to
allow
of
that
whereof
they
cannot
satisfie
&
well
informe
themselues
.
For
albeit
the
state
,
which
is
well
aduised
,
hath
sufficient
warrant
to
impose
,
yet
the
bare
authority
of
the
state
,
is
no
warrant
vnto
them
to
obey
,
which
be
not
yet
resolued
,
but
stand
in
doubt
,
because
they
must
build
vpon
this
ground
of
the
Apostle
,
that
be
the
thing
in
it selfe
neuer
so
lawfull
,
without
faith
,
it
is
sinne
.
But
onely
I
exhort
them
better
to
instruct
and
informe
their
weake
consciences
,
which
if
they
cannot
,
or
will
not
doe
,
the
imputation
of
this
schisme
must
not
be
Rom.
14.
1.
Cor.
10.
laide
vpon
the
state
,
which
is
well
aduised
,
but
vpon
their
weaknesse
,
which
will
not
be
perswaded
when
they
are
perswaded
,
which
are
men
wedded
to
their
owne
opinions
,
or
that
I
may
speake
more
mildely
of
them
,
which
either
cannot
,
or
will
not
reforme
their
iudgements
.
But
for
the
better
satisfaction
of
our
Christian
brethren
,
we
will
not
refuse
to
yeeld
reasons
of
our
gouernment
,
albeit
it
hath
beene
so
long
by
law
established
:
and
for
the
iustification
of
our
state
,
we
will
by
Gods
assistance
,
proue
it
in
the
chapters
following
,
to
stand
with
the
lawes
of
the
holy
Bible
.
As
namely
,
that
the
state
of
Archbishops
and
Bishops
,
which
hath
continued
among
vs
euer
since
wee
first
receiued
the
Gospel
,
had
their
institution
from
God
himselfe
,
whereas
parish
Churches
are
mans
inuention
:
and
the
gouernment
of
the
Presbitery
,
is
not
onely
repugnant
to
the
lawes
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
but
also
preiudiciall
to
the
state
of
a
Kingdome
.
A
defence
of
Church
gouernment
established
in
England
.
Of
Eldership
.
ALl
would
be
in
title
as
high
as
Aaron
,
all
would
bee
gouernours
rather
then
priuate
Ministers
;
but
because
the
keyes
of
the
Church
are
not
committed
vnto
all
which
be
of
the
ministerie
;
therfore
some
of
our
brethren
,
being
discontented
with
the
present
state
,
make
it
now
a
question
,
whether
the
Church
of
right
,
ought
to
be
ordered
by
elders
,
as
it
is
in
Geneua
,
or
by
Diocesan
Lord
Bishoppes
,
as
it
is
in
England
?
I
cannot
denie
but
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
is
committed
to
Elders
in
the
new
Testament
,
where
the
Apostle
saith
:
The
elders
which
rule
well
,
are
worthy
of
double
honour
,
1.
Tim.
5.
17.
especially
they
which
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
.
But
,
the
disputation
is
between
vs
and
our
brethren
,
which
stand
for
the
eldership
;
whether
these
elders
were
lay
men
of
trades
&
worldly
vocations
,
as
they
be
now
in
Geneua
,
or
preachers
,
&
ecclesiasticall
persons
?
whether
this
Eldership
was
an
annuall
,
or
a
perpetuall
office
?
whether
they
ought
,
their
yeare
being
ended
,
to
relinquish
that
office
,
and
so
to
returne
to
their
trades
and
occupations
,
as
they
doe
in
Geneua
,
or
else
to
continue
the
whole
terme
of
their
liues
?
They
alleage
for
the
establishing
of
their
laye
Presbyterie
,
that
because
Saint
Paul
vseth
these
wordes
:
especially
they
which
labour
in
the
word
:
therefore
two
sortes
of
Elders
are
there
included
,
some
learned
and
preaching
Ministers
,
some
vnlearned
,
and
therefore
vnpreaching
and
silent
gouernors
.
Therefore
,
to
come
to
the
true
construction
of
this
text
,
and
due
vnderstanding
of
the
words
,
which
may
be
consonant
,
and
agreeable
,
both
to
the
analogy
of
faith
,
and
of
that
place
:
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostle
includeth
two
things
:
a
thesis
,
or
generall
conclusion
;
and
afterward
a
particular
exposition
of
that
thesis
or
generall
conclusion
,
by
a
kinde
of
epanorthosis
or
reuocation
of
himselfe
by
a
restraint
and
limitation
of
that
generall
doctrine
,
shewing
how
farre
it
is
to
be
vnderstood
;
as
namely
,
that
if
they
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
,
they
are
worthy
of
double
honour
:
but
if
they
labour
not
in
the
word
,
hee
vouchsafeth
them
no
double
honour
.
So
that
out
of
these
wordes
,
can
be
collected
no
such
distinction
as
they
doe
imagine
,
of
preaching
elders
,
and
gouerning
elders
,
which
are
no
preachers
,
but
of
gouerning
elders
both
of
them
preachers
,
one
sort
which
laboureth
in
the
word
,
the
other
which
preacheth
also
,
but
laboureth
not
in
preaching
.
For
,
it
is
one
thing
to
be
a
preacher
,
and
another
thing
to
labour
in
preaching
.
And
what
it
is
to
labour
in
preaching
,
he
expoundeth
in
an
other
place
,
where
hee
saith
:
I
charge
thee
before
God
,
and
the
Lord
Iesus
Christ
,
which
shall
iudge
the
quicke
and
the
dead
,
2
Tim.
4.
at
his
appearing
,
and
in
his
Kingdome
,
preach
the
word
,
bee
instant
,
in
season
,
and
out
of
season
.
The
Greeke
word
is
(
copiontes
)
which
is
as
much
as
to
indure
the
heate
and
burthen
of
the
day
,
to
take
extraordinary
paines
in
the
ministery
.
But
that
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
acknowledge
,
neither
annuall
,
nor
lay
elders
,
my
reasons
are
these
.
Because
eldership
is
a
lawfull
ministery
,
therefore
it
is
of
God
:
but
a
man
which
is
called
of
God
vnto
the
ministerie
,
may
not
after
the
expiration
of
one
yeare
,
or
at
his
own
pleasure
,
be
discharged
of
that
calling
,
or
by
any
warrant
from
men
play
the
Iordan
to
start
backe
againe
.
For
,
that
were
with
Demas
to
forsake
Saint
Pauls
fellowshippe
,
and
to
Psal.
114.
2.
Tim.
4.
1.
Cor.
3.
Luke
9.
62
imbrace
this
present
world
.
This
ministrie
is
the
Lords
husbandry
;
that
is
,
the
Lords
plough
:
and
,
hauing
once
laid
their
hands
to
this
plough
,
if
they
looke
backe
,
they
make
themselues
vnfit
for
the
kingdome
of
God
.
God
calleth
no
man
,
whom
he
furnisheth
not
with
some
talents
,
more
or
fewer
,
and
these
talents
may
not
rust
.
But
Matt.
25.
Act.
8.
such
lay
elders
haue
no
talents
at
all
committed
vnto
them
:
And
therefore
I
say
vnto
them
,
as
Saint
Peter
did
to
Simon
Magus
:
They
haue
no
part
nor
fellowshippe
in
this
businesse
.
The
Church
must
be
ordered
accorcing
to
the
precepts
and
examples
of
holy
writ
;
but
wee
haue
neither
example
for
instance
,
that
euer
there
was
,
nor
precept
out
of
Gods
booke
for
warrant
,
that
euer
there
may
be
any
such
lay
eldership
.
But
to
the
contrary
,
we
abound
in
examples
,
and
1.
Pet.
5.
Iohn
2.
Epist.
1.
Act.
20.
haue
expresse
commandements
.
Saint
Peter
a
preacher
,
calleth
himselfe
an
elder
,
and
chargeth
other
elders
to
feede
the
flocke
.
Saint
Iohn
,
a
preacher
,
calleth
himselfe
an
elder
,
in
his
epistle
to
the
elect
Lady
.
Saint
Paul
chargeth
the
elders
of
Ephesus
,
to
feede
the
Church
of
God
which
he
purchased
Tit.
1.
with
his
blood
.
And
to
Titus
,
he
giueth
charge
that
he
appoint
ouer
euery
Citie
Elders
,
and
hee
sheweth
that
by
such
elders
he
meaneth
Bishops
,
which
must
be
able
to
exhort
with
wholesome
doctrine
,
and
to
conuince
them
which
say
against
it
.
Deacons
which
be
of
an
inferiour
calling
in
the
Church
,
must
not
be
lay
men
,
but
able
to
preach
:
much
more
then
Elders
which
haue
an
higher
office
,
and
as
they
be
their selues
consecrated
by
imposition
of
hands
,
so
haue
their
authority
to
lay
their
handes
vpon
Deacons
,
and
consecrate
them
.
But
concerning
Deacons
,
the
Apostles
speake
in
this
manner
:
Choose
you
out
7.
men
of
honest
report
,
full
of
the
holy
Act.
6.
Ghost
,
and
wisedome
,
whom
we
may
appoint
to
this
businesse
,
and
we
will
giue
our selues
continually
to
prayer
,
and
the
ministration
of
the
word
.
In
these
words
:
full
of
wisedome
:
they
meane
not
worldly
,
but
heauenly
wisedome
,
which
is
the
knowledge
of
the
Scriptures
:
but
whosoeuer
hath
such
fulnesse
of
knowledge
and
vnderstanding
of
the
Bible
,
is
very
able
to
preach
.
And
where
the
Apostles
say
:
we
wil
giue
our selues
continually
to
praier
,
&
ministration
of
the
word
:
it
doth
not
follow
that
therefore
the
deacons
being
appointed
to
their
office
of
Deaonship
,
did
wholy
neglect
preaching
,
and
the
ministration
of
the
word
,
no
more
,
then
that
they
did
also
giue
ouer
praying
,
which
is
here
mentioned
in
the
imployment
of
the
Apostles
,
as
well
as
preaching
,
(
for
then
had
they
beene
reprobates
.
)
And
that
after
they
were
called
to
be
Deacons
,
they
did
also
preach
,
and
minister
the
sacraments
:
it
appeareth
by
the
examples
of
Stephen
,
and
Philip
,
which
both
preached
,
Act.
7.
Act.
8.
35.
38.
50.
and
baptised
.
Neither
can
a
man
of
sober
iudgement
conceiue
such
an
idle
opinion
of
the
Apostles
,
that
they
would
haue
admitted
them
to
that
office
,
by
that
great
solemnity
of
prayer
and
imposition
of
hands
,
if
they
should
haue
beene
estranged
from
the
ministerie
,
and
wholly
attended
vpon
tables
,
and
beene
but
gatherers
of
almes
.
God
which
hath
established
kingdomes
,
and
ordained
secular
Princes
to
be
supreame
gouernours
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
by
his
word
,
cannot
so
much
crosse
his
owne
ordinance
,
as
to
appoint
in
the
same
word
,
such
a
consistory
,
or
state
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
as
may
not
stand
with
the
state
of
a
kingdome
.
As
for
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
vnder
the
King
,
it
hath
alwaies
vpheld
the
state
of
a
kingdom
,
and
maintained
the
soueraigne
authority
of
Princes
,
as
holding
their
Scepter
and
Crowne
immediately
from
God
,
and
not
from
the
people
,
that
they
are
not
to
be
deposed
,
nor
censured
by
the
people
.
But
contrariwise
,
the
Presbyterie
and
their
fauourers
,
both
by
their
doctrine
,
and
also
by
practise
,
make
all
Kings
subiect
to
the
people
,
and
by
a
consequent
,
to
the
Consistorie
to
be
punished
and
depriued
by
them
,
because
they
are
the
Magistrates
which
are
chosen
by
the
people
,
and
for
the
people
,
&
the
authority
of
the
people
is
executed
by
them
.
And
for
the
better
proofe
of
this
assertion
,
I
wil
produce
some
writings
of
the
presbyterians
themselues
.
The
Scottish
Consistorian
hath
these
words
following
:
Populo
Eucan
:
de
iure
regni
apùd
Scotos
.
iu●●
est
,
vt
imporium
cui
velit
deferat
.
It
resteth
in
the
hands
of
the
people
,
to
set
the
Crown
vpon
whose
head
they
please
.
B.
Nam
nisi
regem
suffragijs
electum
habeamus
,
vereor
nè
legitimum
habituri
simus
.
M.
Ego
quoque
idem
islud
vereor
.
No
man
is
a
lawfull
King
,
but
by
election
of
the
people
.
Nam
,
&
quem
nes
Venetorum
〈◊〉
vocamus
,
is
nihil
aliud
est
,
qùám
rex
legitimus
.
He
whom
we
we
call
the
Duke
of
Venice
,
is
nothing
else
,
but
a
lawfull
King
.
Leges
igitùr
hâc
dè
causâ
inuentae
sunt
à
populis
,
regesque
coacti
,
non
suâ
●n
iudicijs
licentiâ
,
sed
quod
populus
in
se
dedisset
iure
,
vti
.
For
this
cause
lawes
are
deùised
by
the
people
,
and
Kings
constrained
,
not
to
vse
their
own
liberty
in
the
seate
of
Iustice
,
but
that
whereunto
the
people
hath
restrained
them
.
Sit
,
quando
ita
vis
,
p●në●
populum
vt
leges
serat
,
&
perferat
,
sint
reges
velut
tabulariorum
custodes
.
The
making
of
lawes
is
onely
in
the
power
of
the
people
,
kings
are
but
as
it
were
keepers
of
the
records
.
Vides
opinor
,
quantam
vno
versu
des
principi
licentiam
:
nempè
,
vt
quod
velit
ipse
,
dicet
lex
,
quod
nolit
non
dicat
.
Id
si
semèl
recipiamus
,
non
proderit
bonas
leges
condere
,
quae
principem
bonum
officij
sui
●oneant
,
malum
circumscribant
.
Immo
,
vt
dicam
apertiū●
,
nullas
omninò
▪
leges
habere
praestaret
,
quàm
liberum
latrocinium
,
atquè
etiam
honoratum
,
sub
legis
praetextu
tolerari
.
M.
Certè
,
non
modo
potest●tem
legum
iubendarū
,
sed
etiàm
eas
interpretandi
,
regiabstulist
:
As
kings
may
not
be
makers
of
lawes
,
so
they
may
not
be
trusted
with
the
exposition
of
lawes
,
for
then
it
were
all
one
as
if
no
good
lawes
were
made
,
which
may
put
a
good
Prince
in
mind
of
his
duty
,
&
compell
an
euil
Prince
to
doe
his
dutie
,
because
they
will
wrest
them
to
their
owne
purpose
.
And
so
robberie
shal
not
onely
be
free
,
but
also
rewarded
and
honoured
vnder
the
colour
and
pretence
of
lawe
.
Concerning
such
Princes
as
behaue
not
themselues
well
in
their
gouernment
:
Deo
&
hominibus
habendes
inimicos
,
eosqùe
in
luporum
,
aliorumnè
noxiorum
animalium
genere
,
potiùs
quàm
hominum
,
habendos
putem
,
quae
qui
alit
,
&
sibi
perniciem
alit
,
&
alijs
&
qui
occidit
,
non
sibi
modo
,
sed
publicè
vniuersis
prodest
.
Interfectoribus
autèm
praemia
decarni
non
ab
vniuerso
tantùm
populo
,
sed
à
smgulis
:
quemadmodùm
vulg
ò
fieri
solet
ijs
qui
lupos
aut
vrsas
occiderunt
.
They
be
enemies
to
God
and
man
:
Wolues
,
who
so
killeth
them
,
benefiteh
the
common
wealth
,
and
is
to
be
rewarded
as
he
that
killeth
Wolues
,
Bares
,
and
such
harmful
beasts
.
And
what
is
this
lesse
then
which
the
conspirators
of
Rome
do
hold
it
meritorious
to
murther
Princes
.
Againe
,
saith
this
Presbyterian
:
Quemadmodùm
in
primis
regibus
vsquè
,
ad
Kennethum
3
qui
primus
regnum
in
suâ
familiâ
stabiliuit
,
perspicuam
est
quae
fuerit
potestas
populi
in
regibus
creandis
,
&
in
ordinem
redigendis
:
ità
necesse
est
vt
is
aut
populo
inuito
id
fecerit
,
aut
à
persuaso
impetrauerit
.
Perrò
,
si
ceëgit
populum
sibi
parere
,
populus
quoquè
vbi
primum
caeperit
suis
viribus
confidere
,
violentum
illud
imperium
poterit
excutere
,
cùm
à
regibus
&
populo
recepta
iura
pronuncient
,
&
natura
clamet
,
quicquid
per
vim
fiat
simili
vi
solui
posse
Si
tu
mecum
ex
conuentu
agas
,
quid
causae
est
,
quin
ego
ex
aduerso
eas
causas
ponam
,
cur
pacta
&
conuenta
solui
possint
?
What
power
the
people
hath
both
in
setting
vp
kings
,
and
ruling
them
after
they
be
established
,
Kennethus
the
third
,
is
an
example
,
which
first
established
the
kingdome
in
his
own
family
.
If
by
violence
he
compelled
the
people
to
yeeld
vnto
it
,
by
the
same
violence
they
may
free
themselues
againe
,
if
by
their
consent
,
they
may
pretend
cause
enough
to
reuerse
that
whereunto
they
gaue
consent
.
And
what
is
this
but
the
doctrine
of
the
Papists
,
that
faith
with
heretikes
is
not
to
be
held
?
To
them
which
alledge
that
wee
must
pray
for
Princes
,
though
they
be
wicked
,
and
therefore
not
lift
vp
our
Tim.
2.
hands
against
them
;
he
answereth
.
Nèc
slatim
,
si
promalis
principibus
orandum
est
,
hinc
allegare
debemus
corum
vitia
non
esse
punienda
:
non
magis
quam
latronum
,
prò
quibus
etiam
orare
iubemur
,
nec
si
bono
principi
parendum
est
,
ideò
malo
non
est
resistendum
.
We
are
bound
to
pray
for
wicked
Princes
,
in
such
sort
as
for
theeues
:
we
must
pray
for
them
both
,
and
punish
them
both
.
Quod
autem
àd
Caligulam
,
Neronem
,
Domitianum
&
reliquos
eius
generis
tyrannos
attinet
:
cur
violats
iuris
diuini
&
humani
poenae
non
●ebeant
exigi
,
nihil
hic
apùd
Paulum
habes
,
qui
de
ipsâ
magistratuum
potestate
,
non
dè
malis
ma●è
potestatem
eam
gerentibus
disserat
.
Nec
,
si
ad
Pauli
regulam
id
genus
tyrannorum
examines
,
omninò
magistratus
erunt
.
As
for
Caligula
,
Nero
,
Domitian
,
and
such
tyrants
,
it
standeth
with
Paules
doctrine
that
they
may
be
punished
for
their
offences
.
For
he
disputeth
onely
of
the
lawful
autoritie
of
the
magistrates
not
of
wicked
magistrates
which
abuse
their
authoritie
.
Neither
according
to
Saint
Paules
doctrine
are
such
Kings
to
be
held
for
Magistrates
.
Vt
cunque
negare
non
possunt
:
aulici
adulatoras
carnificis
functionem
pariem
esse
muneris
publici
,
&
fortasse
etiam
regij
,
vel
ipsorum
regum
testimonio
,
qui
quoties
aliquis
è
ministus
publicis
violatur
,
se
,
suamquè
maiestatem
,
&
corpus
violari
queruntur
.
The
flattering
Courtiers
cannot
denie
,
but
that
the
office
of
the
hangman
doth
belong
to
the
King
,
witnes
the
Kings
themselues
,
which
when
their
Catchpoles
,
and
hangmen
receiue
any
wrong
,
doe
complaine
that
their
owne
person
is
in
them
wronged
,
and
their
princely
Maiestie
.
M.
Quid
tandem
e
scripturis
profers
cur
liceat
tyrannos
impunè
occidere
?
B.
Primùm
id
affero
,
quod
quùm
diserte
praeceptum
sit
de
scelere
,
&
sceleratis
à
medio
tollendis
,
sinè
vllâ
exceptione
gradus
aut
ordinis
nusquàm
tamen
in
saeris
literis
tyrannis
magis
quàm
priuatis
est
cautum
.
Hauing
a
generall
commandement
out
of
Gods
word
,
to
put
to
death
wicked
men
,
without
respect
of
any
degree
or
order
in
particular
,
tyrants
haue
no
more
priuiledge
then
priuate
men
,
and
therefore
,
according
to
his
word
,
it
is
lawfull
to
kill
tyrants
.
Rationem
excogitarunt
Canonistae
quá
&
scelera
plecterentur
,
&
Papa
tamen
sacro
sanctus
&
inuiolatus
haberetur
.
Aliud
enim
Papa
,
aliud
illius
hominis
qui
Papa
esset
,
ius
existimabant
,
&c.
Wee
may
distinguish
betweene
the
Kings
person
and
his
office
,
to
punish
him
as
he
is
a
man
offending
,
setting
a
side
his
place
,
and
so
not
the
King
,
but
the
malefactor
is
chastised
.
Nos
contendimus
idem
ius
reges
habere
in
multitudinem
quod
illi
in
singulos
e
multitudine
habent
.
The
people
haue
ioyntly
the
same
authoritie
ouer
the
King
,
which
the
King
hath
ouer
euery
seuerall
person
among
the
people
.
The
French
Consistorians
write
in
this
manner
:
Subditi
Vindiciae
contra
tyrannos
.
non
tenentur
regibus
obedire
,
siquid
aduersùs
legem
Dei
imperent
.
Subiects
are
not
bound
to
obey
Kings
,
if
they
command
any
thing
contrary
to
Gods
word
.
In
which
assertion
,
first
they
Quest:
1
make
the
subiects
to
be
both
the
plaintiues
,
and
the
Iudges
betweene
their
King
and
themselues
,
whether
he
hath
commanded
any
thing
against
Gods
word
or
no
?
so
that
it
shall
be
an
easie
matter
for
them
at
their
pleasure
to
discharge
themselues
of
all
dutie
and
obedience
to
the
King
.
Secondly
,
they
deceiue
the
simple
reader
by
a
fallacie
,
for
,
the
ambiguitie
lyeth
in
these
words
:
Si
quid
aduersus
legem
dei
imperant
,
If
they
command
any
thing
contrary
to
Gods
word
.
For
,
the
question
is
,
whether
they
meane
onely
in
that
particular
thing
which
is
against
Gods
word
,
the
King
is
not
to
be
obeyed
,
or
else
,
that
in
nothing
he
is
to
be
obeyed
,
because
he
hath
commanded
some
one
thing
repugnant
to
the
law
of
God
?
In
this
last
sense
,
it
is
by
them
vnderstood
,
as
appeareth
by
the
words
following
,
which
are
these
:
Vassallus
se
Domino
superiori
iuramento
diuincit
,
sic
&
Rex
,
ex
legis
diuinae
precepto
se
imperaturum
iurat
.
Vassallus
deniquè
nisi
iusiurandum
seruat
,
feedum
committit
,
ipsoque
iure
se
omni
praerogatiuâ
priuat
.
Rex
quoque
si
deum
negligat
&c.
ipso
iure
regnum
committit
,
&
èx
facto
plerumque
amittit
.
Duplex
autem
foedus
in
regum
inaugurations
legimus
,
primum
inter
De●m
,
&
regem
&
populum
,
vt
esset
populus
Dei
populus
,
secundum
vero
inter
regem
&
populum
,
vt
bene
obtemperanti
benè
obtemperaretur
.
The
vassall
is
bound
to
his
Lord
by
an
oath
,
and
the
King
sweareth
that
hee
will
rule
according
to
Gods
word
:
if
the
vassal
keepeth
not
his
oath
,
he
forfeiteth
his
estate
,
so
if
the
King
breake
his
oath
,
hee
forfeiteth
his
Crowne
.
There
is
a
double
couenant
at
a
Kings
Coronation
,
the
first
betweene
God
on
the
one
side
,
and
the
King
with
the
people
on
the
other
side
,
that
the
people
shall
be
Gods
people
:
the
second
betweene
the
King
and
the
people
,
that
the
people
shall
be
faithfull
subiects
no
longer
then
the
King
shal
continue
a
good
King
.
Populus
si
regem
non
coercet
,
culpâ
tenebitur
,
quià
correi
sunt
.
Licet
Isràels
si
Rex
legem
Dei
Ecclesiamne
euertat
,
resistere
:
nèc
id
Vindicïae
contra
tyrannos
modo
,
verum
nifecerit
,
eiusdem
criminis
tonebitur
,
&
eandem
poenam
luet
.
Resistat
vero
verbo
si
verbo
oppugnabitur
,
vi
si
vi
,
arte
inquàm
&
marte
,
quin
et
dolo
bono
si
bono
,
cùm
nihilintersit
vbi
iustum
bellum
Qust
:
2
susceperis
,
vtrum
aperte
pugues
an
èx
insidijs
.
It
is
lawfull
for
the
people
to
resist
the
King
which
impugneth
Gods
law
,
or
his
Church
,
and
vnles
they
doe
resist
him
,
they
shall
be
accessarie
as
he
is
principall
,
and
incurre
the
same
punishment
which
is
due
vnto
him
.
If
he
deale
by
sword
or
word
,
they
must
oppose
themselues
against
him
with
the
same
weapons
.
For
as
much
as
the
warre
which
in
that
cause
they
doe
wage
against
him
is
iust
,
it
maketh
no
matter
whether
they
vse
open
warre
and
hostilitie
,
or
secret
slight
and
politie
.
Nemo
rex
nascitur
,
nemo
per
se
rex
est
,
nemo
absqùe
populo
regnare
Vindic●oe
contra
tyrannos
,
potest
,
populus
per
sè
esse
potest
,
&c.
No
man
is
borne
to
a
kingdome
,
no
man
is
of
himselfe
à
King
,
no
man
can
raigne
but
by
the
fauour
of
the
people
,
but
the
people
are
absolute
Quest:
3
of
themselues
,
the
people
is
in
time
before
the
king
,
&
therefore
all
Kings
are
ordained
,
&
authorized
by
the
people
,
and
in
such
kingdomes
as
are
haereditarie
,
the
child
may
not
succeed
his
Father
,
vnles
he
haue
the
approbation
of
the
people
.
Quùm
reges
a
populo
constituantur
,
vniuersus
populus
rege
prior
est
&c
,
Seeing
kings
are
appointed
by
the
people
,
the
whole
people
is
aboue
the
king
,
his
authoritie
being
deriued
from
them
,
he
is
vnder
them
as
Ioseph
was
vnder
Putifer
,
Daniel
vnder
Nabuchadnazer
.
The
king
is
but
a
seruant
to
the
commonwealth
as
a
shipmaster
to
the
honour
of
the
ship
.
Whatsoeuer
accrueth
to
the
king
by
wars
,
or
by
his
Exchequor
,
he
must
be
accountable
for
it
to
the
people
,
as
a
Merchants
factour
is
to
his
.
Mr:
Let
the
people
forsake
their
king
,
he
wil
be
a
contemptible
person
in
the
eyes
of
all
men
,
when
they
shall
put
him
from
his
dominion
ouer
men
,
he
will
be
glad
to
be
some
paedanticall
fellow
,
and
to
vse
his
paedagogical
authoritie
ouer
boyes
.
As
for
our
English
Consistorians
,
they
haue
these
words
:
T.
C.
lib
:
2.
pag.
15.
7.
T.
C.
lib.
2.
pag.
165.
Admonit
:
2.
No
ciuil
Magistrate
hath
preheminence
by
ordinary
authoritie
to
determine
of
Church
causes
.
And
,
no
ciuil
magistrate
in
Councels
&
assemblies
for
Church
causes
,
can
be
chief
moderatour
,
Iudge
,
or
gouernour
.
And
,
no
ciuil
magistrate
hath
such
authoritie
,
as
that
without
his
consent
it
should
not
be
lawful
for
Ecclesiasticall
persons
to
make
any
Church
orders
or
ceremonies
.
For
as
much
therfore
as
God
hath
established
kingdomes
,
but
a
presbytery
and
a
kingdome
cannot
both
stand
together
,
because
one
standing
,
the
other
falleth
.
They
are
enemies
not
onely
to
Gods
ordinance
,
but
also
to
the
state
of
Kings
,
which
goe
about
to
establish
this
Eldership
in
a
kingdome
.
Of
Diocesan
Bishops
.
MAister
Iacob
,
in
his
Booke
of
reformation
obiecteth
against
the
state
of
Bishops
,
and
Cathedrall
Churches
,
that
of
right
there
are
no
Diocesan
,
but
onely
parochiall
Bishops
,
that
the
authoritie
,
&
iurisdiction
,
and
rites
of
a
Bishop
,
are
no
other
then
belongeth
to
all
parsons
of
parish
Churches
,
and
consequently
that
euery
parson
is
a
Bishop
.
That
there
is
no
visible
Church
ministeriall
,
besides
the
parish
Churches
,
and
that
they
as
depending
vpon
no
other
,
nor
subiect
to
any
other
,
nor
parts
or
members
of
any
other
,
haue
absolute
authoritie
and
power
,
as
wel
of
gouernment
as
of
teaching
within
themselues
,
and
so
consequently
,
there
are
no
cathederal
Churches
.
And
,
as
one
absurditie
being
granted
,
a
thousand
will
followe
,
so
vpon
these
proemises
,
which
without
proofe
,
he
taketh
for
granted
,
he
inferreth
these
fiue
conclusions
,
to
the
slander
of
our
state
,
as
absord
as
the
proemises
were
,
That
the
case
standing
thus
:
1.
Our
Bishops
be
no
Christians
,
for
(
saith
he
)
euery
Christian
is
a
pastour
,
or
one
of
the
people
,
of
the
people
they
denye
themselues
to
be
,
and
pastours
they
are
not
,
2.
Being
not
lawfull
Diocesan
Bishops
,
much
lesse
may
they
be
Lord
Bishops
.
3.
Hauing
no
lawfull
authoritie
,
nor
calling
their selues
,
they
cannot
conferre
Ecclesiasticall
orders
,
and
lay
handes
vpon
others
,
and
so
consequently
our
ministers
by
them
ordered
,
haue
no
lawefull
ministerie
.
4.
That
by
their
meanes
wee
are
defrauded
of
a
mayne
point
of
our
ordinarie
meanes
of
saluation
,
which
is
the
true
Ecclesiesticall
discipline
.
5.
That
in
our
state
Christ
is
robbed
and
spoiled
of
some
parts
of
his
kingly
and
propheticall
office
,
his
kingly
office
being
to
appoint
vs
,
and
his
prophetical
office
,
being
to
teach
vs
solely
of
himselfe
the
true
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
which
our
Bishops
take
from
him
,
and
ascribe
vnto
men
,
altering
that
discipline
and
gouernment
,
which
he
alone
as
king
hath
appointed
,
and
as
a
Prophet
hath
taught
in
his
holy
word
,
which
conclusions
because
they
are
inferred
vpon
false
,
grounds
,
the
grounds
being
shaken
,
the
conclusions
will
fall
of
themselues
.
Therefore
let
vs
come
to
the
examination
of
these
grounds
,
to
shewe
how
weake
,
and
vnsufficient
a
foundation
they
be
to
build
vpon
.
He
impugneth
the
Church
&
state
of
Bishops
,
first
by
shew
of
argument
,
secondly
by
his
own
idle
conceits
,
vaine
coniectures
,
and
imaginations
.
He
maketh
shew
of
two
arguments
,
the
first
is
this
;
that
the
state
of
Bishops
is
a
breach
of
the
2.
commandement
,
and
by
a
consequent
,
idolatrie
.
For
in
this
commandement
:
Thou
shalt
not
make
to
thy selfe
any
grauen
image
,
thou
shalt
not
bow
down
to
it
▪
nor
worship
it
(
saith
he
)
are
forbidden
all
meanes
being
humane
inuentions
,
wherby
men
would
giue
honour
to
the
true
God
.
But
,
one
of
these
meanes
of
diuine
worship
being
an
humane
inuention
,
he
saith
,
to
be
the
state
of
Bishops
,
our
Diocesan
,
&
prouincial
Churches
vsing
gouernment
,
with
the
ministeries
&
offices
proper
to
them
.
For
answer
to
which
argument
,
I
denie
the
MINOR
proposition
,
which
consisteth
of
2.
parts
,
meanes
of
diuine
worship
,
&
humane
inuention
.
And
because
he
bringeth
no
proofe
of
his
MINOR
being
the
subiect
of
his
disputation
,
which
all
opponents
ought
to
doe
,
I
will
disproue
it
,
and
each
part
of
it
.
And
first
,
Diocesan
&
prouinciall
Churches
vsing
gouernment
,
and
their
ministeries
,
which
are
of
Archbishops
,
&
Bishops
,
were
neuer
intended
by
the
founders
of
them
,
nor
vsed
by
the
officers
&
ministers
of
them
,
nor
held
by
the
defendours
,
&
maintainers
of
them
,
nor
conceiued
by
men
of
vnderstanding
,
to
be
any
meanes
of
diuine
worship
but
of
gouernment
.
God
can
be
,
and
is
worshipped
,
without
these
,
and
was
worshipped
as
sincerely
as
now
hee
is
,
when
they
were
not
,
but
the
Ecclesissticall
state
vnder
a
kingdome
cannot
be
peaceably
gouerned
without
these
.
God
is
worshipped
alike
in
Geneua
and
in
England
▪
though
this
gouernment
and
these
offices
,
are
not
in
Geneua
which
are
in
England
.
And
God
is
worshipped
as
sincerely
,
and
as
fully
,
and
amplely
in
our
parish
Churches
as
in
our
cathederal
churches
,
and
by
ordinarie
pastors
,
as
by
Bishops
,
so
that
their
ministeries
and
high
callings
doe
not
afforde
them
any
greater
or
other
meanes
to
worship
God
;
then
they
had
when
they
were
first
admitted
to
be
priuate
ministers
.
But
their
places
,
and
high
callings
do
strengthen
and
arme
them
with
authoritie
for
the
better
gouerning
of
the
churches
which
are
committed
to
them
,
wheras
being
but
priuate
ministers
,
they
had
no
such
charge
of
gouernment
.
These
things
therefore
are
not
morall
or
doctrinall
,
&
therefore
belong
not
vnto
worship
,
but
politicall
,
and
therefore
belong
vnto
gouernment
.
And
according
to
the
course
of
the
holy
Bible
,
that
which
is
politicall
&
that
which
is
morall
,
being
of
sundrie
natures
,
are
to
be
distinguished
the
one
from
the
other
.
God
in
his
word
established
3.
lawes
among
his
people
,
one
politicall
,
which
did
bind
the
Iewes
to
the
obseruation
of
it
,
but
,
it
was
not
imposed
vpon
other
nations
that
they
should
be
bound
to
receiue
it
,
further
then
that
it
might
stand
with
the
peace
,
and
good
of
the
state
.
The
other
ceremoniall
which
was
to
abide
in
force
till
the
comming
of
our
Sauiour
,
and
by
his
death
to
be
abolished
,
so
that
now
ceremonies
vnder
the
Gospell
doe
cease
,
excepting
those
only
which
serue
,
not
for
worship
,
but
decensie
,
comlinesse
,
and
good
order
,
and
so
the
primitiue
Church
did
in
the
dayes
of
the
Apostles
,
and
the
Church
of
Geneua
now
doth
deuise
ceremonies
,
witnes
their
owne
Booke
of
Lawes
,
and
that
all
1.
Cor.
11.
Churches
may
doe
the
like
,
witnes
Caluin
,
Beza
,
Vrsinus
,
their
owne
Doctors
.
The
third
morall
,
which
containeth
rules
of
Gods
worship
,
which
was
from
the
beginning
,
and
must
continue
as
a
patterne
of
holines
to
the
ende
,
and
bindeth
all
to
the
obseruation
of
it
.
But
this
is
no
part
of
that
lawe
,
and
all
these
three
Lawes
differ
in
nature
one
from
the
other
.
Secondly
,
that
such
Churches
,
and
Church
offices
,
are
not
humane
inuentions
,
I
proue
by
euident
demonstration
.
For
,
the
first
Church
ministeriall
that
euer
was
,
had
ordination
from
God
,
which
was
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
vnder
Aaron
and
his
successours
,
and
that
Church
was
both
Diocesan
,
and
prouinciall
,
and
also
nationall
,
hauing
all
rites
and
iurisdiction
which
a
Diocesan
,
or
prouinciall
,
or
nationall
church
euer
had
or
coulde
haue
.
Also
vnder
the
Gospell
,
Saint
Paul
by
warrant
from
the
holy
Ghost
,
appointed
Timothy
a
prouinciall
Bishop
of
Ephesus
,
hauing
many
Bishops
vnder
him
,
and
Titus
a
nationall
Bishop
ouer
all
the
kingdome
of
Crete
,
hauing
many
Churches
and
Bishops
vnder
him
,
witnesse
Tit.
1.
5.
.
1
Tim.
1.
3
Eeseb
.
hist.
l.
3.
c.
4.
not
onely
the
Scriptures
,
but
also
Eusebius
,
his
wordes
being
these
:
Timotheus
sanè
primus
Ephesinae
paraechiae
,
sicut
&
Titus
Cretensium
Ecclesiarum
Episcopatum
sortitus
scribitur
.
Timothy
was
the
first
Bishop
of
the
whole
praecinct
of
Ephesus
,
in
as
ample
manner
as
Titus
of
all
the
Churches
of
Creete
.
Thus
haue
I
freed
our
Church
Gouernment
vnder
Diocesan
and
Prouinciall
Bishops
,
from
that
slanderous
imputation
of
idolatry
,
seeing
their
institution
is
of
God
,
and
no
way
opposite
to
his
commandement
.
In
his
second
argument
,
he
defineth
that
onely
to
be
a
visible
Church
,
which
is
indued
with
outward
spirituall
gouernment
.
And
so
concludeth
,
that
there
can
be
no
Diocesan
or
Prouinciall
,
or
Nationall
Church
,
nor
by
a
consequent
,
any
such
Bishop
,
but
onely
parish
Churches
,
and
by
the
like
consequent
,
parish
Bishops
.
The
reason
of
this
sequell
,
he
produceth
onely
this
:
Because
,
if
there
might
be
such
Diocesan
,
or
Prouinciall
,
or
Nationall
Churches
ministeriall
,
or
indued
with
Church
gouernment
,
then
also
would
it
follow
,
that
there
might
be
a
Catholike
,
or
vniuersall
Church
,
visible
ministeriall
;
and
so
by
a
consequent
,
the
Papists
might
lawfully
inforce
a
Catholike
gouernment
,
and
so
establish
the
Papacie
againe
.
To
the
sequell
of
which
sequell
I
answer
,
it
is
no
good
consequence
,
that
;
it
being
granted
one
may
be
a
Bishop
ouer
one
Diocesse
,
Prouince
,
or
Nation
:
therefore
one
may
bee
a
Bishoppe
ouer
the
world
.
For
first
,
one
Bishoppe
cannot
gouerne
the
whole
worlde
,
consisting
of
manie
Kingdomes
,
Oligarchies
,
and
Democraticall
states
,
and
subiect
to
seuerall
Princes
,
and
temporall
gouernours
,
as
he
can
one
Diocesse
,
Prouince
,
or
Nation
,
subiect
to
one
secular
Prince
.
And
secondly
,
we
haue
no
example
of
any
vniuersall
Bishoppe
that
euer
was
since
the
beginning
of
the
world
,
not
the
Pope
himselfe
,
which
chalengeth
that
title
,
For
the
east
part
of
the
world
,
which
is
the
Greeke
Church
,
was
neuer
yet
subiect
vnto
him
,
neither
could
be
induced
to
vse
the
same
rites
,
ceremonies
,
&
leitourgie
which
he
vseth
.
But
of
prouinciall
and
nationall
Bishops
,
wee
haue
examples
out
of
the
Scriptures
:
the
high
Priestes
among
the
Iewes
were
so
ordained
of
God
,
&
that
office
not
only
ceremoniall
,
but
also
politicall
;
which
office
,
so
farre
as
it
was
politicall
,
might
as
well
continew
,
and
be
executed
in
the
same
Temple
by
Saint
Iames
,
the
first
Archbishop
of
Ierusalem
vnder
the
Gospel
,
as
it
was
by
the
high
Priests
vnder
the
Law
,
that
which
was
ceremoniall
being
abolished
,
euen
as
the
obseruation
of
the
Sabaoth
,
beeing
partly
ceremoniall
,
&
partly
morall
,
the
ceremony
being
out
of
date
,
that
which
is
morall
,
doth
abide
.
Our
Sauiour
in
the
Gospel
reformed
the
Temple
,
but
he
did
not
plucke
it
downe
,
to
shew
that
it
Ioh.
2.
15.
might
continue
still
being
lawfully
vsed
.
Hauing
answered
his
arguments
,
we
will
come
to
his
suppositions
,
and
bare
coniectures
,
which
without
shew
of
argument
,
he
bringeth
in
defence
of
his
assertion
.
Hee
distinguisheth
Bishops
into
sixe
sorts
,
two
lawfull
,
a
parishionall
Bishop
,
or
ordinary
Pastour
,
and
a
Diocesan
titular
Bishop
,
who
hath
a
bare
title
aboue
others
,
but
no
Episcopall
iurisdiction
at
all
:
these
two
sortes
it
pleaseth
him
to
allow
.
A
Diocesan
ruling
Bishop
,
which
hath
more
power
than
Parsons
of
parish
Churches
,
yet
not
sole
power
to
rule
in
his
Diocesse
,
a
Diocesan
Lord
Bishop'
which
ruleth
by
his
sole
authoritie
,
a
Patriarke
,
and
a
Pope
;
which
foure
sorts
he
condemneth
as
repugnant
to
the
lawes
of
the
Scriptures
.
To
speake
therefore
of
the
first
,
which
is
but
a
Parson
of
a
parish
;
what
example
can
he
alledge
to
proue
,
that
euer
there
was
,
or
place
of
Scripture
to
proue
that
there
ought
to
be
such
a
Bishop
?
His
bare
opinion
without
proofe
,
can
be
no
satisfaction
to
perswade
others
,
howsoeuer
in
his
owne
conceit
,
he
may
please
himselfe
.
He
alledgeth
,
that
all
Bishops
mentioned
in
the
new
Testament
,
and
in
the
Ecclesiasticall
writers
which
were
within
200.
yeares
after
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
were
such
Bishops
.
But
that
is
his
owne
assertion
without
proofe
,
neither
doth
hee
instance
in
any
author
which
doth
affirme
the
same
.
To
disproue
him
,
besides
that
,
neither
parish
Churches
,
nor
parishes
were
erected
or
instituted
vntill
260.
yeares
after
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
in
the
Platina
dvitis
pontiofi●um
.
Charion
Monarch
.
4.
daies
of
Dionysius
Bishoppe
of
Rome
,
and
that
they
had
their
institution
not
from
God
,
but
from
the
Pope
,
whereas
wee
haue
examples
of
Diocesan
Churches
out
of
Gods
word
,
as
before
I
haue
proued
:
that
all
the
Bishoppes
mentioned
in
Ecclesiasticall
writers
,
within
200.
yeares
after
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
were
not
parish
Bishops
:
wee
haue
for
instance
Iulian
,
the
tenth
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
in
the
yeare
of
our
Lord
181.
which
was
Bishop
of
many
Churches
.
For
Eusebius
Euseb.
hist.
l.
●
.
c.
9.
writeth
:
Alexandrinarum
Ecclesiarum
Episcopatum
accepit
:
he
tooke
vpon
him
the
Bishopricke
of
the
Churches
of
Alexandria
.
And
againe
,
Eusebius
writeth
of
a
Bishop
which
was
set
ouer
many
Bishops
long
before
that
time
,
in
the
daies
of
Saint
Iohn
the
Euangelist
,
and
by
the
appointment
of
St.
Iohn
himselfe
.
His
words
are
these
:
Post
,
mortuo
tyranno
quùm
Easeb
.
hist.
l.
3.
c.
●0
.
ex
insu●â
Pathmo
Ephesum
reuersus
esset
,
abijt
etiam
rogatus
ad
vicina
gentium
loca
,
vt
partim
constitueret
Episcopos
,
partim
totas
Ecclesias
componeret
,
partim
clerum
ex
his
quos
spiritus
sanctus
indica●a●
,
sorte
deligeret
.
Quùm
ergò
ad
ciuitatem
quandam
haud
procul
dissitam
,
cuiui
etiam
nomen
nonnulli
dicunt
,
venisset
,
verso
ad
cum
vultu
qui
supèr
cunctos
Episcopos
erat
constitutus
,
adolescentem
corpore
valido
,
facie
eleganti
,
animoque
feruenti
conspicatus
,
hunc
,
inquit
,
tibi
summo
studio
,
testibus
Christo
&
Ecclesiâ
commendo
.
When
the
Tyran
(
meaning
Domitian
)
was
dead
,
hee
returned
out
of
Pathmos
to
Ephesus
,
at
the
request
of
others
,
he
visited
the
places
bordering
there
vpon
,
that
he
might
ordaine
Bishops
,
constitute
Churches
,
and
elect
clergy
men
by
lots
,
whom
the
holy
Goost
had
assigned
.
And
comming
to
a
Citie
not
farre
of
,
which
by
many
other
writers
is
expressy
named
,
hee
cast
his
eye
vpon
that
Bishop
which
was
set
ouer
all
the
rest
,
and
committed
to
his
tuition
,
a
young
Gentleman
proper
in
body
,
and
faire
in
face
,
youthfull
in
courage
,
saying
:
I
doe
earnestly
commend
vnto
you
this
young
man
,
witnesses
Christ
and
his
Church
.
Such
pregnant
examples
,
all
making
against
him
,
and
none
for
him
,
that
ye
may
know
what
motiue
hath
induced
him
to
write
,
that
all
Bishoppes
within
200.
yeares
mentioned
in
Eusebius
,
,
were
but
parish
Bishops
:
surely
he
suffered
himselfe
willingly
to
be
deceiued
by
the
fallacye
,
called
,
fallacia
figurae
dictionis
.
For
,
Eusebius
(
saith
he
)
sheweth
that
the
Churches
of
most
famous
Cities
,
were
but
parishes
onely
,
as
the
parish
of
Ierusalem
,
the
parish
of
Ephesus
,
of
Alexandria
,
Assert
.
2.
Euseb.
hist.
l.
3
c.
11.
l.
3.
c.
28.
l.
2.
c.
13.
l.
4.
c.
11.
&c.
22.
Hierapolis
,
&c.
But
all
the
cunning
resteth
in
the
proofe
therof
,
to
shew
that
Eusebius
did
call
them
parishes
.
Eusebius
indeed
writeth
,
that
Celedion
and
Agrippa
were
Bishops
in
Alexandrinâ
paraechia
,
and
so
that
Dionysius
in
paraechia
Corinthiorum
Episcopatum
tenuit
.
But
can
Maister
Iacob
be
so
simple
,
as
to
take
that
weake
aduantage
of
the
word
,
and
so
to
interpret
that
Latine
word
paraechia
,
parish
in
the
English
tongue
?
and
to
restraine
that
word
in
Eusebius
,
to
as
small
limits
and
confines
as
a
parish
is
with
vs
,
that
all
the
Christians
in
it
might
meete
together
in
one
place
to
heare
Diuine
seruice
,
as
with
vs
for
the
most
part
they
doe
?
though
in
some
places
they
cannot
doe
so
.
Can
hee
thinke
this
a
good
argument
,
that
the
praecincts
of
their
Bishoprickes
,
were
called
by
this
generall
name
paraechiae
,
bounds
,
or
borders
,
containing
and
including
some
set
compasse
of
ground
and
place
;
and
this
generall
name
paraechia
,
may
also
include
the
small
circuit
of
a
parish
,
as
well
as
a
larger
iurisdiction
:
therefore
they
were
but
parish
Bishops
?
that
the
precincts
of
their
Bishoprickes
were
no
larger
then
the
praecincts
of
a
parish
,
and
that
their
Episcopall
authoritie
,
was
no
more
then
the
iurisdiction
of
euery
priuate
Pastour
?
In
like
sort
may
I
as
well
conclude
,
that
paraechia
doth
also
signifie
a
larger
iurisdiction
,
so
as
it
haue
confines
,
and
a
certaine
limitation
,
as
a
Diocesse
,
a
Prouince
,
a
whole
Kingdome
:
therefore
that
they
were
Diocesan
,
Prouinciall
,
and
Nationall
Bishops
.
It
is
well
knowne
that
Alexandria
conteined
many
Churches
,
as
appeareth
by
Eusebius
,
whom
I
haue
alreadie
cited
,
where
he
saith
,
that
Inlian
the
tenth
,
had
Alexandrinarum
Ecclesiarum
Episcopatum
,
Euseb
lib.
5.
hist.
c.
9.
the
Bishopricke
of
the
Churches
of
Alexandria
.
And
againe
,
where
we
writeth
:
Primus
post
Marcum
Apostolvm
&
Euangelistam
Eeseb
.
hist.
l
4.
ca.
24.
Anianus
paraechiae
Alexandrinae
administrationem
suscepit
:
Anianus
immediately
succeeded
Marke
the
Apostle
and
Euangelist
,
in
the
gouernment
of
the
paraechia
of
Alexandria
.
That
this
parechia
was
such
a
limitation
as
contained
in
it
many
Churches
,
it
is
manifest
by
the
confession
of
Eusebius
,
where
he
hath
these
words
:
that
Saint
Marke
did
primuus
Ecclesias
Alexandriae
constituere
:
first
institute
the
Churches
of
Hist.
l.
2.
c.
16.
Alexandria
.
So
then
,
if
because
of
the
word
paraechia
,
Ananias
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
should
be
held
onely
for
a
parish
Bishop
,
by
the
like
absurditie
,
Saint
Marke
,
which
was
an
Euangelist
,
and
did
first
conuert
the
Citizens
of
Alexandria
,
and
instituted
many
Churches
there
,
should
not
haue
authority
ouer
his
owne
Churches
,
which
his
selfe
instituted
,
but
onely
pastorall
authority
ouer
one
of
them
,
because
hee
was
Alexandrinae
Ecclesiae
administrator
,
gouernour
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
:
as
Eusebius
writeth
.
And
,
that
being
an
Euangelist
,
and
of
higher
authority
,
which
founded
many
churches
,
should
not
be
Bishoppe
ouer
as
many
as
Iulian
his
successour
,
which
was
no
Euangelist
,
nor
founded
none
,
and
therefore
was
of
lesse
dignitie
and
authority
,
because
the
argument
must
follow
,
being
deriued
from
the
word
in
the
singular
number
,
hee
did
Alexandrinam
Ecclesiam
administrare
,
gouerne
the
Church
of
Alexandria
.
And
,
what
is
the
true
grammaticall
signification
of
this
Greeke
word
(
paroicia
)
of
whom
paraechia
,
the
Latine
is
deriued
,
no
better
witnesse
then
Scapula
himselfe
,
which
in
his
Lexicon
writeth
;
That
it
signifieth
any
iurisdiction
which
is
limitted
,
or
any
Church
,
bee
it
great
or
small
,
or
manie
Churches
.
His
wordes
are
these
:
(
paroicia
)
incolam
esse
,
item
accolarum
conuentus
,
&
accolatus
,
sacraqúe
vicinia
,
prò
Ecclesiâ
vsurpari
dicitur
Can:
18.
Concilij
Ancyrani
.
And
,
to
speake
of
the
Bishoppe
without
a
Bishopricke
,
whom
hee
calleth
Titular
Diocesan
,
I
would
gladly
haue
for
instance
,
when
,
and
where
there
was
anie
such
Bishoppe
?
For
proofe
thereof
,
hee
alleageth
nothing
else
,
but
his
owne
doubtfull
coniecture
,
saying
:
Perhaps
Iulian
,
the
tenth
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
was
the
first
of
that
sort
.
And
againe
:
It
seemeth
to
me
that
this
was
Ieroms
meaning
,
that
the
first
ruling
Bishop
was
Diony
sius
,
the
thirteenth
Bishop
of
Alexandria
.
And
againe
,
At
Heracles
it
is
probable
there
was
a
period
of
one
sort
of
Bishops
,
and
with
Diony
sius
began
another
.
That
priority
of
order
of
one
Bishop
ouer
a
parish
,
seemeth
to
haue
continued
from
Marcus
to
Iulianus
.
And
againe
,
Nothing
letteth
vs
,
but
that
we
may
thinke
,
&c.
To
which
I
answer
:
his
bare
&
naked
coniectures
,
and
idle
surmises
,
grounded
vpon
no
reason
nor
authoritie
,
or
proofe
,
but
onely
vpon
:
perhaps
,
it
seemeth
,
it
is
probable
,
nothing
letteth
but
that
we
may
thinke
,
are
no
warrant
to
the
state
to
disturbe
the
peace
,
and
discipline
of
our
Church
so
long
established
,
and
to
ouerthrow
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
,
which
hath
continued
among
vs
since
Christian
religion
was
first
planted
,
and
the
land
conuerted
to
the
faith
.
And
therefore
to
him
may
fitly
be
applied
,
the
saying
of
St.
Paul
:
They
would
be
Doctours
of
the
law
,
and
vnderstand
not
what
they
1.
Tim.
1.
7
speake
,
neither
whereof
they
affirme
.
It
is
more
safe
to
beleeue
with
the
Church
,
that
Iulian
the
10.
was
not
the
first
Bishop
which
had
many
Churches
vnder
him
in
title
and
name
,
but
that
all
his
nine
predecessours
,
Marcus
,
Anianus
,
Albialus
,
Cerdon
,
Pius
,
lustus
,
and
the
rest
,
had
the
same
praeheminence
which
hee
had
,
and
especially
Saint
Marke
being
an
Euangelist
,
and
the
first
conuerter
of
that
people
,
and
founder
of
those
Churches
.
And
that
in
other
places
,
Bishoppes
were
set
ouer
many
Churches
before
his
time
,
because
I
haue
instanced
out
of
Eusebius
alreadie
in
a
Bishop
in
Saint
Iohns
daies
,
which
was
suprà
cunctes
Episcopos
constitutus
,
set
ouer
all
the
Bishops
in
that
place
.
And
it
is
far
safer
to
beleeue
the
wordes
of
Eusebius
:
Alexandrinarum
Ecclesiarum
Episcopatum
accepit
,
&
suprà
omnes
Episcopos
constitutus
est
,
hee
was
Bishoppe
of
the
Churches
of
Alexandria
,
and
,
hee
was
set
ouer
all
the
Bishoppes
,
to
bee
vnderstoode
of
both
title
and
iurisdiction
,
according
to
the
interpretation
,
vse
,
and
practise
of
all
Churches
,
and
not
of
bare
title
,
without
iurisdiction
,
rather
then
to
subscribe
to
Maister
Iacob
,
his
opinion
,
which
hath
nothing
to
ground
vpon
,
but
his
owne
opinion
,
which
hath
no
better
proofe
,
then
teste
me
ipso
,
witnesse
my
owne
selfe
.
And
,
not
to
passe
ouer
with
silence
those
foure
sorts
of
Bishoppes
whom
hee
condemneth
as
vnlawfull
.
Maiority
,
saith
he
,
of
ruling
Bishoppes
in
the
Diocesse
,
seemeth
to
haue
begun
with
Dionysius
,
the
next
successour
after
Heraclas
.
To
which
I
answere
as
before
.
Quaedam
videntur
&
non
sunt
,
many
things
seeme
to
be
otherwise
then
they
are
:
among
which
,
this
his
supposition
is
one
.
Againe
,
Quoedam
videntur
paucioribus
&
indoctioribus
,
quaedam
pluribus
&
san
oribus
,
that
may
seeme
so
to
the
fewest
,
and
vnlearnedest
,
but
to
the
most
and
soundest
of
iudgement
,
it
seemeth
otherwise
,
that
this
maiority
of
ruling
in
the
Diocesse
,
began
in
Alexandria
,
not
with
Dionysius
which
was
the
fourteenth
,
but
with
S.
Marke
which
was
the
first
Bishop
of
that
place
;
and
with
the
Apostles
in
other
places
:
and
so
continued
by
succession
from
them
,
vntill
these
daies
,
vnlesse
when
their
succession
was
interrupted
by
warres
,
or
schisme
,
or
persecution
.
But
to
come
to
a
Diocesan
Lord
Bishop
,
ruling
by
his
sole
power
,
which
is
indeed
,
the
chiefe
matter
now
in
question
.
Such
a
Bishop
,
saith
hee
,
seemeth
not
to
haue
beene
established
in
Ambrose
,
Ierom
,
and
Augustines
time
.
It
may
be
it
seemeth
not
so
to
Maister
Iacob
;
but
it
seemed
so
to
Zozomene
,
that
Saint
Ambrose
himselfe
did
rule
like
a
Lord
Bishoppe
Sozom.
l.
7.
ca.
24.
by
his
sole
authority
,
when
meeting
the
Emperour
Theodosius
as
hee
went
to
Church
,
without
any
consent
or
consultation
had
with
other
Priests
,
on
a
suddaine
took
him
by
the
gowne
in
the
sight
of
the
people
,
interdicted
him
both
from
the
holy
communion
&
the
Church
,
for
the
offence
he
had
committed
;
and
the
Emperour
obeyed
his
authority
.
His
wordes
are
these
:
Imperator
quum
Mediolanum
venisset
,
ad
Ecclesiam
processit
vt
oraret
.
Sed
quùm
ad
ostium
iam
pernenisset
,
occurrit
et
Ambrosius
eius
ciuitatis
Episcopus
:
&
apprehensâ
illius
purpû-â
in
prae●entiâ
populi
,
siste
gradum
inquit
,
homini
enim
ob
peccata
prophano
,
&
manus
innoxio
sanguine
comaculatas
habenti
,
fa●
non
est
antequam
poenitentiam
egerit
,
vel
sacrum
ingredi
solium
vel
ad
diuinorum
mysteriorum
communionem
admitti
.
Imperator
libertatem
sacerdotis
admiratu●
,
cogitationibus
conscientiam
accusantibus
,
regressus
est
poenitentia
compunctus
.
The
Emperour
,
when
he
came
to
Millanie
,
went
towards
the
church
to
pray
,
when
he
was
but
at
the
doore
:
Ambrose
,
the
Bishop
of
that
citie
,
ran
to
him
,
caught
him
by
his
purple
robe
in
the
presence
of
the
people
,
commanded
him
to
stay
there
,
shewing
that
it
was
not
permitted
him
,
hauing
defiled
his
hands
with
innocent
blood
,
to
goe
into
the
Church
,
nor
to
be
partaker
of
the
Sacrament
,
before
he
had
shewed
himselfe
penitent
.
The
Emperour
meruailed
at
the
great
spirit
of
the
Bishop
,
his
conscience
pricked
him
,
vpon
his
remorse
,
hee
went
backe
and
repented
.
And
afterward
,
more
plainly
he
saith
:
Ambrosius
Imperatorem
insimulans
,
vt
consentaneum
est
,
ab
Ecclesiâ
arcuit
,
&
à
communione
seclusit
.
Ambrose
laying
to
the
Emperour
his
charge
his
crime
which
he
committed
,
as
it
did
behooue
him
,
thrust
him
out
of
the
Church
,
&
secluded
him
from
the
communion
.
In
this
Story
,
that
action
is
ascribed
solely
vnto
the
Bishop
:
no
mention
is
made
of
any
other
,
whose
consent
was
required
.
Though
soone
after
we
doubt
not
(
saith
Maister
Iacob
)
it
tooke
place
in
the
Church
.
Therefore
,
by
his
owne
confession
,
the
office
of
Lord
Bishop
,
ruling
by
his
sole
authoritie
,
is
of
great
antiquitie
:
and
therefore
to
be
preferred
before
the
Eldership
,
which
is
but
a
nouelty
,
and
neuer
preuailed
vntill
our
age
,
and
that
but
in
some
few
Churches
.
And
that
I
may
speake
something
for
the
iustification
of
Bishoppes
,
ruling
by
their
sole
authority
,
Timothy
and
Titus
were
such
Bishops
.
Maister
Iacob
replieth
two
manner
of
waies
.
First
he
saith
:
the
Apostles
did
not
ordeine
Ministers
,
nor
censure
offenders
by
their
sole
authority
,
much
lesse
then
Timothy
and
Titus
,
which
were
inferiour
to
the
Apostles
.
For
answer
to
his
reply
,
which
consisteth
of
nothing
but
manifest
vntruthes
,
I
do
instance
in
S.
Peter
,
which
by
his
sole
authority
,
censured
Ananias
&
Suphira
,
when
they
lied
to
the
holy
Ghost
,
smiting
them
with
present
death
:
&
St.
Paul
,
which
alone
censured
Elymas
the
sorcerer
,
when
he
smote
him
Acts.
5.
Act.
13.
11
with
blindnes
,
for
seeking
to
peruert
the
deputy
from
the
faith
,
And
both
these
censures
were
then
in
the
place
of
excommunication
,
Vide
Bucerum
dè
clauibus
.
1.
Cor.
16.
22.
anathema
marannatha
.
Politiae
Iudaicae
.
c.
2.
which
is
now
the
ordinarie
censure
of
the
church
.
And
besides
that
Saint
Paule
by
his
sole
authoritie
excommunicated
in
general
,
all
that
loued
not
the
Lord
Iesus
;
euen
vnder
the
time
of
nature
,
Henoch
as
Cornelius
Ber●ram
writeth
in
his
booke
Printed
at
Geneua
,
and
allowed
of
by
that
church
did
alone
:
anathema
illud
solenne
suoe
aetatis
hominibus
proponere
quod
extat
Iudae
ver:
14
&
.
15.
pronounce
that
solemne
sentence
of
excommunication
against
the
men
of
his
time
,
of
which
mention
is
made
in
S.
Iude
ver.
14.
&
15.
Behold
the
Lord
commeth
with
thousands
of
his
Saints
to
giue
iudgement
,
&c.
And
so
did
Saint
Ambrose
,
by
their
examples
.
And
as
for
making
Ministers
,
our
Bishops
doe
not
conferre
orders
alone
,
but
assisted
with
other
ministers
which
ioyne
with
them
in
prayer
&
imposition
of
hands
.
Yet
still
the
chiefest
authoritie
resteth
in
Bishops
,
as
S.
Paule
writeth
to
Titus
:
For
this
cause
I
left
thee
in
Creete
,
that
thou
shouldest
ordaine
Elders
in
euery
citie
.
And
to
Timothy
:
Tit:
1
5.
lay
hands
sodainly
on
no
man
:
by
which
words
it
appeareth
that
ordination
,
&
imposition
of
hands
belong
to
the
Bishops
1.
Tit:
5.
22.
principally
,
and
to
the
inferiour
Ministers
but
as
assistants
to
the
Bishop
.
But
that
it
belonged
to
the
same
men
to
censure
offenders
,
&
rule
by
their
sole
authoritie
,
the
places
of
Scripture
doe
make
it
so
plaine
,
that
ir
may
not
be
denied
.
Rebuke
1.
Tim:
●
.
v.
1.
9.
11.
17.
19.
21.
not
an
Elder
,
but
exhort
him
as
a
Father
.
Let
not
a
widdow
be
taken
into
the
number
vnder
60
yeares
old
.
Refuse
the
yonger
widdowes
.
The
elders
that
rule
wel
,
let
them
be
had
in
doble
honor
,
Obserue
these
things
without
preferring
one
before
another
,
&
doe
nothing
partially
Receiue
no
accusation
against
an
elder
,
but
vnder
2.
or
3
witnesses
.
Secondly
,
he
saith
:
that
if
these
things
were
granted
,
that
Timothy
&
Titus
ruled
by
their
sole
anthoritie
,
it
would
not
follow
that
therefore
our
Bishops
might
do
the
like
:
his
reason
is
this
:
For
,
saith
he
,
they
are
not
to
be
reckoned
in
the
catalogue
of
Bishops
;
neither
were
they
properly
called
Bishops
,
because
they
were
not
affixed
to
certaine
places
,
but
often
remoued
to
other
churches
as
the
Apostles
did
.
Which
reason
I
refute
by
manifest
text
,
for
as
much
as
Timothy
was
affixed
to
Ephesus
as
his
proper
charge
,
and
so
Titus
to
Creete
as
to
his
peculiar
place
,
witnesseth
the
Apostle
.
I
besougbt
thee
to
abide
still
in
Ephesus
.
For
this
cause
haue
I
left
1.
Tim.
1.
3.
Tit.
1.
5.
thee
in
Creete
that
thou
shouldest
continue
there
to
redresse
the
things
that
remaine
But
what
then
,
though
they
afterward
remoued
,
and
were
called
to
other
places
?
so
are
our
Bishops
also
,
and
priuate
pastours
,
oftentimes
called
from
one
congregation
to
another
.
I
cannot
deny
,
but
the
cannon
Lawe
hath
determined
,
that
Bishops
shal
not
remoue
from
one
Bishopricke
to
another
,
without
some
vrgent
cause
,
as
when
they
are
required
by
another
Church
,
their
gifts
beeing
thought
fitter
for
a
greater
charge
,
and
the
lawe
is
grounded
vpon
the
decrees
of
the
first
generall
councell
of
Nice
,
which
so
concludeth
:
Episcopus
,
Presbyter
,
aut
diaconus
,
non
aebet
transferri
ab
vnâ
ciuitate
ad
a●iam
,
quia
id
est
contrà
regulas
,
&
si
transferatur
,
Concilij
Niceni
:
1.
Can:
15.
&
16.
mitti
debet
ad
ciuitatem
vbi
primò
ora●â●us
fuit
.
It
is
against
the
Canons
,
that
Bishops
,
Priests
,
Deacons
,
should
bee
translated
,
and
therefore
,
if
any
be
so
translated
,
let
them
be
dismissed
,
and
sent
backe
to
the
places
to
which
they
were
first
appointed
.
And
,
Qui
discedit
ab
Ecclesiâ
sibi
commissa
,
ad
aliam
,
excommunicetur
,
&
reuerti
cogatur
.
Who
so
remoueth
from
one
Church
to
another
,
let
him
be
excommunicated
,
&
forced
to
his
first
charge
.
But
these
are
the
ordinances
of
men
,
we
find
nothing
in
the
word
of
God
,
why
Bishops
may
not
be
translated
,
neither
doth
it
followe
that
Timothy
and
Titus
were
not
to
be
reckoned
for
Bishops
,
because
they
remoued
from
one
place
to
another
.
Last
of
all
,
Patriarchical
Churches
(
saith
he
)
beganne
sometimes
before
the
councell
of
Nice
.
I
answer
,
therefore
they
are
of
more
credit
then
the
Presbyterie
,
which
beganne
but
with
Maister
Caluin
.
And
as
for
that
Councell
,
it
was
in
the
pure
age
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
before
corruption
crept
in
,
it
was
the
first
general
councell
,
and
therefore
of
greater
authoritie
,
called
by
the
Emperour
and
not
by
the
Pope
,
and
therefore
freest
from
suspition
,
a
Greeke
,
and
not
a
Latine
Councel
,
therefore
more
sincere
.
And
whereas
it
seemeth
to
him
,
that
patriarchical
Bishops
began
but
sometime
before
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
it
seemeth
to
the
Councel
it selfe
,
that
they
began
long
before
,
because
the
Canon
it selfe
speaketh
in
this
manner
:
Seruetur
antiqua
consuetudo
,
vt
Episcopus
Alexandrinus
habeat
potestatem
in
Aegyptum
,
Pentapolin
,
Libiam
,
quià
&
Episcopo
Concil:
Nicen
1.
Can.
6.
Romano
parilis
mos
est
,
sie
apud
Antiochiam
,
&
ceteras
Ecclesias
sua
priuilegia
seruentur
.
Let
the
ancient
custome
be
kept
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
haue
his
iurisdiction
ouer
Aegypt
,
Pentapolis
and
Libia
,
because
the
Bishop
of
Rome
hath
the
like
custome
,
so
let
the
Church
of
Antiochia
and
other
Churches
keepe
their
priuiledges
.
But
if
patriarchicall
churches
be
of
such
reuerend
antiquitie
,
and
allowed
of
by
so
venerable
a
councell
:
that
maketh
much
for
the
credite
,
and
dignitie
of
Diocesan
churches
,
which
are
more
ancient
and
of
lesse
iurisdiction
,
and
not
so
subiect
to
enuie
,
and
nere
vnto
Papacie
,
as
the
Patriarchicall
churches
are
.
It
cannot
be
denied
,
but
the
Fathers
which
were
present
in
that
Councel
,
were
prouincial
,
Diocesan
,
and
patriarchicall
Bishops
,
ruling
by
their
sole
authoritie
.
And
concerning
the
credit
of
that
councell
,
with
the
other
three
following
,
which
were
oecumenicall
,
as
that
was
;
Gregory
affirmeth
that
their
doctrine
and
decrees
were
consonant
to
the
writings
of
the
4.
Euangelists
,
and
no
way
to
be
impeached
.
And
Maister
Iacob
his
owne
Doctor
,
whom
hee
Grëg
:
li.
1.
epist
24.
Pag.
31.
Respons:
ad
4.
Campiani
rationem
.
calleth
the
reuerend
Maister
Whitaker
,
giueth
as
large
a
testimonie
of
them
,
saying
:
Et
nos
illorum
quatuor
Conciliorum
saluberimam
fuisse
authoritatem
planissimè
confitemur
.
Maister
Iacob
therefore
,
must
either
denie
the
authoritie
of
his
own
Doctor
,
and
of
this
Councell
,
which
no
learned
man
will
doe
,
or
else
subscribe
to
the
state
of
Diocesan
Bishops
ruling
by
their
sole
authoritie
,
which
hitherto
he
hath
impugned
.
Of
Cathedrall
Churches
.
IN
defence
of
Cathedrall
Churches
,
wee
haue
to
alledge
,
Platima
dè
vitis
Pontificum
.
Carion
in
ann●l
:
monar
.
that
till
the
time
of
Dionysius
Pope
of
Rome
,
no
other
kinde
of
Church
ministeriall
was
euer
heard
of
from
the
beginning
of
the
world
.
For
,
from
Adam
to
Moses
there
was
no
Church
ministeriall
at
all
.
In
Moses
his
time
,
a
Tabernacle
was
erected
by
Gods
commandement
,
which
stood
in
steede
of
a
Church
for
all
the
land
of
Iudaea
,
and
was
to
be
caried
vp
and
downe
,
vntill
the
dayes
of
Solomon
.
But
Solomon
erected
Exed
:
25.
40.
Act:
7.
44
2.
Sam:
7.
6.
Act.
7
,
47.
a
Temple
as
a
standing
church
at
Ierusalem
,
to
be
in
the
place
of
the
Tabernacle
.
And
vntill
the
time
of
the
Gospell
there
was
no
other
Church
for
Gods
people
through
the
whole
world
.
And
that
Church
was
more
then
Diocesan
,
or
Prouinciall
,
for
it
was
Nationall
.
After
the
Gospell
was
preached
to
the
Gentiles
,
&
al
nations
were
conuerted
,
sundry
churches
ministeriall
were
erected
,
according
to
the
number
of
the
Bishops
,
so
that
euery
Bishop
had
his
Church
after
the
imitation
of
the
Iewes
,
which
hauing
but
one
Bishoprik
,
had
also
but
one
Church
for
that
whole
nation
,
vntill
afterward
humane
politie
vnder
Dionysius
the
Pope
deuised
parish
churches
,
and
diuided
euery
Bishoprik
into
particular
constant
congregations
,
which
were
but
members
of
the
Diocesan
and
prouinciall
Churches
.
But
saith
Maister
Iacob
,
Although
the
Iewish
Church
were
nationall
vnder
one
Bishop
or
high
Priest
according
to
Gods
ordinance
,
yet
now
vnder
the
Gospell
,
our
Sauiour
Christ
hath
changed
that
forme
of
gouernment
into
parochiall
Churches
,
which
are
euery
one
a
particular
congregation
,
and
euery
particular
congregation
is
a
diuided
body
by
it selfe
,
and
of
it selfe
a
visible
Church
,
and
being
absolute
of
it selfe
,
ought
to
vse
within
it selfe
proper
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
.
So
then
two
things
rest
to
be
proued
by
him
,
first
that
euery
particular
congregation
is
a
diuided
body
of
it selfe
,
and
secondly
,
that
euery
particular
congregation
is
to
vse
gouernment
of
it selfe
without
reference
vnto
any
other
aboue
it selfe
.
The
first
hee
would
proue
by
this
argument
.
There
was
,
saith
he
,
but
one
Church
at
Corinth
,
because
the
Apostle
saith
:
When
the
whole
church
is
come
together
in
one
place
,
&c.
And
the
same
may
be
affirmed
of
Rome
,
Antioch
,
Ierusalem
,
and
the
other
1.
Cor.
14.
23.
cities
,
therefore
in
euery
of
these
cities
,
though
they
were
so
populous
,
yet
the
beleeuers
were
so
fewe
,
that
they
all
assembled
in
one
place
.
Againe
saith
he
,
Ignatius
perswading
the
Church
of
Philadelphia
to
concorde
,
writeth
:
I
exhort
you
to
vse
one
faith
,
one
preaching
,
one
supper
of
the
Lord
,
for
there
is
Ignatius
ad
philad
:
but
(
en
thusiasterion
pase
te
ecclesia
)
one
communion
Table
to
the
whole
church
(
HERE
IN
THIS
CITIE
)
.
For
answer
whereof
I
deny
his
argument
,
for
a
man
may
in
the
like
manner
write
to
the
Citizens
of
London
dwelling
in
Bowe
parish
,
when
your
whole
Church
is
come
together
:
and
so
to
them
which
dwell
in
any
other
parish
,
though
there
be
many
other
Churches
in
London
,
and
they
not
diuided
bodies
absolute
of
themselues
,
but
all
subordinate
vnto
,
and
members
of
that
Church
which
belongeth
to
the
whole
Diocese
.
And
so
I
answer
to
Ignatius
his
wordes
:
euery
one
of
them
haue
one
communion
Table
,
not
euery
one
collectiue
,
but
distributiue
,
not
iointly
,
but
seuerally
.
But
whervnto
Ignatius
;
his
words
,
he
addeth
his
owne
words
(
HERE
IN
THIS
CITIE
)
he
dealeth
not
ingenuously
.
For
these
words
which
he
alledgeth
out
of
Ignatius
,
as
he
alledgeth
them
,
do
not
import
that
that
whole
citie
should
haue
but
one
Communion
Table
,
and
by
a
consequent
but
one
church
,
but
that
the
citie
might
haue
many
churches
,
and
euery
church
his
proper
Communion
Table
,
as
with
vs
in
this
Citie
.
And
againe
,
that
there
were
many
churches
in
those
cities
which
he
named
,
euen
in
the
Apostles
time
,
I
haue
alreadie
proued
,
when
I
shewed
out
of
Eusebius
that
not
onely
Iulian
the
10.
did
Alexandrinarum
,
Ecclesiarum
Episcopatum
accipere
,
take
vpon
him
the
gouernment
of
the
Euseb:
hist:
l.
5.
cap.
9.
l.
2.
c.
16.
churches
of
Alexandria
,
but
also
that
Saint
Marke
did
,
p●imus
Ecclesias
Alexandriae
constituere
,
first
institute
many
churches
in
Alexandria
.
And
that
the
beleeuers
were
not
so
fewe
,
as
that
they
might
be
assembled
in
one
congregation
,
it
is
euident
by
the
storie
of
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
and
because
he
nameth
Ierusalem
,
I
will
instance
in
Ierusalem
.
It
is
written
in
the
Acts
,
there
were
men
at
Ierusalem
that
feared
God
,
of
euery
nation
Act.
2.
5.
vnder
heauen
,
which
heard
the
Gospell
preached
in
their
owne
language
▪
and
concerning
the
multitude
of
these
saith
Maister
Beza
,
they
are
to
be
vnderstood
:
Quicunqù●x●eri
illo
Beza
in
annotat
:
mai●rib
in
●ilum
locum
.
tempore
Hierosolymis
vrsabantur
:
adeò
vt
non
modo
exteros
comprehendat
,
quisedes
illic
vt
in
vrbe
maximâ
,
&
frequentissimâ
posuerunt
,
sed
eos
quoqùe
qui
studiorum
,
&
religionis
discendae
cansâ
illic
ad
tempus
commorabantur
,
quorum
distributa
fuisse
collegia
intelligimus
ex
ijs
quae
narrantur
Cap
,
6.
verse
9.
and
9.
29.
All
strangers
which
at
that
time
were
resiant
at
Ierusalem
,
that
such
a
multitude
comprehendeth
not
onely
the
strangers
which
had
dwellings
there
,
being
so
great
and
populous
a
citie
,
but
also
those
which
were
students
,
and
came
thither
as
vniuersitie
men
for
learning
sake
,
which
were
diuided
into
Colledges
as
appeareth
by
the
Act.
Ch:
6.
9.
Where
there
arose
certaine
of
the
Synagogue
which
are
called
Libertines
,
&
Cyrenians
,
and
of
Alexandria
,
and
of
them
of
Silicia
,
&
Asia
,
which
disputed
with
Stephen
,
and
Act
ch
:
9.
29
where
the
Grecians
disputed
with
Paule
.
And
againe
(
saith
he
)
Oportuit
tam
amplam
ciuitatem
ad
quam
etiam
vndiqùe
Iudaei
tanqum
ad
communem
Academiam
suos
erudiendes
mittebant
,
in
varios
cae●us
distribu●
,
quos
apparet
ex
hoc
loco
pro
nationum
varietate
fuisse
distinctos
,
vt
hedie
Lutetiae
multa
collegia
,
&c.
So
spatious
a
citie
to
whom
the
Iewes
farre
and
wide
sent
their
sonnes
as
to
a
common
vniuersitie
to
be
trained
vp
,
was
of
necessitie
diuided
into
many
Colledges
,
as
it
is
now
at
Paris
,
according
the
diuersitie
of
the
nations
as
out
of
this
place
it
appeareth
&c.
Againe
,
how
did
they
all
heare
the
Gospel
preached
in
their
owne
languages
?
Narrat
Apostolus
varij●
linguis
loqui
coepisse
,
id
est
modò
hác
modò
iliâ
,
non
tamen
confusè
aut
furiosê
,
sed
prou●
h●c
vel
ille
in
varias
gentes
inciderat
,
The
Apostle
sheweth
that
they
spake
diuerse
languages
,
not
confusedly
like
mad
men
,
but
as
this
or
that
Apostle
did
happen
vpon
this
or
that
nation
so
he
spake
to
them
in
their
owne
language
.
Therefore
,
at
the
very
first
there
were
diuerse
Preachers
,
and
seuerall
congregations
,
speaking
seuerall
languages
,
vncapable
of
hearing
the
word
preached
before
them
al
at
one
time
,
as
they
which
be
but
one
church
or
congregation
.
And
againe
,
in
the
same
chap
:
v
41.
there
were
added
to
the
church
in
one
day
about
3000.
&
ver.
47.
the
Lord
added
to
the
church
from
day
to
day
.
Yet
Maister
Iacob
would
haue
all
these
,
being
so
many
thousands
,
&
so
many
nations
,
not
of
one
language
,
but
speaking
diuerse
languages
,
to
haue
bin
but
one
congregation
.
Neither
were
they
first
all
one
congregation
,
&
then
by
reason
of
their
great
increase
,
as
not
able
to
assemble
in
one
place
,
diuided
themselues
into
many
congregations
,
vpon
the
persecution
of
S.
Stephen
,
as
Mr.
Iacob
affirmeth
,
but
they
were
many
churches
at
the
first
,
as
I
haue
already
proued
,
being
seueral
nations
,
and
speaking
seuerall
languages
,
and
those
many
Act.
8.
1.
churches
were
scattered
as
it
is
written
:
A
great
persecution
was
raised
against
the
cburch
of
Ierusalem
,
&
they
were
scattered
abroad
through
the
regions
of
Iudaea
&
Samaria
.
In
which
words
the
holy
Ghost
calleth
Ierusalem
but
one
Church
,
which
wee
haue
proued
to
haue
consisted
of
diuerse
congregations
,
&
because
all
those
congregations
were
but
one
church
,
therefore
they
could
not
be
diuided
bodies
absolute
of
themselues
,
&c.
And
,
wheras
Mr.
Iacob
obiecteth
that
these
congregations
so
diuided
,
were
not
to
be
called
churches
,
because
they
were
vncertaine
,
and
but
occasionall
.
I
answer
,
that
so
were
all
other
churches
in
time
of
persecution
,
euen
those
churches
which
he
mentioneth
out
of
Ignatius
,
for
as
much
as
al
the
time
of
Ignatius
there
was
persecution
,
&
long
after
his
time
,
&
therefore
they
were
but
occasionall
,
&
vncertaine
.
But
this
disproueth
me
not
,
but
that
I
do
rightly
alledge
against
him
,
that
the
beleeuers
in
Ierusalem
were
more
then
could
be
assembled
in
one
congregation
,
&
so
in
Alexandria
,
and
other
cities
.
Secondly
,
he
goeth
about
to
proue
that
euery
congregation
is
a
diuided
body
absolute
in
it selfe
,
because
the
Scriptures
still
speake
of
the
churches
as
of
one
.
There
is
one
Body
,
one
Spirit
,
one
Lord
,
one
Eph.
4
,
4.
5.
faith
,
one
baptisme
,
&c.
To
which
I
answer
,
that
these
words
are
vnderstood
of
Christ
his
vniuersal
church
,
which
is
inded
vnica
sponsa
,
vnica
columba
,
one
Doue
,
one
spouse
,
betroathed
to
one
husband
,
one
body
knit
and
vnited
to
one
head
,
which
is
Iesus
Christ
,
for
one
head
cannot
haue
many
diuided
bodies
.
And
therfore
this
argument
maketh
against
himselfe
.
The
whole
church
is
but
one
,
&
therefore
parish
churches
are
but
members
of
that
one
,
and
not
diuided
bodies
,
for
vnitas
non
potest
diuidi
,
that
which
is
but
one
cannot
be
diuided
.
And
that
euery
parish
,
or
particular
congregation
must
vse
gouernment
within
it selfe
;
he
taketh
vpon
him
to
proue
by
the
wordes
of
our
Sauiour
:
If
thy
brother
trespasse
against
thee
,
Mat.
18.
17.
goe
tell
him
his
fault
betweene
thee
&
him
alone
if
he
heare
thee
,
thou
hast
won
thy
brother
,
if
he
heare
thee
not
,
take
with
thee
one
or
two
,
that
by
the
mouth
of
two
or
three
witnesses
euery
thing
may
be
confirmed
,
if
he
refuse
to
heare
them
,
tell
it
vnto
the
church
,
if
he
refuse
to
heare
the
church
,
let
him
be
to
thee
as
a
heathen
and
a
publican
.
Out
of
these
words
(
saith
he
)
is
proued
that
euery
ordinary
congregation
is
a
proper
visible
Church
,
and
a
visible
Church
is
but
one
congregation
,
and
euery
such
Church
is
indued
immediately
from
Christ
with
power
absolute
to
gouerne
within
it selfe
,
and
euery
member
of
the
Church
must
haue
a
sensible
and
visible
vse
of
the
whole
intirely
together
.
In
which
wordes
he
ascribeth
the
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
to
the
whole
multitude
of
euery
parish
.
Further
,
he
diuideth
this
Church
gouernment
into
these
two
parts
,
to
wit
,
excommunication
and
elections
,
so
that
euery
priuate
man
(
be
hee
neuer
so
vnfit
)
should
haue
his
free
voice
and
consent
in
all
excommunications
and
elections
.
Eor
answer
whereof
,
I
denie
his
argument
.
For
,
besides
that
,
in
the
fift
page
of
his
booke
,
hee
affirmeth
that
man
cannot
make
a
societie
to
be
a
visible
church
,
but
Christ
alone
,
and
it
is
proued
that
all
these
parishes
are
the
institution
of
men
,
which
onely
haue
distinguished
the
bounds
of
Parishes
,
and
that
very
vnequally
,
making
some
too
large
,
and
some
too
small
,
and
so
he
contradicteth
himselfe
:
the
multitude
haue
not
the
keyes
of
the
Church
committed
vnto
them
,
but
onely
the
ministers
,
where
our
Sauiour
saith
to
Peter
,
in
the
behalfe
of
the
rest
:
Tibi
dabo
claues
,
to
thee
I
will
giue
the
keyes
.
And
to
the
Apostles
,
whose
sinnes
yee
remit
,
they
are
remitted
:
and
whose
sinnes
ye
retaine
,
they
are
retained
.
And
whereas
there
be
two
keyes
Mat
:
16.
19.
Ioh.
20.
23.
of
the
Church
,
the
one
of
the
word
and
the
Sacraments
,
the
other
of
gouernment
:
the
key
of
gouernment
witnes
Maister
Beza
himselfe
,
is
not
giuen
to
all
ministers
,
much
lesse
to
the
people
,
but
onely
vnto
such
ministers
as
be
magistrates
of
the
Church
,
as
Timothy
and
Titus
was
.
For
saith
he
:
Ecclesia
interdum
prò
Senatu
Ecclesiastico
vsurpatur
vt
infrà
Cap:
Mat
:
18.
verse
17.
Dic
Ecclesiae
.
This
word
Church
,
is
sometimes
taken
for
Beza
in
annotat
:
maior
:
in
Mat
:
16.
the
senate
or
Consistorie
Ecclesiastical
,
as
Mat
:
18.
17.
where
our
Sauiour
saith
:
Tell
the
Church
.
And
his
owne
Doctor
Maister
Beza
vpon
this
place
expoundeth
these
wordes
:
Tell
the
church
,
more
at
large
in
his
notes
vpon
that
place
,
shewing
that
Maister
Iacobs
exposition
is
very
absurde
,
and
that
such
discipline
as
that
the
peoples
consent
should
bee
required
in
excommunications
,
is
very
far
from
the
discipline
receiued
in
Geneua
.
His
wordes
are
these
.
Dic
Ecclesiae
,
spectat
ad
forum
Ecclesiasticum
,
quia
versu
proximo
fit
mentio
ligandi
&
soluendi
Haec
potestas
erat
penes
eos
qui
(
archisunagogo●
)
vocantur
Marci
5.
22.
Et
huius
conscietudinis
exemplum
extat
.
Iohn
9.
22.
&
12.
42.
&
16.
2.
Vt
apud
Iudaeos
idem
fuisse
videatur
paenaegenus
(
aposunagogon
genesthai
)
atque
apud
Christianos
excommunicari
.
Sed
notandum
est
turpiter
errare
qui
ex
hoc
confici
volunt
,
dè
singulis
rebus
referendum
esse
ad
totius
multitudinis
caetum
A●unt
enim
Ecclesiae
nomen
nusquam
aliter
accipi
quod
vel
ex
hoc
ipso
loco
falsum
esse
counincitur
.
Nam
certè
,
tanquàm
aè
Iodaeis
haec
dici
apparet
,
saitem
ex
eò
quod
addit
:
sit
tibi
sicut
Ethnicus
&
publicamus
.
Sed
iudicia
de
his
rebus
penes
seniores
fuisse
apud
Iudaeos
,
nec
semper
cogi
consueuisse
totum
populi
caetum
,
omnes
illarum
rerum
scriptores
testantur
Et
certè
Christus
nisi
ad
suorum
temporum
consuetudinem
totum
hunc
sermonem
accommodasset
,
quis
eum
loqu●ntem
intellexisset
?
Quod
si
quis
excipiat
tyrannicam
fuisse
illam
consuetudinem
,
ne
id
quidem
vere
dixerit
quum
Christus
sic
loqui
non
potuer●t
,
quin
eum
morem
vt
legitimum
approbaret
.
These
words
:
te●
the
Church
,
belong
to
the
Ecclesiastical
court
,
because
in
the
9
verse
,
mention
is
made
of
binding
&
loosing
.
For
this
power
belonged
only
vnto
them
which
Mark
5.
22.
were
called
the
Rulers
of
the
Synagogs
.
And
we
haue
example
of
this
custome
.
Iohn
.
9.
22.
where
the
Iewes
had
ordeined
,
that
euery
one
which
confessed
Christ
should
be
excommunicated
out
of
the
Synagogue
.
And
Iohn
12.
42.
Among
the
chiefe
Rulers
,
many
beleeued
in
him
,
but
because
of
the
Pharisies
,
they
durst
not
cofesse
him
,
lest
they
should
be
cast
out
of
the
Synagogue
:
and
Ioh.
16.
12.
They
shall
excommunicate
you
,
and
cast
you
out
of
their
Synagogues
.
And
among
the
Iews
,
to
be
cast
cut
of
the
Synagogue
,
was
all
one
,
as
among
the
Christians
to
be
excommunicated
.
And
,
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
they
erre
filthity
,
which
out
of
this
place
conclude
:
that
in
all
matters
of
excommunication
,
the
multitude
must
be
consulted
.
And
where
●●
they
obiect
,
that
the
name
of
the
church
is
no
where
vnderstord
otherwise
then
for
the
multitude
,
their
exposition
is
out
of
this
place
conuicted
to
be
false
&
erroneous
.
For
our
Sauiour
deliuereth
these
laws
of
discipline
to
Christians
,
in
the
same
maner
as
if
he
spake
to
the
Iewes
because
he
saith
:
let
him
be
to
thee
as
an
heathen
&
a
Publican
.
But
only
the
Magistrates
among
the
Iews
,
did
exercise
these
iudgmēnts
without
the
consent
&
knowledge
of
the
people
,
as
all
their
writers
do
testifie
.
And
surely
,
vnlesse
our
Sauiour
had
applied
his
speech
vnto
the
custome
of
his
times
,
no
man
could
haue
vnderstood
what
he
meant
by
these
words
.
And
,
if
any
shall
obiect
,
that
this
custome
was
tyrannicall
and
vnlawfull
,
hee
deliuereth
an
vntruth
in
so
saying
:
because
our
Sauiour
could
not
haue
spoken
to
christians
after
this
maner
of
the
Iewes
,
vnlesse
he
had
approued
this
maner
of
excommunication
among
the
Iewes
,
which
was
by
the
Magistrates
,
and
not
by
the
people
,
to
haue
beene
also
lawfull
,
and
to
be
vsed
among
christians
.
So
farre
Theodorus
Beza
vpon
this
place
.
And
,
as
for
popular
election
,
which
is
the
other
part
of
gouernment
Ecclesiasticall
,
to
which
hee
intituleth
the
whole
multitude
:
let
the
case
be
put
,
that
sometimes
of
fact
,
the
people
had
a
consent
in
the
election
of
their
Bishops
,
in
time
of
persecution
:
and
,
when
the
church
being
not
indowed
with
any
landes
or
maintenance
,
they
liued
onely
by
charity
and
deuotion
of
the
people
:
what
proofe
hath
he
that
it
ought
to
be
so
?
or
that
euer
it
was
so
in
any
setled
estate
?
Hee
saith
it
is
plaine
,
the
people
had
their
free
election
of
their
Bishops
in
the
daies
of
Ignatius
;
because
in
one
epistle
hee
writeth
these
words
:
Prepon
esi
vmin
es
ecclesia
theou
cheirotonesai
ton
episcopon
vmon
;
which
ignorantly
he
englisheth
in
this
maner
:
It
is
meete
for
you
,
being
the
church
of
God
,
to
choose
by
common
consent
your
Bishop
.
First
,
it
is
well
knowne
,
that
when
Ignatius
liued
,
which
was
in
the
very
infancy
of
the
Church
,
there
was
neither
any
certaine
maintenance
for
the
Ministers
,
nor
any
setled
estate
of
a
Church
,
but
all
liued
vpon
the
beneuolence
of
the
people
.
Secondly
,
this
word
Church
,
signifieth
not
the
people
,
but
the
Ecclesiasticall
persons
,
as
before
I
haue
shewed
you
out
of
Mr.
Beza
.
Thirdly
,
no
learned
man
would
haue
translated
this
word
(
cheirotoneo
)
to
choose
by
common
consent
,
as
he
hath
translated
it
.
For
,
the
very
grammaticall
signification
of
this
word
is
,
not
to
elect
by
suffrages
,
or
voyces
,
or
lifting
vp
of
hands
,
as
the
people
choose
their
Mairos
,
or
Bailiffes
,
and
ciuill
officers
;
but
consecration
by
imposition
of
hands
,
as
all
Ministers
are
to
be
consecrated
,
by
the
rule
of
the
Scriptures
.
That
the
people
should
haue
any
voyce
in
elections
;
it
is
so
strange
a
position
as
was
neuer
read
of
in
the
Scriptures
.
For
,
as
no
man
Matth.
3.
Exod
3.
Exod.
4.
Matth.
4.
1
Tim.
1.
Tit.
1.
may
enter
into
the
ministerie
without
a
lawfull
calling
,
(
for
our
Sauiour
had
his
calling
from
his
Father
,
Moses
from
God
,
Aaron
from
Moses
,
the
Apostles
from
our
Sauiour
,
Timothy
&
Titus
,
from
S.
Paul
)
so
we
must
consider
in
whom
this
authority
resteth
,
to
call
men
to
the
ministery
:
for
none
of
these
of
whom
I
haue
spoken
,
had
any
consent
of
the
people
.
This
custome
of
popular
election
is
borrowed
out
of
the
Turkes
Alcaron
,
and
not
of
the
Bible
.
It
is
saide
to
the
congregation
,
concerning
the
election
of
Deacons
;
Looke
ye
out
7.
men
of
honest
conuersation
,
&c:
by
which
it
is
iustified
which
our
law
doth
require
,
that
they
vpon
whom
the
Bishoppe
Act.
6.
shall
lay
hands
,
must
bring
with
them
sufficient
testimony
of
their
worthinesse
:
but
in
the
words
following
it
is
said
;
whom
we
may
appoint
to
this
businesse
.
And
afterward
,
verse
6.
when
they
were
found
out
,
they
set
them
before
the
Apostles
,
and
the
Apostles
prayed
,
and
laide
hands
vpon
them
,
but
not
the
people
,
as
our
Bishops
assisted
with
other
ministers
,
without
the
helpe
of
the
people
,
ordeine
ministers
with
vs
.
Therefore
in
their
obiection
out
of
the
Acts
,
where
they
alleage
these
English
words
;
When
they
had
ordeined
Elders
by
Act.
14.
election
,
in
euery
Church
,
&c:
they
doe
but
deceiue
themselues
.
For
the
Greeke
word
is
(
cheirotoneo
)
of
(
cheir
)
an
hand
,
and
(
teino
)
porrigo
,
extendo
,
noteleno
,
to
reach
,
or
stretch
forth
,
or
lay
on
,
not
to
eleuate
or
lift
vp
;
so
(
cheirotoneia
)
is
not
eleuation
,
but
imposition
of
hands
,
in
Eccesiasticall
writers
.
These
words
then
:
(
cheirotonesantes
eautois
presbuterous
)
is
,
manuum
impositione
consecrantes
sibi
ipsi●
presbyteros
,
when
by
imposition
of
hands
,
they
had
consecrated
Elders
,
or
Ministers
,
as
Moses
by
imposition
of
hands
,
conferred
the
holy
Ghost
vpon
Iosua
,
and
sanctified
him
to
be
a
Magistrate
:
and
our
Deut.
24.
Matt.
19.
Sauiour
in
the
Gospel
,
by
laying
hands
on
the
children
,
blessed
them
.
And
th●●
(
cheirotoneia
)
is
expressed
more
plainely
by
another
Greeke
word
in
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
concerning
Act.
6.
the
consecration
of
Deacons
,
to
be
(
epithesis
ion
cheiron
)
imposition
of
hands
,
where
the
text
saith
:
(
proseuxamenoi
op●thecan
autois
tas
cheiras
)
when
they
had
prayed
,
they
layed
hands
vpon
them
.
And
Gual●er
in
his
Commentary
vpon
that
place
of
the
Acts
,
which
before
was
alleaged
,
when
they
had
ordeined
Elders
by
election
in
euery
Citie
,
after
he
hath
iustified
these
popular
elections
vsed
in
the
Church
of
Tigurie
,
and
dispraised
our
manner
of
ordination
,
reuoketh
himselfe
,
and
confesseth
by
the
word
(
cheirotonesantes
)
magis
verisimiliter
hîc
incelligi
manuum
impositionem
,
&
non
incerto
populo
rem
tam
seriam
committendam
:
that
in
that
place
,
imposition
of
hands
is
rather
to
be
vnderstoode
,
then
any
popular
election
,
and
that
a
matter
of
so
great
importance
as
the
ordination
of
Ministers
,
is
not
to
be
committed
to
the
rude
and
inconstant
common
people
.
He
commeth
now
to
his
ob
&
Sol
:
and
obiecteth
in
our
behalfe
,
as
we
doe
our selues
commonly
alleage
;
that
it
cannot
stand
with
the
state
of
a
Kingdome
,
that
there
should
be
a
popular
gouernment
of
the
Church
.
And
he
answereth
himselfe
,
that
it
is
not
requisite
that
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
should
bee
answerable
to
the
gouernement
of
the
Realme
.
To
which
his
answer
I
reply
,
that
if
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
be
not
answerable
to
the
gouernment
of
the
Realme
,
then
our
assertion
is
true
,
that
this
popular
gouernment
cannot
stand
with
the
state
of
a
Kingdome
,
because
the
King
is
by
the
people
excluded
out
of
the
Church
gouernment
.
With
vs
Bishops
are
the
Kings
Lieutenants
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
and
all
Ecclesiasticall
Courts
are
the
Kings
Courts
,
they
be
held
immediately
vnder
the
King
,
his
authority
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
being
subalternate
,
and
immediately
subordinate
vnto
our
Sauiour
Christ
.
Now
for
as
much
as
they
which
hold
with
the
lay
Eldership
,
and
popular
gouernment
,
doe
claime
their
authority
immediately
from
God
,
without
the
King
,
they
derogate
from
the
Kings
authority
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
and
in
Church
matters
they
hold
him
for
no
King
.
Lastly
,
whereas
we
obiect
,
that
popular
gouernment
with
vs
,
cannot
be
but
tumultuous
:
and
hee
answereth
,
that
no
tumults
can
arise
by
their
gouernment
,
considering
foure
circumstances
.
First
,
that
it
is
Gods
ordinance
.
Secondly
,
that
it
is
to
be
executed
by
no
greater
multitude
then
a
parish
.
Thirdly
,
that
the
Church
guides
being
seperated
from
the
people
,
determine
the
matter
and
prepare
it
,
onely
the
people
consent
with
them
.
Fourthly
,
if
any
few
be
violent
and
vnruly
,
the
next
Iustices
are
to
keepe
the
peace
among
them
.
It
is
but
an
answerlesse
answer
.
For
first
,
that
popular
gouernment
is
not
Gods
,
but
mans
ordinance
,
as
I
haue
shewed
.
Secondly
,
it
is
apparant
,
that
diuers
parishes
with
vs
be
so
populous
,
that
they
consist
of
many
thousands
,
and
are
as
large
in
compasse
,
as
some
Diocesse
in
other
places
.
Thirdly
,
for
the
guides
of
the
Church
,
priuately
to
agree
vpon
the
matter
,
and
to
vrge
the
people
,
and
constraine
them
by
the
authority
of
Iustices
of
peace
,
to
yeelde
vnto
that
which
they
haue
decreed
,
is
as
much
as
to
make
it
no
popular
election
at
all
,
because
then
free
consents
are
denied
them
,
and
all
authority
resteth
in
the
guides
of
the
Church
.
For
,
if
there
be
no
tumult
,
it
is
wholly
in
the
power
of
the
Church
Magistrates
,
to
conclude
and
establish
what
they
list
,
and
the
people
must
agree
to
it
:
if
there
be
a
tumult
,
the
Magistrates
of
the
Church
are
to
command
the
Iustices
to
execute
what
their selues
would
haue
done
:
so
that
the
people
are
vsed
but
as
ciphers
,
and
haue
no
liberty
in
themselues
.
So
this
is
as
good
as
no
election
.
Of
Lord
Bishops
,
and
Ecclesiasticall
persons
,
exercising
ciuill
authoritie
.
THe
common
obiection
is
,
that
our
Sauiour
being
the
chiefe
Bishop
,
was
not
held
for
a
Lord
,
neither
had
hee
any
outward
pompe
or
glory
in
this
world
.
To
which
I
answer
:
if
so
be
they
inferre
this
conclusion
vpon
that
example
therefore
,
Bishops
must
not
be
Lords
:
the
weakenesse
of
that
argument
will
appeare
by
the
like
:
for
they
may
as
well
conclude
against
Kings
;
that
because
our
Sauiour
being
a
King
,
yet
was
no
Lord
,
had
no
pompe
nor
glorie-therefore
Kings
must
not
be
Lords
,
&c.
I
could
answer
further
,
Tit.
2.
that
he
was
a
Lord
,
and
so
the
Apostle
doth
call
him
a
great
Lord
,
and
the
head
of
the
Church
,
and
the
Prince
of
Eph.
4.
15.
Apoc.
1.
the
kings
of
the
earth
:
and
because
he
is
head
of
the
Church
,
all
Kings
doe
holde
their
Crownes
vnder
him
.
That
the
world
did
not
acknowledge
him
for
a
Lorde
,
it
was
their
blindnesse
.
Hee
came
to
be
crucified
,
and
had
the
world
knowne
him
,
non
Dominum
gloriae
crucifixissent
,
they
had
not
crucified
the
Lord
of
glory
.
And
yet
in
his
state
of
humility
,
hee
had
an
honourable
retinew
to
attend
vpon
him
,
to
the
number
of
eighty
two
,
his
twelue
Apostles
,
and
seuenty
Disciples
,
Matth.
1●
.
Luk.
10.
Iudas
was
his
treasurer
or
pursbearer
,
he
sent
Philip
to
the
market
to
buy
bread
,
he
imployed
his
Disciples
in
such
seruices
as
to
him
did
appertaine
,
as
appeareth
by
the
story
of
the
Gospel
.
But
thus
I
prooue
that
Bishops
ought
to
be
Lords
:
Our
Sauiour
being
asked
whether
a
man
might
put
away
his
wife
?
answereth
negatiuely
,
his
argument
of
proofe
being
drawne
from
the
law
of
nature
,
saying
:
Ab
initio
non
fuit
sic
,
from
the
beginning
it
was
not
so
.
Likewise
the
argument
Mat.
19.
followeth
:
Bishops
ought
to
be
Lords
,
and
Ecclesiasticall
persons
to
exercise
ciuill
authority
,
quoniam
ab
initio
fuit
sic
,
because
from
the
beginning
it
was
so
.
From
Adam
to
Moses
it
was
so
,
from
Moses
to
our
Sauiour
Christ
&
the
Apostles
it
was
so
,
with
them
it
was
so
,
and
from
them
it
hath
continued
so
vntill
this
time
,
excepting
onely
the
times
of
persecution
,
when
the
course
of
the
Gospel
was
interrupted
,
and
there
was
no
setled
state
of
a
Church
.
No
meruaile
though
in
time
of
persecution
,
they
were
not
held
for
Lords
,
for
then
they
were
not
allowed
to
be
Citizens
,
nor
thought
worthy
to
liue
in
a
Common
wealth
.
The
Pagan
Emperours
helde
them
for
seditious
persons
,
troublers
of
the
state
,
and
of
all
men
most
worthy
of
death
.
Our
question
is
not
what
then
was
of
fact
,
but
what
ought
to
haue
beene
of
right
.
It
must
not
seeme
strange
that
Saint
Iohn
,
or
Saint
Paul
could
not
be
in
authority
vnder
Nero
&
Domitian
,
nor
the
godly
Bishops
vnder
the
ten
persecutions
,
seeing
our
Sauiour
was
not
allowed
any
authority
vnder
Herod
,
nor
Pilat
,
nor
Augustus
,
nor
Tiberius
.
No
meruaile
though
Titus
could
not
be
held
as
a
Lord
in
the
Kingdome
of
Creete
,
seeing
that
neither
Iehoahaz
,
being
lawfully
anoynted
King
of
Iuda
,
could
not
reigne
2.
Reg.
25.
2.
Rug.
24
as
a
King
,
being
taken
captiue
by
Pharao
,
nor
Iehoiakim
nor
Sedechias
,
being
oppressed
by
Nebuchadnezer
.
From
Adam
vnto
Moses
,
he
that
was
the
eldest
of
euery
Gen.
1.
26
Gen.
2.
23
Gen.
4.
3.
4
familie
,
was
both
the
king
and
the
priest
ouer
his
own
family
,
among
Gods
people
.
So
Adam
was
a
king
,
because
God
gaue
him
absolute
power
ouer
the
whole
world
:
he
was
also
a
priest
,
for
hee
offered
sacrifice
:
Caine
and
Abel
brought
to
him
their
sacrifices
,
that
he
might
offer
in
their
behalfe
,
they
are
onely
saide
to
haue
offered
,
as
Asa
the
King
,
and
all
the
people
are
saide
to
haue
offered
,
when
the
Priest
did
offer
in
2.
Chr.
15
their
behalfe
.
Henoch
seeing
the
children
of
God
to
fall
daily
from
faith
to
infidelity
,
which
was
the
cause
of
the
deluge
,
published
against
them
the
sentence
of
excommunication
,
saying
:
The
Lord
commeth
,
which
is
the
most
grieuous
kinde
of
excommunication
.
And
S.
Paul
did
borrow
that
form
of
him
Iudae
.
v.
14
where
he
writ
;
Hee
that
loueth
not
the
Lord
Iesus
,
let
him
be
an
athema
marannatha
,
cursed
vntill
the
Lords
comming
.
And
Moses
1.
Cor.
16
did
reckon
vp
so
long
a
catalogue
of
all
the
eldest
sonnes
descended
from
Adam
before
the
flood
,
to
this
end
,
that
it
Gen.
5.
might
appeare
vnto
whom
from
time
to
time
the
Lord
committed
the
care
of
gouerning
&
instructing
the
Church
.
Noah
a
king
,
was
a
preacher
of
righteousnesse
one
hundred
and
twenty
yeares
before
the
flood
,
hee
offered
sacrifice
after
the
flood
.
That
Iethro
the
father
in
law
of
Moses
,
was
both
a
2.
Pet.
2.
5
1.
Pet.
2.
19
&
4.
16.
Gen.
8.
20.
Numb.
3.
12.
12.
&
8.
16.
17.
prince
&
a
priest
:
&
likewise
Iob
,
in
the
land
of
Huz
,
no
learned
man
will
deny
.
And
that
none
might
offer
sacrifices
,
but
the
eldest
and
Princes
of
euery
family
,
it
appeareth
by
the
writings
of
Moses
,
because
God
said
,
he
would
take
the
tribe
of
Leui
,
to
be
seperated
for
his
seruice
,
as
a
redemption
of
all
the
rest
of
the
first
borne
of
Israel
.
In
which
words
,
hee
did
but
call
to
remembrance
the
time
of
nature
,
wherein
the
eldest
were
all
his
:
that
is
,
they
were
consecrated
for
the
offering
of
sacrifice
vnto
him
.
When
Melchisedech
was
King
and
Priest
of
Salem
,
Ge.
14.
18
Abraham
also
was
King
and
Priest
ouer
his
own
family
.
It
was
saide
of
him
,
Thou
art
a
great
Prince
of
God
among
vs
Gen.
23.
6
Ge.
18.
19.
Ge.
22.
10
Gen.
17.
Ge.
26.
24
And
he
taught
them
Gods
word
,
he
erected
an
altar
,
and
offered
sacrifice
.
To
him
first
was
committed
the
sacrament
of
circumcision
,
and
he
circumcised
his
sonne
Isaac
.
Isaac
his
heire
,
erected
an
altar
,
and
offered
cacrifice
for
the
exercise
of
his
faith
.
Iacob
after
him
did
the
like
,
taught
purity
of
religion
,
and
how
Idolls
were
to
be
abolished
.
Ge.
35.
11.
In
the
daies
of
Moses
,
vnder
the
time
of
the
law
,
when
priesthood
was
appropriated
to
one
peculiar
tribe
of
Leui
,
and
the
Bishoprick
to
one
certaine
family
,
Moses
and
Aaron
both
being
priests
,
Moses
the
yonger
brother
had
the
chiefe
authority
in
ciuill
businesses
,
Aaron
the
elder
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
:
but
all
supreame
authority
was
committed
to
these
two
priests
,
Moses
and
Aaron
.
That
Moses
was
a
priest
,
Exod.
24.
6.
7.
8.
it
is
euident
,
because
all
the
whole
tribe
of
Leui
,
were
then
consecrated
●o
holy
priesthood
,
whereof
hee
was
one
,
hee
in
particular
offered
sacrifice
,
preached
Gods
word
,
consecrated
Exod.
40.
Numb.
20.
Aaron
to
be
an
high
priest
,
and
Eleazar
in
his
place
when
he
was
dead
,
consecrated
the
altar
,
which
none
could
doe
without
sacrilege
but
a
priest
.
Yet
he
was
the
supreame
ciuil
Magistrate
.
And
in
his
absence
40.
daies
he
substituted
Aaron
the
priest
in
his
roome
,
to
heare
ciuill
causes
,
and
supply
the
place
of
a
ciuill
Magistrate
.
Phinees
the
high
priest
,
Numb.
25.
was
a
Captaine
in
warre
,
and
busied
himselfe
with
secular
affaires
,
and
it
pleased
God
so
much
,
that
the
priesthood
was
conferred
not
onely
vpon
him
,
but
also
his
posterity
.
Samuel
the
Prophet
,
who
ministred
before
the
Lord
in
a
linnen
Ephod
,
was
also
the
chiefe
ciuil
Magistrate
,
and
in
his
own
person
did
ride
his
circuit
as
a
Iudge
euery
yeare
ouer
all
the
1.
Sam
▪
12.
18.
1.
Sam.
7.
1.
Sam.
8.
land
.
All
the
daies
of
the
Iudges
,
which
was
about
two
hundred
ninety
and
nine
yeares
from
the
death
of
Iosua
,
vnto
Eli
the
priest
,
there
was
no
certaine
supreame
ciuill
magistracie
in
any
,
but
in
the
high
priests
or
Bishops
,
among
the
people
.
When
the
people
desired
a
king
of
God
,
they
consulted
with
Samuel
in
that
secular
busines
.
After
those
299.
yeares
of
the
Iudges
,
Eli
the
Bishop
reigned
as
supreame
ciuill
Magistrate
40.
yeares
:
so
did
Samuel
after
him
the
space
of
40.
yeares
.
Afterward
,
when
Saule
was
by
him
annointed
King
,
yet
Samuel
ruled
ioyntly
with
Saule
so
long
as
he
liued
,
and
indeed
,
bore
the
greatest
sway
in
the
realme
,
because
Saule
had
little
more
then
the
title
of
a
King
,
during
the
life
of
Samuel
,
and
was
to
doe
nothing
without
allowance
from
him
.
How
the
Clergie
among
Gods
people
busied
themselues
with
the
affaires
of
the
temporal●ie
,
and
howe
much
they
pleased
God
in
so
doing
,
it
appeareth
by
these
examples
.
Numb.
31
6.
26.
Numb
:
34.
17.
Iosua
.
22.
13.
Numb
:
26.
63.
64.
2.
Chron:
13.
Iosua
,
6.
1.
Pet:
23.
4.
Phinees
the
Sonne
of
Eleazar
the
Bishoppe
,
was
a
Captaine
against
the
Midianites
,
and
Eleazar
his
selfe
,
ioyntly
with
Moses
diuided
the
spoyles
among
the
Souldiers
,
Eleazar
with
Iosua
diuided
the
land
of
promise
among
the
Tribes
,
Phineas
the
Bishop
was
sent
Ambassador
to
proclaime
warre
against
Gad
,
Ruben
,
and
halfe
Manasses
,
Moses
and
Eleazar
numbred
the
people
in
the
plaine
of
Moab
,
and
Moses
,
and
Aaron
in
the
wildernes
of
Sina
.
The
Priests
and
Leuites
sounded
their
Trumpets
,
and
bid
the
battell
in
the
warre
of
Abias
against
Ieroboam
.
The
Priests
ouerthrewe
the
citie
Iericho
.
And
the
godly
King
Dauid
setting
the
Kingdome
in
better
order
then
it
was
before
,
appointed
6000.
Leuites
to
be
Iudges
and
Magistrates
ouer
the
people
.
Likewise
,
beyond
Iordan
towardes
the
West
,
1700.
both
to
serue
God
in
the
place
of
Leuites
,
and
also
to
serue
the
King
in
ciuill
offices
pertaining
to
the
common
wealth
,
and
also
2700.
he
set
ouer
Ruben
,
Gad
,
and
Manasses
to
heare
and
determine
all
causes
,
both
ecclesiasticall
and
ciuill
,
concerning
God
in
the
Church
,
and
the
King
in
the
common
wealth
.
The
Kings
were
annointed
,
and
confirmed
in
their
kingdomes
,
by
the
hands
of
the
Bishops
,
&
ecclesiasticall
persons
.
1.
Sam:
10.
1.
Sam:
16.
1.
Reg:
1.
So
Samuel
annointed
Saule
&
Dauid
,
Sadoc
annointed
Solomon
,
when
Adoniah
had
proclaimed
himselfe
King
,
by
help
of
Abiathar
the
Priest
:
Nathan
the
Prophet
said
to
Dauid
:
me
thy
seruant
,
&
Sadoc
the
Priest
,
haue
they
not
called
,
nor
Benoiah
the
son
of
Ichoiada
.
Then
Dauid
said
:
Call
me
Sadoch
the
Priest
,
and
Nathan
the
Prophet
and
let
them
annoint
and
proclaime
Solomon
Ier:
26.
Exod:
32.
King
.
Ieremy
was
condemned
to
death
by
the
Priests
and
the
Prophets
.
The
Leuites
by
the
commandement
of
Moses
slewe
with
the
sword
3000.
that
committed
idolatry
.
It
was
commanded
by
God
,
that
when
they
went
to
warre
,
Ex
:
32.
Deut:
20.
Deut:
21.
19.
1.
Sam.
15
the
Priests
should
go
before
them
&
exhort
them
to
be
couragious
and
valiant
.
That
if
there
were
inquisition
after
murther
,
the
Priests
should
come
forth
,
and
by
their
word
the
cause
should
be
tryed
.
Samuel
valiantly
slewe
Agag
the
King
of
the
Amalakites
,
whom
Saule
the
King
for
foolish
pittie
could
not
find
in
his
heart
to
smite
.
Godly
Iosephat
in
his
reformation
of
the
Church
and
common
2.
Chron:
wealth
,
appointed
Iudges
in
euey
citie
throughout
the
land
,
as
it
appeareth
,
verse
5.
And
what
kinde
of
men
these
Iudges
were
,
it
appeareth
in
the
8.
verse
following
.
In
Ierusalem
,
as
also
in
other
cities
,
he
appointed
Iuges
out
of
the
Princes
of
euery
family
,
and
the
Priests
and
Leuites
which
were
to
heare
both
ciuil
and
Ecclesiastical
causes
,
(
and
so
doth
Tremelius
expound
it
according
to
the
truth
of
the
Hebrew
text
)
and
at
Ierusalem
which
was
the
chamber
of
the
Kingdome
,
there
was
established
by
him
the
highest
bench
of
iustice
,
vnto
which
,
as
vnto
the
highest
court
,
it
was
lawfull
to
appeale
from
all
inferiour
Courts
and
Iudges
,
euen
as
it
is
now
with
the
Kings
Bench
,
and
the
high
commission
Court
at
London
.
And
among
these
Iudges
who
were
to
take
place
before
other
,
it
is
explaned
in
the
11.
verse
of
that
chapter
,
namely
,
in
ecclesiasticall
causes
,
ecclesiasticall
men
:
in
temporall
causes
,
temporal
men
:
but
so
that
in
euery
ciuil
court
of
Iustice
there
should
be
some
Priests
and
Leuites
in
Commission
.
Moreouer
the
Lord
saith
:
If
there
arise
a
matter
too
hard
for
thee
in
iudgement
,
betweene
blood
,
and
blood
:
plea
,
and
plea
:
plague
,
Deut:
17.
8.
and
plague
:
in
the
matters
of
controuersie
within
thy
gates
,
then
shalt
thou
arise
,
and
goe
vnto
the
place
which
the
Lord
thy
God
shal
choose
,
and
thou
shalt
come
to
the
Priests
of
the
Leuites
,
and
to
the
Iudge
that
shal
be
in
those
dayes
,
and
aske
,
and
they
shal
shew
thee
the
sentence
of
iudgement
;
&
thou
shalt
doe
according
to
the
thing
which
they
of
that
place
(
which
the
Lord
hath
chosen
)
shal
shewe
thee
,
&c.
and
that
man
which
wil
doe
presumptuously
,
not
hearkening
to
the
Priest
which
standeth
before
the
Lord
thy
God
to
minister
there
,
and
the
Iudge
,
that
man
shal
dye
,
and
thou
shalt
take
eway
euill
from
Israel
,
so
all
the
people
shal
heare
,
and
feare
,
and
doe
no
more
presumptuously
.
As
for
Ezra
the
Priest
,
he
had
authoritie
from
Artaxerxes
the
King
of
Persia
,
to
order
all
matters
whatsoeuer
,
spiritual
,
Ezra
.
7.
and
temporall
:
concerning
the
returne
of
the
people
out
of
captiuitie
,
he
ordered
both
the
Princes
and
the
people
,
Priests
and
Leuites
,
he
appointed
al
the
Iudges
in
the
land
,
that
whosoeuer
would
not
doe
according
to
the
Lawe
of
God
,
and
the
Kings
Lawe
,
should
haue
iudgement
without
delay
,
whether
it
were
vnto
death
,
or
banishment
,
or
confiscation
of
goods
,
or
imprisonment
.
And
there
was
by
Ezra
set
down
the
whole
Ezra
.
8.
platforme
of
the
ciuill
estate
of
the
common
wealth
.
Againe
,
he
gathered
together
the
Princes
,
and
all
the
Clergy
,
proclaimed
a
fast
,
humbled
them
before
God
,
that
hee
would
guide
them
in
their
iourney
,
beeing
ashamed
to
aske
of
Artaxerxes
an
Army
of
horsemen
to
helpe
them
,
because
he
had
saide
before
,
that
their
trust
was
in
God
alone
.
In
the
10
,
Chapter
hee
causeth
all
,
as
well
temporall
as
spirituall
,
to
sweare
that
they
would
put
away
their
strange
wiues
,
caused
a
proclamation
to
goe
out
through
Iuda
and
Ierusalem
,
to
assemble
in
Ierusalem
within
three
dayes
in
paine
of
confiscation
of
their
goods
.
How
afterward
the
Maccabes
,
being
Gods
seruants
,
held
both
the
Priesthood
and
the
Kingdome
among
the
Iewes
being
Gods
people
,
and
that
without
impeachmenr
,
the
learned
know
very
well
,
and
that
they
continued
both
high
Priests
and
also
Kings
vntil
the
land
was
conquered
by
the
Romans
,
and
the
ciuill
gouernment
committed
vnto
the
family
of
the
Herods
,
vntil
the
comming
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
who
translated
both
the
kingdome
and
the
Priesthood
of
right
vnto
himselfe
.
And
,
whereas
some
men
doe
obiect
against
these
examples
Ioh.
18.
by
me
alledged
for
confirmation
of
spirituall
mens
authoritie
in
temporal
causes
among
Gods
people
;
That
when
our
Sauiour
Christ
was
to
bee
arrayned
,
they
brought
him
from
the
high
Priest
,
to
the
iudgement
seate
of
Pilate
a
temporall
Iudge
,
and
saide
to
Pilate
,
verse
31.
It
is
not
lawful
for
vs
to
put
any
man
to
death
.
I
answere
,
first
the
Priest
in
particular
did
not
say
these
wordes
:
It
is
not
lawfull
for
vs
to
put
any
man
to
death
,
but
the
Iewes
in
generall
,
not
to
the
preiudice
of
Priests
onely
but
of
the
whole
nation
of
the
Iewes
.
Secondly
,
they
speake
not
these
wordes
,
as
if
the
Iewes
had
of
right
from
God
no
authoritie
to
put
men
to
death
.
For
Pilate
himself
doth
confesse
,
that
they
had
right
in
themselues
,
where
he
saith
:
Take
him
,
and
iudge
him
according
to
your
owne
lawe
.
But
these
wordes
are
to
be
vnderstood
,
that
according
to
the
Lawes
of
Herod
a
stranger
,
and
of
the
Romans
which
made
them
tributary
,
and
by
force
tooke
from
them
all
power
of
life
&
death
,
not
onely
from
the
Priests
,
but
also
from
the
whole
nation
,
40.
yeares
before
that
time
,
as
Maister
Beza
hath
well
obserued
,
it
was
not
lawfull
for
them
to
put
any
man
to
death
.
Thirdly
,
if
the
Iewes
had
had
all
their
authoritie
in
their
Beza
in
annot
:
maiorib
:
in
Ioh:
18.
hands
without
controlment
,
yet
it
appeareth
by
the
28.
verse
of
that
chapter
,
that
the
Priests
at
that
time
would
not
be
present
at
that
iudgement
where
sentence
of
death
was
to
be
pronounced
,
because
the
feast
of
Easter
was
at
hand
,
and
so
doing
they
should
haue
made
themselues
vncleane
,
and
by
a
consequent
disinabled
themselues
from
executing
their
office
at
that
solemnitie
.
Thus
you
haue
heard
proued
out
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
that
among
Gods
people
,
in
that
kingdome
which
was
gouerned
according
to
Gods
own
lawes
,
euen
then
when
it
was
reformed
by
godly
kings
,
there
was
no
bench
of
Iustice
for
hearing
and
ending
of
ciuill
causes
,
vpon
which
Priests
and
Leuites
did
not
sit
as
Iudges
and
Iustices
.
Therefore
I
demand
other
sound
reasons
,
or
places
of
Sctipture
,
to
proue
why
it
should
not
so
continue
among
vs
which
are
also
Gods
people
,
especially
our
Ecclesiasticall
persons
being
more
honourable
vnder
the
Gospel
,
then
they
were
vnder
the
law
?
I
confesse
that
the
Popes
lawes
haue
decreed
the
contrarie
,
but
Lancelelot
iustitut
:
iuris
can
:
l
1.
Tit:
4.
Concil:
Lat
:
31.
partis
1.
can
:
12.
it
is
not
fit
that
wee
which
are
a
reformed
Church
,
and
haue
long
since
abandoned
the
Popes
authoritie
,
should
nowe
forsake
God
,
and
the
examples
of
the
holy
Bible
to
followe
the
Pope
and
his
Canons
.
The
Popes
lawe
saith
:
Laici
sunt
quibus
licet
temporalia
prssidere
,
vxere●●
ducere
,
causes
agere
,
intèr
virum
&
virum
iudicare
,
Clerici
qui
diuinis
officijs
mancipati
sunt
,
&
quos
ab
omni
strepitu
cessare
conueuit
.
Lay
men
are
they
to
whom
it
is
lawful
to
haue
temporal
possessions
,
to
marie
wiues
,
handle
causes
and
controuersies
in
Law
,
to
iudge
betweene
man
,
and
man
:
but
as
for
Clergy
men
,
their
state
and
condition
is
otherwise
,
they
are
so
deuoted
and
mancipated
to
the
seruice
of
God
,
that
they
must
not
intermeddle
with
such
worldly
troubles
.
Some
of
our
brethren
giue
this
answerles
answer
:
that
arguments
drawen
from
the
state
of
the
Ministerie
in
the
olde
Testament
,
to
that
which
is
vnder
the
Gospell
,
doe
not
holde
,
that
we
must
not
followe
examples
of
the
olde
Testament
in
Church
gouernment
,
and
that
therefore
the
argument
doth
not
followe
,
that
because
Bishoppes
in
the
olde
Testament
were
Lords
,
and
of
the
Kings
Counsell
in
the
highest
place
,
and
inferiour
Ministers
were
ciuill
Magistrates
,
therefore
vnder
the
Gospell
it
may
be
so
,
although
what
should
hinder
,
they
cannot
shewe
.
But
that
I
may
followe
them
in
that
course
of
disputation
:
They
say
wee
must
not
followe
the
examples
of
the
olde
Testament
in
Church
gouernment
,
and
that
therefore
the
argument
doth
not
followe
:
Bishops
in
the
olde
Testament
were
Lords
,
and
Kings
Counsellers
,
and
inferiour
Ministers
were
ciuill
Magistrates
,
therefore
vnder
the
Gospel
they
must
be
so
.
To
whom
I
alledge
,
that
by
the
like
reason
,
these
arguments
which
Bishop
Iuell
,
and
the
learned
men
of
the
reformed
churches
haue
vrged
against
the
Popes
authoritie
,
and
for
the
vpholding
of
Princes
cannot
follow
,
when
they
conclude
in
this
manner
:
Solomon
deposed
Abiathar
the
Priest
for
committing
high
Treason
,
and
placed
Sadoc
in
his
roome
,
therefore
vnder
the
Gospell
Christian
Kings
may
punish
their
Ministers
for
high
Treason
:
Ezechias
reformed
the
Church
,
Iosias
reade
the
Lawe
before
the
Priestes
in
the
house
of
the
Lord
,
and
commanded
Helchias
the
high
Priest
,
and
the
Priests
of
the
second
order
,
to
bring
forth
of
the
Temple
all
the
vessells
made
for
Baall
,
put
downe
Idolls
,
1.
Reg:
2.
2.
Reg:
18.
slewe
the
idolatrous
Priestes
;
therefore
Christian
Kings
may
put
downe
idolatrie
,
and
reforme
the
Church
:
You
see
thereforefore
the
weakenes
,
and
great
vnsufficiency
of
this
answere
.
Againe
,
why
doe
the
Lawes
of
Geneua
punish
adulterie
with
death
after
the
example
of
the
olde
Testament
,
and
why
doe
our
brethren
,
which
stand
for
the
reformation
,
labour
that
the
same
punishment
may
bee
inflicted
vpon
adulterers
with
vs
,
vrging
vs
with
the
authoritie
of
that
Law
,
if
so
be
that
they
will
holde
that
the
Lawes
of
the
old
Testament
may
not
preuaile
vnder
the
Gospell
?
In
their
simplicitie
and
want
of
iudgement
,
they
shape
this
answere
,
as
if
it
were
the
Trumpet
to
blowe
downe
Iericho
,
Dauids
sling
to
kill
Golias
,
Sampsons
iawe-bone
to
slay
a
thousand
Philistines
,
that
the
ceremoniall
Lawe
is
abolished
,
whereas
before
I
haue
shewed
,
thal
this
is
not
ceremoniall
,
but
politicall
,
and
that
the
Priesthood
is
abolished
,
whereas
onely
that
which
is
ceremonicall
,
concerning
the
Priests
office
is
abolished
,
but
that
which
is
moral
indureth
to
the
end
.
And
againe
,
a
Minister
of
the
Gospell
may
with
more
conueniencie
be
a
ciuill
Magistrate
,
then
the
Priests
vnder
the
Lawe
,
because
now
the
daily
sacrifices
,
the
great
number
of
feasts
,
and
solemnities
,
the
infinite
number
of
ceremonies
do
cease
,
which
then
procured
vnto
them
a
whole
world
of
businesses
in
their
Ministery
▪
by
which
they
had
lesse
vacant
time
to
heare
ciuill
causes
,
then
our
Ministers
haue
vnder
the
Gospell
.
The
answer
to
the
common
obiection
,
Luk:
22
,
25.
they
that
beare
rule
ouer
them
,
are
called
gracious
Lords
,
but
ye
shall
not
be
so
.
FOr
the
opening
of
this
text
,
these
things
are
to
be
examined
?
First
,
whether
our
Sauiour
spake
these
wordes
to
his
Apostles
onely
,
or
in
the
name
of
the
Apostles
to
al
Christians
?
For
albeit
the
Apostles
onely
were
personally
present
,
and
his
apostrophe
was
vnto
them
,
yet
many
circumstances
do
proue
that
these
words
doe
concerne
al
Christians
.
For
,
first
we
find
else
where
another
speech
parallel
vnto
this
:
The
Scribes
and
Pharisies
loue
the
chiefe
places
at
feasts
,
and
to
Mat
:
2.
3.
haue
the
chiefe
seates
in
the
assemblies
,
and
greeting
in
the
markets
,
and
to
be
called
of
men
:
Rabbi
,
Rabbi
:
that
is
,
Lord
,
Lord
:
but
be
not
yee
called
Rabbi
:
for
one
is
your
Rabbi
,
to
wit
,
Christ
,
and
all
ye
are
brethren
,
&c.
but
he
that
is
greatest
among
you
,
let
him
be
your
seruant
.
No
man
can
iustly
say
,
this
was
spoken
vnto
Ecclesiasticall
persons
onely
,
but
also
to
lay
men
,
for
so
the
text
saith
:
Then
Iesus
spake
to
the
multitude
,
and
to
his
Disciples
.
2.
In
the
same
chapter
it
appeareth
,
that
our
Sauiour
did
celebrate
his
last
Supper
immediately
before
he
spake
these
wordes
,
but
that
storie
being
set
downe
more
plaine
by
the
other
Enangelist
,
hee
saide
:
drinke
you
of
this
all
,
Mat
:
26.
which
wordes
were
spoken
onely
to
his
Apostles
,
and
yet
,
none
but
they
of
the
Church
of
Rome
will
so
conster
them
,
as
if
they
were
ment
onely
of
Ecclesiasticall
persons
.
For
,
euen
as
the
Cuppe
in
the
holy
Communion
,
did
not
appertaine
onely
vnto
the
Ministerie
,
but
also
vnto
the
laitie
;
so
humilitie
,
which
is
the
Subiect
of
this
speech
,
is
not
commended
onely
to
the
Apostles
,
but
to
all
men
.
So
that
,
if
the
title
of
Lord
belong
not
to
the
Apostles
,
neither
doth
it
belong
vnto
ony
other
,
because
these
wordes
doe
indifferently
concerne
all
.
The
second
question
is
,
whether
in
these
wordes
of
our
Sauiour
any
mention
is
made
concerning
the
title
of
Lord
,
or
no
?
Surely
whosoeuer
shall
say
that
the
title
of
Lord
is
here
forbidden
,
hee
hath
as
litle
iudgement
in
the
Greeke
tongue
,
as
the
man
in
the
Gospell
,
which
was
not
able
to
discerne
men
from
trees
.
For
the
Greeke
which
is
authenticall
,
because
it
was
written
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
hath
no
such
words
as
gracious
Lords
,
but
euergetai
bountifull
,
or
benefactors
,
or
doers
of
good
:
they
which
bare
rule
ouer
them
are
called
well
doers
,
but
yee
shall
not
be
so
.
There
cannot
be
one
place
of
Scripture
alledged
betweene
the
first
of
Genesis
,
and
the
last
of
The
Apocalips
,
to
proue
that
Gods
Ministers
may
not
be
called
Lords
,
but
some
places
may
bee
alledged
to
proue
that
they
are
Lords
.
Our
Sauiour
his
selfe
doth
accept
of
that
titile
Ioh:
3
▪
2.
of
Lord
giuen
him
by
Nicod●mus
,
when
hee
called
him
Rabbi
,
that
is
,
my
Lord
.
For
Rabbi
,
as
Pagnin
sheweth
in
his
Lexicon
,
signifieth
:
Magistrum
;
honorabilem
,
inclytum
,
ob
multiplices
quibus
po●let
dignitates
,
a
Maister
,
an
honourable
Ioh.
13.
13.
person
,
a
man
that
is
eminent
by
reason
of
his
manifold
dignities
,
and
places
of
honour
which
he
holdeth
.
And
in
another
place
he
saith
,
the
name
Kurios
Lord
,
doth
of
right
belong
vnto
him
,
Vmeis
phoneite
me
o
didascales
,
caio
Kurios
,
cai
calos
legete
,
eimigar
.
You
call
me
Doctor
,
and
Lord
,
and
ye
say
wel
,
for
so
I
am
.
Furthermore
,
Saint
Paule
and
Silas
accepted
of
the
same
●itle
of
Curios
Lord
,
when
it
was
giuen
them
by
the
keeper
of
the
prison
,
when
hee
fell
downe
before
them
,
and
saide
:
Kur●oi
Lords
,
what
must
I
doe
to
be
saued
?
to
whom
they
Act.
16.
30
answered
:
beleeue
in
the
Lord
Iesus
,
and
thou
shalt
be
saued
.
And
a
greater
title
then
Lord
is
giuen
to
Gods
Ministers
in
his
owne
word
,
they
are
called
Gods
.
For
that
of
the
Prophet
:
Psal.
82.
6.
Ioh:
10.
33.
God
standeth
in
the
assemblie
of
Gods
,
and
I
haue
saide
ye
are
Gods
,
meaning
of
Princes
and
Iudges
,
our
Sauiour
his
selfe
expoundeth
of
Ministers
.
For
,
when
the
Iewes
saide
to
him
:
For
thy
good
worke
wee
stone
thee
not
:
but
for
blasphemie
,
and
that
thou
being
a
man
,
makest
thy selfe
God
.
Iesus
answered
them
:
Is
it
not
written
in
your
Lawe
,
I
saide
yee
are
Gods
?
if
hee
call
them
Gods
vnto
whom
the
word
of
God
is
giuen
,
and
the
Scripture
cannot
be
broken
,
say
yee
of
him
whom
the
Father
hath
sanctified
,
and
sent
into
the
world
,
thou
blasphemest
,
because
I
sayd
:
I
am
the
Sonne
of
God
?
You
see
how
in
the
whole
course
of
the
Scripture
the
Minister
and
the
Magistrate
goe
together
,
both
of
them
are
Gods
annointed
,
both
called
Gods
,
because
they
represent
the
person
of
God
vpon
earth
:
both
Lords
,
because
they
be
the
deputies
and
Leiftenants
of
him
that
is
the
Lord
of
Lords
:
to
the
ciuill
Magistrate
is
especially
committed
the
temporall
sword
,
to
the
Minister
the
dispensation
of
the
word
.
And
you
see
here
the
reason
plainly
expressed
,
why
our
Sauiour
calleth
Ministers
Gods
,
because
vnto
them
the
word
of
God
was
giuen
,
and
the
same
word
which
was
committed
to
the
ministers
vnder
the
law
,
is
committed
more
abundantly
to
the
ministers
of
the
Gospel
,
and
must
continue
with
them
to
the
worldes
end
.
The
king
is
called
Poimen
,
shepheard
,
so
is
the
minister
,
&
in
the
originall
tongues
,
pascere
,
&
Psal:
2.
regere
,
to
feede
and
to
gouerne
is
all
one
And
that
the
English
translation
is
corrupt
,
where
it
hath
;
ye
shall
not
be
called
gratious
Lords
:
it
appeareth
,
not
onely
by
the
originall
,
but
also
by
the
analogy
of
faith
:
because
according
to
faith
,
Bishops
may
be
Lords
,
as
I
haue
shewed
,
and
then
much
more
gratious
Lords
:
for
else
they
were
gracelesse
Lords
.
For
this
word
grace
,
according
to
the
Scriptures
,
is
taken
actiuely
for
the
loue
and
fauour
of
the
superiour
,
which
hee
vouchsafeth
the
inferiour
.
So
the
Apostle
saith
:
By
the
grace
of
God
,
I
am
1.
Cor.
15.
Luk.
1.
Luk
2.
Luk.
4.
Rom.
3.
Tit.
3.
Eph.
4.
1.
Tim.
4.
that
I
am
:
or
else
passiuely
,
for
any
good
parts
&
gifts
in
the
inferiour
,
by
which
he
is
respected
of
his
superiour
.
So
the
Virgin
Mary
was
ful
of
grace
,
the
child
Iesus
grew
in
grace
:
they
all
meruailed
at
the
wordes
of
grace
which
proceeded
out
of
his
mouth
,
wee
are
freely
iustified
through
his
grace
;
if
of
grace
,
then
not
of
works
;
we
are
saued
by
grace
through
faith
.
To
euery
one
of
vs
is
giuen
grace
,
according
to
the
measure
of
the
gift
of
Christ
.
Do
not
neglect
the
grace
which
is
conferred
on
thee
by
imposition
of
hands
.
Let
euery
man
1.
Pet
4.
Eph.
2.
as
hee
hath
receiued
grace
,
minister
the
same
one
to
another
.
Thirdly
,
that
wee
may
come
to
the
true
exposition
of
these
wordes
:
There
arose
a
controuersie
among
them
,
who
should
seeme
to
be
the
greatest
,
&c.
In
which
story
,
are
two
things
to
be
obserued
:
their
example
of
ambition
,
which
did
striue
for
superiority
,
and
our
Sauiour
,
his
doctrine
of
humility
,
teaching
,
that
such
ambition
is
found
among
the
Gentiles
,
and
ought
not
to
bee
among
Christians
.
The
Kings
of
the
Nations
,
saith
hee
,
reigne
ouer
them
:
that
is
,
ouer
the
Nations
which
are
vnder
them
,
and
that
by
oppression
,
as
Saint
Chrysostome
,
and
Musculus
haue
ezpounded
it
,
not
according
to
iustice
,
as
Gods
word
willeth
them
to
doe
,
but
after
their
own
sensuall
lusts
and
fleshly
desires
,
and
they
are
called
(
euergetai
)
doers
of
good
,
as
the
Ptolomes
King
of
Aegypt
,
two
of
them
did
sername
their
own
selues
,
albeit
they
were
not
doers
of
good
,
but
of
euill
,
and
oppressors
of
their
subiect
Concerning
the
application
of
this
to
christians
,
he
saith
you
shal
not
be
called
so
:
that
is
,
you
shall
not
reign
as
kings
,
but
gouerne
as
subiects
,
not
tyrannically
,
but
iustly
,
you
shall
not
be
called
doers
of
good
,
but
(
cacoergoi
)
euill
doers
,
and
malefactours
,
although
ye
doe
good
,
as
the
Apostle
speaketh
;
Wee
are
reuiled
,
and
yet
we
blesse
,
wee
are
persecuted
,
and
wee
suffer
,
1.
Cor.
4.
12.
13.
Act.
10.
38
we
are
euill
spoken
of
,
and
we
pray
.
It
is
your
dutie
to
doe
good
,
as
it
is
said
of
our
Sauiour
(
dielthen
euergeton
)
he
went
about
doing
good
:
yet
you
shall
not
haue
the
due
praise
of
your
well
doing
,
as
our
Sauiour
himselfe
was
called
Belzebub
,
a
glutton
,
a
drunkard
,
Iohn
the
Baptist
an
hypocrit
,
all
the
Apostles
seditious
men
,
&c:
notwithstanding
they
were
all
doers
of
good
.
So
then
,
in
this
place
is
not
forbidden
honour
and
authority
,
but
ambitious
seeking
of
it
,
as
when
they
stroue
,
and
vniust
vsing
of
it
,
as
the
Kings
of
the
Nations
did
:
as
when
he
saith
;
The
Scribes
and
Pharisies
loue
the
chiefest
places
,
&c:
and
to
be
called
Rabb
,
&c:
Maister
Beza
vpon
that
Mat.
23.
8
In
annot.
maioribus
.
text
,
saith
;
The
title
of
Rabbi
,
was
giuen
to
such
as
were
Doctours
in
the
Chaldaean
vniuersities
,
as
also
which
in
Iudaea
by
imposition
of
hands
,
were
declared
to
be
the
wise
men
of
the
land
,
as
also
it
was
a
title
giuen
to
those
noble
and
wise
men
which
were
counsellers
to
King
Dauid
.
And
saith
hee
;
When
our
Sauiour
forbiddeth
them
:
be
not
ye
called
Rabbi
,
for
one
is
your
Doctour
,
to
wit
,
Christ
,
&c:
Ne
vocemini
,
id
est
,
nè
ambiatis
,
neque
enim
vetat
Christus
ne
suum
honorem
exhibeamus
magistratus
,
vel
doctoribus
,
sed
ambitionem
damnat
,
vt
declarat
August
:
ser:
deverbis
Domini
ex
Matthaei
.
11.
Be
not
you
called
Rabbi
:
that
is
,
doe
not
you
ambitiously
seeke
after
that
title
;
for
otherwise
our
Sauiour
doth
not
forbid
vs
to
giue
due
honour
to
the
Magistrate
and
Doctour
,
but
onely
he
forbiddeth
the
ambitious
seeking
after
such
honour
,
as
appeareth
by
Saint
Augustine
,
his
exposition
.
One
is
our
Doctour
,
that
is
,
the
chief
pastour
,
the
fountaine
of
all
knowledge
,
according
to
that
of
the
Prophet
:
And
all
thy
children
shall
be
taught
of
the
Lord
.
Call
Esa.
54.
13
no
man
your
father
:
that
is
,
nourish
no
man
in
his
ambition
,
which
glorieth
in
such
titles
,
respicit
enim
Iudaeorum
consuetudinem
,
apud
quos
non
modo
Aboth
,
id
est
patres
,
sed
&
Abothenu
,
id
est
patres
nostri
,
salutabantur
Rabbini
:
he
hath
reference
to
the
custome
of
the
Iewes
,
among
whom
the
Rabbines
would
not
be
contented
to
be
called
fathers
,
but
our
fathers
.
Ye
are
brethren
,
that
is
,
beate
downe
the
pride
of
them
which
exalt
themselues
aboue
their
brethren
.
For
otherwise
it
is
lawfull
to
call
them
fathers
which
are
fathers
.
So
the
King
of
Israel
called
Elisaeus
his
father
:
and
Saint
Paul
will
haue
an
elder
to
2.
Reg.
6.
21.
.
1
Tim.
5.
1.
Cor.
4.
15.
bee
rebuked
as
a
father
,
and
hee
calleth
himselfe
a
father
of
them
whom
he
hath
instructed
in
the
word
.
As
for
the
Apostles
,
they
did
not
exercise
ciuill
iurisdiction
,
according
to
forme
of
humane
lawes
,
as
Magistrates
in
Courts
of
iustice
vse
to
doe
,
partly
because
they
being
to
trauell
through
the
world
,
had
no
certaine
abiding
place
,
and
partly
because
Iudges
and
Iustices
are
subordinate
vnto
Kings
&
Princes
,
and
haue
their
commission
from
them
,
as
our
Sauiour
speaketh
:
Quis
me
constituit
Iudicem
?
who
hath
appointed
mee
to
be
a
Iudge
ouer
you
?
But
all
Kings
&
Princes
were
at
that
time
Luk.
12.
14
infidells
,
and
therefore
would
not
call
them
to
such
offices
,
which
if
they
had
been
called
vnto
,
they
might
lawfully
haue
executed
.
And
yet
it
may
be
iustified
,
that
Saint
Peter
executed
ciuill
iustice
vpon
Saphira
,
when
hee
pronounced
sentence
of
death
against
her
,
saying
:
Behold
,
the
feete
of
them
Act.
5.
9.
which
haue
buried
thy
husband
,
are
at
the
doore
,
and
shal
carry
thee
out
:
and
Saint
Paul
vpon
Elymas
,
when
hee
pronounced
sentence
Act.
13.
of
depriuation
of
his
sight
,
saying
:
Thou
shalt
be
blinde
,
and
not
see
the
Sunne
for
a
season
:
although
outward
forme
of
proceeding
was
wanting
;
like
to
that
example
of
Dauid
a
King
which
said
of
the
man
which
brought
tydings
of
Sauls
2.
Sam.
1.
15.
1.
Sam.
19.
33.
death
,
without
any
further
processe
or
course
of
law
:
Goe
,
fall
vpon
him
;
and
he
smote
him
that
he
died
:
and
of
Samuel
which
tooke
Agag
,
&
he
wed
him
in
pieces
:
and
of
Ioiada
the
priest
,
which
when
Athalia
the
Queene
in
the
Temple
cried
;
treason
,
treason
,
without
any
iudiciall
examination
,
or
kinde
2.
Reg.
11.
15.
of
proceeding
,
commanded
the
Captaines
immediately
to
carry
her
out
and
kill
her
.
And
that
these
things
may
not
seeme
strange
,
the
Apostle
Saint
Paul
,
and
the
Prophet
Esay
foretolde
so
much
.
For
the
2.
Cor.
3.
6
Apostle
writeth
in
this
manner
:
Hee
hath
made
vs
able
Ministers
of
the
new
Testament
,
not
of
the
letter
,
but
of
the
spirit
,
for
the
letter
killeth
,
but
the
spirit
giueth
life
.
If
then
the
ministration
of
death
,
written
with
letters
,
and
ingrauen
in
stone
was
glorious
,
so
that
the
children
of
Israel
were
not
able
to
beholde
Moses
his
face
,
for
the
glory
of
his
countenance
,
which
glory
is
done
away
,
how
shall
not
the
ministration
of
the
spirit
be
more
glorious
?
For
,
if
the
ministery
of
condemnation
was
glorious
,
much
more
doth
the
ministration
of
righteousnesse
exceede
in
glory
:
for
if
that
which
should
bee
abolished
was
glorious
,
much
more
shall
that
which
remaineth
bee
glorious
.
In
which
wordes
are
to
be
obserued
two
things
:
the
anti●hesis
or
contrariety
,
betweene
the
Ministers
of
both
the
Testaments
,
and
then
the
correspondency
and
agreement
betweene
them
both
:
that
is
,
wherein
they
consent
,
&
wherein
they
dissent
.
They
disagree
in
these
points
,
the
letter
and
the
spirit
,
death
and
life
,
condemnation
and
righteousnesse
,
that
which
was
to
be
abolished
,
and
that
which
is
to
abide
vntill
the
end
of
the
world
:
and
yet
both
agree
in
glorie
,
but
the
spirit
excelleth
the
letter
,
life
death
,
righteousnesse
,
condemnation
,
that
which
is
that
which
is
not
.
Therefore
the
ministerie
of
the
Gospel
by
an
argument
,
a
minori
ad
maius
,
is
also
glorious
,
and
by
so
much
more
glorious
then
the
ministerie
of
the
law
,
by
how
much
it
is
more
excellent
then
the
law
.
The
question
is
now
,
what
is
meant
by
glory
?
And
because
men
may
be
resolued
of
that
point
,
the
text
it selfe
doth
make
it
plaine
,
it
was
outward
.
The
children
of
Israel
could
not
behold
Moses
his
face
,
for
the
glory
of
his
countenance
.
After
he
had
talked
with
God
,
the
skin
of
his
face
shone
so
bright
,
Exod.
34.
Exod.
33.
Matth.
17
that
they
were
afraid
to
come
neare
him
.
And
that
sheweth
what
is
meant
by
the
glory
of
God
which
Moses
desired
to
see
,
when
answer
was
made
,
hee
should
see
his
backe
parts
onely
,
but
not
his
face
.
And
it
is
shewed
by
example
,
how
our
glorified
bodies
shal
looke
after
the
resurrection
,
when
the
face
of
our
Sauiour
being
transfigured
,
did
shine
like
the
Sunne
.
The
Lord
said
to
Moses
:
Thou
shalt
make
holy
garments
for
thy
Exod.
●8
.
brother
Aaron
,
glorius
&
beautifull
,
of
gold
,
blew
silke
,
purple
,
&c.
The
holinesse
of
his
garments
consisted
in
this
,
that
they
were
consecrated
to
an
holy
vse
,
they
were
for
the
priest
to
weare
in
his
ministration
,
the
glory
of
them
is
specified
to
be
the
outward
beauty
,
that
they
were
of
glod
,
silk
,
purple
,
&c.
Solomon
in
his
glory
was
not
like
a
lily
in
the
field
,
but
wherin
Mat
6.
Solomons
glory
consisted
,
no
man
is
ignorant
:
that
is
,
in
his
outward
pompe
,
riches
,
seruice
,
honourable
retinew
,
the
adifice
of
his
Temple
,
the
world
did
admire
him
.
So
it
is
plaine
,
that
the
priesthoode
of
Israel
,
the
glory
of
it
consisted
in
the
riches
of
the
Temple
,
the
large
possessions
of
the
Leuites
,
their
authority
and
worldly
reputation
,
the
high
Priest
being
next
in
place
of
honour
vnto
the
king
.
But
how
the
ministery
of
the
Gospel
should
exceede
them
in
glory
;
the
Prophets
haue
foretolde
,
and
especialle
Esay
,
where
he
saith
:
Esa.
60.
Thine
heart
shall
be
astonished
,
and
inlarged
,
because
the
multude
of
the
Sea
shall
be
conuerted
vnto
thee
,
and
the
riches
of
the
Gentiles
shall
come
vnto
thee
,
the
multitude
of
Camel●s
shall
couer
thee
,
the
Dromedaries
of
Midian
and
of
Ephah
,
they
of
Sheba
shall
bring
gold
and
incense
,
and
shew
forth
the
praise
of
the
Lord
,
&c.
Surely
the
Isles
shall
wayte
for
me
,
and
the
Shippes
of
Tha●sis
,
as
at
the
beginning
,
that
they
may
bring
thy
sonnes
from
farre
,
and
their
siluer
,
and
their
gold
with
them
to
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
and
to
the
holy
one
of
Israel
,
because
he
hath
glorified
thee
.
The
sonnes
of
strangers
shall
build
vp
thy
walls
,
and
their
Kings
shall
minister
vnto
thee
,
&c.
The
Nation
of
the
Kingdome
that
will
not
serue
thee
,
shall
perish
,
and
those
Nations
shall
be
vtterly
destroyed
,
the
glory
of
Lebanon
shall
come
vnto
thee
,
the
firre
,
the
elme
,
the
boxe
,
to
beautifie
the
place
of
my
sanctuarie
,
for
I
will
glorifie
the
place
of
my
feete
.
The
sonnes
of
them
that
afflicted
thee
,
shall
come
and
bowe
vnto
thee
,
all
they
that
despised
thee
,
shall
fall
downe
at
the
soules
of
thy
feete
,
&c:
Thou
shalt
sucke
the
milke
of
the
Gentiles
,
thou
shalt
sucke
the
breastes
of
Kings
,
&c.
That
the
Reader
may
be
yet
better
satisfied
.
Flacius
Iilyricus
In
claui
scripturae
.
diuideth
glory
to
be
two
folde
,
the
one
of
God
,
the
other
of
men
:
and
as
for
the
glory
of
God
,
it
cannot
be
vnderstood
in
this
place
,
but
of
men
onely
;
because
hee
speaketh
onely
of
the
glory
of
the
Ministers
of
the
olde
and
new
Testaments
,
which
were
onely
men
.
Againe
,
hee
diuideth
the
glory
of
men
,
either
into
that
which
is
eternall
in
heauen
,
or
temporall
vpon
the
earth
:
but
the
latter
onely
is
vnderstood
,
because
it
is
the
glory
of
the
ministery
,
which
ministery
is
temporall
,
and
must
cease
after
this
life
,
euen
as
also
then
faith
and
hope
must
cease
,
onely
loue
must
indure
.
Thirdly
,
he
diuideth
this
temporall
glory
of
men
,
into
gloriam
fame
1.
Cor.
13
&
bonitatis
rei
;
the
glory
of
wordes
,
and
of
matter
and
substance
,
the
glory
of
wordes
or
fame
,
which
consisteth
in
the
fame
and
good
report
of
other
men
,
which
is
chiefly
in
them
which
doe
glorifie
vs
,
and
not
in
our selues
which
are
glorified
and
magnified
,
but
the
glory
which
is
not
in
wordes
,
but
substance
,
which
indeed
is
the
cause
why
men
doe
praise
and
magnifie
vs
,
is
our
riches
,
honour
,
authority
,
all
outward
ornaments
,
which
stirre
vp
the
outward
senses
,
and
mens
affections
,
to
admiration
of
our
persons
,
places
,
and
calling
,
is
onely
to
be
vnderstood
in
this
place
,
as
appeareth
by
these
reasons
.
First
,
the
glory
of
fame
is
defined
by
Illyricus
,
and
also
by
Melancthon
,
in
his
common
places
,
to
be
:
Approbatio
conscientiae
nostrae
rectè
iudicantis
,
&
al●crum
rectè
iudicantium
:
The
testimony
of
a
good
conscience
,
approuing
vs
that
we
haue
walked
sincerely
,
and
the
report
of
other
men
,
consenting
in
iudgement
with
vs
,
that
wee
haue
so
walked
.
But
in
that
sense
,
wee
cannot
be
more
glorious
then
Aaron
and
Moses
,
and
the
Priestes
of
the
old
Testament
,
because
they
were
men
of
as
holy
life
as
wee
,
and
walked
euery
way
as
sincerely
in
their
calling
,
as
wee
doe
in
our
vocation
,
and
were
as
pleasing
to
God
,
and
as
well
approoued
of
Gods
people
as
we
be
.
Secondly
,
it
were
vnworthy
of
the
Maiesty
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
to
play
the
so
phister
in
this
place
,
and
to
vse
aequiuocation
of
the
word
glory
,
as
if
by
their
glory
and
ours
,
he
did
not
vnderstand
one
and
the
same
thing
:
for
then
it
were
no
iust
comparison
.
For
the
things
which
be
compared
together
,
must
agree
in
that
thing
in
which
they
be
compared
:
therfore
,
being
compared
in
glory
,
they
must
agree
in
the
same
glory
;
only
they
must
differ
secundum
magis
&
minus
,
being
compared
not
in
the
positiue
,
but
in
the
comparatiue
degreee
,
one
must
be
more
glorious
then
another
.
So
then
,
the
glory
of
one
being
outward
in
pompe
and
state
,
the
glory
of
the
other
must
also
be
so
,
but
in
a
greater
measure
.
Thirdly
,
if
some
men
should
be
so
ignorant
as
to
say
,
that
the
glory
of
our
ministery
consisteth
in
this
,
that
it
is
the
ministery
of
the
spirit
,
of
life
,
of
righteousnesse
,
and
of
that
which
must
remaine
.
I
answer
;
that
cannot
be
,
for
then
the
glory
of
the
ministery
of
the
olde
Testament
,
should
consist
in
letters
,
death
,
condemnation
,
&c:
but
that
is
disproued
by
the
text
it selfe
,
which
sheweth
that
these
things
were
the
subiect
of
that
ministery
,
but
the
glory
consisted
in
the
brightnesse
of
Moses
his
face
:
therefore
I
say
;
spirit
,
life
,
righteousnesse
,
are
the
subiect
of
our
ministery
,
and
not
the
glory
of
it
:
&
the
cause
why
it
ought
to
be
so
much
the
more
glorious
then
the
old
priesthood
was
.
Fourthly
,
if
we
consider
the
scope
and
drift
of
Saint
Paul
in
that
place
,
it
was
to
magnifie
himselfe
,
and
credit
his
calling
,
that
so
it
might
not
be
brought
into
contempt
,
as
poore
and
beggarly
,
which
were
inglorious
.
For
,
saith
thee
:
Doe
wee
beginne
to
praise
our selues
?
Neede
we
as
some
other
,
an
epistle
of
commendation
?
Hee
answereth
:
that
hee
needeth
not
to
commend
himselfe
,
hee
needeth
not
mans
commendation
to
credite
his
ministery
,
for
as
much
as
his
calling
is
of
sufficient
credite
of
it selfe
,
and
his
owne
person
credited
by
it
three
manner
of
waies
.
First
,
by
the
Corinthians
themselues
,
to
whom
hee
did
minister
.
Secondly
,
by
that
which
was
inward
in
his
ministery
,
as
spirit
,
life
,
righteousnesse
.
Thirdly
,
by
that
which
was
outward
,
and
apparent
to
the
eye
,
and
that
was
glorie
.
Now
,
lest
any
man
should
obiect
out
of
Saint
Chrysostome
,
Theophilactus
,
Aquinas
,
and
others
,
that
in
their
interpretation
of
that
place
of
Saint
Paul
,
they
affirme
that
the
glory
of
his
ministery
,
was
no
such
glory
as
was
visible
and
subiect
to
outward
senses
.
I
confesse
that
when
Saint
Paul
wrote
that
epistle
,
it
was
not
so
of
fact
,
although
it
was
so
of
right
.
It
could
not
be
then
outwardly
glorious
,
by
reason
of
the
present
persecution
,
the
ministery
of
the
Gospel
being
not
established
by
Princes
.
Therefore
the
Apostle
spake
not
so
much
of
the
glory
which
then
was
,
as
of
that
which
in
the
peace
and
prosperity
of
the
Church
,
should
afterward
be
,
when
the
world
was
conuerted
.
For
his
words
are
these
:
P●s
o●ch●
mallon
e
diaconia
tou
pneumatos
estai
en
doxe
?
how
shall
not
the
ministration
of
the
spirit
bee
more
glorious
?
where
hee
speaketh
in
the
future
tence
,
as
of
a
thing
in
due
time
to
be
performed
,
and
not
present
.
And
therefore
,
where
he
speaketh
in
the
present
tence
in
the
next
verse
;
Pollo
mallon
perisseu●i
e
diaconia
tes
dicaiosunes
en
doxe
;
much
more
doth
the
ministration
of
righteousnesse
exceede
in
glory
,
as
it
is
a
figure
called
enalloge
temporis
,
where
one
tense
is
vsed
for
another
,
as
it
appeared
by
the
euent
(
which
is
the
best
interpreter
of
all
prophecies
)
when
the
riches
,
authority
,
and
outward
pompe
of
the
Church
was
increased
.
And
yet
it
cannot
be
said
,
that
the
ministery
of
the
Gospel
was
without
outward
glory
,
in
the
extreamest
pouerty
of
the
Church
,
for
as
much
as
the
Apostles
at
Ierusalem
had
all
the
riches
of
the
Church
layed
at
their
feete
,
and
at
their
owne
disposition
;
and
when
worldly
promotion
was
most
of
all
wanting
,
they
had
the
gift
of
working
miracles
,
which
was
a
greater
glory
and
countenance
to
their
ministery
,
then
any
Kings
or
earthly
meanes
could
giue
vnto
them
.
St.
Peter
,
his
shadow
was
more
glorious
and
more
honoured
then
the
body
and
person
of
any
Prince
.
Saint
Pauls
napkins
and
handkerchers
,
and
such
like
ragges
which
came
from
his
body
,
Act.
5.
Act.
93.
were
of
more
account
then
the
purple
robes
,
and
golde
and
siluer
of
earthly
Kings
.
And
this
gift
of
working
miracles
,
continued
as
the
portion
and
inhaeritance
of
Christ
his
Ministers
,
vntill
they
obteined
peace
,
and
so
were
indewed
with
worldely
possessions
,
and
honours
,
which
were
to
countenance
their
ministerie
in
the
place
of
miracles
which
did
cease
.
So
that
still
the
ministery
of
the
Gospell
was
outwardly
glorious
and
honourable
,
not
vile
,
abiect
,
or
contemptible
.
The
Lord
of
his
mercy
continue
the
state
of
it
vnto
his
own
glory
,
to
the
worlds
end
.
Amen
.
AN
ANSWER
TO
THE
TREAtise
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
,
contracted
into
this
Syllogisme
.
-
"
No
humane
ordinance
becomming
an
idoll
,
may
lawfully
"
be
vsed
in
the
seruice
of
God
.
-
"
But
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
being
an
humane
ordinance
,
"
is
become
an
idoll
.
-
"
Therefore
The
signe
of
the
Crosse
may
not
be
lawfully
vsed
in
the
seruice
of
God
.
OF
THE
SIGNE
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
.
FOr
as
much
as
wee
be
no
plaintiues
,
but
defendants
,
neither
doth
it
belong
vnto
vs
,
as
opponents
to
obiect
,
or
allege
any
arguments
for
proofe
of
that
truth
which
is
already
established
,
but
onely
,
as
respondents
to
answere
such
obiections
,
as
are
brought
by
our
aduersaries
to
ouerthrow
that
hold
whereof
wee
are
possessed
:
we
will
therefore
,
so
farre
as
by
the
Lawes
of
disputations
we
are
bound
,
make
answer
to
all
points
in
particular
,
as
they
are
vrged
against
vs
.
And
therefore
,
first
of
all
we
will
examine
the
title
of
the
booke
which
is
contracted
into
this
Syllogisme
.
-
"
No
humane
ordinance
becomming
an
idoll
,
may
lawfully
"
be
vsed
in
the
seruice
of
God
.
-
"
But
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
being
an
humane
ordinance
,
"
is
become
an
idoll
.
-
"
Therefore
The
signe
of
the
Crosse
may
not
be
lawfully
vsed
in
the
seruice
of
God
.
Because
this
Syllogisme
is
intended
to
be
in
the
first
figure
,
we
wish
the
author
had
explaned
his
meaning
,
in
what
mood
it
is
concluded
?
because
,
as
it
is
set
downe
in
these
English
wordes
,
it
is
vncertaine
whether
it
be
in
CELARENT
or
in
FERLO
,
in
one
of
them
it
must
be
,
for
else
it
is
no
lawfull
Syllogisme
.
If
it
bee
in
CELARENT
,
then
the
MINOR
must
be
vnderstood
to
be
vniuersall
affirmatiue
,
and
then
,
these
wordes
:
The
signe
of
the
Crosse
being
an
humane
ordinance
is
become
an
idoll
,
are
equiualent
to
these
:
Euery
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
an
humane
ordinance
,
and
euery
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
become
an
idoll
.
Which
,
if
it
be
so
vnderstood
,
then
the
MINOR
is
to
be
denied
as
vntrue
.
For
,
the
visible
and
permanent
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
which
appeared
to
Constantine
the
great
,
by
which
he
was
conuerted
to
the
Christian
faith
,
Euseb:
dè
vitâ
Const:
lib
:
1.
cap
:
22.
was
neither
an
humane
ordinance
,
because
it
was
the
worke
of
God
,
and
not
of
men
,
it
appeared
in
heauen
,
and
not
on
earth
,
neither
was
it
an
idoll
,
because
it
was
neither
worshipped
,
nor
shewed
to
that
end
that
it
should
be
worshipped
(
the
Author
his
selfe
in
his
Treatise
saith
,
nothing
is
an
idol
,
vnlesse
it
be
worshipped
)
neither
was
the
inuisible
and
transient
signe
Ezech:
9.
4.
of
the
Crosse
in
the
Prophesie
of
Ezechiel
any
humane
ordinance
because
God
commanded
it
,
nor
any
idoll
,
because
it
was
not
worshipped
.
Onely
it
was
a
marke
of
them
which
were
ordained
to
saluation
,
and
it
was
to
be
signed
in
their
forheads
by
the
Priest
in
the
Surplesse
,
or
linnen
Ephod
,
resembling
the
blood
of
the
paschal
Lambe
which
was
sprinkled
Exod:
1●
.
7.
vpon
the
dore
cheekes
in
Egypt
by
the
Angell
,
which
was
to
passe
ouer
the
houses
so
marked
,
and
to
saue
them
from
death
which
were
in
the
houses
so
marked
.
And
that
in
Saint
Iohns
reuelation
was
but
a
resemblance
of
them
both
,
where
the
elect
had
the
seale
of
the
liuing
God
in
their
forheads
.
This
Apoc:
7.
4.
signe
in
Ezechiel
,
was
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
because
it
was
the
Hebrew
charactar
,
AV
,
which
letter
as
it
is
now
printed
in
the
Alphabet
,
resembleth
the
Gallowes
,
or
instrument
of
execution
of
thieues
and
murtherers
.
But
,
as
Saint
Hierom
sheweth
:
when
this
prophesie
was
first
written
,
the
Iewes
hauing
Hierom
:
in
Ezech
:
9.
then
the
same
letters
which
the
Samaritans
had
,
according
as
they
were
deuised
by
Moses
,
the
Hebrew
T
A
V
was
of
the
same
forme
which
the
Greeke
AV
is
of
at
this
day
,
which
is
such
a
Crosse
in
forme
,
as
that
which
was
,
,
ara
mundi
,
the
Altar
of
the
world
,
vpon
which
our
Sauiour
Christ
was
crucified
.
And
that
afterward
it
was
changed
into
this
ordinary
forme
of
Gallowes
by
Ezra
,
after
the
captiuitie
,
which
altred
all
the
letters
in
the
Alphabet
into
this
forme
which
is
now
vsed
in
all
Hebrewe
impressions
,
that
the
letters
of
the
beleeuing
Iewes
might
differ
from
the
letters
of
the
vnbeleeuing
Samaritans
.
The
signe
of
the
crosse
in
the
forheads
of
the
elect
was
as
especiall
in
the
dayes
of
Ezechiel
,
as
the
marke
of
the
liuing
God
in
their
forheads
,
in
Saint
Iohns
reuelation
,
&
the
sprinkling
of
the
dore-cheekes
in
the
dayes
of
Moses
,
and
did
outwardly
shewe
that
none
could
escape
death
,
which
had
not
interiùs
expressam
fidem
crucis
&
mortis
Christi
,
quiqùe
exteriùs
Cerisium
intrepidè
profiteretur
,
an
inward
impression
in
their
hearts
,
of
the
Crosse
and
death
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
and
made
an
outward
constant
profession
of
the
same
to
the
view
of
the
world
,
to
sh●w
that
they
were
not
ashamed
of
their
crucified
Lord
Iesus
,
nor
afeard
to
drinke
of
his
cup
,
and
be
baptised
with
his
baptisme
,
which
was
calix
amaritudinis
,
and
baptismus
sanguinis
,
and
Math.
20.
23.
crucis
,
the
cup
of
bitternes
,
and
baptisme
of
blood
and
martirdome
,
of
the
Crosse
&
tribulation
.
Now
,
the
Christians
in
the
infancie
of
the
Church
,
did
signe
themselues
with
this
TAV
or
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
in
eâ
parte
vbi
est
signum
pudoris
vt
non
puderet
eos
crucifixi
,
as
Saint
Augustine
witnesseth
,
in
their
De
verbis
apostoli
Ser
:
8.
De
catherudibus
.
cap
:
20.
very
forheads
,
to
testifie
their
profession
,
in
imitation
of
the
examples
of
the
holy
Scriptures
which
I
haue
recited
,
as
the
same
Saint
Augustine
witnesseth
,
and
that
before
popery
had
crept
into
the
Church
,
witnes
Tertullian
,
which
liued
within
two
hundred
yeares
after
our
Sauiour
.
And
in
the
imitation
of
these
examples
,
the
signe
of
the
crosse
is
continued
among
vs
,
to
bee
signed
vpon
the
forheads
of
them
which
are
baptized
,
and
that
without
any
worship
or
diuine
honour
done
vnto
i●
,
therefore
it
is
no
idoll
.
But
if
this
Syllogisme
be
in
FERIO
,
as
according
to
the
rules
of
Logick
it
ought
to
be
,
because
it
is
an
indefinite
proposition
in
matter
contingent
,
then
is
the
MINOR
particular
,
and
likewise
the
conclusion
,
and
then
it
is
all
one
,
as
if
he
had
saide
:
Some
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
an
humane
ordinance
,
and
some
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
become
an
idoll
,
therefore
some
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
not
to
be
vsed
in
Gods
seruice
.
And
then
we
grant
both
the
proposition
&
the
conclusion
,
as
no
disaduantage
vnto
vs
,
because
he
concludeth
nothing
against
vs
.
For
our
signe
is
neither
that
which
man
hath
diuised
,
neither
that
which
is
worshipped
(
the
Author
his
selfe
doth
confesse
in
his
Treatise
,
that
wee
doe
not
worshippe
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
,
nor
any
way
make
an
idoll
of
it
)
.
Neither
can
any
particular
conclusion
ouerthrowe
a
generall
point
of
doctrine
,
as
if
because
one
Crosse
is
so
,
therefore
all
Crosses
should
be
so
.
A
generall
is
not
to
bee
concluded
by
a
particular
,
but
a
particular
by
a
general
.
Syllogizari
non
est
ex
particulari
.
Hauing
answered
the
matter
which
is
contingent
,
and
the
quantity
which
is
indefinite
,
it
followeth
that
we
examine
the
forme
of
this
syllogisme
,
and
lay
open
the
manifold
defectes
of
it
,
to
shewe
how
indeede
it
is
no
true
syllogisme
,
but
a
fallacie
,
which
that
we
may
the
better
effect
,
we
must
first
scan
euery
word
in
order
,
as
they
bee
placed
in
the
Syllogisme
.
First
of
all
therefore
,
where
he
saith
:
No
humane
ordinance
being
become
an
idoll
may
bee
vsed
in
Gods
seruice
.
Iwould
knowe
then
whether
a
diuine
ordinance
being
become
an
idoll
may
be
vsed
in
Gods
seruice
?
If
it
may
,
then
the
bread
in
the
Sacrament
of
the
Lords
Supper
,
which
is
Gods
ordinance
being
hallowed
by
the
Priest
,
eleuated
vpon
the
Altar
in
the
Masse
,
adored
by
the
people
,
being
put
in
the
pix
,
and
reserued
,
may
bee
afterward
broken
by
the
hands
of
the
Minister
,
and
deliuered
to
the
people
in
the
celebration
of
the
Sacrament
of
the
Lords
Table
.
I
hope
,
to
that
question
hee
will
answere
negatiuely
,
therefore
this
caution
which
hee
putteth
in
,
to
wit
,
No
humane
ordinance
,
is
but
superfluous
,
and
might
as
wel
haue
beene
left
out
of
the
syllogisme
.
Nay
,
he
might
as
well
haue
saide
:
No
diuine
ordinance
becomming
an
idoll
,
may
be
retained
in
the
Church
,
much
Iohn
3.
14.
Numb
:
21
9.
2.
Reg:
18.
4●
lesse
vsed
in
diuine
seruice
.
For
the
brasen
serpent
being
Gods
ordinance
,
and
ordained
to
bee
a
most
liuely
type
and
figure
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
when
they
burnt
incense
vnto
it
,
was
defaced
by
Ezechias
,
and
for
so
doing
hee
was
commended
,
to
haue
done
vprightly
in
the
sight
of
the
Lord
,
according
to
all
that
his
Father
Dauid
had
done
.
And
yet
,
I
say
,
the
idoll
being
remoued
,
Gods
ordinance
ought
still
to
stand
.
The
bread
which
is
consecrated
,
eleuated
,
and
adored
in
the
Masse
,
is
vnfit
to
bee
taken
and
eaten
in
the
Lords
Supper
,
and
yet
bread
is
still
to
be
vsed
in
that
Supper
without
such
eleuation
,
and
adoration
.
And
as
for
the
brasen
Serpent
,
here
is
the
difference
betweene
that
and
this
:
Had
the
people
ceased
to
burne
incense
vnto
it
,
yet
being
broken
and
defaced
,
no
other
like
to
that
was
to
be
erectect
,
for
as
much
as
that
was
but
a
temporall
ordinance
of
God
for
that
present
time
,
when
they
were
stunge
with
fierie
Serpents
in
the
Wildernesse
,
seruing
for
that
vse
to
heale
them
when
they
looked
vppon
it
,
which
vertue
of
healing
afterward
ceased
,
but
,
had
Serpents
still
stunge
them
,
and
the
sight
of
a
brasen
Serpent
serued
still
for
healing
of
such
woundes
,
a
newe
brasen
serpent
which
was
neuer
worshipped
,
might
haue
beene
made
in
the
place
of
it
which
was
defaced
.
Secondly
,
I
would
knowe
also
,
whether
an
humane
ordinance
being
no
idoll
may
bee
vsed
in
Gods
seruice
?
To
that
Maister
Iacob
answereth
negatiuely
,
in
his
Booke
of
reformation
,
likewise
,
the
Author
of
the
Treatise
of
diuine
worshippe
,
therefore
this
clause
:
becomming
an
idoll
,
was
but
idle
,
and
might
very
well
haue
beene
spared
,
and
it
standeth
but
in
the
place
of
a
ciphre
,
or
rather
an
idoll
it selfe
,
because
,
as
the
Apostle
writeth
:
idoium
nihil
est
,
1.
Cor:
84.
an
idoll
is
nothing
,
and
this
also
standeth
for
nothing
.
Let
the
framer
therefore
of
this
syllogisme
speake
whether
hee
meaneth
:
in
sensu
diuiso
,
because
it
is
an
humane
ordinance
?
or
because
it
is
an
idoll
?
or
else
,
because
ioyned
both
together
in
sensu
coniuncto
,
it
is
both
an
humane
ordinance
and
an
idoll
,
it
is
vnfit
for
Gods
seruice
?
If
hee
make
it
a
sufficient
reason
why
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
should
bee
crossed
out
of
the
s
;
eruice
Booke
,
Vel
eo
nomine
,
because
it
was
an
humane
ordinance
,
then
hee
might
haue
spared
to
make
mention
of
an
idoll
,
if
he
meane
eò
nomine
,
because
it
was
an
idoll
,
then
might
hee
haue
spared
to
speake
of
humane
ordinance
,
as
wordes
idlely
put
in
.
Frustra
fit
per
plura
quod
aequè
benè
fieri
potest
pèr
pauciora
.
If
yee
meane
an
humane
ordinance
might
haue
beene
vsed
,
so
it
were
not
become
an
idoll
,
or
an
idoll
,
had
it
not
beene
an
humane
ordinance
,
or
otherwise
,
if
he
ment
none
of
them
both
,
then
these
two
were
not
well
ioyned
together
in
this
syllogisme
.
But
,
as
for
our
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
with
which
we
signe
infants
in
Baptisme
,
wee
doe
not
in
so
doing
imitate
the
examples
of
men
,
but
the
holy
Scripture
,
and
so
denye
it
to
bee
an
humane
ordinance
,
wee
adore
it
not
outwardly
with
the
body
,
nor
inwardly
in
our
mindes
,
and
therefore
wee
denie
it
to
be
an
idoll
(
for
still
I
builde
vppon
that
ground
of
the
Author
of
this
syllogisme
,
that
nothing
is
an
idoll
vnlesse
it
be
worshipped
)
therefore
,
no
worship
,
no
idoll
.
And
therefore
notwithstanding
this
syllogisme
,
nothing
hindereth
but
that
it
may
bee
vsed
in
the
Sacrament
of
Baptisme
,
which
is
a
part
of
GODS
seruice
.
Thirdly
,
the
argument
doth
not
followe
,
that
because
the
bread
which
is
adored
by
the
Papists
,
is
become
an
idoll
,
therefore
the
bread
which
is
not
adored
by
vs
is
an
idoll
,
because
the
Sunne
and
Moone
were
as
Gods
to
the
heathens
which
worshipped
them
,
therefore
they
are
Gods
to
vs
which
vouchsafe
them
no
worship
,
because
Gedeons
Ephod
was
an
idoll
to
them
which
worshipped
it
,
being
hung
vp
in
Iud:
8.
27.
Ophra
,
therefore
that
Ephod
which
the
Priest
did
weare
in
Solomons
Temple
and
not
worship
,
was
an
Idoll
in
Ierusalem
,
because
the
altars
which
were
erected
for
sacrifice
in
the
high
places
,
&
that
vpon
which
Iereboam
offred
incense
,
were
monuments
1.
Reg:
13.
1.
Iosua
22.
10.
of
idolatry
,
therefore
the
altar
which
the
two
tribes
of
Ruben
,
Gad
,
and
halfe
Manasses
,
erected
to
be
a
witnesse
betweene
themselues
and
the
other
tribes
,
vpon
which
no
sacrifice
nor
incense
was
offred
,
nor
intended
to
be
offred
,
should
also
be
held
for
a
monument
of
idolatry
,
because
the
name
of
Iesus
was
abused
and
vainely
taken
by
the
coniurers
,
it
might
not
be
lawfully
vsed
by
the
Apostles
:
so
the
argument
Act:
19.
13.
doth
not
followe
,
that
because
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
an
idoll
to
the
Papists
which
worship
it
,
therefore
it
should
be
an
idoll
to
vs
which
worship
it
not
.
The
Author
his
selfe
,
as
before
I
haue
shewed
,
saith
nothing
is
an
idoll
but
quatenù●
it
is
worshipped
:
and
againe
,
hee
freeth
vs
from
the
crime
of
idolatry
,
saying
that
our
Church
ascribeth
no
worship
vnto
it
,
therefore
hee
doth
not
iustly
call
it
by
the
name
of
an
idoll
;
and
apply
it
vnto
vs
.
Their
abuse
cannot
disanull
our
lawfull
vse
,
and
whatsoeuer
may
by
them
bee
abused
,
may
by
vs
bee
lawfully
vsed
,
therefore
their
superstition
cannot
make
a
nullitie
of
our
sincere
and
true
deuotion
.
As
the
Crosse
hath
beene
abused
,
so
hath
Gods
Temple
beene
profaned
in
the
dayes
of
Ezechiel
,
and
in
the
dayes
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
yet
Ezechi
:
8
:
Ioh:
2.
neither
of
them
would
haue
the
Temple
to
bee
suppressed
.
Masses
haue
beene
saide
in
all
our
Churches
,
shall
wee
therefore
be
as
the
Brownists
which
refuse
to
come
to
Church
to
heare
our
dinine
seruice
?
They
are
the
same
Churches
numero
,
the
Crosse
is
not
,
therefore
the
argument
followeth
á
maiori
ad
mious
,
the
Churches
may
bee
as
well
remoued
as
the
Crosse
.
Fourthly
,
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
he
saith
:
is
become
an
idoll
,
therefore
he
denieth
it
to
haue
beene
originally
an
idoll
as
the
golden
colfe
was
which
was
erected
in
Horeb
,
and
because
Ex
:
32.
4.
he
denieth
it
to
haue
beene
originally
an
idoll
,
he
must
needes
ouerthrowe
that
first
ground
which
hee
layed
in
his
MINOR
proposition
,
where
hee
affirmed
that
it
was
an
humane
ordinance
.
For
the
Author
of
the
booke
of
reformation
alledging
the
authoritie
of
Vrsinus
in
his
exposition
Maister
Iacob
.
vpon
the
second
commaundement
,
and
the
Author
of
the
treatise
of
diuine
worship
,
affirme
that
all
humane
institutions
in
the
Church
are
idolatry
,
because
they
impugne
the
second
Commaundement
of
the
first
Table
,
and
that
the
word
of
God
is
so
perfect
and
all-sufficient
of
it selfe
,
that
man
may
ordaine
nothing
in
the
Church
,
but
all
additions
of
men
are
idolatry
.
I
conclude
therefore
,
out
of
their
own
wordes
,
that
if
it
be
become
an
idoll
,
it
was
no
humane
ordinance
,
and
if
it
were
an
humane
ordinance
,
it
could
not
become
an
idol
,
because
it
was
an
idol
ab
initio
,
from
the
first
institution
of
it
.
And
therfore
,
because
he
saith
,
it
is
become
an
idol
,
he
must
grant
,
that
it
was
God
ordinance
.
And
so
I
deny
not
but
the
holiest
creatures
in
the
world
may
become
idolls
by
mans
worshipping
them
.
For
so
is
the
bread
in
the
sacrament
,
so
is
the
beginning
of
S.
Iohns
Gospel
,
In
principio
erat
verbum
;
being
hung
about
childrens
necks
,
with
certaine
charmes
of
sorcery
to
keep
them
from
stumbling
,
become
an
idol
.
And
the
18.
verse
of
the
50.
Psalme
:
When
thou
sawest
a
theefe
,
thou
didst
run
with
him
:
being
vsed
with
other
circumstances
by
coniurations
to
finde
out
stolen
goods
,
which
is
to
ascribe
diuine
power
to
these
creatures
.
But
,
for
as
much
as
originally
,
the
vse
of
the
Crosse
was
lawfull
,
we
doe
retaine
it
in
our
Church
as
originally
it
was
vsed
:
and
therefore
wee
may
iustifie
the
vse
of
it
.
Fiftly
therefore
,
whereas
hee
saith
:
that
which
is
an
idoll
may
not
be
vsed
in
Gods
seruice
:
it
maketh
nothing
against
vs
which
haue
proued
the
Crosse
to
be
no
idoll
.
Therefore
,
that
I
may
lay
open
the
manifolde
imperfections
of
this
kinde
of
argumentation
,
to
shew
that
it
is
no
lawfull
syllogisme
,
but
a
flat
paralogisme
,
in
it
I
will
discouer
foure
fallacies
.
And
that
I
may
not
be
like
them
,
which
as
it
is
in
the
prouerbe
,
will
spell
law
,
and
conster
logicke
,
I
must
be
forced
to
vse
such
termes
as
belong
to
the
Logitians
,
which
cannot
be
well
expressed
in
English
,
that
I
may
obserue
the
lawes
of
schooles
.
Out
of
the
premisses
which
before
I
haue
obserued
.
First
,
there
is
fallacia
à
dicto
secundum
quid
ad
dictum
simpliciter
,
quia
in
conclusione
falso
id
tribuitur
rei
simplicitèr
consideratae
,
quod
in
praemissis
tributum
fuit
aliquâ
conditione
,
seu
determinatione
&
circumstantiâ
,
as
Abetzon
speaketh
:
In
the
conclusion
,
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
condemned
as
simply
vnlawfull
,
being
simply
considered
without
any
respect
of
worship
,
which
in
the
premisses
is
not
vnderstood
but
vpon
circumstances
,
and
conditions
of
diuine
worship
to
be
ascribed
vnto
it
.
Secendly
,
it
is
a
paralogisme
,
called
ignoratio
Elenchi
,
the
ignorance
of
that
fallacy
,
quià
non
est
idem
respectus
,
res
non
intelligitur
ad
idem
secundum
idem
similiter
&
eodem
tempore
:
there
is
not
one
and
the
selfe
same
respect
,
but
diuers
,
the
thing
is
not
alike
,
but
diuersly
vnderstoode
,
it
is
not
referred
to
one
and
the
same
things
,
according
to
the
same
,
after
the
same
maner
,
and
at
the
same
time
,
but
all
these
circumstances
are
different
one
from
another
.
Thirdly
,
it
is
fallacia
non
causae
pro
cau●â
,
such
a
fallacy
wherin
that
is
taken
for
a
cause
,
which
is
no
cause
:
the
abuse
of
them
which
worship
it
,
is
here
alleaged
for
a
cause
why
it
may
not
be
lawfully
vsed
among
vs
,
which
their
abuse
is
no
cause
at
al.
Fourthly
,
it
is
fallacia
accidentis
,
a
fallacy
by
reason
of
the
accident
which
is
included
in
that
which
belongeth
onely
vnto
the
substance
,
and
ought
to
bee
vnderstood
without
any
such
accident
.
For
he
draweth
his
argument
from
the
euent
,
which
was
meerely
accidentall
vnto
the
Crosse
,
vnto
the
nature
of
the
Crosse
it selfe
,
as
idolum
fit
,
ergo
verè
idolum
est
.
It
is
among
some
vsed
as
an
idoll
,
therefore
properly
,
and
originally
the
thing
it selfe
is
an
idoll
.
They
doe
à
praeteritis
accidentibus
aut
euentis
ad
praesentiam
rei
argumentari
;
draw
their
arguments
from
the
accidental
euents
which
are
passed
,
vnto
the
thing
as
among
vs
it
is
now
vsed
:
as
for
example
,
because
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
was
worshipped
in
the
time
of
ignorance
and
superstition
among
Papists
,
that
therefore
it
is
now
worshipped
among
the
Protestants
,
after
the
reformation
of
the
Church
.
To
leaue
the
title
of
the
booke
,
and
come
to
the
tract
it selfe
.
For
proofe
of
the
MAIOR
,
hee
alleageth
Saint
Iohns
authority
,
Babes
,
keepe
your selues
from
idolls
:
as
if
that
were
a
Iohn
.
5.
21
good
argument
;
we
must
keepe
our selues
from
idolis
,
therefore
wee
may
not
make
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
:
which
before
I
haue
shewed
to
be
no
idoll
,
which
is
but
petitio
principij
,
a
begging
of
the
question
.
But
for
explanationof
this
text
of
Saint
Iohn
,
he
vndertaketh
two
things
:
first
,
to
set
downe
the
definition
of
an
idoll
:
and
secondly
,
to
limit
vs
how
farre
wee
are
to
keepe
our selues
from
idolls
,
and
therein
he
presseth
vs
with
the
authority
of
learned
Zanche
,
when
his
selfe
refuseth
not
onely
to
stand
to
the
authority
of
learned
Caluin
,
,
and
learned
Beza
,
and
learned
Peter
Martyr
,
but
renounceth
all
other
humane
authorities
,
which
are
by
vs
alleaged
against
him
,
saying
;
he
will
stand
to
no
authorities
,
but
to
the
canonicall
Scriptures
.
But
to
come
to
the
definition
of
an
idoll
,
hee
defineth
it
to
be
,
A
quicquid
praetèr
Deum
diuino
honore
colitur
,
a
whatsoeuer
ye
wil
besides
God
,
if
it
be
worshipped
with
diuine
worship
.
And
he
that
will
define
an
idoll
to
be
à
quicquid
,
will
not
refuse
to
say
à
quidlibet
,
whatsoeuer
his
owne
idle
braine
shall
apprehend
.
Hee
might
rather
haue
said
with
the
Apostle
,
it
is
à
nihil
,
then
à
quicquid
,
a
new
nothing
,
rather
then
euery
thing
,
Scimus
quià
idolum
nihil
est
in
mundo
,
saith
St.
Paul
,
1.
Cor.
8.
4
we
know
that
an
idoll
is
nothing
in
the
world
.
For
though
in
matter
it
be
somewhat
,
as
wood
,
or
stone
,
&c:
yet
in
forme
it
is
nothing
,
because
it
representeth
that
which
is
not
,
as
were
the
idolls
of
Mercury
,
lupiter
,
and
such
like
.
And
therein
it
differeth
from
an
image
,
which
representeth
that
which
is
comprehended
within
the
vniuersality
or
nature
of
things
,
as
the
Schoolemen
call
it
,
as
the
image
of
a
man
,
of
a
lyon
,
and
such
like
.
But
,
because
it
pleaseth
him
to
confound
idols
and
images
,
which
in
nature
doe
differ
:
yet
for
as
much
as
they
serue
for
one
purpose
in
this
place
,
and
the
worship
of
either
of
them
is
a
breach
of
the
second
commandement
,
we
will
be
contented
to
comprehend
them
both
in
one
definition
.
And
for
as
much
as
euery
definition
must
consist
of
à
Genus
,
and
that
which
is
loco
differentiae
,
at
the
least
,
I
meruaile
that
he
doth
call
it
à
quicquid
,
and
so
make
it
à
transcenaēt
,
as
if
it
were
in
no
praeaicamēt
.
For
in
that
God
saith
:
Thou
shalt
not
make
sculptile
aut
simulacrum
;
any
grauen
image
,
nor
the
likenesse
of
any
thing
,
&c:
thou
shalt
not
bow
downe
to
it
nor
worship
Exod.
20.
it
:
by
these
words
it
is
plaine
,
that
it
is
in
the
predicament
or
action
,
and
out
of
it
may
be
gathered
this
definition
;
that
it
is
the
workemanshippe
of
a
mans
hand
,
whether
carued
,
painted
,
molton
,
or
facioned
howsoeuer
by
the
art
of
man
,
whether
in
the
ayre
,
as
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
transient
,
or
otherwise
,
as
the
Crosse
of
wood
which
is
permanent
,
representing
som
substance
or
figment
,
to
which
we
ascribe
diuine
power
,
&
by
a
consequent
,
we
giue
diuine
honor
.
And
wheras
the
author
replieth
,
that
then
the
worship
of
Angells
,
soules
of
iust
men
,
and
inuisible
spirits
,
were
no
idolatry
.
I
answer
,
that
such
worshippe
is
a
breach
of
the
first
commandement
;
Non
habebis
Deos
alienos
coram
me
:
thou
shalt
it
haue
no
other
Gods
besides
mee
:
as
also
the
worshipping
of
the
Sunne
and
Moone
,
which
are
the
workemanship
of
God
,
and
not
of
men
.
As
for
the
second
,
where
he
saith
:
we
must
keep
our selues
both
à
cultu
&
ab
vs●
idoli
,
f●om
the
worship
of
the
idol
,
&
also
from
any
other
vse
of
it
,
in
so
much
that
we
must
not
reteine
it
among
vs
:
his
own
self
doth
clear
vs
that
we
do
not
colere
,
worship
it
.
And
as
for
the
vse
of
it
,
which
he
saith
;
may
be
either
ciuill
,
as
for
story
,
Princes
banners
,
coignes
,
or
else
religious
,
it
is
an
idle
distinction
,
for
it
is
repugnant
to
the
nature
and
definition
of
an
idoll
,
that
it
should
be
ciuill
.
Idolls
are
made
for
diuine
worship
,
and
for
no
other
vse
:
therefore
for
Ecclesiasticall
and
religious
vses
onely
,
and
beeing
not
so
vsed
,
they
are
no
idolls
,
as
the
author
his
selfe
confesseth
.
If
hee
Pag.
11.
meane
by
the
vse
of
idolls
,
the
bare
retaining
of
them
in
the
Church
without
any
worship
,
as
in
many
Churches
of
the
Lutherans
,
where
the
images
,
which
hee
calleth
idolls
,
doe
stand
in
the
Temples
for
ornaments
onely
:
It
is
easily
answered
,
we
remoued
them
out
of
our
Churches
,
and
defaced
them
long
since
.
But
he
saith
;
that
by
religious
vse
of
idolls
,
he
meaneth
:
when
any
thing
of
mens
deuise
being
worshipped
as
an
idoll
,
is
vsed
in
the
worship
of
God
.
For
answer
whereof
,
we
vse
no
such
thing
in
our
seruice
:
the
Crosse
which
we
vse
in
Baptisme
,
is
not
worshipped
at
all
.
Yet
,
saith
hee
:
this
point
is
farther
strengthened
by
the
commandement
,
which
forbiddeth
not
onely
to
worship
,
but
also
to
make
an
image
ad
cultum
,
or
for
religious
vse
.
In
which
words
,
he
should
doe
well
to
see
his
owne
weaknesse
,
or
rather
folly
.
I
doe
not
deny
,
but
as
it
is
vnlawfull
to
worship
it
,
so
it
is
vnlawfull
to
make
it
ad
cultum
,
that
another
should
worship
it
,
as
Demetrius
the
siluer-smith
and
his
fellowes
did
,
which
Act.
19.
made
shrines
and
images
for
Diana
,
her
Temple
.
But
,
whereas
hee
saith
:
it
is
forbidden
to
make
any
similitude
ad
cultum
,
or
for
religious
vse
;
if
he
make
these
English
words
,
for
religious
vse
,
to
be
an
interpretation
of
these
Latine
wordes
,
ad
cultum
;
as
if
they
were
but
the
same
thing
:
hee
erreth
,
because
there
be
other
religious
vses
besides
worship
:
but
,
if
he
vnderstand
them
disiunctiuely
,
as
they
ought
to
be
taken
;
that
is
,
signifying
diuers
things
,
then
he
falcifieth
the
second
commandement
,
which
saith
onely
;
thou
shalt
not
make
it
to
bow
down
to
it
,
nor
worship
it
:
but
maketh
no
mention
of
other
vses
;
neyther
expresly
,
nor
by
way
of
implication
;
for
them
God
should
be
contrary
to
himselfe
,
which
after
this
commandement
was
giuen
;
yet
commanded
images
to
be
made
for
religious
vses
,
as
the
brasen
Serpent
,
and
the
images
which
were
in
Slomons
Temple
,
and
ihe
Cherubins
vpon
the
mercy
seate
:
so
that
these
words
;
religious
vses
,
are
an
addition
of
his
owne
vnto
Gods
word
.
And
,
whereas
he
saith
;
all
occasions
and
meanes
leading
to
idolatry
,
are
forbidden
.
I
answer
;
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
is
no
leading
to
idolatry
;
for
as
much
as
our
doctrine
concerning
the
vse
of
it
,
is
clearely
set
downe
;
that
we
put
no
confidence
in
it
,
&
our
vse
of
it
is
according
to
our
doctrine
:
if
he
vse
it
otherwise
,
it
is
his
fault
,
&
not
ours
.
Our
doctrine
and
practise
is
as
plaine
to
the
contrary
,
as
that
of
Ruben
,
Gad
,
and
halfe
Manasses
,
concerning
the
altar
which
they
erected
,
their
doctrine
explaining
ther
intent
,
&
their
vse
of
it
being
consonant
to
their
doctrine
,
remoued
all
scruples
&
iealousie
out
of
the
minds
of
their
brethren
,
which
before
were
offended
,
and
so
concerning
that
point
they
were
well
satisfied
,
as
also
our
brethren
woulde
bee
concerning
this
controuersie
,
were
they
as
charitably
minded
towards
vs
,
being
Christians
,
as
the
Iewes
were
towards
their
brethren
being
Iewes
.
Therefore
,
where
he
saith
:
wee
offend
against
St.
Iohns
precept
,
warning
vs
to
keepe
our selues
from
idolls
;
because
we
doe
vse
an
idoll
in
the
seruice
of
God
.
I
answer
as
before
,
it
is
petitio
principij
.
a
begging
of
the
question
:
for
I
haue
shewed
,
how
it
is
no
idoll
,
and
hee
is
greatly
destitute
of
a
medius
terminus
,
to
proue
that
conclusion
which
hee
vndertooke
to
proue
.
If
we
grant
all
Crosses
which
are
worshipped
,
to
be
idolls
:
it
cannot
follow
,
that
our
Crosse
in
Baptisme
which
is
not
worshipped
,
is
an
idoll
,
no
more
then
this
:
that
because
all
altars
,
erected
for
sacrifice
in
places
prohibited
of
God
▪
were
abhomination
,
therfore
the
altar
of
which
before
I
spake
,
being
not
ercted
for
that
end
,
was
also
abhominable
.
Neither
doth
he
so
fitly
alleage
for
his
purpose
,
that
our
Church
of
England
in
the
Homily
against
perill
of
idolatry
,
iustifieth
the
remouing
of
images
out
of
churches
,
which
were
set
vp
by
Papists
to
be
worshipped
,
and
are
worshipped
,
to
prooue
that
by
the
same
reason
,
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
allowed
by
Protestants
;
should
be
also
abrogated
,
which
neither
was
appointed
for
worship
▪
nor
yet
worshipped
.
Neyther
is
that
place
of
Saint
Augustine
alleaged
against
images
August
.
in
Psal.
113.
which
haue
eyes
,
eares
,
noses
,
which
doe
valere
ad
curuandum
infaelicem
animum
,
depraue
the
minde
of
man
,
which
is
very
apt
to
be
deluded
and
carried
away
,
and
also
are
an
obiect
to
the
eye
,
very
dangerous
to
intice
and
allure
to
idolatry
:
fitly
applied
by
him
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
not
visible
,
not
permanent
,
and
of
which
,
none
of
these
things
may
be
verified
,
which
are
incident
to
the
images
which
haue
eyes
,
eares
,
and
noses
.
And
for
our
part
,
we
doe
as
much
abhorre
such
,
both
images
and
image-makers
,
as
this
author
doth
,
or
as
euer
Epiphanius
and
Tertullian
did
,
whom
he
citeth
,
how
vnproperly
soeuer
.
And
to
answer
the
conclusion
,
which
so
idlely
he
inferreth
vpon
these
authorities
:
That
,
if
godly
fathers
were
so
vehement
against
erecting
images
of
Christ
and
Saints
,
euen
at
that
time
,
before
any
worship
was
giuen
vnto
them
:
much
more
would
they
withstand
it
now
,
after
men
haue
made
idolls
of
them
:
and
therefore
hee
condemneth
vs
for
induring
the
idoll
of
the
Crosse
(
as
he
calleth
it
)
in
the
seruice
and
sacraments
of
God
,
and
contrary
to
Dauids
doctrine
,
keeping
an
honourable
memory
of
that
which
the
Prophet
Esay
willeth
vs
to
abandon
.
I
say
,
it
is
no
meruaile
though
they
were
so
vehement
against
erecting
Psal.
16.
Esa
50
,
22
of
images
in
Churches
,
for
we
are
as
vehement
in
that
cause
as
they
were
,
and
it
behoued
them
at
that
time
to
be
vehement
,
considering
that
the
whole
world
then
was
giuen
to
idolatry
,
and
in
euery
citie
the
Pagans
had
their
Temples
,
and
as
they
worshipped
idolls
in
their
paganisme
,
so
they
were
prone
to
worshippe
images
after
their
conuersion
to
the
Christian
religion
.
And
seeing
they
which
were
not
conuerted
,
were
readie
to
offer
sacrifice
to
Paul
and
Barnabas
Act.
14.
13
then
aliue
:
no
doubt
but
they
would
haue
worshipped
their
images
when
they
were
dead
.
But
all
this
is
vnfitly
applied
vnto
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
.
To
come
to
the
MINOR
,
in
which
he
indeuoureth
to
proue
that
the
Crosse
is
an
idoll
.
HE
writeth
for
a
marginall
note
in
capitall
letters
,
THE
PROOFE
OF
THE
MINOR
:
because
in
his
owne
conceit
it
is
already
proued
.
But
for
the
proofe
of
it
,
he
onely
alleageth
the
authority
of
Bellarmine
,
Potiformus
,
Hart
,
Costerus
,
Aquinas
,
being
Papists
,
which
hold
that
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
to
bee
worshipped
with
diuine
worship
,
and
ascribe
to
it
diuine
power
.
And
grant
all
this
to
be
true
,
that
the
Papists
worship
the
Crosse
,
&
ascribe
so
much
to
it
.
I
answer
as
before
,
it
toucheth
not
our
signe
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
,
which
ascribe
no
such
thing
vnto
it
.
Therfore
nothing
is
here
alleaged
by
him
for
the
confirmation
of
the
MINOR
,
which
is
not
already
by
vs
answered
and
refuted
sufficiently
,
in
the
confutation
of
the
MAIOR
.
The
author
now
commeth
to
his
Ob
:
&
Sol
:
and
in
our
behalfe
obiecteth
,
that
our
Crosse
is
neque
numero
neque
vsu
,
the
same
Crosse
which
was
among
the
Papists
,
neither
yet
vsed
among
vs
as
it
was
vsed
among
them
The
validity
of
this
obiection
in
our
behalfe
,
wee
shew
to
be
of
as
great
validity
on
our
side
,
as
it
was
for
the
tribes
of
Ruben
,
Gad
,
and
halfe
Manasses
on
their
side
,
which
being
chalenged
by
their
brethren
for
suspicion
of
idolatry
when
they
erected
an
altar
,
which
as
it
was
not
numero
,
so
they
answered
it
was
not
vsu
,
such
an
altar
as
they
suspected
it
to
be
:
which
answer
contented
the
Iews
,
&
might
as
well
satisfy
our
brethren
,
if
they
were
as
charitable
.
But
let
vs
examine
the
answer
he
maketh
to
this
obiection
.
When
(
saith
he
)
God
commanded
his
people
to
breake
downe
the
images
of
the
heathen
,
and
to
extinguish
the
very
name
of
them
,
they
could
not
haue
performed
that
charge
,
if
they
had
burnt
all
the
idolls
of
Canaan
,
and
made
others
new
of
the
same
forme
,
though
to
another
vse
not
idolatrous
:
so
cannot
we
discharge
our
duties
,
if
hauing
defaced
the
Popish
idolls
,
wee
erect
them
new
in
our
Church
,
though
not
to
worship
;
because
it
cannot
be
without
breach
of
the
commandement
:
Babes
,
keep
your selues
from
idolls
.
So
farre
disputeth
the
maker
of
the
syllogisme
,
in
our
behalfe
.
But
,
because
it
may
be
verified
of
vs
,
which
was
saide
of
the
blinde
man
who
receiued
his
sight
;
aetatem
habet
,
prò
se
respondeat
,
we
are
old
enough
to
answer
for
our selues
;
we
will
answer
our
own
selues
for
our selues
,
we
craue
no
helpe
of
our
aduersary
,
but
we
will
shew
the
vnsufficiency
of
this
answer
two
maner
of
waies
.
First
,
he
hath
dig●essed
from
his
matter
,
because
the
subiect
of
this
disputation
is
an
humane
ordinance
become
an
idoll
,
whereas
he
instanceth
in
humane
ordinances
which
are
not
become
idolls
,
but
which
originally
were
idolls
,
and
erected
by
infidells
to
this
end
,
that
they
should
be
worshipped
:
for
that
was
to
the
imitation
of
the
heathen
people
,
&
this
is
not
so
.
And
,
according
to
this
kinde
of
disputation
,
he
might
as
well
impose
a
necessity
vpon
vs
,
of
suppressing
all
our
parish
Churches
,
as
the
Brownists
do
;
because
they
were
not
onely
the
Popes
ordinance
,
but
also
ordeined
for
the
celebration
of
the
Masse
,
and
so
imployed
from
their
first
erection
,
vntill
this
late
reformation
of
the
Church
.
For
,
according
to
Gods
commandement
,
not
onely
the
idolls
their selues
were
to
bee
put
downe
,
but
also
the
altars
,
groues
,
and
high
places
,
where
the
idolatry
was
committed
,
and
the
Priests
which
did
offer
the
sacrifices
,
all
they
being
abhominable
as
the
idoll
it selfe
.
Secondly
,
in
that
he
taketh
it
pro
concesso
,
as
a
thing
granted
,
that
the
Crosse
is
an
idoll
,
it
is
but
a
begging
of
the
question
,
as
before
I
haue
shewed
;
because
it
is
not
yet
proued
,
that
the
signe
of
the
crosse
is
an
idol
among
vs
:
neither
doth
it
follow
,
that
if
with
the
Papists
it
were
so
;
therfore
with
vs
it
is
so
,
no
more
then
because
their
bread
in
the
sacrament
is
an
idol
,
therfore
ours
is
also
an
idoll
.
That
only
numero
which
is
worshipt
is
an
idol
;
for
the
author
confesseth
,
wher
there
is
no
worship
ther
can
be
no
idol
.
That
we
may
proceede
farther
.
For
as
much
as
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
like
the
bread
in
the
Lords
Supper
,
in
the
beginning
was
free
from
superstition
,
&
the
abuse
of
it
which
grew
after
,
is
remoued
by
vs
,
why
may
not
the
one
continue
among
vs
as
well
as
the
other
without
any
such
slanderous
imputation
of
idolatry
?
His
answer
is
;
because
one
is
an
humane
ordinance
,
and
the
other
diuine
,
as
the
brasen
serpent
which
being
an
humane
ardinance
when
it
was
abused
,
was
defaced
by
Ezechias
.
To
which
wee
reply
,
that
neither
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
an
humane
ordinance
,
as
before
wee
haue
shewed
,
neither
might
an
humane
ordinance
bee
vsed
though
not
an
idoll
,
by
his
own
doctrine
,
neither
an
idoll
,
though
at
the
first
it
were
a
diuine
ordinance
,
neither
was
that
brasen
serpent
an
humane
ordinance
,
as
by
the
text
it
appeareth
:
For
the
Lord
said
to
Moses
,
make
thee
a
serpent
,
and
set
it
vp
for
a
signe
,
that
as
many
as
are
bitten
may
looke
vpon
it
,
and
liue
;
So
Moses
made
a
serpent
Numb
:
21.
8.
of
Brasse
,
&c.
And
,
whereas
he
alledgeth
out
of
Tertullian
:
horum
si
legem
postules
scripturarum
,
nullam
inuenies
,
that
we
haue
no
warrant
out
of
the
Scripture
;
it
is
to
be
vnderstood
that
according
to
Tertullian
we
haue
no
expresse
commandement
out
of
holy
writ
to
vse
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
particularly
in
baptisme
,
and
therefore
we
hold
it
as
a
thing
indifferent
,
whether
it
be
vsed
or
omitted
,
yet
we
haue
an
example
of
signing
with
the
signe
of
the
crosse
out
of
Ezechiel
as
I
haue
alledged
,
to
shew
that
man
is
not
the
first
deuiser
of
it
,
but
that
man
followeth
gods
example
:
so
then
albeit
we
haue
not
legem
aut
praecaptum
,
a
law
or
commandement
to
impose
vpon
vs
the
vse
of
the
crosse
,
yet
we
haue
an
example
to
shew
that
God
was
the
first
author
of
it
.
And
againe
,
authoritas
in
negatiuis
non
valet
,
it
followeth
not
that
because
the
Scriptures
make
no
mention
of
Melchisedech
his
father
,
therefore
hee
had
no
father
:
or
because
the
Scriptures
commend
Ioseph
for
a
iust
man
,
and
make
no
mention
of
his
sinnes
,
that
therefore
he
had
no
sinnes
as
Rodolphus
Agricola
in
his
Topics
obserueth
out
of
S.
Augustin
.
All
things
necessarie
to
saluation
,
are
expresly
set
downe
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
but
this
is
a
matter
indifferent
,
&
no
way
concerning
the
state
of
our
saluation
.
Now
he
commeth
with
his
coleworts
twice
sodden
,
&
repeateth
that
which
he
hath
so
often
said
before
:
that
the
crosse
is
become
an
idoll
,
and
therefore
not
fit
to
be
vsed
in
the
seruice
of
Iehoua
,
which
because
it
is
but
a
tautalogy
,
or
repetition
of
the
same
thing
,
I
refer
this
obiection
to
the
answere
made
before
.
And
farther
,
to
presse
vs
with
more
vnthruthes
,
hee
alledgeth
that
it
is
retained
among
vs
with
opinion
very
superstitious
and
erroneous
,
because
in
our
30.
Canon
ecclesiasticall
,
wee
read
these
words
:
That
the
child
is
dedicated
by
it
,
to
the
seruice
of
him
that
dyed
vpon
the
crosse
,
which
(
he
saith
)
is
to
equal
the
ordinance
of
man
,
with
the
ordinance
of
God
,
to
ascribe
that
vnto
the
Crosse
which
is
due
vnto
Baptisme
,
such
an
absurditie
,
as
no
water
can
cleanse
it
.
To
which
I
answere
:
that
which
cannot
be
washed
away
by
water
,
may
bee
auoided
by
distinction
.
There
are
two
sortes
of
dedication
to
the
seruice
of
him
that
died
vpon
the
Crosse
,
one
actiue
,
the
other
significatiue
,
action
is
due
to
Baptisme
,
but
signification
after
the
act
is
ended
,
is
ascribed
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
because
the
ministration
of
Baptisme
dedicateth
them
,
and
the
signing
of
the
Crosse
signifieth
,
that
they
are
already
dedicated
vnto
that
seruice
,
but
there
is
the
difference
betweene
the
work
it selfe
,
and
the
declaration
or
testifying
of
the
worke
after
it
is
finished
,
when
Baptisme
being
ended
,
we
make
a
solemne
declaration
of
it
vnto
the
people
.
Farther
,
this
syllogiser
saith
:
we
vse
not
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
as
Augustine
,
Cyprian
,
and
Chrysostome
did
,
which
vsed
it
to
consecrate
the
elements
,
and
not
to
crosse
the
children
,
but
referred
that
to
the
Bishoppes
confirmation
,
as
if
wee
were
necessarily
tyed
to
followe
their
example
,
or
as
,
if
because
they
did
that
,
we
might
not
doe
this
,
or
as
if
because
they
did
that
,
therefore
they
did
not
this
:
or
as
if
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
were
not
as
effectual
to
liuing
children
which
are
members
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
as
to
dead
elements
to
whom
the
merits
of
the
Crosse
&
sufferings
of
Christ
doe
no
way
appertaine
:
or
as
if
it
were
not
as
lawfull
for
the
minister
to
vse
the
crosse
in
baptisme
,
as
it
was
for
the
Bishop
to
vse
it
in
confirmation
,
or
the
signe
were
lesse
effectuall
in
the
one
then
in
the
other
.
But
,
let
vs
examine
his
proofes
by
which
he
confirmeth
his
assertion
,
that
the
Fathers
vsed
not
the
crosse
in
baptisme
.
First
he
saith
by
way
of
anticipation
,
that
this
place
of
Tertullian
:
The
flesh
is
washed
,
that
the
soule
may
be
purged
:
the
De
resurrestione
caruis
.
flesh
is
annointed
,
that
the
soule
may
be
consecrated
:
the
flesh
is
signed
,
that
the
soule
may
be
guarded
,
may
as
wel
be
referred
to
confirmation
as
to
Baptisme
.
And
,
I
retort
it
againe
vpon
him
,
that
it
may
be
as
indifferently
vnderstood
,
of
baptisme
as
of
confirmation
.
But
saith
he
:
the
fathers
describing
the
forme
of
baptisme
did
make
no
mention
of
it
in
baptisme
.
To
which
I
answer
,
Martyr
in
defens
:
ad
Antoninum
Tertul
:
de
Baptismo
,
et
coronâ
mil●tis
.
that
the
Crosse
is
no
part
of
the
forme
or
essence
of
baptisme
,
but
onely
the
word
and
the
element
,
neither
is
it
vsed
vntill
the
sacrament
be
finished
,
and
therefore
no
meruaile
though
describing
the
forme
of
baptisme
they
made
no
mention
of
the
Crosse
,
therefore
this
negatiue
argument
cannot
ouerthrow
the
vse
of
the
Crosse
.
And
yet
,
that
the
Fathers
did
vse
to
signe
them
with
the
Crosse
which
were
baptized
,
it
is
euident
by
their
owne
words
:
for
Tertullian
saith
in
these
general
Dè
coronâ
cap
:
3.
termes
:
ad
omnem
progressum
atquè
promotum
,
ad
omnem
aditum
atqùe
exitum
,
ad
vest●tum
,
ad
calciatum
,
ad
lauacra
,
ad
meusas
,
ad
lumina
,
ad
cubilia
,
ad
sedilia
,
quaecunque
nos
conuersatio
exercet
,
frontem
crucis
signaculo
terimus
,
that
in
his
time
,
at
their
goings
out
&
commings
in
,
when
they
put
on
their
clothes
,
their
shooes
.
when
they
wash
or
eate
,
or
light
the
candle
,
at
their
lying
downe
,
or
sitting
vp
,
whatsoeuer
they
doe
,
they
signe
their
forheads
with
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
.
And
Cyrillus
Hierosolymit
saith
:
Non
pudeat
igitur
nos
crucifixum
confiteri
,
Cyrillus
sed
in
fronte
confidentèr
signaculum
crucis
digitis
imprimatur
,
&
in
alijs
omnibus
crux
fiat
.
That
wee
may
not
be
ashamed
to
confesse
Christ
crucified
,
we
signe
our
forheads
confidently
,
and
in
all
other
actions
we
make
the
Crosse
.
And
S.
Ieron
saith
:
Heiron
:
Epist
:
22.
Ad
omnem
actum
&
progressuus
manus
crucem
pingit
,
whatsoeuer
we
doe
we
make
a
Crosse
.
The
conclusion
followeth
out
of
their
assertions
,
that
if
in
their
dayes
,
in
all
actions
the
crosse
was
vsed
and
the
forheads
signed
,
then
a
Crosse
was
made
vpon
their
forheads
which
were
Baptized
.
As
for
our
signing
with
the
Crosse
,
we
doe
it
after
Baptisme
is
finished
,
to
shew
that
we
adde
nothing
to
Gods
institution
,
&
that
we
thinke
so
honourably
of
that
ordinance
,
that
it
needeth
no
addition
,
to
cleare
our selues
of
that
iniust
imputation
which
is
laid
vpon
vs
,
of
adding
vnto
it
.
And
therefore
,
whereas
hee
alledgeth
that
the
praying
and
crossing
are
one
continuall
action
of
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
,
and
that
by
our selues
the
Crosse
is
called
signum
crucis
in
Baptismo
,
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
.
I
answer
:
Baptisme
is
taken
two
manner
of
waies
,
for
the
sacrament
it selfe
,
simply
and
barely
considered
in
its
own
nature
&
essence
,
consisting
onely
of
the
element
and
word
,
and
as
in
the
holy
Scriptures
it
is
set
down
&
comended
vnto
vs
,
&
so
Signum
crucis
est
extrà
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
is
no
part
of
baptisme
,
nor
any
addition
vnto
it
:
or
else
it
is
taken
,
Prò
sacrame●●●
v●â
cùm
singulis
baptismum
concōitantibus
,
for
the
action
,
together
with
all
solemnities
which
man
hath
appointed
for
the
celebritie
of
the
action
,
&
so
,
not
onely
the
Crosse
,
but
also
the
prayers
which
are
vsed
,
and
preaching
,
which
are
not
commanded
by
the
Scripture
,
are
extra
baptismum
,
no
part
of
baptisme
,
and
yet
may
be
called
preces
lectae
in
baptismo
,
prayers
which
are
read
in
baptisme
,
and
so
concio
habi●a
in
baptismo
,
a
Sermon
made
at
Baptisme
,
so
crux
in
baptismo
the
Crosse
in
Baptisme
,
though
neither
of
them
are
held
for
any
part
of
Baptisme
,
and
therefore
by
them
no
violence
is
offred
to
the
diuine
ordinance
.
We
conclude
,
This
signing
with
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
hath
beene
commended
to
vs
from
antiquitie
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
to
shew
that
it
is
not
a
noueltie
of
60.
yeares
old
,
as
this
syllogiser
hath
obiected
,
neither
doe
we
alledge
antiquitie
as
though
we
did
ground
vpon
bare
antiquitie
without
reason
,
but
we
alledg
antiquity
against
the
nouelty
of
them
which
slaunder
vs
,
shewing
that
antiquitie
in
points
of
Religion
is
to
be
preferred
before
nouelty
.
And
,
to
his
reply
which
asketh
why
we
doe
not
also
giue
vnto
them
which
are
Baptized
,
milke
&
hony
?
why
we
doe
not
vse
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
with
opinion
of
vertue
and
efficacy
as
the
ancient
Fathers
did
?
and
ascribe
that
vnto
it
which
antiquitie
did
?
I
answer
:
the
argument
doth
not
follow
that
,
because
we
doe
colliger●
vuas
,
gather
grapes
:
therfore
we
may
not
cauerespinas
,
take
heed
of
being
pricked
with
thorns
,
1.
Thes.
5.
21.
but
we
must
first
by
the
Apostles
rule
omnia
probare
proue
all
things
,
&
then
quod
benum
●ct
tenere
retaine
that
which
is
good
.
And
if
ther
be
any
which
think
baptisme
vnauailable
without
the
crosse
,
insomuch
as
that
they
rebaptize
when
the
crosse
is
omitted
,
as
this
syllogisme
maker
alledgeth
,
the
fault
is
in
their
superstition
,
and
not
in
our
religion
,
which
teach
the
contrary
by
our
canons
,
and
punish
such
offenders
by
our
lawes
.
FINIS
.