' ' ,'

i	ol \u mitotan £$m. PRINCETON, N. J. x
Collection of Puritan Literature.
Division^ c^ ^— -^V*^^. Section \f C- ^■■■^ -^ 7V« ;«#<?/•

/

h*

-V

V

AN fa ^SV.

ANSVVERE TO A CER-

TAINE TREATISE OF THE CROSSE IN BAPTISM^

Intituled

A Short Treatifeof the Crofle in Baptifme5 con- tracted into this Syllogifmc.

2(o huntAne or din An ce becomming An idsfimsyUw* fully be v fed in the fervice of God,

But the figne of the Ctoffejbeing ah hum me or din am t it become An Idoll. Ergo :

The figne of the Crofle 3 ntdy net lawfully bee vfed in the fervice of God*

Wherein notonly the weakneffe of the Syllogifme it

felfes but alio of the grounds and proofs* there-

of,aro|>lamely difcovered.

fy L% H, Doc7,ofDivinitif.

Auguft. Scrm. ip, deSan&is,

' QthiifixM nofl ft 2 nurte vefurrtxit3& calos aftenih ; Qructm nthh in Biimoriamfme pafi'otiu rtliqmu

Idem Serm, 130. De Tempore.

Crm Chrifii3 efi cUvkp»ttdiJtt & infignt rtgnh

Printed at Oxford by lofeph Barnes , and are to be

lold in Faults Church-yard ac the figne of the

Crowne, by SmtnfVAterJk, xtfoj.

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2011 with funding from

Princeton Theological Seminary Library

http://www.archive.org/details/answeretocertainOOhutt

TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE AND MOST REVEREND FA- thcr in God> R i c H A a d , by the providence of God, Lord Arcbbifhop of Canterbury y Trimate of all England <&* Metropolitane-, &one of his Mate' Hies mojl Honorable TrtYie Qouncell.

Othing makes mee more a fraid, to offer this mine an* fwcre , to your Graces view 8c cenlure,thcn the very length, which cotrary to my purpofe and conceit, it is now growne vnto.For both it may iuftly argue me of indi£ cretion/or framing fo long an amtwere to fb fhort a Treatiferand the longer it is, thc-more muftit needs be fubicd: to diucrs and fundry overfights. Both which give me iuft occafion much the rather to flie to (o fate a ian^uary5as your Graces patronage, not only againft them, , who for the matters fake will certainly miilikc k:but euen againft them alfoywho fauoring the argument,mayperaduetureiudgethe coat too big for the body,or wi(h fomthing otherwife then here they find it.May it pleafe your Grace therforetoremcmbcr,thatfirft this matter of

if a the

The Eplftle "Dedicatory,

the frofy in fiapti/me, is that great Humbling blacky whereat al our dilcoir.cnted brethren doe take orFencei & feccndly^tKat in this fmnll TreatiYe al die chiefeft arguments which they vfuailv make a^ainRihis figne,arecomorehe* ded:I make no doubrbuc that both vour Grace & al other indifferent Pveaders , will eafily par- don my length. Efpecially becaufe my ende- vourwas^togiueiuftfatiffa&ionto euery ob- iec~tion,and co lcaue nothing vnanfwcred, that might feeme to carry any waightofreafo with it. which couiie^as i held throughout the whol Treatifein general!3fb more especially in the laft part. Where our obieeli on s-, which the Tre« atiiermakcthfhewto (atiine, areiuftifiedto be too waig,hty;for Co {light and incoherent anfwer$,as are fitted vnto them. TheTreatifer more ouer,not only fbmwhat in eveiy part of thcTreatifc.but fullvand of refoIued& (etlcd purpofeinthe laft part, mafceth great vaunt, that either the Ancient fathers in thdr times v- fednotthisfigneat aiin Baptifme, or if they did, theyvfed ittofarotherpurpofesthe we do now^or laftly^i; they vfcd it to any fuch end yetcuenin them it was ncucrfrce from finnc,

and

7 he Epifile 'Dedicatory,

and fuperftidon. I thought it therefore a prin- cipall part of my duty/omwhat more at large to infill: vppon these points, beirg things in my iudgment not (Tightly to be paflcd ouer. AndaccoFd nglyhaue declarcd3both that the Ancient fathers vied this confignarion of the Crofle inBapdfmcin their times,And alfothat they vied ki{ though to other pnrpofes too )yct even to inch ends 8c purpofea,as our Church doth at this day:& laftly , ! haue freed (as I truft) afwell our Chriftian vfe thereof, from fufpiti- on of Idolatry, as that vfe which the Auntients had of it, from that imputation of fin & diper* fiition^whichvniuftlyisiiippofedto haue ac- copanied it in their times. And this I trull: may be diffident excufe and defenfe for the prolix- ity ofthis ar.rwere. Asfortheouerfights and* imperfections therm cotained^no iuft Apo'o- gy can be niadetonly Imufi fly to your Graces fauour,&good acceptance cf the Readers. I could bsue wiihed; and from my hartldoede- fite, that the lateCoference before his rnoft e%>. cellentMaieftie, (To much de fired Sc expect- ed before it came) mishit haue had that fucceflff wherof there was hope giuen at the firft , Thac

The Eptflle Dedicatory.

iseithcr vtterly haue taken away, and made an cndofihefe quarelsin our Church, or at the leaft, after full fatiffaction giuen/which there they hadjfomwhat abated the heat of their dif- contentment.That fo we all with one hart and one minde,might haue prouided ourfelues a- gainftthat head of Popery, that by thefedo- niefticall diflentionsgetteth dayly ftrength a- mong vs. But it is come to paiTe ( I knowe not howjthatthefe contentions are fmce that time, much more rife then they were before, 3c pro* fecuted with greater heatetheever;As though by that meeting in thecpnference^they had ra- ther taken hart, and greater courage, then any foilejand new ftrength rather,then any iuft i e- profe,orfatiffac"tion. Where vppon,as diucrs others haue endeuoured to anfwere their ex- ceptions to our Church Ceremonies in gene- ral!, Co I haue laboured to take out of the way all their fcrupels and objections againft this particular of the CrolTe in Baptifme. wherein my confeiencebearethme record, I haue wal- ked with anvprighthart,and fincere affection,* and I verily thinck, according to the truth in this bchalfe. If therfore there fhall be any

thinge

TJjeEptflle Dedicatory

thing found therin, anfwerableto the worth & dignity of the cauie-all that iuftly and proper- ly belongeih only to your Graceyhom whom it tookc thefirft begining. jf otherwife,Ijfhalbc alwaies ready vpon better information, to rc- formc my errors and ouerfight, How focuerl commend both it and my felfe to your Graces honorable fauour and protection, and fhalbc alwaies willing to difpofe my labours accord- ing to your Graces dirediojftudying in althings wherin God flial enableme,to aduacetheglo- ry of God;and knowledge of his truth, wherof as God hath made your Grace the greatcft or- nament and pillar in our Church; fo I humbly befeech him of his infinite goodnes, to blelTe all your religious & careful endeuours for the fame; And withal, to giue you many honorable daies and comfortable Ailiftants in lo great a worke-to the glory of his holy name, content- ment of his moft excellent M aieftie, & perpc- tuall good of this Church and congregation.

Your Graces moflbounden anddutifull Cbapleine

Leon. Hvttsk,

AN ANSWERE TO A TREA- tife of the CrofTe in Baptifmc.

The Title whereof is

A fhortTrcatife of the Crofle in Baptifiue contracted into this Syllogifme.

2(j> ham *m ordinance becomming An /doHi may lawfuHU

be vfed in the fer vice of God \ $ut theftgne of the crofte being a humane ordinance, is be»

come An Idoll, Ergo Thefgne of the Croffe may not lawfully be vfed in thefet*

vice of God,

Thiijhoft treat ife of the Croffe in Bdptifme eonfifteth of three principal! parts,

I The maine fyllogifmc whereinto thiswhole trea*

tifeiscontra&ed. a The proofe of the (cverall partes of this /yllo-

gifme. 3 The anfwering of ceitaine obie#ions.

THE ANSWERE TO THE Whole Syllogism e.

Concerning the mainejyflogifme, let vs confider* fir ft* little of the forme > and then aftermrde some vntothe

mitter*

A IN

</fn an/were to a Treat tfe

^|^ N the forme I only obferue , that if the Treatifer had goneordinarihe, toworke, and kept himfelfc exact- ly to the termes of his CMaior , the CMwor would much better, and with lefle fufpition of deceipt hauc beenc conceaved thus :

7{j> hum a ne ordinance becomming an idoll^may Lixofu'tie

bevjedinthe fervice of God. But the (igne of the Croffeisa humane ordinance becom*

tningan idol!. Ergo 1 he figne of the Crofiemay not lawfullybc vfcdtn the fct* 'vice of God.

For fo the ambiguity of the word, becomming wouldc haue ftill remained.and we micht ftill haue beene at our choice whether we would take it [or be feeming, 2nd ad* ding ornament or decencie to an !aoll,ox f >'r being made or become indeede an /doll it felfe . And I marvaile much why the Treatifer held not this courfe, considering that, fa ft it would hauc been as availeable for his prefent pur- pofe.and/^<?^/y it would (li! haue left an impreffion in the minde of the readers5that no ornamet5or other thing befeeming or Adding decencie co an Jdol ( and they can make what the lift an Jdoljmay lawfully be vfed in Gods ler. ice . By which meancs as great a blow woulde haue beene giuen to CapsSurpliffcsJIoodef^andCopes^s now by this Treatifer i<> giuen to the figne of the CrofTe.

But the Treatilei(youwi)J fay) n. cant mcrcboneftly, and therefore having vfed a word of doubtful Significa- tion in the maiorhc very fmcerely retrained it in the mi- nor to his purpofed intent 5 thcrby fhewinu that he dealt

plainetya& intended no deccipt. His finceriiie and true

dca-

of the (jofie in Baptijme. 5

dedingisno waies teftincdby thismeanes: for had he indecdc meant plainly, and intended no Sophistication, hee vvculde haue conceaved his fyllogifme in vfuall.and knowne tcrmes,& (uch as are proper and familiar in this argument of ceremonies.as namely inftecde of humane ordinance he would haue vied Ecclefiafiicalconflitution^ for becommingan fdo/lhc would haue (ald^abufedto /do* l&trte ,or [upcrfiittoufly abufedjn place oifervice efGod, hee would haue put celebrating of qodsfervice. and (6 haue concluded in this,or lome (uch like forme. 2Yj? Ecclefiaflicallconflitution , thatfometime hath beene

fuperjlitioujly abufed.may afterwards be reduced to his

firfltaxofullvfe , and /o retained in the celebrating of

Gods fervice. 'But thefigne of the Crop in 7Zaptifmetis an EcclefiaflicaU

corJtitutionjhat hathfometime beene fuperftitiouflie

abufed. Ergo the figne of the Crop in Baft if me may not bee reduced to

hisfivfi laxcfullvfe , andfo retained in the celebrating

ofGodsfervice,

This observation I make the rather becaufe the very name of humane ordinace is alwaies odious, Sc import eth . ■ traditions meerely humane, wicked, impious*, and lying, ' '- proceeding fro our corrupt nature : for the which caufe humane dottiinesjthe commandements of men.Jarc re- proved by our Saviour: contrary wife the name oiEcck' fi&ftieallconftttuti&nsjs much more gentle, & gracious, and tmporteth ordinances made by the Church ofchrifl^ z<cnch.incom- which the very name affordeth to be not meerly humane ■, {endjoco.zs. and therefore not falfe3but in part divine \ and therefore ?*s *** ■ good,true,holy,and iuch as pleafe God . The reafon is. The Church is ruled by the (pint of Chrift , who is the A 2 truth,

jfnanfwzn to a Treatlfe

truxh,and thcrfore the traditions ofthc Church arc true and holy. And yet it plcaicd the Treatifcr,in his charitv, r ther to vfe humane ord nance. then Ecclefiajlicallconft'i* tnthn^ to what purpofe and intent let the indifferent Kcader iudge.

But becaufc he was to make choice of his tearmes by his ownc judgment, and not by my r ire&iou, I wii thcr« fore follow him in hi ;owne words. And then I fayagain^ that if he had indecde meant honeftly-, and intended no fnphitiicati6,hc would in inch proportions, a< expreflc a thing to bee iuft or vniuft, lawful, or vnlawfuljiaue (ct downe the c ircumftances of rime, perfons5and p!accaoc (uchoiherlikc. Oftimcinthis fort. T^oh'im&nc ordwance^Ofice of 'good vfe , that aftetxearde became &n id'Al^nay la^fullie be vfe&ia theferviceof: God... But thefigne of the Crojfi being a humane ordinance } once

of good vfe. afterward became an IdolL Ergo The fi^ne of the Crajfe may. not law fully be v fed in thefer- vice of God.

0fpIacc,and pcrfons thus. 2^o humane ordinance becoming an /doll in the church of Kcme.andam:n^ethe P api fl s .may lave fully be vfedim theferw.ee ofgodinthj church of England? %and 4- tnongethe P rot e/f ants. But the ftgneoftheCroffe is a Immune ordinance becom* mingAnldolIinthelhuYch of Rsme , and amonge the Papifls.,Ercp The figne of the Crcfft- may not lawfully be vfed m the feruheof God in the Church of England, and amonge the Prole (lasts.

trjr.ihuidieialfhood and inconfequsnee of his ar-

^umens

oftheQ'o/sein'Baptifme. m 5

gumert would eafllyhaue appeared vnto all men. But the Treatifer thought it more for his aduantage, to muddic hi* proportions, concealing all circumstances that might t>ii;c'i.ht to the point in eontroucrfte, and to let down hi*; argument conftifectly,the more ro fh'ible the vnfkiifull Header. Budeauingthc forme of thisfyl- logifme, let vs briefly come to the matter therein eon* teined.

TheVaior.

7{o hum are ordinance lecemming An J dot, may la w fully he vjed in the femtce of god, T he anf w ere to the ma/or.

The nraiorls merely faife/or although' the Syllogizer doth verily peifwadehimfelfe, that he hath cunningly coniriuedinto on propofition, two inexpugnable rea- fonsjwhythe/igne^t tire CrofTe may not lawfully he vredintheferiiiceofgod,thefirflhecaufeitisahi;3uar.e ordinance^ihe lecond becaulc it h become an Jcfoll,yec there is no truth neither in the one, norm the other.

Concerning the fnftj that no humaneordinSce is to be- vied in the(cruiccofgod,l would faineknoweof the Treatifer what he mcancxh lytht ferrt/ce of ' gcd.y he meane (preaching, which to that feci: is now becomcal- moft the only (eru:ceofgod) J will propofe fuch plainc matter againft his affertion, as himfelfeihal not be able locontradicry.lhe fentences which §KP*ul borrowed • out of heathen Pberr, Ar^tus. Acls 1 7.2 8, L%fcffanders l.Cor.iy.si.FftrmrmdrSy ikus.i 12; were firft of hu- mane tmrehtion: ioi forhe ApoftleexpreflJycitethtwvi ofthem in there (euerall places. Secondly they were v- (cd in the feruice of iod: For thefrfl was vied in a fer- uaonto die Athenians; ihcfecendin that great argu- A 3 mens-

6 jin anffoere to oTnattft

merit & heauenly difcoiiifc of our reftirrc&ion: the tbirdinhh inftru&ion to Titus how he fhould carrie him felfe towardcs them of Creet.And Iaftly/or anic thing that euer J could learne, they were well and law- fully v(cd in gods feruice. For though it haue pleafed thole that are of opinion with our trcatifer, in the hu« inor of there feci:, and fauor of there ignoranc, vtterly to reiec~r the vie of all humane learning in their fermos, yet J hold [x not therfore vnlawfnll: And fure J am that, i^mbrofius dele Standi gratia vtitur fententiarum argu- tijs\Hieronymu$ poctarum iUecebrts> et CMtmorum fali* bus: Tertullianus facet ijs et iocis: Chryfojlomus fimiltbus^ ccllationibus*etmetaphoris ad illustration em et delecla- tionem admit abilt artificio concinnatis^ a learned man

fpeaketh of thofe fathers.

And Saint ^Augu^inea. greater clarke then'any they ' pedoflr.chri- can fer againft him,is of opinion that a Si qua forte vera^ fiknMb.z.c^. fr fifai notff/t accomwoda dtxerunt% non folum for mi dan- da nonfunt fed &b ijs etiam tanquxiniuflu foffe(foribu4% invfumnoflrumvendicanda : now if amanvponthefc grounds fhould inferre> that therefore all humane ordi- nances & inventions are not excluded from the fervice of God , I rnarvaile what our Tieatiler wouldc thinke of his vniverfal negatiue propofirion.

Secondly .if by the fer vice ofCjodlit vn derfhnde the Leitugie and fotme of divine lervice and praier> then! demaundc what manner of Leiturgiethcvc was in the Church of the Jewes till the time of our Saviour . For wee arc not to imagine , that in their dayly faci ifices Jn their Sabbaths}and new moones,Sc other feftival daics,

I men aflembled only to pcrformc the bare outward acti-

ons of killing their i'acrificcs; and offring their oblations,

with-

oj the Crofie in 'Baptifme. y

without an v forme of praier and Leiturgie for fuch holy purpofes. A nd yet rhofe outward anions only are recor- ded and tegiftredvnto vs 3 as being of Gods inftitution, and chofe utherof praicr,ard thanklgiving,&: vocall fer- vice of the congregation (if any fuch were>as cerrainely they werejarc pafTcd over in filcnce without any record or ren embr ance->which makes me to conceaue(and ve- lily I ilia! remaine in that opinion til I be reformed) that al other complements were wholy left , & permitted to the direction of the Priefts.For had thae been any fuch formes of praier and thankfgiuing inftituted by God, they would (noedoubtj ether hauebcene recorded by Mo/es^ afwell a& there forme of bleffing the people, me- tioned Numb^.24. or preferued as iafe as the other Ceremonies and 1 ires of there facrificej- And herdn J am the rather confirmed by the Titles and Infcriptions of divers pjalmes,which in the times of thofe oblations & facrifices were v fed in holy meetings. But the whole manner of ordering and dilpofing of them feemeth to hauebeene in the Hiefts and Leuites,and rhem that had the chicfe gouernment in holy afTemblies.For fo , much both the fending of diners p/almes to the Chaun- ter,or him, that excelled in muficke as hiuthime^^- faphti\\t \or\x\s of forab: and the names of cetraine Jn« ftrum"ntssor tunes whereto they were to be fer , as Ne» ginoth^Shoj^annim.^^Umoth^xx^ fuch like, doe mofl manifeftiy import. Alfo 1 would faine know of the Trea- tifcr whether th'eappointing of the Singers,Pricrts,and Levites in their orders and courfes, which h afcribed to Vau/d,i,Chroff,2^to/rMa}2,Chra.l^.iS,to Ezecbi- as, 2,c/?ren.^i.2.wcrcz humane ordinance, or noe? foe that it was yfedia Gods fcruice3 thefe alleged places

fin-

I *An anftoere to a Trenttfe

fufficfcntly teftifTe: and that it was a humane ordinance inftitutcd firft by Dautd^nd renewed afterward by thofc others, thefe places following plainly a i;rme. Thefong of the Lord began with the trumpets & inftrumentsof David King of jfraell. 2. chron. 29.17. Ezecbi/es the King and Princes comrnaunded ihe Levites% to praifc the Lord with the words of David,2i\d Jfuph the kings feer. 2.Chron.2p.^o. and after the caprivitie, fojkua the Prieft, and TLerubbabell the governour, appointed the Pricfts in their apparel with trumpets, & the Levites the fonnes ofAfaph with Cymbals, to praif e the Lcid after theordinance of Dau/dK'mg of JfraeL Efra:$. 10.

Thirdly if by thcfe?uice ofGod,hc mcane the outward ceremonies of our religious carriage5and behavior while we are in the Church hearing Gods word, and praying vnto him in the congregation , I wou'de knowe whether thofe ordinances which the Apoftlc S. /^/prefcribeth That women fhouldkeepefilence in die Church 1. Cor. 14. 34 That men fbould pray bare headed and women couered.i.Cor.i 1.4. That men comming rogiihertothe I ords (upper fhould ftay one for ano;h<:r,and that pro- phane feafting ftiould not be mingled with die Lordcs Supper. 1. Corinth. 1 1.17. whether J laie thefe, and many (uch like were of humane mftitution or diuine? Jf they were of mans ordinace, then the Treatihr is much miftaken, for alth^fc belonged to the ierviceof God3if they were not of humane but diuine inftitution*', how then doth he cal them CMy things >The ordinances that I haue delivered} 1. Cor'H.2. and why fpeakeshe not in Gods per{on,but his owne? /will that men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands. That women array them- (elues in comely apparel. i.T/>»:2.8.£. and,/ permit not

a wo-

of the Crojje in <Bdptifme\ \

a'woman to teach, i .Tim'2.\ 2. Jf the Treatifer fba! fay that in a! thefe examples formerly alleadgcd^hofe men were ie ddc by the (pirit of God, & therfore what foeuer they appointed was Gods ordinance, my anfwerc there vntois, that now alfo the Church of God is guided by the fame (pirit : and as now,fo even then alfo , there was a difference to be made betweene thofe things which God commanded in fuch anions, &thofc things which were ordered by men: clfc the fcripturc would neither fo exprelly haue mentioned fuch thinges to haue bin done by fuch men, as in the former examples: nor Sc. Faule haue fpoken in his own perfon foe re/olutely,as in the latter. A manifeftproofewherofwc may draweoue of the (ame /YpoCtlcfpeakingofa matter of greater im- portacejnamely marriage, i.Cor.j. where he would not haue acknowledged, that feme thing he (pake by per* w/ffioft tZXidtomG other things by Commandement^ in the <5.ver(e? nor haue focxa&lydiftinguifhed between the Lord commandeth & not /, (peaking of equal mar- riages, verfe, 10. and / cowman de , and not the Lord9 fpeakingof vncqual marriages, ver(e. 12. Butonely to giue vs to vnderftand.that in thefe matters of ceremony and outward order, where he vfeth not Gods exprefle authoritic,therehcfpcakethofhis ownc iudgment,di- rectedalwaies,as him felfe veryly chinkcth. 1. (7^.7.40, foythefpirkofGod.

Hitherto J haue fpoken only of thofe things,wherin I wold willingly beinftrudedjconcerning the Leiturgies of theo'd teftamet til the Apoftles times.Now,if I fliould refume the fame points, & difcourfe of them, as J finde them to haue been vied in the Prirmtiue Church & im- mediate ages next after, ihe Apoftles* I fhould preile the

ft Trca-

1 6 jin anfinrt to a Treat i/e •

Treatifcr with fuch a mulcitudc ofexamples aboue a! ex ception, as muft needs ouerthrow his weake pofttion. Forfirftforfcrmons, both in there preachings aid in there writings, how ful of humane arts andfeai'ar lear- ning arc the auncient holy fathers? For although in the TtrtuB.m A- end and (copeofthereteaming * Qutdadeofimtle pbiU- P -'*?■■ * • fop bus et ^hrt/iia»us> GracU difctpulus et cMfam* re • gotiatortetvit<t? &c yet in the commerce and inrer- courfe of there knowledge 5as on the one fide, Qu/s poe. tar urn? qms Sopbiftarum qui non omnino de Prophet arum fonte potauerit? vt facile credit ur dininam liter at ur am, thefawumfui/ftpoBerioricuifcfapientiA: to on the o- hug.it foci, ther fide ^l^jnne afpicimus quant o auro et argent o et shriftM.i.c.40. ve^e fuffArcinatus exierit de fcgipto Cyptianus doctor Juauif fimus ,ct ^Martyr heatifpmus} qtstnto Latfantws* quantoftfforinus, Optatus , Hylanus 3 and to omitt xhtx&^quanto ipfe quihoc fcribit AuguflivHS? So that uBxnt.ub 4. i n thofe times ,* pbilofophia bumana fuis at mis confetti obmutuit, and there was not anie one of the auncient fa- thers, that was not able to conuince prophane Poets, Sophilters,& Fhilofophers 3 out of their own principles and(uperftitions,Godinhiswi(domefoc eiueing gifts 7jjcefh.cai. to thofe rm mofl: worthie inftruments ,that they , * Tan* tib.z.cjp, 19. qUJlMperjfi Mnjicigratum et iucundum dec ant antes car- me^ f uper vac&neas quo^percurrere plecJrochrdas pctw . erint^et ornatus gratia fupr a e&s qud ex ifufunt, alias ithm adijeere*

Secondly for the Leiturgics & forme of dinineferuice in thofe times, as we do willingly acknowledg, al things tohaucbeeneof farmore (imple and plain e obferu.»ri. on,thcn they came afterward vnto, fc it cannot be deni. ed^buc that eucn then alfo humane ordinances & invert. ■••■:- ~ tions

of the Croffe in Baptifme. 1 1

tions were vfed in Gods feruicc : for what elfe fha! wee cal,and to what head (hal we refer, the Leiturgies of Sc. ' Jtimts vfed in the Church oi lerufalem} ot~St.Ba/i//vkd in the Church oic^efarea Cappad? of Sc. chryfoHomev- {ed in the Church of Conftantinoplc? of Sc. C/ement3vkd in the Church of Rome? and generally of all thofe other famous Leiturgies mentioned in the Ecclefiafticalhi* ftories, and recorded to haue been vfed in feveral Chur- ches in the moft flourifhing ftatc of the Primitiuc Church? what conceipt fhal we haue of thofe zealous & religious Chrifr ians,that haue in al ages, and in al Chur- ches, without any interruption Jo devoutly fong,& faid, isxtbat/afius^nd the Tfjeenc Creede? what of the hea- venly dittie,7> D^WjCompiledby Sc- ^ugufiine^ and §x*Ambrofc#xid from them derived into al Churches? what ofthefecred hymnc Trifagium , vfed firftinthe Chuichof fonftantineple 3 & afterward commended to the world by the councel otcalcedon} what of fo manic

t ions &wd LetAnies&s we reau1 to haue bcene made by S. Gregory K^azianzen^ SMilarie^ S.<^Amhofe) S.^*ugu* Iiwe% SyneftuslTrudent'tta^ Gregor/e the great, Sedulity and divers others,vfed continually in the Church ? And JanMy*(toavoide infinite examplesto this purpofe^what fhal we chinke of the fourth Coucelof 7*/^*, that doth c°nc'Tf!"'* luitiric the laying of praters, &nnging of hymnes made by men, againft fuch as woulde haue nothing v fed in the church,but what is in the Canonical fcriptures, or hath beene rcceiued by the Apoftles? Quia nonnuUi hymni hu. Tie confee aff. mano tfudio in Undent Dei>at% ^poftolorum, & OHarty- l%caM h2mk\ rum triumphos tempo fit i efie nofcutur ,/icutij quos beat if- ftmi Dottorts HyUrius & Ambrofim condiderunt^uos ti- ll 2 men

l%\ jfn anftoere to a Treati/e

men qtiidamJp'G'taltter rcprobdntjro eo quod de fcriptmli-

fanfforum C&nomm , ve/Jpi/Iotica tr adit "tone nonexi-

flunr#c(f>UMit ergo & ilium hymnum ab hsmtrtibm compo-

fitum^qtiem in fine omnium PJdmoYumdicimut ,gloria&

honor pAtrii&filiet&fpirttuifdnch&e .Similiter ejr to*

tumilluk^quodfequttur pott Angelicum hymnum, gloria iff

<exce//is Deo 3ejrc. quod tamest Ecc/e/iafticiDoffores scmpo*

fuerut, &c. 1 hauc the more willingly repeated the rnoft

part of the Canon, becaufe it fo fitly meetcth with the

thwart humor of certaine men of our time,wh<yfcofring«

ly and in contempt calthofe godly longs made by men

^which are ioined in the fame volume with our tinging

Pfalmes) Ballads & Jigges and fuch like names, andean

abide nothing but the Gemua Pfalmesfas theycal them)

to be funge in our Chriftian congregations. As if they

certainely were Gods word it felfe , & not rather expor

fitions and paraphrafes made by men„

Third!y3for the rites and ceremonies of thofe times it muft be remebrcd that firft for a Jog fpace in the church, they were ludaical,cither becaufe me borne & brought 9tW*p.t. vpinthe lewifh Pa?dagogie5knewe not what belonged vrno Chriftian liberty jor elfe becaufe many worthy and famous men in thofe daies were of opinion, that all the lewifh ceremonies, could not fuddenly.be abrogated, without the great offence & fcadal of the weaker forr.Of which opinion it fecmes S l^Augutttne alfo was,who of- tentimes praifeth and commendeth this faying, Iudatca, SynagogAW cum honor e fuijTe fepeliendam Secondly it is to be obfervedjthat they were divers & fundrie in divers Churches,according to that faying of Socrates . Omnes

Eunl hnVe- Ecc^£ 'fiaf um ntf^ 24V ■ n firi'iu^ ^rb/btMy region tbuffo v- iu{jrl.i,c.i}. furpAntur>fcji£tu mandate vt vMiUborhfumfH > ?t*

vix

of the Qojle in 'Baptijme. * 3*

vix 4tit ne vix qu'tdemfieripoiett. €uiuffy enim rehgionu & fecit vari/Junt ntiUylicet eadem dc if /is habeattir opim xio,& ottim CAdcmfide conf<=,ntiunttijdetfi rtttbw & cfr*' monijs inter ipfos di fere pant.

Thirdly, it tiiiift alfo be remembred that they were //• bcrdobfcrvAtionUy no one Church prefcribing to ano- ther.nor condening another for diverfity of ceremonies, but every one following their ownc cutfomes,and vfing that freedome that is agreeable to chriftian liberty. This point is fully proued by many particulars in the place formerly ailcadged out ok Socrates^ mo ft piainely deli- vered vnto vs,not only in the example of Sc. ^Ambrofe^ Cum Romam venio> iewno Sabbat*) cum hie (Cfttediolaxi) fuw>non /Wfti/wjbur alfo by his advife and councellcom- u»g.'ep.u9» mended to ^AugufUne^Sicetiam tu ad qua forte Ecclefi* ad i*n»*tmmi am vef?efii,eiu6 moremfertsa^ficuiquAm non vu effe fan* dAlo.necquenquumtibi. Which advife and counccl of S» Awbvofe^s often as S*. Anguftine thought vpon, he al- waies embraced as an oracle from heaven , becaufe hee had often found , and with much gricfe lamented , that many weake brethren were troubled by the content! • ©us obftinacy.and fupcrflicious feare of I'ome me«,who in thofe matters,which cannot certainly berefolued vp* OHjiieitfrer by the-authority of the fcripturcs^nor by the traditio of the vniuerfal church,becarae fo troublclome that they thought well of nothing, but what they did them felues; Hither becaufe they had Tome Height rea- fon ior there opinions, or becaufe the'euftome of there • Co iitry was othervvife.or becauie they had (eene things otherwise carried in (ome places where they had rrauail- ed5 and therfore thought belt of that, which they had learned fuu heft from homc.Nowe out of thefe premif-

14 *4n anftoert to a Treati/e

fcs, wc may gather this firmc and fure Conclufion, That thcrfore the Ceremonies of thole times were certainely of humane ordinance: or, to fpeake more properly, of Ec- clefiastzcall Con ft it ut ion. For had God givea any law co* cerningthe,neither could the Jewifli rites hauecotinu- ed fo long , neither could they hauc bin fo divers as they wcrcmeither could they haue 6in of (o free obferuation, but that one church muft needs haue binjlcadalized by a nothcr. And although this were fufficient to infring the Treatifers proposition : yet 1 will giuc the Reader a little tafte of thoie things only, which antiquity hath al vvaies commended in this kinde5that he may thereby be indu- ced,to thinkerhe more reverently of Church Ceremo- nies. The tranflation therefore of rhe Sabbath into 'the Lords day,and that men praied with their faces towards the Eaft, of whofe ordinance and inftitution were they? Mg.deTm. OfthefirftSt.^»^»/?/^plainelyaffirmeth. Apoftolt& Sem.15. Apoftoliciviril& jantfiDottoresEcclefi* ^ decreveiunt omnem gloriarn Judaic ifabbattf mi , in illam tranfferre* 1 he fecond alfois very ancient as lufltne Martyr witneC udder- feth referring it to the Apoftles. A quibus morem or xndi 1U'110' acciftt Ecclefia^ab ijjdcm etiam locum accept .viz.ajan- cJts Apoftolu . In like manner we read that our Lord and Mat.irf. Saviour inftituted his fupper in the Evening, and after meMctCumaatctniflimanducaret,t acccpit Jefm panem% rjrc. From whence then is it, that now for fixe hundred years,it is reccaved in the morning, & before men eate? ju£fp.u9.ad For the former Sc. AugufiinehiihySalaator quo veheme* januxriHm. tiit j commendaret my ft er if tllim ahitudinem fultimum hoc volmt infigere cordibm }&memori& difcipulorum ; a qui- bus adpaponem digrefjurm erat. Et ideononprxceptt quo deinceps or dine fumeretur^vt Apojlolts^n quos Ecclefias

Kefpon

ihodox.

oftheCrofieinBdptifme. 15

itjpoltturm erat.fervaret hunc locum , For the latter hee demandetb , l^unqutdpropterea calumniandum efivni- i>erfA£c.cteftJt quod a. teiunu femper accipit»r?ex hoc enim placuit fpiritui SancJo.vt in honor em t ant ifacr anient i^in os CbrishampriM Domimcum corpm intraret^ quam ex- teri ctbt. This cuftomc was in vie Therefore ev ery where in his time,except only in fome few parts of Eg ypt\n the cuntries ncerc vnto Alexandria and ihebait^ as Socrates obferveth , Qmsprobabilu quxdam ratio deleffaviti&c. as S.^»g«/?/>Wpeaketh in the lame Epiflle.lt was after- wardes commanded in the third provincial councell of Carthage \Can. 29. and laftly confirmed by the fixt gene- ^?i9.c*m* ral councel in irullo.i The like rmy be faid of the Jnftitu- rmuti demon tioof Holly daies.of Lcnt,of kneeling in the time of pub- mlLeat:%* like praier vfed all the yeare long, fa tie only on Sundaies and Pentecoft, on which daies the cuftome was 5 or are /»/?. Mart. n. Bantesj.o ftand while they praied, for fuch like reafons ft0"- aci°nhod. pcradveture as /uftine Martyr ycelds for it. Laftly thofe ?a,u** ceremonies in praier mentioned by C biyfoftomc , Cum c*»y(°B* in \Ua manw extendi* jettmtundisfaciem in caelumeri<iu\ & verb*™i<ido- oculos aperu fluid aliudfacu* quam vt tottm homwem 0- -vet. adorabunt, fiendas Deo} And thofe other f poke of by TertuMyl/luc^ Teuu\i.jpoU ideflin caelum, fufpicientesjnanihus expanfts^ capite mt- caP-s°- & co?v do.genibus p 0 jit is ^m ambus c&dentibus pectus, facie humi "* {"*rf*M volutata. As alfo that they (food vp at the reading of the Gofpe!s3& kneeled at the Sacrament, what other groild had they then humane Institution? And I truft that that ceremony otviror um prior , fceminarupoflerior admen- B^tf-24.d*? famac cubit ns&nd ail thofe others, which our newe re* formers would haue brought in, either in their ftanding, or fictingjor walking at the Communion ,if they mighte h^ue prevailed , in their generall proiects of a forme of

Church, \

1 6 ^4n anfwere to a Treatife

Church F eiturgie, and of a Church difciplinefb often tcndred to the Parliament, would in lb or t time haue proved no better, then humane devifes and inuzntions* though neuer (o fayrely coloured with the names of A- pojlolicafl cufiomes and honored with the mod glorious titles of, Themofl holy Difcipline> the [center of Chrift^ and full placing of him in his kingdowe. Concerning the fecond, that not hinge becoming an /dollm&y lawfully be vfcd in the feruice of God. Before I come-to anfwere the propoittioiij J defire the Reader a litlcto obferue the Treatifers phra(e,and manner of ipeech . His phtafe is hecomming an ldoll\ will you know the reafon ? Hee had not fpoken home enough, if hee had only faid beingabu* y^fbr the woidahufed, would haue implied a good vfe once, which the Trcatifer perhaps will not admit that there was ever any of the CrofTe. Neither thought he it fumcient to fay abafedto Idolatrie , for then perhaps, ic would haue been too hard a taike for him to proue, that nothing abufedto Idolatrie may lawfully be v(ed in Gods fervice. And therefore there was no remedy } his phrafc muft need-> be Jvecomming an idolL But how, I praie you, may a humane ordinance become an Idol!? Doe you in- tense by this fpeech a LMetamorphofrs , or Tranfub- Uanttationy whereby it ceafeth to be the nature ic was, and is turned into a nature ic was not? But that i$ cieane againfl the Apoftles minde, who faith that/- i.Cor.8.4. dolum nihil efi in mundo. Your meaning then muiib e, that by thecogitationand minde ofmen,afcribing^//^ to the ordinance jx. was framed and made an Edol. For o- thcr efcnce and becom?ning ic can haue none . What then needed this far fetched fpeech becommmg an Idolle But that perhaps you meant thereby to expreiTe your

zcale

if the (/ope in HZaptifme* * 7

zea!e,or rather 4as I fuppofcto aftonifh the igtioranr,& makethefigneof the CrofTe more fu(pecl:ed,and odi- ous to the people . But leauing the Treatifcrs ipceeh let vs come vnto his matter.

* And hei e J muft debate ajitle with cheTreaci{er,whe- therthe,»*ff«Tofan IdolUiiot the forme we fee by the Apoftles do&iine is none :but only in the minde and co- gitation of the Jdolater^ whether J fay, the matterof an Afc/^beingfilueror go!de, braiTe> lcadejor ftone,&c< after it is altered & reclaymed from the JdoJatrousvfe, maynotafwclibe vied in Godc ieruicc, as Churches, or Lands,or veflels may .which fomerirnes haue beenc confecrated vnto Jdols: J am of opinion it 'may. For as TertulltAn fpeakcthj De fimu/acbris ipjis nihil a/iud de- J^Ua^t^ prekendoflttamm&terias J or ores e([cvaJcnlorum> inftrtf & **' wentoyuwfo comunium: and that therforc as they Jdola- ters them leiues, Fubiicos et domelticos deosfublica et do* mefticapoteftate tratfarunt^ pinner ando, vendicando s dmut&udoin Cacabulum de S&tuwo, in trulUm de CWi- »^^4,evesynianashisprcfentwiJlor neceffitie requir- ed, fo wee , abandoning the fuper{tition,andimbracing the Creature, which God at the beginning made good, mayapplyittohisfcruice. Myrea(onis this, while the Jdoll ,& they thing* confecrated to the Juo!l,wcre both abufedtoldo!atrie,they were both equally diftant fro God, and alike removed from his (eruice, differing noe othcrwife,then thatthe Jdoll was the thing worship- ed, and the confecrated thinge, that wherewith it was worshipped. Andfuppolc the Jdoll were a litle farther e(trangedfrornGod,a'nd a ftepp further in the power oftlieDeuil,yet,2^;*^?y7/?/; efie ejus' qui creawt> No creature ofGod can be fofarre alienated from him, vt

C &m

l8 jfn an/were to aTreatife

nonpo(]-t qttmdo vttk repetere. Nihil enim ita eff fub pot eft ate Diaboli%quin aiglsri^m etbo nor em detpoffit con- verti. jf this be granted (and as I thinkeic vvil not be de« nied)then this phrafe to beccme an /do/Jjmpoc tcth in ef* f eft no more,then to be abufed to Jdolatrie, or ro be co« fecrated to the fervice of an Jdol. Whereby it wi! come topafTc,that whatfoeuei may be alleadgcd, for the good and lawful vfeof things in Gods fervice, that were fome- times abufed to Idolatry,the f2me alfo may be aileadued to prone ,that even that thing a!fo may haue a good and right vfein Gods fervice , which foretimes hath beene

TmuU fcido* an Jdol itfclfc. 7{jc enim differt ,faith Tertul/tan, Si ex*

'"*' into*) vetexornes^fitemplum^fiaram^ft adiculam eim ex*

truxerU^ftbraEieam exprefferu^aut infignia%aut etiam do*

mum fabric avert*. Nay he goerh farther and plainely af-

fir roe t h , Maior eft eiufmodi opera , qua no effigitm c ofert,

Wifd.ij.i*. fedauther/tatem. And in very nurb the Artificer thac made it knowcth well enough, that it isbutwoodeor

Mfiwi. >noda. ftone,&c.2v^W»w Deusfaxum eftjignum.aut argentu\ Ecceornatur^confecratur^oratur , turn poftremb Deuseft* cum homo tlii valuit , ejr dedicavit , faith Minutius^Thz greaicftfault then is in him, that by erecting , adorning, and adoring of it,procureth vnto it the credit and opini- on of a God. For by this meanes , Etiam qui mninvenit

j,?''" tvitakmmotum^reditnumen$ccultum\feducl:mforma^et commotio autoritate 7Jine vivo altquo Habit at ore efle nom put at.

Hauing laide this foundation, J come nowe to «(• amine the Treatifers propofition. And firft,if weconfi- • dcr it in Theft, That nothing one abufed , ?nay ever af- ter bee well v fed , but mufi bee vtterly abrogated andre* ietfed. It will cafely appearc to b^moft vntruc , not on .

lie

of the Qrope In (Baptlfme. l §

!y in thingesnaturall and artificial!, which haue beene exceedingly abufed:(for fo wine muft bee gone,becau(e ithathbeene abufed vnto drunkennes: meats, becauie fome haue abufed them to gluttonicl: (words, becaufe by fomc cruell hands they haue beene imbrued in inno- cent bloude^ but euen in thofe things alfo , which arc iayd tobcthedevifcs& inuentionsofprophane&hea- thenifb Jdolators, nay, euen of the heathen Gods the (dues, which yet might be thought molt vnlikc to be fitted to holy vies, for that they haue proceeded from fuch corrupt fountaincs. Of things natural, Se.^4ugu< ^w&pf-m jltnes opinio is, Si de area vel torcukri tolUtur altqiud u M 4m> ddfacrificUD^momorum^etkm Jciente Cbriftiano^ ta* tnenvtitur mundis rcliquisfrucitbm., *vnde ill* fubUt* funtj&c.Eue as we vfe thofe fountains ,out of which we moft certainelyknowc,that water isdrawen for the vfe ofiacrifices. Neither doubt we to fetch our breath fro that aire, into which we knowe, that the fmoke of al the altars, and incenfeofDcuilsdoth goe". For we muft beware, leaft that if we fhall(uppofe,that we may not eate thofe herbes which growe in the garden of the Te« pleofanjdoll, icalfo foliowc, that wee imagine, that the A poftles ought not to haue eaten bread in Athens, becauie it was the Citty of tMineruifii ^onfecrated to her Deitie.T his alfo may we anfwere of that well and fountainc which is in the Temple^.nd of thofe facrifices which arc call into the well and fountaine \ nay more, which are therforecaft into the water, to doc iacrifice vnto the waters, Neither muft we therfore refufe the benefite of this light,becaufe they facrilegious,when fo they can3 ceafc not to facrifice vnto the .fame. Sacrifice alfo hath beene offered vnto the windes , which not

C a with*

to jin an/were to a Treat i/e

withftanding wee vfe to our manifolde commodity , al- though they themfe'ues feeme a* it were to draw in;and fucke vp the fmoke of thofe facrifices.Of artificial tilings likewife Sr. Auguftines iudgmcnt is the fame.2\^>^ enim propatria non eft miles armandut quia centra pat r /am no- milt armafttmpfsinnt. Nor therefore may not the good and skilful Phifitionsvfe medicinal yrons for cure, and fafcty /oecau (e the v nskilfu! and ill-difpofed men jdoc vie die lame for death and dcftru&ion . Otherwise no yron were to bee vied either in houfeor field , for feare leafl Fome man (hould therewithal flay himlelfe , or others.' nor muft there 6e a tree, or a corde remaining, for feare leafl any man iliould hang himfelfe . Neither muft vvc make any windowes , for feare leaft fbme one or other fbould cafl himfelfe headlong from the fame. Tertull'tan alfo is ofthe (ameopinion , net only concerning thofe things ,but of fuch things alfo as hauc becneviedandin- TtrtuiLdtmen veined by the Pagan Gods. ^ox^Primm Mercuritu lite- mill.™?. . rai excogitaver it .&c\*ti it be fo (faith hc)'that Merwtf was the firft that invented letters > yet for althat 1 wilac* knowledge them to be neccfTary>hoth for matters of co» merce amongft men , and a!fo for our fludies towarcics Vide Augup.de God . Nay;fay alfo chat hee likewife invented Muficke, dofi.chntiit.z ne]j[lcr VYj{ [ denie (knowing what David did ) but that: this invention alio was agreeable to the Saints, & mini • fired in the fervice cf Gcd.Let A-fcithpius be the full in* venter of medicines i why, I remember that Efaie tnini- ftxzdzmedicim of figgeswXQ Ez>cchiiU beingficke ."and Tank could tei Timet fath at a licle wine was good for his ftomacke3and for his many infirmities. Vca,and though CMinerva alio firft framed a/fy^yer J (ce that ionas and the Apoftles failed in flips* And,which is mote , though

cveiy

of the Crcf?e hi Rdptifme. 1 1

every thing,3nd vefle! r.eceflarie for our vfe, had one of the heathen Gods to bee the author, yet that is no caufe why Chrift fhould not be cloathed&t S.Paule not wearc a chair. And j muftconfefie alfothat Chrifl: lay vpon a bed,znd vfet? a bafon when he wafkcdhii DHciples/iw/*.* and that he powrcd wate rout of zpitcher , and was gir* ded shorn with Linncnj\\e ftufTe peculiar to cy/rtf.Laft* Jy, ^irishtle f peaking of the vfe otLogicke & Rhetoruk. jriji. RhttMo, Si o&fjc/titMrtfahh he) quod valde necebit is^uivtAtur i**-1****1: sujle huiufmodi facilitate tatiom ,why this is'art ordinary obieclion againft a! good things (vertue only excepted) and moft of al againft thole things.which are moil profi* cable ,as ftrength,health,richcs3militarie dHcipJine, &cv For thefe be things , which a man may doe much good' withal,if he vfe them iuftiys and exceeding much hurt,if he vie them vniuftly , The reafon hereofis3becau(e the1 eviUvfixg ofgoodthixgs$ZQceedeth only ft on) the cor- rupt nature of the vf&\ and therefore cannotalterthe goodnes of the creatures , which God hath made 3 and: {tamped vpon them this marke,Ehat God (aw thai every thing that he had made , was exceeding good; G^n. i.

The felfe fame reafon alio holdeth in Kyprthefit to what thing fo ever a man wil apply it3and is molt »ue e- ven in (lie point we baue now in cucition . Things a< >u- (ed to Jdolatrie., nay even to make an Idol it (eife , haue not therefore ioftal manner of good & holy vfc^b? caufe the fault was not in the things foabn(cd ,. but in tht that abuferfthem fo, A proofe hereof we ha»ue in the Apoftle $,Paul^who wfedthau thing in thefervkeofGod3 wher- of other men had made an Jdol. For 1 demande.Tne^/- Ur'm y^/^/ii.hauinr.this iufcription. vntothevnknown <W>was it not a thing contecrated to an IdolfOr rather.,

a z *An an/were to a Treatife

not to chgreffe from the Trcatifers phrafc, was it not be* gome an Idollk fclfef I fuppofe the Treatifer wil not deny it : for S.Faule reckons it among their f upcrftitions , be- cau(e they worfhipped3 they knew not what . And did not S.paulvfe it in the fervice of GodrNo doufct he did, when hee tooke the Infcription thereof for the text and theamc of his fermon. Whom you ignorantly worfhip, him (hew I vnto you. Lafl!ysdid he not vfe it lawfullie in Gods fervice? Jam peifwadcd hee did,both becaufethe Athenians, could not be better conuinced, then by their owne ignorant deuotions and fuperftitions, and alfo be- caufe God gaue a blefling to this fermon , in Dionyfiui ^^reopagite^nd Damaru&wd divers others : according mjt. Trij0t. to the oblcrvation olCaffiodorc in the Tripartite hifto • M. 9 cap. %9. fejiLefaftoftifitu ditatU4>multosAthemenfiiiadduxit sdfidem^uando ea qutittara erantfcripta9/hi/uprcprU narrationu expo/uit,

Jf this example wiii not content our Treatifer, J re- mitt him ouer to the 6. Chapter of fofuah ver. 17. and ;: likewife to the <5. Chapter of Judges x ex-. 2s. Jnthe for- mer place the Cittie otler/co&nd al the wealth therein was made Anathema, an execrable thine vnto the Lord: & yet all the filuer, & gold, and veflels of brafte & yron wereconfecrated vnto the Lord, and commanded to Xuh **•*• be brought into his Treafurie. In the latter place God commanded Gedeen to deftrov the altar of Baai, and to cut downe the groiie that was bv it, and yet he would al* fo haue the wood of the grouc that was cut downe .and the bullockc that lots the father oiGedeon had flailed fe- vcnyeares,& had fo long before ordained forafacriflcc vnto Baai, tobe offrcd to himlelfe fora bumtofTring. And why al this.?but to make if manifefl that God is the

Lord

dfthe (jof?e in Baptifme. tj

Lordofall things,and that nothing can be (o farre gone into the power of the Dc ■ il, but it may be againc reclai- med to the honor,& fcrviceof God. For although C\to* fes in the golden Calfe", and Ezechm in the bralen Ser- penr,fhewed each of the a memorable example of their /

religions zeale, and iuft anger againft Idolatrie : the one by burning theCalfc in the hVe.grindingit into powder, itrowin, it vpon the watered making the people drink thereof. The other by breaking the Serpent in peeccs, and calling it 7^eb:t(htan^ vile and contemptible pcece of brafFe: yet thofe actions rather commend the zeale of thofc good Princes, detefting the Idolatry and Idols the- felues,then are any waies left for a necefiarie rule for o - thermen. For whereas there are two things memorable in the(eactions;theone,the taking away of the Idolatry, the other jthat vtter deftroying,and abolifhing (of the J- dolsj The firftjslcfno Christian Princes & Magiftratcs for an example of imitation : The latter, as it increafeth a commendation of their zeaIe,foitimpofctbnoneccf- fity on other men to doe the like: as may appeare, not only by the two former examples commanded by God himfelfe.bnt alfb by many other worthy,and famous re - formations made by ChriftianPnnces,inthePnmitiue Church. Among whom one Theophilmis commended in the Tripartite hiftorie,forfaithfullieperfourming the commandement of Theodofw* the Emperour , who had given him commiHion, todeftroy althe heathen Idols in Alcx*ndri<t& to imploy the matrer and riches of them, to good and holy v fes. According to which commanded ment ,lJdoU Dtorumdefiru6imtTheofbUo;7 exmatsdaU RifiXrip**- Thtodofij Imperatoris, confiabahturddfdciendas ellas>& lib-9t€fAi* &dAUxdndrind Ecskfu diver fos vfvsftti ab Imfcutere

24 \An miftpen to aTreattfe

donati fuerunt "D ij %td expert fa egentittm . Many exam- ples of the fame 7heod«ftuv>in& o{€onft&ntimxk\s, greac in former ages,as alio of other Chriftian Princes &Ma- giftrats in their fevcral cimes,might be alleadged to this purpofe. But I wil conclude this point with the mod iu- dicious fentence and refoSution of Sc. jiuguFiineywhQxz* Mpip.iU «i by he confirmeth what/oeuer I haue Boken . Cutemtl^ vubikotm. idoUJuci.crc.whzn Teples, )dols>groues, or any things of like quality , by amorized power at e ruinated and call downe,ii they be tranilated into common, and not pro* per vfes,& converted to the honor of the true God, that fa.feth out in them,which hapnech alfo in men3when as of facrilegioi^s and vngodly perfons,they become pliable and conformed to the true religion. And well may v vec irragine,that God hath intimated and taught vs this 5 in chofe teftimonies which he laid before vs3when he com- maunded chat the woods whichgreweinmegrouesof Orange Gods>5fhould be vfed in the holocauft, and that si the gold;and filue^and brafFe of lertco , fhou'de 1 ce brought into the Lords treafurie. J f this judgement of §t.j4ugujline$ be true, then it is as lawful to vie the m .c« ter of an Idol,or to fpeakin the Treatifers language, that verythingthat was become anjdoll, in thefeniceof God, if it be reclaimed and remoucd fiorn Jdolatrous fii? perftition,as it is for a man-from an lafide 11 to become a ChtiftiAn^x from an cull and wicked man, to become a trueconvert, and faithfullfervantofGod. And thus much to be aniwered to the Chi&tor.

The Minor.

But thefigneofthe Cropjjting a humane ordtntr.ee> it besme an IdoH.

An-

of the Crojfe in Bafti/mc} 2 5

Anfwcre to the minor.

In the 'minor likcw'tfc there are two things ccm[re« bended,

Firft thaf the figne of the Crofie'in Baptifine is a hu- mane ordinance, which none of vs euerjdcnied, but doe willingly acknowledg with TertuilhniXrix^ Sijegemex- foftules fcripturatum nulUm inuen:cs*&c. And ycc we cannot lee, how this may ether aduantage the Treati* fers caufe, or exclude the figne of the CrofTe, from be- ing a lawful! and commendable Cercmonie^inthe fer- \ ice of God.

But for all that J muft defier. the Treatifer5 that he and J may demurre a little iongervpon this point. For, notwithftanding ai that is already graunted, me thinks J may further fay, that it is fo a, humane ordinance \ as ic isalfoa diuinejtisa divine ordinance3in as much as it is a part of that decency, which is commended viko vs by the Apoftle? and it is a humane conftitution3in as much as it doth particularly defigne that3 which in the generall was pointed at,rather then exprefied. And this doarine J lcarne of W.Cahine him felfc , who gi- C^HUMh v e th th i s rule >quia in externa difciplinajt ceremony s &c Bccaufe God in outward discipline, and Ceremonies^ would not prefcrihe any thing feudally tor vs to follow, (for that he fore-fawe that thofe things would depend moftvppon the condition of times, neither iudged he one forme agreeable roalages)in this cafe we muft rc- fbrtto thole generall rules which he hath giuen, that accordingtherevnto3al things maybe exa'.r/ined , what foeuer the neceffirie of rhc Church (hall require to be commanded. Him felfefolloweth this rule, and by the Ccrcrnonie of knedingin the time of (olemne praicrs,

D uvhick

26 ^nanfweretoaTreatifz

which he vfeth as an example for il'uftrarion, h- giucth vs this general'direc-lio, how to judge of this whole rnac* terof Ceremonies, Namely our or Sc Panics gencra|ex* j1.C0u4.4c. hortaxiun, Let all things be done decently gr m order , to deduce ev ery pa ricular alter this iorte.

Whatfotuer feretnome is done accent 7? , And in order ', ■ ts a part of z Paules general! exhortation, . *But the Ceremonte of kneeling at Jolemne praters , is done decently andtn order, brgo

it is a part of S z Paules general/ exhortation,

Nowbecaule the Treatifer aud his adheients, will hardly belieue that this particular Cercmo ie of the CroiTe in i apriime , can as iultly , as that of kneeling be deduced, and applied out of this general!, J wil out of M\C aluines own grounds cieaie this point alio.

ritft this Cetemonieof the CroiTe in Baptiimcjiath in it that Decorum ov?)ecevcy, that by |Vi% Calvin is re- quired. Decorum, or decency ,ahhc teacheth, condfteth in thefe points. < hat it be io agreeable to the reference ofholymviieriesjasumay alio be a fiticxercile topi- ttie, or at the leait, that it adde a bewtie 01 ornament fie and agreeable to the action. And that not without fruit, but lo as it may admonith the faithful! , with whac modefly, religion arid obteruance, they fhould handle facred things. A i theie parts of Decor u are in the Crofle.

It is agreeable to the reuerent maieftie of /acred my/leries . For what can be more agreeable to holy myf- ter/esthen thefigne of that, which was the confuma- tio/i, and accompltfkment o( all holy my fieriest Then the iigneofthat,whereonhe hath nayled the Bill that was againft vs: through the^bioudof which Crofje^ he hath f« at pcace,both the things inearth, and the things in

heaucn.

of the Qrofie in fiapti/mc. 27

heauen. Secondly , it is a fit exercife smopietie. For, Ad Defanff^r x9 Chrtftn rctfa nos ducit^t leadeth vs dire&iy vnto Chrift de verb. ^pft. and putteth vs in mindeof him that died for vs,fbadow- {"'^^"^ ingout vnto vs,thc height,snd breadth, length & depth of his loners S.^ugufti/tefticwethin diverfefermons. Thirdly , it is an ornament y Quia crux C hrifii gloria Chri* fliani. an ornament fit and agreeable to the action : T he actio is the receaving of the child jnto the body of chrtftn and therefore moft agreeable it is,thit the childe fhoulde even then bey^x^, with the marke & badge of him, in to whole fervice he is prefently receaved . Fourthly.it is rot without fruit Jbwi doth admonifh the faithful , with what mode ft ie ^religion >and obfervance they fhould han- dle holy myfteries . Two things are commonly obie&ed bytheTreatifers friends agajnftthe flgneoftheCrolTc in Baptifmc. Firft that it is a vaine & idle ceremony of no fruit ^nd to nopurpofe. Secondly, that by being fignifi- cant^nd fymbolicall, itbringetna/^w 'vwdfe into the Chinch. Thefe two objections doe vtterly tthwart &o- vtrthroweach ihe other. Againft the/<rwW,the judge- ment of Ca/u/n in this conditio is mainely oppo(ite,who here rec,uireth in the decern ieot every ceremony, that it be not without fruit ^rcAntimatingthexbyyihatiuch ce- remonies, as arc not fignificant.muft. needs be vaine. A- gainit the fit ft . I am to anfwerc now,& I doubt not but it wij appeare.to be of wuch fruit } and to very good pur* fofeji it do admonifh vs of thefe things . And that it lo dothjdeciarethus.

Firft it admonifheth vs olmtdeflie^ becaufc it is as a watch word,& fecretremembrance,tokeepcvs fro fin, the grand impugnero(modefly*&. mother of fhatne^rin* ging to minde,whatfoeuer Chrift hath wroughr,aod we

D 2 vowed

1% *An anftoere- to a Treat! fe

vowed sgainft (inland fo cauGng that Chrifiian men ce*

ver wain,amoft cffe&uaKthougha iilent Teacher^ toa-

voide whatfoeuer may defczuediy procure rtiame. And

jZugjrtSlh for that cauic it is made vpon xheforebeady *vbi eji quo*

loan, jj , dtmmodo fedes verecundia'? vt de nomine etas fides non e~

rube feat, e^-c .That we (liquid nci5her-.be fo baft)fu]|,as to

beafhamedofthat, wherein there is no fhame, norfo,

fnifai. 141. fwc fronted the fame S. Au^ufttne fpeaketh in another

placets not to fears that,which is the only deferver and

brineeron of fhame,

Secondly jt doth admonifh vs o^Religio , for thofe rea« fons alleadced before in the condition. Sed^ ft ft filtihos fig ^ificat. quod ait i-ApoHolus , that they that belong to Jems Chiifijiaue crucified the flefo, with theiufts,and eoncupifcenccs thereof, how great a goodturne were that alone?

Thirdly , it doeth admonidn vs with what ohfewance holy things are to be handled,namely with an •€,& due regarde alwaie? had, to thecafines and familiarity of the Ceremonie,ihat it be vie me y hard at hand, and obvious y norfarfetcht j a >propLtne ceremonies commonly are, but, admodumfrnplex , & pdfentii idmonttionucrmu Chrifti&s Mr. Bucer in his ceniure iudgeth this to be, A gai ne -this ceremony hath in it alfo that order which, i^vMr.C4/w^jopinionJSt./>4*/<pintendcth,becaufeitis done with fuch moderation in our Churches may iuitly take away al confullon3bavbarity, contumacy ^roubles, and diflentions;being fo reduced to the run infritution, asr.eithertoomuchisafcribedvntoit', as in the mani- folde luperftitions oiTopertc. nor too litt!e>or rather no- thing at al,as in the confuted phantafies jof the A»abapm Sifts. But you wilfay there are difieations a6ouc this ce- re-

ofth ? QrofSe in Baptifme. 2£

remonie in our Chu ch,true, but in whomc is the fault? not in onr Church, that by the order of this Ceremony, would tike a waval confufion, tumult, and duTention: bur in \hoietttrbttlentmen, who will neither admitt, vt qui pr* fw.it , rrgufam uc legem bcx} tegendi nouerixt y*u2 plcbsqut regit nr,adobe<lkKt'tar» Dei, reclame^, difcipl'f *am alfuefiat, which is the firlt thing required in order? not\\\fcT9vt beneempofio Eccle/ix flatu, pact ettran* qui Hit at i copfu/atufjwhich is the fecond. And thefebc the true caufes, why they cannot content them felue9 with the good order of this Ceremonie.but would h auc ?{j>veit/es,and alterations brought into our Church. But J ieaue them to be better aduifed by the good coun- fell , andiearned judgment o$CMl Bucer, * Ad ilioi tutc M2 e^mo qui offenduntHt > vnto h:eh as be oftended, becaufe (ome utngca.f*tmi», vuiall rites are yet rete-ined, we may well an(were3 that if they would but confider, howe neither dfciplinej nor order can'be preferued in the Church, without force Ceremonies, ihh m'ghc fuffice to fatiffie themiForifwe grant that3which cannot be denied, that it is behouefulj for fame Ceremonies to be, it is then- a ncceflarie con* fequenc/^that vfuall Ceremonies, 'which we may well vfe .cannot be rcprehended,even for that fole antiqiutie, which doth procure the rather authority, the reproofe wuh a!i men that bccai'cfull to continue the quietnes of publicke peace, ana feaic ro be taxed for leuitie, and af- fected novelties, which a! together 3as, much aspoffi- blyitmavyougmuo be auoided, ia the propagation o£ true doctrine,

Laftly jthis ceremony of the Crofie in Baptifme, hath in ital thofe other conditions both neg&tiue&Xid affi*m&» tiitejhdx Mr. Cahtn requireth in laudable Ceremonies,.

p 3 Fii£

j o jfn an/were to a Treatl/e

Firfl neg&t'tuejx. is not thought necejfary vntofalvatiorty nor in that refpeft to binde the confidence. Secondly.it is not receiued with any opinion of divine xcot/h/p thereto belonging. v4//frw4///w,)it is accompanied with that gra' i///y,that is required in al honefta&ions. Thirdly, iris reverend>aud may both procure a venerable regardeto the myfterie,and alfo bee a helpe to ftirre vs vp topietie. Fourthly ,it tendeth to edification. And laftly ?that it may want no complement, it hath hisg^/wd/Zfoundarion in the Scriptures. And therefore by thefe rules of Mr. CaU i>/»3may be wcl faid to be both a divine aand humane co* Jiitution. D/w/v.becaufe it is founded vpon S.Pauls ge- neral direction , Let a It things be done decently & in order. Humane , becaufe the continual vfie and pr a cfifie of the Church 3 hath alwaies thought this consignation of the Crofle in Baptifme, one of thofe Ceremonies that are performed with decencie and order, & therefore iiidged ihh particular Xo be fitly deduced out of that general/.

Secondly 3that the figne of the CrolTe is become an /- doll. And herein lurketh, the whole deceipt of the 1 rea • tifers Sophifme , who becaufe it is confefTed , that the Crofle hath beene ahuied among the Papifts, and wor- fhipped, cultu latri* , as himfelfe afterward iTiew cth, would therevponinierre,that therefore the figne ofihe Crofle in Baptifme.canot be wel v(cd bv vs Protectants. Our anfwere therefore in few words is this: Jf he meane that the Crofle is become an i 'dolt \ in the (bur c hoi Rcme, wc grant it. But what is that rovsi'Ifrecrneane that the figne of ihe Crofle in Baptifme, is become an /doll in the Church oiSngland.wc deny it : & then to what pnrpofe is this Treatife?For whereas he would make our Crofle inEaptifmet, the fame that it isin the Chuich of **/«*•,

Koth

of the Croffi in ftaptifmt. 3 1

both fn wjw^and in forme, aid in feh»iotu , though not ldoUtro,u fe,a- hetpeakcth,it wilaopeare vpo due ex- amination to be vtterlv vntruc. Fortograunt that they ♦ are the fan>e/>> »jW( for they are both called Cro(Ic.s:& in forme (for they are both croffe lines drawn in the aire, and vet Imuft tcli the deatiier, that/Wrvfingrnanie Crofe in the tame thing, doth diverfificare forma, make the forme diueis from vs that vfe but oney yet the religi- ( , ous vfe of them is notorioufly different . For fir & , they;; giue vnto their Croffe divine power, and vertuc , as if it c6v\&fanciifie things crofted therewith, di iue away Di- vels,heale infirmities, Sd fence vs from all manerof dan» ger;Trrafcribe no fuch vert ue ox power vntO0»r.f.Sec6d» ly,they yeeld vnto their Crofte, abiiitie to mertte pardon for vemallfi»nes,xo convert finners>and to giu;faluati6: wee yeeide nofuch ability, ox efficacte vnto ours . As foe their Idolatrota iy^,whereby they adore and worlliippc their Croffe jultuUtri*, we much more dhTent fro them, and are Jarre fro giving any adoration > or either outward or inwardc fcrvice vnto ours. So ask feemes the Tread- fer was not wel advifed when he /aid , their croffe Scour crofle is the fame in religious vfe, for neither did hee re- member(as I ihal tel him hereafter) that we put no reli- gion in the vfe of the CrofTj,as the Papiils doe, but oniie vie it in a religious action : neither 1 beleeue (if hee were wel put to it) could he fhewethe difference betweenc the religious vfe , wherein he faith we agree with the Church oiRome^ the Idolatrous vfe, wherln they dif- u$ ^ 4 e s8; fer from vs. For if Reiigio be vericultus, and Super ft it io f alfi, as La ffantius d\'\lingi\i(bcth, J (hoi\\d thinke that cur vfe., being veri cv/tus-wexe only religious and theirs becing nothing elfc, but fatji cultus , werconly Jdola- i

trous,

J 1 j>6ianj%ere to a Treati/e

trous/and fuperftitious.But J leauc the fu! lifting & ex* aminingof thefe points to there proper place. Jn the meanetinieJimkethisobferuation,outof the Treati- fcrsowne mouth, that, contrary to his aimed intent,& purpofe in this fy!Iogifnie,hce frceth vs fro al jdolatrous vfe of the Crofle. whence jagainft the maltgnitie of this Minor propofition, J gather this Conclufion out of the Treatilersowne words.

That which hath net an Idolatrous vfe in our Church, is not an /doll in our Church.

Butthefigneof the Crofle hath not an Idolatrous vfe in our Church. Ergo.

The ftgxe of the Croffe, is not an 1 doll in our Church.

The Major is pIaine,for ldolum> & ldololatria are Re* IatiuestPofitovno^ fonitur et alteru<n> For neither can an Idoll be,but where Jdolatrous vfe is,neitlicr idolatrous vfe,but where an/*fo//is. The iJMinor is the Treatifers ownc propofition, and ( the trued propofition in his booke,andtherforetheO>W*yftw muft needs directly followe of the premises.

The Conclufion.

Ergo, The figne of the Croffe may not lawfully be wfedtn the feruice \of God,

Anfwere to the Conclufion.

The Conclufio of every fyllogifme receauerh his vir- tue and'ftrength of the premifles, which being firme& true, it {tandeth good, being weakc and falle , ir faifeth, & is of no effect:. The /W<z/<?r therfore of this fyllogifme being falfc euery way,as hath been declared; and the OWinor being vntruely fitted, and applied, to the figne of the Crofle in Baptifmc, vfed in our Church, This C*#r /#/£?# ftr ike th without any forccj and miffing the

bodie.

of the (jo fie hi Baptifrne. $ %

body Jighteth into tbcairc:andhurtcthnoti And for a- ny thing in thisfyllogifmecontainedjihc Croflemay be ftil both lawfully and commendably v/ed in thefepicc of God. And thus much for anfwerc to the mainc fyllo- gifme3thc ground and foundation of this Treatile. The Trcatifc. i. Sect.

The vfe of the Croffe in B iptifme u not a thing indif- ferent Jbut 'utterly vnlaw full for thu reafon ; It is again ft the Apoftles precept. I , Joh. 5 . 2 1 . *Ba bes keepe pur fe lues from Idols*

Anfwere.

From the maine fy Hogifme , the Treatifer comcth to the proofe,firit of his rnaior }and then of his minor . For Maior. fo he telleth vs in the mat gent, and we muft needcs be- lceuethemargenr,becaufeittelleth vsfo in Capital let- ters. For otherwjfe if we looke vpon the words prefixed immediatly before his proofe,we fhal finde a propofiti- on3thatis nether the Maiornorthc Minor of the former fyllogifme »but a mixture & composition of them both, for it hath the tearmer, of vnlawfull vied in the Ma'w&L oithe Crojfe tnBaptifmevkd in the CWinor,fk of a thing indifferent, never yet mentioned in cither proportion. Sothat leavingthat as an animal awpbibion, and of the two, likelier to be the Minor, I rather beleeue the jMar- gent then the Text. And that the Treatifer may in fome honeft fort fecme toconclude his fundamental propor- tion,! frame his argument after this manner.

That which u again ft the Apoftles precept, Bales keept your f clues from Idols f nay. not law fully l?e ^v fed in the/er* vice of God,

But the vfe of an idollie againH the apoftles precept^ Tlabes keepe pur ft 'lues >&c% Ergo :^

E ' The

} 4 <An tmfom to a Treati/e

The vfe ofan tdoflit not law full in the fervke ofG^, The Maior proportion i granttobetrue,but vpon theie conditions. 2 That you rake the word againft ,in h<s proper fignirl- carion,for contrary or oppofite vnto ; & nor fox prater be • fidessov oth'rwife then the Apoflleprefcribeth^ mod of your friends and favorites doe,

2 Thatherevponyoubenottooinfolent, andinferre this contrary conclufion Ergo , 'Tithing may be vfed in the (erviceofGodjbut that which is in the Apoftles/>/r- cept. For there arcmanythingshudsbly vfed in Gods fcr vice,whereofthe Apoftles hauc giuen no precept . For whereas the Apoftle St./>4»/promi(ed the Corinthians , other things will \fet in order when J come, and yet ne- ver after dtjpofedptfet in order thole other things , for ou^ht thar appeareth in any of his writingsjour vndoub- ted perlwafion is,that both the Apoftles left many things unordered 2Lr\d vndijpofed : & alfo in matters of Ceremo- nie,belonging to order , deeencte.and edification, there is alwaies a power left in the Church ,to difpofe, & order fiich things, according to the fever al times ^places , na~ ?wes, and eccafwns of every church.

,To the Minor J an(wcre,thar the vfc ofan Jdoli, qua-

tenia an ldo/I,that is,while it is an tdol,or as long as it re, taines the forme,credit,andeftimation ofan Jdoll, isin- deede againft the Apoftles precept:butthis is no hinde- rance, why wee may not vfe that thing in Gods fervice, which is now reclaimed from the Idolatrous vfe, though wecertainelyknow,thatitwasfomecimes vfed as anl- dol,as before hath bin declared. For thofe things which are recovered out of the cuil vfes,whcrcvnto they were applied,and rcftored to holy vfes in Gods icrvicc j Jpfo

mi"

of the Crofse in Baptifme. 3 5

mint (I er io confecratafanftadicunturjneiui honorejtli jug.mpf.\i%, fro nostra falute tnde fervitur.

But let vs now fee how the Treatifer doth flrftexplane the fentence of S John in this next fe<Stion,& afterwardc confirme his explanation in the third, Treatife. 2. Sc<5r. Tor the explanatio whereof two things are to be J 'can- ned. Fir If , what is meant ly an J dell Secondly ho we far -we are to keepe our fe/ues frcm idolles, An Idoll is, Qmc- quid prater Deum diuiuo colitur henore: and though fome refiraine an idol/, to a viftbleforme,becaufe it is deriued3 5*75<rS«V*bs :yet>as a learned writer obferueth.Qui de em- xanch.dere- ribus idololatrU genet ibus affurifunt> latius nomen /- dem^.iKuc\7» dolt acc/piant necefie efi.ldoli igitur nomine intelligitur^ quicquid homo vel /implicit er veh? n>fibi extra verum £)eumproponit,fingitfc colendum.T^either is thisjpoken without goodreafon, for nethmgis properly an /doll, qua' tenus eft njiftbilis forma, fedquatenus religiofecoliturjf therforc it be worjhiped^it may be an I do 11 > though it be no *vifible.Jhapc. otherwife the worshipping of Angells. ejr the foules of the iufi men, were no Idolatry ife'ing thefe are inuifible (pints, Andtherforethe figne of the Croffe^ if it be religioujly worJhtpf.edy mayproue an Idoll. j hough it bee% tranfiens quiddam, a thing zaniflomg in the aire^and no permanent forme. For as tint learned Zanchie jpeakethy there is, duplex Idolum, the one really he other \maginar'm ■& tantum mente concept um.

For anfweretothe fecond Que ft ton* (.Men may keepe thernfeluesfror*ldoflstwowayesiviz.acultui & ab vfu Jdoli,fiom the wor/bip^ and from the vfe of the Idoll. For the first S\Paule tifo HrieJ, that he atloweth not the ChrifiianSyfomuchastobeprefentintkelempley at the

E 2 U$*

j 6 An an/were to a Treatife

idolatrous feasts jhovgh they did it without' W;y intern aH opinion y or extcrn&ll action of worfliiffng the laoll.

Bat lohn in this place dsth not Jpeake fo much of the tcorfhipping, as the vfe of the Idotl, for (as Lss'uguftwe inpfal: 113. wellobferueth) the Aptflle commandeth^ vt caucant non txntum a cuitu fimuhcrorum^ fed a ftmulacrU ipfis, that they avoid not only the wor/l)/p of the Images, hut alfo the images or Idols them (dues..

Now the vfe of an Image or Iddmay he ciml%or religi- ous: and both of them, publike, orpittate.

That an Image s euen fuch an Image as is idolatroufy Tf^j%'pped}may he made andreteinedfor ami re(pecls,cf ornament ^floyy^ or fuch (ike, we make no.qutfl ion*, though the tolerating of them < in open and publike places , etten extra cultum,be ojfenfus% and fume into a jnare, as Ce* aeons Ephcdwasto his poflerity ,when it was abufedto /- dohtne. '^inavpon this ground we yceld, that though the Crofe beappArantly&n idcHjetix Princes banners, coro? pattens , coyne ? Crow fie, or any other ciuil re/petf^ tt may haue law fuLife. Butthst any tbtngof mans deutfing^bem ing worfaippedas an I&olffhouldbc vjed^Religionts ergo, 4nd in the wotjh/ping ofGod.feemeth direttly againflS1. Johns precept, for, how do ikeepe myfelfe from the Idtll, cr, how do ifoew my zealous dettftaSio of that filthy Idola- try,when Iretaine tt^&vfe it fo honorably as in the Tem- ple,in the Sanciuaryjntbe feruice of god} Vybich inter" fret at ion of this place of Sx. Ichn, the Church of England doth .on the warrant of TerttdUan > approve & Gcmmcnd*

Aniwere In thecxplanatioofthefTrftpointjwtaf /jjw<t4#/ hyan Idolljl ice not any great matter to be diflented in, from the Treatifer : only Jpercuue not, how by any of thefe

de<

of the Qrof?e in 'Bapttjme. $7

de/criptions!cheCrofic may bee made an Idol! ; neither i;i the explanation of his fecond point , howe wee are to kecpe cur (elms from the tioll^ is any thing greatly to bee reprove ij j Jo long as hee ipcaketh of keeping our felues , a cultu [deli , from the worOiippe of the J doll: only J mull rel him, that thole words, which he citeth out of Sc. ^'ȣa/?//w words, vpen the uj.Pfalme, <vt caueam xontantum &c^ either are not oc. Augu fines vpon that Pfa'me,ore!femy booke and his dodiiagree. Forjhauc diligently foughtfop chcm,al that P(a!me oucr , but cannot-finde them: which J do not obferue, as if J tooke exception againft the Treatiter : {qxj&uUs eft error ? a man may ealely mifie in a quotation : or againift thewords them (elites, let them be Sc. ^uguftines^&c the Treatifcrs, or any other mans, and let them forbidd both the worfhipp,.& vfe of idols, as much as they can, we miilike both the one ,and the otber,as highly as the Treatifer him (elfe doth. The things that in tb is iecHon I takeexcepticm vnto3arcin thole points. he deliuereth, de vftilcioli j [as *.

I Theie words. That an Image^even fnch an Image ^a* ii ideUtrcttfly Ttorjhipped^may be made tandretained for c$. "jillve (peels of ornament 3and fuch like jhere is no que ft ton though the tolerating ofthem\ tn openand .publike puces % even extra cultum, be ojfenj?ue3(fr turne into afnare3 &e. The firft p&tt>That they may bee made andret&inedfor ct« vi'l refpetfs of ornament orfuch liketwe eafily grant : but thofe other words, Though the tolerating ofthemtbee of* fenfme 3& tame into a Jnare ^oundharfh in mine cares, not only becaufe they containe a flat contradi&io to the Treaiifersownc words a little after:where he faith, thac without 4oubt>thc meaning of the lecond commande-

E. 3 mene

3 8 *An anffoere to a Treutife

ment i5,to binde the Church from al fuch fnarcs,and af- Juremcnts to fin,and that al occasions & meanes leading thervnto,are like wife prohibited: but e(pecially?becaufe they containe a contradiction to the truth. For what els gaue occafion to Idolatry at the fir ft, but the vaine gory of mentmsbingftatucs ,and portraits of their triumphes, and for thememerjol them whom they louedfWhiJi at the firft were civtllrejfiectsjhmwhcn they came to bee a fnare,were no better then Jdols. Had the Treatifci well obferved the nature of the words,which he here deliue- reth,he would haue found , that nothing is Scandalumy offenfme&x a (tumbling blocke>til it bee fet to make men ftumbie:nora//w;r>tilIitbeJaid to catch and intanglc. Such things are no longer tollerated,then while they rc« taine their civil refpects : if once they become offenfme^ lfc.f7.14. and//w«,then God commaundeth prefently , Caft ip9 Cdfl vp prepare the vpay , takevpthejiumblingblockesout of the way of my people.

Againe,if this fpeech of theTreatifers be true, as hee maks no queftio,what reafon hath he to be more friend- ly to an ynage , even fuch an image as is ]dolatrou/ly ycof jhipped.tbcughejrcthcvi to our CroiTe in Paptifm5which is neither an /ffif*g?,nor \dolatroufly xccrflvpped, nor ret at- ned,cum opinicne cultm%x\ox off en fine ^ or zfnare to any, but fuch as wiibe offended without caufe? Jf either / in this anfwere , or any other of the conformable Cleargie, fhould fuffer this, or fuch a like fpeech to fal from vs,we ftraightway fhould be reckoned Antichnftian, and Po- pifh3and favourers of Jdolatry : but our Treatifer, & his fnends,may fay what they wil,and yet alwaics bee corn* mended.

The next words immediatly following are as lavifh as

the

of the Croffe in Baptifme. 39

the former. Vpon th* ground wee yeelde, that thottgf) the Croffe bee apparantly art idolLyettn Princes "Banners &e. Firli,your ground is weakc,as cucn now we declared, & then if the Crofle be apparantly an Idoll, neither Princes Banners ', nor Crowne^nox Coine^ nor any other civiUre' ^t?,canmakeithauca/4w/»//^/<r.Your perpetualar- guin g from fecundum quid adfimpl/citer>doih bewray an exceeding defire to deceiue both others, and your felfe. For5be it granted,that the Croffe is an Jdollfecurtduquid, that is ,according to the vfe ofthe Church oiRome^ will you thence concltideyfo»/'//e//£r,that therfore the Crofet among whom,andwherefoevcr,andv(edhow(ocuer, is apparantly &fimplie an J<M? who {eeth not the childifh* neffeofthis caption?

3 The third Ipeech argueth the Treatifer to bee both iniuriousjandmaiitious.jw^/a^ih that he faith, thai the Croffe \a thing of mans deviling , being xcorfhtppedaa an j dolly uvfed by vs in the worjh/p ofGodjdi nei t her v fe wethatthing,whichis worshipped as an Jdoll, becaufe there is nothing like between our Cronre3& their Crofle- but the name on!y,asis before declared in the anfwere to the **i#0r:neitherdo we vie the Crofle,as a thing torvor Jhip God thereby jbutonly asathingtoput vsinremem* brance ofout duty o/kfalitictajn that he faith,it is vied by ys^Rel/gionis ergo, for Religio.vis ergo in this place , is the fame phrafe with Religsonis eaufa afterwards: And in my vnderltanding is properly Englifhed , for the Religions fake3or becaufe ofthe Religion^hzt we fuppofe to bee in it t a id therefore the Treatifer doth but double, and dif* femble, when he tranflateth Religionis ergo, to retaineit, and vfe it , fo honorably *t in the Temple jn the Sandiuary^ in the few ice of God* For out of what Authors can he

fhcwj

4© jfn anfwere to a Treatife

fiiew,that tovfe a thing, Religtoms ergo fignifTeth to vie a thing in the outward feruice of God the Treat ifec knows well enough, that theJe (peaches differ, &: hearc not the fame meaning: and yet is content to fatten vpo vs}that we v(e the Crofle Rel/gion/s ergo, which is a'moft malitious calumniation. And J mult tel him the more plainly ofthisiugciing,becau<e he v(cth it very much, and thinks it a fit bait to catch the fimplc* True tc js,wc vie the flgneof the Crofle. in ^.religious aflion> namely in Baptifme, but we vie it not Reiigiotns ergo, with anic sonceiptox opinion of Religion , that we aicribc vmo itj and this I giue the Reader as a perpetual caveat , againft the grand impofture of the Treatifer. Jn vainethcrfbre is that which he addeth of the church of England, appro- ving & commending ofTertulltans interpretation of thii place of lohrifWotthcly it is approvedjand commended, as moft fit and agreeable therevnto. Tertullian nevef meant thofe words againft the fign of the Crofle in Bap- tifme,of which hcalwaies fpeaketh moft honorably: nei. ther coth the Church oiEngland'iw that Homilte^ other- wife apply his teltimony ,thcn 10 the deteftation both of thefervice or worfliipping, and alio of the very fhapes and likenes of the /mages or Idols tkemfelues, his wordes there, are effigies & imago .as the fame Homily doth well obferue.Our Creffe is neither of them both. Tieatifc. 3. §e€t. Kyfnd this point is further fire ngt bene d by thefeconde sowmandeweh t . which forhiddeth not only to wotfhip , but euen to make an Image ^or anyfmilitudc xobntfoeverjo xcit ad cuku,*r for religtotu vfe , at according to the jcripture the be ft interpreters , partly again ft Images in churches , partly on the words of the precept domofi naturally expoud

it.

of the Crofje in 'Baptifmei 4 r

it. For furelyif idolatry itfelfet as a mofi execrable thing, be forbidden J hen alloccafions&mcanes leading thervnto are like wife prohibited, & what flronger provocation to that fpir/tualwhoredome/be erecting Images jn the place of Gods worftip'fPlus enim,vtrette Auguftinus in Pfalm. 1 1 g.valcnt finiulacra ad curuandam inf eliccm animam, quod os habcnt,nares habent^anus habent , pedes ha- bent,quam ad corrigendam quod ncn loquentur, no vi- dcbunr,non audient,non odorabunt,non tra3:abunt,no ambulabunt.

An A therefore without doubt ^ the meaning of the com* mandement is Jo binde the Church from all fuchfn ares & allurements to fin. Andtherfore doth Auguftine in queft. fuper Leu.q.68.-w el conclude 'from this comandement f hat fuch making of an Ida Lean never be iuft or law full.

Now if no fimilitude at allbe toller able in Godsfervice, then much Uffe any that hath beene^nd is worjhipped /do* latrouflie.

Tertullian againfi the Gnofticks, accomptedthem Ido- laters not only which wotfhipped , but thofe alfo vvhich made and retained Images(nQmpe ad cultum, or for holie *vfe)andin his bookei de Idololatria Jjee vehemently repro* i/tth the very makers of Images >t hough they Aid not tffem fe/ues worflupthe 3 which [heweth in what execration the frimitiue Churches held any religiom vfe of An IdolL

7heltkewemayfindeinEplphamus,a6 JohannemE pifcopum Hierofol. where he reportetbjhat finding an /> mage of£brift or fome Saint hanging at a Church dor?, he tent it inpeeces, dvouching,that to hange a picture in the Church of ChrisfiWascontta. autoriratem icripturarum3 contra religionem Chriftiananvo/tfM^ to the authority of the friptures^ndtheChiftian Religion.

F From

4.Z sAn anfivere to a Treat if e

Fro hence I conclude, that if the godly fathers were fa wehcmetagainBihcercclingoftbe Images ofchrtfl , & of Stint sseuen ,it t hat time >bef ore any wo>fl>?p was giue* vntotbem: Muchmne would they wtthftandit now after menbiue made /dell* of them, i^/tnd if they would not fujfer an idolLfo much, as in the place of Gods worfh/p: wo »ld they endure themfelu>$tovfe fuch an I do 'J as the Crofletnthe f"rmceandfacramentesofGid} Their zeale agatnfl thitfpirituaH fornication, would nener permitt them fa highly to honor fuch an execrable thing'- neither was thsirze ale herein without ground of knowledge ', for the (pint of God in f/i/. 115.8. flaking of /dolls, They ( faith he)t hat make them > are like vnto them, and fo are allthey that truH in thm. J^rhere aplaine difference is made bet wene makers* and worfhippets of Idylls , and both condemnedas Cur fedtranfgreffors of the Law. Shall any then make the Idolloftbe Croffey & that Rcl/gioms caufay and yet be innocent}

Que flionleffe by < Daetids example \wemufl make no me- tion, that isMep no honorable memory of an ldoll,ejr ther- fore without doubt \notgiue it fo much honor as to njfe it% or the memoriall theroftn the houfe ofGod^ & in his holy worjhtp'-but as lfai'. faith >we muff pollute the rdiquescr the very couertng and ornament of the \doll , andcafl the aw Ay as a menttruous cloth, &fay vntoit.gct thee hence* Anfwere. TheTreatifereonfirmes his explanation of the fen« tenceof SWohnby the fecond Commandement, & by the teftimonies of S. AuiuJ}inetTertuilia& E pip ha niu4 thervnto applied. Whenn giuing way to his allegatios , becaufe they are only againft Jdolatry, and making of JmagestoworniipthemjJ only marke his f capes, 2nd

ovtr~

oftk Qrofse in IBaftifme. 43 '

over r cachings, wherof the firft is in thefe words Ad cul- turn ,or for Religious vfe: where J note, that how (oeuer in words, he would'fainc make Cultus^ and religious vfe ^/j^r&things.thatfohe might foeme to follow his pro- poled diuiflon, tie cult u ct v I tt, yet in his proofes he n akes them both one; A manifeft argument; that in all this diicourfcheneucrcommeth nere our vfe, of the CrofTein Baptifme, which is fofarre from Cult us, andr religious vje> (as he vnderftands it ) that we neither worfhip it pot fuppofe any religonto be in it, as J faid even now.

A fee *.Wfcape of his3is in this conditional! Collecti- on, vpon the fecond Commandcment5and teftionies of St*Auguftine,Ifnofimilitudeatall,be tolerable in Gods feruicefhenmuch leffe any ,/ hat hath bin^andis worjbip* ed Xdoktroujly. For wheras the fecond Commandcmenr, & all his proofes there vpon, run mainly againft Cultus, or reltgious\vfe, (which to him are both one) he canot thece coclude,that therfore the vfe of fome fimilitudes, in a religious acllion, without any xeorjhip afcribed vnro them, or opinion of religion rcpoitd in them, is nottol- lerable. For by thisgeneraHreftraintjbcyond the nature of his proofes, he may as well exclude the vfe of Sacra* mets out of Gods feruice, w hich certainly are fome kiud of fimilitudes, of thofe things which they doe reprcfent: according to that ofSz.^ySuguftine^ Sifacrameta quan~ ^»g- '?• *i*«i dam fimilitudinem earu rcrum^u&rumfunt facratn(#~Bl>m'acmm' t a nonhaforentjmninofacr amenta nonejfent, Againc bis illation and inference vpon this iiippofition, is like- wife fal(e:for though that were true:yet fome thing,that hath bin heretof§ft\dolatroujly worfhiped, may lawfully be tollerated n*w\ ifcnd fome thing that even now is \do-

F z latroufly

44 «^» anftoen to a Trtdtift

latronflly worfhipcd, (which yet is not granted of the figneofchc Croficin BaprKme, as fnali hereafter ap- peared may be lawfully tollcrated in fome other,, that are free from all conceke ©1 jdolairic, asfoni/eriyhath bin declared.

T^W//, bee over- reacheth in his collection vpon the words oilertniiian and Epiphanim , where hec a(kcth, XBotiUe they endure themfelues tovfe fuchan ydollas the Crc/p^n the fervice and Sacraments ofGod?'\/Vc an (vver, they would J'uch an ]do(l,as our Croffc U : A nd we are per» fwaded chat both they,^: Sc, Ksfngufline too, would like //wel enough. When they fhouldepereciue,that with- out opinion ofpsperjlition^ox efficacie afcribed vnto ic5ic were reclaimed to the very fame fymbolic&Uor cenmoni. all vfejt had in their times , howfoc ver in the times be* ■ tweenethtmandvs, it hath bin abufed by fome to Jdo/a- npifh.tih.f.%.. tue^ Epiphajjius mifliketh it not in his time , as may ap- ztionit* pcare in t hat narration he makech ol}ofephm.Tettullia, we aiefureswouklindure it wel enough, who fo often Sc _, ... wiliineivmentionerhit,and in all his writings commen-

Ttrtuil.de coron % r \

mil, cap.3. deth the v fc of if, Ad cmnempro^refium at fypromotttm> ad

omnem aditum & exit urn yad veftttum ejr calcea?um>ad/d«

vac) * madmen fas ,ad lamina^ adcubiculaj adfeddsa^qua*

cunfy tios -cover (aI io exercet,froMem cruris fignaculo ter-

tCJih.u , rntnas, infomuch that T. C. pronounceth ( full raiWy &:

without al caufe)'thar the Lorde left a marke of his curfc

vpon ic3for camming out of the forge of mans brainc, &:

'jngfem.i9t. being fo much abufed. And for Sc. ^dugujhnes opinion

Astmp. liefer you tohis hundred eighty & one icrmon|,^<?/*/»-

pore , or if that pleafe you not ,to his fei mop de verbis do-

t\»g rerJevn- tninitwhctchze faith. Quodipfe honor at anise rat fide Us

k» dm™, , jmi wjin€ hum fa cutiyprtM honor wit truce m hot ft-

cuUf

of the Crofft in $at>tifmf. 45

cuto, &c, Qu:d cti magni *\*fultathr t perfections ludat Domino p; ocuraruntjum magna Jiduc/a ftrm eim\ ettzm & regtswf rente nuKCportar.t, And yet notwithstan- ding al this , wc arc as weil3and better fjir (waded of their vehemency Againfi erecting of Images* atod of their zeale againiiJperJtuattforii/c*troji7thcii the Trctftifer is,& can morecaiily be induced to beleeuc5that their zeale hsre- jn was not without knowledge, then xheit men canfb flcnderly acquaint themielues with their knowledge > or zeale : and as in this : h in all other poinees^sver cite a- ny teftimonieoutof themimcerelyy and according to their meaning.

Fourthly .the Treat Ker much overlatTieth , where hee marfhals vs among the vporjh/pers of Idols, Concluding thatftreine of his with this forcible m^^fhal any then make an \ doll of the Crofie? and that Religionis caufa^and jet beinnocet? J rue it is.Theprophet Vauid faith. They that make them are Iske vnto them, &c> but what? is his meaning that they are like vnto them far finiply making them? J truftno: for thenjhow wi! you iuftifie your for- mer words? that anirn&ge m.?y he made and referred fc? C/W/r^/7>*#^we makenoqueiiion; His meaning is the, rIheythacmakcthemto.worlhipthem» and to put their .. ix\\fiin\hQ\'ni^s^\\dolat re us makers doe, are like vnto them, w&maketheCrcffe indeed, but neither to wor* Jh/p it nor to put our truftin iti And cherfore J hope are no more robe Condemned as curfed Tranfgreffbrs of the Law, then you arc when you writethe letters .of T. C.name,which youcannot do but you mud needs make a Crofle. And J think verily, that you put more religion in this T. then ou r Church doth in the figne of the Crop, Asforyour Qftbc ofRtligtonis cau/d^it is ar.iwered be^

4 6 jin an/were to aTreatifc

fore , and is an odious impuritkm , by you fattened on our Church j without all colour of crush. Treatise. 4. Sect. T^orv if ^anyfoubt ,wk(t her thefigne of the Croffe be a> dored-.ejr'fo made an idolli let him well Confider the t rati; of BelUrniine,d£ adorationecrucis , where diHingutfhing thejfrofie on which chrtft wo* hanged fr om the fimilttude thereof > he faith, cetera? cruccs i!Ji fimiles , inter facras imagines nnmcvmtur,jind after he diftingu/fhethtbofe fmilitudes ofchrijis Croffe jnto the Image \& figne of the Crofiejo that if the Image of the Crofic bee taken for an A- do l^ ( & who knoweth not that it is the vniverfa 11 1 do II of Popery ,& to be adored^ even cultu latria? 3 which wor/hip, 46 they tfoemfelue&holde, is due only vnto God,) thefigne of the CrofiemuB tseedes be taken for no better. 'Be fides , the

Wt im*g.U.3of*we Bellarmine hauing}as ufaid^iflinptifhedthe ctoffe into threefortsjhe true Crofle,the image of the CrolTe3 and the figne of the Crofle , he laieth downe this doffirine generally of them al^cmnes cruces adoratmis >ar,d parth

s>e imitub.i. cuUrly. of 'thefigne of the Croffe hee faith , fignum cruris

*af'2'9' quodinfrontejVelinaerepiiigitur, eflefacrii&venera- bi!e. To this agreeth Potifortnus Saritb^.w/wr it u thm prefe/TediSdorzmus cruris fignaculum , per quodfalucis fumpfimus facrarncntirm.

'^fndthat the Im age. rjr figne of the CrcffeJ* ofone.ejr

» „ .. the fume accompt with P api (I es .appear eth evidently ^asby

C*nfrr.with ,. J -j. r >. , , , \ J, frr. ^ A ^ \\

Hart. c4p iji- diver fejo particularly by Hart . For Doctor hay Holds, *'/ 4 •/<*'*<>?• (hewing that the C hurcfo of Englande , hath iufily left the figne of the £ roffe out efthefupper.for tie idolatry thete* of\dothf roue that it is worfhtpt edas an I dol yby fuchte Hi- monies .&' indee de beUn<i tothe image of the Croffe \ which Hart no way excepted againfi^ dcth imply , that Uojce what

eflima'

of the Crofs'e in Baptifme. 4*7

eftiwatio they haue of the [maze J he fame they hxue of the figne\& what honor u due to the one.u due to the other. For ^niric.onUL in very deed they carefully teach jhat it U not in re^ardeof 'expiicMb.% ; the matt <r , wherein the Croffe ts painted , or the colour x^tlp™*? whereby it is f\uhwcd,but o*?ly ejr fimply.foythe cxpreftng of the likenesofchrtHes Croft & for the uprefenting of Chrifl crucified (which the figne performeth a& welas the image)that they aAore the Croffe with t he fame honor J hat is due vnto chrtft himfelfe : And this no doubt wtcs the meaning of ' Aquinas sw/ktf he fit h J hat every effigies or ^ Jejti}n part likenesof the Cro(fe[w hereof t he figne is one) is to be ado- 3 ?.ij «r«/t.4. red cultu latvise; andCofterus djh avouch \that the fame worfhip is due to the figne , <u belon^cth to the very Croffe of 'Chrtft . Whe he fatt h( 'though faljly) Chriftiani,a Chri- Co^ Euch> di temporibus , fei^pcrfumma veneracione coluerunc c*p.u. ipfum lignum dominica? cruris N&fignumcrucis, quo fe quoridiemuniunt , LMarke that the figne of the Croffe is wr/fc/^/>^/ummaveneratione, with t be highetf degree 0rth ^ of honor ^and, as Andradius in expreft words 'faith, In the ty.% fame manertthat the Image of chrtft himfelfe U worftip-* ped:then the which >what can be more cleeretoproonejhat not only the Image, but the figne of the Croffe 3 is by Papijls * mojt idolatroufly worfoipped?

If any f&yjhit to the figne of the \ltoffe none boweth the knee, or vadeth the bonnet \ andtherefore it is not adored* I anf were firftj hat <adoration is interne ^and externa and the exteme adoration is therefore idolatry, becaufe it pro* seedeth from the interne .as Zanchius very learnedly -.And janch',ie,f'\ largely jhewetti.

if a man mayinvoate to an AngeU^ brgiue any honour internalltoa creature, fhill it not be called idolatry ^except be bow outwardly vnto if} How then doeth ?wkfaie that

GOVS" ■

4 $ jfn an/were to a Treattfe

Onetoufnss id Idolatry? For a rich man dotVnot cut ward*

Mfh^.i. fy worjhip his goods, jet beaufe he giueth vnto it interne

Ccioffj.y. confidence., which is due vnto God.it ts truck called his I-

i.TimVt*.' dolyos imto the Sardanapalt there belly U termedtheir God:

iuJr.r a i j. 'Right fo the Papifts afcr thing to thefigne of the Crojfe9

1 '*' ,f* that honey ^r confidence -which bclongeth to Cod doe make

QMfi.dSfpup: ** an execrable idoll^ & fo tnaft vnfitt to ft and in the fane-

<k%mhdptt. tuary^or to be annexed to the holy things of God. For fir ft

they afcribe *unto thefigne oft he Croffe.po wer drveitue t§

wer it t pardon, at the least for veniall/ynnes, as appear-

ithbyTho. Aquinas^Bellarmine^and theRhemiites.

Alfo it is heldjo partake of power efficient >and imme- diate oper at iue^ and that to conuert fmners' MarftiaM de crucc.fol. 1 14.115. yea togaine fatuation > Hofius cotra Brcntrpag. 227. and generally the whole rabble ofRomifh Doctors, doe teach to put great affiance in this figne^for chafing away diuells, and curing dij cafes, andfancJifie* ing both man, and ether Creatures to the vfeofman.

Secondly 2 J ay indeed, they doc gittc outward^ fwcH as inward worfhip to the Cro/fe, For it is apparent, that they inuocate itjn the fame manerjhat theyinuocate Saincls% when they f&y. Per crncis hoc fignfi fugiatproculomnc malign urn. By thisfigie of holy Crofiejet euiils al file far r from vs. -^gaine by thefigne of the holy Croje^ from our enemies deiiuer vs 0 Lord our God.Aifo in another place ', victorious Croffe and admirable figne, makevs triumph d-ndioyin heauenly Courts diuine. yea in praters thty iome at with lefus Chrift* at in officio Miflae, ts to be fcene> "where t hey fupplicateypci mifericordam Tefu Chrifti,per auxilium & fignum Cruci?, per huerceffionem bcatar Maris, &c. They couple it alfo with the bleudof Chrift^ in t hefs words i defend me lefu ab omnibus viujs, maiis

prae

of the Qrofie in Baptt/me. 49

pr«tcritis,prcfentibus, $c futuris, per (tgnum fan&a* crucis,& pcrinseftimabilepretkim iufti, & prctiofi fa- guinisrui. (^11 which dothmoft ' maxifeftfy prcue, shit 4- mong the Pap. ft s it ts religioufly honored, both with in" ward confidence ^and outward reuerencc. Anfwcre.

Though althat the Treatiferatteadgeth in this fcc"ti5, fhould bcgrauntcd,yet nothing is concluded againft our Croflfc. For whereas his conclufion fhould be this, his.o,the//gneoftheCrofein B apt if me, m\tt is v fed in the Church of England, u an idolljoe bringeth vs only this ccxlufion, Ergo jhefigne of the Crofe,in theChurch of Rome tt6 an ldoll,\\\% argument is this.

Whatfoeuer the church of Rome doth adore, withdi* nine honor , efrwhervnto it jeeldet hboth interne c cfidencey & outwardwofjl)ipp,is an Idoll,

But the Church of Rome doth adore thefign of the C*6ffe with diuine honor >&yeeldtth vntoit interne cofikencey& fUtwardworfbippfMigo,

The figne of the CrojTeJn the Church of Rome $ an idoU

The Maier\sh\fe, What foever the church of Rome doth adore y^cFor Co the bread inthe Lords fuf per jfhouldl likewife bean Idoll, becaujethe church of %ome doth a," dore itiWith diuine honor, and yteidsth hth interne confi- dence,andoutwardwor(bipptherevnto, as is better obie- <5tedjthen anfwercd in the firft obie&ion. Againc3if vnto thofe words, whatfoeuer the Church of Rome doth adore &c. u an /doll,you had added thofe words, in the church ofRcrnt) your LMaior had beene true,&we fhould not haue denied it. But from fecundit quid, to coclude adfim* flieiter> (asyoualwaiesdoe,)i* toofimpIeaConcIufio to deceaue any manathac is but a mcane Logician: wee

G grant

5 a sm an/ivire to a Treat ife

graunt that their is , eadem tAtio vrbtset orhts: nor that that muft needs be an Idol in eucrypiace ,thit the Church of £00^ hath made an Idol within htr owne furi/dtcfion.

Touching the Minor , we partly graunt it, and part- ly denie it: we graunt it, Defigno cruets mater tali, (uch a? were Crucifixes ,of wood, ft one^ox mettA/Ifa p/aine Crojfes of all forts, without the /w^ofChrift. And io we vndcr- ftand all your proofes,two only excepted, whereof you fhal hcarc our anfwer by and by. Defigno, or rather de co» fignAtione cruets immateria/tydrzwcn in the aire,or vpoit the forehead .without any print remaining, we denie it, andanfweretoyour two proofes. the one out oi Btllar* m'tne : Signu cruets quod in f route, Velin acre ptngitur ,eft /acrum&vznerabtie: the other out of Coflerus, Ckrifli* *m fuwma, veneratione coluetunt ftgnum cruets, quo fe (justidie mumur.tax\\2\ there is great dirFercncebetwecnc veneratto. the word that they vie in thole places, and 4- dorattoHy the word that you apphe vnto them ; The flrft cxprsifiingonly areuercnt regai d, that they haue of the fignc; The other a religious worlhip, which you(ay:they yeoldvntoit. Jwil not ukevpon me their defence, nor iuihfie their ablurd!ties,for J willingly acknowledge,that they haue too too lupeiftitiouily thought of this config- #4f/0»aifo,and extended their fummAvenerAtioy to the higheft decree of fuperfticious opinion, in alcribing too much power, vertue and efficAcythctvmo, as you declar- ed in the fecond place of this Section. But yet 'J cannot beperfuaded, that.fignum [ncrumdr vctrerabi!ey oxfumt veKCtAtiO) as they call it, do fignifie Adoration, with di* nine honor ^ or interne confidence ^tnd outward worjhip, as youaffirme. -" —

Tljree things therefore I anfwerc to the Minor. Firft,

That

cftha (rojse in 'Bapttfme. 5 1

That the Papilfs doe indeed veiy fuperftitioufly deeme, of the consignation of the Crofle in Baptifuje,that // is of vertue, force ,& efficacy >wh\ch we do vtteriy & in plaine tearmes deny. Secondly,! fuppofe that the Treatifet will never be able to proue,that the cofignatio of the Croflc in Baptifme, ('eve in the groflcfl time of Popery) was ever made an ldoi,ai had any divine ador at ion&x intetne xvor- fhip. or externe honour exhibited v nto it . Foi firft, howe could italic thing ceafing to bee, as foone as ever it was madefand then^ho fhould worfhip it?The childe could not, the Pr ieft ^.people reflected rather their devotion to their materia/! wooden Crojfes , and men ad Crucifixes, which they had ever at hand , then to this immaterial! tranfient marked cerium eft \omnes fere Jdololatras fo- Zmhden- lit os femperfuifietne% Deum>velverumjvelfalfum , vel *"*' ' vllam creator am, externa adoratione colere^tjr odor are jti- ftft*b>& in aliquafigura ilium reprefentante&nd fo farrc only holdcth that,which you alleadge out of Tho. Aquh ifcJftf-pf nas ,that every effigies tot likenes of the Croft e, is to bee * *'4'f^' adored^kh the fame honor ,that is due vnto the Frototy pen : namely 5if it be effigies , a material! fhape or fimili- tude,which remaineth^J? o^us.not the immaterial! ef~ figiatio, or figningjthat paheth,and leaueth no imprefll- oii5afterthe Action. As for your allegations out of Sc. F , paule ,that covet oufnes is Idolatry, and that vnto the Sar * cSur! danapali^heir belly is their GW,jthecompanfon is not e- Phil 312. quaL For the^/i'/»^^»^itbatyouconceiuetobefous» ded inconfignatione cruets ,is grouded only vpon a thing tranfient& imaginary >but contrary wife , the Idolatry of the covetous man > and felicity ohhe beliy~god , are both founded inmaterialiobiec7o,vpon a real/. & not vpon an Imaginary foundation, Auarm trtbuit the f amis fuis quod zmthJenfyi

G 2 #*■*"**

5* jfn an/were to a Treatifs

propymm eft Dei, & Sardanjpdlf&fagin<efaamfa'lkiu+ tern.

Thirdly , J affirme , that though Poperie hath eftec- mc d fuperftitUufy of the Ctoffe in Baptiime,which wee tonfcffe$s\& given divine honor vntoitjwhich we thinke may very probably be denied', yet our conjignation in Bap- tifme, is altogether different from t heirs ^ as before hath bin declared in the aniwerctothec^/wofthemainc Syllogifme,

Treatife. %. Sccl.

K^nd there fore if * their I dots jnty in no fort he annex- fd to the fervtce of our God , the Crojse in TSapttfrne ought wcejfarilyje be crojsed^ndcurfed out of our LeJturgie* Anfwere.

This is thatjyou hanc all this while houered about, & yet cat? finde no fit <Jfrledius termtnm to conclude. For how wil thefe two propofit ions hang tcgither ?

Theftgneofthe Crofie in the church of Rome it an ldsl> (which ruth bin the only thing you haue proved in the former fec'tion,) Ergo :

The conftgnatton of the Croffe in 'Baptifme^vfedin the Church of England ifnuB needs be crofted and cur fed out of our Ltiturgie}

You v ndertakc to leap too far at once, there are many bankes in your way : you mull proue3yfr/? that the Jigne of the CrofTe in Baptifme,in the Church of Rome , is an Ido/fywhlch is not granted. Secondly, yon mull proue5that §ur Crofle, and //;<•/> CrofTc in Baptifme is ai onc,in nii» berjtaturejvfe & eftimation-.'ycu mult laffily proue , that we may not lawful!/ redeemer ancient Ceremony, out of his abufejaoi reftore him, to his auncieni Uxcfullvfe a* gaine : ul which,! fcare,or any ofchem, wiibe too h3rd.a

cafke

of the CroJJe in Baptifme. 5 3

tafke for you ro vndeitake 3 but you: prefent argument is this.

The idcStfthe Church of Rome , may in no fort bee 4«« nexedto t hefnviee of our god, but mutt be crojfed^ cur- fed out of our Lfiturgie*

But the fate of the Crojfe in B apt i fine ^ an Idollof the Church of Kcxie. Hrgo •'

The con/cation of the Cr°!fein Baptifnte, in the Church of England, muHbecrojfedand cuffed out of out Leiturgie*

IhzMaior is granted.The LMinor is denicd,for/r/?> as was faide before,y ou will not bee able to pioue , that their immateriali ' conftgnatioa with the CfofTe in Bap- ti(rne3was ever madean Idohand if you chance (o to do, yet fure I am you wil never proue,^»r confignationof the Crofle in Baptifme, to haue bin an Jdoll of the Church

ot%omc% your conclujhn therforc,and youspremi/fesavQ

fo fane a iunder,that they wil never bee (reconciled . Jt feemes your cr offing and curfing hath lighted vpon youg owne conclufsns^hty arefo curfedly cro(fed,andcto§cd» ly curfed , that they conclude nothing plaindie and di- rectlie. .

Treatife. 6. Seel.

Tfjithet uit fufficient to fay that the Crofe amongfl V5,is neq;numero3ncqj.vfu, the fame that theirs is , and though theirs be an /doll) yet ours it not . For when Godco* manded his people fo breake downe the Images of the he a* fk^n^andtoexttngmfh the very name of the Jud they pet* formed that chaydge^if they had burnt all the idols of C&* naan^and afterward made new of the fame for me ■> and to another vfefh-.ugbnot Idolatrom^yet religious* Or hovv haue we dif charged our duties , andfhewedour dete flat ion

G z of

54 &4n anftoert to a Treatife

cf that filthy Idolatry y if having defaced a/the fop'tfh Cm-

* /fixes, and Idols twe erecJ them new i» our Church }thoug h

9ot to worfhip themyyet to any other holy vfe whatfoevere

Anfwere.

If this be not a fufficient anfwere jthen you may make it more fufficient by adding ne% aft imat tone .nee^ opinio' tie religionism hath beenc taught you before 5 But why is this rcafon vnfufficicnt? Your rcafon is^ For when GcA tornmandeAidrc. Toyour^>y?demaundeI anfwere, no. And yet that toucheth vs nor. The things compared arc nothing like. They fhouldhauedeftroied the olde idols, and not haue made#*w : we make no newe Jdsfl, but re- ftore an ancient Ceremony of the church, to his fir ft in* tegritiei which we take we may lawfully doc.

To your fecond J anfwere likewife , That we erecl: no new 70//yfcCrucifixes,and AMnnour Church.but re- (lore an ancient confiitutton of the Church, to the rcve. rend v fe o f the ftf^z;**/*/* of the Crofle in Baptifme: Nst to wor/hip it,nor yet to afcribe virtue vnto it, as you would fuggeft,but to be a Ceremony of Decency, & Order , agreeable to io holy , and religious a Sacrament. Treatife. 7. £e<5t.

2tU true \t hat our Cro/fe^and their sis the fame 60th in name ><& forme > hut not in vfe ^f or then were it idolatrous'? 2{ow I doe not fay that the Church of England doth com- mit idolatryibut that it ought to abflainej*ot only from the Idolatry ^or worjhip^ hut euenfro allrelgious vfe^ of fuch humane crdtKances,andinuenttons, which others baue.ejr doe idoLtroufly adopter jf to erect Crucifixes, and other Peptfb Images for holy vfe \be( contrary to the Commandc- mem) a keeping of an honorable memory of the I doll, how (an/he religious vfe of the Croffein 'Baptifme, being as

well

ofthcCroffe in rBaptifmel 5 5

iteUanldoll^M any of their Images^ be reteined without h each of the Law. Babes keep your (elues from Jdols? Aniwere. Jt is true, that our CrofTe & theirs is the fame in name% but neither in forme ,nor religiom vfe altogether . J fate altogether^ becaufe in fome reltgiotid vfe , ours and theirs is the fame: namely in this,tbac both they , and wee v(e it for an cutwarde Ceremony , to teftifie that the child* fha!I not be afhamedsto confefTw the faith of (_ hrift crucified: then fuperflztiou* vie we admit nor,and their idolatroua v(e'(which I wonder how you doc diftinguifh from their JuperHttiout vfe^you free vs from. But you fay we ought toabflaine not only from the idolatry \or yvorfhip> hut even jromallreligiom v(e>of fuch humane ordinaces, as others doe Idclatroujly^ dore. From the Idofatrie I confefle , but not from that religious v/e which is good , and tendeth to a good end . That it is a humane ordinancejn'mdcteih nor, becaufe being wirhal.an EccleftaflicaEConflitution9 it is thereby made in part divine* That they vfe it lome way fuperititioufly,is no reaion, why we fhould not co- cur with them in that wherin they vie it wel. For, Quif Aug. oV A$ qui* bonm.yeruffy chrifiianm efi , Domini fui efic tntel* «*w#&*«fc s*» hgityvbtcunfcinvenerity veritatcme

The erecting of Crucifixes t and other Pop/fh Images^ for holy <vfejs indecde a keeping of an honorable memorf of the Jdol,& yet the wel vfingof the figne of the Crofle in Bapt ifme,in out Church ,is not fo. For neither doth our Church propofe ir as an idollfaux. as a Certmonieoi deeen* tf/Vjand Order fit for a iacred Affionx neither doth ir pro- pofe it as a remembrance ofpopijh Idolatry, as you would imply ,but as an outxeardtefttmony of our profeftion ,and as a. memor&t'mfigxcjLo put vs in minde of our Chriftian

due-.

5' 6 An anfwere to a Treatlfe

duetie : which may make vs rather detcft, then religioiif* lyremebertheabufesof Popery, And thcrfore neither is it afwel! an idd&s any of their Images ,which you will not proue in haft : nor a breach of the Apofiles exhortation. Babes keepeyourfelues from Idols.

Now we come to the third general part of this Treatife, wherin the Treatifer endeuoreth to anfwere certaine ob- ieftionsofours, in defence of the Croffe; Out firjt ob« ieclion heictteth downein thefe words. The fir ft obietf/on.8, Seel, The figne of the Croffe ir> the firfl institution was free from fu^erfiition and idolatrie: and if the ahufe which grewe after be removed, why fhou/d it not recouer hts at/n- cicnt vjc^andindifferency Jike as the bread in the Lords J upper ^ which the Tap His do religioujly adore}

The Treattfers anfwere to the obietJUn. There is great difference ejre.

I expected the Treatifer in his anfwere to our obietfh */w,framedbyhimleIfe,wouIdhauemade every thinge plaine andeuidentifo as a man at the firft fight,mjght perceaue the anfwere fitted and applied to the \obietfton in every point: But fomethingthcre was: cither ha(t,or JgnorancCj not knowing how to anfwere,or Confcientia fraudis, or } knowe not what, that would not iuiier him to fpeake directly , nor toexemplifiehis allegations, but make him wind himfelfe every way, and fo to double, & huddle things together, that my felfc J confeflc,and',J beleeue tew men el(e,can find m him .Quidcut r?/fozdea- ta^TrjWisanfwcredvntOTr/jtfV^asto any manthardi- ligently markech,what he faith to the firfl: objection , may plainly appeare. By which meanes, though he hath puc me to a double labour> yet J will endeuor in my Replie,

both

of the Crofic in faaptifmi. 57

both to fort his anfweresxothz obiection,zx\& inafce'thcrn ftrenger^fo, that the indifferent Reader (hall pcrccauc, thstjno wrong is offered him; andjyet with all J wil (odiU couer his (1 lifts. & windings, as a! me J hope , that come not with that obftinatc refutation of > Non perfuadebis : — eJiamfiperfiuaferisftigA] reft fully fatifiied. & contented. Now therfore to.his anfwere.

His anfwere confiileth of three parts, .The fir -ft wherof is or thofe dirTerences,which are betweene that;, which God hatrmftf/?4?,and commanded, and that which man hath ordained', whereby he would iniplie3as I take it,that the reafbn is not like , why the CrolTe recoyeredout of the abufe,fhould returne to his Ancient integrity & why the head in the Lords/upper 3 reclaimed from Top.fo <*- dor at ion fhouid be againe reftored to his right vfe.

The (econdput of his anfwer , is of a double vfe of the Croffe: Civitt&nd T{eJigio/M3whGtGby he would imply ,as I thinke,that the civillvic may be reftored to his ancient tndifferency ,but the religious vfe cannot.

The third pan of his anfwer,is cocerning our abufing of the fign of the Croflejin the Church of England yw\\o^ he faith , retaine itamong vs with opinion very fnperlli* tioas&nd erropeeous&ndvic it other wife,then the ancient fathers did : Each of rfiefe I will confider by it felfe , in their feveral order: The frfi therefore hee delivered in thcie words.

Treatifers anfwere to the i. Obie6t.

There is great difference betweene that which God hath create d^and commanded., and that which Man hath ordai- fiedjfcr the one is necefary7andno abufe can alter the na* ture of it\the other indifferent } and by abufe may become vn/awfuiliand therefore Hezechia did worthily bre^ke

H the.

5 8 Jin anftoere to a Treatlfe

the bra fen Se^pentynot feekingto redreffe the abufe of it: Nowe howfoever BeJIarmine woulde infinuate , that the Croffe it founded on Scripture , yet the weaknes of his ar- guments >doe bewray the vnfoudnes of the matter, & they* fore Tertullians judgment js to be pref erred >whicb plum . , lj faith \ that there is no warrant in Scripture for it \ Ho • rum intuit, 11 legem poitules , lcripturam nuilam mvc- nics3 traditio tibi pranenditur auCtrix3confuetudo con- firmatrixjfides obiervatrix.

Repiie to the Treat if ers anfwere. Here J obkwe.firfi your after tion>rhax there is g*(at difference ^betweene that which God hath creatt d, & com- manded^and that which man hath ordained.

Secondly ,y our proofe of this difference)^ ihek parti- culars.

i That which Godhzth cemmaundedis neceffary, as the breadin the fupper of this nature are Churches , PuL pits e^f. things of neceftarie vfe 3 and warranted by God himfelie.

That which manhixh ordained is indifferent , as the CrofTeinBaprifmc.

2 No abufe can alter the nature of that, which God hath commanaed,ar\6 is neceffary : as the bread in the fup • per^churches^pu/pits ^c.Thai which «w hath ordained, and is indifferent ,may by ahufe become vnlawful-as the retaining the bra fen Serpent, which was no where com* tnaunded.

3 That which Godhath commanded , is warrxtedby thtferiptures.

That which man hath ordained ', is not warranted in ihcfcripture. 'Foihowfbcver Beliawinc would inflnuate;&c. yet

you

of the (rofse in Baptifme* 5 9

you pre ferre Tertullians judgement, who faith, Traditio tibiprttenditur auflrix^c.

Jt mil bee not vour meaning , in the firft part of your anfwere, I confeflTe, J cannot attaine vnto it : your words are io intricate^ doubtfully kt downe,which hath cau- fedrnetovfetheheIpeofyour?wdrg^/, for the better vndcrilandingof your text.

ForrepJietherforc vnto this your a/fertion^ve wil- lingly acknowledg, that there is indeed great difference -, bctwene that which God hath created, Sc commanded: and that which man^.% man> hath ordained', for the firfi proceedeth fro the clear foutaine of al goodnes j wifdue, and truth: the /^r^r from the corrupt fountaine of mans hart;wherin naturally is nothingjbut voickednejignorace, and falfhood.-But if you make your comparifon> betwene that which (Whath commanded j& that which theChurch of Godhath ordained, (sasin reafon you ought to doe) the differ eceis not (o great}as you would haue it;Let Gods cowman foment haue worthely the firfi place,and prehe- minenceinalthings,as ismeete, but let the ordinances of the Church^ immediatly fubordinatesvxo Gods com- mandement , and ranged in a lecond place : not only be- caufe the church of god hearcthhis voice; but alfo be- cauiejhe is ruled by his^/r//:and by the^r^ and preti* 2.pCc, 1;^ cuspromifts ofGod,is made partaker of the dittine na* tme<. which no doubt dothaflift them,eucn in thc/^w^ alfo. and confutations, which are made for Order & De- cency in the Church,

Concerning your firft ptoofe, & point of difference3 whtnyoufay3T^4/w^/'^ God hath commanded U necef* fary that xohichman ordained U indifferent-,] grant, that which God hath commanded is indeed mceffarie^ for the

H 2 mat-

60 Jin an/were to a Treatife

Mr** equina ******* * and new fori* for the forme, f wherein yet looke

md, vpon the fecond Bpiftleof W.Beza.Howfarit is necef-

faT ie to he done as he hath commanded: )neceffary to be r e- ilaimediiom all ahnfes^ that it hath bin fubicct vnto:and neceffary tobc reftcred to his/r/2 and truevfe. But be« fore we grant you your fecond proportion. That which man hath ordained is indifferent: we mufi be inftructed, what you meane by this worde tndifferent\iot if -you vn- dei ftan ds the f kings them ft lues, as they are of them f dues r we grant that the Church canot make a thing indifferent* to be of it felf Mother then a i\\\r>gindtfferent'. but if you. vnderftand the fame things^as they are for *&/2yIawfuHy eowwandidjOx forbidden Jby the authority of the Church, then wemuittel you,that it is not freely in your ownc power }and liberty, whether you will vfe them,or not vfe them accordtngly. for then they ceale to be altogether in* d/fferext ^bcgmntobccomcf ome way neceffary /which that you may the rather beleeuc, J will direct, you to Mr. Bezaes 24, Epittle,, where you may learne it.

*<tf ep> *+*d Res altoefui per fe medis ( faith ht)mutant quodammod* ffsturam, cum al.quo legzttmoManctato, vet prac/ptitntur9 'uelprohibentursquta neq, contra iullump? aceptum omittt foffuntijiprACtpi&nturinefy contra mterditlum fieri }fi prohtbeantur.

Things otherwife of them felues indifferent, change their nature after a fort, when they are either comanded, or forbidden-, by anie lawful] authority:bccaufe they can neither be omitrcd, contrary to thciuft precept jif they be commanded; nor done contrary to the prohibition, if they be forbidden. And a litle after.

j * m$* • 7<r dmet (icon fc tent i as prof rle folusVe us lig«Lt\ tame n qnafenm Eiclejia^rdmsej^dcsori^deo^iidtficationts r&-

ttonem

of the Croffe in ^Babtlfm?. & *

(ionem habens Jeges aliquas de rebus medijs rite condit^e- iufmodi lezespijs omnibus funt obferuand<t,& eatenus co* fcientias Igant^vt mmojciens & pyudens^ rebellandia- tshtio^ft.lfitabfa<feccAt9^jelf<icereqttA it a pohibentur^ vel omittere qu<e fie prtcipiuntur.

For though God only doth properly bind the conferences: yet fo farr forth as the Church, hailing regard of order ^de* cency, and ad>ficGthnixnzVzx\\ rightly any Uxees, cocern- ing things tndifferent:thole lawes are to be obfcrued3by a! godly men, and fo far bind: he confidences ,thax no man wittingly yzxxdxsiliixglyy/ixha pur p9 fie of ' reletting, may -without finne tfixliQi d&e thofe things which areib forbid" den^ox omits thofe things >which are fo commanded.

1 pray yon Mr Treat ifer, marke diligently the words, tonfcientias ligant, or .nemo fc sens &prudens rebellandi gnimo^pofifit abffypeccato'fox you knowe how many of your biethren, are forgetful! of this inftru&ion: without iinne,fay you,what finne J pray yo«?J referre you for an- „ , , iwere to an other. Qui vtoUt Ecclefiafiicam pohttam.pc ■ in SyUrag.capl cat mult is modi* : primum enim rem fit violate or dixit in de adiaphonZ y 8cclefia : deinde authorities <JMagijlratu$ contemnit: til in firm or urn confcientias vulnerat \poHremu nocet exew- fio : ejr charitatem ergafr aires vioLt.

He that breakes the ecclefiaBicallPolicieyimnzxhmz- ny waies ifirfi hee is guilty of breaking the orders of the Church \fecondly he contemneth the authority of the Ma- giflrates : thirdly 3 hee woundeth the confidences of the weake : andlaftly he hwtethby example > & violateth the law of Char it ie.

A game whereas fpeaking of things necefiary , in your mar sent you giue vs to vnderftad, that of this nature are GhurcbesiPulpttSj&c,] demand^/ w^tf nature? meane

H i " you

6 % odn dnfipere to a Treatife

you of the fame nature j\wx the breadin the/upper «?for fo the purport ofyour anfwer ieemeth to imply, that be- ing only v rged in the obicctio. Jf this be your meaning, you are very much raiftaken : for though churches and Putpits&vc very nece/fary in deedjin their kindetyct theic neceffity is not of that nature ,that the bread'm the /upper is of. For the brtad'm the /upper >is fim ply, and ab/oiutely #£f ^rjyniomuch that if there be /7* breads there is no Sacramenthvx Churches } and Pulpits are only neceftaric T*r/. hpolci. f°r conveniency^nd dec evcy : for i hope, t hole Cxtusan' telucani , adcanendum Chrifio & Deo , meetings in the morning to flng to Chrift, and God, as Tertullian fpea- keth, frequented by the Christians , in the time oiperfe- . . . cutio.wevc grateful vntoGodjthoueh not done in CW* jLa w« i«fe« * ^w" anc^ tn°k wbaprtpoftti exhort atoria^ad imitatione it fine, * t&m henefta*um ter um^otds of the Provoft , wherewith he exhorud to the imitation of fohoneft things, which iufiineLMartyr mentioneth,may be efteemed good Jer- • wons .though not deliueredout ofTulpits. To conclude this point,if cWs/wbeofthe fame nature for nece/fity> that the £r^inthe/^?r#,howhathit oflateyeares come to pafTe,that many of your brotherhoode3 in the freedwe of Chriftian religion^ haue made choice of pri- vate houfes for their fermons^ rather then of churches'^ of the end of £ ?<*£/* in a Gentkmans parlour ^ rather rhen of a Pulpit^ Thefe your pracliles haue made proofe vnto the worldjthat Churches,znd Pu/pjtSyhowiocvemeceffat ty,ivc not yet fo nece/fary ,even in your owne opinion as the bread'm the/upper '• nor fo greatly refpected by you, as here you would make vs now bcleeue.

Your/tfMu/.poiru of difference ,betweene thin £*.*■ fl- aw W<Wby Godfinderdainedby man is,Noabnfe cun al- ter

of the Qroffe in Bapfifnte. 6 $

ftr the nature of that {which God bath comanded, but that wh/chman hath ordaincdjnay by abufe become unlawful'. as the retaimngthe brafen Serpety which you note in the margent tw^ no where commanded, andtherefore Heze- chia did worthily heake tt , not fecking to rcdrejfe the a- bufeof it.

in the///? of thefe proportions . 7^o abufe can alter the nature of that ,nr hie h God hath commanded. I contefTe J do rather gucflevthen wel vnderftand wh&t you meanc by altering of the nature : J fuppofe your meaning to be this>viz.that no abufe fattened by Pr.pifis ,vpon the bread in the J "up perxzn Co alte r the right vfe thereof, but that by the Orthodox and right beleevers 5it may againe be re- duced to his firtf integrity, we concur with you in this o» pinion,& thinke the very fame in the fignelofthe Crofle.* No jfay y ou 5not fo , becaufe that which ma hath ordained may by a6ufe become vnlawfull; this we confefle alfb>bu t adde .that by right vfe>it may againe alfo become lawful: for what fhould hinder it?Becaufe,fay you, it is ordained by man. {o then the point ot difference confifteth in the dt* verfty of the dutborsi the breadahufedmay againe bee rightly vfedfcccauie Godis the author of thatinilitution: the Crop in Baptifme once abufed, can never againe be rightly vfed,becaufe man is the ordainer thereofcg^and man doe differ , tanquam creator & creatura i betweene whom Chrift being both God and tnanh^Wymedi m:hc* tvveene God 1 <ay3on the one fide,& ail mankinde en the other :but to bring them yet a great dea!e nearer,: God & faithful man ^regenerated by thefpirit of God(of which fort is the Churcn and every trne member thereof) doe differ Janquam pater & filtu* , as the father & the fonne, J mil bee a father vntoyoutandyeefhallbee my fonnes and Icr,3'

Aau"h«

64 ^n a nfwere ta a Treat Ij e

daughters j betweene whom (hrtft in both natures . b% a.Cor.^.f 8. Ms?/ ret 3a mediatonrjox reconciler* to take away that ^//f*- P ■*««• ?«f«-,vrhich was bctweene *$tfWj and i* , f j&j* w<? i»i^/&f be the habitation of god by tbeJpirir.So that thefe, as you iee}differ only as re/at wes^vhote difference. is jhek natu- vallreciprocation^ and whofe diner fit ie is their coviuncii o: the on not crojfingfcwx referring it felfe vnto the other: Only (Wand vmegenerate men% &$Q.tytanquamhofles3t Rom,J.f. like oppofites,- for Pffoty** *»**»* that (waicth in thern5is am*//? with cWa as the Apoftle teacheth?fo that9 excepc youwiIfay3that^»^^<fr/f/<fandir/'^W^«4»,is the or* dk/'wofthcCr^jasyoudoefalfly, when you lay it is, the inuention of i^sfntichrift^the man of/foffor by your owneconfeiIion,it is more auncient then he) you fee there is no inch great difference between the breadin the f upper , and the Crofei\\{Baptifme%ex parte autoris^m re* JpecJ of the authors, The one being the ordinance of god9 the other of the church of c?*«/,which hearcth his voice, & is guided by his Jpir it :the one being the ordinance of GW, the other o£thcfaithfuli,]the obedient Children & fons oiGodzs partly before hath bin declared, j fuppofed ra- ther5 that you would haue made the difference to confab in the diner fity of the pollutions, which each of them in the time of their ahufe had cotracIedfXhe breads polktio indeedjbu!: e^fely feparablejU remoucable from it againei The Crefe fuch a pollution , or filth ,as afterwards you pleafetocallit,asno-sr£*crcan clenfe ir,nor any pretext purife it\(ortheho\y feruiceoi lehoua.But becau(e you vfe theie fbrifhes, in the next fe&io, J wii (pare to /peake ofir, til J meet you there.

Thirdly you preffevs with the example of Hezekiah. The.br a fen ferpent^ fay you, though commanded by Cod

hw„

oft be (jrofie in Baptifme. 6%

hmfelfe,yit retainedwithout his expyeffe cowandemexty became an idoll^and was therfore worthily broken of He' ztkt&bjtet fetkmgto re forme the abufe, Therfore much Wore the Crojse in Baptifmet which was ordained by man enlrjbeing ahufed in as high a degree of idoktryas the bra.* - fen Serpent was h vtterlytj be deUroied^ -Without any far- ther redre/fe.rhh is the -nodus Gordius?a*nn ^height of al youro ie tf/os,youi fortref!e,& bulwarke,y out Hercuieit^^. -— ejr AchilUum a*gumentum> wherin you repofe all ycur ftiength and greatcfl:confidence:and therfore J wil inde- uor,loto fat mine anfwere, toeuery point therof,as J truit the indifferent reader3 fhal ealely perccaue your *veaknes,ei:cn in the midft of al your flrength:

Therfore concerning your comparijcn^bziwcnc the reformation of Ezechtah, and our Gcuernors^ anfwere, jfrf/inthis^wtf^/^wemuft put a dtfferenct ,betweene thofe things thatare^w«f<7»thcrinand left for example oiimitatio to other men3and thofe things which art/™-. per>and peculiar to ihisatfion : The things common to all good reformer J3and lefc to others for example of iwitati- ff#,arethefe.

Fir ft the duty of a Kinge %icheife Magiftrate^an whom it lieth to reforme abufes^and without whofe authority no priuat man is to aitume that office , vnro himfelle; Rex A?/?'*0-^ domino aliter feruit quia homo ejt.aliterquia et/am et Rex efl'.quia homo eft tet feruit viuendofidehter quia etta Rex> ei fruit jum e&f&ctt adferuiendum illi^us nonpoteflfa^ eereyn ife Rex. which J note the rather to putourTreati- ter5and his adherents3in mindt of their too much forward- nes .tobegin reformation, being butpriuat perfons,and sucerJufcripil to put it inpr affife ^without commijfton. Nemo hanc au~ Angipag.iH. teritatemfibifumere debet yvt conftituat aliquem ordinem in Ecclefia /lift fit Ad hoc divinitui vosattu, & hah at au«

I tor it At em

66 jfn an/wen to a Treatlfe

Woiphiiu ;« tot it a tern public am ^ ejr con fen fum Ecclefu, Triuat'ts hem* kwuiitum. mbus,vt hoc agatit,pius et fattens autorefl nemo, Thofc j>v/uat men, that arc thus bufy .hzdntithct piety nor wif- dome, to giue the counfelliox fo doing. Secondly His zeale anGodscaufe, which was moi\ feruent , & fuch it ought to be,in al good Gouernors, and reformers. 7 htrdly his re" formation in reprefling idolatry, & raking away the oc ca~ fion therof. Fourthly that together with his reformatio ,hc ioincd inflruftionjU teaching bi the people :for whe hec law them to repofe a power ox healingfin the brafen. Ser- pent, he called it l^ehustan , & (lie wing the the matter, taught them that it had no fuch power in h;and was no* thing but a lump ofbrajfe: a! thefe things , J doubt nor, but that our reformers propofed vnto themfelues3for an example of reformation.

Tnethings^/^rto this action, and hauing peculiar reference^after afbrte,tothe per fan of Hezekiah were fir ft his manner of reformation , by breaking the brafen Serpent in peaces ,& vtterly annihilating ot it: Secondly the particular mottues that might induce him,to this re' format lo^m^y one in ward, being extraordinarily mo- ved therevnto by the fpirit of God>which dc th appear in this.that hee did cthcrwifc reforme it, then his religious predeceiT)rs before him had done. Another outwardbc- ingoccafioned fo to do becaufe Achiz his father,had ei- ther himfelfe brought this fuperftitio into his kingdom, oc elfc being brought in formerly, by his P r edecejf or s .had by hisexampleyind authority '.giuen great furtherance, and encouragement ihctvnio\and xhtx^oxc, vtterly to take a* way that Jlaine wherwith ^^fchaz had (rained the hcufe and flock of Dautd^Hezekiah, no doubr,was the rather in- duced to this diHroying kind, and manner of reformation. Nowi\'outpredecefbrs,and Reformers followed him

nor,

of the Crofje In Baptifin J. 67

not,in this manner of re forming7by vtttcr fuhnerfio , they had great reafonio to do.beingmen, whom neither the abufes might fo particularly concernc, as (this did Heze- hah, and knowing moreover ,thatj <^td eundem finem mult is medijspcruenitur. Reformation of abufes, & taking away of Jdolatry is the end, and this end may be attained by more waies then on, as either, by

Jnftrutfwg the people, and teaching them the right *vfe:otby Lawes prohibiting the Jdolatry .*orby punifo- msnts ^either penally capita^ vpon the tranfgretfors of the lawes cftablilhed : or by removing the thing fir it be a materia// 'thing,as this was)oi:t of the places of re fort ^in- to lome feclufe place , where the people might neither tome at it,norfee it , and where without offence it might ftill be kept;for a monument of Gods mercy : or iaftly , if nothing elie wilferuesby vtter aholijhing^nd deftroying the thing . Nowc becaufe, of all thefc waies, hce made choice or'that,which he iudged,and which was indeed, the moft expedite ^nd ready way , and withal the fure ft, that ido/atry might never be comitted to it againcj (Re- jug.dec Ugio/apoteflate Deoferviens , cum magna piet at 'is laude veiiib. io.ck%. contrivitjdoine. (?^fervicejwith his re/igiom authority, he brake it,and is worthily commended for his piety.

If it had feemed good in his iudgement,tohaue taken fome of the other courles,as it is IikeIy3jD^^/^^- Afa& Je hof op hat \znd other good kings oiluda before him did9 his comendations&s theirs 5had bin no whit lefle, though his reformatio had neit her bin fo expedite ,nor (ofure for time to come : for which' caufe alfo, that great & famous txecution\ which K. Hem ie the eight did vpon the lMo» neftaries of this Land,is likewife commended '.yet manic bo:h zealous ,znd religious profeflbrs, could rather hauc wifiied,that fo many famous Monuments ^reeled fbme-

I 2 time

'. c tvtt.

& S lAn anfwere to a Treati/e

time to thefervice of 6W,but then ahufed by the kicked zndftnfu Bin habit ant s^m\^\t flii haue retained the end. andpunifhmenthzue lighted only on the offenders.

Yea but you will fay , where the abufes could noto- thenvHcbc redrefled^ but had it remained (HI vnbr often, IE would Itil haue bin ijtumbltng hlocke ' 5 and occafton of idolatry ,there die readiefl^udfurefl way was to be take:1 J grant where the <*£#/> could not otherwife be redrejfed as in the bra fen Serpent, &c but where the *&#/<? may o- therwilc he red? efted^i, in the^g/v of the CrofetthcYC de» ftruclion£i vtter fubuerfionjis not alwaies the beft cure. And herein plaiuely is the difference, bctweene the bra-* fen Serpent sand the Crofle . Hezechiab (aw the ahttfe of a&ing.iS.* the Serpenuotherwife incureable, for vnto thole daies <iaiththefcripture)thef^7'/^r<!'»ofJ(raer, didburnei*- cenje vnto itwntotbofe daies, importeth a long timebc- fore,and an inevitable abufe , that had long continued} wherein (as we are in al good rcalon toconceiue)the for- mer godiy kings, Oaved^fa^nd lebofepbat , who arc greatly eotnmeded5for their reformat ions, had no doubc made triall of al other meanes,and yet experience made procfejhat by a!thofeitcou\d notbercdrcfled.In which caje Bezecbiabs ccur'e was vecrffary, ^nd^hocfupfofto, Di[l63.c4p. thereof Pope Sfephe#ho\dctft, Per boc jn&gna autort^ £nm $%na«, fai i[}a ep. falfxfa in Ecclefta, vtfino vnulli exprxdecef* fortius & w&toribu'i Kcflrujecerunt altqua qux iltotcm* pore pot nerunt ef[e fine culpa, fjrpojlca vertuntur in e?rort ejrfuptrjlitionem : fine tarditate aliqua.jcb' cum magna au- torttate,apc/leru atfirmntur . For this caule ihis autho- rity is to be eftecm -d great,tn the church, thai if fomeof curpredecrfforSt&anceJlors.fauQdoiiCjcwtbings^xhich at (hat time ,might be without faulty and afterwards are

tur-

oftheCro/?ebt!Baptifme. 6 9

turned into error ,and fupe rtt/tionjhey may be deftroied bv poller itt /,withonr al/ingring^nd w'ithgtetf authri> ty, Our church contrary wife percciveth, by t\\tfruitfu!l — experience paw of AmoR fifty yeares yxhat the 400/?, of the ^vgwaf/tfoftheCV^in Bapttjwe,hcureab/efwhctc obedient ,and conformable Teachrs^ inftrudr the people 4 right & it (eemeth funher,that this abufe^M hauc bin much more redrefed before /£<f/^ *ta/,?j, had not the Treatifer>and his complied hindered the vrorke, by their <vntrueflznders and accufations^boih of our Church, as retaining the r*//gwM of /"fl/w? , andofthefte^, 'asifie were the MMrifc ot the bed ft & framed in thz forge o{An* tichri/l\>which they know to haue bin,a <fcf f #f Ceremony vied in the pureft age , and by the greateft jpillars of the Church,long before any/hew otAntichriB did appear. Againe 3an(weie,thatit is by the Magiftrates .to bee confider.ed.F/r/,wherin the abufe doch mere principal- ly rehdejwhether in the per/ons^hat do abufe the things or in the thing that is ahufed,l:ot reafon would general- ly ,tfiat as by the ikilfuli fhyfitian , cures arc applied to l hofe parts jthat are moft affected^ fo by the difcreet Mah gift raie,the redreffe fhould be made there, where the <a~ httfc principally confiftcth. Jf in theperfonsfche eafines, or diffi.uUy5ofreformiiigthem,iv diligently to be refpe- &ed. Jf in the thing that is abufed> the Magistrate is like- wife toconfider,ofwhat nature the thing is. Ueviilof his ownenatureJandfirliinrtitution,asZf^4»4p/4the5^-B,J and fuch like places bcsthen without alquejftiajtheirbeft - redreffe is,their vttcriubver-lion,and deliru&ion, ]£good of his owne nature. &fii ft inftitution, bmabvftdby me, as both the brafen Serpent 3& the fignohheCro/fewcrci shen ihe confideratio is^vhether the thing thus abufed,

1 i b<*

*jO j4n an/were to aTreatife

bcJucLas may wel be (pared, or fuch as cannot wel bee fpared.Jf fo,then it is apparantly, the readier,and cafier way,'to take away the thing.Ifotherwife,then the wifd5 of the Magiftrate5wil direct him.rather to take avvay the 4bufetthcn deftroy the^//?£.Thefec6fiderationsin the matter of the brafen Serpet, made good king Hezech/ah to finde,that the brafen Serpet was for one peculiar time & occa/ionjhzt it had long before his dates performed hat ferviccfot which it was erected, that it belonged not to the people dihutime, nor had nofuchcure,as beforc,to fffecJilhat though the Serpent were a type of the Mef fiahtysx there remained a memory of it in the bookes of MofeSithdX would ferue that turne, though this were ta- ken away. Laftly3that it was attonejhete things confidc- red,whether it were preferved ftill 5 or vtterly abolifhed: vpon which grounds,he proceeded jto thatjfo much c5- mended execution, brake it in peeces,and called it, 2^V- bufhtan. The fame deliberations hkewife , in our refor- mers^ the matter of the Croffe Jmzdc them to find^that the conftgnation of the Crefle in Taplifme^as not more peculiar to the times of the Trimitme church , then to *«r.j:That it had not performed all that fervice , for the which ,it was fir ft inflituted . 1 hat it is an admonifier^s neceflary now,againft (^theiftsiUUocke/s^t\(\ Blafphe- mers^s it was at the jfr/?,againft heathen, and Pagan Ida* lators. That if it were taken away5the Church of Rome> might iuftly accufe vs,of abrogating an harmelefe^ & in- ^an tmtte , nocent inftitutton, of rhe Primitiue Church, That it is not mtcfubinde,nec indifferent to our Church,whetherit bee taken away,or fiTadlovatitJ not:both becaufe we are not to reieel ancient ivflftutits, »m efideeune where there is no neede,and alio to make knowne to the tr^Ht R6maMfts>th*l we Willingly meet nothings \Xnxpoffiblie 4f^,I#'J may

of the Q'ofie in <Baptifme. 7 l

iray be reduced f& hisferft integrities Vpon thcfe grouds and deliberat-ons, our good Magistrates in\K. Sdwardes dates , did not abolifn the vfe oFthe Croffe Jin Baptifme, And vpon the fame grounds our worthy Prince, & Ma- £//?-4/^thatnovvarc,thinke itmcete, to retaine it ftill. Quid hie peccatume&whzt offence J pray you is this?or whyfhouldnotymi be as fauourable to our ChriHUn Be^inefpa»\ai Itbetty herein3as the moft learned W.Beza is?Scio non F"*"<-B<^w>». nullos fublata cruris adoratione^aliquem figni crack vfit ?etinuiffe\ vtantur igitur ipji.fecut par eft^fua libertate,

Ianiweie thirdly that our 'Reformers did the fame thingjn their reformation^ the Crojfe in 'Baptifme^ which Ezekiah did in his reformation of the Bra fen Ser* pent'Sor what was that which Hezekiah did?/urely it wasjthat he tookeaway the abufe jvhexin it was/W//, not the right <z//<r,wh£rein it was typicall, zndftguratiue* The abufe wherein it was faulty, was the burningof/n* cenfe vntoit&ndworfhipping of it, & the occ a/ion of this abufe was , that opinion, and eftimation of Deity , which the people had falily affixed vuto it : both the'e he tooke away, namely the abufe y^nd the occafion. Our reformers haue done the very fame^ They haue taken away *firHs the ^/f/? of the figne of the Croffe in Bapttfme ; which was,the too great eftimation ,and opinion^ grace, power and vertuej\\zt the people erromeufly repofed in it : and fccondlyjihe occafion ot that abufe ; which was the igno- ranee ^ndmifvndcrftandingoiihe people , for want of infer uff ion.

Only the difference is: that the abuje which was the leaftjnthe lao/at row f ewes; namely their falfe opinion of Deity in the Serpent , was thegreate/l in our men , as touching the Crofle : and that which was thegreateft in

theirs?

}ga j&i anftoere to a Treatlje

tliemwamely tlieir verjhiping^nd burning imenfeyxC* to the Serpent jn%% none at al in ours fin the y^//*- of the £r^.Forour»J*/?,goingasfaras//;£y,in afcribing ver* J&f, which was an equal fault in both, could not 2pfofat jn xeorjhipixgfa adoring,beca\\[e o{ the diver fit iy of the nat ures, o[ the feuera/things,1 he braf en Serpent .being nfub fiance material^ and permanent ^nd therfore ?*/f^ fubieti to adoration^ by reafon of the cutxcardfliape, and /tfrw«The/gr»*ofthei(>d/& an 4#/<?» immateria!l>z\\d tranfientfiL therfore nothing (b *4/>#, to be worfapped, by reafon it wanted both fubfiance:ft)apey and forme.

Secondly Hezekiab, neither tooke away 5nor purpofed to take away, the right vfeoUheferpent^wheiin it was not/40/f^namely, that it was a typeyo{ cb: tfts exalt at io, ~on the Cro/fe) and therm a reprefentationphhe Mefiabx This vfe remained (till, after the reformation of He^eki- 4&Neither did our Goueworsjake away that vfe, (of the Jtgnepi the Crofie, wherin it was not faulty Neither did they flip pole it mrrff ,totake it away : but reflonng it to that'iV?, for which it was infiituted at the firftjefr it fhl taheamem&ratiue /ig?ie>ot oui promife mace to Chrift in Baptifme&nd afecret^ndfaithfulladmontfher of our dutiesSo that we may fafely lay, our Informers follow- ed the reformation of Hezekiah ^moft exactly in at points, wherein the diuers natures of the abufesfa the things^ did not make a. necefitry difference of theiv reformation. Concerning your comparing of the authors: The £7*. y£/*5V;,/?«tf commanded by God*', and the Croje tn Bap- tifme ordained by man^ though J haueanfwercd theno before,this now Jaddmoreouer,by way of retortion: Though both did giueocc a fion to Idolatry, yet the bra- fen Serpent, even thcrfoie,becaufeit was ordained by

God,

of the Qrofr: in Baptijme. 7 3

<W,might miniftcr a more pr oh&ble yprefctit ^rs&ohtiiott* f aliimo Idolatry, then th?£rofeii\ 'Baptifme, in that it Ywsordainedby man.- This I declare thus.

When mi;ns minds arc once infefiledwlxh fupcrflitr en ,they take hoUc fooneft of that, which is molt com- mended by the author: & the more worthy the author is, the inoic firmely they cleauc to thar3 which they hauc once faitned their error vppon. if therrbrc they finds Gctd to be the author of it} they take that for region fujf/cient, why they fhonld worfi/p it. This caufe made the Idola • trous h wj.not onJy to worflhp the bra fen Serpent at the firft3buta!fo to thinke,thatinfo doing they did Tr<r//;be- caufethey rcorjh/pped only that ,whcto(they knewe cer- tainly ^Codhimkik to be the author. The fame reafon moued thofe idolaters, rtpzoued by the Prophet,/* burne ierem. 151 ij, $ncenfetotheSunnetandCMoone>andalltbe ho ft of he a- lcrcna'8'*» w#,and to itr0r/fo/> the,thinking their Idolatry the more /#/%£?£/<?, becaufc it tooke occafton, not vppon any in* ttention^iman^bwi vppon thofc excellent creaturei of 6W, whom hee hath placed fo high, and adorned with fo great beauty: Contrariwi(e,the deuifes and inucntionsoi men3 fuch as the CV^ is, are al waves doubtfully andfuf f>e£ted}ci\er\ vnto the Idolators thernfelucs, and haue not their cccz&onSo pre fent >& immediate ^s the other: For firft, the ^Author muft haue fome reafon for his dcuilc, and then atirhorify3to giue countenance thervnto : and /*/?/), the opinion of the peop!e3approuing the reafon, & imbracing the authority, which points being we! confi- dered5as they makea farther way about^to bring the crc, dit otadoration^o that which is inuentedby man*fo they arc good meanes ,to perfuade the people to fcrlake their lAoiatrywhzn they haue imbraced it: So that your argu-

K menr,

74 *^n tnfaert to a Treatife

ment/rom the diutrfity of thcSAut hers ,doth rather make againft youthen giue any ftrength to your caufc.

The like may befaidof the opinio of vcrtue, which the Jdolatoris aiwaies willing, to aicribc vnto his/*fc//.Foc when it dorh manifestly appeare, that that, which he maketh an Idoll.h commanded of God,the JUation is farrmore ptefenc andeafy Ergofxx cannot be wuhouc vertue.-then can be applied to any ordinance deuiled by man.

Concerning your comparing of the brafen Serpent > and the Croffe together,weemuft confefle, the Jdolatrie is like, and worthy to be punifhed with like extirpation, (b long as you cdpare, the material brafen Serpent ^vith the material CrofTe,ofwood, ftone, bralTe, oranieouc- ward fenfible fnbftanc %For thefe having once gotte the opinion of Deity , to refide m the, expofe themfelues to be adored by the vufgar fort, no leflc,and in no inferiour degrec,then the Serpent did. But when you extend your companion, to match the immateriaflconu'gnaxio of the Crofle in Bsptifme , with the materia.lt brafen Serpent, your companion holdeth not correfpondency , as in the former . For there is great difference, betweene this con* fgnation^znd thole otha Crofts: (o thatjwherein this is diffet ent,from them,therein alio it muft needs bee diffe- rent from the brafen Serpet. From tho(e other CrofTes, andfo confequently,from the brafen Serpenr, this con- fignation of the CroiTe in Baptifme,doth differ , Fir ft in mutter :they nut criall^nd fenfible ,this immatcrtall$L i». fenfible, Secondly^ the end,ihcy made perhaps, and fra- med of purpofe to be receptacles of divine rror/hip , this only to ferue for zfigne of remembrance, being therefore iuftly to be reckoned among thof e things,2*<« pertinent

'd

of the Croffe in Baptifme. 75

sdiUTetZUr&ivtrxjnpomvni^ which belong xo order and ae- Buctrin faipt. tency: Becaufeit admonifheth rhe rude people of their J«gi.p*g4i4. duty,and calleth men to a remembrance 4 of that obedi- cnce,that they owe toGod,by a manifeft and fpecial fig- nification wherby the Church is edified. Thirdly Jnthe sb»fe> they abufed in as high a degree of fuperftition,as the Serpent was,this only abufed in erroneous opinion, andconcciptofwtffl^and^Trfi^falfly aicribedvntoic And foarth/y in redrejfe jhey no vvaies cureable, but by demolition tihU curable by informing the vnderftanding aright,&: teaching the ignorant,that we rcpofe no power zndvertue in it,nor yeeld any dt<vine xcorfhip vnto it>but vfe it only as an aAmomjbers & remebrancer of our Chri- ftian duties : and therefore you muft not argue, that be- caufe thole material Cro/fes were as offtnfiue as the bra- fen Serpent,therefore this immaterial! confignatio muft necdes be fo. You fhali doe better to diftinguifh them in 04WDcalling them,as they ate indeedejCrofles^and this the confignation of the CrolTc:then to confound them in nature &t fufTei your felfe to be deceived by the name,z$ if what things foeuer agree in jm*?*, muft. of neceflity a* grec in fupct flit ion ,and idolatry.

Laftiy concerning your marginal note , chat God no yvhcie comanded the retaining of the brafen Serpent^we anf^er, nether doth beany where forbid /t:Sc J make no doubt,but had it not bin abuled to fuperitition,it might without offence to God,haue beene retained , though he gaue noexprefle cornmandement (o to do. And he that confider s , what great prerogatiues the 6ra(en Serpenc fcad,wi!(IfuppofeJbe of the fame opinion. For it was ere fted^ot by mans, but by Gods direct cornmandement . Jc was adorned and commended, with a mod famous and

K a memo-

7 & sfn an/were to a Treatlft

memorable miracle ? Jt was a monumet of a very ftragts and extraordinary cure: Jt had continued a long time,& might almofl alleadge Prefcription, why it fhould be re- tained ilil : Jt was a type and figure of ChriHs exalt atiom on the Crofters himfelfe expounded! it •. As Mofedtf$ i»h.3.f4. vp the brafen Serpent in the wildernes :fo muft the fonna of man be liftedvf-.&c.

But what woulde you inferre vpon the not retaining of the brafen Serpent ? That we fhould not reraine the vfe of the Croffe in Baprifme?But this our Church hath en/oyned}znd commanded, whole comwadement^ we arc bound in confeience to obay,fo long as it commaundeih nothing contrary to the xvord> & w///of God.For howfo. ever you & your con forts re iect obedience, yet we take it not our duties fo to doe. Lawcs made by the churchy t^tfifi.%4. of thing1; in differ ent(x*W 'SBeza told you a litle before} NumV & 8* ^Ge ^°*ar k*nt^c ?be conference, that no man wittingly , and wiHi.vgly^nd with a purpofe of refilling ([take heedc Mr. Treat iter this claufe coclude not manv of vour Bro- tiierhood)may without fin% either do thofe things whichi arc fo forbidden, or omit thofe things which are fo com- G*/t>. fafl.f$k. manded. chrifiianipopuliofficium eft (faith WXalvin) 4 €,io.f ar.6.3 ' qu.tfccundum hunt, canon em (in quo char it <u modcrattix eft) fueyint inftituta&c. Jt is the duty ot Chriftia peo- ple to obferue and keepe thofe lawcs that ilia) beanade, according to this rule , ( meaning where charity is the Moderatrix as hefaid before) with a free confeience in- decde , and no (upcrflition, but with a cod. y and rcadic propenfion to obedience. Neither muft they hauethem in contempt, not by csrelefle negligence omit them: much lefle through pride and ilubboruncfle openly vi- olate and refill the. Whereby the wayjetit trout-:.' no

man,

of the (rope in 'Baptifme. 77

man. that W.Beza faith confctentia^ iiganty Mr. cdvin faith Jjberaquidem confcientia.Vox Mr. Beza in his bind- ing ofthe cofctexce Math itipcd: vnto the obedience that is due vnto the ant hot it? > Mr Caluin in his freedoms of the Confciencc, hath reference to that eftirnation wc fhould haueof the thing* , not to thinke otherwife of them then of things indifferent^ though commanded by authority : to which purpofcMr.T««^ra!fo fptaketh, hat etfiferuare '& omit t ere etiam extra fcandalum licet fame ^^'Z^^ ft ex prater uia ant pet ttlantia guts or dinem, public* auto* 7 it ate conjlttutum contemn at ejrturbet %non lemterpeccat* Thefe Ceremonies though itbe lawful to obferue or o- mittjwhete no fcandall is offered, yet if any man vpon frowardnes or wantonnes,(hal coremne , or difquict the order,that is efrablifhed by publike authority :he iinncth grciuoully . And let this fuffice for anf were to your exam- pic of the bra fen Serpent^andfeccndpo'mtoi difference.

YoiJr^/V^pointofdiiferenceJraketobe, The bread in the [upper M warranted in the fcripture. The Crofte in Baptifrne hath no war rat in the word, for howfoeuer Bel* larminewouldinfinuate^&c,

The/*/«wofthcfe, That the bread I in the f upper u yrarrantedintbe 'icripture,wc know right wel: to the latter /W the ftgns of the Crofie is rot warranted we an- fwere)&y?jthai it is no wheie in the Scripture forbidden* Secondly j2\£tf* rrquirtin? nece/fa'io^vt in facris lttte*is Vtt'Mauim exprefant mentionem exhibeamus ifnguUmrerugudt v* fj^4 ^ fu?p.tmus. Thirdly thzit hough in exprelTe words it be not warranted, yet virtually tfundaJnenta/ty^ and in fuo principio,iti< even in the Scriptures coprehended.The princ:plejand foundation that Jmeane5is,that gtnerall frecept of the Apoiile concerning things indifferent. Let

Kj it

7 8 *An an/were to a Treat i/e

i.Cor.1440. s^thingshe done decently and in order jn thc'genetallity whcrof this particular is contained , as by the deduction before mentioned in the anfwerc, to the Minor of your maineSyllogifme,may plainly appeare*, Laftly concern- ing rBellarmins insinuation, that the Crojfe is grounded freweftandenotvpon itjiior build our opinion vpon any proofeof his . Yet, as it is cercainc that the materials . Croflejwherevpon Chrift fufTcred > was fhaddowed by

the^/r,whervpon the brafen Serpent was litted vp ( for fo our Savior himfelfe doth relemble it)fo 1 (ee nor what rZitunfizo. inconvenience can follower we fhould fay with SV-^- Cyprian Ad De- guftinetand Sc. Cyprian jthat eve this our immaterially- ^.sap. \$. + jjgnation^did take his firft beginning and occafion in the primitiue Church, vpon the figningof the Ifraclites dore Exod.u.7. pofls ,, with the bleud of the Pafca/i Lambe : or by thtfig- ning of the that mouine in their foreheads with the mark Ezcch.9.4. of the letter T.or by /acobsbkftinQofZphraimand Ma- 4 ' 4' naffes with his hands a croffeythttby as Mufculus obfer- WoifMufcul veth t <^fdumbrabatur myflerium €r nets jn quo efl omnis in g«i.m/».48. verd benediffionisfonsejrorivo^in al this we yeeld vnto you ,and embrace with you 7>r/»/foiw judgement, that this is eftablifhcd by no other warrant , then by the an- thoritie of the churcb9the weight wherofycu haue ftiffi- ciently hard of before . But now let vs heare the iecond partofyouranfwere,to6urfirft obicc~tion. Treatile. 9. Seer. 7{ovp it is farther to bee nil vd , that a double vfe of the Croffe u mentioned in antiquity.one civill^r the ether re- Itgioui .against the former xeee doe not difpnte , yecldino a // reverence to t hofe Christians , xchich by that note fie xred their reioicing and glory in that,rch ch the heathen conn- ted t heir fhame.But noxvjhat abufe hathturnedthe Jmi%e *ndfignc of the Crcffe^nto an IdoU, itfeemeth the: by to be

wade

of the Croffe in ISapuftne. 79

wade execrable. For Gideons Ephod being firfi a ciuill m§* nument»f ~ victory \when the people went a whoring Aftet tttwas it Is w full for the MagttttAtjo ereff in the Tabe?~ TJAcleor Stnagoguey though not the fame yet the like Jet h in name & forme to any religious vfe} VVouldit h*ue fuf- feed to haue faid , this u not the fame Ephod , thAt Ifrael mAkcth an I do 11 of > neither ts it fet here to bee worfhipped (fory.ur brethren doe grievoufly fin t her in) but only to keep in mtnde the great victor ie that God by Gedeon gaueto Ijraell} Right fo the Croffe v/ed by the ancients tojhevve that t hey were not afharnedofchnfl crucified.bemg meer- ly civill^andyet exprepng a moft ChriHian re/olution, ha~ *ving bin abufedyca continuing to be worfhipped , both in Imagine & in Signo , It feemeth thAt this filth hath made it vnfit% on Any pretence of refioring it to his Ancient vfe, to be Annexed to the holy things of the SancluAry. EJpeci Al- ly while there Are fo many Typifies , that fuperflitioufiy 4- bufe it among vs. 21 pw for the religious vfe of the CrojTe, by the Ancient sjt was never free fiom fin Andfuperflition, 4* AfterwArds ufhewek.Andifit were , yet it being An hu- mAne ordinance And now not only abufedto idolatrie , but becoming it felfe a mofi abominable idol^no water caclefe ittnor Any pretext pur ifie its for the holy ftruiceofiehouah %eplieto the fecondpart of the Treatifers anfwere, TheTreatifersmaiuc forces arefpent a!ready,in the firft part of his anfwere, All chefe things that follow are nothing elfe but Jsttts armaturafrnJleta^MsTight horfme andfloriLhes,to make the number of his argumentes feeme the greater. Jn this Section he tellethvs of a two- fold vfe of the Croffe mentioned in antiquity, one Ciuill, the other Religious ^bis we acknowledge to be true. The

siutH

So jfn anffrere to aTreatrfe

vfe was held of the , a« a Troj>hee,U publike Monument, of chat great victory which God gaueto fontfantine a- gainft tJtt*xentiu$. For which caufc Conft&nth <?, at the fir ft made the fignc of the CrofTe in his imperia/l banner 3 ftamped it vpon his Comes, graued it in his Hatues , & /- mages^nd in the armor of his Soldiers: And the like ^ath bin vied by all Cbriftian Princes ever fincc . Secondly .as an ornamet in ftory ,or outward bcantifiingof any thing: Thirdly y as an outward marke of diftin&ion fro ths hea- then JdolaterSswherby in their common meetings, and intercourfe of life , they made it knowne, as well to the Jnfldcls, as to one another, that they were Ck'ifti&nsfc no waies afhamed of the Croffe of Chrift.

The religious vfe they made of the CrofTe , confided more privady,in a mutual reference towards thefelucs, and was frequented , FirH in their actions of cdmon life, ftill to exc ite their devotion , toadmonifh them of their dutics,and put them in minde of Chrift crucified. CMu- tyftpMdlhi- fjfaxftty tures^ne sudiant edifidferalia.Mttniantur oculi ^ '■ nevideantdetc(lanclaJimHlacra.Mf4nidtrtrjr<?ns>vtft?n» net mcolume feruttur. Muniuiur osfji domin* fan lingua vifirix tue&tttr>2& C}'p7taipczkcih.ad omne ' progreftu atfc Tirtuil dictron fromotu,,<&c,i& Tertullhn declarcth, They v fed to m*rk ■M/.M/.3. their foreheads with the ilgn of the CrofIe,ai every mo- ving,andftirring of their bodies , a*, they went out, as they came home, as they put on their cloathes, pulled on their fhooes,and as they wafhed;at tab!e,and at can- die~)ighring,going tobed,and fitting downe, & general- ly in every par ticuhr action of their life. Secondfyjhcy v- fed the figne of the CrofIe,in the S icrair.et of BapnfniCj as we doe now,for a prefent admovitton,'+\\{\ mcmoY&ttue Sgkcn^ continually to put vs in minde of our duty & pro-

fcflion,

of the Crofts in Baptifme. 5 1

feflion,which in that Sacrament we vndertake. J haue therforc the more particularly mentioned thefe diffe- rences, that J may the better expreffe this point to the vndcrftandmgofthe Reader.

Concernin gther fore the ciu'tU vfe of the Crojfe^ mong',the Auncients, the Treatifer deliueretb vs thefe oracles.

1 That he will not di/pute Again ft the c tut il vfe, & yet be tells vs, that now by abufejx is turned to an /doll.

2 Hcyceldsalreuereneeto'thofe ChrisJ/a&s, which fa that note fhexved their reioycing, and glory jn that which the Heathen couHtedthe/rJhameiYctmthailhc faith, Jc is made execrable.

3 He faith,thc Auncicnts,to (hew that they were not afhamedof Chrift crucified, exprefled therby a mod Christian refolution : But withal he addcth,By the filth which it bath fince contracted, it is made vnfitonany pretence to be reftored to his auncient vfe,&to be an- nexed to the holy things of the Sanctuary.

Touching thefe his fpecches,as we willingly embrace that.wherin hecommendeth the Auncients, (which is a'thing very rare among that generatiojfa we would al* fo free our fellies, that tread only in their fieps, and vfe itno'.worfe then they did, from thofe imputations of making it an fdctfyexecrablepnd & filthy which the Trea- tifer doth lay vpon vs,iinot zs Author s$t\ at the leaft as K^sbettors.

And therfbreleauing their religious vfe,tohisp]3ce,

becaufethe Treatifer fpeakcth thefe things only of the

CiuiUvtv*] would faine learne,which of thofc Ciuil vies

. mentioned before, wehauerluisgreiuoiifly abufed. Jf

htbyihcftrft ylcMBannerStCeinej, Statues, Amor& s*^**

X* fucb,

jSx an/were to a Treati/e

fuch Iikcjor the fecond^ in matter of Htftw >or outward flr^wf«/,orbeautifiingofany thing, hirulelfe is farre more faulty, then any of vs. For of the former he hath yeelded before., that in Princes Banners ^ Coronations, Covney Croxvnes^or in any other CtutU refped, it may hauc a lawful vfe : yea,though it be apparantly an idolL An J touching the latter he maketh no queftion.but that it may be made and retained ^though it be of an Image, cuen fuch an Image as is idoUtroufly worfhipped. Nei- ther can J poffibly fee, how we haue made an Idolljxe- cration^nd filth of their thirde ciuillvfe, whei by they made it a note oldt ft in ft ton from the Infidells. For thac is the very point,for the which,in thi/ place he (o com- mendeththe Auntients,yeeldingalreucrcnce tothofe Chriftians&c. & againc, They hauc exprefled a mod Chriftia rciolutio:&x.So that except the Treatiler hauc fome other Cmilvfestoi the Aunticnts in ftore, that we know not of^we cannot be perfuaded, that we retaine a y C/v/I/vleot theirs as an idoU, execrable % and & filthy either in the Image>ox in the figne .

Butyetheprouethitby the example of Gideons £• fhod.^ox Gideons £/>M,(aith'hee, being firft &x. J take the foice of his reafon to be this.

That good ciuillvfe of any thine that is abufed, and continucth to be wotfhipped both in Imagine^ infigm *<?:is made an idoll, execrable^ and a filth. This he prou- eth by the example of Gideons Ephod.

But the good ciuillvfe of the i rojfe among the Aun- tient^jisabufed Sicotinueth to be worfhipped, both in Imagine ettn/igno, Thishetaketh tobe prouedby the practife of fo many Papifts> as do iuperftitioufly abufe it among ys»v Ergo,

Ihe

of the Croffe in 'B^ti/mel 8 $

The good f/*///vfe of the Croffe am >ng the Aunti- cntsis madeaniW*//}execrab!e*apdafi!th.

The maior I grant to he twcynot /imp to iter, but fee u . dum quid t\\*t is,only there,and among them on!v5 that <foe abufe the good f/-&/#vfe, and continue worshipping of it,both in Jmagtne^nd in figno. Jn them, and to them it is mdeede an idoll, execrable^ a filth. Put what is that to others,iha»" neither abufe it nor worfhippe it ? To the _. cleanefaxh the kvou\\eyallthings a*e cleane ,but tothem that are d? file d^anci vnbeleeving^nothing u cleane , butt* ventheirmindes^r con fciences are defiled. Shall the fins of one man, thinke you, be laid vpon anotherfGod hath promifed no . Anima qu* peccaverit ipf amor let ur , The E«ch.i8.io. foule that finneth that fhalldie\ Thefonne ihal not beare the iniquity of the father, nether fhal the father bear the iniquity of the fonne . Your pcrpetuall harping on one ftf ing,fr bfecudum quid,to [implicit er> maketh thar your in ufickc is nothing plcafant 3 as J haue tolde you often before. * *

Touching the proofe of your Maior y by the example of Gideons Ephodjvbich you fay, beeing firft a civilfmo- nument of vi&ory ,&c. J anfwere , that it was not only a civill monument, and therefore your coparingof it with the civill v/es of the fignc of the Croffe , among the An- cients}isvnfit.

And that it was not only aciv'tttmonumentbzu'&ts S \ Auguflines authority , the very nam? and nature of the £- Aui; v**n*in ^W,whichhe madc>doth plainly teach. For what elfe is " 'c'2 '4t an EphoAMxx. that molt glorious & beautifull vpper gar* mci.t , which the hi< h Priefi ware in the celebration of divine (acnflces? Pot uiffet carmen vt Barac tjr Deboraco. v.MartJ* jcribcrc^eholnmnam erigere aut qutpfUmftmile, If hee /*«/w»«h

L 2 in"

8 4 tAn anftocre to a Trettife

intended a civil monument only ,wh v made he choice of an E^/W?Jfbefides the civil remembrance of his victo- ry.he alfo i'uend^d the ler v ice of God (as Sc. Anguft'tne iudgeth;ihewas it not only tor a civil monument. Now that rhc ier v ice of Gru^was alio in his intennonmot on- GtiewiUvdE U rhe n&me >f an Fphod Qu \ nomine cmwiapoffunt inttlli* phot ]?otific*ie qf»nt conlittmt Gedecm* fnacivitate^elut adco/endt*

&>pretui<u» «i» 7 / J / //-i

ten few, i>eu &ft*m - tiVntitA tiber;-ia.cmo Oeiyea, tecuttone qu* J -'gut fie at a

*kr#. pa\telotum,propterexceUentiAmve(lisSaeerdetalu^ By

winch <iar,;e all things may be vnderftood that Gedeonc* recced in his ciftie;as to wotfhip God , like the taberna* cleofGod,by that manner of Ipeech called Synecdoche^ whir h bv a { >art doth fignifie the whole,for the excellen- ce of the Priests garm .nt)but the fenpture alfb fcemetb

Udg 8*7* to cov a.ce.t or there i- is faid,Thatal Jfrael went a who- ring after it. And that it was the dellru&ion of Gcdcsn&L his houfe How could it be to his deftruefcion if he meant it not to the (erviccofGpd?

Gedeons(\\\ then was, net that hee erected a civill mo^

h»yfi* numct only , as you faie, bi)t,Qu&d extra DeitabernaculZ)

feett altQutdfimile^bi coleretur Dem&vx becaufe with,, out the Tabernacle ofGod hee made iome like thinges, where God iTiould be worlhipf>ed: which was plainly a- gainft the wilJ of God , who had appointed his worfhip, to bee frequented no where , but where the Arkc of the Covenant wa^which at th \t time was in Silo,

2. J fay that there is no iu«l compaH (on bet weenc Ge* deomSph»d^nd the figneof the Croflein liaptiirae.For the end oiGedeom SphodwM. .either for qodsfcruice, (& the it was faulty, as is (aid be fore, )&ib is not the Croflc i with vsx>r elfefto make the beft ofit , and to graunt you

your owne interpretation) it was , that the memorie of

Gods

of the Croffe in fidptifms. 8 jj

Gods benefit towards him in his vi&oi y,mighc not be a- bolifbed.and then the fi^ne^whichhee vied, was not fit, nor ag:ceab!e to the matter . For, Deus nenmafidtverat vetM^rt. la h? lege, njt fit * et Fphod intftumvfum , fed tan turn vtfa ■ hmncUcum* ter dotes (um fucr/jc atari iff nt >Uluh tduere/jr.Signo igi* tt$r minus dextero ejrofiporti/no vjus efi. God did not co» niandcm'hela v,thatan£^Wi!iou!d bcemade tothis vfe,butonly that the PrieiU fhouldweareit, when they were (acrifici iitft wherefore hce vteda figne not fo com* modious,nor fofit. But out figne of the Crofle in Bap* tifme,ismo(t,f1t,and natural,and agreeable to the a<5H5, to figmfis the end,which we iotende thereby , which is rot (o much to impr intamemorie of Gods benefite to* wai ds vs,a$ to remember & admonifh our ielues of that dutie,whichi 1 BapnimcweepromifedvntoGod.

3» To \ our que(iid.Prfras t? lawful for the Magi/trite, &c. i may as we» alke you. Was it not lawful for the Ma- giHrat: (otodoefOr if that Ephadwetc vnlawfui,was no Ephidia bj vied in Gods ferv ice afterwards?

4. A s touching , that you fay ; The figne of the Croffe in Hsps/fne. among the An cunts .wMmetrefy civil, I an • lvve»e,ihac you lane heard before,that it wzsfome wate rehgioui though they repoied noreligion in it.For thofc vic^thai ttsey made at it, To be a figne of 'their profefiio of Chriifian ;e!ig^oii, J obeea token that they were not aliiamcdotenavJro^eorCbtrh Tobeateitimonycvc before Jdotater^ That the) pui their hope & cofidence in Chri(t cruci6ed-are rather to be co.inredreligious,in niy vnJerftatidiiigjhcn^w^ dndmeerefyciv/l^s you co- cciucof them..

Yourw;/*?rpropofitionofTendcth in the fame capti- on ibac your ma/or doth, lor fay thai the good civil vfe of

L 1 the

&6 jin an/were to a Treatife

the Crofle is ahufed & worfhippedby the Papifh, what

Vn.Msrt.tp 4 is that to vs? Indifferenti* nonpoJfuKt tiles, qui pur a fmce-

miUofftrn*. ra^ aguntmenterf confcientia^ontam/nare.why I pray

you may not we vfe that well, which they vfed ill? As wel

as an Orthodox writer may vfe the fame Logick & Rhe-

torickc^oproue the truth, which Heretickes doe to op-

jmgc$nt.cre(. pugne the trurhfOi an honeft Souldicr vfe thofe weapos

t*n.Gramm*. jn defence of his coiitry, which Rebels and Tray tors vfe

" forthedeftru&ion and defolation thereof,as was before

alleadged out of ^.Auguft/ne. Your proof* holderh wel

for the mtterUttftgne* and for ihefuperftttious conceipt

of the Croflc in Baptifme, but that they adored them as

an /^//,rcmaincthyct to be proved,

Coccrning the religious vie of the fignc of the Crojfe in Baptifme,he faith two things.

Firft that among the Anciencs,'it was never free fro fin , and fuperftitiomSccondly if it werc> yet being zh»- m*ne ordinance ^n& abufed,& made a moil abhomina* b)e ldoltyV\o water can clenfe it &c.

Touching iheftrft, which of their religious vfes doc you mcanc? Jf that wh.ch they holde in their actions of common Iifejwe neither commend it, nor condemnc itj we condemnc it not, becaufe we fuppofc it may be well vfed,when it is donc,on!y to excite, and put vs in minuc of Chriftcrucificd,without any c«>nceite of vcrtue or meritt,QY power therinrepofed.asweveriiy thinkc the Hm.i*t*pt *. huncithisvicdttiQuimdne fkrgcns & ve/pers cubit urn widens, l/gnat fecruce,inftgr,umCk)iftiin*mtlttt<t, con- tra, Satana^^no eft culpandus ,modo gbfit fuperftttto.W'c commend it not,becauie we knowc how ar^t the com- mon people are, to be led away with that mifconceipc, that fo long hath clouenvnto it: And yet we canowaies

allow

oftk' Qrofie hi Baptifme. 87

allow oFyours, nor of your Patriarch T. C judgment, se&xj. wherwith be ccnlurcth h.Thatthe Lord hath left amark TX./tf.r. of his cuffe vpon it , up her by it wight be pcrcetued to come *** 1 7°* out of the forge of mans braine&c. This cenfure of his istooperepcory,&orTendeth not only againft the rule of charity tx\\2X bids vs thinke the beft of thenyvhom wc knowenot,e(peciallyof the Auntients; but of lufltce »](o:Inthat helaicth the fault, of (uperftitious fuccee- ding ages, vppon the religious and godly Fathers, that were before them. For why might not that be without abufe at the firft,which wc are certaine,was greatly a- v:tyurtyrin bufed afterwards, afwel as the fepulchers ofLMartirs7& efy#.$2iK retipesofSimtSt. and thcLwg«ofChrift,andhis A- JJSi^j |>oft es,al which had a good vfe at the firft, and yet af- terwards where occafions of hainous Idolatry and fu~ perftirion.

Yfyou meane their religious vfe of the figne of the C^offe in the Sacrament of Baptifm,we vtrcrly difclaime your fentencc,and doubt not but that it was free from finn,and ^upcrftir ion, both in the ^Auniientsi^x\A in our Church. *\nd to this your rafh and inconfidcrate con^ demningofthe Juntient Fathers&ndby them vs,we oppofe the more temperate and indifferent opinions, of your owne fieinds '5 who by how much they were more learned then your felfe,fo much the more modeft, and refpe&iue they were of Antiquity then are you. And becaufeyou fhal not thinke^hat Jwil peruertor falfifie their meanings by my interpretation, Jwill fee downe their (peaches in thc:r ownc words,as ] find them in their writings.

Mr Veza doth both grant], by way of Coceflion,that b^ nfimfai there might be a good vie of it in the Primitiuc Church vrMcMUvm*

Fuerti

88 j(n an/were to aTreatife

JFueritfAnetempus^quofuitAliquisiftmsfignAculi.Actuef* fus ChriBi crucifix/ contempt ores vfus: fit etiam diu et libenter a Chriftianis vfurpatus,pr» extern a zer<e reiigs* 9e%*i*tcck. mis prof effioHe&zlia in cxprcfle words affirrnc, Cruris mtbwtu, €onjig„Attomm^ c$jtAt initio fuijje aperunt chrijliamf' mtprofeffhneni.

Hemingim deliucring ccrtaineobferoations & con- ditions,'how the iignc of the Croflemayin rhefe daict bcwel vfed in'thc Church ,conciudeth with thistefti- mony of Antiquity. His rationibus exijiimo vfos effe *jfau*ap"i? fi&no MM Augujltnum, Epiphar.ium ^^tbanafmm^ qui multufignAculo cruets tribuerunt propter fig^fic at/one t$ Admonitionem . tftfw/ teftimony to this purpofe is mod famous ,that 9mw m miin. \\ wzs^fus in EeclefiA anttqutjfimiladmodum fimplcx\et Uaitfaf.il. pr4jentis tdmonitionticructi ChrifiL TtreiJi ntfut ViztUn* fpeaketh more plainly in their commenda- uuukjtfmt. tion, Antiqui hie figncprofitebAntur, quad CfaifttAni ef- fent.qubd cruris Cbrifti eos non puderet. quod in Cbrijlo (pcm,et fiductam omnem co Hoc at Am habere tit. ^ , 'vanem yet eocth fur thcr.and (aith Finis propter que mi Btiitr. tent. Pdtres Uudes iftasfigno cruets Chrtsft trtbuunt, Janet us 7<*l<*p.»9. ttpius eft: pat res er.im illas laudes fcrtbunt de figno crw cis quAtenus ejl^et erat confefftonts cbrifiianorum intre- pid* de Chrttto teftimonium, liber umtAper turn >mani- fefium , licet illis proper e a mtnarentur Bthnici pants grauiffunai.Erat tgitur buiw figni inter Ethmcos vfur* fAt'tOyConfepo de Chrifto crucifixotpulchtrr'mA.&c. b/i*. Perkins not only excufeth it from fuperftition in >*#«/» in the Ancient sjym alio declareth, as VAnem did ', wherin i'Sif?*' « was iuftly commended by the fathers. His wordes are amunun. x tneie. Crux ntnfutt a vcUtsbw adorstA/nulto m$nm U-

triA

tfthc (rofse in Baptifmt. • %9

trisadorata' veneratiotaxthtvci'tributa.fuit, id eft v- f us cum rcucrrnitti'camtfc vfmparnnt tn'tc ft tm opium fidc't Cu£y (mulfeUudattt) quAtcnusfuit fignum intrepid* fide tin Chrijlum cruciftxuw ante ethmsos^eti&m dumilli faf/M minarentnr.

Zanchim .{peaking of the vfe of this ffgne in Con ft an- //J7tttime,freet)bai the former ages from fuperftition, Z(tHet,.ietp». Hue ifgt nihil fuperjl it ion u habebatftgnum illud. Rtdmjjuui 1.

JLaftiy Goulartius fpeaketh more plainly in this point, ,

then any other, Quamuu veteres-Chrid/ant (iairn ne; Cyp.*dDtmu cxtcrno fignocr uciivfifunt^idt amen fuit fine dliquaftt- cap. 19, tcrftitione\ct doctrina de Chrifti merito, ab errore^ qui toftca irrepftt,pios fcruavit immunes. And in another phccTertulIianiftculo^t aliquot fequent^buty (hrifti- jiem;n Cypr\ Am cum Ethnicu Qjyillum C7ucifixum deridentibus per- Ep.$6.adThi' m'txti^vt doctrine fdlutarisyqu4 in Chriftu nos credere ***•'"""'» <«.7. iubet}fe minimepudereteftarentur^digitu in dere forms* bant figuram tranfuerfam quaji cructi, qu* CerimonU tune er At Chriftidnifmi, nonfuperffittonu Magic a , (vt pcftea acridity) fymbolum.

That it might oncehzuzhzd good vfe, and was VLpro* /<^/*ofChrifKanity,as Mr.5«tffpeaketh,0rthat S% i^fuguftine, and other Auntients vfed it witlr luch due regard^ theno belonged, as Hcmingius thinketh. Or that it was a moR auntient vfe in the Church, very h"m, pie ;and of prefent admonition of the [rofte of Chrifti as Bucer ceftificth: t o my vnderftanding doth plainly def- cribe3a mod Chriftian and religious vfe of it,among the Auntients, and vttcrly difecuer your flaunderous ao cufation.

But thofe other that tel you particularly ,wherin it was wel vfed,as Tezcl. M,Ptrk.& by a proportion moft ma-

M nifeftly

po j(n (infotrt to a Treatife

nifeftfy contradi ftory vnto yours, fay, it had a mod holy and godly end,as D&neMt2x\& that it wa> 'without any fa - ferftition'm the Auntients,as Goulartixtfe TLanchitu doc, They J fay plainly free it from finn and lupcrftitio, and w ith a contrary testimony in flact termes , conuince the hfolency , and audacioulnes of your falie aflcue- ration.

Touching the fecond. //// were: yet being An humane ordinance &c.vour two reafons Jbecaufe it u an humane ordinance abufed.andbecaufe it ii now alfo become an I- doll, are anfwered. before. And it hath oftentimes bin (aid, that thofe pollutions howabhorninable fccucr,doc extend them felues no farther, then to the Perfons that are polluted with them: Jndifferent things cannot de- file them, that vfe them with a fincere minde, and pure conference, how fbeuer they be abufed by others:

And therfore you might wel haue fpared your huge words , Execrable jabhomin able Ido^ filth j no water ca tlenfe it tnor any pretext purifie it, &c» except you had brought other arguments then the(e,the wcaknes wher of doth moil manifeflly appeare.Al the bigg words,that you cm biing,wil not make the vncleannes, you fpeake of, deft 2 the Innocent, nor the pollution, and abhomi- nation,of Popijh Idolatry ,clcaue vnto the UutPreteftat, that with agoodcoafcience,vfsth the Ceremony, and with hart and foule,abhorreth the fupcrftition . And thus much to the fecond part of your aniwere. Your third followeth now tobe confideied. Treatife. 10. Seel:.

'But in very dee dto fpeake m the truth ujhc Crop U re*

taintd among vs,xvith opinion very (uperflttiom , & erro •

*»•». 3©. nc cus . pQr -n tjje iAte caHm ft u fatdcf hat the [htUe u

there-

of the (rope in Baptifme. 9 1

thereby dedicated vnto the fervice of him that died on the Croffe: what u this but to equalmans ordinance wtth Gods? And to afcrihe that vnto the Crofie^which is due vnto Bap tifmefA conceipt fitter for ignorant Tapiflsjhen learned Chriftians to a]?ent vnto. ISljither do we vfe it as the An- cients did,for Cyprian, Auguftinc , Chryfoftome and fi- shers , as ts apparent At thofe times did confecrate tWe e~ /erne ntstherewith^and did not crofe the ch tides forehead at alljbut referred that vnto theBifhopi confirmation 5 S$ that our cr offing the Infant s fore he ad > & not the element cf Baptifme, is a meere novelty, without any warrant of that antiquitie . ?i either will that place of Tcrtullian de refurrebltone carnis proue the contrary . The flefh is wa- ihedjthat the foule may bee purged, the flefh is annoin- ted3that the foule may be confecrated5the flefh is figncd that the foule may be garded,the flefh is fhaddowed by the impofition of hands,? hat the foule may be by the fpi. rit enlightned, the flefh doth (eede on the body & bloud of Chriu\that the foule may be filled and fatted of God. In which words Joe toiningtogither divers Ceremonies of the christians ,doth indeed metiothefigntng of the faith' fuli^but tt may as well he referred to confitmatio, expre/fell by imp 0 fit ion of hands \ as to Baptifme \vnderfloode by the wafhtvg of the body; rjr that on better reafonfor it is mere then probable, that thefigne of the Croffe was notji t vfei in Baptifme, feeing* Juft. Martyr indefenf. ad ^sfntoni- num.& Tertull.de Baptifmo^r de corona militis) doe def- er ibe the forme of Baptifme , vfe A tn thofe times, and yet make no mention of the Croffe therein : which in all likely- hood they would not haue omitted ,t fit had bin v fed there - in-,Ejpecially'Tcni}\\ian,who in that very place fieaketh of the C'cpsOt v fed out of 'Baptifme in the ordinary blefong efthemfelucs* M 2 Re*

9 if yfn an/mere to a Treatife

Jtep/ie to the third part of the Trent ifers. an f were to the fir jl obieclio.v.

This tenth Se&ion contain et-h two grievous accufa- rions, wherewith the Treatiter doth charge our Church, and &iZ governors thereof.

The fir ft , That the ft^ne of the Crojse is retained among ws} with opinion very fuperjtttious and erroneous.

1 he JtcondjThat we doe nor vfe it as theAnctents didl Grievt i\$ crimes no &ouht7 if they beiuftlylaid vpon vsj But if vniuftly,thcn mectcreprodches,audJIanders of the Treatifer.

Touching thefirftS-Hierstne faith, In caufahitrefe* 4>s \neminem \decet efie pntientem,]t becommeth no ma to hold patience,when he is accufed of'herefie.The Treati- fer be'ike3meant to trie our patience, when he burdened vs with opinion of the Cr of e both erroneous zndfupertfi* thus, jf he had accufed vs of error only , the matter had not bin fo very spent. votfomines fumtu jrr&repoffumtdtx we are men3and therefore fubieft vnto eirour . And yet here alfo he might haue remembred. that the cempanie of thofe k arncd men that made the Canon , was as vn- likely to crre,as either the Treatifer or his adherents, But whe vnto his accufation of error }he addeth the mod hei- nous crime Q(fupe?/htion,thi$ is fuch an imputation } as whereof by all good meanes we are bound to cleare our fclues.

But he proveth it:for in the late Canons jf isfaidjhdt the child tstherby dedicated vnto the fet vice of him , that died on the Croffe^what is this but to equallmans ordinac c with Godsend to afcribe that vnto the Crofie , which is due vnto Baptifme? A conceipt fitter for ignorant Papifts thetiUarntdchriJtiamto affe/it vnto* If wee afTcmed ei- ther

oftb ■ Qrofie in Baptiftne. 9 3

ther to the one or to the other ,it were indeede not onlie a conceipt fitter for ignorant Papiftsfher* learned chrifli- gns >b\\t al/o an opinion erroneous an dfuper flit ions , and which is moxt^prowd^njolent^ndprefumpttous too.

But how doth the woidJedicated^mioicc thus much: namely ,becaufethe Sacrament which is Cods ordinance, can doe no more but Dedicate the infant Jo the fcrvice of him that died on the Crofic+Andtherefote when wee faie% thefigne of the Crofte, which is but mans invention, doeth Xedicate.doe we not cqualhnans ordinance with Gods? & afcribe that vnto the Cr of e which is due vnto the Sacra- ment?] anfwere$ no : roxfirfl the Sacrament dath more then dedicate only fax it really giueth that which it promt* fth^is to the child that,which ic doth^g>?//fe.C6trart- wi(c3thc Cf ^neither giueth any thing to the chi!d,nor pomifethfxox is any other thing, then an outward Cere* mow only,fignifying that the child hereafter ihould not be afhamed to confeiTe thefaithof Chrift cruc.fledi&c. "^Secondlyjthc word Dedicate doth not alwaies figni- fie ,to fan ctifie o r to Confecrate^ but fbimimes to appro* priate^o appoint to fome fpeciall vfe,to declare and tef» tifie, that the thing is afligned,addi<5led,and culled out to fuch, or fuch a feueizi pur pojesjfiee perfon, or fer* nice. And this is monYrnanifett,by that vfe of this word, which is moft ordinary and common in our fpeach: As namely to dedicate a book to a great per(onage,is not in in our language to confecratej&Xan&ifie it vnto him3 but by that wotd o£ Dedication, we tcftifie and declare our loue>duty3 & affedtion towards him, & appoint the bookfb dedicated}tobeamanifeftfignejtoken,proofe, argument5and declaration of our louc. The word Dedi* sated cherJfore being Ecclefiafticall,and v cry frecjucnt in

M 3 .. this .

P4 j4n an/were to a Treat ife

thisfignificauon>it was thought fitt to be retained in this matter,rather then to take.in a word more ftrang. & nothing fo fignificant: Efpecially confideiing,that ther are many wordsjandfcntenccsin]that Canon, both af* firmatiueand negatiue,vcry fufficient to declare, and make manifeft vnto al reafonable men,that the Church of England doeth not attribute any fanctifiing, or con- fecratingofthc child to the feruice of Chriftjvnto any vertue grace >er power, of,or in the fignc of the Croflc.

Thirdly though both the Sacrament , and ihefigne of the Crojfe may be faid to dedicate,yat they doe not both dedicate after the fame fort,' for the Sacrament doth de- dicate as ajtgne\ And as a Sacrament too , the Crojfe as £ fignc or ceremony only , ihe Sacrament doth dedicate as a eaufe effcient inftrumentaUtworking inward/?, by the o- peration of Gods fpirite , the Crofe ,'doth dedicate as a caufe declaratory itefiimonialywttnefftngoutwardlyx.o the Church,and tothepartiethatis baptized. And fo much the very wordes of the Canon woulde haue taught you, but that you would not learne,when jt faith. Accounting it a lawful/ outward C^emony^andhonorab/e badge ^whcr~ by the Infant is dedicated^c.

The wearing ofabadge,or cognizance of fomc noble man jOr the colours of fomc Capraine5doth nor, J hope, in your apprehenfion, make the lervant or fculdior that wcareth it, to be of fuch a noble mans retinew, or fuch a captaines regiment. But becaufe he is of that retincwe, he weareth that badge or cognizance,and becaufe hce is of that regimet,he wcarerh thofe colours.) And yet both the one and the other, doth make other men to know, & • withall doth put himfclfe in remembrance , that fuch 2 npble mans man5or fuch a captaines fouldior hec is, and

fuch

ef the Crojfe in %af>tiftne\ 95

fuch he ought to (hew himfelfe to be. Even fo it is in the matter of the Crofle. The figne of the Crofle maketh not the childc to be the fer vant ,or fouldior of Chrift,but bccatife by Baptifme he i< (o made, therfore he is figned with that honorable badge,that there6y, both other me may know rhat he is the fervant,and foutdiour of Chrift, DuUwrii and himfelfe m y be remembred>and admonifhed , that i"0** *lio'* he is in al his life to fhew himfelfe as the faithfull fcrvant J^"™^ of fuch a matter , and the couragious fouldiour of fuch a <*//«>/»». captaine: Which our Communion book mod wifely ,& beyond all exception of malice , fctteth downe in thefc religious tearmes. In token that hejhallnot beafhamedto tonfeffe the faith ofchrift cruet ' fie d.andm An fully to fight vnder his banner t Again ft fin ,t he w or Id, and the Divel^and to continue his faithfull fouldiour andfervant vnto hit Hues end.

Laftly,if the Canon fhould haue hi&yfa»ffified,ox ct- fetrated\ percciue,we fhould haue had much a do with the Treatifer : And yet al Antiquity ,as afterwards I fhal haue better occafion to dec!are,and fpecially Sr. isfugu- , fiine teacheth vs fo to fay. Cat echumenos , faith he, /*«*»• mtr'itis &"?!' dumquendammodumfuum^erfignumChrijli^oratione mfflme, nb,%t manusimpofitionis+pHtofanGtificari. J thinke the Care- "** z % chumeni are fanclifiedjafrer a certaine manner of theirs, by the figne of Chrift, and praier of laying on of handes. But what neede J albadgc S t*Attgufiine^ our owne men vfe the wordconfecrare to fignifiejto allot,or appoint for fomevfe.asltoldyou before the word Medicare did fig- nifle: As may appcarc at large by the teftimony of Gou. „ . . lartmSyCon jeer are panem & vtnum, eft ea dtvims acfa- g^t mm.19* sris vfibus defiinire> &c. But our Canon of purpofe de« dined thofe words^which might any waics breed offece

vnto

p 6 jfn an f were to a Treat 'fe

vnto the weake brerbrcn.and made choice of this harm- lefTe and innocent word, Dedicatedwhich favorabiy vn- derftood,gineth no offence,and is farr from al fuch dan- ger o$ error Hfitper Hit ion ^s the Treatifer woulde make the ignorant reader to beleeue.

Yourfecond accufation laieth two greiuous Corrup- tions to our charge, as namely.

1 That in the ftgn of the Qroffe we doe not that which the K^Aunt tents did. For Cyprian Auguftine^ chryfoftome.and *theys,asis apparant,at thofc times did confecrate thee- /etnents therewith, which wee doe not,

2 Th4t we doe that which the Aunt ients did not : Tor they did not c? op c the childs for he ad at ad, tut referred that vnto the Bifhopps confirmatiomSothat our cr offing the Infants forehead,& not the element of Baptifme > is a mcere nouetty, (of /bme 6oo. yearesfianding as you fay tn the M Argent) without any warrant of that antiquity.

For aniwer to the firft. That we do not a/ that the An* tientsdid , that is,j)otvfc the figne of the Crofle rofo many purpofes5as they did:wedo eafily acknowledge: Butthisisnothingtothepointinqueftion. For what if this particular you a\\e2L<$ge*ofccnfecrating the Element rcith thefign ofthe£rojse7yvcrc one of thole Nduio{ the Ancients ?^ What if they,hapfy,didamiiTe info doing, as you fay afterwards they did? Or what if they did well in fo doing,& the fuperftitio was brought in afterwards? Will you hauevs to imbracc their vices as well as their yertues?Or wil you take away the liberty oi our Church jn making choice of her Ceremonies?Or will you hence condude,that we may not retaine their good things, for the which they are worthely commended, except we al- fo rccciiiw thole deletes and imperfections , vvhichTuc-

cee-

of the Cropfe m Bapttfms. 97

cecding ages brought in aftenvardcs? our this is no way agreeable to reafo: i rather think it ben er to follow thac could that St.ffierem eiucth,ot reading Origens works, Weron,*iTrfr and to applv it to this matter of the Ceremonies of the q»tU u.t?.s$. Aunticnts,/r/ bona, tor urn eligamuSy vitcrnufy cotraritt, ruxta ^^poHoium dtctntem, omnia probatt^ quodbonuin cftttnete&c. Thatwechoofctheirgoodth!ngs>anda- i.ThefT.Mi0 void the cotrary according to the Apoftles faying,Try al thineskeepe that which is good. For they which are carried away , either with too much loue , or with too mueh hatred of him}by thediftemper of their fto- macke,feemc vnto mc to be vnder that curfe of rhe Pro* phetjir^ be vnto tbtmjhat call good euill% and evil good} ifaLf.ao; that make fbvrer fweete>and fvrtttt fowtr.

huKCyfrian^sfuguflinefihryfoftome^and others did con fe crate the Elements ,you (ay, with the figne of the Cro(fe,which we doe not. Theydidindeed,andin thofe times they did it wcl: Jf we fhould now doe the like, we could not choofe, but doe very ill*

I hat they did wel info doing, J am the rather pcr- fwaned for my part/For J am nor willing to conceiue any thing amine of thofe b!dTed,and excellent inftru- ments of Gods glory , that by any reafonablc conftru&i- on of their words may be ialued) becaufe they d<dic without offence, in refpeft of others, and without opint* o * of-jer tue afcribed to the figne of the Croffe, if you reipett their owne itidgments. without offeree to others, for at that time the Jnftitutio of that Ceremony, & the reafonsof the Jnftitution, were fo wel knowne vntoal inen,thatno man could be ignorant of them, nor take offence at them : without opinion of 'vert ae in the figne, in their owne judgments, to**/* that confecration or

N Jancii*

98 >Jnanf)Vere toaTreatifc

fanciificatlon which thev attributed to the fi{*ne of the Croflejwas rather in name fo called, then any hallowing ^W<?c^andraeher an c ut ward declaration, that the Ele- ments were confecratcd then anycaufe of their confe- cration, \nd that this was their conceit of the figoe of the CrofTe,is nioft manifeftly apparant by thofe words MgJepeecat. <y>(St»AuguJl:ne.Santfificatio £&thet;kumeni , fmon fue- mtrim&tt- rit baptjzatm} nonfibi vdet adintrandu regnum coe!.-ru% m"' l ' aut adremtjiione peccatoru*. Agaiue> they did not afcribe that confecratio of the elements , how little foever they thought it to be,vnto the fign of the Crofle, which they made vppnnit,buta-waies wnh the (igneioined fom- thingeis.SothefameS'. Augustine in that placewhe he faith, Cathechumenos fecundum quendam modmn fuu futo confecrati per (ignum Chriflt,doth not reft there, & cyp.it ptfltoK. % omy» s*g»u Chri/li ,but ioin :th thereunto, et oratio- dim.cap.ii. nemmanm iwpo/itionis.:\nd(a Sr. Cypr tan , whofe tefti* Seci.u. mony you cite afterwards >faith indeed, Operat'tonit at*' tor it as infigmacrtta , omnibus facramentU largttur cf* fcttumhvx wirhal he addeth. (which you thought wif- domerorupprc(Ie,as not making for your purpofe^ dr cuvttapevagit Nomen^ quodomnibus nom in ib us emmets aficramentorumvicarijsinvQCatum.Rux. of this we fbal lay more in the 1 2. feftion.

That we fhould doe very ii!,if we fhould vfe this Ce

remony now,thefe rca(ons induce me to coceiue. Fir ft

, Th: people a*e now more prone tocrror,and mifcon

ceitjthen they were in thofe times. Secodlj fome things

and among others this, were more fit for. thofe times

Goabrt in v tnen f°r wfei Diflinguenda funt tempqr*fi\x\k.Go*l**

?r\xn Epifi.tf. tins, and before him S c. Augustine, tm\ then it wil ea(i

ai rhibmtM. jy appcar,tbat that may be dune wel at one time, which

can-

of the Q-ofic in <Baptifme. 99

cannot be done wel at another. CMutai a quippetempori* jug.epift i.*d tauf&, quod reel} ante f "acl urn fuer it, it amut art vera ra» Morct^ww. ttopkrumfyfi&gitAtjvt cum altquidicantfton re tie fieri, fimutetur, contra Veritas clametje tie non fieri nifimute-* turqu?atvtrnMfytu?neritrfclum,fierit pro temporu va* rtetatediuerfum. As in a child many things are permit- edby thePatents,whichwilnotbe5whenhe is corneto riper yeares : So in that infancy and innocency of the Church,many things might wel be done, by the Aun- tients,which cannot be wel done by vs, now in the ma- hood ,or rather old age of the Church: And lawful it was Hi them3whi!c Chriftianity was yet but greeae, to be led and brought on by thofe outward rudiment^ which we rune no neede of now.

If you aike,why thefe rcafons,fhould not afwel make againfttheiigningoftheChilde in the forehead, as a- gain{hhefigningofthcElemcnts,Thcaniwereiseafic.° firft^thc danger is not Co great, nor fo remedilefie in the one, as in the other , Secondly ,the ends are different:The figning of the Childs forhead was thenjand is now, for admonitions The figning of the Element s-^ was \ki£davge» f0«j,and would now be delperat for confecration, if we fhoukl imbrace it: Andiherforeme thinks ,you fhould rather commend the wildom of our Church, which out of the nuber of thofe Ceremonies, which were trouble- ibme to good confeiences , and burdenfome jto the Church,as that learned Birfiop fpeaketh, hath culled ' thofe which were barmelejfejhcn any way diflike vs, for M °w ** '** not retaining all thofe ceremonies of this flgne , which though vfed by the Ancients , might proue fcandalous to the weaker fort.

For aniwere to the Seconds hat we doe that which the

2£, 2 jhh

J oo jfn an/were to a Treattfe

Ancients did not , for they did not croffethe chitdes fore* he Ad At *fltbut referred that vntoi be B/fltops confirmsts- onA make no doubt 5 but rheTrcatifer by the Ancients, that hefpeaketh of,entedeth thoic elpecully, that were neareft vnto the <^sfpcft ks times }& that flourished with- in thecompailc of the firfi three hundrcdyetires : which by al men is reputed the tureft age ^zs it were.the inai~ ^Henliead.and virginity of the Church. For he cannot be jgnoranfjthar in the ages that fucceeded after them5this cuftome was mof t ordinary & frequent in all Churches. This fuppofed I anf were :

Firji , That either the Treatifcr is deceived, ortfc^ whole C hriftia world for fo many ages togitherjhath bin very greatly overfeenejthatjever fincc the firft times, e- ven from fuch as lived with the Apoftles thefelurs , haue receaved this confignatio of the childs forehead in Bap- ti£mc,as one of the molt ancient Ceremonies of chriiii* anity. This is acknowledged, not only by our bed Ute w//m,whofe fpeeches to that purpofc I hauereported before Jn the 88. and ^.pages^ut alio by the Ancients \ out or who they learned it,wholc authorities come now to be considered. SothatitthcTreatifercan reforme this common errourjoffo many learned men , andoffb Iongcontinuance,he fhal dofno doubt,)a good workj & a great fervice tothe Church of ChriitjThis hce cannot bring; about , except hee cither deny the authorities of the Ancients ^otiiuc their words fome other interpreta- tion ,then they doe apparantly fignilie, & al men hither- to haue made of them. rAm^m. DionifitM commonly called Areopagita (whether tro- Eerfcf. Hierar. Jy or falily J wil not difcufTc, but certainly a very Ancient «M'& h Tfuter^makcth ofcen mention, of iigning the party that

is

tfth; Qrojse>in Haftifme. lOl

is ba'-itifcdjwith thefign ofthcCrofle, And to exprefie that he meaneth the CHulfcin Baptifmc,he ca'leththc Sacraivicnrof Baptifmcsav^'^^p^i^^heSacramcc or fealc bailing the forme of aCroffc; And defcribing the maner how it was donahs faith, fmponit (minifler) tius capiti manum^cofignanftj^ ilium. facer dot ibm mtdat, virum fnfceptorcwfrdeJc7?bant. This authority mil ft needs be vudeiftocd of Raprifme, which he there de- fcr.bcth,calling ir Sacramentum iUumimtionu, and can by no interpretation be referred either to the Element, as is roanifeil by the word.?; Imfonit ems capiti manum, confign an f^ ilium y nor to the Eifhopps confirmation *

The like is to be thought of that place ofclufiin Mar- fypswho florifhed about the yeare of Chrift 140. Vex* MM«»i? tramanu in nemine [hrtfii confignamus eos , qui hocfigno * m ' 2* x l * egent : where,/r/? al men vndcrltand him3to meanc the conftgnation of the Croffe,$econdtyj\\ai\\e cannot meane it of confirmation^ is more then probable, becaufe hee mentioned) only dexttrammanum, whereas confi?maiio required) impofuion of both-, <vt adumbratiofeptiformis gratUmelius fignificaretuTy that the adumbration of the ieauen-fold grace,rnightdiereby be the better fignified. Thirdly jx cannot be vndsrftoode of the Element of Bap* ti(me,foi his wordes arc conflgna?nus.ejrc. qui hocfigno e* £f/;£.importingihe^yvj»j,andnot the Element . Nei- ther Ujlly can it be referred to that vfe of the Crcjfe9 which they obferuc in atlions. of common life, becaufe in that,euery man did figne him felfe,but in t hit he fpea^ keth of fuch as were flgned by other men.

The next ihat J will remember after him, is Origen ffor Tertullians tcftimony, 'becaufe the Treatifer al- leadgeth.uaeamftvs^fhalbecoiidered afterwards) who

N 3 h

102 j4n an/were to a Treattfc

, lined in the fame age with Tertullian, though fomwhat

after him3about the yeaie of our Lord 220. his words

9rigtn. Uomil. are thefe. Ft r.on exprobrcmur ab infipiente , c overt amm

i.m 7/4/. 38. nos ab omntbm intcjuttatibus noftrU^ne deprehendens in

Y*m.i. nobu macules peccatorumjd eft, fat voluntatis inftgnia^

exprobret^ et dicat, ecce hie Chnflianu-s dicebaturM fig-

noihrifttfignab&tur infronte^meas autem vtlnntatcsjt

me a chirographa gerebat in corde. Ecce ifte , qui miht et 0 •

pcribus meii renunciavit tn Rapt if mo , meu rurfu operi*

busfetnferutt meif^legtbmparuit. I his is an evident

tcftimony againft the Treatiier, mentioning both Bap'

tifme ,and the figne of the Crofie^and the fore he ad whet?

on it was figned.

From Origen J come to S*. Cyprian, who was famous in the Church about the veare2so.whofe tcftimonies againft the Treatifers aflcrtion,as J wil not take vpo mc to repeate the al,(for they are very many,) lo it canot be cither mifliked or fufpeded ,if J acquaint the t eader with fomefew:efpecialiy feeing the Treatifer himfelfe doeth SetlM acknowledge Cyprian to bethe'firftjthatmaketh menti- on™ <fr v- on of the Croflfein Baptifm.Jnhis treatife devnitate Ec- wt.Ecci.ca.16. clefiafe hath thefe words . Ozias Rex leprtvanetatein fionte maculatm eft , ea parte corporis not at m offer) fo Do* mino>vbifignanturtqtii dominumpromerentur. Againc, 'MDmet. c«. \o Demetrian Proconfall of^/'c/^,hefpeaketh thus. E- **• vadtreeosfolosfcjfe^uirenatt&figno Chrtfttfignatifu~

trintfix\d a little after, ffrjrc (Chrtftum ) ft fieri pofeftfe- quamuromnesJtjntusfacYamentoejrfignoconfecrcwurA^i C*ti» all which places, as alfo in his fifty fixtfcpiflle adThtba-

c a. ritanos}andhisthhdbockeTcffin7cn.adQnirh>umt not

only Tawclim who may feemefomewhat partial for the Crofle3biit GtuLrtius alfo , whom ihe Ticatifer cannot

fuf.

of the Crojfe hi Bapti/toe} 1 0 J

fufpecl, Joe acknowledge that he fpeaketh of the CrofTe

jnBaptifme.

Latfantius that lived after Cyprian about feme 50. yeares,and flour iilied in the beginning of theyeare 300 fpeaketh much ro the fame purpofe.Extcndit Chrijlui in papone mams fu.M,orbem% dimenfut eft.ut iam turn ofte- Deverafkpien, deret^ab 0; tu (olii vffa ad occafum , magnum popu/um ex ' *4"e^' * omnibm Unguis ^dr trtbubus congregatu, fub alas fuas ejfc 'vent ur urn ffignum^ illud maximum at^fub/ime% infion - tt bus fu u jufcepturum.

After LaeJant/usYmcd S^Tafilthe great in the Church oiCxfarea Cappadocixjn the yeare 37o.or there abouts, who rehearfing the traditiSs vied in his time,reckoneth thisinthefirft place.^/zW;* cruris eos fonemus *qui in ^afJde bhim ChrtHo (pern fuampofuer urn. c

The laft of this age,is Sc. -duguftine, whofe glorious labours lightened the Chriftian world, about the end of the yeare 300 . To rebearie his many teftimonies were an endlefle woike,- and therefore J will content my felfe with two only, the former in his fourth bo i\lz de fide & Jm . .. Symbolo ad Cateckumenos ^which. he beginneth with thefe rymb.adcauch. words, Per facrattfiimum cruris fign urn , vos fufcepit in /&4-M/M. vteroyfanffa mater Ecclefia : and the latter in his exposi- tion of the lo.Ffalme, 2{jn fine caufa ftgnum fuu chri^ fnVfaim}o. ftm infronte nobis figi voluit , tanqaam tn fede pudorist neChnfliopprobrio Chrifliams embefcat. To the which purpofe he fpeaketh in Pfalm. 141 . vffa adeo de cruet non ln P/&X41. erubefco cjt non in occult 0 loco habeam cruce Chriftt^fed infronteportem,&c.- To which place J refer the reader as alio to his 5 ^.and 1 1 8. Treati.(e,vpon S\ Iohn: & his 1S1. ktmonde tempore^ and diuers other places . So that thefe proofs of the ^fontients duly confIdered,we

may

1 04 aAn an/liters to a Treattfe

maybebcn^d ro pronounce againft the Treatifer, that

the Auntients did vfe ro figne the Child? forehead in

BimnH. +nh. "Baptifme, and to affirmc with Mr. Perkins, Signum

ce.de figno cm- cruris per mult a feculafutt in facrAmeti adminitf ratio*

'Jf'r ~ , 8e./iff»Plex r it tu&nd with Pezel/ta, vetus eft h*c Cere*

Wut.Qatecb. J . ' r ■ r 1 / p / r w /i r

Ujmfo* monta ab ipfis mtuntbttu Ecclefiz £hri/riAnt vjarp&tx.

The collection therfore of the fxeasifer is vaine,whc he concluded) after this fort.

They that in the vfe of 'the figne of the Croffe in Bap' t i fme doe not con fi crate the Element ^hich the Aunti- ents didtejr doe crofie the Childs forehead}which the Aun- tients did not doe not <vfc the figne of the Crojsejn B apt if* me as the ^Aunt tents did.

But the church of England in the vfe of the figne sf thefrofie in B apt ifme% doth not con fee rate the Element > -which the '^Auntients did:and doth crofe the £ hddsfore • head which the Auntients did not. Ergo.

The Church of England doth not vfe the figne of the Cfofjfc inTSaptifme as the Auntients did.

For/r/?,touchingthc/5rwtf,it is a Sophifme com- pounded of all manner of Fallacies, that which is mod apparant is, FallaciA compofitionis : for ex ptoiofttione vem raw fen jn compaftto , infert conclufionemfalfam in fen* fudiuifo. Touching the matter jtis mealy raHe.For in the Major h doth afitimc, that the Auntients did not vie to figne theChildsforehead,wh:"chis refuted by their alleaciged authorities.

Secondly he doth conclude the abufe ofone Ceremo- ny, by th i 2{j>n vfe of another , which hath neither re/a* tionvvsKoizpox dependency on it,nor loth ate ordained to the fame end; & therfore the one cannot neceliarily inferic the negation or affirmation of the other: as if

with

of the Qrofie in ftaptijmc. toy

with Icfle adoe.and in fewer circumfcanccsjhe fhouid haue concluded thus.

They that in the vfe of the figne of the Crofie in Bap - tifme^oe not vfe cenfecration of the Element at all: doe not vfe the con fignation of the forehead well^and as the ^unticnts did.

'But the church of England in the vfe of tie figne of the Crop in Baptifme^ doth not vfe confecratio of the E« lementat all. Ergo.

The Church of Bnfland doth not vfe the conpgnation of the forehead tightly ,and as the Aunt tents did.

ThenotvfiRgof;*ffytfr4//*#atal,is no reafbn why the conftgnation of the forehead may not be vfed right - ly.For though both agree in this>that they both be con* Jignations&nd are both vfed in the Sacrament ofBaptif* fne3ycz they differ in this,that they xtzdifltndt Ceremo- J?/?;. differing one from another in nature, for they are meerly difhn&jand haue no dependency , the one of the other : & in v/e, Forthey arcnot ad Idem, they haue not both reference to the fame ending atlion. the one prc- fun-sptuoufly goingbefore the Sacrament, and arrogat- ing to it felfe fome kind of ^rcparin g of the Action 3 the other modejl fyxomlng after, and adaionifhing vs only, what we promifedin the Action.

I might better conclude thus againft their nouclcies in the Lords fupper.

They which doe not receiue the Communion kneeling 7 1 -which the sAuntients did}and doe receiue it (landing or fa&TJ*tpU ftting)Which the Auntients did not > doe not receiue the &&rijti*iu communion as the Auntients did. vewr^hn^ae

'But the Treat if er ana his adherents doe not recctue the oiim cum fm fa eommmion kneeling, which the* Aunt tents did, and doevf'n?*li-Ue%

u recetue ' ~-

m

1 06 Jin 'an/were to a Trcatife

reeeiue itftandtng •rfittingjnhich the Auntientsdid not. Ergo !

The Treats fet gnd his adherents doe not reeeiue the sommunionasthe tsfuntienti did.

For here,though the Ceremonies of kneeling which the Aunt tents vied, and of fitting or landing, which the Treatifers trends vfe^be different ,the one fro the other: yet both the affirmatio of the one, doth nccefTarily inter the negation rf the other, and alfo both of them are or- dained to the fame end and Action, namely the recei- ving of the communion.

Thtrdlythc rreati(er3fTumingir,asathing granted, that the Ceremony oiconfecrating the EIement,isaun . tienter then the Ceremony of figningthe foreheadydoth thcrvpon conclude, rhatthe moftaunuent of the Fa- thers vfed the confecratton of ihe Element, long before the conJtgnattocAthc forhead was heard of .Wherin he is exceedingly deceiued- For though the Ceremony of confecration be of treat antiquity, yet he may learne of Terk>nt demon MT.Terkins, that it is not to compare with confignation, ftobi cap.de fa- F0rhc(ahh.s4nnuaChrt/?o 300 crux tran/iem, (which isrheconhgnationof the Crofle) futt fignum extern* prof efionufidt /, not only adhibituwin vtta communis he faith, but in Baptifme alfo, as before is prouedoutof the Auntients:But W.Perkins ftaieth not there,hc faith furthers/A; t;/i^4#* adhibit a fuit ad ftgnandum facra- metaynificirc/i annum 400. Neither then was it ftraiaht- way vfedincofecratingofthe Blemets, buiby degrees: frimbvt fignaret nobitChrijli bona, Aug: tract: 118. in loannem : turn pofteavt per earn benedtciio facrarnenti &confecratto ficret. Why the Iieatifer fhould dcliuer.vs this ftrange doc- trine,

■« emeu.

efthe Croffe in Baptifms. 1 07

trine SThat the ^^unt tents bid net vfe tofgne the childs foreheadat all in Baptifme^] cannot concciuc :only J fuppofc his error might come thusrThe Auntients fpea* king of /tr* vfes of the cofignatiojthe one in commoltfe% the other intheSacramentjasis faid before,doe make farre more often mention of the \(cin common life, thenoftheother5 and fomtimes ioine them both toge- ther in one periodc.S° that except the iudgment of the rcader5can diicc*t him to defceme,which ciaufe belongs cth to the one vfe3& which to the otherjthe error in this point is very eafy: And fo it fcemeth the Trcatifcr was deceiued^applieing al their fpeaches whcrfoeuer,to the vfe in common actions, and referring none to that in the Sacrament of Baptifme .But now let vs fee how he pro- ucthhis aflcrtion.

Firft the Auntients referred that , (faith hcj to the Bijhopps confirmation Jo that our croffingthe infants forehead^1 not the Element ofBaptifme^is a rneere nomU ■//><£■*: True it is jhat in eon fit mat ion ,the Childs fore- head was flgned by the Bifhopp,but how doth this qq* uince, thatin Baptifme it was not figaed by the MituC- terfThat in confirmation's Childs forehead was fign- cd,we eafiiiy beleeue, for fb Tertulltatt tellech vs in many M"%£ ' ' *** p'aces.andCy^/j&in his Epiftle ad Jiibaianun}32vj*#r qttrfc apud nosgcriturjvt qui in Ecclefta bapttzaft$ur,pr.t • h««S;t! fofitis Ecclefi& offeranturjer ft oft ram oratwnem^ac ma-x*j>>*» ft us impofittonem jpiritumfancfum con/equantur,etfgna- eulo Dominico cenfumentur* But the affirmation of this doth notinferre a negation of the orher.Yesjfay you, they referred that vntothe Bifhops confirmation They re« ferred indeed confirmation ,zn& al the rites, and Cere- monies therof^Ynto the Biihop,as was meete:Buc did O 2 no*

t o S j(n Anfioert to a Treatife

not they s thinke ycu.performc al die rites of Baptifme themfeluesPyourfpcachdoth import as if you fauo^ed confirmation j and allowed of the configoation there, jf you fauor it truly, J am glad:Tc r the Ceremony of con- firmation is auntient,and hath a good vfe(& yet J know not that our Bifhoppes vfe the confignation of the CrofTeinthat action) Jf you mention it only for your purpofe, without any allowance of the confirmation3it ieemeth you care not what you fay ,foyou may giue the le.'ftblowe to our fettled orders of the Church jt ieem- eth likewife, that youafcribe greater antiquity to the figning in confirrnatid,then to that in Baptifnv For you inferrimmediady here vpon, that ourcrofling the Jn- fants forehead is a meere nouelty, J cannot yecld} than the figning in confirmation fhould be auntientcr then the figning in Baptifrac, no more then J can yee!d,that confirmation is auntientcr then Baptifme'And yet foe a! that.] acknowledges figning in confirmation to be very auntient,& am glad to heai e you argue for the an- tiquity of that,which your adnionitio to the Parliament fo much extenuated], calling wfuperftitiom^not Agree- ing to the word of God,Pcptfh,dnd peeuifi) ,fullof totes , & degenerating fro the fir ft inBitutiom{\ am glad J (ay?to hear you plead the antiquity of that Ceremony , though it be wirh oppofition to an auntienterj but yet J nether acknow]cdg confirmation Co auntient as Baptifm <?:NTor the figning of confirm ation,fo auncient3as {\\tfignwgoi Baptifme .

Bccaufe you thought , wee woulde not bclceuc this ftrange fpeech of yours vpon your bare word , without proofe,you note vntovs in your margent'.TW/*//J<? Bap- te/Mocap.jM %>EuJebJ.6,c^ i%lnnocent*l*eptadDccen-

tium

of the Crojfe in fiapti/tob; 1 09

tium num.] 3 . Rabanm Maurus deinflitutione Cleyieotuy ca. 3 o.Durand.Rational d/vinji.i cap.cie con fccrat, You might hatie done wcl to bane reported their words too, and no doubryou would hatie done ic3had they been To pregnant for your purpofc}as vou make fccw.Tertufltan TmuUM fy. in that place conf efleth indeede , that the figne was v fed ^'c^' 9 in confirmatiOibut neither there, nor in any other place doth he deny it of Baptifro.Your fccond authority {new- eth that Novatus the Hcreticke after his Baptiftr.e , reli- Eufthuje^z quaconfecutus non eft pofl morbum,^HA iuxta Ecclefia. ca- nonem tonfequi dcbebat^obfignationtm videlicet ah Epif- topo. But how doth this prone that the fign was not v fed in his Baptifmef.Thc like may be (aid to your teftimony out of innocent wsjus words indeede are. De confignan itnt epA[itmtl du Infantibusmanifeflueft^no afralogua Sfifcopo fieri toacit. licereSut hefpeaketh thiscfconfirmatio^only which he there proveth mud be miniftred by the Bifhop alone, he maketh no mention of Baptihn at ah Your other two m- thoriucsoui of Rabanus an&Durandusipczkeiomzwhat more pfcinly &direcl]y to your purpofe.-for theprfl faith Jtgnatur bapttzatus cum chifmate perSacerdotem in ca- Kuban-Maun* pitUfummitate.perpontificetn vero mfionte^cA he/*- *?»$"**«*•- con A faith : Ch'ifliam bis ante Haftrjmuinuvguntur do Dnrand.r'a/ien. . heneditf 0 tprimo m pc cl ore det?) dc inter fctpulas , &bii tivi*.i8>.t.tap pojv Baptsjmum-y prima m vert tee > detndeper Epijcopum ilb ^ap.%9, injronte^iidking a diftincticnoi the places : To^tliefe 1 anfwerc.

Firft ,lhzt they make a diftinclion of the place where this figne was made:in Baptifmeon the crevcxejn coflr- mation on the forehead: But they make no diftinclion of the fignefoi they Jay,tbat the childe in both was figned, whereas ycur proofe ihould be 5 that the childe was not

9 3 %.

1 1 o An anfweae to a Treatife

figncdinBaptifmc.

Secondly^] fay that this difference , of the vpper parts of the head, and the forchead,is a nice difference, and might well haue bin the devife of latter timcs:EfpccialIic feeing Durandus faith : Prints t res vnttionesintroducl* funtpotius vfuquampcr aliqut fcriptura, ThirdfyyJ an- swer that inDurands timeahe childc in Baprifm was not (Igned in the crown only , but in the forehead too -.For fo VwMniub t. faith Durandus your owne aiuhor:5V#/«w donum Baptif- v*$i$».c*p. 83 • mi eft in vert ice ^id eft tnfummttate capitis fuper cerebri* cu chrtfmatefadiaperunClio xfepimu eft infionte chrif. matioiznd that you may be fure,that this jnjrontc chrtf- matio^wsis with the fignc of the CrofTe, he tcls you3 that fUd^taf, «4. omnia, chrifmata cum crucUfiguraperficiuntur. Laftly , J oppofe to thofe late writers, the authorities of the Anci. ents before rehearfed3andwithall the iudgement and //- berty of our Church , which rather chofc to follow the v niformc [implicit) of the Ancient sy then the divers multi- plicit/eohheic Utter writers, whom I fuppofe you doc not quote/efpecially Duraxdus)fox any liking you hauc of them, or credit you yeeld to their authorities.

'But our crofing of the Infants fore headland net the E~ lenient of Baptifme^u ameer e novelty ofjome 6 oo. ye arcs ftanding^&c.

Our crofting of the Infants forehead , & not the tie. ment is no noveltie, as hath bin already Chewed . Your fpeech doth loud as if,if we did erode both the forhead, & the c lement:then it were no novelty . And this is trt,c too : For crofting of the element alfo is ancient, though not fb ancient a? the crofting of the forehead "alone . As for your marginal note,of fome 6co.yeares (landing , it is jo manifeft an v fitrutlvas I njaivaile,you coulc be per

hva.

of the (rope in Baptifme* 1 1 1

(Waded to fct it downe.

Secondly ,vour fecond proofe is out otTertuUUnJJei* ther xvilthatpUr.e of Tertullianje refurretJ.CArnti,proue Cgfx the contrary : Caro ahluitxr,vt & amma emaculetur> Cdro vtgitur vt Ati<m» confecretur %CAYofigKAtur , vt & an/ma munsAtur>C2.yo m&nui impo fit tone adumbrAtur , vtejr axi- majpirituiilumitieturs caro cor pore & [anguine Chri ft i i>efcitury vr & anima de Dcofaginetur. Hece you gather that though indeed he mention the figning of the faith- full,vet it may bee as well referred to confirmation as to Baptifme: True; And yet more properly to Baptifm, the to confirmatio.For in thefe words ,alluding as you fay,to diverfe Ceremonies of the Chriftians, it is far more like- ly (as any man that is acquainted with his articulate ma- ncr of writing wil thinke)that he endevoured rather, e • qually to fit each feverail claufc to his feverail Ceremo- nie, then to apply any one to two: which muftnecdes follow vpon your interpretation,,

Thirdly, your third proofe isaprebAbi/L/t is more then probAbletUy youjhAt thsfigne of the Croffe wm not yet vfed&c.Thc probability you fpeake of, is none at al. Concerning /«/?/#* tMartyr in his fecond sfpoUgie te uintoninuijlt was not neceffary that he fhould there me tion any thing more, then thole things 9which'did belog to the f ubltance of Baptifme : For his purpofc was to be breife>andnotto propofe tttery Ceremony of Chriftiani- ty,but to mention only their praiers,and the things ef- fentiatlin the Sacrament. And therfore no marvaile, if he did omit this Ceremony here , especially feeing he doth remember it clfe where, as hath bin (hewed, & c, uen,i;uhis Apologiehe faith before,that nothing was done,withoutthis^w<f of the Croft. Concerning TVr-

tullun

112 *An anftoere to a Treati/e

t u&Anyncit remembring it in theplaces, you cite 3w£*, you {2^, would not haue omitted ft j fit had bin then vf* ed: ejpeciallyin that very place ,where he fpe&keth of the Croffe >as vfedout of "Baptzfrne:}an(wcte that euenthac might be fufticient reafon,whyhc omitted ir, when he fpakeofBaptifme: Becaufc he that faith, omnem pro- greffum^mnemptomoturn.jkVid quaca-?^ nos converfati$ exercet drc.doih e xcepe none, and thciforc not Baprif- mc. Agahehe that faith it was vfedjin Actions of ciuil eonuerfation^dothleaue no place of doubt>but thattt was much rather vied in their holy actions of Religion. Lafily the; e are fbme learned me, that vnderftand thofe words in the feuenth chapter: Exinde egrefft de lauacr» TevtM B«pt. peyungimur benedict a, v ncJione>ohhs fign of the Croffe, r^*7* which was vied in all annoyntings.as you heard before

out oi Durandus,

Treatife. n. Sect. 2. ObieCtion. Xuttheftgne of the Croffe is not v fed in H apt i fine, but when Haptifme is ended, Treatifers anfwere to our 2. ObieCtion. if you take BAptifme 3 only for that dipping and fir ink' ling of the party ,tt is tritt^ and fo none of the 'Popijh addi- tions, whereby they defile the holy S 'acr '&ment , are in Bap' ttfmefor thofeywhich apud Sellar.Baptidn. comitantur A re not impiom^But ifypa take Baptifme 3 as indeede we doe ^for the administration of that Sacrament , then both the praters beforehand the praters after the Act tons. after the dtppng.doe all indifferently belong to one and the f elf g fame thing : yet it is al/^na & continua actio adminiftra- tionib (acramenti : Sure it ujhatitmutt be faid to be, ei- ther in Bapriirno,extra Baptifmum3 aut nuilibi, if it bee

out

of the (rojse in fiabtifme. 11}

i/»; of "Baptifme y how u it by common confent of a [if aid to j^fignum crucis in Baptifmo.

Replic to the Treatifcrs anfwerc to ourfecond objection.

This whole anfwere to our fecond obie&ion is no- thingelfc butameerccauilofthe Treatifcrs :For though the whole action, btingvnaet continua aclio admini-f trationUfacramenti&s you name it, be called Baptif- me: Yet it'isfo called, 4 ^/£»/'w/tf>tf*j and therfore wc may very wel,& ought alwaies to diftinguifh 5 between thofe things.which areefentiallm this a<5iion,and thofe things, which are accidental!, betwene thofe things which are hatful fiance of Baptifme, and thofe thinges which are for decency \& ornament: For ne ij quidem, q ui , . ifta cxcogitaruntyvel ab alijs introducJa defender unt3 a- FutiMdvia* liudeffe cenfuerunt>quam B&ptifmi ornament &*

No,fayyou,you muft not fo diiringuifh, but you muft take Baptifme as we doe: for otherwifc 2{one of the Toptfh additions , whereby they defile that holy Sa * €rament^are in Baptifme. for thofe which apud Be Harm t~ num Baptifmum c omit ant ur^are not impious: A\ this not- wtthftacing,you muft giue vs leauc to diitinguifli thofe things which in their owne nature are diftinct.True it is that noncohhoicqu<eapudBeHarminu?nBaptifw^ c@mi~ tantar9MC of their owne nature impiou$,tickhcr arc they oftheeflence of Baptifme.jand therfore wee hold, that they which are Baptifed^in the Church offt?w<r,are rightly Baptized.Butifthofe^>W^^fz»: are not //»- pious ^s you fay> why call you them Antichriftian? and if they be i^f ntichrift tan J\ow are they not impious? we fee your kind affedio towards our Church: Our figning with the Crofle in Baptifme is Antichriftian^s vou

P caU

* 1 4 dn an f were to a Treattfe

caUitin chc T4.Sec"tion5and,yetthcfe Papifli additions, that defile the Sacrament arc nor impious.

Yourargutation,thatitmuft be either,/'* Bapt/fm^ extra Baptifmum.aut nullibi^ is anfwered in a woe d.It is in Bapttfmojhix is, in azminift rat tone Baptifm^ not in efsntia Baptifmi^t is in Baptifme as an outward de- cent Ceremony, and ornament of the a£fciona not as an inward part or fubftance of the Sacrament. Treatife. Section* 12. 3. Obiection. Thefgneofthe Croffe is very aunt ten t% Treat ifers an/were to our ^.obieclio, Soaremanypopifh traditions^ andif onthat grounde% Ware to ret awe it.xfhydoe xve not giue the Baptized, ja^isetmedisconcordiarw^^ we not bring offerings for tie dead} for 1 ertuilian the fir ft of the Fathers that e- ner mentioned the Cro/e^dotheftabl/flj the fe^ the figne cfthe Croffe ^by one% and the felfefame warranty. Be fides if vpon the Fathers tradition wee vfe the frofle >then ntuft xcereceiue% andvfeit \asthey hauedeliueredit vnf vs,that ii,with opinion of 'vertue% & efficacy > not only in t he Act of bleflingour fehesutnd in the expelling of Di> uellsjbuteuen in the confer at ion of the hie [fed Sacra* i>tcorotttwiiit. iMents^orthefirfl Tertul'ianis wittnes. Ad omne pro- greffum^ad omncm promocum5ad omnem aditum,atq; exitum,ad veftitum et calceaium3frontem crucis figna- . ., ... culo terimus:F<?r chafing ofDiuels+Hicromz counfelleth

ad D<*etr. Dcmer.vir. to vfe the frofSQ : ct ciebo mquit lignaculo z;£ 4.^:7, crucis munias frontem tuam.ne exterminator ^Egipti in ie locum rcpe[iat: La&antius de hoc figno (cribens, ait Chnftifeitatoresjnquinatosfpiritus figno paflionis e^cItjacreiChryfoilom inilalmuo^.Crux inquit mu<-

nic

$fthe Croffe in Bapti/m?. 1 1 5

nitmenrernveadajmonesvlc.fcitur^ca rollit mcrbosa- ivn^x But thefe fuperfttttonsare fmall in regard of that efficacy ,vrh/ch tn the Sacraments ^antiquity afcribed vnto Cyprian, de the Croffe: For Cyprian {being the aunttentefl., that mak- r*fion' tth mentton of the Croffe tn Bapttfme)fpcaketh of it. cu- ius virtus omnia peragitSacramenra,fine quoficno ni- hil eft fanctum,neq; aliquaconfccratio mercturcffc&ei; 1 K^fnd 'againe: Quicunq; funt Sacramentorum miniftri, qualcfcunqi funt manus quae vel mergunt accedenres adBaptifmum^elvngunrjqualccunqjpciftusjdequofa- era exeunt vcrba,operationis autoritasin figure crucis omnibus Sacramentislargitur etfettum: Auguft.m loh. tra&; 1 1 8. Quod lignum inquitnifiadhibeatur fiue fro- tibus credentiunijfine ipfi aqua% qua regeneranrur,fiue oleoquo Chrifmatc inungucur , flue facrificio quo alun- tur,nihiIcorum riteperficitur: ftwerefuperflwus to re- hear f ether eft.

*Replie to the Treat ifers an/were to our third Obietfion. I looked in this pface^hat you would rather haue pro- ved , the noveltie ofthis Ceremony, and that it is no anci- entcr then of fome tfoo.yeares ftanding fas you pleafe to left: before,) then (o eafily yeeld3thatit is very ancient ,as here you doe : For you doe not deny the ami ''quit 7>,that which was obie&ed , but imply 5 That antiquity is no caufcfufjzcient why wee fh ould vfe ic> becaule,(ay you, io are many other Popijh traditions.

Your anfwerc contained thefe two branches.

1 Ifantiquitie be a caufe , why we fhould retaine if, why fhould wc not retaine other Ceremonies alfo3-<# an* */>/7/asthis?

2 Jf v pon the father $ tradition wee vfc the Cro {&,1

P % why

i 1 6 jin 'an/were to aTreatife

why then doc we not vf e it with opinion \ofvertue & ef* fcac'te^.% they haue delivered it? Vnto this your anfwer you add by way of Corollary that though it be Ancient ,yet Antiquity could nevc< frc e it fro Jinye£fuperftitio : whcrvpo you make two obfervations.

i How dagerout a thing it is to bring in any humane invention into the fervice of God .

2 How it may iuftly.be reputed Popijh ejr Antichri* j?/4*5though it were before thofc times wherein Popery and Antichrist were hatched.

Firfl- we doe not thinke,that Antiquity alone without tea fan and trutbjs caufe fufficient ,why wee fhoulde rc- tainc a Ceremony: Ycc it may giue vs good caufc4to ex- amine the reafbnsjthac moved the fathers to vfe it, and not without iuft cauis rafhiy to abrogate and difanull ir. Now becaufcour Church by examining thofc reafons, that caufe d the Fathers to inititute, & vfe this Ceremo- ny of the Croflein Baptifme3hr.thfounde,that as it was the n,fo it may be ftil a Ceremony vtdecencie , and profi- table admonition in the Church : fheehath therefore ac- cording to that liberty,whkh in matter of Cer€m*nte* is permitted to every/f^^/ZC^f^retainedtliisj^ ab- rogated feme oth?rs which in her iudgmet5fcemed 6oth more burdcnfome,& lefle profitable. Thefe retfons co* curring with antiquity, adele she greater weight vnto it, as on theother fide,t't addetbalfo vnro rhemjcJ" all of the togithcryeeld caufe veryfuffiaent , why font* axctent Cet remonies rathtr be retained.then other fame . A nd there- fore to your fir ft question, why doe xce not vfe other anci* ent Ceremonies as well <u this , J anlwere, Becaufcour Church thought them not f'o necefary s nor convenient, Shec mighty no doubt, haueftiU rewired thctn, iMlice

wouJd

eftheCro[JeinfBaptifme. uy

would : For J willingly fubmit my weaker iudgement to that mofl graue>and iearncd iudgment of Mr. Bttcer : De Suee,;n 4, #iw caterufignis.qu*. i»fart* adhibit a f tint a veteribm , vel*dEpfnf. ho die adhdentur awuliissvt funt ignis ad exorcijmos^ ejr tatech/fmos.& db& vejUs Baptizatorunt, facer pants qui dabatur Catcchumenis^ pier alalia fie fentio:St qua Er- €iefi* e/pnt^qua puram Chrifti tenerent docirinam, et finceramferuarent dtfciplinam^is^ (ignis vterenturfim* fliciter,et pure^abf^ omnifuperHttione^el leuitae9 practfe adpias admonit/ones,eaffc probe omnibus intel* /ecJaS) eat Ecc/efias non poffnm equidem, propter fignorum tAlem vfum condemnart*

Your two examples ofLaffts etmellis concordia, and offerings for the dead^xt auntient Ceremonies indeed, & in thole umes^had, no doubt, their very good & pro- fitable vferas of the former TertuMian teftifieth lib.de coron.rmLc&p* 3. and of the latter, both lM\ Beza , & ^adtnotb peter Martyr ,as is recorded before.&r tberfore though VMartyrint* Tertullian doth eftablifli thefe,&thc %ne of the Croffe, 7 /»<&«». with the fame warranty of tradition, or Ecclefiafticall conftitution,yet our Church cor.nceth them notfo ne* cefTary,nor fofTtt for thefe latter times,

The/^Wbraunchofyouranfwere is: If vp on the fathers trad/t/on,yce vfe the [rofiejhen ntufl we receiue, andvfeit^asthey bsuedetiuendit vnto vs,that is yettb opinion of vt'tue and effcacytSuppofingthw this opini- on ofvertue & eiicacy fwhjcwf we fhall (ay more after- wards) was euill'uvhe Father s^tx there is noVea(o,why we hanine, free liberty to make our choice, fliould be bound to rake their euill things with their good, as hath bin fhewed before out of S^ffterome: For he that gaue ys.thc. fceecommiffion of omnia probate^ retrained vs ***»• . ? I ?nly;

1 1 8 >An anfweae to a Trcattfe

only to good things in our choice qtiodbonum eft tenet*. ButmyarTcclion(\vi!iing Jconfcfle in nothing iafh- ly toaccuicthe Auntientsjicadeth me rather rothinke, that cue this opinio of vertue & efficacy that you fpeake of, was no evill thing in them, For though they vfed the confignation of the Crofle,in thofe actions,that you mentio a Iitle after3yct they yeelded no opinio of vertue and efficacy, to chat tignsfcuttolthe £ro/fe,& pa/pon of C^r//?,whcrof that (igne was an outward token and re* ■femb/ance:r\ndihis Jhopetomakeapparant to the in- different reader , in every particular of your accufarion. firft thei Jore you accufe them for afcribing virtue ejr efficacy 3to the figne of the Croflc in the <-<#? ofblcfing themielues, in common converfatiom& this you proue QmotTertu/tiatsst Ad omnem progrefum at^promotum^ C^t.But what if they by this;a&ofy^/?/>£ thefelucs with the figne of the Crofle,d<d not intend bleffmg of them- le!ues,asyou ttarmcit^bnt remewhsnee of Chriftes be- nefits performed for them on the Csvffe ? For fo S. CyriU anfwereth JulUn the Apoftat: , when hee had calicd the prill. Akxtni Chri(ti2ns,J0//iraj-g0/£ja cur a effet fcmpert ejr domes & ™bl'!u!wT™ fionte s.fignopretiofd. cruris ftgnare.H^c omnia{{?Mh hee) meaning the benefits of Chrifts paffio which he had re- ft Cor i % c*tcc* before) rec or dart nosfacit faint are lignum , ejrfua* det}ut ccgitcrui^uodffcut die it diuinm Paulus,vnwpr» omnibui mortuu* eft vt viventes non v lira fib ijpfis vivat fedei quiproipfts mortuut eHj& refurrexit. And a little rfxetjretiofiligni c rue em facimm in memcriaomnis boni tyomrm virtutis. What if they afcribed not this which you call blefftng.xo the figne of the Crojfe, but to Chrifts faffion , reprefented and remembrcd vnto them by this ftgne} for fo M . Perkins tcachcth you to thinkc of them ,

of the Q'ofie in Baptifme. up

Crux(apudveteres)nor,figtiifieat ipfumfignu cruciifed ft^w^w'l per LMetot.ymiam pafftonem crucifix:, Xo which purpofe j^cr2/ he expounded! Conftanttnes hr'nTa v\*.**idefl3 Deo , n~on fignoi and ciceth an amhoritie of C^/ry^w*, Crueem ^hryfofi, .;» ncx /imp He iter digit o in cor p ore t fed\ magna profecio M*t jhm.su fideinmente fomaicopoftet. And afterwards ccnclu- deth air that heehad (aide before 3 with this moH: ex- cellent ruIc,how the Fathers arc to be vnderitood, whe they attribute any thing to this figne : Omnia dicta T/t- t rum/faith he) vbi cruce.fpem, redemptioncmy ac falute drc.efe vohtnt >inte lligcnda effe re/at iue>vt referanturad pafiionem Chrifl iyvd adtp [um crucifixum^figno crucii re yrcfcntatum : So that not only the Fathers repofed no fuchvertue and efficacy in the figne,but alibjif any man fhould v fe it now, (which yet J will not commend vnto any man.by reafon of the fcandallit may bring with it) J hold that iudgement of /#/«/>?£/#* veryfound,£W«?4- Hewh.im.tf, tie fur gens 3et vefperi cubit am vadens fignatfe crucey in ***»Mp,f, fignum nttUti*. cbri/iianatnonefi ctdpandm^modo abjit Juperflitio*

Secodly you accufe them for afcribing venue and ef- ficacy to the figne of :hcCro(Te,in expelling and chaf- ing away of Deui/s , for proofe whereof, you cite Hi* eromeadDemetriadem.LaBantMb.^.eap, 17. andC^ry- zW>.V#r*« foflome tn pfal, 1 05?. All thefe autarkies J eafily grant to **m*u ^€s be true,and a number fuch !ike3in the writings [ofthefa- thers.-and yet J deny that in thofe fpeeches , they afcribe any opinio of venue ot efficacy, to the fign of the Crofle. This is not mine owne opinion only j but Jlearne icof that excellent divine Hicr.Zanchius; J doubt not /aith he but that fometiwss Satan was driven away indeede at the Hi». ZanehJt figneoftheCro/fc^sAuguftinereportethmany miracles to r'£™%tib" 4t

120 *An anftotre to a Treatife

htuehindonexctth that figm^and the Demit alfo, to hauc bin chafed : Dc ciuitatc Dei Iib.22.cap.8.^r» non prop' tervimfigni , fed propter vtrtuternfideijn thrift um cru* iifijium^qnaprddtti erantjtfuntfidelcsinfugAm vertex hatur^atg^ vcrtitur Diabo/us. GW<*rf /w.'fpeaketh to the *t!?JjDm- ^effect: Signumillud (cruets) Ad paffionem et fangui- pbsut.if, Mm chrifti pert mere Cyprianus teftatur , Quamais erg* vet ere $ Chrtftianiextemoftgno cruet* vfi fut;t , id tame a fttit finefuperftitione: et dottrtna de ChriBi mertto &b trrore, qui poftea irrepfittfios feruauit immnnts% Cypri* an himfeife fpcaketh fo fully to this purpofc>as any man that marketh his words cannot conceiuc fo grofly of the t?prMp*j!l*n. Ancients: His words be theicjAmvidet Hebraus.et qui" thrift, c*p,u. cunfade feruitute JEgypiA adrepr*rnifijtpatri& Ubertate tnhelat \qubd fanguis Chrtfti efficAQim.quxm fanguis ag- »i illim^quem in JEgypto ifraelimmoUvit^ contraries ab- tgat pot eft At es\ cuius h&dietaxta eft AutoritM* ejrpoteftas% •vt nonfolum Ifraclitica Umina muni at , Jed cti&m a b tjs qui tfraelitice non vivunt ,/blttm Sacrament i fignu repel* tat Dtmonia , & vbicun^ connect a fucrit , tcr rib tits fit facri nominis virtus ><& J "anguinh not a.1 his ccftimony J haue rehearfed at large3becaufe it mod excellently deli- vered vnto vs,as wel his own opinio, as the opinio of al the Ancients,touchingthis figne.And yet if you defirca plainer teftimony, hear M./Vr£/>r.r,whoin moftexpiefle & Significant tearmesvttcrly acquitteth the of your vn- 9<rki»stiwon iuftaccufation.rffm\f (ii\t\\\\c)fecrucecotra D*mone$ ffob. capjt fg. fnwicfunt , non quodextcrno figno cruets t ant am vim ejr efficacia adferip ferint 3 fed hac folenni ceremonia fatm fiduciam in crucemjd efi>mcrtcmC hrifti.Apttd aIios tefta- ritet quodAmquafi ' m on it or to fide excitAre voluerunt .qu* $mnia mala depefttt* And becaufe you fball not haue the

of the (jof?e in ftaptijme. lit

vfc of this Ceremony without a rc^on,Za»cb/m tcllcth you why t pleafed God to (hewe* fiich power at the ma- king of this fignc . vt illos in fincera, fide cottfirtntret , qui zAnth. hn fa* frimamadchrrfti > venicbint religtr.hem, * (r*dut$.

Thirdly you accufe them for afcribing^crf^^^^/- ^fr^to the figneof the Crone, in confecration of the blefled Sacraments, *\nd this you aggrauat with Tra* gickwords.Forthefe/«/>vV^//0».fjfay you, arcfmall in regard of that f^r^which in the Sacraments Anti* y«//yafcribed vnro the Crofle.-and this point you prouc out ofS1 .Cypn hm >dc Bapt.dr pafj rione Chrifti^ S% Aug* I i8.tracl: vpon Sc. Iohn. All theie authorities J willing- ly acknowledg:Eut withal Jmuft giuc you to vndcrftad, that vou cite your firft authority out o^SzXfpriaifi rnaU Cyprkwde hfi fide fox thereby the C'rofle he meaneth Chrifts paflio, CMfit+'*' wherein the ApoftleS'.T'W^ boaftcth: and your fe- Cyp: d» pajf. cond partially and to your owne aduantage , as partly Ch'fow11' hath bin tould you before :For after thefe words: Opera-, tioniiAutorttAsinfigwa crucu ^omnibus Sacramexth Lr- git ur effetfum,y oufhou'd haue added that which ini- mcdiatly followed, Ef cuvfta peragit nomen* quod omni* bus nominibut eminctyH S&cramentorum Kicarijs inuoCA- turn, &: then the latter part of the Sentence would haue .p^,^ cleared -the former ,-from that moft wrongful imputatio c-mccmQhrim that you lay vpon it. S. a Jut.'m that place ilicvvethj not v**fa&j* how the CrofT: fancijfieih.bnt how it fignifieth. Itn^ramai

Jtisaveryitrongand ilrang conceyptof yotsrs that «>««», ««*jfy»- could induce you to thinke, that the Auncient Fathers J""^^ were (o timple,as to alcribe any efficacy of confecration ^aft ; I rkin« of the Sacramenrs,vnto x\\tJigneof the Grofc>yow can* Hrmrelffe ex- not be ignorantjthat the name or word oiconfecratten, £mn \r'06.c*. is an EccleftafticaUwoxdpi frequent vie in the matter of.<k p&*» <w*» Sacraments,cailed iomtimes SantfifcattM as in Cyprt-

II 2 An an/mere to a Treatife

an% and diners others, fomtimes W**.»<ri« foment ion. as

in Sz, Ha fill. Mid TbeodoretAomumes^^oyU^ Benedic- t/on, as A4/it:2 6:2 6'- Mar k.i4.ti. l. Cor. 10, i d.iomtiwcs iv^nUtThankfgiufogss Luk.22.\$.\.Cor: 11.24, but rooft ordinarily confutation in the writings of the Fa- thers. Neither can you be j^noranr^that S.P4«/*ci!lcth I.Cor.xo.l6. t^e cl,Pnc* Towrnfiovf Ivhoyiatotv^oy^iv, The ClippC of blejfrng.xrhick we b/effe jcrervinQt\m bleffing not 'nto CoA^qwx vnto the cupp : infomuch as Oecumenzus expou>~ detbthe Apoflle^ if he had laid thu v to *v\oy«vlu k*.ta<t- Xw^p-wtbe cup of bit (ting which we b(cffe,that'\% which wc prepare withpraife and thank fg/uin%.]t is euident therfore,that the name of confecration. when we Ipeak of theSacraments,isnofuchnamc as we lhould be a- fraid of, hauingfo good warrant for it:efpecially in the Scriptures. The thing that is fignified by the name, would likwifcbe confidered, thattherby we may aifo iudg, whether the '^untients be iuftly taxed by the Treatiier.The thing thetfore (ignified by this name. was nothing cite among [the Auntients, but a fequfflra- /Mffofrhe Elements % from their commovfe >ar\d a fane • tifiing of them , by prater \ & inuocation^and thank Jgtue ing vnto God.ro that holy vfe which was proper to the 5acramcnrs:3s of t\\zwater in Bapnftr.e that ir might be fan cii fed, to the myfticall wafhingawayof (ins : of the b*e ad and wine in the Lords fupper,that it might be^r*- pared & fnBified to the fpirituali eating of Chrifts bo- hug cont.vaufi dy.and drinkingofhis blond. TlpUer cahxetpanis faith sap.iz.Tom.6. Sr. Augimme. £•<?»/<* confecrattone mjtietes ft nobts.non nafcitur .promde ^uod non it afit ^quamuii fit panu^et ca* Itx^adiumentum eft refettiontsjion Sncr amentum reltgt- onu. Thus far the Aimtienc Fathers are free fro blame,

for

of the (rofa hi Bapti/me. I 2 j

for even we al;o in our Church doe ihe fame thing: For welikcwifedo by praier and invocation fanclifie theE- Itmcms ( which areotherwi/e ot their o^ne nature or- darned for eemmo vfe^ihzt they may'ferue for holy vfesx and that thofe things3which were before necifjary helps y for the vfe of life , and clenfing of our bodies >may nowe become ejfettnallfignes of 'regeneration ,and of the body and bloud'of Chnft,for the nonfiling of our fouls.Nei- therdoewenowin our Church abhorie the name of confecrationj\ox think the thing to noe purpofe, but a(« cribevmoitacertaineefYeetcf change -,\hax it woiketh in the Elements. not of their f u6 fiance ^ into an ether, nor of their natural! qualities, (as the Papifis conceitic their /^£;f4//confec ration/to effect Tr&nfubjlantiiti" ■en)>\Mo\ their vic3and feruicc onlyj that thofe things which were for common vfe beforc,are now dedicated and appropriated to thefe holy vfes.

Agdne a man that truly eftemcthjthat the Fathers afcribe no venue nor efficacy to the (acraments them- felues, wil eafely free them from this imputation, of a(* cribing vertue and efficacy to the figne of the CroiTe in Confecration.For how can any manimagine:rhat they which attribute the vertue and efficacy of confecrating the Elements to the figne of the Crofte 3 fhould not, much more afcribevnto the Elements fo confecrared^^^ iome efficacy and vertue of themfelues ? Now that they afcribed no fuch power v-nto the Sacraments thefelues, nor had any conceit o^ grace to be conferred by the opus operatumof the Sacraments, as the fchoolme afterward conceiucdjwe haue mod ful and certaine affarance out oftheirowneteftimonies.aS. Hierome kith. Qm plena fide non accipiunt Baptifma}non Jpiritumfanclum.fed

g_2 aquam

1 2 4, j£h anffrere to a Treatife

tqttamptrcifmvtS.^Mbrofe likew He ro the fame pur*

pofe, fpnitm munusefl,gratiam imp/ere myfterij.&.Au-

gnHi.ttis plentiful in this axgmrLtm.Sacrameuta^ncqnid.

fifmuntm^fcdqiita creduntur^fancl/ficant, A nd againej

Jnfi&elibm & Eleclu Sacrament a hoc vereefficinnt quod

figtiran{m^s\d22pAncyFi(]bilii facramenti forma, amini*

Hro daiur , ipfe autem Chriflm invifibi-lewdtt gratiam.

And in another phct'}Aqua ccrnitur^fed qui pop videtur

jugufl. tjucfi. fcrftm cperatur.Fxclc tanta vis aqua. , vt corpm tana at -&

ex nono itji Jj f , r „r , J '. , f x-^t

59, cor ablaut \m 'ft faciettte verbo.non quia aiatur j fed qma.

Vev»a.chif. czfd/tur?£r*d $\Cypriaj3moi\ -plainciy of all. Effetfum

matu uf.y Janifificitu Element u>ncn propria eorttm natura prabet, fed virtus divtna pctentiiis opcratur,vt adfit Veritas fig" no,,**? fpiritm facramento : atq^exipfis rerum efficient ijs, dignit as grati* patcfiat >& tnteriori homini inmtefcat.

Yea (ay you , all this were well enough , but herein the. Fathers are to be bJanied^becaufe in confecration , they vkd the figne of the CrouV, and afcribed this cottfecrd* tionfe fanc-Hfyingof the Elements vnto xhdxjigne.l hey vfed ihcjtgne of the Croflfe therein indeede, and thence are thefeipeeches of theirs which you alleadgcd. But they afcribed not this confecration^ A b.if/ovcing to the figne of the Croifej but vnto chriHcs Heath, whereof the

„ + k* . i-ords Supuer is a remembrance.!^/ j/^** remebrame of we 'A;id H apt if me afimslitude or repre/efitation^ <vvce

Rom,rf. 3.4, jfaf are 'Baptized into chiitth fits, are Baptized iff to his death ianda7e buried xritb hi-m LyBaptifme ixlchisd'ath, cjre. Andtherforein thefe Sacraments of Ch lifts death,. they made the figne c>£ the Crofle,wheron he died, to fig- nifie that it was his deatb\ t''at gaue efficacie and vertue to thefe Sacraments. Alio they afcribed this efficacie and power , not vnto the figne of the CrcfTe , but vnto the words oiconjccrAtiQfjfQi if you wil rather fo cail ihcm,of

cbrift*.

of the Croffe In fithti/mtl \lf

Chriftsinftitutio** according to ihzxoiS.Auguftine.Ac* cedat verbum aa eleven lumber fit Sacr amentum. And be- cau(e tiic words ol Chriftsittftitutton refer vs alwaies to bis death ythcx^ote they made in the pronouncing of the, thefigne of the Crofkjwberon he die::*, Hence it is,that though they vfed xktfignc of the CrolTe in confecration, yet they attributed not the vert t& ok confecration vnto itjbutvntoC^/^andhis tnftitution. And therefore S\ Cy^r/4/i,wherc(oever he mentioneth the one , d-: eth al- „ waies loine the other with it : Rs^npa \fitone crucu.et (tg- auy,„t ti^ lm no virtu* omniA'efli&potefias\ & in the examples before «#.«. rchearfed,with Vjgura cruciSjht ioineth peragtt name in* iMcatum32nd withfignum repellat d£moniai hee io'neth, facrinominis virtm^fanguinis not a . The like doth S. ^u„:rtm x%t ^«7, Omnia Mtcunfyfantfi fie &ntur hoc jigna domini&A deftmp.viii*' stuck cum invocatione ^hri/linominii confecrantur. &f»m.i^<U I he diftinclio that you rn^kc between 7W* .& £)/>.that Tett. fhould bee the firfl of the Fathers that ever menti- oned the.Croflc,& Cyprian the ancienteflj thar msketh men- ion of the Oofle in Baptifme, is a very yaine ck fri- volous diflinction. For(to keepe my fclfe within the c5- patTc of rhofe Ancicms that i haue before cited,,) both Jujlin AUr!yr,bdorc Tertufl/a, mentioneththe CroiTe: & Tertnliian him«e!ie3as alio Origen^ which were before Cfpr/a/nAz mentis of the Croffe in Bapnfme5as before J haue declared. Jt wsiefupeifluousjay you3to lehearie the relt,& theic too3 except you rehearfed the to better purpofe, . . Tresrife. 13. SecV.

But hereby it is evident , that the religion* vfe of the CroJse.wM even &t the firft finful^andfuperfirttsus , nei* ther can it be ftiexved.t hat it was ever vfedbythe Fathers: Rcligionis ergo fine admixta fuperftitionc , and this in*

Q^$ ve»i

1 % 6 jin anfweat to a Treaiife

ventio did no jooner creese into the Sacramet, but it drew

vnto it felfefuchfuperjlitioui conceipt of effcacie &ne-

ceffityjhat without it , the wcanes which God appointed

for the confecration of the Elements , feemeA over weake,

• Lately in yc* rvnavaileable>accordtng aifom: a among ft vs< account

Sunry a child not the iv children lawfully Baptized, yea, willhaue the re*

bc^Se^thc bapttzedrftheCrofehaue bin omitted.

Croflewaso- Anfwere.

aaiticd. This is that which you adde, by wav of Corollary , to

youranfwere,tmportingthusmuchineffec1:, as Jcon- ceiuc:That though thejigneof the Crofle be \ ery unci' entfltt antiquity could not free it fromyfo, and/uper/lt- tion : we doe not alleadge the antiquity of the CfofTe, as an argument to free it from fw3x\<$fuperJiilion^ which we thinkc in ettr vfetand in the vfe of the Ancients , it is not infected with . But we alleadge it,as an argument why it fhould not be raftly changed, and taken away,as you would baue it , both becaufe ir was ordained vpon good reaf offend advife at the^>/?,and hath bin vfed ever iince,with no fwa'l profit to the Church. As for the evi- dence you talkc of,it doth not yet appeare^he vfe of it in actions of religion, without opinion of vertue andtffica- #/>jwas ever free froniy£» & fuperft it i on, Bur to rhis your accufationjfhalneede tofpeake nothinginthisp'ace, becaufe J haue anlwered it before againfr you,& aeninft your grand Mailer T„ C. hfpccially feeing here you bring no matter, but repeat your former equivocation of religions vfe,and repofc vnto vs your oide Crambe of Religtonis ergo fa often recocted.

Your fecond objection tthat this tnuention did no [to* tier creepe into the Sacrament , but it drew vnto it icife fuch fuperft ttious conceit, of efficacy drc.ls likwifc anfwe-

red

of the Croffi in Bapttfm ?. i a 7

red in the laft feSion.rhe conceite of (uperflttiou* necep . Jjty,thM,vouiiv jt drexvvnt'o it ,that without d?c. is the fault or the perfons thitio concerned of it , &not of ths y%»^itfcHe:R>rthis/^»^oftlieCroire/'rr/W^<f/? , 4tfc uqui vt it ur, bene vtentibus bonum efijnde i)tenttbm main efh And therfore the beit wav to reforme this mif. conceite, is to inttrud them aright that doe thus lupcr- ftitioufly conceiue of it, A fan better way then vtterly to aboiifh it ,as may appeare euen by your ownc exam- ple otacbilde lately rcbaptized in Surrey, becau(e the {rojft was omitted; For if this be truest is manifeft,chat the caking of the vfe of the Crop cieane away, would fcadalizeSc alienate more mens minds fro our church, then the retaining ofit itiii can doc; for feeing that they that will take ofFence at the removing of it,are the weak- cr-and'you that knowe what belongeth to 'matters of fuchindifFercncyare the ftronger,ic is much more a' greeable to the rule of Chriftian charity , that you in the fpiritofmildnefte fhould beare with their infninities, by Allowing the Jawfully 'eftahlifhcd vfe therof > the they fhould haus any caufe of offence giuen vncothem ?by the vtter abrogating and remourog ofit. Jf any man a- mong\s,vpponiuchconceiteof#^^/y of this figne, as you intima^haue caufed his child to be rebaptized, becaufc the Crofle was omitted, Charity bids me not to doubt,but that the wifdome, & authority of our chiefs Gouemours ,haue had an eie vnto ir,& the Minifter that gauc the offence,hath bin hartely forryfor his omitfion: ¥or tTake heed Azith the Apoftlejin another thing indif- ferent ,/?*/? by any means this liberty ofyours3be an occafio i.Cor.8.^. of falling to them that are weakei But now we will con • fider your two obfet nations,

Trea-

* l § ^An \mf) vereto a Treat i/e

Treatife. 14. Se>^.

Out of which may be obftrved, fir ft ho we daun^eromg

fling it is to bring in any hum a ne tn vent ion , into the fey*

<vtte of God ., fit hint he very pure ay of the Church ,/t wai

funifhed w/thfuch a >nr/tua/l curfe of horrible fuperftt-

tion. Secondly though at thi* time Popery was not hatched,

yet the my fiery of iniquity was then a. workings and the be •

ginning,as it were yof the w hor ij h fornication was found,

even in the Fathers times. fo that as worshipping ofi~/$n-

eeflbff.i.18. ' gels i* Taules time, praiers, indications for the dead , m

TertuflidHS ttme^be rightly counted Popifh and Antichri*

fi tan \t hough as yet that monger was not borne, fo this anal

at her ceremonies ratified by the Popifh Canons & ccnflttu*

tions may well bee taken for Popifh and ^4ntichrtfttan%

even in the Fathers times , feeing they then made a waie

for the BeaH , andfince htue receiued farther inPietyt%

tjr authority from himJrrhereforey to ccxc/udey<ts J fay ex*

borteth Gofo people , to keeps them fe lues fro t he ntei &poU

tittionjoftheHeathen,faying,Lkpan,i\<:pzrT\'ce~.£ocoiit

from rhem,anu touch no vncleanc thing • fothefpirit in

the fame manner \thargeth the Church not to middle with

the corruptions 0/ Annchnilian Babiloh , but goc out of

her my people ,faith he^that you may not bee partaker of

her ilnncs,and that yee receiue not of her j blagues . The

feare of which curfe doth keepe vsfiom all thefiuperftiti*

iWjt&d idolatrous ceremonies of that wbortfl) Synagogue*

Aniweic.

Touching your fir ft obfervfction , How daungerous 4

thing it is, drc . Though J haue laid diffidently before,

yet this one word I adde more by way of remembrance:

That if humane invention be brought into the Church,

either with a purpok to attract any thing from the in-

of tie trofietn feapttfme* uj>

jtitution of God fix. to equaf/them to Gods ordinance ,'orto ob/cure & darken Chrifts in Bit ut ion , 'or to impofeayoke t>r burden vpon w* m confciencei r", or with opinion either of 'efficacy or neciJ]ity>oi with mixture of impiety And fa* ferjtttionsn that they (hould be ellemed any otherwise ofahen of things ind/jferent:thcn weconfefle,t(iat it is indeed a thing very dangerous to 'bring any humane tn- uention into the feruiceof God: and that thecurfle of God wil alwaies accompany fuch inventions . But on the contrary fide5if they be brought into the Church* only as Ceremonies > to Attend Gods inflitut tonkas orna- ments for decency jrderiedtficationyand admonition, or if the caufes , ends , ind vfesfoi which they were fir ft inftituted, rcmainc fti\k(altwhich circumjlances concur^ in our vfe of the Crofe in Baptifinejthen we fee no rea- fon,why they may not lawfully be vfed in Gods feruicc, and hould them not only free from Gods curfe5but alfo sceompan/edvith his b/ejfingjolong as they arc retain- ed and obferued with thefe limitations:

Touchingyoury2?fWobferuation,A?"B>4 thing may he iuHly reputed Foptjh & AntichriBiantthough tt were before that monfter of Popery and Antichrifi were hatch- ed. Jmuft needs fay,you bring vs to a pretty & ftrangc fpeciiIation,and deriue the pedegrec of Popijh Ami- tbriflidnifme farther,then he that began the Troia waT~ gemino about \ for you fetch it from before the egge> & theHentoo3andmakemeto remember that vaunt of the Arcadians, that boafted they were before theMoone*

That a Ceremony 3that is oppofite vnto the Do£lrine& Goftellof Chrifi-)(z%y on wrongfully fuppofethis to be) may be Antichrtflian> before Popery J doe not denie, fox, Even noWifa/th Saint Iohn of his times ,/ here are ma- i.i°K* it*

R ny

1 1 o *4n anftoen to a Treatije

m Anticbrijles'lXhz myHery of iniquity began to works a.Thcffia. berimes^Jt wrought in Simon <jM*gus, and his follow* crs,while Chrifl: was yet'aliue; Jc wrought in Elimas the Sorcerer \in the falfe Apoftles^ndin the T^Jcholaitans, in Mcnander^Ebion^andCerinthm, euen in the Apoftls times; All thefe were Anticbriffs'.And any bereft either in do chine or Ceremony, that they held againft the truth fjrvoordofchrift w<ts Arjtickriftia&ui that a ihmgfhould be Popifh and tAntichriftian^nd that before Popery was batched >isin my vnderftadingas if you (hould hauefaid, The chicken was a bird before the Hen peeped out of thcfhell.As in other thingsjoin Antichriflianifme,7'£- porafu»tdiffinguenda:ov die wc(ha\ make a confufien ofalithingSj andfo fpcake of herefies,asif all herefies were but one herefle: and thofe which S*. lohn calleth many Antichrifts,were but one Antichrift, called **t i£oX"v° ^Hx^oi^thztLyfntichrifi whom you conceiuc

the Papacy to be.

^ You proue this^a fimili , as worfhipping of Angels in

S.paulestime, &c. Antichriftian they might bee rightly countcd,becau(e they were againft the truth , and do* cfrineoichri ft ^Popifh they coulde not], becaufe neither w&\P<>pery yet heard of^nor had thc^/i^yctimbraced thofe fuperftitions.

Againe jthat a thing fhould be Popifh oiAntichrifttl^

is not in the thing, but in the minds of them that make it

Popifh zndAnticbriftian.Vor this you haue bin of te told,

, - . that no ceremony cznbc Pop/fl)&zAnticbri/Iiano£it{c\fc:

Jguctrde facta * / , • * ' . ■ i ,.

vtfi.»d Hotf. Rituw aliqucm Aaromcum epe vel ^fntichrt Hi an urn 3 m nullii h&rct Dei creaturis^tn nulla veftc,/n nulla figura^ in nullo colore ^aut vUo Deiopere,fed in animo &profeffionei bonis Dei creaturist adtmpiasjtgn/fcationes abut ent turn m

Things

of the [rofse hi Baptifinei I j 1

Things arc good/aith he farther, not only in their natU' ralieffe5tsyas bread in the effect of feeding , & ftrength- ning of the body: wine,in the effect of drinking & heat- ingrbut alfoin their diners fignifications ejr Admonitions: QujtfcrtpuYA docet)dsaboloirveLmdu hominibm^ea fac* tameffepoteflatem^ vt abtifu faovll&m queant Dei ere a- turam,et bonam etiam fignificando et admonendo.per fe macam facere et i nipi aw hvher to: e nothing can be faid ro belong to the Preifthood */* ^™»3 but that which is vfed to that fuperflition^s if it were necejjary and profi- f4&&ofitfelfcto/4/#4f/003eucnnowafter Chrift is tc* ueled;orwherbyfomcoccafion3to imbrace or retaine that fupermtion5or to trouble the concord of Brethre, may be miniftred: So likwife no rite can be called Antt- chriflianybut that 3 wherby {omzprofeffion^nd commu- nication with An tichrift may be fhewed, or may ferue to ihat prof ejTion or communication: And a litle after he haththe(ewords,very pertinent and cffc&uall to this purpofc:£4w entm libertatem cfc.For if any man wil (ay that this hbertyfof Ceremonies,) may be permitted to noChurchofChriftjhemuftneedesyeeldto one or o- ther of thefeinconueniences,Ether that nothing is gra- ted to the Churches touching the Lords mpper5but that whetcof they haue the exprejfe commandement rf chrifl, and then al the Churches muft be condemned of wick- ed boldnes and pref umtio &c. Or that there are not any Churches,which the Lord doth fbjfarr e free from al tuf- pition and abufc of his good creatures,that al the good creatures of God are puref through true faith in his nae) to them that arc pure,yca cuen in their fignific ationj which who foeucrfhall fay3he therin muft alfo denie, Chtiflto be that Lord,which he hath promifed him-

R 2 telfe

I. J * jin anfweae to a Treatife

■fclfctobctoalraen,that is3 their deliuerer fromal vn* cieanncs.-.Or that wicked men by their abufe can fo pol- lute the creatures of God, which are good of themfelus, as they can ferue no godly man to d godly vfe : which is manifeftly againft the teftimony of the holy Ghoft: ^o: i4.i4.i.Cor08.4.et^.2o.i 77f».4.4.0r certainly that it is not lawfull for Christians,/* difpofe of dl things ^ for - ddmonition of their Creator and ours ,of his benefits to- wards vs,and of our duties towards him:which is repug- nant to that,that the holy. Ghofl: teacheth every where, concerning the knowledgand worfhip of God in al his works,and doing al things in the ndtnc of our Lord lefm Chrif?,to the glory ofthefdther.

This teftimony of Mr. BucerJ haue therefore repea- ted at Iarge,becauie therein two things very effectual to this prefent queftio are delivered. Firft,frat the church hath Itbertie and power to ordxsne thinges indifferent in Gods fervice:And/^^^,that^^///? of other men ca fo pollute the creatures of God, as that the pollution (hould ever after cleaue to the creatures 3 as the Leprotic ofT^jtarnan did vnto Giezr. but the corniptio remaining only in the mindes oiihtm that did defile the creatures, they become againe/wy^to them that are puret that is, to the faithful.VVhence it followeth neceffarily ,thatno« thing can be iuftly reputed Ant/chriftian vnto zt\y , buc vnto them that vie it to tlut enci}thzt Antichriftian pro- fcflion may be advanced by it,or with that opinio , that they that are Antichriftian doe afcribe vnto it:'whervp5 it rnuft as neceilarily enfue, that feeing we in the church ofEnghnd^do not vfe thefgne of the CroiTc in Baptilm,. to advance the prof eflto of Antichr/ft, nor with ihofe <?- pinions dut Popifb Anttibrifkts doe afcribe vnt<?it,\hct*

fore

of the Croffe in 'Baptifms. 133

forevntovsitrcmaineth/w;randf/<?40*, &Ieaveththe <Pcpety and ^nticbriftianifmejhaikhadftkkingM in themindesandconfciencesofPopifh Antichrifts . The foundation therfore of your obfervation being thus fha- ken , we will now trie the iointes and finewes or your ar- gument,whereby you would conclude this Ceremonie tphaue bin Antichriltianin the Ancients, and therfore mud bee alio fuch in vs, Againft the ^Ancients you at- guethus.

Thai which was the beginning^it were ^of the whori/h fornications >4nd made wayforthebeaft} may well be take for7opifhand'^sfntichriftian.

But the ahufes And opinion of vert ue^ andefficacy,that the Ancient 1 hadoftheftgneofthe CroJfeywerethe begin* wings of the whorijh fornications 9 and made way for the leaft. Ergo

The abufes and opinion of efficacy andvertuejhat the LAncients hadofthefigne oftheCroJe^may well bee taken for I'optfb andsAntichnfti&n.

To the Maior.That which was the beginning e^cAt is true in the 3 in who it was the beginning of whoriCh for- nicationsj and in who it made way for the beaft,as in Si- mon Mtigm^ Elim&s J he Nicholaitansjhefalje Apoftlsy andthe Heretiqnes'.d which, no doubt3gaue the begin- nings to the whorifh fornications,and made way to the beaft.Jn the holy fat hers that did not fo,it canot be iuft- ly reputed Popifojr Antichriftian> as hath bin declared in the laft words before.

To the OHinorB tit the Abtifis &c.1t is falfe : for tha Ant tents did not abufe^neither had any opinio of vcr- tue and efficacy of ir,as is flic wed in the 1 2.fe<5t:& ther- fore your coclufio toucheth none but the,that were for-

Rl runners

* J 4 dn an/were to a Treati/e

runners of Antic hriftjjt cannot touch the sentient fa- ther $% thatoppofedthemfelucSito the firft working of the my fiery & refifted the Here fie s ,that made way to^the BeaftXikevnto this is your reafon that you make a- gainft our prefent vfe .

That which hath face receiued farther impiety > and autority {rem the Antnhriftitnay iuftly be taken for Po* ptjhtjrijAntichrifthn now.

But the figne of the Croffe in Baptifme in the Church of Englandfath ftnee receiued farther impiety & autority from the Antichriffl , Ergo

The figne of the Croffe tn 'Baptifme in the church of JEngland^may iuftly be taken for Popijh and\Antichriftiatt now.

The Maioroi this argument holdeth true as the Ma* ior of the former did,thatis2in them. in whome it hath receiued farther impiety ,and'authority fro Antichrift, Jn others in whome it hath not receiued farther impie - ty,it holdeth not.

1 he Minor is falfc, for in the Church of England the Popifh abufes of the Croffe, haue receiued neither/iff - ther impiety \ nor authority ,but contrariwifc are ai re- . moucdjandthe tlzft facere vfe of the Antients is re- tained:For we vfe this fane of the CrofTe, in truth,to no other purpofe, ihewe \ic the name or worde £rofie,ihat isjonly xoxfigntfication and admonition-, and feeing there is no other difference betweene the, but what the word (oundcth vnto the earc,that the figne reprcfenteth v nto the eie ,why ihould there be more fault founde wirh the one,the with the othcr?or why fhould our vfipg of mote outward meanes,forhc!pincour infirmities.in remem- br;ng' Chrifts pafiion be mifliked, Seeing in al other mat- ters

of the (jrofit in TZaptifme. 1 3 5

tcrs»the more raeancs we vfc to helpc our weakenes^the better wc reckon of the : Ex quo noBr* redemptions pre Be^* in dtftn, tiumjn crucepependit , illudtpfum crucu vocabulum an- f.ffi^'jf^ tea i^nGrnimofiffimumjiobU chriftianu fattum eft hono« itficenttfftmuw.\i\\\z word Ctofte be To honourable, be- caufe our Saviour fonr.timcs hunge vpon the CrofTe^ why fhould the ftgne of the fame thing be fo daungerous and pernirious ? rind therefore your conclufion no way hur- tcth the Church of fcingiand,but only in the vniuft calii- niationjthat it Iaieth vpon it,and in it vpon the Ancients whofe reputation, and integrity j touching the Crofle, ftanding good fas for anv thing you can fay Jagainft it > it alwaies wil) it is not poffible for you to faften the popijh abufes , and whon(h fornications of the %emjb <^>inti~ thrift vpon our Church.

The exhortation,wherewith you conclude this your Treatifeisgoodj/tf T^vntoal men,&evcn in this par- ticuler Hypothefesohht Crofle in Baptifme , to the that are in tangled ,& defiled with popijh conceipts , '& fupcr- ftitions.But vnto vs, that are no waies partakers of thole corruptions,you might very wel haue forborne it.

The fear* of a curfejeaft being partakers of the Rornijh Ant ich*i(ls fins you Jhouldalfo receiue of her pUgue sleeps jouyoufayjromhii fuperftttiom idolatries'. The feareof a curfejought/no doubt, to be a great bridle to reftraine all men from doing evil.But we invite you not to be par. takers of the Romifh Antichrifts finncs , but only of our fociety5in our innocent and harmleiTe ChriftianCerema * a/tt.Whcrin if you fear a curfe,yoti fear where no caufe of feare is.Ifyou fear a curfe indeed ,as you pretend,you fhalldo wel to tranf late this feare of yours,fro the harm- kfle vfe of the Crofle, wherein either there is no danger

At

l%6 jfruinjlpmtoaTrecttift '

at dlife we are perfwadedjor no cert awe danger (which

your felues cannot proue)vnto the moft certaine&c v»-

doubted dager of difobediexce'ywhcwnto , without a! per-

aduenture ,thcre is due a fearfuiland feuere cur(e5 as we

tfwnb.xtf.i. are taught by the exampls of c^^D^*, Wcx/-

&™winthebookeofGod:To,which purpofe alio the

wife preacher fkzx fought to find out pleafant words, &:

, . . anvprightwriting>euenthewordsoftruth,dothaduer- Icc^c. .*. t-|e VS3name]y to rake hegj ^ tfjg mmtfj 0ftfje King^ &

tothe wordoftht oath of Godtthat is &$ theGcneua note doth well expound (it,^ the King,& keepe the oath, that thou haft make for the fame caufc.TSLeperturbatc a Cmwritht infACteeim abtto'Sox. this is radix rebel/ionis faith M. Cart- •v.txafS Eceit Wright, Siperturbate animoferrifepatiaturwndefitjvt fieri fc afubietttoncdebita deficiantfumirajndignati- enejambitionejucri tupiditate^ab officto difcedunt> This is the roote of rebellion jfLvbvsx will fuffer themfelus to be caried with difcontentment, -from j the prefence of the King: whence it commeth,that many men fall from due fubiec~tion,whcn they depart from their duty, either for angcr,or indignation5or ambition,or defier of gainc.

The conclufion to the Treat if er & his friends. And thusfarj haue atteded the Trcatifers difcours, ftep by ftcp & foot by foot, omitting,as J think,nothing that is water iallund yeelding,as J hope,iuft /atiffa&ion to al them 5that with peaceable minds, &vnpartiallaiTe£lios iliall be pleated to weigh his arguments, & my anfweies in indifferent ballances: wherin if J haue done any thing that may content (though in the lead degree) you to whom this anlwereis addreflfed , J fhahhinke this la- bour of mine > wel bellowed: where vnto, as J was firft moiled by them, which had autority to command me,

(o

of the Qofie in ^apttjme. 157

foitwas'onmy -ownepart moft willingly vndertaken, with an crneit dcfire ro»ad if poifibly J nvght,fome drop of water to the quenching of that flame of discontent- ment that thus ragcth amogft vs: And J truft, J may the rather hope, that fome good hereby may be effected, in that J came into this workc, with a fingle mind,& with- out al eie or affection to any particular man,that might be imagined to be the writerof this Trcatife.of whom, J neither had,nor yet haue,fo much as the ieaft'inckling or fufpition. Only the matter and argument of this Trc- atrfe,drcwon my'pemwhichfto (pcake my iudgment & opinio of it^ fecrncd vnto me fo warily fet down-, as th at It might both (tumble a weake and vnfetled reader: and alfo'add ob(tinacy,& ftiffncs,to minds already pofle fifed with loue,and liking of that opinion;though it ha tie nei- ther (trength of argument 5nor power of perfuafion, to svinn any man vnto that conceite,that either had judg- ment to defcerne the manifold fallacies and captions therein vfed,or Hood before contrarily affected.

That which J would now lay is,to defier the Treat i* ferandhisfrendsjthat they would flrft reforme them- felues,andremoucthis Humbling block, which them- fclues,and not our Church hath laid before them,out of their ownc waiesjf itbe,as they are wont to {ay,againft their con(cicnces,the to reforme the error of their ownc confcience*,which no doubt,they may doe, by inform- ing their consciences aright3and laying true Sctcncc as the fureft foundation of their confciencesjlf otherwifc it be but only fearc Jeaft they may feemc by yeelding to hauc oucr fecne them fclucs>and hauing i otimes preen- ed againft this Cercmony,may beaccufed of lenity Sc inconftancy in their do&rinc,and fo consequently bring

$ ©a

1 3 8 Jn } an/were to a Trcati/e

pi. fomedifcrc<!it\vnto their Miniftry tct theknow.that altheiearebut humane >cjpetfs,and can no way be al- leadged, as iuftcauies,why they mould break brother- ly amity and concord,and make j rent. and diflenuo in the Church of God; ^cither can thefe outward telpetts giueany iuft excu(e,to di(obcdience, & oppofition, a- ga nftrhe Magiftratt&laxpseflabtifhed: which being of things indiftcrent,made for preferuarion of order & ue. cency in the Church ,bindtheir conferences', and that re* fiftance,thatis made againft them, is made againft the ordinance of God.

Secndly, Jdoeveryhanily defire them to confider howe great a rnif chief t they haue brought vpon our Church : what breach of Chriftian charity among our felues, which being al of one houthold, fhould bee all of one minder and what reioycing and courage they haue given to our common enemy .% KirynMwBfidfm nyduw /§ o-aT/es : How the PapiHs reioice to fee this iar amongft vsthow/^^ydayly doth prevaile, and take ftrength,& hart,byoccafion of this breach. How much better were it.to turne thefe forces that are (pent vpon our felues, a« gainft the commo adverfary.?who ( as lamentable expe- rience hath taught vs^maketh this ftrife of ours , a fit oc* cafion and inftniment to overthrow our common faith. As lately did appeare mofi manifeitiv, when they ende- vored to cloaks their barbarous, and inhumane cruelty, with the colour oi your ;difcotctmet againft the ftate Ful of rage and malice is Satan now towards the laft time of his hopes.'he worketh every way,& Iaieth al his Inares to decciue the flmple:in fome by pretenfedzeale : in fome by Muilcns an d falfe impoflutes ; in fome by dive flifl) plots , and defperate defignes.'and generally in aiUortsof men,

by

of the Croffe'm fcapti/mi. 1 39

by heaping difcraces and contempt vpon the reverende C/earo/t»,iT)d Mmiftry of rhis C hurch.as if they were the only ictvhat hindered the full lhengthning and pcrfe* ' tbnc of his kingdome.

1 hele things and many other grievous fins 3 $c works of darknes,that blurti not now to fhew rhemfelues in the open day, could not thus fwarme amongfl: vs , as day lie they doe,if weall truely intended the fame thing: if wee could faithfully & vnfainedly gire one an other the right hanq'offellowfhip, and ierioufly doe the Lords worke with one confenc . My hartie defire therefore, & earned requeft is , that you with vs3& we with you, would right- lie couuderthefe things: and knowing that our bolyCMi* niBry'm preaching of Chrift crucified jis the moft forci- ble waic,wherby it pleafeth God to weaken the ftrength & bodie of fin5giue our felues wholie to that worke:Tha t laying afidetheiequeftions of Ceremonies, that hauc now a long time troubled our peace^'our contcntio hece forth may be againftthemjthat differ front vs in the fub- ftaunce of our laving faith: Thatfo God may giue a blcf- fing to'our labours .and wee all with one mouth,andone ininde may glorifie Godche Father of oui Lorde Jdus Chrift.

Q /)0 Smnih

.7

k