Plain Declaration that Brownists be Full Donatists, Part 1

Plain Declaration that Brownists be Full Donatists · Part 1

p. 1That the Browniſts are full Donatiſts.

NO Apoſtle, no Prophet, no Euangeliſt, no true paſtor or teacher can hauehave his owne name put vponupon the Diſciples which he gathereth: but as they bee all gathered onelyonly by Chriſtes doctrine and vntounto Chriſt alone, according as it is written, one is your Doctor, euen Chriſt: Matth. 23. ſo are they onelyonly by his title called Chriſtians. But it hath béen the manner of olde, and euen from the time of the Apoſtles, in Gods Church, when any wicked ſchiſme or hereſie hath ſprung vp, to call the ſcholers and followers by the names of the firſt maſters of the ſame, and chiefe leaders. As of Montanus, the Montaniſts; of Nouatius, the Nouatians; of Arrius, the Arrians; of Pelagius, the Pelagians; of Donatus, the Donatiſts; of the Pope, the Papiſts, &c. And who ſhall reprehend this as vaine, or condemne it as a thing vniuſt, ſeeing wee followe his example, who ſaith to the Angell of the Church of Pergamus, Reuel. 2. Thou haſt them which hold the doctrine of the Nicholaitanes? Now, there is a ſect in England commonly called Browniſts, not becauſe Browne was the firſt originall of it, but for that he hath written and publiſhed bookes in maintenance and enlargement thereof, and with more ſkill and learning than others which either as yet hauehave followed, or gone before him. Many men thinke that they p. 2bee ſprung vp but of late, whereas in very déede it is well knowne there was a Church of them in London 20. yeares paſt, and one Bolton a principall doer therein, whoſe fearefull end is not forgotten. I hauehave termed them the Donatiſts of England. How iuſtly, and how charitablie, and with what due conſideration, it ſtandeth me now vponupon to ſhewe; leaſt the ignoranter ſort of ſuch as ſomewhat fauour them, ſhould imagine, that I hauehave iniuriouſlie and falſelie giuen them this odious title, to worke their vniuſt diſcredite. For Donatiſme in olde time, about twelue hundred yeares paſt, was condemned as a deteſtable proud Schiſme and hereſie, that began at Carthage in Aphrica, and was vehementlie withſtood by the faithfull Paſtors, and cut downe by the holie Scriptures, as no learned godlie man will denie. The holie Father Auguſtine was the chiefe that did ouerthrowe them, as his writings which are extant, anſwering to their writings at large doo declare. Now, my purpoſe at this time is to compare them together, the Donatiſts and the Browniſts, from point to point out of the writings of Auguſtine. If it fall out cléere and manifeſt that they agree together, as euen as two peeces of cloath that are of the ſame wooll, the ſame threed, colour, working & breadth: and that an Egge is no liker to an Egge, than they be each to other: I hope all that be ſober minded will not blame me for giuing them the ſame title. Their originall, firſt, (of the Donatiſts I meane, and how they cut off themſelues) is to bee noted & ſet foorth; which was this. From the birth of our Sauiour Chriſt, for the ſpace of thrée hundred yeares & more, there were euer anon great and greeuous perſecutions raiſed vp againſt the Church, by the Romane Emperours, vntill the Emperour Conſtantine the great imbraced the holie Goſpell, and gaue peace to the Chriſtians. In thoſe daies of perſecution, ſuch as through feare, or otherwiſe, did deliuer to the cruell perſecutors, either the bookes of the holie Scriptures, that they might burne and deface them, or the veſſells appointed for holie vſe in the publike aſſemblies, that they might carrie them away; or the names of the brethren, that they might p. 3finde them out: ſuch (I ſay) were called traditores, that is, deliuerers or traitors. There was a rumour that ſuch offence had béen by ſome committed, as no doubt it was by many. Now, as Auguſtine reporteth in his Pſalme againſt the Donatiſts, there came certaine Biſhops from Numidia vntounto Carthage, a famous Citie in Aphrica, to ordeine a Biſhop, and found Caecilianus alreadie ordeined and placed in the Seate: then were they wroth that they could not ordeine. They ioyned together, and layd a crime vponupon Caecilianus. They ſay his ordeiner deliuered the holie bookes and was a traitor: whereupon they will hauehave him reputed no Miniſter of Chriſt, but the ſonne of a traitor. There was no aſſemblie of the learned Paſtors for to iudge in this caſe according to Chriſtes ordinance and diſcipline: the accuſed and the accuſer did not ſtand foorth for triall. There were no witneſſes produced to prooue the crime: neither were matters ſcanned by the Scriptures. But furor, dolus, & tumultus, that is, furie, deceipt, and tumult, did beare the ſway, as Auguſtine ſheweth in the ſame his Pſalm. They aſſembled which were the accuſers, and Caecilianus is condemned being abſent, by Tigiſitanus Secundus, as hée ſheweth in his firſt booke againſt Parmenian Chap. 3. and in his third booke againſt Creſconius Chap. 40. Now was there great ſtirre and deuiſion begun: Donatus, he ſteppeth foorth and requireth of the Emperour Conſtantine to hauehave Iudges (not of Aphrica, out beyond the ſeas) to heare the crime which was to be obiected againſt Caecilianus. The Emperour appointed that the matter ſhould bee heard at Rome, where Caecilianus was cléered, and Donatus and his part receiuing repulſe appealed, accuſing Meltiades then Biſhop of Rome, that he was alſo traditor, as Auguſtine reporteth in his firſt booke againſt Parmenian, Chapt. 5. and ſo they require to hauehave the cauſe heard by the Emperour, vntounto whom they had appealed: where hauing alſo the repulſe, as falſe accuſers, they ſay y^e Emperour was corrupted through fauour. They made a ſeparation from Caecilianus and thoſe that claue to him. The deuiſion grewe greater and greater, they had aſſemblies p. 4and Biſhops on Donatus part in proceſſe of time in great number. They condemned not only the Church at Carthage, and the neighbour Churches in Aphrica, as guiltie therewith, but all Churches through the world as wrapped together in the guiltines of thoſe Churches of Aphrica. They pronounced them all polluted, vncleane, abominable and vtterlie fallen from the Couenant of God, through the pollution of ſuch as had committed ſacrilege, and were not ſeperated. They ſaid there were no Miniſters of Chriſt, no Sacraments, & ſo no true Church among them, but heapes of wicked polluted ſacrilegious perſons, whoſe teachers were all generations of traitors, Iudaſſes, & perſecutors of Gods Saints, and that as many as would bee ſaued muſt ſeperate themſelues, and ioyne with the pure ſelected companie of Donatus. And for theſe reſpects they baptized again all ſuch as fell vntounto them, as not being baptized before, but polluted with a prophane waſhing. Now, through the ſhew of burning zeale, and ſtiffe rigorous ſeueritie in condemning ſinne, and by the vehement outcries which they made that the diſcipline was not duely executed, in as much as the prophane were mingled together in the aſſemblies with y^e pure, and no ſeperation made: many of the people not well ſettled and grounded in the trueth, were terrified and turned vntounto them, taking them to be moſt zealous holie men, and the onlie true Church in earth: and with excéeding bitterneſſe condemned all other as abominable Idolaters and curſed traytors, whoſe worſhip God abhorred. It was before the daies of Auguſtine that this ſect began, and in his time was greatlie ſpread. And when he wrote that it was againſt all equitie to condemne (as they did at the firſt) the whole world for the ſinne of Caecilianus, becauſe if he were guiltie, yet the Churches farre off knew not ſo much, but might rather iudge him cléere, being cléered in iudgement. They maintained the matter to prooue that there were no true flocks, nor paſtors after another ſort: and did affirme, that as the Church of Carthage, and the Churches elſewhere in Aphrica, were fallen from God by the pollution of the ſacrilege of Caecilianus p. 5and other: ſo all other Churches in the world were deſtroyed by the like ſacrileges committed in the daies of perſecution by wicked men among them, whoſe ſinnes were open and knowne and no ſeperation made. For thus ſpeaketh Parmenian a Donatiſt Biſhop, as Auguſtine doth ſet it downe in his firſt booke againſt him, and third Chapter. Dicit etiam Parmenianus; hinc probari conſceleratum fuiſſe orbem terrarum criminibus traditionis, & aliorum ſacrilegiorum: quia cum multa talia fuerint tempore perſecutionis admiſſa, nulla propterea facta eſt in ipſis prouincijs ſeparatio populorum. That is, Parmenian alſo ſaith, that from hence it is prooued, that the world hath been together made wicked, or hainouſlie polluted with the crimes of treaſon and of other ſacrileges: becauſe, when many ſuch things were done in the time of perſecution, there was no ſeperation of the people made for the ſame in the Prouinces. Marke well this ſaying of Parmenian the Donatiſt, for it doth expreſſie ſet downe the ground of Donatiſme. The words of Petilian another Donatiſt Biſhop, to prooue all the Miniſters of the Churches to be but ſucceſſors of traitors (as Auguſtine doth report them in his ſecond booke againſt him Chapt. 8.) are many, I will onelyonly recite the chiefe of them. This Petilian hauing before ſaide, that he which is baptized by one that is dead, his waſhing doth profite him nothing: then procéedeth to ſhewe how farre (as he ſaith) an vnfaithfull traitor may be accompted dead while he liueth. And for this be frameth a compariſon betwéene Iudas and the Paſtors of the Church, condemning them as the worſe. For after he hath ſet forth that Iudas was an Apoſtle when he betraied Chriſt, and ſpirituallie dead when he had loſt the honour of an Apoſtle: and as it was foretold by Dauid that another ſhould hauehave his place, ſo Matthias ſuccéeded him in the Apoſtleſhip. He would hauehave no foole here diſpute that Matthias dare away triumph and not iniurie, which by the victorie of Chriſt, had the ſpoyle of the traitor. Then he demandeth, how canſt thou by this déede challenge to thy ſelfe the office of a Biſhop, being the heire of a more wicked traitor? p. 6Iudas Christum carnalem tradidit, tu ſpiritualem; furens Euangelium ſanctum flammis ſacrilegis tradidisti. Iudas betraied Chriſt carnal, thou ſpirituall; being in furie thou haſt deliuered the holie Goſpell to the fire. Iudas legiſlatorem tradidit perfidis: tu quaſi eius reliquias legem dei perdendā hominibus tradidisti. Iudas betraied the lawgiuer to the wicked: thou haſt betraied as it were his reliques the lawe of God vntounto mē to be deſtroied. Si hominis mortui teſtamentū flammis incenderes, nonne falſarius punireris? quid de te ergo futurum eſt, qui ſanctiſſimam legem dei iudicis incendisti? If thou ſhouldeſt burne the will of a dead man, ſhouldeſt thou not bee puniſhed as a falſifier? what then ſhall become of thee, which haſt burnt the moſt holie lawe of GOD the Iudge? Iudam facti vel in morte poenituit: te non modò non poenitet, verumetiam nequiſſimus traditor nobis legem ſeruantibus, perſecutor & carnifex existis. Iudas repented him of his deed, at leaſt in death: but thou doeſt not onelyonly not repent, but alſo being a moſt wicked traitor, remaineſt a perſecutor and a tormentor of vsus that keepe the lawe. Creſconius a Grammarian (one as it ſeemeth that taught ſome Grammar ſchoole) tooke vponupon him to write againſt Auguſtine in the defence of Petilian, or rather of the whole Donatiſme, and he laieth to the charge of Caecilianus the vnpardonable ſinne againſt the holie Ghoſt, in betraying the ſcriptures to the perſecutors, vſing this argument: Holie men of God deliuered them as they were led by the holie Ghoſt, (Auguſtine in the 4. booke againſt Creſconius, Chapt. 8.) Petilian (though otherwiſe full of great bragging) being verie vnwilling to hauehave open diſputation in any open aſſembly of learned men, vſed this arrogant ſpeach: Indignum eſt vt in vnum conueniant filij martyrum, & progenies traditorum. It is an vnworthie thing that the ſonnes of the Martyres and the generations of traitors ſhould be aſſembled together. Thus much may ſuffice for this poynt. Where we ſee that the Donatiſts departed diſorderlie out of the Church, condemning it not for any poynt of doctrine (for therein they did not diſagree) but for that many, which in the time of perſecution p. 7diſſembled, many which reuolted, and to ſaue their liues did ſacrifice to the Idolls: many which deliuered the bookes of holie Scripture to bee burned, and betraied the names of the brethren; when the ſtorme was ouer, & there was a ſodaine calme, the Emperour Conſtantine being become Chriſtian, ſuch ioy in all Chriſtian lands, Chriſtianitie magnified with ſuch honour: for that (I ſay) many ſuch returned to profeſſe the Goſpell againe as members of the Church, and were receiued. For, ſaide the Donatiſts, the Church is holie, conſiſting of ſuch as be called foorth and ſeparated from the vnpure and wicked world: and therefore no ſeparation being made, but ſuch villanous traitors, ſo vile Idolaters, and their childrē being communicated withall, all your aſſemblies through this mixture are none other before GOD, but heapes of abominable vncleane perſons. Your teachers are the ſonnes of Apoſtates and traitors, and no Miniſters of Chriſt. Now looke vponupon the Donatiſts of England: Antichriſt hath béen exalted according to the propheſie of S. Paule, he hath ſate in the Temple of God, boaſting himſelfe as God, perſecuting and murthering Gods true worſhippers. He is diſcloſed by the glorious light of the Goſpell: his damnable doctrine, curſed Idolatrie, and vſurped tyrannie are caſt foorth of this land by the holie ſacred power of our dread Soueraigne Ladie Quéene Elizabeth, whom God hath placed & ſettled vponupon the Throne of this noble Kingdome. The true doctrine of faith is publiſhed, and penalties are by lawes appoynted for ſuch as ſhall ſtubbernlie deſpiſe the ſame. Our Donatiſts crie out, that our aſſemblies, (as ye may ſee in their printed bookes) and that the people were all by conſtraint receiued immediatlie from Idolatrie into our Church without preaching of the Goſpell, by the ſound of a Trumpet at the Coronation of the Queene, that they bee confuſed aſſemblies, without any ſeparation of the good from the bad. They affirme alſo that our Miniſters hauehave their diſcent and ordination, and power, from Antichriſt, and ſo are his marked ſeruants. Hereupon, not vnderſtanding the manifeſt Scripture, that the Apoſtaſie p. 6duplicate page p. 7duplicate page p. 8hauing inuaded the Church, it continued ſtill euen then the Temple of God in which Antichriſt did ſit, and that the verie Idolaters were within the Church, were ſealed with the ſigne of baptiſme, profeſſed Chriſt in ſome points rightlie, their children from ancient diſcent being within the couenant of God, and of right to bee baptized, the Miniſterie of Chriſt ſo farre remaining, as that it was the authentick ſeale which was deliuered by the ſame; in a mad furie, like blind hypocrites they condemne the reformation by ciuill power, and purging Gods Temple by the authoritie of Princes, becauſe the Church of Chriſt is founded and built by the doctrine of the Goſpell. Herein they are deceiued, that they imagine the Princes take vponupon them to compell thoſe to bée a Church which were none before: whereas indeed they doo but compell thoſe within their kingdome ouer whome the Lord hath ſet them, which hauehave receiued the ſigne of the couenant, and profeſſe themſelues to bee members of the Church, accordinglie to renounce and forſake all falſe worſhip, and to imbrace the doctrine of ſaluation. What other thing did Ioſias and other holie Kings of Iuda, when they compelled the multitude of Idolaters which were the ſeede of Abraham, and circumciſed, to forſake their Idolatrie and to worſhip the Lord? It is moſt cléere alſo, that where the reformation of the Kings was not perfect, (as appeareth in the bookes of the Kings and Chronicles) yet all the fouleſt things being aboliſhed, and the ſubſtance of trueth brought in, they were reputed godlie Churches, where many were falſe brethren and open offenders. The Browniſts blinded with their ſwelling pride, and not ſéeing the euident matters of the Scriptures, without all order of that holie diſcipline of Chriſt, accuſe, condemne and forſake our Churches, vnderunder the appearance of feruent zeale, and rigorous ſeueritie againſt all ſinne, not inferiour to the Donatiſts; as if they were the onelyonly men that ſtood for Chriſt and his kingdome, they crie out aloude and proclaime all the Miniſters of our Churches to be Antichriſtian, the ſonnes of the Pope, falſe Prophets, Baals Prieſts, that propheſie in Baal, and pleade p. 9for Baal, perſecutors of the iuſt, bearing the marke, the power and life of the beaſt, becauſe they ſay our ordeiners bee ſuch. They ſay wee hauehave no word of God, no Sacraments nor true Church, but that all is vtterlie polluted and become abominable: our aſſemblies they call the very Synagogs of Antichriſt, vtterlie fallen from the couenant of God, and all that ioyne with them, through the pollution of open ſinners which are not caſt foorth: and therefore they hauehave ſeparated themſelues, and crie aloude vntounto others to doo the ſame if they will be ſaued. What rule of diſcipline hauehave they obſerued in this? HaueHave theſe things béen brought foorth, ſcanned, diſcuſſed, and iudged in the Synods of the learned Paſtors and teachers of the Churches? Nay, but euen as Auguſtine ſaith of the other, furor, dolus, & tumultus, furie, deceipt and tumult, do beare the ſway. Then I conclude, that in this poynt of accuſing, condemning, and manner of ſeparating themſelues from the Church, the Donatiſts and the Browniſts doo agree and are alike. Some man will here replie, that I build vppon a weake ground, or rather vponupon the ſand, in prouing the Browniſts and the Donatiſts to bée all one, becauſe they are alike in accuſing and condemning the Churches, and ſeparating themſelues from the ſame. For the matter reſteth not ſimply vponupon the actions; but whether there were iuſt cauſe. The queſtion will bee whether the Browniſts doo that iuſtlie, which the Donatiſts did vngodly. For the Donatiſts did accuſe the Churches and Miniſters falſely, condemned them moſt wickedly, and therefore their ſeparation could not bee good, becauſe it was from the true Churches of Chriſt: but now if the Browniſts obiect open and manifeſt crimes, ſuch as cannot be denied, their caſe doth differ farre. May not a man ſeparate himſelfe from thoſe aſſemblies, where he ſeeth open ſinners ſuffered on heapes to remaine in the boſome of the Church, and where idolatries, blaſphemies and abominations are committed, where the Miniſters and gouernment be Antichriſtian, but he muſt bée a Donatiſt? Moreouer, it is certaine the Donatiſts did condemne all Churches in the world; the Browniſts doo condemne p. 10onelyonly the aſſemblies as they generally ſtand in England, which is a very great difference. The Donatiſts hold that the Sacraments or the efficacie of them doth depend vponupon the worthines of the Miniſter: the Browniſts are not of that mind. The Donatiſts did rebaptize; the Browniſts doo vrge no ſuch thing. It may be alſo they are vnlike in ſome other things: if it be ſo, why ſhould they be termed Donatiſts? Indeed if there be ſuch differences, the Browniſts hauehave great wrong to bee called Donatiſts, and to bee condemned with ſo wicked a ſect? But what if it fall out otherwiſe, and that it be ſhewed and prooued manifeſtlie that they be all one in theſe things? Shall wee not then ſay they be euen brethren? ſhall they not ſtand or fall with the Donatiſts? ſhall they be vngodlie Schiſmatickes, and not theſe? I will procéede from poynt to poynt, to compare them together, that it may appeare whether there be difference. Touching the firſt, it is moſt true that the Donatiſts did accuſe and condemne the Churches and the Miniſters of the Churches moſt falſelie: and I ſay the Browniſts are as falſe accuſers as they, and condemne as iniuſtlie in all crimes which they obiect, and ſhall in no wiſe bee found vnlike in this poynt. Yea, will it bee ſayd, how ſhall that appeare? All men doo knowe that the Browniſts may without any falſe accuſing lay greeuous faults to the Church of England. I graunt they may: and I ſay likewiſe, the Donatiſts might lay as great faults to the charge of many Churches then, and in ſome points greater, & yet be no liers. This is to be prooued by comparing the Churches of thoſe times with ours: for ſo ſhall wee ſee how farre both hauehave iuſtlie accuſed, or might accuſe, and where they meete together as falſe accuſers. The Browniſts may ſtand foorth and accuſe the church of England in this manner: That there bee heapes of open ſinners not ſeparated from among the good, but ſuffered and admitted to the Lords table, at leaſt wiſe in many, or in the moſt aſſemblies: There be prophane ignorant perſons that deſpiſe the holie religion: There bee ſwearers and curſers: There bee thoſe that are puffed vp and ſwell in pride and p. 11vaine glorie: There be ſwarmes of drunkards, gluttons and vnchaſt perſons: There be couetous worldlings, and greedie vſurers, extortioners, oppreſſors, bribers and defrauders: There be liers, backbiters, and ſlanderers: There bée enuious, hateful and contentious perſons: yea, what ſinnes almoſt are wanting? Where ſhall a man goe but he is readie to fall into companies of wicked men? This is not alone among the common people; but verie many of thoſe that ſhould bee guiders, lights, and patternes of godlineſſe vntounto others, are nothing leſſe. Who is able to deny theſe things? heauen and earth will witneſſe againſt him. We may lift vp our voyces and ſay: wee hauehave ſinned with our fathers, wee hauehave done wickedlie. We may confeſſe that our iniquities are heaped vp and reach aboue the clowdes, and that ſhame and confuſion of face is due vntounto vsus. Wee may crie, ſaue Lord for the godlie ceaſe, the faithfull are diminiſhed from the children of men. The complaints that the Prophets doo make euerie where againſt the Church of Iſrael, may verie well be applied againſt vsus. Where is louelove, where is fidelitie, where is merciemercy, where is trueth? But now ſhall wee thinke that the Donatiſts had no ſuch things to accuſe the Churches of in thoſe daies? Could they not ſay your aſſemblies are full of couetous men, proud perſons both men and women? Had they not iuſt cauſe to complaine that many walked in hatred and diſcord? Doo ye imagine that there were no vngodlie Miniſters? or will ye ſuppoſe that Auguſtine and other holie men ſtoode to cléere and iuſtifie the Churches that way againſt the Donatiſts and other Heretickes? Nay, let their words bee heard what they teſtifie in this behalfe. Creſconius alleaged this ſaying of the Lord, I will giuegive ye ſhepheards according to my heart, which ſhal feede yee with knowledge and vnderſtanding. Ieremy. 3. This he cited to prooue that the Paſtors ought to bee faithfull. Auguſtine maketh anſwere thus: Scio, completum eſt, tales Apostoli fuerunt, tales etiam nunc, etſi pro eccleſiae latitudine perpauci, non tamen deſunt. That is, I knowe it is fulfilled, ſuch were the Apoſtles, ſuch alſo there be now, though p. 12very fewe in reſpect of the largenes of the Church, yet they are not wanting. This is a plain teſtimonie that in the time of Auguſtine the faithfull ſincere godlie Paſtors were verie fewe in compariſon. Many teſtimonies may be brought out of diuers ancient writers for this matter: but I will bring but ſome fewe, and firſt out of Cyprian, which alone are ſufficient being both large and cleere. Cyprian was in the time of perſecution before the Donatiſts ſprung vp; and after one perſecution was ouer, he wrote an Epiſtle de lapſis, of thoſe that fell and denied Chriſt: In which firſt he triumphantly reioyceth ouer them which ſtoode; then he mourneth dolefullie for thoſe that fell: and after that he ſheweth why God ſent that perſecution. Si cladis cauſa cognoſcitur, & medela vulneris inuenitur, Deus probare familiam ſuam voluit. If (ſaith he) the cauſe of the ſlaughter be knowne, the cure of the wound is found alſo, God would prooue his familie. Et quia traditam nobis diuinitus diſciplinam pax longa corruperat, iacētem fidem, & poenè dixerim dormientem, cenſura coeleſtis erexit. That is, and becauſe long peace had corrupted the diſcipline deliuered vsus of God, the heauenlie cenſure hath raiſed vp the faith lying along, I may ſay almoſt ſleeping. Then ſhewing that God did not puniſh them ſo much as they deſerued, he ſetteth foorth the greeuous open ſinnes committed in the Church. Studebant augendo patrimonio ſinguli, & obliti quid credentes, aut ſub Apostolis ante feciſſent, aut postmodum facere deberent, inſatiabili cupiditatis ardore ampliandis facultatibus incubabant. That is, They ſtudied euerie one to increaſe their patrimonie, and hauing forgotten either what the beleeuers had done before in the time of the Apoſtles, or what they ought to doo afterward, they all did applie themſelues to increaſe their riches with an inſatiable burning heate of couetous deſire. Here is one ſinne that ouerſpread: then he addeth further. Non in Sacerdotibus religio deuota, non in ministris fides integra, non in operibus miſericordia, non in moribus diſciplina. There was not deuout religion in the Prieſts, there was not the ſound faith in the Miniſters, there was not merciemercy in p. 13workes, there was not diſcipline in manners. And what more? Corrupta barba in viris, in foeminis forma fucata. Adulterati poſt dei manus oculi, capilli mendacio colora…i. Ad decipienda corda ſimplicium callidae fraudes, circumueniendis fratribus ſubdolae voluptates. Iungere cum infidelibus vinculum matrimonij, prostituere cum gentilibus membra Christi. Non iurare tantum temerè, ſed adhuc etiam peierare. Prapoſitos ſuperbo tumore contemnere, venenato ore ſibi maledicere. Odijs pertinacibus inuicem diſſidere. The beard was corrupted, or diſguiſed, in men: the beautie was counterfeit or painted in women. The eyes corrupted from the forme in which Gods hands had made them, the haires were ſet out with a falſe colour: ſubtill fraudes to deceiue the hearts of the ſimple; deceiptfull pleaſures to circumuent the brethren. They coupled themſelues in mariage with infidels; they proſtituted the members of Chriſt with the heathen: they did not onelyonly ſweare raſhlie, but alſo forſweare. They contemned their gouernours with ſwelling pride, and curſed themſelues with venymed mouth, being at diſcord among themſelues with ſtiffe hatreds. Are not theſe horrible ſinnes which ouerflowed in the church? Is there no more? Yes, he ſaith, Epiſcopi plurimi, quos & ornamento eſſe oportet ceteris, & exemplo, diuina procuratione contempta, procuratores rerum ſecularium fieri, derelicta cathedra, plebe deſerta, per alienas prouincias oberrantes negociationis quaeſtuoſae nundinas aucupari. Eſurientibus in eccleſia fratribus habere argentum largiter velle, fundos inſidioſis fraudibus rapere, vſuris multiplicantibus foenus augere. That is, very many Biſhops, which ought to bee an ornament and an example vntounto other men, deſpiſing the deuine cure, became factors in worldly matters, leauing the chaire, forſaking the people, wandring through other Prouinces, did hunt after faires or markets of gainefull trafficke. The brethren hungring in the Church they had ſiluer in great plentie: they would in rauening manner get lands by ſubtill fraud, increaſe their gaine with vſurie. What ſhall we ſay, did this holie Cyprian falſelie accuſe the Churches of his time, in laying theſe greeuous crimes p. 14to the charge both of the Paſtors and the people? Doubtles he ſpake the trueth. It will be demaunded whether Cyprian and the reſt of the godlie did worſhip together with thoſe open ſinners, ioyning with them in praier & receiuing the Sacraments. We ſee it is manifeſt they did: for he deſcribeth not the heathen, or ſuch as had been caſt foorth of the Church, but ſuch as God ſent chaſticement vponupon to raiſe vp the faith which was almoſt, as he ſaith, a ſleepe. He doth alſo teſtifie in plaine wordes, that the godlie could not ſeparate themſelues from the Church, becauſe of ſuch open ſinners, without proud obſtinacie and ſacrilegious preſumption. He ſpeaketh vponupon this occaſion: there were certaine which had ſuffered impriſonment for the Goſpell; among whom was one Maximus an Elder, and certaine brethren, which when they came out of priſon, ſeparated themſelues from the Church, taking offence at the open ſinners which were not caſt foorth, as it appeareth by the words of Cyprian. For hauing teſtified his gladnes y^t they had forſaken their ſchiſme, and did returne againe into the Church: he addeth, Nam etſi videntur in eccleſia eſſe zizania, non tamen impediri debet aut fides, aut charit as nostra, vt quoniam zizania eſſe in eccleſia ſemper cernimus, ipſi de eccleſia recedamus. Nobis tantummodo laborandum eſt, vt frumentum eſſe poſſimus, vt cum caperit frumentum dominicis horreis condi, fructum pro opere nostro & labore capiamus. That is, Although there bee tares ſeene to be in the Church, yet neither our faith nor our charitie ought to be hindered, that becauſe wee alwaies perceiue tares to be in the Church, wee our ſelues ſhould goe out of the Church: wee muſt onelyonly labour that we may bee corne, that when the corne ſhall begin to belayd vp in the Lords barnes, wee may receiue fruit for our work & labour. Then further he addeth: Apoſtolus in Epistola ſua dicit, in domo autem magna, non ſolū vaſa ſunt aurea, & argentea, ſed & lignea, & fictilia, et quaedā quidē honorata, quaedā vero inhonorata: nos operā demus, & quantum poſſumus laboremus vt vas aureū, vel argenteū ſimus. The Apoſtle his Epiſtle ſaith, but in a great houſe there are not p. 15onelyonly veſſels of gold and ſiluer, but alſo of wood and earth, and ſome vntounto honour, and ſome vntounto diſhonour: let vsus doo our endeuour, and labour what we can, that wee may be veſſels of gold, or at leaſt of ſiluer. Finallie he ſaith: Caeterum fictilia vaſa confringere domino ſoli conceſſum eſt, cui & virga ferrea data eſt. Eſſe non poteſt maior domino ſuo ſeruus: nec quiſquam ſibi quod ſoli filio pater tribuit vendicarit, vt ſe putet vniuerſa poſſe zizania, humano iudicio ſegregare: ſuperba eſt ista obstinatio, & ſacrilega preſumptio, quam ſibi furor prauus adſumit, & dum ſibi ſemper quidam plus quam mitis iusticia depoſcit, aſſumunt, de eccleſia pereunt: & dum ſe inſolenter extollunt, ipſo ſuo tumore caecati, veritatis lumen amittunt. But it is graunted onelyonly to the Lord to breake the earthen veſſels, to whom alſo the yron mace is giuen. The ſeruant cannot be greater than his Lord, neither ſhall any challenge that to himſelfe, which the father hath giuen to the ſonne alone, that he ſhould think he can by humane iudgement ſeuer all the tares. That is a proud obſtinacie and ſacrilegious preſumption, which wicked furie doth take to it ſelfe. And while ſome doo alwaies take more vponupon them, than meeke iuſtice dooth require, they periſh out of the Church: and while they inſolentlie extoll themſelues, being blinded with that very ſwelling of theirs, they loſe the light of the trueth. What can be more manifeſt than theſe teſtimonies, which ſhewe that there were greeuous open ſinnes committed by multitudes in the Church, not onelyonly of the common ſort, but euen of the teachers? We ſee they did communicate together, as in the old Church vnderunder the law, heapes of notorious wicked men did flock vntounto the Temple and worſhip at the ſame Altar and Sacrifices with the godlie. Hierom in his Epiſtle to Paulinus ſheweth, there were many of all ſorts, both men and women, which did preſumptuouſlie, ignorantlie, & with baine glorie prattle of the ſcriptures, and ſo abuſe the bolie word of God. And in the Miniſtrie there were that had ſtepped from ſeculer learning to deale with the Scriptures, which being able to rowle out words, thought they made goodlie ſermons. Therefore if p. 16the Donatiſts had but complained that there were multitudes of open ſinners in the Church, as proude, couetous, hatefull perſons, irreligious and prophane abuſers of the Scriptures, and not only of the common ſort, but alſo of the teachers: their complaint had béen true. But when they proceeded thus; That all that did communicate with any ſuch open ſinners, were polluted by them, and fell from God: and ſo termed all the Paſtors wicked traitors and Iudaſſes, wretches, whoſe worſhip and praiers were abominable, and all the people that ioyned with them prophane and heathen: therein they became falſe accuſers and wicked coudemners: they did with moſt intollerable pride and ſacrilegious treacherie publiſh a diuorſe betweene Chriſt and his ſpouſe. The Browniſts offend in the ſame degree in accuſing, condemning, and caſting foorth the Churches of Chriſt, affirming that by open ſinners admitted to the Lords table, all are fallen from the couenant of grace, hauehave no true Sacraments, nor Church, but are as an heape of polluted heathen, whoſe worſhip and praiers are abominable.

Now that it may appeare vntounto eueryevery one that will not ſhut his eyes, that in this point our Browniſts, (I ſpeake of the Capitaines) are full Donatiſts, I wilenter into the particular diſcourſes, and ſhew vponupon what Scriptures they ſtood, and with what arguments they maintained this their wicked hereticall opinion. And what anſwere they receaued from the holieſeruants of God, the paſtors of the Churches. Wherein I deſire the reader to obſerue whether there may be found one haire breadth of difference between them: talke with the Browniſts about this point which they hold, that where open ſinners are admitted to the participation of the Sacraments, all which communicate with them are polluted, and caſt away: or reade the bookes and writings of theirs which are ſpread, marke well the ſentences and places of Scripture which they alleage and quote, and what reaſons they drawe out of them, and then looke vponupon theſe. For I will note the chiefe Teſtimonies of holy Scripture that the Donatiſts did alleage, to proue that all Churches p. 17were polluted by the mixture of open ſinners, and that a ſeparation was commaunded by God from ſuch aſſemblies, which are theſe. Come out from among them (ſaieth the Lord) and touch no vncleane thing, and I will receaue yee, and I will be your Father, and you ſhall be my Sonnes and my Daughters, ſaith the Lord God Almightie. 2. Cor. 6. HaueHave no fellowſhip with the vnfruitefull workes of darkenes but rather reprooue them. Epheſ. 5. Bee not partakers of other mens ſinnes. 1. Tim. 5. A little leauen dooth leauen the whole lumpe; and take away the euill from among yee. 1. Cor. 5. Ifanie which is called a Brother be a Fornicator, an I dolater, or couetous, &c. with ſuch ſee that yee eate not. 1. Cor. 5. What hath the Chaffe to doo with the Corne? Ierem. 23. Alſo depart, depart, come out from thence, and touch no vncleane thing, come out from the middeſt thereof and ſeperate your ſelues, yee that beare the veſſels of the Lord. I ſay. 52. All theſe and ſome other did Parmenian the Donatiſt Biſhop alleage in his Epiſtle. Wee may not thinke that theſe Scriptures were alleaged onelyonly by ſome one Donatiſt: for Auguſtine in his booke De vnico Baptiſmo againſt Petilian Chapter 14. ſaith, Magis enim ſolent in ore habere, quando peccatis aliorum alios criminantur, ad excuſandum nefas ſeparationis ſuae, videbas furem & concurrebas cum eo, &c. For they are wont rather to hauehave in their mouth, when they accuſe ſome to be guiltie or polluted by the ſinnes of other, to excuſe their wicked ſeperation? Thou ſaweſt a theefe and diddeſt run with him. Pſal. 50. And be not partakers of other mens ſinnes, depart and come out from thence, touch no vncleane thing, & he that ſhal touch that which is vncleane ſhal be poluted, and a little leauen dooth leauen the whole lump, and other ſuch like. Now what the eſtate of the queſtion was, (and how they held men polluted, if they did not ſeperate themſelues) the diſputation betweene the Catholique Biſhops and the Donatiſts which were aſſembled at the cōmaundement of the Emperour dooth ſhew. Where the names of the Donatiſt Biſhops that had ſubſcribed their conſent to that conference, p. 18were two hundreth ſeauentie and nine, but ſome of them were not there. Thus Auguſtine reporteth their words in the conference of the third day. Chapter 4. Quia & in eo quod dicebant, & diuinis testimonijs velut astruebant, non eſſe malos in eccleſia tolerandos, ſed ab eis recedendum propter contagium peccatorum: Itaſe dicere demonſtrabant, vt tamen ignoratis peccatis alienis neminem maculari poſſe faterentur. Becauſe euen in that which they ſaide, and which they did as it were confirme by the Scriptures, that the euil are not to be tolerate in the Church, but wee muſt depart from them for feare of the contagion of their ſins: they ſhewed that they ſpake it to be vnderſtoode thus, that neuertheleſſe they confeſſed, that no man could be ſpotted with other mens ſinnes which are ſecret. In this conference the Donatiſt Biſhops ſtoode vponupon this, that the Lord ſaith of the Church Eſay. 52. There ſhall no vncircumciſed or vncleane paſſe through thee anie more. And vpō that which is writtē by the Prophet Hag chap. 2. Aſk the Preeſts concerning the Lawe. If a man carrie holie fleſh in the lappe of his garment, and the lappe of his garment ſhall touch the bread, &c. Shall he bee ſanctified? The Prieſts anſwered, no. Then if a man that is vncleane touch any of thoſe things, ſhall it not bee vncleane? The Prieſtes anſwer, it ſhall bee vncleane. So is this people, and ſo is this Nation before me ſaith the Lord, and ſo is the whole work of their hands, yea that which they hauehave offered there, hath been vncleane. Stay now and ſee whether the very ſame Scriptures bee not in the mouthes of the common ſort of the Browniſts, and whether the writings of the chiefe Browniſts bee not euerie where ſpatred with the quotations of them. And to proue the ſame thing which the Donatiſts held, and maintained by them; namelie that ſuch as communicate with open ſinners are polluted by their ſinnes, and therefore they ſeparate themſelues? But that this agreement betweene them may yet more fully appeare, I will proceed further and ſhewe how theſe matters were diſcuſſed. For otherwiſe it maye bee, ſome man will imagine that p. 19the auncient Fathers might defend the Churches againſt thoſe allegations of the Donatiſts after ſuch a ſort as wee canne not truly defende ours at this day. Whereas therefore it was by the Donatiſts vrged; depart, depart, come out from among them, ſeperate your ſelues, touch no vncleane thing, &c. the anſwere was by the Paſtors of the Churches, that this ſeperation was not to bee made in bodie when the Church is peſtered with open ſinners, but in heart, and not conſenting in minde vntounto the ſins openly committed by thoſe with whom they did communicate in the Church. Theſe be the wordes of Auguſtine againſt Parmenian, in the ſecond booke Chapt. 18. Qua verba isti carnaliter ſentientes, per tot diuiſiones ſeipſos minutatim in ipſa vna Aphrica conciderunt. Non enim intelligunt neminem coniungi cum infidelibus, niſi qui facit peccata Paganorum, vel talia facientibus fauet: Nec quenquam fieri participem iniquitatis, niſi qui iniqua vel agit vel approbat. Quis autem communicat tenebris, niſi qui per tenebras conſentionis ſuae, dimiſſo Christo ſequitur Belial? quis ponit cum infidelibus partem ſuam, niſi qui eius infidelitatis fit particeps? Ita enim templum dei eſſe deſinit, nec ſe aliter ſimulachris adiungit. Qui autem ſunt templum dei viui, & in medio nationis tortuoſae ac peruerſae apparent ſicut luminaria in mundo verbum vitae habentes, nihil eos quod pro vnitate tolerant inficit, nec anguſtiantur. quia in illis habitat & deambulat deus; & exeunt de medio malorum, atque ſeparātur interim corde, ne forté cum id facere per ſeditionem Schiſmatis volūt, prius a bonis ſpiritualiter, quam a malis corporaliter ſeparentur. That is to ſay, which words they vndetſtanding carnally; (for he had before repeated their allegation, Come out from among them and touch no vncleane thing) they hauehave cut themſelues by morſels into ſo many diuiſiōs in that one Aphrica: for they doe not vnderſtand that no man is ioyned with Infidels, but he that doth commit the ſinnes of the Pagans, or elſe doth fauour thoſe that doe ſuch things: neither that any man can be made partaker of the iniquitie, but he that eyther doth the wicked things, or elſe doth approoue them. p. 20And who hath felowſhip with darknes, but he that by the darknes of his conſent forſaking Chriſt doth follow Belial? who putteth his part with infidels, but he which is partarker of that infidelitie? for that way he ceaſeth to be the tēple of God, neither otherwiſe dooth hee ioyne himſelfe to idols. And they which are the temple of the liuing God, and in the middeſt of a crooked and peruerſe generation appeare as lights in the world, hauing the word of life; nothing doth infecte them which they tolerate for vnities ſake, neither are they pent vp in anie ſtraight, becauſe God dooth dwell in them and walke in them And they depart out of the middeſt of the euill, and in the meane while are ſeperate, at leaſtwiſe in heart, leaſt perhaps while they would doo that by ſedition of Schiſme, they ſhould rather be ſpirituallie ſeparated from the good, than corporallie from the bad Thus farre Auguſtine, for ſeperation in heart when it cannot be in bodie. Againe he ſaith, anſwering Parmenian to this ſentence, bee not partaker of other mens ſinnes, chap. 20. Nos dicimus, quod qui non facit malum, nec facienti conſentit; & facientem arguit, firmus atque integer inter iniquos tanquam frumentum inter paleas, conuerſatur. We ſay that he which dooth not commit euill, nor conſent to him that dooth, and rebuketh him that dooth, he is conuerſant firme and ſound among the wicked, as the corne among the chaffe. Now whereas the Donatiſts did replie that the ſeparation from the open ſinners which God commandeth could not be meant of a ſeparation onelie in heart and mind, for ſo we ought to be ſeparate from the heathen: with whom yet it was lawfull to eate, for S. Paul willeth If an infidell bid thee to a feaſt goe, but if anie that is called a brother bee a fornicator an idolater or couetous, with ſuch ſee that yee eate not: this muſt néedes be vnderſtood of a bodelie ſeparation, the Browniſts preſſing this Argument, alſo as the Donatiſts did, ſay we might eate common bread with infidels, yea at the ſame common table with ſuch vngodlie Chriſtians as Paul forbiddeth to eate with, and therefore the commandement of the Apoſtle they ſay is plaine, which p. 21all men ought to obey, that if open ſinners come to the holy table of the Lorde, wee ought not there to eate with them. But let vsus ſee the anſwer of Auguſtine in the third booke againſt Parmenian Chap. 3. His words in déede are manie, but I will ſet them downe, becauſe they be ſo full and pregnant to declare, wherein the controuerſie lay betweene the Donatiſts and the Churches, and why the Donatiſts made ſeparation. In hac velut angustia quaestionis, non aliquid nouum aut inſolitum dicam, ſed quod ſanitas obſeruat eccleſiae, vt cum quiſque fratrum, id eſt Chriſtianorum intus in eccleſiae ſocietate constitutorum, in aliquo tali peccato fuerit deprehenſus, vt anathemate dignus habeatur, fiat hoc vbi periculum Schiſmatis nullum est, atque id cum ea dilectione, de qua ipſe alibi praecipit dicens, vt inimicum eum non existimetis, ſed corripite vt fratrem, non enim estis ad eradicandum, ſed ad corrigendū: quod ſi ſe non agnouerit, neque poenitendo correxerit, ipſe for as exiet, & per propriam voluntatem ab eccleſiae vnitate dirimetur. Nam & ipſe dominus cùm ſeruis volentibus ZiZania colligere dixit, ſinete vtraque creſcere vſque ad meſſem: praemiſit cauſam dicens, ne forte cum vultis colligere Zizanea eradicetis ſimul & triticum. Vbi ſatis ostendit, cum metus iste non ſubest, ſed omnino de frumentorum certa ſtabilitate, certa ſecuritas manet: id est quando ita cuiuſque crimen notum est omnibus, & omnibus execrabile apparet, vt vel nullos prorſus, vel non tales habeat definſores, per quos poſſit ſchiſma contingere: non dormiat ſeueritas diſciplinae, in qua tantò est efficacior emendatio prauitatis, quantò diligentior confirmatio charitatis, tum autem hoc ſine labe pacis & vnitatis, & ſine laeſione frumentorum fieri potest, cùm congregationis eccleſiae multitudo ab eo crimine quod anathematizatur aliena est. Tunc enim adiuuat praepoſitum potius corripientem, quam criminoſum reſistentem: tunc ſe ab eius coniunctione ſalubriter continet, vt nec cibum cum eo quiſquam ſumat, non rabie inimica, ſed coertione fraterna. Tunc etiam ille & timore percutitur & pudore ſanatur, cum ab vniuerſa eccleſiaſc anathematizatum videns, ſociam turbam cum qua in delicto ſuo gaudeat, & bonis inſultet non poteſt inuenire. p. 22That is to ſay, As it were in this ſtraight of the queſtion. I will not ſpeake any thing that is new or vnwonted, but that which the ſoundnes of the Church dooth obſerue: that when anie of the Brethren, that is of the Chriſtians, which hauehave place within in the vnitie of the Church, be taken in ſome ſuch ſinne, that hee may bee accounted worthie to bee excommunicate; let it bee done where there is no danger of a Schiſme, and the ſame with that louelove, of which hee commaundeth elſewhere, ſaying, eſteeme him not as an enemie, but admoniſh him as a Brother, for yee are not to roote vp, but to amend. If that hee ſhall not acknowledge himſelfe, neither reforme himſelfe by repentance, hee ſhall depart out, and by his owne will ſhall bee cut from the vnitie of the Church. For the Lord himſelfe, when he ſaide to the ſeruants, which would gather the tares, ſuffer both to grow together, ſhewed a cauſe, ſaying, least peraduenture while yee goe about to roote vp the tares, ye pluck vp alſo with them the wheate. Where hee dooth plainelie ſhew, that when there is no ſuch feare, but there remaineth a full ſecuritie of the vndoubted ſtabilitie of the corne; that is when the crime of any one is ſo knowne to all, and appeareth execrable vntounto all, that either it can hauehave no defenders at all, or elſe not ſuch by whome there may a Schiſme fall out: let not the ſeueritie of diſcipline ſleepe, in which the curing of the diſeaſe is ſo much more effectuall, as the confirmation of louelove is more diligent. Then alſo this may bee done without any blot of peace and vnitie, and without hurting the corne, when the multitude of the aſſemblie of the Church is free from that crime, for which the excommunication is denounced. For then they rather helpe the paſtor that dooth chaſtice, than the guiltie offendor which reſiſteth, then euerie man dooth healthfullie abſtaine from his fellowſhip, and not ſo much as eate meate with him, not of an enemie like mad rage, but of a brotherlie reprehenſion. Then hee alſo is ſtricken p. 23with feare, and healed through ſhame, when ſeeing himſelf excommunicate of the whole Church, cannot finde a multitude to bee of his fellowſhip with which hee may reioyce in his ſinne, and inſult ouer the good. Thus farre Auguſtine, which yee ſee expoundeth that place of Paul, with ſuch eate not, of thoſe that be excommunicate iuſtlie by the Church, ſhewing that this excommunication cannot be executed when ſuch a multitude doo ſinne that it would bréede a Schiſme, if they ſhould be all caſt foorth and ſo pluck vp the wheate: ſéeing as he ſheweth this cenſure is ordained as a remedie to heale, and not to pluck vp and deſtroy. This point peraduenture will ſeeme ſtrange vntounto many, that the ſeueritie of the diſcipline ſhould ceaſe as it were when it is a multitude that dooth offend: and leaſt it may be thought not to be his meaning and as he ſpeaketh, that which the ſoundnes of the Church did obſerue, I will ſhew how he proceedeth further in his anſwer. Neque enim potest eſſe ſalubris a multis correptio, niſi cum ille corripitur, qui non habet ſociam multitudinem, cum verò idem morbus plurimos occupauerit nihil aliud bonis restat quam dolor & gemitus, vt perillud ſignum quod Ezechieli ſancto reuelatur illae ſi euadere ab illor…m vastatione mereantur. For neither can that reprehenſion by manie (ſaith hee) bee for health, but when he is reprehended, which hath not the multitude his companion. But when the ſame ſicknes hath taken hold of verie manie, there remaineth nothing elſe to the good, but ſorrowe and bewailing, that through that ſigne which is reuealed vntounto holie Ezechiel, they may deſerue to eſcape vnhurt and free from the deſtruction of thoſe wicked.

When Auguſtine hath vttered this, a little after he bringeth in Paule himſelfe for example in his practiſe: for he willed them to excommunicate the inceſtuous perſon, and he that had willed not to eate bread with a brother ſo called that were a fornicator, doth not will them to caſt them foorth, and not to eate bread with them whom he complaineth of: 2. Epiſtle 12. that had not repented for the vncleannes, and p. 24fornication and wantonnes which they had committed: for theſe he ſaith were many: and therefore that S. Paule doth not threaten that whē he came he would caſt them foorth, but he would, as he ſaith, bewaile them. The like we ſee in thoſe that denied the reſurrection, he willed them not to caſt theſe foorth, leaſt a ſchiſme might growe thereupon. After this he addeth, Et re vera ſi contagio peccandi multitudinem inuaſerit, diuina diſciplinae ſeuera miſericordia neceſſaria eſt: nam conſilia ſeparationis, & inania ſunt & pernicioſa atque ſacrilega, quia & impia & ſuperbafiunt, & plus perturbant infirmos bonos, quam corrigant animoſos malos. That is: And in verie deede if the contagion of ſinning hath inuaded the multitude, the ſeuere merciemercy of diuine diſcipline is neceſſarie: for the counſell or enterpriſes of ſeparation are both vaine and pernicious, yea ſacrilegious, becauſe they become both wicked and proude, and doo more trouble the good which are weake, than chaſtice the ſturdie ones which are euill. What can bee more vehementlie thundred out againſt the Donatiſts than this? and yet the Browniſts which are the ſame in their ſchiſme, may not bee ſpoken ſharply vntounto. Then a little after Auguſtine doth as it were conclude in this poynt: Miſericorditer igitur corripiat homo quod poteſt: quod autem non poteſt patienter ferat, & cum dilectione gemat atque lugeat, donec aut ille deſuper emendet & corrigat, aut vſque ad meſsem differat eradicare zizania, & paleam ventilare. Let a man therefore with merciemercy correct that which he can: and that which he cannot, let him beare with patience, and with louelove let him mourne and lament, vntill he from aboue doo either redreſſe and amend, or elſe differre vntill the harueſt to roote out the tares, and to winnowe out the chaffe. Here he alleageth the example of that holie Martyr Cyprian which had béen Biſhop of Carthage, who deſcribing the multitude to bee ſo full of groſſe ſinnes, yea verie many of his fellow Biſhops ſpotted with very foule crimes, yet he communicated with them, though not in their ſinnes, which he did euermore reprehend, but in the Sacraments p. 25and holie worſhip of God. Furthermore, anſwering to the ſentence alleaged by the Donatiſt out of Ieremie, what hath the chaffe to doo with the corne? He ſaith among all things the Donatiſts in this did bewray their ſacrilegious ſwelling pride. For though being demaunded they would confeſſe themſelues to be ſinners; yet in this they did not onelyonly challenge to be the true Church alone, but alſo ſuch as the holie Church ſhall be after the laſt winnowing. Cui ſacrilegae praeſumptioni & nephandae elationi, quid addi poſſit ignoro. That is, To which ſacrilegious preſumption and curſed abominable ſwelling, I knowe not what can be added. Reade the bookes of Browne and the writings of other Browniſts, and ye ſhall euer and anon finde great outcries, as they charge vsus, againſt our wicked tollerating. If it were ſwelling pride in the Donatiſts that cauſed them to denie any tollerating, what is it in the Browniſts? But to proceede yet further, in the third booke againſt Creſconius, Chapter 50. hee ſaith: Haec omnia diſplicent bonis, & ea prohibent, & cohibent quā tum poſſunt, quantum autem non poſſunt ferunt, & ſicut dixi, pro pace laudabiliter tolerant, non ea laudabilia, ſed damnabilia iudicantes: nec propter zizania ſegitem Chriſti, nec propter paleas aream Chriſti, nec propter vaſa inhonorata domum magnam Chriſti, nec propter piſces malos retia Chriſti derelinquunt. That is to ſay, Al theſe things diſpleaſe the good, and they forbid them and reſtraine them as much as they can, and as much as they cannot reſtraine, they beare: and as I hauehave ſaide, they tolerate laudablie for peace ſake, not iudging the thinges laudable but damnable: neither doo they forſake the corne of Chriſt for the tares, nor the fl…aer Matth. 13 Matth. 3. 1. Timo. 5 Matth. 14Matt 13Matt 3:1Matt 14of Chriſt becauſe of the chaffe, nor the great houſe of Chriſt becauſe of the veſſells for diſhonour, nor the nettes of Chriſt for the euill fiſhes. I hauehave ſhewed alreadie, that the Donatiſt Biſhops when they were by the commandement of the Emperour aſſembled in great number at Carthage, that there might bee a conference; declared this to bee their mind: when they affirme that the good are polluted and caſt away by communicating with the bad, that it is when p. 26the ſinnes are manifeſt. Now I thinke it is not amiſſe to ſhewe ſomewhat of their diſputation, that the things which I alleage touching their opinions, may not ſeeme to be from ſome fewe, which peraduenture might differ from others. Looke in the conference of the third day, Chapt. 4. The Biſhops of the true Church to prooue that there ſhould be open wicked ſinners in the Church mingled together with the good vntounto the end of the world, alleaged firſt that the Church is called Chriſtes flower where the corne and the chaffe are mixed together, but he hath his fanne, and will purge his flower, and gather the corne into his barne, and burne the chaffe with vnquenchable fire. Matth. 3. The Donatiſts at the firſt raſhlie replie, that there was not the word flower expreſſed in the Scripture: but when they were conuinced manifeſtlie in that, then they ſay the chaffe did ſignifie the hypocrites and cloſe ſinners: as though the chaffe did ſo reſemble the corne, that it could not be diſcerned. Then next was alleaged the parable of the good ſeede and the bad, and that the ſeruants were forbidden to plucke vp the tares, leaſt they ſhould in plucking vp the tares, plucke vp alſo together with them the wheate, but they are willed to let them grow together vntounto the harueſt. Matth. 13. Now becauſe it is expreſly ſaid that the Tares appeared or ſhewed themſelues and that the ſeruants did diſcerne them, ſo y^e it cannot be taken alone of cloſe ſinners: The Donatiſts did flie vntounto y^e Cauil, that the field is not y^e church, becauſe he ſaith, the field is this world. And ſo they ſtood vponupon this, that y^e godly & open ſinners are together in y^e world, but not in the Church: For they did alleage many teſtimonies to ſhew that the world is taken for the wicked. It was replied by the Catholike Biſhops, y^t the world was ſometimes put in good part, as whē it is ſaid, God was in Chriſt reconciling the world to himſelfe: And indéed, if it were not taken to be the Church, & that the gdooſeede & the bad in the field, were together in the Church, howe ſhoulde the ſeruants hauehave a deſire to pluck them vp? what had they to doe to meddle with ſuch as were without▪ or why ſhould there be danger in rooting them vp, leaſt they p. 27ſhould together roote vp the wheat? Then further when it was ſaid that our ſauiour compareth the kingdome of heauen vntounto a Net caſt into the ſea, which gathereth together of all ſorts both good bad and, which when it is ful men draw to land, & gather the good into veſſells, & caſt the bad away. Math. 13. The Donatiſts to this ſaid that the euill fiſhes did ſignifie cloſe hypocrites, and ſuch ſinners as could not be eſpied. Victi euidentia veritatis malos in eccleſia vſus que ad finem ſeculi permixtos eſſe, confeſſi ſunt: ſed occultos eos eſſe dixerunt, quoniam ſic a ſacerdotibus ignorantur, quemadmodum piſces intraretiacum adhuc in mari ſunt a piſcatoribus non videntur. That is, Being ouercome with euidence of truth, they confeſſed that the euill are mixed in the Church euē to the end of the world, but they ſaid they are ſecret becauſe they are vnknowen of the Paſtors, euen as the fiſhes within the nettes, while they are yet in the Sea are not ſcene of the fiſhers. But if the Donatiſts had beene aſked whether the fiſhes together in the Net doe not ſee one another, what would they ſay? Howe then are they ſecret, and not ſeene of the Paſtors, who are alſo together with thē in the Net▪ For they did erre in taking the Paſtors to bee the fiſhers that ſhall draw the N…t to the ſhoare. For expounding it, ou Sauiour ſaith: The Angells ſhall goe foorth, and ſeperate the euill from among the iuſt. The Angels then are they that draw the Net to the ſhoare. Were thoſe vngodly ſinners ſecret as fiſhes vnderunder the water which the Prophets complained of in olde time, and yet did not in bodie ſeperate themſelues from them in the Temple▪ The like may be demanded touching the Phariſies and Saduces, and the multitude of common people in the Church, from whom our Sauiour did not ſeperate himſelfe in bodie. But the Donatiſts were impudent in denying that the Prophets and the other godly did worſhip together in the temple, and at the ſame Altare with the wicked multitude whom they ſo ſharply reprehended.

Now may the reader ſee what the Donatiſts maintained, and wherefore they ſeperated themſelues: which I will expreſſe p. 28in the wordes of Auguſtine in his third booke againſt Creſconius Chapt. 81. Ibi enim tota defenſi… vestra conſistit, quia propterea vos ſeparaſtis, ne aliorum peccatorum contagione periretis: vndenouum genus areae vos ſeciſſe gloriamini, aut quae ſolum triticum habeat, aut in qua ſolum triticum appareat, cui non ſit neceſsarius ventilator, ſed perſcrutator. That is For therein doth your whole defence conſiſt, that therefore ye hauehave ſeparate your ſelues, that ye might not periſh by the contagion of other mens ſinnes: wherevpon ye glorie that ye hauehave made a new kinde of floare, which either hath in it only wheat, or elſe in which there appeareth wheat alone which needeth not a winnower, but a ſearcher. The Donatiſts alleaging againſt the Churches for the open ſinners mixed among them y^e ſaying of Eſay, wo be to thē that cal euill good and good euill, light darkenes, and darkenes light, &c. Auguſtine anſwereth, Quiſques ergo vel quod poteſt arguendo corrigit, vel quod corrigere non poteſt, ſaluo pacis vinculo excludit, vel quod ſaluo pacis vinculo excludere non potest, aequitate improbat, firmitate ſupportat, hic est pacificus & abiſto maledicto immunis quod ſcriptura dicit, va his qui dicunt quod nequam est bonu, &c, Whoſoeuer therefore dooth either amend that which hee can by reprouing, or that which he cannot amend, he caſteth forth, the band of peace being kept ſafe, or that which he cannot caſt out with the ſafetie of the band of peace, by equitie hee diſaloweth, and beareth it with conſtancie: this man is the peacemaker, and is free from that curſe which the Scripture pronounceth, Woe be to them which cal euill good, &c. Againſt Parmenian booke 2. chap. 1. The Donatiſts alleaging the ſentences of the Prophets to proue that all ought to ſeparate themſelues from thoſe, among whome the open notorious wicked men were ſuffered, and not caſt foorth: he anſwereth that they cited the teſtimonies of Scripture, and did not looke vponupon the déeds of the Prophets, and ſo to know how the words of the Prophets were to be vnderſtand. Then hee demaundeth, Dixit Ieremias quid paleis ad triticum? Ʋt ipſe recederet a paleis upopli ſui, in p. 29quas illa tanta & vera dicebat? Did Ieremie ſay what hath the chaffe to doo with the corne, for this end, that he himſelfe ſhould depart from the chaffe of his people, againſt which hee did vtter thoſe ſo great things, and the ſame moſt true? Dixit Ieſaias, Recedite, recedite, exite inde, & immundum nolite tangere. Sed cur ipſe in illo populo immunditiam quam grauiter arguebat, in vna cum eis congregatione tangebat? Legant quanta in malos populi ſui, & quam vehementer ac veraciter dixerit, a quibus ſe tamen nulla corporali diremptione ſeparauerit. That is, Eſay ſaide, Depart, depart, come out from thence, and touch not that which is vncleane. But whie did hee himſelfe in one congregation with them, touch that vncleannes which hee reprooued in that people? They may read how great things hee vttered againſt the wicked of his people, how vehementlie and trulie, from whome notwithſtanding hee did ſeparate himſelfe with no bodelie ſeparation. After he hath ſhwed the like in the holie Prophet Dauid who profeſſed hee had not ſit in the counſell of vaine men, and yet was not ſeparate in bodie from the vngodlie in his dayes: He addeth Nonne, ſi eorum verba factis eorum obijceremus responderent nobis, nos planè cum talibus nullum habuimus in corde conſortium, nec tangebamus immundum vbi potest coinquinari contactus: id est conſenſione at que placito conſcientiae recedebamus, & exibamus ab eis, qui non ſolùm talia non faciebamus, ſed nec facientibus tacebamus. If we ſhould obiect their words againſt their deedes, would they not anſwer vsus, wee hauehave had vtterlie no fellowſhip in heart with ſuch wicked men, neither did we touch that which is vncleane, where the touching may be defiled: That is to ſay, wee did depart and come out from them in conſent and likening of conſcience, which our ſelues, not onelie, did not doo ſuch things, but alſo kept not ſilence to them that did ſuch wickednes. Againſt Parmenian booke 3. chap. 4. Again, in the ſame place he addeth. Poſtremò ſi Prophetae poſteros monuerunt vt ſe ante tempus vltimae ventilationis a paleis corporaliter ſepararent, & tali ſeparatione p. 30cauerent tangere immundum, & cum facinoroſis non introirent, cur hoc non fecit Apostolus Paulus? An palea nō erant, qui non ex veritate, ſed ex inuidia Christum annunciabant? An immundi non erant, qui non caſtè euangelium praedicarunt? Hos in illis temporibus eccleſia fuiſſe testatur, cuius excellentiſſimam charitatem omnia tolerantem, etiam posteriores imitati ſunt. That is, Laſtlie if the Prophets gaue warning to the poſteritie that they ſhould before the time of the laſt winnowing ſeparate themſelues from the chaffe in bodie, and by ſuch ſeparation take heede of touching any vncleane thing, and that way not to enter with the wicked dooers, whie did not the Apoſtle Paul doo ſo? Were not they chaffe which preached Chriſt of enuie, and not for the trueth? Were not they vncleane, which preached the Goſpell not purelie? That there were ſuch in the Church at thoſe times hee dooth teſtifie Philip▪ 1. Whoſe moſt excellent charitie induring or tolerating all things, thoſe that ſuceeded hauehave alſo imitated. Hauing thus affirmed, that this moſt excellent louelove of Paul tolerating open wicked men in the church where they could not without danger of ſchiſme be caſt foorth was imitated of the godlie paſtors that ſuccéeded: he alleageth for example holie Cyprian: who teſtifying that not onelie the people, but alſo manie of his fellowe Biſhoppes were horriblie wicked, yet liued in peace with them, and did not ſeparate himſelfe in bodie. Thus hee demaundeth, An immunditia, an etiam auaritia, quam Cyprianus corde non tetigit, & tamen inter auaros collegas pacatiſſſimè vixit? Was it not vncleannes, was it not alſo couetouſnes, which Cyprian touched not in heart, and yet liued moſt peaceablie among his couetous fellowe Biſhops? He knew right well what God commaundeth in the Pſalme, that hee ſhould not ſit in the counſell of vaine men, nor enter with the wicked dooers. An non erat conuenticulum vanitatis in eis, qui eſurientibus in eccleſia fratribus, largiſſimo argento nitere cupiebant? An non erant facinoroſi qui fuundos inſidiosè fratribus rapiebant? An p. 31nequiſſimi & impij non erant qui vſuris multiplicantibus foenus augebant? Ille vero, lauabat manus ſuas cum innocentibus & circundabat altare domini. Ideo quippe tolerabat nocentes, ne deſer…ret innocentes cum quibus manus lauabat, quia diligebat ſpeci…m domus domini, quae ſpecies in vaſis honorabilibus fuit. That is, Was not the conuenticle of vanitie among them, which while their brethren indured hunger or penurie in the Church, did couet to ſhine gorgeouſlie with moſt aboundant wealth? Were not they wicked dooers, which by deceiptfull meanes in ſuch rauening ſort tooke from their brethren poſſeſsions of Lands? Were they not moſt vngodlie and wicked, which with multiplying vſurie did increaſe their gaine? But Cyprian did waſh his hands with innocents, and compaſſed the Altar of the Lord. He tolerated the wicked, leaſt he ſhould forſake thoſe innocent, with whom hee waſhed his hands, becauſe hee loued the beautie of the Lords houſe, which beautie was in the veſſels for honour. Now where the Donatiſts might obiect, ſhall the diſcipline then be neglected, and wicked men ſuffered to liue at their pleaſure in the Church? Auguſtine anſwereth both them and all others touching this obiection, firſt in his third booke againſt Parmenian chap. 1. Quapropter quiſquis etiam contempſerit eccleſiae Dei diſciplinam vt malos cum quibus non peccat, & quibus non fauet, deſistat monere, corrigere, arguere: ſi etiam talem gerit perſonam, & pax eccleſiae patitur, vt etiam à ſacramentorum participatione quem piam poſſit ſeparare, non alieno malo peccat ſed ſuo, ipſa quippe in tanta re negligentia graue malum est, & ideò ſicut Apoſtolus admonet, ſi auferet malū a ſeipſo, non ſolum aufirre… audaciam committendi, aut pestilentiam conſentiendi, ſed etiam pigritiam corrigendi, & negligentiam vindicandi adhibita prudentia & obedientia in eo quod praecepit dominus, ne frumenta laedantur. That is to ſay, Wherfore, whoſoeuer alſo ſhall deſpiſe the diſcipline of Gods Church, ſo that he giuegive ouer admoniſhing, correcting, and reprouing the euill men with whome hee dooth not ſinne, and p. 32whome he dooth not fauour, yea if he beare ſuch office, and the peace of the Church permit, that hee may alſo ſeparate any from the participation of the Sacraments, and dooth not, he ſinneth by his owne falt and not by the falt of another. For the verie negligence it ſelfe in ſo great a matter is a grieuous ſinne, and therefore as the Apoſtle dooth warne. If he will take away euil from himſelfe, hee muſt not onelie take away the boldnes of committing it, or the peſtilence of conſenting thereto, but alſo the ſlouthfulnes of correcting and negligence of reuenging the ſame, prudentlie obeying in that which the Lorde hath commaunded, that the wheate may not be hurt.

In his third booke againſt Petilian, Chapt. 4. hauing before ſhewed that there is a worthie patience in ſuffering the falſe brethren for the vnities ſake: he addeth, Neque hoc ideo dixerim vt negligatur eccleſiastica diſciplina, & permittatur quiſque facere quod velit ſine vlla correptione & quadam medicinali vindicta▪ & terribili lenitate, & charitatis ſeueritate. That is, Neither hauehave I therefore ſayd this, that the eccleſiaſticall diſcipline ſhould be neglected, and that eueryevery one ſhould be ſuffered to do what he will without rebuke, and without a certaine medicinable reuenge, terrible lenittie, and ſeueritie of louelove. In the 37. Chap. of the ſame booke, hauing ſpoken of the corne and the chaffe mixed together, the wheate and the tares growing together, the good fiſhes and the had in the ſame nette together vntounto the end of the world, he then inferreth: Nec propterea tamen eccleſiastica diſciplina negligitur à constantibus, & diligentibus, & prudentibus dispenſatoribus Chriſti, vbi crimina ita manifeſt antur, vt nulla poſſint probabili ratione defendi. That is, Notwithſtanding the eccleſiaſticall diſcipline is not therefore neglected of the conſtant, diligent and wiſe diſpenſers of Chriſt, where the crimes are manifeſted in ſuch ſort that they can in no probable maner be defended. In the fourth Chapter of his booke after the conference with the Donatiſts, taking aduantage of a ſaying which they vttered, which p. 33was this: Nec cauſae cauſa praeiudicat, nec perſonae perſona. That is, neither doth cauſe preiudicate cauſe, neither one perſon another. Hee ſaith that the cauſe and perſon of the tares doth not preiudicate the cauſe and perſon of the wheat growing together in the ſame field vntill the harueſt come: The cauſe and perſon of the chaffe doth not preiudicate the cauſe and perſon of the corne, beeing together in the ſame floare vntill the laſt winnowing: The cauſe and perſon of the goates, doth not preiudicate the cauſe and perſon of the ſheepe, kept together in the ſame paſtures, vntill the great ſhepheard ſhall ſeparate them to the right hand and to the left in the laſt day: The cauſe and perſon of the euill fiſhes doth not preiudicate the cauſe and perſon of the good fiſhes, though they bee held in the ſame nette to be ſeparated in the laſt ſhoare. Then he addeth, Quibus parabolis, & figuris eccleſia praenunciata eſt vſque in finem ſeculi bonos & malos ſimul habitura, ita vt nec mali bonis obeſſe poſſint, cum velignorantur, vel pro pace & tranquillitate eccleſiae tolerantur, ſi eos prodi aut a…cuſari non oportuerit, aut alijs bonis non potuerit demonſtrari: ita ſanè vt nec emendationis vigilantia quieſcat, corripiendo, degradando, excommunicando, caeteriſque coertionibus licitis atque conceſſis, quae ſalua vnitatis pace in eccleſia quotidie fiunt ſecundum praeceptum Apostolicum charitate ſeruata qui dixit, ſi quis autem non obaudit verbo nostro, per epistolam hunc notate, & nolite commiſceri cum eo, vt erubeſcat, & non vt inimicum existimetis, ſed corripite vt fratrem. Sic enim & diſciplina ſeruat patientiam, & patientia temperat diſciplinam, & vtrumque refertur ad charitatem, ne fortè aut indiſciplinata patientia foueat iniquitatem, aut impatiens diſciplina diſſipet vnitatem. That is to ſay, By which parables and figures, the Church is foreſhewed that it ſhall hauehave the good and the bad together vntounto the ende of the world, ſo as the euil cannot hurt the good, when either they are not knowne, or elſe are tolerated for the peace and tranquilitie of the Church, if it be not behoueful that they ſhal be manifeſted or accuſed, or that it cannot be ſhewed to others that be good: euen ſo verelie as yet the watchfulneſſe p. 34of redreſsing may in no wiſe reſt, in rebuking, degrading, excommunicating, and in other lawfull and allowable reſtraints, which, the peace of vnitie receiuing no dammage, are daylie practiſed in the Church without any hindrance or breach of louelove, according to the Apoſtles precept, which ſayd: If any obey not our word, note him by an Epistle, and hauehave no fellowſhip with him, that he may bee aſhamed, and eſteeme him not as an enemie, but admoniſh him as a brother. For in ſo doing, the diſcipline doth keepe patience, and patience doth temper the diſcipline, and both are referred vntounto charitie, leaſt either vndiſciplined patience ſhould foſter iniquitie, or impatient diſcipline, might diſſolue and ſcatter the vnitie.

Thus farre Auguſtine: by which words he ſheweth, that albeit the good and the bad ſhall alwaies euen to the end of the world bee mixed together on heapes in the Church, ſo that oftentimes open ſinners cannot bee all caſt foorth without daunger of ſchiſme, and therefore are to be tollerated for the peace of the Church: yet the diſcipline is not to ſleepe, but ſinners are to bee rebuked: ſuch as beare publike office, if they deſerue, are to be degraded and depriued. The notorious wicked are to bee excommunicated, where the multitude is not guiltie with them, but that they may be forſaken of all and ſo made aſhamed: but louelove, according to the rule of Saint Paule, is to ſit at the ſtearne and to order the whole matter, leaſt the ſeueritie of chaſticing diſcipline, if it were not mixed and tempered, or as I may ſay, delaied with patience, might breed tumults and ſchiſmes, and ſeparations: or leaſt on the other ſide, if tollerating patience were not ſharpened by the ſeueritie of diſcipline, it might nouriſh all manner of wickednes.

We ſee then what was the practiſe of the auncient Churches, and that touching the Eccleſiaſticall cenſures, the mixture of patience and ſeueritie, whollie referred vntounto louelove, doo make a ſoueraigne plaiſter and medicine, to ſalue and cure the ſores of the Church. Where theſe be not tempered together there is great decay: for as the rigorous ſeueritie of p. 35Donatiſme, without any aſwaging the heate of ſeueritie with the mixture of louelove and patient tolleration, doth rend vp and furiouſlie teare all in peeces: ſo doth ouermuch or a looſe ſufferance (for it deſerueth not the name of patience, not regarding Gods honor nor mens ſaluation) ſuffer the Lords field to ouergrowe with tares, and fill the Lords Courts with Goates and Swine: whereby holie things are greatlie prophaned, the weake are made to ſtumble, and many are caſt downe. Touching this firſt point then in controuerſie betwéene the Donatiſts and the Churches, I will conclude it with that which Auguſtine writeth in his treatiſe De vnitate Eccleſiae, Chapt. 16. where hauing ſhewed in the former parts of the ſame booke that the controuerſie was not about the head, which is Chriſt, but about the bodie, which is his Church. For touching the head they agreed, and touching the bookes of holie Scripture and their authoritie, there was no diſſent at all betweene the Donatiſts and them.

Then further he commeth to this poynt, that as Chriſt the head is to bee ſought for and knowne onlie in the Canonicall Scriptures: ſo the Church, which is his bodie, is likewiſe to be ſought for, found out, and iudged onelyonly by the ſame bookes of Scripture. Then he calleth for triall not by thoſe darke places of the Byble which are ſpoken in figures and may be expounded diuers waies in probable ſenſe; but from the manifeſt cléere teſtimonies, which alſo he alleageth out of many bookes both of the old and newe Teſtament, to prooue that the Church ſhould bee ſpread ouer all the kingdomes and nations of the world. He anſwereth the places of Scriptures which they alleaged to prooue that the world at ſundrie times had ſo fallen away from God, that a verie fewe true worſhippers remained, and why might not they be now as thoſe fewe? He ſheweth that there be innumerable teſtimonies to prooue, that the open bad did communicate together with the good in the Sacraments, and that the good were fewe in compariſon of the bad ſo mixed with them, of which (after he hath cited many) he commeth at the p. 36laſt as it were to a concluſion, that al other things remooued, hee would hauehave them ſhewe their Church out of the holie Scriptures, and from the places which are not darke. And then it followeth, Quiſquis ergo huic epistolae reſpondereſe praeparat, ante denunciationem mihi dicat, illi codices dominicos ignibus tradiderunt, illi ſimulacris gentium ſacrificauerūt, illi nobis iniquiſſimam perſecutionem fecerunt, et vos eis in omnibus conſenſiſtis. Breuiter enim reſpondeo quod ſaepè reſpondi, aut falſa dicitis, aut ſi vera ſunt, non ad frumenta Christi, ſed ad eorum paleam pertinent ista quae dicitis, non inde perit eccleſia, quae optimo iudicio ventilata, istorum omnium ſeparatione purgabitur. That is to ſay, Whoſoeuer therefore prepareth himſelfe to anſwere this Epiſtle, let him before the denouncing, ſay vntounto me; ſuch deliuered the Lords bookes to the fire, ſuch ſacrificed to the Idols of the Gentiles, ſuch hauehave perſecuted vsus moſt vniuſtlie, and you hauehave conſented vntounto them in all things. For I anſwer brieflie, which I hauehave often anſwered, either ye ſpeake things which are falſe, or elſe if they bee true, that which ye ſpeake pertaineth not to the corne of Chriſt but to the chaffe thereof, the Church doth not periſh thereby, which winnowed with moſt perfect iudgement, ſhall bee purged by the ſeparation of that ſame chaffe. He addeth: Ego ipſam eccleſiā requiro vbi ſit, quae audiendo verba Christi & faciendo aedificat ſuper petram, & audiendo & faciendo tolerat eos, qui audiendo & non faciendo aedificant ſuper arenam. Ʋbi ſit triticum quod inter zizania creſcit vſque ad meſſem, non quid fecerint vel faciant ipſa zizania. Vbi ſit proxima Christi in medio filiarum malarum, ſicut lilium in medio ſpinarum non quid fecerint, vel faciunt ipſae ſpinae. Vbi ſunt piſces boni qui donec ad littus perueniant, tolerant piſces malos pariter irretitos, non fecerint aut faciant ipſi piſces mali. That is to ſay, I ſeeke the Church, where ſhe is, which in hearing the words of Chriſt and doing them doth build vponupon a rocke, and which hearing and doing doth tolerate thoſe, which hearing and not dooing doo build vppon the ſand. Where that wheate is which groweth vp among the tares vntill the harueſt come, not p. 37what the tares hauehave done, or what they doo. Where that ſpouſe of Chriſt is in the middeſt of the euill daughters, as the lillie among the thornes, not what the thornes hauehave done, or what they doo. Where the good fiſhes be, which vntill they come vntounto the ſhore doo tolerate the euill fiſhes held in the ſame nette together, not what the euill fiſhes hauehave done, or what they doo.

Thus hauehave I laide open, that the Church in olde time was full of open wicked men both of miniſters and people: That the Donatiſts vnderunder the colour of zeale and ſeueritie againſt ſinne did ſeparate themſelues, affirming that all were polluted and fallen from the couenant, which did communicate in the worſhip of god and Sacraments with ſuch notorious euill men. All men may ſee by that which I hauehave noted, that the Donatiſts did maintaine this their opinion with the ſame Scriptures and argumēts that the Browniſts doe maintaine it withall nowe: And receiued the ſame anſwers to confute them, which we make nowe to confute the Browniſts. This was the maine point of Donatiſme, and as it were the pith & ſubſtance therof: & it is one of the foure chiefe pillers of Browniſme, Yea but now the Browniſts doe ſeparate themſelues from a worſhip which is Idolatrous, full of blaſphemies and abhominations: The Donatiſts did rend themſelues from an holy and true worſhip. Indeede where the worſhip is Idolatrous and blaſphemous, a man is to ſeparate himſelfe. But there are many and great corruptions before it come to that: for it is the true worſhip of God where the foundation is layd and ſtandeth ſure. If there be timber, Hay, and ſtubble built vponupon the foundation, the fault is great, ſuch things are not to bee approued: But yet there is Gods true worſhip. And now to come to the verie poynt of the matter: I doe affirme & wil ſtand to iuſtifie, that there were greater corruptions in the worſhip of God, euen in thoſe Churches from which the Donatiſts did ſeperate themſelues, than be at this day in the worſhip of the Church of England. So that if Browniſme be any thing to be excuſed in that, the Donatiſme may as iuſtly therein be defended. p. 38For if wee conſider matters which concerne doctrine, what can any man ſhew ſo corrupt in this our Church, as in the publike worſhip to pray for the ſoules of the dead, and to offer oblations for the dead? This corruption was generall in the Church then, yea long before the dayes of Auguſtine, as it appeareth in Cyprian and by Tertullian which was before him, and nerer to the time of the Apoſtles; who in his booke De Monogamia reaſoning againſt ſecond mariage (for hee was fallen into that error) woulde perſwade any woman that had buried her huſband not to marie againe, becauſe, he being ſeperated from her in peace & not diuorced, ſhe was to pray for his ſoule, and yearely to offer oblation for him: thus he writeth, Et pro anima eius oret, & refrigerium interim ad poſtulet ei, & in prima reſurrectione conſortium: & offerat annuis diebus dormitionis eius. That is, And let her pray for his ſoule, and craue refreſhing for him nowe in the meane time, and his felowſhip in the firſt reſurrection, and let her offer yearely vponupon the day of his departure. It will bee ſaid by ſome ignorant man, that this was but the minde and practiſe of ſome few, which were corrupt and ſuperſtitious. I anſwere it was the practiſe of the Church in generall, and the corruption ſo auncient, that the ſame Tertullian in his booke De corona militis, ſpeaking of it & certain other things ſaith they were obſerued by tradition from the Apoſtles, they were obſerued ſo generally in the Churches and no ſcripture to warrant them. Theſe bee his wordes, Oblationes pro defunctis, annua die facimus. Wee make oblations for the dead in the yeerely day. The doctrine of Purgatory, and the doctrine of Free will were crept in alſo, beſides diuers other groſſe errors which ſundrie of the chiefe teachers held, ſome in one poynt ſome in an other. Touching Ceremonies not for order and comlynes, but with ſignification, the libertie was exceeding which men tooke, and the corruption greeuous, which was not eſpied but of few. Tertullian for his time nameth theſe, which he ſaith were receiued by tradition and had no ſcripture to warrant them. firſt in baptiſme hauing ſhewed what they profeſſed, and the thrée p. 39times dipping into the water, hee addeth, Inde ſuſcepti lactis & mellis concordiam praguſtamus. Exque ea die lauacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadam abſtinemus. That is Taken from thence (hee meaneth from the water wee firſt taſte the concord of milke and hony, and from that day we abſtaine from the dayly waſhing a whole weeke. Die dominico ieiunium nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare: Eadem immunitate a die paſchae in Penticoſtem vſque gaudemus. That is, We account it an heynous matter to faſt on the Lords day, or to worſhip vponupon the knees: by the ſame freedome, from Eaſter vntounto Penticoſt we reioyce. And by and by after hee ſaith, Ad omnem progreſſum atque promotum, ad omnem aditum, & exitū, ad veſtitū, ad calciamentū, ad lauacra, ad mē ſas, ad lumina, ad cubilia, ad ſedilia, quacunque nos conuerſatio exercet, frontem crucis ſignaculo terimus. That is, At euerie ſetting forward and mouing, at euerie comming to, or going foorth, at our appareling, and putting on our ſhooes, at waſhing at table, at lighting the candle, at bed, at ſitting, whatſoeuer wee are buſied about, we weare our forehead with the ſigne of the Croſſe. Theſe ſuperſtitious obſeruations were crept into the Church, and in the daies of Tertullian who liued not much more than two hundreth yeares after our Sauiour Chriſt, receaued ſo generallie, that hee ſaieth they were by tradition from the Apoſtles. Auguſtine vntounto Ianuarius complaineth that there was ſuch a multitude of rites or ceremonies in the Church. But what ſhould I labour in this point? If the Browniſts will affirme that there be as great corruptions in the worſhip of the Church of England, if we reſpect either doctrine or ceremonies, as were in the Churches from which the Donatiſts did ſeparate themſelues, they ſhall be conuinced of groſſe ignorance. And if they ſtand in it, they ſhall ſhew themſelues ſhameles: let the reader in the meane time but looke vponupon the Epiſtle of Maſter Beza before the new Teſtament, and ſee what he affirmeth in this matter, how corrupt the Churches were. Then I conclude that the Donatiſts ſeparating themſelues from Churches more corrupt than the Churche of p. 40England in the worſhip of God, as I dare ſtand to maintaine againſt them: if they denie it, may as well bee excuſed as the Browniſts, and ſo hetherto they bee euen bretheren with them, or their naturall Children, no difference to bee found at all. And now touching the third and fourth pillars of Browniſme; the Donatiſts cried out that the Churches had no true Miniſters, but that they were all falſe Prophets, Iudaſſes, perſecutors of the iuſt, generations of Traitors, becauſe as they ſaide they had their ordination from thoſe that were ſuch. The Browniſts with all their might lift vp their voices, and call vsus Baals Prieſts, the marked ſeruants of Antichriſt, falſe Prophets, ſeducers and ſuch like, becauſe, as they ſay, we are ordeined by Antichriſtian Biſhops, which exerciſe a Diſcipline contrarie to the Diſcipline of Chriſt. Here wee hauehave to conſider of two things at once the Miniſters and the Diſcipline: let vsus firſt ſee what the Donatiſts held againſt the Miniſters. This was the common voice among the Donatiſts, O that matters might be diſputed, diſcuſſed, and ſcanned. But when by the commandement of the Emperour, the conference ſhould bee holden what miſerable ſhiftes and delayes did they finde out? And in the conference of the third day, Chapt. 2. It is ſhewed that the Donatiſts did accuſe them as Traitors and perſecutors: and that this ſaying had been vttered. Indignum est vt in vnum conueniant filij Martyrum & progenies traditorum. It is an vnworthie thing, that the ſonnes of Martyres, & the generations of traitors ſhould come together. When Auguſtine had ſaide he was no traitor, Creſconius the Donatiſt replieth. Sed ille qui tradidit te, creauit. Fonte deducitur riuus, & caput membra ſequuntur, ſano capite omne ſanum est corpus, & ſi quid in hoc morbi vel vitij est, omnia membra debilitat, or iginem ſuam respicit quicquid in ſtirpe proceſſit. Non potest innocens eſſe qui ſectam non ſequitur innocentis. But he that created thee plaied the Traitor, the riuer or ſtreame is deriued from the Fountaine, and the members followe the head. The head being ſounde, the whole bodie is ſound, and if there bee anie diſeaſe in it, it p. 41weakeneth all the members. It reſpecteth it owne originall, whatſoeuer groweth out of the ſtock: hee cannot bee innocent, which followeth not the ſect of the innocent. Theſe be the words of Creſconius the Donatiſt, by which hee taketh vponupon him to proue that Auguſtine, and all the Paſtors of the Churches had no true ordination, were not true Miniſters of Chriſt, but the generations of traitors: He vſeth as we ſee thrée ſimilitudes. The firſt is to this effect, as the riuer is deriued from the Fountaine, and muſt néedes be ſuch as it is, ſo thoſe that bée ordeined Miniſters are like the ſtreame deriued from the fountaine, the ordeinors being trators, Iudaſſes, falſe prophets, perſecutors; y^e ordeined muſt néedes be ſuch alſo. The ſecond is that the members doo followe the head: He that ordeineth is the head, the Miniſters ordeined are the members. If the head be infected, the poyſon of it goeth into the mēbers, Thy ordeinor, euen thy head was a traitor, thou art then a traitor alſo. The third ſimilitude is from the ſtock and the branches that growe out of it: ſuch as the ſtock is, ſuch are the braunches that growe out of it. But he that ordeined thée or created thée a Miniſter, was a falſe Prophet: therefore thou art a falſe prophet: for hée is the ſtock out of which thou dooſt growe, how canſt thou but bee ſuch as the roote, out of which thou dooſt ſpring. The Browniſts handling this point, to proue that we be no Miniſters of Chriſt ſet foorth the matter thus: your diſcent and pedegrée is in few degrées deriued from the Pope, you being the Children of your Antichriſtian Biſhops, which are the creatures of the Pope, who is the eldeſt ſonne of Sathan, and his vicar generall in earth, whoſe image, marke, power, and life you beare, and together with him growe, liue, raigne, ſtand, and fall as the branches with the Trée. This is the eloquence of the Browniſts, which differing in words, containeth the ſame reaſons that the Donatiſts did vſe: for in ſtead of the Fountaine and the ſtreame, the head and the members, they put the Fathers and the Children: for the ſtock and the braunches they put the Trée and the boughes which is all one: And from the roote, as it were p. 42from the Fountaine and head, they deriue the life, the power and the Image, &c. Thus they agrée then, that the one part ſaide thoſe which ordeined ye were ſuch as ſacrificed to Idols, and Traitors, verie Iudaſſes, you are their children and like them. The other part ſaieth, thoſe that ordeined yee bée the creatures of Antichriſt, yée receiue the verie life and power of your Miniſterie from them, ye are their Children, and ſo the Children of the Pope. Now let vsus ſée the anſwer which Auguſtine maketh, which is this, In his omnibus verbis tuis creatorem meum caput meum, non fecisti niſi traditorem, quem quidem accuſare tantùm, non conuincere potuisti. Ego autem nec eius innocentiam mihi creatricem vel fontem caputúe constituo. Sed tu ad illud redis in quo Petilianus errauit, cum cuiuſ que in ſanctificatione baptiſmatis Chriſtu… ſit orig… caput que naſcentis: & nos vis venire in maledictū, de quo ſcriptum eſt: maledictus omnis qui ſpem ſuam ponit in homine. That is to ſay, In all theſe thy wordes thou haſt made my ordainer, my head, none other than a traitor, whom thou couldeſt onelyonly accuſe, but not conuince. But I do not hold his innocencie to be that which hath ordained me a Miniſter, or to be fountaine or head: but thou doeſt returne to that in which Petilian erred, when as Chriſt in the ſanctification of baptiſme is the originall and the head of euerie one that is borne againe: and wilt hauehave vsus come into the curſe, of which it is written: Curſed is euerie one that putteth his truſt in man.

Thus farre Auguſtine, whoſe anſwere hath two parts. The firſt is, that the Donatiſts did accuſe, but could not prooue that the ordainers were ſuch as in time of perſecution had yeelded to ſacrifice to Idols, or deliuered the holie booke to the fire. The other part is, that whether he that ordained him were a godlie man or a wicked man: the matter is all one touching his ordination and Miniſtrie. The ordination not being mans, the innocencie of man cannot be the ordainer, it cannot bee the head or fountaine: neither can it make his ordination the better. Then likewiſe, the wickedneſſe of the man that ordaineth, cannot be the roote nor the fountain, p. 43nor the head. The men which ordaine, are not the fathers of the Miniſtrie, becauſe it is not theirs which they deliuer, but Chriſts. That this is Auguſtines meaning it is cléere by that he telleth Creſconius he returned to that in which Petilian erred. Petilian denying that it was baptiſme that had béen miniſtred by an vngodlie man: rendereth this reaſon, that euerie thing muſt hauehave an originall and an head, or elſe it is nothing. Auguſtine repl…eth, that Chriſt onelyonly is the originall and the head of him that is baptized: and that the baptiſme being Chriſts, and not theirs that did deliuer it: the goodnes of the Miniſter made it not one iot the better, nor the wickednes of the Miniſter any whit the worſe. Adding moreouer, that ſuch as take the baptiſme miniſtred by a godlie man to bee better in it ſelfe, than that which is miniſtred by a naughtie man: fall into the curſe, of which it is written, Curſed is euerie one that putteth his truſt in man. He that hangeth the matters which are Chriſts vponupon men, putteth his truſt in men. The ſame anſwere that hée hath made to thoſe his Donatiſts of Aphrica, doo wee make vntounto our Donatiſts of England. Firſt they accuſe in moſt bitter and hainous manner, but ſhall neuer be able to prooue their accuſation: for there is no Miniſtrie in England ordained by the Pope or for the Pope. The Miniſtrie of publiſhing the Goſpell and deliuering the Sacraments is not the deuice of man, but Chriſtes ordinance: and therefore we receiue it not as theirs that deliuer it, neither doth their godlines or vngodlines make it better or worſe vntounto vsus. The Miniſtrie was not vtterlie deſtroyed in the Poperie, for there remained the Sacrament of baptiſme, howſoeuer the Catabaptiſts denie the ſame. How much is the Miniſtrie of Chriſt to bee acknowledged when it is onelyonly to that end for which he ordained it, though the men that ordaine ſhould be moſt vngodlie? This thing will more fullie appeare when we come to handle the agréement of the Browniſts with the Donatiſts in that ranke Donatiſme, affirming it to bee no Sacrament which is miniſtred by an open wicked man.

Thus much may ſuffice to ſhewe, that in denying the miniſtrie p. 44to bee Chriſts, they hold the ſame ground and arguments, and receiue the ſelfe ſame anſwere. And for their rayling termes, as generations of traitors, ſeducers, falſe Prophets, Iudaſſes, perſecutors, and ſuch like; I néed not mention the compariſon of our men with them, ſeeing they doo in this, as in one of the chiefe vaines of their eloquence, apparantlie excell. Their baſeſt diſciples can crie out Antichriſts, Baals Prieſts, falſe Prophets, ſeducers, and what not? But it will bée ſayd, that in the matter of diſcipline the Donatiſts and Browniſts are vnlike. I graunt the Donatiſts, that euer I hauehave read, did take no exception that way. That is not alone in queſtion, but whether there were any fault, ſo that exception might betaken. And for this, men are to conſider, that as corruption in doctrine and ceremonies did enter betimes into the Church, and growe a pace: ſo alſo the diſcipline or externall gouernment was of many neglected, abuſed and corrupted. Sundrie of the Paſtors being proud and ambitious, the ſteppes were made for Antichriſt to climbe vp, who challenged not onelyonly an externall power ouer all other, but alſo a Lordſhip ouer the conſcience. Thus much touching the firſt obiection.

The ſecond difference obiected is, That the Donatiſts did condemne all Churches in the world: The Browniſts condemne but the Churches of England. Indéed the Browniſts doo affirme that they be farre from condemning all churches: and ſo here is an apparant difference, and a great, at the firſt ſight, if men doo not narrowlie way and conſider all matters. They knowe it is a great preiudice vntounto them, if it bée found that they condemne all Churches: but wee may not looke vponupon their words of deniall, but vponupon the conſequence of their matters. For he that ſhooteth an arrowe at one thing and together therewith ſtriketh another, cannot bee ſayd not to hauehave ſtriken it becauſe he had no ſuch intent. So muſt wee conſider whether the dart of condemnation which they hauehave ſhot at the Church of England, doo not together with the ſame runne through the ſides of all Churches. I ſtand to prooue it doth, and ſo that they are in this alſo full p. 45Donatiſts. But if they did not, yet they ſhall bee found thus farre in Donatiſme, as to condemne ſome Churches of Chriſt. My firſt reaſon ſhall be from hence, that the Church of England is eſteemed and reuerenced among the Churches as a ſiſter, and communicated withall: and yet they all know what her faults be, in her aſſemblies, in her worſhip, in her miniſtrie and gouernment, in as much as they are open and apparant to them, euen as to our ſelues. Now, that they iuſtifie her as a true Church, we hauehave their own words: for the harmonie of confeſſions of the Churches, collected and ſet foorth by the Churches of France and of the Lowe Countries, doth receiue and approoue the confeſſion of the Church of England, and call it one of the reformed Churches. Whereupon I argue thus: If the Church of England be Antichriſtian, and idolatrous, and worſhip the beaſt, bow downe vntounto him and receiue his marke, becauſe of the gouernment by Biſhops: then the Churches which doo perfectlie knowe the ſame, and yet doo acknowledge her as a ſiſter, and communicate with her, are partakers of her ſinne, and ſo to be condemned with her. Therefore the Browniſts condemning it, condemne thoſe that iuſtifie it, knowing the eſtate. The Browniſts condemne all thoſe as perſecutors of the iuſt, enemies of Chriſt, and of his kingdome, that ſhall hold them to be Heretickes and Schiſmatickes for condemning the Church of England and ſeparating themſelues. I argue thus: All the Churches which know the Church of England▪ and her forme of gouernment, and yet doo louelove and reuerence her as a true Church of Chriſt, condemne thoſe as hereticall Schiſmatickes which call it Antichriſtian and ſeparate themſelues from it. For how can the Churches as they doo eſteeme the Church of England as a true ſiſter, and yet not condemne the Browniſts as wicked Schiſmatickes, which call it the Synagog of Sathan? Then let the Browniſts ſhewe that the Churches hauehave reuoked this their former iudgement of the Church of England: or elſe let them anſwere whether they condemne not all thoſe as no true Chriſtians, which ſhall affirme them to p. 46be wicked Schiſmatickes for ſeparating themſelues from the aſſemblies of England: If they will deny that the churches eſteeme our Churche as a ſiſter, and therefore condemne them as vngodlie Schiſmatickes, the matter is ſo cléere that all men ſhal ſee them then to be impudent. It may be ſome Browniſt will replie, that it cannot be extended vntounto all Churches a farre off which is verified in ſome that be nigh. Well, let vsus ſee then for the Churches a farre off. Doo not the Browniſts condemne the Church of Geneua? They will ſay no. But I ſay they doo. For as I ſayd before, will they not condemne all ſuch as doo reiect them as wicked Schiſmatickes? This doth the Church of Geneua. Which I prooue thus: In that the Church of Geneua doth approoue the doctrine of thoſe that hauehave béen and are her moſt learned and godlie Paſtors: as Maſter Caluin, with whom the reſt conſent in doctrine. Now, touching the doctrine of Maſter Caluin publiſhed, whereby he condemneth the Browniſts as Schiſmatickes, ye may reade it in fourth booke of his Inſtitutions, and the firſt Chapter. It is too large to recite the whole, I will alleage but ſome parts. Looke vppon the ſeuenth ſection where he ſaith: that in the viſible Church in earth, there are verie many hypocrites mingled; verie many that be ambicious, couetous, enuious, curſed ſpeakers, ſome of more impure life, which tollerated for a time, either becauſe they cannot in lawfull iudgemēt be conuinced, or elſe becauſe that ſeueritie of diſcipline which ought to be, is not alwaies in force. In the ninth ſection he affirmeth, that the reaſon is ſomewhat diuers in eſteeming priuate men and in eſteeming the churches: for it may come to paſſe (as he ſaith) that wee ought to handle them as brethren, and accompt inſtead of beléeuers, ſuch as wee ſhall thinke vtterlie vnworthie the fellowſhip of the godlie, euen for the cōmon conſent of the church, by which they are tollerated in the bodie of Chriſt. Wee doo not approoue ſuch by our voyce to be members of the Church; but we leaue vntounto them that place which they hold among the people of God▪ vntill it be taken from them by lawfull iudgement. Then p. 47he addeth, but wee muſt thinke otherwiſe of the multitude: which if it hauehave the Miniſterie of the Word, and giuegive honour, if it hauehave the Adminiſtration of the Sacraments, no doubt it deſerueth to bee accounted a Church: becauſe it is certaine, thoſe things are not without fruite: ſo wee both keepe for the Uniuerſall Church her vnitie, which diueliſh Spirites hauehave alwaies endeuored to cutte in ſunder: neither doo wee defraude of their authoritie, the lawfull aſſemblies which are ſeuered according to the fitnes of places. In the tenth ſection hee vttereth that the Lord maketh ſo great account of the communion of his Church, that he eſtéemeth him as a runnagate, and forſaker of religion, whoſoeuer he be that frowardlie ſhall ſeparate himſelfe from any Chriſtian ſocietie, which imbraſeth but the true Miniſtrie of the word and Sacraments. And a little after he inferreth vponupon ſome ground of reaſon, that the departure from the Church is the deniall of God and of Chriſt: affirming moreouer that no crime can bée deuiſed more horrible than with ſacrilegious trecherie, to violate the mariage which the Sonne of God hath vouchſafed to contract with vsus. In the twelft ſection hée dooth expounde what is his meaning when he requireth a pure Miniſterie of the word, and pure order of adminiſtring the Sacraments, as notes infallible of the true Church. For hee ſaieth there may ſomewhat that is faltie créepe in, either in the adminiſtration of the word, or of the Sacraments, which ought not to ſeparate vsus from the Communion of that Miniſtrie. Becauſe there be principles of Religion, without which we cannot be ſaued, and there be points in which men diſſent, and the one part erreth, and yet the vnitie of faith and brotherlie louelove is kept: not that we are to approue the leaſt errour in doctrine, or the ſialeſt corruption in the adminiſtration of the Sacraments. In the thirtéenth ſection he ſaith, that in tolerating the imperfection of life, wée ought to bée much more fauorable: for here we are vponupon ſlipperie ground where wée may eaſely fall. And the euill dooth héere lie in waite, and aſſalt vsus with ſpeciall engines; for there hauehave p. 48been alwaies ſome, which being caried with a falſe perſwaſion of an abſolute perfection, as if they were now become certaine ayrie ſpirites deſpiſed the fellowſhip of all men, in whome they ſaw any thing that is humaine or corrupt remaining. Such were of olde time the Cathari, and the Donatiſts which fell into the ſame furie: ſuch are at this daye ſome of the Anabaptiſts which would ſeeme to hauehave profited more than others: There be other ſome that offend rather of an inconſiderate zeale of righteouſnes than of that mad pride: for while they ſee the life is not anſwerable to the holie doctrine in bringing foorth good fruite among ſuch as hauehave the Goſpell preached, they iudge by and by that there is no Church. Then he ſheweth further that the offence is iuſt, and God muſt needs puniſh that there is ſuch wounding of weake conſciences: but in this they offend, as hee ſaieth, that they knowe not how to keepe anie meaſure in being offended; or omitting that clemencie which the Lord requireth, they giuegive themſelues wholie vntounto immoderate ſeueritie. And becauſe they think there is no Church, where there is not ſound puritie and integritie of life, through the hatred of wickednes they depart away from the lawfull Church, while they thinke they turne a ſide from the faction of the wicked. Then he proceedeth in anſwering their obiections, they alleage that the Church of Chriſt is holie; he willeth them alſo to vnderſtand by the parables in the Goſpell, that the good and the bad are mixed together. They erie out that it is a thing intollerable that the contagious peſtilence of vices dooth in ſuch violent raging ſort ouerſpread all, hee ſetteth before them the vices that were in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia. They obiect that Paul dooth will we eate not with anie called a brother which is of an vngodlie life. Yea here they crie out that if it be not lawfull to eate common bread with ſuch, how ſhould it be lawfull to eate with them the bread of the Lord? He anſwereth that it is a great reproach in deede, if dogges and ſwine bee admitted to hauehave place among the children of God: yea it is alſo much greater, if the ſacred bodie of Chriſt be proſtituted p. 49vntounto them. And where the Churches are well ordred, they doo not keepe in their boſome the notorious wicked, nor admit all without difference to that holie banquet: but the paſtors are not alwaies diligent, ſometime they fauour more than they ought or bee more remiſſe. And ſometime they cannot but are letted from exerciſing that ſeueritie which they would. Now when the Church ceaſeth to doo her duetie herein, it is not for eueryevery priuate man (ſaith he) to ſeparate himſelfe: eueryevery godly man is indeede to keepe himſelfe from the fellowſhip of ſinne; but it is one thing to eſchewe the fellowſhip of ſinne, and another for hatred thereof to renounce the Communion of the Church. Then hee anſwereth further, that Saint Paul willeth euerie one to examine himſelfe when hee commeth to eate of that bread; and if it were a wicked thing to communicate with the vnworthie, Paul would certainelie hauehave willed vsus to looke about leaſt there ſhould bee ſome in the multitude, by whoſe vncleannes we might be defiled. Theſe things he hath in the fourteenth and fifteenth ſections: in the ſixteenth ſection hauing ſhewed that the chiefe ringleaders in ſuch ſeparation are led with pride, he willeth the godlie to conſider that in a great multitude there are manie which are truelie, holie and innocent before the eyes of the Lord, which are hid from their ſight; that of thoſe which ſeeme diſeaſed or infected, there are manie which doo not pleaſe or flatter themſelues in their vices, but being eftſones awakened with an earneſt feare of God labour to amend. That they muſt not iudge of a man for one fact: when the holieſt men doo ſometime fall moſt grieuouſlie: That the Miniſtrie of the word, and the participation of the Sacraments, hauehave more force to gather a Church, than that by the fault of certaine wicked men, that whole power may vaniſh or come to none effect. Finallie let them conſider that in eſteeming a Church, the iudgement of God, is of more waight and certaintie, than the iudgement of man. In the eighteenth ſection, hee ſetteth forth how the holie Prophets of God did not ſeparate themſelues, in thoſe horrible and lamentable deſolations which p. 50they deſcribe: when moſt of the people and the Prieſtes themſelues were openlie wicked.

Thus may wee ſee that Maſter Caluine condemning the Browniſts ſo ſeuerelie by the Scriptures, they muſt either reuoke Browniſme in this point, that the bad pollute the good, and therefore ſeparation to be made, which he termeth ſacrilegious treacherie; or elſe condemne him not onelie with the Church of Geneua which he taught, but alſo all other Churches that imbrace his writings, and acknowledge him for a noble inſtrument of God. Furthermore let the Browniſts ſhew any one aſſemblie at this day in the World, in which there bee not open ſinners admitted to the Lords table, and which ſinne in great ſinnes, as either in pride, ſelfe louelove, ambition, couetouſnes, idlenes, hatred, enuie, contention, backbiting, lying and in ſuch like. They ſay all are polluted and fallen away from the couenant, where any that openlie ſinneth is admitted to the holie Communion. How can they ſay then that they doo not condemne all Churches vnderunder heauen? Finallie when in their writings they affirme that preſcript forme of prayer impoſed is Idolatrie, a bondage breaking chriſtian libertie, a thing moſt deteſtable, they doo ſo farre condemne all Churches, in as much as there is no one which hath not preſcript forme of Prayer impoſed. And the Browniſt which hath publiſhed in Print, a defence of the ſame, alleageth the extreame curſe againſt thoſe that adde to Gods word Reuel. 22. and ſaith they adde which make Lawes in the Church, in matters of circumſtance, or things indifferent. Which in deede all the Churches doo; and therefore hee layeth that extreame curſe vponupon all the reformed Churches: let no man therefore be ſo ſimple, as to imagine that the Browniſts doo condemne but the Engliſh Churches, when their extreame ſeueritie in condemning reacheth ouer all.

Now to the third thing obiected wherein they may ſeeme to differ from the Donatiſts: namely that the Donatiſts did holde that the Sacraments, or the efficacie of them doth depend p. 51vponupon the worthines of the miniſter: but the Browniſts are not of that minde. I anſwere that in this great and ranck poynt of Donatiſme I can find no difference at all betwéen them and the Browniſts: and let the wordes and meaning of both be ſcanned, and it ſhal appeare manifeſtly that they hold the ſelfe ſame thing, neither more nor leſſe like euen brethren.

The Browniſts affirme that we hauehave neither worde of God nor Sacraments in our Church. But demaund of them, doth the Sacrament or the efficacie thereof depend vponupon the worthines of the miniſter? They will aunſwere, it doth not, but yet it can be no Sacrament of Chriſt vnles hee be a miniſter of Chriſt that doth deliuer it. If it bee ſaide vntounto them Iudas was a moſt wicked man, and our Sauiour calleth him a diuell yet was he a miniſter of Chriſt for the time, and the baptiſme he adminiſtred as effectual as the baptiſme of any other. They will replie and ſay, that was ſo becauſe the ſinne of Iudas was ſecret, they were not polluted by his vncleannes, becauſe they did not know it: But he that is an open ſinner cannot be a miniſter of Chriſt; and ſuch as receiue the Sacrament at his hand, knowing his wickednes cannot but be partakers of his ſinne and polluted by the ſame. This wil they ſay is not to make either the being of a Sacrament, or the efficacie therof to depend vponupon a man, but vponupon Gods ordinance that he be a minſter that deliuer it. I will not denie that he muſt be a miniſter that doth deliuer it: And I ſay withall that although the Donatiſts may ſeeme by ſome of their ſpeeches to holde a further thing touching this matter, yet lay al their ſayings together, and it is manifeſt they held, that where the ſinne was ſecret in him that did adminiſter, the Sacrament deliuered by him was effectuall, notwithſtanding he were neuer ſo wicked inwardly: but if his ſinne were open, he was no miniſter, and ſo no Sacrament, but the partie that communicateth with him is polluted by him.

Potilian the Donatiſt Biſhop in the beginning of his epiſtle denying that they did rebaptize, but that ſuch as were p. 52baptized in the Churches were not baptized at all, before they baptized them, for confirmation vſeth this ſaying, Conſciētia namque dantis attenditur, quae abluat accipientis. For the conſcience of him that giueth is attended, which may waſh the conſcience of him that receiueth. Further he ſaith, Qui fidem a perfido ſumpſerit, non fidem percipit ſed reatum. He that will take faith of the faithleſſe, receiueth not faith but guiltines. And rendring a reaſon for confirmation he ſaith, Omnis enim res origine et radice conſistit: & ſi caput non habet aliquid, nihil est. For eueryevery thing doth conſiſt of an originall and roote: and if any thing hauehave not a head; it is nothing. Auguſtine anſwereth to theſe ſayings of Petilian, demanding firſt, what if the conſcience of him that giueth be ſecret, and perhaps vncleane, how can it waſh the conſcience of him that receiueth? For if the Donatiſt ſhall ſay it apperteineth not to the receiuer, whatſoeuer euill lie hid in the conſcience of the giuer, that ignorance perhaps ſhal be of this force, that vnwittinglie he cannot bee defiled by the conſcience of him that baptizeth him: let it ſuffice therefore that the defiled conſcience of an other while it is not knowne doth not pollute, yet will they ſay it ſhall alſo waſh? From whence is he waſhed then that receiueth baptiſme of one that hath a polluted conſcience, and he doth not knowe ſo much? Séeing he ſaith, he that will take faith of him that is faithles, doth not receiue faith, but guiltines. Behold a faithles man doth ſtand to baptize, but he that is to be baptized doth not knowe his vnfaithfulnes, what doeſt thou thinke he ſhall receiue, faith or guiltines? If the Donatiſt ſay, he receiueth faith, then he inferreth, that it is graunted it may come to paſſe, that a man may receiue faith and not guiltines from an vnfaithful man, and ſo the former ſaying is falſe. But if the Donatiſt ſhould anſwere, he receiueth guiltines: then he ſaith the Donatiſts ſhould baptize thoſe againe which were baptized among themſelues by wicked men, whoſe wickedneſſe was ſecrete at ſuch time as they did baptize, but afterward they were be…raied, conuict, and condemned. I ſay then it is manifeſt by p. 53the practiſe of the Donatiſts, in not baptizing againe any of thoſe which had béen among them baptized by their owne Miniſters whom they eſtéemed godlie, but afterward were diſcloſed to be ranke hypocrites, and ſo they condemned and caſt them foorth, that their iudgement was, that he was a Miniſter of Chriſt, though a reprobate touching his owne perſon, and the Sacrament deliuered by him a true Sacrament, ſo long as his wickednes ſay hid from the knowledge of men: howſoeuer the reaſons of Petilian which he vttered in the raſh heate of his furie, may ſeeme to ſtretch further. And where as Auguſtine anſwering to y^e reſt of the words ſaith: Quapropter ſiue à fideli, ſiue à perfido diſpenſatore Sacramentum baptiſmi quiſque percipiat, ſpes ei omnis in Chriſto ſit, ne ſit maledictus qui ſpem ſuam ponit in homine. Alioquin ſi talis quiſ que in gratia ſpirituali renaſcitur, qualis eſt ille à quo baptizatur, & cum manifestus eſt qui baptizat homo bonus, ipſe dat fidem, ipſe origo & radix, capút que naſcentis eſt: cùm autem latet perfidus baptizator, tunc quiſque à Christo percipit fidem, tunc à Christo ducit originem, tunc in Christoradicatur, tunc Christo capite gloriatur: laborandum eſt omnibus qui baptizantur vt baptizatores perfidos habeant, & ignorent eos. That is to ſay: Wherefore whoſoeuer receiueth the Sacrament of baptiſme, whether it bee of a faithfull, or whether it be of an vnfaithfull diſpenſor, let all his hope be in Chriſt, leaſt he be accurſed as one that putteth his truſt in man. Otherwiſe if euerie one that is borne in ſpirituall grace be ſuch an one, as he is by whom he is baptized: and when he that baptizeth is manifeſt a good man, he giueth faith, he is the originall, the roote and the head of him that is newe borne: but when he that baptizeth is vnfaithfull being not knowne ſo to be, then euerie one receiueth faith of Chriſt, taketh originall from Chriſt, is rooted in Chriſt and glorieth in Chriſt his head: then all men are to endeuour which are baptized, that they may hauehave vnfaithfull baptizers, ſo they knowe them not to be ſuch. His reaſon is, that when the man that baptizeth is ſecretlie wicked, it is moſt abſurd to ſay his conſcience baptizeth, or that he is the p. 54roote or head of him that is regenerate, and therefore the Donatiſts confeſſing ſuch to bee truelie baptized, he ſaith it muſt néeds then be Chriſt that doth baptize. And thereupon inferreth, that this abſurditie muſt needes followe, which is moſt fooliſh to beléeue, that it is better to be baptized of a ſecret wicked man, than of the beſt manifeſt godlie man, becauſe Chriſt is incomparablie better than the beſt men. Wherefore he wiſheth them to confeſſe whether the Miniſter be good or bad, it is Chriſt alone that doth baptize, that giueth faith, that is the roote and the head. It will now be ſaid, that by this it appeareth the Donatiſts did aſcribe all to the man, if he were godlie. Let vsus ſee therefore what they anſwere. Creſconius taking vponupon him to defend the ſaying of Petilian, in this that the conſcience of the giuer doth waſh the conſcience of the receiuer: and Auguſtine demaunded, what if the giuer be of a defiled conſcience, and ſecret? Creſconius anſwereth: Conſcientia dantis attenditur, non ſecundum eius ſynceritatem, quae in illa videri non poteſt, ſed ſecundum famam quae de illa ſeu vera, ſeu falſa eſt: quia videlicet eius eſt hominis, qui & ſi ſceleratus occultus ſit, ſufficit accipienti, quod bonae ſit existimationis nondum cognitus, nondum iudicatus, nondum ab eccleſia ſeparatus. That is, The conſcience of the giuer is attended, not according to the ſynceritie thereof, which in it cannot be ſeene, but according to the fame which is of it whether true or falſe: that is to ſay, becauſe it is of that mā, who though he be ſecretlie wicked, it is ſufficient for the receiuer, that he is of good eſtimatiō, not yet knowne, not yet iudged, not yet ſeparate from the Church. Booke. 2. Chapt. 17. This blind ſhift had Creſconius alleaged to auoide thoſe former abſurdities, and fell into as great that falſe fame doth baptize. By which it appeareth that the whole matter of the Donatiſts opinion reſted in this, that an open wicked man onelyonly did not, or could not baptize. Creſconius calleth vponupon Auguſtine thus: Responde quomodo baptizent quos damnauit eccleſia? Anſwere how they can baptize whom the Church hath condemned? Auguſtine doth anſwere: Sic eos baptizare, quomodo baptizant p. 55quos damnanit Deus, antequam de illis quicquam iudicaret eccleſia. That they baptize as thoſe doo whom GOD hath cōdemned, before the Church hath iudged any thing of them. And ſeeing the ſecrete wicked man is condemned alreadie by Chriſt, and the Church is ſubiect to Chriſt: hée inferreth, Non igitur debet eccleſia ſe Christo praeponere, vt putet baptizare poſſe ab illo iudicatos, à ſe autem iudicatos baptizare non poſſe, cum ille ſemper veraciter iudicet, eccleſiastici autem Iudices ſicut homines plerun que falluntur. Therefore the Church ought not to preferre her ſelfe before Chriſt, as to thinke that ſuch as are condemned by him can baptize, but ſuch as are condemned by her cannot baptize, when he alwaies iudgeth truely, where the eccleſiaſticall Iudges as men are oftentimes deceiued. Hereupon hee concludeth, Baptizant ergo quantum attinet ad viſibile ministerium, & boni, & mali, inuiſibiliter autem per eos baptizat, cuius eſt & viſibile baptiſma, & inuiſibilis gratia. Tingere ergo poſſunt & boni & mali, abluere autem conſcientiam non niſi ille, qui ſemper eſt bonus. Therefore both the good and the bad do baptize in as much as appertaineth to the viſible miniſtrie, but inuiſiblie by them doth hee baptize whoſe is both the viſible baptiſme, and alſo the inuiſible grace. Both the good then and the bad may dippe them in the water, but to waſh the cōſcience, there can none but he which is alwaies good. Booke. 2. Chapt. 21. Creſconius procéedeth, demaunding what can be vttered more wicked than this, Vt purificet aliū maculoſus, abluat ſordidus, emundet immundus, det infidelis fidem, criminoſus faciat innocentem. That he which is ſpotted ſhould purifie another, he that is foule ſhould waſh, he that is vncleane ſhould clenſe, that an Infidell ſhould giuegive faith, that he which is criminous ſhould make another innocent? Booke. 3. Chapt. 5. Auguſtine anſwereth: Nec maculoſus, nec ſordidus, nec immundus, nec infidelis, nec criminoſus eſt Christus, qui dilexit eccleſiam & ſeipſum tradidit pro ea, mundans eam lauacro aquae in verbo, faciens nos certos de bonis ſuis, ne malis viciaremur alienis. Chriſt is not ſpotted, nor foule, nor vncleane, nor an infidell, nor criminous p. 56which hath loued his Church and giuen himſelfe for it cleanſing it by the lauer of water through the word, making vsus ſure of his good things, that wee cannot be defiled with the euill of other men.

But now to come to a more cléere opening of this matter, whereas Petilian had ſaide that euerie thing conſiſteth of an originall and roote, and if any thing hauehave not an head it is nothing: and the anſwere was made, that Chriſt is the originall, the roote and the head of him that is baptized: and that he is accurſed which putteth his truſt in man. Creſconius dooth replie, as Auguſtine reporteth his words, Hoc & nos ſuademus & volumus, vt ſemper Christus det fidem, Chriſtus ſit origo Christiani, in Christo radicem Christianus infigat, Christus Christiani ſit caput. Non quaerimus hominem in quo ſpem constituat accepturus, ſed quaerimus per quem hoc melius fiat? Et quia ſine ministro nec vos dicitis hominem poſse baptizari, quaerimus vtrúmne melius iniuſtus ſit miniſter, an iustus? This alſo (ſaieth the Donatiſts) we will and perſwade, that Chriſt alwaies giueth faith, Chriſt is the originall of a Chriſtian, in Chriſt the Chriſtian muſt fixe his roote, that Chriſt is the head of the Chriſtian, wee ſeeke not a man in whome he that is to be baptized may ſet his hope, but we ſeeke by whome this may better be done. And becauſe you alſo ſay a man cannot be baptized without a miniſter, we demaund whether is the better, that the miniſter be vniuſt, or that he be iuſt. Booke 3. chapt. 6, 7, and 8. Auguſtine replieth. Vbi respondeo, ad hoc eſſe melius, vt ſit iuſtus minister, quod infirmitas hominis, cui ſine exemplo laborioſum est & difficile quod imperat Deus, imitatione boni ministri ad vitam bonam facilius erigatur. Vnde dicit Apostolus Paulus, imitatores mei estote, ſicut & ego Chriſti. ad hominem vero baptizandum, & ſanctificandum, ſi tantòeſt melius quod accipitur, quantò est melior per quem traditur: tanta est in accipientibus baptiſmorum varietas, quanta in ministris diuerſitas meritorum. Si enim, quod ſine controuerſia creditur, melior erat Paulus quam Apollo, meliorem baptiſmum profectò dedit, ſecundùm istam vestram vanam p. 57peruerſamque ſententiam. Et ſi meliorem baptiſmum dedit, profecto eis quos a ſe non baptizatos gratulatur inuidit. Porro ſi interbonos ministros, cum ſit alius alio melior, non est melior baptiſmus qui per meliorem datur, nullo modo est malus qui etiam per malum datur, quando idem baptiſmus datur, & ideo per ministros dispares, Dei munus aequale est, quia non illorum, ſed eius est. Where I anſwere (ſaieth Auguſtine) That in this reſpect it is better, that the miniſter be godly, becauſe the infirmitie of man, to whome without an example it is labour ſome and difficult to doo that which God commaundeth, may more eaſilie by the imitation of a good miniſter be raiſed vp and ſupported vntounto good life. Whereupon the Apoſtle Paul ſaieth, Be yee followers of me, as I am of Chriſt. But for the Baptizing, and ſanctifying a man, If it be ſo much better which is receiued, as he is better, by whome it is deliuered: then there is as great varietie of Baptiſmes in the receiuers, as there is diuerſitie of worthines in the miniſters. For if Paul were better than Apollo, which is beleeued without controuerſie, then hee verelie, according to that your vaine and peruerſe ſentence, gaue a better baptiſme. And if he deliuered a better baptiſme, doubtles he enuied thoſe for whome hee is glad that they were not baptized by him. Moreouer if it be ſo, that among the good Miniſters, when one is better than another, the baptiſme is not better which is deliuered by the better, it is by no meane euill when it is giuen by a naughtie man, ſeeing the ſame baptiſme is deliuered. And therefore by vnequall Miniſters, the gift of God is equall, becauſe it is his, and not theirs. Thus farre Auguſtine. It is apparant enough by that which I hauehave alreadie cited, what the Donatiſts meant in denying it to bee Baptiſme which was adminiſtred by an open wicked man: and requiring for the trueth and efficacie of Baptiſme, that it ſhould be adminiſtred by a godlie man, or at the leaſt by a man godlie in ſhew: but yet I will adde ſomewhat more. Petilian replying vponupon Auguſtine with great railing, ſaide alſo that thoſe abſurdities which he gathered were his own. booke 3. chap. p. 5845. And whereas Auguſtine had demaunded, what if the conſcience of him that deliuereth be vncleane & ſecret, what dooth waſh (if anie thing be to be that way regarded in mā)? he anſwereth it is as to ſay, Quid ſi nunc coelum ruat? What if the ſkie ſhuld now fal? Moreouer he ſaith that two words of his were omitted by Auguſtine, in his two ſayings: the one is, the conſcience of him that giueth, where he ſaieth his words were ſanctè dantis, of him that giueth holilie: The other, he that will take faith of an vnfaithfull man, hee receiueth not faith but guiltines: where hee ſaith this word ſciens, was omitted: which is knowing. So that howſoeuer Petilian ſéemed in his heate to vtter otherwiſe, hee will hauehave this to be his meaning, that hee which receiueth Baptiſme of a Miniſter whome he knoweth to be a wicked man, becauſe his ſinnes are open, he receiueth not Baptiſme, but pollution and guiltines, by Communicating with him. booke 3. Chapter 31. Againe, where Petilian and the reſt affirmed, that hee which is Baptized of one that is dead, his waſhing dooth not profit him, hee meaneth by one that is dead, not the ſecret wicked, nor yet the open ſinner, vntill the Church hauehave condemned him Booke 1. Chap. 10. Parmenian that Donatiſt Biſhop, to proue that it was no Baptiſme which was miniſtred by an open wicked man, alleageth that the wicked which ſacrificeth a ſhéepe, is as hee that cutteth off the head of a dog; and the ſacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord. Eſay. 66. And that the man which had any blemiſh, or ſpot in him ſhould not come to offer as a Prieſt to the Lord Leuit. 21. And that God heareth not ſinners. Iohn. 9. As Auguſtine reporteth againſt Parmenian Booke 2. Chapt. 6, 7, 8. Where Auguſtine anſwereth, Ʋnicuique retribuit Deus ſecundùm cor ſuum. Nam ſi primis temporibus non obfuerunt mali ſacerdotes, vel collegis bonis, ſicut fuit Zacharias: vel popularibus, ſicut fuit Nathaniel in quo dolus non erat, quantò magis nihil obest in Christiana vnitate Epiſcopus malus, vel coepiſcopis vel lucis bonis, cùm iam ille ſacerdos in aeternum ſecundùm ordinem Melchiſedech & pontifex noster ſedens ad dextram patris, p. 59interpellat pro nobis, &c. God rendreth vntounto euerie one according to his heart. For if in the firſt times, the naughtie Prieſts did not hurt either their fellowes which were good, ſuch as was Zacharie: or anie of the people, ſuch as was Nathaniel, in whom was no guile. How much more doth an euill Biſhop in the Chriſtian vnitie, nothing hurt, either his fellowe Biſhops being good, or anie of the laietie? when now that Prieſt for euer after the order of Melchiſedech, euen our high Prieſt, ſitting at the right hand of the Father, maketh interceſsion for vsus, &c. Dicant ergo mihi, cui ſancto ſecundùm ſalutem ſpiritualem obfuerit vel in ſacerdotibus, vel inter populum conſtituto, malus aut maculatus ſacerdos? Let them ſhew vntounto me therefore which holie one either of the Prieſts or among the people, an euill and ſpotted Prieſt did hurt touching ſpirituall ſaluation. Where was Moſes and Aaron, there were the wicked murmurers: where was Caiphas and other ſuch like, there were Zacharie, Symeon and other godlie ones: where Saul was, there was Dauid; where Eſay, Ieremie, Ezechiel, and Daniel were, there were the wicked Prieſts, and naughtie people. Sed ſarcinam ſuam vnuſquiſque portabat. But euerie one did beare his owne burthen. And hauing ſhewed that the words of Balaam a wicked man were heard of God for the people, he addeth, Vnde non mirum est, verba bona quae propopulo dicū tur in precibus, etiam ſi a malis dicantur epiſcopis, exaudiri tamen, non pro peruerſitate praepoſitorum, ſed pro deuotione populorum. From whence it is no meruaile, that good words which are vttered in prayer for the people are heard, though they bee vttered by naughtie Biſhops, not for the peruerſenes of the guides, but for the deuotion of the people. No man can take any thing vnles it be giuen him from aboue; Petilian ſaith thereupon: Doce igitur traditor ſimulandi mysteria quando acceperis potestatem, Shew therefore thou Traitor, when thou diddeſt receiue the power of counterfaiting the myſteries. Booke 2. Chapter. 31. Hee termeth it a counterfaiting, or faining of the ſacraments when they bee miniſtred by one that is openlie wicked, becauſe p. 60he holdeth, that God neuer authoriſed any ſuch to deliuer them. And what is the whole pith of Browniſts touching this poynt, when they crie out that wee hauehave no word of God, nor Sacraments, but euen the verie ſame that the Donatiſts held, namelie that if he be openlie wicked, becauſe God commaundeth there ſhould be no ſuch in the Miniſterie, he hath no authoritie to Baptize, and ſo it is no Sacrament which is deliuered by them? The Browniſts affirme that the efficacie is of God, the faith is of God, the grace is of God alone, but God beſtoweth theſe by ſuch onelie as be his true Miniſters, and thoſe are none that be openlie wicked. The Donatiſts did affirme nothing but the verie ſame: For Auguſtine thus rehearſeth the words of Creſconius, Ideo magis te dicis iuſtum & fidelem, per quem hoc ſacramentum celebretur inquirere, quia ſpem & fiduciam Dei non hominis habes: Dei eſſe autem fidem atque iustitiam, quam ſemper in ministris eius attendis. Thou ſaieſt that becauſe thy hope and confidence is in God and not in man, thou doſt ſo much the rather ſeeke for one that is iuſt and faithfull by whome this Sacrament may be celebrated: and that the faith and righteouſnes is of God, which thou dooſt attend in his Miniſters. Booke 3. Chap. 9. I hold him therefore a verie ſharpe diſcerner, which waying throughlie all the ſayings of the Donatiſts, ſhall be able in this poynt of hanging the being and efficacie of the Sacraments, vponupon the worthines of the Miniſters, to ſhew anie ſmall difference betweene the Browniſts and them. Yea but herein they may ſeeme to differ verie much, that the Donatiſts did rebaptize, but the Browniſts doo not. In déed herein I confeſſe they differ, but yet ſo that in this difference the Browniſts are the groſſer, if we may reaſon from that which they holde: for if this were true, which the Browniſts affirme moſt ſtiffelie to bee true, as the Donatiſts did before them, that where an open wicked man dooth adminiſter the Sacraments they be no Sacraments at all. And if this alſo were as true, which they both hauehave taken vponupon them to iuſtifie, the Donatiſts of olde ſaying, they had no true Sacraments p. 61in the Churches, and the Browniſts that we hauehave none now: It muſt needes be graunted that the Donatiſts did the better of both, in baptiſing thoſe which were not before baptized: for he that is not baptized ought to be baptized. And as no vncircumciſed might eate of the Paſſeouer, but was to be cut off from the people of GOD: ſo no vnbaptized is to eate at the table of the Lord. How groſſe are the Browniſts which take it as a thing vndoubted that we hauehave no Sacraments, and muſt needes thereupon be aſſured that they themſelues were neuer baptized, and ſo can be but as an heape of vncircumciſed, and yet ſeeke not to hauehave the Sacrament? I would hauehave them anſwer this queſtion, whether a man that knoweth he was neuer baptized, can be ſaued, if he ſeeke not to bee baptized, when hee may come by it? Let no man imagine that I ſpeake this as though the Browniſts ſhould doo well in rebaptizing, for their former ground is falſe, wicked and hereticall, when they ſay it is no Sacrament that hath been adminiſtred by open offenders: and that we hauehave no Sacraments. But if that were true which they hold, they ſhould doo much better, I will not ſay to rebaptize, but to baptize ſuch as were not before baptized.

Now, where it is generallie obiected, that the Donatiſts perhaps held diuers things which the Browniſts doo not. I anſwere, that the Donatiſts indeede held ſomewhat which the Browniſts doo not, and the Browniſts hold ſomething which they did not. For ſome of the Donatiſts did caſt themſelues downe from high places, and into the fire, accounting them holie Martyres that ſo died, and others defended their doing. For thus ſaith Gaudentius a Donatiſt Biſhop in his Epiſtle, An ista perſecutio eſt, quae tot milliq innocentum martyrum arctauit ad mortem? Christiani enim ſecundum euangelium ſpiritu prompti, ſed carne infirmi à ſacrilega contaminatione caminorum reperto compendio ſuas animas rapuerunt, imitati preſbyteri Raziae in Machabaeorum libris exemplum, nec fruſtra timentes: quiſquis enim eorum manus inciderit, non euaſit: ſed quantum velint faciant, quod certum eſt, dei eſſe non poſsunt qui faciunt contra Deum. Whether is that p. 62a perſecution (ſaith he) which hath pent vp in a ſtraight ſo many thouſands of innocent martyres euen vntounto death? For Chriſtians according to the Goſpell, being readie in ſpirit, but weake in the fleſh, finding out a compendious way of their chimneyes, hauehave deliuered their ſoules from the ſacrilegious pollution, imitating the example of olde Razia in the bookes of the Machabees, not fearing without cauſe: for whoſoeuer falleth into their hands, doth not eſcape: but let them doo as much as they will, that which is certaine, they cannot be of God, which doo againſt God. booke 2. againſt Gaudent. Chapt. 20. Auguſtine ſheweth, that Gaudentius meaning was not that they burnt themſelues in their chimneys for feare of perſecution vntounto death, for the ciuill Magiſtrate did not ſo perſecute them, hauing made a lawe againſt them for baniſhment, but not for death: as Auguſtine ſheweth book 2. againſt Gaudentius chap. 11. Mitiora in vos conſtituit Imperator propter manſuetudinem Christianam: exilium vobis voluit inferre, non mortem. The Emperour hath decreed more gentle thinges againſt yee through Chriſtian mildnes: he would lay baniſhment vppon ye and not death. But his meaning is that ſuch as fell into their hands were drawne to ioyne with them in worſhip, which he calleth the ſacriligious defilement. And therfore doth abuſe that place of the Goſpell, to colour ſuch horrible murthering of themſelues, the ſpirit is readie but the fleſh is weake: for fearing leaſt through weakenes they ſhould yéeld to ioyne with the Churches, they rather choſe to kill themſelues. This the Browniſts doo not: but they condemne read prayer, or praying after any preſcript forme of words which the Donatiſts did not, as may bee gathered by theſe words of Petilian: Si p…ecem domino facitis, aut funditis orationem, nihil vobis penitus prodeſt. Vestras enim debiles preces cruenta vestra conſcientia vacuat, quia dominus deus puram magis conſcientiam quam preces exaudit, domino Chriſte dicente, non omnis qui dicit mihi domine, domine, intrabit in regnum coelorum, ſed is qui facit voluntatem patris mei qui eſt in coelis. Voluntas dei vtique bona eſt, nam ideo in ſacra oratione p. 63ſic petimus, fiat voluntas tua ſicut in coelo, & in terra. If ye make prayer to the Lord (ſaith the Donatiſt) or powre foorth ſupplication, it doth profite ye nothing at al, for your bloudie conſcience doth make your weake prayers of none effect, becauſe the Lord God doth rather heare a pure conſcience than prayers, the Lord Ieſus ſaying, that not euerie one that ſaith vntounto me Lord Lord ſhall enter into the kingdom of heauen, but he that doth the will of my father which is in heauen. The will of God is good, for therefore in the holie prayer we pray thus, thy will be done in earth as it is in heauen. Thus we ſee that the Donatiſt denying that any praied but they, ſheweth with all that praying they vſed the Lords prayer.

But what doo I ſtand to ſeeke differences betwéen them, which can hardlie be found: whereas indeede whole bookes doo ſet foorth at large their agreement. I will therefore proceede further to declare in particulars touching the power of Chriſtian Princes, in reforming the Church, in eſtabliſhing religion, and in puniſhing heretickes, ſchiſmatickes, and diſturbers, and in compelling their ſubiects to the obedience of the trueth, or to imbrace the true worſhip, how iniuriouſlie Browne hath dealt in his booke, and the Browniſts that hauehave written ſince, I hauehave layd open in my former booke, let their ſayings be throughlie peruſed, and now ſhall ye ſeee a little whether they be not the verie naturall children of the Donatiſts in this poynt alſo. Thus writeth Gaudentius a Donatiſt Biſhop: Per opificem rerum omnium dominum Chriſtum omnipotens deus frabricatum hominem vt deo ſimilem, libero demiſit arbitrio. Scriptum eſt enim, fecit deus hominem & dimiſit eum in manu arbitrij ſui. Quid mihi nunc humano imperio eripitur quod largitus eſt deus? Aduerte vir ſumme quanta in deum ſacrilegia perpetrentur, vt quod ille tribuit auferat humana praeſumptio, & pro deo ſe inaniter iactet magna iniuria dei, ſi ab hominibus defendatur. Quid de deo aeſtimat qui eum violentia vult defendere, niſiquia non valet ſuas ipſe iniurias vindicare? God almightie (ſaith this Donatiſt) by the maker of all thinges the Lord Chriſt, left man to his owne p. 64free will being created as in the likenes of GOD. For it is written, God made man and left him in the power of his owne will. Why ſhould that bee plucked from me by humane authoritie, which GOD hath beſtowed vponupon me? Marke moſt worthie man, how great ſacrileges are committed againſt God, that humane preſumption ſhould take that away which he hath giuen, and vainly boaſt it ſelfe for God with great iniurie to God, if he muſt be defended by men. What doth he eſteeme of God, which will defend him with violence, but that he is not able to reuenge the iniuries done vntounto him? In what ſenſe this Donatiſt ſpake thus, may beſt appeare by the anſwere of Auguſtine. Secundum illas vestras fallaciſſimas vaniſſimáſ que rationes, babenis laxatis at que dimiſſis, humanae licentiae impunita peccata omnia relinquentur nullis oppoſitis repagulis legum, nocendi audacia, & laſciuiendi libido bacchetur, non rex ſuum regnum, non dux militem, non prouincialem iudex, non dominus ſeruum, nec pater filium à libertate & ſuauitate peccandi minis vllis paeniſue compeſcat. Auferte quod ſana doctrina pro ſanitate orbis terrarum ſapienter per Apostolorum dicit, & vt confirmetis in arbitrio tanto peiore quanto liberiore filios perditionis, delete quod ait vas electionis, omnis anima potestatibus ſublimioribus, ſubdita ſit: non eſt enim potestas niſi à deo. Quae autem à deo ſunt, ordinata ſunt. Quapropter qui reſiſtit poteſtati, dei ordinationi reſiſtit. Qui autem reſiſtunt, ipſi ſibi iudicium acquirunt. Principes enim non ſunt timori boni operis, ſed mali. Ʋis autem non timere potestatem? Fac bonum, & habebis laudē ex illa. Dei enim miniſter eſt, vindex in iram ei qui male agit. Delete ista ſi potestis, aut ista, ſicut facitis, ſi non potestis delere, cōtemnite. Habete de his omnibus peſſimum arbitriū, ne perdatis liberū arbitriū, aut certe quia ſicut homines hominibus erubeſcitis, clamate ſi audetis, puniātur homicidia, puniantur adulteria, puniantur caetera quātalibet ſceleris, ſiue libidinis facinora ſeu flagitia. ſola ſacrilegia volumus à regnantiū legibus impunita. An verò aliud dicitis, cū dicitis, magna dei iniuria ſi ab hominibus defendatur. Quid de deo aestimat qui eū violētia vult defendere, niſi quia nō valet ſuas ipſe iniurias vindicare? p. 65Haec dicentes, quid aliud dicitis, niſi nulla hominis poteſtas cō tradicat atque obstrepat nostro libero arbitrio, quando iniuriam facimus deo. That is, According to theſe your moſt deceiuable & moſt vaine reaſons, the raines being let looſe to humane licentiouſnes, all ſinnes ſhall be let goe vnpuniſhed, no barres of lawes oppoſed, the boldnes to hurt, and luſt of rioting ſhall rage eueryevery where, the King ſhall not with any threatnings or penalties reſtraine his kingdome, nor the Captaine the ſouldier, nor the Iudge any of his circuit, nor the maſter his ſeruant, nor the father his ſonne from the libertie and ſweetnes of ſinning. Take away that which ſound doctrine, for the health of the world ſaith wiſelie by the Apoſtle, and that ye may confirme the children of perdition in a will, by how much the more free, by ſo much the worſe, blot out that which the elect veſſell ſaith; Let euerie ſoule be ſubiect to the higher powers: for there is no power but of God. The powers that bee are ordained of God. Wherefore he that reſisteth the power, reſisteth the ordinance of God: and they that reſiſt ſhall receiue to themſelues damnation. For Princes are not a terrour for well dooing but for euill. Wilt thou not feare the power? Doo well and thou ſhalt hauehave praiſe of it: for he is the miniſter of God for wrath to take vengeance vponupon the euill doer. Blot out theſe things if ye can, or elſe as ye doo, deſpiſe theſe thinges, becauſe ye cannot blot them out. HaueHave a will concerning al theſe things moſt euill, that ye may not loſe your free will. Or verely, becauſe as men ye are aſhamed before men, crie out if ye dare, let murtherers be puniſhed, let adulteries bee puniſhed, let other whatſoeuer enormities & hainous deeds of wickednes & luſt be puniſhed, wee will that only ſacrilegies go vnpuniſhed by the lawes of princes. Do ye ſay any other thing, when ye ſay, it is great iniurie to God, that he ſhould be defended by men? What doth he eſteeme of God which will defend him with violence, but that he is not able to reuēge the iniuries done to him? ſaying theſe things, what other thing ſay yee▪ but that no power of man muſt gainſay or mutter againſt our free will when we doo iniurie to God? p. 66Thus farre Auguſtine? But let vsus ſee further what Gaudentius ſaith, Sed belliferae pacis cruentaeque vnitatis ſe incolas iactant, audiant Dominum dicentem, pacem meam do vobis, pacem relinquo vobis: non ſicut ſeculum dat, ego do vobis. Seculi enim pax inter animos gentium diſſidentes armis & belli exitu foederatur: domini Chriſti pax, ſalubri lenitate tranquilla, volentes inuitat non cogit inuitos. But they boaſt themſelues (ſaieth the Donatiſt) as inhabitants of warring peace, and bloudie vnitie. Let them heare the Lord, ſaying, My peace I giuegive vntounto yee, my peace I leaue vntounto ye: not as the world giueth, doo I giuegive. For the peace of the world, when the minds of the Nations are at diſcord, is couenanted or eſtabliſhed with armour and euent of warre: The peace of the Lord Chriſt being calme with healthfull lenitie inuiteth the willing, compelleth not the vnwilling. This Donatiſt addeth, Ad docendum populum Iſrael omnipotens Deus prophetis praeconium dedit, non regibus imper auit. Saluator animarum Dominus Chriſtus, ad inſinuandam fidem, piſcatores, non milites miſit. To teach the people of Iſrael almightie God gaue prophets to preach, he inioyned not Kings. The ſauiour of Soules the Lord Chriſt, to inſinuate faith ſent fiſhers and not Souldiers. Booke 2. againſt Gaudentius chapt. 11. 16. 26.

Let vsus ſee alſo what Petillian that other Donatiſt Biſhop ſaith, booke 2. againſt him Chapter 78. Charitas non perſequitur non aduerſus caeteras animas Imperatores inflammat. Charity doth not perſecute it doth not inflame or kindle the wrath of rulers againſt others. This was the out-crie of the Donatiſts againſt the godly teachers of the churches when the Emperours made any lawes to driue them from their madnes, that they had inflamed the rulers to perſecute them. Ieſus Chriſtus it a ſidem vener at facere, non vt cogeret homines, ſed potius inuitaret. Ieſus Chriſt came ſo to worke faith, not that hee might compell men, but rather inuite them. Quodſi cogi per legem aliquem vel ad bona licuiſſer, voſipſi miſeri a nobis ad ſidem puriſſimam cogi debuistis. Sed abſit, abſit a nostra conſcientia, vt ad nostram ſidem aliquem p. 67compellamus. If it were lawfull (ſaith this Donatiſt) that anie ſhould by the Lawe be compelled, yea euen vntounto good things, you wretches ought to bee compelled by vsus, to the moſt pure faith: but farre be it, farre be it, from our conſcience, that we ſhould compell anie vntounto our faith. chapt. 83. Quid vobis est cum regibus ſeculi quos nunquam Chriſtianit as niſi inuidos ſenſit? What hauehave you to doo with the Kings of the Worlde which the Chriſtianitie hath neuer felt but enuious againſt it? Chapter. 92. Compare now the doctrine of our Browniſts and their ſayings with theſe former of the Donatiſts, and ſee if there bee anie difference? They ſay Princes are not to make Lawes for Church matters, Princes are not to reforme the Church by their authoritie: Princes are not to compell their ſubiects to the true worſhip of God by penalties: If Princes pleaſures are to be attended, where is the perſecution wee ſpeake of? None of the godlie Kings of Iudea durit compell anie to the couenant. The people of Chriſts Kingdome are ſpontanes, ſuch as come of their owne free accord, &c. It were too long and tedious, to ſet foorth all the outcries of the Donatiſts, their glorying in ſuffering perſecutions for the trueth, their accuſations againſt the paſtors of Chriſts Churche and the Princes while they ſought to reſtraine their furie, the one by Gods word, the other by lawes; that they perſecuted, and therefore could not be the true Church which as they ſay is perſecuted, but neuer perſecuteth: reade the epiſtle of Parmenian, of Petilian, and of Creſconius. The Browniſts are not behinde them an intch in this matter, but crie out as faſt of Antichriſtian perſecutors, boaſting of their patience and ſufferings, calling themſelues the perſecuted remnant, the poore afflicted, &c. Aug. anſwereth thoſe Donatiſts at large, I will recite but a little. Cum phreneticus medicum vexet, & medicus phreneticum liget, aut ambo inuicem perſequuntur, aut ſi perſecutio quae malo ſit, non est, non vtiq, perſequitur medicus phreneticum, ſed phreneticus medicum. When the man that is in phrenſie dooth vex the phiſitian, and the phiſitian dooth binde him that is in phrenſie, either p. 68both doo perſecute each other, or elſe if that bee not a perſecution which is done to the euill, then verelie the phiſitian dooth not perſecute the phrantick or mad man, but the phrantick or mad man dooth perſecute the phiſitian. Againſt Creſconius Booke 4. Chapter. 51. his application is that the penall Lawes of the Princes were as the bands of the Phiſitian to binde the Phrenſie and furious outrage of the Donatiſts. And whereas they boaſted of patience, and woulde compell none. He anſwereth, that becauſe they bee not able to reſiſt ſo manie nations which were Catholike, they gloried of patience, that they compelled none to their part. Hee then addeth, Iſto modo & miluus cum pullos rapere territus non potuerit, co lūbum ſe nominet. After the ſame ſort the Puttocke when he is fraid and can not ſnatch away the chickens, may name himſelfe a Doue. For he doth demaund of them what they hauehave not done which they were able? When Iulian the Apoſtata being Emperour, & enuying the peace of Chriſt, ſhewed them fauour, and graunted to them Churches, what ſlaughters they committed? Likewiſe he ſheweth in many places what reuell their circumcellions made, which in companies walking with clubbes and ſtaues did ſpoile, and beate ſuch as light into their handes, vſing moreouer a ſauage crueltie in putting vineger and lime into mens eies when they had beaten them. And verely what is it which men of excéeding intemperate heate will not doe, if it bee once in their power againſt ſuch as they ſhall iudge to bee but as vile Idolaters and perſecutors of Chriſtes truth.

The impatient heate of moſt Browniſtes is not vnknowē, but when the Kites for feare can not ſnatch vp the Chickens, muſt profeſſe the mekenes of Doues; as to ſay weare Chriſtes poore afflicted ſeruants, we be meeke and patient, we beare the croſſe. Where it is taught that priuate men are authoriſed to deale, and furie aboundeth, which things are among the Browniſtes: who is able to expreſſe the tragedies that would enſue, if power were not wanting in thē: the Princes may not ſtoppe their courſe, and who ſhall then p. 69reſiſt? The Donatiſts abuſing the ſcriptures in their plentifull allegations, and finding that their groſeneſſe was detected much by the ſkill of artes, found fault that any thing ſhould be ſcanned by the rules of Logike. The Browniſtes are euen with them, if not beyond. In his firſt booke againſt Creſconius Chap. 14: Auguſtine reporteth the wordes of that Donatiſt thus: Veſtros Epiſcopos laudas quod nobiſcum velut dialecticis nolint habere ſermonem. Thou doeſt commend your Biſhoppes, that they refuſe to hauehave ſpeech or conference with vsus as being Logicians. He anſwereth at large in ſhewing what Logicke is, and the worthie and neceſſarie vſe thereof in diſcuſſing matters of religion. Browne in the preface of his booke which (hee ſaith) ſheweth the life and manners of Chriſtians, calleth them ſophiſticall diuines which deale by the rules of Logicke. The Browniſtes with whome I deale, charge the ſtudents of the Vniuerſities, as trained vp in vaine and curious Artes. And what other cauſe ſhall euer be ſhewed of ſo barbarous an errour, but that they would not hauehave their matters tried by the rules which make manifeſt which is truth, and which is falſehoode. Thus hauehave I briefely laide open that the whole Donatiſme is maintained by the Browniſtes, and therefore I hauehave rightly termed them the Donatiſtes of England.