A Reply to an Answer Made by Doctor Whitgift, Reply · Part 37
The reply vntounto the next ſection whych is contained in the 106. 107. and a peece of the. 108. pages.
FOr that whych is in the. 105. page / and concerneth the ſurplice / I hauehave anſweared before. There foloweth the interrogatories or demaundes miniſtred vntounto the infants in baptiſme / for the profe wherof is brought / in the firſt place Dioniſius Areopagita, a worthy couer for ſuch a cup. For to let pas / that M. doctor alledgeth the celeſtiall hierarchie / in ſtead that he ſhould hauehave cited the eccleſiaſticall hierarchie / thys teſtimony being founde in the one / and not in the other: dare M. Doctor be ſo bold / as to delude the worlde in ſo great light / wyth ſuche bables as thys? doth he thinke that the author of theſe bokes of hierarchies / being ſo full of ſubtile ſpeculations / vain and idle fanſies / wicked blaſphemies / making one order of popes / an other of prelates / the third of ſacrificers / and then of monkes (ſome of whych orders came not many hundreth yeares after that time / wherin Denis the Arcopagite liued) which mentioneth many foliſh ceremonies and corruptions (that no other author neyther Greeke nor Latine ſtories / nor others diuers hundreth yeares after dothe make any mention of beſydes hym) I ſay doth he thynke to abuſe men / and to geue them ſuch droſſe in ſteade of ſiluer / ſuch chaffe in ſtead of corne / as to make vsus beleue that he that wrote theſe bokes of hierarchie / was ſ. Paules ſcholer? for the better blaſing of this Denis armes / I will ſend the (reader) vntounto that whych Eraſmus wryteth of thys Denis of M. Doctors / vponupon the. 17. of the Actes of the Apoſtles / where he alſo ſheweth togither wyth hys owne iudgement / the iudgement of Laurentius Valla. I am 1. Lib. 20. cap.not ignorant what Nicephorus a fabulous hiſtoriographer / and of no credite in ſuch matters (and in thoſe matters eſpecially / whych myght lyke or miſlike thoſe times wherin he wrote) ſayeth of S. Paules communicating wyth Denis / and another / concerning the heauenly and Eccleſiaſticall hierarchie. But becauſe I thynke M. Doctor be now aſhamed of hys Denis / I wil folow it no further.
By thys it may appeare / that M. Doctors Dioniſius being a counterfet and ſtartvp / theſe interrogatories and demaūds miniſtred vntounto the infants / hauehave not ſo many gray haires as he would make vsus beleue / although in dede the queſtion lyeth not in ye antiquitie. As for reaſons he hath none / but only as one which hath learned hys aequipollences very euil / he maketh it all one to ſay (I renoūce) and to ſay (I will teach an other to renounce.) As for S. Auguſtines place (although I can not alow hys reaſon that he maketh / nor the proportion that is betwene the ſacrament of the body and bloud of our ſauioure Chriſte / and hys body and bloud it ſelfe of one ſide / and betwene the ſacrament of baptiſme / and faith of the other ſide: ſaying that as the ſacrament of the body of Chriſt after a ſort is the body / ſo the baptiſme of the ſacrament of faith / is after a ſort faith / whereas he ſhould hauehave ſayd / that as the ſupper being the ſacrament of y• body of Chriſte / is after a ſort the body of Chriſt: ſo baptiſme being a ſacrament of the bloud of Chriſt / is after a ſort the bloud of Chriſt / for faith is not the ſubiect of baptiſme / as the body and bloud of Chriſt is the matter of the ſupper). Yet I ſay that S. Auguſtine hath no one word to approue thys abuſe of anſwearing in the childes name / & in hys perſon / but goeth about to eſtabliſh an other abuſe / whych was / that it was lawfull for thoſe that preſented the childe / to ſay that it beleeued. So that it is lyke that the minyſter dyd aſke thoſe whych preſented the infant / whether they thought that it was faithfull / and dyd beleeue / and thoſe whych preſented it / ſayd it was ſo: wherevpon thys queſtion roſe / whether it was lawfull to ſay that the childe beleeued.
In the. 191. and. 192. pages / he ſpeaketh of thys agayne / but he doth nothing els but repeat in both places / that whych is here / only he ſayth / that it is a mocking of God to vſe the place of the Galathians (God is not mocked) againſt Galath. …. 7.thys abuſe / and hys reaſon is / becauſe ſ. Paule ſpeaketh there agaynſt thoſe that by fained excuſes / ſeeke to defraud the paſtor of hys lyuing / as who ſhould ſay ſ. Paule dyd not conclude that particulare concluſion (thou ſhalt not by friuolous excuſes defraud the miniſter) wyth thys general ſaying (God is not mocked) for hys reaſon is / God is not mocked at all / or in any matter / therfore he is not mocked in thys. Or as who ſhould ſay / becauſe our ſauioure Chriſt ſaying that it is not lawfull to ſeperate that which God hath ioyned / ſpeaking of diuorce: it is not lawfull to vſe thys ſentence / being a generall rule / in other thyngs / when as we Math. 19. 6.know it is as well and properly vſed agaynſt the papiſts / whych ſeuer the cup from the breade / as agaynſt the Iewes whych put away their wiues for eueryevery ſmall and trifeling cauſe. And as for thys queſtioning / it can be little better termed / then a very trifeling and toying. For firſt of all / children hauehave not / nor can not hauehave any fayth / hauing no vnderſtanding of the word of God / I will not deny / but children hauehave the ſpirite of God / whych worketh in them after a wonderful faſhion. But I deny that they can hauehave faith which cometh by hearing / & vnderſtandyng whych is not in them. Secondarily / if children could hauehave fayth / yet they that preſent the childe / can not preciſely tell / whether that particulare chylde hath fayth or no / and therfore can not ſo abſolutely anſwere that it beleeueth? Becauſe it is comprehended in the couenaunt / and is the chylde of faythfull parents / or at the leaſt of one of the parents / there is warrant vntounto the preſenters to offer it vntounto baptiſme / and to the miniſter for to baptiſe it. And further we hauehave to thinke charitably / and to hope / that it is one of the church. But it can be no more preciſely ſayd that it hath fayth / thē it may be ſayd preciſely elected (for in dede it is all one to ſay that it is elect / and to ſay it beleueth) and this I thinke the authors of the admonition do meane / when they ſay that they require a promiſe of the Godfather / whych is not in them to performe. Thirdly / if bothe thoſe thyngs were true / that is / that infantes had fayth / and that it myght be preciſely ſayd y• it beleeueth / yet ought not the miniſter demaund thys of the childe / whom he knoweth can not anſwer hym / nor thoſe that anſwer for the childe ought to demaund to be baptiſed / when they neyther meane / nor may be (being already baptiſed. But it is meete / that all thyngs ſhould be done grauely / ſimply / and plainly in the church. And ſo (if thoſe other two thyngs were lawfull) it ought to be done / as ſeemeth to hauehave bene done in S. Auguſtines times / when the miniſter aſked thoſe that preſented the infant / and not the infant / whether it were faythfull / and thoſe whych preſented / anſweared in their owne perſons / and not in the childes / that it was faythfull.
For Godfathers there is no controuerſy betwene the admonition / and M. doctors boke / whych appeareth not only in their corrections / but plainly in the 188. page / where they declare that they rather condemne the abuſe / whyleſt it is vrged more then greater matters / and whych are in deede neceſſary / thys being a thyng arbitrarie / and left to the diſcretion of the church / and whileſt there is ſo euil choyſe for the moſte parte of Godfathers / whych is expreſſedly mentioned of the admonition / and whileſt it is vſed almoſt for nothyng elſe / but as a meane for one frende to gratify an other / wythout hauing any regarde to the ſolempne promyſe made before God and the congregation / of ſeeing the childe broughte vp in the nurture and feare of the Lord. For the thyng it ſelfe / conſydering that it is ſo generally receyued of all the churches / they do not miſlike of it.
As for fonts I hauehave ſpoken of before / both particularly & in general. But wheras M. doctor ſayeth in the apoſtles times they baptiſed in no baſins but in riuers & common waters / I wold know whether there was a riuer or common water in Cornelius and in the iaylors houſes / where Paul and Peter baptiſed.
To proue croſſing in baptiſme / M. Bucers authority is brought. I hauehave ſayd before / what iniury it is to leaue the publyke workes of Bucer / and to flye vntounto the Apochryphas, wherin alſo they might driue vsus to vſe the like / and to ſet downe lykewiſe hys wordes whych we finde in hys priuate letters. But it is firſt of all to be obſerued of the reader / howe & wyth what name thoſe notes are called / whych are cited of M. Doctor for the defence of theſe corruptions. They are called by M. Doctors owne confeſſion (cenſures) which word ſignifyeth and implyeth / as muche as corrections and controlments of the booke of ſeruice / and therefore we may take thys for a generall rule throughout the whole boke of ſeruice / that in whatſoeuer thyngs in controuerſy M. Doctor doth not bring Bucers authority to confirme them / that thoſe thyngs Bucer miſlyked of: as for example in priuate baptiſme / and communions miniſtred in houſes / for interrogatories miniſtred vntounto infants / & ſuch lyke / for ſo much as they are not confirmed here by M. Bucers iudgemēt / it may be thought / that he miſlyked of them / and no doubt if eyther M. Bucers notes had not eyther condemned or miſlyked of diuers thyngs in the ſeruice boke: we ſhould hauehave had the notes printed and ſet forthe to the full / thys I thought in a word to admoniſhe the reader of.
VntoUnto M. Bucers authority / I could heere oppoſemen of as great authority / yea the authoritye of all the reformed churches / whych ſhall alſo be done afterward. And if there were nothyng to oppoſe but the worde of God / whych will hauehave the ſacraments miniſtred ſimply / and in that ſincerity that they be left vntounto vsus / it is enoughe to make all men to couer their faces / and to be aſhamed / if that whych they ſhall ſpeake / be not agreeable to that ſimplicity. The reaſons whych Bucer bryngeth I will anſwer / whych in thys matter of croſſing are two. Firſt that it is auncient / and ſo it is in deede. For Tertullian maketh mention of thys Lib. de reſurrect. carnis.vſage / and if thys be ſufficient to proue the goodneſſe of it / then there is no cauſe why we ſhould miſlyke of the other ſuperſtitions and corruptious whych were likewyſe vſed in thoſe tunes. For the ſame Tertullian ſheweth / that they vſed Lib. de corona militis.alſo at baptiſme to taſte of miike and hony / and not to waſhe all the weeke after they had miniſtred baptiſme.
But heere I will note the cauſe whervpon I ſuppoſe thys vſe of croſſing came vp in the primitiue church / wherby ſhal appeare / how there is no cauſe now why it ſhuld be retained / if there were any why it ſhould be vſed in the primitiue church. It is knowne to all that hauehave red the Eccleſiaſtical ſtories / that the heathen dyd obiect to the Chriſtians in times paſt in reproche / that the God whych they beleued of / was hanged vponupon a croſſe. And they thought good to teſtify that they were not aſhamed therefore of the ſame God / by the often vſing of the ſigne of the croſſe / whych carefulnes and good minde to keepe amongſt them an open profeſſion of Chriſte crucifyed / althoughe it be to be commended: yet is not thys meanes ſo: for they myght otherwyſe hauehave kept it / and wyth les daunger / then by thys vſe of croſſing. And if they thought ye vſe of the croſſe to be the beſt meanes / yet they ſhould not hauehave bene ſo bolde / as to hauehave brought it into the holy ſacrament of baptiſme / and ſo mingle the ceremonies and inuentions of men / wyth the ſacraments & inſtitution of God. And as it was brought in vponupon no good groūd / ſo the Lord left a marke of hys curſſe of it / and wherby it myght be perceyued to come out of the forge of mannes braine / in that it began forthwyth / while it was yet in the ſwadling clouts to be ſuperſtitiouſly abuſed. For it appeareth by Tertullian alſo in the ſame booke De corona militis, that the chriſtians had ſuch a ſuperſtition in it / that they would doe nothyng / nor take nothyng in hande / vnles they had croſſed them when they went out / when they came in / when they ſate or lay downe / and when they roſe / and as ſuperſtition is alwayes ſtrengthened / and ſpreadeth it ſelfe wyth the time / ſo it came from croſſing of men / vntounto croſſing of eueryevery thyng that they vſed. Whervpon Chryſoſtome commēdeth the croſſing VponUpon the. 1. of Tim. 4. chap.of the cup before a man drynke / and of the meate before it was eaten. But if it were graunted that vponupon thys conſyderation whych I hauehave before mentioned / the auncient chriſtians dyd well: yet it foloweth not / that we ſhould ſo doe. For we lyue not amongſt thoſe nations whych do caſt vsus in the teethe / or reproche vsus wyth the croſſe of Chriſte. If we liued amongſt the Turkes / it were another matter / and then there myght peraduenture ſome queſtion be / whether we ſhuld do as they dyd / and hauyng the ſame ſore / vſe the ſame playſter: but now we liue among the papiſtes / that do not contemne the croſſe of Chriſt / but whych eſteme more of the wodden croſſe / then of the true croſſe of Chriſt (whych is hys ſufferings) we ought now do cleane contrarywiſe to the olde chriſtians / and abolyſhe all vſe of theſe croſſes / for contrary dyſeaſes muſt hauehave contrary remedyes. If therfore the olde chriſtians to delyuer the croſſe of Chriſt from contempt / dyd often vſe the croſſe: the chriſtians now to take away the ſuperſtitious eſtimation of it / ought to take away the vſe of it. Concerning the other reaſon of the profitable ſignification of the croſſe / I hauehave ſhewed / that that maketh the thyng a greate deale worſe / and bryngeth in a newe worde into the church / wheras there ought to be no Doctor heard in the church / but only our ſauioure Chriſt. For if theſe ſignifications be good / then the papiſts hauehave to anſwer vsus / that their ceremonies be not dumbe / whych hauehave as lykely and as gloryous ſignifications as theſe are / and ſo in deede they ſay / that their ceremonyes are not dumbe ceremonyes / for ſo much as they ſignify ſo good thyngs. But although it be the worde of God that we ſhould not be aſhamed of the croſſe of Chriſte / yet is it not the word of God / that we ſhould be kept in remembrance and obſeruation of ye by two lines drawn a croſſe one ouer an other in the childes forehead / but a fond toy and idle deuiſe of mannes brayne.
In the. 192. page / vntounto the admonition obiecting that by thys ſignification it is made a ſacrament / M. Doctor anſweareth that eueryevery ceremony whych betokeneth ſome thyng is not a ſacrament: I would knowe what maketh a ſacrament if a doctrine annexed vntounto an outwarde ſigne dothe not make a ſacrament. And I am ſure / there was no outward ſigne neyther in the olde teſtament nor in the newe / whych hath a doctrine ioyned wyth it / whych is not a ſacrament. For if he will take the nature of the ſacrament ſo ſtraightly as Auguſtine dothe / and that there be no Sacramentes / but when as to the clement there commeth the worde / the circumciſion can be no ſacrament. Beſydes that / ſeeing that mayſter Doctor hath condemned the allegorie and ſignifycation of ſytting at the Lordes ſupper / ſaying that it is Papiſticall / I maruell what priuiledge he hath or ſpeciall lycence / that he may allow that in hym ſelfe and in hys owne aſſertiōs / whych he ſayeth is vnlawfull and papiſticall in others / eſpecially ſeeing the allegorye of the ſitting was neuer vſed by the Papiſtes / but thys of croſſing is. And if thys licence of allegories be alowed / I ſee not why Oyle may not be brought into the ſacrament / as well as croſſing / bothe becauſe it hath bene a ſacrament of God before / and for that the ſignification therof (betokening the gifts of the holy ghoſt / and ſhadowing out the power & efficacie of thoſe gyfts) caryeth as great a ſhew of wiſedome and chriſtian inſtruction / as doth the croſſing. And to conclude / I ſee no cauſe / why ſome croſſes ſhuld be vnlawfull / and other ſome commendable: and why it ſhould be a monument of popery in wode and metal / and yet a chriſtiſtian badge in the forehead of a man: why we ſhould not lyke of it in ſtreates and hygh wayes / & yet allow of it in the church. And becauſe I would hauehave all thoſe thyngs together / that touche thys matter of baptiſme / I come to that whych he hath in the next ſection / & in the. 111. page / where after hys old manner he wrangleth and quarelleth. For although the Admonition ſpeaketh ſo plainly and ſo clearely / that (as Heſiode ſayth) it myght areskein to momo ſatiſfy Momus / yet M. doctor goeth about there to bryng it in ſuſpition of Anabaptiſme / becauſe allowing in playne words / the baptiſme of infants / they adde that if the parties be of diſcretion and yeres / them ſelues in their owne parſons ſhould demaund to be baptiſed. For ſayeth he in this church / they tary not for baptiſme ſo long. But is there no caſe or may there not be / when they that be of age may be baptiſed? It may be there are Iewes in England / whych vnderſtanding their blindnes / and confeſſing their ſynne / may deſire to be baptiſed / and there be diuers Mores in noble mennes and gentle mennes houſes / whych are ſometimes brought to the knowledge of Chriſt / wherby there is ſome vſe and practiſe of thys caſe.
After that M. Doctor hath caſt hym ſelfe in deriſion / at the feete of the authors of the Admonition / and deſired to be taught of them whom he hath ſo contemptuouſly condemned as vnlearned / he dothe by and by raiſe vp hym ſelfe into hys chaire / and there ſitteth Doctorally / appoſing the authors of the admonition / as if they were hys ſchollers: and vponupon occaſion of the ſound fayth and good behauyor of the parents of the infante mentioned by the admonition / aſketh firſt of all / what if the infant be the childe of a dronkard? what if he be of a harlot? ſhall not (ſayeth he) the infant be baptiſed? If it were not that M. doctor in aſking theſe queſtions dothe alſo anſwer them / and anſweareth them farre otherwyſe then the truthe doeth ſuffer / I would not be drawne from the cauſes whych we hauehave in hand by theſe roging queſtions / nowe I can not leaue them vnanſweared / becauſe I ſee that mayſter Doctor dothe make of the holy Sacrament of baptiſme (whych is an entry into the houſe of God / and whereby only the family of God muſt enter) a common paſſage wherby he will hauehave cleane and vncleane / holy and prophane / as well thoſe that are wythout the couenaunt as thoſe that be wythin it / to paſſe by: and ſo maketh the church no houſholde / but an Iune to receyue whoſoeuer commeth. I will anſwere therfore almoſt in as many words / as the queſtions be aſked. If one of the parents be neyther drunkarde nor adulterer / the chylde is holy by vertue of the couenaunt / for one of the parents ſakes. If they be bothe / and yet not obſtinate in their ſynne / whereby the church hathe not proceeded to Excommunication / (them ſelues being yet of the church) their chylde can not / nor ought not to be refuſed. To the ſecond queſtion / wherein he aſketh what if the childe be of Papiſtes or Heretikes. If bothe be Papiſtes / or condenmed heretikes / (if ſo be I may diſtinguiſhe papiſtes from heretikes) and cutte of from the church / then their children can not be receyued / becauſe they are not in the couenaunt: if eyther of them be faithfull / I hauehave anſweared before that they ought to be receyued. To the other queſtion wherin he aſketh / what if they erre in ſome poynts of matters of faithe. If it be but an error / and be not in thoſe poynts whych caſe the foundations of fayth / becauſe they ſtill notwythſtandyng their error / are to be counted amongſt the faythfull / their children pertaine vntounto the promiſe / and therfore to the ſacrament of the promiſe.
And in the. 193. page he aſketh / what if the parentes of the chylde bee vnknowne. If they be / yet if godly men will preſent it to baptiſme / with promiſe of ſeeing it brought vp in the feare of the Lorde / for ſo muche as it is founde in a place where the church is / and therefore by lykelyhoode to appertayne vntounto ſome that was of the church: I thinke it may be baptyſed / if the church thinke it good in thys laſt caſe.
Then hee goeth forth in the. 111. page to proue that the children of thoſe which he hath reckned / may be baptyſed / and demaundeth whether a wicked father may hauehave a good child / a papiſt or heretike father a beleuing child? yes verely may they. So may hauehave and hath the Turke and the Iewe / and yet theyr children are not to be receyued / vnleſſe their fayth doe firſt appeare by confeſſion. But you ſay the papiſt and hereticke be baptiſed / and ſo are not the Iewes and Turkes. Their baptiſme (they being cut of from the church) maketh them as much ſtraungers vntounto it / as was Iſmael and Eſau: which albeit they were circumcyſed / yet being caſt out of the church / they were no more to be accompted to be of the body of Gods people / then thoſe whiche neuer were in the church. Now you ſee the poyſon (as you terme it) which lyeth hyd vnderunder theſe wordes / and if it be as you ſay poyſon / let vsus hauehave ſome of your triacle. In all the reſt of the ſection / there is nothing but that which he ſpake of before / only the elderſhyp is named / which commeth to be entreated of in the next ſection.