M. Some laid open in his colors: WHEREIN THE INDIFFErent Reader may easily see, how wretchedly and loosely he hath handled the cause against M. PENRI.  
Done by an OXFORD man, to his friend in Cambridge.  PROVERB. 30. 32. 
If thou hast been foolish in lifting up thyself, and hast thought maliciously, lay now thy band upon thy mouth.  
For Proud, haughty and scornful is his name, that worketh wrath in his arrogancy. PROV. 21. 24.   

To the Reader.  
Having this lying by me, without any purpose to publish it as yet, I was advertised of the taking away of M. Penry's book by the Pursuivant. Whereupon I resolved (though it should be some offence to my friend) not to closet it up any longer, lest th'adversary should too much triumph & insult. Even as it came unto my hands, so have I given it his passport, without any addition or alteration of mine: only the Title I confess is mine own, the rest is my Oxford friends, who if he be thought in his pleasant vein any thing too snappish, the reader is to weigh with what kind of ad versary he deals: namely, with the snappishest gentleman, and most bitter mouths, that ever put pen to paper. For the rest, it may be I am partial, and therefore I leave the judgement to others. The man (it should seem) had no purpose to stand upon every particular, but rather in a kind of cursory delivery to his friend, but to touch (as it were) the general defects & lameness of M. Somes distempered discourse: which yet the reader shall see he hath not done it so slightly neither, but that the nakedness and poverty of most of the adversaries grounds, may easily be descried by this, if there were no more. Nevertheless, for the better satisfying of all men, I hope he that hath hitherto undertaken the cause with so happy a hand, will not so leave it if God assist him. I hope I say, not with standing the violent & injurious wresting of his labours out of his hands, the Lord in his good time will bring them forth to the fuller clearing & deciding of the whole at large. In the mean while M. Some may do well, having gotten his adversaries book (as it is like he hath, if his pen be not strooken with a desperate fear) to publish it unmangled as he received it, and so to confute it if he can. His adversary being so weak as he takes him to be, he need not to sweat much about it, it will be done he knows, with the turning of a hand. And while he is in travel about such a miracle, there be of his friends, that will be so bold to pray for him for goodwill, that God would vouchsafe him an humble spirit in a thorough feeling of his own wants, that howsoever he be puffed up otherwise, he may tremble and stoop at the sceptre of juda, and beware he spurn not against the truth.   

M. Some laid open in his colors.  
Be it so, sithence you will needs have it so, provided that you be not overhasty to communicate it, for that may breed danger to me, and no great good to yourself. If it be the same M. Some, that read sometime a Lecture in my L. of Leicester's house, then is he quite new founded since I saw him, and his spirit it should seem, strangely vapored upward into some loftier climate them was usual with him in those days, you can remember I am sure, when he was taken for an other manner of man of a soft constitution, and a simple hearted man, as most of his coat within the land. Albeit that even then when he gave this glamse of sincerity and mildness, there were some you know that stood in contention with us about him, in that he made no bones (as they then said) to be adaylie non-resident from his charge, and withal closely and slily to glut down a pretty prebend or 2. to help his digestion, which as you and I were then hardly drawn to believe, thinking all this to be but injuriously fathered upon him, so yet if that should be true as the knight giveth out, that my L. of Leycester should use any such speeches of him, That he feared be would prove but an ambitious fool when all was done. Remembering what hath fallen out since, I promise you it was shrewdly aimed of my Lord, and we must needs yield he had a notable eye, that could in so smooth a countenance, and so close a carriage of a man, spy out nevertheless the cloud of ambition afar of: it was not for nought it should seem, that he was so long emplojed by her majesty in affairs of State.  
But it is no reason you would say, that every thing should be measured after the partial and passionate judgement of men how great soever they be: very true, and therefore to clear the suspicion, and to wipe away all that might seem through prejudice in any sort to bleamish the man, let your D. hardly speak for himself, for index animi sermo, or as he himself saith, ex unguibus leonem, of th'abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh, and these (if I be not deceived,) you shall find to be his own words, which some think had been fit forfytie works against the landing of the Spaniards, then for grounded reasons and arguments to decide a controversy by. But I will not brand them with any coal of mine, let them weigh as they will in the judgement of the wise, I will neither poise down the balance at th'one end, nor lighten it at th'other: only because you press me to tell you what I think, I will first take some pains to draw you a calendar of his own speeches as I find them scattered in his book, and so leave the judgement to yourself: nay as master Doct. telleth the ignorant welshman, I will not in this case refuse the judgement of his own disciples, if they have any dram of equity in them, so that they remember to follow their master's rule, and bring with them judicium non preiudicium, hearken than I pray you a while, to the sound of this learned trumpet, and tell me your opinion when we meet.  
First in the very title of his book, he beginneth thus. If the bare outside be so glittered, what may we think of the pearls within? A refutation of many anabaptistical, blasphemous, and popish absurdities touching Magistracy, Ministry, Church, Scripture, and Baptism: And then he goeth on very sweetly thus.  
M. Penri (saith he) is very ignorant, and his treatise very silly & corrupt stuff: His book is a farthel of gross errors: none account of it but such as are of the fantastical crew, men extremely both proud and ignorant: his inconstancy proceeds of a vain humour, which as a whirlwind doth strangely carry and overcarie him: his gross errors: his absurd, anabaptistical and blasphemous fancies. I dare be bold to say, that is the spider's web be good cloth, and the cockatrice eggs wholesome meat, than such points as I resute in this treatise, are very excellent divinity. His speech is very gross: his reasons are most absurd and childish. This is intolerable sauciness: Inscitia audax: None so bold as blind bayard. This is a gross and popish error, a popish collection, a most absurd heresy: your arreast is like Goliabs' curse. M. PENRI hath troubled heaven, church, commonwealth & himself. Heaven, for he is saucy with God himself: Church, for in stead of treasure, he hath offered it very dangerous poison. Common wealth, for he hath undermined the chair of the Magistrate, I hope such coneys will be looked unto. Himself, for he hath broached many proud, blasphemous, and anabaptistical fancies. The mark that M. PENRI levels at, is I fear me, to shake hands with the anabaptistical recusants, some part of his writings look shrewdly that way. I make very mean account as yet of your judgement: you have broached gross errors: thank yourself for sowing such giddy fancies: you are too imperial. If my reasons were suitable to your answers, they were very woeful: your tongue cannot disgrace me, your tongue is no slander. Sus Mineruam: your dealing with me, is neither honest nor schoolelike: if you see not this, you are stark blind. The wrangling spirits are the more for your absurd writings: They which are so forward in jangling of these points, are either of your humour, which is very bad, or anabaptistical recusants which is somewhat worse.  
Will you any more of this? It is you see but a miry track that I tread in, and yet the farther one wades, the more quick sands and quavemires he is like to find: for thus your doctor goeth on.  
I am sorry for your heaviness: I detest your anabaptistical fancies: your gift in answering is very rare: you make wash way of the weightiest arguments: you bewray intolerable both pride and ignorance: you are one of the strangest divines that ever I heard of, very ignorant, very bold, very absurd: your judgement is not worth a rush: your dealing with me is most absurd: you have grossly abused me: you are near driven when you use such beggarly shifts to bombast your treatise: Honest matrons use no paintings, but harlots do: gross errors have need of such vermiliom: the vail of malice did hinder your sight: This odious instance doth best become your spirit: It is suitable to the rest of your writings, most absurd and childish: your absurdities are many and gross: if you recant not your anabaptistical errors, I will account very basely of you. The name of Majesty is to costly a garment for so lepprous a body as your treatise is: It is the manner of all sectaries to use lofly & majestical words, that their ignorant followers may commend them above the skies. My answer is, that you are a wicked slanderer: such dealing is an argument of a vile nature, and a wrangling spirit: if I were of your humour, I could chase and pursue you hotly for your inconstancy and error. In your treatise you have sown gross errors thick & threefold. Are not your disciples most unhappy that depend one you as one an other Pope? This bewrayeth your gross ignorance: if my reasons were as weak as your senseless answers, they were strange stuff: what mean Scholar, what russet coat in the country would shape such an answer? your wits I think were a woolgathering: this answer I think came out of Barbary, I hope you are ashamed of it by this time: did ever any student deal so childishly? I see by his answers what a deep clerk he is, your weighty objections have neither succum nor sanguinem: they have no pith in them, they are lighter than any feather, and bewray your ignorance: your lusty speeches cannot daunt me: it is but a visor. I have been long acquainted with the boisterous speeches of such ignorant and bold companions as you are. salis pro imperio, you are by your leave a little to Lordly: had I nothing to think of but your absurd fancies: you imagine very basely of me: I do but touch this gross and blasphemous paradox of yours: what base ware you commend unto us for excellent divinity?  
How think you? Will you any more yet? Or are you not half weary of reading? Well I hope now if my hands do happen to smell any thing unsavorly, you will of courtesy bear with me, because you see I have been all this while gathering of weeds. But alas is this all think you? No assure yourself, there is yet a vile deal of such behind, for these (I take it) are of the same forge:  
He that would sail after your compass for divinity matters, should prove as giddy as a goose (saith your doctor:) you have evil luck: you are an unpleasant musician: you have kept strange coiles: you lay on load, but it is fulmen non tonitru, black clouds but no rain: I pray God to keep the people of the land, from such blind guides as the ignorant sort are, & from such shameless & fantastical guides as you master Penry are: if you will deal plainly never piddle any longer, go through stitch with al. Seing you are over shoes, adventure over boots to confute Calvin, give th'onset, if you fail, you shall lose no credit of learning, for you never had any as yet. Qui semel vericundiae limits, etc. you know the rest etc. M. Peurye is in his ruff. His pride and ignorance appear in their colors: if you be not void of grace be sorry and ashamed of your blasphemous lewdness: you have used th' Apostle as Cacus did Hercules' oxen. Did any student ever broth such sluffe as this? Many Carrmen in London can make better arguments: your writing have neither grace nor salt: your absurd collections are evidences of your spirit: unskilful preachers are your bulwarks and blockhouses to support your fancies: you have shot but many scores wide: you are one of the strangest turners that ever I knew: you have turned out such a deal of gross Divinity upon me and others, that we are weary & you may be ashamed of it: you would never I think have vented such motley stuff as this, if you had thought it would have been looked on. Many learned condemn your treatise for a foolish and fantastical babble: you are so sawey with the principal of the religion, in this noble land. I make more account I tell you of one Calvin then of a thousand Penries: you have a special gift in varying a phrase, for that you shall bear the bell and the claper to: it is a blind and beggarly shist: your arguments are Scopae dissolutae, very lose ware & slenderly trussed together: more he tells master Penry, that there is no reason he should have such liberty of printing as he, for saith he, you broach and Print gross errors & anabaptistical fancies: so do not I: you refused to offer & submit your writings, to the view & allowance of the Magistrate: so do not I: you would have me procure your judicial hearing, etc. your request is not equal. Nec te novi nec ubi sis. Speak for yourself in God's name: so will I. If you will revoke your error & heresies, otherwise I will not open my lips for any such as you are. Likewise in the same place, Master Penty having showed that he did reverence him for his guifes, is thus cut short, and uncourteously rewarded for his pains. Be sorry saith he for yourself. Detest your fancies, your reverence I make very mean account of: God's truth is as dear to me as to you. I hope it hath had & shall have more defence by me then by you, there is some reason it should. And afterwards he cometh upon him thus: you are not (saith he) Master of the sentences as Peter Lambarde was: if you were, the sound divinity that is taught in Cambridge & Oxford should be cried down: and your strange fancies should be ruled cases. The refutation of your blasphemus, Anabaptistical, popish, & proud errors by me, is I am sure a performance of a special duty to almighty God, my Prince, and this Church. Great words shall not fray me: if your ignorant disciples will still magnify you, it shall not be strange to me, they do but their kind: you use goodly words sometimes, but your proud malice will appear, it cannot be hidden: your heretical absurdities in your treatise, & your shameless dealing with our Magistrates do cry aloud, etc. I pray God with all my heart, to keep me & all such as love religion from such as you and the fantastical sort are: you are strange cattle: you hope that I will grant you the cause, a vain hope, for I think scorn to be one of ignorant Penry's disciples, that is a proud and ignorant Anababtist. If you will have any thing at my hands you must get it by force of argument. If you think I will come of otherwise, you are in a wrong box, for I intend not to be at your whistle: yea I require and charge you in the name of God, (if you be not void of grace) that you confess your ignorance and detest your errors, etc. Thus have you my resolution, and yet you are no conqueror as Caesar was, nor I overthrown as Pompey was: if your arguments were as tidie, as your speeches are confident, there were no dealing with you: I perceive the greatest barkers are not the forest byters: Blind Bartimeus could have espied this: you may command and control, and deal with others as Strato did, that was king over beasts, etc.  
How now if a man may ask you, are you not near cloyed by this? What think you now of my L. of Leycester his prophesy? Was not the figure well set that hit so right of the man's constitution? Yet is this the man you see, that can for all this tell his adversary and that full solemnly, that the best conqueast he can have is, to overcome his pride by humility, yea and more, tell him plainly that he liketh better Humile peccatum, quam superbam innocentiam: he that will so often and so peremptorily lay haughtiness and pride to an other man, had he not need think you to be a little clearer from that infection himself, than your doctor showeth himself to be? But it may be he will mend the matter in some other places of his book, and it is odds he will not always be in this key: like enough, and therefore let him speak once again for himself. About his. 77. page as I take it, where M. Penri doth seem to say, that we can hardly have any sealed assurance in our hearts, that we receive any sacrament at the dumb ministers hands, because we have no such promise of the Lord, and our assurance must always be grounded upon the promises of God, mark I pray you how M. Some refuteth this:  
You are at war (saith he) with yourself: you words agree like harp and harrow: your disciples are sit vessels to receive any liquor of you, but men of learning and wisdom are otherwise affected: your dealing is absurd and dangerous, absurd for it is void of truth, dangerous for it would breed confusion. The Magistrates thanks be to god, neither do nor will suffer this bad course of yours: if they should, sancies would as weeds grow too fast, and this noble land should receive more hurt than your head is worth: I doubt not of their godly wisdom: The miserable estate of Germany heretofore by reason of sectaries, may and will awaken them: If you be restrained from your gross errors, as some are very justly, you must not cry, persecution persecution, your note must be, Poena persidiae, that is, that you are justly met with, otherwise you sing out of tune. And not long after this, he payeth him again with a syllogism or two in the same figure. I am persuaded, that if you be not well conjured by the magistrate, you will prove a strange body: you are far gone already, strange fancies have almost consumed you: The Magistrate's discipline is the fittest medicine for you: if that will not recover you, your disease is desperate. Yea & now he hath said it, he will stand to it, he means not you shall see him blush at the matter: For page 155. he addeth: If either M. Penrie, or any of his fantastical crew, shall think much of my speech, I do not pass: I confess freely, that sharp words are not sufficient plasters for such proud sores: I hope the magistrate will consider further of him and such as he is. Duro nodo, durus cuneus, etc. that is, a wedge of iron is fittest for knotty wood. Besides all this, he is up with blasphemous against him, I think above a dozen times, and in that good Christian mood of his, it pleaseth him full sweetly, to call M. Penri, an heretical Catabaptist: and of his charity, to liken and compare him to Demetrius the silver Smith: to Alexander the Copper smith: to the wicked women in the 13. of Ezekiel: to the graceless people in the time of isaiah, jeremy and Micheas: To wicked Amaziah in jeroboams court: To Athalia that wicked traitoress: To harlots that paint themselves: To Nevius the clamorous companion: To Thrasilaus the frantic man: To the monstrous son, that cudgeled his father: To Nestorias the heretic: To Photinus a gross heretic: To Aetius a pestilent heretic: To the Donatists, the Papists, the Pelagians, and the Anabaptists: To Campion: To Goliab: To Simon Magus: To julian the Apostata: To murdering joab: To that bloody beast Ishmael, that shed tears, but they were Crocodiles tears: and last of all, to make up the mouth of all, to that honest man judas that betrayed Christ. And like enough, if he could have found out any viler image, to have drawn us his portraiture by, it should not have been left out of this worthy roll: The best is, himself tells us, that the greatest barkers, are not the sorest byters. Therefore our hope is, M. Some will do little hurt with his teeth, he is so unreasonable a barker.  
Of all which, what other confutation should a wise man make than vah quam sordid: quis suror que rabia? Sure if your doctor had concealed his name, and set only these 3. letters R. S. D. in the forehead of his book, his friends would rather have taken it for Roger Salter Drover: then for Robert Some Doctor: for they would never have suspected that any such rags as these should have fallen from a man of that gravity, so rich in gifts and graces as they take M. Some to be: why, is this your manner of canvasing of Controversies in CAMBRIDGE? or is it your custom now a days, to draw the most of your arguments à sustibus & sascibus, à vinculis & carceribus Do you remember how you were wont to be girding at me for our Oxford Doctors, as D. Kennall, D. Barnard etc. and to tell me that Barnardus non videt omnia, with many such like glicks? In requital whereof, if I should now lay D. Bridges, and D. Some in your dish, I think your advantage would not be great, Well howsoever you may out go us in other respects, I hope in one regard, you will not be overhasty to compare with us: that is, in Modesty and Mildness of spirit. For to go no farther, show me if you can, a Cambridge man that is a match to M. Reynolds, I mean not in learning but in mildness: or show me an Oxford man that is a match to M. Some, I mean not in learning but in bitterness. Surely I am persuaded (I speak it not I protest of any partial affection) that that one work alone of D. Reinolds against Harte, that wretched jesuite, may therein be as a pattern and glass to your whole university while the world standeth. I doubt not but you have read it, and then you cannot but know, against what kind of person he dealeth in that conference, namely against one already attainted and convicted of treason, in him against all such as were sworn enemy's to our religion and state, such as had long thirsted for the destruction of her majesty, and th'overthrow of God his church, and viler men you know, there could not lightly be under the sun. If any people in the world should move a man to glance out into passion, or his pen to impatience, it were like enough to these. And yet I believe (pry as narrowly as you can,) you shall hardly pike out any one bitter, evenimed or despiteful sentence brought in of purpose, only to wound and disgrace his advetsarie in the whole book. See then the difference of spirits: your doctor dealeth not with any such manner of man I trow: for M. Penri, how unlearned soever he be, (as M. Some maketh him worse than a drudge and a turnespit in all manner of knowledge) or howsoever he may vary from others in judgement, is thought yet of those that know him to be very honest and godly of life, and I have heard that he is one that usually haunteth the holy excersises of religion, walking in all peaceable obedience to God and her majesty, and that he hath been a means to reclaim and call back some that for want of a preaching minnistery, were even at the brink to decline to Brownisme: this I have heard, howsoever it be, if you have read his writings, I appeal to your own heart, whether you think him the child of God or no, being in the judgement of some, a thing unpossible that any man should write as he writeth, unless he were endued with some good measure of God's spirit, if it be so, then that he be the child of God, and that he be wide in this point, (as for mine own part I will not trust him that never held error,) how happy had it been for him, if he had had M. Reinolds his adversary in lieu of M, Some, of whom he might happen have learned more and been disgraced less. For he that dealeth so mildly with an enemy, how christianly think you would he have entreated a brother: why alas, the question being, Whether we may be assured to receive a sacrament at the dumb ministers hands, is it not possible for a christian in humbleness to handle this question, unless he run to Vulcan the blacksmith for weapons, or bring Hercules furens upon the stage, as M. Some doth, setting out his adversary in the vilest and most deformed features that he can devise? and yet he knows him not neither. Now where it pleaseth him to say, that M. PENRI hath just as many learned of his side, as H. N. the prince of the Family of Love: as I would not wish M. D. to be therein over hasty to swear, so yet if it were so, he knows that that overworn argument drawn only from the multitude, can be no stronger for him, than it hath been heretofore for the papists. But it should fall out now (this being a point that hath not been heretofore greatly looked into) that there should be any more of M. PENRIES' mind hereafter, I do not see but that M. Some may in a sort thank himself for it, and that among many other reasons, this may very well be one, that your Doctor hath carried himself so loosely and distemperedly in the cause, seeking rather to plague the man, then to clear the matter. For when men (desirous even in simplicity of heart to learn the truth) shall sensibly perceive that so famous and learned aman as M. Some reputeth himself to be, little inferior in anciency, (as some think) M. Whitguist, can none otherwise assail or defend the cause, then by holding (as it were) a naked dagger in hand, striving by all means to draw blood of his adversary, and crying out aloud on the magistrate, the magistrate, as if he had sold his logic to become a journey man in the shambles: will not this think you bring many into a mammering, and make them doubt of that they never doubted of? And yet what will you say if after all this rage & choler, he be so kind hearted to grant M. Penri the cause? Surely I am deceived else, and therefore I pray you tell me your judgement. This among others is one of of M. Penry's arguments.  

1 Every ministry of the New Testament, is a preaching ministery:  
2 But the ministery of our Readers, is not a preaching ministery: Ergo.   
To the mayor or first proposition M. D. saith thus: If you mean (as I think you do,) every ministry of the word in the new Testament I descent not from you: So that he grants the mayor you see. To the minor or second proposition he saith flatly thus. No man doubteth 
185  of this unless he be void of common sense: And yet there are as learned as M. Some, that dissenting from M. Penri in the point have denied the minor, alleging that though the persons themselves could not preach, yet their ministry & Function whereunto they were called, might justly he said to be a preaching ministery. But I hope these men (how learned soever) will henceforth reverse their judgement, in that M. Some hath branded them all with this mark, that they are void of common sense. Thus you see how easily a wise man may overshut himself when he is in his ruff, and therefore it is most rrue as one said once. That a patient mind discerneth aright, but a passionate heart seldom seethe the truth: here you see your learned doctor hath granted the poor ignorant Welshman, both the mayor and the minor, so that I see no shift in the world, but only M. Bridgis his shift, that is to deny the conclusion.  
Well (howsoever in discretion or otherwise, in a kind of conceitedness, he may happily overshut himself) you tell me that questionless he is learned: It may be so, neither will I say against it: I know there may be wine enough in the seller, when there is none in the cup, and it may be that M. Some in this encoumpter against M. Penri, did choose rather to look up his learning against the rising of some billow or tempest, then to stand pouring it out against so weak an adversary, whom his conceit might easily enough be overthrown with a blast of words: But the thing we stand upon is this, that how learned soever he be, he hath showed little of it in this treatise. And that if those worthy men (whom in heart I reverence, and whose guises I admire) M. Fulke and M. Whitaker I mean, had acquitted themselves no better against their several adversaries, than M. Some hath done against his, your famous university that you boast of, had been like enough to have received a scar in the face long ere this, and therefore let your D. ruffle it never so much in big words and countenances, yet I can tell you, if he relieve us not better in his next supply than he hath done hitherto, (be he as learned as he will) we Oxforde men shall think that M. Penri hath a great dealo more cause to fear th'Archb. his pursuivant, than your D. pen. For what call you learning in this age? I would you would yourself take some pains to draw an Analisis of your Doct. book and then tell me whether we judge amiss. For mine own part I confess to you I have viewed it and reviewed it, and I find very little in it, but that which may easily be drawn to one of these 4: heads.  
The 4. principal heads or common places of M. Somes book 

1 Bitter and spiteful speeches, to bring his adversary into danger.  
2 Bare and naked assertions, as if it were sufficient that himself doth say so.  
3 Needless positions that few or none ever doubted of.  
4 The bare authority and Judgement of men without ground.    
In these, with the begging of the question, and the praising of himself, lieth the sum of his whole book, I believe, I say, you cannot bring me many things out of his treatise, but it may easily be referred to on of these. And these you know be no such fortresses but that they may easily be battered and laid flat to th'earth by a weaker Cannon than ever M. Penri shoot in his life. By the way I pray you remember, that I do not in any sort take exceptions to M. Somes learning in general, that is, to that knowledge which he fancieth to be in himself, I meddle not with that: only to the learning which it hath pleased him to give us a taste of in this book, this is the thing that I think a very mean Scholar may justly complain of without danger. And I am verily persuaded, (I bear so much reverence to the man) that if it were his doing, he wrote it altogether without study, as it were upon a spleen, or in haste as he was riding to Lambeth. Now for the first point which is his bitter & over-passionate speeches, I think you have heard enough already, for no longer a treatise then that is, I dare say you think it was enough evea of conscience. For the second, uz. his autos ephe, that is his bare and peremptory assertions, if you find that in any eight penny book of some 40. leaves or there abouts, (for I think of itself it be not much bigger) your D. hath cloyed our ears with above 400. of those speeches, without 
Master Some hath in his book, above 400. naked assertions.  either sap or salt in them, will you not think it strange? To tell you the very truth, I have taken some pains to reckon them lease by leaf, and I find them as I tell you above 400. much after the nature & complexion of these: you are not ready: you are to seek in the principles of divinity: you know not your ignorance: your speeches are very idle: it is no great matter what you say: your bolt is soon shot, your water is very shallow: your eyes are not matches, such trifles are toe base for your great spirits: your conclusion is nothing else but an. Anabaptistical flourish: your argument is very nought & fancy: your argument is as weak as a staff of reed: your argument is as strong as a roppe of sand, every child may see the weakness of it, but I must be content to put it up, it is such ware as you have. He that wanteth wood must burn turse: your writings are like the wind. This beat of yours is like a blaze of thorns, it will last but a while: your cause is nought: your armour is not of proof: your divinity is as a low ebb: your arguments are pitiful: your answers are silly, etc. And if I should go one I think I should tire you: I hope you will witness with me, though there may be some little eloquence, yet there is no great learning, Logic, or divinity in this. It is sure, but the good luck that some men have over others, for if poor M. Penri had written thus, he should have been chronicled I warrant you, for a cobbling welshman while he had lived.  
For the third Pillar of M. Doctor's book, that is needless positions whereof there is small controversy, I think I shall not need to wander far to find your precedents, for M. Some himself in the beginning of both his books, doth lay them down to us in a role: it were to no use and a mere spending of time to run through them all, and therefore I will only record some few of them for a taste of the rest.  
A godly prince (saith he) may and aught to compel his subjects (if any refuse) to th'external service of God.  
This being a matter so notably & throughlie handled already by M. Fulke, and M. Wyborne against Owlet, that almost there cannot any thing be added to that which they have set down, I muse your D. would be at cost to print us a new Almanac of the last year, I do not know of any that profess the holy religion of God in soundness, and sincerity, that will deny this. And therefore I dare say for M. Penri, that he will willingly with heart and hand subscribe to it, yea and I think he will if need be, add one clauze more to it for the farther strengthening, and confirmation of the prince's authority, uz. That the same Prince that hath power de jure to do this, ought also to compel every preaching minister to be ordinarily resident on his charge: And if that were put in execution, I think M. Some and some others, should not be suffered to rove and range up and down as they do, neglecting their charges, and breathing after chaplainship, promotions, and I know not what well, after this he telleth us forsooth: That able teachers ought to be provided for the Churches, so much as can be: for the furtherance whereof (if we may believe his word) himself hath been a very earnest & humble suppliant both by writing and speech, yea and he hath received very comfortable answer of very great 
54.  & honourable personages, etc. and is not that well? Therefore ye hotspirited men wheresoever you be, ye may now sit down and surcease your suits and supplications to her majesty, and the parliament, for you see M. Some hath dealt in it, and hath received a comfortable and honourable answer. Nay farther he is not afraid to tell us. That the teachers of religion must have maintenance. That God blesseth those kingdoms with peace which promote the Gospel. That the church of England is the visible Church of Christ. That magistracy is 
M. Somes Book cases  God's ordinance. That the reading of the holy Scriptures doth edify. That the scripture is of credit itself. That a sermon is not of th'essence of a sacrament. That they which are once baptised, must not be rebaptized, etc. Theseyou see be good sure points all, but I dare say you think there be none of them very weighty School points for all that. For mine own part I would be loath I tell you, to be opponent in any one of them, for I fear my brain could scarce devise any probable Syllogism to shake or batter them with. Nay though I confess myself to be one of the poorest haggler's that ever our university bread, yet I durst by God's assistance defend any on of these against a 100 D. Somes, if it were possible to have so many in a land. And I tell you true, when I first ran over these your D. deep mysteries, I thought certainly I had been at one of M. Deane of Westminster his sermons, because he good soul, seldom handleth any controversies, but tells the people in good sound english: That virtue is good, and vice is evil. And that me thinks I durst defend myself (if need were,) aswell as any of the rest of M. Somes authentical principles.  
But you shall see he will go deeper than thus. For as he hath taken pains (we thank him,) to set us down a proper short Catechisine in the end of his book, to prove to M Penry's face, That the regenerate cannot fulfil the law of god: so you shall perceive that when occasion serves, he will not spare him no more than another man, were he better than he is, & therefore he fears not to tell him, and that roundly to: If you deny (saith he) that the scriptures read by unpreaching ministers do edify in any sort, you speak blasphemously: yea and to the same effect in another place, he boldly layeth before us, certain uncontrollable oracles, but yet such as we have heard talk of before: He that disliketh (saith he) the reading of holy scriptures is a Swink fieldian heretic: He that mistiketh the administration of the sacraments is a Massalian heretic: He 
184. Mast. Sines book cases.  that misliketh th'invocation of our gracious god, is a filthy Atheist. Cocksure, your Dan●y lay his life on it, and twenty to one, that th'ignorant Welshman, with all the fantastical crew, will subscribe to this without racking or imprisonment. For these be called questions without controversy. Alas, that reading doth edify, considering what a great ancient M. Some is, might very well, for any thing we see, have been left to one of his junior pupils to have declaimed in, because it was never yet, our haps to meet with that man (if he were a scholar) that doubted of it. In deed if he had laid down the question thus, Whether bare and simple reading be any part of the ministers office, this peradventure might have bred a demur even among the learned: otherwise, that a minister may read, and by that his reading, some edification may arise, as also that he may sing, or do some other good things jointly with the congregation, we make no question: But when he hath read or song, and done all this, than the question is: whether he have done any thing that is peculiarly annexed, or appropriate to his office, more than to another man: For we suppose that the office of a minister, standeth only in these 3, Preaching, Prayer, Sacraments. I speak not here of discipline, but only of doctrine. I know very well, that there are many lawful and commendable preparations or circumstances, before a man come to th'execution of his office, which cannot for all that, rightly be called any part of the office itself. As for example, a judge may ride, may walk, may hear a sermon, may confer with the gentlemen & justices, may sit down on the bench, yea & he ought in wisdom (as occasion serves) to do all these, yet nevertheless the very knot & execution of his office consisteth in none of all these, but only in hearing and determining, for all the rest he might aswell have done before he was a judge. Even so we doubt not, but that a minister may walk, may sit, may confer with his parishioners, may distribute to the poor, may sing, may read the Scriptures, either privately or publicly (yea and all these in their time & place with a good conscience, but yet all this while (say we) he is not come to the very marrow and execution of his office, till he come, To divide the word aright: etc. because all the rest, he might well enough have done before he was a minister. For if you should ask me now, by what thing a christian man is singled out from a mere natural man, I cannot well answer you by his speech, because that you know, is incident to all men by nature, therefore I must answer you, by the holy profession of his religion. Even so, if you ask me what is the thing that singles out a minister in his o●●ce from other christians, if I should answer you, bare reading, you would laugh at me, for it soundeth to harsshe in the ears of the learned: explosa est sentencia, it is hissed out of the Schools, that unless poor M. Deane of Satum take it up again, I believe it will lie in the channel these 20. years before any man be so mad to touch it. Therefore I answer you, it is not his reading but his sound preaching in a lawful function that severeth him from other men: Neither if you mark it, doth our Saviour himself in that special charge of his to his Apostles, couple reading with Baptizing but preaching, bidding them go preach and baptise: And put case her majesty, should command a mere lay man to read the Scriptures publicly in the Church, should this man sin in refusing or no? I would gladly know. I take it he should, because there is no warrant to the contrary in the word: on the other side, if she should enjoin a mere lay man to take unto him the pastoral office, by dividing the word and dealing with the sacraments, this man I suppose should sin grievously in obeying, because he ought rather to die, then to usurp that office without the lawful calling of the church, so that the bare and sole authority of the Magistrate, is sufficient for th'one but not for the other. But this by the way, is but my poor judgement, whereby it may appear to you, that simple reading, in what account so ever it be amongst men, yet is it not as I conceive, the thing that doth single out a minister from another christian. It must be only (as I told you before,) the sound preaching of the word in a lawful function. etc. Bear witness I pray you, that I speak here of sound preaching, that is, of dividing the word aright which the Apostle calleth orthotomein, I speak not of babbling or of handling a text with a Curricombe, in that I join with M. Some with all my heart, and therefore I wish he had been with me the 10. of November last, at a certain Church by the exchange, I think they call it Bartholmewe church, where it may be his ears would have glowed, and (if he durst have been so bold,) I do not think but he would have condemnned the preacher and that worthily for his babbling. For there he might have heard him fetch many vagaries, and spend the most of his time in invectives against good men, telling th'audience to this effect. That for the papists thanks be to God, we need not so greatly fear them, for they were through the vigilans and wisdom of the magistrate reasonably hampered, god be blessed for it: but now the magistrate was only to cast his eye on the fantastical crew, such as troubled the peace of the Church, otherwise there might fall out many mischiefs: For so was it done to the Donatists in S. Augustine's time, and so to other heretics in other times. And naming another D. of the Church, either basil or Chrisostome I take it, I know not well whether: he told them greatly to their comforts, That he would first tell them his words in greek, & afterward in English, and so he did, belike because they should know that he was a Graecian: what a sweet receipt was that trow ye, to such of the people as were either sick, or troubled in mind? I hear that 
This preacher (as I understood since, was M. Some himself.  M. Some useth to come to that Church himself sometime: I pray you when you see him, be in hand with him to shake up that snuffing preacher for his babbling  
Farther I pray you bear witness with me, that in singling out his minister from other men, I do ad to, The sound preaching of the word, A lawful function. For as I know that gifts alone cannot make a minister without a calling, so on th'other side do I think, that the bare calling of the Church alone, is not sufficient neither to make a minister, for so might a woman be a minister, which M. Some himself denies: But both these meeting in one man, that is, gifts and calling together, these I take it, do make a full minister to us ward, though there be a Nullity in regard of some inward man that we know not of. Now whereas some do tell us, that Admissio indignorum ab Ecclesia non tollit naturam & essentiam Ministerij: that is, The admission of unworthy ones by the Church, doth not altogether destroy the nature of the ministery: As we were much to blame if we would strive against this, so it seemeth they say little or nothing to the matter in question, for th'ambiguity is in this word Indignorum, unworthiness. I know that a practising papist is an unworthy subject, but yet a subject: So may a man of vicious life be a minister, though an unworthy minister: But on th'other side, what say you to these? A dumb man from his cradle is an unworthy orator: A blind man from his cradle is an unworthy painter. These be good sense and good English both, and yet it is unpossible that any of these should be at all, such as they are named to be: either the first an Orator, or the Intter a Painter: And therefore I take it (by their favour) that this word unworthiness, is something too general, and thereby something too weak, to express sufficiently, Questiones & controversiae energiam: because it may as well be applied to that which is, as to that which is not, and as M. Penri saith, by a mangled body, that some be so mangled that they have no life in them at all. So say we by these unworthy ones: some be so unworthy, as they are not at all that thing whereof they have their name. And therefore where M. Some saith, That the Sacraments are not the better for the worthiness, nor the worse for th'unworthiness of the man: we yield he saith true, and yet nothing to the matter: yet me thinks it had been a great deal nearer the point, if in lieu of these unworthy ones, they had inserted these words, Corum qui non sunt omnino ministerij capaces, that is, Which are not at all capable of the ministry: and then we suppose the assertion had been sound and to the purpose: For not th'admission of every unworthy one (in that in deed they say true) but th'admission of such an unworthy one, as is altogether uncapable of the ministery (as infants, women fools, mad men, dumb men, etc.) those we say, do wholly overthrow the nature and essence of the ministery, and is (as the lawyers call it) a none est factum or as a lease that is void assoon as it is made. Whereupon if they reply, that Sola Ecclesia vocat, The Church only calleth in this age, and that God doth not now (as in times passed by Paul and others) call extraordinarily, or miraculously from heaven, but hath resigned that power solely and wholly to his Church, we grant it is true: But then the question is, what kind of power this is, whether it be a power without exception, or a limited power? We say it is a limited power & hath his bounds, that it cannot pass (I speak not here de iure, but de posse) And indeed it must needs be so in despite of our hearts, though we should burst ourselves in wrangling about it. For first I am sure they will not deny, that the Church in this her admission, is limited only to living creatures, for if she should make an image a minister, there were presently a nullity. Secondly she is limited only to the seed of Adam, for if she should make an Ape a minister, there were presently a nullity. Thirdly out of the seed of Adam she is limited only to the sex of man, if she should make a woman a minister, there were presently a nullity. Out of the sex of man she is limited only (say we) to those that can speak, and have the use of reason: for if she should make a natural, a mad man, or a dumb man a minister, there were presently (as we think) a nullity. Now M. Penri goeth an ase further, and saith, that of those men that can speak, & have the use of reason, she is limited only to such as have gifts, and are in some measure Thithacticoi, or else (as he holdeth) there is also a nullity. And here is that so heinous & blasphemous error of his, that hath so distempered M. Some, and for the which he would so feign have the magistrate to conjure him. Which, whether it be an error or no, as for mine own part, I am not able to define it, so yet do I see, that when men have run themselves windless in wandering, yet must they of force in th'end come to this, to inquire, Qualis est potestas Ecclesiae in admission ministro rum, & quibus circumscripta finibus, that is, what kind of power the Church hath, and within what bounds to be limited, for therein consisteth the very marrow and sinews of the whole controversy, to know how far the Church may stretch her arm in this case. Yet by the way I cannot but muse at one thing, that the popish churches should find more grace and favour in this our Metropolitan State, than the reformed churches of other nations. For it is granted you see, that the popish shavelings and their priests of Baal have forsooth a calling though afaultie one, but do you think that this will be granted to those of our ministers that were only ordained by the reformed churches beyond sea? Nay soft, Be judge by M. Whittingham, whom it is known th'Archb. of York called in question for his calling, in that he was made minister at Geneva: I have heard also, that M. Travers when he was thrust out of the Temple, was bidden by my Lord of Cant. to prove his calling, alleging that he was no minister, (for what authority saith he in his choler, hath M. Cart. to make a minister?) Therefore you may see the luck of it, popish wretches and Apostates, breathed upon only by such as themselves are, have a calling, but other worthy men (called to the ministry by worthy churches) must sine a new for their letters of orders, is not this good stuff think you? Well sithence it is known that M. Travers was in deed ordained a minister by a reformed church beyond the sea, I would your D. durst in his next discourse, be as kind to that poor ministry of his, as he hath been hitherto to the popish priesthood, that is of courtesy, (in respect of the credit of the Reformed churches,) to give it some allowance of a calling, yea albeit his grace of Cant. should stand against it. For he knows it can be no more blasphemy in M. Penri, to say that the popish church can not make a minister, than it is in an other greater man to say that the reformed churches cannot make a minister. But I fear me M. Some is not at leisure, he will pleasure us in an other matter, for such a dash with a pen as this might happily breed a scab, why is it not well that he taketh our parts in the Nullity of women's ministery: but still men will be regrating more at his hands? Therefore because we will hold him where we have him, I will be so bold in that point to record his words, lest in time he give us the slip men grow so giddy headed now a days: They that have heard my sermons saith he, or read my writings do know very well that I allow of none to preach the word, 
81  or administer the sacraments, without a calling, therefore neither woman nor private man: plainly implying that it is unpossible for a woman to have any calling: I promise you, I was glad when I read it with all my heart, for I was half afraid before, I tell you that we should have some learned paradox, or some godly treatise in the defence of the ministry of women, with this or the like pretty gloze, Quoad substantiam, but not quoad qualitatem: or else with this. That they should have had a calling though a faltie one, which had been but peccatum ecclesiae: or else with this, that the sex had been but of th'essence of a lawful & good minister, but not of a minister simply, and that for us it should suffice only to muffie our faces, with a settled persuasion that Ministerium is datum, and acceptum, and so hang wholly upon th'ordination of the church without farther questioning or inquiry. All this I tell you, I was afraid of, but now sithence we are sure of M. Some one our side, we shall fear the less the assaults of others, as having on string more to our bow than we looked for. For he is as learned in his conceit as the best of them, and if he take a pitch, I believe he will be as hot as the best of them toe for need. And thus by occasion of your D. worthy position, that reading doth edisie, have I fallen as you see cursory into the question of the ministers office, and so of the calling of the ministery: It is but my poor verdict you see, and therefore you need not make a record of it, unless you list, for you know what a deep clerk I am, if you desire farther to be satisfied in the point, I refer you over to him, to whom the matter especially appertaineth, who I hope will either answer his adversary with less ven●me and more modesty than he finds at his hands, or else give over the cause in silence: For mine own part, as my skill is not great, so do I not hold any thing, but I am apt enough to recall it, if you or a meaner man than you, can bring me the word to refute it, but hitherto I confess I see no farther.  
Well your D. hath yet an other wipe at th'ignorant Welshman, which I had like to have forgotten, the best is, it is with an if aswell as the rest: If you think 
176  saith he, that all the popish sort, that died in the popish Church are damned, you think absurdly: most true they that think so, think absurdly in deed, and I promise you, therein I must hold with M. Some, that if M. Penri think so, he is much to blame. But I pray you ask your D. when you see him, upon what wall, or with what coal M. Penri did record this thinking of his, for as yet I believe this monster is unborn, & unheard of. And how if M. Penri or some of the fantastical crew should now in riquitall say thus. If you think M. Some that the calling of a B. or an Archb. is agreeable to the word, you think absurdly: or thus, if you hold that a man may be anonrestdent from his charge at his pleasure, you err grossly: or thus, if you say that the Discipline & government of the Church, is not prescribed in the word, & that Moses was amore faithful lawgiver than Christ our Saviour, you speak blaspemously? Why what is all this to M. Some? For he is not sure so gross to maintain any of these, and therefore we doubt not but he may wipe his mouth, and wash his hands, and wonder to whom they speak. Even so may M. Penri I dare warrant for the other, who though he be shrewdly threatened by many of these rigorous and thundering Statutes of M. Somes, yet so long as every one of them have their gentle desaisans, there is no danger in any of them, for Threatened men (they say) live long, if M. Penri do so or so, then saith M. Some he speaks blasphemously, he er grossly, & thinks absurdly, and I know not what. But if he do not so, then belike he hath his supersedeas, and discharge from errors, absurdities, & blasphemies and al. This is some comfort yet, and may happen fall out well in th'issue, for these isfs, imaginations & supposals of men, do weigh so light in the balance of the wise, that they may as easily with one and the same breath be defaced, as ever they were coined at the first, for who can let a man to batter in pieces that pretty Image which he made himself. Therefore for a full answer to all these isss, if I were as M. Penri, I would no more, but fair lap up this sentence in some letter, and send it M. Some of a token, to see whether he know it or no: I deal plainly with you. If my answers please you not, confute them directly, and not with ifs, ands, & why's: In which kind of answering (if I may call 
174  it answering) you have a special grace. And again man other place: When you prove this if of yours. I will accept 
91  your answer, etc. Me thinks when M. Some looks in this glass, he should never trouble the reader more with any of those conjectural syllogisms, made only of ifs and ands. As concerning this last though of h●s, I hope there is no man so far gone, to pronounce any definitive sentence upon all those that departed this life in popery. That being th'only office of God himself, it must needs be too much presumption, and beyond the reach and commission of any mortal man, so to define: But if it had pleased M. Some to have added but one word more to his sentence, & set it down thus: All the popish sort that die papists in the popish Church. If I say, he had added but this word papist, then do I not see (by his favour) hat there had been any absurdity in it at all: For we hold, that to him that dieth a papist (let him do never so many good works, and bu●lde if it were possible, ten thousand Colleges or Churches) the very gates and portecullese of God's mercy are quite shut up, and all those his glorious work, how sweet soever they may be to others, shall be but wrack and misery to himself. And in this point if either M. Hooker, M. Some, or all the reverend Bb. of the land do stand against us, it shall little dismay us, we say w●th your own D. (but yet not altogether as he) I●s●er mill, he saith Platonis, but we say veritatis calculus. Now if you tell me, that a man may return at the last gasp, and so renouncing all other means, cast himself wholly upon the merits and bloodsheading of Chr●ste jesus, (as M. Some saith in one place, That many of them have died Gods servants) then say I, this man dieth not a papist, whatsoever he were before: Nay M. Fox saith flatly, he dieth a Lutheran, for justification by merit and works, is the very heart, life and soul of papistry.  
By these and the rest, it may easily appear to you, that your D. might very well have spared the better half of his pains, and have done full as much good as he hath. They say it is an evil bargain that no body thrives by. Therefore if it should fall out so now, that for all these sweet lessons, drawn with such advisement into several chapters, neither M. Some himself should be the more reverenced, nor M. Penri & his disciples the better instructed: what should a man say to this world? but that Satione belike had a frowning aspect when the books were sent to the press. Now if you ask me what should be the reason why so many things out of question, should be thus jumbled & interlaced as it were, in one roll, with things of question and controversy indeed, let this suffice you, that there is a mystery in it, yea and such a mystery, as peradventure every one seethe not, & I believe I could go near to guess where M. D. learned it, I pray you what call you him, that giveth in his coat. An ass with a tippet about his neck, and writes underneath, Come and see? He should sure be some ancient gentleman by his coat: I mean that proper scholar that could speak English before I was borne: he that hath given Calvine and Beza such a blow, as they could never speak word of good Irish since: I mean him that sucked so long, till he could carry his mother a stool, and that physicians say, is a shrewd thing for the brain. That pretty pigeon that wrote the 16. great volumes in defence of the Hierarchy of Bb. but as he hath handled it, it may serve aswell for the foul causey betwixt Gloucester and Bristol: I do not mean Tarleton man, Tush no, I mean that musical Poet, that can so ingeniously translate rhyme into prose, and prose into rhyme again: That patch of S. Mary's pulpit, what should I call him? Bridges, Bridges, a shame on him, I shall hit on his name anon: This is he I fear me, that taught M. Some this trick, and yet when it is looked into, it will be found but a sluttish trick neither I believe. This Bridges you must understand, is bound in a recognizance. The condition is this, That if ever he hurt puritan by any learning, reason, logic, divinity, 
The recognizance that M. Bridges standeth bound in.  or good grammatical sense, than he sorsaits all that ever he hath to her Majesty, and is utterly undone for ever. Now because he hath a pretty good will to hurt them, and yet this Recognisance stands so full in his way, that he cannot well do it without his loss, see what a fetch that jowl of his hath contrived: he brings me in after his patched manner, certain assertions (which himself doth not well understand neither) Some of the Frenchmen against the government of women, some of th'anabaptists against the lawfulness of magistracy, some of the Brownistes that say we have no Church. And these forsooth, he mingleth as well as his reach will serve him (like darnel among wheat) with such other sound doctrines and grounded truths as his brethren have set down in defence of Discipline, and every hand while he bids them, Beware lest they fall into any of those soul errors, for their speeches and writings tend shrewdly that way: which he for his part, good man, is sorry for: And why doth the patch do this, but only to draw the state to believe (if he could) that his puritan brethren whom he writeth against, are in one and the same predicament with these? As if the state were as blear eyed as himself, and could not discern both of the soundness of the one, & of the wretchedness of the other, unless they borrowed his glass to look in. And were not that state in an woeful taking think you, that should fetch their pattern of direction from such an ginger as he? By the way, now I think on it, I would you could get M. Some (marry it must be in his good mood, when his choler is passed) to tell you betwixt you two, whether he thinks the better scholar in good earnest, the poor ignorant Welshman or the dean of Sarum: I know he hath already past his sentence of condemnation very far upon one of them, making him in all good knowledge, no better than a very abject of the earth: but what then? yet me think▪ on th' other side, he should never look advisedly upon his brother Bridges, but he should blush for joy. And this offer I dare be bold to make him, on the behalf of that worthy dean, that let him take into his hands, not only M. Penry's works, but the writings of all those that they call puritanes for the space of these twenty years or better: if I do not find more gross, proud, popish, treasonable & blasphemous absordities, more impudent revilings, and slanderous untruths, more apparent contradictions, more Skoggins jests, more rhyming in prose, more childish foolery., more sottish shameless, and senseless periods in that one book alone, then can justly be collected out of all the other, I will lose my head for it.  
And yet would you think that in this learned and lightsome age of the Gospel, any man's eyes should be so beglazed, or his forehead so beseared as to bestow a laudate upon such a companion as this? Now sure we shall come to a pretty pass shortly, what trow you will be the next piece of work, that that good fellow will venture to commend unto us? Belike the virtuous attempts of the Spanish Inquisitors, provided that they will not disturb th'hierarchy of L. Bb. Some sweet Admonition to the people of England, in praise of such honest men as these, would sure marvelous well, with that savage commendation of Parson Bridges his bo●ke They say it was my L. of Winchester's work: If it were, then hath his L. won his spurs for ever, if in nothing else, yet in this, that he ha●h so liberally bestowed a cold piece of pasty crust upon that packsadle of Sarum: well whosoever it were, if it were an Oxford man, I must needs be sorry for him, because his honestest shift must be now to plead ignorance. That he by his troth took it to be a profound piece of work, in his poor conceit, otherwise if he be learned, and of judgement in deed, what need the puritans writ against him, when his own very hand hath been th' instrument, to give himself such an open brandmarke of impudency, as if he should live th'age of Methuselah he should hardly be able to wipe it out: being a thing unpossible, that any man of sound judgement, should ever commend that book in earnest, but that the very light of his own heart, must strait flash him in the face with the lie. And I would they durst put their Lordly jurisdictions upon the jump of this trial, I would I say they durst hazard their whole title upon this issue, whether that be an ignorant or a learned book or Noah. They have had heretofore many a round offer of disputation, touching the unlawfulness of their callings, which I will never blame them if they brook not, for if they would accept of it, (their case being with them as it is) they were worse than mad, but this is some thing a less offer than that, and of less prejudice and disgrace unto them, because it toucheth them but a latare as it were, only in this, that they have not blushed to commend this book unto us for the sufficiency, and we one the other side, hold the flat contrary, that it was one of the reproaches of our Land, that ever it was suffered to pass the press. Now in this case who must be judge? If I should name Oxford men unto you, it may be you would think me partial. Therefore seeing M. Bridges himself is a Cambridge man, let him hardly be tried by his peers of the same university, and let the grandfathers (if they dare,) put it to the censure of D. Fulke D. Whitaker, M. Cartwright and M. Chaterton, men I hope as well able to judge as all the L. Bb. in Christendom. And if by the veredict of these it be not found as I have said, one of the poorest, grossest, and rawest piece of works of that bigness, that came out in English since her majesties reign, let the conquest hardly be theirs, and let them possess their seats in peace, and the reproach light one the puritans for ever: if otherwise, then let them yield themselves guilty and resign. But I believe as well as they love M. Bridges, they had rather see him over the ears in purgatory, or fast bound in the house of Inquisition, then to hazard the least of their Bishopptickes, upon any such trial.  
With what reason then can M. Some so distemper himself against M. Penri for one poor error, if it be an error, crying out so loud, and so often, blasphemy blasphemy, and I know not what, and in the mean time, suffer that clotheade of Sarum to go away with a whole farthel of errors and absurdities, and not to say Black was his eye? Or what measure call you this, not to give M. Penri leave to dissent from Calvin for once no not even there, where he supposeth he hath the word one his side, and to ride by M. Bridges as if he saw him not, when he taketh upon him to tread both Calvin and Beza under his feet, yea and to throw dust, as it were, one their faces, even in those points where all the learned know they have both the Scriptures, the counsels and fathers with them? Surely there can be no indifferency in this at all. M. Bridges saith that his good and learned discoursing brethren, (for those I take it be his words,) do err foully, and fall into a number of monstrous and impossible absurdities, and why? Forsooth through th'overmuch credit of these famous men, Calvin, Beza, Daneus and the rest. But how shall we do now? M. Some comes in the neck of this with his appeal, and removes this matter with a Sursurare to a higher court, and there he puts in a quite contraty plea to M. Bridges, telling us more than once, that he for his part, resteth wholly in the judgement of these excellent men, & that if M. Penri had done so, he had sailed a sure compass, & not swerved from God's book, etc. Yea and he addeth moreover, & that in good earnest I warrant you, that he more esteemeth of one Calvin, then of a thousand Penries. And will he give his poor brethren leave, to answer Father Bridges in that plain matter toe. That they more esteemed of one Calvin or Beza, then of a thousand Bridges? Why alas then the poor man, is undone, his whole book may go to the washhouse. But in this fowl rent of judgement betwixt your 2. D. what will M. Some say to this? He that was last B. of Norwitch and is now (if I be not deceived,) either of Peterborough or of Worcester, calling once before him a godly minister of Suffolk, one M. Sweat, about some small breach of the book in the administration of baptism when the said M. Sweat for his just defence, had brought forth the judgement of M. Beza, the good B. in his angry mood replied thus, what tellest thou me of Beza? Beza I tell thee is but a brabbler. In like manner my L. of Cant. having once before him one Thomas Settle a preacher, about some doctrine that he had taught of Christ's descending into Hell, when the said M. Settle alleged for himself, that the doctrine taught by him, had not only the warrant of the holy scriptures, but also the approbation & testimony of the best writers of our age, as namely, of M. Calvin and others: What tellest thou us of Calvin? (Quoth the B. in very disdainful sort,) I tell thee there are here that can teach Calvin. At which time, there sat in commission, th'Archb. himself, the Dean of Westminster, D. Pearne and Cousins, a proper band of musicans to teach Calvin. But belike he meant it only by his old Patron and benefactor, D. Pearne, for who but he could teach Calvin to fetch a turn, and a return? As for any other kind of good learning, whereby a man's knowledge might be bettered, or his conscience comforted, he that had Caluins guistes, and would make any pilgrimage to Lambeth for a supply, were worthy to be muffled in M. Bridges h●s hood. By this you may see that if M. Penri should set light by Calvin or Beza, (as I dare say it is far from his very heart) being men that I doubt not he doth many ways reverence as notable instruments of God, yet I say, if he should do so, he hath you see his warrant and protection under seal, and that from M. Somes betters, even of the highest and gravest prelate's of our Land, wherein I observe one pretty trick, that ye Cambridge men have above others, that is, that ye can m●ke of the new writers, as Merchants do of their Counters even what ye list, sometime a 100 pounds, & sometimes 6. pence against M. Penri, Calvin shallbe instarmontis, ask M Some else. But against M. Bridges, or against the hierarchy of L. Bb. or any th●ng that they hold in their consistory, both Calvin, Beza, and Danaeus, yea and there were an hundredth mere of them, they shall be all put to silence for want of subscription.  
Therefore for that point of relying so wholly and absolutely upon the authority of men, (which as I have said, is an other great pillar of your doctor's book,) I do not see but that M. Some (considering how feign he would be thought somebody in the eye of the learned,) hath by this means rather disadvantaged himself, by bringing the credit of his own judgement into base account, them it may be, his friends would have w●shed him, who might otherwise peradventure in some things, have conceived as reverently of him as of Calvin himself. I remember I heard once a notable divine say in pulpit. That he was not worthy to be a minister of the Gospel, that could not in some measure wring forth the sense of the holy ghost, even by the Scripture itself without an interpreter: So far was he, from resting in any man's judgement, that he did altogether condemn those that brought nothing else with them into the pulpit, but what they had gathered out of Augustine, Cyprian, Aretius, Calvin, or some such old or new writer. And I put case Calvin & Beza had never written, how would M. Some have done? would his breasts trow ye, have been so dried up, that he should never have given milk of his own? that had been pity. I confess to you I reverence D. Fulke, and no disparagement to any, I think him universally as well learned as ever Calvin or Beza was: But what then? yet were it you know, but a poor judgement in matter of controversy, barely to say thus, I rest wholly in his judgement. I had thought that where Caluine and Beza had been wide, as no question but they are wide sometimes (for I dare not trust him I tell you that never held error) there a man might have had some resolution at M. Somes hands, with reasons alleged of their several slips and oversights, but now I perceive he that had made such a journey to master Some, should have but lost his labour, and have been frustrate of his hope, for it seemeth he would never have made him other answer then this: Irest in their judgements. In which regard, there is some reason yet, that M. Bridges should be privileged above others, though the good soul do not rest in any of their judgmentes, because he doth not lightly rest in his own, for if he chance to set down any thing in one book, he is commonly so kind hearted, to pull it back again in another, and what reason were it, he should be more tied to them then to himself? Well, for all this jesting, I would you would take some pains to reconcile me your two Cambridge doctors. I know peradventure what you will say, that you are sure M. Some is nothing so blear-eyed as M. Bridges, and therefore to a wise man the choice is soon made which way to incline: wherein as I have small reason to dissent from you; (because I do not think I tell you, that for that disease, which they call Th'apoplexy of the brain, the Dean of Sarum hath many fellows of his standing in Christendom) so do I the rather think it strange, that so grave a man as M. Some would be reputed to be, should be so bewitched, to follow in any sort the sleps and traces of him, whom (in regard of all sound knowledge and judgement) his own very heart must needs condemn for a drudge. And why then should your D. so eagerly pursue his poor adversary, by endeavouring to make him hateful to the state, as if there were no way to clear the matter, then by crying out on the Magistrate to conjure the man, sithence Master Bridges useth it? Why should he so peremptorily condemn him he knows not, with all the bitter and evenimed speeches he can devise, sithence M. Bridges useth it? Why should he huddle in a number of isses, and strange opinions, that all the world knows his adversary disavoweth, sithence M. Bridges useth it? In sum, why should he not hate and detest all those bad sleights, that savour neither of learning nor honesty, sithence so brazen a face as Bridges doth both use them, practise them, and can scarce make a good flylogisme without them.  
Now for that point of Begging the question, though it please him never so much to flourish it over with the name of Beza and others, telling M. Penri that His 
8●  answer is beggarly, etc. Yet by his favour, he cannot so wipe it away, but that it may justly be charged and recharged upon his head with a witness. As to begin withal, what call you this I pray you? my reason is (saith he) The popish Church is a Church, though an unsound 
163 175  Church: Twice or thrice at the least, he is at cost to bestow this upon us as a reason, and what is this else, but a begging of the question. For how if a man will not be so kind hearted, to grant him that it is not any visible Church of God at all, where is he then? Then you know he must about again, with a new voyage into Portugal for more great reasings, for this reason will not serve his turn. And that we have small reason to yield him this, shall appear by God's grace hereafter, because all the reasons that ever we could see hitherto, have been in our judgements too weak to prove it to be any Church of God at all. In the mean season, that it is doubtful & questionable at the least: me thinks a man that so vaunteth himself of reading & knowledge, as M. Some doth, should not be ignorant. We see Anthony Tyrrell, one of the Seminary priesies that lately recanted at Paul's, makes a doubt of it in these words, If that may be called (saith he) a Church, that is infested with so great a contagion, 
4●  which being advisedly perused, seen and allowed, & so suffered to pass the press without a razure, implieth that (howsoever M. Some would over rule the case, as he doth many others with his Censociall rod) there is neither danger nor heresy to hold the contrary, sithence our Church doth allow men to make an if at it. What means your D. then to plead it in evidence, as an unsuspected testimony, when the thing is either disputable, or clean against him. Wherein if he faulted but once yet, as it were a crash and away to recreate himself, he were to be borne with: But it seemeth he hath some delight in it, in that he plods upon it in a manner in every lease, so that if his last treatise be well examined, it will be found, that he hath proved the question, by the thing in question, & brought in one razed record to prove another, no less than 30. or 40. times at the least. As in this 192. pag. where he gathereth, that M. Penri should say that the dispensation of our reader's ministery doth feed none, therein he chargeth him To err grossly: And what is his reason, for it is like you know, to be some reason of weight, that should so apparently convince a man of so gross an error: My reason is (saith he) that the Sacraments administered by them, do comfort and feed the souls of 
192  the godly communicantes: for the virtue of the Sacraments, dependeth not upon any minister whatsoever, etc. Here mark I pray you, he takes it for granted, that both the things delivered be sacraments, and that the men delivering them be ministers, which as I conceive is the very main point in controversy, betwixt his adversary and him, uz. Whether our readers be ministers or no, and thereby whether we can be assured to receive any Sacrament at their hands. Notwithstanding all which, your learned D. as if he were strongly betaken with M. Bridges his swimming in the head, will needs pawn us this for reason, thinking belike, to go smooth away withal, That they are ministers forsooth, and that the Sacraments from their hands, do both feed and comfort, etc. As if I to prove unto you, that our Bb. should have no superiority over other ministers, should bring in this for a reason, That their callings are unlawful: Though this were true (as heaven and earth knows it to be most true, howsoever like miserable men they strive to avoid it) yet you might justly take exceptions to my proof, as a flat begging of the question. Euenso look how often it shall please M. Some to warble upon any of these notes, either That the popish Church is a church, though an unsound Church, or that bare readers be ministers, or that the Sacraments from their hands do both feed and comfort. etc. So often are we not afraid to tell him and tell him again, that it is ameere childish begging of the question, unworthy of any man that beareth the face of learning. And yet in this vein, doth he very near spend & consume himself thorough our his whole book: Talk of a sacrament, why he proves they deliver it thus, they have a calling: Speak of a Calling, he proves it thus, they deliver a sacrament. And thus backward and forward, up and down, from one end to another, he wearieth both himself and the reader, so cloying us with A sacrament by a calling, and A calling by a sacrament, as it is able to make a horse to break his halter, and me thinks ye Cambridge men should blush to think that ever any man's pen should be driven to that penury: neither do I think that you can bring me the like pattern in any treatise of that bigness written since jur majesties reign. And yet this is the man that will have us know forsooth, that there is nothing to be had at his hands in divinity matters, but by force of argument, if you think (saith he) that I will come of otherwise you 
119  are in a wrong box: for I intent not to be at your whistle etc. The best is if you mark it, he speaks here only of divinity matters, and nothing else, so that if a man should happen to deal with him in Law, Physic, or Philosophy, there is some hope yet we should find him more tractable. But in divinity matters there is no mercy with him, he hath told us what we shall trust unto, either arguments or nothing, yet I would you would ask him in his ear, whether a deanery or a Bishopric, would not prevail as much with him in mat●er of Divinity, as the best argument in Christendom? For if nothing will do good of him but arguments, how shall poor M. Bridges and I do with him, that have scarce a good argument betwixt us to throw at a dog's head? We had best keep us out of his way, till the edge of these arguments be something overworn, and that we hope will not be long, especially if he light once in one of these sweet Deaneries or Bishoprics. Then I trust a man may speak with him under a couple of Capons, than I hope he will not be so hasty to fright us with these forcible arguments. For it may be he will not be at leisure, he will have somewhat else to do: his Chapel and his Organs, with other such implements and impediments more, will keep him I trust from doing us any great hurt, either in Lodgicke or Divinity while he lives. Then we look rather he should do as the rest of his comperes are wont to do, that is, live of the stock, and waste of the store, till they be within a little of bankerour: as for arguments and matter of controversy, because they grow old themselves, alas, they may leave that to Watson or Walton, Haslop or Monday, or some such sweet Chaplain of theirs, who have excellent wits at whipcoard conclusions, to manicle these puritans with.  
Well as it is clear you see, that M. Some can beg the question as well as his betters. So you shall well perceive, that he can speak for himself, if his neighbours will not. And in deed for that good gift of sounding forth the trumpet of his own praises, he shall have it of all, and of al. To begin withal, what say you to this? If you will know (saith he) what I think of sound preaching before th'administration of th'holy Sacrament, my 
97  answer is, that I do greatly both like and commend it. etc. This mind was I ever of since I knew what gods Religion & good Divinity meant: how say you? Is not sound preaching much beholden to M. Some, that will of his curcesie vouchsafe it both his liking and commendation? Belike it had been in some danger to h●ue lost his credit, if M. Some had not reached forth his hand to give it some allowance: well for all that he had best look to it, that he do not only afford it his good liking in words, but that he reverence it in deed from his heart, and that to some measure of practise, if he love his own soul: otherwise we can tell him it will bruise him into powder in th'end, were he 10. times better than he is, being (as he may easily learn by th'Apostle) either A Savour of life unto life, or A Savour of death unto death: and therefore not to be dallied withal, as if it were as our pleasures to entertain it or reject when we think good, but he that doth it not, that is, he that doth not embrace the word preached, as the message of salvation with trembling and fear, may be sure (without repentance) he very curse of God will overtake him and his seed, what means your D. then to tell us so solemnly of his good liking of sound preaching, when in pain of God's vengeance he is bound to like it? But he telleth us farther, that it hath pleased many of excellent learning 
66  and wisdom to like of his treatise. Sure if they did so, then is th'old proverb verified, that Blessing goeth by savour. Some B. belike or Bishoplike man, for I do not think that any man else would abuse him so much And you may tell your Doct. from, me that certainly if they were Courtiers they did but flout him, if they were learned and of judgement in deed, they did but flatter him And therefore for mine own part I cannot so much condemn him in this case, if in the want of Heralds and some other good friends, he be forced as it were, to make an emblazure of his own coat armour himself, who can blame him then: if in speaking of the ignorant ministers he tell us himself, when no man else will tell us for him, That his writings and sermons are not Ajax shield to cover them, 
150  but the Lords sword to cut them? So that if any man be desirous new to find out the sword of the Lord, where shall he redilier come by it, then about the exchange or those places where M. Some useth to preach, there he may happen hear news of it. But by the way can you show me any writer old or new, that ever gave that name of the Lords sword to his own writings and sermons with his own mouth, but only M. Some? I know right well, that the true preaching of the word, is both the fire of God to burn, the water of God to quench, and the sword of God to cut betwixt the marrow and the bones: but what of that? Yet it may be doubted whether M. Some may justly brag of any such apparent success of his labours: and if he could, yet me thinks modesty might have taught him rather to have left the publishing and emblazinge thereof to others, than thus out of season to be the proclaimer of it himself, indeed if a man mark it, there is much a do through out his whole book with his writings, his words, his reasons, his answers, his sermons, etc. which it seemeth he would feign fasten upon posterity for laws and statutes, as if the ground of all good knowledge were graven in the very wrinkles of his forehead: in one place he tells M. Penri, that he may as easily fetch oil out of a flint, as any such consequents out of his writings. etc. And again, They 
81  which have heard my sermons, or read my writings, etc. And yet more, my own words in this present Chapter, are as clear as the Sun. etc. what should a man talk of it then, when all things that M. Some doth are so clear, so direct, and in so good proportion? There be men in the world, that writ out of joint sometimes, speak darkly and intricately, and make many evil consequents, but they be not belike of that college that M. Some was of, where a man shall as soon fetch oil out of a flint. etc. as any thing that hath not his weight & measure, and therefore no marvel if he call his own writings and Sermons, The Lord's sword to cut these ignorant ministers, for he that doth never any thing out of square, must needs cut deeply I trow. In deed if he could so cut them, that they might be quite cut of the ministery, it were a happy cutting both for them and our church. But that he is not the man that is like to work this cure, we see by his looks. For as our Saviour Christ saith to his disciples, This kind of 
Matth. 17.  Devil is not cast out but by prayer and fasting. So we say to M. Some, that this kind of Devil or deadly sore of our dumb ministry, (which may rightly be called Vlous Matricis, that so feastereth and wrankeleth inwardly, even to the very bowels of our Church, and State) can never be cured but with an humble spirit, & a heart that bleedeth for the ruins of Zion, which because it is a lesson, that it seemeth M. Some had never yet any leisure to take out, we cannot look for any great thing from those cutting sermons and writings of his, though he should blaze them to us a thousand times over: well may they help a little to the lapping and shreading of the tree, but to hew it down by the root (because the high minded heart is commonly by God's just judgement plagued with a bluntedged pen) we never look for at the hands of any such as M. Some is, till he be come of a better spirit than hitherto he hath showed himself.  
Now that you may witness with me that I do him no wrong in all this, I pray you ask him when you see him, whose sweet sentences these be. Content 
66 71  yourself I have made no fault: The fault is in your eye, and not in your pen: if that you mean that my reasons 
70 69  are faulty in the eyes of the learned, you mistake the matter: if my reasons were suitable to your senseless answers, 
87 96  they were strange stuff: I serve not one jotte from the cause I dealt in: My answer to your objection is very direct: 
132 102 103  My reason was a very sure one. For the clear proof of this point I have set down sound reasons: I mislike the popish Priesthood and sacrifice as much as he, and if 
179 147  occasion serve, will set down sure reasons to shake them both in pieces. Sure it is odds, your Doct. never looked down on his legs, but all one his feathers, when he perfumed us with this sweet powder. But how say you, have I done him any wrong? The places you see I have quoted, be you yourself the judge, here is neither swerving nor falting, but all sound, sure and direct therefore you may see what a treasure your university hath bred up to our Church, such a sure card as we may be bold to trust unto, if there do chance to fall a dearth of learned men in this age. And in this glass it was belike, that he beheld himself, when he told us so confidently, That there is some reason that God's truth should have more defence by him, then by his adversary. 
144  Wherein I dare say you think, that the life blood of his own conceit did tickle him a little too much. In deed if he be so sure a man as he supposeth himself to be, there must needs be more looked for at his hands then of other poor men that are not half so sure: & it is like he speaketh this altogether in the overweening of his own sufficiency, to make us know what odds there is betwixt his poor adversary and him, otherwise we see no reason why the defence of God's truth (according to the measure of his talentes and place) should not every way be as dear and precious unto another as to M. Some. I perceive it would distemper him unreasonably, if one should tell him that Mast. Penri hath discharged a better duty to God's Church in one six leaves, than ever M. Some did in all that ever he wrote, and yet I think he that should say so, might have hands enough to subscribe to it, even of the godliest and best affected subjects in the land: but I purpose not to enter into that comparison, let each man speak as his heart hath felt comfort, and God give M. Some an humbler spirit. Only this much I think one may safely and truly say, that in all that ever M. Penri hath written (though M. Some have beprouded him I know not how many times) no man shall be able justly to find any one dash with a pen, savouring so palpably the corruption of the heart, thorough the good liking of himself, as is in a hundred places of M. Somes book. Too long and loathsome it were to run through all, and therefore I will only add some few more to suit with the rest: Your fear (saith he) that posterity will not rest in my reasons, is a vain fear: My arguments for baptism by unpreaching ministers are 
94 73  such as you are not able to stir: if I have any learning, you do toto caelo errare. For the knowledge that God hath given me, I thank his majesty very humbly: I can receive 
66 139  no disgrace by any such as you are, etc. How say you, is not this a medicine to give a modest man a vomit? or is not this able to make a man draw his mouth to his elbow, to hear a man professing learning, lay about him on this fashion beyond the bonds of shamefastness: Why did your D. never read Laus propria sordescit in ore? Tush he is at a point you see, and goeth on like a censurer in his impious vain, telling master Penri, That as yet he maketh very mean account of his 
66  judgement: And again in another place to the same effect, he presseth him shrewdly: You desire pardon of 
82 83  me, if you recant (saith he) you shall have an easy suit, otherwise I do and will account very basely of you: Was not the man in a golden dream think you, when he persuaded himself, that the whole poise of the matter lay upon his account? Take heed therefore my masters of the fantastical crew, if you go on your course, you see what will come of it, certainly M. Some will account very basely of you, and where be you then? I know peradventure what you will say, that this base account of his, is but as a man stuffed with draw, that frayeth the birds but for a day or two, and afterwards they fear not to peck on his head: And if you say so, then comes M. Some upon you again, full as powerfully as before, and telleth you plainly, That he will speak for you, if you revoke your errors and heresies, otherwise 
143  he will not once open his lip for you, or any such as you are, etc. And then ye are dressed, if M. Some give you over once, therefore it is good to be wise, and to look before you leap. Thus I hope you see that your Doct. is none of these nice and shamefast divines that in the sense and feeling of his own good gifts, is afraid to make known to you what he can do. But where abouts dwelled he trow you, or what uncourteous neighbours had he, that would thus suffer him for want of help, to sing all the 4. parts himself? Fie, fie, that an ancient D. of divinity should be thus used. It is sure long of these puritanes that are despisers of degrees of Schools, and thereby force men to fall a praising of themselves, whether they will or no. But in good earnest speak your mind, do you not think M. Some to be unmatchable in this Thrasonical vein? When you show me the like of any learned protestant of our time, I will then yield myself faltie, and say I did him wrong. Till than you must give me leave to think that he is among divines, th' only prince of conceited writers in this age: unto all which unbridled Rhetoric of his, if I were as M. Penri, I would never make any other answer then this, for thus it pleaseth Mast. Some to play with him. It is easy to say so, & you might worst have said it. A party is unfit to be a judge, I hope we shall not have a P●thagoras of you. Would you have 
67  your boisterous speech go for an oracle, and carry all as a stream before it? It were a hard case, I trust you desire it not, if you do, you are not like to have it: your writings are not as the laws of the Medes and Persians. After all 
92  his vaunting of himself, if M. Penri should happen to send him this nosgaie in a letter, being as he knows, eadem mensura, and very justly returned upon his head (because of all men in the world, he might worst have sung us this note in his own praise) me thinks this should make him look downward a little, and humble himself.  
Now if one should ask your D. what was the reason why in both his treatises he had such a special flying at this point, namely that the Church of England is the vizible Church of Christ, which I hope M. Penri will not be so mad to gainsay, I persuade myself he would answer, that he discharged the shot only at the Brownists, and that M. Penri and his disciples must give some other men leave, both to make fond arguments & to hold dangerous opinions, aswell as themselves nevertheless, that this should not be wholly M. Somes drift, may sufficiently appear by these glances that follow.  
The mark I fear that M. penri levels at, is simyly to condemn, th'outward calling of the Ministry of out 
35  Church, & so to shake hands with th' anabaptistical recusantes. etc. Some part of his writings look shrewdly that way.  
And again, if you mean (saith he) that the best calling in our Church, is simyly corrupt, that is none at all, I 
130  detest your Anabaptistical fancy. For then the worthiest divines in this land are no Ministers. And yet more, if you do simply condemn th'external calling of the ministers of our Church, then in your judgement, we have 
114  no ministry, no Sacrament, no visitble Church in England I looked I confess unto you, that in the neck of this should have followed these words, and then belike her Majesty, is no visible member of the Church, for that would have suited well with the rest of these pretty ifs. And how think you now, was this great ordinance laid only to batter the Brownists? I am sure you do not think it: But why be all these ifs brought in, when the man that he writes against, did not so much aa dream of any such matter? Forsooth because the Stae should think (for what should we else conjecture,) that M. Penri is in some sort a Brownist, and then let D. Some alone with him: in like sort, what should mean all those worthy book cases of S. bartholmew's hospital? That reading doth edisie. That the Scripture is of credit in itself: That he that doth thus, etc. is a Massalian heretic, & he that doth thus. etc. is a filthy Atheist etc. what should all these I say, & a number of the like mean, but only to draw the state to think that M. Penri is either in part an Atheist, or in part an heretic, or else that he holds the contrary to some of these principles, I pray you recommend me to your D. when you see him, and tell him from me, that there is little divinity or humanity in this, let him use it as much as he will, it will be found as I said, (when all is done) but a sluttish trick of M. Bridges, liker a great deal, to begrease his fingers, then to bring any grace or credit to his pen.  
And not only herein by your leave, hath your D. offered his poor adversary more injury, than some think a man of his profession might well do with a good conscience, but also in sundry other respects he offers him in my judgement as foul play as I have seen, used of any man professing learning in my life. And will you to begin withal see a pattern of it? Then mark first what M. Penri sets down to be the question, for these I take it be his own words. The question therefore is not (saith he) whether the one or th'other of them have delivered a Sacrament in respect of th'action 
10  done, but whether a christian going unto them for these holy seals, may be assured that he can receive the same at their hands. etc. This you see is plain enough: yet M. Some in his preface tells us far otherwise, that the question is, whether such as were and are baptised by popish priests and ignorant ministers have & do receive a Sacrament. etc. his adversary layeth down in flat terms that it is not the question, and yet your D. blusheth not to say, that it is the question: were it not good then that they were both bound hand and foot till they were agreed to the Question? Nay soft you will say, that promotion will do better with one of them then with both, like enough. But is not this foul play think you, that M. Some will enforce a question upon his adveasarie whether he will or Noah, M. Penri utterly rejecting it in so express terms calling it an odious & impertinent controversy, and telling M. Some, that he hath therein quickened a dead controversy, not unlike to breed stirs through the wrangling spirits of this age. etc. And why may not he I pray you take the same liberty in this question as M. Some doth in an other or the like? For in this point, whether infants ought rather to be kept unbaptized, then to be presented to popish baptism, hatken I pray you to M. Somes resolution: After he hath told us Caluins' judgement, he shutteth up the whole with this good lose: I confess freely that this is a very weighty question, (but in this our time 
181  a needless question, and that men of great excellency for learning have their several judgements: and speak your conscience: If M. Penri should answer even so to th'other question, uz. Whether that which is delivered by popish and unpreaching ministers, be a sacrament or no, were it any great blasphemy; If he should chance to say in effect as M. Some doth, that this in our time is but a needless & fruitless question, and eccellente men have their several judgements, were it not pity to make him an anabaptist, a catabaptist, or a Pelagian for this.  
O but you will say, that though M. Penri do deny it to be the question, yet of consequence it must needs be the question whether he will or no: for if the popish and dumb ministers have no ministery at all, then that which either they have delivered, or do deliver can be no sacrament, and so her majesty and a number of excellent men more, must be unbaptized at this day. This believe me is a shrewd blow, and may well be called a syllogism in Bocardo, and yet if her majesties name were left out, it might peradventure be avoided with more ease: But I pray you what think you of the second point of M. Somes first treatise, That a godly prince may not suffer any religion but the true religion, either publicly or privately in his dominions, is not that a sound point agreeable to the word? I am sure you will not deny it, and yet by that which I have learned of M. Some I can teach you a Cambridg trick to overthrow it: namely thus, Her Majesty all Christendom knows to be a godly Prince, and in that regard, through the great mercy of God few princes under the Heaven to be compared unto her, yet hath she nevertheless suffered the Ambassadors of sorrain nations to have their Mass, (which she must needs know to be Idolatry) within her dominions. Therefore either that proposition of M. Somes is false, or else he must be forced to yield that her majesty is in that regard ungodly: And if he do so, than I have him where I would have him, & mark I pray you, how I can fetch him about for need with a proper short declamation (but truly it is a sweet on) of the learned Bridges, Secundum ordine Sarum in this manner: Yea my learned masters are ye good at that? Is the wind in that door? Are ye come after so many miraculous blessings, and such an extraordinary hand of God upon her majesty, after all that great care and endeavour she hath had to advance the Gospel, and to succour th'afflicted members thereof, (So many thousand of christian souls having been saved under her government) are ye become I say, now after all this, openly to charge & accuse her of ungodliness? I know brethren, that the best Princes under the Heaven, have their several infirmities: But openly to tolerate so gross & grievous a sin against the honour of God, and the light of his truth, this is more brethren than may well be shadowed by infirmity: Therefore what shall I say? With grief I speak it and yet I must needs speak it, O wicked & ungrateful wretches to their dread sovereign the Queen's highness, that thus bash not to require her with repining and slanders: Fie, Fie brethren, beware, what you writ an other time, ask pardon of her Majesty, for she is merciful and most godly: whom ye have thus openly slandered to be ungodly: Therefore away with that false proposition and burn the record for shame. For you see plainly that a godly Prince may suffer some other religion beside the true religion, within her Dominions: how say you now? Have I not acquitted myself worthily in confuting M. Some? For I trow he will be better advised, then openly to accuse her Majesty of ungodliness.  
And even thus for all the world, and no better than thus doth it seem to me, that M. Some and his assistance do confute the Nullity of our dumb ministers: For they have not in the world any other arguments to fright us with, but only that of her Majesty, her Majesty, which they think to be a biter: And it puts me in mind of a little pretty story, that we have of a scholar of Oxford, and a Clumperton of the Country: The scholar having got a little smattering of Lodgeicke, would needs threat down the poor man that he could by logic prove any thing against him: Namely, though he had a cudgel in his hand, yet he would prove he had non: whereunto the Country man made answer, by my faith if you do so, I'll make your shoulders feel that I have one: By the way, you must not think that this Country man was a B. for all he began with his Faith, for I would you should know it, there be others that can swear besides Bb. But thus you see the poor scholars logic was something too weak to serve him against a cudgel. Even so now, if one chance to deny popish ministers to be ministers: Is it not a good round ready way to refute them thus: I'll make you feel they be ministers? For what else should this fearful thunderclap of M. Somes mean? You dare not for your ears say in flat terms, that it was no baptism 
172  which was beretosore delivered in the popish Church etc. Yet for all this daring, D. Fulke against Stapleton, hath dared to write thus much: unlearned priests (saith he) were forbidden to serve in the church, Bed. lib. 1. cap 6. In so much that S. john of Beverley baptised again a 
Pag. 21  young man, which was baptised of an unlearned priest. Yea and because it seemeth he feared no daring of any man that should come after, he hath recorded it twice unto us in less than 6. leaves: For in the 11. page going before, he sets it down more at large to this effect: That this john of Beverley told the young man, that doubtless he was not well baptised, if that dull-headed dogbolt 
11  priest baptised him: And therefore after he had deprived that ignorant wretch of his ministry, he caused the young man to be baptised a new, as not rightly baptised before, etc. Thus much D. Fulke: and I hope for all this daring, he will not revoke it in haste, for what need he, when his book is seen and allowed? And that which is allowed by our state to confute a papist, I do not see but it hath the very same vigour and efficacy against M. Some or any man else that jumpeth with them in judgement. And therefore if a man should venture to say: That an ignorant popish priest cannot truly baptise, so long as such a speech hath the warrant and allowance of our Church and state, what need he fear the threat of his ears? In deed this daring of your Doctors, (when I consider of it well) me thinks it looks like a good well favoured cudgel: And if you can tell me what figure it is in, I'll put you out of doubt what Mood it is in, so you and I betwixt us, shall I hope, find out the Mood and Figure, whence this stingging syllogism is drawn. But I muse whether ever M. Some knew D. Bourcot or no, if he did not, let him learn one of his receipts of me for the lengthening of his life: Thou'fret and kill thyself, be patiented, be patiented. Entreat your D. the next time you see him, to favour himself that way more than he doth, for sure these arguments that are drawn from the passionate Mood, and the threatening Figure, do nothing so well with a man of his constitution, as to be continually resident upon his charge: And if he look not to it, I can tell him this choler and fretting of his, with an ambitious desire to rise, will go near in time to be the shortening of his days. Alas how should the poor ignorant Welshman, or any of the fantastical crew, be able to answer such an unmerciful syllogism as this? You dare not for your cares say, etc. Th'only way that I see is to couch under the board, and keep close for the time, till that same perilous pillory, which so frighteth and threateneth men with their cares be shifted or removed out of his place. In deed it is not unlike that some of their wretched and fawning solicitors, do but too often warble upon that string in her Majesty's cares, thereby to make way to the rest of their odious and malicious complaints: And me think I should see some reverent B. or other one his knees before her majesty as one loath to speak good man, but only that the heinousness of the case doth thereunto force him, as it were against his will, and therefore he gins I warrant you with a sigh or 2. fetched from the very depth of his bowels in this sort: O Madam, you may see now what your puritans are come to: As men always rising from one error to another, & never at rest they are now grown to this, that your Majesty is not christened, are you not greatly beholden to them? By this your highness may measure the fruit of the rest of their desires: Therefore you may yield to their new platform if you please, but I fear Madam, (my heart trembleth to speak it) you shall not enjoy many good days after: Sure if we may know of any such venomous complaint to her majesty, we will fly to M. Some to prove them liars all, for he hath set down in print, that M. Penri is in the case of H. N. that is in manner alone in this judgement of the Nulltie, and therefore if they use us thus, to make a number of us, when the salt (if it be a fault) lieth but in one alone, though we dare not tell them, yet we will get M. Some to tell them, that by their leave they lie, and they lie loudly toe.  
But for the point wherein M. Some thinks he hath his adversary on the hip, first we say for the clearing of ourselves, and we speak it even in singleness of heart, (be thou O God witness and revenge if we lie) that we do account her majesty the dear child of God, so marked from her Cradle, and so chosen from the very foundations of th'earth, whereof we doubt not but she hath had assured seals and testimonies to her own soul, not only by her outward and miraculous desiverances, but by an inward sense and ceiling of God's mercies, she hath been from her infancy through God's great mercy delivered from the dregs of popery, & thereby from one of the gates that leadeth unto hell: She hath since that time made no doubt, some fruitful increase in the knowledge of the truth: She hath been kept from those soul and enormous sins, which other great States & princes have fallen into: She hath not feared to profess and publicly to a vow the cause, notwithstanding the frowning threats, and practices of many other mighty potentates round about her: yea though her blood have been many ways unjustly sought for, and only for the gospel sake, yet hath she not for any such earthly respect abandoned the cause, but hath boldly from time to time, even with joy of heart succoured the afflicted, both at home and abroad, yea and more, it is manifest that under that happy and peaceable sovereignty of hers, many a thousand have come to the sound knowledge of the truth, which were before in palpable darkness. And these be to us ward, sufficient reasons & motions to put us out of doubt, that (whatsoever other wants, weaknesses & infirmities she may have incident to flesh and blood) yet that she is the dear child of God and right precious in his eyes: & if that be so, than I hope I shall not need to stand loug about any pretty catechism (as M. Some hath done about the inabillitie of the regenerate) to prove That whom God loveth, he loveth for ever: for I do assure myself, meaner men the M. Some are resolved in that. Well that then being set down for granted, That whom God loveth he loveth for ever, and that it is unpossible for all the power of hell and darkness, to wipe her Majesty out of the book of life, wherein she is written: let us come to that wound that M. Some and others do think to be so uncurable, namely, That her Majesty should be unbaptized.  
First though it be very clear, that M. Penri doth not say so, altogether disclaiming the point, as an odious and fruitless controversy, yet because M. Some will still be hagling at that biting consequent, as a man half starved and hungerbit for want of other sustenance, let us allow for once that M. Penri did say so in deed: what then? What will your learned D. assume upon that: I trust if it were granted him for a mayor, a man might soon guess what would be his minor, namely this, I am persuaded if you be not well conjured by the magistrate, you will prove a strange body, and then what should be the conclusion, but Hue & Cry? So that if the cutler's shop do not better befriend your D. in this case then th'university, he is at a stand But let us presuppose that her majesty were unbaptised, (though I know of none that say so) yet so long as she hath the inward baptism, that is so long as she is baptised of the holy Ghost and with fire, having joyfully embraced the holy faith of the son of God, and withal having the seal and assurance of that which shall never be taken from her, that is of remission of sins in the death & righteousness of Christ and that more is, having also many times been comfortably fed and refreshed at the Lords table by those holy seals of her redemption, as a farther pledge of the favour and mercy of God, I see no reason, nor I know no use, why after all this, that she should be brought back again to the sacrament of her entrance and ingrasting into the body, if it were so that she were not baptised, if there be any other mystery in the matter, I frankly confess it is more than I see as yet. As for that inevitable and remediless necessity of the Sacrament, which the bewitched papists do so sottishly dream of, I hope all the children of God have long a go turned that strange beast a grazing, as having been safficiently taught: That it is not the want of the sacrament, but the contempt and neglect of the sacrament that is damnable: Now her majesty being already persuaded in her heart that she is baptised, cannot thereby justly be said either to contemn or neglect the sacrament, because she resteth in that persuasion, howsoever it be, whether she be baptised or no, (being clear from these 2. sins of contempt and neglect) we are assured it shall no kind of way redound to her heart, because she is the child of God, and we doubt not but she findeth and feeleth daily those inward comforts and tokens of God's love towards her, as neither the adding or iterating of th'outward sacrament can by any means better or increase. And if that be so, then do I not see why M. Penri or any man else should so greatly fear that bloody consequent of M. Somes, uz. If popish ministers, be no ministers, than her Majesty is not christened. For you see when this bugbear is unuizarded once, then alas it hath but the face of a sheep as it were, and his phisnomy appears nothing so terrible as it seemed before.  
O but you will ask me peradventure what I say to this: None unbaptized may be admitted to the holy supper: I answer, that it is most true in a sort with M. 
92  Somes distinction, uz. which are known to be unbaptized, for those be his very words: In deed if the case be so cleared, without all question and contradiction, that both the minister & the man himself that is to communicate, doth assuredly know himself to pe unbaptized, than I dare not deny but there is a salt both in the minister that admitteth, and in the person that so presenteth himself. But one th'other side, where the man verily persuadeth himself that he is baptised, and the minister hath no knowledge of the contrary, (though revera and in truth, there were no baptism at all) than the question is how these do sin, for this I take it cannot be that sinful ignorance that M. Some mentioneth in these words, ignorantia excusat non a toto sed a tanto. And I hope he will not deny 
90  that it is a sacrament, and may be a comfortable sacrament to him that in this persuasion doth present himself at the Lords table, though in truth he had not the outward seal of baptism before. For where the Apostle biddeth a man to examine himself. etc. I suppose it is not to be understood as is he would say thus: I charge thee that among other things thou search and inquire diligintly what was done to thee, 50. 90. years ago, when thou wast an infant, whether that were true baptism that thou didst then receive, and whether that person that did then baptize thee, had a calling or no: And is thou canst by no means bolt out the truth thereof to assure thy heart that thou wast baptized in deed than I charge thee keep thyself from the holy communion, I take it I say this was no part of th'Apostles 
92  meaning, and M. Somes own words do seem in a sort to cross it: This examination (saith he) consisteth in saith and repentance, which are not in them, that either 
92  wittingly omit, or wilfully contemn the holy Sacrament of baptism: So that M. Some himself restraining it only to one of these 2. omission of knowledge, or contempt of wilfulness, we think we may safely say that where these 2. be not, there the man, (whether he be baptized or Noah) may be a worthy and fruitful receiver. And in this case it seemeth that a man's own very heart and conscience may be a notable light and direction to him, against all the wrangling spirits in the world. For if in communicating at the Lords table, thou didst ever in thy life feel any growth in thyself with a desire to rise from the wretchedness of the first Adam, to the righteousness of the second Adam, if I say thou didst ever feel any inward sweetness and comfort in thy gracious God to a thorough peace of thy conscience, and a quieting of thy soul, then assure thyself (against all that man or Angel can bring against it) that where thou hast been once so banqueted, there thou hast thy warrant from the holy Ghost without scruple to go feast again, and that either thou art baptised, or else that certainly thou hast no need of it. For as we say to the papists touching there traditions, that seeing we have life everlasting which is all in all by the word written, let them draw us never so many embo slements, and tell us never so many miracles of their traditions, we value them all as old concealed records, wherein there is neither strength nor power, and the reason is, because we have sufficient without them: Even so in this case, so long as we are assured of the principal, I mean that excellent fruit of a justifying faith, which is a perpetual peace of conscience in the son of God, if any man shall the take in hand to bring us into a quandary or perplexity about our christening as they call it, we need not greatly fear what he can say therein, because we are at peace with God, and therefore if he tell us never so much, That the popish priests must needs have a calling, otherwise we cannot be baptised, & if we be not baptized, than we must keep ourselves from the communion, and so consequently be deprived of the holy seals of our redemption, unless we will acknowledge popish idolaters to have a calling. etc. Because these and such like, have neither sap nor edge, neither life nor quickening in them, nor can no whit better our estate touching our peace of conscience (our own very hearts by the comforts that we have already received, being able infinitely to control them) who can blame us, if so long as we are clear from all contempt, and neglect of the holy sacraments, we hang all these by among other our canceled records, as a needles & frutlesse jangling to no use?  
But in the mean season, what say you to him that dare be so saucy to control a whole Church and state? may not that man for once suit with proud Penrie, or any of the fantastical crew? I would be sorry that M. Some should be taken in such a trip, but if he be, I must needs say it is Gods just judgement upon him, because he doth so embitter his pen against his poor adversary, laying pride and blasphemy to his charge, I know not how often. Which when I look upon, me thinks I should hear Eliab speaking in his high voice to his younger brother David, in this or the like manner: I know thy pride and malice of thy heart, etc. Well let M. Penri look to that himself, he knows how grievously God hath visited that sin in others, and therefore at his peril be it. But to make it appear to you, that your D. in this his hot and eager desire to strike M. Penri on the legs, hath not seared withal to gash our whole Church and state in the face, let that last Cannon of his (which I spoke of before) uz. That none unbaptized must be admitted to the supper, be compared with the practise of our Church, and then tell me your judgement: For if it be clear, that of all those that are and have been baptised by women (which of all the learned, excepting only the papists, is confessed to be no baptism at all) our Church doth neither rebaptize any, nor yet in that regard, repel them from the supper: whom then I pray you doth M. Some more cross and control in this case, than our very Church and state itself, whose doctrine & practice is flat contrary to this maxima and rule of his? And that you may see into what distress your doctor hath brought himself by this means: mark how syllogisticasly I can come upon him for need, and yet you know my Atithmaticke hath been as good as my Logic in my days.  
1 The Church of England maintaineth nothing in her doctrine or regiment, whereof she cannot reader a sound reason and a sufficient proof from the foundation of God's word, to maintain it with a good conscience:  
2 But the Church of England alloweth of those (whom she knoweth & confesseth to be unbaptized) to come ordinarily to the Lords table.  
3 Ergo, it is agreeable to God's word and to conscience, and so falleth to the ground that assertion of M. Somes, uz. That none unbaptized must be admitted to the supper.  
How say you now? have not I cut the throat of this gear? if you urge me now to prove my mayor, I know I shall no sooner name the man unto you from whom I had it, but you will put of your cap strait, and I presume so much of his courtesy, that if you and I had him in a corner to spur him the question, he would answer us as he doth elsewhere full sweetly, Forsooth brethren that did even I: for it is the kindest gentleman if you were acquainted with him that ever: well I will not say now what I know, but if you will needs have my mayor proved, do but turn I pray you to the 5. page of the learned preface of that greek Lexicon in 40. which was printed by Charred, to his cost I fear, I befool his fingers that was the cause of it: if you ask me what time it was published, though I should miss of the month, yet me thinks I should not miss much of the year, because it came forth just at the same time that many proper fooleries came out without privilege: Even there I say, and in the very same page shall you find my mayor, proved sufficiently, and I hope M. Some will not be so hard hearted to deny th'authority of M. Bridges, for then there is no deiling with him. My minor you see is manifest by the daily practice of our Church, in admitting such to the Lords table, as have none other baptism then that of women, and that I am sure M. Some will confess to be none: Neither is there, nor never was since her majesties reign, any trial or examination had of the matter, nor any article, injunction, or commandment so to inquire, no nor any Homily, or other private or public admonition that ever I heard of, to charge men to examine themselves in that point, whether they have true baptism or no, but as if it were a thing nothing material, they are (as we see) without further scruple received to the Lords table in peace. And the like is of those that are our ministers & preachers of the gospel, as well Bb. as others. For among all the Bb. articles, and urge to subscription, was there ever any stay made I pray you, in the admission of any to that public function of the ministery only upon that point, whether they were baptised by women or no? I think not, and yet it may be that many of them have had none other baptism then that: O but you will say that was not known, and at the time of their admission, it was supposed they were sufficiently baptised: But I say again, if the matter be so material, as M. Some would have it, that ought especially to have been known, and no hand given to their allowance, before it had been perfectly known. And if we should stay till then, I think it would go near to craze the licence of some of the grandfathers, and make a foul scour amongst th'oldest of our preachers: And so peradventure, father john Elmar should kiss Cate no more in the pulpit while he lived, and what a shrewd loss were that? Well I conclude therefore, sithence The Church of England maintaineth nothing in doctrine or regiment, but she may well do with a good conscience, as from the foundation of godsword (For I tell you, we poor parishioners hang much on that mayor of M. Bridges his) and that all this while she never called this matter in question, but admitteth both to the Communion, and to the public teaching in the Church, such as have been only baptised by women, and never stoppeth nor stayeth at it, nor maketh any inquiry after it. I conclude I say (for so it must needs fall out) that M. Some was greatly overseen, thus in a kind of singularity to control his betters without cause: What? I believe we shall have one of these puritanes of him shortly, for they are always taking exceptions to something or other in Church or state. No more of that I would advise him if he love his health or his wealth either, for those fellows be so elvish, that they had rather beg than have two benefices.  
Now for farther confirmation and authorizing of this practice of our Church, because M. Some seemeth to carry so reverend a mind to his superiors, that he will submit himself and all his writings to their censure, I will here, to cut of all cavils, set down the judgement of one of the gravest Prelates of the land, concerning that point of women's baptism: For these (as I am informed) are my L. of winchester's own words with his grave preamble and all, and I think himself will not deny them.  
Although I be persuaded that the most obiestions made by some persons against the book of comen prayer are in truth of no weight, but rather captious & unprofitable as concerning the Church of England, in public prayer and the use of the Sacraments to maintain those things that be directly against the word of God, yet for the quieting & better directing of some moderate minds which by occasion have been drawn into some scruple about these things, I have laid down mine opinion about the true interpretation of the same in this wise: First as touching the baptism by Midwives, I can assure you that the Church of England, or any that I know in place of government therein, doth not maintain either the baptism of midwives as a thing tolerable in the Church, or else the condemnation of those children that depart this world unbaptized, but doth account them both eronius & not according to the word of God. For in the Convocation the matter was debated amongst us wherein some of those persons were present, to whom the drawing of the book was committed, who protested that neither the order of the book did allow any such thing, neither that it was any part of their meaning to approve the same: But for so much as baptizing by women, hath been a sore time commonly used and now also of rashness by some is done, the book only taketh order & provideth, that if the child be baptised by the midwife rebaptizing be not admitted. For when it is done according to the form of the questions set down in the book, if it should be condemned as 
My Lord of winchester's judgement touching those that are baptised by Midwives.  no baptism, it would in th'opinion of many learned draw some error of doctrine, and infer greater inconvenience then in any Church may be borne, that is an infinite number which never had other baptism, should now be rebaptized, and all those of years of discretion that were dead and were only so baptized, depart without the seal of God's promise in the Sacrament. The learned do right well know, how the primitive Church and the learned fathers that lived therein, shunned rebaptisation, though the former baptism were ministered either by lay persons or children: Therefore the book providing only for the remedy thereof ought not to be condemned. Thus far my good L. of Winchester: The sum whereof is this: That the book of common prayer condemneth the baptism of midwives, and yet admitteth no other baptism for fear of rebaptisation: And why then should her Majesty be brought back again to baptism, when such as in our own judgements, were never baptised in deed, are notwithstanding let alone, without any farther addition, or supply of the sacrament, and yet (as I said before) not barred from the communion for all that?  
Therefore presuppose now a man should tell M. Some plainly, that in the popish Church there is no true baptism, what would he infer upon that? marry that many thousands are at this day unbaptised, & what then? Why then they ought to be brought back again to baptism: Nay soft, by his favour I deny that, for that you see is flatly overthrown by the judgement and practice of the Church of England, and therefore it becometh both M. Some and me, to sit down by it with reverence. So that if my L. of Cant. should now be baptised by a woman, (as being so long ago who dare take his oath to the contrary; And my L. of Winchester by a popish shaveling, what reason is it that my L. of Winchester should be washed a new, seeing it is a ruled case that my L. of Cant. must not? And yet it may be for the true substance of Baptism, they may well go together in one balance, and never a barrel better hearing.  
But it may be you will altogether condemn this poor judgement of the Bishops, as manifestly bewraiing very gross & palpable ignorance, wherein though I should not dissent from you, yet in as much as he is in place of on of the grave patriarchs of our church, there is no reason, but that his very credit & countenance (if there were nothing else) should in this case be sufficient to crush in pieces a better man's judgement then M. Somes: Beside that he is one of our ordinaries you know, and the statute saith (as I take it) that in matter of doubt or scruple, we must always rely upon the sense and interpretation of our ordinary, howsoever it be, I hope you will bear me witness, that by this means both my propositions are as substantially proved as a man would wish, the dean of Sarum being author of th'one, and my L. of Winchester in a sort confirming th'other. And this I tell you before hand, (therefore look to it and say you had warning) that if I catch M. Some once in that vein, that he will make no bones to reject, and set light by such men as these, (th'one a dean, th'other a Bishop and both pillars of our Church) I will certainly in my next letter give M. Penri leave to deny Calvin, if he have but the bare truth on his side, and you cannot say now, but you have had warning, wherein yet by your favour, your D. case must needs be the harder, in that he cannot well deny any of these reverent men, but he must withal be forced inclusive to give a foul check to our Church and State: Which rather then Gosser Bridges would do: I know him so well, that I presume he would rather in reverence deny S. Paul or any of the 12. Apostles: and what a sound hearted subject is that? In deed I must needs say thus much for him, (if he would wish me in my grave) that when he doth confute S. Paul, he doth it lightly with as much reverence as ever I heard or read of in my life. well here again is offered me occasion, to borrow an other piece of copia rimarum out of M. Deane of Salisburies' buttery book, and to come upon M. Some once more with a dutch figure or two, in this extravagant manner: Yea my learned brother, are you good at that? Is the wind in that door? Are you now come to that height of conceit in yourself, as not to fear openly to control a whole Church or state? Fie, Fie, brother either unsay that again, or farewell all brotherhood. etc. But I will not blot any more paper, with such ware as this, there is enough of it to be had in the west Country, if a man could light on it, only you may imagine, if M. Penri should have thus crossed and encountered the doings of our Church and State, what a heavy sentence should have passed upon him, than I warrant you the streets would have rung, of that Proud schismatical Anabaptist, which had so troubled heaven, church, & common wealth. etc. And thus you see the gins that are so purposely set for an other, may sometimes ensnare the fouler himself.  
As to that great school roll of errors and absurdities charged with such an imperial Majesty upon the poor Welsh man's head, I know 〈◊〉 well what to say, only if I had been of Council withal at the beginning, th'enrolment should have been made in parchment and not in paper: For now being but bare paper, see the ill luck of it, the Mice have so mangled the record, that the absurdities were never worth talking of since, therefore the only shift for your D. is, to get them pass by parliament if he can, for otherwise to take them to be such upon his bare word, he must pardon us for that, for if he were Archb. of Cant. I tell you, we would be loath to take his word in this case, we hear in deed many times a great noise and a rustling, and we see before us as it were a swelling sea of big words, telling us many wonders of certain strange blasphemies, absurdities, and I know not what: but when we come to examine them by the touchston, and look to be satisfied by some plain demonstration or syllogistical proof, then behold in lieu of this, there appears before us a man new come out of the clouds (as it were) with his mace in his hand, and his sandals on his feet (as it should seem) rather to make laws then to handle controversies, pointing with his finger, at this and at that, telling us what he thinks, as if all the world were to gape upon him: For what else should all these pretty flowers mean, wherein for the most part lieth the whole power of your D. book; I am not of your judgement: This is a gross error: Herein I descent from you: This is a blasphemous absurdity: My arguments are such as you are not able to stir: This is a most absurd heresy: I detest your Anabaptistical fancy. etc. with a number of the like whereof you have seen the record already, yea and sometimes he refers us we thank him, very friendly to his chapter bidding us read his answer, which when we come to view, either it serveth us for a pretty dictionary to Caluius institutions, or else we are just as wise as we were before: For this you shall find to be true (if you view it attentively) that he hath for the most part as much substance in his very table of direction as he hath in the whole chapter whereunto we are directed, and peradventure more toe, by the reason of some distemperature that makes him forget himself, yea and for our better satisfaction, he tells us and that very often, that he doth rest in that which he hath written, dreaming belike, that because himself hath some good liking of his own Image, therefore others must needs have so to. But how if this test be a broken rest? or how if D. Bridges and D. Bancroft should also tell us, that they likewise for their parts, do rest in that which they have written? Yet M. Some knows that he 
183  must needs be a very resty jade, that for all this resting of theirs, would rest or rely upon any such frippery ware as they have cumbered the Church with. But is it not a shrewd wipe to fearful and ignorant men, when a man of that anciency as M. Some is, shall reach at us with a weapon drawn from the experience of his own learning and judgement? in this manner: If I have any learning, you do toto caelo errare: It is something I confess, and yet if our brother Bridges had 
73  so come upon us, we should have done well enough with him, we could quickly have added this Minor to his Mayor: But Heaven and earth knoweth brother Bridges, that you have no learning, & are but a sol▪ ergo, marry to M. Some the case goeth harder with us, and therefore he that would now be resolved in the point, whether dumb ministers be ministers or no, need no more but ride to Cambridge, to know whether M. Some be learned, & if he find him to be so, then to make no question but that they be ministers in deed, quod substantiam but not quoad qualitatem. Nevertheless because learned men have their slips sometimes, and are not so privileged, but that in their heat or height of spirit, they may now and then let fall absurdities as well as others, therefore we are in no great fear of this neither, the rather because your D. leaveth us certain pretty outrules (I dare not say absurdities) uncanceled of purpose as I think, to try whether his adversary be spurblind or no: For what else should this mean? If you deny not that it is a Sacrament you affirm it: For not to deny is to affirm: Every child (saith M. D.) can teach you that lesson: And I promise you then it is a proper lesson, but if a child can so readily 
140  teach it, I trust an elder man may as readily learn it. See then what a wit I have, that can at the first dash upon the sight of one bare pattern, thwite you out an other strait, full as good as that: M. Some denies not that I am a bastard, Ergo he affirms it. For not to deny is to affirm. Every child can teach him that. Ye how now? What occasion did I give M. Some to call me bastard? Trust me if he use me so, i'll have an action of the case against him: For I would he should know it, my mother is an honest gentlewoman, & nobly borne: And thus you see, of words may grow blows. Well for all that, if I witted your D. were in good earnest, I would certainly get M. Penri to wright on his head as an absurdity, and a childish absurdity to by his leave, with out either reason or sense: for what consequence is there I pray you in these, M. Some denies not that his brother Bridges is a patch, Ergo he affirms it: M. Some denies not that the calling of an Archb. is unlawful, Ergo he affirms it: For not to deny is to affirm? He that had a good commission to reason thus at his pleasure, might peradventure move your D. patience unreasonably, and make the colour come in his face: For so a man might be convinced to affirm a thousand things that he never so much as dreamt of, because it cannot be proved that ever he denied them.  
O but you will say peradventure, that M. Some means this only of those things that are in question and debate, and not of every thing at random: As if there be a controversy about Predestination, he that in handling of this denies it not, may truly in a sort, be said to affirm it: And so now the controversy being about the Sacrament from popish priests, and M. Penri not denying it, may truly in like sort be said to affirm it. And then by that reckoning there is no doubting of any thing. For if a man doubt of a thing, and deny it not, he affirms it strait. And is this trow you th'evidence that M. Some will plead for himself in this case? Now sure then hath he firmed fair: And what may the good Dean of Sarum say to this, but that he was borne in an unfortunate hour, to be by this proper distinction manifestly convinced as a traitor, even by the mouth of my L. of Winchester himself, if it were he that fumbled us up that sodden Admonition to the people of England? For Martin (whom he calls the libeler) chargeth D. Bridges with flat treason, and I take it, he names both the place & the page: Now comes father Admonitor, and he worthily defends, but what? marry forsooth, for want of other matter. That ministers livings should not be taken from them, and be employed he knows not how. But the principal thing in controversy, namely the treason charged so justly upon D. Bridges his head, he had no leisure to peruse, though he could find leisure to speak of him twice or thrice and that purposely in his praise. The issue therefore is, that seeing the thing was in controversy, yea and the principal and most material thing of all the controversy: and my L. of Winchester having the matter in hand, doth not nor dare not (it seemeth) deny it. Then out of M. Somes Logic or divinity (choose you whether) I conclude vn●oydablie, that he must needs affirm it: For not to deny, is to affirm, Every child can teach him that. Ergo M. Bridges (I am sorry for him good soul) must needs be a traitor by my L. of Winchester's verdict. And I would I might live to see him, either to fall out with M. Some for this kind of reasoning, or else to try his action of the case against the Bishop.  
Likewise where M. Penri saith, that those that receive the Communion at the hands of dumb & unpreaching ministers, do in a sort approve their sin. will you see how prettily your D. refutes it with an inflance of judas in this sort. The Apostles (saith he) received the lords supper with judas, but did not approve the 
120  theft and treason of judas, etc. How say you? would you not think he were in jest? & speak your conscience, was not this right from the corner of the staff and to very good purpose, the controversy being of receiving the Sacraments at the hands of dumb ministers? Why alas, we suppose that Christ our Saviour was no dumb minister, at whose hands the Apostles received it: What have we then to do with judas in this case, unless he had been minister of it? In deed if the question had been Whether one may without pollution, communicate in the company of the wicked, than this example of judas, had been a just last for that foot: the speech being of the minister that should deliver it, we may truly use M. Somes own words against himself, and tell him by his patience, that it was even as near as York and London.  
An other of his pretty outrules is this: It is confessed (saith he) of all famous and learned men, that God's Church is not necessarily tied in all places & times to one form in th'external calling of the ministers, wherein I con him thank yet, that he hath learned so much discretion as to name none though he speak of all. And therefore if a man should give them all the lie, it were not a point matter, for the disgrace can light one no man where no man is named. But for the matter it self (if he speak it of an established church, we fear not to tell him that th'assertion is manifestly false and unttue, we grant in deed that at the first planting of a Church, when men are newly transformed (as it were) from paganism to christianity the Lord worketh extraordinarily, & that in those cases there cannot well be traced out any certain prescript rules of direction: But in a settled and established Church it is far otherwise: There we say that the Church is necessarily tied in all places to one essential form in the external calling of the ministers: I say essential form, to cut of all cavels and wranglings about any circumstance or ceremontal custom: As if in one Church the calling and election should go by lifting up the hand. In an other by throwing up of caps, in an other by Scrutiny or voices, in an other by one custom, in an other by an other: This several guise and fashion of several Churches in their elections hindereth no whit, but that the essential form remaineth still one, and the same in them al. And if you ask me what that essential form should be, I answer, The godly and christian fore deliberation, trial, and allowance of the Church & elders, with the assent and approbation of the people: This I say is that essential form, whereunto all churches in all ages (speaking of an established church) are so necessarily tied in regard of God's ordinance, as it is utterly unlawful by any means to violate or infringe the same. And this we suppose a meaner man then M. Penri need not be afraid to defend against 10. D. Somes, or any non-resident in Christendom, neither can we be persuaded that among all those famous learned men he speaks of, there was ever any godly sincere professor of the Gospel that did deny it: And even much after this manner, and full as learnedly as this doth he handle himself within 2. pages of the same place, where after he hath gathered his adversaries argument thus. All may be capable of the outward allowance: Ergo. th'outward calling of the Church makes not a minister to us unless he have the inward, he tells him that his Antecedent is a special one. And what is his reason? Mark I pray you, and give care for your learning, and then tell me whether an old D. may not forget as fast in London, as ever he learned in Cambridge: I trust (saith he) you do not condemn a prescript Liturgy in the Church of God. If you do all the reformed Churches descent from you. How think you was not his head smitten with a Lethargy that spied now a time to speak of a Liturgy, when in a manner he had as just occasion to speak of the Moon. In like sort it is worth marking, what a proper construction he makes of this word ministery, By ministery (saith he) I understand the reading of the holy scriptures, the delivering of the public prayers, th'administration of the sacraments: That is even as much to say in good english, as by the horse I understand the saddle, or rather by the tree, I understand the apple of the tree, or by ministery I understand that which is not indeed the ministery, but the execution of the ministery. And cannot M. Some see a sensible difference betwixt these 2.? Or is he now to learn, that there may be a tree that never had apple, and that a man may have a lawful ministery committed unto him, and yet never come to any of these, because he may either die or by occasion be recalled or deprived by the Church before.  
Yet among all his outrules I do not think that his pen hath more squared in any one thing, then in this, that he chargeth his adversary to say flatly, and yet it is but a Flat lie Neither: that the want of a Sermon maketh th'action frustrate, that is, the sacrament to be no sacrrment, and that a Sermon is simply of th'essence 
97  of a sacrament. etc. upon which Imagination or rather dream of his own brain, he keepeth great a do after his manner, making it one of his solemn chapters to prove unto us forsooth, that midnight is not high none, but if the words (as he hath set them down) be not to be found in all that ever M. Penri hath published, me thinks M. Some should be stricken with some remorse, especially when he remembreth that A lying tongue slayeth the soul, and a false witness pulleth shame and confusion upon himself. But it may be you will say that though the very words be not there, yet the same very sense must of necessity be gathered out of that which M. Penri hath written: For doth he not say I pray you, that the substantial form of consecration, is contained in the exposition of the holy institution, and th'invocation of the name of God, all which are necessarily required in th'administration of the sacrrment? Most true he saith so in deed: I see no danger why he may not say so again: for what is there here (if it be rightly examined) that is either blasphemous or injurious to the holy saith that we profess? First he saith not here (if you mark it) that, that the substantial form or essence of the Sacrament consisteth in th'exposition or invocation, etc. but that the substantial form of Consecration, as if he should say, there is no true consecration, no substantial form of blessing and hallowing of the Sacrament, without exposition of the word, and invocation of the name of God: Which I take to be very sound and inviolable, and therein I refer me to the learned. Now whether the elements delivered be a sacrament without this Consecration, that is, without the opening of the word, & calling on the name of God, that is another question: Albeit I do not read in the whole Scripture, that there was ever any sacrament administered without one of these. And if a man should tell M. Some, that Where there is neither of these, that is, that where there is neither breaking of the word, nor invocation of the name of God, there is no Sacrament at all: I think this might well enough be justified. And I would feign know of M. Some for my learning, if a minister lawfully called, should rudely and abruptly come into the congregation, and stepping strait to the Communion table, should without more ado, deliver the elements to the people, only with these bare words: Take, eat, this is my body, etc. If he should I say, so far forget himself, as neither to use prayer nor exposition of the word at all in that action: Whether this were a sacrament or no, I suppose nor. For what is the thing that doth sanctify the elements, consecrate and separate them to that holy use, but only The word and prayer. Take away that, and then are they you know, but in the case of our common and ordinary sustenance. And M. Some himself saith in one place, that The very life of the sacraments dependeth upon God's promises expressed in his 
119  holy word. Now if there be no promise, but where the invocation of God's name is, then it is clear, that without it, the things delivered, are but bare and dead elements, because they are not consecrated according ro th'institution. But well you see how M. Some doth herein bring his Ergo about, to prove out of his adversaries own words, That the want of a sermon, doth make the action frustrate. Then thus it must be whether he will or no, if he will make any thing of it.  
The exposition of the holy institution, and th'invocation of the name of God, is necessarily required in th'administration of Baptism.  
Ergo, without a sermon, there can be no sacrament. Which (as I conceive) is a consequent much like to this:  
The examination and ripping up of a man's own heart, with the arraignment of his conscience, is necessarily required of every one that will present himself at the Lord's table:  
Ergo without this examination, he receiuce no Sacrament  
The lame leg of both the consequents, lieth in these words, necessarily required: Which if it be taken of that inevitable necessity, that the want thereof should utterly destroy the very nature and essence of the thing in question, than indeed it were a good consequent: But understanding necessary in regard of our obedience to the holy ordinance and institution of Christ (the breach whereof, is only a sin in the doer, and no overthrow to the thing done) In this sense I think M. Some will yield, that his brave Ergo limpeth and shrinketh in the sinews unreasonably. But what will you say, if the man that you reverence so, be taken now and then with a trick of a false singer? you would be sorry for that I am sure: you do not hear me say, that he can juggle or help a die, I would not have you to take me so. My meaning is only, that he can for need if he be not watched, slily wipe out a word or two out of the text for his advantage: and another time peradventure, glide me in a word or two more than he should, to make th'evidence a little more pleadable. This you know is a fault, but yet such a fault, as you shall perceive by M. Some, that a learned man may fault in sometimes if he be not locked unto: For where M. Penri saith thus: We are already received into the bosom of the Church, and acknowledged to have the seal of the Covenant, in as much as we were once offered and received, etc. See how your D. controlleth this, in his third page of his roll of errors. If: his be true which M. Penri saith, th'outward and bare element delivered by him, which in his own judgement is no minister, is the seal of God's covenant: which is a most absurd heresy. Mark here I say a false finger, for how else could the poor Welshman have been an absurd heretic? The pith of the whole matter lying in this word Acknowledged, M. Doctor hath quite left it out: For M. Penri doth not say absolutely, That we have the seal of the covenant, but we are acknowledged to have it And is there not a sensible difference betwixt these two? For it is certain, that Baptism of women, neither is not can be in truth, the seal of God's covenant: but yet you see (as I have proved to you before) both by the practise of our Church, and by the interpretation of my L. of Winchester, that it is plainly acknowledged amongst us for the seal of God's covenant, otherwise it should never pass as it doth amongst us without any interruption, questioning, controlment, or inquiry. If then there be a plam difference betwixt having, and acknowledged to have, than I pray you do you so much as devise some honest means to salve this false finger, for I promise you I cannot.  
Furthermore in that point of the magistracy (which M. Penri is so charged to have handled with very foul and bepitched hands) the very words which M. Doctor would seem most to make vantage of. uz. devise of man. I cannot find in all M. Penry's book, sure I am, they be not to the places quoted, betwixt the pages. 47. and 51. And if they be not in the book at all (as I believe they be not) them by your leave we charge him once more with a trick of a false singer, in that he hath thrust in more than was in the text. Now if you tell me that though the words be not there, yet they are necessarily gathered out of the sense, than I choke him again with M. D. own sentence, Non scriptura sed sensus scripturae est heresis, it is not M. penries words but M. Somes gloss and collection upon the words, that makes this absurd heresy: But your D. granting that S. Peter doth indeed call magistracy A bnmane ordinance, doth withal assure us that th'Apostle did not thereby mean that Magistracy was ordained and devised by man: It may be he looks for thanks for this, which though of courtesy we may yield him, yet you may tell him that our ignorance is no more relieved by this, than it is by a hundred things more in his book, which we knew before, marry he tells us withal: That it is not th'Apostles words but the sense that M. Penry gives them, that is Anabaptistical, in deed we thank him for this, it is some more good manner 
137  yet, then is in old Lockwoode of Sarum, for if he had the matter in handling, there had been some danger that th'Apostle would have proved an Anabaptist: Well now th'Apostle hath obtained that favour to be cleared, how shall we do to clear M. Penri, whose sense upon the words M. Some will needs have to be Anabaptistical? First in that he doth never say so, but rather the contrary as M. Some himself acknoledgeth in these words, you confess in this place that Magistracy 
136  is th'ordinance of God, me thinks in equity this should be a reasonable clearing to him: Nay I say farther that as he he hath no such words, so there can be no such sense gathered out of his words without violence: In deed if your D. had put but one. A. before, than I would have taken his part that such a sense might very well have been gathered of that which M. Penri sets down: As when he speaks of Cincinatus, Tarqvinius, Opinius, Candaules, Gracchus and the rest: A man with half an eye may easily see that he speaks not indefinitely of Magistracy, but of a Magistracy in such an age, and such a time, which his own very words do so clear, as thereby malice it self may blush and be silent: There may (saith he) be 
47 48  a lawful Magistracy according to the word, whose name & office was never heard of before in the world, so can there not be a Ministry. etc. here you see plainly he speaks not of Magistracy indefinitely, but of A Magistracy: As for example, if her Majesty should erect now a new kind of government either at Windesore or at Kingston upon Thames, (as by her pretogative she may do if she list,) and call th'one of them, The Tribunes of Windesore, and th'other The Consuls of Kingston: This k●nde of magistracy in that it was never known nor heard of before, may truly without any blemish to the honour of God, be called A devise of man, and yet Magistracy in general and indefinitely understood, the very immediate ordinance of God prescribed in the word: and this me thinks is so plain as I cannot believe that old D. Stumbler himself, I mean the Prince of all the Stumblers in the world, uz. Sir john of Sarum would ever stumble at it. Therefore if in wring this sense out of his adversaries words flat contrary to the drift and intent of the writer, he did willingly and of purpose leave out A setting down Magistracy indefinitely, in lieu of A Mastracie, we must be so bold by his leave, to charge it upon his head with the rest, as a trick of a false finger wheresoever he learned it.  
another thing there is in this chapter of M. Somes that for mine own part I can conceive no sense of, namely this: That Magistracy is an ecclesiastical constitution: this I confess is a mystery to me, and sounds more harsh in mine ears a great deal, then that which M. Penri is charged with, uz. Devise of man, which may in a sort you see be justified, and therefore I would ride a good way I tell you, to hear this matter sound and substantially proved: I hear indeed a heavy sentence, pronounced on all those that shall dare to deny it to be an Ecclesiastical constitution, uz. That is a very gross & Anbaptistical error, but this doth neither fright us nor satisfy us: For having seen a number of the like thunderclapps before, and little rain falling after them, but only a bare rattling in the air, we have certainly determined with ourselves that they shall never fright us more if there come a hundredth of them, in the mean time if you ask me what I think of Magistracy, I answer freely: That it is the holy ordinance of God prescribed in the word, for th'use and comfort of man, & is therefore called of the Apostle, a human ordinance, in that his proper object & office is to deal in human things: And will not all this serve to clear a man from Anabaptistrie, but he must confess withal, that it is an Ecclesiastical constitution? This goeth hard, to bind us to entertain a stranger upon so small acquaintance: Good entreat your D. to resolve us and instruct us first, & then upon our contumacy if need be, to proceed to sentence, and so to pronounce us Anabaptists. In other needle's points I remember your D. is but to unreasonable full of his authorities, Calvin, Beza, P. Martyr, Famous Churches, & I know not who, in somuch that sometimes he leaves no room almost either for grounded reason, or scripture, there is such a press of them: yea, and in one place he tells M. Penri and that aloud, All the learned agree with me, and dissent from you: And will all these his learned friends forsake him now trow ye, when he hath most need of them? Surely I believe they will if they be well examined: For I do not think that he can for his life bring out that man, if he be worth whistling, I mean any good, sound, and learned author, either old or new, that he may honestly muster with himself in this point, to call Magistracy (as he doth) by the name of Ecclesiastical constitution: Therefore as he saith by M. Penri, so we think we may justly say by him, that in this case he may worthily walk jowl by jowl with H. N. indeed. But his proofs if you mark them, are even as pregnant as the matter itself. I must needs say they be sure onsal, for they are fetched out of the scripture the most of them, as you may see by these: By me kings reign (saith he) Proverb. 8. Thou couldst have no power at all against me, unless it were given thee from above, saith Christ our Saviour to Pilate, john. 19 There is no power but of God, whosoever therefore resisteth power, resisteth the ordinance of God, Rom. 13. more he layeth down an other reason drawn from the reverence that is imprinted by almighty God in the hearts of subjects, At quorsum haec? matty to prove unto us (as I conjecture that Dover Castle stands where it did the last year,) or else as M. Some saith, that midnight is not high noon: By this you may 
187  see that when a nail is knocked fast in a wheel, turn the wheel never so many times about, the nail will be still where it was: Even so it is in this case with M. Some, he turns and turns, and it may be sweats in turning, and yet when he hath done, he leaves the nail sticking where it was: For what hath he won I pray you by all this? Forsooth That Magistracy is the ordinance of God: And where is that Muscovite that doth donie it? Proud Penri you see doth grant it, The schismatical Catabaptist doth grant it, he that hath breched so marry popish, blasphemous, & anabaptistical fancies, this man doth grant it by M. Somes own confession: And could he then be so jellous to suspect any man else? Now sure your D. hath a marvelous suspicious head, well for his farther satisfaction, and to ease him of some pains hereafter, I will here give him my free warrant under my hand to cry Crusisige against him that should deny it, and therefore let him never draw weapon more in the defence of that assertion. that Magistracy is the ordinance of God prescribed in the word, for it yielded him without blows: But in the mean season, what is become of Ecclesiastical constitution? I hear nothing of that gentlewoman all this while: Is she fled over with the jesuits? If she be, it were good to fetch her again by proclamation, lest she die in exile: For I can tell you this proper Enthimem will never fetch her again while the world stands: It is an ordinance of God prescribed in the word, Ergo. it is an ecclesiastical constitution. This I say will be found to weak though all the Doct. of Sorbona should set their hands to it: For is there not a flat opposition betwixt Civil and Ecclesiastical; I take it there is, and I am sure I have heard learned men say so. And is not Civil jurisdiction an ordinance of God prescribed in the word? me thinks it should, why then by this new found consequent, we shall have short lie a new university nosgay, uz. that civil jurisdiction is an Ecclesiastical constitution, and that were good time but small reason: Even so War, Physic, The inheritance of men, and a number of things more would be found to be Ecclesiastical constitutions, because they are all the ordinance of God prescribed in the word. And if this will not hold water, than I dare avow your D. hath not any thing else, in that his 13. chapter more than his bare word (which we are now glutted with) to warrant that outlandish assertion of his: That Magistracy is an Ecclesiastical constitution, etc. Moreover, if in speaking of the ministry of the New Testament, that be a true proposition, that Sola ecclesia vocat, The Church only calleth, as I have heard it aveared by learned men, that the Lord doth not now call any more extraordinarily from heaven as in times past, but hath left that to be done Per suffragia ecclesiae tantum, only by the voice and allowance of the Church: if I say this be sound, and will abide the fire (as I verily think it will) then mark what I say to you: if your D. with all his learning, be not taken in as foul, gross, and more palpable absurdity then ever th'ignorant Welshman was, i'll lose my credit, and that were pity you know, that so proper a man as I should lose his credit. But will you see how unresistably I can bring this gear about? then lay down your book a while and give ear.  
Vbi non est Ecclesia, ibi non est vocatio:  
ubi non est vocatio, ibi non est ministerium:  
ubi non est ministerium, ibi non est Sacramentum.  
Ergo.  
Will you have it in English now? For i'll never dissemble you, I do by my Latin, as that sweet babe of Sarum doth by his greek and Hebrew, beg and borrow here a patch, and there a patch, as the Dictionaries that come in my way do yield me sustenance. And if any thing happen to be false, than it was either Chard my printers fault, or else my Dictionary was not of the last edition, or else my candle wanted snuffing. But let me not forget my argument I pray you, for it may be I take a pride in it: Then I say,  
Where there is no Church, there there is no calling, for Sola Ecclesia vocat: Otherwise, the Church's prerogative in this case, should not be above the heathen and unbelievers, if it were in them to call both alike: (take me I pray you, that I speak still of the ministry of the New Testament or else you offer me wrong) In that case I say, it is the Churches only to call. And therein I appeal to the flower of your own universitier I do not mean D. Copquot, for we count him but of the middle sort, as we set D. Bridges and D. Pearne in the seventeenth form behind him: No I mean the very ornaments of your University in deed, whose very names and lives do carry with them an estimation to be reverenced: D. Fulke, D. Goad, D. Whytaker, & M. Chaterton: To these men I say I appeal, to speak their consciences herein, even Coram tribunali, whether it be not a firm truth, That there is no calling out of the Church: Speaking of the ministery of the New Testament. That then being set down as a brazen wall, I go on in the face of the enemy with my target in my hand in this manner.  
Where there is no calling, there there can be no ministery, I'll never stand to prove that for shame: For he is worthier of a censurer (as M. Some saith) than a refuter that will deny that. And last of all  
Where there is no ministery, there there can be no Sacrament. For Nullum sacramentum sine Ministro. This M. Some himself confesseth either twice or thrice, & calls it a rule in divinity.  
The conclusion therefore is: That there can be no Sacrament out of the Church, and then say I M. Some is berayed, who holds that true baptism is and may be out of the Church, wherein it is no more possible for him to escape an absurdity, than it was for Campion to escape hanging. And how say you now? Had it not been pretty that my Logic should have died in a ditch? Well in good sadness for all that, allow me but my first proposition to be true (as I hope you will) that there is no calling into the ministery but only of the Church, & then good leave have you to bring upon me a thousand Augustine's, Calvines', or boza's, or all the famous churches in the world, I say in reverence to them all, Instar mill veritatis calculus, yet M. Some yields that Cyprian was of that judgement, and then we dare be bold to say that he was in that point of a true judgement against them all: For I have heard baptism defined to be an action of the whole Church, that the whole congregation hath an interest in that Sacrament: And if it be so, if it be th'action of the church, how can it be where there is no Church? Furthermore M. Some himself calls it an entrance into the visible Church, an engrasting into the true Christ, all which how it may stand, and yet be out of the Church, (I confess mine own ignorannce) I see neither sequel nor possibility: As to that which is inferred in this case of Heretics, of Caiphas, of judas, and such like, I take it under correction to be quite beside the cushion, for as I know that the wretchedness and treachery of judas, could not overthrow his caling and Ministry, being the very same that peter's was: So do I also know, that no holiness or godliness of any man whatsoever, (if he be blind or dumb) can approve his caling into the ministry: And thereupon I report me to you, whether this conclusion have not a wry mouth.  
judas, Cayphas, heretics and such vile wretches, may have (for all their lewdness) a lawful ministery, and so deliver a sacrament:  
Ergo popish priests and dumb ministers (for all their ignorance and inabillitie to teach) may have and do the like.  
Me thinks this argument smells as if it were shaped at Salisbury, I cannot tell, but I am greatly deceived if I have not seen M. D. Bridges ride on such a lame jade in my days. Therefore advise your D. to beware of these curtailes and hackneys of Sarum, that will stumble unreasonably and tire at every to. miles riding, we know it right well and we knew it before M. Some wrote that the case may be so, that an heretic may delivet true Baptism: And if Cyprian were absolutely of a contrary judgement to this, we hold with M. Some he was wide. But what is this to those on whom it is not possible to fasten any such calling into the ministry, because they are as I may say, of an uncapable nature, as Infants, dumb men, blind men, etc. And (as Mast. Penri will needs have it) men without gifts? For what a kind of refuting call you this? you hold that men without gifts can have no calling of the Church: I prove yes, and how? Marry forsooth, because that Heretics sometimes may deliver true baptism, would you not smile at me? And yet this way you shall find many of your D. mighrie conclusions to look, that is full side West, when the wind would serve him a great deal better into Flaunders. Therefore whereas it pleaseth M. Some, very peremptorily to tell his adversary, that He hath proved already, 
175  that true baptism hath been and may be out of the Church: We fear not to tell him as resolutely again, and that upon good assurance, That neither he, nor all the Doctors of Sarbona (if they should sweat their hearts out) can ever prove it while the world standeth. And thereupon we conclude against him, that To say or write, that true baptism hath been or may be out of 
176  the Church, is a flat false proposition in divinity, which by God's assistance, and her Majesty's good favour shall (if he dare procure the encounter) be openly maintained against him or any man of his complexion within the land.  
For that which is said to be among th'Ismaelites and Edomites, I think by M. Somes favour, that a man may truly say it was no sacrament: Circumcison might well be amongst them, that is, the bare cutting of the foreskin: but not the sacrament of Circumcision, as laying on of water may be amongst Midwives, but the sacrament of baptism can never come from their hands: no more was it possible, that in that place where there was no ministery, there could be any sacrament, whatsoever man or Angel shall mutter against it. But M. Some will prove it you shall see, by M. Penrie's own confession. For M. Penri saith thus: Neither could any of the godly assure themselves, that an Edomitish priest administered true circumcision according to the substance: Whereupon M. Some courseth him thus: If circumcision were among the Ismaelites and Edomites (as you writ and I affirm) then a 
162  sacrament was amongst them, I pray you remember this. In deed he had need of a good remembrance that should remember this, for either I do not understand English, or else M. Penri saith no such thing: For how if a man should venture to say thus: He is not living that can assure himself, to find either wit or learning in M. Bridges? Would your D. thereupon face us down, that we confess there is either wit or learning in such a buzzard as he? Nay, he should write 36. volumes more first, and every one shall be as big as his other book, and then peradventure he may win our hearts. And here by the way, your D. is once more laid open to the charge of a false finger, which he cannot avoid: For where M. Penri speaking of th'Edomitish circumcision, calleth it barely a Cutting of the foreskin and a profanation of circumcision, etc. thereby sufficiently expressing his meaning, M. Some the better to writhe in something to his advantage, and to make the matter a little more saleable, hath twice at the least, foisted me in this word true, which his adversatie hath not at all. As for example, these be M. Somes words: Circumcision in Idumea (as you writ) was true circumcision, 
114  and a seal of God's covenant. And again to the same effect, If th'Edomitish circumcision were true circumcision, and th'Edomitish church no church, than a sacrament 
166  was out of the church. How like you this M. Penri? Whereunto I do not see, but that M. Penri might justly reply thus: If in all my writings you cannot find that ever I gave that name of true circumcision to th'Edomitish circumcision, then are you taken tardy M. Doctor, and manifestly convinced of legerdemain, How like you this M. Some.  
Now if M. Some could abide to be reverenced, and would not return it again upon us as he doth to M. Penri with uncourteous and reproachful words, we could here tell him, that we are sorry, that a man of his estimation and gravity, should cumber the ears of the learned with such wind shaken stuff, as is fit a great deal, for that sorry chaplain of Sarum, then for him. The best is he tells us, That excellent men have 
144  their second thoughts wiser than their first, & that puts us in some comfort, that he being (if he deceive not himself) an excellent man, we shall (if it please God) for all his choler, see some printed record of a second thought of his, that shall indeed be wiser, and of more pawzed and grounded judgement then the first, or else I promise you we are half shamed. And I tell you true, I like not this jesting: Therefore me thinks it were good in this case, that your D. did set before his eyes his noble Ancestor of Sarum, who by a foolish custom of reasoning thus loosely, and shuffeling in desperately he cares not what, is so far gone as he seethe with a Flever Lourdaine, that his brain was never in good temper since. And certainly let him look to it, for if he do not better bethink himself hereafter, to answer in other sort then hitherto he hath done, It will sure increase the jealousy and suspicion of many, who begin to distrust some privy maim in M. Somes manhood, that he is not the man he is taken for and that all that great knowledge which he so boasteth of, will without some speedy redress, fall ere it be long into some fearful consumption of the reins, because the veins that swell so, are commonly fuller of wind then of blood, yet for mine own part, I had rather a great deal attribute all these defects, byships & out rules of his, to that extreme passion and unruly affection that quite overswareth his judgement, and is able both to mate and to amaze a man, yea and so to blindfold and bewitch him, that he may soon break his face against a wall, if he look not to it: And this sure was the cause (as I judge) that the very main point betwixt his adversaty and him, he had not (it should seem) any leisure to peruse: Eor the question being whether we may be assured to receive a Sacrament at the Dumb Ministers hands, the very marrow and life of the whole controversy lying in this word. Assured, your D. hath fair given it the slip, and hath not as far as I see in any on line, clauze or sentence through out his whole book, so much as looked that way: Nay it seemeth to me, he is half afraid of it when he seethe it. For in the last place that I before mentioned of th'Edomites, where M. Pemi saith that the godly cannot assure themselves, etc. what saith M. Some to this? Not a word I warrant you, tush he is among the organs at Paul's, or else looking out of his window towards Lambeth, what should he meddle with the thing in question? Can not an old, university man find his pen play enough without that? And therefore he threatens kindness on his adversary and will needs wring from him whether he will or no. An acknowledgement of a Sacrament among the Edomites, and prayeth him to remember it: yet some men think this matter of Assurance had been the most need full thing of all other for your D. to have dealt in, for the cutting of of all scruple, and the satisfing of men's minds. For though a man should make no question of the baptism delivered in times passed by popish shavelings, but satisfying himself with those other comforts that he findeth in the holy exercises of Religion, should never trouble himself to look back so far, though I say a man should make no question of that which is past, yet I see no hurt to desire to be assured in that which is to come, which Assurance (as M. Penri saith) can never be had but by saith, in the promises of God, and that is the point he stands most upon in all his writings, uz. that in the whole scripture of God there is no promise to bare readers, and men without gifts to deliver, and therefore no warrant for us to receive any sacrament at their hands. All which if M. Some could overthrow any otherwise then with some such stolen jests as this, why then my grandfather was not christened, he might happen work more miracles than he is like to do. For he must think, that it is neither these consequences nor inconveniences, that smell so much of the flesh, nor yet the authority of Calvin or Beza (though we should admire their gifts and reverence them as Angels) that can settle a man's heart in this case, it must be only the word of the living God and nothing else, out of which, whensoever we see any sufficient record to warrant this promise whereupon our faith must be grounded, it shall by God's grace draw presently from us a willnig and reverent subscription to the truth, with an open revocation of all that ever hath been written in that point to to the contrary: But that there is no such Scripture to be had for money, we gather as by others, so specially by this late treatise of M. Somes, wherein I dare be bold to say, and I speak it advisedly, for I think I have viewed it meetly well, there is not to be found any on text of holy scripture to prove this Assurance, which is the main point in question, and then say we whatsoever he proveth else, there is some reason he should have his labour for his travel, because he hath been at so unreasonnable charges to wound his own shadow, and do his adversary no hurt.  
Touching that point, That the popish Church is in a sort the Church of God, though an unsound Church: More than that, he croppeth out of Caluine, Philip de Mornay and others (which was not written in such strange characters neither, but that it might be easily understood before M. Some revealed it unto us) there is little I dare warrant you of his own worth taking up as they say: and that is the thing that we expect in a learned man, especially in this flourishing age of the Gospel, to yield us some sap and juice of his own, that thereby our judgements might be bettered, and we also occasioned to praise the gifts and graces of God's spirit as well in him as in others. Otherwise thus to cloy us still, and overcloye us with other men's sayings: why alas, you see Th'alabaster man of Sarum can do that for need, and that I warrant you so thick and in so good order, that if he could but handsomely turn to them without help, it were even learning enough for a man of his mediocrity, neither might we well require more at his hands with modesty: as in one of his books (the 5. as I remember) you shall find that the good soul hath fumbled together, little less than 60. pages of other men's writings, and scarce 4. or 5. whole ones of his own: and is not that a sweet kind of bookemaking for a mirror to posterity? Now for the reasons that your D. seemeth to bring of his own, I am sorry to think they should be so over traveled or troubled with a Sciatica, that they should not be able to look a man in the face without limping. Will you consider of them a little, and tell me whether they come not towards you for all the world like Cripplegate men, as if they had need poor creatures of some Hospital to relieve them?  
The very name (saith he) of reformed Churches, doth 
176  manifestly import, that the churches of England, Germany, Denmark, etc. (though popish and unsound) were yet churches in a sort before: or why else should they be called reform churches.  
What good luck was it then, that the protestant churches should light on the name of reformed churches at the first? For if in lieu of this, they had happened to have been called Christian Churches, you may see M. Some had been in some distress for one of his brave arguments, and so peradventure his book would have proved less than it is, by one 7. or 8. lines at the least: For christian Churches could never have done him half that pleasure, as to have implied any necessity, that the church of Rome must needs be in a sort, the Church of God before: But it is only this word reform, that hath strooken it dead. Hath not M. Some then good cause to bid A blessing go with him whosoever he were, that in traveling over the mountains of Arabia, first found out this name Reform, by means whereof, he hath as you see, so daunted his adversary, that he dare scarce peep out of doors? But I pray you tell me, Is it not a misery, that such unlearned stuff as this, should drop from the pen of any man that beareth the face of learning? who would stand then to blot paper in refuting that which faleih (as you see) to shievers of itself? For when this worthy collection is at the strongest, it will be found but a mere childish Fallax, from the bare name of a thing to a thing in esse, as if it were a good consequent, that this and this must needs be so, because it is so commonly called, and runs so corrant in the account of men: And yet upon the like sandy foundation as this, would he feign enforce upon his adversary, an acknowledgement of a ministery whether he will or no, and that by his own confession forsooth: For doth not M. Penri I pray you, call the ministery of unpreaching ministers, An evil and prosane ministry? why then have at you saith M: Some, a conjugatis, and if that be a ministery, than the persons that exercise that function 
183  must needs be Ministers. Will you do so much for me when you pass that way, as to call at D. pera's window, to see if he can dissolve you of this doubt? & if he cannot, then let him never trouble the University more for shame, but fair bundle up his books, and get him to Waltham to some other trade: For if it be manifest, that M. Penri do speak here of such a ministery as hath only the name of a ministery and nothing else, then must M. Somes reason, a coniugatis, (if he will not have it to look quite Collyweston) point just likewise upon such a minister as hath only the name of a minister and nothing else: as if one by occasion should say thus: This woman's baptism is a very wretched and miserable baptism: or thus, This wild Irish ministery is a very vile and abominable ministery: had he not need trow ye, to have his wits new ground, that upon these or such like speeches, would headely infer any consequent, either of a sacrament or ministry indeed, because they are so called? or that the popish Church was revere & in truth the church of God, because the bell so sounded in his ear? This being (as you know) one of poor M. Bristow'S reasons in his Motives, to prove the papists to be catholics only in regard of the name, in that they be called catholics: who would have thought that M. Some would ever have bestowed new varnishing of an old rusty and cankered blade, which was so behackled before, For may not I pray you, the papists by as good a proportion prove themselves catholics by the very name, or the Midwife of Cheapstow prove her baptism to be a sacrament by the very name, as M. Some proves the popish Church to be a Church, or the dumb ministery to be a ministery only for the name? Surely I cannot think that his very Carmen, whom he likeneth M. Penri unto, will ever be dismayed 
102  with such poor papershort conclusions as these. Well to make some amends, you shall see now if you please, the reason of all reasons, even such a one, as if you look not to it, will go near to clatter the glass windows in pieces.  
Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God.  
Ergo (saith he) The popish Church must needs be the 
147 166  Church of God.  
This M. Some thinks to be a sure one, and it seemeth in deed he hath a special good liking of it above the rest, in that he will needs (after it hath been all to be battered and defaced by M. Penri, that it knows not well which way to look) arm it nevertheless into the field a new, as if a gilded coat armour could any whit relieve a drooping and crazed carkisse: But now I have learned the way, let me a loan with him, let him bring it into the field a thousand times, and that a horsekacke if he will, you shall see, that I am a man good enough for a dozen as brave Silogisines as this: For I fair and flat deny the argument. It may be you wonder at me, but I tell you again I deny the argument, yea were it openly at the Commencement at Cambridge, I would deny the argument & never blush at it, nay I am a shrewd fellow I tell you, why do you not see what a lame leg it hath? There lacks a certain thing the call Ever, and then it were a good consequent in deed, Antichrist must ever sit in the temple of god, Ergo. The popish Church must needs be the Church of God. And then by M. D. favour, if he reason so, I deny th' Antecedent: for it was sufficient say I, that Antichrist first planted his seat in that place, which was once the Church of God, and no necessity that it should be so still.  
Nay if your D. have no better reasons then these, as mean a Clerk as I am, I durst me thinks dispute with him in the point myself, and I believe if a man were disposed to enter into the question, it were no hard matter to bring other manner of profess against it, then M. Some hath brought with it for any thing I see: For what say you to this I pray you? And tell me whether I have forgot my Logic.  
1 If the popish Church continuing Popish, be in any sort the visible Church of God, then there must needs be some one member of it, so continuing a visible member of the Church of God.  
2. But it is not possible that any one Member of it so continuing, should be a vizible member of the Church of God, Ergo.  
How say you? Have not I as good cause to make my cracks of this argument, as M. Some hath of that brave one of his, of antichrist's sitting in the temple of God? By the way I pray you remember, that I speak not here of God's eternal council, or secret election, but of a vizible Church and vizible members, and not of every vizible Church neither: For I know there is Ecclesia Malignantium the church of the malignant but of the vizible Church of God by profession: also when I speak of the popish Church, you must take me that I speak altogether of such a church and such members as by profession continue popish, even in the main grounds of popery, otherwise if we agree not of this, we shall but serve from the question and contend in vain: This being set down then for the first, I would feign know which of my propositions you can deny, for I am persuaded I tell you, that unless they meet with a very unreasonable wrangler, they are both sound and of musket proof: As for the Mayor, I will never for shame lose time to prove that, It shall lie as it doth for me open to all the world, to give him the blush that shall deny it: For the Minor, if you shall tell me that on may be a papist in this point, as in Crossing, kneeling, oiling, sasling, Pilgrimages, prayer for the dead. etc. and so continue, & yet be a member of God's Church, you answer nothing: For these and such like slight instances (though they may be otherwise offensive to god) be not yet the things a quibus dennoiantur tales, though I confess that these be in deed of the dregs and ossales of popery, (and a very shrewd sign that they that are wholly drenched herein are scarce sound at the heart) yet can they not rightly be called papists only for these: As an Arrian, what other errors soever he hold, yet is he called an Arrian, & hath his name only for the denial of the Godhead of Christ & nothing else, which detestable heresy whensoever he renounceth, (though he be wide in some other smaller points) he is no more an Arrian but may well be reckoned as a member of the Church: In like sort Papistry consisting of these 3. Pillars. 1. The denial of the true & only Headship of Christ, by placing Antichrist in his room, 2. The denial of the Sole sufficient sacrifice of Christ by the use of their blasphemous & Idolatrous Mass: 3. The denial of our justification in the blood of Christ by saith alone, by thrusting in rags and merits of their own: This being as I say, the whole frame and groundwork of popery, whensoever any man renounceth and a bandoneth this, he is no more say I a Papist, though not withstanding in some other smaller respects, he may peradventure justly be called Popish, and so may a protestant to in some sort, as if a woman for the great love she bore to her husband, would by no means be persuaded but to pray for his soul when he is gone, or if a man in some scruple of conscience would in no sort be drawn to taste any mere on good friday as they call it: This man or woman (though otherwise sound in the grounds of religion) may in this regard, truly be called popish, and yet none of the papists neither for all that: In which sense, if M. Some should understand popish, he must needs make a very warm conclusion of it, for so might the protestants Church be called a popish church. Therefore understanding popery in that sense that all the godly learned for the most part understand it, that is, for a profession that holdeth of these three heads I spoke of before: uz. That Antichrist of Rome: Th' idolatrous Mass: and the denial of our justification in the blood of Christ. In this sense I take it, my minor proposition is in itself sufficiently rampired against the strongest battery of the best learned pen under heaven: For who dare say that any man holding any of these three, & so continuing, can be a visible member of the Church? And if a man may ask it, what was that I pray you that cut of the jews from being the people of God? Was it not infidelity? For I take it th' Apostle doth not mean in that place that unbelese made them a stained or a corrupted Church, but that it quite broke them of from being any Church at all I mean any vizible church, otherwise from the everlasting covenant I know there can be no breaking of, neither can infidelity lay hold of those that are once enroled in the bocke of life: well than if it be an apparent truth that infidelity cut of the jews, not only from being a sound Church, but from being any Church at all, I would gladly know what Charter of privilege the Church of Rome hath, but that the very same defection which was the breaking of of the jews, must needs also (and that by God's just judgement) be the cutting of of them: But will you hear any more of my arguments? For I begin now to be of M. Somes humour, that is, to have a pretty good liking of myself.  

1 The church of Infidels can in no sort be the Church of God.  
2 But the Popish Church is the church of infidels, Ergo.   
Remember I pray you that I speak 〈◊〉 here of a Church of infidels, not that among infidels there is or may be a church, for that is nothing to the matter: no more is that, That under the Papacy there is a Church, as M. Some tells us of that poor Church that is there held under captivity, and that many of them in th' agonies and conflicts of death, did wholly cleave to the cross of Christ, & that numbers of them forsooth held the foundation that is jesus Christ. etc. which as they be mysteries that no man doubts of, so we answer your D. that look how many of them did so indeed, look how many of them clave wholly and thoroughly (as he saith) to the Cross of Christ without wavering, so many of them (say we) were no longer papists: as a jew by profession in what moment of hour soever he forsakes his judaisme and cleaves to the Messiah, at the same very moment is he no longer a jew but a christian, otherwise it is not possible that either a papist continuing a papist, or a jew continuing a jew should hold the foundation: Therefore the Mayor is clear, that The Church of infidels continuing Insidels, can in no sort be the Church of God. The minor is D. Fulks, whose learned judgement (having so notably deserved of this Church of England) if we should now for once & use it not, set against the bare authority of Calvin or Beza in this case, I do not see that it would be any great prejudice or disparagement to any: These be his words: The catholic Church of Christ (whereof the Church of England is a part,) is an invizible Church, etc. Contrariwise the Popish Church 
Consu. S●nd of Imag. 168  which is vizible is the church of Insidels, & Rome which is upon earth is the mother of all Antichristians: Nay but for spending of time it should manifestly appear unto you, that there were nothing more easy then to dash this assertion of M. Somes in pieces, and to prove against all the world, that The Popish Church is not (as he and some others would have it). a stained, corrupted, an unsound Church but flatly no Church of God at all: For how if a man should reason thus?  

1 That Church that denieth the foundation of our salvation, can in no sort be the church of God at all:  
2. But the popish Church denieth the foundation of our salvation. Ergo.   
Taking the Mayor to be so clear that no man of judgement can deny it without some check to his own heart and conscience, I would easily for need & never go farther, confirm my Minor by the sacred & inviolable authority of M. Bridges, Scilicet si sanum haberet Sinciput, that is, if his brain were in temper, or his judgement were worth a marginal note: For he sets down plainly in one place: That the Church of Rome doth overthrow the foundation, which by his confession in an other place is jesus christ: but because I hear that this learned D. is one of Tarlton's executors, and it may be he is now very busy in proving of his will, I would be loath to trouble him at this time, nei●her were it reason to draw him from proving his friend's Testament, to help to prove any proposition of mine, and therefore I will for this once give him good leave to walk where he will, and content myself only with the testimony of D. Fulke whose words against Stapleton be these: If pieces of truth 
Contra. Stapl. Fort. pag. 35.  might be sufficient to make them the Church of Christ, many heretics might challenge the church which have confessed and practised a great number of more truths than they, and do err but in one article, as th' Arlans Pelagians. etc. whereas the papists err in many, yea in the whole doctrine of justification by faith and the worship of God: Therefore papistry is not only a schism, error or heresy, but an Apostasy, defection, and Antichristianitie, etc. Nay more against Bristol he speaks to this effect: seeing beside these errors of the fathers ye hold many blasphemous 
Rejond. to B●istow, pag 10.  heresies which they never hold, and utterly deny th' office of Christ, the foundation of our salvation, therefore we justly deny you to be of the true church of Christ. And yet there is an other place as pregnant as any of these, in the 14. page as I take it of the same book against Bristol, where he speaketh likewise to the papists in this sort: Ye therefore building salvation upon good works done after baptism, do manifestly build 
Rejond. 14.  upon another foundation, than th' only true foundation jesus Christ: and therefore notwithstanding your error, you cannot (as th' old Father's erring in small matters) be yet the church of God.  
Thus you see, I am not so ill befriended, but that I can fetch in my proofs, though M. Bridges were at no leisure to help me. But I pray you speak indifferently, is not the evidence very clear for me, & is not D. Fulk flat against M. Some in that point? doth he not say directly that the popish church is both the church of Infidels, and that it doth deny the foundation, which were the two points you know, I had in hand to prove? Neither if you mark it, doth he mince it with any of these calm and gentle qualifications, as if he did allow it for a Church in a sort, though an unsound Church, but he lays it down flatly and expressly (as you see) to the view of all men, that it is not at all the Church of God: and he yields this reason, because it builds not upon the foundation jesus Christ. Can there any thing be clearer than this? Now your D. had best take D. Fulke in hand, and tell him another while, that he doth err grossly, and that (if he have any learning) he doth toto coelo errare: or that ●is one of the strangest divines that ever he heard off: or that he is very ignorant, very absurd, and that his arguments are pitiful, and his divinity at a low ebb: or else that his judgement is not worth a rush, etc. For some such pretty dagger without a sheath would become the house well, and trouble D. Fulke shrewdly: And so we might happen have a merry world of it, when the sick man should fall a casting of the physicians water, and M. Some fall a setting Doct. Fulke to school. Well yet we must desire him for all that (because it is a law of his own making) that he will not be overhasty to confute M. Fulke before he have confuted his reason, for so he wishes M. Penri to do by Calvine and others. In deed M. Fulke is a man of singular learning, an enemy to papists, etc. A notable light and 
143  ornament in God's Church. What M. Some is, we will not say, we would be loath to do him wrong: Therefore we 
168  will not match him with so famous a man as M. Fulke is. You may see now by this, whether I be not old excellent at the Art of imitation. Me thinks your D. should know the sound of this bell by his clapper, I believe he can quickly smell out of what forge it came, and therefore I have purposely quoted the place that you may commend my wit, for it is but a little altering of the names, you see otherwise the case is all one. And how if the ignorant Welshman should now in some requital, be so saucy to tell him, that he for his part, doth rest in the judgement of this excellent man, with all his heart, & thereupon should will him Never to stand 
177  piddling longer, but to go through stitch withal, & sithence he is gone over the shoes to rush over the boots, etc. and 
147  to confute M. Fulke, & to confute him sound if he can, so shall he have the garland, and be counted the rarest 
155  man alive, etc. But if he cannot (which we are assured of) he shall no more go for a Patriarch among his ignorant followers. etc. And if he give th'onset and fail, be shallbe sure to lose no credit of learning, etc. These with many 
18●  other more, being as you know, but the crops and flowers of his own pretty garden. I muse with what patience he would disgeast it, if a man should thus wipe his nose with his own sleeve: And by this you may see how much your D. hath advantaged himself, by troubling the printer with a number of such worthio Enigmas, as may as naturally be apropriate to john a Style as to himself: By means whereof, if he should happen by occasion hereafter, to appeal from D. Fulke to the word, M. Penri having learned the trick of it, would be sure to choke him strait with a pill, out of his own confectionarie in this or the like manner. A strange kind of appealing, when M. Fulkes arguments are drawn from the word: and then might not your D. well rue the time that ever he drew out his adversary such a line, as by turning of a thredd, might go near to strangle himself? or is it not full as good English, and every way as good sense for M. Penri to say thus? Th' argument that I made is indeed M. Fulks and a very sure one: as it is for M. Some to say thus, The argument that I made, is indeed M. Calvin's, and a very 
80  sure one? What great odds is there I pray you, betwixt these two countertenors? Being famous learned men both, and both notable members of God's Church. I see no such difference, but that the balance is full as heavy at this end as at that: and that it were as lawful for M. Penri (if he were so disposed) to say with reverence, that He doth more esteem of one Fulke, then of a thousand Sums, as it is for M. Some in a kind of swelling and disdainful contempt (which he hath notably laid open in above 200. places in his book) to say that He doth more esteem of one Caluine, then of a thousand Penries, as if that were any thing to the matter, or as if 
168  the bare defacing of his adversary, would any whit better his cause in the judgement of the wise, or as if the truth of God did at any time hang upon the gifts and credit of men.  
But now I remember me this is not altogether the bare judgement of D. Fulke alone neither, for his books (being as you see authorized) and apparently stamped with that State mark of Seen and allowed, we may in that regard truly say, that look what is there advisedly set down as this point, that the popish church is no church at all, must needs be, because it is so often iterated and redoubled, and to be proved very near in 20. places of his works: therefore I say, look what is there advisedly set down, and not by error or oversight mistaken, is implicit the very judgement and resolution of our Church and State: which being true, M. Some hath a warm suit of it to keep such a stir about the authority of Calvine, when those that my L. of Cant. saith can teach Calvine, are of a contrary judgement, whereupon I could here once again for need (if I had old Dorbel of Sarum lying by me,) blunder you out an other proper figure or 2. to trounce M. Some with, that should sound in your ears like a jews trump, after the old melodious manner: Yea my learned D. are you good at that; Is the wind in that door? are you still controling of our church & state. etc. But because you are reasonably acquainted with this sweet note already, I will not stand now to set it in parts, only you may see by this, that if a man should chance to tell M. Some to his face, that to hold that the Romish church is in a sort the church of God, is a gross and palpable error, there were no danger in it at all, because he that should so do, hath you see, not only the judgement of a famous learned man to back him, but also the flat allowance of the Church of England to bear him out in it: For Papistry being (as M. Fulke hath proved) not only a Schism, error, and heresy 
Rejond, to Bristowe pag. 5.  but an utter defection and a mere Apostasy compact of all errors, what should fear us to say and avow that our christian magistrates have done well not only with Thrasibulus to fly from the tyranny of Athens, but rather with Lot and his family to leave the whole city of Sodom, wherein there was not any free place but all the body one a blister? Even so if the popish Church be in truth nothing else, but a very lump, mass, and body of Apostasy, what a proper nice disstinction were this to say, that our Magistrates have indeed severed themselves from the corruption of Apostasy, but not from Apostasy itself, as if there were any thing in Apostasy but corruption? Therefore if M. Some do think he have any advantage that way, good leave have he to make his best of it: For we, are not afraid to say and say it again, yea and if it were possible, to proclaim it in the hearing of all the churches in the world, that Q. Elizabeth & her godly magistrates have not only severed themselves from the plague that pestereth the city, but from the very city of Sodom itself, not only as he saith from the corruption of the popish Church, but from the very popish Church itself, and the reason is because it is in no sort the Church of God, having overthrown the foundation, and therefore must needs (whether M. Some will or Noah) be the very synagogue of Satan: And then say I as before, that our magistrates have done well, & that which they may justify by good warrant from God's word, otherwise they should be apparently guilty of a grievous sin which after my kind of Logic I prove thus.  
1 All christian Magistrates are bound utterly to divorce themselves from that Church, not only from the corruptions of that Church, but from that very Church and society itself, which hath made a divorcement from Christ & erreth in the foundation of our faith:  
2 But the Romish Church (as is before sufficiently proved) hath made such a divorcement & erreth in the very foundation: Ergo.  
Our Magistrates ought (as thanks be to God they have done) utterly to divorce themselves from that very Church itself, & therefore need not M. Somes help to clear them from being Schismatics:  
Thus you may see M. Somes worthy distinction of our Magistrates, not severing themselves from the Church but from the Idolatry of the Church, etc. Is by this means quite quashed in pieces: For if it were indeed in any sort the Church of God, then would fall out this strange paradox, that one and the self same body of a Church might in a sort be the church of Christ and in a sort again the Church of Antichrist, and that might be a piece of john a Bridge's divinity well enough for the soundness of it: Furthermore if it were only but from the stains and corruptions of the popish Church that this our separation was made (as M. Some would have it) then belike they and we are both one body of a Church, though ours be as much more refined body than theirs: But how can that be when they hold not the same head and foundation that we do? For one body you know must have but one head otherwise it is a monster: They then having an other head, than we have, we may safely conclude that they are not of the same body with us, neither do I see any warrant for a Christian man to severe himself from the body of God's Church (in that sort as we have severed ourselves from Rome) for any blemishes or corruptions whatsoever: For so might out Brownists (if they list) get themselves a pretty pleadable shelter of defence, and tell us, That they do not forsooth severe themselves from our congregation as from the City: but from the plague that pestereth the city. Not from the common wealth, but from the Tyranny that oppresseth the common wealth: Not from our Church, but from the soul disorders that bleamish our Church, etc. And if they should thus temper the matter, I muse whether M. Some would be so courteous to take that for payment: But it is not come to that you see, for our Brownists are far of any such coulorable pretences: They go more roundly to work with us then so, & bash not to tell us plainly (though indeed very wretchedly and falsely) That our church is not at all the vizible church of God, and for that cause it is, that they bear us in hand, they do so single themselves from us, and not for any disorders that might otherwise bleamish or disfigure our Church, why should we then more mince it with our papists?, than these men do with us, clawing them with I konwe not what tolerable and half faced allowance of a Church forsooth: though an unsound Church? Or why should not we deal as roundly with the enemies of God in a truth as the Brownists do with the children of God in a falsehood? Or why should we fear to make known unto the world that it is not for this or that corruption, or any patches or pieces of unsoundenesse, that we have thus severed from the Romish Synagogue, but only for that the very fountain itself is altogether as a poizened puddle, whence nothing can flow naturally but continual streams of corruption? And therefore that it is not, nor never was since her general defection and Apostasy, any more the Church of God, than the very church of the heathen or Infidels. Mark I pray you, that I say no more the Church of God, for albeit in some regard it may peradventure be nearer the Church of God, (in that they have amongst them I know not what rubbishes, remnants, and traces of some good things,) yet to speak of a Church indeed as a Church, it may truly be said to be no more the Church of God than the very church of the heathen or Infidels, I speak not here of the nation of the jews, who in regard of God's promise are nearest of all, I speak only of the heathen and Infidels, and in comparison with them, I say that as a lump of Iron or steel is no more an axe head, then either a piece of wood or stone, though in nature & possibility it be nearer: Even so, if M. Some will have us say that the Romish Church is any thing nearer, or in possibility liker to be the Church of God, then that of the heathen or Infidels, we will not greatly stick with him: Any farther allowance we may not well give to the popish Church without sin, the reason is because it hath utterly cast of the foundation of jesus Christ crucified, without whom all the learning & eloquence of men or Angels can not make a Church, & therefore he that shall either file his pen or strain his wits to prove it, shall when he hath struggled to the uttermost, but miserably strive like a bird in the lime, and so flutter himself windelesse in his own conceit.  
Now for those prerogatives and pre-eminences that are commonly given to the popish Church above other heathen & Idolatrous Churches, if a man should ask M. Some what they be, it is like he would begin strait with true baptism, which if M. Penri should stand upon as a flat begging of the question, I do not think that your D. with all his skill could travel much farther that way: But allow it to be so, that in popery there is baptism, yet you see by M. Somes divinity, we are never the nearer for a Church, because he holds that true baptism may be our of the church well what be the other good things that they are supposed to have? If you say the Trinity, I ask where? in their windows? If you say the scriptures, I ask where? in their coffers? If you say our saviour Christ I ask how many of them they have, or rather how many hundred dozen of them? For him alone I am sure, either as mediator, intercessor, or redeemer they have not. So that a man may truly say, they have much good things but the swine eat them up all. The very truth is, let the faith and profession of a christian be rightly scanned after the line of God's word, and it will be found (howsoever men like to smooth it, or smother it) that they have in deed none of all these things, and the more they have of them, in that manner as they have them, the greater is their condemnation And I take it, that M. Beza himself in his Antithesis betwixt the faith of a christian, and the faith of a papist, doth sufficiently prove that they hold not a sound profession in any one article of the faith. How can that be then the Church of God that venteth & runneth our every where, that faileth in every article, & hath not so much as one sound sinowe to trust unto? yea and by your leave I do not see, but that out of M. Caluine himself if he were narrowly looked into (though M. Some erect him as a pillar against us, in a manner in every leaf) there might easily enough be drawn arguments to confirm this judgement of ours. I grant indeed he saith thus: Whereas we will not simply grant to the papists the title of the Church, we do not therefore deny that there be churches among them: likewise again in another place in the same section he saith thus, We do not deny but that under the tyranny of Antichrist remain Churches, etc. Which is no more in effect then M. Some himself hath said before. And I cannot conceive how this should prejudice the cause any whit, for let us draw it into form if you please:  
Among the papists there are Churches, or under the tyranny of Antichrist there are Churches:  
Ergo The popish Church is in a sort the church of God  
I deny the argument, neither is there any consequence in it at all: For it is not enough say I, to be among and under, but as I have proved before, they must be themselves thorough papists, even in the main grounds of popery, and so continue unto th'end, otherwise it is not possible to frame th'argument, with out the string haut do what they can. Yet rather this seemeth to be much stronger against it, when M. Calvin reasoneth to this effect: Like as a man's life is at an end 
Institut. lib. 4. cap. 2. sect. 1.  when his throat is thrust through, or his heart deadly wounded, So when lying is broken into the chief Tower of religion (as no man doubts I trow, but it is in popery) the destruction of the Church followeth. Mark here, he saith not the corruption of the Church (as M. Some would have it) but the destruction of the church, which immediately after he explaineth thus: If the true church be the pillar and stay of the truth, it is certain that there is no Church (he dorh not say an unsound Church) where lying and falsehood hath usurped the dominion. Ye and in the fourth section of the same chapter, he is yet more clear for us to this effect: Where the doctrine of the prophets and Apostles is not, there remaineth nothing that gives any true signification of the church: if nothing, what babble they of baptism, Lord's prayer and I know not what? But in popery say I, the doctrine of the prophets and Apostles is not. Ergo: & me thinks th'argument is unanswerable, which in the end of the seventh section he confirmeth thus: Who dare call that the Church, where the word of the Lord is openly and freely trodden under foot, yea the very soul of the Church is destroyed, &c: But in popery this is apparent, Ergo. Lastly, in the tenth section of the same chap. he reasoneth thus: If they be Churches (saith he, speaking of popish Churches) than they have the power of the keys: But the keys are unseparably knit with the word, which from thence is quite driven away, and there upon he concludes, That either the promise of Christ is in vain, or else that in that respect they are no Churches. Can any thing be spoken more plainly and directly then this? out of which places, how if a man should now argue with M. Some in this manner.  
Where the power of the keys is not, and where the word of God is quite driven away, there it is unpossible to be any church of God at all:  
But in popery this is so, witness M. Calvin. Ergo.  
I confess to you it is strange, and strange again to me, that the vizible Church being (as I take it) always known by the word, Sacraments and Discipline: the special and principal mark of the 3. being the word, in that it giveth life and authority to th'other, there should yet be a church where this word is not: that where this word is quite driven away, where the very soul of the church is destroyed, where there cannot be so much as any true signification of the church, the doctrine of the prophets and Apostles being utterly banished, wherefore I say, all this is (as Master Caluine sufficiently proveth) there should yet be a Church, this is a wonderful mystery to me. It had need be in deed as they say, a church secundum quid: And yet if there be nor (as Master Caluine saith) so much as any true signification of the Church) I do not see but that they may be bold to blot out secundum quid, and by good warrant make it none at all: As for that which is said of the Trinity, I ask whether the Devil do not also believe the Trinity, for in the trinity I am sure non of them both believe: I have heard that Demons credunt et contremiscunt: Then if this be a good argument, the Papist is better than the Turk because he holds the Trinytie: Then say I, The Devil is likewise better than the Turk because he holds the Trinity: There is only this difference, that the papist or the Turk may be a convert and die penitent, so can nor the Devil, but then say I still he is no longer either Turk or papist: By this you may see that it is not then having bare reading or coffering up of the scriptures, Lords prayer, Articles of the faith, etc. Nor the naming, picturing or spelling of the Trinity, but the sound profession of these holy things, according to the rule of God's word that doth make the Church.  
And me thinks (if a man consider of it well,) that which is alleged before of M. Fulke against Stapleton, should so cut the face of these poor prerogatives brought in for defence of this Church Secundun quid, that they should never peep out of doors again, in any printed record without blushing, shall I repeat it to you again? Ispeeces of truth (saith he) might be sufficient to make them the Church of Christ, many heretics 
Contra. Siaple. pag. 35.  might challenge the Church which confessed & practised a number of more truths than they, & do err but in one article, as the Arians, Pelagians, etc. what means M. Some then to tell us a tale of a Tub, of the lords 
149  prayer, articles of the faith, Commandments, and some other good things that are amongst them: when these and a hundredth of these (so long as they err as they do in the foundation) can not make them the church? For the papists saith D. Fulke in the place before recited, do err in many articles, yea in the whole doctrine of justification of saith & the worship of God: Therefore Papistry is not only a Schism, error and heresy, but an apostasy: Defection, & Antichristianitie, etc. and then belike it is somewhat more than M. Some in his calm conceit can well afford it to be, for it seemeth he dare go no farther then to An aberration of the Christian 
150  Church, and so far you see he dare go boldly: And is not that well? For it may be Cardinal allen with all his troup dare not go half so far: well for a small resolution of the whole (being as we are so strengthened and confirmed herein by the judgement of D. Fulke) look what offer the Demonstration of Discipline maketh to our Bb. that is their lives to their bishoprics: the very same offer is here presently tendered to M. Some, that upon notice given and leave obtained of a judicial hearing before her majesty, and the State, (D. Reynoldes & D. whitaker's being judges) if it do not appear by unavoidable proofs that the popish Church is not only An unsound Church, but no church of God at all, and so by that means that M. Some is manifestly overthrown as well in this point as in sundry others of his treatise, the man that so presents himself to this encounter, will ask no favour, but willingly submit himself to such heavy censure & punishment, as shallbe thought meet for so rash a disturber of the peace of the Church.  
There is yet an other point in your D. book, that in my conceit his friends may aswell cover with a curtain as any of the rest, and that is his lose defence of Bare reading and pronouncing the words of th'institution by Dumb Ministers, M. Penri denying that unpreaching Ministers do add an edifying word to the Element, M. Some will prove it you shall see. But first you must give him leave to warm himself a little at the Magistrate's fire, for it may be his hands are a cold: And then (when he hath stirred the coals a while for the better conjuring of his adversary) you shall see him prove his Anticedent, as I believe you have not seen many Anticedents proved by a D. of divinity in your life. My Anticedent was (saith he) that unpreaching Ministers do add an edifying word to th'Element: very well, and will you have this proved now? Then take this with you for a pattern: The sum of Christ's 
98  Sermon in th'institution and administration of the holy Supper is the very same that we use here in the Church of England: Ergo. unless we will deny the sum of Christ's Sermon to be an edifying word, we must confess we have verbum aedisicans, etc. and what is this else but (as M. Some saith) to prove that Midnight is not high Noon, and yet I have heard that with the Antipodes, our midnight is there high noon: Nevertheless M. Some (we thank him for his cost,) bestoweth above 20. lines to prove this deep mystery unto us, paraphrasing upon it full demurely: So that ear he have done withal I dare lay a good wager he will make it as clear as it was before, & that it was clear enough, That the word of institution & the sum of Christ's Sermon doth edify, which if Blind Bartemeus could not have spied, yet I doubt not but his cousin germane of Sarum (who it may be would disdain to be either his or a better man's inferior in Blindness) would willingly subscribe unto it without wresteling. And I muse if on should defend That women, idiots, Sorcerers, & Conjurers can not add an edifying word to th'Element, though they should repeat the words of th'institution a thousand times over. I muse I say, whether M. Some would refute this even as he hath done the former, by telling us that which the very boys that learn their pricksong, could not I trow, be ignorant of, uz. That the sum of Christ's Sermon is an edifying word: For who doubts (unless his brains be out) that The word of God is in his own nature an edifying word? That the Scripture is autopisos, that is of credit in itself, & inspired not of man but of God, etc. who doubts of all this? but what of that? Shall we therefore infer that out of a conjurers mouth it is an edifying word, or that wheresoever else, the word is wretchedly profaned hand over head, as by a woman at baptism, or by a cursed man of no calling in the congregation, there must needs be Edification strait? O but you will say, M. Some doth not say so, he speaks only of unpreaching ministers: But I say again he must needs say so whether he will or no, for the reason that he bringeth doth point as directly, and conclude as forcibly for sorcerers & conlurers, as for Dumb Ministers, and therein I pray you be judge yourself. The sum of christs Sermon (saith he) is an edifying word, Ergo. The dumb Ministers repeating the same Sermon do add an edifying word. And why not I pray you by the same proportion, Ergo. Women, Ergo. Witches, Ergo. Madmen, Ergo. Idiots repeating the same Sermon, do add an edifying word? For if there be no more in the matter but only the words of the institution, & the sermon of Christ without regard had of the calling of the man, and of God's inviolable ordinance therein: And M. Penri holding that our dumb dogs that have no measure of gifts, are no more capable of the ministry than these, then is it not possible but that M. Some must either (as his usual delight is) beg the question, or else the consequences must be all one in spite of his heart. I know right well, that a godly man may even then be edified by the word, when it is most blasphemed by a hellish mouth, and I know that a man may be edified some times & strooken with remorse upon the sight of some horrible murder, as he may also at on of these plays or Theatre Spectacles, as some have not let to give out, That they for their parts have been more edified by a play then by all this preaching: nevertheless I hope no man of sense will say that either murder or blaspheming the word of God, or the same word wretchedly profaned in a play, is therefore an ordinary means to edify: And what warrant hath any man to seek for Edification there where there is no promise he shall be edified? Though the word itself be an edifying word, yet may not the Lord choose whether it shallbe an edifying word to us or no, especially when we make no conscience of repairing thither, where we know before hand his holy ordinance is profaned? Farther it is worth marking, that whereas M. Penri saith, No learned man will deny the Lords prayer rightly said to be an edifying word, now M. Some as a man that had long fasted, and thereby glad of any thing to relieve his hunger, doth hereupon all to be thank him: I thank you (saith he) for this, and therefore do conclude against you that the Scripture barely read, and to non other 
120  purpose then to edify, by reading is wholesome doctrine: for the Lord's prayer is part of the holy Scripture: wherein I know not well whether M. Penri should do better to thank him for his cost, or praise him for his courtesy. Nevertheless when the matter shall come to sifting, I fear it will hardly deserve half the Thanks that M. Some bestoweth. For did you never hear of a man that took post horses to ride northward, & yet by wandering all night, found himself within 2. mile of Lambeth in the morning? This was sure M. Some, who making more haste then good speed to ride away with his poor advantage, is after his long travel & wandering (as you see) returned home by some night spirit, by means whereof he is (if you mark it) as near his jornies' end as when he first set foot in stirrup. Why alas cannot so great a Clerk as M. Some is see into these words, Rightly said, unless they be written in great text letters or printed in Folio? Or is he now to learn that No popish Priest as a Priest, Noah Papist as a Papist, Noah Witch as a Witch, did ever say the Lords prayer rightly in his life? What a squinteyed conclusion is this then, to draw an argument from Rightly said, to Barely read? As if we were so childish to grant him that which is Barely read of a minister in his place & function, were Rightly said, or that the hurrying over the Lord's prayer or any other piece of Scripture, either without book or within book were rightly said: that is to say, that the word profaned contrary to the holy ordinance and institution of Christ were wholesome doctrine. But how shall we do now? M. Some hath yet spied out an other blasphemy, an other strange point of divinity, and what is that? Forsooth The word of God uttered, is not an edifying word, unless it be uttered according to th'ordinance, both in regard of the persons that uttered the same, and the end wherefore it is uttered: whereupon he questioneth with his adversary in this manner: Is not this M. Penri to make the person to give credit to the holy word of God? which position is very grosso 
120  & blasphemons. We answer in M. Penry's behalf, no in deed is it not: First it is clear M. Penri speaketh here (as he doth in the whole course of his book) of that which is ordinary & not extraordinary: For what have we to do now with miracles or extraordinary revelatious: Or (as I said before) if any man be edified by a Play, by a Murder, by Blaspheming or profaning of the word of God, what have we to do with that? This being set down then as a thing clear and out of question that M. Penri speaketh only of that which is ordinary, we answer that his assertion standeth firm and inviolable against M. Some and all the wrangling spirits in the world, uz. That the word uttered is not an edifying word, unless it be uttered according to the ordinance both in regard of the persons, etc. neither is this at all To make the person give credit to the holy word, no more than we say that the bread & wine prepared for the Lords table, can be no sacramét unless he be a minister that delivers it. Is this to make the sacrament depend upon the person, or the person to give credit to the sacrament? I think not, no more is it of the word. And who seethe not that when he speaketh here of the persons, he meaneth not (as M. Some would seem to enforce) of the dignity or worthiness of the persons, or barely of the persons themselves as they be of men (for that were too childish) but only of the Calling and office of the parsons, which being the holy ordinance of God prescribed in the word, what incongruity or absurdity is it, for the Lord to restrane th'ordinary blessing of edification to his own ordinance, as if he should say, My word is in deed the word of life, nevertheless if any man abuse it, or profane it, if any man presume to deal withal, that hath no calling or warrant thereunto, let him never look that I will blove upon it with my spirit. And who dare say that there is or can be edification, where the Lord breatheth not with his spirit? Therefore let M. Some say what he will, there can be neither error nor heresy to make not the person, but the holy calling of the person, that is, the Lords own ordinance to give a majesty & credit to his own word, which in truth is nothing else, but to make the very word give a credit to the word, and so it is Autopisos still. Now for his manner of writing, I rest even of the same judgement I was, when the book came first into my hands: you know what I then told you upon the first taste of it, & I dare warrant you, you shall find it to be true: for he is all in his short cuts & questions like pretty apothegs. What say you to 40. full points in 50. lines, to 30. full points, in 33. lines, to 6. full points in 4. lines, to 4. full points in 3. lines? Nay in one place, about the pa. 76. as I remember, he hath more full points than lines: then & in that space that john a Bridges hath one period, I dare be bound M. Some hath 50 or upward. And is not that sententiously written? Nay farther, let his whole book be well viewed, I mean his last book which of itself, is not much above 40. leaves & that in a large letter, such as consumeth a great deal of paper in a little matter, & I dare undertake you shall find above 1500. full points. So that whereas in one place he telleth his adversary, that unless it be granted him, that unpreaching ministers have no calling, he is at a 
118  full point: his adversary may now justly reply upon him, unless the contrary be granted him, he is at a 1000 full points. And I pray you tell me, are not his lungs in great danger think you, that he is so short winded that he can scarcety 2. propositions together in mood & figure I promise you for mine own part I am half afraid of him, if he look not to himself in time. Well, I could tell M. Some a notable receipt for this shortness of breath, if he would be ruled by me. first he must cross the Thames no more towards Lambeth, for the moistues of the air so near the water side is very dangerous: hem the closeness of London streets is perilous for the stopping of his pipes: more, the great fare & entertainment about the court & at Bb. houses, may breed in time a Lethargy: therefore his only way (if he love his health) must be to get him into the country in th'open air, & to make his only residence & ordinary abode upon Gyrton benefice, shaking of all other appendices and hangbies whatsoever, & even there in love and conscience to take pains with his poor parishuers, aswell by public teaching & catechizing of them, as by private admonishment & familiar conferences, seeking to win them by all other good & godly means that the Lord hath prescribed in his word. And let him ask M. Grenham whether this be not an excellent medicine for the shortness of the breath, I warrant you he hath tried it, and hath found good of it, for he hath wind at will ye see, & as shrill pipes as most men. Now M. Some may choose he hath my direction for nothing, & if I might see his water I might happen tell him more. I know there be other paltry practitioners in Physic that will advise him otherwise, but let him take it of my word, it will not be so good for him in the end. For it is sure this short windiness and nothing else that makes him thus in a kind of kingly manner with so many uncontrollable periods to debate with us: I agree with you in this: I descent from you in this: strange sansies have almost consumed you: your reverence I make very base account of: I think great scorn I tell you, to be one of ignorant Penry's disciples, etc. Sure your D. persuadeth himself I believe, that look what he saith it is a statute straght, otherwise he would never come upon his poor adversary in this jumping manner. Well for all that if he can make shift with all the skill he hath to fetch a jump from his benefice at Girton to some sweet Deanery or Bishopric, it will sure be one of the prettiest jumps that ever he made in his life. There be of his betters that have made such Alemaine leaps in their days, and thereby may the better direct him the way if need be, how think you by these jumps. From Peter house to Pembroke hall, from thence to Trinity College, from thence to Lincoln, from Lincoln to Worcester, from Worcester you know whither. But were not these vengeable steps? Well let your D. look to it, for I have known a man bursten in my days, with fetching such strides. And this I fear me is the blessing that he so often harpeth upon as well in his preface as in his book: It pleased God (saith he) to assist me graciously 
preface  in my pains I have taken: I thank his majesty very humbly for it: And I doubt not but he will give ablessing unto it. And again in an other place, I was desired 
177  (saith he) to provide a plaster, I did so, and God hath given a blessing to it. And yet again, I doubt not but that blessing which god hath given already to my last treatise, & which his majesty will give to this, will mar your market. And last of all he closeth up the mouth of all with this: My comfort is that almighty God will bless 
198  this labour. But you may tell M. Some when you see him that I have heard of a man who dreaming of gold overnight, had but an ill-favoured mishap in the mornning: These hasty promises of golden mountains had need we suppose have better grounds, than these dreaming conceits and fancies of men: For unless it be some such blessing as I spoke of before, namely some hope or promise of promotion, (which is not so privileged neither but that it may end in bitterness) I durst me thinks in this case stand betwixt M. D. and the danger of any other great blessing that may befall him. As to those high words of his, that he thinketh soul scorn to be one of ignorant Penry's disciples, etc. Considering how rightly it sorteth with the rest of his rhetoric, it can neither bring any grace to him▪ self, nor disgrace to his adversaty. Alas it doth but lay open the rottenness and corruption of his heart, being very far from that spirit that teacheth, Let the greatest among you be as the least, etc. It is well enough known that there be M. Somes betters, I mean in 
Luke. 22. 26.  learning and judgement, that will not refuse even in the fear of God to learn sometimes of far meaner men in gifts then ever M. Penri was, whom how the Lord hath blessed in plentiful measure that way, his adversaries themselves have been forced to acknowledge: but I would you would ask M. Some when you see him, where was Humile peccatum, when he did thus tread upon his adversary with a disdainful foot. Well to correct this bad humour of his, you may do well to refer him to Apollo's in the 18. of th' Act. who though he were an eloquent man & mighty in the Scripture, informed in the way of the Lord, and servant in the spirit, yet saith the text, did he not disdain to learn of Aquila & Priscilla, who expounded unto him the way of God perfectly, whereupon our Bb. own note in the margin is this, which we presume M. Some will give ear unto with reverence: Apollo (say they) being a learned man was not ashamed to be taught & instructed in the doctrine of Christ, of a poor craft's man & his wise, what great disparagement then could it be for such a man as M. Some is, were he as great as an Archb. or a Cardinal, to learn some small trifling things of of a poorer and meaner student, because he knoweth that the Lord sometimes chooseth the weak things of the world to confound the wise. And therefore he that should wish your D. less learning & more modesty, should I suppose wish him no hurt. Thus have you my verdict because you requested it: I confess I have been too long, but it is my fault, wherein as in any thing else, I am very well content you shall censure me as you please.  
I. G.