9. CHAP. IX. A. Of the dedication of Temples, wherein is entreated of sundry corruptions of Baptism.

9. CHAP. IX. A. Of the dedication of Temples, wherein is entreated of sundry corruptions of Baptism.

CHAP. IX. A. Of the dedication of Temples, wherein is entreated of sundry corruptions of Baptism.

W hile I earnestly think upon the Dedication [ of the temple] which Solomon made, that cometh to my remembrance which Augustine hath in a certain Oration to the people, of the dedication of a temple: to wit, that those things which are done in the outward temples, do also pertain unto us, who be the true temples of God. Wherefore in the first Epistle to the Corinthians the third Chapter, it is written, That the Temple of God is holy which are you. Further we have in the 6th chapter: Your bodies are the Temples of the holy Ghost. Therefore we must take heed least we err in the dedicating of any of both temples. The outward temple is then dedicated, when we begin to apply it to holy uses: and godly men are then visibly consecrated unto God, when they be washed in holy baptism. But this must be provided, that both the one and the other be done according to the rule of the word of God. But seeing we are to entreat of these things, it is meet we should begin with the Etymology of the words. In Hebrew there be two verbs Chanac and Cadasch, which in the conjugation Hiphil hath Hicdisch, and is nothing else but to sanctify. But Chanac, signifieth to teach and

instruct in the first principles. Wherefore Solomon in the Proverbs the 22nd chapter wrote Chanoc lannaar alpi darco, which is: Instruct a child according to his way, that is to say, as his capacity will serve. And in Genesis we read that Abraham for the recovery of Lot, armed Eth Chanicau his house born servants, whom he had trained not only in religion but also in necessary arts. Moreover that verb signifieth to dedicate, because it is then done so soon as we begin to use anything. Wherefore Chrysostom upon the Epistle to the Hebrews saith: that consecration or dedication is then done so soon as ever we begin to use it. And not only are temples dedicated, but many things else, as a house. And therefore the title of the 30th Psalm is Schir channucath beth Ie-david, that is: The dedication of the house of David. Then also men are said to enter their house, when they first begin to eat, to drink, and to dwell therein. Which thing the godly without prayers and thanks giving use not to do. Therefore David when he had dedicated his house, made a song or Psalm: wherein both he himself gave thanks unto God and also prayed, that the same might be godly, religiously, and holily used. Of such dedication also, there is mention made in the 20th chapter of Deuteronomy, wherein are delivered precepts of warfare. Verily

God would, that many should be excepted from the wars, and those among the rest, which when they had built a house had not after dedication used the same. And in the Book of Nehemiah's there is a dedication of the walls of a City: which was nothing else, but that the walls of the City being made up, the people, together with the Levites and Priests, and also the Princes went thither, and there gave thanks unto God, because the walls were reedified, and prayed that the City might be righteously used. After which manner likewise, before we take meat, we also consecrate the same: not that we think that the Devil is therein, or that it is evil in his own nature:

Because God saw all things that he made, and they were exceeding good, and Paul in the first to Timothy very well said, That the things which God hath made be good, and that therefore nothing must be rejected which is taken with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and by prayers: But in our consecration, we first give thanks unto God, that he hath provided for us these helps of life. Further we crave that our bodies may not be hurt by them, because we distemper ourselves, whereby we afterward fall easily into sickness, and while we be loaden with surfeiting and drunkenness, we can be no apt instruments either of reason or of the spirit of God.

2. Wherefore it is very commendable, that after this manner we should consecrate all things so soon as ever we begin to use, them: that is to wit, as well by thanksgiving as by prayers: so far are we from disallowing such a custom. Constantine the great, when he had repaired Byzantium, and had determined to use that City for the seat of the Roman Empire, would consecrate the same to God: and to the dedication thereof, he called 318 fathers, which at that time held the Synod of Nice. The same Emperor also going to Jerusalem, built a very sumptuous temple unto Christ, and decked it with precious offerings: with gold I mean, with silver, and with precious stones: And he called away those Bishops, which held a Council at Tyrus, that they would come to dedicate the same. And as Eusebius showeth, that dedication consisted of preaching of the Gospel, of praises unto God, of prayers, and of thanksgivings. And hereof (as I think,) the dedication of temples had original and beginning among the Christians. For I find not in the Ecclesiastical histories, that Temples were dedicated before that time.

Neither must this be unspoken of, that the Hebrews accustomed to dedicate Temples not only which were new built, but also those which were repaired

and cleansed from uncleanness. This they did when after the return out of Persia they had repaired anew the Temple and altar. Also Judas Maccabeus reformed the Temple when it was polluted by the Ethnics with the most filthy idolatry of Antiochus. Yea and yet still in the papacy both the one and the other is retained. Such renewed dedications are in the Greek called ἐγκαίνια, which in Latin we may call Renovalia or Renovales dies, that is renewals or days of renewing, which are not once celebrated, but the solemnities of them are done every yere at one time. Moreover in the executing of them, the Papists have gotten to themselves many things as well from the Hebrews as from the Ethnics: pretending that they very much profit the ignorant by the ceremonies which they use. Howbeit what the Jews did in their dedications, the holy history doth plainly teach. But the rites of the Ethnics were sundry and manifold. Whereof we read many things in Tulli: especially in the Oration for his house unto the high

Bishops. There the Soothsayer must hold fast a post, and speak certain set words, without stutting or stammering in his tongue, but with a firm and constant mind. Also men were consecrated by the Ethnics, and thereof

Cicero rendereth a reason in his second book de legibus, namely, that the mysteries which were delivered unto them were certain entrances of man's life. Whereby men might be drawn from rude and rustical to a more human and civil kind of life. Yea and children were said to be initiated or entered, when as they were weaned, because they were then trained up: namely from milk unto a more substantial meat and drink. Wherefore they were said to be consecrated unto the goddesses Edidia and Potina. The things verily were Ethnical, but yet a token of them remaineth in the holy history.

Wherein it is showed, that Abraham made a banquet when he weaned Isaac.

Wherein no doubt but thanksgiving and prayers were placed among. Also

Chanoch which lived before the flood, had his name of consecration or dedication: and I doubt not but it was by some mystery: of which, although

I know that the Hebrews do fable, yet have I not what to bring for a certainty. And to dedicate or initiate the Greeks call τελεῖν and μνεῖν: but to consecrate, they call ἐκθειάζειν καθιερόειν: and to sanctify, ἁγιάζειν. And the Latins name them Initiari, Dedicare, Consecrare, Sanctificare. And to sanctify is nothing else but to apply to divine and religious uses, or to prepare himself to offer something unto God. And Cicero said: to bind with everlasting religion. And there is a difference between these words, To consecrate, and To dedicate: forasmuch as things are said to be consecrated, when of profane things, they are said to be religious and holy: and they are said to be dedicated when they are appointed to any certain God. This truly is a very trifle: but yet it must be earnestly considered, that the Hebrews did dedicate and initiate their things, not by simple and bare words, but by adding of outward rites, signs I mean, and tokens which might be seen: not forsooth that they thought any holiness or divine quality to be in those things: for seeing they be in the soul, they be not capable of holiness: but so they thought, because, the rites being instituted by God, those things which were consecrate, might become instruments of the holy spirit, by which the faith of men might be stirred up. Neither were they deceived because those things for that time had the word of God: and that which is to us at this day, water, bread, and wine, was unto them sundry, and manifold signs in holy things. Furthermore as the holy history teacheth, they extended consecration unto priests, altars, garments, and other implements as well of the Temple as also of the Tabernacle.

3. The very selfsame things in a manner have the Papists of a certain naughty zeal drawn unto them. In the second council of Bracca in the 5th

Canon it is commanded, that a Church should not be consecrated till a provision be made for gifts and revenues. Whereby both the Minister and Deacon might be maintained least the temple being built should lie desolate. Both these might have been done, if superstition had not been added: whereby they in that Synod would have it provided, that in no wise the Temple should be without oil and lights. Much better should it have been that these expenses had been bestowed upon poor and sick folk. The like in a manner hath the council of Worms 3rd chapter. But De consecratione in the first distinction, by the former Canons, it is very severely commanded, that no Temple should be built or consecrated, unless it were with the will of the Bishop of Rome. Which in very deed tended unto manifest tyranny. And why it was abolished, I will not now declare.

But again De Consecratione, in the chapter, Missarum Solennia there is strait commandment, that Masses should not be said or sung, except in places dedicated by bishops. And there in the chapter Si alijs, it is affirmed that it is far better, that Masses be not said nor sung, than that they should be celebrated in places not consecrate. And least they should seem to speak without the scriptures, they bring that which is written in the 12th chapter of Deuteronomy: Take heed that thou offer not thy whole burnt offerings in every place, but in that place only which God hath chosen. As though God hath chosen to himself all those places, which they with their superstitious

Masses do everywhere contaminate. But there be many more of these things in the Extravagants of consecration of Churches and Altars, and also of holy anointing. In a National Council, holden at Colen: which was held in the year of the Lord 1536, in the 9th part the 12th chapter: Those fathers which were present, endeavored to excuse their dedications, and denied that they would follow the trade of the Jews, when as nevertheless in confirming

their trifles they bring nothing out of the word of God, unless it be so much as they wrest for their purpose out of the Old Testament. But Gratian in the beginning of the first distinction De Consecratione, while he goeth about to confirm those things which are fondly done in the dedication of Temples, reasoneth on this wise: The Jews did these things, therefore it is much more lawful for Christians to do the same: grounding his reason in very deed from the greater. Which kind of Argument is most feeble: because it is not lawful so to conclude of the ceremonies and rites of the old fathers. In moral precepts, the reason would be firm: but in ceremonies which were figures and shadows it is not meet so to reason, seeing all the commandments of that kind were abolished after the purging of Christ. But I return to those of Colen, who in the place now alleged, the 14th chapter, say, that Temples are therefore consecrated, that from thence ill spirits may be expulsed: which how true it is, shall afterward in his place be declared.

But in consecrating of the Church, they have superstitiously devised many things. For they use water, oil, wax, lights, many marks of the cross upon the walls: And upon the flower the description as well of the Greek as of the Hebrew alphabet: when as nevertheless the bishops which do these things be altogether ignorant both of the Greek and of the Hebrew. Their custom is also to reconcile (as they speak) the Temples themselves, if they have been overthrown, if blood have been shed by slaughter, or if filthy lusts have been committed, or if the dead body of a man excommunicate or an alliant from Christ have been there buried, when as nevertheless their temples are continually polluted with horrible Idolatry. But in those reconciliations, least they should be thought destitute of holy scriptures, they bring for example sake the fact of Christ, who having made a whip of small cords, cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple. Which argument in very deed

doth manifestly reprove them: because the Bishops and Suffragans which dedicate their Temple, do buy and sell their own labor. For unless they be hired for some reward for the doing of these things, they deny to go.

Further, what other thing else are the Papists Temples, but the markets and merchandise of Masses? Neither doth that anything help them, which they bring out of the 14th and 15th chapters of Leviticus, seeing all those things belong unto the tabernacle of Moses.

14. Furthermore it is to be considered, that these importunate men, do not only consecrate the Temples themselves, but also the altars, and coverings of the altars: I mean the tablecloths and napkins, and also the Chalices and patins, the Massing garments, the Churchyards, the wax candles, the frankincense, the paschal Lamb, eggs, and also holy water, the boughs of their palm trees, young springs, grass, and potherbs, and finally all kind of fruits: and it is come to that pass, as they consecrate the very belles and they take it in ill part that we say they baptize them. For Hosius cavileth, that this is vainly spoken by us, and affirmeth that they be consecrated by their

Ministers, but not baptized. But truly, the common people are wholly to be excused for saying, they do baptize them: for seeing all things in a manner are there done which pertain unto baptism, it is not without a cause that they say they baptize them. For they be washed, they be anointed, they be conjured, they are named and handled with far greater pomp and ambition, than men are while they are baptized with the holy baptism, and much more is attributed unto them, than to the prayers of godly men. For they say, that by the ringing of them, the wicked spirits, the host of adversaries, the laying await of enemies, tempests, hail, storms, whirlwinds, violent blasts, and hurtful thunderclaps are driven away, flames and fires extinguished, and finally what else soever. But we much more soundly and rightly judge, that

it is lawful as we have said, yea to be required by godly right, that in the first use of everything, we should give thanks unto God, and celebrate his goodness, and that with meet and convenient praises, and desire that we may use religiously and holily such a benefit bestowed upon us. These things doubtless cannot be reproved, seeing they have just foundations out of the holy Scriptures. But the trifles of our adversaries, seeing they be not derived of the word of God, but have been brought in by idle and superstitious men, ought worthily to be rejected by the Church of Christ.

For such is not the condition of men to institute sacraments at their own pleasure, because that is proper to God alone, and to none besides him. For sacraments be instruments of the holy Ghost, the which he useth to stir up our faith. And seeing he is altogether the wisest, he hath no need that we should by our own imagination or endeavor prepare instruments for him.

Which thing also no artificer in his faculty would abide, but would himself make choice of his own instruments. Wherefore great is the boldness of these men, which will prescribe his instruments whereby he should work our salvation. They are also reproved for another cause: because they deal against the devil by commandment, as though they could constrain him to depart when they will, whereas they have received no such grace of the holy Ghost, and seeing that all Christians enjoy not that gift. For the spirit

(as Paul testifieth) distributeth his gifts, even as he will. Further they be ignorant whether an evil spirit be in that place, which they say they consecrate: which seeing they know not, neither are warranted by the word of God, whatsoever they do, they work without faith: and therefore they sin, seeing it is written by the Apostle: Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin. Indeed there hath sometime been certain wicked houses where ill spirits exercised horrible things, so as they might not be inhabited by men: but there it was

known by the deed itself: that the ill spirit was present: but in other houses we cannot perceive, either by the effects, or yet by the word of God that there be ill spirits. Why then do they so imperiously conjure them? They might as well conjure the whole world, seeing Paul in the 6th to the Ephesians calleth the devils, The rulers of the world: or at the leastwise the whole air (whereby we chiefly use to take breath) seeing the evil spirits are called the powers of the air. Neither can that be, because they make more account of the ceremonies invented by themselves, than of the Sacraments instituted by God. For they use greater pomp and preparation in the administering of them, than when they celebrate the supper of the Lord or baptism, which Christ instituted: Again, they prefer their inventions above the ten commandments, and would more grievously punish the breakers of them, than those which transgress the commandments of God. Wherefore godliness is marvelously impaired: for men are led away from the word of God and do turn their minds unto vanities and to men's traditions. And it is unspeakable how greatly the ordinance of new worshipping's do displease

God: for he hath everywhere in his laws forbidden that it should not be done.

5. But now that we have spoken enough of the consecrating of outward things, wherein this briefly must be held, that besides prayer and thanksgiving, no other thing ought to be used: now will we see whether they deal anything more sincerely and godly in the baptizing of men.

Undoubtedly with their superstitions and inventions they have horribly infected baptism. For that sacrament doeth consist of two things: of the outward element of water, and the word of God. Whereupon Augustine very well said: The word is added unto the element, and it is made a Sacrament.

Other things which afterward were put thereunto proceeded from Bishops,

who were more given unto Ceremonies than was meet, and were marvelously affected to things invented by themselves. For this is a grievous, and in a manner a continual fault of the nature of man, that we have in estimation those things especially which we ourselves have invented. Therefore were the institutions of Christ and of his Apostles contemned as things worn out of use. Whereof it came to pass that the Papists do more detest them being barely and simply received, than good

Orators do the words that be altogether out of use. So that in tract of time the Bishops have foisted into Baptism, Oil, salt, spittle, wax, light, breathings, exorcisms, consecration of Fontes twice a year, (that is at Easter and at Pentecost) three times dipping, and such other like. And (as they be most pregnant in coining of words) they have called many of them not sacraments, but sacramentals, because they be tokens and signs of those things which they themselves not God, would have to be signified: and as they were moved and did dream in their imagination, so they brought in things which seemed good unto themselves. As concerning Oil, we confess that the ancient Kings, Prophets, and Priests, and among the Ethnics the wrestlers were anointed withal. But these men by applying their anointings in Baptism, do say that they shadow Christian kings to be made Prophets and Priests, and also strong wrestlers, to fight continually with the Devil, the world, and the flesh. And while they do these things, they expound them not unto those that stand by: and a great part of their Priests are ignorant of them. Besides this, if they understand the matter after such a sort, (seeing they alone will be Priests) they disagree much among themselves.

Wherefore intolerable is their ambition, who by the ceremonies which they have added, do arrogate unto themselves only that which belongeth unto all

Christians, as they themselves also testify. But it is no marvel if they be

injurious to other Christians, seeing they spare not Christ himself, whom they fear not to rob of his honor. For he (as the Epistle to the Hebrews teacheth,) is our only Priest which remaineth forever, and alone offereth the sacrifice of salvation for us. But these men with an incredible boldness have challenged unto themselves the ministry both of the Priest and of the offering. Moreover Paul when he armed the faithful unto battle against the world, the flesh and the Devil, he did it by the word, that is, by wholesome admonition, not by oil: neither do we find, that the son of God or the Apostles anointed them whom they baptized. But it is no marvel that these men do things which the Apostles never did, seeing they also teach those things which the Apostles never taught. The use of salt was much in the Old

Testament, for without salt sacrifices were not offered. But Christ and the Apostles admitted not that seasoning to the Sacraments of the Gospel. So then, that which is added unto Baptism, is self-worship and no lawful and sincere administration of Baptism. Further why should they have used their corrupt spittle? The devils be no Scorpions, whom they would destroy with their spittle. In deed there is a certain property of spittle against poisons: but that is natural: but to spiritual graces, we read of no power that it hath, especially when the institution and word of Christ is not applied unto it. But they say, that Christ with his spittle tempered the dust, and with that clay wiped the eyes of him that was born blind. We know that this was done: but let them show that Christ commanded that we should do the like: and then we will grant that they do it rightly and orderly, but they can in no place show of such a precept. Whereunto thou mayest add that the spittle of a corrupt and infected man (to say no worse) ought not to be compared with the spittle of Christ. It is therefore a perverse imitation, seeing they learned no such ceremony, neither of Christ nor yet of the Apostles. And it may well

be sometime, that they hurt the infant which they spit upon, if they be infected either with the Leprosy or with the French-pocks: which is not unlike, for it falleth out sometime that diverse of them be whoremongers.

6. Furthermore I would demand of them, wherefore they light wax Candles in Baptism, seeing it is ministered in the day time. I am not ignorant that the Christians were constrained in the old time to use lights in the holy assembly: because when the Church had no peace of their Princes, it was not lawful for the Christians to assemble in the day time: and therefore (as Pliny testifieth) they had their holy assemblies before daylight.

Yea and Jerome against Vigilantius writeth: we light not candles in the day time as thou doest vainly misreport, but we use light as a tempering of darkness, that we may watch till it be day light, least we sleep with thee in darkness, &c. For in the time of Jerome, when the Church had now peace, upon certain days there were watches used in the temples: and there candles being lighted, the Christians which watched, gave themselves to prayers, singing of Psalms, and hearing of the word of God: And this is it that Jerome teacheth, that the use of wax lights was not used in the day time, but for avoiding darkness of the night. Whereby whether that this father acknowledgeth not the use of wax candles which are lighted in the day time: and yet notwithstanding in Popery candles are lighted even in the Churches at high noon. The double consecration of fruits is also superfluous at Easter and at Pentecost, because the salt water is consecrated when it is applied to an holy use, the word of God (I mean) being added thereunto.

For then (as it hath been said) it is made a sacrament. Let them say moreover what meaneth the breathing of the Priest, before that the Infants be baptized. Perhaps they attempt to breath the holy Ghost upon the Infant, that is to be baptized. But that this is not in man's power, all wise men

understand. For only God giveth the holy Ghost unto men. But and if they will say, that by such a breathing they drive away the evil spirit, who hath given them such power? But of that matter we will speak more largely when the place serveth. In vain also do they give precept of the three times dipping in the water, seeing that once may be sufficient and otherwhile a small sprinkling is enough. And therefore in the book de ecclesiasticis dogmatibus the 7th chapter, the proposition is read not simple, but disjunctive: that is to wit, that after the confession made the party to be baptized should either be dipped in the water or else sprinkled. Yea and Cyprian himself allowed the baptism of them that lie bedridden. For many at that time deferred baptism till the end of their life: and when as they in that state being at the point of death could not be baptized, they were only sprinkled with water. We also demand of them, wherefore they conjure the salt, as though the devil by himself were not salt enough, and therefore dwelleth in salt, that he may be yet better and more salted. The master of the Sentences in the 4th book the third Distinction of baptism, saith, that therein be some things (as he speaketh) substantial, but othersome that be added: he saith that the substantial things with us are the word and water: but the rest he saith are added for honesty sake, for comeliness, and solemnity. If we shall receive these things, it will follow thereof that John,

Christ, the Apostles, and primitive Church did baptize unhonestly, uncomely, obscurely, or shamefully: because their baptism wanted all these things, the which (as the master of the Sentences deemeth) do serve for honesty, comeliness, and solemnity. This doubtless is lamentable that almost all things in Christianity be corrupted, not only as concerning manners, but also as touching doctrine and Sacraments. Verily it had been meet in baptism to have dealt by faith, and to require a full and perfect

profession thereof. And let not any man answer, that the creed is recited, because in the baptism of Papists it is done very coldly: especially seeing it is always used in the Latin tongue, which is not under stood of them that stand by. And although, they that be present do after a sort know by long experience, the articles of the faith, yet do they but lightly understand them, wherefore it is necessary to instruct them more plainly. They boast also that they use a Catechizing or instruction: But in what sort? Forsooth the same consisteth of five or ten words, and these not understood. Besides they command him that is to be baptized to renounce the Devil and the pomp's of this world: For the which they have no commandment of God.

7. But leaving the rest of their trifles: let us come to Exorcism, wherein they put the whole sum and effect of the things that be added. And seeing the matter is of great importance, I think it first meet to speak somewhat of the signification of the word. In Greek ἐξορκίζειν is to adjure by holy things. Augustine in his book de Beata vita, writeth, that an evil spirit invadeth the soul, troubleth the senses, and casteth men into madness, in the driving out of which they that have authority, do lay on their hands and exorcise, that is, do drive him out in adjuring him by divine things. Hereby it appeareth now that exorcism is an adjuring by holy things. Ulpianus in the Pandects in the Title de variis & extraordinariis cognitionibus, in the first law saith, that he alloweth not of those Physicians which enchant and exorcise: and he addeth, that the same is a word which deceivers use. And although some (saith he) affirm, that they be holpen, yet do they nothing but enchant and curse. Also Pliny believed that there be certain diseases, which may be healed by enchantments and adjurations. In like manner there were some which supposed that exorcism is therefore applied to holy baptism, because a great oath is there made in the name of Christ. But they be very

far deceived, for that the sacrificer doth there adjure the evil spirit, neither doeth he take any oath in the name of Christ. True indeed it is, that the verb is derived of the noun ὅρκος, which is, an oath. And undoubtedly as I have already said: A certain adjuration by holy things is performed in exorcism. I have noted that the verb ὁρκίζειν is three times found in the New

Testament. For in the fifth Chapter of Mark, the Devil adjured Christ, saying, ὁρκίζω σε τόν θεόν: that is, I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not. In the 19th chapter of the Acts the sons of Sceva said: ὁρκίζομεν ὑμᾶς τόν Ἰησοῦν ὅν ὁ Παῦλος κηρύσσει, that is, We adjure you by Jesus

Christ whom Paul preacheth. And in the first to the Thessalonians the last chapter, ὁρκίζω ὑμᾶς τόν κύριον, ἀναγνωσθῆναι τήν ἐπιστολήν πᾶσι τοῖς ἁγίοις, that is, I adjure you by the Lord that this Epistle be red unto all the Saints. Wherefore these places declare, that exorcisms as it hath been said, is an adjuration by divine things. But exorcism is exercised, by a certain commandment and royal power: because the exorcists command the unclean spirits, and very boldly command them to depart: and by this means exorcisms differ from prayers and supplications. Now it thoroughly appeareth, what is exorcism, and what is to exorcise.

8. Now are there three things to be considered in order, first, when exorcisms began: secondly, whether exorcists should be retained, and so retained as they may belong to the holy ministry: Lastly, whether exorcisms are to be joined with baptism. As touching the first; I say that in all the Old

Testament I have not read that any exorcisms were ordained for the driving out of devils. I know indeed that there be adjurations extant. Wherefore there is a law of jealousy in the book of Numbers, which commanded unto the Israelites a form of a certain adjuration: but by it the Priests did not adjure the woman to cast Devils out of her: but he wished either good or

evil unto her, according as she had behaved herself. If she had been chaste and blameless, he wished her well, but if she were unclean and defiled with whoredom, he cursed her with express words. Also Joshua adjured Acham, not to drive the Devil out of him, but to drive him to confess a truth of conveying away the accursed thing. Some think that David did exorcise

Saul: which I allow not, for he with his Harp played before him, and with most pleasant verses praised God: But that he used not exorcism it may for two causes be affirmed. First because he did not perfectly heal him: but as it is written in the history: While he played, his trouble was asswaged: yet was not the evil spirit utterly cast out from Saul. Further David used not the form of adjuration, which the Scripture teacheth, but verses of Music: and these (as it is like lie) of the nature of prayers. But that there were Exorcists among the Hebrews, I deny not, as I will straightway declare by plain

Testimonies: although I grant that I am ignorant in what age they first began. Josephus in the 8th book of Antiquities, the second Chapter writeth, that Solomon made certain charms and exorcisms. But of that matter I spake sufficiently, when I interpreted that place where it is showed that Solomon passed in wisdom all the men of the East and the Egyptians. But to come somewhat nearer unto the matter I think that the wisdom of Solomon was inspired into him by God. And those things which God bestoweth upon men are not to be counted evil, but good: but that incantations are condemned by the laws of God, it is most certain: For which cause they are not given to men by the spirit of God. Whereby it is proved that the exorcisms, enchantments, and the book of the little Key, the which are carried abroad under the name of Solomon: are counterfeit and not to be fathered upon him. They abound everywhere with superstitions, and be fraughted with gestures both ridiculous and Idolatrous.

9. But that the Hebrews (as I have said) had Exorcists, it is proved by the testimony of Christ in the 12th of Matthew. For there the Lord answered: If I in the name of Beelzebub do cast out Devils, in whose name do your children cast them out? Where Jerome interpreteth, that by the children of the Hebrews may be understood exorcists, which all that time wandered here and there conjuring il spirits by the name of the Lord. It is said then that they shall be their judges, not by power but by comparison: They doubtless confessed that Devils were cast out by the spirit of God, but these men attributed the power unto Baalzebub: wherefore they were found to be much worse than they. But he addeth that that place might also be understood of the Apostles: which were the children of the Hebrews as touching the flesh and had already given by Christ the gifts of casting out of Devils, and are rightly said, that they shall be judges of the wicked and of the blasphemous, seeing it is said unto them: Ye shall sit upon 12 seats judging the 12 Tribes of Israel: And he far preferreth this latter interpretation before the first. But me thinks the first seemeth the more agreeable. For if we affirm that these things are spoken as touching the Apostles, the Scribes and Pharisees shall not seem at the full to be reproved of Christ. For they might have said: Thy Disciples also cast out Devils in the name of Baalzebub, even as they be taught by thee. Neither do I persuade myself that those wicked men make more account of the Apostles in better place than they did of their master. But if so be we refer those words unto exorcists, the Scribes and Pharisees are notably confuted.

Wherefore I confess that among the Jews there were exorcists. Neither do I deny but that God bestowed that gift (of driving away of Devils from men) to certain men whom he would, yet not unto such as the Priests had appointed. But the Priests therein grievously sinned, in that they would at

their own pleasure appoint a fellowship, or college, or order of Exorcists: as though they might bind the grace of God to their elections and constitutions.

10. But afterward Christ renewed that strength and power, yea rather: he was the a chief and prince of new Exorcists: and he dealt against the unclean spirits with great commandment and absolute power, as it manifestly appeareth in the story of the Gospel. Neither did he only cure them that were present, but them also which were absent: for he healed the daughter of the woman of Canaan which was absent: neither had he himself only power over the devils, but he also gave the same gift unto his Apostles.

But there is another place in the Acts of the Apostles, in the 19th chapter: whereby it most evidently appeareth, that such Exorcists were among the Hebrews. For the sons of Sceva adjured ill spirits, which also they attempted to do through the name of Jesus. Howbeit the ancient Prophets, although I read that sometime they did miracles, yet do I not find that they used Exorcisms. But that Christ gave power of casting out the Devil unto his Disciples, it is showed in the 16th chapter of Mark, where it is written:

And there signs shall follow: the believers shall cast out devils, &c. And in the 9th of Luke it is declared that John saw a certain man which through the name of Christ cast out devils, and yet he did not follow him: Wherefore

(saith John) we forbad him: which deed Jesus disallowed. Many also at the latter day shall say: as we have it in the 7th of Matthew: Have we not in thy name cast out Devils? And Paul as it is written in the 16th of the Acts commanded the spirit of divination to depart: which forthwith was done.

Howbeit we must understand, that the Apostles were not always able by their authority to cast out ill spirits. For as the history of the Evangelist teacheth: A certain man offered to them his son to be cured, whom they could not deliver. And Christ coming to them taught that that kind of

Devils, are not cast out but by fasting and prayers. As if he should say: that therein prayers, and that very earnest are needful: the which are very much furthered by fasting: true fasting I mean, not that feigned fasting, which consisteth only of the choice of meats.

11. A great while did these gifts of healing remain in the Church. And what time they utterly ceased, it cannot precisely be defined. And because that they are now no longer had, we are constrained to think that the words of Christ, (wherein he said: These signs shall follow them that believe:) were not generally spoken, as if those graces should be given always unto all the faithful. It was sufficient that they were given to the Church, and remained for a certain space in it. Justinus Martyr, who lived in the time of Antoninus Pius in the First Apol. pg. 146. writeth, that the Christians over all the world and in the City itself healed very many that were possessed with evil spirits, which other enchanters, conjurers, and sacrificers could not perform: and that as yet those men of ours persist in their purpose. Neither only did these graces endure until the time of Antoninus, but as Tertullian in his Apology teacheth, they continued still until the time of Severus the Emperor, in whose time he flourished. We are accustomed (saith he) to assail Daemons, that is spirits, and to drive them away from men: and as it should seem he reckoneth himself among the number of them which did this. And in the same place he saith: We drive out ill spirits without reward or hire. Likewise in his book entreating of idolatry, in the 734th pg. he saith, against them who being Christians yet nevertheless sold frankincense, and those things which were used in the worshipping of Idols: When thou seest the Altar smoking, how canst thou contemn it, and with what constancy wilt thou exorcise thy scholars? And he calleth the Devils, the scholars of these men, because they made their house a Cell for Idols, whereby they retailed

Frankincense unto them, to the intent they might make a perfume for them.

By this place we are taught that the gifts of these adjurations, were not only given unto the Clergy men, but that they happened even to merchants also, and moreover that they were granted unto soldiers. For the same Author in his little Book De Corona Militis pg. 454. against them which of their own accord went a warfare with Emperors, writeth: Those which he by exorcism in the day time chased away, in the night he defended. Which he therefore wrote, because the soldiers were constrained otherwhile to watch about the Churches and Temples of the Idols. Also in his Book De Anima, the last

Chapter but one, he teacheth that unclean spirits did oftentimes deceive men, and made lies unto them: namely when they feigned themselves to be the souls of men departed, which wandered in the shape of men's bodies.

For the Devil would not that it should be thought of the Christians, that the souls after this life should be detained in hell. And he addeth, that at the last they were convicted, and constrained by adjurations to confess the truth: to wit, that they were no souls of men, but ill spirits. Further in his Book De

Praescriptionibus adversus Haereticos pg. 111. saith, that the women among the Heretics were wont to use Exorcisms.

12. But it must be considered that what hath hitherto been brought as concerning Exorcisms, must not be understood of the Exorcisms in baptism, but of those whereby the possessed with ill spirits were healed by the Christians. Yea and Justinus Martyr in the former Apology while he is earnestly occupied about baptism, maketh no mention of Exorcism. Neither did that Dionysius whatsoever he were, that wrote the Ecclesiastical

Hierarchy, make any mention of such Exorcisms. In deed he hath certain things, I cannot tell what, of three times breathing out and three renouncing's. Which nevertheless must be done (as he teacheth) by a man

that is to be baptized, and not by an exorcist, or minister of the sacrament.

Of renouncing also Tertullian made mention in his Book, De Corona militis, but he writeth that the same was wont to be used under the hands of the chief Prelate. But at this day, there be no Bishops present when the sacrament of baptism is administered. But they were present in those days, and also in the time of Ambrose, as he himself testifieth in the first book De

Sacramentis, in the first and second Chapters: And also in the Book of them which were entered into orders even from the beginning. Yea and Basel in his Book De spiritu sancto in the 27th chapter made mention of Renouncing: likewise anointing and holy water: and also of thrice dipping in the water: but he speaketh nothing of Exorcism. But the consent of Colen, to prove their trifles as touching fault and anointing, allege Origen in the 6th and 7th Homilies upon Ezekiel. But if a man diligently weigh his sayings, he hath nothing which serveth to that purpose. Eusebius

Caesariensis in his 6th book 43rd chapter maketh mention of an Epistle of Cornelius the Bishop of Rome, unto Fabius the prelate of Antioch, in which he describeth the manners and life of Novatus, making mention among other things, that at the beginning when he was possessed with a devil, he was remedied by exorcisms, which was an occasion that he was converted to Christ, where notwithstanding he was afterward baptized lying bedridden. And Cyprian in the 4th book and 7th Epistle writeth unto

Magnus that the unclean spirits do sometime deceive the servants of God while they be adjured by them, and do fain that they go their ways, whereas nevertheless they depart not. But he saith: that when they come unto the water, that is to wit, unto Baptism, there the devil cannot stay, he utterly departeth, neither is he able to abide the Sacraments. While I diligently consider with myself this place, it seemeth to me that I have found the

fountain, head, and beginning of Exorcism joined together with Baptism.

For that Father seemeth to signify, that if deliverance succeeded not after Exorcisms, men in those days fled unto Baptism, and that men followed this way in the curing of them which were possessed with ill spirits. Wherefore the age that followed would imitate this, that Exorcisms should be used before Baptism, even though the possessed were not to be baptized, least they should seem to have anything less than the former church, in which they which could not be cured by Exorcisms, were brought to the receiving of baptism. And afterward it followed that although the power of casting out devils be not nowadays had, yet do the Papists use Exorcisms. But to return unto Cyprian: He in his treatise De Baptismo Christi & manifestatione

Trinitatis, calleth those children of Sceva (of whom we made mention before) gainful Exorcists, as though they sold those adjurations, and made a market of them. Also Gregory Nazianzen in his Oration De Luminaribus, or in his third Oration ad Sanctum Lauacrum made mention of Exorcisms: and also many other Fathers. But this must be considered, that the latter age used Exorcisms as being joined with baptism: and as though they belonged unto a certain order of Clergy men.

13. Wherefore I will now come to the second point of the question proposed: wherein we must try whether at this day Exorcists should be retained, and so retained, as in the Church should be a certain peculiar order of Exorcists. It hath seemed good unto many that such an order should be had in the Church. For Epiphanius in his third book and second Tome, when he reckoneth the holy orders, among others, nameth ἐπιορκήσας that is adjurers. Indeed after a sort he altereth the word, but yet indeed he meaneth the self-same thing. Also Isidorus in his book De Officijs Ecclesiasticis chap. 13 citeth the place of Esdras where in the second Chapter, the sons of

the children of Solomon are reckoned together with the children of Nathan.

The Hebrews were declared to be those servants of Solomon for the reparations of the Temple: namely that they should provide to keep it safe from wind and water. But Isidorus saith, that they were Exorcists: But how truly, let others judge. In the decrees, Gratian Distinct. 77, in the Canon

Monachus: Exorcists are called defenders, as if (in my judgment) they should defend bodies and souls from the devil. In the Laodicean Council in the chapter 26, it is forbidden, that none should exorcise, unless he be ordained by the Bishop, as though the Bishop be able by his imposition of hands, to give power to drive away ill spirits. This also we have in the decrees in the distinct. the 69th in the Canon, Non oportet, &c. Again in the fourth Council of Carthage it is decreed that when an Exorcist, is ordained the Book of Exorcisms is delivered unto him, and he is commanded to learn them by heart, that he may use them when opportunity shall serve. But at this day the Papists in their Churches have only the titles and names, but they perform nothing of those things which they teach to belong unto their functions. For only the Elders do baptize ordinarily among them, neither are there used besides them any other Clergy men, which by their ministry, may exorcise the infants which be brought unto them. And they which in times past accompanied the Bishops as witnesses of their good name and conversation, were called ἀκόλουθοι. At this time in deed remaineth the order of Acoluthes, but they do not the office. They have also the name and order of doorkeepers: unto whom the Temple doors are said to be committed, that they may have a regard to them that go in, and that they may keep the infidels and excommunicate persons from the holy service.

But there is no doorkeeper found at this day that doth execute that office.

Furthermore they ordain readers: whose office in the purer times was, that

they should openly read certain places out of the Scriptures unto the congregation assembled: which the Bishop afterward succeeding did interpret unto the people standing by. This office is at this day out of use:

Yet is the name and order retained. And they have also added exorcists which should adjure them which be assailed with devils. And this as I have said, the priests at this day do in baptism, not the meaner Clergy men, who seem now to do nothing in the Temples (as we see) but to sing, to bear wax lights, to ring belles, and to help the priest to say Mass: and so now all things in the Church are become ridiculous and foolish. And while they will imitate the forefathers, especially in that wherein they were not to be allowed, they after a sort show themselves to be their Apes. Wherefore vain names and degrees ought not to be retained without the true exercise of a function. What then shall we do with men that be taken and assaulted with evil spirits, when they be tormented by them? Shall we forsake them?

Undoubtedly they must not be forsaken: Yet must we not by adjurations command the evil spirit to go forth, seeing we perceive not ourselves to be endued with that grace and power that we should by our own commandment cast forth devils. Wherefore we will use faithful prayers, devout and most earnest supplications for the recovery of them. Briefly it would be well and advisedly done in these days to convert exorcisms into prayers. And hitherto concerning this point.

14. Now let us see for the third: whether exorcisms should be joined with baptism. They which defend the part affirmative, use very many testimonies and sentences of the fathers. Further they bring certain reasons of their own mind. Augustine in the first and fourth books De Fide & Symbolo ad

Catechumenos giveth an excellent testimony unto exorcism. And in his book De peccato originally against Pelagius and Coelestius the 40th

chapter. By exorcisms (saith he) is blown out before baptism a contrary power. The same father in his Enchiridion unto Laurence chapter the 31st saith: that now Exorcisms be in the whole world, and that by an exsufflation or blowing out, the unclean spirit is driven away and the prince of this world is cast forth, the strong-armed man is bound and his vessels are plucked from him. Moreover in the first book and 14th Chapter De peccatorum meritis & remissione he writeth: what doth my Exorcism work in the baptizing of an infant, if he be not held in the family of the devil?

Undoubtedly Augustine in this opinion erred grievously, in that he attributed over much unto Baptism. For he acknowledgeth it not to be the outward sign of regeneration, but he would that by the very act of washing, we should be regenerate and adopted, and pass into the family of Christ. As though before that very hour of washing, we did pertain unto the family of the devil, and were wholly possessed of him. The same Author in the 6th chapter De fide & operibus teacheth that by Exorcisms men be purged. And in his treatise De Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus he is of the same opinion. And also in his Sermon De Sacramentis fidelium feria secunda paschae, where he saith: By Exorcisms and adjurations ye began to be grinded. Chrysostom also in his Homily of Adam and Eve made mention of Exorcism and exsufflation, as of things used generally by the Church. Furthermore

Optatus the Bishop of Miletum in the 8th book against Parmenianus, maketh mention of Exorcisms, as though they served everywhere for the use of Churches.

15. Surely, it would be over long, to recite here the sayings of all the fathers. Wherefore leaving now the Testimonies of them, I will rehearse the reasons by which they defend this opinion of theirs. First they take as granted, that it is necessary unto salvation to pass from the power of

darkness into the kingdom of light. They add afterward that men before baptism, live under the power of the Devil. So then they conclude, that he must be put away, which they judge to be done by exorcism. Secondly, they say, it is come to pass for sins sake that the Devil hath power over men: but they affirm that sin is in them until such time as they be baptized: and therefore judge it requisite that the evil spirit which is always joined together with sin, shall give place unto the good spirit, seeing they cannot be both together. For what agreement is there between light and darkness, and between Christ and Belial? Further that the unclean spirit is driven out by exorcisms, they thereby confirm, because with their cries they testify themselves to be tormented and il vexed while they be adjured. But if thou shalt say unto these men, that the nature of Infants is good: For God saw all things that he made, and they were good: They will answer, that they do not exorcise nor blow out nature which God hath made, but that they would depress the power of the enemy, I mean the Devil, that he should not at his own pleasure hurt nor stir up the infection or concupiscence to commit sin.

And they add that it is lawful for them to Exorcise every creature: seeing Paul hath said unto Timothy: that things are sanctified by the word and by prayers. For this purpose also they allege that saying which was spoken by God unto Adam after sin committed: Cursed is the ground for thy sake: and thereby they gather, that by Exorcisms the state of man is to be delivered from the devil and from the curse. They bring also that saying of the Apostle: Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against wickedness in heavenly things. Wherefore they affirm that the spirits must be bridled by Exorcisms. Lastly they say, that in natural things the impediments are first removed from the matter, before a form and habit of good be brought in. So it behooveth before the form of new generation to

exclude the adverse power which hindereth, and altogether resisteth spiritual birth.

16. But this matter is far otherwise: for seeing the Scripture hath nowhere commanded, that exorcisms should be joined with baptism, it is not to be attempted by us. And if so be we will follow better examples, we shall perceive that Peter baptized Cornelius: and that the Eunuch was baptized by Philip without any adjurations. Thirdly I add, that this gift of the holy Ghost flourisheth not at this day in the Church, that we be able to heal them that be taken with ill spirits, and to cure such as be possessed with the Devil.

Therefore we must cease to boast of that which we have not received.

Moreover it should be necessary, that they which judge otherwise should show some sign or token of their power which they have received from God. There be (as it is said) very many Lunatic men, and there want not of them that be possessed of ill spirits, why do they not heal them? This whilst they do not to the Devil himself, nor yet to us, let them not persuade us that they be endued with such power. Augustine in the 22nd book de Civitate dei chapter 22, writeth that Infants of Christians being baptized, are oftentimes miserably vexed by unclean spirits. Then seeing these Exorcists be not able to drive away unclean spirits out of them, in whom it is not doubted but that they are, why babble they, that they can cast them out of them in whom they show no sign of their presence? Over this let us consider, that Circumcision in old time was in the place of Baptism, and yet that during all the time of the Old Testament no exorcisms were used to the Circumcising of Infants.

Which if they had been necessary, we are not to think that so many Prophets had passed them over: especially seeing among the Hebrews, (as we have said) there were some exorcists that were endued from God with the power of driving away ill spirits. Neither can they easily escape which embrace

exorcisms, but that of one Sacrament they make many, seeing they make so many signs which they will to be accounted holy, adding oil, spittle, exsufflations, and such like: so as one Sacrament of baptism doeth degenerate into many. Neither must they be heard when to the intent to mock the simple, they feign a difference between Sacraments and Sacramentals, which is altogether Sophistical. For distinctions are to be received gladly, but those to be such as are taken out of the very nature of things, because they bring much light to controversies: but those distinctions, which spring out of the brain of Sophisters only for the shifting off of Arguments, are altogether to be refused.

17. But seeing that among themselves, even private men and silly women do baptize and use neither exorcisms nor exsufflations, what manner of baptism will they judge that to be? If they will say: a perfect baptism, they ought not to join thereunto these inventions of their own, seeing they judge that to be perfect, unto which nothing can be added: If imperfect, they make themselves wiser than Christ, who joined not exorcisms and exsufflations with baptism. Besides that, they are so insolent, as they say in the 4th book of the Sentences, Dist. the 6th that these their Sacramentals must both be supplied and pieced up, when they have been omitted upon the dangers of life. But they know for a certainty, that they are vainly and superfluously patched. For if (as themselves say, and Cyprian affirmeth) when they come to baptism, the Devil is chased away, neither can he be there anymore after Baptism is celebrated at the peril of Death: if he now be away, why do they adjure him, and by a certain imperious manner command him to depart? A foolish thing doubtless it is to speak with one that is absent, and to command him to depart which is already gone. But that we may again fight with their own weapons, we remit the reader unto Gratian, who de

Consecratione, distinct. the 4th chap. Si parvuli, bringeth the judgment of Caelestinus who decreed, that from baptism must be driven all those from whom the Devil by adjurations and exsufflations hath not been cast out.

There the Gloss saith, that this must not be absolutely understood, because the evil spirit before baptism is not cast out, seeing until the time of baptism we be the Family of the Devil and his members. Wherefore he affirmed that the Devil is not cast out by exorcism, but signified that he shall be cast out, namely in baptism. To conclude, these men be they which so greatly fly from figurative speeches, and cannot abide that we should apply a figure of signification unto the words of the Lord's Supper: where as they at their own will (I will not say for their pleasure) everywhere abuse figurative speeches. But if it be lawful for them to say, that by exorcisms is signified that the Devil shall be cast out, by the same reason another will say, it is signified that he is cast out already. But I go yet unto stronger reasons, and affirm, that those which are to be baptized, be either men of ripe age, or else Infants. They which be of ripe age, it behooveth that they believe before they be baptized: who if they believe they be already justified, and when they are become the members of Christ, the Devil out of doubt is departed from them: So that they ought not to be exorcised or adjured as though they had yet evil spirits present in them. And if they which be offered to be baptized, be the Infants of Christians, I deny them to belong to the devil, seeing they be in the covenant of God, wherein it was said unto Abraham: I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed. Wherefore in the Prophet Ezekiel the 16th chapter and also in the 23rd chapter, God is brought in to the Israelites, blaming them because they had yielded unto Idols, the children which they had begotten unto him, and had made them to pass through the fire that they might become sacrifices of the Idols. And Paul in the first

Epistle to the Corinthians affirmed that the Children of the Christians be holy. Which if it be true, there can no cause be assigned why the Devil should be driven from them by exorcisms.

18. But the head of their superstition is this, that these men think, that by the outward baptism sins are chiefly forgiven. But they are greatly deceived: this is the gift of Christ alone: and therefore John in pointing unto

Christ said: Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world. And in Exodus the 33rd, it is expressed as a thing proper unto God, that he taketh away iniquity, ungodliness and sins. And Isaiah in the 43rd

Chapter: It is I that take away sins. In the first of John we read: He it is that is the Propitiation for our sins. Which also Paul affirmed unto the Romans when he saith: Whom he hath set forth a Propitiation through his blood.

Also John in his first Epistle and first Chapter wrote: The blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin. Verily the outward things do not cleanse the conscience, otherwise Christ had died in vain. Again, the soul which is a spirit and without body, is not purged by gross and corporal things. Which the Epistle to the Hebrews the 9th chapter doeth plainly teach, when it saith, That the gifts and sacrifices do not purge nor make clean: but that Christ was the very high Priest, who having wrought eternal redemption, passed into the heavens. And if at any time the holy scriptures may seem to attribute forgiveness of sins or salvation to outward signs, that must be understood by the figure Metonymia, whereby those things are given unto signs, which are proper unto the things signified, and the things signified are expressed by the name of the signs. So Peter in his first Epistle saith, that in the time of Noah, 8 souls were saved by the water, alluding unto baptism. Howbeit by water he understandeth not the outward element, but that washing which is done by the blood of Christ. And so in the

outward sign he comprehendeth the thing signified. Which he himself manifestly declareth afterward, when he saith: Not in that wherein the filths of the flesh is put away, but in that a good conscience answereth even to God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. So that by the water he noted the blood and death which is expressed under the name of Resurrection. After the same manner must that be understood, which we have to the Ephesians: namely, That Christ gave himself for the Church, that the same might be sanctified by the washing of water through the word, &c. The cause of sanctification is Christ himself, who gave himself for us, and for that cause gave the washing of water, that the cleansing by him might be testified by the word and by the sign. Briefly this must be held: that the outward signs join us not unto Christ, but that they be given when we be already joined unto him. Even as the watch word of soldiers doth not levy a soldier, but hath been accustomed to be given when he is already levied. And there is none that marketh his sheep, horse, and ox, unless he first possess those beasts. Yea and the letters of Donation are first finished and written before the seals of the givers be set unto them. And assuredly thus God dealt with Abraham: First he believed and it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Then he received circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of faith, which he was endued with when he was uncircumcised. Neither did God begin to deal with Abraham in circumcision, but the same circumcision followed justification. Which is also done in baptism. The thing itself, that is the covenant, made with mankind by Christ goeth before: afterward followeth the outward token. And that it is not otherwise with us than with Abraham,

Paul declareth, when he saith, that he was set forth unto us, as an example of justification. Which if it were not, all the Arguments of Paul concerning that matter should be weak: yea rather, they would be utterly overthrown.

19. Yet do I not deny, but that there be certain signified things of baptism, which do not go before but follow the eternal washing: as is mortification and repentance: and according to this Analogy I understand that which we have in the Epistle unto the Romans, to wit, that we die with Christ, and are buried together with him, because the old man, that is the affections and lusts of the flesh must perpetually be mortified: which is not yet brought to pass so soon as we be baptized, but it is requisite that it should afterward be done. And whereas we read unto the Galatians: So many of you as are baptized, have put on Christ: I judge it must be so expounded, as if thou understand, To put on Christ, for to be made the member of him; that goeth before baptism: but if you mean it by manners and life to express the child of God; that followeth after baptism received. So as we must decree as concerning the children of faithful men, that they be reckoned among the faithful, and that the children of the Saints are numbered among the Saints: as Paul testifieth in the first Epistle to the Corinthians. And if that one will object, that in the same Epistle the 12th chapter it is written: that we be baptized into one body: that must not be so expounded, as though we first pass by outward baptism into the body of Christ, seeing we were of the body of Christ before. Then to the intent that this may be testified and sealed, we are outwardly baptized. And therefore before those words it is written: By the spirit we are baptized into one body. So that it is first wrought by the work of the holy Ghost that we become the members of Christ: then baptism is added. Wherefore seeing the Infants of Christians be such, there is no cause why they should be adjured or breathed upon. But we must weigh, that it is not brought to pass by those things that original sin is utterly taken away, because we confess that all men are born the children of wrath, and be depraved with original sin: seeing that kind of sin cometh

not by imitation, as the Pelagians taught, but it is the corrupting of the whole nature of man, both as touching the soul and as touching the body.

Again we add that God, by Jesus Christ doeth make clean his elect and predestinate: so as the vice, which in his own nature should be mortal sin, shall not be imputed to them unto death. Further by his spirit he reneweth and adorneth them. Afterward is added the sealing of outward baptism. First therefore, they have election or predestination, they have the promise, and they are born of faithful [Parents:] and seeing they be now in the covenant, adopted by God, and justified, there is no cause, but that they be justly and of good right baptized.

20. Wherefore many are deceived, which thoroughly persuade themselves that the Infants of Christians which perish without baptism are utterly damned. In deed Christ said: He that shall believe and be baptized shall be saved: And further added: He that will not believe shall be damned: But did not there put, He that shall not be baptized. For it may well be that some man believeth, and by some occasions is let that he cannot be baptized. Yea and Augustine himself somewhat hard in this matter, acknowledged a baptism as well of the spirit as of Martyrdom, namely, when any man dieth of Martyrdom before he be baptized. And Ambrose in his funeral sermon made at the death of Valentinian who was slain, being newly converted and not yet baptized, affirmeth that he reigneth with Christ in heaven. For albeit that he were not baptized, yet did he therefore travel into Italy, that he might be baptized of Ambrose a Catholic Bishop. Wherefore he affirmeth that he was justified by faith. Therefore look what faith bringeth to pass in men of ripe age before they be baptized, that doth the spirit of Christ, and the promise, work in young children. But here some men demand, whether all the children of the Christians belong unto the covenant. Which, if it be

avouched, then that is objected which unto the Romans is written of the two twins: of whom being not yet born, when as they had done neither good nor ill, it was said: Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Neither is it any doubt, but that Isaac was a faithful father and a holy man: whose son Esau notwithstanding is known to have been out of the covenant. Unto this we answer, that those which be of the covenant of God, are considered either as they are before God, or else in such sort as they may be known of the Church. God doubtless hath the number of his children most certain which he hath predestinate from all eternity. But the promise of the covenant with the stock of Abraham, is not of any number certain, and it expressly shutteth forth none of his successors. And so when the children of the believers are offered unto the Church to be Christened, the same hath respect unto the promise according as it is uttered. But if there be any prerogative or exception in the secret counsels of God: the Church stayeth not for that, seeing no such matter belongeth unto it. Therefore it cannot be accused of falsehood when it reckoneth the children of holy men among the holy. And so it circumcised Esau and such like. It is said of some that regeneration is not to be granted but by the word which is the seed of God. For Peter saith in his first Epistle the first Chapter, That we are born anew not of a corruptible seed, but of an incorruptible, which is the word of God. But unto this we answer, that this must be understood as touching men of ripe age, but that the case standeth not so with infants, unless we will make the children of the Hebrews to be in better state than the children of the Christians. For those could not be circumcised, if they had died the 8th day.

Whom notwithstanding to exempt from the covenant of God would be wicked. Also it might be lawful to affirm that young children be born again by the word of God, but yet by the inward word, that is by the comfortable

power of Christ and his holy spirit. Lastly is objected that which is written in the 3rd chapter of John: Except a man shall be born again of the water and the spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Unto this may be first said, that Christ would teach Nicodemus a new regeneration, and that the same is done by the spirit. Which he expressed by two words, namely by water and the spirit: neither is it against the manner of the scriptures, that the grace itself of God, should be signified under the name of water. For it as well watereth as also maketh fruitful the mind and the soul of the faithful. Yea and John the Baptist joined together the spirit and fire when he saith: He that cometh after me, shall baptize with the spirit and with fire. In which speech he uttered one and the self-same thing under two manner of words. Or if ye had rather refer these words unto outward baptism, the saying may be drawn unto them which neglect the receiving of baptism, when they have no let to the contrary. For if a man refuse this sacrament, he undoubtedly showeth himself not to be justified. Then seeing the matter thus standeth, that justification dependeth not of baptism, but goeth before it, there shall be no need of exorcisms and exsufflations. For the word of God teacheth not that these things should be used. Also there appeareth not in us at this day this grace of healings: neither are the Infants which are offered to be baptized, such as these men have imagined. But perhaps thou wilt say: To what end then is Baptism delivered unto them, if they had the substance of baptism before? Is the labor spent there in vain?

No verily. First, because we obey God, who commanded unto us the work of baptism. Secondly, we seal the promise and gift which we have received.

Moreover, faith is there confirmed by the holy Ghost, through the word and outward signs. And when we think with ourselves of this visible word or sacrament, the spirit of God stirreth up faith in our hearts, whereby again

and again, we embrace the divine promises, and so justification is amplified while faith is increased in the believers. Verily God doeth assist the signs ordained by him. For they are no profane or empty things. Wherefore the fruit of baptism is not momentary, but it endureth all our whole life. For which cause they that are baptized, spend not their labor in vain, neither do they an unnecessary work.

21. Now these things being declared and expounded, it remaineth that I answer the judgment of the Fathers, and the reasons which the favorers of exorcisms do bring. The fathers that were of the greater antiquity and purer age, spake of those exorcisms, with which the men taken or possessed of ill spirits were healed by those faithful which had the grace of healings given them by God. And therefore they would wonderfully marvel, if they should now see men being not endued with that grace, so boldly and impudently command the Devils, as at this day it is done by Priests and feigned exorcists. But those things that were afterward spoken by the latter writers of the Church, as touching the joining of exorcisms with Baptism, seeing they be alleged without Scriptures, and savor of superstition, neither are done with any fruit nor ought to be received. But from whence the error sprang, it was declared before, when we handled a certain place of Cyprian.

Further another cause of the error was, for that men had begun to attribute over much unto Sacraments. In which thing Augustine (otherwise a man of a sharp wit and incomparable learning) was very much deceived. For he thought that the Infants did then first go out of the power of the Devil when they were baptized. But seeing it hath been declared, that this is not so, I think it good not to use any new confutation. Only this I will say, that the Sacraments must not be contemned: but on the other side, we must not attribute unto them that which belongeth only unto God.

22. And thus much as concerning the Testimonies of the Fathers. Now come we to confute the reasons alleged. First it was taken as granted, that we out of the kingdom of darkness, shall be translated into the kingdom of light. That we willingly grant, but we deny that to be first done by receiving of Baptism, seeing Infants obtain this by the predestination and promise of God, and also in right of inheritance of the covenant. So that there is no cause why place should therefore be given to exorcisms. And they which were of ripe age obtain this translation by faith. For by the same they receive justification. Wherefore they must not be adjured, seeing they belong already unto Christ. We confess also that by the desert of sin it is come to pass, that men are come into the power of the Devil: but yet that the same is taken away and evacuated by Christ through the holy Ghost and the word of God: and as concerning men of ripe age, by faith, not by adjurations and exorcisms. And whereas otherwhile, when adjurations be used, the ill spirits cry out that they be wrung, tormented and vexed, it may be done by collusion: namely that the father of lies doeth fain such things, to the intent that superstitions may increase, and may be longer time nourished in the Church. And whereas they say, that they do not blow out or exorcise the man's nature made by God, which is therefore good, but only endeavor by their adjurations to make feeble the power of the devil and original corruption, least then it should as much hurt as it did before: We answer, that this may much more justly and religiously be obtained by prayers. Further if this were their mind, men ought to exorcise, not only at Baptism, but also in a manner throughout their whole life, seeing men are endangered all their life long by the violence and temptations of the Devil, and also by the naughty original corruption, which doeth perpetually remain in them. But after what manner, meats, and those things which we use for

defending the life of the body are sanctified by the word of God and by prayers, there is no need now to express, seeing of that matter we have spoken largely enough before. They added, that in times past the earth was cursed by God, by reason of the first fault of Adam: and that therefore it is needful that the fruits thereof should by adjurations be plucked out of the power of the devil. This do we not deny, but we add, that the curse was through Christ, either mitigated or turned into blessing, and that therefore exorcisms should be counted for superfluous and unprofitable, seeing that the use of the earth and the fruits thereof (so that thanksgiving and prayers be used therein) are made clean and pure unto the faithful. Also the words of the Apostle were alleged, wherein he saith: That our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual wickedness's. What this maketh for the present purpose, I cannot so much as imagine, much less perceive. The Apostle in that place instructed us, with a wonderful complete armor against spiritual enemies, and against celestial things: yet spake he not of exorcisms and exsufflations. To conclude, they said that before regeneration be wrought, the impediments must be removed: namely the forces of the Devil. That which they first take unto them, let us grant them: but we must add that such obstacles are removed by the might of Christ, and also by the power of the holy Ghost, by the promise of God, by the right of the covenant, and, in men of riper age, by the preaching of the word, by faith and by prayers, and therefore there is no place left unto adjurations, unless perhaps in someone man, that shall be endued peculiarly from God with the gift of healing. Which power or faculty we judge not, that it can be given by the bishops to whomsoever they will by laying on of hands: seeing it is the holy Ghost which distributeth these gifts of his upon

whomsoever he will. And thus much have we spoken as concerning the question propounded.

Of Papistical holy Water.

23. The fact of Elisha, [wherein he applied salt to help the waters of Jericho] do the priests of the Pope imitate of a certain perverse zeal, who not only use salt in the baptizing of infants, but do also pour it into their holy waters, which may rather be called heinous waters. I marvel that they sometimes use not figs, since that Isaiah once applied them in healing the sore of Hezekiah. Howbeit so great is the boldness of these men that in their fainings and inventions, they not only exercise these things which Christ and his Prophets used, but they also take those things which they never used. For they say that they mingle the holy oil with Balm. But they make a notable lie, seeing Balm hath not been brought unto us of long time. And seeing they so bountifully abuse salt, they bewray themselves that the salt is become unsavory. Which Cardinal Caietanus manifestly confessed, when he interpreted the words of Christ, wherein he said: But if the salt be made unsavory, it is nothing else worth but to be cast forth and to be trodden under foot by men. When he wrote these things, the City of Rome was sacked by the Spaniards under Pope Clement the 7th. Whereupon he said:

Because we are now become unsavory salt, therefore are we cast forth and trodden under foot. Wherefore we must pray unto God that these bondslaves of Antichrist may become new vessels, and receive the salt of wholesome doctrine, seeing they have of long time forsaken God the fountain of lively water, and have digged to themselves pits, which cannot contain wholesome waters. And this place they have abused for confirming of their holy water, which every Sabbath day they enchant and conjure, ascribing the invention thereof to Alexander the first Roman Bishop of that

name, whom they will to be the fifth or sixth after Peter. And in deed there is carried about a decretal Epistle of his wherein are contained many things as touching this invention, which were afterward set forth in the decrees De

Consecr. distinct 4, in the chapter Aquam Sale. But in my judgment and the judgment of the more learned, that Epistle is no right, but a supposed

Epistle. For Alexander lived in the time of Traianus. So then most ancient had the institution of this water been. Whereof nevertheless the Ecclesiastical writers which flourished before the time of Gregory made no mention in any place. But how fond and absurd things they be which are there written, we will somewhat more diligently examine. First he decreed that that water should be sanctified of the Priests. Whereupon the Canonists gather, that the same is not lawful neither for a Deacon nor a Subdeacon, whenas notwithstanding they admit the administration of Baptism both unto laymen and unto women. But this is an old purpose of the devil, to provide that man's inventions may he had in more price than the laws of God.

Which also may be perceived in confecting of the unsavory ointment called of them Chrism or the holy oil: where so great a solemnity is used, as it behooveth that a Bishop with all the Clergy men be present, when in the meantime Baptism and the Eucharist, which be the very sacraments of Christ himself are ministered after a vulgar and common manner. But howsoever this Alexander or whosoever he were do approve his holy water, he useth a very wicked argument in usurping those words which are in the Epistle to the Hebrews: If the blood of Goats and of Bulls, and the ashes of an Heifer being sprinkled did sanctify them that are unclean as touching the sanctification of the flesh, how much more doth the blood of Christ, which by the eternal spirit offered himself for us, &c? Wherein Paul the Apostle argueth from the less to the greater. These words Alexander taking, inferreth

that much more the water consecrated by divine words, shall sanctify them that be unclean. And so that which Paul concluded, as touching the blood of Christ, this man with intolerable blasphemy transferreth to holy water. For the worthiness and work of Christ his blood, must not be attributed to the elements of this world, especially when they lack the word of God.

24. Again, he commendeth his water through the fact of Elisha. For if Elisha (saith he) by casting in of salt, put away barrenness from the waters, much more shall this water drive away all barrenness. And yet further amplifying the matter, It will bring all good things (saith he) to them which use it. Moreover he attributeth so great a strength thereunto, as he affirmeth that the crafty endeavors and temptations of the devil are thereby put away, and that it also removeth from the minds of men, hurtful visions and naughty cogitations. And he yet proceedeth further, and useth a very wicked argument. If the skirts (saith he) of our Lord's garment, when he was touched by the sick woman, did make her whole, how much rather shall this water bring health both of body and soul unto the faithful? By these things it plainly appeareth, that this holy water is made equal unto the blood of Christ, and is preferred above the skirts of his garments: as though our sins were so light, and took so feeble root in our minds, as they can be wiped out by the sprinkling of a superstitious water. Besides this, among the false

Ecclesiastical men, there is in use another kind of consecrated water, which they use in the consecration or reconciliation of Churches or Temples. That, only the Bishop doth conjure, or as they speak, doth sanctify: and he applieth thereunto wine and ashes. There is also among them another kind of most solemn water, namely, of the fountain of baptism, which they with great pomp consecrate the day before Easter and Pentecost. And thereof is mention made by many of the fathers. And the custom of consecrating such

waters of baptism seemeth to have been of some antiquity. And so whereas I said before that the Elder fathers made no mention of holy water, I had only respect unto that which is said to have been instituted by that same

Alexander, namely which they keep in temples, to the intent that men may sprinkle themselves therewith. They themselves also do sprinkle houses, dead bodies, churchyards, eggs, flesh, potherbs and garments with the same.

Of this doth Aquinas in the 4th book of sentences, inquire whether it be a Sacrament: And in answering, denieth it, alleging this reason, that it is not instituted to abolish any defect of ours. But he affirmed it to be a certain sacramental thing whereby we are affected, and as he speaketh, disposed to obtain the forgiveness of some certain sins. And from this opinion Petrus de

Palude and Alexander de Ales do nothing disagree. For they say, that by the use of the consecrated water, sins be forgiven, not in very deed as by the Sacraments, (which perform this even without the motion of the heart, if only there be put no let) but in respect of merit, because they sprinkling themselves with that water, do devoutly (as they speak) lift up their mind unto God, desiring the forgiveness of sins, which by prayers they obtain.

Among those sayings of the schoolmen, there are many wicked and blasphemous things, seeing they attribute to the elements of this world that which belongeth only unto Christ. Besides this, they trifle many ways, disputing whether profane water being added unto consecrated water becometh holy. And finally they conclude that it doth so after this manner: to wit, that those things which be the more worthy do convert into themselves the things which be less worthy. Which is most contrary unto the truth. For if a man mingle water with wine, and do that often, at length the water changeth into his own nature the wine itself which is better than it.

25. But pass we over these things, and let us consider that this ordinance had his original of two sorts of perverse zeal and fond imitation. One wherein they would imitate the Hebrews, unto whom by a prescript rule of the law of Moses that water was commanded, as it is in the book of Numbers. Howbeit seeing the legal ceremonies by the benefit of Christ his death be extinguished, we ought not of our own rashness to revoke the same. While they were in use they had the word of God joined with them: but now when they are destitute of that, they be more superstitious. Another there is wherein they have imitated the Ethnics, who no doubt but used purifying waters, but yet not after the same manner. For when holy service was done unto the supernal God's, the body that was to be purified was all wholly washed: but if to the infernal God's, they were only touched with sprinkling of the purifying water. And this Virgil as a man very skillful of [their] high priest's law, did diligently observe by the testimony of Macrobius in the 3rd book of his Saturnals the first chapter. Which I therefore thought good to rehearse, to the intent that sacrificing priests may know, that while they sprinkle things with holy water, they do it not to the high God, but do sacrifice unto the infernal gods, that is, to them that be in hell. And that sprinklings with purifying waters was a use among the Ethnics, the Ecclesiastical history teacheth. In which it is written of Valentinianus, when as yet he was not Emperor, and was in the train of Julianus the Apostate, and had come into the Temple: there the prelate sprinkled him with his water. He being angry thereat, gave him a blow, saying: Why hast thou polluted my purple garment with thy water? Yea and God may therefore seem to have appointed that rite unto the Hebrews, because they should not decline to the superstition of the Ethnics. And that ceremony no doubt so long as it was of force had his utility, as the rest had.

For the old rites before the coming of Christ, were testimonies and certain seals of the heavenly gifts, promises, and favor of God to be given. For these are spiritual things, neither can they be discerned with the outward eyes: and therefore were signs, rites, and ceremonies added thereto, that men being admonished by them, might be confirmed as touching the good will and grace of God. Whereunto add, that all those things shadowed

Christ and his redemption. Also we after the same manner do in Christianity use baptism and the Eucharist. And there is no doubt but that David when in the 51st Psalm he sang (Sprinkle me Lord with Hyssop and I shall be clean, and shall become whiter than snow) had respect unto the legal sprinkling, the which in that age as I have declared had the word of God joined therewith. But that which the sacrificers do say that they consecrate, is no invention of God but of men.

26. These men endeavor indeed, howbeit in vain, to fasten to their superstition certain places of the Scripture. As that of Ezekiel: I saw water going forth of the Temple &c. And also the Testimony of Zechariah, wherein it is written: And in that day shall the house of David and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem have an open well. Those things are altogether impertinent to the matter, because the Prophets under this word, Water, meant nothing else than the gifts of the holy Ghost, and abundant grace of God toward the faithful. And there was a certain Papistical preacher in these our days, who commending unto the people the use of the holy water, taught that it served to renew the remembrance of Baptism: and he counseled all those which sprinkle themselves with the same, that they should say in themselves: Remember that thou art Baptized. Howbeit these things, besides that they be fond, they have not any testimony either of the Scriptures, or Canons, or Councils. Over and besides we must weigh how

frivolous and absurd it is, in that they would institute it to be either a Sacrament or (as they call it) a Sacramental thing, because someone

Prophet or Apostle did it once or twice. As, if so be God would once by Elisha amend the waters by using of salt, should therefore such a kind of Rite be brought into the Church? Jeremiah ware upon his neck a wooden yoke, And Isaiah healed the sore of Hezekiah with figs. Why did they not here make so many sacraments?

27. In like manner the men of Colen, have offered themselves to be laughed at in their Antididagma, where they alleged the example of Marcellus Bishop of Apameansis, as it is in the Tripartite History in the 9th book the 34th chapter, who, when the Temple of a certain Idol was to be burned, and that the fire put thereunto took no effect (for there was present an ill spirit which repressed the violence of the fire) then he, perceiving a danger least the people as yet weak, should take offense, and think that the ill spirit was stronger than Christ, did run unto the Church, and commanded water to be brought unto him, and lying prostrate before the altar, prayed with great spirit and faith. Further he signed that Water with the sign of the cross, and commanded Equitius his Deacon that he should cast the same upon the Temple of the Idol, and after that, he cheerfully set it on fire, which, when he had done, both the Idol and the Temple were very easily burned. They bring also that which Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalem did, As Eusebius reporteth in the 6th book and eighth chapter. He upon Easter day at night (during which night the faithful in times past were continually praying in the Temple) when there now wanted oil in the Lamps, and that it seemed that the lights could no longer endure, and that the people were marvelous sad, he himself commanded that water should be brought him forth of a well near at hand. And when he had prayed earnestly, he

commanded to fill the lamps, and the water did in a manner take unto it the nature of oil, and kept in light all the whole night. But to what purpose are these things alleged? The Histories show not that those were holy Waters.

Furthermore if it seemed good unto God to make those Bishops famous by the instrument of water, for confirming of their sound Doctrine, ought therefore holy water to be instituted? Undoubtedly, as a law is not wont to be made, upon a particular example, so for the showing forth of some certain miracle, sacraments in the Church must not be invented according to the will and pleasure of men. Whereas I have now spoken many things touching holy Water, namely that the author thereof (as they will) was

Alexander, and have confuted the Arguments whereby he commended the same, and have declared the strength which they ascribe unto it, and have showed how many kinds there be, reprehending two sorts of their fond imitation, and lastly have set forth that an Ecclesiastical Rite must not for every miracle sake be instituted, I think I have spoken enough of that matter: This only will I note at the last, that the end of the miracle showed by Elisha was, that the people of Jericho might by that benefit received be more and more allured to the true service of God: and that not only that City should be won unto God, but that all other Cities to whose knowledge so great a miracle should come, might be brought to the knowledge of God.

↑ Back to top