The defense of the aunsvvere to the Admonition against the replie of T.C. By Iohn VVhitgift Doctor of Diuinitie. In the beginning are added these. 4. tables. 1 Of dangerous doctrines in the replie. 2 Of falsifications and vntruthes. 3 Of matters handled at large. 4 A table generall.

About this Item

Title
The defense of the aunsvvere to the Admonition against the replie of T.C. By Iohn VVhitgift Doctor of Diuinitie. In the beginning are added these. 4. tables. 1 Of dangerous doctrines in the replie. 2 Of falsifications and vntruthes. 3 Of matters handled at large. 4 A table generall.
Author
Whitgift, John, 1530?-1604.
Publication
Printed at London :: By Henry Binneman, for Humfrey Toye,
Anno. 1574.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Cartwright, Thomas, 1535-1603. -- Replye to an answere made of M. Doctor Whitgifte -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Church of England -- Apologetic works -- Early works to 1800.
Episcopacy -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15130.0001.001
Cite this Item
"The defense of the aunsvvere to the Admonition against the replie of T.C. By Iohn VVhitgift Doctor of Diuinitie. In the beginning are added these. 4. tables. 1 Of dangerous doctrines in the replie. 2 Of falsifications and vntruthes. 3 Of matters handled at large. 4 A table generall." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15130.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 8, 2024.

Pages

T. C. Pag. 36. Sect. 4. 5.

Platina also in the lyfe of Pope Adrian the seconde, writeth that Ludouike the second by his let∣ters (a) 1.1 commaunded the Romains that they should choose their owne bishop, not loking for other mens voyces, which being strangers could not so well tell what was done in the common weale where they were strangers, and that it apperteyneth to the citizens.

The same Platina witnesseth in the lyfe of Pope Leo the. 8. that when the people of Rome were earnest with the Emperour Otho the fyrst, that he would take away one Pope Iohn yt liued verie licentiously & riotously, & place an other, the same Emperor answered, that it perteined to the clergie and people, to choose one, and willed them that they should choose, and he would approue it: and when they had chosen Leo, and after put him out without cause, and chose one Pope Ben∣net, he compelled them to take Leo againe. Wherby appeareth, that in those estates where Ma∣gistrates were Christian, and where the estate was moste of all Monarchicall, that is subiecte to ones gouernmente, and also when the Church put out any without good cause, that then the Ma∣gistrates should compell the Churches to doe their dutie. In deede the Bishop of Rome gaue the election then into the Emperou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 his handes, bycause of the lightnesse of the people, as Platina maketh mention, but that is not the matter, for I doe nothing else here but shew that the elec∣tions of the ministers by the Churche were vsed in the times of the Emperours, and by their con∣sentes. And seyng that Otho confessed it perteyned not vnto him, it is to be doubted, whether hee tooke it at the Bishop his handes.

Io. Whitgifte.

You haue not truly reported the wordes of Platina in the first place, for he sayth* 1.2 not that the Emperour Ludouike did commaund the Romains that they should choose their own Bishop, but that he commended them for their godlie and sound choise. His wordes be these: Superuenere à Ludouico Imperatore literae, quibus Romanos admodùm laudat, quòd summum* 1.3 Pontificem sanctè & integrè creassent, There came letters from Ludouike the Emperoure, wherin he praiseth the Romans very muche, bicause they had holily and syncerely created the high Priest. &c. But Platina declareth how tumultuous an election that was, and howe iniuriously the Emperours Embassadors were secluded from the same, hauing therin interest: and although the Emperoure was contente to put vp that iniurie, and to commend that election (peraduenture for some worldly respect) yet it is ma∣nifest, that then the Bishops of Rome began to vsurpe vppon the authoritie of the Emperour, and to seclude him from hauing any interest in their elections. M. Bale* 1.4 speaking of this election sayth: Vi enim eligendi pontificis potestatem, ad se tunc rapiebant Romani, For the Romaines then tooke by force vnto them selues power to choose their Bishop.

The second place of Platina argueth the vndiscretenesse of the people both in pla∣cing and displacing their Bishop, and the authoritie of the Emperour in taking this authoritie of placing and displacing from them, when they doe abuse it: for here hée put out Benet whom they had chosen, & placed Leo whom they had displaced, wher∣by it appeareth, that there was not then any one suche prescripte forme of electing the Bishop of Rome, but that it was in the authoritie of the Emperour, to abrogate, alter, or chaunge it. All this is nothing to the improuing of my assertion, for I de∣nie not, but that the people had interest in elections of Bishops, in diuers places, and especially in the Church of Rome, a long tyme: But this dothe not proue, that there is any prescript rule in Scripture, for the election of ministers whiche maye not be altered, and chaunged from tyme to tyme, as shall be moste conuenient for the pre∣sente state of the Churche: naye whatsoeuer ye haue hitherto sayde, proueth the contrarie.

Page 187

Platina doth not write that Otho coufessed that the election of the Byshop of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 did not perteyne vnto him: you should haue a care to report the words of the author truly: it is one thing to say, that the election of the Byshop perteyneth to the Cleargie and people, another thing to say, that it perteyned not to him: for it might perteine to them al. And the same Platina in the life of Io. 13. saithe, that after Iohn was condemned by a councell, and therefore fled away, the Emperoure Otho, at the request of the Clear∣gie, did create Leo Byshop of Rome: his words are these: Hanc ob causam Otho persua∣dente* 1.5 clero, Leonem Romanum ciuem Lateranensis ecclesiae Scriniarium Pontificem creat. For thys cause Otho by the perswasion of the Cleargie, chooseth Leo a Citizen of Rome, and keper of the monuments of the Church of Laterane, to be Byshop. He further in that place de∣clareth, how the people after the Emperours departure deposed Leo, and placed Be∣net, and how the Emperoure by force compelled them to place Leo agayne.

That Otho the Emperoure did take this graunt at the Byshops hands, that the electi∣on of the Byshop should be in him, and not in the people, M. Bale testifyeth in manifest words, in the life of Leo. 8. where he saith thus. After, he tooke from the Cleargie and people of Rome, the power of choosing their Byshop, whiche Carolus Magnus had gyuen* 1.6 vnto them before, and by a Synodall decree did commit the same to Otho the Emperoure, for the auoyding of seditions whiche were wont to be in these elections, and Otho recey∣uing this graunt thankfully, that he mighte shewe himselfe agayne beneficiall towards the Sea of Rome, restored all things which Constantine is feyned to haue giuen. &c. In the which words also it is to be noted yt this libertie of choosing their Byshop, was gran∣ted vnto the people and Cleargie of Rome by Carolus Magnus, the which not only M. Bale testifyeth in this place, but M. Barnes also, in these words. Leo the. 8. vnderstan∣ding the wickednesse of the Romaines in obtruding their friends to the Church, by bribes, threatnings, and other wicked deuises, did restore the interest of choosing the Byshop to O∣tho the Emperoure. Whereof I also conclude, that it is in the power of the ciuill magi∣strate to take order for elections of ministers, and that the consent of the people is not of any necessitie required therevnto.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.