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.

Chap. 5. the. 13. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 96. Sect. 2.

And here let vs obserue by what degrees and stayers, Sathan lifted the child of perdition vn∣to that proud title of vniuersall Byshop. First (*) 1.1 where the Lord did ordeyne that there shoulde be diuers pastors, elders, or Byshops in euery congregation, (a) 1.2 Sathan wrought first, that there should be but one in euery Church: this was no doubt the first steppe. Afterwards he pushed fur∣ther, and stirred vp diuers not to content themselues to be Byshops of one Church, but to desire to be Byshops of a dioces, wherevnto although it seemeth that ther was resistance (in that it is sayd, that it was decreede often) yet in the end this wicked attempt preuayled, and this was another steppe: then were there Archbyshops of whole prouinces, whiche was the thirde stayer vnto the seate of Antichrist. Afterwards they were patriarches of one of the fower corners of the whole world, the whole Church being assigned to the iurisdiction of fower, that is to say of the Romaine, Constantinopolitane, Antiochene, and Alexandrine Byshops, and these fower stayers being layde of Sathan, there was but an easie stride for the Byshop of Rome into that chaire of pestilence, wherein he now sitteth.

Io. Whitgifte.

All this is as coldely proued, as it is boldely affirmed, for here is neyther scrip∣ture, doctor, story, Councell, or any thing else, but ipse dixit. How proue you that the Lorde ordeyned that there should be in euery congregation diuers pastors, elders, or Byshops? The place of scripture (if there be any) had bin soone quoted. Or howe proue you that Sathan wrought first that there should be but one in euery Church? Is it Sathās worke* 1.3 that one Church should haue but one pastor? This is straunge doctrine, and far from an Apostolicall spirite: contrary to the practise of the Apostles, and of the Church euen from the beginning. But séeing you haue so barely set it downe without any kynde of proofe, I will passe it ouer, by putting you to your proofe. But yet tell me, dyd Sathan stirre vp Timothie and Titus, who were Byshops of one whole diocesse?

Did he stirre vp the other auncient fathers and godly Bishops of whome I haue spo∣ken? Whither will this slaunderous mouth reache? whome will this venemous tongue spare, if it speake so spitefully of such worthie Pastors?

Your collection of resistance that hath béene to such superioritie (béeing grounded of the place, that you neuer sawe nor red) is rashe and vnaduised. For if you had séene eyther that Epystle, or those Canons, you woulde (or at the least you might) haue learned another lesson.

Archbishops, Patriarches, &c. were allowed by the Councell of Nice, the godlyest, and the most perfect Councell (since the Apostles time) that euer was. And did Sathan rule there also and preuayle? O that Arius were aliue to heare it. These steppes whereof you make Sathan the authour, and whereby you say, the Bishop of Rome hath ascended into the Chayre of pestilence, &c. haue béene the best, and most conuenient kinde of gouernment, that euer was in the Church since the Apostles time: approued and allowed by the best Councels, and the next meanes to haue kept Antichrist out of his seate, if in all places they had remayned in theyr full force and authoritie.

But this I may not passe ouer, that you in effect confesse your kinde of gouern∣ment by elders to haue ceased before the Councell of Nice, and also one Bishop to haue béene ouer one whole Diocesse before that time, in that you say that the childe of perdition was lifted vp by these degrées, the last whereof was allowed in the Ni∣cene Councell.

Notes

• (*) 1.1

  In what place of scripture▪
• (a) 1.2

  Is not this soundly proued▪
• * 1.3

  Sathan not the cause of one Byshop in one church.