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.

T. C. Page 101. Sect. 3. & Pag. 102. Sect. 1.

After M. Doctor translateth out of M. Caluine the Papistes reasons for the supremacie of the Pope, and M. Caluines solutions. For what purpose he knoweth, I can not tell, vnlesse it be to blotte paper, I know not what he should meane, and the quarell also whyche (a) 1.1 he picketh, to translate thys place, is yet more straūge. For he sayth, that the authors of the Admonition borrowed their arguments from the Papists, when the contrarie is true, that they vse the reasons whyche they of the Gospell vse agaynst the supremacie of the pope, to ouerthrowe the archebishop: And M. Doctor dothe vse reasons to defende the archebishop,(b) 1.2 whiche the Papistes vse to mayn∣teyne y^e pope(c) 1.3. For M. Doctor would proue(d) 1.4 that for bycause there is one king ouer a realme, therefore there may be one Bishop ouer a prouince, and the Papistes vse the same reason to proue the Pope to be a Bishop of the whole Church. Shew now one reason that the authors of the Ad∣monition brought of the papistes, to proue that there shoulde be no archebishop. But nowe I per∣ceyue his meaning, and that is, that he thought to get some comfort for the archebishop in M. Cal∣uines solutions made vnto the papists reasons for the supremacie. And therefore he hath haled and pulled in as it were by the shoulders, this disputation betweene the protestantes and the papistes touching the supremacie. And what is it, that M. Caluine sayth for the archbishop? It hath been before shewed, what his iudgement was touching hauing one minister ouer all the ministers of a prouince, & that he doth simply condemne it in his cōmentarie vpon the fyrst chapter of the Philip. Now let it be considered, whether in these sentences he hath sayd any thyng agaynst himselfe. The

Papistes obiect that for so muche as there was one highe priest in Iury ouer all the Church, there∣fore there should be one Bishop ouer all. To whom M. Caluine answereth that the reason follo∣weth not: for sayth he, there is no reason to extende that to all the world, which was profitable in one nation. Here vpon M. Doctor would cōclude, that M. Caluine alloweth one Archbishop ouer a whole prouince.

If one going about to proue that he may haue as many wiues as he list, would alleage Iacob for an example, which had two wiues, and M. Doctor should answere and say, that althoughe he might haue two wyues, yet it followeth not that he may haue as many as he list, woulde not M. Doctor thinke that he had great iniurie, if a man should conclude of these words, that his opinion is, that a man may haue two wiaes? I thinke that he would suppose that he had great wrōg, & yet thus would he conclude of M. Caluines words in this first sentence, where as in deede M. Cal∣inne declareth a little after, a speciall reason why there was but one highe Priest in the whole lande of Iewry, whych is bicause he was a figure of Christ, and that thereby shoulde be shadowed out his sole mediation betweene God and hys Churche. And therefore (e) 1.5 sheweth that for so muche as there is none to represent or figure our sauiour Christ, that his iudgement is, that as there should be no one ouer all the churches, so should there be no one ouer any nation.

Io. Whitgifte.

The authors of the Admonition say, that they may as sa〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ely by the warrāt of Gods word subscribe to allow the dominion of the Pope, vniuersally to reigne ouer the Church of God, as of an Archbishop ouer an whole prouince, or a Lord bishop ouer a dioces, which conteineth many shires 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 parishes. This I confute by M. Caluines answere to the arguments of the Papistes, wherin it appeareth euidently how far frō reason this & such like assertions are, that there may aswel be one pope ouer y^e whole Church, as one Bishop ouer one prouince or dioces.

Nowe therefore you may sée if you liste, that I haue translated these reasons and soluti∣ons out of M. Caluine to some purpose. And althoughe I might haue had the same so∣lutions out of other learned writers, yet I thought it best to vse M. Caluine, as one of whome you haue conceyued a better opinion.

I may truly say, that the authors of the Admonitiō, borrowed this of the Papists, that there may be as wel one Pope ouer y^e whole world, as one bishop ouer one prouince or dioces.* 1.6

The reasons that I vse for the defense of the Archbishop, are the solutions of the arguments vsed from the Pope: & such solutions as are vsed by al learned men that write agaynst the Pope (as the solution of the places of Cyprian before mentioned, and now these that follow) to the strongest arguments of the Papists. Wherfore I confesse that I vse some of the same arguments, but not to the same ende, nor in like maner. For they vse them vntruely, agaynst reason, & the true meaning of the Au∣thor: I vse them truely, according to reason, and their proper sense. And my vsing of them to the purpose that I doe, is the direct answere & playne ouerthrow of all the arguments of the Papists. It is not therfore good dealing, to make the simple beléeue that the same arguments confirme the Pope, that confirme the Archbishop, when as the application of them to the one, is the quite ouerthrowe of the other.

M. Doctor neuer wēt about to proue that bicause there is one king ouer a realine, therfore there may be one Bishop ouer aprouince: and in vttering these and suche like vntruthes willingly & wittingly as you do, you declare of what spirite you are. But M. Doctor hath reasoned cleane c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ntrarie, that it is no good argument to saye, that bicause one king may well rule one kingdome, therefore he may also well rule the whole world, or bicause one Bishop may be ouer one prouince, therfore one Pope may be ouer all Christendome. These be papisticall reasons, these M. Doctor dissolueth & con〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uteth: neythrr can you be ignorant of it, but malice is blinde. God forgiue you: for your whole drift is to bring M. Doctor into hatred & contempt, by such lying meanes, but God that séeth the hearts of al, will one day detect your déepe dissembled hypocrisie, & reueale that lūpe of arrogancie & ambition, which is nowe cloaked with a counterfeit desire of reformation.

I haue tolde you for what purpose I haue vsed these solutions of M. Caluines, whose opinion also I haue shewed before concerning those names and offices.* 1.7

In the place to the Philippians now agayne repeated (and yet this Replier can a∣bide no repetitions in others, though he vse almost nothing else him selfe) M. Cal∣uine ouerthroweth your equalitie, for thus he sayth: Truely I graunt, that (as the man∣ners and conditiōs of men are) there can no order remaine amōg the ministers of the word,

〈1 line〉〈1 line〉xcept one do rule ouer the rest. And he addeth that he speaketh de singulis corporibus, non de totis prouincijs, multò autem minùs de orbe vniuerso: of seueral bodies, not of whole prouin∣ces, much lesse of the whole worlde, meaning, as I suppose, suche prouinces as be vnder* 1.8 diuers gouernours: for one prouince in one particular Church, in one kingdome, vn∣der one Prince, is but one body, and therfore M. Caluin sayth nothing to the cōtrary, but that one may praeesse reliquis ministris, rule ouer the rest of the ministers in such a pro∣uince. Undoubtedly he can not meane that in euery seuerall parishe or towne there should be one, qui praesit reliquis, bicause the most parishes & townes, haue but one mi∣nister, and he that ruleth must haue some to rule ouer. If you will say that M. Caluin meaneth of suche ministers as be in cities where there be many, and not of the Coun∣trey, where there is in euery seuerall towne but one: then I answere, that it were agaynst reason to bring the ministers of the citie vnder the gouernment of one, and to suffer the ministers of the countrey to liue as they list. The same causes that require a ruler or gouernour for the one, requireth the same also for y^e other, except you would haue vniformitie in the citie, and confusion in the countrey. Wherfore M. Caluines meaning is, as I haue sayde. But you haue subtilly kept in his wordes, bothe héere and before, bicause you know that they made much more against your equalitie, than they doe agaynst the Archbishop. It had béene vprighter dealing to haue set downe his words, but you wil neyther vse that playnnesse your self, nor allow of it in other men.

M. Caluine vseth two answeres to that obiection of the Papists, the first whereof is this, that I haue reported in my Answere. And surely he would neuer haue vsed y^• solution, & caused it to be printed, if he had not allowed it, & thought well of it. And not he alone, but other of singular religiō & zeale, haue vsed the same, as Hyperius in the place before by me alleaged: so doth M. Nowell agaynst Dorman in his first booke, Fol. 50. whose words (bicause they be wholy to my purpose, & an euident declaration that such testimonies may lawfully be vsed for the authoritie of the Bishops, that are* 1.9 vnlawfully abused for the authoritie of the Pope) I haue set downe before. Wherby also the Reader may vnderstand how we agrée both amōg onr selues, & to our selues, which are desirous to kéepe the peace of the Churche, and that these places now vsed in the defense of the Archbishops and Bishops authoritie, are no otherwyse applied by vs, than they were before any suche controuersie beganne.

M. Caluine maketh no doubt of the matter, but setteth it downe as an apt answer, and by him allowed. And therfore your obiection of Iacobs two wiues maye serue for a iest, but little to the purpose.

It followeth not that if a man make two answers to one argument he disaloweth the one: for they may both be true. Touching M. Caluines second answere: I haue spoken before, and declared wherin that high Priest was a figure of Christ. M. Cal∣uine in that place hath not these words, that his iudgement is, that as there should be no one ouer all Churches, so should there be no one ouer any nation. And therefore you kéepe your accustomed maner of falsifying.

Notes

• (a) 1.1

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e is not pie∣ked, but offered
• (b) 1.2

  Beeing truly alleaged.
• (c) 1.3

  In ali〈1 line〉〈1 line〉aging them falsly.
• (d) 1.4

  V〈1 line〉〈1 line〉true, for he neuer vsed that for a rea〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ō.
• (e) 1.5

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 for he 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉heweth no such thing.
• * 1.6

  The reasons for the Arch∣bishop are so∣lutiōs agains〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the Pope.
• * 1.7

  Caluine allo∣weth one to rule ouer the test of mini∣sters,
• * 1.8

  What is mēte by a body in Caluine.
• * 1.9

  Supra cap. 3. the. 15. diuis.