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.

Of Archebishops, Metropolitanes, Bishops, Archedeacons. &c. Tract. 8. (Book 8)

The reasons of T. C. answered, whereby he goeth about to take away the superfluous loppe (as he termeth it) of these offyces.

Chap. 1. the. 1. Diuision.

Admonition.

The thirtenth and fourtenth. Then (c) 1.1 it was paynefull: nowe gaynefull. (d) 1.2 Then poore and ignominious: nowe riche and glorious.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 63. Sect. vlt.

It was then as it vseth to be vnder the crosse. And it is now as it* 1.3 vseth to be when God doth blesse it with peace, quietnesse, and god∣ly Magistrates: And yet surely euen now it is more paynefull than gaynefull, more ignomious than riche and glorious: and that doe those knowe that beare the heate of the daye. But it is the more* 1.4 paynfull and ignominious for you, who ceasse not with rayling and spitefull words in Pulpits and at tables, to depraue and backebite your brethren, & to trouble the whole state with your factions and dayly inuented newe opinions: the persecution of the sworde ceas∣seth, but the persecution of the tongue is extreme hotte: and we who gayne so muche, and be so glorious, are molested aswell by you, as by the Papist, and Atheist: and therfore not very glorious.

T. C. Pag. 61. Sect. 1.

A hundreth poundes by yere is taken of some benefice, for whiche foure sermons onely are preached, and those sometimes by an other. If this be more paynefull than gaynefull, it is bicause the horseleeche hath two daughters, giue, giue. &c. And I can not seehowe they can be more glo∣rious,* 1.5 vnlesse the Palace were turned into a Court, and their chayre into a throne. There are di∣uers* 1.6 places that God hathe blessed with peace; where the ministers take more payne, and haue* 1.7 lesse gayne; and whiche make (*) lesse noyses, when they goe in the streates. We haue (a) 1.8 amongst vs which haue had Bishoprickes offered, and as things vnmeete for a minister of the Gospell, haue refuse〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 them▪ God be praysed the sunne shineth not so hotte in this countrey nowe, that you neede to complayne of any great heate, and if you feele any heate, you haue better shade than Io∣nas had by his gourde▪

Io. Whitgifte.

It may be that he which hath an hundreth poundes by the yere, for whiche foure sermons onely are preached. &c. (if there be any suche) taketh more paynes for the Churche, is more carefull for the state of it, suffereth more opprobrious wordes, and false slaun∣ders (whiche is not the least kinde of persecution) for dooing his duetie, and kéeping him selfe within the listes of obedience towardes God and his Prince, than those doe that glorie moste of persecution, and lacke of liuing. He that hathe muche, is also occasioned to spende muche: neyther is his paynes the lesse, but more, if he be once desirous to doe his duetie. And the higher he is in degrée, the more subiecte to the en∣uious backbiter, and to the slaunderous tongue.

Those that haue suche Palaces, and make suche noyse when they goe in the streates. &c. I thinke verily take more paynes and care in and for the Churche of God, profite their Countrey more in one moneth, than you and all your company do in a whole yere: Nay, I woulde to God it might be sayde you profited. Their pompe and their Palaces are by lawfull authoritie committed vnto them, and the true Martyrs of God haue occupied the same, or the like before them, and yet Martyrs too.

Who amongst you they be that haue had Bishoprickes offered vnto them, I knowe not: but if they boast of their deniall, and haue suborned you to make it knowne, they haue their rewarde. It maye be the Bishopricke was to little for them, and they looked for some greater, and so missed bothe: but I will not iudge: surely this bragge commeth héere out of place.

The heate of the tongue and backbiter, bothe I and other may greatly complayne of: and I hope we get not our liuing by going vp and downe the streates, and feasting dayly at other mens tables, or as Diogenes did, by disdayning and contemning all others. Melius est vinum bibere cum ratione, quàm aquam cum fastu & superbia, It is better to drinke wyne with discretion, than water with haughtinesse and pride. It is also more acceptable to God to dwell in a Palace, and liue in abundance, with dooing a mans duetie towarde God and his Churche, than to lye in prison for disdayne and con∣tempte. Godly men may enioy preferment, and suche as be arrogant and wilfull, may séeme to contemne the same.

Chap. 1. the. 2. Diuision.

Admonition.

And therefore titles, liuings, & offices by Antichrist deuised, are giuen to them, as Metropo∣litane, Archebishop, Lordes grace, Lorde Bishop, Suffragane, Deane, Archedeacon, Prelate of the garter, Earle, Countie Palatine, Honor, highe Commissioners, Iustices of Peace and Quorum. &c. All whiche togither with their offices, as they are straunge and vnhearde of in Christes Churche, nay playnly (f) 1.9 in Christes worde forbidden: so are they vtterly with speede out of the same to be remoued.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 64. Sect. 2.

Heere you are in your ruffe, but you shewe your ignorance and contemptuous stomacke. You haue giuen sentence that the names of Metropolitane, Archebishoppe. &c. and their offyces, were deuised by Antichriste. Likewise that they are strange and vnheard of in Christes Church. Also that they be playnely in Gods worde forbidden: and laste that they are vtterly with speede to be remoued. If you can proue all these poyntes, it is tyme the Churche were transformed, and the whole kynde of gouernment of this Realme altered. But if you can not proue them, then is it highe tyme that suche insolencie shoulde bee repressed, and perturbers of Churches and common wealthes refourmed. Well, I muste doe the best I can to improue all these poyntes, whiche

I mighte doe sufficiently, if I shoulde as barely denie them, as you haue affirmed them: but I will not deale so nakedly in so great a matter.

T. C. Pag. 61. Sect. 2.

Of those offices something hathe bin spoken before, where it hathe bin proued out of the words of Christ, that neyther the names, nor offices of Archbishop, or Archdeacons do agree to the mini∣sterie of the Gospell. Now as M. Doctor bestoweth great cost heere, and trauell in digging about them, and laying (as it were) newe earth to their rootes, that they beeing halfe deade, if it were possible, might be recouered and quickened agayne. So I (*) 1.10 (bicause these trees mounte vp so highe, and spread their boughes and armes so brode, that for the colde shade of them, nothing can growe and thriue by them) will before I come to answere these things that are heere alleaged, set downe certayne reasons (as it were instrumentes) to take away the superfiuous loppe and spread of their immoderate offices.

Io. Whitgifte.

T. C. hathe a speciall quarell agaynst Archebishops, Bishops, and other that haue* 1.11 the name of authoritie and degrée in the Churche. For he perceyueth that they be the principal stoppes and hinderances of his confused platforme, and that also they be the enimies vnto sectes and contentions, wherwith he is so greatly delighted. Moreouer he and many of his adherents, be of that nature whereof Cesar and Pompey were re∣ported to be: the one could abide no superiour, the other no equall: euen so is it with them, as it is well knowne to those that haue bin conuersant with some of them. And although they pretende equalitie in words, yet if you marke well their writings, it shall easily appeare, that they meane it in others, not in them selues, for they would haue him to be the best rewarded, & most reuerenced, that hath the most & best giftes, which euery one of these chiefe captaynes persuaded himselfe to haue: so that in y^e end there would be as great a do (after their maner) which of them should be the chiefe, as euer there was betwixt the Bishop of Rome, and other Bishops, or betwixt Can∣terburie and Yorke in times past. In the meane time you may easily vnderstande, if you please, that notwithstanding they themselues would be exempted from the iu∣risdiction of Archbishop, Lorde Bishop. &c. yet doe they chalenge vnto themselues as great iurisdiction ouer their Parishes, and as loftie dominion ouer Prince, Nobles, and all, as euer the Pope did ouer the whole Church, as shall (God willing) be more fully declared, when I come to speake of their seigniory and kinde of gouernment. Nowe to his Reply.

Where hath something bin spoken before of these offices & names? Or what arguments haue you hitherto vsed to proue that they do not agrée to the Ministers of the Gospell: If you haue so done, I trust you are fully answered in that same place. But I promise you I doe not presently remember where you haue hitherto done it. If you meane the places of Math. 20. &c. you haue your full answere.

I haue bestowed the more cost and labour in this matter, bicause I sée your chiefe force bent agaynst it. For marke you who will, all your drift is agaynst superiours. But let vs heare your reasons.

Chap. 1. the. 3. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 61. Sect. 3.

And for the names first, I desire the reader, that we be not thought studious of contention, bi∣cause we striue about the name of Archbishop. &c. For this is not to striue about words, vnlesse it be counted a strife of words, which is taken for the maintenāce of the word of God, as it hath before appeared out of the Euangelistes. Then it must be remembred which Aristotle sayth very well in his Elenches, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is, that names are imitations, or as it were, expresse images of the things whereof they are names, and doe for the moste parte bring to him that heareth them, knowledge of the things that are signified by them. Howsoeuer the thing be it selfe, yet oftentimes it is supposed to be as the name pretendeth, & there∣vpon followeth that a man may be easily deceyued, when the names doe not answere to the things wherof they are names. There may be (I graunt) a free and more licencious vse of names, but that licence is more tollerable in any thing, rather thā in matters of the Church & saluation. And if there be some cases, wherin names that are not so proper, may be borne with, yet are there also whi∣che are intollerable. As who can abide that a minister of the Gospel should be called by the name of

〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Leui〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e, or sacrificer, vnlesse it be he which would not care muche, if the remembrance of the death and resurrection of our sauiour Christ, were plucked out of his minde? Agayne it is vnlawful for any man to take vpon him those titles which are proper to our sauiour Christ: but the title (*) 1.12 of an Archbishop is onely proper to our sauiour Christ, therfore no man may take that vnto him. That it is proper to our sauiour Christ, appeareth by that which S. Peter sayth, where he calleth him* 1.13 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is Archesheph〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ard, or Archbishop: for Bishop and shepheard are all one. And in the Hebrues where he is called the great shepheard of the sheepe: and in the Actes, and Hebrues, archeleader of life & of saluation, which titles are neuer founde to be giuen vnto any, but vnt〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 our sauiour Christ, and are proper titles of his mediation, and therefore can not be without 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉olde presumption, applied vnto any mortall man.

Io. Whitgifte.

To contende about names, when there is an agréement of the ma〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ter and sub∣stance, hath alwaye〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 bin taken for a manifest note of a contentious Sophister. But your answere is ready that you contende for the substance also, whiche 〈◊〉〈◊〉 true you mighte haue cut of the most part of this section, whereby you would excuse your selfe for improuing the name of an Archebishop. But to come to the purpose, you say It is vnlawful for any man to take vpon him those titles, which are proper to our sauiour Christ: but the title of Archbishop is onely proper to our sauiour Christ, therefore. &c. The minor you proue by the wordes of S Peter. 1. Epist. chap. 5. where he calleth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Actes. 3. 5. and. 13. to the Hebrues. &c. where he is called the great shephearde of the sheepe, archeleader. &c. But before I come to your minor, I muste a little better searche your maior, for you passe it ouer smothly, as though there could be nothing said vnto it.

I graunt that those names which be proper vnto God, can not be giuen to any o∣ther,* 1.14 in that respecte that they are proper vnto God: but that they can in no other respect be attributed to any other, it is vntrue, and agaynst the manyfest words of the scriptures. What name is more proper vnto God, than is this name, God. And yet is the same also attributed vnto man. Moses Exod. 7. is called Pharaoes God, bi∣cause he was Gods minister to speake vnto Phar〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o in his name, and to execute his iudgements vpon him. Nec verò (as M. Caluin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 sayth) quicquā sibi detr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉xit Deus. &c.* 1.15 Neyther did God derogate any thing from himselfe, in that he transferred (his name) vn∣to Moses, bicause he doth so communicate that, which is proper to himselfe with his ser∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ants, that he still remayneth whole. In the. 22. of Exod. the Iudges are called Gods, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 in the. 82. Psalme, Magistrates are called Gods also. In the. 23 of Math. Christ speaketh of the names of Master, Father, & Doctor, as proper to himselfe, for he sayth, be not y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 called Rabbi, for one is your master, to wit Christ. &c. And call no man your father vpon earth, for there is but one your father, which is in heauen. Be not called Doctors for one is your Doctor, euen Christ, and yet no man is so ignorant that he wil denie these names to be common to others, though not in the same respectes, as I haue shewed before. Christ also calleth himselfe a Pastor, Ioh. 10. and so doth S. Peter call him Bishop and Pastor, 1. Epist. 3. and so he is properly & of himselfe, & yet these names be cōmunicated with other. In the. 8. of Ioh. he is called Lux mundi, which is a most proper name, aptly giuen vnto him, & yet doth he himself giue the same name to his Disciples, Mat. 5. Di∣uers such exāples might I shew for y^e improuing of your maior, but these be sufficient.

Thus therefore I answere in fewe wordes, bothe to your maior & minor, that some* 1.16 names that be proper to God are also attributed vnto man, but not in the same res∣pect: for they belong vnto God properly and per s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, to man per accidens, and in respecte that he is the minister of God, and suche other like causes. And therfore although this name Archshepheard, or (if you will) Archbishop, be proper to Christe in the respecte that he is not onely the chiefe shepheard, but also the onely shephearde, to whome the shéepe doe properly perteyne, and to whome all the other shepheards muste of neces∣sitie submit themselues, and in whose name, and vnder whome onely, the Churche is gouerned, yet in the respect of the externall pollicie of the Churche, & of Pastors and Bishops that are to be kept & directed in such things as perteyne to their du〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tie, the same name of Archbishop may aptly & fitly be attributed vnto him, that hathe the or∣dering and direction of the rest, in the externall gouernment of the Churche.

But whiles you confound the spirituall and the external regiment of the chur∣che,* 1.17 you confounde both your selfe and your reader also: In the spirituall regiment Christ is only the pastor: and al other be his shéep. In the externall regiment there be manie other Pastors: In the spirituall regiment Christe is only the Archbishop, and gouerneth all to whom all other must make their accompt, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nt in the externall gouernment there be many Archbishops, as the state of euery church requireth. In the spirituall gouernment Christe is only the prince, the king, the iudge, and in re∣specte of him all other be subiects: but in the externall gouernment, there be seueral countreys, seuerall kings, princes, magistrates, iudges. Again in the spiritual king∣dome of Christ, & regiment of his Churche, there is no respect of pe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉sons, but all be equal: In the external regiment & gouernment there is and must be degrées of per∣sons: To be short, in respect of Christ and his spirituall gouernmente, there is ney∣ther Magistrate nor Archbishop. &c. But in the respecte of men, and the externall face of the Churche, there are bothe, and that according to Christes owne order, as shall hereafter be declared. So that nowe you maye perceyue your errour to be in not rightly distinguishing the states, and tymes of the Churche and gouernment.

Chap. 1. the fourth Diuision.

T. C. Page. 61. Sect. 4.

And if any man will replie and say, that it is not sayd that our sauior Christe is only Arch∣bishop: I answere that he is not only sayd the head, and yet notwithstanding ther is no more hea∣des or the church but he: And i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 it be further sayd, that these Archbishops are but vnder and as it were subordinate Archbishops, I say that a man may as wel say, that men may be also vnder∣heades of the churche, whiche is the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ame whiche is alleadged for the Pope. Whiche thing is not only true in those wordes which doe signifie and set vnlawfull things before our eyes, but euen in those names also which hauing no corruption in their owne nature, yet thorough the corrupte vse of menne, haue 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s it were gotten suche a tacke of that corruption, that the vse of them can not be without offence.

Io. Whitgifte.

He is only Archbishop and Bishop in respecte of his spirituall gouernment which he kéepeth only vnto himselfe, and in the respect that all other be vnder him, & haue their authoritie from him. But this name may also aptly be giuen vnto 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that haue the ouersight of other bishops in the externall gouernment of the Churche in the which as I haue sayd, Magistrates be called Gods.

Christ is the only head of the Church, if by the head you vnderstande that which gi∣ueth* 1.18 the bodie lyfe, sense, and motion: For Christ only by his spirite doth giue life and nutriment to his bodie: He only doth poure spirituall blessings into it, and doth inwardly direct and gouerne it. Likewise he is only the head of the whole Church, for that title can not agree to any other: But if by the head you vnderstande an 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉x∣ternall ruler or gouernour of any particular nation, or Church, (in which significa∣tion head is vsually taken) then I doe not perceiue why the Magistrate maye not* 1.19 as well be called the head of the Churche, that is the chiefe gouernour of it in the externall policie, as he is called the head of the people, and of the common weal〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h. And as it is no absurditie to say, that the ciuill magistrate is heade of the common wealth, next and immediatly vnder God (for it is moste true) so is it none to say, that vnder God also he is head of the Churche, that is chiefe gouernour as I haue before sayde. Constantine in an Epistle that he writeth to the people of Alexan∣dria,* 1.20 as it is reported by Athanasius Apol. 2. calleth Bishoppes Ecclesiarum capita, the heades of their Churches. And yet is the Popes Supremacie vsurp〈1 line〉〈1 line〉d, bothe bicause it taketh from Magistrates that whiche is due vnto them, and also vsurpeth the authoritie of Chryste in remittyng and retaynyng synnes, in making La∣wes contrarye to Gods Lawes, whyche he sayeth be necessarie to Saluation, in makyng hys Supremacie a matter of Saluation, and in chalengyng authoritie

ouer the whole Churche of Christ, and an hundreth suche lyke presumptions.

The Archbishop being both vnder God and his Prince, hath his name onely in respecte of his authoritie in certaine causes aboue other Bishops, and that but in one prouince or kingdome only, neyther can eyther the name or vse of it (as it is in this Church) offende any but such as be offended with all superiors, and think that none ought to be better than themselues.

Chap. 1. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 1. 2.

In the primitiue church, the * name of a Pope was honest, & was al one with the name of a good* 1.21 pastor: but nowe by the ambition of the man of Rome, it is so defyled that euery good man sha∣keth at the very mention of it.

The name of a tyrant was fyrst honorable, and the same with a king, and yet through crueltie and vniust rule of certaine, it is become nowe so hatefull, that no vpright and iust dealing Prince, none that gouerneth with equitie, and to the commoditie of his subiectes, woulde beare to be called tyranne: wherby it may appeare that it is not for nought, that we doe stande of these names.

Io. Whitgifte.

Papa signifieth a father, and was in tymes paste common to all Bishops, but nowe it is proper to the bishop of Rome, and therefore hated for his sake, whome it nowe signifieth. So tyrannus. sometyme signified a king generally, no〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e it signi∣nifyeth* 1.22 a cruell king, and a bloudie gouernoure, and therefore also abhorred. But an Archbishop though the persons at sometime haue degenerated, yet the name hath continued in the same signification, and therfore the reasen is nothing lyke, except you wil also for the lyke cause cōdemne the name of a Bishop, or of a king, for there haue bene many euill men called by the name of bishops; and many tyrants by the name of kings, and yet the names neuer the worsse. If names shoulde be chaunged so ofte as they be abused, some had nede to haue an office only to inuent new names. There was a certaine kinde of heretikes that called themselues Apostolike, and yet the name of an Apostle is neuer the worse. A lawfull name of a lawfull office may remaine together with the office, howesoeuer before tyme it hath bin abused.

Chap. 1. the. 6. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 2.

Nowe if the names ought to be odious, being both horribly abused, and also * 1.23 forbidden by our Sauior Christ, the things themselues, must be in greater hatred: the vnlawfulnesse whereof may thus appeare.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is a manifest petition of the principle, and in no pointe as yet proued. But let vs heare the reasons why the office should be condemned.

Chap. 1. the. 7. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 3.

First of all the ministerie is by the word of God, and heauenly, and not left to the wil of men to* 1.24 deuise at their pleasure, as appereth by that whych is noted of S. Iohn, where the * 1.25 Phariseys cō ming to S. Iohn Baptist, after he had denyed to be eyther Chryst or Elias, or an other prophet * 1.26 conclude if thou be neither Christ, nor Elias, nor of y^e Prophets, why baptizest thou? whych had ben no good argument if S. Iohn might haue ben of some other function thā of those which were ordinarie in the churche, and instituted of God. And therfore S. Iohn to establish his singular and extraordinarie function, alledgeth the worde of God, whereby appeareth, that as it was not lawfull to bring in any strange doctrine, so it was not lawfull to teach the true doctrine vnder the name of any other function, than was instituted by God.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is your fyrst argument, the Phariseys comming to S. Iohn Baptist, after he had denyed to be eyther Christ or Elias, or an other Prophet, conclude, if thou be neyther Chryste

nor Elias, nor of the Prophets, why baptizest thou? Ergo, there may be no Archbishops, which is your meaning. But least you shoulde thinke that I cauill, I will vse your owne conclusion, which is this, Ergo there was no other ordinarie function in the Churche. This argument hath neyther head nor foote, forme nor matter: is this your exqui∣sitenesse* 1.27 in Logike? First your antecedent is vntrue, and builded vpon the false al∣legation of the Scripture. For the Phariseys doe not say vnto him: If thou bee ney∣ther Christ, nor Elias, nor of the Prophets, but these be the wordes of the text, If thou bee not the Christ, nor Elias, nor the prophet, now there is a great difference betwixt these two kynde of speaches, if thou be not of the Prophets, and if thou be not the Prophet. For the first signifieth that they should aske him, whether he were any of the Prophets, the other whether he were that prophet whom they looked for to be suche a one as Moyses was, according to that which is written Deut. 18. vers. 15. for else Iohn wold* 1.28 not haue denied himself to haue bin a Prophet, seeing that Christ sayth he was one, Math. 11. Moreouer they aske him not of those ordinarie functions that were then in* 1.29 the Church, but of such extraordinarie persons as they looked for to come, as Christ, Elias, or that prophete. Thirdly, they did not recite all the ordinarie functions, as Leuite and Priest, whiche were then most ordinarie and almost only at that tyme: so that your reason hath neyther forme, nor truth in it.

Chap. 1. the eight Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 4.

Let the whole practise of the church vnder the law be looked vpon, & it shall not be founde that any other ecclesiastcal ministerie was appointed, thā those orders of high priest, and priests and Le∣uites. &c. which were apointed by the law of God, and if there were any raised extraordinarily, the fame had their calling confirmed from heauen, either by signes or miracles, or by playne and cleere testimonies of the mouth of God, or by extraordinarie exciting and mouing of the spirite of God. So that it appeareth that the ministerie of the gospell and the functions therof, ought to be from heauen, and of God, and not inuented by the braines of men: from heauen I say and heauenly, bi∣cause although it be executed by earthly men, and the ministers also are chosen by men like vnto themselues: yet bicause it is done by the worde and institution of god, that hath not only ordeyned, that the worde should be preached, but hath ordeined also in what order and by whome it should be preached, it may be well accompted to come from heauen and from god.

Io. Whitgifte.

Neyther is there any new ministerie or order appointed in this churche, bicause* 1.30 there be Archbishops. For Archbishops be ministers of the word and Sacramentes, and Quoad ministerium do not differ from other pastors (in respect of whom they are called Archbishops) but touching order & gouernment, as you may reade afterwarde in the answere to the admonition. So that all this which is here spoken is grounded vpon a false principle. For you would make the reader beléeue, that to institute an Archbishop, is to institute a newe ministerie, wherein you are maruellously ouer∣shot. The Iewes had gouernment in their church, and superioritie in the ecclesiasti∣call estate, and so haue we. But you may not tie the church of Christ to the patterne of the Iewes synagoge, for that were to make it seruile.

Chap. 1. the. 9. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 5.

Seing therfore that these functions of the Archbishop and Archdeacon, are not in the worde* 1.31 of god, it followeth that they are of the earth, and so can do no good but much harme in the church, And if any man will say that we do the Church great iniurie, bicause we doe tye hir to a certayne number of orders of ministers, as it were to a stake, so that we may not deuise new functions: I say that both the church and Christ dothe accuse him againe: Christ esteemeth himself to haue in∣iurie, bicause that by this meanes he is imagined not to haue bene carefull and prouident enough for his churche, in that he hath left the ministerie, wherin doth consist the lyfe of the church (being that whereby it is begotten) so rawly and vnperfect, that by permitting it to the ordering of men, there is a greate danger of errour, whiche he might haue set without all daunger, by a woorde or two speaking.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your proofes hitherto alleadged are moste insufficient to iustiste this conclusi∣on, and yet doe you boldly goe on as though all were sure. This is but beldenesse and confidencie, it is not sounde and pithie dealing. I still denie that there is any other ministerie in the Churche, bycause there are Archebishops, than is by the worde of God confirmed: But you haue not yet proued by either Scripture or rea∣son, that there oughte not to be gouernours or superiors among the ministers of the Gospel, to whome any other names may be giuen, than is expressed in the word, which you ought to proue, else you doe but dallie, and studie with vayne wordes to enlarge your booke.

It is manyfest that Christ hath left the gouernment of his Church, touching the externall policie in sundrie points to the ordering of men, who haue to make orders and lawes for the same, as tyme, place, and person requireth, so that nothing bée done contrary to his worde, as it is before proued, Tract. 2. and shall be more here∣after.

Chap. 1. the. 10. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 62. Sect. 6.

The Churche of the other syde ryseth against him, for that he maketh Christ lesse careful for hir, than he was for that vnder the law. For 〈◊〉〈◊〉 me in the whole volume of the testament, is there any kinde or degree of ministerie, wherof God is not the certaine and expresse author? Was there euer any man (I except Ieroboam and such prophane men) either so holie or so wyse, or of such great knowledge y^t euer did so much as dreame of instituting of a newe ministerie? After the long wandring of the arke in the wildernesse, when it came to be placed in Ierusalem, tell me if any be∣sydes the Leuites and priests, the ordinarie ministers, and the prophetes whiche were unmediatly stirred vp of God, were found to haue ordeined any office or title which was not commaunded or whether there was at any tyme any thing added or enioyned to those offices of priesthobe, and Leuiteship, which was not by the lawe prescribed.

Io. Whitgifte.

Surely here is nothing but vaine repetitions of that false principle, whervpon thys tantalogie and multiplication of wordes is buylded, that is, y^t the institution of* 1.32 an Archbishop is the institution of a new ministerie, as though the apostle S. Paule whē he placed Timothie at Ephesus & Titus at Creta, did institute a new ministe∣rie, bicause he gaue thē authoritie & iurisdiction ouer y^e rest, as it is afterward proued: or the Church whē it did apoynt one amōg the Bishops to gouern the rest in Scisma∣tis remedium, to remedie schismes, as Hierom sayth, & as it shall more at large hereaf∣ter be declared. Neyther can it therfore be sayde, that Christe doth shew him selfe lesse* 1.33 carefull for his church, than he did for that vnder the lawe: For his carefulnesse appeareth and consisteth in this that he hath nowe muche more playnly set down the doctrine of saluation in all pointes, than it was in the law, and hath also ordeyned that there shoulde be not only fit ministers to publish that doctrine, but offices also to gouerne the people in godlinesse. As for names and titles & other externall things variable according to diuers circumstances, he hath left them to the libertie of his Churche, as I haue before declared: which is one part of his singular goodnesse towardes the Churche, in that it is not so seruilely tyed to externall things, and to the letter as it was vnder the lawe.

And it is euidēt, that vnder the law, there were offices & titles in the church, which* 1.34 are not cōmaunded in the scripture, nor wherof we reade God to haue bene the expresse author. As Archisynagogus, Mar. 5. Scribae, or legis doctores, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or magistratus seu duces templi. Luc. 22. vers. 52. and those seniores populi, and that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whervpon you ground your seigniorie. For M. Caluin vpon the. 18. of Math. sayth, that this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was apoynted after the children of Israell returned from the captiuitie of Babylon.

Chap. 1. the eleuenth Diuision.

T C. Page. 63. Sect. 1.

All men know that the Arke of Noah was a figure of the church. Noah was both a wise and a

godlie man: yet what doth the Lorde leaue to his wisedome, when as he appointeth the matter, the forme, the length, the breadth, the height, the wood, the kynd and sorte of wood?

Io. Whitgifte.

All men knowe howe vncertaine a reason it is that is grounded vpon figures and* 1.35 types, excepte the application therof may be founde in the Scriptures. For a man may applie them as it pleaseth him, euen as he may doe allegories, and yet was there manie things required to the Arke whereof there is no expresse mention made, and namely nayles or pinnes to ioyn it together, neither is it expressed whether the win∣dow was of glasse or of chrystal, or of neyther. Moreouer he is not prescribed to make a couer for it, and yet it had one as is declared cap. 8. The ouerseers and maisters of the woorke lykewyse are not there appoynted, but lefte to the discretion of Noah. There are many other thinges required to the making of suche an Arke, whereof there is no expresse mention in that place. To conclude, Noah beeing in the Arke, did thinges which the Scripture dothe not expresse that he was commaunded to do, as when he sente out the Rauen and the Doue. &c. cap. 8. Wherefore I say with M.* 1.36 Caluin: Arcam fuisse Ecclesiae imaginem certum est, teste Petro, verùm singulas eius parteis ad ec∣clesiam aptare minime consentaneum est. It is certaine that the Arke was a figure of the church by the testimonie of Peter, but it is not mete to applie euerie parte thereof vnto the Churche.

Chap. 1. the twelfth Diuision.

T. C. Page. 63. Sect. 4.

In the tabernacle the Church is yet more expressely shewed foorth. Moyses that was the o∣uerseer of the worke was a wise and godly man, the artificers that wrought it Bezalaell and A∣holiab, most cunning workmen, and yet obserue how the Lord▪ leaueth nothing to their will: but telleth not only of the bourdes, of the courtanes, of the apparell, but also of the barres, of the rings, of the strings of the bookes, of the beesoms, of the snuffers, and of the thinges, the matter, and the form〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is well knowen that the Israelites had long continued among the Egyptians, a* 1.37 most superstitious kind of people, without any law of God written, and therfore now being deliuered from them, and yet inclined to their Idolatrie, God (as most writers thinke) of his infinite wisedome did so charge them with ceremonies of his owne in∣stitution, that they should neyther haue leysure to vse any other, nor yet desire the E∣giptiacall kind of worshipping.

Touching the tabernacle and the particular description of things perteining to the* 1.38 same, I say with Pellicane These things are particularly described according to the word of the Lord, that the people might know that they ought not so much to obey Moyses pre∣cepts as the will of God, in building the Tabernacle, and in freely offering to the same their gold, their siluer, their brasse, their purple. &c. the which otherwise they would haue abused to their owne vanities: and that also they might not be without that bewtie in ceremonies and worshipping of God, which they see among the Gentiles. Moreouer that they mighte haue matter to occupie them with, least they shoulde fall to slothfulnesse and idlenesse. So that of this place it may be well gathered, that nothing wherein the worship of God doth consist, is to be vsed without his prescription, but how you can aptly apply thys figure to the externall gouernment, and pollicie of the Church, I cannot well vnder∣stand: and if you may so vse it, yet do you but allegory, which is no good kind of proofe bycause allegories may be applyed according to euery particular mans inuention. But all that can be truely gathered of this figure is (as I haue saide before) that,* 1.39 no kynde of worship may be broughte into the Churche of God, whiche is not grounded vppon hys woorde, and therefore Ma. Caluine speaking of thys taberna∣cle saythe that God gaue preceptes of the tabernacle and thynges perteyning to it.

Ne externa pietatis exercitia, quae vidimus fuisse admodùm necessaria, populum deficerent, Least the people should wante the outwarde exercises of godlynesse, which we see to haue bene verie necessarie. And againe he sayth, that when Moyses in the mountaine dydde sée the example of the Tabernacle, he was then instructed De vero Dei cultu & mysterijs. of the true worship of God and of heauenly mysteries. And againe speaking of this Ta∣bernacle he sayth: Lex Iudaeos ad spiritualem solum Dei cultum instituit, sed ceremonijs vesti∣tum, vt ferebat temporis ratio. The lawe did institute the Iewes only to the spirituall vvor∣ship of God, but yet couered with ceremonies, as the tyme required. Therfore in this fi∣gure there was only expressed what shoulde be done in the worshipping of God, and not in the externall policie and gouernment of the Churche.

Chap. 1. the. 13. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 63. Sect. 3.

Let vs come to the temple, which as it was more nere the tyme of Chryst: so it doth more liuely expresse the Chur〈1 line〉〈1 line〉he of God whiche nowe is. Salomon the wyse〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t man that euer was, or shall be, doth nothyng in it, neyther for the temple, nor for the vessels of the temple, nor 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉or the beau∣tie of it, but according to the forme that was enioyned him, as appeareth in the first of the kings, and the second of the Chronicles. And in the restoring of that temple, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉zechiell is witnes〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e, how the ange〈1 line〉〈1 line〉l by the commaundement of God doth parte by parte, appoint all to b〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 done bothe in the temple and in the furniture therof.

Io. Whitgifte.

These two examples of the Tabernacle, and of the temple, tende to one ende, and might more aptly haue bene alleaged in the title of Ceremonies than of the gouern∣ment of the Church, bicause whatsoeuer is here spoken of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ither of them perteyneth to Ceremonies, and to the worshipping of God, and not to externall policie and go∣uernment of the church, and therfore moste vnaptely alleadged agaynste Archebi∣shops.* 1.40 &c.

But what néede I labor much in this matter, when you your self in the. 22. pag. of your booke, offer for one thing that I shall bring lefte to the order of this Church, to shewe me, that the Israelites had twentie that were vndecided by the expresse woorde.

And it is certaine that both Dauid and Salomon appoynted orders, the one about the Tabernacle, the other about the Temple, whyche wée reade not in Scripture they were commaunded to doe. And Dauid appoynted degrées of officers in the Temple, and Salomon workmen and ouerseers, whereof we doe not reade, that they had any speciall commaundement.* 1.41

Chap. 5. the seuenth Diuision.

T. C. Page. 63. Sect. 4.

Nowe if the holie Ghoste in figures and tropes doth so carefully, (and as a man may speake) 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uriously comprehende all things, in the truth it selfe, howe muche more is it to be thoughte that he hath performed this? If in the shadowes, how much more in the body? If he haue doone this in earthly things, and whiche shall perishe, howe is it to be thought, that he hathe 〈◊〉〈◊〉 performed it in heauenly, and those whyche abyde for euer? And then tell me, what are those tymes of which it was sayd, the Mel▪sias when he commeth will tell vs all? Is it a lyke thing that he which did not only appoynt the temple and the tabernacle, but the ornaments of them, would not only neglect the ornaments of the church, but also that without the which (as we are borne in hand) it cannot long stand? Shal we thinke that he which remembred the barres there, hath forgotten the pillers here? or he y^t there remembred the pinnes, did here forget the maister builders? how he should there remember the besoms, and here forget Archbishops, if any had bene needful? that he should there make mention of the snuffers to purge the lights, and here passe by the lightes themselues? And to conclude, that he shuld make mention there of the moates, and here say nothing of the beames? there recken vp the gnattes, here kepe silence of the camel〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es? What is this else but that which Aristotle sayth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, to looke to smal things, and not to looke to great, which if it can not fall into the Lorde, l〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t it be a shame to say, that the chief piller and vpholder of the Church is not expressed in the scripture, nor can not be concluded of it.

Io Whitgifte.

You haue before confessed Pag. 15. that certaine things are left to the order of the Church,* 1.42 bycause they are of that nature which are varied by times, places, persons & other circumstāces. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. which is sufficient to answere whatsoeuer you haue here spokē of the care〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ulnesse of the holy ghost in the truth it selfe, aboue figures and tropes. Although there is no doubte but the holy ghost was as carefull in the one as in the other, and loued the one people as wel as the other, and therefore it may be an argument à paribus, but not 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 minori, as you seeme to make it. I haue told you before also why god did more particularly prescribe euery ceremonie to the Israelites in the law, than he hath done to his p〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ople in the Gospell.

God hath in his Gospell performed and fulfilled all the tropes and sig〈1 line〉〈1 line〉res of the law* 1.43 whatsoeuer. Christ which is the Messias hath told vs all things that are necessary to saluation, Iohn. 20. and so is that place in the. 4. of Iohn to be vnderstanded.

We make not an Archbyshop necessary to saluation, but profitable for the go∣uernment of the Church, and therefore consonant to the word of God, as shall be de∣clared. We know the Church of Christ is not builded vpon any man, eyther as vpon foundation, or pillers, if we speake properly, but vpon Christ himselfe, and his worde, which remaine vnmoueable: we know also, that the same Church may stand wit〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣out the external help of man But yet hath God appointed functions in his Churche, both ecclesiasticall, and ciuill, as meanes to kéepe it in externall peace, di〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cipline, and or〈1 line〉〈1 line〉er: and though he hath not expressed the names, yet hath he allowed the 〈◊〉〈◊〉. A∣mong men the chiefe piller that vpholdeth the Churche is the Christian prince and magistrate, and yet where haue you in the Gospell any such expresse mention made thereof, as there is in the appointing of the tabernacle of Beesoms, snuffers. &c. whiche e〈1 line〉〈1 line〉amples you vse in derision: suche is your modestie and reuerence. We knowe that all things nec〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ssary to saluation are much more plainly expressed in the Gospell, than in the law: We are also well assured that Christ in his word hath fully and playnly comprehended all things requisite to faith and good life: but yet hath he committed certaine orders of ceremonies, and kind of gouernmente, to the disposition of his Churche, the generall rules giuen in his worde being obserued, and nothing being done contrary to his will and commaundement therein conteyned, as 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 haue pro∣ued before.

Chap. 1. the. 15. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 63. Sect. 5.

Moreouer (a) 1.44 these ministeries without the which the Church is fully builded, and broughte to perfec〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ion and complete vnitie, are (b) 1.45 not to be reteyned in the Church: but without the mini∣steries of Archbyshop. &c. the Churche may be fully bu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉lded and brought to perfection, therefore these ministeries are not to be reteyned.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your minor is vntrue. For the Church in a kingdome where it hath an external gouernmēt, where it includeth both good and bad, where it is molested with conten∣tious persons, with schismes, heresies &c. cannot enioy complete vnitie, nor be per∣fectly* 1.46 gouerned touching the externall forme and gouernment, without such offices and gouernours. Your maior also conteyneth daungerous doctrine, including as well the christian magistrate as the Archbyshop. And it is in effect all one with thys argument: The Church is fully builded and brought to perfection and complete vnit〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e with∣out the Christian magistrate: Therefore Christian magistrates are not to be reteyned, which is the very argument of the Anabaptists against Christian magistrates. You must therefore vndersta〈1 line〉〈1 line〉d, that the Churche must as well be preserued and kept in perfection, peace and vnitie, as builded and brought therevnto, and that such offices

and functious are lawfull as tend to that end, and be therefore by lawfull authoritie appointed, howsoeuer some weyward persons thinke the contrary.

Chap. 1. the. 16. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 63. Sect. 6.

And that without these ministeries the Church may be complete, it appeareth by that which is in the fourth to the Ephesians, where it is said that Christ gaue some Apostles, some Euange∣lists, some Pastors and Doctors, to the restoring of the saincts vnto the worke of the ministerie, vntill we all come to the vnitie of faith, and of the knowledge of the Sonne of God, and vnto a perfect man.

Io. Whitgifte.

In that place to the Ephesians there is no mention made of Deacons and wi∣dowes,* 1.47 nor of your elders, and therefore it maketh as much against them as it dothe against Archbyshops. Moreouer it hath Apostles, Euangelists, and Prophets, all which you seclude from the state of this Church. Thirdly it conteyneth those mini∣steries only which are occupied in the word and administration of the sacramentes, not those whiche perteyne to order and discipline as you afterwarde your selfe con∣fesse, and therefore I vnderstand not how that place can help you any thing at all.

Chap. 1. the. 17. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 63. Sect. vlt.

The learned writers haue thus reasoned against the Pope: that forasmuch as Apostles, Pro∣phets. &c. are sufficient for the building of the Church, therefore there ought to be no Pope. The argument and necessitie of the conclusion is as strong againste the Archbyshop and all one. For by the same reason that the Pope is cast away as a superfluous thing, for that these offices are able to make perfect the Churche, is the Archbyshop likewise throwen out of the Churche, as a knobbe or some lumpe of flesh, which being no member of the body doth both burden it and disfi∣gure it. And as they say that God gaue no Pope to his Churche, therefore the Pope can do no good: so we may well say God gaue no Archbyshop to his Churche, therefore the Archbyshop can do no good.

Io. Whitgifte.

If there were no stronger places than this against the Pope of Rome his vsur∣ped authoritie, it might stand still, for any thing that I know: bycause this place spea∣keth only of the offices occupied in preaching the worde and administrating the sa∣craments, as I haue said, not of any office of gouernment. Neyther is it a perfect pat∣terne bycause it hath omitted those offices before mentioned. I haue tolde you before that a negatiue argument from the scripture (except it be in matters of saluation) is but weake. Likewise that an Archbyshop is no new ministery, but may well be con∣teyned in the number of those, of whome the Apostle there speaketh. For the name of a Pastor doth comprehende both Archbishops and Byshops. The name dothe but signify an office of gouernment conuenient for the state of the Church in the external pollicy of it. And if it did preuaile againste the Pope, yet dothe it not so againste the* 1.48 Archbyshop. For the Pope dothe chalenge hys authoritie by succession from Peter, so dothe not the Archbyshop. The Pope saythe that he is the head of the vniuersall Churche of Christe, so dothe not the Archbyshop. The Pope saith that to be subiect to him is necessary to saluation, the Archbyshop thinketh no suche matter. The Pope chalengeth power to remitte and retayne sinnes, to dispense with the word of God, to make newe articles of faythe. &c. so dothe not the Archbyshop. To be shorte the Pope claymeth authoritie ouer kings and princes, and saithe that they haue autho∣ritie

from him: but the Archbyshops (if you speake of ours) acknowledge themsel∣ues to be subiects to their Prince, and to haue that authoritie and iurisdiction from hir, which they practise ouer and aboue that that other byshops do, and therefore▪ on must needes be reproued here, either of great lacke of discretion, or else of gresse ig∣norance, or purposed malice. You mighte saye that God gaue no magistrate in that place to his Church, Ergo, the magistrate can do no good. Surely I thinke that if you should well consider how néere your arguments approch to the Anabaptists, you would eyther more circumspectly vse them, or else quite cast them away.

Chap. 1. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 64. Sect. 1.

Neyther did God giue any Archdeacon to his Church therefore he cannot profyte y^e Church. But it will be said that this argument followeth not, bycause no mention is made here of the dea∣con or of the elder, which notwithstanding are both necessary in the Churche, and therefore that there are functions profitable in the Church wherof no mention is made here. But how (*) 1.49 easily do all men know that the Apostle speaketh of those functions here only, whiche are conuersant in the worde, and haue to do with the preaching thereof: and therefore made hereno mention of the Deacon or elder. It is said agayne that in the epistle to the Corinthians, S. Paule speaketh only* 1.50 of Apostles, Prophets and Doctors, leauing out Euangelists and Pastors and yet Euangelists and Pastors necessary: and so although Archbyshops are not spoken o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 in the place to the Ephe∣sians, yet they may not be therefore shut out as vnnecessary. But they that saye so, shoulde haue considered that the diuersitie of the matter which the Apostle handleth in these two places, bred a diuerse kind of speach. For in the epistle to the Corinthians, going about to condemne the ambiti∣on of men, whiche will thrust themselues into other mens callings, and take vpon them to do all themselues, and to be as it were eye, and eare, and hand and all: S. Paule proueth that the Church is a body wherein there are many members, and the same diuerse one from another, and that it is not one member only. And to proue that, it was sufficient to say that he placed some Apostles, some Prophets, some Doctors, without rehearsing al y^e kinds of functions. But in the Epistle to the Ephesians, meaning to shew the liberalitie of our sauioure Christ in giuing those which shuld be able by doctrine and teaching to make perfect and absolute his Church, it was necessary that he should recken vp all those functions whereby that worke is done.

Io. Whitgifte.

You haue in this place your selfe answered your former reasons touching the* 1.51 place to the Ephesians. For I haue tolde you that the names of Archbyshops and Archdeacon be names of iurisdiction and gouernmente, not of any newe ministerie and therefore suche byshops and ministers, as be so called to haue those names, not in the respect of the ministerie of the word, but of order and pollicie.

The obiection made of the place of the. 1. to the Corinth. Cap. 12. is of more weight than you can be able to remoue with all the might you haue. For the Apostle there as well declareth the diuersitie of offices in the Church, as he doth in that Epistle to the Ephesians: yea and more perfectly to, as the place it selfe and the very order that the Apostle kéepeth doth declare. your distinction is but in vaine inuented for a shift only, against both reason and authoritie: against reason bycause the Apostle hauing before made a perfect diuision of gifts in the Church, it is not like but now speaking of offices he doth the same. Moreouer he doth reherse them in order saying, firste A∣postles, then Prophets, thirdly Doctors. &c. Lastly he reciteth here more offices thā he doth there, for here he reciteth eight and there only fiue at the most. Authoritie both of learned writers, and of the manifest words of the Apostle himselfe is against it. Peter Martyr saith that in this place Recenset singulatim quas parteis habeat boc corpus he* 1.52 rehearseth particularly what parts this body hath, meaning the Church. And the Apostle himselfe recyting the diuerse parts of the body and functions of the same to declare the diuerse functions that be in the Church, doth no doubt make as perfect a diuision here as he doth in any other place, so that this shift cannot serue your turne, and if it did, yet haue you proued nothing by it, for you your selfe haue giuen the salution say∣ing That in the place to the Ephesians he only speaketh of suche functions as are conuersant in the word, which is true.

Chap. 1. the. 19. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 64. Sect. 2.

But how commeth it to passe that S. Paule neyther in the one place, neyther in the other nor else where maketh mention of the Archbyshop, which is said to be the chefest piller and vnderset∣ter of the Church? Now I heare what is said to this, that vnder the Pastor is conteyned byshop, he is not conteyned but is the same that byshop. How then? Forsooth say they an Archbyshop is byshop? well then of byshops some are Archbyshops some are what? Here I see that they (*) 1.53 are hanged in the bush, but I will help them, of by shops some are Archbyshops, some are by the com∣mō name byshops. For if they answer not thus, what haue they to say? But what an absurd thing were that to say that S. Paule comprehended an Archbyshop vnder a Pastor or byshop, whych neyther was at that time nor certaine hundred yeares after? this were not to deinde but to pro∣phecie. And how is it that they neuer marked that S. Paule speaketh of those functions whiche were in the Church, and not of those which should be afterward? and of those that God had giuen, and not of those which he would giue▪ For the words are and he hath giuen.

Io. Whitgifte.

No man can denie, but a bishop may aptly be comprehended vnder this name Pastor, and Archbyshop vnder the name of a Byshop: and it may as well be saide that of byshops some be called Archbyshops, and some by the name of byshops, as it may be saide of kings some be called Emperours, some by the common name of kings: of Dukes, some Archdukes some by the common name of Dukes: of Iustices, some chiefe Iustices, some by the common name of Iustices.

What if the name of an Archbyshop were not in S. Paules time? Doth it there∣fore* 1.54 follow that the thing signifyed by the name was not in his time? This worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not in S. Paules time, but afterward inuented in the councel of Nice. Yet was the thing thereby signifyed in S. Paules time, and from the beginning. Other names there be also whiche were inuented since the Apostles time, and yet both lawfully and necessarily vsed. The authoritie and thing whereof the Archby∣shop hath his name, was in Paules time and therefore the name lawfull: and if it hád not bin in S. Paules time, yet were both the name and the office lawfull by∣cause it perteyneth to the externall policie and regiment of the Church, which is va∣riable according to the place, time, person, and other circumstances. Shall not the authoritie that Christian Princes haue in matters ecclesiasticall be thought law∣full, bycause there were no such Princes in S. Paules time? Dr shall not they haue the chiefe authoritie in ruling and gouerning the Church in exteruall policie and re∣giment bycause there is no suche expresse mention of them in those two places of S. Paule?

But you shall answer yourselfe, for you say that in those places S. Paule speaketh of such functions as were then in the church, not of such as should be afterward, whiche is true. And therefore I conclude that as all those offices (by your owne confession before) are not necessary for all times in the Church: so are they not only, for all times of the Church, but other may be brought in méete for the gouernment of the same. I know your meaning is nothing lesse, yet this is my collection which I thinke you will ve∣ry hardly answer.

How many hundred yeares the name of Archbyshop was after the Apostles time, shall appeare in another place.

Chap. 1. the. 20. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 64. Sect. 3.

Moreouer, if so be vnder the Pastor the Apostle comprehended an Archbyshop, thē the Arch∣byshop is necessary, and such as the Church cannot be without, and commaunded of God, & ther∣fore not taken vp by the pollicie of the Church for the tune, countrey, and other circumstances, and such also as cannot be put downe at the will of the Church, which is contrary to the iudgemente of those which are the Archbyshops Patrones.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your argument if it be thus framed, Pastors are necessary at all times in all e∣states of the Church, and in all places, and cannot be put downe at the will of the Church: Archbyshops are Pastors, therfore they be necessary at all times. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. I denie your argumente, bycause the maior in the first figure cannot be particular. If you make your maior vniuersall, then I do denie it, and put you to the proofe. If you say that to preach the word and to administer the sacramēts (which is, the office of a Pa∣stor) is necessary at all times: then I confesse it to be true, and distinguish the minor on this sort: that an Archbyshop in respect of the ministery of the worde and sacra∣ments, is at all times necessary, not in the respect of policie and gouernment, in con∣sideration whereof he hath the name of an Archbyshop.

Chap. 1. the. 21. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 64. Sect. 3. 4. 5.

The last (*) 1.55 refuge is, that the Apostle made mention of those functions whiche haue to doe with the ministring of the word and sacraments, and not of those whiche haue to do with order and discipline.

Speake in good earnest, had the Apostles (a) 1.56 nothing to do with discipline and order? with what face can you take away the raines of gouernment out of the Apostles handes, and put them in the Archby shops and Archdeacons hands? what a peruersnesse is this that the ministeries in∣uented by men should be preferred to all the ministeries appointed and commaunded of God.

The Apostles for sooth haue in common with the Archbyshops and Archdeacons the power of ministring of the worde and of the Sacraments, of binding and losing, and thus farre as good as the Archbyshops and Archdeacons. But for discipline and order the Apostles haue nothing to doe, but herein Archbyshops and Archdeacons are aboue them and better than they.

Io. Whitgifte.

You wonderfully forget your selfe, for it is your owne distinction as it appeareth* 1.57 in the. 5. line of the same page of your booke: and thereby you shifted off the obiection of Deacons and Elders. I know no man that taketh the raines of gouernmente out of the Apostles hāds and giueth it to any to whome it is not due by the word of God. But is your meaning that the Apostles should now execute it themselues? else Quorsum bae〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Surely you are so full of passions that you forget the matter. I knowe the Apostles had in their time togyther with the ministerie of the word and sacraments, power to exercise ecclesiasticall discipline and order: But truly I vnderstand not your mea∣ning, for neuer any such thing as you here fancie entred once into my cogitation. I rather say that bycause in the Apostles there was ioyned the administration of dis∣cipline with the ministerie of the word and sacraments, therefore it may be so like∣wise now in Archbyshops and Byshops. For that authoritie of discipline and go∣uernment that the Apostles had in their time, is now for the most part executed by Archbyshops and Byshops, which is the ouerthrow of your whole assertion.

Chap. 1. the. 22. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 64. Sect. vlt.

Now sir if I would follow your vaine of making so many exclamations, as oh the impuden∣cie, oh the insolencie with twentie other such great ohes, you see (*) 1.58 I haue occasion both here and else where. But I would not gladly declaime, especially when I shoulde dispute, nor make out∣cries in stead of reasons.

Io. Whitgifte.

Where haue I vsed these exclamations? or what cause haue you so suddenly to burst into them at this time? except it be to set some countenance vppon your euill fauoured reasons. But I will let you alone in such toyes, and suffer you to play with your selfe.

Chap. 1. the. 23. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 1.

But to come to this distinction, I had thought before this time, that the Apostles had bin the (*) 1.59 chiefe builders in setting vp the Church, now I perceiue you make the archbyshops and Arch∣deacons the chiefe builders, and the Apostles vnder carpenters or common masons, to serue and to* 1.60 take the commaundement of the Archbyshop and Archdeacon. And whereas it is saide that the ministeries which S. Paule speaketh of are in the words and sacraments, binding and losing on∣ly, and that there be other whiche are besides these (occupied in the order and discipline of the Church) (of which number are Archbyshops and Archdeacons) let vs marke a little what deepe diuinitie here is.

Io. Whitgifte.

Surely you wander you know not whether, without doubt your mind, whē you writte this, was vpō some other thing than vpon my booke. For wher haue I made this comparison betwixte the Apostles and Archbyshops? or what haue I spoken sounding that way? I would haue you to deale honestly and plainly. If you meane the booke in latin, whereof you after ward speake, the words of that booke sounding any thing this way be these. Archiepisiopi ab èpiscopis quoad ministerium non differunt (om∣nes enim paripotestate docendi, baptizandi, ligandi & soluendi praediti sunt:) sed quoad ordinem et politiam: ordinis enim & politiae causa quaedam vltra episcopos Archiepiscopis cencessa sunt. Arch∣byshops differ not from byshops in respect of the ministerie (for they are all endued with equall authoritie to teach, to baptise, to bind and lose) but in respect of order and policie. For some things are graunted to Archbyshops for order and policies sake aboue the byshops. And further answering that place to the Ephesians it saith: Apostolus eo in loco eos tantiòn ministr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s & ministeria enumerat quae in precibus, verbo, & administratione sacramento∣rum versantur, non eorum quae ad ordinem & disciplinam instituuntur, qualia sunt Archiepiscopo∣rum & Archidiaconorum The Apostle in that place doth only recite those ministers and mi∣nisteries, which are occupied in prayer, the word and the administration of the Sacraments, not of them whiche are instituted for order and discipline, suche as are the functions of Archbyshops and Archdeacons. The which selfesame distinction for that place you vse* 1.61 in the beginning of the 64. Page of your bóoke, these only words excepted (qualia sunt Archiepiscoporum & Archidiaconorum) as I haue before shewed and your owne words declare. And I am sure these words do not make the Archbyshops and Archdeacons chiefe builders and the Apostles vnder carpenters as it pleaseth you to collect, but this is your modestie.

Chap. 1. the. 23. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 2.

And first of all I would gladly aske them with what aduise they hauelaide on a greater (*)* 1.62 burden and weight of the Archbyshops and Archdeacons shoulders, than the Apostles were able to sustaine.

Io. Whitgifte.

When you haue told where they haue laid on this greater burden and waight, or what the burden and waight is that you say they haue laid on, or who they be that haue layde it on, then shall your question be answered, in the meane time let this suffice the rea∣der, that you do but forge matter to encrease your volumes, and to sport your selfe.

Chap. 1. the. 24. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 3.

Secondarily I aske with what boldnesse and vppon the confidence of what giftes, any man dare take vpon him both that which the Apostles did, and more to?

Io. Whitgifte.

To this I answer as to the former.

Chap. 1. the. 25. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 3.

Then I say that it is too too vnskilfully done, to separate order and discipline from then that haue the ministerie of the woorde in hand, as though the Church without Archbishops and Arch∣deacons▪ were acōfused heape and a disordered lumpe, when as S. Paule teacheth it to be without them, a bodie consisting of all his partes and members, comely knitte and ioyned together, wherein nothing wanteth, nor nothing is to much.

Io. Whitgifte.

Order and discipline are not separated from the ministery of the worde, although all such* 1.63 as be ministers of the woorde haue not the like authoritie to execute them. For as it is sayd in that Latine booke, for order and policies sake more is graunted to the Arch∣bishop than to the Bishop, neither will any learned man so greatly maruayle at this, seing the practise thereof was in the Apostles time. For Paule had more large and ample authoritie than Timothie, and Timothie than the resse of the ministers of Ephesus.

What if the Church without Archbishops and Archdeacons were perfect in S. Paules time, and may be perfect at other times, doth it therefore follow that the Church in no time or stare may haue them, or rather that they be not necessarie at some time for the Churche? In S. Paules time Apostles, Prophets, workers of miracles, giftes of healing, diuersitie of tongs were counted necessarie, and principall partes of this body, which not with standing you confesse now to be cut of, and yet the bodie perfect: So that you see this is no reason at all, to say that the Church in S. Paules time was a perfect body without Archbyshops and Archdeacons: Ergo, they are not necessary in the Church of Christ. For I might as well reason thus: The Church of Christe in S. Paules time was not perfect without Apostles, Prophets, doers of miracles, giftes of healing, diuersitie of tongs, therefore it is not now perfect being without them. And likewise it was then perfect without Christian magistrates,* 1.64 Ergo, Christian magistrates are to be remoued from the Church. This kinde of rea∣soning, as it is vnskilfull, bicause it doth not distinguish the times of the Churche, neither considereth necessarie circumstances, so it is moste perilous and openeth a dore to Anabaptisme and confusion.

Moreouer I told you before, that although this name Archbishop is not expressed* 1.65 in the Scripture yet is the office and function, as it is euidently to be séene in the ex∣amples of Timothie, and Titus, yea and in the Apostles themselues, whose office of planting Churches thorough the whole world is ceassed, but their care for the good gouernment of those Churches which were planted, and their authoritie ouer those Pastors whom they placed, doth and must remayne in such places where there are Churches. And therefore M. Bucer writing vpon the fourth to the Ephesians sayth* 1.66 thus: Miletum Presbiteros Ecclesiae Ephesinae conuocat: tamen quia vnus inter eos praeerat alijs & primam Ecclesiaecuram habebat, in eo propriè residebat nomen Episcopi. In the Actes Paule calleth the same men Bishops and Elders, when as he called together the ministers of the Church of Ephesus vnto Miletum: yet bicause one amongst them did rule ouer the reste and had the chiefe care of the Churche, the name of Bishop did properly remayne in him So that this superioritie and iurisdiction which we speake of, was euen in the Apostles time, as it is more at large afterward proued.

Chap. 1. the. 26. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 3.

Doth it not pertayne to order that the Apostle sayth that God hath set first Apostles, second∣ly Prophets, thirdly teachers? are not these wordes, First, Second, Thirde, differences of order? if this be not order, surely I know not what order is. And yet neyther Archbishop nor Archdea∣con author of this, and it was kept also before they were hatched.

Io. Whitgifte.

Yes, but will you haue the same order now? then muste you haue Apostles, and Prophets, which you denie, so that this order you sée is not perpetuall, wherefore from time to time that order among the ministers of the woorde muste be obserued,* 1.67 that is most conuenient for the state of the Church. Neyther is any agaynst such or∣der, but those that will not liue in order. Did euer any man denie but that there was order in the Apostles tyme? All this is but to make the reader beleue that some such thing is in that Latin booke, when there is not one woorde whereof any such thing can be gathered: is this your simplicitie?

Chap. 1. the. 27. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 4.

Let vs see of discipline and gouernment, which we may see to be cōmitted to those which haue the preaching of the worde and to others also which did not preach the worde, when S. Paule* 1.68 sayth, that the elders which gouerne well are worthie double honour especially those which trauell in the word: where he appoynteth the gouernment to the ministers of the word, & to those also that were not ministers of the worde. And therevpon it followeth that the ministers of the Church ar not seuered one from an other, as you, bycause some haue the ministration of the worde and Sa∣craments only, and some with the administration of the Sacraments and worde, haue also the go∣uernment and discipline in their handes: but cleane contrarywise S. Paule distinguisheth them, and sheweth that all the ministers in the Church haue the gouernment, but all haue not the worde to handle, so that he distinguisheth the ministery into that which is occupied in the worde and go∣uernment, and into that which is occupied in the gouernment onely. But in this distinction you do not onely forget S. Paule, but you forget your selfe. For if S. Paule speake in that place of those that meddle with the ministring of the worde and sacraments (*) 1.69 only: why doth the bishop which is one of the ministers that S. Paule speaketh of (beyng the same that pastor is) why I say doth he meddle with the discipline and order of the Church, seyng that belongeth not to him by your distinction? why doth also the Archbyshop (whom you say is a byshop), meddle with it? And thus you see you neede no other aduersary than your selfe to confute you.

Io. Whitgifte.

The reader should better haue vnderstoode what you had gone aboute, if you had set before his eyes the wordes that you confute. Now I scarce vnderstand your mea∣ning my selfe. You shote altogether without a marke. I know no man that denieth discipline and gouernment to be committed to those that haue the preaching of the worde, and to o∣thers also which preach not the worde. But if you meane that eyther all kinde of ecclesi∣asticall discipline and gouernment, is committed to all such as preach the worde, or in as ample manner to one as to another, you haue not yet proued it, neyther will you be hable to proue it with all the learning that you thinke your selfe to haue.

That in 1. Tim. 5. doth proue no such matter, as you pretende. For what doth* 1.70 S. Paule meane there, by gouerning well? Christ〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 & Ecclesiae suae tum doctrina tum inte∣gritate vitae fideliter inseruire, non suased quae Dei sunt quaerere: to serue Christ and his Church faythfully both in doctrine and integritie of lyfe, to seeke not those things which are his, but those which are Gods. Thus do the learned interpreters expound, bene praeesse, in this place. Is not the office of teaching, exhorting, reprouing, an office of ruling and gouerning? But you say that the Apostle doth make two kinde of gouernours, one that trauayleth in the worde, the other that doth not. And what then? he that dili∣gently doth that office that is committed vnto him, whether it be in preaching the worde, prouiding for the poore, visiting the sicke, or any such lyke function, doth rule well. But doth it therefore follow that all haue like authoritie, or that there is no kinde of Ecclesiasticall gouernment or discipline, but that which is common to all the ministers of the worde? Certayne it is, that euery Pastor that doth his duetie in* 1.71 preaching ruleth well, and so do they also that duely and truly administer the Sacra∣ments, relieue the poore, visite the sicke, priuately admonish, &c. But is there there∣fore none that hath superioritie ouer them, to procure that those things be done accor∣dingly, to correct them if they be not done, to sée that euery man be kept in order, be

obedient to lawes, teach true doctrine, breake not vnitie. &c? This place therefore helpeth you not. For although all ministers of the woorde rule and gouerne after a sort, yet do not they al so, in all kinde of gouernment, nor equally, for they also must haue gouernours.

But consider your reason or at the least the end of your drifte. All ministers of the* 1.72 worde gouerne their parishes by preaching the woorde, rebuking sinne. &c. Ergo, th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉y must haue none to gouerne them, and kéepe them in order, and sée that they do their duetie: it is all one with this. Euery Master of a familie ruleth ouer his familie▪ and therefore he must haue no superïour to rule ouer him: or euery chiefe officer of Ci∣ties or Townes be rulers and gouernours of those places, therfore they must haue none to rule and gouerne either their cities and townes, or themselues. In déed this is a plausible doctrine to make euery Pastor chiefe gouernour within his owne pa∣rishe, and to make euery citie and towne a kingdome within it selfe: but it is a pesti∣lent doctrine, for in short time there would be as many Popes as Pastors, as many religions as parishes, as many sectes as families, and in the end an ouerthrow both of religion, the Churche, and the kingdome. Neyther coulde there possibly haue bene inuented a more readier way for the Pope to make his entrie in hither againe.

Of your distinction of Presbyter, I will speake in a more fitte place.

I haue not forgot my selfe, but you neyther vnderstande (as it appeareth) my writings, neyther yet your own, for hyther to you haue fought wythout an ad∣uersarie.

And yet I muste put you in minde of your falsehoode and subtill dealing: for whereas I saye that the Apostle in the. 4. Ephe. speaketh onely of those ministers and ministeries, which are occupied in prayers, the worde and administration of the sacraments. you by displacing the woorde, only, make your Reader beléeue, that I affirme the A∣postle to speake in that place, of those that meddle with the ministring of the word and Sa∣craments onely, as if I shoulde seclude the ministers of the worde from all kinde of gouernment.

Chap. 1. the. 28. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 5.

And least any man should say I confute my owne shadow, I must let him to vnderstand that there is a Pamphlet in Latin, which is called the (*) 1.73 boke of the Doctors, which goeth from hande to hande and especially (so far as they could bring to passe) to those only that they thought to fauour that opinion, in the which booke, all these answeres vnto the place of the Ephesians are conteyned, and almost all that which is comprehended in this defense of Archbyshops and Archdeacons, wyth other things also which are founde in this booke of M. Doctors: and therefore it is very likely that he hauing no other way to vent his rapsodies, and rackings togither, thought he would bring them to light after this sort. But how much better had it bene that this mishapen thing had had the mo∣thers wombe for the graue, or being brought out had bene hidden as the former is, in some bench∣hole or darke place, where it shoulde neuer haue seene any light, nor no mans eye should euer haue loked of it?

Io. Whitgifte.

It had bene much for your credite if you had set downe the wordes of that booke the which you and your fautors in derision cal the booke of Doctors. Which you haue only named and not cōfuted. The booke dare abide the light, and the Author also, but so dare not you. To the rest of your woordes my answere is onely this, that you be∣wray your spirite: for further proofe hereof I referre the reader to the third Chapter of S. Iames, from the tenth verse to the end.

Chap. 1. the. 29. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 5.

And thus al these clowds being scattered by the sunne of the truth, you see that the place to the Ephesians standeth strong against the Archbyshop and Archedeacon.

Io. Whitgifte.

Nothing lesse: but the contrary for any thing that you haue spoken yet.

Chap. 1. the. 30. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 65. Sect. 5. & Pag 66. Sect. 1.

Nowe I will reason also after this sort out of the place of the Ephesians and Corinthians ioy∣ned together. There is no function but hath giftes fit and apte to discharge it, annexed and gyuen vnto it: wherevpon the Apostle by a Metonomie, doth call the Apostles, Prophets, &c. giftes, by∣cause they haue alwayes giftes ioyned with them. This being graunted (as no man can denie it) I reason thus.

(a) 1.74 Those functions only are sufficent for the church, which haue all the gifts needefull, eyther for the ministring of the worde and sacraments, or for the gouernment of the churche: but all these functions reckened of S. Paule to the Ephesians, with those which S. Paule calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which are the Deacons and elders) haue the giftes needful either for the gouern∣ment of the church, either else for the ministring of the worde and sacraments: therefore these func∣tions only are sufficient for the church. For it is a superfluous thing to make more offices than ther be gifts to furnish them, for so they that should haue them, should rather be Idols than officers. And therefore for asmuch as there is no gift which falleth not into some of these 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nnctions, it is altogither a vaine and vnprositable thing to bring more offices and functions into the Church besides these.

Io. Whitgifte.

You saye there is no function, but hath giftes apt and fitte to discharge it, annexed and giuen* 1.75 vnto it. If you meane that there is no function but there is giftes méete for it, which God hath in his power to bestowe, it is most true: But if your meaning be, that the giftes be so annexed to the function, that of necessitie whosoeuer is called to that function muste also haue those giftes, it is moste vntrue. For experience dothe teache that euery man hath not giftes according to his function, althoughe he bée lawfully there vnto called, touching his externall calling: for the in warde calling none knoweth but God himselfe, and a mans owne conscience. But you put mée in remembraunce of that whiche maister Bullinger writeth of the Anabaptistes lib. 5. cap. 1. wher he (confuting the reason they vse to proue that Christians ought not to haue magistrates, bicause Christians be so perfect of themselues that they can go∣uerne themselues, and therfore néede not to be subiect to any other superiour autho∣ritie saith thus: Solent autem Anabaptistae libenter ea imaginari & animo suo fingere quae nun∣quàm* 1.76 fueru〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t, ne{que} extant, aut posthaec futura sunt. The Anabaptistes willingly vse to imagine and conceyue those things in their myndes whiche neuer hath bene, nor are, nor hereafter shall bee. Euen so I say vnto you, that in imagining the giftes perteyning to euery func∣tion so to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vnto the function, that he whiche hath the one must of necessitie haue the other, you phansie that whiche neuer was, is, or shall be: and in so reasoning what do you else, than vse that argument against superioritie in the Ecclesiasticall estate, which the Anabaptists vse both against Ecclesiasticall & Ciuill magistrates? But I answere you as M. Bullinger answered them: Excepte you were blinded with pertinacie you might easily see in your selfe iuste cause why there shoulde bee magistrates* 1.77 and Superiours.

Moreouer God dothe not tie his giftes to any certayne and definite number of names or titles of offices, but bestoweth them as it pleaseth him, to the commoditie of his Church, vpon such as be méete to vse them, by what name or title soeuer they be called. Wherefore this assertion of yours is eyther vnaduisedly auouched, or else doth it conteyne some secrete poyson not yet vttered.

This being sayde, to the ground that you haue layde, thus I answere to your ar∣gument:* 1.78 it is in no mode, and in déede to bad for any boye to vse in his Sophismes. It is in forme the same with this: Those things onely are sufficient for saluation which are conteyned in the Scriptures, but al those things in the Aue Maria are con∣teyned in the Scriptures, therefore those things only which are in the Aue Maria are sufficient to saluation. Or this, those onely are men which are indued with reason,

but all the Cosrardmongers in London are indued with reason, therefore the Costard∣mongers of London onely are men. Besides this, the Maior is particular, which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 agaynst all forme of Syllogisme in the first or second figure: to be shorte, in your Maior you haue this woorde (onely) in your Medium and in the Minor is left out. And therefore your conclusion followeth not, except you had sayd in your Minor, that only these functions reckened of S. Paule to the Ephesians &c. haue all giftes needefull for the mini∣string of the woorde and sacraments and for the gouernment of the Church: And yet if it were so, your argument should be of no force, being ex solis particularibus. So that in your Syllogisme there is no manner of forme, and therefore not woorthie of any other an∣swere, vntill it be better framed. Although I could say vnto you that all those fun∣ctions haue giftes necessary for them: but not only those functions: bycause there be other not mencioned of you which haue giftes necessary also, and which the Apostle rehearseth. 1. Corinth. 12. So lykewise could I answere that moste of those functions (according to your owne opinion) be not perpetuall but for a time, and therfore your reason is no good reason. Likewise that the Apostle hath not made in eyther of these places any perfect diuision of offices which were euen at that time in the Churche. For in the first to the Corinthians the. 12. chap. he leaueth out Euangelistes, Pastors, Byshops, Deacons, widdowes: and in the fourth to the Ephesians: Deacons, wid∣dowes, workers of miracles, &c. So that he hath not lefte any perpetuall paterne of offices, or names in eyther of those twoo places. To conclude I could tell you that God hath lefte to his Church authoritie to appoynt both names and offices, as shall be for the same most conuenient and profitable, the which authoritie the Church hath also from the beginning vsed, as in appoynting Catechistes, Lectors, and such lyke, not superfluons but moste necessarie offices, and profitable for the Churche, in those times wherein they were.

Chap. 1. the. 31. Diuision.

T. C. Pag 66. Sect. 2.

And so it may be thus reasoned. If men may make and crect new ministeries, they must eyther giue giftes for to dischardge them, or assure men that they shall haue giftes of God, whereby they may be able to answere them. But they can neyther giue giftes, nor assure men of any giftes neces∣sary to discharge those functions, therefore they may make or erect no new ministeries.

Io. Whitgifte.

First there is no new ministery erected. But among the ministers some are ap∣poynted to gouerne the rest, and to haue the chiefe direction of them, and such are cho∣sen to that superioritie, vpon whom God (as farre as man can iudge) hath bestowed giftes méete for the same. Secondly, it is not necessary that those that appoynt any office, should be able to giue gyftes incident there vnto. For then no man might ap∣poynt any office. It is therefore sufficient if he appoynt such Persons as God hath in∣dued with giftes méete for such an office, and such offices as there may be persones méete to execute: which being obserued, your argument is soone answered.

Chap. 1. the. 32. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 66. Sect. 3.

Last of all to conclude agaynst these made and diuised ministeries of Archbyshops and Arch∣beacons after this sorte,(a) 1.79 if men may adde ministeries, they may also take away: for those both belong to one authoritie:(b) 1.80 but they can not take away those ministeries that God hath placed in his Churche, therefore they cannot adde to those that are placed in the Churche. And this founda∣tion I thought first to lay or euer I entred into M. Doctours not reasons, but authorities, not of God but of men, in confuting of which there will fall forth also other arguments, against both these offices of Archbyshop and Archdeacon.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your whole booke is for the moste parte buylded vpon that false founded argu∣ment,* 1.81 that is called Petitio principij. For this will not be graunted vnto you, which you haue so oftentimes repeated, and wherevpon all your arguments are grounded, that to appoynt Archbyshops or Archdeacons, is to appoynt a new ministery. It is (as I tolde you before) but to kéepe an order in the ministery and in the Churche, and to execute that office of gouernment which the Apostles themselues did. When Hierome sayde, That for the auoyding of Schismes the ministers appoynted one among themselues to gouerne the rest. Did he meane that they instituted a new ministerie? A man may sée by this, how vnable you are to defend your cause, seing you are enforced to frame principles vnto your selfe, agaynst the which you may reason, that the igno∣rant reader may thinke your quarell to be iuste. But nowe to your argument. The Maior is not true, for men may adde ministeries to those that be, and breake not the will and commaundement of God, bicause they may be helpes and furtheraunces to those ministeries that God hath appoynted: But he can not take away such ministeries as God hath placed in his Churche, to be perpetuall, without breache of his will and commaun∣dement. Moreouer, besides those ministeries that God hath appoynted in his woorde as necessary at all times, there may be some added that be cōuenient for some times, and yet the Churche that hath authoritie to adde these, hath not the lyke authoritie to take awaye the other: So that your Maior lacketh proofe. Your Minor also is ambigu∣ous: for man can not take away those ministeries that God hath appoynted to be perpetuall in the Churche, but he may take away those that be but temporall, as occasion ser∣ueth.

If your foūdation be no sounder than this that you haue hitherto layde, surely your buylding cannot long stande, and M. Doctors authorities may well ynough encoun∣ter with all your reasons.

That the names of Metropolitane, Arch∣bishop, &c. be not Antichristian.

Chap. 2. the. 1. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 65. Sect. 1.

Firste therefore I proue that the names of Metropolitane and* 1.82 Archbishop &c. be not Antichristian names, that is, names inuented by Antichrist, but most aūciēt: yea that they were in the Church, lōg before the Gospell was publiquely embraced by any Prince or in any kingdome. Polidore Virgil lib. 4. De inuentoribus rerum, Cap. 12. saith that Clement in his boke entituled Compēdiarium Christianae religionis, testifieth, that the A∣postle Peter did in euery Prouince appoynt one Archbyshop, whom all other Byshops of the same prouince shoulde obey. He sayth also that the same Archbishop was called Primas, Patriarcha, and Metropolitanus. Peter was not Antichrist, Ergo, the name of an Archbishop is no An∣tichristian name.

T. C. Pag. 66. Sect. 4. 5. 6. 7. & Pag. 67. Sect. 1. 2.

Now I will come to the examining of your witnesses, whereof some of them are so bored in the eares and branded in their foreheades, that no man neede to feare any credite they shall gette

before any iudge wheresoeuer, or before whom soeuer they come, but in the Romish courte, and the Papistes onely excepted. For to let go Polidore Uirgile bycause whatsoeuer he sayth he sayth of the credite of another, let vs come to Clement which is the author of this you speake. And what is he? Is there any so blind that knoweth not that this was nothing lesse than Clement, of whom S. Paule speaketh, and which some thinke was the first Bishop of Rome ordeined by Peter, and* 1.83 not rather a wicked helhounde into whome the Lorde had sent Satan to be a lying spirite in his mouth, to deceiue them for their vnthankful receyuing of the gospell? And he must witnesse for the Archbishop: a worthie witnesse. For as all that Popish Hierarchie came out of the bottomlesse pit of hell: so to vpholde the Archbishop the necke of it, wherevpon the Romish monster standeth, are raysed vp from hell bastards, Clemens and Anacletus, and indeede as it may appeare, the very na∣turall sonnes of Satan, and the sworne souldiours of Antichrist.

A man would haue thought that the Bishop of Salisburie, M. Iuel had so pulled of the pain∣ting of the face of this Clement, that all good men woulde haue had him in detestation: so farre of would they haue bene to haue alledged out of him to proue any thing that is in controuersie.

The Bishop alledgeth both Eusebius, and S. Hierome, to proue that none of those woorkes* 1.84 which go in his name are his: and although the proofes be strong which the Bishop vseth beeing the witnesse of vnsuspected witnesses: yet bicause the law, although it allow two witnesses, not∣withstanding doth like the better of three, I will set downe here also Ireneus which was a great while before them both, and followed hard after the time of the true and vncounterfeyte Clement,* 1.85 and therefore coulde best tell of him, and of his wrytings, and yet he maketh mention but of one Epistle, which vpō occasion amongst the Corinthians he wrote to them. Indeed in an other place of that booke he sheweth, that it is verie probable, that Clementalso eyther wrote or turned the Epistle to the Hebrues. Nowe if that Epistle to the Counthes were extant, we shoulde easily see by comparing those that are nowe in his name wyth that, what a misshapen thing this is.

And if so be that Ireneus coniecture be good, that Clement was the authour or interpreter of the Epstle to the Hebrues, then what horrible iniurie is done to the holy Ghost, while the same is supposed the wryter of thys booke to the Hebrues, which is the authour of suche beggerie as thys Clement brought into the worlde? And I pray you do you holde that it is the true Christian reli∣gion which that booke conteyneth? Could none of these considerations driue you from the testi∣monie of this Clement? It goeth verie harde with the Archbishop, when these Clements, and Anacletusses must be brought to vnderprop him.

But what if there be no such booke as this is, which you name, (when you say in his booke in∣tituled Compendiarium religionis Christianae) it is like you know not him, nor what he saith, when you cannot tell so much as his name. Onely bicause Polidore wryteth that Clement sayth this in a certaine short and summarie booke of christian religion, you haue set downe that he wryteth thus in a booke intituled Compendiarium Christianae religionis, where there is no such tytle neither in the Councels where his Epistles are, neyther yet in all other his workes.

Thought you to disguise him with this newe name of the booke, that he should not be knowne? or ment you to occupie your answerer in seeking of a booke which bicause he should neuer finde, he should neuer answere? The place which Polidore meaneth is in the first Epistle which he wry∣teth vnto Iames the brother of the Lord, which is as the rest are both ridiculous in the maner of writing, and in the matter oftner tymes wicked and blasphemous, which I speake to this ende, that the reader through the commendation that M. Doctor hath giuen to this Clement, in taking him as one of his witnesses in so great a matter be not abused.

Io. Whitgifte.

Here is much more labour spent than is necessarie. No man denyeth but that the Epistles attributed to Clement are Counterfeyte, neyther do I otherwise alledge him or Anacletus, or any such like, than both M. Caluine, M. Iewell, and many other learned men do, as it is euident in their writings. That testimonie whiche I vse is out of Polidore, and therefore haue I quoted both the booke and Chapter. Poli∣dore wryteth as other doe that intreate of such matters, and for as muche as he was learned, and of purpose gaue himselfe to the searching out of such things, his report is not lightly to be reiected. But (God be thanked) neyther the name nor the an∣thoritie of an Arfhbishop dependeth vpon these witnesses, neyther do I vse them as sure groundes, but as probable testimonies of the antiquitie of the name. You haue cited the Canons of the Apostles thrise at the least in this your booke, and Higinus likewise, and vsed them as proofes, and yet is there as great suspicion in the counterfeyting of them, as there is of this booke of Clements. I pray you therefore giue me that libertie in recyting Authours, that you take to your selfe, and that no man refuseth when they serue to his purpose. For I protest vnto you, that I haue as euil an opinion of many of them, and think as great corruption to be in them as any man doth, and that not only bicause I haue so red in other mens writings of them: but also for that I my self in reading of thē haue noted the same. But I am well assured

that Polidore ment that Clement which is supposed to be the first Bishop of Rome, how he was therein deceyued (béeing so learned a man) I leaue it to others to iudge.

It is not like that Polydore ment that Epistle, for hée knewe what difference there was betwixt an Epistle and a booke: neyther doth the length or the matter of that Epistle giue anie occasion that it shoulde so be called: wherefore it is like that Po∣lydore had it out of some booke attributed vnto Clement vnder that title, thoughe the same be not extant. For there be diuerse woorkes of auncient fathers, whiche bée not now ertant in print, and yet in some places to be had. But I will not stande longer in this matter. The wordes of Polydore be these. Sicut D. Clemens in suo Chri∣stianae religionis compendiario libello perhibet, &c.

Chap. 2. the second Deuision.

T. C. Pag. 67. Sect. 3.

For answere vnto him, although he be not worth the answering, I say first it may bee well sayd here of the office of the Archbishop, that the father of it was an Amorite, and mother an Hittite, that is that it commeth of verie infamous parentage, the beginning thereof beeing of the Idola∣trous nations.

Io. Whitgifte.

These be but wordes of pleasure: it will appeare in this discourse that the parents and authours both of the office, and of the name, be such as ought with greater reue∣rence to be spoken of, and with greater signification of duetie.

Chap. 2. the thirde Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 67. Sect. 4.

And whereas Clement maketh S. Peter the Apostle to make it as it were his adopted sonne, therby to wipe away the shame of his birth, it doth S. Peter shamefull iniurie. For besides that it was farre from S. Peter to take this authoritie to himself, not only of making Archbishops tho∣rowout euery Prouince but also instituting a new order or of fice, without the counsell of the rest of the Apostles, which none else of the Apostles did, and which is cōtrarie to the practise of S. Peter, both in the first and sixt of the Actes, contrarie also to the practise of the Apostles which after shall appeare. I say besydes this, is it like that S. Peter woulde graffe the noblest plant as it is sayd of the ministerie of the Gospell, in such a rotten stock of that which was most abhominable in all I∣dolatrie? For the greater they were in the seruice of the Idolles, the more detestable were they before God.

Io. Whitgifte.

I do not take vpon me the defense of Clements wordes in that Epistle, or of Po∣lydore in the booke and Chapter before recyted, in all things that they spake touching the matter. But I cannot suffer your vaine reasons to serue for an answere. For if Saint Peter did thus place Archbishoppes, yet did he not appoynt any newe order or office, as you haue bene oftentymes tolde. Of all Byshops there is one order or* 1.86 ministerie, but diuerse degrées. Betwéene an Archbyshop and a Bishop there is one∣ly a difference of degrée and dignitie, not of order or ministerie: as diuerse learned men giue vnto Peter, aboue the rest of the Apostles the preheminence of honour for orders sake, but not of power. Moreouer Peter in appoynting them without the con∣sent of the other Apostles, did no otherwise than the Apostle S. Paule whē he placed Timothie at Ephesus, and Titus at Creta. It may be also that in some places where there were before Archiflamines he placed such as were called Archbishops, &c. whiche might be done in respect of y^e city & place, and not in respect of the idolatrous priests.

For Archiflamines were but in great Cities, which being conuerted vnto Christ, might haue in the place of their Archiflamines, Godly and learned Archbishops, to ouersée and direct the rest of the Bishops and Preachers, that vnitie and order might be obserued. Thus Paule did at Ephesus and Creta. And why might not Peter do it in other places likewise?

Chap. 4. the fourth Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 67. Sect. 5. 6. 7. 8.

The Lorde when he woulde giue lawes of woorshipping to his people, in the things that were indifferent, of shauing and cutting, and apparell wearing, sayth to his people, that they should not do so, and so, bicause the Gentiles did so, yea euen in those things, the vse whereof was otherwise verie profitable, and incommodious to forbeare, he woulde haue them notwithstanding to absteyne from, as from swines flesh, Conies. &c. to the ende that he might haue them seuered as appeareth by S. Paule, by a great and high wall from other Nations.* 1.87

And therefore it is verie vnlike that S. Peter woulde frame the ministerie of the Gospel (which is no ceremonie but of the substance of the gospel.) by the example of the heathenish and ydolatrous functions.

If one had sayde that the Lorde had shapen this common wealth by the paterne of other com∣mon wealthes, although it had bene most vntrue (all other flourishing common wealthes of A∣thens, Lacedemon, and Rome, borowing their good lawes of the Lordes common wealth) yet had it beene more tollerable: but to say he framed the ministerie of the Gospell by the Priesthoode of Idolatrie, is to fet chastitie out of Sodome, and to seeke for heauen in hell.

And if so be that the Lord had delighted in this Hierarchie, he woulde rather haue taken of his owne, than borowed of others: of his owne Church, than of the Synagog of Satan. For vnder the law besydes the Leuites there were Priests and aboue them a high Priest.

Io. Whitgifte.

God gaue vnto the Israelites a king, though other Nations had so in like maner.* 1.88 And he ordeyned degrées of Priests among them, to offer vnto him Sacrifices though the Gentiles had the like: and what inconuenience could there come by placing Arch∣byshops (which shoulde faythfully preache the worde of God, and carefully gouerne the Church of Christ) euen in those places where there were Archiflamines, who did de∣face Christianitie, and persecute the Christians? For by these meanes there could no harme come vnto them, as there might haue done to the Israelites by vsing of such things of the Gentiles as he forbad vnto them, but the contrarie: For this was a meanes to plucke them from all their superstition and Idolatrie. Neither is this in any respect a framing of the ministerie of the Gospell by the examples of Idolatrous & heathnish functions. Except you will say also that bycause the Gentiles had Flamines, and the Christians had Bishops, therefore the Christian Bishops were framed according to the example of the Gentiles Flamines. If you cannot say so truely in Bishops, ney∣ther can you iustly affirme it of Archbishops: for the reason is all one. Do you thinke this to be a good collection: where in the Popes time there was a Massing priest, now is there placed a Minister of the Gospell, Ergo the ministerie of the Gospell is framed according to the example of Massing priests? And yet thus do you conclude, that by∣cause there are nowadays Archbishops where before there were Archiflamines, therfore the ministerie of the Gospell is framed according to the heathnish and ydolatrous functions.

Chap. 2. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 68. Sect. 1.

And to say that Peter appoynted Archbishops and Bishops (*) by the example of Idolaters,* 1.89 * 1.90 is after a sort to make the law to come out of Egypt or Babilon, and not out of Sion or Ierusa∣lem, as the Prophete sayth.

Io. Whitgifte.

Neyther Clement in that Epistle, nor Polidore in that booke, nor Gratian dist. 80. sayth that Peter appoynted Archbyshops and byshops by the example of Idolaters, but this onely they say, that in those Cities where there were before Archiflamines there were placed Archbyshops, and where th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉re were Flamines, there byshops. There is greate difference betwixt their kinde of speach and yours. Howsoeuer the authors please you, or displease you, yet report their w〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rdes truly. M. Foxe Tom. 1. Pag. 14. is of this iudgement that where before there were Archiflamines, &c. there were placed Patriarches &c. His woordes be these: Thus it is made playne how the* 1.91 byshop of the firste seate, or firste byshop or Primate is none other, but he which then was called Patriarche, and belonged not onely to the Churche of Rome, but to all such cities and places, whereas before among the Gentiles were Primiflamines &c. Dist. 80. cap. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rbes & loca, & in illis. Hitherto M. Foxe.

Chap. 2. the. 6. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 68. Sect. 1. 2. 3.

You say after that Iames was an Archbyshop, if he were, he was the fyrst and placed ouer the Iewes.

And although S. Peter might, to gayne the Gent〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es, be c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ntent to vse their 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉dolatrous fun∣ctions, with a little chaunge of their names, yet there is none so madde to thinke that he woulde translate any such function, from the Gentiles to the Iewes, which were neuer before accusto∣med with any such Flamines or Archiflamines. And this I dare generally and at once say, against* 1.92 you and your Element, that the Lorde translated diuerse things out of the Lawe into the Gospell as the Presbetery, or eldership, excommunication, and the office of Deacons (as it is thought) for that the Sadducees, of whom so often mention is made in the gospell, are thought to haue had that office to prouide for the poore, for those that knowe the Hebrue tong, do vnderstande that Tsadi∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉im* 1.93 and Tsidkah, do not onely signifie Iustices and iuste menne, but also almes and almesmen: I say these and others more translated from the lawe vnto the gospell: but neyther you nor your Clement, shall euer be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hew, that the Lord euer translated any thing from Gentelisme in∣to the gospell.

Wee reade in the Actes, that all the Gentiles were commaunded, to conforme themselues vn∣to* 1.94 the Iewes in the ab〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ayning from bloud and strangled meate for a tyme, but we can n〈1 line〉〈1 line〉er finde that the Iewes were commaunded to conforme themselues to the Gentiles in their 〈◊〉〈◊〉, the reason whereof is, bycause the one was sometyme the lawe of God, and therefore he that had conscience in it, was to be borne with, and the other came from menne and out of their forge which the L〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rd would neuer g〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ue so much honor vnto, as to make other men by any meanes sub∣iect vnto them.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you had not learned that poynt of Sophistrie which is called Petitio princip〈1 line〉〈1 line〉j, (whereof I haue so o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tentimes told you) without doubt you had lacked much matter, and your booke would haue ben very thinne. For all this adoe in this place is nothing but discanting vpon a false playne song. The offices of an Archbishop and Byshop are no Idolatrous functions but Christian, and méete both for Iewe and Gentile con∣uerted vnto Christ: neyther are they translated from the Gentiles, but grounded vpō the woorde of God, practised in the Apostles time, approued by the best councells as is declared in the answere to the Admonition, and shall be more amplie hereafter, occa∣sion being offered. Wherefore all this that you haue here sayde, (the ground being taken away) serueth for no purpose.

Your coniecture of the Deaconship to be taken from the Iewes, is but a mere coniecture, if there had bene any such office in the law, it would haue bene specified in one place or other of the old Testament.

Touching your eldership wée shall sée what you haue to say for it in place. I will not trouble my selfe and the reader with bye matters not incident to this question.

And yet I would gladly learne of you in what portion of the lawe your presbyterie is commaunded or prescribed, for I tolde you before out of M. Caluine, that it was appoynted after the returne of the Iewes from the captiuitie of Babylon.

Your reason why there should be no orders or ceremonies taken from the Gen∣tiles is not sufficient: for it is a negatiue reason ab authoritate. But to speake of that matter is now from the purpose bycause I haue denied these offices to be taken from the Gentiles.

Chap. 2. the seuenth Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 68. Sect. 4.

B〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t what if there were no such offices among the Gentiles and Paganes as Archiflamine〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 and Protoflamines? whereof before I shew the coniectures which I haue, I must giue the gen∣tle reader to vnderstand, that I am not ignorant that there are diuerse which say there were such offices among the Gentiles, and namely here in England: that there were. 25. Flamines and three Archiflamines, wherof were made three Archbishops of London, Canterbury, and Yorke, and. 25. Byshops as Platine hath in the chapter E〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eutherius. And Ga〈1 line〉〈1 line〉frydus Monemutensis in his se∣cond booke and first chapter. And 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s I thinke Gildas also, and Lumbard in his fourth booke speaketh of it, as a generall thing that was in all places where Paganisme was. But if so be that the religion of other Paganes did follow, and was like vnto that of the Romaynes (which is ve∣ry probable) they being then the rulers of the whole worlde in a manner, vnto whose example all men do lightly conforme themselues euen without commaundement, then there is greate lykely∣hood, there were no such Archiflamines or Protoflamines out of Tullie, which sheweth that there were among the Romaines diuerse kindes of Priestes whereof some were called Flamines of a se∣uerall attire which they ware alwayes on there heads, other Pontifices, and a third sorte were cal∣led Salij, and the chiefe of those Flamines was called Flamen dialis, who was als〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 distinguished from the reste by a white hatte: but of any Archiflamines, or Protoflamines, he maketh no mention at al: and therefore it is lyke that there was neuer any such office amongst the Paganes.

Io. Whitgifte.

Whether there were such offices among the Gentiles or no, the matter is not great, nor woorthie of deciding. But that there were such it is manifest, if any credite is to be giuen to so many Histories and wryters bothe Eccles〈1 line〉〈1 line〉asticall and prophane,* 1.95 not onely those whom you haue reported, but Gratian, Polydore, and others. But as a sufficient confutation of all this that you haue here written, and as an argu∣ment of your vnskilfulnesse in stories, I will set downe the woordes of Master Foxe, Tom. 1. Pag. 146. which be these: Lette vs returne to Eleutherius the good byshop, who* 1.96 hearing the requeste of the King and gladde to see the godly towardnesse of his well dis∣posed minde, sendeth him certayne teachers and preachers: called Fugatius, or by some Fagamus, and Damianus or Dimianus, which conuerted first the King and people of Bri∣tayne, and baptised them with the baptisme and sacrament of Christes fayth. The Tem∣ples of Idolatrie and other monuments of Gentilitie they subuerted, conuerting the peo∣ple from their diuerse and many Goddes, to serue one liuing God. Thus true religion with sincere fayth increasing, superstition decayed with all rites of Idolatrie. There were then in Britayne. 28. head Priestes which they called Flamines, and three Archpriestes among them which were called Archiflamines hauing the ouersight of their manners, as iudges ouer the reste. These. 28. Flamines they turned to. 28. Bishops, and the three Archiflamines to three Archbyshops hauing then their 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eates in three principall Cities of the realme: that is in London, in Yorke, and in Glamorgantia, videlicet in vrbe legionum, by VVales. Your coniecture therefore is but vayne, and cannot counteruayle so many witnesses.

Moreouer your argument is negatiue from humane authoritie: for you argue that there were no Archiflamines among the Paganes, bycause Tullie maketh no mention of them, and therefore of no credite. Besides why might not the Grecians

call those Archiflamines whom Tullie called Flamines diales. But the matter is not woorthie the labour, and therefore thus briefly to haue answered it shall suffice: o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ly I would haue the Reader by the way to note the antiquitie of Archbishops here in England, euen from the first beginning of the publike profession of Christia∣ni〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e;* 1.97 which was Anno. 180. or there about.

Chap. 2. the. 8. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 68. Sect. 5.

And if there were, I haue shewed how wicked it is to say that Peter framed the ministerie of the Gospell by it. Now let it be seene of all men how strongly you haue concluded, that the names of Archbyshops are not Antichristian, when as it is most certayne that he was a piller of Anti∣christ, vpon whom your reason is grounded.

Io. Whitgifte.

Though it be certayne that Peter framed not the ministerie of the gospell by any custome of the Paganes, yet y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ur arguments are of no force, to proue that he did not place ministers of the gospell, where there were before priests of the Paganes, call them by what other name you will〈1 line〉〈1 line〉or that in the chie〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Cities he placed not such as might direct and gouerne the rest: seing it is the consent of all wryters that the Apostles when they had planted Churches, did place Bishops, and other ministers in the Churches which were planted.

Whether he were a piller or no of Antichrist by whom I haue hitherto proued the names of Archbyshops not to be Antichristian, I leaue it to the learned to iudge. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉f you meane Clement of whom Polidore doth borrowe his report, it is euident that Po∣lidore meaneth that Clement that was one of the first Bishops of Rome, who was no piller of Antichrist but a godly Bishop. Yf you meane Polidore himselfe vpon whose credite I take the report, then surely h〈1 line〉〈1 line〉wsoeuer in diuerse poynts o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Papism〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 he erred, yet is he one that hath greatly detected and opened their supers〈1 line〉〈1 line〉itions, and whose authoritie neyther your selfe nor any other learned man in many things will ref〈1 line〉〈1 line〉se.

But if all this were true that you say, yet may we take reportes of antiquities* 1.98 euen from Turkes, Paganes, Papistes, or 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ls must we condemne the most parte of Histories.

Chap. 2 the ninth Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 65. Sect. 2.

Volusianus Bishop of Carthage, who liued Anno Do. 865. in one* 1.99 of his Epistles which he write to Nicholas the first in the defense of the marriage of Priests, sayth that Dionisius Areopagi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉a S. Paules scholler, was by S. Paule made Archbishop of Athens.

T. C. Pag. 68. Sect. vlt.

The times wherein Uolusianus liued declare sufficiently how littell credite is to be giuen to his testimonie, which were when the masse had place, if not so wicked as it was after, yet notwith∣standing farre differing from the simplicitie of the supper which was left by our Sauiour Christ. And Eusebius is of more credite in this than Uolusianus, which in the thirde booke and fourth chapter, & in the fourth booke and thre & twentie chapter, sayth of the report of Dionysius bishop of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉orinth. That S. Paule 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ade Dionysius Arcopagita (*) 1.100 byshop of Athens: he sayth not Arch∣bis〈1 line〉〈1 line〉op but Bishop, although he spake twi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e of it, & in the preface before his workes it is sayd that after his conuersion he went to Rome to Clement, and was sent with others of Clement into the weste partes, and that he came to Paris and was there executed, whether soeuer of these opinions is true that falleth which Uolusianus affirmeth. And if eyther Uolus〈1 line〉〈1 line〉anus or you, will haue vs beleeue that Dionysius Areopagita was Archbyshop of Athens you must shewe some better au∣thoritie than Eusebius, or Dionysius byshop of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉orinth, and then your cause shall haue at the least some more colour of truth.

Io. Whitgifte.

Thus indéede may you easily wype away all authoritie of Histories, and Fa∣thers. But this shifte will not serue your turne with wyse and learned men. Uolu∣sianus was very well learned, and a very godly Bishop in his tyme, neyther is it to be thoughte that he woulde wryte any thing in suche a matter whiche he had not certaynely learned of worthy wryters. Your reason broughte out of Eusebius, to proue the contrarie, fayleth in two respectes. First, bicause it is negatiue from au∣thoritie and that of man: For thus you conclude: Eusebius did not call him Archbishop, Ergo, he was no Archebishop: whiche kinde of argument is neuer good in any res∣pecte, when it is taken from the authoritie of man. Secondly, your argument fay∣leth, bicause Histories be not so curious in cal〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ing men by their seuerall titles. They thinke it sufficient, if they vse the common and moste vsuall name, eu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n as it is the common vse amongest vs, to call the Archbishops of Canterbury and Yorke ofte∣ner by the names of Bishops of Canterbury and Yorke, than by the names of Arch∣bishops. So that in déede your argument béeing denied, you are not able by any sounde reason to confirme it. If Eusebius or Dionisius had denied 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉him to be an Archbishop, your argument had bin good.

Chap. 2. the. 10. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 65. Sect. 3.

Erasmus in his argument of the Epistle to Titus, saythe that Paule made Titus Archebishop of Creta, but Antichrist was not in Paules time, Ergo, the name of an Archbishop was not inuented by Antichrist.

T. C. Pag. 69. Sect. 1.

Erasmus followeth, which sayth Titus was Archbishop of Crete, whom I could answere with his owne words. For I am sure he will graunt me, that Titus and Timothie had one of∣fice, the one in Ephesus, y^e other in Crete, but it appeareth by Erasmus his own words that Ti∣mothie was but a Bishop of Ephesus, therfore Titus was but Bishop of Crete. (a) 1.101 For Eras∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉us in his argument vpon the first Epistle of Timothie, sayth that S. Paule did informe Timo∣thie of the office of a Bishop, and of the discipline of the Churche. If eyther he had bin an archebi∣shop, or an Archbishop had bin so necessarie as it is made, he woulde haue instructed him in that also.

Io. Whitgifte.

This maketh wholly agaynst your selfe, for héereby it appeareth that the wry∣ters vse not any greate curiositie in obseruing proper titles, but they thinke it suf∣ficient, if that name of office be vsed that comprehendeth all. Where dothe Erasmus saye, that Timothie was but a Bishop? Will you not learne to deale playnely? But let vs heare your argument: Erasmus sayth, that S. Paule dyd informe Timothie of the of∣fice of a Bishop, and of the discipline of the Churche, Ergo, Erasmus sayth that Timothie was no Archbishop. Undoubtedly you had néede beare with other mens vnskilful∣nesse in Logike, if you vse suche reasons in good earnest. This argument also is ne∣gatiue ab bumana authoritate, Whatsoeuer is necessarie for a Bishop is necessarie for* 1.102 an Archebishop, and the office of a Bishop is the office of an Archebishop. There is no difference of Bishop and Archebishop, but onely this, that the Archebishop hathe authoritie ouer other Bishops, to call them togither when occasion serueth, to sée that they walke according to the lawes and rules prescribed to kéepe vnitie and concorde in the Churche, and suche lyke. There is no difference quantum ad ministe∣rium, in respecte of their ministerie and function, but onely quoad politiam & ordinem, in respect of pollicie and order, as I haue sayde before.

Chap. 2. the. 11. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 69. Sect. 2.

And I pray you tell me whether Erasmus or the greeke Scoliaste be more to be beleeued in this poynt, out of whome is taken that which is in the latter ende of the Epistles to Timothie and Titus, where they bothe are called the first elected Bishops that euer were, eyther of Ephesus or Creta: for my parte I thinke they were neyther Bishops nor Archbishops, but (*) 1.103 Euangelists, as shall appeare afterwards. But it may be sufficient to haue set agaynst Erasmus authoritie, the authoritie of the Scholiast. And heere if you will cauill, and say that the Scholiast which sayth he was Bishop, denieth not but that he also was an Archbishop, bicause an Archbishop is a Bishop, it may be answered easily, that the Scholiast did not speake nor write so vnproperly, as to cal them by the generall name of Bishop, whome he might as easily haue called (if the truthe woulde haue let him) by a more proper and particular name of Archbishop. And further in (a) 1.104 this diuision of the ministers, the Archbishop and the Bishop are members of one diuision, and therefore one of them can not be affirmed and sayde of an other, for that were contrarie to the nature of a true diuision.

Io. Whitgifte.

I tell you that Erasmus and the grecke Scholiaste, doe very well agrée, and the one dothe expounde the other. I tell you also that your negatiue argumentes are not worthe a rushe, vse them as ofte as you liste. What you thinke of Thimothie or Titus béeing Archebishops or Bishops, is not materiall, but of what force your reasons are shall be considered, when you vtter them. If Erasmus and the Gréeke Scholiaste were of diuers iudgements in this poynte (as they be not) yet were it an vnlearned answere to set the one agaynst the other.

He that calleth an Archbishop a Bishop, speaketh properly, for so he is in the res∣pecte of his ministerie, and substance of his office, the name of Archebishop he hathe onely in respecte of order and pollicie. Archbishop and Bishop are members of one diuision, as chiefe Iustice and Iustice is. Euery chiefe Iustice is a Iustice, but euery Iustice is not a chiefe Iustice: euen so euery Archbishop is a Bishop, but euery Bishop is not an Archbishop: neyther is this suche a straunge diuision as you thinke it to be. For Aristotle dyd in like maner deuide 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Regnum, Aristocratiam, & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, that which is commonly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Chap. 2. the. 12. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 69. Sect. 3.

And yet I haue a further answere both to Erasmus and Uolusianus, and whatsoeuer other haue written after this sorte, that they spake and gaue titles to those men they wrote of, not accor∣ding to that which they were, but according to the custome & maner of that age wherin they wrote. And so we may reade that Uincentius and Nicephorus writing of Uictor, speake farre otherwise* 1.105 of him than Eusebius doth, which notwithstanding wrote of the same man whiche they did. The one calleth Uictor the Pope of Rome: (*) 1.106 and the other fayth, that in glorie he passed all the Bi∣shops before him, which Eusebius neuer maketh any word of. Euen so Uolusianus & Erasmus, liuing in the times when as they which were y^e most esteemed in the ministerie, were called archbi∣shops, call Titus and Dionisius Archebishops, vpon whome depended the chiefe care of those Churches which they gouerned.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is no answere at all, first bicause Erasmus woulde then haue giuen to Timo∣thie the same title also: secondly bicause Erasmus béeing a man of so singular know∣ledge and iudgement, woulde not otherwyse than truely report of any man, especially in suche a case, and handling matters of diuinitie. Thirdly, bicause when he wrote, there was neyther Bishop nor Archbishop at Creta, as there was at Rome, when Vincentius and Nicephorus writte. And if this were true that you saye, then shoulde Eusebius when he wrote of Victor, haue termed him a Patriarke or an Archbishop, or Metropolitane at the least. For these names were vsuall in Eusebius his time.

But why doe you vntruely reporte of Nicephorus? for in that booke and chapter he giueth vnto Victor no other name and title, than the same that Eusebius dothe, for he calleth him by the bare name of Victor, without any other title, neyther dothe he saye, that in glorie he passed all the Bishops before him, but this he sayth, that the other Bi∣shops which were with him, did diswade him from excommunicating the Bishops of Asia, and addeth: Et acrius seuerius{que}cum illo qui gloria eos anteiret egerunt: They delt more sharply and seuerely with him that excelled them in glorie. Therefore he saythe that he did excell in glorie those Bishops that were then, not those which were before him. But what is this to your purpose? If he had giuen vnto Victor any other title than was vsuall when he liued, dothe it therfore followe that Erasmus and Volusianus had done so in like maner? will you answere suche learned and notable mens autho∣ritie, with so vayne and childishe coniectures.

Chap. 2. the. 13. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 65. Sect. 4. & Pag. 66. Sect. 1.

I omitte Anacletus a godly Bishop and Martyr, who liued Anno Domini. 85. whiche in his Epistle, Tom. 1. conci. diuers times maketh mention of Archbishops, Patriarkes, Primates, Metro∣politanes, and sayth, that S. Iames, which was called Iustus, was the first Archbishop of Ierusalem.

I omitte also Anicetus, who liued Anno Domini. 155. whiche likewyse in his Epistle maketh mention of Archebishops. Bicause these Epistles are not without iust cause suspected eyther to be none of theirs, or else in diuers poyntes corrupted.

T. C. Page. 69. Sect. 3.

There followeth Anacletus, an other of these witnesses which must depose that the name of an Archebishop is not Antichristian, of whom, as of Clement that went before, & Anicetus which followeth after, the common prouerbe may be verified: Aske my fell〈1 line〉〈1 line〉we it I be a theefe. And al∣thoughe the Answerer be ashamed of him, and sayth therfore, he will omit him: yet euen (a) 1.107 very neede driueth him, to bring him in, and to make him speake the vttermost he can. And this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 man sayth, that Iames was the first Archbishop of Ierusalem: but Eusebius sayth, Iames was* 1.108 Bishop, not Archbishop of Ierusalem, and appoynted by the Apostles. And in the thirde booke, (*) 1.109 22▪ chapter, he sayth, that the Apostles did appoynt after his death, Simeon the sonne of Cleo∣phas Bishop of Ierusalem. And Ireneus in his fourth booke. 63. chapter, saythe that the Apo∣stles in all places appoynted Bishops vnto the Churches, whereby it may appeare what an idle dreame it is of Clement, Uolusianus, and Anacletus, eyther that Peter dyd this by his owne au∣thoritie, or that the primitiue Church was euer stayned with these ambicious titles of Patriarke, primate, Metropolitane, or Archbishop: when as the stories make mention, that throughout euery Churche, not euery prouince, not by Peter or Paule, but by Apostles, a Bishop, not an Archbishop was appoynted.

Io. Whitgifte.

If they be the A〈1 line〉〈1 line〉acletus, or Clemens, or Anicetus that commonly they are taken for, and these writings were theirs vncorrupted, then were their witnesse sufficient, althoughe they were Bishops of Rome. But I neyther will defende their writings, neyther doe I thinke them to be worthy any defense, onely I require but that libertie of vsing them, that no learned man refuseth when they serue his turne. Master Caluine doth alleage this Anacletus his authoritie to proue that the peoples consent* 1.110 was required in y^e appoynting of ministers. Instit. cap. 8. Sect. 61. So doth M. Foxe tom. 1. pag. 12. who writeth thus: VVherfore as we must needes graunt the Bishop of Rome to be called a Metropolitane, or an Archbishop by the Councell of Nice: so we will not greatly sticke in this also, to haue him numbred with Patriarkes or Primates: whiche ti∣tle seemed in olde tyme to be common to moe Cities than to Rome, both by the Epi∣stle of Anacletus, of Pope Stephanus, and Pope Iulius, and Leo. &c.

Master Iewell also himselfe dothe vse his authoritie in that sorte that I doe. But what néede you be so curious, who haue so often alleaged the Canons of the Apostles: and in your. 95. page you vse the authoritie of Higinus or Pelagius, as greate a coun∣terfeite as this Anacletus is. I speake not this to winne any credite to Anacletus his* 1.111 Epistles or decrées, but to auoyde your cauils, and to shewe that in citing him in this manner and forme that I doe, I doe no otherwyse than other godly and learned men haue done. You shal vnderstande ere I come to an ende, that I haue not allead∣ged him for any néede.

Your argument to proue that Iames was no Archebishop, bicause Eusebius and other doe call him Bishop and not Archebishop, is of the same nature that your other arguments be, that is, ab authoritate negatiuè: and therefore must be sent away with the same answere.

Whether the Apostles placed Iames and Simeon at Ierusalem, or no, is not the que∣stion. But you are something deceyued in your quotation, for you should in the place of the. 22. chapter of Eusebius, haue noted the. 11. chapter.

The place of Ireneus, thoughe it make not agaynst any thing that I haue spoken, if it were as you doe alleage it, yet muste I tell you, that it is by you not truely vn∣derstoode. For Ireneu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 dothe not saye that the Apostles dyd togither in euery place* 1.112 appoynte Bishops, but he sayth, Secundum successiones Episcoporum, quibus illi eam, quae in vnoque{que} loco est ecclesiam tradiderunt. According to the succession of Bishops, to whome they committed the Churche that was in euery place. Meaning that euery one of the Apostles dyd appoynt Bishops in those Churches, whiche they had planted, as S. Paule did at Ephesus and Creta. And notwithstanding that in some Churches the Apostles togither dyd place Bishops, yet that in other Churches whiche they plan∣ted,* 1.113 they dyd the same seuerally, it is manyfest, not onely by these examples of Ti∣mothie and Titus, but of sundry other, whereof we maye reade in ecclesiasticall histories, and namely of * Policarpus made Bishop of Smirna, by S. Iohn. And you your selfe testifie the same of S. Iohn out of Eusebius, euen in the nexte section. Moreouer, it can not be gathered, eyther out of the wordes of Ireneus, or any other ecclesiasticall historie, that the Apostles dyd place Bishops any where, but in the chiefe and principall Townes and Cities, committing vnto them the gouernment of other Uillages and Townes, and the appoynting of seuerall Pastors for them, as it is also euident in the foresayde examples of Timothie and Titus, and the wordes of Ireneus importe the same. But if they had in euery Hamlet placed Pa∣stors, yet dothe it not followe, but that there mighte be some one in a Dioces or Prouince, by whome these Pastors shoulde be directed: As Timothie at Ephesus, Titus at Crete.

Chap. 2. the. 14. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 69. Sect. vlt.

And heere you put me in remembrance of an other argument agaynst the Archbishop, which I will frame after this sorte. (a) 1.114 If there should be any Archbishop in any place, the same shoulde be eyther in respect of the person or minister, and his excellencie, or in respect of the magnificence of the place: but the most excellent ministers that euer were, in the most famous places, were no Arche∣bishops, but Bishops onely, therefore there is no cause why there shoulde be any Archebishop: For if there were euer minister of a congregation worthy, that was Iames. If there were euer any Citie that ought to haue this honor, as that the minister of it shoulde haue a more honorable title than the ministers of other cities and townes, that was Ierusalem, where the sonne of God preached, and from whence the Gospell issued out into all places. And afterwarde that Ierusalem decayed and the Churche there, Antioche was a place where the notablest men were, that euer haue bin since, whiche also deserued great honour, for that there the Disciples were first called Christians, but neyther was that called the first and chiefest Churche, neyther the ministers of it called the Arche or principall Bishops.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is a straunge matter that you should so grossely erre in making arguments, sée∣ing you haue taken vpon you so great skill in that Arte. But I will not be occupied in examining the forme of it. Your maior is not true, for suche offices maye be ap∣poynted rather in the respecte of the time, and of the persons that are to be gouerned,* 1.115 than of the worthynesse of the minister, or the dignitie of the plate: and therefore your maior doth not conteyne a perfect and sufficient distribution. Agayne the worthinesse of the person, and the dignitie of the place, be not at all the causes why suche offices shoulde be appoynted in the Churche, but the suppression of sectes, the peace of the Churche, and the good gouernment of the same. The worthinesse of the person may make him méete for suche an office, and the place may be conuenient for suche offi∣cers to remayne in: but neyther of them bothe can be a sufficient cause why suche of∣fices should be appoynted. I knowe the worthiest cities haue had the preheminence in suche matters, but it was bicause they were the most méetest places for that pur∣pose, and the place dothe onely adde one péece of title to the office, but it is not the cause of the office. Lastly, you haue not yet proued that there was no Archbishops in those places, or that Iames had not that office.

Chap. 2. the. 15. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 70. Lin. 9.* 1.116

And Eusebius to declare that this order was firme and durable, sheweth in the thirde booke 13. chapter, that Sainct Iohn the Apostle, whiche ouerliued the residue of the Apostles, ordeined Bishops in euery Citie.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is no reason at all: S. Iohn ordeyned Bishops in euery Churche, therfore there was no one Bishop superiour vnto them to gouerne and directe them in matters of* 1.117 discipline, order a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉d doctrine, if occasion serued: I thinke that S. Iohn him selfe was directer and gouernour of them all, and in effecte their Archebishop. And that dothe manifestly appeare in that thirde booke and. 23. chapter of Eusebius. For thus he sayth: In those dayes Iohn the Apostle and Euangelist, whome the Lorde loued, lyued* 1.118 as yet in Asia, whiche did gouerne the Churches there, after he was returned out of the Isle, from banishement, after the death of Domitian. And a little after he saythe, That he went beeing desired, ad vicina Gentium loca, vt partim constitueret Episcopos, partim tota〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 ecclesias componeret, partim clerum ex his quos spiritus sanctus iudicasset sorte deligeret: Vnto the places of the Gentiles adioyning, partly that he mighte appoynte Bishops, partly that he might establishe whole Churches, partly that he mighte by lotte choose suche into the Cleargie, as the holy Ghost shoulde assygne. So that whether he had the name of Arch∣bishop, or no, certayne it is, that he had the gouernment and direction of the rest, and that he appoynted Bishops and other Ministers. Eusebius dothe not saye that he or∣deyned Bishops in euery Churche, for his wordes be as I haue reported them. But if he had so sayde, it had not made any thing to your purpose, but agaynst you. For he appoynted them, not all the Apostles, nor the people, and he gouerned and directed them as their Archbishop.

Chap. 2. the. 16. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 70. Sect. 1. 2.

These two Anacletus and Anicetus you say are (*) 1.119 suspected, why do you say suspected, when as they haue bin conuinced and condemned, and stande vpon the pillorie with the cause of forgerie

written in great letters, that he whiche runneth maye reade. Some of the Papistes them selues haue suspected them, but those whiche maynteyne the truthe, haue condemned them as full of po∣perie, full of blasphemie, and as those in whome was the very spirite of contradiction to the Apo∣stles and their doctrine.

And doe you marke what you saye, when you saye that these are but suspected? Thus muche you say that it is suspected or in doubte, whether the whole body of Poperie and Antichristianitie were in the Apostles time, or soone after, or no. For Clement was in the Apostles time, and their scholer▪ and so you leaue it in doubte whether the Apostles appoynted and were the authors of po∣perie or no. I thinke if euer you had read the Epistles, you would neuer haue cited their autho∣rities, nor haue spoken so fauourably of them as you doe.

Io. Whitgifte.

I say that they are not without iust cause suspected, whiche you haue left out, and therefore it appeareth that you haue layde aside sinceritie. I haue alleadged them with as little credite vnto them, as eyther master Caluine, or any other dothe. You your selfe haue sundrie times in this Replie vsed (as I haue sayde) as forged authors as these be, with lesse defacing of them. Turpe est doctori. &c. I can shew good proofe that I haue read their Epistles: but I am not disposed eyther to boast of my own reading, or to deface other mens: I leaue that to you.

Chap. 2. the. 17. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 66. Lin. 5. & Sect. 1. 2. 3.

But that notable and famous Councell of Nice, muste be, and is of all wyse and learned men nexte vnto the scriptures themselues reuerenced, esteemed, and imbraced. That Councell celebrated Anno Domini. 330. (when as the Bishops of Rome were as yet learned* 1.120 and godly men) doth not onely allow of the name, but also of the of∣fice of Metropolitane, Archbishop, Archdeacon. &c.

In the sixte Canon of that Councell it is thus written: This* 1.121 Councell dothe determine him to be no Bishop, vvhich is made vvithout the consent Metropolitani Episcopi, of the Metropolitane.

In the. 13. Canon mention is made of a Patriarche, and of an* 1.122 Archedeacon diuers times, and his office there in diuers poyntes declared, as it is also in the seuenth Canon of the same Councel. In the. 25. Canon is named bothe Patriarche and Archebishop, and* 1.123 declared what authoritie they had in their Prouinces, and in admit∣ting of Bishops. So is it likewise in the. 26. and. 27. Canons of the same Councell.

T. C. Pag. 70. Sect. 3.

You come after to the Councel of Nice, wherin I wil not sticke with you that you say it was holden the. 330. yere of the Lord, when it may appeare by Eusebius his computation, that it was holden Anno Domini. 320.

Io. Whitgifte.

I know that there is some varietie among the writers, for the time of this Coun∣cell.* 1.124 Musculus in his common places sayth, that it was celebrated Anno Domini. 313 the writers of the Magd. Historie, centu. 4. cap. 9. affirme (as they say) out of Eusebius that it was Anno Dom. 320. Master Foxe Tom. 1. fol. 12 thinketh that it was Anno Dom. 340. and so dothe Illyricus him selfe in his defense of the Magd. Historie, thoughe he séeme to be of a contrarie iudgement in the Historie it selfe. Pantaleon in his Crono∣graphie placeth it Anno Do. 330. Some there be that say it was. 324. &c. So that to dif∣fer in the yere is no suche matter as deserueth any suche nippe. But if all circum∣stances

be well considered. It will fall oute that Eusebius himselfe confirmeth that which I haue set downe, touching the time of that Councell. For Constantine began his raigne according to Eusebius his Cronicle. Anno. 311. and this is noted also Cent. 4. fol. 62. But the Nicene Councell according to the sayde Centurie fol. 617. was holden Anno. 17. Constantini. So that it must néedes be by their owne collection Anno. 328. or very neare. But if we admitte Eusebius Cronicle for the beginning of Constantines raigne videlicet Anno. 311. it will fall out by Eusebius himselfe vpon the time which I haue appointed, for Lib. 4. de vita Constantini, he sayth that the Nicene Councell was holden Anno vicesimo imperij Const. So that it must néedes be Anno. 330. or in the begin∣ning. 331. at the vttermost, but vnder it cannot be.

Chap. 2. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 70. Sect. 3.

And here you take so great a leape, that it is enough to breake the Archbyshops necke, to skippe at once. 300. yeares without anye testimonye of anye, eyther father or storie of faythe and credite which maketh once mention of an Archbyshop.

Io. Whitgifte.

This leape shall not hurt him one whit. For if there were no other testimonie but* 1.125 that Councell, it were of sufficient credite, and habilitie both to saue his necke, and his body from all kinde of harme. For séeing it is thus written in the sixth Canon of that Councell Antiqua consuetudo seruetur per Aegyptū, Libyam & Pentapolim, vt A∣lexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habeat potestatem, quia & vrbis Romae Episcopo parilis mos. est. &c. Let the auncient custome be kepte throughout Aegipt Libia and Pentapolis that the Byshop of Alexādria haue the gouernmēt of all these, for the Byshop of the citie of Rome hath the same order. Lykewise in Antioche and other Prouinces, let euery Churche reteine hir priuileges. But this is generally plaine that if any be made Byshop without the consent of his Metropolitane, the great Synod hath decreed that he ought to be no Byshop. And in the seuenth Canon, Quia consuetudo obtinuit & antiqua traditio, vt Aeliae* 1.126 Episcopus honoretur, habeat honoris consequentiam salua metropolis dignitate. For as muche as custome & auncient tradition hath bene such, that the Byshop of Ierusalem be ho∣noured, let him haue honour accordingly, not impairing the dignitie of the Metropolitane citie. It is plaine that Archbyshops and their office were long before the Councell of Nice, for else why should the Canon say, Let the olde custome be obserued. &c. And M. Foxe tom. 1. Pag. 12. reporting these two Canons sayth thus. First in the Councell of* 1.127 Nice which was the yeare of our Lorde. 340. and in the sixt Canon of the sayde Councell we finde it is so decreed that in euery Prouince, or Precinct some one Church & Byshop of the same was appoynted & set vp to haue the inspection & regiment of other Churches a∣bout him, Secundum morem antiquum, that is, after the auncient custome, as the wordes of the Councell do purport. So that the Byshop of Alexandria shoulde haue power of Libia, and Pentapolis in Egipt, for as much as the Byshop of the Citie of Rome hath the like or same manner. Nowe if I might as safely alleage the Canons of the A∣postles as you doe, then coulde I tell you that in the. 33. Canon (which Canon is allea∣ged as good authoritie against the supremacie of the Byshop of Rome) you shall finde Archbyshops. For that Canon setting an order among Bishops willeth the Byshops of euery nation to knowe their first or chiefe Byshop, and him to be taken for the head of them. The wordes of the Canon be these. Cuius{que} gentis Episcopos oportet sc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉re, quisnam* 1.128 inter ipsos primus sit, habere{que} ipsum quodammodo pro capite, neque sine illius voluntate quicquam agere insolitum. The Bishops of euery countrie must knowe who is chiefe among them, and must take him as it were for their head, neyther muste they doe any vnaccustomed thing without his will, and euery one must doe those things alone by him selfe which belong to his parishe and to the places that be vnder him: But neither must he do any thing without

the will of all them, for so shall concorde be kept, and God shall be glorified through our Lord in the holy Ghost. Now I pray you tell me what difference there is betwixt the first or chiefe Byshop, or head of the reste and Archbyshop: And least you shoulde thinke this Canon to be of small force (as suspected) you shall heare it almost verbatim repea∣ted and confirmed by the Councell of Antioche, In euery countrey it is conuenient that* 1.129 the Byshops should knowe that their Metropolitane Byshop beareth the care of the whole Prouince. VVherefore let all those that haue any businesse repaire to the Metropolitane ci∣tie. And for this cause it is thought good that he both shoulde excell in honour, and that the other Bishops do no vnaccustomed thing without him, according to the auncient rule appointed of our fathers, sauing those things onely which belong to their owne Dio∣cesse and to the places that are vnder them. For euery Byshop hath power ouer his owne pa∣rishe to rule them according to reuerence meete for euerye one, and to prouide for all the countrey that are vnder his citie, so that he ordeyne both Priests and Deacons and conteine all things with his iudgement. But further let him attempt nothing without the Metropoli∣tane, neither let the Metropolitane do any thing without the aduise of the other. You haue now the Canon of the Apostles confirming Archbyshops, and the Councell of Nyce & Antioche alleaging olde custome for them, and confirming them also. And a little be∣fore* 1.130 I declared vnto you out of M. Foxe that there were Archbyshops here in England Anno. 180. So that their fall cannot be very great.

Chap. 2. the. 19. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 70. Sect. 3.

What? no mention of him in Theophilus Bishop of Antioche, none in Ignatius, none in Cle∣mens Alexandrinus, none in Iustine Martyr, in Ireneus, in Tertullian, in Origine, in Cyprian, none in all those olde Historiographers, oute of the which Eusebius gathereth his storie? was it for his basenesse and smalnesse, that he coulde not be seene among the Byshops, Elders and Dea∣cons, beyng the chiefe and principall of them all? Can the Cedar of Libanon be hyd among y^e Boxe trees? Aristotle in his Rhethoricke ad Theodecten sayth that it is a token of contempt to forget the name of an other. Belike therefore if there were any Archbyshop, he had no chaire in the Churche, but was as it seemeth digging at the metalles, for otherwyse they that haue filled their booke with the often mentioning of Byshops, would haue no doubt remembred him.

Io. Whitgifte.

And what then? is not the Councell of Nice, and of Antioche of as good credite as all these? Shall not Athanasius, Epiphanius, Ambrose, Hierome, Chrysostome, Sozomene, &c. counteruaile them? and yet if you had read these authors, you might haue learned that in the most of them, the office of an Archbyshop is expressed, as my answere fol∣lowing declareth. But still you vse negatiue reasons ab authoritate, and that humane. Your tauntes and frumpes I let passe: they are confutation sufficient to them sel∣ues.

Chap. 2. the. 20. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 70. Sect. 3. 4.

But let vs heare what the Councell of Nyce hath for these titles.

In the sixth Canon mention is made of a Metropolitane Byshop, what is that to the Me∣tropolitane which nowe is? eyther to the name or to the office. Of the office it shall appeare after∣wardes. In the name I thinke there is a great difference betwene a Metropolitane Byshop, and Metropolitane of England or of all England. A Metropolitane Byshop was nothing else but a Byshop of that place, which it pleased the Emperor or Magistrate, to make the chiefe citie of the Diocesse or shire, aad as for this name, (*) 1.131 it maketh no more difference betwene Byshop and By∣shop, than when I say a Minister of London and a Minister of Nuington. There is no man that is well aduised, which will gather of this saying, that there is as great difference in preheminence betwene those two Ministers as is betwene London and Nuington. For his office and prehemi∣nence we shall see hereafter.

Io. Whitgifte.

For the full answering of this it shall be sufficient to set downe the iudgement of certaine of the learned writers of our time, touching the true meaning of that Canon* 1.132 of the Councell of Nyce, as the practise of the Church before that time, at that tyme, and since that time, haue expounded it.

M. Caluine in his Institutions Chap. 8. Sect 54. sayth thus. That euery prouince had among their Byshops an Archbyshop, And that the Councel of Nice did appoynt Patriarkes which should be in order and dignitie aboue Archbyshops: it was for the preseruation of discipline. M. Caluine sayth the Councell of Nyce did appoint Patriarkes which shoulde be in order and dignitie aboue Archbyshops. He sayth also that euery Prouince had a∣mong their Byshops an Archbyshop.

Il〈1 line〉〈1 line〉yricus in his cataloge testium veritatis speaking of this Councel sayth thus: Consti∣tuit* 1.133 quo{que} haec Synodus, vt singularum prouinciarum Metropolitani, potestatem habeant in suos E∣piscopos, sacerdotes & ecclesias, Alexandrinus in Aegypto, Antiochenus in Syria. &c. This Synode also appoynted that the Metropolitanes of euery prouince shoulde haue authoritie ouer their Byshops, Priestes, and Churches: The Byshop of Alexandria in Egypt, and the By∣shop of Antioche in Syria. &c. And in his booke that he entituleth a refutation of the in∣nectiue of Brunus against the Centuries, he doth interprete this Canon on this man∣ner. Here we see plainely that the Nicene Councell first in this Canon doth giue a primacie to the Metropolitane in euery Prouince, and doth make subiecte vnto him all the Byshops and Priestes of his prouince. Moreouer, that it maketh all the Metropolitane Byshops, as of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioche, and of other Prouinces altogether of equall authoritie a∣mongst them selues. And last, that the subiectes (if that I may so say) of an other, may not ap∣peale to any other Metropolitane, and after this manner the sixth Councell of Carthage doth vnderstande, alleage, and vrge the foresaid Canon in the former Epistle.

M. Foxe who hath very diligently, and faithfully laboured in this matter, and sear∣ched out the truth of it as learnedly, as I knowe any man to haue done, in his firste Tom. Pag. 11. writeth thus. Then followed the Councell of Nyce wherein it was decreed* 1.134 that throughout the vniuersitie of Christes Churche which was nowe farre spred ouer the world, certeine Prouinces and Precinctes to the number of foure were appoynted euery one to haue his head Churche and chiefe Byshop, called them Metropolitanes or Patriarkes to haue the ouersight of such Churches as did lye about him: and Pag. 12. he speaketh to the same effecte as it may appeare in his wordes which I haue before recited. And in the same Page he saith: VVherefore as we must needes graunt the Byshop of Rome to be called a Metropolitane or an Archbyshop by the Councell of Nyce: so we will not greatly sticke in this also, to haue him numbred with Patriarkes or Primates. &c.

But the very wordes of the Canon it selfe doth condemne you of a great ouersight,* 1.135 For this is the Canon, antiqua consuetudo seruetur per Aegyptū Libyam & Pentapolim: ita vt Alexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habeat potestatem &c. Let the auncient custome be kept throughout Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the Byshop of Alexandria haue the go∣uernment of all these. &c. as is said before.

How say you nowe? is not this for the name and for the office also of our Metropoli∣tanes and Archbyshops? had not they iurisdiction of whole Prouinces, as ours haue?* 1.136 were not all other Byshops and Ministers of the Church subiect to them, as they be to ours? were not they Metropolitanes of Prouinces and countreys as ours be? And is this no more to differ, than a Minister of London and a Minister of Nuington? Truely I maruaile that you can be caryed vnto so manifest vntruthes, and palpable errors. But for the further declaration of the authoritie of a Metropolitane Byshop, though this which I haue said be sufficient, it may please you to take paines to peruse, in the* 1.137 Councell of Antioche the. 9. Canon. Per singulas prouincias Episcopos conuenit nosse Metropo∣litanum Episcopum, solicitudinem totius prouinciae gerere. In euerye prouince it is conuenient that Byshops should know, that the Metropolitane Byshop hath the caryng for of the vvhole prouince. &c. as is mentioned before, in the first Canon of the

Councell of Ephesus. It is also euident that the Metropolitane of the Prouince (for so is he there called) had authoritie ouer all the Bishops in the same prouince. But to make short bycause I shall haue other occasion to speake of this matter, M. Foxe in the trea∣tise before recited concludeth thus, VVhereby it is to be concluded, that to be false that Clement and Anacletus and Anicetus be reported (but falsly) to put a difference betwene Primates or Patriarkes, Metropolitanes, or Archbyshops, whereas by sufficient authoritie 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is to be proued, that in the olde Churche both Primates, first Byshops, Byshops of the firste seate, Patriarkes, Metropolitanes, Byshops of the mother Citie, and Archbyshops, were all one. First that Primates and Metropolitanes were both one, is before declared in the Ca∣nons of the Apostles, and by the Councel of Antioche aforesayd. The same doth Vilierius* 1.138 affirme in his booke de statu primitiuae ecclesiae. Fol. 26. and proueth it out of Socrates verye manifestly: that is, that Metropolitanes and Patriarkes were all one at the first. I am not ignorant but there is some controuersie among both the Ciuilians and Cano∣nistes whether a Metropolitane or an Archbyshop be all one or no, but in the ende this is the opinion of the most, so farre as I can reade or learne, that they be idem re, the same in déede, but differ nomine in name. For he is called an Archbyshop in respect of the other Byshops of whom he is the chiefe. But he is called Metropolitane in respecte of the Cities that be within his Prouince. But of Archbyshops and Metropolitanes more must be spoken hereafter.

Chap. 2. the. 20. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 70. Sect. vlt.

There are alleaged to proue the names of Archbishops, Patriarkes, Archdeacons, the. 13. 25. 26. and. 27. Canons of the Councell of Nice. For the. 25. 26. and. 27. there are no suche Canons of that Councell, and although there be a thirtenth Canon, there is no worde of Patriarke or Arch∣deacon there conteined. And I maruaile with what shame you can thrust vpon vs these (*) 1.139 coun∣terfeite Canons, which come out of the Popes mint: yea and which are not to 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e founde. Theodo∣rete saith, that there are but twentie Canons of the Councell of Nyce, and those twentie are in the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ome of the Councels, and in those there is no mention of any Patriarke, Archbyshop, Archdeacon.* 1.140 Ruffine also remembreth. 22. Canons, very little differing from those other twentie, but in length, & in none of those are founde any of these names of Archbishop, Archdeacon, or Patriarke, and it is as (a) 1.141 lawfull for M. Harding to allcage the. 44. Canon of the Councell of Nyce to proue the Su∣premacie of the Pope of Rome, as it is for M. Doctor Whitgifte to alleage the. 25. 26. 27. to proue the name of Archbyshop, Archdeacon, Patriarke: for they are all of one stampe and haue lyke au∣thoritie.

Io. Whitgifte.

I will not greatly sticke in the defense of those Canons, the fixth & the seuenth Canō do sufficiently verifie all that I haue alleaged out of the other, as is declared not onely* 1.142 by the words of the Canons, but by the iudgement of those, whose learning & Religion was neuer as yet stained. I know that there is no small controuersie about the num∣ber of the Canons of that Synode. In the booke of the Coūcels there are only twentie, in Ruffine. 22. Athanasius in an Epistle that he (as some thinke) with the other By∣shops of Egypt writte to Marcus Byshop of Rome (if any credite is to be giuen vnto* 1.143 that Epistle) writeth that there were first. 80. and afterwards the same brought into 70. Canons. Isodorus in his preface to the Councell, sayth that in the decrées of Pope Iulius, there is mention made of. 70. Canons, so that for the number of the Canons there is great difference in the writers.

Concilium Arelatense the second, Canon the. 24. doth recite a Canon of the Councell of Nice, touching infamous libels, which is not to be founde among the. 20.

Hierome in his preface vpon the booke of Iudith sayth that the Councell of Nice did* 1.144 recken that booke in the number of the holy scriptures, and yet there is no such thing to be founde among those. 20. Canons.

Ambrose Lib. 10. the Epistle. 82. attributeth another Canon to the Councell of Nice* 1.145 concerning second Mariages in clarkes, I could recite more Canons alledged by good writers out of that Councell, which are not to be founde in those. 20. or. 22. but it shall not néede.

Wherefore though I haue alleaged moe Canons than are to be founde in the vo∣lume of Councels: yet I haue done nothing which is straunge, neither haue I allea∣ged any Canon that is not agréeable to the sixth and seuenth, wherof there is no doubt: and according to the true meaning of those two Canons, as they be interpreted by the* 1.146 best learned. And in very déede, the. 25. 26. 27. Canons by me alleaged are the verye same with the. 6. &. 7. differing onely in number, wherin I followed the author that so placed them. And in the. 13. Canon the name of Archbyshop is added, wherof more shal be spoken hereafter (God willing).

M. Hardings. 44. Canon is plaine repugnant to the sixth Canon, and therefore with∣out all doubt a counterfeite. But the Canons that I haue alleaged agrée both with the sixth and seuenth, and therefore not vnlike to be truely attributed to that Councell, in these poyntes wherein I haue alleaged them.

Chap. 2. the. 21. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 1.

I feare greatly some craftie dissembling Papist had his hand in this booke, who hauing a great deale of rotten stuffe, which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 could not vtter vnder his owne name, being already 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oste, brought it vnto the author hereof (*) 1.147 which hath vpon his credit wythout further examination set it to sale. Peraduenture you will thinke scorne to be censured and reprehended of a poore minister of the countrey, and therefore I will turne you ouer for your lesson in this behalfe vnto the Byshop of Salisburie in his replie against M. Harding touching the article of the Supremacie.

Io. Whitgifte.

Feare not I warrant you, I haue alleaged nothing which I am not hable by suffi∣cient testimonie to proue, that I haue read my selfe. And therefore your surmise is but grounded vpon your owne practise.

Whatsoeuer the Byshop of Salisbury sayth in his reply against Harding touchyng the Canon alleaged by him is most true, and I doe most willingly acknowlenge it so to be, neither doe I take any Canon of that Councell as vndoubtedly tru〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, but these, 20. specified in the first Tome of Councels, the other I haue onely mentioned as 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣ble, bicause they agrée with them, and yet all the Canons that I haue alleaged, be 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣tant in print and the booke is commonly to be solde, and therefore I haue not receiued them of any other.

Chap. 2. the. 22. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 66. Sect. 3.

Ambrose also that olde and learned father, both alloweth the name* 1.148 and office of an Archbyshop, Lib. de dignitate Sacerdotum. cap. 5.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 2.

If (*) 1.149 all shoulde be allowed of that S. Ambrose alloweth of, then besydes other thyngs which he holdeth corruptly, the mariage of the Ministers should go very hard: but it is worthy to be ob∣serued wyth what wordes Ambrose doth allowe of the Archbyshop, that all men may vnderstande,* 1.150 howe lowe it goeth wyth M. Doctor, for his defence of the Archbyshop: and how the Archbyshop is so out of credit, that there cannot be gotten any to be suertie for his honestie. Ambrose complay∣ning of the Ministers or Byshops in those dayes sayth, if a man aske them who preferred them to be Priests, answere is made by and by that the (a) 1.151 Archbyshop for an hundred shillings ordeined me Byshop, to whome I gaue an hundred shillings that I myghte get the fauour to be Byshop, whych if I had not giuen I had not bene Byshop: and afterwarde he saythe that this greeued him, that the Archbyshop ordeyned Byshops carnally or for some carnall respect, and this is all the allowance that Ambrose sheweth of an Archbyshop. Your Archbyshop taketh all things in good part, so that his very dispraise he expoundeth to his commendation.

Io. Whitgifte.

I know no man whose writings and workes are so perfect (the writers of the Ca∣nonical scriptures excepted) that all things in their bookes are to be allowed. But God forbyd that we should therefore reiect that which they haue well and truely spoken: you will doe little for Ambrose if you will not allowe him for an historicall witnesse of that which was in his tyme, this is therefore a shifting answere, but nothing com∣mendable. It euidently appeareth by that place, that in his tyme there were Archby∣shops, for what though he reproue the abuse of some Archbyshops in ordeyning By∣shops & Ministers for monie, doth he therefore disalowe, either the name or the office? Nay this is rather to be concluded, that there were Archbyshops in Ambroses tyme, which had authoritie to ordeine Bishops, bycause Ambrose doth reproue suche Arch∣byshops as for carnall respects ordeined Byshops.

Your vndutifull and arrogant frumpes and scoffes I passe ouer. It séemeth by your so oft vsing them, that you are afraide, least you should be taken for a modest Chri∣stian.

Chap. 2. the. 23. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 3.

And there is great (*) 1.152 likelyhoode, that the Archbyshop which Ambrose maketh mention of was no other than he which for the time ruled the action wherin Byshops were ordeyned, and after the action ended, had no more authoritie than the rest.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you had read any auncient storie or father: yea if you had but perused M. Cal∣uines Institutions the. 8. Chapter, or any writer intreating of this matter, you would neuer haue vttered this vaine coniecture, nor shewed so manifest a token of greate ignorance, and no reading. For it shall appeare by sufficient testimonie, that neyther the name nor office of an Archbyshop was any thing at all straimge in this time. And the authors of the Centuries: Cent. 4. can tell you that Ambrose himselfe was Metro∣politanus* 1.153 plurium coniunctarum ecclesiarum administratione fungens, A Metropolitane gouer∣ning many Churches adioyning together.

Your coniecture that this Archbishop should be no other, than he which for the time ruled the action, wherin Byshops were ordeined and after the action ended, had no more authoritie than the rest, is a méere phansie of your owne, contrarie to all authoritie, and withoute any grounde or similitude of reason, and yet you often repeate it, and make it the foundati∣on of this your building. But let vs heare your coniectures.

Chap. 2. the. 24. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 4.

And I am moued so to thinke, First bicause it is not like, that one onely ordeyned Byshops, be∣ing contrarie to the olde Canons of the best Councels: but that there were other, and that this whō Ambrose calleth Archbyshop, did gather the voyces. &c.

Io. Whitgifte.

I haue shewed before, that it was not so strange at this time for the Byshop alone to ordeine Ministers. And yet Ambrose in this place signifieth that the people had* 1.154 somewhat to doe in this matter, for he calleth them populum nugacem & indoctum, qui talem sibi asciuerunt sacerdotem: a people that trifeleth and is vnlearned, that hath gotten vn∣to them such a priest. But I pray you where is now your distinction betwixt election & ordination? For Ambrose speaketh in this place of ordeyning and not of electing. If

you wyll néedes so distinguishe them that they maye not bée at any tyme, nor in any place confounded, then haue you answered youre selfe here, and wyth one coniecture ouerthrowne an other. But howesoeuer it is, coniectures can not pre∣uayle agaynst so manyfest a truthe, being so silly coniectures. For tell mée where you euer redde that he was called an Archbishop that did only gather the voyces, or that this name was attributed to any during the action only, and no longer. This is ve∣rie newe Diuinitie vnhearde of in any good Authour that I haue readde, or can heare of.

Chap. 2. the. 25. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 5.

Secondly, bycause it was verie vnlyke that there was any absolutely aboue S. Ambrose in those partes where he complayneth of euill bishops or ministers made.

Io. Whitgifte.

Why, to whom or for whom did Ambrose write this booke? for his owne pro∣uince or Diocesse only? therein are you deceyued, that you thinke Ambrose to haue written this booke for his owne Prouince onely, when he writte it to profite the whole Churche, as it may appeare in the fyrst Chapter of that Booke. Neither doth he complaine of suche euill Bishoppes or ministers as were vnder him (for then should he haue complayned of himselfe, béeyng theyr Metropolitane) but of suche he complayneth, as were in other places and Prouinces, as may be séene by these wordes of his. Ita vt videas in Ecclesia passim, quos non merita sed pecuniae ad Epis∣copatus* 1.155 ordinem prouexerunt, So that a man maye see euery where in the Churche suche as are promoted to the order of a Bishop, not by desertes but by money, and therefore this coniecture is soone answered.

Chap. 2. the. 26. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 71. Sect. 6.

Thirdly, for that Ambrose in an other place (which you after cite) deuidyng all the Church in∣to the cleargie and laytie, dothe subdeuide the cleargie into Byshoppes, Elders, and Deacons, and therefore it is not lyke, that there was any which had any continuall function of archebyshoppe: But as he was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or leader of the daunce which commeth fyrst, and after commyng in agayne in the seconde or thyrde place, is no more so called, so that bishop was called Arche∣bishop, which for the time present did gather the voyces of the rest of the bishops, which he by and by layde downe, with the dissoluyng of the meetyng. And that thys is not my coniecture only, that there was no ordinarye or absolute Archebishop (*) 1.156 let the Centuries be seene (a) 1.157 whych alledge that place of Ambrose to proue that the office of an archebishop was not then come into the Churche, which was foure hundred yeares after Christ, and more also.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is a dauncing deuise in déede, withoute any shadow of truthe, as it maye appeare by that whiche already is alleadged, and shall do more and more by that which followeth. You are maruellous circumspect in your quotations least you shoulde be tripped, and therefore you saye let the Centuries be seene, but you tell not where. Surely you doe verie vntruely reporte the Centuries, for I haue redde them where they doe alleadge that place of Ambrose, and there is not to be founde any suche matter, but the cleane contrarie, as is to be séene in that place* 1.158 by you alleadged of the fourth Cent. the wordes be these: Episcopi & Metropolitani dicebantur à praecipuis seu primarijs ciuitatibus, sicut Basilium Metropolitanū Capadocū, Zozome∣nus vocat lib. 3. cap. 16. Et Archiepiscopi, qualem Seleuciae fuisse Simeonem, idem retulit lib. 2. cap. 8. Patriarcha, totius alicuius prouinciae diceba〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ur Episcopus, vt Socrates indica〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Lib. 5. cap. 8.

Bishoppes and Metropolianes were named of the chiefe and princip〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ll Cities, as Zozo∣menus calleth Basile the Metropolitane of Cappadocia, lib. 3. cap. 16. and Archebishoppes, suche as he reporteth that Simeon was of Seleucia lib. 2. cap. 8. Patriarke of some whole prouince was called a Bishop, as Socrates sheweth lib. 5. cap. 8. Wherefore it is too much boldnesse in you to auouche so manyfest vntruths. Neyther is it any maruel though you quote not the places, for forgerie séeketh corners.* 1.159

And although that whiche hath bin hytherto alleadged out of the Councells of Nice, and Antioche, with the iudgemente of so manie learned men interpretyng the same, might serue to perswade any reasonable man, that the office and name of Archebishoppe and Metropolitane is bothe of greate antiquitie and not for one action onely, or a dauncyng office (as you woulde haue it) but fixed and permanent: yet bycause I haue to doe wyth quarellers, before I goe any further in confuting, I will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 downe the iudgement of other aunciente and famous wryters also, who allowe bothe of these names and offices: And fyrste I will recite suche as haue the names expressed with the offices, then suche as speake of the very thyng it sel〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e withoute the names. I will begin with Councels.

The Councell of Nice, as you haue hearde, hath the name of Metropolitane,* 1.160 and dothe limitte vnto 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ym certaine Prouinces, to gouerne and take the care of. It hathe bin declared that bothe M. Caluine, Illyricus, M. Foxe, and others doe ac∣knowledge the names and office of Patriarkes and Archbishoppes. &c. in the same Canon to be conteyned. Neyther doe they, nor any other learned wryter denie these names and offices to haue bene in the primitiue Churche, and that fixed to certayne places and persons, not mouable by actions, nor practised by course. Lykewyse you haue hearde, howe that Councell by this clause Secundùm morem antiquum, according to the auncient custome, doth signifie that these names and offices haue bene in the Churche of long tyme, or else it woulde not haue bin saide to be an olde custome.

Moreouer, the nynthe Canon of the Councell of Antioche before alledged is* 1.161 most playne and euident, both for the name and the thing, together with the long continuance of them in the Churche.

The. 20. Canon of the same Councell of Antioche sayeth directly, that no Bi∣shoppes* 1.162 may call a seuerall Councell withoute the consente of theyr Metropo∣litanes.

In the sixth and. 37. Canons Concilij Arelatensis, mention is made of the Me∣tropolitane,* 1.163 of his authoritie in ordering of bishoppes, and of the authoritie of his Synode.

The lyke bothe for the name and the matter also, touchyng ordeynyng of* 1.164 Byshoppes is in the twelsth Canon of the Councell of Laodicea.

In the seconde Councell of Carthage in the twelfthe Canon it is euident, that there was a Primate in euerye Prouince, and that withoute his commaunde∣ment it was not lawfull for any to bée ordeyned Bishop.

In the. 13. and. 17. and diuers other Canons of the general Councell of Carchage* 1.165 as it is in the Gréeke copie the authoritie of the Primate is also expressed.

In the Councell of Chalcedon the name of Archebishoppe is sundrye tymes v∣sed: Flauianus is there called Archebishop of Constantinople, Dioscorus Archebishop of Alexandria and one Atticus bishoppe of Nicopolis, dothe call the saide Dioscorus Archi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉piscopum nostrum, our Archebishop. Leo is called Archebishop of Rome. &c.

Of the Councels that folowed there is no doubte, and it were but superflu∣ous for mee to stande in reciting of them, and therfore thys shall suffise for the Councels, to shew that bothe the name of Metropolitane or Archbishop, and also the authoritie is not vnhearde of in the Churche of Christ, or a flitting or slyding office.* 1.166

Nowe to the fathers and stories. Epiphanius Lib. 2. tom. 2. haeri. 68. calleth one Peter Archebishoppe of Alexandria. And that it maye fully appeare, that it was bothe a continuall office and of greate authoritie and iurisdiction, I will sette towne his woordes.

Et Meletius quidem in carcere detentus erat vnà cum praedictis Martyribus, ac Petro Alexan∣driae Arc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉iepiscopo. &c. And Meletius truely was kepte in pryson togyther with the forena∣med Martyrs, and Peter the Archbishop of Alexandria: and Meletius seemed to excell the other bishops of Aegypt, for he had the seconde place after Peter in his Archbishoprike, as being vnder him to helpe him, and looking to Ecclesiasticall matters vnder him: For this is the custome, that the Byshoppe of Alexandria hathe the Ecclesiasticall gouernmente of all Aegypte, Thebais, and Mareota, and Libya, and Ammonica, and Mareotis, and Penta∣polis.

In the same leafe he calleth this Peter Archbyshop thrée times. This Peter ly∣ued in the yeare of our Lorde thrée hundred and foure, twentie yeres at the least be∣fore* 1.167 the Councell of Nice.

The same Epiphanius in the same Booke and Tome baere. 69. writeth thus: Quotquot enim Ecclesiae in Alexandria catholicae Ecclesiae sunt, sub vno Archiepiscopo sunt. All the Churches that are Catholike Churches in Alexandria, are vnder one Archeby∣shoppe. And a little after he calleth Meletius Archebyshoppe of Aegypte, but yet sub∣iecte to Alexander the Archebyshoppe of Alexandria, and all this was before the Coun∣cell ot Nice.

What can be spoken more aptely, and more playnely to my purpose? And if T. C. will cauill at the authoritie of the authour (whyche is the poorest shifte that can bée, especially when the authour is so generally allowed) then for breui∣ties sake, I doe referre hym to the Epistle of Ianus Cornarius prefixed before this Booke, and to that whiche after warde I haue alledged in his defense out of the Centuries.

Athanasius was called Archebyshoppe of Alexandria: and that it may appeare that it was not a bare title, but an office of Gouernment, you shall finde these wordes in his second Apologie:

Iscbaras quidam, vt nequaquam clericus, ita moribus improbissimus conatus est sui pagi insu∣las decipere, iactans sese clericum esse. Id vbi resciuisset eius loci Presbyter, mibi tum Eccle∣sias* 1.168 perlustranti renunciauit: ego igitur. &c. A certaine man named Ischaras, as hee was no Clearke, so was hee most wicked in manners, who wente aboute to deceyue the yles of his precincte, boasting that hee was a Clarke: when the Prieste of that place vnderstoode thereof, hee tolde it vnto mee, when I was visiting my Churches, so I sente the same man togyther wyth Macharius the Prieste to fetche vnto mee Ischaras, whome when they founde sicke in his chamber, they commaunded hys father to warne hys sonne, that hee attempted no suche thing as was reported of him. And after in the same place followeth Ischaras Letters of submission to Athanasius. In the same Apologie there are Letters of submission written by Arsennius Byshoppe of Hipsell, and the Ministers and Deacons of the same Diecesse to Athanasius: the begin∣ning of the Letters is this: Et nos quoque diligentes pacem & vnanimitatem cum ecclesia ca∣tholica, cui tu per Dei gratiam praefectus es, volensque ecclesiastico Canoni, pro veteri instituto, subijci, scribimus tibi (Papa dilecte) promittimusque in nomine Domini nos deinceps non commu∣nicaturos cum schismaticis. &c. And we also louing peace, and concord with the Catholike Churche ouer whiche thou arte by the grace of God appoynted, and willing accordyng to the olde custome to be subiecte to the Ecclesiasticall Canon, write to thee (louing father) and in the name of the Lorde promise, that wee hences orth will not communicate with the Schismatikes.

By this it is playne that Athanasius had great iurisdiction ouer many Byshops, and other Ministers, and ecclesiasticall persons. Againe in the same Apologie men∣tion is made of an Archbyshop.

In the same Booke the Priestes and Deacons of the Churches of Mareo∣ta, in an Epistle that they writte to the Synode, besydes that they call A∣thanasius, Episcopum nostrum, oure Byshoppe, they shewe that hée vsed to visite the Churche solemnlye accompanyed. Theyr wordes are woorthe the no∣tyng, and bée these folowyng: Vtpote qui non longis finibus ab Episcopo diste∣mus,

& comites in lustranda Marioteei cohasimus, nunquam enim ille solus visitandi causa iti∣nera obire solet: sed comites secum trabere, Presbyteros & Diaconos & non paucos ex plebe. Bicause we dwell not farre from the Byshoppe, and we accompanied him whilest he visited Mario∣tes, for he is neuer wont alone to take iourneyes in visitations, but to take companions with him, Priestes and Deacons, and many of the people. And his own wordes a little before that Epistle speaking of these Priestes, and Deacons, be these: Et mecum Prouincias lustrabant, And they visited the Prouinces with me. Whereby also it is euident, that he had a large iurisdiction, and that he did visite his Prouinces. The same Athanasius in that. Apologie, declaring what this place called Mariotes is, sayth: Mariotes ager est in Alexandria, quo in loco nunquam fuit Episcopus: imo ne Chorepiscopus quidem, sed vniuer sae e∣ius loci Ecclesiae Episcopo Alexandrino subiacent: tamen vt singuli pagi, suos presbyteros habeant. Mariotes is a territorie of Alexandria, where there was neuer Byshop, no not so muche as a Byshops deputie, but all the Churches of that place are vnder the Byshop of Alexandria, yet so that euery village haue their Priestes.

In his Epistle Ad solitariam vitam degentes, he calleth Lucius Metropolitane of Sardi∣nia, and Dionysius Metropolitane of Mediolane.

Socrates Lib. 5. cap. 8. sayth, that in the Councell of Constantinople, They confirmed* 1.169 the faythe of the Nicene Councell, and appointed Patriarkes, assigning their Prouinces, that the Byshoppes of one Dioces shoulde not intermedle in other Churches (for this before was indifferently vsed by reason of persecution) And to Nectarius was allotted Megalopo∣lis, and Thracia. &c.

The same is to be séene in the Canons of that Councell of Constantinople.* 1.170

I omitte Iustinian the Emperoure, who so often mentioneth these names and offices in his Constitutions. I also omitte that Illyricus calleth Cyprian Metropo∣litane of Carthage: and the fourthe Centurie, where Ambrose is called Metropoli∣tane, hauyng gouernmente of many Churches. Neyther shall I néede to repeate the places of Caluine, M. Foxe, M. Beza Lib. conf. cap. 5. or other late wryters iudge∣mentes, who directely confesse, that these names were vsuall in the Primitiue Churche, and that the office was permanente: for this that is spoken, maye suafice.

I will come to those Authours and places, where the office and iurisdiction is* 1.171 spoken of, though the name be not expressed.

Cyprian Lib. 4. Epist. 8. sayeth, that he hadde a large Prouince, Habet enim Nu∣midiam & Mauritaniam sibi cobaerentes, for it hathe Numidia and Mauritania annexed vnto it. And Gregorie Nazianzene in the Oration that he made in the commen∣dation of Cyprian sayeth, that he didde rule and gouerne not onely the Chur∣ches of Carthage or Affrike, sed & Hesperiae vniuersae: imò Orienti ferè ipsi ad finem vs∣que meridiei & Septentrionis: but of all Spayne, and almoste of the whole Easte, vnto the ende of the Southe and the Northe. And what was this else, but to bée an Arche∣byshop?

Eusebius Lib. 6. cap. 1. sayeth, that Demetrius was Byshop of the Parishes of Alex∣andria,* 1.172 and of Egypt, and this Demetrius liued Anno Domini. 191. Eusebius testifyeth there likewise that one Iulianus was before him in the same roume.

Athanasius in an Epistle that he writte De sentētia Dionysij Episcopi Alexand. contra Arri∣anos,* 1.173 affirmeth, ad Dionysium Alexandria▪ Episcopum curam etiam Ecclesiarum in Pentapoli su∣perioris Libyae pertinuisse, that vnto Dionysius Bishoppe of Alexandria the care of the Chur∣ches in Pentapolis of the higher Libya perteyned. And it is manyfeste in the same Epistle, that these Churches had their Byshoppe besydes. For Eusebius Lib. 7. cap. 26.* 1.174 writeth, that Basilides was Byshoppe of the parishes of Pentapolis while Dionysius lyued: so that it is euident that Dionyfius was an Archebyshoppe. And this is that Diony∣sius that is called Alexandrinus, whose workes be extante, and is one of the most an∣cient writers. The same Eusebius sayth, that Gregorie did gouerne the Churches throughout Pontus.

Sozomen. Lib. 7. cap. 19. sayth, that though there be many cities in Sythia; yet they* 1.175

haue but one bishoppe.

Theodoret. lib. 4. cap. 11. testifyeth, that Amphilochius to whome the Metropolitane citie of Licaonia was committed to be gouerned, did also gouerne that whole countreye, and did driue from thence the heresie of the Messalians: And in the same Chapter we* 1.176 reade that Letoius gouernour of the Churches of Militia, burned Monasteries infec∣ted with that heresie: whiche declareth that Bishops had then greate authoritie in gouernment.

Aurelius Bishop of Carthage in the Councell of Affrike sayd, that he had the o∣uersyght and care of many Churches.

But what néede I labour so muche in a matter that can not be vnknowne to* 1.177 any that is of any reading, this therfore shall suffice bothe for the name and office of an Archebishop & Metropolitane. &c. against the vnlearned distinction that you haue vsed in answering S. Ambrose.

Chap. 2. the. 26. Diuision.

Auswere to the Admonition. Pag. 66. Sect. 5.

Sozomenus lykewyse Lib. 2. of his Ecclesiasticall historie cap. 8. calleth Symeon Archbishop of Seleucia, and Basile the greate Metro∣politane of Cappadocia. Lib. 3. cap. 16.

T. C. Page. 71. Sect. vlt.

Basill you saye, the great Metropolitane of Cappadocia. I haue shewed what the woorde Metropolitane signifyeth, and howe there was not then, suche a Metropolitane as wee haue now, and as the Admonition speaketh agaynst. You playe as he whithe is noted, as none of the wysest among the marchauntes, whyche thought that euery shippe that approched the hauen was his ship. For so you thinke that wheresoeuer you reade Metropolitane or Archebishoppe▪ foorthwith you thinke, there is your Metropolitane, or your Archebishop, where as it shall ap∣peare, that besydes the name, they are no more lyke, than a bishop with vs is lyke a minister.

Io. Whitgifte.

What this worde Metropolitane signifyeth, what office and iurisdiction he had, is before sufficiently declared, and may more at large appeare in the con∣stitutions of Iustinian. Lykewyse whether our Metropolitans in office any thing at all differ from them. Surely he that shall well consider your vnapte answeres and your vtopicall iestes, may thinke that you weare the liuerie of those marchantes you talke of, and may verie wel sayle in their ships.

Chap. 2. the. 27. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 72. Sect. 1.

I can not tel whether you would abuse your reader here with the fallation of the accent, by∣cause this worde great is so placed betwene Basile and Metropolitane, that it may be as well re∣ferred to the Metropolitane, as to Basill, and so you hauing put no comma, it seemeth you had as lieue haue your reader, reade great Metropolitane as great Basil. But that the simpler sort be not deceyued therby, it is not out of the way to let the reader vnderstande what a great Metropolitane this was, whiche appeareth, for that when he was threatned by the magistrate confiscation, of his* 1.178 goods, answered, that he was not afrayde of the threatnings, and that all his goodes were a very fewe bookes, and an olde gowne: suche were then those Metropolitanes, vnder whose shadowes M. Doctor goeth about to shroude all this pompe and princely magnificence of Archbishops.

Io. Whitgifte.

You search verie narowly when you misse not a comma, but you knowe what nugator signifieth. All men of learning can tell that Basile is in common speach called Basile the great. And yet if he were called great Metropolitan, the title might verie well agrée vnto him: for he had large and ample iurisdiction, being

bishoppe of Cappadocia, as Athanasius dothe also witnesse in his Epistle written to Palladius.

The contention is for the name and the office, not for the ryches, al〈1 line〉〈1 line〉houghe I thynke that there both are and haue bene Bishops in Englande as poore as Basile if they had 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉en taken so soone after they were placed in theyr bishoprikes, as Basile was nowe at this tyme.

Chap. 2. the. 28. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 72. Sect 2. 3. 4.

As for Symeon Archbishop of Sele〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cia, I will not denie, but at that time was the name of Archbishops. For then (*) 1.179 Satan had made thorough the titles of Archbishops, Pr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ates, and Patriarches, as it were three staires, wherby Antichrist might clyme vp into his cursed seate, not∣withstanding there wanted not good decrees of godlie councelles which did strike at these proude names, and went aboute to keepe them downe. But the swelling waters of the ambition of dy∣uers, coulde not by any bankes be kept in, which hauing once broken out in certaine places, af∣terwardes couered almost the face of the whole earth.

This 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉deuour of godly men may appeare in the Councell of Carthage, which decreed, that the* 1.180 bishop of the fyrst seat shold not be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, eyther the chiefe of the priestes, or the hyghe priest, or any suche thing, by whiche woordes (any such thing) he shutteth out the name of Archbishop, and all such hau〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e titles.

The same decree also was made in the Africane councell, and if you saye that it was made a∣gainst* 1.181 the Pope of Rome, or to forbidde that any man should be called Archbishoppe, shewe me where ther was eyther bishop of Rome, or any other that euer made any such title or chal〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nge to be the generall Bishop of all at that tyme, when this councell of Carthage was holden, when as the first of those which did make any su〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h chalenge, was the bishop of Constantinople, which not∣withstanding (a) 1.182 chalenged not the preheminence first ouer all, but that he might ordeyne bishops of Asia, Pontus, Thracia, whiche were before appointed by theyr Synodes, and this was in the councell of Chalcedon, which was long after that councell of Carthage before remembred.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is before sufficiently declared, that these names and offices were allowed and confirmed by the Councell of Nice, and therefore not brought in by Satan. Moreouer this Symeon Archbishop of Seleucia, liued as it may appeare by most Chro∣nicles aboute the tyme of the Councell of Nice, and was martyred by Sapores the king of Persia.

Which peraduenture if you had vnderstoode, you woulde not haue burste oute into this heate of woordes, for then might you haue made the same answere to Am∣brose his authoritie which was long after him, & so kept secret your owne fond deuise.

The Councell of Carthage and also of Affrike was at that tyme, wherein the Bishop of Rome by his Legates didde clayme the right of hearyng of appeales, from whome soeuer they were made, and for his purpose alleaged a counterfait Canon of the Councell of Nice. Wherefore it is moste certayne, that then th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Bishop of Rome beganne at the leaste to clayme the super〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oritie ouer all Chur∣ches, and to take vpon hym as it were the name of vniuersall Byshoppe: and ther∣fore this canon is made against him.

And that thys is true, the Epistle of the Councell of Affrike written to Cele∣stinus, then Bishoppe of Rome declareth. For after that they haue 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉esyred hym that he woulde admit no suche appeales, nor absolue such as they should excom∣inunicate, bycause that was to doe agaynst the decrées of the Councell of Nice, and to abridge them of their iurisdiction and libertie: they adde and saye:

Both bicause this priuiledge hath bin taken from the Church of Aphrike by no consti∣tution of the fathers, and also the decrees of the councell of Nice hath committed bothe the inferiour Clearkes and the Bishops themselues vnto their Metropolitanes: for it was di∣scretely and rightly consydered, that all matters are to bee determined in the places, where they began. and that no prouince can lacke the grace of the holie ghost, wherby the prieste of Christe may be hable, both wisely to see, and also constantly to mainteyn the right: espe∣cially

for that it is lawfull, for euery man that shall mislike the discretion of the iudges, to appeale either to particular councels within the same prouince, or else to an vniuersal coun∣cell: vnlesse perchaunce some man will thinke, that God is able to inspire the triall of iu∣stice into one man alone, and will not inspire the same into a greate number of priests meeting togyther in Councell. And how may such beyond sea iudgemente be thoughte good, wherevnto the persons of the witnesses which in triall of truth are thought necessary either for that they be women, or for the infirmitie of their age, or for many other incident letts, cannot be brought. Now that any should be sent abroade as it were from your ho∣linesse side, we find it not decreed in any Councell. And a little after, And send you not any your Clerks hither to execute iustice at any mans request, least we seeme to bring the smokie puffe of the world into the Church of Christ. &c.

Whereby it is plaine, that they only prohibite that title of vniuersalitie and of generall iurisdiction, that the Byshop of Rome now claymed and at that time began to claime ouer all Churches, and not the names of superioritie due vnto any in their owne prouince. For that perogatiue of iurisdiction ouer. Byshops and other mini∣sters they acknowledge to be due to the Metropolitane, as it is euident in the words of that same epistle, which I haue recited.

Moreouer it is manifest that this name Archbishop was then vsed, and after that* 1.183 time continued and not disalowed by any, as it may appeare by that which hath bin hitherto written. And this name Primate (whiche is as hautie as the name of Arch∣byshop) is allowed euen in that councell of Carthage, as may appeare in the. 13. 17. and. 23. canons, as it is in the Gréeke copye. Wherfore in my opinion M. Foxe doth aptly decide this controuersie, in that learned treatise of his firste tome, where he speaking of this same Councell and of this Canon which you haue recited, (for I sup∣pose you did borrow it there) signifyeth in effect that neyther the name of Primate, Archbyshop or Metropolitane, is by that Canon prohibited, but rather these ambitious titles of uniuersall Byshop, prince of all priests, head of all priests, and suche like. Whiche names séeme to derogate authoritie both of iurisdiction and office from all other prie∣stes, and therfore alittle after he saith. Thus then these titles aboue recited, as Byshop, Metropolitane, Byshop of the first seate, Primate, Patriarke, Archbyshop, that is to meane, chiefe byshop or headbishop 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o other byshops of his prouince, we denie not but were then in old time applyed and might be applyed to the Byshop of Rome, like as the same also were applyed to other Patriarks in other chiefe cities and prouinces. And in the same place, af∣ter he 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉athe declared this title (summus orbis Pontifex) as it is now vsed in Rome to be vnhard of in the primitiue time of the Churche, that is fiue hundred yeares after Christ. He saith the like is to be affirmed also of other presumptuous titles of like ambiti∣on, as the head of the vniuersall Church, the vicar of Christ in earth, Prince of priests, with such like, which be all new found termes. &c. so that it is plaine, that these general titles of vniuersall iurisdiction ouer all, and not the particular names of superioritie ouer seuerall Churches, is by this Councell forbidden.

Thys farther appeareth in the fyfth Councell of Constantinople where Iohn not* 1.184 being content with the name of Patriarke of Constantinople would néedes haue it ratifyed by the councell that he should be called Oecumenicus Patriarcha, that is vniuer∣sall Patriarch. Against which title not of Patriach but of vniuersall Patriarch, both Pela∣gius and Gregory at that time byshops of Rome, the one succéeding the other, did ear∣nestly write, and this is the true meaning of that Canon.

Ignatius immediatly after the Apostles time calleth a Byshop principem sacerdo∣tum,* 1.185 the Prince of priests, or chiefe Priest: and so doth Ambrose in the fourth ad Ephe∣sios. But this they do not attribute to any one as hauing vniuersall authoritie ouer all, but to euery byshop in respect of such as be vnder him.

Touching the byshop of Constantinople, your are deceyued very muche, and de∣clare in hym the same vnskilfulnesse that you haue done in the other. For it is euident that he required thys name and title of vniuersall Patriarch ambitiously as béeing desirous to be superiour to all the Patriarchs in the worlde. This to be true* 1.186 is manifest by the decrée of Pellagius Distinct. 99. Canon Nullus. And by the Epistles of

Gregory written purposely of that m̄atter. Neyther do I reade in any approued author to the contrary.

Agayne you are deceiued greatly in the Councell. For though the Byshoppe of Constantinople did chalenge in the Councell of Chalcedon the righte of ordering Metropolitanes in those places, yet doth he not in that Councell chalenge the title of vniuersall Patriarch, whiche notwithstanding was offered to the Byshoppe of Rome in that Councell of Chalcedon, but first giuen to the Patriarch of Constanti∣nople, in the seconde Councell of Constantinople: or as it is termed in the booke of* 1.187 Councels, the fifte, bycause it was the fiftegenerall Councell, as it may appeare in the same councell. Moreouer whereas you say, that the Byshop of Constantinople re∣quired that he might ordeyne Byshops in Asia. &c. if you marke the words diligently, you shall perceiue that he re quired therin nothing but according to the sixth Canon of the Councell of Nice, whiche is also there alledged for that purpose: but I haue shewed before how the Byshop of Rome made this chalenge of vniuersalitie in ef∣fect, and indéede, euen in that Councell of Carthage, where this Canon by you al∣leadged is, and therefore I néede not stand any longer vpon this poynt.

Chap. 2. the. 29. Diuision.

Ansvver to the Admonition Page. 66. Sect. 6. 7. 8. &. Page. 67. Sect. 1. 2.

Damasus calleth Stephen an Archdeacon.* 1.188

Hierome in his epistle ad Euagrium hath this name Archdeacon.

Sextus in his decrees saithe that Laurence the Martyr was an Archdeacon.

Sozomenus lib. 7. cap. 19. maketh mention of an Archdeacon reading the scriptures.

Socrates in the seuenth booke of his ecclesiasticall historie speaketh of one Timothie an Archdeacon.

T. C. Pag. 72. Sect. 5. 6. 7.

For to proue y^e lawfulnesse of the name of an Archdeacon, the antiquitie, the necessitie of it, the testimonies of (a) foure are brought, which neyther speake of their lawfulnes nor of their necessitie,* 1.189 and they say not indeede so much as god saue them, and two of these witnesses are Popes, whereof the first and best, ordayned that if the Metropolitane did not fetch his pall at the Apostolike see of Rome within three moneths after he be consecrated, that then he should lose his dignitie, as (b) 1.190 Gratian witnesseth in the decrees that he ascribeth vnto Damasus.

I doubt not therefore that this is but a forger vpon whome you would father the Archdeacon: For that Damasus in whose place you put this forger liued Anno. 387. at what time the see of Rome had no such tyrannie as this and other things which are fathered of him do pretend. And if this be inough to proue Archdeacons I can with better witnesse proue subdeacons, Acoluthes, exorcists, lectors, ostiarios, these doth Ensebius make mention of, an (c) 1.191 auncienter writer than any you bring: and out of Ruffine, Theodorete, Sozomene, Socrates. &c. monkes almost in euery page, and herevpon it is more lawfull for me to conclude, that monkes, subdeacons, exorcists, aco∣luthes, ostiarij, lectores, are necessary ecclesiasticall orders in the Churche, as you conclude the ne∣cessitie of the Archdeacon.

I perceiue you care not whether the Archdeacon fal or no, that you bestow so little cost of him, and leaue him so nakedly. And if I would be but halfe so bold in (d) 1.192 comectures and diuinations as you are, I could say that this sleight handling of the Archdeacon, and sweating so much aboute the Archbyshop, is there vpon, that you would be loth to come from being Deane to be an Archdea∣con, and you liue in some hope of being Archbyshop: but I will not enter so farre: and surely for any thing that I see, you mighte haue trussed vp the Archbyshop as shorte as you do the Archdeacon, for they stād vpon one pinne, and those reasons which establish the one establish the other. Wher∣vpon also commeth to passe that all those reasons which were before alledged against the Archby∣shop, may be drawen against the Archdeacon.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.193

My purpose in that place is (as you mighte haue séene if you woulde) to proue that the names of Archbyshops Archdeacon. &c. be not Antichristian

names, that is, names inuented by Antichriste, but most auncient, for those be my very words, & as I haue proued that to be most true in Metrapolitanes and Archbyshops, by shewing that they were in the Churche, before the Pope was Antichrist, so I do the like of Archdeacons. And where I haue brought in fiue wit∣nesses, you say I haue brought in fower. Damasus, Hierome, Sixtus, Sozomene and So∣crates be in number fiue, and of these fiue you haue answered only two, and that after your vsuall manner, by reiecting the Authors. What is falsely attributed to Dama∣sus in other matters is no answer to this, that he reporteth of Archdeacons, whiche also the third Centurie alledgeth as true. And though he were Byshop of Rome, yet was he a vertuous, learned, and godly Byshop. So was Sixtus in like manner, who liued Byshop of Rome Anno. 265. So that Damasus was neyther the first nor the best. For Sixtus was martyred for the Gospell, so was not Damasus. They speake as much for Archdeacons as I require, that is that their names were not inuen∣ted by Antichrist: and if there were then no such tyrannie in the Churche of Rome, as you here mislike, and yet this name in that Church, it is not like to be a tyrannicall name.

But I maruaile you will deale so barely in this matter, knewing that Hierome, who liued in Damasus his time, hathe this name Archdeacon oftner than twise or thrise. Without doubt you do not well consider what you write.

This Answer of yours was neuer as yet approued of any learned mā. For what if Eusebius make mention of Subdeacons, Acoluthes. &c. which were peraduenture profi∣table offices in the Church at that time, doth it therefore follow that it is vnlawfull to haue Archdeacons? I conclude no necessitie of the Archdeacon, but I conclude hys antiquitie, and bycause you cannot answer that, you fall to scoffing and vnséemely iesting as your manner is, and so do you shift off thrée of my witnesses.

Chap. 2. the. 30. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 72. lin. 2. &. Sect. 1.

Hauing therefore before proued the vnlawfulnesse of them, I will here set downe the differēce betweene those Archdeacons that were in times past, and those whiche are nowe, whereby it may appeare they are nothing like but in name.

They were no ministers as appeareth in (*) 1.194 Sozomene, ours are.

Io. Whitgifte.

What one reason haue you vsed to proue the vnlawfulnesse of them. If you meane such reasons as you haue against Archbyshops, they be fully answered.

Not one word is there in the seuenth booke and nineteenth Chapter of Sozome∣ne to proue that Archdeacons eyther then were not, or now may not be ministers. For all that he speaketh in that chapter is this. And this also is a strange thing in the Church of Alexandria, whiles the Gospells are a reading, the Byshop doth not rise vp, which I haue hard of others. This holy booke a Monke that is an Archdeacon readeth there, in other pla∣ces Deacons: in many Churches the priests only: but in principall feasts Byshops. Howe you can conclude that Archdeacons were not then ministers by any thing here spo∣ken, surely I know not, for if you meane, bycause he saith that in some churches only Priests did reade, you can no more thereof conclude that Archdeacons were then no Priests, than you may that they were no Deacons, or that Byshops be no Priestes, neyther is it necessary that they shoulde be nowe ministers, it is sufficiente if they be Deacons: yet may they be ministers and méete it is that they should so be, and you cannot proue the contrary.

Chap. 2. the. 31. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 2.

They were tyed to a certaine Church, and were called Archdeacon of such a congregation or* 1.195 Church, ours are tyed to none, but are called Archdeacons of such a shire.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is no other words in that booke and chap. of Sozomene touching Archdea∣cons, than these whiche I haue before recited: what they make for your purpose let the reader iudge. Your Vrbanum Concilium is very obscure, for there is none such to be found in all the volumes of Councels. But to put you out of doubt, we haue no Arch∣deacons, but such as be tyed to one Church, though they haue the names sometimes of the Shire, wherein their iurisdiction lyeth.

Chap. 2. the. 32. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 3.* 1.196

They were chosen by all the deacons of the Church where they be Archdeacons, ours are ap∣pointed by one man, and which is no Deacon.

Io. Whitgifte.

There can be no such custome gathered of Hieroms words in that place, only he vsing an example to declare what the manner of choosing their Byshop was in the Church of Alexandria saith, that they elected one from among themselues whome they placing in an higher roome called him a Byshop, as if the souldiers should choose their cap∣tayne, or Deacons should choose one of them whome they know to be painfull, and name him archdeacon. You can no more hereof conclude, that it was then vsuall for deacons to choose their Archdeacon, than you may that it was also vsual for souldiers to choose their captaine: neyther can you here by proue that our Archdeacons are not like vnto theirs (if this were true) no more than you can, that our Captaines are not like vnto theirs, bycause the Souldiers do not choose them. But what create matter is it, if they were then chosen by Deacons and be not so now? and doth not the Byshop ap∣poynt them and is not the Byshop more than a Deacon?

Chap. 2. the. 33. Diuision.* 1.197

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 4.

They were subiect to the minister of the word, ours are aboue them, and rule ouer them.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is not one word of Archdeacons in the fourtaenth Canon of the Councell of Nice, nor in the 20. after Ruffine, and therefore you do but abuse the reader. That which is in that place is spoken of Deacons onely, and is at this day obserued in this Church.

Chap. 2. the. 34. Diuision.* 1.198

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 5.* 1.199

It was counted to them great arrogancie if they preferred themselues to any minister or elder

of the Churche: ours will not take the best ministers of the Church as their equals. If therefore Archdeacons will haue any benefite by the Archdeacons of old time, it is meete they shoulde con∣tent themselues with that place which they were in.

Io. Whitgifte.

No such thing is in that epistle of Hierome: only he speaketh of deacons, touching that matter, whome he also she weth in the Church of Rome to haue bin in certaine points preferred before ministers, neyther is there one word of Archdeacons in that booke of Augustines, but only of Deacons. You must learne to make a distinction be∣twixt an Archdeacon and a Deacon, and not to make the reader beléeue that the au∣thors you quote in the margente, speake of Archdeacons, when they onely speake of Deacons. My witnesses how few so euer they be, are sufficiente to withstand thys cowardly assault of yours, wherein there is neyther strength nor truth.

Chap. 2. the. 35. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 67. Sect. 3.

Augustine in his first booke de moribus ecclesiae Catholicae, maketh mention of* 1.200 Deanes, and their offices.

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 6.

As for the office of a deane, as it is vsed with vs it is therefore (*) 1.201 vnlawfull, for that he being minister, hath (*) 1.202 noseuerall charge or Congregation appointed wherein he may exercise his mini∣sterie, and (*) 1.203 for that he is ruler and as it were master of diuers other ministers in his Colledge, which likewise haue no seuerall charges of congregatiōs, and for that (which is most intollerable) both he himselfe oftentimes hauing a seuerall Church or benefice (as they call it,) is vnder the co∣loure of his deaneship absent from his Church, and suffereth also those that are vnderneath him, to be likewise absent from their Churches. And whereas M. Doctor alledgeth S. Augustine to proue this office to be auncient: indeede the name is there found, but besides the name, not one pro∣pertie of that deane which we haue. For Augustine speaking of the monks of those dayes, saythe that the money which they gate with the labor of their hands, they gaue to their deane, which did prouide them meate and drinke and cloth and all things necessary for them: So that their monkes shoulde not be drawen away from their studies and meditations, through the care of worldly things: So that this Deane which he speaketh of, was seruaunte and stewarde and cater to the Monks, and therefore only called Deane, bycause he was steward and cater to ten Monks. Now let it be seene what Augustines deane maketh for the deane which is theirs, and what faith and trust M. Doctor vseth, in reciting of the old fathers.

Io. Whitgifte.

All thys is but your owne sansies taken for principles and groundes. For fyrste it is vntrue that euery Minister muste of necessitie haue some seuerall* 1.204 charge, as I haue declared before. Secondly it is as vntrue, that a Deane hathe no seuerall charge or congregation, wherein to exercise his ministerie. For there is no Cathe∣drall Churche withoute a congregation and charge. The third that followeth, is buil∣ded of the same groundes that these two fyrste be, and may as well be spoken a∣gaynste the masterships of suche Colledges in the vniuersities, wherein any prea∣chers or ministers bée maynteyned. Whyche argueth that you meane the same to Colledges that you doe to Cathedrall Churches, and that you woulde haue ministers frée from subiection. Last of all, that whyche you say is most intel∣lerable, you speake withoute any tolerable reason: For Master Deane and hys Prebendaries do more good both in the Churche of Englande generally, and in

their seuerall Churches particularly, and take more paines in one moneth, than you and your companions (whereof some notwithstanding are contente with∣out doing any dutie at all, to enioy prebendes more than one) in one whole yeare. And if eyther Master Deane or the Prebendaries neglect their dueties, there be superiours and lawes to reforme them.

The place of Augustine proueth the name of a Deane: it proueth a College and societie, whereof he is Deane: it argueth a superioritie and gouernmente, for he saith they be called Decani, ideò quòd sint denis praepositi, Deanes, bycause they are set ouer tenne: it sheweth an office to care and prouide for them, and sée that they haue all thynges necessary: it declareth dayly exercise of praying and teaching: for he addeth thus. Conueniunt autem diei tempore extremo de suis quisque habitaculis, dum ad∣huc ieiuni sunt, ad audiendum illum patrem, & conueniunt ad singulos patres terna ad mini∣mum hominum milia: Nam etiam multò numerosiores sub vno agunt. They come togyther at night euery man from his lodging whilest yet they are fasting, to heare that father: and they* 1.205 come togyther to euery father, three thousand men at the least, for a greate meanie moe liue vnder one. &c.

Now sir if God of his singular goodnesse hathe to the greate and vnspeake∣able benefyte of his Churche, moued the harts of princes and men of wealth, so to indue suche places with possessions and reuenewes, that they hauing thynges necessary prouided for them, may bestow that tyme in studying, praying, prea∣ching, and other godly exercises, whiche these that Sainct Augustine speaketh of, did in labouring with their handes, is Master Deanes name or office euer the woorse? howsoeuer it pleaseth you to terme these companies, that Sainct Augu∣stine héere speaketh of: Yet were they Godly societies, and do very aptly set foorth the vtilitie, and the antiquitie of Churches and Colledges: the Deanes and Masters whereof, haue indéede the chiefe and speciall care of all externall things perteyning to them, whether it be landes, prouisions, or any thing else that is neces∣sary: And therefore the liker to Sainct Augustines Deane, and the place more aptly alledged to proue the antiquitie of this name and office. If Master Doctor should vse no more faith in reciting the Doctors than you do, I woulde he were whipped at the crosse in Cheape.

Chap. 2. the. 36. Diuision.

Ansvver to the Admonition. Pag 67. Sect. 4.

Nytherto Antichrist had not inuaded the Church of Rome. But what shoulde I trouble you with any more authorities? those that be learned may easily vnderstand that these names Metropolitane, Archbyshop, Archdeacon, Primate, Patriarke, and suche lyke, be most auncient and approued of the eldest, best, and worthyest Coun∣cells, fathers, and writers.

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. 7.

And vnto the end that these testimonies might be more autenticall, and haue some waighte in them, Master Doctor addeth, that hitherto Antichrist had not inuaded the seate of Rome. You shall haue much a do to proue that Antichrist had not inuaded the sce of Rome, when your Cle∣ment Anaclete, Anicete, and Damasus wrote: nay it is most certayne, that then he had possessed it: but what is that to the purpose, although there was no one singular head appeared or lifted vp, yet corruptiō of doctrine & of the sacraments, hurtful ceremonies, dominion & pompe of y^e Cleargie, new orders, & functions of y^e ministerie, which were the hāds that pulled him, y^e feete which brought

him, the shoulders that lifted and heaued hym vp into that seat, were in the Church. Neither while you do thus speake, do you seeme to remember, that this monster needed not nine monethes, but al∣most nine hundred yeares, to be framed and fashioned, or euer he could with all his parts be brought to light. And althoughe the louer of this Antichristian building were not set vp: yet the foundati∣ons thereof being secretly and vnder the grounde laid in the Apostles time: you might easily know that in those times that you spake of, y^e building was wonderfully aduaunced & growen very high, and being a very daungerous thing to ground any order or pollicie of the Churche vpon men at all, which in deede ought to haue their standing vpon the doctrine and orders of the Apostles, I wyll shew, what great iniurie M. Doctor doth, to send vs for our examples and patterns of gouernment to these times which he doth dicette vs vnto.

Io. Whitgifte.

These be but wordes, the same mighte be also spoken of the Apostles times. For* 1.206 enen then Paul speaking of Antichrist sayd, Nam mysterium nuncagit iniquitatis, for the mysterie of iniquitie doth already worke: And S. Iohn sayd that there then began to be many Antichristes: but doth this detract any thing from the truth taught in that time? or shall we therfore refuse to take such examples of it, as is conuenient for our time? There is no man of learning and modestie which will without manifest proofe con∣demne any order, especially touching the gouernment of the Churche, that was vsed and allowed during the time of the primitiue Church, which was the next. 500. yéeres after Christ, within the which time, most of my authorities are conteined. Neyther was there any functiō or office brought into the Church during al that time, allowed by any generall Councel or credible writer, which was not most meete for that time, and allowable by the word of God.

I graunt that Antichrist was working all this time, and grewe more and more, for else could there neuer haue bene so many sectes and heresies from time to tyme spred in the Church, which was the cause of so many singular and notable Councels, so many profitable and necessary bookes, written by such learned and godly Doctors, as did with might and maine striue against them. Out of the which Councels and fa∣thers, and best witnesses what was done in those times, I haue fetched my proofes: euen out of them (I say) that did with might and maine labour to kepe out Antichrist from the possession of the Church, and therefore not to be suspected to consent to An∣tichrist.

I knowe that those sectes and heresies gaue strength vnto Antichriste, and at the length were one speciall meanes of placing him in his throne, euen as I am also per∣swaded* 1.207 that he worketh as effectually at this daye by your styrres and contentions, wherby he hath and will more preuaile against this Church of England, than by any other meanes whatsoeuer. Therefore it behoueth you to take héede, how you deuide the armie of Christ, which should vnanimiter fight against that Antichrist. As for vs we must follow the examples of those good fathers, and labour, accordingly to restore vnitie, and to preserue it.

Chap. 2. the. 37. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 73. Sect. vlt.

Eusebius out of Egesippus writeth, y^e as long as the Apostles lyued, y^e Church remained a pure virgin, for that if there were any that went about to corrupt the holy rule that was preached, they* 1.208 did it in the darke, and as it were digging vnderneath the earth. But after the death of the Apo∣stles, and that generation was paste, whiche God vouchsaued to heare the diuine wisedome with their owne eares, then the placing of wicked error began to come into the Church.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is euident in diuerse places of the Scripture, namely in the first Epistle to the* 1.209 Corinthians, and the Epistle to the Galath, that there were many grosse and greate corruptions openly professed in the Churche, by diuerse, not onely in maners, but al∣so

in doctrine, euen in the Apostles tyme, and Eusebius hymselfe declareth that there* 1.210 was one Simon mencioned Acts. 8. whom he calleth the author of all heresie, Lib. 2. Cap. 13. Likewyse he sheweth Lib. 3. that Ebion, Cerinthus, and the Nicholaites, all horri∣ble heretikes were in the Apostles time. Wherefore if this be a good reason, then is it not safe for vs to follow, no not the Apostles time.

Chap. 2. the. 38. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 74. Sect. 1.

Element also in a certayne place, to confirme that there was corruption of doctrine immediately* 1.211 after the Apostles time, alleageth the prouerb that there are fewe sonnes like their fathers.

Io. Whitgifte.

I can finde no such thing in Clement, but the matter is not great whether he saye so or no. The argument is starke noughte: for if this followe, that we may take no example, paterne, or testimonie of gouernment, out of that time, bycause it was corrupte, then by the same reason muste we not take examples of any tyme, no not out of the Apostles time, bicause that was also corrupte as I haue saide. Your argumentes be passing strong, surely I maruaile with what boldnesse you write them.

Chap. 2. the. 39. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 74. Sect. 2.

And Socrates sayth of the Church of Rome and Alexandria, which were the most famous* 1.212 Churches in the Apostles tymes, that aboute the yeare. 430. the Romane and Alexandrian By∣shops (*) 1.213 leauyng the sacred function were degenerate to a secular rule or dominion, wherevpon we see, that it is safe for vs to goe to the Scriptures, and to the Apostles tymes, for to fetche our gouernment and order: and that it is very daungerous to drawe from those ryuers the fountaynes wherof, are troubled and corrupted, especially when as the wayes whereby they runne are muddier and more fennie, than is the head itselfe.

Io. Whitgifte.

You falsifie the wordes of Socrates, for thus be sayth, For euen till that tyme the Nouatians florished maruellously at Rome, and had manye Churches and had gathered* 1.214 muche people. But enuie tooke holde of them, when as the Byshopprike of Rome and of Alexandria nowe a good whyle was passed beyonde the Limites of Priesthoode to an out∣warde Dominion. He sayth not leauing the sacred function, were degenerate to a se∣cular rule and dominion, as you translate it.

But why doth Socrates burste out into thys reprehension of them, euen bycause* 1.215 they expelled the Nouatian heretikes, of whome Socrates was a fautor, as it may ap∣peare in Nicephorus, wherefore he dothein that place affectionately, and vniustly re∣proue both the Byshop of Rome, and Alexandria, for stoutly resisting those heretikes and expelling them from their Churches, especially they nowe increasing to so great a multitude, as it may séeme by Socrates wordes they dyd. And althoughe the words of Socrates whiche I haue alreadie recyted iustifie this to be true, yet doth his words followyng declare the same more euidently. For he commendeth the Byshop of Con∣stantinople bycause he friendly interteyned the Nouatians, & suffered them quietly to remayne wythin the Citie, and yet it is certayne, that the Byshop of Constanti∣nople, had as large authoritie as the Byshop of Alexandria, wherefore Socrates in thys poynt is no more to be beléeued against those Byshops, than you are against the* 1.216 Byshoppes in thys Churche, whose authoritie you maligne vpon the lyke occa∣sion.

Chap. 2. the. 40. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 74. Sect. 3. 4.

And (a) 1.217 although M. Doctor hath brought neither Scripture nor reason, nor Councell where∣in there is either name of Archbyshop, or Archdeacon, or proued that there may be: And althoughe he shew not so much as the name of them foure hundred yeares after our saniour Christ. And al∣though where he sheweth them, they be either by counterfeit authors, or without any worde (b) 1.218 of approbation of good authors: yet as though he had shewed all and proued all, hauing shewed no∣thing nor proued nothing, he clappeth the hands to himself, and putteth the crowne vpon his owne head, saying, that those that be learned maye easily vnderstande, that the names Archbyshop, Arch∣deacon, Primate, Patriarke, be most auncient, and approued of the eldest, best, worthiest Councels, fathers, writers: and a little afterward, that they are vnlearned and ignorant which saye other∣wyse.

Here is (c) 1.219 a victorye blowen with a great and sounding trumpet, that myghtè haue bene piped with an o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉en straw, and if it shoulde be replyed againe, that M. Doctor hath declared in this little learning little reading, and lesse iudgement, there mighte growe controuersies without all fruite.

Io. Whitgifte.

If I were not acquainted with this spirit, it would make me muse at such euident and manifest vntruthes, ioyned with so prophane iestes and tauntes. If I had allea∣ged no moe authorities but onely the Councell of Nice, it had bene sufficient to haue disproued this so bolde assertion of yours. But séeyng I haue alleaged other testimo∣nies also, which euidently proue my purpose, I muste néedes thinke you not to be a man that greatly careth for your owne credit, but if you thinke they are few, & there∣fore accompt them for none, I haue now I trust in this Chapter. 25. Diuision supply∣ed their want, and made vp the number.

What Scriptures I haue appeareth afterwards. It is sufficient if I finde there the office of an Archbishop, as I doubte not but I shall, and therefore I say againe, that to doubt of the antiquitie of these names and offices, argueth great penurie of reading the auncient writers.

Chap. 2. the. 41. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 67. Sect. 4.

And for as much as the originall and beginning of these names Metropolitane, Archbyshop, Archdeacon, Primate, Patriarke, and such like (such is their antiquitie) cannot be found so farre as I haue reade, it is to be supposed they haue their originall from the Apostles themselues. For as I remember S. Augustine hath thys rule in hys* 1.220 118. Epist. ad Ianuar. Those things that be not expressed in the Scriptures and yet by tradition obserued of the vvhole Churche, come eyther from the A∣postles or from generall Councels, as the obseruing of Easter, the celebra∣ting of the day of the ascention, and of the comming of the holy Ghost, & suche like. Uery vnlearned therefore and ignorant be those which so boldly affirme that these names vsed in the purest time of the church, be Antichristian.

T. C. Page. 74. Sect. 4. 5.

And by and by in saying that the Archbyshops beginning is vnknowne, in steade of a (a) 1.221 bastard which some brought into the Church, that hid themselues bycause they were ashamed of y^• child, he will make vs beleue that we haue a newe Melchisedech, without father, without mother, & whose generation is not knowen, and so concludeth with the place of S. Augustine, as farre as he remem∣breth, in the. 118. Epistle to Ianuarie, that the original of them is from the Apostles themselues.

Here (b) 1.222 M. Doctor seemeth to seeke after some glory of a good memory, as thoughe he had net Augustine by him when he wrote thys sentence, and yet he maruellously forgetteth himselfe, for he vsed this place before in his. 23. Page, and cyteth it there precisely and absolutely, where also I

haue shewed, howe vnaduisedly that sentence of Augustine is approued: and howe that thereby a window is open to bryng in all Popery, & whatsoeuer other corrupt opinions. That the names of Lordes and honour as they are vsed in this Realme, are not meete to be giuen to the Ministers of the Gospell, there hath bene spoken before.

Io. Whitgifte.

This place of Augustine is of greater force and credite with those that be learned, than that it can be shifted off. I haue answered whatsoeuer you saye against it in that place, and shewed of what credite it is with some famous writers of our time, name∣ly with Master Zuinglius, Master Caluine, and Master Gualter. And surely I thinke no learned man doth dissent from them.

Your iestes are to vsuall and vnséemely for a Diuine, especially when you abuse the scripture to make sport withal. I might haue sayd also of you, y^t you sought after some glory of a good memorie, when as you vsed the like kinde of speach, in alleaging of Gil∣das and Lumbard, Pag. 68. but that I am not delighted with such kinde of eloquence.* 1.223

Chap. 2. the. 42. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 65. Sect. 5.

Whether that the name of Prelate of the Garter, Earle, Coūtie Palatine, Honor, high commissioner, Iustice of peace and Quorum,* 1.224 being necessary offices in this common weale, partly for the honour of the Prince and Realme but especially for good gouernment of all estates and degrees of persons, be Antichristian, let those consider to whom God hath committed the sworde of gouernment: such insolent audacitie against states and lawfull regiment, is rather to be correc∣ted with due punishment, than confuted by argument.

T. C. Page. 74. Sect. 6. 7. 8.

As for Prelate of the Garter, if it be a needefull office, there are inowe to execute it besydes the Ministers, which for as much as they be appointed to watche ouer the soules of men, purcha∣sed with the bloude of Christ, all men vnderstand that it is not meete that they shoulde attend vpon the bodie, muche lesse vpon the legge, and least of al vpon the Garter. It is not vnlawfull for Prin∣ces to haue Ministers of their honor, but also it is not lawfull to take those that God hath appoyn∣ted for another ende, to vse to such purposes.

Thou seest here good reader that M. Doctor kepeth his olde wont, of (*) 1.225 manifest peruerting of the wordes and meanyng of the authors of the Admonition. For whereas they saye that the name of Erle, Countie Palatine, Iustice of peace and Quorum, Commissioner, are Antichristian, when they are giuen to the ministers of the Churche, whose calling wil not agree with such titles, he concludeth simply, that they saye they be altogether vnlawfull, and simply antichristian, as if I should reason, that it is not meete that the Queenes Maiestie should preache or minister the Sa∣cramentes, therefore it is not meete that there shoulde be any preachyng or Ministring of the Sa∣cramentes.

Nowe letting passe all your hard wordes and vnbrotherly speaches, with your vncharitable prognostications, and colde prophesies, I will come to examine, whether you haue any better hap in prouing the office, than you haue had in prouing the name.

Io. Whitgifte.

I sée no cause why he that is prelate of the garter, maye not also sufficiently discharge his duetie in watching ouer the soule, for I thinke the garter dothe not re∣quire such continuall or great attendance. Those that are appointed to watche ouer y^e soule are not exempted from bodily seruice to their Prince, excepte you will take from the Prince, not onely authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters, as you haue done, but ouer Ecclesiasticall persons also, as by this and such other lyke assertions you séeme to doe▪

But here of more in place. I peruert not the wordes of the Admonition, as appeareth by their manifest wordes: what their meaning is God knoweth. But how little autho∣ritie these offices should haue, if your plat forme were framed, shall be declared when I come to your seigniorie: neyther the names nor offices that come from a Christian Prince, that detesteth Antichrist, can be called Antichristian, vpon whom soeuer they be bestowed. Wherevnto this your example tendeth of the Quéenes Maiestie, wise men may easily coniecture. It smelleth of that Papisticall cauillation, Scilicet that we giue to hir Maiestie authoritie to preach and to administer the sacramentes, bycause we acknowledge hir lawfull authoritie in Ecclesiasticall causes.

I pray God my prognostications be not to true: the more I consider of your booke, the more I am driuen to suspect it. My hard speaches be within the bondes of modestie, but yours may better beséeme the order you talke of, then a man of your profession.

Chap. 2. the. 43. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 68. Sect. 1. 2.

Lordes Grace, Lordbishop, honor. &c. be names of reuerence, tea∣chyng vs to acknowledge our duetie towardes our superiours, and their authoritie ouer vs. And it is much more to be reprehended, not to giue honor to whom honor is due, then to receyue honor when it is due. You maye and you please in verye auncient Histories and in* 1.226 great learned fathers, see as honorable and reuerent titles giuen vnto Byshops as these be. And surely it is not Antichristian to be called by names and titles, not ambitiously soughte for, but orderly and lawfully giuen according to the condition and state of the place wherin a man is. But it is Antichristian, that is proude, presumptu∣ous, disdainfull, arrogant, and contemptuous, to refuse to giue to e∣uery one that name and title that by law, ciuilitie, and duetie of vs is required, and expresseth our reuerence, duetie, and obedience.

You would speake as much of names of honor and reuerence in o∣ther persons if you durste be so bolde wyth them, as you thinke you may be with some.

Io. Whitgifte.

Nothing is sayde to this.

The offices of Archbishops, &c, are not strange or vnheard of in Christes Church: and of superioritie a∣mong the Cleargie.

Chap. 3. the first Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Page. 68. Sect. 3. 4. & Pag. 69. Sect. 1.

Nowe it followeth to proue that the offices signifyed by these names are not straunge and vnheard of in Christes Churche, ney∣ther yet plainly in Gods worde forbidden, that they are not to be re∣moued, but as most necessarie to be reteined.

It is without all doubte that both these names and offices haue* 1.227 bene in Christes Church, long before Nicene Councell, and that they haue had in the same continuance euen to this daye: as partlye if may be gathered by that which I haue spokē before, and most mani∣festly by all histories and learned writers from before that Councell of Nyce to this instant houre: and therefore they little consydered what they writte, when they set it downe that these names and offi∣ces were straunge and vnheard of in the Church of Christ.

These men contemning auncient writers neuer read them, & that is the cause of such vnlearned assertions.

T. C. Pag. 75. Sect. 1.

And wheras in the former treatise of the name of the Archbyshop, he blew the trumpet before the victorie: heere in this of the office he bloweth it before he commeth into the fielde, or striketh one stroke, saying that they little consider what they write, that they are contemners of auncient writers and that they neuer read them, and that they are vnlearned which denie these things which he affir∣meth. Well what we reade & howe vnlearned we are, is not the matter whiche we striue for, the iudgemente thereof is first with God▪ then with the Churches, and in their iudgementes we are content to reste. But if you be so greatly learned, and we so vnlearned and smally read, then the truth of oure cause shall more appeare that is maynteined with so small learnyng and reading, a∣gaynst men of such profound knowledge & great reading. And yet I knowe not why if we be not tooidle, we should not be hable to reade as much as you, which may haue leysure to reade a good long writer, or euer you can ryde onely to see and salute your houses and liuings, being so many and so farre distant one from an other. And if we be so vnlearned and holde suche daungerous opinions of Papistrie and anabaptisme, as you beare men in hand we doe, why do you not by the example of the Ministers in Germanie, procure a publike disputation, where you may both winne your spurres and suche detestable opinions with the ignoraunce of the authors, may be displayed vnto the whole world? But let vs heare what is sayde.

Io. Whitgifte.

I haue sayd nothing of the authors of the Admonition, which their owne doings proueth not to be true, and if you will also take it vnto your selfe, who can let you. If notwithstanding al my iourneys to see and salute my houses and lyuings, I be founde to discharge my duetie there, and also to haue read as much as you, that haue suche leysure, it is at the least an argument that I am not idle. I loue not to boast of my self. Your too too arrogante and contemptuous speaches prouoke me further than mode∣stie requireth. I am not ashamed of my readyng, and yet I will make no compari∣sons.

I haue sundrie times both priuately and publikely, as I am able to proue by suffi∣cient* 1.228 testimonies, and you cannot denie, offered you conference by writing of these matters, I haue earnestly moued you vnto it, and you haue alwayes refused it. This had bene a quiet and the best and most assured way: for litera scripta manet, That whiche is set downe in writing remaineth. Howbeit I refuse no way that shall be thought con∣uenient to the Magistate, neyther am I afrayde of your stoute bragges, for I knowe what substance is in you: but yet by the way this may be noted, what you bunt after and séeke for, when you refuse priuate conference by writing offered vnto you, and cry out for publike disputation: scilicet popularem laudem, popular praise: But therein do you follow the vaine bragges of other sectaries. &c.

Chap. 3. the. 2. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 69. Sect. 2. 3. &. Pag. 70. Sect. 1.

Cyprianus Lib. 1. Epist. 3. ad Cornelium speaking of the office of an Archbyshop,* 1.229 sayth on this sort, Neque enim aliunde haereses obortae sunt, aut na ta schismata, quàm inde

quòd sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, nec vnus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, & ad tempus iudex vice Christi cogitatur, cui si secundum magisteria diuina obtemperaret fraternitas vniuersa, nemo aduersus sacerdotum collegium quicquam moueret: Neyther haue heresies or schismes rysen of any other occasion, than of that, that the Priest of God is not o∣beyed, neyther one Priest for the tyme in the Churche, and one Iudge for the time in the steade of Christ thought vpon, to vvhom if the vvhole brotherhoode vvoulde be obedient, according to Gods teaching, no man vvould moue any thing agaynst the Colledge of Priests.

Cornelius beeing Bishop of Rome, and hauing excommunicated* 1.230 certayne notorious wicked men, and afterwarde beeing threatned and ill vsed at their handes, beganne to faynte and to be weerie of his office: Cyprian hearing thereof, wrote comfortably vnto him, and willed him in any wise to proceede, she wing further what sects and schismes ensueth in any Prouince or Diocesse, whereas the Bi∣shops authoritie is despised. For in these wordes he speaketh not of the vsurped authoritie of the Bishop of Rome ouer all Churches, but agaynst the insolencie of some, whiche despising their Metro∣politane, or Archebishop, did with their factiousnesse trouble the Churche. For he woulde haue an Archebishop in euery Prouince, whiche shoulde beare the chiefe rule ouer the rest of the Cleargie, and so doe the godlyest and best learned expounde Cyprian.

The same Cyprian writing to one Florentius Pupianus, spea∣king* 1.231 in his owne behalfe beeing Bishop of Carthage, sayth on this sorte: Vnde schismata & haereses obortae sunt & oriuntur, nisi dum Episcopus qui vnus est, & ecclesiae praeest, superba quorundam praesumptione contemnitur, & homo dignatione Dei hono∣ratus, ab hominibus indignis iudicatur? From vvhence haue heresies and schismes sprong heeretofore, and vvhereof spring they novve, but that the Bishop vvhiche is one, and gouerneth the Churche, by the presumpiuous dis∣dayne of certayne is despised, and a man preferred by Gods allovvance, is examined and iudged by vnvvorthy men. For it is the chiefe and prin∣cipall office of an Archbishop to keepe vnitie in the Churche to com∣pounde contentions, to redresse heresies, schismes, factions, to see that Bishops, and all other of the Cleargie whiche be vnder him doe their duetie. &c.

T. C. Pag. 75. Sect. 2. 3.

Cyprian (sayth he) speaking of the office of an Archebishop. &c. (*) 1.232 Unlesse (good Reader) thou wilte first beleeue that Cyprian speaketh of an Archebishop, and haste before concerned a strong imagination of it, M. Doctor can proue nothing. Aristotle sayth▪ that vncumming payn∣ters write the names of the beastes whiche they paynt in their tables, for bicause otherwise it could not be knowne what they paynt: So M. Doctor mistrusting that the Archebishop will not be knowne by his description, writeth first the name of that he will paynt out.

This is it which we striue about, whereof the controuersie is, and this M. Doctor taketh for graunted. He accuseth the authors of the Admonition for faulting in the petition of the princi∣ple, or desiring to haue that graunted which is denied, and yet I am sure that in the whole Admo∣nition there is not suche a grosse petition as this is. Where or in what words dothe S. Cyprian speake of the office of an Archbishop?

Io. Whitgifte.

It is the chiefe and principall office of the Archebishop, to prouide that peace and* 1.233 vnitie be kepte in the Churche, to suppresse schismes and heresies. &c. This dothe Cyprian in this place signifie in playne words.

That he meaneth of an Archbishop and Metropolitane, though he expresse not the name, it is euident by his words: for in the first place he speaketh of Cornelius, then Bishop of Rome, who had gouernment ouer that whole Prouince. And in the secōd place he speaketh of him selfe, who had a very ample and large iurisdiction. For bée∣ing* 1.234 Bishop of Carthage, he had the charge & ouersight of the Churches in Affrike, in Numidia, and in both the Mauritanies, as he him selfe doth testifie. lib. 4. Epist. 8▪ And as I haue before shewed out of Gregorie Nazianzene, he did not onely rule the Churche of Carthage, but also of Affrike, of Spayne, and almoste of the whole East* 1.235 partes: for the whiche cause Illyricus as I also sayde before, dothe call him Metro∣politane. And therfore I haue truely affirmed, that in those places he speaketh of the office of a Metropolitane or Archbishop: neyther is this a petition of the principle: but a true principle: but it is straunge to sée howe you forget your selfe, for afterwards in the. 95. page of your booke, you acknowledge that Cyprian was a Metropolitane* 1.236 Bishop, which sufficiently iustifieth my second place out of Cyprian.

Chap. 3. the. 3. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 75 Sect▪ 3.

And heere by the way it is to be obserued of the Reader, howe neere a kinne the pope and the Archbishop be. For this office is confirmed by the same (a) 1.237 places that the (b) 1.238 popes is. The places and arguments which are brought agaynst him are soluted with the same solutions that they vse which maynteyne the Papacie. For these places of Cyprian be alleadged for the popes supremacie, and (c) 1.239 in deede they make as muche for the pope as the Archbishop. For althoughe they be two heads, yet they stande vpon one necke, and therefore the reformed Churches whiche cut righte dyd strike them both of at one blowe.

Io. Whitgifte.

This argueth eyther wilfull ignorance, or professed malice: for you can not but knowe that Cyprian meaneth of the subiection that ought to be giuen to Cornelius in his owne Prouince, and that the Papistes wrest the same to proue his vniuer∣sall iurisdiction ouer all Christendome. Nowe if a man maye not alleadge that truely, according to the true sense and meaning of the author, whiche the Papistes abuse to serue their turne, then muste we abstayne from alleadging diuers places of the Scripture.

It is true that the Papistes vse this place for the Popes supremacie, but falsly: for Cyprian onely meaneth of the superioritie of a Metropolitane or Bishop in his Pro∣uince or Diocesse. And the Papistes them selues haue giuen ouer their holde, that they tooke of those places of Cyprian, confessing that he ment of euery seuerall By∣shop in his owne Diocesse or Prouince, as appeareth in Dormans & Hardings latter bookes, and others. And is this kinde of reason so neare a kinne to the Papists, which vtterlye ouerthroweth one of their strongest argumentes? Surely I mar∣uell that your desire is so muche to write agaynst the person, that in the meane time you neglect the common cause, and giue strength as muche as lyeth in you to the rea∣son of the aduersarie, whylest you say, that this place maketh as muche for the Pope, as it dothe for the Archbishop. But the truthe of this your Replie shall appeare, when I haue answered your other cauilles.

Chap. 3. the. 4. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 75. Sect. 3.

In neyther of the sentences heere alleaged out of Cyprian, nor in all his works as hathe bin before noted, is there one worde of an Archbishop, and yet M. Doctor sayth, that he speaketh of an Archbishop: before he shewed the name without the office, and now he goeth about to shew the office without the name: so that he can neuer make both the name and the office meete togither. To shape out an Archbishop here, you must needes interprete the words Bishop and priest, Arch∣bishop and high priest: for Cyprian maketh mention of no other name of ministerie in those places, and if you may haue this scope of interpreting, it will not be harde for you to proue that stones be bread, and that chalke is cheese.

Io. Whitgifte.

Epiphanius lib. 2 tom. 2. haer. 69. dothe call the Bishop of Alexandria sometyme Bi∣shop,* 1.240 and sometime Archbishop. The Councell of Calceden in like maner calleth the same men, as Flauianus, Dioscorus, Leo, & other, sometimes Bishops, and sometimes Archebishops: the lyke is to be séene in other authors and wryters. So that the o∣mitting of the title is no reason at all to disproue the thing. It is certayne that in Cyprians time, this name Papa was a common name to many Bishops, those espe∣cially that were of fame, as M. Foxe at large declareth, tom. 1. fol. 11. And yet doth not Cyprian vse that title commonly when he wryteth to Cornelius, or to any other Bi∣shop. This therfore is but a féeble argument.

Chap. 3. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 75. Sect. 3.

Let vs see what is a Bishop or Priest, I vse the name of priest agaynst my will, but bicause it is sacerdos, and you so translate it, that it may better be vnderstanded what I answere to you, I am content to followe you so farre. I saye, let vs consider what is a Bishop or priest by S. Ci∣prian, and thereby wee shall knowe what an Archbishop he setteth foorth vnto vs, whiche thing may appeare manyfestly, by that which he sayth in the same Epistle, that the Bishop that is ap∣poynted into the place of him that is dead, is chosen peaceably, by the voyee of all the people. (*) 1.241 I thinke you will not say, that all the people throughout the whole Prouince, or throughout a whole Diocesse (as we count a Diocesse) met togither, for that had bin both a great disorder and confu∣sion, a great charge to the Churche, and in the time of persecution as that was, to haue offered the whole Church in all the prouince into the mouth of the wolfe.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you had read Ecclesiasticall histories, then shoulde you vnderstande that the Metropolitanes and Bishops of euery Prouince and Diocesse, were chosen in the presence of the people of that place and citie, whereof they had their names, and that the consent of no other of the people in that Prouince or Diocesse was required. So Cyprian himselfe, thoughe he had so ample a charge as I haue shewed before: yet was he chosen onely by the people of Carthage. The same is to be séene also in other suche elections: and especially of the Bishop of Rome, after that he was in his greatest glorie, and therefore this is a poore argument. The Bishop of Rome or of Carthage were chosen by the consent of the Citizens onely, and not of the people in other places of the Prouince, Ergo their authoritie & iurisdiction extended no farther than these Cities: and yet the whole Diocesse, that is, the Christians in the Dio∣cesse (suche I meane as were appoynted for that purpose) mighte haue met in that time without perill, or any other such inconuenience as you speake of, for such a pur∣pose, as well as they did in the same time to Synodes, whiche were frequent both in Cyprians time, and before.

Chap. 3. the. 6. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 75. Sect. vlt.

And least peraduenture you should haue this hole to hide your selfe in, saying that it might be procured, that in euery Church or parish throughout eyther the Prouince or Diocesie, the consent of the people mighte be asked, and they tarie in their places where they dwel, Cyprian in the next Epistle doth put the matter out of all question, saying that the priest (whome he after calleth Bi∣shop) is chosen in the presence of the people, & in the eyes of all. So that Cyprians Bishop whom you wil needes haue an Archbishop, had neyther prouince nor dioces, as we cal a dioces, out only a Church orcongregatiō, such as the ministers & pastors with vs, which are appoynted vnto seueral townes: whiche may further appeare in that Cyprian sayth, that oute of (*) 1.242 one prouince there were. 90. Bishops which condemned Priuatus. Nowe if there were. 90. Bishops in one pro∣uince met, and yet not all that were in that prouince (as may appeare out of the same Epistle) all men doe vnderstande, that the scope that Cyprians Bishop or Archbishop, as you will haue him, had, was no suche thing as a Dioces or a prouince. I could bring infinite testimonies out of Cy∣prian

to proue that the Bishop in his time was nothing else but S. Paules Bishop, that is, one that had cure and charge of one flocke, whiche was so placed as it might be taught of him, and o∣uerseene by him, and gouerned by him, and of whome in matters perteyning to God it mighte depende.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your proofes goe very lowe when you vse suche slender ones: the words of Cy∣prian in that Epistle be these: Quod & ipsum videmus de diuina authoritate descendere vt* 1.243 sacerdos, plebe praesente, sub omnium oculis delegatur. &c. The whiche thing we see to discende from the authoritie of God, that the Priest be chosen the people beeing present before them all. &c. What can you else gather of this, but that a Priest must be chosen in presence of the people, and that then he is sayde to be chosen sub omnium oculis, before al their eyes, when he is chosen publikely, and openly in the sighte of many. But what is this to the strayghtning of his charge? A man mighte as well reason thus: Al the Citizens of Rome were not at Cornelius election, therefore he is not Bishop of all the Citie of Rome. But to the ende that you maye vnderstande, the vanitie of this your assertion, and that it may appeare that Cyprian maketh the Bishop in degree to be aboue a Priest, & also that at the election of the Bishop of Rome, moe were pre∣sent than those of the Citie: I will set downe his wordes as they be. Lib. 4. Epist. 2.* 1.244 I come nowe vnto the person of our fellowe Cornelius, that you may more truely knowe him, as well as we, not by the lyes of malicious men and backbyters, but by the iudgement of God, whiche made him Bishop, and by the testimonie of his fellow Bishops, the whole* 1.245 number whereof through all the worlde dyd ioyntly agree. For (whiche thing did greatly commende our welbeloued Cornelius vnto God, and to Christ, and his Churche, and al∣so to all his fellowe ministers) he did not sodenly come to the Bishopricke, but beeing promoted by all the ecclesiasticall offyces, he ascended to the high dignitie of Priesthoode,* 1.246 by all degrees of religion. Then afterwarde he neyther desired nor would haue the Bishop∣ricke it selfe, neyther as others vse whiche are puffed vp with pride and arrogancie, dyd he inuade the See by force: but beeing quiet and modest, and suche a one as they vse to be whiche are chosen vnto this place by God, for the moderation of his chaste conscience, and the humblenesse of his naturall and preserued shame fastnesse. He dyd not (as some men doe) vse violence, that he might be made Bishop, but suffered violence, that he mighte by* 1.247 compulsion be driuen to receyue the Bishopricke. And he was made Bishop of many of our fellowe Bishops, whiche were then at Rome, and whiche sente very honorable and commendable letters vnto vs of his ordination. But Cornelius was made Bishop by the iudgement of God, and his Christ, by the testimonie almoste of all Clearks, by the suffra∣ges of the people whiche was then present, and by the Colledge of the auncient Priestes, and of good men.

In these wordes first it is to be noted that he sayth Cornelius was made Bishop* 1.248 by the testimonie of his fellowe Bishops: Quorum numerus vniuersus per totum mun∣dum concordi vnanimitate consensit, The whole number whereof through all the worlde did ioyntly agree▪ Secondly that he was promoted to the highe dignitie of Priesthoode, per omnia ecclesiastica officia & cunctis religionis gradibus: Through all ecclesiasticall offyces▪ and by all degrees of religion, and then afterwarde was made Bishop. Thirdly, that Cornelius was made Bishop by the iudgement of God and Christ, by the testimonie almoste of all Clearkes, and by the suffrages of the people, whiche was then present, and by the Colledge of auncient Priests, and good men. Howe farre these thinges differ from your collections, and howe farre from Cyprians meaning you gather your coniectures, let the Reader iudge. I haue before sufficiently proued by auncient te∣stimonies, that the Bishop of Rome, Carthage, and other, had not one Citie onely to gouerne, or one parishe, but diuers places, whole Prouinces and Countreys, as Cyprians owne wordes before rehearsed maketh manifest. Wherefore all this you doe but speake of pleasure.

If you had tolde me in what place Cyprian sayth, that out of one Prouince there was 90. Bishops that condemned Priuatus, I woulde haue sayde something to it: but séeing

you haue kepte the place secrete to your selfe, you giue your Reader occasion to sus∣pecte, eyther that it is forged, or else not faythfully alleadged. If it be that whiche is lib. 1. epist. 3. then truely antiquum obtines. For these be Cyprians words: Per Foelicianū* 1.249 autem significaui tibi frater, venisse Carthaginem Priuatum veterem baereticum, in Pambesitana colonia, ante multos ferè annos, ob multa & grauia delicta. 90. episcopora sententiā condemnatū, an∣tecessorū etiā nostrorū (quod & vestrā conscientiam nōlatet) Fabiani & Donati literis seuerissimè notatum. &c I haue signified vnto you by Felicianus, that Priuatus an olde heretike, is come to Carthage, beeing condemned in the Citie Pambesia many yeres since, for many and gree∣uous trespasses, by the sentence of 90. Bishops, and beeing also moste sharply reprehended by the letters of my predecessours Fabianus and Donatus (as your conscience knoweth.)

Héere is not one worde of so many Bishops béeing in one Prouince, neyther yet any Prouince or Diocesse mentioned wherin they should be. Surely this is too much, so often to offend in falsifying: but be it there were so many Bishops in one prouince, what conclude you therof, that Bishops then had but one towne or parishe limited vnto them? As though there be not Prouinces of that largenesse that they may con∣teyne so many Bishops, & yet the seuerall parishes furnished with peculiar pastors. Massaeus lib. 16. sayth, that there are. 160. Bishoprickes subiecte to the Patriarche of Antioche.

But there can no such thing as you affirme be gathered of Cyprians words, ney∣ther shal you euer be able to proue out of Cyprian, or any other auncient writer, that such Bishops as Cyprian & Cornelius were, had onely gouernment of one towne, or as we call it, parishe: but the contrarie is most euident, as I haue before declared.

Chap. 3. the. 7. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 76. Sect. 1.

Furthermore, to shape the Archbishop by these places of Cyprian, you muste be driuen to ex∣pounde this worde (Churche) Prouince. The Papistes whiche cite this place for the Pope as you doe for the Archbishop, they expounde the worde Churche heere to be the whole Church vni∣uersall and Catholike. And in deede although it be falsly expounded so in this place, yet maye they doe it with more probabilitie and likelyhoode, than to expounde it a Prouince, for so much as these wordes (the Churche) is oftener read bothe in the Scripture, and olde writers, to signifie the whole Churche, than any prouince of one Realme: but let Cyprian expounde him selfe what he meaneth by a Churche heere, although that may easily appeare by that whiche is spoken of S. Cyprian his Bishop, wheras Cyprian declareth that Cornelius the Bishop of the Church which was in Rome, would not let Felicissimum a Nouatian heretike, beeing caste out by the Bishops of Affrike, to enter into the Churche, he declareth sufficiently that he meaneth that company of the faythfull whiche were gathered togither at Rome, to heare the worde, and to communicate at the sacraments.(*) 1.250 For it was not Cornelius parte to shut him out of the Prouince, neyther in deede coulde he himselfe, beeing not able without hazarde by reason of the persecution that then was, to tarie in any part of the prouince. Agayn speaking agaynst y^e Nouatian heretike, he sheweth that throughe his wicked opinion of denying of repentance to those that were fallen, the confes∣sion of faultes in the Churche was hindred. Nowe it is manyfest that confession was not made throughout the prouince, but in that particular Churche, where the party dwelte that committed the faulte. Therefore Cyprian vnderstandeth by the name of the Churche, neyther Dioces, as we call Dioces, and muche lesse a whole prouince. And in the same Epistle, speaking of those whiche had fallen, he sayth, that they durst not come so muche as to the thresholde or entry of the Church, where he also opposeth the Churche to the Prouince, saying that they roue about the Prouince, and runne about to deceyue the brethren.

Io. Whitgifte.

I expounde this worde (Churche) in this place no otherwise than al learned writers expounde it, that is, for that prouince & diocesse whereof Cornelius was Bishop, and it is no vnaccustomed thing, to cal the Church which is extended through a prouince, by the name of the chiefe Citie or Metropolitane seate of the Prouince, as the Churche of Rome all that that is subiecte to the Bishop of Rome: the Churche of Carthage, all that that is belonging to the Bishop of Carthage. And this is truely to expound the places of Cyprian, and may be iustified both by examples & authorities, as I haue proued before, wheras your interpretatiō hath no shadow or shew of truth.

But you had rather iustifie the Papists interpretation, than séeme to relent to the* 1.251 authoritie of an Archbishop. Suche is your zeale.

Cyprians wordes touching Cornelius dealing with Felicissimus the Nouatian, be these: Likewise that thou mightest knowe of Felicissimus the author of the sedition:* 1.252 who also is conteyned in the letters of our fellowe Bishops, written of late vnto them, whiche Felicissimus is not onely driuen from hence by them, Sed abs te illic nuper de eccle∣sia nullus est: but is there of late expelled by thee out of the Churche. Of these wordes you gather this argument: Cyprian signifieth that Cornelius had banished Felicis∣simus from the Churche of Rome: Ergo, Cornelius was Bishop but of one Parishe or Citie, or therefore a Churche in that place signifieth one onely particular congre∣gation gathered togither in one Towne. What kinde of coniectures call you these? And what thoughe Cornelius coulde not shut him out of the Prouince? mighte he not therefore by excommunication seclude him from the congregation of the faythfull throughout the Prouince: Doe you thinke that he forceably shutte him out of the locall Churche of Rome, or rather dealte with him according to the ecclesiasticall Censures? You maye delude simple readers that beléeue whatsoeuer you saye, but suche as be able to examine your doings, can not (if they wyll searche) but finde passing forgerie.

Agayne you saye, speaking agaynst the Nouatian heretikes. &c. Cyprians wordes tou∣ching that matter be these: Quibus etiam non satis fuit ab Euangelio recessisse, spem lapsis* 1.253 satisfactionis & poenitentiae sustulisse, fraudibus inuolutos vel adulterijs commaculatos, & sacri∣ficiorum funesta contagione pollutos, ne Deum rogarent, ne in ecclesia exomologesiu criminum fa∣cerent,* 1.254 ab omni sensu & fructu remouisse: To whome it was not inoughe to haue departed from the Gospell, to haue taken awaye hope and satisfaction, and repentance from those that haue fallen, to haue remoued from all feeling and fruite of repentance those that are taken in snares, or defiled with adulteries, or polluted with the deadly contagion of sacri∣fices, that they should not pray to God, nor make confession of their sinnes in the congre∣gation. What dothe Cyprian else meane by these wordes, but that Nouatus denyed repentance to suche as were fallen, and woulde not receyue them agayns into the Churche, that is, not this or that parishe, but the Churche of Christ, the congrega∣tion of the faythfull, for that was Nouatus herefie, negare veniam lapsis, to denie for∣giuenesse to those that fell. And therefore also he denied vnto them the fruites of repentance, as confession of their offences in the congregation of the faythfull. &c. For Nouatus opinion was not that suche shoulde onely be secluded from this or that congregation, but generally from the Churche of Christe, and hope of saluation: And therfore in that place of Cyprian is ment that Churche, extra quam non est salus, without the which there is no saluation.

And to what purpose doe you procéede and go on forward, saying: That in the same Epistle, speaking of those that had fallen. &c. What proueth it? but that those heretikes had caste them into suche a dispayre of forgiuenesse, that they durste not offer them selues to be receyued into the Churche, that is, to repentance? And that the same Heretikes béeing them selues excommunicated, wandred vp and downe, sowing the pestilent séede of their doctrine. This is to oppose Heretikes and Schismatikes, (whiche runne vp and downe in corners) to the true members of the Churche. But it is not to oppose the Churche to the Prouince. For the Prouince (if it be Chrystened) is the Churche, althoughe it conteyne in it seuerall congregations, whiche be also Churches, and yet béeing members of it, are subiecte to one Bishop, and so dothe the whole Epistle of Cyprian declare, neyther can there anything be gathered out of it to the contrarie: for a testimonie wherof I call to witnesse these your weake collec∣tions, which you would not haue vsed, if you could haue founde any better.

Chap. 3. the. 8. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 76. Sect. 2.

Seeing therefore (a) 1.255 the Bishop which Cyprian speaketh of, is nothing else but suche as we call pastor, or as the common name with vs is parson: and his Churche whereof he is a Bishop,

is neyther dioces nor prouince▪ but a congregation whiche meete togither in one place, and to be taught of one man, what should M. Doctor meane to put on this great name of Archbishop vpon so small a Bishopricke? as it were Saules great harnesse vpon Dauid his little body, or as if a man shoulde set a wyde huge porche before a little house.

Io. Whitgifte.

Where the premisses be nought, howe shoulde the conclusion be good? I would to God your argument were in his right forme, that we mighte sée vpon what sub∣stantiall postes your conclusion dothe stande. But let the Reader consider your grounds which I haue opened before.

I might heere tell you agayne that Cyprian in playne and manifest words, Lib. 4. Epist. 1. dothe make a Bishop superior in degrée to him that you call pastor: his words I haue repeated before. I might also put you in minde of Cyprians iurisdiction ouer the churches of Carthage, Numidia, and Mauritanie, according to his owne testimo∣nie. lib. 4. Epi. 8. in which respecte Illyricus dothe call him Metropolitane: Likewise I might tell you that the most writers of that age, as Tertullian de Coro. militis, & de Fuga in pers. Origen hom. 2. in Numer. &. 11. in Hierem. doe make thrée degrées of Ministers: Deacons, Priests, & Bishops. To be short, I could bid you looke Eusebius. lib. 6. cap. 1. and you should sinde that Demetrius, who liued Anno. 191. was Bishop Paroeciarū Alex∣andriae & Aegypti, of the parishes of Alexandria and Egypt, and referre you to many suche examples vsed before, which vtterly ouerthrowe this conclusion, and euen hisse it out of the doores.

Chap. 3. the. 9 Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 76. Sect. 3.

And least that M. Doctor shoulde saye, that notwithstanding the Bishops had but seuerall churches: yet one of them might haue eyther a title more excellent than the rest, or authoritie and gouernmēt ouer the rest: that shal likewise be considered out of Cyprian. And first for the title and honor of archebishop, it appeareth howe Cyprian helde that as a proude name, for he obiecteth to Florentius as a presumptuous thing: for that in beleeuing certayne euill reportes of him, and mis∣iudging* 1.256 of him, he did appoynt himselfe Bishop of a Bishop, and iudge ouer him whiche was for the time appoynted of God to be iudge.

Io. Whitgifte.

Pupianus to whome Cyprian wrote that Epistle, had greatly misused Cyprian, in beléeuing certayne false rumors & reports of him, & vpon the same giuing sentence against him: for this cause Cyprian reproueth Pupianus, saying: Quis autem nostrum Iongè est ab bumilitate, vt〈1 line〉〈1 line〉úmne ego, qui quotidie fratribus seruio, & venientes ad ecclesiam singulos benignè, & cū voto & gaudio suscipio: an tu qui te Episcopū Episcopi, & iudicē iudicis ad tēpus à Deo dati constituis, &c. VVhether of vs is further from humilitie, I which serue my brethren dayly, & receyue euery one that cōmeth vnto the Church gētly, & with desire & ioy, or thou which makest thy selfe the Bishop of the Bishop, and the iudge of the iudge, giuen of God for the time. It appeareth rather in these words, that Florentius is reproued for taking vpon him to iudge Cyprian, to whō he ought obedience: so that this place doth not de∣regate any thing frō any lawful authoritie, that one Bishop hath ouer another, but it condemneth the rash & presumptuous iudgement of those, that will take vpon them rashly to giue sentēce of their superiours & betters, as Pupianus did. For in that he fin∣deth fault with him, for making himselfe (as it were) Bishop of the Bishop, and iudge of the iudge, he playnly declareth, that he himself was both Bshop and iudge of Pupianus: neyther dothe he obiect this to Pupianus as a proude name, but as a proude deede.

Chap. 3. the. 10. Diuision.

T. C. Pag 76. Sect. 4.

And heerein also I may vse the same reasons, which the godly writers of our time vse agaynst the Pope, to proue that he had no superioritie in those dayes ouer other Bishops, for that the other

Bishops called him brother, and he them, called him fellow Bishop, & he them. For so doth Cypri∣an call the Bishops of that prouince in hys Epistle, his fellow Bishops, and in diuers places his brethren. And in the sentence which he spake in the Councel of Carthage, he sayth, none of vs doth take him selfe to be Bishop of Bishops.

Io. Whitgifte.

Euery Bishop was chiefe in his owne Prouince, and not subiect to any. The Bi∣shop of Rome had no iurisdictiō ouer the Bishop of Carthage, but they were of equall power and authoritie, as others were also of the like seates. In that Cyprian called the Bishops of his prouince, fellowe Bishops and brethren, he declared that the functiō and ministerie was all one: he like wise vttered his humble minde & spirite. But this proueth not that he had no superioritie ouer them. S. Peter in his first Epist. chap. 5.* 1.257 calleth himselfe fellowe minister with those whom he then exhorted, which were all pastors, and such as were ministers of the worde, and yet you acknowledge an Apo∣stle to be the highest in the Church, & aboue al the other degrées mentioned ad Ephe. 4.

Cyprians words in the Councell of Carthage, I haue spoken of in another place: he meaneth the title of vniuersall Bishop, and suche as séeke tyrannically & vnlaw∣fully to rule, and especially suche as will of necessitie binde all other men to their opi∣nions in all thinges, for his words be: Tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem colle∣gas suos adigat: None of vs enforceth his fellowes by tyrannicall feare to the necessitie of obeying.

Chap. 3. the. 11. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 77. Sect. 1.

Nowe, that there was no authoritie of one Bishop ouer an other, and that there was none such as when controuersies rose, tooke vpon him the compounding of them, or any one, to whom it ap∣perteyned, to see the vnitie of the Church kept, and to see that all other Bishops and the Cleargy dyd their duetie, as M. Doctor beareth vs in hande, it may clearely be seene in dyuers places of Cyprian, and first of all in that sentence which he spake in the Councel of Carthage, where he pro∣ceedeth further after this sorte, that none of them dyd by any tyrannicall feare binde his fellowes in office, or any fellowe Bishops, to any necessitie of obedience, seeing that euery Bishop hath for his free libertie and power his owne iudgement, and discretion, as one which can not be iudged of an other, as he also him selfe can not iudge an other, but sayth he, we ought to tarry and wayte for the iudgement of our Lord Iesus Christ, which only and alone hath power to fet vs ouer his Church, and to iudge of our doing. And in the same Epistle, wherout the first place is taken by M. Doctor he sayth, that vnto euery one a portion of the flocke is appoynted, which euery one must rule & go∣uerne, as he that shal render an accompt of his deede vnto the Lord. And in an other place he sayth:* 1.258 we doe not vse any compulsion or violence ouer any, nor appoynt no lawe to any, seeing that euery one that is set ouer the Church, hath in the gouernment the free disposition of his owne will, wher∣of he shall giue an accompt vnto the Lorde. And yet Cyprian was the Bishop of the Metropoli∣tane or chiefe seate, and one whome for his learning 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nd godlynesse, the rest no doubte had in great reuerence, and gaue great honor vnto.

Io. Whitgifte.

Bicause so much adoe is made of the words of Cyprian in that erroneous Councel* 1.259 of Carthage, wherein Cyprian himselfe also was the chiefe author of the errour, I will recite the words as I doe there finde them: Nequè enim quisquam nostrum episcopū se esse episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore, ad obsequendi necessitatem Collegas suos adi∣git, cum habeat omnis episcopus licentiam libertatis, & potestatis suae arbitrium proprium, tanquā iudicari ab alio non possit, cum nec ipse possit alterum iudicare, sed expectemus vniuersi iudicium Domini nostri Iesu Christi, qui vnus & solus habet potestatem, & praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione, & de actu nostro iudicandi: Neyther dothe any of vs make him selfe Bishop of Bishops, or enforceth his fellowes to the necessitie of obeying by tyrannicall feare, bi∣cause euery Bishop hathe freedome of libertie and free iudgement of his owne power, as he who can be iudged of no other, neyther can him selfe iudge another Bishop: but let vs all wayte for the iudgement of our Lorde Iesus Christ, who alone hathe power bothe to place vs in the gouernment of the Churche, and to iudge of our dooing. It were very absurde, to thinke that Cyprians words are generaily to be vnderstanded of all kinde of iudgement, or that a Bishop in all things shoulde be left to his owne free libertie:

and discretion, or that be is frée from all controlement. For what if he be an heretike? what if he be otherwise criminous? shall he not be iudged by man, but lefte onely to the iudgement of Christe The words of Cyprian if they be as you vnderstand them,* 1.260 take authoritie of iudgement aswell from Synodes, as from Archbishops. Cyprian therfore meaneth as the words themselues do teache, that one Bishop should not ty∣rannically rule ouer an other, & at his pleasure abridge the libertie of an other in vt∣tering his iudgement, especially in a Synode, or rashly condenme an other. For Cy∣prian in that Councell propounding the controuersie of rebaptization, requireth eue∣ry mans iudgement therof, protesting (as it were) not to condemne, or to excommu∣nicate any that should dissent from him in that matter, and therevpon sayth, Nequè enim quisquam nostrum. &c. so that he meaneth that to be tyrannicum, to compeil other Bishops necessarily to agrée to his opinion in▪all things, & these words, licētia libertalis & potestatis suae arbitriū propriū, are not m〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nt of iurisdiction, but of iudgement and opi∣nion. For one man is not of necessitie bounde to frame him selfe to the iudgement and opinion of an other, but therein hath fréedome and libertie, neyther will any man allowe this authoritie in any Archbishop.

Touching iurisdiction, euery Bishop in this church hath frée gouernment ouer his stocke, in al things that belongeth vnto him: if any thing happen that he can not end, then the Archbishop intermedleth, if that will not serue, it is referred to a Synode. The words of Cyprian can in no respect derogate any thing from the iurisdiction of Archebishops. For concerning iurisdiction they be bounde to lawes themselues, and do but execute lawes made, not of their owne priuate authoritie, but by Parliament, and by the Prince. Neyther can they controle the worst minister in their Dioces, if he obserue the lawes and rules prescribed. Therefore excepte your meaning be, to haue Bishops and ministers frée from all lawes and from all subiection to any supe∣riour, Prince or other (whiche is moste like) I doe not knowe why you should take this saying of Cyprian in that sense you doe. Sure I am that the words doc not fa∣uour your Anarchie, and that may the Reader easily perceyue.

In that Cyprian sayth, vnto euery one a portion of the flocke is appoynted, he sayth truely, but yet dothe he not thereby exempte Bishops, Pastors, and Ministers from obedience and subiection to their lawfull gouernours. For due obedience dothe not hinder any dutie that is owing towards their flocke.

In the place that you alleage out of Cyprians seconde booke and first Epistle, you haue omitted that whiche goeth before, and declareth what Cyprian meaneth by the words that you haue recited. His wordes be these: Caeterùm scimus quosdam quod* 1.261 semel imbiberunt nolle deponere, nec propositum suum facilè mutare: &c. But we know that cer∣tayne will neuer laye away that which once they haue taken: neyther easily chaunge their purpose, but doe reteyne certayne thinges peculiar to them selues, whiche once they haue vsed: yet not breaking the bonde of peace and concorde among their fellowes, wherein we neyther compell any man, nor appoynte any lawe, since euery gouernour hathe free iudgement of his wyll in the gouernment of the Churche, and shall render an accompt of his deede to the Lorde. Cyprian in the wordes before, sheweth his opinion con∣cernyng suche, as béeing Ministers of the worde had sacrificed to Idols, and when he hathe so done, thus he speaketh to Stephane to whome he writte the Epistle: Haec ad conscientiam tuam (frater charissime). &c. Then followeth, Caeterùm scimus. &c. as I haue before recyted, wherein Cyprian signifieth, that he wyll not take vpon him to iudge or to condemne other Churches, whiche haue a contrarie cu∣stome, so that they kéepe the bonde of peace. But he meaneth vndoubtedly suche Churches and Bishops, as he had nothing to doe with, else it is manyfest, that within his owne charge he woulde not haue suffered any suche thing to be done, and thys place answereth all that Cyprian hathe spoken any where touchyng* 1.262 not receyuyng into the ministerie suche as had sacrificed to Idols, whereof I haue spoken before.

Chap. 3. the. 12. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 77. Sect. 2. 3. 4.

And whereas it is sayd for the preseruation of vnitie, one must be ouer al, S. Cyprian sheweth* 1.263 that the vnitie of the Church is conserued not by hauing one Bishop ouer all, but by the agreement of the Bishops one with another. For so he writeth, that the church is knit and coupled togither (as it were with the giue) of the Bishops consenting one with an other. And as for the compoun∣ding of controuersies, it is manyfest, that it was not done by one Byshop in a prouince, but those byshops whych were neere the place where the schisme or heresie sprang.

For speaking of the appeasing of controuersies & schismes, and shewing how dyuers Bishops* 1.264 were drawen into the heresy of Nouatus, he sayth that the vertue and strength of the Christians, was not so decayed or 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉anguished, but that there was a portion of Priests which did not giue place vnto those rumes and shipwrackes of fayth.

And in another place he sayth: therfore (most deare brother) the plentyfull body or company* 1.265 of the pr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ests, are as it were with the g〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ue of mutuall concorde and bande of vnitie ioyned togither, that if any of our company be author of an heresy, and goe about to destroy and rent the flocke of Christ, the rest should helpe, and as profitable and mercyfull shepheards, gather togither the sheepe of the Lorde. Whereby it is many fest, that the appeasing and composing of controuersies and he∣resies, was not then thought to be most fitte to be in one bishops hande: but in as many as coulde conuemently assemble togither, according to the daunger of the heresie which sprang, or depe roote which it had taken, or was like to take.

Io. Whitgifte.

The Bishops agrée not one whit the worse, when they haue a superior, by whom they may be called togither, and put in minde of their office and duetie. Neyther doth Cyprian deny this when he affirmeth the other. For thoughe the chiefe cause of vni∣tie is the consente and agreement of the Bishops one with another: yet to haue one that shall haue the chiefe care thereof, must néedes be a great helpe thervnto, euen as it is in other societies. For if the Bishops were deuided among themselues, & at variance, and had no superiour, who should compounde the controuersies?

Our Archbishops doe not take vpon them (neyther can they) to decide any contro∣uersie* 1.266 in doctrine and religion of their owne authoritie, but therein doe they deale ey∣ther according to the lawes of the Churche prouided for that purpose, or else expecte a newe Parliament or Synode. Neyther doth any Bishop in his Dioces, otherwise meddle in suche matters, than by the common consent of the Churche is appoynted vnto him: and yet it was neuer otherwise taught by any, but that a Bishop in hys owne Diocesse, or an Archebishop in his Prouince, mighte vse persuasions to ende controuersies, and execute the lawes prouided for the same: other kinde of deciding controuersies, by any priuate authoritie I knowe none in this Church of Englande. Wherfore al these allegations be but in vayne, for surely not in Cyprians time, was the determining of suche controuersies committed to the Pastor and Seigniorie of euery Parishe, neyther doth Cyprian make mention of any suche matter, if he did, yet for gouernment the diuersitie of the time, and state of the Church is to be considered,* 1.267 as I haue before noted.

Chap. 3. the. 13. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 77. Sect. 4.

And that there was in his time no such authoritie giuen, as that any one might remoue the cau∣ses or controuersies which rose, as now we see there is, when the Bishop of the Di〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es taketh the matters in controuersie which rise in any Church within his Dioces from the minister & Elders, to whom the decision perteyneth, and as when the archebishop taketh it away from the Bishop, it may appeare in the same thirde Epistle of the first booke, where he sayth after this sort: It is or∣deyned, and it is equall and right, that euery mans cause should be there heard, where the fault was committed. And a little after he sayth: It is meete to handle the matter there where they maye haue both accusers and witnesses of the faulte, whiche although it be spoken of them whiche fled out of Affrike vnto Rome: yet the reason is generall, and dothe aswell serue agaynst these eccle∣siasticall persons, whych wyll take vnto them the deciding of those controuersies, that were done a hundred myle of them.

Io. Whitgifte.

Cyprian as I sayd, speaketh not one worde of your Seigniorie, & in that place by you alleages, he speaketh of the seueral Prouince▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Dioces of euery bishop, & would haue euery matter ended in that Prouince 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Diocesse where it is cōmitted, & ther∣fore he speaketh there of suche as fled out of Affrica into Italie, to haue their matters heard, so that this place is soluted by your owne selfe. It is méete that the matter should be there handled where there may be had bothe accusers & witnesses: And that was one of the reasons that the Councel of Affrica 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉sed agaynst the Bishop of Rome, clayming interest in hearing appeales from thence. But there is no Prouince in Englande so large, but that both the accusers and witnesses may be brought into any parte of it from any other parte. This reason of yours maye serue better agaynst Westminster hall, which is but one place to serue the whole Realme for deciding of controuersies, and yet I thinke it very necessarie▪

You may not wrest that to your purpose or proof of Seigniorie, or authoritie ther∣of, whiche Cyprian speaketh of diuers Prouinces: yea diuers Countreys and Na∣tions. This is no good reason, Cyprian mislyked the translating of causes from Affrica to Rome, Ergo, there maye be no causes remoued from Northampton to London.

Chap. 3. the. 13. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 77. Sect. 5.

And whereas M. Doctor in bothe places of Cyprian seemeth to stande much vpon the words (one Bishop and priest) the reason thereof dothe appeare in another place of Cyprian moste ma∣nyfestly,* 1.268 and that it maketh no more to proue that there ought to be one archebishop ouer a whole prouince, than to say, that there ought to be but one husbande proueth, that therefore there should be but one husbande in euery countrey or prouince, whiche shoulde see that all the rest of the hus∣bands do their duties to their wiues. For this was the case, a Nouatian heretike beeing condem∣ned & cast out of the Churches of Affrica by the consent of the Bishops, & not able by embassage sent to them, to obteyne to be receyued to their cōmunion & fellowship agayne, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oeth afterwards to Rome, and beeing likewise there repelled, in time getteth himselfe by certayne which fauoured his heresie, to be chosen Bishop there at Rome (Cornelius beeing the Bishop or pastor of those which were there godly minded) whervpon it commeth that Cyprian vrgeth (one Bishop, one priest in the church) bicause at Rome there was two, wherof one was a wolfe, which ought not to haue bin there, considering there was but one churche whiche was gathered vnder the gouernment of Cor∣nelius, and therefore by that place of Cyprian it can not be gathered, that there ought to be but one Bishop in one citie, if the multitude of professors require more, and that all can not well gather them selues togither in one congregation, to be taught of one man, muche lesse can it serue to proue that there should be but one in a whole Diocesse or prouince. I graunte that in latter times, and which went more from the simplicitie of the pri〈1 line〉〈1 line〉itiue churche, they tooke occasion of these words to decree, that there should be but one Bishop in a citie, (*) 1.269 but that can neuer be concluded of Cy∣prians words, if it be vnderstanded why he vrgeth (one Bishop, and one priest.) If therfore ney∣ther worde (Bishop nor priest) do make any thing to proue an archbishop, nor this word (church) dothe imply any prouince, nor in these words (one Bishop, one priest) there is nothing lesse ment than that there should be one archebishop ouer all the Bishops and clearg〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e in a prouince, and if Cyprian wyll neyther allowe of the title of an archebishop, nor of the authoritie and office, but in playne wordes speaketh agaynst bothe, we may conclude that M. Doctor hathe done very vn∣aduisedly to lay so great waight of the archebishop vpon S. Cyprians shoulders, that will not onely not beare any thing of him, but whiche hathe done all that coulde be, to make him go afoo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e, and hande in hande with his fellowes.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Doctor standeth not vpon these words, (one Bishop, and one priest) although the words serue very well for his purpose: Neyther is your shifte of a Noua〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ian, beeing chosen Bishop in Rome, any thing to the matter. For though it might séeme partly to inter∣prete Cyprians meaning in his Epistle to Cornelius, yet can it not perteine to that that he writeth of Florentius Pupianus. And be it that Cyprian ment to seclude Nouatus, when he sayde, Du〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Episcopus qui vnus est. &c. when as the Bishop whiche is one▪ &c. What can be spoken more to my purpose▪ for Cyprian woulde haue but one Bishop in one citie to gouerne the Church, as his words manifestly declare.

And whereas you saye, that it can not be gathered by that place of Cyprian, that there ought to be but one Bishop in one citie if the multitude of professors require more. &c. the Epistle of Cornelius in Eusebius, lib, 6. cap. 43. dothe conuince you of vanitie in so saying. For* 1.270 in that Epistle he declareth, that there was then in Rome. 46. Priests, seuen Dea∣cons, seuen Subdeacons. 42. Acoluthes. 52. Erorcistes, readers, doorekéepers. 1500. widdowes and diseased: and therfore it is to be presupposed that the number of other Christians there, was very great, séeing that the Cleargie, and those whiche were founde of the Churche, amounted to the number of. 1654. and moste lyke that there were seuerall congregations, for it was not possible for them to méete in one place, and yet was there then but one Bishop. For Cornelius in the same Epistle, spea∣king of Nouatus sayth, Ita{que} vindex ille Euangelij ignorauit vnum esse debere Episcopum in catholica ecclesia, This defender of the Gospell was ignorant that there ought to be one Bi∣shop in a catholike Churche.

The olde Canons and auncient Fathers doe testifie, that in one Citie there ought to be but one Bishop. Chrysostome tolde Sisinius, that one citie must haue but one* 1.271 Bishop, as we reade, lib. 6. cap. 22. of Socrates. Neyther are you able to shewe from Christes time, that euer there was allowed to be two Bishops in one citie. Where∣fore the words of Cyprian are yet in force (for any thing you haue alleaged to the contrarie) to proue the office of an Archbishop, or metropolitane to be, to compounde schismes, and prouide that there be vnitie in the Churche. &c.

Chap. 3. the. 14. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 78. Lin. 26.

There are other reasons which M. Doctor vseth, as this, a notable one. S. Cyprian speaketh* 1.272 not of the vsurped power of the Bishop of Rome, therfore he speaketh of the office of an Archebi∣shop and Metropolitane. It is harde to call this argument to any head of fallation, for it hath not so muche as a colour of a reason. I thinke it can deceyue no body but your selfe.

Io. Whitgifte.

I tell you that the place is not to be vnderstanded of the vsurped authoritie of the Bishop of Rome, but of the authoritie of the Archebishop in his Prouince, or By∣shop in his Diocesse. I doe not make any argument of it: dothe it gréeue you to heare that Cyprian dothe not speake of the vsurped authoritie of the Bishop of Rome? or doth euery man make an argument when he dothe interprete? But this dealing of yours is not straunge, I must be content to beare with it.

Chap. 3. the. 15 Diuision.

T. C. Page. 78. Lin. 30. & Sect. 1. 2. 3. 4.

An other reason is, that all the godlyest and best learned men doe expounde the place of Cy∣prian in the thirde Epistle of the first booke, of an Archebishop. The vanitie of this saying, that the godly and learned wryters so expounde it, I haue shewed before, and heere it commeth to be considered agayne. I wil not say that no godly nor learned writer expoundeth the place of Cyprian of the authoritie of an Archbishop.

But first I desire M. Doctor to sette downe but one, and then I will leaue it to thy consideration (gentle Reader) to thinke whether M. Doctor hathe read any learned or godly mans exposition to be suche, when he hathe not read those which are nearest him, I meane our owne countreymen. I saye he hathe not read them, bicause I woulde thinke charitably so of him, rather than that he should haue read them, and yet speake vntruely of them, and father those things of them which they neuer spake.

M. Iewell the Bishop of Sarisburie expounded this place, and yet did (a) 1.273 neuer expounde it* 1.274 of the office and authoritie of an Archbishop of all the Bishops, and Cleargie of the prouince, but cleane contrarywise applieth it to the authoritie that euery Bishop had in his Dioces. His words are these. Nowe therefore to drawe that thing by violence to one onely Bishop, that is generally spoken of all Bishops, is a guylefull fetche to misleade the Reader, and no simple nor playne dea∣ling. Heere you see that M. Iewell dothe not vnderstande this of any Archebishop, but of eue∣ry Bishope

M. Nowell Deane of Paules hauing occasion to talke of this place saith on thys sorte. So that* 1.275 * 1.276 when he speaketh (meanyng Cyprian) of one Byshop, one Iudge, in the Churche, for the time, or of the Byshop which is one, and ruleth the Churche absolutely, he meaneth euery Byshop in hys owne Diocesse, without exception, if he speake specially, he meaneth the Bishop of the citie or Dio∣cesse whereof he intreateth, whether it be the Byshop of Rome, Carthage, or any other place.

M. Foxe also expoundeth this of euery Byshop within his owne Churche or Diocesse. You* 1.277 heare the iudgement of these three writers, that cannot picke out neyther the name nor the office of an Archbyshop out of Cyprians place, and yet I thinke you will not denie, but these were lear∣ned and godly writers.

Nowe I haue shewed you three. I aske once againe of you, one godly and learned writer, that expoundeth it as you doe. And by this time I suppose all men vnderstande what a smallfriend S. Cyprianis either to the name or office of an Archbyshop. Let vs heare whether Hierome make any more for the Archbyshop then did Cyprian.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Iewell Byshop of Sarisburie expounding the place of Cyprian in the fourth arti∣cle* 1.278 5. Diuision. 228. page of his first booke hath these wordes. Vpon occasion hereof he sheweth (meaning Cyprian) what hurte and confusion of sectes and scismes ensueth in any prouince or diocesse whereas the Byshops authoritie and ecclesiasticall discipline is despised. I pray you what call you that Byshop that hath gouernement of a prouince? Is he not a Metropolitane or Archbyshop? and doth not my L. of Sarisbury as well speake of a prouince, as he doth of a diocesse? I do not deny, but that Cyprians words may be fitly applyed to euery Byshop in his diocesse: but is the Archbyshop therefore secluded? seing he of whome, Cyprian did write was a Metropolitane, or Arch∣byshop. That whiche is the office of the Archbyshop in his prouince, is also the office of a Byshop in his diocesse, and therefore that whiche is spoken of the pro∣uince, in respecte of the Archbyshop, is also spoken of the Diocesse in respecte of the Byshop. And pag. 230. he saith that vniuersa fraternitas, is taken for one whole particu∣lar* 1.279 brotherhoode, within one prouince or diocesse: so that your firste witnesse testifieth with me, else would he not haue named a prouince.

M. Nowell fol. 22. 23. 24. doth expounde this place of the authoritie of euery Byshop* 1.280 in his owne Diocesse, which is sufficient for me, and is as much against you as can be, for you would haue no Byshops ouer Diocesses, but only pastors in seuerall townes. That whiche he speaketh of a Byshop in his Diocesse, he also meaneth of an Archby∣shop in his Prouince, whose both name and office he doth allow, as it is manyfest in these wordes of his in his thirde booke against Dorman, fol. 320 where he answering* 1.281 this question of Dormans, whether he will condemne the whole Church for making of Archbishops, saith thus. I answere I much commend the Churche for so doing, so farre of is it that I will condemne the whole Church therfore. But what shal I neede to vse any circumstances, seing he doth most euidently apply this place of Cyprian to that pur∣pose which you wil not acknowledge, yea euen vnto the office of an Archbyshop in his Prouince, for thus he writeth fol. 33. of his firste booke (speaking of this epistle of Cy∣prian to Cornelius, and confuting Dormans argument taken out of it for the Popes supremacie, whiche is grounded vpon this place, Non aliunde haereses obortae sunt. &c.) Concerning the auoyding and quieting of schismes and troubles in the Churche, VVe saye that as the seuerall Kings of euery kingdome, the seuerall gouernours of euery countree and cittie. &c. are able to ouersee their seuerall charges, and to keepe their people in ciuill order and peace, so are the seuerall Byshops of euery Diocesse, and the seuerall chiefe Pre∣lates of euery Prouince, able to auoide or to appease if they ryse al Schismes and trou∣bles ecclesiasticall, as S. Cyprian out of whome this reason is borowed, and falsely wrested by them to an other purpose, doth most plainely teach saying thus. Cum statutum sit omnibus no∣bis. &c. What call you chiefe prelates of euery Prouince? Be they not Archbyshops? Likewise fol. 60. &, 61. in the same booke, speaking of this and such like places he saith, And further whatsoeuer M. Dorman eyther out of Deutero▪ or any other place of Scripture doth vntruely apply to the proofe of the Supremacie of one head, to witte the Byshop of Rome, the same doth S. Cyprian, M. Dormans owne vsuall witnesse, euerie where alleage

for the proofe of the superiorite of euerie Byshop in his owne Diocesse, and for the obedi∣ence due vnto him there, he doth neuer apply it as doth M. Dorman to the Supremacie of one Byshop ouer all other, but rather against such supremacie of one: & it agreeth very well with the estate of the lewes, that as they beyng one nation had one chiefe Prieste, so is it good lykewise that euery Christian nation haue their chiefe Priest or Byshop: it a∣greeth not that bycause the Iewes (one nation) had one highe Prieste to gouerne them in doubtes, therefore all nations throughout the worlde shoulde haue one high Priest ouer all other, for not onely the vnlikelyhood betwene these two, but the impossiblitie of the latter is most euident.

The words of M. Foxe in that place speaking against the Papisticall interpretati∣on* 1.282 of Cyprians wordes be these, when their meaning is otherwyse, howe that euery one catholike Church or Diocesse, ought to haue one Byshop ouer it: whyche also iustifyeth my interpretation. For if it be vnderstanded of one Byshop ouer one Diocesse, then is it in lyke maner of one Archbyshop ouer one Prouince: For the reason is all one, and you denie them both alike: For you would haue no Bishops but in seueral Parishes. Nowe therefore you sée that euen these authors whom you would abuse against me, doe make wholy and fully against you, and with me. For they confesse the two pla∣ces of Cyprian to be ment of Cornelius, and of himselfe, who were both Archbyshops and Metropolitanes, and had ample iurisdiction, especially Cyprian as I haue decla∣red. And M. Fexe hymselfe Tom. 1. Fol 21. sayth that the sea of Rome was a Patriarchall* 1.283 sea appoynted by the primitiue Church, and the Bishop therof, an Archbishop, limited with∣in his owne bordering Churches: so that the one place beyng ment of Cornelius Arch∣byshop of Rome, the other of Cyprian Archbyshop of Carthage (for so they were in déede though they were not in those places so called), S. Cyprian may well be sayde in both places to speake of an Archbyshop, though he expresse not his name. And that which is there spoken of Cornelius or Cyprian within their Prouinces, may most apt∣ly also be vnderstoode of euery Byshop within his Diocesse, and therefore my L. of Sarum expounding this place speaketh of them both vnder these names of Prouince and Diocesse: and so doth M. Nowell vnder the name of chiefe Prelate and Prouince, and M. Foxe also vnder the worde Diocesse, beyng plaine and euident, that they allow of the office.

That learned man and godly Martyr M. Philpot, as it is recorded in the booke of* 1.284 Actes and Monumentes in his fifte examination answering this place of Cyprian ob∣iected vnto him by D. Sauerson, answereth most plainely in these wordes: And nowe for the vnderstanding of that place, you doe misconstrue it, to take the high Priest onely for the Byshop of Rome, and otherwyse than it was in his tyme. For there were by Nicene Councell foure Patriarches appoynted, the Patriarche of Ierusalem, the Patriarche of Con∣stantinople, the Patriarche of Alexandria, and the Patriarche of Rome, of which foure the Patriarche of Rome was placed lowest in the Councell, and so continued many yeares, for the time of seuen or eight generall Councels as I am able to shewe. Therefore S. Cyprian writing to Cornelius Patriarch of Rome, whome he calleth fellowe Byshop, findeth hym∣selfe offended that certaine heretikes being iustly excommunicated by him (as the Noua∣tian, were) did flie from his Diocesse which was their chiefe Byshop (refusing to be obedi∣ent vnto him & to be reformed) to the Bishop of Rome & to the Patriarch of Constantino∣ple, and there were receiued in communion of congregation in derogation of good order, & discipline in the Churche, & to the mainteining of heresies and schismes. And that here∣sies did spring vp & schismes dayly arise hereof, that obedience was not giuē to the Priest of God, nor once considered him to be in the Church for the time the Priest, and for the time the iudge in Christes steade (as in decree of Nicene Councell was appointed) not meaning* 1.285 the Bishop of Rome only, but euery Patriarch in his precinct, who had euery one of them a colledge or a Cathedrall Church of learned priests in hearing of whom, by a conuocation of all his fellow Byshops, with the consente of the people, all heresies were determined by the word of God, & this is the meaning of S. Cyprian, hetherto M. Philpot. Thus the reader may easily perceiue how you haue dalied about this place of Cyprian, and that this in∣terpretation is not mine alone.

Chap. 3. the. 16. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 70. Sect. 1. 2. 3. &. Pag. 71. Sect. 1.

And therfore Hierome writing vpon the first to Titus sayth, that* 1.286 in the beginning a Bishop and a Priest was all one. But after that there began to rise factions in Religion, and some saide they helde of Apollo, some of Paule, some of Cephas, and some of Christe, it was decreed that one should be chosen to beare rule ouer the rest, to whō the chiefe care of the Church should apperteine, and by whom sectes and schismes should be cut of.

Here a man may reason thus. The distinction of degrees began in the Church, when men began to say I holde of Paule, I holde of A∣pollo. &c. But this was in the Apostles time, the. 1. Cor. 1. Therefore these distinctions of degrees beganin the Apostles time.

The same Hierom in his Epistle ad Euagrium teacheth, that the cause why one was chosen amongst the Bishops to rule ouer the rest, was in schismatis remedium, ne vnusquis{que} ad se trahens Christi ecclesiam rumperet, to meete vvyth Schismes, leaste euery one according to his ovvne fansie should teare in peeces the Church of Christe, and saith further, that in Alexandria, from S. Marke vnto Heracla and Dionisius Byshops, the Ministers vsed to electe one among themselues vvhom they placing in a higher degree, called a By∣shop, euen as an armie shoulde choose their Captaine, or Deacons shoulde choose one of themselues vvhom they knevv to be painefull, and call him an Archdeacon. Haec Hieronymus.

In all these places Hierome doth not maynteine the authoritie of one man ouer the whole Church, but thinketh it necessarie that in e∣uery Prouince there be one to be chiefe ouer the reste, for vnitie sake, and for rooting out of contentiōs & sects. And therfore contra Luciferianos he sayth that vnlesse this superioritie were, there would be as ma∣ny schismes in the Church as there be priests.

T C. Pag. 79. Sect. 1. 2.

The Hebrues do deriue the name of time of a verbe, which signifieth to corrupt, bycause in deede it doth corrupt all, & as the times are so are mē which liue in them: that euē very good men cary the note of y^e infection of the times wherin they liue, & the streame of the corruption therof being so ve∣hement & forcible, doth not only driue before it light things, but it eateth also & weareth y^e very hard & stonie rockes, & therfore there is not to be looked for (*) 1.287 such sinceritie at Hieromes hand, Which we found in S. Cyprian, considering y^t he liued, some ages after Cyprian, what time Satan had a great deale more darkened y^e cleere light of the Sunne of the Gospell, than it was in S. Cyprians time. For as those y^t came neerest vnto the Apostles times, bicause they were nearest the light dyd sce best, so those that were further of from these lightes, had vntill y^e time of the manifestation of the sonne of perdition, their heauens more darke & cloudy, & consequently did see more diuiely, which is diligently 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 be obserued of y^e reader, both the better to vnderstand y^e state of this question, and all other controuersies, which lye betwene vs and the Papistes.

And althoughe Hierome besides his other faultes, myghte haue also in this matter spoken more soundly, yet we shall easily perceiue y^t he is a great deale further, from either the title or office of an Archbishop, or else from y^e authoritie, that a Bishop hath with vs, than he is from the simplicitie of the ministerio which ought to be, and is commended vnto vs by the word of God.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is but a poore refuge, when you cannot answere to discredite the author: it is euident that Hierome saythe nothing touching this matter, but that which is both consonant to the scriptures, & confirmed by the practise of the Church, long before his time, as appeareth by that which is saide before. And I pray you what difference is there, betwixte that which Hierome speaketh in this place, and that which Cyprian

hath s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉id before? For Cyp〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ian said, That heresies & schismes haue sprong & do spring of this, bicause the priest of God is not obeyed. &c. And bicause the Bishop which is one, & is set o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉er the church, is through the proude presumption of some contemned. &c. And Hie∣rome saith that y^e cause why among y^e Bishops one was chosen to gouerne y^e rest, was to remedie schismes. Do you not perceiue how these two fathers ioyne in one truthe, & directly affirme y^e self same matter? It is true y^t time corrupteth, & therfore much more occasion is offered to appoint gouernment according to y^e times, least the corruptions preuaile & get the vpper hand, & for this cause, Hierome saith that vpon these corrupti∣ons of time, the Church was constreined to appoint this order.

Chap. 3. the. 17. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 79. Sect. 3.

And here I must put M. Doctor in remēbrance, how vnfitly he hath dedicated his booke vnto y^e church, which hath so patched it & peeced it of a number of shreddes of the Doctors, y^t a sentence of* 1.288 the scripture either truly or fal〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ly alleaged, is as it were a Phenix in this booke. If he would haue had y^e church beleue him, he oughte to haue setled their iudgement, & grounded their faith vpon the scriptures, which are y^e only foūdations whervpon y^e church may build. Now he doth not only not giue thē ground to stand of: but he leadeth them into wayes which they cannot follow, nor come af∣ter him. For except it be those which are learned, & besides haue the meanes & abilitie, to haue the bookes which are here cited (which are y^e least & smalest portion of the Church) how can they know that these things be true, which are alleaged, & as I haue said if they could know, yet haue they no∣thing to stay themselues vpon, & quiet their conscience, in allowing y^e which M. Doctor woulde so faine haue them like of. Therfore he might haue much more fitly dedicated his booke vnto y^e 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ear∣ned and riche, which haue furnyshed lybraries.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Doctor hath brought more scriptures thā you haue answered, as in the sequele it wil fal out, although (as I said before) in such matters, y^e scripture hath not expres∣ly* 1.289 determined any certeintie, but hath left them to the Church, to be appointed accor∣ding to the circumstances of time, place, and person, as I haue proued both out of the scriptures & learned writers, & intend to do hereafter more particularly, whē I come to entreat of your Seigniorie. If al other men should do as you haue done, that is, bor∣row the sayings of the Doctors out of other mens collections, & not read y^e authors thē selues, a few bokes wil serue, & with very smal charges, they mightbe prouided.

The patches, peeces. & shreds of Doctors that be in my boke, are taken out of the Doc∣tors thēselues, & they be whole sentences faithfully alledged. But the shreds of doctors, that your boke is stuffed with, you haue borrowed of other: you haue falsifyed thē, & cut them off by the half: you haue fathered vpon them that which is not to be founde in them: and the words of late writers, you haue set downe vnder the name of anci∣ent fathers: and the scriptures you haue falsely alleaged, and vntruely translated: I would not gladly haue burst out into this accusation at this time, being from the mat∣ter, but that you haue vrged me therevnto.

Chap. 3. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 79. Sect. 4. 5. 6.

Hierome saith, y^e at the first a Bishop & an elder (which you call a priest) were all one, but after∣ward through factions & schismes, it was decreed y^t one should rule ouer y^e rest. Now I say against this order, that y^e Bishop should beare rule ouer all, y^e which our sauiour Christ saith vnto y^e Pha∣riseis, from y^e beginning it was not so, & therfore I require that y^e first order may stand, which was* 1.290 that a Bishop & elder were all one. And if you place so great authoritie against the institution of God in a mortall man, heare what Tertullian saith vnto you.

That is true, whatsoeuer is first, and that is false whatsoeuer is latter.

Hierome & you confesse y^t this was first, that y^e Bishop was all one with y^e elder, & first also by y^e* 1.291 word of God, thē I conclude y^t, that is true. You both do likewise confesse, y^t it came after that one bare rule ouer the rest, then I conclude, y^e that is false: for all that is false, that is latter. Further∣more Hierome in the same place of Titus saith after this sort. As y^e elders know themselues to be subiect by a custome of the Churche, vnto him that is set ouer them, so the Byshops must knowe, that they are greater than the elders, rather by custome, than by any truth of the instatution of the Lord, and so they ought to gouerne the Church in common.

Io. Whitgifte.

It followeth after in my answere to the Admonition, that there was superioritie a∣mong

the ministers of the word, e〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ē in the Apostles time, which I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rip∣tures & other testimonies, it is also 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that great factions & schi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉mes did 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 the Church euē in the Apostles time: & therfore most like these that Icrome sp〈1 line〉〈1 line〉keth of, to haue bin thē determined. The which to be true, his words ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉 touching y^e church of Alexādria doth euidently declare: for he saith y^t this order was kept 〈◊〉〈◊〉 frō S. Marke. But admit these were not true (which you wil neuer be able to proue) yet your argument is of no force, & the place of Tertullian is not vnderstanded, for Tertullian in that boke, after he hath repeated the rule of faith, which is to beleeue in* 1.292 one God, and in his sonne Iesus Ch〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ist. &c. he saith, that this rule hath come from the be∣ginning of the Gospell euen before all former heretikes, muche more before 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that was but yesterdaye, as well the posteritie of all heretikes as the verye noueltie of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which was of late will proue. VVhereby iudgement may hereof be indifferently gyuen a∣gainst all heresies, that that is true whatsoeuer is first, & that count〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rfeit, whatsoeuer is last. Wherby it is e〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ident that Tertullians rule is to be vnderstanded in matters of sal∣uation,* 1.293 & of faith, & not in matters of ceremonies, & kinds of gouernment: which thing he himselfe in plaine words declareth in his booke de virginibus velandis, where in lyke maner after he hath recited this rule of faith, he addeth this lawe of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉aith remaining, o∣ther things of discipline & conuersation admit newnesse of correction, the grace of God working and going forward, euen to the end. So that Tertullian thinketh that matters of ceremonies and discipline may be altered (y^e rule of faith remaining 〈◊〉〈◊〉) not∣withstanding his former rule.

If you will not haue this to be the meaning of Tertulliā, then will I reason thus.* 1.294 In the beginning there were Apostles, therfore there must be Apostles now: in y^e be∣ginning it was forbiddē to eate y^t which was strangled, Ergo we may not eate it now: In y^e beginning there were no Christian Magistrates Ergo there must 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e no〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e now: In the beginning the Apostles baptized in riuers, the cōmunion was ministred to. 12. only. &c. Ergo quòd posterius falsū, that which is latter is false: these be as good arguments as yours. But it is manifest that Tertullian speaketh of matters of faith, & necessarie to saluation, & therfore these arguments, & yours also with such like, be starke naught.

Chap. 3. the. 19. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 79. Sect. vlt.

Now seing that Hierome confesseth y^t a Bishop & an elder, by God his institution are all one, & that custome of y^e Church hath altered this institutiō, for y^ taking away of this custome, & restoring of the Lords institution, I say as our sauiour Christ said, why do you breake the cōmaundements* 1.295 of God, to establish your own traditions▪ for the one is the institution of God, & the other the tradi∣tion of the Church, & if a mans testimonie be so much with M. Doctor, let him heare what y^• same* 1.296 Tertullian saith, whatsoeuer sauoreth against the truth, shalbe accounted heresie, euen although it be an olde custome.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your whole bóoke is groūded vpon the sands, y^t is vpō foūdatiōs not proued, as this is. For you should first haue proued, that Christ hath so cōmaunded equalitie of Mini∣sters in gouernment & ecclesiastical pollicie, that one of them may not be aboue the o∣ther: the contrary is to be sene in scripture, both in words & examples, as I haue after declared, so far of is it, that you can shew any cōmaundement to the contrary. Thys text of y^e. 15. of. Mat. did the Anabaptistes, obiect vnto Zuinglius in the like case, as it ap∣peareth in his boke de Baptismo. But he answered thē as I must answere you, I speake* 1.297 not as you feyne me to speake, I speake only of external & indifferent things, wherof there be many which are neither cōmaunded nor forbidden by any expresse worde of God. &c. & againe, for this that we speake of is not necessarrie vnto saluation, but it is external, of the which things many may be foūd omitted in the scriptures. &c. Wherfore except you can proue, that we bring into the Church some thing as necessary vnto saluation which is not expressed in the scriptures, this text is no more aptly applyed by you against me, than it was by the Anabaptists, against Zuinglius.

The wordes of Tertullian are true, and make nothing for your purpose, for you must first proue that these degrées be against the truth.

Chap. 3. the. 20. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 80. Line. 3.

Now I will turne M. Doctors owne argument vpon his head, after this sort. (a) 1.298 In the Apo∣stles times there were (b) schismes & heresies but in their times ther were no archbishops ordeined to appeare them: therfore the best meanes of composing of controuersies and keping concorde, is not* 1.299 by hauing an Archbishop to be ouer a whole Prouince.

Io. Whitgifte.

I will seuerally answere your arguments, that the reader may the better vnder∣stand the pith of them. And first I denie this argument, bicause it is neither in mode* 1.300 nor sigure. For first you must cal to memory, that in the third figure where you wold seeme to place it, the Minor may not be negatiue as yours is. Secondly there is more in the conclusiō then there is in the premisses which is against al rules of sillogismes. If you had concluded according to your former propositions, you shoulde haue sayde thus, Ergo when there are Archbishops there are no schismes. For this is the true con∣clusion of that false sillogisme. Thirdly Minus extremum should be subiectum conclusionis, and in this argument it is praedicatū. Seing therfore that your argument hath no true forme in any respect, I denie it, vntill it be better framed.

Chap. 3. the. 21. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 80. Line. 7.

That there was none in the y^t Apostles times, thus it may appeare. If there were any they were either ordeined by the Apostles, & their authoritie, or else without and besides their authoritie. If there were any without & besides their authoritie; then they are therefore to be condemned y^t more, bicause in their time they starie vp without their warrant. And if the Apostles did ordeine them, there was some vse of them, to that whervnto they were ordeined, but there was no vse of them to that whervnto they were ordeined, therfore the Apostles did not ordeine them. The vse whervnto M. Doctor saith they were ordeined, was to compose controuersies and ende schismes, but to this they were not vsed: wherevpon it followeth, that if there were any they were vnprofitable. That they were not vsed to any such ende it shall be perceiued by that which followeth.

Io. Whitgifte.

This should be the proofe of your former Minor, if the argument had bene good: but be it as you would haue it, here is yet no sufficient proofe of your Minor. They are but only your owne bare words, which may as easily be reiected, as they be barely by you affirmed. But least the ignorant reader shoulde thinke that I shifte of matters wyth suche quidities as they vnderstand not, I will set a side the deformed face of your ar∣gument, and come to the matter, & (as I thinke) your meaning, which is this. Con∣trouersies were compounded in the Apostles time without an Archbyshop, Ergo they maye lyke∣wise be so now, so that there is no neede of any Archbishop. This is the controuersie, whe∣ther the Church be bound to the same kind of external gouernment at all times, that was vsed in y^e Apostles times. I haue proued hetherto that it is not. And more is to be* 1.301 said of the same afterwards. In the meane time this I giue you to vnderstand, that al∣thoughe the Apostles had not this name of Archbishop among them, yet they had the same authoritie and office. For they had the gouernment & direction of diuers Chur∣ches, both in matters of doctrin & discipline: they ended controuesies, repressed errors, kept them in quietnesse: ordeined them Bishops, & visited them, as appeareth Act. 14. 15. 18. 1. Cor. 3. 4. 5. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. & in the Epistle to Timothie & Titus. Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 23. declareth of Iohn the Euangelist, that after he returned from Pathmos, he visited & gouerned sundry Churches, & ordeined them Ministers. The like doth Epiphanius report of Pe∣ter in Pontus & Bithinia Lib. 1. Tom. 2. And what other office then those hath the Archbi∣shop. Therfore though the name of Archbishop was not among the Apostles, yet was his office & function. And notwithstanding that part of the office of the Apostles is cea∣sed which consisted in planting & founding of Churches, throughout y^e world: yet this part of gouernment & direction of Churches remaineth still and is committed to By∣shops. Therefore saith Ambrose in the. 4. ad Ephe. Apostoli Episcopi sunt, Apostles are By∣shops,* 1.302 bicause Bishops do succeede them in preaching the word, & gouerning y^e church.

Now if I shal also proue by good authoritie that among the Apostles themselues* 1.303 and in their tymes, there was one chiefe (though he were not called Archbishop) then I suppose that it will not seeme straunge vnto you, that in this state of the Church, it should be cōuenient to haue the like in euery Prouince or Diocesse. Ierome in his first* 1.304 booke aduersus Iouinianum sayth thus. Yet among the twelue one is chosen, that a head be∣ing appoynted, occasion of schisme might be remoued. And least ye should wipe this a∣way with your accustomed deprauing of the Authour, I will ioyne vnto him the testi∣monie of M. Caluine in his Institutions Cap. 8. who writeth thus. That the twelue* 1.305 Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest, it was no marueyle, for nature requireth it, and the disposition of man will so haue it, that in euerie companie (although they be all equall in power) yet that there be one as gouernour, by whome the rest may be directed. There is no court without a Consull, no Senate without a Pretor, no Colledge without a president, no societie without a master. M. Bucer likewise in his booke, De regno Christi, hath these wordes. Now we see by the perpetuall obseruation of the Churches euen from* 1.306 the Apostles themselues, that it hath pleased the holy Ghost, that among the Ministers to whome especially the gouernment of the Church is committed, one should haue the chiefe eare, both of the Churches and whole ministerie, and that he shoulde go before all other in that care and diligence, for the which cause the name of a Bishop is peculiarly giuen to such chiefe gouernors of Churches, &c. Againe vpon the. 4. to the Ephe. he sayth as before is alledged. Paule in the Acts called the same men, Bishops & Ministers, whē he called for the* 1.307 Ministers of Ephesus to Miletum, yet bicause one among them did rule, and had the chief eare of the Church, the name of a Bishop did properly belong vnto him. Neither was his age alwayes considered, so that he were vertuous and learned, as we haue an example in Ti∣mothie being a yong man. Thus then you sée, that euen amongst the Apostles themsel∣ues, and in the Churches in their tymes, there were some, that had the chiefe autho∣ritie ouer the rest, and to this ende especially, that schismes and contentions might be compounded, and the rest might be directed, whiche are the chiefe partes of the Archbishops office: and therefore all this that you haue here sayde, falleth flat to the ground: And yet still I do affirme, that if it had not béene so in the Apostles time, yet might it haue bene both lawfully and necessarily, at other tymes.

Chap. 3. the. 22. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 80. Sect. 1.

At Antioch there rose a great & daūgerous heresie, that had in a maner infected al the Churches which shaked the very foūdation of the saluation of gods childē, that was, whether faith were suf∣ficient to iustifie without circūcision. The matter was disputed of both sides, it could not be agreed of. What do they now? Do they ordein some Archbishop, Archprophet, Archapostle, or any one chief to whō they will referre the coutrouersie, or vpon whō they wil depend? Nothing lesse. And if they would haue had the controuersies ended by one, what deuine was there euer, or shall there be more fitter for that purpose than S. Paule, which was amongst them? Why do they send abrode for re∣medie, when they had it at home? Why with great charges and long iourneyes, which they might haue had without charges, or one foote set out of the doore? what do they then? They sende Paule and Barnabas to Ierusalem, as if the lesser townes should send to the Churches of the Uniuersi∣ties, & of London, to desire their help in the determining of the controuersie. And what is Paule & Barnabas ambassage, is it to desire the iudgement or mind of some one? It must needes be answe∣red with S. Luke, that they came to know the resolution of the Church, and yet there were the A∣postles, whereof euerie one was better able both sharpely to see, and to iudge incorruptly without affection, than any Archbishop that euer was. If therefore in so great aboundance and ouerflowing of the giftes of God, and in that tyme when as controuersyes might haue beene referred without daunger of error vnto one onely, this ministerie of one aboue all, was not thought good: now when the giftes are lesse, and the daunger of error more; to make an Archbishop for the deciding of contro∣uersyes, and auoyding of schismes, is a thing so straunge, that I am not able to see the reason of it. For to which soeuer of the Apostles the controuersie had bene referred, it is certaine that he would haue giuen a true sentence of it.

Io. Whitgifte.

It was tolde you before, that an Archbishop of himselfe alone doth not take vpon* 1.308

him to determin matters of doctrine in controuersie: But if any such contention arise, either he determineth the matter according to the law, & rule alreadie by the Church established, or else with the consent of the Prince doth he set an order in the same by a prouinciall and lawfull Synode: in the which he is the chiefe, as some one of the Apostles were in such like assemblies, according to that which I haue before declared: & therfore all this speach might well haue bene spared. Your argument also is faultie in two respectes: first it is Ab authoritate negatiuè, or à non facto ad non ius, which is good Neque in diuinis ne{que} in humanis, neyther in diuine nor in humane matters: Secondly, you go about to conclude an vniuersall doctrine of one particular and singular example: which at no time, nor in any matter is tollerable.

Moreouer it rather iustifyeth my assertion, for it euidently proueth that euerie* 1.309 Parish within it selfe, hath not absolute authoritie to ende controuersies, but that it behoueth them in such weightie matters, to resort to the chiefe Church, as they now did to Ierusalem. This example therefore, if you well consider it, is directly against you: neither doth it in any respect proue, that there was then no chiefe gouernour or guide of the rest, to supplie that place and office which now the Archbishop hath.

Chap. 3. the. 23. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 80. Sect. 2.

And if any can shew me one man in these tymes, of whom we may be assured, that he will pro∣nounce* 1.310 the truth of euery question which shall arise, he shall make me somwhat more fauorable to the Archbishop, than presently I am. For although there were found one such as could not erre, yet I could not consent that the matter shoulde lie only vpon his hande, seeing that the Apostles which could not erre in these matters, would not take that vpon them, & seeing that by that meanes the iudgement of the Church should be contemned, and further, for that the iudgement of one man in a controuersie, is not so strong to pull vp errors that are rooted in mens minds, as the iudgement and consent of many. For, that the iudgement of many is very apt either to confirme a truth, or to confute falsehoode, it is euident that S. Paule doth holde forth, as it were a buckler agaynst the frowardnesse of certaine, the authoritie of the Church.

Io. Whitgifte.

You take great paynes in fighting without an aduersarie, and bicause otherwise (as it should séeme) you lacke matter to lengthen your booke, therfore you deuise mat∣ter of your owne to striue agaynst. For who hath affirmed that, which you so ear∣nestly séeke in this place to ouerthrowe? It hath bene tolde twise alreadie, that ney∣ther of our Archbishops taketh vpon him to compounde controuersies in doctrine by himselfe alone, neyther is it their office so to doe. The Archbishops authoritie in this* 1.311 Church is, to prouide by lawfull and ordinarie meanes that vnitie be obserued in the Church: that contentions and schismes be cut off: that the religion and orders of the Church, by the whole consent of the Church agréed vpon, be mainteyned: that euery Bishop in his prouince doe his duetie according to the same: this is his principall charge (as I take it) agaynst the which you haue not as yet spoken any thing, but de∣uise with your selfe, to improue that which no man affirmeth: this is but verie shif∣ting and dallying.

Chap. 3. the. 24. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 80. Sect. 3.

Furthermore, if this distinction came vp in the Apostles tyme, and by them, how commeth it to passe, that they neuer mention it, nay how commeth it to passe that euen S. Paule in that very E∣pistle where these voyces are founde (I holde of Paule, I of Apollo, I of Cephas whiche are* 1.312 sayde to be the cause of the Archbishop) ordeyneth a cleane contrarie to this that M. doctor com∣mendeth? (a) 1.313 For when two or three Prophets haue expounded the scriptures, he appoynteth that all the rest that are there, should iudge whether they haue done well or no.

Io. Whitgifte.

I contend not that the name of the Archbishop was in the Apostles tyme, but you haue not yet proued that the office was not then, or that there was then no superio∣ritie among the Cleargie, which you notwithstanding denie. Your negatiue rea∣son proueth nothing, as you haue bene oftentymes tolde.

The place in the. 1. Cor. 14. is farre fetched, it speaketh not of gournment, and* 1.314 discipline, or externall pollicie of the Church, but of expounding the Scriptures. And what a reason cal you this S. Paule, saith. 1. Cor. 14. Prophet〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 duo aut tres loquantur, caete〈1 line〉〈1 line〉i dijudicent: Let two or three Prophets speake, and let the other iudge, Ergo he speaketh a∣gaynst an Archbishop? Surely if the Authours of the Admonition had not bene de∣tected of their vnskilfull allegations of Scriptures, I shoulde haue had as much a doe with you in that poynt: for euen of these fewe which you haue vsed, there is not al∣most one rightly and truely applied. S. Paule in that place to the Corinthians shew∣eth, that the hearers must iudge of the doctrine of the Prophets, whether it be accor∣ding to the worde of God or no, as those did whiche are commended in the. 17. of the Actes: but what is this to an Archbishop?

Chap. 3. the. 25. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 1.

And howe commeth it to passe that S. Paule being at Rome in prison, and looking euery day when he shuld giue vp his last breath, cōmended vnto the Church a perfect & an absolute ministerie,* 1.315 * 1.316 standing of fiue partes, wherein he maketh mention, not one worde of an Archbishop: and sayeth further, that that ministerie is able to enterteyne the perfect vnitie, and knitting togither of the Church? Do not all these things speake or rather crie, that there was not so much as a step of an Archbishop in the Apostles times?

Io. Whitgifte.

How oft haue you alledged this place to y^e same purpose? If I should do the like, you* 1.317 would bestow one whole side in iesting at it. But I answere you as I did before. In this place the Apostle as you confesse, reciteth offices that be but temporall, as Apostle, Prophet, &c. he leaueth out those offices which you say are perpetuall, as Deacon, and Senior. Therefore it is no such perfect patterne, as you would haue it. And if you say that these offices are conteyned vnder the names of Pastors and Doctors, then I say that Bishops and Archbishops be so in like maner. If you will haue the Apostle to speake of these ministeries onely, which are occupied in the worde and sacraments, then I say vnto you, that an Archbishop is a name of Iurisdiction and gouernment* 1.318 committed to a Bishop, Pastor or Minister of the worde, as necessarie for the good gouernment of the Church, but not as any new ministerie, as you vntruly both now, and also before haue surmised. But to let all this passe: in those offices whiche S. Paule here reciteth is the office of an Archbishop conteyned, though it be not named, and namely vnder the Apostles and Pastors as I haue before shewed.

Chap. 3. the. 26. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 1.

And if you will say, that the Apostles did ordeyne Archbishops (as you haue indeed sayd, and do now againe) when as there is not one worde in the writings of them, I pray you tell vs, howe we shall hold out of the Church the vnwritten verities of the Papists? For my part if it be true that you say, I cannot tell what to answere vnto them. For our answere is to them, the Apostles haue left a perfect rule of ordering the Church written, and therefore we reiect their traditions, if for no other cause, yet bicause they are superfluous and more than need. Now this degree of Archbishop being not only not mentioned in the scriptures, but also manifestly oppugned, it is to bold, & hard〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 a speech (that I say no more) to 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉et the petegree of the Archbishop from the Apostles times, and from the Apostles themselues.

Io. Whitgifte.

I must answere you still as Zuinglius answered the Anabaptists in the like ob∣iection, and as I haue answered you before: the Papists make their traditions neces∣sarie vnto saluation, and therefore they are to be reiected, bicause the worde of God conteyneth all things necessarie to saluation. I make those offices part of decencie, order, Ecclesiasticall gouernment and pollicie, whiche admitteth alteration as the tymes and persons require, and are not particularly expressed in the Scriptures, no more than diuerse other things be in the same kinde, as I haue prooued before. And that this may séeme no straunge matter, or any thing fauouring the Papists vn∣written verities, you may call to remembrance that which M. Caluin sayth of such tra∣ditions* 1.319 vpon these wordes. 1. Cor. 11. Quemadmodum tradidi vobis instituta tenetis. I do not denie (sayth he) but that there were some traditions of the Apostles not written &c. as I* 1.320 haue before recyted, speaking of Ceremonies not expressed in the worde. And you may sée that wise and learned men are not so scrupulous in Apostolicall traditions not written, so that they be not such as are made necessarie vnto saluation: neyther is any learned man of contrarie iudgement. And therefore Archbishops may well be brought from the Apostles tymes, without any daunger of admitting the vnwritten verities of the Papists. You haue not yet proued that eyther the name or office of Arch∣bishoppes is in any respect oppugned in the worde of God, and therefore that is but feyned.

Chap. 3. the. 27. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 1.

But all this time M. doctor hath forgotten his question, which was to proue an Archbishop, whereas all these testimonies which he alledgeth, make mention onely of a bishop, & therefore this may rather confirme the state of the bishop in this realme, than the Archbishop. But in the answere vnto them it shal appeare, that as there is not in these places so much as the name of an Archbishop mentioned, so except only the name of a Bishop, there shall be founde very little agreement betwene the Bishops in those dayes, and those which are called Bishops in our time, and with vs.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Doctor remembreth that the Authours of the Admonition aswell denie the of∣fice of a Bishop, as the office of an Archbishop, and hée is not ignorant, that the proofe of the one is the confirmation of the other, and therefore he vseth suche testimonies as perteyne to them both: of the whiche nature those places be that he hath hither∣to alledged. For you muste vnderstande, that I spake before of the name, and nowe according to my promise I speake of the office, whiche is not so farre distant from the Bishops, but that in moste things they be confounded: But let vs nowe heare how you performe your promise.

Chap. 3. the. 28. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 2.

And consequently, although M. doctor thought with one whiting boxe to haue whited two walles (by establishing our Archbishop and Bishop by the same testimonies of the fathers) yet it shall be plaine, that in going about to defend both, he left both vndefended.

Io. Whitgifte.

Wordes of pleasure, too too vsuall with T. C. but of smal weight (God be thanked) and of lesse truth.

Chap. 3. the. 29. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 2. 3.

Let vs therfore come first to examine Ieromes reasons, why one must be ouer the rest, for in the testimonie of men that is onely to be regarded which is spoken either with some authoritie of the scripture, or with some reason grounded of the scripture: otherwise, if he speak without either scrip∣ture or reason, he is as 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉asily reiected as alleaged. One (sayth he) being chosen to be ouer the rest, bringeth remedie vnto schismes: how so? least euery man (sayth he) drawing to himselfe do breake the Church in pieces.

But I would aske if the Church be not in as great daunger(*) 1.321 when all is done at the pleasure and iust of one man, and when one carieth all into error, as when one pulleth one piece with him, an other another piece, & the third his part also with him. And it is(a) 1.322 harder to draw many into an er∣ror, than one, or that many should be caried away by their affections, than one, which is euident(b) 1.323 in water, which if it be but a little, it is quickly troubled and corrupted, but beeing much, it is not so easily. But by this ecclesiasticall Monarchie, all things are kept in peace: Nay, rather it hath bene the(c) 1.324 cause of discorde, and well spring of most horrible schisme, as it is to be seene in the very de∣cretals* 1.325 themselues.(d) 1.326 And admit it were so, yet the peace which is without truth, is more exe∣crable than a thousande contentions. For as by stryking of two flintes togither, there commeth out fyre, so it may be, that sometymes by contention, the truth which is hidden in a darke peace maye come to light, which by a peace in naughtinesse and wickednesse being as it were buryed vnder the ground, doth not appeare.

Io. Whitgifte.

Ierome being a man of such singular learning, and great credite among those that be learned, in a matter of Hystorie as this (for hée reporteth when one Byshop was* 1.327 placed ouer the rest, and for what cause) is more to be beléeued withoute reasons, than you with all your popular and friuolous arguments. Let the reader againe consider whether this be your maner or no, by vaine reasons to shake the credite of the au∣thour, when you cannot otherwise answere.

The reasons that you vse for the popular or Aristocraticall gouernment of the Church, when they come among the people, will be easily transferred to the state of the common weale, and peraduenture bréede that misliking of ciuill gouernment, that you would now haue of Ecclesiasticall, to a further inconuenience and mischiefe, than you and all yours will be able to remedie. In the meane time you vtterly ouerthrow* 1.328 the Quéenes authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters, giuen vnto hir by the lawes of God, as hereafter shall be proued. For if the state must eyther be popular or Aristo∣craticall, then must there be no one supreme gouerner in Church matters, but I wil come to your reasons.

First you aske whether the Churche be not in as great daunger when all is done at the pleasure and lust of one man, and when one carieth all into errour. &c. Here you do eyther ig∣norantly* 1.329 or wilfully confounde Monarchiam with tyrannie. For betwixt a king and a tyrant, this is one difference, that a king ruleth according to the lawes that are pre∣scribed for him to rule by, and according to equitie and reason: a tyrant doth what him list, followeth his owne affections, contemneth lawes, and sayth, Sic volo, sic iubeo, stat pro ratione voluntas. So I will, so I commaund, my pleasure standeth for reason. Now there∣fore to vse those reasons to ouerthrow a lawful Monarchie, which are onely proper to wicked tyrannie, is eyther closely to accuse the gouernment of this Church of England of tyrannie, or maliciously by subtile dealing, and confounding of states, to procure the* 1.330 misliking of the same in the hearts of the subiects. There is neyther Prince nor Pre∣late in this land that ruleth after their pleasure and lust, but according to those lawes and orders that are appointed by the common consent of the whole realme in Parlia∣ment, and by such lawes of this Monarchie as neuer hitherto any good subiect hath mislyked: and therefore your grounde being false: how can the rest of your building stand? It hath bene sayd before that the Archbishop hath not this absolute authoritie, giuen vnto him, to doe all things alone, or as him lust. He is by lawe prescribed both what to doe, and howe to procéede in his dooings. Moreouer this Churche of Englande (Gods name bée praysed therefore) hath all poyntes of necessarie

doctrine certainly determined, Ceremonies and orders e〈1 line〉〈1 line〉presly prescribed, from the whiche neyther Archbyshoppe nor Byshoppe maye swarue, and according to the whiche, they must bée directed, to the obseruing of the whiche also, their dutie is to constreyne all those that 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ée vnder them. So that whosoeuer shall wilfully and s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ubburnely seuer himselfe from obedience, eyther to Archbyshoppe or Bishoppe in suche matters, may iustly be called a Schismatike, or a disturber of the Church. And in this respect is that saying of Cyprian nowe most true: For neyther doo Heresyes* 1.331 aryse, nor Schismes spring of any other thing, but hereof, that the Priest of God is not obeyed. And so is this of Ieromes in like maner. Ecclesiae salus in summi Sacerdotis pen∣det* 1.332 dignitate, cui si non exors & ab omnibus eminens detur potestas, tot in Ecclesia efficiuntur schismata, quot sacerdotes. The safetie of the Churche dependeth vppon the dignitie of the highe Priest, to whom vnlesse a singuler and peerelesse power be giuen, there will be, as manie schismes in the Church, as there be Priests.

You say that it is harder to draw many into an error than one, &c. whiche is not true,* 1.333 when that one ruleth and gouerneth by lawe. For the minde of man euen of the best may be ouerruled by affection, but so cannot the lawe. Wherefore a wicked man directed by lawe gouerneth more indifferently, than multitudes withoute lawe, bée they neuer so godly. Moreouer one Godly, wise, and learned man is muche more hardly moued to any errour, than is the multitude, whiche naturally is prone and bent to the same: in whome not onely Philosophers, but singular Di∣uines also haue noted great inconstancie and a disposition moste vnméet〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 to go∣uerne.* 1.334

Your similitude of water holdeth not: for a little water in a grauelly or stonie Well or Ryuer is not so soone troubled and corrupted, as are multitudes of waters in Fennishe and Marrishe groundes. Againe, a little water in a running Ryuer or Fourde is at all tymes more pure and cleare, than is a great quantitie in standing Puddelles: to bée short, is not the water of those little springs, and Cundite heades, (which béeing safely locked vp, and inclosed in stone and Leade, do minister greate reléefe to whole Cities) muche more pleasaunt, hardlyer corrupted, lesse troubled, than the great waters in the Thames. Therefore is a little water procéeding from a good Fountaine, by stones and Leade kept from things that may hurt it, hardlier putrifyed and corrupted, than all the Fennishe waters in a whole Countrey, than mightie Pooles, yea than the Thames it selfe. So is one wise and prudent man go∣uerned and directed by order and by lawe, further from corruption and errour in gouernement, than whole multitudes of people, of what sorte soeuer they bée.

You further say, that this Ecclesiasticall monarchie hath beene the cause of discorde, &c. I aunswere, that it hath béene the cause of the contrarie, vntill suche tyme as it was turned into tyrannie, as by all Ecclesiasticall storyes and wryters it may appeare, and namely by these two, Cyprian and Ierome.

In all that decretall part. 2. c. 9. quaest. 3. noted in your Margent: there is no∣thing* 1.335 agaynste any forme of gouernment vsed by the Archbyshoppe in this Churche of Englande, but in plaine and manifest wordes bothe the name and office of the Archebishoppe is there mainteyned and approoued. And I wishe that the learned Reader woulde peruse ouer all that parte of Gratian, then shoulde he easily perceyue your faythfulnesse in alledging Authorities. And thoughe it be somewhat tedious, yet that the vnlearned also may haue some taste of your dealing, I will sette downe some Canons conteyned in that parte of Gratian. Out of the Councell of Pope Mar∣tine hée cyteth this Canon. Per singulas prouincias oportet Episcopos cognoscere. &c. In euerie Prouince the Bishoppes must knowe theyr Metropolitane to haue the cheefe au∣thoritie, and that they ought to doe nothing withoute him, according to the olde and auncient Canons of oure forefathers, for the whiche cause also the Metropolitane muste take vppon him nothing presumptuously without the councell of other Bishoppes. And out of the councell of Antioch, he hath this. Per singulas prouincias Episcopos singulos scire oportet, &c. In euery prouince the Bishops must know their Metropolitane which go∣uerneth,

to haue the chiefe care of the whole prouince: and therefore those that haue any causes must resort to the Metropolitane citie. &c. In all the rest of the Canons he ma∣nifestly attributeth superioritie and gouernment to the Archbishop and Metropoli∣tane, euen the same that we do in this Church, only he denieth that the Metropolitane or Archbyshop hath such absolute authoritie, that he can deale any thing in criminall causes agaynst a Byshop, or in other common matters without the consent of other Bishops, which is not agaynst any thing by me affirmed, or contrary to any authori∣tie claymed by the Archbishop, for it hath bene from the beginning denied that the Archbishop of his own absolute authoritie can determine any thing in matters doubt∣full, and not determined by the lawes and orders of this Churche, to the which the whole realme hath consented.* 1.336

The. 33. Canon of the Apostles quoted in the margent is this: Episcopos singularum gentium scire conuenit quis inter eos primus babeatur, quem velut existiment. &c. It behoueth the Bishops of euery prouince to know who is chiefe among thē, whom they must esteeme as their head, and do nothing without his knowledge, saue such things only as pertayne to their owne parish and villages, which are vnder it, neyther shall he do any thing without the knowledge of all. For so shall vnitie be kept and God shall be glorified through Christe in the holy Ghost. What haue you gotten by this Canon? you see here manifestly that in euery prouince or nation there must be one chiefe Bishop, that is Archbishop, to whom the rest muste submitte themselues, and do nothing without his knowledge. This is asmuch as I require: And if this Canon was made by the Apostles (wherof you seeme not to doubte) then is the name and authoritie of an Archbishop, of greater antiquitie than you would gladly haue it, and the reason and saying of S. Ierome most true.

Both of this Canon, and of the Canon of the councell of Antioch confirming it, I haue spoken before. Your Passim in the margent, if it be meant of such like plac〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s as this, I graunt it: but if of any other popular or Aristocraticall state and kinde of gouernment, or to the improuing of the office and authoritie of an Archbishop, it will fall out to be nusquam. You say, that it appeareth in the decretalls themselues that this kinde of gouernment hath bene the wellspryng of most horrible schisme. Shew one place: why are you not ashamed to vtter manifest vntruthes? Shew one sentence there tending to that ende. I haue recited some Canons out of that place, and I haue shewed the en∣tent of Gratian both in them, and in the rest. They all signifie that an Archbyshop may not do any thing of his owne authoritie without the consent of the other By∣shops, which no man denieth, and this is the whole scope of that question.

Our peace is in truth and due obedience, we haue the true doctrine of the worde of God: and the right administration of the Sacramentes: and therefore to make contention in this Church, and to disturbe the quietnes and peate, cannot be but mere schismaticall, I will say no worse. Zuinglius in his Ecclesiastes sayth, that the Ana∣baptistes went aboute to defende their contentions then, after the same manner that you do yours nowe. But I answere you as he answered them: your contention is not agaynst Infidels, Papists, and such like: but agaynst the faythfull, agaynst the true professors of the Gospell, and in the Church of Christe, and therefore as it is of it selfe wicked, so is it the cause of contempt, disobedience, and much other vngodlinesse. And the two flintstones may be in such time and place striken togither, that the sparkes of fire which commeth from them, may consume and burne the whole citie and coun∣trie too. And surely he is but a mad man that will smite fire to light a candle to sée by at noone day, when the sunne shineth most clearely.

Chap. 3. the. 30. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 81. Sect. 4.

If therefore superioritie and domination of one aboue the rest haue such force to keepe men frō schismes, when they be in the truth, it hath as great force to keepe them togither in errour, and so be∣sides that one is easier to be corrupted than many, this power of one bringeth as great incōmoditie in keping them in error, if they fall into it, as in the truth, if they are in it.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is as though you should saye, that if a Monarchie be an excellent kynde of gouernment, and in déede the best, when the lawes rule and not man (as Aristo∣tle sayth) then also is it the worste, when affection ruleth and not the lawe, which is true: for that is the worst state of gouernment which is opposed to the beste. But if you will therefore conclude, that a Monarchie is not the best state, your argument hath no reason in it: euen so is it in the gouernment of the Churche, if the chéefe go∣uernour thereof should follow his owne appetite and be ruled by his priuate affecti∣ons: but it is farre otherwise when he ruleth according to the lawes wherevnto he himselfe is subiect.

Chap. 3. the. 31. Diuision.

T. C. Pag 81. Sect. 4.

Morouer if it be necessary for the keping of vnitie in the Church of England, that one Arch∣bishop should be primate ouer all, why is it not as meete that for the keping of the whole vniuersall Churche, there should be one Archbishop or Byshop ouer all, and the like necessitie of the byshop o∣uer* 1.337 all Christendome, as of the byshop of all England, vnlesse peraduenture it be more necessary, that there should be one byshop ouer the vniuersall Church; than ouer the Church of England, for as much as it is more necessarie, that peace should be kept, and schismes be auoyded in the vniuer∣sall Church than in the particular church of England.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is the reason of the Papistes for the Popes supremacie, and you haue bo∣rowed* 1.338 it from them. Wherefore I will answere you as M. Caluine answereth them in his Institutions Cap. 8. Sect. 95. That which is profitable in one nation, cannot by any reason be extended to the whole worlde, for there is great difference betwixt the whole world and one nation. And a little after, it is euen as though a man should affirme, that the whole world may be gouerned by one King, bycause one fielde or towne hath but one ruler or Mayster. And agayne, that which is of force among fewe, may not by and by be drawne to the whole worlde, to the gouernment whereof no one man is sufficient. M. Nowell also answereth Dorman (making the same reason that you doe) in these* 1.339 woordes. To your third question (sayeth he speaking to Dorman) the lewdest of all why the same proportion may not be kepte betweene the Pope and the reste of the Byshops of Christendome, that is betweene the Archbishop and the other Bishops of the prouince? I answere, you might as well aske, why the same proportion may not be kepte betweene one Emperour of all the worlde, and all the Princes of the worlde to be vnder him, that is be∣tweene the King of one realme and his Lordes vnder him. The reason that the same pro∣portion can not be kept, is first, bycause there is no lyke proportion at all betweene the abi∣litie of mans witte and power (being but weake) to gouerne one prouince, and his abilitie to gouerne the whole Churche, and all Churches throughout the worlde, which no one man can haue knowledge of, much lesse can haue abilitie to rule them. Secondly you can bring no such proportion of antiquitie for your Pope to be cheefe head of the whole Churche, as is to be shewed for Archbishops to be the chiefe Bishops in their owne prouinces, &c. Hitherto M. Nowell. I marueyle that you will ioyne with the Papistes in so grosse a reason.

Chap. 3. the. 32. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 82 Sect. 1.

If you say that the Archbishop of England, hath his authoritie graunted of the Prince, the Pope of Rome will say that Constantine or Phocas which was Emperour of al Christendome, did graunt him his authoritie ouer all Churches. But you will say that is a lie, but the Pope will set as good a face, and make as great a shew therein, as you do in diuerse poyntes here. But admit it to be, yet I say further, that it may come to passe, and it hath bene, that there may be one Chri∣stian

Cesar ouer all the realmes which haue Churches. What if he then will giue that authoritie to one ouer all, that one king graunteth in his lande, may any man accept and take at his handes such authoritie? and if it be not lawfull for him to take that authoritie, tell me what fault you can finde in him which may not be founde in them?

Io. Whitgifte.

The Pope doth chalenge muche of his temporalties from Constantinus and Pho∣cas: but his supremacie and iurisdiction ouer all Churches he claymeth from Peter, and from Christe: wherein his clayme is more intollerable being most false, and his iurisdiction more vsurped beyng wrongfully chalenged: you erre therefore in that 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oynt greatly. The Archbishop doth exercise his iurisdiction vnder the Prince, and by the Princes authoritie. For the Prince hauing the supreme gouernment of the realme, in all causes, and ouer all persons, as she doth exercise the one by the Lorde Chancellor, so doth she the other by the Archbishops.

Your supposition of one Cesar ouer all realmes that haue Churches is but sup∣posed, and therfore of no weight: but admit it were true, yet is there not the like rea∣son for one Archbishop to be ouer all those Churches, and ouer one prouince: the rea∣sons I haue alleaged before out of M. Caluine, & other, neither is there any man not wilfully blinded, or papistically affected, that seeth not what great diuersitie there is betwixt one prouince and many kingdomes: the gouernment of the one, and the go∣uernment of the other. Si vnus duodecim bominibus praefuit, an propterea sequetur vnum de∣bere* 1.340 centum millibus hominum praefici? If one was ouer twelue men, shall it therefore follow, that one may be appoynted ouer an hundred thousand men? Sayth M. Caluine.

Chap. 3. the. 33. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 82. Sect. 2.

It will be sayd that no one is able to do the office of a Bishop, vnto all the whole Church, ney∣ther is there any one able to do the office of a byshop to the whole Churche of England, for when those which haue bene most excellent in knowledge and wisdome, and most ready and quicke, in do∣ing and dispatching matters, being alwayes present, haue founde ynough to do to rule and gouerne one seuerall congregation: what is he which absent, is able to discharge his duetie toward so many thousand churches? And if you take exception, that although they be absent, yet they may do by vn∣der ministers, as Archdeacons, Ehauncellors, Officials, Commissaries, and such other kinde of people, what do you else say, than the Pope, which sayeth, that by his Cardinalles, & Archbishops, and Legates, and other such lyke, he doth all things? For with their handes he ruleth all, and by their feete he is present euery where, and with their eyes he seeth what is done in all places. Let them take heede therefore, least if they haue a common defense with the Pope, that they be not also ioyned nearer with him in the cause, than peraduenture they be aware of. (a) 1.341 Truly it is agaynst my will, that I am constrayned to make such comparisons, not that I thinke there is so great di∣uersitie betweene the Popedome and the Archbyshopricke, but bycause there being great resem∣blance betwene them, I meane hauing regard to the bare functiōs, without respecting the doctrine good or bad which they vphold, that I say there being great resemblance betwene them, there is yet as I am persuaded, great difference betwene the persons that execute them. The which good opi∣nion conceyued of them, I do most humbly beseech them by the glorie of God, by the libertie of the Churche purchased by the precious bloud of our sauiour Christe, and by their owne saluation, that they would not deceyue, by reteyning so harde, such excessiue and vniust dominion ouer the Church of the liuing God.

Io. Whitgifte.

But one man may do the office of an Archbishop in one prouince, euery seuerall diocesse whereof hath a Bishop. And one man may do the office of a Bishop in one dio∣cesse, euery seuerall parishe whereof hath a seuerall Pastor. The Archbishop hath a generall charge ouer the prouince to sée that vnitie be kept among the Bishops, and that the Bishops do their duties according to the lawes and order of the Churche, or else to sée them reformed according to the sayd lawes & orders, if they shall be cōplay∣ned of to haue neglected the same. The lyke care haue the Bishops ouer the seuerall Pastors of their diocesse, and other persons. Neyther doth their office consiste in preaching onely, but in gouerning also: in the respect whereof they are ouer & aboue the rest. This office of gouernment may be well executed in one prouince, so much

and so far as by the lawes is required, and as is cōuenient for the state of the Church, but it could not be so ouer all Christendome.

It may be that some Pastors hauing small charges, and busie heades, may finde and procure moe matters and controuersies than eyther they be able or willing to compound: such busie Pastors there be in England: but their vnquietnesse, or lacke of abilitie to dispatch those controuersies which they themselues are the authors and causes of, doth not proue but that eyther the Archbishop or Bishop may do those things sufficiently, and well, that do apperteyne to their office and calling.

So much may they do by vnder ministers as Archdeacons, Chauncellors, &c. as by the rules of the Churche are permitted vnto them, and may be conuenient for the time and persons. But the office of preaching, of ordeyning ministers, of suppressing he∣resies and schismes, with such lyke, they do not commit vnto them, but execute them themselues, the which bycause they cannot do throughout all Churches, as they may in one Prouince, therefore your reason is no reason. Moreouer a Bishop of one dio∣cesse or prouince, may haue conference with his Archdeacons and Chauncellor, and be priuie to all and singular their doings: So cannot the Pope with his Cardinalles, Archbyshops, and Legates &c. dispersed thorough out whole Christendome. And there∣fore an Archbishop or Bishop may well gouerne a prouince or diocesse, and vse the heipe of Archdeacons, Chauncellors &c. but so cannot the Pope doe whole Christen∣dome, what helpe or deputies soeuer he haue.

If agaynst your will you were constrayned to make such comparisons, why do you make* 1.342 them when there is no cause? why do you forge that which is vntrue? why do you ioyne togither offices which in no poynt are like. The Pope chalengeth authoritie o∣uer all Christendome: so do not our Archbishops. The Pope exalteth himselfe aboue Kings and Princes: so do not our Archbishops, but with all reuerence acknowledge their subiection to the Prince. The Pope sayeth, that to be subiect vnto him, is of ne∣cessitie to saluation, so do not our Archbishops. The Pope maketh his Decrées equall to the woorde of God, our Archbishops thinke nothing lesse of theirs. To be short, the Pope oppresseth and persecutetth the Gospel: they earnestly professe it, and haue suf∣fered persecution for it. Therefore your comparison is odious, & your riotous speach more presumptuous than becommeth a man pretending your simplicitie.

Your good opinion conceyued of them, is well vttered in your booke: what spirit hath taught you thus to dissemble? surely euen the same that hath falsified Scriptures, and wryters in your booke: that hath vttered so many prowde and contemptuous speaches agaynst your superiours: that hath moued you to make contention in the Churche: euen spiritus mendax, spiritus arrogantiae & superbiae, a lying spirite, the spirite of arrogancie, and pryde, for such frutes cannot procéede from any other spirite.

Chap. 3. the. 34. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 82. Sect. 3. 4.

But Ierome sayth that this distinction of a Bishop, & a minister or elder, was frō S. Marke his tyme, vnto Dionysius time, whereby M. Doctor would make vs beleeue, that Marke was the author of this distinction: but that cannot be gathered by Ieromes wordes. For besides that things being ordered then by the suffrages of the ministers and Elders, it might (as it falleth out oftentimes) be done without the approbation of S. Marke: the wordes from Marke may be ra∣ther taken exclusiuely, to shut out S. Marke, and the time wherein he liued, than inclusiuely, to shut him in the tyme wherein this distinction rose.

Howsoeuer it be, it is certayne that S. Marke did not distinguishe, and make those things di∣uers, which the holy ghost made all one. For then (which the Lord forbid) he should make the sto∣rie of the Gospell, which he wrote suspected.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is no answere to Ieromes woordes, but a dallying with them: the place is euident: he sayth, from the time of Marke the Euangelist, whom vndoubtedly he would not haue named, vnlesse the same manner had bene in his time. But be it

that the wordes (from Marke) be taken exclusiuely (which no man of Iudgement will graunt) yet doth it argue a great antiquitie of this distinction, euen from the moste pure and best time of the Churche.

It is certayne that these thinges were not otherwise distinguished than the holy Ghost had appoynted: and therefore your (for then &c.) is an vngodly collection, and vnbeséeming your person in any respect, to imagine of the glorious Gospell written by that holy Euangelist.

Chap. 3. the. 35. Diuision.

T. C Pag. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉2. Sect. 5.

Againe it is to be obserued that Ierome sayeth it was so in Alexandria, signifying thereby,* 1.343 that in other Churches it was not so. And indeede it may appeare in diuers places of the auncient fathers, that they confounded Priest and Bishop, and tooke them for all one, as Eusebius out of Ireneus calleth Ani〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ete, Pius, Telesphorus, Higinus, Xystus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.344 Elders, and presidents. Cyprian confoundeth Priest and Bishop in the Epistles before recited, so doth Ambrose in the place alledged before by M. Doctor, and yet it is one thing with vs, to be a priest (as M. Doctor speaketh) and an other thing to be a Bishop.

Io. Whitgifte.

This argument passeth of all that euer I heard, Ierome sayth, there was a Bi∣shop* 1.345 in Alexandria aboue the other ministers, from S. Markes time, therefore there was no Bishop in any place else. God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob. Ergo, he is no bodies God else: he is the God of the Iewes, Ergo, not of the Gentiles. There be Bishops in England, Ergo, there are none in any other place. No marueyle it is, though you riot in your Logike, when such stuffe is set abroad. Like vnto this are the other: Eusebius out of Ireneus, calleth Anitete, Pius, Telesphorus, &c. elders, and presi∣dents, and Cyprian confoundeth Priest, and Bishop, and so doth Ambrose, Ergo, euery Priest is such a Bishop as Ierome here speaketh of. These be pretie argumentes.

Euery Bishop is a Priest, but euery Priest hath not the name and title of a Bi∣shop,* 1.346 in that meaning that Ierome in this place taketh the name of a Byshop. For his woordes be these: Nam Alexandriae à Marco Euangelista vsque ad Heraclam &c. At A∣lexandria from Marke the Euangelist, vntill Heracla and Dionysius Bishops, the ministers alwayes chose one from among themselues, and placing him in a higher degree of dignitie, called him a Bishop: as if an armie should make a Captayne▪ &c. Neyther shall you finde this woorde (Episcopus) commonly vsed, but for that Priest that is in degrée ouer and aboue the rest, notwithstanding (Episcopus) be oftentimes called Presbyter, bycause Presbyter is the more generall name: so that M. Doctor sayth truely, that it is with vs one thing to be a Byshop, an other thing to be a priest, bycause euery Bishop is a Priest, but euery Priest is not a Bishop.

I know these names be confounded in the Scriptures, but I speake according to the manner and custome of the Church, euen since the Apostles time. And this is not onely my opinion, but other learned men affirme it in lyke manner: as M. Bucer in his booke De regno Christi, and vpon the. 4. Ephes. Whose woordes I haue before reher∣sed. Thus you sée that M. Doctors distinction is with better authoritie cōfirmed, than you haue any to ouerthrow it.

Chap. 3. the. 36. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 82. Sect. vlt.

Ierusalem was a famous Church, so was Rome as the Apostle witnesseth, so was Antioche* 1.347 and others, where also were great contentions, both in doctrine and otherwise, and yet for auoyding of contention & schisine there, there was no (*) 1.348 one that was ruler of the rest. Therfore we ought rather to follow these Churches beyng many, in keping vs to the institutiō of the Apostles, than A∣lexandria beyng but one Church and departing from that institution, & if there had bene any one set ouer al the rest in other places, it would haue made much for the distinctiō that Icrome had recited.

Io. Whitgifte.

Iames was byshop of Ierusalem, and in authoritie aboue all other ministers there.* 1.349 Eusebius so reporteth of him out of Egesippus, who liued immediatly after y^e Apostles time, his wordes out of Egesippus be these: Ecclesiam gubernandam post Apostolos Iacobus frater Domini accepit: Iames the brother of the Lorde had the gouernment of the Churche after the Apostles, Lib. 2. Cap. 23. And in the beginning of that chapter Eusebius speaking of this Iames sayeth thus, Cui Hierosolymis ab Apostolis Episcopalis sedes concredita fuerat: to whom the Byshops seat at Ierusalem was committed by the Apostles. In the first chapter of that booke: he sayeth out of Clement, that Peter and Iohn after the ascension of Christe. Constituerunt Iacobum Iustum Hierosolymorum Episcopum, did appoynt Iames the* 1.350 Iust, Bishop of Hierusalem. The same thing do all Ecclesiasticall histories and wryters (that make any mention of this matter) affirme of him. After Iames, was Simeon the sonne of Cleop〈1 line〉〈1 line〉as appoynted Byshop there, as the same Eusebius reporteth, lib. 3. cap. 11.* 1.351 and lib. 4 cap. 22. Therfore you are greatly deceyued in saying that there was no one o∣uer the rest at Ierusalem: although if there had bene none, yet would it not haue serued your turne, bicause the Apostles as yet beyng aliue, this office of Byshops was lesse néedefull: But it is certayne that they placed Byshops in all great and famous Churches, after they had planted them, as Zuinglius sayeth in his Ecclesiastes: and auncient authors do testifie.

Linus was Byshop of Rome as Eusebius witnesseth Lib. 3. cap. 2. and he liued in* 1.352 the Apostles time. Timothie byshop at Ephesus, Titus at Creta, Dyonisius Areopagit〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 at Athens &c. as he also wryteth in the same booke cap. 4. But this thing is so mani∣fest and so well knowne to all that read Ecclesiasticall histories, that I am sure they will maruayle at your grosse ouersight in denying the same. Wherefore Ieromes di∣stinction standeth.

Chap. 3. the. 37. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 83. Lin. 2.

But agaynst this distinctiō of S. Ierome, I will vse no other reason than that which Ierome vseth in the same epistle to Euagrius. Ierome in that Epistle taketh vp very sharply the Arch∣deacon* 1.353 that he preferred himselfe before the Elder, and the reason is, bycause by the Scripture the Deacon is inferior vnto the Elder. Now therfore Ierome himself confessing that by the scripture, a Bishop and an Elder are equall, by Ieromes owne reason, the byshop is to be sharply reprehen∣ded, bycause he lifteth himselfe aboue the Elder.

Io. Whitgifte.

Without doubt you forget your selfe, else would you not reason in this manner: The Archdeacon is inferior to the elder, therefore the byshop is not superior to the elder in any respect: I sée no sequele in this reason, neither yet any likelyhoode. Besides that, you vntruely report of Hierome, for hée speaketh of a Deacon, and not of an Archedeacon. But it is your manner so to deale: suerly I marueyle that you will vtter so manifest vntruthes. But if Hierome should so saye, yet is your argument nothing: for though an Archedeacon be inferiour to a minister (whome you call Elder) yet doth not that proue but that there mayé bée degrées among the ministers, and that the chéefest of them in authoritie, may be called a Bishop, as Hierome also in that Epistle declareth. And although Hierome confesse that by the scripture, Presbyter and Episcopus is all one, (as in déede they be quoad ministerium.) yet doth hée acknowledge a superioritie of the Bishop before the minister. For besides these places that I haue alleaged in my Aun∣swere to the Admonition, he saith thus in the same Epistle. Presbyter & Episcopus aliud* 1.354 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tatis, aliud dignitatis est nomen, the one is a name of age, and the other of dignitie. And a litle after: In Episcopo & Presbyter continetur, the Elder or minister is conteyned in th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Bishop. Therefore no doubte this is Ieromes minde, that a Bishop in degrée and di∣gnitie is aboue the minister, though he be one & the selfe same with him in the office

of ministring the word and sacraments: and therfore he sayth, presbyter continetur in episcopo: bicause euerie Bishop is presbyter, but euery presbyter is not Bishop.

Chap. 3. the. 38. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 83. Lin. 8.

But what helpeth it you that there was a Bishop of Alexandria, which vrge an Archbishop, or what auantageth it you, that there was one chief, called a Bishop in euery seuerall congrega∣tion, which wold proue that there ought to be one Bishop chief ouer a thousand congregations? What coulde haue bin brought more strong to pull downe the Archbishop out of his throne, then that which Ierom faith there, when he affirmeth that the Bishop of the obscurest village or ham∣let, hath as great authoritie and dignitie as the Bishop of Rome? Erasmus did see this, and sayd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, * 1.355 testingly, that Hierome spake that of the Bishops of his tyme, but if the had seene howe the Metropolitanes of our age excell other Bishops, he woulde haue spoken o∣therwise. And what could haue ben more fit to haue confuted the large dominion and superioritie of our realme, than that that Ierome sayeth, when he appointeth the Bishops sea in an vplan∣dish town, or in a poore village or hamlet, (a) 1.356 declaring therby that in euery town there was a Bi∣shop, and that the Bishop that he speaketh of, differeth nothing at all from an elder, but that the Bishop had the ordeyning of y^e ministers, whervpon it doth appere (which I promised to shew) that by this place of Ierome, there is neither name of Archbishop, nor so much as the shadowe of his authoritie, and that the Bishoppes whiche are nowe, haue besides the name, no similitude almoste with the Bishopes that were in Ieromes tyme. As for his reason ad Luciferanos, it is the same which he hath ad Euagr. and to Titus, and is alreadie answ〈1 line〉〈1 line〉red.

Io. Whitgifte.

If this be true that you say, why haue you then hitherto sought so to deface this worthie writer? why did you not in the beginning tell vs, that this saying óf Ierome made nothing against you, bicause he only speaketh of Pastors in seuerall parishes, and not of one to haue charge and gouernment ouer one whole dioces? But full* 1.357 well knew you the vanitie of this your fansie, & how vnlyke it is to stande with Ie∣romes words: For in his cōmentaries vpon y^e epistle to Titus, he sayth that Post{que} v∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉usquis{que} eos quos baptizauerat. &c. After that euery one did think those to be his, & not Chri stes, whom he had baptized, it was decreed throughout the whole world, that one of the mi∣nisters being chosen should be set ouer the rest, vnto whome the whole care of the churche should aperteyn, and the seeds of schismes be taken away. Do you thinke y^t this is ment of the Pastor of euery towne? To what purpose shoulde Ierome saye so? For the pa∣stor of euery seueral towne, had from the beginning his a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉thorite ouer his flocke, without any such constitution. Moreouer, there are not in euery seuerall congregatiō many pastors or priestes, ouer whom one shold be placed as chief. But Ierome spea∣keth of a Bishop that must gouerne the other Priestes, and procure that vnitie bée kept among them, and therfore his iurisdiction must of necessitie extend to many pa∣rishes, bicause it is ouer many pastors. He sayth lykewise, that the care of the whole was cōmitted vnto him. In his epistle ad Euagrium, he vttereth his meanyng as plainly, For he sayeth, That the Priests did choose one among themselues, whome they placing* 1.358 in a higher degree called a Bishop: Wherby it apeareth y^t he had authoritie ouer many Pastors, and therfore ouer many congregations, for you will not denie but that e∣uery presbyter, that is minister of the worde had his seuerall flocke. This he decla∣reth more euidently by the examples there vsed, of souldiers choosing their Captain, for though the Captain before was a common souldiour, yet now being 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hus prefer∣red, he ruleth and gouerneth the reste of the souldiers, euen so the Bishop being before a minister equall with other, yet being chosen to that degrée, he is their guide and gouernoure, a gouernour I say of those that did elect him, that ist of Priests or ministers, & therfore of diuers congregations.

This dothe yet more euidentely appeare in these woordes of the same Epistle, That one was afterwardes chosen to rule the reste, it was a remedie against schismes, least euerie one drawing to himselfe the Churche, shoulde breake the same. And in his booke* 1.359 contra Luciferianos, he sayeth that except the chief authoritie were giuen to one, tot es∣sent schismata quot sacerdotes, there would be as many schismes as priests. By which places

it is certain that Ieromes meaning is to haue some one in a prouince or dioces ouer the rest (proprely called a Bishop) who should haue chief authoritie, least euery man in his owne seuerall parish being permitted to do what he list, might in the end fyll the Church with schismes, vt tot essent schismata quot sacerdotes. And surely it is vnpos∣sible to expounde Ierome otherwise.

But you aske me, what this helpeth for the Archbishop. &c? very much. For if it be so necessarie to haue one Bishop ouer diuers Priests in euery seuerall dioces, for the auoyding of schisme and cōtention, it is also necessarie in euery prouince to haue an archbish〈1 line〉〈1 line〉p for the direction of diuers Bishops, & the auoyding of schisme amōg them. And therfore sayth Ierome again in his epistle ad Rusticū monachū, euerie ecclesiasticall* 1.360 order is subiect to hir gouernours.

You aske what could haue ben brought more strong to pull downe the Archbishop out of his throne, than that which Ierom sayth there, when he affirmeth that the bishop of the obscurest vil∣lage or hamlet, hath as gret authority & dignitie as the bishop of Rome? I answer, that this no∣thing at alderogateth frō the Archbishop. For it is not denied, but that euery bishop, & euery minister are equal quoad ministerium, but not quoad ordinem & politiam: & this is that which Ierome saith, eiusdem sunt meriti & sacerdotij, they be of the same merite and priesthod y^t is, their ministerie & office in preaching the word, & administring y^e sacra∣ments, is al one. And their authoritie also toward such as were vnder their iu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉isdicti∣on:* 1.361 but he doth nor say, y^e one Bishop hath not more ample & large iurisdictiō thā the other, for the contrarie of that is manyfest. And in S. Ieroms tyme there wer Me∣tropolitanes, Archbishops. &c. as you may read in the defe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉se of the Apol. edit. 2. pag. 121.

These obscure townes doe derogate nothing from the authoritie of a bishop: for we see it oftentimes come to passe, y^t the Bishops seate is but in obscure towns, as it is in diuers places of England: & yet is the bishops iurisdiction in his dioces no whit the lesse. If we respect the places, Canterburie is far inferior to London. And therefore Ieroms meaning is, y^t the place neither addeth any thing, or taketh any thing away from the worthinesse, authoritie, and office of a Bishop. Wheresoeuer a Bishop is in citie or in towne, he is of the same authoritie and worthinesse.

Erasmus in his Scholies vpon that epistle of Hierome hath these words: Certè Me∣tropolitanus* 1.362 habet aliquid dignitatis &c. Surely the Metropolitane hath some dignitie & iuris∣di〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tion aboue the other bishops, therfore that he here maketh the Bishops of base cities e∣qual with the rest, it is to be referred vnto the deacons, which in some places were preferred before the ministers, whom he doth in a maner make equall with Bishops. And in an other place he sayeth, that the ministers, succede into the place of the Apostles, the Byshop into the place of Christ. In this thing therefore are Byshoppes and ministers equall, that where∣soeuer they are, they are to be preferred before Deacons. Here Erasmus speaketh in good earnest howsoeuer he iested before. He she weth that these obscure villages or hamlets (as you terme them) were cities, and no doubt, as good as eyther Ely, or Pe∣terborough: but in the respect of Rome, contemptible, as these be in respect of Lontō. And yet the Bishops of euery one of them eiusdem meriti & sacer dotij. of the same merite, priesthood & authoritie. Erasmus also here telleth in what respect he hath made this cōparison betwixt Bishops and other ministers, in the respect of Deacons. For both Bishops & Priests are to be preferred equally before Deacons, bicause of their mi∣nisterie & office, which is aboue the office of a Deacon. Nam ex Diacono ordinatur presby∣ter. For a minister or priest is made of a Deacon, not ex presbytero diaconus, the Deacon of the priest. It is most euident (neither can it be so vnknown vnto you) y^e Ierome in al these places meaneth to haue one bishop gouernour of many priests. And therefore this interpretation of yours is without all probabilitie, or shadow of truth, that Hie∣romes meaning is to haue suche a Bishop in euery towne.

I trust the reader will note with what vaine reasons you first went about to shake* 1.363 the credit of this wryter: Then, how without reason, you tooke vpon you to answer his reasons: and now in the ende, how vnpossible an interpretation you feine of his words: which if he well consider, he shall note in you great audacitie, smal iudgemēt, and no truthe. For the author is of greate learning and worthynesse, his reasons

strong, and his wordes playne and euident for the authoritie of the Bishop ouer the rest of the Cleargie.

Chap. 3. the 3. 9. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 71. Sect. 2. 3.

Chrysostome writing vpon the twentieth of Mathevve sayth, that* 1.364 the rebellious nature of man caused these distinctions of degrees, that one. should be an Apostle, an other a Bishop, an other a minister, an other a lay man. And that vnlesse there vvere suche distinctions of persones, there coulde be no discipline.

And vpon the. 13. to the Romaines he sayth, that bicause equalitie en∣gēdreth strife & contētion, therfore superioritie and degrees of persons were appoynted.

T. C. Page. 83. Sect. 1.

What is that to the purpose, that Chrysostome sayth, there must be degrees? who denyeth that there are degrees of functions? we confesse there is, and ought to be a degree of pastors, an other of Doctors, the third of those which are called Elders, the fourth of Deacons. And wher he saith, there should be one degree of Byshop, an other of a minister, another of the lay man,(*) 1.365 what pro∣ueth that for the office of an Archbyshop, whiche is your purpose to shew? how often times must you be called ad Rhombum? and that he meaneth nothing lesse, than to make any such difference be∣twene a byshop, and a minister, as is with vs, whiche you woulde fayne make your reader beleeue, I will send you to Chrysostome, vpon the third chapter. 1. Epistle to Timothie, wher he saith: the office of a byshop differeth little or nothing from an Elders, and a little after, that a byshop disier∣reth nothing from an Elder or minister, but by the ordination only. Still M. Doctor goeth for∣ward in killing a dead man, that is in confuting that whiche all men condemne, and prouing that which no man denye〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h, that there must be superioritte amongst men, and that equalitie of all men alike confoundeth all, and ouerthroweth all.

Io. Whitgifte.

Chrysostome in that place maketh degrées in the ministerie, and placeth the Bi∣shop in degrée aboue the minister, which vtterly ouerthroweth your equalitie. As for your distinction of degrées it hath a small grounde in the scripture to warrant it, as can be, and in déed it is but your owne inuētion. For the Pastor, doctor, and elder in office are all one, as the most & best writers thinck. Howsoeuer it is, you haue them not thus distinguished in the Scripture, that the Pastor should be firste, the Doctor next, the Elder third, & the deacon last: and it is strange that you will inuent a new order of ministers, without the expresse warrant of Gods worde, misliking the same so muche in other.

This superioritie that Chrysostome talketh of, ouerthroweth that part of the Ad∣monitiō that I confute, for they do not only disallow the office of the Archbishop, but of the Bishop also, & would haue a mere equalitie amōg the ministers: this I refel, as well as the other: and indéede the ouerthrow of this, is the ouerthrow of the other. And therefore this place of Chrysostome serueth my turne very well, and aptly.

Chrysostom vpon that. 3. chapter of the first to Timothie, giueth asmuch superiori∣tie to the Bishop as I doe: and maketh asmuch difference betwixt him and the mi∣nister: for I graunt that quoad ministerium, they be all one, but y^t there be degrees of dig∣nitie, and so sayth Chrysostom, that there is little difference betwixta Byshop and a priest, but that a Byshop hath authoritie to ordaine priests, and all other things that the Byshop may do, the priest also may do, that excepted: so that Chrisostome here speaketh only of the ministerie of the Byshop, not of his authoritie, in the ecclesiasti∣call gouernment, for of that he spake in the place before alledger, where he sayth that* 1.366 there is one degree of the Byshop, and other of the minister. &c. which distinction of de∣grées was long before Chrysostomes time, as I haue declared.

To proue these degrées of superioritie among ministers, is to proue y^e which both the Admonition, & you denie, & which is the grounde of this controuersie: & therfore

I haue not herein gone about to kill a dead man except you count the grounde of your assertion dead.

If there must be superioritie amongst men, and that equalitie of all men alyke confoundeth all, and ouerthroweth (as you confesse, and is most true) then equalitie of ministers con∣foundeth all among them: and therefore it is requisite, that in that state also there be supe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉iours to auoyde confusion: whiche being graunted, what haue you to saye, eyther against Archbishops or Bishops, except you haue some newe deuise of your owne? which is not vnlyke, bicause nothing doth please you but your owne.

Chap. 3. the. 40. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 83. Sect. 2.

This is a notable argument, there must be some superiour amongst men, ergo one minister must be superior to an other: again ther must be in y^e ecclesiastical functions some degrees, ergo ther must be an archbishop ouer y^e whole prouince, or a Bishop ouer y^e whole dioces. And albert M. Doctor taketh great paine to proue y^t which no man denieth, yet he doth it so 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and so vn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉itly, as that i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 a man had no better proofes than he bringeth, the degrees of y^e ecclesiasticall functions might fal to the ground. For here to proue the degrees of the ecclesiastical functions he bringeth in that, that Chrysostome sayth there muste be magistrate and subiecte, him that commaundeth and him that obeyeth.

Io. Whitgifte.

The argument is good, & foloweth verie wel. For as superioritie & gouernment is* 1.367 necessarie in al other states & degrees of men, so is it in y^e ministerie also: for ministers be not angels, nor they are not of y^t perfection, y^t they may safely be left in their own absolute gouernment. That which Chrysostom in this place speaketh of gouernmēt in the ciuil state, the same doth he speak in the. 13. to the Hebrues of y^e ecclesias〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ical in lyke maner: for expounding these words, Parete his qui praesunt vobis. &c. whiche is vn∣derstood of Bishops, he sayth, that there be thrée euils which oue〈1 line〉〈1 line〉throw the church, &* 1.368 all other societies. The first wherof is, to haue no superiour, none to rule: and this he proueth by diuers examples, as of a Quier without a Chaunter, an armie of souldi∣ours without a captaine, a ship without a maister, a 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉locke of shéepe without a shepe∣heard. Now if superioritie be so needfull among the clergie, then why may not one Bishop be ouer one diocesse, & one 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rchbishop ouer one Prouince? Wherfore I con∣clude thus: It is necessary y^t among the cler〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ie some should be in authoritie ouer the rest and therfore there may be both Archbishops & Bishops: but I know you wil an∣swer y^t there may be gouernment without these degrées: then say I vnto you againe, stand not so much in your owne c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ceyt, this order is most auncient in the Church, it is confirmed by the best and noblest Councels, it is allowed by the best learned fa∣thers, it hath the pattern from the practise of the Apostles (a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉l whiche hath bin she∣wed before) it is most méet for this state and kingdome: and therfore be no〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 wilful in a new deuise, the triall wherof was neuer as yet, the maner wherof is vnknown to your selfe, and the end no doubt mere confusion. Your welfauoured and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 spee∣ches together with your accustomed cōtempt, I omit here, as I doe in other places.

Chap. 3. the. 41. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 83. Sect. 3.

The moste therfore that he can conclude of this, for the ministerie, is that there must be mini∣ster that shall rule, and people that shall be obedient, and hereby he can 1. of proue, that ther should be any degrees amongst the ministers and ecclesiasticall gouernours, vnlesse he wyl say peraduen∣ture, that as there are vnder magistrates, and a kyng aboue them all, so there shoulde be vnder mi∣nisters, and one minister aboue all. * But he must remember that it is not necessary in a common* 1.369 wealth, that there should be one ouer all: for that there are other good common wealthes, wherin many haue lyke power and authoritie. And further if bicause there is one kyng in a lande aboue all, he wil conclude there should be one Archbishop ouer all. I say as I haue sayd, that it is not against any word of God, which I know (although it be inconuenient) but that there may be one Cesar ouer all the worlde, and yet I thinke M. Doctor wyll not say, that there maye be one Archebi∣shop ouer all the worlde.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.370

Yes, I wil cōclude that ther ought to be degrées of superioritie amōg y^e ministers also, bicause they labour of imperfections as wel as other mē do, & especally of pride, arrogancie vainglorie, which ingender schismes, heres〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es, contentions, as the exam∣ples of all times and ages euen from the Apostles to this time declare.

I am persuaded y^t the externall gouernment of the church vnder a christiā Magi∣strate, must be according to the kinde & forme of the gouernment vsed in the cōmon wealth, else how can you make the Prince supreme gouernour of all states & causes ecclesiastical? wil you so deuide the gouernment of y^e Churche from the gouernment of the cōmon wealth, that the one being a monarchie, the other must be a Democra∣tie, or an Aristocratie: this were to deuide one realme into two, and to spoyls the Prince of the one halfe of hir iurisdiction and authoritie. If you will therefore haue the Quéene of Englande rule as Monarche ouer all hir dominions, then muste you also giue her leaue to vse one kinde and forme of gouernment, in all and euery parte of the same: and so to gouerne the Church in Ecclesiasticall affaires, as she doth the common wealth in ciuile.

But you say, that I must remember that it is not necessarie in a common welth, that there* 1.371 should be one ouer all: & I say, that you must remember that in this cōmon wealth it is necessarie, y^t one shuld be ouer al, except you wil trāsform aswel y^e state of y^e kingdom as you would of y^e church: which is not vnlike to be your meaning, for not long after you adde that the common wealth must be stamed a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cording to y^e church, as the hangyngs to the house, & the gouernmēt therof w^t her gouernment, &c. & not contrary: meaning y^t the gouernmēt of the cōmon wealth, ought not to be monarchical, but either democratical, or Aristo∣cratical, bicause (as you say) the gouernment of the Church ought to be such. What this in time wil bréed in this common wealth, especially when it cōmeth to the vn∣derstanding of the people, who naturally are so desirous of innouations, I referre it to the iudgement of those that can and ought best to consider it.

The vnlike linesse that is betwixt one Cesar being ouer all the world, & of one archbishop being ouer all the world. I haue shewed before, they be most vnlike, & yet this is but a friuolous & vaine supposition, & M. Caluin in his Inst. cap. 8. sect. 96. doth say, that it is ab∣surdissimum, most absurd.

Chap. 3. the 42. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 71. Sect. 4.

It is not to be denied but that ther is an equalitie of al ministers of* 1.372 gods word, quoad ministeriū, touching the ministerie, for they haue allike power to preach the word, to minister the sacraments, that is to say, the word preached, or the sacramēts ministred, is as effectual in one (in respect of the ministerie) as it is in an other. But quoad ordinem & poli∣tiam, touching order & gouernment, ther always hath bin & must be de∣grees and superioritie among them. For the churche of God is not a cōfused congregation, but ruled & directed aswel by discipline & poli∣cie in matters of regimēt, as by the word of God in matters of faith.

T. C. Pag. 84. Sect. 1. 2.

Nowe M. Doctor cōmeth to his olde hole, where he would fayn hide himself, and with him all the ambition, tyrannie, & excesse of authorttie which is ioyned with these functions of Archebishop and bishop, as they are now vsed: & this his hole is, that al the ministers are equall with bishops & Archbishops, as touching the ministerie o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the word & sacramentes, but not as touching policie & gouernment. The Papists vse the very self same (a) 1.373 distinction for the maintenance of the Popes tyrannie and ambition, and other their hierarchie.

M. Doctor hath put out the mark & concealed the name of the Papists, & so with a little change of wordes, as it were with certayn newe colours he would deceyue vs. For the Papistes saye, that euery syr Iohn or hedge Prieste hathe as greate authoritie to sacrifyce, and offer for the quycke and the deade, and to minister the Sacramentes, as the Pope of Rome hath, but for go∣uernment, and for order, the Bishoppe is aboue a Prieste, the Archebishoppe aboue a bishop, and the Pope aboue them all. But I haue (b) 1.374 declared before out of the Scriptures, h〈1 line〉〈1 line〉we vayne

a disrinction it is: and it appeareth out of Cyprian, that as all the Bishops were equall one to another, so he sayth that to euerie one was giuen a portion of the Lords flock not only to feed with the worde and sacraments, but to rule and gouerne, not as they which shal make any accompt vn∣to an archbishop, or be iudged of him, but as they which can not be iudged of any but of God. And Ierome vpon Cituz sayth, that the elder or minister (c) 1.375 did gouerne and rule in common with the Bishops, the Churche wherof he was elder or minister.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.376

The distinction is good and true, allowed of the best writers, though the Papists wrongfully applie it. M. Caluin vpon the 2. Cor. 10. hath the same distinction. Quamuis (sayth he) commune sit omnibus verbi ministris idem{que} officium, sunt tamen honoris gradus: Al∣though there is one office cōmon to al the ministers of the word, yet are there degrees of ho nour. M. Beza likewyse lib. conf. cap. 7. saith thus: that pastors in proces of time wer distinct into Metropolitanes, Bishops, and those we now call curates, it was not in therespect of the ministerie of the worde, but rather in respecte of iurisdiction and disci∣pline. Therefore concerning the office of preaching the vvorde and admi∣nistrating the Sacramentes, there is no difference betwixt Archbishops, Bi∣shops, and curates. &c. The same distinction doth Hemingius vse in his Enchiridion,* 1.377 as shall be seene hereafter. What say you now? is this a starting hole, or rather a true distinction, allowed by such as are far frō Papistrie? except you wil accuse M Caluine and Beza for Papists. You are not able to improue this distinction with all the lear∣ning you boast of: and bitternesse of words will not carie away the matter.

You haue declared nothing tending to the improuing of this distinction, & the wordes both of Cyprian and of Hicrom do manifestly confirme it: for they both would haue one chief among the ministers to gouerne the rest, as it is said before. You deale cor∣ruptly in reciting Hieroms words: for you haue left out his purpose and meaning, I wil set them down as they be in déed. Idē est ergo presbyter. &c. VVherfore the minister* 1.378 and bishop are al one, and before that through the instinct of the deuil, there were diuisions in religion, and that it was sayd among the people, I hold of Paule, I of Apollo, and I of Ce∣phas, the churches were ruled in cōmon by the coūcell of the ministers: But after that euery one accompted those whom he baptized to be his, and not Christes, it was decreed thorow∣out the whole world, that one being chosen from amōg the ministers should be placed ouer the rest, to whom the whole care of the church should appertein, and the seedes of schismes be taken away. Wil you not leaue off to deale thus guilefully with your Reader? haue you no care to deale plainly and simply? Ierome in that place verifieth this distinctiō, and she weth that it was for order & policie, that among the ministers there was one bishop apointed, ad quē omnia ecclesiae cura pertineret, & schismatū semina tollerētur. And what can be spoken more directly to the purpose? But one thing here I note, that you wold be controlled of none but of God, that is, you would be exempted from all authoritie of man, euen as the Pope himselfe is.

Chap. 3. the. 43. Diuision.

Answere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Lin. 4.

And therfore wel saith M. Caluin, in his Institutions cap 8. that the* 1.379 twelue Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest, it was no maruel: sor nature requireth it, and the disposition of man wilso haue it, that in eue∣ry companie (although they be al equal in power) yet that there be one as go∣uernour, by whom the rest may be directed: there is no Courte without a Consul, no Senate without a Pretor, no Colledge without a Presidente, no societie vvithout a maister. Haec Caluin.

T. C. Page. 84. Sect. 3.

After foloweth M. Caluin, a great patron forsoth, of the Archbishop, or of this kinde of bishop, which is vsed amongst vs here in England. And here to passe ouer your strange citations & quota tions which you make, to put your answerer to pain, sending him sometimes to Musculus common places for one sentence, to Augustins works, to Chrysostoms works, to Cyril, to M. Foxe, & here

sending him to y^e. 8. chapter of y^e Institutiōs (*) 1.380 as though you had neuer red Caluins institutions, but tooke she sentence of some body else, withoute any examination, whereby it seemeth that you were loth, that euer any man should answer your booke, letting I say al this passe: what maketh this eyther to prone, that there should be one Archbyshop ouer all the ministers in the prouince, or one Byshop ouer all in the diocesse, that amongst twelue that were gathered togyther into one place, there was one which ruled the action for which they mette.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.381

This is to be obserned throughout your whole booke, as I haue noted in other places, that when any authoritie is alleadged that pincheth you, then you fall to ca∣uilling by and by I haue no where referred you to Iustinians code, to Gratians decrees, to Augustines works, to diuers councels, to Theodorete, to the centuries. &c. Without noting eyther booke, Chapter, distinction, number, Canon, or such like, as you vsually deale with me: and yet these be farre more tedious to reade ouer, than is the. 8. Chap. of Caluines Institutions. I do not remember that I referred you to Augustine, Chry∣sostome, or any other writers, for any matter in controuersie (Cyrill, Museulus, and M. Foxe onely in one place excepted) but I quoted the places, as particularly as I coule. And why will you then so vntruly report of me? vndoubtedly I neuer red a booke for the quantitie of it, so pestered with slanderous reportes, false accusations, and contentious deriding speaches, as this your booke is. But let it go.* 1.382

This booke of institutions which is distinguished into Chapters and not into boo∣kes, I red and noted thorough before you (as it shoulde seeme) knew whether there were any such booke or no, and bycause I haue laboured in it, noted it, and am well acquainted with it, therefore I vse it, and follow it, and so will I do still: Neyther are you ignorant I am sure, that there be sundry editions of those institutions: al∣though you séeme to dissemble the matter in this place, I mighte say of purpose (for you haue answered after your manner places before, out of the same booke quoted in like manner) but let it be of ignorance, you take occasion by it, to vtter your cynicall 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but to your owne shame.

The place alledged maketh much for my purpose, for it proueth superioritie to haue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 among the Apostles, and therefore that it may be among ministers, which you denie▪ and I affirme: which also being graunted (as it cannot be denyed) what∣soeuer I affirme eyther of Archbyshops or Byshops, will soone be proned. But let vs heare the proofe of this new deuise of yours in soluting this, and such like places: that one ruled the action. &c.

Chap. 3. the. 44. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 84. Sect. 3.

And that it may appeare what superioritie it is, whiche is lawfull amongst the ministers, and what it is that M. Caluine speaketh of, what also the fathers and councels do meane, when they giue more to the Byshop of any one Church, than to the elder of the same Church, and that no man be deceiued by the name of gouernoure, or ruler ouer the rest, to fansic any such authoritie and do∣mination or Lordship, as we see vsed in our Church, it is to be vnderstanded, that amongst the pa∣stors, elders and beacons of euery particular Church, and in the meetings and companies of the mi∣nisters, or elders of diuers Churches (*) 1.383 there was one chosen by the voyces aud suffrages of them all, or the most pare, which did propound the matters that were to be handied, whether they were difficulties to be soluted, or punishments and censures to be decreed vpon those which had faul∣ted, or whether there were elections to be made, or what other matter soeuer occasion was gyuen to entreate of: the which also gathered the voyces and reasons of those which had interest to speake in such cases, which also did pronounce according to the number of the voyces whiche were gyuen, which was also the mouth of the rest, to admonish, or to comfort, or to rebuke sharply, such as were to receule admonishment, consolation, or rebuke, and which in a word did moderate that whole acti∣on, which was done for the time they were assembled. Which thing we do not denie, may be, but affirme that it is fitte and necessary to be, to the auoyding of confusion.

Io. Whitgifte.

All this is spoken of your owne head, and a deuise withoute proofe or reason as yet, and contrary to the testimonies of all histories, Councels and fathers: affirmed by no learned writer, as it may appeare by that whiche I haue hitherto alledged

out of the canons attributed to the Apostles, the Councel also of Nice, Antioch, Are∣lat, Carthage, Calcedon, likewise out of Cyprian, Eusebius, Epiphanius, Athanasius, Gre∣gory Nazian. Ambrose, Ierome, Socrates, Sozom. Theodoret, Caluin, Illiricus: All whiche manifestly declare that the office of an Archbyshop, and iurisdiction of a Byshop is permanent, and affixed to certayne places, not moueable, nor during one action on∣ly. And vndoubtedly I maruayle what vrgeth you to such absurd and vnlearned pa∣radoxes: vnlesse it be ignorance and lacke of reading. But let vs heare your reasons.

Chap. 3. the. 45. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 84. Sect. 3.

For it were an absurd hearing that many should at once attempt to speake. Neyther coulde it* 1.384 be done without great reproch, that many men beginning to speake, some should be bidden to holde their peace, which would come to passe, if there should be no order kept, nor none to appoint when euery one should speake, or not, to put them to silence, when they attempted confusedly to speake, and out of order. Moreouer when many ministers meete togyther, and in so great diuersitie of gifts as the Lord hath giuen to his Church, there be found that excell in memorie, facilitie of tongue, and expedition or quicknesse to dispatch matters more than the rest: and therefore it is fitte, that the bre∣thren, that haue that dexteritie, should especially be preferred vnto this office, that the action may be the better, and more speedily made an end of.

Io. Whitgifte.

Surely and your deuise of saluing it, is as absurd: for there would be as great con∣tention at such elections, as there is confusion in the former equalitie: and the rather bycause there is none to direct them therein. For who shall call them togyther before this election be made? where shall they meete? who shall declare vnto them the cause of their meeting? or what remedie if they cannot agrée of some one that hathe thys dexteritie, but are drawen into diuers parts, some thinking one most meete, and some another, other some the third. &c? how if there be sects and schismes among them, as there is at this time? an hundreth inconueniences are there in this deuise of yours: and to tell you the truth, it may be vsed in places where there is no gouernment, no lawes, no forme of a common wealth, no order: But in a kingdome, in a Church vn∣d〈1 line〉〈1 line〉r ciuill gouernment, in a place of order. &c. it is the very high way to subuersion and confusion.

Chap. 3. the. 46. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 85. Sect. 1.

And if any man will call this (*) 1.385 a rule or presidentship, and him that executeth this office 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 president or moderator, or a gouernour, we will not striue, so that it be with these cautions, that he be not called simply gouernour, or moderator, but gouernour or moderator of that action, and for that time, and subiect to the orders that others be, and to be censured by the company of the bre∣thren, as well as others, if he be iudged any way faultie. And that after that action ended, and mee∣ting dissolued, he sit him downe in his old place, and set himselfe in equall estate with the rest of the ministers. Thirdly, that this gouernment or presidentship, or whatsoeuer like name you will gyue it, be not so tyed vnto that minister, but that at the next meeting it shall be lawfull to take another, if another be thought meeter.

Io. Whitgifte.

These cautions are méete for such a deuise, and apt for a tumultuous company and a congregation of proude and arrogant persons, that cannot abide any superioritie or gouernment. This I am well assured of, and it is euident both by that which is alrea∣dy spoken, and that which is to be said herea〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ter, that there can neyther patterne nor* 1.386 forme be found of it in any Church since the Apostles time, recorded in any writer of credite, but the cleane contrary for ecclesiasticall writers do both cal Byshops gouer∣nours simply, and manifestly also declare, that their office of gouernment was not for one action only, but during their life or at the least during their continuance in that seate or byshopricke▪ and it is playne by that which I haue sayd before, that the office

of the Metropolitane (which was to call Synods, and to moderate them, to ordeyne* 1.387 byshops, or at the leas〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 to consent therevnto, to suppresse schismes and such like) was affixed to the place and byshop of the same, as to Rome, Cō〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tantinople, Alexandria, &c. this do all the olde canons declare, as the. 6. and. 7. Canon of the councell of Nice, the. 9. of the councell of Antioch, and the. 5. of the generall councell of Constantinople, the. 12 of the second councell of Carthage, the. 21. Concilij Mileuitani: the. 11. of the gene∣rall councell of Chalcedon: to be short all these testimonies and examples alleadged of me before, out of Cyprian. &c. and the continuall practise of the Church. And there∣fore such new cautions here by you set downe, be only méete for such a strange and mishapen platforme and kynd of gouernment as is by you and your faction deuised.

Chap. 3. the. 47. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 85. Sect. 2. 3. 4.

Of this order and pollicie of the Church, if we will see a liuely image, a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉d perfect patterne, let vs set before ou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 eyes the most auncient and gospellike Church that euer was or shal be.

In the first of the Actes the Church being gathered togither, for the election of an Apostle in∣to the place of Iudas the traytor, when as the interest of election belonged vnto all, and to the Apo∣stles especially aboue the rest, out of the whole company Peter riseth vp. telleth the cause of their comming togyther, with what cautions and qualities they ought to choose another, conceyueth the prayer, whereby the help of God in that election, and his direction is begged, and no doubt ex〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cuted the resi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ue of the things which perteyned vnto the whole action.

In the. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. of the Actes all the Apostles are accused of dronke〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nesse. Peter answer〈1 line〉〈1 line〉d for them all, wypeth away the infamie they were charged with. But you will saye, where are the voyces of the rest, which did choose Peter vnto this? (*) 1.388 First you must kn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉w that the scripture setteth not downe euery circumstance, and then surely you do Peter great iniurie, that aske whether he were chosen vnto it: for is it to be thought, that Peter would thrust in himselfe to this office or dignitie, without the consent and allowance of his fellowes, and preuent his fellowes of this preheininence? vndoutedly if it had not bin done arrogantly, yet it must needes hau〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 a great shew of arrogancie, if he had done this without the consent of his fellowes. And here you shall heare what the scholiast saith which gathereth the iudgement of greeke diumes, (a) 1.389 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (speaking of Peter) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Behold how he doth all with their common consent. And if any man hervpon will say, that Peter exercised domination ouer the rest, or gat any ar〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hapostle∣ship, beside that the whole storie of the Actes of the Apostles, and his whole course of life doth re∣fute that, the same scholiast which I made mention of in the same place, sayth he did nothing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, imp〈1 line〉〈1 line〉riously, nothing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with dominion or power: further I will admonish him to take heede, least if he s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉riue so farre for the Archbishop, he slide or euer he be aware into the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉entes of the Papists, which vse these places to proue that Peter had authoritie, and rule ouer the rest of the Apostles.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is a rodd to beate your selfe with, for it is euident euen by these wordes of yours, that your deuise is most farthest from the Apostolicall forme: for Peter in all* 1.390 such assemblies is the chiefe, speaketh the first and moderateth the rest, in whiche re∣spect most of the olde ecclesiastical writers count him the chiefe of the Apos〈1 line〉〈1 line〉les, ney∣ther do the la〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e writers diss〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nt from them in that poynt, and yet is there no daun∣ger of sliding into the Papists tents, who by this woulde proue the Popes supremacie, whose arguments you haue vsed, and I haue confuted before.

To preuent subtily that question which neyther yo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 do〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, nor can answer, that is, where it is in scripture mentioned that at euery action, or at any time Peter was chosen to speake before the rest, or to gouerne the action? 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ou say, that first I must know that the scripture setteth not downe, euery circumstance, and then that I do Peter great iniurie that aske whether he were chosen to it. &c. To the first I answer, that you ought to know, how wicked and vngodly a thing it is, to ground the alteration of any lawfull kinde of g〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣uernment so long continued, and in the best times of the Church practised, vpon your owne fonde deuise and coniectures, without any ground of scripture, yea to make that* 1.391 your foundation which you cannot fynde in the whole scripture, but the cleane con∣trary. For shew me one péece of a text that doth but insinuate Peter, to haue bin at

any time in any action chosen to direct the action: I can shew you the contrary, espe∣cially in the second of the Actes, where Peter sodainly answered with a notable apo∣logie in the presence of the Apostles, the accusation of dronkennesse layde agaynst him, and them: neyther can it be that he should expect the voyces of the rest, to choose him to be the chéefe, for that time in that action.

Whosoeuer shall well consider the first of the Actes, and the. 15. and other places where mention is made of Peters speaking, as he shall perceiue that this was Pe∣ters peculiar office, and always apperteyning vnto him, from the ascensiō of Christ to his dying day, so shall he also easily vnderstand, that he was not at any time cho∣sen to that office by voyces, much lesse at euery particular méeting or singular action. And dare you presume vpon vaine coniectures, without warrant of scripture, to bild the foundation of your kinde of gouernment, whyche you before sayde is a mat∣ter of faythe and saluation? is not thys to open a way to vnwritten veri〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ies, and phantasticall interpretatious? if your wordes be of suche weighte wyth the Reader, that bycause you speake them, therefore hée will be〈1 line〉〈1 line〉aeue them, per me▪ licebit: but thys I will assure hym of, that he shall beléeue that, that is neyther grounded vppon Scripture, nor anye learned or aunciente au∣thoritie.

To the seconde, that is, that I doe Peter great iniurie. &c. I saye that I doe him no iniurie at all, when I affirme that of hym, that the scripture dothe, and presume not of mine owne brayne, for the mainteyning of an euill cause, to imagin that of him, whych I haue my selfe deuised besides the word of God, as you do most ma∣nifestly.

Peter did not thrust himselfe into any office or dignitie, whiche was not appoyuted vnto hym by God, neyther did he otherwise vse himselfe therein, than his office and duetie required: and it is impietie thus to dallie and trifle in Gods matters. We are w〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ll assured in scripture that Peter did this, and had this preheminence, and there∣fore you must knowe that he was lawfully called vnto it, and did lawfully exe∣cute it.

The Gréeke Scholiast saith, that Peter in such assemblies did conclude nothing* 1.392 without the consent of the rest, the which also the scripture it selfe dothe plainly de∣clare. But the Gréeke Scholiast no where sayth that Peter was at euery assemblie, or at any time chosen by the voyces of the rest, to speake first, and to moderate the ac∣tion: which is your assertion. For in the place by you cited, he speaketh not of the e∣lection of Peter to his prolocutorship, but of the choosing of Matthias to the Apostle∣ship. Wherein Peter tooke not that preheminence to himselfe to appoint him alone, but communicated the matter with the rest of the disciples. So that you haue eyther wittingly, or ignorantly applyed the Scholiast to a wrong matter.

It is true that Peter did nothing imperiously, nothing with dominion or power: no more doth any man that executeth lawfull iurisdiction, and gouerneth by law, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉quitie, and order, no not the king himselfe: for in superioritie there is humilitie, and in rule and authoritie there is seruitude: as I haue before shewed in the exposition of the places in the. 20 of Matth. 22. Luke. &c. And yet doth the Gréeke Scholiast in the same place say, that Peter rose vp and not lames, as being more feruent, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.393 and as hauing receiued the presidentship of the Apostles. Your ad∣mo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ishment of falling into the tents of the Papists, howe necessary it is for your selfe, whi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h vse their manner of reasoning vpon this example of Peter, and vpon deuised interpretations of the scripture, I haue touched before. As for my selfe I refuse no warning▪ But I trust it is not so necessary, for I know what they haue said, & what they can say in that matter.

Chap. 3. the. 48. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 85. Sect. 4.

And that it may be vnderstanded, that this inoderate rule, voyd of all pompe and outwarde

shew, was not perpetuall, nor all wastyed vnto one man, whiche were the last poynts of the c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uti∣ons I put before, turne vnto y^e. 15. of the Actes, where is shewed, how with the rest of the church, the Apostles, and amongst them Peter, being assembled, decide a great controuersie, (a) 1.394 Iames 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉he Apostle, and not Peter, moderated and gouerned the whole action, when as after other had sayde their iudgements, and namely Paule and Barnabas, and Peter, he in the end in the name o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 all, pronounced the sentence, and that whereof the rest agreed, and had disputed vnto, and the residue rested in that iudgement: the which also may likewise appeare in the. 21. of the Actes.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.395

It is euident by the story of the Actes of the Apostles, that this function remayned to Peter, so long as the Apostles cōtinued togither, and that he did execute the same when soeuer they mette: and therefore it is vntrue that this off〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ce was not tyed to one man: the. 15. of the Acts helpeth you nothing: for euen there, Peter kéepeth his accustomed manner in making the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉irst oration: and in that place it may appeare, that he did it as chéefe in that assemblie, for the text saith, that when there had bin great* 1.396 disputation, Peter rose vp and said vnto them. &c. so that Peter as one hauing authori∣tie to appease the tumult and bitter contention, rose vp and said vnto them. &c. Then spake Barnabas and Paule, after them, Iames, not as moderator or gouer〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oure of the whole action, but as one hauing interest to speake as the rest of the Apostles had, and bycause he had spoken that which the rest well liked of, therefore they consented to his opinion, and iudgement. This is no more to giue preheminence 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o Iames in moderating that action, than it is to giue the speakership in the Parliament to hym that speaketh last in a matter, and whose oration hath most perswaded, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o whome al∣so the whole house consenteth. So that Peter kéepeth his prerog〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tiue still for any thing that is here spoken to the contrary: which may also euidently appe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉re by this,* 1.397 that when there was greate contention among them about the matter, the cause whereof is like to be, for that they did not vnderstand the state of the cause, Peter stoode vp, & in hoc maximè insistit, vt statum quaestionis demonstraret, and stoode especially vp∣pon this point, that he might declare the state of the question, as M. Caluine saith, whiche is the office of the speaker or moderatour: wherefore not Iames, but Peter did mode∣rate the action.

But best as you would haue it, that Iames did moderate the action: it maketh most a∣gainst* 1.398 you, for if we beléeue the auncient writers, and namely the gréeke Scholiast vpon the. 15. of the Acts, Iames was now Byshop of Ierusalem: and therefore the Synode being 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ithin his charge, it was not 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that he according to his office, should moderate the same, as other bishops did in their seuerall Churches.

The. 21. of the Acts is nothing to your purpose, but Paule comming to Ierusalem, went with certaine other in vnto Iames, and told him and all the rest that were ga∣thered togyther, what God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministration. What is this to proue your purpose? Peter is not here, and Iames was now 〈◊〉〈◊〉 op of Ierusalem, as the note in the margent of the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ible printed at Geneua doth testi∣fy. The place in no respect proueth your assertion, but the contrary: for there is no doubt, but that Iames was the chiefe gouernour of the Churche of Ierusalem in all actions, during his life, after that he was once placed in the Byshopricke.

You talke in another place of raking of Doctors to proue my purpose, but if these be not rakings of scriptures, gathered togither to no purpose, for the cōfirming of your fonde deuises, I know not what you should meane by the name of rakings.

Chap. 3. the. 49. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 85. Sect. 4.

This is he which is called the Byshop in euery Church, this is he also, whome Iustin where∣of mention is made afterwards, called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And fynally this is that great Archbyshoppricke, and great Byshoppricke, that M. Doctor so often stumbleth on. This order and preheminence, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Apostles tune, and those that were neare them kept, and the nerer they came to the Apostles 〈◊〉〈◊〉, the nearer they kept them to this order, & the farther of they were from those tunes, vntill the dis∣couering

of the sonne of perdition, the further off were they from this moderation, and the nearet they came to that tyrannie, and ambitious power, whiche oppressed and ouerlayed the Churche of God.

Io. Whitgifte.

Indéede this is one parte of the office of the Archbyshop and Byshop, but not the whole, no more than it was of Iames being Byshop of Ierusalem, nor of him whome Iustine calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: But your chéefe purpose now is to proue that this office is not perpetuall, but changeable at euery action, and durable only continuing that acti∣on, which how soundly you haue done, and with what straunge argumentes euery childe that hath discretion may iudge.

Chap. 3. the. 50. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 86. Sect. 1.

And therefore M. Caluine, doth warely say, that one amongst the Apostles indefinitely, not a∣ny one singular person, as Peter, had the moderation and rule of the other: and further shadoweth out what rule that was, by the example of the (*) 1.399 Consull of Rome, whose authoritie was to ga∣ther the Senate togyther, and to tel of the matters which were to be handled, to gather the voices, to pronounce the sentence. And although the Antichrist of Rome had peruerted all good order, and taken all libertie of the Churche into his handes, the Cardinals, Archbyshops, and Byshops, yet there are some colde and light footings of it in our synods, which are holden with the Parliament: where amongst all the ministers which are assembled, out of all the whole realme, by the more part of voyces, one is chosen whiche shoulde go before the rest, propound the causes, gather the voyces, and be as it were the mouth of the whole company, whome they terme the prolocutor. Such great force hath the truth that in the vtter ruines of Poperie, it could neuer be so pulled vp by the rootes, that a man could neuer know the place thereof no more, or that it should not leaue such markes and prints behind it, whereby it might afterwardes recouer it selfe, and come agayne to the knowledge of men.

Io. Whitgifte.

It followeth in the same place of M. Caluine immediatly. Sic nihil absurdi esset* 1.400 si fateremur Apostolos detulisse Petro talem primatum. Sed quod inter paucos valet non pro∣tenus trahendum est ad vniuersum o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉bem terrarum, ad quem regendum nemo vnus sufficit. So shoulde it be no absurditie if we shoulde confesse that the Apostles did giue this kynde of preheminence vnto Peter. But yet that whiche auayleth among fewe, must not by and by be drawen to the whole worlde, to the ruling whereof no one man can suffice. You sée therefore that M. Caluine speaketh of one singular person, euen of Peter hym selfe, and yet dothe he not slide into the tents of the Papistes, but teacheth rather how to beware of them, and yet to acknowledge the truthe of Peter.

We gyue no greater authoritie eyther to Archbyshop or Byshop, than the* 1.401 Consull, or Pretor had among the Romanes, or a Master and president in a col∣ledge: for the Consuls (vppon whose authoritie you séeme so muche to stay) were appoynted to gouerne the common wealth of the Romanes, after they had ba∣nished theyr kynges, and they were called Consuls, quia plurimum reipublicae consule∣bant: bycause they profited the common wealth very muche: whose authoritie in thys dyd differ from the authoritie of a king, that there mighte be appeale from them, and that they could〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 not put to deathe any citizen of Rome, withoute the consente of the people: but they mighte otherwise punishe them, and 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ast them into prison: They had authorite also to make frée th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉se that were in bondage, they were of the greatest honoure (si nullus esset Dictat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉r) if there were

no Dictator) in the common wealth, and their authoritie was offorce, not onely in the Senate, but else where. And it is manyfest that they had not onely authoritie to call the Senate, to tell those matters that were to be handled, and to take their voyces, but to com∣maunde that none shoulde depart oute of the Citie, that had anye v〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ycè in the Senate and to electe Senators. &c. It appeareth that you little knewe what the offyce of a Consull was, when you wrytte thys. If you take aduantage of thys, that the office of the Consull was annuall and not perpetuall, yet it helpeth not you anything, for he was moderator and ruler not of one action onely, but of so manye, as were by oc∣casion, eyther ordinarie, or extraordinarie in the whole yeare of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ys Consulshyp. For my part I doe not thinke that the Archbyshop, either hath, or ought to haue that authoritie in his prouince, that the Consull had in Rome.

A Master of a Colledge (the which example also Master Caluine doth vse) hath a* 1.402 perpetuall offyce, he is chiefe gouernour of that societie, and all the members there∣of owe duetie and obedience vnto him, as to their head: he hathe authoritie to puni〈1 line〉〈1 line〉he and to sée lawes executed: neyther doe I thynke that eyther Archbyshop or Byshop claymeth greater authoritie and iurisdiction ouer theyr Prouinces and Diocesse, than is due to the Master within hys Colledge. And therfore those examples of Master Caluine do confute your assertion, they doe in no poynt confirme it.

In Synodes thoughe there be chosen a prolocutor for the inferior sorte of the Cleargie, yet dothe the Archbyshop reteyne still bothe hys office, place, and autho∣ritie: euen as the Prince dothe, or the Lorde Kéeper, notwythstanding it be per∣mitted to the lower house of Parliament to choose them a Speaker, and therefore this is nothyng, nor alleaged to anye purpose: excepte you wyll saye that in the ciuill state all was equall, and that there was no superior, but in eueryaction some chosen by the multitude, to gouerne the action, bycause in the lower house of Parlia∣ment they choose a Speaker, whose offyce continueth but duryng that Parlia∣ment. You passe not what you alleage, so you maye séeme to alleage something.

Chap. 3. the. 51. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 86. Sect. 2.

Nowe you see what authoritie wee allowe amongst the Ministers, bothe in theyr seue∣rall Churches, or in prouinciall Synodes, or nationall, or generall or what so euer other mee∣tings shall be aduised of, for the profitte and edifying of the Churche, and wythall you see, that a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 we are farre from thys tyrannie, and excessiue power whyche nowe is in the Churche, so we are by the grace of God as farre from confusion and disorder, wherein you trauell so muche to make vs to seeme guiltie.

Io. Whitgifte.

I sée you allowe muche more authoritie in wordes, that is in the examples you haue vsed, than you wyll willingly acknowledge: I sée also that this authoritie, whyche you call tyrannie and excessiue, is moderate and lawfull, and according bothe to the lawes of God and man. To conclude, I see that you are as farre from order, and a ryghte forme of gouernment, as you are from modestie and due obedience, and that the ende you shoote at, is nothyng else but a méere confusion, not onelye of the Churche, but of the common wealthe also: the gouernment whereof you would haue framed, according to your platforme of the Churche: that is, you would haue it brought from a Monarchie, to a popular or Aristocraticall kinde of gouernmente, euen as you would haue the Church.

Chap. 3. the. 52. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. 1.

Paule was superior both to Timothie and Titus, as it may easi∣ly be gathered out of his Epistles written vnto them.

T. C. Page. 86. Sect. 3.

M. Doctor reasoneth agayne, that Paule an Apostle, and in the hyghest degree of ministerie▪* 1.403 was superior to Timothie and Titus Euangelistes, and so in a lower degree of ministerie, there∣fore one Minister is superior to another, one Byshop to another Byshop, which are all one office▪ and one function. As if I shoulde saye my Lorde Maior of London is aboue the Sherifes, therefore one Sherife is superior to another.

Io. Whitgifte.

There was no difference betwixte them in respect of preaching the Gospell and* 1.404 administring the sacramentes, but in respecte of gouernment, therefore among Mi∣nisters of the worde, and Sacramentes there may be degrées of dignitie, and supe∣rioritie, and one may rule ouer another: which is the grounde of my assertion, and the ouerthrow of yours. And this doth the example of Paul proue euidently, euen as the example of my Lorde Mayor doth proue, that there is superioritie in gouernment among the Citizens. For thus you should haue reasoned: as my Lord Mayor his au∣thoritie aboue the rest of the Citizens, declareth, that there is superioritie in the ciuill state, and one subiecte to another, euen so Paules superioritie ouer Timothie, Ti∣tus, and other Ministers declareth, that there may be superioritie in the state Ecclesi∣asticall, and that one of them may and ought to be subiect to another: thus you should haue applyed the similitude if you had truely applyed it.

Chap. 3. the. 53. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. 2.

Titus had superioritie ouer al y^e other pastors & Ministers which* 1.405 were in Creta: for he had potestatem constituendi oppidatim presbyteros: ad Tit. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. The which place M. Caluine expounding, sayth on this sort, Discimus ex hoc loco. &c. vvelearne of this place (saith he) that there vvas not suche equalitie* 1.406 among the Ministers of the Churche, but that one bothe in authoritie, and councell did rule ouer another,

T. C. Page. 86. Sect. 3.

Againe another argument he hath of the same strength. Titus being an Euangelist was superi∣or to al the pastors in Crete, which was a degree vnder the Euangelists, therefore one 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ must be superior vnto another pastor. And that he was superior he proueth, bycause he had authoritie ordeine pastors: so that the print of the Archbishop is so deepely set in his head, that he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 imagine nothing, but that Titus should be Archbyshop of all Creta.

Io. Whitgifte.

Titus was a Byshop as it shal be proued: and you haue not one worde in Scrip∣ture of his beyng an Euangelist: it is Erasmus and Pellicane, two famous men, that imagine Titus, to haue been Archbyshop of Creta: scoffe at them.

Chap. 3. the. 54. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 86. Sect. 4.

I haue shewed before, howe these wordes are to be taken of Saynte Paule. And for so muche as M. Doctor burdeneth vs wyth the authoritie of Caluine so often, I wyll sende him to Caluines owne interpretation vpon this place, where he (*) 1.407 sheweth that Titus dyd not or∣deyne by hys owne authoritie: For Saynte Paule woulde not graunte Titus leaue to doe that whyche he hymselfe woulde not, and sheweth that to saye that Titus shoulde make the election of Pastors by hymselfe, is to gyue vnto hym a princely authoritie, and to take awaye the electi∣on from the Church, and the iudgement of the insufficiencie of the Minister from the companye of the pastors, which were (saith he) to prophane the whole gouernment of the Church.

Io. Whitgifte.

Thys is to set Caluine againste Caluine, and not to answere hym: and yet thys is nothyng contrarie to that whyche I haue alleaged oute of hym: for in the place that I haue alleaged he gathereth vpon these wordes vt constituas oppidatìm pre∣sbyteros.* 1.408 &c. that there was not suche equalitie among the Ministers of the Churche, but that one bothe in authoritie, and Councell dyd rule ouer another. You to auoyde thys testimonie of Caluine for superioritie, tell me that Caluine saythe vpon this place, that Titus dyd not ordeyne Ministers by hys owne authoritie. &c. whyche is no answere to the place that I haue alleaged, but a verye quarrell pickte oute, to auoyde the answering of it. Master Caluine sayth that among the Ministers there was one ruled ouer another, authoritate & consilio: by authoritie and Councell. And he dothe ga∣ther it oute of the texte by me alleaged: eyther answere it, or gyue place vnto it, or denie it. Of electing Ministers I haue spokē before, it is now out of place to speake of it agayne, and it is to no purpose, but to shift of an Answere.

Chap. 3. the. 55. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 86. Sect. 5.

I maruell therefore what M. Doctor meaneth, to be so busye wyth M. Caluine, and to seeke confirmation of hys Archbyshop and Byshop at hym, whyche woulde haue shaken at the namyng of the one, and trembled at the offyce of the other, onlesse it be bycause he woulde fayne haue hys playster, where he receyued hys wounde. But I bare assure hym, that in hys garden he shall neuer fynde the herbe that wyll heale hym. And bycause that the Scriptures, when they make for oure cause, receyue thys answere commonly, that they serued but for the Apostles tymes, and Master Caluines authoritie wyll weye nothyng as I thinke wyth M. Doctor, when he is alleaged by vs againste hym, I will sende hym to the Greeke S choliast, whiche vpon this place of Titus saythe after this sorte. He woulde not (speaking of Saynte Paule) haue the whole Isle of Crete, ministred and gouerned by one, but that euerye one shoulde haue his proper charge and care: for so shoulde Titus haue a lighter laboure and the peo∣ple that are gouerned, shoulde enioye greater attendance of the pastor, whylest he that teacheth them dothe not runne aboute the gouernmente of manye congregations, but attendeth vnto one and garnisheth that.

Io. Whitgifte.

What opinion Master Caluine hathe of Archbyshops, and of Superioritie a∣mongest Pastors and Ministers, maye appeare in his wordes that I haue alleaged in my Answere. I thinke Master Caluine neuer vttered in worde or wryting hys

mislyking of the present gouernmente of thys Churche of Englande, by Archbyshops and Byshops, what he hath spoken agaynst the abuse of them in the Popes Church, is not to be wrested against the right vse of them in the true Churche of Christ.

I haue answered the Scriptures by you alleaged, truely, and directly. You haue not as yet vrged me wyth that authoritie of Master Caluine, that I haue so shif∣ted of, as you haue done this last.

The Scholiast meaneth that euery Citie shoulde haue his Pastor, in the Isle of Creta, and that Titus shoulde gouerne them as Byshop, not as hauyng the whole* 1.409 and sole charge of euery seuerall towne or Citie: whych maye euidently appeare to be true, by these wordes of Theodoret placed in the same author. Titus was a notable Diseiple of Paul, but was ordeyned Bishop of Creta, whych was a very large Isle, &* 1.410 it was permitted & cōmitted vnto him, that he might ordeine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Byshops that were vnder hym. Wherby it may be gathered that euery Citie in Creta had a Byshop, whyche had the seuerall charge, and that Titus gouerned them as Archbyshop. The lyke doth Chrysostome (whom the Greeke Scholiast doth espe∣cially followe) affirme of Timothie in. 1. Tim. 5. vpon these wordes aduersus presby∣terum. &c. Timotheo credita fuerat ecclesia, imò gens ferè tota Asiatica: The Churche, yea al∣moste* 1.411 the whole people of Asia was committed to Timothie. But what néede I vse ma∣nie wordes, when Chrysostome hymselfe affirmeth the same directly of Titus. 1.* 1.412 ad Titum: neque eius profectò illi. &c. Truely Paule woulde not haue committed the whole Isle to hym, neyther woulde he haue commaunded those thyngs to be supplyed whyche were wanting, (for he sayth that thou myghtest correcte those thyngs whyche are wan∣ting) neither woulde he haue committed vnto him the Iudgemente of so manye Byshops, if he had not trusted hym very well.

Chap. 3. the. 56. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 87. Sect. 1.

Nowe M. Doctor maye see by thys, that Titus was not as he fansyeth, the Archbyshop of all Crete: but that he had one flocke, wherevpon for the tyme he was there, he attended, and that where it is sayde he ordeyned Ministers: it is nothyng else but that he was the chiefe, and the moderator in the election of the ministers, as I haue declared before by many examples. And it is no maruell, althoughe the reste graunted hym this preheunnence, when he had both most ex∣cellent giftes, and was a degree aboue the Pastors, being an Euangelist.

Io. Whitgifte.

Thys I maye see, that firste you haue no conscience in falsifying and corrup∣tyng of authors: Secondly, that you speake contraryes, euen in these fewe lynes: for you saye that Titus had one flocke in Creta, wherevpon he dyd attende for the tyme he* 1.413 was there▪ whiche muste néedes proue hym to be a Pastor: and yet you after∣wardes denye hym to be a Pastor, affirming hym to be an Euangelist, and you take the office of an Euangelist to be so distincte from the office of a Pastor, that they may not méete together in one man. Thirdly, I sée that you confidentlye take vpon you, to expounde Paules meanyng agaynste hys playne woordes, and agaynste the Iudgemente of the olde interpreters, and diuerse of the newe, as I haue she∣wed before in the election of Ministers. Besydes these, I see nothing answered to this example of Titus.

Chap. 3. the. 57. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. 3.

Timothie bare rule ouer all the other Ministers of the Churche* 1.414 of Ephesus: for Paule saythe vnto hym. 1. Timo. 5. aduersus presbyterum ac∣cusationem. &c. Agaynst a Minister receyue no accusation, vnlesse there be two or three vvitnesses. In which words Paul maketh him a Iudge ouer the rest of the Ministers.

T. C. Page. 87. Sect. 2.

Unto the place of Timothie, where he wylleth hym not to admitte an accusation agaynste an Elder, vnder two or three witnesses, I answere as▪ I haue done before to the place of Ti∣tus: that is, that as the ordination of the Pastors is attributed vnto▪ Titus, and Timothie, by∣cause they gouerned, and moderated that action, and were the firste in it, so also is the deposyng, or other censures of them, and that for as muche as he wryteth his Epistles vnto Timothie and Titus, he telleth them howe they shoulde behaue them selues in theyr offyce, and dothe not shut oute other from thys censure and Iudgemente. And it is more agreeable to the inscription of the Epistles that he shoulde saye admitte not thou, or ordeyne not thou, wryting vnto one: than if he shoulde saye ordeyne not ye, or admitte not ye, as if he shoulde write to manye, for so shoulde neyther the endyng agree wyth the begynnyng, nor y^e myddest wyth them both. And if thys be a good rule, that bycause Paule byddeth Timothie and Titus to Iudge of the faultes of the pa∣stors, and to ordeyne Pastors, therefore none else dyd but they: then (*) 1.415 whereas Saynte Paule byddeth Timothie that he shoulde commaunde, and teache, that godlynesse is profitable to all thyngs, and admonisheth hym to be an example of the whole flocke, by your reason he wyll haue no other of the Ministers of Ephesus, or of the Isle of Creta, to teache that doctrine, or to be examples to their flockes, and an hundreth suche thyngs in the Epistles of Timothie and Ti∣tus, whyche althoughe they be there particularly directed vnto Timothie and Titus, yet doe they agree, and are common to them, wyth all other Ministers, yea sometymes vnto the whole flocke.

Io. Whitgifte.

You haue certeyne common shiftes, to put of suche places as you can not an∣swere, among whiche thys is one, that you vse in thys place. But it wyll not serue, beyng grounded neyther vppon authoritie nor reason. These woordes of Saynte Paule in déede be not spoken to Timothie alone, but to all other By∣shops of lyke authoritie: for that whiche is prescribed to Timothie is also prescri∣bed to all other in the lyke function, whyche argueth that thys authoritie gyuen to Timothie ouer all the Ministers of the Churche of Ephesus, dothe perteyne al∣so to all other Byshoppes, ouer the Ministers of theyr seuerall Diecesse. But as Saynte Paule in these Epistles wryteth onely to Byshoppes, and Pastors, so are the preceptes gyuen therein properly perteyning to the offyce of Byshops and Pastors, and therefore not to be wrested to anye other. And howe can the Pa∣pistes more grossely abuse the Scriptures, in interpretyng them to serue their turne, and to shifte of theyr authoritie alleaged agaynste them, than you doe in thys and suche other places, agaynste the whole scope of the Epistle, and the playne and euidente wordes of the texte? for what is this, but to giue Timothie superioritie and gouernment ouer the other Ministers of Ephesus, to saye vnto hym, aduersus presbyterum, Agaynst a Minister receyue no occusation &c? and as thys au∣thoritie of Iudgement is not onely gyuen vnto Timothie, but to all Byshops, of like callyng, so that also of teachyng (that godlynesse is profitable to all thyngs. &c.) perteyneth to all Ministers of the worde generally, and not to Timothie alone. This is onely the difference, that the firste is common to Timothie wyth all other

Byshops of like iurisdiction: the other common to him with all other ministers of the worde.

You knowe that euery Pastor, or other Minister of the worde, hath not other Pastors and Ministers of the worde vnder hym, that it maye be sayde vnto hym ad∣uersus presbyteros. &c. as it is here sayde to Timothie, for I haue proued before that presbyter dothe signifie the Ministers of the worde and Sacramentes, and shall haue occasion to speake more of it hereafter.

You saye that there is an hundreth suche things in the Epistles of Timothie and Titus▪ I thinke that there is not one hundreth seuerall preceptes in all the thrée Epistles. These stoute and hyperbolicall bragges, wyth so manyfest resisting of the playne sense and meanyng of the Scriptures, argueth an euill conscience, and a mynde so addicted to errour, that it will not be reformed. Manye things in these Epistles perteyne to all Christians, many things be proper to Byshops, suche as Timothie was, and many common to all Ministers. But this aduersus presbyteros▪ &c. muste néedes to proper be those that haue vnder them other Ministers, committed to theyr gouernment, which euery Pastor hath not.

Chap. 3. the. 58. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. 3.

And Epiphanius Lib. 3. Tom. 1. contra Haeresim Aerij proueth Timothie his su∣perioritie* 1.416 ouer the rest, by this selfe same place.

T. C. Pag. 87. Sect. 3.

As for Epiphanius, * 1.417 it is knowen of what authoritie he is in thys place, when as by Aerius sides, he goeth about to pricke at the Apostle▪ whilest he goeth about to confute the Apostle, which maketh a distinction and difference betwene those which the Apostle maketh one, that is a Bishop and elder, and to spare the credit of Epiphanius, it were better lay that opinion vpon some Pseu∣depiphanius, which we may doe not without great probabilitie, seyng (*) Augustine sayth, that the* 1.418 true Epiphamus vttereth all after a storie fashion, and doth not vse anye disputation, or reasoning for the truth agaynst the falshood, and this Epiphanius is very full of arguments and reasons, the choise whereof M. Doctor hath taken.

Io. Whitgifte.

I haue not heard any probable reason alleaged of any, why these bookes of Epi∣phanius* 1.419 should be suspected, whether they be his or no, seeyng they be both learned and very auncient, mentioned also of sundry olde writers. But to omitte all other proofes I wyll onely vse the iudgement (at this tyme) of the authors of the Centuries who are to be credited in suche matters, bycause they haue diligently and carefully laboured in them: their opinion of these bookes of Epiphanius, Cent. 4 cap. 10. is thys, Nunc de scriptis. &c. Nowe we wyll speake of hys bookes: of the which that worke against* 1.420 the foure score heresyes is most noble: which booke he hymselfe in his Epistle to Acacius, and Paulus Ministers, And in his booke called Anacephaleosis, calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. &c. Of the which writing Augustine in his booke ad quod-vult-deum, maketh this mention. Our Epi∣phanius Byshop of Cyrus (sayth he) which dyed not long since, speaking of foure score he∣resies, wrote also himselfe sixe Bookes making mention of all things after an Historicall maner, & disputing nothing either against the falsehood, or with the truthe: They be but short bookes, and if they were all made in one, yet were it not to be compared to ours, or to diuerse other mens bookes in length. Out of the which words it is euident, that Augustine neither had, nor at any time dyd see that worke which Epiphanius intituled Panarium, for Epiphanius is very long in recountyng the historie, as concerning the beginning, the ende∣uour & countrey of the heretikes, the occasiō of the heresie, the successe, increase, and suche

lyke throughout euery heresie. Then is he very long in confuting and condemning the heresies by true Scriptures, and the interpretation of them: wherfore it should seeme that Augustine had belyke onely the arguments prefixed before the Tomes of bookes of Epi∣phanius, whiche he dothe therefore call shorte bookes, or at the least, had his booke called Anacephaleosis, (which is the summe of his worke called Panarium) Cornarius that wri∣teth* 1.421 the Preface before this booke of Epiphanius, is of the same iudgement, and addeth these wordes: VVherefore eyther Augustine dyd not see this worke of Epiphanius, or the right worke of Augustine is not extant, but loste, or else Augustine dyd not in deede performe that whiche he promised. I can reade of none that doubteth whether these bookes were Epiphanius his, or no. And certaynely this kinde of answering is nexte the worst, especially when it is vsed agaynst suche approued authors.

And bicause all men may vnderstande, what Epiphanius wordes and reasons be* 1.422 (whiche in déede pinche you very néere, for he calleth you heretikes) I will declare them as I haue there founde them. First he setteth downe the heresie of Aērius in these words: His talke was more outrageous than becōmed a man: and he sayd, what is a Bishop to a Priest? he nothing differeth from him: for there is but one order, and the same honor and dignitie. The Bishop layeth on his handes, and so dothe the Priest: the Bishop ministreth baptisme, and so dothe the priest: the Bishop sayth diuine seruice, and so doth the Priest: the Bishop sitteth in his throne, and so dothe the Priest. In this he hathe decey∣ued many, and they vse him for their captayne. Then dothe he a little after confute this heresie with Aerius reasons, on this sorte: To saye that a Bishop and a Priest is e∣quall, howe can it be possible? for the order of Bishops, is the begetter of fathers, for it in∣gendreth fathers to the Churche: the order of Priests not beeing able to beget fathers, dothe beget sonnes to the Churche, by the sacrament of Baptisme, but not fathers or tea∣chers: and howe is it possible for him to ordeyne a Priest, not hauing imposition of hands to electe, or to saye that he is equall with a Bishop? but phantasticalnesse and emulation deceyued the foresayde Aërius: he proueth his errour, aud the errour of those that heare him by this, that the Apostle writte to Priests and Deacons, and dyd not write to By∣shops. And to the Bishop he sayth: neglect not the gifte that is in thee, whiche thou hast receyued by the handes of the Presbyterie. And agayne in another place he writeth to Bi∣shops and Deacons: wherefore (sayth he) a Bishop and a Priest is all one: and he kno∣weth not, whiche is ignorante of the sequele of the truthe, and hathe not read profounde stories, that when the preaching was but newely begonne, the holy Apostle writte accor∣ding to the state of things as they were then: for where there were Bishops appoynted he writte to Bishops and Deacons: for the Apostle coulde not by and by at the first appoynte all things: for there was neede of Priests and Deacons, bicause by those two, ecclesiasti∣call matters maye be complete. And where there was not any founde worthy a Bishop∣ricke, there the place remayned without a Bishop, but where there was neede, and wor∣thy men to be Bishops, there were Bishops appoynted. And when there was not so many that there coulde be founde amongst them meete to be Priests, they were content with one Bishop in an appoynted place, but it is vnpossible for a Bishop to be without a Dea∣con, and the holy Apostle had a care that Deacons shoulde be where the Bishop was, for the ministerie. So dyd the Churche receyue the fulnesse of dispensation, suche was then the state and condition of the places. For euery thing had not the perfection from the be∣ginning, but in processe of time those things whiche were necessarie to perfection were added. &c. The Apostle teacheth who is a Bishop, and who is a Priest, when he sayth to Timothie that was a Bishop, chide not a Priest, but exhorte him as a father: what should a Bishop haue to doe, not to chide a Priest, if he had not authoritie aboue a Priest. As he also sayth agayne, agaynst a Priest admitte no accusation sodenly, without two or three witnesses, and he sayde not to any Priest, admit no accusation agaynst a Bishop: neyther did he write to any Priest, that he shoulde not rebuke a Bishop. Thus mayest thou sée good Reader, that it is not for nought, that T. C. so stormes agaynst Epiphanius, and so vnreuerently vseth him.

But I wyll giue him as muche cause to deale in like maner with Augustine, who* 1.423 in this matter fully ioyneth with Epiphanius: and in that booke of his, de haeresibus

ad quod-vult-deum (quoted by T. C. in his margent) attributeth this also as heresie to the sayde Acrius, adding that the cause of this and other of his heresies was, bicause he himselfe was not made Bishop.

Chap. 3. the. 59. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. 4.

That this worde (presbyter) in this place of the Apostle, signi∣fieth a minister of the worde, bothe Ambrose, Caluine, and other learned writers declare.

T. C. Page. 87. Sect. 4.

And whereas M. Doctor citeth Ambrose, Caluine, and other godly wryters, to proue that the minister is vnderstanded by the worde Elder or Presbyter, he keepeth his olde wonte, by bringing stickes into the wood, and prouing alwayes that which no man denieth, and yet with the minister of the worde, he also vnderstandeth the Elder of the Churche whiche ruleth, and dothe not labour in the worde: But therein is not the matter, for I doe graunt that by Presbyter the minister of the word is vnderstanded, & yet nothing proued of that which M. Doctor would so fayne proue.

Io. Whitgifte.

I adde this interpretation, that the Reader may vnderstande Timothie to haue authoritie ouer Bishops and Ministers of the worde, least you by cauilling shoulde shifte off this place, with your signification of Seniors, whiche were not ministers of the worde, as you say.

All this whyle haue I looked for the performance of your promise, to proue that* 1.424 Timothie and Titus were no Bishops: But bicause I perceyue that you are con∣tent to forget it, I will héere perfourme mine (least I fall into the same faulte with you) repeating only that which I haue before added to my answere in the 2. edition, least I shoulde put the Reader bothe to coste and paynes in searching for it there.

First therefore that Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus, the whole course of the* 1.425 two Epistles written vnto him declareth, wherein is conteyned the office and duety of a Bishop, and diuers precepts peculiarly perteyning to that function, as it is ma∣nyfest: neyther were those Epistles written to Timothie for the instruction of other onely, but for the instruction of him selfe also, as the whole course of bothe the Epi∣stles doe declare, and all learned expositours confesse.

Secondly, the subscription of the seconde Epistle is this: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.* 1.426 The seconde (Epistle) was written from Rome to Timothie, who was ordeyned the first Bishop of the Churche of Ephesus, when Paule appeared before the Emperour Nero the seconde time. Whiche althoughe it be lefte out in some Gréeke Testamentes, yet is it in the moste, the best, and the aun∣cientest, yea almoste in all: neyther is this a sufficient answere to saye, that the sub∣scription of some one or two Epistles séeme to be vntrue, therefore this is vntrue: For the subscription, as it is (no doubt) of great antiquitie, so is it consonant to al olde auncient authoritie.

Thirdly, the vniuersal consent of histories conclude him to be Bishop at Ephesus.* 1.427 Eusebius lib. 3. cap. 4. saythe, that Timothie was the first Bishop of Ephesus.

Dorotheus who lyued in Dioclesians time, wryteth that Paule made him Bishop of Ephesus.

Nicephorus lib. 2. cap. 34. sayth, that Paule made him Bishop of Ephesus, before he writ his first Epistle vnto him.

Hierome in catalog. scripto. Ecclesi. sayth, that he was made Bishop of Ephesus by Paule.

Isidorus de Patribus noui Testamenti, sayth also that he was Bishop of Ephesus.

Antoninus parte. 1. titulo. 6. cap. 1. affyrmeth the same oute of Polycrates. So

dothe Supplementum chroni. So dothe also Volaterane, lib. 20. where he calleth him Prae∣sulem Ephesinum. And all the Histories that I haue read, whiche make any mention of him.

Historia Magdel. centu. 1. lib. 2. cap. 10. in vita Ioan. Euang. hathe these words: Constat Paulum Ephesinae ecclesiae Timotheum dedisse pastorem: It is certayne that Paule appoynted Ti∣mothie Pastor of the Churche of Ephesus.

Surely it is the generall consente of all hystories, that Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus.

Fourthly, the fathers affirme the same.* 1.428

Dionisius Areopagita (so called of some men) who liued in the Apostles time, wry∣teth his booke De diuinis nominibus, to Timothie Bishop of Ephesus.

Epiphanius lib. 3. tom. 1. affirmeth that Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus.

Ambrose sayth the same in his Preface to the first Epistle written to Timothie.

Chrysostome in his argument of the same Epistle giueth this reason why Paule of all his Disciples writte onely to Timothie and Titus, bicause he had committed to them the gouernment and care of the Church: and the other he carried about with him. The same Chrysostome vpon the fourth to the Ephe. speaking of Pastors and Doc∣tors, vseth Timothie and Titus for an example.

Occumenius like wise vpon the fourth to the Ephe. calleth Timothie and Titus Bishops. And vpon. 1. Timoth. 1. he sayth, that Paule ordeyned Timothie Bishop of Ephesus. And in the fifth Chapter vpon these words, Manus citò nemini imponas. he sayth, Mandat de ordinationibus, Episcopo enim scribebat: he giueth preceptes of ordeyning, for he wrote to a Bishop.

Theodoret, vpon the first to Timothie, affirmeth in playne words, that Timothie had cure of soules committed vnto him.

But to be shorte, there is not one olde writer whiche speaking of this matter, doth not testifie that Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus.

Last of all, I proue him to be Bishop there, by the consent of the late wryters.* 1.429

Erasmus in his annotations, sayth that Paul made him Bishop: so sayth he likewise in his Paraphr. 1. Timoth. 4.

Pellicane sayth the same. 1. Tim. 1.

Zuinglius in his booke called Ecclesiastes, sayth directly that Timothie was a Bishop▪

Bucer sayth the same, writing vpon the. 4. chapter of the Epistle to the Ephe.

Caluine vpon. 1. Tim. 1. calleth him Pastor of the Churche of Ephesus. And in the 1. Timoth. 4. expounding these words, Ne donum quod in te est. &c. he sayth, Spiritus sanctus oraculo Timotheum destinauerat, vt in ordinem pastorum cooptaretur: The holy Ghost by oracle did appoynt Timothie, that he should be chosen into the order of Pastors. And in the. 2. Timoth. 4. sayth, that he did excell Vulgares pastores, common Pastors. meaning that he was an excellent Pastor, indued with more singular and notable giftes, and of greater authoritie than the common sorte of Pastors be. And in the same chapter speaking of Paules sending for Timothie from Ephesus to Rome, he saythe, That there was no small cause why Paule sent for Timothie from that Churche which he ruled and gouerned, and that so farre off: Heereby we may gather (sayth he) howe profitable conference is with suche men: for it might be profitable to all Churches, whiche Timothie might learne in a small time: so that the absence of halfe a yere, or a whole yere, is nothing in comparison of the commoditie that commeth thereby. And agayne in the same place he sayth, That Paule sent Tichicus to Ephesus, when he sent for Timothie to Rome, in the meane tyme to supply Tymothies absence. By all these places it is manyfest that Caluine taketh Timothie to be Pastor & Bishop of Ephesus, as I haue beforesayde.

Bullinger vpon these words also, ne neglexeris quod in te est donum, &c noteth three things to be obserued in the ordering of a Bishop: and proueth therby that Timothie was lawfully called to his Bishopricke. And vpon these words. 2. Tim. 1. Quamobrem cōmonefacio te vt suscites donum. &c. he sayth, that per donū Dei, Paule vnderstandeth the gifte of Prophecying, & functionem Episcopalem, the offyce of a Bishop to the whiche the Lord called Timothie, but by the ministerie of Paule. What can be spokē more playner?

Illyricus in his epistle dedicatorie to the newe Testament sayth, that Paule praysed Timothie his Bishop, and in his Preface to the epistle written to Timothie, he calleth Timothie and Titus praestantes doctores, multarum{que} ecclesiarum Episcopos: Notable Doc∣tors, and Bishops of many Churches.

Of the same iudgement is Musculus, and all the rest of the late wryters that I haue read, one onely excepted, who notwithstanding in effecte confesseth also that he was Bishop at Ephesus: for in his annotations. 1. Tim. 4. vpon these words, vsque∣dum venero. &c. he saythe, that when Paule sente for the ministers of Ephesus to Mile∣tum. Acts. 20. he sent for Timothie especially. Cuius ministros (meaning of Ephesus) ac proinde Timotheum inprimis Miletum accersiuit. But it is manyfest Act. 20. that they were all Pastours and Bishops: therefore Timothie was a Bishop. The same author vpon these wordes. 1. Timoth. 5. aduersus presbyterum. &c. sayth, Timotheum in Ephesino presbyterio tum fuisse 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 1. Antistitē, vt vocat Iustinus. And addeth, that it is mani∣fest by Cyprian, that the Bishop dyd rule in the Colledge of Seniors. Then if he that was chiefe in the Colledge of Seniors, was a Bishop, and Timothie was chiefe in the College of Seniors, it must néedes followe that Timothie was a Bishop.

But it maye appeare howe little learning and learned men be estéemed of those, whiche to maynteyne contention, are not ashamed to denie that whiche all learned men agrée vpon.* 1.430

Their reasons as in number they be not many, so in substance they be nothing: I will recite the chiefe, and leaue the rest to children to be discussed.

The first, is taken out of the. 2. Ti. 4. where Paule sayth to Timothie, Opus perage* 1.431 Euangelistae: do the worke of an Euangelist. Their reason is this: Paule biddeth Ti∣mothie do the worke of an Euangelist, Ergo, Timothie was not Bishop.

First therfore we must searche out what Opus Euangelistae is, and then trie whether it be incident to the office of a Bishop, or no.

Bullinger vpon that place sayth, that he doth the worke of an Euangelist, which prea∣cheth the Gospell purely, and is not by any persecutions or aduersitie driuen from his calling,

Hemingius sayth, that opus Euangelistae, generally taken, is to preache the Gospell.

Musculus in locis commun. ticulo de verbi ministris, sayth, that he is Euangelista, eyther that preacheth, or that writeth the Gospel, and that Paul in the first sense speaketh to Timothie, saying, opus fac euangelistae.

And in the same place among other things that Paule requireth of a Bishop, he affirmeth this to be one, vt opus peragat Euangelistae. So sayth Illyricus likewise.

Zuinglius also is of the same iudgement in his booke called Ecclesiastes, and proueth by that text of Paule, that the worke of an Euangelist and of a Bishop is all one. Nowe howe this reason dothe followe, Paule did bid Timothie preache the Gospell purely and constantly, Ergo, Timothie was not a Bishop, let euery man iudge.

The seconde reason is taken out of the. 4. to the Ephe. Et ipse dedit alios quidem A∣postolos,* 1.432 alios verò Prophetas, alios autem Euangelistas, alios autem pastores ac doctores: He ther∣fore gaue some to be Apostles, and some Prophetes, and some Euangelistes, and some Pa∣stors and Teachers. The reason is framed on this sorte: An Euangelist and a Bishop were distincte offices, and coulde not be bothe ioyned in one. But Timothie was an Euangelist, Ergo, he was not a Bishop. This argumente is very féeble in euery* 1.433 parte: For first the maior is vtterly false, for those offices named by Paule were not so distinct, but that diuers of them may concurre in one man, as maye easily be pro∣ued. Paule was an Apostle and also a Doctor. 2. Timoth. 1. Matthew and Iohn bée∣ing Apostles were also Euangelists, as the consent of al writers doth testifie.

Timothie was according to M. Beza his iudgement both an Euangelist and also a prophet: Looke his notes in the fourth chap. of the first to Timothie.

Zuinglius in his booke called Ecclesiastes, sayth, that an Euangelist is nothing else but a Bishop or a pastor, as it is manyfest (sayth he) by the wordes of Paule whiche he speaketh to Timothie, saying, opus fac Euangelistae, and Timothie at that tyme when Paule writte this Epistle vnto him, was a Bishop: And therefore it is certayne that according to

Faule his sentence, the office of an Euangelist and of a Bishop is all one. These be the ve∣ry words of Zuinglius.

Bullinger expounding this place in the fourth to the Ephe. hath these words: There is no man whiche seeth not these names to be confounded, and one to be taken for an other: for an Apostle is also a Prophete, a Doctor, an Euangelist, a Minister, and a Bishop: and a Bishop is an Euangelist and a Prophet: A Prophet is a Doctor, a Minister, and an E∣uangelist. Therefore the Apostle Paule by these sundrie names, dothe signifie these diuers giftes which God hath bestowed vpon his Churche to saluation. And in that he so often vseth this disiunction; alios at{que} alios, he hath signified that all giftes are not giuen to one man, but that diuers men haue diuers giftes of the spirite, wherof he hath spoken more in the. 12. to the Rom. and the. 1. to the Cor. 12. chapter. Hitherto Bullinger.

Pellicane in the same place is of the same iudgement.

These offices therefore or giftes maye well concurre in one man, so that the maior is false, and this conclusion followeth not. Timothie was an Euangelist, Ergo, he was no Bishop.

The minor (which is this, Timothie was an Euangelist) is very doubtfull: For* 1.434 first it may be doubted what an Euangelist is. The common opinion of old writers, and also of diuers late writers is, that those were properly called Euangelists which writte the Gospels. Other say, that he is an Euangelist whiche preacheth the Gos∣pell. Some say that he was an Euangelist that was occupied in teaching the people playnly and simply. Caluine and some other thinke, that they were next vnto the A∣postles in degree, and helpers of them, and suche as supplied their office oftentimes. Diuers other opinions there are of Euangelists, and scarse two agree in one opinion touching the office of an Euangelist. The moste saye (whiche also the etymologie of the name dothe importe) that those were Euangelistes whiche eyther preached or writte the Gospell.

Sainct Augustine in his seconde booke contra Faustum Manichae. wryteth héereof on this sorte: Narratores originis, factorum, dictorum, passionum domini nostri Iesu Christi pro∣priè dicti sunt Euangelistae: They are properly called Euangelistes, which are the declarers of the birthe, deedes, sayings, and sufferings of our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ Which may be done both by preaching and writing the Gospell, as I sayde before.

Now if Timothie be an Euangelist bicause he preached the Gospell, there is no cause why he may not be a Bishop also. And it is certayn that when Paule sayd vn∣to him, do the worke of an Euangelist, he ment the preaching of the Gospell.

If an Euangelist be taken in any other significatiō, how can it be proued that Ti∣mothie was an Euangelist? For this proueth it not, fac opus Euangelistae, a man may do the worke of an Euangelist though he be not an Euangelist, a man may doe the worke of a pastor, though he be not a pastor.

To be short the conclusion is not necessarie, howsoeuer the premisses be true, for* 1.435 although it should be graūted that bothe the maior and minor were true, yet the conclu∣sion dothe not followe: for Timothie might first be an Euangelist, and after a Bi∣shop, as Zuinglius in his booke called Ecclesiastes, sayth, That Philip the Euangelist bee∣ing a Deacon, was afterwarde Bishop and pastor of Cesarea: Iames the yonger beeing an Apostle, as Hierome and all the olde fathers doe testifie, was after Bishop of Ierusalem, and there remayned: and dyuers of the Apostles when they lefte off going from place to place, became in the ende Bishops, and remayned in one place, as it appeareth in olde hystories.

So that although one man could not be bothe an Euangelist and a Bishop at one time, and if it be graunted that Timothie was an Euangelist, yet doth it not proue but that he was a Bishop also.

But certayne it is, that one man at one time might be both an Euangelist and a Bishop: and most certayne it is that Timothie was a Bishop, howe certayne soeuer it be whether he were an Euangelist, or no.

But héere it may be sayde that Timothie no more returned to Ephesus, after he had bin the seconde time with Paule at Rome, and therefore not to be like that he

was B〈1 line〉〈1 line〉shop there. This argumente is onely coniecturall, and of no force to proue any suche matter. Howbeit if we will credite stories, wherby in such cases we must be directed, it is certayne that Timothie returned to Ephesus, & there dyed.

Dorotheus sayth that he died at Ephesus, and was there buried.

Polycrates testifieth that he was stoned to death at Ephesus.

Isidorus in his booke de Patribus noui Testamenti, writeth that he was buried at E∣phesus in the mount Pyon.

Symeon Metaphrastes testifieth the same.

Nicephorus li. 10. ca. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. testifieth, that Iulian the Apostara did tormēt one Artemius for translating the bones of Andrewe, Luke, and Timothie from Patra, Achaia, and Ephesus, to Constantinople. But it is certayne that Andrew was crucified at Patra by Aegeas the Proconsull: and auncient writers testifie that Luke was buried in Achaia: ther∣fore the bones that were brought from Ephesus, must néedes be Timothies.

Héereby it may appeare that Timothie not onely returned from Rome to Ephe∣sus, but also continued there euen to his death. And therefore certayne it is that he was Bishop at Ephesus. But nowe to my purpose.

Chap. 3. the. 60. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 72. Sect. vlt.

Ignatius who was S. Iohn his scholer, and lyued in Chrystes* 1.436 time, in his Epistle ad Trallianos, speaketh thus of the authoritie of a Bishop ouer the reste: Quid aliud est Episcopus quàm quidam obtinens principatum,* 1.437 & potestatem supra omnes? VVhat is a Bishop, but one hauing povver and rule ouer all? And in his Epistle ad Smyrnenses, he writeth on this sorte: Ho∣nora quidem Deum vt authorem vniuersorum & Dominum: Episcopum autem, vt Sacerdotum Principem, imagi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉em Dei ferentem: Dei quidem per Principatum: Christi verò per Sacerdotium. Honor God as the author and Lorde of all thinges, and a Bishop as the chiefe of Priestes, bearing the Image of God: of God bicause of his su∣perioritie: of Christ by reason of his Priesthoode. And a little after: Let laye men be subiecte to Deacons, Deacons to Priests: and Priestes to Bishops, the Bishop to Christ. And agayne: Let no man doe any thing vvhiche perteyneth to the Churche, vvithout the consente of the Bishop. And agayn: He that attēpteth to do any thing vvithout the Bishop, brea∣keth peace, and confoundeth good order. The like saying he hath in his Epistle ad Magnesianos. These three Epistles doth Eusebius make men∣tion of Lib. 3. cap. 35. &. 36. and Hiero. de viris illustribus.

T. C. Pag. 87. Sect. 4.

It is no maruell although you take vp the authors of the Admonition for wante of Logike, for you vtter great skill your selfe in writing, whiche keepe no order, but confounde your Reader in that thing which euen the common Logike of the countrey, which is reason, might haue directed you in: for what a confusion of times is this, to beginne with Cyprian, and then come to Ie∣rome and Chrysostome, and after to the Scripture, and backe agayne to Ignatius that was be∣fore Cyprian: which tymes are ill disposed of you, and that in a matter wherin it stoode you vpon to haue obserued the order of the tymes.

Io. Whitgifte.

Be patient a whyle, the matter is not great, the Authors be knowne, and the* 1.438 antiquitie of them, my mynde is of the matter: and there is reason why I should〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 thus place them. Cyprian telleth the necessitie of suche superioritie, and so dothe Chrysostome: Hierome, the cause and the originall: Paule, Timothie, and Ti∣tus

be examples hereof: Ignatius and the rest are brought in as witnesses of the continuance of such offices and superioritie in the Churche, euen from the Apostles. Now first to proue the name of these offices not to be Antichristian, then to shew the necessitie of the offices, thirdly the cause, and last of all to declare the vse of the same to haue bene in the Churche euen from S. Paules time to this houre, is to kéepe a better order, than you shall be able to disorder, with all the Logike, Rhetorike, and hote Eloquence you haue.

Chap. 3. the. 61. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 87. Sect. 4.

But as for Ignatius place, it is sufficiently answered before, in that which was answered to Cyprian his place, for when he sayeth the Bishop hath rule ouer all, he meaneth no more all in the prouince, than in all the world, but meaneth that flocke and congregation, whereof he is Bishop or minister. And when be calleth him Prince of the priests, although the title be to excessiue and big, condemned by Cyprian and the councel of Carthage, yet he meaneth no more the prince of all in the diocesse as we take it, or of the prouince, than he meaneth the Prince of all the priestes in the world, but he meaneth those fellow ministers and elders, that had the rule and gouernment of that particu∣lar Church and congregation, whereof he is a Bishop, as the great churches haue for the most part, both Elders which gouerne only, and ministers also to ayde one an other, and the principalitie that he which they called the Byshop had ouer the rest, hath bene before at large declared.

Io. Whitgifte.

You very lightly shake of Ignatius wordes, but they haue more pyth in them, if it please you better to consider of them. For he maketh degrées of ministers, and the Bishop to be the chiefe: he placeth Deacons vnder Priests, and Priests vnder Bi∣shops, so that he giueth to the Bishop superioritie and gouernment ouer both Priests and Deacons, which is the grounde of this cause: and it being graunted (as it muste néedes, neyther can this authoritie of Ignatius be auoyded) Aerius Heresie falleth, and so doth your whole assertion.

What is ment by Prince of Priests, Ignatius himselfe declareth, saying: Obtinens principatum & potestatem supra omnes: hauing chieftie and power ouer all.

How this name may be wel vsed, I haue shewed before, where I haue also decla∣red the meaning of Cyprians woordes, vttered in the hereticall Councell of Carthage, and therefore not coumpted in the number of those Councels.

Chap. 3. the. 62. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 88. Sect. 1. 2.

But M. Doctor doth not remember, that whylest he thus reasoneth for the authoritie of the Bishop, he ouerthroweth his Archbyshop quite and cleane. For Ignatius will haue none aboue the Bishop but Christ, and he will haue an Archbishop.

I see a man cannot well serue two masters, but eyther he must displease the one and please the other, or by pleasing of one offend the other. For M. Doctor would fayne please and vphold both, and yet his proo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es are such, that euery proppe that he setteth vnder one, is an axe to strike at the other.

Io. Whitgifte.

I remember it very well: and I know that an Archbishop is a Bishop, and that therfore there may be superioritie among Bishops, and yet nothing detracted from the woordes of Ignatius, I know likewise that as well the one as the other is cōdem∣ned by you: and I am well assured that the proofe of the one is the proofe of the other, and therfore. M. Doctor may well serue two masters, but they be such as be not onely not contrary, one to the other, but so néerely linked and ioyned togither, that what soeuer pleaseth the one, doth also please the other. M. Doctors proppes and proofes are such: as M. T. C. is compelled to vse railing & flouting, in steade of answering, which is a shift, but how honest and Christian let the world iudge.

Chap. 3. the. 63. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 73. Sect. 1.

Iustinus Martyr one of the most auncient writers of the Greekes,* 1.439 in his second Apologie ad Antoninum Pium, alloweth this superioritie, & calleth him that bare rule ouer the other ministers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

T. C. Pag. 88. Sect. 2.

But that M. Doctor deliteth alwayes where he might fetch at the fountayne, to be raking in ditches, he needed not to haue gone to Iustine Martyr for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when as S. Paule calleth* 1.440 the ministers and Elders by this title. And if this place of Iustine make for an Archbishop, then in steade of an Archbishop in euery prouince we shall haue one in euery congregation. For Iustine declareth there, the leyturgie or manner of seruing God that was in euery church vsed of the Chri∣stians. And I pray you let it be considered what is the office of that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, & see whether there be any resemblance in the world betweene him and an Archbishop. For he placeth his office to be in preaching, in conceyuing prayers, in ministring of the sacraments: of any cōmaundement which he had ouer the rest of the ministers, or of any such priuiledges as the Archbishop hath, he maketh not one worde. It may be that the same might haue the preheminence of calling the rest togither, and propounding the matter to the rest of the companie, & such like, as is before declared. As soone as euer you founde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you snatched that by and by, and went your wayes and so deceyue your selfe and others. But if you had read the whole treatise you should haue found that he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the people, for thus it is written in the same Apollogie, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Afterward bread is brought to the president of the brethren, cal∣ling the people as S. Paule doth continually brethren: And therefore these are (a) 1.441 M. Doctors arguments out of Martyrs place. There was a minister which did stand before, or was president of the rest in euery particular Church and congregation, therefore there was an Archbishop ouer all the prouince. And agayne there was one which ruled the people in euery congregation, therfore there was one that ruled all the ministers throughout the whole prouince. And albeit things were in great puritie in the dayes that Iustine liued, in respect of the times which followed, (b) 1.442 yet as there was in other thinges which appeare in his workes, and euen in the ministration of the Sa∣craments spoken of in that place corruption, in that they mingled water and wine togither, so euen in the ministerie there began to peepe out some thing which went from the simplicitie of the gospell: as that the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which was common to the Elders with the ministers of the worde, was (as it seemeth) appropriated vnto one.

Io. Whitgifte.

Though notable & famous doctors be ditches with T. C. yet are they pleasant and cleare riuers with men of more liberall sciences. S. Paule 1. Timoth. 5. hath these woordes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. &c. which derogate nothing frō any thing, that I haue alleaged, but iustifieth the same, for there it signifieth rule & gouernment, but yet in Iustine it signifieth some one that had the chiefe rule and gouernment ouer the rest, as M. Beza noteth vpon these woordes, 1. Ti. 5. Aduersus presbyterum &c. Praeterea* 1.443 notandū est ex hoc loco Timotheum in Ephesino Presbyterio tum fuisse 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 id est, Antistitem vt vocat Iustinus. Furthermore it is to be noted out of this place that Timothie in the presby∣terie, or colledge of ministers at Ephesus was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, the prelate or Bishop, as Iustinus calleth it. You may say vnto him as wel as to me, that he deliteth where he might search at the fountayne, to be raking in ditches, bycause he might haue had the same wordes spoken of all ministers in the same chapter of that Epistle to Timothie.

Furthermore that Iustinus Martyr doth vse this worde for him that hath autho∣ritie* 1.444 ouer the rest, not only of the people, but of such also as be presbyteri: the same M. Beza testifieth vpon the first to the Philip. saying: Haec igitur olim erat Episcoporum ap∣pellatio, donec qui politiae causa reliquis fratribus in caetu praeerat, quem Iustinus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vocat peculiariter dici Episcopus coepit. This therefore was the common name of Bishops, vntill he which for pollicie sake did gouerne the rest in the cōpany, whom Iustine calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, began to be called peculiarly a Bishop. In which words M. Beza testifieth that he whom Iustinus called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 did gouerne as well the other ministers, as he did the peo∣ple. And whosoeuer doth duely consider Iustines woordes, & peruse that whole place, he shall easily vnderstand, that those whom he there calleth Brethren, were ministers & Deacons: for afterward speaking of the people, he calleth them by the name of peo∣ple, as it is there to be séene.

I know that Iustine speaketh of their manner of liturgie, but that doth not improue any thing that I haue affirmed, for I speake of the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in that signification that Iustine doth vse it, which is for one that doth gouerne the rest. Wherefore this is my Argument, there was one among the ministers in Iustines time that did rule and gouerne the rest: Ergo, there was then superioritie among the ministers of the Churche, and one was aboue an other, which is the ouerthrow of your ground of e∣qualitie, at the which I shoote: and the which beyng ouerthrowne, the superioritie of Bishops and Archbishops is soone proued. And agayne I say, that in Iustines time there was one that gouerned the rest of the ministers, Ergo, there may be one to do the same now in like manner. These be my reasons, as for yours they be lyke to the rest of your owne. But your best refuge is to discredite the Author, which you do in Iustine, as you haue done in the rest. There is no antiquitie of any credite with you, no not in in a matter of Historie as this is. For Iustinus doth but declare the manner vsed in the Churche in his time. It is well, that in the ende you confesse this name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to signifie in Iustine the authoritie of one minister: This bycause you are constrayned to acknowledge, you will do it with nipping and biting the Author, af∣ter your manner. Ignatius who was before Iustine, as you haue heard, vseth a more loftie woorde, for he doth call him, Princeps Sacerdotum: the Prince or chiefe of Priests.

Chap. 3. the. 64. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 73. Sect. 1.

Cyrillus calleth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.* 1.445

T. C. Pag. 88. Sect. 3.

An other of M. Doctors reasons, for to proue the Archbishop, is that, Cyrill maketh men∣tion of an high priest, where vnto I answere, that he that bringeth in a priest into the church, goeth about to burie our sauiour Christe: for although it might be proued that the worde Priest were the same with the Grekes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yet (as shall appeare in his place) is the vse of this worde (priest) for a minister of the Gospell very daungerous. And as for him that bringeth in an high prieste into the Churche, he goeth about to put our sauiour Christe out of his office, who is proued in the Epistle to the Hebrues to be the onely high priest, and that there can be no more as long as the world endureth. And yet if all this were graunted, you are not yet come to that which you desire to proue, that is an Archbyshop. For if you looke in (*) 1.446. Theodoret you shall finde this worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifieth the high priesthood, to be nothing else but a byshopryke and in the seuenth chapter of that booke, and so forth diuers tymes, you shall haue 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 taken for a Bishop, as speaking of the councell of Nice, he sayth that there was 318. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 high priests. Now I thinke you wil not say there were 318. Archbishops, if you do, you are confuted, by all Ec∣clesiasticall wryters that euer I read, which speaking of them calleth them Byshops.

Io. Whitgifte.

This name Priest is vsuallly applied to the minister of the Gospell, in all Hi∣stories, fathers and wryters of antiquitie. And the most of the latest writers do vse it, and make no great serupulositie in it, neyther doth the name Priest, burie our Saui∣our Christe, as long as it is vsed for a minister of the Gospell: neyther is there any daunger in it at all, as long as the office is lawfull.

Not onely Cyrill vseth this name (high Priest) but Tertull. also in his booke De* 1.447 Baptismo, where he sayeth that Episcopus, is, summus sacerdos, The Bishop is the hie Prieste, and in lyke manner Theodorete, as you here say, and yet none of them ment to de∣rogate any thing from the office of Christe.

I told you before how names proper to Christe, may be also attributed to men: this beyng graunted, I haue as much as I desire: for as the Bishop is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the respect of other Priestes that be inferiour vnto him, so is the chiefe Bishop called Archiepiscopus, in respect of other Bishops that be gouerned and dire∣cted by him. And as among the ministers there is one chéefe which is called a Bi∣shop,

so among the Bishops there is one chéefe also that is called an Archbishop: and this is that ordo that Augustine speaketh of, as I haue sayd in my Answere to the Ad∣moni〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ion, in the woordes of M. Foxe.

Chap. 3. the. 65. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 73. Sect 2.

Theodoretus, li. 5. ca. 28. wryteth that Chrysostome beyng the Bi∣shop* 1.448 of Constantinople, did not onely rule that Churche, but the Churches also in Thracia in Asia, and in Pontus.

T. C. Pag. 88. Sect 4.

Chrysostome followeth, which as M. Doctor sayth, ruled not only the church of Constanti∣nople, but the churches of Thracia, Asia, & Pontus, and he sayeth it out of Theodorete. But here∣in it may appeare, that either M. Doctor hath a very euill conscience in falsifying writers, and that in the poynts which lie in controuersie, (*) 1.449 or els he hath taken his stuffe of certaine, at the second hand without any examination of it at all. For here he hath set downe in steade of (had care of the churches of Thracia, &c.) ruled the churches, the Greke is, (a) 1.450 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is translated also (prospexit): so that it appeareth he fetched it neyther from Theodorete in Greeke nor in Latine. And what is this to proue an Archbishop, that he had care of these churches: there is no minister but ought to haue care ouer all the churches thorough christendome, and to shewe that care for them in comforting or admonishing of them, by writing or by visiting them, (b) 1.451 if the necessi∣tie so require, and it is thought good by the churches, and leaue obteyned of the place where he is minister, vpon some notable and especiall cause, being some man of singular giftes, whose learning and credite may profite much to the bringing to passe of that thing, for the which he is to be sent. After this sort. * 1.452 S. Cyprian being in Afrike had care ouer Rome in Europe, and wrote vnto the church there. After this sorte also was Ireneus Bishop of Lions sent by the french Churches, vnto the churches in (c) 1.453 Phrygia, and after this sorte haue M. Caluine, and M. Bez〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 bene sent from Geneua in Sauoy, to the Churches of Fraunce.* 1.454

Io. Whitgifte.

It shall appeare God willing, whether M. Doctors memory or yours be worse:* 1.455 whether he hath an euill conscience in falsifying writers, or you in slaundering of him: whe∣ther he taketh his stuffe at the second hand, or you rather, that haue borrowed of other mē〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 collections, almost whatsoeuer you haue heaped togither in your booke. All this I say shall appeare, euen to trie your corrupt & vntrue dealing in this place: and certainely I cannot but maruell what affection hath so gotten the vpper hand of you, that it pro∣uoketh you to such outrage〈1 line〉〈1 line〉us speaches in a matter so manifestly counterfet. If you haue not séene the Author I will ascribe it to negligent ignorāce, but if you haue séene him, I cannot ascribe it to any other thing, than to vnsha〈1 line〉〈1 line〉efast malice. The whole storie as it is in Theodoret is this: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉* 1.456 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Iohn the great hauing receyued the sterne of the Church, reproued the iniuries of certaine boldly, and counsayled the king and the Queene things c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uenient, and exhorted the Priest〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o walke according to the lawes appoynted. But such as were not afrayde to breake them, he suffered not to come to the table, saying it was not meete that those should enioye the ho∣nour of Priestes, which would not follow the conuersation of true Priestes. And this care 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vsed not only ouer that citie, but also ouer whole Thracia, which cōteyneth six prouinces, and ouer all Asia, which is gouerned vnder eleuen rulers: and moreouer he gouerned the Church of Pontus with these lawes, in which coūtrie are as many rulers as in Asia. First he sayth that Chrysostome tooke the stern〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 or gouernmēt of the Church, then that he did

freely reprehend vice. Thirdly, that he commaunded the Priests to liue according to the lawes. Fourthly, that he did excommunicate and depriue of their priestly honour such as durst transgresse. Is not this to rule? what Archbishop in England doth execute greater iurisdiction? Then it followeth immediatly in Theodor. and vvith this care he did prouide for, or embrace not only his citie, but the Churches of Thracia, &c. Where it is to be noted that Theodorete sayth with this care &c. meaning that as he had the gouernment of the Church of Cōstantinople, and did there reprehend vice, cōmaunded the Priests to liue according to the lawes, excōmunicate them that did not, and put them from their office, so did he also in the Churches of Thracia, Asia, and Pontus. Theodoretes words be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. and you haue craftely left out 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that you might the rather cloke Theodoretes plaine meaning. Besides this Theodo∣ret sayth in playne woordes, that he gouerned the Churches in Pontus with these lawes, the Gréeke woorde is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

I shall moste hartely desire the Reader to consider this dealing of yours: surely I thinke fewe Papistes would haue dealt in lyke manner. And if the woordes of them∣selues were not playne (as they be most playne) yet very reason might haue taught you, that this was Theodoretes meaning, for if he should not haue ment some special care of these Churches, wherfore should he rather make particular mētiō of them, thā of other Churches? do you not thinke that wisé mē can easily espie your grosse shifts?

Cyprians care ouer Rome, was not lyke the care that he had ouer his owne Chur∣ches, it could not be sayd that he embraced Rome with the same care of gouernment, of reprouing, of excommunicating such as durst offend &c. that he did Carthage, and o∣ther places committed vnto him, as it is here sayd of Chrysostome.

I omit your ouersight in saying that Ireneus was sent to the Churches in Phrygia: for Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 3. & 4. (which places you quote in your margent to proue it) hath no such thing: only he sayth that Ireneus was sent to Rome to Eleutherius.

Chap. 3. the. 66. Diuision.

T. C Pag. 89. Sect. 1.

Now if you will conclude herevpon that Cyprian ruled the church of Rome, or Ireneus the Church of Phrigia, or M. Caluine, or M. Beza the churches of Fraunce, or that they were Bi∣shops or Archbishops of those places, you shall but conclude as you were wont to do: but yet all men vnderstand, that here is nothing lesse than an Archbishop, or any such Bishop as we haue and vse in our church. And if so be that Chrysostome should be Bishop or Archbishop of al these chur∣ches, which were in all Asia, Pontus, Thracia, as you would giue the reader to vnderstand, you make him Bishop of (a) 1.457 more churches than euer the Pope of Rome was, when he was in his greatest pryde, & his empire largest. For there were sixe presidentships in Thracia, & in Asia there were an eleuen princes, & had seuerall regions or gouernments, & in Pontus as many, & if he were Bishop or Archbishop of all the churches within these dominions, he had neede of a long spone to feede with all. (b) 1.458 It is certayne therfore that he was Bishop only of the church in Constantino∣ple, & had an eye and a care to those other churches. And that he was Bishop of one citie or of one churche, it may appeare by that which I haue before alleaged out of the Greeke Scholiast vpon Titus, who citeth there Chrysostome, where it is sayd that S. Paule did not meane to make one ouer the whole Ile, (c) 1.459 but that euery one should haue his proper congregation &c. And in another place he sheweth the difference betwene the Emperour and the Bishop, that the one is ouer the* 1.460 world, and the other, that is the Bishop, is ouer one citie.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your exāples proue nothing, neither be they any thing like to this of Chrysostome,* 1.461 for Theodorete doth mention these Churches as places annexed to the Bishopricke of Constantinople, & properly apperteyning to the care and charge of Chrysostome the Bishop of that citie. Socrates speaking of a councell assembled at Constantinople, sayth thus: They do againe establish the fayth of the Coūcell of Nice: & deuiding prouinces* 1.462 they appoint Patriarkes, there was therfore allotted vnto Nectarius, the great and ample ci∣tie of Constantinople & Thracia, &c. And this Nectarius was Patriarch of Constanti∣nople next before Chrysostome, so that it is manifest that Chrysostome was Patriarch or Archbishop both of Constantinople and also of Thracia, &c. Sozomenus* 1.463 sheweth euidently that Chrysostome had iurisdiction ouer all Asia, and of other

places also, and that he executed iurisdiction there accordingly: For he deposed to the* 1.464 number of 13. Bishops, some in Lycia, some in Phrygia, some in Asia, bycause they sould be∣nefices and bestowed them for fauour, and for rewarde. And if you were not eyther very ignorant, or wilfully bent, you might haue read in Ecclesiasticall histories, that one Bishop had authoritie and charge ouer diuers Churches, long before Chrysostomes time, the which thing I haue also before proued by diuers examples.

That Chrysostome was Archbishop of all those Churches (although it be suffi∣ciently proued by the testimonie of Theodorete a worthie writer and notable diuine: and by Sozomene also) yet will I adde (as a full confutation of all your phansies in this matter) the iudgement of the wryters and collectors of the Centuries, who being many learned, & trauayling especially in such matters, deserue great credit: In their 5. Centurie. cap. 10. they wryte thus of Chrysostome: Non autem tantùm istius Ecclesiae Pa∣storem* 1.465 egit &c. But he was not onely Pastor of this Churche (meaning Constantinople) but was Archbishop also or ouerseer of other Churches in Thracia, which was deuided into sixe presidentships, in Asia which was ruled of eleuen pretors, and in the region of Pontus, which is likewise deuided into eleuen presidentships. If 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o report of any historiographer will please you, what remedy: though you remayne willfull still, yet I trust the tra∣ctable Reader may here finde sufficient to satisfie him. For a further proofe that the Bishops of Constantinople were called Archbishops, I could referre you to the gene∣rall Councell of Calcedon which was Anno. 453. where Flauianus is called Archbishop* 1.466 of Constantinople sundry times. Where also it appeareth that the Archbishop of Cō∣stantinople, had the ordeyning, allowing and disallowing of the Bishops in Pontus, Asia, and Thracia. You are greatly deceyued in saying that if he were Archbyshop of al these Churches, he was Bishop of m〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e Churches, than euer the Pope was in his greatest pryde: for euen all these Churches, and all other Churches were made subiect to him, when by Phocas he was made the head of the Church and vniuersall Bishop: and though he had not possession of all, yet did he clayme interest in all, and iurisdiction ouer all, or at the least ouer so many of them as professed Christianitie.

You say, it is certayne therefore that he was Bishop onely of the Church in Constanti∣nople, and had an eye and care to those other Churches: and against this your owne certayn∣tie without any ground or authoritie, I haue brought in Theodoret, Sozomene, the Councell of Calcedon, and the Centuries: although in effect you confesse asmuch as I desire: for there is neyther Archbishop nor Bishop in this Church, but he hath his pe∣culiar sea and Church, and yet care of gouernment ouer other also, euen as Chryso∣stome had.

You haue alleaged nothing, neyther can you, to proue that Chrysostome had not gouernment ouer mo Churches than one. The Gréeke Scholiast (whom I haue an∣swered) hath not one woorde to that purpose: for euery seuerall parish hath a Pastor,* 1.467 notwithstāding the Bishop hath the care of gouernment of them, euen as Titus had in Creta. The wordes of the author be, Sed singulas ciuitates suum habere Pastorem, but e∣uery citie should haue hir Pastor, And you haue translated it, that euery one shoulde haue his proper congregation: whereby you meane scant good fayth, but couertly go about to make your reader beleue; that the Scholiast would haue no ministers without a pro∣per congregation. But of this and many other of your like corruptions, I trust the reader is already sufficiently instructed.

The woordes of Chrysostome Hom. 3. in Act. be these: N〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nne imperium orbis terrarū tenet imperator? Hic autem vnius ciuitatis Episcopus est. Doth not the Emperour gouerne the world? but this man is Bishop of one Citie. The which woordes are spoken of Chryso∣stome in this sense, that he which is but Bishop of one Citie, is asmuch subiect to af∣fections and troubles as the Emperour is, that gouerneth the whole worlde. This to be Chrysostomes meaning the woordes following do declare: wherefore he doth not in that place shew any difference betwixt the Emperour & a Byshop, in the largnes or straightnesse of their charges, & places of gouernment (as you say) but in the troubles, in the opprobries & slaunders that they be subiect vnto, wherewith the Bishop of one citie is more tossed, thā the Emperour of the whole world: which Chrysostome spea∣keth

hyperbolycally, for there was not one Emperour ouer the whole worlde at any time, and he himselfe being Bishop had the care and charge of diuerse Cities, wher∣fore he must be vnderstoode secundùm subiectam materiam: as the matter in hand requireth.

Chap. 3. the. 67. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 73. Sect. 3.

Theodoretus Episcopus Cyri in an Epistle that he writte to Leo, sayth of Theodoret〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, himselfe, that he had gouernment ouer. 800. Churches.

T. C. Pag. 89. Sect. 2.

Touching Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus,(a) 1.468 to let passe that which the Bishops of Egypt cried in the Councel of Calcedon, that he was no Bishop, it is to be obserued, that which the Emperors* 1.469 Theodosius & Ualentinian, write vnto Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria, that he had commaun∣ded Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus that he should kepe himselfe vnto his owne Church only: wher∣by* 1.470 it appeareth,(b) 1.471 that he medled in more Churches than was meete he should. Besides, that wanteth not suspition that he speaketh this of himselfe, especially when he sayth that there was not in all those. 800. Churches one 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉are, that is(c) 1.472 one hypocrite or euill man.

Io. Whitgifte.

In the conuocation holden in the first yeare of Quéene Marie, the testimonie of* 1.473 this Theodoret, being alledged agaynst transubstantiation, D. Watson bicause hée coulde not answere the authoritie, denyed the Authour, accusing him to be a Nesto∣rian. To whom replie was made, that it was but a lewde refuge, when he could not answere, to denie the Authour. The same may be sayde to you, dealing in the selfe same maner. For this Theodorete as he is a notable Hystoriographer, & of great cre∣dite in the reporting of things done by other, & before his time, so is there no cause at all why he shoulde be suspected speaking of him selfe. And he himselfe doth report of himselfe in that Epistle written by him to Leo, that he had not onely gouerned these 800. Churches, but so gouerned them by the space of. 26. yeares, that he susteyned no re∣proch or blame of the bishops of Antioche: whereof I might also truely gather, that the Bishop of Antioche was as it were his Archbishop or Metropolitane. This autho∣ritie or rather example of Theodorete is so plaine, that you are driuen to séeke vn∣lawfull shiftes to deface a worthie wryter: but let vs sée how iustly.

You say, that the Bishops of Egypt cryed in the Councell of Calcedon, that he was no Bishop, and you note in the margent the. 1. Act. of that Councell: and I say vnto you againe, that the whole Councell in the. 8. Action, cryed out and sayde, Theodoretus dig∣nus* 1.474 est sede Ecclesiae, orthodoxum Ecclesia pastorem recipiat. Theodoret is worthie the seat of the Church (that is the Bishoprike) let the Church receyue him as a Catholike Pastor.

You adde, that Theodosius and Ualentinian, writte vnto Dioscorus Bishop of Alexan∣dria,* 1.475 that he had commaunded Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus, that he shoulde keepe himselfe to hys owne Church onely, &c. To this I answere, that you haue here delt, as commonly you do, that is, verie corruptly: for the wordes that followe in the same Epistle doe eui∣dently declare, that the Emperours meaning was, that Theodorete shoulde kéepe himselfe at home, and not come to the Synode, vnlesse it should please the whole Sy∣node to accept of him, and to admit him. The which also appeareth in another Epistle of the Emperours to Dioscorus in that first Act of the Councell of Calcedon (in the which Epistle the Emperour calleth the Bishop of Ierusalem Archbishop) It appea∣reth that Theodorete was first by the Emperours commaundement inhibited from comming to that Synode, which was called the seconde Councell of Ephesus, and af∣terwarde that he was con〈1 line〉〈1 line〉mned in the same Synode in his absence, and not called to answere for himselfe, as he declareth in his Epistle written to Leo. But he was restored in this generall Councell of Calcedon, and that seconde Councell of Ephasus

was afterward condemned: so that all this that you speake to the discredite of Theo∣dorete is but a friuolous, and yet a corrupt shift.

You do but as you are woont, when you expounde that which Theodorete spea∣keth of his 800. Churches being without tares, of hypocrites and euill men. If you had read the authour your selfe, I thinke you would not so grossely haue erred: his words be these. By Gods helpe I deliuered more than a thousande soules from Martions heresie,* 1.476 and I conuerted many to Christ the Lorde from the sect of Arius, and Eunomius, & vt in octingentis Ecclesijs pastor essem, mibi sortitò obtigit: tot enim paroecias, habet Cyrus: and it was allotted to me to be pastor in 800. Churches, for Cyrus hath so many parishes: in the which* 1.477 through your prayers there did not remaine one tare: sed ab omnierrore haeretico liberatus fuit grex noster, but our flocke was deliuered from all hereticall error. Theodorete there∣fore meaneth heresie, he meaneth not hypocrisie, there was not one heretike in all his Bishoprike, he doth not say one hypocrite or euill man: so that you are farre wyde and do Theodorete double iniurie, for you do both slaunder him, and misconstrue him.

Chap. 3. the. 68. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 89. Sect. 3.

Nowe, that it may appeare what great likelihoode there is betwene this Theodoret, and our Lorde Bishops and Archbishops, it is to be considered which he writeth of himselfe in the Epistle vnto Leo, that is, that he hauing beene. 26. yeares Bishop, was knowne of all those that dwelt in those partes, that he had neuer house of his owne, nor fielde, nor halfepenn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e, not so much as a place to be buryed in, but had willingly contented himselfe with a poore estate, be〈1 line〉〈1 line〉yke he had a verie leene Archbishoprike, and if the fatte morsels of our Bishoprikes, and Archbishoprikes were taken and employed to their vses of maintenance of the poore, and of the Ministers, and of the Uniuersities, whiche are the seede of the ministerie, I thinke the heate of the disputation, and contention for Archbishops and Byshops woulde be well cooled.

Io. Whitgifte.

We speak〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 of the office and authoritie, not of the liuing, to the spoile of the which,* 1.478 you and most of your fautors haue more respect, than you haue to the office, thoughe you pretende the contrarie: and yet it followeth not, but that Theodorete had ly∣uing sufficient, and might haue béene more welthie, but as it séemeth he professed voluntary pouertie of purpose, for he gaue away that also whiche was left vnto him of his parents, as he in that Epistle testifyeth saying, Sed sponte electam amplexus sum paupertatem: but I imbraced pouertie which I chose willingly. His Bishoprike might be of large reuenues, and yet he poore, séeing that he had chosen, and professed pouertie. But if Bishops be better nowe prouided for, than they were then, it is their partes to be thankefull vnto God and the Prince for it, and to vse it well. It is not your du∣tie to enuie their prosperitie, bicause you are not in case your selfe.

Chap. 3. the. 69. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 73. Sect. vlt.

But what shall I neede to vse such proofes in a matter so plaine, and euident to all such as haue read any thing of antiquitie? The best learned men of our dayes, and diligentest preferrers of the Gospell of Christ do with one consent (one or two of the latest writers excep∣ted) acknowledge and confesse that this distinction of degrees, and superioritie in the gouernment of the Church; is a thing most conue∣nient and necessarie.

T. C. Pag. 89. Sect. 4.

Now good reader thou hearest what M. Doctor hath beene able to 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ake togither out of the olde fathers, which he sayth are so plaine in this matter, and yet can shew nothing to the purpose. Heare also what he sayth out of the writers of our age, all which he sayth (except one or two) are of hys iudgement, and allow well of this distinction of degrees.

Io. Whitgifte.

Well what I haue raked togither, and howe you haue carted these rakings away, I commit to the iudgement of the learned. These raking termes, in my opinion are not séemely in him, that would séeme so much to iustifie himselfe, and to condemne other of immodestie.

Chap. 3. the. 70. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 74. Sect. 1.

Caluine in his Institutions sayth on this sort, that euery prouince* 1.479 had among their Bishops an Archbishop, and that the Councell of Nice did appoynt Patriarches vvhich should be in order and dignitie aboue Archbi∣shops, it vvas for the preseruation of discipline: Therfore for this cause espe∣cially vvere those degrees appoynted, that if any thing shoulde happen in a∣ny particular Church vvhich could not there be decided, it might be remo∣ued to a prouinciall Synode: If the greatnesse or difficultie of the cause re∣quired greater consultation, then vvas there added Patriarches togither with the Synodes, from vvhom there vvas no appeale but vnto a general Coūcel▪ This kind of gouernment some called Hierarchiam, an improper name and not vsed in the scriptures: for the spirit of God vvil not haue vs to dreame of dominion and rule in the gouernment of the Church: But if (omitting the name) vve shall consider the thing it selfe, vve shall finde that these olde By∣shops did not frame any other kinde of gouernment in the Church, frō that vvhich the Lorde hath prescribed in his vvorde. Caluine here mislyketh this name Hierarchia, but he alloweth the names and authoritie of Patriarches and Archbishops, and thinketh the gouernment of the Church then vsed, not to differ from that which God in his worde prescribeth.

T. C. Pag. 89. Sect. vlt. & Pag. 90. Sect. 1. 2.

M. Caluine first is cyted to proue those offices of Archbishop, Primate, Patriarch: The names whereof he cannot abyde, and as for him he approueth onely, that there should be some, which when difficult causes arise, which cannot be ended in the particular Churches might referre the matters to Synodes and prouinciall Councelles, and which might do the offices whiche I haue spoken of before of gathering voyces. &c.

But that he liketh not of those dominations and large iurisdictions, or at all of the Bishops or Archbishops, which we haue nowe, it may appeare plainly ynough both in that place, when as he will haue his wordes drawen to no other than the olde Bishops, shutting out thereby the Bishops that now are, as also in other places, and namely vpon the Philippians, where reasoning agaynst* 1.480 this distinction betwene Pastor and Bishop, and shewing that giuing the name of Bishop, to one man onely in a church, was the occasion why he afterwarde vsurped do〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ination ouer the rest, he sayth after this sort: In deede I graunt (sayth he) as the dispositions and maners of men are, order cannot stande amongst the ministers of the worde, vnlesse one be ouer the rest, I meane (saith he) of euerie seuerall and singular bodie, not of a whole prouince, much lesse of the whole worlde.

Now if you will needes haue M. Caluins Archbishop, you must not haue him neither ouer a Prouince nor Diocesse, but onely ouer one singular and particular congregation: how much better therefore were it for you to seeke some other shelter agaynst the storme than M. Caluins, which will not suffer you by any meanes to couer your selfe vnder his winges, but thrusteth you out al∣wayes as soone as you enter vpon him forceably.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Caluine affirmeth directly, that euery prouince among their Bishops had* 1.481 an Archbishop, and that the Councell of Nice did a ppoynt Patriarkes: he sayeth that these degrées were appoynted for the preseruation of discipline, and by calling of Synodes to ende controuersies that arise in particular Churches he well lyketh this kinde of gouernment: onely he mislyketh the name (Hierarchia) what can bée plainlyer spoken both of the name and office of the Archbishop? As for your fonde de∣uise that it shoulde be his office onely to gather voyces, &c. it is singular to your selfe, you haue not one learned wryter (that I can read) with you.

The Bishops that now are in this Church, neyther haue, nor chalenge to haue more iurisdiction than the olde Bishops had, nay they haue not so much, as it is eui∣dently to be séene in the olde Canons: and therefore M. Caluine allowing of them, doth allow of ours also.

His place to the Philippians maketh agaynst you, for he alloweth one to be su∣periour amongst the ministers, and to rule the rest, and sayth. that as the nature and disposition of men nowe is, there coulde be no order except it were so: which doth vtterly ouer∣throw the equalitie that you and the Admonition dreame of. He saith that he speaketh de singulis corporibus. which he cannot vnderstand of particular parishes, for euery par∣ticular parishe hath not many ministers: so that of necessitie he must haue manie se∣nerall Churches to make the bodie he speaketh of: and therefore a Diocesse or a pro∣uince. I thinke M. Caluine did thinke Geneua, and the townes therevnto ad∣ioyning and belonging to be but one bodie: so doe I thinke London and the Diocesse therevnto perteyning to be but one particular bodie. And likewyse the Prouince of Canterburie, distinguished into diuerse partes and members, to be but one bodie in like maner. Neyther do I thinke that master Caluine euer shewed his mislyking of these degrées in this Churche as they be nowe vsed: for (as I sayde before) the great abuse of them vnder the Pope, made him more to mislyke of them, than hée woulde haue done, but in these wordes that I haue repeated of his, he testifyeth as* 1.482 much as I desire, that is the antiquitie and the cause, and vse of those offices, and (that which you omit and skip ouer) that herein the olde Bishops did frame no kinde of gouernment in the Church, diuerse from that which the Lord hath prescribed in his word: which neyther you nor your adherents can abide to heare of.

Chap. 3. the. 71. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 90. Sect. 3.

But here I cannot let passe M. Doctours ill dealing, whiche recyting so muche of master Caluine, (*) 1.483 cutteth him off in the waste, and leaueth quite oute that whiche made agaynst him, that is whiche M. Caluine sayeth in these woordes: Althoughe (sayeth he) in this disputation, it may not be passed ouer that this office of Archbyshop or Patriarke, was most rarely and sel∣dome vsed, which dealing seemeth to proceede of a verie euill conscience.

Io. Whitgifte.

I knowe not what perfection is in your booke, more than in mine, but I am sure that I haue followed mine owne booke faythfully and truely, neither haue I o∣mitted one worde that maketh eyther with me or agaynst me: and therefore you haue vniustly charged mée. The booke that I follow was printed Anno. 1553. where∣in there are no such wordes, that this office 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Archbishop or Patriarke was most rarely and seldome vsed. Neither is there cause why. M. Caluine shoulde so say, for he could not but knowe that these offices haue had continuance in the Churche, at the least, since before the Councell of Nice, for there are these wordes, mos antiquus perduret, &c. and that they were continually affixed to the Bishoprikes of certaine Cities, as Rome, Antioch. &c.

In déede in the last edition of his institutions, he hath these wordes, quanquam in hac disputatione praeteriri non potest, quod rarissimi erat vsus, which wordes he referreth to* 1.484 the office of a Patriarch, whome he sayth the Nicene Councell did place in dignitie and order aboue Archbishops, for the preseruation of discipline, neither doth he say that the office of a Patriarke was moueable, or chosen at euery action, (for then shoulde he affirme that which is repugnant to all Hystoryes, Councelles▪ and auncient wry∣ters that speake of Patriarkes) but his meaning is, that there was but seldome tymes occasion offered for Patriarkes, to exercise the authoritie they had ouer Arch∣bishoppes, which is the occasion that the most authours doe confounde them, and thinke them to be all one: other meaning than this, his wordes neyther can nor doe admit.

Chap. 3. the. 72. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 74. Sect. vlt.

Hemingius in his Enchirid. sheweth, that these degrees in the* 1.485 Church be necessarie, & that discipline cannot be kept without them. And he addeth that their Church kepeth this forme, Necmouetur (saith he) Anabaptistarum ac Libertinorū effreni libidine, qui ecclesiam Christi barbaricum quendam bo∣minū caetum, sine ordine fingunt, cū habeat nostra ecclesia non solū exemplū Apostolicae & purioris ec∣clesiae, verum etiam mandatum spiritus sancti omnia ordinaté & decenter ad aedificationem faciendi. Neyther is our Church moued vvith the licencious libertie of Anabaptists and Libertines, vvhich feine the Church of Christ to be a barbarous confu∣sed societie vvithout order, seeing that our Church hath not onely the ex∣ample of the Apostolicall and most pure Church, but also the commaunde∣ment of the spirite of God, to do all things orderly and decently to edifie.

T. C. Pag. 90. Sect. 4.

Then followeth Hemingius, who you say approueth these degrees of Archbishop, Metro∣politane, Bishop, Archdeacon, for so you must needes meane, when you say he approueth these* 1.486 degrees, or else you say nothing, for therevpon is the question. Nowe howe vntruly you speake, let it be iudged by that which followeth. First he sayth that our Sauiour Christ in S. Luke di∣stinguisheth, and putteth a difference betweene the office of a Prince, and the office of the Mini∣ster of the Church, leauing dominion to the Princes, and taking it altogither from the Ministers▪ here you see, not onely howe he is agaynst you, in your exposition in the place of S. Luke, which woulde haue it nothing else but a prohibition of ambition, but also howe at a worde, he cutteth the throte of your Archbishop, and Bishoppe as it is nowe vsed. And afterwarde speaking of the Churches of Denmarke, he sayeth they haue Christ for their heade, and for the outwarde disci∣pline, they haue Magistrates to punishe with the sworde, and for to exercise the ecclesiasticall dis∣cipline, they haue Bishoppes, Pastours, Doctours, which may keepe men vnder with the worde, without vsing any corporall punishment. Here is no mention of Archbyshoppes, Primates, Metropolitanes. And althoughe he sheweth that they keepe the distinction betweene Bishoppes and Ministers, agaynst which there hath beene before spoken, yet he sayeth that the authoritie which they haue, is as the authoritie of a father, not as the power of a mayster, which is farre o∣therwise here. (*) 1.487 For the condition of many seruaunts vnder their maysters, is much more free than the condition of a Minister vnder his Bishop. And afterwarde he sheweth wherein that au∣thoritie or dignitie of the Bishop ouer the Minister lyeth, that is in exhorting of him, in chyding of him▪ as he doth the lay people, and yet he will haue also the Minister, although not with suche authoritie, after a modest sort to do the same vnto the Bishop. And so he concludeth, that they reteyne these orders, notwithstanding the Anabaptistes. Nowe let the reader iudge whether Hemingius be truely or faythfully alledged or no, or whether Hemingius do say that they haue in their Church Archbishoppes, Primates; Metropolitanes, Archdeacons, or whether the By∣shoppes in the Churches of Denmarke are any thing like ours. For I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 omitte that he spea∣keth there agaynst all pompe in the Ministerie, all worldly superioritie or 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ghnesse, bycause I * 1.488 loue not to wryte out whole pages, as M. Doctor doth out of other mens wrytings, to helpe to make vp a booke.

Io. Whitgifte.

Hemin. in that very place quoted in your margēt hath first these words: Praeterea cū hic c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tus, &c. Furthermore seing this society is ruled by the word of god, there are in it two sorts

of men, that is to say the preachers of the worde, and their hearers, which do reuerence and* 1.489 loue one another as fathers and children. But in the Ministers there is great diuersitie: for although the authoritie of all Ministers in respect of spirituall regiment is all one (for of ex∣ternall discipline shall be spoken in the proper place) yet there are diuerse orders and de∣grees of honour and dignitie: and that partly by the worde of God, partly by the approba∣tion and allowance of the Church. Where first he alloweth this distinction which you so greatly mislyke that all Ministers be equall touching spirituall iurisdiction, that is their ministerie, but not concerning externall discipline: then doth he allowe degrées of dignitie and superioritie among the Clergie: the which after that he hath prooued by the Scripture, as namely the. 4. to the Ephesians, and by the examples of Paule,* 1.490 Timothie, and Titus, he procéedeth and goeth on forwarde: and sayth, Ecclesia. &c. The Church, to whome the Lorde hath giuen power vnto edification, hath ordeyned an order of ministeries for hir profite, that all things might be rightly ordeyned for the re∣edifying of the bodie of Christ. Hereof the Primitiue Church following the tymes of the Apostles, did appoynt some Patriarkes, whose office it was to prouide that the Byshoppes of euerie 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shoulde be rightly ordeyned and elected: that the Bishops shoulde doe their duetie truely: and that the Clergie and people shoulde obey them in those things that perteyned to the Lorde: it appoynted also Chorepiscopos, (that is coadiutors of Bishoppes whome we nowe call Prouostes) some Pastors, and Catechistes. This was the ordination of the Primitiue Church. Wherein he plainly declareth these degrées that I speake of (for vnder the name of Patriarkes, it is euident that he comprehendeth Archby∣shops or Metropolitanes) to haue bene in the Primitiue Church, immediately after the Apostles tyme, and in the purest time of the Church: than the which what can be spoken more directly for my purpose, whose chiefe intent is, to proue the antiquitie of these names and offices?

After this he sheweth the abuses of these offices in the corruption of doctrine vnder the Pope, and he doth not onely name Archbishops, but Bishops also, Curates, and other, and therefore the note in your margent, is but a note of a speciall spyte agaynst the Archbishops. In the end speaking of Bishops, Pastors, and Doctors, he sayth thus. Inter hos ministros, &c. Amongst these ministers also our Churche acknowledgeth degrees* 1.491 and orders of dignitie, for the diuersitie of giftes, the greatnesse of labour, and the worthi∣nesse of their calling: and iudgeth it to be barbarous, to will to take this order out of the Church: It iudgeth that other Ministers ought to obey their Bishops in all things that tend* 1.492 to the edification of the Church, according to the worde of God, and the profitable order of the Church: It iudgeth that the Bishops haue authoritie ouer the other ministers of the Church, not such as is of masters, but of fathers. Wherby he acknowledgeth distinction of degrées and superioritie among Ministers, and the iurisdiction of Bishops ouer o∣ther Ministers: After all this he concludeth with these wordes conteyned in mine an∣swere: Nowe let the reader iudge whether I haue otherwise reported of Himingius than he himselfe in that Chapter affirmeth: and whether he consent vnto me that woulde haue distinction of degrées among the Ministers, or to you that would haue an equalitie which he calleth an Anabaptisticall and barbarous confusion.

Touching your notes gathered out of him, I will briefly answere: first, in the exposition of the. 22. of Luke, he is not agaynst me, for I would not haue Archbishops or Bishops. &c. to take from Kings their rule and dominion as doth the Pope: ney∣ther woulde I haue them to reigne ouer the people as Kings and Princes do. And I doe not thinke but that the authoritie and superioritie that they haue, is a ministe∣rie for the quietnesse of the Church, and the commoditie of other, and yet a gouern∣ment to: for the Apostle sayth, ad Hebr. 13. Obedite his qui praesunt vobis, Obey them that* 1.493 beare rule ouer you &c. Hemingius in that place especially dealeth agaynst the two swordes of the Bishop of Rome, and his excessiue pompe.

For the kinde of authoritie that the Bishop hath ouer the Ministers, that it should* 1.494 be of a father, and not of a master, I agrée with him, and I knowe that all you speake to the contrarie in the gouernment of this Churche, is most vntrue: For vndoub∣tedly if they haue offended in any thing, it is in to much lenitie, whiche is a fault euen

in a father. The authoritie that Hemingius giueth to the ciuill Magistrate, we ac∣knowledge with him to be moste due, and I would to God you also dyd in heart and mouthe confesse the same. Thus you sée that Hemingius and we agrée, and that there is nothing ascribed vnto him, whiche is not playnely to be founde in him.

Chap. 3. the. 73. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 75. Lin. 11. & Sect. 1.

Wherefore thus I conclude with the very wordes of that wor∣thy* 1.495 man, (who hathe so well deserued of this Churche of Eng∣lande) Master Foxe: In the ecclesiasticall estate vve take not avvay the distinction of ordinarie degrees, suche as by the Scripture be appoynted, or by the Primitiue Churche allovved, as Patriarkes or Archebishops, Bishops, ministers, and deacons, for of these foure vve especially reade as chief: in vvhich foure degrees as vvegraunt diuersitie of office, so vve admit in the same also diuersitie of dignitie: neyther denying that vvhich is due to eache degree, neyther yet maynteyning the ambition of any singular person. For as vve giue to the minister place aboue the Deacon, to the Bi∣shop aboue the minister, to the Archbishop aboue the Bishop, so vve see no cause of inequalitie, vvhy one minister should be aboue another mi∣nister, one Bishop in his degree aboue another Bishop to deale in his dioces: or an Archbishop aboue an other Archbishop: and this is to keepe an order duely and truely in the Church, according to the true nature and definitiō of order by the authoritie of Augustine, lib. de Ciui. Ordo est parium disparium{que} re∣rum sua cui{que} loca tribuens dispositio. Hitherto M. Foxe.

Nowe let the indifferent Reader iudge whether these offices be straunge and vnheard of in the Church of Christ, or no.

T. C. Pag. 90. Sect. vlt.

M. Doctor closeth vp this matter with M. Foxe, but eyther for feare that the place shoulde be founde, that there might be answere, or for feare that M. Foxe shoulde giue me the solution which hath giuen you the obiecion, he would neyther quote the place of the booke, nor the booke it selfe, he hauing written diuers. You can not speake so muche good of M. Foxe, whiche I wyll not wyllingly subscribe vnto: and if it be any declaration of good wyll, and of honor, that one bea∣reth to another, to reade that which he writeth, I thinke (*) 1.496 I haue read more of him, than you. For I haue read ouer his booke of Martyrs, and so I think dyd neuer you: for if you had read so diligently in M. Foxe, as you haue beene hasty to snatche at this place, he woulde haue taughte* 1.497 you the forgery of these Epistles, whereout you fetche your authorities, and woulde haue shewed you that the distinguishing of the orders of Metropolitanes, Bishops, and other degrees, whiche you say sometimes had their beginnings in the Apostles tymes, sometimes you can not tell when, were not in Higinus tyme, whyche was. 180. yeares after Christe. I (a) 1.498 perceyue you feare M. Foxe is an enimie vnto your Archbishop and primate, and therfore it seemeth you went about to corrupte him with his prayse, and to seeke to drawe him, if it were possible, vnt〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the Archbishop, and if not, yet at the least that he would be no enimie, if he woulde not, nor coulde not be his friend. You make me suspect that your prayse is not harty, but pretended, bicause you doe so often and so bitterly speake agaynst all those that wyll not receyue the cappe, and surplesse, and other ceremo∣nies, whereof M. Foxe declareth his great misliking. For answere vnto the place, bicause I re∣member it not, nor meane not to reade ouer the whole booke to seeke it, I say first as I sayde be∣fore, that there may be somethyng before or after, whych may giue the solution to this plac〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, espe∣cially seeing M. Foxe in another place page. 96. prouing the Epistles of Stephanus to be coun∣terfeyt, he vseth this reason, because the fyft canon of the sayd Epistles, solemnly entreateth of the difference betweene, Primates, Metropolitanes, and Archbishops, which distinction (sayth he) of titles and degrees, sauour more of ambition than persecution. Moreouer I saye, that M. Foxe wryting a storie, dothe take greater payne, and looketh more diligently to declare what is done, and in what tyme, and by whome, than howe iustly or bniustly, howe conueniently or inconueni∣ently it is done. Last of all, if any thing be spoken there to the hinderance of the sinceritie of the Gospell, I am well assured that M. Foxe, whyche hathe traueled so muche and so profitably to that ende, will not haue hys authoritie or name therein to bryng any preiudice. Nowe wyll I also ioyne wyth you, and leaue it to the iudgemente of the indifferent Reader, howe well out of the

Scriptures, Councels, wryters olde and newe, you haue proued eyther the lawfulnesse at all of the names of Archbishops, Patriarkes, Archdeacons, Primates, or of the lawfulnesse of the office of them, and of Bishops which be in our times.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you had so diligently read M. Foxe his booke of Martyrs, as you boast and brag that you haue done, then could not this place haue béene so straunge vnto you, for it is in the, 20. page of his first tome, where he hath an whole treatise touching the su∣premacie of the Bishop of Rome, and speaketh of this matter at large. The words be his own, and expresse his owne iudgement of these degrées & offices in this Church of Englande. It had béene some token of modestie, so to haue commended your selfe, and your owne reading, that you had not depraued any other mans: But to cōmend your selfe, and to detract from an other, is eyther arrogant foolishnesse, or foolishs arro∣gancie. I can bring foorth good testimonies of my reading of these bookes, thoughe I make no vragge thereof, or vayne comparisons.

I haue alleaged none of these Epistles other wyse than M. Foxe him selfe hathe al∣leaged them.

M. Foxe hathe shewed him selfe (in the place by me cited out of his booke) to be no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 eyther to Archbishop, Priuate, or Bishop, for I am sure he speaketh as he thin∣keth. He is not a man like to be corrupted with prayse, and therefore in so saying, you doe vs bothe great iniurie.

You may not iudge my heart: I thinke of M. Foxe as of one that I loue and re∣uerence, I will not vtter all that I could, least I should séeme to flatter.

There is nothing that goeth eyther before that place, or followeth after it, that can procure any other sense to his wordes, than that in the which I haue set them down. I doe not alleage M. Foxe for the originall of these names and offices, but for the al∣lowance of them. These words that I haue recited are not spoken in the waye of any hystorie, but of the order of gouernment of this Church, which he alloweth, and I dare saye for him, that he hathe héereinspoken nothing, whiche he thinketh maye hurte the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Gospell. And I am right well content to let the godly Reader iudge of bothe our proofes.

¶ The defense of the answere of Master Iewell, concerning Archbishops. &c. agaynst the vnreuerende Replie of T. C.

Chap. 4. the first Diuision.

T. C. Pag▪ 91. Sect. 1.

And for as much as I haue purposed to answere in one place that which is scattered in diuers. I 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 halfe a sheete of 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ which is annexed of late vnto the booke, put foorth in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ and vnder the credite of the Bishop of Sarisburie, wherein I will say nothing of those 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & sharpe w〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rds, which are gyuen partly in the beginning, when he calleth the propounders of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 why〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h 〈◊〉〈◊〉 archebishops and archedeacons nouices, partly in the ende when he 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 children, and the doctrine of (*) 1.499 the Gospell wantonnesse. &c. If he had ly∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 learning and grauittie, and otherwyse good desertes of the Churche, in defending the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thereof agaynst the Papistes, we could haue easily borne it at his hands: nowe he is dead and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vp 〈◊〉〈◊〉 peace, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were agaynst all humanitie to digge or to breake vp hys graue, onely I 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the consideration of the Reader vpon those things whiche are alleaged, to iudge whether it or 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 or 〈◊〉〈◊〉, which is confirmed by so graue testimonies of the aun∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 worke of God.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you doubt whether the Bishop of Sarisbury were the author of that half shéete of paper, or no, you may sée his owne hande writing. If you call the words which he vseth there 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and sharpe, what shall we thinke of yours? we had néede terme them Serpentine or viperous: or if there can be any other name that better expresseth such

immodest, contemptuous and scoffing spéeches. Hypocrita quid vides fest〈…〉〈…〉 in oculo fra∣tris tui. &c? But what are these biting and sharpe wordes that he vseth? forsoothe that he calleth the propounders of the proposition whych concerneth Archbishops and Archedeacons,* 1.500 nouices: and in the ende he calleth them children, and their doctrine wantonnesse. Oh these be byting and sharpe words: but wouldest thou knowe good Reader whye T. C. taketh these wordes so gréeuously: euen bicause they touche him selfe. For the man is of that humilitie and patience, that if there be neuer so little signification giuen of any vnskilfulnesse or lacke of learning in him selfe, he roareth like a lyon, & swelleth like the sea: for none of that faction can in any case abide to haue their learning touched:* 1.501 and they will not sticke in commending them selues, to deface all other, yea euen that notable Iuell, whose bothe labour and learning they doe enuie, and among them selues depraue, as I haue heard with mine owne eares, and a number more besides. For further proofe wherof I doe but referre you to the reporte, that by this faction was spred of him after his laste Sermon at Paules crosse, bicause he did confirme the doctrine before preached by a famous and learned man, touching obedience to the Prince and lawes. It was then straunge to me to heare so notable a Bishop, so lear∣ned a man; so stoute a champion of true religion, so paynefull a Prelate, so vngrate∣fully, and spitefully vsed, by a sorte of wauering, wicked, & wretched tongues. But it is their manner; except you please their humor in all things, be you neuer so well learned, neuer so paynfull, so zelous, so vertuons, all is nothing with them, but they will depraue you, rayle on you, backbite you, inuentlyes of you, and spred false ru∣mors, as though you were the vilest persons in the whole earth.

And consider whether T. C. be not euen nowe in that vayne: for howe malici∣ously* 1.502 doth he slaunder that so Reuerend Bishop, saying, that he calleth y^e doctrine of the Gospell wantonnesse, when he speaketh of their childishe and phantasticall deuises, ex∣cepte all were Gospell that they speake, or that commeth from them. Pardon me, thoughe I speake something earnestly: it is in the behalfe of a Iuell, that is contem∣ned and defaced by contentious and vngratefull persons. If it had pleased God to haue suffered him to liue vnto this day, in answering this Replie, he should no doubt haue proued his byting and sharpe wordes, (as they be called) to be moste true. But sée∣ing that he is at rest, and not héere to answere for him selfe, though in respecte of him I am farre vnméete to intermedle in his doings, yet in respecte of the cause and ad∣uersarie, I will be bolde to iustifie his answers.

Chap. 4. the. 2. Diuision.

¶ The Iudgement of that Reuerende father Iohn late Bishop of Sarum, auouched by his ovvne hande.

Archiepiscoporum & Archidiaconorum nomina simul cum* 1.503 muneribus & officijs suis sunt abolenda.

The first Reason.

God so loued the Churche, that he lefte a perfect paterne orderly. &c. Eph〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 4. but there* 1.504 is named neyther Pope, nor Archbishop, nor Archdeacon.

The ansvvere of the Bishop of Sarisburie.

Hovve knovve you that the fourth chapter ad Ephe. is a perfecte patterne* 1.505 of all ecclesiasticall gouernment? vve haue novve neyther Apostles, nor* 1.506 Euangelistes, nor Prophetes, and yet are they the cheefe in that patterne, neyther haue vve there eyther Bishop, or Presbyter, or Diaconus or Catechista, or Lector, and yet are these necessarie partes in ecclesiasticall gouernment:

Therefore that patterne is not perfect to holde for euer, neyther vvere there then any publike Churches or Pulpits, or Scholes, or Vniuersities, &c. S. Paule nameth neyther Pope nor Archbishop I graunt, and the Church is not gouerned by names, but by offices. Euery Bishop then vvas called Papa: and Anacletus, that vvas nexte after Peter, (if there be any weight in his vvords) nameth Archbishops.

T. C. Pag. 91. Sect. 1.

Unto the place of the. 4. of the Ephesians before alleaged he answereth cleane contrarie to that which M. Doctor sayth, that we haue now neyther Apostles, nor Euangelists, nor prophets, wherupon he would conclude that that place is no perfect patterne of the ministerie in the Church. In deede it is true, we haue not, neyther is it needefull that we should. It was therfore sufficient that there were once, and for a tyme, so that the wante of those nowe, is no cause why the mini∣steryes there recyted be not sufficient, for the accomplishment and full finishing of the churche, nor cause why any other ministeries should be added, besydes those which are there recyted.

Io. Whitgifte.

Not one worde contrarie to any thing that I haue spoken, for I tolde you before* 1.507 in what respect it maye be sayde these offices to remayne, and in what respect they be ceased: there is nowe no planting of Churches, nor going throughe the whole* 1.508 worlde, there is no wryting of newe Gospels, no prophecying of thinges to come, but there is gouerning of Churches, visiting of them, reforming of Pastors, and dyrecting of them, whiche is a portion of the Apostolicall function: there is prea∣ching of the Gospell, expounding & interpreting the Scriptures, which be incident to the Euangelist & Prophet. Agaynst this no learned man (as I thinke) speaketh.

But nowe to my Lorde of Sarisburie his argument, whiche is this: that, from* 1.509 the whiche somewhat muste be taken, and vnto the whiche somewhat muste be ad∣ded, is no perfect patterne, but Apostles, Euangelistes, Prophets, are taken away from the fourth to the Ephesians, and Deacons & Elders as you your selfe say must be added, Ergo, it is no perfect patterne: neyther do you, neyther can you answere this argument. But I will come to your accustomed shiftes.

Chap. 4. the. 3. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 91. Sect. 2.

Afterwarde he sayth, that neyther Bishop nor Elder are reckoned in that place. The pastor is there reckoned vp, and I haue shewed, that the pastor and Bishop are all one, and are but dyuers names to signifie one thing. And as for those Elders whyche doe onely gouerne, they are made mention of in other places, and therefore the Bishop and Elder are there conteyned, whych thing also M. Doctor graunteth.

Io. Whitgifte.

If the Bishop be conteyned vnder the Pastor, why may not the Archbishop be so likewise: but if the Elders (which you say do only gouerne) be not there conteyned, and yet a necessarie function in the Church (as you thinke) howe can it then be a perfecte platforme? or why may not Archbishops & Archdeacons be also necessarie, thoughe they be not in that place named: but you say that those Elders be in other places mentioned. That is no answere to this place, but a reason rather to proue it no perfect patterne.

M. Doctor graunteth a Bishop to be conteyned vnder the name of a pastor. But he doth not graunt that your Elder is so, or euery Presbyter (to whome the ministerie of the worde of God and sacraments is committed) to be a Pastor.

Chap. 4. the. 4. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 91. Sect. 3.

After that, he sayth there is no Catechista: if there be a pastor, there is one which bothe can, and ought to instruct the youth, neyther (*) 1.510 dothe it perteyne to any other in the church, and publikely to teache the youth in the rudiments of religion, than vnto the pastor, howsoeuer in some tymes and places they haue made a seuerall offyce of it.

Io. Whitgifte.

If a pastor and a Catechiste maye be in one, why may not a Bishop and a gouer∣nour* 1.511 also be one, and so your Elders shut out of the doores? But you may learne in auncient writers, that the office of a Catechiste was necessarie in the Churche, and distincte from the Pastor. Origene was a Catechist in the Churche of Alexandria, as Eusebius in his sixte booke dothe in sundrie places declare, and yet he was not then a Pastor.

Chap. 4. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 92. Sect. 1.

And where he sayth that there is neyther Deacon nor Reader mentioned: for the Deacon I haue answered, that S. Paule speaketh there onely of those functions which are occupied both in teaching and gouerning the Churches, and therefore there was no place there to speake of a Dea∣con: and as for the Reader it is no suche office in the Churche whiche the minister maye not doe. (*) 1.512 And if eyther he haue not leasure, or hys strength and voyce wyll not serue hym fyrst to reade some long tyme, and afterwarde to preache, it is an easy matter to appoynt some of the Elders, or Deacons, or some other graue man in the Church to that purpose, as it hath beene practised in the Churches in tymes past, & is in the Churches reformed in our dayes, without making any newe order or offyce of the ministerie.

Io. Whitgifte.

This distinction helpeth not héere: for if you saye the offices or names of Dea∣cons be lefte out in this place bicause Sainct Paule speaketh not of suche offices, as be occupied onely in gouernment: first I answere, that the same maye be sayde of Archebisho〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s and Archedeacons, who haue those names, onely in the respecte of gouernment. Secondly, I tell you that the office of a Deacon is also to preache, as is* 1.513 hereafter proued. And last of all, that the office of a Deacon (especially as you re∣strayne it) is neyther office nor name of gouernment, but of simple and absolute mi∣nisterie and seruice.

Your starting holes will not hyde you: and this argument of the Bishop will not he answered. You haue sayde nothing to proue this place to be a perfecte paterne of all ecclesiasticall functions: neyther doe you saye any thing for omitting the names of Bishop, Deacon, Presbyter. &c. but we may saye the same for the names of Archebi∣shop, Archedeacon. &c.

The Reader hath béene counted a necessarie office in the Churche, and is of great antiquitie, and I knowe that the Deacon, or any other graue person vpon occasion maye be admitted to reade. But I pray you, where do you finde any such thing in the scrip∣ture,* 1.514 especially of those whiche you call Elders, which be in no degrée of the ministe∣rie? for it is great presumption for you to appoynt any suche office in the Churche, not hauing your warrant in Gods worde, séeing you finde suche faulte with whole Churches for allowing offices vsed in the best time of the Churche, confirmed by the best Councels, and approued by all auncient writers, bicause their names be not ex∣pressed in the scripture: and séeing also that you your selfe a little before sayde, that onely the pastor ought publikely in the Churche to teache the youth, and not a Catechist, and I take publyke reading in the Churche to be as solemne a matter as Catechising the youthe. But you haue libertie to coyne what order you lyste, without ey∣ther Scripture, or anye other approued wryter: we muste make you another Pythagoras.

In times past it was a peculiar office, and he that had it was called Lector, and therefore you can not saye (as it hathe beene practised in times past) excepte you wyll confesse that name and office of Lector, and so also graunte some name and of∣fice profitable for the Churche, to be omitted in the fourthe Chapter to the E∣phesians.

Chap. 4. the. 6. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 92. Sect. 1. 2.

Where he sayth that by this reason we should haue no Churches, pulpits, scholes, nor vniuer∣sities: it is first easily answered that S. Paule speaketh not in the. 4. to the Ephesians of all thinges necessarie for the Church, but only of all necessarie ecclesiasticall functions, which do both teache and gouerne in the Churche, and then I haue already shewed that there were both Chur∣ches and pulpits.

As for scholes and Uniuersities, it is sufficient (*) 1.515 commaundement of them, in that it is com∣manded that both the Magistrates and pastours should be learned, for he that commaundeth that they should be learned, commaundeth those things & those meanes, wherby they may most conue∣niently come to that learning. And we haue also examples of them commended vnto vs in the old* 1.516 Testament. As in the booke of the Iudges when Debora commendeth the Uniuersitie men, & those whiche handled the penne of the wryter, that they came out to helpe in the battayle agaynst the enemies of God. And in the first booke of Samuell: and in the seconde booke of the Kings:* 1.517 when Naioth and Bethel, Iericho, and a place beyonde Iordan are specified places which were* 1.518 scholes or Uniuersities, where the scholers of the Prophets were brought vp in the feare of God, and good learning: the continuance of whiche scholes and vniuersities amongst the people of God,* 1.519 may be easily gathered of that which S. Luke writeth in the Actes, where it may appeare, that in Ierusalem there were certayne Colleges appoynted for seuerall countrey men, so that there was one College to receyue the Iewes and Proselites, which came out of Cilicia, another for those that came out of Alexandria. &c. to studie at Ierusalem. And if any man be able to shewe suche euidence for Archbishops and Archedeacons, as these are for vniuersities and scholes, I will not denie but it is as lawfull to haue them as these.

Io. Whitgifte.

Yet sayth he truely, for in those tymes in Christian congregations there were neyther publike Churches, or Pulpits, or scholes, or Vniuersities, &c. and yet these doe apperteyne to the gouernmente of the Churche. In déede S. Paule speaketh onely there of suche ecclesiasticall functions as doe teache and preache the worde, and not of suche as doe onely gouerne, and therefore it can not be a perfecte platfourme for euer, as I haue before declared: and yet dyuers of these thinges mentioned by the Bishop of Sarisburie, perteyne bothe to the office of teaching and gouerning.

That whiche you saye of Scholes, and Uniuersities, I minde not to examine, bicause I knowe they be necessary for the Churche, howe aptely soeuer you proue them. But this is the matter: they be necessarie in the Churche bothe for the office* 1.520 of gouerning and teaching, and yet they be not expressed in the fourthe to the Ephe∣sians, therefore in that fourth to the Ephesians there is no perfecte paterne of all ecclesiasticall gouernment: for that is the thing that the Bishop of Sarisburie affir∣meth, and therevnto you answere not one worde.

Not one of these places that you alleage, proueth that in this texte to the Ephe∣sians, eyther Scholes or Vniuersities be mentioned: thoughe it be certayne, that they perteyne bothe to teaching and gouerning, and therefore all this spéeche of yours is* 1.521 to no purpose, but onely to dasle the eyes of the Reader, least he should perceyue how you offende in ignorantia Elenchi, in not answering ad idem.

Chap. 4. the. 7. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 92. Sect. 3.

Furthermore he sayth, that the Churche is not gouerned by names, but by offices, so is it in deede. And if the office of an Archbishop or Archdeacon can be shewed, we wyll not stryue for the name, but for so much as all the needefull offices of the Church togither with theyr names are mentioned in the the Scripture, it is truely sayde that bothe the offices and names of Arche∣bishop and Archedeacons, beeing not onely not conteyned in them (but also condemned) ought to be banished out of the Churche.

Io. Whitgifte.

I haue before shewed, that the office of visiting Churches, of ouerséeing many Pa∣stors* 1.522 and Bishops, of suppressing schismes. &c. was in the Apostles, and is in the scrip∣tures: But in these things doth the office of an Archbyshop consist, and in part of them the office of an Archdeacon, therefore the offices of Archbyshops and Archdeacons be conteined in the scriptures, and were in the Apostles time. For although (as I then sayde) that this part of the Apostolicall office, which did consist in planting and foun∣ding Churches through the whole world, is ceased: yet the manner of gouernment by placing Byshops in euery Citie, by moderating and gouerning them, by visiting the Churches, by cutting of schismes and contentions, by ordering Ministers, remai∣neth still, and shall continue, and is in this Church in the Archbyshops and Byshops as most meete men to execute the same. Wherefore séeing the offices be in the scrip∣tures, there is no cause why the names should be mislyked, much lesse banished and cast out of the churche.

Chap. 4. the. 8. Diuision.

T C. Pag. 92. Sect. 4.

Last of all he sayth that Anacletus (if there be any wayght in his wordes) nameth an Archby∣shop. I haue before shewed what waight there is in his wordes, & I refuse not that he be weygh∣ed by the Byshops owne weyghtes, whiche he giueth vs in the handling of the article of the su∣premacie, and in the. 223. and. 224. pages, by the which weyghtes appeareth that this Anacletus is not onely lighte, but a playne counterfeit.

Io. Whitgifte.

Yet you sée that learned men are content to vse such authoritie as occasion serueth,* 1.523 as I haue also before shewed other learned men to doe the lyke. And if it be to greatly to be reproued, first smite at your selfe, as most guiltie in this poynt.

Chap. 4. the. 9. Diuision.

The second Reason.* 1.524

The Synagogue of the Iewes was a figure of the Church of Christe. And God to the per∣fection of that Church omitted nothing.

The Ansvvere of the Byshop.

I see not vvhat you vvoulde conclude: perhaps you vvill saye they had* 1.525 not the names of Pope or Archbyshop. So had they not this name Episco∣pus in all Moses lavve, yet vvere not all Priests of like aunciencie in gouern∣ment. They had other names that vvere equiualent vvith Archbyshops: as Principes Synagogae: Principes sanctuarij: Principes familiarum Leuiticarum: Principes familia∣rum sacerdotalium: Principes Sacerdotum: Principes domus Dei: Pontifex: Summus Pontifex: Summus sacerdos. &c. Therefore this negatiue reason is but vveake. Agayne vvhereas it is sayde that to the perfection of the Synagogue there vvanted nothing, it may be ansvvered, that to the perfection thereof there vvanted many things, as it is knovvne and confessed. And as the Synagogue had not the names of Pope and Archbyshop, so had it not the name of Apostle, o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Euangelist. &c.

T. C. Pag. 92. Sect. 5.

The second reason which saith that the churche of God vnder the lawe, had all all things neede∣fu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪

appointed by y^e commaundement of God, the Bishop saith he knoweth not what could be con∣cluded of it: I haue shewed before that there is nothing lesse ment, than that the Church vnder the Gospell should haue al those things that y^e Church had, or should haue nothing which that had not. But this ther vpon is concluded, that the Lord which was so carefull for that, as not to omitte the least, would not be so carelesse for this Church vnder the Gospell, as to omit the greatest.

Io. Whitgifte.* 1.526

I tolde you before, that this which you call the perfection of the Synagogue, was rather a burthen than a perfection: for God therfore prescribed vnto them a prescript forme of externall things, that it mighte be a meanes to kéepe them from further in∣conuenience, but to vs in such things he hath lefte a greater libertie: and the perfecti∣on of the Church doth not consist in outward appearance, but in spirituall giftes, and therin hath the Lorde muche more plentifully and gratiou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ly shewed his care for the Church vnder the Gospell, than he did for it vnder the lawe.

Touching externall orders both of ceremonies and gouernment he hath lefte the disposition therof to his Church in many things, as I haue proued in the beginning of* 1.527 this booke.

Chap. 4. the. 10. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 92. Sect. 6.

And where he saith that there was then which was called high priest, and was ouer all the rest, he did well knowe that y^e cause thereof was (*) 1.528 bicause he was a figure of Christ, and did represent vnto the people, the chieftie and superioritie of our Sauiour Christ, which was to come: and that our 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉amour Christ, being come, there is now no cause why there should be any suche preheminence giuen vnto one, and further that it is vnlawfull that there should be any such, (a) 1.529 vnlesse it be law∣full to haue one head Byshop ouer all the Churche, for it is knowne, that that priest was the head priest ouer all the whole Church, which was during his time, vnto our Sauiour Christ.

Io. Whitgifte.

The high priest was a figure of Christ, so was Dauid and Salomon: but yet was the high priest also appointed to gouerne other for order and pollicie, and so was Dauid and Salomon. The figure is taken a way and the kinde of Sacrifice: but the office of gouerning remaineth still, and is to be obserued as the state of the Church requireth. Christ being come, the office of sacrificing ceaseth but not the office of gouerning: for Christ by his comming did not take away gouernment, and pollicie, no notfrom the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 state.

This reason of yours, that that priest was the head priest ouer all the Church, therefore if by* 1.530 his example we will haue an Archbyshop he must be such a one as shall gouerne the whole church, is in déede a plaine confirmation of the Papistes reason for y^e supremacie, who thinke that they may reason in lik〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 maner. But I answere you as M. Caluine answereth thē Lib. inst. cap. 8. Sect. 87. There is no reason that compelleth to extende that vnto the whole* 1.531 worlde, which was profitable in one nation: nay rather there is a great diuersitie betwixt one nation and the whole world. Bicause the Iewes were compassed in on euerie side with Ido∣laters, least they should be withdrawen through the varietie of Religion, God did place the seat of his worship in the middest of the earth: there he appoynted ouer them one prelate, whom all should looke vpon, that they might the better be conteined in vnitie. Now when as true Religion is dispersed through out the whole worlde, who dothe not see it to be ab∣surde, that the gouernment of both the East & VVest, should be giuen to one? it is like as if one would say, bycause one precincte of grounde hath not many gouernours, therefore the whole world ought to be ruled of one president or gouernour.

I knowe that he maketh another answere likewise: euen the same that you haue borrowed of him, touching the figure, but his first answere is more direct in my opi∣nion. And M. Nowell, against Dorman reasoning as you do, giueth him this answere,* 1.532 It agreeth very wel with the estate of the Iewes, that as they beyng one natiō had one chiefe* 1.533 Priest, so is it good likewise that euery Christian nation haue their chiefe Priest or Byshop.

It agreeth not that bicause the Iewes, one nation, had one high Priest to gouerne them in doubtes, therfore all nations through the world should haue one high priest ouer al other: for not only the vnlikelyhood betwene these two, but the impossibili〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ie of the latter is most euident. Other learned men also ther be, as Hyp〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rius Lib. 3 Method Theolog & d〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uers others, who answering this same argument of the Papists, say, that by it we may well proue that one Archbishop or Metropolitane maye gouerne one Prouince, or one kyng∣dome, but that it is to weake to proue that one Pope may gouerne all t〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e world. Now be it you had rather giue strength to the aduersarie, than lacke argumentes to the defense of your cause.

Chap. 4. the. 11. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 93. Line. 1.

And as for those titles chiefe of the Synagogue, chiefe of the s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nctuarie, chiefe of the house of God. I say that that maketh much against Archbishops & Archbeacons, for when as in steade of the Synagogue, & of the sanc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uarie, and of the house of God or tempee, are come part〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cular chur∣ches and congregations, by this reason it foloweth, that there should be some ch〈1 line〉〈1 line〉f, not in euery pro∣uince or dioesse, but in euery congreg〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tion, & in deed so ought there to be cer〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ain chief in euer〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 con∣gregation, which should gouerne and rule the rest. And as for the chief of the families of the Le∣uites, & chiefe of the families of the priests, the same was obserued in all other tribes of Israell, and by all these Princes ouer euery tribe 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nd fam〈1 line〉〈1 line〉le, as by the Prince of the whole l〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nde God did as it were by diuers liuely pictures imprint in their vnderstanding the chiet〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ie and domina∣tion of our Sauiour Christe. Besides this the order which was appointed in this poynt, was obserued in all the tribes.

Io. Whitgifte.

These titles be as glorious as any that are now remaining in our church. And my* 1.534 L. of Sarum speaketh o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 names, to the which you do not answere one word, but s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉k out other matter to blind the Reader with▪ least he should beholde your follie. But I will follow you. You s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉y that in steade of the Syn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉gogues. &c. are come particular Churches and congregations. &c. and I say vnto you, that they had thē particular Synagogues as well as we haue now particular Ch〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rches, the whiche you your sel〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e in 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ffect haue confessed before. And yo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 must vnderstand, that one Christian common weale is but* 1.535 one Church, as it was among the I〈1 line〉〈1 line〉wes, & th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rfore such offices of gouernment may be such in the Church, as was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Iewes, and such superioritie among mini∣sters, as was then amongst Priests and 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉euites And I maruell that you wil denie this, especially seing that you would 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉de vs to the ciu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ll law of Moses, wherof this is a portion.

You adde that by all these princes ouer euerye tribe and fainilie, as by the prince of the whole land, God did as it were. &c. all this maketh nothing against our 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉xcept y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉u will also take away the Prince of the whole land▪

As this order among the Iewes was obserued in al tribes: so is it now in al Pro∣uinces and Diocesse. This is but slender 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ou bring, and y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t not to the purpose, for the A〈1 line〉〈1 line〉swere speaketh of na〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es and you driue it to offices. Indeede you almost in no place reason ad Idem, which is a maniiest argumente, that you are but a shiftyng cauiller.

Chap. 4. the. 12. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 93. Line 13.

Moreouer these orders and pollicies touching the distribution of the offices of the Leuites and priests, and touching the appoin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ment of their gouernours, were done of Dauid by the (*) aduise* 1.536 of the Prophets, Gad and Nathan, which receiued of the Lord by commaundement; that whyche they deliuered vnto Dauid. And if so be that it can be shewed, that Archbishops and Archdeacons came into the church by any commaundement of the Lord, then this allegation hath some force, but now being not only not 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but also (as I haue shewed) forbydden, euery man doth see that this reason hath no place, but serueth to the vtter ouerthrow of the Archbyshop and Archdea∣con. For if Dauid beyng suche a notable personage, and as it were an Angell of God, durste not take vpon him to bring into the Church, any orders or pollicies, not onely not againste the worde

of God, but not without a precise word and commaundement of God, who shal dare be so bold as to take vpon him the institution of the chiefe office of the Church, and to alter the pollicie that God hath appointed by his seruantes the Apostles?

Io. Whitgifte.

You runne away with the matter, as though all were cleare when as it is not so. You affirme, y^t Dauid did apoint these orders & pollicies touching y^e distribution of the offices of the leuites & Priests. &c. by the eduise of Gad, and Nathan the prophets of God. And for proof hereof you quote in the margent. 2. Chron. 19. where there is not one word for your purpose, or signifying any suche thing. In déed in the 2. chro. 29. there is affirmed the lyke thing. But my L. of Sarisburie hath answered you, that such negatiue reasons are very weake. And if you wil denie it to be a negatiue reason from authoritie, yet can you not denie but that it is as féeble an argument as almost can be. For what if Dauid did appoynt these orders touching the distribution of the offices of the leuites & priests &c. doth it therfore follow that the church at no tyme may appointe suche offices as shall be thought méete for the gouernment of it, according to the tyme, places, and per∣sons? where haue you learned of a singular example to make a generall rule, or to frame an argumente ex solis particularibus?

In the. 2. Chro. 19. which you haue quoted in the margent, there is a not able place* 1.537 against you: for there expresse mention is made that Iehosaphat set in Ierusalem of the Leuites, and of the Priests. &c. for the iudgemente and cause of the Lorde, and made Amariah the Priest chiefe ouer them: neyther were they Iudges for the citie* 1.538 of Ierusalem onely, but for the whole countrey. And yet we reade not of any com∣maundement* 1.539 that Iehosaphat had, so to do.

Chap. 4. the. 13. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 93, Sect. 1.

And where the Bishop sayth, it is knowne and confessed that ther wanted many things to the persection of the Churche of the Iewes: truly I doe not knowe, nor can not consesse that that Churche wanted (*) 1.540 any thing to the perfection of that estate, which the Lord would haue them be in, vntill the comming of our sauioure Christ. And if there were any thing wanting, it was not for wante of good lawes and pollicies, whereof the question is, but for wante of due execution of them, which we speake not of.

Io. Whitgifte.

Conueniet nulli. &c. Nowe can he agrée with anye other man, that dothe not agree with him selfe? For before (after you haue recyted diuers thinges lefte to the* 1.541 order of that Churche of the Iewes, for the whiche they had no expresse worde) You saye, that you wyll offer for one that I bring that we haue lefte to the order of the* 1.542 Churche, to shewe that they had twenty, whyche were vndecided by the expresse word of God. And heere you saye, that it wanted nothing to the perfection of that estate: how you wyll reconcile your selfe, I knowe not: or whether it be your pleasure not to respecte your owne credite, so that you may séeme to discredite that whyche that no∣table Byshop hathe spoken: but that whyche I haue alleadged of Iehosaphat, 2. Chro. 19. dothe manifestly iustifye my Lord of Sarisburies saying, and condemneth youres. For there it is to be séene that in matters of gouernment, orders were ap∣poynted which neyther were commaunded by any expresse commaundemente of God, neyther yet expressed in the worde of God. But of thys matter I haue spo∣ken before.

Chap. 4 the. 14. Diuision.

The third Reason.

VVhere the substance of anything is most perfite, there the accidents be most perfite: but* 1.543 the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Religion was most perfit in the primitiue Churche: and yet there was then 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Ergo.

The Ansvvere of the Byshop.

First, this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is not proued: for it may vvell be doubted, vvhether the* 1.544 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 substance hath euermore most porfit accidentes. And againe the substance of Religion is the same novve that it vvas then: the difference if there be any, standeth in accidentes, and not in substance. Therefore thys 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of substance and accidentes vvas not needefull. In the primitiue Church God raised vp Apostles, and Prophets, and gaue them povver ex∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, as the gifte of tongues, the gift of healing, the gifte of gouern∣ment, &c. In place vvher of he hath novv giuen Vniuersities, Scholes, By∣shops, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shops, &c. But you say there vvas then no Archbyshop. So may you say that before king Saul there vvas no king in Israel. So may you say 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 of late times, there vvas neither Duke nor Earle in England. So may you say 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the primitiue Church, there was neither Deane, nor person, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 prebendarie. And yet novv both in Ecclesiasticall and ciuill go∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 these are thought necessarie. Last of all, vvhere you say there was no And by shop in the primitiue Church, it is vvritten by many that S. Paul made 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Archbishop of Creta. Erasmus saith, Paulus Titū Archiepiscopū* 1.545 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. And Lyra likevvise sayth Paulus instituit Titum Archiepiscopum 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 authorities like you not: Chrysostome sayth Paulus Tito mul∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 commisit. Novv hauing the gouernment of many By∣shops, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 may vve call him but an Archbyshop.

T. C. Pag 93. Sect. 2.

For the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ast reasons against the Archbyshop and Archdeacon, although I be well acquayn∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 that fauour this cause, yet I did neuer heare them before in my life: and I beleue ther 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 is be his reasons, whose they are supposed to be, and which did set downe the 〈◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊〉 Byshop confuteth. Notwithstanding the former of these two seemeth to haue 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to be grounded of that place of Logike, that sheweth, that according as the 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 of any thing is excellent, so are those things that are annexed and adioyned vnto 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 I would she simplest should vnderstande what is sayde or written, I will willing∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 reasons, the termes whereof are not easily perceyued, but of those whyche be 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

Io. Whitgifte.

〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 you may dilclaime what you lyste, for you coulde neuer be brought before* 1.546 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 downe your reasons in writing: and there is no holde at your worde, 〈◊◊◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊◊◊〉, euen at your pleasure, and so wil diuerse of your com∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hath taught. But yet you thinke that this former reason hath a 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, you answere not one word to my L. of Sarums solution, which 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 to be very fonde.

Chap. 4. the. 15. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 93. Sect. 3.

And as for the answere which the Bishop maketh, that in place of Apostles, Prophets, y^e giftes of tongues, of healing, & of gouernmēt, are brought in vniuersities, scholes, Bishops & Archbishops: for scholes & vniuersities, I haue shewco they haue bin alwayes, & therfore cannot come in, to sup∣ply the roome of the Apostles & prophets. And whether a man consider the schollers that learne, or the scholemasters which teach, or the orders appoynted for the gouernment of y^e scholes, they shal be founde to be rather ciuill than Ecclesiasticall, and therfore can not come in steade of any Ecclesiasti∣call ministerie. If the Bishop do meane that they come in place of the gift of the tongs, and know∣ledge of the Gospell that was first giuen miraculously, I graunt it, and then it maketh nothing to this question.

Io. Whitgifte.

You haue not shewed that scholes & vniuersities were alwayes in the Church of Christ nor you cannot shew that there were any vniuersities or scholes of Christians in the Apostles time. I am not disposed to contrary any thing y^t is alleaged for vniuersities or scholes: neither would I haue you to denie this truth affirmed by my L. of Sarum for it is certeine that God worketh now in the Churche by meanes of vniuersities & scholes, that which he wrought in the Apostles time myraculously, by his Apostles & prophets. And those gifts of tongs, healing, gouernment. &c. which he then inspired at once without teaching, doth he now giue by little & little vsing y^e ministery of scholes, vniuersities, & such like: wherfore it is true that the Bishop hath said.

And wheras you say y^e scholes whether a man consider y^e schollers that learne, or the schole∣masters which teach, or orders appointed for y^e gouernment of y^e scholes, they shall be founde rather ciuill than Ecclesiasticall: If you speake of scholes in a prophane or heathenishe common wealth, it is true. But if you speake of a Christian kingdome it is most vntrue. For in a Christian cōmon wealth, scholes are the first nurses, that bring vp childrē in y^e true knowledge of God, & of his word, & prepare many of thē to the ministerie, both which are Ecclesiasticall. Moreouer if you talke of vniuersities, such especially as be in thys Realme of England, then whether you consider either y^e masters, fellowes, or schol∣lers, or rules or orders appointed for y^e gouernment of them, they be for y^e most parte Ecclesiasticall, and therfore those things make greatly for the purpose, and you haue said nothing that can ouerthrow them.

Chap. 4. the. 16. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 93. Sect. 4.

As for Bishops they can not come in place of Apostles or prophets, for as much as they were when the Apostles, Euangelists & prophets were, & are one of those ministeries, which S. Paule mentioneth in the. 4. to the Ephesians, being the same that is the pastor.

Io. Whitgifte.

I tolde you before, that y^e part of the Apostles office which consisted in gouernment, is now remaining in Archbishops and Bishops, as to visite Churches, to reforme dis∣orders, to suppresse contentions and such like: which also they practised in the Apo∣stles time, in such places as were committed vnto them by the Apostles, as it is eui∣dent in Timothie and Titus.

That Bishops do succeede the Apostles in this function of gouernment it may ap∣peare* 1.547 by sundry learned writers Cyprian Lib. 3. Epist. 9. writeth thus. But Deacons must remember that the Lord hath chosen Apostles, that is to say Bishops and chief gouernours, but the Apostles after the Ascention of the Lord into heauen did appoint vnto themselues Deacons, Ministers, of their Bishopricke, and of the Churche. And Ambrose in. 4. ad Ephe.* 1.548 saith, Apostoli Episcopi sunt: Apostles are Byshops. Zuinglius also in his Ecclesiastes saith that the Apostles when they left of goyng from place to place, and remayned in one Churche, were no more called Apostles but Byshops, as Iames at Ierusalem, and Iohn at Ephesus. Wherby it may appeare that it séemeth straunge neither to the olde wryters, nor to to the new, to say that Byshops succéede the Apostles and come in place of the〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.

Chap. 4. the. 17. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 93. Sect. vlt.

There remayneth therfore the Archebishoppe, whyche if he came in place of the Prophetes and Apostles (as the Bishoppe sayth) how commeth it to passe, that the bishop sayth by and by out of the authoritie of Erasmus that Titus was an archebishoppe: for at that tyme there was bothe Apostles, Prophetes, and Euangelistes. If it bee so therefore, that the Archbyshoppe muste supplye the wante of Apostles. &c. howe commeth it to passe, hee wayteth not his tyme whylest they were dead, but commeth in lyke vnto one which is borne out of tyme, and lyke the vntymely and hastye fruite, whyche is seldome or neuer holesom. And for one to come into the Apostles or Prophetes place, requirerh the authoritie of hym whych ordeyned the Apostles. &c. whyche is the Lorde, and his institution in his worde, whiche is that whiche we desire to be she∣wed. But hereof I haue spoken before at large.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is not vnknowne to suche as be willing to learne, that where the Apostles coulde not be presente themselues, there they appoynted some other to gouerne the Churches for them: as the Apostle Paule did Titus at Creta. Therefore this reason of yours is sóone answered. And in that that the Apostles dyd appoynt By∣shoppes in Churches whyche they had planted, and gaue vnto them suche autho∣ritie, it is euident that therin they made them theyr successours, which they did not withoute sufficient testimonie and warrant of the spirite of God: and therfore you do but talke, you proue nothing.

Chap. 4. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 94. Lin. 9. & Sect. 1. 2.

The necessitie of Deanes I do not acknowledge, & I haue already spoken of them. Touching Prebendaties I shall haue occasion to speake a worde hereafter. For Earles and Dukes and suche lyke titles of honour they are ciuill, neyther dothe it followe, that bycause there may newe titles or newe offices be broughte into the ciuill gouernment, that therefore the same maye be at∣tempted in the Church. For God hath left a greater libertie in instituting things in the common wealth than in the Churche.

For, for so muche as there be diuers Common wealthes, and dyuers formes of common wealthes, and all good, it falleth out, that the offices and dignities whyche are good in one com∣mon wealthe, are not good in an other: as those whych are good in a Monarchie, are not good in Aristocratie: and those whiche are good in Aristocratie: are not good in a popular state: But that can not be sayde of the Churche whyche is but one and vniforme, and hathe the same lawes, and forme of gouernment thorough out the worlde.

In common wealthes also, there are conuersions, one forme beeing chaunged into an other whiche can not be in the true Churche of God.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your acknowledging or not acknowledgyng the necessitie of Deanes. &c. is not greatly materiall: they depende not vpon you. To the example of king Saule the first king of Israell, you say nothing, and yet it is materiall. There is no suche difference be∣twixte the ciuill gouernment of the common wealth, and the externall gouernment of the Churche, but that the one in many thinges may be vsed as an example for the other. And it is vntrue y^t the external forme of gouernment in the Church ought to be one, and the selfe same thorough out the worlde in all tymes and places, as it shall hereafter more fully appeare. But still I woulde haue the Reader to note* 1.549 what kynde of gouernmente of the Churche you doe allowe: and ioyne the same wyth that assertion of yours, that the gouernment of the common wealth muste bée framed according to the gouernmente of the Churche, as the hangyngs to the house.

Chap. 4. the. 19. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 94. Sect. 2.

As for Erasmus authoritie which saith that Titus was an archbishop, I haue answered to it.

And where as Chrysostome sayeth, that the iudgemente of many Bishoppes was committed to Titus, * 1.550 I haue declared in what sorte it is to be vnderstanded, and yet vppon these wor∣des the Bishoppe can hardly conclude, that whyche he dothe: that Titus hadde the gouern∣mente of many Bishoppes. For it is one thyng to saye, the iudgement of many was commit∣ted vnto Titus, and an other thing to say, that he had the gouernment of many.

Io. Whitgifte.

And shall the same answere serue for Lyra too? Well I haue answered your answere to Erasmus. And I truste that these authorities wyth the Godlie Reader shall haue the more credite, bycause this Reuerende Father dothe herein con∣firme their opinions: whose iudgement for his singular vertue and learning, ought to be more estemed, than a number suche as you are.

You neyther haue answered, nor doe answere, nor can answere these wordes of Chrysostome, and it is but a verie poore shifte, to make suche a distinction be∣twixte iudgemente and gouernment. For what is it else to haue the iudgemente of ma∣nye Byshoppes commytted vnto hym, but to haue the gouernment? shewe a diffe∣rence if you can: No doubte you woulde haue doone it, if you coulde. Wherefore this authoritie of Chrysostome remayneth vntouched: and it confirmeth my an∣swere to the Gréeke Scholiast, who borrowed his wordes of him. Neyther would you haue thus dalyed in this place, if you had looked vppon Chrysostomes wordes, who there affirmeth, that Paule didde commytte to Titus, the whole yle of Creta.

Chap. 4. the. 20. Diuision.

The fourth Reason.

The Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill gouernment maye not be confounded, or be together* 1.551 in one person. But to be a chiefe or a ruler is a ciuil power Ergo it can not be exercised by any Ecclesiasticall person.

The ansvvere of the Bishop.

Bothe these gouernmentes vvere confounded in Moyses: Therefore* 1.552 they may be confounded. And the priestes of Israell had the iudgemente and gouernment of the people. And Sainct Augustine was troubled vvith hearing and determining of causes, as it appeareth by Possidonius.

And vvhere you saye to be a chiefe or a ruler is a ciuil gouernment, nay in Ecclesiasticall causes it is ecclesiasticall gouernment and not ciuil. And these differences of gouernment may not so vnaduisedly be confounded. This is the key of ecclesiasticall correction, and belongeth only to the ec∣clesiastical officer, and to none other. Hereof S. Paule sayth, Seniorem ne corri∣pueris nisi sub. &c. Tradidi illum Satanae. &c. This iurisdiction is not ciuill but eccle∣siasticall, and therefore may be exercised by any ecclesiasticall person.

T. C. Page. 94. Sect. 3.

The answere of the Bishoppe vnto the fourthe supposed reason, perteyneth vnto an other question, that is, whether Ecclesiastical persons oughte to exercise ciuill iurisdiction, wherevnto I will answere by Gods grace when I come to speake vppon occasion of M. Doctors booke of that question. In the meane tyme I will desire the reader to consyder what weake groun∣des the Archebishoppe and Archedeacon stande vppon, seeyng that the Bishoppe of Sarum, being so learned a man, and of so greate readyng, coulde say no more in their defense, whiche not∣withstandyng in the controuersies agaynst Doctor Harding is so pythie and so plentyfull.

Io. Whitgifte.

The Bishop of Sarum hathe sayde muche more than you haue answered vnto:

and in the respecte of the reasons he hath sayde fully inough. You may not thinke but that if he had bin disposed to haue delt of purpose in this cause, he coulde haue sayde muche more. But your secrete and priuie nippes, whereby y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉u 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the Reader, that he would willingly defende a false cause, shall neuer be able to de∣face so worthie a Prelate. You maye perceiue by this his conclusion (〈◊〉〈◊〉 tou∣cheth you so néere) that he tooke no great care or tyme for answering these weake reasons: for thus he concludeth, I beseeche you to take these sodaine answeres in good parte: As for these reasons, in my iudgement they are not made to buylde vp, and they are to vveake to pull downe. Stultitia nata est in corde pueri, & virga disciplinae fugabit illam. Prouerb. 22. It is but vvantonnesse, correction will helpe it.

Thus haue I answered in his behalfe, who bothe in this and other lyke contro∣uersies, might haue bene a greate stay to this Churche of Englande, if we hadde bene worthie of him. But whilest he liued, and especially after his notable and most profitable trauailes, he receiued the same reward of wicked and vngrateful tongues, that other men be exercised with, and all must looke for, that will doe their duetie. But nowe agayne to T. C.

The causes of Archbishops and of their preroga∣tiues, and the estate of the olde Bishops, (assigned by T. C.) examined.

Chap. 5. the. 1. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 94. Sect 4.

Now I haue shewed howe little those things which M. Doctor bringeth, make for proofe of that wherfore he alleageth them, I will for the better vnderstanding of the reader se〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e downe what were the causes why the Archbishops were fyrst ordeyned▪ and what were their preroga∣tiues and preheminences before other Bishops, and the estate also of the olde Bishoppes, which lyued in those tymes, wherein although there were great corruptions, yet the Churche was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 some tollerable estate, to the intent it may appeare, partly how 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 we haue of them now, & partly also howe great difference there is betwene oures and them. O〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the names of Metropoli∣tanes it hath bene spoken, howe that he shoulde not be called the chiefe o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 priests, or the high priest, or Bishop of Bishops: Now I will set downe their office and power, whiche they hadde more than the Bishoppes.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you haue no more truthe in your words folowing, than y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉u vtter in the begin∣ning of these: or if you deale no soundlyer in them, than you haue done in the other, M. Doctors proofes shall serue the turne. But it is in vayne to answere wordes, I will therfore come to your matter.

Chap. 5. the. 2. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 94. Sect. 5.

In the Councel of Antioche it appeareth that the Bishop of the Metropolitane seat, called (a) 1.553 * 1.554 Synodes, & propounded the matters which were to be handled, &c. The archbishop doth not 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ew call Synodes, but the Prince doth, forasmuche as there is no conuocation without a parliament, and he dothe not propounde the matters, and gather the voyces, but an other chosen, whiche is called prolocutor: therefore in the respecte that an Archbishop, and Metropolitane was tyrst or∣deyned, we haue no neede of an Archebishop or Metropolitane. Agayne, an other cause also ap∣peareth there (b) 1.555 whiche was to see that the Bishops kepte them selues within their owne di〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 cesse, and brake not into an others Diocesse, but fyrste this maye be doone withoute an Arche∣bishoppe, and then it is not doone of the Archebishop himselfe, giuing licences vnto the wande∣ring ministers to goe thoroughout not so fewe as a dosen diocesse: therefore the office of an arch∣bishop is not necessarie in this respecte, and if it were, yet it muste be other than it is nowe.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is no Councell more flatte agaynst you, than is that Councell of An∣tioche, nor any Canon that ouerthroweth your assertion more directely than that ninth Canon, the woordes whereof I haue repeated before, but youre vntrue alle∣gation in a manner compelleth me to repeate them agayne, that the Reader may see before his eyes, what truthe there is in your doings. And although it do per∣teyne to the office of the Metropolitane or Archebishoppe to call Synodes, yet is there not one woorde thereof in this Cannon, nor yet of propounding any matters in Synodes, or of seyng Bishoppes keepe themselues within theyr owne diocesse, as you doe here auouche without all truthe: and notwithstanding as I sayde before, those things doe perteine to the office of the Archebishoppe: yet if they were also com∣prehended in that Canon, it were rather a confirmation of that office, than o∣therwyse.

The contentes of that Canon be onely these: firste it sayeth, that it behoueth the Bishoppes of euery countrey or prouince to knowe theyr Metropolitane Bishoppe to haue the care and ouersighte, or gouernment ouer the whole Prouince. By the whiche woordes, the authoritie and name of a Metropolitane or Archebishoppe is moste pl〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ynely confirmed, and proued to be a permanent off〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ce: Secondly, this Canon willeth all those that haue any businesse to doe, to resorte to the Metropolitane citie. Whereby also is giuen to the Metropolitane Bishop greate preheminence: and therefore it followeth immediatly, that he shoulde excell all the reste in honour: and that the other Bishoppes shoulde doe nothing of importance without him: according to the olde rule made by their forefathers, but onely those thyngs whiche perteyne to theyr owne diocesse: and those places and possessions that perteine vnto the same. In whiche wordes who séeth not what preheminence is giuen to the Metropolitane ouer all the Bishoppes in hys Prouince: and what iurisdiction to the Bishop in his owne diocesse and places perteyning vnto it? where also it is to be noted that the Coun∣cell sayeth, secundiòn antiquam à patribus nostris regulam constitutam: according to the auncient rule appointed of oure forefathers. Whyche argueth a greate antiquitie of this office. Then it followeth: for euery Bishop hath authoritie ouer his owne Dio∣cesse, to rule and gouerne it, iuxta reuerentiam singulis competentem, accordyng to the reue∣rence due vnto euerie one of them, and that he hathe especiall care of that whole region that i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 subiecte to his Citie, so that he maye ordeyne Priestes and Deaeons, & singulasuo iuditio comprehendat. But he may not attempt any other thyng without the Metropoli∣tane Bishop, nor the Metropolitane do any thing without the counsel of the other Priests.

What can bée more playne, eyther for the authoritie of the Arche bishoppe, or iurisdiction of the Bishop? and what one worde of this Canon haue you truely al∣leadged? and yet it is quoted in your margent.

But if we imagine those thinges to be true, whiche you saye, howe will you conclude? forsooth, that the Metropolitane did then call Synodes, and propounded the matters, but nowe he dothe not call Synodes, and propounde the matters: Therefore there is nowe no neede of a Metropolitane. Firste it is vntrue, that Metropolita∣nes did then call eyther all Synodes, or that they called them of theyr owne au∣thoritie without the consente of the Prince, and Ciuill Magistrate: whiche thing is euident when the Magistrates were christened.

The Councell of Nice was summoned by the commaundement of Constantine* 1.556 the Emperoure, Eusebius de vita Constanti. lib. 3. Constantius called the Councell whyche was in Sardica ciuitate. The Bishoppes in the Councell of Constanti. confesse, that they came together by the Emperoures wrytte. Ambrose in the Councell of Aquileia, speaking of him 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and of other Byshoppes sayeth, that they were assembled oute at Aquileia, by the commaundemente of the Empe∣roure: The same dothe Hierome testifye concernyng a Councell holden at Rome, In Epita. Pauli. Pope Iulio Epist. 9. ad Theodos. desyreth the Emperoure, that by his authoritie there myghte be a Councell in Italye. Zozomen. libr. 6. cap. 7.

sheweth howe certayne Catholyke Bishoppes intreated the Emperoure, that they myght haue leaue to gather together for the redressing of certaine erroures. But 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hat shall I neede to labour in a matter moste manifest? No man can be igno∣rant that readeth Ecclesiasticall stories, but that the Emperoures authoritie was r〈1 line〉〈1 line〉quired in summoning Councels and Synodes, not only generall, but prouinciall also. Secondly, it is vntrue that the Metropolitane in this Churche dothe not call Synodes, or propoundeth not the matters in them. &c. For he dothe bothe, althoughe he calleth no Prouinciall Synode, withoute the commaund〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ment of the Prince, no more than other Metropolitanes haue 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oone in the beste tyme of the Churche vn∣der christ〈1 line〉〈1 line〉an Princes. Laste of all, thoughe all thys were true, that is 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉éere vn∣truely affirmed, yet were the office of an Archebishoppe necessarie, for it dothe not onely consiste in calling Synodes, but in sundrye thinges besyde, as I haue shewed before, and this councell of Antioche manyfestly declareth. And surely yf you would proue any thyng hereof directely, it s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ould bée thys, that eyth〈1 line〉〈1 line〉r the Archebishoppe dothe not exercyse that iurisdiction whyche he oughte to doe, or else can not doe that whiche perteyneth to his office, and so shoulde you speake for the amendement of the Archbishops iurisdiction.

Agayne, you saye an other cause appeareth there, whyche was to see that the Bishops kepte themselues within theyr owne diocesse. &c. but fyrst thys may be doone without an Arch∣bishoppe. &c. I tell you there is no suche thyng in that nynthe Canon: I say fur∣ther, that it maye beste an〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 mos〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e orderly bée doone by an Archebis〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oppe. Thirdely, I answere as before, that it is but one parte of his office. Fourthely, I saye vnto you, that this is a symple Argumente, the Archebishoppe dothe not kéepe suche olde Canons as bée not in vse in thys Churche, therefore there is no neede of his office. Laste of all, you oughte to knowe, that th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉se whom〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 y〈1 line〉〈1 line〉u call wandering ministers, be fai〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hefull Preachers a number of them: And suche as laboure diligentely in preachyng the woorde, and haue not a little pro∣fyted the flocke of Chryste, so that youre conclusion is not woor〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h a strawe.

Chap. 5. the. 3. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 95. Sect. 1.

Agayne the cause why the Metropolitane differed from the reste, and why the callyng of the Synode was gyuen to him, as it appeareth in the same Councell, was for that the* 1.557 greatest concour〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e was to that place, and moste assemblie of menne, wherevnto also may be added, for that there was the best commoditie of lodgyng and of vittayling, and for that as it appeareth in other Councells, it was the place and feare of the Empire. But with vs ney∣ther the greatest conc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉urse nor assemblie of men, nor the greatest commoditie of lodgyng and vittayi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉g, neyther yet the seate of the kingdome is in the Metropolitane citie, therefore with vs there is no suche cause of a Metropolitane or Archebishop.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is not alleadged as a cause why there shoulde be a Metropolitane, or why he differed from y^e rest, or why the calling of the Synode was giuen vnto hym, but rather why he was placed in the chiefe citie: so that these wordes touche not the Metropo∣litane or his office, but the aptnesse of the place where he shoulde continue. And yet if credite be to be giuen 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉yther to interpreters, or to the glosse in Gratian, caus. 9. quae. 3. per singulas, the wordes be not as you interprete them, for thus they be set downe in the booke of Councels, Tom. 1. Pr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉pter quod ad Metropolim omnes vndi{que} qui ne∣goti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 videntur habere concurrant, For the which let all that haue any businesse haue recourse from all places into the Metropolitane citie. An other 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ranslation is thus: Propter quod ad Metropolitanam ciuitatem ab his qui causas habent con〈1 line〉〈1 line〉urratur. And this last interpretati∣on

the authors of the Centuries do vse. Cent. 4. Of whiche wordes there can be no suche thing gathered, as you doe imagine, but farre otherwise. And the meaning of the Councell is, that suche as haue causes to be heard, may resort to the Metro∣politane citie where the Metropolitane is.

And you must vnderstand that it was in the power of the Emperour, and other Princes, to appoint the seat of the Metropolitan, where it pleased them, as it appe∣reth in the. 12. cap. of the Councel of Chalcedon, and in the. 17. Hom. of Chrysostome, Ad populum Antiochenum.

Chap. 5. the. 4. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 95. Sect. 2.

In the Councel of Carthage holden in Cyprians tyme, it appeareth that no Bishoppe had au∣thoritie ouer an other, to compell an other, or to condemne an other, but euery Bishop was left at his owne libertie to answere vnto God, and to make his accounte vnto Christe, and if anye thing were doone against any Bishoppe, it was done by the consent of all the bishoppes in the pro∣uince, or as many as coulde conuemently assemble. Therefore Cyprian whiche was the Metro∣politane bishop, had then no authoritie ouer the rest, and yet then there being no christian magistrate* 1.558 whych would punishe the disorders whiche were committed of the christian bishops, there was greatest, neede that there shoulde haue bene some one, which myght haue had the correction of the reste. If therefore when there was most nede of this absolute authoritie, there neither was nor might be any suche, it foloweth that nowe we haue a Christian magistrate, which may and ought to punyshe the disorders of the Ecclesiasticall persons, and may and ought to call them to account for their faultes, that there shoulde be no suche nede of an Archbishop.

Io. Whitgifte.

You here fall into the same faulte that a little before you ascribed to me, for you come backe from the Councell of Antioche, whiche was Anno. 360. to the Councell of Carthage, being Anno. 260. I omitte to tell you, that that Councell concluded an heresie for the whiche only it was assembled. And therefore though it be in the booke of the Councells, yet is it not reckened among the Councels: Only I demaund the woordes of that Councell that doe signifie one Bishoppe not to haue had autho∣ritie ouer an other. I tolde you before out of Cyprian himselfe, and out of Gregorie Nazianzene, that he had ample and large iurisdiction. The wordes of Cyprian in that Councell, whiche séeme to touche the matter you talke of, I haue expoun∣ded and answered before, they make not for your purpose.

It is no reason to proue that a Bishop muste not be subiecte to anye, bycause he is lefte at his owne libertie to answere to God, and to make his accompte vnto Christe, For by the same reason he myghte be exempled from the authoritie of the Ciuill Magi∣strate, and from all Lawes and orders touching Churche matters, and so myghte euery priuate man in lyke manner. But you muste remember that a Bishoppe is so lefte to his owne libertie, to answere vnto God, and make accompte vnto Chryste, that hée muste also acknowledge his duetie towardes man: and be subiecte to orders and lawes.

What do you saye for the fréedome of a Bishop from obedience vnto the Arche∣bishop, but it may be sayde lykewyse of his fréedome from subiection to his Prince in lyke matters: and of euery Anabaptist, for his deliuerance from subiection to all superiours▪ Wherfore you wring Cyprians wordes to an euill sense.

You haue bin oft tolde that no Archbyshop hath such power ouer either Byshop or inferioure minister, that of his owne authoritie he can do any thing againste them. The lawes of the realme will not suffer it, no the Canon law dothe by no meanes permit it: And therefore you do but dreame of an authoritie that is not.

Cyprian being a Metropolitane had authoritie ouer the rest.

The ciuill Magistrate doth gouerne the ecclesiasticall state, punisheth disorders among them, calleth them to accompt for their faults by Archbyshops, Byshops, and

other officers, as he doth the same in the ciuil state, by ciuill magistrates. Your mea∣ning is not (I dare say) to haue the Prince heare al matters hir selfe: You wil giue hir leaue to appoint vnder officers, as Moses, Dauid, Solomon, Iehosaphat, & other good kings haue done. If you will not allow the Magistrate so to do, let vs vnderstand your reasons, for surely I beléeue there is some such toy in your head.

Chap. 5. the. 5. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 95. Sect. 3.

The moderation of their authoritie in the aunciēt times may appeare first, by a canon which is falsely giuen to the Apostles, being as it is like a canon of the councell of Antioch (*) 1.559 whe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 in al∣though* 1.560 it ordeyneth one Primate in euery nation ouer the rest, and will not suffer any great matter to be done without him, as also will not suffer him to do any thing without the rest, yet euery By∣shop might do that which apperteyned vnto his owne parrish, without him, (a) 1.561 and he nothing to do with him in it. But as it seemeth the meaning of the canon was, that if there were any waigh∣tie matter to be cōcluded for all the Churches in the nation, then the byshops of euery parish should not enterprise any thing without calling him to councell. Now we see that the Archbyshop med∣leth with that which euery Byshop doth in his owne dioces, and hath his visitations for that pur∣pose, and will take any matter out of their hands, concludeth also of diuers matters, neuer making the Byshops once priuie to his doings.

Io. Whitgifte.

If it be a false canon or falsely gyuen to the Apostles, why do you vse it as a proofe? I might 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ay vnto you, as you said before vnto me: haue you such penurie of proofes, that you are constrayned to alleadge false canons? if it be a canon of the Councell of Antioch, shew what canon it is: if it be within that Councel, vndoutedly it is the. 9. canon before by you alledged, and how muche that proues your cause the very igno∣rant reader may iudge.

But let vs heare this canon be it true or false, and consider your collections of it:* 1.562 the wordes I haue recited before, but I will set them downe againe, that your py∣thy reasons (reasoning altogyther against your selfe) may appeare. The Byshops of e∣uery nation or countrie must know who amongst them is chiefe, whome they ought to e∣steeme* 1.563 as their head, and do nothing without his councell, besides those things only, which belong vnto their owne parish, and the places which are vnder it: neyther ought he to do a∣ny thing without the aduise of them all: for so shal there be concord, and God shall be glo∣rifyed by Christ Iesus in the holy Ghost. &c. Here first ther must be a Primate or chiefe Byshop (that is Archbyshop) of euery nation or countrie, whome the rest of the by∣shops must acknowledge as it were for their head. Secondly, the Byshops must do nothing vnaccustomed without him. Thirdly, that the other Byshops may do those things only quae ad parochiam eius, & regiones ei subditas pertinent: VVhich perteine vnto his parish, and places subiect vnto it which last words you leaue out. Last of all, that thys Primate must do nothing without their consents: what hath the Archbishop lost by this canon? surely not one iote: I think verily he doth not require so much▪ Euery by∣shop may do as much in his owne dioces now, (the authoritie of the Prince and hir lawes reserued) as he might do by that canon, for the Archbyshop dothe not rule by will, but by law, not of himselfe, but vnder the Prince, to whome both he and all o∣ther byshops be subiect.

You hit nothing lesse than the meaning of the canon: nay vndoutedly you imagine a sense contrary to the expresse words of the canon.

When the Archbyshop dothe visite, it is not to make newe lawes, or appointe newe orders (excepte he be commaunded so to doe by greater authoritie) but to see those orders and lawes kepte, that all Bishoppes and other are bounde vnto, and therefore he doth nothing in their diocesse contrary to that which they are bound to do, neyther doth he cōclude any thing without them, which by their consent and au∣thoritie of the law and Prince is not giuen vnto him.

Chap. 5. the. 6. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 95. Sect. 4.

Higinus or as some thinke Pelagius (I speake here as Platina reporteth, not thinking that* 1.564 in Higinus time, ther was any Metropolitane) ordeyned that no Metropolitane should cōdemne any Byshop, vnlesse the matter wer first both heard, and discussed by the byshops of that prouince, at what time, and after a greate while, a byshop was the (*) 1.565 same we call a minister. Nowe the Archbyshop will without any further assistance or discussion by others suspend him, and in the end also throw him out of his charge, and if he haue the same authoritie ouer a byshop, as a byshop ouer the minister, (as it is said) he may do the like vnto him also.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is another forged witnesse (such sound proofes the man hath that reprooues other men for the like) and yet God knoweth his witnesse maketh nothing for him. For who giueth authoritie to the Archbyshop to depriue eyther Byshop or inferiour minister, without due proofe and examination of the cause? touching consente of o∣ther, if he deale with him according to law, then dealeth he with the consent, not of the other Byshops only, but of all the realme: bycause that which is done by law: is done by the consent of all that consented either to the confirming or making of that law. Your glaunces by the way, (that there was then no Metropolitane: that then the same were byshops which we now cal ministers) bycause they be but barely affirmed, it shal be sufficient as flatly to denie them, and for proofe thereof to referre the Reader vnto that which hath bin spoken before.

Chap. 5. the. 7. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 95. Sect. 5.

The councell of Antioch ordeyned, that if the voyces of the byshops were euen, and that if* 1.566 * 1.567 halfe did condemne him, and halfe cleare him, that then the Metropolitane byshop should call of the next prouince some other byshops, which should make an end of the controuersie: whereby appea∣reth that the Metropolitane had so small authoritie and power ouer and aboue the rest, that he had not so much as the casting voyce, when both sides were euen. And therefore it appeareth that be∣sides the names of Metropolitane, there was little or no resemblance betweene those that were then, and those which be now.

Io. Whitgifte.

You haue written in the margent the. 17. canon of that councell, in the which ther are no suche words, nor any thing tending to that purpose: it is the. 14. canon, that I think you meane, for in that canō it is thus determined: that if a Byshop be iudged for* 1.568 certaine crimes and it happen that the other byshops of the same prouince varie in iudge∣ment, some thinking him to be innocent, some guiltie, for the resoluing of all doubte, it pleased the holy Synode, that the Metropolitane byshop shal call for other iudges out of the next prouince, to end the cōtrouersie, who togyther with the Byshops of the same prouince, shall approue that which is iust and right. Here is no mention of equalitie in voyces, but only of disagréeing in iudgemēt among the Byshops of the same prouince. Like∣wise in this canon it appeareth that a Metropolitane had authoritie ouer moe pro∣uinces than one, for he might cal the Byshops of another prouince to decide the mat∣ter, if the Byshops of the same prouince could not agrée.

I sée not how this canon can any thing help you: for now neyther the Metropoli∣tane,* 1.569 nor all the Byshops in the prouince can depriue any Byshop without the con∣sent of y^e Prince: so that in that poynt the authoritie of the Metropolitane is nothing encreased, nor yet the authoritie of the Byshops. For then as it appeareth in the▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 canon of that councell, if a Priest or a Deacon had bin condemned of his owne byshop, o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 a byshop of a Synode, it was not lawfull for them to complaine to the Emperoure: if they* 1.570 had complayned, it was determined in the same canon, that they should neuer be pardoned, nor haue any place of satisfaction, nor hope of restitution. But now it is farre other∣wise. The. 11. canon of the same councell is much to the same effect. Wherefore the* 1.571 authoritie of the Metropolitane & other Byshops is not encreased as you presēd, but both the Metropolitane and other Byshops had asmuch authoritie then ouer other priests, ministers, and deacons, as they haue now, as appeareth by sundry canons of

the same councell.

In the. 4. canon it is decréede, that if a Byshop condemned by a Synode, or a priest, or* 1.572 a Deacon condemned by his owne Byshop, shal take vpon him to exercise any mini〈1 line〉〈1 line〉terie, he shall be without all hope of restitution, and who soeuer doth communicate with hym, shall be excommunicated. In the. 5 canon it is thus determined: If any priest or deacon* 1.573 contemning his proper Bishop, hath separated himselfe from the Churche, and gathering people apart, hath erected an altar, and hathe not obeyed the admonition of his Bishop, neyther hath consented and agreed vnto him calling him backe diuers times, let this man be condemned, and deposed by all meanes, and let him not obteyne any remedie afterward, bycause he cannot receiue againe his dignitie. But if he persist to trouble the Churche, let him be corrected by the outward power as a seditious person. By these canons it is eui∣dent that the Bishop of euery seuerall diocesse had authoritie by himselfe to excom∣municate, to depriue, and to seclude from the ministerie any priest, deacon, or any o∣ther of the cleargie in more ample and large manner, than he hath at this day. The which thing also may be séene in the. 6. &. 12. canons of the same Councell: so that you haue sought for help at the Councell, whiche is one of the greatest enimies to thys your assertion, and doth flatly condemne it. Diuers canons of the which Councell, if they were practised, woulde soone remedie the sects and schismes whiche you haue stirred.

Chap. 5. the. 8. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 95. Sect. vlt.

Now, to consider how the Byshops which are now, differ from the Byshops, which were in times past, I must cal to thy remembrance (gentle reader) that which I haue spokē before, which was that then there was, as appeareth out of Cyprian, and Ierome and others, one Byshop in e∣uery* 1.574 parish or congregation: now one is ouer a thousand, then euery Byshop had a seueral Church where he preached and ministred the sacraments: now he hath none, then he ruled that one Church (as I shewed out of Ierome) in cōmon with the elders of the same: nowe he ruleth a thousand by himselfe, shutting out the ministers, to whome the rule and gouernment belongeth: then he ordeyned not any minister of the Church, except he were first chosen by the presbyterie, and approued by the people of that place wherevnto he was ordeyned: now he ordeyneth where there is no place voyde, and of his priuate authoritie, without eyther choyse or approbation of presbyterie or people. Then he excommunicated not, nor receyued the excommunicated, but by sentences of the eldership, and consent of the people, as shall appeare afterward: now he doth both. And thus you see that contrary to the word of God, he hath gotten into his owne hand, and pulled to himselfe both the preheminēce of the other ministers, and the liberties of the Church, which God by his word had giuen.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is scarse one worde of all this true, and surely I muche maruell that you dare be so bolde so manifestlie to speake against your owne conscience & knowledge. I haue before sufficiently proued all that is here by you auouched, to be cleane con∣trary for the most part. It shall be therefore sufficient, as briefly now to answer, as you do propound. Demetrius was Byshop of all the dioces in Egypt and Alexandria.* 1.575 Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 1. Cyprian was Byshop of Carthage, Numidia, Mauritania, Cyprian lib. 4. epist. 8. Timothie being Byshop had the gouernment almost of the whole countrie of Asia, as Chrysostome declareth vpon the. 1. Tim. 5. and. 2. Tim. 4. Titus was Byshop of y^e whole Ile of Creta, as the same Chrysost. testifyeth ad Tit. 1. I〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 aue before by sundry* 1.576 examples and testimonies, by diuers councels, and especially the councell of Nice, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the vanitie & vntruth of this that is here affirmed, that is, that there was one Byshop in euery parish and congregation: and the words of Cyprian and Ierome be cleane 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rary: for they both make a difference betwene a Byshop, to whome the gouern∣ment of many pastors is committed, and a pastor that hath but one seuerall flocke or charge. For further vnderstanding whereof, I referre y^e Reader to that, which is spo∣ken before.

The byshops haue now as seuerall churches to preache and minister the sacra∣ments in, as they had then. They haue no more authoritie in gouernment now, than they had at that time, nor so much: and yet if they had more authoritie than they ey∣ther haue now, or had then, I thinke it were more for the commoditie of the Church,

the state of the time, and conditions of men considered.

As for ruling euery seuerall churche by those, whiche you call Elders, you haue shewed no such thing out of Ierome, neyther can you. For Ierome in that place you meane, by presbyteri meaneth Priests, as he dothe in all other places that I remem∣ber. Neyther doth he there speake of particular parishes.

Touching the electing and ordeyning of ministers, sufficient hath bin spoken be∣fore.* 1.577 The Byshop doth nothing therein, but that which he may iustly by the word of God, and testimonie of the best and most worthy writers.

Of excommunication we shall speake hereafter, you do glance at it now out of* 1.578 place. And thus he that is an indifferēt Reader may vnderstand that the Byshops in these days in this Church of England haue no other authoritie, than the word of God doth giue vnto them: The Byshops of the primitiue Church haue pract〈1 line〉〈1 line〉sed: y^e libertie of the Church wel beareth: and the state of the time, and condition of men requireth.

Chap. 5. the. 9. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 96. Lin. 7.

And as for the offices wherein there is any laboure or trauayle, those they haue turned vnto the other ministers, as for example in tunes past (*) 1.579 it was not lawfull for him that was then an* 1.580 elder, to preach or minister the sacraments in the presence of the Byshop, bycause the Byshop him∣selfe should do it, and now those which they call elders, may preach and minister the sacraments by the Byshops good licence, although he be present.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is no iust cause of complaint for most of the Byshops in that behalfe. For I thinke the time hath not bin, wherein there were moe preaching Byshops, than are at this day, in this Church. But do you thinke that a minister may not preach or minister the sacraments in the presence of the Byshop? Or do you so well allow of* 1.581 that Councell and canon quoted in your margent? It was the second councell called Hispalense concilium, it was not generall, but prouinciall, celebrated Anno. Dom. 659. the contents of the canon by you alledged are these. That a Priest may not cōsecrate alters, but only the Byshop: that a Priest and Chorepiscopi may not consecrate virgines, erect altars,* 1.582 blesse and anoynt them, hallow churches, make holy oyle, and such like, but only the By∣shop. Likewise that no priest may baptise, say Masse▪ teach the people, or blesse them in the presence of the Byshop. Surely this is a worthy Councel, and a notable canon, especi∣ally for you to alledge, that haue so depraued other worthy writers for some imper∣fections founde in them.

But what doth it make for your purpose? They might both preach and minister* 1.583 the sacraments in the presence of the Byshop, if he willed them, and so is the canon. This law was made for the encreasing of the Byshops pompe and dignitie: for no man might presume to speake or do any thing in their presence, without their leaue and licence: so were they estéemed thē, and such authoritie had they. But if our By∣shops should clayme the like, you would say that it were an vntollerable arrogancie and pride.

I would to God all those that be deluded by you, would consider your allegations, and the grounds of your proofes. Surely I woulde be loth to alledge any Councell of that time to proue any thing in controuersie. Much more loth would I be to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so corrupt a canon: but lothest of all to alledge that, which should be so flat against 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cause, & proue the cleane cōtrary to that, which I affirme, as this doth in your 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪

And here I haue one thing to tell you, y^t diuers of those things, wherin you 〈◊〉〈◊〉* 1.584 make this difference betwixt our Byshops and those of the primitiue church, if t〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ey were true, yet wer they no saults in the office, but in the men: as for example, thys which you here set downe. Will you make a differēce in the offices of our Byshops and those of olde time, bycause some of them do not preach? This compareth the mē togither, not the offices, except you proue that it is forbidden or vnlawfull for one of our Byshops to preach. There are other such like, which I omitte.

Chap. 5. the. 10. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 96. Sect. 1.

Now if you wil also consider how much the Lord ship, pompe, and statelinesse of the Byshops in our days, differ from the simplicitie of them in times past▪ I will giue you also a taste therof, if first of all I shew the beginning, or as it were the fountaine where vpon the pompe grew, which* 1.585 was when in stead of hauing a Byshop in euery parishe and congregation, they began to make a Byshop of a whole dioces, and of a thousand congregations.

Io. Whitgifte.

If the pompe began as you say, then began it in the Apostles time, for then began they to make one Byshop ouer a whole diocesse, as Timothie almost ouer all Asia, and Titus ouer all Creta, as I haue declared. Which order hath bin from that day to this obserued throughout all Christendome, as it may appeare by that, which is al∣ready said.

Chap. 5. the. 11. Diuision.

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

In an epistle of Zacharie vnto (*) 1.586 Pope Boniface, it is thus written, it hath bin oftētimes de∣creede,* 1.587 y^t there should not be a Bishop apointed in euery village▪ or little citie, least they should waxe vile (a) 1.588 through the multitude: wherby it both appeareth that ther was wont to be a Byshop in e∣uery parish, and vpon how corrupt and euill consideration one Byshop was set ouer a whole dio∣cesse. No doubt, those that were authors of this, had learned to well our olde prouerb, the fewer the better cheare, but the more Byshops, the merier it had bin with Gods people.

Io. Whitgifte.

This epistle was writtē by Pope Zacharie to one Boniface which was Byshop in France, and not to Pope Boniface: moreouer it is in the. 2. tome of Councels, and you haue quoted in your margent the third. But to the matter.

You haue not one word in that epistle to proue that there was wont at any time* 1.589 to be in euery parish a Byshop. And you haue falsely alleadged the words of the epistle: for these words (least they should waxe vile through the multitude) are not ther to be found. The words of the Epistle be there. For you must remember what we are commaunded by the olde canons to obserue, that we ought not to ordein Bishops in villages, and smal ci∣ties, least the name of a Byshop should waxe vile. What one word is there here of pla∣cing Byshops in euery parish? Zacharie telleth Boniface, that it is according to the olde canons that Byshops should not be placed in such smal cities, but in more ample and large cities, bycause the contemptiblenesse of the place, dothe oftentimes bring contempt to the person, and a Byshop ought to be estéemed and reuerenced. If you had red the epistle, you should haue perceiued that this Boniface had lately conuerted to christianitie interiorem Germaniam, and that he had ordeyned amōg them certaine By∣shops to gouerne them, whome he desired Pope Zacharie by his authoritie to con∣firme, to whome Pope Zacharie answering, willeth him to consider whether the places be so conuenient, or the number of the people so great, vt Episcopos habere merean∣tur. Meminerimus enim (saith he) quid in sacris canonibus. &c. as I haue rehearsed them be∣for〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪ And a little after he nameth the places, where he will haue the byshops seates 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 that there is nothing lesse ment, than that there was in euery parish a Bishop, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 much as there was there before no Byshop in any parish: but this is all that may be gathered, that the seates of Byshops were by the olde canons apointed to be in the best cities, and most famous places: which to be true you may soone perceiue in those canons themselues, mētioned here by Zacharie: they are to be found. dist. 80.

Chap. 5. the. 12. Diuision.

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

And they might with as good reason hinder the sunne from shining in all places, and the raine 〈◊〉〈◊〉 falling vpon al grounds, for feare they should not be set by, being common, as to bring in such

a wicked decree, whereby vnder pretēce of deliuering the Byshop from contempt, they sought no∣thing else but an ambitious and stately Lordship ouer those, whiche had not that title of Byshop that they had, although they did the office of a Byshop better than they did. And what intollerable presumptiō is this, to chaunge the institution of God, as though he (*) 1.590 which ordeyned not one on∣ly, but some number more or lesse of Byshops in euery Church, did not sufficiently foresee, that the multitude and plentie of Byshops could breede no contempt of the office. And it may be as well or∣deyned that the children of poore men shoulde not call them that begar them, fathers and mothers, but only the children of the rich, and of the noble, least that if euery man that hath children, shoulde be called a father, fathers should be set nothing by.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is a maruellous matter that you delight to runne so fast vpon a false string: I tell you once agayne, that you neuer red that Epistle, neyther yet those canons that it speaketh of. If you had red them, you would neuer haue affirmed (if there be any modestie left in you) that the multitude of Byshops is alledged there as a cause of contempte, no such thing being mentioned. The canons haue a very good consideration, and be not wicked, but wise and godly. This superioritie of Byshops is Gods owne institu∣tion, and it hath a necessary vse in the Church of God, as is shewed before. It hathe bin, and may be abused: and it is, and may be well vsed. All these glorious words of yours, are but very wordes, and therefore as words, I will committe them to the winde.

This one thing I cannot let passe that you say, God ordeyned not one onely, but some* 1.591 number moe or lesse of Byshops in euery Church. What scripture haue you to proue that there should be more Byshops than one in one Church? What one example in al the primitiue Church haue you to warrant this your assertion? Nay you haue the whole practise of the Church to the contrary, euen from the beginning. Iames alone was Byshop of Ierusalem, Timothie of Ephesus, Titus of Creta, Clemens of Rome. &c. and it hath bin always compted as monstrous to haue two Byshops of one citie, as to haue two heads of one body But such bolde assertions without proofe, are méete principles for such a ruinous and totering platforme, as you dreame of.

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 (*) 1.592 where the Lord did ordeyne that there shoulde be diuers pastors, elders, or Byshops in euery congregation, (a) 1.593 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* 1.594 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.

Chap. 5. the. 14. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 96. Sect. 2.

Hauing nowe shewed howe this Lordly estate of the Bishop began, and vppon what a rotten grounde it is builded, I come to shewe howe farre the Bishops in our tyme are for theyr pompe and outwarde statelinesse degenerated from the Bishops of elder tymes.

Io. Whitgifte.

A man woulde haue thought that you being so great an enimie to those degrées, woulde not haue thus concluded vpon so small proofe, and the same vtterly vntrue: vsing onely for your grounde the Epistle of Pope Zacharie, which maketh nothing for your purpose. Now let vs sée, how farre the Bishops of our tyme are for theyr pompe. &c. degenerated from the Bishops of elder tymes.

Chap. 5. the. 15. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 96. Sect. 3.

And here I call to remembrance, that which was spoken of the poore estate of Basill, and Theodorete: and if M. Doctour will say (as he doth indeede in a certaine place) that then was a time of persecution, and this is a time of peace, it is easily answered, that although Basill were vnder persecution, yet Theodorete liued vnder good Emperours. But that shall appeare bet∣ter by the Canons which were rules giuen for the Bishops to frame themselues by.

Io. Whitgifte.

It is for lacke of other examples, that you are constreyned to repeate these: To the poorenesse of Theodorete I haue answered: there may be as poore Bishops now, as there was then, and there might be as riche Bishops then, as there are nowe. It is not one or two examples that can proue the contrarie.

Chap. 5. the. 16. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 97. Sect. 1.

In the 4. Councell of Carthage it is degreed that the Bishops shoulde haue a little house* 1.595 neare vnto the Church, what is this compared with so many fayre large houses, and with the princely Palace of a Bishop? And in the same Councell it is decreed that he shoulde haue the fur∣niture and stuffe of his house after the common sort, and that his table and dyet shoulde be poore, and that he should get him estimation by faythfulnesse and good conuersation.

Io. Whitgifte.

In the. 52. and. 53. Canons of the same Councell, Clearkes, how learned so euer they be in Gods woorde, are willed to get their liuing by some occupation, or by hus∣bandrie, but I thinke you will not haue them so to do now at this time. Wherefore you must cōsider the diuersitie of the time and state of the Church. If God hath dealt now more bountifully with his Church in externall benefites, if he hath put into the hearts of Christian Princes thus to deale with the ministers of the woorde: and if this state and condition be necessary for this time, and people, why should you enuie it? Ritches and fayre houses be no hinderances, but helpes, if they be vsed according∣ly: and commonly hypocrisie and pryde, lieth hidde vnder the name of pouertie and simplicitie.

Chap. 5. the. 17. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 97. Sect. 1.

And in another Councell, that the Bishops should (a) 1.596 not giue themselues to feastes, but be* 1.597 content with a litle meate. Let these Bishops be compared with oures, whose chambers shine with gilte, whose walles are hanged with clothes of Auris, whose cupbordes are loden with plate, whose tables and diets, are furnished with multitude and diuersitie of dishes, whose dayly dinners are feastes, let them I say be compared together, and they shall be founde so vnlike, that if those old Bishops were aliue, they would not know eche other. For they would thinke that oures were Princes, and ours would thinke that they were some hedge Priests, not worthie of their acquain∣taunce or fellowship.

Io. Whitgifte.

If you meane the first Tyronense Concilium, there is no such thing to be found in the 5. Canon of it, nor in the whole Councell. The fifth Canon conteyneth a profitable ad∣monition for you and such as you are, for it forbiddeth vnder the payne of excōmu∣nication, that any beyng a Clearke should leaue of his calling, and become a lay man. If you meane the seconde Tyronense Concilium. I make you the like answere. Belike your collector hath deceyued you, but what if it were so? This onely might be gathe∣red, that vnlesse Bishops then had bene welthie, there should not haue néeded a decrée against feasting. If our Bishops should make the like now, it would be thought they did it for sparing. And I thinke that, and such like Canons méete not onely for Bi∣shops, but for all states and degrées of men.

Riches and costly furniture bée no impediment to a godly man for doing* 1.598 his duetie. And in suche externall thinges the condition of the time, and state of the Countrie is to be obserued. Lette our Bishoppes be compared with them in truthe of doctrine, in honestie of life, in diligent walking in theyr vocation, and in knowledge (I speake of the moste in bothe ages) and I thinke the difference will not be so greate, but that they maye bothe knowe one another, and very well

agrée among themselues: this onely excepted, that the doctrine of the Gospell is now much more purely professed by our Bishops, than it was at that tyme by them, for both the Councels are in sundrie poynts very corrupt.

Chap. 5. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 97. Sect. 2.

In the same councell of Carthage, it was decreed that no Bishop sitting in any place shoulde suffer any Minister or Elder to stande. Nowe I will report me to themselues howe this is kept,* 1.599 and to the poore ministers which haue to do with them, and come before them.

Io. Whitgifte.

A poore quarell: though this humilitie is to be required in all Bishops, yet is it to be vsed with discretion: for thus to deale with a proude and hawtie stomacke, were but to giue nourishment to arrogancie and contempt. It is méete that euerie man haue that honour and reuerence giuen vnto him, which his place, his office, and his person requireth. And as it is humilitie in him to remitte any part of it: euen so it is an intollerable contempt and pryde for those that be inferiours, so to looke for suche equalitie, that in the meane tyme they refuse to doe that, whiche ciuilitie, good maners, and duetie requyreth. But let all men consider those notes and tokens of your hawtie stomackes, and perswade themselues, that it woulde not bée long before you woulde chalenge the same equalitie, wyth other states and degrées in like maner.

Chap. 5. the. 19. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 97. Sect. 3.

The Bishoppes in tymes past had no tayle nor trayne of men after them, and thought it a slaunder to the Gospell to haue a number of men before and behinde them. And therefore is (*) 1.600 Paulus Samosatenus noted as one that brought Religion into hatred, and as one that feemed to* 1.601 take delight rather to be a Capitaine of two hundred, than a Bishop, bycaus〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 he had gotten hym a sorte of seruing men to waight on him, An other example not vnlyke and lykewyse reprehended is in Ruffine of one (a) 1.602 Gregorie a Bishop. Nowe in our dayes it is thought a commendation to* 1.603 the Bishop, a credite to the Gospell, if a Bishop haue. 30. 40. 60. or mo wayting of him, some be∣fore, some behinde, whereof three partes of them (set a part the carying of a dishe vnto the table) haue no honest or profitable calling to occupie themselues in two houres of the day, to the filling of the Churche and common wealth also with all kinde of disorders, and greater incommodities, than I minde to speake of, bicause it is not my purpose.

Io. Whitgifte.

In Eusebius it is sayde that Paulus Samosatenus vsed to walke publikely in the market places reading letters and boasting himselfe, being accompanied with a num∣ber* 1.604 of Souldiours some before him and some behinde him, more like to a Capitaine than a Bishop. If any of our Bishops walke in the stréetes to be séene, or stande in the market places, or other open and publike assemblies reading of letters, accompa∣nied with Souldiours and men of warre, then may it be truly sayde of them, that is here truly spoken of Paulus Samosatenus. But if they being farre from such vani∣tie, kéepe that countenance and retinue of men, which their place, the maner of their Countrey, the honour of the Prince, the state of the Church requireth, then doe you vncharitably and vniustly applie this example agaynst them. But vnlesse Paulus Sa∣mosatenus had béene riche and wealthie, howe coulde this pompe of his haue béene mainteyned? Wherefore this example is rather agaynst you, than for you: ney∣ther doth it condemne wealth and ryches in Bishops, but pride, vainglorie, and light∣nesse. For they accuse him of spoyling the Church, and thereby enriching himselfe.

In the example of George, whom you 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉all Gregorie, mentioned in 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uffine, there is no worde spoken of any seruing men, or souldiours: onely he is there reproued, be∣cause he got his Bishoprike by violence, and thought that the office of iudgement in* 1.605 ciuill causes was rather committed vnto him, than the Priesthoode. &c. If any Bishop of∣fende in the like with vs, it is the fault of the man, not of the office. By this example also it may appeare, that Bishoppes in those dayes had ryches and authoritie: For this abusing of their wealth and authoritie, doth argue that they had both, which they might haue vsed rightly and well.

Chap. 5. the. 20. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 97. Sect. 4.

And here I will note another cause which brought in this pompe, and princely estate of By∣shops, wherein although I will say more in a worde for the pompous estate, than M. doctour hath done in all his treatise: yet I will shewe that although it were more tollerable at the fyrst, nowe it is by no meanes to be borne wyth. * 1.606 In the Ecclesiasticall Storie we reade that the inscriptions of diuers Epistles sent vnto Byshops were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. * 1.607 We reade also of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 house of salutations, which Ambrose Bishop of Millayn had. As for the tytle of (moste honourable Lordes) it was not so great, nor so stately, as the name of a Lorde or knight in oure Countrey, for all those that knowe the maner of the speach of the Grecians doe well vnderstande, howe they vsed to call euerie one of any meane countenance in the common wealth where he lyued 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is Lorde, so we see also the Euangelists turne Rabbi which signifyeth master by the Gre〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ke worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lorde, as lykewyse in Fraunce they call euery one that is a Gentleman, or hath any honest place Monseur, and so they wyll say also, sauing your honour. Nowe we know this worde (Lorde) in our Countrey is vsed otherwise, to note some great personage, eyther by reason of birth, or by reason of some high dignitie in the common wealth, which he occupieth, and therefore those tytles although they were somewhat excessiue, yet were they nothing so swelling and stately as ours are.

Io. Whitgifte.

The wise man sayth, Let not thine owne mouth prayse thee: but you for lacke of* 1.608 good neighbours, or else for tootoo much selfe loue, oftentymes forget this lesson, as in this place.

Howsoeuer the Grecians vsed to call euery one of any meane countenance in the common* 1.609 wealth, where he lyued 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Lorde, yet did they not vse to call him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 most honourable Lorde, for that tytle was onely giuen to such as were of great dignitie and authoritie: as it is in the place of Theodorete (by you quoted) giuen to Bishops: and therefore you haue made an obiection, which you cannot answere. This worde Lorde, doth signifie preheminence and superioritie, and hauing this title (most honou∣rable,) ioyned with it, it cannot but signifie some greate state and degrée of au∣thoritie.

The same I answere to that, which followeth. And yet Rabbi was a name gy∣uen primarijs hominibus, & honore aliquo praeditis: to the chiefe men, and those, which were* 1.610 indued with some honour: and in that the Euangelistes do translate it Lorde, it is ma∣nifest that this name, Lorde, signified then a degrée of superioritie: but hauing (as I sayde) this tytle (most honourable) added vnto it, as it is in that place of Theodorete, it cannot but signifie some especiall preheminence, and therefore equiualent with the titles now vsed. Master Caluine vpon the. 20. of Iohn. verse. 16, sayth that (Rabboni)* 1.611 which is there interpreted (master) is nomen non modò 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉onorificum: not onely an honou∣ble name, but also, quod professionem continet obedientiae, such as conteyneth a profession of obedience.

But doe the tytles of honour, and degrée giuen vnto Bishops so much trouble your hawtie stomacke? Surely you are not then of that spirit, that the olde auncient* 1.612 fathers were, who disdeyned not to call Bishoppes by as honourable tytles as wée

doe: looke in Atha. his. 2. Apol you shall there find the Synode gathered at Ierusalem, writing to the Priestes of Alexand call Athanasius sundrie tymes Dominum, not as by* 1.613 a common tytle, but a tytle of dignitie, quum vobis restituet pastorem vestrum & dominum comministrum nostrum Ath〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nasium: VVhen he shall restore vnto you your Pastor and Lorde our fellow minister Athanasius. In the same Apol. Bishops are called domini preciosissimi, most excellent or worthie Lordes. And it is euident in the same booke, that there was no other tytle gyuen to the Emperoure himselfe, for there hée is onely called (Lorde) and so were other of his Nobles in like maner. So that in those dayes it was not grudged at, to giue vnto Bishoppes the same ty〈1 line〉〈1 line〉les of honour, that was giuen to the Emperour & other Nobles. The name of (most reuerend) is as much as the name of most honourable, and yet was that name also giuen vnto Bishops in A∣thanasius tyme, as appeareth in the same booke in sundrie places. For Athanasius him selfe is called by his Priestes and Deacons reuerendissimus Episcopus.

Eusebius Nicomed. wryting to Paulinus Bishop of Tyrus vseth this style, Do∣mino meo Paulino, &c. To my Lorde Paulinus to. 1. con. But what shoulde I labour to proue the antiquitie of such tytles, which cannot be vnknowne to such as be learned? I had more neede to declayme agaynst the pryde and hautinesse of such, as do disdaine to vse them: but I will not spende paper in wordes.

Chap. 5. the. 21. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 97. Sect. 5. 6.

And as touching Ambrose house, albeit the worde doth not employ so great gorgeou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nesse nor maginfycence of a house, as the Palaces and o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉her magnificall buildings of our Bishops, yet the cause where vpon this rose, doth more excuse Ambrose, who being taken from great wealth and gouernment in the common wealth, giuing ouer his office, did reteyne(*) 1.614 his house and that which he had gotten.

But our Bishops* 1.615 do mainteyne this pompe and excesse, of the charges of the Church, with whose goodes a great number of ydle loytering seruing men are mainteyned, which ought to be be∣stowed vpon the Ministers, which want necessarie finding for theyr familyes, and vpon the poore and maintenance of the Uniuersityes. As for these ryotous expences of the Church goodes, when many other Ministers want, and of making great dinners, and interteyning great Lordes and magistrates, and of the answere to them that say they do helpe the Church by this meanes, I will referre the reader to that, which Ierome wryteth in an Epistle ad Nepotianum monachum, where this is handled more at large.

Io. Whitgifte.

Your answere for Ambrose his house hath no probabilitie in it, for the wordes* 1.616 of Theodorete in that place, do plainly declare that it was neare vnto the Churche, yea infra sept〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Ecclesiae: within the bondes or close of the Church, and therefore most like to be the house perteyning to the Bishoprike, and not any part of Ambrose his for∣mer 〈◊〉〈◊〉. For if you remember, you sayde a little before, that it was decréed in the. 4. Councell of Carthage. Can. 14. that a Bishop shoulde haue his house neare vn∣to the Church. But wise men can consider from whence such vnlikely assertions without any shew of proofe do come.

Bishops buylde not these great houses of the Churches goodes, but receyue them* 1.617 as left vnto them by such as were farre from séeking a spoyle: they vso them accor∣ding to the lawes of the lande: and their number of men can in no respect be discom∣mended, tending to the defense and strength of the realme, the honour of the Prince, and their owne honest and góod education. Our Bishops therefore vse the goodes of the Church according to the first institution and foundation, and I doubt not but they vse them to more profite both of the Church and common wealth, than they should be vsed, if your phansies might take place.

Your complaint for ministers, for the poore. &c. may be otherwise satisfyed than by* 1.618 a spoyle: For if benefices were rightly vsed, the Ministers of thys Kealme

are better prouided for, than in any rountrey or age: yea there are mo sufficient ly∣uings for them besydes the Bishoprikes, than can be supplyed with able ministers. The poore also are well prouided for (God be thanked,) by sundrie meanes, if lawes* 1.619 made for the same were duely executed, and Hospitalles with suche other prouisi∣ons delyuered from vnreasonable Leases, and bestowed vppon the poore according to their fyrst ordinaunces. Wherefore this clamour of yours is nothing but the* 1.620 voyce of an enuious spirite proclayming the spoyle of the Churche, to the decay of learning, and bringing in of barbarisme, if it be not in time preuented.

The Uniuersityes are much beholding to you for your care ouer them: but what reasons haue you vsed agaynst the lyuings and houses of Byshoppes, that may not also be vsed agaynst their landes and Colledges: for in tymes past, when that Councell of Carthage (before by you alledged) was holden, there were nosuche Colledges indued with such possessions, as there are nowe. Neyther are there (as I haue hearde) in Christendome the like Colledges, and the like liuings for Stu∣die〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es, as are in this Realme of Englande. Wherefore if such examples and con∣ditions of Countries, tymes, and persons bée sufficient to ouerthrowe Bishoppes houses and landes, I sée not howe Colledges can stande long after them, and there∣fore we pray you speake for your selfe, we require not the helpe of so euill a Proc∣tour. Woulde you séeke to mainteyne learning with the spoyle of the Churche, and the diminishing of the rewarde of learning? An non vides, quàm pugnanti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 lo∣queris?

By that Epistle of Ierome ad Nepotianum, it appeareth that the state of the Clergie was not then so poore, as you woulde séeme to make it. Ierome reproueth the abuses* 1.621 of his time, as couetousnesse, gluttonie, gorgeous and costly apparell with such lyke which at all tymes are in lyke maner to be condemned. But doth he that reproueth the abuse, condemne the thing? It is a fault by couetous or vniust dealing to waxe riche: but yet it is no fault to be riche. Pride in apparell is to be condemned: but yet euerie man may lawfully weare that apparell, that is méete for his degrée. No man alloweth gluttonie or immoderate seasting: neyther doth any wise man con∣denme a plentifull table, and good house kéeping. It is not good dealing to applie that which is spoken agaynst the abuse of a thing, to the condemning and quite euer throw of the thing it selfe, as you d〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the wordes of Ierome in that Epistle.

Chap. 5. the. 22. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 98. Lin. 2.

By this which I haue cyted it appeareth, what was one cause of this excesse and stately 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ompe of the Byshoppes, namely that certaine noble and riche men, beyng chosen to the ministerie, and liuing somewhat like vnto the former estates, wherein they were before, others also assayed to be like vnto them, as we see in that poynt the nature of man is to readie to followe, if they see any example before theyr eyes. But there is no reason bicause Ambrose and such like did so, there∣fore our Bishops shoulde do it (*) 1.622 of the Churches costes. Nor bicause Ambrose and such lyke did tarie in their trim houses, which they had built them selues of their owne charge before they were Bishops, that therfore they should come out of their chambers or narrow houses into courts and pallaces, builded of the Churches costes.

Io. Whitgifte.

Where haue you shewed any such thing by Ambrose his example? or how doth it appeare that by such meanes the pompe of the Bishops (as you cal it) was brought in? That which you speake of Ambrose house is most vntrue: it was perteyning to the Byshop, and no part of Ambrose his proper possessions, as it is euident by this, that it was neare vnto the Churche, euen within the limits, of the Church, as I haue sayde before.

Chap. 5. the. 23. Diuision.

T. C Pag. 98. Sect. 1.

Another reason of this pompe and statelinesse of the Bishops was, that which almost brought in all poyson and popish corruption into the church, and that is a foolish emulation of the manners and fashions of the idolatrous nations. For as this was the crafte of Sathan to drawe away the Israelites from the true seruice of God, by theyr fonde desyre they had to conforme themselues to the fashions of the Gentiles, so to punish vnthankefull receyuing of the Gospell, and to fulfill the Prophecies touching the man of sinne; the Lord suffred those that professed Christ to corrupt thei〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 wayes, by the same sleyght of the Diuell.

Io. Whitgifte.

If it be inough to say without any kinde of proofe, then you haue sayd some thing:* 1.623 but if woordes without proofes be but light, then are these woordes so to be estéemed, & not otherwise. I know the Papistes through foolish imitation of the Gentiles, haue brought in sundrie superstitions of the Gentiles. But I speake of the matter we haue in hande, that is inequalitie of degrées; and authoritie among the ministers of the Churche, and the names and offices of Archbishop, Bishop, Archdeacon, &c. which you neyther haue shewed, nor can shew to be brought into the Churche, by any imitation of the Gentiles, and therefore you do still Petere principium.

Chap. 5. the. 24. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 98. Sect. 2.

Galerianus Maximinus the Emperour to the ende that he might promote the idolatrie, and* 1.624 superstition where vnto he was addicted, chose o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the choysest magistrates to be priestes, and that they might be in great estimation gaue eche of them a trayne of men to followe them: (a) 1.625 and now the Christians and Christian Emperours thinking that that would promote the Christian reli∣gion, that promoted superstition, and not remembring that it is often tymes abhominable before God, which is esteemed in the eies of men▪ endeuoured to make their Bishops encoūter and match with those idolatrous priestes, and to cause that they should not be inferiour to them in wealth and outwarde pompe. And therefore I conclude, that seing the causes and fountaynes, from whence this pompe and statelinesse of Bishops haue come, are so corrupt and naught, the thing it self which hath rysen of such causes can not be good.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is no such thing in that place of Eusebius quoted in your margent: for in that booke and chapter of Eusebius, he onely sheweth that Inchaunters and Sorcerers were greatly estéemed of Maximinus, and that he buylded Churches of Idols in euery Citie, and appoynted idolatrous Priestes in euery place, also that he placed in euery prouince one to be chiefe ouer the rest, & furnished him with souldiers and seruants: but there is not one woorde, that any Christian Prince toke any example of him to do the like in Christianitie. It rather appeareth that Maximinus did in this point imitate the Christians, who had theyr Metropolitanes, and one chiefe Bishop in euery pro∣uince long before this time, as I haue declared before. And I sée no cause why you should say that Christians did follow the Gentiles rather in prouiding for the mini∣sters of the Gospell sufficiently, than in buylding of Churches in euery Citie, and pla∣cing ministers in them, for Maximinus did this aswell as he did the other. This I am well assured of, that there is no such signification in that place of Eusebius, that any Christian Prince should follow this example. And therefore your conclusion beyng collected and gathered of such false and vntrue coniectures, must néedes be lyke vnto them.

I do not speake to mayntayne any excessiue or outrageous pompe, but I speake of the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉egrees in the Ecclesiasticall state, and of the manners and conditions of the persons, as they be now according to the lawes and customes allowed in this Church of England.

Chap. 5. the. 25. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 98. Sect. 3.

And thus will I make an end〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, leauing to the consideration and indifferent waying of the in∣different reader, how true it is that I haue before propounded, that our Archbishops, Metropo∣litanes, Archdeacons, Bishops, haue besides the names almoste nothing common 〈◊〉〈◊〉 those, which haue bene in 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉lder tymes, before the sunne of the Gospell beganne to be maruelously darke∣ned, by the stinking mistes which the Diuell sent forth out of the bottomlesse pit, to blynde the eyes of men, that they should not see the shame and nakednesse of that purpled whoore, which in the per∣son of the Cleargie, long before she gatte into hir seate, prepared hir selfe by payntyng hi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 writhen face, with the colours of these gorgeous titles, and with the shewe of magnificall and worldly pompe. For the Diuell knewe well inough, that if he should haue set vp one onely Byshop in that seate of perdition, and lefte all the reste in that simplicitie, wherein God had appoynted them, that his eldest sonne shoulde neyther haue had any way to get into that, and when he had gotten it, yet beyng as it were an owle amongst a sorte of byrdes, should haue bene quickly discouered.

Io. Whitgifte.

And I also leaue it to the iudgement of the learned and indifferent Reader, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 consider by that, which I haue sayde before, how vntrue all this is, that you here af∣firme, (I speake of these degrées and offices as they be nowe vsed in this Churche of England) if there be any difference, it is bycause they haue not so large and ample iu∣risdiction and authoritie now, as they had then.

Sathan worketh by sundrie meanes, and spareth no fetches to bring to passe his* 1.626 purpose. Under the pretence of zeale, he hath ingendred sectes and schismes: vnder the title of puritie & perfection, he hath brought in heresie: vnder the cloake of simplicitie, he hath spread abrode many kindes of idolatrie and superstition: vnder the shadow of humilitie, he hath couered vntollerable ambition, and marueylous arrogancie: and what soeuer he bringeth to passe, commonly he doth it vnder the colour of vertue, and of that which is good: and therefore I thinke that euen vnder the names and titles of lawfull degrees and calling, he hath established vnlawfull authoritie: but neyther is true zeale, puritie, perfection, simplicitie, humilitie, nor yet lawfull degrées and cal∣lings therefore to be condemned. Viti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 (as Cyprian sayeth) vicin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 sunt virtutibus: Vices* 1.627 be very nigh vnto vertues: and the one laboureth to imitate the other, but we must not therefore the lesse estéeme of vertue, but rather learne prudently to discerne what is the difference betwixt the one and the other. If we haue not learned this lesson, what state in the common wealth, what office, what degrée of person, nay what kinde of go∣uernment shall we allowe? it is the greatest folly in the worlde to condemne the thing it selfe, bycause of the abuse.

Chap. 5. the. 26. Diuision.

T. C Pag. 98. Sect. 3.

But I haue done, only this I admonish the reader that I do not allowe of all those thinges,* 1.628 which I before alleaged in the comparison betwene our Archbishops and the Archbishops of olde tyme, or our Bishops & theyrs. Onely my intent is to shew that although there were corrupti∣ons, yet in respect of ours they be much more tollerable: and that it might appeare how small cause there is, that they should alleage their examples, to confirme the Archbishops and Bishops that nowe are.

Io. Whitgifte.

You do well to worke surely, for now shall no man take any great aduauntage of your woordes, how be it, it had bene curteously done to haue let vs vnderstand what you allowe of this you haue wrytten, and what you allowe not. For in leauing the matter so rawly, you will make vs suspect, that you haue spoken you know not what.

Other things concerning the offices and autho∣ritie of our Cleargie, of inequalitie of degrees amongst ministers, &c. dispersed in other places of the Answere.

Chap. 6. the. 1. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 75. Sect. vlt.

Concerning the offices of an high commissioner & iustice of peace, how necessarily they be committed to some of the best & wisest of the Cleargie, what vice by them is bridled, what inconuenience mette with, what necessarie discipline vsed, those know that be wise, & haue experience in publike affaires and gouernment. There is no worde of God to proue why these offices may not concurre in one man. But it is the commission that troubleth these men, as for peace they are at defiance with it.

T. C. Pag. 98. Sect. 4.

Concerning the offices of cōmissionership, and how vnmeete it is that ministers of the worde should exercise them, and how that the worde of God doth not permitte any such confusion of offi∣ces, there shall be by Gods grace spoken of it afterwarde.

Io. Whitgifte.

And vntill that (afterward) be performed, will I also differre that, which is fur∣ther to be sayd in this matter.

Chap. 6. the. 2. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 76. Sect. 1. 2. 3. & Pag. 77. Sect. 1.

To be shorte, they say that all these offices be plainely in Gods worde forbidden, and they alleage Math. 23. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 4. 1. Pet. 5. The places of Mathew & Luke be answered before. Christ beateth* 1.629 downe ambition and pryde, and desire of bearing rule, as he did be∣fore, when he sayde, be ye not called Rabbi, and call no man father, be not called Doctors, he doth not condemne the names, but the ambi∣tion of the minde.

In the. 1. Cor. 4. it is thus written, Let a man thus thinke of vs, as of the ministers of Christ, &c. The ministers of the worde in deede are not to be estemed as Gods, but as the ministers of God. Some among the Corinthians gloried in their ministers, and attributed to much vnto them. Here of came these factiōs, I holde of Paule, I of Apollo, &c. This teacheth your adherentes and disciples, not to attribute to much to you, & such as you are, or any other minister of Gods word. It maketh nothing agaynst the names or authorities eyther of Archbishop, Lordbishop, or any other that you haue named, who be the ministers of Christ, and ought so to be esteemed.

The place of S. Peter cap. 5. is this, Feede the flocke of God, &c. not as though you vvere Lordes ouer the flocke, &c. Peter here condemneth hautinesse, contempt, and tyrannie of pastors towards theyr flockes, he doth not take away lawfull gouernment. The Pastor hath rule and superioritie ouer his flocke, but it must not be tyrannicall.

These be but very slender proofes that the names and offices of

Archbyshops, Lordbysh. &c. be plainly forbiddē by the word of God.

Surely you had thought that no man would haue euer taken paynes to examine your margent.

T. C. Pag. 98. Sect. vlt.

To your answere also vnto the places of S. Mathew & Luke the replie is made before. The place of the fourth of the first to the Corinthians is well alleaged, for it teacheth a moderate estima∣tion of the ministers, and a meane betweene the contempt & excessiue estimation: neyther can there be any readier way to breed that disorder, which was amongst the Corinthians, as to say I holde of such a one, and I of such a one, & I of such another, than to set vp certayne ministers in so highe titles, & great shew of worldly honour: for so commeth it to passe that the people will saye, I will beleue my Lorde, and my Lorde Archbishop, what soeuer our persone say, for they be wise men and learned, as we 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ee it came to passe amongst the Corinthians. For the false Apostles because they had a shew & outward pompe of speach, they caried away the people. For although S. Paule sayth that some sayd I holde of Paule, I holde of Apollo, I of Cephas, yet as it appeareth in his fourth chapter, they helde one of this braue eloquent teacher, and another of that. For he translated these speaches vnto him & his fellowes by a figure. All that rule is tyrannicall which is not lawfull, and is more than it ought to be. And therefore the place of S. Peter is fitly alleaged, whereof also I haue spoken some thing before.

Io. Whitgifte.

The Corinthians did not brust out into these factions & partes taking, in respect of any title or office cōmitted to any of their preachers: but it was a partiall affection that they had towardes theyr teachers in preferring them (for theyr supposed vertue & learning) before other of whom they had not conceyued so good an opinion. A more liuely example whereof can not be, than the dissentiō that is at this day, wherein some of your fautors forgetting all modestie, do so greatly 〈◊〉〈◊〉 you, and your compa∣nions, that nothing may be heard, that is spoken to the contrary: nay in comparison, all other men be flatterers, worldlinges, vnlearned, doltes, & asses. So do some sorte of men extoll you, and contemne other: so did the Corinthians extoll & magniffe their false Prophets, & depraue the true preachers. Wherefore to take away this partiall affection & iudgement, the Apostle sayeth, Sic nos aestimet homo, &c. Let a man so esteeme* 1.630 of vs, as of the ministers of Christ, &c. You will not (I am sure) acknowledge that at this time among the Corinthians there was any such difference of titles, or degrées of su∣perioritie. Wherfore you cannot (speaking as you thinke) say that the Apostle in this place meaneth any such matter. But wel you wotte that these affectiōs (which I haue spoken of) were rife among them, and therefore it is most certeyne that the Apostle laboreth for the suppression of them. So that the interpretation, that I haue giuen of this place in myne Answere, is true, neyther haue you refelled it.

The rule that a Bishop hath ouer other ministers in his diocesse is lawfull: neither is it such tyrannicall rule as the woorde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (vsed by S. Peter, and spoken of before) doth signifie, that is to rule with oppression: and therefore the place is vnapt∣ly alleaged.

Chap. 6. the. 3. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 77. Sect. 1.

I am of Hemingius opinion in this poynt, that I thinke this your assertion smelleth of playne Anabaptisme.

T. C Pag. 99. Sect. 1.

You are you say of Hemingius minde, & thinke that this opinion smelleth of Anabaptisme. I haue shewed how you haue depraued & corrupted Hemingius, and desire you to shewe some better reason of your opinion. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will not suftice vs.

Io. Whitgifte.

And I haue shewed how vntruly you haue reported of me. Hemingius alloweth superioritie, & degrées of dignitie among the ministers: he condemneth your confused equalitie, & calleth it Anabaptisticall. Moreouer if you well marke the beginninges & procedings of the Anabaptistes, you shall perceyue that they first began with the mi∣nisterie, in the selfe same manner and forme that you now do.

Chap. 6. the. 4. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 77. Sect 1.

And surely if you had once made an equalitie (such as you phansie)* 1.631 among the Cleargie, it would not be long or you attempted the same among the laitie. Let them take heede: Tunc tua res agitur, &c.

T. C. Pag. 99. Sect. 1. 2. 3.

You say that if we had once obteyned equalitie amongst the Cleargie, we would attempt it in the Laitie.* 1.632

In what starre do you see that M. Doctor? Moyses sayeth, that if a man speake of a thing to come, and it come not to passe as he hath spoken, that that man is a false Prophet, i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 your prophe∣cie come not to passe, you know your iudgement already out of Moyses.

The Pharesies when our sauiour Christ inueighed against their ambiti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, accused him that he was no friende to Cesar, and went about to discredite him with the ciuill magistrate, you shall ap∣plie it your selfe, you will needes make the Archbyshop, &c. neyghbours vnto the ciuill magistrates, and yet they almost dwell as farre a sunder as Rome and Ierusalem, and as Sion and S. Peters Church there, so that the house of the Archbishop may be burnte sticke and stone, when not so much as the smoke shall approche the house of the ciuill magistrate.

Io. Whitgifte.

In the starre that is in your forehead, in the accustomed practises of the Anabap∣tists,* 1.633 in the places of scripture alleaged by the Admonition for the equalitie of all mi∣nisters, which very same the Anabaptists do also vse against the ciuil magistrate. To be short, I sée it in your owne wordes, where you say that the gouernment of the common wealth must be framed according to the gouernment of the church, & what kinde of gouernmēt you would haue in the Church, who knoweth not? I do not take vpon me to prophe∣cie, but ex antecedentibus colligo consequentia, I gather that we shall haue stormes, by the blacke clowdes. You are not Christ, neyther is your cause like vnto his, and therefore you make a very vnequall comparison. To whom the name of Pharisie doth most aptly agrée, is shewed in my Answere to the Admonition.

The selfe same reasons ouerthrow the ciuill magistrate, that ouerthroweth the Ecclesiasticall. And therefore the fire kindled against the one, muste néedes be very daungerous for the other.

Chap. 6. the. 5. Diuision.

Admonition.

In steade of the Seniors in (r) 1.634 euery Church the Pope hath brought in, and yet we mainteyne the Lordship of one man ouer sundry Churches, yea ouer many shyres.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 116. Sect. 1. 2.

I haue proued before in my answere to your. 13. & 14. reason, that this lordship of one man (as you terme it) but in deede lawfull iuris∣diction ouer sundry churches, was not the inuentiō of any Pope, but of great antiquitie in the church of Christ, allowed by that famous Councell of Nice, & practised since of most godly and learned fathers.

In the. 9. Canon. Concil. Antioch it is thus written: Per singulas regio∣nes Episcopos conuenit nosse Metropolitanum Episcopum solicitudinem totius prouinciae gerere, propter quod ad Metropolim omnes vndi{que} qui negotia videntur habere, concurrant, vndè placuit 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉um & bonore praecellere, & nibil amplius praeter eum caeteros Episcopos agere, secundùm antiquam à patribus nostris regulam constitutam, nisi ea tantùm, quae ad suam Dioecesim pertinent, &c. It behoueth the Bishops in euery countrie to knovve their Metropolitane Bishop to haue care ouer the vvhole prouince, and therfore all such as haue any businesse muste come to theyr Metropolitane Citie: vvherefore it pleaseth this Councell, that he also excell in honour, and that the other

Bishops do nothing vvithout him, according to the auncient rule prescri∣bed by our forefathers, but those things onely vvhich perteyne to his ovvne diocesse, &c. This Councell was about the yeare of our Lord. 345.

T. C. Pag. 99. Sect. 4. 5.

In the. 116. page, for the authoritie of the Archbishop, is alleaged the. 9. Canon of the councell of Antioche, which I haue before alleaged to proue how farre different the authoritie of the Me∣tropolitane in those tymes, was from that which is now. For there the Coūcel sheweth that euery Bishop in his diocesse hath the ordering of all the matters within the circuite thereof, & therefore the meaning of the Councell to be, that if there be any affayres that touch the whole Church in any lande, that the Bishops should do nothing without making the Metropolitane priuie, as also the Metropolitane might do nothing without making the other Bishops a Counsell of that, which he attempted, which M. Doctor doth cleane leaue out.

And if this authoritie which the Councell giueth to the Metropolitane being nothing so ex∣cessiue, as the authoritie of our Metropolitanes now, had not bene ouer much, or had bene iustifia∣ble, what needed men father this Canon (which was ordeyned in this Councell) of the Apostles, for the seeking falsely of the name of the Apostles, to giue credite vnto this Canon, doth carie with it a note of euill and of shame, which they would haue couered as it were with the garment of the Apostles authoritie.

Io. Whitgifte.

There is no Canon that maketh more directly against you than this doth, all the shifts that you haue to auoyde it, I haue answered before. There is as great authoritie giuen to the Metropolitane in that Canon, as now he eyther vseth or requireth. For euery Bishop obseruing the lawes of the realme, and of the Church, hath the ordering of al matters within his diocesse: and the Metropolitane in this Church may attempt no newe thing, or any matter of great importance, not already by lawe established, though he haue the consent of all the Bishops, so farre is he from hauing authoritie to do any such thing without theyr consent.

That Canon of the Apostles is repeated & confirmed in this Councell, as diuerse Canons of the Councell of Nice are in like maner repeated and confirmed by diuerse Councels following. This is so farre from discrediting that Canon with wise men, that it rather addeth great authoritie vnto it: but you kéepe your olde wonte, in dis∣crediting the authoritie, which you cannot answere.

Chap. 6. the. 6. Diuision.

Admonition.

Now then, if you will restore the Church to his auncient officers, this you must do. In stead of an Archbishop, or Lorde byshop, you must make (x) 1.635 equalitie of ministers.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 123.

I haue proued before that aswell the name as office of an Archbi∣shop is both most auncient, and also most necessarie in the Church of Christ: & that this equalitie of ministers, which you require, is both flatly against the scriptures, & al auncient authoritie of councels and learned men, & the example of all Churches, euen frō Christes time, as more plainly appeareth by these wordes of M. Bucer in his booke De 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉egno Christi. Iam ex perpetua Ecclesiarum obseruatione, ab ipsis iam Apostolis videmus, visum* 1.636 & hoc esse spiritui sancto, vt inter Presbyteros, quibus Ecclesiarum procuratio potissimùm est com∣missa, vnus Ecclesiarum, & totius sacri ministerij curam gerat singularem: ea{que} cura & solicitudine cunctis praeeat alijs. Qua de causa Episcopi nomen huiusmodi summis Ecclesiarum curatoribus est peculiariter attributum. &c. Novve vve see by the perpetuall obseruation of the Churches, euen from the Apostles themselues, that it hath pleased the holy ghost, that amongst the ministers to vvhom the gouernment of the Church especially is cōmitted, one should haue the chiefe care both of the Churches, and of the vvhole ministerie, and that he should go before all other in that care and diligence, for the vvhich cause the name of a Bishop is peculiarly giuen to such chiefe gouernours of Churches, &c. Furthermore I haue

declared that it engendreth schismes, factions, & contentions in the Churche, and bringeth in a meere confusion, and is a branche of Ana∣baptisme.

T. C. Pag. 99. Sect. 6. 7.

〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nd in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 twētie & three page, to that which M. Bucer sayth, y^t in the Churches there hath bene one, which hath bene 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ouer the rest of the Ministers, if he meane one chiefe in euery particular Church, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one chiefe ouer the Ministers of diuerse Churches meeting at one Synode, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and for suche respectes as I haue before shewed, then I am of that mynde which he is: and if he meane any other chiefe, or after any other sorte, I denie that any such chiefe∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 was from the Apostles times, or that any such 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pleaseth the holy Ghost, wherof I haue before shewed the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

And whereas M. Bucer seenieth to allowe, that the name of a Bishop, whiche the holy Ghost〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 expressely gyueth to all the Ministers of the worde indifferently, was appropriated to certayne chiefe gouernors of the Church, I haue before shewed by diuerse reasons, howe that was not done without great presumption and manifest daunger, and in the ende great hurt to the Church.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Bucers wordes are plaine, there is no cause why you shoulde make such (I〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s) but onely that you may be thought able to say some thing, howe contrary to truth and reason soeuer it be. Your owne bare deniall of M. Bucers iudgement, will weigh little with any wyse or learned man, considering what difference there is betwixte your knowledge and his: the triall that hath bene of him, and the triall that hath bene of you: his experience, and yours. But what shoulde I compare together things so vn∣like? That M. Bucer is directly against you in this assertion of yours, it dothe not ap∣peare onely in these words of his, but in others also, which he speaketh to the like ef∣fect, as in the. 4. to the Eph. as I haue before declared. And again vpon the same chap∣ter* 1.637 he saith, The third part of discipline is obedience, which is first to be rendred of al to the Bishop and Minister, then of euery clearke, to those that be in degree aboue him, & to suche as may helpe him to the well executing of his ministerie. Last of all of Bishops to synodes, and to their Metropolitane Byshops, and to all other, to whom a more ample charge of the churches is committed. And in the same commentaries after that he hath proued by sundry examples & apt reasons, y^t this superioritie among Ecclesiasticall persons is conuenient and profitable, and shewed that these degrées in the Church, Bishop, Arch∣byshop, Metropolitane, Primate, Patria〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ke, be not onely most auncient, but also necessa∣rie, he concludeth on this sort. Bicause it is necessarie that euery one of the cleargie should* 1.638 haue their rulers and gouernours, the authoritie, power, vigilancie, and seueritie of Bishops, Archdeacons, and all other, by what name soeuer they be called (to whome any portion of keping and gouernin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the cleargie is committed) should or ought to be restored, least there be any in thys order out of rule, and without gouernment. Howe thinke you nowe of M. Bucers iudgement? Is it not directly against you? be not his wordes plaine?

Chap. 6. the. 7. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 124. Sect. 1.

Your places quoted in the margent to proue that there ought to* 1.639 be an equalitie of Ministers, sounde nothing that waye. 2. Cor. 10. vers. 7. these be the wordes of the Apostle. Looke ye on things after the appearance? If any truste in him felfe that he is Christes, let him consi∣der this againe of himselfe, that as he is Christes, euen so are vve Christes. Howe conclude you of these wordes your equalitie? I promyse you it passeth my cunning to wring out of them any suche sense: rather the contrary may be gathered oute of the wordes following, whiche be these: For though I shoulde boast somevvhat more of our authoritie,

vvhich the Lord. &c. I should haue no shame. M. Caluine expounding* 1.640 these wordes sayth on this sort, It vvas for modestie that he ioyned him selfe to their number, vvhome he did farre excell: and yet he vvould not be so modest, but that he vvould kepe his authoritie safe: therefore he addeth that he spake lesse than of right he might haue done. For he vvas not of the common sorte of ministers, but one of the chiefe among the Apostles▪ and* 1.641 therefore he saith, if I boaste more, I nede not be ashamed, for I haue good cause. And a litle after: Quamuis enim commune sit omnibus verbi ministris idem{que} offi∣cium, sunt tamen bonoris gradus: Although the selfsame office be common to all the Ministers of the vvorde, yet there is degrees of honour.

Thus you see Caluine farre otherwise to gather of this place than you doe.

T. C. Pag. 100. Sect. 1.

And if M. Doctor delight thus to oppose mens authoritie to the authoritie of the holie ghoste, & to the reasons which are grounded out of the scripture, M. Caluine doth openly mislike of the ma∣king of that name proper and peculiar to certaine, which the holy ghost maketh common to mo. And where as of M. Caluines wordes, which sayth that there be degrees of honoure in the ministerie,* 1.642 M. Doctour would gather an Archbishop, if he had vnderstanded that an Apostle is aboue an E∣uange〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ste, an Euangeliste aboue a Pastor, a Pastor aboue a Doctor, and he aboue an Elder that ruleth onely, he neded neuer haue gone to the popishe Hierarchie to seke his diuersiti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s of degrees▪ which he might haue founde in S. Paule. And whereas vpon M. Caluines wordes, which sayth that Paule was one of the chiefe amongest the Apostles, he would seeme to conclude an Archbishop amongst the bishops, he should haue remembred that S. Paules chiefetie amōgst the Apostles, con∣sisted not in hauing any authoriti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 or dominion ouer the rest, but in labouring and suffering more than the rest, and in giftes more excellent than the rest.

Io. Whitgifte.

I do not oppose mens authoritie to y^e authoritie of y^e holy ghost, & to the reasons, which ar groun∣ded out of the scripture, but I oppose them to your authoritie, and to your reasons, who spurne against that order, whiche the holie ghoste hath placed in the Churche, & most shamefully abuse the scripture to mainteine your errours: an example wherof is this present text alledged by the Admonition. which you passe ouer in silence, condemning therby their leudenesse in abusing the same. It is you and yours that abuse the name and authoritie of the holie ghoste: it is you that wring and wreste the Scriptures vn∣tollerably: it is you that falsifie authorities of learned men, & corruptly alledge them: It is you I say, that depraue and discredit such writers as haue bene, and be notable instrumentes in the churche of Christe, and all this you do to maintaine your errone∣ous opinions and false doctrine, wherewith you endeuour to subuerte this churche of Englande.

M. Caluines wordes be playne, and they directly ouerthrowe your equalitie of mi∣nisters, and shewe the fondnes of the Admonition in alledging that place of scripture to proue any such equalitie. M. Caluines wordes be these: Qu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉muis commune sit omnibu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 verbi ministris, idem{que} officium, sunt tamen bonoris gradus: Although the selfe same office be common to all the ministers of the worde, yet there are degrees of honor. Which wordes disproue the equalitie of ministers by the admonition affirmed, & confirmed with this portion of scripture by M. Caluine here interpreted, that is. 2. Cor. 10. verse. 7.

If there were degrees of honour in the Apostles tyme among those which had idem 〈◊〉〈◊〉, the selfe same office, as M. Caluine affirmeth, why should there not be so now* 1.643 likewise? But will you sée howe vnlike you are vnto your selfe, euen in these fewe lynes? first you saye that M. Caluines meaning is that an Apostle is aboue an Euange∣liste, an Euangelist is aboue a Pastor. &c. and by and by after you confesse that there was chieftie euen among the Apostles, but it consisted in labouring and suffering more than the rest, and in giftes more excellent than the rest.

To omitte these contrarieties of yours, into the whiche the plainenesse of Master Caluin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s wordes hath driuen you: this inequalitie that you confesse to haue bene in these offices (which notwithstanding you speake of your owne head without any war∣rant of Gods worde) argueth that there maye be superioritie among the ministers of the Churche. And the degrées of honour that you acknowledge to haue bene a∣mong the Apostles, quite cast〈1 line〉〈1 line〉th downe your confused 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉qualitie. As for your sal∣uing the matter in saying, that this chiefetie among the Apostles consisted not in hauing anye superioritie aboue the reste, but in laboring. &c. it may please vnskilfull persons, but it will not satisfie men of discr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tion and wisdome. For it is to be thought that euery one of y^e Apostles laboured in their calling to the vttermost of their powers, that they suffered whatsoeuer God laide vpon them, that they had all giftes most aboundantly necessa∣rie for their functions. Wherfore in all these things there was summa aequalitas, and no m〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n sought such preheminence, or receyued it being offered vnto him, but according to their owne doctrine euery one thought of another better than of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Wher∣fore it could not be for this respect, but it was for order & pollici〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 to a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oyde confusion.

I haue tolde you before why you labour so muche to haue honour and dignitie dis∣tributed according to the excellencie of gifts, for then you perswade your selfe, that the chiefetie would light on your owne necke, but you may peraduenture be deceiued.

Chap. 6. the. 8. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 123. tovvards the ende.

And nowe I adde, that you desire this equalitie, not bycause you* 1.644 would not rule (for it is manifest that you seke it most ambitiously in your maner) but bycause you contemne and disdaine to be ruled, and to be in subiectiō. In deede your meaning is (as I said before) to rule and not to be ruled, to do what you list in your seueral cures, without controlement of Prince, Bishop, or any other. And therefore preten∣ding equalitie, most disorderly you seeke dominion. I speake that I know by experience in some of you.

T. C. Pag. 100. Sect. 2. 3.

Now whereas he saith that we desire to pull the rule from others, that the rule might be in our handes, and we might doe what we list, and that we seeke to withdrawe our selues from controle∣ment of Prince and Byshop; and all: first he maye learne, if he will, that we desire no o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉r authoritie, than that which is to the edifying of the Churche, and whiche is grounded of the wo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e of God: which if any Minister shall abuse to his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or ambition, then he ought to abyde not 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e∣ly the controlment of y^e other Ministers, yea of the brethren, but also further the punishment of the Magistrates according to the quantitie of the fault.

And seyng you charge the brethren so sore, you must be put in remembrance, that thys vnreaso∣nable authoritie ouer the rest of the ministers and cleargie, (*) 1.645 came to the Bishops and Archby∣shops, when as the Pope did exempte his 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hauelings from the obedience, subiec〈1 line〉〈1 line〉on, and iurisdicti∣on of Princes. Nowe therefore that we be readie to giue that subiection vnto the prince, and offer our selues to the princes correction in things wherein we shall doe amisse, doe you thinke it an vn∣reasonable thing that we desire to be disburdened of the Bishops and Archbishops yoke, which the Pope hath layde vpon our neckes?

Io. Whitgifte.

Your answere maketh the matter more suspicious: for this authoritie you speake of* 1.646 which you say▪ is to the edifying of the Church, and grounded of the word of God, is as it plea∣seth you to interprete it. For what so euer you phansie, and whatsoeuer authoritie you vsurpe, shall haue the same pretence: and if the Prince seeke to restraine you, or to breake your will, you and your Seniors will excommunicate hir if she be of your parishe. Fu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉thermore the greatest preeminence she can haue, is to be one of your seig∣niorie, and then must M. Pastor be the chiefe, and so in authoritie aboue y^e Prince and consequently a Pope, but of this more in due place shal be spoken.

This authoritie, which the Bishops and Archbishops now exercise, came first from* 1.647 the Apostolicall Church, then from the example of the primitiue Churche for y^e space of fiue hundred yeares after the Apostles time. Thirdly, from the Councels of Nyce, Antioche, Constantinople, and all the beste and purest Councels that euer were. And last of all from the authoritie of the Prince, and by the consent of this whole Churche and Realme of England, & therefore not from the Pope, who hath rather diminished it (by taking all to himselfe) than in any respect encreased it. Wherfore you also in ex∣empting your self, from the authoritie and iurisdiction of the Archbishop and Bishop, resist God in his Ministers, the Prince in hir officers, and the lawes of the Church & Realme in their executors. And as for your protested obedience, it is so enwrapped with conditions and prouisoes (as in other places of your booke more plainely appea∣reth) that when it should come to the triall (if your platforme were builded) it woulde proue as little, as 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uer the Popishe Byshops was, in their greatest pride.

Chap. 6. the. 9. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 124. Sect. 2.

The place in the first to the Coloss. vers. 1. is this, Paul an Apostle of Iesus Christ by the vvill of God, & Timotheus our brother. Surely your minde was not of equalitie (I thinke) when you quoted these places to proue it. But it is your vsuall maner without al discretiō & iudge∣ment to dally & play with the scriptures. For what sequele is there in this reason, Paule calleth Timothie brother, Ergo in all respectes there must be equalitie? As though there were not distinction of de∣grees euen among brethren.

Io. Whitgifte.

Magis mutus, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 piscis, and by his silence the ouersight confessed.

Chap. 6. the. 10. Diuision.

Admonition.

And (g) 1.648 as the names of Archbishops, Archdeacons, Lord bishops, Chancelours, &c. are drawen out of the Popes shop, togither with their offices: So the gouernment which they vse by the life of the Pope, which is the Canon law, is Antichristian and diuelishe, and contrarie to the scriptures.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 208. Sect. 1.

Both of the names, and also of the offices of Archbyshops, Arch∣deacons,* 1.649 Lorde Byshops. &c. I haue spoken before sufficiently, and fully answered those places quoted in this margent, sauyng the. 2. to the Galat. the. 5. to the Hebrues. Ezech. 34. 2. Cor. 1. for these places haue bene founde out since, and thoughte meete now to be alleaged, but howe discretely, by examination it will appeare. The words of the Apostle to the Galat. 2. verse. 6. be these. And of them vvhich see∣med to be great I vvas not taughte (vvhat they vvere in tyme passed, it ma∣keth no matter to me, God accepteth no mans person) neuerthelesse they

that are the chiefe, dyd communicate nothing vvith me. The Apostle in these wordes doth declare, that he receyued not the Gospell, which he preached, of men, no not of the Apostles, but of Iesus Christ, and that the Gospell preached by him oughte to be no lesse credited, than the Gospell preached by them. So that in those wordes he decla∣reth that the truthe of the doctrine dothe not depende of any mans person. He speaketh nothyng agaynst superioritie quoad ordinem, conc••r∣ning order, but dothe rather acknowledge it, for he sayth, they that are the chiefe, &c. But it is true that Master Caluine noteth on thys place. Hic non est certamen ambitionis, quia nequaquam de personis agitur. The contention is not for ambition, for it is not vnderstanded of the persons. Nowe I praye you consider this argument, Paule receyued the Gospell that he preached, not of the Apostles, but of Christ: or the Gospell prea∣ched by Paule, is equiualent with the Gospell preached by other of the Apostles: therefore the names of Archbyshops, Archdeacons, &c. are drawne out of the Popes shop together wyth their offices, or this. Paule sayth that they that were the chiefe did cōmunicate nothing with him: Ergo, the names and offices of Archbyshops be taken out of the Popes shop.

T. C. Pag 100. Sect. 4.

And in the. 207. page vnto the middest of the. 214. page this matter is agayne handled, where firste M. Doctor woulde drawe the place of Galatians the seconde; (*) 1.650 to proue an Archbyshop and that by a (a) 1.651 false translation, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is they that seemed, or appeared, he hath translated they that are the chiefe, and although the place of the Galatians maye be thought of some not so pregnant, nor so full against the Archbyshop, yet all must needes confesse, that it ma∣keth more agaynst hym, than for him. For Saynt Paules purpose is to proue there, that he was not inferior to any of the Apostles, and bringeth one argument thereof, that he had not his Gospell from them, but from Christe immediately, and therefore if the Apostles that were esteemed moste of, and supposed by the Galatians and others to be the chiefe, had no superioritie ouer S. Paule, but were equall wyth him, it followeth that there was none that had rule ouer the reste. And if there needed no one of the Apostles to be ruler ouer the reste, there seemeth to be no neede that one Byshop shoulde rule ouer the rest.

Io. Whitgifte.

I haue set downe the words of the Apostle as they be translated in the English Bi∣ble printed at Geneua, not altering one title, and therefore if there be any falsehood in the translation, it is in that Bible not in me. How truely you haue translated 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.652 saying it signifieth, they that seemed or appeared, let the Reader iudge after he hath considered these wordes of M. Beza vpon the same worde ad Galat. 2. verse. 2. with those that are of reputation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (that is) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (those which are well estemed of) the contrarie whereof are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (they which are without renowne or estimatiō) the cōmon translatiō hath, which semed to be some thing, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is cō∣trarie to al our bokes, & vnto Ieromes interpretatiō also. For thus he writeth, which thing E∣rasmus also dothe well note. I did very carefully search (saith he) what that should be that he said (qui videbātur) they which semed: but he hath takē away al doubt, in that he addeth, Qui

videbātur esse colunmae, they which were accoūted to be pillers. Hetherto Hierom: wherby he doth euidently declare, that he had not read in this place 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: But in such sort notwith∣standing, that he seemeth not to haue knowne 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to haue bene called of the Grecians absolutely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, those, who are of great estimation with all men. And this ignorance of the Greke tong, as I thinke, was the cause that the olde interpre∣ter (being more bolder than Hierom) did adde, aliquid esse. And Erasmus in his annotations* 1.653 vpon the same place agréeth with M. Beza herein 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 absolut〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 dicuntur Graecis, qui magnae sunt aut〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oritatis: they which are of great authoritie, are of the Grecians absolutely called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Budeus also saith, that the Apostle in this place taketh thys woorde* 1.654 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And both M. Beza himselfe and Erasmus translate it, as it is in the Geneua Bible. Wherefore here your cunning faileth you, and you had not well considered the matter before you entred this accusation of falsifying.

The true sense and meaning of this place to the Galat. I haue set downe in my Answere: and it is according to the interpretation of the best writers, iustified by the words of M. Caluine there alleaged, and not confuted by you. Wherfore the conclusion remaineth as it did.

That there was superioritie among the Apostles, ordinis & politiae causa, I haue she∣wed before.

This place to the Galatians is not brought in by me to proue the authoritie of the Archbyshop (although it might well be alleaged to proue degrées of honour in the ministerie) but it is quoted in the Admonition fondly and foolishely, to proue that the names of Archbishops, Archdeacons, Lordbishops. &c. are drawne out of the Popes shoppe toge∣ther with their offices. And of this dalying with the Scriptures, you speake not one worde, for you care not howe they be profaned, so it be for the maintenance of your owne cause.

Chap. 6. the. 11. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 208. Sect. vlt.

The wordes in the. 5. to the Hebrues verse. 4. be these. And no man taketh this honor to himself, but he that is called of God as Aarō vvas. The Apostle here sheweth that Christe was a lawfull Priest, bycause he was therevnto called by God as Aaron was. What is this to Arch∣bishops. &c? This place teacheth that no man ought to intrude hym∣selfe* 1.655 to any function, except he be there vnto called by God. But what maketh this against any lawfull function or authoritie? or what con∣clusion call you this? Christ did not take vnto him that office, wher∣vnto he was not called, or no man muste take vpon him that, wher∣vnto he is not called: Ergo Archbishops. &c. and their offices came out of the Popes shop. you shoulde first proue that which ought to be your Minor.

T. C. Pag. 100. Sect. 4.

But that I runne not backe to that I haue hādled before, I will not here so much 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rge y^• place,* 1.656 as I will not doe also y^t of the Hebrues which followeth, & yet the argument is stronger than that M. Doctor could answere. For if the writer to the Hebrues do proue our Sauiour Christs voca∣tion to be iust and lawfull, (*) 1.657 bicause his calling was conteined in the scriptures, as appeareth in y^e 5. and. 6. verse, then it followeth, that y^e calling of the Archbishop, which is not comprehended there, is neither iust nor lawfull. For that no man (sayth the Apostle) taketh the honour vnto himself, but he that is called of God. &c. But I say, hauing before sufficiently spoken of the reasons, which ouer∣throw the Archbishop, I wil let passe these and other places, answering onely that which M. Doc∣tor bringeth for the establishment of them.

Io. Whitgifte.

This is a cleanly & handsome shift to auoide y^e defense of these grosse & vnapt allega∣tions* 1.658 of scriptures. I haue answered the argument grounded vpō the. 5. to y^e Hebrues,

and required the proofe of the minor, whiche is this, that Archbishops, Lordbishops. &c. intrude them selfes into their offices without any lawfull calling, whiche bothe they and you haue omitted: and therefore I haue answered sufficiently, vntill you haue proued that which is by me denied.

It is not true, that the Apostle to the Hebrues proueth the vocation of our sauiour Ie∣sus Christ to be iust and lawfull, bicause his callyng was conteyned in the scriptures: he onely sheweth by euident testimonies of the Scriptures, that Christ dyd not intrude hym selfe, but was called of God. And if you will haue no man to execute any function in the Churche, but him that hath suche speciall and personall testimonies of the scrip∣tures to shewe for him selfe, I sée not howe any man can iustifie his calling. It is therefore sufficient if his calling be generally conteyned in the Scripture, as al law∣full and ordinary functions are, euen the offices of Archebishops, and Lordebi∣shops, &c.

Chap. 6. the. 12. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 209. Sect. 1. 2. 3. & Pag. 210. Sect. 1.

In the. 16. of Luke verse. 25. it is thus written: But Abraham sayd,* 1.659 sonne remember that thou in thy life time receyuedst thy pleasures, & like∣vvise Lazarus paynes: novve therfore is he comforted, and thou arte tor∣mented. The riche glutton in his lyfe receyued pleasure, and there∣fore was after in hell tormented: Lazarus receyued paynes, and af∣ter was comforted: Therefore Archbishops. &c. and their offyces come oute of the Popes shoppe. These fellowes neyther care for maior, minor, nor con∣clusion, so they saye something, and vaynely paynt their margent, with shamefully abusing the scriptures.

The words of Ezech. Chap. 34. verse. 4. be these. The vveake haue ye not strengthned, the sicke haue ye not healed, neyther haue you bound vp the broken, &c. In the which place the Prophet speaketh agaynst suche Kinges, Magistrates, and rulers, as despise the people of* 1.660 God, & vse them selues cruelly towards them. This dothe aswell condemne Kings & Magistrates, as it doth Archbishops: although in deede it condemneth no office or superioritie, but the abuse of the same, that is, the man abusing the office, and not the office it selfe.

In the. 2. Cor. 1. verse. 24. the Apostle speaketh thus vnto them: Not that vve haue dominion ouer your fayth, but vve are helpers of your ioy, for by fayth you stande. S. Paule heere sayth, that he hathe no authoritie to alter true religion, or to rule ouer their consciences, but how proueth this, that Archbishops. &c. came out of the Popes shoppe? Paule sayth that he had no power ouer the consciences of the Corinthians, therfore Archbishops. &c and their offices were drawne out of the Popes shop. If you had beene more studious when you were a Sophister (if euer you were any) you would haue learned better to frame an argument, and haue had better iudgement in the sequele of the same. If you had not troubled your margent with these quotations, you had lesse vttered your folly.

So muche of the Canon lawe as is contrarie to the Scriptures,* 1.661 is Antichristian and diuelishe: But there be diuers Canons in it ve∣ry good and profitable, whiche may well be reteyned. Good lawes

may be borrowed euen of Turkes, and heat henishe Idolaters: and why not of Papists also? I haue tolde you before, that the thing it selfe is to be considered, not the inuentor: if it be good and profitable, it may be vsed whosoeuer dyd inuent it.

Io. Whitgifte.

Not one worde answered to all this.

Chap. 6. the. 13. Diuision.

Admonition.

And as safely may we by the warrant of Gods worde subscribe to allowe the dominion of the pope, vniuersally to reygne ouer the Church of God, as of an archebishop ouer a whole prouince, or a Lorde bishop ouer a Dioces, whych conteyneth many shires and parishes. For the dominion that they exercise, the Archebishop aboue them, and they aboue the rest of their brethren, is vnlaw∣full, and expresly forbydden by the worde of God.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 210. Sect. 2.

In that you say, that you may as safely by the warrante of Gods worde sub∣scribe to allowe the dominion of the Pope vniuersally to reygne ouer the Church of God, as of an Archbishop ouer an whole Prouince. &c. You expresse but your heate, I suppose you thinke not so: can the Pope aswell gouerne the whole Churche, as the Archbishop one Prouince, and a Lord bishop one Dioces? Is one king aswell able to gouerne the whole worlde, as he may be to gouerne one kingdome? Or bicause you can rule one pa∣rishe well, can you therefore in lyke manner well gouerne twentie parishes? Surely an Archbishop may well gouerne one Prouince,* 1.662 but the Pope can neuer well gouerne the whole Churche. And yet an Archbishop hath not the charge of gouernment ouer the whole Prouince generally, but onely in cases exempted, and therfore may do it more easily.

T. C. Pag. 100. Sect. 4.

He sayth therefore afterwarde that although one man be not able to be Bishop ouer all the Churche, yet he may be Bishop ouer a whole Dioces, or of a prouince. Nowe if I woulde saye the one is as impossible as the other, and for proofe thereof alleage that whiche the philosophers say, that as there are no degrees in that whych is infinite, so that of thinges whiche are infinite, one thyng can not be more infinite than another, so there are no degrees in impossibilitie, that of thyngs whych are impossible, one thyng should be more impossible than another. If I shoulde thus reason, I thynke I should put you to some payne. But I wyll not drawe the reader to suche thorny and subtyll questions, it is inough for vs that the one and the other be impossible, although one should be more impossible than the other. And that it is impossible for one man to be Bishop ouer a whole prouince, or ouer a whole Dioces, I leaue it to be considered of that whych is be∣fore sayde in the description of the offyce of a Byshop, pastor, or minister, where I speake of the necessitie of the residence of the Bishop in hys Churche.

Io. Whitgifte.

In so saying I say but as other learned men haue sayd, and especially M. Caluine, in the place afterwarde alleaged in my answere: and as the practise of the Churche hath béene in the best state, and vnder the best Bishops, as it may appeare by that which hath béene hitherto spoken. Your Philosophicall argument is sone answered without any great payne. For to gouerne one Prouince in that maner and forme that is required of an Archbishop, is neyther infinite, nor impossible. But it is great lack of iudgement to thinke that bicause one man can not well gouerne the whole world, therfore he can not well gouerne a prouince or dioces. I haue shewed the practise of the Churche to be contrarie in the Apostles tyme, and since their time.

Chap. 6. the. 14. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 101. Sect. 1.

As a Prince may rule a whole Realme, suche as Fraunce or Englande, (*) 1.663 so may he rule the whole worlde by officers and Magistrates appoynted vnderneathe him. And there haue beene di∣u〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rs Princes, which haue had as many landes vnder their power, as the Pope hath had Chur∣ches, and althoughe it be somewhat inconuenient, yet I knowe not why they mighte not so haue, comming lawfully by them. Nowe I woulde gladly heare, whether you would say the same of a Bishop, and if you dare not, then why doe you bring the similitude of the gouernment of a prince ouer a lande, to proue that a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Archbishop may be ouer an whole prouince? M. Doctor dare bold∣ly say, that there may be one Bishop ouer a whole prouince, but he dare not saye that there may be a bishop ouer the whole Churche. But what better warrant for the one than for the other? A∣gayne (a) 1.664 if the whole Churche be in one prouince, or in one realme, whiche hathe beene, and is (b) 1.665 not impossible to be agayne, if there may be nowe one bishop ouer a realme or prouince: then there may be one bishop ouer all the Churche, so that in trauelling with an Archbishop, he hathe brought foorth a Pope.

Io. Whitgifte.

The selfe same reason you had before, and I answere it nowe as I did then. The* 1.666 causes by me there alleaged be sufficient to proue the difference betwixt the gouern∣ment of a Prince, and the gouernment of a Bishop. And yet no man will denie but that one Prince shall better be able to gouerne one kingdome, than the whole world. And to affirme that the whole worlde may be conteyned in one Monarchie, learned men saye is multis modis absurdissimum, In diuers respectes moste absurde. I bring the* 1.667 example of a King, bicause other writers vse the like examples in the like matter to confute suche vnlikely reasons, and namely M. Caluine in the words following.

That which M. Doctor affirmeth of one bishop ouer one whole prouince, and of one By∣shop ouer the whole worlde, no man will denie. A warrant for the one are the examples of Timothie and Titus, and the continuall practise of the Churche without contra∣diction in the best tymes: but there is no warrant for the other of any credite or suffi∣cience, béeing onely in the moste corrupt tyme of the Churche, and contrarie to all former examples and Canons.

You say, if the whole Churche be in one prouince. &c. I say, that if the skie fall you may catche larkes, as the common prruerbe is. Moreouer, if it were possible so to be (as nowe it is not) then it were no absurditie the Bishop of that Prouince still to re∣mayne Bishop of the same. But what moueth you to suche straunge suppositions?* 1.668 I might aswell say, if the whole Churche were in one Citie, or Towne, or Parishe, as it was in Ierusalem after Christes ascention, and one Bishop or Pastor might be ouer that citie, or towne, or parishe, then one Bishop or Pastor shoulde be ouer the* 1.669 whole Churche: and so you likewise in trauelling with a pastor to be in one Churche, at the length bring foorth a Pope. But doe you not knowe that the Churche of Christ is dis∣persed throughout the whole worlde, and can not nowe be shut vp in one kingdome? muche lesse in one prouince, excepte you will become Donatistes. He that is not wilfully blinde may sée into what streights you are driuen, when you are constrey∣ned to vtter suche impossibilities for reasons.

Chap. 6. the. 15. Diuision.

T. C. Pag. 101. Sect. 2.

But he sayth that an Archbishop hath not the charge of gouernment ouer the whole pro〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ince generally, but in cases exempted, and so may doe it more easily. But he shoulde haue remembred, that he assigned before the offices of Archbishop and bishop, to be in all those things whiche other ministers are, and that beside those offices, he giueth them particular charges. So that where the office of the minister, is but to preache, pray, and minister the sacraments in his parishe, the office of archebishop and bishop, is to doe the same, and more too in the whole prouince or dioces: And so it followeth that it is easier for a minister to discharge his duetie in his parishe, than for an archeby∣shop or bishop to discharge their dueties in any one parish of their prouince or dioces: for they haue in euery parishe more to doe, and greater charge, than the minister of the parishe hath, then much〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 lesse are they able to doe their dueties in all the parishes of their prouinces or dioces.

Io. Whitgifte.

I speake of the office of gouernment, and so be my words. Euery particular parish hath a particular pastor to preache, pray, and mynister the sacraments. The Bishop hath to procure (so much as lyeth in him) that all things be done in his Dioces, according to the lawes & orders of the Church. The Archbishop hath not only to sée that y^e Bishops do their duties, but to helpe thē in reforming that, which by thēselues they cannot do. The office of preaching they exercise, where & when they sée it most conuenient. The whole charge of preaching & of gouerning resteth neyther vpon the Archbishop, ney∣ther vpō the Bish〈1 line〉〈1 line〉p: but the one is a helpe vnto the other, & they togither with the pa∣stors teach the flocke of Christ faithfully & truely, and gouerne them according to the lawes prescribed And therfore the whole gouernment of the prouince dothe not rest in the Archbishop, for the whiche cause he may with lesse difficultie execute that, that dothe apperteyne vnto him.

Whatsoeuer any other minister may do, the same may y^e Archbishop do also, but it doth not therfore follow, that he is bound to y^e same particular parish. The pastor may preach, so may the Archbishop, but the pastors charge is particular, the Archbishops more generall. And this is a very euill consequent, the Archbishop may minister the sacraments, and preache the worde, therfore he muste doe it in euery particular con∣gregation.

Chap. 6. the. 16. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 211. Sect. 1. 2.

You borrowed these arguments from the very Papistes, who by* 1.670 the selfe same reasons goe about to proue the Popes supremacie, for thus they argue

Among the Israclites there was one highe Priest, which had au∣thoritie ouer the rest, therefore there must be one high Priest (which is the Pope) ouer the whole Church of Christ. Master Caluine in his Institutions, chap. 8. dothe answere this reason on this sorte:* 1.671 Quod in vna natione fuit vtile, id in vniuersum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ext〈1 line〉〈1 line〉dere nulla ratio cogit: imò gentis vnius & totius orbis longè diuersa erit ratio. That vvhiche is profitable to one nation, can not by any reason be extended to the vvhole vvorld, for there is great difference betvvixt the vvhole vvorld and one nation. And a little after: Perinde enim est acsi quis contendat, totum mundum à praefecto vno debere regi, quia ager vnus non plures praefectos habeat: It is euen as thoughe a man shoulde affyrme, that the vvhole vvorld may be gouerned of one King, bicause one fielde or tovvne hath but one ruler or master.

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) 1.672 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) 1.673 whiche the Papistes vse to mayn∣teyne y^e pope(c) 1.674. For M. Doctor would proue(d) 1.675 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) 1.676 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.* 1.677

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.* 1.678

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* 1.679 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* 1.680 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.

Chap. 6. the. 17. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition. Pag. 211. Sect. 3.

Another of their reasons is this: Peter was the chiefe among the* 1.681 Apostles, therfore there ought to be one chiefe ouer the whole Chur∣che. The same M. Caluine in the booke and chapter before rehear∣sed, maketh his owne answere to that argument: Vnus inter Apostolos summus fuit, nempè quia pauci erant numero. Si vnus duodecim hominibus praefuit, an proptere〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 sequetur, vnum debere centum millibus, hominum praefici? There vvas one chiefe among the Apostles, bicause they vvere but fevve in number, but if one man rule ouer tvvelue, shall it therefore follovve that one man maye rule ouer an hundreth thousande? And a little after: Quod inter paucos valet, non protenu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉

tr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉bendum est ad vniuersum terrarū orb〈1 line〉〈1 line〉m, ad quem regendum nemo vnus sufficit, That which is offorce among fewe, may not by and by be drawne to the whole world, the which no one man can gouern. Euery hiue of Bees hath one chief mai∣ster Bee, euery companie of Cranes hath one principall guide, muste ther be therfore but one Bee, & one Crane to direct all the Bees & the Cranes that be in the world? You see therfore how weake this rea∣son is. The rest of this reason I haue answered before.

T. C. Pag. 102. Sect. 1.

To the Papists obiecting for the supremacie y^e S. Peter was the prince & chief of the Apostles M. Caluin answereth, first by denying y^t Peter was so, & bringeth many places to proue y^t he was equal to y^e other Apostles, afterward he saith, although it be graunted, y^t Peter was chiefe, yet folo∣weth it not bicause one may bear rule ouer twelue, being but a few in number, that therfore one may rule ouer an hundreth thousand, & that it followeth not, that that which is good amongst a few, is foorthwith good in 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ll the worlde, Nowe let all men iudge, with what conscience and truste, M. Doctor citcth M. Calnine for to proue the office of the Archbishop.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Caluine in the same place hathe these wordes, It is not to be maruelled that* 1.682 the twelue had one amongst them, that might gouerne the rest. For this thing doth nature allow, & the disposition of man require, that in euery societie, though all be equal in power, yet som should be as it were moderator of the rest, vpon whō the other might depend. Ther is no court without a Consull, no session of iudges without a Pretor or iustice, no Colledge without a gouernour, no societie without a maister: so should it not be any absurditie, if wee should confesse, that the Apostles gaue such preheminēce vnto Peter. Now let the Reader iudge whether it be Caluines meaning in good earnest or no, y^t there was one chief a∣mong the Apostles: which being true (as it is) M. Doctor may with good conscience vse this answere of M. Caluine both against the Papistes, and the authours of the Ad∣monition also, reasoning not much vnlyke vnto them.

Chap. 6. the. 18. Diuision.

T. C. Page. 102. Sect. 1.

But I maruel y^t he could not also see that which M. Caluine writeth in y^e next sentence almost, where he sayth, y^t Christ is only the head of the church, & that the church doth cleaue vnto another vnder his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, but by what meanes? According (saith he) to y^e order & forme of policie, which he hath prescribed, but he hath prescribed no such forme of policie, y^t one Bishop should be ouer all y^e ministers & Churches in a whole dioces, or one Archbishop ouer al the ministers and churches in a whole prouince, therfore this form of policie which is by Archbishops & such Bishops as we haue is not y^e meanes to knit vs one to an other in vnitie vnder the dominion of Christ. Touching y^e ti∣tles & names of honor which are giuen to the Ecclesiastical persons with vs, & how that princes & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Magistrates may and ought to haue the title which cannot be giuen to the ministers, I haue spoken before, & therfore of Archbishops, Archdeaco〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s, and the Lord bishops thus farre.

Io. Whitgifte.

M. Caluine in the nexte section after that he hath answered to other arguments of* 1.683 the Papists saith thus: But let it be as they would haue it, that it is good & profitable that the whole world should be conteined in one monarchie, which notwithstanding is most ab∣surd, but let it be so: yet I wil not therfore graunt, that it doth likewise hold in the gouernmēt of the churche. For the church hath Christ her only head, vnder whose gouernment we are knit together acording to that order and forme of policie which he himself hath prescribed. VVherfore they do Christ notable 〈◊〉〈◊〉, which vnder this pretence will haue one man to rule ouer the whole church, bicause she can not want a head, for Christ is the head, wherby the whole bodie being compacted and coupled by euery ioynt of gouernment, dothe accor∣ding to the operation in the measure of euery member, iucrease to a perfect bodie. Al whi∣che I agrée vnto as moste true, but nothing at all perteyniug to youre purpose. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sayth, that vnder the gouernment of Christe we cleaue together among our selues, accor∣ding to that order and that forme of pollicie, whiche he hath himselfe prescribed: And who denyeth this? But Quorsùm? This he speaketh of the spiritual regiment and policie, not of the externall: and yet that externall regiment and policie is also 〈◊〉〈◊〉

by him, whiche is profitable for his Churche according to tyme, place, and pers〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ns, though it be not particularly expressed in his word, as partly hath bin declared be∣fore, and shall be hereafter more at large vpon particular occasion.

Thus haue you (after so many yeares trauel in this controuersie) vttered all your skil against the Archbishop, poured out alyour malice, exercised your gibes and iests, whetted your slaunderous tong: and yet besides corrupt and false allegati〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ns of wry∣ters: fonde and toyish distinctions of your owne, contrary to al practise and learning: vnchristian speaches and heathenish floutes and frumpes, you haue vttered nothing. And I protest vnto the whole Church before God, y^t your vnfaithfulnesse in hande∣ling the matter, your vaine and friuolous reasons, haue muche more animated me to the defense of those auncient, reuerend, profitable, and necessarie offices. I speake of the offices as they be vsed in this church. And I shal most heartily desire the Rea∣der to weigh and consider the authorities and reasons on both parties indifferently, and to iudge therof according to the truth.

¶ A briefe collection of suche authorities, as are vsed in this defense of the authoritie of Archbishops and Bishops.

Ca. 7.

Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus, & Chrysostome saith in. 1. Ti. 5. y^t gens ferè tota* 1.684 Asiatica, almost the whole countrey of Asia was cōmitted to him. And vpon the. 2. to Ti∣mo. chap. 4. he saith, that Paul had cōmitted to Timothie gubernacula ecclesiae gentis totiu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the gouernment ouer the church of the whole nation, meaning Asia.

Titus was Bishop of Creta, not of one citie only, but of the whole Is〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e. So sayeth Chrysostome in his cōmentaries vpon the fyrst to Titus. And Lyra, Erasmns, Pellican and others write, that S. Paule made him Archbishop of Creta. And Illyricus calleth him and Timothie, multarum Ecclesiarū Episcopos, Bishops of many churches.

S. Iohn (as Eusebius reporteth lib. 3. cap. 23.) after his returne from Pathm〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s, did gouerne the Churches in Asia, and ordeyned Ministers and Bishops.

Iames was made by the Apostles Bishop of Ierusalem, and the gouernment of that churche was cōmitted to him. Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 23.

The. 33. or as some counte. 34. of the Canons attributed to the Apostles apointeth one head and chiefe Bishop to be in euery nation or countrey, to whom all other By∣shops of the same nation must be subiecte.

Dionysius Areopagita was Archbishop of Athens, appoynted thervnto by S. Paul as Volusianus a godlie and learned writer testifieth.

Polycarpus was by S. Iohn made Bishop of Smyrna. Tertull. de praescript.

In the Church of Alexandria from the time of S. Marke the ministers had always a Bishop to gouerne them. Hiero. ad Euagrium.

Ignatius who liued in the Apostles tyme doth call a Bishop principem Sacerdotum, the prince of Priestes, in epist. ad Smyrnenses.

In Eleutherius 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉is tyme, whiche was Anno. 180. when this realme of England* 1.685 was fyrst conuerted to Christianitie, there was appoynted in the same thrée Arch∣bishops. and. 28. Bishops. M. Foxe To. 1. pag. 146.

Demetrius who liued Anno. 191. was Bishop of Alexandria, and of Egypt. Euseb. libr. 6. cap. 1.* 1.686

Cyprian who was Anno. 235. being Bishop of Carthage, had vnder him Numi∣dia* 1.687 and Mauritania, as he himselfe sayeth, Lib. 4. Epist. 8. And Gregorie Nazianzene in an oration that, he made of Cyprian sayth, that he ruled and gouerned not onely the churches of Carthage and Aphrike, but of Spayne also, and of the whole East churche. And for this cause doth Illyricus call him a Metropolitane: the which name T. C. also doth giue vnto him in his Replie. Pag. 95. sect. 2.

Dionysius called Alexandrinus, who lyued Anno. 250. béeyng Bishop of Alex∣andria* 1.688 hadde also vnder his iurisdiction all the Churches in Pentapolis, as A∣thanasius testifyeth in a certainepistle Apol. 2. and yet hadde these Churches their pro∣per Bishop, as Eusebius dothe witnesse lib. 7. cap. 26. Wherefore the Bishoppe

of Alexandria did gouerne them as Archebishop.

Gregorie béeing Bishop, did gouerne all the Churches thorowe Pontus, An. 270* 1.689 Eus. lib. 7. cap. 14.

Epiphanius li. 2. to. 2. haeri. 68. maketh mention of one Peter, who liued An. 304. whom be calleth Archbishop of Alexandria, and declareth that Meletius then Bishop in E∣gypt* 1.690 was vnder him: where also he hath these words: Hic enim mos obtinet vt Alexandriae Episcopus, totius Aegypti, ac Thebaidis, Mariotae{que} ac Lybiae, Ammonicae{que} ac Mariotidis, ac Pentapo∣lis ecclesiasticam habeat administrationem. For this custome hath preuailed, that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of all Egypt, Thebai〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, Mariota, Lybia, Ammonica, Mariotis, and Pentapolis. And haere. 69. he sayth, Quotquot enim ecclesiae in Alexandri〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 cat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉olicae ecclesiae sunt, sub vno Archiepiscopo sunt, For all the Churches in Alex∣andria that be Catholike, are vnder one Archebishop.

The same Epiphanius in the same place doth call Meletius, Archbishop of Egypt,* 1.691 but yet he sayth that he was subiect to the Archbishop of Alexandria. And this Me∣letius liued also Anno. 304.

The Councell of Nice An. 330. in the. 4. Canon sayth that the confirmation of Bi∣shops* 1.692 doth pertein to the Metropolitane of euery prouince: and in the. 6. mention is made of Metropolitanes to be in euery prouince, and that sec〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ndùm antiquum morem, according to the olde custome. And it is further sayde, that the Bishop of Alexandria hath the regiment of Libya and Pentapolis in Egypt.

In the. 6. &. 37. Canons of the secōd Councell of Arelat. it is decréed that no Bishop may be ordeined without the consent of the Metropolitane: nor any thing to be at∣tempted* 1.693 against the great Synode of the Metropolitane.

The Councell of Antioch in the. 9. Canon willeth y^t in euery prouince y^e Bishops be subiect to their Metropolitane bishop which hath y^e care of the whole prouince. &c. And in that Canon is this clause also. Secundùm antiquam à patribus nostris regulam consti∣tutam,* 1.694 according to the auncient rule appointed by our forefathers.

Athanasius was Archbishop of Alexandria, and had iurisdiction ouer the rest of the clergie, to whom also Mariotes was subiect. Atbana. apo. 2.

Amphilochius Metropolitane of Lycaonia gouerned y^• whole coūtry. Theod. lib. 4. ca. 11.

Zozomene li. 7. ca. 19. writeth that though there be many cities in Scythia, yet they haue but one Bishop.

Aurelius bishop of Carthage in the councell of Aphrica sayth, that he had the ouer∣sight and care of many churches.

Ambrose li. de dig. sacer. ca. 5. maketh mētion of Archbishops, & he himself was a Me∣tropolitane, hauing charge and gouernment of many churches, as the authors of the Centuries testifie in their fourth Centurie.

Simeon was Archbishop of Seleucia Zozo. lib. 2. cap. 8. he liued about the tyme of the Nicene Councell. Basile Metropolitane of Capadocia. Zozo. lib. 3. cap. 16.

In the councel of Constātinople, which is one of the. 4. general Councels in the. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉* 1.695 and. 5. Canons this authoritie & regimēt of Primates, Metropolitanes & Archbishops is conteine〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. Which thing also Socrates doth note in the same Councell lib. 5. cap. 8.

In the. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. Counce〈1 line〉〈1 line〉l of Carthage Canon. 12. &c. it is euident that in euerie Prouince* 1.696 there was a primate.

In the councell of Chalcedon, Flauianus is called Archbishop of Constantinople: Di∣oscorus* 1.697 Archbishop of Alexandria: Leo Archbishop of Rome, and the authorities of these offices and degrées there in diuers pointes specified.

In the first Canon of the councel of Ephesus it may manifestly be gathered, y^t all* 1.698 other Bishops of y^e same Prouince wer then subiect to their Metropolitane Bishop.

Hierome ad Rusticum Monachū sayth: Singuli ecclesiarum Episcopi, singuli Archipresbyteri, singuli archidiaconi. &c. I omit his other places ad Lucif. ad Titum. &c.

Ambrose in 4〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 d Ephe. sayth that all orders be in a Bishop, bicause he is primus sacer∣dos, hoc est princeps sacerdotum, the chief Priest, that is, Prince of priestes.

Augustine in his questions in vetas & nouum test. cap 101. sayth, Quid est Episcopus, nisi primus presbyter, hoc est Summus sacerdos?

Chrysostome being Archbishop of Cōstantinople did also gouern the Churches in Thracia, Asia, and Pontus. Tbeodo. lib. 5. cap. 28 The authors of the Centuries affirme the same, and call him Archbishop. Cent. 5. cap. 10.

Theodorete being bishop of Cyrus had vnder his gouernment. 800. Churches, as he himselfe t〈1 line〉〈1 line〉stifieth in his Epistle to Leo.

Gennadius Bishop of Constantinople writeth to the Bishop of Rome thus, Curet* 1.699 sanctitas tua vniuersas tuas custodias, tibi{que} subiectos Episcopos.

Infinite testimonies and examples there are of this sorte, and no man that is of any reading can be ignorant but that these degrées of superioritie, and this kynd of regiment hath bin in the Churche continually, euen from the Apostles tyme.

M. Bucer vpon the fourthe to the Ephes. sheweth that these de〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rees in the churche Bishop, Archbishop, Metropolitane, Primate, Patriarke, be not onely moste aunti∣ent, but also necessarie.

M. Caluine in his Instit. cap. 8. Sect. 52. vpon the place of Hierome in the Epistle ad E∣uagriu sayth, that in the old tyme there was to euery citie apointed acertain region, Prouince, or Dioces, Quae presbyteros indè sumeret, & velut corpori illius ecclesia accenseretur, and that y^• same also was vnder the Bishop of the citie. Quod si amplior erat ager, qui sub eius episcopatu erat, quàm vt sufficere omnibus episcopi munijs vbi{que} possit: per ipsum agrum desi∣gnabantur certis locis presbyteri, qui in minoribùs negotijs eius vices obirent, eos vocabant 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉borepi∣scopos, quòd per ipsam prouinciam episcopum representabant.

M. Beza lib. conf cap. 7 calleth the names of Archbishops, Bishops. &c. Holie names: for thus he sayth, That Pastors in proces of tyme were distinct into Metropolitanes, Bi∣shops, and those whome they nowe call Curates (that is, such as be appoynted to eue∣ry Parishe) was not in the respect of the ministerie of the worde, but rather in respecte of iurisdiction and discipline. Therfore concerning the office of preaching the word, and administring the Sacramentes, there is no difference betwixte Archebishops, Bishops, and Curates, for all are bounde to feede their flocke with the same breade, and therefore by one common name in the Scriptures they bee called Pastours and Bishops. But what impudencie is there in those men (meaning the Papistes) to vse those holie names, and therfore to glorie of the succession of the Apostles and true Bishops. In the same chapter, he maketh two kynds of degrées vsed in the Papistical Churche: the one vnknowne to the Apostles, & to the primitine church, the other taken out of the word of God and from the primitiue Church: In this second order he placeth Archebishops, Curates, Can〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ns, Seniors or Ministers, Archedeacons, Deanes, Subdeacons, Clearkes.

But what should I stand longer in this matter? There is not one writer of credit y^t denieth this superioritie to haue bin always among the clergie, and these degrées to come euen from the best tyme of the Church since the Apostles, and so be both most〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 auncient and generall. Wherfore I can not but compt suche as denie so manifest a truthe, eyther vnlearned and vnskilful persons, or else verie wranglers, and men desirous of contention.

A briefe comparison betvvixt the Bishops of our tyme, and the Bi∣shops of the primitiue Churche.

Chap. 8

I Knowe that comparisons be odious, neither would I vse them at this tyme, but that I am thervnto (as it wer) compelled by the vncharitable dealing of T. C. who by comparing the Bishops of our time with the Bishops in the olde Churche, hath soughte by that meanes to disgrace them, if it were possible. I may peraduenture in this point sée me to some to flatter, but the true iudgement therof I leaue to him, that knoweth the secretes of the heart. In the meane tyme I will affirme nothing, which is not euident to all those that be learned diuines, and not ouer ruled with affection. My compar〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ion shal consist in these thrée points: Truthe of doctrine, Honestie of lise, and right vse of externall things.

Touching the fyrst, that is truth of doctrine, I shall not néed much to labour. For I think T. C. and his adherents wil not denie but that the doctrin taught & professed by our Bishops at this day, is much more perfect and sounder, than it commonly was in

any age after the Apostles time. For the most part of the auncientest Bishops were deceyued with that grosse opinion of a thousande yeares after the resurrection, wherein* 1.700 the kingdome of Christe should here remaine vpon earth: The fautors whereof were called M〈1 line〉〈1 line〉llenarij. Papias who liued in Polycarpus and Ignatius his tyme, béeing Bishop of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉erusalem, was the first author of this errour, and almost all the moste auncient fat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ers were infected with the same.

Cyprian and the whole Councel of Carthage erred in rebaptisatiō, & Cyprian himself* 1.701 also was greatly ouerseene in making it a matter so necessarie in the celebration of the Lords Supper, to haue water mingled with wyne, which was no doubt at y^• tyme cōmon to moe than to him: but the other opinion which he confuteth, of vsyng water only, is more absurd, and yet it had at that tyme patrones among the Bishops.

Howe greatly were almost all the Bishops & learned writers of the greke church, yea and the Latines also for the most part, spotted with doctrines of freewill, of me∣rites, of inuocation of Sainctes, & suche lyke? Surely you are not able to recken in any age since the Apostles tyme, any companie of Bishops, that taught & helde so sound & perfect doctrine in all poynts, as the Bishops of England do at this tyme.

If you speake of Ceremonies, & of the syncere administration of the sacraments, you shall finde the like difference: for compare the cerenionies that Tertullian sapet〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 lib. decoro. mil. then to be vsed in the Churche about the Sacraments, and otherwise: or those that Basile reherseth Lib. de Sancto spi. or suche as we may reade to haue bin in S. Augustins tyme, with those that we nowe reteine in this Churche, and you can not but acknowledge, that therin we are come to a far greater perfection.

I meane not to stande in particulars, I thinke T. C. and his companions wil not contende with me in this poynt, for if they doe, it is but to maynteyncontention. Se∣ing then that in the truthe of doctrine, which is the chief and principall point, oure Bishops be not only comparable with the olde Bishops, but in many degrées to be preferred before them, we thinke there is tootoo great iniurie done vnto them, and to this doctrine whiche they professe, when as they are so odiously compared, and so contemptuously intreated by T. C. and his Colleags.

2 Touching honestie of life, which is the second point, I wil not say much, I do not think but that therin they may be compared with the old Bishops also: and in some points preferred: euery age hath some imperfectiōs in it, and the best men are most subiect to the slanderous tong. Great contention ther was among the Bishops in the Councell of Nice, insomuch that euen in the presence of the Emperour they ceased not to libell one against an other. What bitternesse and cursing was there betwixt Epiphanius and Chrysostome? what affectionate dealyng of Theophilus agaynste the same Chrysostome? what iarring betwixt Hierome and Augustine? But I wil not pro∣secute this. Men, be they neuer so godly, yet they be men. & the cōm〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n sorte of peo∣ple, when they waxe wearie of the worde of God truely preached, then doe they be∣gin to depraue the true and chiefe ministers of the same.

3 For the third poynt, that is, the vse of external things, if the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ishops nowe haue more land & liuing than Bishops had then, it is the blessing of God vpon his church: and it is commodious for the state and time. If any man abuse himself therin, let him be reformed, let not his fault be made a pretence to cloke a minde desirous to spoyle. I sée not how those lands and liuings can be imployed to more bene〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ite of y^e churche, cōmoditie of the cōmon welth, & honor of the Prince, than they be nowe in state and cōdition wherin they remain. Bishops shal not now need to liue by pilling & polling,* 1.702 as it séemed they did in Cyprians tyme, for he complaineth therof. Ser. de lapsis. Nor as some did in Ambrose or Augustins. They haue (God be thanked) liuing sufficient with out any such vnlawfull meanes, and I doubt not but if their expenses shall be compa∣red with their predecessors, it shall appeare that they be according to the proportion that God hath limitted vnto them. But an eye dimmed with malice, or bente to the spoyle, can sée nothing that may hinder the desired purpose. God roote out of the har∣tes of men such rauening affections and gréedie desires.

Notes

• (c) 1.1

  1. Tim. 3. 1.
• (d) 1.2

  Phil. 4. 11. 2. Cor. 6. 4. 8. 10.
• * 1.3

  Scil the mi∣nisterie.
• * 1.4

  The ministe∣rie is nowe more payneful than gaineful▪
• * 1.5

  Pro. 30.
• * 1.6

  The twelfth of Mat. straungely applyed.
• * 1.7

  Math. 12.
• (a) 1.8

  A vayne bragge, thoug〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 it were true.
• (f) 1.9

  Ma. 23. 11. 12. Luc. 22. 25. 1. Cor. 4. 1. 1. Pet. 5. 2. 3
• (*) 1.10

  1. Bicause they florishe more prosperously, than the enuious man can well beare.
• * 1.11

  T. C. maketh his chief qua∣rell agaynst those in au∣thoritie in the Churche, and whye he so doth. What kinde of equalitie is pretended.
• (*) 1.12

  If Christ be called an Arch∣bishop, then is not the title de∣uised by Anti∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉hrist.
• * 1.13

  1. Epist. 5. Heb. 13. Act. 3. 5. Heb. 1〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.14

  Names pro∣per to God maye in some respect be at∣tributed to other.
• * 1.15

  Cal. in Harm.
• * 1.16

  Howe y^e name Archbishop may be trans∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rred to other than Christ.
• * 1.17

  The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nd externall gou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rnment confounded.
• * 1.18

  How Christ〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 is the onely head of the churche.
• * 1.19

  How the ma gistrat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be called 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the church.
• * 1.20

  Bishops cal∣led heades of churches, and yet y^e Popes supremacie i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 vsurped.
• * 1.21

  Tertull. lib. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cyp. li. 27. Hierome in his epistles to Augustine.
• * 1.22

  A lawfull na∣me maye re∣maine; though it hath bene a∣bused.
• * 1.23

  Petitio princi∣pii, for you haue not yet proued this.
• * 1.24

  Scriptures wil∣lingly falsified▪ to make them serue his turne.
• * 1.25

  The Phariseys made false argu∣ments, and so do you in fo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉owing them.
• * 1.26

  The Phariseys made false argu∣ments, and so do you in fo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉owing them.
• * 1.27

  The disorde∣red argument of y^e Replier.
• * 1.28

  Deut. 18.
• * 1.29

  Math. 11▪
• * 1.30

  The Archbi∣shop no new ministerie.
• * 1.31

  W〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ake proofes must needes in∣ferre a weak〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 conclusion.
• * 1.32

  T. C, faulteth still in the pe∣tition of the principle.
• * 1.33

  Christe is not lesse carefull for this chur∣che than for that vnder the lawe.
• * 1.34

  Titles & offi∣ces in y^e church vnder the law where God is not y^e chief author.
• * 1.35

  Uncertaine reaso〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ing of figures and allegories. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 le〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 no〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣ded. Gen. 8.
• * 1.36

  Caluin. in. 6. genes.
• * 1.37

  Why God ap pointed so ma ny ceremonies to the Israe∣lites.
• * 1.38

  Pellican.
• * 1.39

  Calui〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e. 35. Exo. in. expos 2. praecept〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪
• * 1.40

  The Replier 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by his own wor∣des. Pag. 22. sect. 1.
• * 1.41

  1. Par. 24.
• * 1.42

  T. C. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣reth by 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉
• * 1.43

  Iob〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 2〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• (a) 1.44

  A 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ma〈1 line〉〈1 line〉or.
• (b) 1.45

  An vntr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 minor.
• * 1.46

  The maior tendeth to th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 shu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ing out of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 magistrate. The Church must not only be brought to persection, but also be preser∣ued therem▪
• * 1.47

  The place in the. 4. Ephe. discussed.
• * 1.48

  The great difference be∣twixt the Pope and the Archbyshop.
• (*) 1.49

  It is easily knowne and as easily 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 of you, as appeareth af〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣wards.
• * 1.50

  1. Cor. 12.
• * 1.51

  T. C. hath answered him selfe touching the place Ephe. 4.
• * 1.52

  P. Martyr 〈◊〉〈◊〉 12. 1. Cor
• (*) 1.53

  You imagin that they are hāged and ther∣fore help before you be d〈1 line〉〈1 line〉sired.
• * 1.54

  Things may be lawfull which were not in Paules time.
• (*) 1.55

  You 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that against your selfe nov▪ which before you were glad to vse as a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for your selfe.
• (a) 1.56

  Here he con∣futeth his owne shadow.
• * 1.57

  Page. 64. li. 5.
• (*) 1.58

  Indeede 〈◊〉〈◊〉 haue made your selfe 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 sion.
• (*) 1.59

  Surely the man is in a dreame.
• * 1.60

  1. Cor. 3▪
• * 1.61

  Pag. 64. lin. 5.
• * 1.62

  What burden? who hath laid it on▪
• * 1.63

  Authoritie to execute disci∣pline, is not e∣qually giuen to all.
• * 1.64

  The vnskil∣full reasoning of T. C. ope∣neth a bore to Anabaptisme.
• * 1.65

  The office of the Archbi∣shop expressed in scripture.
• * 1.66

  Bucer in 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. Eph.
• * 1.67

  That order multe be ob∣serued which is conuenient for the state.
• * 1.68

  1. Tim. 5.
• (*) 1.69

  You falsifie my woordes, by displacing the worde (only).
• * 1.70

  What it is to rule well.
• * 1.71

  All ministers gouerne but not alike.
• * 1.72

  Wherevnto 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dust of the 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉.
• (*) 1.73

  The booke 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 named but 〈◊〉〈◊〉 you haue consu∣ted your shadow, and not the boke as hath appeared
• (a) 1.74

  Syllogisme without all forme.
• * 1.75

  In what sense euery function is sayde to haue giftes to dis∣charge it.
• * 1.76

  Bullinger. lib. 5. aduersus a∣nab. cap. 1.
• * 1.77

  Idem.
• * 1.78

  The deformed argument of T. C.
• (a) 1.79

  The 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉.
• (b) 1.80

  The 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉.
• * 1.81

  The Replie grounded vpō the petition of the principle.
• * 1.82

  The antiqui∣tie of Archbi∣shops.
• * 1.83

  Phil. 4. Tertul. de praescript. aduers. hae∣ret.
• * 1.84

  In the replie to M. Hard.
• * 1.85

  Li. 3. cap. 3.
• * 1.86

  One ministe∣rie of bishops, but diuerse degrees.
• * 1.87

  Eph. 2.
• * 1.88

  The Israe∣lites had some things like to the Gentiles.
• * 1.89

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 No man hat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 sayde so.
• * 1.90

  Esay. 2.
• * 1.91

  M. Foxe, tom. 1. Pag. 14.
• * 1.92

  Math. 5. 10. 9.
• * 1.93

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.94

  Act. 15.
• * 1.95

  Archiflamin〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 1.96

  M. Foxe, tom. 1. fol. 146.
• * 1.97

  Archbyshops in England, An. Do. 180.
• * 1.98

  Repor〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es of antiquitie may be taken from infi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ls.
• * 1.99

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• (*) 1.100

  A notable 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• (a) 1.101

  A slender proofe.
• * 1.102

  The differēce betwixte an Archbishop & a Bishop.
• (*) 1.103

  This is often promised, but neuer per〈1 line〉〈1 line〉or∣med.
• (a) 1.104

  This diuision is not so strange as you make it.
• * 1.105

  Vinc. 10. li. cap. 124. Nicep. 4. li. cap. 38.
• (*) 1.106

  Nicephorus falsified.
• (a) 1.107

  This is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s will appea〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 in the ende.
• * 1.108

  Ibi. 2. 23.
• (*) 1.109

  It is the▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chapter.
• * 1.110

  Caluin. M. F〈1 line〉〈1 line〉xe.
• * 1.111

  M Iewell. Pag. 95. sec. 4
• * 1.112

  Irenaeu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.113

  Sometime one Apostle did appoynt Bishops. Tertulli. de praescript.
• (a) 1.114

  The maior false.
• * 1.115

  Why these of∣fices are ap∣poynted.
• * 1.116

  This is contrar〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 to that whiche was immediatly affirmed before.
• * 1.117

  The office of an archbishop in S. Iohn.
• * 1.118

  Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 2〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪
• (*) 1.119

  I say not only suspected, but that they are not without iuste cause suspected
• * 1.120

  Concil. Nice.
• * 1.121

  Metropoli∣tane.
• * 1.122

  Archdeacon.
• * 1.123

  Patriarke.
• * 1.124

  Uar〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tie con∣cerning the time of y^e Ni∣cen Councell.
• * 1.125

  Archbyshops & Metropoli∣tanes long be∣fore the Ni∣cene Councel. Concil. Nice∣ni. Can. 6.
• * 1.126

  Can. 7.
• * 1.127

  M. Foxe.
• * 1.128

  Cano. Apo. 33. alias. 35.
• * 1.129

  Concil. Anti∣oc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. Can. 9.
• * 1.130

  In the. 7. Di∣uision before.
• (*) 1.131

  An vntruth contrarie to the manifest wordes of the Councell of Nice.
• * 1.132

  The iudge∣ment of lear∣ned writers of the. 6. can. con. N〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cem. Caluine.
• * 1.133

  Illyricus.
• * 1.134

  M. Foxe.
• * 1.135

  T. C. con∣demned of vn truth by the words of the Canon. Can. 6.
• * 1.136

  The authori∣tie of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣tropo. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ane.
• * 1.137

  Con. Antioc〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.138

  Vilierius.
• (*) 1.139

  These Canons differ onely in number, and not in matter from, those that are not counterfeit.
• * 1.140

  Li. 1. cap. 8. Li. 1. cap. 6.
• (a) 1.141

  Not so, for that is repug∣nant to the true Canon〈1 line〉〈1 line〉; & ther∣fore coūterfeit.
• * 1.142

  Controuersie about the nū∣ber of y^e Ca∣nons conci. Niceni.
• * 1.143

  Canons as∣cribed to the Nicene coun∣cell, not found in the number extant. Con. Arelat.
• * 1.144

  Hieronymus.
• * 1.145

  Ambrose.
• * 1.146

  The. 25. 26. 27. Canons differ onely in number, not in substance from the true Canons.
• (*) 1.147

  You 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 you vse.
• * 1.148

  Ambrose.
• (*) 1.149

  Ambrose i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 little beholding to you, that can∣not be accepted for a wi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nesse.
• * 1.150

  1. Lib. offi. cap. 50.
• (a) 1.151

  In those words Ambrose doth not dissa low the office, but the abuse of it by the person.
• (*) 1.152

  An vnlikely likelyhoode voyde of truth.
• * 1.153

  Ambrose a Metropoli∣tane. Cent. 4. cap. 10
• * 1.154

  Ambrose.
• * 1.155

  De dig. Sacer cap. 5.
• (*) 1.156

  Where, or which centurie〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• (a) 1.157

  Vntruth.
• * 1.158

  Cent. 4 cap. 7.
• * 1.159

  Forgerie see∣keth corn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rs.
• * 1.160

  Councels of the name and o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ice of Me∣tropolitane an〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Archbi∣shoppe. &c. Con. Ni〈1 line〉〈1 line〉en. Can. 4. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 7.
• * 1.161

  Con. Antiocb. can. 9.
• * 1.162

  Can. 20.
• * 1.163

  Con. Arelat. cano. 6. &. 37.
• * 1.164

  Con. L〈1 line〉〈1 line〉odic. can. 12. Con Cartb. 2. Can 12.
• * 1.165

  Con. Carth. can. 13.▪ 17. &c Con. Chalcedo.
• * 1.166

  Fathers and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the name and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t Arche∣bishop. E〈1 line〉〈1 line〉phanius.
• * 1.167

  Peter, Arch〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣bishop of Ale∣xandria abou〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 twentie yeres before the Councell of Nice. Idem.
• * 1.168

  Atbanas. Apol. 2.
• * 1.169

  Socrates.
• * 1.170

  Iustinian. Illyricus. Cent. 4.
• * 1.171

  The office of Metropolitan & Archbishop without the name. Cyprian. Greg. Nazi.
• * 1.172

  Eusebius.
• * 1.173

  Atbanasius.
• * 1.174

  Euseb.
• * 1.175

  Sozom.
• * 1.176

  Theodoret.
• * 1.177

  Con. Afric. can. 55. in graeco.
• * 1.178

  Sozom. 6. l. e. 16.
• (*) 1.179

  An vnaduised answer.
• * 1.180

  Con. Car〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. cap. 39.
• * 1.181

  Con. tom. 1 cap. 6.
• (a) 1.182

  An vntruth.
• * 1.183

  The name of Primate al∣lowed in the Councell of Carthage. M. Foxe.
• * 1.184

  Con. Const〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 alias the. 2.
• * 1.185

  Ignatius epist. ad Smirn. Ambros. in. 4. Eph.
• * 1.186

  Distinct. 99.
• * 1.187

  Con. tom. 2.
• * 1.188

  Archdeacons
• * 1.189

  (*) T. C. f〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eth in his accompt, and telleth but fower, for fiue.
• (b) 1.190

  In what part of Gratian.
• (c) 1.191

  This is vn∣true, for Sixtu∣is more ancient.
• (d) 1.192

  What haue you else but cō∣iectures?
• * 1.193

  The vnto∣ward dealing of the replier, & his vnsuf∣ficiēt answer.
• (*) 1.194

  Vntruth, no such thing ap∣peareth.
• * 1.195

  Con. Vrbi∣num. Sozo. 7. lib. cap. 19.
• * 1.196

  Ierom. to Euagri.
• * 1.197

  Con. Nicen can. 14. and after Ruf. 20
• * 1.198

  Vntruthes, for neyther of them speaketh of Atchdeacons in those places al∣ledged to this purpose.
• * 1.199

  Ierom. ad Euag. Aug. quaest. noui & vet. teit. q. 101.
• * 1.200

  Deanes.
• (*) 1.201

  Vntruthes.
• (*) 1.202

  Vntruthes.
• (*) 1.203

  Vntruthes.
• * 1.204

  Tractat. 4.
• * 1.205

  Aug. de mori∣bus ecclesiae.
• * 1.206

  Antichrist be∣gan in the A∣postles tunes 2. Thess. 2. 1. Io. 2.
• * 1.207

  Antichrist worketh in England by contentious persons.
• * 1.208

  Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 32.
• * 1.209

  Corruptions in the churche in the Apo∣stles time▪
• * 1.210

  Euseb. lib. 2. Cap. 13. Idē. Lib. 3.
• * 1.211

  Li. stromat. somvvhat after the be ginning.
• * 1.212

  Li. 7. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 11.
• (*) 1.213

  Socrates fal∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉fied.
• * 1.214

  Socra. lib. 7. Cap. 11.
• * 1.215

  Socrates a fauourer of y^e Nouatians. Niceph. lib. 6. Cap. 37. &. lib. 9. 13.
• * 1.216

  Socrates do∣ings agreable to our time.
• (a) 1.217

  Where i〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 truth become.
• (b) 1.218

  Would you haue better 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 tha〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 decrees for th〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 authoritie, and continuall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ise.
• (c) 1.219

  Vanitie.
• * 1.220

  August▪
• (a) 1.221

  Modestie.
• (b) 1.222

  This is fro〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the matter.
• * 1.223

  Pag. 68. Sect. 4.
• * 1.224

  Ciuill offices giuē to eccle∣siasticall per∣sons.
• (*) 1.225

  Vntruthe.
• * 1.226

  Titles of dig nitie in mini∣sters not An∣tichristian.
• * 1.227

  Antiquitie of the offices.
• * 1.228

  Conference offered hath bene refused.
• * 1.229

  Of the office of an Archbi∣shop.
• * 1.230

  Cyprian ex∣pounded.
• * 1.231

  Auhoritie of Archbishops.
• (*) 1.232

  This is rather to make sporte, than to confute
• * 1.233

  The princi∣pall office of an archbi∣shop.
• * 1.234

  Cyprian a Metropo∣litane.
• * 1.235

  Cap. 2. diui. 25
• * 1.236

  Pag. 95. sec. 2.
• (a) 1.237

  Truly.
• (b) 1.238

  Falsly.
• (c) 1.239

  In deede you knowe this is vntrue.
• * 1.240

  Epiphanius. Concil. Calc.
• (*) 1.241

  A cauill.
• (*) 1.242

  Vntruthe, for Cyprian nameth not a Prouince.
• * 1.243

  1. Lib. Epi. 4.
• * 1.244

  Cypr. lib. 4. Epist. 2.
• * 1.245

  All the Bi∣shops agreed to Cornelius his election.
• * 1.246

  A Bishop aboue a priest in Cyprians time.
• * 1.247

  Cornelius chosen by o∣thers, than y^e Romanes.
• * 1.248

  Collections out of Cypri∣an.
• * 1.249

  Cypr. lib. 1. Epist. 3.
• (*) 1.250

  A cauill▪
• * 1.251

  The zeale of the Replier.
• * 1.252

  Lib. 1. Epist. 3.
• * 1.253

  Ibidem.
• * 1.254

  The Noua∣tian heresie.
• (a) 1.255

  A weake con clusion of false principles.
• * 1.256

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 4. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉p. 9
• * 1.257

  1. Pet. cap. 5.
• * 1.258

  Li. 2〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 ep. 1.
• * 1.259

  The wordes of Cyprian discussed. Tom. 1. Con. Carth.
• * 1.260

  The meaning of Cyprian.
• * 1.261

  Lib. 2. Epist. 1.
• * 1.262

  Tract. 3. cap. 2. Sect. 5.
• * 1.263

  Li. 4. epi. 9
• * 1.264

  Li. 1. epi. 4
• * 1.265

  Li. 3. epi. 1〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 1.266

  Howe farre our Archbi∣shops deale in controuer∣sies.
• * 1.267

  Tract. 2. &. 3.
• * 1.268

  L〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 3. epi. 13
• (*) 1.269

  This is to pre 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉erre your owne iudgemente be∣fo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e the iudge∣ment of worthy Councels.
• * 1.270

  Euseb. Lib. 6. Cap. 43. The number of Christians in Rome gret in Cyprians time.
• * 1.271

  Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉2.
• * 1.272

  This argument is of your owne ioyning, and not M. Doctors.
• (a) 1.273

  Vntruthe, as will appeare.
• * 1.274

  In his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 booke. 4. article, and in 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 5▪
• * 1.275

  (b) M Nowell will wi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 esse a∣gainst you.
• * 1.276

  First booke against Dor man &. 25. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.277

  Fol. 93.
• * 1.278

  M. Iewell.
• * 1.279

  Idem.
• * 1.280

  M. Nowell.
• * 1.281

  Idem.
• * 1.282

  M Foxe. Tom. 1. fol. 93.
• * 1.283

  Idem.
• * 1.284

  M. Philpot exam. 5.
• * 1.285

  ☞
• * 1.286

  Hierome.
• (*) 1.287

  This is your vsuall practise, whē you cannot answere to cauill at the credite of the author.
• * 1.288

  A friuolous di∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 from the matter.
• * 1.289

  Tract. 2.
• * 1.290

  Contr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Prax.
• * 1.291

  Tertullians mea∣ning falsified,
• * 1.292

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉▪
• * 1.293

  〈◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊〉 is to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ode. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 gin. veland.
• * 1.294

  The reason of the 〈◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊〉 gainst 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.295

  Math 15.
• * 1.296

  Develand. virg.
• * 1.297

  Zuing. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• (a) 1.298

  A sillogisme 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉.
• * 1.299

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 you are 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to your 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ pag. 7〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉5.
• * 1.300

  A 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ar∣gument dis∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.301

  The office of an archbyshop in y^e Apostles. Ad. 4. 15. 18. 1 Cor. 3. 4. 5. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪ l'tra{que} id tim. epi ad Tit. Euseb. lib 3. Cap. 23. Epibha. lib. 1. Tom. 2.
• * 1.302

  Ambro. in. 4. Ephe.
• * 1.303

  Superioritie among the Apostles.
• * 1.304

  Ierom. aduers. Ioni. lib. 1.
• * 1.305

  Caluine.
• * 1.306

  Bucer.
• * 1.307

  Idem.
• * 1.308

  Supr. diui. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.309

  The example of T. C. is rather against him, than for him.
• * 1.310

  The Archbishop hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to thanke you for your gentlenesse
• * 1.311

  The authori∣tie of Archbi∣shops in our Church.
• * 1.312

  1. Cor. 14.
• (a) 1.313

  A place farre se〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ched to im∣proue the office of the Arch∣bishop.
• * 1.314

  T. C. faul∣teth with the Admonition in vnapt alle∣gations of scripture.
• * 1.315

  Ephe. 4.
• * 1.316

  Howe oft hath this beene re∣peated.
• * 1.317

  The place Eph. 4. no per〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ect pater〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 1.318

  Archbishop, a name of iuris∣diction, not of a new mini∣sterie.
• * 1.319

  Caluine.
• * 1.320

  Tract. 2.
• (*) 1.321

  Here you cō∣found a monar∣chie, and a ty∣rannie.
• (a) 1.322

  Not so, if tha〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 one do gouerne by lawe.
• (b) 1.323

  Your simili∣tudes hold not.
• (c) 1.324

  Vntruth.
• * 1.325

  Decret. par. 2. c. 9. q. 3. & can. Apost. 33. &. alibi passim.
• (d) 1.326

  A good 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣tor for conten∣tio〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.327

  T. C. descre∣dueth the au∣thor whom he cannot an∣swe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e.
• * 1.328

  T. C. ouer∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ec∣clesiasti〈1 line〉〈1 line〉all.
• * 1.329

  Difference betwixt a king and a tyrant.
• * 1.330

  The ecclesi∣asticall go∣uernment in this Church not tyrannicall but lawfull.
• * 1.331

  Li〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. Epist. 3.
• * 1.332

  Contra Luci∣scrianos.
• * 1.333

  The gouern∣ment of one by lawe, more safe than of many with∣out lawe.
• * 1.334

  The s〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ili∣tude of water returned a∣gaynst the Replier.
• * 1.335

  The places c〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ed by T. C maketh for the Archbishop.
• * 1.336

  Can. apost. 33.
• * 1.337

  A popish reason.
• * 1.338

  The reasons serue not for the Pope that serue for the Archbishop. Caluine.
• * 1.339

  M. Nowell. lib. 3. fol. 321.
• * 1.340

  Inst. cap. 8.
• (a) 1.341

  Who can be∣leue you mean〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 good fayth▪
• * 1.342

  Difference betwene the Pope and our Archbishops.
• * 1.343

  An absurde col∣lection.
• * 1.344

  Lib. 5. 16. De dignita∣te sacerdo∣tali.
• * 1.345

  The passing Logike of T. C.
• * 1.346

  Difference betwixt by∣shop & priest. Hieronymus ad Euagrium.
• * 1.347

  Rom. 1.
• (*) 1.348

  An vntruth.
• * 1.349

  Bishops at Ierusalem in the Apostles time. Eusebius, lib. 2. cap. 23.
• * 1.350

  Lib. 2. Ca. 1.
• * 1.351

  Idem.
• * 1.352

  Other bi∣shops in the apostles time. Eus. Li. 3. cap. 2. & 4.
• * 1.353

  Ierome spea∣keth not in that place of an Arch deacon, but of a deacon.
• * 1.354

  Ad Euagr.
• * 1.355

  But in the same place spea∣king in earnest he a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉firmeth a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 muche as I r〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 quire.
• (a) 1.356

  Vntrue.
• * 1.357

  Ieromes bi∣shop differeth from an elder in dignitie and rule. Hier. in Tit. 1.
• * 1.358

  Idē ad Eu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉gr.
• * 1.359

  Ibidem. Idem contr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Lucifer.
• * 1.360

  Hiero ad Ru∣sticum.
• * 1.361

  Metropoli∣tanes &c. in Ierome his tyme.
• * 1.362

  Erasmus.
• * 1.363

  The shift of T. C. in his answer to Hierom.
• * 1.364

  Chrysostome,
• (*) 1.365

  It proueth that there are degrees among ministers of the word, which you denie.
• * 1.366

  In: 20. Math.
• * 1.367

  Superioritie conuenient a∣mong mini∣sters.
• * 1.368

  Chrysost.
• * 1.369

  Note this suspi∣cious speache of the kinde of gouernment.
• * 1.370

  Why there ought to be superioritie among mini∣sters as well as other. The gouern∣mente of the churche in a Christi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n cōmon wealth oughte to bee according to the forme ther in vsed.
• * 1.371

  T. C. spea∣keth suspici∣ously of go∣uernment.
• * 1.372

  Equalitie a∣mong mini∣sters touching minist〈1 line〉〈1 line〉rie.
• (a) 1.373

  This distin∣ction is allowed of those that be sarre from Pa∣pistrie.
• (b) 1.374

  You haue no〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 yet declared 〈◊〉〈◊〉, neyther can you.
• (c) 1.375

  But you con 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that which foloweth.
• * 1.376

  The distine∣tion (quoad ministerium, & quoad or∣dinem) tusti∣syed. Caluine. Beza. Lib. con. cap. 7 art. 12.
• * 1.377

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 the. 72. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this chapter.
• * 1.378

  Heir. ad Tit. 1.
• * 1.379

  Caluine allo∣weth superi∣oritie.
• (*) 1.380

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.381

  A practis wor thy the noting
• * 1.382

  Diuers editi∣ons of Cal∣uines institu∣tions.
• (*) 1.383

  This is a deuise neuer hard or before.
• * 1.384

  A needlesse proofe.
• (*) 1.385

  And what scripture hau〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 you for this▪
• * 1.386

  Byshops go∣uernours sim∣ply, not of one action only.
• * 1.387

  The 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 the 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ixed to a place.
• (*) 1.388

  What is this but a meere con 〈◊〉〈◊〉, or 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ather an imagine〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 an∣swer o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 yo〈1 line〉〈1 line〉r ow〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e▪
• (a) 1.389

  This is not 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉poken o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 cho∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ing 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eter to be speaker, but of 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉lecting Mat∣thias, which pe〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eyned not to Peter alone.
• * 1.390

  Peter chee〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e in Apostolicall assemblies.
• * 1.391

  Peter not cho sen in euery action to be chee〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e.
• * 1.392

  The scholiast playeth not y^e parte which is layde vpon him.
• * 1.393

  Tract. 1.
• (a) 1.394

  This 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aga〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nst your 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ap∣peare.
• * 1.395

  Peter mode∣rat〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ur 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉o 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ong as the Apo∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉tles 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣nco 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ogyther.
• * 1.396

  Actes. 15.
• * 1.397

  The of〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ice o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉peaker o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.398

  The example o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Iames 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Re plyer.
• (*) 1.399

  The Arch∣byshop conten∣teth himselfe with lesse autho∣ri〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ie than the Co〈1 line〉〈1 line〉suls had.
• * 1.400

  Instit. cap. 8.
• * 1.401

  The example of T. C. a∣gainst him∣selfe. Consuls, and their autho∣ritie.
• * 1.402

  Masters of Colledges and their au∣thoritie.
• * 1.403

  They are not yet proued E∣uangelistes.
• * 1.404

  The example o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pro∣ueth 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉∣ritie among y^t ministers of the worde.
• * 1.405

  Titus had superioritie.
• * 1.406

  Caluine con∣fessem superi∣oritie among ministers.
• (*) 1.407

  You shifte of M. Caluines place for superi∣oritie amongst the Cleargie, by flying to another place of election of Ministers.
• * 1.408

  The shifts of the Replyer▪
• * 1.409

  Titus Arch∣byshop.
• * 1.410

  Theodoret. in arg. Epist. Tit. apud Scholiast.
• * 1.411

  Chrysost.
• * 1.412

  Idem.
• * 1.413

  T. C. contra∣rie to himselfe.
• * 1.414

  Timothies authoritie▪
• (*) 1.415

  A meeres▪ uill.
• * 1.416

  Epiphanius.
• * 1.417

  This is your practise to discre∣dite the author that speaketh against you.
• * 1.418

  Ad quod vult deum.
• * 1.419

  The writings of Epiphanius contra. 80. hae∣reses, not coun∣terfeite.
• * 1.420

  Cent. 4. cap. 10.
• * 1.421

  Cornarius.
• * 1.422

  Aerius here sie in denying the difference betwixt a Be shop & priell▪ Epi. li. 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 haeres. 75▪
• * 1.423

  August. ad Quod-vult.
• * 1.424

  That Timo∣thie was Bi∣shop.
• * 1.425

  1 The course of the Epistle.
• * 1.426

  2 The subscrip tion.
• * 1.427

  3 Consent of hystories.
• * 1.428

  4 Content of fathers.
• * 1.429

  5 Consente of late writers.
• * 1.430

  The chiefe reasons to the contrarie an∣swered.
• * 1.431

  1 The place. 2. Tim. 4. an∣swered. The work of an Euāgelist.
• * 1.432

  2 The place Ephe. 4. an∣swered.
• * 1.433

  The maior false.
• * 1.434

  The minde doubtfull,
• * 1.435

  The conclu sion not ne∣cessary.
• * 1.436

  Ignatius.
• * 1.437

  The bishops 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉uthoritie.
• * 1.438

  The order ob serued in pla∣cing the au∣thorities in y^e answere.
• * 1.439

  Iustine Mar∣tyr.
• * 1.440

  1. Tim. 5▪
• (a) 1.441

  Nay, they are yours, and like to the rest.
• (b) 1.442

  Antiquum obtinet.
• * 1.443

  Beza.
• * 1.444

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ouer mini∣sters aswel as ouer the peo∣ple. Idem.
• * 1.445

  Cyrill.
• (*) 1.446

  In what booke ▪
• * 1.447

  Tertull.
• * 1.448

  Theodoret of Chrysostome.
• (*) 1.449

  Or els you plucke your self by the nose.
• (a) 1.450

  The wordes of Theodoret clipped.
• (b) 1.451

  What scrip ture expresseth these conditions and cautions▪
• * 1.452

  As it ap〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 peareth by diuerse e∣pistles of his.
• (c) 1.453

  Vntrue.
• * 1.454

  Euseb. li. 5. cap. 3. & 4.
• * 1.455

  The falsify∣ing of Theo∣doret retur∣ned vpon the Replier.
• * 1.456

  Theodor. lib. 5. cap. 28.
• (a) 1.457

  Or els you are deceyued.
• (b) 1.458

  An vntruth as will appeare.
• (c) 1.459

  The wordes of the Scholiast peruerted.
• * 1.460

  3. Hom. Act.
• * 1.461

  Thracia, &c. annexed to the bishoprike of Constantino∣ple.
• * 1.462

  Socrates, li. 5. cap. 8.
• * 1.463

  Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 6.
• * 1.464

  Chrysostome 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉xerciseth Archiepisco∣pal iuris〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ictiō in Asia.
• * 1.465

  Cent. 5. cap. 10. Chrysostome Archbyshop of Thracia, Asi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉, &c.
• * 1.466

  Act. 16.
• * 1.467

  The Scholi∣ast falsified by T. C. and to what pur∣pose.
• (a) 1.468

  You 〈◊〉〈◊〉 those that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 agayns〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 you.
• * 1.469

  In the. 1. Act.
• * 1.470

  In the same Act.
• (b) 1.471

  An 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ & 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉oule oue〈1 line〉〈1 line〉sight.
• (c) 1.472

  Vntrue 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ terpretation.
• * 1.473

  Theodorete can haue no credite either with the Pa∣pists, or with the Replier.
• * 1.474

  Act. 8. Con. Cal〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ed.
• * 1.475

  The corrupt dealing of T. C.
• * 1.476

  Theod. in E∣pist. ad Leonē.
• * 1.477

  How Theo∣dorete le〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t no tares in his 800. churches
• * 1.478

  Comparison made in office, not in riches.
• * 1.479

  Caluin. Cap. 8. Sect. 54.
• * 1.480

  Phil. 1.
• * 1.481

  Caluine ac∣knowledgeth the names, 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉nd the end of thē, and alloweth the kinde of gouernment.
• * 1.482

  T. C. letteth that slip, that maketh a∣gainst him.
• (*) 1.483

  Vniust accu∣sation.
• * 1.484

  The vse of the Patriarch rare, in what sense▪
• * 1.485

  Hemingi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪
• * 1.486

  Cap. 10. 3. class. lib. Enchirid. vvhere also among the popish or∣ders he rec∣keneth the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• (*) 1.487

  So is the con∣dition of a good seruant vnder a good master, muche better than the condi∣tion of an vnruly sonne vnder a wise father.
• * 1.488

  And therefore you cu〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sentences.
• * 1.489

  Hemingius alloweth di∣stinction of degrees in the ministerie.
• * 1.490

  Hemingius acknowled∣geth Patriar∣ches in the primitiue Churche. The office of Patriaches in the primatiue Church.
• * 1.491

  To take away degrees is barbarousnes.
• * 1.492

  Ministers subiect to Bi∣shops.
• * 1.493

  Heb. 13.
• * 1.494

  What kind of authoritie the Bishos ex∣ercise.
• * 1.495

  M. Foxe▪
• (*) 1.496

  I maruel 〈◊〉〈◊〉 place 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cape so 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a r〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ader.
• * 1.497

  Pag. 78. of the booke of Actes.
• (a) 1.498

  A suspicious head.
• (*) 1.499

  A shameless∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 vn〈1 line〉〈1 line〉kedlye.
• * 1.500

  Why. T. C. scometh so muche at the words of the Bishop.
• * 1.501

  The malici∣ous nature of that faction.
• * 1.502

  The Bishop maliciously staundered by T. C.
• * 1.503

  Nouitiorum assertio.
• * 1.504

  Prima ratio.
• * 1.505

  Eius solutio▪
• * 1.506

  The. 4. Eph▪ no perfect plat forme of all ecclesiasticall gouernment.
• * 1.507

  Tract. 4. cap. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 diuis. 1.
• * 1.508

  In what res∣pect Apostles &c. be ceased.
• * 1.509

  The Bishops argument.
• (*) 1.510

  What say you to the Doctor.
• * 1.511

  Catechist and pastor distin∣guished.
• (*) 1.512

  Where haue you scri〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ture for this geare.
• * 1.513

  Tract. 14.
• * 1.514

  T. C. taketh greater liber∣tie to himselfe than he will allowe to whole chur∣ches.
• (*) 1.515

  I graunt, but not out of the. 4. to the Ephe.
• * 1.516

  Iud. 51.
• * 1.517

  1. Sam. 19.
• * 1.518

  2. Rg. 2.
• * 1.519

  Act. 6.
• * 1.520

  The Byshop is not answe∣red.
• * 1.521

  Ignorantia Elenchi.
• * 1.522

  The office of archbyshops & archde〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cons contemed in scripture.
• * 1.523

  Supra. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ diuis. 13.
• * 1.524

  Secunda ratio▪
• * 1.525

  Eius solutio.
• * 1.526

  Tract. 2. cap. 6 diuis. 3.
• * 1.527

  Tract. 2.
• (*) 1.528

  This was one cause, but not the only cause.
• (a) 1.529

  A Popishe non sequitur.
• * 1.530

  A popish rea∣son vsed by the Replyer.
• * 1.531

  Caluine.
• * 1.532

  Nowell.
• * 1.533

  Lib. 1. 63.
• * 1.534

  The Replye〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 slippeth by the matter.
• * 1.535

  Pag. 22. line. 1.
• * 1.536

  2. Chro. 19.
• * 1.537

  Scripture al∣leaged against himselfe.
• * 1.538

  2. Chron. 19.
• * 1.539

  vers. 8.
• (*) 1.540

  This is di∣rectly contrary to your selfe.
• * 1.541

  T. C. contra∣rie to himself.
• * 1.542

  Pag. 22. Sec. 2.
• * 1.543

  Tertia ratio.
• * 1.544

  Eius solutio▪
• * 1.545

  Eras. in arg. epi. ad Titum Chryso 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. cap. Tit.
• * 1.546

  The incon∣stancie of the Replyer & his companions.
• * 1.547

  Bishops suc∣ceed Apostles in gouernmēt. Cyprian.
• * 1.548

  Ambrose. Zuinglius.
• * 1.549

  Tract. 17.
• * 1.550

  vntrue, for you haue not as yet spoken one worde of it.
• * 1.551

  Quarta ratio.
• * 1.552

  Eius solutio.
• (a) 1.553

  An vnt〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 there is no suche thing in that much cano〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪
• * 1.554

  Chap. 9.
• (b) 1.555

  An 〈◊〉〈◊〉 truthe.
• * 1.556

  Co〈1 line〉〈1 line〉cels sum moned by Princes. Euse de vita Constan lib. 3.
• * 1.557

  Chap. 9.
• * 1.558

  T C con〈1 line〉〈1 line〉esseth Cyprian to be a Metropolitane.
• (*) 1.559

  This canon is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 both by adding, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.560

  34. Canon.
• (a) 1.561

  This you add vnto the canon.
• * 1.562

  The canon alledged a∣gainst him∣selfe.
• * 1.563

  Can. Apost. 34.
• * 1.564

  Platina cap Higin.
• (*) 1.565

  A grosse pe∣titio of the prin∣ciple, or rather an vntruth.
• * 1.566

  Can. 17.
• * 1.567

  No such thing in the. 17. canon.
• * 1.568

  Con. Antio. ca. 14.
• * 1.569

  The authori∣tie of Archby∣shops and by∣shops, lesse, than in times past.
• * 1.570

  Can. 12.
• * 1.571

  Can. 11.
• * 1.572

  Canon. 4.
• * 1.573

  Canon. 5.
• * 1.574

  Many vntruthes heaped togither
• * 1.575

  Euse. li. 6. cap. 1 Cypr. li. 4. ep. 8 Chrisostome.
• * 1.576

  Idem.
• * 1.577

  Tract. 3.
• * 1.578

  Tract. 18.
• (*) 1.579

  A worthy councell.
• * 1.580

  Hispal. con. ca.
• * 1.581

  A corrupt councell al∣ledged.
• * 1.582

  Hisp. Con. 2. Can. 7.
• * 1.583

  The councell alledged a∣gainst himself
• * 1.584

  T. C. char∣geth the office with the fault of the men.
• * 1.585

  Marke how this is proued.
• (*) 1.586

  It is an epistle o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Pope Zacha∣rie to Boniface, not of Zacharie to Pope Boni∣face.
• * 1.587

  Concil. to. 3 epist. Zacha Papae ad Bonifac.
• (a) 1.588

  An vntruth as will appeare.
• * 1.589

  The Epistle of Pope Za∣charie falsified
• (*) 1.590

  When, or where did God ordeyne this?
• * 1.591

  But one Bi∣shop in a citie
• (*) 1.592

  In what place of scripture▪
• (a) 1.593

  Is not this soundly proued▪
• * 1.594

  Sathan not the cause of one Byshop in one church.
• * 1.595

  14. Canon▪ it calleth it hospitiolū▪ 15. Canon.
• (a) 1.596

  No suche thing in that place.
• * 1.597

  5. Canon concil. Ty∣ronen〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.598

  Riches no impediment to godly men. Wherein our Bishops may be compared with the olde Bishops.
• * 1.599

  Can. 34.
• (*) 1.600

  He was re∣proued for vsing himselfe like a capitaine, be∣ing accompanied with a garde of souldiours.
• * 1.601

  Euseb. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 7. cap. 30.
• (a) 1.602

  Gregorie for George.
• * 1.603

  Ruf. lib. 1. cap. 23.
• * 1.604

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is accom∣panied with spearemen, and halbardes. The example of P. Samo▪ vniustly ap∣plied to our Bishops.
• * 1.605

  Rufsin. lib. 1. cap. 23.
• * 1.606

  Theo. li. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 cap. 8.
• * 1.607

  Li. eodem cap. 18.
• * 1.608

  Pro. 27.
• * 1.609

  The tytle of most honou∣rable Lorde.
• * 1.610

  Rabbi.
• * 1.611

  Caluine.
• * 1.612

  Uerie honou∣rable titles gi∣uē to bishops.
• * 1.613

  Atban. Apol 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• (*) 1.614

  It was the house belonging to the Bishop.
• * 1.615

  A heape of slaunders.
• * 1.616

  Ambrose house within the bounds of the Church.
• * 1.617

  Bishops de∣fended against the slaunde∣rous replie.
• * 1.618

  Prouision 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ministers.
• * 1.619

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ròuision for the poore.
• * 1.620

  Where vnto the Repliers clamour ten∣deth. The same axe is lifted a∣gainst Uni∣uersities, that hacketh at by∣shops landes.
• * 1.621

  The thing must not be condemned for the abuse.
• (*) 1.622

  This is before answered.
• * 1.623

  T. C. still of∣fende〈1 line〉〈1 line〉h 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pe∣titione prin∣cip〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.624

  Euseb. 8. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 15.
• (a) 1.625

  A 〈◊〉〈◊〉 collection.
• * 1.626

  The subtiltie of Sathan in counterfeyte godlinesse must not pre∣iudice that which is true.
• * 1.627

  Discretion is very necessa∣ry.
• * 1.628

  A proper ca∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉eat.
• * 1.629

  Tract. 1.
• * 1.630

  1. Cor. 4.
• * 1.631

  Anabaptisme feared.
• * 1.632

  Deut. 18.
• * 1.633

  Equalitie of ministers wil pull on the e∣qualitie of o∣ther estates. Pag. 144. Sect. 1.
• (r) 1.634

  Rom. 12. 8.
• (x) 1.635

  2. Cor. 1〈1 line〉〈1 line〉. 7. Colos. 1. 1.
• * 1.636

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ucer.
• * 1.637

  Bucer. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉n. 4. Ephe.
• * 1.638

  Idem.
• * 1.639

  Scriptures wreasted to proue equali∣tie of Mini∣sters.
• * 1.640

  Caluine.
• * 1.641

  Degrees of honour in the ministerie.
• * 1.642

  Here he defen∣deth not the ad∣monition, but shifteth it or by 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉auilling.
• * 1.643

  T. C. contra∣〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ie to himselfe
• * 1.644

  Why y^e Ad∣monitors de∣sire equalitie.
• (*) 1.645

  An vntruth〈1 line〉〈1 line〉▪ for the lawfull authoritie o〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 Bi∣shops and Arch∣byshops was long be〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ore.
• * 1.646

  Excessiue au∣thoritie is sought vnder pretence of e∣qualitie,
• * 1.647

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 authori∣tie of By∣shops & Arch∣bishops came not from the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• (g) 1.648

  Lu. 22. 25. 26. 1. P〈1 line〉〈1 line〉t. 5. 3. 4. 5. Math. 20. 25. 26. Math. 23. 8 11. 12. Gala. 2. 6. Hebr. 5. 4. Lu. 16. 25. Eze. 34. 4. 2. Cor. 1. 24.
• * 1.649

  Scriptures wreasted.
• (*) 1.650

  This is an vn∣truth, for it is only proued that the place is not against the Archbishop. &c
• (a) 1.651

  Here you rashely accuse the translation of the Bible printed at Gene∣ua, and others:
• * 1.652

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated. Beza.
• * 1.653

  Erasmus.
• * 1.654

  Bude〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s.
• * 1.655

  Weake argu∣ment〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s.
• * 1.656

  A cleanly shifte.
• (*) 1.657

  Vntrue.
• * 1.658

  The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 proueth not y^t which is de∣uyed.
• * 1.659

  Scriptures wrested.
• * 1.660

  Abuse of offi∣ces condem∣ned, not the offi〈1 line〉〈1 line〉es.
• * 1.661

  Canon lawes not altog〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ther condemned.
• * 1.662

  An archeby∣shop may go∣uerne one pro uince, but the Pope not all the worlde.
• (*) 1.663

  This is ab∣surdissimum, a〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 M. Caluine 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Instit. cap. 8. sect. 92.
• (a) 1.664

  If the skye fall. &c.
• (b) 1.665

  Yes surely, as the state is nowe.
• * 1.666

  Supra, cap. 3. diuis. 31. 32. 33.
• * 1.667

  Cal. Inst. cap. 8. Sect. 92.
• * 1.668

  The replyers (if) turned vpon him self.
• * 1.669

  The Church cannot be shut vp in one pro∣uince nowe.
• * 1.670

  Argumentes borrowed of the papists.
• * 1.671

  Caluine.
• (a) 1.672

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e is not pie∣ked, but offered
• (b) 1.673

  Beeing truly alleaged.
• (c) 1.674

  In ali〈1 line〉〈1 line〉aging them falsly.
• (d) 1.675

  V〈1 line〉〈1 line〉true, for he neuer vsed that for a rea〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ō.
• (e) 1.676

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 for he 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉heweth no such thing.
• * 1.677

  The reasons for the Arch∣bishop are so∣lutiōs agains〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the Pope.
• * 1.678

  Caluine allo∣weth one to rule ouer the test of mini∣sters,
• * 1.679

  What is mēte by a body in Caluine.
• * 1.680

  Supra cap. 3. the. 15. diuis.
• * 1.681

  Caluin. Inst. cap. 8.
• * 1.682

  Cal. inst. ca. 8.
• * 1.683

  Cal. insti. ca 8.
• * 1.684

  Testimonies of the Apo∣stles tymes, & thervnto ad∣ioyning.
• * 1.685

  Testimonies of the tymes nexte after the Apostles. Anno. 180.
• * 1.686

  191.
• * 1.687

  235.
• * 1.688

  250.
• * 1.689

  270.
• * 1.690

  304.
• * 1.691

  304.
• * 1.692

  3〈1 line〉〈1 line〉0.
• * 1.693

  335.
• * 1.694

  344.
• * 1.695

  An. 38〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.696

  An. 415.
• * 1.697

  An. 453.
• * 1.698

  An. 468.
• * 1.699

  Rufsi. libr. 1. cap. 29.
• * 1.700

  Euse. lib. 3. cap. 39. &. 35.
• * 1.701

  To. con. 1. Lib. epi. 2. ep. 3.
• * 1.702

  Amb. de dig. sacerd. August. lib. 3. aduer. Per∣menìa.