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

T. C. Page. 117. Sect. 3.

But it may be obiected, that in this poynt the booke of common prayer is not in fault, whiche doth not onely not forbid that all the Church shoulde receyue togither, but also by a good and godly exhortation moueth those that be present, that they shoulde not depart but communicate altogither. It is true that it doth not forbid, and that there is godly exhortation for that purpose, but that (I say) is not enough, for neyther shoulde it suffer that three or foure shoulde haue a Communion by themselues (so many being in the Church meete to receyue, and to whome the Supper of the Lord doth of lyke right apperteyne) and it ought to prouide that those which woulde withdrawe them∣selues, should be by ecclesiasticall discipline at all tymes, and now also vnder a godly Prince by ciuill punishment(*) 1.1 brought to communicate with their brethren. And this is the lawe of God, and this is nowe and hath bene heretofore the practise of Churches reformed. All men vnderstande that the Passeouer was a fygure of the Lordes Supper, and that there shoulde be as straight bondes to binde men to celebrate the remembrance of our spirituall deliuerance, as there was to remember the deliuerance out of Egypt. But whosoeuer did not then communicate with the rest at that time, when the Passeouer was eaten, was excommunicated, as it may appeare in the Num∣bers,* 1.2 where he sayth, that whosoeuer did not communicate being cleane, (*) 1.3 his soule should be cut of from amongst the people of God, therefore this neglect or contempt rather of the Lordes Supper ought to be punished with no lesse punishment, especially when as (after the Church hath procee∣ded in that order which our Sauiour Christ appoynteth of admonishing) they be not sorie for their fault, and promise amendment. And that this was the custome of the Churches, it may appeare by* 1.4 the. 9. of those Cannons which are fathered of the Apostles, where it is decreed that all the faythful that entred into the congregation, and heard the Scriptures read, and did not tarie out the prayers and the holy Communion, should be as those which were cause〈1 line〉〈1 line〉s of disorders in the Church, sepa∣rated from the Church (or as it is translated of an other) depriued of the Communion. Also in the councell of Braccara, it was decreed, that if any entring into the Church of God, heard the Scrip∣tures,* 1.5 and afterwarde of wantonnesse or losenesse, withdrew himselfe from the Communion of the Sacrament and so brake the rule of discipline in the reuerend Sacraments, should be put out of the church, till such time as he had by good frutes declared his repentance.

Io. Whitgifte.

I do not much disagrée from this, sauing that I sée no reason, that thrée or foure should be debarred from so comfortable and fruteful a Sacrament, either for the neg∣ligence or necessarie impediments of others: except also your misunderstāding of the 9. of Numbers: for delere animam eius de populis suis is there not to excommunicate, (as you

interprete it, but to put to death and to kill, which were a hard punishment for such as be negligent in comming to the Communion. Conuenient discipline I thinke very necessarie in this poynt, and therefore I will not stande with you in other circum∣stances of this portion, onely I will desire the Reader to note howe farre the Au∣thours* 1.6 of the Admonition varie from you in this assertion, who Page 102. say, That we thrust them in their sinne to the Lordes table, and page 109. that it shoulde be prouided, that Papists nor other, neyther constraynedly nor customable communicate in the mysteryes of saluation, whiche cannot otherwise be ment, than that we compell them by punish∣ments to come to the Lordes table. But howe much more cause shoulde they haue so to say: if we were as seuere in punishing as you here requyre. But the negligence of the common sort, in not oftner frequenting the Lordes supper is lamentable, the punishment appoynted for such, in all places not so well executed, and therefore as I sayde before, I thinke conuenient, discipline and due execution of the same, verie necessarie.

An other thing also I woulde haue the Reader to marke, that you here alledge for proofe the Canons of the Apostles; which are as much doubted of to haue béene the Apostles, as the Epistles either of Clement, or Anacletus.

Notes

• (*) 1.1

  This is clean〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 contrarie to the Admonition. pag. 109.
• * 1.2

  Num. 9.
• (*) 1.3

  This is not excommunica∣tion, but putting to death.
• * 1.4

  Conc. Apo. Can. 9.
• * 1.5

  Con. 2. Bracca. cap. 83. 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉om. 2.
• * 1.6

  The Admo∣nition and the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 agr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 not.