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

Chap. 1. the. 16. Diuision.

Ansvvere to the Admonition Pag. 180 Sect. 3.

You say kneeling is a shew of euill, and for proofe thereof you al∣ledge.

1. Thessa. 5. Absteyne from all apparance of euill. How followeth this, The Apostle willeth vs to absteyne, from all apparance of e∣uill: therefore kneeling at the communion is a shewe of euill? But your meaning is, that bycause the Papists kneeled at the sacring of the Masse (as they called it) therefore we may not kneele at the re∣ceiuing of the communion: you may as well say, they prayed to ima∣ges and saincts kneeling, therefore we may not pray kneeling.

The places written in your margent to proue, that Christ did sit at* 1.1 supper be needelesse, & were vsed for the same purpose before, where I haue also spoken my opinion of kneeling.

If you cite the Galat. 4. and. 5. and the Epistle to the Hebrues in many places, to proue that sitting signifyeth rest, that is, a full fini∣shing of the ceremoniall law: you do but delude the Readers, and a∣buse the Scriptures, for there is no such matter to be found in them. If you alleage them to proue that Christ is the full finishing of the the Ceremoniall lawe, you take vpon you to proue that whiche no man doubteth of, and is verie farre from your purpose.

You note also the. 20. of Exodus: Thou shalte not bovve dovvne to* 1.2 them, nor vvorship them, to proue that we may not kneele at the com∣munion: but how fitly, euery childe may iudge. For what sequele is there in this argumente? God in the seconde commaundement for∣biddeth worshipping of images, therefore we may not receyue the communion kneelyng.

T. C. Pag. 132. Sect. 1.

For the rest which he hath here, or in the. 180. and. 181. page, it is eyther answered before (as that the daunger of adoration may be taken away) or hath no matter worthye the answeryng. I onely admonishe the Reader, that sytting at the communion is not holden to be necessarie, but on∣ly I thinke that kneeling is verie daungerous, for the causes before alleadged.

Io. Whitgifte.

An easy kinde of answering, & a verie slender defense for the crooked handeling of the scriptures, by the authors of the Admonition. But it is wittily done, so to passe o∣uer that which you can not mainteyn. Surely the authors of the Admonition are ve∣rie little beholding to you, for in most places you leaue them to answer for thēselues.

If sitting at the cōmunion be not holden to be necessarie, why do you then make a schisme* 1.3 in the church for it? do not you know y^t M. Caluin, M. Bullinger, and others, writing a∣gainst the Anabaptists, do especially condemne them for makyng a tumulte in the Churche aboute externall and indifferente things? S. Paule sayeth, If any luste to be contentious, we haue no such custome, neither the Churches of God, and he meaneth in externall rites. But the question is whether the church must giue place to you, or you to the church, in that thing that by your owne confession may be vsed.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Pag. 181. sect. 1. &. 2.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 182. sect. 1
• * 1.3

  Contention aboute exter∣nall rites be∣come not the churche of God. 1. Cor. 11.