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.

Io. Whitgifte.

Those that be learned know, that the gouernment of the church is neither populare, nor* 1.1 Aristocratical▪ (as it is before declared where you haue affirmed the lyke) but a Mo∣narchie. For in euery particular church where there is a christian Magistrate, he is chiefe and principall ouer the rest: and you your selfe confesse, that the Pastor is the chiefe of the Seigniorie, whiche ought not to be if the state were eyther Popular, or Aristocraticall. Of the vniuersall churche onely Christ is the head and chief, and ther∣fore the state of it is Monarchicall. But of the state and kinde of gouernmente of* 1.2 the church in euery kingdome or prouince, I haue particularly, and at large spo∣ken in the treatise of Archbishops.

I shal not néed to will the Reader once againe to marke how you bend your force against a Monarchie. For your principle is, that the gouernment of the common wealthe* 1.3 must be framed according to the gouernment of the churche: And therfore it maye not be a kingdome, but rather a Popular estate, or Aristocraticall, bicause the gouernment of the Churche (as you say) is so. But be it as you woulde haue it: what then? Forsooth it maye easylyer decline from a popular estate to a confused tumulte, and from an A∣ristocratical state to the gouernmente of a fewe, when there is no Christian Magistrate, than when there is a Christian magistrate, therefore it is more meete for the gouernmente of the Churche, to be populare or Aristocraticall vnder a Christian Magistrate, than vnder a tyrant.

Fyrste, I deny your argument as béeing voyde of all sense and reason. Secondly, I saye that no Christian Magistrate is bound to suffer in his dominion, so manie seue∣ral and distinct kindes of gouernment: and to haue one kinde of gouernment in the Churche, and an other in the common wealth, seing that God hath committed the chief care of them both to one and the self same person. Thirdly, I denie your antece∣dent: that is, that a popular or Aristocraticall qinde of gouernyng the churche doth more easyly decline into their contaries vnder a tyrant than vnder a Christian magistrate: for men being in persecution, and in dayly expectation of death, are not so desirous to procure vnto themselues authoritie & dominion, as they be in the time of peace and prosperitie, Moreouer vnder a tyrant and in the tyme of persecution, those that be appoynted gouernours of the Church, be but for a time only, and during the pleasure of such as appointed them, and therefore can not vsurpe any vnlawfull iurisdiction ouer the rest against their willes. In such times of the Church rather disobedience and stub∣bornesse in the common sort, than tyrannie or oppression in the gouernours, is to be feared. Surely you would fayne haue reason for your popular cause, if you could tell where to fynde it.

And lette the Reader note the myght of this your reason: the popular and Ari∣stocratical kind of gouernment may more easyly decline to their contraries vnder a tyrant than vnder a Christian magistrate: therfore y^e gouernmēt of the church must be popular or Aristocratical rather vnder a Christian magistrate, thā vnder a tyrant. Nowsoeuer the antecedent is true, there is no sequele in the argument. For vnder a tyrant necessitie doth driue the Church oftentymes to one of these two kindes of go∣uernment, but when there is a Christian Magistrate, God hath appointed it to bée subiect to him.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The gouern∣ment of the church monar chicall.
• * 1.2

  Tract. 8.
• * 1.3

  C. T. bendeth his force a∣gainst a mo∣narchie.