A reply to an answer made of M. Doctor Whitgifte Against the admonition to…A replye to an ansvvere made of M. Doctor VVhitgifte Against the admonition to…

Erasmus followeth / which saith Titus was archbishop of Crete / whom I could answer with his own words / for I am sure he will grant me / that Titus & Timothy had one office / the one in Ephesus / the other in Crete: but it appeareth by Erasmus his own words / that Timothy was but bishop of Ephesus / therefore Titus was but bishop of Crete. For Erasmus in his argument upon the first Epistle of Timothy / saith that S. Paul did inform Timothy of the office of a bishop / and of the discipline of the church: If either he had been an archbishop / or an archbishop had been so necessary as it is made / he would have instructed him in that also.

Erasmus followeth / which sayth Titus was archbyshop of Crete / whom I coulde answere with hys owne wordes / for I am sure he will graunt me / that Titus & Timothe had one office / the one in Ephesus / the other in Crete: but it appeareth by Erasmus hys owne wordes / that Timothe was but byshop of Ephesus / therefore Titus was but byshop of Crete. For Erasmus in hys argument vpon the first Epistle of Timothe / sayth that S. Paule did enfornie Timothe of the office of a byshop / and of the discipline of the church: If eyther he had bene an archbyshop / or an archbyshop had bene so necessary as it is made / hee would haue instructed hym in that also.

And I pray you tell me / whether Erasmus or the Greek Scholiast / be more to be believed in this point / out of whom is taken that which is in the latter end of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus / where they both are called the first elected Bishops that ever were / either of Ephesus or Creta. For my part I think they were neither Bishops nor Archbishops / but Evangelists / as shall appear afterwards: But it may be sufficient to have set against Erasmus authority / the authority of the Scholiast. And if here you will cavil and say that the Scholiast which sayeth he was Bishop / denieth not but that he also was an Archbishop / because an archbishop is a bishop / it may be answered casely / that the Scholiast did not speak nor write so unproperly / as to call them by the general name of bishop / whom he might as easily have called (if the truth would have let him) by a more proper and particular name of archbishop. And further in this division of the ministers / the archbishop and the bishop are members of one division / and therefore one of them can not be affirmed and said of an other / for that were contrary to the nature of a true division.