A18080:1079
The second reply of Thomas CartwrightThe second replie of Thomas Cartwright
The second reply of Thomas Cartwright: against Master Doctor Whitgiftes second answer, touching the Church disciplineThe second replie of Thomas Cartwright: agaynst Maister Doctor Whitgiftes second answer, touching the Churche discipline
Heidelberg: printed by Michael Schirat, 1575
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Where I ask / what buckler we may have to hold out 1against the Papists, which come upon us with the name of traditions off the apostles, if we admit that there were archbishops ordained by them, whereof the scripture maketh no mention: he answereth there can be no danger in them, so they be not made necessary to salvation, but such as receive alteration. Which although it be clean contrary to that he said before / where he bindeth ⟨p. DLXXVII⟩2us to observation of them / as I have showed: yet it shall be sufficient here to let him understand / that he hath utterly barred him self from this answer / for that he asaith / this ministry of the Archbishop is necessary, yea most necessary. Now if it be most necessary, for preservation of unity off the church: it is plain that it is necessary also for the salvation of it. For the next divis. I have showed 4how absurdly the D. defendeth this roving: where let the reader judge what difference there is / between our archbishop and Jeromes bishop / which differed nothing from a common minister / but that he had the ordaining off ministers. And here I call once again upon him / to show any godly and learned writer / which expoundeth this place of Jerome off an archbishop: to see if he be any happier in this place / then he was before in Cyprian's. The Bishop off Salisb. baffirmeth / that the very meaning off Jerome is, off every bishop in his diocese: and Harding in the end beaten down with the light off the place / is compelled to cconfess it. The next I leave to the reader to judge / by that alleged on both sides.
Where I ask / vvhat buckler vve may haue to hould ovvt 1against the Papistes, vvhich come vpon vs vvith the name of traditions off the apostles, if vve admit that there vvere archbishops ordeined by them, vvherof the scripture maketh no mention: he answereth there can be no daunger in them, so they be not made necessarie to saluacion, but such as receiue alteracion. Which althowgh it be cleane contrary to that he saide before / where he bindeth