A18080:362
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.
Tract. 2. and 3. according to the D. Off election of the minister.
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.
But mine argument is nothing worth, because it is drawn off an act off the Apostle. If this be true / S. Luke was evil advised / to in title his book the act. or deeds of the apostles. For it is as much in the ans. language / as a book of deeds / which christian men are not bound to follow. and yet it was not without cause / that when there are contained in that book / both the doctrine / and deeds of the Apost. S. Lu. as off the greater part / entitled his book / the deeds or acts of the apostles. wherefore doth he in the beginning of that book / repeating the sum of his gospel / by that transition / or passage ⟨p. CLVI⟩1make one body of them both / and bind them as it were in one volume? was it not to give the same authority unto the one / a• to the other: to show that the church had wanted so much / of a perfect direction / as it wanted of that story? Wherefore doth he in the beginning / show that our Sau. Christ instructed them / with the commandments touching his kingdom? was it not to teach us / that whatsoever they did in building of the church: they did it not of there own heads / but by his authority? And if a commandment unto them / be not a commandment unto us: then have we no word in the Scripture / to warrant baptism with. For the commandment of baptising / was spoken to the Apostles only / without any further limitation. Finally / wherefore doth S. Luke set out the Apostles / filled with the holy Ghost? Was 2it only to give credit unto there doctrine / that it should be believed: and not unto there Acts / that they should be followed? yes assuredly / unto there acres / that they should of every one / according to his vocation (where they may) be followed.
But mine argument is nothinge worthe, because it is drawen off an acte off the Apostle. Yf this be trew / S. Luke was euil aduised / to in title his booke the act. or deedes of the apostles. For it is as much in the ans. lāguage / as a booke of deedes / which christiā mē are not boūd to followe. ād yet it was not withowt cause / that whē there are cōteined in that booke / bothe the doctrine / and deedes of the Apost. S. Lu. as off the greater parte / intitled his booke / the deedes or actes of the apostles. wherfore dothe he in the begin̄ing of that booke / repeating the sum̄e of his gospell / by that transition / or passage