The second reply of Thomas CartwrightThe second replie of Thomas Cartwright

Moreover the comparison is most unfitly made: seeing the civil magistrate is a perpetual office for all times / persons / places: whereas by his own confession / the Archbishop is temporal / and arbitrary. Where also he asketh whether the civill Magistrate shall not have the chief authority in governing the church, because there is no express mention off him in thes two places: I answer that the Princes authority is established in other places / so that it may flourish without thes. But the Archbishopric / seeing it is an ecclesiastical function / ether must be planted by one off thes places / or die in the church considering that there is no ecclesiastical function / which is not here set forth. Your collection off my words is evil bound together. for how cleave thes? Some offices instituted off God endured for a time, therefore men may devise new offices. Where lieth the strength of your argument? Whether in this that because God instituted offices for a time / therefore man may: or in this that God did abrogate certain offices / therefore man may institute? Which soever you say (as you must needs say one): the absurdity is apparent. for in both the comparison is made / between the authority off God / and the authority off man. Between whom how great distance there is: so great difference is there between your argument / and a just conclusion. The clean contrary is gathered rather. For as we reason against the Papists / that God did not abrogate his own ceremonies / that men should thrust in others considering that if he would have had ceremonies / he would have taken off his own: so it may be said / that God did not cut off his own ministries / to make place for others: and that if moe ministries off preaching / and governing jointly had been necessary / beside Doctors / and Pastors: he would rather have kept his own / then taken those which men devise.

Moreouer the comparison is most vnfitly made: seing the cyuill magistrate is a perpetuall office for all times / persones / places: wheras by his owne confession / the Archbisop is temporall / and arbitrarie. Where also he asketh whether the ciuill Magistrate shall not haue the cheif autoritie in gouerning the church, because there ys no expresse mention off him in thes two places: I answer that the Princes autoritie is established in other places / so that it may florish withowt thes. But the Archbishoprick / seing yt ys an ecclesiasticall function / ether must be planted by one off thes places / or die in the church considering that there is no ecclesiasticall function / which is not here set forth. Yowr collection off my wordes is euill bound together. for how cleaue thes? Some offices instituted off God endured for a time, therfore men may deuise new offices. Where lieth the strenght of yowr argument? Whether in this that becawse God instituted offices for a time / therfore man may: or in this that God did abrogate certein offices / therfore man may institute? Which soeuer yow say (as yow must needes say one): the absurditie is apparant. for in both the comparison is made / between the autoritie off God / and thautoritie off man. Betwene whom how great distance there is: so great difference is there between yowr argument / and a iust conclusion. The cleane contrarie is gathered rather. For as we reason against the Papistes / that God did not abrogate his owne ceremonies / that men should thrust in others considering that if he would haue had ceremonies / he would haue taken off his owne: so yt may be saied / that God did not cut off his owne ministeries / to make place for others: and that if moe ministeries off preaching / and gouerning iointly had bene necessarie / beside Doctors / and Pastors: he would rather haue kept his owne / then takē those vvhich men deuise.