The second reply of Thomas CartwrightThe second replie of Thomas Cartwright

Against the authority alleged out off Eusebius / that Denis was bishop / is opposed that it is a negative argument of authority: which is an engine to wring out off the churches hands / a singular means which all the writers of our times / use against the forgeries off the Papists. For when they reason against the forged Epistles / against Chrysostoms liturgy / against the bastard writings of Augustine / &c. that there are things contained in them which no writer of that age wherein they are supposed to have writ / maketh mention off; the D. hath taught an easy answer / that it is an evil argument off authority negatively / and that it followeth not that there were no such things then / because they were not mentioned in their writings. Likewise when the bishop of Salis. made this challenge after performed / that it could not be showed out off any allowed writer 600. Years after Christ / that there was any mention off such / and such things maintained by popery: the Answ. hath with one word / wiped away the profit off all those travails. for it may be answered / that such things were / although none made mention of them. The Papists in their defences have hard foreheads: but I think there is scarce found amongest them / that would not blush at such an answer. Yet this is almost the salve for all sores / namely where I have showed / that in ⟨p. CCCCLXXVIII⟩none of the writers within certain hundred years after Christ / which have filled their books with the mention of bishops / there is any the least mention of an Archbishop. Against which riot off answer oftentimes repeated / it shall be sufficient once here to have spoken generally.

Against the autoritie alledged owte off Eusebius / that Denys was bishop / is opposed that it is a negatiue argument of autorisie: which is an engine to wringe owte off the churches handes / a singular meanes which all the writers of our times / vse againste the forgeries off the Papistes. For when they reason against the forged Epistles / againste Chrisostomes leytourgie / against the bastard writinges of Augustine / &c. that there are thinges conteined in them which no writer of that age wherein they are supposed to haue writte / maketh mention off; the D. hath tawght an easie answer / that yt is an euill argument off autoritie negatiuely / and that yt followeth not that there were no suche thinges then / becawse they were not mentioned in their writinges. Likewise when the bishop of Salis. made this chalenge after performed / that yt coulde not be shewed owt off any alowed writer 600. Yeares after Christe / that there was any mention off suche / and suche thinges mainteined by poperie: the Answ. hath with one worde / wiped awaie the profite off all those trauailes. for yt maie be answered / that suche thinges were / althowghe none made mencion of them. The Papistes in their defences haue harde foreheades: but I thincke there is scarce founde amongeste thē / that would not blushe at suche an answer. Yet this is almost the salue for all sores / namely where I haue shewed / that in