A04468:1849
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to a certain book lately set forth by M. Harding, and entitled, A confutation of &c. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Elephant, by Henry Wykes, Anno 1567. 27. OctobrisImprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Elephante, by Henry VVykes, Anno 1567. 27. Octobris
Part 2 › The Apology. › M. Harding.Part 2 › The Apologie. › M. Hardinge.
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.
For these causes it may well be said, that we should rather follow the order of Luke, who witnesseth that Christ spake these words before his maundy, * then Matthew, and Mark, who tell it, as spoken after. Secondly the order of Luke is confirmed by the circumstance of the things, that he describeth, more then the other Evangelists. Now because in the Chalice of the Old Law there was certainly not Blood, but Wine, (whereas Christ teacheth, that in his Chalice his own Blood is * contained) let▪ he discrete Reader judge, whether we must not rather think, that these words of Christ▪ I will not from henceforth drink of this generation of the Vine, do not rather pertain to the Cup of the Old Law, (as Luke placeth them) then to the Chalice of Christ after the Consecration, whereof Matthew, and Mark rehearse them.
For these causes it maie wel be saide, that we shoulde rather folowe the order of Luke, who witnesseth that Christe spake these woordes before his maundie, * then Mathewe, and Marke, who tel it, as spoken after. Secondly the order of Luke is confirmed by the circumstance of the thinges, that he describeth, more then the other Euangelistes. Nowe because in the Chalice of the Olde Lawe there was certainely not Bloude, but VVine, (whereas Christe teacheth, that in his Chalice his owne Bloude is * conteined) let▪ he discrete Reader iudge, whether we muste not rather thinke, that these woordes of Christe▪ I wil not from hencefoorthe drinke of this generation of the Vine, do not rather perteine to the Cuppe of the Olde Lawe, (as Luke placeth them) then to the Chalice of Christe after the Consecration, whereof Mathewe, and Marke reherse them.
Fourthly, and lastly, when Mathe we, and Mark rehearse that Christ said, he would not from henceforth drink of that generation of the Vine, they both, in much like sort of speaking, add thereunto these words,1 (which in the Apology were guilefully left out) Until that day, when I will drink it New with you in the Kingdom of God my Father. If Christ speak of a New drinking, which is to come, by likelihood the drink paste is Old. What exclamation would be sufficient to express, that in this