A04474:1125
A reply unto M. Hardinges answerA replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare
A reply unto M. Hardinges answer by perusing whereof the discrete, and diligent reader may easily see, the weak, and unstable grounds of the Romaine religion, which of late hath been accounted Catholic. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare by perusinge whereof the discrete, and diligent reader may easily see, the weake, and vnstable groundes of the Romaine religion, whiche of late hath beene accompted Catholique. By Iohn Iewel Bishoppe of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Black Oliphant, by Henry Wykes, Anno. 1565Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Blacke Oliphante, by Henry VVykes, Anno. 1565
Article 3 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 3 › The B. of Sarisburie.
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.
The other is, that Ephrems Homilies were pronounced unto the people in the Vulgar tongue: yet M. Harding him self pronounceth Gospels, Epistles, and Homilies, and all what so ever, unto the people in a strange tongue.
The other is, that Ephrems Homili•s were pronounced vnto the people in the Uulgare tongue: yet M. Hardinge him selfe pronounceth Gospels, Epistles, and Homilies, and al what so euer, vnto the people in a straunge tongue.
But to avoid this inconvenience, he saith▪ The Homilies were no part of the Service. First how is he sure of that? Certainly, the Latin Homilies be read in the Matins, and accounted part of the Romish Service. Again, what necessary Sequel is this: The people understood Ephrems Homilies: Ergo, his Homilies were no part of the Service? Or what leadeth him to think, It was profitable for the people to hear and understand Ephrem, and yet was not profitable for them, to hear & understand Peter, Paul, or Christ? To be short, be confesseth, that Ephrems writings were exhortations to the Greek people: and yet doubteth, whether they were translated into the Greek, or no: and so he endeth in uncertainty, and concludeth nothing.
But to avoide this inconuenience, he saithe▪ The Homilies were no parte of the Seruice. First how is he sure of that? Certainely, the Latine Homilies be redde in the Matins, and accompted parte of the Romishe Seruice. Againe, what necessary Sequele is this: The people vnderstoode Ephrems Homilies: Ergo, his Homilies were no parte of the Seruice? Or what leadeth him to thinke, It was profitable for the people to heare and vnderstande Ephrem, and yet was not profitablé for them, to heare & vnderstande Peter, Paule, or Christe? To be shorte, be confesseth, that Ephrems writinges were exhortations to the Gréeke people: and yet doubteth, whether they were translated into the Gréeke, or no: and so he endeth in vncertaintie, and concludeth nothing.