A04474:1938
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 4 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 4 › 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.
But what are these Old Fathers taught to say? Or how is M. Harding relieved by their words? In the Salutation before their letters they write thus, Sixtus, Pontianus, Victor, Bishop of the Universal Church. This (saith M. Harding) is even alone thing with, Universalis Episcopus▪ there is no manner difference. O what ranging, and hunting here is, to beat up that thing, that will not be found. M. Harding, because he can not find the Universal Bishop, that he sought for, therefore he hath sought out the next of kin, that is, The Bishop of the Universal Church: and these two, he saith, be both one. Howbeit, this matter neede• no great seeking: every Child might soon have found it. But if an Universal Bishop, and a Bishop of the Universal Church, be all one thing, how then is it true,1 that S. Gregory saith, Nemo decessorum &c. None of my Predecessors would ever consent to this name? Or how can he find such fault with the name of Universal Bishop, and bear so easily with the name of Bishop of the Universal Church, which, he knew, his Predecessors had used, if he took them both for one thing, without difference? To be short, if these names, as M. Harding assureth him self, be both one, how is the one Godly, the other Ungodly: the one Arrogant, the other not Arrogant: the one blasphemous, the other not blasphemous?
But what are these Olde Fathers taught to saye? Or howe is M. Hardinge relieued by their woordes? In the Salutation before their letters they write thus, Sixtus, Pontianus, Victor, Bishop of the Vniuersal Churche. This (saithe M. Hardinge) is euen alone thinge with, Vniuersalis Episcopus▪ there is no manner difference. O what ranginge, and huntinge here is, to beate vp that thinge, that wil not be founde. M. Hardinge, bicause he can not finde the Uniuersal Bishop, that he sought for, therefore he hath sought out the nexte of kinne, that is, The Bishop of the Uniuersal Churche: and these two, he saithe, be both one. Howbeit, this mater néede• no greate séekinge: euery Childe might soone haue founde it. But if an Uniuersal Bishop, and a Bishop of the Uniuersal Churche, be al one thinge, howe then is it true,1 that S. Gregorie saithe, Nemo decessorum &c. None of my Predcessours woulde euer consent to this name? Or how can he finde suche faulte with the name of Uniuersal Bishop, and beare so easily with the name of Bishop of the Uniuersal Churche, which, he knew, his Predecessours had vsed, if he tooke them bothe for one thinge, without difference? To be shorte, if these names, as M. Hardinge assureth him selfe, be bothe one, howe is the one Godly, the other Ungodly: the one Arrogant, the other not Arrogant: the one blasphemous, the other not blasphemous?