A04474:1972
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 […]of Salisbury.Article 4 › The 〈…〉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.
Here M. Harding doubting, least his Reader being weary of these cold slender shifts, and looking for some other more substantial, and formal reasons, would say, I hear not yet the Head of the Universal Church, purposely preventeth the matter, and saith: what forceth that, whether that very term be used in any ancient writer or no? Gentle Reader, I beseech thee, mark well this dealing. This name, the Head of the Universal Church, is the very thing, that we deny, and that M. Harding hath taken in hand to prove: and boldly avoucheth, that he hath already plainly showed, and proved the same. Yet now in the end finding him self destitute, he turneth it of, as a thing of nought, and saith, What forceth that, whether he were called by that very name or no? As though he would say, Al the old Fathers of the Church both Greeks, and Latins, wanted words, and eloquence, and either they could not, or they durst not call the Head of the Church by his own peculiar name. Howe be it, if the Bishop of Rome be so called, it may be showed: If not, then is my first assertion true. Verily, touching the title of Universal Bishop,1 S. Gregory calleth it, Novum Nomen, A New Name, unacquainted, and unknown unto the world. And saith further, If we quietly take this matter, we destroy the Faith of the Universal Church. 2This therefore was the cause, that the ancient Doctors never called the Bishop of Rome the Head of the Church: for that they knew he was neither reputed, nor taken so, nor was in deed the Head of the ⟨p. 307⟩Church.
Here M. Hardinge doubtinge, least his Reader being wearie of theise colde sclender shiftes, and lookinge for some other more substantial, and formal reasons, woulde saie, I heare not yet the Head of the Vniuersal Churche, purposely preuenteth the mater, and saith: what forceth that, whether that very terme be vsed in any ancient writer or no? Gentle Reader, I beseeche thée, marke wel this dealinge. This name, the Heade of the Uniuersal Churche, is the very thinge, that we denie, and that M. Hardinge hathe taken in hande to proue: and boldely auoucheth, that he hathe already plainely shewed, and proued the same. Yet nowe in the ende findinge him self destitute, he turneth it of, as a thinge of nought, and saith, VVhat forceth that, whether he were called by that very name or no? As though he woulde saie, Al the olde Fathers of the Churche bothe Greekes, and Latines, wanted woordes, and eloquence, and either they coulde not, or they durst not cal the Heade of the Churche by his owne peculiar name. Howe be it, if the Bishop of Rome be so called, it maie be shewed: If not, then is my first assertion true. Uerily, touchinge the title of Uniuersal Bishop,