A04474:232
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 1 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 1 › 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.
With what honest countenance then can M. Harding say, that we have no Consecration? we pronounce the same words of Consecration that Christ pronounced: we do the same that Christ bad us do: we proclaim the death of the Lord: we speak openly in a known tongue, and the people understandeth us: we Consecrate for the Congregation, & not only for our self: we have the Element: we join Gods word unto it: and so it is made a Sacrament: Yet saith M. Harding we have no Consecration. And can he think, that a Priest of his side doth Consecrate, that whispereth his words closely, and that in a strange tongue, in such sort as no man heareth, or understandeth him: that oftentimes him self knoweth not neither the words of Christ, nor the sense of the words: nor the use, nor the end of the Sacrament: that exhorteth no man: that speaketh to no man: that, if he do Consecrate, doeth Consecrate only for him self, and not for others: that doeth neither that Christ did, nor that Christ commanded to be done? If we Consecrate not, can he think that such a one doeth Consecrate?
With what honest countenance then can M. Harding say, yt wée haue no Consecration? wée pronounce the same woordes of Consecration yt Christe pronounced: wée doo the same yt Christe bad vs doo: wée proclayme the death of the Lorde: wée speake openly in a knowen tongue, and the people vnderstandeth vs: wée Consecrate for the Congregation, & not onely for our selfe: wée haue the Element: wée ioygne Gods woorde vnto it: and so it is made a Sacrament: Yet saith M. Harding wée haue no Consecration. And can he thinke, yt a Priest of his side doth Consecrate, yt whispereth his woordes cloasely, and that in a straunge tongue, in suche sorte as no man heareth, or vnderstandeth him: yt oftentimes him selfe knoweth not neither the woordes of Christe, nor the sense of the woordes: nor ye vse, nor the ende of the Sacrament: that exhorteth noman: that speaketh to no man: that, if he doo Consecrate, doeth Consecrate onely for him selfe, and not for others: that doeth neither that Christe did, nor that Christe commaunded to be done? If wée Consecrate not, can he thinke that suche a one doeth Consecrate?
And where as he saith further, that we have no manner Oblation in our Communion, he should not him self speak manifest untruth, having taken upon him, as he saith, to reform falsehood.