A reply unto M. Hardinges answerA replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare

Tertullian only saith thus, Christ took Bread, and made it his Body: And because these words seemed doubtful, and might be diversely taken, he openeth his own meaning in this wise: This is my Body: That is to say, A Figure of my Body. And touching this word, Fecit, in what sense it is used in the Holy Fathers, I have spoken at large before in the Tenth Article, and the Second Division. Yet a little more to open M. Hardinges folly in this behalf, whereas in these two several Propositions, Hoc est Corpus, and, Hoc est Figura, this pronoun, Hoc, as Tertullian useth it, hath relation only to one thing, as if he would say, This Bread is my Body: and This Bread is a Figure: M. Harding, to make up this New Construction, contrary both to Tertullians mind, and also to the Natural course of the words, imagineth the same pronoun, Hoc, in the first place to Signify one thing, and in the second place to Signify an other thing: As if Tertullian in the former clause had written thus, Hic Panis, This Bread is my Body: and in the seconde thus, Haec Accidentia, These Accidents are a Figure of my Body. And so, where as these two Propositions should sound both one thing, the one being only a declaration of the other, by M. Hardinges Exposition, they are made to sound two diverse things, the one nothing like unto the other. Thus M. Harding useth the Ancient Fathers, in like sort, as they say, Procrustes the cruel Giant was wont in old times to use his Prisoners: If they be longer, then his measure, he choppeth them shorter: If they be to short, he racketh them longer.

Tertullian onely saithe thus, Christe tooke Breade, and made it his Bodie: And bicause these woordes seemed doubteful, and mighte be diuersely taken, he openeth his owne meaninge in this wise: This is my Bodie: That is to saye, A Figure of my Bodie. And touchinge this woorde, Fecit, in what sense it is vsed in the Holy Fathers, I haue spoken at large before in the Tenthe Article, and the Seconde Diuision. Yet a little more to open M. Hardinges folie in this behalfe, whereas in these twoo seueral Propositions, Hoc est Corpus, and, Hoc est Figura, this pronowne, Hoc, as Tertullian vseth it, hath relation onely to one thinge, as if he woulde saie, This Breade is my Bodie: and This Breade is a Figure: M. Hardinge, to make vp this Newe Construction, contrary bothe to Tertullians minde, and also to the Natural course of ye woordes, imagineth the same pronowne, Hoc, in the firste place to Signifie one thinge, and in the seconde place to Signifie an other thinge: As if Tertullian in the former clause had written thus, Hic Panis, This Breade is my Bodie: and in the seconde thus, Haec Accidentia, These Accidentes are a Figure of my Bodie. And so, where as these twoo Propositions shoulde sounde bothe one thinge, the one beinge onely a declaration of the other, by M. Hardinges Exposition, they are made to sounde twoo diuerse thinges, the one nothinge like vnto the other. Thus M. Hardinge vseth the Ancient Fathers, in like sorte, as they saye, Procustes the cruel Gyant was wonte in olde times to vse his Prisoners: If they be longer, then his measure, he choppeth them shorter: If they be to shorte, he racketh them longer.