A04474:2848
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 12 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 12 › 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.
How be it, (saith M. Harding) this Interpretation of Tertullian in deed is not according to the right sense of Christs words. Hereby it appeareth what affiance M. Harding hath in the judgement of this learned Father. After so many fair words, he beginneth utterly to mislike him, and concludeth in the end, that he wrote, he knew not what: and took upon him to expound Christs words, and yet understood not, what Christ meant: and that, not in any deep Allegory, or other Spiritual, or secrete meaning, but even in the very Literal Sense, and outward sound of Christs words. And thus Tertullian is charged, not only with Ignorance, but also with Presumption.
How be it, (saith M. Hardinge) this Interpretation of Tertullian in deede is not according to the right sense of Christes woordes. Hereby it appeareth what affiance M. Hardinge hath in the iudgement of this learned Father. After so many faire woordes, he beginneth vtterly to mislike him, and concludeth in the ende, that he wrote, he knew not what: and tooke vpon him to expounde Christes woordes, and yet vnderstoode not, what Christe meante: and that, not in any deepe Allegorie, or other Spiritual, or secrete meaning, but euen in the very Literal Sense, and outwarde sounde of Christes woordes. And thus Tertullian is charged, not onely with Ignorance, but also with Presumption.
But if, as M. Harding saith, Tertullian understood not Christs meaning, what if some man would likewise say, M. Harding understandeth not Tertullians meaning? And what if the simple Reader understand not M. Hardinges meaning? It were to much to say further, M. Harding understandeth not his own meaning. Verily Tertullian not once nameth any one of all these M. ⟨p. 460⟩Hardinges strange Fantasies, neither Form, nor Accident, nor Visible, nor Invisible, nor Outward Element, nor Secrete Presence, nor Really, nor Substantially, nor I know not what. He wrote, and meant plainly in these cases, as others the learned Fathers wrote, and meant.
But if, as M. Hardinge saith, Tertullian vnderstoode not Christes meaning, what if some man woulde likewise say, M. Hardinge vnderstandeth not Tertullians meaninge? And what if the simple Reader vnderstande not M. Hardinges meaninge? It were to muche to say further, M. Hardinge vnderstandeth not his owne meaninge. Uerily Tertullian not once nameth any one of al these M.