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

The New Fantasy of Being present Secretly, or under Covert, is answered before.

The New Fantasie of Beinge present Secretely, or vnder Couerte, is answeared before.

And where as, for further proof of Tertullians mind herein, M. Harding hath here alleged certain words of his unto his wife, understand thou, good Reader, that wilfully he hath of purpose corrupted the same, the rather to mislead thy simplicity. True it is, that the Unfaithful, that knoweth not Christ, if he happen to see the Bread of the Holy Mysteries, will judge no further of it, but that he seeth. But what it meaneth, or Signifieth, or unto what end it is appointed, he knoweth not. But the Bread of the Sacrament, by Christs Institution, is Spiritual, and Heavenly Bread, even as the Water of Baptism is Spiritual, and Heavenly Water. Which thing, as Tertullian saith, the Infidel cannot see. But M. Harding, having small regard to his Readers judgement, hath wittingly falsified his Translation, changing this Article, It, into, Him, Only of his own particular wilfulness, contrary to all others, Old, or New: yea contrary to his own Fellows. Of whom one Translateth the same in this wise: And if he know it, he believeth it to be Bread, and not that, which it is said to be. No man may be bold to work such open Corruption, but M. Harding. For, where as Tertullians words be plain, Si scierit maritus tuus, Panem esse credet, non illum (Panem) qui dicitur: If thy husband know it (being an Infidel) he will believe it to be (bare) Bread, but not that (Bread) that it is called, M. Harding thought it better to Translate it thus, He will believe it to be Bread, but not Him, Who it is called: As if it were the person of a Man. This dealing, and the whole understanding of Tertullians mind, is opened more at large in the first Article, and in the seventeenth Division. Certainly, false Translation maketh no sufficient proof.

And where as, for further proufe of Tertullians minde herein, M. Hardinge hath here alleged certaine woordes of his vnto his wife, vnderstande thou, good Reader, that wilfully he hath of purpose corrupted the same, the rather to misleade thy simplicitie. True it is, that the Unfaithful, that knoweth not Christe, if he happen to sée the Breade of the Holy Mysteries, wil iudge no further of it, but that he séeth. But what it meaneth, or Signifieth, or vnto what ende it is appointed, he knoweth not. But the Breade of the Sacramente, by Christes Institution, is Spiritual, and Heauenly Breade, euen as the Water of Baptisme is Spiritual, and Heauenly Water. Whiche thinge, as Tertullian saithe, the Infidel cannot sée. But M. Hardinge, hauinge smal regarde to his Readers iudgement, hath witingely falsified his Translation, changinge this Article, It, into, Him, Onely of his owne particular wilfulnesse, contrary to al others, Olde, or New: yea contrary to his owne Felowes. Of whom one Translateth the same in this wise: And if he know it, he beleeueth it to be Breade, and not that, whiche it is saide to be. No man may be bolde to woorke suche open Corruption, but M. Hardinge. For, where as Tertullians woordes be plaine, Si scierit maritus tuus, Panem esse credet, non illum (Panem) qui dicitur: If thy husbande knowe it (beinge an Infidel) he wil beleue it to be (bare) Breade, but not that (Breade) that it is called, M. Hardinge thought it better to Translate it thus, He wil beleeue it to be Breade, but not Him, VVho it is called: As if it were the personne of a Man. This dealinge, and the whole vnderstandinge of Tertullians minde, is opened more at large in the firste Article, and in the seuenteenth Diuision. Certainely, false Translation maketh no sufficient proufe.