A04474:297
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.
The error of these M. Hardinges reasons is called Fallacia aequivocationis, That is, a falsehood in reasoning, rising by the crafty handling of one word, that hath two, or moe significations, whereby one thing is laid forth in show, and an other is concluded. This word Communio, being one, importeth two things, Consent in Religion, and the Ministration of the holy Mysteries. The one is spiritual, the other corporal: The one requireth circumstance of place, the other requireth no place. Therefore to say, S. Hierome and S. Augustine, being so far a sunder, did Communicate in Religion: ergo, they did Communicate in breaking and receiving the Sacrament: hath no more order in sequel, then if M. Harding would reason thus: S. Hierome, and S. Augustine did communicate in Spirit, ergo, they did also communicate in Body: Or thus, Their Sprites were together, ergo, their Bodies were together. So might he aswell say,1 The Sprite of Elisha was with Giezi his man upon the way: ergo, the body of Elisha was with Giezi upon the way: Or, The Sprite of Paul was with the Corinthians: ergo, his body was with the Corinthians.
The errour of these M. Hardinges reasons is called Fallacia aequiuocationis, That is, a falseheade in reasoninge, risinge by the craftie handlinge of one woorde, that hath twoo, or moe significations, whereby one thinge is laide foorth in shewe, and an other is concluded. This woorde Communio, beinge one, importeth twoo thinges, Consent in Religion, and ye Ministration of the holy Mysteries. The one is spiritual, the other corporal: The one requireth circumstance of place, the other requireth no place. Therefore to say, S. Hierome and S. Augustine, beyng so farre a sunder, did Communicate in Religion: ergo, they did Communicate in breakinge and receiuinge the Sacrament: hath no more order in sequele, then if M. Hardinge woulde reason thus: S. Hierome, and S. Augustine did communicate in Spirite, ergo, they did also communicate in Bodie: Or thus, Their Sprites were togeather, ergo, their Bodies were togeather. So might he aswel say,1 The Sprite of Elizeus was with Giezi his man vpon the way: ergo, the bodie of Elizeus was with Giezi vpon the way: Or, The Sprite of Paule was with the Corinthians: ergo, his bodie was with the Corinthians.
- 1