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

It is most certain, and therefore the more lamentable, that, as it now fareth through the whole Church of Rome, the people knoweth, neither the Substance, nor the Meaning, nor the Use, nor the Effect, nor the End, or purpose of the Sacrament, nor the Consecration, nor any Word thereto belonging. They hear nothing: They see nothing: They understand nothing: They learn nothing: The Pope, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Priests teach them nothing: It is thought to be the surest fence, & strongest ward for that Religion, that they should be kept still in ignorance, and know nothing: M. Harding both in this place, and also before, calleth them all Hogs,¹ & Swine, as insensible, & Brute beasts, and void of reason, and able to judge, and conceive nothing. Yet he blusheth not to say, The people of the Latin Church is sufficiently instructed, touching the Sacraments: And the more sufficiently, as it appeareth, then ever they were instructed in the Primitive Church, or in the time of the Old learned Fathers. Verily Ignorance is easily learned: They may soon be taught, to know nothing, But the Doctrine, that he meaneth, standeth in Transubstantiation, & Real Presence, and other like matters incident unto the same, such as the Godly people in the Old times never learned. How be it, if the people were thoroughly instructed, and knew the meaning of all Mysteries, would M. Harding thereof conclude, That therefore they should not hear the Words of Consecration? Is this the Logic of Louvain? who ever taught him to frame such a Syllogismus? In what Form, in what Mood may it stand? How may this Antecedent, and this Consequent join together?

It is most certaine, and therefore the more lamentable, that, as it now fareth through the whole Churche of Rome, the people knoweth, neither the Substance, nor the Meaninge, nor the Use, nor the Effecte, nor the Ende, or purpose of the Sacrament, nor the Consecration, nor any Woorde thereto belonginge. They heare nothinge: They sée nothinge: They vnderstande nothinge: They learne nothinge: The Pope, the Cardinalles, the Bishops, the Priestes teache them nothinge: It is thought to be the surest fence, & strongest warde for that Religion, that they should be keapte stil in ignorance, and know nothinge: M. Hardinge bothe in this place, and also before, calleth them al Hogges,¹ & Swine, as insensible, & Brute beastes, and voide of reason, and hable to iudge, and conceiue nothing. Yet he blussheth not to say, The people of the Latine Churche is sufficiently instructed, touchinge the Sacramentes: And ye more sufficiētly, as it appeareth, then euer they were instructed in the Primitiue Churche, or in ye time of ye Olde learned Fathers. Uerily Ignorance is easily learned: They may soone be taught, to know nothinge, But the Doctrine, that he meaneth, standeth in Transubstantiation, & Real Presence, and other like maters incident vnto the same, suche as the Godly people in the Olde times neuer learned. How be it, if the people were thorowly instructed, and knewe the meaninge of al Mysteries, woulde M. Hardinge thereof conclude, That therefore they shoulde not heare the Woordes of Consecration? Is this the Logique of Louaine? who euer taught him to frame suche a Syllogismus? In what Forme, in what Moode may it stande? How may this Antecedente, and this Consequente ioine togeather?