A04474:509
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
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.
But saith M. Harding, in case of negligence of the people, if the Priest receive alone, the substance of the Mass is not impaired. This difference in terms of Substance, and Accidents in Christs Institution, is newly found out, and hath no warrant neither of the Scriptures, nor of the old Fathers. Howe be it Christs example in doing, and commandment to do the same, may not be taken for a show or Accident, but for the effect and Substance of his Supper. Do this saith Christ,1 the same that you have seen me do: Take, Bliss, Break, Divide, in my remembrance. 2Which words S. Chrysostom expoundeth thus: Hoc facite in memoriam beneficij mei, salutis vestrae: Do this in remembrance of my benefit, and of your Salvation. This is no Accident or light fantasy, that may be left at our pleasure, but the very substantial point of that Sacrament, which we are specially commanded to continue until he come: and for want whereof S. Paul saith,3 that Supper is not the Lords Supper.
But saithe M. Hardinge, in case of negligence of the people, if the Prieste receiue alone, the substance of the Masse is not impaired. This difference in termes of Substance, and Accidentes in Christes Institution, is newly founde out, and hath no warrant neither of the Scriptures, nor of the olde Fathers. Howe be it Christes example in dooinge, and commaundement to doo the same, may not be taken for a shewe or Accident, but for the effecte and Substance of his Supper. Doo this saithe Christe,1 the same that you haue seene mee doo: Take, Blisse, Breake, Diuide, in my remembrance. 2Whiche woordes S. Chrysostome expoundeth thus: Hoc facite in memoriam beneficij mei, salutis vestrae: Doo this in remembrance of my benefite, and of your Saluation. This is no Accident or light fantasie, that may be leafte at our pleasure, but the very substantial pointe of that Sacrament, whiche we are specially commaunded to continue vntil he come: and for wante whereof S. Paule saithe,3