A04474:908
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 2 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 2 › 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.
This argument may be good in M. Hardinges Divinity, but it is of small force in good Logic.
This argument may be good in M. Hardinges Diuinitie, but it is of smal force in good Logique.
As for your Synecdoche, whereby of the part ye understand the whole (sayeth M. Harding) It is but a patch of your devise, and will not serve. Yet S. Augustine, S. Gregory, Bede, Julianus, Dionysius, Lyra, Wideforde, and others that understand these words of S. Luke of hospitality, must needs crave the warrant of a figure, and under the name of Bread must needs conceive meat, and Wine also: otherwise there had been a very simple, and a dry feast. Now if M. Harding can allow them the figure of Synecdoche, why may not he as well allow us the same? It is a manner of speech commonly used in all the Scriptures.
As for your Synecdoche, whereby of the parte ye vnderstande the whole (saieth M. Hardinge) It is but a patche of your diuise, and wil not serue. Yet S. Augustine, S. Gregorie, Bede, Iulianus, Dionysius, Lyra, Wideforde, and others that vnderstande these woordes of S. Luke of hospitalitie, must néedes craue the warrant of a figure, and vnder the name of Breade must néedes conceiue meate, and Wine also: otherwise there had beene a very simple, and a drie feast. Now if M. Hardinge can allowe them the figure of Synecdoche, why may not he as wel allow vs the same? It is a manner of speache commonly vsed in al the Scriptures.
But Christ straight way vanished from their sight upon the breaking of the Bread: and therefore had no leisure to deliver the other portion: neither is their any mention made of the Cup. O what miserable straits these men be driven into? To make up their tale, they are glad to say, that Christ lacked leisure. But there is nothing written of the Cup. I grant. Neither is there any thing there written, that Christ did Consecrate the Bread. And this place is privileged above all others. We must conceive no more of it, then is spoken. Then was there a Sacrament without Consecration. Neither is there any thing there written, that either Christ him self, or the Disciples did eat the Bread. Thus hath M. Harding with much a do found out at last, not a Communion of One Kind, that he sought for, but a Communion of No Kind at all. And so have we a Sacrament without Sacrament: and a Communion without Communion.