A04482:732
The true copies of the letters between the reverend father in God John Bishop…The true copies of the letters betwene the reuerend father in God Iohn Bisshop…
The true copies of the letters between the reverend father in God John Bishop of Sarum and D. Cole upon occasion of a sermon that the said Bishop preached before the Queens Majesty, and her most honourable Counsel. 1560. Set forth and allowed, according to the order appointed in the Queens Maiesties iniunctions. Cum gratia & privilegio Regiæ Maiestatis per septennium.The true copies of the letters betwene the reuerend father in God Iohn Bisshop of Sarum and D. Cole vpon occasion of a sermon that the said Bishop preached before the Quenes Maiestie, and hir most honorable Counsel. 1560. Set forthe and allowed, according to the order appointed in the Quenes Maiesties iniunctions. Cum gratia & priuilegio Regiæ Maiestatis per septennium.
London: printed by John Day, 1560
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.
Touching the second abuse of the communion under one kind it would be long to say, so much as the place would seem to require. For, besides the Institution of Christ, & the words of S. Paul, which to a christian man may seem sufficient, it was used through ⟨p. 135⟩out the whole catholic church, six hundred years after Christs ascension, under both kinds without exception. But in one word, to say, that may be sufficient for a wise man to consider: Gelasius, an old father of the church, and a bishop of Rome, saith that to minister the communion under one kind, is open sacrilege. His words be these: Divisio unius eiusdémque mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire. I trust I shall need no farther evidence, to prove that the mass, in this part, hath ben abused. The third point y• I promised to speak of, is the canon, a thing, for many causes, very vain in it self, & so uncertain, that no man can readily tell, on whom to father it. S. Paul saith, scio cui credidi, & cer•us sum. I know whom I have believed, & ⟨image 138⟩I am certain, And unto Timothy he saith, permane in his quae didicisti, sciens a quo didiceris. Stande steadfastly in such things as thou hast learned, knowing of whom thou hast learned them. Yet many men, this day, stand to the Canon, as unto the holiest part of all the mass, and know not of whom they have learned it. Sum say Alexander the first made it: sum say Leo: sum say Gelasius: sum say Gregorius the first: Gregorius (saith) one Scholasticus: sum others say Gregorius the third: But Innocen•ius tertius, to put the matter quite out of doubt, said plainly, it came from Christ, and from his Apostles. Howe be it, who soever was the first deviser of it, it forceth not. The substance of it, and the meaning ⟨p. 136⟩is more material▪ & thereof I think it needful to touch sum part in as few words, as I may. For notwithstanding, I have small pleasure in opening such matters, as may seem odious, yet is it behoveful. for every man, to understand, of that thing that was counted so high & holy, what manner a thing it was, and what it contained.