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.

About this Item

Title
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.
Author
Jewel, John, 1522-1571.
Publication
Imprinted at London :: In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Blacke Oliphante, by Henry VVykes,
Anno. 1565.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Harding, Thomas, 1516-1572. -- Answere to Maister Juelles chalenge.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Doctrines -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A04474.0001.001
Cite this Item
"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." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A04474.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 1, 2024.

Pages

The B. of Sarisburie.

Our proufes are grounded, not onely vpon Natural Reason, but also vpon the expresse, and knowen Wil of God. And by suche Argumentes the learned Fa∣thers were wonte in olde times, to dispute of Christes Humanitie against Apolli∣narius. Manichaeus, Eutyches, and other like Heretiques, without controlment. For Natural Reason holden within her bandes, is not the enimie, but the daugh∣ter of Goddes Trueth. And therefore he must be very vnreasonable, that wil thus without cause be angrie with Reason. But it appeareth, that M. Hardinge, as he is vtterly without Scriptures, and Doctours in these cases, so is he also voide of

Page 367

Reason. As touchinge Plato, it seemeth, there was harde holde, when a Natural Philosopher must stande foorth, to proue Christes Mysteries. This mater, within these fewe hundred yeeres, hath benne attēpted many waies: by Logique: by Phi∣losophie: by the Metaphysiques: & by the names of Olde Fathers. But, when none of al these healpes woulde serue, they imagined, & brought foorth Animosam Fi∣dem, a Faith without any woorde of God, bolde to beleeue, they knewe not what. In the ende findinge theire wante, and weakenes herein, for that this Faith had no grounde, they diuised Miracles, and fieres yenough, and ioined them with it: Then was the mater sufficiently, and fully prooued.

But Plato saith, Natura est, quod Deus vult. Nature is that thinge, that God wil. First, what if M. Hardinge vnderstande not, what Plato meante? And what if Plato neuer vnderstoode, what M. Hardinge meaneth? Yet must Platoes name serue to prooue al M. Hardinges fātasies? Plato saith, Nature is what so euer God wil. Must we therefore conclude, That Colde is Hoate: White is Blacke: Accident without Subiecte: Subiecte without Accident: a Bodie is no Bodie: a Nature Fi∣nite is Infinite? What a strange kinde of Philosophie hath M. Hardinge founde out? It is a simple weapon, that these menne wil refuse, to serue theire turne.

The Philosophers called Epicuraei, helde this fantasie, that God sitteth in Hea∣uen idly, and at ease, neuer incombringe or troublinge him self with the rule of the worlde: and that therefore Nature ruleth it self onely by chance, and at aduenture, without any certaine direction of Goddes gouernement: and that, what so euer is donne therein, is no parte of Goddes dooinge. Contrary wise the Philosophers called Stoici, helde an other fantasie, that God him self is nothinge elles but na∣ture, and that therefore al thinges are wrought by necessitie, and force of Destine, and that God is hable to woorke no Miracle, nor to doo any thinge contrary to the common course of Nature. Both these folies Plato reproued by this shorte an∣sweare, Natura est, quod Deus vult. His meaninge is, that Nature is subiecte, and obedient vnto God, and that there is, neither Chance, nor Necessitie in the course of Nature: but al thinges are ordred by Goddes appointement, and Natural Cau∣ses are onely the instrumentes of Goddes Wil. And therefore some compare Na∣ture to the horse, and God to the horseman, that bridleth her, and turneth her, whi∣ther he listeth. And for the same cause Origen* 1.1 saith, Anima mundi est Virtus Dei: The Soule of the Worlde is the power of God. And S. Baile saith, The Worlde is the schoole of our soules, to leade vs to knowe God. Therefore God was hable by his power to diuide the Sea:* 1.2 to pul backe, and to staye the Sonne: to open the Earth: to make the water of Iordane to stande as a walle: to staie the Fier from burninge, and the water from drowninge.* 1.3 If any man liste to knowe the cause hereof, there is none other, but Goddes Wil. In this sense the Philosopher Simonides was wonte to saie, Solus Deus est Metaphysicus. God alone is Supernatural. And Pindarus for the same called God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The best, or skilfullest Artificer. Likewise S. Au∣gustine saith, Quomodo est contra Naturam, quod Dei fit voluntate, cùm voluntas tanti Conditoris sit cuiuscunque rei Natura? Howe is it against Nature, that is donne by Goddes Wil, seeinge the Wil of so noble a Creator is the Nature of euery thinge?* 1.4 This vndoub∣tedly was Platoes meaninge. Nowe let vs examine M. Hardinges reasons.

Nature is what so euer God wil: Elias, and Enoch are yet alieue in theire bodies: Abacuc was caught, and carried to Babylon: S. Peter walkte vpon the Sea: Ergo, Christes Bodie is at one time in a thousande places. These argumentes holde A posse, ad Esse, and might haue stande the Heretiques Manichaeus, and Eutyches in some good steede: but in Ca∣tholique Schooles they haue no place.

But howe is M. Hardinge so wel assuered of Goddes wil? Howe knoweth he, that God wil haue Christes Bodie to be in a thousande places at one time: to be

Page 368

euerywhere: to be infinite: to be no Bodie? Uerily, the Ancient Fathers, for any thinge that may appeare, neuer knew it.* 1.5 Contrary wise, he might haue saide, Gods holy Wil was, that Christe should take the Natural Substance of a Mans Bodie: and, that in al thinges he should be like vnto his Brethren: and, that his Bodie shoulde be a Creature:* 1.6 and, as S. Augustine saith, should be in one place.

This is Goddes knowen, and expresse Wil:* 1.7 therefore by Platoes iudgement, this is Nature. Certainely S. Augustine saith, as it is before alleged, Christus Corpori suo Immortalitatem dedit: Naturam non abstulit. Christe gaue Immortalitie to his Bodie: but he tooke not from it the former Nature of a Bodie.* 1.8 Thus muche hath M. Hardinge gotten by the Authoritie of Plato.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.