The B. of Sarisburie.
Here, good Christian Reader, I beseche the to consider thus muche by the way. In the Uniuersitie of Oxforde,* 1.1 and in the late Solemne Disputation holden there againste that godly Father, and Martyr of blissed Memorie D. Cranmere the Archebishop of Canturburie, the Authoritie of this Father Theodoretus was vt∣terly refused in open audience, for that he was a Grecian: and therfore not thought to iudge Catholiquely of the Sacramentes, accordinge to the late Determination of the Churche of Rome. Whiche thinge notwithstandinge, it appeareth, M. Hardinge hath nowe reconciled him, and made him Catholique. How be it, this thinge séemeth very strange, that one man, in the vtteringe of one Sentence, with∣out any manner alteringe, or change of Woorde, should be bothe an Heretique, and a Catholique, bothe togeather.
Concerninge the greatest Substance hereof, this place of Theodoretus is an∣sweared before, in the eighth Article, and in the .28. Diuision. Here he saithe, That the Breade, and the Wine are seene, and touched, as they were before. Hereof M. Har∣dinge concludeth thus, Ergo, there is neither Breade, nor Wine remaininge, but onely Accidentes, and shewes without Substance. This Argument of it selfe is strange, and woonderful, and the more, for that it concludeth plaine contrary, not onely to the meaninge, but also to the expresse, and euident woordes of Theodoretus. For thus his woordes lie:* 1.2 Qui se ipsum appellauit vitem, ille Symbola, & Signa, quae videntur, ap∣pellatione Corporis & Sanguinis honorauit: non Naturam mutans, &c. He that calleth him selfe the Vine, honoured the Signes, and Tokens, (whereby he meaneth the Sacra∣mentes) that be seene, with the name of his Bodie, and Bloude: not changinge the Nature therof, &c.* 1.3 And againe, Signa Mystica post Sanctificationem non recedunt à Natura sua. Manent enim in priori Substantia. The Mystical Signes after the Consecration departe not from their owne Nature. For they remaine in their former Substance.
Now let vs compare this texte with M. Hardinges Glose. Theodoretus saith, The Breade, and Wine departe not from their Owne Nature: M. Hardinge saithe, They departe vtterly from their Owne Nature. Theodoretus saithe, The Breade, and VVine remaine in their former Substance: M. Hardinge saithe, There remaine onely the Shewes, and Accidentes of Breade, and VVine, without any their former Substance. It is a bolde Glose, that thus dareth to ouerthrowe the manifest meaninge of the Texte. I trowe suche dealinge shoulde be rectified by a Write of Errour.
Of these plaine woordes of Theodoretus, we may wel conclude thus against M. Hardinge: The Substance of the Breade, and Wine remaineth stil, as it was be∣fore: Therefore the Accidentes, and Shewes of Breade and Wine, be not there without their Substance. For the rest, How these Mystical Signes be vnderstan∣ded, and beleeued to be the Bodie, and Bloude of Christe, it is answeared before, in the eighth Article, and .28. Diuision.