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.

The B. of Sarisburie.

If we abuse the simplicitie of the people, vtteringe plainely, & simply the very

woordes of the Ancient Fathers, then did the Fathers them selues likewise abuse the simple people: for that they of al others, first vttered, and published the same woordes: and specially for that, they neuer qualified the same, with any of these M. Hardinges Newe Constructions.

But if we abuse the people, speakinge in suche wise, as the Olde Catholique Fathers spake so longe before vs, what then maie we thinke of M. Hardinge, that commeth onely with his owne woordes, that wreasteth, and falsifieth the woordes of the Holy Fathers, and by his strange Expositions maketh them not the Fa∣thers woords? Gelasius saith,* 1.1 In the Sacrament there remaineth the Substance of Breade, and Wine: That is to saie, saith M. Hardinge, There remaine the Accidentes of Breade and Wine. Ireneus, and Iustinus Martyr saie,* 1.2 The Breade of the Sacra∣ment, increaseth the Substance of our Fleashe: Then meaninge is, saith M. Hardinge, that the Accidentes of the Breade increase the Substance of our Fleashe. S. Ambrose saith,* 1.3 Post consecrationem Corpus Christi Significatur. After Consecration the Bodie of Christe is Signified: M. Hardinge saith, No, not so: But after Consecration the life to come is Signified. Nowe iudge thou indifferently, good Reader, whether of vs abuseth the simplicitie of the people.

Nowe let vs see howe he handleth this good Olde Father Ephrem. In deede here he maketh the darkenes light, and the light, darkenes. For Ephrems woordes be so plaine, as nothinge canne be plainer.

Christ tooke Breade, and blissed it, and brake it, in Figure, or, as Christe him self vttreth it, in Remembrance of his Blissed, and Unspotted Bodie. But M. Hardinges Exposition vpon the same is so peruerse, and so wilful, as if it were frée for him, to glose, and fansie what him listeth. Ephrem saith. Christ tooke and brake Breade: M. Hardinge saith, Christe brake Formes, and Accidentes, and brake no Breade. Ephrem saith, The Breade is a Figure of Christes Bodie: M. Hardinge saith, The Breade is no Figure of Christes Bodie. To be shorte, Ephrem saith, Christe breake Breade in Figure, or Remembrance of his Bodie:

Ergo, saith M. Hardinge, Christes Bodie is there present, vnder the Forme of Breade. Suche regarde hath he to the simplicitie of the people. Certainely Ephrem saith not, neither that the Formes, or Shewes be broken: nor that the same Formes be Figures of Christes Bodie: nor that Christes Bodie is presently in them contei∣ned. And therefore M. Hardinge in his guileful construction of the same hath included greate Untrueth.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Gelasius contra Eutychetem. Irenaeus li. 5.
• * 1.2

  Iustinus Martyr Apologia. 2.
• * 1.3

  Ambrosius de ijs qui initiantur. Cap. 9.