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.

This argument hangeth onely vpon lacke of carriage. For if it were possi∣ble to diuise a way, that the Sacrament might be caried aboute in bothe kindes, then were this gheasse soone answeared. For otherwise Melciades speaketh not one woorde of the Communion in One Kinde. Now, that the carriage of bothe kindes is not impossible, the examples of antiquitie doo wel declare. S. Hierome writeth thus of Exuperius y^e Bishop of Tholouse in Fraunce:* 1.1 Nihil illo di••ius, qui Corpus Domini in canistro vimineo, sanguinem portabat in vitro. There was no man richer th••n he, that carried the Lordes Body in a wicke•• Basket, and his Bloud in a Glasse.* 1.2 Likewise Iustinus Martyr, declaring the order of the Churche in his time, saithe thus: Illis, quae cum gratiarum actione consecrata sunt, vnusquis{que} participat: Eadem, ad eos qui ab∣sunt,

Diaconis dantur perferenda. Of the thinges that be consecrate (that is, the Breade, Water, and Wine) euery man taketh parte, The same thinges are deliuered to the Deacons to be carried vnto them that be away. Here haue we founde not onely a possibilitie, but also a common vsage & practise of carrieyng the Sacrament in Bothe Kindes. This is the first inuincible argument, that al the worlde cannot answeare.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Hieronym. ad Rusticum.
• * 1.2

  Iustinus Martyr in Apologia. 2.