of Gelasius. He leaueth the whole route of his owne companie, and is gladde to
renne alone. He expoundeth Gelasius by Leo, as though they wrote bothe of one
thinge. And yet others of his owne side say, that Leo wrote of Heretiques, and
Gelasius of Catholikes: Leo of the people, Gelasius of the Priestes. He com∣plaineth,
that the reste of Gelasius is not to be founde, as though it were sup∣preste
by some of vs: and yet it is thought the Pope hath it whole in his Libra∣rie.
He diuiseth newe causes of vnitie of the Mysterie, suche as Gelasius neuer
knewe. He concludeth at the laste, that this breache of Christes Institution, and
Ministration vnder One Kinde, that is nowe vniuersally vsed in the Churche of
Rome, was firste brought in, and practised by the Manichees, whiche were in olde
time wicked, and horrible Heretiques.
He saithe, I haue guilefully alleged Gelasius, and to the intent it mighte the
sooner appeare, he hath noted it specially in the Margin. But if M. Hardinge
himselfe had meante no guile, he woulde haue shewed plainely, wherein I haue
béene guileful: or what I might haue gotten by this guile: or what aduantage I
mighte haue loste by plainer dealinge. For guile without cause is meere ••olie, and
no guile. But I recited the woordes in Latine, and had forgotten to Englishe
them. Nowe surely, that is but a simple guile, and might wel haue béene spared
out of the Margin.
But my woordes be these: Gelasius saithe, that to Minister the Sacrament in one
Kinde, is open Sacrilege. And what guile canne he finde herein? This woorde, Sa∣crilege,
and the refusinge of the Cuppe, are bothe specially named by Gelasius. There
remaine onely these woordes, To minister the Sacrament: and there, saithe M. Har∣dinge,
lieth the guile. How be it therein, as it shal wel appeare, I say nothinge,
but that Gelasius saithe, and M. Hardinge him selfe woulde haue him say. For
thus saithe Gelasius, The diuision of the Mysterie, whereby he meaneth the Sa∣crament,
is Sacrilege:
But the Priest that Ministreth in One Kinde, diuideth the Mysterie:
Ergo, the Priest that Ministreth in One Kinde, committeth Sacrilege.
This argument is perfite and formal, & founded vpon Gelasius woordes. I trowe
this is no guileful dealinge.
The vnitie of the Mysterie, that M. Hardinge hath here fantasied, that either
parte is in other, and therefore harpeth so often, as it were by reportes vpon these
woordes Vnum, & idem, is but his owne voluntarie. He is not hable to allege
either Gelasius, or any other olde Father, that euer expounded Vnum, and Idem, in
that sorte. He calleth it one Mysterie, as Hugo Cardinal••s saith, although other∣wise
a very grosse writer, Propter vnitatem Institutionis, For the vnitie of the Institu∣tion:
and for that the Breade and Wine beinge sundrie portions, haue bothe relation vnto
one Christe: and for that cause by S. Hieromes iudgement S. Paule saithe, vna fi∣des,
vnum Baptisma, one Faithe, one Baptisme. And for that also, that beinge,
as I saide, two sundrie portions, yet they make not two sundrie Sacramentes,
but one onely Sacrament. And therefore Durandus a late writer seemeth to
say wel. In multis locis communicatur cum Pane & Vino, id est, cum toto Sacra∣mento.
In many places they Communicate with Breade and Wine, that is, saith he, with
the whole Sacrament. Of whiche woordes the Reader, be he neuer so simple, may
easely geather, that the Communion in One Kinde, is but the Halfe Sacrament:
and so the diuision of one Mysterie: and so further, the selfe same thinge, that Gela∣sius
calleth Sacrilege.