ONly give us leane to spurre you a Question before we end this third Booke. Seeing that Transubstantiation cannot properly be, by your owne Doctrine, except the Substance of Bread ceasing to be there remaine onely the Accidents thereof (this Position of the con∣tinuance of Onely Accidents, without a Subiect, being your Positive Foundation of Transubstantiation) Why is it that none of all your Romish Disputers was hitherto ever able to produce any one Te∣stimony out of all the Volumes of Antiquity, for proofe of this one point, excepting only that of Cyril, which * 1.1 hath beene (as you haue heard) egregiously abused and falsified? Learne you to An∣swere this Question, or else shame to obiect Antiquity any more; but rather confesse your Article of Transubstantiation to be but a Bastardly Impe.
Wee might enlarge our selves in this point of your Vnconscio∣nablenesse in obiecting Testimonies of Fathers, for proofe aswell of Transubstantiation, as of the other Articles above-mentioned;