answered by Sir Thomas More (A.D. 1533, "after he had geuen ouer
the offyce of Lorde Chauncellour of Englande"), and is described by
him as "the poysoned booke whych a _nameles_ heretike hath named the
Supper of the Lorde" (_Works_, pp. 1035, seqq., ed. Rastell). From
the following passage of the reply, we learn that this offensive
publication, like so many others of the same class, has been printed
abroad:--

"And in thys wyse is ther sent ouer to be prynted the booke
that Frythe made last against the blessed sacrament answering
to my letter, wherewyth I confuted the pestilent treatice that
he hadde made agaynst it before. And the brethen looked for it
nowe at thys Bartlemewe tide last passed, and yet looke euery
day, except it be come all redy, and secretly runne among
them. But in the meane whyle, _ther is come ouer a nother
booke againste the blessed sacrament_, a booke of that sorte,
that Frythe's booke the brethren maye nowe forbeare. For more
blasphemous and more bedelem rype then thys booke is were that
booke harde to be, whyche is yet madde enough, as men say that
haue seen it" (p. 1036. G.).

More was evidently at a loss to discover the {333} author of this
work; for, after conjecturing that it might have come from William
Tyndal, or George Jaye (_alias_ Joy), or "som yong unlearned fole,"
he determines "for lacke of hys other name to cal the writer mayster
Masker," a sobriquet which is preserved throughout his confutation.
At the same time, it is clear, from the language of the treatise,
that its author, though anonymous, believed himself well known to
his opponent: