A19563:1248
An answerAn aunsvvere
An answer by the Reverend Father in God Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and metropolitan, unto a crafty and sophistical cavillation, devised by Stephen Gardiner Doctor of Law, late Bishop of Winchester against the true and godly doctrine of the most holy sacrament, of the body and blood of our saviour Jesus Christ Wherein is also, as occasion serveth, answered such places of the book of Doct. Richard Smith, as may seem any thing worthy the answering. Here is also the true copy of the book written, and in open court delivered, by D. Stephen Gardiner ...An aunsvvere by the Reuerend Father in God Thomas Archbyshop of Canterbury, primate of all England and metropolitane, vnto a craftie and sophisticall cauillation, deuised by Stephen Gardiner Doctour of Law, late Byshop of Winchester agaynst the true and godly doctrine of the most holy sacrament, of the body and bloud of our sauiour Iesu Christ Wherein is also, as occasion serueth, aunswered such places of the booke of Doct. Richard Smith, as may seeme any thyng worthy the aunsweryng. Here is also the true copy of the booke written, and in open court deliuered, by D. Stephen Gardiner ...
London: printed by John Daye, 1580London: printed by Iohn Daye, 1580
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And where you say that Christ maketh not him self of the matter of bread,1 either you be very ignorant in the doctrine of the sacrament (as it hath been taught these five hundred years) or else you dissemble the matter. Hath not this been the teaching of the school divines, yea of Innocent him self, that the matter of this Sacrament is bread of wheat, and wine of grapes? Do they not say, that the substance of bread is turned into the substance of Christs flesh? and that his flesh is made of bread? And who worketh this, but Christ him self? And have you not confessed all this in your book of the Devils sophistry? why do you then deny here that which you taught before, and which hath been the common approved doctrine of the Papists so many years? And because it ⟨p. 204⟩should have the more authority, was not this put into the mass books, and read every year? Dognum datur christianis, quod in ca•nem transit panis, & uinum in sanguinem? Now seeing that you have taught so many years, that the matter and substance of bread is not consumed to nothing, but is changed and turned into the body of Christ, so that the body of Christ is made of it, what mean you now to deny that Christ is made of the matter of bread?2 When water was turned into wine, was not the wine made of the water? And when the rod was turned into a serpent, and water into blood, the earth into a man, and his rib into a woman, Were not the woman, man, blood and serpent, made of the matter of the rib, the earth, the water and the rod? And is not every thing made of that which is turned into it? As bread is made of Corn, wine of grapes, bear of water, hops and malt, and so of all things like? And when you have confessed your selves so many years passed, that Christ is made of bread in the sacrament, what moveth you now to say, that Christ maketh not him self of the matter of bread? except that either you will say, that the priest doth it and not Christ (which were an intolerable blaspheme) or that the truth is of such a nature that even the very adversaries thereof (sometime unawares acknowledge it, or else that force of arguments constraineth you to confess the truth against your will, when you see none other shift to escape?