A19563:1260
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.
As for Doctor Peter Martyr, he is of age to answer for him self, but concerning him, that told you that he was not learned, I would wish you to leave this old rooted fault in you, to be light of credit. For I suppose, that if his learning that told you that lye, and yours also, were ⟨p. 206⟩set both together, you should be far behind Master Peter Martyr. Marry in words, I think that you alone would overlay two Peter Martyrs,1 he is so sober a man, and delighteth not in wasting of words in vain. And none do say that he is not learned, but such as know him not, or be not learned themselves, or else be so malicious or envious, that they wittingly speak against their own conscience. And no doubt, that man bringeth him self out of the estimation of a learned man, which, hath heard him reason and read, and saith that he is not learned. And whosoever misreporteth him, and hath never heard him, may not be called so well Momus as Sicophanta, whose property is to misreport them, whom thy neither see nor know. Now resteth only Damascene, of whom I write thus.
As for Doctour Peter Martyr, he is of age to aunswer for him selfe, but concerning him, that told you that he was not learned, I would wish you to leaue this olde rooted fault in you, to be light of credite. For I suppose, that if his lernyng that tolde you that lye, and yours also, wer ⟨p. 206⟩set both togither, you should be farre behind Master Peter Martyr. Marye in wordes, I think that you alone would ouerlay two Peter Martyrs,1 he is so sobre a man, and delighteth not in wasting of wordes in vayne. And none do say that he is not lerned, but such as know hym not, or be not lerned themselues, or els be so malicious or enuious, yt they wittingly speake agaynst theyr owne consciēce. And no doubt, that man bringeth hym selfe out of the estimation of a learned man, which, hath heard him reason and reade, and sayth that he is not learned. And whosoeuer misreporteth hym, and hath neuer heard him, may not be called so well Momus as Sicophanta, whose property is to mysreporte thē, whome thy neither see nor knowe. Now resteth onely Damascene, of whome I write thus.