A19563:1296
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.
First after the sum of my fourth book, collected as pleaseth you, at the first dash you begin with an untrue report, joined to a subtle deceit or falax, saying that my chief purpose is to prove that evil men receive not the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament. And hereupon you conclude, that my fourth book is superfluous. But of a false antecedent, all that be learned do know that nothing can be rightly concluded. Now mine intent and purpose in my fourth book is not to prove, that evil men receive not the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament (although that be true) but my chief purpose is to prove, that evil men eat not Christs flesh nor drink not his blood, neither in the sacrament nor out of the sacrament: as on the other side good men eat and drink them both in the sacrament: and out of the Sacrament.
First after the sūme of my fourth booke, collected as pleaseth you, at the first dash you beginne with an vntrue report, ioyned to a subtell deceyte or falax, saying that my chief purpose is to proue that euill men receaue not the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament. And hereupon you conclude, that my fourth booke is superfluouse. But of a false antecedent, all that be learned do know that nothing can be rightly concluded. Now mine intent and purpose in my fourth boooke is not to proue, that euill men receaue not the body and bloud of Christ in the sacrament (although that be true) but my chief purpose is to proue, that euell men eate not Christes flesh nor drincke not his bloud, neither in the sacrament nor out of the sacrament: as on the other side good men eat and drincke them both in the sacrament: and out of the Sacrament.
And in the word (Sacrament) which is of your addition (is a subtle falax,1 called double understanding. For when the Sacrament is called only a figure (as you rehearse) wherein the body and blood of Christ be only figuratively, there the word (Sacrament) is taken for the outward signs of bread and wine. And after when you rehearse that the Sacrament is a visible preaching by the tokens and signs of bread and wine, in believing and remembering Christs benefits, there the word (Sacrament) is taken for the whole ceremony and ministration of the Sacrament. And so when you go about by equivocation of the word to deceive other men, you fall into your own snare, and be deceived your self, in that you think you convey the matter so craftily, that no man can espy you.