A19563:1387
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.
Winchester.
In the .97. leaf and the second column, the Author beginneth to traverse the words §1of S. Paul to the Corinthians, and would distinct unworthy eating in the substance of the Sacrament received, which can not be: For our unworthiness can not alter the substance of Gods sacrament, that is evermore all one, howsoever we swerve from worthiness to unworthiness. And this I would ask of this Author why should it be a §2fault in the unworthy not to esteem the Lords body, when he is taught (if this authors doctrine be true) that it is not there at all? If the bread after this authors teaching §3be but a figure of Christs body, it is then but as Manna was, the eating whereof unworthily and unfaithfully,1 was no gift of Christs body. Erasmus noteth these words of S. Paul to be guilty of our Lords body, to prove the presence of Christs body there, who compareth such an offender to the Jews, that did shed Christs blood maliciously, as those do profane it unprofitably, in which sense the Greek commentaries do also expound it. And where this author bringeth in the words of S. Paul as it were to point out the matter, Let a man examine him self, and so eat of the bread §4and drink of the cup,2 for he that eateth unworthily, &c. these words of examining and so eating, declare the thing to be ordered to be eaten, and all the care to be used on our side, to eat worthily, or else S. Paul had not said (and so eat.) And when S. Paul saith, Eat judgement, and this Author well remember him self, he must call Judgement, the effect of that is eaten, and not the thing eaten, for judgment is neither spiritual meat nor corporal, but the effect of the eating of Christ in evil men, who