A19563:1431
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 as concerning the Catechism,1 I have sufficiently answered in my §2former book. But in this place may appear to them that have any judgement, what pithy arguments you make, and what dexterity you have in gathering of authors minds, that would gather my mind and make an argument here of a picture, neither put in my book, nor by me devised, but invented by some fond painter or carver, which paint and grave whatsoever their idle heads can fancy. You should rather have gathered your argument upon the other side, that I mislike the matter, because I left out of my book the picture that was in the original before. And I marvel you be not ashamed to allege so vain a matter against me, which in deed is not in my book, and if it were, yet were it nothing to the purpose. And in that Catechism I teach not (as you do) that the body and blood of Christ is contained in the sacrament being reserved, but that in the ministration thereof we receive the body and blood of Christ, whereunto if it may please you to add or understand this word (spiritually) then is the doctrine of my Catechism sound and good in all mens ears, which know the true doctrine of the sacraments.
And as cōcerning the Catechisme,1 I haue sufficiently answered in my §2former booke. But in this place may apeare to them that haue any iudgement, what pithy arguments you make, and what dexteritie you haue in gathering of authors myndes, that would gather my mynd and make an argument here of a picture, neyther put in my booke, nor by me deuised, but inuented by some fond paynter or caruer, which paynt and graue whatsoeuer theyr idle heades can fansy. You should rather haue gathered your argument vpon the other side, that I mislike the matter, bycause I left out of my booke the picture that was in the originall before. And I meruayle you be not ashamed to alleadge so vayne a matter agaynst me, which in dede is not in my booke, and if it were, yet were it nothing to the purpose. And in that Catechisme I teach not (as you do) that the body and bloud of Christ is conteined in the sacrament being reserued, but that in the ministration therof we receaue the body and bloud of Christ, whervnto if it may please you to adde or vnderstand this word (spiritually) thē is the doctrine of my Catechisme sound and good in all mens eares, which know the true doctrine of the sacraments.