A19563:1512
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.
But to the purpose, the simplicity of faith in a christen mans breast, doth not so precisely §1mark and stay at the syllables of Christs words, as this author pretendeth, and knowing by faith the truth of Christs words, that as he said he wrought, doth not measure gods secret working after the prolation of our syllables, whose work is §3in one instant how so ever speech in us require a successive utterance, and the manner of handling, this author useth to bring the mystical words in contempt, were meeter in §2an Ethnics mouth to jest out all, then to pass the lips of such an author, to play with the syllables after this sort. For although he may read in some blind gloss that in the instant of the last syllable, gods work is to be accounted wrought, being a good lesson to admonish the minister to pronounce all, yet it is so but a private opinion, and reverently §4uttered, not to put the virtue in the last syllable, nor to scorn the catholic faith, after which manner taking example of this author, if an Ethnic should jest of (Fiat §5Lux) at (fi) was nothing, and then at (at) was yet nothing (at lu) was nothing but a little little peering, put an (x) to it, and it was suddenly Lux, and then the light. What christen man would handle either place thus? and therefore reader let this entry of the matter serve for an argument with what spirit this matter is handled, but to answer that this author noteth with an exclamation: Oh good Lord how would they have bragged: if Christ had said, This is no bread. Here I would question with this author,§6 whether Christ said so or no, and reason thus: Christs body is no material bread, Christ said: This is my body, Ergo he said, this is no bread. And the first part of this reason, this author affirmeth in the 59. leaf. And the second part is Christs words, and therefore to avoid this conclusion the only way is to say, that Christs speech was but a figure, which the catholic doctrine saith is false, and therefore by the catholic doctrine Christ saying, this, is my body, saith in effect, this is no bread, whereat this author saith: They would brag if Christ had said so. In speech is to be considered,