A19563:1524
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 it is an other vain brag also that you make, when you say, that you have showed before, that Christs words were not figurative, when he said, This is my body. For you have neither proved that you say, nor have answered to my proofs to the contrary (as I refer to the judgement of all indifferent Readers) but you have confessed that Christ called bread his body, & made demonstration upon the bread, when he said: This is my body. How can then this speech be true, but by a figure, that bread is Christs body? seeing that in proper speech (as you say) every yea containeth a nay, and the affirmation of one thing is the denial of an other.
And it is an other vayne bragge also that you make, whē you say, that you haue shewed before, that Christes wordes were not figuratiue, when he sayd, This is my body. For you haue neither proued that you say, nor haue aunswered to my proofes to the contrary (as I referre to the iudgement of all indifferent Readers) but you haue confessed that Christ called bread his body, & made demōstration vpon the bread, when he sayd: This is my body. How can then this speach be true, but by a figure, that bread is Christes body? seyng that in proper speach (as you say) euery yea conteineth a nay, and the affirmation of one thyng is the deniall of an other.
And where you allege (as it were against me) the words of Hilary,1 that there is both a figure and a truth of that figure, for answer hereunto the truth is, that your matter here is gathered of an untruth, that I would have only a figure, where as I say plainly as Hilary saith, that ⟨p. 260⟩in the true ministration of the Sacrament is both a figure and a truth: the figure outwardly, and the truth inwardly. For bread and wine be sensible signs and Sacraments, to teach us outwardly, what feedeth us inwardly. Outwardly we see and feel bread and wine with our outward senses, but inwardly by faith we see and feed upon Christs true body and blood. But this is a spiritual feeding by faith, which requireth no corporal presence. And here I ask you two questions, One is this, whither Hilary say that the body of Christ is under the forms of bread and wine, and that corporally? If he say not so (as the Reader shall soon judge, looking upon his words) then stand I upright without any fall or foil: for Hilary saith not as you do. The other question is, whither Hilary do not say that there is a figure: let the Reader judge also, and see whither you be not quite overthrown with your own crook, in saying that Christs speech is not figurative. And yet the third question I may add also, why S. Hilary should say, that bread and wine be figures, if there be no bread nor wine there at all, but be taken clean away by transubstantiation? And where as for answer hereto you take the example