A19563:1528
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.
1And as touching this place of S. Paul, that God calleth things that be not, as they were, if it pertain unto Sacrament, where Christ called bread his body, what could you have alleged more against yourself? For ⟨p. 261⟩if in this place Christ call that which is not, as it were, then Christ called bread as it were his body, and yet it is not his body in deed.
1And as touching this place of S. Paule, that God calleth things that be not, as they were, if it perteine vnto Sacrament, where Christ called bread his body, what could you haue alledged more against yourself? For ⟨p. 261⟩if in this place Christ call that which is not, as it were, then Christ called bread as it were his body, and yet it is not his body in deede.
- 1Rom. 4.
But in this your answer to the arguments,1 brought in by me out of the very words of the Evangelists, is such a shameless arrogance and boldness showed, as abhorreth all Christian ears for to hear, which is, that three Evangelists telling the manner of Christs holy Supper, not one of them all do tell the tale in right order, but subvert the order of Christs doings and sayings, and that in such a necessary matter of our Religion, that the definition of the whole truth standeth in the order. The Evangelists (say you) rehearse what Christ said and did, simply and truly. But is this a simple and true rehearsal of Christs words and deeds, to tell them out of order otherwise then Christ did & said them? And S. Paul also (if it be as you say) speaking of the same matter, committeth the like error. And yet never no ancient author expounding the Evangelists or S. Paul could spy out this fault, and in their Commentaries give us warning