A19563:1585
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.
Put out his eyes, and is not a white sapphire, a diamond, and a glass all one in his judgement? Mary if he be a man of clear sight, of true knowledge and experience in the judgement of stones, and be therewithal a man of good faith and honesty (as you tell the tale) they that be ignorant will be ashamed to control his judgement. But if he be blind, or be a man neither of faith nor honesty, but his experience hath ben ever exercised to deceive all that trust him, and to sell them white sapphires for diamonds, then no man that wise is, will take a glass or sapphire at his hands of trust, although he say it be a true diamond. Even so likewise the Papists (being so accustomed with these merchandises of glistering glasses and counterfeit drugs, to deceive the world) what wise men will trust them with their feigned Transubstantiation, being so manifestly against the plain words of scripture, against all reason, sense, and ancient writers? And although you have taken never so great labour and pains in this place to answer mine arguments (wherein you do nothing else but show your ignorance in philosophy and logic) yet all is in vain, except you could prove Transubstantiation to be a matter of our faith, which being not proved, all that you have spoken here, serveth to no purpose, nor concludeth nothing. For you are not so ignorant in sophistry, but you know well though, that of a false Antecedent, can no Consequent directly follow.
Put out his eyes, and is not a white saphire, a diamond, and a glas all one in his iudgemēt? Mary if he be a man of cleare sight, of true knowledge and experience in the iudgement of stones, and be therewithall a man of good fayth and honesty (as you tell the tale) they that be ignorant will be ashamed to controll his iudgement. But if he be blinde, or be a man neither of fayth nor honesty, but his experience hath ben euer exercised to deceaue all that trust him, and to sell them white saphirs for diamondes, then no man that wise is, will take a glas or saphire at his handes of trust, although he say it be a true diamond. Euen so likewise the Papistes (being so accustomed with these marchandises of glistering glasses and counterfayte drugges, to deceaue the world) what wise men will trust them with their fayned Transubstantiation, being so manifestly agaynst the playne wordes of scripture, agaynst all reason, sence, and auncient writers? And although you haue taken neuer so great labor and paynes in this place to answere myne argumentes (wherin you do nothing els but shew your ignorance in philosophy and logike) yet all is in vayne, except you could proue Transubstantiation to be a matter of our fayth, which being not proued, all that you haue spoken here, serueth to no purpose, nor concludeth nothing. For you are not so ignorant in sophistry, but you know well though, that of a false Antecedent, can no Consequent directly follow.