A19563:1629
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.
But least any man should stumble at Cyprian's words, where he seemeth to say that the blood of Christ should be really in the cup, he saith nor meaneth no such thing, but that it is there sacramentally or figuratively. And his meaning needeth none other gathering, but of his own words, that follow next after in the same sentence, that by the wine the blood of Christ is showed. And shortly after he saith, that the cup which the Lord offered, was wine, and that it was wine that Christ called his blood. Now come we to Emissen, your principal stay in whom is your chief glory. Of him thus I write.
But least any man should stomble at Ciprians wordes, where he seemeth to say that the bloud of Christ should be really in the cup, he sayth nor meaneth no such thing, but that it is there sacramentally or figuratiuely. And his meaning needeth none other gathering, but of his owne wordes, that follow next after in the same sentence, that by the wine the bloud of Christ is shewed. And shortly after he sayth, that the cup which the Lord offered, was wine, and that it was wine that Christ called his bloud. Now come we to Emissen, your principall stay in whome is your chiefe glory. Of him thus I write.
Eusebius Emissenus,1 a man of singular fame in learning, about CCC. years after Christs ascension, did in few words set out this matter so plainly, (both how the bread and wine be converted into the body and blood of Christ, and yet remain still in the nature: and also how besides the outward receiving of bread and wine, Christ is inwardly by faith received in our hearts) all this (I say) he doth so plainly set out, that more plainness can not be reasonably desired in this matter. For he saith, that the conversion of the visible creatures of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, is like unto our conversion in baptism, where outwardly nothing is changed, but remaineth the same that was before: but all the alteration is inwardly and spiritually.