A19563:1646
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.
Canterbury.
Caunterbury.
Your distinction made here of outwardly and inwardly, is a plain confusion of Hilarius mind, and contrary to that which you wrote before in Emissene. For there you said, that the visible creatures be changed (meaning by the visible creatures, the substances of bread and wine) and now when Hilary saith, that bread and wine be seen, you say that their substances be not seen, but the outward forms only, which you say, be called bread and wine. But here appeareth into how narrow a straight you be driven, that be fain for a shift to say, that the accidents of bread without the substance, be called bread.
YOur distinction made here of outwardly and inwardly, is a playne confusion of Hilarius mynd, and contrary to that which you wrote before in Emissene. For there you sayd, that the visible creatures be changed (meaning by the visible creatures, the substances of bread and wine) and now when Hilary sayth, that bread and wine be seene, you say that their substances be not seene, but the outward formes onely, which you say, be called bread and wine. But here appeareth into how narrow a straight you be driuen, that be fayne for a shift to say, that the accidents of bread without the substance, be called bread.
Epiphanius is next in my book.