A19563:1696
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.
When you wrote this, it is like that you had not considered my third book, wherein is a plain and direct answer to all that you have brought in this place, or else where, concerning the real presence of Christs body and blood in the Sacrament. And how slender proofs you make in this place, to prove the real presence, because of the Sacrifice, every man may judge, being neither your argument good, nor your antecedent true. For S. Augustine saith not, that the body and blood of Christ is the sacrifice of the church, and if he had so said, it inferreth not §1this conclusion, that the body of Christ should be really in the bread, and his blood in the wine.
WHen you wrote this, it is like that you had not considered my third booke, wherin is a playne and direct answer to all that you haue brought in this place, or els where, concerning the reall presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament. And how slender proofes you make in this place, to proue the reall presence, because of the Sacrifice, euery man may iudge, being neyther your argument good, nor your antecedent true. For S. Augustine sayth not, that the body and bloud of Christ is the sacrifice of the church, and if he had so sayd, it inferreth not §1this conclusion, that the body of Christ should be really in the bread, and his bloud in the wine.
1And although S. Augustine saith, that bread is Christs body, yet if you had well marked the 64.65. 66. leaves of my book, you should §2there have perceived how S. Augustine declareth at length, in what manner of speech that is to be understand, that is to say figuratively, in which speech the thing that signifieth and the thing that is signified, have both one name,2 as S. Cyprian manifestly teacheth. For in plain speech without figure, bread is not the body of Christ by your own confession, who do say, that the affirmation of one substance is the negation of an other. And if the bread were made the body of Christ (as you say it is) then must you needs confess, that the body of Christ is made of bread, which before you said was so foolish a saying, as were not tolerable by a scoffer to be devised in a play, to supply when his fellow had forgotten his part. And seeing that the bread is not annihilate and consumed into nothing (as the school authors teach) then must it needs follow, that the body of Christ is made of the matter of bread, for that it is made of the form of bread, I suppose you will not grant.