A19563:1731
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.
And for the special point, wherein you do note a marvellous diversity §1in report, and would gather thereof no truth to be, where such diversity is, let the reader be judge, what a wonderful diversity it is. The Latin is this, Panis dignus habitus est dominici corporis appellation. The translator of M. Peter Martyrs book saith. The bread is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body. My translation hath, The bread is exalted to the name of the body of the Lord. When a man is made a Lord or Knight, if one say of him, that he is reputed worthy, the name of a Lord or Knight, and an other say, that he is exalted to the name of a Lord or Knight, what difference is between these two sayings? Is not this a wonderful diversity? I pray thee judge indifferently good reader.
And for the speciall poynt, wherin you do note a meruaylous diuersity §1in report, and would gather therof no truth to be, where such diuersity is, let the reader be iudge, what a wonderfull diuersity it is. The Latine is this, Panis dignus habitus est dominici corporis appellatione. The translator of M. Peter Martyrs booke sayth. The bread is reputed worthy the name of the Lordes body. My translation hath, The bread is exalted to the name of the body of the Lord. When a man is made a Lord or Knight, if one say of him, that he is reputed worthy, the name of a Lord or Knight, and an other say, that he is exalted to the name of a Lord or Knight, what difference is betwene these two sayinges? Is not this a wonderfull diuersity? I pray thee iudge indifferently good reader.
1But (say you) a figure can never be counted worthy the name of the §2thing onles the thing were there in deed. Wrangle then with S. John Chrysostom himself, and not with me, who saith that the bread is exalted to the name of the Lords body or is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body after the sanctification, and yet the nature of the bread remaineth still, which can not be as you say, if the body of Christ were there present.