A19563:1759
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 yet although the Eutychians said, that the nature of God and of man, before their uniting were two, yet I read not that they said, that they were two in the virgins womb (as you report of them) which is no great matter, but to declare how ignorant you be in the thing, whereof you make so great boast, or how little you regard the truth, that wittingly will tell an untruth. But to say my mind frankly, what I think of your declaration of these two heresies, I think a great part thereof you dreamed in your sleep, or imagined being in some trance or rapt with some Sophistical vision, and part of your dream agreeth neither with approved Authors and histories, nor with it self. For first as touching the Eutychians,1 where you say that Gelasius directeth his Arguments of the two natures in man, & of the two natures in the Sacrament: chiefly against the Eutychians, to prove the nature of man to remain in Christ after the adunation, whosoever readeth Gelasius, shall find otherwise, that he directed his Arguments indifferently, as well against Nestorius, as against Eutiches, §4and no more against the one then against the other. Nor no more did the Eutychians abhor alius and alius, 2(although some gathered so of their words) then did the Nestorians, which words signify diversity of person, as aliud and aliud signify diversity of nature:3 So as the body & soul in one man be aliud and aliud by reason of diversity of natures, & yet ⟨p. 314⟩be they not alius and alius, because that both together make but one person. By means of which difference between alius and alius, we say, Alius pater, alius filius, alius spiritus sanctus, and not Aliud pater, aliud filius, aliud spiritus sanctus, for asmuch as they be three in persons, and but one in nature and substance. And because Christ is two in nature, that is to say, of his deity and humanity, and but one in person, therefore we say, Aliud & aliud est divinitas & humanitas, but not Alius, sed unus est Christus.
And yet although the Eutichians sayd, that the nature of God and of mā, before their vniting were two, yet I read not that they sayd, that they were two in the virgines wombe (as you report of thē) which is no great matter, but to declare how ignoraūt you be in the thing, wherof you make so great boast, or how litle you regard the truth, that wittingly wil tell an vntruth. But to say my mynde frankely, what I thinke of your declaration of these two heresies, I thinke a great part thereof you dreamed in your sleape, or imagined being in some traunce or rapt with some Sophisticall vision, and part of your dreame agreeth neither with approued Authours and histories, nor with it selfe. For first as touchyng the Eutichians,