A19563:1791
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.
So that if one nature remain not, the same is confounded. And if there be more natures that lose their substance, they be all confounded, except there be an utter consumption or annihilation of the thing that looseth his substance, and therefore the argument which all the old ecclesiastical authors use, to save the confusion of the two natures in Christ, is to prove, that they both remain. And if we may learn that, by the similitude of the sacrament (as Gelasius and Theodoret teach, and you here confess the same) then must needs the substance of bread and wine remain, or else is there none example nor similitude of the remaining of two natures in Christ, but of their confusion, as by your feigned doctrine the substance of bread is confounded with the body of Christ, neither being annihilate, nor remaining, but transubstantiated, confounded and converted into the substance of Christs body. And thus with your well understanding of the matter, you confound all together, where as I with my ignorance, not blaspheming that holy union and mystery of Christs ⟨p. 322⟩incarnation, do save all the natures whole, without mixtion, confusion or Transubstantiation, either of the divine & humane nature in Christ or of the soul and body in man, or of the bread & wine in the Sacrament, but all the substance & natures be saved & remain clearly with their natural properties & conditions, that the proportion in that point may be like, and one to be the true Image and similitude of the other. But surely more gross ignorance or wilful impiety then you have showed in this matter, hath not lightly been seen or red of.
So that if one nature remayne not, the same is confounded. And if there be more natures that lose their substance, they be all confounded, except there be an vtter consumption or adnihilation of the thing that looseth his substance, and therfore the argument which all the old ecclesiasticall authors vse, to saue the confusion of the two natures in Christ, is to proue, that they both remayne. And if we may learne that, by the similitude of the sacrament (as Gelasius and Theodoret teach, and you here confesse the same) then must needes the substance of bread and wine remayne, or els is there none example nor similitude of the remayning of two natures in Christ, but of their confusion, as by youre fayned doctrine the substance of bread is confounded with the body of Christ, neyther being adnihilate, nor remayning, but transubstantiated, confounded and conuerted into the substance of Christes body. And thus with your well vnderstanding of the matter, you confound all togither, where as I with my ignorance, not blaspheming that holy vnion and mistery of Christes