A19563:1883
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.
Winchester.
1Answering to Chrysostom this author complaineth as he did in Cyprian, of malicious §1leaving out of that, which when it is brought in, doth nothing impair that went before. Chrysostom would we should consider the secret truth of this mystery, where Christ is the invisible Priest, and ministereth in the visible church by his visible minister the visible priest, whereof Chrysostom would by his words put us in remembrance, not denying thereby the visible ministry no more then he doth in his other words deny the visible form of bread, and yet would not that we should look only upon it but whether §2faith directeth us, that is to say, upon the very body of Christ there invisibly present, which faith knoweth, and knoweth it to be there the very body, and there therefore to §3be no bread, which bread this true confession of Christs body present by faith excludeth. But touching the priest, S. Chrysostoms words do by no mean teach us that there is no visible priest, but to think that the body of Christ is delivered of Christs hands, which excludeth not in like sort the minister visible as faith doth the substance invisible of bread in the Sacrament. The one saying in Chrysostom is a godly exhortation according to the truth, the other is a doctrine of faith in the truth, we be not taught that the priest is Christ, but we be taught that the substance of the bread is made Christs body. And then the question in the words of Chrysostom (Seest thou bread) is as much to say, as rememberest the faith: as being one of the faithful that know? which term S. Augustine used. And then Chrysostom to confirm our faith in so high a mystery, declareth how we should think Christ to deliver his body him self as a thing far exceeding mans power to do it. And with other heavenly words setteth forth the greatness ⟨p. 339⟩of that mystery, which be words of godly and good meditation convenient for so high a matter to adorn it accordingly, which because they be wholesome, and meet allegories, wherewith to draw and lift up our minds to celestial thoughts, we may not thereby esteem the substance of that mystery to be but in allegory. Here in steed of a solution the author filleth three whole leaves with proof of that is not necessary, how a denial by comparison is not utterly a denial, which is in deed true.