A19563:1909
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 where you confess, that S. Ambrose saith not in words, that the §3substances of bread and wine be gone, and yet saith so in effect, because he speaketh of change, either you know that your argument is naught, and ⟨p. 345⟩yet bring it in purposely to deceive some simple reader, or your ignorance is more then I would have thought, that of this word (change) would argue change in substance, as though there could be no change, but it must be in substance. But if you had well considered the examples of S. Ambrose by me alleged (which he bringeth forth for the proofs and similitudes of the change of bread and wine in the sacrament) you should have found that in all the said examples remain the substances,1 notwithstanding the change. As in the water of Jordan staying to run after the natural course, in the dry stone that contrary to his nature flowed out water, in the bitter water of Marath that was turned into sweetness, in the iron that contrary to nature swam above the water, in the spiritual generation of man above all natural operation, in the sacramē tall mutation of the water of baptism, and in the incarnation of our saviour Christ, which all being brought by S. Ambrose for example of the change in bread and wine, as in them the substances remained, notwithstanding the changes, so is it in the bread and wine, whereof other were brought for examples.
And where you confesse, that S. Ambrose sayth not in wordes, that the §3substances of bread and wine be gone, and yet sayth so in effect, because he speaketh of chaunge, either you know that your argument is naught, and ⟨p. 345⟩yet bring it in purposely to deceiue some simple reader, or your ignoraunce is more then I would haue thought, that of this word (chaunge) woulde argue chaunge in substaunce, as though there could be no chaunge, but it must be in substaunce. But if you had well considered the examples of S. Ambrose by me alleadged (which he bringeth forth for the proofes and similitudes of the chaunge of bread and wine in the sacrament) you should haue found that in all the sayd examples remayne the substaunces,