A19563:1993
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.
But to answer the absurdities laid unto the Papists charge, you recompense me again with •• great huge absurdities. One is that Christ is really but in heaven only, the other is that bread is still bread. Here thou mayst judge (gentle reader) what errors I defend, that am by force driven to such two absurdities, that I am fain to say as I have written in my book, and as the Apostles and Evangelists said. But beware I would advise thee, that thou say not as Gods word teacheth, for if thou dost, thou mayst be sure to be taken of the Papists for an heretic.
But to aunswere the absurdityes layed vnto the Papistes charge, you recompence me agayne with •• great huge absurdities. One is that Christ is really but in heauen onely, the other is that bread is stil bread. Here thou mayst iudge (gentle reader) what errours I defend, that am by force driuen to such two absurdities, that I am fayne to say as I haue written in my booke, and as the Apostles and Euangelistes sayd. But beware I would aduise thee, that thou say not as Gods word teacheth, for if thou doost, thou mayst be sure to be taken of the Papistes for an hereticke.
1Finally you come to your contradictions of bread and no bread, the body and not the body, simulation and dissimulation, wherein when you have well practised your self in all your book through, at the last you make as it were a play in a dialogue between Chrysostom, Theodoret and me. But Chrysostom, Theodoret and I shall agree well enough,2 for they tell §3not what in no wise may be, but what was commonly used, that is to say not to call the bread by his proper name after consecration, but by the name of the body of Christ. And if you had well considered, what I wrote in my §4