A19563:1995
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 (as I have declared before,) all things which be exalted to an higher dignity, be called by the names of their dignity (So much the many times their former names be forgotten,) and yet nevertheless they be the same things that they were before, although they be not usually so called, As the surnames of Kings and Emperors, to how many be they known? or how many do call them thereby? but every man calleth them by their royal and imperial dignities. And in like manner is it of figures and sacraments, saving that their exaltation is in a figure, and the dignities royal and imperial be real and indeed. And yet he should not offend that should call the princes by their original names, so that he did it not in contempt of their estates. And no more should he offend that did call a figure by the name of the thing that it is indeed, so that he did it not in contempt of the thing that is signified. And therefore Theodoret saith not, that the bread in the sacrament may not be called bread, and that he offendeth that so calleth it, for he calleth it bread himself, but with this addition of dignity, calling it the bread of life, which it signifieth. As the cap of maintenance is not called barely and simply a cap, but with addition of maintenance. And in like manner we use not in common speech to call bread, wine and water in the sacraments, simple and common water, bread and wine: but according to that they represent unto us, we call them the water of baptism, the water of life, sacramental water, sacramental and celestial bread and wine, the bread of life, the drink that quencheth our thirst for ever. And the cause Theodoret showeth, why they be so called, that we hearing those names should lift up our minds unto the things that they be called, and comfort our selves therewithal. And yet neither in the sacraments, in the cap of maintenance, nor in the imperial or royal majesties is any simulation or dissimulation, but all be plain speeches in common usage, which every man understandeth.
But (as I haue declared before,) all thinges which be exalted to an hier dignity, be called by the names of their dignity (So muche the many times their former names be forgotten,) and yet neuertheles they be the same thinges that they were before, although they be not vsually so called, As the surnames of Kinges and Emperours, to how many be they knowen? or how many doe call them thereby? but euery man calleth them by their royall and imperiall dignities. And in like maner is it of fygures and sacramentes, sauing that their exaltation is in a figure, and the dignities royall and imperiall be reall and indeed. And yet he should not offend that should call the princes by their original names, so that he did it not in contempt of their estates. And no more should he offend that did call a figure by the name of the thing that it is indeed, so that he did it not in contempt of the thing that is signified. And therefore Theodoret sayth not, that the bread in the sacrament may not be called bread, and that he offendeth that so calleth it, for he calleth it bread himselfe, but with this addition of dignity, calling it the bread of life, which it signifieth. As the cap of maintenāce is not called barely and simply a cap, but with addition of maintenaunce. And in like manner we vse not in common speach to call bread, wine and water in the sacraments, simple and common water, bread and wine: but according to that they represent vnto vs, we call them the water of baptisme, the water of life, sacramentall water, sacramentall and celestiall bread and wine, the bread of lyfe, the drinke that quencheth our thirst for euer. And the cause Theodoret sheweth, why they be so called, that we hearing those names should lift vp our mindes vnto the thinges that they bee called, and comfort our selues therewithall. And yet neither in the sacraments, iu the cap of maintenaunce, nor in the imperiall or royall maiesties is any simulation or dissimulation, but all be playn speaches in common vsage, which euery man vnderstandeth.