A19563:2091
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 yet all your wiles and shifts will not serve you, for by extending the name of a propitiatory sacrifice unto so large a signification as you do, you make all manner of Sacrifices propitiatory, leaving no place for any other sacrifice. For (say you) all good deeds and good thoughts be Sacrifices propitiatory, and then be the good works of the lay people Sacrifices propitiatory, as well as those of the Priest. And to what purpose then made you in the beginning of this book a distinction between sacrifices propitiatory and other? Thus for desire you have to defend the Papistical errors, you have not fallen only into imaginations contrary to the truth of Gods word, but also contrary to your self.
And yet all your wyles and shiftes will not serue you, for by extendyng the name of a propitiatory sacrifice vnto so large a signification as you do, you make all maner of Sacrifices propitiatory, leauyng no place for any other sacrifice. For (say you) all good deedes and good thoughtes be Sacrifices propitiatorie, and then be the good workes of the lay people Sacrifices propitiatorie, as well as those of the Priest. And to what purpose then made you in the begynnyng of this booke a distinction betwene sacrifices propitiatorie and other? Thus for desire you haue to defend the Papisticall errours, you haue not fallen onely into imaginations contrary to the truth of Gods word, but also contrary to your selfe.
But let pass away these Papistical inventions, and let us humbly profess ourselves with all our Sacrifices, not worthy to approach unto God, nor to have any access unto him, but by that only propitiatory sacrifice, which Christ only made upon the Cross. And yet let us with all devotion, with whole hart and mind, and with all obedience to Gods will, come unto the heavenly Supper of Christ, thanking him only for propitiation of our sins. In which holy Communion the act of the Minister and other be all of one sort, none propitiatory, but all of lauds and thanks giving. And such sacrifices be pleasant and acceptable to God (as S. Paul saith) done of them that be good,1