A19563:2131
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.
For I say (as all the old holy Fathers and Martyrs used to say) that we receive Christ spiritually by faith with our minds, eating his flesh and drinking his blood: so that we receive Christs own very natural body but not naturally nor corporally. But this lying papist saith, that we eat his natural body corporally with our mouths, which neither the council Ephesine, nor any other ancient council or doctor ever said or thought.
For I say (as all the olde holy Fathers and Martirs vsed to say) that we receaue Christ spiritually by fayth with our myndes, eating his flesh and drincking his bloud: so that we receaue Christes owne very naturall body but not naturally nor corporally. But this lying papist sayth, that we eate his naturall body corporally with our mouthes, which neyther the counsell Ephesine, nor any other auncient councell or doctor euer sayd or thought.
And the controversy in the council Ephesine, was not of the uniting of Christs flesh to the forms of bread and wine in the sacrament, but of the uniting of his flesh to his divinity at his incarnation in unity of person. Which thing Nestorius the heretic denied, confessing that Christ was a godly man as other were, but not that he was very God in nature: which heresy, that holy council confuting, affirmeth that the flesh of Christ was so joined in person, to the divine nature, that it was made the proper flesh of the son of God, and flesh that gave life: but that the said flesh was present in the sacrament corporally, and eaten with our mouths, no mention is made thereof in that council.
And the controuersy in the councell Ephesine, was not of the vniting of Christes flesh to the formes of bread and wine in the sacrament, but of the vniting of his flesh to his diuinity at his incarnation in vnity of person. Which thing Nestorius the heretike denyed, confessing that Christ was a godly man as other were, but not that he was very God in nature: which heresy, that holy counsell confuting, affirmeth that the flesh of Christ was so ioyned in person, to the dyuine nature, that it was made the proper flesh of the sonne of God, and flesh that gaue life: but that the sayd flesh was present in the sacramēt corporally, and eaten with our mouthes, no mention is made therof in that councell.