A19563:2143
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 D. Smith saith, that Gods word doth teach this as plainly as the other: using herein such a kind of sophistical argument, as all Logicians do reprehend, which is called petitio principij, when a man taketh that thing for a supposition and an approved truth, which is in controversy. And so doth he in this place when he saith: Doth not Gods word teach it thee as plainly as the other? Here by this interrogatory he required that thing to be granted him as a truth, which he ought to prove, and whereupon dependeth the whole matter that is in question, that is to say, whether it be as plainly set out in the scripture, that Christs body is corporally in every place where the sacrament is, as that God created all things of nothing, Adam of the earth, and Eve of Adams side &c. This is it that I deny and that he should prove. But he taketh it for a supposition, saying by interrogation, doth not the word of God teach this as plainly as the other? Which I affirm to be utterly false as I have showed in my third boob, the xi. and twelve chap. where I have most manifestly proved, as well by Gods word as by ancient authors, that these words of Christ, This is my body, and, This is my blood, be no plain speeches, but figurative.
And yet D. Smith sayth, that Gods word doth teach this as playnly as the other: vsing herein such a kind of sophisticall argumēt, as all Logitiās do reprehend, which is called petitio principij, whē a mā taketh yt thing for a supposition and an approued truth, which is in controuersy. And so doth he in this place when he sayth: Doth not Gods word teach it thee as playnly as the other? Here by this interrogatory he required that thing to be graunted him as a truth, which he ought to proue, and whereupon dependeth the whole matter that is in questiō, that is to say, whether it be as playnly set out in the scripture, that Christes body is corporally in euery place where the sacrament is, as that God created all thinges of nothing, Adam of the earth, and Eue of Adams side &c. This is it that I deny and that he should proue. But he taketh it for a supposition, saying by interrogation, doth not the word of God teach this as playnly as the other? Which I affirme to be vtterly false as I haue shewed in my third boobe, the xi. and twelfe chap. where I haue most manifestly proued, as well by Gods word as by aūcient authors, that these wordes of Christ, This is my body, and, This is my bloud, be no playne speaches, but figuratiue.