A19563:301
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.
Canterbury.
Caunterbury.
1Now we be come to the very pith of the matter, and the chief point whereupon the whole controversy hangeth, whether in these words, this is my body: Christ called bread his body, wherein you and Smith agree like a man and a woman that dwelled in Lincolnshire (as I have heard reported) that what pleased the one misliked the other, saving that they both agreed in wilfulness.2 So do Smith and you agree both in this point, that Christ made bread his body, but that it was bread which he called his body when he said. This is my body, this you grant, but Smith denieth it. And because all Smiths buildings clearly fall down, if this his chief foundation be overthrown, therefore must I first prove against Smith,3 that Christ called the material bread his body, & the wine which was the fruit of the vine,4 his blood. For why did you not prove this my Lord (saith Smith) would you that men should take you for a prophet, or for one that could not err in his sayings?
1NOw we be come to the very pith of the matter, and the chiefe pointe wherupon the wholl controuersie hangeth, whether in these words, this is my body: Christ called bread his body, wherin you and Smith agree like a man and a woman that dwelled in Lincolnshere (as I haue heard reported) that what pleased the one misliked the other, sauing that they both agreed in wilfulness.2 So do Smith and you agree both in this point, that Christ made bread his body, but yt it was bread which he called his body when he sayd. This is my body, this you graunt, but Smith denieth it. And because all Smithes buildinges cleerely fall downe, if this his chiefe foundation be ouerthrowen, therfore must I first proue against Smith,