A19563:379
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 it is not the doctrine of Christ, but the subtle invention of Antichrist, first decreed by Innocent the third,1 and after more at large set forth by school authors, whose study was ever to defend and set abroad to the world, all such matters,2 as the bishop of Rome had once decreed. And the Devil by his minister Antichrist, had so dazzled the eyes of a great multitude of christian people in these latter days, that they sought not for their faith at the clear light of Gods word, but at the Romish Antichrist, believing what so ever he prescribed unto them, yea though it were against all reason, all senses, & Gods most holy word also. For else he could not have been very Antichrist in deed, except he had been so repugnant unto Christ, whose doctrine is clean contrary to this doctrine of Antichrist. For Christ teacheth that we receive very bread, and wine, in the most blessed Supper of the Lord, as Sacraments to admonish us, that as we be fed with bread and wine bodily, so we be fed with the ⟨p. 43⟩body and blood of our saviour Christ spiritually. As in our baptism we receive very water, to signify unto us that as water is an element to wash the body outwardly, so be our souls washed by the holy ghost inwardly.
But it is not the doctrine of Christ, but the subtile inuention of Antichrist, first decreed by Innocent the third,1 and after more at large set forth by schoole authors, whose study was euer to defend and set abroad to the world, all such matters,2 as the bishoppe of Rome had once decreed. And the Deuill by his minister Antichrist, had so daseled the eyes of a great multitude of christian people in these latter dayes, that they sought not for their faith at the cleere light of Gods word, but at the Romish Antichrist, beleeuing what so euer he prescribed vnto them, yea though it were against all reason, al sences, & Gods most holy word also. For els he could not haue been very Antichrist in deede, except he had been so repugnant vnto Christ, whose doctrine is clean contrary to this doctrin of Antichrist. For Christ teacheth that we receaue very bread, and wine, in the most blessed Supper of the Lord, as Sacraments to admonish vs, that as we be fedde with bread and wine bodely, so we be fedde with the