A19563:432
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.
IN the first part of this comparison I go not about to term the true catholic faith, for the first part in all the comparisons is the Papistical faith, which I have termed none otherwise, then I learned of their own terming, and therefore if my terming please you not (as in deed it ought to please no man) yet lay the blame in them that were the authors and inventors of that terming, and not in me, that against them do use their own terms, terming the matter as they do them self, because they should not find fault with me (as you do) that I term their teaching at my pleasure.
IN the first part of this comparison I go not about to tearm the true catholicke faith, for the first part in all the comparisons is the Papisticall faith, which I haue tearmed none otherwise, then I learned of their own tearming, and therfore if my tearming please you not (as in deede it ought to please no man) yet lay the blame in them that were the authors and inuentoures of that tearming, and not in me, that against them do vse their owne tearmes, tearming the matter as they doe them selfe, because they should not finde faulte with me (as you doe) that I tearme their teaching at my pleasure.
And as for receiving of the body of Christ with our mouths, truth it is that S. Augustine, Ambros, Chrysostom, and other use such speeches, that we receive the body of Christ with our mouths, see him with our eyes, feel him with our hands, break him & tear him with our teeth, eat him and digest him (which speech I have also used in my catechism) but yet these speeches must be understand figuratively (as I have declared in my fourth book the eight chapter, and shall more fully declare hereafter) for we do not these things to the very body of Christ, but to the bread whereby his body is represented.