A19563:536
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.
1The Papists say, that the body of Christ that is in the Sacrament, hath his own proper form and quantity. We say, that the body of Christ hath not his proper form and quantity, neither in the sacrament, nor in them that receive the Sacrament, but is in the sacrament sacramentally, and in the worthy receivers spiritually without the proper form & quantity of his body. This was my meaning at the first, and no man that had looked of this place indifferently, would have taken the second part of this comparison to be understanded of Christs divine nature: for the bread and wine be sacraments of his body and blood,2 and not of his divinity (as Theodoretus saith) and therefore his divine nature is not sacramentally in the sacrament,§2 but his humane nature only. And what manner of speech had this ben, to say of Christs divine nature, that it is in the sacrament without quantity, which hath in it no manner of quantity where so ever it be? And where I set forth these comparisons to show wherein we vary from the Papists, what variance had ben in this comparison, if I had understanded the first part of Christs humanity, and the second of his divinity?
1The Papistes say, that the body of Christ that is in the Sacramēt, hath his own proper forme and quantity. We say, that the body of Christ hath not his proper forme and quantity, neither in the sacrament, nor in them yt receaue the Sacrament, but is in the sacrament sacramentally, and in the worthy receauers spiritually without the proper forme & quantity of his body. This was my meaning at the first, and no mā that had loked of this place indifferently, would haue taken the second part of this comparison to be vnderstanded of Christs diuine nature: for the bread and wyne be sacraments of his body and bloud,2 and not of his diuinitie (as Theodoretus sayth) and therfore his diuine nature is not sacramentally in the sacramēt,§2 but his humayne nature onely. And what maner of spech had this ben, to say of Christes diuine nature, that it is in the sacrament without quantity, which hath in it no manner of quantitie where so euer it be? And where I set foorth these comparysons to shew wherein we vary from the Papists, what variance had ben in this comparison, if I had vnderstanded the first part of Christs humanitie, and the second of his diuinitie?