A19563:670
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.
First to the Scriptures by me alleged particularly,1 he utterly answereth nothing. To Origen, and S. Augustine by name, and to all the ⟨p. 102⟩other Authors by me alleged, he maketh this brief answer in general, that whatsoever those authors say, they mean no more, but that Christ is not here in earth visibly, naturally, & by circumscription, and yet nevertheless he is in the sacrament above nature, invisibly, and without circumscription. This subtle distinction hath Smith devised (or rather followeth other Papists therein) to answer the Authors which I have alleged. And yet of Smiths own distinction it followeth, that Christ is not in the sacrament carnally and corporally.2 For if Christ be in the Sacrament but supernaturally, invisibly, & without circumscription, then he is not there carnally, and corporally, as S. Augustine reasoneth ad Dardanum. But yet Smith only saith that the Authors so meant, and proveth not one word of his saying, supposing that the old holy writers be like to the Papists, which write one thing, and when they list not, or cannot defend it, they say they mean another.
First to the Scriptures by me alleadged particularly,1 he vtterly answereth nothing. To Origen, and S. Augustine by name, and to all the ⟨p. 102⟩other Authors by me alleadged, he maketh this brief answere in generall, yt whatsoeuer those authors say, they meane no more, but yt Christ is not here in earth visibly, naturally, & by circumscriptiō, and yet neuerthelesse he is in the sacrament aboue nature, inuisibly, and without circumscription. This suttle distinction hath Smith deuised (or rather followeth other Papistes therin) to answere the Authors which I haue alleadged. And yet of Smithes own distinction it followeth, that Christ is not in the sacrament carnally and corporally.2 For if Christ be in the Sacrament but supernaturally, inuisibly, & without circumscription, then he is not there carnally, and corporally, as S. Augustine reasoneth ad Dardanum. But yet Smith onely saith that the Authors so meant, and proueth not one word of his saying, supposing that the old holy writers be like to the Papistes, which write one thing, and when they list not, or cannot defend it, they say they meane another.