A19563:721
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 they say not that there is only bread in the Sacrament (saith Smith) and not Christs body: what then? What is that to purpose here in this place, I pray you? For I go not about in this place to prove that only bread is in the sacrament, and not Christs body: but in this place I prove only, that it was very bread, which Christ called his body, and very wine which he called his blood, when he said, This is my body: This is my blood. Which Smith with all his rabblement of the Papists deny, and yet all the old Authors affirm it with Doctor Steven Gardiner, late Bishop of Winchester also, who saith that Christ made demonstration upon the bread, when he said, This is my body. And as all the old Authors be able to countervail the Papists: so is the late Bishop able to match Smith in this matter, so that we have at the least a Rowland for an Oliver. But shortly to comprehend the answer of Smith: where I have proved my sayings, a dozen leaves together, by the authority of Scripture and old catholic writers, is this a sufficient answer, only to say without any proof, that all my travail is lost? and that all that I have alleged is nothing to the purpose? Judge indifferently gentle Reader, whether I might not by the same reason cast away all Smiths whole book, and reject it quite & clean with one word, saying, All his labour is lost and to no purpose. Thus Smith and Gardiner being answered, I will return again to my book, where it followeth thus.
But they say not that there is onely bread in the Sacrament (sayth Smith) and not Christes body: what then? What is that to purpose here in this place, I pray you? For I goe not about in this place to proue that onely bread is in the sacrament, and not Christes body: but in this place I proue onely, that it was very bread, which Christ called his body, and very wine which he called his bloud, when he sayd, This is my body: This is my bloud. Which Smith with all his rablement of the Papistes deny, and yet all the old Authors affirme it with Doctor Steuen Gardiner, late Bishope of Winchester also, who sayth that Christ made demonstration vpon the bread, when he sayd, This is my body. And as all the old Authors be able to counteruayle the Papistes: so is the late Bishope able to matche Smith in this mater, so that we haue at the least a Rowland for an Oliuer. But shortly to comprehend the aunswere of Smith: where I haue proued my sayinges, a dosen leaues together, by the authoritie of Scripture and old catholike writers, is this a sufficient aunswer, onely to say without any proofe, that al my trauayl is lost? and that all that I haue alleadged is nothing to the purpose? Iudge indifferently gentle Reader, whether I might not by the same reason cast away all Smithes whole booke, and reiect it quite & cleane with one word, saying, All his labore is lost and to no purpose. Thus Smith and Gardiner being aunswered, I will returne agayne to my booke, where it followeth thus.