A19563:735
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 you teach such a carnal & gross eating, and drinking of Christs flesh & blood, as is more meet to express how dogs devour paunches, then to set forth the high mystery of Christs holy supper. For you say, that Christs body is present really, substantially, corporally, and carnally, and so is eaten: and that we eat Christs body, as eating is taken in common speech: but in common speech it is taken for chawing, and gnawing as dogs do paunches: wherefore of your saying it followeth, that we do so eat Christs body, as dogs eat paunches, which all ⟨p. 114⟩christian ears abhor for to hear.
But you teach such a carnall & grosse eating, and drinking of Christes flesh & bloud, as is more meet to expresse how dogges deuoure paunches, then to sette forth the high mistery of Christes holy supper. For you say, that Christes body is present really, substauncially, corporally, and carnally, and so is eaten: and that we eate Christes body, as eating is taken in common speach: but in common speach it is taken for chawing, and gnawing as doges do paunches: wherfore of your saying it followeth, that we do so eate Christes body, as dogges eate paunches, which all ⟨p. 114⟩christian eares abhore for to heare.
But why should I join with you here an issue, in that matter which §5I never spake? For I never read nor hard no man that said (saving you alone) that we do eat Christ grossly, or carnally, or as eating is taken in common speech without any figure, but all that ever I have hard or read, say quite clean contrary. But you, who affirm that we eat Christ carnally, and as eating is taken in common speech (which is carnally & grossly to chaw with the teeth) must needs consequently grant, that we eat him grossly and carnally, as dogs eat paunches. And this is a strange thing to hear, that where before you said, that Christ is present but after a spiritual manner, now you say, that he is eaten carnally.