A19563:744
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.
Here may every man that readeth the words of Origen plainly see, that you seek in this weighty matter nothing by shifts and cavillations. For you have nothing answered directly to Origen although he directly writeth against your doctrine. For you say that the eating of Christ's flesh is taken in the proper signification without a figure. Origen saith there is a figure. And Origen saith further, that it is only a figurative speech, although not adding this word (only) yet adding other words of the same effect. For he saith, that we may not understand the words as the letter soundeth. And saith further, that if we understand the words of Christ in this place, as the letter soundeth, the letter killeth. Now who knoweth not, that to say these words (not as the letter soundeth, and yt letter killeth) be as much to say, as only spiritually, and only otherwise then the letter soundeth? Wherefore you must spit upon your hands, and take better hold, or else you can not be able to pluck Origen so shortly from me. And I marvel that you be not ashamed, thus to trifle with the ancient authors in so serious a matter, and such places, where the reader only looking upon the authors words, may see your dealing.
HEre may euery man that readeth the words of Origen plainly see, yt you seek in this waighty matter nothing by shifts and cauillatiōs. For you haue nothing aunswered directly to Origen although he directly writeth agaynst your doctrine. For you say that the eating of Chrstes flesh is taken in the proper signification without a fygure. Origen sayth there is a figure. And Origen sayth further, that it is onely a figuratiue spech, although not adding this word (onely) yet adding other words of the same effect. For he sayth, that we may not vnderstand the words as the letter soundeth. And sayth further, that if we vnderstand the words of Christ in this place, as the letter soundeth, the letter killeth. Now who knoweth not, that to say these words (not as the letter soundeth, and yt letter killeth) be as much to say, as onely spiritually, and only otherwise then the letter soundeth? Wherfore you must spit vpon your hands, aud take better hold, or els you can not be able to plucke Origen so shortly from me. And I maruayle that you be not ashamed, thus to trifle with the auncient authors in so serious a matter, and such places, where the reader onely looking vpon the authors wordes, may see your dealing.