A19563:762
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.
And as for the cause of the figure, you declare it far otherwise, then S. Augustine doth, as the words of S. Augustine do plainly show to every indifferent reader. For the cause (say you) is this, that in the Sacrament we eat not the carnal flesh of a common man (as the letter soundeth) but the very spiritual flesh of Christ, God and man, and in that respect it is well noted for a figurative speech.
And as for the cause of the figure, you declare it far otherwise, then S. Augustine dooth, as the words of S. Augustine do playnely shew to euery indifferent reader. For the cause (say you) is this, that in the Sacrament we eat not the carnal flesh of a commō man (as the letter soundeth) but the very spiritual flesh of Christ, God and man, and in that respect it is well noted for a figuratiue spech.
In which one sentence be three notable errors or untruths. The first is, that you say the letter soundeth than we eat the carnal flesh of a common ⟨p. 118⟩man: which your saying the plain words of the gospel do manifestly reprove. For Christ separating himself in that speech from all other men, spake only of himself, saying, My flesh is very meat,1 and my blood is very drink: He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him. The second is, that you call the flesh of Christ a spiritual flesh, as before you said that he is spiritually eaten. And so by your doctrine his flesh is spiritual, and is spiritually eaten, and all is spiritual: which hath need of a favourable interpretation, if it should be counted a sound and Catholic teaching. And if all be spiritual, & done spiritually, what meaneth it then, that in other places you make so often mention, that he is present and eaten carnally, corporally, and naturally?
In which one sentence be three notable errors or vntruthes. The first is, that you say the letter soundeth than we eat the carnall flesh of a common