A19563:781
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 Tertullian proved not in that place the verity of Christs body §4by the figure of the Prophet: but by the figure which Christ ordained of his body in his last supper. For he went not about to prove that Christ should have a body, but that he had then a true body, because he ordained a figure thereof, which could have had no figure (as Tertullian saith) if it had ben but a fantastical body, and no true body in deed.
And Tertullian proued not in that place the veritie of Christes body §4by the figure of the Prophet: but by the figure which Christ ordeyned of his body in his last supper. For he went not about to proue that Christ should haue a body, but that he had then a true body, because he ordeined a figure therof, which could haue had no figure (as Tertullian sayth) if it had ben but a phantasticall body, and no true body in deed.
Wherefore this which you say in answering to the plain words of §5Tertullian, may be said of them that care not what they say, but it can not be said evidently, that is spoken so sophistically.
Wherfore this which you say in aunswering to the playn wordes of §5Tertullian, may be sayd of them that care not what they say, but it can not be sayd euidently, that is spoken so sophistically.
But if so plain speech of Tertullian (say you) that Christ made bread §6