A19563:957
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.
The calling of bread by enunciation for a name is not material, because it signifieth that was, but in that is here alleged is no mention of bread to prove the note: and to §3faithful men the words of the Epistle, reverently express the remain of the mysteries, in which when many hosts be offered in the altar, according to the multitude that should communicate, those many hosts, after consecration, be not many bodies of Christ, but of many breads one body of Christ. And yet as we teach in England now, in the book of common prayer, in every part of that is broken, is the whole body of our Saviour Christ. Mans words can not suffice to express Gods mysteries, nor can utter them so, as froward reason shall not find matter to wrangle. And yet to stay reason, may suffice, that as in one loaf of bread broken, every piece broken, is a piece of that bread: and every piece of the bread broken, is in it self a whole piece of bread, and so whole bread, for every piece hath an whole substance of bread in it: So we truly speak of the host consecrated to avoid the fantasy of multiplication of Christs body, which in all the §4hosts, and all the parts of the hosts is but one not broken, nor distribute by pieces, & yet in a speech to tell, and signify that is broken, called in name the leaving pieces of the body, portion of the body, residue of the body, in which nevertheless each one piece is Christs whole body.
The calling of bread by enunciation for a name is not material, because it signifieth that was, but in that is here alleadged is no mention of bread to proue the note: and to §3faythfull men the wordes of the Epistle, reuerently expresse the remayne of the misteries, in which when manye hostes bee offered in the altar, according to the multitude that should communicate, those many hostes, after consecration, be not many bodies of Christ, but of many breades one body of Christ. And yet as we teach in Englād now, in the booke of common prayer, in euery part of that is broken, is the whole body of our Sauiour Christ. Mans words can not suffice to expresse Gods misteries, nor can vtter them so, as froward reason shall not finde matter to wrangle. And yet to stay reason, may suffice, that as in one loafe of bread brokē, euery péece broken, is a péece of that bread: and euery pece of the bread broken, is in it self a whole pece of bread, and so whol bread, for euery pece hath an whole substance of bread in it: So we truely speake of the host consecrated to auoyd the fantasy of multiplication of Christes body, which in all ye