A19563:996
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.
Canterbury.
Caunterbury.
IT shall not need to make any further answer to you here as concerning Ireneus, but only to note one thing, that if any place of Ireneus had §1served for your purpose, you would not have failed here to allege it. But because you have nothing that maketh for you in deed, therefore you allege nothing in especial (least in the answer it should evidently appear to be nothing) and so slide you from the matter, as though all men should believe you, because you say it is so.
IT shall not nede to make any further answer to you here as cōcerning Ireneus, but onely to note one thing, that if any place of Ireneus had §1serued for your purpose, you would not haue fayled here to alleage it. But bicause you haue nothing yt maketh for you in dede, therfore you alleage nothing in especiall (least in the answer it should euidently apeare to be nothing) and so slide you from the matter, as though all men should beleue you, bicause you say it is so.
1And as for the place of Irene alleged by Melanchthon in an Epistle,§2 Decolampadius without any such troubling of him self as you imagine, maketh a plain and easy answer thereto, although Melanchthon wrote not his said Epistle to Decolampadius (as you negligently looking upon their works be deceived) but to Frideritus Miconius. And the words of Irene alleged by Melanchthon mean in effect no more, but to prove that our bodies shall rise again, and be joined unto our souls, and reign with them in the eternal life to come. For he wrote against Valentine, Martion, and other heretics, which denied the resurrection of our bodies, from whom it seemeth you do not much dissent, when you say that our bodies shall rise spiritually, if you mean that they shall rise without the form and fashion of mens bodies without distinction and proportion of members. For those shall be marvellous bodies, that shall have no shape nor fashion of bodies, as you say Christs body is in the sacrament, to whose body ours shall be like after the Resurrection.