A14216:1354
The Sum of Christian Religion
The sum of Christian religion: delivered by Zacharias Ursinus in his lectures upon the Catechism authorised by the noble Prince Frederick, throughout his dominions: wherein are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment, which have been or are controversed in divinity. Translated into English by Henry Parry, out of the last & best Latin editions, together with some supply of wa[n]ts out of his discourses of divinity, and with correction of sundry faults & imperfections, which are [sic] as yet remaining in the best corrected Latin.The summe of Christian religion: deliuered by Zacharias Vrsinus in his lectures vpon the Catechism autorised by the noble Prince Frederick, throughout his dominions: wherein are debated and resolued the questions of whatsoeuer points of moment, which haue beene or are controuersed in diuinitie. Translated into English by Henrie Parrie, out of the last & best Latin editions, together with some supplie of wa[n]ts out of his discourses of diuinitie, and with correction of sundrie faults & imperfections, which ar [sic] as yet remaining in the best corrected Latine.
Oxford: printed by Joseph Barnes, 1587Oxford: printed by Ioseph Barnes, 1587
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.
4 Objection. If the god-head of old without the flesh was the Son, and now two natures are one Son: there shall be nevertheless two Sons, one incorporeal, the other corporeal. ⟨p. 475⟩Wherefore there was not any son before the flesh. Answer. Neither is this Antecedent true. For one and the self same Son is, of old incorporeal, of one only nature, and only God; but now corporeal of two natures, and existing both God and man.
4 Obiection. If the god-head of oulde without the fleshe was the Sonne, and nowe two natures are one Sonne: there shall bee neuerthelesse two Sonnes, one incorporeall, the other corporeal. ⟨p. 475⟩Wherefore there was not any sonne before the flesh. Answer. Neither is this Antecedent true. For one and the selfe same Sonne is, of olde incorporeal, of one only nature, and only God; but now corporeal of two natures, and existing both God and man.
5 Objection. The humanity by it self is not the Sonne. Therefore neither the Divinity by it self is the Sonne. Answer. This reason doth not follow: because there is great dissimilitude of the natures, which are compared. The Word existed and was a person and the Son, before the flesh was taken and assumed. But the humanity was neither before the assumption, neither being assumed did it make the person by it self. And therefore the humanity severally is not the Son, but is in the Son, or is the other nature of the Son: but the Word both separate and knitted to the flesh is the same Son: as touching it self it is the Son of GOD by nature, but as touching the assumed nature or humanity the natural Son of of man, and the Son of GOD by grace of personal union.
5 Obiection. The humanity by it selfe is not the Sonne. Therefore neither the Diuinity by it selfe is the Sonne. Aunswere. This reason doth not followe: because there is great dissimilitude of the natures, which are compared. The Woorde existed and was a person and the Sonne, before the fleshe was taken and assumpted. But the humanitie was neither before the assumption, neither beeing assumpted did it make the person by it selfe. And therefore the humanity seuerally is not the Son, but is in the Son, or is the other nature of the Sonne: but the Word both separate and knitted to the flesh is the same Sonne: as touching it selfe it is the Sonne of GOD by nature, but as touching the assumpted nature or humanitie the naturall Sonne of of man, and the Sonne of GOD by grace of personall vnion.