A14350:532
The Common Places
The common places of the most famous and renowned divine Doctor Peter Martyr divided into four principal parts: with a large addition of many theological and necessary discourses, some never extant before. Translated and partly gathered by Anthony Marten, one of the sewers of her Majesties most honourable chamber.The common places of the most famous and renowmed diuine Doctor Peter Martyr diuided into foure principall parts: with a large addition of manie theologicall and necessarie discourses, some neuer extant before. Translated and partlie gathered by Anthonie Marten, one of the sewers of hir Maiesties most honourable chamber.
Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rowe, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henry Denham, Thomas Chard, William Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rovve, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
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.
113 But Origin in his book [Greek or Hebrew], as Jerome citeth him against John bishop of Jerusalem, was of a far other mind. For whereas we say, that the visions of Angels may be conceived three manner of ways; to wit, either in fantasy, or in body, but not humane: or else in the very true body of a man; he taketh a certain mean, and saith; that The bodies of Angels, wherein they present themselves to the eyes of men, are neither perfect bodies, nor humane bodies, nor yet fantastical bodies, and yet bodies nevertheless: and that he applieth to them that rise again. For we shall (saith he) have bodies in the resurrection, but yet only bodies, not bones, not sinews, not flesh. And indeed there is some difference between a body and flesh: 2for every flesh is a body, but every body is not flesh. Such a difference Paul toucheth in the first chapter of his epistle to the Colossians, when he said; Ye are reconciled in the body of his flesh. 3And in the second chapter; 4By putting off the sinful body of the flesh. Yea, and in the Creed also we say; that We believe in the resurrection of the flesh, and say not; Of the body. Origin said, that he saw two exceeding errors; the one was, of them which said, that there was no resurrection. Such were the Valentinians and Marcionites; 5of which sort also were Hymenaeus and Philetus, who (as Paul witnesseth) taught that the resurrection was already past; and such are the Libertines at this day reported to be. For they babble (I cannot tell what) of the matter both ungodly, and unlearnedly. Another of those which think, that perfect and true bodies shall rise again with flesh, sinews, and bones: which thing (he saith) is not possible; for Flesh & blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
113 But Origin in his booke 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, as Ierom citeth him against Iohn bishop of Ierusalem, was of a far other mind. For whereas we saie, that the visions of Angels may be conceiued thrée maner of waies; to wit, either in phantasie, or in bodie, but not humane: or else in the verie true bodie of a man; he taketh a certeine meane, and saith; that The bodies of Angels, wherein they present themselues to the eies of men, are neither perfect bodies, nor humane bodies, nor yet phantasticall bodies, and yet bodies neuertheles: and that he applieth to them that rise againe. For we shall (saith he) haue bodies in the resurrection, but yet onlie bodies, not bones, not sinewes, not flesh. And indéed there is some difference betwéene a bodie and flesh: