A15857:854
H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which now at length being 70. years…H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which novve at length being 70. yeares…
H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which now at length being 70. years of age, he caused to be published in the name of himself & his family. Englished in sense agreeable, and in words as answerable to his own latin copy, as in so grave a mans work is requisite: for the profit of all the unlearneder sort, of English christians, that desire to know his judgement in matters of faith.H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which novve at length being 70. yeares of age, he caused to bee published in the name of himselfe & his family. Englished in sense agreeable, and in words as answerable to his ovvne latine copie, as in so graue a mans worke is requisite: for the profite of all the vnlearneder sort, of English christians, that desire to know his iudgement in matters of faith.
Cambridge: printed by John Legat, 1599Cambridge: printed by Iohn Legat, 1599
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.
For if any man shall object out of the text, that same truly and but: it proveth nothing against the fathers exposition: seeing it is no unusual thing with the Apostle, where he sayeth first truly, not always to join the adversative particle but: Rom. 3. ver. 2. Coll. 2. ver. 23. and in other places. And unto this truly, another but, which Luke for brevity sake left out, might be understood very fitly, as hereafter we will show: so that it is no necessity, with this truly to join that but, which followeth in the 5. verse: in which verse the fathers, will have, not Pauls speech, but Lukes to be continued. Therefore the fathers ⟨p. 305⟩exposition is not repugnant to the text: nor yet with any other scripture. For if any man say, Paul writeth to the Corinthians, that he is glad he baptized none, but the house of Stephana: it may be answered, it is true, namely at Corinth: but these twelve were baptized at Ephesus: and besides, he speaketh of such as were baptized with his own hand: but these twelve, he might baptise by some other: to dispute no longer about the circumstance of the time. And it is most certain, it is not repugnant to the analogy of faith, nor bringeth with it any absurdities: because the fathers do not speak of a baptism rightly administered, as though Paul had repeated that again. This exposition therefore of the fathers in my judgement, cannot easily be refelled. And this therefore is the chiefest cause why I have ever thus thought, and yet think of this action of Paul: although indeed I cannot consent unto them all, in the cause, why Paul baptized them: but only to Ambrose and Hierome.
For if any man shall obiect out of the text, that same truely and but: it prooueth nothing against the fathers exposition: seing it is no vnusuall thing with the Apostle, where hee saieth first truely, not alwaies to ioyne the aduersatiue particle but: Rom. 3. ver. 2. Coll. 2. ver. 23. and in other places. And vnto this truely, another but, which Luke for breuitie sake left out, might bee vnderstood verie fittly, as hereafter we will shew: so that it is no necessitie, with this truely to ioyne that but, which followeth in the 5. verse: in which verse the fathers, will haue, not Paules speach, but Lukes to be continued. Therefore the fathers ⟨p. 305⟩