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…

It is diverse and another thing, not to have beginning, and to subsist by a beginning: to die, and not to be able to suffer: yet, as they are both proper unto Christ, so are they both common, not unto him, but in him. For if we say, common unto him: we must needs be urged and driven, to give and show some other, with whom the same should be common unto him: which necessity of instance, cannot but incline to the impious opinion of Nestorius. We therefore better and more catholically: say, it is common in him and not to him: and so we say better, it is proper to him, and not in him. Therefore it is proper to him to dye, by the nature of his flesh, which is mortal: and it is proper to him, not to dye, by the nature of the word, which cannot dye. Likewise by that unspeakable mystery of the union of both the natures, the mortality of the flesh was common in him, to the nature of the word, which could not dye: and the immortality of the word was common in him, to the nature of the flesh, which yielded to death. Therefore as it is proper unto him in respect of both natures, to dye and not to dye: so it is common in him, in both natures, to do that which is their propriety: and as I may (for example sake) say, it is proper to me, to carry the mark ⟨p. 355⟩of the blackness of a stroke in my body, by the nature of my flesh: so it is proper to me to carry the stripe of a word, that is, of some hard speech, in my mind, by the nature of my soul: and it is also proper to me, not to carry the same stripe of words in my body by the nature of my flesh. And sith both these are proper to me: and both of them different from my body and from my soul: because neither my body understandeth any hard or any pleasing speeches, neither can my soul be made black by the stroke of a whip: yet both these are common in my self, both to my soul and to my body: because, neither my soul placed out of my body, doth feel that, which is proper to it to feel: nor my body without the company of my soul, can carry the marks of the blows. That therefore, which is proper unto me in either of them and ere different from neither of them; that is common in my whole self to either of them, which is proper to either of them.

It is diuerse and another thing, not to haue beginning, and to subsist by a beginning: to die, and not to bee able to suffer: yet, as they are both proper vnto Christ, so are they both common, not vnto him, but in him. For if wee say, common vnto him: we must needs bee vrged and driuen, to giue and shew some other, with whom the same should be common vnto him: which necessity of instance, cannot but incline to the impious opinion of Nestorius. We therfore better and more catholically: saye, it is common in him and not to him: and so wee say better, it is proper to him, and not in him. Therefore it is proper to him to dye, by the nature of his flesh, which is mortall: and it is proper to him, not to dye, by the nature of the vvord, which cannot dye. Likewise by that vnspeakable misterie of the vnion of both the natures, the mortallitie of the flesh was common in him, to the nature of the vvord, which could not dye: and the immortalitie of the vvorde was common in him, to the nature of the flesh, which yeelded to death. Therefore as it is proper vnto him in respect of both natures, to dye and not to dye: so it is common in him, in both natures, to doe that which is their proprietie: and as I maye (for example sake) say, it is proper to me, to carry the marke