A15857:975
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.
By this the very same is undoubtedly proved, which was also by the other before, namely, not only that the word and flesh, cannot possibly be both of one nature, as the Monophysites affirmed: but also that the proprieties of the one nature, cannot really be communicated to the other: so as indeed, it should have the same in it self, and that the one nature should be made the very like, that the other is: as thus, that the flesh, by reason of the union with the word, should also with the same word, be made present in all places, in it own essence. For from this proposition, which is held for granted, of all sound believers, namely, The flesh through the union with the word, hath not gotten this propriety of the word, that it self, should with the word be present in all places, in it own substance: from this proposition (I say) he concludeth, therefore neither is it made of the same ⟨p. 367⟩nature with the word. This certainly is the argument of Vigilius, yea of the whole catholic church. What remaineth? only this, that if it may be said to be present in all places: it can be said to be so, by no other means, then by the Hypostasie of it, which is the very word.
By this the very same is vndoubtedly prooued, which was also by the other before, namely, not onely that the worde and flesh, cannot possiblie be both of one nature, as the Monophysites affirmed: but also that the proprieties of the one nature, cannot really be communicated to the other: so as indeed, it should haue the same in it selfe, and that the one nature should be made the very like, that the other is: as thus, that the flesh, by reason of the vnion with the word, should also with the same word, bee made present in all places, in it owne esseuce. For from this proposition, which is held for graunted, of all sound beleeuers, namely, The flesh through the vnion with the word, hath not gotten this proprietie of the word, that it selfe, should with the word be present in all places, in it owne substance: from this proposition (I say) he concludeth, therefore neither is it made of the same ⟨p. 367⟩nature with the word. This certenly is the argument of Vigilius, yea of the whole catholicke church. What remaineth? onely this, that if it may be said to bee present in all places: it can be said to bee so, by no other meanes, then by the Hypostasie of it, which is the very word.