A64611:1232
The sum of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism,…The summe of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism,…
The sum of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism, and then afterwards more enlarged by a sound and judicious exposition, and application of the same : wherein also are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment have been, or are controversed in divinity / first Englished by D. Henry Parry, and now again conferred with the best and last Latin edition of D. David Pareus, sometimes Professor of Divinity in Heidelberg ; whereunto is added a large and full alphabetical table of such matters as are therein contained ; together with all the Scriptures that are occasionally handled, by way either of controversy, exposition, or reconciliation, neither of which was done before, but now is performed for the readers delight and benefit ; to this work of Ursinus are now at last annexed the Theological miscellanies of D. David Pareus in which the orthodoxall tenets are briefly and solidly confirmed, and the contrary errors of the Papists, Ubiquitaries, Antitrinitaries, Eutychians, Socinians, and Arminians fully refuted ; and now translated into English out of the original Latin copy by A.R.The summe of Christian religion, delivered by Zacharias Ursinus first, by way of catechism, and then afterwards more enlarged by a sound and judicious exposition, and application of the same : wherein also are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment have been, or are controversed in divinitie / first Englished by D. Henry Parry, and now again conferred with the best and last Latine edition of D. David Pareus, sometimes Professour of Divinity in Heidelberge ; whereunto is added a large and full alphabeticall table of such matters as are therein contained ; together with all the Scriptures that are occasionally handled, by way either of controversie, exposition, or reconciliation, neither of which was done before, but now is performed for the readers delight and benefit ; to this work of Ursinus are now at last annexed the Theologicall miscellanies of D. David Pareus in which the orthodoxall tenets are briefly and solidly confirmed, and the contrary errours of the Papists, Ubiquitaries, Antitrinitaries, Eutychians, Socinians, and Arminians fully refuted ; and now translated into English out of the originall Latine copie by A.R.
London: printed by James Young, 1645
Title page: Internet Archive scan of the Early English Books microfilm
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.
But that in Christ the Union of the flesh with the Word is not essential, 1made in the nature, or any essential property of the God head, is showed by these reasons: §11. Of the God-head and flesh assumed, there ariseth not any third Essence: but each is, and abideth an Essence so perfect and whole, as neither (especially the Divine, as being in it self a person, and simply void of all change) cometh into the composition or compounding (as we properly take this word) of the other. §22. If the Union of the flesh with the word were essential, it would follow, that the humanity, once assumed and taken, was equalled with the God-head in essential properties, & so by a consequent, to be made of the same nature and essence with the Word. So Vigilius showeth,2 that the Eutychians held two substances to be in Christ of the same nature. Wherefore, they who will have the essential properties of the God-head to be really communicated and common with the flesh, so that the flesh should truly and really be, and be called omnipotent, omniscient, and whatsoever else the God-head is: they indeed (howsoever in words they mightily stand against it) hold this Union to be made in essential properties and in nature, and both with Eutyches and Swenckfield, they confound both natures, and take away the difference between the creature and the Creator: and also with Nestorius, they frame and make two persons, and so bring in a quaternity. For albeit they say, that they in their confusion, or (as themselves call it with their Master Swenckfield) deifying and majestical exaltation of the flesh, do retain the substance of the flesh: yet two substances, having really the same and like perfections, are two subsistents or persons of one nature, as are two men, and whatsoever other individuals of the same kind or nature. Lastly, with Sabellius and the Patripassians they incarnate the whole Trinity. For there is one and the same essence in number of the divine person, and the same essential properties. Wherefore, that which is united, and equalled with one of these three according to essence, must needs be also united, and equalled with the rest.
But that in Christ the Ʋnion of the flesh with the Word is not essentiall,