A64611:1965
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
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.
The Explication.
This question expoundeth and declareth the thing signified in the Sacrament. The eating of Christs flesh, and drinking of his blood, is not corporal,1 but spiritual; and compriseth, 1. Faith of Christs passion and death. 2. An apprehension of remission of sins and eternal life through faith. 3. Our union with Christ by the holy Ghost dwelling in Christ and in us. 4. The benefit of his quickening by the same spirit. Wherefore, to eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his blood, is, to be received into favour with God for Christs merit, to receive remission of sins, and be reconciled to God by the same faith, to have the Son of God, who assumed mans nature, and united it personally unto him, dwelling in us, and coupling us unto himself and his assumed nature, by pouring into us his Spirit, through whom he regenerateth us, and restoreth light in us, righteousness and life eternal, such as is eminent in his assumed manhood. More briefly, to eat, is, 1. To believe. 2. To receive remission of sins by faith. 3. To be united to Christ. 4. To be made partakers of the life of Christ, or to be made like, and conformed unto Christ by the holy Ghost, who worketh the same things in us and in Christ. This eating is our communion ⟨p. 431⟩with Christ, which the Scripture teacheth, and which we profess in the Creed: namely, a spiritual union with Christ, as members with the head, and branches with the vine. Christ teacheth us this eating of his flesh, John 6. and confirmeth it in the Supper by external signs. Thus did the ancient Fathers, Augustine, Eusebius, Nazianzen, Hilary, and others expound the eating of Christs body, as hereafter shall appear. Wherefore the opinions of Papistical Transubstantiation, of a corporal presence, and of eating Christs body in the bread with the mouth (which many defend) are not grounded on the words of the Supper, which promise the eating of Christs body.