A64611:2046
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.
3. The bread which we break (saith the Apostle) is it not the communion of the body of Christ? As bread is the communion of the body of Christ, so also it is the body of Christ. The reason is clear, because Pauls words and Christs have both one meaning; seeing Paul interpreteth Christ. But the bread is the communion of the body of Christ sacramentally; that is, it is a Sacrament or sign of our spiritual communion with Christs body. For properly and literally, bread cannot be termed a communion: Therefore, bread also is Christs body sacramentally; that is, it is a Sacrament or sign of Christs body. Now that the communion or communication of Christs body is spiritual, is thus proved: 1. Paul speaketh of such a communion, as whereby we being many, are made one bread, one body. But we being many, are one body spiritually: Therefore the communion mentioned of Paul is spiritual. 2. The communion of Christ, whereof he speaketh, cannot stand with the communion of Devils:1 Ye cannot (saith he) drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of the Devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table, and of the table of the Devils. The argument is not deduced from an inconvenience or an undecency, as some fondly tell us,2 but from an impossibility: as that of Christ, Ye cannot serve God and Mammon. Where the words [Greek or Hebrew], ye are not able; or, ye have no possibility, are likewise used, as well as in this place:3 and as that of the same Apostle else-where; What concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath the Believer with the Infidel? 3. This communion of the Saints with Christ, and Christ with the Saints, is spiritually expounded in Scripture,4 Our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. If we say, that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lye, and do not truly. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin. Neither do we in the Creed believe any other communion of the Saints with Christ, and Christ with the Saints, but that which is spiritual. 5