A64611:2071
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.
A refutation of objections framed to confirm Consubstantiation.
A refutation of objections framed to confirme Consubstantiation.
1Object. 1. It is an usual kind of speech when two things are jointly given, the one apparent, the other in covert, that that only be named, which appeared not: as we say of purses fraught with money, This is money: of a cask of wine, This is wine. But Christ in his Supper delivering in the same manner two things jointly at once, namely, the bread and his body, named that only, which appeared not, under the bread, saying: Take, this is my body: Therefore Christs manner of speech is most usual and proper, neither needeth it any explication at all. Answ. To the Major we answer, that it is a form of speech most usual, &c. but with this limitation, when it is certain that the thing which is named, though it be not apparent, yet it is contained in that thing which is apparent; as it is certain, that money is in the purse, and wine in the cask. Otherwise it is no usual, plain, or true form of speech, to say of an empty purse, This is money. But hitherto it is not clear, neither have the Consubstantials as yet proved, that Christs body lay hid in the bread, when Christ said thereof, This is my body; as it ought to be evident, that money is in the purse, and wine in the vessel, when it is said, This is money, This is wine. Yea, and we avouch the contrary, to wit, that Christs ⟨p. 453⟩body in the first Supper, lay not hid in the bread, but sate at table, and now is in heaven, until it thence return in judgement: Therefore this form of reasoning, is a begging of that which is in controversy betwixt us. Answ. 2. The Minor also is false. For Christ, delivering unto his Disciples, not his body but bread, taken from the table, and broken said, Take, cate, This (that is, this bread) is my body. Which exposition is proved: 1. Because it is said of the cup, This cup is the New Testament. 2. Paul expoundeth the particle This, of the bread, saying: The bread which we break is the communion of Christs body. 3. Because the bread and body of Christ (both together) are neither properly, not figuratively Christs very body: and hereby a Tautology, or a vain and childish iteration of the same thing should be fathered on Christ, in saying; My body is my body. 4. We deny also the consequence, because their conclusion compriseth more then their premisses in force. For they conclude, that it is a most usual and proper speech.