A64611:2143
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.
for they take as granted, that the bread is properly called the body, which yet lieth upon them to prove; for it is a sacramental manner of speaking. Secondly, we return their own reason upon them, by inverting it thus; The body of Christ properly so called was given for us: But the bread was not given for us: Therefore the bread is not the body properly so called. Likewise, as the bread is the body broken, so the breaking of the bread is the breaking of the body: But the breaking of the body is the crucifying thereof: Therefore the bread broken is but sacramentally and by representation the body broken. 2. They reason from the author who said it, and is true. Ans. This is also a begging of that which is in question. They must prove that Christ said, his body was in, under, with the bread. And further, a man may speak figuratively, and yet speak perspicuously and plainly. Repl. He is also omnipotent: therefore he is able to be every-where, and so in the bread. Ans. Albeit he were able to bring to pass, that two flat repugnant things should be true together: yet will he not do it. Again, God is not able to work contradictories, or things flat repugnant, because he is true. Now, to will those things which are contradictory argueth a liar: Wherefore we deny not the truth and omnipotency of God, but these mens lies; nay rather, we defend Gods truth, affirming, that God doth that which he spake. But they oppugn it, making contrary wills to be in God. Repl. Christs body hath many prerogatives not agreeable to our bodies: as, that he was born of a Virgin, walked on the sea, was at one time and together in the grave, in hell, and in paradise; and passed through the gates when they were fast shut. Ans. These examples are partly not matches, and partly false. For this may agree unto a creature, to walk on the waters, as it did to Peter: to pass through the gates shut, as it is agreeable to the nature of a spirit. Again, these examples are not matches, nor of the same quality with that which is in question; because these do not imply a contradiction. For when he is said to be born of a Virgin, he is not said withal not to be born of a Virgin. But, to be both finite and infinite, (as they will have Christs body who consubstantiate it with the bread) these imply a contradiction.
for they take as granted, that the bread is properly called the body, which yet lieth upon them to prove; for it is a sacramentall manner of speaking. Secondly, we return their own reason upon them, by inverting it thus; The body of Christ properly so called was given for us: But the bread was not given for us: Therefore the bread is not the body properly so called. Likewise, as the bread is the body broken, so the breaking of the bread is the breaking of the body: But the breaking of the body is the crucifying thereof: Therefore the bread broken is but sacramentally and by representation the body broken. 2. They reason from the authour who said it, and is true. Ans. This is also a begging of that which is in question. They must prove that Christ said, his body was in, under, with the bread. And further, a man may speak figuratively, and yet speak perspicuously and plainly. Repl. He is also omnipotent: therefore he is able to be every-where, and so in the bread. Ans. Albeit he were able to bring to passe, that two flat repugnant things should be true together: yet will hee not do it. Again, God is not able to work contradictories, or things flat repugnant, because he is true. Now, to will those things which are contradictory argueth a lyar: Wherefore we deny not the truth and omnipotency of God, but these mens lies; nay rather, we defend Gods truth, affirming, that God doth that which he spake. But they oppugne it, making contrary wils to be in God. Repl. Christs body hath many prerogatives not agreeable to our bodies: as, that he was born of a Virgin, walked on the sea, was at one time and together in the grave, in hell, and in paradise; and passed thorow the gates when they were fast shut. Ans. These examples are partly not matches, and partly false. For this may agree unto a creature, to walk on the waters, as it did to Peter: to passe thorow the gates shut, as it is agreeable to the nature of a spirit. Again, these examples are not matches, nor of the same quality with that which is in question; because these do not imply a contradiction. For when he is said to be born of a Virgin, he is not said withall not to be born of a Virgin. But, to be both finite and infinite, (as they will have Christs body who consubstantiate it with the bread) these imply a contradiction.