A64611:2152
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, the soul being every where present, could not be really separated, in ⟨p. 478⟩distance of places from the body, which also should be every-where present, and so neither could the body die, but only in outward appearance and imagination. 4. He ascended not truly into heaven: but it shall be said to have been only a vain and imaginary, and fantastical spectacle, if he were in his body substantially there, before he visibly ascended thither: and after he was ascended thither, he remained yet in the substantial presence of the same body, no less truly than before on the earth, yea, & in the very bodies also of the faithful. If these things so fell out in the truth of the thing; it will follow that the same body of Christ was indeed at once and together, both weak and omnipotent, base and glorious, subject to sufferings, and not subject, dead and alive, limited and unlimited; which is horrible to affirm. For avoiding therefore of these prodigious and impious absurdities, they will except, that he was not as touching his body, otherwise than limited, weak subject to passions, and mortal in the time of his humiliation; because he had debased himself, and would not show forth that Majesty, communicated unto his body, before his resurrection. Ans. They interpret amiss that debasing of himself, of all the glory and Majesty of his humanity hidden and kept close for a time: whereas it is to be understood in respect of the Divinity of the Word, in that he would take the form of a servant, that is, the mass of our nature, and become man. Moreover, it will follow that Christ did show forth the communicated power and Majesty of his flesh, even then, when he was indeed weak and limited, or circumscribed in body: as when, shedding tears, he raised Lazarus from the dead, and when being apprehended by the Jews, he healed Malcus, whom Peter wounded. Now, what is it else to raise the Marcionites up again from hell, or in the greatest matter of all others impiously to blaspheme, if this be not? The second Argument. The blasphemy of Samosatenus, Arrius, and the late Anti-trinitarians, is this: That Christ-man, is not properly and by nature God, but only by an accidental participation of Divine properties, majesty, honour, power, and virtue.
For, the soul being every where present, could not be really separated, in ⟨p. 478⟩distance of places from the body, which also should be every-where present, and so neither could the body die, but onely in outward appearance and imagination. 4. Hee ascended not truly into heaven: but it shall be said to have been onely a vaine and imaginarie, and fantasticall spectacle, if he were in his body substantially there, before he visibly ascended thither: and after he was ascended thither, he remained yet in the substantiall presence of the same body, no lesse truly than before on the earth, yea, & in the very bodies also of the faithfull. If these things so fell out in the truth of the thing; it will follow that the same body of Christ was indeed at once and together, both weak and omnipotent, base and glorious, subject to sufferings, and not subject, dead and alive, limited and unlimited; which is horrible to affirm. For avoiding therefore of these prodigious and impious absurdities, they will except, that hee was not as touching his body, otherwise than limited, weak subject to passions, and mortall in the time of his humiliation; because hee had debased himself, and would not shew forth that Majesty, communicated unto his body, before his resurrection. Ans. They interpret amisse that debasing of himself, of all the glory and Majesty of his humanity hidden and kept close for a time: whereas it is to be understood in respect of the Divinity of the Word, in that he would take the forme of a servant, that is, the masse of our nature, and become man. Moreover, it will follow that Christ did shew forth the communicated power and Majestie of his flesh, even then, when he was indeed weak and limited, or circumscribed in body: as when, shedding tears, he raised Lazarus from the dead, and when being apprehended by the Jews, he healed Malcus, whom Peter wounded. Now, what is it else to raise the Marcionites up againe from hell, or in the greatest matter of all others impiously to blaspheme, if this be not? The second Argument. THe blasphemie of Samosatenus, Arrius, and the late Anti-trinitaries, is this: That Christ-man, is not properly and by nature God, but onely by an accidentall participation of Divine properties, majesty, honour, power, and vertue.