A64611:465
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 is an objection framed by humane reason against the question here proposed: For, if man be so corrupt, that he is no way apt to do any thing well, in vain God seemeth and unjustly to require at his hands perfect obedience to the Law. Object. He that requireth or commandeth that which is impossible, is unjust; God in the Law requireth of man that which is impossible, to wit, perfect obedience, which he is not able to perform: Therefore God seemeth to be unjust. Ans. The Major is to be distinguished. He is unjust that commandeth things impossible: 1. Except himself first gave an ability to perform those things which he commanded. 2. Except man, who is commanded, covet that impotency and unability, and of his own accord hath purchased it unto himself. 3. Except the commandment, which is impossible, be a spur unto him, who is commanded, of acknowledging and bewailing his insufficiency. But God by creating man after his Image, gave him possibility, that is, a power of performing ⟨p. 100⟩that obedience which in right he requireth of him: Wherefore, if man, by his own fault and folly, lost and cast away this his good ability, and procured unto himself this unability of obeying God; God hath not therefore lost his right to require due obedience of him. Nay rather, because we have rejected this good, by transgressing Gods commandment, and because God threatened punishment to the transgressors, therefore he justly punisheth us. Repl. But not we, but Adam drew on us this sin. Answ. Our first Parents, being fallen, lost this ability both unto themselves and to their posterity; like as they received it for themselves and their posterity. If a Prince give unto a noble man a Lordship, and he traitorously rebel against him, he loseth his Lordship not only from himself, but also from his posterity: neither doth the Prince any injury to his children, if he restore no• unto them the Lordship lost by their fathers fault and disobedience; and if he do restore it, he doth it of free grace and mercy. Repl. He that commandeth things impossible, 1