M. Harding. The .10. Division.M. Hardinge. The .10. Diuision.

M. Harding. The .10. Division.

M. Hardinge. The .10. Diuision.

And the cause, why Tertullian so expounded these words of Christ, was, that thereby he •ight take advantage against Marcion the heretic, as many times the fathers in heat of disputation do handle some places, not after the exact signification of the words, but rather follow such ⟨p. 461⟩way, as serveth them best to confute their adversary. Which manner not reporting any untruth, S. Basil doth excuse in the setting forth of a disputation, not in prescribing of a Doctrine. As he defendeth Gregorius Neocaesariensis against the Sabellians,¹ for that in a contention he had with Aelianus an Ethnic, to declare the Mysteries of the Trinity, he used the word, [Greek or Hebrew], in stead of [Greek or Hebrew]. And the learned men, that be well seen in the Fathers, know, they must use a discretion, and a sundry judge between the things they write Agonisti [Greek or Hebrew], that is to say, by way of contention or disputation, and the things they utter, Dogmatic [Greek or Hebrew], that is, by way of setting forth a doctrine, or matter of Faith. Neither in that contention did Tertullian so much regard the exact use of words,² as how he might win his purpose, and drive his adversary, denying that Christ took the true Body of man, and that he suffered death in deed, to confess the trueth, which he thought to bring to pass, by deducing of an argument from the Figure of his Body, which consisteth in that,³ which is visible in the Sacrament, to prove the verity of his Body. And therefore in framing his reason by way of illation he saith, Figura autem non esset, nisi veritatis esset Corpus. There were not a Figure, onlesse there were a Body of trueth, or a very Body in deed.