Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	ancient_a	church_n	father_n	2,262	5	4.7708	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90866	Theos anthrōpophoros. Or, God incarnate. Shewing, that Jesus Christ is the onely, and the most high God· In four books. Wherein also are contained a few animadversions upon a late namelesse and blasphemous commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrewes, published under the capital letters, G.M. anno Dom. 1647. In these four books the great mystery of man's redemption and salvation, and the wayes and means thereof used by God are evidently held out to the capacity of humane reason, even ordinary understandings. The sin against the Holy Ghost is plainly described; with the cases and reasons of the unpardonablenesse, or pardonablenesse thereof. Anabaptisme, is by Scripture, and the judgment of the fathers shewed to be an heinous sin, and exceedingly injurious to the Passion, and blood of Christ. / By Edm. Porter, B.D. sometimes fellow of St. John's Colledge in Cambridge, and prebend of Norwich.	Porter, Edmund, 1595-1670.; Downame, John, d. 1652.	1655 (1655)	Wing P2985; Thomason E1596_1; ESTC R203199	270,338	411

ABout four years sithence Christian Reader there was brought unto me a Comment or Exposition on the Epistle to the Hebrews written by a Namelesse and unknown Author to the end that having perused and allowed it it might be Printed and published the which I also undertook and finding as ● then conceived that for the most part it was Learned and Judicious plain and profitable I did so passe it with my Approbation Yet there were divers passages against which I took as I thought just exceptions as disagreeing with the Scriptures and the received Doctrine of Our and all other Reformed Churches which I would not let passe before by my Letters I had acquainted the Author with them that I might receive satisfaction in those things which I objected from whom I received a sober modest Answer wherein he did not at all maintain those errors but left me to my liberty to expunge what I misliked the which I also accordingly did as I thought fit But the Work being long and my time but short divers other faults and errours escaped unobserved by me they being comprized in few words and short passages and so the more easily passed over without my observation The which Errors I the rather fell into because the Author was wholly unknown unto me who am naturally of this disposition that I neither am nor desire to be more scrupulous and curious in observing other mens errors and faults then I have evidence of truth for it whereas otherwise if knowing the Persons with whom I have to deal to be Heterod and Erronious in their Doctrine I should be more wary and observe their words and works with a more vigilant eye All which I speak not wholly to clear my self from all blame for I ingeniously acknowledge my inadvertency and want of due and serious consideration in so weighty a matter and therefore being convinced of my errour by divers Letters from men of great Eminency both in respect of Place Learning and Piety and by mine own more serious observation but especially by the Labours of this Learned Author chiefly intended to lay open and confute these dangerous Errors and Heresies I could do no lesse and indeed in respect of my old age and infirmities accompanying it I could not do much more then revoke my Approbation of that otherwise Learned Commentary so far as it maintaineth these pernic●ous doctrines that detract any thing from the Lord Christs Divinity and his Supream and Eternal Godhead For far be it from me to derogate any thing from my blessed Saviour and Redeemer by not acknowledging him the Supream God Co-essential Co-equal and Co-eternal with the Father seeing the Evangelical Prophet in the Old Testament calleth him the Mighty God Esay 9. 3 and the blessed Apostle St. Paul affirmeth that Christ who took upon him our flesh is over all not Deus factus but God blessed for ever Rom. 9. 5. and therefore seeing this Learned Book intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asserteth and maintaineth this truth and confuteth the opposite errors I do most willingly approve it and allow it to be Printed and published John Downam Θεὸς ' Α●θρωπ●φόρος OR God Incarnate SHEWING That JESVS CHRIST Is the Onely and the most HIGH GOD. In Four BOOKS Wherein also are contained a few Animadversions upon a late namelesse and blasphemous Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrewes published under the Capital Letters G M. Anno Dom. 1647. In these Four Books the great mystery of man's Redemption and Salvation and the way●●●●d means thereof used by God are evidently held out to the Capacity of humane reason 〈◊〉 ordinary understandings The Sin against the Holy Ghost is plainly described with the Cases and Reasons of the Vnpardonablenesse or pardonablenesse thereof Anabaptisme is by Scriptur and the Judgment of the Fathers shewed to be an heinous sin and exceedingly injurious to the Passion and blood of Christ There were false Prophets among the people even as there shall be among you who privily shall bring in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction 2 Pet. 2. 1. Contra rationem nemo Sobrius contra Scripturas nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus 〈◊〉 Aug. de Trinit lib. 4. cap. 6. By EDM. PORTER ● D. sometimes Fellow of St. John's 6. Colledge in Cambridge and Prebend of Norwich London Printed for Humphrey Moseley and are to be sold at his Shop at the Prince's Arms in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1655. TO The Right Honourable THOMAS Lord Coventry Bron of Ailesbury Peace and Truth My Lord I Humbly beg leave to use your honourable name in the dedication of this Book thereby to present the expression of a thankful Soul to my deceased Patron your most Honourable and prudent Father who even from my Childhood continued his manifold favours to me and ceased not untill he had planted me in an imployment and probable subsistence in the Church where I continued peaceably during his life and untill the pressures of these unhappy Times dislocated not onely me though too low God wot to be an object of publick wrath but also the strongest bones and principal joynts and nerves of our once most renowned Church To his memory do I owe the first fruits of my publick Labours nor can I offer them at any other shrine so proper as your self my Lord who are his living Image whose Name and Title you worthily bear whose Honour is revived in you and the pious and thankful memory of him during my life will not be obliterated in me seeing the very Heathens fansied their Sen. de Benef l. ● c. 3. Charites which were but the Emblems of gratitude to be Virgins and alwayes Young to teach us that thankfulnesse should not be Corrupted or decayed by time and age and their great Orator although he was one of the most deadly enemies of Caesar who had been newly murthered in the very Senate-house yet he confessed that he could not find fault with the faithfulnesse of Cic. lib. 11. Epist 240. Matius for honouring him that was dead who whilest he lived had been his Friend and Patron The Church hath t●●ght us further that death it self doth not dissolve Christians Communion Hier. in Proaem l. 18. in Esa Viventium Dormientium eadem Charitas est Aug. de Civit l. 20. c. 9. Animae piorum mortuorum non seperantur ab Ecclesia hâc The Church Triumphant and Militant are but one Church and therefore did the Primitive Christians honourably by name Commemorate their pious and worthy Benefactors at the very time of their Sacred Eucharist although they were long before departed out of this life So seeing I have not any other meanes to commemorate my deceased Lord I have ma●● 〈◊〉 if this to professe hereby Mihi erit nomen 〈◊〉 benedictionibus but to you my Lord do I present the Book because possibly it may do some good to the Living For the subject

Parents by the intimation of God himself to Abraham the great Patriarch of the faithful Gen. 18. 19. For I know him that he will command his children and his houshold after him and they shall keep the way of the Lord. This that your posterity may perform the Lord grant It shall be the hearty prayer of Yours Honours most humble Servant Edm. Porter Norw March 21. 1647. AN ADVERTISEMENT to the READER BE pleased good Christian Reader in order to the perusal of this Book to pre-understand a few things 1. That the Commentary on the Hebrews so often mentioned was long since written in the Latine Tongue by a forreigner either Johannes Crellius or some other Socinian as I am informed from a noble and Mr. Ed● Cock learned Gentleman residing in Norwich in whose hands that Latine Commentary is now extant And this English Commentary is but a 〈◊〉 of that Latine one And tha● the Tra●slator is a Doctor of Divinity as lately hath been discovered How the ●aid Doctor will quit himself from the crime of Plagiarism in concealing the right Author's name ipse viderit 2. That because this Doctor contemptu●●sly slighteth the Ni●●●● Fathers and yet ●●ledgeth Eusebius to his own design but very injuriously I have bestowed some leave in the vindication of that Learned Father perhaps more then otherwise would have been needful yet I have not used the Authority of any of them that were members of that most Religious Council except onely the same Eusebius Indeed AthanasiUs is often mentioned by me but he was no member there for although he were present as a Disputant among many others in the outward porch yet being then but in the Degree of a Deacon he had no voice or right of Suffrage in that Council But if this Doctor under the notion of the Nicenei Fathers intendeth a contempt of all those Primitive Doctors and others that since have adhered to the Decrees of that Council he must thereby dis-believe the then whole Catholick World and we with more modesty and lesse liberty professe we do not believe him nor his fellowes 3. That I have bestowed the more time in the Question of the visibility of God because this Doctor doth very prophanely slight that great mysterious apparition of God to Abraham in the shape of three men which I conceive Gen. 18. to have been purposely acted as an holy Scene to teach man That in after-times God would be really incarnate and corporally and hospitably converse with Abraham in his posterity which was performed when the Person of the Son of God became Emmanüel and is also spiritually intimated in the Gospel Joh. 14. 23. Rev. 3. 20. 1 Joh. 4. 13. And also to give a timely intimation of a Trinity of Persons in the Vnity of the Godhead For as to the Eternal Covenant of Grace before the Creation Three Persons were necessarily required as is shewed in the Preface of this Book so now because the same Covenant was renewed with Abraham when he was newly circumcised it pleased the Divine Wisdom to exhibit a glimpse of the same Blessed Trinity As also again in the Gospel when our blessed Saviour was Incarnate and then Circumcised and Baptized which Sacraments were a new Sealing of the same Covenant there was a manifestation of the Three Persons Matth. 3. the Father by a voice the Spirit as a Dove and the Son in the flesh I do not remember any other so evident Overtures and Apparitions of the Trinity as these 4. That I have so largely endeavoured the Exposition of those hard places Heb. 6. 4. and Heb. 10. 26. because the Commenter hath passed them over very slightly although the difficulties therein might well busie a Doctoral pen and brain But I conceive he knew that a true and sound Exposition would spoil his design of picking Socianisme out of this Divine Epistle to the Hebrews 5. That the Reader is not to expect Answers to Arguments against the Divinity of Christ because the Doctor useth none at all but onely his own magisterial affirmation without proof and if he had proceeded by way of Argument he could not have used stronger then had been before published in print by the said Joh. Crellius which are also as strongly answered by that Learned man Johannes Henr. Bisterfeldius 6. That whereas in my first Book and tenth Chapter I have affirmed The Article of Christ's Descent into hell not to have been mentioned in any Creed generally received till after the dayes of St. Austin I am still of the same mind Although I confesse that this Article is mentioned in that large Symbole which is rehearsed in the ninth Tome in the book called Soliloquia Chap. 32. And also in Aug. Soliloq cap. 32. To. 9. De Temp. Ser. 115. To. 10. the 10. Tome Serm. 115. De Tempore and there asserted as if it were cast into the Creed by St. Thomas the Apostle My answer is That those writings were not Austin's own but Supposititious and pinned on him by later Writers as is well known and proved by Learned men Because the same Father in his book De Fide Symbolo which is undoubtedly Aug. De Fide symb To. 3. his own disputeth quite through that Creed which was then called the Apostles Creed and this in the Presence of a grand Council of all Africk at Hippo yet maketh no mention at all of Christ's Descent And although it be true that the Doctrine of Christs descent into Hell is by the same Father very often asserted as Catholick notwithstanding as I said it was not in his time inserted into the Creed 7. That whereas in my fourth Book and 10th Chapter I have said That no old or new Anabaptist did ever to my remembrance assert two Baptismes except onely Marcion Now since the writing thereof which was finished Anno 1647. Two English Books came to my hands one printed 1646. affirmeth that Baptisme may be oft administred as well as the Word may be oft preached to one and the same person The other book printed 1638 very modestly and under Correction affirmeth That Not Scripture but the Practice and Tradition of the Ancient Church is the Onely ground whereby we are restrained from twice Baptizing the same person But I trust that the godly Reader will be otherwise perswaded when he hath perused the Exposition of Heb. 6. 4. which beginneth at the 4th Chapter of my 4th Book 8. That my design in penning this Book was both to discover the great and dangerous Heresies lurking in that Commentary And also in my way to open and set forth the very foundations of Christian Religion and to give what satisfaction I could to scrupulous men in the Doctrines and Disciplines of this Church Which hath been my practice both in my private and publick Labours for many years Especially in these our later Sceptick and Zetetick dayes of New-light wherein we have many Seekers that will never find what they pretend to Optatus thus writeth of the

amendment To this doctrine of the pardonablenesse of any sin though ever so great upon repentance the Church discipline of old was correspondent for in the Ecclesiasticall Canons recorded by St. Basil it is ordered That whosoever had denied Christ in time of persecution should be debarred from the Communion all his life time untill his death bed and remain onely in the number and ranck of penitentiaries but upon point of death he should be restored and the Sacrament administred to him and this propter fidem divinae Clementiae i. because the Church believed that our merciful God did pardon those true penitents who had fallen into that grand sin of denying Christ Upon the same doctrine did the fathers ground their dist●nction of sins calling some mens sins venial and others mortal just as St. John here doth a sin unto death a sin not unto death For so Origen mentioneth mortale peccatum and St. Amb●ose speaketh of crimen Orig n. 41. Ambr. n. 9. 15 Aug n. 6773 77. Prosp n. 34 mortale and Erratum Noae erat veniale So doth St. Austine call sins V●nialia Morralia capitalia Damnabilia and so doth Prosper and so doth the Church of Englands Liturgie mention a Deadly sin and all these onely in this sence as Saint Ambrose expresseth himself Venialis culpa est quam Amb. de Paradiso cap. 14. s●qnitur confessio i. that sin is called venial which is confessed or repented of And so that sin is onely a deadly sin or a sin unto death in which men live and die impenitently aud therefore unpardonably as is shewed before CHAP. XVIII The meaning of these words Idoe not say he shall pray for it that this praying and not praying is to be understood of the living and not of the dead the practise of the Church in praying for penitents the manner and form of Ecclesiastical or external pennance viewed in the Roman Lady Fabiola in what case God forbad praying for sinners in the Old Testament THere remaineth yet a greater difficultie in the words next following wherby this sin unto death may seem to be such a sin as the Apostle forbiddeth men to pray for wherby he may also seem to set the brand and mark of absolute unpardonablenes upon the sinner as being quite forlorne and bereft of all remedie and left utterly to desperation for thus we read A sin unto death I doe not say he shall pray for it It being granted that the sin unto death is one of those capital sins before mentioned out of Math. 12. 31. and Gal. 5. 19. In which the sinner continueth impenitently al his life time and therin dieth we are next to inquire whether the Apostle meaneth that such a sinner so dying is not to be prayed for after his death or whether he mean that such a sinner is not to be prayed for during his life time whilest he continueth in his sin without repentance For if we grant that by these words a man dying in that sin is excepted from being prayed for after death then it will follow that the other sort of sinners which sin not impenitently unto their death may be prayed for after death and so prayers for the dead must be allowed of as if they were warranted by Scripture which the Church of England doth neither practice nor allowe of although we can not denie but that the ancient Church used them so as I have shewed above in my first book To this inquirie the answer is that the praying or not praying here mentioned is to be understood of men living and only during their life time for so the Apostle meaneth he that is seen or knowne to consess his sin to repent and amend it may be prayed for by the Church whilest he is living But he that is not perceived or perceived not to Confess repent and amend his foul visible and noted sins whilest he liveth the Church hath no direction to pray for such a sin or for such a sinner in this sense that the sin may be forgiven which is never repented Or that the sinner may be pardoned notwithstanding his obdurate persisting and continuing in his sin no not whilest he is living and much less when he is dead So here is no warrant for praying for the dead whether they died penitently or impenitently but in what sense an impenitent sinner during his impenitencie may and ought to be prayed for in this life will appeare hereafter more cleerly but first I must shew the Church practise in praying for sinners The reader may consider that this Epistle is Catholick written to the whole Church and upon this direction the Church Catholick used to p●ay most earnestly yea and with teares and lamentations for such sinners who for some grievous and known Crime had bin excommunicated and this the Church did at such times as the sinners appeared to and in the Church or at the Church dores as penitents confessing and bewayling their owne sins in garments of sackcloth and their faces besmeared with ashes b●gging on their knees both the prayers of the Church and also reconciliation and re admission to the congregation and communion The manner of penitents humiliation and of the Churches commiseration and compassion we have very frequently described in the Church Histories and the Fathers thus In the wist●rne Church saith Sozomen Soz l. 7. c. 1● Ambr. 34. 37. Epiph. haer 59. Origen lam n. 30. there is a set place appointed where the penitents stand with a sad coun●enance mourning and weeping then they cast themselves downe on the pavement being clad in course sack cloth and their beauti● obscur●d and d●faced with ashes and with long sorrow and fasting they beg the prayers of the Church to God for them Confessing their sins openly If the Bishop be present he Compassionatly kneeles and weepes and prayes with them and for them and so doth the whole congregation S. Jerome relates the particular Hier. Epist 30. n. 8. pennance of the noble and religious Lady Fabiola as it was performed in his owne time She had bin divorced and after divorcement she was married to another man whilest her divorced husband was living But she repented and confessed her offence with great sorrow in sack cloth and ashes publickly in the sight of the whole citie of Rome Episcopis presby●eris populo Collacrimantibus i. her self and the Bishops present and the priests and the whole multitude altogether compassionatly weeping This was the use and manner of the Churches praying for those Brethren or Sisters which were thus seen to confefs and express penitency for their sins and therfore not sinning unto death impenitently and this they did upon this direction If any man see his brother sin a sin that is not unto death let him pray for him c S. Ambr●se doth exhort the sinner to confession Ambr. de paenit l. 2. c. 10. n. 34. and penitencie by this motive Fleat pro te mater ecclesia that

Christ is the Authour or Testator of the Evangelicall Testament and not onely a Witnesse or Martyr as the Commenter would have him Chapter VIII The Immortalitie of the Soules of Men asserted against this Commenter from our Saviours Page 23 words Matthew 22. 32. Luke 23. 43. That the Article of Resurrection is therefore expressed to be said of the body onely because the Soul dieth not which is shewed in Saint Pauls Rapture and Saint Stephens Prayer from Church Writers Philosophers and Physicians observations in Anatomie the Souls mortalitie was the old Arabick Heresie Of the immortalitie of Christs humane Soul and consequently of ours That the Doctrine of the Souls immortalitie is now an Article of the Creed and why this Article was then newly added to the old Creed Chapter IX That the Article of Christs descent was added to Page 26 the old Creed principally to set forth the Immortalitie of the Soul of Christ and so of our souls An examination of the tradition oral and the writing of Creeds The summe of the ancient Doctrine of Faith briefly delivered by Irenaeus and the most Ancient Creed thereunto agreeing recorded by Tertullian Chapter X. That divers additions were made to the old Creed Page 29 occasioned by divers Heresies What the Heresies were and what Articles they occasioned and particularly that the Arabick Heresie denying the Souls immortalitie occasioned the Article of Descent is probably shewed for that it was not any Creed generally received before the death of Saint Austine the Nicene hath it not yet the Athanasian at first had it not nor is it in the symbolicall Hymne called Te Deum A modest censure of the Athanasian symbol and an Observation concerning the multitude of Creeds Chapter XI Of the word Hades which is translated Hell Page 32 that it proves the soules immortalitie in that it signifies a being subsistence or permanencie of the souls of dead men separated from their bodies and residing in a Mansion and Condition invisible to us Mortals That the place and state of souls separated is kept secret from us though the knowledge thereof hath been and is much desired Of Saint Hierom's and Curina's visions and the apparition of Irene deceased Chapter XII A censure of those visions of Saint Hierome and Page 35 Curina by comparing them with the Ecstasies of Saint Peter and Saint Paul mentioned Acts 10. 10. and Acts 22. 17. What an Ecstacie Traunce or Vision is In what manner God spake to the Prophets in visions Of Saint Johns Revelation The difference between Divine Inspirations and prophane Enthusiasmes That the one illuminates the other obtenebrates mens understanding and how such raptures or exstacies do argue and prove the Soules seperabilitie and immortalitie Chapter XIII That the Apparitions of the dead do not prove the Page 39 Souls immortalitie For that they are not really the Soules of men deceased but possibly may be the delusions of Satan assuming the shapes of men Why Necromancy is forbidden Deuteronomie 18. 11. Albeit the dead cannot appear to the living at their desire That the state of Soules seperated is concealed Chapter XIV That the Soules immortalitie is confessed by the Page 41 Church Catholick That the Commemoration of the dead in the Church Litnrgies was principally to set forth the Churches belief of the immortalitie of their Soules For that the dead receive no benefit by the prayers of the living The Opinion of some Divines concerning Saint Pauls prayer for Onesiphorus 2 Timothy 1. 18. and of that saying 1 John 5. 16. of which see a full Exposition in my fourth Book Chapter XV. That the Father's did not believe as the Commenter Page 43 doth that Soules departed are insensible as if they were dead or asleep because the Saints departed do pray for the Church Militant as the Fathers thought Chapter XVI Of the departures of mens soules That their conductors Page 48 and leaders to the other World are Angels good or bad That soules seperated are setled in certain Mansions is shewed by Scriptures and Fathers whereby the permanencie and immortalitie of the soul is clearby proved That all those severall mansions go under the generall appellations of Heaven and Hell Chapter XVII A particular detection of the blasphemies contained Page 51 in the Commentarie which are reduced to these two heads The first shewing the blasphemies against the Godhead of Jesus Christ The second shewing the blasphemies against the Incarnation of God and his gracious work of Redemption CHAP. XVIII The dreadfull consequences of the Commenters Page 51 blasphemies in denying the Godhead of Christ and his great works both of Creation and Redemption That it is much better never to have been born or by death to be annihilated or to perish as the beasts doe then to live and die in these sinnes and to rise to judgement The conclusion of the first Book The Table THE SECOND BOOK Containing an assertion of the Godhead of Jesus Christ against the Commentarie Chapter I. AN introductorie discourse concerning Page 1 the sinne against the Holy Spirit as it is described Matth. 12. 31. Mark 3. 29. Luke 12. 10. Divers doubts difficulties and opinions thereof Chapter II. What the word Blasphemie signifies That this Page 4 sinne was the blasphemous denying the Godhead of Christ The spreading of that Pharisaicall blasphemie amongst Jewes and Heathens Of Apollonius of Tyana the Magician compared by Heathens with Christ for miracles Certain considerations premised for clearing doubts concerning this sinne and two conclusions extracted from those consisiderations Chapter III. That the Godhead of the Sonne is called Spirit 7 and Holy Spirit that every Person in the Trinitie is and may be called the Everlasting Father in respect of Creatures and yet how the appellation Father is proper to the first Person That every Person is holy and an Holy Spirit and yet how the appellation Holy Spirit is proper to the third Person That the words Spirit and Ghost signifie the same thing Chapter IV. Diverse Observations of the words of Christ Matthew Page 20 12. The result is that the Pharisee's blasphemie consisted in the deniall of Christ's Godhead The difference between a sinne against the Sonne of Man and against the Holy Spirit The judgement of the Fathers herein Chapter V. The Opinion of later Divines concerning this Page 14 sinne that they affirm Arius and the Emperor Julian the Apostate to have sinned this sinne An examination of the particular sinne of the said Arius and Julian and a breif narration of their lives and deaths Chapter VI. Why the Blasphemy of denying Christs Godhead Page 33 is called the unpardonable Sinne that the Commenters Doctrine in this grand Heresie is no better then Judaisme or Turcisme that it is by the Fathers esteemed and called Antichristianisme To deny Christs Godhead is to renounce redemption and salvation by him wherein the worth and preciousness of the blood of Christ consisteth Chapter VII That the Commenter in Logick sheweth himself Page 37 to be a

The everlasting Covenant and Rev. 14. 6. The Eternal Gospel and must needs be meant in those places of Scripture where mention is made of Eph. 1. 4. Electing us in Christ before the foundation of the World and of 2 Tim. 1. 9. Calling us according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the World began and of 1 Pet. 1. 20. Christ ordained for our Redemption before the foundation of the World Of which there is a full discourse in my Third Book and eighth Chapter This Covenant doth necessarily imply a plurality of persons in the Godhead One to require and injoyn another to restipulate and which is requisite in all Covenants a third Person distinct from the Contractors as a stander-by and Witnesse thereof So in this Covenant First God the Father requireth obedience upon pain of death Secondly God the Son undertaketh for man's performance or penalty or both Thirdly God the Holy-Ghost is witnesse between the Father and the Son for oftentimes in Scripture we read of the Spirit bearing witnesse For though the Father the Son and the Spirit are all said to bear witnesse for our assurance as Joh. 8. 18. I am one that bear witnesse of my self and my Father that sent me and 1 Joh. 5. 7. There are three that bear witnesse in heaven and Rom. 8. 16. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our Spirit But before the Creation who could be a witnesse between the Father and the Son save onely the Eternal Spirit of the Father and the Son Nor can it be imagined that this Covenant and restipulation could be enacted by One single Person for the Law-giver must be considered as a Soveraign onely and the persons upon whom the Law is imposed are as subjects so it will be dissonant from right reason to fasten the Legislation and subjection upon the self-same person Now supposing the Law made and the penalty determined and set down it cannot be denyed that the Supream Law-giver hath naturally and absolutely a power of relaxation and dispensation so that he may remit the punishment for breach of his own Law and of meer grace without any satisfaction forgive the offender but if the said Law-giver do decree and by his Word bind himself to punish the offender as he did when he said Gen. 2. 17. In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye hereby he doth confine and restrain himself from using the Imperial prerogative of free pardon which otherwise he might have granted and hence it is that a Satisfaction must needs be exacted necessitate hypothetica as Divines say upon supposal of the said decree and upon this reason Jesus Christ our Surety becomes liable to his dreadfull Passion and death Touching the Passion of Christ in Satisfaction of Gods Justice for the sins of men the Socinian Writers do utterly deny it as being unjust to punish one for another and especially an innocent for a malefactor and they call this doctrine of Christ's satisfaction as Vossius reporteth Ger. Joh. Vossii Defens Grotii c. 13. Dogma nugatorium frigidum falsum injustum et horribilitèr blasphemum Their reasons are very considerable for they say that God hath by his Prophets and Apostles declared the contrary as Deut. 24. 1● Every man shall be put to death for his own sin Jer. 31. 30. Every one shall dye for his own sin he that eateth sower grapes his teeth shall be set on edge Eze. 18. 4. The soul that sinneth it shall dye Gal. 6. 5. Every man shall bear his own burthen 1 Pet. 1. 17. God judgeth according to every mans work The Answer hereunto usually given is That because God doth actually punish one for another it must needs be just because God doth it but this answer doth not satisfie the Adversary neither doth it I confesse satisfie me for God doth not so Therefore for the better satisfaction of my self in this weighty question and perhaps of others also I offer to the consideration of the Learned Reader these two Propositions following First The Passion of Christ neither is nor ought to be accounted the punishment of one for another but the same that offended the same is punished Secondly The sins of the elect Members of Christ are not to be accounted onely the sins of the Elect but are justly charged on the score of Jesus Christ being their Surety and Redeemer These two Propositions may perhaps seem at first Paradoxical but I trust I shall prove them to be truly Catholick and Orthodox For the first That Christ's Sufferings are 1. Proposition not the punishment of one for another I have learned from St. Bernard Bernard Epist 190. Omnium peccata unus portavit nec alter jam inveniatur qui forefecit alter qui satisfecit quia caput corpus unus est Christus satisfecit caput pro membris i. One bare the sins of all so that we cannot say One forfeited and another satisfied because the head and body are but one Christ the head satisfied for the members So the Husband and Wife are but one person in Law an action of debt is not brought against the wife but the husband so the principal debtor and the Surety are in Law but one person and either of them are liable to payment or penalty This first Proposition is grounded on the doctrine of Christ's Vnion and conjunction with his members which Vnion is of such weighty concernment that without it it is impossible to salve or unfold the mysterious riddles of Gods operations and words in the businesse of man's Salvation and therefore the holy Scriptures and ancient Doctors have with very great abundance of testimonies asserted this necessary truth See first what the Scriptures say Rom. 12. 5. We being many are one body in Christ Eph. 5. 30. We are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Gal. 3. 28. Ye are all one in Christ Jesus 1 Cor. 6. 17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit 1 Cor. 12. 2. By one Spirit ye are all baptized into one body Eph. 4. 4. There is one body and one Spirit This is because the same Spirit that is in Christ is also in his members and because there is but one Spirit uniting the head and members therefore the head and members are but one body having the same Spirit residing in both for so it is said Eph. 3. 17. Christ dwelleth in your hearts and 2 Cor. 13. 5. Jesus Christ is in you 1 Cor. 6. 19. Your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost Joh. 15. 1. I am the vine ye are the branches This Union of the members with Christ the Head is called by the Apostle a recapitulation Eph. 1. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as Bishop Andrews observeth Andr. de Nativ Serm. 16. A gathering of all to the head for as God is one with Christ as Christ is God so we are one with Christ as Christ is man who is therefore called

in Cron. as Prosper writeth yet the Manichees did not more deprave the Passion of Christ then you have done and therefore your book cannot expect a better fate then its fore-runners for of all the great Volumes which former hereticks writ there is little or nothing at this day to be found except such fragments as remain in the Fathers who confuted them and a few Creeds and Ep stola fundamenti in St. f Aug. Con● Epist fund 10. 6. c. 5. Austin and nothing else of Controversie considerable and yet I must tell you that the books of the Arians were written with far greater art and learning then your loose writings shew and I assure you that many Judicious Divines have said that they find nothing in your book fi● to be observed but onely the errours and heresies and yet those are so poorly proved that I may truly say of your book as Austin did of the books of Faustus the Manichee g Aug. Cont. Faust lib. 16. c. 26. Faustus scribit tanquam libellus ejus surdos auditores vel caecos lectores esset habiturus O hominem dictorem alium non cogitantem contradictorem i. Surely you imagined that your Readers and bearer should be deaf or blind and that none would contradict you but all acquiesce in your opinion yet your writings are so blasphemous as if they had been written by him that was the Author of that Libel which Mr. Fox calls h Acts Mon. n. 40. Lucifers Letter and so insipid as if they had been i Erasm f. 359. Suibus Scripti as Erasmus said of such kind of Writers in his time I wish they had been dedicated to Vulcan or strangled with a spunge in their birth because I see that they are like the fry of Serpents and other Vermin and are by you made onely to do mischief untill they be catcht and then the height of their preferment will be as Martial merrily writes of his own Poems k Mart. l. 3. ep 2. Libelle Festina tibi vindicem parare Ne nigram citò raptus in culinam Cordyllas madida ●egas papyro Vel thuris piperisque sis Cucullas Make haste and get a Patron pretty book Before the Black guard or the Master-Cook Snatch thee as waste-paper for his Kitchin To put Spice Sprats Frankincense or Pitch in But if they misse this yet they will not fail of such an end as Arius himself came to or of the fate of Volusius his Annals in Catullus Pleni ruris inficetiarum Catul. car 37. Mart. lib. 12. p. 62. Annales Volusi c. carm 37. So I leave them for present to be put into the Black Bill at Cambridge or the black Catalogue of the late Gangrana CHAP. IV. The Commenters temporizing in unsainting the Apostles in condemning Tombs and in short hair THe next thing to be observed in you and your Comment is your great Compliance with the tender Consciences of these Times which they that formerly observed your very zealous conformity with the then garb must needs judge that you intended this new change onely as a bait to invite the brethren more chearfully to swallow your deadly hook First you will not afford the title of Saint to the holy Apostles but they are plain John Peter Paul only James is beholding to you for Sainting him if not an erratum of the Printer Is not this to shew your conformity with the Plague-bill of London and yet there is the title Allhallowes though not the word Saint and there the word Saint is withdrawn but from places and Churches but you will not allow it to the persons of Apostles the Bill had some colour for it self for it was once ordered in a Council a Concil Constantinop sub Const 5. An. Domini 755. That Churches should not have the appellation of Saint because of the great abuse in Image-worship and because people did then give the title of Saint to those places not because the Churches were so named in their dedications but because the Images of Saints were set up in Churches and the name of the Saint was painted on the Image So that when men said Let us go to St. Peters they meant it of the image when perhaps the Church was not so named but it was never ordered by any Christian Council that the title Saint should be denyed to the persons of the holy Apostles and Evangelists you see the Scriptures give that ●itle to whole Companies of people professing Christ b 1 Cor. 14. 33. who were much inferiour to the high Office and sanctity of the Apostles I think you would be offended with him that should not stile you Doctor and yet the Apostles have a better title to Saint then you to your Doctorship And because some are offended with Images of men lately set upon Tombs as they have as just cause perhaps to find fault with them as to be offended with the memories of Apostles and Martyrs in glasse-windowes if all imagery in Churches be unlawful you more zealously condemn all Tombs built for memory of men departed though they deserved well of us and therein you condemn the practice of holy men in Scripture in preserving the Sepul●h●● of David even the accursed Jews did adorn the Tombs of the Prophets whom Matth. 23. 29. their fathers slew yea and all Christian Churches in all ages did allow and with great cost set up Tombs of holy men and Martyrs and called them Memorias Martyrum i. e. the Memories of Martyrs the Sepulcher of Christ was much esteemed by Constantine the Great and a fair Church built over it as we read in Eusebius and that for the memories of twelve Apostles Euseb de vit Const l. 3. lib. 4. Hier. Epist 53. c. 3. n. 17. Aug. de Civ l. 22. c. 8. he built twelve several Tombs in one Church as Constantinople and in St. Hieromes time the Tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul were of great esteem in Rome In St. Austin's time and in his Church at Hippo was the Tomb of St. Stephen set up though far remote from the place of his stoning and we find a Tomb set up or the blessed Virgin Mary in Judaea as some in Di●nysius and St. Hierome tell us Nonna the holy woman Vid. Dionys vit Hier. to 9. P. 39. and Mother of Greg. Nazianzen devoted the whole estate which her son Caesarius left to build a costly Monument for his memory as her own son Nazian in his Funeral Oration to her great praise reporteth Naz. Orat. 10. and in the Canons of the Primitive Church recorded by St. Basil The violaters of the Tombs of the dead are Basil ad Amphil c. 64. n. 36. ordered to stand excommunicate the space of eleven yeares even as long as adulterers were This Commenter surely hath an higher conceit of his own wisdome then any other men have discovered to be in him that presumeth to controul the Practice of

si c●imen est nimium legi Prop●e●is Apostolis credidisse ignosce Omnipotens Deus qu●a in his m●ri possum Emend●ri non possum Id est Lord why hast thou deceived me thy poore creature I believed thine own words concerning thine own self thy servant Moses David Solomon Dani●l and thine Apostles have misled me If it be a fault to give too much credence to thy Law thy Prophets and Apostles I beseech thee to have me ●xcused if in this Faith I live and die for I can never recant this Doctrine Finally this was also the constant Profession of that learned Bishop Saint Basil for when Valens the A●ian Emperour had by a messenger threatned him with sequ●stration of his Church and banishment of his person if he persisted in this Doctrine which he called a foolish doctrine The good Bishop answered u●inam sempiter na sit Theod. hist l. 4. c. 10. haec mea insipientia id est And so say I and I pray God I may never be withdrawen from that true and most wholsome Doctrine which I have here delivered and which our new fashion rationall animalls call folly but that I may persevere in the Faith and Confession of the Godhead of Jesus Christ unto my lives end And afterwards I doubt not but I shall so continue with the Angels and Elders Revelation 5. 13. saying Blessing Honour Glory and Power be unto him that sitteth on the Throne and to the Lambe for ever and ever Amen L. Deo FINIS THE THIRD BOOK Α●θρωπ●ς Θε●φόρος THE Incarnation of GOD And the MYSTERIE Of Mans Redemption unfolded Tentemus animas quae deficiunt in fide naturalibus rationibus adjuvare Ruffin in symb apud Cyp. LONDON Printed for Humphrey Moseley and are to be sold at his Shop at the Princes Armes in St. Paul's Church-yard 1655. THE PREFACE HAving in the second Book shewed that Jesus Christ is the onely true supream and most high God and that there is no other God but he for that we are assured that Christian Faith cannot H●l de Trin. l 7. admit of two gods And because we have learned the same in the Holy Scriptures Deut. 6. 4. Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord. And that the Prophet calls the Son of God Esay 9. 6. The mightty God the everlasting Father and that in the Gospell the Son of God saith John 10. 30. The Father and I are one and that all his are the Fathers and all that the Father hath are his John 17. 10. Which sheweth a perfect communion in one Essence and that the Son in Godhead is no way inferiour to the Father but both are equall and therefore the Scripture with great reason doth promiscuously sometimes name the Father before the Sonne and sometimes the Sonne is put before the Father as John 8. 16. I and the Father that sent me and Gal. 1. 1. By Jesus Christ and God the Father And 2. Thes 2. 16. Our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father For if Christ were absolutely under and subject to the Father how could this be endured when no Prince will suffer his subject though he be never so high and honourable to write Ego Rex I and my King as Chrysostome Chrys tom 6. ser 4. n. 55. notes In this third Book I am to shew that the same Onely true and most high God was incarnate by assuming humane flesh from the Virgin Mother and in that assumed nature was called Jesus Christ and in that assumed Manhood performed the great work of Mans redemption and therein suffered death on the Cross thereby satisfying the Justice and submitting to the Sentence of God as an expiation for our transgressions and by his most holy life and perfect righteousness in fulfilling the whole Law and so performing the Covenant of God for us and in our stead as our suretie and thereby according to the Covenant Do this and live hath obtained for his whole Mysticall Body the kingdom of Heaven and everlasting life To this discourse I am lead by the pernicious doctrine of this Commenter who denied Jesus to be the supreame God and to colour this blasphemy hath most apparantly misinterpreted and transverted the holy Scriptures and wronged the ancient Nicene Fathers as hath been shewed before and particularly that most learned Bishop and ancient Church-writer Eusebius as is next to be shewed THE INCARNATION of GOD. CHAP. I. The Vindication of Eusebius whom this Comment hath calumniated and falsified VPon those words Heb. 13. 2. Some have P. 331. entertained Angels the Commenter saith Eusebius in his first Book contends that one of the Angels was the Son of God for he will not have him the most high God c. You have not onely all to becommented the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the Nicene Father but have written a loud Comment on Eusebius who never wrote or said for ought can appear that Jesus Christ was not the most high God But I am sure divers times in his most learned Books he teacheth true Doctrine quite contrary to yours when he saith Filius erat ante aeterna tempora Euseb de Demonst i. 4. 6. ● the Son of God was from eternity and also particularly condemneth this very Heresie which you have so belaboured under the name of Heresie Artemon Theodotus and Paulus Simosatenus as hath been shewed before Id hist l. 5. c. 28. lib. 7. c. 2. For this Eusebius was one of those renouned Bishops who at the N●●ene Councel against Arius decreed and subscribed the article Homossion id est that the Father and the Son are of the same essence and Godhead whereas some Arians at that Councel refused to subscribe and thereby insinuated as your selfe have done that there was a greater and a lesser God and so fell into the old heresie of Mercion who said Bas ho. 27. con sabel Soc. l. 2. c. 5. there were two Gods 2● Saint Basil notes one of the refusers was also named Eusebius who was ●ishop of Nicomedia at that time and afterwards was preferred to the Bishoprick of Constantinople and their lived and dyed an Arian but we have no writings of this Eusebius now extant The Eusebius whom you mean lived and dyed Bishop of Caesaria a man of so great learning and worth that the Emperour Constantine said he was worthy to be the Vniversal Bishop of the Sec. l. 1. c. 18. world this man at first was unwilling to have the word homo●sion put into the Creed because it was new but afterwards when he perceived that it was but the expression of that Doctrine which is really contained in Scripture when it is said The Father and I are one he accepted of it and exhibitted his own Church-Creed to the Councel and the Councel confirmed it onely adding the word Homo●sion and so published it as Socrates saith so that it seemeth the Soc. l. 1. c. 5. creed which we call the Nicene Creed

of her for neither of them severally can be called perfect Man and Master Rogers in his notes upon that Article tells us that it was one of the Arrian errours who said That Christ took ●tha de Incarn n. 22. onely flesh of the Virgine but not the Soul and that some Arrians did indeed so say is affirmed by Athanasius Finally if it can clearly appeare that the Sonne of God did indeed take both his flesh and also his humain Soule by Propagation from Man it will be a great consolation to Mankinde that the great God of Heaven and Earth would vouchsafe to be so compleatly near of kindred to us his poore creatures and hereby also a perfect and compleat Incarnation of God will be proved against this Commenter CHAP. XIV The question of the Soules propagation left undetermined by Saint Augustine yet he thought it more probable that our soules are propagated from our Parents I Will not presume good Reader to determine this great question because that I find that the most profound Doctors of the Primitive Church and after very great and diligent discussion yet left it dubitable as may appear by the Epistles which passed mutually between Saint Hierome and Saint Augustine concerning this very question which neither of them would absolutely determine and conclude either for the Soule of Christ or the Souls of other men for that the Originall of the Soule of Christ was surely the same with the Originall of other mens souls since our first Parents and both alike obscure and hard to be understood Onely I will truely relate what hath been thought and said of it especially out of Saint Augustine who saith utrum origo animarum Aug. n. 7. n. 18. n. 44. sit ex uno illo Adam an semper fiant singulae si●gulis adhuc nescio adhuc incertum i. whether the souls of all men came from Adam or whether new souls for severall men be dayly created as yet I know not and it is uncertain And again Nunquam ausus sum definitam proferre Id. Epist 175. Id. Epist 120. sententiam i. I never durst venture upon a definitive sentence thereof and concludeth Satius est ortum animae semper quaerere quam invenisse praesumere i. It is safer to be alwayes seeking then to presume that we have found it And a great while after he said Ego adhuc inter utrosque ambigo vincant qui poterant i. Id. de Gen. ad lit l. 10. c. 22. I am still doubtfull between those two opinions prove either who can And although he confesseth in the same book that he would be more willing to acknowledge that Christ had not his soul from Adam yet saith he the other opinion that men receive their souls from their Parents doth preponderate and turn the scale of my judgement The same Father for the probability of propagation of souls from Adam alledgeth many reasons For first writing to Saint Hierome Tell me saith Id Epist 28. he if Soules are doyly created and not transmitted from the Parents wherein have poore Infants sinned and how are they involved in the sins of Adam or their Parents so that they need the Sacrament of remission of sins But secondly If it be said that our soules are indeed derived from the soul of Adam then who can say I have not sinned seeing the Originall soul of Adam sinned Thirdly It was the Argument which Pelagius used If the soul be not propagated as well as the body then onely the bodies of Infants are liable to the punishment for Originall sinne for it may seem very hard measure that so ancient a sinne should be laid to the charge of a soul newly created and but one day old Fourthly when the woman was made out of the body of Man It is not said that God breathed into her nostrils the breath of life as it was said of the man Gen. 2. 7. Perhaps to intimate that her soul was derived with het body from the man Fifthly Saint Augustine confessed that to say that soules are dayly created seeing God finished the Creation the sixth day will seeme a violent speech Sixthly it is said Romans 5. 18. By the offence of Aug. de Gen. ad lit lib. 10. c. 11. one judgement came upon all to condemnation ● Now because onely the soul sinneth for the body is but the souls instrument how can the soul that was not created till so many generations from Adam are passed be said to sin in Adam for what evill hath the soul of a young dying infant committed if his soul were not derived from Adam Lastly he granteth Non absurde ●reditur ●animas è Id. ibid. traduce ●sse ●id est It is no inconvenience to our Christian Faith to say the souls of men are propagated from the first man For it was indeed anciently received by Christians as a Truth long before Saint Augustines time as we finde in Ter●ullian who saith Tert. de anima c. 27. expresly that Our souls came from Adam and again he saith in the same Book Omnis anima censetur in Adamo donec in Christo recens●atur id est Every Id. ib. c. 40. soul is first c●nsed or inrolled in Adam untill they be new enrolled and accounted in Christ And Saint Hierome avoucheth this to be the opinion Hier. Epist ad Marcel apud Aug. Epist 27 not onely of Ter●ulli●n but also that the greater part of the Western Churches were of the same minde that as our bodies are derived f●om the bodies of our Parents so our souls are propagated from their souls Even as millions of Ta●ers may be tinded or lighted at one burning Taper and as all the Stars of Heaven receive their light from the Sunne yet neither the light of that one Taper or of the Sunne are any thing diminished So although the manner how our souls are propagated be inestable yet De facto that they are propagated is no way incredible For why not the souls of Men as well as the souls of Beasts and why may not the humane soul extend it self into the childe in the wombe as well as it doth inlarge it self in a greater distance into other parts of the body as the body from its birth waxeth bigger from one cubite length of the Infant to foure Cubites at our full growth and this Doctrine of the Soules prop●gation seemeth to stand with a great deall of equitie in our mercifull and most iust Redeemer that as he would redeem our bodies by his owne body taken from man so to redeem our soules by his soul so taken and propagated from man And this seemeth to be the Opinion of Athanasius Atha de incarnat n. 23. Corpus Chisti pro corpore nostro anima ●jus pro nostra integer homo pro integro homine in Redemptione rependitur id est The Body of Christ was given for our bodies and his Soule for our Soules and his whole Man for

13. 13. and 1 Corinthians 14. 47. The second man is the Lord from Heaven Thus did some of the old Hereticks believe as the l Basil n. 37. Valentinians and m Naz. n. 34. Apollinarius n Aug. to 6. n. 9 the Manichees and o Epiph haer Apelles said that Christ made himselfe a body of the Elements and did not take it from Marie And this they professed in a pretended honour 44. of Christ p Aug. to 6. n. 10. Iusipienti honorificentia as Saint Augustine calleth it id est foolishly thinking thereby to honour Christ and this was also one of the Tenents of the late Anabaptists as we finde in the sixteenth Centurie Now to affirme these things is to gainsay the Doctrine and promise of Redemption by the seed of the woman and the promised seed of Abraham and the sonne of David for Christ is not from their loyns if his body came from Heaven and although a simple well meaning soul should live and die in this errour who hath alwayes adhered to the main principall Doctrine viz. God in Christ and God incaruate believing Vide supra lib. 3. cap. 10. 11. that Christ performed the Law actively for him and also suffered death on the Crosse for him in a body howbeit not in such a body as descended from Adam shall we affirm that such a misbeliever must necessarily perish I answer that I dare not so pronounce because this sinfull and erroneous conceit of the incarnation is at most but one of these sinnes which our Saviour called A word spoken against the Sonne of Man Matthew 12. 32. For it is onely against this humane nature and no blasphemy against his Holy and Divine Spirit or Godhead and of such sinnes he saith It shall be forgiven him viz. If such a sinner with an humble heart make an acknowledgement and general confession of his secret and unknown sinnes wherein this will be included so as is before said with a resolution to decline any thing that he knowes to be sinfull so much as by assistance of Gods Grace he can still holding himself close to the main foundation which the forenamed old Hereticks did not but vented many blasphemies against the Divine Nature and also polluted themselves with many fowle Morall vices I say when Jesus Christ hath said It shall be forgiven how dare any Man presume to say It shall never be forgiven For although the Erroneous conceits of Christs Body comming down from Heaven doe disturb the Order of Gods dispensation and the congruitie of the work of Redemption and correspondence thereof with the words of the Covenant yet it doth not take away and root up the foundation This doth not un-God our Redeemer nor deny utterly the gracious work of Mans Redemption So as this most blasphemous Commentarie hath none which I now together with my weak endeavours in opening the dangerous Doctrines thereof leave and submit to the censure of the learned and to the namelesse Anthor thereof I say of both our Writings as Saint Cyprian did Cyp. lib. 4. Epist 9. to Paptanus In die judicii ante Tribunal Christi utrumque recitabitur To God the Father God the Son God the Holy Ghost three Persons one onely God be ascribed all honour and glory for ever and ever Amen Qualitèr haeretici pro falsae opinione in die judicii puniendi sunt nullus potest scire nisi Judex patiens est Deus quia affectis piae opinionis errant Salvian degub l. 5. p. 163. FINIS THE TABLE Of the Contents of each several CHAPTER THE FIRST BOOK Containing General Animadversions upon the Commentarie and Commenter and the assertion of the Souls Immortalitie Chapter I. CErinthus Artemon Theodotus and Page 1. Natalis Authors and spreaders of the blasphemie of the denying Christ's Godhead The Divine warning of Natalis That after these Paulus Samosatenus and Arius were maintainers of the same Heresie The spreading of it in severall parts of the known world even in our Britain That it was here discovered in Queen Maries dayes And punished by fire in the reign of Queen Elizabeth and of King James That the same is now revived by this Commenter the qualitie of G. M. who negotiated in the Printing and publishing this Commentary Chapter II. That the Commenter though he carefully concealed Page 4 his own name yet caused this his Book to be presented to divers persons of quality That this Commenter is the first that ever published this Heresie in our English Print Three reasons conceived why he concealeth his own name Chapter III. Of the licensing of this Comment the Licensers Page 7 censure of it and an Apologie for him in that he called this Commentarie a Comment and in his letter to an honourable Person declared it to be erroneous The copy of the Letter a parallel passage of Libanius concerning Julian and the Manichees concerning their Founder Manes the ancient practice of burning such hereticall books Chapter IV. The Commenters compliance in unsainting the Page 10 Apostles The reason why the Title of Saint was of old withdrawn from Churches by the decree of a Council That the abuse of images occasioned it and yet that the Title of Saint was not denied to the persons of Holy men Of his condemning Tombes Something concerning Hypocrisie in long hair and short Of the reason of the Nazarites long hair and the hypocrisie of their imitators Chapter V. The Commenters compliance with the old Arians Page 15 The judgement of the Ancients concerning the Authour of the Epistle to the Hebrewes A Vindication of Eusebius concerning the words Homo ousion and Homoi ousion and also of the Nicene Fathers falsly charged by the Commenter as if they favoured his own Heresie How the Father and the Sonne are said to be Opposite and yet both are but one God The Commenters Errour in the Logicall Doctrine of Relatives Chapter VI. That this Commenters principall designe was by Page 16 his pretended Commentarie to darken and extenuate or confute the clear Evidences of this Divine Epistle onely because therein are many great Testimonies of Christ's Godhead That herein he imitateth the practices of the old Hereticks Marcion Valentinus and the Manichees The Commenters misexpounding Hebrewes 1. 6. in allowing Divine Adoration to Christ and yet will not acknowledge him to be more then a creature and in applying the appellation Jehova to one whom he denieth to be the Supream God contrarie to Psalme 83. 18. what prostration signifieth Chapter VII That this Commenter mis-expoundeth Hebrewes Page 21 2. 2 3. That the Gospel is therefore preferred before the Law in that the Gospel was delivered by God himself immediately for it was delivered by Christ himself who is the Supream and onely God whereas the Law was delivered indeed by the same God but mediately by the Ministery of Angels or Creatures A true Exposition of Acts 7. 53. and of Gal. 3. 19. and Exodus 20. 21. Moses and Paul reconciled That