Drafts on the history of the Church (Section 7)

described, [Vnder the name of the father & son they worshipped fals Gods & is their fundamental error [called by the Apostle Paul the mystery of iniquity.] And as they agreed in one common fundamental error w^ch made them Idolaters & Polytheists, so they were united into one common body {by} baptism. ffor when the Church of Rome had ad|l|lowed the Baptism of Pra{xeas} a {illeg} patripassian, & the practise of allowing the baptism of hereticks began to be of some standing in that Church, Stephen Bishop of Rome de in a letter to Cyprian defended it by the like practise of the hereticks amongst themselves who allowed one anothers baptism. But the rest of the Churches of Christ disagreed from y^e Church of Rome in this point, contending that Christ had given to {sic} authority to Antichristians to baptize. There was but one God one Christ \one spirit \spirit// one Church one faith & one baptism {but} Antichristians denied that God & that Christ & opposed that Church & had not that faith w^ch \{illeg} w^ch was into that faith & by w^ch that faith men were admitted into/ \|And| This baptism/ was in y^e name of that God & that Christ \& that Spirit/ & into that faith & by w^ch \{illeg}/ \it/ men were admitted into that Church. And \Whereas/ Antichristians had denied that God & that X^t & had not that Spirit nor that faith & opposed \{illeg} the {baptism} were enemies to/ that Church & had \by/ another baptism admitted men in into another faith admitted men into another Church. the Church of Antichrist or Synagogue of Satan.

The come education of \learned/ men in the Christian religion who prea principles of \Plato &/ other heathen philosophers & y^e \too/ easy admission of hereticks into y^e Church of {illeg} before they became Christians, the study of the heathen learning by some Christians \learned/ men after they became Christians \the writings of Tertullian \&/ the reception of Montanism by the bishop of Rome abouty^e end of the 2^d century/ & the easy admission of {illeg} hereticks into y^e latine Church all in the third century & the writings of Tertullian & some other learned men gave occasion to the spreading of some {heathen} erroneous opinions in the /very early\ Church her self, & particularly {illeg} to y^e spreading of y^e opinion the the {sic} son of God was the Λόγος ἐνδιάθετοσ –– – – from the Sun. For Athenagoras in his Apology for the Christians, after he – – – – – – quæ est Patris et filij.

When y^e Nicene Council at y^e importunity of y^e Emperor had decreed the son to be ὁμοούσιος to the father, & Hosius who published the {illeg} cre\e/d of the Council translated this word not by the word consubstantial w^ch was the proper by the phrase unius subs by unius substantiæ & some Greek translated unius substantiæ by μιας ὀυσίας & μιας ὑποστάσεος & these translations became a stumbli being capable of several senses {illeg} became a stumbling block to the people, especially to the Latines & \in a few years/ led them in great numbers into the errors of Montanus & Sabellius.

The education of learned men in the principles of {illeg} Plato \& other heathen ꝑers/ before they became X^ians & the {illeg} writings of Tertullian gave occasion to the spreading of those propagating of those opinions not only in the chur amongst such as separated from the Chu\r/ch but even in the

When the opinion that the Son \or Word/ was |is| the \only/ inward reason understa |λόγος of the λογος ενδιαθετος of the father the inward {illeg} reason & wisdom| father emitted outwardly as Gods voice or word had a was thus far spread in the Churches as has been described, & \the Emperor Const w^th/ the bishops of this opini {sic} by the assistance of the Emperor Constantine had \had prevailed w^th y^e Council of Nice to/ decreed the Son to be ὁμοούσιος to y^e Father: Hosius who published the Creed of the Council translated the word ὁμοούσιος unius substantiæ & others translated for unius substantiæ wrote μιας ὀυσίας & μιας ὑποστάσεος. And these translations \by their ambiguity/ became a stumbling block to y^e people & led many of them into the errors of Montanus & Sabellius, as I gather fom an epistle w^ch \what/ Hilary A.C. 358 wrote from Asia \from the/ to the Bishops of Gallia & Britain. Multi ex vobis, saith he,

<116v>

You have heard out of Ireæus, that all the Churches throughout the whole world agreed in one & the same faith the till his days, that is till towards the latter end of the second century, & that they kn \the people/ were \so/ zealous for this faith that even y^e illiterate Germans wou upon hearing the opinions of the old hereticks would stop their ears & run away. The same zeale in the common people of the Christians, \both Greeks & Latines/ for the monarchical unity of the father & son \&/ against their metaphysical unity is thus described by Tertullian in his book against Praxeas written And what their opinion was \in those days/ in relation to y^e unity of y^e deity & how zealous they were for it in opposition to the me\me/taphysical opinions of y^e Montanists \hereticks/ about it, is thus described by Tertullian in his book against Praxeas written in the end of y^e second century or beginning of y^e third. Simplices quosqꝫ, saith he, ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotæ quæ major semper credentium pars est.

This Oeconomy of the Montanists consisted in explaining how the father Son & holy Ghost were one by unity of substance, & the \and/ credentium pars major, the major part of beleivers were certainly the christians of the Church catholick. And these in the Tertullian complains that these in the Greek Empire would not understand the Oeconomy of the Montanists & in the Latine empire in opposition to it cried out Monarchiam tenemus pronouncing the word Monarchy with an emphatically w^th a loud voice, & in generall were affrighted & trembled at y^e {illeg} this Oeconomy accounting it \the Trinity of the Montanists/ a division of that unity \w^ch they held Church beleived &/ in w^ch y^e Monarchy was founded & affirming that the Montanists worshiped two or three Gods

<117r>

w^th its co ουσια with its compounds ὁμοουσιος \{ὁμοι}ουσιος/ because not extant in scripture nor understood by y^e people The|is| \was first done by the/ Council of Sirmium A.C. 357 in a Creed subscribed by Hosius & Potunius. Then in another Council of Sirmium A.C. 359 in a Creed \{publis}hed before the Emperour/ in w^ch they professed the son to \be/ similis Patri secundum scripturas. And this \Which/ Creed was \published \{illeg}/ before the Emperor at Sirmium &/ subscribed the same year by the Councils of Ariminum \in Italy/ & & {sic} Nice in Thrace. And the same thing was done \also/ y^e \same/ year by the Council of Seleucia \abolished the use of those words both/ in their prefa preambl preface to y^e Creed of Lucius the martyr, & \again/ at y^e end of that Creed where they say that \confirm the/ y^e {sic} \said/ faith of Sirmium & Ariminum. And the next year A.C. 360 the Council of Council of Constantinople pub subscribed the same faith without of Sirmium \it/ w^thout any material alteration of words. The reasons given for abolishing the use of those words were y^t because they were not extant in the scripture nor received by tradition \allowed by ancient Councils/ nor understood by the people. \For by/ The Apostles had commanded them |rule they were| to hold fast the form of sound words. In The Council of Antioch convened against Paul of Samosat about 93 years 60 years before y^e Council of Nice, & \had/ rejected the Sons being ὁμοούσιος to the father & the sentence of this Council was communicated to & approved by all the Churches of y^e Roman Empire \& therefore could not be revoked./ The Council of Nice had admitted the word Ὁμοούσιος hastily & w^thout due deliberation & {illeg} |being pressed by the Emperor then present & the word was misinterpreted & thereby proved| proved {sic} a stumbling block to people leading them into y^e errors of Sabellius, Montanus & the Gnosticks. For the Council underst \of Nice/ took the word in y^e same sense with ὁμοιούσιος, as appeared by the Acts of the Council produced at Ariminum, but the Latines translated it unius substantiæ & {illeg} unius hypostasis & the people were apt to understand this translation in the sense of those hereticks. |Hilary in the third year of his banishment A.C. 358, writing to the bishops of Gaull & Britain & taking pains to make them understand in what sense the father & son were to be called una substantia, speaks thus to them, Multi ex vobis fratres charissimi – – – –| Multi ex vobis, fratres charissimi saith Hilary – – – – – in some of those corrupt senses. And a little after he repeats the objection several times without denying the matter of fact Sed forte dicetur, \saith he/ idcirco [homoousion] improbari oportere qu{illeg}itiose intelligentem? Male homousion Samosatenus confessus est? Sed nunquid melius Ariani negaverunt? Octoginta episcopi olim respuerunt: sed trecenti decem & octo nuper receperunt. And that the word ὁυσία was misunderstood by the people & led them into error is|was| also manifest by acknowledge{d} |also| by all the bishops who subscribed the Creed of the Councils of {illeg} Sirmium \Nice &/ Ariminum in w^ch are these words. Nomen autem substantiæ | ὀυσιας, quod a Patribus simplicius positum a patribus positum, a populisqꝫ minime intellectum offensionis causa sit: quod etiam in scripturis non contineatur, de medio tolli & nullam omnino {illeg} ὀυσίας mentionem in Deo deinceps faciundum esse placuit. Thus did the eastern Churches for putting a stop to the growth of Sabellianism, Montanism, \& Gnosticism/ &c prevail with the western Churches to lay aside the ὁμοούσιος as the Council of Antioch \with the approbation of the Church Catholick/ had done long before for putting a stop to the growth of the heresy of Paul of Samosat. ffor a A And now the eastern & western Churches being reunited \in outward profession of faith/ became once more the visible Chuch {sic} Catholick of the Roman Empire. If it be said that the Eastern Churches were Arrians in their hearts, this \is d/ doth not hinder them is a|n| change \accusation/ w^ch no man can prove. God alone is the searcher of hearts. Man I speak of the visible church whose communion is measured by outward profession of faith. For God \& Christ/ alone are \is/ the searchers {sic} of hearts. We are now come to the period of time at w^ch it \was/ said: Athanasius continued |If it be said that this Church was Arrian in outward profession of faith, I do not see for rejecting the word ὁμοούσιος, I do not see how the Church catholic in y^e| days of Paul of Samosat can be excused for the like heresy doing the like

Th Hilary in his book de synodis written in Asia A.C. 358, tells the western Bishops, Tantum ecclesiarum Orientalium periculum est, ut ravum sit hujus fidei [sc. consubstantialis] quæ qualis sit vos judicate, aut sacerdotes aut populum inveniri – – – – – Nam absqꝫ Episcopo Eleusio et paucis cum eo, ex majori parte Asianæ decem Provinciæ intra quas consisto, vere Deum nesciunt. This state of things <117v> increased so much that Ath in the reign of Iovian w^ch was about five years after saith

The faith w^ch Athanasius & his followers began now to profess \preach/ was the Serdican w^th this difference \alteration/ that instead of saying that \calling/ the father son & h.g. were one hyp usia & one hypostasis they called them one usia & three hypostases, that is changing the language of one hypostasis into that of three hypostases for clearing themselves from the imputation of Sabellianism under w^chthey had hitherto lain. [And henceforward \then/ the words usia & hypostasis w^ch by those of Serdican faith were taken in one & the same signification were henceforward taken in different significations] ffor by one usia & thee {sic} hypostasis, or as the Latines exprest it, una persona & tre substantia et tres personæ they meant one substance in nature & species & three intelligent substances in number & substance \{meant it}/ the word person being taken for an intelligent substance. This faith Athanasius Eusebius verc. & 12 or 15 other B\ps/ returning from banishment read & meeting at Alexandria had agreed upon at \at Alexandria/ a few months before abolishing the use of the words usia & hypostasis except in opposition to Sabellianism. {illeg} But afterwards they retained una usia in conformity with \to/ the una substantia of y^e Latines & put hypostates in the \only/ & {sic} distinguished the persons only by the name of hypostases.

& abolished the use of the word usia. The reasons they gave for abolishing it are thus set down by Hilary. \De homœusio quod est similis essentiæ, commune iudicium est./ De homousio /vestro\ quod est unius substantiæ tractantes primum idcirco respuendum pronunciastis, quia verbi [per] verbi hujus enunciationem – – – – nusquam scriptum repena\re/tur./. As to \The meaning of/ the first of these reasons is that whereas the word ὀμοούσιος properly signifes two \a/ substances taken out of one common substance, \derived from another/ substance by separation, eff efflux, commutio some sort of separation or distinction, & for excluding this sense the Council of Nice had allowed \agreed/ that y^e word was not to be taken in such a sense, nor to signify any thing more then ὀμοιούσιος \similis substantiæ/ & yet the Latines had translated y^e word unius substantiæ & thereby laid aside the interpretation of y^e word agreed upon by the Nicene Council, & gave occasion to the Nicene Council to people to understand the Nicenes decree in favour of the erros of Sabellius Montanus & the Gnosticks; for puting a stop to these errors it was fit the word usia should be laid aside. Another And that the word usia was then misinterpreted by the people {illeg} Hilary himself it {sic} witness. Multi ex nobis, fratres charissimi – – – – – quam inter se duo pares habeant. Here Hilary describes three corrupt senses in w^ch peo|the| people understood y^e Nicene decree, the first in favour of Sabellianism, the second in favour of Montanism & the third in favour of the errors of Hieracas & y^e Gnosticks, & says that many of his party understood unam substantiam in some of these sen corrupt senses [& y^t ought to be understood of a generical unity or similitude of property] And for The second reason making it appear that y^e Nicene decree \ὀμοούσιος/ was not to be understood in any of these senses, the Acts of the Nicene Council were produced, in w^ch the word was interpreted to signify nothing more then ὀμοιούσιος or ὁμιος κατ᾽ ὀυσίαν.. {sic}

The second reason is made stro

For understanding the force of the second reason it is to be considered that the sentence of the Council of Antioch {illeg} \against/ Paul of Samosat, by w^ch the {illeg} Council rejected the ὀμοούσιος, commcated to & approved \by/ all the Churches of the Roman Empire without any dispute arising thereupon. And so the Councils of Sirmium Nicæa Ariminum Seleucia & Constantiple {sic} \are not to be blamed for {illeg}/ restored|ing| the \a/ decree w^ch had been made by the Council of Antioch & established by the \consent of the/ Church Catholick above 90 years before, & so had the tradition of the Church catholick on its side.

The third reason, \namely/ that the ὀμοούσιος w^ch the Nicene fathers had been compelled to admit, was not to be received because not in scripture, is made stronger by the Aposles {sic} command: Hold fast the form of sound words. A command w^ch no general Council whatever had authority to repeal or trans

Vpon these reasons the Council of Sirmium

<118r>

^[1]Epiphanius tells us that the Scribes held various traditions some of w^ch they derived from Moses, others from Akkiba others from Andanus or Ananus & others from y^e sons of Assamonæans, & celebrated these traditions under the name of wisdome & learning. And y^t y^e pharisees^[2] added to the Doctrines of the scribes, & attributed much to fate & Astronomy^[3] gving hebrew names to the translating the greek names of y^e seven \seven/ Planets & 12 signes into the hebrew language. Whence I gather \its probable/ that the Cabbala descended through their hands to posterity its probable that \the Cabbala was handed down by/ the Scribes & Pharisees \handed down the Cabbala/ were Cabbalists \& Doctors of the law./ For Akkiba is recconned among the Cabbalists. |New heresies began \first/ {amongst} the Iews. For Hegesippus tells us that| Hegesippus tells us y^t {sic} from the sects of the Iews founded by Thebutis simon & others came the sects of Menander Marcion Carpocrates Valentinus Basilides Saturnilis &c.

Irenæus calls Simon

<119r>

And that every son is ὁμοούσιος to his father, & if the son of God be a true natural son he must be also ὁμοούσιος, & that the son being the image of the father, & perfectly like him with an per invariable likeness to express this more fully they Council wrote him consubstantial, & (in the name of Theognostus) that the ὀυσία of y^e son is not \taken/ from without nor deduced out of nothing but born of the fathers ουσία \& flows from it/ as the splendor of light & the vapour of water, & \yet/ by this nativity the ουσιαof y^e father suffers no change division or change, having the son its image. And if such a similitude of substance was the sense of y^e the {sic} Council

these these

<119v>

For S^r Isaac Newton
at his House
in S^t Martin's streat
near Leciester fields
London

<120r>

8 Hod æs. 2 Cochmah gradus plumbi {illeg} Chesil argentum. 1 Icod argentum vivum. 5 Geberah {illeg} 1 Kether radim metallica p. 117. 3 Binal stannum p. 117. 6 Tophereth ferrum p. 118 7 Nezach æs {illeg} 10 Malchuth medicina metallorum p. 118. 4 Gedulah argentum p. 118. 9 Iesod plumbum p 118 {illeg} fæmina metallica, aqua auri. p. 118. 1, 2, 3 Chether Cochin bina principia metallica. 4 Gedulah Chesed argentum. 5 Geburah aurum. 6 Tipherath ferrum 7 Nezach stannum 8 Hod æs. 9 9 Iesod plumbum 10 Malcuth argentum vivum fæmina metallica aqua auri. p. 118.

but Hyparchus & Ptolomy placed a primum mobile above it & Theologus has placed an infinite & immoaveable calm empyrean above that, & to have die accordingly the Cabbalists have placed three sephiroths above the planetary orbs (Kether Cochmah & Binah) & comprehended them under the name of Arech Anpin \& they first called the crown to signify that it encompasses all the rest & made it infinite/ And in like manner some of the Gnostics have placed more Æons then one above the planetary Orbs. \they supposed to be infinite/ & called it the crown to signify that it encompasses all the rest. And some of the Gnosticks in like manner placed more Æons then one {illeg} above the orbs of the Planets & said equalled the first Æon to the supreme father.

And the Gnosticksalso imitated the heathens \& Cabbalists/ in the manner of \generating/ their Æons, making them either hermaph males & females or hermaphodites {sic} & to generate one another in a litteral sense that is by emission of substance as animals generate other animals of the same species A by seminal emissioons {sic}. And thence the

The Cabbalists placed Æn Soph the Infinite or first God in the highest heav{en.} And under him they placed a sphære w^ch they called his garment & under that a sphere of splendor \or light (w^ch Divines call cœlum empyricum & make the seat of y^e {illeg})/ & under that a spaceof the first aer w^ch some \have/ called the {illeg} soul of the world, & \in/ this space they say the ten sephirahs were gradually produced. The first or highest \next under the sphere of splendor/ /The first or highest\ was the sphere called Kether the Crown w^ch e \& the highest crown/ because it encompassed the other nine. This sphere was much less then the sphere of splendor there being a vast empty space between them. And within this sphere were 9 or 10 \the/ spheres of the other nine Sephiroths \the lowest of w^ch was Malcath the kingdom/. These sephiroths they distinguished into two classes, called Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin \the man w^th a g^t face & y^e man w^th a little face/ & in Seir Anpin {illeg} comprended {sic} the seven lower sephiroths & put the names of these seven sephiroths to signify the seven metals. Whence it \it/ seems to me \y^t they {illeg} \made/ the orbs of the seven Planets &/ that this {illeg} Cabbalistical philosophy had it's rise from the {illeg} Aristotles system of the world. He being the master of Alexander the great, his philosophy came into request among \in/ the reign of the successors of Alexander & chiefly \especially in Egypt/ The three superior Sephiras comprehended in Arich Anpin, answer to the Cœlum empyreum the primum mobile & the firmamentū stellatum. And thus the ten sephirahs are nothing else then the intelligences w^ch Aristole {sic} & his successors placed in the \heavenly {illeg} eight/ Orbs of y^e the {sic} Planets & {illeg} fixt stars & to Aristotel made but eight Orbs & then seven of y^e Planets & one of the fixt stars & thence came the ogdoas of Æons as I said above. Hyparchus & Ptolomy added a ninth called the Primum mobile, & P Theologers have added the cœlum empyreum & reccon it the seat of the blessed. The Cabbalists also supposed that the souls of men come down from above & passed into various bodies till they had performed all that they were to do And thus does the philosophy of the Cabbalists agree w^th that of the Gnosticks.

<120v>

For the Gnosticks Simon Menander Nicolas Saturninus Basilides Carpocras, Valentinus, Secundus Ptolomæus Epiphanes Marcus \Heracleon/ Calarbasus Tatian & the Cainites Ophites Sethians Barbelites Phibeonites Militaries &c made many emissions Æons or Deities male & female & derived them from the first God & from one another by generation, \or emission of substanceor vertue/ & from them derived Archangels & Angels & the souls of men & said that the world was made \not by the first God but/ either by the Angels or by one or more of the Æons. And Irenæus tells us {illeg} \And/ placing their \chief/ Æons \with Angels under them/ in the orbs of the seven Planets & fixt stars made an Ogdoas of principal Æons \or intelligencies to to goven {sic} those Orbs with \with/ Angels under them according to the number of the Orbs/ & said that they \{illeg}/ governed the world tyranically & kept the souls of men below & made them pass into various bodies. And that either the supre{me} God or one of the Angels {his} first Æon one of the \highest/ Æons descended \from above the highest heaven/ to teach men their science how \the knowledge by w^ch/ their souls might be saved from y^e power of the tyranny of the Angels & suffered to \enabled to escape them & after death to escape them &/ ascend upwards through the Orbs to their first station \& condition/. [And some of them as Simon Menander Saturninus \Basilides/ Cerdo Marcion Basilides said that this Saviour descended with a putative body & \appeared as a man but/ was not a true man, others as Valentinus & Secundus that in descending \through the orbs/ he framed to himself a ma out of the elements a real body of flesh & bones but was not man & took not \without taking/ flesh of the Virgin & others that {illeg} Valent as the Ebionites Cerinth Nicolaitans \Sethians Ophites/ & Cerinthus, & Carpocras & Valentinus, \& Secundus, & {illeg}/ Epiphanes, & {illeg} Colarbasus & Marcus & {illeg} in general the Nicolaitans with their various sects of Sethians, Ophites, Cainites, Gnosticks proper{ly} so called, Phibionites &c that Christ \the saviour/ descended upon Iesus \the son of Mary/ & did the supernatural works. And some of these as Cerinthus & said that Iesus was the son of Ioseph & Mary, others as the Sethians & Ophites that he was the son of the Virgin Mary by the power of God & others as Valentinus & Secundus that {illeg} he descended from above & in descending thro the orbs formed to himself a bo out of the elements a true body of flesh & bones & f without taking flesh of the Virgin, & Valentinus said that he passed through the Virgin as water through a pipe.] And from their pretending to science & particularly to y^e knowledge w^ch the Saviour came down to teach, \& placing their religion for their salvation in this science/ they were called Gnosticks. And this mystery of iniquity, {illeg} these endless genealogies, these oppositions of science falsly so called these fables, old wives fables, Iewish fables began to work in the Apostles days, & consisted of \of/ the metaphysical theology of the heathens {illeg} & Cabbalists introduced into the Christian religion, ffor & pa & particularly of the Egyptian Chald Pythagoric, Platonic & Cabbalistic transmigration of souls, & of the heathen Gods & Astrological Intelligencies \& Cabbalisticall sephiroths/ seated in the orbs of the starry firmament & seven Planets the first {illeg} Sephiroth called {illeg} Arech Anpin \the man with a great face/ & the seven next Sephiroths called by them Seir Anpin, {illeg} the man with a little face, & ffor |For the Cabbalists put the names of the seven last Sephiroths for the seven {illeg} metals & by consequence by the Cabbalists & {sic} the Gods y^t \to w^ch/ the seven metals are the Gods dedicated are the Gods of the seven planetary orbs| They Cabbalists distinguished their \ten/ Sephiroths into Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin, the man with a great face & the man with a little face [& by Seir \Arich/ Anpin understood the second first or highest sephiroth] & by Arich Seir Anpin |all| \understood/ the seven \lower/ Sepiroths under him that is the {illeg} of seven intelligences in the seven Planetary orbs, |& these of answered in number to the or Gods of the Planetary orbs ffor as the Gr. & Latins put the names of the seven Planets for the seven metals so the Cabbalists put the names of the seven last sephiroths for the seven metals the sephiroth or sephirots above the Planetary orbs intelligences| & because the Astronomers make a by Arich Anpin the hi first or highest Sephiroths of the Sephiroths, {illeg} answering to the {illeg} sephiro intelligences, in the starry firma \in the heaven or heavens/ above the Planetary orbs. ffor This \8^th/ heaven till the after the days of Alexander the great was \was at first called only {sic}/ \reputed called/ only the starry firmament, but Pt Hypparchus & Ptolomy added added a distinguished it into the starry \firmament & the primum mobile &/ heaven, the cœlum empyreum \crystallinum/ & the primum mobile \& others the Theologers added the cœlum empyreum/ And so Which made up the number of ten Sephirots, {illeg} \the/ three \first/ of w^ch were comprehended in the {illeg} Arich Anpin, the supreme God w^th these three \& the seven last in Seir Anpin/] |& {sic}| Theologers gave the name of cœlum empyreum to the infinite immoveable space beyond the primum mobile & so made up the number of ten heavens with their Sephiroths the three first of w^ch were comprehended in Arich Anpin & the seven last in Seir Anpin. ffor the Cabbalists refer the three first Sephiroths called Kether Cochma & Binah to Arich Anpin & so \have/ turned the Ogdoas into a Decas of Æons. |And| The Gnosticks were apt to increased the number of their gods \Æons/ & \more then/ the Cabbalists might do the like did, making them at length as many as days in the month or year, & placing many of them above the Planetary Orbs.

<121v>

The religion of the Encratites was set up on foot \{illeg}/ by Tatian & Montanus, (two Gnosticks). {illeg} And the superstions {sic} \religion/ of the Moncks were \is/ of the same kind, but more absurd. Monckery was {illeg} set up in Egypt by Antony & soon after in Syria by Hilarion, & spread so much that in the reign of Valen soon after the reign of Iulian the apostate a third part of Egypt was the wildernesses of Egypt wer a third part of the Egyptians were got into the deserts of Egypt. They lived first singly in cells, then associated into small companies & cænobia & at {last} length came into towns, & filled the churches with bishops presbyters & deacons. Athanasius finding the Athanasius finding |Athanasius in his younger days poured water upon the hands of his master Antony poured wa| \He/ was first a monck then a Deacon & then a bishop & finding the Moncks faithful to him made many of them bishops & Presbyters in Egypt & these bishops erected Monasteries in their cities, out of w^ch they chose Presbyters & sent bishops to other cities. And the like was done in Syria. Spiridion \& Epiphanius/ of Cyprus, & Iames of Nisibis were both moncks & bishops in the time of the council Cyril of Ierusalem, \Eustachius of Sebastia in Armenia/ Eusebius of Emissa, Titus of Bostra{illeg}, Basilius of Ancyra, Acacius of Cæsarea were both Bishops & Moncks. Epiphanius \in Palæstine/ Elpidius of Laodicæa Melitius, & \&/ Flavian \& Chrysostom/ of Antioch, Theodorus of Tyre, Protogenes of Carrhæ, Acacius of Berekæa, Theodotus of Hierapolis Eusebius of Chalcedon, Amphilochius of Iconium were both bishops & moncks. \Eustachius Sebastenus/ Basil, Gregory Nazianzen \&/ Gregory Nyssen & Eustathius Sebastenus had monasteries by \of Clergymen in/ their cities, & propa were the first who propagated the this sort of Monkery in Cappado Armenia \Cappadocia/ & Asia minor. \Pontus/ And Eusebius Vercellensis, Hilary & Martin were the first who {illeg} carried this sort of Monckery into the west & Austin carried it into Afric, All & all these being |both| bishops & moncks erected monasteries of clergymen in their cities out of \w^ch/ bishops were sent to other cities who in like manner erected monasteries in their cities w till the churches were supplied with Bishops & Presbyters out of the monasteries & Whence Ierom saith of in a letter written about the year 385^[4] saith of the Clergy: Quasi et ipsi aliud sint quam Monachi & non quicquid in Monachos dicitur non redundit in Clericos qui patres sunt Monachorum Detrimentum pecoris pastoris ignominia est. And in his book against Vigilantius Quid facient Orientis Ecclesiæ? quid Æypti & sedis Apostolicæ? quæ aut virgines Clericos accipiunt, aut continentes, aut si uxores habuerint mariti esse desistunt.

Thus the encratites invaded the Chur\c/hes of God & got the Empire into their hands. And now you may understand the meaning of the Apostles words where he saith. ^[5]Now the spirit speeaks expresly that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits & doctines of ghosts: speaking lies in hypocrisy (in their legends & figments of miracles done by y^e dead) having consciences seared as with a hot iron: forbidding to marry & commanding to abstain from meats w^ch God hath created to be received w^th thanksgiving of them who beleive & know the truth. For every creature of God is good & nothing to be refused if it be received w^th thanksgiving.

<122r>

the days of Iustin Martyr notwithstanding \without falling out about/ their different opinions. ffor when Trypho y^e Iew put Iustin upon proving that Iesus Christ was God before the world began & was afterwards born & became a man: Iustin makes this \in returning an/ answer \subjoins./ Veruntamen, O Tripho, non perierit illud, Christum hunc esse Dei, si demonstrare nequeam, et fuisse prius filium conditoris universitatis hujus Dei, esseqꝫ Deum, & genitum esse hominem ex virgine; sed hoc tantum ex omnibus \præ/ ostensis \probarem/ quod hic est Christus Dei, quicunqꝫ tandem sit. Quod si non demonstravero inquam, eum et prius extitisse Sed ex \omni/ præ ostenso \[sequatur tantum]/ quod hic est Chistus {sic} Dei, quicunqꝫ tandem sit. Quod Sic autem non demonstravero, inquam, eum et prius extitisse et nasci hominem sustinuisse ijsdem nobiscum passionibus obnoxium, carnem habentem secundum Patris consilium & voluntatem: in eo ipso tantum æquum fuerit me errore lapsum esse dicere, non autem negare hunc esse Christum illum, etiamsi \si modo/ tanquam homo ex hominibus genitus, videatur \esse appareat/ et electione Christus factus esse ostendatur. Sunt enim aliqui, O amici, ex genere nostro, profitentes hunc esse ipsum Christum esse, sed hominem tamen ex hominibus genitum affirmantes: quibus non assentior, neqꝫ id sane multi, qui in eadem mecum sententia sunt, dixerint Iustin. Dial. cum Tryphon p. 267

The Christians therefore who beleived that Christ was before the world began, were much the greater number {illeg} in the days of Iustin Martyr but did not \yet/ looke upon the \Christians of the/ other \party \Christians/ opinion/ as hereticks On|r| the contrary they looked upō \think/ the difference between the two opinions as not material to the truth of the Christian religion. And And in this state things continued till the days of Victor. ffor Victor excommunicated one Theodotus \a Tanner/ for affirming that Christ was a mere man born of the virgin Mary by the power of the holy Ghost, & elected for his justice & vertue. And henceforward those of this opinion were accounted hereticks & Theodotus was accounted the first author of the heresy. \the P/ But those \who/ beleived Christ to be but a mere man \&^e[6] particularly the followers of Artemon)/ represented that this was the doctrine of the Christians till y^e times of Victor & that from y^e times of his successor Zepherinus (in whose days also Artemon was condemned for in y^e east for y^e like opinion) the truth was adulterated.

Also the Church of Rome in the days of Pope Victor began to lay stress upon \contend about place religion in/ ceremonies & to err in the faith. ffor this Pope excommunicated the Churches of Asia for keeping Easter upon the 14^th day of the first month of the Iewish year \a thing in its own nature indifferent/ & wrote communicatory letters to y^e Churches Churches of the Montanists in Asia & Phygia {sic}, & then turned {illeg} Patripassian \&/ recalled those letters, as Tertullian a Montanist in his book against Praxeas written about the year 201 thus mentions. – – – – – – – crucifixit. The Predecessors of Victor who had opposed the Montanists were Soter & Eleutherus. ffor Soter wrote against them at their first rise, & Irenæus was sent to Rome by the church of Lyons to conferr w^th Eleutherus against them. And therefore Victor was the first B^p of Rome who turned Montanist. |He seems to have closed with the Montanists of Asia & Phrygia in opposition to the \true/ Church {illeg} he excommunicated.|

The changes therefore wrought in the Church of Rome by Pope Victor in respect of the faith were so very great that we may begin the third state or age of the church with y^e Papacy of \{S^t}/ Victor or reign of the Emperor Severus.

<122v>

And this is to be understood as well of the Christians of y^e circumcision as of the Christians of the uncircumcision. ffor Iustin Martyr in his Dialogue w^th Tryphon written between the years 140 & 148 \150/, represents that Christian \circumcis/ Iews might keep the law \& circumcise their children/ but Christian Gentiles might not. \His words are:/ Si ipsi [Iudæi] propter animi imbecilitatem, etiam quæcunqꝫ nunc possunt ex Mosæ constitutionibus, quæ ob duritiam p cordis populi sancita esse intelligimus, unà cum concepta in hunc Christum spes atqꝫ perpetuis naturâqꝫ comparatis justitiæ et religionis veræ actionibus, servare, & cum Christianis fidelibusqꝫ vivere voluerint; ut modo illis non suadeant pariter \cum eis/ circumcidi ac sabbata agere aliaqꝫ quæcunqꝫ tandem sunt ejusmodi, exequi: eos recipiendos & ad communionem verū omnium ut fratres, eorundemqꝫ viscerum homines, admittendos esse censuerim. Sin qui generis vestri sunt, in hunc Christum se credere asseverantes, O Trypho, dixi omnibus modis secundum legem per Mosem latam eos vivere cogant qui ex gentibus in hunc Christū credunt; aut a consuetudinis istiusmodi commercio eos excludere statuant \cum illis qui sic instituuntur communicare recusant/: consimiliter et hos non susceperim. Eos vero qui (ex gentibus fideles) qui {illeg} observatione in Christum professionis, in legalem cum illis {illeg} consentiant politiam, itidem non salvari putem. \Thus/ And this I account the state of the Church till |the death of Iustin & & {sic} Polycarp &| the days of Pope Eleutherus catholic in point of \the faith &/ communion \{illeg} beleiving Iews & {Gentiles} /of the churches\/ till the days of death of In the days death of Iustin & the days of Pope Eleutherus & his successor Victor. For about that time they some Christians began to make additions to their creed \mixing strong meats with the milk w^ch was to be given to babes./ There wa And particularly in opposition to the Gnosticks who denyed the resurrection of the body & maintained that the souls of men after various transmigrations returned into God, some Latines began to add y^e resurrection of the body & the life everlasting to the end of their Creed, & some Greeks Gree in opposition to y^e Ebionites some Greeks began to insert the creation of the world by Iesus Christ. \& thus by/ mixing strong meats w^th y^e milk w^ch was to be given to babes they

For the Ebionites \& Nazarenes/ beleived that Christ \Iesus/ was a mere man who for his \{supreme}/ vertue was chosen before other men & annoninted King of the Iews by y^e spirit & thence called the Messiah or Christ that is the annointed. And the Nazarenes were of the same opinion in the days of the Apostles. But after the calling of the Gentiles \& the days of y^e Council of Ierusalem/ when \part of/ the Nazarenes ou to s endeavoured to impose the law upon \the Gentiles as necessary to salvation/ them |& part of them complied with the decree of y^e Council of Ierusalem about this matter| & refused to communicate with them upon other terms, & these became y^e Ebionites & part of them communicated w complied with the con communicated with the Gentiles with uncircumcision. \And/ These two parties lived together in the Church of Ierusalem under Iames & Symeon till the destruction of that city dispersion of y^e Iews & then the Nazarenes who refused to converse w^th the Churches of the uncircumcision gained the Name of Ebionites & the other Nazarene mixed by degeres w^th y^e Churches of the

For like the \in the first age of Christianity/ days of Iustin Martyr [there \were/ Christians {illeg} who beleived that y^e world was created by Iesus Christ, &] there \were/ Christians \(especially among the Iews)/ who beleived that I Iesus took his beginning from the Virgin Mary, & \for his vertue/ was chosen before other men for his vertue & was chosen \therefore/ annointed king of the Iews by the Holy Ghost & thence called the Messiah or Christ that is the annointed, & there were other Christians \(especially among the Gentiles)/ who beleived that Iesus was before the creation of the {sic} world \began/ & that the world was created by him. And these two sorts of Christians conversed \together as friends brethren/ & communicated with one another \as members of the Catholick Ch./ {illeg} till

<122Ar>

⊡ – \holy/ men. The Iews who first published \Talmudists in setting down/ the measures of Herods Temple, omitted some measures from north to south on either side of the altar, & the following \later/ Iewish writers dividing the summ of the omitted cubits into two equal parts \have/ placed the altar nearer to the south side of the Temple \Priests court/ then to the north side: whereas they should have divided that summ unequally so that the altar might have stood in the center of the court. The altar was 32 cubits broad & between it & the little rail on the north side were {many} \24/ rings in the pavement for tying down the sacrifices to be slain. From the altar to y^e rings was a space of eight cubits. The space of the rings took up 24 cubits & there were two cubits more to the little rail. And on the south side of the altar there was a slooping {sic} ascent to y^e altar without steps. This ascent took up 30 cubits upon the pavement & there remained a space of four cubits more to the little rail. And thus much concerning the Temple. It remains that we see &c

<122Av>

Solis semi \vero/ diameter mediocris apparens {illeg} 32' 15" \& parallaxis horizontalis mediocris 10" usurpari /potest\/. Lunæ semi diameter mediocris apparens in Octantibus syzygij 31' 30", in Quadraturis vero 31'.3 & parallaxis horizontalis \mediocris/ in syzygijs 57. 30 in quadraturis 55 40, in Octantibus 57. 5

<123r>

What the Ebionites meant by the first of these three opinions I do not well understand unless perhaps \they meant/ that Christ was the Adam Kadmon \or first Man/ of the Cabbalists, that is, their first Sephiroth or Æon called {illeg} by them Cochmah the Crown or {illeg} supreme beginn Æon \Sephiroth/ & by the Gnosticks Αρχὴ the beginning or Principle. But be that as it will it is manifest that the Ebionites according to all the three opinions here ascribed to them taught that Christ was as old as the creation of y^e world, & according to the second & third opinion \& perhaps y^e 1^st also that/ he was above the \Angels &/ the Archangels & reigned over them, & all things else from the beginning [[ & at {legth} |so with by the Cabbalists must be taken for Adam Kadmon & by all th| not inferior either in time or dominion to the Adam Kadmon of the Cabbalists, or to the Angel of Gods presence in the scriptures.] And tho they called him a creature |said that he was created| yet they \those of y^e second sort/ me\a/nt not surely \not/ that he was a created out of nothing but rather that he was the firs the first begotten of every creature [& ἡ ἀρχὴ της κτίσεως του θεου {illeg} And yet the Ebionites of third so the princ \the/ beginning of the creation of God. A T Those of the [Now whilst \if/ this was the doctrine of theEbionites much more did the Nazarenes think honourably of Christ & make him before all things & above all things.] Those of the third sort in \not/ saying that he was not the generated of God the father but created, might meane at first \in those days/ that he was not generated of the virgin \Mary/ by the power of God but of Ioseph & Mary by the ordinary course of nature, or they might mean that he was not generated before the world began \in the manner of the heathen Gods/ by prolation emanation projection but produced by such a power as they called formation out of something {illeg} w^ch & we should rather call generation then creation.] & those of the third that he was ἡ ἀρχὴ της κτίσεως του θεου would no \& those of the third that he/ did not say that he was \not/ generated after the manner of the {illeg} heathen Gods or by emission of of {sic} substance. & those of the third that he was not generated in \the/ usual signification of the word, that is, by emission of the fathers substance, \as men are generated &/ as the heathens supposed their Gods to be generated. The main difference between the Ebionites \was/ in {sic} their opinions about Christ {illeg} about in {sic} incarnation of this X^t some of them sa] & came down from heaven & was either incarnate of y^e virgin or descended upon Iesus. |And whereas they said that he was created they meant only that he was not generated in the sense of y^e words then in use.|

<123v>

And if the Ebionites took Christ \made Christ as old as the creation & took him/ to be the supreme being next under the father \& Lord of the Universe/ much more did the Nazarenes. ffor the Nazarenes generally took called X^t y^e son of God w^ch those Nazare Ebionites who said that Iesus was y^e son of Ioseph, did not. Those \Ebionites/ saidthat Ionly \that/ Iesus was the son of God by election & by the descent of Christ upon him, but they allowed no generation of Christ as the Nazarenes did, & therefore the nor did they |say| \say with the Naz/ that Christ suffered on the cross & rose again from the dead. & therefore These things they attributed only to Iesus the son of Ioseph & Mary & said [& if at any time they called him Iesus Christ they] that isbut therefore the Nazarenes who said that Christ \(meaning what we call the divine nature)/ was the son of God & suffered & rose again & ascended, were of the opinion of those who beleived that Christ came down from heaven, took flesh of the Virgin by the power of God & thereby he became a man \& was born of her & being/ & {sic} suffered & rose again from the dead & ascended where he was before, & by reason of his supernatural incarnation was called the son of God.

Vpon the com Iewish war commencing, the Christian Iews fled from Ierusalem into \other countries & chiefly into/ Peræa on the eastern side of Iordan. No And there they acquired the name of Ebionites, being con being called \Ebionites/ so by them selves \& their freinds/ & Nazarenes by \their enemies/ the Ie unbeleiving Iews. ffor they gloried in y^e name of Ebionites & said that they knew of no such man as Ebion, but but {sic} from the times of y^e Apostles had releived distributed what they had \their goods to the poor/ to y^e poor & so bei by that means being generally poor \impoverished/ were called Ebionites from the heb word Ebion w^ch in their language signifies a poor man. And divers among them being so zealous of the law as not only to observe it themselves but also to impose it on the \converted/ Gentiles Christians & th these zelots also falling into the opinion that Christ descended upon Iesus the son of Ioseph & Mary, the name of Ebionites at length degenerated into the name of this heresy, the nam this heresy denoting those Iews. But however |those only being called Ebionites who said that Iesus was the son of Ioseph & Mary & that Christ descended upon Iesus, that is the divine nature upon the humane. And from all this| it is hence manifest that of the Iews of the circumcision Christians of the Church of Ierusalem \whether Ebionites or others/ beleived from the beginning that Christ was from the \time of the/ creation a a being superior to the Angels & Archangels & at length came down from heaven & either was incarnate or descended upon Iesus. And this faith spread from Ierusalem into all the earth. By the descending of X^t upon Iesus they meant * < insertion from lower down f 123v > * in our language < text from higher up f 123v resumes > the descent of the divine nature upon the humane

Also what the Seigniorage has been deteined for seigniorage & for the charge of the first melting \according to the rules of the mint/ & whether all the rest have been pai delivered out of the Mint to the Paymasters: & if not, then who has had the profit made by the lightness & coarsness of the two ryall pieces \new money/ & how the Queen must have satisfaction. Also what evidence the Paymasters have (suppose by the books of the Mint & of the Melter or by Receipts or Certificates or living witnesses) that they have / I suspect that the Mint Master has paid out five two Ryal pieces for every ounce standard received {illeg} that is \coined or/ an hundred for every twenty ounces & deteined 3 or 4 or perhaps 5 peices for seigniorage: whereas in every twenty ounces of Ingot produces about 110 two Ryall pieces \If this be so, then/ Inquiry should be made about the excess above Who has had the profit of the excess remainder. For every \twenty/ ounces of Ingot produces about 110 two ryal pieces.

<123Av>

The word w^ch was in the beginning with God was

That this word was not an emanation or emission or λόγος {illeg} ἐνδιάθετος ἢ προφορικὸς but a pro a thing emitted without a proper & distinck {sic} will & understanding but a person or Being with a proper will & understanding. Λ {sic} [not the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος ἢ προφοικὸς {illeg} {sometime} but a person] or substance \Being/ with a proper will & understanding.]

but also to avoid the communion of the churches of y^e Gentiles who did not observe it, they were \censured by those Churches/ for this separation & distinguished

And these Iews \even from the days of the Apostles/ being for the most part so zealous of y^e law as not only |{illeg}| to observe it themselves but also to avoid the communion of y^e Churches of y^e gentiles who did not observe it, they were for this separation censured by|&| con {sic} condemned by the Churches of the Gentiles & at length distinguished from the rest of the Nazarenes by the Name of Ebionites. ffor Ierome {illeg} tells us y^t the Ebionites were anathematized by the fathers for this alon nothing else but mingling the law with the Gospel.

Chap XVI
Of the contest between the host of heaven and the transgressors of the holy covenant.

We have \hitherto/ described the state of the {illeg} Host of heaven or Church of God down from the days of the Apostles {illeg} to the times in w^ch of those {illeg} men who introduced \in which/ the invocation of Saints called by Daniel the transgression of desolation \began to be introduced/. It remains that we shew how the authors of this worship \invocation/ separated from the Church of God, made war upon her & \&/ set up an antichurch of transgressors. For the transgressors who trode under In the reign of the Emperor Iulian the apostate A.C. 362 Athanasius & about 14 or 16 other excommunicated Bishops, most of them of Egypt returning from banishment fro the Host of heaven & the sanctuary {illeg} \under foot/ must of necessity be a distinct body of men from the host which they trampled upon. And the transgressors who set up \authors of/ the invocation of Saints separated from the Church \of God & oppressed her/ at the same time that they set up that transgression

In the reign of the Emperor Iulian the apostate A.C. 362, Athanasius & about fourteen or sixteen other excommunicated bishops, most of them of Egypt, returning from banishment,

{illeg}

{illeg}p tot:: AB−EF. AB. Et p tot. resist:: AB+EF. AB−EF
p columnæ resist:: AB+EF. AB. Velocitas cadendo ab I ad H acquisita.
$\sqrt{\mathrm{IH.}}$ $\sqrt{\mathrm{IG::}}$ ☉EF. ☉AB:: IJ. IO:: IO. IG.

<125v>

understand that the party of Athanasius was very small & the {illeg} first half of t some part of the reign of Valens & that those who {illeg} ans were more numerous & those whom they called Arians and {illeg} at that time the \{flourishing}/ religion of the eastern Empire; You may & that the {illeg} \{illeg}/ {illeg} (except the d church of Millain) in the \first/ three or four first {years of} Valentinian & Valens returned to the homousian faith & embraced the com{munion} of both the Athanasians & Macedonians without medling with the {illeg} dispute between them concerning the holy deity of the holy Ghost; but \w^th {illeg}/ at {length he} declared for the Athanasians & threatned to turn the Macedonians out of their bishopricks if they did not come over to the faith of three persons & one God, they were all \And at the same time one or more Councils in Spain declared for the same faith./ And from this time forward, that is during the last six or seven years of the the reign of Valens there was a very sharp contention.

One of his

He was accused of killing by the Meletians of killing Arsenius, {illeg} one of their bishops & of seueral other crimes & condemned for them – – – – – – – in his own defence this Council wrote also to the Churches in defense of Athanasius & in their Letter represent that Arsenius was alive & desired to be joyned in communion with them, & did not expect other testimony but to prove that he was alive but he himself confessed in his letters that he was alive by his letters w^ch he wrote to our bishop Athanasius whom they affirmed to be his murderer. Nor were they|ose| \wicked men/ ashamed to charge him with killing a man who was {illeg} at so great a distance from us by land & sea, & whose place of abode at that time was known to no man. Yea they dared to hide him & make him disappear when he had suffered nothing And if it could have been, they would have translated him into another world, or rather have killed him that they might have killed Athathanasius {sic} either by objecting either a true or feigned murder. But \herein/ thanks be to y^e divine providence which suffered nothing unjust to prevail, but produced Arsenius alive [\vizt/ by his letters] before the eyes of all men & manifestly convicted them of reprehended \reproved/ their conspiracy & calumny. For he does not avoid us as his murderers nor hates us as injurious to him. ffor he hath suffered no harm at all, but desires to join in communion with us, & wishes to be amongst us, as his letters testify as he hath written in his Letter. This was all that Athanasius & 90 bishops of Egypt & Libya had at that time to say of this matter. \for Athanasius/ /themselves.\ They knew nothing of the hand of Arsenius in a bag or of his appearing alive at m \before/ y^e Council of Tyre \otherwise then by his Letters/. Al On the contrary they say that Arsenius confessed by his Letter to Athanasius expected no then his |expected staid for no other testimonies of his being alive besides the| Letter w^ch he had sent to Athanasius {illeg} & by which he {illeg} exprest his desire to be amongst them. This This letter it seems was produced at the Council of Tyre to prove that Arsenius was alive & th{illeg}e was Bishops of Egypt still \in this Council of Alexandria/ insisted upon it as a sufficient proof of this matter \his being alive & of his ✝/ < insertion from lower down f 125v > ✝ desire to be amongst them: w^ch is a demonstration that he was not yet amongst them & that they had no better evidence of his being alive & desiring to be amongst them then this Letter. The letter is extant in the apology of Athanasius against the Arians & has an air of fiction. And if Arsenius had appeared alive before the Council of Tyre it is not to be imagined that the Council would have persisted in condeming them for the murder or that Athanasius would have fled from the Council or been banished by the Emperor Constantine. When Athanasius was \first/ accused of killing Arsenius he made the Emperor beleive that Arsenius was alive. But Arsenius not appearing the Emperor commanded that the cause should be heard before the Council of           Athanasius came not & & {sic} the Emperor the next year commanded that y^e cause should be heard before y^e Council of Tyre & threatned Athanasius that if he would not goe thither he should send him thither \be carried/ by force. Athanasius then went with a great multitude of Egyptians. The Council heard the cause between him & his accusers & for their further satsfaction sent six of their number into Egypt to inform themselves upon the spot. Vpon the report of the six bishops Athanasius fled to the Emperor. The Council sent some of their number to acquaint the Emperor with their proceedings, & upon hearing the whole matter the Emperor banished Athanasius into Gallia & five years after {illeg} five years \more/ Athanasius & \the/ 90 bishops of Egypt Libya made the defence above mentioned. But no one witness wa is named in history who had ever seen Arsenius alive after Athanasius was accused of killing him. < text from higher up f 125v resumes > : w^ch they would not have done if they could have proved it by living witnesses \is a demonstration that they had no other evidence/

When the Easter next after these Councils of Antioch & Alexandria approched, the eastern Emperor Constantius sent Gregory to Alexandria – – – – – – – Greek Church over her own members

But after the reign of the Emperors Constantius & Iulian, Pope Liberius revolted

Some bishops were{illeg} also banished in Egypt for no adhering to Athanasius \& making disturbances/, & on these accounts the Emperor has been railed at as a great persecutor tho he was the mildest & most pious \of a very mild & pious temper/

<126r>

about 10 years after the Council of Sirmium] By his making the {body} of Christ to be moved & actuat{ed} by the Word without any other a humane soul you may know what was the opinion of the Patripassians Sabellius Noetus Praxeas \Hermogenes/ & the rest touching the incarnation

The Council of Antioch w^ch condemned Paul represented that he fell into the heresy of Artemas [And Artemas \(called also Artemon)/ was condemned as a heretick about 50 or 60 \or perhaps 70/ years before. And if Theodotus the Tanner \whom Pope Victor condemned/ was the same man with Theodotus the Cataphrygian he might not differ much \in opinion from/ from the opinions of Montanus \Æschines/ Artemas & Paul] & Artemas flourished in the reigh of Severus or soon after. And

Eustathius \the disciple of Mon/ bishop of Antioch was deposed for Sabellianism A.C. 328 & banished by the Emperor Constantine the great. He was

The Iews of the circumcision called Ebionites many of the Nazare \& some of the Nazarenes/ held that Christ was a mere man & therefore received not the writings of Iohn in w^ch he is called the λόγος. Of the same opinion were also some Christians of the uncircumcision called Alogi by Epiphanius. The Ebionites were such as the Apostle Paul reprehends for imposing the law upon the Gentiles. |For they arose from the Christians of the circumcision who fled to Pella upon the sige of Ierusalem & they were a branch of the Church of Ierusalem under Iames &| They communicated w^th the Churches of the circumcision (                 ) but were schismaticks for refusing to communicate w^th Christians of the uncircumcision. The Nazarenes & Alogi continued in communion w^th the Churches of the uncision {sic} till about the end of the second century. For Iustin Martyr tells u in his dialogue against Tryphon tells us speaks to him in this manner,^[7] Verum enim vero, Trypho, dixi, non perierit illud Christum hunc esse Dei si demonstrare nequeam et fuisse prius filium conditoris universitatis esseqꝫ Deum et genitum esse hominem ex virgine: sed suffic{illeg} {illeg} |ex omni demonstrat{illeg} sequatum tantum| quod hic sit Christus Dei quicunqꝫ tandem fuerit. At si non demonstravero inquam, eum et prius extitisse et nasci hominem sustinuisse – – – – – – – qui in eadem mecum sententia sunt dixerint. And a little after the death of Iustin |The Alogi therefore were not yet accounted hereticks. Ephiphanius {sic} tells us that this heresy arose after that of the Cataphygians {sic}, that is, they began then to be accounted hereticks. But I do not find that they were| when Theodotus the currier of Byzantium was dep condemned by Pope Victor for holding Christ to be a mere man & \soon after I think in the days of Zepherin the successor of Victor/ Artemon the master of Theodotus was deposed comned {sic} in the days of soon after by the Greeks for y^e same error, \I think in the days of Zepherin the successor of Victor/ they alled their disciples alledged that their opinion was most ancient taught by the Apostles & first Christians & the truth of the doctrine preached was conserved to y^e days of pope Victor, but from the days of his successor Zepherin was adulterated. Yet I do not find that Theod Artemon & Theodotus were of the same opinion with the Ebionites & Alogi. These one last rejected the λόγος & the writings of Iohn, the former {illeg} (so far as I can find) owned both. but held that Christ was a mere man inhabited by the λόγος. ffor Epiphanius argues against them \Theodotus/ out of the writings of Iohn concerning the λόγος. If \this/ Theodotus was the same with Theodotus the Cataphrygian, \& Artemon was Artemas the master of Paul of Samosat,/ they might be of the same opinion with Paul of Samosat Marcellus & Photinus. For Theodotus & Artemas or Artemon & Paul & Marcellus & Photinus are all of them equally accused of making Christ a mere man. By which opinion I conceive they meant that Iesus was a mere man inhabited by the λόγος as a Prophet is influenced by the holy Ghost.

For the hereticks thinking it below the dignity of the principal Gods – – – –

And about this time the bishops began to meet in councils in Asia & Afric

{illeg} of God the God of God the son our Lord Iesus Christ, the God {illeg}

☉ \{illeg} church or/ distinguished from other Christians by any proper name before th till Epiphanius gave them the name of Alogi. About the time that this heresy is said to have risen Theo because of their not receiving the writings of Iohn concerning the λογος \gave them the name {illeg} Alogi/. For it was late before all the writings of the new Testam^t were generall {sic} received. About Neare the end of the second century when this heresy is said to have risen Theodotus the Currier of Byzantium ––

<126v>

Some of the Gnosticks derived [as Marcion & Va{lentine} {illeg} Gods {illeg} Bythos & Sige or Depth & Silence & feigning the {illeg} & produced the λόγος or word by speaking \& this act they call the generation of the Son/. An{illeg} in general that in explaining the generation of the Son they co{mpare} {illeg} him to a word spoken by a man [Iren. l. 2. c. 45.] But yet they make him not a vanishing voice but a permanent being emission.

Of the host of heaven

Marcellus bishop of Ancyra \the metropolis of Galatia/ was deposed by the Council of Constantinople A.C. 336 & again by the Council of Antioch A.C. 341 for holding the opinions of Paul of Samosat & Sabellius. His opinions are described He wrote against      [& H|h|is opinions are recited out of this \of his own/ book by Eusebius Pamphili who wrote thre books against him, were as follows: That the Word of God w^ch was eternally in \God/ the father as a mans reason or wisdom is in a man without a proper substance. That before the beginning there was rest & quietness in God (called silence by the Valent some of the Gnosticks) the Word being with him inwardly & nothing existing then but God. That |when all things were to be made he came out of the father with an operating power, & became Verbum prolativum & that| all things were made by this word & that this Word is called an angel by Moses, & that his coming out of the father w^th an operating power to create the world is not called his nativity nor constitutes him the son of God but only the word of God. That this word assumed flesh & was united to it & was born with humane flesh of the Virgin, & by this nativity became the son of God & the son of man, being only the Word of God before |& that before this nativity he was not the son of God nor the image of God but by means of his \{visible}/ body became the image of the invisible God.| And that the word was in the body only by an operative vertue to move it & do those things w^ch are related in the gospels being united in joined in substance to God as his word inseparable & undistinguishable from him. And that he must reign till he hath put all things under his feet & then become subject to the father & be in the father as before his incarnation, being {separed} from \relinquishing/ y^e flesh or body w^ch he had assumed. And for these opinions he was deposed by the council convened at Constantinople out of Pontus, Cappadocia, Asia, Phrygia, By|i|thi|y|nia, Thrace & other remoter regions.]

His opinions as they are are recited out of his own book by Eusebius & were these. That there was \is/ but one single substance of the Deity \God & his Word/ & that before the creat beginning God was alone & there was rest & quietness & there was nothing but God. ffor & the \word/ was in him & with him inwardly as from all eternity as a mans reason & understanding is in a man without a proper substance & there was rest & quietness {like} \{illeg}/ (the Sige \Silence/ of the Gnosticks)]) & when all things were to be made the word came out of God with an operating power & became Verbum prolativum, & by him all things were made & he is called an Angel by Moses but had no proper substance. That this Word assumed flesh, was united to & it & born with it of the Virgin & by this birth became the Son of God & the son of Man, being only the Word before this nativity. That his visible body & not the word alone was the image of the invisible God |& the image of the God the invisible God, being neither the son of God nor the image of God but only the Word before this nativity. That the| Word was in the body only by an operative vertue to move it & do those things w^ch are related in the Gospels, being joined in substance to God as his Word . \& {mind}/ inseparable & undistinguishable from him. And that he must reign \in the body/ till he hath put all things under his feet & \& after the day of judgment/ then |yⁿ| become subject to the father & be in the father as before his incarnation, relinquishing the body w^ch he had assumed. And for these opinions he was deposed \in the reign of Constantine the great/ by the Council of convened at Constantinople out of the bishops of Asi Pontus, Cappadocia, Asia, Phygia {sic} Bithynia, Thrace & other remoter regions. And about seven or eight years before \his disciple Eustathius bishop of Antioch was/ was {sic} condemned \of Sabellianism about seven or eight years before/ by the Council of Antioch & banished by Constantine the great. And Photinus another of his disciples was condemned of the same

<127r>

The Cabbalists called ther distinguished their ten sephiroths into two ranks classes called which they called Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin the man with a great face & the man with a little face, & by Seir Anpin understood the seven lower Sephiroths, & \by their names/ called the seven metalls by the names of these {illeg} sephirahs & therefore took them \for the Gods of the metalls & by consequence/ for the intelligences seated in the orbs of the seven Planets, & Arich Anpin for Whence Arich Anpin must be seated in the hi eighth heaven above the \orbs of y^e/ Planets. This eighth heaven In this heaven above y^e firmament of the fixed stars P Hipparchus & Ptolomy have placed a primum mobile & Theologers above that Theologers have placed a|n| \infinite & immoveable/ cœlum empyreum the seat of the blessed & to these three orbs answer the three first sephiroths Kether Cochmah & Binah conteined in Arich Anpin. The first |of| them is supposed infinite & called Kether the crown to denote that it encompasses all the rest. Let this systeme be compared with the systeme of Ogdoas of the Cabbalis Gnosticks. For \some of/ the Gnosticks |have| placed more then one Æon in the heaven above the Orbs of the seven Planets

The Cabbalists placed the root & fountain of the Sephiroths above & said that the first sephiroth Kether was a sphære w^ch comprehended the other nine sephirahs & {illeg} was there called the highest crown     the

– \infinite/ retracted himself from a great spherical space in w^ch he designed to form y^e world create the worlds, [& emitted gradually into this space ten subordinate emanations w^ch they callled – – – in scripture deified] \first Being./ Next under God they placed a sphere w^ch they called his garment & next under that sph a sphere of splendor or light \[the cœlum empyreum or seat of the blessed]/, & under [\that/ a space of the first aer {illeg} w^ch they called Tohu. And under] that a large empty sphere & under that the sphere of the {illeg} & under that the sphere of the {illeg} first sephiroth called \Cochmah/ the crown highest Crown because it encompassed the other nine. And the lowest wor last world called Asia & mundus fabricationis they \some of them/ said was the {animate} corporeal world of the spheres or cælestial orbs & all \corporeal/ things therein to the very center of the earth |& some of the oldest of the Cabalistical writers now extant said that the Sun Moon & Planets were moved by intelligences. Whence| Whence {sic} I gather that they received the Aristotelick systeme of the heavens, & that their Sephiroths were originally the \supreme/ intelligences w^ch Aristotel placed in the sp\ph/eres {sic} to move them, {illeg} & their mundus & the world Briah was the system of Intelligences under them & the world Iezirah the system of Angels under them. ffor they distinguisehd the sephiroths into two classes w^ch \they/ called Seir \Arich/ Anpin & Seir Anpin, the man w^th a great face & the man w^th a little face & by Seir in Seir Anpin comprehended the seven lower sephiroths & called the seven metals by the names of these seven Sephiroths. Whence I gather that these seven Sephirots were originally the Gods to w^ch the heathens dedicated the seven metals & the seven Planets or \&/ w^ch Aristotel called intelligences & seated in the Orbs of the seven Planets to move them. And hence came the philosophy of the Gnosticks who placed an Ogdoas of Æons in the orbs of the seven Planets & the \heaven above them or the/ starry firmament. By Arich Anpin they understood the first Sephiroth Kether called Kether the crown because the starry firmament was the highest \Orb/ {illeg} & encompassed the system of y^e Planets. Aristotle made only these eight heavens supposing the starry firmament to be the first mover but later Astronomers {illeg} have distinguished this heaven into two or more heavens more orbs then one placing the first mover above the starry firmament & the cœlum crystallinum between them & accordin accordingly some refer the second & third Sephiroths to Arich Anpin. And as the

And if the theology of the cabbalists be {illeg} compared with that of the Gnosticks it {illeg} will appear that the Cabbalists were Iewish Gnosticks & the Gnosticks were Christian Cabbalists. For as the Gnosticks placed their Æons in the Orbs of the stars & Planets so did the Cabbalists their Sephiroths, They pla following therein the doctrine of Aristotel who placed Intelligences in the planet Planetary Orbs to move them. Aristotel was the master of Alexander the Great & his philosophy was in request in y^e reign of Alexanders successors \especially in Egypt/ & his systeme of the heavens ^a[8] was received by the \oldest of the/ Cabbalists. For they said that the world Asia \(called also y^e m world of the fabric)/ was the corporeal world of the spheres or celestial Orbs & of all [corporeal] things therein to the very center of the earth, & that the sun Moon & stars were moved by intelligences; & distingu allotted to every sephira his orb, & to placing ^b[9] the first Sephira in the highest Orb \next under a sphere of splendor/ & calling it Kether the crown the highest crown & the crown of the Aziluthis world because it was the highest & encompassed all the rest \& the next sephiroth & so in the second Orb & so on/, & distinguishing the Sephiras into three superior & seven inferior

<127v>

^[10]{illeg} new, they referred the inferior to the orbs of the seven Planets & y^e superior to \to the inferior &/ the heavens above the Planets \to the superior./, the first called Kether to the {ffor} viz^t the 8^th sphere w^ch was \or firmament/ of y^e fixt stars & 12 signes to Binah, the ninth or spere {sic} of y^e diurnal motion to Cochmah & the tenth or world of Intelligence w^ch gives power & vertue to all the starrs & circles to to {sic} Kether. \The highest of them save orb of Saturn they referred to {illeg} Gedula that of {♀} to Gebura./ The three superior /Sephiras\ they called Arich Anpin the man w^th a great face & the seven inferior to Seir Anpin the man w^th a little face & the Chymcal Cabbalists gave the names of these seven \inferior Sephirahs/ to the seven metals. Some \Above the Planetary Orbs/ Aristotel made but one heaven, the starry firmament.) above y^e Planetary Orbs & {illeg} thence it comes to pass that the Cabbalists frequently take Arich Anpin only for the first Sephiroth Kether & in this sence Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin compose the Ogdoas of Æons. But \as/ later Astronomers \have/ distinguishing|ed| the eight heaven into more the orbs then One so the Cabbalists have placed more Sephiroths then one referred those Orbs to more Sephirahs then one, From & so also the later Gnosticks have increased the number of their Æons & placed {illeg} to many of them in the heavens above the planetary Orbs. And by from all this & the opinions common to the Gnosticks & Cabbalists that became so \the world was made by the Angels & that/ y^e souls of men came from above passed through various bodies till they had performed all things requisite & at then returned up, it is manifest that the \Apostle in condemning/ Iewish fables endless genealogies & oppositions of science falsly so called had relation to the doctrines \fabulous learning/ of the Cabbalists \then entering into y^e X^tian religion X^tians of his days/ which began \in his days/ to be introduced into the Christian religion by the primitive Gnosticks. [And this is the \great/ mystery of iniquity w^ch then began to work & was to work untill the man of sin should be revealed & whose coming \was to be/ after y^e working of Satan with all po [magical] power & signes & lying wonders in them that perish because they received not the love of the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousnes, For the time was coming when they would no (the generality of Christians) w|sh|ould not endure sound doctrine \[the doctrine of the unlearned Apostles]/, but after their own lusts should heap to themselves \[learned]/ teachers, having itching ears [after science falsly so called] & should turn away their ears from the truth & be turned unto \[Iewish]/ fables] the fables \of the learned/ coloured over w^th an appearance of science & in other places called by the Apostle Iewish fables, old wives fables, & science falsly so called. The|i|se fables|ous| \learning/ the primitive Iewish Gnosticks princip of y^e circumcision principally followed & their disciples added to their \it/ out of the Poets & Philosophers of y^e Greeks.]

a Cabb denudatæ p. 20 Pars 2 p. 203, 204. 181, 182, 203, 204 b

And thus there are \only/ eight sephiroths or splendors of y^e celestial Orbs, the first being in the \namely \the splendor of/ the starry firmament/ & \& {sic} the splendors of/ the seven Planets, & Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin compose y^e \primitive/ Ogdoas of Æons. – – – sephiras then one inserting Cochmah & Binah & calling Cochmah the father & Binah the mother of the seven inferior Sephiras.

<128r>

\As the/ As the Cabbalistical Iews distinguished the powers & affections of God & considered \them/ as so many {illeg} divine beings or persons whom they called Sephiroths.

As the Sephiroths of the Iewish Cabbalists were nothing else then the powers & affections of God the father, consider \considered as so many divine persons & of his first Emission called Adam Cad/mon\/ (namely the his \Crown or {first supreme} {illeg} & first & supreme emission emanation conteining all the other Sephiroths in it self his/ Wisdom, his prudence, his Magnificence, his {Being} his Power, his Beuty his {illeg} Eternity, his Glory, his supporting all things & his reign{illeg}) & {illeg} considered as so many {illeg} persons: so the Æons of the Gnosticks were of the same kind. Simon said that Ennoia was the first conception of his mind (or Idea) of his mind. \The unknown father whom the Cabbalists called God whom they called w^th Æn Soph the Infinite/ As {illeg} {illeg} {father & Ennoia his} {illeg} |or immense Magnitude & from him & his wife Ennœa| Valentinus \Valentinus {illeg}/ derived \Bythos & Megethi {profundity}/ {illeg} Nous & Alathea \the Mind & Truth/ & from these two Logos & Zoe the Word & life. A He had {illeg} these Æo this doctrine from his master Basilides: ffor Basilides derived Nous from the unknown father & Logos from Nous |said that the {Vnbegotten} God emitted Logos Nous & Nous emitted Logos, & Logos emitted Φρόνησις Prudence|. They {illeg} both lived at Alexandria & might have their Æon this doctrine from y^e Cabbalistical Iews of Egypt. \☉/ Ptolomæus a disciple of Valentinus assigned to the unknown father two wives Ennœa & Theleus {illeg} {illeg}|U|nderstanding & Will & called them \the/ affections of the unknown father, & said that the understanding was the older wife because the understanding precedes the will. The Ennœa & Nous {illeg} with Alethea \Truth/ & Logos with {illeg} are are here nothing else then various modes of the \or powers of the inherent/ mind of God called by the Greeks λογος ενδιάθετος & Logos with life {illeg} is his λογος προφορικὸς. ffor so the Valentinians themselves explained this their philosophy & the words are cited by Epiphanius out one {sic} of their books. In the beginning, say they, the {word} {illeg} \of/ himself in the father conteined all things within himself. Then the Ennœa w^ch was in him (whom some call Ennœa & others properly Charis because she effuses the trasures {sic} of Magnitude \[Æn Soph]/ that is of the unknown father call Bythos by Magnitude by the Valentinians & their followes {sic} & Æn Soph the Infinite by the Cabbalists) upon those who are upon those who are from Magnitude, but others more truly call her silence because by cogitation without the use of speech Magnitud{e} performs all things,) she, I say, the uncorrupt & Æonia being willing to extricate her self from her bonds enticed Magnitude to her embraces & brought forth the ffather of Truth, whom those that are perfect call the Man [viz Adam Kadmon] because he bears the likeness of the unbegotten. Afterwards Sige & the Man being conjoyned by thir will brought forth Truth in their own likeness of Sige. This Man they also call Nous. But But whereas Basilides & Valentinnus said that the unbegotten father emitted Nous & Nous emitted Logos, Irenæus reprehends them whereas the Gnosticks made Nous the son of Æn Ennœa Irenæus tells them that they should rather have made Ennœa the daughter of Nous because Nous \the Mind/ is the fountain of thinking & Ennoia \thinking/ is the motion. The first motion of \Nous/ the Mind is Ennoia & if it persevere & encreas it is \called/ Euthymosis, & after much time of perseverance & becoming perfect it is called perception, & at length it becomes Council & Council by persevering w^th w^th {sic} motion is deliberation & deliberation \at length/ becomes λόγος ἐνδιάθετος reason |&| {illeg}|fr|om reason is emitted λογος προφορικὸς a word or speech. And all these things are but one thing in several degrees, & have place only in the Mind of man. They err therefore saith Irenæus in ascribing to God the affections & passions of man \& making him a compound./ ffor God is not as man nor are his thoughts like ours. He is simple & not compound. He is all like & equal to himself all sense all spirit all perception all Ennœa all λόγος all hearing \ear/, all eye all light. He is all sense w^ch cannot be separated from it self, nor is there any thing in him w^ch can be emitted from any thing else. Thus \does/ Irenæus \represent &/ confute the Metaphysicks of the Gnosticks. And whereas up after the Apostle Iohn had said In the beginning was <128v> Word & the Word was with God, the Gnosticks called the beginning Nous & the ffather Proarche, & took the Word for the λογος ενδιαθετος & {illeg} ἢ προφορικὸς & feigned that silence preceded the Word & thence called Ennœia by the name of Sige: Irenæus in op tells the Gnosticks that Logos & Sige could not be in Bythos at one & the same time no more then light & darkness. And if they say that λογ their λο this λόγος was ἐνδιάθετος (for it seems this was the language of these Gnosticks) then {illeg} Σιγὴ will be also ἐνδιάθετος: w^ch two saith he are inconsistent, Iren l. 2. c. 14, 15, 16 & therefore Σιγὴ is not ἐνδιάθετος. Iren l. 2. c. 14. 15,16, 47, 48, 49.

And \Simon/ placed several phi sorts of \& that/ Angelical powers of several sorts {illeg} \{illeg} the inhabit the/ several celestial orbs. \& said that/ Ennoi {sic} was beutiful {sic} & incited the powers to lust. & that e

The two last of them called \whom Valentinus calls/ Ἄνθρωπος & Εκκλησία by Valentinus seem to be the Seir Anpin & {illeg} Malcuth of the Cabbalists \& his wife Malcuth/. ffor by Seir Anpin homo parvae facie \a man with a little face,/ the Cabbalists understood the Soul of the Messiah systeme of all \the/ seven last sephiroths & by Malcuth his kingdom or church. And as the Cabbalists from their Sephiroths derived a great number of other intelligences so did & Angels & Archangels & Angels & three worlds so \did/ Basilides from from the fir his Æons derived {illeg} \the first/ Principalities powers & Angels & from \these/ the supreme heaven or celestial world w^th other Angels & from those a second heaven or world of other Angels, & from those a third heaven or world & {illeg} from those others to y^e number of seve of {sic} days in the year. And Valentinus his scholar Valentinus multiplied the Æons to the number of years in the age of Christ before he began to act was baptized & began to act \& from these Æons derived Powers & Angels & the world./ Well therefore might the Apostle {illeg} caution the prim churches against the Iewish fables & endless genealogies \of the first hereticks & their/ & {sic} oppositions of science falsly so called.

This phil Theology these her

And whereas the Iohn wrote in his Gospel In the beginning was the Word & the word was w^th God –– In him was life –– And the Word was made flesh & dwelt among us – full of grace & truth: they interpreted these words of their Æons makin saing saying that y^e beginning Αρχ \the/ Beginning ἀρχη was the |Gods| first emanation \male/ emission or Æon & the Word w^ch was in the beginning was the next male Æon & \{illeg}/ Grace & Truth |&| were the Life were their wives Ennoia Charis Alethea & Zoe.

And that these Gnosticks ––

The Nicolaitans therefore said distinguished between Iesus & Christ & said with Simon, Menander,

They agreed with Simon in placing several Powers in sev or Intellignces in several orbs & the supreme power with his wife Prunicus in the supreme orb & making her beautiful & lustful, & the incarnation & passion of Iesus to be only in appearance: & therefore are justly reputed Simonians

They said w^th Saturninus,

<129ar>

☉ And Basilides living at Alexandria seemes to have had this Theology from the Cabbala of the Iews of Egypt

♀ ffor Basilides said that the father of all things emitted Nous &Nous emitted Logos & Logos an emitted Phronesis, \& Phronesis emitted {Dynamis} & Sesostris./ And Basilides living in Alexandria seems to have had And these were the four first Deities in the Iewish Cabbala. The father of all things \was/ called Bythos & Magnitude by the Gnosticks to denote his immensity & \so answers to/ the first God in the Iewish Cabbala was called Æn Soph the Infinite. \The first Æon/ Nous was called Αρχὴ & the Man & \the/ Father or supreme Sephiroth \& cause of causes/ & Adam Kadmon the first man & the father of Cochma {illeg} The \& Arech Anpin a man with a large face. And as the/ Gnosticks made Nous like & equal to the father & said that he conteined all the other Æons {illeg} virtually in himself: {illeg} \so/ the Cabbalists said that Adam Kadmon comprehended all the \other/ Sephiroths. The second Æon called λόγος reason understanding & wisdom answers to the second Sephiroth called Cochmah wisdom, & the third Æon called by Basilides Φρόνησις Prudence answers also to the third Sephiroth called Binah Prudence. |But Φρόνησις being a female Valentinus changed her to a Man & these four Gods with their wives made y^e first Ogdoas of Valentinus & the following leaders of the \& the following leaders of the Gnosticks/ Secundus Ptolomæus Marcus Heracleon & some others leaders of the Gnosticks| After Basilides had been instructed by his master Menander he went into \lived in/ /& scholar {sic} Valentinus lived in\ Egypt & had there an opportunity of learning the cabbala of the Egyptian Iews, & his scholar Valent

And that these Gnosticks by their Æons understood the powers & affections operations & Ideas of the supreme God is further manifest by what Epiphanius cites out of their writings In t in these words In the beginning, say they, there \he who/ – – – – – – – – likeness of Sige. Ptolomæus another of these hereticks Gnosticks assigned to Bythos his wives, the unknown By that the supreme father two wives – – – – – – – – – precedes the will; & that Ennœa thought of an emission but could emitt {sic} it till the power of the will came to her assistance & then she emitted Nous & Alathea. And whereas the Gnosticks made Nous the son of Alethea Irenæus tells them – – – – came originally from these Gnosticks Basilides & Valentinus & their disciples Secundus Ptolomæus Marcus Heracleon & their followers & perhaps also from Saturninus the fellow disciple of Basilides & Menander the common master of Bas Saturninus & Basilides, & disciple of Simon. ffor Irenæus – – – – – – – to a word spoken by a man. And Eusebius tells us that Marcellus – – – –

< insertion from f 129v >

☉ For whereas the Cabbalists called the first God Bythos the Infinite Æn Soph the infinite or immense, the Gnosticks called him Bythos & & said that his first \Sephiroth or/ emanation w^ch they \called/ the Crown \η Αρχη/ & Adam Cadmon \the first Man/ reteined all the other nine Sephiroths eminently in {it self &} the Gnosticks w^th called the first God Bythos & Megathos the Profundity & the Magnitude, meaning {illeg} \the/ {illeg} magnitude w^thout bounds. And his first emission Nous they called the Man \& the Son & the only begotten & Adam Cadmon] & ἡ Αρχη the Principle [Cether, the Crown]/ & Αρχε \Αρχη/ the Principle & said that he was the Principle w^ch conteined all the other Æons in himself. And whereas Iohn had said in the beginning of his Gospel Ἐν ἀρχη ἠν ὁ Eight or nine hundred thousand Dollars λόγος In the beginning was the Word, they said that ἡ ἀρχὴ the beginning was Nous {illeg} & |in| t this Νους was the λόγος & thence concluded that Nous & Logos were the two first Æons [Iren. l 1. c. 1. sect 18.] |The λογος answers to the second sephiroth called Cochma reason or wisdom & φρόνησις Prudence the third Æon of Basilides is the third sephiroth of the Cabbalists| And the Ennœa of Simon & Menander they retained & made her the wife of Bythos & called her Sige silence because she \silence/ preceded Nous & Logos \called Binah Prudence/, & Charis favour because by her favour the treasures of Bythos were {illeg} effused into the Æons. And ffor that this was their philosophy is described by Irenæus in the beginning of his first book & by the Valentinians themselves in one of their letters cited by Epiphanius in these words. In the beginning, say they, he who of himself is the father – – –– – – likeness of Sige. This Man they also called the father & Nous [& said \some of them said/ that he & truth bought forth Logos & [Cochma wisdom] & {Bios life}. Ptolomæus a disc & {illeg} Zoe reason & life & these] \& said that Bythos was unknown to all the Æons except Nous/ & these four {illeg} Bythos & Sige ligh Nous & Alethea they called the Tetractys of Pythagoras & said that Nous & Alethea {illeg} emitted Logus & Zoe. with ten other Æons & Logus & Zoe emitted twelve others By Bythos & Ennoia they m Ptolomæus assigned to the unknown father two wives Ennœa & Thelesis Vnderstanding & will, & called them the affections of the unknown ffather & said that the Vnderstanding was the older wife because the understanding precedes the Will. |And Colarbasus said that Ennœa thought of an emission but could not emitt it till the power of the will came to her assistance & then emitted Manases or Nous & Alethea.| And by all this it it {sic} is manifest that the Æons of these Gnosticks were nothing else then the powers {illeg} affections & Notions or Ideas of the supreme God distinguished from one another & represented by divine persons. And whereas the Gnosticks made Nous the Ennœa the monther of Nous \Nous the son of Ennœa/ Irenæus tell {sic} them – – – – – – – is not ἔνδιάθετος. [Iren. l. 2. c. 14, 15, 16, 47, 48, 49.] // The doctrine therefore that {illeg} the λόγος of or Word of God was the λογος ἐνδίάθετος of the father & was emitted or exerted & thereby generated {life} into a son before the world began came originally from these Gn Gnosticks Basilides Vale Valentinus, \^e Secundus?/ Ptolomæus, \f/^[11] Marcus ^g[12] Heracleon, & perhaps also from Saturninus the fellow disciple of Basilides. ffor Irenæus blames tells us that Valentinus had his opinions ^a[13] from his masters & blames Saturninus Basilides Valentinus & Marcion that they b \Marcion/ & the Gnosticks in general [Iren l. 2. c. |18,| 48, \49/ & l. 1. c. 10.] that in exp they \for/ pretended|ing| to know the generation of the Word & explained|ing| it by comparing to a Word spoken by a Man. And this opinion seems to have been as old as the days of Simon magus. For ^h[14] Eusebius tells us that Marcellus \in making Quiet to precede the Logus/ imitated that impious heresiarch ringleader of the hereticks who {illeg} taught \this teaching/ atheistically, saying \said atheistically/: There was God & {Sol} \ην/ θεὸς καὶ {illeg} Σιγὴ ἠν Θεὸς καὶ Σιγή There was God & Silence. And Gregory Nazianzen alluding to this doctrine of Simon & his follows {sic} saith that the Simons & \the/ Marcions & the & Valentines & \the/Basilides's & Cerdons & Cerinthuses & Carpocrateses & th all their trifles & {fa illusions} juggling tricks \were delivered/ τω ἑατων βυθω καὶ τη σὶγη to their Bythos & Sige own abyss & silence. [And Ignatius tells the Thes Magnesians that they should not be seduced with foreign doctrines [of observing the law] nor with vain [Iewish] fables] –– but th their convince men men {sic} that there was \there being/ one God who hath manifested himself by Iesus X^t his son not who is \being/ the eternal Word not born out of silence]. Whence it seems that after the writing of the Apocalyps & Epistle to the Hebrews in w^ch Christ is called the Word of God \ο῾ λόγος του θεου/, the Gnosticks began to compare him to a word spoken after silence the λόγος of a man, w^ch is first ενδιαθετος |silently conceived in the mind {illeg}| & then emitted w^th a voice after silence {illeg} & from this comparison make him give the name of sige to make him the son of God & Silence. & after the writing of the Gospel, to make him the son of Αρχὴ & Αρχὴ the son of God \& Silence./ ffor I think its not to be doubted \it will easily be granted/ that Αρχη \Ennoia/ had the name of silence not from her son Αρχὴ but from her son λόγος. And therefore the opinion that λόγος was the son of Sige was older then the days \Heresy/ of Basilides & must be attributed to the disciples of Simon of w^ch Menander was {the} chief.

{illeg} of the same kind was that of the Nicolaitans \The Ennoia of Simon they called Prunicus & Barbelo/. ffor they made {illeg} placing her in the eighth heaven & {illeg} <129br> that Ialdabaoth (or as others called him, Sabaoth) was her son & placed him in y^e seventh heaven, {illeg} & other \inferior/ Æons they placed in y^e seventh \inferior/ heavens \calling one of them {Iautacouth}/ & said that \({illeg}) that/ Barbelo was beutifull {sic} & enticed the other Princes divine {illeg} powers to her embraces: And upon such deg{illeg}s \fables/ founded their lasciviousness. [And the Phibionites a sect of these Nicolaitan Gnosticks, placed 365 Princes in so many cœlestial orbs giving names to each of them.] In the first \{empyreum}/ Orb they placed Iao, in the second {Saclan} the God of lust, in third {sic} Seth, in the fourth Daden, in the fifth Abonæus, in the sixt Ialdabaoth \Philæus/ in the seventh Barbelo Ialdabaoth |or Sabaoth the maker of heaven & earth, in the eighth Barbelo Chus {and other}|, in the eighth Barbelo & God & Chus. And these are the supreme Princes. And seing the Nicolaitans placed their Æons in the heavenly spheres & {illeg} had these & the God of the Iews, in the eighth |& highest orb they placed| Barbelo & the God of the universe \& another Christ was begotten of himself/ & Christ who descended & revealed these things to mankind this knowledge to mankind, who was also called Iesus & was manifested by Mary but not born of her nor took flesh otherwise then in appearance. And the And this {illeg} philosophy \from these eight Orbs with their intelligences/ seems to have given occasion to the Ogdoas of the Gnosticks. \ffor Valentinus suited his Ogdoas to seven Orbs placing the uknown father above them./ And \further/ the Phibionites a sect of the Gnost Nicolatians, multiplied the Orbs to the number of days in the year & placed in these \365/ orbs placed Princes so many Princes or Æons giving to each of them his proper name. Whic Which mak placing the AEons in orbs y^e celestial Orbs & first increasing the number of Orbs from eight to 365 \& giving a phantastic body to Iesus/ makes it evident that the Nicolaitans & the {illeg} successors \followers/ of Basilides & Valentinus were Gnosticks of the same kind {illeg} with the followers of Basilides & Valentinus & differed only in \language & some ot/ In some circumstances language & \perhaps/ circumstances of small but differed but gave hebrew names |but| being of the circumcision \Iudea/ gave hebrew names to their Æons, & countenanced their unclean actions by the copulation & generation of their Æons. And no doubt the Nicolaitans were the older hereticks, their doctrine & deeds bei \&/ denyal & that Iesus Christ is|was| come in the flesh being condemned by Iohn, & their Iewish fables endless genealogies & contentions about \profane & vain bablings & profession of/ science falsly so called being cautioned against by the Apostle Paul being oppo for censured by the Apostle Paul as \amounting to/ a denyal of the faith.

< text from f 129ar resumes >

Chap
Of the faith unity & universality of the Primitive Church

Chap
Of the breaking of the primitive Church into parties & the rise of Popery

The Christian religion continued in its purity till the death of the Apostolic men who had seen Christ the last of w^ch was Iohn the Apostle \who died AC. 99/ & Simon bishop of Ierusalem who was crucified A.C. 107. After their deaths heresies increased \continually/ as The Apostle Paul had predicted saying, The mystery of iniquity already worketh & shall work untill that w^ch letteth be taken out of the way & then shall the Man of Sin be revealed. The Church maintained continually; {illeg} but yet the Church kept her grownd against them during {illeg} her afflictions, under the heathen persecutions of the heathen Roman Empire \w^ch letted the rise of an Antichristian/, as the Apostle Paul had predicted saying |that there should come a falling away & the Man of Sin should be revealed & that the mystery of iniquity worked \even/ in his days, for| The mystery of iniquity already worketh & shall work untill that letteth only that which letted should lett untill it should be taken out of the way, that is the heathen Roman Empire \which letted the rise of antichristian \Roman/ communion/, & then that wicked \one/ should be revealed & continue |sit as the \{illeg}/ Church {illeg} the {sic} Church of God & conti/nue\ {sic} {illeg} & continue till the coming of o^r Lord.| till the coming of o^r Lord. {sic}

In opposition to those heresies the Christians of th of the third century \& end of the second/ added some new articles to their Creed to hinder their being admitted into {sic} the Church by baptism \intending thereby to prevent the admission of those hereticks/, & while the articles were in the scripture language & for that reason created no disputes among the Churches about them, they did no hurt to y^e unity of the Church \catholick/. But after the practise of adding new Articles became of some standing & was reputed authentic & the Bishops began to add such articles as were not in the scripture language they soon rent the Church Catholick into parties. And ffor when they Council of Nice had inserted into their Creed that the Son was ομοιούσιοσ to the ffather & allowed the interpetation {sic} that |y^e| word ομοουσιος when appled {sic} to things spiritual signified nothing {illeg} more | did not signify \import/ any emanation emission projection or division of substance, nor any thing more then ὁμοιούσιος or ὁμοιος κατ᾽ ὀυσιαν of like substance or like according to substance: & the L Hosius & the Legates of the Bishop of Rome sent a Latin translation of this Creed in or whoever was the Latin translator or whoever translated that Creed into Latin instead of translating the word ὁμοούσιος by the word consubstial or \& interpreting consubstantial by/ similis substantiæ, translated it unius substantiæ. \And/ this different interpretation of the word created such a misunderstanding between the Greeks & Latines as ended in a breach |great criticisms upon the word & {severe} \{vain}/ disputing \in {illeg}/ among the Greeks in the reign of Constantine the great & the beginning of the reign of Constantius, while the western Churches remained quiet.|

For they that \with the Latines/ took consubstantial in the ὁμοουσιος for one substance were thought \by those of the other opinion/ to speak impiously as if they took away affirmed the asserted the son \to be/ without subsistence & were of the same opinion with Montanus & Sabellius: & \they/ that took it for several substances were looked upon \by the other party/ as Gentiles & authors \introducers/ of a multitude \plurality/ of Gods. (Socr. l. 1. c. 23 Sozom l. 2. c.18. And when Eusebius of Nicomedia was accused by the opposed the sense of the Latines & was accused as if he de opposed the ὁμοούσιος he shewed the Emperor Constantine his garment & said If this garment was divided before my eyes yet I would never say that the two parts were της αυτης ὀυσίας of the same substance Sozom l. 2. c. 21. And this wrangle the Bishop of Rome turned to his advantage in the manner following.

F For those \some among the Greeks/ who took the Son to be an emanation \or emission from/ of the ffather as light is of \from/ y^e sun & \or a river from the fountain/ & on that account said that he was ομοούσιος to the father (of w^ch sort were the \Gnosticks/ Cataphrygians or Montanists) others took him to be an attribute of the fathers substance namely the \fathers/ wisdom \reason/ & word spoken without w^ch the ffather would \be/ ἄσοφος & ἄλογος (of w^ch sort were the Sabellians) willingly & for that reason approved the language of unius substantiæ (of w^ch sort were the \Montanists &/ Sabellians:) \And all these embracing/ affirmed from the latin translation of the \Nicene Creed affirmed/ Creed {sic} that the ffather & Son were μιας ύσιάς & μιας <130v> υποστάσεος of one essence \or substance/ & one hypostasis, And & accounted \represented/ the denyal of this to bee a denyal of the Nicene faith |& the maintaining of three \{illeg}/ hypostases to be the introducing of a plurality of Gods. And those who w^th the Council of Nice held the son to be of like substance w^th the father looked upon those who held him to be of one hypostasis with the father to speak impiously as if they asserted the son to be without proper subsistence & \were/ of the same opinions with Montanus & Sabellius. For Montanus made the Son a part of the fathers substance & by consequence without any {illeg} distinct \any other/ substance then that of the father.| And hence arose great disputing in private among the Greeks in the reign of Constantine the great & in the beginning of that of Constantius & great criticising upon the word ομοουσιος. And those who took ὁμοούσιος for one substance were thought by those of the other opinion to speak impiously as if they asserted the Son to be without proper \proper/ subsistence & were of the same opinions with Montanus & Sabellius |And finally \During these disputes/, Eustathius bishop of Antioch being \was/ accused in this manner by Eusebius Pamphili was & deposed as a Sabellian. For Montanus| And those who took them for like substances were looked upon by the other party as Gentiles introducing a plurality of Gods (Socr. l. 1. c. 23) & Sozom & l. 2. c. 18.] And when Eusebius of Nicomedia who opposed the language of one substance was accused as if he opposed the ὁμοούσιος \& taxed for it by the Emperor Constantine y^e great/ he shewed the Emperor Constantine the great his garment & answered boldly: If this garment should be divided before my eyes yet I would never say that the two parts were της ἀυτης ὀυσίας of the same substance. Sozom. l. 2. c. 21. By this {illeg} answer Eusebius seemsto have satisfied the Emperor who knew that the Council of Nice had approved the language of like substance: into that of for the Emperor afterwards had him in \great/ honour & was baptized by him & trusted him with his last will & Testament [Whereas his son Constantius & much more he himself adhered to that {illeg} Nicene faith according to y^e sense w^ch the Council it self put upon the word ομοούσιος. |& banished Eustathius for the other opinion & consented that Arius upon retracting his novel expressions & confining himself to the \faith &/ language of the Church should be received into communion. I cannot find that the Emperor or his son Constantius receded from the Nicene faith, but rather that they adhered to it constantly in the sense of the Council| < insertion from lower down f 130v > \w^ch was/ that ομοουσιος signified nothing more then \not unius substantiæ but/ ομοιος κατ᾽ ουσίαν.

< text from higher up f 130v resumes >

[During the reign of Constantine the western Churches were quiet & these disputes were only among the Greeks \& that without a breach/. But after a while they \they {sic} reached the West &/ made a breach beteen the Greeks & Latines in the following manner.]

Athanasius being accused \before th/ of several crimes \before the Council of Tyre/ by the Meletians (a party of Christians who had withdrawn themselves from under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria,) & being condemned for them by the Council of Tyre A.C. {335} & banished into Gallia by Constantine the great A.C. 335 & sent back into

\In the mean time/ The Meletians a party of Christians who had withdrawn themseves from |{his}| the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria |thinking the B^p of Alexandria too forward in receiving lapsed persons into communion had withdrawn themselves from his jurisdiction| {illeg} accused Athanasius before the Council of Tyre A.C. 335 of several crimes the killing Arsenius one of their Bishops & of some other cri{illeg}mes, & the Council having heard the cause, for their further satisfaction, sent six of their \own/ number into Egypt to examin matters upon the place & after their return deposed {illeg} him. When sentence was ready to be pronounced Athanasius fled to y^e Emperor Constantine who reheard y^e cause & banished him into Gallia. After the death of Constantine his eldest son Constantine sent back Athanasius into Egypt A.C. 338, and the Council of Antioch w^ch consisted of about 97 bishops

And Ierome: Animas humanas de cælo lapsus esse Pythagoras Omnesqꝫ Platonici statuant et Origines putant: a propria Dei substantia esse Stoici Manichæus & Hispaniæ Prisciliani hæresis suspicantur: continuo creari {illeg} volunt alij, alij ex traduce ut Tertulianus Apollinarius & maxima pars Occidentalium. Ad Marcellinum Epis 82. This op last opinion that they souls we|a|re ex traduce or \that is/ by emission \of substance/ seems to be of the same kind with that of the heathens & first hereticks who traduced their Gods & Æons from one another by \such/ emissions of substance \& made them descend from heaven into humane bodies./ And in opposition to the opinions of those traduced all things from the substance of God by emissions \emitted/ in various forms the {illeg} primitive Christians taught that all their God {illeg} \made/ all things out of nothing.

<131r>

Some hereticks as Simon Magus, Noëtus Praxeas & Sabellius gave the the {sic} name of father son & holy Ghost to one & the same substance in respect of several appearances, \{being}/ {bodi} attributes qualities dispositions or actions, \or {illeg} to the attributes of that substance/ & some pretended \& some called their emissions by the names of Gods attributes pretending/ that the attributes of God were substances emitted from him emitted

Some hereticks as Basilides Simon Magus Basilides Marcion thinking it below the nature of their Gods that th to be realy incarnate & to suffer really on the Cross, said that Christ was not really incarnate but appeared to men only in shew. Others as \Carpocrates/ Cerinthus \& Paul of Samosat/ said that Iesus was born of Ioseph & Mary after the manner of other men & that {illeg} \a vertue called/ Christ descended upon \him & dwelt in him/ as the holy Spirit doth in good & men & deserted him at his passion.

The Gnosticks beginning from Nicholas \& Simon Magus/ the first authors of their heresy perm permitted the promiscuous use of weomen. They also laid stress upon {illeg} |attributed supernatural effects to invocation {illeg} &| ceremonies, \&/ of humane invention for producing supernatural effects

Some hereticks as Saturninus Marcion Tatian & \their followers/ the Encratites

Some hereticks as Simon Magus & Noetus & Praxeas \& Sabellius/ gave the name of father son & Holy Ghost to one & the same substance in respect of several appearances \attributes/ dispositions or actions. Some, as Sabellius compared the father Son Some called & holy Ghost to the body soul & spirit of a man, or to the body the light & the heat of the son {sic}

Some hereticks, as                                               called the emissions by y^e names of Gods attributes. And some as Simon Magus, Noetus, Praxeas & Sabellius gave the names of ffather Son & Holy Ghost to one & the same substance in respect of several appearances attributes dispositions or actions \or partes./ Sabellius compared the ffather Son & holy Ghost to the body soul & spirit of a man & to the body light & heat of the Sun, & the ffather & Son he compared to a man & his reason & speech makin {sic} the son the inward reason \& wisdom/ of the father before the creation & his word spoken at the creation by which all things were created.

Montanus refining the heresi errors of the Gnosticks made the Son & |h.| Ghost emissions from y^e ffather & subordinate to him. His opinion Tertullian th a Montanist thus sets down. Protulit enim Deus Sermonem, quemadmodū Paracelsus (id est Montanus) docet, sicut radix fruticem & fons fluvium et Sol radium; quia omnis origo parens est, et omne quod ex origine profertur progenies est: multo magis Sermo Dei, qui etiam proprie nomen filij accepit: nec frutex tamen a radice nec fluvius a fonte nec radius a sole discernitur sicut nec a Deo sermo. Tertius est Idea Igitur secundum – – – – – proprietates suas ducit: {illeg} Ita Trinitas per consertos et connexos gradus decurrit. And a little after. Pater tota substantia est, filius verò derivatio et portio totius et portio, sicut ipse profiter, Quia pater major me est. Tertul. adv. Prax.

Tertullian represents that God ha a Montanist represents that God had reason & wisdom in himself by which he contrived all things before he created them, but this reason & wisdom & notions of things to be created were only internal to God as a mans reason & ideas are in himself \only internal in/ a man, before he declares them outwardly by speaking so Gods reason or wisdom & his conceptions or notions of all things were only internal in God untill he began to speak them outwardly & make them appear outwardly in their species & substances. And when he said Fiat lux, then his reason {illeg} or λογος was formed \outwardly/ into speech or voice not \empty/ transient \& vanid/ like the voice of a man but permanent & substantial. For nothing can want substance w^ch ‡ < insertion from f 130v > ‡ proceeds from so {illeg} great a substance. Thus Tertullian describes the philosophy of the Montanists & \a little after/ calling Montanus the Paraclete, he further describes his philosophy in this manner \adds/ Protulit Deus sermonem – – – – me est. [Tertul adv. Prax.] And afterwards {sic} Afterwards Tertullian distinguishes three Perso calls the Trinity three persons in one substance \&/ representing|s| the persons distinct from one another but not divided, saying adhærebat {illeg} illi [Patri] filius secunda persona sermo ipsius & tertia spiritus in sermone. And a little after. Vbiqꝫ teneo unam substantiam in tribus cohærentibus. Tertul. adv. Praxeam

< text from f 131r resumes > <131v>

Those heresies consisted principally in opinions of old heathen Philosophers

|By the mystery of iniquity he means the heresies w^ch began to spring up in his days & were to work till they ended in the Man of Sin great apostacy called the or Man of Sin. And| Those heresies consisted principally in certain heathen opinions & superstitions \& impieties/ w^ch men converted from the heathen religion endeavoured \under various disguises & specious pretenses/ to bring into the Christian. Those opinions were chiefly that The chief of those opinions was that all things came from one first being by \emanation or/ emission of substance & returned into it \& by consequence was consubstantial to it/, & that there was a transmigration of souls into various bodies. ffor Simon Magus & his successors derived all things from one first being by emission of substance this was the opinion of the ancient Egyptians {illeg} Phenicians {illeg} \& {illeg}/ \this was the opinion of the ancient Egyptians Phœnicians \{Phenicians}/ & Greeks &/ the opinions of y^e Indian Brachmans to this day, & of this opinion were Simon Magus & his followers succe successors the Gnosticks. Simon & Menander \said/ called the first emitted substance Ennoia & the next Angels & the last \& said that Angels created/ the world. created by Angels Basilides called the first emission Νους Νους & said that Νους was Christ & from Νους || derived another \a/ series of other emissions the \two/ last of w^ch were Angels, {illeg} \{illeg}/ |&| the world \was/ created by them. \Nicolaus/ Valentinus, Secundus \Marcus Heracleon Ophitæ/ & Tatian called such emissions Æons & Irenæus tells us that Valentinus had this doctrine of Æons \came/ from Hesiods Genealogies of the Gods heathen Gods. |With Hesiods genealogies may be joyned the Phœnician in Sanchomiato, the Egyptian in Manetho & the {illeg} in the fragment of Byrsus| Montanus made the Son & Holy Ghost emissions from the father & subordinate to him & Tertullian a Montanist called them consubstantial & so did {Paul} said that the son was a part of the father \father was the whole substance & the son an emanation of {illeg} \a {illeg} derivation & {property} of the/ the {sic} father & part of him/, & I mistake if Paul of Samosat did not call the \Father &/ Son consubstantial to y^e ffather in the same sense of the Gnosticks. These Hereticks also \taught the tran heathen transmigration of souls &/ derived the souls of men from y^e supreme Deity \God/ by emission reputing them parts of his substance \& making every soul to have various bodies denyed the resurrection of the body/. For Simon Magus made said that y^e first emission called Ennoia \was shut up in a woman by Angels &/ passed from woman to woman & \was in Minerva & afterwards in Helen/ in y^e time of Trojan war was in Helena. {illeg} |{illeg} & that the Angels transformed themselves \passed/ into humane bodies that they might enjoy her & that he himself came down into a humane body to seek her| Saturninus or Saturnilis taught that when y^e Angels who made y^e world had formed a man they were not able to give him life, but the virtue from above emitted a spark of life w^ch made the man live, & w^ch after death should return to those things w^ch are of y^e same nature [ὁμοούσια] with it self. And \Carpocrates & Marcion held the transmigration of souls/ The Montanists said that Man was not only made by a rational author but animated ^a[15] ex substantia ejus |And| The Manichees Priscilianists & Stoicks (as Ierome tells us) that y^e souls of men were particles of the substance of God. And in the same sense I understand Epiphanius where he tells us that Valentinus & Colarbasus & all the Gnosticks & Manichees make certain traductions of souls & transmigrations into various bodies |Hæres. 42. Refut. 24. And ^a[16] Augustin B^p of Hippo Gnostici Manichæi Priscilianistæ animas humanas de substantia Dei confectas Deoqꝫ consubstantiales esse docebant|. And in opposition to these doctrines, the genuine \true {illeg}/ Christians taught that God created all things out of nothing.

There were other \Some/ hereticks who took away the substance of the son & holy Ghost \giving making them & the ffather one & the same substance in several respects; as/ as {sic} Simon Magus, who made the himself all three {illeg} but one substance of the father son & holy Ghost, saying \said/ that he {illeg} \was/ that substance \&/ appearing|ed| as the ffather in Iudæa \Samaria/, as the Son in Samaria \Iudæa/ & as y^e holy Ghost in other countries; [I suppose he means in \respect of/ \viz^t in respect of/ several humane bodies {illeg} \bodies animated by y^e Deity according to/ the doctrine of y^e transmigration of souls]: a|A||nd| heresy \error/ of the same nature was that of \Praxeas &/ Sabellius who g who \& such as others as/ gave the name of ffather Son & holy Ghost to one & the same substance in respect of several attributes qualities, ac dispositions or actions. |But some who gave the name to avoid the name of Sabellians said that the attributes of God were substances.|

Some hereticks as Saturninus Marcion& Tatian \& the Encratites/ condemned marriage & the eating of the flesh of Animals & Montanus condemned marri taught to abstein from marriage & from some sorts of meat. And several other errors & superstitious practises were set on foot by the {illeg} old Hæreticks. & some of them

And some hereses {sic} spread so much that in the end of the second Century or beginning of the third, the Bishop of Rome himself became first a Montanist & then a Praxean. Tertull. adv. Praxeam.

And \Now/ in opposition to the heresies w^ch spr arose in the second & third Centuries the Christians of those days added some new Articles to their Creed. And while the Articles were in the scripture language &c.

<132r>

In obedience &

76 × 24

304

18240

We humbly represent to your Lordship that we have considered the same, and upon the best computation we can make, we {illeg} do find that at the Expiration of the present contract there will be so much Tin befe unsold in her majesty's hands as will amount to \about/ £180000. and we are humbly of opinion that upon \upon/ a new contract her Maj \should/ will be at a medium as the like disburse, which |the same deed w^ch will remain in her the Interest of which| being computed at six per cent per annum (being the Interest that is \what is/ allowed {illeg} for the £10000. advanced to the Tinner in Cornwall) her Majesty cannot in safety afford to give more then £3. 10. – per hundred stannary Weight, the Tinner paying the coynage duty and post groats or an equivalent, provided her Maj^ty takes no more Tin then the consumption may annually carry off

and upon supposition that her Maj^ty purchases no more Tin then will the consumption will annually carry off,

– that if 6 p^r cent \the consumption sh \the consumption shoul 1600 Tunns of Tin per an & y^e same be annually consumed// her Ma^ty purchases no more |1600 Tunns of Tin per an stan w^t at 3^li 10^s per Tunn & without abating the coinage duty & Post groats| Tin {sic} then y^e consumption will annually carry off \supposing 600 Tunns {illeg}/ & 6 p^r cent {illeg} (the interest {illeg} at w^ch her Ma^ty lends money to cont \money/ to y^e Cornwall) be allowed up to her Ma^ty {illeg}upon all y^e \rest of the/ money advanced, w^ch by our we estimate at y^e at about 180000 the \being the/ value of y^e Tin w^ch at the end of the contract present contract \by the best estimation we can make/ may remain unsold at y^e recconning 3^li 10^s per C averdupois will according to the best estimate we can make \will remain/ remain unsold \be at the end of the present contract/ her Ma^ty may safely purchase 1600 Tunns per an stan. w^t at 3^li 10^s p^r C stan weight \to be sold/ at 3^li 16^s p^r C averdupois: there remain will be allowed only to her Ma^ty only about 1458.^l. 18.^s \annually,/ to answer all unforeseen accidents & expences w^ch \at a medium/ have hitherto amounted to {illeg} 3 or 4 thousand pounds {illeg} \yearly/ & there will remain upon be added to the dead stock annually about 80 or 90 Tunns averdupois the excess of the quantity received annually abov fom both Conwall {sic} & Devonshire above the quantity w^ch has been sold annually duringthe last four years

that if her Ma^ty purchases 1520 Tunns per an stan w^t at 3^li 10^s p^r C stan w^t {illeg} w^thout remitting the Coinage duty & post groats & if 6 per cent be allowed upon

If her Ma^ty should purchase annually 1520 Tunns p^r an at 3^li 9^s p^r C st. w^t there would

<132v>

that 1520 Tunns per stan. w^t is as much as the consumption has been y^e consumption

–– that y^e consumption during the last four & the present has \at a medium/ amounted to annually to 156 about 1560 Tunns from \w^ch/ if 44 Tunns of Devonshire Tin be deducted there will remain 1516 Tunns the annual consumption of the Devonshire \Cornish Tin/ That at y^e end of the present contract there will remain {illeg} \a/ dead stock of about 2400 Tunns averdupois w^ch {illeg} at {illeg} per C is worth at 76^li per Tunn is worth 3^li 16 182400^li /or in round or in round numbers, about 180000\ {illeg} \If in the next contract {the for} 16 16 Tunns &/ 6 p^r cent (the Interest paid by Cornwall for her Ma^ties moneys advanced to them by her Ma^ty) be recconed upon the standing dead stock of 182400^li during the next contract, & the contract be for {illeg} 1516 \only for 1600/ Tunns per an that the dead stock may not in remain the |& this quantity should be carried off by the consum annually that the dead stock may remain the| same, & her Ma^ty gives 3^li 10^s per C {illeg} stan w^t, the state of the contract will be as in the sch annexed \following/ account

That it

That at the end of the present contract there will remain \by the course of the sale \during this & the four last years/ there will remain at y^e end of the present contract/ a dead stock of about 2400 Tunns averdupois w^ch at 76^li per Tunn is worth 182400 or in round numbers about |of Tinn w^ch at 76^li per Tunn {illeg} averdupois is worth would produce about 18000 l will be worth about| 180000^li.

That if {no m the} \her Ma^ty/ contracts {illeg} for 16{illeg} 1600 Tunns of Tin stan w^t \annually/ & her Ma^ty at 3^li 10^s per C stan. w^t, & receives \without remitting/ the Coinage duty & Post groats & this quantity \shall/ be consume sold off annually so that the dead stock \of 180000^li/ may more or less remain the same during all that cont contract, & if 6 p^r cent (the interest now paid by \those in/ Cornwall for moneys advanced to them by her Ma^ty) be recconned \allowed/ upon the said dead stock: the state of the contract will be as follows.

|☉ If &c.| < insertion from f 133r > ☉ \In this recconing/ If 10800 /should\ be thought too great an interest upon dead stock, 1458.^li 18^s, is \as much/ too little for insurance & \all/ other accidents & unforeseen charges. < text from f 132v resumes > During this & the four last years the sale of the Tin \by our acc^ts/ has at a medium amounted to 15 about 1560 Tunns per a per an stan. w^t. w^ch being deducted from 1600 Tunns received annually from Cornwall & about 44 Tunns received annually from Devonsshire leaves upon her Ma 84 Tuns stannary or 90 Tunns averdepois \{being valued} at 76^li p^r Ton is 6840^li/ to be annually added to the dead stock: the interest of w^ch in \additions if the contract should continue/ six|even| years amounts to {illeg} 8618.^li 8^s besides the loss by the fall of the price in the end of y^e contrct {sic} w^ch may amount to about \about/ 13860^li m above \more/ if the Tin should \then/ fall {illeg} only to 54.^s p^r C averdepois <133r> ffor we are humbly of opinion that when y^e contract cease whenever the crown shall sell the dead stock it will bring down the clog the markets & bring down the price of Tin very low. Thus the Crown by purchasing 16 contracting for 1600 Tunns of Tin at 3^li 10\s/ per C would lose \in the space of 7 years/ about 2348.8 {illeg} \or above/ if the consumption \should/ continue at the as it \has/ been this & the last four years. & this loss in four years more would be more then doubled.

We have grownded this recconing upon a supposition that her Ma^ty the sale of the Tin at a me at a medium \will the l{illeg}/ continues uniform. How much it may increase or decrease by peace or new wars abroad we do not know & without a certainty can make no estimate of what may be got or lost

–– b|B|efore the determination of this present contract for setting making & {sic} new one at such a price as that her Ma^ty may be no loser thereby & pen p desire that it may be for some a further \a greater/ quantity: we have according to the the {sic} best of judgm^ts stated the account of {illeg} quantity & \the greatest/ price & quantity at w^ch her Ma^ty may contract w^th upon a par without being a loser \&/ supposing the sale continues \one year with another/ at y^e same rate as in this & the four last years, {illeg} w^ch find And for explaining this re that is {illeg} one year w^th another amounts to about 1560 Tunns p^r an we find that if her Maj^ty purchases {illeg} 1600 Tunns of Tin p^r an at 30 10^s p^r C stan w^t she will bea loser \only/ by the \a/ dead stock of about 84 Tunns p^r an lying upon her hands

<133v>

1 If all the purchase goes off her Ma^ty may give

2 {illeg} 100 Tunns remaining annually upon her Ma^ts hands is in the end of seven years {illeg} a loss \of/ {illeg}^li 126 Tuns in the interest & 220 Tuns by the {illeg} by the fall of y^e price in the end of y^e contract.

2 Every Tunn remaining in her Maj^ts hands is in 7 years a loss of 90 li in the

If any spirtual being be called an Angel, they understand the word absolutely & in a metaphysical sense for a species of being of a certain species: whereas the word is relative & moral, denoting a \messenger or/ servant sent upon messages by his Master \Lord/. So Chr In this sense Christ is the Angel \or messenger or servant/ of God & the Prophetick spiritus the Angel \or servant/ of God & Christ & all much more are all inferior spirits the Angels or servants of God when any inferior spirits is \are/ called the Angels of God it signifies that they are the servants or ministers of God. If the holy spirit be said to proceed from the father \meaning as a Messenger/ they take it for a metaphysical procession of his substance If Christ be called the Λόγος whereas he is said to proceed from the father as a messenger to confirm the truth of his message. If Christ be called the λ The Comforter who is the holy Ghost whom the father will send in my name he shall teach you all things Iohn 14.26. When y^e Comforter is come whom the Father \I/ will send unto you from the Father, even the spirit of truth who proceedeth \[or comes]/ from the Father, he shall testify of me Iohn 15.26. He shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak, & he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive \take receive/ of mine & shall shew it unto you. All things y^t the ffather hath are mine: therefore I said that he shall take of mine & shall shew it unto you. Iohn 16.13, 14, 15. And in the same sense Christ also proceeded from God. I proceeded forth, saith he, & came from God: neither came I of my self, but he sent me. Iohn 8.42. If Christ be called the λ λόγος – – – – –

If Moses saith saith {sic} Thou shalt not suffer a Witch to live we take it for a Woman who hath a metaphysical power of conversing w^th spirits, a {sham} conjurer & in the same sense we understand the word wizzad {sic} as if there were real conjurers & necromancers whereas the words signify only such \deceivers/ as pretend to the art of divining by spirits. So Astrologers, Augurs, Auruspices, are such as pretend to art of divining by the starrs, or \by the flying of/ birds & by the entrails of sacrifices, & Sorcerers & Magicians are such as pretend to do supernatural {works} by certain \words &/ ceremonies without being able to do what they pretend to.

If {it be said} \Moses saith/ There shall not be found among you \any one/ that useth divination or an observer of times [or an such as are \that is or \of/ days and/ lucky & unlucky days] or an enchanter or a witch or a consulter with familiar spirits or a wizzard or a necromancer: for because of these things the Lord thy God doth drive them [the nations] out before from before thee: \superstious {sic}/ men are apt to understand by these names such \men & weomen/ as have a metaphysical power of divining, inchanting, bewitching conversing w^th spirits & conjuring up \& raising/ the souls of the dead; whereas they should understand \take the names in \a/ moral sense for deceivers,/ such as only \falsly/ pretend to a power of doing these things, & thereby seduce \deceive/ & delude the people, & lead |{illeg}| them into idolatrous superstitions \seduce them/ to put their trust in dæmons \imaginary spirits/ & ghosts \or dæmons/ w^ch is \a degree of/ idolatry. \ffor what else were the Idols of the Gentiles but enchanted statues./ And so Astrologers, Augurs & Aruspices \& sorcerers/ are such \as/ pretend to y^e art of divining by y^e stars, |by| the motions of birds, \&/ &|by| the entrails of sacrifices, & by certain words & ceremonies \but are not without being able to divine &/ sorcerers & enchanters are such as pretend to \do/ supernatural works by \deceive the people by attributing supernatural effects to/ certain words & ceremonies, without being able to do what they pretend to \called charms & spells,/ w^ch in truth are of no efficacy. And to beleive that men \or weomen/ can really divine, \charm/ enchant, \bewitch charm/ or converse w^th spirits is a superstitions {illeg} \& {illeg} of the same nature with/ beleiving that the Idols of the Gentiles were really inhabited not vanities but had dæmons \spirits/ really seated in them. [All this is the doctrine of Dæmons \& of spirits of seduction/ condemned by the Apostle. For he that can conjure up a spirit may lodge {illeg} it conjure it into a statue & he can {sic} divine by a spirit can make himself a Priest to an \{illeg}/ Oracle.

<134ar>

Athanasius being accused of several crimes & condemned by the Council of Tyre A.C. 335 was banished by Constantine the great after he had also heard the cause. & So soon as Constantine was dead Iulius bishop of Rome \A.C. 337/ wrote to y^e {illeg} eastern bishops a chiding letter representing that the privilege of calling general synods & no bishop \acccused of crimes/ was to be judged upon an accusation of crimes but in a lawful synod called by Apostolic authority & that y^e privilege of calling general Councils \& hearing the {greater} causes/ belonged to y^e first seat, & the the first seat was the Roman by not only by the Canons & decrees of the holy fathers but also by the words of our saviour saying Thou art Peter & upon this rock will I build my Church & whatsever thou shalt bind or lose on earth shall be bound or losed in heaven. And that without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome Councils were not to be celebrated nor a Bishop condemned because the holy Roman Church has the Primacy over all the Churches. And as Peter was the first of the Apostles so the church of Rome was the first of y^e Churches & to her all the greater ecclesiastical causes & judgments of bishops ought to be referred & nothing be determined w^thout the Bishop of Rome. And this letter of y^e Bishop of Rome to y^e Oriental Bishops was the first attempt to y^e universal Bishopric, & the beginning of Popery. To this letter the Eastern Bishops re wrote a sharp answer representing that he dissoved {sic} their Council & sought to destroy em & unless he would forbear these

< insertion from f 135v >

The words dead & buried were also inserted into y^e Creed since the beginning. ffor th are also wanting in

The four words \expressions/ suffered was crucified dead & buried

Instead of the four expressions suffered, was crucified, dead & buried, the primitive Creeds had only the word \expression/ suffered & sometimes the word expression was crucified. T {illeg} Dead is implied in y^e following \next/ article \viz/ the third day he rose again from y^e dead. \And/ Buried is a circumstance mentioned only to confirm the truth of his death.

Now if the articles & expressions w^ch have been inserted \into the Creeds of the Latines/ since the beginning be omitted we there will remain the primitive following \primitive/ Creed of the Latines, I beleive in God the father Almighty maker of heaven & earth; & in Iesus Christ his only Son o^r Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, \was crucified dead & buried,/ the third day rose again from y^e dead, \He/ ascended into heaven & sitteth at|on| the right hand of God the father Almighty, From thence he shall cometo judge the quick & the dead. And I beleive in the holy Ghost. And the primitive Creed of the Greeks answer {sic} in substance to this of the Latines will be to this purpose. I beleive in One God the Father Almighty maker of heaven & earth & of all things therein visible & invisible & in one \Lord/ Iesus Christ the son of God who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, the third day rose again from the dead, He ascended into heaven {illeg} \in glory,/ ffrom t|w|hence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead; And I beleive in the Holy Ghost who spake by the Prophets. These \two/ Creeds are the same in substance as they ought to be because {illeg} in the beginning of the Gospel men were baptized into y^e same faith from one end of y^e earth to y^e other as you have heard out of Irenæus & these \primitive/ Creed was the symbol by repeating of w^ch they \Christians of all nations/ knew one another to be christians. The Articles conteined in them are generally found in the ancient Creeds & therefore authentiqꝫ those omitted are wanting in the oldest several of them & chiefly in the oldest. They are short & easy to be learnt by heart & remembred as a symbol ought to be. They are easy to be understood by the meanest capacities as the faith ought to be w^ch was to be offered to men of all capacities in order to their salvation, & is therefore compared by the Apostle to milk for babes. The Articles conteined in them are generally found in the ancient Creeds & therefore are \the most/ authentic. And \They/ contein the first principles of y^e Oracles of God They contein not all the articles of christian faith of Christians but all thats necessary to salvation the remission of sins by baptism & admission into the church by baptism. We must beleive in God one God or else we cannot love him. We must beleive y^t he is the father almighty, that the father by his almighty power, the fi that is, the first author of all things by the almighty power of his will, for we are to thank & worship him for our being & for all the blessings of this life. We are to beleive that Iesus the son of Mary who suffered under Pilate was is the Christ or Messiah predicted by Daniel or else we are no Christians. We are to beleive that he rose from the dead, for if he be not risen our faith is in vain & the dead in Christ are perished. 1 Cor. 15. We are to beleive that he sitts at y^e right hand of God \or/ that we may consider him \he/ a|i|s the Mediator be next to God in dignity, \the heir of all things/, the Mediator between God & Man \the heir of all things/, the King of Kings & Lord of Lords, that we may pray to God in his name & \{& beleive}/ keep his law endeavour to obtein the have some notion of \{illeg}/ the greatness of \conceive/ the happiness of those who shall be admitted into his kingdom be invited to live well to be exceeding great. We are to beleive that he shall \come to/ judge y^e quick & dead that we & reward all men according to their works that we may live accordingly. And we are to beleive that there is a holy spirit, who spake by Moses & the Prophets, that we may beleive & study their writing. \All these are truths w^ch influence the practise & therefore are necessary to be beleived./ But \what is the metaphysical nature of y^e ffather son & h. Ghost &/ what Christ was or what he did before he was born of the Virgin Mary \or between his death & resurrection/ or what he \or we/ shall do after the day of judgment, or with what bodies the dead shall rise, [whether w^th all the body w^ch they ever had from their conception to their death or only w^th so much of that body as they had at their death or only w^th part thereof or only] are questions of a {illeg} nature \{illeg} to disse/ less material for us to understand know \in order to a good life & conversation/ & more difficult to understand & so are the questions about predestination & free will & \about/ the nature of the satis{faction} made by Christ & therefore

Now if the Articles w^ch have been inserted into y^e Creeds since the beginning {be} omitted, the Creed of the Latines usually called the Apostles Creed wll be reduced to this form. I beleive in God y^e ffather Almighty maker of heaven & earth & in Iesus Christ his only son our Lord who was conceivd by the holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified dead & buried, the third day rose again from the dead; asc He ascended into heaven & sitteth at the right hand of God the ffather almighty; From thence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead And I beleive in the holy Ghost. And in this Creed there still remain some Articles w^ch seem to have been inserted from \since/ the beginning. ②

< insertion from lower down f 135r >

① The Article sitteth at the right hand of God the father almighty [hath also ben inserted by the Latins to since the beginning. ffor in] is wanting in the \two/ Creeds of Irenæus, \& in those of/ Eusebius, \&/ Lucius, & in those of y^e Councils of Nice, Antioch, one of Tertullians & that o \the Nicene & \in/ one of Tertullians/ one of Tertullians & in the Nicene, & therefore was not one of those articles of faith into w^ch all nations from {illeg} were baptized in the beginning of the Gospel nor is necessary to baptism, but has been crouded \put/ into the Creed between the articles ascended into heaven, \&/ from thence he shall come \to judge the qu/. ffor it spoiles \interrupts/ the reference: w^ch sense \those articles have to one another/ the words from thence relating to the word heaven ffor he does not come from y^e right hand of the ffather but fom heaven to judge the quick & the dead |ffor he comes from heaven to judge the quick & the dead & not from the right hand of the father for he sits at the right hand of the father not only in this world but also in that w^ch is to come as the Greeks represented in one of their Creeds|

Let these two articles therefore be omitted & the Apostles Creed will be reduced to these Articles. I beleive in God the ffather Almighty maker of heaven & earth, & in Iesus Christ o^r Lord his only Son who was born of y^e Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead & buried, the third day rose again from y^e dead, He \&/ ascended into heaven, ffrom thence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead, & I beleive in the holy Ghost.

< text from f 135v resumes >

ffor thes \two articles/ conceived by the Holy Ghost & sitteth at the right hand of God the father Almighty are \is/ wanting in the two Creeds of Eusebius Irenæus & in those of \recorded by \and// of Eusebius of Cæsarea & Lucius the Martyr & the Creed \Cyril/ of Ierusalem recited by Cyril & in two of Tertullians & in all the Creeds of y^e Councils of Nice, Antioch, Sirmium, Ariminum, Seleucia & Constantinople & therefore it was not necessary to baptism came not from the Grek Church in the beginning of the Gospel it being generally wanting in their Creeds, nor was necessary to baptism many nations being baptized without it, {illeg} & therefore was not inserted \put/ into the Creed \by the Apostles/ in order to baptism but came & after their days was inserted out of Lukes Gospel |& that improperly because it was improper to mention the holy Ghost in the Creed before the Article, I beleive in the Holy Ghost|. And indeed it obscures the true sense of the primitive Creeds w^ch teach that God is the ffather & the Virgin Mary the Mother of Iesus, or that he was incarnate of the Virgin Mary by the almighty power \& workes/ of God hi the father himself & the {free} \had no other father then God &/ is the only begotten son of God, all other man {sic} being born \begotten/ by the Almight ordinary course of nature. As he was raised from the dead by the Almighty power of the father & therefore is called the first begotten from \of/ the dead & the first born from the dead \& the son of God of whom God saith Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee./ Apoc. 1.5 Colos. 1.18, & the son of God Act 13.33: so he was incarnate by the same power almighty power & therefore \also/ is called the Son of God. The Angel said unto y^e Virgin Mary, a holy Spirit \(the λογος or Shekinah or Angel of Gods presence)/ shal come upon thee {illeg} & the power of the Highest (the almighty power of God the ffather) shall overshadow thee: therefore also that t|h|oly thing w^ch shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God Luke 1.35.] |He is not the Son of the Holy Ghost & the Virgin Mary but the Son of God the father. & the Virgin Mary. |

 As God Almighty the father \in the creation of the world/ by his almighty power formed the seeeds {sic} of all animals & vegetables before they grew out of \in/ the earth \& in the sea waters/ Gen. 1.11, 21, 24, & therefore Adam is called the son of God Luke 3.38: so \the same/ God for by the almighty power of his counsel, choise & will {illeg}incarnated Iesus & formed him in the seed before he \he/ grew in the womb of the Virgin Mary & to express this in the Creed, Iesus is called the Son of God & Mar his mother is called a Virgin. God formed the seeds of other things in the earth & waters by him & him in y^e womb of the Virgin by his own immediate power & operation {& therefore} he is called the only Son & the only begotten son of \God/ the father. <134v> The titles given to Iesus have generally a relation to y^e old prophesies in the old testament concerning him, that we may \& were given to him/ for explaining those prophesies & signifying that he is \the/ person predicted in them. He is called the son of man to signify that he is the person spoken of by that name in Daniels prophesy of the four b|B|easts. He is called Michael Apoc 12 to signify that he is that Michael the great Prince who at spoken of by Daniel in these words And at that time shall Michael stand up the great Prince w^ch standeth for the children of thy people Dan. 12. He is called the Mes Christ or Messiah to signify that he is the Messiah spoken of in the prophesy of Daniels weeks. He is called the king of kings & Lord of Lord {sic} to signify that he is the Prince of Prince the host & the Prince of Princes spoken of in Daniels prophesy of the Ram & he Goat. He is called the Λογος or Word of God to signify that he is the mouth \mouth or Oracle/ of God \whose testimony is the spirit of prophesy/ the great Prophet foretold by Moses. |He is called the Lamb of God to signify that he was prefigured by the Paschal Lamb in the law of Moses.| He is called the son of David to signify that he is the seed of David whose throne shall be established for ever Psal. 89. \Luc. 1.32./ He is called the son of God to signify that he is the person of whom God said in the Psalms Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Which prophesy Peter applies to Christs being begotten by his resurrection from the dead Act. 13.33 & the Angel Gabriel \& the Creed/ to his being begotten \conceived or begotten/ of the Virgin by the power of the most High. Luc. 1.35.] And in the same sense he is called \in the Creed/ the Son of God born{illeg} of the Virgin Mary, [& the relation w^ch these two Articles have to one another is interrupted by & clouded by inserting between them that he was conceived by the h. G]

< insertion from the left margin of f 134v > But the following form suits better with the Creeds of the Greeks of the Greeks < text from f 134v resumes > Now if these two articles be omitted the Apostles Creed will be reduced to this form. I beleive in God, the father Almighty, maker of heaven & earth, & in Iesus Christ his only Son o^r Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified dead & buried, He ascended into the third day he rose again from the dead & ascended into heaven, from thence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead & I beleive in the holy Ghost. This Creed is the same in substance w^th the first Creed of Irenæus, & therefore conteins the primitive faith w^ch according to Irenæus was preached to all nations in order to baptism & by the recital of w^ch all Christians from one end of the earth to y^e other knew one another to be Christians. Its articles are generally to be met with in the ancient Creeds of both Greeks & Latines, but |in the Creeds of the Greeks are better exprest by teaching to beleive in one God the father & in one Lord Iesus Christ \the son of God/ & in the h. Ghost who spake by the Prophets| use to be exprest more fully in the Creeds of the Greeks, {illeg} as in the following form I beleive in one God, the ffather almighty, maker of heaven & earth, & of all things visible & invisible, & in one Lord Iesus Christ the Son of God, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, & was buried, \&/ the third day he arose again from the dead, {illeg} \He/ ascended into heaven, from w|t|hence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead & reward them \every allowin one/ according to their|is| works |sending the ungodly & the {pern} blasphemers & the unjust & the lawless into everlasting fire & receiving into his own kingdom w^th glory all those who have lived well towards either from the beginning or after repentance| & I beleive in the holy Ghost who spake by the Prophets.

These Creeds, w^ch are the same in substance, are easy to be understood by the meanest capacities \& so are fit to be proposed to all men/, as the first principles of religion ought to be & on that account are \may/ properly \be/ compared to milk for babes. They are short & easy to be remembred as the symbols of religion ought to be. They are not mere mere Theories but practical truths on w^ch the whole practise of religion depends & therefore to be learned in the first place as the foundation of all religion. We must beleive in one God that we love him. We must beleive that he is the father <134br> almighty or first author of all things by the almighty power of his will, We y^t we may thank & worship him for our being & for all the blessings of this life. We must beleive that Iesus who was born of the Virgin Mary & suffered under Pontius Pilate is the Christ or Messiah \the Prince our Lord/ predicted by Daniel or else we are no Christians. We must beleive that he is o^r Lord or King that we may behave our selves \obediently/ towards him as subjects & keep his laws. \And that we may give him the more {honour}/ We must beleive that he was not an ordinary man but \incarnate by the almighty power of God &/ born of a Virgin without any other father then God him self. {illeg} We m We must beleive that by the same almighty power of God he rose from the dead & \that he/ shall come to be our Iudge y^t we may hab be our judge that we may endeavour to give \expect y^e like resurrection &/ fit o^r selves to stand before him at the in that day in the day of judment {sic} \& to deserve an early resurrection/. And we must beleive that there is a holy \prophetic/ spirit by w^ch Moses & the Prophets \& Apostles/ were influenced, that we may study their writing as the oracles of truth & thereby grow in grace & in the knowledge of o^r Lord Iesus Christ to y^e end of o^r lives. // ffor besides the \first principles &/ fundamentals of religion conteined in the Creed, there \w^ch all are to learn before baptism &/ w^ch the Apostle \therefore/ compares to milk for babes there are many truths of great importance but more difficultly to be understood & less \not absolutely/ necessary to salvation. And these the Apostle compares to strong meats for men of ripe \full/ age who by use have their senses exercised to discern both good & evil. With these truths the mind is to be fed continually as the body is w^th meats. And to these truths I refer what Christ did before his incarnation & between his death & resurrection \& after his ascention what he doth in heaven how long/ < insertion from the left margin > & how he {reins} in the day of judgmt untill all enemies are put under his feet, the last of w^ch is death that is untill all the dead are raised & judged < text from f 134br resumes > & what he \or we/ shall do after the day of judgment, as also the power of the keys, forms of \Church/ government, \all disputable {illeg} questions about the satisfaction of Ch Providence/ predestination free will, the nature of Angels, & the like state of the dead between death & the resurrection, & the like \the bodies w^th w^ch the dead shal rise, the power of y^e keys, forms of Church government/ the keeping of Easter /& other holydays\ & the like. About these \& such like/ things we are to learn all we can & to instruct one another, but not to fall out about them. The strong in faith & knowledge must not despise the weak & the weak must not judge & censure the strong but all pers Christians keeping the common faith into w^ch they were baptized & whereby they are \were admitted {illeg} into the Church &/ united into one church \mystical body of Christ/ must beare w^th one anothers infirmities & abound with love & charity \& meekness/ towards one another more then with {illeg}{self} love & fondness towards their own opinions. ffor knowledg puffeth up \but charity is the fulfilling of the law/ & self conceipt & pride of mind tends to wrangling & & {sic} enmity & contention \& schism,/ whereas the man of God must not strive. ffor Charity is the fulfilling of the law, & without it all {illeg} other graces & all knowledge whatsoever profit nothing. In this consists the unity of the & peace of the Church & wo be to them through whom offences come.

Now altho strong meats should not be given to mixed with \the/ milk w^ch is to be given to babes. yet the Latine Churches have done it. & thereby In opposition to hereticks they have added divers new articles to their Creed & thereby altered the foundation upon which the Church was built by Christ & his Apostles w^ch they had no authority to do. They might anathematize or excommunicate men for wicked practices, & for denying or perverting the faith into w^ch they were baptized. But were not to enlarge diminish or alter that faith themselves. ffor the servant is not above his master. All the articles of faith necessary to baptism were put into the Creed by the Apostles & nothing unnecessary was to be added afterwards. The sybol {sic} by which the Christians of all nations from {illeg} till the days of Irenæus knew one another to be Christians should not have been changed & in which the unity of the Church Catholick consisted should not have been changed. But they {illeg} changed it & by inserting new articles at length dissolved that unity was \dissolved/ While the new articles were in the language of the scriptures they made no disputes: but when they varied from the scripture language the Church was rent asunder by the contentions w^ch arose thereupon

< text from f 134ar resumes > <136r>

So that the sentence against him was the sentence of the Church Catholick. But the Council of Nice admitted \disputed against/ /scrupled\ the homousios, admitted it at the importunity of their Emperor, \&/ limited its signification, & as soon as the fathers of that Council & \& the next su/ were at liberty they disputed against it, \vehemently &/ dropt it in all their Councils & never desisted till they got it repeald If numbers of bishops are to be considered the Council of Ariminum was bigger then then {sic} y^e Nicene: If antiquity \freedom/ & universal approbation, the Council \of/ Antioch must take place. Hilary indeed te

Basil in his 300^th Epistle represents that the Council of Antioch in the case of Paul of Samosat rejected the word ὁμοούσιος because it implied a division represented \when/ a substance w^th its properties became divided in such manner that the substace {sic} \becam into parts/ when divided into parts {sic} w^ch it represented those parts it represent the parts of a divided substance And this was true in brass & money coyned out of it but had no place in God the father & God the son

ffor Basil tells us that y^e Council of Antioch in condemnng Paul of Samosat rejected the ὁμοούσιος for this very reason.

To Sir Isaac Newton Kn^t

Master and Worker of Her
Majesties Mint,

These

After the {illeg} question about y^e sen authority of the Greek Church was res over her own members was restored, {illeg} other \new/ Councils were called \at Sirmium Nicæa in Thrace/ to {illeg} reconcile the Churches about the faith. & a Council called These met at Sirmium, Nicæa in Thrace, Ariminum Seleucia & Constantinople in the years \357,/ 358, 359 & 360, & agreed to abolished the use of the word ουσια \& its compounds for these reasons 1/ because it was not in scripture \2^dly because it/ had been condemned by the Council of Antioch \with the approbation of the Church Cat all the Churches/ 60 years before the Council of Nice & the sentence was universally received, & was & 3^dly because it was a stumbling block to y^e people \& led them into \dangerous/ errors/ being commonly understood by them in a different sense from that of the Council of Nice, {illeg} for proving of w^ch the Acts of the Council were produced. The Council of Sirmium therefore \omitting the words ομοούσιος & μιας ουσιάς {illeg} declared the son to be similis patri secundū scripturas/ composed & subscribed a Creed w^ch was the next year subscribed by the Councils of Nicæa \&/ Ariminum & \by/ the Legates of the Council of Seleucia & the year following by the Council of Constantinople: to declare \{illeg} in w^ch Creed/ the son is \said to be/ similis patri secundum scripturas ✝ declared in their Creed that the son was similis patri secundum scripturas. And this Creed was the next year subscribed by y^e Councils of Nicæ & Ariminū & in the end of y^e year by y^e Legates of the Council of Seleucia & the year following by the Council of Constantinople. This Creed we recited above. And thus was the Grek & were the eastern & western Churches reconciled & reunited in the outward profession of faith. And in this \united/ state things continued till the end of the reign of Constantius & during the reign of Iulian the Apostate who be

at Sirmium in y^e years 357 358 & 359, at N Ariminum Nicæ in Thrace, Ariminum & Seleucia in y^e year 359

<136v>

the force of these reasons b The opinion of the

The words were laid aside therefore 1^st be for putting an end to y^e \great/ disturbances w^ch {they} had made in y^e Churches, & ffor the \Council of Nice &/ eastern Churches interpreting the ὁμοούσιος by ὁμοιούσιος similis substantiæ, the western by unius substantiæ. The And for convincing the western Churches that

The words were laid aside therefore for these reasons. 1^st because the \word/ ομοουσιος in its most proper signification (of w^ch the Greek were the best judges) imported a former substance out of w^ch both were a result of two substance first intire & then distinguished or divided into two arising out of division distinction or division of {illeg} \a prior/ substance into two or the coming of one substance out of another by emanation, emission, projection, \or/ partition as light comes from y^e sun, a river from y^e fountain, a branch from y^e root a fragm a {sic} piece from the whole & the like a child from the mother &c. And in this sense the word implies that the son sprang f & holy ghost sprang from y^e father after the manner of the Æons of y^e Gnosticks or were parts of him as in y^e Trinity of Montanus, & so was not \a/ proper \word/ to be applied to y^e Trinity.

2^dly Because the Council of Nice had admitted the word hastily \& by {illeg}/ & without mature deliberation the Emperor being present in y^e Council & pressing it, & the Council making scruples & {illeg} excepting against the {illeg} signification above mentioned w^ch was the proper signification of y^e word & cautioning that it should \not/ be taken for nothing \in that sense nor for any thing more/ more {sic} then ὁμοιούσιος & after the Council was ended, making the bishops who had composed the Council \& the B^ps in all the east/ disputing \afterwards/ against y^e use of word {sic} in all the East & \omitting it/ in a bigger Council at Tyre receiving Arius into communion w^ch {sic} & in all their Councils w^ch followed \{contending} that ομοουσιος was proper to bodies & ομοιουσιος to spirits/. For the Greeks how universally the Greeks rejected the word \ομοουσιος/ may appear by the character w^ch eusebi Hilary in his banishm^t A.C. 358 gave of the Eastern provinces where he was then in banishment.

3^dly Because the Latines had translated the word ομοούσιος by unius substantiæ & the translation thereby departed from the sense of the Nicene Council w^ch had interpreted the word by ὁμοιουσιος by similis substantiæ as appeared by the Acts of the Council produced in the Council of Ariminum for convincing the Latines. And there {illeg} {illeg} to put an end to the disturbances w^ch had arisen \{having} arisen great disturbances/ between the Greeks & Latines about the language of unius substantiæ & similis substantiæ \the best way to put an end to those disturbances/ was to abolish the use of the words w^ch had caused those|em|. disturbances

4 Because the words ex usia, homousios & unius substantiæ taken together, very much {illeg} the errors of Montanus & Sabellius, & caused them to spread in the west & the best {way to} put a stop to the growth of those errors was to remove the cause For Hilary in y^e year 358 wrote thus to the Bishops of Gallia & Britain. Multi ex nobis &c

5 Because the word homousios was repealed /rejected\ by the Council of Antioch

6 Because it was not in scripture.

Vir celeberrime

Quæ mihi attribuis vota{illeg} {illeg} patum conveniunt At fama tua ob doctrinam \simul/ et prudentiam late diffuse efficet inter Principum cura tibi demandata sit

Principes nobilissimi

Quod in regiones nostras discendi gratia peregre profectientes {illeg} gaudeo cum vestris auspicijs inde augurer quod vestris auspicijs reg humaniores scientiæ mere flore in regno Moscovitico augmentum sument & maxime florebunt.

<137r>

From this opinion of the Egyptians Plato had his doctrine of Ideas & the cabbala Iews, who in the rein \reign/ of the Greeks {illeg} were numerous in Egypt, had that part of their Cabbala w^ch treats \theirs/ of the ten Sephiroths or splendors w^ch were a{ether}eal emanations from the supreme deity.

Those heresies consisted chiefly in certain heathen opinions superstitions & impieties & per w^ch insinuated themselves first into the Iewish religion & then into the Christian. ffo

And as the Israelites of old by conversing w^th the heathens we

Hence came their Theogenies & metaphysical philosophy about the {illeg} generation {sic} \& nature/ of the Gods & the original of the world & the Platonic Idæas \From this opinion of the heathens came these metaphysical philosophy of the heathens/ \about the/ origin of the wold {sic} {illeg} \the generation & nature of the Gods & the/ transmigration of Souls. And this doctrine of Dæmons was as old as th the Idolatry of the heathens. ffor their Idolatry was grownded upon it. And therefore Moses to prevent the spreading of this sort of Philosophy among the Israelites wrote the history of the creation of the world in a very different manner from the {illeg} Cosmogenias of the heathens, attributing the production of all things to the immediate will of of the supreme God. Yet the Iews were very {illeg} were very apt to fall into Israelites by conversing with the heathens {illeg} in Canaan were very apt to fall into frequently lapsed into the worship of their Gods & by conquence {sic} received their Theology untill they were captivated for these transgressions. After And afterwards by conversing w^th the Babylonians \Chaldæans/ Assyrians, Egyptians {illeg} Persians Egyptians & Greeks they imbibed their metaphysicks about the Metaphysical Theology as is manifest by their Cabbala \of y^e Iews/ w^ch consists chiefly in describing how the first Being [whom they call Æn Soph the infinite, {illeg} caused {illeg} ten emitted ten |whom they call Æn-Soph the infinite emitted ten gradual subordinate emanations w^ch they call| Sephiroths or Splendors, {illeg} the first (w^ch they call Adam Cadmon & the first man, & Kether the Crown) proceeding \flowing/ immediately from himself \himself Æn-Soph/, the second (w^ch they call Cochmah wisdom) flowing from the first, the third (w^ch they call Binah prudence) flowing from the \first or second/ second {sic} & so on.] emitted ten sub-subordinate & gradual emanations the first And these {illeg} ten ema\na/tions they consider call by the names after Gods attributes & powers, the f calling the{illeg} first Adam Kether the Crown & Adam Kadmon the first man, the second Cochmah wisdom, the third Binah Prudence & {illeg} the fourth Gedulah magnificence, the fift Geburah strength \the sixt Tipherah beauty/ & so on \the last Melcoth \the {illeg}//. And after these ten \w^ch they call mundus azilutheus the emanative world/ they make three /lower\ worlds to be produced \w^ch they/ the called Iezirah, Briah & Asiah, w^ch last is this corporeal world w^ch they call Iezirah, Briah \Iezirah/ & Asiah Briah the throne of glory \& world of separate intelligences/, Iezirah the world of of {sic} Angels & Asiah the corporeal world \that is the world in w^ch we live/. And they say that the influence & power of the first cause w^ch they call Æn-Soph & the Ænsophic world reaches through all things & by means of the Sephiras the by means of the su by means thereof |that of Kether {illeg} & Cochmah & Binah through all things below them & that by means of the the superior powers superior powers| the Azaluthic kingdom formed the world Briah, the Briathic kingdom formed the world Iezirah & the Iezirathic kingdom formed the lowest world Asiah: & that y^e souls of men \come from above revolve & pass into several states & bodies &/ after death return to the internal light of y^e Shekinah.

This opinion seems to have had its rise from the \first/ worshipping & deifying of dead kings & exalting them in the opinion of the people till they made them the highest celestiall Gods taking \& took/ the oldest for \the supreme/ God almighty or for a God descended immediately from him & his successors for a series of Gods descended fro successively from y^e oldest, The & making this race of Gods as ancient as the creation of the {sic} world \or first/. For the Chaldeans placed a race of ten successive Gods {illeg} reigning from the time of the Creation \beginning of the world/ to the time of the flood, the as is recited in a fragment of Berosus preserved by Eusebius. The Phenicians Egyptians began their represented God's creation of the world by a spiders weaving a webb out of her own bowels & began their history with a gener race of Gods & {illeg} heroes the last of w^ch was Orus. The Phenicians began their history w^th a rac the creation \of the world/ & a race of above ten successive pairs of Gods as is recited by Sanchoniatho. And from Egypt & Phenicia came the like Theology into Greece as you may see in Hesiods Theogenia. And as the Cabalistical Iews \by conversing with the heathens fell into Idolatry frequently before the captivity so/ by conversing w^th the Chaldæans {illeg} Pheni <137v> cians & Egyptians in the time of the Babylonian Captivity \they/ seem to have learnt their Theology of those nations & refined it. ffor they derived their mystical Cabbala \by tradition/ from the days of Ezra \& supposed that it came to Ezra from Moses/ & this Kabbala consists chiefly in describing how \from/ the first cause whom they call Æn-Soph the infinite \were/ emitted ten gradually ten subordinate emanations which they call Sephiroths – – – – – Shekinah \formed/ the lowest world Asiah \X Each of the ten Sephiroths &/ < insertion from lower down f 137v > X Each of the ten Sephiroths they called Adam \a man/ & the first of them they called Adam Kadmon the first man \& make him the son of God as Adam is called in Scripture & {sic}/. From Which confirms the opinion that the ten Sephiroths were originally ten men deified, namely the ten antidiluvian patriarchs \mentioned by Manetho/ the first of w^ch was called Alorus & by the Chaldæans & Adam by the Iews. < text from higher up f 137v resumes > And as the ancient heathens held the transmigration of souls into various bodies, making them come from above \God/ & pass into various bodies & at length \after various states/ return upwards from whence they came so did the cabalistical Iews held that souls had a revolution; coming from above passing into various bodies & after death returning to the internal light of the Shekinah.

Now the ancient heresies sprang as well from the Cabbala of theIews as from the Theology of the heathens

Now as the Metaphysicks of the Cabbalistical Iews came from the Theology of the heathens so the opinions of the ancient hereticks \about the emanations of the Deity/ sprang from both. Simon & Menander called the first emitted substance {illeg} Ennoia

Plato travelling into Egypt at a time when the Iews were very numerous in that country learnt there his metaphysical opinions about the superior {illeg} beings & \formal/ causes of all things, which he calls Idæas & w^ch the Cabbalists call Sephiroths & separate intelligences \& the heathens Gods/ The first being {illeg} \was {illeg} by by/ the Platonists cald \was called/ the one & the {word} the next they called by them \was called Æon, Αιων/ Λόγος, ἐιδος, Ιδεα, Ο νους Η῾Σοφια, & Æon. \& by Philo/ Ιδέα των Ιδεων the general Idæa of all things \Æon the word the form the Idea the Mind the Wisdom^[17]/ And \by/ Philo {illeg} κόσμος νοητὸς το ἀρχήτυπον παράδειγμα, Ἰδέα των Ιδεων, ὁ θεου λόγος \& ὁ ὀρφὸς θεου λόγος προτοτονος {υιος}./ the intellectual world, the archetypal exemplar, the generall idea of all things, the word of God, the \true/ first begotten son of God. The third This principle seems to be the same w^th the {illeg} second Sephiroth of the Cabbalists called Cochmah wisdom. And [the third principle of the Platonists is Psyche the soul of the world. whose {illeg} is in matter the lowest |If by the world they mean the inferior material world Asiah, then Psyche will answer to Malcuth the last of the Sephiroths: but if they mean the system of the ten worlds, then Psyche will be the Shekinah w^ch produced {the three}| [This principle they make to be the wife of Æon & therefore /it was the Binah or third\ Æon Æon & Psyche of the Platonists are the Cochma & Binah of the {illeg} Cabalists Sephirah of the Cabbalists. For the Cabbalists made Binah to be the wife of Cochmah & called her the superior Shekinah & said that y^e Shekinah produced the worlds.] that is the soul of this material world \Asiah which soul/, w^ch according to the Cabbalists was called Malcuth the last of the Sephiroths. And as the Platonists make Psyche \to be/ the wife of Æon so the Cabalists make Malcuth \to be/ the wife of Seir Anpin other Microscopus, & the modern Cabalists tell us that Seir Anpin is the Soul of the Messiah united to the conjoyned w^th the eternal Logos. They call Malcuth the Shekinah & make a double Shekinah the superior called Dinah & the inferior called Malcuth & say that Shekinah produced the three worlds Briah Iezirah & Asiah. But the Platonists do not not {sic} make all these distinctions. When they speak [When they speak of the soule of y^e world they seem by this world to mean the system of all the three worlds & by the soul of this world to mean \the Schekinah & in the shekinah to comprehend/ Binah & Malcuth {illeg} w^th the six intermediate Sephiroths considered joyntly as the |ideal or| formal cause of this world \& called Malcuth in a large sence or at least by Psyche &/ & or at least they speak of Malcuth as |they mean| the soul of the inferior world Asiah. & called her Psyche <138r> The third principle \Being of the Platonists was/ was by the Platonists called Psyche the soule of y^e {illeg}world. & \She was/ supposed to be the wife of Æon \& therefore this philosophy had its rise from men & weomen {coupled}/. [And these three principles some take to be the three first Sephiroths of the Cabbalists Kether Cochmah & Binah. ffor the Cabbalists to make Binah to \{illeg}/ make \Cochmah the husband of/ Binah & from Binah deri with her \race of/ emanations derive the three world systeme of the three worlds, Briah, Iezirah & Asiah] And ffrom \{illeg} {illeg}/ Psyche they derived \the/ inferior ideas {illeg} \or forms {illeg} of the/ the souls of animals \women & beasts/ & the materia prima, The three & made a transmigration of souls \into various bodies/. Some take the One, the Logos & Psyche \of Plato/ to be the three first Sephiroths of the Cabbalists, Kether, Cochmah & Binah. And its possible that Plato might borrow from \in his travels might coverse {sic} w^th/ the old \Iewish/ Cabbalists, but whether he did or not is not material certain. This only \at least only/ is certain that Plato's Metaphysicks is of y^e same stamp w^th the ancient Theology of the heathens & Cabbala of the Iew Iews, all of them deriving the substances of all things from y^e the {sic} first cause by emanation & making male & female Gods.

Now as the Theology \Metaphysicks/ of the Cabbalistical Iews & Platonists came from the Theology of the heathens, so the \metaphysical/ opinions of the ancient hereticks about their Gods sprang \came/ from them all \both/. Simon & Menander called the first emitted substance Ennoia

The hereticks of the circumcision as Simon & Menander Nicolaus \Cerinthus \Menander// would be most apt to derive their opinions from the Iewish Cabbala & from this fountain came \was/ the rise of y^e Gnosticks. Those of the uncircumcision arose later & derived their errors partly from the Gnostic either followed the Gnosticks or or {sic} derived their opinions from the heathen Philosophers. the chief of w^ch & Principall from Platonick upon the after the death of Iohn & those that had conversed with him the begining of his Gospel was taken \by some/ for a piece of Platonick Philosophy |& chiefly the Platonists & some of them as Carpocrates & his followers worshipped the Images of the heathen Philosophers Pythagora Plato & Aristotle & other heathen Philosophers| & refining their opinions adapted them to the {Idea} principles of the Christian religion \set down in the Creed/. And first Montanus refining the errors of the Gnosticks \& heathen Philosophers/ by the Platoniqꝫ philosophy /end of Matthews Gospel,\ the principles \beginning/ of Iohns Gospel \& the Creed/ made the Son & holy Ghost emissions or Æons emitted from the father & subordinate to him. And misinterpreting the word \name/ Logos \used by Iohn/ he made the Son to be the internal wisdom reason & Word of the ffather, the Λογος ἐνδιάθετος emitted from him not like the empty voice of a man, but – – – –

– – – Philosophers. For some of them, as Carpocrates & his followers, worshipped the Images of several heathen Philosophers Pythagoras Plato Aristotle \Homer/ & some others. At first their opinions were gross but afterwards they refined them \by Platonism/ & applied them to the \ffather/ son & holy Ghost. For Montanus made the Son & h. ghost emissions or Æons emitted from the father & subordinate to him: & misinterpreting the name Logos use made the Son to be the internal wisdom reason & word of the ffather, the Λόγος ἐνδιαθητος emitted from not like the empty voice of a man but, but – –

<138v>

Where Christ saith, He y^t hath seen me hath seen y^e father, that is in their works, somehave understood it \literally/ of seeing their substance & thence inferred that the father & son are one in substance, tho the father is y^e invisible God whom no eye hath seen nor can see. Where Christ saith, Be ye one I & the father are one, many have understood it of a metaphysical unity as if they were one in substance, tho Christ himself interprets it of a moral unity by saying, Be ye one as I & the father are one. [Where Christ saith that y^e Holy Ghost proceedeth from y^e father many have understood it metaphysically as if \the sub substance of/ the holy Ghost proceeded from y^e \substance of the/ father by emanation; {illeg} whereas Christ plainly speaks of his proceeding from y^e father as a messenger. He tells his disciples that he would send the {illeg} comforter to them, & to confirm the truth of the message he tells them holy Ghos further that |t|hewould send Comforter proceeds from the father.] Where Christ is called the Son of God they many understand it of a natural generation from all eternity, whereas it relates to the prophesy Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, & this Prophesy is applied by Peter to Christs resurrection from the dead. Where Christ is called the Word Λογος, the Word reason & wisdom the Word of God, the many of understand it of the Λογος ἐνδιάθετος the \only/ inward reason wisdom & word of y^e of God \the father/ w^thout w^ch the ffather would be ἀσοφος & ἀλογος: whereas he is called the Word as he is the great Prophet to whom alone God reveals himself immediately & who sends his Angel w^th the revelations pr revelations to his servants the Prophets, [& is therefore call by this Prophetick Angel called the called the faithfull & true witness whose testimony is the spirit of prophesy] \as Iohn witnesses in these words:/ The Revelation of Iesus Christ w^ch God gave unto him & he sent his Angel & signified it to his servant Iohn God had the book \Apoc. 1.1./ The book of Prophesy was originally in the had {sic} of God & none was {illeg} worthy to receive it but the Lamb. who obteine (Apoc 4 & 5) who is therefore called the faithful & true witness whose testimon the Word of God, whose testimony is the spirit of prophesy.

<139r>

For understanding the progress of these heresies it may be convenient to distinguish the it into periods of time. And the first period I reccon the age of the Apostles w^ch ended with the death of Iohn in the first \or 2^d/ year of Trajan, A.C. 99, or \100 or about seven years after/ with the death of Symeon the son of Cleopas & bishop of Ierusalem, the last of the Apostolic men who had seen Christ. For Hegesippus who was contemporary to Irenæus mentioning y^e death of Symeon, adds that y^e church continued \till that time/ like a Virgin incorrupt & pure; but after the holy company of Apostles were dead, errors & heresies began to spring up very fast. {illeg} In this first age there were some hereticks of note as Simon, Menander, Nicolaus & Cerinthus, but these being checkt by the authority of Apostolick men who had conversed with Christ, made no great progress.

|In| The next age \therefore/ the arose \many hereticks/ Basilides, Carpocrates, Saturninus, Valentinus, \Secundus, Ptolomæus Cerdon/ Marcion, \Apelles, Severus,/ Marcus, Colarbasus, Montanus, Tatian, Theodotion, Bardasanes, Noetus, & others, & their {illeg} errors spread till they began to shock the Church w^ch The next age may be recconed first happened in the days reign of Severus, when Victor \the/ Bishop of Rome turned first a Montanist & then a Praxean (as Tertullian mentions) & excommunicated the Churches of Asia for keeping Easter on y^e 14^th day of y^e Moon. |The third period \age/ therefore must begin w^th y^e reign of Severus or Episcoppacy of Victor.|

The {illeg} next period of moment for \in respect of/ ecclesiastical affairs was the \sharp/ persecution of Decius in the end of w^ch anniversary holy days to martyrs \were instituted/ & auricular confession & pennance crept into the churches & Stephen Bishop of Rome wrote excommunicated the Churches of Afric & {sic} |for not admitting the baptism of| all sorts of hereticks. For By this easy admittance of hereticks into the Church of Rome, they were invited to croud into it. & by admitting it himself he invited all hereticks to croud into his church.

{illeg} made y^e son to be the internal wisdom reason & word of y^e ffather & emitted from him not like the empty vanid voice of a man but with a substance, {illeg} \like the emissions or Æons of the Gnosticks/, nothing being empty & void w^ch proceeds from God. His opinion Tertullian a Montanist thus sets down \& defends/. Invisibila quæcunqꝫ sunt habent apud Deum & suum corpus et suam fomam {sic}: quanto magis uod ex substantia ipsius missum est sine substantia non erit

☉Νους of Basilides & y^e emssions or Æons of the other Gnosticks, noth [nothing being empty & void w^ch proceeds from God.] {illeg} For in this manner Tertullian a Montanist sets down the opinion, Invisibilia of Montanus & in defending it contends that Valentinus borrowed his Æons from y^e truth

The Py