<116r>

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 wch 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 ye 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 wch \{illeg} wch was into that faith & by wch that faith men were admitted into/ \|And| This baptism/ was in ye name of that God & that Christ \& that Spirit/ & into that faith & by wch \{illeg}/ \it/ men were admitted into that Church. And \Whereas/ Antichristians had denied that God & that Xt & 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 & ye \too/ easy admission of hereticks into ye 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 aboutye end of the 2d century/ & the easy admission of {illeg} hereticks into ye 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 ye spreading of ye 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 ye Nicene Council at ye importunity of ye 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 wch 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 ers/ before they became Xians & 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 wth/ the bishops of this opini {sic} by the assistance of the Emperor Constantine had \had prevailed wth ye Council of Nice to/ decreed the Son to be ὁμοούσιος to ye 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 ye people & led many of them into the errors of Montanus & Sabellius, as I gather fom an epistle wch \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 ye 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 ye unity of ye deity & how zealous they were for it in opposition to the me\me/taphysical opinions of ye Montanists \hereticks/ about it, is thus described by Tertullian in his book against Praxeas written in the end of ye second century or beginning of ye third. Simplices quosq, 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 wth a loud voice, & in generall were affrighted & trembled at ye {illeg} this Oeconomy accounting it \the Trinity of the Montanists/ a division of that unity \wch they held Church beleived &/ in wch ye Monarchy was founded & affirming that the Montanists worshiped two or three Gods

<117r>

wth its co ουσια with its compounds ὁμοουσιος \{ὁμοι}ουσιος/ because not extant in scripture nor understood by ye 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 wch 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/ ye \same/ year by the Council of Seleucia \abolished the use of those words both/ in their prefa preambl preface to ye Creed of Lucius the martyr, & \again/ at ye end of that Creed where they say that \confirm the/ ye {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/ wthout any material alteration of words. The reasons given for abolishing the use of those words were yt 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 ye 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 ye Roman Empire \& therefore could not be revoked./ The Council of Nice had admitted the word Ὁμοούσιος hastily & wthout 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 ye errors of Sabellius, Montanus & the Gnosticks. For the Council underst \of Nice/ took the word in ye 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 wch are these words. Nomen autem substantiæ | ὀυσιας, quod a Patribus simplicius positum a patribus positum, a populisq 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/ wch 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 wch 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 ye| 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 absq 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 wch was about five years after saith

The faith wch Athanasius & his followers began now to profess \preach/ was the Serdican wth 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 wchthey had hitherto lain. [And henceforward \then/ the words usia & hypostasis wch 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 ye 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 ye 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 ye word unius substantiæ & thereby laid aside the interpretation of ye 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 wch peo|the| people understood ye Nicene decree, the first in favour of Sabellianism, the second in favour of Montanism & the third in favour of the errors of Hieracas & ye Gnosticks, & says that many of his party understood unam substantiam in some of these sen corrupt senses [& yt ought to be understood of a generical unity or similitude of property] And for The second reason making it appear that ye Nicene decree \ὀμοούσιος/ was not to be understood in any of these senses, the Acts of the Nicene Council were produced, in wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 wch they derived from Moses, others from Akkiba others from Andanus or Ananus & others from ye sons of Assamonæans, & celebrated these traditions under the name of wisdome & learning. And yt ye 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 ye 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 yt {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 ye 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 ye father suffers no change division or change, having the son its image. And if such a similitude of substance was the sense of ye the {sic} Council

these these

<119v>

For Sr Isaac Newton
at his House
in St 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 wch they called his garment & under that a sphere of splendor \or light (wch Divines call cœlum empyricum & make the seat of ye {illeg})/ & under that a spaceof the first aer wch 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 wch 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 wch was Malcath the kingdom/. These sephiroths they distinguished into two classes, called Arich Anpin & Seir Anpin \the man wth a gt face & ye man wth 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 \yt 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 wch Aristole {sic} & his successors placed in the \heavenly {illeg} eight/ Orbs of ye the {sic} Planets & {illeg} fixt stars & to Aristotel made but eight Orbs & then seven of ye 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 wth 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 wch/ their souls might be saved from ye 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 ye knowledge wch 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 yt \to wch/ 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 \8th/ 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 wch were comprehended in the {illeg} Arich Anpin, the supreme God wth 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 wch 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 wch 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 \wch/ 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 ye dead) having consciences seared as with a hot iron: forbidding to marry & commanding to abstain from meats wch God hath created to be received wth thanksgiving of them who beleive & know the truth. For every creature of God is good & nothing to be refused if it be received wth thanksgiving.

<122r>

the days of Iustin Martyr notwithstanding \without falling out about/ their different opinions. ffor when Trypho ye 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, esseq Deum, & genitum esse hominem ex virgine; sed hoc tantum ex omnibus \præ/ ostensis \probarem/ quod hic est Christus Dei, quicunq tandem sit. Quod si non demonstravero inquam, eum et prius extitisse Sed ex \omni/ præ ostenso \[sequatur tantum]/ quod hic est Chistus {sic} Dei, quicunq 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, neq 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 ye times of Victor & that from ye times of his successor Zepherinus (in whose days also Artemon was condemned for in ye east for ye 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 14th day of the first month of the Iewish year \a thing in its own nature indifferent/ & wrote communicatory letters to ye 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 wth Eleutherus against them. And therefore Victor was the first Bp 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 ye Papacy of \{St}/ Victor or reign of the Emperor Severus.

<122v>

And this is to be understood as well of the Christians of ye circumcision as of the Christians of the uncircumcision. ffor Iustin Martyr in his Dialogue wth 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 quæcunq nunc possunt ex Mosæ constitutionibus, quæ ob duritiam p cordis populi sancita esse intelligimus, unà cum concepta in hunc Christum spes atq perpetuis naturâq comparatis justitiæ et religionis veræ actionibus, servare, & cum Christianis fidelibusq vivere voluerint; ut modo illis non suadeant pariter \cum eis/ circumcidi ac sabbata agere aliaq quæcunq tandem sunt ejusmodi, exequi: eos recipiendos & ad communionem verū omnium ut fratres, eorundemq 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 legatem cum illis {illeg} consentiant politiam, itidem non silvari 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 wch 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 ye resurrection of the body & the life everlasting to the end of their Creed, & some Greeks Gree in opposition to ye Ebionites some Greeks began to insert the creation of the world by Iesus Christ. \& thus by/ mixing strong meats wth ye milk wch 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 ye 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 ye 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 ye Council of Ierusalem about this matter| & refused to communicate with them upon other terms, & these became ye 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 ye Iews & then the Nazarenes who refused to converse wth the Churches of the uncircumcision gained the Name of Ebionites & the other Nazarene mixed by degeres wth ye Churches of the

For like the \in the first age of Christianity/ days of Iustin Martyr [there \were/ Christians {illeg} who beleived that ye 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 ye 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 ye 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 ye world, & according to the second & third opinion \& perhaps ye 1st 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 ye 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} wch & 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 Xt some of them sa] & came down from heaven & was either incarnate of ye 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 ye 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 Xt ye son of God wch those Nazare Ebionites who said that Iesus was ye 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 ye name of Ebionites & said that they knew of no such man as Ebion, but but {sic} from the times of ye Apostles had releived distributed what they had \their goods to the poor/ to ye poor & so bei by that means being generally poor \impoverished/ were called Ebionites from the heb word Ebion wch 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 Xt upon Iesus they meant * < insertion from lower down f 123v > * in our language < text from 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 wch 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 ye 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 ye law as not only |{illeg}| to observe it themselves but also to avoid the communion of ye Churches of ye 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 yt the Ebionites were anathematized by the fathers for this alon nothing else but mingling the law with the Gospel.

<124r>

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 wch 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}

Due to Mr Spelman at Midsummer 1707 1. {0.} {6.}
1708 81.
1709 161.
at Xtmas 1709 201.
Paid Mr Molins 30.13.4 & 22.15.0 53. 8. 4
Paid Mr Walker 32. 0. 0
Taxes 12li & 12li & 6 30. 0. 0
Lent 32li 32. 0 0
147. 8. 4
21. 13. 4.
Due at Lady day 1708 0. 0. 0 Due to Mr Spelman at Lady day 1708. 5. 6. 8
1709 80. 0. 0 Pd to Mr Walker 16.
Xtmas 1709 {illeg}60. 0. 0 Spelman 21. 53. 4
140. 0. 0 Taxes 32. 00. 0
Pd Mr Molins 22 15. 0. Mr Molins 22 15. 0
Mr Walker 16 16. 2. 6
Mr Spelman 32. 0. 0 Taxes 20. 10. 0
Taxes 6. 0. 0 21. 00 0
150. 0. 10
145. 6. 8
4. 13. 2
Lady day \1708/ advanced 32
Lent Ian 22 17089 32
Paid Mr Molins 22. 15
Taxes a year & 3 qters 21
Pd Octob 16 1709 15 Guineas 16. 2. 6
Pd Ian 17101 20. 10. 0
Rent due 140li 144. 7. 6
140. 0. 0

{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.
IH. 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 \wth {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 wch 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 ye 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/ ye 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 wch 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: wch 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 ye cause should be heard before ye 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 f 125v resumes > : wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 wth the Churches of the circumcision (                 ) but were schismaticks for refusing to communicate wth Christians of the uncircumcision. The Nazarenes & Alogi continued in communion wth 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 esseq Deum et genitum esse hominem ex virgine: sed suffic{illeg} {illeg} |ex omni demonstrat{illeg} sequatum tantum| quod hic sit Christus Dei quicunq 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 ye 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 ye 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 Testamt 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 wch 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 wth 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 wch 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/ ye flesh or body wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 ye/ Planets. This eighth heaven In this heaven above ye 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 wch comprehended the other nine sephirahs & {illeg} was there called the highest crown     the

\infinite/ retracted himself from a great spherical space in wch he designed to form ye world create the worlds, [& emitted gradually into this space ten subordinate emanations wch they callled – – – in scripture deified] \first Being./ Next under God they placed a sphere wch 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} wch 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 wch 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 wch \they/ called Seir \Arich/ Anpin & Seir Anpin, the man wth a great face & the man wth 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 wch the heathens dedicated the seven metals & the seven Planets or \&/ wch 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 ye 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 ye 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 ye 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 & ye superior to \to the inferior &/ the heavens above the Planets \to the superior./, the first called Kether to the {ffor} vizt the 8th sphere wch was \or firmament/ of ye fixt stars & 12 signes to Binah, the ninth or spere {sic} of ye diurnal motion to Cochmah & the tenth or world of Intelligence wch 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 wth a great face & the seven inferior to Seir Anpin the man wth 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 ye 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/ ye 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 ye Xtian religion Xtians 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 wch then began to work & was to work untill the man of sin should be revealed & whose coming \was to be/ after ye 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 wth 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 ye circumcision principally followed & their disciples added to their \it/ out of the Poets & Philosophers of ye 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 ye 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 ye \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 wth 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 ye 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 wch 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 wth wth {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 wch cannot be separated from it self, nor is there any thing in him wch 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: wch 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

Symbol (cross with 3 uprights) in text 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 wth other Angels & from those a second heaven or world of other Angels, & from those a third heaven or world & {illeg} from those others to ye 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 wth 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 ye beginning Αρχ \the/ Beginning ἀρχη was the |Gods| first emanation \male/ emission or Æon & the Word wch 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 wth Saturninus,

<129r-a>

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 ye 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 wch they \called/ the Crown \η Αρχη/ & Adam Cadmon \the first Man/ reteined all the other nine Sephiroths eminently in {it self &} the Gnosticks wth called the first God Bythos & Megathos the Profundity & the Magnitude, meaning {illeg} \the/ {illeg} magnitude wthout 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 wch 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 Xt 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 wch 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, wch is first ενδιαθετος |silently conceived in the mind {illeg}| & then emitted wth 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 wch 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} <129r-b> that Ialdabaoth (or as others called him, Sabaoth) was her son & placed him in ye seventh heaven, {illeg} & other \inferior/ Æons they placed in ye 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 ye 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 p 129r-a resumes >
<130r>

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 wch 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 wch 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 \wch 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 or Lord.| till the coming of or 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 ye 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 |ye| 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/ ye sun & \or a river from the fountain/ & on that account said that he was ομοούσιος to the father (of wch 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 wch the ffather would \be/ ἄσοφος & ἄλογος (of wch sort were the Sabellians) willingly & for that reason approved the language of unius substantiæ (of wch 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 wth the Council of Nice held the son to be of like substance wth 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 ye 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 ye sense wch 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 > \wch was/ that ομοουσιος signified nothing more then \not unius substantiæ but/ ομοιος κατ᾽ ουσίαν.

< text from 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 Bp 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 ye Emperor Constantine who reheard ye 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 wch consisted of about 97 bishops

And Ierome: Animas humanas de cælo lapsus esse Pythagoras Omnesq 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 ye 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 ye 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 wch < 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. Vbiq 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 wch 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/ wch 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 ye 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 wch 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 ye ffather in the same sense of the Gnosticks. These Hereticks also \taught the tran heathen transmigration of souls &/ derived the souls of men from ye 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 ye first emission called Ennoia \was shut up in a woman by Angels &/ passed from woman to woman & \was in Minerva & afterwards in Helen/ in ye 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 ye Angels who made ye world had formed a man they were not able to give him life, but the virtue from above emitted a spark of life wch made the man live, & wch after death should return to those things wch are of ye 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 ye 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 Bp of Hippo Gnostici Manichæi Priscilianistæ animas humanas de substantia Dei confectas Deoq 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 ye holy Ghost in other countries; [I suppose he means in \respect of/ \vizt in respect of/ several humane bodies {illeg} \bodies animated by ye Deity according to/ the doctrine of ye 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 wch 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 wch 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 Majty takes no more Tin then the consumption may annually carry off

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

– that if 6 pr cent \the consumption sh \the consumption shoul 1600 Tunns of Tin per an & ye same be annually consumed// her Maty purchases no more |1600 Tunns of Tin per an stan wt at 3li 10s per Tunn & without abating the coinage duty & Post groats| Tin {sic} then ye consumption will annually carry off \supposing 600 Tunns {illeg}/ & 6 pr cent {illeg} (the interest {illeg} at wch her Maty lends money to cont \money/ to ye Cornwall) be allowed up to her Maty {illeg}upon all ye \rest of the/ money advanced, wch by our we estimate at ye at about 180000 the \being the/ value of ye Tin wch at the end of the contract present contract \by the best estimation we can make/ may remain unsold at ye recconning 3li 10s per ton symbol in text averdupois will according to the best estimate we can make \will remain/ remain unsold \be at the end of the present contract/ her Maty may safely purchase 1600 Tunns per an stan. wt at 3li 10s pr ton symbol in text stan weight \to be sold/ at 3li 16s pr ton symbol in text averdupois: there remain will be allowed only to her Maty only about 1458.l. 18.s \annually,/ to answer all unforeseen accidents & expences wch \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 wch has been sold annually duringthe last four years

that if her Maty purchases 1520 Tunns per an stan wt at 3li 10s pr ton symbol in text stan wt {illeg} wthout remitting the Coinage duty & post groats & if 6 per cent be allowed upon

If her Maty should purchase annually 1520 Tunns pr an at 3li 9s pr ton symbol in text st. wt there would

<132v>

that 1520 Tunns per stan. wt is as much as the consumption has been ye consumption

–– that ye consumption during the last four & the present has \at a medium/ amounted to annually to 156 about 1560 Tunns from \wch/ if 44 Tunns of Devonshire Tin be deducted there will remain 1516 Tunns the annual consumption of the Devonshire \Cornish Tin/ That at ye end of the present contract there will remain {illeg} \a/ dead stock of about 2400 Tunns averdupois wch {illeg} at {illeg} per ton symbol in text is worth at 76li per Tunn is worth 3li 16 182400li /or in round or in round numbers, about 180000\ {illeg} \If in the next contract {the for} 16 16 Tunns &/ 6 pr cent (the Interest paid by Cornwall for her Maties moneys advanced to them by her Maty) be recconed upon the standing dead stock of 182400li 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 Maty gives 3li 10s per ton symbol in text {illeg} stan wt, the state of the contract will be as in the sch annexed \following/ account

Paid annually for 1600 Tunns of Tinn at 3li 10s per ton symbol in text106120 \112000/
ffeight {sic} to London2{illeg}|142| {illeg} 163
Salaries in London1350
Incidents & Porters in London200
Passing accounts94
Salaries in Cornwal & including \&/ 30li to Truro1540
Incidents in Cornwall700
Interest of 182400l at 6 pr cent10124
122958
Insurance & accidents502757
Annual produce of Tin sold at 3li 16s pr ton symbol in text averdupois12798557
|Annual| Addition of 84 Tunns \84 Tuns stan wt or 90 averd/ to the dead stock \added annually/ to make up 1600 Tunns per an {illeg} makes an Interest a \annual/ addition of {illeg} 6840li {illeg} to ye value of the dead stock the interest of \all/ wch additions in seven years \at 6 per cent/ comes to1149115

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 ye end of the present contract/ a dead stock of about 2400 Tunns averdupois wch at 76li per Tunn is worth 182400 or in round numbers about |of Tinn wch at 76li per Tunn {illeg} averdupois is worth would produce about 18000 l will be worth about| 180000li.

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

Pd annually for 1600 Tunns of Tin at 3li 10s per ton symbol in text stan. wt112000
ffreight to London2142. 163
Salaries in London1350
Incidents & Porters in London200
Passing accts94
Salaries in Cornwall & 30li to Truro1540
Incidents in Cornwall700
Interest of 180000li at 6 pr cent10800
128826. 16.3
Insurance & other accidents & unforseen charges1458. 18.0
Produced \annually/ by sale of the Tin at 3l 16s pr ton symbol in text averdupois130285. 14.3

| If &c.| < insertion from f 133r > \In this recconing/ If 10800 /should\ be thought too great an interest upon dead stock, 1458.li 18s, 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 accts/ has at a medium amounted to 15 about 1560 Tunns per a per an stan. wt. wch 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 76li pr Ton is 6840li/ to be annually added to the dead stock: the interest of wch in \additions if the contract should continue/ six|even| years amounts to {illeg} 8618.li 8s besides the loss by the fall of the price in the end of ye contrct {sic} wch may amount to about \about/ 13860li m above \more/ if the Tin should \then/ fall {illeg} only to 54.s pr ton symbol in text averdepois <133r> ffor we are humbly of opinion that when ye 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 3li 10\s/ per ton symbol in text 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 Maty 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 Maty 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 judgmts stated the account of {illeg} quantity & \the greatest/ price & quantity at wch her Maty may contract wth upon a par without being a loser \&/ supposing the sale continues \one year with another/ at ye same rate as in this & the four last years, {illeg} wch find And for explaining this re that is {illeg} one year wth another amounts to about 1560 Tunns pr an we find that if her Majty purchases {illeg} 1600 Tunns of Tin pr an at 30 10s pr ton symbol in text stan wt she will bea loser \only/ by the \a/ dead stock of about 84 Tunns pr an lying upon her hands

<133v>

1 If all the purchase goes off her Maty may give

3l 10s per ton symbol in text for {illeg}
3. 10s. 812 for {illeg}
3. 11. 4 18{illeg}

2 {illeg} 100 Tunns remaining annually upon her Mats 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 ye price in the end of ye contract.

2 Every Tunn remaining in her Majts 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 ye 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 yt 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 wth 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 wth 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/ wch 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 ye art of divining by ye 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,/ wch in truth are of no efficacy. And to beleive that men \or weomen/ can really divine, \charm/ enchant, \bewitch charm/ or converse wth 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.

<134r-a>

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 ye {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 ye privilege of calling general Councils \& hearing the {greater} causes/ belonged to ye 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 ye Churches & to her all the greater ecclesiastical causes & judgments of bishops ought to be referred & nothing be determined wthout the Bishop of Rome. And this letter of ye Bishop of Rome to ye Oriental Bishops was the first attempt to ye 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 ye 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 ye following \next/ article \viz/ the third day he rose again from ye dead. \And/ Buried is a circumstance mentioned only to confirm the truth of his death.

Now if the articles & expressions wch 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 or 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 ye 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 ye same faith from one end of ye earth to ye other as you have heard out of Irenæus & these \primitive/ Creed was the symbol by repeating of wch they \Christians of all nations/ knew one another to be christians. The Articles conteined in them are generally found in the ancient Creeds & therefore authentiq 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 wch 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 ye 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 yt 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 ye 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 ye 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 wch influence the practise & therefore are necessary to be beleived./ But \what is the metaphysical nature of ye 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 wth all the body wch they ever had from their conception to their death or only wth so much of that body as they had at their death or only wth 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 wch have been inserted into ye 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 ye 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 wch 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 ye 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 wch 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: wch sense \those articles have to one another/ the words from thence relating to the word heaven ffor he does not come from ye 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 wch 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 or Lord his only Son who was born of ye Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead & buried, the third day rose again from ye 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 ye 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 wch 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 ye 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 wch 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 ye 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 ye 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 wch 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 wch 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 or 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 wth the first Creed of Irenæus, & therefore conteins the primitive faith wch according to Irenæus was preached to all nations in order to baptism & by the recital of wch all Christians from one end of the earth to ye 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 wth 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, wch 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 wch 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 <134r-b> almighty or first author of all things by the almighty power of his will, We yt 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 or 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 yt we may hab be our judge that we may endeavour to give \expect ye like resurrection &/ fit or 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 wch 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 or Lord Iesus Christ to ye end of or lives. // ffor besides the \first principles &/ fundamentals of religion conteined in the Creed, there \wch all are to learn before baptism &/ wch 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 wth 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 wch is death that is untill all the dead are raised & judged < text from p 134r-b 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 wth wch the dead shal rise, the power of ye 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 wch they were baptized & whereby they are \were admitted {illeg} into the Church &/ united into one church \mystical body of Christ/ must beare wth 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 wch 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 wch they had no authority to do. They might anathematize or excommunicate men for wicked practices, & for denying or perverting the faith into wch 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 wch arose thereupon

< text from p 134r-a 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} ye Nicene: If antiquity \freedom/ & universal approbation, the Council \of/ Antioch must take place. Hilary indeed te

Basil in his 300th 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 wth its properties became divided in such manner that the substace {sic} \becam into parts/ when divided into parts {sic} wch 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 ye Council of Antioch in condemnng Paul of Samosat rejected the ὁμοούσιος for this very reason.

To Sir Isaac Newton Knt

Master and Worker of Her
Majesties Mint,

These

After the {illeg} question about ye 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 \2dly 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 & 3dly because it was a stumbling block to ye 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 wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 ye Councils of Nicæ & Ariminū & in the end of ye year by ye 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 ye years 357 358 & 359, at N Ariminum Nicæ in Thrace, Ariminum & Seleucia in ye year 359

<136v>

the force of these reasons b The opinion of the

The words were laid aside therefore 1st be for putting an end to ye \great/ disturbances wch {they} had made in ye 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. 1st because the \word/ ομοουσιος in its most proper signification (of wch the Greek were the best judges) imported a former substance out of wch 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 ye sun, a river from ye fountain, a branch from ye root a fragm {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 ye father after the manner of the Æons of ye Gnosticks or were parts of him as in ye Trinity of Montanus, & so was not \a/ proper \word/ to be applied to ye Trinity.

2dly Because the Council of Nice had admitted the word hastily \& by {illeg}/ & without mature deliberation the Emperor being present in ye Council & pressing it, & the Council making scruples & {illeg} excepting against the {illeg} signification above mentioned wch was the proper signification of ye 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 Bps in all the east/ disputing \afterwards/ against ye use of word {sic} in all the East & \omitting it/ in a bigger Council at Tyre receiving Arius into communion wch {sic} & in all their Councils wch 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 wch eusebi Hilary in his banishmt A.C. 358 gave of the Eastern provinces where he was then in banishment.

3dly Because the Latines had translated the word ομοούσιος by unius substantiæ & the translation thereby departed from the sense of the Nicene Council wch 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 wch 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 wch 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 ye 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 wch treats \theirs/ of the ten Sephiroths or splendors wch were a{ether}eal emanations from the supreme deity.

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

And as the Israelites of old by conversing wth 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 wth the Babylonians \Chaldæans/ Assyrians, Egyptians {illeg} Persians Egyptians & Greeks they imbibed their metaphysicks about the Metaphysical Theology as is manifest by their Cabbala \of ye Iews/ wch 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 wch they call| Sephiroths or Splendors, {illeg} the first (wch they call Adam Cadmon & the first man, & Kether the Crown) proceeding \flowing/ immediately from himself \himself Æn-Soph/, the second (wch they call Cochmah wisdom) flowing from the first, the third (wch 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 \wch they call mundus azilutheus the emanative world/ they make three /lower\ worlds to be produced \wch they/ the called Iezirah, Briah & Asiah, wch last is this corporeal world wch 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 wch we live/. And they say that the influence & power of the first cause wch 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 ye souls of men \come from above revolve & pass into several states & bodies &/ after death return to the internal light of ye 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 ye 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 wch was Orus. The Phenicians began their history wth 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 wth 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 wch was called Alorus & by the Chaldæans & Adam by the Iews. < text from 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 & wch 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 wth 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 wch 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 ye Shekinah produced the worlds.] that is the soul of this material world \Asiah which soul/, wch 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 wth 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 ye 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} wth 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 ye {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} wth/ 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 ye same stamp wth the ancient Theology of the heathens & Cabbala of the Iew Iews, all of them deriving the substances of all things from ye 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 ye 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 wch & 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 Platoniq 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 yt hath seen me hath seen ye 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 ye 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 ye Holy Ghost proceedeth from ye father many have understood it metaphysically as if \the sub substance of/ the holy Ghost proceeded from ye \substance of the/ father by emanation; {illeg} whereas Christ plainly speaks of his proceeding from ye 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 ye of God \the father/ wthout wch 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 wth 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 wch 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 wch ended with the death of Iohn in the first \or 2d/ 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 ye death of Symeon, adds that ye 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 wch 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 ye 14th day of ye Moon. |The third period \age/ therefore must begin wth ye 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 wch 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 ye son to be the internal wisdom reason & word of ye 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 wch proceeds from God. His opinion Tertullian a Montanist thus sets down \& defends/. Invisibila quæcunq 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 & ye emssions or Æons of the other Gnosticks, noth [nothing being empty & void wch 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 ye truth

The Py

<139v>

Chap.
Of the working of the mystery of Iniquity

The Apostle Paul hath told us that before the coming \day/ of Christ there should be \a falling away or/ an Apostasy & the Man of Sin should be revealed the son of perdition, who was to who opposeth & exalteth himself above all that is called God or that worshipped, so that he as a God (or Oracle) sitteth in the templ so that he as a God \(or Oracle/ sitteth in the Temple \(or Church)/ of God \(as it were upon the throne between the Cherubims)/ shewing himself that he is a God, & that this mystery of iniquity worked even {illeg} in his days only that wch letted should let untill it be should be taken out of the way & then should that wicked one be revealed whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power & signes & lying wonders & a strong delusion & with all deceivableness of unrighteousness & who should reign as a God or Oracle in the temple or Church of God untill the Lord should destroy him with the brightness of his coming. There was to be therefore an Apostasy which should last from ye Apostles days to the day of judgment second coming of Christ & therefore is now in being. It worked in the Aposles {sic} days & was to work without dominion untill that wch letted its \rise/ should be taken out of the way & then it was to rise up & appear & reign as a God in the Church untill the day of judgment. \by means of a like an angel of light/ with all power & |signs| |&| lying wonders & a strong delusion & reign as a God in the Church \or Oracle in the Temple of God or as an Orac/ untill the day of judgment, that is, \it was to reign & be worshipped in the {illeg} angel of light/ it should \was to/ reign /in ye Church\ with \divine authority/ an authority wch all Christians \whose names are not writen in the book of life/ should worship & wonder after whose names are no as the authority of God himself whose names are not as the \infallible/ authority of God himself, & by this authority it should change times & laws & they should be given into its hands untill the judgment should sit.

Now that wch letted ye Apostle does not name \least he should should be thought an enemy to ye \Roman/ Empire/, but tells the churches that they knew it already & by the tradition of ye first ages of Christianity it was the Roman Empire: not the sun \the a {illeg} future/ Christian Empire {illeg} (for the Man of Sin was to be a Christian dominion) but the heathen Roman Empire wch reigned in the Apostles days While this empire stood the Man of Sin \who was to be a Christian Roman dominion/ could not rise up with dominion but when so soon as it should \be/ taken \out of the/ away we were to exp he was to be revealed. And because th that wch letted was to be taken \out of the/ away therefore the Apostle does not name it least he should seem {sic} \be blamed by the heathens as/ an enemy to ye Roman \their/ Empire. So then we are he{illeg}re to consider the working of the mystery of iniquity during the reign of ye heathen Roman Empire & after the fall of that Empire to expect the rise of the man of sin.

Now the mystery of iniquity wch worked in the Apostles days & continued to work till the end of the heathen Roman Empire was the heresies {illeg} of Simon Magus, Nicolaus, Menander, Cerinthus & wch then sprang up & whose authors Iohn calls Antichrists. Little children saith he, it is the last time; & as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come even now there are many Antichrists whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us but they were not of us &c. Which is as much as to say that |as| they had heard that Antichrist should come & \that/ the last time was the time of Antichrist \his reign/,so by the \many/ hereticks which had separated from us \the Church/ & a|we|re the forerunners of the great Antichrist, ye may \they might/ know that the last time taken in a large sense so as to comprehend Antichrist with his forerunners was already begun. Those heresies consisted chiefly in – – – – – – & used the signe of the cross as \an/ amulet or charm against the devil & his works, as the Montanists.

In Parabola velocitas corporis ad quamvis ab umbilico distantiam est velocitatem {illeg} circulo ad eandem a centro distantiam in subduplicata ratione

<140r>

The authority of this Viccar extended over Epire, {illeg} {as} {illeg}

The bishop of Rome had also his Vicar over the Province of Venice. For Pope Leo in his 87th Epistle directed to Septimus writes thus. \Ne imperia possit obtinere fall{acem}/ Ad metropolitanum Episcopum provinciæ Venetiæ scripta direximus quibus ad status sui periculam {co}gnosceret pertinere si quisquam de Pelagionorum {sic} & Cælestianorum consorte veniens in communione Catholica sine professione legitimæ satisfactionis habeatur.

He had also his Vicar over all Gallia & this Vicar \in the day/ was sometimes the bishop of Arles. ffor all the Bishops under \of/ this Metropolis \Diocess/ in their Epistle to Pope Leo I say in favour of their Ra{vennius} b their Metropolitan Cui id etiam honoris dignitatisq collatum est, ut non tantum has Provincias \[vizt Viennensem, Narbonensem primam & Norbonensem secundam]/ potestate propria gubernaret verum etiam omnes Gallias, sibi Apostolicæ sedis vice mandata sub omni Ecclesiastica Regula continteret. [And in the same Epistle these bishops say that per beatum beatissimum Petrum Apostolorum principem sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia Romana teneret supra omnes totius mundi Ecclesias principatum. [And \Ceretius/ Salonius & Veranus &|t|hree other bishops of Gallia in their Epistle to Pope Leo I say Magna præterea et ineffabili quadam nos peculiares tui gratulatione succeressimus] These relate About 34 years before the wri These letters were written A.C. 450 & about 34 years be] {illeg} And Pope Leo in his epistle to his Vicar Anastasius bishop of Thessalonica (one of his Vicars) speaking of the subordination of bishops \governours/ saith: De qua forma, episcoporum \quoq est/ orta distinctio, & magna dispositione provisum est, ne omnes sibi omnia vindicarent: sed essent in singulis Provincijs singuli quorum inter fratres haberetur prima sententia: et rursus quidam in majoribus urbibus constituti sollicitudinem suciperent ampliorem per quos ad unam Petri sedem universalis Ecclesiæ cura conflueret & nihil usq a suo capite dissideret. Qui ergo scit se quibusdam esse præpositum, non moleste ferat aliquem sibi esse præpositum: sed obedientiam quam exigit etiam ipse dependat. Et sicut non vult gravis oneris sacinam ferre ita non audeat alijs importabile pondus imponere. These words sufficiently shew the the form of government then set up in the Churches of the western Empire under the bishop of Rome.

One circumstance of this form of government was that no bishops or others were allowed access to the Pope without the Credentialls of his Metr Vicars, as is mentioned in the decretall Epistle of this Pope Zosimus \written A.C. 417/ to the bishop of Arles his Vicar over \all/ France, in these words

Zosimus universis episcopis per Gallias & septem Provincias constitutis.

Placuit Apostolicæ sedi – – – – concessimus. Which words imply that the power here given to the Popes Vicar over France had been \was/ given also to his Vicars over other Provinces. < insertion from the left margin of f 140r > For Pope Zosimus A.C. 417 ordeining that none should have {illeg} all Gallia upon the Bp of A \bp/ of Rouen Arles by this decree < text from f 140r resumes >

{illeg} \The granting of this/ This {sic} jurisdiction being granted to the Pope, gave occasion to several bishops to write decret to him for his resolutions upon doubtfull cases & to his answering them by decretal Epistles. For in these days he began to give laws to the western Churches by decretal \such/ Epistles. For Himmerius bishop of Tarraco &c – – – – – of Syricius to Himmerius:

Pope Innocent I – – – – – – as the head of their institution.

In the days of Pope Zosimus (A.C. 417) the bishop of Arles wasthe Popes Vicar over all Gallia. For in those days \the bishops & others had/ no access was allowed to the Pope was granted to Bishops or others without the credentialls of his Vicars, & the power of giving credentials to those of France all Gallia was \then/ lodged in this bishop by the Decretal Epistle of Pope Zosimus wch ran thus.

Zosimus universis Episcopis per Gallias & septem Provincias constitutis.

Placuit Apostolicæ sedi – – – – – – – concessimus. And all the bishops in the Diocess of Arles in their Letter to Pope Leo, say, in favour of their Metropolitan: – Cui id etiam – – – – – – – contineret.

<140v>

And in pursuance of the vote of the \said/ Council of Rome & the Edict of Gratian thereupon \Pope Innocent I in his decretal Epistle to Vatricius bp of Rouen in France A.C. 404./ made this decree: Siquæ – – – – – – of their institution

– Rome A.C. 382, that is, presently after the Edict of Gratian. ffrom that time they allowed a superiority to ye Pope & soon after became his emin their metropolitan became his Vicar.

By vertue of the authority wch the Bp of Rome had been long {illeg} endeavouring to compass & wch the Council of Serdica had given him, Constantius had taken from him & Gratian by Gratian had restored, he soon began

The Hilarary \The/ bishop of Arles in Province & Vienne in Dauphiny had a lasting controversy about superiory {sic} & at length upon some disturbances answe occasioned thereby

The same Pope

By vertue of this authority, Pope Boniface A.C. 419 \upon a complaint of the Clergy of Valentia against \Maximus the \a/ bishop// summoned the Bishops of Gallia & the seven Provinces to convene in a Council in that Province \in that Province against him/ & saith in his epistle to them that his predecessors had done the like. Vide Bonifacij Epist. 2.

And when the bishops of Arles & Vienne in Province & Dauphiny had a lasting controversy about superiority & at length upo & the disturbances created thereby were complained of to the Pope, Hillary bishop of Arles was checkt by the Popes Boniface, & Cælestine & Leo successively, & \upon a citation appeared at Rome {illeg} before a Council & Pope/ Leo not only sent {illeg} a decretal Episle {sic} about this matter to the bishops of Gallia & Province but procured a new Imperial Edict to back the authority of his see.

But in citing the Council of Nice

But Pope Zosimus a litle after, in city|i|ting the Council of Nice for this authority, was discovered by the African Churches, upon consulting the Acts of that Council, to be mistaken. The canon wch he cited was a Canon of the Serdican Council not of the Nicene.

The same Pope Zosimus A.C. 417 cited Proculus bishop of Marseils to Rome for illegitimate ordinations & condemned him as he mentions in \several of/ his epistles. to Patroclus bishop of Arles [He also constituted the Bishop of Arles his Vicar of over Gallia [& metropolitan of Province Gallia Narbonensis, granting him the ordination of bishops in that diocess, &] ordeining that the none in all Gallia should have access to his holiness wthout the testimonials of this Bp. He made ordeined also \&/ that this Bishop should be metropolitan of all Gal Gallia Narbonensis & have the right of ordeining Bishops in all that Diocess, [representing that the Gospel was first preached thre by Trophinus & went out thence into all Gallia] Placuit Apostolicæ sedi] He also orde constituted the bishop of Gallia \decreed/ ordeined that no Bishops or others should have access to him without the testimonial of his metropolitan \Vicars/, & particularly that none in all Gallia should have access to him wthout the testimonial of [the Bishop of Ales Arles [his Vicar the for those parts] the Bishop of Arles. Th For he def His Decree was in this manner. Zosimus universis Episcopis per Gallias & septem Provincias constitutis.

Placuit Apostolicæ sedi – – – – – – – concessimus.

The same Zosimus decreed also that

And whereas the Bishops of Arles & Biters Vien conten at that time contended for superiority, Pope Zosimus \upon/ decreed that the bishop of Arles should have the right of ordeining Priest in all Gallia Narbone Viennensis & Narbonensis prima & secunda as Metropolitan over \all/ those Provinces. Iussimus autem, saith he, præcipuam – – – – – admonemus. But afterwards upon a Letter from Simpli\ci/us bishop of Vienn, Pope Zosimus repealed this decree. And the bishop of Arles continuing contentious, Pope Leo cited {illeg} him to Rome & decreed against him & \for quieting this bishop & such {hot fractious men}/ backt his decree wth the following Edict of the Emp Valentinian. {illeg}

{illeg} continued in communion wth the Church Catholick from the days of the Ap{ostles who} in the reign of Constantius had opposed & supprest the universal bishoprick {illeg} {illeg} {illeg} erected by the Council of Serdica, – & by this Epistle the Pope made Him the Vicar over all Spain for promulging his Decrees & seing them observed

<141r>

– except the Alan kingdom in Spain which fell in the year 419. And if this by reason of its shortness, is not to be recconed, we have the Kingdom of the Lombards to make up the ten. This kingdom was seated in \came into/ Pannonia in the year 4|3|79 under its captains A Ibor & Ayon \as above/ & after their death chose Agilmundus the son of Ayon their king. This was done in the year 489 Consulship of Honorius & Theodosius that is A.C. 4|3|89 according to Prosper. Agilmundus reigned 33 years according to {illeg} Paulus Warnefridus, & then was slain by the Bulgars a people so called from the river Volga from whence they came \originally/. He was succeeded by Lamissus in the Consulship of Lamissus Maxinianus & Asclepiodorus \(according to Prosper) i.e./ A.C. 423: Lamissus \routed the Bulgars &/ reigned three years & was succeeded by Lechu who reigned almost 40 years & then was succeeded by his son Hildehoc & he by Gudehoc {illeg} reign was contemporary to the {whore} the reign of Odoacer king of Italy (suppose about the year of Christ 480). The Heruli in Italy & before the invasion of Italy by the Ostrogoths (suppose about the year 479) invaded \Rugia/ the seats of the Rugij] |Claffo, Tato, Wacho, Walter, Audoin, Albain & others {illeg} about the year 478 {illeg} Gudman was contemporary to Odoacer king of the Heruli in Italy & About the year 478 led his people into Rugia| on the north side of the Danube over against Noricum. [After \Gu/ Hildehoc reigned Claffo, Tato, Wacho, Walter, Audoin, Albain & by successive] Tato overthrew the kingdom of the Heruli in & Wa upon the Danube, & Wacho the kingdome ofthe Sueves, & Audoin returned into Pannonia \A.C. 526/ & overcame the Gepides \{illeg}/ Alboin \A.C. 551/ overthrew the kingdom of the Gepides; \& A.C. 563/ led his people \out of Pannonia/ into Lombardy where they reigned 206 year longer till the year 774.

A part of the Sar

The G Geberic made war \also/ upon \their/ the Sarmatæns seated westward from the \between Dacia & Moravia/ The river Tene, & the servants of the Sermatans being armed against the Goths revolted & d made their masters fly into the \Roman/ Empire where Constantine granted them seats. This was in the year 333 \or soon after./ & soon aft And Geberic made war also upon the Vādals & slew their king Wisumar – – seats

They came into the Empire beat the Vandals & seated themselves in Pannonia, A.C. 379 as above. After the death of their captains Ibor & Ayon they had kings Agilmunds {sic}, Lamisso, Lechu, Hildehoc, Gudehoc, Claffo, Tato, Wacho, Walter, Audoin, Alboin, &c. After the death of their captains Ibor & Ayon they made Agilmundus the son of Ayon their king. And this they did (according to Prosper) in the rei Consulship of Honorius & Theodosius A.C. 389. But considering that they were at this time a small kingdom its probable that they contued {sic} in Pannonia by the permission of the Romans & \like the other Barbarians/ lived quietly there till after the death of {illeg} Theodosius the great. Agilmundus reigned 33 \or 34/ years according to Paulus Warnefridus \& Pros/ & then was slain by the Bulgars a people so-called from the river Volga. Lamisso routed the Bulgars & reigned 3 years, & Lechu reigned almost 40 years. Gudehoc was contemporary to Odoacer king of the Heruli in Italy, & about the year 478 led his people from Pannonia into Rugia on the north side of the Danube \in the borders of Germany & Moravia/ over against Noricum \[from wch place Odoacer then carried the Rugians into Italy/. Tato overthrew the kingdom of the Heruli upon the Danube, & Wacho the kingdom of the Sueveians. Audoin returned into Pannonia A.C. 526, & overcame the Gepides. Alboin A.C. 551 overthrew the kingdom of the Gepides, & A.C. 563 assisted the Greek Emperor against Totila king of the Ostrogoths, & A.C. 568 led his people out of Pannonia into Lombardy where they reigned till the year 774.

These are the kingdoms into which the Latine Empire was rent at its first breaking. Afterwards some other new kingdoms arose & some of the Alemans as that of the Alemans in Rhetia, & some of the old ones fell. For it is not to be imagined – – – – – – – at their first rise.

At this time it was necessary for the Lombards in Pannonia, {illeg} to arm themselves in their own defence, & assert their liberty

<141v>

And in the year 789|5| the Pope sent a Legate \& the Emperor Charles an Abbot/ into England who {decreed} a Councils {sic} to be called in wch Aelfwaldus king of Northumberland & Ean in Northumberland {illeg} & anathema in Mercia in which tythes were granted to ye Church by Aelfwaldus king of Northumberland & Offa king of the Mercians. & Westsaxons & {illeg} this Bishops & Nobles subscribing, & Chuniulf king of the Westsaxons promised to do the like.

And In the year 786 the Pope Adrian sent {illeg} two Legates & Charles the great king of France an Abbot into Britain with twenty Canons to be received by {illeg} in Councils \the Saxons king And of the Saxons Charles the great the king of France sent an Abbot/. Some of those Canons were \there/ to receive the first \six/ General Councils, {illeg} with \&/ the Decrees of the Pope; To keep the ancient privileges granted to the Churches by the Church of Rome; To give the tenths of all the fruits of the earth & of all their possessions to the Church; And \&/ not to pray for those who dye without confession. And these Canons were received & established in Council by Aelfwald king of Northumberland & \by/ Offa king of the Mercians & by their bishops & great men amongst which were the Archbishops of Canterbury & York, & Chuniulf king of the Westsaxons promised also to receive them. [And Ethelwolf the son & successor of Egbert A.C. 846 gave Peter pence to the Pope \out of all his kingdom/ & A.C. 854 he gave the tenth part of his kingdom to the Church.] Also Offa king of the \going to Rome/ ordeined \further/ that every house in his kingdom should pay a penny yearly to St Peter. & \And/ Ethelwolph the son & succesor of Egbert exten \A.C. 846/ confirmed these donations of Tiths & Peter pence & extended them to all his kingdom of England. These were therefore the days in which Tythes Tythes & Peter pence \& Tyths/ were given to the Pope & Church Clergy, & by consequence in which they \{illeg}/ began to feed the Woman \began to be fed/ in the wilderness.

The granting of Indulgences & Pardons & Canonizing of Saints began about the same time {not} in the reign of Charles the great or soon after & \some/ say that Pope Leo III began them.

And by setting \up/ the worship of Images & canonizing saints, & granting taking upon him to change per \canonize saint {sic} & deify a wafer & to be worshipped & to/ grant Indulgences & Pardons & absolve men from their Oaths & Vows &c \& to be infallible & to create his God & in his Decrees &c/ he has reigned ever since with changed times & laws –– ––

And by setting up the worship of Images & taking upon him to canonize saints & deify a wafer to be worshipped & to absolve men to be from their vows & oaths & to grant p|P|ardons & Indulgences & to be \supreme &/ infallible in his Decrees &c he has changed times & laws which after his rising up & rooting up three of the first kings were to be given into his hands for a time times & half a time.

& ordeining (in the Council of

Thessalus Prince of Bavaria about \about/ the year 765 in the Synodus Aschaemensis granted tyths to the Clergy. And so did Charles the great in the Synodus Duriensis A.C. 779 & in his Capitulare composed A.C. 789, ordeining that all his subjects should pay tiths to the Churches out of all their possessions & out of all the fruits of their labours \{And in the} year 803 in the Council of Hall he freed the Saxons from all taxes except tyths/. And Pope Adrian in the year 786 sent two Legates into England with twenty Canons to be received by the Saxons; & Charles the great sent an Abbot with them. Some of those Canons – – – – – promised also to receive them. Also Offa goin Charles the great ordeined that every house throughout all France should pay a penny yearly to St Peter & Offa above mentioned going to Rome about ye year 790 made the {illeg}rant to the Pope of a penny yearly from every house in his kingdō & Ethelwulph – – – of England. And Charles the great established tyths also in Councils at Ments & Rhimes & Arles \A.C. 863./ These were therefore the days – – –

And in the year 803 in the Councill of Hall celebrated in his Pallace {Salle} he freed the Saxons from all taxes except tyths. And in a Council|s| at Mentz \& Reimes & Arles/ A.C. 313 he established tyths / And when the Emperor Leo Isaurus sent some to tak apprehend Pope Gregory II, the Pope \& Citizens of Rome/ took those that were sent & many of them were slain A.C. 726. And Pope Greg 14. A.C. 837, upon the Saracenes Leo IV upon the Saracens coming by sea to invade Rome, met them with his own forces & those of Naples & overcame them in a fight {sic} fought them & put them to flight A.C. 8

<142r>

Arabia to Babylon. And then a new Temple is built whose outward court is given to the Gentiles \Babylonian the Ba the conquering Babylonian Gentiles/ who/captivate &\ tread the holy city under foot, the nations \Babylonian Gentiles/ /the {sic} nation composing the {ten} {illeg}|h|orns of the\ of the {sic} Beast who kills the two witnesses in the streets of the {illeg} great city Babylon.

– Arabia to Babylon. And then a new Temple is built \for the two tribes/ whose outward court is given to the Gentiles, the conquering Babylonian Gentiles who captivate & tread the holy city under foot, the nations composing the horns of the Beast who kills the two witnesses |who were tormented by ye 2 witnesses & see the|ir| dead bodies of| in the streets of the great city Babylon

The Church catholick is at first represented by the seven churches of Asia, & these are called the seven golden candlesticks, \They are/ the seven candlesticks \in the first Temple/ whose lamps gave light to the church catholick in the first ages of the Christian religion. At length the Woman The same church \catholick/ is represented by the Woman in heaven & this Woman at length is persecuted by the Dragon & receives two Wings of a great Eagle that she may fly from the persecutor, that is, she becomes distinguished into two Churches & these two churches by reason of the persecution are the two witnesses of God, & having once acquired this name they keep it ever after. And when a second Temple is built, two candlesticks of olive tree are placed therein to represent these two Churches or witnesses. In respect of the sevenfold division the Church catholick is represented by the lamb with seven horns & seven {illeg}ys eyes \appearing/ in the first Temple & on Mount Sion. In respect of the twofold division the Church catholick is represented by the son of man {illeg} with two flaming eyes & two leggs burning as it were in a furnace & standing on the earth & sea to represent the church in time of persecution to s burning leggs |feet {illeg} as pillars of fire standing upon the earth & sea with feet as pillars of fire| to signify the persecutions of his people in this state of the Church. And when the Dragon went from the Woman & the ten horned beast ros of her seed |woman {sic} was escaped & began to make \& made/ war upon the remant & separated from the remnant of her seed & the Dragon was gone \was gone/ from her to make war upon that remnant.| & the ten horned beast rose of out of the sea to succeed the Dragon in the west & the two horned beast rose out of the earth to succeed the Woman in the east then was there a new \second/ Temple buit {sic} to succeed the first & the beast was deified & worshipped with his image & none mo none were suffered to buy & sell excpt {sic} those who were initiated in the worship \Church/ of the Beast & by receiving his mark & name, [then was the first Temple destroyed by the Babylonians in respect of it {sic} outward form of Church government, & a second Temple was built whose outward court was given to the Gentiles.] & all the twelve tribes received this mark except the 144000 who are sealed wth the seale of God in their foreheads; then was the first Temple destroyed in respect of by the Babylonians in respect of its outward form of church government & a second Temple was built whose outward court was given to the Gentiles. And in this Temple two ch Candlesticks of Olive tree are placed to represent the two witnesses now separated from the communion of the Woman.

When these times are represented by allusions to the feast of ye seventh month & \to/ the day sealing in the day of Expiation, & then the first Temple with the seven {illeg} golden{illeg} candlesticks continue to the end of the visions, & in this Temple the 144000 \are sealed &/ stand with the lamb on mount Sion wth \having/ the name of God in their foreheads & on {illeg} the sea of glass having the harps of God. & singing the song of Moses \& the Lam/ for their victory over the Beast who is spiritually called Sodom & Egypt & where our Lord was crucified And in this Temple the seven Trumpets & the 7 Vials of wrath are poured out at the sacrifices of the seven days of the feast. And where these times are represented by allusions to the Babylonian captivity, the first Temple is destroyed & a new one built with two Candlesticks alluding to \for/ the two tribes & \to/ the building of a new Temple for the two tribes, the first Temple is destroyed & a new one built with two Candlesticks to represent the two Churches or witnesses who worship in the measured Courts while the outward court is left open to the Babylonian gentiles.

<142v>

Then the Woman f fled from the temple in heaven into the wildernes & separated from to commit spiritual fornication, & separated from the the {sic} remnant of her seed wch keep the commandments of God & have the testimony of Iesus & therefore Christ {illeg} directed no more {epistles to her.} At that time the two Beasts rose out of the earth & sea & \thereby/ the Empire became divided into two Empires with their Churches false & true {seated} \in the earth & sea:/ the two Empires being the Dragon & \tenhorned/ Beast, {illeg} their fals churches the two horned Beast & the Woman & their true Churches the two witnesses. And this great alteration brings in a new scene of things.

He must also \be taught/ in particular what those \dead/ works are of wch he is to repent And these are comprehended in the promis {sic} made before baptism vizt to fosake {sic} the Devil & all his works the vain pomp & glory of the world with all covetous desires of the same & the carnal desires of the flesh so as not to be led by them nor to follow them nor to be led by them: that |is| he promisses to forsake the all Idolatry the religion of the Devil \the worships of fals Gods called the Devil/, with all the works accompanying it; all & all ambition & covetousness & {illeg} unchastity. Love not the world saith Iohn neither the covetous desires of the world. If any man love the world the love of the ffather is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes &the pride of life is not of the father but \is/ of the world. So then the first Principles of the Oracles of God are or the Principles of the doctrine of Christ are \called by the Apostle/ repentance from dead works, faith towards God, the doctrine of Baptisms & of laying of on of hands & of the resurrection of the dead & of eternal judgment, are comprehended in these things, \in/ repentance from \all/ Idolatry & the works accompanying it, & from all ambitious, covetous & unchast desires, \in/ a right beleif in God & Christ & the Holy Ghost in whose name we are to be baptized & in \the/ the {sic} death & resurrection of Christ, a right notion of Bapt \in/ the doctrine of Baptisms & of laying on of hands consequent thereupon, & \in that/ of the resurrection of the dead & of eternal judgment. [Vpon renouncing the Devil & his works, & \idolatry/ ambition covetousness & unchastity & professing to beleive aright in the father son & holy Gost {sic} \& in the resurrection \& judm/ of the dead {illeg}/ [according to ye \Baptismal/ Creed or system of ffaith in wch the Catechumens were instructed from the beginning,] they were admitted into communion by Baptism & laying on of hands. T In the beginning of the Gospel nothing more was requisite to communion then \these/ things. [And to make any thing mo requisite to communion now wch was not requisite to communion in those days or to excommunicate any man \now/ for any thing which was not requisite to communion in the beginning, is schismatical & make the author guilty of preaching another Gospell & makes the author guilty of Schism to alter the fundamentals of the Christian religion, \to/ teach another Gospel & to create Schisms in the Church. of God

Now they there were men appointed from the beginning to instruct novices in the first principles of the Christian religion in order to baptism, & those that were so instructed were called Catechumens. And that they were taught \from the beginning/ to forsake idolatry, ambition, covetousness & unchastity & to beleive understand who were t

To forsake these things with the heathen worship \religions of/ of {sic} Dæmons \& the superstions {sic} accompanying that worship/ & to beleive aright {was} \& love one another is/ the summ of what the Ch Catechumens were taught \the {sic} Apostles days/ in order to baptism & admission into Communion. & These were the fist Principles of the doctrine of Christ in the beginning of the Christian religion \Gospel/ & there is no power on earth that can increase or diminish the fundamentals of the Christian religion. And these almost all these fundamentals are \again/ thus touched upon \enumerated/ by the Apostle Paul. I beseech you, saith he,

<143r-a>

By repence {sic} from dead works he means repentance from Idolatry, ambition, covetouness & unchastity \& the works wch accompany them/, for we promis {sic} before baptism to forsake the devil {illeg} & all his works the {pomp} of the world with the \& the/ covetous desires thereof \the world/ & the carnal desires of the flesh. If any love the world saith the Apostle \Iohn/, the love of the father & is not in him. ffor all that {illeg} is in the world, the lust of the flesh [unchastity] the lust of thes eyes [covetousness] & the pride of life [ambition] is not of the father but is of the world. And the Apostle Paul in another place has in anoth has again summed up –

< insertion from f 143v >

The Church catholick is the being the mystical body of Christ is reprented {sic} by him|s| \body/ sometimes in the form of a Lamb with seven ey man with two flaming eyes & two feet burning as in a furnace & sometimes by a in the form of a Lamb wth seven horns & seven eyes & seven horns. ✝ The first \representation/ relates to the Church catholick as diffused through the Greek & Latine Empires, the two last of the four Empires spoken of by Daniel. The second relates to the Church catholick as represented by the seven churches of Asia. The Church catholick is \here/ compared to the temple & the seven Churches to \of Asia to the/ seven candlesticks holding with seven lamps wch enlighten the whole temple to signify that the Church catholick in the first ages of the Christian religion was illuminated not by the sea of Rome but by the seven churches of Asia who had been long instructed by Iohn. The same Church catholick is also represented by the glorious woman in heaven who at length receives two wings of a great Eagle that she tra partakes of the division of the Roman Empire into the Greek & Latine Empires & ther by begins to be divided into the Greek & Latin Churches. She was distinguished into those Churches before but not yet divided. These wings are given her that she may fly from the persecuting Dragon. ffor the Dragon persecuted her & thence the Churches represen{ted} by her two wings became two witnesses of Christ, & having once obteined the name of two witnesses, they ever after keep that name. To represent these two witnesses Churches the son of man stands on the earth & sea sea with his right foot & on the earth with his left & prophesies concerning the measuring of the inner courts of ye Temple, & {illeg} that is, concerning the rebuilding them, & concerning two Candlesticks \calls/ the two Witnesses represe the two Olive trees & two Candlesticks standing before the Go{d} of the earth, that is the two Candlesticks of olivetree standing before God {in} this Temple: & Candlesticks in this prophesy are Churches, (Apoc. 1.20) & so are Olive trees Rom. 1.17, 24.

In relation to the Churches of the greek Latine empires it is represented sometimes by the two leggs &two eyes & two leggs of the |the {sic} inhabitants of ye earth & {sea.}|

The Church Catholick in relation to ye \churches of the/ Greek & {sic} latin churches \Empires/ is represented by the \the {sic} son of man with/ two leggs & two eyes, of the son of man, the \& by the woman with/ two wings of a great eagle given to the Woman & \ & by/ the \temple with/ two Candlesticks & two Olive trees in the second Temple & \therein & by the two witnesses & in/ the two witnesses: repres \&/ in {sic} relation to ye seven Churches of Asia it is represented by the Lamb with seven horns & seven eyes & by the Temple with seven golden Candlesticks & seven lamps & by the seven churches of Asia

The first representation by the seven Churches of Asia & \of the Church catholick/ by the \first/ Temple with seven Ca golden candlesticks [& seven lamps \therein/ & \by/ the lamb with seven horns & seven eyes] continues till the end of the sixt times of the seventh seale \commence./ And if the affairs of that seale be represented by allusions to the feast of the seventh month & day of expiation, the first Temple wth the seven gold candlesticks & seve the Lamb therein \same representati/on\/ continues to the end of the prophesy. At the opening of that Seal the 144000 are sealed \in this Temple/ with the seale of God \in the day of expiation/ & appear with the Lamb on mount sion \in this temple/ & on the sea of glass singing the song of the Lamb, \in this temple of the Tabernacle/ & the rest receive the mark of the beast & the seven trumpets sound & the seven Vials are poured out & all this is done in the first Temple & in the Temple of the Tablernacle. \at the sacrifices of the seven days of the feast in this temple./

But if the Babylonian capitivity of the Church be alluded unto

The representation by

But if the affairs of the seventh seal be represented by allusions to to {sic} the Babylonian captivity then the \the/ first Temple is destroyed by the Dragon Babylonians {illeg} when all men receive the mark of the Dragon persecutes the remnant of & a second Temple is built & the \courts of the/ temple & Altar \&/ with the court of them that worship therein are built measured to signify the \{illeg}/ building of a second Temple, & \the/ outward court is left unmeasured & given to the Babylonian gentiles {illeg} who captivate & tread under foot the holy city, & two candlesticks are placed in this Temple to represent the two <143r-b> {churches} {& them that} worship therein now called the & by reason of their sufferings are now called the two witnesses. When the Empire begins to |be| divided into the Greek & Latin Empires, {illeg} the Woman in heaven receive {illeg} being persecuted by the Dragon receives two wings of a great eagle that she may fly from him & these two wings \{illeg} denote the churches of the Greek & Latine Empires &/ are Gods witnesses in this persecution. Afterwards when \she escapes into the wilderness &/ the multitude receive the mark of the Beast, the residue who receive the name of 6 are sealed out of all the twelve tribes of Irael {sic} remain the two witnesses & prophesy in sackcloth & by their prophesying tormented those that dwell on the earth the peoples & kindreds & tongues & nations that dwell upon the earth untill the thousand 1260 days be ended, & then are politically slain revive & ascend up to heaven in a cloud being the church catholick with the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on ye earth even to every nation & kindred & tongue & people. Afterwards when she escapes into ye Wilderness & leaves \the Dragon goes to persecute/ the remnant of her seed behind her this rem wch keep the commandments of God & have the testimony of Iesus, this remnant of the two Churches are the two Witnesses [And when this persecution is ended & the Dragon gives the Beast his throne the 144000 who are sealed out of all the twelve tribes of Israel \& stand on mount Sion with the Lamb/ remain the two witnesses] & continue to be so till the persecution is ended \& the dragon gives the Beast his throne & power/ & there remain /only\ 144000 sealed out of all the 12 tribes of Israel. & These put on sackcloth & by their prophesying torment the peoples & kindreds & tongues & nations that dwell upon the earth untill the 1260 days are ended & then \they/ are politically slain revive & ascend up to heaven in a cloud with the everlasting gospel to preach to every nation & kindred & people tongue & people.

When the Dragon comes down amongst the inhabitants of ye earth & sea {illeg} & persecutes the Woman, two wings of a great eagle are given her that she may fly from him. & These wings denote \two churches/ the churches of the earth & sea or Greeks & Latines, & \wch/ \& these churches/ are Gods witnesses in this persecution And when she escap & having once the names of Gods witnesses they always keep it. While the Woman flyes from the Temple of heaven into the Wilderness The Dragon goes to persecute the remnant of her seed wch keep the commandments of God & have the testimony of Iesus. And in this persecution 144000 are sealed out of all the twelve tribes of Israel. the son of man stand in the form of an Angel stands with his right foot or {sic} the sea & his left foot on the earth & cries wth a loud voyce as a lyon roareth, & an hundred &|f|orty & four thousand are seale {sic} out of all the twelve tribes of Israel before the four Angels hurt the earth & sea These being sealed out of the earth & sea inhabitants of the earth & sea to whom the Dragon came down, are gods witnesses in the earth & sea during this persecution. And when the Dragon gives the Beast his western throne & power & all the world wonders after the Beast & \&/ worships him & his Image, they prophesy against him till the 1260 days are ended & they are politically slain by in sa in sackcloth & torment the peoples & kindreds & nations tongues & nations untill the thousand years \1260 days/ are ended, & then they are politically slain by the Beast & revive & ascend up to heaven in a cloud with the everlasting gospel to preach unto all unto every nation & kindret {sic} & people & tongue.

< text from p 143r-a resumes > < insertion from f 144v >

When \/ The \proper/ opinion of the Nicolaitans \namely/ that Christ descended upon Iesus, or as the Valentians expressed it that the Saviour descended upon Iesus, or as others, that the Word descended upon Iesus being more plausible then many & did the works & dwelt in him & did the supernatural works, being | was much more plausible then that \the common opinion of the Nicolaitans & Simonians of wch consisted in/ of {sic} placing a multitude of Æons in the celestial orbs, \& for that reason/ spread \much/ more & lasted much then that \& lasted longer being/ & was handed down to posterity \by/ Hermogenes Tatian Montanus, Proclus or Proculus, Æschines, Praxeas, Tertullian, Artemas, Noetus, Sabellius, Paul of Samosat, Marcellus Eustathius & Photinus \& I think Tatian/. All these hereticks held this doctrine of the Nicolaitans but yet with some diversity of language & circumstances. For some of them as Tatian Proclus & Tertullian held the Logus to be a person or substance endued wth a proper life will & understanding & distinguished but not divided separated from the substance of ye father; & others as Hermogenes, Æschines, Praxeas, \Artemas/ Noetus, Sabellius, Paul, Marcellus & Photinus, held that the {illeg} Logus was only a power seated in some dilated part of the fathers substance without any other life will or understanding then that of the father. And again, some of them, as \Artemas/ Paul, Marcellus, Eustathius & Photinus \& perhaps Tatian/ held that the Logus only dwelt in Iesus as the holy spirit doth in good men & did the supernatural works & others as Montanus Hermogenes Praxeas \Æschines/ Tertullian Noetus & Sabellius \& perhaps \{illeg} {Proclus} &/ Æschines/ that \& perhaps Proclus & Æschines that/ he was united to Iesus so as to become passible. And thence Hermogenes Praxeas, Noetus & Sabellius were called patripassians. But all agreed in distinguishing between the divine nature of Christ called the Word & the \humane nature or/ man Iesus who took his beginning of the Virgin & was was assumed by the Word.

Montanus a Platonist refining the errors of the Gnosticks rejected their Astronomical me Theology as too \gross &/ remote from the Christian religion & retained only those Æons of the Gnosticks wch might best be defended. For he took \For He took/ the Son & holy Ghost for emissions of the fathers substance, or Æons emitted from him \by efflux or projection of substance/ & made them subordinate to him.

The \true/ Christians wch Tertullian here calls simple & imprudent, \in other places of his works/ he calls Ph|s|ychici – animal people, a name borrowed by the Cataphrygians from the Valentinian heresy. ffor the Valentinians called themselves Pneumatici spiritual men & the true Christians Psychici Which confirms me in the opinion that Montanus refined the Valentinian heresy rejecting the Astronomical Æons & retaining only {illeg} \so much of the Nicolaitan philosophy as/ was applicable to the Word |Logus| & the Paracles & to Angels & the souls of men.

In this philosophy of the Cataphrygians the father is a fals God because the true God emitts nothing from his substance. He is all eye, all ear all {illeg} sense, all understanding, all wisdom, \all power/ all light & has nothing \in him/ wch can be \separated or/ emitted by {illeg} speaking, generating, emanation, proj dilation, projection or an or any other act, from any thing els that is in him & to worship a God that emitts any thing that generates by emission of substance is to worship a strange God, a God {illeg} who resembles the Gods of the heathens \another God a strange God the God of Simon Magus & the Gnosticks a God the great Iupiter/ Iupiter {sic} of the heathens who was a man deified & deified & exalted into the throne of the supreme God & is still said to retain the humane passions of love & lust & generating by emission of substance. Also the Son in this Philosophy is a fals God because a substance generated by emission of the fathers substance, {That} the father gene & by consequence \the son of God of the Gnosticks who denied the father & the son,/ the son of the heathen Iupiter, the Logus of Orpheus & the Platonists & Gnostic \&/ Plato, & the Gnosticks \& Philo/ the λογος ἐνδιάθετος ἢ προφόρικος of the \God of the/ Gnosticks, an Æon emitted from the substance of the God of the Gnosticks as a ray from ye sun, water \a river/ from its fountain, & a {vine} tree from its root. And for ye same reason the Paraclete of ye Gnosticks \Montanists/ is a fals God heathen God a Gno false God & \being/ an Æon \emitted from the God/ of the Gnosticks. And therefore the generality of the Christian{illeg}s in Tertullians \days/ were not mistaken in proclaiming the Montanists to be polytheists. As the Gnosticks denyed the father & the son by dividing the \by their Theology & substituted other/ so did the Montanists Gods in their {illeg} room so did the Montanists. When Iohn tells us that there were many Antichrists in his days who went out from the church because they were not of the Church, & adds, Who is Ch a lyar but he that denyeth that Iesus is the Christ & He is Antichrist that denyeth the father & the son; Whosoever denyeth the Son the same hath not the father: in these sayings he speaks of the great Antichrist {illeg} Gnosticks of his days who {illeg} denyed that Iesus was the Christ \the son/ by distinguishing {betwe}en them {an}d saying that Christ descended upon Iesus, & \who/ by denying that Iesus was the Christ the {son} of God denyed the Son, & by denying the Son < text from p 143r-a resumes > <144r> & dividing the father into Æons denyed the father. And as|in| the \same manner that the/ Gnosticks denyed the father & the son & the Montanists also denyed them & worshipped fals Gods in their stead worshipped fals Gods a fals father & a false son \the heathen Iupiter & a part or power of the heathen Iupiter/. ffor as worshipping fals Gods is denying the true God (Iob. 31.28) so in the language of Iohn to deny the father is to worship a fals God in his room & to deny the son is to worship another \Lord & another another/ God then {Iesus} |ye| father of the Lord Iesus Christ & therefore \Iohn saith/ he that denyeth the son hath not the father \of our Lord {master} Iesus Christ/. For in the language of Iohn |when Iohn tells us| he that denyeth the Son hath not the father, He doth not mean that he \that denieth the son/ hath no God but that \instead of the father/ he hath another God then the father. And this is the spirit of Antichrist Every Christian who \by fals {wisdome} denys that Iesus is the Christ or that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh denies the son & hath a fals son & he/ |yt| hath a fals son hath a fals father & denyes the true father & the true son & is an idolater & this is the spirit of Antichrist according to the Apostle. To distinguish the supreme God into parts & make him generate by emission {illeg} of substance \& to worship s/ is to \have &/ worship the Iupiter of the heathens instead of God the father \the God of the Christians/ & to worship the parts of or powers of the supreme God as his Son & the son & spirit of the supreme God is to worship the son & spirit of the Iupiter of the heathens. And this was the case of the Montanists as the Christians of those days represented. ffor they accused the Montanists of dividing the unity of the supreme God & thereby becoming polytheists, & when {illeg} the Montansts {sic} excused this division by calling {illeg} God unicus cum sua œconomia One God with an œconomy, they waxed pale at this œconomy as polytheistical as a palliation of polytheism like the \œconomy/ of the heathens who siad that they worshipped but one God because all their Gods were but one, being \nothing els then/ parts or powers of the supreme Iupiter. The God of the Gnosticks was the Iupiter of the heathens because they made him generate by emission of seed into Ennœa. {illeg} And as the heathens \sometimes/ considered their Gods as both male & female so the Gn & said that Minerva was born of Iupiters brain & Bacchus of his thigh, so the Gnosticks made Ennœa born their supreme God both male & female & said yt Ennœa was born was born of Iuppiter him alone as the first conception of his mind & so the Cataphrygians made the Logus the son of the first God without the help of any other female then himslf {sic}, & said that he was first conceived in him & then born out of him being the λογος ενδιάθετος by conception & the λόγος προφορικὸς by birth.

And w{h}ereas the Gnosticks had hi{th}erto made a great multitude of consubstantial Æons generated of this father \Iupiter/ & of one another by emission of substance & therefore consubstantial: Montanus for restraining their number to three gave them the name of Τριὰς the Trinity. ffor I do not find that this name was used by any ancienter heretick. And his disciples {illeg} erroneously pretended that baptism was performed in the name of this Trinity & that the {illeg} \three witnesses the W/ spiritt the water & the blood were s in the first epistle of Iohn were symbols of this trinity. And this was the metaphysical philosophy

reason of the father, {even} the father \being substances. And/ as a man \is first begotten & then born/ first thinks & reasons & then speaks \what he \has/ thought of/ so according to the Cataphrygian philosophy God first thought of the creation \generated Sophia Wisdom by wch he in h by wch he/ so & contrived all things \secretly/ in himself by {illeg} his exercising his reason & {illeg} then produced them outwardly {sic} |& then brought forth this Logus wisdom outwardly as {illeg} & Word & by this Word produced all things in their several species & individuals| as it were by speaking, & for the con & for contriving them \he/ first created \or begat/ this {illeg} the exercise of his mind called Sophia & then for producing outwardly what he had contrived, brought forth his Word as it were out of the womb his own womb by speaking Itaq Sophiam quoq exaudi, saith Tertullian, tanquam ut secundam personam conditam. Primo Deus creavit me – – – – – cor meum sermonem optimum. The Gnosticks feigned that their Æons were first begotten & then born & \yt/ their Word \Logus was/ first conceived in the \Gods/ mind & then emitted by speaking; & in the very same manner the Cataphrygians feigned that the Son of God was first conceived in Gods mind as his wisdom \before the creation began/ & then {illeg} \emitted &/ brought forth \as his Word/ & born as it were out of his womb by as his Word by speaking & born out as it were out of his womb by eructation when God said ffiat Lux. And this Word they supposed to be not an empty van not the same with the Λόγος . . . . . substantia Father in me. And

was first conceived as Gods \active/ reason & wisdom by wch he contrived all things & then born as Gods son \as it were outwar of Gods womb & emitted out of his mouth as his/ & emitted outwardly as Gods Son & Word when he said Fiat Lux & the w as his Son, & emitted as it were out of his mouth as his Word when he said: Fiat lux.

And as the Gnosticks made Silence to precede the Λόγος so did the Montanists. Ante omnia, saith Tertullian, Deus erat solus, ipse sibi et mundi et locus et omnia —— Cæterum ne tunc quidem solus; hebebat enim secum quam habebat in seipso; Rationem suam scilicet. Rationalis enim Deus — etiam ante principium, — tacite cogitando et disponendo secum quæ per Sermonem mox erat dicturus. — Vide cum tacitus tecum ipse congrederis, ratione hoc ipsum agi intra te Qanto {sic} ergo plenius hoc agitur in Deo cujus tu quoq imago et similitudo censeris quod habeat in se etiam tacendo rationem & in ratione sermonem.

<145r>

Among the \many/ nations conquered by the Huns Ermaneric I reccon the Lombards. Paulus Diaconus tells us that before they entred Italy they lived in Pannonia 42 years, And & went thence into Italy in April \A.C./ 568. They came into Pannonia therefore A.C. 526. They were led thither from beyond the Danube \over the Danube/ by Audoin their ninth King, being \the Emperor granting them seats. They seated them were/ seated before beyond the Danube in the confines of the Heruli & the Suevi, & before that in a country called Rugiland or the country of Rugis, a place on the north side of the Danube over against Noricum whither they were led by Gudehoc that is about the year 476. And before that their first King Agelmundus led them into Paulus Dioconus {sic} tells us they were ori Germans originaly called Winuli & from their long beards Longobardi, & came out of an Island of the Baltic \Scandinavia (so the ancients/ under the conduct of two captains Ibor & Ayon who led them to the borders of Vandalus |against the Vandals whom they routed| & that after the death of these two captains they set up kings over them the first of \which/ reigned 33 years & was slain by the Bulgares, & the third reigned 40 years. Whence its probable that they were a Vandalic nation \(as the name Winuli imports/ & above an hundred years before the Heruli invaded Italy, came into the countries conquered first by Hermaneric & then by the Hunns & were left by the Hunns in or neere Pannonia out |out of Gothland in the southern parts of| of {sic} the great {illeg}peninsula of Sweden & Norway called by the ancients called Scanzia & Scandinavia & taken for an Island in the Baltic sea, & landing between the Wesel & \near/ the Oder, came amongst the Vandals, Bulgars, Rugij, Heruli Suevi & Gepides & other nations subject first to Ermanreic & then to Attila & upon the death of Attila were left on the north side of the Danube neare the Gepides. The Greeks say that the \Lombards/ were descended from the Gepides, & therefore in the opinion of the Greeks they were \the/ subjects to the Attila {sic}.

Among these nations I reccon also the Lombards who (according to Iornandes) came \originally/ out of the Is Scandinavia or Scanza in the Baltic sea & were called Winuli (that {illeg} is Vandals) & (from their beards) Longobardi, & under the conduct of their captains Ibor & Ayon first first attacqued & routed the Vandals & then after the death of these captains were governed by Kings the following kings. Agilmundus who after a reign of 33 years was slain by the Bulgars \a people who came from the river Volga/. 2 Larisso \Larisso who routed the Bulgars/. 3 Lechu who reigned 40 years. 4 Hildehoc. 5 Gudehoc who led them into a place |the seats of the Rugij| in the north side of the Danube over against Noricum where a little {before} the Ostrogoths invaded the Heruli in Italy, that is, about the year 476 & about 3 years after passed over the Danube into Pannonia, the Emperor granting them seats. The Greeks recconed them a branch of the Gepides a people subject to the Vandalic \Gothic/ nation subject to ye Huns in \& before/ the reign of Attila & before. Whence its probable that the Lombards {illeg} {led} the Gepides, Heruli, Ostrogoths & other northern nations to the Rhene under the conduct of Attila in his wars against the Romans. The Bulgars came from the river Volga & therefore might {illeg} come into Europe with the Hunns under Balamir \in the days of the Emperor Valens/ & attaque the Lombards in Dacia that part of Dacia where the Vandals were seated.

<145v>

The Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Gepides, Lombards came all of them \{out of}/ {illeg} Scanzia or Scandinavia Swedeland ca \the Peninsula in the Baltic sea conteining Swedeland & Norway & by the ancients recconed an island & {called}/ Scanzia or Scandinavia. And thence it came to pass that they all spake the same language & agreed in their manners. Paulus Diaconus tells us in his Historia Miscella \lib. XIV/ when he came to the {illeg} \reign/ of the sons of Theodosius, tells us: Eodem tempore erant Gothi & aliæ gentes maximæ et multæ & maximæ trans Danubium habitantes: ex quibus rationabiliores quatuor sunt; Gothi scilicet, Huisogothi, Gepides et Vandali, et nomen tantum et nihil aliud mutantes. Omnes autem fidei erant Arianæ malignitatis. Isti sub Arcadij|o| et Honorij|o| temporibus Danubium transeuntes locati sunt in terra Romanorum, et Gepides quidem (ex quibus postea diversi sunt Longobardi et Avares) villas quæ sunt circa Singidonem & Sirmium habitavere. \And Procopius in the beginning of his Historia Vandalica writes to ye same purpose./ The same [Paulus \And Warnefridus/ in his first Book de Gestis Langobardorum tells us that the Lombards came out of {illeg} Scandinavia \&/ under the conduct of two Ibor & Ayon & beat the Vandals \& led the Lombards over {illeg} {into new seats}/ I suppose he means in the reign of Constantine the great in that war wherin the Vandals being {illeg} routed by the Gepides retired into Pannonia & left their seats upon the Teis in Dacia to the Gepides with whom the Longobards were then mixed. And the same Paulus tells us that after the death of those captains the Vandals Agilmundus who & in & after he had reigned in peace made Agilmundus their king & after he had reigned peaceably 33 years were sundenly {sic} set upon by the Bulgars who slew their king. These Bulgars were so named from the river Volga from whence they came. And thence its probable that they came into Europe with the Hunns under the conduct of Balamir in the reign of the Emperor Valens, & attact the Lombards \in Dacia upon the Teis/ soon after their coming, & afterwards were brought over the Danube with the Gepides \& Ostrogoths/ by the Hunns in the reign of Arcadius & Honorius & placed in Pannonia neare Singidonum & Sirmium, being not yet divided from the Gepides.] And Constantinus Porphyrogenita Emperor of Constantinople transcribed out of the History of Theophanes Γήπαιδες ἐξ ὡν ὕστερον διηρέθησαν Λογγοβάρδοι, Gepidæ ex quibus dissidio facto orti Langobardi. And Salmatius out of Greek MSS not yet published Γήπαιδες ὁι λεγομενοι Λογγοβάρδοι, Gepidæ qui dicuntur Langobardi.

Prosper & Iornandes \& Paulus Diaconus Warnefridus/ tell us that the Lombards \seking new seats/ came out of Scandinavia under the conduct of Ibor & Ayon & first set upon \& that/ the Vandals \& routed them/, & Prosper places this victory in the year next after the death of Valens Ausonio et Olybrio Coss. A.C. 379. |Whence its probable that Lombards came over the Danube with the other Gothic nations in the reign of Valens.| The Vandals had now lived quietly in Pannonia \about/ 40 years \before this incursion,/ & tho they might now \now/ retired from the Lombards, yet they did not quit Pannonia before Stilico invited them against the Western Empire. When therefore the Hunns invaded Pannonia, they found the Lombards there. Prosper tells us that in the Consulship of Timasius & Promotus \A.C. 389/ the {illeg} Lombards made Agilmundus their first king & that he was succeeded by Lamissus their second king in year 423.

In the reign of Hermaneric \the Lombards/ came out of Scandinavia to see under the conduct of Ibor & Ayon to seek new seats. They were then called Winuli but afterwards from their long beards had the name of {illeg} Longobards given them. When the Gothic nations fled from the Hunns into the Empire the \Lombards/ also {illeg} came over the Danube \under the same captains into Pannonia/ & beat the Vandals {illeg} then seated in Pannonia \thence in Pannonia/, & remained in Pannonia many years. The Vandals retired retired westward & the Emperor Gratian went into Gallia against them \& the/ & the Alemans \& the Vandals went back into Pannonia/. This was when Theodosius lay sick at Thessalonica A.C. 379. And the Vandals went back into Pannonia {illeg} |And accordingly Prosper places the victory of the {Lombards} over the Vandals in the Consulship of Ausonius & Olybrius.| {illeg} A part of the Salian Francks were received into Brittain by {the Emp}eror Iulian about the year 358, & the Burgundians in ye year 373 or 374 rose from their seats & came to the side of the Rhene {illeg} with an army of 80000 & there seated themselves till they invaded Gallia on the side of the Rhene. And this state of things continued till/ And now the ten Kings who had received no kingdom were ready to take up arms & receive power as kings so soon as the Dragon should give the Beast his throne.

<146r>

The {illeg} Vandals in the reign of Constantine the great were seated in Dacia upon the river Teys between the rivers Maresh &       . The Gepide & in the latter end of his reign left their seats to ye Gepides & seated themselves in Pannonia. T And in the end \upon death/ of the reign of \Emperor/ Valens were routed by the Lombards. Yet staid in Pannonia till Stilico called them from thence against the Western Empire. The Gepides came over the Rhene into Pannonia in the Reign of Arcadius & Honorius, & seated themselves in Pannonia neare Singidodonum {sic} & Sirmium in the borders of the Vandals & Lombards. And after the death of Attila the Gepides with their associated {sic} routed the sons of Attila & became lords of all Dacia where they seated themselves making the main body of the Hunns retire beyond them. The Avares retired from Pannonia into Hungary. The Lombards retired over the Danube into & seated themselves over the banks of that river over against Pannonia. And the Ostrogoths staid in Pannonia.

The Burgundians between the Vistula & the southern fountain of the Boristhenes where Ptolomy places the Phrugundiones & the Burgiones. The Alans between the northern fountain of the Boristhenes & the mouth of the River Tanais where Ptolomy places the Mons Alaunus. The Roxolani on the western side of the Palus Mœotis, & southern side of the Alans. The Bastarnæ upon the Boristhenes westward not far from the Euxine sea.

|Before these nations revolted|

The Goths or Ostrogoths were seated in the eastern parts of Dacia, the Vandals in the western upon the river Teys where the rivers Maresh & Karesh run westward into it, the Visigoths upon between them, the Gepides \are placed by / upon the Vistula. The Burgundians another Gothic nation were seated between the Vistuala & the sothern fountain of the Boristhenes at some distance from the mountain Crapac nothward {sic} where Ptolomy places them by the names of the Phrugo Phrugundiones & the Burgiones. The Alans (another Gothic nation \according to Procopius/) were seated between the foun northern fountain of the Boristhenes & the mouth of the river Tanais where Ptolomy places the mountain Alaunus. The Rouolani were on the western side of the Palus Mœotis & southern side of the Alans.

The Latine Empire is represented by the little horn of the He-Goat, & the Beast with ten horns. It became a horn of the He Goat by inheriting the kingdom of Attalus in Asia minor. It had seven \crowned/ heads without crowns It had seven heads It wa It had seven \successive/ heads without crowns common to it self & the Dragon, \These began to reign at the opening of the seven seals/ but its heads are without crowns because \during the {opening of} the 7 seals/ it {served} in the Dragon whose heads are crowned. \& answering to the times of the seven seals because until the Dragon gave the Beast his throne/ It was wounded to death with a sword \in its sixt head/ during the reign of Constantius. It & revived & its deadly wound was healed by the division \of the Empire in the beginning/ of the reign of Valentinian & Valens. It was a After its wound was healed \& the division of the Empire between Gratian & Theodosius/ it rose out of the sea wth \& yn/ this \healed/ wound in its sixt head \& {illeg} began the reign of its seventh head. And/ It {illeg} The Dragon gave him his \power &/ throne at the divisiō of the Empire between the sons of Theodosius. {illeg} And then the ten horns which hitherto had received no kingdoms & therefore were without crowns on the Dragons head, receive power as kings & are crowned in the head of the Beast. Because they were upon the head of the Dragon without crowns we are to look for them among the nations which were under the Dominion of the Dragon before the divion {sic} of the Empire & from time to time came under his dominion untill the Dragon gave the Beast his throne. And because they \are crowned on the head of the Beast/ & received power as kings the same hour with the Beast, we are to look for them among the nations which received power as kings when the Dragon gave the Beast his power & throne & great authority. [But before I give you an account of them it will be necesse convenient to give you some further account of the Monarchy of Dacia.

And on this eighth head are ten horns all of them crowned: but on the Dragons head they are without crowns. They were therefore ten nations over which the Dragon reigned but are in the reign of his sixt head had received no kingdoms, but \were to/ received {sic} power as kings about the same time with the Beast, that is, about the same time that the Dragon gave the Beast his power & throne.

< insertion from the left margin of f 146r >

And when the Dragon gave the Beast his throne the seven Trumpets began to sound, the seven thunders began to utter their voices & the seven Vialls of wrath began to be poured out.

< text from f 146r resumes > <146v>

By the Decree of Gratian the \Popes/ receiving of appeals from the western Churches, his appointing of Vicars in these Churches & his writing Decretal Epistles to them be observed by them: his superiority over other Bishops was \became/ so far established \advanced/ in the West by degrees, that the \Council/ C|c|alled at Rome by Charles the Great in the year 800 to hear his accusers declared him above all humane judicature, & by that Declaration established his supremacy over the Western Churches. And henceforward times & laws were given into his hands, & not before because he had but newly subdued three of the first kings who were to oppose him in his rise & had but newly acquired a temporal dominion whereby he became a horn of the fourth Beast, \& his religion & authority was but newly extended into Germany/ & tiths were but newly settled \on the Church/ by Charles the great.

The Popes were still \now/ chosen by the Romans & confirmed by the Emperors. But Leo VIII A.C. 964 gave power to the Emperor to chuse the Pope. And the Romans still contending for their right of Election \the Emperor Henry II made them renounce their right of Election Anno 1046 &/ the Nicolas II ordeined that Anno 1058|9| ordered that the Popes should be chosen by the Cardinals & Emperor, & Gregory the VIIth soon after \(vizt 1077)/ deprived the Emperor of the Investitures as Simoniacal, & by excommunications set the Papal power above the Imperial{illeg}. |& had a look more stout then his fellows.|

The controversy about worshipping of Images lasted in the Greek Empire till the year 842, & then that worship, was established for the fr{illeg} after it had been set up by the 2d Council of Nice \under Irene {illeg}/ A.C. 787, condemned by th a Council at Constantinople \under Leo X/ A.C. 814, was restored \& established/ by a Council at Constantinople under \the Empress/ Theodora, {illeg} & hath lasted ever since. The doctrine of Transubstantiation began to be \was first/ broached \openly by/ by Bertram or {Rotram} Paschasius Ratbertus a litle after the year 800. It \got ground by degrees &/ continued to be disputed till Berangarius appealed against it, who for opposing it was condemned for it by a Council|s| at Rome A.C. 1050, & Rome \AC/ 1059, {illeg} (wch last Council decreed the Election of the Pope by the Cardinals with the consent \subsequent approbation/ of the inferior clergy & a few \then some/ of the people, salvo Imperatoris honore.) And these the ab by these steps the Abomination of Desolation was set up.

Pope Leo III A.C. 803|4| co|a|ming|e| into Germany to the Emperor Charles ye great attended with his Cardinals Archbishops Bishops & Prelates dedicated several \new/ Churches in several parts of Germany granting them \several/ Indulgences many Indulgences And at the instance of the Emperor Charles the {sic} went together to the town of Vuerda on the Rhene & near Colen & visited the Church & Convent of St Suibert Sunibert & there Pope Leo wth the consent of his Cardinals & Prelates in the presence of the Emperor canonized S. Sunibert with great solemnity, & this is the first instance of canonizing the dead. And at the same time upon & appointed that day \vizt / day to be observed yearly \by that town/ in memory of the Canonization & Exaltation of this Saint, & granted special Indulgences for that Church to those who should meet there annually to observe the same. And at the same time many people of both sexes came together out of the Province to see the Canonization & receive the Popes benediction & remission of their sins.

As Dacia by being formerly a part of the Roman Empire is {illeg} \{hence} {illeg}/ part of the subject of the prophesies {illeg} concerning this Empire, so {illeg} all the nations conquered by it \henceforward/ belong to that third part, & so Germany from the time that it was conquered by the Francks in the reign of Charles the great, is another became another part of of {sic} the subject of these prophesies body of the Beast.

<147r>

I have hitherto considered those false Christians (or rather Antichristians) who \either/ separated fom the {illeg} communion of the true Christians or were excommunicated by them. I will now mention some others \Christians/ who continued in commuon {sic} notwithstanding their opinion that the son was the λόγος ενδ προφορικὸς emitted not from all eternity but a little before the world began & by that emission generated into a son.

Iustin Martyr who flourished – – – – – – – Christ is called the son of God

Tatian the disciple of Iustin was also instructed – – – – it began to have considerable effects

Eusebius bishop of Cæsarea – – – – – – being all things potentially.

<148r>

the prof{illeg}ane & impious may not trample upon the holy things. For we also acknowledge it a benefit received from you that we are preserved safe & intire, & we {illeg} pray for f{illeg} freedom from danger in time to come. And if there shall be need of greater intercession & deprecation, call together a Quire of your brothers the martyrs & in conjunction with them all intercede for us. Let the prayers of many just ones {illeg} \{illeg} attone for/ the sins of the multitude & peoples. Exhort Peter, excite Paul & also Iohn the divine & beloved disciple that they may be sollicitous for the Churches wch they have erected for wch they have been in chains, for wch they have undergone dangers & deaths, that the worship of Idols may not lift up its head against us, that heresies may not spring up like thorns in the vineyard, that tares grown up may not choak the wheat, that there may not be against any \no/ rock void of the fatness of true dew, may be against us & render the force \fruitful power/ of the word void of a rood|t| but by the power of the deprecation of your self & your companions, o admirable man & eminent among the martyrs, the common wealth of Christians may become the {illeg} a fei|ie|ld of corn. The same Gregory Nyssen in his {illeg} Sermon {illeg} upon the death of Meletius bishop of Antioch, preached \at Constantinop/ the same year (A.C. 381) before the bishops of the second General Council, spake thus of Meletius. The bridegroom, saith he, is not taken from us. He stands in the middle of us tho we do not see him. He is a Priest in the most inward places & face to face intercedes before God for us & the sins of the people. This \And while/ Gregory preached \this/ before \Constantinop/ the Council of Constantinople: that you may \thence/ know (saith a[18] Baronius) that he professed what the whole Council, & therewith the whole Church of those parts beleived, namely that the saints in heaven offer prayers for us before God.

Symbol (3 dots in circles arranged as an inverted triangle) in text And even the great Athanasius who died in the year 373 was of the same opinion \from his youth/. For in his Epistle to Marcellinus concerning the \the {sic} book of the/ Psalms, he introduces an old man calling him his Son & giving \him/ many advices concerning the interpretation & use of this book, & {illeg} |wch he recommended to Marcellinus| particularly that no man under a shew of eloquence should be \recommended to Marcellinus &/ induced to adorn them \Psalms/ with secular words nor endeavour to transpose the sayings or anywise to change them, but \without any artifice/ to recite & sing them as they are spoken, that the wise holy men who spake them deliv as Gods men servants delivered them to us, knowing their own words may pray with us, yea \or/ rather that the holy spirit who spake in the holy men seing his own words with wch he inspired them, may \join [with them] in/ assisting us in or prayers. Certainly, said the old man, I have heard from prudent men that anciently in Israel they put the Devils to flight by the reading of the scriptures alon{e} they put the devils to flight & detected their stratagems against men. And therefore, said he, they are worthy of all condemnation who om{illeg}itting these, & using foreign {illeg} elegant words, from those name themselves exorcists. ffor they rather trifle & offer themselves to be derided by the devils as happened to the sons of Sceva the Iew who attempted to exorcise in this manner. For the Devils hearing such things mock at them but are afraid of the words of the saints & cannot bear them. This was the doctrine wch Athanasius imbibed in his youth & under \in/ the name of the old man recommended to Marcellinus. For certainly this Epistle \& the Exposition of Athanasius upon the Psalms/ was writ in the reign of Constantine the great, the discourses therein {illeg} concerning the Divinity of Christ being suitable to tho{se} <148v> times & conteining nothing which may relate to the times after the Council of Tyre not {illeg} \to/ say after the Council of Nice. Let these discourses be compared wth the discourses of Athanasius in his Orations contra Gentes written before the times of the Coun homousian controversy & they will appear to be much of a piece. For he yn attributed supernatural effects to words & the sign of the cross.

Pope Damasus who was made bishop of Rome A.C. 367 & died A.C. 384 – – – – – – – – into the bishopric of Rome A.C. 38|6|7.

Hilary who died in the year 368, not only ascribed supernatural effects to the reliques of saints as you have heard but but {sic} also declared for the invocation of Angels & saints. For upon the 129th Psalm he writes thus. It is not the nature of God but our infirmity wch wants the intercession of Angels. ffor they are sent for the infirmity \sake/ of those who shall inherit {the} salvation, God being ignorant of none of those things wch we do but our infirmity wanting the ministry of spiritual intercession to ask & merit. And so upon the 124th Psalm: Neither the custody of the saints nor the protection of Angels are wanting to those who desire to stand. And a little after: And least we should beleive it to be a light protection safeguard wch is placed in the Patriarchs Apostles or Patriarchs & Prophets or rather in the Angels wch do compass the Church with a certain custody, it is added: {illeg} And the Lord encompasses his people henceforth & for ever. {illeg} But perhaps the custody of the Apostles or Angels may be thought sufficient: It is true, but &c.

Ambrose who was made Bishop of Millain A.C. 374 & died A.C. 397, concludes – – – – – cohæredes Dei. And in his book de viduis he writes thus. When Peters wives mother was taken with a great feaver, Andrew intreated the Lord for her –––– & thou hast neighbours to supplicate God for thee. Thou hast the Apostles thy neighbours, Thou hast the martyrs thy neighbours – – – The Angels are to be intreated for us who are granted to us for a safeguard the Martyrs are to be intreated whose patronage we by the pledge of \their/ bodies we seem to chalenge. They can supplicate for our sins because by their own blood if they had any sins they havewashed them away. \For they are the martyrs of God, our Presidents, the inspectors of our lives & actions./ Let us not blush therefore to use them as intercessors of our infirmities because when they overcame they knew the infirmities of the body.

[Epiphanius \who died A.C. / was at first free from these superstitions but at length gave way to the multitude

<149r>

By vertue of the same Imperial Edict not only Spain {&} Gallia but also Illyricum became subject to the Pope. Damasus made Ascholius or Acholius bishop \of Thessalonica the metropolis of Illyricum/ his Vicar for hearing of causes, \& in ye year 382 Ascholius being summoned by Pope Damasus came to a Council at Rome/ & Pope Innocent \Syricius/ the successor of Damasus decreed that no bishops should be ordeined I in Illyricum wthout the consent of Anysius the successor of Ascholius. \And the following Popes gave Rufus the successor of {illeg} Anysius power of calling Provincial Councils./ For in the collections of Holstenius there is an account of a Council of Rome convened under Pope Boniface II in wch were produced Letters of Damasus Syricius, Innocent I, Boniface I, & Cœlestine bishops of Rome to Ascholius Anycius & Rufus bishops of Thessalonica, in wch letters they commend to them the hearing of causes in Illyricum granted by the Lord & the holy Canons to the Apostolick Sea throughout that Province. \/ < insertion from lower down f 149r > [✝ And Syricius \saith/ in his Epistle to Anysius: [19]Etiam du\du/m Frater charissime per Candidianum Episcopum, qui nos præcessit ad Dominum, hujusmodi literas dederamus ut nulla licentia esset, sine consensu tuo in Illyrico Episcopos ordinare præsumere, quæ utrum ad te pervenerint scire non potui. Multa enim gesta sunt per contentionem ab Episcopis in Ordinationibus faciendis, quod tua melius caritas novit. And a little after: ad omnem enim hujusmodi audaciam comprimendam vigilare debet instantia tua, spiritu in te sancto fervente: ut vel ipse, si potes, vel quos judicaveris episcopos idoneos, cum litteris dirigas, dato consensu qui possit in ejus locum qui defunctus vel depositus fuerit, Catholicum episcopum vita et moribus probatum, secundum Nicænæ synodi statuta, vel Ecclesi& Romanæ, clericum de clero meritum ordinare.] < text from f 149r resumes > And Pope Innocent I \saith/ in his epistle to Anysius:[20] Cui \[Anysio]/ etiam anteriores tanti ac tales viri prædecessores mei Episcopi, id est, sanctæ memoriæ Damasus Siricius, atq supra memoratus vir ita detulerunt, ut omnia quæ in \omnibus/ illis partibus gererentur sanctitati tuæ quæ plena justitiæ est, traderent cognoscenda. And in his epistle to Rufus[21] the successor of Anysius Ita longis intervallis disterminatis a me ecclesijs discat consulendum ut prudentiæ gravitatiq tuæ committendam curam causasq, siquæ exoriantur per Achaiæ Thessaliæ, Epiri veteris, Epiri novæ & Cretæ, Daciæ mediterraneæ Daciæ Ripensis, Mœsiæ Dardæniæ & Prævali Ecclesias Christo Domino annuente censeam. Vere enim ejus sacratissimus monitis lectissimæ sinceritatis tuæ providentiæ et virtuti hanc injungimus sollicitudinem: non primitus hæc statuentes, sed præcessores nostros Apostolicos imitati; qui beatissimis Acholio et Anysio injungi pro meritis ista voluerunt. [✝ And Boniface I in his decretal Epistle to Rufus & the rest of the Bishops in Illyricum: Nullus, ut frequenter dixi, alicujus ordinationem citra ejus [{Rufi}] episcopi Thessalonicensis] conscientiam celebrare præsumat: cui, ut supra dictum est, vice nostra cuncta committimus. And Pope Cœlestine in his decretal epistle to the Bishops in \throughout/ Illyricum, saith: vicem nostram per vestram provinciam noveritis [Rufo] esse commissam, ita ut ad eum fratres charissimi, quicquid de causis agitur, refereatur sine ejus consilio Nullus ordinetur, nullus usurpet eodem inconscio commissam illi Provinciam. Colligere nisi cum ejus voluntate episcopos non præsumant. \/ < insertion from f 149v > And in the cause of Perigenes he thus in the title of his epistle[22] he thus enumerates the provinces under this bishop: Rufo et cæteris Episcopis per Macedoniam Achaiam Thessaliam, Epirum veterem, Epirum novam, Prævalin & Daciam constitutis. < text from f 149r resumes > And Pope Xystus in a decretal Epistle to the same bishops: Illyricanæ omnes ecclesiæ ut a decessoribus <149v> {decessoribus {sic} nostris} {illeg}, et nos quoq {fecimus}; {illeg} Thessalonicensis Antistitis, ut suo solicitudine, siquæ {illeg} assilent, actiones distinguat atq definiat, et ad eum quicquid {illeg} dotibus agitur, referatur. Sit Concilium quotiens causæ fuerint {illeg} pro necessitatum emergentium ratione decreverit. And Pope Leo in his Epistle to Anastasius bishop of Thessalonica: Singulis autem Metropolitanis sicut potestas ista committitur ut in suis Provincijs jus habeant ordinandi {illeg} eos metropolitanos a te volumus ordinari; maturo tamen & decocto {judicio}

Felix III

[23]Synodus Romana sub Felice III circa{illeg} annum 484 in epistola synodica ad Constantinopolitanos:

The Church of Ravenna (the Metropolis of Flaminia & Æmelia) was also subject to the Pope. ffor Pope Zosimus \A.C. 417/ excommunicated some of the Presbyters of that Church, & wrote a commonitory epistle \about them/ to the Clergy of that Church about them, calling as a branch of the Roman Church. In in {sic} Ecclesia sua, saith he, hoc est in ecclesia nostra Romana. ③ And Pope Leo I being consulted by Leo bishop of Ravenna about some quæstions, answered him by a decretal Epistle. A.C. 451. ② And Petrus Chrysologus bishop of Ravenna in his epistle to Eutyches {illeg}|e|xtant in ye Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, wrote thus: Nos pro studio pacis et fidei, extra consensum Romanæ Pontificis civitatis Episcopi, causa fidei audire non possumus. ① And when those of Ravenna having elected a new bishop gave notice thereof to Pope sixtus, A.C. 433 the Pope set him \set him aside &/ ordeined another \Peter Chrysologus/ in his {illeg} \room/ [See Baronius Anno 433 § 24.] And Petrus Chrysologus . . . . . . possumus. And Pope Leo I being consulted by Leo . . . . . . . . . . decretal epistle. And \Pope/ Gregory the great reprehending Ioh the bisho Iohn bishop of Ravenna tells him of the privileges granted by \about the use of the pallium tells him of/ a precept of one of his predecessors Pope Iohn cammanding that all the privileges \{illeg} privileges/ granted by \{primiti}/ his predecessors should be to the \bishop &/ Church of Ravenna should be kept. And this bishop Iohn returned a submissive answer, & after his death Pope Leo I ordered a visitation of ye Church of Ravenna sent the pallium to his successor Maxinian as of ancient custome & confirmed the privileges heretofore granted to this Church [Greg. l. 3. Epist 56, 57 & l 5. Epist 25, 26, 56.] This Church revolted two or three times from the Church of Rome but returned again to its obedience.

<150r>

When some whom the Church of Rome excommunicated

In like manner the Bishop of Aquileia with his diocesse was subject to the Bishop of Rome, {illeg} ffor Nicetas Bishop of Aquileia \& acted by his decrees/ as is manifest by the 79 \decretal/ Epistle of Pope Leo I wch {begins thus} directed to Nicetas bishop of Aquileia ffor this Epistle begins thus \A.C. 458 For the {illeg} Pope begins this Epistle thus./ Regressus ad nos filius meus & Deo Adeodatus Diaconus Sedis nostræ, dilectionem tuam poposcisse memoravit, ut de his a nobis authoritatem Apostolicæ Sedis acciperes, quæ quidem magnam dijudicationis difficultatem dijudicationis videntur afferre. And then receiving \he continues sets down/ an answer to the Questions proposed by Nicetas, & concludes thus: Hanc autem Epistolam nostram, quam ad consultationem tuæ fraternitatis emissimus ad omnes fratres & comprovinciales tuos Episcopos facies pervenire, ut in {exitium} observantia, data prosit aut\h/oritas. Data 12 Sept Kal. Apr. Majorano Aug. primùm cos. \A.C. 458. {illeg}/ {illeg} This Diocess was large extending eastward to Pannonia secunda or inferior & westward to the river Adda which ran between it & \divided it from/ the Diocess of Millain.[24] It conteined Pannonia prima, Rhætia secunda, Noricum, Istria, Forum Iulium & Venetia. It was |then| the chief \second/ city of the western Empire, & was by some called the second Rome. |Gregory the great A.C. 595 cited Severus Symbol (dot in a circle with a cross to the right) in text| < insertion from f 149v > Symbol (dot in a circle with a cross to the right) in textAnd Gregory the great A.C. 591 cited Severus bishop of this city to appear before him in judgment in a Council at Rome. Greg. Lib. 1. Indic 9 Epist 16. < text from f 150r resumes >

The Bishops of {illeg} Aquileia & Millain created one another & therefore were alike sub of equal authority & alike subject to the sea of Rome ffor Pope a[25] Pelagius (about the year 557) testifes this in the following words Mos antiquus fuit, ut quia pro longinquitate vel difficultate itineris ab Apostolico illis onerosum fuerit ordinari ipsi se invicem Mediolanensis & Aquileiensis ordinare episcopos debuissent. \/ < insertion from lower down f 150r > ⊡ These word {sic} {illeg} imply that the ordination of these two bishops belonged to the sea of Rome. And accordingly Gregory ye great writing to ye Clergy & people of Millain for Deusdedit then elected Bishop of Millain. When Laruentius bishop of Millian had excommunicated Magnus one of his Presbyters & was dead, Gregory the great A.C. 293 absolved Magnus & sent the Pallium to the new elected bishop Constantius. [Greg. Lib. 3, Epist 26 & Lib. 4 Epist. 1.] And the next year reprehended him of partiality in judging Fortunatus & commanded him to send Fortunatus to Rome to be judged there [lib. 5. Epist 4.] & four years after appointed the bishops of Millain & Ravenna to hear ye cause {on} Maximus. [Lib 9. Epist. \10 &/ 67. < text from f 150r resumes > Hence Ambrose bishop of Millain saith: [26]Ecclesia Romana hanc consuetitudinem non habet, cujus typum in omnibus sequimur & formam. And a litte after: In omnibus cupio sequi ecclesiam Romanam. And in his commentary upon 1 Tim. 3: Cum totus mundus Dei sit, tamen t|d|omus ejus Ecclesia dicitur cujus hodie rector est Damasus.

<150v>

And two years after (viz A.C. 601) when Constantius was dead, & the people of Millain had elected Deusdedit his successor, Greg & the Lombards had elected another: Gregory wrote to the Notary clergy & people of millain that by the authority of his letters Deusdedit should be ordeined & that he whom the Lombards had ordeined was an unworthy successor of Ambrose [Lib. 11 Epist. 3, 4. Whence I gather that the church of Millain had continued in this state of subordination to the sea of Rome ever since the days of Ambrose. For Ambrose himself acknowledged the authority of sea {sic} of Rome. Ecclesia Romana, saith he, hanc consuetudinem – – – – – – – – – rector est Damasus. |Auxentius the predecessor of Ambrose was not subject to ye sea of Rome & therefore the subjection \began in Ambrose./| The|is| diocess of Millain conteined Liguria \with Insubria/, the Alpes Cottiæ & Rhætia. This bishop re In the year 844 the bishop of Millain revolted from the sea of Rome & continued in this revolt about 200 years as is thus mentioned by ✝[27] Sigonius. Eodem anno [sc. 844] Angilbertus Mediolanensis Archiepiscopus ab Ecclesia Romana parum comperta de causa descivit, tantumq exemplo in posterum valuit, ut non nisi post ducentos annos Ecclesia Mediolanensis ad Romanæ obedientiam auctoritatemq redierit.

The bishop of Ravenna (the metropolis of Flaminia & Æmilia) was also subject to ye Pope. For Petrus Chrysologus Gregory the great sent the pallium to |upon the death of Iohn bishop of this city| appointed a visitation of this Church, sent the pallium to his successor \Maxinian/ &|a|s of ancient custome & confirmed the privileges heretofore granted to this church. [{illeg} Lib. 5 Epist 25, 26, 56. Pope Leo the great in answer to some questions proposed by Leo bishop of Ravenna sent him a decretal Epistle [Epist 37] Petrus Chrysologus bishop of Ravenna in his epistle written againsto Eutyches & produced \extant/ in the \acts of the/ Council of Chalcedon; wrote: Nos pro studio pacis et fidei extra consensum Romanæ civitatis episcopi, causas fidei audire non possumus

In omnibus autem hortamur te frater honorabilis ut his quæ a beatissimo Papa Romanæ civitatis scripta sunt obedienter attendas; quoniam beatus Petrus qui in propria sede & vivit & præsidet, præstat quærentibus Fidei veritatem. Nos enim pro studio pacis & Fidei extra conscient consensum Romanæ civitatis Episcopi, causas Fidei audire non possumus. Petrus Chrysololus {sic} Ravennatis episcopus in epistola ad Eutychem \Consilium/ Chalcedonense adversus Eutychem A.C. 450.

–– had done the like. And Petrus Chrysologus bishop of Ravenna in his epistle sent to \Eutyches communicated to/ the Council of Chalcedon against Eutyches. In omnibus autem hortamur te . . . . . possumus. And Nos enim pro studio pacis et fidei extra consensum Romanæ civitatis episcopi causas fidei audire po non possumus.

And a little after they add that the number of bishops convened at Ariminum ought not to have ye force of præjudice seing their profession of faith was composed without ye consent of ye Bishop of Rome whose opinion was to be expected in the first place, & wthout ye consent of Vincentius & some others, & those that did then consent, being since \were being since/ returned to a better mind had exprest their testified their dislike of that form.

<151r>

whose bishops met {illeg} in Council at Rome every half year {illeg} at Rome as their metropolis. ffor by the fift Canon the Council of Nice {ordeined} \{illeg}/ that Councils should be held every in every Province every spring & autumn & according to this Canon the bishops of his Province met every half year at Rome. ffor in this sence Pope Leo I interpreted this Canon of the Co

For that that the Bishop of Rome began now \exalt {sic} the Council of {illeg} \of Rome &// to overrule the Councils \& {Metropolitans}/ of other Provinces \by the Council of Rome/ there are many instances. Pope Zosimus A.C. 417

Thus Pope Zosimus ––

And to give you some instances of these proceedings \in relation to Councils/ Pope Zosimus A.C. 417 – – –

The bishops of Rome claimed a p{illeg} prærogative over all the west by primitive instititu

And if this Ecclesiatical Monarchy had not yet been erected yet the Imperial edict of Valentinian II was

And the same Pope Leo having \in a Council at Rome/ passed sentence against Hilary bishop of Arles for what he had done in a Provincial council in Gallia \unlawful ordinations/ took occasion from thence to procure the following Edict from the western Emperor Valentinian for establishing more absolutely the authority of his Sea over all the \provincial councils &/ Churches of the western Empire –– A.C. 445.

There were at this time some barbarian kingdoms in the western Empire but as soon as they became converted to the Roman catholick faith they submitted to the dominion of the sea of Rome.

{illeg} Now tho the Western Emperors for the peace of their Empire set up this ecclesiastical dominion of their Imperial city, yet the Bishop of Rome coloured over his claim wth other pretenses. So Pope Innocent I in his Decretal epistle to Decentius bishop of Eugubium. A.C. 406, claimed it represents that – – – – head of their institution: an argument that would subject Rome to Illyricum & both to Asia & Antioch & Antioch to Ierusalem. And in almost all the decretal Epistles the language obedience to the Apostolic sea & chair of Peter is inculcated, whereas the Church of Rome was of the uncircumcision & Peter was an Apostle of the circumcision & none of the Apostles were bishops of any cities. They were not confined to residence in single cities but sent to preach to the whole world, & left no successors in this mission. Nor were the Churches of Asia during the reign of Vespasian Titus Domitian & Nerva under the government of the Bishops of Rome but under that of the Apostle Iohn who was superi And as for that text Thou art Peter & upon this rock will I build my church: it was personal & was fulfilled in Peter when by his first sermon he converted three thousand & therby founded the church of the circumcision & afterwards by the calling of Cornelius founded also the Church of the uncircumcision. These These a Arguments drawn from these heads might help to colour f over delude the people, but it was by the edicts of Gratian & Valentinian that this {illeg} Ecclesiastical {illeg} \dominion/ |colour over this dominion with a shew of religion when it was set up: & we must reccon that {sic} but it| was set up & established by the Edicts of Gratian & Valentinian. When the Bishops of Asia deposed Paul of Samosat the \heathen/ Emperor \Aurelian/ referred the matter to the bishop of his imperial city Rome. When the bishops of Afric referred their case to the hearing of the Gallican bishops the Emperor Constantine the great refe added the bishops of Rome & Italy, & soon after the Council of Nice gave \him/ the primacy of honour {illeg} & when Constantinople was built & made the head of the eastern Empire the second general Council gave the primacy to the bishop of this city next after Rome, as being new Rome.

<151v>

And the same Gregory Pope Leo in another place teaches the same thing in these words. De toto mundo unus Petrus eligitur, qui et universarum gentiū vocationi et omibus {sic} Apostolis cunctisq Ecclesiæ patribus præponatur, ut quamvis proprie regat Petrus quos principaliter regat et Christus. Serm. 3 de sua ad Pontificatum assumptione.

And when Ambrose came to \the bishop of/ a certain city of Sardinia, percontatus est ex eo utrum cum Episcopis Catholicis, hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia, conveniret. [Ambr. de obitu fratris Satyri.] And the same Ambrose in conjunction with ye Synod of Aquileia A.C. 381 in their synodical epistle to the Emperor Gratian: Totius Orbis Romani caput Romanam Ecclesiam, atq illam sacrosanctam Apostolorum fidem, ne turbari sineret, obsecranda fuit clementia vestra; inde enim in omnes venerandæ communionis jura dimanant. [Synod. Aquil.

<152r>

And Tertullian is witness that the baptism of hereticks was rejected \disallowed/ by the \practice of the/ African Churches before the end of the second century. ffor in his book de baptismo wch he wrote before the end of the {illeg} he became a Montanist, he \describes the practise of ye Churches in Afric {&}/ saith [28]Vnus omninò baptismus et nobis tam ex Domini Evangelio quam ex Apostoli{s} literis, quoniam unus Dominus et unum baptisma et una Ecclesia in cœlis. Sed circa hæreticos sane quid custodiendum sit, digne quis retractet: ad nos enim editum est. Hæretici autem nullum habent consortium nostræ disciplinæ, quos extraneos utiq testatur ipsa ademptio communionis. Non debet in illis cognoscere quod mihi est præceptum quia non idem Deus est nobis & illis, nec unus Christus, id est, idem; ideoq me baptismus unus quia non idem; quem cum rite non habeant, sine dubio non habent.

The Cataphrygian \heresy/ first spread silently in the Churches & at length created great tumults Apollinaris & at leng \&/ Apollinaris bishop of Hierapolis in his latter days was \wrote/ against it in its infancy \& was one of the first who did so/ & not long after it had created great tumults in the Churches \(Euseb. Eccl Hist. l. 4 c. 27) &/. ffor it was condemned \& its professors excommunicated/ by a Council called \convened/ at Hierapolis by \under/ Apollinaris & by other Councils \convened/ in the east \Asia/ (Euseb. l. 5. c. 16, 19) And these were the first Councils of Bishops convened against hereticks so far I as I can find in Ecclesiastical history, & by excommunicating the Cataphrygians seeme to have given occasion occasion to Pope Victor to issue communicatory \letters/ to them, \this being done as it seems to me/ in opposition to the proceedings of the Churches of Asia against them |this being done as it seems to me in opposition to the proceedings of the Churches of Asia.| ffor I see not why he should write communicatory letters to the Cataphrygian Churches of Asia as distinct from the other Churches of Asia before they were distinguished before they were distinguished by excommunications: & after they were excommunicated to write communicatory letters to them was to oppose & dissolve the sentence & authority of the Churches \& Councils/ wch excommunicated them. And this was the first attempt made by the Bishop of Rome to the universal Bishopric.

When Cyprian –– – – – – catechized & baptized accipiat spiritum sanctum. The doctrine \therefore/ of disallowing the baptism of hereticks continued in the Churches of Afric till \after/ the year 314: but the bishops of Italy Rome & Italy extirpated it {illeg} & introduced their own doctrine by supporting the party of Cæcilian extirpated it & introduced their own doctrine of allowing that baptism.

In the eastern Churches – – – – – – – – – catechised & baptized.

Athanasius

This principle of allowing – – – – – – – – A.C. 362. But after this principle began to be received in Egypt & Syria, the Church it overspread the eastern Empire & became universal in a little time.

It has been a frequent – – – – – – – – – – – Greek Church over her own members.

<153r>

\to God/ had. Athanasius had an Oration upon the 40 Martyrs \who died in the year 373/ \// Ephrem Syrus who died in the year 378 had an Oration on these 40 Martyrs/ not yet published & therefore wch \The|i|s Oration of Athanasius is not yet published but/ Gerard Vossius saw the MS in ye library of Cardinal Ascanius in Italy, & there as he mentions in his commentary upon the oration of Ephrem Syrus on these 40 martyrs; & therefore their reliques were sent dispersed & sent some of them sent into Egypt in the life time of Athanasius, that is before the year 373.

|by him| And \[Basil]/ a little after: At the memory of the Martyr the whole region is moved; at his festival the whole city rejoyce he is changed into a state is transported with joy Nor do the kindred of the rich turn aside to the sepulchres of their ancestors \but all go to the place of piety/. And in ye end of the Homily he prays that God would preserve the Church thus fortified with the tower great towers of the martyrs. And in his Oration on ye 40 Martyrs – – –

Ephræm Syrus who was contempory {sic} to Basil & dyed the same year with him, in the \end of his/ encomium \Encomium or Oration/ upon Basil newly dead \thus/ invokes him: Deprecate for me a most \very/ miserable man & recall me by thy intercessions, o father [Basil,] thou couragious me a weake one, thou diligent me a sloathful \negligent/ one, thou chearful me a sloathful \an inactive/ one, thou wise me a foolish one. Thou who hast treasured up a treasure of all virtues me reduce me empty of every good work. And in the beginning of his encomium upon the 40 martyrs written at the same time he thus invokes them. Help me therefore, |O| ye saints, with your intercessions &, o ye beloved, with your \holy/ prayers, that Christ by his grace may guide my tongue to speake &c And afterwards mentioning the mother of one of these 40 martyrs he thus concludes the Oration with this invocation. I {illeg} entreat thee o holy & bless faithfull & blessed woman, pray for me to the saints saying: Intercede ye triumphers of Christ for the least & the miserable Ephræim, that I may find mercy & by the grace of Christ may be saved. And ag\a/in in his second Oration Sermon or Oration on the praises of the holy martyrs of Christ, he thus invokes them. We entreat you, O most holy martyrs to deprecate the Lord for us that miserable sinners {illeg} beset with the squallor of negligence, that he would infuse his divine grace into us. And in th \afterwards/ neare the end he {illeg} invokes them again in this manner. Now ye most holy men & glorious martyrs of God, help me a miserable sinner with your prayers: that in that dreadfull hour I may obtein mercy, when the secrets of hearts shall be made manifest. I am \to day/ become \to you/, O ye most holy martyrs of Christ, as it were, an unprofitable & unskilfull cup-bearer: for I have delivered to the sons & brothers of your faith a cup of the excellent wine of your warfare & \wth ye excellent table of your victory replenished with all sorts of dainties/ have endeavoured with the whole affection & desire of my mind to recreate the \your/ fathers & brothers of the kindred & relations wch dayly frequent your \the/ table: ffor behold they sing & with exultation & jubile glorify God who has adorned the most sacred heads of your vertue with incorruptible & cælestial crowns, & with excessive joy they stand about the sacred reliques of your martyrdome, wishing for a benediction | blessing & desing {sic} to carry away the holy medicines of body & mind. Bestow therefore a blessing upon them all, As good disciples & faithfull ministers of our benign Lord & Saviour, bestow therefore a blessing upon them all. And I also, tho weak & feeble, having received strength by your merits & intercessions, with the whole devotion of my mind, have sung a hymn of your praise & glory before your holy reliques. Wherefore I beseech you stand before the throne of the throne of the {sic} divine majesty for me Ephræm a vile & miserable <153v> sinner that by your prayers I may deserve to obtein salvation & with you enjoy eternal felicity by the grace & & benignity & {illeg} of our Lord & Saviour Iesus Christ to whom with the father & holy ghost be prais honour vertue & glory for ever & ever Amen.

Gregory Nazianzen A.C. 373 being \newly/ made bishop of Sasyma wrote his sixt Oration

Gregory Nazianzen in his sixt Oration written A.C. 373 when he was newly made bishop of Sasima, saith: Let us purify our selves to the martyrs or rather to the God of the martyrs. And a little after he calls the martyrs mediators of obteining an ascention or divinity. And in the end of his Oration written upon Athanasius written presently after his death A.C. 373, he thus invokes him. Do thou – – – virgin Mary.

Gregory Nyssen in the life of Ephræm Syrus tells us \tells/ how a certain man returning home from a far country was in great danger by reason that all the ways were obstructed \intercepted/ by the armies of barbarous nations; but upon invoking Ephræm by name & saying Holy Ephræm assist me he escaped the danger, neglected the fear of death & beyond his hope got safe home. And in the end of this Oration Gregory invokes Ephræm in the following manner: But thou [o Ephæm {sic}] stand|assist|ing now at ye divine altar & sacrificing to the p|P|rince of life & to the most holy Trinity together wth the Angels, remember us all & obtein for us pardon of our sins that wee may enjoy the eternall happiness of the kingdom of heaven. The same Gregory in his Oration the on the Martyr Theodorus written A.C. 38{0}|1|, \thus/ describes the power of the martyr & the practise of the people. in this manner. This martyr, saith he, the last year, quieted the barbaric tempest & put a stop to the horrid war of the fierce & cruel Scythians. –––– Si {illeg} pulverem quo conditorium ubi martyris corpus quiescit If any one is permitted to carry away the dust wth wch the tumb where is covered wherein the body of the martyr rests, the dust is accepted as a guift & gathered as \to be laid up/ a thing of great price. ffor to touch the reliques themselves, if any such prosperous fortune shall at any time happen, how great a favour that is & not to be obteined without the most earnest prayers they know well who have obteined this prevailed obteined it. ffor as a living & florid body, they that behold it, imbrace it, applying to the eyes, ears, mouth, ears & all the organs of sense, & then with affection pouring tears upon the martyr as if he was whole & appeared to them, they offer prayers with supplication that it would intercede for them as an advocate praying to him as an Officer attending upon God & invoking him {sic} receiving guifts whenever he will And at length Gregory concludes the Oration with this prayer. O Theodorus we want many blessings. Intercede & deprecate for your country before the common king & Lord. ffor the country of the Martyr is the place of his passion & they are his citizens & brethren & kindred who have him & defend him & adorn & honour him. We fear afflictions, we expect dangers: the wicked Scythians are not far off ready to make war against us. As a soldier fight for us, as a martyr use your liberty of speech for your fellow servants. Pray for peace that these publick meetings may not cease, that the furious & wicked barbarian may not rage against the temples & altars, that

<154r>

And the Latines mutually charged the Greeks with Polytheism & {Arianism} \for calling the father & son two hypostases/ as if the ffather & Son must be two Gods if they be not one {or}|by| unius|ty| |of| substantiæ|ce| & if as if {illeg} all men who did not place the unity of the Deity in the unity of substance were Arians.

Now that Sabellianism & Montanism – – – – – ὁμοιούσιος to ye father as well as ὁμοούσιος.

After this conviction the homousians began to change their language of one hypostasis to that of three, & to fall out amongst themselves about it, those who cho to call those sabellians who still adhered to ye language of one hypostasis & to be mutually to be called Arians \by them/ for changing their language. And in this state things continued till the reigh|n| of Iulian ye Apostate when Athanasius reconciled the two parties about their language making telling them that one party by their language of one hypostasis understood that th one substance in nature & species & the other by their language of three hypostases understood three substances in number. And this exposition was allowed by the Bishop of Rome. ffor Ierom a little after the reign of Pope Iulian the Emperor Iulian coming into the east Syria & ther & there \being reprehended for/ using the language of one hypostasis would not change his language till he had written to Pope Damasus about it. Now

In these disputes Arius & Athanasius had both of them perplexed the Church with metaphysical opinions & expressed their opinions in novel language not warranted by scripture. The Greek|s| Church had to preserve the Church from these innovations & metaphysical perplexitys had innovatio anathematized the nove & restore to her that peace wh anathematized the & put an end to the troubles occasioned by them anathematized the \novel/ language of Arius in several of their Councils, & so soon as they were able repealed the novel language of the homousians, & contended that the language of the scripture was to be adhered unto. The Homousians rejected made the father & son one God by a metaphysical unity the unity of substance: the Greek Churches rejected all metaphysical divinity as well that of Arius as that of Athanasius & {illeg} the Homousians & made the father & son one God by a Monarchical unity, an unity of Dominion, the Son being subject to ye father receiving all things from the father, being subject to him, & executing his will &, sitting in his throne & calling him his God, ffor & so is but one God wth the ffather as a king & his viceroy are but one king. ffor the word God relates not to the metaphysical nature of God but to his dominion. It signifies the same \is a relative word sc/ thing with Lord but in a higher degree. For as w It is a relative word & has relation to us as the servants of God. It is a word of the same signification with Lord & King but in a higher degree. For as we say my Lord our Lord your Lord, \other Lords, fals Gods/ the King of Kings & Lords of Lords, \other Lords,/ the servants of ye Lord, \serve other Lords/ so we say \my God/ our God your God, \other Gods/ the God of Gods, \other Gods/ the servants of God, serve other Gods. And therefore one God And therefore as {illeg} a father & his sons cannot be called one King upon account of their being consubstantial but may be called one King by unity of dominion if the son be Viceroy under the father: so God & his son cannot be called one God upon account of their being consubstantial. Nothing can make them one God |The heathens made all their Gods of one substance & sometimes called them one God & yet were polytheists. Nothing can make two persons one God but| but unity of dominion. And if they \Father & Son/ be united in dominion, the son being subordinate to the father \& sitting in his throne/, they can no more be called two Gods then a King & his Viceroy can be called two kings.

And h|H|is wratling {sic} wth Iacob {illeg} is as full a proof that he had a body before his incarnation as his being handled by Thomas is a proof that he had a body after his resurrection. Not the body of an Angel \wch hath not flesh & bones/ but a body wch by the power {illeg} of his will he could form into the consisten{cy} & solidity of flesh & bones as well before his incarnation as after his resurrection. And therefore as his Such a body as he had after his resurrection, such a body he had before his incarnation. And there

<154v>

Now while ye Apostles of the {illeg} \for the {sake} of ye Gospel/ communicated with all these churches of ye Iews & Gentiles: they have {illeg} us an example of {illeg} \charity/ wch deserves to be considered.

<155r>

This Creed \{illeg}/ is attributed to Athanasius in the MSS. It was composed before the reign of Iulian becuase it takes ὀυσία & ὑποστασις in the same {illeg} signification. It recites & anathematizes all the particular expressions of Arius & therefore was composed in the heat of that controversy. It comprehends all the Nicene Creed & enlarges it wth several articles of the Creeds of the Latines & therefore was writ when Athanatius {sic} had to do wth the Latin Church & studied to approve himself orthodox to their|m| opinion And these characters agre best to ye time when the Latines {illeg} he was in the west & the Latines gave an acct of his faith to ye Latines in order to be received into communion. This Creed I \I have recited at large because it/ is ye oldest I can meet wth in wch the H.G. is declared consubstantial to the father.

The man of sin was to be revealed by a falling away or defection from ye Church & to exalt –

The heathens off derived all their Gods \{illeg}/ from one suprem Iupiter, & \made/ {them} all of one usia & in that sence said they were all but one God. The Cab{balists} & Gnosticks call call limited their number & called them by the names of {their} attributes & powers. The Cataphrygians, {ye Ca} Noetians, Sabellians & Paulinists restrained their numer {sic} to the father son & holy Ghost, The auth but did not make them actually distinct from all eternity, the authors of the language of one usia & one substance \&/ one usia are the translat of the the homousians who made ye Son \to be/ the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος of the father & \in turning the nicene creed into latin/ translated Ομοούσιος by unius substantiæ & \afterwards/ in turning the faith of the Latines into Gr the homousian who took ye son to be ye λογος ἐνδιάθετος of the father made the the homousians who took the son for the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος of the father made them as much distinct from all eternity as they are at present.

The man of This mystery of iniquity was to work till the {most} should {illeg} the man of sin there should be a falling away & the man of sin should be revealed \& sit in the Tempe of God/ & exalt himself in the Temple of God above eve every thing that is called God worshipped, that is till it should make \such/ a great falling a defection from the Church or schism & by it power wch should \as should/ overcome the Church reign in its stead \it & reign/ over it & grow into a very potent dominion above all dominions.

They did not not se at this time separate from the Greek Chuch {sic}, but claimed dominion over them, & the bishops of each party excommunicated six or eight of ye other party & thereby declared that they continued in communion wth the rest.

And the Montanists th|a|ught that the word was God & the flesh was man, & \that/ the word |was| cloathed with |yt| flesh without confusion of substance & by the union \they/ became one person both God & man. Videmus saith Tertullian duplicem statum non confusum sed conjunctum in una persona, Deum et hominem Iesum. De Christo autem differo Et adeo salva est utriusq proprietas substantiæ: ut et spiritus res suas egerit in illo; id est virtutes & opera et signa; & caro passionis suas functa sit, esuriens sub diabolo, sitens sub Samaritide, flens Lazarum, anxia usq ad mortem, deniq et mortua est. Quod si tertium quid esset ex utroq confusum ut electrum, non tam distincta documenta parerent utriusq substantiæ. Sed et spiritus carnalia et caro spiritualia egisset ex translatione . . . . . . occurrerunt. And

& wrought the supernatural \divine/ works. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ And to avoid being charged wth dividing between Christ & Iesus & making them two, T|t|he Montanists taught that the word being cloathed with flesh without confusion \mixture/ of substance, {illeg} by this union they became one person \with it/ both God & man, the word being God & the flesh man. Videmus, saith Tert. – – – – – occurrerunt.

It was not therefore wthout reason that the Bishop

But the Council {illeg} understanding the \original/ word of two sub substances one of wch was Ὁμοούσιος to the other, {illeg} the \Bishops of the/ Greeks Church was|ere| offended at the translations & \as leading to Sabellianism & Montanism & in opposition thereunto/ called the father & son two hypostases \& the h.g. a third/ & the Latines taking the language of two \or three/ hypostases to be a denyal of the father & son ὁμοουσιος, & placing the unity of the Deity in the unity of substance, comp complained of ye Greeks for worshipping more Gods then one. Whence arose \And this was/ that {illeg} \great/ controversy \about the meaning of the word ομοουσιος/ wch Socrates compares to a nocturnal war. Verum sicut nos, saith he, – – – – aversabantur.

<155v>

\{This heresy} {began in} ye Greek Empire but after a {few years} spread into the western/ |For| And in relation to this controversy the {Greek} Council of Antioch A.C. 341 at the end of a declaration of their faith, added that ye Father Son & holy Ghost were not mere names but were hypostasi quidem tres, consesu {sic} autem unus. And another coucil {sic} of Antioch about 4 or 5 years after, in a declaration of their faith wch they composed for the satisfaction of the western Churches & sent to the bishops of Italy they defend themselves against the calumnies of making three Gods, or separating the son from the father & anathematize the opinion of Sabellius them who make the father Son & h.g. one thing [because it make the father suffer] because according to this opinion the son cannot \be incarnate &/ suffer without ye father. by reason of their common substance. And on the other hand ye western Bishops in ye Council of Serdica \A.C. 347/ in their general Epistle as it is recited intire by Theodorit, say call it heresy to to {sic} say that ye father son & h.g. are three hypostases & endeavour to clear themselves from the crime of Sabellianism. But however, that the language of una substantia \& una hypostasis/ became a stubling {sic} block to ye western nations & {illeg} in the space of 33 years led many of them \Bishops/ into ye errors of the Sabellians & Montanist {sic} Hilary in an epistle wch he wrote from Phrygia to ye bishops of Gallia & Britain \A.C. 358 to convert them from those opinions/ thus acknowledges.

<156r>

The bishop of Hispalis \(Sevil)/ was vicar over all Spain till the days of Pope Hormisda & then vicar over Batica & Lusitania only, the vicarage of all the rest being given to the bishop of Tarracon.

To the Rt Honble the Ld

Papa Simplicius hæc ad Z{anirem} Hispalensem Episcopum scribabat Talibus idcirco gloriantes indicijs, congruum duximus Vicaria sedis nostræ te authoritate fulciri: cujus vigore munitus, Apostolicæ institutionis decreta, vel sanatorum terminos Patrum nullatenus transcendi permittas. Pene similia scribet Hormisda Pontifex \(Epist. 24)/ ad Ioannem Tarraconensem his verbis: Et quia per insinuationem dilexionis tuæ, hujus est nobis via patefacta providentia, remuneramus solicitudinem tuam & servatis privilegijs Metropolitanorum, vices nobis Apostolicæ sedis eatinus delegamus, ut inspectis istis, sive ea quæ ad Canones pertinent, sive ea quæ a nobis sunt nuper mandata, servenur. |At this time Pope Hormisda made the bishop of Hispalis his vicar over Bœtica & Lusitania only & the bishop of Tarracon over all ye rest.|

In the time of the Council of Nice, Thrace was under the Bishop of Thessalonica. For Gelasius Cyzicenus representing that at when the Bishops of the Nicene Council sent the Nicene decrees faith to ye Provinces under each of them, the subscription of the Bishop of Thessalonica (as Gelasius Cyzicenus represents was this Alexander Thessalonicæ Episcopus, per eos qui sub ipso censentur Ecclesijs in Macedonia prima & secunda cum ijs qui in Græcia & Europa tota, in {illeg}utraq Scythia, et omnibus deniq in Illyrico Thessalia et Achaia: Europa is sometimes taken generally for all all {sic} Europe sometimes strictly for all for Thrace alone, & here it is taken in the latter sence. Constantinople at that time was subject to Thessalonica & presided only over the Islands Cyclades. ffor the subscription of Alexander bishop of Constantinople was Ecclesijs omnium cycladum insularum. But upon the building of Constantinople by Alex Constantine the great & the dision division of the Empire between Rome & Constantinople whereby Thrace became a part of the Eastern Empire while all the rest of the Province of the bishop of Thessalonica remained in the western. And at length the Council of Constantinople called the second general Council |giving him the primacy next after the Bishop of Rome, he extended his juri a patriarchal authority over the diocesses of Thrace Asia & Pontus, {illeg} whose metropolitans were the Bishops of Heraclea, Ephesus & Cæsarea| sub {sic}jected Thrace & Asia minor & Cappadocia to the bishop of Constantinople & set Constantinople above Alex him above the bishop of Alexandria: wch gave great offence to the Bishops of Alexandria & Rome.

Syrmium was

Syrmium was the Metropolis of Illyricum occidentale till Attila destroyed the city, after wch Laureacum became the metropolis of Noricum & both Pannonias, & Salona the metropolis of Dalmatia. [And the Pallium was sent by |ye| Pope Symachus to Theodorus bishop of Laureacum & by Pope Garth \to the bishops of Laureacum & Salona/ [Vide Epistolam Symmachi Papæ ad Theodorum episcopum Laureacensem & Epistolas Gregorij magni {illeg} lib. 4 Epist Ep. 53 ad Episcopos per Illyricum.] And the bishops of Laureacum & Salona received the Pallium from the Pope. [Vide Caroli a S. Paulo Geographiam sacram p. 72, 73] And Pope Zosimus in his decretal epistle to Hesychius bishop of Salona, directed him to denounce the Apostolic decrees as well to the bishops of his own Province as to those of the neighbouring Provinces. The first Roman Catholic bishop of Sirmium was Anemius. He was ordeined by Ambrose Bishop of Millain in the reign of Gratian & in the Council of Aquileia under Pope Damasus A.C. 382 held this opinion these were his words: Caput Illyrici non nisi civitas <157r> Sirmicensis, Ego igitur illius civitatis episcopus sum. Eum qui non confitetur filium Dei æternum et coæternum patri, qui est sempiternus, anathema dico. The next year Anemius & Ambrose wth Acholius bishop of – – |&| Valerian bishop of Aquileia & Acholius bishop of Thessalonica \with many {illeg}/ went to the Council of Rome {illeg} wch met \was convened by the influence of the Pope/ for abrogating the decrees of the eastern Councils [& setting up the power of the western Churches \under the Bp of Rome/ by the majority of votes as] \& carrying on the designes wch/ had ben attempted before in the {illeg} calling the Council of Serdica, {illeg} the designes wch] wch met for overruling the Greek Chur{ch} by the majority of votes & setting up the Popes authority \enabling the authority of the Apostolic Sea,/ as was attempted before in ye Council of Serdica.

<156v>

Magnus ille Ioannes [Chrysostomus] susceptis Ecclesiæ Constantinopolitanæ gubernaculis, non illi solum civitati, verum et toti Thraciæ, quæ est in sex Episcopatus divisa, & cunctæ etiam Asiæ quæ undecim habet Antistites, Ponticam præterea ecclesiam quæ eundem habet Episcoporum numerum quem Asia, ijsdem legibus adornavit. Theodoret l 5. Hist Eccl. c. 28

Magnus ille Iohannes [Chrysostomus] simul atq Ecclesiæ gubernaculis admotus est, iniquia –– non urbem duntaxat regiam hujusmodi cura ac sollicitudine gubernabat sed et universam Thraciam quæ in sex Provincias divisa est; et Asiam totam, quæ ab undecim Præsidibus regitur {illeg}: Ponticam præterea ijsdem legibus exornavit quæ totidem Rectores habet quot Asia. Theod \l. 5/ Eccl Hist c. 18.

Besides these three Diocesses the Patriarch of Constantinople præsided over some {illeg} churches without the Roman Empire & particularly over Alania & Russia. For ye Alans belonged to the Diocess of Pontus & the Russia to that of Thrace. Balsomm in Can 18 Conc. Chalc.

After the destruction of Ierusalem Cæsarea Stratonis became the Metropolis of Iudæa. & Ælia was su was superior to Æia till The Council of Nice by this canon gave the dignity of Patriarch to Ælia the bishop of Ælia by this Canon. Quia consuetudo obtinuit & antiqua traditio ut Æliæ Episcopus honoretur; habeat honoris consequentiam salva metropoli [Cæsariæ] propria dignitate. And hence|forwd| the Bishop of Ierusalem was sometimes named before the bishop of Cæsarea as Patriarch & sometimes the bishop of Cæsarea was named first as Metropolitan, At this time Cæsarea & these two bishops contended abo And Cyrill bishop of Ierusalem contending with Acacius bishop of Cæsarea about superiority was deposed by him. [Theod. Eccl. Hist l. 2. c. 27] At this time Iudæa & Cæsarea wth all Iudæa was under the patriarch of Antioch ffor Ierom in his epistle to Pamm At this time, as Cæsarea was the metropolis of Palæstine so Antioch was the Metropolis of all the east including Palæstine [Hieron Epist 61 ad Pammachium.] But at length the Council of Chalcedon exempted the three Palæstines from ye bishop of A jurisdiction of the bishop of Antioch & gave subjected them \with their Metropolitans the bishops of Cæsarea Scythopolis & Petra/ to ye power of the bishop of Ierusalem. [Concil. Chalced. Act. 7.]

The Diocess of Asia had its rise from the kingdom of Attalus inherited by the Romans: that of Pontus from the kingdom of Mithridates conquered by them

<157v>

But lett And accordingly Pope T Hormisda, in his decretal Epistle[29] to Iohn bishop of Tarraco wrote thus: Et quia – – – – – serventur.] Bu The bishop of Sevil was also some the Popes viccar sometimes. ffor Pope Simplicius wrote thus to the \Zeno/ bishop of Sevil: Talibus idcirco . . . . permittas And Pope Hormisda made the bishop of Sevil his vicar over Bœtica & Lusitania & the bishop of Tarraco his vicar over all the rest of Spain, as appears by his Epis Epistles to them.

Aquileia was the second city of the western Empire & was by some called the second Rome. It was the Metropolis Istria {sic}, Forum Iulium & Venetia & its subjection to \the sea of/ Rome is manifest by [the 79th] decretal \decretal/ epistle of Pope Leo I directed to Nicetas bisop {sic} of Aquileia. For the Pope begins this Epistle thus. Regressus – – – – – A.C. 458. And Gregory the great A.C. 4|5|91 cited Severus bishop of this city to appear before him in judgmt in a Council at Rome. Greg. Lib. 1 Indic. 9 Epist. 16.

<158r>

And The abominat transgressions or abomination lasts till the sanctuary be cleansed & the desolation accompanies \the abomination/ & is caused by the \Kings/ indignation. of the {het} again of the king against the holy comment & all of the in & the time of the end is the time of their rapine & continuing at the height untill the sanctuary be cleansed. & \therefore>/ all of them rage & continue at the height until |all| the time of the end untill the sanctuary be cleansed.

Chap. 7
Of the corruption of the Christian religion in \Monkery/ superstition & idolatry

ffor as Antiochus Epiphanes when he last returned out of Egypt & interdicted the law {illeg} of of religion \sacrifices/ of the Iews & set up the worship of the heathen Gods in all Iudea is said to have indignation against the holy covenant \Dan. 11./ so by the indignation in the reign of the bl king who doth according to his will, is to be understood the kings indignation against the holy per holy covenat {sic} in favour of the \abomination of the/ Mahuzzims whereby the people of God are \persecuted &/ made desolate \& troden under foot/ untill the sanctuary be cleansed & by consequence all the time of the end.

And this is also described plainly by Daniel in his prophesy of the scripture of truth \weeks./ The \Messiah saith he shall be cut of {illeg} – & the/ people of a Prince that shall come shall destroy the city & the sanctuary & {sic} the end thereof shall be wth a flood & unto ye end of the war desolations are determined –– & upon a wing of abominations he shall make \[the land]/ desolate, or \that is/ by the overspreading of abominations as seing \or of idolatrous me/ a bird overspreads her {illeg} wing he shall make the land desolate \See \Isa. 8./8. Ier. 48.40 & 49.22./ And to After this placing of the abomination in all the this desolation \And thus was the desolation completed, to which/ the Prophet Hosea relates in saying, The children of Israel shall {illeg} abide many days wthout a king & without a prince & without a sacrifice & without an image & without an Ephod & without a teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God & David their king & shall fear the Lord & his goodness in the latter days.

After this placing of the abomination in all the land of the Iews

Now when the Romans – – – – – –

Chap 9
Of the Mahuzzims worshipped by the King who doth according to his will.

And the flatterers are fals Christians such Christians as those above mentioned who forsake the holy covenant,

Chap. 10
Of the daily worship & the abomination of desolation

This horn is also said to exalt himself \stand up/ against the Prince of Princes & \& to/ from this opposing & exalting himself, & {illeg} establ\ish/ing the transgression th And by all these circumstances you may know him to be the \great Antichrist & the/ man of sin, He wil He set up the transgression of desolation & thence is has the name of \properly called/ the man of sin. He stand magnifies himself even to the prince of the host stands up against the {illeg} prince of princes, & {illeg} exalts & magnifies himself above every God, \&/ speaks marvellous things against the God of Gods, & in matters of relig & from this opposition & exaltation the man of sin is said to oppose & exalt himself again above every thing that is called God or that is worshipped. In making a \making laws about/ religion he doth according to his will & defe by the transgression of desolation treads under foot the sanctuary & the host of heaven untill the sanctuary be cleansed & this sanctua vision continues till the last end of the indignation: & \accordin/ the man of sin continues \sits in the temple of God/ till Christ destroy him wth the breath of his mouth & the brightness of his coming. And the man of sin se

– By his setting up the transgression of desolation, exalt magnifying himself even to the Prince of the host & above every God, standing up against the Prince of Princes & \&/ speaking marvelous things against the God of Gods, treading under foot the sanctuary & the host untill the sanctuary be cleansed & reigning in the time of the end & last end of the indignation, you may know that he is the man of sin who exalts & opposes For the man of sin or \is the man of/ transgression \&/ opposes & exalts himself above every God, & sits in the temple of God till Christ destroy him with the breath of his mouth & the brightness of his coming.

This king by reason fo the transgression of desolation is by the Apostle Paul called the man of sin & because he stands up against the Prince of Princes he is by Iohn called the Antichrist & because he ma speaks marvellous things against the God of Gods & exalts himself above every God & prospers till the sanctuary be cleansed the man of sin is said |to| oppose & exalt himself above every thing that is called God or that is worshipped & to sit \as a God/ in the temple of God till Christ destroy him by the brightness of his coming.

And in the last place I would observe that the prophesy of the Apostle Paul concern{ing} the man of sin is nothing a commentary upon Daniels prophesies concerning the last hor{n of the} Goat. They that forsake the holy covenant {illeg} <158v> hereticks called by A S mystery of iniquity as I noted above, & \{illeg}/ the king who doth according to his will is the man of sin so called from the transgression of desolation.

The hebrew word ח    Mahoz signifies

That Mahuzzim \here/ Signifies protectors guardians defenders & helpers such as were the fals gods of the gentiles to those that worshipped them & angels saints & dead men \Christians/ to those that worship them has been sufficiently \shewed/ by Mr Mede, & I shall here only shew how & when the king who doth according to his will became a worshipper of such Gods.

The idolatry of the heathens consisted

And when new emperors were of new opinions they failed not of new opinions Councils to repeal the acts of former \the councils of former Emperors as is manifest in hist./ And since the Councils were convened by the civil authority for establishing the opinions & {sic} religion of the Court, they de \their/ decrees are to be looked upon as acts of the Empire Whence Daniel saith

These times wch follow the opening of the seals are in the new

[The book was to be opened not only by the prophesy of the Apocalyps but also by the fulfilling of prophesy] testament c

called in the new Testament the latter days, & the latter times But first it will be{illeg} convenient to premise {illeg} explain more at large some things relating to the prophesies of Daniel.

1 Chap.

Of the Messiah the Prince of the host

2 Chap.

Of the sanctuary of strength.

3 Chap.

Of the holy Covenant & daily wp

Chap

Of those that forsake the holy covenant.

4 Chap

Of the worship of Mahuzzims.

<159>

their land: the second – – – – – – Mahuzzims. The first interval is ushered in wth these words But it shal not prosper – – – – – – shall fall in the reign & by the persecution of this king till the time of the end. For it is to be noted that this second intervall of time consists of two parts. In the The first part precedes the time of the end; the second is called the time of the end. In the first part the king who doth according to his will sets up the \transgression of/ worshipping {illeg} the Mahuzzims \strange Gods & th with a strange God/ & those of understanding fall & grow few: in the second the \people of this king continue to/ worship of the Mahuzzims \thus set up/ called the or transgression of desolation con & the \few remaining/ saints continue {illeg} in a state of affliction dispersion & desolation all the time of the under the \persecuting/ transgressors, whose transgression is therefore called the transgression of desolation.

The Angel Gabriel in interpreting the prophesies \Vision/ of the \he/ Goat tells Daniel that this rough goat is ye king of Greece & the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king ({illeg} not the person of Alexander And that being broken whereas four stood up for it four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation but not in his power And in the latter time of their kingdom when the transgressors are come to the full a king of fierce countenance shall stand up & understanding dark sentences shall stand up \& his power shall be mighty but not by his own power. By kings he understands kingdoms/. And because the period of time when the transgressors are come to the full relates to the vision concerning the daily worship & the transgression of desolation wch was to last 2300 prophetick days, the Prophet \same Angel Gabriel/ in the prophesy of the scripture of truth, wch (as I said) is a \{sermo}/ commentary upon the Vision of the he goat), after he had described the rise of he kingdom of Greece \represented by the first horn of the Goat/ & its breaking into four kingdoms \represented by the four next horns/, to point out the period of time \called the latter time of their kingdom/ when the trasgressors {sic} are come to the full, \he/ describes the \particular/ actions of two of the four the single kings of two of the four kindoms {sic} wch he calls the kings of the north & south & prosecutes the decription {sic} to the eighth year of Antiochus Epiphanes, the year in wch the Romans conquered Macedon & \then the at that period of time/ passes from the description|bing| of the kings of the north & south to describe the arms affairs of the arms wch then \at that time/ begin to stand up. And therefore the eighth year of Antiochus is the period of time when the called transg the latter time of the kingdom of the four horns when the transgressors are come to the full & the king of fierce countenance begins to stand up in room of the four & the arms wch \then begin to/ stand up after that that period \the eighth year of Antiochus/ are this king of fierce countenance, And this the reas or last horn of the Goat, & the       But after remaining part of the prophesy of the scripture of truth relates to that horn. And this I take to be the true reason why the Angel after he comes to that|is| period, insists no longer upon the particular actions of the single kings of the north & south but passes on to the time of the end \gradually through \all/ the kings following/ by describing \touching/ only the greas upon the main turns of affairs relating to the reign of the last horn.

And it is to be observed that the Angel in passing on from this period downwards to the end of the prophesy proceeds by two large pe intervalls of time answering to the double reign of the last horn, The first that wch followed its rising up \waxing great towards the pleasant land &/ to the host of heaven & that wch followed its rising \growing up/ up {sic} to the Prince of the host. The first intervall

{illeg} Hitherto the Prophesy h Now This practising & prospering relates to \imports that is /relates to\/ the time of ye end |is ready to co| For \the vision is said to be at ye time of the end & at the last end of the indignation &./ In the proceedings against the of Antiochus Epiphanes against the holy covenant its said that it should not prosper because the end {illeg} or time of the end was not yet but still at a further time & therefore the prospering imports that the time of the end is at hand for The set \setting up the/ Transgression {illeg} was attempted by Antiochus \Epiphanes/ but was not \then/ to prosper till the time of the end \because the time of the end was not come. But/ & therefore but but {sic} the king who doth according to his will & prospers till the indignation be accomplished & \therefore/ the abomination of the mahuzzims wch he sets up proper prospers & continues |lasts all the time of the end all ye times of ye end all ye time of ye end| till the sanctuary be cleansed. For the time of the end now fo For the time of the end is now commencing.

For after the invocation of saints & the veneration of their \reliques &/ pictures were established: the Empire of the Saracens – – –

The little horn is the power of the

<159v>

After the Prophets had described the

This Prophesy of the scripture of truth consist of th

After the Prophet had descibed {sic} the actions of the kings of the north & south down the 8th year of Antiochus Epiphanes, the year in wch the (Romans conquered Macedon & began to reign over the Greeks, he proceeds downwards from that period of time by \two/ large intervals of time to the end of th day of jugment {sic}, describing only the greatest turns of {illeg} affairs. The first interval conteins the \mighty/ reign of the Greeks by \by {sic} or under/ the power of the Romans from the 8th year of Antiochus \in wch that power began till the end/ till the division of the Roman Empire & separtion {sic} of the Greeks from the Latines \whereby that power \reign/ came to an end/. The second conteins the reign \& fate/ of the Greek Empire after separation, & this interval is subdivided into two \successive/ parts the last of wch is called the time of the end. The first \of the two great/ intervals is ushered in wth these words But it shal not prosper – – – – – – And the second part of the second interval beginns wth these words; And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him, & continues to the day of judgment. And in this time of the end the abomination \transgress/ \worship/ of the Mahuzzims set up by the king who doth according to his will continues to {illeg} overspread the churches \christian world/ & the saints continue in a state of affliction \&/ desolation & d|t|herefore this abomination \worship/ is called the abomina\transgres/t|s|ion of desolation & said to this affliction \state of desolation/ of the saints is called the indignation against the holy covenant, & the last end of the indignation meaning by the last end not the last moment but the last interval called the time of the end.

The first interval conteins the reign of the|is| Greeks {sic} \horn/ by the power of the Romans; the second conteins the reign \& fate of this horn/ of the Greeks \Empire/ after separation from the Latines. The first begins with the 8th year of Antiochus inclusively this being the year in wch the Romans conquered Macedon & began to reign over the Greeks, & ends with the division of the Roman Empire into the Greek & Latine Empires this division putting an end to the reign of the Romans or Latines over the Greeks. The second intervall extends from \the time of/ that division to the end of the prophesy & day of judgmt. The first interval comprehends the taking away \of/ the Iewish daily worship & placing the abomination of desolation in their land: the second interval comprehends the taking away of the Christian daily worship & the placing the abomination of desolation in the sanctuary of the sanctuary of the {sic} Christians \wch abomination is represented by the honouring of a strange God together wth Mahuzzims/. The first interval conteins the rise of the last horn of the Goat up to the host of heaven & his reign in wch he cast down some of stars to ye ground, the second interval conteins his usurpation of the throne of the Prince of the host

After the Prophet had described the rise of the Greek empire represe

– by two large intervalls of time with relation to the double rise & reign of the last horn of the Goad {sic} of

– represented by the Goat & the \{illeg}/ actions of his first horns & particularly of the the {sic} kings of the north & south down or northern & southern horns down to the the {sic} eighth year of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes the year in wch the Romans conquered Macedon & began to reign over the Greeks: he translates his discourse from the first horns to the last & proceeds downwards from this period \of time to the day of judgment/ by two large intervalls of time answering to the double rise & reign of this \last/ horn, & describes only the greatest turns of affairs relating to this horn it. The first interval conteins the reign of the Greeks by this horn by the \anothers/ power of the Romans or \or/ the reign of the Greeks under the dominion of the Latines: the second conteins the reign & fates of the Greeks \Empire/ after separation from the Latines. The first begins – – – – – day of judgmt. The first interval conteins the rise of the little horn up to the host of heaven & the first part of his reign wherein he cast down of the stars host & of the stars to the ground: the second conteins the reign rise of this horn up to the Prince of the host & his taking away the daily worship of the people of the {Prince} & casting down & casting down his sanctury {sic} with an host given him th by reason of the transgression of desolation. The first interval comprehends the taking away of the Iewish daily worship & placing the abomination of desolation in their

<160r>

When we are commanded to beware of Philosophy & vain d{illeg} & {opposi}tions of science falsly so called: the meaning is, not that we should {illeg} condemn all Philosophy of falshood, but that we should avoyd falling out with one another about it \philosophical opinions true or false./ When {illeg} some of the Christians \of the Circumcision/ who came from Iames endeavoured to impose the law of Moses upon the Christians Gentiles, the Apostles Paul told them that they preached ano \called it/ preaching another Gospel whereby they made void the faith in Christ, not because the law was evil \(for the Apostle tells us that it was good;)/ but because {illeg} it was not necessary to salvation & therefore not to be imposed as an articles of communion. {illeg} And for{illeg} the same reason we are not to \the/ imposing \of/ any Proposition {illeg} (true or false) as an Article of Communion wch was not an Article of communion from the first preaching of the gospel, is preaching another Gospel & the persecuting of a \any/ true Christians for not receiving that gospel is persecuting a memb Christ in his mystical members & the persecutor in making war upon Christ deserves the name of an Antichristian in a litteral sense.

Moses commanded the people of Israel that they should make Iudges & Officers in all their Gates (or \that is/ in the Gates of every \all their/ city|s|) to judge the people with just judgment. Deut. 16.18. And These Iudges sat in the Gates of every \the every/ |citys| & were called the Elders of the city & had power \judged of capital causes & \{illeg}/ {Mults more often other} matters/ of life & death Deut 21.19, 20, 21: & 22.15, 16, 17, 18, 21. \& 25.7, 8./ Ruth 4.1, 2, 9, 11, Amos 5.14. And This sort of government \by Elders for putting the laws of God in execution/ continued in Israel till the captivity & then was abolished by the Chaldeans (Lament 5.14) & at length restored by the commission of Artaxerxes given to Ezra (Ezra {illeg} 7.25, 26), & 10.14) And while these Elders met in the Gates of the City to do justice, & were there attended by their under Officers & by such of the people as had business with ye Iudges or came to heare the tryalls, they|re| had \was/ also a place of worship in ye Gates set apart \in the Gate/ for prayer & for reading of the Law of Moses by wch the Elders were to judge the people \& the Elders \{illeg}/ who sacrificed erected an Altar on the next hill \calling it the high place/ 1 Sam. 9.19, 25./ And these Assemblies were under the direction of the Elders & were at length called by the Greeks called Synagogues \& the Elders & Presbyters & sometimes the Synagogue were called Churches Matt. 18.17./ [And this form of government & \public/ worship was retained by the primitive Christians, the christians of the circumcision calling these assemblies Synagogues (Iames 2.2) & continuing to call them \so in Iudea till after the {illeg} middle/ so till the end of the fourth Century as Ierome informs us who tells us also that the President whom we call the Bishop \of the Church/ they called the Prince of the Synagogue] And the Iews \also who were/ dispersed among the Gentiles, erected Synagogues in every city where they were sufficiently {numous} numerous, the Greeks & Romans conniving at this practice. And this form of government descended from them to ye Christians, \|\For they ordeined Elders/ Elders {sic}| being ordeined in every city 1 Tit. 4 5 {}/ < insertion from lower down f 160r > ✝ & the Iewish ceremony of ordeining by laying on of hands {illeg} the board of Elders in every city exercising|ed| a judicial power even in civil affairs – – – < text from f 160r resumes > the board of Elders \in every city & {ward among them reteined}/ exercising a judicial power \ever {sic}/ {illeg} civil affairs by the consent of the Christian|s| people \under them/ 1 Cor. 6.1, 2, 3, 4, \& Tim. 5 Tim This board was/ & {illeg} being by the Greeks called ye Presbytery \or consistory of Elders 1. Tim. 4.14 &/ & by the Latines Prebendaries those of the board by the Latines Prebendaries, & their President \the chief ruler of the Synagogue/ the President or Presul or [Ἐπίσκοπος the] Bishop, And a Roman Lawyer \being who was at length/ called in to assist them in civil affairs, beco|a|ming|e| their Chancellour of their Court. The \And/ the \first/ Christians of the circumcision called these assemblies \Cathedral Churches/ Synagogues Iames 2.2. & continued to call them so in Iudea till after the middle of the fourth Century as Ierome informs us, who tells us also that the Bishop was by them called the Prince of the Synagogue. And {illeg} \since/ this form of government was interrupted by the Babylonian captivity & is now much altered from what it was in the beginning of Christianity, \ < insertion from lower down f 160r > / ✝ & the Holy Ghost is not given to wicked men by the laying on of hands, & no man has power to give the Holy Ghost to whomsoever he pleases by vertue of a ceremony Christians may hence < text from f 160r resumes > we \Christians/ may hence learn every man to live quietly under the govern |to live quietly & to suffer one another to live quietly every man under the govern|ment of his own city. & suffer other Christians to live quietly under the governments of theirs

These Elders were elected by the City the people voting & the Elders \Presbytery/ confirming the Elections by laying on of hands <160v> And this form of government descended from them to the Christians. For they ordeined Elders in every city 1 Tit. 1.5 & in ordeining them retained the Iewish ceremony of laying on of hands 1 Tim. 5.22. & the board of Elders in every city exercised a judicial power over the Christians by their consent even in civil affairs 1 Cor. 6.1, 2, 3, 4 & 1 Tim. 5.17, & was by the Greeks called the Presbytery or consistory of Elders 1 Tim 4.14, & the place of their assembling & worshipping was by the christians of the circumcision called their syagogue {sic} Iames 2.2.

And after the manner of the Iews the Christians of every city incorporated themselves \Presbyters/ under a Council \or Consistory of Elders or/ of Elders hea Presbyters \called the Presbytery &/ headed by a President or Bishop \Act. 4.23 1 Tim 1.5 & called the Presbytery of/ & this Council admitted of Presbyters \1 Tim 4.14 admitting them/ after baptism into the communion of their \own/ city by laying on of the hands of their President & {illeg} deprived|ing| offenders of this communion as they saw reason. They judged also of civil affairs by the consent of the people 1 Cor. 6.1, 2, 3, 4 & 1 Tim. \3./5. & 5.17. [And by reason of an allow stipend allowed them yearly for their attendance on the affairs \business/ of the Council they were called Prebendaries \At length/ They called in a Roman Lawyer to assist them in civil affairs & this Lawyer becme their Chancellour.] Thus the Ch primitive Christians disting by ordeining Elders in every City distinguished themselves into as many \Communities or/ Churches as there were cities & those of \any/ one Church communicated with those of any other by Letters communicatory. & being excommunicated by their own Church they lost the communion of all the rest. And in this state things continued till the days of Pope Victor. The places where the Presbytery met were called Churches by the converted Gentiles & Synagogues by the converted Iews. And by re the Bishop was by the converted Iews called the Prince of the Synagogue Iames. 2.2. Ierom

And by reason of a stipend allowed them \Presbyters/ yearly for their attendance on the Council they were called Prebendaries. by the Latines At length they called in a Roman L\a/wyer to assist them in civil affairs & this Lawyer became their Chancelour.

& Theseus stole Helenaa[30] just before the time of the Argona{utic} expedition being then 50 years old & she but seven or as some say ten. \Thus/ And And {illeg} \{Atachates &}/ Theseus went \also with/ Perithous to b[31]steale Proserpine \Proserpina/ the daughter of Orestes \Aidoneus & Persephone king & Queen/ of the Molossi & was imprisoned by \{Aidoneus}/ {illeg} & \then/ {Castor} \& while Theseus lay in prison Castor/ & Pollux released their Sister Hellena & captivated Æthra the mother of Theseus, & while Theseus lay in prison \then sailed with/ the Argonauts. sailed Sesostris was therefore contemporary to &c

– And Apollonius Rhodius, that Hypsipyla gave Bacch Iason the purple cloak, wch the Graces made for Bacchus, & h \{illeg} & wch Bacchus/ gave {illeg} to his son Thoas the father of Hypsipyle.

His tuition might begin about t in the 17th or 18\th/ Olympiad & his Legislature fall upon the 22|1|th or 23|2|d|th|.

Now the daughters of Danaus being contemporary to Theseus, & some of their sons being Argonauts, Danaus \with his daughter/ fled from his his brother Sesostris into \Greece one/ {generation} before the Argonautic expedition, and so that w \& therefore Sesostris returned into Egyp {sic}/ in the reign of Rehoboam & so was Sesac. ffor both of them were kings of all Egypt at one & the same time.

nine years in – soon after, & Prixus married Chaleiope the daughter of Danau Ætes & by her had Argus the Argonaut & other \by some reputed/ \several/ children & died before the Argonautic expedition

<161r>

For as the Heathens & Hereticks beleived all their Gods to be of one substance with the first God, so all the Christians who beleived the Son to be the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος of the father must of necessity \have/ beleived that he was unius of one substance with the father, this opinion being the consequence of the former. And yet this opinion was the foundation of the philosophy \theology/ of the heathens Cabbalists & Gnosticks & when the Montanists applied it to the Trinity \& gave the name of Oeconomy to their disposition of the Trinity/, the Christians major part of Christians both Greks & Latines \who flourished/ in the end \beginning/ of the second \third/ century & beginning of the third \(that is, the body of the Church Catholick)/ were frighted at this doctrin (as you have heard out of Tertullian) & accounted it polytheism \& therefore looked upon the Montanists as heathens & idolaters/. ffor as the heathens were guilty of polytheism notwithstanding that they beleived all their Gods to be of one substance & sometimes called them one God so the Christians of those days |& accounted them all to be but one Iove & sometime called them one God| so the Montanists might be polytheists notwithstanding that they beleived the Tinity to be unius substantiæ & called it one God, For words without sense cannot free {any} men from being criminals, & \therefore/ the Christians of those days ffor the affirming the three persons to be but one God amounts to nothing more then a denial of ye crime of polytheism, & a bare denial of a crime doth not free men from \being/ guilty. And if it did, it would free the heathens as well as the Montanists from this crime. Tertullian indeed calls the Christians who opposed the Montanists, simplices quosq & imprudentes \& Idiotas/ quæ {illeg} major semper credentium pars est, but in doing so he speaks in calls himself a Gnostick. ffor the Christian religion \Gospel/ was adapted to the understanding of the meanest of the people, \& preached to the poor/ Father, saith Chris The Gospel was \&/ preached to the poor. Father saith Christ, I thank thee that thou hast hid these things from the wise & prudent of this world & revealed them to babes. And therefore we are to look for Apostolick tranditions amongst Tertullians simple people & to account all such \learned metaphysical/ doctrines as are above the reach of these people to be the inventions of the wise & prudent of this world. |The common people are tenacious of traditions, ye learned are apt to intermix their own opinions.|

As by Tertullians testimony it appears that the body of Christians \both Greeks & Latines/ in his days were \both Greeks & Latines were very/ averse from placing the unity of the Deity in the \a metaphysical unity the or/ unity of substance \& could not so much as hear the opinion wth patience accounting the Montanists to be Idolaters:/ so it appears by the proceedings of the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosat that the Churches continued against it till those days. This Council \met 55 years before the Council of Nice &/ consisted of about 80 bishops & her sentence against Paul \rejected the ὁμοούσιος & her sentence/ was communicated to all the Churches & unanimously approved by them & confirmed by them & confirmed by the bishops of Rome & Italy even in writing & therefore the ὁμοούσιος or \doctrine of the λογος being one God with ye father by/ unity of substance was then rejected by the voluntary \& unanimous/ consent of the Church Catholick. And after \when/ she had once rejected it she had no authority to receive it afterwards, because by rejecting it she declared tradition to be against it. And \For/ in matters of faith she has no authority to vary from tradition, no not in point of language. For the faith wch was once delivered to ye saints is only to be known by the language in wch it was delivered, & therefore the Church is commanded to keep to ye form of sound words.

And yet the by the writings \& discourses/ of Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clemens |&| Tertullian & their \friends &/ followers, the \{illeg}/ opinion that the {illeg} Word \son of God/ was the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος καὶ προφόρικος spread so much was in consequence was \that they were/ unius substantiæ cum Patre |of God the father the internal & prolatitious word of ye father,| spread so much \in the Churches {illeg}/ in the third & fourth centurys that as to [procure an establishment of the word ὁμοούσιος in the Council of Nice.] taint taint the bishops of Rome & Alexandria & the {sic} Emperor Constantine the great with his favorite Hosius & the Bishops \of Rome & Alexandria with those of their party who/ who {sic} subscribed the Letters of Alexander /ye Bp of\ the bishop of Alexandria & by their means tho not without much opposition to get the word ὁμοούσιος established by the Council of Nice inserted into the Creed by the Council of Nice. The Emperor to influence ye bishops published his opinion bef in all the Cities before the Council met, & when they met & <161v> could not agree he came in person into ye Council upon a day appointed, & proposed & pressed the ὁμοούσιος & got it received into ye Creed before he went out of ye Council giving the bishops no time to consider the danger of admitting the lan condemned language of hereticks. Yet the Bishops cautioned that it should not be understood in the sense of ye hereticks nor signify any thing more then ὁμοιούσιος as being derived from ὅμος wch signifies the words ὁμος & ὅμοιος signif being of \commonly taken in/ the same signification. But Hosius,f[32] who f[33]published the Nicene Creed & by consequence translated it into Latin, rendred the word ὁμοούσιος by unius substantiæ & the Greeks of that perswasion translated unius substantiæ by μιας ὀυσίας & μιας ὑποστάσεως & the|i|se language |being \frequently/ used instead of \ομοουσιος &/ being more apt to be understood in the sense of the hereticks| became a snare & stumbling block to the people, being frequently taken in ye sense of the Sabel here hereticks |especially most apt to be to the Latines who used only the translation.| Whence the Greeksg[34] began \soon/ to look upon the Latines as inclining to Montanism & Sabellianism \& to put a stop to the growth of those opinions anathematized them in their Councils/ & the Latines mutuallyh[35] charged the Greeks with polytheism & Arianism for calling the So ffather Son & Holy Ghost three Hypostases \& in their i[36]Councils endeavoured to free themselves from the imputation of Sabellianism/. And even those who used the lang word ὁμοούσιος \at length/ fell out amongst themselves some calling \continuing to call/ the father son & holy Ghost one hypostasis, others \to avoid ye imputation of Sabellianism,/ calling \them/ three |hypostases,| & these two parties called {illeg} one another Sabellians & Arians till Athanasius in the reign of Iulian the Apostate reconciled them & made them understand that tho they agreed \differed/ in language \yet/ they agreed in sense, one party by one hypostasis meaning one in species & nature, the other party by three hypostases meaning three in number. And thence forward the homousian Greeks \to free themselves from the imputation of Sabellianism, \began/ wholy/ left|ave| {sic} of the language of one \usia & one/ hypostasis & used \constantly to use/ the language of one usia & three hypostases & meaning one substance in nature & species & three in number & the Latines \thenceforward/ used the language of one substance & three persons in the same sense.

And that Sabellianism & Montanism by the influence & under the protection of the \language of una substantia in/ Latin translation of the Creed spread very much in the Latin Churches is not sufficiently acknowledged by Hilary who in Hilary in an Epistle wch he wrote A.C. 358 from Phrygia to ye Latine Churches. Bishops of Gallia & Britain thus acknowledges. Multi ex nobis, fratres charissimi, ita unam substantiam Patris et ffilij prædicant ut videre possint non magis pie quam impie prædicare: habet enim – – – – – – ὁμοιούσιος to ye father as well as ὁμοούσιος T And by this conviction I conceive it was that Sabellianism fell in the west, & that the homousian Greeks began to change \use {illeg}/ ye language of one|three| hypostasis {sic} into that of three & not long after, were taught by Athanasius to ye language /this new language\ of three Hypostases \generally reconciled {illeg} to it by Athanasius in order to bring/ over the Greeks more easily to his party. For at this time <162r> his party was very low (the world being \now/ against him) & wanted art to revive it {illeg} \the world being now against him/ But after the reign of Constantius & Iulian, \Iovian/ an Emperour of his own opinion came to the crown & began to give new life to the \his/ affairs. of his party [The circumstances of his party at that time you will best understand by the description wch his contemporary Gregory Nazianzen gives of them.] ffor Iovian {illeg} succeeding Iulian recalled the excommunicated & banished bishops & demanding {illeg} ac {sic} acct of their faith favoured that of Athanasius, as {illeg} his contemporary Gregory Nazianzen thus describes, [37]Iovianus, ut pulcherrimum sui l imperij \sui/ fundamentum jaceret rectamq legum sanctionem – – – – – – partem animo tenus pietatem colunt –– partim eam igniculi cujusdam instar nonnihil accendunt –– partim deniq omni verborum libertate veritatem prædicant. And this was the state of affairs at the death of Athanasius.

<163r>

The homousian controversy was managed b lasted till the death of ye Emperor Valens A.C. 378 & was managed between the Latine Churches & {illeg} chiefly the Church of ye one Rome on ye one hand & the Greek Churches & chiefly the churches of Asia on the other. Th

In the year 341 A.C. 341 {sic} Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria, Paul of Constantinople, Marcellus of Ancyra & Asclepas of Gaza having been accused of various crimes & deposed by the Greek Councils, fled to Rome & appealed from the Greek Councils to Iulius bishop of Rome: Iulius accepted of the appeal, examined the appellants, received them into communion & called a Council of about 50 or 60 bishops of Italy & the parts adjacent to meet at Rome A.C. 342 & cited the eastern Bishops then met in a Council at Antioch, to appear in this Council at Rome & justify their proceedings. – – – – – – – – – – I have therefore recited it as the oldest Creed in wch the father son & holy Ghost are declared consubstantial |because they appeared not when Iulius – – – – – – act of the eastern & western Churches.|

Six years after these things were done Constantius conquered Magnentius the successor – – – – – – – sup acknowledging the supreme & absolute judicial power authority of the Councils of the Greek Church over her own members.

After these things several Councils meeting at Sirmium, Nice in Thrace Ariminum & Seleucia & Constantinople in the years 357, 359 & 360 abolished ye use of the words usia homousios \& homoiusios/ as not being in scripture \& occasioning great disturbances/, alledging also that the word ο ho\mo/usios was rejected by \their fathers in/ the council of Antioch above 50 years \{illeg}/ \long/ before ye meeting of ye Council of Nice, & was not well considered \put/ by the Council of Nice hastily & \sudenly or/ without mature deliberation & was apt to be misinterpreted by in favour of heresies, & gave offence to ye common people \who understood it not/ & created great disturbances by imposing it. |& was a stumbling block to ye people who understood it not in the sense of the Council. For Constantine the great coming in person into the Council proposed & pressed the word ομοουσιος & got it decreed in one day, & the bishops having no time to deliberate, admitted the word with an interpretation that it should signify the sa be taken in the same sense wth ομοιουσιος, not considering the danger {illeg} of admitting a word wch was usually taken in another sense.| For Constantine the great {sic} coming in person into ye Council of Nice proposed it & pressed it without giving the bishops time & got it {illeg} decreed the same morning wthout giving the Bishops time to deliberate: The {illeg} Latines \used not ye very word but/ translated |it| homousios unius substantiæ & by unius substantiæ \the common people of the Latines & even their Bishops/ were apt to take understand {either} one common substance out of wch the previ \of ye vizt father & son/ whether a previous substance out of wch the father & son \both/ were derived by division or one undivided substance in wch both subsisted; To as Hilary in a \A.C. 358/ complains in a letter \written A.C. 358/ to the Churches \Bishops/ of Gallia & Britain, saying, [38]Multi ex nobis, fratres charissimi, ita unam substantiam Patris et ffilij prædicant ut videri possint non magis id pie quam impie prædicare \Habet enim hoc verbum in se et fidei conscientiam & fraudem paratam &c/ &c. And as for the people \& clergy/ of the eastern Churches, how {illeg} much they were \either/ strangers to ye word homousios \or averse to it against it/ the same Hilary in the same Epistle may appear by the character wch the same Hilary in ye same letter[39] gave of the eastern provinces where he was then in banishmt. Tantum ecclesiarum orientalium periculum est, saith he, ut rarum sit hujus fidei [consubstantialis,] quæ qualis sit vos judicate, aut sacerdotes aut poulum inveniri. –– Nam absq episcopo Eleusio et paucis cum eo, ex majori parte Asianæ decem provinciæ vere Deum nesciunt.

The new language \above mentioned/ being for these reasons rejected, the Greek & Latin Churches continued {united} \still in quiet/ till the end of the reign of the Emperors Constantius & his successors Iulian the last heathen Emperor. And hitherto \from the times of the Apostles till the death of Iulian/ the Church Greek & latin Churches continued united by one fai in one {illeg} \unanimous/ Church \the main body of/ the visible Church Catholick of Christ {illeg} visible {illeg} \without interruption/ tho not without intestine broiles nor without heretical men in their m intermixt wth them in outward communion For Churches may have hereticks in their congregation & yet not be {hereti}cal. There were \might be/ Sabellians in \the/ communion of \wth/ the Latin Churches & <163v> yet the Latine Churches if they did not make an open profession of the Sabellian faith were not to be called Sabellian, & there were \might be/ Arians in communion wth the Greek Churches & yet if the Greek Churches did not make an open profession of Arianism they were not to be called Arian. They anathematized the proper langua were so far from professing Arianism that they anathematized the \proper/ language \of Arius/ in several of their Councils. They published several articles Creeds or Professions of faith & I do not meet wth any heretical articles in any of them. If their Councils of Sirmium, Ariminum & Seleucia are called Arian for repealin rejecting the use of the word homousios, the Council of Antioch wch did the same thing 90 years before must also be Arian & so must And if it be said that they were Arians in their hearts; God only knows the hearts of men: we are to judge of visible churches by their outward professions of faith If the \worship &/ outward profession of faith be free from heresy we are not to leave separate from ye Communion so that {illeg} of any Church be free from heresy so that we may joyn in communion with her without sinning we are not to separate \from her communion/ upon pretence that her members are hereticks in their hearts & by their continuing in communion wth the Church catholick. The Church composed of the Greek & Latine Churches \& of the Churches in Scythia & Germany all of them/ in fo commuunion wth one another in the reign of Iulian never separated from the Church Catholick & therefore was not \schismatical/. These Churches & such others as were in communion wth them were the whole body of Christians \throughout the whole world/ a few separatists excepted & therefore they were the church Catholick of Christ. The Greek & Latin Churches never separated from this Church catholick nor from one another & therefore were neither of them schismatical. They contended with one another vehemently in the time of the Council of Serdica, but wthout breaking communion excomunicating one another or breaking communion by any publick act. And if they had broke communion the western Churches would have been the schismaticks because they in the dispute was they imposed the Popes supremacy upon the eastern Churches wch was an unjust article \condition/ of Communion. \& occasioned the schism/ And upon returning into communion wth the eastern they \the schism/ would have ceased And when the western Churches desisted from their imposition & the imposition & acknowledged the authority of the eastern Councils over her own members, subcribing subscribing to the sentence of sentence of those Councils in the Council of Millain they would have ceased to be schismaticks. And as for the faith, the Creed published by the {illeg} eastern bishops {illeg} in their return from the Council of Serdica is by Hilary (one of the hottest of the homousians) allowed to be a complete & absolute definition of the faith And the Creed published b in wch the Churches of the whole Empire agreed in the (both Greeks & Latines) agreed {illeg} at the Councils of Sirmium, Nice in Thrace, Ariminum, & Seleucia & Constantinople & is not found fault with except for abolishing the use of ye word usia. because it was not in the scriptures ffor Certainly if the Greek & Latin Churches were in communion with {illeg} one another before they & by consequence a member of the Church Catholick before they abolished the use of this word: the \they could not cease to be a member of the church catholick/ |by| abolishing of the use of \a word wch was not in/ |it|, it would not make them become a word wch |is| not in scripture nor received from the Apostles by tradition, but a word wch had been introduced by hereticks & abolished 90 years by ye Council of Antioch wth the approbation of the Church catholick 90 years before, could not make the Greek & Latines cease to be a member of the Church catholick in {illeg} anything {which} \a word wch created great disturbances {illeg} & was/ abolished by the Apostles rule of holding fast the form of sound words wch they had received from the beginning Apostles beginning.

<164r>

It was

Hitherto the Man of Mystery of iniquity was to work before the Man of sin should be revealed. ffor b it was to work {sic} without prevailing against the Church. ffor it was to work the man o the Man of s was to work the Man of sin was not to be revealed till that wch letted should \it was to work without prevailing untill the man of sin should {sic}/ & the Man of Sin was not to be revealed till that wch letted should be taken out of the way & that wch letted was by the first Christians taken for the Roman Empire St Paul had told the churches what it was, but was unwilling to set it down in writing least he should be taken for an enemy to the Empire. Remember ye not, saith he, that when I was with you I told you these things? And now ye know what witholdeth that he [the Man of sin] might be revealed in his time. ffor the mystery of iniquity doth already work. Only he who now letteth letteth {sic} will let untill he be taken out of the way. And then shall that wiked {sic} one be revealed. That which letted was therefor in being in the days of the Apostles & therefore was the Roman Empire. And this agreed on \is generally allowed/ by interpreters. Not a Christian Empire but the heathen Roman Empire then in being, the heathen Roman Empire While the Empire continued heathen The Man of sin was to be a Christian dominion & while the Empire continued heathen it was impossible for a Christian dominion to rise up. It was therefore the heathen Empire which letted. This Empire began to be taken out of ye was {sic} by the conversion of Constantine to the Christian religion & his victories over Maxentius & Licinius: but was not fully taken out of the way before the death of Iulian the last heathen Emperor. And we have shewn that the mystery of iniquity only worked till his death, but without prevailing In the reign of Constantius the mystery of Bishop of Rome laboured hard for the supremacy, & the Western Emperor Constans with his bishops endeavoured to set up this \new/ dominion wch was \to be/ the man of sin: but they succeeded not. The their endeavours were without success & frustrated & the Church catholick continued entire till the taking away of th death of Iulian. And now that which letted it|s| taken out of the way it remains that we shew how the mystery of iniquity prevailed over the Church & became the man of sin sin {sic} sitting in the Temple of God. For the revelation of the man of Sin signifies the victory of the Man of sin |the victory of the mystery of iniquity prevailing of the mystery of iniquity the by the| over the Church & his \its/ exaltation into the throne where the \Man of sin/ is \to be/ worshipped as a God. And this came to pass in the manner following.

When the Emperor Iulian was dead, his successor Iovian, as as Gregory Nazianzen tells us who lived in those days informs us released from banishment \released/ Athanasius & some other bishops, & in that {illeg}, as Gregory subjoyns, presented \from \{illeg}/ banishment &/ desired an account of their faith, as Gregory \Nazianzen who lived in those days/ thus mentions. Quinetiam fidei nostræ veritatem a multis laceratam & perturbatam – – – – – upon the death of Athanasius A.C. 373.

The faith wch Athanasius & his followers began now to \be/ preach\ed/ was agreed upon at Alexandria a few months before by Athanasius & 12 or 15 other banished bishops. Hitherto they had used the greek words usia & hypostasis in \one &/ the same sense making the father & son but one usia & one hypostasis but hence forward they thought fit to use the word una usia in conformity to ye una substantia of the Latines & to distinguish the {sic} persons by the name of three hypostases, meaning by una usia \& tres hypostases/ |the Greeks to avoid the suspicion of Sabellianism {they} called the ffather Son & holy ghost one usia & three hypostases {illeg} \& conform themselves to the/ the {sic} language of the Latines, thought fit to call the father son & holy Ghost one usia & three hypostases meaning| one substance in nature & speces {sic} & three substances in number. They agreed also that the bishops who had subscribed in the late Councils of Sirmium, Nice – – – – – finibus

The faith wch began now to be preached was agreed upon a few months before partly by between letters between Athanasius & Liberius Bishop of Rome & by \a consultation of/ 12 or 16 banished bishops who were there with Atha <164v> nasius. The Latines had \long ago/ translated homousios by unius substantiæ, & the G homousian Greeks had translated the una substantia of the Latines by una usia & una hypostasis. And the Latines now declaring the holy Ghost to be consubstantial to ye father & son & expressing it \this faith/ by una substantia & tres personæ, Athanasius \& those with him examined the language/ translated it una usia & tres hypostases, changing una hypostasis into tres hypostases to clear themselves from the suspicion of Sabellianism. & meaning by una usia & tres hypostases one substance in nature & kind & three personal substances in number. And this was the faith wch Athanasius presented to Iovian. It was agreed also by Athanasius & those with him at Alexandria that the Bishops who had subscribed in the late Councils of Sirmium, Nice – – – – – – – – – – ereptus est mundus.

The Bishop of Rome therefore separated & joyned himself \in communion/ with Athathanasius {sic} an excommunicated person \by/ communicating wth Athanasius a man revived his claim to appeals & to strengthen himself sent letters to all the western bishops signifying that they might separat inviting them to separate & inviting \come over to him &/ signifying that they should be received into his communion without losing their bishopricks, & in a few years he gained the greatest part \& his successor Damasus gained/ most of the western bishops.

In ye third year of this controversy

In three years he bained one half of the people of Rome. ffor upon his death, wch happened in November 366 A.C. 366 – – – – & this Council sending a letter to the bishops of Illyricum they met & subscribed the Roman faith & sent recommended it to the Churches of Asia & Phrygia & the western Emperors Valentinian & Gratian – – – – – – prædicare præcepit.

In the mean time the bishops of Alexandria & Antioch endeavoured to propagate ye same faith in Egypt & Syria & were generally assisted by the Moncks of in their diocesses. Yet the Greek Emperor Valens opposed the homousion – – – – – – – – – – – – sine dilatione contendat.

And henceforward the Bishops of Rome began to give laws to the Churches by their Decrees. ffor soon after this edict Himmerius – – – – – – – – ignorare sit liberum &c. This was the beginning of decretory Epistles.

The next year A.C. 386 a Council of 80 – – – – – – jurisdiction.

After three years more – – – – – – – called in the east.

Together with the Popes supremacy & Decretory Epistles, & the worship of three equal substances in the Deity, came in the invocation of saints & the veneration of their miracle working reliques \the practis of writing fabulous legends/ & the superstitious use of the signe of the cross in baptism. ffor the Council of Constantinople usually called the second general council.

–– because they appeared not when Iulius cited them & because they now fled from justice and they made some Canons also in wch they decreed that appeals might be made to y