Drafts on the history of the Church (Section 5)

<77r>

Now \it is to be conceived y^t/ the mystery of iniquity w^ch consisted in these heresies & began to work in the Apostles days, worked more & more till it prevailed & th it brake in upon the Church & caused that Christian religion was purest in the first ages of Christianity & decayed gradually till the man of sin was revealed. [And since the Man of Sin was opposed & exalted himself above every thing that is called God or that is worshipped we may conclude that he was under no temporal {illeg} power but reigned with a power both temporal & spiritual. The \by the sword/ Christian religion \set up one God rejected \against/ all the Gods of the heathens &/ was propagated \against the religion of y^e Empire/ by poor men preaching the gospel under all temporal discouragem^ts \to the hazzard/ & sometimes to the loss of their lives: the Antichristian worked according to y^e theology of the heathens \was a branch of the heathen religion / owning many consubstantial Gods \according to the theology of the heathens/ & making Christ to be one of them, {illeg} & worked in vitious men in opposition to the Christian untill it. The Christian religion was set up against the power of the sword, the mystery of ini Antichristian by the power of the sword. The Christian maintained one God & one Lord against all the Gods of the heathens \& all the hereticks/ & was propagated by poor men against the religion of y^e Empire by poor men preaching y^e gospel under all temporal discouragements to the hazzard & sometimes to y^e loss of their lives: the Antichristian was a branch of y^e heathen religion owning many Gods according to the Theology of the heathens & making Christ to be one of them & worked in vitious men in opposition \to the Christian/ untill it {pre} gained the power of the sword & thereby exalted it self above every thing that it {sic} called God or that is worshipped. But \This/ power of the sword it could not have while the heathen empire stood, & {illeg} but yet worked & encreased in strength untill under this Empire that when that w^ch letted should be taken out of y^e way it might be {illeg} able to gain the|is| power.] of the sword. Let us therefore now see by what steps this mystery of ini iniquity grew up untill it gained the dominion, [& the Christian religion at the same time decreased in vertue] And for this end let us distinguish the \For y^e first times of Christianity \may be distinguished/ into the three or four following states,/ Christian religion into ages recconing that the first age in w^ch the Christian religion was in its purity & heresies were kept under by the Apostolick authority, the second {illeg} in w^ch they encreased but without making a breach upon th \heresies multiplied & gained many followers but without/ breaking in upon the Chruch {sic}, the third {illeg} in w^ch they \were refined grew more plausible & refined &/ began to break in upon |insinuate themselves into| the Church & divide her against her self the fourth in w^ch they began to \unite into one general heresy & to/ divide the Church against her self.

The first of Church continued in the first of these four states till the reign of Trajan \& /. For Iohn the Apostle lived till the 2^d or 3^d year of his reign \& Ignatius bishop of Antioch/ & Symeon the son of Cleopas & {cousin} unkle of Christ \son of Cleopas a disciple & kinsman of X^st/ & bishop of Ierusalem till \was martyred/ about the middle of Trajans \his/ reign \being 120 years old/. But And Hegesippus who was contemporary to Polycarp the disciple of Iohn tells us mentioning the death of Symeon, subjoyns Ecclesiam ad hæc usqꝫ tempora instar \cujusdam/ virginis integram atqꝫ incorruptam permansisse . . . . . . . . obtrudere aggressi sunt. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 3. c. 32. Hactenus Et Ecclesiam quidem hactenus virginem vocabant propterea quod vanis sermonibus nondum corruptam fuerat. Hegesippus apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l 4. c. 22. \✝/ < insertion from f 77v > ✝ In this age flourished several hereticks as Simon, Nicolaus, \Ebion,/ Cerinthus, Menander, but their heresies being checkt by the authority of the Apostles were of short continuance And concerning the Nazarenes & Ebionites its observable – – – – – – {chronicles} \circumcision/.

✝ The Gnosticks began to rise up before the destruction of Ierusalem for in oppsition to them the Apostle Paul advises to avoid endless \profane & old wives/ fables & endless genealogies \& oppositions of science falsly so called/, that is the fables of the ancient Poets \w^ch were profane & foolish/ & the genealogies of y^e Gods w^ch were endless & the philosophy of the hea disputes about the metaphysical philosophy of the heathens \& doctrines of demons/ w^ch was false. Some reccon Simon others \others/ |&| Nicolaus the first authors of the Gnosticks. The genealo Simon made some Genealogies, Nicolaus & others might encrease their number & give occasion to the Apostle to call them endless. After these flourished \Ebion/ Cerinthus & Menander but all their heresies being checkt by the authority of the Apostles were of small extent & short continuance. And concerning the Ebionites & Nazarenes its observable that the Christians of y^e first age Church of Ierusalem – – – – – – Churches of y^e circumcision. And the Church of Ierusalem was of the circumcision & had bishops of the circumcision till the 18^th year of Adrian A.C. 135 when all Iews were forbidden the city. < text from f 77r resumes > And its observable that the Christians of the Church of Ierusalem in this age were all zealous of the law (Act. 21.20) \Gal. 2.12, 13. & the churches of the uncircumcision were by/ & by {sic} the Iews were {sic} called the sect of <77v> the Nazarenes {(Acts} 24.5) & when the dispersion of this Church by y^e wars of y^e Romans was at hand Matthew wrote his Gospel in hebrew for the sake of this|ese| Christians, {illeg} & therefore I do not reccon them amongst the hereticks. They were all circumcised & by circumcision had covenanted w^th God to keep the law & it was no crime to keep their covenant \for y^e law was good/. (Rom. 7.7, 12. Gal. 5.3) But to impose the law upon y^e gentiles as necessary to salvation, made void the faith of in Christ, & this was the crime of the Ebionites. There were Apostles of the circumcision & Apostles of y^e uncircumcision & the Nazarenes were the Churches of the circumcision.

The second \state or/ age of the Church lasted till the Episcopacy of Victor reign of Severus, Victor being bishop of Rome, ffor in this interval of time the Gnosticks flourished Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, Secundus Ptolmæus Marcus Colarbasus Heracleon, Cerdon, Marcion, Apelles, Tatian, & some other \eminent/ hereticks of the great {illeg} \after them arose/ Montanus & his weomen Prisca & Maximilla. T But the Church notwithstanding these heresied {sic} continued entire till the days of Victor. For Irenæus who wrote against heresies in the days of Eleutherus the predecessor of Victor – – – – heard above. And Hegesippus who who {sic} wrote about the same time w^th Iren in the days of the same Eleutherus tells us – – – taught by o^r Lord.

After the reign of Trajan rose up a multitude of eminent Gnosticks Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, Secundus, Ptolomæus, Marcus, Colarbasus, Heracleon, Cerdon, Apelles Marcion, Apelles, Tatian. All these rose up in the days of Polycarp the disciple of Iohn the Apostle, who was martyred A.C. 169 & about y^e time of his death rose up Montanus with his weomen Prisca & Maximilla whose heresy being a more refined sort of Gnosticism then any of the former spread much faster & within the space of twenty \or thirty/ years insinuated it self into the Church of Rome, Pope Victor \or his succcessor Zepherinus/ in the beginning of |in {sic}| the reign of the Emperor Severus becoming a Montanist. And therefore I end the second age of the Church w^th the reign of his prec beginning of his reign. In this age flourished those great lights of the Church \The Christians of chief note who {illeg} the {illeg} \{illeg} & defended the Church/ in this age were Polycarp b^p of Sm/ Melito bishop of Serdica, In Theophilus bishop of Antioch, Iustin Martyr, Apollinaris bishop of Hierapolis \Dionysius bishop of Corinth, Iustin Martyr/, Athenagoras, \&/ Hegesippus the historian \ Pantænus/ & Irenæus.

x Penytus bishop of Gortymus Crete Philip bishop of Gortym The Christians of chief note who instructed the Churches & defended them against heresies \in this age/ were Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, Melito bishop of Hieropolo Sardica, Theophilus Bishop of Antioch, Apollinaris bishop of Hierapolis, Dionysius bishop of Corinth, Pinytus bishop of Crete. Iustin Martyr, Athenagoras, Irenæus & Pantænus

Xystus or Sixtus was made B^p of Rome in the 3^d year of the Emperor Adrian & after 10 years was succeded by Telesphorus \in y^e 12^th year of Adrian/ & he after 11 years by Hygjnus in y^e first year of Antoninus Pius. Hyginus was bishop of Rome 4 years & his successor Pius 15 years, Anicetus 11, Soter 8, Eleutherus 13 13 {sic} Victor      Zepherinus 18, Callistus 5, Vrbanus      Pontianus 6 Anteros 4. Fabianus      Cornelius Lucius     Stephanus      Soter began in y^e 8^th year of <78ar> Verus, Eleutherus in y^e 17^th year of Verus. V{ictor} in y^e 10^th year of Con{illeg}

spread much faster but yet the church continued entire till y^e days of Pope Victor. & the reign of the Emperor Tra Irenæus

Lydiats Canones

Chronologic. Oxon 1675

Basnages Hist. of the Iews.

< insertion from f 78v >

As the heathens deified the souls of dead men & made all their Gods to be consubstantial \both/ to one another & to the supreme God whom they called Iupiter, so the

It was in its purity in the days of the Apostles by whose authority heresies were kept under. After they were all dead heresies were {illeg} at li In the next age heresies multiplied, in the third they brake in upon the Church & in the fourth they began to divide the Church against her self.

They circumcised their children. ffor \all/ the Bishops of Ierusalem \with i (15 in number/ were of the circumcision & {observed} till the year 135 A.C. 135, at w^ch time the Em \till the Em/peror Adrian |in y^e| \19^th year of his reign A.C. 136/ banished all |y^e| \{illeg}/ Iews \upon pain of death/ from that city, & \from/ the neighbouring regions neare it, & thereby dispersed the churches of the circumcision Every man was to remain in the state in w^ch he was called. ffor C{illeg} If he was called being a gentile he was to remain in the state of uncircumcision. If he was called being a Iew he was to remain in the state of circumcision. if he w And these two sorts of Christians were not to fall out about their circumcision & keeping the law² or uncircumcision¹ & not keeping the law but to eat together & convers love one another. ffor in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision, but faith w^ch worketh by love Gal. 5.6. [{illeg} /that is y^e\ faith being conteined in y^e primitive creed, & was no ways opposite to \w^ch neither commanded nor prohibited/ circumcision. Is any man called being cicumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision let him not become circumcised. Circumcision is nothing & uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of y^e commandm^ts of God. Let every man abide \in/ y^e same con calling wherein he was called. 1 Cor. 7.18, 19, 20. [This was the ground of \reason why/ the Naza\re/nes or \children/ converted Iews circumcised {illeg} their children & keepi|t|ng the law & therefore they were not to be blamed for doing so.] This was the Apostles rule \& by this rule all the converted Gentiles were forbidden &/ all the converted Iews were bound \commanded/ to {illeg} observe the law & circumcise their children & \therefore/ the Nazarenes or Churches of the circumcision were not to be blamed for doing so. But if the converted Iews wh imposed circumcision upon the \converted/ Gentiles & refused to eat w^th them or keep company with them | communicate w^th them unless they were circumcised – this \excommunication/ was a breach of Christian charity, & \made circumcision & the observation of the law made/ imped by making \by making the/ circumcision an \a fundamental/ article of faith necessary to communion & by consequence to salvation \& baptism & salvation & thereby/ made void the faith in Christ \as y^e Ap. explains in his Epist./, & rending the Church catholick into parties \& made the party offending guilty of schism/. And the crime was as great if the converted Gentiles refused to communicate with the converted Iews unless they became uncircumcised. [In both cases the parties offending were schismaticks guilty of schism.] But \They were to converse {illeg} w^th one another & be of one communion \& one Church/ & might intermarry. And/ the children of a Iew & of a Gentile were at liberty \either/ to remain uncircumcised or |to| become circumcised, as in y^e case of Timothy, And this wa & had reason to chuse y^e former \uncircumcision/ for avoiding the burden of {the} observing the law. by w^ch means the churches of the circumcision d And this was the state of y^e primitive Church Catholic in relation to y^e Churches of the circumcision & uncircumcision of w^ch she was composed during her virgin age & for some time longer. ffor the Churches of the circumcision being dispersed by the wars of y^e Romans & intermixing with the Churches of the |un|circumcision by marriages \& in such cases not circumcising their children/ were but of short continuance.

After the death of Symeon the \successor of Iames & /second\/ metropolitan bishop of the churches of the circumcision, {illeg} rose up a multitude of eminent Gnosticks, Saturninus, Basilides – – – – – – – And therefore I end the second age of the Church w^th the beginning of y^e reign of Severus. the Emperor

For Irenæus who wrote against heresies in the days of \Pope/ Eleutherus [Bishop of Rome] the Predecessor of \Pope/ Victor testifies – – – – heard above. And Hegesippus a Greek \the historian a Christian/ Iew \historian/ who in the days of Arietus bishop of Rome travelled to \had {sic} had travelled from Syria by Corinth to Rome/ Rome {sic} & staid there \at Rome/ till the days of Eleutherus, {illeg} & conversed w^th the bishop of {illeg} Corinth & with many bishops of bishops of Rome testifies that he found them all agree in the faith th exactly in one & the same doctrine |Anicetus Bishop of that city he was {illeg} \{the predecessor}/ Soter the predecessor of Eleutherus \affirmed/in his his travels {written} \he/ had conversed with Primus bishop of Corinth & with very many very many {sic} others bishops, & \affirmed that he/ heard one & the same doctrine from them all, & that| things remained in the several cities as they had been taught by our Lord, same \& that in y^e several {sic} successions of bishops & in the several cities things remained the/ as they had been preached by the Law & by the Prophets & by our Lord.

& wrote in the days of Eleutherus the successor of Soter the successor of Anicetus

So then the Christian Chu till the days of Soter & Eleutherus the faith remained the same in all y^e Churches: but about that time it began to vary, the {sic} Latines someof the Latines inserting in \adding/ to their Creeds the resurrection of the <78br> body & the life everlasting in opposition to the Gnosticks who denyed y^e resurrection of the body & made the soul after various states & transmigrations return into God.

The fi In the days of Pope Victor or not long before some Latines began –

\About the end of the second age of the Church/ In opposition to y^e Gnosticks who denyed the resurrection of the body & maintained that the souls of men after death various states & transmigrations returned back into God: some Latines towards \before about/ the end of the second age of the Church began to add the resurrection of the body & life everlasting to y^e end of their creed And the Church of Rome began also to be prejudiced against |also growing prejudiced against the law {now} began also to be in the end of this age made| the religion of the Nazarenes \a heresy. For/ & Pope Victor in the end of this age made it a heresy. ffor he excommunicated|ing| the Churches of Asia for keeping Easter \with the Iews/ upon y^e 14^th day of the Moon. as if it Also the Church of Rome also began to place religion in things indifferent, And make them fundamental began also to be prejudiced against the religion of the Nazarenes & \to/ lay stress upon thing ceremonies & things indifferent \& to err in the faith/, Pope Victor excommunicating the true Churches of Asia for keeping Easter with the Iews \& with Iohn the Apostle & Polycarp/ upon the 14^th day of the Moon & w \first {sic} month of the Iewish year &/ writing communicatory letters to the {illeg} Churches of the Montanists in Asia & Phrygia, as Tertullian a Montanist thus mentions \& then \afterwards/ turning patripassian/ [& recalling those letters by the advise of Praxeas,] a Patripassian, as Tertullian a Montanist in his book against Prxeas written about the year 201 thus mentions – – – – crucifixit. The predecessors of Victor who had opposed the Montanists were Soter & Eleutherus. For Soter wrote against them at their first rise & Irenæus a sharp enemy to all heresies was sent \to Rome/ by to confer the Church of Lyons to confer with Elutherus against the|m| Cataphrygians

[And whereas the Nazarenes & some other Christians knew nothing of the hypostatical union] The creation of y^e world by Iesus Christ began also about this time to be inserted into some Creeds of the Greeks & thereby the Churches \Christians/ /Churches\ \which had flourished under Iames the brother of o^r Lord & Symeon & their successors/ were made hereticks

< text from f 78ar resumes > <79r>

At the same time came in also the great contention about Metaphysical opinions, directly contrary to y^e rules of the Apostle. ② O Timothy \{illeg}tab/ keep that w^ch is committed to thy trust avoiding profane & vane bablings & oppositions of science falsly so called, w^ch some professing have erred in the faith. 1 Tim. 6.20. ① Beware least any man spoile you through philosophy & vain deceipt after the tradition of men after y^e rudiments of the world & not after Christ Coloss. 2.8. [3 Now I beseich you brethren mark them w^ch cause divisions & offenses contrary to the doctrine w^ch ye have learned, & avoid them. Rom. 16.17. Hold fast y^e form of sound words 2 Tim. 1.13. ffoolish & unlearned questions avoid knowing that they gender strife. 2 Tim. 2.23 & the servant of the Lord must not strive. 2 Tim 2.23. For avoiding contentions they Christians \Churches/ were to hold fast the form of sound words \2 Tim 1.13/ & therefore had {illeg} \no/ authority to make any alteration so much as in words & therefore to make any alteration, so much as in words, was against the Apostle's rule.] & they that made y^e alteration {illeg} were guilty of the schism [This was in opposition to the heathen Philosophers who coming over to the Christian religion retained their old opinions \or invented new ones/ & endeavoured to spread them in the churches as points of knowledge: whence they were called Gnosticks, & to this head are to be referred all philosophical opinions whether true or false w^ch have been na were not articles of communion in the Apostles days but have been made articles of communion at any time since by any party what ever. To make a \any humane science true or false/ it an article of communion that there are or are not Antipodes, that the earth rests or moves about the sun, \that there are or are not more \{illeg} habitable/ worlds then one ihhabited/ that matter is or is not out of nothing, that the souls of men are or are not particles sparks of y^e divine light, that they are or are not præexistent, that they are \or are not/ sparks of y^e divine light \&c would/ tends not to salvation but to strife \& faction/ & schism & therefore would be \criminal/ a degree of wicked [& might {illeg} deserve to be accounted a new sort of Gnosticism] These are & such like \philosoph/ opinions in resp may be examined by Philosophers but not by divines. In respect of religion \salvation/ they are vain & useless philosophy & I beseech you brethren, saith the Apostle, mark them w^ch cause divisions & offences contrary to y^e doctrine w^ch ye have learned & avoid them Rom. 16.17. ffoolish and unlearned questions avoid knowing that they gender strife, & the servant of the Lord must not strive. 2 Tim. 2.23. All humane All opinions merely humane tend to strife & Philosophical opinions may be examined by Philosophers \& demonstrated by such as can understand demonstration/ but of them if they \must not/ be made a part of religion |becaus| they tend to strife. & to establish them \In respect of salvation they are foolish & unlearned &/ To make them a part of religion is to father them upon humane opinions upon y^e Holy Ghost & \to/ disturb the world. by pretending to science & if the opinions be false or uncertain the pretending to science is Gnosticism by oppositions of science w^ch was the crime of y^e Gnosticks.] By philosophy & vain deceipt after the traditions of men he understands the old opinions of \old/ Philosophers handed down by tradition concerning \the origin & nature of body & spirit,/ the origin of the world, the {illeg} \origin/ nature \& hist number \{sons}/ power \qualities/ & actions & genealogies/ of the Gods, the |preexistence| transmigration \& transmigration/ of souls & other doctrines of Dem Ghosts or Dæmons the nature of body and spirit & all other philosophical doctrines or opinions not revealed by by the spirit of God \not revealed/ whether they be false or uncertain. All disputes about these matters are opposit in respect of {illeg} the true religion \& the salvation of mankind/, vane bablings & oppositions of science falsly so called, & therefore are \here/ forbidden by the Apostle, & they & they that endeavoured to introduce any such opinins {sic} into the Christian religion wer under y^e notion of science were in the first ages of Christianity called reputed hereticks called Gnosticks. In the first ages of Christianity there were two sorts of people who troubled <79v> Churches of the gentiles \uncircumcision/ very much, the Iews who laboured to impose upon them the ceremonies of the law \& the traditions of their Doctors &/ & the Gentiles who endeavoured to impose upon them the opinions of the heathen Philosophers. The law was good & was observed by the Churches of the circumcision while the Temple stood. For those with Iames were zealous of the law & Paul circumcised Timothy & thereby obliged him to keep the law. For every man that is circumcised is a debter to the law.^[1] Bu And he that was called being circumcised was not to become uncircumcised Every man was to remain as he was called, wheter in circumcision or uncircumcision. ^[2]Is any man called being uncircumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any man called in uncircision {sic}? let him not be\come/ circumcised. For the Apostles were not sent to preach the law of Moses but only to preach the Gospel.^[3] They neither taught the Iews to forsake the law nor the Gentiles to receive it: but & when any endeavoured to impose the law upon the Gentiles \as necessary to salvation/ they were looked upon \opposed/ as false teachers, & the Gentiles were told taught to ^[4]stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free & that they not to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage, & that if they be circumcised Christ shall profit hem nothing. For ^[5]if they which are of y^e law be heirs, faith is made void. ^[6]A man is not justified by {illeg} the works of the law but by the faith of Iesus Christ. And for this reason the Apostles & Christians of y^e circumcision wrote to y^e gen \who kept the law wrote meeting/ in a Council at Ierusalem^[7] wrote to the Ie Gentiles that they should not observe the law it but that they should only abstein from meats offered to idols & from blood & from things strangled & from fornication. Strangling is a painful death & therefore we are not to kill strangle things food but to let out \for food & eat them with/ their blood, but to let out their blood upon the earth. For we are to avoid all \unnecessary/ acts of cruelty

Now the Iews who were for imposing the law upon the Christian Gentiles were apt to trouble the Churches also w^th unnecessary questions about y^e traditions of their Doctors & And {sic} these were thus reprehended by the Apostle. I besought thee, saith he to Timothy,^[8] to abide still at Ephesus that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrines neither give heed to fables & endless genealogies w^ch minister questions rather then godly edifying w^ch is in faith. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart & of a good conscience & of faith unfeigned: from w^ch some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain janglings, desiring desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say nor whereof they affirm. And again: ^[9]There are many unruly & vain talkers & deceivers, especially they of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped who subvert whole houses, teaching things w^ch they ought not for filthy lucres sake — — Wherefore rebuke them <80r> (the Cretans) sharply that they may be sound in the faith not giving heed to Iewish fables & commandments of men that turn from the truth. And again: A man {illeg} ^[10]Avoid foolish questions & genealogies & contentions & strivings about the law for they are unprofitable & vain.

The other sort of men who troubled the Churches were such Gentiles as adhered to the \any/ opinions of the \old/ heathen Philosophers & endeavoured to propagate them among the Christians. In opposition to whom Paul thus admonished the Churches. ^[11]Beware least any man spoile you through philosophy & vain deceipt after the tradition of men after the rudiments of the world & not after Christ. \And again/ ^[12]Timothy keep that w^ch is committed to thy trust avoiding profane & vane bablings & oppositions of science falsly so called w^ch some professing have erred in y^e faith. By philosophy & vain deceipt after the tradition of men he understands the uncertain & disputable opinions of the old philo
sophers handed down by tradition among their several sects. And the disputes about these being \endless &/ of no consequence to salvation he calls vane bablings & oppositions of science falsly so called. And because the disputers pretented {sic} to science they were ca Christians called them Gnosticks. To this head may be referred all disputes about the nature & origin of matter \& spirit/, the origin or production of the world by natural causes, the nature, origin, qualities, \powers,/ actions, species & genealogies of the Gods, the preexistence & transmigration of souls & doctrines of ghosts & the kingdom of the dead & the like in hades the |state &| kingdom of the dead & the like. And the mischief of such introducing opinions about these matters into the christian religion was that they tended to disputes \wrangling & discord &/ & {sic} faction & schism whereas the chief end of the Christian religion was mutual love & charity & peace. I beseech you brethren, saith y^e Apostle, mark them w^ch cause divisions & offences contrary to y^e doctrine w^ch ye have received & avoid them Rom. 16.17 ffoolish & unlearned questions avoid knowing that they gender strife & the servant of the Lord must not strive 2 Tim 2.23. And for enabling the Christians to {illeg} discover oppose \suppress avoid/ & keep out such p philosophical disputes & opinions the Apostles delivered the faith in certain forms of words with direction not to vary from those forms. Hold fast the form of sound words w^ch thou hast heard of me 2 Tim. 1.13. And b The Christians were to {illeg} adhere to the forms of sound words delivered by the Apostles & set down in the scriptures or in the Creed \or learned by heart/. ffor the form of sound words w^ch they were to hold fast & deliver down to posterity they would certainly set down in writing least their memory should fail them \or at least learn by heart./ And hence came the Creeds, these being the forms of words in w^ch they instructed new Christians in order to baptism & for handing down the true faith to all posterity. For they were not to be baptized till they were well instructed in the true faith. The things, Paul saith Paul, that thou hast <80v> heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithfull men who shal be able to teach others also. That is, the \principles of religion or/ Articles of faith w^ch thou hast heard of me in catechizing thee before many Christians who were witnesses of \the truth of/ what I taught thee, the same commit thou to faithfull men who shall be able to teach others also by cath|e|chising others also for handing \propagating/ down the true faith to all posterity. And this could not be done without setting down a form of faith in writing \words/ w^ch \being either written down or learned by heart/ might remain unchanged. O This form the Apostle calls the form of doctrine {illeg} w^ch was delivered to new \converted/ Christians. Ye were the ser God be thanked \saith he/ that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine w^ch was delivered you. Being then made free fom sin ye became the servants of righteousness. Rom. 6.17. That is, at your first conversion when you were instructed in the faith, ye \{illeg} beleived &/ obeyed tha|e|t form of doctrine w^ch was delivered you set down \conteined w^ch was delivered you/ in your Creed, & thereby being made free from sin ye became the s were {illeg} ye became the servants of righteousness. This form of sound words the Churches were to hold fast till without variation [& did so during the reign of the heathen Roman Emperors. They had no more authority to correct their Creeds then to correct the scriptures, They ha In the d And tho in the & did not venture to do it before the Empire became Christian. \In the times of the heathen Empire/ They had many disputes w^th Hereticks but did not alter their in the times of but did not alter their Creeds in opposition to any of them before untill Constantine the Great coming in person into the Coucill {sic} of Nice prevailed with the Bishops of that Council to insert into the Creed of the Church of Cæsarea a new \philo/ article w^ch had never been in any Creed before. And this innovations {sic} had all the ill consequences described by the Apostle. ffor it occasioned vehement & lasting disputes & contentions for almo setting the Churches of y^e whole Roman Empire in flame for above an hundred years together, the Roman Emperors calling Councils to & caused several new articles of faith to be decreed by several Councils of Bishops every Council {enac} \decreing/ whatever the \reigning/ Emperor was for convened them for. & the Emperor putting the Decree in force by the power of y^e sword. {illeg}] It was called the symbol of the Christians that is, the token by w^ch they knew one another to be Christians, & distinguished themselves from the rest of the world, |& others to be none ignorant of it to be be the none| & therefore was learned by heart |committed to memory| by all Christians that by repeating it they might know one another. & \was/ not committed to writing published in writing least the heathens should learn it \by heart/, & was the same in all the Churches without any material variation {illeg} that they \all Christians/ might thereby know one another. And because it was an universal unwritten tradition of all the Churches it was called the tradition of faith. It was the unwritten tradition \mentioned by/ of w^ch Paul sa of w^ch Paul makes this mention. Therefore brethren stand fast & hold the traditions w^ch ye have been taught whether by word or our Epistle 2 Thes. 2.15. And again: Now I praise you brethren that ye keep the traditions I as |I| delivered them to you. 1 Cor 11.2. The manner of handing down this unwritten tradition was this. The new converts were first instructed in the principles of religion with <81r> out the Creed, then they were taught the Creed by memory as being a summary of them\ir/ faith, w^ch they & at baptism they repeated it by memory as a profession of the faith into w^ch they were baptized. \Thus every man was obliged to learn that creed before he could be baptized. And/ After this manner they handed down \the Creed/ by oral or unwritten tradition & they had no other \& this was the only/ unwritten tradition of faith the only t then by handing down the Creed w^ch they took special \such/ care of obliging every man to learn it before he was baptised. And this I take to be the only unwritten tradition of the Churches faith.

Tertullian tells us^[13] the rule of faith (so he calls y^e Creed) had been current from the Apostles days descended down from y^e beginning of y^e gospel. And Irenæus repeating the substance of it saith that the church dispersed throughout the whole world had received this faith from the Apostles & their disciples. And the substance of this Creed Irenæus sets down in this manner \speaking of the Creed affirms the same/ & sets down the substance of the Creed in the|i|se words manner. The Church altho dispersed throughout the whole world to y^e ends of y^e earth, preserves \keeps/ that faith w^ch was received from the Apostles & their disciples w^ch is, In one God the father Almighty, who made the heaven & earth & sea & all things in them, & in one Iesus Christ the son of God incarnate for our salvation, & in the Holy Ghost who by the \Prophets/ preached the disensations of God & the coming of Iesus Christ our beloved Lord & his birth of the Virgin & passion & resurrection from the dead & ascent into heaven with his flesh &\his/ coming from heaven to restore \to li/ all things & to raise from de\a/th to life all the flesh of all \all/ mankind that every knee may bow of things in heaven celestial terrestrial & infernal may bow to Christ Iesus our Lord & God & Saviour & King according to the good will & pleasure of the invisible father, & every tongue may confess to him & he may give just judgment in all things, \&/ sending \into æternal fire the/ the wicked spiritual beings \w^ch are wicked/ & the fallen & rebellious Angels &|w|ho transgressed & revolted fell & the ungodly & unjust & lawless & blasphemous men, & to the into eternal fire; & giving \giving life/ unto the just & holy & those who{illeg} keep his commandments & remain in his love \who/ whe|i|ther from the beginning or after repentance remain {illeg} in his love, giving life, & incorruptibility & eternal glory \may/ make them incorruptible & compass them with glory. This preaching & faith, \being received/ as I said above, the Church having receivedaltho dispersed throughout the whole world keeps carefully as if she inhabited but one house & beleives these things even as if she had but one soul & one & the same heart, & with one voice preaches & teaches & delivers these things as if she had but one mouth. For altho there be various languages in the world yet the power of the tradition is one & the same. Neither do the Churches seated in Germany beleive otherwise or deliver otherwise nor those w^ch are in Spain or in France or in the East or in Egypt or in Afric or in the middle regions of y^e world. But as the sun created by God is one & the same in the whole world, so the preaching of the truth shines every where & illuminates all men who are willing to come to the knowledge of y^e truth. Neither doth any man very prevalent in speech amongst those who preside in the Church, speak other things then these, for no man is above his master. Nor does he that is weak in speech diminish the tradition <81v> ffor the faith being one & the same, neither does he who can speak much of it enlarge it, neither does he who can speak but little diminish it. Thus far Irenæus concerning the Creed \framed by the Apostles &/ delivered down by universall by universal tradition from the beginning of the gospel |it being \conteining/ that one faith by w^ch & baptism all Christians were admitted into the Church Cath. from the beginning.| For if was it had not been from the beginning of the gospel it could not have been {illeg} universal. |Irenæus was the disciple of Polycarp & Polycarp was the disciple of Iohn the Apostle & had conversed with others also who had seen the Lord & Irenæus was the disciple of Polycarp, & therefore in reciting the Creed primitive Creed & telling us that it was received from the Apostles & their disciples, could deserves to be credited.| It contains the whole faith. He that beleived all the Articles of this Creed into w^ch Christians were baptized from the beginning & therefore I \& therefore was from the beginning/ In order to their being baptized & thereby admitted into the Church Catholick they were to beleive nothing more nothing or less then the articles of this Creed. They were not obliged to beleive the {auth} in the infallibility or supremacy of the Pope nor {illeg} the authority of the Church or Councils. If they beleived \all/ the articles of this Creed they were qualified for baptism&, & therefore this Creed was the rule & measure of Church communion w^th the Church Catholic in the primitive times of Christianity, & the bond by w^ch all Christians were united throughout the whole world were united into one Church Catholick. And therefore after the Apostles had fixed this rule & measure of communion no [humane authority \power on earth/ could enlarge or diminish it, no not that of General Councils & the Pope together or general Councils or of the whole Church catholick. ffor the Church has no power servant is not above her master]

When Christ rose from the dead he conversed with his disciples 40 days^[14] & explained to them the scriptures how Christ {illeg}t to suffer & rise & again from the dead, & w saying unto them O fools & slow of heart to beleive all that the Prophets have spoken! Ought not Christ to rise from the dead have suffered these things & to enter into his glory. And beginning at Moses & all the Prophets he expounded to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And he said unto them, These are the words w^ch I spake unto you while I was yet with you that all things must be fulfilled w^ch were written in the law of Moses & in the Prophets & in the Psalms concerning me. Then opened he their understandings that they might understand the scriptures; & said unto them, Thus it is written & thus it behoved Christ to suffer & to rise from the dead the third day & that repentance & remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations beginning at Ierusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And behold I send the promise of my father upon you: All po but tarry ye in \in the city/ Ierusalem untill ye be endued with power from on high. All power is given unto me in heaven & in earth.^[15] Go ye therefore & teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the father & of y^e son & of the holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. & lo, I am with you alway unto the ends of the world. And ^[16]Behold I send the promise of my father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Ierusalem untill ye shall be endued with power from on high. Thus was Christ instructed h after his resurrection instructed his Apostles in the principles of the Christian religion & commanded them to teach all nations the same principles, & \then to/ baptize them in the name of <82r> the father son & holy Ghost in whom they had been taught to believe \They were first to beleive in the father son & holy ghost & then to be baptized in their name/ The Apostles therefore collecting into one body the heads of what Christ had taught them & commanded them \& their disciples/ to teach all nations to y^e end of the world, composed the Creed as the rule of faith into w^ch all nations were to be baptized & this Creed Irenæus \received from Iohn the Apostle by Polycarp &/ recites: telling us that the Church throughout the whole world to y^e ends of the earth had received it from the days of y^e {sic} Apostles & their disciples, & kept it every where with one heart & one voice as if she were but one house, none of the Bishops \how wise learned or eloquent soever/ adding any thing to it or taking any thing from it. ffor the servant is not above his master. They were to hold fast the form of sound words with\out/ presuming to add or alter; this Creed being \the rule & measure of communion &/ the bulwark of the Church without against all heresies. the rule & measure of communion, the bond by which all Christians were united into one body & the bulwark of the Church against all heresies.

Yet some of the Churches altered the order of the articles \was not the same in all the Churches/ as may be seen in Creed {sic} of the Rom Church of Rome \usually/ called the Apostles & in that established by the Council of Constantinople: w^ch runs thus.

I beleive in one God the ffather Almighty maker of heaven & earth & in Iesus Christ his only son o^r Lord who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of y^e Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead & buried [He descended into Hell;] the thrid day he rose again from the dead, He ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of God the father Almighty; From whence he shall come to judge the quick & the dead. I beleive in the Holy Ghost [The Holy Catholick Church, The Communion of saints] the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body, And the life everlasting.

We beleive in one God the father Almighty, maker of heaven & earth, & of |all| things visible & invisible, And in one Lord Iesus Christ the only begotten son of God, born [begotten of the father before all worlds, God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten not made, Consubstantial to the father (that is of the same substance with the father) by whom all things were made,] Who for us men &o^r salvation descended & was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin & was made man & crucified for us under Pontius Pilate & buried & rose again the third day & ascended into heaven & sitteth on the right hand of the father, & shall come again in glory to judge the quick & the dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end; And in the Holy Ghost [the Lord, of whose kingdom there shall be no end & giver of life, who proceedeth from the father, Who with the father & the son together is worshipped & glorified] Who spake by the Prophets. [And in one Catholick Church & Apostolick Church.] We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins & look for the resurrection of the dead & the life of the world to come.

|In| These three \two/ Creeds, w^ch were were were if the \{illeg}/ Articles w^ch were inserted in the fourth Century & are conteined within the brackets, be omitted & were inserted in the fourth Century, \& if they/ be omitted, the Creeds agree w^th one another & with the Creed set down by Irenæus & by their agreement confirm one another to be the true universal tradition of faith during the three first centuries.

There is extant a fourth Creed \recited &/ commented on in the middle of y^e 4^th century by Cyrillus bishop of Ierusalem. It runs thus. I beleive in one God the father <82v> Almighty maker of heaven & earth & of all things visible & invisible. And in one Lord Iesus Christ the only begotten son of God [begotten of his father before all worlds, the true God, by whom all things were made] who was incarnate & made man, crucified & buried, rose again from the dead the third day & ascended into heaven & sitteth at the right hand of the father & shall come to judge the quick & the dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Ghost the comforter who spake by the Prophets, [& in one holy Catholick Church] & in the resurrection of the flesh & in life everlasting

The Creed of the Church at Hippo in Afric set down by Austin Bishop of that city is the same w^th the Roman abovem mentioned except that the descent into Hell the Communion of saints & life everlasting are omitted. And Tertullian in his book de Virginibus velandis recites the same Creed in these words. Regula quidem fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis & irreformabilis, credendi scilicet in unicum Deum, mundi conditorem, & filium ejus Iesum Christum natum ex virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in cælis, sedentem nunc ad dexterā Patris, venturum judicare vivos & mortuos per car{illeg}nis etiam resurrectionem. He omits here the article of beleiving in the Holy Ghost but adds it in his book de præscriptione Hæreticorum where he paraphrases the Creed in this manner. Credimus unum omnino Deum esse nec alium præter mundi conditorem qui universa de nihilo produxerit per Verbum suum primo omnium demissum: Id Verbum filium ejus appeallatum, in nomine Dei varie visum a Patriarchis, in Prophetis semper auditum, postremo delatum ex spiritu patris Dei et virtute in Virginem Mariam, carnem factum in utero ejus, & ex ea natum egisse Iesum Christum, exinde prædicasse novam legem & novam promissionem regni cælorum, virtutes fecisse, fixum cruci, tertia die resurrexisse, in cœos ereptum sedisse ad dexteram patris, misisse vicariam vim spiritus sancti qui credentes agat, venturum cum claritate ad sumendos sanctos in vitæ æternæ & promissorum cælestium fructum et ad profanos adjudicandos igni perpetuo, facta utriusqꝫ partis resuscitatione cum carnis restitutione. Hæc regula a Christo at p instituta nullas habet apud nos quæstiones nisi quas hæreses inferunt & quæ hæreticos faciunt. Thus far Tertullian. Now by comparing all these Creeds together it is easy to see what were the \primitive/ Articles of the primitive Creed & in what sence they were to be understood.

Hitherto y^e {whol} Cath Church cont throughout the whole world continued united in one faith & the Creed continued \was every where/ one & the same as to y^e sense & substance of it \no dispute arising between the Churches about it/: but in the fourth Century new Articles began to be inserted. And first Alexander \B^p of Alexandria/ in making a large declaration of his faith inserted the Catholick \& Apostolick/ Church in this manner. We confess also one Holy Ghost —– & one only Catholick Apostolic Church w^ch is ever inexpugnable tho the whole world attack it

<83r>

^[17]Simon Magus is generally accounted the founder of all the heresies & the father of all the hereticks. ^[18]He taught that one & y^e same God in the form of the father son & holy ghost w three persons was the father son & holy Ghost, that this God had a & the first conception or Idea of this God he called Ennœa & Prunicus \& a holy spirit/ & said that by her he conceived in his mind \in the beginning/ to make Powers & Archangels & Angels. He |made several heavenly Orbs &| placed this God & Ennœa above the heavenly Orbs & said that when she came out of him she descended to the lower regions & generated Powers & Angles & that they created the world & {when they} governed it the world {illeg} {amiss} contending for dominion & that she was {illeg} very |He placed these These Powers & Angels he placed in the several Orbs according to their degrees & said y^t that they governed the world & {sic} gave barbarous names to their weomen whom he called intelligences & said that the Angels governed the world amiss contending for dominion & that Ennoia was very| beautifull & enticed the Powers & Angels to her embraces & they used her injuriously & deteined her below & made war upon {one another} for her sake \& that she was the lost sheep/ & that the first God {illeg} whom they knew not \(& who was therefore called the unknown father)/, came down from above to rescue her \& save those who \that acknowledged him/ from the tyranny of the Angels which deteined their souls below/ & |y^t| in passing through the Orbs changed his \descending changed his/ form \in every Orb/ into that of the \Powers &/ Angels in that Orb that they might not know him, |& among men appeared as a {illeg} man.| ffor he placed powers & Angels in every Orb with a proper dominion & called He said also that \Ennœa/ the Angels & Powers & Ennœa passed into various \successively into the bodies of/ bodies of {sic} men & broke hearts & that she \several weomen &/ was \in/ Minerva & afterwards \in/ Hellena the Greek & of other weomen of in his \& in many others/ & at length came into his concubine Hellena a leud w a leud Tyrian woman the concubine of Simon, & that the powers & Angels also passed into the bodies of men & beasts & in the bodies of the Greeks & Trojans made war upon one another for Ennoia \then/ in the body of Hellena. & that he himself was the supreme God after his descent {illeg} passed also into /various bodies & \And that Steichoras the Greek Poet was blinded for cursing her,/ He said also that he himself \(that is his soul)/ was the supreme God & appeared in Iudea as the son, in Samaria as the ffather & in other nations as the holy ghost: \& his disciple Menander said that who followed his masters philosophy in all things, said that |the first Virtue was unknown but he was the power sent by the invisible Æons to be the Savior| he was sent by the superior powers or Æons to be the Saviour of y^e world. I suppose they meant in the sense that they feigned Hellena to be Ennoia/ I suppose they meant by a Pythagoric transmigration, and But he said that {illeg} he did not suffer really upon the Cross but had only an apparent body. He instituted also obscure mysteries {illeg}|in the same sense that they feigned Hellena to be Ennoia, that is, by a Pythagorick metmpsychosis, or something like it Yet Simon| \Yet Simon/ said that he only appeared as a man \in Iudæ/ & did not \really/ suffer in Iudæa \upon the cross/ when he was thought to suffer. {illeg} [Whence I gather that he either assigned an pu apparent body to Iesus, or made himself the Christ w^ch descended upon Iesus & left him when he was led to Pilate or both.] His {illeg} He said also \that men were to be saved not by just works but only by faith in him & Helena & therefore might do what they pleased/ that the Prophets were inspired by Angels his enemies & therefore were to be rejected them of to be rejected, & that men were to be saved |(he meant from the Angels| \(he meant from the tyranny of the Angels who detained their souls below)/ not by just works but only by faith in him & Helena & therefore might do what they pleased. \By the saving of men he & his followers meant the rescuing/ Whence his Priests lived in lust & used exorcisms & incantations & mag sorcery sor magical arts & philters {illeg} provoking lust & incitations to & things inciting weomen to lust, & fictions of \familiar/ spirits assisting them & of prophetick dreams, & worshipped the images of Simon & Helena in the form of Iuppiter & Minerva, And in their assemblies had filthy mysteries instituted by Simon, w^ch consisted in offering \to their Gods/ the seminal profluvia of men & menstrua of weomen instead of y^e Eucharist. And this was the philosophy & practice of the Simonians & the beginning \original/ of science falsly so called rom whence the Gnosticks had their name. |By what he saith of Steichoras & Helena & the celesial orbs & their intelligences & comparing himself & Ennoia to ♃ & Minerva its manifest that his doctrine was borrowed from the heathen theology {illeg} mixed w^th an abuse of the christian religion| In the supreme father & the intelligences presiding in y^e seven Orbs you have the original of their Ogdoas of Æons & of the creation of the world by the seven Archangels Angels |& their seven| their seven Presidents their Presidents \their Presidents/ the seven Archangels. And in the lusfulness of their Æons, filthiness of their mysteries & leudness of their lives you have the deeds of the doctrine & deeds of the Nicolaitans.

< insertion from f 84r > {Epiphanius} \For Irenæus/ tells \us/^[19] that Cerinthus & long before him the Nicolaitans taught who were {illeg} \ἀπόσπασμα/ a sect of the Gnosticks, taught that the maker of the world was one & the father of our Lord was another; the son of the fabricator was one & Christ from above was another who |being impassible| \being/ descended upon Iesus the son of the fabricator \in the form of a dove/ & returned to flew back to his Pleroma \or Ogdoas of Æons/ & that Αρχὴ was the only begotten & Λόγος the son of the only begotten, & our world was made not by the first God but by a Power very inferior & cut off from the communication of those who are invisible & innominable: & that for putting abolishing these heresies Iohn wrote in his Gospel that there was one God who made all things by the Word who was with him in the beginning. The Nicolaitans therefore being a branch of the Gnosticks were the disciples of Simon. ffor they were contemporary to him & so far as I can find held the same doctrines. His Ennœa ^b[20] they called Prunicus & Barbelo – – – – – – – – – – every Orb. When Nicolas upon being reprehended by the Apostles for uxoriusnes quitted his wife to other mens embraces he seems to have resented it \the reprehension as {deserved} \{and quitted his}// & fallen away to the Simonians \& found|ed| the party called by his name/ for Irenæus^[21] calls {him the} \Nicolas the/ master of the Nicolaitans, |& therefore reputed him the (next after Simon) the author of the sect.|

Carpocrates held much the same opinions ^a[22] w^th Cerinthus & the Nicolaitans. He said that Iesus was the so with Cerinthus \that the world was made by Angels &/ that Iesus was the son of Ioseph & Mary \& like other men/ but had a soul from above & more firm & pure then those of other men, & remembred what it had seen in the c\irc/umlation & conversation above w^th the unbegotten God & for that reason a vertue (called Christ by Cerinthus & the Nicolaitans) was sent to him from above by w^ch he might avoid the Angels who made the world & having gone through \performed gone through/ all things return to God & to those who acted \lived/ like him, & by means of the vertues w^ch was sent to him, he virtues w^ch he (or graces) w^ch he received from above he voided \(or made nothing of)/ the passions w^ch other men underwent in pains or punishments sufferings. And that other mens souls of y^e same circulation {illeg} might perform the contemning the powers w^ch made the world might be worthy of the same {illeg} vertue from above, & return to the same station. By this circulation he meant that the souls of men came \down/ from the unbegotten God {illeg} & circulated by a Pythagoric Metempsychosis untill they were worthy to return up to their first |station &| condition. He said that the devil was one of the Angels in the world & delivered the souls of those that perish to y^e Prince or chief of the Angels who made the world, & the \Prince/ delivered the soul to another Angel to shut it up in other bodies untill by Pythagoric transmigration <84v> it had suffered all things requisite /undergone all what it deserved\ & when it had paid y^e uttermost farthing (for they called the body its prison) it should return to its first station above. They used also magical arts & inchantments incantations & philtres & things provoking lust & pretended to have assisting (or guardian) Angels & prophetic dreams: so that they were genuine disciples of Simon & Nicolas. And Epiphanes the son of Carpocrates was instructed by his father & recconed among the Nicolaitans. But Cerinthus imposed the Law & therein differed from Simon & Carpocrates.

< text from f 83r resumes >

For Irenæus ^a[23] tells us that the Nicolaitans were a branch of y^e Gnosticks & so far as I can find, they held the same doctrines w^th Simon. His Ennœa they \b/^[24] called Prunicus & Barbelo, & placed her with the \father &/ God of the univers in the eighth heaven, & \seven Intelligences \or/ Æons whom they \some of them/ called/ Ialdabaoth, Elilæus Adonæus, Daden, Seth, Saclan & Iao \they placed/ successively in the seven heavens under her, & said (with Simon) that Barbelo was be\a/utiful & enticed the other powers to her embraces & that Ialdabaoth (or as some called him {illeg} Sabaoth) was her son & made the heaven & earth \& was shaped like an Ass or Hog & therefore forbad swinesflesh to the Iews/, & that Saclan was the God of lust. And in the eighth heaven they placed also \the father of all things and the Lord who of himself was the father & {illeg} another Christ/ another Christ who was self originated, \unborn/ & also \& {was}/ the Christ who descended & revealed this knowledge to mankind, who was also called Iesus & was manifested by y^e Virgin Mary but not born of her nor took flesh otherwise then in <83v> appearance. [Whence I gather that they were of the same opinion with the Gnosticks who had but] And whereas Nicolas had a beautifull wife & |{illeg}ed that souls destitute of the knowledge were cast down from above & transferred into the bodies {of h}oggs & other animals but by their knowledge & science & {illeg} practise the soul {should} be set at liberty to return up & pass by the Princes to Sabbaoth & thence to y^e highest habitation where {Barbelo} resided. And this they called the saving of the soul. And whereas Nicolas had a beautiful wife & being reprehended| being reprehended {sic} by the Apostles for uxoriousness quitted her to them that would make use of her, as the supreme father was feigned to quit his wife Ba Prunicus to the Powers & inferior Powers & Angels: the {illeg} Milita \the/ Nicolaitan Gnosticks {illeg} \lived indulged carnal pleasures &/ invited one another to their tables & after dinner {illeg} \departed/ |from| their wives & said to them, Arise & be \eating,/ the man departed from his wife saying to her: Arise & be charitable to the brother. And after adultery some of them (as the Militaries in Egypt) \copulation they/ \filthily/ offered the seed of the man to y^e unknown father calling it the body of Christ, & preserving the menstrua of the weomen off/ered\ that also calling it the blood of Christ. Of these Nicolaitan Gnosticks there were various sects called Phibionites Gnosticks, Phibionites, Barbelitites {sic}, |Ophites Cainites| Militaries, Levites, followers of Epiphanes, & by other names, every master finding out something or other to gratify the curiosity & pleasures of his followers \& thereby setting \up/ new denominations of sects/. And the Phibionites increased the number of the heavenly orbs to 365 \the number of days in the year./ placing an Intelligence or Æons in each of them every orb.

^[25]Saturninus & Basilides were the disciples of Menander & Saturninus taught with Simon & Menander that there was one unknown father who made vertues powers Archangels & Angels. And that seven of these Angels [the Presidents \who reigned in seven parts of the world [viz^t the Presidents/ of the seven Orbs] made the world & all things therein & man. And And when the man crept upon the grownd & could not erect himself: a virtue from above emitted a spark of life w^ch erected him & made him live & after death this spark of life \(the soul of the man)/ is to return upward to those things w^ch are consubstantial to it self. He said also that the Savio\u/r was unborn & incorporeal & only appeared to be a man, & that one of the Angels [viz^t Sabbaoth] was the God of the Iews & y^t prophesies were either from y^e Angels or the Devil.

^[26]Bailides, after he had been instructed by Menander at Antioch went to Alexandria. He said \w^th Cerinthus & w^th the Nicolaitans/ that the unknown father \whom {illeg} he called Abranas/ emitted Nous & Nous emitted Logus & \further that/ Logus emitted Phronesis & she emitted Dynamis & Sophia & they emitted Virtues Princes & Angels who made the first heaven, & these emitted others who made the second heaven & these others who made the third heaven & so on till to y^e number f \three hundred/ sixty five heavens: (w^ch was the philosophy of the Phibionites a sect of Nicolait{illeg}ans in Egypt:) & that the Angels in the lowest orb made the {illeg} world & all things therein \& spake by the Prophets/, & the Prince of those Angels was the God of the Iews \& gave the law/ & that the unknown father sent Nous his first begotten son (who is {illeg} also called Christ) to free the world from the power of the Angels who made it: & that he appeared in the world & did miracles but was incorporeal & {illeg} suffered not, but reascended to his father while Simon of Cyrene suffered in his stead. And that prophesies were given by the Angels who made y^e world & the Law by their Prince. He gave names also to the Princes of the several orbs

^[27]|The| Valentinus|ians| the scholar of Basilides that Ennœa \e/ (whom he called also Charis & Sige, being impregnated by the \said that y^e unbegotten/ invisible God whom he called Proarche Propator & Bythos & a perfect Æon remained infinite ages in quiet & silence w^th Ennœa whom he called also Charis & Sige & then willing to emitt a Principle of all things impregnated her & she brought forth Nous \who was/ like & equal (& therefore consubstantial) to his father, & \was called also/ the only begotten & y^e father & ἡ Ἀρχὴ the Principle of all things. And at the same time his sister Alethea was also emitted, & these four Bythus & Sige Nus & Alethia were the Pythagoric Tetractys. Then N Nus & Ellethea emitted Logus & Zoe & these two emitted Anthropus & Ecclesia {illeg} & so completed the first Ogdoas answering to the seven Orbs & | eight heavens <84r> heaven above them. But because Christ was 30 years old before he was baptized & began to act, Valentinus carried on the generation of Æons to the number of thirty \w^ch constituted the Pythagoric Æons & were {set} by him above {the}Orbs./ He said also that Bythos was unknown to all the Æons but Nus. That Nus Monogenes produced also I Christ & the holy Ghost, & that out of all the Æons arose Iesus the Saviour called the inferior Christ & the Angels \arose/ with him, & that that Iesus passed through Mary as water through a pipe & the superior this inferior Christ descended upon Iesus in the form of a Dove & left him at his passion. And that Iesus himself did not really suffer nor was really incarnate but had a body w^ch passed through \the Virgin/ Mary as as {sic} \water/ through a pipe. And whereas the Apostle Iohn had said In the Beginning was the Word \& the word was w^th God/ — In him was Life — And the word became flesh & dwelt among us . . . . full of Grace & Truth, they took the Beginning, the Word, God, Life, Grace & Truth for their six first Æons.

Secundus, Ptolomæus \Epiphanes/, Marcus Colarbasus & Heracleon were Valentinians & held much the same number of Æons but with some variation of \Names &/ Circumstances, & gave the name of Ogdoas to the first eight of them: Epiphanes was also a Nicola reputed a Nicolaitan.

<85r>

natural branches again into the root of their own olive tree.

The Christians of the uncircumcision during the three first centuries & some part of the fourth generally held that Iesus Christ was in the beginning before all things, \& that God said to him Let us make man & all things/ all things {sic} were created by him & that he had the dominion over all things & sometimes appeared to Adam in Paradise & to Cain & Noah & the Patriarchs & Moses \& Ioshuah/ & at length was bo incarnate & born of the Virgin Mary without the help of a man & suffered & rose again from the dead & reascended into heaven, & some \there were also/ Christians of the circumcision of the very same opinion in the first ages of the Church. ffor Epiphanius^[28] tells us that among the Ebionites some of the Ebionites said that some of the Ebionites said that Christ was Adam, \even/ that Adam who was first formed by God & animated by the divine breath; & that others of them said thathe \Christ/ was from above & that he was a spirit \which was/ created before all things \[I suppose they mean \not that he was created out of nothing but/ that he was the first begotten of every creature]/ & was above the Angels & had dominion over all things & was called Christ, & that his habitation or residence was there perpetually, & but as often as he pleased he descended to these lower regions, as when he came in Adam & appeared to the patriarchs cloathed w^th a body, coming to Abraham & to Isaac & to Iacob. This same Christ {spirit} Christ came in these last times & cloathed himself w^th the body of Adam \that is w^th flesh & bones of the race of {illeg} Adam)/ & appeared a man & was crucified & rose again & ascended. But these Ebionites again when they please {sub} say it was not thus, but that a spirit who is the Christ came into Iesus & cloathed himself with him who is called Iesus. Thus far Epiphanius. And a little after^[29] describing the third opinion more fully, he saith \he represents that \the Chionites, {in com̄on w^th}/ those of the third opinon said/ that Iesus was born of the seed of man, & was chosen, & by election was called the son of God from the Christ who came upon him from above in the form of a Dove, & that they said not that this Christ was generated of \God/ the father but that he was created as one of the Arch-angels & was greater then they & reigns over them both the Angels & all things else w^ch were made by the Omnipotent, & came & taught what was in their Gospel, that is, in the Gospel according to Matthew. And b both Epiphanius & {illeg} Irenæus say that the Ebionites taught that Iesus was a mere man born of Ioseph & Mary. Now for understanding all this it is to be observed that the two first opinions are one & the same. Now these three opinions I consider as but two, the first of them seeming to be the same with the second. And the tw The second is the opinion of the Ebionites \of the circumcision/ properly so called who said that Iesus was a mere man the son of Ioseph & Mary, {illeg} which acording to Irenæus^[30] is the proper character of the Ebionites. |Now according to all three opinions the Ebionites taught that Christ was as old as the creation of the world. According to the third opinion Iesus was but a mere man the son of Ioseph & Mary. And this was the proper opinion of the Ebionites according to Irenæus: but they added that Christ was from above & descended upon Iesus. And in opposition to this opinion the Apostle Apostle {sic} Iohn asks the questions, Who is he that overcometh the world but he that beleiveth that Iesus is the son of God? And, Who is a lyar but he that denyeth that Iesus is the Christ? \‡/| < insertion from f 85v > ‡ And Irenæus.^[31] Vani autem et Ebionæi unitionem Dei et hominis per fidem non recipientes in suam animam, sed in veteri generationis perseverantes fermento, neqꝫ intelligere volentes quoniam spiritus sanctus [nempe Verbum] advenit in Maria & Virtus Patris obumbravit eam: quapropter et quod generatum est sanctum est, et filius Altissimi Dei patris omnium, qui operatus est incarnationem ejus, & novam ostendit generationem. And again^[32] Iudicabit autem et Ebionitas. Quomodo possunt salvere nisi Deus est qui \salutem/ illorum super terram spiritus est, ὴ {πως} ανθρωπως χωρήσει ἐις θεὸν ἐιμὴ ὁ Θεὸς έχωρήθη ἐις ἄνθρωπον {illeg} et quomodo \{illeg}/ transit in Deum si non Deus in hominem. < text from f 85r resumes > |The first second opinion I understand not unless it be the same w^th the second.| [And the second is the opinion of those of the circumcision who were of the same faith with those of the Christians of the uncircumcision during the three first centuries. ] And \The/ third opinion is condemned by Iohn condemns in saying Who is he that overcometh the world but he that beleiveth that Iesus is the son of God. And again, Who is a lyar but he that denyeth that Iesus is the Christ. The|is| second opinion is condemned by Epiphanius as the opinion of the Ebionites sometimes contradicting themselves. But Epiphanius is surely in some mistake It's not likely that the same men would thus contradict themselves nor that those of the second opinion were Eb of the same sect with those of the third: I had rather call them Nazarenes because they taught that Christ descended upon Iesus the son of Ioseph by \then Ebionites unless/ they had the name of Ebionites from their poverty. ffor they followed \knew of {illeg}/ <85v> Mary, but that upon descending he was really incarnate & suffered w^ch was the truth such {sic} man as Ebion but said tha gloried in their poverty^[33] & said that they from the time of the Apostles it had been the practise to distribute their goods for the releif of their brethren & thereby they being \were/ reduced to poverty. & |y^t| from the hebrew word Ebion w^ch signifies a poore man they had the name of Ebionites. \Vpon the siege of Ierusalem/ They & the Nazarenes are said to have fled from Ierusalem into Pella & oth Peræa & chiefly to Pella upon the siege of Ierusalem & from thence to have spread their heresies. Whence I gather that they were originally of the Church of Iames, called Nazarenes by the unconverted |& by {illeg} {illeg} consequence were {w^thout} of called Nazarenes by the unconverted| Iews, An And as that name being given by the unconverte \the|o|m\se/ Iews/ to all those Iews |them of the circumcision| who owened Iesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah. And as But the name of Ebionites seems not to have been so general whether it was taken from a man called Ebion or from the \supposed/ author of a sect, or from the poverty of the beleiving Iews in Peræa, seems not to have been so general, nor so ancient. And whilst these Iews \beleiving Iews of those parts/ gloried in the name of poor people (that is (in the Iewish language) in the name of Ebionsits, its probabable {sic} that the I Nazarenes of tho we need not wonder that this name was given \as well/ by Epiphanius [ as well by th if the best Christians of those parts who beleived Iesus to be the son of God, called themselves |poor people or {illeg} or at least were called so so by others {sic}| Ebionites, while the worst who called \beleived/ him \to be/ the son of Ioseph recommended themselves by that name so as at length to make it the name of a heresy. And [It seems therefore that among the Christian Iews of Peræa & the parts adjacent, who beleived that Iesus was the son of God, & there were some who taught that he was the son of Ioseph, & by boasting of their poverty gave the name] But be it us it willing it But whatever be the original & signification of that name it is manifest that among the beleiving Iews there were churches of the circumcision as well as who agreed with the churches of the uncircumcision from the {illeg} days of the Apostlesthat Iesus was \in teaching that/ in the beginning there was a Spirit, then by whom all things were created & who was above the Angels & reigned over all things & appeared to the Patriarchs & to Moses & came down from heaven & took flesh of the virgin & became a man the son of God & not of Ioseph, & was crucified & rose from the dead & ascended whilst others taught that he \this/ was the son of Ioseph & Mary & that Christ descended upon Iesus the son of Ioseph. And for distinguishing these two sorts of Christian Iews from one another by \I will for the future call/ call {sic}ing the first Nazarenes & the second Ebionites. ffor I know of no other difference between them in point of faith. They b both observed the law \themselves/, but the Ebionites imposed the law upon the Gentiles & on that account were vain schismaticks in respect of the Gentiles. They \Ebionites/ also absteined from \eating/ flesh & all \some/ things endued with life, & in the Eucharist used water alone instead of wine. Which Customes might arise from their poverty. But the cheif \chief/ difference is that the Nazarenes owned owned Christ to be the son of God born of the Virgin, & that he was crucified & rose again & the Ebionites said that Christ \was did not born but nor suffered but/ descended upon Iesus the son of Ioseph w^th who was the \only/ the son of Ioseph & suffered alone.

Now for enlightning the Iews

|They said that he was|

<86r>

Sabellius \(like Paul of Samosat)/ made the father son & holy Ghost but one person & compared them to the body soul & spirit \w^ch composed the person/ of a man & to the body light & heat of y^e Sun, & the father & Son he compared also to a man & his reason or speech making the Son to be the only inward reason & wisdom of the father before the creation of the world & \also/ the word spoken by him at the creation & \after the creation/ then received back into the father \after the creation/, & that when the son came into the world he was emitted from the father as a ray of light & after his passion returned back into God. Concerning this heresy Basil tells us that – – – Basil Epist. 64. p. 850. Whence this heresy of Sabellius was fundamentally the same w^th that of Simon Magus who made one & y^e same God \according to the subject appear/ at several times in the form of several persons

Some

For unders The next shock of of w^ch the church received from these heresies was by gaining \the prevailing w^th/ the Church of Rome's to allowing their baptism \of all hereticks/ & excommunicating other churches who would not allow it. And this was in the days of Stephen bishop of Rome A.C. 356 \done by Stephen B^p of Rome/ presently after the {sharp} persecution of Decius, T Stephen being bishop of Rome & allowing the baptism of Marcion Valentinus Apelles & all other hereticks, as Basnagius in his Annals has proved abundantly) & excommunicated Cyprian in his Cyprian having received a letter from Stephen about this matter) For Stephen allowed the baptism of all hereticks, as Basnagius has abundantly proved |by Basnagius,| & is \sufficiently/ manifest by Cyprians Epi Stephns Stephens epistle to Cyprian \& the Africans/ a paragraph of which is thus quot recited by Cyprian in his Epistle to Pompeius. Quia desiderasti, saith Cyprian, in notitiam tuam perferri, quæ mihi ad literas nostras Stephanus frater noster rescripserit, misi tibi rescripti ejus exemplum – – – – – – – coacervata congessit

The next shock w^ch the Church received from these heresies was by the Church of Romes allowing the baptism of all hereticks & excommunicating other Churches w^ch would not allow the same. For \hereticks received one another into communion by imposition of hands without baptism/ this was done by Stephen Bishop of Rome presently after the {sharp} persecution of Decius. A.C. 355 \tho/ Agrippinus Bishop of Carthage in the second century calling \calling/ a Council \being called/ of many bishops of Africa & Numidia, rejected the O{illeg} \they delivered caused/ that hereticks were to be baptized, Apud & this custome continued in use till Cyprian's days & was followed by Cyprian. Apud nos autem,saith Cyprian,^[34] non nova aut repentina res est, ut baptizandos censeamus eos qui ab hæreticis ad ecclesiam veniunt quando multi jam anni sunt & longa ætas ex quo sub Agrippino bonæ memoriæ vero convenientes in unum Episcopi plurimi hoc statuerunt, atqꝫ exinde in hodiernum tot millia hæreticorum in provincijs nostris ad Ecclesiam conversi, non aspernati sint neqꝫ cunctati imo et rationabiliter & libenter amplexi sint ut lavacri vitalis ac salutaris baptismi gratiam consequerentur. Ep Vpon occasion of the schism of the Novatians Cyprian called a Council of many bishops & sent \to Stephen/ their sentence for baptizing hereticks & schismaticks. It The \A former/ Bishop of Rome had formerly received Praxeas into communion by laying on of hands without baptism, & Stephen claimed this practise as delivered down in his \Church/ from Peter & defended it in a {illeg} letter w^ch he wrote to Cyprian, of w^ch Cyprian makes this mention in a Letter to Pompeius. ^[35]Quia desiderasti in notitiam tuam perferri, quæ mihi ad literas nostras Stephanus frater noster rescripserit, misi tibi rescripti ejus exemplum quas {illeg} <86v> magis ac magis ejus errorem denotabis, qui hæreticorum causam contra Christianos & contra ecclesiam Dei asserere conatur. Nam inter cætera vel superba vel ad rem non pertinentia, vel sibi ipsi contraria, quæ imperite atqꝫ improvide scripsit, etiam illud adjunxit, ut diceret: [Siquis ergo a quacunqꝫ hæresi venerit ad nos, nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est, ut manus illi imponatur in pœnitentiam: cum ipsi proprie alterutrum ad se venientes non baptizent sed communicent tantum.] A quacunqꝫ hæresi venientem baptizari in Ecclesia vetuit, id est omnium hæreticorum baptismata justa esse & legitima judicavit Et cum singulæ hæreses singula baptismata & diversa peccata habeant, hic cum omnium baptismo communicans universorum delicta in sinum suum coacervata congessit. And a little after in reference to the words of Stephen, [nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est] he adds Præclara sane et legitima traditio Stephano fratre nostro docente proponitur, quæ auctoritatem nobis idoneam præbeat. Nam in eodem loco Epistolæ suæ addidit et adjecit [cum ipsi hæretici proprie alterutrum ad se venientes non baptizent sed communicent tantum] Ad hoc enim malorum devoluta est ecclesia Dei et sponsa Christi ut hæreticorum exempla sectetur, ut ad celebranda sacramenta cælestia disciplinam lux de tenebris mutuetur et id faciant Christiani quod Antichristi faciunt. And a litte after Cum vero nulla omnino hæresis sed neqꝫ aliquod schisma habere sanctificationem salutaris baptismi sanctificatiationem {sic} foris possit, cur in tantum Stephani fratris nostri obstinatio dura prorupit ut etiam \de/ Marcionis baptismo, item Valentini et Apelletis & cæterorum blasphemantium in Deum patrem contendat filios Dei nasci.

Athanasius in many places of \(as you may frequently in see in many places of/ his works) explains him self thu frequently takes the λόγος for an attribute of the father, the λογος ἐνδιάθετος without w^ch the father would be ασ ἄλογος & ἄσοφος, & thence argues his eternity & making this attribute to be {illeg} a substance saith the {illeg} \λογος/ arose from the father not as an empty vanid voice but \w^th a substance/ as light from the Sun, a river from the fountain & a tree from the root & so was consubstantial to him: w^ch was the \language &/ doctrine of the Montanists as you may see in Tertullian above |was e hath been explained above.| you have heard above. {sic}

<87r>

I The {illeg} From these beginnings \And And from these metaphysical disputes opinions/ arose all {illeg} that vehement religious war wch dis The {illeg} disturbed the whole Roman Empire for above seventy almost all the fourth century, & a good part of y^e fift, the Council of Nice \at the importunity of Constantine the great/ repealing the decree of the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosat & making the \condemned/ language of Paul an article of faith \in {illeg}/, & many other \the other/ following Councils \of that Centur/ contending about it: all w^ch wrangling would have been prevented by holding fast the form of sound words \by in the faith/ w^ch was once delivered to y^e saints & only rejecting the novel language of Arius & other rash men.

Whilst the heathen Philosophers made derived the souls of men from the substance of God & accounted them consubstantial to him \the supreme God & accounted them consubstantial to him/ & worshipped them after death as |true| Gods \consubstantial to him consubstantial to the t him/: all they became dearer would be readily embraced by \we may reason that/ the heathens who in the fourth centry {sic} came over in great crouds to y^e profession of Christianity \would readily embrace the Nicene decree. For in \by/ {illeg} the words of/ they that decree they were obliged to beleive nothing more then that Christ was a mere man deified after death like their old Gods one of \one of/ the heathen Gods{illeg}: & the Gnosticks also who received their opinions from y^e heathen philosophers & took y^e λόγος to be one of their Æons would readily embrace the same decree. The Trinity of Montanists \Montanus & the Cataphrygians/ (whether κατὰ Proclus or κατὰ Æsthine) \And much more would the Cataphrygians & Sabellians. For the Trinity of Montanus/ was henceforward accounted orthodox & I do not hear of any man henceforward excommunicated for Sabellianism. [And instead of allowing calling Christ the son of God with respect to his nativity of the virgin & his resurrection from the dead, we are taught to \(as we are taught in scripture)/, that is, w^th respect to y^e his humane nature; we are \now/ taught an eternal generation of a divine nature that is, a generation w^ch never was; a generation of a new being w^ch was \nature/ necessarily existing & so incapable of being generated \therefore/ not generated.

[We are taught in scripture that Christ is the son of God with respect to his gene nativity of the Virgin & his resurrection from the dead that is w^th respect to his humane nature \coming in the flesh & his humane nature/ & that he {illeg} Antichrist {sic} who denieth the father & y^e son \& that Iesus Christ was come in the flesh/, that is, who denyeth that God & Christ are called the ffather & Son w^th respect to this generation, & yet the Bishops of y^e 4\th/ century were not afraid to c] And yet the fathers of y^e fourth centure {sic} were not afraid to lay aside this relation of y^e father & son & instead of his thereof to substitute a generation w^ch has no relation to his coming in the flesh, an eternal generation or {illeg} \generation/ w^ch never was; a generation of a diviner \& nobler/ nature then the humane, |nor consists in action or if it be perpetual will always be to come, a generation of a divine nature, {illeg}| a nature necessarily existing & so not generated, a nature w^ch came not in the flesh so as to see w^th the eyes of y^e body & hear w^th the ears of the body & feel the pains of death upon the cross but only dwelt in Iesus. The Word w^ch according to Simon Magus Basilides Saturninus Valentinus Marcion Tatian &c was not really incarnate nor suffered really on the cross but only appeared to be so \incarnate & to suffer/, & w^ch \according to/ Cerinthus Carpocrates Marcus Colarbasus & Paul of Samosat san descended upon y^e man Iesus & dwelt in him, [the fath Bishops of the fou\r/th \& fift/ century lodged in him by a new term of art w^ch called] more lastingly by as a holy spirit in a good man without feeling the pains of death upon the cross, the Bishops of y^e fourth & fift century lodged in him more artificially by a new term of art, the hypostatical union, a phrase w^ch y^e old hereticks would never have opposed had it been invented in their days, because it leaves the λόγος as much a distinct \nature &/ substance with his own will & understanding, & as free from feeling the actual pains of death upon the cross, as they beleived him to be.]

Neither would the ancient hereticks who taught that y^e λογος came not in the flesh but only dwelt in Iesu the man Iesus as a holy spirit in a good man, have been much offended at y^e hypostatic union of the two natures each \remaining distinct/ with its own substance will & understanding, & the λόγος not being affected subject to the infirmities of the flesh nor feeling the pains of death upon the cross.

<87v>

or y^e son for the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος of y^e father, & his generation for an action \act/ whereby God {illeg} \emitted/ him outwardly \not from all eternity but/ in the beginning of y^e creation in order to his work as the principle by w^ch he \would/ created the world, & accounted y^e Holy Ghost ἀπό᾽ρρ῾οιαν an \efflux/ emission {illeg} \or/ emation {sic} {illeg} \of/ the substance of God as light is of{illeg} y^e sun.

And of y^e same opinion was T his contemporary Theophilus bishop of Antioch ffor \Theophilus/ in his second book to Autolicus he writes thus, Εχων ὀυν ὁ θεος

Of the

For Tatian made the Son to be Word to subsist in God from all eternity & by th \at length/ to emerge out of him by his will, \& being/ not an empty emission by \became/ /but\ the first begotten work of his spirit, born of him by division not by avulsion but by division only without diminution of the father. ffor as at one lamp many others \lamps/ may be kindled without diminishing the light of y^e first lamp, so the Word coming out from y^e power of the father did not make his father ἄλογον void of reason & understanding. |And| This was the full first emission or Æon of {illeg} of Tatian & h

Tatian & his followers the Encratites seem to have held much y^esame opinion about the Son, y^e [& by their appearance of sanctity to have contributed much to y^e spreading of this opinion.] ffor he made the Word

So also Clemens Alexandrinus a great admirer of Plato, made the Word to be the omnipotent power & wisdom \& Idea/ of y^e father & \at length/ to come out of him for {illeg} sake of \effecting/ the creation & afterwards to have begot himself when the was {illeg} \Word became flesh/ so as to be visible

By these instances it is manifest that Pla\to/nism began to spread much in the Churches before y^e end of y^e second century. And therefore we need wonder {sic} if it prevailed in y^e fourth. |By the condemnation of Paul of Samosat in the middle of the third it met with some check especially in the east: but yet spread silently.| Athanasius declares frequently in his works that the son of Godwas the λογος ἐνδιάθετος w^thout w^ch the father of God \of the father/ w^thout w^ch the \father/ would be ἄσοφος & ἄλογος & saith that he arose from y^e father as light from y^e sun a river from y^e fountain & a tree from the root. And Alexander of Alexandria in his general Epistle directed \& sent to/ to {sic} y^e all the bishops of the Church catholick in the beginning of their controversy w^th Arius has these words \& subscribed by all \those of/ his party,/ writes thus. Quid si filius ratio Patris est ac sapientia, quomodo fuit tempus cum non esset? Perinde est enim est ac si dicerent Deum aliquando rationis & sapientiæ expertem fuisse ἄλογον καὶ ἄσοφον ποτὲ τὸν Θεόν, Deum aliquando rationis & sapientiæ expertem fuisse. \This being subscribed by all the party may be taken for their common opinion./ And Constantine the great \& his party were of y^e same opinion. For/ in an Epistle w^ch he {illeg} \composed against Arius &/ sent to the Church of Alexandria against Arius before the meeting of y^e Council of Nice & \w^ch/ (according to Epiphanius & Socrates) was \then/ published in all the cities of the \Roman/ Empire writes \speaks/ thus \to Arius/. Verum Dicis Deum: habes ejusdem me sententiæ. Sic igitur sentias. Ejus essentiæ Verbum & pricnipij et finis expers, Verbum esse dicis: Eo contentus sum; ita crede. Siquid præterea adjungis, id tollo. Siquid ad impiam separationem fraudulenter consuis id nec videre nec intelligere me confiteor. Si hospitium corporis assumis ad divinorum operum dispensationem, non improbo. \These things shew that the opinion of the son being the λογος and of the father was then very much spread/ And the bishops of Egypt & the west convened soon after, say in at Serdica say in their general Epistle Confitemur filium esse virtutem patris. Confitemur illum esse Verbum Dei Patris præter quod nullum est aliud: et Verbum verum Deum et sapientiam et virtutem esse Verum autem filium esse tradimus non sicut alij Filij appellantur. Nam hi quidem aut regenerationis causa Dij dicuntur, aut eo quod digni habiti fuerint Filij noncupantur: non autem ob unam ὑπώστασιν substantiam quæ est Patris et Filij. This was in those days the opiniō of the Bishops of the West. For ὑπωστασις was in|then| those days taken for in the same sense w^th ουσια, the language of one υσια & the ὑπωστασεις being not yet established. And these things shew that y^e opinion of the sons being the λογος ἐνδιαθετος of the father was in those days grown \spread/ very much in the whole empire.

The words of Tertullian run thus, ^[36]Nam idem [Praxeam] {tunc} Episcopum Romanum, agnoscentem jam prophetias Montani Priscæ Maximillæ et ex ea agnitione pacem Ecclesijs Asiæ et Phrygiæ inferentem, falsa de ipsis Prophetijs et Ecclesijs adseverando, & præcessorum ejus a\u/ctoritates defendendo, coegit et literas pacis revocare jam emissas, et a proposito recipiendorum charismatum concessare ita duo negotia diaboli Praxeas Romæ procuravit; prophetiam expulit, & hæresin intulit; Paracletum fugavit et Patrem crucifixit.

<88r>

Simon Menander

|For| The \{illeg}/ Gnosticks like the Cabbalists & Heathens & Cabbalists derived many \emissions or/ Æons \male & female/ successively from the first God by generation & {illeg} emission & Archangels & Angels from these Æons & the world \not from the first God but/ either from the Angels or from one or more of the Æons. And Simon the founder of Gnosticism And the first God who & his wife whom they called the unknown father the unbegotten God, Propator, Proarch \Bythos/ & Abraxas, they placed in the eight or highest heaven together with his wife whom they called Ennœa, \{illeg}/ Prunicus \Barbelo {illeg} Ataris &/ Sige, & in y^e seven inferior Orbs they placed seven intelligences or chief Æons with Angels under them \& the world under them & called the first of those Æons Αρχή, Nous, {illeg} Pater, \{Hang, Cyn}/ {Ialdabaoth} & the second Λόγος, & Iao & by other names/ And hence came their Ogdoas of Æons. Æ And some added a Decas of Æons answering to the number of y^e nations \w^ch God promised to give to Abraham for a possession/ & a Dodecas of Æons answering to the twelve signes. All w^ch made up 30 Æons answering \to/ the da number of days in the month & of years in the age of Christ before he was baptized & began to act. And some increased the number of Æons to that of days in the year. This was the Philosophy of Simon, \Nicolaus,/ Menander, the Nicolaitans, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocras, Valentinus, Epiphanes, Secundus, Ptolomæus, Marcus, Colarbasus, Heracleon, Tation & the Canaites Ophites Sethians Borbelites, Militaries Phibeonites, Militaries &c, tho not without variety of opinions. Simon began with the Ogdoas of Æons & Angels & the creation of the world by the Angels, & others added to his inventions. These hereticks pretending to be Simon said Simon making a Pythagoric {sic} |Simon said that the first God appeared on {illeg} mount Sina \& in Iuda {Samaria}/ as the father, In Iudea as the son & in other nations as the holy Ghost & making Pythagoric| transmigration of souls said that he \himself (that is his soul that is his soul)/ was the first God & his wife Hele concubine Helena was Minerva \(meaning their souls)/ & accordingly his followers erected statues to him & his concubine in the form of Iupiter & Minerva & worshipped them & \And/ By this |worship, & \the/ male & female Gods & Pythagoric transmigrations worship, & Pythagoric transmigrations {sic}| & his placing Æons in the Orbs of the Planets \& deriving all things from the substance \& power/ of the first God/ you are you may know that he borrowed part \the main/ of his philosophy from the \Poetry Philosophy Poetry & Astrology of the/ heathens.

These hereticks pretending to learning & science [& introducing the Philo |philosophical opinions of the heathens & Cabbalists into the| Philosophers Astrologers & Cabbalists into the Iewis Christian religion] were thence called Gnosticks. And their Æons had – – – – – – affinity with the Iewish Cabbala.

For the Nicolaitans \& Cerinthus/ called the first emission of Proarc

For the first emission of Proarche & Borbelo was by the Nicolaitas {sic} & Cerinthus & Basilides called Αρχὴ & the second Λόγοσ & the third (by Basilides) Enthymasis: & these were the first four. \sephiroths of the Cabbalists./ Their Æn Soph Infinite was the first God called by some of the Cabbalists Gnosticks Bythos & Megethos, Abyss & Magnitude, meaning without bounds. Their \first sephiroth called Kether/ Kether the Crown or beg Beginning, was the Ἀρχὴ of the Gnosticks. Th The Cabbalists said that the first sephiroth Kether was the principle w^ch conteined all the following Sephiroths eminently in it self, & the Gnosticks said the same thing of {illeg} \Ἀρχὴ/ the first Æon. |And| The seco two next sephiroths Cochmah & Binah Wisdom & Prudence. are the same w^th y^e two next Æons λόγος & Φρόνησις Reason & Prudence \Some of the Gnosticks called the supreme father the first man & Ennoia the second man: w^ch names answer to the Arech Anpin & Scir Anpin [& Adam Kalmon] of the Cabbalists./ The hereticks of the circumcision & those w^ch had opportunity of conversing with the Iewish Cabbalists took \therefore seem to have taken/ some things from their Cabbala & in this oppinion I am confirmed by the Apostle who in opposition to these heresies admonishes the Christians not to give heed – – – pretending to science.

The Gnosticks of the \un/circumcision rose later – – – – – – derived the same heresy \in the Apocalyps/. |The| Siimon/ians\ said that Ennoea [& the Nicolaitan Gnosticks] \said/ that Ennoea was very handsom & descending into the lower Orbs to emit the Æons, {wa} enticed them by her beauty & was detained by them below & shut up in the bodies of weomen & passed from woman to woman by a Pythagoric metempsychosis [& was in Minerva & the Trojan Hellena] & that y^e Angels passed into the bodies of men that they might enjoy her [& in the bodies of the Greeks & Trojans made war for her]. And \that/ the souls of men \came from above &/ were detained below till by the tyranny of the Angels & that he but might escape & \be permitted to/ return up again to their first stations by [their science & practises. And of their sect. And this] learning their science & living \trying all things/ according to the practise of their sect. And this leaving escaping & returning up again they called the salvation of men. And by this sort of philosophy & the examples of their Gods they encouraged one another in all manner of uncleanness. |And in like manner the Nicolaitan|s| Gnosticks said that Borbelo was very handsom & enticed the other Gods to her embraces & upon this doctrine founded their lascivious practices. Nicholas After the example of these Gods| After the example of the unknown father & Ennœa Nicholas \the master of the Nicolaitans as Irenæus calls him/ abandoned his wife to the lust of other men, [& is by Irenæus called the master of the Nicolaitans] |And| Those of this sect invited one another to their tables & after eating, the man said to his wife Be charitable to the brother. And when the brother had lain w^th her they offered |to their \fals/ Gods| a filthy sacrifice of the profluvia of men & weomen saying (in derision of the Christian religion) This is my body & this is my blood. This \abominable/ sacrifice was first instituted <88v> Simon {sic}, {illeg} the Nicolaitans being a sect of the Simonians the first founder of {this} heresy. And by all this you may understand that under the names of y^e Nicolaitans & Antichristians the impure Gno & idolatrous Gnosticks are condemned by Iohn in his Gospel & Apocalyps & epistles.

Irenæus tells us that Cerinthus & long before him the Nicolaitans, a branch of the Gnosticks said – – – – . . . . . . . . – philosophy of the Nicolaitans. Simon feigned that the first God came down to rescue Ennoia whom he called y^e lost sheep & to save those that beleived on him from the tyranny of the Angels, but had not a real body nor suffered on the cross. Others said that Ialdabaoth or Νους was the Christ the saviour who descended upon Iesus, others said that this Saviour was another of the Æons. And some said that Iesus was y^e son of Ioseph & Mary others that he passed through Mary as water through a pipe.

As the Sephiroths of the Cabbalists were nothing else then the powers & affections of God the father considered as {illeg} divine persons (namely his Crown or first & supreme emanation, his Wisdom, his Prudence, his Magnificence, his Power, his Beauty his Eternity, his Glory, his being the Support & Foundation of all things & his Reign) so the Æons of the Gnosticks were of the same kind. Simon said that Ennoia was the first conception of his mind & made her the mother of all the rest. And Basilides said that God emitted Νους & Νους emitted Λόγος & Λόγος emitted Φρόνησις & Φρόνησις                        & all these are nothing else then Gods at the powers & attributes of God. And Valentinus said that Α Αληθεια was the wife of Νους /& {ennoia}\ Ζ Ζωη the wife of Λογος. And all these are nothing else then the attributes the Powers & Attributes of God And the inherent word of God. |the attributes of God or the modes & powers of his being called by the Greeks λ his λογος ἐνδιάθετος.| Ptolomæus a disciple of Valentinus assigned to the unknown father two wives Ennœa & Thelesis, Vnderstanding & Will & called them the affections of the unknown father, & said that the understanding was the older wife because the understanding precedes the will. Ennœa t Ennœa Nus & Thelesis, Thinking, Mind & Truth are h And the Valentinians in one of the books said: I cited by Epiphanius said: In the beginning he who of himself is the father {illeg} – – – – – – – – – & therefore Sige is not ἐνδιάθετος Iren. l. 2. c. 14, 15, 16, 47, 48, 49.

The doctrine therefore that the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος or Word of God was the λογος ἐνδιάθετος of the father & \that the λογος ἐνδιάθετος/ was emitted or exerted & thereby generated into a son before the world began came originally from the Gnosticks Basilides Valentinus& Ptolomæus & their followers Marcus Secundus Marcus |&| Heracleon & perhaps from Saturninus the fellow disciple of Basilides. ffor Irenæus tells us that Valentinus had his opi blames Saturninus Basilides Valentinus & Marcion for & the Gnosticks in general for pretending to know the generation of y^e Son & Word & explaining it & comparing it to a Word spoken by a man. ffrom this opinion the name of Sige was given to Ennœa & therefore it was as old as that name. They feigned that God was silent before he spake & thence gave the name of silence to his intellectual power of thinking &

Before the Apostles beg gave the name writing of the Apocalyps, in w^ch the name of λόγος was given to Christ the Gnosticks said that Christ descended upon Iesus

The Gnosticks at first said that Christ descended upon Iesus, but after the writing of the Apocalyps & Gospel & \first/ Epistle of Iohn & the Epistle to the Hebrews in w^ch X^t is called the λόγος, some of the Gnosticks began to say that the Λόγος [descended upon Iesus] \was/ assumed Iesus Christ, or assumed him

<89r>

Cyprian read|ing| Tertullians works as t the works of Tertullian as his master & seems to have imbibed his {illeg} \notions/ about the Deity. \For he calls the f. s. & h. g. Trinitas adunata & {illeg}/ In the second book of testimonies against y^e Iews (ch. 1) for proving Christ to be the first begotten & the wisdom of God by w^ch all things were made, he alledges y^e words of Solomon (Prov. 8.) [v. 22, 23, 24, 25, & sequ.] [w^ch are spoken of that wisdom w^ch is Gods attribute or λογος ἐνδιάθετος of God the father.] The lord created me \[are possessed/ in the beginning of his Dominus condidit me initium viarum suarum ad opera sua, in opera sua ante sæculum fundavit me: in principio atequam {sic} terram faceret, et antequam abyssos constitueret, priusquam procederent fontes aquarum antequam montes collocarentur, ante omnes colles genuit me Dominus. & those in Ecclesiasticus: Ego ex ore altissimi prodivi ante omnem creaturam. both w^ch places are spoken of Wisdo that wisdom w^ch is seated in God as his attribute or λογος ενδιαθετος. Ruffin tells us that many in the parts about Constantinople took him to be of the same faith in these matters, w^th Tertullian.

The author of the book de Trinitate ascribed to Novatian, tells us \his opinion in these words./ \Antequam nihil præter Patrem. pag. 349./ Ex quo [patre] quando ipse voluit, sermo filius natus est, qui non in sono percussi aeris aut tono coactæ de visceribus {illeg} vocis accipitur, sed in substantia prolatæ a Deo virtutis agnoscitur. And a little after. Hic ergo quando pater voluit processit ex patre: et qui in Patre fuit processit ex Patre: et qui in Patre fuit, quia ex Patre fuit cum Patre postmodum fuit, quia ex Patre processit: substantia scil. illa divina cujus nomen est Verbum, per quod facta sunt omnia et sine quo factum est nihil.

② Lactantius seems to have been of opinion that the Son was an emitted part of the fathers substance ‡ < insertion from f 89v > ‡ And afterwards. Est ergo Deus pater omnium institutor et creator, solus originem nesciens, invisibilis, immensus, immortalis, æternus, unus Deus, cujus neqꝫ magnitudini, neqꝫ majestati, neqꝫ virtuti quicquam non dixerim præferri, sed nec comparari potest. Ex quo, quando ipse voluit, sermo filius natus est, qui non in sono percussi aeris, aut tono coactæ de visceribus vocis accipitur sed in substantia prolatæ a Deo virtutis agnoscitur. . . . . . . Hic ergo cum |sit| genitus sit a Patre, semper est in Patre. Semper autem sic dico, ut non innatum [vel \ab æterno/ sine initio existentem,] sed natum probem. Sed qui ante omne tempus est, semper in patre fuisse dicendus est. Nec enim tempus illi assignari potest qui ante tempus est. Semper enim in patre ne pater non semper sit pater: Quia et Pater etiam illum præcedit, quòd necesse est prior sit quæ pater [generandi potentiam in se habens antequam filium generavet.] |Quoniam antecedat necesse est eum qui habet originem ille qui originem nescit.| His meaning seems to be y^t the father was before the son the son not in respect of time w^ch was not yet created, but in respect of the power of generating the w^ch was in the father from all eternity before he generated the son & by the son created time, And that y^e son was semper in Patre & that the son was in the father even before he was g was generated & by generation came out of him. ffor he adds Hic ergo quando Pater voluit processit ex patre: Et qui in Patre fuit processit ex patre: et qui in Patre fuit quia ex Patre fuit processit ex Patre: et qui in Patre fuit quia ex Patre fuit, cum Patre postmodum fuit, quia ex Patre processit: substantia scilicet illa divina cujus nomen est Verbum per quod facta sunt omnia et sine quo factum est nihil. The saume author explaining the sons g makes y^e father omnipresent & y^e son comprehended in place: Q < text from f 89r resumes > emitted without division before y^e {illeg} Cum dicimus \saith he/ Deum Patrem et Deum filium quæ asseveratio non diversum dicimus, nec utrumqꝫ separamus secernimus; quia nec pater sine filio esse potest nec filius sine \a/ Patre secerni, siquidem nec Pater sine Filio esse potest nec Filius a Patre secerni nuncupari nec filius potest sine patre generari. Cum igitur \&/ Pater filium faciat et filius patrem; una utriqꝫ mens, unus spiritus una substantia est: sed ille quasi exuberens fons hic tanquam defluens ex eo riv{um} ille tanquam Sol ille hic quasi radius a sole porrectus; qui quoniam summo Patri et fidelis et charus est, non separatur, sicut nec rivus a fonte, nec radius a sole quia et aqua fontis in rivo est & solis lumen in radio. And a little after: Quare Quapropter cum mens & voluntas alterius in altero sit vel potius una in utroqꝫ: merito unus Deus uterqꝫ appellatur: quia quicquid est in filio ad Patre ad Filium transfl{illeg}uit, et quicquid in Filio a Patre descendit. \And in another place/ Yet Lactantius seems to place the deity of the son rather in the power & dominion given him by the father then in the metaphysical nature of his substance.

① Lactantius seems to have been of opinion that the Son was a part of the father emitted without separation before y^e world began \but not separated/. ^[37]Deus igitur, saith he, antequam præclarum hoc opus mundi adoriretur, sanctum incorruptibilem spiritum genuit, quem filium nuncuparet. Et quamvis alios postea innumerabiles per ipsum creavisset quos angelos dicimus hunc tamen solum primogenitum divini nominis appeallatione dignatus est, patria scilicet virtute ac majestate pollentem. Then he applies to him the words of Solomen {sic}, Deus condidit me \in/ initio viarum suarum in opera sua &c^[38] & describes how he came out of the mouth of God as word w^th a voice & sound, \whilst Angels were spirits or breath without a soun/ God speaking him in the first place that by him he might speak to us, \whilst Angels were spirits breathed out without a sound/ & that he was not an empty vanid voice but <89v> but a living permanent substance, And afterwards & by unity of \mind with/ substance one God with the father: ^[39]Cum dicimus, saith he, Deum Patrem – – – – – – – – – – – – a Patre descendit. And in another place. Docuit [Christus] quod unus solus

The author of y^e book de Trinitate ascribed to Novatian, makes the son \a God/ generated by th not by necessity of existenc {sic} but by the power of the fathers will, not from all eternity but in the beginning so that before the father was before him Est enim p he generated the son, & that the son was generated before y^e father created all things by him. Est enim, saith he, periculum grande . . . . . . generare non potuit. p. 349. ‡

< insertion from f 90r >

‡Hitherto therefore, that is, till the beginning of the fourth century the opinion lasted that y^e father was the supreme \Lord/ God, the {one} God whom we are always to understand by one God, the God Lord God \God of Gods the God of God his son the God/ to whom of our Lord Iesus Christ, the Lord God & of God the Son, the Lord God almighty to whom all whose dominion all things are subject not excepting the son himself \is over all other persons without exception/ & whose worship is the \foundation &/ end of the Christian religion. Platonism had hitherto been spreading as a philosopical {sic} opinion, but had not yet made any \material/ alteration in the worship of the Christian Churches. < text from f 89v resumes > [And that text of scripture Eructavit cor meum Verbum bonum he applies to the Sons generation. p. 354. Quod si et primogenitus omnis creaturæ ab Apostolo dictus sit Christus, quomodo omnis creaturæ primogenitus esse potuit, nisi quoniam secundum divinitatem ante omnem creaturam ex patre Deo sermo processit. p. 361. Deus ad formam Dei patris ex ipso genitus atqꝫ prolatus p 364. {illeg} semper \[ab initio]/ habet rerum omnium potestatem sed qua traditam, \sed/ qua concessam, sed qua a patre proprio sibi indultam. p. 375. Quem volunt hîc Deum descendisse ad turrem illam & homines tunc illos visitare quærentem? Deum patrem? Ergo jam loco clauditur p. 387.] Also the texts of scripture Eructavit cor meum verbum bonum & primogenitus omnis he applies to his creaturæ he expounds of the Sons coming out from the father as a word or voice by generation in y^e beginning. Quomodo omnis creaturæ primogenitus esse pouit {sic} (saith he) nisi quoniam secundum divinitatem ante omnem creaturam ex patre Deo sermo processit. p. 361. And that his dominion over all things was not by necessity of nature but by the voluntary concession of his father. Semper [s. ab initio] mundi] habet rerum omnium potestatem sed qua traditam, sed qua concessam sed qua a patre proprio sibi concessam. p. 375. And that that y^e father was differed from the son in that he was not comprehended in any place Quem volunt hic Deum descendisse ad turrem illam et homines tunc illos visitare quærentem? Deum patrem? Ergo jam loco clauditur. p. 387.

Platonism grew spread in \all/ the Churches of both Greeks & Latines, & yet \yet/ notwithstanding the growth of this philosophy, the opinion still lasted in the Churches, that{illeg} father was

<90r>

Arnobius speaks of God the Father as the supreme King, & sole object of o^r worship, & of Christ as Deus Sospitator sent to us from the supreme King to be our Master & to teach us the worship of his father. Nihil sumus aliud Christiani, nisi, magistro Christo, summi Regis ac Principis veneratores: nihil, si consideres, aliud in ista religione versari. Hæ totius summa est actionis: hic propositus terminus divinorum officiorum, hic finis, huic omnes ex more prosterimur, hunc collatis precibus adoramus. And a little after. O maxime, O summe rerum invisibilium procreator. O ipse invise et nullis unquam comprehense naturis, dignus, dignus es vere (si mode te dignum mortali dicendum est ore) cui spirans omnis intelligensqꝫ natura et habere et agere nunquam desinat gratias: cui tota conveniat vita gen nixo procumbere et continuatis precibus supplicare. Prima enim tu causa est es, locus rerum ac spacium fundamentum cunctorum quæcunqꝫ sunt, infinitus, ingenitus, immortalis perpetuus, solus quem nulla deliniat forma corporalis, nulla determinat circumscriptio qualitatis, expers quantitatis, sine situ, sine motu et habitu &c. \By these characters he distingishes the Father from all other beings: but yet/ He speaks also magnificently of Christ. Deus ille sublimis fuit, Deus radice ab intima, Deus ab incognitis regnis & ab omnium principe, Deus sospitator est missus. But he calls the father the supreme God & seems to restore think the worship sufficient |He calls Christ a true God but makes him a derivative & subordinate God as in the Platonic philosophy & so first calling the father the first God, he represents the worship of this God sufficient| Possumus interim dicere ad cultum divinitatis obeundum satis est nobis Deus primus: Deus (inquam) primus pater rerum ac dominus, constitutor moderatorqꝫ cunctorum. In hoc omne quod colendum est colimus: quod adorari convenit, adoramus: quod obsequium venerationis exposcit, venerationibus promeremur. Cum enim divinitatis ipsius teneamus caput, a quo ipsa divinitas divinorum omnium quæcunqꝫ sunt ducitur: supervacaneum ducimus putamus personas ire per singulas. He distinguishes Christ from the man w^ch he \who suffered on the cross & saith that he put on that man &/ carried him about in a small part of himself. \This opinion savours of Platonism &/ And I meet w^th nothing in his book by w^ch it may be concluded that he differed \in these notions/ from his disciple Lactantius in his opinion about the nativity of the son of God. \in opinion about the nativity of the son/ But Now Lactantius tho he makes Christ a God an derivative God subordina |This opinion savours of Platonism, & if we may judge of him by his calling God pater rerum & by the| opinion of his disciple Lactantius, he held the nativity of y^e son of God before the creation of the world began.

Thus Here Lactantius makes God the Son subordinate in power & dominion to his father as the supreme God, the God whom we are to understand whenever we speak of one God & whom alone we are to worship as one God. And of the same opinion was Arnobius the master of Lactantius. Nihil sumus aliud Christiani, saith he, nisi, magistro Christo, summi . . . . . . per singulas.

The Chur We have heard that {illeg} Clemens the master of the divinity school at Alexandria was tainted with Platonism, & I beleive it will easily be granted that \{illeg}/ his disciple & successor in that school was tainted with the same principles not altogether free from error.

<90v>

Arius & those

The hereticks \Gnosticks/ maintaining that the Angels & souls of men Angels & other creatures were either parts or powers of the substance of God, \many of/ the Christians in opposition thereunto maintained th affirmed that they were created out of nothing. [And hence at length arose a question between in the Church of Alexandria whether the Son] & because its said that all things were made by Iesus Christ therefore it became a \growing/ opinion that all God created all things out of nothing by Iesus Christ & by consequence that Iesus Christ was omnipotent, & time & place being recconed among the creatures it followed \also/ that Christ was in all time & in all place & that he was begotten before all ages & before all time & was always with the father, that is, always from y^e beginning of time. These were the opinions of \many of/ them who held that Christ the word was the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος, & the inherent reason & wisdom of y^e father, & that creation was signified the producing of things out of nothing \& generation the emission of so the λογος out of the father/. And these opinions at length occasioned a \the great famous/ dispute in the Church of Alexandria, A{illeg} Arius affirming that the s \between Alexander the bishop & Arius one of the Presbyters/ both parties allowing that the father had a λόγος ἐνδιάθετος from all eternity, & Alexander affirmin & those with him of his party affirming \as you have heard/ that this λόγος was the son of God, but \and/ Arius & those of his party de affirming that the son was not this λόγος but another λόγος \a substance/ begotten by the father out of nothing before the creation of the world. & that there was \a time when the son was not or a/ duration of the being of God from all eternity before the son was \generated by him. Now/ And [Arius & those with him] in their \an/ epistle w^ch they sent to Alexander before the meeting of y^e C. of Nice in the beginning of the controversy \they/ wrote \to him in / thus. The son . . . . . . . . proper to bodies. ^[40]But Alexander avoided these difficulties by recconing time among the creatures & taking denying that the son came out of the father in {illeg} {illeg} or out of y^e womb in any part of time or was in him in any part of time before he came out of him, or had any other antemundane generation then what was from all eternity before all time & even \by consequence/ from all eternity, there being no prius & posterius in \time or/ duration before the creation of time \was created/ by the son. He affirmed therefore, as I find by his epistles, y^t the father was always a father & that Son the son being the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος the only inherent reason & wisdom of y^e father, was a natural son always coexisting with the father without a by a generation without beginning & coequal to him in all things except paternity & uncapable of mutation. And they that opposed Alexander replied that according to this opinion the son was ἀγένητος unbegotten, meaning that the necessary & eternal generation of the son existence of the λογος ἐνδιάθετος was no generation & by consequence amounted to a denial of the father & the son. |that the calling him the son of God with respect to such an existence made him ἀγένητον the affirming it made him ἀγένητος & that the placing the generation of the son in such an existence made the son ἀγένητον &| And this is the first /material\ instance that I meet with of calling the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος of the father the natural son of the father by an eternal generation \The eternity of this λογος \before he came out of the father by an act of generation/ was not a new opinion, but the calling this λογος the son of God by an eteral \act of/ generation was a new one ‡/ < insertion from lower down f 90v > ‡ or at least had but few followers before Alexander expoused it.

< text from higher up f 90v resumes >

And as it is \seems to me to be/ the first instance \of this opinion \so far as I can observe/ was now broached set on foot/ so it was some time beforeit began to be generally received. For while the Council of Nice . . . . . . . . . . . .

that y^e father it is \the father/ never was without y^e son nor can be, & that none of them deny that y^e son was begotten, & that the Word he could not have alway been if he had had a beginning. And that he is called the only begotten because the word because he always was & is in the Father & that the Father is greater then y^e son

that y^e son had no beginning & defend themselves from the objection of making him unbegotten & affirm th     / And these were the Pastors & sheppherds of Israel \frequently/ reproved by the prophets for neglecting their flocks Ier 2.8 & 3.15 & 10.21 & 23.1, 2 & 50.6 & Ezek 34.

w^ch makes it probable that the bishop was not recconned among the ten       They called him Preses, the president of the council \or board/ of Presbyters.

We have recconed eleven officers which makes it probable that

The Deacons are \were/ the same as among the Iews. The Lectors were those whom the B^p called forth to read the scriptures

The Dean seems to be the chief Ruler of the synagogue. For y^e word Decanus signifies a ruler over ten. But whereas the \chief/ Rulers of the synagogue was above the Chazan in the Iewish synagogues: the teachers & Pastors & teachers are set before governments in the Christian Churches 1 Cor 12.28. & Eph. 4.11.

Chap 2
Of the Christian religion & its corruption \the difference between/ \w^ch was once delivered to the Saints/ the Churches of the circumcision & uncircumcision.

The God of the Iews & Gentiles was one & the same God the creator of heaven & earth, & the Christian religion was one & y^e same with the Iewish till the calling of the Gentiles, with this only addition that Iesus – – – – – – – – – – – – years of the vulargar {sic} Æra 312, 314, & 318.

When God rejected the Iews

The law of the Iews & Christians (except the cermonial part) was one & the same law. For the first & great commandm^t was to love the God w^th all our Thou shalt love the Lord thy God w^th all thy heart & with all thy soul & with all thy mind. This is the first & great commandment. And the second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Pro prophets. Matt. 22.37. And on these two hangs \also depends/ all the {illeg} Gospel. These are the laws of nature, the essential part of religion w^ch ever was & ever will be binding to all nations, being of an im̄utable eternal nature because grounded upon immutable reason. And hence it came to pass that charity or the love of o^r neighbour is by the Apostle commended as the chief of graces & absolutely necessary to salvation w^thout w^ch all other graces profit nothing, no not though a man out of faith or hope should give his body to be burned. And the charity of the first Christians is very conspicuous by their keeping in communion & friendship with one another all over the Roman Empire {illeg} & the nations round about for three hundred years together, excepting some ruffles made by the bish{ops} of Rome Victor & Stephen. How far the first Christians were from falling out with one another upon every difference of opinion, as is now the practise, is manifest by the communion of the Churches of the circumcision & uncircumcision, one of w^ch observed the law & the other did not was forbidden to observe it. For understanding this I would it is to be noted that the converted Iews or Churches of the circumcision were by the |un|converted Iews called the sect of the Nazarenes (Act. 25) & were all zealous of the law (Act. 21.20 Gal. 2.12{illeg}, 13.) & when the dispersion of the Churches & yet were in communion with the Apostles & composed the body of the Church of Iames Ierusalem w^ch in those days was the head of all the Churches. And when the dispersion of these Christians was at hand by the wars of the Romans was at hand, Matthew wrote his Gospel for their use in hebrew for their use, & therefore the Nazarenes are not to be recconned among the hereticks. They were all circumcised & by circ. – – – – – – – – – – – – unless they departed from the covenant of circumcision.

Now the primitive Church in relation to the Churches of the circumcision & uncircumcision remained in this state till the days of Iustin Martyr & Hegesippus . . . . . . . . . . . itidem non salvari putem. Thus far Iustin A beleiving Iew of Syria And Hegesippus a beleiving Iew of Syria who wrote in the days of the same Eleutherus &had travelled from Syria by <91v> Corinth to Rome & had conversed with many bishops of the circumci\uncircumci/sion as well as with the Christians of the circumsision testifies that he heard one & y^e same doctrine from them all, things remaining but one & the same sente the same in the several successions of Bishops & in the several cities as they had been preached according to the law the Prophets & our Lord. Which testimony Hegesippus would never have given of the Churches of the uncircumcision, had \those Churches/ then broken communion with the churches of the circumcision & looked upon \his own nation/ the Nazarenes as hereticks & looked upon them as hereticks.

But the Christians Gentiles by degrees loosing their first love & growing daily less & less charitable towards one another & more apt to fall out about trifles Pope Victor the successor of Eleutherus excommunicated the Churches of Asia \or at least threatened to excommunicate them)/ for keeping Easter on y^e 14^th day of the \Lunar/month, the day on w^ch the Iews observed it \converted Iews & the/ Christians of Syria \Iews & Nazarenes/ observed it: & there |as this act shews that the Church of Rome b began now to look upon the Churches of the circumcision w^th an evil eye| after this I do not meet w^th any \further/ communion between the Nazarenes & the Latine Churches of Churches in communion w^th the Latines. But as the Apostles had & Nazarenes had worhipped in the Temple while it stood & preached the gospel in the Synagogues of the Iews, so the Nazarenes w^ch \worsh/ frequented the Syna when they were not numerous enough to worship in have synagogues of the|ir| Iewes own, worshipped in the synagogues of Iews long after the days of Victor. For Ierome \two hundred years after/ in an epistle to Austin bishop of Hippo tells us Vsqꝫ hodie per totas Orientis synagogas – – – – – in quem et nos credimus.

And so is the latter part of the Creed in his book against Praxeas, \w^ch was/ also set down & above. And if two articles omitted in

|{flourishes}| But \it/ wants two \of the/ articles w^ch he sets down in the latter without \w^thout a paraph/ /& the epithetes of the father almighty & our Lord\ in the latter part of the creed in his book against Praxeas \☉/ < insertion from higher up f 91v > ☉ It wants also the epithetes w^thin the of father almighty, & our Lord w^ch being supplied < text from lower down f 91v resumes > : w^ch being supplied the whole Creed will runt {sic} thus. Credo in unicum Deum \{illeg} patrem omnipotentem/ mundi conditorem, et filium ejus Iesum Christum [D^nū nrū] natum ex virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato \& sepultum/, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis receptum in cælis, sedentem a receptum in cælis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram Patris venturum judcare vivos et mortuos, qui exinde miserit (secundūpromissionem suam) a Patre Spiritum sanctum. And this Creed or (if the epithetes of father almighty, & our Lo within the brackets be inserted) agrees |comprehends the substance of the two Creeds of Ireneus & agrees in language| w^th the Creeds of the several Churches of the Latines afterwards published by commentators  

Now if the articles within the brackets be omitted there will in all these Creeds of both Greeks & Latines, be omitted there will remain the {sic} Creeds w^ch we last set down out of Tertullian remain will agree w^th one another & w^th the Creed w^ch we last set down out of Tertullian, without any material variation of words, excepting that \Alexander has omitted/ the article of judging the quick & the dead is omitted in Alexanders. In those \Eusebius has omitted the article \Eusebius// of sitting at the right hand of God. in that of of Irenæus of Eusebius And {illeg} \from/ this agreem^t it follows, that the Creeds w^ch remain after the articles within the brackets are rejected \omitted/ were the original Creeds of the several cities b churches before they|ose| |Creeds| began to be enlarged by the addition of new articles; [And \particularly/ that the Creed last set down out of Tertullian was the genuine Creed in w^ch he had been instructed.] And by this means taking all these Creeds for one & the same Rule of faith (as they one {sic} in sense without any material variation of words) we have in them the primitive Rule of faith as it was delivered down in the Churches till the days of Irenæus Hegesippus Irenæus & Tertullian; that Rule of faith w^ch the Apostle|s| calls the form of sound words, the form of doctrine, the f \the/ one faith, the faith w^ch was once delivered to the saints & the traditions. For I know of no other traditions \of faith/ then those \of the articles/ conteined in the Rule of faith.

And that these Creeds \jointly & severally/ contein the primitive Rule of faith is further confirmed by the Scriptures themselves, wherin the articles of the|i|se Creeds are faith are spoken of as fundamentals & sometimes expesed in the very same words as in the Creeds. \the Apostles in preaching sometimes touching upon the articles of their Symbol/ We preach unto you –– – – baptized. Acts. 19.3. By all these \& such like/ places of scripture it \{is} abundantly/ manifest that all the articles of the Creeds above mentioned \(not with the brackets)/ are divine truths & fundamental points of religion put together \faith requisite to baptism. & composed/ in a form of sound words. What the Apostles preached allege & by parts & explained at large \to their auditors/ is {found} < insertion from f 91r > in this Rule /of faith\ comprised in a short form of sound words.

< text from f 91v resumes > < insertion from the left margin of f 91v >

These places of scripture may suffice to shew that all y^e articles of the Rule of faith above mentioned are fundamental truths requite {sic} to baptism. And as for the articles of \of the Creeds/ within the brackets, that they have been added since the beginning there are manifest indications.

< text from f 91v resumes >

Chap. 3.
Of the faith w^ch was once delivered to theSaints

For uniting all Christians in one body & \preventing/ disputes w^ch tended to break this body into parties the Apostles in the beginning of the Gospel comprehended all the articles of faith necessary to communion, in one short systeme called the Creed or symbol of faith. And in relation to this Creed the Apostle Paul tells us that ^[41]there is one body or Church, one Spirit, one Lord, \one/ faith, one baptism, one God & father of all & exhhorts us to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of love, that is, to be all of one mind. By one faith one baptism he means one faith by w^ch all men are ad \were/ admitted to baptism & one baptism by w^ch they were admitted into one Church or body or church. For there were certain principles – – – – – – – – – – – – for he had not writ an epistle to them before.

Now that there was one short \& unalterable/ systeme \system rule or rule/ of faith propagated with the gospel into all nations in the beginning & delivered down \from the Apostles days/ by tradition in the several Churches from one end of the earth to the other, & what was that faith Irenæus declares in the following words. The Church, saith he, altho dispersed throughout the whole world to the ends of the earth keeps that faith which was received from the Apostles & their disciples; Which is in one God the father – – – – – – judicare vivos et mortuos, per carnis etiam resurrectionem. Hac lege fidei manente, cætera jam disciplinæ et conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis, operante scilicet et proficiente usqꝫ in finem Dei gratia Dei. And in his book de Præscriptione hæreticorum he paraphrases the Creed & then adds. Hæc regula a Christo instituta nullas habet apud nos quæstiones nisi quas hæreses faciunt inferunt & quæ hæreticos faciunt. And \again/ in book {sic} against Praxeas he paraphrases the Creed & then subjoyns Hanc Regulam ab initio evangelij decurrise, etiam ante priores quosqꝫ hæreticos nedum ante Praxeam hesternum probabit tam ipsa posteritas omnium hæreticorum quam ipsa {illeg} novellitas Praxeæ hesterni. By these testimonies of Irenæus & Tertullian & also by the testimony of Hegesippus mentioned above, it is manifest that \in their days/ all the churches from one end of the earth to the other |end thereof| agreed in the faith had \one & the same/ R rule of faith in w^ch they all agreed \& agreed in this rule without/ without any disputing about it & by consequence that this Rule was propagated into all the Churches at the beginning first preaching of the gospel it being impossible to {illeg} propagate it afterwards without great disputing. It is manifest also that in the days of Irenæus & Tertullian \second century/ the Churches looked upon this rule of faith as derived down to them from the A by tradition from the Apostles themselves & as the bulwark of the Church not to be altered by any \so of divine au/ & so of divine authority not to be altered by any humane authority what ever. As the Kings & Emperors & kings, Bishops, & Councils |& Popes| have no authority to alter the Creed or Lords prayer or ten commandments or any part of the scriptures so they have none toalter the Creed. And its further manifest that the primitive Christians looked upon \the unity & immutability of/ this Rule of faith as the bulwark of the Church, & the foundation of their unity & {illeg} internal peace <92v> & {concord} of the Church & the bulwark by w^ch she stood her grownd & against all hereticks & distinguished her self from them & from the heathens. For this end the Apostles directed the first Christians to \keep/ hold fast \& contend for/ the form of sound words, \the form of doctrine, the traditions,/ the faith w^ch was once delivered to the saints \& declared that there was but one faith/. For this end they delivered it down by o to the Churches by oral tradition that the heathens might not know it but Christians by reciting it might know one another & avoyd those \as heathens/ who could not recite it or as hereticks who recited it corruptly. And hence the \ancient {illeg}/ Christians called it the symbol of their faith, by that word alluding to the watch word by which those \soldiers/ of a party distingish {sic} themselves from y^e enemy & to the symbols by w^ch heathens were taught at their being initiated into the mysteries of any God & were obliged to keep secret that they might thereby k by reciting the symbol know one another whenever they met.

Now though the unity of the Church depended upon the unity of the faith & therefore the \rule of/ faith was unaliterable yet the before the end of the second century some of the Latines Churches \in opposition to hereticks/ began to add new articles to it. And after they had by adding two or three \some/ articles in the language of the scriptures {illeg} made precedents for giving \creating to/ them selves an authority of a creed-making authority: they began to add articles in others language then that of the scripture till they lost the primitive Apostolick rule of faith & by the loss of it brought all into confusion. & rent the Church into parties.

|1| [Tis agreed on all hands that T|t|he Communion of Saints was inserted into the Creed of the Roman Church usually called the Apostles Creed, a little after \neare/ the beginning of the fift century the same being in none of the Creeds which were published in the four first centuries. |& {was never} nor in any of the Greek Creeds to this day.It {illeg} \was inserted in favour/ of saint worship.|

|2| Tis agreed that The descent into hell was inserted began to be \was first/ inserted into the Creeds \in/ about the middle of the third century. It was first published by the Councils of Sirmium & Ariminum A.C. 357 & 359 \but whether they borrowed it from y^e {illeg} And thence it crept into the Creed of Aquileia being in that Creed {because}/ but it first {illeg} to be made an Article of faith by Saint ^a[42] {Athanasius} before. ffor it was in the Creed of Aquileia into w^ch Ruffin was baptized as Ruffin himself testifies |for asserting a soul in Christ distinct from the λογος before Ruffin was baptized, as he himself testifies. But he lets us know that it was not in the creed in his days it was not in the Creed of the Church of Rome nor in those of the Greeks.|

|3| The When \After/ the Churches, {illeg} instead of opposing to hereticks \preserving &/ the tradition of faith received from the Apostle \& opposing it to heresies/, began to magnify the authority of the Chuch {sic} & by that authority \to condemne hereticks &/ {illeg} mend the tradition: they made that authority an article of faith & |to increase that authority of ma they| inserted the holy catholick church into the Creed. When And The first upon record that inserted it was Alexander bishop of Alexandria,^[43] & he a year or two before the Council of Nice, in making a declaration of his faith inserted it in this manner. We confess also, saith he, one Holy Ghost ————— & one only catholick Apostolick Church w^ch is ever inexpugnible tho the whole world attack it & overcomes every impious faction of hereticks who rise up against it.

After the persecution of Decius the Christians began to remit of their discipline \towards offenders/ & to avoide the shame of publick confessions before the board of Presbyters {illeg} appointed Basil a Presbyter to take their confessions in private & the easy reception of such as had lapsed <93r> in that persecution gave occas gave occasion to Novatus & his followers to separate from the communion of the Roman Church as defiled by the communion of a great multitude \a great number/ of such penitents & to deny remission of sins to those who lapsed after baptism. Whereupon the Latines condemned him & inserted the remission of sins into their Creed. ffor it is not found in any Creed till after \before/ the condemnation of this man: |but soon after his condemnation Cyprian mentions a Creed which ended in these words: ^[44] remissionem peccatorum ac vitam æternam per sanctam Ecclesiam.|

The Gnosticks denyed the resurrection & th of the body & in opposition to the & life everlasting & in opposition to them those {illeg} \two/ articles seem to have been inserted into the creed by the Latines towards the end of the second century. Tertullian \in the Creed above recited/ added the resurrection of the body of next after the d judging of the quick & the dead. [But these \two/ articles got not into the Greek Creeds till afte towards the middle of the fourth century. Tertullian For the Council of Antioch A.C. 341 in subscribing & publishing the Creed of Lucian the martyr for added to the end of it these words.] And Cyprian added the life eternal as above: but these two articles were not found in the Greek Creeds \began about those days to creep into the Creed & were not then established./ till the Council of S Antioch A.C. 341 added to the end of the Creed of the Lucian the martyr in these words: And if, say they, this is also to be added; we beleive in the resurrection of the flesh & the life everlasting. |They were {illeg} They are \From y^e Creeds/ of the Latines {compliant} with the Latines added them they began to creep into the Creeds of y^e Grees {sic} about y^e middle of the fourth century. For the Council of Antioch A.C. 341 added in compliance w^th the Latines added them to the end of the Creed of Lucian the Martyr in these words. And if, say they, this is also to be added, We beleive in the resurrection of the flesh & the life everlasting.|

To mention the

Be The Creed consists of three principal articles relating to y^e father son & holy Ghost & in whose name baptism was to be performed. & And all the articles after that of beleiving in the holy ghost have been added since the beginn And \these three/ \&/ after these three nothing is added in the Creeds of the Greeks And therefore all the articles after these three in the Creeds of the Latines have been added since the beginning

And so has the article of [conceived by the holy Ghost] [for it is improper to mention the holy Ghost before the proper Article I beleive in the holy Ghost. Or if he be mentioned before, its a tautology to add, I beleive. For afters {sic} the Holy Ghost has been once mentioned, its a tautology to add And I beleive in the holy Ghost. And therefore Tertullian in the Creed above recited omits this|e| last article.

And so has the article conceived by the Holy Ghost: for it was improper to mention the Holy Ghost after before the third article. And after {illeg} he was once mentioned it was superflous to add the third article, I beleive in the holy Ghost. And therefore Tertullian \in his creeds/ omits this article]

{Take} \first/ T|t|hey added {illeg} in the language of the scriptures these \seven/ articles conceived by the holy Ghost, crucified, dead, sitteth at the right hand of God, the resurr remission of sins, the resurrection of the body & life everlasting. These additions were made in the second & third centuries & in the fourth & fift they added in other language then that of the scriptures these five: descended into hell \holy catholick church/ &, ὁμοούσιος to the father and |togeth| with th descended into hell, who together with the father \& the son/ is worshipped & glorified, the communion of saints. In the first century while {illeg} any of the Apostolick men continued alive the Church remained an uncorrupted virgin, but as Hegesippus testifies: but after the death of Iohn y^e Aposle {sic} & Symeon bishop of Ierusalem & cousin german of o^r Lord,{illeg} heresies began to <93v> multiply & molest the churches much more then before & when any heresy was convicted by any text of scripture, it {was} \may/ be conceived that y^e Christians in y speaking of that heresy would be apt to magnify that text of scripture & recite it in their paraphrases & comments upon the creed until at lengh they inserted it into the body of the Creed it self. And by this means the articles beg conceived by the holy Ghost, {was} crucified, dead, sitteth at the right hand of God, the resurrection of the body & the life everlasting began to be inserted into the creed {illeg} of the Latines before the end of the second century. For all these articles crept first into y^e creeds of the Latines & from thence were translated into the Creeds of the Greeks in the fourth century. For the Latines were less tenacious of the tradition of faith then the Greeks, as is manifest by y^e histo proceedings of Pope Victor who turning in the end of the second century turning Cataphrygian, excommunicated the churches of Asia for keeping Easter on the 14^th day of the \first month of y^e/ Luni-solar year, w^ch was the ancient year of all nations & issued out comm that he might not break communion w^ch all the christians of Asia issued out communicatory letters to y^e Cataphrygians, & this without any regard to the \Apostolick/ tradition of faith w^ch was the \primitive/ rule of communion. For there was nothing in the creed concerning holidays. It was by the \supposed/ authority of the Church of Rome that Victor did this. And by doing it he attempted to make himself \universal bishop/ & the Church of Rome supreme over all the Bishops & Churches.

The One of the first articles added to y^e Creed was sitteth at the right hand of God. ffor this is in the Creeds of Tertullian & in all those of the Latines now extant but not in the earliest Creeds of the Greeks, the two Creeds of Irenæus, & that of Eusebius Pamphili & the Nicene – – – – – – – – – – – put under his feet.

The article conceived by the holy ghost is wanting – – – – – – – – – – before the Article I beleive in the holy ghost, & makes that Article superfluous. And therefore that Tertullian in two of his Creeds where he omits the first Article he omitts the last

The articles

Two other new Articles were the resurrection of the body & the life everlasting – – – – – – as Christ rose to judge them. But the Gnosticks denying the de real death of Christ & the resurrection of the body \& life everlasting/ the Latines explained made their Creed more express by inserting the words was crucified, dead & the \adding the/ resurrection of the body to y^e end of it adding those words to y^e end of it & inserting the words was crucified dead. Tertullian \has not the life everlasting &/ adds the resurrection of the body in such a manner as is to be met with in no other Creeds \then his/, & therefore it \the addition/ was not settled in his days.

The arti forgiveness of sins is an article not in the creeds of Ireneus Tertullian, Lucian, Eusebius, \not in those of/ Nice |&| Constantinople, nor in that of Ierusalem recited by Cyrill. It seems to have been added by t by the Latines in the middle of the third century in opposition to Novatian. For the first mention of it is in the end of \the end of/ a Creed mentioned \recited/ by Cyprian \w^ch ended/ in these words remissionem peccatorum et vitam æternam per sanctam ecclesiam.

Hitherto the Christians kept to the scriptures, but now the authority of the Church began to be in vogue, & for magnifying \& establishing/ that authority they began to inserted the holy catholick church \into the Creed/. For Alexander bishop of Alexandria inserted it a year or two before the meeting of y^e Council of Nice A.C. 323 ins making a declaration of his faith inserted it in this manner. We confess also, saith he, one Holy Ghost —— & one only catholick apostolick church w^chis ever inexpugnable tho the whole worldattack it, & overcomes every impious faction of hereticks who rise up against it. And henceforward the holy catholick Church was inserted into <94r> \almost/ all the Creeds next after the article of the Holy Ghost.

And now the Bishops had almost lost the primitive form of sound words in w^ch the faith was once delivered to the saints, every Council began \to usurp a legislative authority in all in the faith &/ to make new articles of faith in their own words. In particular \And particularly/ The Council of Nice established in \A.C. 225/ inserted the word ὁμοουσιος into the Creed; And {illeg} the Council of Ariminum \A.C. 359/ inserted this Article, descended into the infernal regions & there performed what was to be done, whom the door-keepers of Hell beholding trembled; the Council of Constantinople A.C. 381 inserted this, who together with the father & the son is worshipped & glorified: & the Latines about the beginnin en beginning of the fift century (I think in opposition to Vigilantius) inserted the communion of saints. For these four Articles are generally allowed to be new ones.

The ancient Creeds of the Greeks generally ended with the article of the Holy ghost & the primitive Creed or Creeds of the Latines came from the Greeks – – – – – – – – – – – – has been added since the beginning.

The first Creed of Tertullian above recited is the oldest Creed of the Latines now extant {illeg} in proper concise words w^thout paraphrastical flourishes. And as it is the oldest so it is the least corrupt. Only the words by the resurrection |If the words by the resurrection| of the body \w^ch/ are added to y^e end of it in such a manner as is not to be met with in any other Creed {illeg} \be omitted/ & the Article of the holy Ghost is put in an improper place. Let these words be omitted & the Article put in its proper place & \w^ch is in all creeds be added,/ the Creed will run thus. Credo in unicum Deum mundi conditorem, & filium ejus Iesum Christum, natum ex virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in cælis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram Patris, venturum judicare vivos et mortuos., & per carnis et m resurrectionem et \Et/ Credo in spiritum sanctum. Now if this Creed be compared w^th \all several/ the Creeds of seve the several Churches of the Latines w^ch were afterwards published it will be found that all \you will find that all w^ch/ the articles of this Creed are all of them be found \are/ in all those Creeds & that this Creed \agrees with &/ conteins the whole substance of all those Creeds except the Articles w^ch we have noted to \have {illeg}/ been added to the Creeds of the Latines since the days of Pope Victor. It And thence it follows that al this Creed of Tertullian is in substance the very Creed of the Latine Churches as it stood in the end of the second century & that all the articles w^ch we have noted to be new ones have been added since those days except the article sedentem ad dextram Patris w^ch migh might be added a little before. To make this manifest, I have subjoyned the principal Creeds of the Latines which were published in the fourth & fift centuries that you may compare them w^th Tertullians creed & with one another the new articles being inclosed to distinguish them from the rest

The Creed of the Church of Aquileia published \is thus recited/ by Ruffin was thus Presbyter of that Church

The Creed of the Church of Turin is thus set down by Maximus Taurinensis {illeg}

The Creed of \the Church of/ Ravenna is thus set down \recited/ by Petrus Chrysologus

The Creed of the Africans is thus set o recited by Austin bishop of Hippo.

The Creed of the Church of Rome commonly called the Apostles Creed, is thus recite is in these words.

Ambrose in an epistle to Pope Syricius has these words ^[45]Credatur Symbolo Apostolorum quod Ecclesia Romana semper intemeratum <94v> semper custodit et servat. This is that Creed w^ch is still called symbolum Apostolorum, & excepting that y^e \descent into hell & the/ communion of saints have been added since the days of Ambrose, & it \now/ runs thus I beleive in God y^e father almighty maker of heaven & earth & in Iesus Christ his only son our Lord who was [conceived of \by/ the Holy Ghost,] born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was [crucified dead &] buried, \[descended into Hell]/ the third day he rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, sitteth at \on/ y^e right hand of God \the father Almighty/ [from thence he] shall come to judge the quick & the dead. {illeg} I beleive in the Holy Ghost, [the holy catholick Church the communion of saints the forgiveness of sins the resurrection of the body & the life everlasting.

Now if in all these Creeds the articles within the brackets be omitted, as being added since the end of y^e second century: you will have the creeds of the Churches of Aquileia Turin Ravenna Hippo & Rome as they stood in the end of that century. And all these creeds agree with one another & with the creed of Tertullian so \very/ well that {illeg} & by that agreement make it very evident that there was a r one & the same rule of faith was propagated down fom the beginning in all these Churches [& that the form of sound words in which it was conteined was that of these Creeds. For the difference between these creeds is of no moment// The Creed of later Creeds of the Latines have I beleive in God the father & in — & in Iesus Christ his son our Lord Tertullians Creed has I beleive in one only God the Father — & Iesus Christ \in/ his son, Iesus Christ. Irenæus & has one God \the father/ & one Iesus \Christ his/. The ancient Greek Creeds generally have one God the father & one Lord Iesus Christ & the Apostle Paul speaks of fundamentals in the same language. There is saith he one Lord one faith one baptism one God & father of all & again one God & one mediator between God & man the man Christ Iesus & again One God the father of whome are all things & one Lord Iesus Christ by whom are all things. Whence it bett

Again T the word buried w^ch Tertullian omits is in almost all creeds & in two of the three creeds recited by Tertullian & in these words of S^t Paul who who speaking of the fundamental faith, saith] Which rule of faith resulting fom all those Creeds compared together is this. I beleive in God [or \in/ one God] the Father almighty maker of heaven & earth & in Iesus Christ his son \[or only son]/ our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, \&/ was buried. The third day he rose again from the dead ascended into heaven, sitteth at y^e right hand of God, From thence he \&/ shall come to judge the quick & the dead, & I beleive in the Holy Ghost. The all

The word buried is in all the Creeds but Tertullians & ought to be in |may be retained| because the Apostle Paul him inserts \it/ into the fundamentals of faith. For I delivered unto you first of all, saith he, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures & that he was buried & that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures. 1 Cor. 15.4.

The Creeds of the Greek Church generally begin thus: I beleive in one God the father almighty, maker of heaven & earth & of all things visible & invisible, & in one Lord Iesus Christ the son of God. And this <95r> form is most consonant to the first commandment & to the words of the Apostle Paul whenever he speaks of the fundamentals of religion as where he says that there is one body one Lord one faith one baptism one God & father of all (Ephes 4.4) one God the father of whom are al& one mediator between God & man the man Christ Iesus (1 Tim 2.5) one God one God the father of whom are all things & one Lord Iesus Christ by whom are all things (1 Cor. 8.6) The article sitteth at the right hand of God was {illeg} wanting in the oldest creeds of the Greeks & in those of Irenæus \as was said above/ & to the article I beleive in the holy Ghost they \irenæus & the Greeks/ added who spake by the Prophets, or words to that sense. In the rest the And some old Creeds omitted the names of Mary & Pontius Pilate |purpose. For it is a fundamental point of religion to beleive Moses & the Prophets to be a divine authority \authentic/, tho it be not| necessary to understand all their writings. And in some of the oldest Creeds the names of Mary & Pontius Pilate were omitted. {illeg} So then the \Symbol or/ rule of faith in the Greek Churches till the days of Irenæus was much 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 a virgin crucified & buried. The third day he rose again from the dead \&/ ascended into heaven, & shall come from thence to judge the quick & the dead. And I beleive in the Holy Ghost who spake by the Prophets.

If w^th the Lat

This form of faith is to the very same sense with that of the Latines & last mentioned & whether one form or the other or a medium between both be used is of no moment. If \with the Latines/ you say I beleive in God the father — & in Iesus Christ his only son our Lord T But to shew that the last recited form comes no {illeg} \profession of faith/ is w^thout any material difference \variation/ the primitive rules Creed of the Greek Churches I will here add \subjoyn/ two or three of the oldest Creeds of the Greeks, [not such as have been formed by Councils but such as] have been now extant.

Eusebius of Cæsarea In the Council of Nice Eusebius of Cæsarea produced a Creed w^ch he said he received from his ancestors & was instructed in it before his baptism. This Creed was approved & interpoled by the \general/ Councils of Nice & Constantinople & is as follows. I beleive in one God the father Almighty creator of all things visible & invisible & in one Lord Iesus Christ [the Word of God, [God of God, light of light, life of life,] the only begotten son, [the first begotten of every creature begotten of his father before all worlds of \by/ whom all things were made] who for our salvation was incarnate [& conversed with men,] who sufered & rose again the third day & ascended to his father, & shall come again to judge the quick & the dead. I beleive also in one holy Ghost.

Lucian who was martyred in Dioclesian's persecution, left a Creed in writing w^ch was produced in the Council of Antioch A.C. 341 & signed by them & again by the Council of Seleucia A.C. 359 & is as follows. Credi|o|mus in unum Deum omnipotentem invisibilium omnium tam insensibilium quam intelligibilium quam {illeg} sensibilium opificem [et conservatorem]; et in unum filium Dei unigenitum [ante omnia sæcula subsistentem manentemqꝫ cum Patre qui ipsum genuit per quem omnia facta sunt visibilia et invisibilia,] qui [novissimis diebus juxta voluntatem patris descendit et] carnem ex sancta virgine suscepit et [postquam patris sui voluntatem omni ex arte implevisset] passus est et resurrexit & ad cælum reversus sedet ad dextram Patris. Qui venturus est ut judicat vivos <95v> [et Rex ac Deus permanet in æternum.] Credo etiam in spiritum sanctum.

Cyrill bishop of Alexandria Ierusalem in commenting upon the creed of that city, thus recites it. I beleive in one God the father almighty, maker of heaven & earth & of all things visible & invisible. And in one Lord Iesus Christ the only begotten son of God [begotten of his father before all worlds the true God by whom all things were made] who was incarnate & made man, crucified & buried rose again from the dead the third day & ascended into heaven [& sitteth at the right hand of the father] & shall come to judge the quick & the dead [of whose kingdom there shall be no end:] & in the holy Ghost the comforter [who spake by the Prophets [& in one holy Catholick Church & in the resurrection of the body flesh & in life everlasting.]

These articles are also found in (except that of sitting at the right hand of God are also found in the Creeds of Irenæus & in the oldest Creeds of the Greeks now extant, viz\t/ that into w^ch Eusebius Pamphili was baptized & w^ch was approved by the Council of Nice, that of Lucian the Martyr w^ch was approved by the Council of Antioch A.C. 341, that of Ierusalem commented upon by Cyril bishop of that city, & that in the Apostolick Constitutions Lib 8. c. 41. And thence it is {illeg} put out of question that {illeg} these Articles are genuine, & were in the symbol \rule/ of faith w^ch in the begining was propagated w^th the Gospel into all nations. But the Creeds of the Greeks began in this manner: I beleive in one God the father almighty — & in one Lord Iesus Christ: which way of speaking is more conformable to that of the Apostle. There is one body & one spirit — one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God & father of all (Eph. 4.4) one God & one mediator between God & man, the man Christ Iesus (1. Tim. 2.5) one God the father of whom are all things & one Lord Iesus Christ by whom are all things. 1 Cor 8.6.

So then the creed of the Latines usually called the Apostles Creed conteins the whole faith requisite to baptism & communion, besides some superfluous Articles w^ch if interpreted innocently may be still retained for the sake of peace.

A|B|ut for other opinions w^ch create disputes & tend to discord amongst Christians such as are what Christ did before he was born, & between his death & resurrection & what he does now in heaven; in what manner the de quick & dead shall be judged & with what sort of bodies they shall rise.

In Our beleiving in one & God & one Lord & should one holy Ghost is {fun} is {sic} the whole foundation of the christian religion: this article The first article teaches us to relinquish the worship of the multitude of heathen God {sic} & worship the \& glorify/ {sic} God who made heaven & earth & all things therein, & governs all thigs {sic} by his almighty {illeg}power & universal dominion. The second teaches to give honour & glory to the Lord by whom God gove who died for us & by whom God governs the world & will judge the quick & the dead. {illeg} The third teaches us to beleive & study the scriptures that we may know ho learn {illeg} how to behave o^r selves in this life in order to give a good account at the day of judgment.

For besides the first principles & fundamentals of religion conteined in the doctrine of baptism – – – – offences to come.

And if we are not to fall censure one another & fall out about such questions much less are we to make them articles of faith necessary to baptism & salvation. Strong meats w^ch are proper for men must not be given mixed with the milk w^ch is to be given to babes. The Church has no authority to alter the foundation upon which she was built by Christ & his Apostles, \none to alter/ that one faith into all {sic} men were \baptized/ & by {illeg} one baptism admitted into one church from the beginning. To alter this faith is to loosen the bond of the union & endanger the dissolution of the whole. To pro\im/pose any new condition of communion is to deny communion to those who by the institution of Christ have a right to it, & \thereby/ to condemn the members of Christ as hereticks: w^ch in the language of < insertion from the left margin of f 95v > the scriptures is blaspheming the names of those that dwell in heaven, making war upon the saints & becoming an Antichrist. Let the men of this spirit consider the admonition of Christ to those of their temper: Iudge not that ye be not judged, for with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged & with what measure ye meet it shall be measured to you again.

< text from f 95v resumes > <96r>

– born of the Virgin by the power of the most High. And so so {sic} the description w^ch Iohn in the beginning of his Gospel gives of Christ before he {merit} the ΛΟΓΟΣ the Word w^ch was incarnate the Λόγος or Word Christ in calling him the Word & saying In the beginning was the Word & the Word was with God & the Word was God: The sam The same was in the beginning with God: All things were made by him & without him was nothing made that was made: And the Word became flesh This description I ha say has a manifest relation to y^e old Testament \to {sic} what is said of Christ \him in/ the books of Moses/ & signifies that Christ was with God before his incarnation, even from \in from/ the begining when God cr made the heavens & the earth & said to him Let us make man ffor Christ himself declared as much when he said to his ffather: Glorify me with the glory w^ch I had w^th thee before the world began. That \It signifies that/ he being then with God, it was he to whom God said Let us make man, & That it was he to who appeared to Adam in paradise by the name of God: from the ffather being \by the name of God & to the Patriarchs & to Moses by the {illeg} same name: for the father is/ the invisible God whom no eye hath seen nor can see. That he \It signifies that Christ he/ was one of the three Angels who appeared to Abraham & of whom it is said Iehova rained fire upon Sodom & upon Gomorrah brimstone & fire out of heaven from Iehova out of heaven: for y^e the name Iehova is given to none but the God of Israel. That \It signifies that/ he is the God who appeared wrastled with Iacob & to whom Iacob erected an altar Gen 35.1,12, & y^e Angel who appeared to Moses in the bush by y^e name of the God of his fathers Abraham Isaac & Iacob, ✝ (Exod. 3) & was with Moses in the wilderness & spake to him in mount Sina & there giving lively oracles to y^e people & to whom the people were disobedient thrusting him from them & worshipping the Calf (Act. 7.38, 39, 40) This is \It signifies that he was/ the Angel of Gods presence of whom God said to IsraelBehold I send mine \an/ Angel before thee to keep thee in the way & to bring thee into the place w^ch thou I have prepared: beware of him & obey his voice, provoke him not: for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. Exod 23.20, 21 To signify that he was the Angel \by/ whom \God/ gave the Law, whose voice was to be obeyed \as the voice of God/, & who had power to judge \as a Iudge/ punish or pardon the transgressions of Israel \having \under God/ a supreme authority both legislative & judicial w^ch is all one as to call him the oracle & mouth of God/, Iohn calls him the Word of God. To signify that the he was the Angel of whom God said obey his voice for my name is in him Iohn saith t & who appeared to Adam & the Patriarchs Iohn calls him God s \& Moses/ by the name of God, Iohn calls him God \saying And the word was God./ & to signify that he ministred to y^e ffather in the formation of the world Iohn saith that he was in the beginning with God & all things were made by him. ffor he that since his resurrection is gone to prepare another place for y^e blessed might before his incarnation prepare this in w^ch we live. |And he who by his resurrection has changed his body mortal flesh into an immortal spiritual body might by his incarnation change his immortal spiritual body into a body of flesh.| But if any man cannot attain to this beleive all this; if he beleives only as much as the {Naza}renes \or primitive Christians of the circumcision/ beleived, the Churches have no more authority to condemn \condem{n or exc}ommunicate/ him then they had to condemn & excommunicate the Churches of the circumcision in the Apostles days.

And as he is called the Word of God to signify that he gave the law & his voice was to be obeyed & that he had also a judicial power over the Iews, & ‡ And so in the Apocalyps when he comes with army upon white horses in heaven he is called the Word of God to signify that he comes with power to reign over |to| judge & reign over the quick & dead & this power is to destroy the wicked w^th the breath of his mouth as with \represented by/ a two edged sword. And he who by his resurrection has changed his mortal flesh into an immortal spirituall body might by his incarnation change his immortal spiritual body into a body of flesh. ffor ffor whereas the father is the invisible God whom no eye hath seen nor can see & therefore is totally incorporeal, the son \Word/ before his incarnation & the Holy Ghost have appeared in visible shapes upon several occasions & therefore had spiritual bodies.

<96v>

& signifies that he \it/ was the being to whom God said Let us make man & who soon after by the name of God appeared to Adam in paradise & afterwars {sic} to the Patriarchs & to Moses. ffor y^e ffather is the invisible God whom no eye hath seen nor can see. As Christ is now gone to prepare a better place for the blessed so in the beginning he prepared this \place/ for mortals \{& was} being in glory w^th the father before 1 Iohn/. ffor the supreme God doth nothing by himself w^ch he can do by others \He was in glory w^th God befor y^e world began/.] And after he had prepared this place he governed it being the Iehova who reigned upon Sodom & upon Gomorrhah brimstone & fire from Iehova out of heaven & is the Word or Oracle of God \who/ gave the law on Mount Sina (Acts 7.38, 39, 40) & led the Angel who \who led the Israelites &/ in whom God had placed his name \& authority/. Behold saith God I send an Angel before thee to keepe thee in the way & to bring thee into the place w^ch I have prepared for thee: beware of him & obey his voice, provoke him not for my name is in him. Exod 23.20, 21. This word had a body & At length this word became \And the Word was made flesh that is his \body/ immortal body became a mortal one/ flesh that is his body {sic}, {illeg} the body by means of w^ch he appeared to Adam the Patriarchs, eat w^th Abraham & wrateled {sic} w^th Iacob. For nothing is tangible but body. As his mortall body by his \the/ resurrection became an immortal body so his immortal body by |y^e| his incarnation became a mortal one. That w^ch was from the beginning, saith Iohn, w^ch we have heard – – – – – – – circumcision in Iudea.

This Angel therefore was the Lord of the Earth & King of Israel in whom God had placed his name & authority & by whom he governed them \Israel/ {illeg} in the days of the Iudges untill they rejected him from being their King & desired Samuel to make \them/ a King {illeg} like the \after the manner of/ other nations

After this I do not find that y^e Angel of the covenant ap who appeard any more to another \to y^e Rulers of/ Israel but [answered them either by the ephod or \till the building of the second Temple & the days of Ezra/ |he| sent his messenger to the Prophets. And at length the Word was made flesh, that is, his body, the body by means of w^ch he had been visible & audible & tangible, appearing & speaking to y^e Patriarchs & Iudges, eating with abraham & wrastling with Iacob, \& touching his thigh this spiritual this body became flesh./ ffor nothing is tangible but body. As his mortal body by the resurrection –– – – – – – – circumcision in Iudea. over whom Iames the brother of o^r Lord was Bishop

– handled by the Apostles, & died & rose again, is gone \by the hand of those who had rejected him from being their king; & rose again from y^e dead, went/ into the heavens to prepare a \new/ mansion, for the blessed (for in Gods house are many mansions;) has \& left sent/ his messenger to comfort the Apostles & disciples, & assist them in preaching the Gospel & \to/ shew them things to come; & \when hee has prepared a \new/ mansion & the times of y^e Gentiles are fulfilled/ shall return to judge the quick & dead & reign over Israel in the beginning beforethey rejected him & desired a king, \& shall continue to reign untill Gog & Magog & all other/ Th \& continuing to reign in this world/ untill all enemies \temporal & spiritual/ be put under his feet the last of w^ch is death, & then he shall \shall/ delivering up the kingdom to the father that God may all {sic} in all, & go \shall go hence/ with the blessed to y^e kingdom \mansion/ w^ch he is now preparing for them, sending \having sent/ the wicked to such places as they deserve.

But if any man cannot beleive – – – Iudæa – – – bishop.

Yet he sent his messenger to y^e Prophets till the days of {illeg} after whom the \{illeg}n prophesy ceased y^e learned/ Doctors of the Cabbala instructed the people, And at length the Word was made flesh, degenetrated \delivered their traditions to the degenerat peo{ple}/ & taught \people & at length taught/ them to kill their Messiah \king whom they had rejected./ For the Word was made flesh, that is his body

✝ ffor in the Creed after the words I beleive in one God the father almighty are added the words creator of heaven & earth as not included in the former.

<97r>

Christ is therefore called the Word to signify \first/ that before his incarnation he was the Oracle & mouth of God \the Angel/ by whom God gave the law on mount Sina \& {purged} \commanded/ Israel/ whose voice was to be obeyed: as the voice of God & who had also a judicial power over Israel to pardon & punish their transgressions & \and also to signify secondly/ that in his mortal body he was the Prophet predicted by Moses: & \{illeg}/ that after his resurrection he was the faithful & true witness, whose testimony was the spirit of prophesy & who shall come to judge the quick & the destroy the wicked with the breath of his mouth as with a two edged sword, & to judge {illeg} the quick & the dead.

He is said to have been w^th God in the beginning \with God/ & that all things were made by him to signify that as he is now gone to prepare a place for the blessed so he in the beginning he prepared & formed this place in w^ch we live. ffor god Almighty |live, & thenceforward governed it. ffor the supreme God| doth nothing by himself w^ch he can do by others.

He is called God to signify that he was is the God who appeared to Adam & the Patriarchs & Moses; not the invisible God whom no eye hath seen nor can see but the Age Angel whose voice was to be obeyed because the name of God was in him because the name of God was in him in whom God had \had/ placed his \{illeg}/ name with dominion \over man/. Beware of him, saith God, & obey his voice, provoke him not for my name is in he will not pardon your transgressions for my name is in him.

And as this his mortal body by the|his| resurrection from the dead became a spiritual body, so the spiritual body w^ch he had in the beginning became a |& by means of which he appeared to the Patriarchs eat w^th Abraham & wrastled wih Iacob, became a| mo\r/tal body by his incarnation. ffor, saith Iohn, the Word was made flesh: & \again/ that w^ch was from the beginning, w^ch we have heard, w^ch we have seen with our eyes, w^ch we have looked upon, w^ch our hands have handled of the Word of life (for the life was manifested, & we have seen it, & bear witness, & shew unto you that eternal life w^ch was with the ffather & was manifested unto us:) that w^ch we have seen & heard declare we unto you. |The word of life w^ch was \w^th the father/ from the beginning, was born of the Virgin, became visible seen & handled heard & handled|

But if any man cannot beleive all this, yet if he beleives as much as the Nazarenes or primitive Christians of the circumcision beleived: the Churches {illeg} have no more authority \now/ to condemn & excommunicate him then they had in the Apostles days to condemn & excommunicate the Church{illeg}\es/ of y^e circumcision at Ierusalem in Iudea, over whom Iames the brother of o^r Lord was Bish/op\

The grand occasion of errors in the faith has been the turning of the scriptures from a moral to a \& monarchical to a physical &/ metaphysical \& physical/ sense, & this has been done chiefly by men bred up in the \metaphysical/ theology of the heathens Philosophers \& the Cabbalists & Schoolmen/ (such as were Pythagoras, \Zeno, &/ Plato, & Aristoteles) & in that of the School men {sic}. For men tainted w^th the {illeg} metaphysical principles of Philophers {sic} \Cabbalists & Schoolmen/ upon reading the scriptures have been apt |to| strain every thing to their own opinions. If it be said This is my body they meaning a symbol of my body, they take it in a metaphysical sense for transubstantiation. If it be said, He that hath seen me hath seen the father, meaning with they by their works, they understand it of seing their substances, tho the father be the invisible God. If it be said I & the father are one, they take it in a metaphysical sense for one in substance tho Christ interprets it morally \of a moral unity or unanimity/, Be ye one as I & the father are one. If \t{illeg} to {teach which} us obedience/ Christ be called the ΛΟΓΟΣ \το Θεου the Oracle of God/ they take it \metaphysically/ for the {illeg} ΛΟΓΟΣ of y^e Platonists, the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος \of God/ without which God would be ἄσοφος & ἄλογος the ΛΟΓΟΣ (emitted as it were conceived \subsisting/ in Gods mind & emitted as it were out of his mouth by speaking: \whereas the name is meant of his legislative & iudicial authority to teach us obedience. If/ {illeg} If {sic} to teach us obedience God be called ο παντοκράτωρ the omnipotent, they take it in a metaphysical sense for Gods power of creating all things \out of nothing/ whereas it is meant \principally/ of his \universal/ irresistible monarchical power to teach us obedience. ✝ If the

It consisted at first in understanding the common monarchy of God & Christ & living according to the laws of this monarchy. And those laws were to give our honour & obedience to God & Christ & to love our nei kings & magistrates, & \&/ to love our neighbours as our selves & do good to our enemies. This religion was suited to easily understood by the meanest of the people & was handed down amongst them by tradition in simplicity untill men skilled in the learning of Cabbalists & heathens \Cabbalists & Schoolmen/ corrupted it with metaphysicks, straining the scriptures from a moral to a metaphysical sense. & thereby making it unintelligible.

Ireneus testifies

These things were written by Tertullian in y^e beginning of the third century & \Irenæus/ about 15 or 20 years before Irenæus testified th testified that one & the same faith was spread \present/ throughout \into/ all the Churches were \then/ of one & y^e same faith & retained it with great zeale so as to stop their ears at heresies. And the common people whom Ire Tertullian represents \calls/ simple & imprudent were \unexceptable witnesses of y^e tradition of the Church being/ such as the Gospel was preached to in the beginning & were very \as are generally/ tenacious of traditions while the learned men were \are/ apt to intermix their own opinions of their masters, \& being making the body of the Church catholick. And/ Certainly the vote of] And Tertullians acknowledgment that the the majority & when Tertullian wro & while & bu And {sic} Tertullians testimony [that these were \vehement/ against {illeg} him vehently {sic} for a monarchical union \in opposition/ & looked upon the Montanists as worshippers of two or three Gods as is unquestionable because against himself his own party.] concerning them is \strong &/ unquestionable because against his own party. So then the Church catholick was \vehemently/ for a monarchical unity till the end of the second century & looked upon \dreaded/ a metaphysical unity as polytheistical.

^[46] – patrem. The doctrine κατὰ Proclum or Proculum I take to be that w^ch is described by Tertullian. For Tertullian makes a very {Saint} of Procul \had him in esteem calling/ had him in esteem calli|s|ng him virginis senectæ et Christianæ eloquentiæ dignitas, quem in omni opere fidei – optaverim assequi. That according to Æschines seems to have been followed by Sabellius for Ierome . . . . cogunt And The difference between the \two/ opinions seems to have lain been only verbal. Proculus \with Tertullian/ considered the whole & its part & part of its parts as three substances or substantial persons & Æschines \w^th Sabellius/ considered them as but one. [But tho Sabellius & some other hereticks followed Montanus in his doctrine of y^e Trinity, yet because \those as/ they were not \called/ Montanists unless they received also his prophesies.] Paul of Samosat seems also to have followed Montanus in the doctrine of y^e Trin. but he & Sabellius \not receiving the proph. of Montanus/ were not accounted Montanists because t

& by the nam I AM: in reference to w^ch Christ \in asserting his age to the Iews \tells them/ Verily I say unto you/ Before Abraham was I AM

If Gods Messengers be called Angels, we take Angels in a metaphysical sense for a species of beings \of {sic}/ & dispute about their nature as if all Gods Messengers were of one speces. whereas they And there \seems to be {more}/ may be {sic} a species more \of Angelsmost very/ commonly imployed \on Gods messages./ But the word \Angel/ is genus a general name \signifying only a {illeg} Messenger &/ comprehendi|s|ng \as/ many species \of beings/ as there are \all the/ species of Gods messengers: being given sometimes to God & Christ it Christ & the sometimes to the Holy Ghost & sometimes to a man Prophets. \& to Iohn the Baptist/ & after the resurrection of the dead may be given to the sons of the resurrection. And how many other species of Angels there are \may be/ is unknown to us.

<98r>

father or son be called God, they take the name in a metaphysical sense as if it signified \{illeg}/ Gods p metaphysical perfections of infinite eternal omniscient {illeg} omnipotent whereas it relates only to Gods dominion to teach us obedience. Fo The For theThe word {illeg} God is relative & signifies y^e same thing thing {sic} with Lord & King, but in a higher degree. As we say my Lord our Lord your Lord, the Lord ou King of Kings, & Lord of Lords the suprem Lord, serva the \the Lord of the earth/ the servants of the Lord, the Lord of the earth, \serve other Lords,/ so we may say my God our God, your God, the God of Gods, the supreme God, the servants of God, the God of the earth \the servants of God serve other Gods/: but we do not say my infinite our infinite your infinite, the infinite of infinites, the servants of \the/ infinite, the infinite of the earth, serve other infinites the servants of the infinite serve other infinites. Where the Aposle {sic} told y^e Gentiles that y^e Gods w^ch they worshipped were not Gods, he did not meane that they were not infinites, (for the Gentiles did not take them to be such:) but he meant that they had no power & dominion over man. They were fals Gods; not fals infinites, but \vanities/ falsly supposed to have power & dominion over man. They were vanities, nothings in the world imaginary ghosts or Demons |And in the same sense the Apostles opposes μορφὴ Θεου to μορφὴ δούλου in saying  Let this mind be in you [of humility] be in you w^ch was in Christ Iesus, who being in| < insertion from f 98v > ♀ Let this mind be [of humility] be in you w^ch was \also/ in Christ Iesus: who being in μορφη Θεου did not acquire by rapine his present state of glory: but \[on the contrary]/ emptied himself of the μορφη Θεου taking \upon him/the μορφη θουλου [by an incarnation,] & being found in fashion as a man he [still] humbled himself & became obedient unto death even the death of the cross. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him & given him [{illeg} τὸ ἐιναι ἰσα θεω] a name above every name that at the name of Iesus every knee should bow: Philip. 2. For \And in the same sence the Father is called the God of God the Son. For/ unto the Son he saith, Thy throne o God is for ever & ever, a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom: Tho {sic} hast loved righteousness & hated iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, hath annointed thee w^th the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Heb. 1

< text from f 98r resumes >

When therefore the father is called God & the son is called Lord (as is done in the Creed,) it signifies that the ffather is the highest Lord & the Son is Lord \next/ under him \or that y^e son sits at y^e right hand of God/. And when the Son is also called God it signifies that the Son \name of God is in him & that he/ is Lord over all things next under the father. And yet they are not two Gods, because a king & his viceroy are not two kings, nor is the name God to be understood of both together. It allways signifies the father unless by any circumstance it be restrained to y^e son; \even/ as the name King always signifies the super raign \superior King/ unless by any circumstance it be restrained to the viceroy. And as a man may give Kings & Princes that ho worship w^ch is due to them suitable to their \dignity/ power & dominion over us, w^thout being guilty of idolatry, so we may give \{some}/ Christ \Chris {sic} Iesus a much greater worsh^p/ that worship w^ch is suitable to his \dignity, power &/ dominion over us without being guilty of idolatry tho he be not the supreme God. [If we give a King any worship which implies {illeg} more power & dominion over us then is\truly/ lodged in him we idolize him & worship a vanity in proportion to y^e excess of power falsly supposed in him: & if we do not give Christ more worship then is suitable to his power & dominion over us we do not idolize him nor worship a vanity.] ffor we are to worship him \& give him honour & glory/ as he is the Lamb of God w^ch was slain for us, \(Apoc 5.)/ the mediator between God & Man the Man Christ Iesus. \His worship is founded in the dominion w^ch God gave to his humane nature after his death & resurrection./ And if this be called worshipping a creature & {illeg} \thought a/ crime of the same nature w^th that of the heathens who worshipped the creature more then the creator I answer that by the creature the Apostle \here/ means Idols w stocks & stones the worshipping of w^ch was idolatry not because they were creatures but because they were vanities destitute of power & dominion over us, having eyes without seing & ears without hearing & being unable to do us good or hurt. ffor all the old Prophets place Idolatry in the worshipping of vanities. [And if the worshipping of Christ\ship given to the Lamb \of God/ the Man Christ Iesus/ doth not exceed {illeg} his \dignity/ power & dominion over us, {illeg} we do not worship a vanity. |If the giving him honour & glory because he was slain & hath redeemed us with his blood be a worship due to him| Let them who deny him this worship consider whether they do not deny the Lord that bought them.] And in this same sense the Apostle \so doth the Apostle when he/ tells us that \{illeg} that {sic} the Gods of the Gentiles are not Gods, & that/ an Idol is nothing in the world. And if the worship due given to Christ as he is the Lamb is {high} not because he has redeemed us w^th his blood \therefore if the giving glo honour & glory to the Lamb w^ch was slain be not/ be not {sic} worshipping a vanity it can not be {illeg} Idolatry tho it be worshipping him as a man \the Man/ who humbled h{im} |{illeg} before ou God Ie Man the Man Christ Iesus {doth merit} {illeg} his dignity power & dominion over us & we do not worship {illeg}|

<98v>

When therefore the father or son is called God we are to understand it not metaphysically but in a monarchical sense. When \we s/ the father is called God & y^e son is called Lord (as is done in the Creed

There is a worship due even to his humane nature & this is founded in the dominion w^ch

The heathens made {fact} a \Philosophers/ & old hereticks made \Gnosticks supposed/ not only their Gods but even the souls of men \& the stars to be/ of one substance w^th the supreme God \& yet were Idolaters for worshipping them/. And \he/ that is of this opinion may beleive Christ \& all the/ to be of one substance with the father without making him him {sic} more then a meer man \& commit idolatry in worshipping the consubstantial {stock}/. Tis not consubstantiality but {illeg} \{illeg}/ power & dominion w^ch gives a right to be worshipped. And to worship a consubstantial being \wholy/ destitute of power & dominion \is/ would be worshipping a vanity & by consequence idolatry. But the giving praise \pra honour/ & glory to the Lamb w^ch was slain \the mediator between God & man the Man X^t Iesus/ is not worshipping a |a| Being destitute of power \vanity & therefore not/ Idolatry tho it be worshipping Christ as a man the Man who humbled himself [the only mediator between God & Man] the man Christ Iesus] the man who humbled himself.

Now this Creed is very \short & free from repetitions as a symbol of religion ought to be. It is/ easy to be understood & rembred {sic} by the common common people & [so was \as/ fit to be proposed to all men in the beginning as milk for babes \first preaching of the Gospel/ as milk is fit for babes, & yet it] & so may be compared to milk for babes, [being fit to be proposed to all men in the first preaching of the Gospel.] Its articles are in the scriptures in express words & so liable to no disputes. It conteins a complete system of the faith sufficient for baptism & communion with the Churches [& was therefore fit to be propagated in|to| |all| the beginning Churches in the first preaching of the Gospel as the symbol of communion.] It wants no Articles but such as have been added since the beginning nor has any Articles that can be spared from y^e faith, all its Articles being almost \in almost/ all the Creeds \of both Greeks & Latins/. {illeg} And by these characters it seems to comprehend without any material difference that summ of faith w^ch was once delivered to all the \at first/ delivered by memory to all Christians \as the symbol of communion/. I may add that its articles are \it conteins/ not mere theories like some of those Articles w^ch we have rejected \omitted/ but all its Articles are practical truths on w^ch the whole practise of religion depends. We must

<99r>

self to death even the death of the Cross & whom God hath therefore highly exalted & given him a name above every name that at y^e name of Iesus every knee should bow. ^[47]Vnto him therefore who loved us & washed us from our sins in his blood \& made us kings & Priests to God even his father & who is/ the faithfull & true witness the firstbegotten from the dead the \only begotten of a Virgin, the/ Prince of the kings of the earth, \unto him/ be glory & dominion for ever & ever. Amen.

The Christian religion was \preached/ by Christ & his Apostles to the meanest of the people, & therefore was suited to theire capacity: Aand what is|t| now \conteins/ above their understanding has been introduced \since/ by men of learning. & was no part of primitive Christianity. Before these corrup it was corrupted by Philosophers & Learned men it consisted in beleiving \that there is a G one Monarchy & in the Monarchy an /& {& serving}\/ & obeying one \invisible/ God or suprem monarch of the Vnivers whose dominion is boundless & irresistible: \& in this Monarchy/ & in having no other God or Monarch saving \&/ in beleiving & obeying In \&/ one visible Lord Iesus Christ by whom God governs the world, in a visible {man} the Word or Oracle of God [whose voice is to be obeyed because the name of God is in him, &] who by his messenger spake to y^e Prophets. And in the third place we are to \we must live according to the laws of this monarchy/ give|ing| all due \honour &/ obedience to Kings & Magistrates set over as set over us by God & \& in one lord/ & love|ing| our neighbours & do|ing| good even to o^r enemies. \& according to o^r merits we may expect to be preferred \in this Monarchy/ or punished in this |by the {illeg}| Monarchy To him that overcometh, saith Christ will I grant to sit with me in my throne as I a even as I also overcame & am set down w^th my father in his throne./ This religion was easy to be understood by the meanest of the people & it was handed down amongst them in simplicity, untill when men skilled in the learning of the heathens {illeg} getting into corrupted it with metaphysicks, & by their eminence for learning & humane wisdom getting into great places Bishopricks spread their opinions amongst the Clergy & great men of the earth. And now I have told given an account of the primitive faith preached to the poor & handed down amongst them by tradition, it remains that I shew by what steps the men of learning \have/ at perplexed this faith with \their/ metaphysical|s| opinions \no way tending to a good life/ & filled it with such subtilties as are not only \much/ above y^e understanding of the common people, but above all human understanding & destructive to the monarchy right notion of the Monarchy.

It was not therefore without reason that eastern bishops que opposed the word ὁμοιούσιος to Sabellianism, & in their Councills anathematized the Sabellian \& Cataphrygian/ principles & declared against the language of one hypostasis. & in the Council of Sirmium as soon as Constantius had conquered Magnentium In the year 35|4|1 {illeg} Constantius entring the western Empire in his war agaist {sic} Magnentius, a very numerus Council of eastern bishops met at Sirmium against Photinus bishop of that city an Sabellian & made many \made many/ declarations particularly \{illeg}/ against the Sabellian \& Cataphrygian/ principles |& for establishing the the monarchy of the Father:|; amongst w^ch were these Siquis ingen{itu}m aut partem ejus ex Maria natum dicere ausit anathema est. siquis Dei substantiam d{illeg}ari aut contrahi dixerit anathema sit. Siquis ἐνδιάθετον ἢ προφόρικον λόγον insitum aut prolatitium verbum esse Dei filium dixerit anathema sit

Now Socrates tells us that the deposi\ti/on of Photinus by this Council \for the heresies of \Sabellius & Paul of Sam \w^ch they convicted him/// was universally approved \both then & afterwards/ as right & just both then & afterwards, & Hillary about seven years after sending of a copy of \to y^e bishops of Gallia & Britain a copy of the Creed of this Council w^th/ the anathemas of this Council against \Paul annexed &/ {illeg} a comment of his own up \such {illeg} anathemas/ {them, &} approved them all, & saith of the Council. Necessitas –– – –     And yⁿ repeating the several anathemas & commenting upon them \he/ approved them all

Socrates writes that the East & West continued in communion till the the {sic} Council of Serdica

Socrates writes that after the Council of Serdica the West separated fom the east. And that they communicated \promiscuously/ as far as the mountain Suchis w^ch seperates Thrace & <99v> Illyricum, notwithstanding their differens in y^e faith, but beyond that mountain that is westward they did not communicate. Which is as much as to say that y^e eastern Churches did not exclude refuse to \the Greeks in the east \{Communion}// communicated w^th those of the western \faith/ \the Latines/ but the western Churches |Latines refused Churches| refused to communicate w^th those of the eastern faith the Greeks. And perhaps the {illeg} there might be some factious people in the western Churches \empire/ who {illeg} they {illeg}: But this |made a difference in some places: but the dispute now between the Greeks & Latines was not \{illeg}/ about the faith but about dominion & did not| did not {sic} amount to a breach of communion between y^e Greek & Latin Churches |{illeg} a difference Greek & Latin Churches, but only to the excommunication of a few persons for misdemeanours|. ffor the bishops of each party & in the Council of Serdica excommunicated six or eight \seven/ of the other party & therefore looked upon all the rest as remaining in their communion. And the \judicial/ proceedings of y^e Council of Sirmi{um} \against Photinus/ four years after the council of Sirmium Serdica, would not have been universally received \as authentic/ had not the Latines \Churches/ been then in communion w^th the Greeks. Tis certain therefore that the Greek & Latine Churches notwithstanding \all/ their intestine disputes remained in external communion w^th one another till \the meeting of this Council of Sirmium & by consequence till/ the death of Constantius, & his successor Iulian the last heathen Emperor. And therefore the separation w^ch the bishop Rome {sic} made from this Communion after the death of Iulian was a separation from y^e visible Church Catholick of Christ. And the Councils of the

The bishop of R

The main difference between the Greeks & Latines was about the Vniversal bishopric The bishop of Rome claimed appeals from all the world churches, & for gaining this {illeg} dominion {illeg} received into communion such persons as had been e the Greeks in their Councils excommunicated & summoned the Greeks to appear before him in a Council at Rome & give an account of their proceedings against them|se| persons excommunica \condemned persons/ & the {illeg} western bishops in y^e Council of Serdica, treated \proceeded against/ y^e Eastern in y^e same manner: but the e & these two Council {sic} decreed that appeals might be made from all the Churches to y^e B^p of Rome: but y^e eastern bishops would not submit. And this controversy was the created that misunderstanding w^ch was between y^e Greek {sic} & Latines presently after the Council of Sardica. Ab But Constantius \soon after/ conquering the western empire made the western bishops submit & subscribe the sentence of the eastern Councils, & so quieted this dispute.

As to the faith, both parties allowed the Nicene decree but interpreted it variously: Tthe western bishops by una substantia una usia & una hypostasis, the eastern by ὁμοιούσιος & ὅμοιος κατ᾽ ὁυσίαν. And at length for putting an end to the controversy \about y^e interpretation/ the |bishops| Greeks \& some of the Latines/ p{illeg}d in the Councils of Sirmium, Nice in Thrace, Ariminum, Seleucia & Constantinople convened in the years 357, 358, 359 & 360 proved that \agreed abolished the use of/ the word usia with its compounds should be abolished & that for these resons. \1/ because the ὁμοούσιος had been rejected by the Council of Antioch w^ch deposed Paul of Samosat {illeg} above 50 years before the Council of Nice decreed it |& therefore the tradition of the Church was against it. & the proceedings of that Council being \were/ approved by the Church Catholick \& therefore being grounded upon {illeg} \tradition were/ irreproachable in matters of faith./|, 2 because the Nicene fathers had put it {illeg} without mature deliberation, the Emperor Constantine coming into y^e" Council upon a day appointed & proposing \& pressing/ it & getting it decreed at once before he went out of the Council 3 Becaus the word ὁμοούσιος was a stumblbling block to y^e people being misunderstood by them & leading them into \various/ errors \4 because it created great disturbances in the Churches/ & 4 5 because y^e word usia w^th its compounds was not in scripture w^ch commands us to hold fast the form of sound words received from the Apostles of o^r Lord. And for satisfying the Latines that the Greeks kept to the true meaning of y^e Nicene decree the very Acts of the Council were produced in the Council of Ariminum & the Latines were shewn that the Nicene fathers them selves in th subscribing those Acts had interpreted the word ὁμοούσιος by the word ὁμοιούσιος & therefore the language of una substantia una usia & {una hyp}ostasis was not authorised by y^t C.

And hence forward the language of una h{ypostasis} began to be left off. Yet some few continued to use it till the reign of Iulian or a little longer. & And they that us & were called Sabellians by those who used the language of three hypostases & mutually called thos who used this language Arians till Athanasius in in {sic} y^e reign of Iulian examining both parties told them that tho they disagreed in words they agreed in sense, the one party meaning one hypostasis in {illeg} nature & kind, the other party meaning three hypostases in number. And its observable that Ierome in the reign of Valentinian & Valens used the language of one hypostasis till he got leave from Pope Damasus to use the language of three. Thus was the language of one hypostasis {illeg} exploded as Sabellian by the Councils of Ariminum & Seleucia