their Councils abridged. z 3 9 TheCouncil feemed to think that the Bithops thought that Chrift was born aServant, and not a Sony and was adopted a Son only after for his merits : But there is no thew of rea- fon to impute this to them that profeffed to believe the Creeds and Scripture,and faid no fuch words. They feemed to intendnothing but to diftinguifh the natu- ral eternal Generation of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, from the temporal Generation of the Man Chrift yefus, which was an Adt of. free. Benefi- cence. But they concluded.that they were Neftorians, le-: caufe they intimated two Sons, by laying that he was eternally begotten,and yet adopted a Son. Ant: a. It is not unlike that Nell-arias himfelf for want of more skill irr (peaking, was ufed as they. were. z. Why thould that be imputed to them which they deny? They are told that as Neftorius craftily denied two Perfons, and yet inferred two, fo do they. But is not this a vindication of Neftorius by a Council ? ( Who, knoweth what a man holdeth, better than himfelfà ) Obj. But by confequence Herefie will follow. Anf. If all areHereticks that hold any Error which fuch a greater Error would follow from as is called Herefie, I doubt not but every Council and Bifhop, and Chriftian were Hereticks ;the layingóf tome great Divines being true, That Truths of Faith and Moralityarefo connext,that he that holdeth the leaß Errer. therein, doth.by confequeneefubvert the foundation. You may fay that every man that tellsa lye, or committeth any known fin, is an Atheift, and that if. hebelieved That there isaGod, he would know that he mutt not fin againft,him;. he that fins before his Face, denieth hisOmnifcience,and fis. denieth God, do c. At this rate all are Atheifts and Heretieks. 3.: But may not one that faith, [Chrift as the fecond Perfen in Trinity war the Eternal Son of God ; and asMan,wasbyGeneration in time made the Son of God and Man : ] truly mean that it is but one Perfon that in one refpeht is the Eternal Son,,and in another refpea the Temporal Son ? May he not hold that the perfonal Unity maketh it unmeet to fay, There are two Sons, becaufe that would imply two Perfans,which they.and Neftorius denied? But, again I fay, what if they had faid-thatthere might be two Foliations, or filial. Relations in ene Perfn, refulting from two foundations, Eternal andTem- poral Generation, and if this had been an unapt fpeech, ( to fay .ex dum- bssa fundamentis. dux oriuntur relationes) yet how comes it to be Herefie.? Bin., p. 4,.8. [Ex gnadam Elipandi confejfione pee in Bib- Both. Toletana repenter in quo- dam hbro à Bcato & Heterio contra Elipandum fer:pto i aient nonnulli Fxlicem & hlipandum non in myfierio Incarnattonis,fed tantum abutendo voce Adoption/I, inflar Durandi, aberrâffe : Idem- que conjeciurìs affirmant iftic, quod nibil eorum qua. Neftorio objeFta fee:ant in Cone. Ephef contra Elipandum attulerent, &c. Seethe reft. § 86. Í write not this, and, fnch" like, to juftifie the accufecl; for i"thinlo the Council faid well, ( Bin. p. 418. ) r. Cur nabis non fufcient, qua in Sanàlorum Pat'ru a diElis. inveniuntur, & oniverfali Catholicoefanllionis con.' fuetssdine..
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=