202 C O M M E N T A T I O 



Viris doctis (W) merito repudiata , Palatinorum 

 Theologorum patrocinium non estnacta. Nam Ger- 

 manica Catechismi editio (e) et Belgica (/) eius 

 verfio ignorant Symboli apostotici nomen, nee duo- 

 decim numerant articulos : et ip(i Latini interpre- 

 tes , fcribentes , fummam eorum , quae in Euange- 

 lio promittuntur , comprehends in S y m b o I o a p o- 

 ftolico , addunt : feu in capitibus catholicae et 

 indubitatae omnium Christianorum fidci. Urfi 

 nus vero , in explicatione resp. 23. haec fcribit: 

 Stint qui put ant , dictum esfe Symb o lum, quid 

 ab apostolis fit collatum. Sed non potcst probari , 

 fingulos apostolos aliquarn par tern contulisfe. Pro- 

 babillor est ratio , Symbolum did , quod [hi ar- 



ti- 



casfent ; fed esfent perfecti in eodet* fenftt , (>t in ea d6 m fen~ 

 tent id. 



(J) Conf. Ger. I oh. Vosfius, in Disf. de Symbolo apo- 

 Jtolicp , 1642. repet. in Tractatibus Tlieol. Amft. 1701. p. 

 5C35J5. loan. Pear fonus, Peer us Kingi us, Her m, 

 Witfius, alii a lo. Clarisfio, Viro eximio , laudati , in 

 Encyclopaedias Thcol. Epitome , ^'. 90. quihus adiun{;i posfunc 

 Sigism. Nagy Borosnyai, Disputationes quatuor dc fri- 

 Mt<i Symboli apoftoiici adornatione , Trai. ad Llhen. 1735* 

 1736. 



C) Ilesp. 22. Alles was vns im Euangelio verheisfcn wirtl , 

 wetchs vns die Artickel vnfers nlgemeinen yngezwaiffelten 

 ChristUc'ncn Glaubcns in einer fumma Ickrcn. 



( f^ Resp. c.1* All wat ons in den Euangello belonet ivert 

 dwelc ons die Artijkclcn onf'cs algheiiicynen enilc ongetwijfeldcu 

 Chrisiclickcn gffoofs in etntr fttmma 



