Assertio orthodoxae doctrinae de duabus naturis Christi, servatoris nostri, opposita blasphemiis & sophismatibus Simonis Budnaei nuper ab ipso in Lituania evulgatis

by citing scripture in that way, they dazzle the eyes of the simple. But first, they prove that about which there is no controversy, namely, that our Mediator is true man, which no pious person has ever denied. Then, when they approach that which they themselves have called into question, and attempt to show that the same Mediator is of only one nature, namely human, they labor much to confirm their opinion with sacred testimonies, which we will indicate how well and truly they do in its proper place. It is indeed manifest that they sometimes preserve the words of the scriptures while neglecting the reality itself. They attribute the name of God and Son of God to Christ, but they constantly deny the truth and the reality of these names. They do the same with other names, when it is written that all things were made through him and the world was founded through him. They also recall the arguments of the ancient heretics and, in their manner, celebrate the divinity and excellence of the Father so that they may despoil the Son of all of it. And as Hilary writes concerning the Arians, they seem to themselves to provide a reason for individual points because they have placed beneath their individual assertions certain testimonies from the divine volumes, which, with a corrupted sense of understanding, might flatter those who are only ignorant, providing a semblance of truth according to the depravity of those interpreting them. To us, however, as the same man teaches, divine matters must be learned only from the scriptures, and the authorities of divine sayings must be followed, yet in such a way that, having removed the opinions of men, we seek the understanding of the sayings from the causes of the speaking, preserving the virtues of the sayings. Therefore, because the adversaries exhort us to test the spirits