Hebrew, as may be seen by Bellarmine’s quotations, to join a noun of the plural number with a verb of the singular. And we may say also of many other texts of Scripture alleged to prove the Trinity, that they are not so firm as that high article requireth. But mark his Lordship’s Scholastic charity in the last words of this period: _such bold presumption requireth another manner of confutation_. This bishop, and others of his opinion, had been in their element, if they had been bishops in Queen Mary’s time. _J. D._ Concerning God the Son, forgetting what he had said elsewhere, where he calleth him _God and man_, and _the Son of God incarnate_, he doubteth not to say, that _the word_ hypostatical _is canting_. As if the same person could be both God and man without a personal, that is, an hypostatical union of the two natures of God and man. _T. H._ If Christian profession be (as certainly it is in England) a law; and if it be of the nature of a law to be made known to all men that are to obey it, in such manner as they may have no excuse for disobedience from their ignorance; then, without doubt, all words unknown to the people, and as to them insignificant, are canting. The word _substance_ is understood by the vulgar well enough, when it is said of a body, but in other sense not at all, except for their riches. But the word _hypostatical_ is understood only by those, and but few of those that are learned in the Greek tongue, and is properly used, as I have said before, of the union of the two natures of Christ in one person. So likewise _consubstantial_ in the Nicene creed, is properly said of the Trinity. But to an Englishman that understands neither Greek nor Latin, and yet is as much concerned as his Lordship was, the word _hypostatical_ is no less canting than _eternal now_. _J. D._ He alloweth every man who is commanded by his lawful sovereign, _to deny Christ with his tongue before men_.