After I had read out these words to Calvin as well as to fifty clerics of his sect, I asked Calvin whether he had not departed from these statements in the Creed - a Creed acknowledged and accepted by the entire Christian world.

Calvin said (1) he saw that he had plainly departed from them.

(2) I asked why he had done so. He replied that he had paid no heed to those words, but now when he did take notice of them he saw that he had departed from them and had followed his own thought in writing.

(3) I asked him what he thought now. He answered that if the Creed was true, and if it was acknowledged on every side as the true doctrine on the Trinity and on Christ's Divinity, plainly he had erred.

(4) I asked, Did he not want to acknowledge that the Divine and the Human, or God and Man, in Christ were one person, as soul and flesh were one man, according to the words of the Creed! He said he would like to, but could not because he had made up his mind differently.

(5) I asked whether he believed Christ to be one person or two. He replied, One, if hypostatic union made one, but he held the view that the Son of God was not the same [as Christ] and was with the Father, and that Jesus Christ was separate from the Son because the Son was in heaven.

(6) I asked, Was Christ then two! He replied, Yes; and in this he had departed from the Creed.

(7) I asked about hypostatic union, who was it from? He replied, From God the Father; that was the idea he had had.

(8) I asked about Christ's soul, what was it? Might it not be the Divine Itself, since it was said in Luke that it was from the Holy Spirit and the Power of the Most High ! He answered that he had observed this in Luke, but had believed tacitly within himself that the soul was from Joseph.

(9) I put the question, Was not Christ as to His Human the Son of God, as is openly said in Luke i 35? And in Matthew [iii 17], when Jesus was baptised; also in John [i 34]; and when He was transfigured [in Matthew xvii 5; Mark ix 7; Luke ix 35]; and in many other passages! He answered that when he mentioned or thought about the words 'the Son of God', he did not mean Christ Jesus as to His Human. When I said that to comprehend it in that way was contrary to Scripture, he answered that he saw it to be so, but had not thought it to have been so. I wanted him to renounce the idea, but he was conscious of his thinking while in the world and said that on that account he could not.

(10) At length he admitted that he had thought Christ was Joseph's son, but had not dared to write it.