Assertio vera de Trinitate, contra quorundam deliramenta quae ex Serveti aliorumque phanaticorum hominum opinionibus nunc primum in quibusdam Hungariae partibus exorta ac publicata sunt

...for Baptism and the Lord's Supper, Synaxis for the Supper, ἀνθρωποπαθεία anthropopathy (ascribing human feelings to God), etc., which surely no one rejects, because they were devised and used for the sake of explaining things. But if anyone rejects words of this kind, let him for the same reason reject the interpretation which is not stitched together by the context of Scripture. But if a clearer exposition of the context is not rejected, then those names which religiously and faithfully serve the truth of Scripture itself, and are used sparingly and modestly and not without occasion and necessity, are not to be rejected. Whence also Augustine showed that the word Person was extorted by necessity, because of the poverty of human speech in such a great matter, not so that what is could be expressed, but so that it would not be silenced that there are three: Father, Son, and Spirit. What then? Is the word unity, when we speak of God, nowhere found in the Scriptures, even if Scripture asserts that there is one God? Thus, therefore, neither is the word Trinity found in the Holy Scriptures. Yet, Scripture clearly and singularly proposes three hypostases to us. Whence we conclude that the unity of God subsists in the Trinity, and that this has its own properties. For if there is no Trinity, to what purpose do those distinct names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit pertain? Wherefore, even the holy leaders of the churches, driven by the hypocrisy, slipperiness, and malice of heretics, both used the most significant and least ambiguous words themselves and provided them to be used by others.