Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n body_n earth_n spirit_n 6,743 5 5.1226 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A04774 Miscellanies of divinitie divided into three books, wherein is explained at large the estate of the soul in her origination, separation, particular judgement, and conduct to eternall blisse or torment. By Edvvard Kellet Doctour in Divinitie, and one of the canons of the Cathedrall Church of Exon. Kellett, Edward, 1583-1641. 1635 (1635) STC 14904; ESTC S106557 484,643 488

There are 31 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

glorie of the Creatour If I be bold with Bishop Bilson he is as bold with S. Augustine and sleighteth his reasons and crosseth the very argument which Aquinas magnifieth and which we have now in hand concerning David All the Reverend Bishops words are too large to be transcribed you may reade them pag. 217. and 218. I will onely single out such passages as shew him to be singular or dubious in that point That David is not ascended into heaven doth not hinder saith he but David might be translated into Paradise with the rest of the Saints that rose from the dead when Christ did but it is a just probation that Davids bodie was not then ascended when Christ sat in his humane nature at the right hand of God Again he saith Augustine hath some hold to prove that David did not ascend in body when Christ did or at least not into heaven whither Christ ascended because in plain words Peter saith * Acts 2.34 DAVID IS NOT ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN But saith he either the bodies of the Saints slept again when they had given testimonie to Christs resurrection or they were placed in Paradise and there expect the number of their brethren which shall be raised out of the dust or lastly David was none of these that were raised to bear witnesse of Christs resurrection but onely such were chosen as were known to the persons then living in Jerusalem So farre Bishop Bilson Before I come to presse the argument let me desire the Reader to observe these things in the forecited words and to censure accordingly That the Saints may be in Paradise with their bodies but not in Heaven Is there any paradise but in heaven and when S. Paul was in paradise was he not in the third heaven Shall the Saints that rose upon Christs resurrection and if they ascended at all ascended upon his ascension Shall they I say be taken up from the earth and not be glorified or being glorified not be with Christ Shall they be kept at distance from the blessed spirits of Angels and men that attend upon the Lambe and hang between the earth and that heaven where their Redeemer reigneth Secondly against his former determination and against the reasons which he brought to confirm it he saith Either the bodies of the Saints slept again But doth it not impeach the power of Christs resurrection or will it not seem an apparition rather then a true resurrection as you before reasoned or they were placed in Paradise or David was none of those who were raised to bear witnesse of Christs resurrection You see now his resolution is come down but S. Augustines argument is sound that David was not excluded from that priviledge which other ancient Fathers and Patriarchs enjoyed if they enjoyed them Bishop Bilson himself confesseth that David ascended not when Christ ascended but Christ sat in his humane nature at the right hand of God when Davids bodie was not ascended If not then when did he or they ascend or how were they witnesses of his ascension Lastly that the Fathers before Christ were in blisse is out of doubt that they were in some mansion of heaven is probable that they were comforted and made happier by Christs exaltation may be beleeved But that either the souls of the Patriarchs and David are not with the other blessed Angels and spirits of men now where Christ is or that the Apostles and Evangelists and other most holy disciples of Christ do not follow the Lambe wheresoever he now is but are in a paradise out of heaven seems strange divinitie somewhat touching on the errour of the Chiliasts But I leave Bishop Bilson in this point unlike himself he being a chief of our worthies famous above thousands for a most learned Prelate 4. And if from the ground of S. Augustine and the words of S. Peter I do not demonstrate that David rose not to an eternall resurrection I am much deceived The confessed ground of S. Augustine is That it is hard and harsh to exclude David from being one that arose if any arose to eternall life so that if David arose not none may be thought of them so to arise as to ascend in their immortall bodies to heaven since he had greater gifts or priviledges then some of them and as great as almost any of them But say I David was none of those that arose or if he did he ascended not into heaven And this I will undertake to prove by S. Peter For first S. Augustine in the same Epistle saith The intent of S. Peter was to prove that these words Psal 16.10 Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption were spoken of Christ onely and not of David and the Apostle evinceth it by this reason Because David did die and was buried and his sepulchre is with us that is his bones and his bodie and his ashes are yet with us whereas if David had bodily ascended they would have fitted David as well as Christ who died and was buried and his sepulchre remained but his bodie was not incinerated neither was his flesh corrupted as Davids was but ascended And so the Apostles argument had been impertinent Secondly it is said most remarkably Act. 2.34 David is not ascended into the heavens But Christ is by Davids confession Note first the force of the Antithesis Secondly observe that S. Peter spake this after Christs ascension into heaven whereas if any arose to incorruptible glorie they arose or ascended with Christ and so by just consequent before this time when S. Peter spake these words yet the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is not yet ascended or He hath not ascended into the heavens Again though David were in heaven in his soul long before that time as we say or if he went up out of Limbus Patrum as some Papists say yet certainly someway he was not ascended when S. Peter thus preached If any way he ascended not it must needs be in bodie or soul They dare not say He ascended not in soul and therefore we may boldly say He ascended not in bodie unlesse they will shew us some third nature in David that might ascend which thwarteth both Philosophie and Divinitie 5. Moreover the Turks now inhabiting Jerusalem keep the sepulchre of David forbidding entrance to all Christians into it as every traveller into those parts knoweth and they questionlesse respect the sepulchre as containing the bodie bones or ashes of David there present and unremoved Lastly if David ascended not when Christ did or a little after which is evidenced from the words of S. Peter our enemies themselves will not say that he ascended long after or of late Therefore David is not ascended bodily as yet howsoever Pineda fancieth O Most mercifull Saviour the sonne of David the Lord of David who hast supereminently the Key of David and openest and no man shutteth and shuttest and no man openeth
and shall be certainly the estate of the righteous who shall be alive at that great and dreadfull day I would be loth also to say That nothing else is noted by the words but that Whereas others die first and then are buried these men were buried alive or as live men that I may passe by his amphibolous phrase i Non inficior quin eorum animae si sint mortui pertinaces in seelecata sua obstinatione adjudicatae sint inferis cum Divite I denie not but their souls if they died obstinate in their wicked rebellion were sentenced to hell with Dives Why doth he not specialize where those inferi are and in what place Dives is or did they go to a parabolicall hell for he could not be ignorant that many hold that historie of Dives to be but a parable The truth and summe of all is this By divine power extraordinarie the houses or tents the beasts and the goods of Korah and his complices were separated and secluded from the use of men were swallowed up and covered in the earth and came to that end and destruction which they were capable of No word of God saith expressely no inference or reason evinceth no probabilitie induceth us to think that their tents houshold-stuffe or utensils were alive or that they yea or the beasts of these conspiratours went into the graves of them if graves they had any much lesse did such trash descend into hell that place of torment that Tophet prepared for wicked men that Deep excruciating and affrighting both the Devil and his Angels That tents goods and faculties should go thither to what purpose were it but God doth nothing unlesse it be to some great end or purpose therefore to the lowest hell their goods descended not But as concerning the men themselves it is plainly said That both the earth did open its mouth and swallowed them up even as it did their tents or beasts or goods and after that most distinctly that they went down alive into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but their souls could not go into the graves and there reside and their bodies might go into hell and there reside therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needes there be expounded not of the grave nor of locus corporum as Doctour Raynolds phraseth it but of the hell of the damned of the locus animarum which place also must be the receptacle for all humane bodies of the wicked after the day of doom and retribution and may be the prison of those reprobate both souls and bodies whom God miraculously thither adjudgeth as he did this rebellious rout Though Lyra cited by Doctour Raynolds thinks the grave is meant because it is appointed for all men to die and after that cometh judgement yet I have many wayes proved that by especiall dispensation and by extraordinarie priviledge some may receive favour beyond the common rule or course of nature and contrarily I doubt not but upon so great a commotion and furious rebellion God could and did by way of exemplarie punishment punish these men bodily before the usuall time and sent their bodies to hell before the generall judgement If Cajetan and Hieronymus ab Oleastro cited by that Reverend Doctour expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the grave yet they want both weight and age to put down Epiphanius before recited and many other Ancients who place their bodies in hell I accept then of Suarez his confession before mentioned and agree with him That Korah Dathan and Abiram are now both in souls and bodies in hell And upon this ground I thus work If they be there they are there to be punished and are punished if they burn in hell-fire they have no longer mortall bodies But as at the last day the bodies of the wicked that are alive then shall put on immortalitie so the bodies of Korah Dathan and Abiram were not properly separated from their souls but were changed and fitted for such places of punishments in the instant of their descent and so they descended alive into the pit of hell Then why may not Enoch and Elias be in immortall and glorified bodies since they were assumed up into heaven especially since Suarez himself again ingenuously confesseth k Animae gloriosae connaturale est uniri corpori immortali glorioso It is convenient yea proper to nature that a glorified soul should be united to an immortall and glorified bodie And the souls of Enoch and Elias are now glorified by the like acknowledgement of our learned Adversaries Again where the souls of Enoch and Elias are there also are their bodies But their souls are in the highest heaven For our Saviour saith John 17.24 Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am And John 12.26 Where I am there shall also my servant be But Christ is in the highest heavens Therefore both Enoch and Elias are with their bodies in the third heaven unlesse you can say They were not given by God to Christ and were not Christs servants Now since they are there in their bodies it is very unlikely that they should be there some thousands of yeares in bodies mortall and unglorified Hierom ad Pammachium avoucheth l Fruuntur divino consortio cibo coelesti They enjoy and have the fruition of the Deitie and are fed with heavenly food which is not meat for mortall bodies Besides S. Hierom Tom. 3. Epist pag. 189. in Epistola ad Minerium Alexandrum citeth Theodorus Heracleotes instancing in Enoch and Elias as carried to heaven and as having overcome death And Apollinarius fully agreeth with the other with this addition onely that Enoch and Elias have now glorified bodies Dorotheus in Synopsi de Elia thus m Qui humi iucedebat instar spiritus cum Angelis in coelis agit Who was on the earth as other men now as a spirit liveth in heaven with the Angels therefore he hath not a mortall bodie Again in most of the generall promises that God hath made he giveth some instance or other to be as it were a taste of what shall succeed lest mens hearts should fail in expectancie of that whereof they see no kinde of proof As for example because it was promised that there shall be a resurrection it was figured not onely more obscurely in Isaac his rising up from the Altar in the drawing of Joseph out of the pit in the Whales deliverie of Jonah in Samsons breaking from the cords in Daniels escape from the lions in the waters yeelding and giving up Moses to live in the Kings house and the like but more evidently by the reall and temporarie raising up of divers dead both in the Old and New Testament Likewise the glorification of our bodies being determined by God and by him promised yea Enoch himself prophesying that God cometh with ten thousands of his Saints to execute judgement upon all Jude 14 and 15 verses which is not
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here whereas in the place of Exodus it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also in the Septuagint the first place is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Leviticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may well be expounded one manner of pleading their causes as there was one law This I am sure of the verb is so used Micah 7.9 I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 untill he plead my cause Why may not then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the pleading of ones cause And why may not the meaning of our Apostle be That as Adam was ostium mortis The doore of death so Christ is clavis resurrectionis The key of the resurrection as Tertullian sweetly calleth him And as by Adam all and every one was guilty of death and damnation so by Christs merit every one shall arise to free himself from it if he can and to plead wherefore he should not be condemned to defend himself and answer for himself as Paul did Acts 26.2 to apologize And herein Adam and Christ to be like That as every one was made guilty by one of condemnation so every one for Christs all-sufficient condignity shall be permitted yea enabled to speak for himself why the sentence shall not be executed But these things I leave to the Professours of the Greek tongue and suo quisque judicio abundet So much for the second exposition of the words and for the similitudes and dissimilitudes between Adam and Christ from which resulteth That Adam representing us did not so much hurt us as Christ representing us did do good unto us And therefore since we are acquitted from sinne from all sinnes originall and actuall since we are acquitted from eternall death and have grace and abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse and shall have life eternall and shall reigne in life by ones obedience by one onely Jesus Christ who in his life and on the altar of the crosse merited all these things for us it is no hard measure no iniquity of God if for Adams sinne and disobedience when he sustained our persons both himself and his posterity in his loyns implicitly consenting with him be appointed to die And thus much shall suffice for the first generall Question upon the words of the Text. The second followeth Drusius towards the end of his Preface before his book called Enoch thus * Haec alia quae hoc libro continentur ut in aliis omnibus à me unquam editis aut edendis subjicio libens Ecclesiae Catholicae judicio à cujus recto sensu si dissentio non er● pertinax These and other things which are contained in this book as also in all other books which have been or shall be set forth by me I willingly submit to the censure of the Catholick Church from whose right judgement if I dissent I will not be pertinacious O Deity incomprehensible and Trinity in Unity in all respects superexcellent and most admirable with all the faculties of my soul and body I humbly beg of thee to shew thy mercy upon me for Jesus Christ his sake and O blessed Redeemer accept my prayer and present it with favour to the throne of grace where thou canst not be denied If thou O gracious Jesu art not able to help me and to save my sinfull soul let me die comfortlesse and let my soul perish but since thy power is infinite I beseech thee to make me one of those whom thou bringest to more happinesse then all our enemies could bring to miserie Heare me for thy tender mercies sake and for thy glorious name O great Mediatour Jesu Christ AMEN AMEN MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe question propounded and explained 2. Armenius or rather his sonne Zoroaster dead and revived 3. Antillus dead and living again because the messenger of death mistook him in stead of Nicandas Nicandas died in his stead 4. A carelesse Christian died and recovered life lived an Anchorite twelve yeares died religiously SECT 1. THe second Question which from the words of my Text I propounded is this Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time yea or no because it is said It is appointed for men once to die I speak not of those who have been thought to be dead and have been stretch't out and yet their soul hath been within them though divers for divers daies and upon severall sicknesses have had neither heat nor breathing discernable but onely of such who have suffered a true separation of their souls from their bodies Whether these have again delivered up the ghost and died I make my question 2. Before I come to mention those whom the Scripture recordeth to be truly raised I hold it not amisse to propound to your view a few stories out of other authours Theodoret lib. 10. de fine judicio hath two strange relations The first is out of Plato of one Armenius but Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat 5. relateth from Zoroaster himself that it was Zoroaster the sonne of Armenius He who onely of all the world laughed so soon as he was born saith Plin. 7.16 and was so famous a Magician One of these two either father or sonne the twelfth day after he and others fell in the battell and was to be buried ante pyram constitutus revixit and being come to himself told what he had seen apud inferos namely that his soul being divided from his bodie came with many others who died with him to an admirable and incredible place in which there were two gulfs opes or ruptures of the earth and two open places of heaven right over them In the midst of these hiatus or gulfs judges did fit who when judgement was ended bade the just souls ascend by the heavenly opennes and gaps the judges sowing on their breasts the notes of their judgement But the souls of the wicked men were commanded to go on the left hand and to be hurried to hell carrying with them on their backs the memoriall of their passed life But as for himself being now come in fight the judges bade him diligently heare and see all things and tell all those things which were done when he revived These are sayings worthy of Philosophy saith Theodoret. 3 A second storie is cited in the same place by Theodoret from Plutarch among those things which he wrote De anima Sositiles Heracleon and I saith Plutarch were present when Antillus told us this of himself The Physicians thought Antillus to be dead but he came to himself as one out of a deep sleep and neither said nor did any other thing * Quod emetae mentis signum possit censeri which might argue him to be crazy or light-headed but he told us that he was dead and that he was again revived and that his death upon that sicknesse
by the Evangelist Matth. 27.52 and 53 verses The graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared unto many So farre the text Of the various pointing of which words see more hereafter opening two windows for two expositions On which words divers worthy men both modern and ancient conclude That those Saints died not again k Sed apparuerunt multis etiam cum Christo nunquam ultrà morituri abierunt in coelum But appeared to many and with Christ never after were to die but went into heaven saith Jacobus Faber Stapulensis And Mr. Beza on this place opineth that they did not rise that again they might live among men and die as Lazarus and others did but that they might accompany Christ by whose power they rose into eternall life The late Writers saith Maldonate think that they went into heaven with Christ and with them doth himself agree So Pineda on Job 19.25 So Suarez a third Jesuit So Anselm So Aquinas on the place and on the Sentences So if Suarez cite them truely Origen in the first book to the Romanes about those words of the first chapter By the resurrection of Jesus our Lord and Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. 6. and Justinus Quaest 85. Ambrose in his Enarration on the first Psalme and Eusebius Demonst 4.12 and of modern Authours and of our Church Bishop Bilson in the effect of his Sermons touching the full redemption of mankinde by the death and bloud of Jesus Christ pag. 217. So Baronius ad annum Christi 48. num 24. concerning those Saints whom Christ piercing the heavens carried with himself on high leading captivitie captive Ephes 4.8 More reserved and moderate is Mr. Montague that indefatigable Student sometime my chamber-fellow and President in the Kings Colledge in Cambridge now the Reverend Lord Bishop of Chichester who in his answer to the Gag of the Protestants pag. 209. saith of these Saints They were Saints indeed deceased but restored to life and peradventure unto eternall life in bodies as well as souls MOst cleare Fountain of Wisdome inexhaustible wash I beseech thee the spots of my soul and in the midst of many puddles of errour cleanse my understanding that I may know and embrace the truth through Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. V. 1. Who were supposed to be the Saints which were raised by such as maintain that they accompanied Christ into heaven 2. A strange storie out of the Gospel of the Nazarens 3. Adams soul was saved Adams bodie was raised about Christs Passion saith Pineda out of diverse Fathers Thus farre Pineda hath truth by him That the sepulchre of Adam was on mount Calvarie so say Athanasius Origen Cyprian Ambrose Basil Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustine Euthymius Anastasius Sinaita Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople 4. It was applauded in the Church in Hieromes time 5. Theophylact thought Adam buried in Calvarie Drusius unadvisedly taxeth the Fathers Tertullian consenteth with other Fathers and Nonnus who is defended against Heinsius 6. At Jerusalem they now shew the place where Adam his head was found Moses Barcepha saith that Sem after the floud buried the head of Adam 7. The Romane storie of Tolus and Capitolium much resembling the storie of Adam 1. TO the clearing of this cloud and that we may carry the truth visibly before us I think it fit to enquire First Who these Saints were which thus miraculously arose and then secondly to determine Whether their bodies were again deposited in the earth till the resurrection or Whether in their bodies with Christ they ascended into heaven 2. For the first Hugo Cardinalis on Matth. 27.53 hath an old storie It is said saith he in the Evangelisme of the Nazarens that two good and holy men who were dead before about fourty yeares came into the Temple and saying nothing made signes to have pen ink and parchment and wrote That those who were in Limbus rejoyced upon Christs descent and that the devils sorrowed Though the rest be fabulous yet herein the Gospel of the Nazarens agreeth with our Gospel That the names of the raised are not mentioned Others have been bold to set down both the names and the order of them who arose 3. Augustine Epist 99. ad Euodium thus a De illo quidem primo homine patre generis humani quòd eum ibidem Christus ad inserna descendens solverit Ecclesia ferè tota conseutit Almost the whole Church agreeth That Christ descending into hell freed the first Adam thence That the Church beleeved this non inaniter not vainly but upon some good ground we are to beleeve from whence soever the tradition came though there be no expresse Scripture If this be true of Adams soul yet is it nothing to our question of his bodily resuscitation Proceed we therefore to those that think his very bodie was raised Adam then arose saith Athanasius in his Sermon of the Passion and the Crosse saith Origen in his 35 Tractate on Matthew saith Augustine 161 quest on Genesis and others also if Pineda on the fore-cited place wrong them not And he giveth this congruentiall reason That Adam who heard the sentence of death should presently also be partaker of the resurrection by Christ and with him who had expiated his sinne by death To which may be added That as S. Hierom reports the Jews have a tradition that the ramme was slain on mount Calvarie in stead of Isaac as also Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore ratifieth And to this day they say they have there the altar of Melchisedech So Athanasius reports from the Jewish Doctours that in Golgotha was the sepulchre of Adam This is true but it is not certain that Adam was raised and not true that he ascended bodily into heaven Mr. Broughton in his observations of the first ten Fathers saith thus Rambam recordeth that which no reason can deny how the Jews ever held by Tradition that Adam Abel and Cain offered where Abraham offered Isaac where both Temples were built on which mountain Christ taught and died And as the place was called Calvaria because the head or skull of a man was there found and found bare without hair and depilated saith Basil so divers Fathers have concluded that Adam was there buried and that it was his head See Origen tractat 35. on Matth. Cyprian in his sermon on the resurrection Ambrose in his tenth book of his commentaries on Luk. 23. Basil on the fifth of Esay Epiphanius contra Haeres lib. 1. Chrysostome Homil. 84. in Joannem Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore and de Civitat 16.32 Euthymius on Matth. So Athanasius Sinaita lib. 6. in Hexam in Tom. 1. Bibliothecae Patrum and Sanctus Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople in Theoria rerum Ecclesiast as you may see in Tom. 6. Biblioth Patrum besides abundance of new writers with whose names I delight not to load my page 4 Hierom on
bill of divorcement or separation for of this Christ spake expressely Mat. 19.9 Mark 10.11 Luk. 16.18 Therefore S. Paul commanded not but the Lord namely Christ in those places of the Gospel to which he aimed The third objection is out of the 1. Cor. 7.12 To the rest speak I not the Lord. These words compared with the former may seem to carrie it cleare against me For what can be of more force I command yet not I but the Lord and To the rest speak I not the Lord as if S. Paul spake and wrote something by humane wisdome which the Lord bid him not First I answer with Peter Martyr S. Paul saith thus because before he had reference to Christs speech in the Gospel of not easily dissolving matrimonie but now he sets down somewhat of which Christ in the Gospel is not found to have said any thing So now he speaks not the Lord namely not Christ in the Gospel not Christ by word of mouth as he was man and yet on the contrarie side we may as truely say even in this place and to S. Pauls proper sense with the words inverted The Lord speaks not I Not I of my self not I as a man but God from heaven or the holy Spirit speaketh The conclusion is S. Paul speaketh or writeth nothing as an Apostle from himself without the Lord without divine immediate revelation from the holy Ghost but he might relate something which Christ spake not whilest Christ lived on earth something that is not registred in the Gospel And thus S. Paul did speak and not the Lord And thus may an other speak or write and not the Lord. p Ego dico non Dominus Nunquid Dominus non loquebatur per eum●Vtique Sed ideo dixit se dicere non Dominum quia hoc praeceptum non continetur in Evangelio dictū à ' Domino sicut illud superius I speak not the Lord Did not the Lord speak by him Yes But therefore he said that himself spake and not the Lord because this precept is not contained in any of the Gospels as the other was saith Haymo before Peter Martyr And indeed I remember not that Christ so much as toucheth at this point Whether a beleeving man should put away or dwell from an unbeleeving woman yea or no To the fourth objection 1. Cor. 7.25 I have no commandment from the Lord yet I give my judgement I answer It was matter of counsel not of precept it was left indifferent the doing or not doing had not been sinne q Noluit Deus de virginitate coelibatu praecipere quia visus fuisset damnare nuptias Christ would give no command concerning single life or virginitie lest he should seem to condemn marriage So Augustine in libello de sanct virginit So Hierom against Jovinian So Ambrose saith Peter Martyr Yet the Consilium do I counsel is the advice of such an one as had obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull and a faithfull steward will not distribute more or lesse then his Lord appointeth The unjust steward made them write lesse then was due the usurer makes them write more the good and faithfull man followeth his masters will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foot by foot So this place proveth not that the Apostle as an Apostle wrote or spake by humane wisdome any thing but what was appointed of God The Rhemists on verse 12 say By this we learn that there were many matters over and above the things that Christ taught or prescribed left to the Apostles order and interpretation wherein they might as the case required either command or counsel and we bound to obey accordingly Doctour Estius goeth further r Satìs autem insinuat hic sermo Praecipio non ego sed Dominus Apostolos eorum successores posse quaedā praecipere quae Christus ipse per se non praecepit This speech I COMMAND YET NOT I BUT THE LORD doth sufficiently evidence that the Apostles and their successours can command something which Christ himself by himself commanded not Both of them runne awry in one extream Doctour Fulk answereth to that place of the Rhemists The Apostles had not particular precepts for every case but they had generall rules in Christs doctrine which they were bound to follow in their precepts and counsels I think he approacheth too nigh unto them unlesse he mean that both their precepts and counsels had the divine dictate to guide them especially in things which they wrote And whereas he saith They had not particular precepts for every case I say they had for all cases necessarie especially concerning the whole Church And their generall rules might rather be for guiding matters of order and discipline then of doctrine For he that promised to lead them into all truth would not leave them in the framing of particulars as he doth us and other men who out of generals do deduce these and these specials For there is a great distance and traverse to be placed between those sacred Penmen and other succeeding Expositours of holy Writ And S. Paul doth imply that even his judgement or counsel was according to the Spirit of God as Bishop Andrews well observed and now cometh to be handled The fifth objection is verse 40 in the same verse where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to my judgement he addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think also that I have the Spirit of God Minus dicit plus volens intelligi He speaketh sparingly but would be understood more largely say I. So verse 26 I suppose and 1. Cor. 4.9 I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last f Puto autem Sobriè loquitur minúsque dicit majus significat ut sit sensus Certò scio I THINK He speaketh soberly signifying more then he spake and it is all one as if he had said I KNOW CERTAINLY saith Dionysius Carthus with whom accordeth Primasius Do not think that I speak what I do of my self the Spirit of God speaketh in me t Futo non dubietatem significat The word I THINK is not wrapped about with doubtfulnesse Peter Martyr thinks it is an Ironie against the false Apostles who traduced S. Paul as unworthy to be an Apostle And then the Ironie hath as full force as if he had peremptorily avouched The Spirit of the Lord is in me and by it I write what I write Other objections may be made as the 2. Cor. 11.17 I speak it not after the Lord but as it were foolishly in this confidence of boasting Therefore not onely humane wisdome but humane infirmitie may seem to challenge part both in his words and writings It is answered in a few words of Dionysius Carthusianus Non loquor id est Loqui non videor that is It seems not so to some though my self know the contrarie Others may object 1. Cor. 9.8 Say I these things as a man or saith not the Law
some think that Joseph lived after Christs resurrection and yet others say he died the twelfth yeare of Christs age to whom Baronius rather inclineth a Ad annum Christi 12. Joseph being very aged about 80 yeares old when he was espoused to the holiest Virgin as Epiphanius and others do guesse For my part I embrace the mean and tread in the middle path Neither thinking that Joseph died the 12 yeare for when Christ was twelve yeares old Joseph went up to Jerusalem Luk 2.42 and after Christs descent to Nazareth Christ was obedient to Joseph and the all-garacious Virgin vers 51. therefore Joseph could not be dead in the twelfth yeare of Christ which the learned Baronius did supinely and sluggishly passe over and not observe Nor yet do I imagine on the other side that he lived beyond Christs resurrection or till his death since there is frequent mention of Christs Apostles of his holy mother and of his cousins and friends men and women yea of strangers and no mention nor intimation at all See Salianus in his Annals in annum mundi 4065 at large on this point that Joseph lived till Christ began publickly to preach and do miracles much lesse after his death So upon my supposall that he died between the thirteenth yeare of Christ and the twentie ninth Joseph might very well be one of those who were raised at that time and with him perhaps divers whom Christ had healed or to whom he had preached if they died before and many others with whom Christ conversed till he was thirty yeares old 4. And all these did prove and confirm unto the incredulous or wavering Saints their friends or kindred yea and to the very beleevers also the truth of Christs doctrine of his death of his resurrection appearing not promiscuously to Grecians or to Romans not to all no not to all the Jews but to many but to fit persons saith the Interlinearie Glosse whether Jews Grecians or Romans then residing at Jerusalem to such as knew them in their lives and at their deaths This conjecture may passe the more plausibly if we consider that Christ himself appeared not to all indifferently but onely to some and to some oftner times then to others yet no where is said to have shewed himself to any but onely to his followers and Disciples And as the Apostles were confirmed by Christs holy conference so might many other then living beleeve or the rather beleeve the Gospel of Christ upon proof made by the new raised in many particulars strengthning their faith They arose b Vt Dominum ostenderent resurgentem To shew that Christ was raised saith S. Hierom on Matth. 27. c Cum eo debebant resurgere ut ipsum ostenderent resurrexisse They ought to rise with Christ that they might shew he was risen saith Ludolphus the Carthusian That d Debebant they ought savoureth of presumption Dionysius the Carthusian hath more moderate terms he on the place saith They did testifie that Jesus was the Christ that he was truely risen and had destroyed hell Hierom Tom. 3. fol. 50. in his answer to the eighth question of Hedibia thus e Non omnibus apparuerunt sed multis qui resurgentem Dominum susceperunt They appeared not to all but to many who received our Lord risen from the dead And yet let me superadde by his leave If they had appeared to the Disciples and Apostles of Christ who received Christ I cannot think they would have concealed it 5. Among my other diversions and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or winde-abouts let this be one occasionally arising from the odde position which Estius hath in 1. Cor. 7.39 f Rectè ex Apostoli verbis inferunt Aquinas carthusianus Non teneri mulierem ad recipiendum virum de morte resuscitatum Aquin and Carthusian conclude rightly saith he from the Apostle that a woman is not bound to receive her husband newly raised nor may she enjoy him without a new contract What if I answer That a woman is tied to her husband as long as he liveth but he liveth afterward though he had been dead and when the Apostle speaketh of death he speaketh of a compleat death not susceptible in this world of another life For he opposeth the dead man to the living as if one could not be dead and then living but first living and then dead for ever till the generall resurrection Suppose we Lazarus was married had not his wife been his lawfull wife bound to him by their first agreement even after his resurrection I doubt it not Yet this might be the case of some of the many who were raised especially if they died but a while before But I confesse the case differeth and is more perplexed if the partie were dead and the dayes of mourning past and the woman married to another Yet even here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Father most gracious O Saviour most mercifull O holy Spirit most comfortable I humbly begge thy grace mercie and comfort to be shed forth upon me in this life that I may please thee in my vocation and do thy will and fulfill the businesse which thou hast appointed for me And leave not off I beseech thee to guide me by thine enabling counsel here till thou art readie to crown me with thy glorie in the life to come Amen Lord Jesu Amen CHAP. XV. 1. The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ as is proved by Scripture and Reason Suarez his shallow answer Epiphanius strengthening my former positive conjectures 2. If the raised ascended bodily into heaven the Patriarchs should not be left behinde 3. The ascending bodily of the Saints into heaven not necessarie or behooffull 4. Onely Christs bodie was seen ascending 5. In likelihood Christ would have shewed the Patriarchs unto some of his Apostles THat these raised Saints who bare witnesse of Christ setling many pendulous and doubting souls strengthening many followers and Disciples of our Saviour and perhaps converting some unbeleevers by teaching them that their expected Messiah was now come that he did live among them and had died for their sinnes and risen again for their justification That they I say after this office performed again deposited their bodies in the earth and ascended not corporally into heaven you may behold proved by this first reason drawn from Scripture For Christ is compared to the high Priest who alone entred the SANCTUM SANCTORUM Hebr. 9.7 It is true indeed that we enter into the Holiest by the bloud of Jesus Heb. 10.19 but he onely * Hebr. 10.10 by a new and living way through the vail that is to say his flesh * Hebr. 9.12 entred in once into the holy place His entring differing from others entring and differing in this That with his bodie he entred others ascended not into heaven with him bodily Secondly if they had ascended into heaven following Christ their bodies must have been
seen as well as Christs But their bodies were not seen ascending for the Evangelists would not have omitted a matter of such moment Suarez denieth this because the Evangelists do describe such things as may be seen with bodily eyes in which regard neither the Angels nor the souls of Saints are reported to have accompanied him which yet divers beleeve to have kept wing and way with him to heaven I answer Though Angels and the spirits of men be not specified as not being seen as not being to be seen without bodies yet such Saints as arose with their bodies and went into heaven with their bodies as Suarez and others think all they who arose out of their graves did might in likelihood be seen ascending with Christ as well as Christs bodie And their bodies were as subject to be seen with bodily eyes as Christs was yea more visible by how much Christs bodie was more glorified then any of the Saints if claritie impassibilitie agilitie and subtilitie do make glorified bodies to be lesse visible all which Christ had in an eminent degree above any other An unglorified eye can see naturally a glorified bodie though a glorified bodie can be seen or not seen according as it pleaseth See the Supplement of Aquin part 3. quest 85. artic 2.3 Therefore my conclusion is firm as his objection is impertinent Thirdly from Epiphanius in Ancorato I gathered what before I onely conjectured That such onely were raised as died a while before who rising were known to such as then lived that their testimonie might by their former familiaritie the rather be beleeved and be void of exception whereas if such were raised as died long before they must first use arguments to prove that themselues had sometimes lived and that they once died that they were newly raised and that they were the same persons whom they reported themselves to be 2. Now that these should go into eternall happinesse both of souls and bodies and leave the Patriarchs bodies in the dust is in judgement improbable Therefore if it were to be proved that those who arose out of their graves after or upon Christs Passion did ascend into the most glorious happinesse in heaven both of bodie and soul as above other men I should think and maintain that Adam Seth Noah Abraham Isaac and all the rest before mentioned and others unmentioned holy Prophets and others were they that did arise and were they who were partakers with Christ of perfect immortalitie and had more favours and priviledges then other men So since Epiphanius concludeth That others of later times were raised I will be bold to inferre that others ascended not into heaven before those holy Patriarchs but laid their bodies in the graves again 3. Again if the end of their resurrection mho now arose was to testifie that Christ was risen this dutie they might fulfill though they ascended not into heaven with him If to testifie that Jesus was the Christ that he was just that he was the Sonne of God which was the collection of the Centurion when he saw the graves open and that many bodies arose Matth. 27.54 their ascension into heaven was not necessary to that certificate If they say They arose to be witnesses of his ascension into heaven I answer He had other witnesses of it Act. 1.9 who would have been witnesses of their ascension also if they had ascended with him If you say they arose to be companions of his ascension I reply that you do but beg the question and hold a groundlesse conclusion 4. Moreover Christ was seen of the Apostles fourtie dayes and spake of things pertaining to the Kingdome of God Act. 1.3 and He shewed himself alive after his Passion by many infallible proofs as is said immediately before and they saw when he ascended into heaven vers 9. But that Christ ever conversed with any of those that were raised or was seen with them or they with him or they with the Apostles or Disciples or that any ascended into heaven is no direct mention as perhaps there would if Adam and the rest of the holy Patriarchs and Prophets had been raised and had gone into heaven 5. Neither would Christ who vouchsafed Peter James and John to see him conferre with Moses and Elias at the Transfiguration have now denied Peter James and John to see him conferre with the same Moses and other Patriarchs after his resurrection if they had arose and conferred with him as out of doubt during the time of fourtie dayes that he conversed on earth since their and his resurrection if they arose he often discoursed with them for he did but about twelve times appeare to the Apostles and that most on the Sabbath-dayes and then stayed not very long with them and so I may probably think that he did imploy some part of the rest of the time from his resurrection to his ascension in conference with Moses and the Patriarchs raised especially if they were to ascend bodily into heaven with him But none of these things are once pointed at Therefore there is no likelihood that they were raised much lesse that they ascended with Christ into heaven O Glorious Saviour of mankinde who didst ascend bodily into heaven to prepare a place for us amongst those many mansions filled with blisse Open the gate to me who do knock bid me enter into my masters joy that I may praise thy name and wait on thee my onely stay my delight and the life of my soul my Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ So be it CHAP. XVI 1. Angels taken for men Angels representing men are called men 2. The name JEHOVAH ascribed to an Angel representing JEHOVAH say Estius and Thyraeus Picking of faults in the Apocryphall Scriptures to be abhorred 3. Drusius his povertie The Apocrypha is too little esteemed The Angel who guided young Tobie defended 4. The great difference between Christs manner of rising and Lazarus his INdeed it is said Act. 1.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Behold two men stood by them in white apparel whiles the Apostles were looking stedfastly into heaven after Christ and they told them of his coming to the last judgement in the same manner as he ascended Which two certainly might be men and were men saith the Text yea say some Expositors were some of those Many who arose out of their graves after Christs resurrection These were amicti vestibus albis saith Erasmus In albo vestitu saith Beza Now the Saints are arayed in white robes Revel 7.13 and whitenesse of garments is a token of joy Ecclesiastes 9.7 8. and these had cause to joy I first answer with most of the Ancients with the modern Beza Sa Montanus and Sanctius That these two men so called were Angels For the Angels representing mens persons are called according to their names or titles whom they represent As in the vision which S. Paul saw by night Act. 16.9 it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There stood a man
answered by the prodigious Legend of Christina who died twice No hurt is to man if God will send his soul from an heavenly place to live a while on earth again 5. No harm to die twice The difference between death compleat and incompleat 6. God can dispense with his own Laws THus having beaten down the opposite authorities if they were fully on that side with weight and number the third and last point which I propounded to handle was the answering of all their reasons and arguments Some are so weak that I need not to answer For Suarez himself who alledgeth them confesseth their weaknesse and answereth them These three proofs following he alledgeth but answereth not First It was decent and behovefull DECUIT saith Suarez that Christ who had both bodie and soul should have companions of his glory in their bodies as well as in their souls For his delight is to be with the children of men Proverb 8.31 Which Suarez it may be took as an hint from Cajetan for he on Aquin. parte primâ quaest 53. art 3. hath it thus a Rationale videtur quòd sucrexerint perfectè ad vitam penitus immortalem ut beatitudo corporis in Christo haberet socios minus enim corporalis felicitas aliquid habere videretur it desit corporalis societas est enim homo secundùm vitam corporcam animal sociale c. It standeth with reason that they arose perfectly to a life fully immortall that the bodily blessednesse of Christ might have some fellows For the bodily happinesse seems not perfect and compleat if bodily societie and company be wanting for man is according to the corporeall life a sociable creature or good fellow not onely for want of necessaries unto life as happeneth in this world but for naturall delight consisting in bodily conversation saith Cajetan dissenting in this from the great Summist his master I answer that Cajetans argument is ridiculous for it holdeth chiefly in children or babies in fools and in striplings who love play-mates or in worldly factours whom businesse forceth into societie and commerce But that the Saints in heaven yea Christ himself the all blessed Saviour of the world both God and Man should not have the full of delight or have too little of bodily felicity if other humane bodies be not present savoureth rather of the Turkish Coran and the Arabian school then of the sacred Text and that Christ in heaven is animal sociale naturally delighting in bodily conversation for so much the application of that Axiom importeth or els he saith nothing to the purpose doth imply his brutish conceit of our most holy Redeemer The sweet singer of Israel saith Psal 16.11 In thy presence is fulnesse of joy at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore If this befall other holy Saints much more it belongeth to Christ from whose fulnesse all the whole bodie of his Church receiveth comfortable influences But grant we that such bodily companie might be desired by Christ yet he needed not these Many but he might have had Enoch and Elias or Moses and Elias with whom he conferred at his transfiguration Secondly unto Suarez his words Barradas his fellow-Jesuite answereth Christ needeth not men indued with bodies now in heaven As for the place of the Proverbs the precedent words give light unto them I rejoyced in the habitable parts of the earth saith the Text So his delights were with the sonnes of men in and upon the earth but of his delight in them with their humane bodies in heaven Before the last resurrection there is no inkling or intimation given Suarez argueth thus secondly b Animae gloriosae connaturale est c. It is very naturall for a glorified soul to be united unto an immortall and glorious bodie But their souls were glorious Therefore their bodies also And the glorie of a blessed soul of its own nature redounds upon the bodie I answer It doth so naturally if it be not hindered But the blessed souls of these Many Saints were in bodies not immortall not blessed not glorious for a few dayes or houres and that by miracle saith Barradius Besides whilest Christ lived on earth unlesse at his Transfiguration or some such especiall occasion the glorie of his most happie soul which was then beatified as much as any of the souls of the Saints are now and more did not impart visible glorie to his bodie but it was passible and mortall for it died Then why may not these Saints have the glorious light of their souls eclipsed from their bodies Again the assumed bodies of blessed Angels ever did resolve into their first principles when the ends why they assumed them were fulfilled the like might be in the Saints whose souls were hindered from communicating incorruptible and glorious qualities to their bodies and so they were partakers not of the perfection of the last eternall resurrection but of the imperfections incident to the temporarie and mortall resurrection Thirdly saith Suarez Corah Dathan and Abiram are in hell with their bodies therefore some to shew Gods mercie must now be in heaven with their bodies and therefore these Many I answer that both the sequences are lame though we should grant the ground or antecedent of the Argument For first was not Gods mercie seen in heaven from the houre of Corah and his companies descent into hell till these Many ascended Then why may it not still be seen though these ascended not especially since that Christ is there in a most blessed incorruptible bodie as they are in hell in cursed bodies which would take corruption for a favour Lastly why must these Many Saints be the counter-pattern in heaven rather then Enoch or Elias or Moses being the Magistrate against whom Corah and his complices combined themselves 2. Others there are who object It is said THEY ENTRED INTO THE HOLY CITIE But the holy citie is the new Jerusalem Jerusalem above Revel 21.2 Therefore they died not but went into heaven I answer Jerusalem below the materiall Jerusalem the seat of the kings of Judah because of Gods worship there especially to be performed in that glorious Temple was also called the holy citie GLORIOUS THINGS ARE SPOKEN OF THEE THOU CITIE OF GOD Psal 87.3 Amongst others thou art styled holy Rev. 11.2 The holy citie shall the Gentiles tread under foot but the Gentiles shall never trample on the new Jerusalem above On the one side of a shekel of the Sanctuarie which once I saw was stamped in Hebrew characters Holy Jerusalem Again Tobit 13.9 O Jerusalem the holy citie he will scourge thee but he will never scourge Jerusalem above which is the Mother of us all therefore Jerusalem below must needs be this holy Citie Bellarmine himself de Pontifice Romano 3.13 accordeth with us and interpreteth the strife of the two Witnesses against Antichrist in Jerusalem below And before him Hierom in his answer to the eighth question of Hedibia Tom. 3. fol. 50. saith Of these words
Assumption most honoured among the Papists and yet there is monstrous disagreeing among them who favour her Assumption The last instances concern not our question ibid. 8. Pineda presumed too farre upon uncertainties Lorinus dareth not name any particularly that were raised It cannot be known certainly 136 CHAP. XIIII 1. MY conjecture that none of the Patriarchs or old Prophets were raised 137 2. An objection concerning Peters knowing of Moses and Elias on mount Tabor answered ibid. 3. A conjecture that the Saints who lived in Christs time and died before him were raised at his Passion Who they were in most likelihood When Joseph the reputed father of Christ did die 138 4. The end why they were raised To whom they appeared 139 5. A crotchet concerning the wives of dead men which have been raised 140 CHAP. XV. 1. THe raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ as is proved by Scripture and reason Suarez his shallow answer Epiphanius strengthening my former positive conjectures 141 2. If the raised ascended bodily into heaven the Patriarchs should not be left behinde 142 3. The ascending bodily of the Saints into heaven not necessarie or behooffull ibid. 4. Onely Christs bodie was seen ascending 143 5. In likelihood Christ would have shewed the Patriarchs unto some of his Apostles ibid. CHAP. XVI 1. ANgels taken for men Angels representing men are called men 144 2. The name JEHOVAH ascribed to an Angel representing JEHOVAH say Estius and Thyraeus Picking of faults in the Apocryphall Scriptures to be abhorred ibid. 3. Drusius his povertie The Apocrypha is too little esteemed The Angel who guided young Tobie defended 145 4. The great difference between Christs manner of rising and Lazarus his 146 CHAP. XVII 1. THe place of Matth. 27.53 is diversly pointed and according to the pointing is the diversitie of meaning The first implieth that the Saints arose with Christ though their graves were opened before This interpretation is not so likely though received generally 148 2. The second inferreth that they arose before Christ though they went not into the citie till after his resurrection This is favoured by the Syriack and is more agreeable to reason ibid. 3. That the raised Saints died again proved by reasons and Heb. 11.40 149 4. Christ the first-fruits of the dead and of the raised Angelicall assumed bodies were seen and heard much rather should mens bodies ascending with Christ 150 5. S. Augustine Aquinas Hierom Chrysostom Theophylact Euthymius Prosper Soto Salmeron Barradius Pererius Valentian affirm that the raised Saints died again Franciscus Lucas Brugensis holds it likely 151 CHAP. XVIII 1. THe arguments of the contrarie opinion answered Suarez and especially Cajetan censured 152 2. That by the holy Citie Jerusalem below was meant proved at large Josephus and the Jews erring about the name of Jerusalem Hierom uncertain 154 3. How the raised appeared A difference between appearing as men And appearing as newly raised men Franciscus Lucas Brugensis rejected 156 4. An argument of Maldonat answered by the prodigious Legend of Christina who died twice No hurt is to man if God will send his soul from an heavenly place to live a while on earth again 157 5. No harm to die twice The difference between death compleat and incompleat 159 6. God can dispense with his own laws 160 CHAP. XIX 1. STrange conceits concerning Nero from Suetonius Tacitus Hierom Augustine Nero supposed to be Antichrist 161 2. Another incredible relation of the Armenian who is said to have lived at Christs passion The Armenians have their holy frauds ibid. The Contents of the third book CHAPTER I. Sect. 1. MAny Papists are very peremptorie that all and every one must die Melchior Canus is more moderate The words are onely indefinite not universall 165 2. Objections brought to prove that universally all shall die Their answers Generall rules have exception Even many learned Papists have acknowledged so much The point handled especially against Bellarmine 166 3. Indefinites have not the force of universals Even universals are restrained 169 4. Salmeron bringeth many objections to prove an absolute necessitie that every one shall die All his objections answered Mans living in miserie is a kinde of death ibid. CHAP. II. 1. THe third question resumed Whether every one must die The second part of the answer unto it That some have been excepted as Enoch and Elias The controversie hath been exquisitely handled by King James and Bishop Andrews 173 2. Bellarmines third demonstration that Antichrist is not yet come propounded The place of Malachi 4.5 expounded by Bishop Andrews and enlarged by my additions The Papists objection answered 174 3. The place of Ecclesiasticus 48.10 concerning Elias examined 178 4. Another place of Ecclesiasticus 44.16 concerning Enoch handled at large against Bellarmine Enoch was never any notorious sinner in some mens opinions Others otherwise Their arguments for both opinions are onely probable and answered My opinion and it confirmed Some think Enoch died Strange and various opinions concerning S. John the Evangelist his living death and miraculous grave More miracles or else mistakings in the Temples of Christs Sepulchre and his Assumption about Jerusalem S. John did die Enoch did not die but is living Mine own opinion of the place Genes 5.24 Et non ipse and it confirmed A comparison between Enochs Elijahs and Christs ascension The posture and circumstances of Christs ascending 180 5. Bellarmine and others say Paradise is now extant In the earth or in the aire saith Lapide the Jesuit The old translation censured The heaven into which Enoch and Elias were carried was not Aërium nor Coeleste but Supercoeleste The earthly Paradise is not extant as it was Salianus with others say truely The materiall remaineth not the formall Superest quoad Essentiam non quoad Ornatum The Place is not removed but the Pleasure and Amenitie Salianus his grosse errour That Enoch and Elias are kept by Angels within the bounds of old Paradise on earth 194 6. Enoch shall never die as is proved from Hebr. 11.5 Three evasions in answer to that place confuted Melchizedech and strange things of him The East-Indian language hath great affinitie with the Hebrew An errour of moment in Guilielmus Postellus Barentonius Elias was not burnt by that fire which rapted him Soul and bodie concur to make a man saith Augustine from the great Marcus Varro Vives taxed Moses at the transfiguration appeared in his own bodie An idle conceit of Bellarmine concerning Moses his face and good observations of Origen upon that point It is probable that Elias was changed at his rapture and had then a glorified bodie An humane soul may possibly be in a mortall bodie in the third heaven Corah Dathan and Abiram are in their bodies in hell properly so called and alive in the hell of the damned Ribera and Viegas confuted Our Doctour Raynolds was not in the right in this matter Some kinde of proofs That Enoch and Elias are in glorified bodies
Charles the fifth his Edicts n Nè quis de Sacra Scriptura maximè de rebus dubiis difficilibus privatim aut publicè disputet aut ejus interpretationem sibi sumat nisi sit Theologus qui probatae alicujus Academiae testimonium habeat Let no man take upon him to dispute publickly or privately of the sacred Scripture especially of doubtfull and hard points or to interpret it except he be a Divine that hath the testimonie of some approved Vniversitie It was an holy Edict breeding reverence to the sacred word of God and I could wish it were in practise with us though I must needs confesse the breach of the edict was too severely punished for the men were to be beheaded and the women to be buried alive though they desisted from their errour but if they were obstinate they were to be burned and their goods confiscated Yet the rebellions of the Anabaptists in Germanie may be some cloke for that cruell sentence which rebellions also forsooth were moved by the Spirit of God if for example sake you wil give credit to Thom. Muncer his oration unto the armed rebellious clowns o Constat nobis auspicatum esse me hanc actionem non meâ quadam autoritate privatâ sed jussu divino We are sure saith he that I began not this action by any private authoritie of mine but by a divine injunction c. And again p Videbitis ipsi manifestum Dei auxilium Ye your selves shall see the manifest help of God And he had Scripture to confirm it Scripture in word not in sense Scripture misapplied things falling out contrary to his propheticall Spirit for they were overcome and he beheaded Likewise Sleiden Comment 30. fol. 28. saith of the Anabaptists q Cum Deo colloquium sibi esse mandatum se habere aiebant ut impiis omnibus interfectis novum constituerent mundum in quo pii solùm innocentes viverent They said they had conference with God and a mandate from him to kill all the wicked and then to frame a new world wherein none but the godly and innocent should live This I will say of mine own knowledge that when that man of happy memory the late right Reverend now most blessed Saint Arthur Lake Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells appointed Doctour Sclater now also a Saint of heaven then my most learned loving friend and sometime fellow-Collegian in the two royall Colledges at Eaton and Cambridge with my self to conferre with an Anabaptisticall woman we heard her determine great depths of Divinitie as confidently as ever S. Paul did though he was taught by Christ himself and as nimbly as ever an ape crackt nuts yet so ignorantly and with such non-sense that we both wondred at her incredible boldnesse The Revelation she had at her fingers ends she thought that she understood it better then S. John himself and defined in a few houres conference more depths of Divinitie then six Generall Councels would in a long time Mysteries were no mysteries to her if an Angel of earth or one from heaven instruct her contrary to her frantick prepossest imagination she would conclude Because the Spirit bloweth where it listeth that the Spirit instructed her in the right way A fit consequence for such a pseudo-prophetissa 7. But what do I speak of her self-conceit when of late an other of her sex hath printed a book of her phantasticall crudities and by English anagrams expoundeth Scripture A new kinde of interpretation never thought of fit for a woman to be the inventour of She teacheth Daniel to reveal himself after a new fashion and such things which were he alive and racked he must say he never thought of She thinks she untieth knots and gives light to prophesies but indeed misapplieth things past and perhaps future contingents to present times and while she gathereth many excellent strains of words and sentences out of the divine Writ in coupling them together she maketh such a roaring hotch-potch as if she had vowed to write full-mouthed non-sense in loftie terms others not knowing nor perhaps herself what she aimeth at Take a taste of her anagrams DANIEL I END AL. Yet did not he end all prophesies nor all things MEDES AND PERSIANS SEND MEE SPANIARDS What would she do with them It was feared that they would have come too soon for her and others too THE ROUGH GOATE THE GOTH ROAGUE Like you this you shall have more as bad as void of wit PRINCE OF PERSIA I CAN POPE FRIERS If Friers should come and prevail they would teach her to be more humble DARIUS THE MED I DREAMED THUS Awake dreamer no sense is in thy dreams much lesse religion Was ever Scripture made such a nose of wax did ever any religious heart think such could be the meaning of those words Let me but touch at her obscene exposition of the end of Christs Circumcision pag. 5 and consider her fanaticall imagination that the Spirit of God by Michael understood King James pag. 50 And the warre in heaven with Michael and his Angels against the Dragon and his Angels is thus expounded by her pag. 55. The fray is fought by seconds by Michael is meant King James the Dragon is the Pope whom Michael overcame by the bloud of the Lambe and by the testimonie of so many Bishops and other faithfull crowned with the glory of Martyrdome whereas King James had never a Bishop so crowned and never a Bishop was so crowned since he was born Holy peaceable and harmlesse King James who would scarce hurt a worm is now interpreted to be the greatest fighter among the celestiall host I could wish she would repent for her blasphemy pag. 70 where she writeth That the person of the sonne of God not made was turned into a lump of clay and for her pointing out the day of judgement For though she confesseth pag. 90 Of the day houre no man knoweth no not the Angels that are in heaven nor the Sonne but the Father yet she addeth The account of this book of note is by centuries of yeares Suppose it were so as it is not could not Christ and his Angels know the day by the computation of centuries as well as she but she by a new account hath found out as she imagineth what Christ and the good Angels were ignorant of namely the exact day of doom For thus she determineth pag. 100 There is nineteen yeares and a half to the day of judgement July the twenty eighth one thousand six hundred twenty five Had not this woman been better never to have seen Scripture then thus to profane it and take Gods word in vain You think you have the Spirit of God as you write in the last page but I am sure if you repent not betimes for your wire-drawing of Gods word and intruding into hidden and unsearchable depths of Divinitie you are in a desperate case and all the Separatists and Enthusiasts of
q Qui dissolvit pactum numquid essugiet He that breaketh his covenant shall he escape unpunished S. Hierome truely thus concludeth r Etiam inter hostes servanda fides est Even among enemies faith is to be kept adding a divine caution which compriseth our cause ſ Non considerandum cui sed per quem juraveris Multò enim fidelior est ille qui propter nomen Dei tibi credidit deceptus est te qui per occasionem divinae Majestatis hosts tuo imò jam amico es molitus insidias It is not to be considered to whom but by whom thou hast sworn For he is much more faithfull who for the name of God beleeved thee and was deceived then thou who didst circumvent thine enemie yea now thy friend by abusing Gods sacred Majestie I acknowledge that S. Hierome speaketh of oaths between Kings or such as have been enemies but the reasons reach and extend themselves even to the causes of private men Lying fraud or any collusion by mentall reservation or verball equivocation is wholly to be secluded and abhorred when an oath is taken prudent silence in diverse cases is admitted Yea but if an examinate be adjured shall he then be silent still silent I answer I would have him imitate our blessed Saviour who saying nothing at divers times insomuch that the governour marvelled greatly Matth. 27.14 yet when the high priest said * Matth. 26.63 I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the sonne of God though he knew it would cost him his life he concealed not the truth And in such an adjuration upon Religion the examinate is bound to give an account of his faith and to witnesse a good confession though to the expense of his bloud t Contra Marcionem lib. 4. pag. 286. Tertullian seems to be more scrupulous in lesser matters saying u Justa digna praescriptio est in omni quaestione ad propositum interrogationis pertinere debere sensum responsionis Aliud consulenti aliud respondere dementis est It is a just and worthy rule that in every question the answer should be applied to the same sense purpose to which the interrogation is made To answer of one thing when he is asked of another is the part of a mad man Again x Sensus responsionis non est ad aliud dirigendus quàm ad propositum interrogationis quò magìs absit à Christo quod nè homini quidem convenit The sense of the answer is not to be directed to any other thing then that which was propounded in the interrogation So farre is that from Christ which beseems not a meer man So he I answer first Tertullian speaketh of questions in Divinitie to instruct the soul and there it were sinne to delude the simple questionist Secondly he speaketh of questions extra jactum teli cùm aries murum non percusserit of questions not concerning great danger life or limme which doth somewhat vary the case Thirdly an homonymous answer of verball equivocation doth both correspond to the sense of the question which is all that Tertullian requireth and implieth also a second sense which may be understood by an intelligent hearer which in a mentall reservation is impossible to be unlocked opened and cleared except by an hand divine Fourthly Tertullian cannot be thought to condemn verball equivocation the daintie use whereof makes almost as great a difference between a wise man and an idiot as between an idiot and a beast and none but wise men can use it with comfort and delight And the wiser men be as their hearts by divers thoughts are deeper then the fools so their words are more abstruse bivious multivious What writings under heaven of finite men have or can have such multiplicity of meanings as are in Scripture comprised under the words dictated by an infinite Spirit whose whole intire exact depths the meer creature never knew fully and perfectly If I might have my desire quoth S. Augustine I had rather speak in words whose divers senses might give content to divers people of different apprehensions then in words that can have one sense onely The second thing I would commend unto this examinate is to give faire language to his Judges Let him not be bold and malapert nor use clamorous opposition Let not the ignorant Syllogize in Barbara Darii Ferio or marre his cause by ill handling yet if he be unmoveably constant let him say I cannot dispute but I can die let him not provoke the Judge by words or actions ill advised Eulalia being a girle about 12 yeares old did spit in the face of the Judge that he might the rather condemn her The answer of Hannah 1. Samuel 1.15 c. when she was in bitternesse of soul to the misjudgeing and uncharitably zealous Priest Eli was as a sweet incense in the nostrils of God and is a good lesson for all to take out when they are called before the Magistrates though hard measure were offered How long wilt thou be drunken quoth he put away thy wine from thee And she answered No my lord I am a woman of a sorrowfull spirit I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink c. Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of Belial The manner of answering may be sinfull though the matter be good froward behaviour never benefitteth a cause but a gentle answer pacifieth wrath Proverbs 15.1 Taunting recrimination argueth a distempered spirit in the gall of bitternesse How humbly did our blessed Saviour behave himself under the hands of unjust Judges How constantly zealously and boldly because they were inspired immediately from God did the Apostles Act. 4. plead for themselves yet without malapertnesse or irreverence S. Paul his speech to the high priest exacteth a larger discourse Acts. 23.5 Paul said I knew not brethren that he was the high priest Some think that S. Paul knew Ananias to be high priest when he called him painted wall I answer if so it were this is no fit example for sawcinesse to be used in our times towards Magistrates For first if S. Paul did know him he might speak though not as a Prophet yet illuminated and inspired from God which now is not in use Secondly he might speak as a Prophet foredivining an evil end to Ananias as indeed it came to passe saith y Homil. 6. de Laudibus Pauli Chrysostom If any one of them who now revile Magistracy have the spirit prophetical denouncing contingent future things which yet end in accomplishment I will not call him a sawcy presumptuous fellow Thirdly though divers learned men think the contrary and that he spake by an Irony when he said I knew not yet I perswade my self that S. Paul in truth knew not when he spake Ananias to be the high priest for these reasons First because he seemeth to put on the spirit of mildnesse towards them that stood
was not altogether irrevocable but that the messengers who brought him to judgement were sharply blamed by their governours because they brought Antillus in stead of Nicandas Within a while after Nicandas died and Antillus recovered life and health And Plutarch in my opinion seemeth to insinuate that he was present at the recovery of him Of both these if each particular were true that they were dead and relived we may boldly averre that they died again Neither doth Plato Plutarch or Theodoret doubt of it As strange a storie though more remote from our subject you shall finde in Alexander ab Alexandro Genialium dierum 6.21 4 An other istance you shall finde in Bellarmine De arte bene moriendi lib. 2. cap. 1. taken out of Joannes Climachus in scala sua grad 6. who relates thus of a man that died twice In his first life saith he he lived most negligently but dying and his soul being perfectly separated from his bodie after one houre he returned again and he desired Climachus and the rest to depart Whereupon they walled up the cell and he lived as an Anchoret within the cell twelve yeares speaking to no man till he was ready to die again eating nothing but bread and drinking water sitting so he astonishedly revolved those things onely which he had seen in his separation with so earnest a thought that he never changed countenance but continuing in that amazement secretly wept bitterly When he was at deaths doore the second time they forced open the entrance into the cell and coming to him humbly desired him to speak some words of doctrine He answered nothing but this onely b Nemo qui revera mortis memoriam agnoverit peccare unquam poterit The serious remembrance of death will not consist with sinne The like storie you may finde in Venerable Bede All these if they lived again died again and rose not to life immortall And in this sense is that averred Wisd 2.1 Never was any man known to have returned from the grave viz. not to die again for otherwise some were known to have been raised From these I come more especially to speak of such whom the word of God reporteth to have been raised MOst gracious God who didst breathe into the face of man the breath of life and at thy pleasure drawest it forth again out of his nostrils grant that we make such use of this present life that we may see love and enjoy thee in the life eternall through Jesus Christ our onely Lord and Saviour Amen CHAP. II. 1. A division of such as have been raised They all died 2. The widow of Zarephath her sonne raised yet died again supposed to be Jonas the Prophet The Shunammites sonne raised not to an eternall but to a temporary resurrection A good and a better resurrection 3. Christ the first who rose not to die again 4. The man raised in the sepulchre of Elisha arose not to immortality 1. ANd because divers have been raised up of whom there is not the like doubt and answer in each kinde to be made I will therefore distribute them in regard of their times into three sorts Such as were raised 1. Before Christs death 2. After he was ascended 3. About the time of his death Which inverted method I purposely choose because I will reserve the hardest point to the last The first sort again is subdivided into such as were raised either before Christ was incarnated or by Christ himself They who were raised before Christ was born were three 1. The widow of Zarephath her sonne 1. King 17.22 2. The Shunammites sonne 2. King 4.35 3. A dead man who was cast into the grave of Elisha and when he touched the bones of Elisha he revived and stood upon his feet 2. King 13.21 All these three were raised up to live and lived to die again Neither did the intention of such as requested to have them raised or of such as raised them aim once that they should live immortally but live onely on earth again as other men did and then die again Neither did I ever reade any who held these to arise to immortall glory neither stands it with reason For that they were once dead and raised to life the Scripture saith and that they must either live to this time or be translated to immortall glorie in their bodies or die is as true as Scripture Now because there is no ground to say that they yet live or were translated bodily into heaven there is good ground to conclude that again they died 2. Concerning the first of these the Jews think he was Jonas the Prophet and S. Hierome in his Prologue on Jonas citeth their opinion and dislikes it not Tostatus also saith Dïvers others think so If Jonas were the widow of Zarephath her sonne we know that Jonas died afterward for the Prophets are dead Joh. 8.53 and he was one of the Prophets And concerning both the first and second instance it is thought by many good Authours that they are pointed at Heb. 11.35 The women received their dead raised to life again or the Prophets delivered to the women their dead as the Syriack reads it that is to converse with them as formerly being raised not to an eternall but a temporary resurrection and so to die again at their appointed times And to this truth the Text it self giveth in evidence for it is said in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might obtain a better resurrection Of holy men there is a double resurrection the first and the last the good and the better The resurrection mentioned in the beginning of the verse was good and with reference to the former saith Chrysostom the latter resurrection is called the better For the former was temporary the latter eternall called also The holy resurrection in our book of Common Prayer in the Epistle on the sixth Sunday after Trinity though there is no substantiall ground for the word holy either in the Latine or Greek Rom. 6.5 Of the former Aquinas in his Comment on Hebr. 11.35 saith it was rather a resuscitation then a resurrection and again c Isti sic resuscitati sunt iterum mortui Christus autem resuegens ex mortuis jam non moritur Rom. 6.9 These being raised died again but Christ rising from the dead dieth no more Rom. 6.9 3. And therefore Christs resurrection was as Aquinas saith and as it is indeed the beginning of the future resurrection Then must they needs die again who were raised before him He was the first Guide that lead the way to the eternall resurrection He abolished death and hath brought life and immortality to light 2. Tim. 1.10 Life and immortalitie to light which were before in darknesse And I think that the Apostle may well be thus paraphrased in that place to the Hebrews The women desired that their dead children might be raised again 1. King 17.18 2. King 4.22 c. and as a gift
Therefore he arose not at all as yet Lastly should we grant that Adam did bodily arise with Christ yet hath Pineda neither Authour nor reason that Adam ascended with Christ into heaven as I said before which is the main point now in question Thus much if not too much touching Adam 3. Eve also arose saith Dionysius Carthusianus on Matth. 27. but voucheth no authoritie nor produceth any reason or probabilitie and therefore I passe it over the more slightly adding onely this that in the Original it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be understood either no women arose or more then one or two though Pineda mentioneth not one woman and Carthusian but onely and soly Eve But why Eve should rather arise then Sarah or the mother of Moses who were singled out for famous Heroinae Hebr. 11. or other Prophetisses in the Old and New Testament as old Anna and the like I see no reason or that Eve in her raised bodie should be translated into heaven and not Adam her husband nor Abraham nor David is both foolish and fabulous This have I said as supposing the words to be understood of women alone as indeed they are not nor probably can they be applied to women mixt with men so far as any likelihood could present it self to the great conjecturer Pineda who would have balked none of them 4. Abraham arose saith Pineda on Job 19. and annexeth this colour because Abraham rejoyced to see Christs day and saw it and was glad John 8.56 I answer Whatsoever is meant by these words of the Text My day either Christs Godhead which Abraham saw a Quia mysterium Trinitatis agnovit Because he acknowledged the mysterie of the Trinitie saith S. Augustine Or the day of Christs nativitie which Abraham might have notice of in his life time by supernaturall inspirations and then did remember being dead and desired that day for separated souls have both remembrance and appetite intellectuall as I shall evidence hereafter Or it may be Abraham being in blisse might first know it by divine illumination so soon as the day came and thereupon rejoyced as the Angel did and the heavenly host Luke 2.13 of which host Abraham might be one for even the souls of men are also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revel 19.14 saith Gregory Moral 31.12 In the foresaid place of Luke mention is made of an Angel and the heavenly host whereas if onely Angels were the heavenly host it might have been onely said The Angels or onely The heavenly host but The Angel and the heavenly host may give us cause to think that there were some of the heavenly host which were not Angels though Angels onely be mentioned If so humane souls were part of that quire and then Abraham in likelihood was one of them Now as the chief Angel like a chaunter began the Evangelisme of Christs birth so might it be answered by the heavenly host viz. as is probable partly by the Angels singing Glory to God in the highest partly by Abraham and the souls of men concluding the Anthem On earth peace good will toward men I say Whatsoever is meant by the words My day they cannot be expounded of Christs resurrection Some there are who interpret My day of the time of Christs passion whom Maldonate justly misliketh because saith he it is added ABRAHAM SAW IT AND REJOYCED but then when Christ said these words Abraham could not see Christs passion because it was not yet come I may say the same or more against Pineda who will have it expounded of the day of Christs resurrection for Christ speaketh of the day that was past he did see it he was glad and rejoyced so that day was ended when Christ said this but Christs resurrection was not accomplished when he uttered these words therefore they cannot be understood of Christs resurrection And if they were so to be interpreted yet it is not written Abraham arose or Abraham was partaker with Christ or Abraham ascended bodily into heaven this being the issue which we joyned in this controversie but Abraham rejoyced he saw it and was glad which words differ farre from Pineda his ridiculous interpretation 5. An other which rose at the same time was Isaac saith Pineda ibid. for he was a parable of the resurrection and this was done to recompense the fear which possessed Isaac of being slain when he represented Christ To this puncto I answer Pineda himself will not say that every one who was a parable or pledge of the resurrection or who figured it was raised as Samson from his sleep arising in strength and carrying away the gates of Azzah in type of Christ who brought away the gates both of death and hell or those who were raised by the Prophets or by Christ himself or the like for he mentioneth none of these Secondly what proof what consequence what shadow of truth is there that Isaac his fear which was past he being dead one thousand seven hundred yeares before should just now be recompensed and recompensed by being raised to a temporall life which was a poore reward if he ascended not into heaven which Pineda proveth not nor can prove Lastly though it be truth it self that Jacob sware by the fear of his father Isaac Genes 31.53 yet it is not meant as Pineda fancieth the fear that Isaac was in when he was to be offered For I suppose he knew by Abraham that it was Gods especiall appointment and that he also willingly offered himself and might think as Abraham did that God was able to raise him up even from the dead Hebr. 11.19 that in his voluntarie condescent and free-will-offering he might be a type of Christ who layed down his life John 10.17 But the fear of Isaac was either the filial fear by which Isaac reverenced worshipped God as Aben Ezra and Cajetan say or the pious and humane fear wherewith Jacob revered his father Isaac or rathest of all Fear is here taken for the object of fear Metonymically for God himself as it is also taken Esa 8.13 Let God be your fear let God be your dread as Cornelius Cornelii à lapide hath observed after Augustine and divers others for not Isaac his fright or Jacob his pietie is to be sworn by but God Deuter. 6.13 O God the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob the God of the living and not of the dead I beseech thee make me to die to my self and live to thee through him whom the Fathers looked for and whose day Abraham rejoyced to see even Jesus Christ thy onely Sonne my alone Saviour Amen CHAP. VIII 1. Pineda his fancie that Jacob then was raised 2. The reason why the Patriarchs desired the Translation of their bones was not to rise with Christ as Pineda opineth but upon other grounds and to other ends 3. Where Joseph was first buried where secondly 4. The great difficultie
The Lord cometh and the words immediately following make it to have apparent and undeniable reference to the last judgement Nor were the words Maran-atha taken from Moses Deut. 33.2 though he saith The Lord came with 11000 of Saints where is a great similitude of some particulars for there is related what passed at the deliverie of the Law and neither Mara nor Maran is mentioned but rather by the semblance of words we may think Moses alluded to the prophesie of Enoch which long after this S. Jude citeth expresly as prophesying of future punishment to be inflicted for the breach of the Law And indeed Ambrose well expounds our Maran-atha of the second coming of Christ so Clemens Romanus Epist 2. in fine Augustine Epist 178 thus Anathema condemnatus Maran-atha definiunt Donec Dominus redeat Condemned till the Lord return to judgement Most true it is Maran-atha is added to exaggerate the power of the Execration and that it is a form of Execration so was it in the intent of the Donor in Mariana The Talmudists say it signifieth one delivered into the hand of the Tormentour by the judgement of the Lord himself Answerable it is in sense to the words in the 17. Chapter of the 6. Councel of Toledo l Perpetuò Anathemate damnetur May he be perpetually anathematized and Chapter 18. m Anathemate divino perculsus absque uilo remedii loco habeatur damnatus aeterno judicio Being stricken thorough with the divine curse without all hope of remedy let him be esteemed damned by the eternall judgement Therefore indeed foolish were they who thought Anathema Maran-atha to be a kinde of oath as if S. Paul adjured them by the coming of Christ yet so some held saith Peter Martyr More foolish was Cornelius a Lapide the Jesuit who on the place confessing the words to be n Verba execrantis denuntiantis aeternam damnationem imò verba condemnantis Words of imprecation of commination of the eternall damnation yea words of condemnation acknowledging also that Maran-atha is Anathema like to Hasschammata being usually contracted to Schammata which was generally known to be an excommunication of an high form adding also that o Maranus est idem quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excommunicatus ob apostasiam Maranus and a man excommunicate for apostasie are Synonymaes yet for all these things by himself avouched saith expresly * Non sunt verba excommunicantis They are not words of one that excommunicateth But indeed they are words of an excommunication taken from the minatorie prophesie of Enoch recited by S. Jude verse 14. The Lord cometh p Indè ergò nemo non videt deductam illam Anathematis rationem ex primis illius Anathematis verbis minùs aliàs ad alia aliarum sententiarum initia usitatis Anathema ipsum de more Hebraeorum appellatum fuisse From thence therefore every man seeeth that Anathema is deduced and that according to the Hebrew guise it is called Anathema from the beginning or first words of that curse which words are otherwise lesse used to the beginnings of other sentences saith the learned Bertram Maran-atha is q Extremum genus excommunicationis apud Hebraees The highest and greatest degree of excommunication among the Jews saith Drusius in his Henoch pag. 29. who addeth concerning the Apocryphall books of Henoch that the Jews say they have them yet to this day From whence it is likely both that the Jews took their form of excommunication and from the first words of the curse Maran-atha might denominate the intire Anathema Maran-atha as from the beginnings of writs or from the principall words many of our Common-law-writs are so called aswell as the decrees of Popes Nor let any object the unlikelihood that this Anathema is taken from Enochs prophesie because S. Jude hath it not like Maran-atha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer that neither Hebrew nor Syriack nor our English so well endure the placing of the Verb before the Noun as the Greek doth but followeth naturally the naturall sequele of the words and not onely when Enoch spake it but when S. Jude first wrote in the Syriack if in it he wrote that was Maran-atha what after by the Spirit was changed into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the meaning is all one whether it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Noun must be construed before the Verb The Lord cometh Maran-atha This excommunication S. Paul briefly and in two words reciteth as an usance of the Jewish Synagogue and fit to be introduced into the Christian Temples and exercised in Ecclesiasticall discipline So much of that An other instance is in Act. 3.21 What is in the Latine and Greek full of Amphibologie diversely at divers editions rendered by Beza and others is plain radiant in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quem oportet quidē coelum recipere saith the vulgat The sentence is altogether doubtfull both in Greek and Latine saith Bellarmine Tom. 1. pag. 409. whether Jesus suscipiat coelum or coelum Jesum as Cajetan openeth the case Now the Syriack translated by Tremellius hath it Quem oportet coeli capiant Quem necesse est coelis ut capiant as it is varied by the skilfull Linguist Bertram Quem oportet coelum ut capiat saith the Arabick all running to the second exposition that the heavens must contain Christ Which words being firm against the Ubiquitaries they interpret Coelum not properly but figuratively for the glorie reigne and majestie of God r Alioqui enim si sermo esset de loco dictum esset Quem oportet coelo recipi For otherwise if he had meant the place of Heaven it would have been said Who must be received into Heaven So Illyricus in lib. de Ascensione Christi But Illyricus must not teach the holy Ghost how to speak nor be offended if the All-wise Divine Spirit use an Amphibolous phrase in the Greek which is cleared by the more Eastern tongues In my opinion he might rather have said that perhaps by Heaven GOD is meant both because our blessed Saviours last words were Luke 23.46 Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit which most certainly was received into the hands of his Father in heaven as also for that not onely the word Coeli in the plurall number is taken for God according to the use of the Aramaeans and also of the Jews as appeareth in the record containing the jointure and dowrie which Rabbi Moses made to Clarora the daughter of Rabbi David explained by Bertram at the end of his Aramaean and Hebrew Grammar where the Bridegroom saith among other things f Esio mihi in uxorem juxta legem Mosit Israel ego ex verbo Coelorum colam honorabo alam regam te Be thou a wife to me according to the law of Moses and Israel and I according to
suggestion and inspiration then a proper command I reply Of precepts properly so called some are hid and secret others more manifest the internall command bindes as much as the externall divine suggestions oft times have the force of an expresse inward precept and commands are sometimes manifested by inspirations Praeceptum propriè dictum which is by word or writing and Imperium internum may be equivalent and so long as it is Imperium internum what need we care though it be not Praeceptum propriè dictum And the command was to write which is an outward act The second Objection brought by Bellarmine against himself is from the Revelation where S. John is commanded divers times to write To this he answereth most unclerk-like That S. John was commanded to write certain hidden visions not the doctrine of the Gospel and precepts of manners But this is easily confuted for Revel 19.9 it is said Write Blessed are they which are called to the marriage-supper of the Lambe Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel what is more Evangelicall He might have considered the marriage-feasts in the Gospels Matth. 22.2 c. and Luk. 14.16 And a voice from heaven said Revel 14.13 Write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours and their works do follow them Are these hidden visions Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel The like might be amplified out of the first second and third chapters of the Revelation where matters of moralitie and precepts of manners are commanded to be written and are written and not hidden visions but rather the doctrine of repentance and of the Gospel Christ saith to his Apostles Act. 1.8 Ye shall be witnesses unto me He forbeareth the word of preaching and useth more generall words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye shall be witnesses and they bare witnesse by writing Joh. 21.24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true not onely he himself but Peter and the rest WE know that his testimonie is true what testimonie but his writings d Toti operi suo fidem vult conciliare He would have all his works or writings beleeved saith Luc. Brugensis and Maldonate When the seven thunders had uttered their voices I was about to write saith S. John and a voice from heaven saith Write them not Revel 10.4 The Apostles forwardnesse or pronenesse to write argueth not necessarily that he was not commanded first to write but rather presupposeth it and this present inhibition Write not may serve as an exception to a former generall command that he might have to write Indeed there is no expresse record that all and every of the Apostles were enjoyned to write nor is it likely they were for then they would have obeyed whereas not the one half of the Apostles committed any thing to pen ink and paper for ought we know But we are sure that some writers of the Old Testament were commanded to write Exod. 17.14 And the Lord said unto Moses Write this for a memoriall in a book Jerem. 36.2 Take thee a roll of a book and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee c. and S. John was commanded eleven or twelve times to write and thence it is more then probable that the rest of the Apostles which wrote were commanded to write they might be expressely appointed to write though in their writings so much be not expressed To say as Bellarmine doth It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write because so much is not written is rash and ill-advised inferring that they were commanded nothing except those things which are written Is every thing false that cannot be proved is nothing true but what can be proved To evince a thing to be false is required a reall proof of truth positive which Bellarmine wanteth and the falsitie may justly be retorted home to the Cardinall himself from the authoritie of a prime man of his own part Wiser Aquinas 3. part quaest 42. artic 4. 2. thus When the disciples of Christ had written what he shewed and spake unto them we must in no wise say that Christ himself did not write since his members wrote that which they knew by the dictate of him their Head For whatsoever he would have us reade of his deeds and words he commanded them as his own hands to write Now let Bellarmine say It is false that the Apostles were commanded by God to write And thus much shall serve for the third question The fourth question Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write As when it is said Luke 1.70 GOD SPAKE BY THE MOUTH OF HIS HOLY PROPHETS per LOQUENDI verbum SCRIPTIONEM quoque comprehendit so what I propound of Propheticall Evangelicall and Apostolicall writing must also be understood of their speaking or dictating Whether they were compelled to it Compulsion is of two sorts Proper and absolute Improper or mixt Proper when a man is forced as we say in spight of his teeth against his will as some who have been drawn to punishment Thus were they not compelled Mixt when a man doth that which he would not do unlesse he feared a greater losse as when a Merchant or Mariner cast their goods into the sea to save their lives which hath in it part of the voluntarie and part of the involuntarie And of this there may be some question for Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord Jon. 1.3 that is was unwilling to do the message Moses again and again refused to be Gods embassadour to Pharaoh Exod. 3.11 and to the Israelites Exod. 4.1 10 13. Isaiah was also backward Isa 6.5 One answer serves for all They were at first fearfull rather then unwilling but when they were confirmed they readily and boldly did their duties So farre were they from shadow of compulsion that they offered their service When the voice of the Lord said Whom shall I send and Who will go for Vs Isa 6.8 the Prophet said Here am I send me Yea but they were impulsi rapti agitati acti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Pet. 1.21 I answer The word rather excludeth voluntarie and arbitrarie will-worship or self-will-service then includeth compulsion for all this was performed Libero motu voluntatis With the free motion of their will or as others take it Salvo pleno usu liberi arbitrii Without any impeachment of the freedome of their will e Acti à Spiritu sancto loqunti sunt à Deo afflati compositos tamen intellige bos motus non quales fuere profauorum vatum They who were led by the holy Ghost spake being inspired by God yet know that their motions and inspirations were setled and composed unlike to the profane heathen priests or prophets for they were wilde senslesse not knowing what they did or said saith Tremellius
conceived more by the boundlesse power of the divine inspiration then we can possibly reach unto and there was never place of Scripture so since the Apostles dayes expounded if before that I dare say The Spirit aimed at nothing else and all is known All known good expositions may be said to be of the Spirit but the Spirit hath many depths which never yet were searched Therefore our anchor-hold must be on the words or else we shall flote in the wide vast sea of imagination and phansie without sail oar or rudder without card or compasse by having recourse to the Non entes or Non extantes allusiones Vnextant allusions which were in the thoughts of our blessed Apostle It is no rule or canon which is not extant Non Ens is an ill guide to Ens. Besides the Syriack now much differeth from that in the Apostles dayes how then can we finde out what the Apostle conceived For the Syriack and Arabick now in use except perhaps the Gospel of S. Matthew and the Epistle to the Hebrews were translated out of the Greek and not the Greek out of these Had we exactly the identicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first originall manuscripts in which S. Matthew wrote his Gospel and S. Paul his Epistle to the Hebrews in the Hebrew or Syriack had we the true self-same paper or parchment in which the Evangelists and Apostles or their amanuenses wrote the divine dictates we might better guesse at their thoughts and the allusions to which they bended themselves But now Heinsius would have us to shoot at rovers or rather to no steadie mark at all at the then thoughts of our Apostle Lastly the worthy Heinsius doth a little interfere when he counselleth us to go to the allusions which were in the thoughts of the Apostles and not to the allusions which are extant For suppose I grant that he hath found whatsoever the Apostle alluded to in his minde is not this now extant Or can a thing be found which is not extant The third conclusion trenching upon Heinsius is this They had no libertie left unto them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done This point concerneth the matter which is written Peter Moulin in his third Epistle to Bishop Andrews as it is in the 182 page of the said Bishops Opuscula wrote thus a Quae ad salutem fidem pertinent ab Apostolis statuta sunt afflatu divino in caeteris saepe usi sunt suâ prudentiâ ut innuit Pauius What things soever concern faith or salvation they were determined by the Apostles under the guidance of divine inspirations In other things they often used their own discretion and prudence as S. Paul intimateth 1. Cor. 7.25 The grave and profound Oracle thus answereth him pag. 193. b Parciùs ista de Apostolis prudentiâ suâ ufis periculose enim vel dicitur vel scribitur Apostolos in Quibusdam asslatu divino in reliquis suâ prudentiâ saepe usos idque in iis quae scripta reperiuntur Atqui vel illium ipsum locum ubi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cis ità concludi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ità ut vel illius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à Spiritu Dei dictamen suum habuerit I pray you speak more sparingly of this point viz. That the Apostles used their own wisdome or prudence for it is dangerous to say or write that the Apostles were in some things inspired from heaven in the rest often used their own counsel and prudence and that in matters which are found written in the Scripture But you know it is concluded immediately after these words ACCORDING TO MY OPINION or judgement AND I THINK ALSO THAT I HAVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD 1. Cor. 7.40 So that his very opinion or judgement had its dictate from the Spirit of God Again If the place cited were not inspired but written in humane prudence we must note it as Apocryphal Then let us make an expurgatorie index of the New Testament For we must separate that which is precious from that which is vile Things of humane wisdome will never stand mixed with things divinely inspired So farre he Enough indeed for an Epistle but I could have wished that the most learned walking-librarie had more fully answered all the objections which do most forcibly arietate the truth especially such as are couched in the same chapter which is cited by Peter Moulin If I come upon the stage after Roscius I look not for praise but pardon Let us muster up all their forces together and since that famous Bishop hath withstood the utmost of their strength in the first brunt the rest will like the French furie in warre be the easier answered The first objection is 1. Cor. 7.6 I speak this by permission and not of commandment The second objection is vers 10. Vnto the married I command yet not I but the Lord as if he had said A common man may speak and both deceive and be deceived but I say these things being taught of God The third objection is vers 12. To the rest speak I not the Lord. The fourth objection vers 25. Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord yet I give my judgement as one that hath obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull The fifth objection vers 40. She is happier if she so abide after my judgement and I think also that I have the Spirit of God To the first I thus answer The Apostle meaneth not that he was permitted onely to write or speak some things and commanded to write other things nor touched it any part of his thought to permit a little sinne that a greater might be avoided as some hence maintain c Dum tribuit veniam denotat culpam Whilest he forgiveth them he granteth they were faultie saith Augustine concerning these words in lib. de peccat Orig. cap. 38. Again de bono Conjugali cap. 10. d Quis ambigat absurdissimè dici non eos peccâsse quibus venia datur It is most absurd to say They sinned not whom pardon absolveth Again in Ench●r cap. 78. c Quis esse peccatum neget cùm dari veniam facientibus Apostoliea authoritas fateatur Who can denie there is a fault where the Apostle confesseth that the doers thereof were forgiven I answer Erasmus saith some Copies have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum indulgentiam as Augustine and others reade and then the sense is I tell you my opinion or This is my advice I leave you to your selves I do not command it God maketh not it a matter of precept but thus I advise or counsel and then it soundeth all one with that in the 25. verse where the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sontentiam do and verse 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f Liberum interim faciens hac in re suum cuique judicium
shews Fabers opinion to be That some writers of Scripture had power to use such words as they pleased and used some amisse even such as he found fault withall O novell criticism Wilt thou set thy self no bounds till thou reachest up to heaven and tramplest on the word of God The holy Amanuenses were guided by the Spirit to write as well as the Apostles to dictate When S. Paul accounted and would have his Galatians to account it as a favour above ordinary that he wrote so large an Epistle as that to the Galatians with his own hand and since the Epistle to the Romanes was larger then it and was writ by Tertius let me probably collect that other Epistles of S. Paul as those to the Corinthians and that to the Hebrews and any other if any other be longer and larger were not written by S. Pauls own hand For then his own writing had not been so great a testimonie and argument of his love to the Galatians for the rest were longer and larger but were writ by some other hand except perhaps the close and saluation Fevardentius on 1. Pet. 5.12 and Salmeron Tom. 13. Disput 5. as they are cited by Lorinus Act. 15.23 do think that Paul and the rest of the Apostles wrote seldome with their own hands but did dictate and subscribe which they prove by S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.12 By Silvanus a faithfull brother unto you as I suppose I have written briefly Lorinus answereth That by the same reason Judas and Silas wrote the Epistle of the Councel at Hierusalem Act. 15.23 Let me reply That I see nothing to the contrary in the Text or otherwhere but Judas and Silas being chief men among the brethren might write it as well as any others and might also be joyned in Commission with others to carrie it Concerning which Penmen this is my opinion That even they were led by the holy Ghost both to conceive what the Apostles spake and to write exactly what they dictated so that they did not they could not erre in writing any one word syllable or letter of the first Originals no nor did nor could mis-accent it or mis-point any part thereof nor can it be proved nor seems it likely that ever the Apostles revised or righted what the Penmen had done but subscribed to it took it as their own or rather as the holy Ghosts and sealed it for divine Scripture Oh that the first Originals themselves of the New Testament or of some part of it could yet be found I would go a thousand miles on my bare feet to see them kisse them and in Tertullians phrase I would adore the plenitude of them They would prove an Antidote against many heresies a correctorie of more false opinions which have sprung up from the variation of Copies and the uncertaintie what reading is best By this opinion I am sure one firm anchor-hold is established That humane wisdome and skill is excluded from having part in any parcell of Scripture and the whole Scripture is by me maintained to be wholly and absolutely true certain and most divine which Heinsius and others seem not to do So end I this point I Give thee thanks most gracious God that thou hast freed me of the gout and eased me of the stone that I have been able though in great weaknes to swim through this sea to go through this wildernesse in paths untrodden Lord I beseech thee by thine infinite mercies be mercifull to my soul prepare me throughly for my departure and in the houre of death and judgement good Christ deliver me Amen Amen CHAP. X. 1. Reall truth in the Greek and Latine texts of Act. 7.16 The place expounded thus The Fathers were not Abraham Isaac and Jacob but the twelve sonnes of Jacob. 2. These twelve Fathers were not buried in Abrahemio but in Sychem 3. Abraham in this place is not taken properly but patronymicé 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by S. Stephen amphibolous and expounded 5. Two opinions concerning the place of Acts 7.16 propounded 6. The last preferred I Now return to the old matter and Text Act. 7.16 Foure propositions there are in the words of S. Stephen which are all questioned First that the Fathers are said to be carried over into Sychem Secondly that they were laid in the sepulchre of Abraham Thirdly that Abraham bought the sepulchre of the sonnes of Hemor Fourthly that this Hemor was the father of Sychem as our last Translation hath it very truely Now let us see what different or contrary propositions are maintained against these and so labour to reconcile them First that the Fathers were not carried over into Sychem Secondly that they were not laid in the sepulchre of Abraham Thirdly that Abraham bought the field of Ephron the sonne of Zohar Gen. 23.8 Fourthly that Hemor was the sonne of Sychem as the Vulgat and Genevean translations have it That the first proposition may be reconciled to his opposite let us examine what is meant by the word Fathers All the Patriarchs indeed were Fathers and so called Abraham is our Father say the Jews Joh. 8.39 and Art thou greater then our Father Jacob saith the woman to Christ Joh. 4.12 I am the God of thy Fathers the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob saith God himself or an Angel representing him Act. 7.32 Abraham was a great Father Ecclus. 44.19 These Patriarchs were Patres majorum gentium Fathers of the highest rank if I may accommodate the Romane distinction unto the Jewish Governours And whereas David is called Act. 2.29 according both to the Greek and Latine a Patriarch there by the Arabick Translatour he is termed Princeps Patrum The chief or Prince of the Fathers Yet in the sense of S. Stephen by the word Fathers those first or greatest Fathers and prime Patriarchs are not to be understood but the Patres minorum gentium Fathers of a lower degree onely Joseph and the other sonnes of Jacob the immediate Fathers and Heads of the twelve Tribes And this is apparent by the light of the words themselves where there is a wall of separation between the one and the other Act. 7.15 Jacob died he and our Fathers therefore there were some who were called Fathers after Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Jacob died he and our Fathers Not Abraham and Isaac for they died before Jacob but Jacob died and who els He and our Fathers What more He and our Fathers when they were dead were carried to Sychem But Abraham and Isaac were never carried to Sychem Again such Fathers are meant as died in Egypt for they that died in Canaan needed no carrying over to the place where they were and Jacob went down into Egypt and died there he and our Fathers But Abraham though he went down into Egypt yet died not there but he went up out of Egypt he and his wife and all that he had Genes 13.1 lest you might think that he by leaving ought behinde might be occasioned to return
me qui fecit coelum terram fluctuans converto me ad Christum quia ipsum quaero hîc invenio quomodo sine impietate adoretur terra I am in a doubt I am afraid to adore earth lest he damn me who made both heaven and earth In this hesitancie or pendulousnesse I turn my self to Christ and here I seek and finde how without impietie earth may be worshipped As if no earthly thing should be adored but his bodie onely I would not say or think that any relique or reliques have in themselves or from themselves power to expell devils or to work wonders for a spirituall power as Thyraeus well observeth though it wound himself is not within a thing corporeall and a bodily power cannot drive away devils or work miracles say I. The great works of healing c. which have been done at the tombes of Martyrs reade S. Augustine de civitat Dei 22.8 might in those dayes extraordinarily be done by the Martyrs or by the Angels l Suscipientes personam Martyrum in assumed bodies like to the Martyrs as Augustine phraseth it in lib. de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 16. The reliques have no vertue in themselves to effectuate or actuate such miracles yea the very Angels or Martyrs themselves were but the agents instruments and the right hand of the Almighty who onely worketh great wonders by his power independent I would put no trust no confidence in the relique of any Saint or Martyr whosoever or whatsoever for help either of soul or bodie For this also is a wrong offered unto him in whose name our help standeth Our help cometh from the Lord which made heaven and earth Psal 121.2 And my God shall supply all our need according to his riches in glorie by Christ Jesus Philip. 4.19 9. What would I then do or how would I behave my self toward a true unquestioned choice relique I would which is the positive part by me promised with Chrysostom Hom. 5. in Job tom 1. honourably esteem of it kisse it and reverently both touch it and behold it and think of it and charily lay it up I would shew it to others not mercenarily but with joyfull and comfortable remembrance of him whose relique it was I would esteem of it above silver gold or precious stones I would make it my remembrancer of things past as a motive stirring me up to the imitation of that Saints vertues and actions which is their best relique I would use it as a bridle to curb evil in me and as a spur to goodnesse If any instrument of Satan should debase it and say that it is vilissimus pulvis I would scorn his scorn and esteem it as a most especiall instrument of the most High and would say to the caviller or rather to his master Lucifer the Father of lies and detraction m Saepe hoc vilissimo tortus es pulvere Even this which thou callest most vile dust hath often tormented thee as S. Hierom said of old Lastly till of it self it decayed and by its imperfection or rottennesse called for interment I would not bury it but commend it to be kept even in Churches and other holy places except idolatrie were committed with it or people in their profane religion adored it And then would I also burie it 10. Much more might be said but I must take manum de tabula or make a quick end and returning to Pineda say That if Ananias Azarias and Misael have no relique now remaining which Lorinus reports from report if they did arise or intend to arise with Christ they having a farre longer journey from the place of their captivitie to the sepulchre of Christ then Jacob had to the land of Goshen would or should have had as great a care as Jacob of translating their bones if Jacob translated his in hope to arise with Christ as Pineda intimateth O Gracious God who art to be loved by me for thine own self onely Grant I beseech thee that no worldly thought may nestle and breed in me nor that I may fasten any respect on any creature which may be derogatorie to the devotion due to thee my Creatour for Jesus Christ his sake in whom onely thou art well pleased Amen CHAP. XIII 1. Pineda saith Jonas arose then and Noah His reasons very shallow 2. Daniel arose saith Pineda from Nicetas If Daniel arose he arose but with one leg the other leg is yet shewed at Vercellis 3. Job arose now saith Pineda His proof lame Jobs Epitaph poeticall His sepulchrall pyramis made of imagination 4. Job shall arise at the generall judgement Pineda wrincheth the Scripture 5. The end of Jobs book according to some Greek copies a double exposition of the words 6. Jobs bodie supposed to be translated to Constantinople 7. Bartholomaeus Sibylla saith S. Hierom is expresse that the holy mother of our Lord and John the Evangelist are bodily ascended The like cited from Aquinas And Holcot saith That the glorious virgins bodie was not to be incinerated Her supposed day of Assumption most honoured among the Papists and yet there is monstrous disagreeing among them who favour her Assumption The last instances concern not our question 8. Pineda presumed too farre upon uncertainties Lorinus dareth not name any particularly that were raised It cannot be known certainly NOw also arose Jonah saith Pineda That Jonas was a lively type of Christs resurrection appeareth Matth. 27.40 But if every lively type of Christ arose then Samson Samuel Joshuah Gedeon Melchizedech Aaron Solomon then hundreds of others arose whom Pineda mentioneth not a Tandem resurrexit Noah At last Noah arose saith Pineda Why AT LAST since he was living before other and great in Gods favour who was saved and delivered from the common destruction of all mortall men This last reason as well holdeth That every one that was in the Ark arose also For they were delivered as well as Noah from the inundation of waters and especially Sem who was an holy man and was great in Gods favour 2. And Daniel arose who was brought out of the lions den saith Pineda and he proves it by Nicetas But neither he nor Nicetas proves it by any reason He might as well argue that Jeremie arose with Christ Because he being cast into the dungeon where he sunk in the mire was afterwards drawn out of the dungeon Jerem. 38.6 and 13. And if Daniel arose he arose but with one leg for b Crus Danielis asservatur Vercellis c. A leg of Daniel is kept at Vercellis a citie of Liguria saith Lorinus on Act. 2.29 Daniel died in Babylon saith Sixtus Senensis concerning him Of reliques he makes no mention nor of his rising again with Christ but alledgeth the last of Daniel the last verse Which words may prove that he arose not with Christ or if he did that he died again For the Spirit saith to him Go thou thy way till the end be for thou
shalt rest and stand in the lot at the end of the dayes IN FINE DIERUM Which words are applied by Vatablus to the resurrection of the last judgement which was mentioned Dan. 12.2 And lest any should interpret the rising out of the dust vers 2. as Porphyrie did for their creeping out of the holes and caverns in the time of the Maccabees Lyra expressely contradicteth it and saith it is to be understood c De resurrectione vera in fine mundi of the true resurrection in the end of the world implying that Daniel shall then arise as he arose not saith Lyra at the time of the Maccabees nor at the opening of the graves before Christs resurrection d Ergò resurrexit Job sanctissimus Therefore most holy Job arose also saith Pineda equalling Noah Daniel and Job in this priviledge But the consequence is lame for Ezechiel doth not mention the equall priviledges of these three in their resurrection though perhaps this latter is figured out but onely the delivery from famine or death by famine Ezech. 14.13 c. of Noah Daniel and Job or rather of other holy men also designed out by their names and like them in their severall vertues Noah overcoming the world Daniel the flesh and Job the devil Concerning Pineda his other proof That Gregorie Nissen in his third Oration of the resurrection saith That the day of their resurrection who arose out of the graves was much more joyfull to them then the day of the generall resurrection If I should grant that he said so and that he said so truely yet it followeth not necessarily scarce probably that they went with their bodies into heaven The day of the generall resurrection is not yet come and could not be rejoyced at but in hope More especially concerning Job though Salianus ad ann mundi 1544. num 783. makes Jobs tombe-stone speak thus e Clausit viator hoc marmor aliquando mortuum emis itque gloriosum eum Principe Messia resurgentem Jobum This stone O wayfaring man kept under it dead Job and sent forth also Job in glorie arising from the dead with Messiah our Prince though Pineda his fellow-Jesuite in the end of his Commentaries on Job saith That Jobs sepulchral pyramis and kingly monument was made for him by his seven sonnes and three daughters and was framed and erected f Ad pietatis memoriam sempiternä spémque resurrectionis cum Redemptore certissimain for an eternall memoriall of pietie and most certain hope of his resurrection with our Redeemer yet none is ignorant that these are tricks of wit panegyrick Eulogies poeticall Epitaphs even a little thwarting one another rather then divine truths or historicall relations 4. And further it is evident that Job spake of the generall resurrection when he said Job 19.25 c. I know that my Redeemer liveth and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth and though after my skin worms destroy this bodie yet in my flesh shall I see God By which latter or last day we may fitly expound not the last day of judgement saith Pineda but the state of the Evangelicall Law and of Christs suffering and rising ending by his death and resurrection the former times and beginning to appoint a new for he is THE FATHER OF THE WORLD TO COME Isa 9.6 Did ever man thus delude Scripture and make it a nose of wax It is scarcely worse used by our unlearned lay-Rabbies the Doctours of Doctours Who ever dreamed that Dies novissimus should signifie so unlikely a matter and if it did how vain is his proof The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pater aeternitatis The father of eternitie as the Interlinearie Bible reads it and Vatablus with it expounding the words g Anthor vitae aeternae The authour of eternall life which hath no reference to Pineda's wilde Comment or the everlasting Father as we translate it 5. The Seventie indeed and the Book of Job thus Job died being old and full of dayes so farre also goeth the Hebrew and it is added in the Greek But it is written that he shall again be raised up with those whom the Lord shall raise These words are not in the Original nor in Aquila nor in Symmachus nor in the Seaventie used by Vatablus but Theodotion so reads it and the Vatican Edition of Sixtus so acknowledgeth it and Origen in his epistle to Africanus confirmeth it and Clemens Romanus cap. 5. lib. 6. approveth it Two wayes there are of expounding the word Rursus Again Francis Turrian the Jesuite on the place of Clement collecteth that Job shall not onely be raised up in the last day at the generall resurrection but that he should be first raised when Christ arose and afterward at the last day Nicetas saith better The word AGAIN was therefore put that his first resurrection might be understood to have been when he was delivered from his troubles Which way soever you follow we have it That Job shall be raised at the last day of the world And therefore he arose not with Christ or died again and so went not into the eternall happinesse of bodie and soul for glorified bodies shall not be raised 6. Lastly there is an opinion even to this day among the Turks grounded no doubt on some old Tradition That Jobs bodie was removed from the place of his buriall to that citie and place which is now called Constantinople as Mr. Fines Morison in the first part of his Itinerary pag. 243. witnesseth These are all that ever I read of by name that are thought by Pineda or others both to rise with Christ and to partake with him at that time of the eternall happinesse both in soul and bodie 7. Bartholomaeus Sybilla Peregrinarum quaestionum decade 1. cap. 3. quaest 7. dubio 3. citeth Henricus de Assia as Authour that Perhaps not onely Enoch and Elias are kept in Paradise to preach against Antichrist but both John the Evangelist and those that rose with Christ Observe saith Sybilla the word PERHAPS for S. Hierom saith formerly concerning S. John WE DOUBT BUT BOTH S. JOHN THE EVANGELIST AND THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARIE DO REJOYCE IN THEIR GLORIFIED FLESH VVITH CHRIST And Aquin. in 4. sentent distinct 43. artic 3. cited by Sybilla saith It is a point of faith holily to be beleeved concerning the blessed Virgin Marie and S. John the Evangelist that their resurrection is not deferred to the end of the world Also Holcot saith on Wisdome cap. 2.2 h Corpus benedictae Virginis non fuit resolvendum in cineres quia in ca fomes extiuctus extitit The bodie of the blessed Virgin was not to be turned into ashes because in her was no fountain of ill from whence her asportation into heaven may seem to be confirmed The feast-day of her assumption is greater and more festivall then any other holy-day for her saith Durandus Rational 7.24 Surely I must needs say we reade
of Macedonia c. Now cleare it is this was not a Macedonian indeed but an Angel bearing his person in the shape of man calling him with the call of God and what is said in truth of storie Joh. 20.12 Marie seeth two Angels in white sitting the one at the head and the other at the feet where the bodie of Jesus had layen is said by representation Luk. 24.4 Two men stood by them in shining garments they took on them the shapes of two men and stood in their places 2. If Angels represent the person of God and do things or say things as from him and as for himself they are called Gods and the very name of JEHOV A is attributed to them as the Angel appearing in the fierie bush to Moses and other Angels saith a De loci● infestis part 1. cap 23. Thyraeus and b Sentent 2. Distinct 8. Paragr 8. Estius In the New Testament another Angel is called Alpha and Omega Revel 22.13 which were blasphemie for any Angel to say or usurp if the Representer might not be styled according to the dignitie of the Represented Which note I have the rather insisted upon to lash the rash censure of such who under pretence to keep the Canonicall Scripture at a great distance from the Apocryphall pick unnecessarie faults in the Apocryphall such faults and so small as a man not prepossessed could not see and a naturall rationall Philosopher would esteem but little in comparison of greater doubts in semblance arising from our undoubted Canonicall S. Hierom was the first that styled them Apocrypha who never left any thing objected against him unanswered yet being therefore taxed by Ruffinus that therein he had robbed the holy Ghost of his treasure he made no reply Thus some have been hurt with kissing and the tendernesse of the ape killeth those young ones whom she loveth best And whilest they play the Criticks in censuring the Apocrypha they breed irreverence and irreligion toward the Canonicall by how much the doubts seem more or greater seem but are not 3. The most painfull and learned John Drusius in his epistle to Joseph Scaliger before his Commentarie on the first book of the Maccabees intimateth his fear of want even of things necessarie and in the very end of his castigations on Ecclesiasticus prayeth to God to stirre up the hearts of the Great ones and illustrious Lords to help him may heaven and earth take notice how miserable the estate of the learned is when tithes the fixed honourary of the Priesthood by Divine right are usurped by the Laicks and reward is measured not by true worth or by the measure of the Sanctuarie which was full running over and double to the common and profane measures but by the ignorant estimate of niggardly mechanicks their under agents yet he brake through all difficulties and hath bestowed great pains in his notes on both these books Scaliger de emendat tempor lib. 5. saith The first book of the Maccabees is c Opus eximium An excellent work Again d Tu praestantiam loujus libri jamdudum scis You knew long since full well the great worth of this book saith he in his epistle to Drusius And Albericus Gentilis most exquisitely disputeth in defence of the first book of Maccabees so little regarded in these times and answereth every objection which is brought against it I could say more in defence of other books Apocryphall but I recall my self to handle that particular which caused this diversion How many wide mouths have been made how many scandalls taken how many aspersions of horrible untruth and lying have been fastened on that blessed Angel who guided Tobias the younger in his long and dangerous journey because he said though he gave old Tobit a nick for that he would enquire his name immediately after Tob. 5.12 I am Azarias the sonne of Ananias the Great and of thy brethren whereas you may expound the words by this rule That he who sustains anothers person may call himself or be called according as the person himself As the Angel who appeared to S. John Rev. 22.9 saying I am thy fellow servant and of thy brethren the Prophets and perhaps took one of their shapes at that time Likewise in the undoubted Canonicall the Angel Gabriel is called The man Gabriel Dan. 9.21 because he appeared in the similitude of a man Thus may the place of Tobit be expounded and without such favourable interpretations Familiaris quotidianus sermo non cohaerebit saith Cicero Pro A. Caecinna Secondly you may expound the words thus I AM AZARIAS that is the help of God THE SONNE OF ANANIAS THE GREAT NOW ANANIAS signifieth the grace or the gift of God And this is verified by the actions of the Angel who helped indeed both the Tobiahs by the especiall grace of God Adde to this that the Angels true name was Raphael Tob. 12.15 which is by signification the medicine or physick of God as indeed he did make whole young Tobie his wife and healed also old Tobie Tob. 12.3 All which being laid together remove all inconvenience from the words if we say The Angel by those names of men Azarias and Ananias did signifie that the help which was to come from him to them came to him from God For even this way draweth nigh unto that Lexicall exposition as d Bibliothecae sanct 3. Sixtus Senensis phraseth it which I will not wholly exclude Secondly I answer If these were no Angels but very men and these some of those Many who arose out of their sepulchres yet cleare it is they ascended not with Christ nor ascended they at all for ought that can be gathered but upon the performance of this their last errand their bodies might again embrace the dust 4. Lastly this may have a place of a probable argument As Elias when he was rapt into heaven in a fiery chariot by a whirlwinde being even therein a type of the resurrection let fall his mantle from him 2. King 2.13 perchance as a token that he needed it no more so Christ when he raised himself left his grave-linen in the grave the linen clothes by themselves the napkin that was about his head wrapped together in a place by it self John 20.7 out of doubt to shew that death should have no more dominion over him In which regard also he arose the tombe being shut and the tombe-stone sealed and observed narrowly with a watch for the removing of the tombe-stone by the Angel was not to help Christ to arise who entred in to his disciples januis clausis the doores being shut and came forth of the grave sepulchro signato the monument being sealed but that the women might go in and see that Christ was before raised Mark 16.3 c. and the stone was not rolled away propter Christum sed propter mulieres for Christ but for the women saith Hierom ad Hedibiam whereas contrarily when Lazarus was
you expound this of the Fathers of the Old Testament and of the stola animae the robe of honour for the minde yet you shall finde Revel 6.11 that in regard even of stola corporis the glorious garment of the bodie the Saints themselves are commanded to rest yet for a little season untill their fellow-servants also and their brethren either then alive or perchance not then born that should be killed as they were should be fulfilled Now against this generall rule you must not make a particular exception without expresse warrant from the word of God But there is no testimony at all from the word of God either direct or inferentiall that any of those Many who arose arose to glorie or immortalitie or ascended into heaven Therefore we may boldly conclude They died again This argument is of such force that Suarez leaveth it unanswered and untouched Lastly if the bodies of these Saints ascended into heaven either they ascended after Christ or before him or with him If after him When and how long after and why after him They ascended not presently after him for the Apostles who looked stedfastly toward heaven even after he was taken out of their sight might have then perceived their bodily ascent If you say So soon as the Apostles left their serious viewing and hearkened unto the Angels then they ascended I answer I would say so also if I saw any proof or if I could think that God sent the Angels just at that moment to hinder the Apostles from seeing the Saints mount up to heaven which would have been so joyous a sight Briefly there is no reason to say they ascended long after Christ ascended and certainly lesse reason is there to think they ascended before him 4. Moreover Christ as man shall be Judge at the last day and God hath given assurance of it to all men in that he hath raised him from the dead Act. 17.31 If any other were raised up in the same manner before him or with him to an eternall resurrection what assurance doth God give by this place of S. Paul that Christ shall be the Judge rather then others But indeed the raising of Christ was more then ordinary was more then temporarie Let him have the preeminence in all things Christ is the first-fruits of them that slept 1. Cor. 15.20 The first-fruits of them that are raised vers 23. He is Primitiae mortuorum Revel 1.5 resurgentium Act. 26.23 Christ is the first who shall arise from the dead viz. to an eternall resurrection his bodie opening as it were the gates of heaven for our bodies which if Enoch and Elias did by priviledge especiall anticipate though these were not properly raised but rather taken up yet if more if so many should before him arise to an everlasting resurrection it destroyeth the nature of a generall rule b Gratia quae omnibus datur non est gratia sed natura privilegium gaudet paucitate Grace given alike to all is no longer grace but nature and a priviledge is properly confined to a few That they ascended not with Christ I proved before and for a Corollarie do repeat this That if assumed and Angelicall bodies were to be seen and were seen and heard at Christs ascension out of doubt the bodies of Saints had been visible yea seen if they had then ascended 5. If any desire to see more reasons let him reade S. Augustine Epist 99. ad Euodium de Mirabilibus Sacrae Scripturae whose reasons c In tertia parte Summae quaest 53. artic 3. Aquinas preferreth and subscribeth unto You may now perceive that I am gently fallen upon the second head in vertue of which I undertook to prove That the Saints who miraculously arose and here arose did not ascend into heaven but died again for the second head was Authoritie Among Authours you have alreadie two of the chiefest for depth of learning Augustine and Aquinas Hierom is of their minde on Matth. 27. Chrysostom Hom. 89. on Matth. compareth those Saints resurrection unto Lazarus his rising to a mortall life though Beza directly contradicteth it The same Hierom Epist 150. ad Hedibiam again confirms it To the same purpose Theophylact on the place and Euthymius chap. 67. on Matth. so Prosper in his book de promissionibus praedictionibus Dei. In the middle school you have Soto in 4. lib. Sentent Distinct 43. quaest 2. artic 1. Yea even among Jesuites Salmeron and Barradius are on this side and Pererius on the 6 chapter of the Revelation Disput 24. and Gregorie Valentian Tom. 4. Disput 2. Quaest 5. where he sleighteth Cajetans arguments and saith that our is the more probable opinion and that Aquin from Augustine doth most excellently confirm it In the last place cometh that learned Franciscus Lucas Brugensis who having set down the ends why these Many were raised to wit To be praecones criers or trumpetters of Christs resurrection which was experimentally evidenced by their own and that Jesus was that Saviour and that he ought thus to suffer and thus to enter into his glorie closeth in these words d Hoc officio quando isti defuncti fuerant verisimile est cos iterum dormivisse in sepulchris suit quievisse quemadmodum Aloses When they had performed this duty it is likely that they slept again and rested in their sepulchres like Moses Yea say I much rather did they sleep in their graves then Moses for though he was buried yet being raised he appeared in glorie Luk. 9.31 which apparition being in bodie principally for his soul was not seen we may not imagine that a glorified bodie is so subject to corruption or a second dying which Brugensis himself will not say of these raised Many for he hath an odde crotchet and singular conceit That those Many were raised neither to an immortall nor to a mortall life but to a middle and mean betwixt both not to a perpetuall one nor yet to a terrene life but heavenly without the use of meats or drinks without fear or pain of death O Fountain of mercie inexhaustible sweet Jesu who being the Sonne of God didst become Man that we the sonnes of Men might be the sonnes of God who didst die that we might live suffering for our sinnes and rising again for our justification Have mercie O have mercie upon me passe by my transgressions I beseech thee and present me blamelesse to the Throne of Grace for thine own merit sake to which I ascribe all power and from which I expect all my glorie So be it CHAP. XVIII 1. The arguments of the contrary opinion answered Suarez and especially Cajetan censured 2. That by the holy Citie Jerusalem below was meant proved at large Josephus and the Jews erring about the name of Jerusalem Hierom uncertain 3. How the raised appeared A difference between appearing as men and appearing as newly raised men Franciscus Lucas Brugensis rejected 4. An argument of Maldonat
pec 4.15 The decree is performed if all the posterity of Adam be obnoxious to death Or as S. Augustine answered the Pelagians concerning those which shall be alive at Christs coming x Satìs est illos fuisse morti destinatos 〈◊〉 quae subsecuta esset si seculum processisset Quòd eximantur à morte erit casus neque privilegium paucorum universali causae derogat It sufficeth that they were appointed to die and die they should if the world had endured By casualty they are freed from death nor doth the dispensation with some particular ones infringe the universall cause as I vouched in the second book And as S. Augustine goeth on when they have lived a life full of miserie and calamitie who can say they have not tasted death especially since thirst hunger cold heat infirmities crosses sicknesses are nothing else but a daily dying In which regard the wise woman of Tekoa in her subtile oration saith not We shall all and every one die but 2. Sam. 14.14 We die MORIENDO MORIMUR so runneth the Hebrew and are as water spilt on the ground when immediately both before and after she had spoken of outward crosses y Etiam dum crescimus vita decrescit Even whilest we are growing our life decreaseth saith Seneca Which S. Augustine in libro Soliloq cap. 2. thus enlargeth z Vita mea quantò magìs crescit tantò magìs decrescit quantò magìs procedit tantò magìs ad mortem accedit My life in going forward groweth backward and by how much it advanceth forward by so much it maketh a nearer approach to death As the fire it self consumes its fuell and is nourished by the consumption of it so mans age is fed and nourished by the consumption of his life and of the age he liveth in Man at the same time begins to live and die for LIFE is but the way tending to DEATH a Nascendo morimur imò longè ante nativitatem morimur In our birth we die yea long before it From the instant of the souls infusion we begin to die Lastly I say in that Christ died for all Although some be extraordinarily dispensed withall every one may be said to die Christ by the grace of God tasted death for every man Hebr. 2.9 Thus much shall serve for the first part of the answer O Blessed Saviour who art life in thy self and the fountain of life unto others Grant I humbly beseech thee that when I shall passe from this present world from this dying life or living death I may evermore live by Thee in Thee and with Thee Amen Amen CHAP. II. 1. The third question resumed Whether every one must die The second part of the answer unto it That some have been excepted as Enoch and Elias The controversie hath been exquisitely handled by King James and Bishop Andrews 2. Bellarmines third demonstration that Antichrist is not yet come propounded The place of Malachi 4.5 expounded by Bishop Andrews and enlarged by my additions The Papists objection answered 3. The place of Ecclesiasticus 48.10 concerning Elias examined 4. Another place of Ecclesiasticus 44.16 concerning Enoch handled at large against Bellarmine Enoch was never any notorious sinner in some mens opinions Others otherwise Their arguments for both opinions are onely probable and answered My opinion and it confirmed Some think E. noch died Strange and various opinions concerning S. John the Evangelist his living death and miraculous grave More miracles or else mistakings in the Temples of Christs Sepulchre and of his Assumption about Jerusalem S. John did die Enoch did not die but is living Mine own opinion of the place Genes 5.24 Et non ipse and it confirmed A comparison between Enochs Elijahs and Christs ascension The posture and circumstances of Christs ascending 5. Bellarmine and others say Paradise is now extant In the earth or in the aire saith Lapide the Jesuit The old translation censured The heaven into which Enoch and Elias were carried was not Aërium nor Coeleste but Supercoeleste The earthly Paradise is not extant as it was Salianus with others say truly The materiall remaineth not the formal Superest quoad Essentiam non quoad Ornatum The Place is not removed but the Pleasure and Amenitie Salianus his grosse errour That Enoch and Elias are kept by Angels within the bounds of old Paradise on earth 6. Enoch shall never die as is proved from Hebr. 11.5 Three evasions in answer to that place confuted Melchizedech and strange things of him The East-Indian language hath great affinitie with the Hebrew An errour of moment in Guilielmus Postellus Barentonius Elias was not burnt by that fire which rapted him Soul and bodie concur to make a man saith Augustine from the great Marcus Varro Vives taxed Moses at the transsiguration appeared in his own bodie An idle conceit of Bellarmine concerning Moses his face and good observations of Origen upon that point It is probable that Elias was changed at his rapture and had then a glorified bodie An humane soul may possibly be in a mortall bodie in the third heaven Corah Dathan and Abiram are in their bodies in hell properly so called and alive in the hell of the damned Ribera and Viegas confuted Our Doctour Raynolds was not in the right in this matter Some kinde of proofs That Enoch and Elias are in glorified bodies in heaven The place of Revel 11.7 concerning the two Witnesses winnowed by Bishop Andrews Enoch and Elias are not those two witnesses THe main third question being Whether all men and every one must of necessitie die the first part of the answer was That there was no absolute necessitie but there might be an exception The second part of the answer touched at was this That some have been excepted who never did die nor shall die If I be further demanded Who they be I will onely insist in Enoch and Elias The controversie concerning which two men is so exquisitely handled by the most learned Monarch our late Soveraigne King James in his monitory Preface and by his Second the reverend Bishop Andrews in his answer to Bellarmine his Apologie cap. 11. that the most scrupulous inquisitour may be satisfied After I have selected some matters of moment from that unanswerable Prelate I will take leave to glean after the gathering of their of their full sheaves and to discover a few clusters after their plentifull vintage and to bring to your taste some remarkable passages concerning Enoch and Elias which perhaps they thought fit to omit as affecting brevitie or tying themselves most strictly to the question whilest the nature of my Miscellanies give me licence to travel farre and neare 2. Bellarmine Tom. 1 de Romano Pontifice 3.6 makes it his third Demonstration as he calleth it that Antichrist is not yet come Because Enoch and Elias are not come who yet do live and must oppose Antichrist Bellarmines first place is from Malach. 4.5 and sixth
supposall should have a certain accomplishment but that this and all other controverted points of moment concerning Enoch or Elias may be the better cleared let us examine these questions 1. Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any great sinner 2. Whether Enoch did ever die 3. Whether Enoch and Elias now live in and with their bodies in Paradise 4. Whether ever they shall die or do live with glorified bodies in the highest heavens Concerning the first Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any grievous sinner First I answer and say I speak not of the first Enoch the sonne of Cain the grand-childe of Adam and Eve in honour and memoriall of whom Cain built a citie and called the name of the citie after the name of his sonne Enoch Genes 4.17 but of the second and younger Enoch the sonne of Jared Genes 5.18 of the posteritie of Seth. Secondly I question not but that this latter best Enoch was a sinner and in his own estimate a great sinner and he might have said and doubtlesse did say in effect as David did and as Adam and all his of-spring except Christ Have mercie upon me O God Psal 51.1 and Create in me a clean heart O God Psal 51.10 O Lord pardon mine iniquitie for it is great Psal 25.11 And in the ballance of God setting aside mercie he might have been weighed found light and accounted for a main delinquent But this is the Quaere Whether comparatively and in respect of other men even of such whose lives ends also pleased God he was so notorious a sinner that he alone was the fittest example of repentance to succeeding generations My answer is negatively for I am sure Adam and as I think Noah and Lot and divers other holy Patriarchs might as well yea rather be an example of repentance to future times then Enoch especially if we measure sinnes by the records of Scripture for the holy Writ hath more amply insisted upon their sinnes then upon Enochs and no part of the Canonicall Scripture toucheth at any thing that was extraordinarily offensive in Enoch but magnifieth his goodnesse Gen. 5.22 and his faith Heb. 11.5 Yet because the divine Writ might omit the offences of Enoch and because I cannot think that Ecclesiasticus wrote without some ground let us search what other Authours have conceited or written for or against Enoch Some think that Enoch all the course of his conversation amongst men in this world lived unblameably and walked with God Some Jews held that Enoch was an incarnate Angel e Vixit dum vixit laudabiliter Whilest he lived he lived worthy of praise saith Drusius Others write that in his youth he was very wicked but after repented and turned heartily to God redeeming the time Drusius proveth that Enoch was a good man still by these arguments Josephus Antiq. 1.5 at the end saith Seth was a vertuous man and left f Nepotes sui simile● issue like himself and they were all good men therefore Enoch was so The posteritie of Seth according to the best Interpreters are called Filii Dei the sonnes of God Genes 5.2 g Filii Dei sunt judicio Augustini qui secunditm Deum vivunt Augustine accounteth that they were called the sonnes of God who pleased God Hischuni also an Authour cited by Drusius saith Because Enoch was just the Scripture h Honoris cau●â to dignifie him used a new phrase concerning him saying HE WAS NOT. And It is a probable reason that Enoch was not any time so ill as some imagine because he lived with Adam 308 yeares and ministred so long unto him as it is in libro JOH ASIN saith Drusius On the other side i Sunt qui insimulan eum levitatis inconstantiae nam aiunt modò justum modò improbum fuisse Id relatum in Genesi magno Some say he was light and inconstant sometimes just sometimes wicked as is recorded in the great Genesis a book called in Hebrew BERESITH RABBA made by one Ibbo so relateth Drusius in his book called Henoch chap. 5. If Ibbo had said Henochum fuisse modò improbum modò justum That Enoch was now and then wicked now and then just I should farre rather have consented for every just man except Christ was sometime wicked But that Enoch after he was once just turned to be extraordinarily wicked I can never beleeve For the Spirit would never have given him this testimonie that he pleased God and walked with him if he had after returned as the dog to his vomit or as the sow to her wallowing in the mire Rabbi Levi the sonne of Gersom thus k Enoch ambulavit in viis Domini postquam genuit Methusalem annos 300. Enoch walked with God after he begat Methusalem 300 yeares whereby he intimateth that he walked l Non in viis domini sed in viis seculi sui Not in the narrow paths of the Lord but in the high wayes of the world and by that account he might be wicked sixtie fiye yeares of his age or thereabouts The arguments of either side are but weak and may be easily answered Seths posteritie might do some notable wicked acts and most heartily repent and be both holy and accounted the sonnes of God The phrase used concerning his being taken out of this world evinceth not that all the former passages of his life were just Thirdly he might live in Adams time yet not neare him and he might live with him and yet not minister unto him and he might minister unto him and yet be wicked before he ministred yea even for a time whilest he ministred unto Adam Many godly parents have lived to see wicked ones of their of-spring and it may be that Adam converted him not till after some time that he ministred unto Adam and had seen evident signes of Adams own great repentance and holinesse On the other side Ibbo writeth like a fabler and his words were before rejected as improbable Rabbi Levi alledging nothing but conjecture wanteth weight for an argument Now as there is nothing certain either pro or contra so if my opinion be asked I shall manifest my self to think that Enoch was sometimes a grievous sinner and after a most contrite repentant and a most holy man My reason is Because I ascribe more to the books called Apocryphall then to any humane Authour for they alone are and have been many hundreds of yeares joyned with the Canonicall Scripture and read in all Churches except the Jewish at set times as well as the Canonicall as no other writings of any other are And if no part of them were divinely inspired yet were the men that wrote them both holy and learned and the Churches of God have dignified them above all other writings Now though the undoubted Canon mentioneth not any evill act or acts of Enoch as millions of millions of matters are omitted both in the Old and New Testament yet some passages of
Which words Christ spake after his resurrection from the dead unto Mary Magdalen Yea further let me expatiate in shewing the correspondence between Enoch in the law of Nature and Elias in the law of Moses and our all-glorious Saviour in the law of Grace Even as Elishah saw the carrying up of Eliah 2. Kings 2.12 yea and fifty men of the sonnes of the Prophets beheld the same as it is likely 2. Kings 2.7 15 and 16 verses so it may very well be that God was pleased to give bodily sight and evidence of Enoch at his translation to those unto whom he gave testimonie before his translation that he pleased God And even this fraction the substance of our Saviours ascension doth strengthen and enlighten For He was seen not onely after his resurrection of Cephas then of the twelve after that he was seen of above 500 brethren at once 1. Corinth 15.5 c. but in the act of his ascension Act. 1.9 While they beheld he was taken up and a cloud received him out of their sight And they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up vers 10. They stood gazing up into heaven and they did see him go into heaven vers 11. If any one be so curious to enquire in what posture Christ was seen ascending I think it is pointed at Luk. 24. ver 50 c. He lift up his hands and blessed them And it came to passe while he blessed them he was parted from them and carried up into heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f Dum benedictionem nondum absolvisset Before he had finished his blessing saith Lucas Brugensis on the words The blessing which he began upon them and with them with words and gesture he continued ascending that is with his hands lifted up not so much upright to heaven whither perhaps his heart hands and eyes were sent in prayer to God a little before for prayer is a prime part of all spirituall blessing but with his hands lifted up over the Apostles g Non habitu precantis Deum sed habitu quasi impartientis infundentis benedictionis gratiam Not in a posture as if he were praying to God but as if he were dispersing his grace and pouring out a blessing So * Levit. 9.22 Aaron lift up his hands toward the people and blessed them So Simon the sonne of Onias used a most solemn form of holy service and benediction Ecclus. 50.20 where it is said He lifted up his hands over the whole congregation of the children of Israel to give the blessing of the Lord with his lips And his lips conveyed it by his hands towards them into their hearts by a Ministeriall Sacerdotall exhibition Thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 h Sustollebatur vel ferebatur non volantis more aut gradientis at ità ac si alior●m manibus g●status panlatim su●sum portatus fuisset Christ was taken not as birds flie or as men go but so as if he had been carried in mens hands and by little and little lifted upward saith Brugensis i Corpori● statu recto paulatim in coeles ten dens With an upright posture of bodie leasurely ascending into heaven saith Barradius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 k Ferchatur n●n alieno adminiculo sed propriâ virtute He was mounted not by any other outward help but his own power saith Cajetan l Vel per potentiam divinam vel per agilitatem dotem humanit atis Either as he was God or else by the agilitie which is proper to glo●ified humane bodies saith Barradius Yet Aquin well observes that as Christ is said to rise by his own power and yet he was raised by the Father because their powers are one so may he be said to ascend by his own power and yet be elevated or assumed by the Father m Elevatus est in coelum non scandend● gr●diens sed totus simul elevatus est He moved not saith Cajetan leg after leg nor seemed to climbe or go● but all parts alike and he wholly together was lifted up And for the greater Majestie a cloud received him Descending even to his feet in the form of a Throne on which he sat saith Abulensis As the royall Chariot declareth the King so saith Chrysostom on Acts 1. there was sent to Christ REGALE VEHICVLVM which cloud was rather carried up by Christ then he by it When Aquinas saith part 3. quaest 57. artic 4. n Nubes non praebult adminiculum Christo per modum vebicul● Christ used not the cloud as men use a coach or chariot to help them in their want I understand him of ADMINICVLVM NECESSARIVM A necessary support or stay for Christ had no need of such an one yet it might be ADMINICVLVM SOLENNE A ceremonious aid and solemne free assistance he might assume it as a token of his Majestie o Apparuit signum Divinitatis There was seen the signe or seal of his Divinitie saith Aquin himself Nor is it against the glorie of Christs Divinitie to make use of a cloud or clouds He shall come with clouds Revel 1.7 With the clouds of heaven Dan. 7.13 In the clouds of heaven Matth. 24.30 This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven saith the Angel Act. 1.11 This one cloud might be so great as many lesser clouds when he ascended as all the clouds shall be in which he shall descend at his second coming or else more clouds were about him but one more eminent on which he sat and with which he ascended And the extraordinarinesse of this cloud might testifie his Divinitie in which regard to discriminate him from his forerunners the Apostles worshipped him Luk. 24.52 which was not in any likelihood performed to Enoch or Elias for they were not carried up in a cloud or clouds But there appeared a chariot of fire and horses of fire and Elijah went up by a whirlwinde into heaven 2. King 2.11 To which is added the fiery nature of the whirlwinde it self Ecclus 48.9 He was taken up in a whirlwinde of fire The manner of Enochs assumption I confesse is uncertain Aquila his Alphabet saith p Deus subduxit Enoch in turbine sicut Eliam God took up Enoch in a whirlwinde as he did Elias So saith Rabbi Menachem and the Zoar on the fifth of Genes Drusius in his Henoch cap. 13. saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tulit eum Deus God took him which are the exact words of Scripture concerning Gods taking away of Enoch Genes 5.24 both in the fair Hebrew Bibles of Stephanus in octavo and in the Interlinearie and in Vatablus though Drusius a little varie the middle word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 q Sanê in Gematria valet by a Jewish gamboll is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r Cum vento tempestatis ascendere fecit eum In
a tempestuous winde did he make him to ascend including an intimation that in a whirlwinde they were both rapted If the Scripture had used the very words in describing the nature of Elias I should the sooner have liked the conceit but the Rabbinicall speculations conclude not therefore I will Lastly it is improbable but divers of the Disciples or Apostles who saw Christs ascending might and would have sought and looked for him but that they were in a sort dehorted by two Angels who told them That Christ was taken from them into heaven Act. 1.11 and therefore it was vain to seek him any longer on the earth And most certain it is that when the sonnes of the Prophets saw Elijah snatcht up and Elishah parting Jordan with Elijahs mantle they said unto Elishah There be with thy servants fiftie sonnes of strength let them go we pray thee and seek thy master 2. Kings 2.16 and accordingly they sent fiftie men and they sought three dayes but found him not vers 17. Semblably we may well imagine that some also did seek for Enoch after he was translated yea it approacheth nearer to belief then to imagination upon this fair resultance He was not found say the Septuagint He was not found saith the Apostle therefore he was sought after therefore he was searched for TV NON INVENTA REPERTAES I have found thee whom I could not finde when I sought thee saith the old Poet but it is harsh to say TV NON QVAESITA REPERTA ES Thou art found and wast never lookt after Finding implieth precedent search or going after most ordinarily but Not being found necessarily implieth a former inquirie Elias was not found by Ahab therefore Ahab sought for him Enoch was not found therefore they made enquirie after him So much be spoken in defence of my Comment upon the words Et non ipse which I have supplied from the Septuagint and most especially from the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he was not found And with it is also ended and terminated the second Quaere by me propounded Whether Enoch did ever die with its Answer That Enoch died not either a sweet death or a sowre an easie death or a painfull 5. The third Question followeth Whether Enoch and Elias now live in and with their bodies in Paradise Bellarmine is for the affirmative That Paradise is now extant and Enoch and Elias live in it More particularly concerning Elias Rabbi David in his Comment on 2. Kings 2. reports it as the common opinion of the Jews That Elias went with his bodie into Paradise and there liveth in the same estate that our Parents did before the fall Others have taken upon them to describe and circumscribe exactly the place of Paradise in an Island now called Eden not farre from Babylon as certain Nestorians of the Greek Church have fabled I say fabled because millions of learned men both Heathen Jews and Christians have seen Babylon and lived in it and round about it who never had such a thought or belief or tradition so farre as may be gathered by any ancient extant records Of which Paradise whosoever desireth to see more at large let him have recourse to my learned friend M. John Salkeld in his Treatise of Paradise I will onely adde somewhat which he omitteth Salianus the great Annalist from the creation of the first Adam to the death of the second Adam or rather to his resurrection and ascension Ad annum mundi 987 saith Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Tertullian Gregorie Epiphanius and Hippolytus acknowledging the translation of Enoch and Elias are silent concerning the place of their being Augustine leaves it as doubtfull and disputable Chrysostom and Theodoret like not the enquirie Rupert saith The Scripture is silent neither are the words of Paradise or Eden in the place of Ecclesiasticus 44.16 in the Greek text but onely in the Vulgat So farre Salianus But indeed first me thinks that the old Translatour should have been constant to himself and adding somewhat to the words of Ecclesiasticus 44.16 should not have added In Paradisum as he doth without any shadow of ground from any other place but In coelum because it is so written 1. Macc. 2.58 Elias was taken up into heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In coelum receptus est as the Vulgat it self hath it Secondly the Jesuit Salianus is somewhat too favourable in that point for S. Ambrose in lib. de Paradiso cap. 13. saith expressesly Enoch was r Raptus in coelum caught up into heaven and S. Hierom on Amos 9. saith Enoch and Elias were carried into heaven Bellarmine and other Papists distinguishing COELVM into AERIVM COELESTE ET SVPERCOELESTE Aëriall heavenly and supercelestiall say Enoch was carried into the aëriall heaven I must confesse that the region of the aire that Expansum the aëriall orb is sometimes called Heaven The Lord thundred from heaven 2. Sam. 22.14 God gave us rain from heaven Act. 14.17 and birds are called the fowls of the heaven Psal 104.12 The Lord cast down great hailstones from heaven Josh 10.11 and they were more which died with hailstones then they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword These hailstones came from the middle region of the aire I confesse also that Enoch was carried up into the aëriall heaven but with this distinction He was taken into it as his way not as the end of his journey not as his habitation or resting place The case of Enoch and Elias is so like so one in this puncto that you are not to marvell if sometimes I use the name of one sometimes of the other what is said of one is meant of both f Qui unum rectè nôrit ambos noverit Who knoweth one is not ignorant of the other Chrysostom in his oration of Elias is expresse that he resteth not in the aire and bringeth in Satan as wondring at Elias his riding through and above the clouds neither is his reason to be contemned Elias is not there where the devil is Prince and what should he do among lightning and thunder hail snow storm and tempest This is the portion of the wicked to drink If you flee to the miraculous omnipotent hand of God why may not I say the like concerning Gods extraordinary clothing him with immortalitie and that by dispensation unusuall in the act of translating him God did not let him continue on the earth or in the aire but assuming him into the highest heaven did glorifie his bodie For concerning coelum coeleste Bellarmine will not say that he resteth there nor did ever any afford patrocinie to that conceit Indeed Seneca De consolatione sheweth that the Stoicks thought that the souls of men departed hovered about their bodies and in the end were carried up t Ad ipsos orbes astr●s ornatos to the starry heaven And Cicero De somno Scipionis placeth that heroïcal soul among the starres Besides that the conceit is heathenish it
nothing concerneth our question of mortall bodies But if Enoch and Elias are in the orbs and among the spheres which is the coelum coeleste they should be hurried with diurnall motion from the East unto the West unlesse you place them upon the Poles to stand there immoveably which Poles are as imaginary as their being there If there they be in mortall bodies what strange influences would the heavens poure forth upon them since the nearer the Object is to the Agent the more effectually the Agent worketh If they have the same unaltered bodies either in the aire or in the coelo coelesti what meat what clothing have they The naturall mortall bodie of Elias yea of Christ himself after fourty dayes fast was hungry whilest he lived on earth Augustine De peccatorum meritis remissione 1.3 saith They either live without meat or as Adam did by the tree of life But Cornelius à Lapide renounceth the latter clause since Paradise and the tree of life is starved and dead S. Hierom ad Pammachium and Epiphanius Haeres 64. say They live without meat The fore-named Jesuit fleeth to a miracle and that is alwayes an help at a dead lift but he dealeth most injuriously with Epiphanius cutting him of by the skirts and mangling his opinion The words of Epiphanius are these u Vivunt spiritualiter non animaliter propter translationem súntque in corpore seu carne spirituali non o●us habente ut per corvos nutriantur sed nutriuntur alio spirituali alimento They live since their translation spiritually and not as they were wont to do on earth their bodies and flesh are spirituall having no need to be fed by ravens but are nourished by other spirituall food If the Jesuit will grant they have spirituall bodies he will let fall his position and the position of his fellows That Enoch and Elias shall die I reassume the interrupted point concerning Paradise Which Cornelius saith was taken away by the floud and The place continueth not saith Pererius directly contradicting Bellarmine and with Pererius stand Salmeron Sa Del Rio and many other I will help them to this argument If Paradise did and doth continue on earth as it was then Noah and his familie and all the beasts might with lesse ado and more soon have been brought into Paradise and there have lived especially there being no great distance between the place where Paradise was and the abode of Noah when he builded the Ark if Divines aim right If Paradise had been on earth in Christs time would not Christ once have gone into it Or would the Angels or could they have kept Christ out Much very much more might be said but Salianus hath saved me all that labour who pag. 66. of the first tome of his Ecclesiasticall Annals writeth thus x Ridiculum est existimare Paradisum esse in aëre supremo aut in lunae concavo collocare codémque flumina quae in terris visuntur transferre It is a folly to think that Paradise is in the highest part of the aëriall orb or to place it by the moon The rivers mentioned to be in Paradise are on earth how shall wee convey or transchange them to those places And it is easier to say then to prove that the Angels kept Paradise from being overthrown with waters Thus doth he reconcile those which said Paradise is extant and those who deny it with a true and good distinction as I conceive it in this manner Let us say that the region and soil the MATERIALE PARADISI the place of Paradise is yet extant for ONE GENERATION PASSETH AWAY AND ANOTHER GENERATION COMETH BVT THE EARTH ABIDETH FOR EVER Ecclesiastes 1.4 For HE LAYD THE FOVND ATIONS OF THE EARTH THAT IT SHOVLD NOT BE REMOVED FOR EVER Psal 104.5 Again Psal 119. vers 90. THOV HAST EST ABLISHED THE EARTH AND IT ABIDETH And saith he The place is not farre distant from Euphrates and Tigris But the delicacies trees elegancie delight order and distribution ordained for innocencie are decayed that it is not to be wondred at if we cannot finde so much as the footsteps of them So he Perhaps saith Eugubinus as Jerusalem and Sion the mountain of God and the Ark of God so Eden also y Vetustate contabuit is grown writhled and wrinkled with age He doth well to add Perhaps for indeed it is more likely that it was not paulatim but suddenly and wholly defaced when the Angels left the custodie of it when the floud washed away its beauty and bemired it just like to other places z Paradisus quoad essentiam non quood ornatum quem olim habuit superest The same ground and the essentiall place on which Paradise was seated remayneth still the beauty adornation and delight is vanished saith Del Rio And the beddes of the rivers are changed and the fountains break forth in other places as Gregorius de Valentia well collecteth Thus farre excellently Salianus Now as I have approved him for saying a Simpliciter fateamur istum Paradisum planè nullum esse Let us ingenuously confesse That that garden of God is now no where the extraordinary beauty and commodities are vanished though the ground thereof yet remaineth so have I just cause to laugh more at him then he did at his fellows for their opinions since he is so strangely conjecturall as to say We may say that Enoch and Elias are placed within the boundaries which invironed Paradise of old and are kept there by the ministerie of Angels yet so that no man can see them as Christ now and then among the Jews made himself invisible Against this I thus argue First whosoever placed Enoch or Elias in Paradise placed them there as in a place of extraordinary pleasure and delight Paradise was ever by all taken for locus amoenitatis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an extraordinary place of pleasure and accounted the garden of God till now But now there is no such unusuall pleasure saith Salianus Therefore they are not now in Paradise Even Aristotle Ethicorum 9.9 could say b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An happy man is not to be made an Anachoret or rather thus An Hermite cannot be an happy man And in the same chapter c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No man would enjoy the whole world on condition to have none in the earth with him For man was born for civill conversation And Pol. 1.2 d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man by nature is a sociable creature Whereupon he well concludeth A blessed man is not solitary For e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eth. 99. he hath whatsoever is naturall but to delight in company is naturall therefore he must needs enjoy it The great S. Augustine perhaps met with the same place I am sure these are his words De Civit. 19.3 f Vitam beatam etiam socialem perhibent esse quae amicorum bona propter seipsa diligat
〈◊〉 is taken Ezechiel 24.16 t Ecce ego aufero 〈◊〉 te desiderium oculorum tuorum Behold I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes Salmanticensis Judaeus in lib. Johasin 98.2 saith u Mortuus est Rabbi Emmi quia rapuit eum mors Rabbi Emmi died for death snatched him away And so it is in the Latine phrases Rapio and Aufero what in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quis Deus Octavi te nobis abstulit te Raptum Romanam flebimus historiam What God Octavius Took the away from us We will bemoan the death of thee And of our Romane historie So farre Drusius in the preface to his book called Henoch But this is no good exposition since God took away by death all the rest of the Patriarchs as well as Enoch and yet it is most singularly spoken of Enoch He was not found for God took him By death saith the shallow Jew but our divine Apostle saith He was translated that he might not see death What Christian or rationall man will doubt but we are to incline to the Apostle Again the third answer brought by Drusius against his own opinion as himself professeth to prove that VIDERE MORTEM To see death doth not signifie to die a naturall death where there is a true separation of the soul from the bodie and that NON VIDERE MORTEM Not to see death on the contrary doth not signifie To be kept alive from death which I with Drusius do say was the true intent of the Apostle draweth to this head Enoch saw not death that is died not because the holy Scriptures where they make mention of his rapture mention not his death I answer If all were true yet it followeth not that Enoch is dead or shall die which is the point questioned Moreover if Enoch were dead or to die the wisdome of the Divine Inspirer would never have singled out such a phrase among so many other thousand as should leade men to think the clean contrary He was translated that he should not see death For there resteth the period If it had been meant he should die it would have been added He should not see death for a long time or He should not see death till toward the end of the world or the like But He was translated that he should not see death Therefore he shall never see death Suarez in tertiam partem summae quaest 59. artic 6. sect 1. saith directly S. Paul meaned that Enoch should not die in that place into which he was translated True But why should he die in any other place or indeed why should he die at all who above other men was rapted purposely That he might not see death Surely the deferring of death for a time is not so great a favour The exempting one wholly from death is a blessing above ordinary Again it is said of Enoch Genes 5.23 All his dayes were 365. where dayes are taken for yeares as otherwhere in Scripture But these are not all his dayes if either he remove from one place of the earth into an other which Salianus fondly imagined or live now in a mortall corruptible bodie It is said of our blessed Saviour Hebr. 5.7 He poured out prayers in the dayes of his flesh that is whilest he lived on earth the life of nature in an elementary terrene humane passive bodie And of some other Patriarchs All the dayes of them were such and such Genes 5.17 20 c. that is all the dayes while they breathed on the earth the breath of life in mortall bodies Therefore even from the very phrase concerning Enoch All his dayes were 365. we may inferre He lived not in a mortall bodie any longer on the earth He liveth not now any where in a mortall bodie Somewhat must I say also of Elias severally Rabbi Solomon on the 5 of Genes saith When Elijah was hurried up in a fiery chariot his bodie was burnt up of that fire and Other Jews agree with him saith x De Romano Pontifice 3 6. Bellarmine For my part I say I will not embrace an unlikelihood though it runne toward my opinion I think the cloke might have been burnt as well as his bodie and Elishah could not have escaped scorching when the fire parted them Again the ashes might have fallen as well as his mantle And the Jew would account it no great favour to be burnt alive That fire certainly was rather conservative then destructive not penal and consuming as the fire from heaven drawn down by Elias 2. Kings 1.12 not punitive and conserving as the fire of hell Everlasting Matth. 25.41 Vnquenchable Mark 9.43 but like the fierie furnace in which the three children sang Daniel 3.25 or the fire in the bush Exod. 3.3 harmlesse yea gracious or the fire at the consummation of the world which one calleth Ignem rationalem The phrase then 2. Kings 2.11 importeth no lesse Elijah went up by a whirlwinde into heaven Elijah All Elijah Whole Elijah Soul and bodie His soul had no need of a whirlwinde Elijah went up It is varied 1. Maccab. 2.58 He was taken up into heaven His rapture excluded not his willingnes his willingnes had been insufficient without his rapture his ascension being grounded on assumption the power being Gods not his or his passively and Gods actively If it be true what Bellarmine avoucheth That some other Jews agree with Rabbi Solomon in this that Elijah was burned Yet I am sure y Bibliothe●● Sanctae lib. 2. pag. 65. Sixtus Senensis citeth the opinion of other Jews to the contrarie For they said that the length of time from the beginning of man till the end of the world hath been and shall be measured by the severall lives of seven men and that there was never houre from mans creation to the generall resurrection but some one of these seven men did or shall live in it Adam lived to see Methuselah Methuselah was alive in Sems time Sem died not till Jacob was born Jacob lived till Amram Moses his father was born Amram expired not till Ahijah the Shilonite lived Ahijah lived with Elijah Elijah shall live till the end of the world Therefore they thought Elijah was not burnt is not dead But first the Papists themselves say that Elijah shall be slain by Antichrist before the end of world Therefore this maketh not for them Secondly the Jews might have tucked up the time shorter on this fashion Adam lived in the dayes of Enoch and Enoch to the end of the world And so their number of seven might be reduced unto two But let us leave these Rabbinicall speculations concerning Elijah and say somewhat of him not as he was in a Paradise of phansie but as he was with our blessed Saviour on the mount at that glorious transfiguration And this I set down for certain No passage in the Gospels proveth demonstratively that his bodie was immortall It is true it is said of
nobilitie richly clad do wait on Kings Tertullian adversus Marcionem cap. 22. saith Moses and Elias were seen p In consortio claritatis equally bright and glorious Luke 9.29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As he prayed the fashion of his countenance was altered q Nemo putet Salvatorem veritatem corporis amisisse externam tantùm speciem permutavit splendore Let no man imagine saith Hierom that our Saviour lost the nature of a true bodie onely he converted the outward form and fashion all into brightnes The like may I say of Moses and Elias if they had their glorie by redundance from Christs glorie as Suarez maintaineth and then there is no necessitie nor indeed great likelihood that Christs glorious transfiguration should leave to himself a mortall bodie and they should be by him then invested in eternall tabernacles of incorruptible flesh Now as I have clearely declared my judgement that it holdeth not demonstratively from any puncto that Elias at the transfiguration had an unchangeably glorious estate of bodie so I hold it very probable that Elias did never die properly but was changed at his rapture and at his ingresse into heaven enjoyed a truly glorified bodie and both unto the time of Christs transfiguration and then and ever since enjoyeth and liveth in flesh incorruptible not Animall but Spirituall as the blessed Saints shall have after the end of the world If any one think to choke me with my former words That Christs glorie was greater then the glorie of his servants And therefore if Elias had an immortall bodie Christ must have one also which he had not I answer That the hypostaticall union of the Divine Nature to the Humane in Christ was at all times of greater glorie then the glorified estate of the Saints shall be after the resurrection Secondly as intensively Christs glorie was greater then Elijahs though it was eclipsed by Christs voluntarie condescent that he might accomplish the work of our redemption so extensively at the instant of the transfiguration I doubt not but the bodily glorie of Christ was as farre above his servants glorie as the light of the sunne surpasseth the light of lesser starres Therefore all things considered Christs bodily glorie was greater then Elijahs though Elijahs was immortall and Christs then changeable and mortall Bellarmine in his Apologie against the judicious Monitorie preface of King James esteemeth it as p Valde admirandum much to be admired at that the learned King said Enoch and Elias are now glorified in heaven Many things indeed might Bellarmine learn by his Majestie which are laudanda valde admiranda both to be praised and wondred at but taking valde admirandum in the worser sense I say his wonder is full of ignorance and malice Wherefore omitting much of what that really-unanswerable Bishop hath copiously alledged I say It is no such strange matter to say or beleeve that Enoch and Elias have glorified bodies And yet here first of all I will ingenuously confesse that a man both in soul and in a corruptible bodie may be in the third heaven because S. Paul else might have known that himself was not in the third heaven in his bodie but his doubting and nesciencie 2. Cor. 12.2 c. Whether in the bodie I cannot tell or whether out of the bodie I cannot tell God knoweth proveth that either might have been The disjunctive might else have been spared if it could have been done onely one way Therefore it is possible unto the Almightie that Elias might or may have a passive mortall bodie though he were rapt into heaven and there be at this present But A posse ad esse non valet consequentia and the reasons and authoritie which place Elias in heaven in an unpassible bodie are more ponderous and numerous then theirs which embrace the contrarie If it be objected that Elias went not up into the third heaven because he was carried up in a whirlwinde and whirlwindes reach not to the third heaven I answer By the same cavill they may say Our Saviour ascended not into heaven when a cloud received him out of their sight Act. 1.9 because clouds pierce not to the highest heaven But we must distinguish between things ordinarie and extraordinarie Both the whirlwinde and the cloud had somewhat in them above the common leuell of nature and were not meerly elementarie but adapted to higher and diviner uses then common clouds or whirlwindes I remove this passant tabernacle of discourse from an objection unto the standing mansion of our great Adversaries confessions Suarez in tertiam partem Summ. quaest 53. artic 3. confesseth in this manner q Sunt in inserno aliqui homines corpore animâ ante generalem resurrectionem ut Dathan Abiram similes Some men are in hell both soul and bodie before the generall resurrection as Dathan and Abiram and the like He is seconded by Peter Morales another Jesuit in his fifth book on the first chapter of S. Matthew Tract 11. This opinion is somewhat minced by Ribera upon the words Revel 19.20 These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone who hath his second also viz. Blasius Viegas for they say Korah Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up alive but then the earth closed and they died and their souls onely were carried into hell The like they say of Antichrist and his fore-runner But this nicetie is contradicted by the Vulgat which to them is authenticall Num. 16.33 Descenderunt vivi in infernum so also in the thirtieth verse and so the Interlinearie rightly readeth it according to the Hebrew And if infernus did signifie the grave in the case of Korah and his complices as it doth not for then it had been no such extraordinarie miracle for people alive to be swallowed up by the earths rupture since many people yea whole cities have often been so punished and came to destruction but they were for a signe Numb 26.10 that is for an example that others should not murmure and rebell against Gods Ministers as the Genevean Note on the place soundly and pertinently and deeply interpreteth yet concerning Antichrist and his false-prophet mentioned by them it cannot be so for it is said most punctually Revel 19.20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vivi missi sunt hi duo in stagnum ignis ardentis sulphuris These both were cast alive into a lake of burning fire and brimstone as it is in their Vulgat Montanus varieth it thus In stagnum ardens in sulphure Into a lake burning in brimstone They did not descend r Ad sepulchrum ad infernum ad stagnum ignis exclusivé to the grave to hell to the lake of fire exclusively coming onely to the brink but ſ Descenderunt in infernum in stagnū ignis they descended into hell into the lake of fire they were plunged into it Therefore they did not die by the way or at the gates of hell but actually
cannot be executed without the glorifying of souls and bodies of his servants we may well think it pleased God to give to the old world a pledge or two of the generall glorification of the bodies of his Saints by the particular performance of the same to the bodies of Enoch and Elias whom he assumed up into heaven by way of especiall favour To this I may adde That Enoch and Elijahs raptures being types of Christs ascension since Christ ascended in a glorified and immortall bodie the shadows must be like the substance and therefore they ascended in glorified immortall bodies Suarez is driven to a great exigent They were onely saith he n in statu merendi potuerunt in gratia crescere c. in a state in which they might merit and increase in grace till the time in which they were translated And as they were translated they were so confirmed in grace that they can commit no sinne And to their old estate of meriting shall they return when they shall live again amongst men But who ever heard of such turnings and returnings in any other men or Angels or that their estate shall be changed from o A non posse peccare ad posse peccare an estate wherein they cannot sinne to an estate in which they may sinne and so backward For supposing they shall live again and die again if they can merit they can also sinne whilest they live among men and so when they die and have their reward in heaven this shall be no small part of it p Non posse peccare To have no power to sinne But this opinion somewhat resembleth the diversified estate of devils who shall be saved after the generall judgement as Origen feigned and fabled and which the Church hath branded for erroneous And now I see I have fallen before I was aware upon the fourth and last question by me propounded Whether Enoch and Elias shall ever die or do live with glorified bodies in the highest heavens which also I have answered at large That they never shall die but do and shall live in glorified bodies Tertullian I confesse said concerning Elias at the Transfiguration q Apparuit in veritate car●is nondum defunctae He appeared in true flesh which had never been separated from its soul and more punctually de Anima cap. 50. r Translatus est Enoch Elias nec mors eorum reperta est dilata scilicet Morituri reservantur ut Antichristum sanguine suo extinguant Enoch and Elias were translated nor is their death recorded or known it being adjourned they are kept and preserved that they may die hereafter and by their bloud overthrow and extinguish Antichrist as Baronius cites him And the more common opinion of the Papists is That they two shall be slain and they prove it by Rev. 11.7 When the two witnesses shall have finished their testimonie the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomlesse pit shall overcome and kill them The three other places of Scripture on which Bellarmine built his third demonstration that Antichrist is not come because Enoch and Elias are not yet come are answered before This last place and passage of Scripture used by Bellarmine de Romano Pontif. 3.6 cometh now to be examined and you shall finde it thus well winnowed by Bishop Andrews in his Answer to Cardinall Bellarmines Apologie Cap. 11. That the two witnesses are the two Testaments as Beda Primasius Augustinus and Ticonius are Authours S. Hilarius rejecteth Enoch and puts Moses in his room and that very peremptorily Though many have substituted Jeremie in Enochs room saith Hilarie on Matth. Can. 20. S. Hierom the next Father cited by Bellarmine is not constant enough for Elias which I touched at before and Rupertus on Malach. 4. testifieth so much of Hierom and Bullinger in Apocal. lib. 3. v. 3. saith S. Hierom esteemeth them to be Jews and Jewish hereticks who think Elias shall come again Lactantius cited by Bellarmine in his Apologie nameth neither Enoch nor Elias And Chrysostom Theodoret Origen and Primasius say nothing of Enoch Hippolytus for the two witnesses brings in three one whereof is S. John the Divine and indeed he is more likely to be one of the witnesses then Enoch for unto him it was said Revel 10.11 Thou must prophesie again before many peoples and nations and tongues and kings but no such thing was said to Enoch Others say Elizeus shall be one of the two witnesses Hieronymus saith r Nisi quis spiritualiter intelligat hunc locum Apocalypsews Judaicis ei fabulis acquiescendum est In Epist ad Marcellum Vnlesse a man understand this place of the Revelation spiritually he must needs settle and rest on Jewish fables Maldonate on the 17 of Matthew and his learned Interpreter saith It is so cleare a matter that Moses and Elias shall come that none but a rash and impudent man can denie it Thus much Bishop Andrews in his Answer to the place of the Revelation against Bellarmines Apologie who vaunted of a cloud of Fathers which cloud is vanished almost into nothing Much more of great worth and consequence hath that Reverend Bishop in the same 11 chapter concerning Enoch and Elias living in glorified bodies to whom I referre the Reader And this shall suffice to have spoken of Enoch and of Elias against Bellarmines third demonstration as he calleth it that Antichrist is not yet come Every part and parcell of which proof is so weak and so farre from concluding apodictically that they scarce deserve a place among probable arguments And thus is the second main branch of my answers made good and manifested That some have been excepted from death viz. Enoch and Elias though it be objected that It is appointed for men to die The third part of my answer followeth That others also shall be excepted O Fountain of life and preserver of men to whom belong also the issues of death I have deserved to die the first and second death I have provoked thy long-suffering I am no more worthy to be called thy sonne Lord make me as one of thy hired servants and put me to what labour to what pain soever within me without me so long as pleaseth thee onely I beseech thee for the blessed mediation of thy dearely beloved onely Sonne Jesus Christ my Saviour give me grace not to faint under the burthens appointed and at the end of the day at my lives end vouchsafe to give me a penie among thy labourers and eternall life among thy chosen Amen CHAP. III. 1. Some others hereafter shall be excepted from death The change may be accounted in a generall large sense a kinde of death The Papists will have a reall proper death Aquinas an incineration This is disproved 1. Thessal 4.17 which place is handled at large The rapture of the godly is sine media morte without death The resurrection is of all together The righteous prevent not the
justly suspected saith the worthy Estius the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being so easily turned into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a little dash And he findeth just fault with Acacius in Hierom for saying it was so read in most Greek copies when as certainly it was read so but in verie few copies whereof there is scarce one now extant and not many proofs that ever there were many copies of that extant Neither indeed doth the reading stand with sense For the Apostle solemnly premizeth Behold I shew you a mysterie and then subjoyneth immediately according to this new-fangled mis-writing We shall all therefore sleep or die Is this a mysterie that all shall sleep or all die Doth he promise mountains and bring forth a molehill Every Heathen knows that we shall die every Christian Turk and Jew that we shall be raised again But when God justly for sinne sentenced man to death with a morte morieris That some sinfull men should be excepted is a mysterie deserving such a watchword as Behold Behold I shew you a mysterie we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed Secondly from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I thus argue That death if such a death there be any which is so speedily begun by separation of the soul from the bodie and ended as I may so say by the swift and momentanie reuniting of the same soul to the same bodie cannot handsomely be called a sleep Doth he sleep who in the twinkling of an eye is changed from mortalitie to immortalitie yea from being alive is made dead and from being dead is made alive and that incorruptibly Was ever sleep confined to an instant till now or may one be said to sleep in the midst of these great works It is not so much as Analogicall sleep The greatest sleepers have more then an instant ere they can begin to sleep Sleep creepeth or falleth on men by degrees heavinesse and dulnesse usher it and the spirits have a time to retire to their forts and cittadels the senses are not locked up nor do they deposite the use of their faculties in a moment And may that be called properly rest or sleep which resteth not above an instant and is as quick as thought Rest and sleep do couch upon the bed of time likewise it is as much as possibly can be done if so much can be done to awake one in an instant The Scripture useth the phrase of sleeping towards them who rest as it were in death in the earth in the grave Our friend Lazarus sleepeth saith Christ John 11.11 when indeed he was buried Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake Dan. 12.2 Let one place of holy Writ be produced where one and the same instant beginneth sleep and endeth awaking and then I may say there may be some shadow for that reading But here is no pause no rest no quiet therefore no sleep therefore the word sleep in this place is applied to such as died before and not to such as are alive and shall die as the second lection implieth Thirdly it wanteth force to say in the whole conjoyned sentence We shall therefore all sleep or die but we shall all be changed If the Apostle had intended any such thing he would not have used the adversative particle But but the implicative word And We shall all therefore sleep AND we shall all be changed This had been sense if thus it had been but not being so we may the more confidently shake off the second lection of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as abhorrent from reason and cleave to the first of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnes quidem non dormiemus c. All we shall not die but all we shall be changed And so from the varietie of Greek copies I come to the Vulgat the Translation in Latine Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur Truely we shall all of us arise but we shall not all of us be changed First I say this differeth from all Greek copies whereas if it had been according to any sort of them it might have swayed us much that way Secondly the same argument toucht at before may also give a side-blow to this translation The Apostle raiseth up their considerations by promising to tell them a mysterie But it was no mysterie to tell them that they should all be raised when he had told it so pithily so divinely and so often beat upon it before by so many kindes of arguments as he did Thirdly where the Vulgat saith Non omnes immutabimur it is not true for Omnes immutabimur We shall all be changed from mortalitie to immortalitie from naturall bodies to spirituall If you say We shall not be all changed to glorie I say so with you I adde That is no mysterie all know that Therefore the Apostle speaketh not of a change to glorie eternall in the heavens whereunto some onely shall be changed but he speaketh of a change from mortalitie to immortalitie from corruptible bodies to incorruptible which even the wickedest men shall have And perhaps he meaneth that this generall immutation shall be made sine media morte without intercurrent or intercedent death even in the wicked that shall be then alive yet in the change you must alwaies make this diversitie The wicked shall be singled out to shame to losse to punishment eternall with their raised or changed bodies for even in their raising also there is a change from corruption to incorruption but in the change of the godly there is glorious incorruption joyfull immortalitie pleasurable eternitie The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a change of a thing from place to place as when we take a piece of wood from the earth and cast it into the water Thus the wicked shall be hurried from their graves to the judgement seat and shall be placed on the left hand of our Saviour and after sentence shall be haled and cast from earth into hell On the other side the righteous in their change shall be mounted up from their graves or from the earth into the aire to meet Christ and shall be at his right hand and after sentence be carried or ascend up into heaven in most glorious manner to live with Christ eternally Fourthly if we reade it with the Vulgat We shall all arise but we shall not all be changed we must also immediately annex the words In a moment in the twinkling of an eie at the last trump for there is the pause and stay to be made there is the full sentence The Vulgat hath done very ill to make the stay and full point at immutabimur for then the words following bear no construction at all if they be considered by themselves In a moment in the twinkling of an eie at the last trump For then cometh in new matter For the trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be
in heaven The place of Revel 11.7 concerning the two Witnesses winnowed by Bishop Andrews Enoch and Elias are not those two witnesses 200 CHAP. III. 1. SOme others hereafter shall be excepted from death The change may be accounted in a generall large sense a kinde of death The Papists will have a reall proper death Aquinas an incineration This is disproved 1. Thessal 4.17 which place is handled at large The rapture of the godly is sine media morte without death The resurrection is of all together The righteous prevent not the wicked in that 224 2. By the words of the Creed is proved that some shall never die The same is confirmed by other places of Scripture with the consent of S. Augustine and Cajetan The definitions Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum of the sentences and tenents of the Church leave the words doubtfully Rabanus his exposition rejected 227 3. The place of S. Paul 2. Corinth 5.4 evinceth That some shall not die Cajetan with us and against Aquinas Doctour Estius and Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit approve Cajetan S. Augustine is on our side and evinceth it by Adams estate before the fall which state Bellarmine denieth not Salmerons objections answered 228 4. Some shall be exempted from death as is manifested 1. Corinth 15.51 The place fully explicated The common Greek copies preferred The Greek reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall not all sleep standeth with all truth conveniencie probabilitie and sense The other Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall therefore all of us sleep and the more different Vulgat Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur Indeed we shall all arise but we shall not all be changed justly exploded as adverse to sense 230 5. The Pelagians though accursed hereticks yet held truely That some shall not die S. Augustine dubious Others stick in his hesitancie Yet other Fathers and late Writers are constant That some shall be priviledged from death yet that change may be called a kinde of death 235 FINIS A Catalogue of the severall Authours quoted in these three books of MISCELLANIES A ABen Ezra Abraham de Balmis Abulensis Adrichomius Cornelius Agrippa Albericus Gentilis Albertus Magnus Alchabitius Alexander ab Alexandro Ambrosius Bishop Andrews Anselmus Apollinaris Appianus Alexandrinus Aquila Aquinas Petronius Arbiter Arboreus Franciscus Aretinus Aretius Arias Montanus Aristoteles Athanasius Avenarius Augustinus B BAlthasar Bambach Moses Bar Cepha Baronius Barradius Basilius Beda Bellarminus Bernardus Bertram Beza Bilson Boëtius Bolducus Bonaventura Bosquier Brentius Broughton Lucas Brugensis Bucer Bullinger Busaeus C Coelius secundus Curio Caesaris commentaria Cajetanus Calvinus Melchior Canus Carafa Carthusianus Casaubonus Cassander Cassiodorus Catharinus Centuriatores Cevallerius Chaldee Targum Christopher Castrensis Chrysostomus Cicero Clemens Romanus Clemens Alexandrinus Joannes Climachus Philip de Comines Concilium Elibertinum Concilium Milevetanum Franciscus Collius Coverdale Cusanus Cyprianus Cyrillus Alexandrinus D DAmianus à Goës Rabbi David Del Rio. Demosthenes Petrus Diaconus Didymus Dionysius Areopagita Dorotheus Drusius Andreas Dudithius Durandus E ELias Levita Epimenides Epiphanius Erasmus Espencaeus Estius Eugubinus Eusebius Eustathius Antiochenus Euthymius F FAber Stapulensis Felisius Fernelius Ferus Festus Feuardentius Dr. Field Dr. Fox Fulgentius Dr. Fulk G GAgneius Galenus Gasparus Sanctius Genebrardus Gerson Gorranus Gregorius Greg. Nyssenus Greg. de Valentia Gretser H HAlensis Haymo Heinsius Helvicus Hermogenes Hieronymus Hilarius Hippocrates Hippolytus Holcot Homerus Horatius Hugo Cardinalis Hugo Eterianus I JAcobus de Valentia K. James Jansenius Ignatius Illyricus Irenaeus Isidorus Isidorus Pelusiota Josephus Justinus Benedictus Justinianus K KEmnitius Kimchi L LAertius Cornelius à Lapide Laurentii historia Anatomica Joannes Leo. Rabbi Levi. Libavius Livius Lombardus Lorinus Ludolphus Carthusianus Ludovicus de Ponte vallis Oletani Ludovicus Vives Lutherus Lyranus M MAjoranus Maldonatus Marianus Scotus Marsilius Andreasius Martin Marre-prelate Martinus Cantipretensis Justin Martyr Masius Matthew Paris Melchior Flavius Rabbi Menachem Mercer Minshew Mollerus Bishop Mountague Lord Michael de Montaigne Montanus Peter Morales Mr. Fines Morison Rabbi Moses Peter Moulin Muncer Musculus N HIer. Natalis Nazianzenus Nicephorus Nicetas Nonnus O OCkam Oecolampadius Oecumenius Jofrancus Offusius Olympiodorus Origenes P PAcianus Pagninus Paracelsus Paulinus Pererius Peter Martyr Petrus Pomponatius Philo Judaeus Photius Pighius Pineda Plato Plinius Plotinus Plutarchus Polybius Julianus Pomerius Porphyrius Postellus Primasius Procopius Gazaeus Propertius Prosper Ptolomeus R Dr. Raynolds Ribera Richeomus Jesuita Rodulphus Cluniacensis Monachus Rosinus Ruffinus Rupertus S EMmanuel Sa. Salianus Mr. Salkeld Salmanticensis Judaeus Salmeron Rabbi Salomon Mr. Sands Sasbout Scaliger Scharpius Dr. Sclater Scotus Mr. Selden Seneca Septuaginta Mr. Sheldon Barthol Sibylla Sixtus Senensis Sleidanus Socrates Sohnius Sophronius Soto Stapleton Robertus Stephanus Stow. Strabo Suarez Suetonius Suidas Surius Symmachus T TAcitus Tertullian Theodoretus Theodosius Theophylactus Petrus Thyraeus Tichonius Titus Bostrensis Toletus Tostatus Solomo Trecensis Tremellius Trelcatius Historie of the councell of Trent Turrianus V VAlla Terentius Varro Vasques Vatablus Didacus Vega. Ludovicus Vertomannus Blasius Viegas Joannes Viguerius Godfridus Abbas Vindocinensis Virgilius Vorstius Bishop Usher Leonardus de Utino W WHitakerus Willet Z ZAnchius Zimenes O Blessed God Father Sonne and holy Ghost whose deserving mercie to me hath been so infinite that nothing in earth which I enjoy is worthy enough to be offered unto thee yet because thou hast so plentifully rewarded the widow of Sarepta for sharing that little which she had unto the Prophet and hast promised even the kingdome of heaven to them who in thy name give a cup of water of cold water and hast most graciously accepted the poorest oblations both of the goats hair toward thy Tabernacle and the widows two mites into the treasurie receive I most humbly beseech thee the free-will-offering of my heart and weak endeavours of my hand in this intended service and as thou didst fill Bezaleel and Aholiab with an excellent spirit of wisdome and subtill inventions to finde out all curious works to the beautifying of thy Tabernacle so I most meekly desire thee to enlighten my soul to elevate my dull understanding that I may search for such secret things as may be found and finde such things as may be searched for lawfully and modestly and that I may like Joshuahs good spies acquaint my self and others with the desert wayes and the severall tracts and paths which our souls immediately after death must travell and passe over toward the Celestiall Canaan O God my good God grant me to accomplish this through the safe conduct of Him who is the faithfull Guide the onely Way the Light and Joy of my soul my Lord and Saviour JESVS CHRIST So be it most gracious Redeemer So be it MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE FIRST BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe subject of the whole Work The reason why I chose the Text of Hebrews 9.27 to discourse upon The division of it 2 Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Death appointed by GOD yet for Adams fault The tree