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 eumâ—Vtique Sed ideo dixit se dicere non Dominum quia hoc praeceptum non continetur in Evangelio dictuÌ„ 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 quaedaÌ„ 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
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
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
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
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 quà m 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
The easie things any man may judge of in the more abstruse the voice of the Pastours is to be followed c Quam clavem habebant Legis Dectores nisi interpretationem legis What key had the Doctours of the law saith Tertullian in the same place but the interpretation of the law So the key of interpretation rests in the ministery for things which need interpretation as hard places do though the key of agnition in things unto which their knowledge can aspire is permitted yea commended unto all men and they who withhold this key of knowledge from the people are accursed by Christ Luke 11.52 To the further explaining of my opinion let us consider in a Church corrupted these two sorts of people First the Magistrates either Civil or Ecclesiasticall And we will subdivide them into the Wilfully blinde and the Purblinde Of the first were some Bishops and Nobles and Gentry in Queen Maries dayes who hunted after bloud even the bloud of innocents and strained their authority to the highest Such is now the Inquisition falsly called the holy house with all the chief officers thereof such in the dayes of Christ were divers Scribes Pharisees Sadduces and some Rulers of the people who knowing the truth to be on Christs side by his doing such miracles as no man ever did before did choke and strangle their belief made shipwrack of their consciences resisted the holy Spirit who would neither go into the kingdome of heaven nor suffer others that were entering to go in against whom Christ pronounced wo upon wo Matth. 23.13 c. For they took away the key of knowledge Luke 11.52 and purposely kept the people ignorant and blinde According to their demerits there are reserved for them intima inferni the depths of hell blacknesse of darknesse and the greatest torments thereof without repentance The next tribe or sort are the purblinde Magistracy either Secular or Clergy Such were divers in the dayes of Queen Mary who had learning enough to know that all went not right yet did not vehemently oppose the truth but did swimme with the stream made the time their stern the whole Church turning and returning three or foure times in one age These were seduced as well as seducers Such also at this day are divers in the Papacy more moderate lesse rigid and rigorous concealing some truths they know because they have given up their hearts and beliefs to trust in their Church for such things as they do not know though they have means to learn and capacitie to understand if they would and therefore are faulty Such also were divers in the Jewish Church and State Ye killed the Prince of life saith S. Peter to the people Acts 3.15 And now brethren I wot that through ignorance ye did it as did also your rulers Such were those Pharisees Matth. 15.12 who were offended with Christ of whom Christ saith vers 14. They be blinde leaders of the blinde And if the blinde lead the blinde both shall fall into the ditch d In foveam peecati inferni Into the ditch of sinne and hell saith Hugo Cardinalis on the place e Cùm pastor per abrupta graditur necesse est ut grex in praecipitium ducatur When the shepherd goes by craggie clifts the flock must needs fall headlong and break their necks saith Gregory f Duces praeceptores fovea infernus The guides are the teachers and the ditch is hell saith Faber Stapulensis on the place So much of the purblinde Magistracy Clericall or Laicall in a corrupted Church From the Magistrates in the first place we descend to the people in the second place whom we also divide into their severall ranks and files In the generall they are either learned or unlearned The learned are first such as go against their conscience and practise contrary to their knowledge and belief sailing with winde and tide and because they will be found fault withall by the fewest they will do as the most do Timorous hypocrites they are fearing persecution losse of goods liberty and life more then they fear God who is able to destroy both body and soul for whom is kept the allotment of hypocrites brimstone and fire storm and tempest ignis vermis this shall be their portion to drink without repentance An other sort of learned men professing truth there are in a corrupted Church and each of them forsooth will be a reformer of the publick these despise government are presumptuous self-willed they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities 2. Pet. 2.10 speaking evil of the things that they understand not vers 12. as out of question they understand not all things which in their carping humour they censure people-pleasers ambitious of esteem full of words running as much after their own will as after their consciences hearty enough to draw on danger obstinate enough to provoke death Of these men though they die for some truths yet because they have a mixture of many errours in their intellect perversenesse in their will and ill grounded ill bounded affections wanting those godly endowments of charity before spoken of we may pronounce as the Apostle did They shall utterly perish in their own corruption 2. Pet. 2.12 Such a fellow was he and his like of whom g Anno 1543. Mr. Fox reporteth that when Christ said This is my body interpreted the words to this effect The word of God is to be broken distributed and eaten So when Christ said This is my bloud the blessed words are missensed as if Christ had then said The Scripture must be given to the people and received by them By which forced exposition the seal of our redemption is troden under foot the thrice-blessed sacrament of the bodie and bloud of our Lord is utterly annihilated whereas indeed in the words of consecration there are included verba concionatoria praedicanda words predicatorie and serving for doctrine I will not esteem him as an holy perfect martyr who dieth with such crotchets in his brain such pride in his heart Such an one was Ravaillac who for conscience sake forsooth stabbed the Anointed of the Lord the Heros of our time his naturall Soveraigne Henry the fourth of France He followed his conscience but his conscience had ill guides When he had outfaced tortures and death it self though he thought that he died a martyr if he died unrepentant the powers of hell gat hold upon him Such manner of people were those Jews who in most desperate fashion said His bloud be on us and on our children Matt. 27.25 Do you think they all were wholly ignorant do you think they all swerved against their consciences or rather medled they not in things above their callings were they not too presumptuous Thus though they had the knowledge of some truths and perhaps would have died for them yet their zeal wanted more and better knowledge to have rectified their consciences and they should have called
illumination as Gerson styleth it Columna ignis A pillar of fire Exod. 13.21 Stella Magos in Oriente antecedens The starre conducting the wise men of the East Matth. 2.9 An holy undeceiving unambiguous influent coruscation The Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters Gen. 1.2 This made Abraham not unwillingly to sacrifice his sonne The quenching of this Spirit against the cleare light of his own convicted conscience made the old Prophet more inexcusable then the other officious lying Prophet who deceived him 1. Kings 13.16 c. Nor did an Angel speak unto the seducer by the word of the Lord vers 18. Samuel being but a childe might not indeed as a novice or some others for a while might not know the voice of the Lord as Peter at the present knew not the operation of God by the Angel in his miraculous deliverie But now I know saith he that God hath sent his Angel yea I know of a surety Act. 12.11 Profane ones I will not priviledge from mistaking of God as perhaps lest Satan might out-stretch his Commission from God when he gave Job into his hands God said restrainingly Onely save his life Job 2.6 And S. Augustine de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 12. telleth an admirable storie of two men each called Curma to wit How Curma the Countrey-man lay almost dead many dayes onely a little steam of breath coming from him they kept him from buriall though he was without motion or any feeling whatsoever they did unto him in which time he saw many visions So soon as he opened his eyes he said Let one go to the house of Curma the smith Who was found dead that moment in which Curma the Husbandman came to his senses And the surviving Curma related that he heard in the place from whence he was returned that the smith and not himself was to be brought to that place A mistaking there was by the messengers of death though it were after righted Caiaphas might not know the inspiration or instinct propheticall which he had because he was a wicked man Dispensativè illi contigit sermo He did distribute the speech to others which he knew not himself saith Basil in Prooem Isaiae He was a Prophet perchance Casu saith Origen on John Balaam his asse and Caiaphas spake they knew not what The prophesie was transitorie saith S. Augustine Wherefore I conclude as before That wicked men may be punished with mistakings in things divine But that ever any holy man was ignorant to the end that God moved when he moved him or that the righteous were ever deceived by Oraculous anfractuous perplexities or that the Notaries of heaven the writers of any part authentick of either Testament could be deceived in their conceptions is not agreeable to likelihood reason or truth The last Lemma is this The holy Penmen could not erre in writing If they could what difference is there between their Writings and other profane Authours And to what end had they infallibilitie of understanding if what they understood they could expresse erroneously A readie perfect and quick scribe writeth not falsly but My tongue is the pen of a readie writer saith the Psalmograph Psal 45.1 Holy Ezra who was the divine amanuensis of the book of Ezra is called by the same words SOPHIR MAHIR a readie swift exact scribe Ezra 7.6 no question with allusion to the words of the Psalmist John 16.13 When the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth How into all truth if there be an errour in writing Or had God care that the Apostles should not misse of the truth in their Speeches and yet misse in their Writings If the Prophets could not erre no more could the Evangelists or Apostles for if there were any superioritie in priviledge we are rather to ascribe it to these latter then to those former in regard that the Law of Christ and of Grace is farre above the Law of Moses as the Apostle doth demonstrate to the Hebrews themselves But that the Prophets could not erre is apparent because Christ himself who is Truth would not have appealed from the present more visible pretending Synagogue to them as all-sufficient Judges as he often did if they could erre A perfect rule is not to be tried by an imperfect one Prophets writ their Prophesies and fastened them to the gates of the Temple and other publick places to be read and were rather judged by their Prophesies written then by them as inspired or uttered by mouth The Gnomon of the Sunne-diall which our late Hieroglyphical Poetaster doth make to signifie the Scriptures is better to be judged by a moving clock the curious handie-work of the same great Artist I mean by the Church and Church-men with whom Christ hath promised his Spirit shall be to the end of the world then by the rude masons or rather the senselesse stones and mortar of the walls I mean the ignorant people who have plucked down not onely the Weather-cock by his interpretation the Pope but usurp to themselves a power to judge the Gnomon and to reform and amend the well wrought well ordered clock The shallow phantastick stateth not the question aright when he is so magisterially peremptorie saying That the Clergie may not so judge of the Scriptures as to conclude or teach any thing against them or to vouch unwritten verities if they be certain verities it mattereth not much whether they be written or unwritten Veritie will vouch it self in spight of lying Poets as some call them or Traditions contradictorie to the written Word Which contradictorie Traditions do much differ from unwritten Verities howsoever the Poet confusedly joyneth them For who of us ever taught that the Clergie may teach any thing against the Scriptures when we professe with him that the Church ought to subject it self to be directed by the Scriptures But that fabling rymer may say any thing who in his Sarcasmos and Frontispice is suffered thus to rave No wonder that the Clergie would be Kings whereas we the now unpriviledged Clergie do humbly pray to God to uphold our declining estates from the hands of those Atheists and turbulent Anti-episcopall Anti-monarchicall Reformists perhaps Pensioners of the forcin enemies of our State who under the pretence of Religion labour to pluck down our Church and Ecclesiastick Hierarchie and upon the ruines thereof to arise to the depluming of the Eagle to the bearding of the Lion not onely to the paring of the royall prerogative but also the removing the very scepter and crown from the Anointed of the Lord whom God alwaies mightily defend and to the bringing in of popular government for No Bishop no King said the learned wise and pious King James most truely I return to retort the Church-reforming Poets words upon himself In his Solarie he saith That the diall is the Written Word which is of it self dead and unprofitable without further illumination since none of the Philosophers nor
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 Enchâ—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
Hellenists Chaldee Paraphrase or any heathen Authours yet it doth not necessarily evince that the holy Actuaries or Notaries did oversee reade heare or transcribe those things out of their knowledge from the said Authours but both the names of those Authours and the things themselves were presented to them by that blessed Spirit which knew all things and this among the rest That these words phrases and sentences were fit to be inserted into the holy Writ which now are in it All Scripture is of divine inspiration But the very words are part of Scripture Therefore even they were inspired Revel 19.9 The Angel said Write Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage-supper of the Lambe Did not the Angel speak the words Did not he give the Apostle both matter and words When the Apostle was commanded Revel 14.13 by a voice from heaven to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord c. was he commanded to write his conceits and thoughts apprehended in Syriack and translate them into Hellenisticall Greek or did the heavenly voice suggest onely an holy inspiration into him and left him to coyn words as Heinsius would have it or rather did not the voice teach the very words which should be written viz. Blessed are the dead c. Now let us passe to the fifth and last Conclusion in which we must dissent from the worthy Heinsius and disarm him of his often-inculcated but not once proved Tenet The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Writers of holy Scripture conceived in one language and writ in an other Upon which ground he hath raised a strange structure but his very ground-work is sandie slipperie and false And this I hope to evince by Scripture Authoritie and Reason All which shall be squared to that Corner-stone which more then once before I hewed upon more roughly and now by Gods grace intend to polish namely That the very words and letters were dictated unto the holy Scribes and therefore they had no power to change or transchange to adde or diminish or to expresse by their own words their internall irradiation but in the language which they conceived they also wrote their heavenly dictates 2. Pet. 1.21 The Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost Therefore their very speech being according to the motion of the holy Ghost their words were not of their own choice but from above and not onely divine thoughts but sacred words were also given them 1. Cor. 2.13 S. Paul spake in words which the holy Ghost taught Did the holy Ghost inspire thoughts into them in one language and teach them words to speak in an other language Cui bono To what end and purpose and why not all done in the language which they conceived 2. Tim. 3.16 Scriptura per Spiritum scripta est The Scripture was writ by the Spirit saith the Syriack not onely inspired as it is from the Greek but written and as it was inspired written Revel 19.9 The Angel saith concerning very words which he commanded to be wrote These are the true sayings of God Not inspirations onely of God and the words of Men but the sayings of God Exod. 34.27 Write thou these words for after the tenour of these words I have made a covenant God was not tied to the words Moses was to the writing of the very words Jerem. 30.2 Write thee all the words which I have spoken unto thee in a book He gave him no power to put in words of his own Twelve times in the Revelation was S. John commanded to write and knew he not the words Hos 8.12 I have written to Ephraim the great things of my Law Even all what my Prophets have done I challenge as mine own writing Authorities of men The Scriptures were written y Magisterio Spiritus in obedience to the Spirit saith Sasbout on Peter Therefore the Apostles had not the power left unto them of writing their own conceits but were fitted with words by the Spirit z Si Spiritu saucto inspirati ab eo impulsi locuti sunt Prophetae caeteri librorum sacrorum scriptores Consequens est Scripturam totam esse verbum Dei non aliter à nobis accipiendam quà m si Deus immediatè absque humano vel Angelico ministerio eam edidisset ut ità dicam digito suo scripsisset If the Prophets and other writers of holy Scripture spake by the moving and inspiration of the holy Ghost it followeth that all the Scripture is the word of God no otherwise to be esteemed of by us then if God immediately without the ministery of men or Angels had set it forth and as I may say had written it with his own finger saith the learned Estius Even Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide himself on Timothie thus a Prophetae alii scriptores 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur calami instrumenta Spiritus sancti quast scribae velociter scribentis inspirantis dictantis sacras literas The Prophets and other holy Penmen of Scripture are styled the pens and instruments of the holy Ghost as of that scribe who speedily writeth inspireth and dictateth the divine writ Where he confesseth the holy Spirit not to inspire onely but to dictate yea to write like a swift scribe the holy Scripture Gregorius Praefat. in Job cap. 2. b Scriptores sacri Eloquii quia repleti Spiritu sancto super se trahuntur quasi extra semetipsos fiunt sic Dei sententias quasi de labiis proferunt The writers of the heavenly word because they are filled with the holy Ghost are elevated above themselves in him and as it were out of themselves and so the sentences of God are uttered as it were by their lips Athanasius Epist ad Lib. saith c Christus vetus novum Testamentum composuit Christ made the Old and New Testament d Quid est illud o◠Domini nisi Scripturae per quas loquitur Dominu◠What is the mouth of the Lord but the Scriptures by which the Lord speaketh saith Rupert on Matth. lib. 4. Philo Judaeus in lib. Quis rerum divinarum haeres thus e Propheta nihil ex se proloquitur sed omnia submonente alio A Prophet prophesieth nothing out of his own brain but all things by the prompting of the holy Ghost as he wittily concludeth Therefore not so much as the words are his own Chrysostom de Lazaro Homil. 4. Though a dead man revive and an Angel come from heaven you must beleeve Scriptures above all for the Master of Angels the Lord of the living and the dead he himself framed them The same Chrysostom de expulsione ipsius sheweth the manner I reade his own handwriting c. They are done by his hand the very writing it self is his and therefore called Chyrographum Dei A writing under Gods own hand by Augustine
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
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
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
THE SAINTS ENTRED INTO THE HOLY CITIE we must take THE HOLY CITIE to be Jerusalem b Ad distinctionem omnium civitatum quae tunc idolis serviebant to distinguish that citie from other cities all which did then give themselves to idolatrie applying it to the materiall Jerusalem which saith he from the time of Vespasian and Titus was no more called THE HOLY CITIE Moreover Paula and Eustochium or rather Hierom in their names ad Marcellam Tom. 1. fol. 59. citing the place of Many Saints c. adde remarkably c Nec statim Hiercsolyma coelestis sicut plerique ridiculè interpretantur in hoc loco intelligitur cùm signum nullum essè potuerit apud homines si corpora Sanctorum in coelesti Jerusalem visa sunt You must not presently understand the celestiall Jerusalem as most have ridiculously interpreted this place when it could be no signe nor token among men on earth if the bodies of the Saints were seen in the heavenly Jerusalem May I annex to this That if the whole land of Jurie be to this day called The holy Land nor will have other estimate of divers Nations in some regards till the worlds end then certainly the Metropoliticall citie thereof the famous and eminent Jerusalem might in those dayes be dignified with the title of The holy citie for many just regardable causes Again when it is said Act. 6.13 This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place they that said so were not in the Temple but in their Councel-house in the citie and the words have a true reference to the citie as well as to the Temple yea more because the Temple was within the citie and not è contrá Now their Councel-house was distant a good way from any part of the Temple and was built close by one wall of the citie and was called GASITH in Hebrew wherein seventie Senatours or ordinarie Judges called SANHEDRIM determined weighty causes and here they examined the Apostles Acts 4.7 and S. Stephen Act. 6.13 and 7.1 The citie which before was called Solyma was by Melchizedech named Hierosolyma that is The holy Solyma saith Josephus de bello Judaico 7.18 Let Josephus justifie upon what grounds he mongrelleth the name for neither did Melchizedech speak Greek nor doth the Hebrew incline to that sense yet is even that hotch-potch better to be digested then the impious and sottish fable of other Jews That Melchizedech having named the citie Salem and Abraham having called the mount Moriah in or about Jerusalem JEHOVA JIREH The Lord will see or provide Genes 22.14 God himself being unwilling to suffer a debate between the holy Melchizedech and Abraham the father of the faithfull umpired the businesse and of both their attributes or appellations compounded one word or name and calleth it thereafter Hierusalem Perhaps S. Hierom can hardly prove what he saith in his epistle to Dardanus de Terra promissionis Tom. 3.24 that the citie was first called Jebus and thencefrom Jerusalem rather then Jebusalem Euphoniae gratiâ that it might have a fair sound and good pronunication For there is mention of Jerusalem Judg. 1.8 yea before that Josh 10.3 long before David expelled the Jebusites and in the dayes of Melchizedech it was called Salem for Melchizedech was King of Salem Hebr. 7.1 Now that the Jebusites inhabited Jerusalem before the time of Melchizedech or that he should be King of the Jebusites inhabiting that place or that he should expell the Jebusites there commorant before him or how they repossessed it till Davids time or indeed that the name was given as S. Hierom opineth are matters onely of conjecture as not being backt with proofs sufficient Lastly if we be led with reason as I said before What should be the end of these Saints ascending to heaven Christ had no need of bodily service and we may not think that they were to bear witnesse in heaven of Christs resurrection for the triumphant Saints need no such proof or witnesses their beatificall vision and fruition exempteth them from doubting The living had more need to know by these Many the resurrection of Christ but by them the living knew nothing at all so farre as can be proved if this going into the holy citie be to be interpreted of the supernall Jerusalem But that the words are to be expounded of Jerusalem below the passage immediately following demonstrateth They went into the holy citie and appeared unto many Certainly if they had gone into heaven they must have appeared unto all there for as d Coelum est singulis â—otum omnibus unum No corner of heaven is hid from any so there all things present are seen face to face their matutine knowledge infinitely surpasseth our vespertine all and every one see all and every one present 3. Yet even from these very words They appeared unto many Maldonat gathereth that they did not appeare commonly or indifferently or generally to all from whence he inferreth If they arose to die again they would have appeared not to many as the Evangelist said they did but vulgò omnibus promiscuously to all I answer They appeared to all viz. All that met them saw them and saw them as men and as other men but not as newly raised men for so onely they appeared to Many as Christ himself did appeare Testibus praeordinatis à Deo Vnto witnesses chosen before of God Act. 10.41 so did they to such onely as God had appointed To evince this distinction let it be considered whether every one who saw Lazarus after his resurrection saw him as a raised man or as an ordinary man But if Lazarus might appeare commonly to all men and yet appeare unto Many onely as a man raised lately from the dead these Saints also might be seen and were seen of all that passed by and looked on them apparuerunt vulgò omnibus they appeared ordinarily to all and yet they might be seen not by all but onely appeare to Many as persons raised of purpose for holy ends And this opinion I hold to be more probable then that of Franciscus Lucas Brugensis on the place That onely unto some the raised did aliquando apparere aliquando disparere sicut Jesus Sometime appeare to some and sometimes vanish as our Saviour did I answer he had said somewhat if the resurrection had been of the same nature with Jesus his resurrection And as I dislike him not if by disparere he meaneth that they did not alwayes converse with the same men but changed company so if by it he understandeth a sudden vanishing from the sight of men and implyeth that the Many raised had a power to be visible and invisible at their pleasure till he bring proof to evince it he shall give me leave to parallell it to the fiction of Gyges and his ring whose broad beazil or insealing part if he turned to the palm of his hand he was forthwith invisible yet himself saw all
doubt before thee and thou shalt fear day and night and shalt have no assurance of thy life vers 66. To all the other alledged places of Scripture one answer fitly serveth viz. That the holy Writ speaketh of the ordinary course of Nature and hath no intent to limit Gods power or to binde the Lawmaker but he may exempt from death whomsoever he pleaseth For generall rules are not without exceptions It is most true what Aristotle de Histor Animal 7.10 generally avoucheth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No childe crieth in the mothers wombe and yet extraordinarily it may be true what Libavius in lib. de vagitu uterino and Albertus Magnus lib. 10. de Animalibus and Solinus in his third chapter report to wit Quosdam embriones plorâsse in utero That some Embrioes have wept and cried out in their mothers wombe As on the contrary what Livie lib. 24. recordeth namely Infantem in utero matris IO TRIUMPHALE clamâsse That an infant in the mothers wombe sang the Outcrie used in triumphs And what Appian of Alexandr de bellis civilibus Roman lib. 4. almost in the beginning relateth That a childe spake so soon as it was born which was a prognostick of sorrow against the erection of the TRIUMVIRI Petrus Pomponatius in lib. de incantationibus cap. 10. goeth one step further and though it be a little out of my way yet suffer me to follow him e Haly Aben-Ragel scientiâ syderum scivit praedicere puerum natum statim prophetaturum sicut refert Conciliator Haly Aben-Ragel saith he by Astrologie knew and foretold that a new born childe should presently prophesie as Conciliator relateth So the universall law of all mens dying may stand in full force and vertue and yet be abridged by some extraordinary exceptions through the unlimited command of the most free Lawmaker My proofs that universall propositions do not alwaies exclude some particular contraries shall be of such generall rules as are limited by the Papists themselves because the controversie now in agitation is onely against them The great master of Controversies Bellarmine himself de Purgatorâ—o 1.12 speaking of the taking up of the good thief into Paradise saith f Privilegia paucorum legem uon faciunt A few mens priviledges establish not a law Gerson that learned Chancellour of Paris in his Sermon on the birth of the thrice blessed Virgin the third part thus settleth g Constat Deum misericordiam salvationis suae non ità legibus communibus traditionis Christianae non ità Sacramentis ipsis alligâsse quin absque praejudicio legis ejusdem possit pueroâ— nondum natos intus sanctificare Gratiae suae baptismos vel virtute Spiritus sancti It is apparent that God hath not tied his mercifull salvation to the common laws of Christian veritie no not so to the Sacraments themselves but without prejudice of that law he may sanctifie children in the wombe with the baptisme of his grace or power of the holy Spirit Matthias Felizius pag. 184. acknowledgeth that extraordinarily the souls of good and bad men do sometimes come out of heaven and hell yet are there generall statutes and the ordinary course opposite and contrarie By an argument drawn from speciall priviledge Petrus Thyraeus de locis infestis part 1. cap. 9. maintaineth That humane souls may return out of Purgatorie yea out of Hell h Bonum publicum Legislatori semper propositum est hoc si lege praeteritâ obtineri potest legis ratio magna non habetur The Law-maker saith he hath an eye still aiming at a generall good which generall good if it take place and succeed without the law it is no great detriment or wrong to the law Cardinal Tolet on John 1.3 i Aliquando solemus generatim loqui ad mulâ—itudinem significandam quamvìs non omnes partes multitudinis comprehendantur Sometimes we speak generally to signifie a numerous multitude though we do not mean to comprise all and every parcell of that multitude 1. Cor. 9.25 Every man that striveth for the masterie is temperate in all things But neither do all abstain nor do they who abstain abstain from all things Which truth in the mouth of Tolet might be confirmed at large by the Fathers Let S. Hierom onely give in his verdict Hierom Tom. 3. Epist ad Damasum de Prodigo thus k Canon Scripturarum est Omnia non ad totum referenda sed ad maximam partem It is even a rule in Scripture that the word ALL hath not reference to the whole comprehending every singular particular but to the greatest part And as OMNIS All so likewise NVLLVS None is restrained 1. Kings 18.10 where the words No nation or kingdome extend not through the whole world but are to be reduced and confined to those Nations or Kingdomes which were Achabs subjects or tributaries to whom he might and could administer an oath which he did not could not do in the dominions of other absolute free Princes I must yet come up closer to Bellarmine Gen. 7.18 Repleverunt aquae Omnia in superficie terrae as it is in their Vulgat though it be not so either in the Hebrew or Greek And All the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered vers 19. Yet Bellarmine in lib. de Gratia primi hominis cap. 4. excepteth Paradise which being on earth was not overflown Genes 7.21 All flesh died and every man and vers 22. All in whose nostrills was the breath of life died and vers 23. Every living substance both man and cattell c. Yet for all these generalities Bellarmine in the place cited excepteth Enoch who then lived upon earth in Paradise as he imagined Rom. 5.12 Death passed upon all for that all have sinned But l Praeventa fuit Maria singulari gratiâ privilegio Dei ut simul esse justa esse inciperet The Virgin Mary was prevented by Gods speciall grace so that she was free from sinne so soon as she had any being saith Bellarmine Tom. 3. de amissione grat statu peccat 4.16 He exempteth her by speciall priviledge from sinne Why may not we by the force of his reason exempt an other from death Moreover Enoch and Elias at what time S. Paul wrote these words were not dead though the Apostle speaketh of things past nor are dead yet as the Papists hold Gorran on the place answereth appositely Death went over all REATV non ACTV by way of guiltinesse not actually 1. Corinth 15.51 c. We shall all be changed at the last trump Yet Bellarmine de Romano Pontifice 3.6 saith that Enoch and Elias shall die and rise again before the generall resurrection till which time the last trump bloweth not And Christ was risen before though the words be large and not Christ alone but if Holcot be not deceived on Wisd 2.5 m De Matre Christi benedicta piè credit Ecclesia quòd sit in