Goates a slaine a Scapegoat * Pag. 23. You obiect heere against 1. that I abuse the Text. That were a great fault but let vs view the text Thus are the very expresse wordes which you also recite * ver 5 Aaron shall take of the people 2. Goats for a Sinne-offering Surely you must bring very good reason to frustrat so plaine a speach That is you say to make a Sinne-offering of one of them Nay the very words are take 2. Goats for a Sinne-offering it saith not take 2. Goats that one of them may be a Sinne-offering But this sheweth so much you thinke where the text saith Lottes were cast over the 2 Goates one lot for the Lorde the other for the Scapegoat And Aaron shall offer the Goat on which the Lordes lot shall fall and make him a Sinne-offering These wordes prove not that the Scapegoat was no Sinne-offering at all Vnlesse this were true that no Sinne offering can possibly bee but by killing and slaying and sheadding of bloud Although the “ Heb. 9. Scripture say Without sheadding of bloud is no remission yet it meaneth that Allmost all things are in the Law purged with bloud That is many Offerings and sacrifices are bloudy but not all I take now sacrifice and offering in the largest sense as signifying any consecrated thing given to God to appease him for sinne And such vnbloudy Sinne-offerings very many we shall finde in * Lev. 2.11 13 8 13. Nomb. 1â— 18 11 28 12 14. Moses Law Wherefore the Scapegoat may we yet a Sinne-offering though it were not slaine nor bloudy And his vtter sending away into the vnknown Deserts may answer to the consuming of som other Sacrifices by fire Thus then these wordes of the text which you bring doe not proue the Scapegoate to be no Sinne-offering at all they proue it to be no bloudy Offering and therefore not such but of another kind then the slaine Goat was It might be consecrated and offered to the Lord and vtterly sequestred from men and beare and take away sinne no lesse then the slaine Goat wherein verily consisteth the nature and being of a Sacrifice or true Sinne-offering And in very deede all this the text following expresly avoucheth of the Scape goate ver 10. The Scapegoat shal be presented alive before the Lord to make reconciliation by him to let him go for a Scape-goat Heere is his Consecrating vnto the Lord yea reconciliation also is made by him though he dyed not as the other did Againe more plainly ver 21 22. * And Aaron shall put both his handes vpoÌ„ the head of the live Goat and confesse vpon him all the iniquities of the Children of Israell all their trespasses and all their sinnes putting them vpon the head of the Goat and shall send him away alive into the Wildernes So the Goat shall beare vpon him all their iniquities into the Wildernes being let go thither Can there be any thing in the world more full and strong to prove that the Scapegoat also was a true Sinne-offering or rather a true parte of this wholl and intire Sinne-offering consisting and being compleat in both these Goats the slaine and the Scapegoat togeather For as the slaine Goate so this Scapegoat wee see was aswell Consecrated to the Lord and * heere Offered though not by killing and separated from men ver 10. ver 21 22. have vpon him all the sinnes of the people and caryed them cleane away So wee may reade of other Sacrifices consisting and being compleat wholly of Sacrifices of sundry divers kindes Nomb. 28.3 c. The bloudy Sacrifice had conioyned togeather with it the vnbloudy Sacrifice of the Meat offering and another of the Drinke offering c. Which may very likely represent vnto vs the sundry and divers kindes of Christes meritorious Sufferings in his life time at his Death som bloudy some vnbloudy but all concurring togeather making the full and persit propitiation for al our sinnes And even such a Sacrifice or Sinne-offering it seemeth surely these 2. Goats were Heere then your advisednes may bee noted by all men which doe reprove me for this assertion and that with such violent and vncomly termes Now if it be a Figurative Sinne-offering what signified this Figure Certainly it signified Christ and his taking away of our sinnes by his death Have you any colour of reason to maintaine those wide coniectures of the * Ancients â—yrill Amâ—â—ose Beda that the Scapegoat signified the Reprobat and castaway people or ells cursed Barrabas that scaped death when Iesus was slaine Who but you would defend these palpable mistakinges of those men And why Because they are Ancient Yet see you not the expresse text against theÌ„ Do damned men or did Barrabas reconcile vs to God take away our sinnes as the Scapegoat did typically Nay surely It must needs be then that it signified Christ yea doubtles Christ man For the Godhead could bee no Sinne-offering neither did it make reconciliation for sinne neither did the Deity beare our sinnes vpon himselfe properly all which the Scapegoat * Tipically did Further if it were Christ man it could not be his Body for his body was slaine bloudily the Scapegoat was not slaine For the other Goat a Sacrifice to being slaine this survived and went away into the land of separation It must then be of necessity I thinke the Humane mortall Soule of Christ which the Scapegoate signified which was a true Sinne-offering and made propitiation for vs aswell as the slaine Goat and bare vpon him our sinnes though his Soule dyed not bloudily nor by loosing life and sense as his body and the typicall slaine Goat did You say “ Pap. 235. If this Scapegoat do signifie Christs Soule then it cannot be that Christes Soule Suffered much lesse dyed any death This obiection truly you might haue spared seeing my self * Treat 1 1â— before brought it fully answered it where against you have said never a word The effect whereof is this The escaping of the Goat may lively shew vnto vs that Christs Soule dyed not as the Body dyed by loosing life and sense but surviving went hence into Hades the land of separation the invisible world of the Dead But in that the Scapegoat did beare and sustaine our sinnes and was indeede a Sinne-offering to aswell as the slaine Goat so it may well signifie that Christes Soule properly suffered and sustayned the burden of our sinnes in satisfying for them no lesse then his body which was bloudily slaine therefore As for the Dying of Christs Soule we shall answer you for that in due place heereafter So that Now where you say “ Pag. 234. I am more bold then wise in affirming the Scapegoat to signifie the Soule of Christ Surely then I were like you who affirme as boldly that among the Iewes no Sacrifice at all foreshewed any Suffering of
f you obiect but consenteth with Irenaeus before and with others after him as shall appeare 〈◊〉 Innius 〈◊〉 on this chap. 188. who were no Montanists Notwithstanding it is true that somewhere he taketh inferos pro locali determinatione as he speaketh for the peculiar and determinat place of the wicked deceased that is Hell strictly and properly 〈◊〉 4. Thus he doth in that g against Marcion wth you cite pag. 201. Also in that h obiection of certaine Haeretikes whom hee confuteth 〈◊〉 anima 55. not the true Christians as i you k misconceave They argued thus as you do in hoc Christus Jnfiros adiit ne nos adiremus 188. 〈◊〉 title of â—ooke in â—â—â—elius â—â—â—s editioÌ„ Christ therefore went to Hell to the ende that wee might never come there He aunswereth them that it is false that Christe went to Jnferos in that sense that is to Hell for then what difference is there betweene the wicked Heathens and the godly Christians if one the same prison after death were for them both Taking it for a thing generally granted in the church that Christ being dead went onely thither where the godly Dead were and therefore that it were a wicked and Haereticall thing to thinke he went where the Damned were that is into Hell And so he quite overthroweth your opinion togeather with the reason thereof as an opinion whiche if any helde they were ill thought of in those dayes 〈◊〉 99. De â—â—â—es ad lit 〈◊〉 33. Thus also is Augustin well l vnderstood where he denyeth that the Patriarkes were apud inferos in Hell namely the place of the Damned because they were in Abrahaâ—s bosom Which yet b Epist 5â— De civi â— 20.15 elswhere he graunteth vnto that they might be apud inferos in the world of the Dead namely where the Godly dead should be So that thus if you had but distinguished these and other Fathers like words as you ought to haue done there needed no such folly of Contradiction to be imputed vnto them as c Pag. 18â— 200. 204 you doe lay to their charge in this point altogeather vndeservedly Which being well observed you shall see that all the Fathers as Mr Iunius saith both Greeke Latin do take Hades and inferos d Promisâ—â— indiffereÌ„tly for the state of the Dead as wel pertayning to that Soules of the Godly as to the Damned likewise Athanasius also saying e Athanas incar Châ—â—â— vbi tenebatur anima humana in morte ibi exhibuit humanam suam animam Where Humane Soules were held by Death there he brought his humane Soule Meaneth nothing els but that his humane Soule came vnder the same condicion of death as other mens Soules did not that he went to the place of the DaÌ„ned Neiter must he be vnderstood after f Pag. 179 186. 214. your partiall translatioÌ„ but after his owne language the Greek When you say ex Orco out of Hell him selfe saith exhadou out of the power of Death So that g De saluâ—â— vent Châ—â—â— hee saith not a word that Christ was in Hell but onely that his Soule was in Hades in the Dominion of Death as h Ad noâ—â—â— similitudâ— other good mens Soules were also whence he by his victorious returne conquering Death i De salut advent Câ—â—â—stâ— brought vs immortalitie and wrought resurrection for vs. Heere Hades being ennemy and opposit to the Immortalitie and Resurrection of mens persons cannot by any meanes be Hell For Hell agreeth with Immortalitie and Resurrection in Hell shal be immortalitie and resurrection as well as in HeaveÌ„ But it is the common Death and dissolution of our persons which is contrarie to the immortalitie and resurrection of them For as Resurrection is nothing els but a restoring and revniting of the Soule to the Body so the contrarie is nothing els but meerely the dissolution and separation of the Soule from the Body which is Death and not Hell Now in this death saieth Athanasius Christ was held till he spoyled and conquered it thereby giving vs resurrection and immortalitie This can not be Hell out of questioÌ„ Hilarius verily hath this meaning also saying k Hilar. â— Psal 13â— This is the Law of humane necessitie that their bodyes goe down to the Grave their Soules to the world of the Dead ad inferos Which descent the Lorde did not refuse that he might prove him selfe in every point to bee a true man His going to Hell proveth him not to be a true man but his Soul to com vnder the power of Death as well as his body to com to the Grave 〈◊〉 koinoâ—â—â—â—ôpos â—â—â—em morâ—â—â— servaâ—â— that right well proveth him in deed to have bene a true man and wholy in nature like all other men Also this was indeed the Lawe of humane necessitie after the like phrase as a Iustin â—â—â—gi satisfaâ—â—â— forma huâ—â—â— mortis â—â—â—us â—ag 157. â—efore 〈◊〉 Death â—â—es aâ—e vâ—â—â—or the same b Irenaeus and c Tertullian also speake but not to goe to Hell Now this Death properly beloÌ„geth to the Body of Men d as it is left without life Also no lesse properly it beloÌ„geth to the whole Person of men as it is dissolved and destroyed thereby Thirdly by consequence it beloÌ„geth to both the dissolved partes yea even to the immortall Soule though blessed not as it is in blessednes but as it remayneth held from the Body by the force of Death And so all these last named are very excellent places to prove which afterward I shall further shew that all those articles of the Creed He Dyed was Buryed and descended to Hades do indeed signifie but one thing in effect that he was a true man seeing thus it befell him as it doeth all other men by the Law of our Nature that is to Dye And therefore that it was cleane left out in all ancient Creedes where both those other clauses are specified as being no divers point in effect from Dead and Buryed Which Creedes nevertheles are worthily deemed to be absolute and perfit touching Christes workes of Redemption which hee hath wrought for vs. Since perhaps when it came into the Common Creed they signified heereby Christes going to Limbus Which opinion indeed men generally inclined vnto though erroneously for many yeares yet that the Ancients put this Descending to hades meaning Limbus or howsoever into the vulgar Creed distinctly from both the other foresaid clauses I beleue not The contrary is proved afterwardes as anon we shall see But to proceed heere â—â—rys Hom. â—ivit de 〈◊〉 bol Tom. in 1. Cor. Hom. 40. â—â—â—asil in 〈◊〉 48. â—â—â—mbr de 〈◊〉 mort 〈◊〉 10. â—â—â—rom in 〈◊〉 1â— 14 â—â—â—uffin in â—â—â—bol 〈◊〉 413.414 c Chrysostom and d Basill likewise with the rest of the Greeks may be noted how they yeeld Hades to the Soules of the godly and iust men deceased remayning in ioyes Also Ambrose
by the death and bloud of Christ. So you commend the force and frute of his bodily death as most sufficient â—ag 84. â—â—g 88. And * the bodily death of Christ payeth the price of our Redemption â—ag 335. it removeth all the impediments of our salvation The ioynt sufferings of Christ the Soule feeling what the Body suffered were most avaylable for our salvation â—â—g 336. †The violence was offered to the Body the sense whereof reached vnto the Soule and these are the sufferings of the Crosse and of death which the Scriptures attribute to the Sonne of God for our salvation â—â—g 60. 58. There is no other sacrifice of Christs Soule which can be neither bodily nor bloudy * The iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the Soule only by the Body 〈◊〉 254. 255 Nevertheles contrariwise you seeme some where to yeeld wholly so much as we affirme â—â—g 17. As where you say The same part might indeed suffer in Christ which sinned in man J meane the Soule If you meane as you seeme and as you ought that as every part and faculty of the Soule is in vs sinfull so in Christ it suffered for our sinne then in his Soule he suffered for sinne properly and immediatly that is in his very Mind from the immediat hand of God not only from and by his Body 〈◊〉 87. 4. Againe you allow in Christ * All those afflictions and passions of the Soule which naturally and necessarily follow paine This All reacheth vnto mo and more grievous paines then the meere bodily are it includeth the Soules porper immediat paines also 〈◊〉 138. And yet playner Smart paine and grief of body or mind bee it never so great will commend his obedience and patience 〈◊〉 286. And * the punishment of sinne which proceedeth from the iustice of God and is no sinne that Christ might and did beare Yea he suffered death with all painfull 〈◊〉 87. but no sinfull concomitants and consequents 〈◊〉 76. And * nothing might befall the humane nature of Christ which was vnfitting for his Diuine Whence we gather vnderstanding you in the best sence that whatsoeuer was fitting for his Divine nature to admit of in his Humanity that his humane nature did feele Consequently then he felt all the paines of the damned which were no sinnes neither indeed perpetuall seeing his Divine nature could admitt this in his Manhood aswell as any suffering at all for sinne You will say If hee felt not also desperation as the damned do then hee felt not all the paines which the damned do feele For desperation augmenteth their very paines I answere we say not that Christ suffered simply All the paines of the damned that is He felt not such as are by their very nature sinnes aswell as paines as indeed desperation is But I say Christ suffered none of those paines All other which are by their nature meere paines and onely painfull Christ did suffer them as sharply for the time we doubt not as the very damned do So that if your L. will stand to that which before we obserued in you and not clip it not renounce it we professe this is all that ever we did or do craue wee neede no longer to striue it is the wholl question which you grant vs viz That Christ did beare punishment of sinne as great as any is proceeding from the Justice of God yet being no sinne Whence it must needes follow that the paines of Christes suffering were the same in nature and altogeather as sharpe and as painfull as they are in Hell it self And this is the whol summe of the matter about Christes Hellish sorrowes and paines thus standeth our quaestion with these differences according to which we hold and professe that Christ suffered the Wrath of God or Hell paines If you set the question otherwise you go back from that which you found fault withall in your Sermons you fully ioyne with the Preachers and Catechismes of England yea withall other Protestants in the world and namely with all them whom at first you reproued and traduced openly for this cause There is none of them I assure you that euer spake or meant any more then this issue delivereth If you agree to this I beseech you what wisedom shewed you in your whot confutations exclamations so vehemently to condemne you knewe not what and to reprove you knew not whom Further if any do teach that Christ suffered the paines of Hell in a grosse and locall maner though you most iniuriously do invey at vs for such a matter yet verily it is neerer your owne assertion then ours if you be well observed For seeing you determine simply that Christ might did suffer such punishment of sinne which proceeds from the iustice of God and is no sinne it seemeth by your speech that Christ did suffer Torments even locally in Hell it selfe for that had ben a punishment that is no sinne â—â—â—â—â—icus â—â—â—â—â—st Latiâ—â—â—er Act. â—â—â—â—on that in deed some learned and godly men did hold but erroneouslie As for vs somway we avouch your sentence also that Christ suffered whatsoeuer punishment of sinne which proceeded from the iustice of God is no sinne but yet with expresse limitation froÌ„ Scripture namely in CircuÌ„stances as I shewed viz. in this world only not after his crosse at all nor locally among the damned So that thus we say it is not true that Christ suffered the paines of Hell 〈◊〉 hold not 〈◊〉 at Christ â—â—â—fered simâ—â—y the parâ—â—s of Hell which yet those your fore-noted indefinit wordes doe import Nay speaking exactly wee vse not this terme of Hell neither delight we to vse it ofteÌ„ in any regard about our maine Quaestion because we finde not this word literally and expreslie applied to Christes sufferinges in the Scripture Howbeit sometimes we speake so I graunt and I thinke that wee may well doe so As also 〈◊〉 â—ny other â—â—â—nts of Reâ—â—â—on are â—â—â—yme afâ—â—â—ned vtâ—â—â—ed when we vnderstand it by plaine Consequence froÌ„ Scripture for the extreame paines of Gods proper wrath vengeance for sinne from which euen Hell it selfe is not separated yea Gods very wrath is a parte and the greatest parte of Hell paines Or els Metaphorically when we haue to set out with an emphasis the most dolefull and incomparable paines of Christes sufferinges as they appeared onely to the sense of men not otherwise Which it seemeth your selfe also liketh well enough 〈◊〉 8. â—34 â—â—9 But howe badly then doe you vrge vpon vs and perswade men that we doe must say in maintenance of this our Question â—â—imious â—â—â—tation 〈◊〉 1.8.244 â—â—7 264 â—â—0 34â— * that Christ suffered All the sorrowes of Hell the whole Curse of God his whole wrath and All the very Torments of the damned and that in such sense as you make of those wordes that is including in
the Soule of Christ which you can never prove Howbeit this I acknowledge indeed that the Iewish Figures though they be applyable vnto Christ the substance of those shaddowes yet wee ought to apply them in the particulars soberly and warily and not without some plaine proportion of the Figure with the thing Figured Wherefore my meaning is none other in these Iewish figures which the Scripture doth not any where expresly interpret but to shew what I thinke to be indeed most probable and likely knowing that yet som such matter as we aime at they do signifie without question And this is sufficient to deny your Assertion which against our saying that the sufferings of Christes Soule may be signified by the Scapegoat is but meerely coniecturall and presumed The very like are * your 3. reasons brought to shew that the Holocaust cannot signifie the sufferingâ—s of whole Christe Pag. 236. and therefore not of his Soule any way Lev. 1. 6. Your former reason is because the Holocaust was 1. slaine and after burnt for then if the burning signifieth Christs paines and sufferings Christ must seeme to suffer after his death But this is a weake inference Is there any Figure or similitude concurring in all points and circumstances with the thing signified Sure there is no man of knowledge so vnexpert or so vnreasonable as to require it Many times where they agree only but in one principall respect that sufficeth to make the similitude Againe many similitudes and Figures there are in the olde Law having as great disparagemeÌ„t to the things signified by them as this in the Holocaust which you talke of The Bodies of beasts first slaine Lev. 4.11 2. 16 27 Heb 13.11.12 ver 13. Lev. 1.9 were after caryed out of the Host Now these signified Christs going out of Jerusalem * to be slaine but being yet alive Againe the beasts carying out by others after they were slaine is likened to our voluntary and free leaving of the world in this life Lastly the * burning of the beastes after they were dead was a sacrifice of a sweet favour vnto God Which in truth is Christs very death Fphe 5.2 and nothing don by him afterward whereby Gods anger is fully pacified towarde vs. Wherefore your first exception is very vaine The 2. is like to it The Holocaust was consumed in one the same sire But Christ was tormented wholly not with one kind of suffering as we maintaine but with 2. kindes that is with bodyly spirituall sorrowes First I say this also if it were true is as weake an exception as the former and altogeather like it See Though Christ indeed suffered divers and sundry kindes of sorrowes yea even of those which were meerely outward and bodily Even that meerely in the Soule viz. when it grew vehement as also of those that were meerely Spirituall and inward yet we plainely affirme that one the same torment afflicted his whole manhood by sympathy For his Soule also was sore grieved I doubt not even with his proper Bodily torments likewise his Body when his trickling sweat was clots of bloud was crushed and broken vnspekeably with his inward and spirituall sorrowes though his flesh then felt outwardly no paine So your 2. exception is also nothing The 3. is no better where you argue from a Treaâ— pag. 1â— my words that the Bodyes of beastes could not prefigure the immortall reasonable Soule of Christ. And it is like to that which b pag. â— afterward you cite from my words about the Sacraments Earthly Elements cannot set out spirituall and invisible effectes in Christ. Hence you thinke that I cannot defend that the firy consuming of the Holocaust may signifie the sorrows both of the Soule and Body of Christ You shall see that I can full easily and without any trisling It is evident that I meane in those former places that bodily thinges generally and for the most part doe-represent the meere bodily externall parts of Christes sufferings but not alwayes and altogeather Which you might haue easily seene by my answere to the c Treaâ— pag. â— Assumption and by the instances which there I give to this purpose Againe the very instances which I give viz the Scapegoat the Holocaust afterward the bread broken in the communion these I say doe not in that respect as they are Bodily things represent the Soule of Christ or any matter pertayning to it But the peculiar vsage and maner of action about them doth lively represent the suffering of his soule and not of his body only As not the Goat representeth Christes soule vnles only in respect of the escaping of it wheÌ„ the other Goat dyed also in respect of the sustayning and bearing vpon himself of our sinnes And not the body of the Holocaust but the vtter consuming by fire of the whole signifieth the sufferings of whole Christ Lastly the bread may signifie the whole Christ who is the intire and perfit bread of life but the Breaking thereof into pieces representeth more lively the breaking crushing in pieces as it were of the soul rather theÌ„ of the body Which was pierced through but was not in case of being broken in pieces so likely as the Soul was Yet you will say the Hol may signifie that whole Christe suffered but some bodily afflictions the Soul feeling the griefs paines of the Body For how wil it follow that the proper and immediat sufferings of Christs Soule might be signified by the Holocaust Surely according to the proportion of the Holocaust so whole Christ then his very Soule chiefly was as it were chopt or broken into pieces and as it were quite consumed and swallowed vp in his firy sorrowes onely the assistance of his Godhead sustained his Soule and withall his body or els he could not have borne it â—reat 1. â—ag â—8 as a I noted M. Whitakers to have truly taught This can not bee but the Soules peculiar suffering of Gods very wrath far beyond all bodily sufferings and yet not those paines of Hell â—ag 8. c. as b you grosly vtter it Your other senses that you give heereof the 1. hindreth not mine â—ag 237. that is c the Acceptation of Christes death The 2. that is Christs fleshes incorruption after death is very hard and far fetcht And Sacrifices had their respect to Christes death not to any thing further or afterwards As for another sense out of Austin that it should signifie our perfection and burning charity it cannot be true for the Holocaust-sacrifice out of question primarily signified the person of Christ not ours See it is vntrue that any man besides Christ alone is or can bee perfect in this life that he should bee wholly consumed with Heavenly love according to the proportion of the consuming of the Holocaust Also you both heere do seeme double vnderstanding by the Holocaust both incorruption after death a perfect
â—â—s heere â—â—g 16. e that no more but the shedding of his bloud onely and meerely is the iust and full satisfaction of all our sinnes even in the righteous and sincere iudgment of God Then we absolutly deny your Assertion as before we haue don the like As for your a 1 Pet. 1 Rev. 5. â— alleaged Scriptures we answer them as we did generally b Treat pag. 8.9 before that they meane not the meere bloud of Christ nor only the body singly and simply considered but that togeather with the proper sufferings of his Soule also they were the iust and full satisfaction and redemption Against which you have nothing any where And likewise our advised and resolut answere is to c pag. 58 60 61 7â— c. all the rest of your scriptures which most tediously and vainly you heape vp scatter every wherein your former treatise to this effect as if they contayned somwhat for your purpose when as indeed there is not one text any where that hath any meaning of your strange conceit So that wee shall have no need to trouble our selves any more heereafter about any of them Yet d pag. 24â— heere you vrge a reason against vs Jf our Soules be not redeemed by the bloud of Christ our bodyes have no benefit of redemption you meane from death But we e 1. Pet. 1 Rev. 5.9 are redeemed not we shal be Ergo it is our Soules which are redeemed our bodyes are not redeemed as yet in this life Wherein we have to note 3. things 1. Your Proposition is vaine and illogicall having no consequence in it at all Which maketh mee to thinke that I hit your meaning right and mistooke you not in my former booke Howbeit to try this your sentence heere what if our Soules were not at all redeemed by Christes bloud but some other way or not by his bloud meerely and onely which indeede is our quaestion will it follow that therefore our bodyes are still mortall and therefore not redeemed from death Or what if our Soules be redeemed by his bloud as indeed they are though not wholly nor only thereby What followeth then from this Nay what if our Soules and Bodyes were redeemed wholly and only by Christs bloud Is these any consequence that therefore our bodyes should now be redeemed from death and never dy Truly I cannot discerne but that your proposition meaneth some such consequence as this which is to me a vey strang reason Yet that which you ad f Pag. 2â— afterward is more strang Jf our Soules be not redeemed wholly by the meere bloud of Christ For thus still I say you must make your wordes or ells you aske the very Quaestion then our bodyes have vtterly no good even no good at all by the death of Christ. In which sequele verily I can see neither head nor taile Chose you now whether you will that you speake this sophistically or absurdly For I cannot discerne it I leave it therefore to your self to determine But perhaps you will yet againe go backe to that you excused your selfe withall before You will meane that our bodies in this life have no benefit of redemption from death even no more then the bodies of Infidels And this plainly you avouch for truth Is this true Are not our bodies now already freed from the curse the sting of death from all the hurt harme that properly and naturally is in death Is it not made vnto vs a quiet sleepe and a peaceable rest an entrance for our Soules into Heaven a putting off of sin to our bodies in such wise that Christ taketh from it the a name of Death and calleth it but b a passage â—oh 8.51 Or have the Jnfidels also thus much benefit in death â—oh 5 2â— as wee have in it by our redemption in Christe I know not therefore how to terme this your assertion I forbeare to name it as it deserveth it is more then strange that Infidels bodies should have as much benefit of nedemption from death as our bodies have by Christ Dy I grant or cease to breath we must and do still even as they do And this death by the naturall property of it is a part of Gods Curse but to the faithful there are great benefits ioyned even in death by the gracious dealing of God peculiarly towardes his children which also their bodies are partakers of thorough the death of Christ The naturall sting is taken out of it for the godly yet it remayneth to the Infidells and hurteth them by retayning even their bodies though dead in vnder Gods dreadfull Curse Wherefore it makes many to thinke that indeed you vttered this matter somewhat otherwise in your Sermons then heere you doe now publish it and it perswadeth mee still that c I mistooke you not â—â—eat 1. â—â—g 11. seeing this your turning setting of it is so vnhansom For every one may see by this your handling of it that then you said more then heere you expresse and heere you would faine fashion it to somwhat but you cannot Yea your own words bewray som alteration froÌ„ that which so confidently you preached where you say Whatsoever the wordes were that you might vse which you do not acknowledge to be these that I bring â—ag 240. Lastly d you grant that you vsed this reason in handling the power of Christes death that is when you preached it For now in this Treatise you have cleane left it out for ought that e I can see which bewrayeth that it was such 〈◊〉 88.113 as your selfe saw was not to be maintayned howsoever heere you strive to set some colour vpon it though yet still in vaine Before we depart from this point That not the bloud of Christ nor his flesh meerely and only without respect to the merit of his whole Soule was the full price of Redemption heere is fit place to shew how sundry of the Ancient Fathers do agree with vs sufficiently in this matter although afterward in your booke you seeme to bring them against vs. But indeed so they seeme onely for in truth they are with vs as by these following we may see First a Ireâ— 5. Irenaeus The Lord bought vs with his owne bloud and gave his soule for our soules his flesh for our flesh b Cyr. de 〈◊〉 fid ad Tâ—â— Cyrill He bestowed his flesh as a ransome for our flesh and made his Soule likewise a price of redemption for our Soules although he lived againe being by nature life it selfe c Naz. in trâ—â— 49. ad Clâ—â— Nazianzen maketh every part of man to be sanctified by the like in Christ our condemned flesh by his flesh our soule by his soule our vnderstanding by his vnderstanding d Ambr. 〈◊〉 Luc. 22. 〈◊〉 trist doloâ—â— c. Ambrose saith Maerorem animae nostrae suae animae maerore abolevit He abolished the sorrow of our Soule by the sorrow of
his Soule And e De incaâ—â— Sacr. cap. 〈◊〉 Hoc in se obtulit Christus quod induit c. Christ offered in sacrifice all that which he assumed that is all every whit that was in him besides his Godhead f Fulgent 〈◊〉 Thrasym 〈◊〉 lib. 3. Fulgentius He shewed in himselfe the sufferinges of a whole man in verity truth quicquid fuit infirmitatis animae sine peccato suscepit pertulit Hee tooke vpon him and suffered whatsoever infirmity may be in the soule without sinne It is not possible that wee our selues should speake a more effectuall sentence for our purpose then this is Say as Fulgentius heere saith and we aske no more All that g Pag. 86. you except that by these Fathers Christe dyed only the death of the flesh is lesse then heere they affirme And we shall answer to that in due place Now marke well how these Fathers do not say that Christ gave his life for a ransom onely as h Pag. 70. â—â— you would construe it but even his very Soule to for our Soules They strive to expresse an exact proportion so far as was possible betwene Christ and vs. First in the parts of Christ who suffered of vs who were saved So that as we are saved not in our bodies only nor only in the externall sensitiue parte of our soules wherein standeth that suffering with and by our bodies but wee are saved redeemed and sanctified in our whole Spirite and Vnderstanding also even so by their verdict Christ suffered for vs not the bodily and outward sufferinges by Sympathy onely but hee suffered for vs even in his Minde also Now this is directly against your present a Assertion which we have in hand 〈◊〉 132.240 â—eere p. 14 Also heere they observe an exact proportion in the Obiects so far as was possible viz in that which he suffered for vs that which we are saved froÌ„ thereby Thus that sorrow of the immortall parte of the Soule not of body only which we are saved from the same he suffered Yea I say all and every whit of those passions sorrowes wherevnto mans nature is b subiect and capable of 〈◊〉 nature we â—â—e subject to â—â—fer in the â—â—nde proâ—erly for sin â—nd not only â—y Sympathy â—rom the Body Cyrill Thesâ—â—ur 10 3 Barnard de â—ass Dom. â—ap 41. Pag. 7. Terâ—ul cout Prax. Amb in Luc. 2. De trist â—olor c. and from which we are saved all the same he tasted and suffered for vs. Thus it is also that Cyrill elswhere saith c Omnia perpessus est vt nos ab omnibus liberaret He suffered all things throughly that hee might acquit vs from all which els we should have suffered And thus I take Barnards meaning to be d He spared not him selfe who knoweth how to spare his Wherevpon you collect well if you meane so e He suffered and indured All to the vttermost with exact obedience and patience To which end Tertullian also f Sic reliquit dum non parcit This was Gods forsaking of him in his passion that in nothing he spared him And thus Ambrose g Minus contulerat mihi nisi meum suscepisset affectum He had don lesse for me if he had not ben altogeather affected as I should haue ben And thus Ierom h â—erom in â—sa 53. h Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere ille pro nobis passus est pacificans c That wich we should have borne for our sinnes the same hee suffered for vs. Wherefore by the Fathers Christ suffered exactly i All whatsoever sorrowes paines which we should have suffered All kindes 〈◊〉 both in â—â—irit Body â—ot all partiâ—â—lars in theÌ„ as well Spirituall as Corporall as well in all the powers of the Soule subiect to suffering as in that which suffered allwayes with and from the body Only they except 2. pointes which of simple necessity indeed must be excepted in the Sonne of God Pag. 10. 12. â—3 which before k I have also acknowledged 1. Sinne Pag. 87. and all sinfull concomitantes and consequentes as l you speake And that is it which Cyprian exactly noteth That in him there was m Similitudo paenae non Culpae Cypr. de pass the very like punishmeÌ„t as should have ben in vs only there was no sinne nor fault in him as is in vs. The 2. point excepted is that he suffered not eternally but for a while for he that was life it selfe could not but live againe saith n Cyrill In the place above cited Where he seemeth to acknowledge a kind of death even of the soule from which Christ revived againe But of that in due place heereafter Nowe heere it is manifest that even the Fathers of whom you doe so exceedingly boast are cleane against you and for vs in the 1. and chiefest point of this question shewing that Christ suffered not only bodly or in the soule by Symphaty only but in the Minde also distinctly even as we may suffer in minde distinctly froÌ„ our bodily suffering that is when we suffer somwhat a As I 〈◊〉 Treat 〈◊〉 pag. 4. imediatly from God Yea he suffered say these Fathers all the paines which els we should haue suffered no materiall thing excepted but only sinne otherwise he was spared by dispensation in nothing Against this cleere and plaine sense of the Fathers b Pa. 35â— you take no exception neither can you Thus having hitherto manefestly defended my selfe that I have not abused any way the Fathers nor yet your selfe as you vniustly charge me in c Pa. 22â— your entrance Now I am to doe the like against d Pag. 2â—â— your vnsufficient refusing of my Reasons Where by I hope it shall appeare that you have not weakened any one of them And First you begin with rehearsing my wordes wherein I briefly noted the very Question betweene vs e Treat 〈◊〉 pag. 4. That Christ suffered for vs the Wrath of God Which you f Pag. 24 exclame at without measure as being not the point which you preached against Howbeit I suppose these wordes do rightly and fitly set out the matter both which then you preached which now you write I have g Pag. 8 heere before truly fully declared the whole state of this controversy I trust Yet because we can never opeÌ„ this point to much for many good vses that it hath I will not thinke it tedious nor labour lost ne to rip vp this question a litle againe in this place that so we may proceede with more ease Your generall cariage in your booke declareth that you abuse the Reader exceedingly by the ambiguous and equivocall taking of this terme Gods Wrath as before in the entrance I have shewed It is not I that abuse them as you h Namâ— 243 24â— every where very bitterly and vnreasonably do charge me For according to the most vsuall and
will disprove d Treat â—â— pag. 19. my Proposition which is whereby Adam first sinned by the same Christ satisfied for sinne You deny this because the Scripture acknowledgeth no satisfaction but by death where still we must note that you meane only by the Bodily death Now how proove you that Because the iudge in prohibiting Adam to transgresse threatned death e Ocn. 2. Jn the day that thou catest thereof thou shalt dye the death Which it seemeth f Pa. 100. 64. you avouch againe and againe And are you sure that Death heere is but the bodily death only no more Then surely the wicked should satisfie easilie for their sinnes Far be it from me to vtter such a sentence Neverthelesse you must give me leave to shew you also your contradiction in this point First in that where you acknowledge g Pag. 42. the Iudges revenge for sinne is Death both of body and soule Againe where you h Pag. 18. agree with Athanasius shewing expresly that this text intendeth even both these Anima dixit Morte morieris He saide to the Soule Thou shalt dy the death But you would prove your matter againe by this Hebr. 9.15 a Through death which was for our redemption we receaue the promise Yet he saith not Through his bodily death meerely and alone and by nothing els togeather therewith which is your intent He excludeth not the Soules proper sufferings as b I have often said Treat 1. the contrarie heereof you never come neere to proove And it must not be forgotten Pag. 8 9. that c heere â—ou renounce all satisfaction for sinne in respect of merit as from Christes soule vtterly Pag. 253. Therefore that absurd speech and worse which you d vniustly cast on me Pa. 250. c. proveth in very deed to be your owne that Christes suffering in Soule by Sympathy makes not to our redemption Your own place in Barnard maketh Christes whole Soule that is the Minde and the part depending on the Body also to have place and part in the meritorious sacrifice Pag. 84. as well as the Body e Vt totum hominem salvum fecit sic de Toto se hostiam fecit salutarem Which suteth not with your wordes The Soule of Christ which could not dye could not pay the satisfaction and nothing might satisfie for sinne but death Pag. 85 86 8. c. Yea all your f other places of Contradiction herevnto must be taken in good part As for your reason That nothing may satisfie for sinne but death it is not sound The Scriptures doe shew in deed that Christ should not satisfie without Death but they deny not that there are other partes of Christes Satisfaction which differ from Death As his bloudshed and besides that Christs Povertie his hunger his wearines his shame his reproches his apprehension his buffeting c. These doubtles yea all other suffringes of Christ whatsoever small or great are satisfactorie meritorious You will say you vnderstand all these and such like in the Death of Christ You may vnderstand what you list but who will grant in proper speech that these are his Death or that his death is any or all these And if you take Christes death by the Figure Synecdoche a part of Christes sufferings for the whole Pag. 41. c. then why doe g you so much abhorre that Figure heere and why may not the Soules proper sufferings be admitted also into the worke of Christes Satisfaction although it can not properly dye Where you nippe me also for saying that the Soule of Christ in some kinde of sense dyed I hope in due place you shall have a reasonable answer to that matter Till then have patience I pray And thus h you come to skan my Assumption also Pag. 253. that Adam committed sinne most properly in his Soule Which you graunt in one sense is true but directly repugnant to my Conclusion How I pray b Pag. 25 If I meane that Adams Soule transgressed the CoÌ„mandement with her body and by her body that is the Soule as agent the Body as the Instrument theÌ„ the conclusion will follow in spite of my heart Ergo in satisfiing for sinne Christs Soule must be punished with her body and by her body which is the thing I labour to overthrow with all the wits I have Nay then the Conclusion will follow that the immortall part the Minde was punished peculiarly and not by and from the Body onely seeing in all even outward sinnes the Soule sinneth both principally and also in a proper and peculiar maner by it selfe yea before the body sinneth Albeit the Body sinneth also secoÌ„darily and in a maner proper to it selfe even as the Instrument as you say Yea further I meane that some sinnes the Soule acteth in and by it selfe meerely and therefore it suffereth likewise some punishments meerely in it selfe which touch not the Body at all vnlesse by Sympathy only and that only when they grow vehement But all this you heere deny Very stranâ— doctrine teaching that the Soule properly committeth no sinne but by and with the body that is the Soule in it self by it selfe alone sinneth not And so consequently that God temporally and eternally punnisheth the Soule only by the Body This is the true effect of your discourse heere For proofe of the first you say c Pag. 25 God did not say to Adam thou shalt not like d The soâ—â—den fruiâ—â— it or desire it which the Soule of Adam did but thou shalt not eat thereof which could not be performed but by the hand and mouth of Adam And therefore Adam transgressed the Commandment not by his Soule but by his Body even as in murder theft and adultery these factes men commit by their Bodies and not by their Soules And after All provocations and pleasures of sinnes the Soule taketh from her ' Body all actes of sinne she committeth by her body Both which speeches are exceeding vntrue and hurtfull For even in these sinnes the Soule as I said sinneth principally and peculiarly before that the Body sinneth at all Yea the Desiring and Liking of evell is sinne before the outward Act is coÌ„summat and finished This Paul e Rom. 〈◊〉 vnderstood at length when he became a Christian though a long while being a Pharisee he knew it not And it seemeth this was in Christs time the Haeresie of the Pharisees against whom he sheweth that not only the outward fact of Bodily sinne was sinne but also a â—at 5.22.28 even the very thoughts and liking towards sinne Wherefore Adam was as well forbidden to desire or like that fruit as to eat it which you deny The Commandement was naturally ingraven in Adams hearte in his Creation Which since Moses maketh distinct and diverse from all the rest which concerne the outward acte Therefore distinctly he saith Thou shalt not desire or covet So that to desire the forbidden
fruit was sinne even without and before the acte of eating Moreover other foule sinnes Haeresies Turcisme and Atheisme are committed and determined simply in the minde without any necessary imployment of any partes of the Body As touching Haeresies to hold Two first causes of thinges a Good and a Bad God and the Divell with Manichee also that Christ the Redeemer was not God with Arrius that the Holy Ghost is not God with Eunomius c that Christ had no Soul with Apollinaris that Christes Manhood was confounded and changed into his Godhead with Eutyches or divided from his Godhead with Nestorius or the opinion of Vbiquity or of Transubstantiation Finally that there never was nor shal be any Christ a Redeemer as the Turkes hold that there is no God as the Atheists Nowe are there not many provocations to hatch and to conclude these opinions meerely in the minde soule of man Are there not many pleasures even in these impieties meerely in the minde Yea it is evident to all that the meere Thoughts the Vnderstanding determination of the only Soule of man doth act them resolveth on them in it self without any concurrence or cooperation of the body therein Happily you will say The Soule takes occasion so to thinke by some outward bodily thinges before seene or heard I deny not but the Soule taketh occasion to thinke many things by the bodily senses How be it not all thinges simply And so are the Fathers b â—prian and 〈◊〉 10. in your â—â—g 255. heere to be vnderstood If any will stumble on that of Aristotle Nihil est in intellectû quod non fuit prius in sensu it is not absolutly nor vniversally true My reason is because Philosophers thought the minde to be as it were Tabula abrasa when we come into the world first They knew not the naturall Pride the impietie and perversity of mans soule which may yeeld many and sundry Thoughts and Determinations to sinne yea provocations and pleasures in sin which the Body ministreth not neither could the Heathen vnderstand them And to say that this pride impiety and perversitie was taken by contagion from the meere flesh originally in Generation is not to be proved Bud yet were that so notwithstanding the Soule afterward can acte many sinnes meerely in it selfe and without the cooperation of the body Further as the Angells sinned in the beginning by their meere spirituall conceit against God so nothing letteth but that man in his Angell-like nature the reasonable Soule may sinne likewise without any Bodily meanes therevnto Also as we can thinke well without vsing our body God so inspiring vs so may we thinke ill which is sinne our owne inborne corrupt vnderstanding and reason and will moving vs only Moreover if I grant you this point of HeatheÌ„ Philosophy that the Soule taketh occasion to thinke all thinges which she thinketh vniversally from the body bodily obiectes yet it followeth not that she taketh occasion to misthinke from thence alwayes The proper provocations and pleasures of sinne are oftentimes not outward at all but the meere perversitie and malignity of our evill minde is vsually the very cause of ill thoughts ill determinations I grant also that the occasion is often taken froÌ„ the outward senses But it is meerely taken not given taken by the corrupt and perverse minde not given by the senses Which though they be also otherwise corrupt yet simply in seeing naturall things they sinne not nor yet in hearing nor in tasting save as the minde which is properly and principally and first sinfull abuseth their operation And as touching those wretched a Haeretâ— Turkes theists men opinions before rehearsed doubtles their presumptuous and perverse wit only so reasoning and concluding falsly without any other proper inducementes froÌ„ without was the very cause of those spirituall impieties in many impes of Sathan Wherefore for you to affirme that the Soule committeth all acts of sinne by the body that God did not forbid Adam to like or desire that fruit is more then strange doctrine Somewhere most iniuriously b Pag. 3â— you reproch purity I dare say heere you have no colour of purity in this point Notwithstanding c Pag. 2â— you resolutly set your self to prove your opinion not by Scripture but by Fathers who are answered before saving Tertullian who d Pag. 2â— you say pointeth to a place of Scripture for it e Mat. 〈◊〉 out of the heart come evill thoughts But this place being considered will rather prove the contrary For Christ heere meaneth not by Heart any parte of the Body but meerely the Minde or Soule of man and that with opposition to the body in this case of sinning For thus in effect hee saith Not the Body sinneth by taking in but the Soule by sending out That is to say The Soule only sinneth properly not the body at all no not in grosse facts except as the body is the Instrument the Soule being the Agent as your selfe doe speake Otherwise the body sinneth not at all much lesse in such thoughts as are meere spirituall vnles wee meane by society for coniunctions sake in one person with the Soule which indeed is it that sinneth And thus some have thought those places of Tertullian which a â—ag 255. you cite may be vnderstood But indeed Tertullian you vse not well and bring these his wordes against his own meaning as anon we shall further see That which you ad of Bodily infirmities letting the operation of the Soule for so I thinke you meane as in Lethargies 〈◊〉 256. Apoplexies Sleepe Phrensy c. Peradventure then it thinketh and coÌ„sidereth more freely in it selfe and by it selfe then when the body setteth it on worke otherwise at other times Howsoever it can never be proved that the Soule then vtterly ceaseth operation and can do nothing for it seemeth that only our memory and sensitive faculties are stopped whereby it commeth to passe that we know nothing afterwards what the minde contemplateth and thinketh in such cases It is very rare when we remember something and by some extraordinary loosing of those obstructions it is which commonly doe possesse our senses wholy in such occasions Yet even those small remnants of such operations of our Soule beeing in such state doe evidently convince that the Soules operations hang not necessarily on the body neither is it idle when the body is hindred though commonly and for the most part we remember litle thereof Lastly if the Soules operations were so necessarily tyed to the faculties and instrumentes of the body as you doe avouch I greatly doubt howe the Soules immortalitie will bee defended against the effect of your assertion â—â—â—oul hath â—â—â—â—ion nor meereâ—â—â—â—mply in 〈◊〉 without â—â—â—dy 54.255 Surely it bringeth in with it the Haeresie of Pope Iohn the 22. and of certaine Anabaptistes that the Soule hath no being till when it shall resume hir body at the
last day And hence also it is that you say Gods iustice punisheth the soule only by the body that is not till the Resurrection This only the effect of you speach contayneth plainly and fully Yea in truth thus you must needs affirme and hold you can not avoid it if you will hold vour maine Question Only except you deny that Christe had a Humane Soule perfit in all the powers and facultyes thereof like ours or els that God did not properly punish Christ for our sinnes Of necessitie you must fall into one of these dangerous evills for ought that I yet see Wherefore this point is not a Pag â— so easie nor so evident to the simple as you pretend and I thinke you had neede of better reasons then hitherto I see any you have before the Godly and Learned will beleeve you The rather for that in deed heere you committ further 2. grievous faultes 1. Tertullian your owne authour the principall ground which you have for your opinion heere is wonderfully ill vsed 2. You are strangely contrary to your selfe in your very winding vp of the matter As for Tertullian he resolveth directly contrary to the wordes which b De Râ—â—â— carn câ—â—â— Animas 〈◊〉 torquers 〈◊〉 rique peâ—â—â—â—â—ros c you cite from him Saith he The example of Lazarus in the Gospell proveth that Mens Soules though alone and without their bodyes are punished and comforted in the world of the dead The Soule shall lacke the revniting of the flesh with it not for that it can not feele any thing without the flesh but for that it must needes heereafter feele also with the flesh For as much as it sufficeth by it selfe to doe somewhat so much or so farre also it sufficeth to suffer It sufficeth indeed to doe lesse by it selfe For it is able of it selfe only to Thinke to Will to Desire to Dispose but to accomplish it looketh for the vse of the body So therefore it also looketh for the societie of the body that by it the Soule may aswell suffer absolutely as without it she could not doe things compleatly And therefore for what actions it sufficed by it selfe the iudgement of the same it receaveth now that is Of the Desire of the Thoughtes of the Will that it had Thus Tertullian directly answereth to that c Pag. â— Conclusion and d Pag. 2â—â— reasons which you gather out of him proving contrarie to the same that the Soule now without the flesh receaveth iudgement for such actions as of it selfe it was sufficient to doe and it is sufficient to doe certaine actions of it selfe as To thinke to Will to Desire to Order and dispose things but to accomplish it is not able namely outward actions the iudgment of which actions indeed the Soule shall tary for till the revniting againe of the flesh therewith It seemeth that Tertullian cited before the reasons of the e Such a fore not 〈◊〉 Pope Lâ—â— Heretâ—kes holding that the Soules slept till the last iudgement and receaved no reward at all in the meane time for want of the societie of their flesh which till then lieth rotten in the Grave but heere Tertullian answereth and renounceth all this same â—â—s afterâ—ard the â—nhapilies 〈◊〉 now 〈◊〉 And so those were the Heretikes wordes against Tertullian which you alleage out of him in steed of Catholike Which dealing what it is I leave to be considered Next your owne contradictorie dealing in this place is also not to be forgotten For your selfe shutteth vp with an excellent reason against your self almost the same that I observed presently before in Tertullian against your collection Thus you say a Pag. 257. Doe I denie then that the Soule hath any sufferings in this life and the next which come not by the body By no meanes The Soule hath some proper punishments in this life as sorrowe and feare when the body hath no hurt from which Christ was not free as appeareth by his Agonie and so in the next the Soules of the wicked have griefe remorse besides the paine of fire c. Yes surely I suppose you denied before the Soules punishment without the Body But now you seeme to graunt it And seeing you graunt also that b Pag. 25â— nothing is more proportionable to Gods iustice theÌ„ to retayne the same order in punishing which they kept in offending Therefore it foloweth by your owne words that the wicked somtimes sinned meerely in and by their Soules and not onely togeather with and by their Bodies seeing they are punished simply in and by their soules and not onely with and by their bodyes Also how sound this is I wot not c Pag. 257. where you yeeld some punishment now to the Damned how beit none other reall and positive punishment but remorse and remembrance of sinne onely as it seemeth Againe in saying that Christ was not free from some proper punishments to the soule as Sorrow and Feare in his agonie if you meane as you speak that these were proper punishmentes inflicted on him by Gods very Wrath and not to be onely his holy affections Devotion to God and compassion to men which yet d â—esâ—oâ—e â—â—g 18. I feare is your meaning then it foloweth evidently from your own words that Christ suffered proper punishment in his Soule from the verie wrath of God more then the Bodily sufferings only on by Sympathy in the Soule which in a word is the grauÌ„ting of our whol question All the rest that you adde out of the Fathers touching Hell and Hell paines is to no purpose If e 〈◊〉 258.259 you cite them to proove that Christ had no naturall feare of Death and Hell you f â—â—g 22â— gainsay that your selfe further then we doe or then the trueth is Then a Pag. you come to my other Reasons which I called Speciall not for more excellency in them then in the other except onely that I take these to bee not so Generall as the former but more neerely to touch our Quaestion Which you might perceave well enough to have ben my meaning by the expresse Opposition that b Treat pag. 3. I make of Generall and Speciall But it appeareth you had rather take my wordes so as that you may make them to serve your vnseemely iesting and better inveying humour which yet in the end will helpe your cause but little Against b my 1. Reason out of I say that Christ suffered those paines and sorrowes for sinne which els we should have borne you except that I expresse not whether I meane All or Some I answer All and every whit I meane so far as possibllity will admit and namely as touching the very sorrowes and paine Nothing was abated in the nature and vehemency of the paine which hee suffered any more then is abated in the paine and sorrows of the Damned This the very text heere expresseth with great c Which faint intâ—tations 〈◊〉 261.
doâ—â— fully 〈◊〉 vnto emphasis d Isa 53 Hee susteyned our very sorrows or our sorrowes themselves And this we conclude the rather because the sense of paines and sorrows e Heb. 2â— only was the Ransom ordayned and consecrated by God in Christ that by them his sufferings should be accomplished our sinnes satisfied Whatsoever therefore in this life might be painfull was due to mankind generally for sin in it owne nature was no sin that Christ suffered wholly and alltogeather for vs even the same which els we should Which is your own f pa. 28â— plaine confession also I grant indeed it vtterly impossible that he who was vncapable of sinne yea God himselfe should be really separated from God or Hated or weakened in faith or punished externally Yet it was possible that even he on whom our sinne was laid should feele both properly in Soule and also in Body all the whole vehemency of our due paine and the sharpenes of our smart Paine affliction sorrow is not sinne be it small or great it is indeed properly and originally the Punishment of sinne either in vs or in others Christe suffered Punishment for sinne not in himselfe as others do but by Gods ordinance he suffered punishment extraordinarily for sinne in vs. When God smot him it was possible for him to feele it yea vnpossible it was that he should not feele it and of necessitie his Soule peculiarly properly infinitly did feele the stroke of Gods wrathful iustice The vehemency whereof may wound and pierce no lesse even in this life where God will then in the locall Hell it selfe All these our due sorrowes therefore and all this our sharpest deserved paine even Gods owne immediat hand smiting the Soule for sinne which far exceedeth and comprehendeth as it were all other paine Christ without any dispensation or qualification whatsoever indured for vs. This is that which we say and thus Ierom also expoundeth this very text â—trom in 〈◊〉 53. Saith hee a Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere ille pro nobis ' passus est Turne nowe your vaine and frivolous insultation against Ierom for his indefinit speech to whom it pertayneth in this case aswell as to me Pag. 26â— if you be not a respecter of persons Say to him b You may do well St Ierom to go to the Vniversitie againe whence you came afore you were wise and there learne to put quantity to your propositions that we may know when you speak of any thing whether you meane All or Some But Jerom would be wise enough to answer you if he were alive that whersoever he studied he knew so much that in learning and reason an indefinit proposition is to be taken as Vniversall in a necessary matter 〈◊〉 specialâ—â— Satisfying Gods vnâ—â—all Iustice 〈◊〉 * as the vndertaking of a Surety is in his stead whom he is surety for and yet namely but so far as knowen possibility admitteth and indeed no further Now this is apparant in this case of Christes suretyship and suffering in our steed Hee suffered all the whole punishent of sinne due to mankinde whatsoever was possible for him being a sinles man also very God to suffer And further then this none will imagin or thinke that any vnles mad men do affirme You charge meâ— c heereafter that I falsify this place of Ierom 〈◊〉 350. â—â—reat 1. 〈◊〉 85. Curse 〈◊〉 I put it â—â—â—hus Maâ—â—ctum 〈◊〉 a paâ—â—â—nthesis â—â—nod enim â—â—al 3.13 because d I did put in e maledictum with his wordes Which is a silly devise to turne of Jerom without answer For by it I expresse Ieroms meaning f his words have plaine reference to Maledictum in the g Apostle whoÌ„ he cited immediatly before This is theÌ„ none other but an honest falsifying of mine Authour Now that this place of Isay and the whole doctrine which I avovch touching these sufferinges of Christ for vs may the better be receaved let vs note that the publike doctrine appointed by h Authority to be taught through our England expresseth the very same Which Auâ—â—â—tie I have â—â—â—ged exâ—â—sed Treat 〈◊〉 88.89 â—he answereth to iâ— a word Namely Nowells Catechisme where it is thus taught He paid and suffered the paine due to vs and by this meanes delivered vs from the same Neither is it vnvsed among meÌ„ â—ne to promise and to be surety yea sometime to suffer for an other But with Christe as our Surety so suffering for vs God dealt as it were with extremity of law but to vs whose sinnes deserved punishments due paines he laid on Christ he vsed singular lenity gentlenes clemency and mercy Christ therefore suffered and in suffering overcame death the paine appointed by the everliving God for mens offense Againe His will was to suffer All extremitie for vs who had deserved all extremitie All these things being taken vpon himselfe he destroyed them all Where marke also what doctrine the Law of this Realme consonantly publisheth and commandeth in the Homilies of Christs Passion See whether it misliketh yours or no. The b Hom. â— Hom maketh Christs putting himselfe betweene Gods deserved Wrath and our sinne the extreamest part of his Passion If this were the extreamest part of his Passion then it was a further feeling then the sense of Bodily paine only it cannot be any other then his feeling of Gods proper Wrath spiritually which our sinne deserved Therefore by the Homily hee felt Gods proper Wrath spiritually which our sinne deserved Againe he bare All our sinnes sores and infirmities vpon his owne backe No paine did he refuse to suffer in his owne body But as he felt All this in his Body so hee must feele the greatest part primarily and much more deeply in his Soule Ergo hee refused not to suffer All the paines of the Wrath of God both in Body and Soule c Hom. â—â— Hee tooke vpon him the reward of our sinnes the iust reward of sinne But this same Homily saith The reward of our sin was the iust wrath and indignation of God the death both of Body and Soule Therefore by the Homily Christ tooke on him for vs the iust wrath indignation of God the death both of body soule And thus also * 1. Treat pag. 34. my text of Scripture is iustified That d 2. Tim. â—â— Christ gave himselfe the price of redemption for vs which we els should have paid Where e Pa. 261. you except against this text in Timoth that I say The Scripture speaketh heere after the common vse custom of redeeming captives taken in warre wheÌ„ a captive being not able som other friend payeth Antilytron the same price for the captive which els he should You aske who told me that the Scripture speaketh after the common vse of enemies I answer The nature of the word Antilytron a Ransom importeth so much which is properly vsed in such cases
But neither shame nor Death to the holy Martyrs are d accounted by God nor by his servauntes as proper and true Curses Before pag. 9. 50. but the holy men are in trueth most glorious and blessed in them Againe the Saints and Martyrs can not bee properly Cursed and properly Blessed too in any measure Neither their Soules blessed vnles their bodyes be blessed also free from the true Curse although you seeme to denie this point Which strange and vncouth assertioÌ„ both heere and in many places mo you doe at least insinuat that is that the godly in their Soules are blessed but in their bodyes they still retaine Gods true proper Curse till the resurrection Which I leave to the consideration of the godly You say We must call things by those Names which God first allotted them That I deny If God since evidently have altered them and disposed of them otherwise But he hath so don in this case The afflictions and death which originally and naturally were punishments for sinne and are so still to the wicked the same to the godly as I have often said are since changed now are properly Chastisements of sinne and not Punishmentes nor Curses Only Christ hath suffered the whole proper punishment and true Curse or Vengeance of our sinnes and therefore on vs it is not it can not be laid againe in any part thereof You a Pag. 96. avouch some that denie Christ to have bene made a Curse or sinne But you must remember b Pag. 92. your owne place of Austin Maledictum est omne peccatum sive ipsum quod fit sive ipsum supplicium The Curse is all sinne which is twofold either that which we commit against Gods law or els the very Punishment of that sinne Nowe c Pag. 96. your testimonies do meane Christ was not made a Curse or sin the first way that is he was not in him selfe sinfull nor hated they deny not the second that he was made the proper punishment or Sacrifice for our sinne And thus though you lust not to see it yet my d Treâ—â— pag. 45. speach was sound and true If Christ dyed simply but as the Godly dye it might in no sort e Gal. 3. heere be called a Curse The reason is evident because the text heere doeth speak treat of the Curse of the Law against sinne such therefore was Christes Curse which he suâ—layned To conclude then his afflictions and death was neither Wages nor Chastisement nor Curse nor Consequent of any sinne in him Yet as God made him sinne for vs so he truely properly and in very deed laid the paine of his Curse vpon his body and Soule Which Curse of God vpon Christ as you f Pag 26 say truly was not in words but in deedes Wherefore my wordes g Pag. 2â— you openly pervert affirming that I say Death heere that is Christes death noted Galat. 3.13 â—ay in no sorte be called a Curse when I expresly even there and every where doe say the contrary Pag. 263. But a your greatest exception is that this Curse laid on Christ cannot be vnderstood of the whole Curse of God or of the Law Pag. 264. and therefore b you spare me not for c saying that Paul heere in his application out of Moses nameth a part of the iust Curse of the Law for sinne Treat 1. pag. 40. thereby meaning and inferring to his purpose the whole Where you must be so good as to vnderstand me by mine own words in other places Pag 290. For thus d you know e I limited my speach els where As touching the vehemency of paine Christ was as sharply touched as the very reprobats Treat 1. pag 81. And Christes sufferings were equall to the very Hellish torments in vehemency of paine and sharpnes Againe f This price equally in Justice must be kept so far as it is possible Pag. 26. And g Pag. 37. Because there was no impossibility no necessitie no reason but he might feele the full smart of our sinnes as there was that he should not feele the full continuance thereof and seeing Gods strict iustice requireth it to be so therefore it was so he suffered all the smart but not all the continuance of our punishment â— Also Pa. 23. Heeâ—e Pa. 13 Thus then plainly h I signified i those 3 Limitations which now are expressed that Christ suffered our whole Curse only so far as the possibilitie of thinges could admit wherein nothing was dispensed nor pardoned to him for there was no cause as I have often said Which doctrine how vnworthy it is of your strang contempt and outcryes against me I leave it to the godly Wise to consider Nowell Catechis Only marke if our k publike doctrine be not the same Vltima omnia pati voluir pro nobis qui vltima omnia commeriti sumus Diram execrationeÌ„ suscepit coÌ„tumelias etiaÌ„ omnes omnia probra atque supplicia c. But you will say thus we make it not the whole Curse of the Law Yes we cal it rightly the whole Curse for as much as Christ suffered it in his whole manhood See before pag 8. 1. The. 5.28 â— pa. 48. 52 even in l All the powers of his m Spirit Soule Body where that Curse in Deutero being a part was suffered only in the Body quickned by the Soul Also in other respectes this suffering of Christ may bee well called the whole Curse or PunishmeÌ„t of sin Pag. 11 12. â—nâ— 16.17 Pa. 27â— 280 as n before is declared After this o you thinke it strange that I say Christ suffered dyed iustly and was hanged on the tree by the iust sentence of the Law that so hee was by imputation of our state and condition vnto him sinfull 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 51.11 defiled hatefull and accursed All the which I avouch because he vndertooke by Gods ordinance as our Surety to receave our whole condemnation vpon himselfe so far as his owne nature and condicion could possibly admit Christ suffeâ— iustly to the ende that hee might wholly acquit vs. In regard whereof I aske Is it wrong for the Law to lay the penalty on the surety when the debtour can not discharge it Against this my assertion you say a Pag. 27â— By no sentence of the Law he hanged on a tree And a reason you give b Pag. 273 because to be hanged on a tree was no necessary part of the generall Curse of God vpon all sinners I answer to Dy for sinne was a necessary part of the generall Curse vpon all sinners What say you then to his Death Did he dy iustly Sure if Christ dyed by the rule of Gods iustice then he dyed iustly If he dyed not by Gods iustice then Wo and thrice Wo to vs. For it cannot be but Gods Iustice * Luc. 16.1 Deut. 10.1 Rom. 8.32 See before pag. 66. must
manhood also after so low humiliation Finally it was his own most free and fore determined will Would hee then so mournfully grieve and complaine thereat It hath no reason nor likelyhood in it Iohn 1â—â— Lazarus when he was returned from the ioyes of heaven to take againe his rotten carcase ofter it stanke having lyen 4. dayes dead in the grave yet he grieved not at it neither ought he so to have don Much lesse ought Christ so to grieve and mourne for a lesser want and for a shorter season as we may thinke then that was to Lazarus But this matter is not worth the speaking of “ See bâ— to this puâ— pag. 10â— any further Neither doe your Fathers prove any such improbable yea vnlawfull mourning complayning in Christ If they prove any thing towardes your meaning it is this that he complayned because of his bodily dying Howbeit they say not that he thus complayned only and meerely for that neither I thinke will you plainly hold this neither doe wee deny the other The truth is they meane he suffered in his whole Humane nature How the â—â—thers are 〈◊〉 taken namely that he suffered not as God They strove heere with Haeretikes whose controversies were far from this our question f Hilar. 〈◊〉 Trin li. 〈◊〉 Hilary and g Epiph. 〈◊〉 Arioma 〈◊〉 Epiphanius wrot against Arius to prove that Christ in this complaint shewed rightly a humane infirmity and that this was not the voice of a Deity inferiour to the Father as Arius blasphemed These Fathers then had no purpose heere to exclude the sufferings of Christes Soule but only to deny that his Godhead suffered complayned as being left to punishment by his Father when the sorrowes of death began to prevayle against him The very same doth †In Maâ—â— can 33. 〈◊〉 Hilary also where he saith that this in Christ was Corporis vox the outcry of his body He plainly meaneth it of his whole manhood the opposition being betweene it and his Godhead â—reat 1. â—â—g 9. as the Scripture †often doth And where he saith he was morte peragendus to be coÌ„summated by death he meaneth that death ended all his suffering not that hee suffered nothing els but meerely death And if their words do any where come neere to our question â—ertul cont â—â—ax â—â—ila in Mat. â—â—au 33. as it is very likely that h Tertulian and the one place of i Hilary doth then surely they are plainly for vs and against you Tertullian pointeth in this place at certaine Haeresies maintained in his time wherwth it seemeth Praxeas was infected 1 That the Father suffered aswell as the Sonne when Christ suffered 2 That the Deity suffered 3 That Christ was no true nor perfit man All these pointes Tertullian overthroweth heere Quid de isto quaeris c. What inquire you of Christ You heere him crying out in his Passion My God my God why hast thou forsaken me The Sonne therefore suffered being forsaken of his Father but this is meant of the Flesh and of the Soule that is of the Man not of the Word nor of the Spirit Heere it is plaine that Tertullian sheweth besides the rest this point exactly that Christ was a very man in that he had a proper Body and a Soule and that this his suffering on the Crosse was in both these partes and so in his whole intire manhood Also that he suffered in both these parts even froÌ„ his Father â—eere pag. 63. â—at 1. pa 4 But he could not suffer in his Soule froÌ„ †God if he felt only and meerely but a bodily death as you hold And to suffer the stroke of Gods hand in his Soule as the proper vengeance of sin is farre more then to feele in Soule by sympathy only the bodies smart Neither had Tertull. overthroweÌ„ but confirmed that Haeresie of Christs being no true natural man if he had said that in this case he suffered in Soule only by symphathy with and from the Body But this is absurd to thinke in Tertullian Therefore in this place he is flatly against you And this DerelictioÌ„ of his Father which he speaketh of is Death indeed to the Sonne But what death Forsooth more then the separation of the Soule and Body â—at Death â—â—e Soule in â—ist wee â—â—ne Even the seperation of the Deity from the whole manhood which is the death of the Soule I speake heere nothing but the Fathers words yea the Scriptures Your owne place of Epiphanius saith that nowe his Deity departed from his manhood So saith your owne Hilary also Corporis vox contestata recedentis a se Dei dissidium So saith Ambrose Clamavit Homo Divinitatis separatione moriturus The man Christ did cry being about to dy by the separation of his Godhead Againe Sequestrata delectatione Divinitatis aternae taedio meae infirmitatis afficitur The ioy of his eternall Godhead being parted away hee was afflicted with the tediousnis of my infirmitie Heere the Fathers doe shewe in deed that Christ dyed but more then a meere bodily death even the death of the Soule also For what is the Separation of the Deitie from his Soule els but the death of the Soule Howbeit note I pray that neither the Fathers nor I do meane any Separating 1 of the vnion of a The Dâ—â— Humâ—â— both natures in Christ nor the Separating 2 of any Holynes or habituall grace of God from his Soule 3 nor the Separating of Gods love from him See befoâ—â— pag. 10â— but the SeparatioÌ„ of all comfortable feeling assistance of the Godhead in that he felt not any supporting of his Soule and Body now pierced thorow with the Paines which he felt inflicted by God This SeparatioÌ„ is meant and it b Thougâ— haps thâ— ther 's dâ— this phâ—â— rarely may be called the Death of the Soule For as it is c Psal â—â— life to the Soule to feele and to enioy the glorie of God So it is death to feele the want and absence thereof vtterly and the rather being also then overwhelmed with incomparable paines That heavenly life Christ tasted a litle while in his TransfiguratioÌ„ this Hellish Death he felt besides his bodily death vpon the Crosse And thus Tertull. meaneth heere that not Christs bodily death only made him now thus to cry out but that death also which was the Separation of his Godhead from both his body Soule which is the death of the Soule And so he saith true the Dereliction of the Father is Death to the Sonne Your d Pag. â—â—â— 4. Exposition for any thing I see may be granted for it seemeth to bee the same in effect that wee holde Your place of Cyrill seemeth also to concurre that Christes words of complaint were the removing of the dereliction which had fallen on vs. Was it removed from vs then surely it was laid vpon some body els Now that must needes be vpon
begging only no further proceeding at all It is written â—â—rk 6.34 a He began to teach them many things Also b And Iesus aunswered them and began to say 〈◊〉 13.5 Take heede least any man deceave you 〈◊〉 10.45 c. And c He began to cast out them that solde in the Temple 〈◊〉 1.1 c. And d All that which Iesus began to doe and teach 〈◊〉 24.2 And e Tertullus began to accuse Paul saying c. It were very simple to say that the Scripture meaneth these things were only begun and no more Nay verily they were heere don to the full Againe as Christ was indeed astonished grievouslie perplexed so he did at the first but begin to be thus and then afterwards grew to the full Now these degrees and proceedings of Christ in his sorrorwes that they were not at the highest at once this worde heere he began may very well signifie For the text following doth invincibly shew that he did fully come to the extreamity of astonishment began not only For did he but begin when hee swet clotted bloud trickling from his body to the ground Also when an Angell was sent from Heaven to refresh and comfort him did he then but begin to be heavy Againe when most moornfully he complained that his Soule abounded with sorrowes even vnto death Finally when he 3. severall tymes prayed to his Father with strong crying teares and feare that the Cup of Gods punishments now given him to drinke might passe from him if it were possible which at other tymes he most perfectly knew that it neyther could nor should escape him wherevnto may be added that at last when he so dolefully complayned that his God had forsaken him was hee now all this while but begining to be troubled and sad You would have mademe ashamed of it if I had had any such thought in my minde Wherfore the text is no way abused as you pretend in that after he began I shew froÌ„ these places that he grew to be mightily astonished grievously perplexed As for Ierom if he deny this I must crave leaue to dissent from him I bring you say “ Pag. 29â— a fardell of phrases to expresse his Agonie he was amazed astonished forgetfull distempered overwhelmed and all confounded in the powers of his soule and senses of his body Yea and I thinke all to little sufficieÌ„tly to expresse our Lords sufferings for vs. All those words which I vsed and many mo cannot shew all that vnspekeable vehemeÌ„cy of Sorrow which now cast him into such a plight So far of it is that * Pag. 28â— I do the Lord of glory wrong when I labour but to shew how he loved vs and to what basenes of our nature he submitted him self for our sake For al these are but meere effects of natures infirmitie if it be oppressed with any infinit sorrow feare Seeing then Christ might be and was nowe thus infinitly afflicted as we have shewed why should we feare to acknowledge extreame Effectes in him where we have extreame Causes Nay God forbid that we should reioyce in any thing so much neither can wee praise magnify him for any thing so highly as we may ought for this extreame abasing of Christe for vs. 〈◊〉 Pilip 2. â— Remember your owne wordes out of Austin that there is in som men Insipiens honorisicentia a fond intent of honoring Christ. If there be any such surely this is one point thereof which you maintaine Mr Calvin a worthy Minister of Christ â—alvin â—ath â—6 and a pillar of the Church is bolde and saith Fatemur certe hanc esse crucis stultitiam quae scandaloest superbis hominibus We consesse indeed such is the basenes and folly of Christes Crosse that proud men cannot away with it In another place where I shewed from the more to the lesse â—eat â— pa. 57 howe Christe might have for the suddain the powers of his minde astonished and yet no decay in him of faith nor of obedience nor of patience nor of loue like as there is not in a man benummed bound in his senses more then Christ was namely in a man a sleepe or amazed with a violent blow on the head For thus any reasonable man would haue conceaved me seeing who would imagine that I thought Christ now to be altogeather so without sense as one that sleepeth or that lyeth in a swoune Heerevpon you aske me skoffingly Pag. 299. a was Christ a sleepe or in a swoune b cast into a traunce Pag. 120. or c in a fit of a Lethargie But what I doe thinke of Christs Agonie I haue said before Pag. 121. Indeed as d you grant that Amazednes and Astonishment commeth naturally from sorrowes and feares and that Pag. 293. both in these causes and effects there be divers degrees so I thinke in Christ both the one and the other was in the extreamest and most violent degree that might be And therefore no marvaile though his AstonishmeÌ„t were far greater then is to be seene in any man ells that ever was or shal bee The Lorde made Solomon to excell all others in e wisedome 1. Chro. 1.12 and riches and treasures and honour so that there hath not ben the like among the Kings which were before him neither after him shall there bee the like Of Christ I iudge we may altogither as truly and as fully say that the Lord made him so subiect to infirmities to suffering of sorrows that there hath not ben the like among meÌ„ which were before him neither after him shall there be the like And yet none of those your former imputations are true Pag. 300. But f for my life I cannot answer this that followeth All that Christ suffered was and must be meritorious with God The suffering of Hell paines which astonish and confound all the powers of the Soule and senses of the Body neither was nor could be meritorious with God Therefore Christ suffered not such paines as did astonish and confound his bodily senses and powers of his Soule I deny your Assumption Not only all Christs paines were meritorious but even all his very infirmities also his wearines his hunger his sleepe and so his astonishment amazednes being in him but a meere natural weaknes and infirmity was exceeding meritorious in him and highly accepted with God Man hath his meere infirmities all agreeable to Gods will but Christ directly and properly glorified God in and by them more then can bee vttered I say in every point whatsoever of his Humane infirmity and basenes wherevnto hee humbled himselfe If it seeme a hard phrase which in my former Treatise I vsed saying Christ at this instant became forgetfull of that which before he knew my meaning is and so still I speake now he remembred not he considered not Which many times wee vse to name forgetting but indeed strictly and properly it is
either now or before he dyed in the flesh or both now then also For he might well suffer it eveÌ„ now and yet feare it more ensuing Yea such a maner measure of Feare as this manifestly was could not be but a very Suffering of these spirituall sorrowes Which also that sheweth where hee saith My Soule is full of actuall sorrowes even vnto death c. Neither is there in this any a doubt full word Pag. 304. which is your maner of writing Pag. 296. nor b device vnfit for Divinity but your CoÌ„parisons of c fearing Captivitie Pag. 301. loosing a purse c. are very vnfit to be matched with this feare in Christ Pag. 302. You thinke this was but a d iest if God be said to have heard Christ and deliuered him from that he feared and yet to let him suffer it Forsooth no iest for he doubtles suffered it as before we haue seene Nowe nevertheles GOD might well heare him 2. wayes 1. by sufficient sustayning him in it 2. by delivering him out of it in due time In one place you seeme to observe a point both strange and very contrary to your selfe Pa. 118. 119 in saying e Feare is more intollerable in Christ theÌ„ doubting Is feare so intollerable a thing for him when as you haue so often and so earnestly affirmed that he feared Pa. 22. 124. and for f feare became thus astonished Pag. 303. Where * you seeke a weake advantage in that I said eisakoustheis may seeme to shew that Christ was heard being in that which he was saved from you see I challenge no certaine but a seeming reason from that worde But your selfe maketh a stranger coÌ„clusion Ergo the Active referred to God importeth that God being in the same Paines did heare him Lastly you say g Indeed but in the Garden Christ never prayed with strong cryes teares to be saved froÌ„ Death Pag. 22 that we read in the Scriptures I hope neither doe you read expreslie in the Scriptures at all that thus he prayed in the Garden You may soundly gather it from the Scriptures I graunt Ioh. 12.27 and so you may that his praying h before was of the self same nature and maner also after in that most dolefull complaint on the Crosse when he cryed My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Where the very like request is plainlie implyed as he made in the Garden when he saide Let this Cup passe from Ieb 5.7 So that the i Apostle in all reason may bee vnderstoode to have respect to all these tymes and wofull cryes of our Saviour Christ Pag. 30. And thus it is without all reason that you say k his Agonie ended in the Garden Pa. 115. 116 and that on the Crosse hee had l alwayes persistance in ioy without obscuration or intermission Likewise also that otherwise his astonishment must a Pag. â—â— continue 18. howers from his entering into the Garden after supper to the ending of his life the next day at 3. of the clocke after noone Howe vaine is this consequence how false are these sayings and contrary to Scripture in all the circumstances But you say b Pa. 30. the cause coÌ„tinuing the effect could not cease The Cause was Gods leaving his weake nature in these sorrowes at somtimes more at sometimes lesse also he is to be thought to reveale and inflict the very sorrowes not alwayes in one tenor but sometime more sometime lesse finally his Manhood apprehended these arrowes of Gods wrath sometime more suddainly then at other times These were the true causes of his Astonishment but these continued not 18. howers togeather therefore the effect was not to coÌ„tinue still in that maner on him Then you c Pag. 29 say in the vttering of these wordes the Cup did passe from him by my owne confession I coÌ„fesse it not But I confesse his extreame astonishment did even quickly passe from him yet the sense and tast of that Cup might continue longer in such a maner and measure as he was better inabled by his Deitie to sustaine it Now what ill is there in these conceites I pray you What folly is there in them Against vs heerein you doe nothing els almoste in your large Treatise Iniuriouâ— sâ—eacheâ— but heape vp many and most false imputarions That we thinke Christ was in d Pag. â—â—â— 116. 1â—â— doubt and feare of Gods favour e Pag. 1â—â— destitute of faith hope love ioy forsaken of Gods favour grace Spirit that f Pag. â—â—â— he continued 18. howres togeather amazed as it were in a trance that he g Pag. â—â—â— vehemently and often strugled and strived in his prayers against the knowen will of God sought by all meanes to decline the worke for which he came into the world His flesh feared death though his Spirit submitted it self to the will of his heavenly Father h Pag. â—â— We put Christ besides him selfe when it pleaseth vs that he knew not what he prayed nor prayed in faith Your L. if you had reasons but any thing probable wanteth not outward meanes enough to commend your cause you neede not to devise against vs such grosse and base vntruths But it bewrayeth how desperat your matter is which can not come foorth nor make any shew to the world without such proppes to leane on Besides that which heere in severall places wee haue declared to the coÌ„trary in our i Pag. 5â— 70. 71. former Treatise we shewed our minde though briefly yet sufficientlie against these iniurious speaches How you seeme to avouch that Christ was by God forsaken in a Body 〈◊〉 114.116 â—â—2 103 â—â—ore 〈◊〉 but not in b Soule let them declare that can For my part I know not your secret therein I am sure no man can in trueth maintaine it As for c Ambrosâ— 114. â—â—â—e pag. 113. 128. 1â—0 〈◊〉 1. of yeâ—â—â—ion See â—â—â—re pag. you wrest him as you did Hilary c d before After this you are bold and aske if e any dare doubt of your doctrine Yea surely I dare not but doubt of it Also we have seene that the publike f authorised doctrine in England dareth to doubt of it Which maketh Christes putting him selfe betweene Gods Wrath and our sinnes a parte divers from his bodily death on the Crosse â—â—â—ore pag. â— yet the extreamest part of his Passion See also other g authorised testimonies heereof But why may not any dare doubt of your doctrine Pet. 2. Because the Scripture saith h Christ suffered for vs. leaving vs an example that we should followe his steppes c. And this is very true also the godly doe followe his steppes heerein many times as I i shewed you before â—at 1. pa. heere 120.129 Some are conformable in some measure with Christe even in these his sufferings Then k you say we ought to be glad and reioyce thereof I answer we ought to
turne them to ioy gladnes though not properly to be glad of them Nay we ought most instantly to pray against them No affliction at all is good in it owne nature and the greatest of all is good to Gods children by his grace So that touching this vse of them therein wee are to reioyce even when we are most bruized and pearced in our soules with the terrours of God Lastlie 〈◊〉 134. l you frame an obiection against your selfe which you neither doe nor can answer Christs soule might feele the tormentes of Hell for the time without any distrust or doubting of his salvation or our redemption You pretend thïs answer The essentiall tormentes of Hell are the absolute losse of Gods kingdom everlastingly and that m Eternall continuance is of the nature and substance of Hell But we shew you â— 53 although the damned are in Hell torments everlastingly and of necessitie so must bee yet eternall continuance in them and to feele them but for a time are indeed but Circumstances not of the essence or nature of Hell tormentes Gods proper and extreame wrath only and his sharpest vengeance for sinne is the essence or nature of Hell paines Which against the Damned indeed is eternall and vnsatisfyable but lighting on Christ it was not eternall because it was satisfyable Wherefore it is plaine that you have answered in effect nothing to your owne obiectioÌ„ Thus far we have gone shewing that we a Pag. 2 neither extende the cause of Christes Agonie to far in affirming it to have com of most bitter extreame Paines which he suffred properly for our sinns neither that we coÌ„tinue it to long in affirming that he felt the same most extreamely on the Crosse Contrariwise that you curtaile it to short when you say it was no more but b Pag. 1 290. Devotion to God and Compassion to men also that Christes Agonie touched him c Pa. 11â— not at all on the Crosse So that d Before 90.91.116 our Maine argument which you would haue frustrated standeth firme and good still that seeing his Agonies Paines and Feares were such so great as the Scripture by the effects signes sheweth that they were both before his death and at his death therefore they were more then meere bodily paines and more then meere bodily death much lesse were his Holy and Religious affections the proper and speciall Cause thereof But of necessity they were the Paines proceeding from the infinit and sharpe Iustice of God which Christ truly suffered in his Spirit and Soule and Body After this a Pag 3â— Touchiâ—â— Death oâ—â—â— Soule you set vehemently against my last argument That Christ suffered in some sorte the death of the Soule First if wee should speake strictly after the maner of Death in the Body then no man is so mad or foolish as to say that any mans Soul can dye at all that is want life and sense as a dead body doth Thus the very damned soules in Hell suffer not death But such a death as immortall soules are subiect subiect vnto is Gods separation froÌ„ them And this is 2. folde The 1. death and the 2. death as the Scripture speaketh The 1. is the separation of them from Gods grace which is in this life by sinne raigning in them The 2. death is Gods leaving them in the feeling of the most sharpe and most vehemeÌ„t paines inflicted by Gods iustice for sinne This last kind of death is so called and named in many places of b Ezek. Gen. 2â— Rom. 6â— 2. Cor. 3.7.5.20 aâ— 1. Ioh. 17. Scripture It hath also a double consideration First ordinarily and commonly it belongeth only to the Damned for their owne inherent sinne where withall are the ordinary Accidents and coÌ„comitants togeather Desperation induration blaspheming vtter darkenes c. with Perpetuitie of punishment and that locally in Hell In this sense the Fathers generally do take it where they deny that Christ suffered the death of the Soule and so likewise do we Secondly The death of the soule or the 2. death may be extraordinarily and singularly considered namely to imply no more but simply the very nature and essense of it 〈◊〉 Death the Soule â—â—rist tasted That is the feeling of most deadly infinit paines inflicted by God himselfe in his proper iustice for sinne all sense also of his comfortable presense being taken away This is a Death to the Soul â—â—g 113. â—ag 135. 6. â—ag 112. 3. as * before we have shewed according to this sense the Scriptures †Fathers before noted may rightly be vnderstood not to deny it in Christ so that this kind of Death in the soule but none other we may safely say Christ did suffer for our sinne imputed to him Moreover let it be observed that if wee had no proofes at all in Scripture for this point yet our Question is fully proved coÌ„firmed notwithstanding by those other sufficient pregnant proofes alleaged iustified before For it is be to noted that no man setteth the questioÌ„ in these termes That Christ dyed in his soule neither doe we at all vse them very much in speaking of this matter We do only when some speciall occasion draweth it from vs neither then do we vtter it in those termes but with vsing some further declaration of our minde The reason of this warynes is because we are not ignorant how ambiguous the phrase is and how apt to be mistaken specially where men list to cavill Also people vntaught and vnsetled in construing the scriptures sense do quickly take offense at thinges which they ought better to digest So that you doe very iniuriously to grate still one this phrase of speach and to straine it to the worst as you do as if by no meanes it could beare any good sense and as if we built our maine Assertion onely heerevpon Which in truth is nothing so The same also doe we affirme touching our vsing in this matter the phrase of Christs suffering Hell paines Both these phrases are but seldome and respectively vsed by vs. Howbeit we deny not but that both these phrases may be well and rightly applyed vnto Christ on occasion â—â—g 16. 52. â—â— 113. as * before is observed may both serve truly and most emphatically to expresse the infinitnes of the paines and sorrowes of his suffering for vs. Yea this very phrase of death extended in Christ further then to his meere bodily dying hath I doubt not expresse ground in the Scripture and therefore may the better be vsed soberly admitted charitably You will aske where is there any scripture Proofes that Christe suffered any other death then that meerely of his body I answer First consider well that to the c Hebr. â—ebr 5.7 Hee offered vp prayers and supplications with strong crying teares to him that was able to save him from death It is not possible that this Death heere should be
his meere bodily Death which he so wofully and impotently feared as I haue before sufficiently coÌ„firmed Therefore it was the death of the soule the 2. Death which heere is vnderstood to have thus mightily afflicted Christ Which also your own selfe do d Pag. â—â— fully grant and affirme with me Yea you affirme further then we doe or then the truth is or possibly can be You say Christ heere thus feared Eternall death and Everlasting damnation What a speach is this Christ could not possibly feare in such wofull maner that which he perfitly knew should never come neere him But he perfitly knew that eternall Death and the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction should never touch him He knew and saw that this by Gods almighty and vnchangeable Decree was set further from him then the East is from the West yea then Hell is from HeaveÌ„ Therefore he could not by any meanes possibly feare eternall death nor pray in such sort against it Againe that which he feared and so pitifully prayed against was that which he knew was by God e Iohn 12 ordayned for him Yea Feare alwayes is of that which is to come But Eternall death was not by God ordayned for him that was “ Which Christ 〈◊〉 right wâ— not to come vnto him Therfore it was not Eternall death which he so feared Finally when in the Garden he prayed against that Cup which he feared that it might passe from him there he yeeldeth and submitteth himselfe presently to the vndergoing of it But it were I know not what to say that Christ did ever yeeld and submit himselfe to vndergo Eternall death or to tast the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction Therefore it was not this that he feared heere prayed against And yet it was I grant the Death of the Soule or the 2. Death that is simply the essense thereof Gods withdrawing himselfe from him in the Paines and torments thereof This onely it was He suffer that deatâ— which he feared not the eternity thereof nor sinfull concomitants which he thus feared And this for the infinitnes of it naturally he could not but feare yea and that so extreamely also he feared f â—ôzein for him selfe as knowing it to be ordayned for him So that hence it followeth invincibly that Christ in deed suffered sith he thus feared more then the meere bodily Death even the Death of the soule For he could not I say thus * Much yeeld to iâ— he did sâ—â—ing Thy â—â—â—don feare but he must needs know that it was to come or might com vnto him â—wed furâ—â— before 131.132 if he but knew that it might come then it * certainly did come vnto him at one time or other in his Passion before heâ— left the world See to the Hebr. g Christ abolished through death him that had the power of death that is the Divell and so delivered all them which for feare of death were all their life time subiect to bondage â—â—b 2.14 Heere I see no reason in the world but that the Apostle by â—his often repeating of death and by mutuall referring of it in one place as it were to the other doth vnderstand signifie one and the same death altogeather But it is the death of the Soule which the Divell hath the power and execution of also the death of the soule chiefly sinful men were held in feare of all their life long It followeth then I suppose that even through this death of the Soule Christ abolished the Divell and deliveted his children Specially seeing there is no enormity nor impossibilitie heerein Against this you haue no reason at all but wordes and wrestings and vaine ostentation of Fathers none of them all denying our sense Third it seemeth also that Peter teacheth this same Pet. 3.18 saying k Christ in his suffering was don to death in the Flesh but made alive by the Spirit Where Death may be very well referred both to the Soule and Body of Christ Because the text heere speaketh as I iudge of the whole and entire sufferings of Christ And it is manifest by that before that Christ did suffer not in his body only but properly and immediatly also in his Soule we haue seene also that the * phrase of Death 〈◊〉 135.136 or Dying may in a good sense be applyed even to Christes Soule Againe this word Flesh it seemeth can not heere in this place be vnderstood to signifie onely the Body of Christ but even both partes of his Humane nature thar is the reasonable Soule and the body My reason is because wheresoever in scripture the Flesh and the Spirit are noted oppositly togeather in Christ â—â—m 1.3 4. â—im 3.16 â—oh 4.2 〈◊〉 1.14 â—or 5.7 â—4 1.4.1 â—â—g 320. there the i Flesh signifieth alwayes his whole Humanity even both partes thereof the Soule also not the Body only the Spirit signifieth his Deity or Divine power Now what have you against this Nothing of waight but floutes and mockes that k this observation is made out of the hinder partâ— of my head c. But what pretend you against it Some Scripture palpably abused First Mathew where Christ speaketh of his Disciples that their Spirit their inward regenerat man was ready to watch â—ath 26. but their Flesh their corrupt nature was weak sluggish What is this to Christes Flesh and Spirit Thinke you that Christs Soule was willing to suffer as God had appointed but that his Flesh resisted Verily so you seeme heere to vnderstand An vntrâ—â— conceit and it is as likely as your applying of Flesh and Spirit to Christ in your pag. 104. Then a Luk. 2. Luke where both Spirit and Flesh are not intended of Christ as our observation before requireth but only the Flesh Then the Romanes where I affirme that b Rom. Flesh signifieth the whole Manhood of Christ according to the which he came from David even as well as SalomoÌ„ or Nathan did who were Davids sonnes in their entire and perfit nature So likewise Christe was kinne to the Iewes according to his c Rom. 9 whole Humanitie aswel as d ver 3. Paul was And heere Paul meaneth him selfe to be kinne to them according to Nature wholly that only by Regeneration in the Gospell he was differing from them Now Nature opposed to Grace and regeneration hath reference both to Soule and Body in a man Howsoever the Soule cometh in Generation that is not heere considered neither is it necessarily to the purpose Which difficulty also your selfe haue vtterly * Pag. 2â— renouÌ„ced before to make it any argument for you in this matter Thus yet the Flesh and the Spirit thus opposed heere in Christ shall signifie the whole Manhood and Godhead in him Further that which e Pa. 32 you bring out of the f 2. Corâ— Corinthians compared with this in Peter doeth most fitlie and clearely open and confirme the
same Hee was crucified touching his infirmitie but liveth by the power of God His infirmitie the text heere nameth Metonimically vnderstanding in Christ that in which his infirmities were Now his Soule had infirmities of suffering in it as well as his body Therefore his Soule also is vnderstood heere that it was Crucifyed and dyed that is according to the condicion thereof as likewise his body according to the condicion thereof And thus that which Paul calleth infirmitie Peter calleth Flesh and that which Paul calleth the power of God Peter calleth the Spirit That is his Deitie is set oppositly in both these places to his whole Humanitie even to body and soule Aug. de 4.13 To which purpose that place also to the “ Rom. Romanes doth serve where the like opposition is found as I have shewed betwene the Flesh and the Spirit in Christ that is his Manhood and Godhead Other reasons also * Treat 137 1â— I haue noted serving well heerevnto as the 4 5 and 6. but I omit to rehearse them againe For it seemeth your selfe agreeth with vs in them â—â—g 324. holding a expresly that the Spirit heere in Peter is the Deitie of Christ according to Austins iudgement Now this being granted and acknowledged that the Spirit heere signifieth Christes Godhead how can it be likely but that the other opposit part the Flesh must needes import his whole and intire Manhood Verily thus it seemeth most plaine that Peter heere distributeth the whole and absolute person both God and Man into these Natures the Flesh and the Spirit Wherfore I can not thinke but that the Apostle heere vnderstandeth by Flesh the whole and intire Manhood of Christ even his Soule and his body Now this being so then it followeth by the text that Christ in his Passion was don to death both in Soule Pag. 320. body Heere you obiect that thus I make all the attributes of the body common to the Soule Nay forsooth that I doe not Nor yet this attribute of Dying vnderstood in such sort and maner as the Body properly dyeth that is to become without life and sense I ascribe Death to both but yet according to the divers condicion and state of both â—reat 1. Pâ—g 78. And thus you might vnderstand my b meaning to be where I say it is absurd false that Christ was made aliue in his Humane Soule that is it neither lost nor recovered life and sense so as his body did â—â—â—e before 〈◊〉 135 136 Howbeit as Death is oftentymes attributed to mens soules in the c Scripture that is the feeling of the extreame wrath of God and the punishment for sinne so d I make Death commoÌ„ both to Christes Soule and body â—â—eat 1. â—â—g 79. even to his whole and intire humane Nature Which if you do not acknowledge the shame of ab surditirie and coÌ„trarietie which in your fancy e you accuse me of that Christes Soule dyed and dyed not â—â—g 322. â—â—3 will sit neerer to you theÌ„ to me Also in such a sense I deny not but Christ may be said that he was quickened in the Spirit that is refreshed and comforted againe in his Soule and restored from that bottomles gulfe of sorrowes to the lively feeling of heavenly ioyes and glory which for a season he had no sense of at all Howbeit though this sense bee a true quickening in his Soule yet I deny that heere in this place of Peter it can be translated quickened in the Spirit meaning the Soule because Spirit heere in this opposition is set indeed for the Deitie of Christ â—â—â—d you with â—â—â—stin doe â—â—sent * as before I have shewed Thus the matter I hope is cleere to reasonable men that Christes Soule even according to the Scripture phrase may be said in some sorte to have tasted and suffered Death that is the extreamest feelings of Gods wrath for sinne and the most vehement paines of the damned though not as the damned doe in respect of the Accidents and concomitants of their ordinary damnation but in a singular maner and extraordinarie way as became the sonne of God and a sinles man yet a very maÌ„ being our Redeemer Now besides the matter you “ Pag. 3 gird at me in divers places as where I say The Death of the Soule is such Paines and sufferings of Gods wrath as allwayes accompanie them that are separated from the grace and love of God Forfooth it is true they are alwayes wicked whom these Paines doe accompanie ordinarily They came vpon Christ extraordinarilie as in a Treat â— pag. 77. this place I expresly noted That was therfore my meaning here if you would haue seene it In another place also b Pag. 33. you know that I say Hell as I take it that is such paines of Gods wrath is * Treat 1 pag. 80. sometime found in this life Thus then you might haue vnderstood my former wordes and not that the tormentes of Hell doe alwayes accompanie the wicked in this life I pray conceave not my meaning against my expresse wordes Againe c Pag 31â— you pretende to haue much against me where I say The feeling of the sorrowes of Gods wrath due to sinne in a broken and contrite heart is indeed the only true and perfitly accepted sacrifice to God True so I said and againe I say it What see you amisse in it Then vnhappy men are the godly which are at any time free from the paines of the damned To what purpose is this I speake of Christs Sacrifice I pray is any other Sacrifice perfitly accepted or a Sacrifice at all but Secondarily that is in and by Christes Sacrifice They are not His Sacrifice then is the onely true Sacrifice and perfitly accepted to God All others are imperfit and accepted not in them selues but only in and by Christ Thus your triumphes before the victorie come to nothing but blastes of vanitie But Augustin †Pag. 32 doth flatly deny that this text can be thus vnderstood or that Christes Soule might dy Austin d Epist 9â— denyeth that Christ suffied any paines of damnation locally in Hell after his death as it seemeth some helde about his time whoÌ„ here he laboureth to confute So that he meaneth to reprove onely the e See besâ—â—â— pag 139 1st sense of the Death of the Soule in him viz. that he suffred it not Ordinarily after the maner of other men nor any way locally Hâ— hath no nâ—cessarie cause to speak of the 2. sense thereof how the Soule may be said to suffer death Extraordinarily for sinne imputed only neither doeth he speake against that in Christ Nay according to Austins owne Definition of the Soules Dying it will easily appeare that Christes Soule may be said to have suffered some kinde of Death de verh 〈◊〉 Ser â—0 〈◊〉 Trin. 4. Saith he a Moritur anima si recedit Deus and b Mors est spiritûs deseri Ã
Deo The Death of the Soule is Gods Forsaking of it â—â—fore pag. â— 113. â— 108. 113 â— 134. But the Scripture saith God did leave him or forsake him for a season yea the Fathers also c agree fully therevnto the maner how d I have shewed before Therefore by Austins definition largly and rightly taken Christ may be said in some sense to haue dyed in Soule Howbeit though the Fathers doe graunt the thing in effect as I have shewed yet I acknowledge they doe deny this phrase generally and so doeth Austin in this place But thereabout we never made question this is no parte of our matter It may bee even for the same cause they shunned it for which we also doe vse it very rarely and warily as before I observed Pag 136. And let this be the Answere touching all your Fathers and Councells which you bring aboundantlie heere and there about this point of the Soules death Though peradventure some of them may seeme to insinuat even this very phrase touching Christ sometyme as in some I touched before Where you say â—â—g 317. †Aske the simplest child that is Catechized in my charge if I have any what death Christ dyed for vs and hee will answer me out of his Creed Christ was Crucified Dead Buried It is true But our authorized Catechisme published by M. Nowel and the Homily i sheweth the meaning heereof to be 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 67 117.â— that Christ suffered far more sharply theÌ„ meere bodily Death even the infinit paines of Gods wrath in his soul which I pointed you vnto k before but you fairly leape it over â—â—eat 1. pa. â— as also the Archb. speciall allowance with others of M. Now. Catechisme as being fully grounded on the word of God contayning the very doctrine of the Church of England Now to this effect the youths in my charge being asked would have answered surely For indeed such a charge in London I had I thank God wherin I hope I was faithfull according to my power might have coÌ„tinued had not your il seasoned teaching so contrary to the established doctrine in Englande burst foorth a You say â—ag 325. â—â—a 53.12 â—r hee powâ—â—◠〈◊〉 I should have don well to have laid that downe for a shew which is written in Esay b He c laid downe his Soule vnto death verily if I had it would have made som shew Considering that d Pa. â—6 you earnestly affirme that this word signifieth Soule or Spirit in a proper sense Also how resolute you are forbidding to e Pag. 1â— divert from the native proper significations of words but when the letter impugneth the groundes of Christian faith and charity This considered surely that in Esay maketh some shew indeede that Christ submitted and humbled and afflicted even his Soule to Death The rather if we note that which followeth He was counted with the sinners and bare the sinne of many That is he was punished by God as the sinners are f See besâ—â— pag. 76. punished and was not by the Iewes onely counted among Theeves But chiefly considering withall that also before g Isa 53. â— He made his soule a sinne offering Heere you must remember †Your pa. â— we shall leave nothing sound sure in Gods word if we may avoid all thinges by figures that please not our humours Therefore you must needes grant that Gods worde heere maketh Christs Soule to be †sacrificed for our sinne And we desire no other death of the Soule We deny not but this phrase AnimaÌ„ pâ—nere is to lay downe the life and in divers places signifieth no more then simply to Dy both concerning Christ and other men as you observe pag. 70. Yet this is no necessary reason that heere in J say the Soule should be taken figuratively for the Life onely the rather seeing heere the text precisely setteth down the great perfit worke of our RedemptioÌ„ And to take it as we do literally impugneth no ground at all of faith or Charity The like peradventure may bee affirmed also of that in Mathew h Mar 2â—â— The sonne of man came not to be served but to serve and to give his soule a ransom for many although the translatours commonly turne it his life But I wil not strive about these phrases Aust hath not a word against vs in that great place which i Pag. 32â— you cite his whole argumeÌ„t there being to another purpose The Iewes slew only the flesh of Christ and yet it is true that they slew Christ Who doubteth this Also where you thinke those words to be so k Pag. 327â— plaine and expresse as may be spoken so effectuall as Pauls heart could invent or his toung vtter that Christ reconciled vs to God in the body of his flesh through death we have answered you †Pag. 45. â— before As for al your other discourse heere against me it is as every where almost nothing but revilings and reproches and bitter skoffes Yet you say l Pag 108. â— you have not learned nor vsed to give reviling speaches Have you not learned it Is it then naturall vnto you Nay you meane m Pag. 264â— these are Fatherly Warnings and admonitions If your Fatherly admonitions are such what are your Lordly rebukes If these bee your Bishoply blessinges what are your Cursings But I am to blame heerein standeth not the tryall of our quaestion As for all thâ—se hogepots as n 〈◊〉 3â—8 you call them which you make of my wordes they are nothing but your owne either wilfull writhings or vncharitable surmises as by every particular in then places may be seene Finally that is not true where you say o 〈◊〉 330. Flesh doth often signifie the soule in vs. It signifieth often the whole Manhood togither in vs and so it may and doth in Christ aswell Also it signifieth in vs many times our whole and intire corrupt nature both in body and soule so it never signifieth in Christ And heere I desire the reader to change a word or two in my former Treatise Note â—reat 1. pa. â—6 lin 2. â—â—d lin 7. â— Cor. 7.1 for p allwayes to set vsually and for q a man to set Christ. Because since I find that Flesh and Spirit togeather applyed vnto men doe r once signifie meerely the Body and Soule which then I thought every where did signifie in vs our corrupt and regenerat man Which oversight the Bishop spyeth not but in this place coÌ„firmeth indeed Finally to make an ende with your Fathers and Councels it is strang that you thus vainly boast of them 〈◊〉 135.327 saying they are a all wholy for you for this 1400. yeares space I have shewed before that your large claime proveth a very short gaine For in substance and full effect they are evideÌ„tly and generally against you and for vs. As for their denying that Christ Dyed in his Soule I
b have answered to that before â—ag 135. â—6 142. Further where you bring them in many places saying by his bloud only he redeemed vs and he suffered only in his Body Fathers 〈◊〉 handled they are abused by you wonderfully Not in their words but in their meaning For they striving against Arians and such other Haeretikes who would have Christs Deity to take part in his sufferings for our redemption â—ee before 〈◊〉 111.113 â—4 c. so consequently would prove it inferior to the Father the godly Ancient Writers do heerevpon say he suffered satisfyed for vs only in his body in his flesh c not excluding the proper immediat sufferinges of his Spirit nor any passible part of his Manhood but onely his Godhead against those Haeretikes shewing thus also that no other Creatuâ—e besides him or with him satisfyed any way for vs altogeather after the Apostles like phrase in many places Let the Authors themselves be viewed if you thinke I affirme of them falsly Tertullian and Cyrill will give a tast heereof for all the rest Tertullians c Pag. 3 â— wordes d Contr. â— id est carnem thas is to say Christs flesh are expresly opposed to his Deity not to his Soul so that evidently he meaneth thereby his whole and intire passible Manhood If hee had meant to exclude any parte or faculty of his Soule from suffering as he doth his Godhead he had confirmed that Haeresy against which he striveth as f before I noted e Pag. 1â— Also it seemes he yeeldeth the name of Death to this suffering of Christes whole Manhood in saying Quod vnctum est mortuum ostendit that Dyed which receaved the Annoynting For I hope his spirit was Annointed with the Holy Ghost aswell as his Flesh And he saith thus as indefinitly so also by way of oppositioÌ„ to his Deity as I said therefore he meaneth the whole Manhood dyed Howbeit in what sort this might be I shewed * pag. 113â— 135. 136â— before My false traÌ„slating of him which you note is not worth the noting But you doe worse in false placing those his last rehearsed words for advantage in Tertull. they are vsed more generally in their owne place coming long before those words after which you set them As for that Denique posuit spirituÌ„ c. it sheweth that Christs bodily death also but not only came by reason of Gods forsaking and separating from him For before we saw how Tertull. expresly attributeth Gods DerelectioÌ„ both to his * Haec vâ—â—â— animae poris soule body on the Crosse though you grudg thereat Thus I say he excepteth only his Godhead from Dereliction and Suffering c. Cyrill also even in that book which you cite for you sheweth that he excludeth but Christs Deity though he mention only his suffering in Flesh †Ad Reg lib. 1. Carne passum dicit docens patiendi ineffabilem naturam a passionibus alienam Deus igitur Christus Divinè quidem impassibilis passibilis secundum carnem He excludeth only the Deity from suffering when he saith hee suffered in his Flesh In a word so do all the rest as h Pag. 1â— before is partly noted Against Nestorius i Pag. 33â— they affirme the vnion of Christes Natures with preserving the properties of each They therefore hold not his only bodily sufferings Is this then your great boast of all the Fathers and Councells Nay are they well vsed at your hands to be thus drawn cleane from their purpose to an opinion which they never thought of Is this good dealing towards Gods people to tell them that the Fathers generally teach the only bodily sufferings of Christ and deny our Assertion of his Soules peculiar suffering â—â—efore 47.48.66.71.88.112 which * they iustifie confirme indeed Yea this 〈◊〉 the profit that comes by ordinary slanting with Fathers which vse many do frequent in these dayes Think they if the scriptures alone suffice not for all thinges in Religion that the Fathers will suffice Or if the Fathers make a sense vpon some text that therefore this must be the right meaning alwayes Or if the Scriptures may be wrested by subtile heades that yet the Fathers cannot Or that Gods people may sooner see and finde when the Fathers are abused then when the Scriptures are It is great pity that men are yea wil be so deceaved with vaine shews Let vs in Gods name content our selves in handling matters of Religion onely with Gods al sufficient worde vnles where the importunity of an Adversary forceth vs. Otherwise let vs spare the Authority of men in Gods matters to them that make an Idoll of it Finally if in this case we were to looke after any man surely we have more cause to regard our later faithfull Teachers rather then those of old Who being equall with the best of them in any of the excellent graces of Gods spirit which hee vseth to bestow on his servants for the edifying of the Church yet heerein these have advantage of the former that they were directly provoked occasioned to study and sift out this question against the Papists which the Ancients were not occasioned to do After â—ag 341. a you set your self to prove that in Hell there is materiall fire But it seemeth you are now almost afraid so to call it yet b you call it true fire â—ag 343. Which also we vtterly deny All your proofes such as they are runne to prove corporall and materiall fire yet eternall Except your Scriptures which vtterly prove nothing at all for they shew no more any corporall or materiall or true fire to be now in Hell then a corporall worme materiall brimston and much wood true chaines Which you say is a sleeveles obiection but neither your selfe nor Austin whom you cite against it doth any where answer it Yea Austin thinketh that incorporall spirits shal be fastened to corporall fire But he saith not that now they are which only is our question or els nothing For my parte I see no reason to believe that now there is corporall fire in Hell whatsoever there shal be heereafter when Bodies also shal be there vnited and tormented with the Soules Againe Austin heere doth not prove that there shal be such fire hee only sheweth the maner how it may be so heereafter if God will Now if all your reason be the power of God only then aswel you may prove that the sky is fallen For as touching Gods will heerein you name it indeed but you shew it no where nor seeme to shew it All the rest say nothing further nor indeed so far as Austin Yet you thinke it may be called a Pag. â—â— a true created fire That no Christian ever doubted of if you meane that it is a true creature If you meane simply that it is true fire that still we deny And me thinks you should not care for corporall fire
now in Hell seeing you seeme to belieue no torments for Damned soules save only at the Resurrection For thus you reason b Pag. 25 As the Body hath ben the instrument of the Soules pleasure in sinne so it shal be of hir paine c Pag. 20â— But all provocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from her body all acts of sinne she committeth by her body Therefore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the Soule only by the Body Or Therefore all the Soules paine for sinne both temporally eternally is by the Body This is your owne reason which being true why should you care for corporall fire in Hell before the last iudgment Your striving to a Pag. 34â— confute my allegations of Fathers I hope I have refuted sufficiently before And then b Pag. 35 Sir Refuter endeth as be began with egregious lyes What lyes began he with and with what doth he end In the begining our lyes have proved tales of truth and in the end your wordes will prove iniurious at least I said that not som or the most or best but even all every one both Churches Writers in the world who are Protestants teach as we do except only your selfe or happily som after you since the year 1597. What ly is there in al this Why name you not in al the world one man of those whom we call Protestants of your minde that it may appeare who deserveth such rebukes Nay in this being the very point of the matter you are silent in revilings outcryes and accusations you exceed Where I avouch that c Treat â— pag 8â— only the hoatest and cunningest Papists Iesuits Priests Fryars have alwayes vntill this day had this controversie with all Protestants and all Protestants against them namely Bellarmin Campian English Rhemists c. To al this scanalous suspicious argument you reply not a syllable What shall we thinke of such doctrine which in this learned age hath none but such defenders And yet among the Papists I noted 2 Cusanus and Ferus as liking of the Protestants doctrine heerein which also they do in some other matters Now these 2. and only these though more there are c you cite at large 〈◊〉 140.141 whose wordes indeede especially the Fryars seeme excessive But our owne most worthy and learned Teachers d M. Fulke â—rea 1. p. 88 M. Deering M. Whitakers which against you I alleaged you vouchsafe not a looke towards them Nor to M. Nowels Catechisme nor to the Synod authorising it â—efore pag. 42. nor to the Archb great * approbation thereof Not to our Common Bibles note authorised publikly to be read thorough out England Only against my alleaging of our Homilyes e you take exception Pag 355. but I trust I have before fully and cleerely defended them to bee for vs and against you Neither doeth any such matter appeare in them as f you avouch Pag. 136. Thus then I end our 1. Question being sorry that I have ben so long But I trust the friendly Reader will pardon me considering how I have ben occasioned therevnto A brief Collection containing the whole effect of our Doctrine before delivered brought into 4. Assertions God himselfe in his Iustice properly punished Christ for our sinnes See pag. 8. 9. 75. 82. Christ even as other men consisted of a perfit Humane immortall Spirit and a mortall living Body and so was by nature capable of suffering sorrows for sinne from Gods hand aswell in his Spirit peculiarly and properly as also in his Soule and Body togeather sith other men do thus suffer for sinne pag. 8. 48 52. 61. 74. Gods exact and immutable Iustice spared his Sonne in nothing but did punish him in all severity as he punisheth sinners I meane Hee punished him in All his partes of nature apt to suffer that is in his Spirit peculiarly and properly and in his Soule and Body togeather also Againe God punished him with all the Whole Generall Curse not with all the particular Curses and punishments with the Generall Curse in all the whole Nature and substance of it not with all the Circumstances with all the meere Paine and Sorrow thereof not with the sinfull Adherents and concomitants in it pag. 8 13 74 86. Gods exact immutable Iustice spared not Christe in these Circumstances of Punishment with he suffered not For either in exact Iustice he could not or necessarily hee needed not to punish him so In exact Iustice he could not punish Christ in such respects as were simply and absolutly impossible It was simply impossible that any touch of Sinne should once come neere his person or Eternall suffering or all the Particular punishments in the world All which come not to any one man though Damned neither can come Finally that Christ should necessarily have suffered after this life or locally in Hell there was no cause seeing these are but meerâ— Circumstances of Gods Iust PunishmeÌ„t of sinne whether now or then whether heere or there These alter not the nature of Gods wrath which is the strength of Hell The whole substance nature of that Punishment he might feele in this life aswell as any parte God is able to inflict it aswel heere as heereafter The rather seeing Christ came and was sent of God Extraordinarily of purpose to suffer for sin all that he might suffer Thus then only in this life Christ might and did suffer all For so was Gods ordinance and will as it is plainly expressed vnto vs in his word Therefore so we professe and so we believe by the certaine rule of Gods word and the proportion of faith Christ shunned for our sake nothing which the Damned suffer except only Circumstances and Accidents impossible or vnnecessary not any Substantiall point of Gods Punishment decreed against sinue pag 13. 14. 16. 43. 66. 75. 87. 134. 135. That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule THe 2. part of our Controversie is this That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule Where note first Notes that we vnderstand Hell properly and locally as our common speach in English doth vsually take it for the very place of the Damned after this life Now against them that belieue Christes Soule did go down locally into Hell thus I reason Reasons gainst Châ—â— Descendiâ—â— locally is Hell First If there be a good and sound generall reason in Christian faith that Christes Soule leaving his Body ascended vp to Heaven and there remained till his Resurrection and if there be no speciall reason of authority to the contrary that his Soul now descended downward then surely every good Christian ought to believe that his Soule ascended to Heaven and descended not locally into Hell Two maâ—â— points to noted But both those former pointes are most true First There is a good sound generall reason in Christian
effect they are all one with Thanatos Death but that Thanatos belongeth properly to Bodyes Hades Sheol sometimes to Bodyes sometime to Soules of Men indifferently Yea sometime these 2. are applyed though more rarely to other things also which are in this visible world namely wheÌ„ they com to Destruction and No being any more as anon we shall better vnderstande Now let vs proceed and shew further even by the Scriptures first that Sheol and Hades are as I say more then once vsed for the generall condition of death wherein even iust mens soules are held or the mansion of soules departed aswell good as bad Then afterward the common consent of others will availe the more That a Psalm 4â— Psalme which intreateth wholy of Death of the impossibility to escape it of the power which it hath over the wicked whose ioy and pompe is only in this world in that it cutteth of all their hopes it endeth their pleasure and marreth all their bewty I say in this Psalme where all expresse circumstances do shew that the Prophet speaketh of this death not of Hell yet David heere saith * verse 1â— notwithstanding God shall deliver my soule from the power of Sheol that is death or the state of death when hee shall reoeave mee most mightily So Tremelius turneth it noting heere Davids hope of the Resurrection which I think he hath well vnderstood in this place Otherwise David might heere comfort himselfe in this that hee knew God would save him alive from this common death not alwayes as you friuolously obiect but oftentimes yea alwayes till he should enioy the Kingdome which indeed God did for him when he was neere death not seldome and when his enemies the wicked were caught therewith Againe that b Psal 8â— Psalme sheweth it also where it is thus written My Soule is filled with sorrowes and my life draweth neere to Sheol By his life he meaneth his soule the proper cause and fountayne of life in him which also in the first parte of the sentence hee expresly named As the manner of phrase in the Psalmes is in the 2. parte of the sentence commonly to speake of the same things that are vttered in the former but varying the termes That life heere should signifie the body distinctly from the soule there is no such likelyhood nor reason Indeed I deny not but life may signifie heere the whole person of man As in these â—esaide Psal â— 48. 49 â— 10 16. al â—116 8. in â—â—y many â—aces of scripâ—â—e besides and so may c nephesh the soule also very wel and then Sheol and Hades signifie not peculiarly and distinctly the Grave which only is for the carcase but the condition of the Whole maÌ„ after he hath no being in this world In which regard chose what sense you will either that nephesh and chai shall in all these places of the Psalmes before handled signifie strictly the soul as very fitly it may or the whole person of man consisting both of a soule and of a living body contrary to which estate Sheol and Hades is very often taken g That is if it â—re not strictly â—â—d peculiarly â—â—e habitation â—sâ—y Souls yet â—â—s the condiâ—ur of the whole â—son that is â—â—â—h of Soul â—â—dy separaâ—â— by Death â—ob 30.23 and d peradventure so it is vnderstood heere in these places In which sense Sheol Hades are far from signifying hell yea or heaven either yea or only and meerely the Grave but it signifieth destruction from out of this world no-being here any more as afore time to the whole person that is both to the Soule and to the Body And thus Sheol and Hades Iob resembleth to a house or Habitation where he nameth it †Beth mâ—gned lecol chai the habitation after this world appointed for every person or if you will for all living things The same also Iob wisheth and desireth of God to himselfe that God would hide him Bisheol in this world of the deceased â—ob 14.13 would give him terme till his wrath was overpast In another place he comforteth himselfe thinking quickly to enioye it saying †Jf I have any hope Sheol or Hades â—ob 17.13 the world of the deceased shal be my habitation He ioyneth therevnto also particularly the grave but as touching Sheol seeng Iob speaketh of it as his continuall habitation till the worldes end it cannot be meant only of the Grave for his body which indured but a very short time neither had his flesh any being at all after it was turned to very earth and wormes He speaketh heere therefore also of his soules continuing habitatioÌ„ or mansion in another world Gen. 37.35 because they â—â—ch dy their â—â—ons do fall â—â—vne according to the Latin â—â—tase cadere â—â—idere occuÌ„â—â— to Dy. And in greatest reason this is that which Iaacob meaneth when he saith He will goe downe mourning to his sonne iâ— Sheol That is He will mourne till he dy for this he meaneth by * going downe heere speaking of death And then he hopeth to enioye the societie of his deare sonne in soule For his body hee thought was devoured and digested in the bellies of wilde beasts therefore he would goe to the soule of his sonne in Sheol Or els vnderstanding heere the dissolution passage of his Whole person he may meane partly his going downe to the graue as touching his body and yet also the enioying of the societie of his deare sonne in Sheol which surely as J said could not bee in body but in soule Thus Sheol heere hath respect to the changed estate of Iacobs whole person dissolved and not to one parte thereof only his body but to his soule also and it hath respect likewise to the estate of his dead sonnes soule where this loving Father hoped againe to haue society with him not any where els without which he could not be comforted Albeit in another place it seemes hee limiteth Sheol to the graue only but that we doe so vnderstand by reason of the Circumstances a Gen. 42. you will bring my Gray Head with sorrow to the Grave But againe to follow our purpose Good Hezekiah also looked for Sheol to be his habitation likewise after this life I said saith “ Isay 38. â—â— 11 12. he I shall goe to the gates of Sheol the Land of the dead I shall not see the Lord in the Land of the living I shall see Man no more among the inhabitaÌ„ts of the world My habitation or Mansion is translated and removed from me as a sheapheards tent c. This heere cannot be the Grave nor Hell which he describeth For he thought he should theÌ„ have dyed and thus his habitation he thought should haue ben removed and translated from him that is I take it his body should be remoued from his soule which was the mansion or habitation of his soule while he lived but now he should
is to be considered who right according to all the rest saith e Soules departed from their Bodyes did go to Hades that is to an invisible place which in Latin we call Infernum And Ierome f Infernus is a place where the Soules are included either in rest or paines And Ruffinus vpoÌ„ g Descendit ad inferna giveth this sense Descendit in Mortem He submitted vnto Death All the rest which h you cite or can cite haue nothing contrary but rather consenting heerewith So that it is certaine by all the Fathers generally 1. That Hades and Sheol are taken for Death Noâ—â— the CoÌ„mon state of Death or the invisible world of the dead common to the Souls both of good and bad though their particular places were far separat and distinct 2. That Christ went not into Hell the place of the Damned as you holde but to the Habitation of the blessed deceased called also by them Abrahams bosome which we knowe and you also was indeed Heaven according to that worde of Christ “ Ioh. 16 16. I leave the Worlde and goe to the Father Which I have prooued further before pag. 149. 150. I doubt not but they erred generally as “ Pag. 21 your selfe also holdeth in thinking that this Habitation of the blessed Souls was beneath in the earth or that it was not heaven nevertheles this is the point wherein we agree and wherein they erred not and which I cite them for and which is directly against you that hades which also is sheol belonged to the Blessed soules deceased aswell as to the Damned and namely that Christes going to Hades was to go to be Blessed deceased Which in Latin also they called JnfernuÌ„ but so vnproperly and so vnaptly in respect of the truth that even this ill terme surely both sprang from error and began in them their error or confirmed and spread farther this error Now thus your vaine boasting of a Pag. 41 all the Fathers is but a bubble and that All the Fathers without exception do touch and teach Christes locall Descent to hell So that if you bee content as “ Pag. 41 you say to be tryed by all the Fathers Greeke and Latin they quite overthrow you notwithstanding your great words For the truth is they are all against you and with vs in such sort as I said Only Austin doubtingly and waveringly differeth from all the rest who somwhere seemeth to think that Inferi cannot be attributed to iust mens Soules departed For thus doubtingly he speaketh c Aug de 〈◊〉 ad liter ca. Illud me nondum invenisse confiteor c. I confesse I haue not yet found that Inferi are named where the iust mens Souls are at peace Yes surely the Ancientes named the places for all the deceased both good bad Inferos like as they named where both wicked and good do live in the world d Arnob. Psal 137. Superos And Austin if hee had marked it well might have founde even this which he saith hee found not in the Latin translation of the Scripture “ Psa 88. Lat. edit Quis est homo qui vivet c. What man is there that ever shall live and shall not see death Shall he deliver his Soule from the hande of Inferi that is Death For he can not heere vnderstand Inferi to bee the Grave because then the Soule must signifie the dead body which a you say is more then absurd â—â—g 168. Wherefore the Soule heere being taken properly for the Soule then Inferi is found applyed to iust mens Soules deceased as well as to the wicked which Augustin might have observed â—pist 57. 〈◊〉 civit Dei â— 15 Yea he him selfe b elswhere graunteth also that the iust in peace might be in inferis after death And heere he denyeth it but coldly waveringly Proinde vt dixi nondum inveni adhuc quaero nec mihi occurrit inferos alicubi in bono posuisse Scripturam Now this is Austins difference heerein let the Reader iudge Pag. 363. Before pa. 56. Pag. 175. if you say truely that c Austin iudicially and resolutely affirmeth it Or is it not rather as I call it his †CoÌ„iecturall inclination yea his only For d Fulgentius denyeth not inferos to the godly deceased nor that Christ was locally with them onely in inferis So that in saying He was where the wicked are tormented he meaneth that in respect of the CoÌ„mon place which in whole hee calleth infernum Thus then we may see that Austins differing heerein is to little purpose 1. Because it is contrary to all the auncient Fathers before him with him and since him 2. Because we must not esteeme his saying by the Latin Inferi but by the originall Sheol and Hades which are more against him as before I have shewed 3. Because it is waveringly delivered with doubt in him selfe yea contrary to him selfe as I have shewed 4. Because he secketh to maintaine it erroneously For he giveth this reason and end of Christes going to Hell the place of the Damned that he might deliver some of the damned sinners out of Hell torments quos esse solvendos occultâ suá iusticiâ iudicabat Which most strange conceit of his your selfe e doe confute rightly Pag. 199. But either graunt this end and reason to be true or els say his maine opinion is false also that Christ went thither feeing he maketh that the reason of this And why may not Austin erre as well in saying that he went to Hell after death as in saying that he went thither to loose out of paines such and such It seemeth Austin was carried into this conceit Vt neque frutrà illâ—c decendisse existimetur nulli â—orum prosuâ—urus qui ibi erant Epist 99. because hee could not imagine what f els Christ should doe in Hell and that he was there in deed he thought because he ghessed contrary to all antiquity besides that the meaning of inferi and hades could not be applyed to the estate of blessed soules after this life Which mistaking of his as also yours with him is plentifully convinced I hope before Wherein I desire the learned to iudge As for Austins opposing against this our sense of Hades saying In graecà linguâ origo nominis quo appellaÌ„tur inferi ex eo quòd nihil suave habeant resonare perhibetur It sheweth his mistaking more yea the very grounde of all his mistaking as I thinke First it appeareth by this that Austin had very litle knowledge in the Greek seeing hee thinketh that Hades should originally signify nihil suave nothing sweet I coniecture that he thinketh Hades is made of hedys sweet and α the Privative Wherein then he misseth much for hades in Greeke hath alwayes iôta written vnder The natur Hades which sheweth that in the true originall whence hades cometh there is the letter iôta expressed But in hedys sweet there is none The trueth is it cometh
from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to see and α the privative as all Graecians Plato Plutarch c. yea the Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian Ambrose c. do shewe and that it signifieth An invisible state after a visible being in this world and somtime Darknes or a place of darknes Not that the state of all the Dead generally was thought to be in darknes but because Death tooke them out of this cheerefull worlds light and covered them as it were with darknes and oblivion from the worlds sight and knowledge heere This etymologie of hades was most familiar and frequent with all Grecians with whom it seemes Austin was not much acquainted as by this his wide coniecture we may thinke Neither impute this I pray as arrogancie to me for so iudging of such a man I think all men will so iudge of him likewise and yet derogat nothing from his great desert in Gods Church Him self doth soberly acknowledge it of him selfe saying “ Contrâ—â— Peâ—il 2â— Ego quidem Graecae linguae perparùm assecutus sum propè nihil Truly J have but litle Greck yea almost none Neither would he heere have said perhibetur thus it is reported touching the Etymologie of Hades if he had preteÌ„ded any skill in that toung Yea Possidonius in his Life testifieth that he had no love to the Greeke language Besides many other argumentes heereof if it were likely that I wronged him in iudging thus of him Wherefore seeing it was thus no marvaile if Austin easily mistooke the proper right meaning of hades c then much sooner of Inferi for the reason * Pag. â— Treat 105. before noted Thus also he might readily imagin heervpon that Hades and Inferi in Scripture specially were no where applyed to blessed Soules Which oversight in him is much more pardonable then it can be in you who I doubt not in the languages want no skill if you would but sincerely iudge according to that you do vnderstand Yea and in comparison of my selfe I vnfainedly confesse that I suppose I haue not seene many bookes in the learned tounges which you are likely to have read and studied Nevertheles I am well assured that in the sense of these words Hades and Sheol you are greatly over hot and most of all in this vnsavoury opinioÌ„ coming therefrom that Christes soule after death went to Hell As I hope it hath hitherto well appeared Yet you will say Austin speaketh marveilous resolutely pist 99. that a None but an infidell will denie that Christes Soule was in inferis So he may well vnderstanding heere Jnferos to expresse Hades in Greeke for that is the Scripture in deed Which to denie were infidelitie But hee is no insidell that denieth inferos to be a fit Latin worde for Hades in Greck 〈◊〉 some have 〈◊〉 â—t simply 〈◊〉 the state 〈◊〉 cath pa. â—3 c. 〈◊〉 Graeca â—â—â—ua origo â—â—â—nis c. or * admitting the translation yet denyeth in English that Christ was in Hell After all yet I may not forget how Aust. heere would have in this coÌ„troversie the very nature proper Etymologie of Hades to be regarded and precisely followed notwithstanding that him self mistooke it much How then is it that you skornfully cal this indeavour touching the Hâ—brue Sheol b Rabbinicall Grammar observations â—â—g 153. and touching Hades in Greeke the Poets fantasticall imaginations In this therefore Austin also is not a litle against you Other exceptions of his touching the matter we shall afterwards consider togeather with yours Now I come from the Ancients to the later learned Writers that we may not neglect their iudgment in this question 〈◊〉 late Deâ—ors of the â—â—â—ll conâ—â—â— oâ—â— exâ—â—ion Who as they were generally freer from errour then those of olde for the most part so they testifie this point with me more cleeâ—ly more constantly then they Who were observed * before Yet because you let them go without as it were saluting them and as if they were not worthie belike that you should cast a looke on them 〈◊〉 cat 1. therefore they shal be noted once more that I may presse you with theÌ„ and that others at least wise may consider them better Bucer saith The Scripture no where speaketh of Hades or Infernum but as being common aswell to the blessed as to the damned 〈◊〉 in Mat. 〈◊〉 50. But Gehenna is proper only for the damned Againe In that we acknowledge that the Lord went down to Infernum we vnderstand that in his Soule he ioyned to the society of the soules of the dead Saints even as in his body hee was ioyned to their bodyes by Buriall P. Maâ—tyr a P Mart Symbo That Christ descended to Inferos or Hades signifieth nothing els but that he did vndergoe the same state as other souls do that depart this life Mollerus touching Sheol Hades and Infernum ascribed to Christ b Moller Psalm 1â— saith they do signifie but that Christ dyed and to be no more then as if he should say in the Psalme Therefore I reioyce because I know that although I dy yet I shall rise to life againe Bulinger speaking of Christ indiffereÌ„tly of the godly sheweth c Bullin D 1.7 8. that To go to Inferos is to go to Abrahams bosom that is into Heaven not into Hell and that Inferi and Hades do make difference only betweene the Living and the Dead nothing els Lavater saith d Lavat Eâ—ech caâ—â— 31.18 Hades in Greeke is a generall worde for the condition of the dead both in torments and in peace Tremellius saith e Annoâ—aâ— Psal 49. This Hebrew word Sheol doth signifie any station or state of the ' Dead in generall in very many places of Scripture and Hell it may sometime signifie but by a figure synecdoche Lastly Iunius in his note vpon Tertullian f Pag. 16 before rehearsed doth confirme all this most fully These men I thinke every wise and faithfull Christian will highly esteeme and prefer for their learning and namely for their skill in the toungâ—s for their syncerity and soundnes in Religion for their vnity and conseâ—â—â—n this point for their diligence faithfulnes and mâ—dâ—sty in all thinges The learâ— Heathen thoutâ— coÌ„our sense Hades The rather this sense of Hades we are to acknowledge because it hath ben the ancient phrase and common vse of speach before Christianity that this worde should signifie the generall state of Dâ—ath applyed even to the Soules both of the Blessed Damned Which sufficiently I shewed “ Treat 〈◊〉 97 98. before out of Plato Homer and others Yea no lesse I shewed also touching the Latin worde Inferi out of * Pa. 100 108. Cicero though this word naturally implyeth an error wch Hades doth not as before also I have declared What is your answer to this Forsooth I thinke because you have ben a master of Grammar you go about to teach Cicero Latin
which indeed he tasted to the full vpoÌ„ the Crosse As this Hebraisme the sorrowes of Death for a sorrowfull Death may emphatically signifie Also he may set these 2. the sorrowes of Death thus togeather as the Cause and the Effect signifying that by the violence of sorrowes and bitter paines which he suffered Death came vnto him tooke hold of him but it could not hold him fast because God himselfe loosed and dissolved it Thus then it can not follow by the text that there were sorrows now in hades where Christ was Further the very text implyeth that Christ was holden in this which was loosed from him I say he was holden but not a Kraâ—â— to bâ—â— fast â—â—enâ—â—â—â—ctoriâ—â— holdâ—â— holden fast Now he was not holden in sorrows for then he could not but have felt them after death which you will not affirme It was therefore Death which came by sorrows whereof he was holdeÌ„ but not held fast Againe it appeareth that Christ was in that which was loosed and rid from him Thou wilt not b enâ—aâ—sai leave my soule in hades I say he was now in the same wherein he was not left nor forsaken But he was in no sorrows at all now for then I think he should have †By 〈◊〉 Sorrowâ—â— felt of 〈◊〉 who aâ—â— them felt them he was in death and in the power thereof Therefore it was Death and the power thereof which was loosed at Christes resurrection not any present sorrowes and paines Neither is it the nature of Sorrowes to hold and hinder froÌ„ ResurrectioÌ„ but it is the strength of Death which doth that Thus c Pag. 1â— your collection out of Austin is against the true and plaine meaning of the text where you say that the sorrowes of death or hel were brokeÌ„ before Christ so he was never in theÌ„ but as the snares of hunters are broken ne teneant non quia tenuerunt before “ You 〈◊〉 the veâ—â— pa. 17â—â—â—ting â—hâ—â— it they tooke hold not after they had taken hold This is meerely imagined the text plainly meaneth an other loosing and dissolving namely of the power of Death as I said vnder the which Christs manhood even the Body also aswell as the Soule was now for a while held but not victoriously holden fast when Gods will was that he should rise againe Yet you mightily vrge how that it is d Pag. 1â—â— 196. Austins collection from this text I perceave your argument is from Austin and not from Peter as e Pag. 13â— 170. you pretend When you cite Scripture it is enough belike if any learned man do collect and frame an opinion from the text whether right or wrong You may easily see by that before that this collection of Austin hath no ground nor reason in the text but is indeed disproved by it Which may the sooner be conceaved if we note how he missed in his Translation of these words Thus he readeth solutis doloribus inferni August 〈◊〉 99. quia impossible erat teneri eum in illis whom God raised vp loosing the sorrows of hell because it was impossible that he should be held in them But the text hath Loosing the sorrowes of f Thanátâ—â— not Hadâ—â— which he 〈◊〉 staketh foâ— Hell death seeing it was impossible that he should be g holden fast or strongly holden h of it â—â—teisthai 〈◊〉 is more 〈◊〉 Austins â—â—ri to bee â—â—ply holdeÌ„â—â—â—p ' aâ—tou 〈◊〉 illis in 〈◊〉 sorrows 〈◊〉 hath it Thus it seemeth Austin looked not to the originall which he ought to have don specially nowe inquiring into and sifting out an obscure point of Christian faith as it appeareth that heere Austin doth In no wise ought he to have leaned to a faulty Translation as this is which he followeth Seeing therefore hee fayled in expressing the text no marvaile if his Collection froÌ„ it were wide Wherein also he is no where resolut nor perswaded indeed therfore a weak stay is he alone for our faith to rest on in this article Nay in the winding vp of that Epistle his godly modesty is registred for example to you and all Christian Ministers He gives vs good leave to refuse his collection and opinion heere so that we bring better reason Thus he saith Hec expositio verborum Petri cui displicet c. Now whether we bring reason to dissent from Austin heerein or no I referre it not to you to iudge who are to partiall but to every indifferent learned reader The rather for that mo Circumstances of this text doe make also affirmatively for vs. 〈◊〉 2.29 First a Peter plainly granteth all this matter of David aswell as of Christ except this that David was left therein even till this day as Christ was not But David was never in Hel. Therefore neither Christ was ever there whose figure David was Sec If it be altogeather heere from the purpose of Peter to speake to the ignorant and vnbeleeving Iewes of Christs Souls being in hell then there is no reason to take these wordes hades and sheol heere for hell But by the whole b 〈◊〉 â—2 Text it is evident Peter had no reason nor purpose to speak to the Iewes of Christs Souls being in hell Therefore I see not how hades sheol if they but might signifie otherwise can heere signifie hell His whole and direct purpose was to shew them of Christs Soules departure out of this world and of his Body lying dead in the grave as is the maner of other men when they dy and that he was from thence mightily c raysed vp againe to life 〈◊〉 31. more then other men were or can be Heere to speake to them of his Soules being in hell what were there in it 1. They being as I said ignorant vnbeleeving and stubborne 2. The thing being invisible strange and vncouth not subiect to sense and without all example of the like in the whole Law namely no Figure foreshaddowing any such matter to be fulfilled in him 3. He intending only in all this speach to shew them that this Iesus whom they had slaine was not now dead but risen againe why should he speake heere of hell Christes being there made nothing the more to shew his Resurrection which was the * ver â—â— only scope of his speach But being so disproportioned with then former faith and vnderstanding it would rather hinder then further them to the Christian faith Both these CircumstaÌ„ces I noted before but I see no answer to them Wherefore I hope they with the rest of my assertions heerein are firme and good Thus it appeareth that hades doth not every where signifie a Pa. 17â— 403. Hell in the New Testament We have seene that it hath no such meaning in the Actes which yet is the only Scripture whereon you build Alas how litle a shew serveth your turne when affection leadeth you This were sufficient to end this Argument but yet it shal be
the Apostle mentioneth the i Ephe. 2.2 Ayre and that k cap. 6.12 on high as being the place of Divels Notwithstanding far be it from me to affirme that hell certainly is not beneath Yet your pretended scripturs are meerely forced to prove it As in the chief I have shewed already In the rest it will appeare likewise anon Howbeit wheresoever Hel indeed is though we do grant in it to be locally in the earth beneath vs yet every Opposition betwene Shammajim the Heavens or Skyes and Sheol doth not signifie the opposition betweene Heaven and Hel. This you shall never be able to prove Shammajim thus placed signifieth the Skyes not the very place of Heavenly glory in the presense of God which in English we call Heaven And Sheol thus placed signifieth not Hell the place of torments but it is taken thus 2. wayes Somtime for †a vast and deepe Gulfe only or pit in the earth Abyssus the bottom wherof we know not Amos. 9.2 Iob. 11.8 Psa 139.8 So doe a many of your places meane which you draw and wrest to signifie Hell Somtime for Ruine and Destruction or Abolishing of any visible Creatures from hence which seemeth to be the largest most proper sense of Sheol â—heols proper sense So doth it in Jsay signifie where Sheol is threatned to the King of Babel b Though thou be lifted vp to the Skyes Isa 14.15 yet shalt thou bee brought downe to Sheol that is in this place to an inglorious Destruction and No being in this word and thy carcase vnto the sides of the pit that is the Grave This the contrariety heere sheweth Thougâ— thou be lifted vp to the Skyes He meaneth not heere into the glory of the Saints of God in Heaven but lifted vp in great pomp and worldly glory as the Latin phrase meaneth also when they say ad sydera tolli Now saith the Prophet to this King of Babell Though at this time it be thus with thee yet surely thou shalt be brought down to the contrary point to an inglorious Destruction and a wiping out from the Earth Which sense of Isay is also very well confirmed by the like matter in Ieremy c Though Babel should mount vp to the Heavens â—er 51.53.4 and though she should defend her strength on high yet from me shall her Destroyers come saith the Lord. A sound of a cry cometh from Babel and of great Destruction from the Chaldeans c. Where that which Isay called Sheol Ieremy speaking of the very same matter nameth Destruction vtter laying wast and overthrowing of that City and State And so to come to our purpose A very Heâ—raisme d this is the very same phrase heere in Mathew touching Capernaum Thou Capernaum which art lift vp to the Heaven shalt be brought down to Hades that is to Destruction to an inglorious Not being any more in the world as before time it had ben â—â—des DestructioÌ„ Razing â—aking away Which also is confirmed by that which he addeth presently of Sodom that if they had had the meanes of repentance as Capernaum had Sodom might have remayned a City to this day Inferring by this that Capernaum for their greater contempt of God and his word deserved more then Sodom to be destroyed to becom no City Hitherto this is the first iudgment threatned to the state of the City Hades Destruction or an vtter razing out from the earth The 2. iudgment heere threatned followeth in the next verse Moveover I say vnto you that it shal be easier for them of the land of Sodom in the day of iudgment then for these Heere indeed is Hell threatned to them of Capernaum yet as touching that before there was nothing els but the overthrow and destruction of their Citie signifyed by that worde Hades applyed to the Citie as is before declared And contrary to this you haue not any piece of reason in al that “ Pa. 147 1â— 409. you say here about The world of Souls which †Pag. 403.409 you play withall Hades may and doeth signifie but yet then only when it is referred to deceased Soules not otherwise Next let vs view the Corinthes a Pag 408. 1. Cor. 1â— 55 O Death where is thy victorie O Hades O Destruction or O Power of Death where is thy sting Heere it is referred to the destruction of the whole and intire Persons of men taken away by death out of this worlde who in the end by this conquest and triumph over Death the power therof at the last day shal be restored to life againe in a true and perfit Resurrection and restitution This is the whole scope and drift of the Apostle heere and you graunt it But you inferre that therfore it is meant of Hel. Of Hell which way Because since by sinne Hell gat possession of both partes of man aswell of his body as of his Soule the full deliverance and conquest ouer Hell is not but in the Resurrection This is very vntrue Our full deliverance from Hell and from Satan is obtayned in this life as it is written b Luke 1.7 We being delivered from our enemies and from the handes of all that hate vs must serve him without feare all the dayes of our life in bolines and righteousnes before him That is we being heere truly iustified by his grace are fully freed and delivered from all the power of our enemies Satan is c Luke 11. 〈◊〉 Rom 8.33 Ioh. 8.51 5 5.24 conquered spoyled bound and cast out from vs. So that your speach is very bad and scandalous where you say d Pag. 216. The bodyes of the Saintes lying in their graves are in the Divells walke For then the Graves where bodyes ly senseles are a part of Hell properly taken At least the Deaths of the Reprobat and of the Children of God e Answerab to your doâ—trine pa. 24 touching the state of their bodyes till the resurrection are all one And men truly iustified are iustified but in their Soules Sinne remayning stil charged on their Bodies and therefore in their bodyes they remaine subiect to the power of Hell and to the curse of the Law and to the claime of Satan till the day of our Resurrection at the last iudgement You call it 〈◊〉 part of the â—ages of sin And thus the godly must pay a part of their own redemption and satisfaction for sinne And then Christ was not our only and absolut Redeemor If this be good doctrine let the godly iudge Your selfe overthroweth this enough Pag. 156. saying f He changed the curse of death and made it now a rest from all labours So that I hope the Bodyes of the dead Saintes are not in the * Divells walke Nor subiecâ—ed to the Râ—â—ge of Saâ—an much lesse are they g in the possession of Hell Pag 216. in the handfast of Hell Further you say vpon the text Pag. 178
h Through death Christ destroyed him that had the power of death that is the Divell Pag. 179. Whereby i it is evident that Hell is spoyled of all right and claime to the members of Christ hee brake c. I hope in this life the godly are the members of Christ then in this life they are fully freed from Hell for euer Wherfore it is very vntrue that Hell properly taken hath any possession of the iust and handfast or power on them or that Hell is not fully subdued for them vntill the Resurrection I graunt that the common death heere is called an enemy Cor. 15.26 but he meaneth not such an Enemy as Hell is especially as this is spoken touchinge the godly Yet it is an Enemie even to them not as any Curse at all but as a Memoriall consequent of the old Curse like as a scarie is where was a deadly wound also as a peaceable and quiet stopp or stay vnto them â—â—ea because 〈◊〉 is painâ—ull â—o the flesh in 〈◊〉 his life that their whole persons cannot yet enioy their appointed felicitie Howbeit for all this toward them it hath not the least affinitie with Hell at all Therfore Hades heere in no sort signifyeth Hell but only Death or the power of Death or the world and kingdom of Death or something to that effect onely Yea the very text seemeth thus to expound it selfe saying Where is thy sting O Hades The sting of Death is sinne Where the later seemeth a very direct answer and exposition of the former words Thus The sting of Death or Hades is sinne noting these 2. wordes Hades and Death as Synonimaes for one thing beeing applyed to men Or if “ Pag. 408. you will haue them to differ He may take Hades for the * As it vtterly â—aketh away 〈◊〉 witholdeth â—rom a visible â—â—ate Power strength of Death which the brain-sick Idolators made a God or the Dominion and Kingdome of Death These respectes Hades might well haue with the Apostle which differ from Thanatos Death the meere separation of the Soule from the Body which yet in effect are all one and haue no difference touching our purpose Like as we saw a Pa. 1â— c. 1 before howe all Authours have vsed them Further The Grave of the Wicked is not to be nâ—med nor reckoned Hell properly nor any part thereof In Hell there wanteth not sense of paine If you say it is an entrance to hell and that which holdeth and reserveth the wicked vnto hell Yet then it is not Hell for even thus the Grave and Hell doe greatly differ Finally Hades is b See 〈◊〉 pag. 1â— adversarie to the Resurrection But Hell would not bee adversarie to the Resurrection Therefore Hades heere is not hell no not to the wicked Death in deed and the Dominion of Death is an adversarie to the Resurrection and at that day it shal be vanquished and vtterly abolished when all flesh shall liue againe As for Hell that shall increase theÌ„ and bee advanced when all the wicked both bodyes and Soules shal be subdued vnder it for ever Therfore Hades heere is not hell but the power of Death as hath bene saide or the Dominion of Death or meerely to that effect Also we are to note that the Apostle heere plainly alludeth to that of Hoseah c Hose O Sheol ò kingdom of death or power of ' Death I wil be thy destruction Not o Hell For the Prophet speaketh this to comfort Israel in their captivitie against their continuall Destructions and razings out from this world shewing that now the Lord would stay his iudgement that way Death which had consumed them should now destroy them no more but they should liue and flourish againe This the Apostle might notably allude vnto speaking of the ResurrectioÌ„ As for Hell if the Prophet had meant it as he doeth not the Apostle could make no allusion to it nor haue any thing to deale wch it in this matter of the ResurrectioÌ„ simply So that where you say what reason is there to exclude out of these words Christs victorie over Hell it is very weake What reason is there to include it where the Apostle speaketh only of our resurrection from bodily Death and of nothing els Next we come to the RevelatioÌ„ First a Rev. I have the Keyes of Hades that is of Destruction or of the * The â—â—ble wâ—â—â— the Dâ—â—â— kingdome of death and of Death Or we may take them as 2. words for one and the same thing that is both of them for Death For heere Christ sheweth only that as He was dead so nowe he hath overcome Death hath power to dy no more as I hauâ— b Treaâ— pa 11â— heeretofore noted What shew of reason haue c Pa 17 you then to bringe in heere Christes power over the Damned Soules in Hell Because there is mention â—lswhere of the Key of hell Therefore the Key of hâ—des heer is the same What color of reasoÌ„ is there in this Again a One sitteth on a pale horse whose name was Death Rev. 6.8 Hades Desâ—â—â—on the world of the Dead or the Kingdom of Death followed aâ—ter â—â—m Thâ—â— in no wise can be Hel because the text addeth Power 〈…〉 them to slay with the sword and with samine and death and with wilde beasts Hell slayeth none in that sorte these are not the weapons of Hell but of the Dominion and Power of Death thâ—se and such other mo â—ag 406. are the proper weapons b You take it to bâ— the power of the Divell because the Divell slayeth somâ—times the bodyes of men Which you proue by the bodily slaying and siniting of Iob and his children This indeed is the thing which we holde This is not the Torments of Hell in the place of Damned these be onely bodily harmes and death So that heereby you confirme our purpose for we denie not but God somtime vseth Satan to punish and to slay the bodies of men But seeing this is nothing but Death not Hell which then is inflicted therefore it is bâ—st to take Hades heere most generally as the nature of it is for the Power of Death or the world of the Dead Hell by no meanes it can be â—â—g 398. You tell me in c one place that my best skill is in varying phrases It is better to vary phrases then to vary opinions as you very often doe I vary phrases to expresse Hades which in Authours is not alwayes the same thing or at least not after the same maner Whose generall largenes which it properly hath can not in one word be expressed in English Wherefore my varying of phâ—ases to this purpose I hope is pardonable sith indeed it is necessarie That coÌ„iecture of mine of the 4th part of the worlde 's not going to Hell at once I never esteemed it worth the standing on I he last place is †Death and Hades
thereof Which in trueth these our wordes in question doe well performe He came vnder the Dominion of Death or Went to the societie of the Dead following presently after these wordes Dead Buried And thus your 2. Rule alse Consequence of order is rightly kept For euen in respect of time it is certaine that Christs whole person perishing froÌ„ hence was wholy ioyned to the Dead after the precise separation of his Soule and body which was his Death And his Buriall being the visible part thereof in good reason may be set before that which signifieth the whole contayning also his Soules invisible going vnto the Dead Lastly if there be no more in this but a stronger emphasis meerely a more full-signifying phrase it might well come after termes of lesse emphasis Your 3. and last Rule Proprietie of Wordes is plainly for vs and against your selfe For that which we strive for is the a Pa. 157 169 17â— native and proper sense of Hades even according to the etymologie of it and according to common vse You if you vrge it to signifie Hel do indeed make a †Pa. 171. Figure in it viz. Synecdoche a part for the whole as before we haue shewed As for the other word heere in the Creed katébe or katélthe Hee descended or came vnder it is not necessarie to take it alwayes to signifie a locall going downe specially thus ioyned with Hades For thus it may aptly lively shew the fall or whole casting down of a mans person from the state of life to death and vtter destruction out of this world as also men are said to stand vp and spring vp when they live Or it may serue to expresse the Force and Dominion of Death which Christ came vnder when he dyed Or the abasement and humiliation of Christ yeelding submitting him selfe so farre that is not onely to Dy but also to come vnder the strength and force of death by lying held subdued as it were for so long time in it All this the very property of the word katebe admitteth very easilie and Ruffinus liketh it where he interpreteth this phrase â—uffin in â—â—mb Descendit in mortem He descended vnto Death If any thinke this to be somewhat figurative yet it is verily so familiar and easie to all people as that other word in this Creed is He sitteth at the right hand of God yea it is farie easier indeed And heerein all the later famous learned and godly Restorers of Religion in a maner doe ioyne with vs as Mat. Bucer P. Martyr Bulinger â—â—slitut Olevia c. Yea M. Calvin liked this also wel enough though yet he seemeth to leane more to another sense viz. Christes Hellish sufferings which indeed is a true doctrine as before is declared though to this place of the Creed I thinke not so fit Now these men your L. ought not to skorne nor reproch though you have leave to deale so with me Their pietie learning and authoritie is such with all that love the Gospell as will overwaigh your big wordes and high lookes and whatsoever els you are lifted vp withal aboue our mediocritie Hitherto we haue answered admitting the authoritie of these wordes He descended to Hades But wee are in truth to know â—ere that as you cite them and vige them they have no such authoritie credit as hitherto we have yeelded vnto them And that for 3. causes First for that your TraÌ„slating and terming them He descended into Hel is corrupt partiall and vntrue Which I trust is manifest by that which I have shewed before touching the true property natural vse of Hades If you say among vs all men do so speak heere and translate hades Hel. I pray you coÌ„sider that this article as also I think this whole Creed was at first written in Greek and not in English Wherefore the English terme how comon so ever must not preiudice vs nor the truth in this matter as very vnreasonably a you indeavour to make it to do â—â—g 420. Convince vs evidently and soundly by Greek authoritie that Hades is alwayes Hell or that Hades is never applyed to the condicion and state of the godly deceased and then I will yeeld or els my sufficient proofes before to the contrary will convince the vntrue and partiall translation Another reason to deny vtterly the authority and credit of these wordes He descended to hades so to hold them vnable to make any argument as from our Creed is because this speciall clause of Christs descending to Hades or to Infernum is new and lately put into our vulgar Creed called the Apostles Creed b Ruffin Symb. Ruffinus witnesseth who lived about 500. yeeres after Christ that it was not at all in the Creed in his time I say not at allâ— neither in the Romane Creed nor yet in the Creed of the Easterne Churches His words are these Sciendum sanè est quod in Ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur additum Deseendit ad inferna sed nee in Orientis Ecclesiis habetur hic sermo Will you say Ruffinus lyeth Or can you bring to the contrarie any proofe I think not yea I am sure you can not Then if there were no such Article as this nor anie such wordes any where in the Creed for the space of 500. yeres after Christ I mervaile what authoritie they haue now to be taken necessarily for a distinct article in our Creed and as differing materially from Dead and Buried Sure it is a Namely Desâ—â—â—le Hades to new to be receaved for doctrine which b Pag. 13â— sprang vp so late Yea thus c Erasm 〈◊〉 Symb. Caâ—â— 4. Erasmus may seeme to haue some colour for his coniecture that about Thomas Aquinas time they might peradventure be put into this Creed Third we can not see but that whensoever whosoever put it first into this place they signified heereby it seemeth that Christ went to Limbus a place vnder the earth where they imagined the blessed Patriarkes rested For this was indeed the opinion generally of the ancient Christians even for “ Limbus inter tayâ— before Châ—â— descendinâ— bades waâ— our set â—câ— oâ— the Crâ—â— a long time and stil is retayned among the Papistes though now growen much worse theÌ„ it was of old But this you iustly coÌ„demne as an error as wel as we how generall and how ancient soever it be Now also though this were the 1st meaning of this Article whensoever it fiâ—fte tooke place in the common Creed yet this was not Hell this giveth no furtherance to your assertion that Christ went into the place of the Damned in tormentes But Thaddaeus Jgnatius Athanasius haue these very words Yet they say not any where that they were in that set forme of the Apostles Creed * Which â—â—deed they 〈◊〉 had not which we now have Also they are cleane against your opinion heere as presently wee shall see You will say yet
even Ruffinus in his exposition of the Creed alleageth this article and he alloweth the doctrine thereof I answere He alleageth truly these wordes Descendit ad inferna but not out of any example of the Apostles Creed yea he expresly denieth it to be therein any where at that time as before we shewed Only it being his owne and the common opinion then hee groundeth it vpon other reasons namely certaine misâ—aken scriptures yet such as he was content to like of and so holdeth indeed that Christ went downe to Infernum that is to Limbus Patrum as an opinion then common among men and worthy as he thought to be beleeued and to be applyed to this place of the Creed touching the Death of Christ â—asin in â—mb Caâ—h 4. although as yet no such matter was contayned in the common Creed Erasmus sayeth The Fathers would not be so rash as to put it into the articles of their Creed seeing their opinions heereabout were so varying and doubtfull Now this you know was all mistaken wrongfully gathered from the Scriptures as badly applyed to the Creed nothing els indeed but the common error of those tymes Yet then hitherto all this is farre from iustifying your opinion nerâ—â—er may you alleage the Creed for your warrant Where note also that Ruffinus heere vnderstandeth the very matter it self precisely signified by these words Descendit ad inferna to be immediatly but this that He dyed like other good men and was buried For hee saith Vis verbâ—â—adem videtur esse in eo quod Sepultus dicitur The effect of this phrase He descended to Infernum seemeth to be all one and the same with this He was Buried And afterwarde going abâ—ut to prove by the Scripture that Christ descended to JnfernuÌ„ he sheweth that hee meaneth his death heereby and his buriall Quod in infernum descendit evidenter praenuÌ„tiatur in Psalmis vbi dicit Et in pulverem mortis deduxisti me Et iterum Quae vtâ—litas in sanguine meo dum descendo in Corruptionem And before vpon those wordes He was Crucified vnder Pon. Pilate and descended to infernum hâ— giveth this sense among other wordes Divina natura in mortem per carnem descendit The Divine nature humbled it selfe eveÌ„ vnto Death in respect of the flesh Howsoever then he thinketh consequently that Christ descending to infernuÌ„ did after Death goe to a place beneath vnto the godly Soules departed before then set them free from thence and caried them with him yet it appeareth that immediatly by this phrase and properly he meant no more but that he Dyed and was Buâ—ied all the rest was consequent as an effect after this according as he and most others of the Ancients did think Lastly heer we see that Ruffinus extendeth this his Descending to the Divine nature but he meaneth it improperly and in a certaine sorte according to that also in the Philippains a Phil. 〈◊〉 He being in the forme of God b Verse humbled himselfe became obedient vnto death So that properly he meaneth it of the very death of his Manhood and nothing els Which is our very minde and iudgment agreeing also generally with the Fathers heerein c Pa. 162 before rehearsed But Ignatius “ Pag. 1 you thinke †is clearely yours likewise one d Pag 17 Thaddaeus by Eusebius report one of the 70. Disciples which the Evangelist Luke speakes of also e Pag 41 Athanasius Creed Ignatius saying Christ descended to Hades alone but rose again with many Ignaâ—â—us meaneth evidently his Buriall and going downe into his Grave as you acknowledge that f Pag. 14. Hades many times may well signifie Which is the plainer to be his meaning for as much as he noteth his Buryall heere in no other wordes besides And sure he alludeth to that in Mathew g Math 27 53. The Graves did open and many bodyes of the Saintes which slept arose And came out of the Graves after his Resurrection and went into the holy City and appeared to many This is touching the Resurrection of their bodyes out of their Graves not of their Soules ansing vp from Hell Neither in Ignatius is there any shew of reason that he meant Hades for Hell He may meane I grant that which is in effect all one the restoring of their whole Persons taken away hence by Death or their comming from vnder the Dominion and power of Death which indeed is according to the proper largenes of this word Also that Christ katélthe came vnder the same Not that he went locally downeward except in his Buriall but touching his whole manhood that hee was humbled and abased even vnder the Dominion and strength of Death And thus it is true that h As Ruffiâ—â— also vndâ—â— stood â—t 〈◊〉 200. Christ by his Death including also togeather his Buriall came downe or Descended But only this you vrge and stand vpon for your claime to Ignatius because it is said He brake downe the wall or stop which was never brokeÌ„ before Where you may know that the meaning is this The power of the Grave or the strength and force of Death was now by Christes Death Resurrection vtterly overcome and dissolved which remayned in deed from the beginning of the world till Christes death as a mighty Wall not broken downe But now the vertue of his death and resurrection brake it cleane downe for ever So that heereby Christ is taught to be as the Apostle also to like effect speaketh the first fruites of the Dead Pag. 179. But you say a Many rose from the dead before Christ and therefore that partition was often broken by others before him I aunswer Though some being dead did rise to life againe before Christes Resurrection as touching the time yet the vertue and power of Christes resurrectioÌ„ was before them by which only and meerely they rose againe Neither yet was ResurrectioÌ„ to all the Dead foorth with performed by the Resurrection of Christ neuertheles throughly purchased it was eveÌ„ then and by the only power and vertue thereof is shal be performed to all in due time So that thus Christ alone brake that wall and stop and absolutly he hath broken it downe which no man before him nor besides him ever brake The like vnto this is your Thaddaeus sentence â—â—â—ddaeus â—â—â—â—nasius also Athanasius in his Creed Whom the rather thus I vnderstand as it seemeth most reasonably and necessarily because they expresse neither his Death nor his Buriall at all in any other wordes save these He descended to Hades Therefore surely this is it which heere they meane by his descending to Hades and this is all that they meane therein that he was brought vnder the dominion of death and was Buryed â—â—escending â—â—plied to â—â—â—â—ts Soule 〈◊〉 Death â—ever fouÌ„d â—â—cripture in anie â—â—cient â—â—ed Consdering also that * no Ancient Creed in the world hath all these 3. divers and
For it is sure that no man can prove by good testimony that there was any or indeed any other then such as these ancient Fathers thus variably and differingly rehearsed Seeing also it is proved that this set forme which we now have specially our article in question was not †As a 〈◊〉 the Câ—â— receaved for many hundred yeares after Christ some supposing that these words were not put in till neer 1000. years after him I say All this being considered it is evident that your Argument only froÌ„ the precise and exact forme of words in the Creed from the order placing of He descended to Hades namely after Dead Buryed is not worth any thing to induce thereby an Article of faith That Christs Soule went to Hell After this it shall not be amisse to consider some other reasons of good moment Our 3d. Reason is REASâ—â— If there be no certaine benefit to the godly by Christes going to Hell then doubtles he went not thither But there is no certaine benefit to the Godly by Christes going to hell Therefore doubtles he went not thither This Reason you a Pag â— call our strongest fort It is not our strongest but yet strong indeed for you have made no where any good answer to it neither can you I know a number of wordes you have throughout your whole treatise denying the Assumption but they are nothing in the world but meere presumptions You say b Pag â— Is the subduing of hell powers and the treading on all their force and the restraining of all their fury so small a matter with you that it doth no good to the Godly And elswhere most tediously and vainly you augment repeate the marvelous thinges that Christe did by his Humane presence in Hell I would willingly beleeve it but alas who saith so besides your self or only such as can tell no better then you Where is that become now c Pag â— what I read in the worde of God that I beleeve what J do not reade that I do not beleeve c. It is easy to say that you will onely hold what the Scripture assureth but in practise you will slip from this precise order when you list I know well that you boldly say that the d Pag â— Purpose of Christs descent is plainly professed in Scriptures to be the spoyling of Sathan and delivering of men from the power of Hell Is it plainly professed I beseech you where I wott well what you will faine devise of the Fathers when you impute so palpable vntruths to the word of God it self Shew vs one title one iot of any benefit which by the Scriptures Christ wrought for vs by his locall presense in Hell and then I will cease to gainsay it forever Otherwise tell vs never so much of the wonderfull and singular fruite of Christs being there the more you amplify the more you hazard your credit the more we shall wonder at your bold avouching matters which are not in the word of God The benefits all and every one which you every where rehearse I most vnfainedly and religiously beleeve namely that he deserved all good things for vs and obtayned theÌ„ for vs in his ResurrectioÌ„ c. Ascention and that finally and fully he shall in his last iudgment tread downe Satan vnder our feet But what is this to his locall being in Hell Shew therefore I say by the expresse word that Christ in Hel did these or any parte of these good things for vs. If you do not for as yet I see no title to prove that surely all your talke is but blasts of vanitie The which I rather beleeve that you never can nor wil do because you confesse asmuch somewhere as overturneth all your shew of Christes doing good to vs in Hell â—â—g 160. For a This conquest you say Christ purchased by his passion but he did not execute it till his resurrection If he executed nothing till his Resurrection and purchased all in his Passion then he did nothing in Hell For his Resurrection was distinctly after his supposed being in Hell whither he never afterwards returned to execute there any thing at all Nay Austin your only stay thinketh * he descended in vaine vnles he did good to som who were even there in Hell in torments â—â—e before â—â—g 168. But this you vtterly renounce So that every way stil it remayneth good that seeing there is no certaine benefit that Christ did in Hell neither to vs nor to any therefore we are not to beleeue that he was in Hell Our 4d. Reason There is altogeather as great reason and as vrgent cause that Christ whole man both Soule â—SON 4. and Body should be present in Hell to free vs thence wholly that is our Souls Bodies as there is that his Soule must be there present to free thence our Soules But simply it is confessed that his Body was never there neither had any cause to be for the freeing of our Bodies Therefore it followeth that neither his Soule was ever there nor had any cause so to be for the freeing of our Soules Heere I wish you would answer my proposition without Skoffes taunts and haughty disdaine as your manner is But bring some evident and cleere difference that his Soul must go more necessarily thither alone then that his Body also should and let it be truly grounded on the proportion of faith and Christian Religion if not on expresse Scripture I wot well what you bring from some Fathers a Pag. 17â— Fulgentius b Pag. 17â— 181 Athanasius others That his Soule by being present in Limbo that they meane by Hades and Infernum saved vs from Hell by his flesh temporally dying he gave vs life eternall and by lying in the grave vncorrupted he gave vs incorruptioÌ„ Heere we allow them so far as they meane that what one parte of him did that our whole man and every parte received good by But if they think his Soul by Divine ordinaÌ„ce had need to be actually present elswhere then only with the godly deceased to execute his victory gotten before on the Crosse against Satan to th end that we might be free froÌ„ Hell theÌ„ let theÌ„ shew vs the Scripture for this Divine ordinaÌ„ce so by Gods grace we shal forthwith imbrace it Otherwise at least let them shew vs a reason or do you so much for them why both parts ioyntly should not rather have gon thither by like necessity to execute that togither which both ioyntly had got and deserved for togeather the benefit also whereof is to come not to one parte alone but ioyntly to both in vs. Againe why this going to Hell by our Saviour Christ was not rather after his Resurrection when he had begun his actuall Triumph in deed by ioyning togeather againe both partes of his manhood in both which togeather before he had bene humbled Neither is it likely
that he began it before his Resurrection seeing the Scripture b Math. Luke 2â— Act 2 2. 3.15 40 1 17.3 Rom. 4.6.4 〈◊〉 Cor. 15 â— 1.20 1 14. 2 Tâ—â— 11. every where noteth this as the first part of his exaltation after death and it being strange in Christian reason against proportion of faith to think that one parte of Christ his Soul should gloriously triumph the other his Body all this while lying in Humiliation possessed with death in the Grave which you say is the Divels range a part of his power and of the Kingdom of darknes Yea also seeing it is most likely that he would cleere himselfe first wholy and intirely in both partes before he would begin to strip and spoyle Sathan for vs. Lastly seeing it is a greater degree of triumph victory to spoyle the enemy to tread him vnder foote to breake his houses and stronge Holdes to set free the captiues to make him and his to bow the knee to the conquerour then to get perfit life freedom to himselfe So that alwayes that is after this Wherefore it seemeth that Christe did thus also If he did actually such thinges in Hell it was not till after his Resurection before which time he had not perfit life and deliverance himself Let vs I pray have some cleere and Christian reason against these strong likelyhoods and then let vs aske a point or two more which we think will follow likewise if your assertion be true First if one part of Christ viz his Soul only were in Hel to execute his victory which before hee had merited on the Crosse then why in his sufferinges righteousnes and obedience might not one parte of Christs manhood have aswell sufficed I say why might not one parte alone have in this world merited enough which Appollinaris an Haeretick affirmed aswell as that one parte might serve to triumph for vs in Hell Againe seeing his Body in the Grave by overcoming corruption which is a part of the Kingdom of Satan as †you say â—â—g 216. did thereby save our bodies froÌ„ that part of Satans walk as you call it by what reason is it that thereby he destroyed not consequentlie the whole kingdom of Satan saving thereby our Soules also in so much that Christs Soule might not have needed to have come into Hell for that purpose Or if they meane that his flesh being in the Grave and his Soule being in Hell did severally and distinctly save our flesh and our soules then how will you be reconciled with them â—â—ur selfe â—eth it 〈◊〉 all men â—â—g a who do deny that point Further for the actuall stripping of Satan of his spoyles why was it needfull that an actuall presence of any parte of his manhood should be in Hell seeing indeed it is certaine that the whole actuall triumph of Christ over Satan proceedeth not of the proper vertue of the manhood but onely from the vertue and power of the Godhead of Christ Therefore that might possibly be as effectuall and as fully accomplished in the absence of the manhood as in the prsence all the while that the Godhead and manhood were still vnited and continually togeather in one Person Last of all if it were the very humane presence of his soule that so delivered our soules from thence that they shall never come thither why did not the presence of his flesh in the Grave keepe ours that it should never come there or at least that it should never putrifie nor rot as his flesh did not All these sequeles and consequences are as good and as likely as your assertion that Christes Soule and not his flesh ought to be locally in Hell for this end that ours might never come there Further I made this Argument in my “ Paâ— 160 former Treatise that Christes Descending into Hell if ever hee did so could not be iudged any part of his Exaltation or Glorification To which your reply is I know not whether more strange or skornful But you †Pa. 416. resolue that these words He descended to Hell importeth his Exaltation and Triumph Yet you skoffe at me for the like as if I had said “ Paâ—â—â— His Descending was Ascending Hell was Heaven But heerin you affirme vntruly 1. I say Though his Soule leaving his body Ascended yet this is not meant by that phrase He descended to Hades 2. I never said that Hades signified Heaven although some in a In aâ—â—â—ble sâ—â—â— Hades are in Heaven 3. Much lesse did I ever say that Hell is Heaven Why theÌ„ cry you out of * Pag â—â— impudencie facing ridiculous and audacious presumption c. Who presumeth let the advised reader iudge when you thus confidently avouch as an article of faith that Christes Soule locally descended and yet bring not one proofe of it from Gods word nor from any mans opinion whom you will cleave vnto fully That b Pa. â—â— you avouch “ veâ—â—â— Phil. 2. for it is more straunge where we have not one word of his local being in Hel. And that the * verâ—â— Colossians 2. should proove it passeth all the rest Where though we graunt you your reading yet the expresse text referreth that triumph to Christes Crosse which you openly deny That of the Councells howe Christ rose againe †Thâ— prove for yoâ— having spoyled Hell I easily yeeld seeing that proveth not his locall being there The same I affirme of that Allegorie in Luke which sheweth Christes c Lukâ—â—â— Overcoming Binding and Spoyling of Satan in deed but not by his locall being in Hel. What if Christ doe set out many pointes of doctrine by Parables Yet such are those pointes as are proved otherwise and elswhere The Parables doe but illustrate them Howbeit this Parable in question Christ expresly applyeth to his Dispossessing of Divells out of mens bodyes Wherefore you ought not to wrest it to another thing whereof there he hath not a word nor any where els that is to shew how Christ bound the Divell in Hell locally Rather remember I pray howe God shewed his displeasure against your wresting of his word by that strange terrour that happened even then when you were descended into the depth of this vncouth doctrine at Paules Crosse Which for the time so affrighted many 1000. of people that it will never be forgotten in England while your opinions be remeÌ„bred albeit this grew but of a small occasion as after it seemed Where you charge me in the end arrogantly and absurdly to falsifie the Synod of our Realme 〈◊〉 17. it is but what your selfe doth in effect I said Our Synod corrected K. Edwardes Synod You acknowledge and professe that in the later words of that former Synod now left out 〈◊〉 419. are 3. things that cannot be iustified by the Scriptures 1. That the Spirites of the iust were in Hell 2. That Christ there preached vnto them 3. That he stayed
A DEFENCE OF A TREATISE TOVCHING THE SVFFERINGS AND VICTORIE OF CHRIST IN THE WORKE OF OVR REDEMPTION Wherein is confirmed 1 That Christ suffered for vs not only Bodily griefe but also in his Soule an impression of the proper wrath of God which may be called the paines of Hell 2 That after his death on the Crosse he went not downe into Hell For Answere to the late writings of Mr Bilson L. Bishop of Winchester which he intitleth The effect of certaine sermons c. Wherein he striueth mightily against the doctrine aforesaid By HENRY IACOB Minister of the worde of God Iohn 7. ver 24. Iudge not according to the appearance but iudge righteous iudgement 1600. To all the godly and religious Magistrates faithfull Pastors and other Christian brethren in England Grace and peace be multiplied in the true sufferinges and victorie of IESVS CHRIST our onely and most glorious Redeemer GIVE me leaue I beseech you Fathers and Brethren right honorable beloved in Christ in so great and necessary a case to reply and Defend my selfe in such wise as becommeth me against the vnseemely writings of a mā who indeed I aknowledg in the world is far greater then I am Yet forasmuch as the Cause which heere I maintaine is right and iust as to any man I hope it shall soone appeare that will simply and soberly trie it by the Scriptures Againe in regard of mine owne person and poore credit although meane in the world yet by Gods mercie such as in conscience I am bound by all honest and Christian meanes to preserue seeing he so strangelie traduceth accuseth me in his booke as is almost incredible I am therfore of necessitie as I take it to open my mouth at this time and specially in the behalfe of that doctrine which I am vndoubtly perswaded for the substance of it that hither vnto I with infinit mo in England haue truly faithfully taught And albeit I finde my selfe very vnequall to try any question with him who is so high in authoritie so prompt of witt so exquisit in learning my selfe in all things so despised and rejected as I am by him and some others insomuch that I might iustlie be altogeather terrified and wholly turned away were my cause neuer so good frō maintayning the same against him yet surely God is my witnes it seemeth to mee so easy and so plaine to defend togeather with the necessitie of duetie binding me as likewise indeed all mē els I think to stande therevnto that I could not choose but speake againe in this matter and cleere it againe so well as I can from his further weake exceptions and vnsufficient obiections against it Neyther let any man thinke that in thus doing I greatly please my selfe or seeme vnwilling to let others to vtter their iudgments heerevpon Nay surely it is the thing that heerein chiefly I desire even that others yea many others if so it may seeme good vnto thē would declare their mindes touching this new doctrine sprung vp from Winchester and likely to bring a common calamitie with other errors mo vpon our Churches in England because I feare that not a few among vs are wil be troubled therewith And so I doubt not but it will most amply appeare how Holy true a doctrine this is which he so disdainfully skoffeth at and reprocheth beeing well assured that even the most learned and godly Teachers in this land Defendours of the trueth against Poperie as wel before time as now at this day vnder our gracious Queene doe concurre agree with my opinion herein This if it shall please God that I may see it wil far more exceedingly please me to beholde then whatsoever myne owne vnskilfulnes hath or can vtter In the meane while I beseech thee Christian Reader consider duly with thy selfe not who speaketh but what is spoken by eyther of vs. As for me I am not ashamed to testifie with all duetie though after my simplicitie in the behalfe of the Gospell of Christ against mens improbable conjectures which my trust is that the godly and sober minded will take in good worth vprightly even as my heart meaneth it the Lord knoweth sincerely The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ bee with you all Amen H. I. A Praeface to the Christian Readers touching our 2. Questions and their Defense following IT is a iust thing with God deare brethren to punish in his dissolute people sinne with sinne and where one iniquitie is not repented to binde others therevnto Which thing surely we may to well see is com to passe and befallen vs in England deseruedly at this day Who after so long plentifull and comfortable enioying of the Gospell the most precious blessing of God in this life are now allmost generally com to this that we haue lost the loue thereof What remayneth then for vs when we set so light by this Heauenly grace forgetting our first loue which once wee seemed to beare towards it and wherein now wee ought to haue abounded but that God should punish this our hainous and generall sinne with others and among others send vs delusions euen strong delusions to broch beleeue lyes seeing we shew so small affection and so little pleasure in his truth The Lord in iustice then no doubt doth punish vs with such delusions of error as are now so rife in our land at this time more then in times past when as the Gospell hath ben soundlyer preached and better beloued among vs then now it seemeth to bee Now so much the more dangerous this mischief is as also it must needes proue yet still because it is offered vnto vs forsooth by the frendes of the Gospell and fathers of the Church as they desire to be called yet being indeed sole Commanders in Religion very Lords ouer mens cōsciences compulsiuely ouerruling their brethren and Gods deare flocke contrary to the “ Mat and 2 2 Cor. 1. Cor. 1. Pet. expresse Scripture and all well ordred Ancient and present tymes How needfull then is it that the Lords faithfull Remembrancers forget not themselues in these deceiptfull dayes nor that great charge which the great Pastour of the Flock hath layd vpon them but to bee watchfull and diligent and for no respect of persons to suffer any part of the gracious truth of God to bee disgraced by men chiefly that part and point if we can discerne what it is which by the corruption thereof raiseth and maintayneth most of our other vaine corrupt and contentious quaestions which now swarme among vs yet which easily would bee cut cleane downe if the word of God alone might beare sway as we see it to be brought to passe this day by the blessing of God in other Reformed Churches of forraine Countryes For my part being occasioned at this time more specially to speak of 2. of these foresaid corrupt doctrines J am not vnwilling though vnequally yoked to defend the truth in them It hath pleaseth Mr Bilson
the now L. Bishop of Winchester to begin among vs a new matter of faith neuer heard of before in England but only in the dayes of Popery touching the All sufficiency of the meere Bodily Sufferings of Christ and to maintaine an other which was neere worne out of his going downe to Hell in Soule In both which because my conscience assured mee that hee was much mistaken and laboured that others should mistake also I thought it not besides my duty the Lord offering me opportunity to maintaine the truth and that in all plainenes and evidence of the Scripture as God inabled me with This now a while since being published wherein my trust is I caryed my selfe no otherwise then J ought the Author and maintayner of the contrary hath so of late intertayned it as seemeth to mee and to many others wonderfull Wonderfull not for strength of reasons nor for exquisit matter such as neuer before was delivered though his learning J acknowledge and will not but reverence his gifts but wonderfull his answer is and altogeather extraordinary considering that such incomparable bitternes disdaine skoffing reproch and furious rage doth so abundantly com from him therein against my poore selfe being yet by the mercy of God a true Christian a Minister of the Gospel and one I praise the Lorde which euer haue bin carefull to bee free from the scandalls of the World Though heerein J boast not but rather with the Apostle will boast of mine infirmities Verily this now J haue learned by his writing better then euer I conceaued before namely what great oddes he maketh and desireth to be made betweene himselfe a Lord Bishop and an other being but a Preacher of Gods most holy word Well this is the Rhetorike and the ornaments of his Conclusion against my treatise But all this is besides his Matter which nevertheles may haue peradventure som weight in it It may peradventure Wherefore J see a double necessity vrging me to reply therevnto First to the end that his exceptions and reasons that is to say his wholl matter may appeare yet better to be so weake and vnsufficient as indeed they are See that those vncivill reproches I will not say vnchristian revilings being the bewty and forme of his booke may appeare to be but the froth of a distempered stomacke the colour of reason and iust cause which he casteth on it being taken away As touching the matter therefore thus I purpose to deale I will begin with his later writing which he calleth a Conclusion because he mainly directeth it against mee taking in by the way also all such places points in the former Treatise as do rightly concerne our matter in hand Finally as touching his reproches and cruell words I intend wholy to passe ouer them seeing for them neither is he any whit the better nor my selfe the worse The Defence of the Treatise of Christes sufferings against Maister Bilsons Conclusion HIs Conclusion for so he thinketh good to call it beginneth against me in his page 225. Wherein first he doeth change me in generall termes that I flee from the state of the Chiefe question and overskip his Authorities The like saith in Eâ— pag. 9. in his reasons I forget and dissemble what pleaseth my self in the defence of my holy cause as it pleaseth him to mocke I roue as I list neither keeping any order nor bringing any matter of moment coÌ„fusedly powring out the hasty resolutions of mine own braines spiced euery where with ignorant absurd positions proudly despising all authority antiquitie c. Al which words are but wind as I shal make it evident God willing wheÌ„ we com to view his particulars heerafter insuing Among which he * Pag. â— beginneh to iustifie that he mistooke not his Text when hee preached this doctrine But I wil speak thereof anon so that first I satisfie him in the most principal point of his challeÌ„ge against me Which is this “ Episâ— that I haue changed the first questioÌ„ that I set not down the state therof fully nor truly so I offer to prove that which he never denied I coÌ„fute that which he never affirmed Let vs ther fore coÌ„sider advisedly this questioÌ„ which I wil set downe again as exactly as plainly as I can that we may see how far I erred froÌ„ it before We affirme That Christ in his Soul suffered all Gods proper Wrath and vengeance being paines and punishment for sinne no sinne also as touching the essence or nature thereof The suâ— whole out 1. â— and so farre as was due Generally for all mankinde to suffer His contrary opinion we conceaue thus That Christ suffered for our sinnes nothing ells but simply and “ or 〈◊〉 his Hoâ— fectioÌ„s â—â—tio and meerely a Bodily death altogither like as the godlie and holy men do often suffer at the handes of persecutors saving only that God accepted this death of his Sonne as a ransom for sinne but the death of his servants be doth not The Opening of the whole staâ—e of this Question For the better vnderstanding whereof we must note these principall things taine spe I things to â—oted First that All suffering of Paines in man is froÌ„ God either properly from his Iustice or from his Holy Love either froÌ„ him alone or also from his Instruments and inferior meanes Againe Al suffering of Paines is for Sinne either inherent or imputed either as Correction or as Punishment either immediatly or mediatly as anon we shall further see Sec By the Lawe of our Creation as we are men having a Soule besides our Body so our Soule hath in it a 3. fold faculty of Suffering Paines First that which is Proper and immediat iustly so called â—ee kindes 〈◊〉 Soâ—â—es â—â—â—ing of 〈◊〉 Proper because it is proper only to reasonable and immortall Spirites although in men if it grow vehement it affecteth coÌ„sequently the Body also Immediat 2. wayes 1. because it can doth receave an impression of sorrow and Paines made from God only by and in it selfe without any outward bodily meanes therevnto 2. It is also an Immediat Punishment or els Correction of sinne it cometh not for any other cause at all So that thus we meane when we speake of the Soules Proper and Immediat Suffering The Soules second faculty of Suffering paines is not Proper but Common to vs with Beasts namely that which is by Sympathy Communion with and from the Body For which cause also it is not Immediat sith it commeth not to the Soule but by externall bodily meanes A third kind of painful Suffering the Soule hath namely her vehemeÌ„t strong AffectioÌ„s are Painful whether they be good or evill As Zeale Love CoÌ„passion Pity Care c. Neither are these immediatly for Sinne whether Punishmentes or Corrections but they com for and by other immediat causes â—â—tions no â—â—at â—or 〈◊〉 Punish 〈◊〉 5. neither are they Punishments or Corrections at all
was not against Christes owne person but against the sinnes which by his office in his own person he sustayned the sorrow and paines whereof touched his very person 2. Their punishments are partly in this life and partly eternall in the life to come but Christes were temporary and only in this life 3. Their sinne being inherent not forgiuen and iustly punished they haue all the properties and Concomitants of sinne inherent never forgiuen but in wrapped in eternall punishments as these Desperation the stinge of Conscience Induration Reiection Malediction Dereliction c. But in Christ where no sinne was inhaerent nor eternally punished there could vtterly be none of these 4. They are pumished heere chiefly in Hell the proper place of the damned heereafter but Christ suffered onely heere in this life Lastly their tormeÌ„ts though euerlasting deserue nothing at Gods hands but Christ though suffering but for a while deserued infinitly favour and grace for them for whom he suffered Howbeit as I said the sufferings of the damned are all one with Christes How the suâ—â—â—rings of Châ—â—â—â— and of thâ—â—â— Damned 〈◊〉 the same as touching the Nature of the punishments and as touching the chiefest causes thereof First God himselfe was the proper and principall Ordayner Author and Executor of his punishment Gods owne hand did it to Christ no lesse then to the damned Sec Christ having most horrible sinnes imputed to him as the damned haue also therefore he suffered for them from Gods hand euen as the damned do namely in these points which are both possible and reasonable that is paines inflicted immediatly and properly in the Soule and not only by outward meanes in the Body For it is most reasonable and possible that the Soule of Christ should haue our sinne imputed to it yea principally to it and not to the Body only even as wee commit sinne in our wholl manhood but yet principally in by our Soule Which being true that Christes reasonable Soule had sinne imputed principally to it according to that of the Prophet He made his Soule sinne Isa 53.10 therefore his Soule principally peculiarly did suffer for it Also his Soule by nature being capable of suffering from Gods very hand an occasion now serving therevnto because of all our sinnes wholly imputed to him lastly God himselfe standing now disposed to punish and revenge sinne in him so far as he was capable thereof therefore his punishment for that sinne was a true proper full punishment as theirs is namely as touching meere paines and was the effect of Gods proper Wrath iustice and vengeance as well on his Soule as on his Body thus for the time it was even like as the sufferings of the damned are â—a 53.134 For * continuance of time in paines is not of the nature of Hel paines or of Gods Wrath Pag. 341. nor yet to be in Hell locally as you wrongly imagin but meere circuÌ„stances ther of only Thus the very nature of punishment for sinne being but the feeling of extreamest paines from Gods hand whether for a time or for ever whether locally in Hell or ells where that neither altereth nor lesseneth the present paines which Gods owne infinit wrathfull power iustice can inflict for satisfaction where and how it pleaseth him These paines then to this end and in this very manner inflicted Christ felt Indeed not being in the locall Hell yet those being as wee see the self same paines for their nature which are in Hell â—ag 247. yea which are * sharpest in Hell And he discerned and receaved them properly yea only in his very Soule as then was manefest when his body was so brused with sorrowes and sufferings yet none at all then touching him without that there strayned out from him much sweat of clotted blood c. These things being thus now let vs see wherein you agree with vs 〈◊〉 248. and wherein you disagree We all agree in termes That Christ suffered in soule Gods Wrath howbeit touching the sense we disagree in 2. maine pointes The iâ—â—â— the qâ—â—â— I affirme that Christ suffered Gods Proper Wrath and vengeance you meane hee suffered only such afflictions as other godly men do suffer at the handes of the wicked and cruell world For “ Pa. 1â— you thinke all Afflictions whatsoever small or great towards whomsoever are the effects of Gods Wrath. But that is not so except in a most vnproper speach To the godly their Afflictions both small and great are Gods Fatherly and gracious Chastisements and no effects of his proper Wrath as shall appeare further heereafter Howbeit you must observe heere my 3. limitations which I set down in the * Beforâ— Quaestion 1. I meane he suffered only that proper Wrath of God which was meerely Punishment for sinne and no sinne 2. This also hee suffered as touching the Substance and Nature of the Paines not as touching the Circumstances either of of Place or Continuance c. 3. I meane hee suffered not every particular Punishment of sinne nor that which every particular sinner meeteth with all but the Generall Curse and Punishment of God for sinne namely that which belongeth in Gods Iustice to All men in Common and Generally who abide in sinne Now after these necessary limitations the maine point wherein we further disagree is this I affirme that Christ Suffered All Gods proper Wrath and vengeance for sinne namely so described and limited as is above said I say All that which the very Damned doe suffer Christ thus did suffer for vs and therefore even a Proper and immediat sense in his Soule of Gods Proper most painfull Wrath his infinit and vntolerable burning Wrath. Which what toung is it that can expresse or hearte conceaue Yet Christs Humane Soule was apt and able to feele it though not to sustaine it A iust occasion in him was offered therevnto for then he stood foorth as the only and absolute Ransompayer of all our debt And Gods vnpartiall Iustice dispenseth not without necessitie Yea where he cometh to Punish he layeth it on finding sinne vnsatisfied as he doth inhaerent in the wicked and as he did imputed in Christ our surety till he had by †Heb â—â— Sufferings accomplished finished perfitly his RedemptioÌ„ for vs. Your Aâ—â— on wâ—â—â—â—gain saâ—â— Christ â—â—red iâ—â—â— only 〈◊〉 froÌ„ hiâ— But this is far greater then as you hold that He suffered no more but meere Bodily paines that is in his Soule by froÌ„ his Body This is your drift every where but I note these expresse places â—â—g 16. * Sin which should have wrought in vs an eternall destruction both of Body and Soule could not farther prevaile in him but to the wounding of his flesh and sheding of his bloud for the iust full satisfactioÌ„ of all our sinnes even in the righteous and syncere iudgment of God Likewise your generall Title is The Full redemtion of mankind
them the Locall Hell eternall punishment Diminution of faith Holines c. with Desperation â—reat 1. â—â— 40 Reiection vtter darknes c As for my wordes which you wrest that way they are cleared by my Opening this Question both before and after Wherefore wee plainly tell you that we defie and detest in our heartes as well as you all these blasphemous wicked thoughtes of the Sonne of God our most glorious and gratious Redeemer And yet if you had vnderstoode those Phrases the whole Câ—rse of God His whole Wrath All the sorrowes of Hell onely toâ—ching the sense of Meere paines that Christ feeling the proper wrath and Iustice of God punishing him for our sinnes felt as extreeme sharpnes of paines which had no mixture of sinne as may in any possibilitie be endured yea though in Hell it selfe and so a kinde also of “ As in 〈◊〉 place I 〈◊〉 â—hew forsaking in them a kinde of * Such as 〈◊〉 self explaiâ—â—â— pag. 245 And as 〈◊〉 Curse is nâ— words bâ— deeds pa. Cursing and hatred and condemnation and a sense of burning wrath which he being our high Priest and Sacrifice was appointed vnto and which payment of ours was by God layed vpon him being our Redeemer and Ransompayer Surety and that all this he sustayned and suffered for a time in this life so deeply wofully as was possible for a man any where to suffer which was also wery God I say if this had ben your meaning we would not then hold it blasphemous nor erronious as “ Epiâ—p you obiect it vnto vs but the very truth indeed to say Hee suffered the true paines of Hell and the wholl wrath of God Which verily your own words also in some places do imply yea at least so much and that manifestly enough it seemeth as before I haue observed But to wade further then this and to particularize or to specifie the parts of Gods wrath which Christ felt as * Pa. â—47 you will vs to do or to shew the manner how or the certaine measure how deepely he suffered it what madnes were it in men to attempt and what folly is it in any to requier This sufficeth that we know God is able aswell out of the locall Hell as in it to reveale and inflict spiritually this wrath where he findeth sinne vnsatisfied and in Christ the vnion of his Godhead might admit it in his Manhood his Soule was capeable apt to discerne and feele immediatly the impression thereof in it selfe Now because also God was heere bent to punish all our most horrible sinnes in Christ and he was ordained to receave the same vpon himselfe and God was never to punish them truly any more nor any where ells and because of the proportion of Gods exact Iustice which dispenseth not where there is no necessitie for dispensation because also of Christes taking our wholl nature for no needfull purpose at all without this and lastly by reason of many pregnant texts of Scripture proving by infallible arguments that thus surely it was in this mystery of Christs purchasing our redemption which you in all your writing have no whit defeated therefore we are vndoubtedly perswaded that this is the very truth of God Namely as “ Treat 80.81.7 before I taught as touching the sense of paine and vehemency of sorrow that Christ suffered for vs All and wholly the wrath of God and his bitter Curse That is as I said so far as * Pa. 37. possibillity would admit so far as he being also very God and a man not possible to sinne could suffer Neither is there any peece of reason on your parte for the contrary And this is much more I trust then to suffer in Soule by Sympathy only from and by and with the Body Pag. 13.14 which as before I shewed you plainly do make the only wholl suffering of Christ for our Redemption which kindâ— of suffering all Godly men doe suffer also when the wicked in the world do afflict and persecute them But touching suffering of Martiâ—s and godly men Pag. 8.11 it is not intruth as †before is shewed of that kinde as Christes suffering was and therefore this suffering of the Soule onely by Sympathy commeth nothing neere to the sorrowes of the suffering of Christ which hee suffered from the hand of Gods offended Iustice and pure Holines and Wrathfull power infinitly satisfying it selfe on him for our sinnes which by his office he receaved vpon himselfe to acquite vs from the same This no Martir nor godly man doth who suffer only as from the malice and rage of men â—â—â—d therefore â—â—â—ey are so â—â—â—eerefull at â—â—â—eir Death â—â—â—hen Christe is extremeâ—â—â— sorrowfull from God there proceedeth nothing but fatherly chastenings to them his very wrath indeed for their sinnes appeareth not at all against them which they know Christ hath once borne and for ever dissolved You haue wordes in some places as if you hâ—ld this difference with vs of Christes sufferinges compared with the suffering of Martirs Namely where you say Pag. 248 Christ suffered the wrath of God punishing sinne â—ag 257 not * in his Body only but in his Soule also by some proper punishments of the Soule as by sorrow and feare in his Agony c. Howbeit though these wordes seeme plaine yet I perceave ambiguity and fallacy in them yea also I thinke a great errour First your fallacy is in that you meane sorrow and feare indeed properly in his Soule but not any proper Punishment of sinne nor comming for any paine or smart that he felt inflicted for sinne but it was meere Devotion to God 2 1â—4.23.9 144 290 Love pity compassion towards men Which say you could not be without some feare and zeale and griefe That is true but this is a notable fallacy For many thinke that you meane Christ suffered such sorrow and paine as was both proper to the Soule and was the proper punishment of sinne also But then had you heerein fully agreed with vs. Nowe that Religious Devotion godly and â—â—â—tâ—ous Aâ—â—tions and Pity are properly partes of Christes Holines and righteousnes not of his Sufferings for sinne For these 2. parts of Christes Mediation I trust you will distinguish And surely Christs Agonie was properly a part of his most bitter Passion not of his Obedience and Righteousnes albeit even in suffering also he was perfitly obedient Thus then you are never the neerer to the truth in this point for all your seeming Againe considering what you write of the wrath “ Pa. 130 132.246 of God which the Godly generally do suffer you seeme to me to thinke that every Martiâ—s death and all the crosses and griefes both of body and minde in the godly are very * For yoâ— make Gâ—â— Wrath â—â—â—ferent to men who afflicted punishments of sinne and right effects of Gods Iustice and wrath taking properly vengeance on them
for sinne in such maner as he doth on the Reprobat though not in such measure and that such likewise were Christs sufferings But then I deny that therein yow have the truth or have rightly expressed the sufferinges of Christ or of his Saintes Because the sufferings of the Saintes are properly not punishmeÌ„ts for sinnes nor effects of Gods wrath properly but are indeed fatherly profitable chastisements purposely inflicted by God for their good as before is said But Christes were altogeather of another nature and condition they were the only true and proper punishment price Satisfaction and Ransom for sinnes as hath ben also noted before after shal be further shewed If you vnderstand Christes suffering Gods Wrath to be such as the godly feele viz improperly and largely as the Scriptures †In your 13â— there do meane and not as the very price and punishment for sinne but only as Chastisements then that is likewise manefestly vntrue Also then againe for your words you are ambiguous and deceiptfull in this issue which kinde of vanity you commonly vse in all other your handling of controversies since you left writing against the Papistes as who so looketh shall see For wee affirming that Christ felt the wrath of God doe meane it properly as it inflicteth properly the punishment and Wages of sinne Your Equâ—cation in terme Gâ—â— Wrath. and you tell vs that he suffered Gods wrath as the Saints and Godly men doe suffer it That is altogeather vnproperly beeing sometime so called for a certain seeming that it hath to bee so as you acknowledge in the sense of flesh and bloud Then what is this to our purpose What ells do you worke heerein but deceipt mistaking to the Reader through the ambiguity of this word the Wrath of God Which palpable fallacy of yours is so plaine that I need not stand to open it any further and yet I assure my selfe that this is the very ground and refuge of the errour in this Question Which if a man marke well distinguish as he ought and may easily do he shall quickly drive you either to shift into this corner Your Equiocation or ells to deny much of that which you affirme in your booke elswhere Therefore lett the wise consider it Neverthelesse if happily you meane otherwise that is Pas you seeme 〈◊〉 meâ—â—â— paâ—â—â—01 105 that Christes very * outward sufferings and bodily death were in a peculiar sort the effects of Gods proper wrath thus truly punishing our sinnes on him then in effect you come to vs againe of yow will sticke but to this For there is no reason in the worlde to make Christes flesh subiect to Gods Curse for sinne and not his Minde and soule likewise Also wee must note that such outward bodily sufferings beeing indeede punishments and not chastisements for sinne that is proper effects of Gods very wrath and iustice comming to take vengeance for sinne they cannot be meere bodily sufferings nor meerly felt by sympathy in the Soule which is the proper effect of the outward sensitive facultie only but they must of necessity be conceaved discerned applyed in the inward feeling of the Minde of Christ â—â—d 〈◊〉 deny at â—â—â—nce that Mens â—â—â—ules haue â—â—â—ny sense in yeâ—â—he â—inde beâ—â—â—des the Comâ—â—â—â— sense deâ—â—nding on â—â—â—e Body and will make a singular and secret impression of sorrow in the Soule far above all meere bodily griefes beyond all measure and proportion of things in ordinary experience so exceedingly differing from all other sufferings in this life Which therefore may iustly bee termed the proper and immediat sufferings of his Soule And this sense the Lord doubtles revealeth vpon men somtime more somtime lesse in this life even as it pleaseth him Which also befell vnto Christ Againe Pag. 257. if the Agonie and sorrow which you grant Christ suffered simply in his minde be meant by you to have ben as it were a foretast of such sufferings and a feare or dread of them as very iustly it may be considering the weake disability of a Creature to stand vp against the Creator Propathia namely now shooting or preparing to shoote presently the sharpe arrowes of his wrath vpon him for our sinnes in which case and condition Christ now stood for that while then I say also I see in effect no difference betwene vs then againe this Question is as it were at an end For doubtles he suffered at one time or other the same thing which he so feared Yea such a kind of fearing cannot be but a mighty suffering thereof Neither doe wee contend to expresse what iust measure of Gods wrath nor precisely in what manner it was revealed and executed on Christ Onely wee know that whatsoever it were Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinnes though outwardly executed on the Body yet it could not but sinke in deeper even into the deapth of the Soule and be discerned by Christ and conceaved to be such and so sustayned as proceeding from God and so wound the Soule properly yea chiefly though the anguish thereof bruized his body iointly also Againe whatsoever you wil call it All or * Such 〈◊〉 as waâ— nothinâ— whol 〈◊〉 sinfull 〈◊〉 rents oâ—â— part of Gods proper Wrath and vengeance as it proceeded from him was incomprehensible vnspeakeable infinit and vntolerable to any creature therefore so it was vnto the very Manhood of Christ namely when the Godhead for a season concealed it self of purpose and with held his wonted supportation and comfort from him to the end that his bitter Passion ordayned of God and most voluntarily vndertaken by himselfe might bee in suffering the “ The 〈◊〉 Paines rowes 〈◊〉 sin werâ—â—â— Christ foâ—â— time no qualifye◠〈◊〉 lessened sorrows and paines which were due to vs nothing qualified but in all severity accomplished As indeed when his Hower was come and gon it was As touching that terme The death of his Soule which you stumble at we shall speake thereof heereafter in due place Thus far I have proceeded in opening the true state of this Quaestion which whether you who have begon to avouch the contrary will now acknowledge and approve or not I know not Overthrow it I trust you shall never with all the cunning and strength you have For vndoubtedly it is and so will appeare by the word to be a manefest truth and therefore “ Act. 5â— will prevaile besides that it is expresly the doctrine taught and established by authority in England as heereafter God willing I shall plainly shew notwithstanding all your strange coÌ„tradicting traducing thereof Lastly whether I did set down this very state of the quaestion in full effect in my former Treatise or whether I changed it though indeed I graunt I was there much shorter then I am heere I pray you looke consider againe in that my †Pag. 5 33. and first booke This being well considered and marked will
it Nâ—â—nim ipsâ—â— in celo â—â—rus crat â—â—mo Chrâ—â— Iesus Divine presense in Paradice But you refuse that because * Pag. 21 wee have no warrant in the word of God to fasten Christs Soule vnto Hell for the time of his Death that it might not be in Paradise before he descended to Hell Third You “ Pa. 196 renounce Austen and as he saith almost all the Church thinking that Christ loosed Adam and som others whom he thought good out of the paines of Hell wherein till his going thither they were held Fourth Against all the Fathers * Pa. 188 200. you affirme it to bee more then manefest that Christ did not fetch the Patriarches out of Limbo Patrum a certaine region of rest vnder the earth as they generally thought Fift “ Pa. 18â— You renounce divers Fathers opinion that * None eâ—â— Martyrs tull none do go into Heaven till after the last Judgment Thus we observe your liberty in leaving the Fathers when you see cause Why deny you vnto vs the like If we bring not as good reason to dissent as you do whensoever we vary from them let vs heare of it and beare the blame iustly This only we desire that in any case of Religion the bare custom of times the opinioÌ„ of men and authority meerely Humane should never barre vs from receaving the simplicity and evidence of the truth concerning vs which appeareth in the Scripture But now that we may proceede let vs see your speciall examples pag. 229. wherein you will make it manefest that J have despised the Fathers First pag. 229. * where you say out of certaine Fathers That Christ in his dying gaue vp his Spirite miraculously pag. 7. * no violence of Death wresting it from him as it doth ours pag. 229. but when hee saw his time hee even at an instant laid it downe of himselfe no paines hastening his death Heb. 4.15 Contrary to this I alleaged the Scripture He was like vs in all things sinne only excepted To answer this * you reply Was he like vs in his birth Pag. 230. Can we lye in the Grave without corruption as he lay Neither yet his flesh ly he Grave hoat possiâ—â—y to cotâ—â—t otherwise â—n as his â—â—es possibly â—â—d not be â—â—en Or raise our selves from death as he did Which poore answere I wonder to see comming from you Aswell you might shew further He was not like vs in that he walked vpon the water nor in that he fasted 40. dayes nor in that he knew the secrets of mens hearts nor in that he turned water into wine and with a word healed all diseases c. These things don by his Manhood yet were they the proper effects of his Godhead they were no naturall but supernaturall thinges But this text to the Hebrues saith onely of naturall Humane properties and infirmities that Christ in them was altogeather like vs sinne excepted Also this maner of Dying whereof we speake that is by sore wounds and blowes by sharpe outrages and deadly paines to draw neerer and neerer to Death is a meere natural infirmity and incident to all men Therefore surely in this very maner did Christ dy also like as all men vse to do in such case Againe those Divine effectes which you mention are iustly beleeved to haue bene in Christ Why Because of the expresse Scripture that * witnesseth the same 〈◊〉 1.23 25.1.2.27 â—â—â—n 1.3 4. â— 1.10.18 Let mee see expresse words in the text that he Dyed as you say not naturally but Miraculously and then will I beleeue it also You cite certain places by which you would prove it â—â—h 10.18 As No man taketh my soule from me but J lay it down of my selfe c. Hee meaneth heere that his Death was meere voluntary freely vndertaken and willingly of his owne accord perfourmed with such naturall and ordinary infirmities as belong to a man As you confesse somwhere * So that to dy even in Christ â—â—g 161. was infirmity though voluntary Heere then Christ denyeth that hee suffered any thing as forced on him by constraint violence but he sheweth that himselfe was altogeather willing even to Dy for his people which also “ pag. 11â— you plainly see How will you hence conclude Ergo He dyed miraculously not by any fayling of the strength of nature in him notwithstanding all his most intolerable sorrowes and paines This is truly a miraculous argument As for Chrisostom whom * pag. â—3â— you cite heerevpon he hath nothing for this point Though it were new not ordinary that Christ a man should haue power to lay down his life and power to take it againe yet why may not his manhood dy naturally notwithstanding But you will conclude this better If I deny you say this that Chrisostom saith I must remember what God himself saith “ Luc. 12. O foole this night shall they fetch away thy soule from thee I remeÌ„ber it well What then Ergo Christ saying None taketh my life from me c. meant that he would dy miraculously and not by the fayling of nature in him If this be the reason as I take it to bee verily I grant it is marveylous subtile and past my reach Further * pag. 7. you cite that “ Ion. 19. When Jesus had tasted the vineger he said All is finished and bowed the head and gave vp the Ghost What proveth this Surely that at last after long and sore anguish of minde and bodily torments his naturall strength fayled him therefore he bowed his head and gaue vp the Ghost What miracle is there in this But Barnard saith this proveth plainly an infinit power Which doth His tasting the vineger or his saying it is finished or his bowing the head or his giving vp the Ghost For my part I can not yet see any infinit power in any of these Wherefore I can not rest on Barnard heere except you for him do finde out som other point in the text to prove plainly an infinit power shewed openly in the maner of the Death of Christ which yet I see not Giue me leaue to refuse the Fathers in such a case which your selfe doth as we saw before Then you alleage that * Luke 23. Iesus cryed with a lowd voyce a little while before he dyed to shew himself “ pag 7. say you to be free from any touch of death How are you sure of that What Scripture saith so Or is there absolut necessitie in reason that it must be so Questionles none at all Is it a thing not possible that Christ should cry alowd saying Father into thy hands J commend my Spirit and even anon after dy and yet nature to haue ben weaker in him and so himself neerer to death now at last then he was before in the beginning of his Passion Let all wise men iudge If this be not possible I will
burning Love in vs now in this life Which things are farre distant asonder and cannot stand togeather But all thâ—se are so vnlikely that I will leave them to the consideration of the godly wise Then d you come to your next reason about the Sacramentes â—â—g 238. wherein you thinke to touch me First you reprove mee for saying â—â—at 1. 〈◊〉 14. e Sacraments are Earthly elementes they cannot set out the spirituall and invisible effects in Christ. This say you is against the definitioÌ„ of a Sacrament which is Avisible signe of invisible grace I answer first you rather overthrow your self in vrging this against me for your owne main assertion is that neither the Iewish Sacrifices nor Christian Sacraments do signifie any more then the bodily and bloudy death of Christ Then it is your selfe Sir indeed that denyeth the very definition of Sacraments that they are visible signes of invisible graces For I hope the Bodily and bloudy death of Christ and the renting of his flesh with whips nayles and speares were visible and not invisible things As for me I can easily defend my self although you fayle in this For I holde that Sacraments are indeede visible signes of invisible graces wrought in vs by Christ and yet vsually they represent not spirituall and invisible Effects or Acts in Christ himselfe but a Albeiâ—â— conseqâ—â— impâ—â— I denyâ— but alâ— Passion be vnâ—â—stood it only the externall and visible partes of his Passion Can you not reconcile these two Any bâ—ginner in Christianitie will easily do it Next b Pag. 2â— you make me to crosse the Justitution of the Lords Table because c Treat â— pag. 14 I said the Ceremony of breaking the bread cannot properly belong to Christes body But even heere doe not I say expresly that it sheweth foorth how Christes body was broken for vs Which you say is the Institution and this I plainly acknowledge where then is mine errour and what is it Indeed I meane that the breaking of the bread into many pieces doth not set out primarily the breaking of his body but of his soule first and immediatly and then of his Body iointly and consequentlie Againe that it doth not set out properly the pearcing or boring through of Christs body with the spear or nayles nor his lashing with the whip because d 1 Cor. 1â— Klòmenon is broken to pieces properly and e Isa 53â— Meducca in the Prophet is also Broken to pieces properlie or crushed and broken to powder As these f Nom. â— Isa 19. Deut. 2â— Likewise ther worâ— very same â—â—ture 2 Câ—â— 34.7 2 〈◊〉 23.6 15.16.12 Isa 21 and 2 and 41.1 Mic 4. â— Scripture do vse this word likewise and also all Lexicons do confirme Your g Psal 14 Ior. 44. â— Except Ioâ—â— 2. wher the portioÌ„ maâ— kept of that per sense 〈◊〉 breake mâ—â— pieces with words Aâ—â— Psal 34 51.17 allegatioÌ„s therfore about the vse of Dacha otherwise shew not the proper but the vse thereof altered Thus then still I say our former places are not to be meant principallie of Christs Body for it was not properly broken which also my other place sheweth suffficientlie where it is said h Ioh 1â— Not a bone of him was broken Seeing it is manefest that none of his flesh was separated from his bones But of necessitie it must have ben so if his flesh had ben properlie broken into pieces and yet his bones not broken i Pag. 23 You say From a part the whole may and doth properly take denomination First you must shew that some parte of him was properly broken into pieces which hitherto is proved to the contrary That fable which k Pag. 6â— you bring of the Nayles being so great that Constantine of them made him a Bridle and a Helmet will not helpe to prove that his Body was properly broken Neither is cutting or tearing or pearching through which onely indeed the Scripture warranteth that Breaking properly which l Dachâ— that word in the Prophet bâ—fore noted doth properly signifie And I pray is that true that from a part the whole may and doth properly take denomination Doth it properly From a part to the whole is a Figure of speach Is a Figurative speach a proper speach w th you Vainly you charge me I know not how often against my expresse words that I call Hell Heaven and Descending Ascending But heere it is no wrong to charge you with such an absurdity indeed who expresly do make that whiche you say is Figurative to bee a proper denomination I am sure your Grammar was better before you were as you are But to proceede if you aske mee Cor. 11.24 〈◊〉 53 10. whether doe I thinke that a those places of the Apostle and the Prophet doe signifie at all the pearcing of his body I aunswere they may by a generall and vnproper speach as piercing may be an vnproper kind of breaking For seeing the H. Ghost by those wordes intendeth to shew the whole outward violence and destruction of his flesh also and not onely the breaking bruizing of his Soule therefore I deny not but heerein so much may be signified yet in no wise not that alone nor by a proper signification as I have said Nowe where you catch at an advantage in me as you thinke Treat 1. â—â—g 14. in that I said b The Caeremony of breaking the bread or that breaking to pieces in I say cannot belong properly to Christes body but to his soule I grant taking my wordes at the worst and thinking me to be a senseles foole as indeed you do in your whole writing so you may construe them as if I had said The Soule might be properly broken to pieces But other men not inferior to your L. in learning none dispraysed who have read this Treatise have coÌ„ceaved me thus This breaking to pieces cannot be properly said of Christs body nor in any sense proportionable to the property of the c words But his Soule may rather more truly be said to have ben broken and bruized to pieces in such wise as souls may be broken with sorrows extraordinary anguish â—omenon â—educca and so was his Body likewise by sympathy with his Soule Where I deny not but Broken applyed to the Soule is Figurative yet keeping a iust and full proportion with the proper sense of Breaking to pieces which we cannot keepe referring it to his Body So that thus it is neerer and better applyed to the Soule then to the Body of Christ which was only pierced or bored through Then you rehearse another of your reasons tending to the very same effect as that last before â—â—g 240. You will prove d you say that the bloud of our Saviour is the true price of our redemption and that aswel of our Soules as of our Bodyes Still you deale fraudulently for who denyeth this as your wordes runne But wee know you meane
common sense of Gods wrath so in my wholl Treatise I take it for Gods perfit Holynes Iustice Power i Ioh. 3â— Psal 2â— 2. Cor 9. properly executing vengeance punishment whether little or great due to them on whom sinne lyeth But you generally do so cary this phrase as signifying any punishment of sinne whatsoever and namely the Afflictions which the very Godly do suffer which is altogeather an vnproper speach This I observe most specially in one place of your booke above others Where you say l Pag. 1â— All kindes of troubles paines and griefes in our states bodyes and mindes which shorten or sower this present life are degrees of Gods wrath and chasticements of out transgression corruption Which presently you prove by many needeles Scriptures And from this sense of his Fathers wrath you do not exempt the Lord Christ. You meane that this he suffered indeed and that this is all in your opinion It is true All troubles paines griefes in their first Ordinance a were the effects of Gods proper wrath â—â—ou doe 〈◊〉 rightâ—â—â— 275. But in their state and condition now they are b not namely as the Godly do suffer them Which we must heere note and consider well â—â—at 1.14 â— 132 You say right also This †because it seemeth grievous for the present and not ioyous is called somtymes in the Scriptures the rodde and wrath of God True it seemeth But indeed it is not so or it ought not so to be For c it seemeth otherwise to the iudgment of faith and knowledg 〈◊〉 1.2 â— 2.28 〈◊〉 2 Cor. â—0 â—efore pa. â—â— 19. Then Gods wrath in this sense is very vnproperly taken as I have often said Wherfore speaking properly exactly as in this CoÌ„troversy we ought according to the revealed minde of the Holy Ghost it is Chasticement correction it is not in any wise Wrath or punishment properly meant Neyther may it be said properly that his Iustice leadeth him to inflict it on vs as e you affirme but it is his Holynes and Love towards his children which chasteneth them 〈◊〉 132. According to the Scripture which saith 〈◊〉 12.10 f God chasteneth vs for our profit that we might be partakers of his Holynes And g whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth 〈◊〉 6.7 〈◊〉 11.32 he scourgeth every Soune that he receaveth If we indure chastening God offereth himselfe vnto vs as vnto sonnes for what sonne is it whom the Father chasteneth not Therefore to speake properly not Gods Iustice but his Holynes and Fatherly Love doth move him to lay whatsoever Crosses and troubles vpon his children He is not vnto them a Iudge or Revenger but a Father Neyther is it Wrath that cometh from him or Vengeance for sinne properly â—â—r 11. but h amendment in Love towards the godly Now the case with Christ was cleane otherwise He needed no Amendement but that which he suffered was right Punishment He was neyther in case as the wicked nor yet simply as the godly He differed from them both and yet in som pointes did partake of both their conditions He was like the godly in that he was highly beloved of God and had no maner of sinne of his own laid to his charge He was like the wicked and differed from the case of the godly greatly because he was laden charged with sinnes yea with all maner of sinnes sustayned their due punishment there being also none other at all to indure the vengeance of God for them but himselfe As we haue largely shewed before in opening the state of our Question Thus then whatsoever Christ suffered and specially at his death was very wrath and vengeance from God properly taken true punishment and iustice executed against sinne for sinne to the which he was in som sort condemned and appointed also this was the true Curse of the Law which thus he sustayned for vs. Nevertheles in all this his Case was extraordinary his condition in the like punishments vtterly vnlike to the wicked For his owne nature was still for all this most holy faithfull stedfast loving the Lord and beloved of him albeit in his office of Redeeming vs and suretyship for vs he did sustaine truly and not vnproperly as the Godly do the Lordes very wrath against sinne which he tooke vpon him Heere is now the Power of God to be deepely considered togeather with his vnspeakeable Iustice and Love and Holines Even one of the greatest mysteries of Christian Religion which to vnfolde what toung is able yea what heart can conceave it And yet most necessary most comfortable to be vnderstood of all men Namely how the Lord hath assigned to his sonne in the worke of RedemptioÌ„ 2. personnes as it were or countenances or coÌ„ditions His owne naturally which God ever deerely loved our countenance or person or coÌ„dition which he sustayned by his office which condition the Lord truly a As yoâ—â— Gods Câ—â— pag. 26â— in deeds in wordâ— accursed and punished Only the sense of the paine of Gods Vengeance came indeede vnto his most holy nature the Curse the Hatred the wrath and iudgment of God being quenched therewith His owne nature felt the sorrow and paine of the Curse and Hatred But the Hatred Curse was bent against the load of our sinne wherein he stood forth as guilty before God and appeared as it were clothed therewith This was Love and mercy to vs this was Iustice vpon Christ having vndertaken for vs this was infinit power and wisdom both wayes in God to bring it to passe which no creature can comprehend his Holynes and Love still chastening his Redeemed ones but laying no part of true Punishment or proper Vengeance for sinne vpon them which Christ only did for them wholly sustayne Thus also seeing Christ indeed had no sinne in him as the godly have to be corrected neyther could be correctted chasticed for nothing therefore properly he was not chastised nor corrected at all but his Afflictions every one both small and great were true and proper punishments and the effects of Gods very wrath for our sinne lying vpoÌ„ him 〈◊〉 245. Som where a you say Christ might suffer the wrath of God in his body yea in his soule he might suffer it and yet not the paines of the Damned or of Hell We grant you say true Christ suffered not the paines of the damned nor of Hell vnderstanding this for the very same condition state alltogeather b as the Damned are in 〈◊〉 you deâ—â—â—e it pag. â—0 49.50 We abhorre such blasphemy as much as you that Christ so suffered Hell paines Yea albeit I know you are far from thinking so yet I say your words do com neerer vnto it then ours do â—â—g 15.16 as is c before noted But I aske do you graunt that Christ suffered Gods wrath in Spirit as the Apostle d somwhere distinguisheth the Spirit Soul If
you meane not thus 〈◊〉 The. 5.23 then you againe vse sophistry deceaving vs with the worde Soule For wee meane thereby in this Question onely the Spirit or Minde as it is also called in exact and distinct speach Howbeit speaking vulgarly and ordinarily we calle it the Soule Which yet sometime is vnderstood onely for the Sensitive parts quickning the body and depending thereon But this indeede is not it which we haue heere in quaestion If you meane in Soule to be properly and immediatly in his immortall Spirit as the ordinary phrase intendeth and that so he suffered directly punishment for sin in his Soule not Devotion Piety zealous Care only as I doubt e you meane then you differ not frō vs 〈◊〉 observe 〈◊〉 18. but we al agree And thus my wordes shal be true Christ suffered a sense of Gods wrath f equall to Hell it selfe and all the torments thereof For as touching Gods wrath punishing his Spirite Which you 〈◊〉 s o blame 〈◊〉 244.247 who can say but that this was as hoat and skorching as Hell fire it selfe Who can limit or measure the fury of Gods severe Iustice when he cometh in iudgment against sinne as now he did vnto Christ This therefore being well pondered we may preceave that Christs sorrow anguish which he indured for sinne might very well be and was no doubt infinit yea even in those bodily stripes woundes and bloudshed whose paines otherwise were finite His soule not only discerning sensitively the bodily paine smart but chiefly in the vnderstanding he conceaved and in his faculty of immediat suffering he felt the fury of that hand which principally strooke those blowes vpon his Humane nature not Pilats nor the Iewes who were but instruments but the originall and chiefe imploying them which was Gods Justice armed with vengeance for his sinne His I may call it for he paid for it Now this could not but make an vnspeakeable impression of paine sorrowes which stacke in the depth of his soule Who then can say how litle or how small this was Nay who can declare or comprehend the infinit greatnes of it Finally your self doth grant expresly that a Pag. 2. the Wrath of God is Hell indeed only it b Isa 30 causeth Hell to be cruell Yea you grant it to be sharper then Hell So that we see heereby how vainly you say c Pag. 2◠Out of this proposition Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God for sinne I shall never conclude Ergo he suffered the true paines of Hell I have heere shewed you I trust that this followeth well seeing the wrath of God which Christ felt in his Spirit was his right and proper wrath albeit he suffered not all nor the wholl wrath of God nor Hell locally nor every part thereof iust as the Damned do Which you without all colour of reason or likelyhood would make men imagine to be the question betweene vs. You d Pag. 24 would make a Contradition in my wordes for saying e Treat 1. Christ suffered in his wholl manhood and afterward f Treat 1. Christ suffered Gods wrath properly and immediatly in his Soule Where I say not as you vntruly charge me that He suffered all that he suffered in his whole manhood Wherefore this is a niew contrariety Againe granting him to suffer all that he suffered in his wholl manhood yet he must suffer Gods wrath as God wrath properly and immediatly in his Soule in his Body mediatly and by coniunction only with his Soule And thus my reason g Treat 1. there framed is yet still wholly good and sound Then I am charged with absurdityes I know not how many nor how great 1. h Pag. 34◠Because I say i Treat ◠pag. 17. Christ assumed not our nature nor any part of it but only to suffer in it properly and immediatly As if I had meant heere that he became man not to reveale to vs by his owne mouth his Fathers will not to worke righteousnes for vs not to quicken and sanctify vs but only to suffer for vs and nothing els Wherein who would have shewed himselfe so vniust an Adversary so vnreasonable Were it not reason and iust dealing to consider whereof we dispute and so weighing the whole matter of our talke not to stretch and racke my words further then that All men may see it to be manefest that k Treat ◠pag. 16. heere I speake only of Christs suffering for our redemptiō having not one word about his other benefits which he wrought for vs. Pag. 17. a And after speaking of Christs Soules suffering I shew that although there were 2 sortes thereof one immediat and proper an other by Sympathy from and with the flesh yet Christ tooke our Humane Soule only to suffer in it properly immediatly that is his maine end was not that he should suffer in it by Sympathy from and with the body and onely so which you very strangely affirme So that my meaning is no more but to exclude that which you affirme That Christ tooke his Humane Soule to suffer in it only from and by his Body This heere I denyed and nothing els For I grant that Christ intended that his Humane Soule should suffer by Sympathy but yet also this he intended not directly nor primarily in taking the 2 distinct partes of our Humane nature our Soule and our Body He intended it by consequence because Natures right state was such in vs therefore determining to be in nature like vs he would also that his Soule should feele the Bodyes outward harmes as it doth with vs. Howbeit in comparison of the Soules most principall disposition of that which is proper to Reasonable Creatures he did not respect the inferiour part that which is common to vs with Beastes even this sensitive suffering by Sympathy with and from the Body I say in comparison of the other Christ respected not this yet he did respect this also as I said secondarily consequently that is because he intended to have our nature in whole and full perfection as we have it only except sinne Now I beseech you would any vpright adversary obiect against me that in this speach I exclude Christes doing righteousnes in his Soule for vs c. I appeale to all indifferent Readers Rather hence we are to gather to conclude that each part in Christ ought to have the proper and immediat vse as is incident to the nature thereof aswell in suffering as it is cleere that it hath in working righteousnes In Christes working of righteousnes and obedience to God his Soule had a proper and immediat part to do which it executed without the Body as to conceave meditate on the will of God revealed to him to love and wholly to imbrace it and to purpose the full performing of it c. His Body also had a proper and externall vse not onely to follow
the holy thoughts and purposes of his minde but also to minister many outward occasions to derive them to the minde whereby Christ wrought righteousnes compleatly and in his whole man That which was by cooperation and mutuall cohaerence only of one part with the other as it was a distinct kinde of working in the Soule and in the body also so it was respected secondarily and only because the true constitution of our nature requireth so which Christ meant wholly and perfitly to take vpon him Whence now we may well argue As it was with him touching his faculty of doing righteousnes and Obedience so it was and ought to bee touching his suffering Gods punishments for vs. There is no reason in the world nor likelyhood that the natural faculty in Christs Soule of proper and immediat suffering for our sinnes should have no vse and a Suffering of paines onely by and from the body should be sufficient when in his doing of righteousnes for vs his Soules ioint Obedience and mutually knit togeather in with his Body was not alone sufficient But there was further obedience found in the Soule of Christ even that which was proper and immediat in it as before I said Seeing then such a kind of Obedience was necessary for vs in Christs Soule therefore such a Suffering also even in the same kinde was necessary likewise This must needs be a perfit reason for vs against you except you could by expresse Scripture disprove this proportion of like necessity betweene the operation of the proper faculties of Christes Humane Soule that is betweene his Doing Suffering for vs which you shall never be able to do And thus it appeareth I hope that you had no cause so cruelly to rage at me for this as you do Nor yet for the next where your charge me that a Pag. 250. I conclude Christs flesh to be needles for our redemption A horrible Haeresie But how do I say so much Because I say His Soules suffering by Sympathy did not make properly to our redemption Ergo his Flesh was needles I deny this sequele how can that follow Touching the sense of my speach you may remember how I have largly declared b Pag. 8. before that the Soules proper suffering is greatly and iustly distinguished from the CoÌ„mon suffering that is by sympathy And that the Soules suffering by Sympathy in Christ was intended by God by reason that our naturall constitution doth require it so to be in every true and perfit man which Christ also was And thus it did make to our redemption even as likewise his Infirmities and Affections as his Wearines Hunger Sleepe Feare Love Ioy c. These doe make to our redemption not as intended in Christs incarnation principally and primarily but secondarily and by consequent because that Humane nature which God ordayned vnto him and intended to be perfit in him could not otherwise be throughly perfit as it is in vs but with these common Affections infirmities which other mortall Creatures have to not Man only Also in Christ these Infirmities and Affections wrought not immediatly for sinne but vsually for other particular causes and occasions immediatly Nevertheles they were all even for sin in him consequently that is because the perfection of Humane nature which he assumed for sinne and was in every point in him as before I noted required so Even thus likewise in Christ I say his Soules suffering by sympathy wrought in him immediatly properly for some other particular cause stirring that faculty that is by reason of the Bodily paine smart which this sensitive power of the Soule apprehended felt and caused the flesh also to feele This suffering then of his Soule only by sympathy was immediatly and properly not for our redemption from sin but for the sensitive apprehending of the smart woundes and blowes which the Iewes gave his body yet as before I said consequently even this was for our sinne also namely because these woundes were given him for our sinne And thus though it made for our redemption in such maner as it wrought in Christ because of our sinne and as it was intended by Christ in taking both partes of our Nature the Soule the Body yet this was not in a direct or immediat respect and so not properly but by consequent as I have shewed After a you charge me sorely Pag. 252. that I falsifie your Argument about receaving pollution from Adam For where b I frame your reason as grounded on that opinion that onely our flesh is derived from Adam and not our soule Treat 1. pag. 19. Pag. 252. c you renounce it vtterly and say you grounded no reason vpon that difficulty so you made no such argument as heere I pretend Which whether it be true or no I report me to them that heard you But then what is your reason now is it any otherwise grounded No certainly if you make any reason at all Who trifleth then and why doe you vpbraid me so much with trifling Let vs see what is your reason now Christes flesh is as able to redeeme vs as Adams to condemne vs. But we inherit pollution from Adams flesh Ergo. Doe we inherit pollution from Adams flesh and is it not by Generation How ells do we inherit pollution coÌ„demnatioÌ„ from him If there be no otherway why doe you then seeme to refuse the difficult question of our Generation and yet vrge the sequele thoreof For if our soules arise in Generation from Adam as well as our flesh how can your reason be good by any possiblity It is best therefore vtterly to omit this reason which you grant hath no ground but a great difficulty doubtfull question I a Treatisâ— pag. 21. have shewed herefore at large that your argument which heere is your Minor is nothing true For pollution that is sin reall iniquity is not in our flesh without a Soule But Ambrose saith We are defiled before we haue life I pray omit mens Authorities in this case prove by sound reason that which you would Neither is it cleere as you say it is that we â—â—heriâ—â— pollution froÌ„ Adams flesh only This word only you must add or els you say nothing against vs. Our parents Soules are in cause as wel as their flesh that sin is derived vnto vs. But you draw me to talke of these intricat things which I would in no wise meddle with I pray kepe b pag. 10. your promise better not to medle with this difficultie neither to make it any grouÌ„d of your reason which yet you do here notwithstanding Again you with one breath overthrow your self For you say we have pollution before the Soule commeth whence soever it coÌ„meth Yea whence soever What if the Soule doe come in by generation You see how you crosse your self who do so taunt me for this fault I hope altogither vniustly Then c Pag. 25 you
lâ—sse to make his Sonne or his Sonne to make him selfe any such Suretie or Redeemer of Rebells as Christ was made and might be made of God for vs. So that also where you would have it to serve that we might perceave by this how Christ was not defiled nor hatefull nor guilty by imputation of our treason it is evidently to weak For you have not shewed neither can shew that this Kings Sonne was or ought to have bene such a Suretie Redeemer as Christ was that is vnto bodily death Therefore this Similitude cannot bee good We have other maner of warrant that Christ was by imputation made Sinne for vs and the Curse for vs and that this ordinance was holy and right and above all reproofe Which you can not bring for your Kings SoÌ„nes Suretiship nor for the Kings fact who kept not the order of iustice when he spared abominable Rebells without their bloudshed or when he slew his guiltles Sonne for them that they might be spared After this c he impugneth another reason of myne with marveylous skorne and detestation Pa. 183.284 That seeing Christ d on the Crosse spoyled principalities and powers Col. 2.15 and made a shew of them openly triumphing over them Therfore I collected that Christ there discerned and felt the Powers of darknes Sathan and his Complices as very instrumentes working the effectes of Gods wrath vpon him selfe Which as I conceave is no such foolish nor impious reason as he vainly pretendeth For doth not the very phrase and maner of speach import some such mightie contention and violent opposition where yet at length an absolut glorious triumphant victorie was obtayned Surely it doeth This then must be conceaved and felt by Christ neither could these be other effectes but onely of Gods proper wrath severitie and indignation against the sinne of the world which was matter of a Of som paine a tormenâ— opposition against Christ at that season it could not be the revealing of anie glorie or comfort which such instruments procured vnto him wrought vpon him Against this you bring not a word Nevertheles your high disdaine towards me breaketh out touching the maner how this might be But what is that to the purpose What if no toung can expresse the maner as neither have I once indeavoured to expresse it shall not therefore the testimonie of the H. Ghost be true that on the Crosse Christ obtayned such a victorie against the Divells which implyeth also such a Conflict first as I have observed Yet because you will needes examine the maner howe possibly this might be let vs see what you make of it The Divells saye you have nothing to doe with the Soules of men but eyther to tempt them or torment them First before I answer you directly this wee may consider Christ might and no doubt he did in his Soule discerne conceave and applie to him selfe all the rage malice How Châ—â—â— might be faulted by than on Crosse and violence of the Iewes tormenting him to death as set on fire by Sathan him selfe and by all the powers of Hell and these also as set on worke by the Iustice and severe Wrath of God now purposely laying punishment on his Sonne thereby to take satisfaction and recompence for all our sinnes Now this feeling and suffering in the Soule of Christ made an other kinde of impression in him and was infinitly more greevous and dolefull as touching the present sense then otherwise the meere outward stripes and woundes of men were or could be These conflictes of Christ on the crosse with Satans rage malice laboring if he could possibly by these meanes to have queÌ„ched the light of our Salvatio may wel be vnderstood by the Apostle in this place yet none of your exceptions do touch this argument Elswhere in your book you speak directly against the maine grouÌ„d of it affirming that God himself did nothing to Christ that is he did not pperly punish him Thus you say b Pag. 3â— God did not any thing vnto him And c Pag. 32. who did Crucifie him I pray you God or the Jewes And d Pag. 7â— He was indeed coÌ„demned by man that gave wrongful sentence of death against him but he was acquitâ—ed of God And e Pag. Christ was no more a Curse then he was Sin who indeed and with God was neither â—roperâ—â—â—hed â—â—st â—â—or 5 21 but with men he was reputed both wicked and accursed Notwithstanding the very trueth and Gods word it selfe is flat contrary to you For it is written a Hes made him Sinne for vs which knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him Yea b he made his Soule sinne Which is nothing els but that c the Lord layd vpon him or inflicted vpon him the iniquitie of vs all 〈◊〉 53 10. 〈◊〉 6.5.10 â—rem in 〈◊〉 8. 〈◊〉 4 28. â—â—m 8.3 Yea d the Lord delighted to bruise him and afflicted him or slew him And the Apostles doe acknowledge that e both the counsell and the Hand of God was in Christs punishment Finally f God sending his Sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh and for sinne â—â—iac condemned sinne in * his flesh His CoÌ„demning of sinne in Christ was in deeds and not in words Gods own hand then did smite Christ and inflicted on him whatsoever he suffered as the condemnation of sinne Where yet we imagine not that God was moved with any affection or perturbation â—â—g 245. but as f you acknowledge the punishment or dayned for sin by the Iustice of God and inflicted by the hand of God whatsoever meane it pleased him to vse is called the wrath of God And then howe may we thinke Gods infinite Iustice power punished Christ Surely in all such respectes as he was capable of paines and punishments as from God Wherefore in his spirit certainly he suffered spirituall and incomprehensible punishmentes being no sinnes such as Mens soules are subiect vnto as from God In his Body also he felt bodily afflictions wch our bodyes can apprehend Some God himselfe immediatlie inflicted some hee inflicted by meanes and instrumentes but still it was his Hand principally which did what soever was done vnto him Neither can you say that Christs punishment was Gods meere and bare permission only Nay his punishment was his revealed and written will his expresse and publike ordinance and most holy appointment from the beginning of the world and now at last effected by his owne hand and by other meanes when the fulnes of time was come Wherefore the whole suffering of Christ was Gods owne and most proper action The wicked Iewes and Divells were only his instruments to doe that which he set them on worke to doe though they thought not so Now we come to answer you more directlie touching the text in hand Where you would intimate that Christ on the Crosse was not tempted by the powers of Hell because
experience of them This same also sundry of the Fathers avouch with vs most fully and even those which your selfe brings for a your selfe Pag. 25. Cyrills wordes before touched are most large Cyrill Theâ—â—ur 10.3 Omnia Christus perpessus est vt nos ab omnibus liberaret Christ throughly suffered all such passions which men doe suffer that he might deliver vs from all Humane â—ature All the passions of †fleshe were stirred in Christ yet without sinne and so that vnles he had dyed we had not bene delivered from death vnles he had feared and sorrowed we had not ben quitt from feare and sorrowe Heere he saith all our passions were stirred in Christes humane nature even so farre as we are cured and so farre as might bee without sinne in him Then I hope by Cyrills iudgement the sense of the true curse and proper wrath of God for sinne was in Christes Soule so faire as it might be painfull and not sinfull seeing Men are subiect to this suffering as the most sharpest among others Lastly by Cyrill here we see that vnles Christ had felt the same suffrings which we feele and are cured of we had not bene delivered of them This also I am sure fitteth not your opinion That one drop of Christes bloud was sufficient for our whole redemption Which was one of your principles in your preaching but in your book you skip it cleane I know not how â—ag 25. 26. Next we may see that c your place of d Ambrosâ— is also fully to the same effect Luc. de â—â—tic dol â—â— A litle after his e former words he saith The ioy of the eternall Godhead being parted away from him Christ was affected with the redioâ—snes of my infirmity â—â—fore pa. 48 He tooke vpon him my sorrow that he might give mee his ioy and he abased himselfe to the sorrow of death in our manner that by the same meanes in him he might bring vs to life He ought therfore to take sorrow that he might overcome sorrow and not exempt himselfe from it that we might learne in Christ to ouercom the sorrow of death approching Wherefore Christ exempted himselfe from nothing in his Passion that we haue experience of as touching Paines and sorrowes And by the same sufferings in him selfe for vs he healeth vs wherevnto we are subiect by reason of sinne So that thus in his agonie hee wrought with a deepe effect that because in his flesh hee killed our sinnes he might also with the sorrow of his Soul extinguish the sorrow of our Soules To this very purpose also a Pag. 47 4â— Naâ—â—anz Fulgent Barnard Tertull. Ierom. many others before rehearsed do affirme most fully Neither is this taking of their sentences any whit to abuse the Fathers which you b Pag. 86. are afraid of You greatly abuse them which take them otherwise namely as if they meant that by the flesh and bloudshed of Christ meerely alone without the merit of his Soules and Mindes proper suffering our whole Ransom were paid As for our comparing the paines of Christs suffering with the paines even of the Reprobats in this life I see not that you nor any man living can finde fault therewith onely set aside their sinfull suffering which alwayes I testifie that Christ was most free from Yea I doubt not but we may compare Christes sufferings in his Agonies touching vehemency of paines even with those of the Damned in hell What the oâ— is betweenâ— Christes Suâ—fering 〈◊〉 Damned Only I conceave betweene Christs and theirs this odds 1 They suffer sinfully 2 Perpetually 3 Locally in Hell All which being excepted otherwise Christ suffered altogither as bitterly as sharpely yea I may say in nature the very same as the Damned doe which therefore may well be called the paines of Hell although yet Hell indeed doeth differ in some great and waighty circumstances as is aforesaid If you say the extreamest paines of punishment caÌ„not be where sinne is not That is true neither in deed can the least paines be where there is no sinne and that no more in the Body then in the Soule though this please not you Marke what I say The extreamest paines of al may as possibly be inflicted where no sinne is as the very least that as well in the Spirit as in the Body But in trueth neither the one nor the other is possible Neither the greatest nor the least paines of Gods proper vengeance for sinne can be inflicted or suffered at all in Soule or in Body but only where sinne is That is to say either imputed or inhaerent Ordinarily the Reprobat are thus punished where sinne is inhaerent Extraordinarily and singularly by Gods owne speciall ordinance Christ was even thus punished yet where sin was but imputed And thus therefore Christes Soule for meere paine might suffer the extreamest spiritual punishments altogeather as well as his body might suffer any at all without inhaerent sinne But you graunt his body suffered truely punishments for sinne Therefore his soule might suffer also even those of the extreamest degree Your “ See beâ—â—â— pag. 14. selfe also granteth that Christ both might and did suffer the extreamest paines that might bee without his owne sinne But it was possible for him to conceave and feele in his a minde farre greater sorrowes and paines for our sinne from Gods wrath â—at ◠〈◊〉 26. then hee could feele meerely in his body outwardly And the greatest was no more sinne then the least though both were properly for sin Therefore by your own grant Christ might and did feele and indure the greatest sorrowes of the minde and soule as well as the lesser in the body being all the very effectes of the wrath of God against sinne â—ag 102. b You bring a reason against this that God spiritually punisheth no man but for his own vncleannes which is a thing meerely vntrue For though no other man was ever punished without his owne vncleannes neither spiritually nor corporally yet Christ our Saviour was who in this case was not in the ordinarie state of men But I pray shewe me this mysterie how it is that God caÌ„not punish Spiritually where there is no inhaerent sinne but can and may Corporally where there is none All the rest of your assertions c heere are altogeather of this sute â—a 101 102 â—03 105. â—66 94. By this one reason I weakened all yours but you could passe that by To this efâ—â—ct Treat 1 â—ag 41 43. answering vnto it not a word Viz d If Christes body hanging on the Crosse and held by Death in the grave was punished by God where yet he found no sinne and which he still intierly loved and was never separated froÌ„ then so hee might did punish properly his Soule also yet never divide his Godhead nor his love from it But thus he did to his body therefore even so hee might doe and did to his
hath no shape of any reason in it It proveth that Christ surely had very great pity and commiseration of them but nothing els in the worlde Besides Christ might have far greater pity of them then Moses or Paul had and yet hee was able to cary his affection far more patiently and quietly then they were able which would rather keepe him from such an outwarde distemper as was even in them Also Christ knew exactly Gods Counsell and purpose for their reiectioÌ„ which those holy men were not so particularly sure of Wherfore Christ might better stay the vehemency breaking out of this affection which in such a case must needs tend against the knowen will of God In those holy men it might better break foorth very strongly as it did seeing they knewe not particularly Gods decree heerein so as Christ knew Lastly those holy men it seemeth having their thoughtes wholly defixed on their vehement pity towardes the Iewes earnestly and constantly wished that the Cup of Gods eternall wrath might come vpoÌ„ them selves that the Iewes who deserved it â—pecially â—ul who â—â—vâ—edly â—proveth yeâ—â—th Rom. 1. might scape But Christ in his Passion contrariwise desired that the Cup which hee tasted to be too bitter and too violent for him might passe away from him selfe Thus here is no semblance of reason in this for your purpose But against you heere are 4. worthie things to be noted If we consider this first that these most servent desires of these rare men were holy and not sinful Because their thoughts being wholly altogeather for the time defixed on their love to their Brethren in the flesh that they might be saved and that Gods glory might be infinitly more ample if he saved so many hundred thousands which now almost seemed to them as lost then it would be in their own particular salvation onely and thus for the tyme not thinking it seemeth vpon their own immutable Election and Salvation not any thing els saving only that they could desire their brethrens salvation yea though it were with their owne damnation for their sakes if so it might stand with Gods will which no doubt alwayes they implyed though expressed nor thus I take it plaine enough that these sinned not in this their desire and I suppose you take it so too in that you alleage them ground your reason of Comparison vpon them Nowe from hence I observe these 4. notable pointes â—â—â—e 1. That if God Omuipotent and only Soveraigne Lord will he may inflict Damnation and the paines of Hel vpon meere men not for them selves but for others not for their own sins but for the imputed Sinnes of other men much rather then may hee doe thus to Christ whom God sent indeed and ordayned for that purpose â—â—g â—76 Flatly contrary to your Assertion That which there you mention is the ordinary common rule The Soule that sinneth it shall Dy. But in Christ this was eatraordinary and singular that The iust dyed for the vniust 2. Wee see heere that there may be possibly a Death of the Soule a Curse and Separation froÌ„ God which is in it selfe neither Sinne nor conioyned with sinne necessarily but meerely a Suffering of Punishment from God for the sinnes of others imputed 〈◊〉 73.310 Contrarie to you also yea generally every where Third That extraordinarily there is greater love even among meere men then only to dy bodily one for another though vsually and ordinarily a greater can not be found among men which is it that a Ioh. 13 1â— Christ meaneth But how much more the may the love of Christ towards his Elect be farre greater Contrary to b Pa. 107 1â— your assertion Fourth Wee see here that these holy men without feeling any paines inflicted by Gods wrath but onely through an earnest and mighty Compassion of love c Pag. 293. have their mindes drawen so wholly to thinke on this speciall thing above their reach that during the time they turne not themselves to any other cogitation Even as the eye being bent inteÌ„tively to behold any thing for that present discerneth nothing els Whereby it coÌ„meth to passe that these wishes of these holy men ravished with Pity and Zeale are not reckoned sinfull in theÌ„ though they were directly against their owne SalvatioÌ„ which otherwise they knew was immutable with God and certainly reserved for them in Heaven This you d Pag. 293. acknowledge may be in men yet you will not skoffe at them as e Pag. 144. cast into a traunce by it nor reproch them with f Pag. 299. infernall confusion How much lesse ought you so to deale with Christ but specially to acknowledge that his marveylous perplexity may well be a meanes that his suddainwishes against his own constant purpose Gods will were yet no sinnes And that much rather even for this because Christ had infinitly more cause by his Paines theÌ„ felt and feared to be in his minde both more amuzed and also amazed then those men had by their affections Thus far of this As for the g Ambroâ—â—â— leâ—om Aâ— Bâ—de Fathers which h Pag. 19. you cite if they meane as they seeme to do that now at his Passion among other causes of sorrow there waÌ„ted not this even his great Pity towards his forlorn CouÌ„trymeÌ„ theÌ„ we ioyne with them If they meane as you would have them that this was the maine and chiefe cause of his extreame sorrows and amazednes therein I vtterly leave them Howbeit this heere note in them that these Fathers avouch Christ feared not his bodily Death and Passion for thereof only they speake heere questionles You contrariwise say that Christ feared bodily death for thereof also i Pag. 26 〈◊〉 you discourse and had more cause as you thinke so to do then any of his members haue Third touching k Pag. 19 〈◊〉 his regard of his Church generally the same answer serveth as is given to the last point before If you vrge that these Fathers are so resolute for these Causes as their wordes heere pretend then your self abuseth them more theÌ„ ever I did or meane to do â—ag 17. where you say a it is curiosity to examine presumption to determine impossibility to conclude as these doe what was the true cause of Christs Agonie Fourth Pag. 20. b you alleage his inward sorrow and zealous grief for the sinnes of the world to be the maine and chiefe cause of his Agonie Surely even to rehearse these your argumeÌ„ts is refutation of them enough All these are proper parts of his Holines Righteousnes as I have said but no proper partes or causes of his bloudy most dreadfull Agonie that is of his Sacrifice satisfying for sinne Only his * Heb. 2.10 Paines were which then he felt and feared Neither in respect of these your supposed causes could he say Save me froÌ„ this hower nor Let this Cup passe from me as
â—â—bâ— 5.7 Againe if you meane that all this was voluntary in him and not felt indeede according to the outwarde semblance and as men beholding him would iudgâ— Luc. 22.43 then belike you make him to have counterfayted Which thought God for bid should ever come into any Christians heart For no cause you say f I iest and iybe with the Apostles wordes Pag. 302. but I feare this is to iest and iybe in deed with the most dreadfull and bitter sorrowes of our Saviour in working for vs our Salvation And heere why say you not aswell that his Death and bloudshed on the Crosse shewed in him no paines nor infirmitie but only that voluntarily he made him selfe there the true Priest and pe formed the prefigured bloudy and deadly Sacrifice for the sins of the world As good reason altogeather you have to say so as to affirme it of his Agonie â—ag 29. As for the Scriptures which g you cite they prove in deed that Christ nowe executed his office of Priesthoode but will you divide exempt his Death on the Crosse froÌ„ his Priesthood Or his â—ines and fit mity froÌ„ ther The sanctifying of him self doeth it not as well intend and comprehende that Sacrifice on the Crosse as that of his Prayers in the Garden To thinke otherwife is without all shewe of trueth or reason yet I see not why you should cite these textes vnles you meant so neither can I see what els you meane where you conclude saying Christs Agonie being alleaged by the Apostle to demonstrat Christs Priesthood must not rise froÌ„ the terror of his own death â—ag 27. And yet h a little before you openly doe confesse and grant that his Agonie did rise from the feare of his death and that Christ had farre greater cause then any of his members to feare it Also it is contrary to your citing of Cyrill pag. 25. And heere why should i Hilary deny that Christes bloudy sweat came of infirmitie â—ag 28. Or k Austin that his feare and perturbatioÌ„ was of infirmitie â—ag 25. Surely there is no cause For though it be against the coÌ„mon course of our Nature for any paines or feare to sweat bloud yet the Divine power with and through paines and feares might wring out of his body that trickling bloudy sweat As it is plaine that it did by the wordes next before in the text a Luk. 2 44. An Angell came to give him some comfort that is least hee should have bene overwhelmed quite in his sorrow and discomfort but still he was in his Agonie and swet like droppes of bloud trickling to the ground and presently saieth My Soule is full of sorrowes even to death and thrice he prayed that this Cup and this Hower might passe from him It cannot be therefore but that by Sorrowes and Paines this sweat came though also Gods power caused it by laying vpon his Soule and body invisible supernaturall vnspeakeable sorrowes and horrors and by making his fleshe visibly to expresse in some sort this spirituall and extraordinary torment of paine and feare which he suffered And in deed where they say 1 Not Infirâ—â—ty but Poâ—â—â— did this Nec infirmitas quod potestas gessit that proveth the cleane coÌ„trary For Jdeo infirmitas quia potestas gessit 2 Therforâ— there waâ— firmity â—â—cause thâ—â—â— was Powâ—â— For the working of his Power in him argueth the suffering of his Infirmitie The power of God is peâ—fited in infirmÃtie And because it was aboue the course of nature therefore nature was herein oppressed not exempted from paines Thus these speak fully for vs and against you that heere appeared not Christes infirmity only in suffering but his Divine power also in punishing And this I iudge in deed to bee their very meaning But those other mysticall and figuratiue sayings of Austin Pag 28. â— Bede Bernard howe shall we admit them without better warrant That Christes bloudshead was to signifie that Martyrs should shead their bloud what reason have we so to thinke Or that his bloud head should signifie the purging of his Disciples hearts froÌ„ sinne yea or of all his Church in the whole world It did not signifie this but it did it in deed Lastly if it had thâ—se significations in it yet withall his Agonie might rise from his very Paines Feare comming from the present sense of Gods iustice and wrath nowe revealâ—d and working vpon him Hitherto we have made it manifest that in trueth you have nothing in all these wordes against our doctrine that Paines and sorrowes were the true and proper cause of Christes dreadfull Agonie nor to prove that his meere bodily paines or death was the whole Cause Now we are to shew the like in his most we full Complaint on the Crosse where he saith My God my God Math 27. why hast thou forsaken me You will aske me heere what kinde of Forsaking may this be I shewed you plainly * Treat 1 â— 6â— 65 6â— before if you had regardâ—d it Namely that Christ being also now yea specially in the feeling of infinit Paines inflicted on him sundry wayes â—â—w Christ on 〈◊〉 Crosse was â—â—â—saken of â—â—â—d See also â—â—â—g 112.113 and that directly froÌ„ Gods proper Wrath for our sinnes he felt his whole Humane nature for the time left all comfortles and alone without any ioyous assistance of his Deitie I say not that he wanted now all assistanc of his Deitie for it surely would then have quite overwhelmed him with this intollerable burdeÌ„ But his Godhead as it were withdrawing and hiding it selfe from him for that season of his Passion gave him no sense nor feeling of ease comfort or ioy but all the sense of sorrowes and paines as well in spirit as in soule and body that might bee all the sense of his ioy and comfort for the while being cleane gone and wholy swallowed vp in that huge bottomles gulfe of sorrowes and paynes issuing vpon him out from the fierce Wrath of God Howbeit yet even nowe he wanted not sufficient assistance of the Deitie to sustayne him in life heerein as I said Phil. 2.7 Rom. 8.32 â—eut 10 17. â—â—c 16.17 This was that extreeme humiliation and exinanition of nature wherein †God spared not his Sonne and wherein also Christ spared not him selfe For hee vndertooke all this most willingly and yet being in it naturally grieved and sorrowed for it at some moments being astonished with it suddenly and naturally desired ease and release from it This forsaking or dereliction beseemeth the time place person and case of Christ our Ransom-payer and Purchaser of salvation with the price of his owne most direfull paines Pag. 24. c â—â—â—r 6. Expoâ—â—â—ions of â—hristes CoÌ„â—â—aint are all â—â—â—isse Not any other farre fet or hardly applyed or strangely devised by the braynes of men As in trueth all those other senses heereof are which you rather imbrace
is the proper principall cause of his Agonie But what can bee meant by This Hower vnles the Paines of his suffering set and appointed by God for him to beare at this determined time from Gods Iustice for sinne What is this Cup but the bitter tast of the same Paines aforesaid This I hope was not his Holines and sanctification which so troubled and molested him not his Piety nor his Pity Nay finally he himselfe expresseth the true Cause even his excessive Paines his overabounding Sorrowes and anguish saying My Soule is full of paines or full of sorrowes even vnto death Heere hee nameth the Cause For which Cause also even of intolerable and vnsupportable sorrowes and paines it must needes be that he cryed at his end My God my God why hast thou for saken me This then manefestly was the only proper and principall cause of Christes most dreadfull Agonies and perplexity in his Passion even excessive Paines and the intire want of feeling of Gods comfort Pag. 17. and nothing els How hard soever b you make it I c know not why to shew the proper principall cause thereof Treat 1. Pag. 72. And heere wee will remember againe what is taught by Authority in England The rather for that you take on as a man impatient because I doe affirme that our doctrine not yours hath the publike Authorie for it Pag. 334. You d call it an egregiously an insolent and impudent speach well becomming an alehouse c. And yet in the verie next b Pag. â—â— page in plaine termes you graunt the same to bee taught in our Homily of Christes Passion for you say thus the Hom teacheth The Justice of God pursued Christe with most paynefull smart and anguish even vnto death and forced the weaknes of his humane flesh to cry My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Heere I am sure you think not that our Homelie maketh Christs Pietie or Pitie nor yet his meere Bodily paine to force him thus farre Nor in those wordes next following there c Hom â— Pass 2. O that Mankinde should put the everlasting Sonne of God in such paines for the grievousnes of our sinnes And in trueth that the Homily is farre from both these your meanings I have plainly shewed d Pag. 6 before Adde heerevnto the full and large declaration heereof in the authorised Catechisme e Nowe techisâ—â— Christ suffered not only a common death in sight of men but à lso was thoroughly touched with the horror of eternall death he fought and wrastled as it were hand to hand with the whole army of Hell before Gods iudgement seat he put him selfe vnder the heavy and grievous severitie of Gods punishment he was driven to most hard straights hee suffered for vs and went through horrible feares and moct bitter sorrowes of the minde that he might in all things satisfye the iust iudgement of God appease his wrath For to sinners whose person Christ did heere beare not only the sorrowes and tormentes of present death are due but also of death to come and everlasting So when hee did take vpon him and beare both the guiltines and iust paine of Mankinde damned and lost he was affected with so grievous feare trouble and sorrowe of the minde or soule that he cryed out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Finally the Annotation of our great f Bibl. 1591. â— Bible authorized and appointed to be read in our Churches iustifyeth all this saying g Annoâ— Luk. 2â— Christ here felt the horror of Gods wrath and iudgement against sinne I pray who is that Egregious lyar now I hope for my part I have spoken the truth in avouching my doctrine that forenoted Proposition Assumption also by you denyed to be our publike doctrine and fully authorized in England Wherefore you may meane some other to be h Pag. â—â— a giddy Spirit lately buzzing in the peoples eares the coÌ„trary I hope I am clear from it And thus it remayneth that we conclude even our whole Reason to be firme true which is i Pag. 9â— before delivered The paines of Christes Passion which now he felt and feared were the principall and proper cause of those his Agonies But his meere Bodily Paines and death or the feare of them caused no such things and lamentable effectes in Christ much lesse did his Pietie and Pitie Therefore Christ felt and feared Paines more and infinitly greater then meere Bodily paine and death which were the principall and proper Cause of this strange plight in him Which consequently can be none other by necessary reason then the Paines and sense of Gods wrath in his spirite properly Therefore Christ suffered that also and not only in Body as you hold Howbeit you have yet heere and there some exceptions against this our doctrine which are not to be cleane neglected First you say â—ag 290. a I extend Châ—istes Agonie too farre because I will have it proceed from b the intollerable sorrowes and horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell Treat 1. â—â—g 80. I shew not there the Cause of Christes Agonie and Feare I shewed it of purpose in the c beginning Why did you not refuse that Treat 1. â—ag 6 7 You ought to have dealt directly against that which I expresly mention to have ben the cause Thus I said His Sorrowes and sufferings for the redemptioÌ„ of sinnes The Cup of Affliction and sorrowe which now he felt and was to feele yet further Caused him to mourne and feare Say then plainly that this Cause is mistaken and too farre extended or els you say nothing to vs but by indirect and pâ—aeposterous collectioÌ„ Now if this Cause which we gave and doe give be true and right as I hope it is before proved more then sufficiently then I doubt not it is as true also by invincible reason that Christ suffered the intollerable sorrowes horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell Which I hope also is as fully proved â—â—g 91. 117 being the effect of our d Assumption before Seeing it could not be his meere Bodily paines much lesse his Holy Affections as you hold that brought him to this miraculous miserie and distresse wherein wee see by the Text hee was Therefore they were the intollerable and incomprehensible dolours of his Spirit questionles which wrought the same There is no other sorrow in the world to be found which can be imagined to be the Cause possibly â—ag 290. And then my other wordes also which e heere you cruelly coÌ„demne shall stand well enough * That Christ as touching the vehemency of paine was as sharply touched as the Reprobats themselves â—reat 1. â—â—g 81. yea if it may be more extraordinarily Though you labour with might and maine to make them amount to Haeresie open blasphemie But why do you not bend your odious outcryes and accusations against that Authority before truly cited
whiche maintayneth the same so fully and amply as I deliver it You doe wisely to dissemble your enmitie to all them and yet nevertheles by me to smite and wounde them Howbeit what reason have you against our Assertion Verily onely this you oppose because a Pag. 29 292. all the sorrowes of the Reprobat are but sinfull guiltines of conscience or feares of iudgement for seene which is executed b Pag. 14 only in the next life you meane onely in the definit and locall Hell Which yet is no refutation of my assertioÌ„ that Christ was as sharply touched with paine as the very Reprobats For though the wicked in this world did never suffer any reall effect of God burning wrath working actuall vengeance on their Soules for sinne but only some guilty remorse or feare and nothing els yet this letteth not but that Christ whom God ordayned extraordinarily alone to be in this life a whole and absolut burnt Sacrifice for all sin did feele and suffer the same truly properly and perfitly Sec How I have alwayes expresly excluded from c As being Extraoroâ—â—â—â—ry suffererâ—â—â— Christ †Likewise 〈◊〉 those your 〈◊〉 thinges 〈◊〉 Hell pag. 49. The Reptâ—â—â— bats doe soâ—â—time here 〈◊〉 a reall tast 〈◊〉 Hell paines all sinful adhereÌ„ts or consequents in paines and feares which are in the wicked and doe resemble his to theirs only and meerely in sharpnes and vehemency of paine I have often declared before Thirdly the case is cleere enough that the Reprobat many times in this life doe not only feare the iudgment to come but also do feele some reall and actuall impression of Gods burning wrath and even of Hell torments though not being yet in the locall Hell For proofe whereof that which before d Treat 1. pag 46. I alleaged out of e Iob 6.4 Iob and f Eph. e. 6. â—â— 16. Ion. 2. others that even the godly heere want not experience of the sorrowes of Hell sometimes you passe over answering nothing therevnto Which yet being so in the godly it must needes be in Cain Iudas and the Reprobats far more direful intollerable somtimes As also their own confession and behaviour do sundry times testifie in this life Againe the Divels are many times g Mat. 8 2â— 32. Eph. 2. 6.12 out of the locall Hell as when they are in this world But the Divells are h 2 Pet. 2 4â— never released of Hell sorrows Therefore the true sorrows of Hell are even in this world and then possibly may be inflicted on wicked men as they are on the Divells which are sometime out of the locall Hell Lastly the true ioyes of Heaven may be out of the local Heaven as when the glorious Angells have ben and taryed some while heere on earth with men Yet did they never for a moment want the ioyes and glory of Heaven And if Angells may inioy Heaven really beeing in this world â—â—â—e Godly â—ay have a â—â—t heere som â—â—nes of Heaâ—â—nly ioyes then is it possible by Gods goodnes to communicat some reall foretast thereof even vnto some blessed men also Further that God doth thus indeed i reveale som reall tast of his Heavenly ioyes to his chirdren even in this life I have k shewed already but am not answered Cor. 2.9.10 Treat 1. pag. 80 Yea the Transfiguration of Christ on the Mount declareth that some reall part of Heavenly glory may bee heere on earth Pag. 115. which your selfe l somewhere confesseth cleane m against your self Pag. 337. 338. Only this n you have to obiect touching men that we heere doe but hope and ioyfully beleeve Pag 338. Nowe faith and hope is the o evidence of thinges not seene Hebr. 11.1 neither are our greatest ioyes the same nor equal to them which we shal possesse in the next world I answere our Reasons before doe prove more then onely Hope in the faithfull somtimes Sec It is true the Apostle saith that heere wee walke by faith and live by hope Cor. 5.7 This is the general state of the godly in this life also it is spoken in CoÌ„parison of the life to come which in truth infinitly exceedeth lasteth Yet some rare exceptions doe not overthrow the generall course and heere may be notwithstanding some particular instant times when some reall sense may be revealed to the godly â—esame in â—ature not in â—easure wtâ—albe heereâ—ter As there was vnto Christ in the mount which was to him not onely a ioyfull hope but a reall tast of his very Heavenly ioyes Likewise the godly somtime may tast of it in their measure yet they may generally in the course of their whole life walke by faith without that actual sense which I speak of saving still a most ioyfull remeÌ„braÌ„ce of it Again though we are not to doubt but that the reall sense of Heavenly ioyes heere and heerafter are the very same in nature as in the examples before we have seene yet I say heereafter weâ— shall receave vnspeakeable increase farther and above this that we tast heere 1. When we shall have all darknes corruption taken from vs wherwith now we are compassed and clogged all this life long 2 When the fullnes of Gods appointed time shall come for it then will he of purpose reveale himselfe and his glory vnto vs as it were with open face which heere is don but vnder a vayle and specally then when our bodies also in the Resurrection shal be conioyned with our soules in glorie 3 When we shall eternally inioy and possesse the same which heere in this life is but now and then revealed vnto vs in such persons times maner and measure as the Lord shall thinke good Thus we graunt the ioyes of Heauen heere are nothing equall to those heereafter only we say the very same in nature may be and are by the effectuall working of Gods gracious spirit in his elect revealed in some measure somtime eveÌ„ in this world Neither is this as your charitie speaketh any lewd or wicked error Now then if more then Hope only eveÌ„ Heavenly ioyes may be on earth surely it followeth that like wise more then Feare even Hellish paynes them selues may be in men on earth also and not in the locall Hell onely And if Hell paynes in this world may be in any much rather may they haue bene in Christ whom God purposely sent a Hebr. 2. through paynes and afflictions the extreamest that might be to be consecrated the Prince of our salvation If you saye yet thus it will followe that the extreamest paines of Hell are not to be fouÌ„d in this world as the highest ioyes of Heaven are not likewise by my confession Wherefore Christ could not bee so extreamely punished any thing neare as the damned be in Hell no not for any moment which yet my conceit as you call it doeth reach vnto I aunswer I knowe not neither meane I to
rather not remembring Where you would h Pag. 296. wring out a contrariety in my wordes as if I had said That Christ being in the depth of his astonishment did then perfitly know that the dominion of death should not hold him you doe mee wrong I say not so In that place I argue from your suppositioÌ„ that if Christ were now not astonished but in his perfit memory and full considering of such thinges as you seeme to affirme but I deny which otherwise hee knew well then it could not be the Dominion of death that hee thus feared sith in his firme estate he knew perfitly that it should not prevaile over him To conclude this matter thus we may see how without colour of reason i Pag. 297. you wrest a plaine text which otherwise taken as it lyeth maketh strongly against you They are our Saviours Christs owne words k Ioh. 12. Now is my soule troubled what shall I say Father save me from this hower but therfore came J vnto this hower You say these words do import a Deliberation of 2. partes But you speak against all reason considering the nature and frame of the very words A Deliberation must needes bee set interrogatively in both clauses thus What shall I say Father save me from this hower Now the text is not so it pretendeth a plaine resolution or at least a great inclining toward resolution thus Father save me froÌ„ this hower It can not be a Deliberation Chrysostom and Epiphanius do descant about it trying how the text may beare such a meaning but it cannot stand being so evidently against the course of the text Chrysost â—â—b Lacet turbatio dâ—â—eâ—e 〈◊〉 servaâ—â—â—â— contrariâ—â—â— tamen â—â—â—o You say S. Iohn beere speaketh of another time and place What then Yet he may speake of the same matter namely of his Passion or of a Foretast thereof Which indeed the text it selfe m sheweth that he did speake of Wherefore neither can we deny â—oh 12.31 â— 33 all titers heerâ—pon but this place of Scripture even as the other about his Praying in the Garden doth surely confirme that his Passion was more then meere bodily which did so miraculously terrifie him It could be no lesse then the paines of the infinit wrath of God vpon his Soule Hence also I reasoned effectually n before Treat 1. pa. 1. 63. but no where you answer it If Christs such sufferinges in his Soule were ordayned of God for him then most certainly indeede he did suffer the same Nowe we see such sufferings were ordained for him seeing he saith but therefore came I vnto this hower Therefore most certainly indeed hee did suffer them at one time or other Yet further you except Pa. 22 23. â—oo c where you avouch that this was a Feare of Eternall death and Euerlasting damnation which caused in Christ this Agonie and from his feare he was deliuered Ergo hee suffered not that which he feared First I graunt indeed this was the 2. Death the death of the soule or Hell tormentes which Christ heere b feared neither can this by any meanes be denied as anon we shall see Howbeit to say as you do that it was Eternall death and Euerlasting malediction which heere Christ thus woefully distresfully feared is the strangest speach in Divinitie that ever I heard See you can not helpe youe selfe in making Christes feare of this Death to be onely a c religious feare Pag. 23. d a feare for others These imaginations I haue removed e before Pag 304. Every Reader will easily see in his owne iudgemeÌ„t that these affections so vehement were not likely at this season Pag 93 94. c. nor likely in him at all much lesse likely to be Causes of such Effectes Againe these are not Feare properly they ought rather to bee called as they are a religious Care Commiseraetion and pitie Which differ greatly from the nature of Feare properly taken such as we ought to coÌ„ceave in this place Pag. 305. You thinke the f nature of eulabia will not admit any proper Feare namely no perplexed Feare as I take it heere to signifie but a carefull diligent regard to beware and decline that which we mislike or doubt What say you Did Christ doubt Eternall Damnation and therefore Feared it you speak so darklie that I know not how to take you But it may be you meane hee him selfe misliked it only and was sorry for others who ran headlong into it But all this still is nothing els save Piety in him properlie yea and so you say this cometh nearest to the signification of the Greek word I graunt it doeth touching Eulabia but in Mark the a lâ—kthamâ— berâ—thaâ— word doth import properly Feare and that in extreamitie Againe touching Eulabia my reason that heere it signifieth Feare properly yea a perplexed feare and not not only a religious devotion as you say is grouÌ„ded not so much on the nature of the word as on the Circumstances and the other words of this Text * Heb. 5.7 Christ in the dayes of his flesh offered vp prayers and supplications with strong crying and teares vnto him that was able to save him from Death and was heard in that which he feared Heere these other words doe shewe that this Feare was more then a carefull regard to beware that which he misliked it was no lesse in deed then a perplexed and troubled feare wofully dreading that which he was to suffer Which also the strange and wonderfull signes thereof in the Garden do more then coÌ„firme as I haue shewed b Pag. 11â— 116. 127 often Thus my meaning is that the nature of eulabia admitting the sense som time of Feare properly admitteth heere this sense yea of necessitie it must admit it for the reason noted aboue Howbeit I grant the Apostle may intend this also by the nature of this worde that Christ notwitstanding all this dreadfull feare yet being meerely naturall in him it declined not a jot from Piety nor from a most reverend regard of obedience to God which still in all this his perplexitie he kept firme and safe This he may withall I grant insinuat yet the other proper feare grievous dread must needs be admitted To like effect this worde signifieth in that place of the c Act. 23. Actes as the CircuÌ„stances there also will coÌ„firme Now then this being in Christ a proper and most vehement feare where you argue Christ was delivered from his feare of Hell torments or the Death of the Soule Ergo he suffered them not I deny your sequele This proveth directly the contrary He feared the Death of the Soule specially he thus feared it Ergo hee did suffer it For Feare being of that which is to come as d Pag. 30â— you well observe Ergo seeing Christ feared yea in such maner the Death of the Soule it surely came vnto him namely
faith that Christes Soule after death Ascended to Heaven remayned there till his Resurrection Namely the Analogy of faith requireth that the Head should bee there where the members were and where they remaine till their Resurrection that there he tary till his Resurrection It seemeth also these texts wil prove it a Ioh. 1â— Where J am there also shall my servant be b cap. 17 I will that where I am there they also shall be with me I see not but that he promiseth heere his servants even a locall accoÌ„panying of him after this life that also generally whither soever he went Moreover this the Fathers c Only Aâ— wavereth where afâ—â—â—ming foâ— where dâ—â—ting all with one voyce I may truly affirme do teach and believe even that Christ after death went no whither but where his faithfull and holy servants were yea and there remayned till his Resurrection To which consent of men somewhere you ascribe exceeding much so that d Perpeâ—â—vern episâ—â— 10. you plainly avouch the coÌ„trary alwayes to be a notorious if not a pernicious novelty To which purpose also other Scriptures doe make very much as where Christ being in the paines of death and presently about to end his life saith Father into thy hands I commend my Soule This being spoken at such a time in the depth of such wofull sorrowes and by such a person in all good reason Gods hands whereinto he commendeth his Soule according to our common vse of speach must be Gods ioyfull peace and Heavenly glory which is also suteable to the scripture phrase as already I have shewed â—reat 1. â—â—g 151. â—â—g 361. neither shew * you any thing against this For what if Gods hands on other occasions do signifie his Power and generall protection only Doth it follow that therefore Holy men oppressed with paines and now about to Dy when they say Father into thy handes I commend my Soule they meane not the ioyes of HeaveÌ„ You aske was David dying when he spake those words He might bee in deadly sorrowes or dangers for any thing you know to the contrary But suppose he were not theÌ„ in danger to dy Yet the Prophets generall sentence may fitly be applyed to this more speciall case of Christ as all men know Howsoever then David were when he spake thus yet Christ now dying ready to come out of most wofull paines doth surely meane when he said so as other holy men do in like case namely to go to Heavâ—n To like purpose serveth that comfort given to the Theefe and common to himselfe This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise As touching †Austius divers opinion and yours â—our p. 360 â—ag 29. see before Be you reconciled vnto him and then let him speake for you Lastlie where the eternal and generall Ordinance of God is shewed to be such â—â—â—k 16.26 that * none can goe out of Heaven downe to Hell nor come from Hell vp to Heaven The text excepteth heere not one This therefore I doubt not is in truth a cleere point against which wee shall find not a worde in scripture that Christes Soule after death was there where the holy Patriarkes deceased were there remayned till his Resurrection So that how you will doe to maintaine that Christ c went indeed vnto them 〈◊〉 220.361 but presently left them that hee might go to Hell I know not In this I doubt you walke f without your guide â—â—g 91. But to proceed I adde that which is a cleere and certaine 〈◊〉 189.193 〈◊〉 219. yea that which g your selfe rightly beleeveth and professeth with vs though against the opinion of the Fathers That the Soules of the holy Patriarkes dead before Christ were not beneath but above not in Limbo but with God in peace ioy blissee even in Paradice 〈◊〉 192.203 that is h Heaven The which to be a doctrine most true against the Popish errour heerein I have briefly i heerto fore â—â—eat 1. â—â—g 131. yet I hope sufficiently proved Therefore hence I conclude that Christs Soule after his death Ascended indeede and descended not downward beneath vs heere 2. Only except there be some speciall reason of good authority to the contrary which is the second point of importance heere to be considered Touching which this I say without expresse and evident Scripture there is in the worlde no sound nor meet authority to disprove our former Reason and Conclusion This also Austin himselfe avoucheth well and faithfully that is supposing there is no expresse nor plaine Scripture for Christs Descending then saith he a Epist â— Miror si quam ad ros cum dâ— dissâ— asserâ— auderet it were marvailous bouldnes that any should dare say he went down to Hel. And againe b Serm. â—temp 14 Nemo de Christo credat nisi quod de se credi voluit Christus No man ought to believe any thing concerning Christ but what himself in his word would have vs to believe Now I assume this and by Gods helpe shall make it manefest No Scripâ—â— at al that Châ—â—â— Soule asâ—â— death dâ— soended That there is in all the Scripture no one place whereby it may bee proved by any shew of reason that Christs Soul after this life went locally downward from hence or diversly from the Soules of all good men deceased besides Yea whatsoever is pretended from the Scripture expresly to prove that he did Descend is but very little and exceeding weake Script prâ—ded Only there are 2. or 3. places sensibly wrested and drawen to this purpose 1. c Your paâ—â— 212. That where Christ is said to have d â—ph 4. come downe into the lowest partes of the earth * Treat â—â—â— pag. 14â— But I have largely and plainly shewed that this place speaketh not a whit neither of Hell nor of Christs Soule descending locally neither before his death nor after It noteth only Christs sensible and apparant Humiliation to the last and lowest point that is to the Grave According to the Hebrue phrase which the Apostles frequented in their Greeke writings very much So that no reason appeareth why or how this place may shew that his Soule after death went downward The rather seeing you will have Christes going downe d Pag 41 to Hell the first and that a notable part of his exaltation and triumph But this was manefestly as I said his lowest abasement Therefore this toucheth not his going down to Hell Where e Pag. 2â— you expound the text say He descended to the lowest and ascended to the highest that he might fill all places with the presence of his Manhood you speake both f In respeâ—â— vbiquitaâ—â— inconveniently and far from the Apostles meaning Who signifieth only Christes filling g Ephe. 1. â— 19 all his Church with the giftes of his Spirit which by his Ascending he h Ioh. 16 7â— Luck 24 4â— promised
to doe and i Act. 2.33 so did indeed Heere is nothing about his filling all places with the presence of his manhood Much lesse is there expresly in the text that which k you adde to it with his presence very deceitfully in a differing letter like the text and togeather with the text â—â—g 212. What censure this deserveth the godly doe knowe Wherefore yet wee must be so scrupulous still as to stick at the phrase of Christs Descending in Soule for as yet wee see no worde in all the whole Scripture any thinge neere much lesse equivalent therevnto If you will vrge that where Christ is said to have a ben 3. dayes 3. nightes in the heart of the earth â—at 12.40 there is nothing els then as before â—ag 21â— even his Buriall Your exception that b Christes sepulchre was in the higher partes of the earth frustrateth not the maner of the Hebrue phrase after which the Scripture speaketh both here and in the last before as I c have declared plainly in my 1. Treatise It seemeth 〈◊〉 144.146 your not considering or not caring for the vse and maner of the Hebrue toung causeth your mistaking as in these places so likewise in all or most of the rest yea indeed it causeth your errour in this maine questioÌ„ as after it will more appeare Third you d make much of that â—ag 213. which doeth you not a pinnes worth of good where it is asked e who shall descend into the deepe â—om 10.7 that is to bring Christ againe from the dead If the deepe heere did signifie Hell which yet certainly it doeth not but suppose it doeth Howe will that follow which you presume that Christ dying desceÌ„ded into the deepe The text saith no such thing It saith he was with the dead and that from thence he came and therfore by this I rather conclude it was thither only that he descended Which also is signified elswhere in the same words â—ph 1.20 f froÌ„ the dead Thus I say the dead heere importeth the generall condition and state of all the Dead as it is opposed to the state of the Living and so it sheweth Christes lowest and last Humiliation as the other places did before saving that before his Grave particularly is intended heere the state of death may bee applyed to his whole humane Person and to both partes thereof dissolved Yea it is not vnlikely that the former word g the deepe is vsed also heere by the Apostle to signifie not Hell Abyssus but even this condition and state of death which is as a Gulfe bottomles never satisfied vnrecoverable Like as Sheol in Hebrue doth likewise properly signifie as after we shall further declare This meaning the Syriak Translator an ancient writer of no small credit seemeth to have sith he turneth it Abyssum Sepulchri the deepe of the Grave And then the deepe signifying heere the state and condicion of Death the Apostle seemeth to expresse his meaning to that effect more clearely in these next words this is to bring Christ againe from the dead that is to frustrate Christes Death wherevnto he descended for our sakes We may consider also that this word heere the deepe many times is referred to the vast Gulfes deepe pits of the earth and likewise to the vnknowen deepe and furthest partes of the sea Now the Apostle may seeme to vse this large signifying word of purpose to expresse the infinit searching about of an incredulous and comfortles minde which seeketh iustice before God by the keeping of the Lawe Who indeed thereby getteth nothing but maketh void vnto it selfe the Gospell and all Christes benefits therein His Death and Resurrection his Ascention c. The Apostle then may insinuat in this word all these senses and significations thereof namely I say with other even such a seeking to the deepest and farthest partes of the Sea to learne somewhere if it might be among all the Creatures of God how to fulfill and keepe the Law For so Moses whom heere he doeth cite * Deu. 30 13. expreslie signifieth then so the Apostle also signifieth the very same For these 3. things the Apostle delivereth heere togeathet 1. That the Law and the Gospell do greatly differ namely in that the Law doeth not save vs but the Gospell doeth 2. He sheweth the cause heereof for that no flesh can keepe the Law nor ever could as he confirmeth by this out of Moses where men thinking to live by the Law are noted to seeke and search every where far and neere by all wayes meanes that they might satisfie their own hearts and finde how to keepe it which proveth that their owne heartes beare witnes that they keepe it not neither can keepe it 3. Hee sheweth that thus by seeking to live by the Law they loose the life of God coming by Christes Death and Resurrection in the Gospell Thus the Apostle rightly keepeth him selfe to the whole matter and meaning of Moses whose wordes though shortened he citeth and discourseth vpon But then it is not possible that the deepe heere should have any reference at all to Hell For what colour is there to make a man pensive about keeping the Law to aske who shall goe downe for him among the Divells and damned spirtis to bring it thence vnto him or to imagine that the keeping of the Law might be rather there then in his owne heart or that any meanes might be got from thence to helpe men that they might keepe it There is no likelilyhood for this out of doubt Therefore also the deepe heere signifieth not Hell any way seeing the Apostle doubtles retayneth Moses sense as is aforesaid Lastly I may not omit to shew how you deale heere againe with the text You alleage it a He descended into the deepe â—ag 220. all with speciall letters differing from the rest of purpose to shew that Christs descent into Hell for so you take the deepe is found written in the very Scripture But He is cuÌ„ningly added to the text neither are these words meant of Him but of a Pharisaical MeritmoÌ„ger searching everywhere for righteousnes by works â—ag 153. b as is before declared The like practise c you vse againe in the Psalme â—ag 147. â—sa 139.8 where the d text hath only veatsignah Sheol If J lodge or if J spread my couch in Sheol thou art there There is no word to expresse beneath which you put into the text of your own head The same also I noted in e you before â—ag 152. â—â—fore pa. 66 Somewhere you charge me but f vainly with falsifying of Ierom. If I had by oversight don so yet that were not like this falsifying which is not of men but of Gods owne word not by oversight but of purpose for advantage These are all the Scriptures that can be brought to make anie shewe of Christes Soule descending locally after his death Which being abused
to this purpose so palpably as before we haue seene I must in earnest say I marvaile that any will beleeve it as an article of faith that Christes Soule descended Specially considering our next reason which followeth Our 2. and most principall Reason is this â—ason 2 If there bee not one place of Scripture to prove that Christes Soule was in Hell then you ought to deny that opinion But you have not indeed any one place that proveth it Therefore it ought to be denyed Against this Argument you say you have one place Pag. 167. Act 2 27. Euen onely one where you thinke it is plaine that Christ saith He reioyceth because God would not leaue his soule in Hell â—r one only â—e neede â—â—e passing â—re and beâ—â—â— all exâ—â—â—ion as this â—â—t For so you must haue it heere translated in Hell even because you will But if men with reason resist your will and proue vnto you that it ought not to bee taken heere for Hell then I pray take it patiently and vse not such raging despitefull termes as against me you do as if I were not worthy to speake of those matters that you speake of vnlesse I would be bound to say your words How be it I beseech you giue vs leave This sentence taken out of Davids a Psal â—â— Psalmes alleadged in the Actes signifieth the very b Pag. â—â— same thing in both places The Hebrew word controversed is Sheol the Greeke Hades Now must the word Sheol and Hades needes signifie Hell being applied to soules departed hence So indeede you c Pa. 1 â—02 avouch more confidently then truly and heerevpon it seemeth you d Pa. 1â— pawne the triall of this Question saying Till we bring you some one good proofe out of the Scriptures that the Soules of the righteous before Christes comming were in Sheol or Hades you will rest in your opinion that by this only plaine place Christes Soule was in Hell We hope then when this proofe which you asko for against your opinion is shewed you will correct your opinion in this point Let it therefore bee considered I pray which the Psalmist also hath elswhere of this matter Sheol attributâ—â— the Soulâ— iust after Let vs interpret the Psalmes by the Psalmes First this we observe in them howe it is written “ Psa â—â— What man liveth and shall not see death Shall he deliver his soule from the hande of Sheol Heere now the Soule attributed to every man living must be properly taken as well as in the former place where you take it for Christs very Soul For e Pag. 1â— This rule must be helde †Much in one aâ—â— same Wâ— in one aâ—â— same maâ— and maâ— speach thoughout the Scriptures that we divert not froÌ„ the native and proper significations of the wordes but when the letter impugneth the grounds of Christian faith and charitie Otherwise we shall leave nothing sound sure in Gods word if we may avoid all things by figures that please not our humours So long then as the proper sense of the Scriptures may stand with the Analogie of faith and direction of charitie we offer violence to the word of God if we wrest it to a figurative vnderstanding Now then it is apparant that heere the soules of all meÌ„ living both good bad after death are appointed to Sheol For there is none whosoever that can possibly escape it saith the text Yet many good men there are then were who could did escape Hell Therefore in the Script Sheol and hades applied to departed soules is not always Hell but the CoÌ„dition or place aswell where the iust mens soules are after death as that where the daÌ„ned are Wherefore we hope that you wil keepe your word that is to acknowledge Sheol and Hades may be applyed to the Soules of iust and blessed men deceased And withall that Christs Soule after his death having Sheol applyed to it by the Psalmist who applyeth the very same also to all iust mens Soules in the worlde when they dy ought not therefore in any wise to be thought to have ben in Hell even because he was the iustest and holyest man that ever was Vnles some other scripture more plaine then this doe affirme it Which because there is vtterly none I say not one that doeth leane any thing towards such a sense therefore you ought not stifly to maintayne that Christes Soule was locally in Hell as hitherto you haue done But Austin a collecteth this opinion from this place in the Actes â—â—g 253. Oh then this point of faith is grouÌ„ded on Austin it is his collection not the text it self without him that serves your turne Certainly so it is But this theÌ„ agreeth not to your worthy protestations noted b before â—ag 28. 29. â—â—r pag 91 â— this becometh not such good wordes I beseech you be not you of them qui virtuteÌ„ verba putaÌ„t Then touching Austins authoritie â—â—fore pag â— c you know how you leave him when you think good regard not his d scant probable proofes coniecturall inclinations Finally â—â—r pa. 169 â— that heere Austin hath no better then scant probable proofes and meere coniectures we shall plainly declare God willing after we have shewed a generall consent and correspondence of all Authors for our sense of Sheol Hades which I hope presently you shall see But first you must note that we goe not about to prove Sheol Hades to be Heaven We never thought it neither need we so to thinke The more is your iniurie when you haue nothing to reprove yet with skoffes and floutes bitter reproches to disgrace me as you doe and that even for this your owne meere conceit Neither yet can your e witty reason prove â—â—g 146. that Limbus heereby can not be avoided Consider a word of like vse in Latin Defuncti signifying the Dead may be applyed generally to the Soules of men deceased Yet notwithstanding this I hope Limbus may be easily avoyded Also I pray are Defuncti none other but the Damned onely in Hell The blessed in Heaven may be likewise called Defuncti I suppose Howbeit not in respect of their being in Heaven Note but only in respect that they haue done with this life and are gone hence The word is properly generall signifying by it selfe neither the Blessed nor the Damned neither to be in Hell nor in Heaven Yet restrained by CircuÌ„stances such as they may be it signifyeth either Certainly so doth hades also Sheol All these the Latin the Greeke The propeâ—â—â— sense of Shâ—â— and Hades and the Hebrew wordes are indifferent and common in them selves signifying in deed no positive thing properly but a meere privation of this life and of a former visible being heere sometime And so it is that the Psalme saith Even the iust mens Soules and all must come to Hades Sheol Moreover thus in
haue another age “ Dâ—r◠〈◊〉 age my coâ—â—nuance or during oâ— my maÌ„sioÌ„ or induring or Mansion and be remoued to another place This can not be vnderstood of his Carcase rotting and wasting away to nothing in the graue and therefore indureth not as the word signifieth therfore he meaneth it of his Soules removing and abiding elswhere Also he expresly opposeth the land of the living to Sheol therfore Sheol is the land of the dead not the graue only nor Hell only * Which alâ— to be collecâ— of that in Prophet toâ—â—ing Christ scinditurâ— râ viventiâ— Isai 53.8 but as large and as generall to the dead and as fit to receaue both the partes of men yea both good and bad men but separated and dissolved as the land of the living is to receave both those partes vnited and knit togeather Againe Hezekiah was a godly man therefore hell was not for him also though hee should not see the Lord in the land of the living which was the thing he desired yet thereby hee seemeth to insinuate that in the land of the dead hee might see him whither he was about to go and that must needes be the place of blessed Soules even that which heere is noted by the word Sheol â—â—g 150. It is a most vaine reason that you give that sheol heere is to be taken for Hell and so to be translated because death to the wicked is the passage to Hel which death Hezekiah was now neere vnto It is vntrue that Hezekiah was neere vnto that death which the wicked dy or that he feared that kind of death or that there is no sound differeÌ„ce betwene the death of the godly the death of the wicked or that by any meanes according to sound divinity the death of the godly may be named or taken for Hell This is so vaine that I will not stand any longer to answere it Another obiection of yours a is as weake Pag. 400. where you say Sheol heere must be the Grave because it is said b afterward ver 18. Sheol doth not confesse the death cannot praise thee c. Though I grant that the Grave is not heere excluded especially in the words next after They that go down to the pit cannot hope for thy truth yet I affirme that Sheol namely in the former place vers 10. cannot exclude the mansion of good mens soules departed hence that for the reasons aboue noted Neither heere doth this circumstance limite it to the Grave onely because it is said Sheol confesseth not thee For it is evident that He Zekiah meaneth not absolutly that there is no praising of God in Sheol but onely hee vnderstandeth that which c hee so greatly desired â—hich was ytâ—â—inary great â—re of the â—lly geneâ—y psal 42. 84.1 the outward frequenting of the Temple the holy Ceremonies and Sacrifices ioyning to the visible congregation and publishing of Gods goodnes to others Which hee expresseth immediatly to be that praising of God that he meaneth cannot be in Sheol by knitting close to the former these words d The living â—sa 38.19 the living he shall confesse thee as I do this day the Father to the Children shall declare the truth This is that which he denieth of sheol that none there doe praise God to the example and edifying of others He denyeth not simply nor absolutly that there is none in sheol at all in any respect that praise God The very same David expresseth also very plainly Psal 116.9 saing e I shall walke before the Lord in the land of the living Psal 118.17 and f I shall not dye but live and declare the workes of the Lord. Where vnlesse they meant only this visible praysing of God to others edifying otherwise these holy men had no cause so greatly to desire to praise God heere for they knew very wel how that for their own parts they should prayse him much better and more perfitly in the next world The Seâ—â—â—â—gint vse 〈◊〉 in the fanâ—â—â—â—â— To the very same purpose the Septuagint vse hades in other places also besides in their translating of these aforesaid For it is truly and well acknowledged by you g Pag 4â— that both these wordes Sheol and Hades are iust all one Now the Septuagint I say in other places do shew thus much also h Psal 9 〈◊〉 after the â—â—â—tuagint Jf the Lord had not holpen me my soule had almost dwelt in Hados in Hebrue it is in silence Which is not meant of hell for there is weeping and wayling and gnashing of teeth but of the state of death Nor yet of the Grave onely because heere it is named to bee the Habitation of the Prophets soule whither it was almost come when he was like to have dyed Againe i Psal 7â— My soule was filled with sorrowes and my life drew neere to hades How my soule and my lift heere are taken for the selfe same I have shewed before As also in that of Iob k Iob. 3â— his life or soule is in hades in the world of the Dead Againe it suffiseth for our purpose that Hades and Sheol are often vsed even indifferently for “ Sheoll 〈◊〉 Hades aâ—â—â—sed often 〈◊〉 only Deaâ—â— effect Thanaâ—â—â—mors Death and as being in effect the same or for the state and Condicion of Death or the Power of Death Which also sometime we may likewise conceave of the Latin Inferi which is by the Translatours and other writers vsed for Sheol and Hades though I deny not very daungerously and corruptly in deed First for a Pro. 2â— misheol the Greeke hath ek thanátou from death reckoning Death and Sheol to be all one So in Ecclesiastes b Eccle. Sheol and c veâ—s Hammethim the dead are in effect all one And the very same doeth Esai call d Isa 3â— Shagnare Sheol the gates of sheol which the e Psa 9. â— 107.18 Psalmes and f Iob. 3â— Iob doe call Shagnare maueth the gates of Death In the * Pâ—o. 3â— and 27â— Proverbes he meaneth Death not Hell nor the Grave strictly taken where by an excellencie the greedines of it is noted for being Neuer satisfied For Death generally craâ—eth more then either Hell or the Grave strictly taken do So likewise Abakuk coupleth them togeather as being in effect alone “ Abaâ— Like sheoll and Death it will not be satisfied Thus also it will appeare that that which g Psal â— David reioyseth for the very same in effect h Psal â— Christ heere reioyseth for Only with this difference David reioyseth that God had delivered his soule from death theÌ„ when he was likely to have dyed Christ reioyseth because God would deliuer his soule from the Condicion of Death sheol after he was in it speedily even before his flesh should corrupt This might be evideÌ„tly shewed in infinit places mo but that it is vtterly needles In this
sense it is that the Reprobates and the Elect after death are said to be togither â—â—n 28.19 a To morrow thou thy sons shal be with vs saith the supposed Samuel to Saul Not that there is any positive thing common to the Elect and Reprobates after death which b you observe wel â—â—g 396. 〈◊〉 Simpâ—â—li â—â—qaest 3. â—â—g 209. but only that they be alike dead and alike remain in death Yet I say they are not like any further This c Aust very well sheweth whom you d bring saith he mortuus mortem vivo proenuntiabat Fathers 〈◊〉 it me our 〈◊〉 of Hadea that is being dead he foreshewed death to him that yet lived So that it was the same condition of death both to Saul and Samuell but not the same fruition of happines Thus the old Latin Translatour vseth Infernum as coÌ„monly for Hades so sometimes for e Thanatos death â—ct 2.24 â— Cor. 15.55 â— Act. 2.24 â—piph in â—â—nacephal 〈◊〉 Anchor â—ustin In â—â—yph and sometimes f Mors death for Hades Epiphanius readeth the g Text indifferently h Thanátou or i Hadou as reckoning theÌ„ in effect all one Justin Martyr long before saith k Christ a little before his death noted the folly of those men tôn nomizónton me êinai auton Christon all hegonménon thanatôsein auton kai hós koinon ánthropon en hadou menein that thought him not to be Christ but that he should dy and remaine in Hades as a common man Hee meaneth not heere as a wicked man in Hell but as any common man whether good or bad dying abideth in Death or in the Dominion of Death or in the world of the Dead Irenaeus saith l Heerein Christ legem mortuorum servavit did but as others do that Dy â—nae lib. 5. 〈◊〉 vlt. conversed 3. dayes vbi erant Mortui sancti where the dead Saintes were And this hee calleth Locum invisibilem the vnseene World What meaneth this but Hades â—es an inviâ—â— place of yeâ—ed Soules as we take it Yea a little before he expresly calleth it Paradise Nevertheles I grant that he thought this vnseene world was indeed beneath in the earth wherein his proofes do vnterly faile him as your selfe do fully grant and professe in that point aswell as wee Againe m hee further sheweth that in the n Scripture he taketh Hades to be all one with Death â—ib 5.13.3.38 â— Cor. 15.55 or the Dominion of Death where he readeth the Text thus Absorpta est mors in victoriâ vbi est mors aculeus tuus vbi est o mors victoria tua â— Greek â—â—des Death is swallowed vp in victorie Death where is thy sting Death where is thy victory And he addeth Haec autem iustè dicentur tunc c. These thinges shall truly be spoken then when this mortall and corruptible flesh about which Death is and which is holden down by a certaine Dominion of Death arising vp into life shall put on incorruption and immortality Then verily shall death be overcome when the flesh which is holden by it shall come foorth out of the Dominion thereof Thus he taketh heere Thanatos and Hades for one and the same thing in effect that is for Death and the power of death and nothing els Tertulian doth likewise for a Terrulâ— Anima 〈◊〉 speaking of Inferi which he taketh for the same that Hades is hee noteth it as the place Quò vniversa Humanitas trahitur whither all mankind must go And therefore of Christs going thither he saith b Cap. 5â— Quia homo mortuus secundum Scripturas sepultus secundum easdem hic quoque legi satisfecit formâ humanae mortis apud inferos functus Because also he was a man therefore he dyed according to the Scriptures was buryed according to the same also heere he satisfied the common law of nature by following the forme of mens Dying and going to the world of the Dead Tertullian is for vs yet further Hee taketh Hades in the c 1 Cor. â— Newe Testament meerely for Death or the Dominion of Death even as Irenaeus before did Thus he readeth the Text that often times d De Râ—carn c. 4â— 54. Vbi est mors aculeus tuus Vbi est “ Hadeâ— mors contentio tua Aculeus autem mortis delinquentia virtus autem delinquentiae Lex O Death where is thy sting O Death where is thy force The sting of Death is sinne the force of sinne is the Law And againe e Adverâ—cion 5. Scriptum est apud f Hose Creatorem Vbi est g Sheol 〈◊〉 Hades mors victoria vel contentio tua Vbi est mors aculeus tuus Verbum autem hoc Creatoris est apud Prophetam It is written by the Creatour Death where is thy victory or thy force or strife Death where is thy sting This is the worde of the Lord God by the Prophet Ozee Still he maketh Hades Sheol nothing els but Death in these places And saith he Deo gratias dicit h 1 Cor. â— Apostolus quod nobis victoriam vtique de morte prestitit The Apostle in the New Testament applying words of the Prophet to the Resurrection giveth thanks to God because he causeth vs to get a victory indeed of Death So still he maketh Hades to be Death and not Hell Which yet is further most cleerely to be seene i De Idoâ— cap. 13 〈◊〉 See also 〈◊〉 before pâ—â— Lazarus apud inferos in sinû Abrahae refrigerium consecutus c. Lazarus in the world of the Dead inioyeth comfort in Abrahams bosom contrariwise the Rich man is in the torments of fire both of them there receaving their divers rewardes How cleere is this that he maketh Hades and Inferos even in a Luke also â—â—â—e 16.23 to be nothing but the common state and world of the Dead Wherevpon the learned Junius noteth thus Observandum autem quod ait Apud Jnferos etiam de Lazaro Nam inferos Latini Patres vt Graeci Haden pro omni loco aut statû mortuorum dixerunt promiscuè Atque in hunc sensum Lazarus Dives apud inferos collocantur 〈◊〉 before â—â—â—g 162. â—â—â—m de â—it 〈◊〉 anima 〈◊〉 55. Quomodo b Irenaeus c Chrysostomus ex verbis Luc. 16.23 locuti sunt TertullÃanus locis quamplurimis This therefore it is that Tertullian saith in another place d Constituimus omnem animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem iudicij We determine that every mans Soule is kept apart in the worlde of the dead til the day of iudgment And Are all soules theÌ„ in the power of the kingdom of Death penes inferos Will you nill you there you shall finde punishments and comfortes as in Lazarus and the Rich man For why should you not thinke that the Soule may be both punished and comforted in inferis in the Worlde of the dead Neither doth he c Montanize in this as
for his general phrase implying that al the Deceased both good bad were apud inferos vou do so whip him handle him g Your pâ—â— 387. 3â— heere that it seemeth you forget by whom your selfe hath profited and that even he in time past hath ben your Teacher I will not now enter into any defense of Cicero his speach and language will defend it selfe Also that were to leave our maine purpose But it is the lesso strange that you vse Cicero thus for others also have had the like correction at your handes with him â—â—g 310. a Before Torence scaped not And b heere Plato and Socrates and other Greekes have also their partes 〈◊〉 374.378 for their vsing and taking of the Greeke worde Hades so largely as the naturall Etymologie thereof doeth beare But let them defend them selves whether they speake vsuall and right Greeke and Latin or no I will leaue them in that They are eloquent enough they can speake in this case for them selves Only I will take their wordes at their handes evens as c I finde them and so I refer the iudgement of all to the learned and wise Reader 〈◊〉 also all 〈◊〉 forenoted â—â—â—ned Wâ—â—â— have loud 〈◊〉 vsed 〈◊〉 likewise â—â—g 385. Also for that charge against me of d lewd lying and open falsifying of Plato I remit all to the indifferent Reader Yet I can not but smile truly for offended I will not be that Mai. Bilson is so strongly perswaded that c I am of Platoes and Ciceroes religioÌ„ touching Hell â—â—g 370. 〈◊〉 389. Heaven the Gods and wicked Spirites and that I seeke indeed to bring in their fantasticall Hell into our Christian Creed This fantasticall conceit of his let him feed him selfe with it and let him perswade it to whom he can Thus much the sober and indifferent Reader will consider and acknowledge that the Holy Apostles doe teach the Heavenly trueth with the very wordes and Grammar of the Heathen men wherevnto that serveth which is written of them f We every man heare them speake in our owne tounges and languages wherein we were borne 〈◊〉 2.8 11. Then the Apostles surely spake according to the currant speach before their times and in their times and yet thereby never g Canonized the fables and fancies which the nations implyed in their wordes â—â—g 368. Whosoever he be that will say otherwise knoweth not what he saith neither shall any credit or greatnes which he hath get him credit in so saying Yet in a certaine place you most strangly and confidently avouch h That neither with the ancient Maisters of the Greeke tounge which were Poets â—â—g 410. 〈◊〉 1. Treat 〈◊〉 97.98 â—â—to in â—â—done â—m iliad 1 â—â—lutarch â—rallel â—â—nsol ad 〈◊〉 nor with the 70. nor with the Writers of the New Testament nor with the people of that time Hades did ever signifie the world of Souls without any limitation of state or place I thought that those fewe allegations which I brought of * Plato †Homer and Plutarch for the Greeke and of Latins for the Latin would haue suffised to cause you not to deny so cleere and manifest a trueth which heere you denie even against your owne knowledge as after shall appeare Wherfore to demonstrat this point a litle further to you and to al men if any yet doe believe this your assertion which is most vntrue I will not thinke it to much to note some more places out of the Heathen authentike Greekes for that is the principall controversie that Hades with theÌ„ did signifie the World of Soules with out any limitation in the very word it self either of state or place But as all men know that by reason of Circumstances it often signifieth with theÌ„ Hell determinatly Note so by reason of circuÌ„stances also it signifieth with them many times determinatly the HabitatioÌ„ of the Soules of good men in ioyes and pleasures which was to them as their Heaven And for this I will only put you in minde of some places which you know well enough already First note that common epithet or title of Hades Hades tâ—â— worlde Soules 〈◊〉 the Auther Greeks a Lycopâ—â— Hades pandokeus or pandocheus The vnseene worlde or state of Death that receaveth all both good and bad b Hom. 〈◊〉 15. Heâ— in Theâ—â— Others imagin Hades a God or mighty power power of Death do cal him eneroisin kataphthimenoisin anassôn Ruler not of Hell only but of all that ' Dy. And therefore to this place com not the wicked and damned onely but the noblest and best also as Achilles saith being dead and being in Hades c Hom. 〈◊〉 λ. Aidós de katélthemen éntha te nékroi Hither into hades all we that are dead do come This d Plato Gorgiaâ— Plutarcâ— Consolâ— Apolloâ— Plato and Plutarch do acknowledge in that place which e Pa. 37â— you cite at large togeather with a number mo both of the Poëts Philosophers And this also it is that Homer shewing how Iupiter cast down his rebellious Angels into Hell Tártaron with them the proper place of the Damned hee describeth it to be so much beneath Hades the place of the other Dead f Hom. hoson ouranos esti apo gaies as heaven is from the earth So in regard of this it is that g Sophoâ— Aiant another maketh it to be much better to be in hades as it is the common place and condicion of the dead not Hell then to be sicke vnrecoverably kreissôn aida keuthôn e nosôn mátan And so Plutarch maketh Hades not Hel but the place of the Dead or the stare of the dead in generall to be a soveraigne comfort to the afflicted miserable in this world h Plutarcâ— swering Aeschyâ— O Thanate paian iatros molois Limen gar ontôs aidas an' aian Aiden d'echôn boethon ou tremo skias Lastly that which i Pag. 37â— you bring of Orpheus describing the true God that he is King both of the Vnseene world aithéros ed'aïdou and also of this present visible worlde ponton gaiéste tyrannos confirmeth all that is before said For aither aides heere is to be construed togeather not separatly and so he signifieth thereby that the true God indeed is Lord and King not onely over this whole Visible world which he vnderstandeth by the Sea and Land but also over the whole Invisible world or ayer that is over all the Dead both good and bad I marvaile therefore very much what you meane to speake so plainly contrary to the truth and to your owne knowledge that Hades did never signifie the world of Soules without any limitation of state or place no not with the ancient Maisters of the Greeke toung which were the Poets The rather this your speach is directly against your knowledge because you expresly collect and confesse the contrary that is the same which I do â—ag 403. thus you say a Hades
other fancyes fictions of the Heathen As for example Zeus Iupiter was among the Heathens their great God he only was their highest of whom besides they held a 1000. fables and indeed he was none other but a Divell as is before noted Nevertheles the Apostle vseth the same for the only true God the author and governour of Heaven and Earth passing by all their Fables when he applyeth the Poets verse a Act. 2â— His generation also we are Tartarus which b Pag. 3â— you obiect though rarely sometime perhaps a Philosopher will note thereby the Ayer yet indeed vsually and in a maner alwayes they meant Hell by it with a thousand of dreames thereto belonging Yet Peter not canonizing nor commending their dreames and fictions of Hell notwithstanding signifyeth Hell indeed by that worde of theirs according to their common vse thereof and according to the proportion of truth which therein they held So Daimonion which also c Pag. ibâ—â— you obiect they vsed to signifie by it both good and bad Spirits following and conversing with them and the good they honoured as Gods But indeede and in truth seeing these same were all Divels therefore the Scripture holdeth not the Heathens erroneous meaning in this word yet it doth retayne that which they vnderstood by it truly that is to signifie Divells and bad spirits Againe Theos the Heathen vsed for to expresse the Nature of God but so as that they thought it coÌ„mon to many severall Gods The Apostles vse the word also for the true God yet not vnderstanding therein a nature common to many which error they otherwise cleerely and often refute And thus we might speake of infinit mo the like wordes as Feare the power and strength whereof they also fained to be a God and of Hope and of Revenge Goddesses c. Like wherevnto is Hades even that which presently we have in hande The diveâ—â— applicatâ—â— of Hadeâ— With the HeatheÌ„ it commonly and most vsually signified the state of Dead men somtime rarely the Destruction of other things which perish out of this visible world haue no more being heere Whereof anon we shall see further Howbeit now to consider it as it respecteth men only thus the Heathens chiefly and commonly by Hades vnderstoode the state I say and Condition of men both good and bad deceased and gone out of this world And they meant it commonly for the Destruction of their persons from out of this world generally and indifferently Againe oftentimes particularly touching their Bodyes buriall also particularly many things touching their Soules state being parted from the Body Some of which they believed were in Blessednes some in Tormentes although they signified neither of these in the word Hades but onely as I said their state after their departure hence Also they thought some of the Blessed Soules to be in the a chiefest Blessednes â—Vhich you â—â—iect pag. â—â—4 376. that was in presense with the Gods Yet they were in Hades also that is in an other world after they were wiped out from hence Hither they admitted onlie Philosophers Treat 1 pa. â— Heroês such like Thus hither it is that b Plato assigneth Socrates and thus Socrates him selfe hopeth to goe to Hades to the wise and good God Other Soules of good men they gave Blessednes vnto in the Elysian fieldes vnder the earth as they fancied or where els I know not And these were also in Hades So that both these estates and condicions of blessed Soules deceased which was their Heaven though differing very much in places they yeeldâ—d to be in Hades Whence I thinke some of the Fathers and after them some Papistes haue fayned divers places of rest and ioy to the Dead Heaven presently to the Martyrs but to other good Christians an other place of rest ioy which they called Abrahams bosome either in the earth or where they also knew not Howbeit into the glory of Heauen and the presence of God and of Christ they admit none save only the Martyrs before the last day But this errour and all other errors about Hades the Apostles sufficiently confute in their writings so that we are not now to respect the same in the vse of Hades Onely we are therefore to note how much and what besides all errours may bee truly retayned and meant by the Apostles in applying this worde Hades as the Heathen did to both sortes of Soules of Dead men They might truely vnderstand that both have one common condicion and state as touching their being in another world as they were dissolved departed from and wiped out of this visible world aâ— they were now in the world of the Dead an opposite estate condicion to the living This also the very Natural Etymologie of the word according to Grammar doeth properly yeeld in that it signifieth c Vnseene Hades The â—â—ke may be â—â—â—id of Sheol or Not seene any more in this world or an estate not seene heere with vs topos aîdes an Vnseene place as Plato calleth it Where note it cannot be referred to the estate of Angels because Hades is the vnseene state of them that once had a visible and ordinary being and conversation heere in this world So that in very deed it hath properly but a Privative sense not any thing positive in it though this d you can not brooke All this then the Apostles might well vnderstand allow in the word Hades Pag. 396. without any taint of Heathenisme And therfore also doubtles so they did But the heathens further made Hades a Divine power whom also they called Pluto as it were the God of Death or of the Dead because as before is shewed they dreamed that he held all that were Dead vnder his power both blessed damned soules And because no man that dyeth whether good or bad doeth ever live heere againe and because all whosoever without exception must dy therefore they call him Hades améilichos kai adámastos implaâ—able and vnmastered and Nélees êtor echôn having a mercilesso bea rt In which sense in Latin also they vsed Parca Destiny the ende of all because it spareth none Certainly this Deifying of such a Power or to make a God of it the Apostles abhorred and every where in their writinges they shew what Idolatry and extreame impiety it is But yet they may and do acknowledg such a power of Death which worketh this Destruction of all men froÌ„ the world detayneth them in Death afterward Wherefore they have in sundry places Prosopopoeas thereof as in the Revelation the Keyes of Death and Hades Death riding on a pale horse and Hades following after him Death and Hades yeelded vp their dead and both were cast into Hell Likewise that O Death where is thy sting O Power of death where is thy victory But of these more anon Hitherto the 1. observation is manefest that the Apostles vsing the Heathens words yet need not nor
do nor vnderstand in them any of their fancyes and errors which by their doctrine otherwise they refute nevertheles they may and do vnderstand the generall truth signified in them whatsoever the Heathens vsed by them to signifie and imply And thus is our worde in controversy Hades cleered But to cleere the rest also of those which b Pag. 36â— you obiect Sec we are to observe that the Apostles transfer the Heathens Civill words many times to their Ecclesiasticall vse namely keeping yet still the proportion of their former sense As in these Apostle Bishop Deacon Gospell Law Sinne Repenâ—ance Hope Conscience Concupisence c. Which change is small and easy sith the words have a iust proportion still togeather both in Civill and Ecclesiasticall vse Onely if any difference or oddes be it is expresly vttered in some part of the Apostles doctrine besides There is no such cause nor matter of difference to be found in Hades Third The Apostles do vse some wordes kat ' éxochen by an excellencie yet in no point altering the native vse or property of them â—â—â—a all the 〈◊〉 before â—â—â—med or â—â—â—t oâ— them 〈◊〉 â—e conâ—â—â—ed also â—â—â—er this â—â—â—e â—ag 403. a Thus Scripture is vsed commonly for the Word of God only Diábolos for the Divell although sometimes other writings are called also Scripture and other Accusers and slanderers Diaboloi But neither hath this consideration any place in Hades that in Scripture it should signifie chiefly Hell much lesse only Which thing b you avouch Lastly Som think the Apostles altered the worde Faith from the Passive sense of it importing Faithfulnes and honestie as the Heathens commonly vsed it to the Active sense which is True beliefe or Trust vsed in the Scriptures which you also obiect But I suppose the Apostles tooke this Active sense of the word Faith froÌ„ the Old Testament meerely translating the Hebrue into Greeke For I see not what difference at all there is betweene c Pistis â—â—â—om 1.17 â—â—â—bac 2.4 and d Emunah whereby the Iewes signified Faith to salvation Which is reason enough for this vse thereof in Greeke by the Apostles namely if it bee a Hebraisme though it bee not very suteable to the Heathens vse thereof The like I iudge of Elder Law Sinne c. But Hadès for Hell hath no like reason Further I think even the Heathens have vsed this word Faith sometime Actively as the Gospell vsually hath it likewise the Gospel abhorreth not altogeather the Passive vse of it for Faithfulnes Lastly if it were so that the Apostles did follow no other reason but meerely transferred that word from the Civill passive to the Ecclesiasticall active vse we say on necessity they might do it For having some Spirituall doctrine to deliver and the ordinary speach wanting some fit word for the same then they might yea of necessity they were forced to take some word neerest in nature and sense to their purpose so they might give to that word a peculiar Ecclesiasticall vse further then anciently it had But Hades for Hell hath no help by this reason they tooke the word Gehenna from the Hebrewes and vsed it properly for Hell Therefore they need not alter hades for that purpose for which they had another proper word It is manefest then that the Apostles stil kept the proportion of the sense in all their words translated from the common and vsuall speach of the Heathen so far as any reason of truth might be alike in both so they spake indeed still the tounge and language of the Nations and therefore Hades with the Apostles can not be properly Hell as even with Heathens also properly it was never I suppose yet you will say The Fathers take Hades for Hell I answered a Pa. 1 before how they sometime take it determinatly and strictly so they signifie Hell by it Somtime they take it largely generally according to the Ancient Heathens vse and so they signifie by it nothing but the generall state of Death pertayning alike both to good and bad deceased as I have declared Thus you get nothing by them albeit sometime theâ— restraine the worde Hades more then they ought to restraine it Heere also were place to have added somwhat for iustifying that I said The Fathers do alter the ancient true vse of som words both Greeke and Latin from whom in controversies we ought to appeale to their authentike vse in Scripture and Classicall authors But because b Pag. 3â— you send me about ChirotonÃa to another place I am content to examine what you have there to the contrary Which seeing it draweth me into further matter therevnto appertaining I will differre for this time Hitherto we have tryed the nature and vse of Hades and have found it to be not properly Hell as c Pag. 1â— 171. 40 you avouch No not when it is applyed to soules of men deceased And therefore also that it can not be so vnderstood in Act. 2.27 where it is applyed to Christs Soule after he was dead Which yet is the only place that you have to pretend How thâ—â— in Act. â— may siâ—â—â— and trâ—â—â— vndersâ—â—â— Now something more you bring for your purpose from the Circumstances of this Text which we must consider But first let vs simply and plainly vnderstaÌ„d the same according to our former true declaration of the nature and vse of Hades Where the text is Thou wilt not leaue my Soule in Hades or to Hades we may simply take Hades for the invisible state or place of the deceased And so supplying the defect of a word which must be vnderstood thus we may say eis ton topon or chôran hadou in the place or region of the invisible state or b Aithér dou Or before pâ—â—â— 173.17 World of the Deceased Otherwise we may take it simply for Deaths force strength and power supplying also the same words eis ton topon or ten chôran hadou in that place where the power and strength of Death prevaileth and holdeth the deceased Soules from their Bodyes This is the World of the Dead implying nothing ells but ap estate opposit to our Visible estate in this world Thus may hades be fuly taken sith I have largely proved before how Hades Thanatoâ— Death are in effect all one and may both be applyed even to iust mens Soules deceased but hades more easily naturally Last of all we may take hades heere by a Prosopopoea conceaving it to be as it were som Person of vnresistable power taking away withholding from hence al mens Souls departed Howbeit this power was controlled and loosed by God in Christes Resurrection And then we may construe it thus eis ten chóran topon or oikian Hadou in the place region or habitation of this mighty power Or eis to kratos exousian dynamin or epikratian tou Hadou to the strength power or dominion of this Destroyer of life Thus howsoever we take it though
this last way is not the vnlikelyest Hades heere signifieth in effect nothing els but Death that Christs Soul departed this life was held therein but could not be holden fast â—â—g 166. You obiect c We must not make a Figurative sense but where manefest need is Heere is no need of a figurative sense Therefore heere ought to be no Figure supposed I answer First wee grant your Conclusion whether of the 2. former wayes soever that we take hades so there is simply no Figure at all therein Sec Then your own sense of Hell in this place is cleane overthrown by your selfe For whensoever hades and sheol do signifie Hell it is indeed by a Figure namely Synékdoche where the Whole is set for a part Which I have proved at large before â—â—re pag. particularly by d Tremellius a sufficient man for his Hebrue skill Wherefore by this reason Hell cannot possibly be meant heere if no Figure be admitted Third it seemeth convenient and also likely to take hades heere by a Prosopopoea after our 3. sense before noted Which kind of Figure supposeth as it were a Person of that thing which otherwise a word properly signifieth So that by this figure nothing of the wordes native signification is diminished Thus our word hades is vsed in the Corinthians O Hades where is thy victory Also as it may seeme in the Revelation Death Hades were cast into Hell â—â—ther as pa. 17â— Thus then it is nothing but emphatically signifying the power of Death Fourth Admit that hades and sheol did properly signifie Hell as we see they do not Likewise that sometime they signifie only the Grave which also you acknowledg it is true when it is applyed to a dead Body Againe admit that nephesh by a Figure may signifie the whole Person yea e the dead Body somtimes 〈◊〉 doth 〈◊〉 21.1 〈◊〉 2â— 4 Then I affirme that heere in this place of necessity there ought to be vnderstood a Figurative sense Heere is plainly most necessary cause For take them thus literally as you doe and they impugne the groundes of faith and charitie Which f Pag 1â— you grant that rightly is sufficient to cause a Figurative sense in Scripture But how do they impugne faith or charity being taken as you take them Verily thus Your sense implyeth by the way and consequently Points in Assertion â—â—â—trary to â—â—â—coÌ„mon â—â—oâ— Faith 〈◊〉 charity that a good and sinles man yea the best that ever was worthy of Paradise and the highest Heavens yet after death did go to Hell And further that being in Heaven yet he stayed not there as you say but immediatly came out againe to go into Hell Againe that a Humane soule being in the depth of Hell yet should feele no paines and that being locally in hell it should com out thence also What can be more against the generall rules of the Scripture then these things Yea how doth this impugne our generall charity towards all the iust when they dy Besides many other disproportions and vnreasonable inconveniences following withall as anon we shall further see Wherefore if by any meames possibly a Figure may be heere admitted certainly it must be so for these most necessary causes last rehearsed The rather seeing no other text any where insinuateth any such peculiar matter in Christ that he should differ in these points from all good men els as you do vrge But you say The Cirâ—â—stances 〈◊〉 against yâ—â— the circumstances heere doe prove that the word must be Hell properly taken That I would faine see What are these circumstances First this place sheweth * Pag. 1â— a special prerogative verified in none but in Christ I deny it heere is no such prerogative mentioned Except this that whereas some other men after death have returned to life againe it was not by their owne power as Christs ResurrectioÌ„ was Againe God in his revealed wil having signified by his Prophet long before that he should be restored speedily to life againe thus it was simply impossible that Christ should be holden fast by the power of Death although it had got hold of him And so indeed he had a prerogative before all men ells which also is heere shewed vs but no other prerogative in the world neither heere nor any where els caÌ„ be gathered touching his returne from Hell You adde No flesh dead was ever free from corruption but only Christes What then Ergo his Soule was in Hell Or ells why bring you such needles and impertinent matter Besides I iudge that not to be true Were not a Pag. 1â— some being dead raised to life againe before their flesh putrified But nonâ— you say in the sepulchre And what then How will this inferre or prove that so none but Christs Soul was ever supported in Hel or that it was ever there These are simple reasons for so great a conclusion Then you say Jf by Hell we vnderstand Paradise it was no privilege to be there not forsaken but rather a childish absurdity to thinke any Soule might be there forsaken It is a strange absurdity still to abuse your reader calling this word Hel â—â—tio prinâ—◠〈◊〉 which indeed is nothing but Death in effect the Power of death or the condition and state of death Againe to presume that wee take it for Paradise or Heaven or Hell at any time when we referre it allwayes to the generall state of the Dead and no further immediatly Now in this Christ had cause to reioyce that neither his Soule nor Body was left but so soone raysed vp to perfit life againe and so sitted to a full receaving of glory which within few dayes after he had Also besides this cause his deliverance from the condition of death he had an other inestimable cause to reioyce that he was raised to life againe namely that he might fulfill his whole work for our Salvation which before his Resurrection Ascension c he could not accomplish â—â—g 170. Further b you obiect that Peter maketh mention that the sorrows of death were broken that they should not hold Christ nor hinder him from rising againe But there were none such in the Grave none in Paradise Therfore in Hel Christs Soule was whence he was delivered when he rose againe I denie vtterly this sequele Because the text saith not that there were any present sorrowes in Hades where Christ was Heere is not a word to any such purpose 〈◊〉 2.24 What saith the text God raised him vp loosing the sorrowes of Death because it was impossible for him to bee holden fast of it Wil you coÌ„clude froÌ„ hence Ergo there were present sorrows in that place where Christ was There is no strength in this reason The Apostle signifieth heere 2. or 3. things 1. That God loosed Death froÌ„ him wherein hee was held but could not be holden fast 2. That this Death had bene a most sorrowfull painfull Death
that is the DominioÌ„ or power of Death were cast into Hell â—â—v 20.14 I said it was absurd to say Hell was cast into Hell You answer it is more absurd to say the world of Soules was cast into Hell Where you doe but dally and play with words â—t â— e woâ—â—â—e â—e Deaâ— Aâ—â—ally For I vse not that terme * the world of soules though it may be named sometime in a good sense Which you will by no meanes conceave only you delight much to sport your sâ—lfe with it Our answer theÌ„ is this There is no absurditie to say that at the last day when the * last enemy shal be destroyed then Death â—â—â—ore pag. 2. and the power of Death or the Kingdome and Dominion of Death shal be cast into Hel that is eternally dâ—stâ—oyâ—d abâ—â—ished shall râ—turn to the Divell whâ—â—â— they came To say many soâ—t that theÌ„ Hell phalbe cast into Hell souÌ„deth sensâ—les in my â—atâ—s Although you meane the Contayning to bâ— put for the Contayned Hâ—ll for the Divels of Hel and that the Divels shalbâ— theÌ„ cast into hâ—l fire Yea although one Andreas â—eda vnderstand it so likewise For neither you nor they it â—â—â—meth do cosidâ—r that this place assigneth them to Hell then at the last day who yet are not in Hell but shal be then cast into Hell â—nd destroyed But the Divels are a 2 Pet. 2. Iâ—d 6. in Hell already reserved in eâ—â—rlasting châ—mes of darknes Therefore the Divels cannot be vndâ—â—stood heere by Hadâ—s that they shal be then cast into Hel seeing â—hey are already cast in to Hell for ever Death and the Power thereof being the last enemie that shal be dâ—stroyed is not yet but shal be indeed at the last day aboliâ—hed swallowed vp of Hell Lastly â—eere is shewed the most general vniversall rendring vp of all the â—ead whatsoever to iudgment But Hel plainly hath not all the Dead Death the world of the Dead or thâ— Dominion of Death have all Therefore Dâ—ath Hades heere do not signifie properly the Divâ—ll Hell but this only that Death and the vniversall Dominion or power of Death yeelded vp to iudgment al the Dead both great smal both good and bad to be iudged according to their workes Thus it is evident and cleere that Hades no where in the â—ew Testament doth signifie properly Hel as you say it doth Thus also that is concluded fully and perfitly which my 2. Reason †Pag. 15 before affirmed that you have not one place at all in the Scripture to prove that Christs Soule was in Hell b Act. â— 2 One place only you have stood vpon that Christs Soule was in Hades but that helpeth you nothing at all as we have seene You must prove indeed that Chriâ—ts Soule was in Gehenna if you would perswade any man of knowledg which you shal never do Gehenna in the New Testament is properly Hell but Hades is never properly so taken as I hope it is sufficiently before proved Therefore the Concluâ—ion is good To thinke that Christes Soule was ever in Hell is a thing that ought to be vâ—terly denyed Yet heere we must consider a maine obiection of yours â—ven those words of our common Creed Touching Câ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 which vsually in English wâ— vtter thus He descended into Hell originally 〈◊〉 is He descended into Hades And in truth this is all that you have to allâ—age for your opinion â—swere But I answer 2. wayes First Admitting then Denying the authority of thâ—se words in our Comon Creâ—d 1. Admitting the authority of these words yet Not as sufficient not as Aposâ—â—hâ—all but such as may be fâ—oÌ„ godly and sound Christians wâ— affirme that we can well vnderstand them according to the Scriptures vse of Hades rightly viz that Christes whole humane Person came vnder the power and Dominion of Death or that he dâ—caying in this world * falling down from that state of life wherein a while he flourished went absolâ—tly from hence into the world of the Dead 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 153. according to the law of nature which all other men follow likewise when they dâ— How this sense doth fully agree also with the mindes of the ancient Fathers generally we have at large dâ—clared c before Pag. 166. Pag. 1â—4 But this serveth not your turne therefore you will needes inioyne vs d 3. Rules to be exactly and prâ—câ—sâ—ly kept in the expounding of these words namely 1. Distinction of matter 2. Consequence of order 3. Propriety of words You must know that we can be no more strict Note nor more religious in observing the Ciâ—cuÌ„stances of matter order even in the holy Scriptures themselves then you inioyne heere to be observed in these words of men Might not these godly men think you misse in som such Circumstance or light point although the Scripture can not Or if they might why impose you such strictnes on our consciences about mens words as if heere were no possibility of any the least missing or imperfection How beit we admit your 3. Rules also 3. Rules and will observe them sufficiently First these words He descended to Hades may very well expresse a Distinction of matter differing from all the words heere besides They naturally and properly signifie as before we shewed that Christ came to vtter decay in this world and being taken hence was gathered in both partes of his Manhood dissolved wholy intirely to those who were departed before him into another world Or ells thus that he came vnder the full power e before Pag. 192. Dominion of Death Now either of these differeth verily from meere and simple Death â—vian â—â—â—â—â—â—ce â—eaâ—h For to Dy propeâ—ly is nothing els but the going a sunder of the Soule from the Body That other is to be wholy razed out from the presence and sight of this world also a remayning vnder the possession and strength of Death and a going to the society of them in another world g. 192. These indeed are f differing points and degrees in Death albeit in effect generally they bee all one with Death that is they be necessaâ—ily consequent alwayes conioyned vnto Death Againe if those wordes in the Creed were only but a more emphaticall phrase of through and perfit Dying and Departing hence if there were in them no further DistinctioÌ„ of matter then so yet this were enough to distinguish them froÌ„ the other words Dead and Buryed This is cause enough especially in the Ancient times when men suppose this Creed was framed when Christs Humanity and naturall Death was by al meanes subtilly and violently oppugned after a short worde signifying his Death and Buriall yet for more emphasis sake and for further Viging the same to addâ— this other short familiar phrase importing no other maine matter then was before noted but only a more effectuall and more absolut signification
there till his Resurrection Which our Synod since very profitably hath overskipped and suppressed First then your selfe granteth that our later Synod corrected the former about this matter which in my wordes you cannot indure to heare 2. You charge these words of K. Edw. Synod with 2. pointes which are not in them 1. That it saith how the Spirits of the iust were in Hell and that Christ descending thither stayed there till his resurrection In me you would make this a great matter so to misreport the wordes of a Synod which in deed saith nothing heereof 3. It is well that you * renounce that of Peter 〈◊〉 22. â—â— 3.19 by Austins direction as making not at all for any locall being of Christ in Hell But yet heerein your selfe openly refuseth the minde of all your predecessors yea of our later Synod if they believed as you vrge that they did For if they liked Christs locall being in Hel they misliked not the applying of that in Peter therevnto as by Mai. Nowells Catechisme may appear Neither misliked they his tarying there till his resurrectioÌ„ which Austin also holdeth as firmely as that he was there All which you vtterly disclaime as wel as I. Why then do you aggravat my differing from them and see not your owne 4. That our English Cleaâ—gie generally did or doe beleeve Christes locall descent into Hell although they reade and rehearse those words so translated certainly no man will nor ought to acknowledge Every man is assured of the coÌ„trarie You can argue nothing then heerein by our vsuall naming of this word Hell in this place of the Creed Which yet is al that you * Pag. â—â— have heere So that your conclusion is vaine If Hell in English bee Hell and going downe bee descending c. Likewise is that You are content to be tryed by all the Fathers both Greeke and Latin Who all as hath ben shewed doe make against your opinion Also as touching the Scripture you are vtterly destitute thereof which yet alone must take place with vs in this matter All that you bring for your purpose are meerely mistaken mistranslated wordes of Scriptures Creedes and Fathers as I hope hath plainly bene proved This therfore may suffice for vs to refuse your doctrine in these points Wisdome shal be iustified of all her children To God only wise be praise through IESVS CHRIST for ever Rom. 16.17 FINIS Pagin Lin. Faultes Correction 13. in marg pag. 8. pag. 7. 23. 37. he they 24. 2. their the 27. 29. will well 36. 22. in marg your you 49. 24. ne  57. 7. herefore heeretofore 65. 28. externally eternally 65. 8. better buter 77. in marg b pag. 51.55 b pag 71.73 103. 33. torments torments yet no only to it The diverse Significations of the Greeke word Hades Which is haâ—â— according to the CircuÌ„stances of the places where it is vsed See pag. 177. Wherevnto also the Hebrue Sheol may be rightly compared Hades a meere PriuatioÌ„ of this visible Worlde No visible being heere any more pa. 157. c. 169. 178. applyed Natively Seldom yet somtime to All visible transitory things when they are Destroyed from out of this World are seene heere no more pag. 188. c. Often chiefly to Dead Men yea to al dead men both Good and Bad Blessed and Damned pag. 155 c. Yet only in respect that they are Dead and seene no more in this world pag. 156 162. 166. 169 177. 178. Thus somtime it signifieth coÌ„cerning theÌ„ that which Tooke them away hence and holdeth them still pa. 169. 179. 181. 192. either Death it selfe pa. 161. 1â—â— The Power Strength 〈◊〉 Force of death pag 194. their State and coÌ„dition pa. 171. 175. 178 viz of their Whole Person dissolved and taken away hence pa. 158. 177. Partes both Soul pa. 155. Body pa. 201. Place pa. 173. 181. in respect of the dissolved Paâ—tes so 〈◊〉 as they have a Being somwhere in a place after Death no Positive thing in any place but meere Privation as is said from thiâ— Visible World Figuratively by a Poeticall fiction making it sometime as it were a Place of things which in truth have no Being nor Place after they cease to be heere pag. 188. Prosopopoeia lawfully setting out the Power of death or of destruction from hence as if it were a Person having this power pa. 182. 179. 192. Idolatrously making such an imagined Person a false God 173. 179. Synécdoche so it is somtime Hell pag. 187. 171. Heaven in Plato pag. 178. the Grave pag. 159.
soule properly also For the one standeth with Gods iustice and with the Nature of man in Christ aswell as the other So farre for this Then e you addresse your selfe against another â—ag 289. even one of the chiefest reasons of mine which I make from the straunge and incomparable Agoâ—ies of Christ in the tyme of his Passion These invaded him as we read principally at 3. times 1. in the foretast of his Passion shewed vs in the 12. of Iohn 2. In the Garden a little before his apprehension 3. In his very extreame Passion it selfe on the Crosse The Scriptures f heeretofore I rehearsed at full Treat â— â—ag 49. 50. â—oh 12.27 Mat. 26.39 and 44. Mark 14.33 â—uk 22.44 and 43. Mat. 27.46 â—ebâ—â— 5.7 whence these piteous and vnspeakeable Agonies of his are notified vnto vs. Whereby to all that duely consider it appeareth so cleare as the Sunne at noone day that The paines of his Passionâ— which plainly now he felt and feared because he knew he was to feele them further vnto death were the proper and direct cause of those Agonies But we assume that such straunge and lamentable things and behaviour in Christ were not the effectes only and meerelie of his bodily paines and death or of the feare of them Therefore Christ felt and indured more then his meere bodily paine and death by the testimonie of the Scriptures which thing a Before 14.25.5 you deny In your whole discourse you gainsay * Pag. 17 22. 23. 2â— 34. c. the Proposition that the paines of Christes Passion or the naturall feare of them was the proper and direct cause of those Agonies or that these Scriptures doe imply so much The Assumption you graunt and acknowledge that the meere bodily paines and death of Christ or the feare thereof were not the only nor the proper and direct Cause of these Agonies in him For b Pag. 29â— you are resolved that the cause of Christes Agonie could not proceede but from his Submission to God or Compassion to men or froÌ„ both These you name elswhere a c Pag. 23. â— religious Feare d Pag. 124. 20 21. Devotion and Pietie to God pitie to men c. And thus you resolutely denie my Proposition For you meane it seemeth that Christ suffered paines in his Soule by reason of the strength and zeale of these his Holy Affections and that these were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie Complaint Therfore not any extraordinarie Paines inflicted vpon him by way of proper punishment as my Proposition intendeth But this your Assertion I simply denie that Christes Holy Affections his Piety and his Pity were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie Complaint And then my Proposition standeth firme that his Paines inflicted on him by way of proper Punishment and Vengeance for sinne were the proper and maine Cause thereof Wherefore let vs try your proofes for it and then mine against it But before we com to them you must know that this your Resolution as you call it is first most vaine also directly contrary to your selfe and then altogeather vntrue and presumed by wide coniecture as God willing presently I shall shew For the first I hartily intreat the Christian Reader to marke wel to consider how your L. doth contrive 3. notable Equivocations in these few wordes Christ suffered in his Soule the wrath of God Notable Sâ—â— phistrie which you e Pa 243 24â— 245. 248. seeme to grant but in truth you do not and if we ad also the paines of Hell then hee opposeth a fourth fallacie against vs. And these 3. or 4. are the only Pillars of his Doctrine For the 3. former your first Equivocation is in this word Christ Suffered and about it wee deale in this place now The common and ordinary phrase of men vnderstandeth heerein His feeling of paines inflicted on him by way of proper punishment and satisfaction for sinne â—t Christes â—fering or â—â—lion is proâ—â—ly which he vndertooke for vs. Only this in the ordinarie and vsuall maner of speach is signified by Christes suffering or his Passion and so doe we alwayes vnderstand by it But you cunninglie take another rare sense of this word as it signifieth the Affections of the Minde in Christ wholly bent to Holines Righteousnes Obedience of God that so he might exactly perfitly keep his iust Law Which 2. partes of Christes Mediation are greatly differing â—â—e before pa. 18. 52. 64. and ought not both in trueth to be called His Passion or Satisfaction for sinne Therefore speake plainly I beseech you and deceave vs not call not this His Soules suffering but his Soules Holines Righteousnes And seeing you meane This was the proper maine cause of Christs Passion Suffering wheÌ„ he wrought his satisfactioÌ„ for sin now at the last end of his life chiefly I simply denie it 〈◊〉 Treat 1. pag. 68. 69. all Reason reclaimeth against it and to that which I alleaged for further reproofe thereof you answere nothing Your next Equivocation is in this See before pag 52. Hee suffered †in Soule your next in Gods wrath Both which I have plainly shewed before As also your 4. Before pa. 49. 19. * Fallacy which may be called Fallacia Accidentis But Sit I hope you will not thinke to beare downe all afore you with nothing but with cunning Before pag. 16. 53. yet vaine deceipt countenanced out with cruell and hatefull wordes Further you are in this your Resolution directly contrary to your owne selfe Before pa. 36. 64. as before I have briefly yet sufficiently shewed Againe where you censure your selfe very sharply for your resolutnes in this cause Pag. 17. * It is curiosity to examine presumption to determine impossibility to conclude certainly what was the true cause therof Thirdly “ Pag. 290. where you make but 2. causes submission to God Compassion to men elswhere but one * Pag. 23. Religious feare But †Pa. 17. c. before you very precisely made 6. If you agree no better w th your self I have small hope that you will agree with vs. Last of al this your resolution making Christs Piety Pity to be the only proper maine Cause of all his wofull Passion is vtterly false and vntrue having no grouÌ„d but meere coniectures But before I vnâ—â— my reasons against your Assertion Your 6. Causes of Chr. Agonie vntrue let vs view all your particulâ—â— Causes see if any one of the can be good †Pag. 18. Your 1. Cause is Sâ—â—mission to the Maiesty of God sitting in iudgemeÌ„t Against whom 〈◊〉 in what cause sate he now in iudgment when Christ was thus astonished Agonized therewith Of necessity it must be one of these three wayes 1. Gods Maiesty great iustice now at this time might sit in iudgement