of the Abbot I confess I understand it not For had he had the apprehension that the torments of Purgatory be so great as Divinity tells us he could never methinks have with a Christian heart spoken those words It is now a good while since our brother who is departed remains in torments of fire and therefore we must shew him some charity As who should say I am content he hath suffer'd the pains of Purgatory for one month nay two for so long it was before he designed him to be released Imagine he had caused him to be rack'd or impal'd so long would not all the Christian World have abominated the cruelty What conceit then had he of Purgatory that would let his Brother burn in that cruel fire so long without shewing him any Charity I would to God your Divine had told us where we might find that Vindication o◠the Book he speaks of For the more I consider it the more unworthy it seems to me to be our great Doctour and savour more of the Monk then of the Pope Though besides he tells us that this story hapned three years before his writing and Baronius tells that the Book was written in the fourth year of St. Gregory's Popedome at which time St. Gregory could not be in his Monastery Nor do I think Baronius can rattle Canus for this opinion then since he held it himself in his eighth Tome and revoked it in his ninth Therefore he may have patience with one who falls into the Errour into which himself fell before 9. Let us omit that ridiculous opinion of excommunicating souls in Purgatory and answer the question he puts what any Judicious Catholick can say to the story Which is that the Authour of this Book sheweth no such exact inspection into every circumstance as that any man should be bound to believe that he could not be deceived either in his Judgment or in his narration as that truly Copiosus knew not of the saying of the Masses And I wish you to note your Divine's advice he gives that when the Authour makes this Argument that concordante visione cum Sacrificio res apertè claruit he speaks like a Doctour Is this Tradition or Scripture or Councils upon the which Doctour's proceed or a common and ordinary prudence by which every man conducts his private business 10. There follow two stories out of Venerable Bede written as an Historian should write and as it was worthy of his Learning and Wisdome The first is nothing to the Alledger's Purpose being but of the profiting of the Mass to the dead which is the position common to us both That which he chiefly takes notice of is this word delivery or loosing as if we held the souls were never to be deliver'd or that their delivery came not to pass by prayers and other good works So that this being agreed on and that there is no specification of time there is nothing particular in this story but that many who heard this story were devoutly inflamed in faith to wit to pray for the dead by which we understand that this story was the occasion of their apprehension of suddain delivery which hath no other ground then the parallelling of the loosing of his fetters to the help in Purgatory which every man would guess of according to the principles he was before imbued with So that both the effect is common to both opinions and the ground every ones application of the Miracle to a spiritual effect which they saw no otherwise then in a corporeal allegory But your Divine explicates inflamed in faith which as it lyes signifies no more then that they grew fervent towards good life to signifie that they had recieved this faith from the beginning which seeing there is no ground for it in the Authour is but a kind of a corruption of the Text by the Divines addition to it 11 The later story of Drithelmus hath one circumstance that favours your Divines opinion but the very same words have a blot to mar it that is what you◠Divine I doubt will acknowledg to be a flat Heresy I mean that these words all shall come to Heaven in the day of Judgment include some who have no Obstacle of Sin to wit those in the fourth place So that he affirms them not to go to Heaven as soon as purged against the Council of Florence and Benedictus his Bull. Whence by the Rule that no Revelations are to be admitted which contain any thing inconsonant to Faith this Revelation is to be rejected not so far as concerns venerable Bede who truly relates what Drithelmus not onely reported but truly thought But that he Drithelmus was some way deluded either because the Vision was a natural effect of forgoing thoughts or that he mistook himself in the rehearsal or some such like cause whereof the contingency of sublunary causes furnish us with store I pray take notice also that the works of the living help many to be freed before the day of Judgment be the words of the Angel not of Venerable Bede narrative not doctrinal Whence you may see this Divine continues still his practice of proving earnestly that which is not in controversy and saying little or nothing of that which is the true difficulty SIXTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his tenth Chapter Of the Nature and Certainty of private Revelations The rare Spright in the Jesuits House at Vienna His Relations for what in them concerns the Alledger's purpose found to be in likelihood what himself intitles them Stories 1. IN his tenth Chapter we must launch into the Ocean of Revelations for after once by the foregoing Relations they grew into fashion every Spiritual body had of them either truly or at least put upon him Nay this very day there want not spiritual directours which profess a kind of skill in such a space of time to bring their Ghostly Children to Extasies and Revelations And who doubts but that if a Devout soul of her self subject to those passions which Galen and other Physicians call Extases or Enthusiasms light into the Government of a Ghostly Father delighted with admirable accidents both their thoughts being continually busied upon spiritual matters the Ghostly Father having such a pitch of Divinity as to correct in his Ghostly Child's apprehensions what is plainly naught and contrary to Faith and Christian life both being constantly conceited that God uses to discover extraordinary verities to those who much converse with them who I say can doubt but many relations of wonderfull sights must needs proceed from them nay many times of things which verily fall out as they see them as all Heathen Histories recount some which hapned so as Philosophers teach us by a secret combination of the soul with outward causes amongst which the Divine Providence mingles it self to work its proper ends 2. But your Divine and I frame about these two propositions seeming contrary yet so well agreeing that one good conclusion
souls out of Purgatory before the day of Judgment His two first Testimonies according to the custom of those whose chief end is to make a shew hang in the position which is common to both sides being but pure prayers that deceased souls should go to Heaven without specifying when But because his devotion was so hot that it could not expect God's pleasure and determination he would have us believe it was meant presently 2. His next two Testimonies are drawn from the Heresy of the Millenaries praying to God that the soul may rise in the first resurrection For the former Testimony being Tertullians of whom it is known that he was of that Sect and the words being proper to that Sect it cannot be doubted of his meaning The second Testimony is from the Gothick Liturgy the which of what authority it is I know not We well know the Goths were Arrians for the most part of their Flourish in Italy and a great while in Spain we know that this Millenary Errour was greatly dispersed even amongst Catholicks but more amongst Hereticks who have not the rule of Unity and Tradition which keep Catholicks from easy changing The words of the prayer are the proper words of the Millenarians The glosses he seeks to make as they may be good to the Text of the Apocalyps so is their sence too far fetcht to be the sence of a prayer for common People Wherefore either it is a pure piece of Millenarism or at least he must first vindicate it from being so before it can serve him for a Testimony Now the Chiliasts Errour was that Christ was to reign upon Earth corporally with his Saints for a thousand years before the general resurrection then to give the hundredfold of what his Saints had forsaken for his sake in this world according to his promise in the Gospel But because this was a corporal resurrection therefore though there had been no Heresy in the position it could serve your Divine to no purpose Now it serves onely to shew how short his performance falls from his bragging promises 3. His next authority comes truly after St. Austins time being a story out of St. Gregory of Tours contemporary to the Great yet because it is of St. Martin it must speak for St. Martin's age The story as he relates it is of a Holy Virgin to whom St. Martin after her death procured bliss His first Note is that Saints whose Sepulchers are visited for Saints Sepulchers may yet stay some while in Purgatory I easily grant him that without the Authority of this story For the fallibility of Peoples Judgments in such things is very well known And I should not boggle at it though it were untill the day of Judgment His second Note is that St. Martin in the primitive Church believed as we do But for this I know not that the name of the Primitive Church reaches after Constantin's time and St. Martin was but a young man in Julian's time when being but a Catechumen he gave half his Cloak to our Saviour Farther to think he believ'd as we do is a hard matter For I must first believe the story to be true which may be doubted since St. Gregory gives testimony of it onely as a report he had heard from some old men who lived where this Tombe was and none of them could have had been witness of the fact which was passed 1â—0 years before So that it has no better Authority then of a Country tale Nor does St. Gregory's Vote which is his third Note much mend it as he may easily see if he reads Baronius his Opinion of St. Gregory's History T. 2. An. 109. Sect. 49. And in the true History which he sets down but by halves there are divers inconvenient circumstances One he makes mention of to wit that the Holy Maid was kept from Heaven by reason of a no very great fault but in the History you cannot perceive there was any fault at all His fourth Note is that St. Gregory the great was not the first that began to write such stories but St. Gregory of Tours before him Those that will be accurate say seventeen yeares before him if that in such a question as this is not to be together But truly I believe it was one hundred at least For the Pope Gregory tells so many of like stories that a popular Errour can hardly be thought to grow so fast as that the first should have been but seventeen years before it could grow so common 2. Then he comes to St. Hierom out of whom he recounts what words a soul delivered out of Purgatory may say And if you ask what this is to the purpose he answers by adding to the words of St. Hierom that the soul speaks this before the resumption of her body and proves it because the Saint passing to other things saith they shall be done in the consummation of the world Is not this goodly stuff for a Divine to fill a Book withall 3. Next in rank is brought in St. Ambrose with the Elogy of the Father in Christ to St. Austin Out of him he cites two places The first out of the Preparatories to Mass assign'd for Friday His words to intreat that the Mass may this very day in great Letters be a great and full banquet of thee Jesus Christ the living Bread which came from Heaven I would he had taken the pains to apply his Text to our question for I find a great difficulty Yet I think I can find two pretty good constructions The one is to understand it objectively the other efficiently For the proposition being that the Mass should be this banquet either it must be meant that the dead should rejoyce of his saying of Mass by way of the devotion that is used to be called communicating spiritually or else that the Mass should be cause of their seeing of God Whether way soever it be taken the effect of the prayer is that he may this day say Mass with that Charity and Devotion as that it may be profitable to the souls of the dead But both these may be done without any change in the souls For if his Mass prove so good the souls knew of it at their first going out of the body and were to have the effect of it in its due time meerly by the position of the Action this very day without any great Letters But to understand it as it must be understood to serve for his purpose that this very day the souls should receive bliss was a very uncivil request to expect Purgatory should be emptied for the saying of one Mass and surely takes away all excuse from the Pope why he likewise doth not give such Indulgences as at least once in the year to make a Goal-delivery of Purgatory that Christians might have as much priviledge as the Jews to lye but one twelve month in that place But specially this request befitted not St. Ambrose whom we shall have our
which we see amongst even our Moderns many profess not to understand and many of those who profess to understand it by their gross explications shew they do not penetrate it But you may ask what then is the force of our Saviours Argument I answer that we have it from our Saviour himself who told his Apostles that Lazarus was asleep not dead and the like he spake of the Prince of the Synagogues daughter and the phrase amongst Christians is used of all the Faithfull and so we sing Regem cui omnia vivunt venite adoremus and St. Paul expresses it in the words then says he those who have fallen asleep in Christ are perished When then our Saviour says God is not God of the dead this word dead must be taken for perished according to what St. Paul comforteth the Christians and tells them they must not be sorrowful at their friends deaths as Gentils were and giveth the reason qui spem non habent that is who expect no Resurrection but think their dead for ever perished and not to be as it were in a sleep untill the last Trumpet awakes them There is yet a deeper Mystery in our Saviours words which neither pleased Bellarmin nor his admirer to wit that because all things are present to God in eternity therefore no future thing is absent to God so that Abraham Isaac and Jacob did live to God and as to God were really living 6. He presses also that St. Paul urgeth the like Argument saying that if there be no Resurrection let us eat and drink for tomorrow we shall dye But this Argument sheweth plainly that his former solution was naught For St. Paul speaks not to Sadduces but rather to Pharisees to whom belongeth the custom of often Baptisms which he there urges therefore it depends not out of the connexion of the Immortality of the soul and Resurrection but rather it supposes the Immortality of the soul to be a thing not known to the vulgar For according to that saying of his sapientiam loquimur inter perfectâ—s he apply'd his Doctrin to his Auditory To the multitude he preached what they were capable of 〈◊〉 is he proposed the Goods proper to the whole man and as it were an excellency and heighth of those goods whereof they had experience reserving the declaration of goods purely spiritual to the special audieâ—ce of the more understanding part Wherefore all his publick preaching being of the rewards 〈◊〉 be received in the Resurrection be mâ—keâ— this Argument if there be no Resurrection we are the most miserable of men for in this world we enjoy no pleasure and in the next we have no reward So you see this solid resolution of Bellarmin to be compounded of pure mistakes and improbabilities And yet if his worship had been so curious he might have found it confuted in the third account of the Book whence he read the objection made though Bellarmin is not by name cited not every petty confirmation impugned the which I should have done if I had taken it out of Bellarmin 7. He yet presseâ— That those who were seduced by the Geâ—â—ils would not esteem of 〈◊〉 Authority of Judas Maccabâ—â—â— in which he shews either little experience or much cunning For as an Ordinary Protestant such as depend from the Authority of their Preacher if he see it prov'd that all Antiquity is against what his Preacher teaches is presently strucken with a horrour and begins to waver because it is natural to men to love and adhere to their Ancestours so those who were wavering amongst the Jews upon the perswasions of the Gentils when they saw the publick profession of their Country in the fact of Judas Maccabaeus would be much sollicited to forgo the apparent reasons of the Gentiles and prefer their Countries belief before them Either therefore your Divine did not understand this or else under the colour of some obstinate Persons he would cunningly make his Reader believe that no body would take good by this example of Judas Maccabaeus 8. His opposition to my second Text is already answer'd for St. Paul did not speak to the Sadduces but to such as received the custom of Baptisms or praying for the dead and his Argument is as strong as that when we out of praying for the dead prove a Purgatory and remission of sins in the next world so does St. Paul prove the Resurrection Whence it is manifest that he taught the Christians to pray for that good to the dead which they were to receive at the Resurrection and by consequence that all the good the dead can receive before that day is already received before they are pray'd for 9. The third Text he dissembles to understand and for that reason with his Paraphrase corrupts the Text The Text it self says that his spirit or soul may be saved in the day of our Lord. He paraphrases Saved to signify to appear with great honour and glory But every one who understands the word knowâ— it signifies to be freed from some danger or harm and all Catholicks by admitting a particular judgment know all danger is past therefore the meaning must be that in that day he shall be freed from punishment and misery At length he turns off this Text with a jeer telling us St. Paul was not so uncharitable as to wish no good to Onesiphorus beforâ— the day of Judgment As if it were not charity mistaken to wish him what St. Paul knew was not to be had St. Paul therfore in this expression wisheth Onesiphorus all good that could happen to him which as yet he possessed not and so shews there was no good to be expected for the dead but either what they have before prayers or else are to receive 〈◊〉 the day of Judgment 10. In his eighth Number he goes over this Text anew and says or rather grants that indeed it is the common phrase of Christians to speak so but that as it cannot be inferred thence that the wicked go not to Hell before that day no more can it be inâ—…ed that the just commonly receive not their reward before that day But the difference of the two 〈◊〉 is very manifest For the damning of the wicked is not proposed to us as a thing to be desir'd and effected by our prayers and therefore concerns not us when it is done But the Reward of our Benefactours is propos'd to be gain'd by our prayers and therefore we ought to know what to pray for and he confesses that Universally the phrase which is the witness oâ— our thoughts and of what we are taught runs so as to wish good in the day of Judgment The consequence therefore is most infallible and in a manner belonging to Tradition that all our prayer for the dead must be that they may receive their reward at the day of Judgment For although Tradition doth not expressly teach the Negative yet because it Universally teaches the positive to pray for good at the last
we make them now will perswade the world we take away pains out of Purgatory Who would have believed that towards the end of the book we should be put to lay open the question I pray then take notice that as 〈◊〉 have before also declared we put the pains of Purgatory to be the very same that they do onely longer and by more connatural means and of their natures stronger and more powerfully tormenting The question betwixt us is onely about the Instruments and manner of effecting these Torments Wherefore if the Supplement giveth answers common to Hell and our Controversy they are to be suspected not to be solid or rather not well apply'd to our case 4. To open therefore the particular case so it stands Where men live under Government by the course of Law certain actions or things are due from one Fellow-citizen to another these are as well negative as positive as it is equally due not to hurt my neighbour as to pay him what I ow him If I offend by not giving him his due the Magistrate forces me to observe the equality and keep Commuâ—ative justice as they call it but if I hurt my neighbour then the Magigistrate himself imposes a penalty upon me either in purse or body and this is said to be Distributive Justice and particularly vinâ—…ative Ask the reason of it â—â—is because I have offended the Magistrate For if I had onely offended my neighbour Restitution that is â—…ative Justiâ—â— had satisfy'd him In what then is the Magistrate oâ—â—ended Why the good of the Magistrate as he is a Magistrate is to have his Government not hinder'd but easy to him Now his Government becomes easy when every one does as he should do and when they do otherwise his Government becomes difficult both because he is gorced to put his own hand to hard work and because the example if the offender be not punished makes others prompt to do the like Here you see two reasons making Vindicative Justiâ—e prudent and good but both reasons concern the common Wealth There is in private men a third occasion of Revenge which is that a harm done to a private man makes him angry that is grieved and as it were sick for the time and this he seeks to amend by Revenge This is plainly the Revenge of fools as proceeding out of passion not of reason but it is the most spectable in human Conversation By this a sensible man will easily understand that if Revenge be to be attributed to God the translation is to be made from the first sort of Revenge which because it iâ— rational may by reason be transferr'd to God who works like the Authour of Reason according to Reason and not out of the second which grows out of passion and is an affection of the Beast that iâ— in â—an joyned to Reason Notwithstanding this â—o so plain nevertheless weak Divines make the Translation from the later not distinguishing the one from the other because of the common name leaping from word to word without considering the different fignification Taking therefore Revenge to be an act of Justice and Justice to be 〈◊〉 Vertue they think the beastly act of Revenge to be a vertuous action and attribute it to God 5. Now to descend to the Answers of the Arguments out of the Supplement it is plaiâ— that the Authour makes the pains of Hell not purely Vindicative because he says they are ordered for the correction of those who are now in the Church And when he says that the exercise of Divine Justice is gratefull to God for its own sake who can doubt but that he speaks of a rational exercise which is done for some end Likewise that he sayth that the punishment of sinners rejoyceth the Saints it is plainly true 〈◊〉 this makes the pains not to be purely Vindicative and therefore are nothing to my Argument which speaks onely of such kind of pains for of others there is no question and if there were any it would press us more then them to answer them But the question betwixt us and your Divine is of the quality of the punishment and the manner of executing them and that special end to satisfy Gods Justice as they take it For they explicate Gods Justice not as it regards the square and frame of the world but abstractedly from circumstances they think one act to be good another to be bad of its own nature and that God is bound to give a reward to good acts and punishment to bad ones purely out of a vertue whose nature it is so to do which is called Justice We on the contrary side put acts to be good or bad in order first to the Doer afterwards to Neighbours in both to the End they were made for and the Fabrick of Causes order'd to bring them to their Ends. This is the difference specially touching this point of Vindicative Justice which they apply to the acts immediately we proportion to the ends of Persons and the whole World Conformable to this riseth another difference that we put the punishments of the next world to spring connaturally out of the behaviour of the Persons in this World and so can give some account of their Quality They put the punishments to be chosen by an â—â—bitrary esteem of God Almighty which is neither revealed nor is there any Ladder to climb so high as to have a sâ—ght of it to help which defect they bring us Revelations some of which may be proper some allegorical all imperfect uncertain and ungrounded having nothing for the most part but the word of some one Person in a trance or some other doubtfull plight 6. Hence you see that the Arguments of the Supplement are so far from being ours that we stand more obliged to solve them then they for they are against torments in General and concern Revenge in the first signification and our Arguments are against Revenge in the bestial meaning and against this voluntary framing of torments and therefore he is deceived when in â—his third Number he says our two best proofs are solved For they are not as much as touched And to answer them he must not shew that pains in common but this quality of pains is profitabler then if they were natural which he never goes about and for the other part that it is rational to do them for pure Revenge he shews plainly he understands not what what is objected framing his answer in his fourth Number about Revenge incoâ—…n and shewing out of that common place not that pure Revenge is rational but that Revenge for a farther end is good For all that is spoken of Revenge in common is questionless fulfilled in that branch whereas pure Revenge is an irrational and unfitting action 7. In his fifth Number he attempts to solve an objection which truly does invâ—â—cibly confute that principle that to every good act is due a Reward and to every ill one a Punishment The Argument is that
comparison to Aristotl's demonstration and saying that in Aristotl's way there be insuperablr difficulties which uses to be the saying of those who understand not this Demonstration of Aristotle which is fundamenta to Philosophy and acknowledged by all who deserves the name of Philosophers And so you may see I did well to promise him no demonstrations who know not what they signify but thinks every Anthropomorphitical explication of Scripture to be Demonstrative EIGHTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his twenty third and twenty fourth Chapters Our Opinion avouch'd by true Philosophy Hiâ— Calumny of our Teâ—ets God's Gâ—… of the Synagogue different from that of the Church The notion of the word Merit The connaturalâ—ess of the pains we put and the needlesness of his The many ill-consequences and absurdities of the Opinion that all Venial affections are blotted out by Contrition in the first Act of Separation The â—illiness of his Opinion that souls in Purgatory cannot help themselves His probable Divinity His non-sâ—… that lyability to be punisht without Fault is 〈◊〉 blem isâ— refuâ—ed 1. I cannot but complain of your Divine that having promised such wonders in the last discussed Chapter he came off so pitifully that where he had the advantage of human apprehension against me he gave me not as much as occasion to explicate my Doctrin unless I should have gone and stray'd from his Text. His oppositions were pure opinions without any sight of Evidence His Authority for the most part of St. Thomas from whom in this point we professedly recede His Scripture such as he himself is bound to solve in respect of Almighty God So that in its words it has no force and all the force must come out of this whether the nature of Angels requires to have the words explicated improperly or no which he may suppose but goes not about to prove otherwise then from uncertain Authority His solutions to admit contradiction or else propose some Argument by halfs The rest of his Chapter high words 2. Howsoever I hope his three and twentieth Chapter will make amends for the question is not so Metaphysical as the other was It begins with an explication of my Doctrin disguis'd in high terms yet true ones for the greatest part In his second Number he accuseth it of being against Philosophy to say that God so order'd all things in the beginning that he need not since put his hand to it By which if he understands that God doth not continue conserving of his creatures it is not my Doctrin If he grants Conservation to God though the truth is that Conservation is but the very Act of first Creation though in name and notion it be divers then I must see how he proves it against Philosophy For saith he no natural cause can produce the soul of a man and therefore God must do some new action when there is an exigence of creating a soul. I grant no creature can create a â—oul but affirm that the first act of Creation creates every soul when time is without farther or greater Influence of God He may reply he understands not this To which my answer is that I beleeve him but cannot help him seeing it is not here place to explicate Mysteries of incident Philosophical points He may help himself if he pleases with my Institutiones both Peripaticae and Sacrâ— He adds two other Philosophical necessities he finds one of the necessity of Gods actual concourse with second causes the other of Gods choosing Individâ—…s for the second causes to produce The former as far as it hath sence in it is done by the Action of Creation or Conservation by which God sets the Angels on work to move celestial Bodies from whose motion actual motion flows into all other causes and this is the true either premotion or concourse of God with creatures plain and visible The other which I fear he means hath no kind of Philosophy nor Divinity in it The choosing of Individâ—… is the rascallest and the ridiculousest Position that ever was affirmed by any scum of Philosophers You see what sound maximes â—e takes to impugn the perfection of God's Wisdom 3. In his fourth Number he begins to employ his Divinity And first he asks what natural cause can raise dead bodies and give them due torments And I must answer with a reply of a question to wit when this is to be done While the Fabrick of Nature holds or when it is ended If when it is ended how comes it to our purpose Or is not he grosly mistaken to put this amongst the workings of Nature Yet that the course of Natural Causes does prepare the World even to this unmaking of Nature you may find in the last book of my Institutiones Sacrâ— For the proportionable pains the Soul of themselves will cause those as you may see in the same book To fill up here a Page with his own opinion of Purgatory was besides the matter for we doubt not but that he puts more Wilfulness then Wisdom in God Almighty's Actions 4. His main Answer begins N. 3. where he tells us that it is Heresie to make natural causes to have vertue sufficient to bring man by themselves alone to his final end of Eterâ—… Bliss And then he tells you that our prime Argument is the same that Pâ—…gius's to wit that every natural Agent ought to have power given it from the Author of Nature to bring it self to its natural perfection But first I would enquire where â—e sound in any Writing of mine the Proposâ—â—on he condemns If I say that God hâ—th ordain'd second causes to do all effects which are not to be seen to be miraculous do I exclude supernatural causes Are not Christ's coming and Preaching the coming of the Holy Ghost the Habits of Faith Hope and Charity the Prayers and Preaching and good Works proceeding from men thorough such Habits the Sacraments the whole â—orm of the Church all Supernatural causes interwoven with natural To what purpose then doth this man talk that natural causes are not sufficient to bring a man to Heaven Is it not plain he knows neither what I say nor what himself See how just our Argument is the same with the Pelagâ—â—n's Out of this you see his Answer is like to be a good one and so it is For Numb 8. he hath so I answer As man's last 〈◊〉 cannot be reâ—ched by Nature so is it out of the reach of natural causes by their natural operation to chastise man's sinning proportionably to his voluntary acting against his supernatural end My Reply is that he must seek out to whom to answer for I never talked of purely natural causes but natural and supernatural together as they compound all second causes But the good man could think of no supernatural causes but God himself working immediately and so strayed to seek out why such actions were not miraculous which we will not follow him to because it is not concerning to our Theme 5.