the poor man who gives but a shilling or has but the hearty will to do what were fitting for the Church of God towards the good of his Soul shall find as much relief as the rich man who distributes an hundred pound in all hast for four thousand Masses Yet do I not say the like to rich men For in a Rich man a small thing is no Charity The Charity which dilates not his heart towards his Neighbour is no Charity to give that which he would not stoop to take up is no Charity If what he gives be not sensible to him if it doth not diminish his love to Money if greediness doth not miss it it is no Charity Therefore the Richer man must give more then the less Rich or poorer that it may do him first good in this life and thereby to his Soul in the next 15. He objects that if the Opinion which hath prevailed for five hundred years be true it cannot be but solid prudence to procure the Souls delivery as soon as may be But he mistakes the question which is not nâ—… Whither the Soul be deliverable before the Day of Judgment but by what means she comes to gain the good she may receive Whether by the pure execution of the External action or by the internal Charity which is where it can be the necessary and unfailing cause of the exteriour act And as for the opinion that the external act gains the remission I am afraid it is subject to that curse Pecunia tua sit tecum in perditionem For who can doubt but the remission of sin or pain and the coming to Heaven are Dona Dei and cannot pecunia possideri I abhor to hear that where there is no difference of Charity and internal goodness there should be a difference in remission of sins and purchasing of Heaven Now in this hudling of Masses regularly there is less internal vertue then when they are dispensed with choice and commodity of the Church 16. By what is sayd his second and third Arguments are annulled for the value of the gift and the good of the Soul is the same whether the Masses be sayd a hundred years hence or upon the obit day or even not at all so there be no fault in the Donour And if you object that then the Prayers are not sayd I answer that is an harm to those who should have sayd them and peradventure to the Church if God's Providence doth not supply it other ways but no hurt to the Donour whose work that is the Prudence and Charity by which he ordered it shall follow him and procure by their own sâ—rength what is due to him What then Do the prayers no good or impetrate nothing to him We know that impetration fâ—r others is uncertain depending from God's Providence no ways due to the prayers but as much and how and when they agree to God's Providence and therefore not to be rely'd upon for any effect but every one must look to bear his own burthen and to receive according to his deserts He tells us in the end of his fourth Paragraph that if he had ten thousand pounds at his death to leave for his Souls good he would expresly order that none should be touch'd by them who think it indifferent whether they pray for him this year or next c. I answer that I am of that mind also For who will take Alms must follow the Donour's conditions not his own knowledg But if I had but five shillings to leave for Masses I would rather seek out the Priest on whom I thought it best employ'd though he should say never a Mass for it then another who had a priviledge to say two Masses that very morning but who was not so prudently relieved by my Alms. It was my fortune to have recommended to me by a Gentlewoman upon her Death-bed about 4â— for the good of her Soul She dy'd in poverty in a strange Countrey yet had saved this to be prayed for according to the course of Piety she had been instructed in She had a Child to be put to Nurse without means to pay for the nursing I openly confess I procur'd her not one Mass in vertue of her money but caused it all to be bestow'd on the keeping of the Child out of opinion that in this I did supply the imprudence of the Mother and that to do so was to employ the money best for the Soul of the Mother And such a mind I pray God I may have for my self at my death if I have any thing to leave to make my last Act of the greatest Charity to my Neighbour that I can and I hope I shall do mine own Soul the greatest good that lyes in my power to do by disposing of Temporal Goods 17. In his fifth and sixth Paragraphs he takes that Souls are chiefly to be helped by the Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Council of Trent But if one can help saith he many much more What says he can be here deny'd by any Catholick I answer easily that nothing is to be deny'd but something to be understood And first because that out of the Principle lay'd Charity is the ground of all impetration therefore to understand how it is true that the Mass is the greatest help for souls inPurgatory we ought to understand how the Mass is the greatest act of Charity Which to do we must remember the Mass to have these two relations The one that it is the Christian Sacrifice The other that it is the Commemoration of the Passion of our Saviour The first Consideration stirs up our Intellectual power towards the Admiration and Adoration of his Essence and Thanksgiving for all the benefits which we have received and are to receive from his Almighty hand and to vow all our love and affection to him upon that score The later stirs up the man the Compound of Reason and Passion to the apprehension and esteem of the Mystery of our Redemption of the good received by it and of the penal course Christ took to do us this good Both these considerations are help'd by an awful reverence to the Action we do of handling Christ's own real Body and of presenting to God not our temporall goods as in Alms nor our own bodies as in Penal Exercises but the true and real Body of Jesus Christ accompany'd with his Soul and Divinity If all this raises not Charity to the heighth that Charity can have in this life it is not the fault of the Work but of the Person Wherefore clearly if Souls can be helped by nothing but Prayers and that Alms-deeds and Satisfactions can have no place but as they are Suffrages or impetrations who can require greater evidence that of all exteriour actions the Mass of its nature is the most impetrative and helpful to the deceased faithful But presently you see that Masses are to be weighed not numbred to increase the power of prevailing I might add
alone knows but it seems rational to think that a very private good cannot exact them but onely such which either singly or in multitude concur to a Publick Good Other circumstances which prayers made by Faith may require to be heard may be supply'd by the subtle twisting of causes by the Divine providence unpenetrable by us which fulfill the desires of weak Persons who with great Faith demand the help of God Howsoever this is the main Principle that God never does such actions but when they are to be known and to govern men by perswasion Out of which it follows That whensoever such Actions have not connatural ways to be known and manifested they ought not to be supposed to be done but that God proceeds according to the course of natural second causes Nor must it be omitted that even in these miraculous Actions God proceeds more according to Nature in general then in the others For this being the main point of Nature to bring Man to Bliss conformably to his nature that is by the way of Perswasion what is most conformable to Perswasion is most conformable to the chief part of Nature that is to Mankind in the greatest effect which is in ordering him immediately to Bliss 7. Hitherto my Principles have been somewhat abstracted yet necessary to be known and taken purely either out of faith or out of evident and confessed natural Truths concerning man's nature The following Principles will be more close to our subject 8. The sixth therefore is that a Sin is an action against Reason that is against the Nature of Man and therefore hurtfull to him first in soul the which it most principally corrupts next in Body both according to his internal faculties and many times also in his external and vegetative qualities Thirdly if it be an external act it prejudices Man-kind that is his Neighbours either in their souls by Scandal and evil Example or also in their Bodies or Fortunes and out of these Considerations the Sinner remains subject to Satisfaction towards himself which consisteth in the reparation of the damages done to himself towards the Church and towards the civil Government As for the damages of his Soul if he repairs them not with penance and good works he goeth thorough the violence of his affection sinfull into the next world and there suffers the sorrows and contradictions which follow distracted affections As for the damages of his inward Bodily powers those breed in him or increase in him either more sinfull actions or at lâ—ast greater strife betwixt the rational and the material part and if they be not remedied in this world cause the disposition of the parting soul to be worse and imperfecter then it should be and so subject to ill effects in the next world As for the other damages to himself or his Neighbours unless he hath the will to repair them he doth not quit the sin as is manifest in the case of Restitution But if he do what lyes in his power and truly is not negligent they hurt him not in the next world But all Negligence and Tepidity is carry'd into the next World in quality of a sinfull disposition and so accrues to the punishment due to the sin 9. The seventh Principle is that by Gods order all the evils which follow sin either by its proper nature or by the orders of Ecclesiastical and Civil Government are ordained by God to be punishments of that sin and therefore whosoever by way of penance doth prevent the punishments which other ways would fall upon him by this order of God doth plainly extinguish the dueness of the pains as St. Zacchaeus when he payd four double of all that he had wronged any man quitted the score of what he had offended human nature civilly He that did willingly undergo the Penitential Canons or like a Holy Mary Magdalene or Mary the Aegyptian did retire to a voluntary penance did satisfy the Church And those who have perfect Contrition satisfy for all the defects of the soul and her interiour powers in the body I find it is a clear case that he who leaveth nothing due to any of these parties hath satisfy'd for all the pains they can exact of him 10. The eighth Principle is that Gods Justice may be taken either for the vertue of Justice in himself or for the effect it hath in its creatures If it be taken for this later it consists in this that every creature hath that which is fitting to him in respect of its proportion to the rest of the world and its situation and order in it Therefore it is clear that he who satisfies for his sins as it is explicated in the former Principle doth absolutely satisfy Gods Justice in this sence But if you take Gods Justice as Justice signifies a vertue in him then to satisfy Gods Justice adds to the former explication that the satisfaction the man does is that which God by the vertue of Justicâ— exacts to have done the which because it is that which the repentant sinner has done it is clear that the sinner hath satisfy'd God also in that sence 11. The ninth Principle is that all and every good act done in state of Grace and proceeding from Charity is meritorious that is deserves a reward And the Reward may be the extrinsecal or intrinsecal good of the actour that is either a good to his own Person or to his Friends For who does an act of Charity increases Charity in himself and becometh more Holy then he was before and therefore a greater and better member of Gods Church And because we know that all things as the Apostle teaches be made for the Elect and do cooperate to their good we know that they are more made and do more cooperate to the good of them who are more just and more Saints Hence it comes that God orders by his ordinary Providence for it is not an infallible rule that the friends of the just man fare better because he is Just and and so the just man by being just merits not onely for his own Person hut also for others Again because God doth this in respect of the desire of the just Person whether that desire be actual or onely in preparation of heart this which we call meriting is also obtaining or impetrating And because what is merited or impetrated may be either addition of good or diminution of evils when it is diminution of evils it is called Satisfaction Wherefore the same Action by the same vertue is meritorious impetratory and satisfactory I know some scruple at saying one man can deserve for another taking that to be the property of Christ but I see the Fathers use the word merit freely in this sence and therefore I do not scruple to do the same Wherefore I do not put these three Words to signify three Qualities of the Action but one quality according as it is related to divers Causes or Effects 12. Hitherto you have read
confess those were satisfy'd with a threatning of a greater Champion to follow yet I must take leave to remit my Reader to that Answer when your Divine goes no farther then the Vindicatour As for your Divine my first exception is that in his first number he affirmeth that both sides agreed that what was left to be purged at death might in some time before the day of Judgment be often truly sayd to be now wholy purged and he adds in Latin Jam Purgatum ex toto I see it is happy for him that he has a good pair of Spectacles such as can make him see deep into a Mill-stone For I that can see onely the outside find no such sence in these words I find nothing in the words cited by him that speaks of Esse Existentiâ— as Philosophers term it but onely of Esse Essentiae that is of this consequence These men are purged what follows That they go to Heaven or no. I never learned in Logick that an Interrogatory form was affirmative Had he sayd that both parties had agreed that this should be the question I perforce must have submitted but to make the world believe that he who asks what is to be sayd in such a case should be supposed to think the case true is beyond my Logick But you may reply that it is no great matter for his Logick may be far beyond mine Nor can I deny it specially if he can make them agreed of what they never thought of For in the same Paragraph he tells us that before our unhappy age he finds no mention of any Catholick who denyed such Souls to be deliverable before that day He had done me a great pleasure if he had set down what Hereticks before that time had deny'd it For then we might have gather'd all Catholicks had agreed against those Hereticks Now the Agreement must be such as was the Solution a School-fellow of mine was wont to give to the difficulties he found in his dictates which was to forget them So this Agreement was never to think or motion it or at most to hold it no way concerning the difficulty then proposed 7. This I believe is the substance of this whole Chapter For I see he tosses it and tumbles it in divers expressions but gets not a foot farther For what he tells us in the next Number to wit that this question concerned much the souls in Purgatory is very true but how he can inser it belongs to the Popes question is what I make difficulty of For I do not understand the Pope either meant to handle all questions or any one of Purgatory or to make an exhortation to pray for the dead by this Definition but onely to declare the efficacioâ—sness of Grace to carry people to perfect bliss as is evident by the Popes so much insisting upon the explication of the fullness to which men arrive 11. In his fourth Number he presses what an intolerable thing it is to keep the souls of one who hath spoken but one Idle word so long not onely from the sight of God but also in most afflictive punishments I do not remember I have any where declared that any man was sent to Purgatory for just one Idle word I think my way teaches that the next world depends on the habits not on the acts otherwise then as they are causes of remaining dispositions in the soul I do not know also where I have determin'd how far the pangs of death do satisfy for sins so that I take his supposition to be very aerial but it is not here place to discuss it In the mean while I see it was a providence of God that your Divine lived not before our Saviour ' s Passion for had he gone to Limbo he would have so murmured against God for keeping Holy Abel so many years out of Heaven for Original sin which Divines hold to be less then any Venial sin that it would have troubled the whole company 9. He seems to press that this will retard men in their progress towards Heaven But he that were to speak for my opinion would say no but that it would press them so much the more to be of that number that shâ—ll not be stay'd so long from their desired reward seeing it is in their own hands to go immediately to Heaven if they will For the case the Pope speaks of differs from ours in this that in his case it was not in the power of the living to obtain their coming to Heaven but in our case it is For Purgatory must needs be a place for tepid people seeing it is written of Heaven that Violence doth carry it 10. In his fifth Number he tediously repeats the same Argument of pressing the word esse to signify existence onely he adds a more silly confirmation For where the Pope speaks of all three sorts of souls being in Heaven in common and uses the three tenses have been are and shall be he presses that these 3 tenses must be true of all 3 sorts of souls whereas any one soul is enough to verify those three tenses seeing who once has been in Heaven is there and ever shall be And this upon no other ground then because it is fit for his purpose So willfull an Interpreter he is 11. In his sixth Number he finds a gross Errour in him that shall say the Pope made but one Definition concerning the state of souls departed What a piece of Divinity is this It is agreed upon by both sides what the Pope determins and in particular there is no disagreement of any point whether it be defined or no And your Divine finds a gross Errour whether it is to be called one Definition or more And I take it for so pidling a question that though the Book ly by me and to my memory it is sufficiently resolved in former writings yet I do not think it worth looking the place to see what the resolution and proof is but onely that it is a great impertinency to count it a gross Errour though it should be found to have missed 12. In the same sixth Number your Divine finds the Popes definition concerning the point in difference in these terms That if there shall be any thing to be purged in them when after death they shall be purged they presently after the afore said purgation even before the resumption of their Bodies and before the general judgment were are and shall be in Heaven have seen and do see God Now I am so blind that I can find neither good sence nor true English in these He begins with if there shall be any thing to be purged and ends with were are and shall be have seen and do see So that in the same proposition the mediuâ— is future and the effect passed Which is a rare piece of Grammar and newly invented to make the Popes Definition reach to what the Pope thought not of Would it not turn a mans stomack to see
opinion which will notnow be far of For the rest of this Chapter he spends in saying his Doctrin is conformable to the Councils of Trent and Florence and to St. Austin all which I confess for they speak but of Purgatory in common and so both our opinions are conformable unto them our difference being onely a particularity of Purgatory and not about the sence of it 11. Here if it please you to cast an eye upon what is passed you will find his first proofs to be out of Scriptures speaking Doctrins common to us both the second out of Fathers who say Christ at his Resurrection deliver'd souls out of Purgatory which we grant His next from Fathers who are known to have fallen into Errours in the points he cites them for that is he cites three Heresies for himself In the fourth place Revelations out of Greg. Turonensis and Metaphrastes insufficient Authours Fifthly some Fathers and Councils who speak no more then what both sides agree of Later Revelations enow but they are such Testimonies as are insufficient I think even in his own judgment to make a Theological proof Two Bulls of Popes whereof the one is grossly mistaken And lastly a false apprehension of the Churches present devotions which he takes not out of publick Prayer-Books but out of private intentions These are the most substantial passages of his discourse others of less moment I neglect not to make my period too tedious SECOND PART Maintaining the Arguments brought by the Authour from Authority and Reason for the Doctrin of the Middle State FIRST DIVISION Containing preparatory Grounds for the ensuing discourses That God being All-wise and Self-Blessed acts onely for the Good of his Creatures and especially Man what God's Honour signifies and how he governs Man The Nature of Sin and its Effects How God's Justice is satisfy'd Of Merit Impetration and Satisfaction A Breviate of the Adversary's opinion 1. BEfore I begin to look into his Impugnations of my Doctrin I think it expedient to lay down a brief explication of mine own thoughts in this question intreating my Reader 's patience if he thinks I fetch it too far about whereof he will see the necessity hereafter I settle therefore or rather explicate some Principles necessary to the seeing how intimately my Doctrin is connexed with Christian Faith 2. Let the first be that God is Essentially Wise and Wisdom or Truth or true Understanding of his actions and the Government of them For if any man sees what he should do but by passion or rather distraction doth not what he sees should be done we may call him Understanding or Knowing but not Wise. Therefore God whose Essence it is to be Wisdome cannot swerve from what he sees to be done or best to be done â—or it is all one to him who is governed purely by Wisdome to be best to be done and to be to be done because nothing but true Good can move such a Will and betwixt two unequal goods the greater is onely the true Good 3. My second Principle is that God is essentially Bliss and Blessed and that in so high and pure a degree that no Good which is adventitious from either his own action or the action of any other Substance can be wanting to him or desirable by him and because Good signifies desirable that there is no extrinsecal good that can truly challenge the denomination of a Good to God Honour for example is the Good of a Man upon two scores one because when he hears himself commended he hath an act of pleasure which perfects him intrinsecally the other because Honour brings him help to do somewhat which perfects him for example to get Wealth or some Office out of which he can gather contentment So that still the interiour contentment is that which makes the exteriour instruments to have the name of Goods Wherefore seeing Christian Religion teaches us that God gets no new contentments out of the effects his action has it is also necessary to believe the honour that all Saints give him is no Good of his 4. Out of these two follows the Third that whatsoever God does he does it for the Good of his Creatures and that when he says that he acts for his own Honour the meaning is that he works that other men whom the Action toucheth not seeing those he acts upon well governed may be bettered and praise him and conceive a greater apprehension of his wisdome and goodness and by that means the good of his whole Mass of Creatures be perfected So that the Honour he speaks of is nothing but the well ordering of his Creatures in which one principal and main part is that his rational creatures have Faith Hope and Charity which are all parts of praising him So that we are not to look for a farther end of God's works then the perfection which is intrinsecal to the Universal Mass of his Creatures 5. The fourth is consequent to these to wit that seeing the Good of his Creatures is his main end and the Good of a Creature is that which is desirable to that Creature and every Nature desires its own Perfection and that perfects Nature which makes it able to do those actions to which such a nature is instrumental or for which such a Nature is made in perfection It follows that if we consider the whole Mass of Creatures God's action is still that which is most conformable unto it or to the Nature of all Creatures But if we consider a particular Nature upon which God acts God's action is that which is most conformable to such a Nature as being in such a posture of Nature in common or the best to this particular Nature as far as it stands with the greatest good of the general Mass. Whence it is evident that God never did nor will do any thing but conformably to the Nature of Creatures And this you see evidently out of the Attributes of his Wisdome and Self-sufficiency which are main Articles of Christian Faith 6. The fifth Principle is that because Man is the end of all material Creatures and Man is to be governed by his own Understanding it is necessary that some things or actions be so done that the effects be not onely performed but that they may be perswasive to man Further because Mankind is of a short apprehension and subject to follow his senses whereas his Beatitude and chief Good is beyond his reach Therefore it is necessary God should be the Teacher of Mankind and speak immediately to him in words and Doctrin as he did to Adam Moyses and the Apostles and that they should know that the words spoken were from God and therefore some extraordinary actions which are above the power of those natural causes with which we are familiar should be in convenient occasions exhibited out of which it should be known that a higher hand gave Testimony to the words and Doctrins delivered The special conveniences which require such actions God
the explication and deduction of my opinion and I do not think my Adversary will quarrel at much of this not that I think them to be his opinions but because partly he knows them to be the opinions of other Divines and partly they are so rational that any sensible man will condemn him at first sight Now therefore it is time to lay down the Adversary's opinion as I apprehend it leaving him all liberty to explicate himself in what I shall miss in at his own pleasure 13. You must know therefore that the Scriptures preach the Doctrin I have lay'd down minutely and Philosophically in few and Metaphorical terms They represent you God like a Man-Law-giver tell you that he hath lay'd up fire for those who will not obey in the next world My Adversaries take this as a word and a blow and conceive that Sin is an Action to which punishment is due of its own nature and that God should not be just if he did not bestow it on the sinner so that they put the relation between sin and punishment and both them to God nor will they hear that this follows out of the Order of Causes which are set for the carrying of Man-kind to Heaven that there may be a proportion natural of the sin and punishment but that God appoints what punishment he thinks best After this they put that the three conditions or names of the Vertue of every Action be three divers Vertues or Qualities whereof one concerns not the other or at least may be separable So that the Action may be meritorious and yet neither impetrate nor satisfy likewise may be impetrative but not satisfactory and may be satisfactory without impetration or merit And hence they say some Saints have had Actions both meritorious and impetrative that satisfy'd for nothing or little because they ow'd little or little pains were due to their offences Whence it comes that there be great heaps of Actions as they are satisfactory lay'd up in the Treasure of the Church and that the Pope hath the power to take what quantity seems to him fitting and to pâ—eâ—ent it to God foâ— the sâ—ns of living or dead and that he is bound to accept of it for the debts or pains of such men or souls whereas my saying is that the abundance of the merits of Christ and the Saints give the Church and the Pope all power and vertue to relaxe sins and punishments alwaies that are for the Churches good This I understand to be the substance of their opinion And now the Reader may be prepared to understand what shall be sayd on both sides SECOND DIVISION Containing an Answer to his seventeenth Chapter That we agree with others in the Torment and disagree onely in the Instrument Ours more connatural and â—it His self-contradiction and false imposing of unheld Doctrin When Baptism remits all pains and how a soul in Purgatory purgeth her self Several petty mistakes No place for merit in the next world That souls in Purgatory are Saints and may be pray'd to The effect of those Prayers which accelerate the day of Judgment Divers intolerable errours and weaknesses in Divinity 1. IN his seventeenth Chapter he professes to shew my Principles to be ill grounded and that there are bad sequels following from them And if that shâ—wing signify no more then saying so I beleeve fully he will do what he promises but if it be taken for proving I doubt he will fall very short of his Title The reason of my suspicion is because I find it so as far as I have hitherto look'd For example the first Principle of mine he makes that the venial affections which mens souls carry into the next world are cause to them of great griefs and torments of mind he farther says I put no other torments in Purgatory but the grief of this affection being joyned to the soul and the privation of bliss And I tell him on the other side that he puts no torments in Purgatory but that I put the very same I confess this proposition is a very bold one for I know not how absurdly he may talk of those pains but in hope he speaks as commonly his fellows do I venture upon this affirmation 2. To make which good I distinguish between the Torment and the Instrument of the torment as to say Burning is the torment Fire the instrument by which the torment is inflicted And then I make this discourse Let him look into the ordinary explication of Divines and see whether they put in Purgatory any other torments then Acts of the will which they call griefs Now the question being of souls in Purgatory that is holy Souls I cannot imagin they will put them to be of other objects then such as deserve grief as of their sins of the want of â—lory and such like Now all these I put in the souls of Purgatory It is clear then then that I put the same torments in Purgatory that he doth not one excepted The difference then is onely that I do not put the same Instruments of torment which he does but I put connatural Instruments he strange and forced Instruments I the nature and eminency of a spirit he a dead body which cannot be imagin'd how it can hurt a soul. Ask which is the stronger Agent and fitter to torment the soul it is clear that her own nature is infinitely more strong infinitely more fit Why then doth not my way satisfy him Because he does not understand that the words of the Scripture are Metaphorical because he understands not what signifies Gods Justice because the Bells ring in his ears that the Councils signify other punishments then their words express He vaunts the Councils be against us but when he declares them he cannot find one word beyond what is common to both opinions 3. In his third and fourth Number he would perswade his Reader that we fall into his own Errour of denying Purgatory because we say these purging torments end not until the day of Judgment and hath not so much reflexion as to remember that there is no place for Purgatory when purging is done As long as we profess Purgatory we must profess not purged This is the Doctrin perpetually before his eyes in the Council of Florence and Pope Benedict and he looks so a squint that he cannot see what is plainly before him that as soon as purging is turned to purged the soul is in bliss About what then doth he quarrel with me because I say the ill affection is in Purgatory all the while the soul is there and yet he says the same Let him reflect upon these his own words N. 4. Whereas Purging cleansing c. signifies the taking away of something which contains the nature of a stain or blemish If this be so then clearly something containing the nature of a stain or blemish is in the soul as long as the soul is in Purgatory Then he unjustly accuses me of saying
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.
Yet I may deliver one Doctrin which I know not whether he has reflected on or no which is that before Christ Miracles belonged to the Ordinary Government of the Church by God Almighty since Christ and his Apostles time these are become parts of Extraordinary Providence This I speak by reason of his great insisting upon pains in the Old Testament which followed not connatural to the sins For no small part of the motives proposed to the Jews were temporal Commodities which are propounded unto Christians meerly as accidents not to be sought for according to that saying Quâ—rite primum regnum Dei caetera adjicientur vobis And St. James tells us Siquis indiget sapientia postâ—let a Deo dabitur ei but for any thing else he does not tell us so but we know they are sometimes granted and sometimes denyed But in the Old Law the Prophets fore-told both punishments and rewards and they failed not Now that sort of Government is turned into a better and we have order to govern our selves by Reason and Faith is given us to help and strengthen our Reason that it may reach the motives propounded to us out of the state of the next World and to expect rewards and punishments there which spring out of our lives here according to the words of the Apostle that Afflictions here do work glory in Heaven and the other that their works follow them And this to those who use understanding Divinity is signified by the word meritorious After this he makes a repetition of some Arguments many times told over and at last Number 12. he tells us that he never sayd that after that God is in part pacified there still remains in him a boyling of his fury not quite allayed But says he we speak of a most just and rational proceeding in God c. What mood the good man was in when he wrote this I know not For the words express as if he meaned that before God is in part pacified there were in God a boyling of fury and not a just and rational proceeding 6. I told you somewhat of the signification of this word Meritorious but I fear I must eat it again For in his 24. Chapter Number second he tells us that when Nature by Death hath put a man out of this World she hath put his soul out of her reach c. So that now in this state the nature of a meritorious cause occurs to be consider'd by Divinity and Aristotle his Philosophy must stand in great part out of doors Farewel then poor Aristotle and his Philosophy Yet because he is a Philosopher he will ask a cause why he should be turn'd out of doors Let us then look into this Mystery If that a Work-man hath bestow'd a days work upon another man's ground he receives at night what according to the manner of living in that Countrey and the quality of the work is esteemed equal to his labour If a Souldier in a Battle or Siege did eminent service towards the winning of the â—attle or Town his General consults what is fitting to stir up others to dare the like and the Souldier receives it And both the Work-man and the Souldier are sayd to have deserved their rewards Another Work-man for example a Watch-maker makes a Watch and hath it and the fruit of it to know the hour of the day but is not sayd to deserve the Watch. And another Souldier goes out upon his enemies and getteth a good booty and is not sayd to have deserved it What is the reason of this variety of language Why the later used the natural causes of the effect which by their own force produc'd it The other got not this particular reward by a natural but by a rational means that is by pleasing one in whose power it was to bestow it upon him If this be well discoursed then also concerning Souls rewards if they be such as follow not out of the force of the disposition which their works have made the Soul to have in the next world but God by his arbitrary will determins to give them what he thinks best out of the General Principles by which he governs the World these rewards will be sayd properly to be deserved On the other side if the rewards are necessarily consequent to the disposition on which the Soul departs out of her body they will be properly called Effect improperly to be deserved 7. Applying this to our case that is to the pains of Purgatory let us see what is to be said And first I ask what pains doth the fire of Purgatory inflict upon the Souls I suppose your Divine will answer Griefs and Sorrows The next question are the griefs of Objects that deserve to be grieved for as it is fit for Holy Souls to have I suppose he will again say Yes The third question Would not she of her self have all those griefs I think he cannot chuse but say Yes and not put a new fault in the Souls not to have a grief which they ought to have The fourth Question is If she have this grief is it not a punishment layd upon her by God notwithstanding that it proceeds from their natural inclination which God gave them amongst other Reasons to punish their faults I know not what he can deny The fifth Question What then does the fire do make the same over again or increase it The former answer is absur'd To the later we ask the sixth Question Is not the grief of a holy and separate Soul proportionable to the offence or ill it did in this World If it be God's Justice requires no greater If it be not a probable cause must be rendred why a less sorrow would have quitted the sin in life and now such an excess will not Or else for any thing that I see Aristotle will claim a share for his Reasons in the next VVorld as well as in this which if your Divine will grant us we will in silence pass over his two first N. N. 8. In his third Number he cuts out a new piece of work to his friends which is that an act of contrition which they put in the first instant of it's nature taketh away pain as well as guilt therefore say we it must take away the pâ—ins of Purgatory if it hath there power to take away the guilt as in this World it usually does and would do if that act were here done seeing it springs out of the whole Heart and power of the Soul His first answer is that Bellarmin hath say'd much to this difficulty which your Divine passes over with a Besides and upon so good an authority I cannot doubt but that it deserves to be lay'd aside His second Solution is out of Saint Thomas which neither your Divine does stand to nor as it seem Saint Thomas himself making no mention of it in a later work where he handleth the question largely Wherefore omitting it let â—…me to the third
which he says to be â—…isfactory Which I believe if he takes 〈◊〉 comparatively for of the three it is the least faulty but if he means truly satisfactory he must first clear me a doubt or two before I can be of his mind First in it is supposed that we must necessarily say that Venial Sins are remitted after this life Which is true but unless the time be specify'd it may be at the Day of Judgment and so nothing to our present question What he adds that the remission of sin doth take away all impediment of going to Heaven but abateth nothing of their pains I do not understand for three Reasons First because it is onely sayd and no other cause rendred but because the state of merit ceaseth after this life But why to take away the guilt of sin and the impediment of going to Heaven is not the effect of merit is not declared and seems that it cannot be deny'd Secondly there is no reason given why it abates nothing of the Souls pain For why should this be accompted a merit more then the other Seeing it increaseth not Charity nor the reward of Charity and is but a removâ—ns prohibens as well as the other Why then is one admitted the other rejected Thirdly since the Council of Florence it is not to be tolerated to say that to a Soulâ—…ins â—…ins any impediment of going to Heaven And this answer puts the Soul to be pure 9. Another difficulty I have about that Proposition We must hold that in the life to come there is no essential change in the will to wit for that which belongs to the increase of Charity First about the Truth of it For I doubt not but by the Beatifical Vision whensoever it begins Charity is increased and likewise that at the re-union of our Bodies Charity and the reward of it shall both increase Neither do I take it to be spoken consequenter to put many acts of Charity and not put them to increase the habit though you put the acts to be of the same degree of intension For we cannot deny but one and one makes two and that two are more then one and ad hominem if the same pain put in a new time makes the pain greater much more two acts of Charity are more Charity If it be answered the time of merit is pass'd I reply then you must put no more merit But with one breath to put merit and cry the time of merit is passed is to oblige us to believe Opposites 10. A third difficulty I have how it is prov'd that in Purgatory there is an act of Charity with detestation of a Venial sin inconsistent with the affection of Venial sin For onely to say it is so is not to answer the Argument but to repeat your conclusion or ask the question It is confess'd by both parties that Charity not onely in habit but also in act stands with venial sin for otherwise every time we make an act of Charity we should revoke our affection to Veâ—ial Objects St. Thomas's known Doctrine is that a will once taken resolutely in the next World is unchangeable and truly that one act remains until a contrary be put out We must therefore either say that the Soul hath a new deliberation at her going out of the body or that she keeps the same she had in the body until she return to it If we put a new deliberation it may be as well of the End as of Venial Objects and so the Soul shall change her state of Salvation after Death and all place of merit will not be deny'd It follows then that there can be no act in the Soul incompossible to the affection of venial sin until Resurrection Wherefore I doubt not but to a man of a not-preoccupated Judgment this Answer will be so far from being satisfactory that it will manifestly appear that the holders of your Divine's Opinion as much as they cry up that there is no room for merit with one breath so much they pull it down by their inconsequent positions on the other side Besides another thing which in a Divine is a manifest defect that they render no rational cause of the impotency to merit which in our opinion is most manifest 11. In his sixth number he falls upon another question not properly against us but amongst his own Divines which I must a little rip up because it so clearly shews the huge weakness of their Doctrin and Doctours The Question arises out of this difficulty that it seems inconsequent that if the Souls in Purgatory may be helped by others they cannot be helped by themselves And it is as true an absurdity as it seems to be and rises out of the denying of our Opinion He seems to give an answer by saying that they have deserved in this life time to be helped in the next World But this doth rather aggravate the difficulty then solve it For it shews they are helpable and then the difficulty is greater why they cannot help themselves For to say it is precisely because God will not give them leave to help themselves is to call God unreasonable and wilful and cruel instead of playing the Divine and giving an accomâ—t why to do so is conformable to God's Goodness and Government But to fall to the Question Some of their Doctours seem to deny to the Souls of Purgatory power to pray which how it can fall into a Christian's head much less a Divine's I am not capable Are not the Acts of Faith Hope and Charity prayers Will any body deny them these Are not the acknowledgment of their sins and the desire of forgiveness prayers Do they doubt of this Can they wish the relaxation of torments from men and not from God How absurd a Position is this that God whose whole endeavour is to bring mens hearts to him should send abstracted Souls from himself to men The very absurdity of this saying to an impartial man would condemn the whole Opinion And yet more that they can impetrate that the Living may pray for them nay impetrate Graces for the Living but none for themselves whereas we are taught that God grants us easilier for our selves then for other men These sayings are so empty of all Divinity and Solidity that depending as they do meerly from this uncertain and unlikely ground of the Souls present delivery from Purgatory they make it like to themselves uncertain and unlikely also 12. In his seventh Number he tells us that perhaps God was mov'd by his Justice to ordain that the pains due in the other life be not ordinarily remitted but by satisfaction made either by themselves or others An excellent piece of Divinity to ground so substantial a point as whether the Souls in Purgatory pray for themselves or no which every man of any Judgment cannot doubt but that they can no more cease from doing then they can cease from loving themselves from hoping and desiring Beatitude and from
actions which cause men to be good in this world are more to be recommended to comprehensive souls But if any one thorough subjectness to passion and shortness of discourse is more moved to Charity by corporeal apprehensions then by strength of reason this praying for the dead is well proposed to him Though the truth is it doth enervate the perfection of Charity not onely in it self by entrenching upon true resignation but also concerning the special fruit of praying for the dead of which the wise man admonishes us saying it is better going to the house of wayling then to the house of banqueting because in the former we are put in mind of the end of all men And J. M. himself cites out of St. Austin that when we celebrate the days of our dead Brethren we ought to have in our mind that which is to be hoped and that which is to be feared that is to say the day of Judgment What a strange humour then is this of men who pretend to devotion to cast away the substantial certain and ever in all Antiquity practised part of praying for the dead to set up a new fallacious uncertain way against the orders of the Church forbidding vncertainties to be taught publiâ—…y to the people against the perfection of those who pray to whom they preach to determin God and to desire a particular effect of which we neither have any promise that it shall be granted nor know whether it stands with Gods providence and even common rules of Government Let then Priests say their Masses and Offices according to the words they find in their Missals and Ceremonials and not frame sences that are not in the words Let them pray as all the former Church hath done and not frame out of Origenical or Chiliastical Principles new inventions to magnify themselves by having some priviledges or more power then others Let them first make it plain that what they profess hath better grounds then such as the Popes call the dreams of devout Persons in their prayers before they impose upon our belief new Articles of Faith Let them not oblige Divines to think that falsities may be solidly connected with Faith and such like Doctrins destructive of Truth and Religion and Devotion I pray also inquire where he found those words in St. Austin whence he father'd that gross absurdity upon him that some should be damned for want of time to be prayed for For I read the Chapter he cites twice over and could espy nothing like it Your Servant T. W. Errata PAg. 28. l. 25. as this is 48. l. 1â— in these 〈◊〉 63. l. â—8 swoun 65. l. 19. struggle 66. l. ult alter the story 67. l. 〈◊〉 â—…ir Inquisition 68. l. 11. severe l. 20. consider how much the torments of this 77. l. 27. we acknowledg 109. l. 28. that the Pope 154. l. 28. If this way 160. l. 18. for fear of being l. 28. knowing 180. l. 6. then we â—udg 181. l. 23. if mine 182. l. 15. Alcuinus 183. l. 24. essence of 184. l. 6. one whether 190. l. 20. not sute p. 19â— l. 6. by â—s 24â— l. 23. change but. 249. l. 16. Peripateticae 253. l. 2. for we FINIS A short Letter sent after the former SInce I writ the former I have found commodity to see the cited Books which before I wanted And can give this accompt of them The Authour of the Oration imposed upon St. John Damascen is an unexcusable Heretick The intent of the Oration to perswade men that however they live they may come to Heaven by other mens Prayers He puts Infidels to have been deliver'd out of Hell by our Saviour Jesus Christ at his descâ—â—sion which St. Gregory declared to be Heresie He puts perfect good works without Faith against the constant Doctrin of St. Paul which is perfect Pelagianism He puts that the Heathen Philosophers knew almost all the Mysteries of our Faith as much as we hear of the Sibyls And to make it wholly fure that he is an Heretick he doth more then half profess his Doctrin is his own invention and that he has evinced against the Prophet saying In inferno quis confitebitur tibi and against the present persuasion of Christians that there is confession in Hell As for Gennadius whom he presses likewise he is of the same stamp He teaches St. John Damascen found this Doctrin of praying for the damned He takes the whole sum of Doctrin out of that Oration He onely cousen'd the Latin Fathers in pretending in common to hold prayer for the dead And being returned into Grece joyn'd with Marcus Ephesinus to annul the Union made in the Council of Florence The work of St. Isidor I find to be none of his but of some Authour who lived about the beginning of the Schools he so perfectly useth the School-terms and so his Authority is no more then of a School-Doctor As for St. Julian of Toledo it is true that he holds the opinion of our Adversaries but so that he confutes their intention For having proposed the question he is so far from saying it was the opinion of the Church that he resolves it as upon his own head and that uncertainly with a Puto I think alleadging St. Austin for his saying whose sentence you have heard examined already So that his Authority is no greater then his ghess that so it is as St. Austin ghessed there might be some such thing So that we have out of St. Julian that it was not the credulity or received opinion in his days By which you will understand how small performances accompany the good mans great boastings And see the growing of their opinion St. Austin ghessed it possible at most for he professes onely not to oppose it The Authour of the Dialogues credited unlikely Revelations St. Julian ghessed it positively St. Odilo and those who follow'd him took it up for certain upon private Revelations The later Greeks upon the like Revelations took praying for damned souls And upon the combining of these two your great Doctour seeks to make it an Article of Faith These short Notes I thought fit to acquaint you with to compleat your satisfaction which done I rest Your Servant Tho. White FINIS
own Errour any words may be so coloured As I remember my Master of Philosophy taught all to explicate Aristotle when he was against us by saying Aristoteles loquitur cum vulgo But if this be an unworthy practise let us see what his fourth Number offers us To wit that whereas we object to them how the whole face of the Churches prayers is directed to the Day of Judgment and not one word insinuated of remission of pains before that day which is an irrefragable testimony of the Churches meaning he seeks to retort the same Argument by saying Why does not the Church pray for the acceleration of the Day of Judgment To which we answer she does it perpetually For he that prays for good at the Day of Judgment prays for the Day of Judgment and he that prays for the Day of Judgments coming prays it may come as soon as possibly So that the Church prays perpetually for it when she prays for the Dead but their fixedness on their Opinion permits them not to see it 22. In his fifth Number he answers our Argument from Foundations for prayers until the Day of Judgment because those who made them were notoriously of their Opinion opposite to ours But we must expect more ground to believe that For such Foundations are sayd to be in France ever since the Children of Charles the Great 's time who were instructed by Alcuinus And therefore were of his and our English Saxon Opinion And later Foundations were made by the imitation of the former and though since the University of Paris got a great Vogue this new Opinion hath been amongst the Doctours yet it cannot be doubted but for a great while the Churches governed themselves by their anâ—ient Customs and by little and little admitted the Opinions of learned men Wherefore it is not to be admitted without proof that the Authours of perpetual Foundations proceeded out of an Opinion contrary to their practice He wonders how the Church should prefix a time to praying for the same soul. I answer by Revelation if she did accept of Opinions by private Revelations for why might not some Saint have a Revelation that no Soul lay in Purgatory more then 100 years as well as that such a Soul layd but three days What discretion of Prelates can provide that particular souls may have proportionable prayers I understand not for where there is not knowledg enough to found a ghess there discretion has no place 22. Here we might have made an End had not a saying of our Holy Bishop of Rochester stuck in his stomach I do not remember where I have made uâ—â— of that place But I less find to what purpose he brings it more then to frame an irreverent Interpretation of his own and impose it upon me and to take occasion to leave the Reader 's mouth season'd with a scandalous â—alumny againstâ— me as if that I favour'd Luther Whereas it is one of the greatest signs of Truth to be betwixt two opposite Errours Luther's and his and therefore no wonder if he cryes it sâ—ells of Luther's Doctrin as ever the middle Truth is wont to be calumniated by the extream Errours He repeats here that I deny the three Propositions he mention'd in his proof against me because I understand them like a Divine and not in his gross Market-way He tells us that supposing the Pope's Definitions be not infallible yet it is rashness not to admit such determinations and for so much he cites Veron But this â—olly to think Propositions and the like is of actions to be temerarious in common I have spoken of before In particular an Action is rash when it is not done upon good grounds But to say there cannot be good grounds to oppoâ—… a Proposition supposed to be false is beyond Logick As likewise it is against my Divinity to say that a true Proposition may have opposition to Principles solidly deduced from Fâ—… Which if it be not directly condemned in the Later an Council under Leo the tenth it is by consequence The words are these Sâ—…g that one truth is not contrary to another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all Propositions contrary to a truth known by Faith to be wholly false and do strictly coâ—… it not to be lawful to teach any otherwise And decree that all such as adhere to such Propositions are to be avoided and punished as Hereticks And so leaving him and the Divulgers of his Book this Bit to chaw upon I remit what is sayd on both sides to yours and all judicious Readers Judgments POSTSCRIPT SIR I have teceived the second part of Mr. M's remembrance to pray for the dead but to what purpose you sent it I do not know I cast my view over it and find it divided into two parts The one contains the Motives of praying for the dead the second â—…e Practise As to the first saving that he supposes his falsity for truth and the Divines imagination of the separable vertues of Satisfaction and Merit and Impetration in every charitable act which hath been sufficiently discoursed of his whole Doctrin is common to both opinions The proper Motives are contained in the three first Chapters in which there is no difference more then some applications of the same words diversly The seven following Chapters comprehend Motives common to all charitable actions and so unless it be in some considerable passages are common to all good books that exhort to any good work The five last Chapters lay forth a petty manner of devotion fit enough for weak souls and therefore not to be hindered What he says of Indulgences hath been twice answered in the book Some things there are in these last Chapters which deserve to be excepted against but because they require the declaration of some Principles of Devotion which I have not as yet explicated I hold it better to speak nothing then to speak without profit Those who understand any thing of devotion and perfection know that Charity is the end of it all and therefore know that those good acts whatsoever they be that increase Charity in our own souls are the best and that Charity is the love of God or of Bliss for so St. Thomas out of St. Austin defines Charity that it is motus Animi ad Deum ut fruendum The minds moving it self to the enjoyment of God Who then will understand what acts are best let him consider how much they advance this Love of God and whether he be onely a Christian or also a Directour let him select to his charge such actions as have the greatest power to make the soul he looks to more solid and fervent in the Love of God as of his last end For the substance of actions the nobler actions fit the nobler souls and fo are to be proposed unto them and as no body can doubt but it is better to hinder a soul from going to Purgatory and much more from going to Hell then to free it out of Purgatory so