â—â—bâ— 5.7 Againe if you meane that all this was voluntary in him and not felt indeede according to the outwarde semblance and as men beholding him would iudgâ— Luc. 22.43 then belike you make him to have counterfayted Which thought God for bid should ever come into any Christians heart For no cause you say f I iest and iybe with the Apostles wordes Pag. 302. but I feare this is to iest and iybe in deed with the most dreadfull and bitter sorrowes of our Saviour in working for vs our Salvation And heere why say you not aswell that his Death and bloudshed on the Crosse shewed in him no paines nor infirmitie but only that voluntarily he made him selfe there the true Priest and pe formed the prefigured bloudy and deadly Sacrifice for the sins of the world As good reason altogeather you have to say so as to affirme it of his Agonie â—ag 29. As for the Scriptures which g you cite they prove in deed that Christ nowe executed his office of Priesthoode but will you divide exempt his Death on the Crosse froÌ„ his Priesthood Or his â—ines and fit mity froÌ„ ther The sanctifying of him self doeth it not as well intend and comprehende that Sacrifice on the Crosse as that of his Prayers in the Garden To thinke otherwife is without all shewe of trueth or reason yet I see not why you should cite these textes vnles you meant so neither can I see what els you meane where you conclude saying Christs Agonie being alleaged by the Apostle to demonstrat Christs Priesthood must not rise froÌ„ the terror of his own death â—ag 27. And yet h a little before you openly doe confesse and grant that his Agonie did rise from the feare of his death and that Christ had farre greater cause then any of his members to feare it Also it is contrary to your citing of Cyrill pag. 25. And heere why should i Hilary deny that Christes bloudy sweat came of infirmitie â—ag 28. Or k Austin that his feare and perturbatioÌ„ was of infirmitie â—ag 25. Surely there is no cause For though it be against the coÌ„mon course of our Nature for any paines or feare to sweat bloud yet the Divine power with and through paines and feares might wring out of his body that trickling bloudy sweat As it is plaine that it did by the wordes next before in the text a Luk. 2 44. An Angell came to give him some comfort that is least hee should have bene overwhelmed quite in his sorrow and discomfort but still he was in his Agonie and swet like droppes of bloud trickling to the ground and presently saieth My Soule is full of sorrowes even to death and thrice he prayed that this Cup and this Hower might passe from him It cannot be therefore but that by Sorrowes and Paines this sweat came though also Gods power caused it by laying vpon his Soule and body invisible supernaturall vnspeakeable sorrowes and horrors and by making his fleshe visibly to expresse in some sort this spirituall and extraordinary torment of paine and feare which he suffered And in deed where they say 1 Not Infirâ—â—ty but Poâ—â—â— did this Nec infirmitas quod potestas gessit that proveth the cleane coÌ„trary For Jdeo infirmitas quia potestas gessit 2 Therforâ— there waâ— firmity â—â—cause thâ—â—â— was Powâ—â— For the working of his Power in him argueth the suffering of his Infirmitie The power of God is peâ—fited in infirmÃtie And because it was aboue the course of nature therefore nature was herein oppressed not exempted from paines Thus these speak fully for vs and against you that heere appeared not Christes infirmity only in suffering but his Divine power also in punishing And this I iudge in deed to bee their very meaning But those other mysticall and figuratiue sayings of Austin Pag 28. â— Bede Bernard howe shall we admit them without better warrant That Christes bloudshead was to signifie that Martyrs should shead their bloud what reason have we so to thinke Or that his bloud head should signifie the purging of his Disciples hearts froÌ„ sinne yea or of all his Church in the whole world It did not signifie this but it did it in deed Lastly if it had thâ—se significations in it yet withall his Agonie might rise from his very Paines Feare comming from the present sense of Gods iustice and wrath nowe revealâ—d and working vpon him Hitherto we have made it manifest that in trueth you have nothing in all these wordes against our doctrine that Paines and sorrowes were the true and proper cause of Christes dreadfull Agonie nor to prove that his meere bodily paines or death was the whole Cause Now we are to shew the like in his most we full Complaint on the Crosse where he saith My God my God Math 27. why hast thou forsaken me You will aske me heere what kinde of Forsaking may this be I shewed you plainly * Treat 1 â— 6â— 65 6â— before if you had regardâ—d it Namely that Christ being also now yea specially in the feeling of infinit Paines inflicted on him sundry wayes â—â—w Christ on 〈◊〉 Crosse was â—â—â—saken of â—â—â—d See also â—â—â—g 112.113 and that directly froÌ„ Gods proper Wrath for our sinnes he felt his whole Humane nature for the time left all comfortles and alone without any ioyous assistance of his Deitie I say not that he wanted now all assistanc of his Deitie for it surely would then have quite overwhelmed him with this intollerable burdeÌ„ But his Godhead as it were withdrawing and hiding it selfe from him for that season of his Passion gave him no sense nor feeling of ease comfort or ioy but all the sense of sorrowes and paines as well in spirit as in soule and body that might bee all the sense of his ioy and comfort for the while being cleane gone and wholy swallowed vp in that huge bottomles gulfe of sorrowes and paynes issuing vpon him out from the fierce Wrath of God Howbeit yet even nowe he wanted not sufficient assistance of the Deitie to sustayne him in life heerein as I said Phil. 2.7 Rom. 8.32 â—eut 10 17. â—â—c 16.17 This was that extreeme humiliation and exinanition of nature wherein †God spared not his Sonne and wherein also Christ spared not him selfe For hee vndertooke all this most willingly and yet being in it naturally grieved and sorrowed for it at some moments being astonished with it suddenly and naturally desired ease and release from it This forsaking or dereliction beseemeth the time place person and case of Christ our Ransom-payer and Purchaser of salvation with the price of his owne most direfull paines Pag. 24. c â—â—â—r 6. Expoâ—â—â—ions of â—hristes CoÌ„â—â—aint are all â—â—â—isse Not any other farre fet or hardly applyed or strangely devised by the braynes of men As in trueth all those other senses heereof are which you rather imbrace
Properly in them selves Accidentally they may be when they growe so strong that they paine and grieve the Soule These 2. later kinds of the Soules Suffering you acknowledg to have ben in Christ the 1. kinde you vtterly deny â—â—g 5. 6. 16 〈◊〉 253. â— 255. 335 Now I affirme that Christ tasted also the 1st kinde For how could the Proper and principall Humane Suffering be not in him â—â—â—br 2.10 a Man made of God to * Suffer for all our Sinnes So this in a maner is the point of our CoÌ„troversie And verily how you can deny the same by the Scripture yet acknowledging withall a true and perfit Humaine Soule in Christ I cannot see Namely seeing iust occasion heereof was giuen him from God as afterward shall further appeare You * pa. 248. seeme to sticke at those termes which I vse The Soules proper and immediat suffering you call them “ pa. 257. 336. vnsalted and vnsetled But any may see how easy they are to bee vnderstood and also that wee must in this quaestion necessarily thus distinguish the same from that which is by sympathy is comon to vs with other creatures Thirdly wee must also note that God himselfe is alwayes and evermore the principall and proper punisher then when the Soule suffereth paines after the first maner that is in her proper and immediat faculty of suffering And that is alwayes immediatly for sinne also not for any other cause at all Gods owne almighty power armed with iustice in burning wrath thus punisheth sinne somtime more somtime lesse when and how it pleaseth him Fourthly God himself therfore was thus the principall and only proper Punisher of Christ as hee sustayned the punishment of our sinnes The Divells and wicked men his Persecutours did their parts also indeed for other ends but yet they were all as Instruments only vsed by God vnto his owne end namely that Christ might pay heereby a iust price and full satisfaction for our sinnes It was then the Almighty and most iust God himselfe in his severe wrath against our sin that principally properly inflicted on Christ the paines and punishments which he as our Surety suffered for the paying of our Ransom As it is written “ Isa 53. â— The Lord laid vpon him the punishment of vs all Whatsoever you have against this afterward we shall consider it in due place Fiftly we meane not that in God was is or can be any †As youâ— serve wâ— pag. 24â— perturbatioÌ„ at all and therefore consequently no Wrath nor Hatred as is in vs. But because Wee painfully afflict others with whom commonly wee are Angry and we discerne somtime and see paines inflicted on men by God therefore we say he sheweth his anger and wrath vpon them whom hee punisheth Nevertheles wee must note especially that to suffer as the Godly doe Chastisements and corrections is not to suffer or feele Gods Wrath nor indeed the pumishment of sinne except it bee in a very vnproper speach To suffer the true punishment satisfaction proper payment wages of sinne only that is to suffer properly and truly the Wrath and Curse of God Now then seeing the paines which Christ for vs did feele were indeed properly the Punishment and Paiment and vengeance for sinn such as the Godly do in no wise suffer Christ only having wholly suffered that for vs all Therefore indeed his sufferings proceeded from Gods proper wrath and were the true effects of Gods meere Iustice bent to take recompence on him for out offences the Godly never suffering any thing at all in such respect Sixt These paines which Christ suffered as the proper Punishment and Price of sinne and inflicted on him even by Gods own hand did not make smart and anguish only in his flesh or onely in the sensitive part of the Soule by mutuall coniuction sympathy with the body but of necessity must also be deepely conceaved felt in the vnderstanding and Mind of Christ Now how deepe this was as we neither do nor can precisely affirme so we are well assured that the sense of paine was not lessened nor abated in Christ needlesly Hee suffered doubtles according as sinne deserved in every point except only in such respects as were flatly impossible For the better vnderstanding whereof wee are heere to note another principalll distinction â—â—â—fering of â—aines for sin 〈◊〉 fold â—or sinne inâ—â—eâ—ent and â—â—puted that there are 3. divers and severall sortes of suffering paines directly for sinne 1. As the wicked and damned do that is by suffering the proper wrath of God truly punishing in them that is properly in their Soules aswell as in their Bodies their sinnes in whom togeather with their paines there is also inherent sinne abiding and imputed the cause of all their punishments with the the adiuncts and consequents thereof desperation induration blaspheming reiection malediction hatred and finall dereliction with such like These are certain proper and right conditions of the reprobat heere of the damned in Hell â—â—r sinne inâ—â—â—ent but 〈◊〉 imputed which Christ never tasted 2. The godly in this world do suffer paines for their sinnes But these whatsoever they be yea though death it selfe are improperly called Punishments as was before noted â—â—ch 12.5 â— 7 8 9 10 â— they are * Chastisements of sinne Yea they are partly remembrances to cause repentance of sinne past presently inherent partly Chastisements to humble vs and to mortifie sinne in vs more and more hereafter And thus they are in no sort inflicted on vs as very Curses by Gods Wrath and Iustice properly so called but properly by Gods Holynes and Love as after wee shall further see These are the ordinary wayes of suffering for sinne but nothing appertayning to Christ neither 3. 3 Suffering sinne not haerent yet impuâ—â—â— There is another peculiar and extraordinary way belonging onely to Christ according to which Christ suffered for sinne distinct and greatly differing from both the former and yet in some speciall points agreeing with both 1. Christ suffered for sinne being sinles indeed How Châ—st sufferings those of thâ— Godly dâ—gree Hoâ— they diffeâ—â— as the Godly also are sinles “ Rom. 4. by imputation Againe their sufferings are temporary and in this life only such also were his But Christes sufferings were exceeding much differing from ours 1 in that his sufferings were for our sinnes now made his by Gods accoumpt and ours are for our owne Also his were the true and proper Punishment or iust vengeance of God for sinne ours onely Chastisements and remembrances which belonged nothing at all to him His the true effects of Gods severe and iust Wrath properly taken ours are from his iustice wrath improperly so called Touching the Reprobats and damned How the sufâ—â—rings of Châ—â—â—â— and of thâ—â— Damned 〈◊〉 differ 1. their sufferings are for sinnes inhaerent Christes were for sinnes only imputed So that Gods Anger
the now L. Bishop of Winchester to begin among vs a new matter of faith neuer heard of before in England but only in the dayes of Popery touching the All sufficiency of the meere Bodily Sufferings of Christ and to maintaine an other which was neere worne out of his going downe to Hell in Soule In both which because my conscience assured mee that hee was much mistaken and laboured that others should mistake also I thought it not besides my duty the Lord offering me opportunity to maintaine the truth and that in all plainenes and evidence of the Scripture as God inabled me with This now a while since being published wherein my trust is I caryed my selfe no otherwise then J ought the Author and maintayner of the contrary hath so of late intertayned it as seemeth to mee and to many others wonderfull Wonderfull not for strength of reasons nor for exquisit matter such as neuer before was delivered though his learning J acknowledge and will not but reverence his gifts but wonderfull his answer is and altogeather extraordinary considering that such incomparable bitternes disdaine skoffing reproch and furious rage doth so abundantly com from him therein against my poore selfe being yet by the mercy of God a true Christian a Minister of the Gospel and one I praise the Lorde which euer haue bin carefull to bee free from the scandalls of the World Though heerein J boast not but rather with the Apostle will boast of mine infirmities Verily this now J haue learned by his writing better then euer I conceaued before namely what great oddes he maketh and desireth to be made betweene himselfe a Lord Bishop and an other being but a Preacher of Gods most holy word Well this is the Rhetorike and the ornaments of his Conclusion against my treatise But all this is besides his Matter which nevertheles may haue peradventure som weight in it It may peradventure Wherefore J see a double necessity vrging me to reply therevnto First to the end that his exceptions and reasons that is to say his wholl matter may appeare yet better to be so weake and vnsufficient as indeed they are See that those vncivill reproches I will not say vnchristian revilings being the bewty and forme of his booke may appeare to be but the froth of a distempered stomacke the colour of reason and iust cause which he casteth on it being taken away As touching the matter therefore thus I purpose to deale I will begin with his later writing which he calleth a Conclusion because he mainly directeth it against mee taking in by the way also all such places points in the former Treatise as do rightly concerne our matter in hand Finally as touching his reproches and cruell words I intend wholy to passe ouer them seeing for them neither is he any whit the better nor my selfe the worse The Defence of the Treatise of Christes sufferings against Maister Bilsons Conclusion HIs Conclusion for so he thinketh good to call it beginneth against me in his page 225. Wherein first he doeth change me in generall termes that I flee from the state of the Chiefe question and overskip his Authorities The like saith in Eâ— pag. 9. in his reasons I forget and dissemble what pleaseth my self in the defence of my holy cause as it pleaseth him to mocke I roue as I list neither keeping any order nor bringing any matter of moment coÌ„fusedly powring out the hasty resolutions of mine own braines spiced euery where with ignorant absurd positions proudly despising all authority antiquitie c. Al which words are but wind as I shal make it evident God willing wheÌ„ we com to view his particulars heerafter insuing Among which he * Pag. â— beginneh to iustifie that he mistooke not his Text when hee preached this doctrine But I wil speak thereof anon so that first I satisfie him in the most principal point of his challeÌ„ge against me Which is this “ Episâ— that I haue changed the first questioÌ„ that I set not down the state therof fully nor truly so I offer to prove that which he never denied I coÌ„fute that which he never affirmed Let vs ther fore coÌ„sider advisedly this questioÌ„ which I wil set downe again as exactly as plainly as I can that we may see how far I erred froÌ„ it before We affirme That Christ in his Soul suffered all Gods proper Wrath and vengeance being paines and punishment for sinne no sinne also as touching the essence or nature thereof The suâ— whole out 1. â— and so farre as was due Generally for all mankinde to suffer His contrary opinion we conceaue thus That Christ suffered for our sinnes nothing ells but simply and “ or 〈◊〉 his Hoâ— fectioÌ„s â—â—tio and meerely a Bodily death altogither like as the godlie and holy men do often suffer at the handes of persecutors saving only that God accepted this death of his Sonne as a ransom for sinne but the death of his servants be doth not The Opening of the whole staâ—e of this Question For the better vnderstanding whereof we must note these principall things taine spe I things to â—oted First that All suffering of Paines in man is froÌ„ God either properly from his Iustice or from his Holy Love either froÌ„ him alone or also from his Instruments and inferior meanes Againe Al suffering of Paines is for Sinne either inherent or imputed either as Correction or as Punishment either immediatly or mediatly as anon we shall further see Sec By the Lawe of our Creation as we are men having a Soule besides our Body so our Soule hath in it a 3. fold faculty of Suffering Paines First that which is Proper and immediat iustly so called â—ee kindes 〈◊〉 Soâ—â—es â—â—â—ing of 〈◊〉 Proper because it is proper only to reasonable and immortall Spirites although in men if it grow vehement it affecteth coÌ„sequently the Body also Immediat 2. wayes 1. because it can doth receave an impression of sorrow and Paines made from God only by and in it selfe without any outward bodily meanes therevnto 2. It is also an Immediat Punishment or els Correction of sinne it cometh not for any other cause at all So that thus we meane when we speake of the Soules Proper and Immediat Suffering The Soules second faculty of Suffering paines is not Proper but Common to vs with Beasts namely that which is by Sympathy Communion with and from the Body For which cause also it is not Immediat sith it commeth not to the Soule but by externall bodily meanes A third kind of painful Suffering the Soule hath namely her vehemeÌ„t strong AffectioÌ„s are Painful whether they be good or evill As Zeale Love CoÌ„passion Pity Care c. Neither are these immediatly for Sinne whether Punishmentes or Corrections but they com for and by other immediat causes â—â—tions no â—â—at â—or 〈◊〉 Punish 〈◊〉 5. neither are they Punishments or Corrections at all
the holy thoughts and purposes of his minde but also to minister many outward occasions to derive them to the minde whereby Christ wrought righteousnes compleatly and in his whole man That which was by cooperation and mutuall cohaerence only of one part with the other as it was a distinct kinde of working in the Soule and in the body also so it was respected secondarily and only because the true constitution of our nature requireth so which Christ meant wholly and perfitly to take vpon him Whence now we may well argue As it was with him touching his faculty of doing righteousnes and Obedience so it was and ought to bee touching his suffering Gods punishments for vs. There is no reason in the world nor likelyhood that the natural faculty in Christs Soule of proper and immediat suffering for our sinnes should have no vse and a Suffering of paines onely by and from the body should be sufficient when in his doing of righteousnes for vs his Soules ioint Obedience and mutually knit togeather in with his Body was not alone sufficient But there was further obedience found in the Soule of Christ even that which was proper and immediat in it as before I said Seeing then such a kind of Obedience was necessary for vs in Christs Soule therefore such a Suffering also even in the same kinde was necessary likewise This must needs be a perfit reason for vs against you except you could by expresse Scripture disprove this proportion of like necessity betweene the operation of the proper faculties of Christes Humane Soule that is betweene his Doing Suffering for vs which you shall never be able to do And thus it appeareth I hope that you had no cause so cruelly to rage at me for this as you do Nor yet for the next where your charge me that a Pag. 250. I conclude Christs flesh to be needles for our redemption A horrible Haeresie But how do I say so much Because I say His Soules suffering by Sympathy did not make properly to our redemption Ergo his Flesh was needles I deny this sequele how can that follow Touching the sense of my speach you may remember how I have largly declared b Pag. 8. before that the Soules proper suffering is greatly and iustly distinguished from the CoÌ„mon suffering that is by sympathy And that the Soules suffering by Sympathy in Christ was intended by God by reason that our naturall constitution doth require it so to be in every true and perfit man which Christ also was And thus it did make to our redemption even as likewise his Infirmities and Affections as his Wearines Hunger Sleepe Feare Love Ioy c. These doe make to our redemption not as intended in Christs incarnation principally and primarily but secondarily and by consequent because that Humane nature which God ordayned vnto him and intended to be perfit in him could not otherwise be throughly perfit as it is in vs but with these common Affections infirmities which other mortall Creatures have to not Man only Also in Christ these Infirmities and Affections wrought not immediatly for sinne but vsually for other particular causes and occasions immediatly Nevertheles they were all even for sin in him consequently that is because the perfection of Humane nature which he assumed for sinne and was in every point in him as before I noted required so Even thus likewise in Christ I say his Soules suffering by sympathy wrought in him immediatly properly for some other particular cause stirring that faculty that is by reason of the Bodily paine smart which this sensitive power of the Soule apprehended felt and caused the flesh also to feele This suffering then of his Soule only by sympathy was immediatly and properly not for our redemption from sin but for the sensitive apprehending of the smart woundes and blowes which the Iewes gave his body yet as before I said consequently even this was for our sinne also namely because these woundes were given him for our sinne And thus though it made for our redemption in such maner as it wrought in Christ because of our sinne and as it was intended by Christ in taking both partes of our Nature the Soule the Body yet this was not in a direct or immediat respect and so not properly but by consequent as I have shewed After a you charge me sorely Pag. 252. that I falsifie your Argument about receaving pollution from Adam For where b I frame your reason as grounded on that opinion that onely our flesh is derived from Adam and not our soule Treat 1. pag. 19. Pag. 252. c you renounce it vtterly and say you grounded no reason vpon that difficulty so you made no such argument as heere I pretend Which whether it be true or no I report me to them that heard you But then what is your reason now is it any otherwise grounded No certainly if you make any reason at all Who trifleth then and why doe you vpbraid me so much with trifling Let vs see what is your reason now Christes flesh is as able to redeeme vs as Adams to condemne vs. But we inherit pollution from Adams flesh Ergo. Doe we inherit pollution from Adams flesh and is it not by Generation How ells do we inherit pollution coÌ„demnatioÌ„ from him If there be no otherway why doe you then seeme to refuse the difficult question of our Generation and yet vrge the sequele thoreof For if our soules arise in Generation from Adam as well as our flesh how can your reason be good by any possiblity It is best therefore vtterly to omit this reason which you grant hath no ground but a great difficulty doubtfull question I a Treatisâ— pag. 21. have shewed herefore at large that your argument which heere is your Minor is nothing true For pollution that is sin reall iniquity is not in our flesh without a Soule But Ambrose saith We are defiled before we haue life I pray omit mens Authorities in this case prove by sound reason that which you would Neither is it cleere as you say it is that we â—â—heriâ—â— pollution froÌ„ Adams flesh only This word only you must add or els you say nothing against vs. Our parents Soules are in cause as wel as their flesh that sin is derived vnto vs. But you draw me to talke of these intricat things which I would in no wise meddle with I pray kepe b pag. 10. your promise better not to medle with this difficultie neither to make it any grouÌ„d of your reason which yet you do here notwithstanding Again you with one breath overthrow your self For you say we have pollution before the Soule commeth whence soever it coÌ„meth Yea whence soever What if the Soule doe come in by generation You see how you crosse your self who do so taunt me for this fault I hope altogither vniustly Then c Pag. 25 you
fruit was sinne even without and before the acte of eating Moreover other foule sinnes Haeresies Turcisme and Atheisme are committed and determined simply in the minde without any necessary imployment of any partes of the Body As touching Haeresies to hold Two first causes of thinges a Good and a Bad God and the Divell with Manichee also that Christ the Redeemer was not God with Arrius that the Holy Ghost is not God with Eunomius c that Christ had no Soul with Apollinaris that Christes Manhood was confounded and changed into his Godhead with Eutyches or divided from his Godhead with Nestorius or the opinion of Vbiquity or of Transubstantiation Finally that there never was nor shal be any Christ a Redeemer as the Turkes hold that there is no God as the Atheists Nowe are there not many provocations to hatch and to conclude these opinions meerely in the minde soule of man Are there not many pleasures even in these impieties meerely in the minde Yea it is evident to all that the meere Thoughts the Vnderstanding determination of the only Soule of man doth act them resolveth on them in it self without any concurrence or cooperation of the body therein Happily you will say The Soule takes occasion so to thinke by some outward bodily thinges before seene or heard I deny not but the Soule taketh occasion to thinke many things by the bodily senses How be it not all thinges simply And so are the Fathers b â—prian and 〈◊〉 10. in your â—â—g 255. heere to be vnderstood If any will stumble on that of Aristotle Nihil est in intellectû quod non fuit prius in sensu it is not absolutly nor vniversally true My reason is because Philosophers thought the minde to be as it were Tabula abrasa when we come into the world first They knew not the naturall Pride the impietie and perversity of mans soule which may yeeld many and sundry Thoughts and Determinations to sinne yea provocations and pleasures in sin which the Body ministreth not neither could the Heathen vnderstand them And to say that this pride impiety and perversitie was taken by contagion from the meere flesh originally in Generation is not to be proved Bud yet were that so notwithstanding the Soule afterward can acte many sinnes meerely in it selfe and without the cooperation of the body Further as the Angells sinned in the beginning by their meere spirituall conceit against God so nothing letteth but that man in his Angell-like nature the reasonable Soule may sinne likewise without any Bodily meanes therevnto Also as we can thinke well without vsing our body God so inspiring vs so may we thinke ill which is sinne our owne inborne corrupt vnderstanding and reason and will moving vs only Moreover if I grant you this point of HeatheÌ„ Philosophy that the Soule taketh occasion to thinke all thinges which she thinketh vniversally from the body bodily obiectes yet it followeth not that she taketh occasion to misthinke from thence alwayes The proper provocations and pleasures of sinne are oftentimes not outward at all but the meere perversitie and malignity of our evill minde is vsually the very cause of ill thoughts ill determinations I grant also that the occasion is often taken froÌ„ the outward senses But it is meerely taken not given taken by the corrupt and perverse minde not given by the senses Which though they be also otherwise corrupt yet simply in seeing naturall things they sinne not nor yet in hearing nor in tasting save as the minde which is properly and principally and first sinfull abuseth their operation And as touching those wretched a Haeretâ— Turkes theists men opinions before rehearsed doubtles their presumptuous and perverse wit only so reasoning and concluding falsly without any other proper inducementes froÌ„ without was the very cause of those spirituall impieties in many impes of Sathan Wherefore for you to affirme that the Soule committeth all acts of sinne by the body that God did not forbid Adam to like or desire that fruit is more then strange doctrine Somewhere most iniuriously b Pag. 3â— you reproch purity I dare say heere you have no colour of purity in this point Notwithstanding c Pag. 2â— you resolutly set your self to prove your opinion not by Scripture but by Fathers who are answered before saving Tertullian who d Pag. 2â— you say pointeth to a place of Scripture for it e Mat. 〈◊〉 out of the heart come evill thoughts But this place being considered will rather prove the contrary For Christ heere meaneth not by Heart any parte of the Body but meerely the Minde or Soule of man and that with opposition to the body in this case of sinning For thus in effect hee saith Not the Body sinneth by taking in but the Soule by sending out That is to say The Soule only sinneth properly not the body at all no not in grosse facts except as the body is the Instrument the Soule being the Agent as your selfe doe speake Otherwise the body sinneth not at all much lesse in such thoughts as are meere spirituall vnles wee meane by society for coniunctions sake in one person with the Soule which indeed is it that sinneth And thus some have thought those places of Tertullian which a â—ag 255. you cite may be vnderstood But indeed Tertullian you vse not well and bring these his wordes against his own meaning as anon we shall further see That which you ad of Bodily infirmities letting the operation of the Soule for so I thinke you meane as in Lethargies 〈◊〉 256. Apoplexies Sleepe Phrensy c. Peradventure then it thinketh and coÌ„sidereth more freely in it selfe and by it selfe then when the body setteth it on worke otherwise at other times Howsoever it can never be proved that the Soule then vtterly ceaseth operation and can do nothing for it seemeth that only our memory and sensitive faculties are stopped whereby it commeth to passe that we know nothing afterwards what the minde contemplateth and thinketh in such cases It is very rare when we remember something and by some extraordinary loosing of those obstructions it is which commonly doe possesse our senses wholy in such occasions Yet even those small remnants of such operations of our Soule beeing in such state doe evidently convince that the Soules operations hang not necessarily on the body neither is it idle when the body is hindred though commonly and for the most part we remember litle thereof Lastly if the Soules operations were so necessarily tyed to the faculties and instrumentes of the body as you doe avouch I greatly doubt howe the Soules immortalitie will bee defended against the effect of your assertion â—â—â—oul hath â—â—â—â—ion nor meereâ—â—â—â—mply in 〈◊〉 without â—â—â—dy 54.255 Surely it bringeth in with it the Haeresie of Pope Iohn the 22. and of certaine Anabaptistes that the Soule hath no being till when it shall resume hir body at the
against vs so consequently yea chiefly against Christ him selfe as our Ransom-payer and Surety in our steed If you meane that thus Christ with SubmissioÌ„ beholding his Father in iudgement at this time was cast into this Agonie it is the verie trueth and the same that we maintayne For this denyeth not but that he had real paines inflicted froÌ„ the Father as from a iust iudge against vs in him who were thus acquitted by him And thus if Aust and others a Pag. 3â— sentences be vnderstood that the Compaint on the Crosse was not Christs in respect of him selfe but in respect of his Church for whom then there he answered before God comming now to execute iudgement for their sinne so they are wel rightly vnderstood otherwise there is no trueth in them namely as you seeme to vse them Second God might be considered now as iudging Satan the prince of this world and overcomming him for vs by the victorie of Christes sufferings which he was nowe about to vndergoe that thus the Divell as b Pag. you note out of c Aug. Austin might be vanquished in our Cause not by Gods absolut and meere power but also by doeing iustice so we deliuered Thus where d Pag. you apply e Ioh. 32. Now even at hand is the iudgement of this world Now eveÌ„ shortly shall the prince of this world be cast out and I if I were lift vp from the earth will draw all men vnto me If you meane it in this sense as you seeme to doe it serveth well But that in this respect as God proceeded against Satan and for this cause Christ should bee cast into these dreadfull scates sorrowes and bloudy Agonies what man of iudgement would imagine What colour of likelihood is there in it Rather this were properly cause of great ioy and triumph indeed as sufficiently I have shewed in my f Ph. 5. former treatise wherevnto you answere not Your testimonies touching g Ioel Heb. Psal men sinfull wherevnto may be adioyned h Lucâ— an other of the like somewhat opening those places make nothing to the purpose at al. For these could not by reason of their Sinnes induce the very presence of Gods Maiesty beeing in anie measure revealed vnto them but Christ in him selfe being free from all sinne could be in no such case No better also is i Isa â— that of the Angells meere Creatures vayling their faces at the glorious presence of God the Creatour of all but Christ the Mediator was not a meere Creature but alwayes personally vnited with a greater power then the Angells were and alwayes sustayned by it vnles only in case of his Iudgement and Passion proceeding vpon him from God as is before noted when purposely the Godhead hid him selfe as it were and withdrew his wonted Comfort that the manhood might be subiect â—o full Punishment for vs as was appointed by God Although even nowe also the Godhead did sustaine his manhood thus being overloaden with paines otherwise it could not a â—efore â— 42 but have ben quite overwhelmed Third Gods Maiestie and iustice may be considered sitting in iudgement meerely against sinfull men If you meane heere against the sinnes of the Elect Christ knew the eternall and sure decree of God which had turned the Cup of vengeance alreadie from them vpon himselfe as being their Suretie so that this commeth to our Assertion as is aforesaid Or touching the Reprobates doe you think that Christ heere so vehemently wished them better whom he knew God hated or that for pity of them he fell into this Agonie and sorrowful prayers First Christ saith a little b 〈◊〉 17. â— before He would not so much as pray for them Yea it is certaine Christ rather would have greatly reioyced to see the due execution of Gods most holy and deserved iustice which is a speciall part of his high glory According to that which is written c 〈◊〉 58.10 The righteous shall reioyce when he seeth the vengeance he shal wash his feet in the bloud of the wicked And men shall say verily there is fruit for the righteous doubtles there is a God that iudgeth the earth Againe if Christes mournfull prayers were to wish better to the Reprobat how can that stand where he saith Let this Cup passe from me he should have saide from them Neither this also might he say from them as knowing perfectly his Fathers and his owne will directly to the contrary Your next supposed Cause d 290. Compassion towards men coÌ„tayneth 3. severall causes e 18.19 heere 1. for the Reiection of the Iewes 2. for the Dispersion of his Church 3. His zealous griefe generally for the sins of the world All these I grant were alwayes in Christ and caused no doubt alwayes heavines in him yet no more then a godly and heavenly minde could and would cheerefully digest and beare Wherefore you strangely deceave your selfe if you thinke that these any or all of them did so far exceede in him as to procure his most dreadfull and bloudy Agonie For the Reiection of the Iewes what reasons bring you a Luke 〈◊〉 Christ wept over their City Ergo Now at his Passion he was driven into his dreadfull Agonie for this cause and that rather now then when hee so wept expresly for them I deny this argument how will you doe to prove it I b Treat 〈◊〉 pa. 6. â—7 have shewed from hence the contrary wherevnto nothing is answered that seeing when a little before hee throughly intended expressed his affection about that matter yet therby he fell into no such Agonie but only wept and mourned for them therefore now in his Passion where he speaketh not a worde of them it is strange to say that his Pity of his CouÌ„try men the Iewes should drive him to sweat bloud and thrice to pray with teares and strong cryes that this Cup of grief might passe from him and thrice to yeeld him selfe againe to Gods will saying Not my will but thy will be done This verily cannot stand with any reason Again that his expresse Compassion towardes the Iewes a little c Luk. 19. Mat. 24. before he prepared him to his Passion plainly sheweth that now in the Garden and so still forward he gave him selfe wholy to other thoughtes matters Namely such as coÌ„cerned his great work in hand that is to be are the Paines which now chiefly he was to suffer for mans redemption at Gods hands Wherefore this work of Christ at this time performed and wrought by him Note is by a proper and peculiar Name iustly called his Passion not not his Compassion Againe you say For their sakes Moses desired to be wiped out of Gods booke and Paul could have wished him selfe to bee separated from Christ for his brethren the Israelites Ergo Christ at his Passion was cast into that strange Agonie for the griefe of their reiection This also
They are 6. in number The 1. is that when Christ on the Crosse cryed out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me by this word me he should meane His Church For the which you have no reason in the world but the bare names of Austin Leo Athanasius Shew me their reasons See before â—ag 28.29 presse not their authorities Which your selfe also reiecteth when you list though when you list againe they must be your best yea your only reason But even these Fathers if they be vnderstood Pag 79. as * before I have shewed Cyprians meaning to be that Christ spake these wordes as doing now the part of the Suretie of his Church and as standing in the case of his Children whom now by his suffering paines he saved then they agree iust with our minde herein For then doubtles it was for the infinite paines which now he felt in our steed that he so cryed out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Otherwise if you thinke they meant that Christ spake this by some strange Metonimy naming him selfe but meaning his Church that can have no good sense For how can it be that we were forsaken of God when Christ was on the Crosse Nay even there and then were we “ Act. 20 purchased vnto God not forsaken by God Againe your owne rule is which I like well that no Figure is to bee admitted in Scripture where there is no ill nor hurtfull sense following literally But I have shewed a little before a plaine easie and Christian sense heereof taking it literally that me signifieth Christes owne person namely his Manhood bearing nowe as our Suretie intollerable paines inflicted by Gods wrath vpon him and so he may mourne sorrowe that he was forsaken that is left in vnmeasurable paines with out feeling of any comfort or succour for the tyme. Wherefore neither you nor any of the Fathers ought to conceave that me heere should signifie not Christ properly but the Church Figurativelie What other construction you can make heereof I can not discerne Finally this 1. sense is contrary to your 2. and 3. following also to your 5. and 6. senses If eyther of these be taken as the true meaning of this place it cannot possibly stande with the rest although you allow them all as by and by we shall manifestly see Now then your sense what is it Even this that Christs humane nature was left helples to the rage of the Iewes which is a kinde of forsaking This seemeth to come neerest indeed to your liking by that which I observe in a Pag. 13 you But as I said this is directly contrary to your 1. sense to the rest following Also b Heere 11.50 before we saw how greatly Christes sufferinges specially on the Crosse differed from such as the godly doe also suffer Yea there is surely no reason nor shew of reason that Christ heere should so mournfully and so vncomfortably complaine that God had forsaken him if it were only but for such distresses as the godly also doe equally suffer at the hands of evill men Seeing most of theÌ„ at the hower of their martyrdoms doe never vtter any such shew as Christ heere did of a minde vncomforted Where also note this well that no godly man not Martyr did ever ascribe this forsaking of themselves to God in the time of their martyrdomes For though then they are oppressed with greater violence of bodily enemies yet they are assisted with far greater abundance of heavenly comfort even in the middest of the paines of death So that they never mourne nor complaine at such extreme dealing as Christ now did when hee said my God my God why hast thou forsaken me Wherefore it is a great shame to imagine that Christ was lesse able to indure such a dereliction or that he would thus complaine and mourne for it only Pag. 35. The bare names againe of c Austin Ambrose Hierom doe heere likewise no good This is but a weake kind of reasoning for so learned a Divine as you are Although also these very sentences of the Fathers I can easily admit if they import no more then they seeme namely that these outward afflictions on the Crosse were some cause and that not small of his complaint alwayes remembring that some greater cause also did concurre was conioyned with them Your 3. sense if I conceave it a right is that his being lâ—ft to bodily death caused him thus to mourne which is but as the last before And yet you seeme to meane not onely that but also because his d flesh now should want all feeling of his heavenly comfort for that while â—n that you 〈◊〉 His Godâ—â—ad deparâ—â— nowe froÌ„ 〈◊〉 body c. that it should remaine dead A marvelous exquisit far fet cause Yet me thinks as this crosseth your other expositions heere so it is flat contrary to the Scripture also which giveth after a sort to Christs dead Flesh this lively affection 〈◊〉 2.26.27 e my flesh shall rest in hope because thou wilt not leave my soule to remaine as all other flesh dying doth in the vnseene worlde of the dead neither wilt suffer thy holy one to see corruptioÌ„ Is it likely is it possible that he should so dolefully mourne that either he should bodily dy or that his body should want the sense of his divine presence so little a while when as in his mind hee speaketh so triumphantly of his constant and continuall ioy in God yea not excluding even his body though dead from participating in some sort therein as we read in the former place at large I beheld the Lord always before me for he is at my right hand that I should not be shaken Therefore did my heart reioyce my toung was glad moreover my Flesh shallrest in hope c. Now can a man in this exceeding generall and constant ioy so vncomfortably mourne in that sense as you vrge My God my God why forsakest thou my flesh It cannot be Many thinges more may be strongly alleaged against this opinioÌ„ As first seeing he perfitly knew thath as his flesh now should quietly rest and have a present ende of all his most bitter sorrowes so even all that while continually after his soul which was his best part should inioy perfit glory and comfort more then before it did Also seeing this senseles rest of his flesh was to be but for a very little while then presently to receave a most glorious and eternall felicity iointly with his Soul and with his Deity who can imagine that Christ would now ready to dy so extreamely mourne and complaine only for this cause as your fancy importeth Further he knew perfitly that this was the very appointment of God and for the fulfilling of Prophesies for the obtayning of his most desired purchase of our health for the more advancing of Gods glory yea and for the more advancing of his very
this last way is not the vnlikelyest Hades heere signifieth in effect nothing els but Death that Christs Soul departed this life was held therein but could not be holden fast â—â—g 166. You obiect c We must not make a Figurative sense but where manefest need is Heere is no need of a figurative sense Therefore heere ought to be no Figure supposed I answer First wee grant your Conclusion whether of the 2. former wayes soever that we take hades so there is simply no Figure at all therein Sec Then your own sense of Hell in this place is cleane overthrown by your selfe For whensoever hades and sheol do signifie Hell it is indeed by a Figure namely Synékdoche where the Whole is set for a part Which I have proved at large before â—â—re pag. particularly by d Tremellius a sufficient man for his Hebrue skill Wherefore by this reason Hell cannot possibly be meant heere if no Figure be admitted Third it seemeth convenient and also likely to take hades heere by a Prosopopoea after our 3. sense before noted Which kind of Figure supposeth as it were a Person of that thing which otherwise a word properly signifieth So that by this figure nothing of the wordes native signification is diminished Thus our word hades is vsed in the Corinthians O Hades where is thy victory Also as it may seeme in the Revelation Death Hades were cast into Hell â—â—ther as pa. 17â— Thus then it is nothing but emphatically signifying the power of Death Fourth Admit that hades and sheol did properly signifie Hell as we see they do not Likewise that sometime they signifie only the Grave which also you acknowledg it is true when it is applyed to a dead Body Againe admit that nephesh by a Figure may signifie the whole Person yea e the dead Body somtimes 〈◊〉 doth 〈◊〉 21.1 〈◊〉 2â— 4 Then I affirme that heere in this place of necessity there ought to be vnderstood a Figurative sense Heere is plainly most necessary cause For take them thus literally as you doe and they impugne the groundes of faith and charitie Which f Pag 1â— you grant that rightly is sufficient to cause a Figurative sense in Scripture But how do they impugne faith or charity being taken as you take them Verily thus Your sense implyeth by the way and consequently Points in Assertion â—â—â—trary to â—â—â—coÌ„mon â—â—oâ— Faith 〈◊〉 charity that a good and sinles man yea the best that ever was worthy of Paradise and the highest Heavens yet after death did go to Hell And further that being in Heaven yet he stayed not there as you say but immediatly came out againe to go into Hell Againe that a Humane soule being in the depth of Hell yet should feele no paines and that being locally in hell it should com out thence also What can be more against the generall rules of the Scripture then these things Yea how doth this impugne our generall charity towards all the iust when they dy Besides many other disproportions and vnreasonable inconveniences following withall as anon we shall further see Wherefore if by any meames possibly a Figure may be heere admitted certainly it must be so for these most necessary causes last rehearsed The rather seeing no other text any where insinuateth any such peculiar matter in Christ that he should differ in these points from all good men els as you do vrge But you say The Cirâ—â—stances 〈◊〉 against yâ—â— the circumstances heere doe prove that the word must be Hell properly taken That I would faine see What are these circumstances First this place sheweth * Pag. 1â— a special prerogative verified in none but in Christ I deny it heere is no such prerogative mentioned Except this that whereas some other men after death have returned to life againe it was not by their owne power as Christs ResurrectioÌ„ was Againe God in his revealed wil having signified by his Prophet long before that he should be restored speedily to life againe thus it was simply impossible that Christ should be holden fast by the power of Death although it had got hold of him And so indeed he had a prerogative before all men ells which also is heere shewed vs but no other prerogative in the world neither heere nor any where els caÌ„ be gathered touching his returne from Hell You adde No flesh dead was ever free from corruption but only Christes What then Ergo his Soule was in Hell Or ells why bring you such needles and impertinent matter Besides I iudge that not to be true Were not a Pag. 1â— some being dead raised to life againe before their flesh putrified But nonâ— you say in the sepulchre And what then How will this inferre or prove that so none but Christs Soul was ever supported in Hel or that it was ever there These are simple reasons for so great a conclusion Then you say Jf by Hell we vnderstand Paradise it was no privilege to be there not forsaken but rather a childish absurdity to thinke any Soule might be there forsaken It is a strange absurdity still to abuse your reader calling this word Hel â—â—tio prinâ—◠〈◊〉 which indeed is nothing but Death in effect the Power of death or the condition and state of death Againe to presume that wee take it for Paradise or Heaven or Hell at any time when we referre it allwayes to the generall state of the Dead and no further immediatly Now in this Christ had cause to reioyce that neither his Soule nor Body was left but so soone raysed vp to perfit life againe and so sitted to a full receaving of glory which within few dayes after he had Also besides this cause his deliverance from the condition of death he had an other inestimable cause to reioyce that he was raised to life againe namely that he might fulfill his whole work for our Salvation which before his Resurrection Ascension c he could not accomplish â—â—g 170. Further b you obiect that Peter maketh mention that the sorrows of death were broken that they should not hold Christ nor hinder him from rising againe But there were none such in the Grave none in Paradise Therfore in Hel Christs Soule was whence he was delivered when he rose againe I denie vtterly this sequele Because the text saith not that there were any present sorrowes in Hades where Christ was Heere is not a word to any such purpose 〈◊〉 2.24 What saith the text God raised him vp loosing the sorrowes of Death because it was impossible for him to bee holden fast of it Wil you coÌ„clude froÌ„ hence Ergo there were present sorrows in that place where Christ was There is no strength in this reason The Apostle signifieth heere 2. or 3. things 1. That God loosed Death froÌ„ him wherein hee was held but could not be holden fast 2. That this Death had bene a most sorrowfull painfull Death
For it is sure that no man can prove by good testimony that there was any or indeed any other then such as these ancient Fathers thus variably and differingly rehearsed Seeing also it is proved that this set forme which we now have specially our article in question was not †As a 〈◊〉 the Câ—â— receaved for many hundred yeares after Christ some supposing that these words were not put in till neer 1000. years after him I say All this being considered it is evident that your Argument only froÌ„ the precise and exact forme of words in the Creed from the order placing of He descended to Hades namely after Dead Buryed is not worth any thing to induce thereby an Article of faith That Christs Soule went to Hell After this it shall not be amisse to consider some other reasons of good moment Our 3d. Reason is REASâ—â— If there be no certaine benefit to the godly by Christes going to Hell then doubtles he went not thither But there is no certaine benefit to the Godly by Christes going to hell Therefore doubtles he went not thither This Reason you a Pag â— call our strongest fort It is not our strongest but yet strong indeed for you have made no where any good answer to it neither can you I know a number of wordes you have throughout your whole treatise denying the Assumption but they are nothing in the world but meere presumptions You say b Pag â— Is the subduing of hell powers and the treading on all their force and the restraining of all their fury so small a matter with you that it doth no good to the Godly And elswhere most tediously and vainly you augment repeate the marvelous thinges that Christe did by his Humane presence in Hell I would willingly beleeve it but alas who saith so besides your self or only such as can tell no better then you Where is that become now c Pag â— what I read in the worde of God that I beleeve what J do not reade that I do not beleeve c. It is easy to say that you will onely hold what the Scripture assureth but in practise you will slip from this precise order when you list I know well that you boldly say that the d Pag â— Purpose of Christs descent is plainly professed in Scriptures to be the spoyling of Sathan and delivering of men from the power of Hell Is it plainly professed I beseech you where I wott well what you will faine devise of the Fathers when you impute so palpable vntruths to the word of God it self Shew vs one title one iot of any benefit which by the Scriptures Christ wrought for vs by his locall presense in Hell and then I will cease to gainsay it forever Otherwise tell vs never so much of the wonderfull and singular fruite of Christs being there the more you amplify the more you hazard your credit the more we shall wonder at your bold avouching matters which are not in the word of God The benefits all and every one which you every where rehearse I most vnfainedly and religiously beleeve namely that he deserved all good things for vs and obtayned theÌ„ for vs in his ResurrectioÌ„ c. Ascention and that finally and fully he shall in his last iudgment tread downe Satan vnder our feet But what is this to his locall being in Hell Shew therefore I say by the expresse word that Christ in Hel did these or any parte of these good things for vs. If you do not for as yet I see no title to prove that surely all your talke is but blasts of vanitie The which I rather beleeve that you never can nor wil do because you confesse asmuch somewhere as overturneth all your shew of Christes doing good to vs in Hell â—â—g 160. For a This conquest you say Christ purchased by his passion but he did not execute it till his resurrection If he executed nothing till his Resurrection and purchased all in his Passion then he did nothing in Hell For his Resurrection was distinctly after his supposed being in Hell whither he never afterwards returned to execute there any thing at all Nay Austin your only stay thinketh * he descended in vaine vnles he did good to som who were even there in Hell in torments â—â—e before â—â—g 168. But this you vtterly renounce So that every way stil it remayneth good that seeing there is no certaine benefit that Christ did in Hell neither to vs nor to any therefore we are not to beleeue that he was in Hell Our 4d. Reason There is altogeather as great reason and as vrgent cause that Christ whole man both Soule â—SON 4. and Body should be present in Hell to free vs thence wholly that is our Souls Bodies as there is that his Soule must be there present to free thence our Soules But simply it is confessed that his Body was never there neither had any cause to be for the freeing of our Bodies Therefore it followeth that neither his Soule was ever there nor had any cause so to be for the freeing of our Soules Heere I wish you would answer my proposition without Skoffes taunts and haughty disdaine as your manner is But bring some evident and cleere difference that his Soul must go more necessarily thither alone then that his Body also should and let it be truly grounded on the proportion of faith and Christian Religion if not on expresse Scripture I wot well what you bring from some Fathers a Pag. 17â— Fulgentius b Pag. 17â— 181 Athanasius others That his Soule by being present in Limbo that they meane by Hades and Infernum saved vs from Hell by his flesh temporally dying he gave vs life eternall and by lying in the grave vncorrupted he gave vs incorruptioÌ„ Heere we allow them so far as they meane that what one parte of him did that our whole man and every parte received good by But if they think his Soul by Divine ordinaÌ„ce had need to be actually present elswhere then only with the godly deceased to execute his victory gotten before on the Crosse against Satan to th end that we might be free froÌ„ Hell theÌ„ let theÌ„ shew vs the Scripture for this Divine ordinaÌ„ce so by Gods grace we shal forthwith imbrace it Otherwise at least let them shew vs a reason or do you so much for them why both parts ioyntly should not rather have gon thither by like necessity to execute that togither which both ioyntly had got and deserved for togeather the benefit also whereof is to come not to one parte alone but ioyntly to both in vs. Againe why this going to Hell by our Saviour Christ was not rather after his Resurrection when he had begun his actuall Triumph in deed by ioyning togeather againe both partes of his manhood in both which togeather before he had bene humbled Neither is it likely