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.
of the Abbot I confess I understand it not For had he had the apprehension that the torments of Purgatory be so great as Divinity tells us he could never methinks have with a Christian heart spoken those words It is now a good while since our brother who is departed remains in torments of fire and therefore we must shew him some charity As who should say I am content he hath suffer'd the pains of Purgatory for one month nay two for so long it was before he designed him to be released Imagine he had caused him to be rack'd or impal'd so long would not all the Christian World have abominated the cruelty What conceit then had he of Purgatory that would let his Brother burn in that cruel fire so long without shewing him any Charity I would to God your Divine had told us where we might find that Vindication o◠the Book he speaks of For the more I consider it the more unworthy it seems to me to be our great Doctour and savour more of the Monk then of the Pope Though besides he tells us that this story hapned three years before his writing and Baronius tells that the Book was written in the fourth year of St. Gregory's Popedome at which time St. Gregory could not be in his Monastery Nor do I think Baronius can rattle Canus for this opinion then since he held it himself in his eighth Tome and revoked it in his ninth Therefore he may have patience with one who falls into the Errour into which himself fell before 9. Let us omit that ridiculous opinion of excommunicating souls in Purgatory and answer the question he puts what any Judicious Catholick can say to the story Which is that the Authour of this Book sheweth no such exact inspection into every circumstance as that any man should be bound to believe that he could not be deceived either in his Judgment or in his narration as that truly Copiosus knew not of the saying of the Masses And I wish you to note your Divine's advice he gives that when the Authour makes this Argument that concordante visione cum Sacrificio res apertè claruit he speaks like a Doctour Is this Tradition or Scripture or Councils upon the which Doctour's proceed or a common and ordinary prudence by which every man conducts his private business 10. There follow two stories out of Venerable Bede written as an Historian should write and as it was worthy of his Learning and Wisdome The first is nothing to the Alledger's Purpose being but of the profiting of the Mass to the dead which is the position common to us both That which he chiefly takes notice of is this word delivery or loosing as if we held the souls were never to be deliver'd or that their delivery came not to pass by prayers and other good works So that this being agreed on and that there is no specification of time there is nothing particular in this story but that many who heard this story were devoutly inflamed in faith to wit to pray for the dead by which we understand that this story was the occasion of their apprehension of suddain delivery which hath no other ground then the parallelling of the loosing of his fetters to the help in Purgatory which every man would guess of according to the principles he was before imbued with So that both the effect is common to both opinions and the ground every ones application of the Miracle to a spiritual effect which they saw no otherwise then in a corporeal allegory But your Divine explicates inflamed in faith which as it lyes signifies no more then that they grew fervent towards good life to signifie that they had recieved this faith from the beginning which seeing there is no ground for it in the Authour is but a kind of a corruption of the Text by the Divines addition to it 11 The later story of Drithelmus hath one circumstance that favours your Divines opinion but the very same words have a blot to mar it that is what you◠Divine I doubt will acknowledg to be a flat Heresy I mean that these words all shall come to Heaven in the day of Judgment include some who have no Obstacle of Sin to wit those in the fourth place So that he affirms them not to go to Heaven as soon as purged against the Council of Florence and Benedictus his Bull. Whence by the Rule that no Revelations are to be admitted which contain any thing inconsonant to Faith this Revelation is to be rejected not so far as concerns venerable Bede who truly relates what Drithelmus not onely reported but truly thought But that he Drithelmus was some way deluded either because the Vision was a natural effect of forgoing thoughts or that he mistook himself in the rehearsal or some such like cause whereof the contingency of sublunary causes furnish us with store I pray take notice also that the works of the living help many to be freed before the day of Judgment be the words of the Angel not of Venerable Bede narrative not doctrinal Whence you may see this Divine continues still his practice of proving earnestly that which is not in controversy and saying little or nothing of that which is the true difficulty SIXTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his tenth Chapter Of the Nature and Certainty of private Revelations The rare Spright in the Jesuits House at Vienna His Relations for what in them concerns the Alledger's purpose found to be in likelihood what himself intitles them Stories 1. IN his tenth Chapter we must launch into the Ocean of Revelations for after once by the foregoing Relations they grew into fashion every Spiritual body had of them either truly or at least put upon him Nay this very day there want not spiritual directours which profess a kind of skill in such a space of time to bring their Ghostly Children to Extasies and Revelations And who doubts but that if a Devout soul of her self subject to those passions which Galen and other Physicians call Extases or Enthusiasms light into the Government of a Ghostly Father delighted with admirable accidents both their thoughts being continually busied upon spiritual matters the Ghostly Father having such a pitch of Divinity as to correct in his Ghostly Child's apprehensions what is plainly naught and contrary to Faith and Christian life both being constantly conceited that God uses to discover extraordinary verities to those who much converse with them who I say can doubt but many relations of wonderfull sights must needs proceed from them nay many times of things which verily fall out as they see them as all Heathen Histories recount some which hapned so as Philosophers teach us by a secret combination of the soul with outward causes amongst which the Divine Providence mingles it self to work its proper ends 2. But your Divine and I frame about these two propositions seeming contrary yet so well agreeing that one good conclusion
The one that he telis the story to have passed in Cyprus whereas St. John lived in Alexandria Secondly that whereas other stories of the same nature in Pope Gregory and Venerable Bede make the Bands remain loose this story makes them to be supernaturally bound again which seems to be against the nature of Gods gifts which are given without repentance but much favours the Doctrin of Relief in Hell Wherefore it is vehemently to be suspected that those words then and when come from his Paraphrase and that the Saint's words reached no farther then what we read in others that this story argued that prayers relieved the dead As truly no more can be gather'd out of such Histories which are Parabolical and it were very absurd to parallel small circumstances betwixt corporeal Allegories spiritual things signify'd by them Howsoever the Authority can be no greater then of Metaphrastes who is held in a Rhetorical way to fain many things and it is to be noted that he lived after Gregory the Third's dâ—ys and peradventure after the time of the Oration De dormientibus was written 13. Being freed from these sleight stories we may see what Testimonies of solid Fathers he brings for his opinion He cites St. Denys but never a word which brings the Testimony home to our Controversy he speaking but in common of the remission of the sin His second Authour is St. Athanasius The words that The souls of sinners feel some benefit when good works and offerings are performed for them This Testimony has three faults First the Authour is not St. Athanasius as is so manifest by the work it self that it is a gross mistake to cite it as his though this Divine be not the first who objected it to me and farther it is clear the Authour wrote since the Turks were Masters of Greece by the phrase of calling the Romans French-men His second fault is that he distinguishes not dead but pronounces of all dead mens souls which argues the opinion of those who hold relief in Hell Thirdly these words When good works c. are equivocal and may be as well interpreted that good works are the causes of relief as they do the time unless other words force them to be taken emphatically which do not appear here St. Ephrem is also cited but not in what work nor of what certainty for his works are very ambiguous Besides that he is cited out of another Authour named Severus Alexandrinus who what he was I know not One I read of but an Arch-heretick The Testimony it self smells of the intervalls which the comforters of Hell invent and the works attributed to St. Ephrem are so uncertain that no guess can be made of what value this Authority is 14. The Testimonies he cites out of St. Epiphanius and St. Chrysostom are more certain but they favour my opinion not his For to help and not cancel the sin and that some comfort accrues to the dead by the sacrifice of the Mass are the very expressions which we use But the other words to wit that it may happen that a total pardon may be obtained for them by our prayers comes out of a false Translation The true Translation is that it is possible to gather pardon from all sides by prayer that is that abundance of prayers may be gotten either from all sorts of persons or all sorts of actions towards getting of pardon for St. Chrysostom makes mention of both And these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies motion from the circumference to the centre His last place of St. Chrys. out of the 21 Homily upon the Acts I must tell him if he had not another Text then I he hath much abused the good Saint The words as I read them are est enim si voluerimus leve ipsi supplicium facere If we will it is possible to make his punishment light Which he translates lighter to which he adds as his own descant to make out the Testimony then it was at first Much from the Saints mind who though he be earnest to perswade to prayers and good works yet never descends to more particulars then that they will do some good or else that the Living shall get good by them nobis Deus placatior erit which St. Austin also glances at to wit when the soul is damned Now if the torment of the dead be sooner ended your Divine will not doubt but that it is lighter 15. But I must not forget his citation of St. Greg. Nazianzen of which he seems to make great esteem and it is least of all to the purpose For as it is true St. Gregory speaks of a Purging before Resurrection so is it clearly to be understood of that which is made by death as is evident by that expression either purged or lay'd aside For nothing can be understood to be layd aside but the body and what is layd aside with it So that all his expression is of the effect of death and nothing touching what is to be done in the pure spirit And so I am quit of this troublesome Chapter without any mention of delivering souls out of Purgatory in the Greek Fathers 16. As for the Greek Church he brings me a Letter from some Town wherein there lived many Catholick and Learned Grecians from whom his friend received this Character that all the Grecian Catholick Church approves and admits priviledged Altars and Indulgences for the souls in Purgatory the which they believe go streight to Heaven as soon as they have satisfyed And I am so far from discrediting this Letter as that I sincerely believe it and yet think what I sayd to be true For this word Catholick Greek Church is not exempt from the Law of other words to wit that it may be understood in divers senses by divers speakers so that if this City he speaks of signifies either Rome or Venice which are the likeliest Cities of Christendome to have Grecians of that quality living in them and the Greeks in those two Cities communicate with none but such as either live under Latin Governours and so do easily follow their customs or otherwise are instructed by such Missionaries as go from the Greek Colledg in Rome I do not wonder that they should answer that the Catholick Grecians hold Indulgences as they do in Italy Nay peradventure may think the rest no Catholicks even upon this score But when I spake of the Greek Church I spake of the descendents from the Greeks which made the Union in the Council of Florence without receiving any new Doctrin since THIRD DIVISION Containing an Answer to his sixth Chapter Testimonies from Latin Fathers before St. Austin either savouring of Millenarism or opposit to the Alledger or not found but fram'd to his purpose by Additions of his own and lastly his onely express Testimony uncertain 1. IN the sixth Chapter he pretends to shew that the Latin Church before St. Austin held the delivery of
from an Authour of less esteem then St. Thomas though I do not deny that ordinarily the Doctrin of the Book is or was St. Thomas's Doctrin in his younger days 15. And now we are brought on to the twelfth Number in which he advances a difficulty which is truly Theological and deserves to be discussed But whereas it hath two parts that part which is chief and should go fore-most he leaves to be discussed in his 22. Chapter to wit Whether continuance of an indivisible Entity makes it greater or no Wherefore here I must onely treat the second part which is what good Prayers do which do but accelerate the Day of Judgment And to do this I must explicate a Doctrin whereof he should not be ignorant yet I perceive he is I lay forth therefore this Proposition No Prayer is heard by God Almighty for any particular effect but for such as are fore-determin'd by God not onely to be but to be by this Prayer Another I add to this of the same quality to wit that no effect which God hath fore-determin'd to be for such a Prayer can be if the prayer be not These two Propositions as peradventure to the ordinary sort of Faithful may be unknown or rather unreflected on so is it a shame that any Divine should doubt or question them As for the former he that will maintain the contrary must say God fore-saw not what he would after do or fore-would not what he after did which are both notorious Blasphemies And he who opposes the later Proposition must say that some cause which God hath order'd to be the cause of an effect is superfluous and hath no influence into the effect since the effect can be without such a cause which is no less a derogation to God's Wisdom and the perfection of his ways Out of â—hese two â—ropositions it follows evidently that if God hath order'd the Day of Judgment to come by the prayers for the Dead the Day of Judgment would not nor could not come unless those prayers were sayd And if this be evidently true it is an evident want of Divinity to ask what good the prayers for the Dead do if the Dead receive no other profit then the advancement of the Day of Judgment Against this Doctrin Number 17. he objecteth What then shall become of Christ's Promises This is a good Objection for a Catechumen who learns Christian Doctrin but a poor one for a Divine who should know that Christ governs the World not as Aristotle puts in common by moving the first Mobile but as Faith teaches by fore-seeing fore-willing and ordering every particular act of Angels Men and irrational Creatures and as far as the acts have any good in them setting and settling the whole Frame of the Causes inerrantly So that Christ's Promises rely upon this not onely power or fore-sight but as I may so speak a kind of fore-acting in his Providence all the good Creatures shall ever do Therefore it is silly to talk so as if Christ's Promises would fail if this particular man did not say this particular prayer for it proceeds upon the actual ordering of this prayer The like or weaker is the Objection that Christ's Judicative Power will depend of particular prayers First because in some way of speaking it is evidently true as it is that Christ could not damn Judas if Judas were not or had not betrayed him Another way and that in a proper manner of speaking is that it doth not follow that Christ's Judiciary Power dependeth from these prayers but these prayers of it For seeing no body doubts but that Christ hath in his power what acts shall be and what shall not it is clear that what shall be depends of him not He from what shall be So that this which with his great Divinity he deems the worst of shifts is as certain as any Article of our Faith and Blasphemous and Heretical to deny 16. To justifie this proceeding of his he brings another piece of sweet Divinity It is that there be some things which God resolves shall come to pass by certain prayers and some that he resolves to effect quite independently of any such means upon other motives To give you his true meaning in this distinction is hard yet I think his meaning is that the means or causes of some effects are such that though de facto they are causes of the effect yet God would have done the effect if these causes had fail'd and other causes are such that if these causes had fail'd God would not secure the effect that is his meaning is that some causes which are truly causes notwithstanding God's Providence that they should be causes might have fail'd and therefore God had cast if these causes should fail to provide others which should supply that the effect might not fail Quantum capio quantum sapio what is this but to put that God's Providence as far as concerns that this prayer should be or should be cause of this effect is fallible and not certain Are we there great Divine that you tell us God's Providence is errable That neither by his Power nor by his Wisdom he can ascertain that which he orders to be done Or if peradventure you will not venter to deny his Power at least that his act falls short That some good Action is done which he did not will efficaciously should be done Is this Catholick or Christian either Divinity or Metaphysicks to make God's Providences fallible to make the Essential Wisdom doubtful of what he is to do casting about like a man If this day will not do I will take another O pittiful stuff O three half-peny Divinity 17. He objects it were superfluous to pray that St. Francis be not turned out of Heaven because God is resolved not to do it whether any body prays for it or no What ill luck have I to meet with such Counsellours of God Almighty who know upon what motives he doth all his Works and what things must be wanting to break God's intentions I am bred simply to believe that if the least dust or straw in the streets should not fall or be cut when it does fall and is cut it would change the greatest effects of God's Providence So exact be the Rules of God's fore-sight so just and fitting all that he determins To us is revealed what is fitting to promote the saving of our Souls that is as concerning our purpose to pray for those things the solicitude of which stirs us up to pray heartily and willingly and therefore it is revealed to us that we ought to pray for the Dead because it causes in us a fervent and great recourse to God It is not revealed to us to pray that St. Francis should possess his bliss eternally because that motive of prayer would either be of small efficacy or have other inconveniences annexed And yet I do not doubt but this amongst the rest may be an effect even of the
day it follows clearly that the position putting another time is added to Tradition and being in a matter that depends of Revelation and therefore cannot be known but by Tradition it appears not onely to be a Novâ—… but also ungrounded and not to be followed I must here note how your Divine who heretofore asked for but 〈◊〉 Aâ—…r who should say that the acceleration of the day of judgment was that which we were to pray for can here tell you that such speeches â—re in most common use and that the usual phrasâ— ruâ—s of this day that as the 〈◊〉 of speech is so usual in Scripture it is no wonder that the Fathers and our Liturgies do sometime make use of it Where you shall see a gradation made that in Scripture it is the usual phrase but the Father's and Liturgies do sometime make use of it As if the Fathers did not usually speak as the Scriptures not the Liturgies were made by the Fathers and at least follow their customs though every man of judgment cannot chuse but see the use of Fathers and Liturgies must of necessary be the same with the Scriptures whence they are taken which were it confessed as it is evident what Testimony could I desire at his hands greater then this 11. N. 7. he impugns the Text taken from the tenth to the Hebrewâ— where the Apostle threatneth a Purgation of 〈◊〉 to them who 〈◊〉 after Baptism which Bellarmin is forced to gloss against the Text to avoid Noâ—â—tus his Errour For whereas the Text speaks of a fire that should feed upon those who were not quite contrary to God which words cannot be understood of any â—â—re but Purgatory fire he very freely without any ground of the Text and onely because otherwise it will not stand with his opinion takes no notice of the properties which particularise this fire and by his own Authority puts in Hell fire and a distinction of the effects of these two fires to which sence a Cable is not strong enough to draw the words 12. In his ninth and tenth Paragraphs he impugns the Texts taken out of St. Matthew and St. Lukâ— concerning agreeing with our Adversary in the way that is in our life time that we may not be deliver'd to the eternal Judge And he thinks we urge this Text for not reflecting upon the particular Judgment at the hour of death and I cannot well deny it For I do not remember that in any place of Scripture Christ is called Judge in regard of the next World but either at his Refurrection or at the last day And besides what passeth at mans death I â—â—ke to be very improperly called Judgment and if it were a true Judgment this Formality of your Adversaries delivering you â—ver to the Judge I do not know that any one attributes to particular Judgment Which circumstances though they were pressed where he found the Argument he totally neglected and presses for himself those words of being sent to a Prison there to remain until he pay the last farthing This sayth he is most unnaturally spoken of the day of Judgment after which there remains no prison but eternal And his discourâ—â— were good if this delivery of our Saviour were not Allegoricaâ— that is a human expression of things above human reach and therefore not to be expected to be verify'd entirely to the material word which taken away it signifies no more then at the day of Judgment the sinners shall be punished without remission But to think there shall be other Prison then the mans own guilt or other toâ—…rer then his own knowledg and conscieâ—… is to be proved not supposed And why this must require length of time more then what precedes the sentence and of the which the sentence is the approbation as of all the rest that shall be executed all that day I expect some better declaration before I frame a new Judgment properly so call'd without any ground in Scripture or Antiquity 13. In his eleventh Number he treats the famous place taken out of the third Chapter of the first to the Corinths but so as if he aym'd not to give the sence of it but onely to wave the force from his opinion no matter how much against the words themselves For it being agreed between parties that the Apostle speaks of the day oâ— Judgment and of material fire yet he hath three solutions First that it is meant of no material fire but of the fire of the district Judgment But this is to prevaricate against themselves who agree there is a true material fire at that day which is the faith of all Christians and the Apostles words are plain that that great day shall be revealed in fire Now so far being the common Faith of Christians it is against all sence to say this is not the fire which shall try the works of all men For the Apostle gives for proof or ground why all mens works shall be try'd by fire because sayth he that day shall be revealed in fire What a strange perversion then of the Text is it to make the Apostle make this Argument The day of Judgment shall be revealed in material and elemental fire therefore the works of men shall be try'd by Gods judgment or spiritual districtness and yet this is the sence given to the Apostles words by this Interpretation His second Interpretation is that the meaning is the sinners shall be saved as it were by fire but fire precedent to the fire of Judgment and this explication 〈◊〉 more against the Text then the other For this ground which the Apostle takes that the day of Judgment shall be revealed in fire can be no more brought for the cause why the sinners works shall be try'd by a precedent fire then why they shall be try'd by Gods judgment And besides the Apostle so expressly says that every ones work shall be try'd by the fire in that day or of that day that nothing can be spoken more plainly against the Text then to say it is meant of another fire which went before Likewise that speech that whose work abides the fire he shall be rewarded but if any mans burn he shall suffer detriment is plainly spoken of the fire of that day so that such an interpretation is a plain corruption And no less can be said of his third explication that the meaning is that the fire shall manifest that is shew what was done before but not do any thing For those words If any mans work burns he shall suffer detriment cannot be understood of what was passed before the day of Judgment but of what is done in that day And therefore the trying he speaks of must necessarily be the working of the fire upon the sinners works so that it is evident he and his Bellarmin do not explicate but corrupt the Text against the plain words of the Apostle 14. The ninth Text concerning the Remission of sin in the next world is brought to shew that
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
it self All Prelates of the Church not excluding the Pope himself none of these in their qualities and degrees by which they are Judges of Christian demeanour pretending the extraordinary favours he requires to make them speak like Doctours I wonder he is not acquainted with the Bull of Leo the tenth beginning Supernae Majestatis In which he lays Excommunication upon all Preachers who in their Sermons do lay forth any such Visions or Revelations before they are approved by the Church because ordinarily they are but Illusions of Melancholy Persons who in their prayer have conceited such dreams and imposed them upon their Directours I pray perswade him to consider how much worse it is to preach such things then to point them in a vulgar Language by which they run amongst the unlearned sort and consider how far he and the divulgers of his Book are from deserving Excommunication Again how many of these Visions in particular have passed the examin and approbation of the Church for which they may not be accompted the dreams of waking men 8. To return now to our former course in his third Paragraph he cites the 63 Canon of the Council of Nice the which though it be known to be none of the Council yet because the custom it speaks of is laudable I except not against it For we doubt not but the multiplication of pryers is ever good St. Paul hath taught us that but the question is onely of the end for which the custom was instituted Yet I may note this that peradventure your Divine is mistaken in the number for we find in the first ages that though there were forty Priests in a Church onely one said Mass upon private days But it is a tedious thing to walk in the dark and to handle a question whereof the Roots are not understood Wherefore I shall to my power lay down the grounds of the question out of which Authorities may be the better understood 9. There are therefore two questions to be display'd the one whereon relys the efficacy of Prayer the second to what it is efficacious First therefore we must note that this word prayer hath two significations In the one it is nothing but the praising of God in the other it signifies the begging something of God Prayer in the first signification chiefly consists in the acts of the Theological vertues By Faith and the qualities consequert to Faith we acknowledg and admire the attributes of God and the perfection of his works so break out into those motions which follow such Acts. By Hope and Charity we love à nd desire God as our proper good whether by his Essence or by and his Creatures Out of this follows that we ask him what we apprehend as necessary to us in which consists that prayer which is properly called Petition Now let us consider God as we would consider a wise man and we shall see that if we beg any thing of a wise man he considers two things one is whether the Petition be convenient for it self which if he finds without difficulty he grants it The other is that though it be not convenient in it self yet he considers whether the friendship of the Person who begs it makes it convenient to be done or no And if he find it does he grants the request So then likewise must we esteem of God that he doth what is beg'd of him because of it self it is fitting to do it even if there had been no prayers At other times it is not good unless it had been begged Further in the Beggar we find two Considerations one of the Person the other of the Begging This later consideration is not considerable before God more then as it makes the Person more acceptable For whosoever begs of God addresses himself to God and by that exercises some vertue for which he comes to be more acceptable But then the begging obtains because of the worth of the Person Abstract from this and begging is but the affection to a created thing and so hath more imperfection then perfection in it unless it be the desire of what is commanded us as when it is said Quaerite Reg num Dei and again siquis indiget sapientia postulet a Deo And it is added in fide nihil haesitans which if I be not mistaken signifies that he shall certainly be heard Of other things we hear Pater vester scit quia his omnibus opus habetis and if we will nevertheless ask them we have the form shaped out to us sed tua volunt as fiat non mea 10. That this explication of Gods hearing our prayers is true depends of the Principles long since explicated that God under forfeit of his Wisdome and Goodness is bound to do what is best for his creatures and nothing else Wherefore what he does is either therefore best because begg'd or of it self therefore on one of these motives to be granted Now if it be best because begged since the title of begging is the favour the Beggar has he must by the act of begging be in greater favour then without it for if it had been convenient otherwise it would have been done without begging and so not for the begging for God needs no Monitor to tell him what and when it is best And so you have the first point clear'd that Charity and onely Charity on the Peggars part is the cause of the effect 11. The other point was what God grants in respect of our prayers That is to what our prayers are efficacious In which the first proposition is that God grants nothing upon our prayers but what first he stirs us up to pray for and ordains our prayers to be causes of the effect the which is both evident of it self and formerly declared The next proposition is that God stirs up no body to pray for any thing unless the action of praying be good to him that prays So that whether the effect be granted or not the good of praying never fails him who prays A third proposition is that all things confider'd no extrinsecal good is the good of the man who prays for it but is absolutely indifferent whether it be the spiritual good of Father and Mother or Children or whatsoever it be and therefore by a perfect soul none of those things is to be absolutely pray'd for or desired but onely under the good will and provideoce of God This is clear also to all those who understand the nature of Good to be respective to him who desires it and that it signifies what according to reason is to be desired by him and that every man is a part of the World and cannot with reason desire the World should be conformable to him and therefore may or must desire his own good because he is made for it and hath that charge from the Authour of nature to procure it and be sollicitous of it But as his Beatitude is but the end of him so the Beatitude