hell and by the like collection it was there though it dwelt not or continued there 16. Slaund The Replyer is charged with Iudaisme for that none but Iewes did euer applie this prophesie to any but to our Sauiour Christ. Contra. 1. It is not Iudaisme to applie the propheticall saying of Dauid concerning Christ in some sense vnto Dauid but to vnderstand them onely of Dauid and not at all of Christ as if his memorie had serued him he might haue turned backe to 2. b. p. 136 where he himselfe citeth Hierome vpon the 71. Psalm v. 20. Thou wilt take me from the depth of the earth Iudaei hunc psalmum in solum Davidem convenire volunt c. the Iewes will haue this psalme to agree vnto Dauid onely and 3. b. p. 47. he alleadgeth out of Mollerus that D. Kimchi interpreteth the 16. Psal. of the Prophet Dauid and wil not haue these words meant of the resurrection of Christ. 2. If they sauour of Iudaisme which applie the propheticall sayings concerning Messiah in the Psalmes to Dauid then is Basil guiltie that way who vpon these words in the 48. Psal. The Lord shall deliuer my soule from the hand of hell thus writeth Manifeste vaticinatur Domini ad inferos descensum qui cum alijs etiam ipsius animam redimat ne remaneat ibi he manifestly prophesieth of the Lords descension to hell which with others should also redeeme his soule that it remaine not there he applieth this text both concerning Christs descension to hell and Dauids deliuerance from thence So Augustine indifferently expoundeth those words Psal. 86. v. 13. Thou hast deliuered my soule from the lowest hell either of Christ or of some of his members Ergo aut ipsius vox est hic eruisti c. wherefore it is either his voice that is Christs or our voice by Christ our Lord which to that ende came thither 3. Then doth he himselfe Iudaize who thus confesseth of that place Psal. 68. 18. He ascended vp on high and led captiuitie captiue which is as properly by S. Paul fitted to the ascension of Christ Eph. 4. 8. as the other place Psal. 16. is by S. Peter to our Sauiours resurrection alluding saith this obiecter to the place of the Psalme where it is literally spoken of King Dauid himselfe to whome God gaue victorie and triumph ouer all his enemies but prophetically meant of Christ our Sauiour of whome Dauid was a type and figure Thus it falleth out according to the saying of the wise man he that diggeth a pit shall fall therein and he that rolleth a stone it shall returne vnto him this accusation of Iudaisme which as a stone he cast at the Replyer recoyling againe hath broken his owne pate 17. Slaunder According to your sense all that will follow Christ must suffer the death of the soule 3. b. p. 63. You deliuer for sound doctrine that Christ suffered that death which was threatened to Adam 3. b. p. 66. Your blasphemous paradox of the death of Christs soule 3. b. p. 83. Whereas the Replier doth directly affirme that Christ died not the death of the soule either by sinne or damnation Synops. p. 977. which are the two kinds onely of the proper dying of the soule And though a kinde of death may after some sort be affirmed of Christs soule in respect of the great anguish and torment which hee endured in his soule yet he wisheth that kinde of phrase as beeing not vsed in Scripture to be forborne and discontinued Synops. p. 978. The Replier here then is as farre from blasphemie as the Accuser is from honestie in charging him with such an apparant vntruth 18. Slaunder That he doth call againe out of hel Arrius Eunomius Apollinaris Lucianus to ioyne hands with you against Athanasius Epiphanius Fulgentius that he doth iustifie so pestilent and blasphemous heretiks against so reuerend so learned and holy fathers 3. b. p. 74. You reiected Athanasius before for a misconstruer of Scripture an establisher of error yea little better then a blasphemer euen because he proued against the Arrians that the word Spirit in this place of Peter signifieth the humane soule of Christ. 3. b. 125. 1. Contra. 1. What an absurd collection is this Athanasius Epiphanius did censure the Apollinarists out of this place of Peter proouing thence that Christ had an humane soule you therefore refusing their interpretation and collection out of this place condemne them and iustifie those hereticks 2. Augustine and Ambrose doe prooue the eternitie of Christ and coexistence with his father against the Arrians out of that place Ioh. 8. 2. which they read thus according to the vulgar latine the beginning who spake vnto you which reading indeed by the authoritie of these Fathers the Rhemists follow in their translation whereas the true reading according to the originall is Euen the same thing which I said vnto you from the beginning Doth it follow that they which refuse this their interpretation and application of this text against the Arrians doe therefore iustifie the Arrians against these godly Fathers 3. The Replier no where ascribeth blasphemie vnto Athanasius the slaunderer blasphemeth rather in so saying error he is not free from seeing he is cited by Bellarmine to prooue Christs descent to Limbus patrum which all Protestants hold to be an error howsoeuer this Antagonist staggereth at it 19. Slaunder That the flames and torments of hell fire are temporall and that eternall continuance in them is not of the essence and nature of hell torments 3. b. p. 77. If this false fellow had not hardened his face as the Adamant hee would not for shame haue thus obiected for the Replier in the first place quoted in the margen speaketh onely of the hell sorrows and torments which Christ suffered in his soule which were not eternall because of the dignitie of his person for these are the words concerning hell flames First in that they are not eternall in Christ the dignitiâ— of his person obtained for his temporall enduring of hell sorrow was as effectuall and meritorious as if they had beene perpetuall Here is no one word of the torments of hell in generall Againe in the other place these are the words The inseperable adiuncts and necessarie members of hell are these 1. the Place which is infernall 2. the Time which is perpetual 3. darkenes vnspeakable What fault can this quarrel-picker finde with these words what meane Logician knoweth not that the continuance of time is not of the essence of a thing but a necessarie adiacent or adiunct Yea these are his very owne words in an other place whose inseperable adiuncts speaking of hell are vtter darkenesse and endlesse paines 1. b. p. 3. Is he not now a wise man that reprooueth another for speaking in his owne words 20. Slaunder By which wicked and intolerable speech you send to hell not onely those which were
is taken for the soule of man 18. He saith that sixteene of the fathers cited by Bellarmine make no mention of the deliuerie of the fathers by Christs descending to hell 3. b. p. 79. whereas there are fiue of that number wanting for Bellarmine citeth in all 36. Councills and fathers of the which 25. doe either directly or by necessarie consequent affirme that Christ descended to hell to deliuer the soules of the fathers so that to make vp the full number there remaine onely an eleuen which make mention onely of Christs descending to hell and speake not of the deliuerie of the fathers and these they are Lateranens Concil Irenaeus Clemens Gregor Nyssen Chrysostome Theodoret Augustine Leo Fulgentius Vigilius Arator subdiaconus all which notwithstanding or most of them if not in those places produced by Bellarmine yet els where in their workes doe giue testimonie with the rest for Limbus patrum 19. Vntr. You flatly denie this distinction of the soules death by sinne or damnation as insufficient 3. b. p. 84. whereas the Replyer directly saith we approoue that sentence of Augustine which maketh mention onely of those two kinds of the death of the soule speaking properly though in a more generall sense the deepe perplexitie and terrour of the soule may be said to be a kind of death of the soule where the Replyer further addeth in direct tearmes I will forbeare to vse this phrase of Christs dying in soule ibid. 20. Vntr. He calleth the Replyers exposition of that place of S. Peter new fancies hauing the approbation of Augustine for the most part and of Bede more fully whereupon the Replyer inferreth that this exposition is not newly deuised Limbom p. 45. 21. Vntr. The word descending is neuer spoken of the graue 3. b. p. 139. whereas Dauid saith thus to Salomon concerning Ioab thou shalt not suffer his hoare head to descend into the graue in peace where the word iaradh is vsed which signifieth to descend and the other word sheol beside the consent of the interpreters Pag. Mont. Tremell Vatab. and the Chalde translatour and both our English translations which all read or vnderstand the graue the circumstance of the place giueth it so to be taken because he speaketh of his gray haires which goe not downe to hell but to the graue 22. He saith that all Latine interpreters turne sheol infernum hell Psal. 139. 8. p. 151. 3. b. when as Iunius readeth stratum ponerem in sepulchro if I should make my bed in the graue and so Vatablus though he reteine the word infernum in the text â—yet in his annotations he vnderstandeth it of sepulchrum the graue An other vntruth it is that all translatours and interpreters are condemned of falshood by Limbomastix when as the Replyer saith onely thus neither doe some of the best interpreters read hell but the graue ibid. 3. b. p. 151. in marg Manifest truths denied Vnto these vntruths vnshamfastly affirmed shall bee added also diuers truths as immodestly denied 1. That there is not one word through his whole booke which doth insinuate so much as any suspition of Limbus patrum 2. b. p. 5. How vntrue this is the Preface doth evidently shewe wherein the imputation of this opinion is iustified by twenty seuerall places out of this hell-harrowers bookes 2. He saith he censureth no man at all 2. b. p. 87. How false this is see before his bitter railings against Doct. Reynolds and others 3. That Bellarmine findeth not fault with Beza for traÌ„slating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cadauer in that place of Gen. 37. but in this place of the Acts p. 123. Yet Bellarmine directly affirmeth animam nunquam accipi pro cadauere that the soule is neuer taken for the carkasse and therefore consequently he findeth fault whosoeuer shall any where take anima for the carkasse or flesh and yet himselfe so taketh it Gen. 37. 21. and therefore he is contrary to himselfe 4. To say I confesse the word sheol Psal. 6. 4 5. doth properly signifie the graue when I plainly confute it is properly to belie me 2. b. p. 127. Who euer heard such a forgetfull and wilfull man for whereas he whome he confuteth readeth that place thus In hell who shall praise thee This cavillous and friuolous obiecter sheweth it should bee read rather thus who shall giue thee thanks in the pit where the word in the hebrew is sheol And hâ— further addeth by which last word all our late interpreters both Latine and English doe with one consent vnderstand the graue as beeing the ordinarie sequel of temporall death both of the good and bad but yet can extend no further then to their dead bodies onely 1. b. p. 12. Doth he not manifestly affirme that sheol is here taken for the graue and therefore findeth fault with his aduersarie for there reading hell If any then be here a lier to returne his owne vnmannerly tearme he hath made a lie of himselfe 5. He denieth that more goe to the graue then to hell 2. b. p. 128. And yet all both good and bad goe vnto the graue the place of corruption where he obiecteth that many wicked men want the honour of buriall so doe many of the godly also yet they all haue a place of rest in the earth where there bodie corrupteth Therefore it is a maruell with what face hee could denie a thing so apparant that more goe to the graue then to hell seeing it is called in Iob the house appointed for all the liuing cap. 30. v. 23. 6. He denieth that he censureth any interpreter at all or that he calleth them wranglers which take sheol for the graue in the olde testament but saith that the Replyer is rather an immodest wrangler in so saying 2. b. p. 151. And yet these are his owne words Howsoeuer some curious linguists may wrangle with the hebrew word sheol in the olde testament c. 1. b. p. 14. What now will this vaine man be ashamed to denie 7. Because it that is hades is all one with Abyssus which I confirme not by the wordes of S. Luke as you vntruely affirme but by the words of Beza himselfe vpon this place 2. b. p. 155. Now let vs see his owne words in his former booke which are these The truth whereof doth more euidently appeare in that the same Greeke word is by the same Euangelist rendred in another place by another Greeke word as Beza himselfe doth interpret it c. 1. b. p. 14. Is it not now apparant that hee first confirmeth that point by the words of Saint Luke which he indeede further explaneth by the wordes of Beza but first he citeth the Euangelist 8. No English translators turne sheol graue in this place but pit Psal. 6. 5. 3. b. p. 26. whereas the Geneua translators read thus in the graue who shall praise thee 9. To say that
these mysteries were not to be learned els where then in the Scriptures as most plainely therein expressed 14. The proceeding of the holy Ghost he thinketh also not to be expressely deliuered in Scripture 2. b. p. 170. whereas notwithstanding our Sauiour saith directly Whome I will send vnto you from the father and whome the father will send in my name Augustine would prooue it out of those wordes in the Gospel vertue went out of him for it is cleare that the holy spirit is called vertue but that other place is more euident which Augustine vrgeth also He shall not speake of himselfe and he shall receiue of mine Audire illi scire est scire ess◠à quo ergo illi essentia ab eo scientia to heare is to him to know to know is to be from whome his essence is from him his science seeing then he heareth and receiueth from the sonne he also hath his essence and proceeding from the sonne These holy mysteries of the Trinitie the coeternitie of the Sonne with the Father the proceeding of the holy Ghost the fathers take to be expressely set downe in Scripture as Bernard speaking of the mysterie of the Trinitie Non potuit expressius commendari c. It could not be more expressely commended then it is necessarie to beleeue To say therefore that these points of doctrine are not expressely deliuered is to giue way vnto those wicked heretikes the Sabellians that denied the first the Arrians the second the Macedonians the third Beside these errors adde as many more which he calleth true and sound positions beeing indeede vnsound and corrupt doctrines as is partly touched before slaund 10. and more at large els where which I will not now repeate because I am onely to deale here with this froward spirit leauing to prouoke those of more modest cariage though in some things otherwise minded Now what hath this blind obiecter of error gained to himselfe but his owne shame who reckoneth that for errour and falsitie in others which agreeth with truth and veritie and seeth not his owne grosse and erring ignorance He with a curious eye obserueth others slippes and tripping nor that neither while himselfe stumbleth and falleth downe flat the Prophet saith Woe vnto them that speake good of euill and euill of good which put darknesse for light and light for darkenesse I pray God he be not of that number Ambrose saith well talis consiliarius sit qui nihil nebulosum habeat He that aduiseth others must not bee darkened or ouercast with clouds himselfe And Hierom wel admonisheth Non confundant opera sermonem tuum Let not thy workes confound thy words And this blinde guide while he noteth other mens wandrings should not haue gone himselfe out of the way he telleth the Replyer most disdainefully and withall vntruely that hee hath neuer a good thought of his owne 2. b. p. 106. while his own heart is pestered with erroneous and malitious cogitations and no maruell for as Iosephus well saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a temperate heart is the hauen of good meditations while the heart therefore boyleth with intemperate enuie the spring head being troubled the waters issuing from thence cannot be cleane I wish hee may haue grace to see his errors and to confesse his ignorance Tully hath a good saying Cuiusuis est hominis errare nullius nisi insipientis perseuerare in errore Any man may erre but none but vnwise men continue in error Let him not thinke it folly to reuerse with iudgement what hee hath written with error It is a wise mans part rather to amend what is amisse and to straighten that which is crooked to rectifie by the line of truth that which hath beene set downe against the rule of truth and so againe I commend vnto him that worthy sentence of Cicero Optimus est portus poenitenti mutati consilij the best hauen to repentāce is to change the heart and purpose The 7. imputation of Blasphemies The accusation 1. The heauinesse which Christ felt in his soule was not through the horrour of eternall death as you and others doe blaspheme c. 2. b. p. 193. 2. Why doe you not exempt it that is the soule of Christ from all kinde of death whatsoeuer but then your blasphemous hell torments which you make a third kinde of death of the soule cannot stand 2. b. p. 91. 3. Let the godly iudge whether those your inward afflictions reach not to the height of sinne and damnation and so consequently proue your doctrine in this point to be blasphemous euen by your owne confession 3. b. p. 67. 4. By this time I trust euery well disposed Reader doth see how this your exposition of this prophesie of Dauid hardeneth the Iewes encourageth Atheists iustifieth old damned Heretiks confirmeth Saduces and Epicures which deny the immortalitie of the soule c. and finally openeth the way vnto blasphemie paganisme and all impietie 3. b. p. 51. The iustification 1. HOw iniuriously this belcher out of blasphemie dealeth with the Replyer his owne conscience if it be not seared with an hot yron knoweth there neede no other iudge for the Replyer in as plaine tearmes as hee could vtter it denieth that there was in Christ any feare of eternall death in these words Wee willingly graunt that Christ feared not hell fire nor euerlasting destruction these authorities presse not vs but rather helpe our cause for Christ neither feared temporall nor euerlasting death as these fathers witnesse and the Apostle saith he feared Heb. 5. 7. what then remaineth but that he feared the cup of Gods wrath mixed with death and as Cyprian saith before cited difficultatem extremi exitus The difficultie or hardnesse of his last passage that is in respect of Gods wrath tempered with it And in the other place quoted these are the words Though Christ neither felt nor feared euerlasting death yet he both felt and feared his fathers displeasure that causeth it What impudencie is this to vse his owne tearme for I may call a spade a spade to charge the Replyer to affirme that which he instantly denieth let the charitable reader iudge of him in the rest as he findeth his faithfull dealing here when hee quoteth any place out of the Replyers bookes not rehearsing the words suspect the like fraud This false charge then of blasphemie returneth vpon his owne head and by the lawe of retalian and equalitie he should be censured as a blasphemer for beeing a false witnesse therein against another 2. The Replyer freeth Christs soule from all kinde of death of the soule which is either by sinne or damnation though beside these a kinde of death may be affirmed to haue beene suffered by Christ in his soule in respect of the inward afflictions and perplexitie which he indured wrestling euen with the wrath of
such Ministers prouided in their roomes as heretofore for their zeale and diligence haue been excluded which haue store of milke in their breasts which seeke in peace and in a good conscience to nourish the people of God being like babes ready to starâ—e for want of such Nurses All these words inclosed as the Reader seeth are added by the Falsifier 5. The Falsifier thus forgeth that hee i. the King acknowledgeth the Romane Church to be our mother Church it is saith Limbomastix a foolish conceit and imagination 2. b. p. 28. The Replyer thus writeth a foolish conceit imagination it is that Rome should bee the mother Church and Nurserie of all the world where there is no reference at all to the Kings Maiestie neither are the words as hee repeateth them for it is one thing to say the Romane Church is our mother Church in respect of the antiquitie of the place because the Romane faith and religion before it yet declined did spread into these westerne parts another that it should be our mother Church as it now standeth corrupted in religioÌ„ it is one thing to say it is our mother Church another that is the mother Church and nurserie of all the world 6. The Confuter thus forgeth doth it follow because I say it ought to be translated to the spirits which were not which are in prison that therefore they were in hell and are not I deny your argument 2. b. p. 39. whereas hee leaueth out this other part of the Replyers argument or else hee striueth about words 7. He imagineth the Replyer to say that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell for others detained in hell and that to thinke otherwise is very absurd 2. b. p. 42. whereas the Replyer so affirmeth not out of his owne iudgement but vrgeth the Confuter with that inconuenience and concerning the inference of absurditie these are his words and not as he repeateth them I thinke he is not so absurd as to thinke he loosed them for himselfe who was neuer in the sorrowes of hell after his death 2. b. p. 36. 8. You affirme some Popish bookes to haue beene written by Protestants whereas these are the Replyers words There are bookes abroad maintaining offensiue doctrine too much declining to Poperie 9. The Replyer saith Durand maintaineth contrary to the opinion of the rest but he thus falsifieth the place Durand maintaineth an opinion contrary to all the rest where all is added the order of the words inuerted 10. You graunt that these two particles not and neither doe shew a difference of the clauses and a diuersitie of matter whereas these are the words of the Replyer here these two negatiues lo lo are vsed yet there is no great difference in these two clauses c. nor they shew no great diuersity of matter he setteth it downe negatiuely the other repeateth his words affirmatiuely 11. His glory victory and triumph remained vnaccoÌ„plished this word vnaccomplished is added of his owne 12. That Christ hath 2. kingdoms belonging vnto him one as he is God and another as he is God man but these are the Replyers words that kingdome whereof Christ promiseth to make the thiefe partaker is not that kingdome which belongeth to him as God 13. The sorrowes of hell or death had fastned on Christ but the Replyer hath the sorrows of death and the graue 14. You most grossely ouerreach your selfe so prophanly and vnchristianly to censure theâ— i. the fathers to prepare the way to a most grosse heresieâ— whereas these are the Replyers words rather this sense of the place to interpret it of the descending of Christ to hell where the disobedient persons and vnbeleeuers were giueth way and openeth a most wide gap to a most grosse heresie He doth not simply charge the fathers or any other but speaketh onely by way of comparison 15. Your bookes saith the falsifier should be in so base esteeme of all hands that many would not vouchsafe the reading of them c. nay that the labours of your sacred wit were onely vsed to beautifie walls whereas the Replyer onely hath bookes were growne into such small request c. and the labours of sacred witts â—he speaketh not of his owne bookes for he thanked be God had no cause to complaine of his owne which he doubteth not but will liue in the memorie of the world more yeares then his shall moneths or daies 16. The Replyers words are these this phrase is neither straunge nor vnusuall to say that Christ went in spirit or the spirit of Christ went seeing Noah went in the spirit of Christ which the Confuter corrupteth thus Christ went in spirit that is saith he Noah went in the spirit of Christ and yet he denieth that he corrupteth the words whereas he leaueth out this clause altogether or the spirit of Christ went which the Replyer insisteâ—â— vpon making these in a manner all one that Christs spirit preached in Noe and Noe preached in the spirit of Christ. 17. It followeth not say you Christ died not the death of the soule by sinne or damnation Ergo he can not be said to haue died in soule But the Replyer hath can not be said any waies to haue died in soule which words any waies he clippeth off 18. He chargeth the Replyer to say that many of the auncient fathers affirme that Christ was crucified in his soule where he clippeth off the Replyers words which immediatly follow that he gaue his soule a price of redemption for our soule So he saith not that many of the fathers affirme the first wherein Ambrose onely is produced but both must be put together 19. The Replyer saith this article of the present tense beeing here to be supplied and the sense not enforcing a change of time doth rather giue to be translated are then were The falsifier clippeth off all that clause and the sense not enforcing a chaunge of time and repeateth the words thus because you make a difference betweene the sense of a word expressed and a word supplied not making any mention of the enforcing of the sense and therefore all these 14. examples produced by him wherein the necessitie of the sense enforceth a participle of the time past as Matth. 1. 36. 2. 25. 5. 40. They that were with him and so in the rest are impertinent for the sense doth necessarily giue that it must be vnderstood of the time past 20. The Replyers words stand thus doth he thinke that these disobedient spirits were in hell and are not if he doe not he trifleth for the word were will helpe him nothing Now commeth this deceitfull forger and thus turneth the sentence whosoeuer thinketh that those disobedient spirits were in hell but are not is a trifler whereas the Replyer saith the contrarie if he doe not thinke so he is a trifler 21.
retention in sinne to the obstinate and so consequently in euerlasting death and damnation for so hee expoundeth that preaching to the spirits in Peter 2. b. p. 77. And now it was as hee saith to enfranchise and set at libertie And thus hee is one of those of whome the Apostle speaketh They would be Doctors of the Law and yet vnder staÌ„d not what they speake nor whereof they affirme I may apply against him the Orators words quam miserum est id negare non posse quod 〈◊〉 est confâ—erâ— how miserable a thing is it not to be able to deny that which it is aâ—â—rame to confesse He is ashamed to confesse he holdeth Limbus patrum and yet beeing pressed with his owne words he can not denie it 4. Pla. What honour is greater then his who entreth by force into his enemies pallace 〈◊〉 him of his power disfurnisheth him of his treasure and returneth victorious c. and what he meaneth by his treasure hee referreth vs to a place of Origen where he saith thus hic alligato forti c. the strong man beeing here bound vpon the crosse hee went forward into his house into the house of death into hell and tooke thence his goods that is the soules which he held 5. Pla. Ambrose is cited in these words beeing free among the dead loosing the power of death he gaue release to those which were in 〈◊〉 and what he meaneth hereby the words following shew omitted by him hee shed the light of life vpon those which were placed in hell c. 6. Pla. He saith that Christ euangelized or deliuered the glad tidings of the gospel to the dead but to whom else could the preaching of the Gospel be glad tidings but to those which had comfort and deliuerance by it And so he must be driuen to say with his great friend Pradicationem Christi c. that the preaching of Christ in hell was only for the annuntiation of that great ioy of their deliuerance to the godly soules 7. Pl. You must first prooue that they erred in holding that opinion of the deliuery of the Fathers but if he himselfe hold that to bee an error what needed any further proofe thereof 8. Pl. Hierom is cited who should say that Christ descended to hell vt vinctos de carcere dimitteret that hee might dismisse them which were bound out of prison 9. Pl. Likewise Cyril is brought in speaking to the same purpose that Christ appeared to the spirits in hell and said to those which were in bonds come forth To what purpose should he alleadge these testimonies if he consented not with them herein for men doe not vse to produce witnesses against themselues 10. Pl. He confesseth Limbus patrum but denieth it to be any part of hell to let passe saith hee your falshood beeing the falsarie himselfe and absurditie in confounding Limbus patrum with locus damnatorum the one being no part of hell as your selfe euery where preach But this is his owne preaching or rather prating for the Replyer in those places speaketh onely of Abrahams bosome not a word of Limbus If then in his opinion there was a Limbus patrum then either the fathers were deliuered thence or else they are in Limbe still for heauen or paradise I hope he will not take to be Limbus which the masters of that tearme the Romanists take for a prison and dungeon of darknes 11. Pl. Cassiodorus is brought in thus witnessing for the deliuerie of the Fathers out of hell Christ hauing bound the devill brought out those prisoners which he held in captiuitie 12. Hierome againe is thus alleadged Christ descended not into the whale but into hell to the ende that those which were in hell might be loosed from perpetuall bonds 13. Augustine also is brought to the same purpose I see no reason why we should beleeue that our Sauiour came thither but to saue some from the sorrowes and paines thereof 14. So also Origene is produced the onely begotten sonne of God descended into hell for the saluation of the world and thence brought backe againe the first man Adam 15. For the enfranchising and setting at libertie the captiues in hell he alleadgeth Ruffinus referring vs onely in generall to his exposition of the Creede in the which he directly affirmeth in these words Redijt victor à mortuis inferni spolia c. he returned a conquerour from the dead and carying with him the spoile of hell brought out those which were held of death So it seemeth that therein he concurreth with Ruffinus for the bringing out of some out of hell 16. Whereas the Article of the descension was thus set downe in K. Edwards time in the Synode held ann 1552. As Christ died for vs and was buried so it is to be beleeued that he descended into hell for his bodie lay in the graue till the Resurrection his spirit beeing sent forth from him was with the spirits which were detained in prison or in hell and preached vnto them as testifieth Peter the last clause whereof was left out by the Reuerend Fathers of this Church in their Synode ann 1562. and so remaineth still Now this man commeth and would expound the meaning of that clause omitted saying that their application of those words of Peter vnto Christs descension into hell is no other then all the auncient Fathers haue made on that place as may appeare by holy Athanasius c. But Athanasius saith he preached the Gospel or glad tidings to those which were in hell so he vnderstandeth S. Peters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So likewise Iustinus and Ireneus say descendit ad eos evangelizare salutem he descended vnto them to evangelize or bring the glad tidings of saluation as they cite the Prophet Isai wherefore if he vnderstand it according to their exposition he must hold that saluation and deliuerance was preached by Christ to some in hell 17. Place The harrowing of hell c. if you will beleeue an old ploughman in your haruest is no such matter as you take it for but such as ought to be beleeued of all Christians as containing a deepe mysterie he would father his conceit vpon an other that fauoureth it not but indeede he cunningly hereby conueieth his owne opinion as fit to be beleeued of all Christians 18. His opinion is that Iob was in hell for that place Iob 17. 13. he readeth thus hell shall be my house and I shall make my bed in the darke And further he addeth for so much as Iob was a perfect figure of Christ in many things the word bed taken in the better part doth very truely agree vnto him because though hell be a place of restlesse disquiet to the wicked yet was it to him a place of quiet rest In which words beside that in right construction the whole sentence runneth
the Orator againe saith Pergit in me maledicta congerere quasi vero ei pulcherrime priora processerint quem ego inustum verissimis maledictorum notis tradam memoriae hominum sempiternae he proceedeth still to speake euill of me as though he had sped so well in the former whome branded with the true notes of disgrace I will deliuer ouer to the euerlasting memorie of men The 2. imputation of slaunders The accusation 1. The Replyer is noted as a slaunderer because he chargeth the Antagonist to vnderstand directly by Christs death hell 2. b. p. 36. 2. He calleth it a slaunder that he is charged by the Replyer to maintaine Limbus patrum 2. b. p. 40. The satisfaction or iustification 1. THe slaunderer himselfe mistaketh the Replyers wordes which are these he directly by his death vnderstandeth hell where this word his should by the Compositor haue beene made this which missing of a letter in the word this is an ouersight of the Printer as may be seene in other places of the Replyers workes the Printer therefore setteth his death the Author wrote this death neither of them hath Christs death as he misreporteth he is therefore the slaunderer himselfe 2. Whether he be not without any slaunder or false imputation directly a Limbist it hath beene sufficiently prooued before in the preface The recrimination That eloquent declamer said well Carere debet omni vitio qui in alterum paratus est dicere he should himselfe be voide of blame that speaketh against an other with what face then could the Accuser impute that to others which he falleth into himselfe and wracke himselfe vpon that rocke which he imagineth others to runne against for here followeth a rabble of his slaunderous accusations 1. Limbomastix is become Symbolomastix that is a scourger of the Creede epist. dedic p. 10. you cunningly went about to casheere an article of the Creede 2 b. p. 166. you still labour to discreede this Article of our faith 3. b. p. 3. 179. you still labour not onely to discredit it but to discreede it also 3. b. p. 198. And in diuers other places he laieth this grieuous imputation whereas the Replyer directly saith Who denieth the article of Christs discension 3. b. p. 197. 2. That he conueyeth an appeale frō his Maiestie and the Clergie vnto the Parlament epist. p. 10. whereas the Epistle Dedicatorie to the Parlament house is directly intituled to the Lords spirituall and temporall 3. That in Synopsis he striketh at some maine points of faith shaking the foundation it selfe and calling in question heauen and hell the diuinitie and humanitie yea the very soule and saluation of Christ himselfe epist. p. 6. all which are meere slaunders the author of Synopsis holdeth all these points more soundly then this slaunderous carper neither shal he be able to fasten any such imputation vpon that booke and therefore he glaunceth ouer with this generall fiction descending to no particular 4. That the Replyer holdeth this blasphemous paradox that Christ our Sauiour suffered in his sacred soule the hellish horror and paines of the damned epist. p. 10. whereas he misliketh this phrase of speech that Christ suffered the paines of the damned and wisheth it to be forborne Synops. p. 974. err 7. 5. That he maintaineth impious and hereticall paradoxes pref p. 2. seeketh to bring in a new Puritane heresie p. 43. that neither Rhemist nor Romanist could lightly haue more disgraced the discipline and doctrine of the Church epist dedic p. 10. how falsly he hath herein slaundered the Replyer his writings alreadie extant can giue sufficient testimonie both to this age present and to posteritie that he is as farre from all heresie and popish doctrine as this Reviler is from a sober and modest man 6. That he falleth to scourging the guides and gouernors of the Church 2. b. p. 2. transformeth the order thereof into an Anarchie p. 29. that he reiecteth Ecclesiasticall authoritie euer repining at that gouernment whereby you should be ruled p. 110. But what a reuerent opinion the Replyer hath of the calling of Bishops it appeareth both by his iudgement deliuered Synops. p. 241. l. 3. wherein he confesseth in the calling of Bishops in the reformed Churches such as the Church of England is somewhat no doubt to be diuine and Apostolicall and Antilog pref to the King p. 9. where he esteemeth the calling it selfe of Bishops as one of the profitable parts of the Church As also by his practise who hath dedicated diuerse bookes vnto certaine reuerend Bishops and Prelates more I thinke then any one writer of the Church in this age hath done beside which he hath done onely of dutie and loue toward them not beeing mooued thereunto by any present fruition or future hope of any preferment either receiued at their hands or expected 7. As for personall inueighing against the writers of our Church there is none that hath more peremptorily directed his penne or more presumptuously emploied his paines then your selfe 2. b. p. 7. There is none among all the impugners of the locall discent of Christs soule to hell who hath in more disgracefull manner reproached some of the best Preachers and writers of this English Church then you haue done 2. b. p. 81. he falsly and slaunderously condemneth the doctrine and teachers of the Church for Popish vnsound corrupt erroneous yea hereticall 2. b. p. 29. you affirme some Popish bookes to haue beene written by Protestants 2. b. p. 54. All these are vncharitable slaunders 1. for he can not name one writer of the Church that the Replyer hath personally inueighed or directed his penne against 2. of like truth is it that he hath vsed reproachfull tearmes against some of the best preachers what are those reproachfull words where and when vttered 3. it is as true that he chargeth the doctrine and teachers of the Church with hereticall opinions and writing of Popish books he saith that some bookes set forth doe maintaine doctrine too much declining to Poperie which can not be denied of any of sound iudgement if these and the like positions that the Scriptures alone are not compleate to euerlasting felicitie that mans will naturally is apt without grace to beleeue that mens naturall workes are acceptable vnto God that there are workes of supererogation that to be preserued from all sinne in this life is not vnpossible and such like as they are noted els where be not doctrines too much declining to Poperie then it must be confessed the Replyer is ouerseene if they be then the wrongfull Accuser is prooued a slaunderer Doth he count these the doctrines of the Church which are directly opposite to the articles of religion established which thus affirme that the holy Scripture containeth all things necessarie to saluation artic 6. that man of his owne naturall strength can not turne and prepare himselfe
making the liuely sense and feeling of religion onely to appertaine to a Novice which is the very perfection of true knowledge and religion for a liuely sense presupposeth knowledge one may haue the knowledge and shew of religion and yet feele not the power thereof as the Apostle saith hauing a forme of religion but haue denied the power thereof in which number I feare me this enuious aduersarie is one But there can not be a liuely sense of religion without knowledge preceding as S. Paul againe saith I pray that your loue may abound yet more and more in all knowledge and sense 11. Slaund That the Replyer defendeth many things in that booke that is contrarie to the Gospel 2. b. p. 50. you conuince your selfe to be no Protestant in calling me an adversarie to Protestants p. 52. they haue neither friend nor faith left them p. 53. that some of his friends denie the Pater noster p. 76. if we must receiue no article of the Creede vnlesse it be expounded according to your sense of the Scriptures and your conceit of the Analogie of faith we may in time haue neither Creede nor Christianitie left vs. 2. b. p. 180. that he followeth prophane errour in hatred of the truth 3. b. p. 203. Vnlesse this shamelesse man were possessed with the spirit of lying and slaunder he would neuer haue laid vnto the Replyers charge to defend things contrarie to the Gospel to be no Protestant to haue no faith no Christianitie to hate the truth whose bookes if they had not more true diuinitie in one leafe then his rayling bundle in the whole packe and the author more faith and Christianitie in his serious meditations then the other in his deepest studies he would neuer set penne to paper againe nor looke any man in the face hereafter But I must here excuse my selfe with Tullie Iniuriae dolor facit me praeter morem gloriosum the sense of my wrong maketh me boast beside my wont 12. Slaund Your seldome excursions abroad against the common aduersarie can not excuse your often incursions at home against your brethren 2. b. p. 58. what will not a slaunderous tongue forge The Replyer calleth God and men to witnesse for the clearing of him in this point that he hath neither vsed often nor seldome incursions against his brethren making any challenge by name to any of them This whole Church can testifie with him that the most if not all of his writings certaine explanations of Scripture onely excepted haue beene directed against the common aduersarie of like truth is the marginal glaunce in the same place that two petitions were exhibited to the King the one with a 1000. hands the other with 1500. whereas I haue beene certenly informed and I doe verily beleeue that neither of them were subscribed with any hands at all Of the same credit is the next obiection p. 60. that the Replyer with others doe think themselues persecuted for the profession of the Gospel whereas leauing other mens complaints he most heartily thanketh God for that sweete peace which he hath enioyed in his ministerie which by Gods gracious assistance hath brought forth such fruits in the vse of his penne as he needeth not be ashamed of 13. Slaund Your words doe necessarily implie all the auncient fathers and all sound writers since together with all good Christians throughout the whole world to be popish and superstitious men c. for all these doe firmely hold the locall discent of Christs soule into hell 2. b. p. 82. Contra. 1. The Replyers wordes doe implie no such thing but the contrarie for these they are They which hold not the locall discent of Christs soule to hell should not condemne the other as prophane superstitious that are so perswaded Limbom p. 5. is not then he ashamed to inferre the contrarie that the Replyers words implie they are popish 2. The fathers opinion touching the local discent of Christs soule is farre different from his and in these fowre substantiall and materiall points 1. in respect of the place they hold he went not downe to the hell of the damned but to that part of hell where the fathers were 2. in respect of their persons that he descended not to the damned but to preach deliuerance to the fathers there detained 3. the ende is also diuerse they hold he went to deliuer 4. in the effect they differ for their opinion is that hell was emptied at Christs going downe thither and that returning from thence he brought an innumerable companie of captiues with him to this purpose Bellarmine alleadgeth aboue twentie Greeke and Latine fathers beside Councells 3. And are all sound writers and good Christians of his opinion then Calvine Bucer Beza Erasmus Sarcerius Marlorate Gasper Megander Oleviane D. Fulke D. Reynolds Sadeel Scultetus Vrsinus Bucanus with diuers others were in his blind opinion neither sound writers nor good Christians all which held the contrarie 14. Slaund That the Replyer was one of those that contradicted what reuerend B. Bilson taught concerning our redemption by the death of Christ p. 95. that he holdeth that the article of Christs descention is to be reiected out of the Creede as a new addition lately foisted into the Creede 2. b. p. 96. Contra. What will not now this malitious Accuser dare to say obiecting things as contrarie to truth as darknes is to light he might as well say that the Replyer holdeth there is no Christ nor God as accuse him to denie the redemption of mankind by the death of Christ and the article of the discension his prophane heart knew that his dissembling lippes wandring hand and erring penne consented here to make a lie 15. Slaund The fourth fault is horrible impietie in that you hereby condemne the soule of the Prophet Dauid to the very place of the damned Whereas 1. the Replyer saith in very direct words his that is Dauids soule was not at all in hell Limbom p. 24. how then is not the slaunderer ashamed thus to obiect 2. because the Replyer saith the not beeing or leauing of the soule in hell was as well performed in Dauid as in Christ Limbom p. 24. hence he doth inferre thus Dauids soule was not left in hell Ergo it was in hell whereas it is cleare that the Replyer by not leauing vnderstandeth the not beeing so our Sauiour saith to his Apostles Ioh. 14. 18. I will not leaue you comfortlesse will he hereupon conclude that they were comfortlesse but not so left 3. It is the accuser himselfe that is guiltie of this impietie that Dauids soule was if not in hell yet neare vnto hell for in these words of Dauid if the Lord had not holpen me my soule had well-nie dwelt in silence Psal. 94. 17. by silence he vnderstandeth hell in his sentence then Dauids soule was almost in
is to be expected from this man which carieth about a lie not onely in his heart but in his head And if this Chian coyner doe so forge with his hand and penne who can iudge his heart to be cleare But I will now open this pedlars packe and bring to view his sophisticate wares 1. Vntr. I doe maruell to see an Article of our Creede in so ill credit with Christians epist. dedicat p. 9. he laboureth in what he may to discreede my Christian and necessarie defence of this article of our Creede pref p. 5. Here are three vntruths couched together for what Christian denieth any article of the Creede his defence is neither Christian beeing full of vncharitable rayling and slaunders nor yet necessarie as though both other learned men had not written better of that argument and as if there were not many that could handle their penne with more wit and learning if he had held his peace 2. Vntr. In the propheticall testimonie of Dauid you will needes haue the word soule to signifie the humanitie of Christ and here that is in this place of Peter you will needes haue it to signifie the diuinitie 1. b. p. 24. Whereas in that place of Peter there is no mention made of the soule of Christ but of the spirit 3. Vntr. Bellarmine most truly defendeth with me against you c. that Christ after his death descended in soule to those places of hell where dolours and torments were and where the soules of sinners wont to be tortured 1. b. p. 35. where fowre vntruths are wrapped vp together 1. Bellarmine saith onely probabile est c. it was probable that Christ descended to all the places of hell whereas this fellow defendeth it to be an article of the Creede so to beleeue and consequently of necessitie therefore his Ringleader and ghostly father therein agreeth not with him 2. Those first are not Bellarmines but Augustines words dicit Augustinus Christum descendisse c. Augustine saith that Christ descended to those places of hell c. where dolours and torments were 3. These torments Bellarmine vnderstandeth to haue beene spoken of the purgatorie paines and not of the torments of hell restat vt loquatur de animabus quae adhuc luebant poenas purgatorias it remaineth that he Augustine speaketh of the soules which suffered purgatorie paines in fin capitis 4. The other words vbi solebant peccatorum animae torqueri where the soules of sinners were wont to be tortured are not Bellarmines but Fulgentius his words see the place 4. Vntr. Howsoeuer you bestirre your selues first to kill and crucifie the blessed soule of our Sauiour vpon the crosse 2. b. p. 35. A great slaunder with vntruth the Replyer is farre from that blasphemie to say that the soule of Christ can be killed 5. Vntr. Whose arguments are euery where seconded vrged and intruded by you 2. b. p. 44. whome with a scurrilous tearme he calleth one of his chiefest captaines and greatest masters p. 51. and euery where he calleth him the Replyers Patriarke 3. b. p. 3. and in diuers other places whereas the Replyer professeth ex animo that he knoweth not what arguments are vrged by him whome this forger noteth as hauing not read his defence and beside the Replyer did first els where write somewhat of this matter and therefore he was rather seconded by the other then did second him And how absurd and inconsequent a speech it is who seeth not to nickname him a Patriarke whome his cauilling spirit euery where inueigheth against as an impugner of the reuerend calling of Bishops 6. Vntr. That he verily beleeueth the Replyer to be one of those which writ the vnchristian letter to M. Hooker p. 49. whereas the Replyer knoweth not to this day who were the writers of that letter which he that calleth vnchristian beeing for the manner modest and for the points of doctrine there maintained sound seemeth rather himselfe to haue small Christianitie If his beleefe of Christs soule discent into hell be of no more certentie with him then this his beleefe as it may be thought verily it is not with him howsoeuer it is with others his faith and beleefe is very weake 7. Vntr. The auncient fathers doe interpret it of a mortall sinne not secretly but openly committed against others 2. b. p. 67. he meaneth that place Matth. 18. 15. If thy brother trespasse against thee c. In this indefinite speech he seemeth to meane all the auncient fathers whereas he alleadgeth not one to prooue this his assertion to be true But in deede in this his bold speech he bewraieth his ignorance mixed with vntruth for the first he is to be borne withall for his schoolemasters skill can not be supposed to be able to attaine vnto any great reading in the fathers But his other fault is not to be excused his ignorance in the fathers should haue made him doubtfull and scrupulous not bold and presumptuous but in him the prouerb is verified who so bold as blind bayard for here he hath with one breath vttered two vntruths first that the auncient fathers doe interpret this place of mortall sinne Origene I hope in his calender is one of the auncient fathers yet he expoundeth the place of light and small offences Qui in peccato levi correptus ter c. non se emendat nos quidem sic eum debemus habere tanquam publicanum c. He that in a light sinne beeing thrice reprooued c. doth not amend himselfe we must so hold him as a publicane Secondly that the fathers doe expound it of sinnes openly committed and therefore to be openly and publikly censured is an other vntruth For the author of the Homilies vpon Mathew fathered vpon Chrysostom writeth thus vpon this place Inter duos solummodo redargutionem fieri iubet c. He biddeth that the reprehension should be made betweene two alone lest by the testimony of the multitude c. he should shew himselfe more hard to bee corrected Likewise I suppose that Augustine will bee allowed for one of the Fathers but he giueth this interpretation Quid est in te peccauit tu scis quia peccauit quia enim secretum fuit quando in te peccauit secretum quaere cum corrigis quod in te peccauit What is this hath sinned against thee thou knowest that he hath sinned because therefore it was secret when he sinned against thee seeke him in secret when thou doest correct that which he hath sinned against thee Now then his owne words may bee returned vpon his owne head it was either great ignorance or grosse ouersight in you to say the ancient Fathers doe interpret it of mortall sinne openly committed 8. Vntruth That the Replyer presseth Carliles very reasons c. and acknowledgeth him for a sound interpreter p. 92. that he borroweth diuers things of
him p. 125. whereas the Replyer doth protest that he neuer yet read or so much as sawe Carliles booke but what will not euill will imagine 9. Vntruth That Bellarmine agreeth with all antiquitie in taking the Hebrew and Greeke words sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they signified onely soule and hell 2. b. p. 119. Here are three notable vntruths for neither antiquitie nor yet Bellarmine nor any learned interpreter euer tooke these two words sheol and hades to signifie the soule and hell for neither of them was euer taken by any to signifie the soule Secondly not all the auncient interpreters tooke sheol translated infernus onely to signifie hell for Cyprian vpon the Creed which is also ascribed to Ruffinus doeth take it for the graue in these words Sciendum est quod in Ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur additum descendit ad infernos c. We must knowe that in the Romane Church it is not found added in the Creed he descended to hell c. Vis tamen verbi eadem videtur esse in eo quod sepultus dicitur but the same force of the word seemeth to be in that he is said to be buried And Chrysostome also concurreth Descendit ad infernum vt ibi à miraculo non vacaret c. He descēded to hell that he should not there be without miracle for many of the bodies of the Saints rose with Christ and died againe hom 2. in Symbol Here by infernus hell hee seemeth to vnderstand that place from whence Christ raised the bodies of the dead that came out of their graues which is none other but the place of buriall and the graue And Augustine expoundeth that place Psalm 88. 3. My life draweth neere to hell by these words of Christ My soule is heauy vnto death Thirdly neither doth Bellarmine take the wordes sheol and nephesh onely to signifie hell for the first hee saith Ordinariè accipitur c. it is taken ordinarily for the place of soules vnder the earth vel raro vel nunquā pro sepulchro or seldome or neuer for the graue He simply denieth not but that it sometime signifieth the graue though not ordinarily For the other word thus he saith Nephesh est generalissim◠vox c. Nephesh is a generall word and signifieth without any trope as well the soule as the liuing creature yea the body Hee may be ashamed therefore thus to belie his ring-leader and grand captaine with whom he saith he is beholding to the Replyer for ioyning him being a learned Papist p. 119. 10. Vntruth That hee doeth fasten all the torments of hell vpon the blessed soule of our Sauiour 2. b. p. 154. wheras the Replyer simply denieth against the false charge of Feuardentius That Christ suffered in his soule the whole paines of the damned in hell 11. Vntruth That you expound in the former testimonie soule that is body hell that is graue and here spirits that is men dead that is liuing 3. b. p. 71. Here are foure vntruths fardelled vp together 1. Neither doth the Replier by soule vnderstand body but either the person or life 2. Neither by hell the graue but only sheweth that the hebrew word sheol which signifieth hell is sometime taken for the graue 3. Nor yet doth he expound spirits that is men but that they are called now spirits with S. Peter which sometime were men 4. And they which are now dead were sometime liuing 12. Vntruth Onely Beza may seeme to fauour you that is in taking soule for life 2. b. p. 118. What boldnesse is this to set downe such peremptorie negatiues as though he had himselfe runne ouer all writers both new olde What a great vntruth is it to say onely Beza when as Caluine directly affirmeth the same Neque enim anima tam spiritum immortalis essentiae significat quam vitam ipsam for the soule doth not so much signifie the immortall essence of the spirit as the life it selfe Is Caluin in his base opinion no bodie 13. It turneth Christs euerliuing soule into a dead bodie it siteth hell in the superficies of the earth maketh hell a place of corruption and there burieth the blessed soule of our Sauiour 2. b. p. 164. All these impieties and absurdities he chargeth the Replyer with for so vnderstanding that place Act. 2. 27. that Christs life seemed to be raked vp in the graue for here he hath vttered three vntruths 1. the soule beeing taken for the life turneth not the soule of Christ into the bodie but maketh the life onely to be as laid vp in the graue 2. they which take sheol here for the graue which also signifieth hell denie not but that beside this sheol in the graue there is an other also in hell sheol taken for the graue is a place of corruption not sheol when it signifieth hell 4. he is the man that burieth and shutteth vp Christs soule in hell holding and affirming that it was there three daies 14. That Durand held an opinion contrarie to all the rest of the Romanists that Christs soule descended not to hell in substance but by certaine effects p. 190. whereas Thomas Aquinas held the same in effect that Christ onely descended per realem praesentiam by his reall presence to Limbus patrum to all the other places of hell per effectum by effects and thus Bellarmine himselfe citeth him take away that conceit of Limbus patrum which to all Protestants is but a dreame and in the rest these two agree 15. Neither Protestant nor yet Papist of any account will take your part for the Papists they are fitter mates for him but diuers Protestants of great account are in this question of the Replyers iudgement as instance is giuen in twelue of them before 13. slaund therefore it is great vnshamefastnes in this brabler to vtter so vnreasonable and improbable a speech 16. He calleth A. Humes his first instructer p. 195. whereas he shall finde that the partie giuen in instance in his Reioynder hath reference vnto some of the Replyers works euen in this argument 17. Vntr. In this sense the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed euery where throughout the Bible that is is meant for the soule 3. b. p. 57. A most audacious speech and full of vntruth for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spirit is as often taken for the diuine spirit of God as for the soule of man as is euident in these places Ioh. 4. 24. God is a spirit Rom. 1. 4. declared mightily to be the sonne of God touching the spirit of sanctification 1. Tim. 3. 16. iustified in the spirit 1. Tim. 4. 1. the spirit speaketh euidently and many other such places might be produced he sheweth how shamelesse a man he is therefore that dare vent forth such a great vntruth that this word spirit euery where
his father yet hee wisheth this phrase of speech to bee forborne and discontinued therefore hee freeth the soule of Christ in effect from all kinde of death of the soule properly so called Further if it be blasphemous to say that Christ suffered some of the sorrowes and torments euen of hell in his soule what thinketh he of that propheticall saying of Dauid Psal. 18. 3. The sorrowes of hell haue compassed me and Act. 2. 24. he loosed the sorrowes of hell as the Latine interpreter readeth doth he also say that these are blasphemous speeches nay doth it not come neerer blasphemie to denie Christ to haue suffered in his soule for our soules and so to rob him of the most glorious part of his passion 3. And doth he count it also blasphemous to say that Christ suffered the inward afflictions of his soule then he most blasphemously must charge the Prophet Dauid with blaspemie who saith in the person of Christ Thy terrors haue I suffered from my youth or as the Latine interpreter whom Augustine followeth terrores tui conturbauerunt me thy terrors haue troubled mee For that diuers sayings in this Psalme are propheticall as that vers 5. free among the dead Augustine confesseth who saith also of this whole Psalme Christi vocem c. Let vs heare the voice of Christ singing in the prophesie Further when the Prophet saith he shall see of the trauaile of his soule or as the Latine interpreter because his soule laboured what other trauailes and labours of the soule were these then the spirituall and internall And is he not ashamed to say that these inward afflictions are blasphemous euen by the Replyers owne confession as reaching to sinne and damnation when as in direct words he freeth Christs soule from all sinne and damnation but not from inward afflictions Further if all inward afflictions include sinne and damnation then he wil fasten vpon S. Pauls soule sinne and damnation who confesseth he had fightings without and terrors within and so was not voide of inward and spirituall afflictions This then is the issue vpon his owne words either to denie that Christ suffered the inward afflictions and terrors of the soule which to him is inglorious in denying the most honourable part of his sufferings or if he did that he incurred either sinne and damnation which to thinke were blasphemous 4. If to vnderstand by nephesh the soule that is the life in that prophesie of Dauid Psal. 16. doe breede all those supposed inconueniences then belike the Prophet Dauid in saying My life draweth neere to hell gaue way and occasion to Atheisme impietie blasphemie for he there calleth it life not soule if those absurdities follow vpon the construction of the one place it can not be auoided in the other Againe what an absurd consequent is it that the immortalitie of the soule should fall to ground and so the Sadduces and Epicures be confirmed if it be not prooued from this place As though there be not many more places pregnant in Scripture to prooue the immortalitie of the soule And as for iustifying of olde damned heretikes let him take heede least by casting Christs soule into hell the place of the damned he make not a way for them himself for two heresies there were one that Christs soule descended into hell there to suffer the paines and torments which the damned spirits abide an other that Christ by descending into hell deliuered all which were there in torment to these heresies they come nearer which affirme Christs locall deâ—cent in soule to hell then they which denie it Then to returne his owne words by this time I trust euery well disposed Reader doth see how this your obiection of blasphemie reboundeth vpon your owne head with shame enough while he would set fire on an others tower his owne braines are pasht out with Abimelech and his serpentine obiections are deuoured of a contrarie serpent His vncharitable charge is discharged vpon himselfe it no more hurteth the Replyer then the viper that leaped vpon Pauls hand and as Diogenes wittily said of one whome he heard to raile vpon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him also beate me beeing absent so false calumniations shall no more fasten vpon the innocent then blowes vpon him that is absent And as for these so improbable and vnreasonable accusations of blasphemie I may say with the Orator Opinor eum non tam fuisse sceleratum qui fingeret nec tam furio sum qui crederet I did thinke he had not beene so leud to imagine them nor so without wit to beleeue them The Recrimination I am loath to set vpon this chafing Challenger and to charge him in the same kinde It is no small matter to lay vpon any the imputation of blasphemie seeing the greatest sinne in the world is called by this name But seeing he which prouoketh is the beginner of the battell and the defender doth but take the chalenge I hope the fault is the lesse if I shall answer him in his owne kinde and beate him with the weapon which he hath chosen It was a good excuse which Tullie vseth in answearing Salusts inuectiue Si mihi forte offendimini iustius huic quam mihi succensere debetis qui initium introduxit If ye perhaps be offended with me ye ought to be more iustly incensed against him then me because he began the quarrell 1. His presumptuous speeches and some of them tending to blasphemie in part are these 2. b. p. 8. I will comfort my selfe with that saying of our Sauiour de bono opere lapidor I am stoned for my good worke what presumption is this to compare himselfe a sinnefull man with the holy person of Christ and his intemperate slaunderous railing and vncharitable writings with Christs most heauenly sermons and miracles 2. He confesseth that Christ looâ—ed the sorrows of hell for himselfe 2. b. p. 37. then it must follow that he was in the sorrows of hell before he loosed them whether he saith in soule he descended for the knot must first be tied before it be loosed but this he himselfe in many places counteth a blasphemie to affirme before blasph 2. 3. 3. The word openly prooueth that it was no triumph at all vpon the crosse for that conquest vpon the Crosse was openly an ouerthrow and therefore no triumph And againe a little after If Christ triumphed on the Crosse as you say he did it was according to the proverbe triumphus ante victoriam a triumph before victorie 2. b. p. 188. What a derogation is this to the triumphant and victorious crosse of Christ thus contrarie to the Scriptures to say that it was an ouerthrow rather then a triumph seeing the Apostle thus witnesseth that he might destroy thorough death him that had power ouer death that is the Deuill If the Deuill were destroied by the death of Christ then was he conquered and ouerthrowne how then did he not
tremble to say that the conquest vpon the crosse was openly an ouerthrow and did not our Sauiour himselfe say vpon the crosse It is finished what els was finished but the redemption of mankind in deliuering of mankinde from the kingdome of Satan And was his heart so prophanely caried with the spirit of derision to scoffe at Christ by that vsuall prouerbe triumph before victorie this is a more heinous offence then Ismaels was to scoffe at Isaak He may remember whome he scornefully calleth Ismaelites 2. b. p. 18. Such an Ismaels tricke shall he not finde in all their writings it were better they were all set on a light fire then that their pennes should be stained with such impietie God mollifie his hard heart that he may in time repent him of this so great iniquitie 4. As the theefe was partaker of Christs humanitie in suffering with him on the crosse◠so he was partaker with him in all his deitie 2. b. p. 199. to this ende he tooke vpon him our humane nature that we might be capable of his diuine substance p. 203. if we should not communicate with Christ in all his glorie c. we should be no better then the wicked 2. b. p. 205. What harsh stuffe is this and fit to be waighed in the ballance of blasphemie that we shall be partakers of Christs diuine nature as he was of our humane and so the Saints shall become Gods with Christ as he was made man with vs. 5. Resurrection is attributed by Peter as well to Christs soule returning out of hell as to his bodie rising out of the graue 3. b. p. 38. What a strange paradox is this In the Creede we are taught to beleeue the resurrection of the bodie but the resurrection of the soule in the next world was yet neuer heard of neither hath Peter any such meaning for that was raised of Christ which rested in hope but it was his flesh not soule that rested in hope Act. 2. 26. that is raised which before was sowne by death but the bodie onely was so sowne not Christs soule both these propositions are S. Pauls that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die 1. Cor. 15. 36. so also is the resurrection of the dead 24. it is sowne a naturall bodie and is raised a spirituall bodie v. 44. How farre now is he from bringing death vpon Christs soule which could not be quickened in the resurrection except it first died which he himselfe counteth blasphemie 6. Is there not a most plaine distinction betweene the holy Ghost who foretold and Christ who endured these afflictions and that not in person onely which is the point I stand vpon but in nature also I meane his diuiue nature c. 3. b. p. 94. Doth hee not here manifestly affirme that there is a plaine distinction betweene the holy Ghost and Christ not in person onely but in his diuine nature was this doting diuine well aduised thus to write What Macedonian heretike would haue written more in disgrace of the holy Ghost then to say he is distinguished from Christ euen in his diuine nature 7. And as hee dealeth with Christ himselfe the like measure he offereth his seruants for thus irreuerently hee writeth of Peter you thinke all men to be vncleane impure in comparison of your selues which was partly Peters error Act. 10. 2. b. p. 107. But doth hee speake as he thinketh had Peter such an opinion of himselfe as to thinke al men vncleane and impure beside Peter onely held as yet them of the vncircumcision to be vncleane not of any singularitie of opinion but because it was not yet reuealed to him 8. Thus also hee serueth the Prophet Dauid making him almost in hell for that place Psal. 94. 14. If the Lord had not holpen mee my soule had almost dwelt in silence This place of silence he ignorantly vnderstandeth of hell 2. b. p. 149. yet falsly printed 159. But Dauid else-where declareth his hope that he was sure neuer to goe to hell when I awake I shall be satisfied with thine image Psal. 17. 15. This holy Prophet now is much beholding to this pragmatical Nouelist in placing him almost in hell 9. The like censure hee giueth of that holy man Iob vnderstanding those his word◠the graue or hell saith hee shall bee mine house and I shall make my bed in the darke Iob. 17. 13. of hell for the graue is neuer called the place of darkenesse 3. b. p. 152. and herein hee maketh Iob a figure of Christs beeing in hel p. 153. What iniury doth this vnholy glossograph offer to this holy man who was most sure he should neuer goe to hell thus professing his faith I am sure my Redeemer liueth c. Iob. 19. 25. 10. And to end where I began with his hard vsage as toward the seruants so against the Lord and master himselfe these words of Peter quickened in the spirit hee applyeth to Christs soule in this sense that hee was not made aliue in soule but kept or preserued aliue 2. b. p. 85. and alleadgeth to this purpose other places where the word is so taken as Nehemiah speaking of the heauens earth saith thou preseruest them and Saint Iames saith receiue the word with meekenesse c. which is able to saue their soules Now then if Christs soule be said to bee preserued aliue in either of these senses as in the first then was it saued from death and mortalitie and corruption as the heauens and earth are and so the soule of Christ should not be immortall of it owne nature but by speciall preseruation if he take it in another sense to be saued as our soules are which is from damnation then it will follow that Christs soule was subiect to damnation as ours are without him and so had neede of saluation which way soeuer he saith his soule was saued aliue hee must needes incurre most horrible blasphemie Here I may now fitly apply Hieroms words vttered against Heluidius Illud dico praeveniens gloriae mihi fore tua maledicta cum eodem qu◠Mariae detraxistiore me laceres caninam facundiam servus domini pariter experiatur mater This I say aforehand that your railing will bee a glory vnto me when as you tare me with the same mouth whereby you backbite Marie that both the seruant of the Lord and his mother may together haue experiēce of your doggish eloquēce But I may say more that the seruant neede not thinke much to be slaundered when as the Lord himselfe is blasphemed I am sory in my heart God is my witnesse that this man was so farre carried in his vncharitable heate as not onely to breake charity toward men but to violate pietie also toward God and let him remember what the Apostle saith It is a fearefull thing to fall into the hands of the liuing
the diuell vpon the crosse but also derogate from his blessed death and passion c. 2. b. p. 189. the same contradiction is againe obiected 3. b. p. 156. 9. You affirme in an other place that the theefe made request to Christ as man and not as he was God c. now your self dare not defend your former opinion but say that Christ spake this as he was the Messias wherein as you delight in contrarietie c. 2. b. p. 195. 10. Herein you contradict your selfe for in the former â—ection you say that Christ is with vs in respect of his Godhead but we with him as he is our Messias 3. b. p. 9. 11. You contradict your selfe herein many waies for before p. 9. you acknowledge this reading of the sorrowes of hell to be the true reading c. how then can you say here that Christ onely suffered the sorrowes of the first death 3. b. p. 25. 12. The Reader may see how vnlearnedly you condemne that for an error in Bellarmine for saying that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell for others not for himselfe which your selfe defend for a truth 13. We say not saith the Replyer that Christs bodie felt sorrowes in the graue but was vnder the sorrowes or bandes of death and yet your selfe meaning the Replyer in the former section make it all one to be vnder the sorrows of hell and to suffer them 14. Your minor or assumption containeth grosse error and contradiction in that it implieth Dauids soule to haue beene sometime in hell because it was not left in hell it is your owne reason and indeede most true 15. Your contradiction is in that you say in your proposition that this prophesie of Dauid Psal. 16. was wholly performed in Christ. Againe in an other place you say that this prophesie is so applied to Christ as it must first be true in Dauid vpon which supposition you inferre thus well then first Dauids soule is in hell and then it must be in the lowest hell c. 16. You say the whole is a peculiar prophesie of Christ not partly of him partly of Dauid and presently after that this prophesie typically agreeth to Dauid 17. There is no more necessitie here by flesh to vnderstand the whole humanitie of Christ his soule and bodie then in that place of S. Paul Rom. 1. 3. Christ was made of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh c. if the soule should necessarily be comprehended vnder the name of flesh it would follow that Christ receiued his soule of the seede of Dauid and so anima should be ex traduce 3. b. p. 61. And yet in an other place the Replyer speaking of the very same place saith Here whole Christ is described vnto vs as God and man the soule then of Christ is comprehended vnder the name of flesh or els it is excluded and so the Apostle should set before vs an vnperfect Christ. 3. b. p. 62. 18. You contradict your selfe herein in iustifying that for a veritie because the Replyer saith to what purpose rather should Christ be thought to preach to the spirits in hell then for their comfort which you condemne a little before for a most grosse heresie namely that by Christs descending into hell the incredulous persons beleeued 19. You grossely contradict your selfe in an other place where you affirme that the doores opened and gaue way vnto Christ when he entred and yet you say here that they were shut in the very instance of his entrance 20. In euery place you defend that by prison in this place of Peter hell and the infernall place of darkenes is to be vnderstood and doe you now recant it and bring vs an other signification of sinnes and errors 21. The Replyer saith hauing cited that place of the Prophet Dauid Psal. 139. 15. thou hast fushioned me in the lower parts of the earth I trust they will not say he was borne in hell 3. b. p. 134. And yet in the first testimonie you that is the Replyer bring S. Ambrose to prooue that by these very words of the Prophet Dauid we ought to vnderstand Christs descending to hell 3. b. p. 140. see the same contradiction vrged 3. b. p. 183. 22. Bearing vs in hand that Bernard acknowledgeth no further descension of Christ then to death c. and yet in an other place you are driuen in the ende vtterly to forsake and reiect him as one carried away with the error of his time in thinking that Christ in his soule after death went locally downe into hell 22. In the former place you say that Bernard goeth not beyond Christs death nor findeth any further degree of descension after that and yet that he maketh here one degree to be his descending to the graue for I am sure that you wil not say he was buried before he was dead 3. b. p. 160. 23. Before in this place you will needes haue the lower parts of the earth to be meant of the crosse death and graue 3. b. p. 170. and yet here you say that the parts of the earth are not compared with it selfe but considered as parts of the world in respect whereof they may be called lower or lowest parts 3. b. p. 163. And againe to descend to the lower parts of the earth is to descend from heaâ—en to earth and yet other where you defend that by descending into the lower parts of the earth is meant Christs descension to death and the graue so that you doe here notably contradict your selfe vnlesse you make this world to be all one with death and the graue 24. You told vs before that there is none of the auncient fathers which speaketh of the descension of Christs soule to hell but addeth withall that it was to this ende to deliuer the soules of the fathers from thence 3. b. p. 193. and yet you say neither did all the fathers agree in iudgement that Christ descended into hell to redeeme the soules of the fathers p. 190. what truth can there be in your words when you thus blow hoate and cold with one breath 25. You change me before to haue misalledged Calvin for Christs descension into hell in that place of Peter whereas you alledge him here your selfe to the same purpose The iustification 1. THis Contradicter hath found out a new kinde of reasoning neuer heard of before that in a proposition where two questions are included together the second can not be denied before the former be graunted As the question beeing whether Christ descended to Limbus to deliuer the fathers one in his logike can not denie that he descended to that ende vnlesse first he graunt that he descended to Limbus by the same reason he that saith that an Idol must not be bowed vnto to worship it doth graunt that it may be bowed
his glorie victorie and triumph onely remained so that he fraudulently putteth in vnaccomplished of his owne The Replyer saith that Christ triumphed ouer death hell and the deuill vpon the Crosse that is the victorie and triumph was then obtained and yet his glorie victorie and triumph remained that is it was not yet manifested and published for this word triumph though it properly signifie the publike solemnitie that followeth after the victorie as the Romane Captaines had their honourable triumphs publikely solemnized in the Citie after their victorious returne in which sense he that so triumphed was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a triumphant man yet in Scripture they are saide to triumph that doe ouercome as Paul saith Thankes be to God which alwaies makes vs to triumph in Christ where the same word is vsed and yet the glorious and proper triumph of the Saints is in the kingdome of heauen As Christ now triumpheth in his members in preuailing and ouercomming so he triumphed vpon the Crosse in obtaining the victorie And if any derogate and detract from the blessed death and passion of Christ it is this Contradicter and detracter who a little before said that Christs conquest vpon the Crosse was openly an ouerthrow and therefore no triumph And againe If he triumphed on the Crosse it was a triumph before the victorie 2. b. p. 188. 9. And are these speeches to make request to Christ as man and as the Messiah contrarie is there in them any contrarietie at all are the manhoode of Christ and the person of the Messiah contrarie or when it is said as man is he so absurd to thinke that Christ is considered as man without his Godhead and not as vnited with it in the person of the Messiah or when himselfe saith that the theefe made request to him as God doth he meane his Godhead without his humanitie And is S. Paul contrarie to himselfe when not in diuers but in one and the same place he ioyneth both together there is one God and Mediatour betweene God and man the man Iesus Christ that is the Messiah Doth not the Replyer in direct wordes expound himselfe that these wordes must not be vnderstood of the presence of Christ in heauen in respect of his Godhead onely but of his whole person as the Mediatour But it may be he tooke this exception because he enclineth to his cousin germanes opinion that Christ exercised his mediatourship as man onely not as both God and man and therfore noteth this as a contradiction and contrarietie 10. It is not the former sect which is the 16. but the 15. sect where the Replyer saith wee are said to be with him as the Messiah and doth hee not say the selfe same thing here for hauing rehearsed those words of our Sauiour Ioh. 17. I will that they which thou hast giuen mee be with me where I am and then follow the other words that they may behold my glory which thou hast giuen me he addeth in very direct words Doth hee not here speake also of that glorie which was giuen him as the Messiah How could then this humorous Contradicter so much as dream of any contradiction here but it seemeth his wits went a woole-gathering when he noted this for in the next sentence before in stead of confuting the Replyers reasons he repeateth and confirmeth them for whereas the Replyer brought this as one if Christ saying where I am speake of his Godhead his request was euen then fulfilled for his Apostles were with him then present as God 3. b. p. 5. This cōfused Confuter steppeth forth and saith secondly if they were with him as God then was Christs prayer vnto his father in vaine to graunt them that which they presently enioyed 3. b. p. 9. Is not this the very same reason vrged before by the Replyer to proue that Christ speaketh not of his Apostles being with him as God for could he not see how vpon his words it may be assumed but Christs prayer vnto his father was not in vaine therefore hee prayeth not they should be with him as God And thus hee hampereth himselfe and woundeth his owne cause 11. It is vntrue that either in that place Limbom p. 9. or in any other the Replyer acknowledgeth sorrowes of hell Act. 2. 24. to be the true reading he only thus saith the hell that Christ went vnto he loosed the sorrowes of Act. 2. 24. which place hee citeth not for the name of hell but for loosing of the sorrowes because euen in the Confuters opinion that which is called hell v. 27. is named death v. 24. And the Replyer is so farre in that place from iustifying that reading of hell in the 24. verse that he would convince by this reason that hell is not meant no not in the 27. verse because it would then follow that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell there which had seized vpon him As vntrue it is that the Replyer in that place goeth about to prooue that Christ suffered the sorrowes of hell in his sense but rather declineth it as an absurdity But in another place he inferreth that conclusion grounding his argument vpon the latine text which the Romanists make their onely authentike translation and therefore it is a good text against them 12. To say that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell the place of the damned for himselfe the Replyer counteth it absurd and yet to say that the sorrowes of death which Saint Peter speaketh of and Bellarmine readeth hell were not loosed for Christ is contrary to the text as there he sheweth by diuers reasons hereupon no contradiction can be inferred but this followeth that the death which Saint Peter speaketh of the sorrowes whereof were loosed for Christ cannot be vnderstood of hell 13. That it is all one to say that the soule is vnder the sorrowes of hell and doth suffer them beeing full of sense and feeling and yet that it is not all one for the body in the graue to be vnder the sorrowes and bands of death and to feele or suffer them because it is senslesse implyeth no contradiction 14. Not to be left in a place the word beeing taken properly for to be forsaken implyeth a being first in the place and in that sense the Replyer thus reasoned Christ was not left or forsaken in hell ergo he was in hell but in this other place by not leauing he vnderstandeth not beeing but the not beeing or leauing of the soule in hell c. And so is the word sometime vsed as Ioh. 14. 17. I will not leaue you comfortlesse that is you shall not bee comfortlesse for otherwise in the other sense of this word it might be inferred Ergo they were comfortlesse but were not so left or remained And so in a certaine place Origen taketh the not leauing in hell for the not beeing in hell sine dubio neque nostras animas derelinquet in
inferno c. without doubt as he left not Christs soule in hell so shall hee not leaue our soules in hell c. and he which called him from hell after the third day shall also call vs in due time 15. 16. To say that this whole prophecy of Dauid was onely historically true of Christ and yet typically agreed to Dauid is no contradiction hath he so forgotten his Logike principles as that he remembreth not that euery contraritie and opposition must be secundum idem ad idem in regard of the same part or place and in one the same respect But where the Replyer inferreth first Dauids soule is in hell hee reasoneth ex concessis because the Romanists doe hold that Dauids soule with the rest of the fathers was in hell 17. It is euident by the reason here set downe concerning the originall of Christs soule which cannot bee said to be ex traduce to bee deriued by propagation as the body is without great inconuenience and in a manner impossibilitie that the Replyer reuersed his former iudgement concerning the exposition of the word flesh Rom. 1. 3. that howsoeuer in some other places it is taken for the whole nature of man consisting of soule and body yet it cannot bee so taken there for the former reason And herein the Replyer followeth Augustines iudgement who against the Apollinarists that held Christ onely to haue taken humane flesh without a soule grounding their error vpon those words Ioh. 1. The word was made flesh abiecteth that place of Scripture all flesh shall see the saluation of God and the like where flesh comprehendeth the whole nature of man yet against Felicianus the Arrian which asked the question why the habite of the sonne of God might not animate Christs flesh in stead of a soule reasoneth after this manner that if Christ tooke not also an humane soule one of those fower must followe it was either for that he thought the soule of man to bee innocent but that could not be because sinne is voluntary and so incident properly to the soule or that it belonged not vnto him which also is otherwise seeing God is the creator of soules or for that he could not heale the soule thē should he not be omnipotent or because the soule was abiect and vile but that is not so as he addeth in the same place to this effect that the flesh was not formed by the breathing in of God as the soule was but of the slime of the earth Here then is no contradiction but a reuocation or qualification rather of his former opinion concerning the interpretation of one word in one place which the Replyer taketh to be no disgrace vnto him hauing altered his minde therein before this cauiller found it out seeing hee himselfe affirmeth the like but vntruely of a Reuerend Prelate of this land that he retracted his iudgement in a waightier matter in the expounding of that difficult and obscure place of Saint Peter This is the onely place which he had any colour of reason to obiect 18. The Replyer affirmeth not out of his owne opinion that Christ preached in hell to the disobedient spirits for their comfort but hee vrgeth it as an inconuenience which followeth vpon their interpretation that say that Christ went and preached in hell and the same absurdity is pressed by Augustine epist. 99. what grosse blindnesse then is this in him not to discerne when the Replyer deliuereth his owne iudgement by way of position and when he presseth the aduersarie by way of obiection 19. The doores were shut vp in the very instant of Christs entrance that is not onely before but at that very instant when Christ began to enter and yet the doores opened and gaue way to Christ when he entred here is no contradiction for first it is said in the instant of his entrāce that is he found them shut when he began to enter then it is said when he entred that is while he was going in is it not euident that a difference of the instant time is here noted one wherein hee found the doores shut beeing to enter the other succeeding when the doores opened as he entred it is lost time that is spent with such a trifler 20. The Replyer still without altering of his iudgement vnderstandeth by prison in that place of Peter hell yet he produceth expositions of some of the fathers which by prison vnderstand the bands of sinnes and errors out of the which the prisoners were deliuered to shew that herein though not in euery point they make for the Replyer vnderstanding the deliuering of prisoners of preaching to the liuing for their cōuersion not to the dead as the Confuter doth Is there not here now great contradiction 21. The Replyer alleadgeth the testimony of Ambrose that so expoundeth the lower parts of the earth of hell not to that end but onely to shew that he vnderstandeth Christs descension to hell of the presence of his diuine power there 2. b. p. 12. Is it necessarie when a testimony is produced to one ende that whatsoeuer is contained there beside should be acknowledged Then he himselfe cannot auoide it but hee must needs goe for a maintainer of Limbus for he bringeth in Ambrose 3. b. p. 169. and Augustine and Origen p. 193. affirming the same as appeareth by their testimonies as he alleadgeth them such measure as he meateth shal be measured to him againe 22. To affirme that Bernard in one place findeth no further descension of Christ then vnto death and yet that in another beeing carried away with the error of those times he holdeth the descension of Christs soule to hell is no contradiction neither would this iangling sophister haue thought so if he had remembred the lawes of opposition and contradiction whereof I touched two before secundum idem ad idem where as he failed in the latter I affirming Dau. prophecy to be true of Christ one way i. historically of Dauid another i. typically and therefore it was without any contradiction so he faileth here in the other because Bernard is said to affirme diuers things but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same part and place 23. As though when Bernard maketh the third degree of descending to bee admortem vnto death his descending to the graue be not there implyed for otherwise he descended not from the crosse to die for he yeilded vp his spirit vpon the crosse And this Bernard sheweth by the words following nunquid amplius potuit Behold how farre he descended could he doe any more but if hee meant nothing else but his death vpon the crosse excluding the graue our Sauiour Christ both might haue done more and did more for vs not onely in dying but in being buried for vs. 24. And doth not the descending of Christ to the crosse and graue include also and imply his descending to the earth vnlesse you thinke that his crosse and graue
was not in the earth thus much also the Replyer noted foreseeing and preuenting this obiection the other two expositions that is of Christs descending to the earth then to the crosse and graue may well agree and stand together and he that affirmeth the one denieth not the other Limbo p. 52. These two then were two degrees of Christs humiliation and descension his taking vpon him the forme of a seruant and beeing obedient to the death of the crosse as S. Paul obserueth Philip. 2. 7 8. 25. The Replyer saith againe that there are none of the fathers which speake of Christs descension to hell but held it was to that ende to deliuer the fathers and yet some of the fathers differ in iudgement for they hold that place where the fathers were not to haue beene any part of hell but Paradise as Origen Chrysostome Augustine is here now any contradiction for they which hold the Patriarchs to haue beene in Paradise and not in hell speake not of Christs descension to hell but to Paradise to illuminate the fathers 26. What a strange fellow is this to say that I alleadge Calvin my selfe for the same purpose for which he alleadged him namely to prooue the local descension into hell whereas I alleadge Caluin Beza and Iunius to the contrary 3. b. p. 191. Limbom p. 59. Thus hath this busie body troubled himselfe to spie faults where he could find none Such Seneca compareth to the restles Ants quae in summuÌ„ cacumen deinde in imum aguntur which creep vp downe vpon trees from the top to the bottome and finde no resting place And Aristo in Plutarke to the windes which do vncouer our garments which of all other are most troublesome Such are they which hunt vp and downe to seeke others disgrace and to vncouer their nakednesse not being able to hide their owne vncomelinesse Augustine doeth fitly resemble the enuious man to the worme which did breed in Ionas gourd so still hee gnaweth vpon others credit and fretteth at their well-doing and where he cannot ouercome with wrestling seeketh to supplant by fraud and as Augustine saith Aliorum gloriam facit suam poenam Maketh anothers fame his owne â—ane as shall nowe appeare in the returning of this accusation The Recrimination 1. This Contradicter findeth fault with the Replyer as though he should say that eternall continnance in them is not of the essence and nature of hell torments Synops. p. 1014. 3. b. p. 77. whereas he onely saith the inseperable adiuncts and necessary members of hell are these 1. the place which is infernall 2. the time which is perpetuall 3. the darkenesse vnspeakable And hee himselfe confesseth as much whose that is of hell inseperable adiuncts are vtter darkenesse and endlesse paines 2. Hee saith it is Iudaisme to apply the prophecy of Dauid Psalme 16. to any but to our Sauiour Christ. 3. b. p. 41. And yet hee himselfe graunteth that the prophecy of the ascending of Christ and leading captiuity captiue which is as peculiar to the ascension of Christ as the other concerneth his resurrection is literally spoken of King Dauid himselfe c. but prophetically meant of Christ our Sauiour 1. b. p. 57. 3. Hee saith that the Creede was made and composed by the Apostles themselues 2. b. p. 182. but else where he saith it was made either by the Apostles themselues as the auncient fathers doe thinke or by Apostolike men as all diuines confesse 1. b. p. 5. If it were made by Apostolike men then not by the Apostles which he certainely affirmed before 4. Hauing recited that place Psal. 6. 4 5. O Lord deliuer my soule for 〈◊〉 death there is no remembrance of thee who shall giue thee thankes in the pit which word hee whome he confuteth translateth hell he thus inferreth by the which last word all our late interpreters both latine and English doe with one accord vnderstand the graue as beeing the ordinary sequell of temporall death 1. b. p. 12. Here he vnderstandeth in this place temporall death whereof the graue is an ordinarie sequell and yet in the next page following he affirmeth the contrary wherefore death in that place cannot signifie the seperation and dissolution of the soule from the body which is onely temporall but the diuorcement and sequestration both of body soule from God 1. b. p. 13. 5. Neither can this word graue signifie any other place then the place of corruption and mortality 1. b. p. 12. And yet the word avad Psal. 88. 10. which the Septuag translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine in sepulchro in the graue hee saith is meant of hell 3. b. p. 28. 6. Who shall giue thee thankes in the pit Psal. 6. 5. by which last word all our late interpreters doe with one consent vnderstand the graue c. which can signifie no other place then the place of corruption and mortalitie 1. b. p. 12. And againe no English translators turne sheol graue in this place but pit which most fitly and truely agreeth to hell 3. b. p. 26. thus in the same place the same word shall signifie both the graue and hell 7. He fondly reprooueth the Replyer for running from the new Testament to the Old and from the Greeke to the Hebrew 2. b. p. 120. you well perceiued the Greeke was vtterly against you and therefore cunningly but cowardly you forsake it and flie to the Hebrew ibid. p. 121. yet he himselfe doth the same which to be so in this place if you will graunt the Hebrewes to haue had any skill in their owne naturall language you must needes confesse 1. b. p. 16. Is it lawfull for him to haue recourse vnto the Hebrew writers and a fault in the other to runne vnto the Hebrew Scriptures 8. Now if you take exception saith this Contradicter against this reading as mistranslated in all our Bibles which I see not by what right you can doe beeing publikely authorised 1. b. p. 26. and 2. b. p. 130. he calleth it an authorised translation yet he himselfe most scornefully reiecteth the great English Bible authorised publikely to be read as hath beene shewed before Imputat 8. recriminat 6. 9. He findeth fault with the Replyer for translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tell him his fault as the Geneva translation and great Bible readeth 2. b. p. 67. yet he himselfe translateth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tell thy neighbour roundly of his fault ibid. p. 71. 10. He saith that faithfull perseuerance in pietie is the finall possession of the land of promise 2. b. p. 113. and yet els where he denieth that the true ioyes of heauen may be in this world 2. b. p. 207. for if a man by faithfull perseuerance hath in this life a sure hope and by hope possession of heauen how hath he not some true
sense of the ioyes thereof 11. That sheol was alwaies taken to signifie hell onely 2. b. p. 119. and yet els where he confesseth that the same word Psal. 6. 5. translated the pit is taken for the graue the sequele of temporall death 1. b. p. 12. 12. He readeth thus Exod. 21. 23. He shall pay life for life not soule for soule 2. b. p. 14. the Hebrew word is nephesh which in an other place he saith was alwaies taken onely to signifie soule 2. b. p. 119. 13. In that the Replyer saith that the glorie victorie and triumph remained that is the manifestation and accomplishment of it after Christ had said Consummatum est it is finished this Contradicter saith you doe greatly derogate from his blessed death and passion for if he obtained not victorie ouer those enemies vpon the crosse then are they yet vnconquered and consequently mans redemption vnperformed 2. b. p. 189. And yet a little before he denieth that Christ triumphed vpon the crosse for that conquest saith he vpon the crosse was openly an ouerthrow and againe so that if Christ triumphed vpon the crosse as you say he did it was according to the prouerb a triumph before victorie ibid. p. 188. who could imagine that he should haue such a sihttle and crazie braine as in the compasse of tenne lines to affirme and denie the same thing 14. It is the Obiecter not I that so taketh it that is the soule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the whole person and yet a little after forgetting himselfe he saith I graunt that the word soule beeing ioyned with the bodie may be taken for the whole person 15. Whereas the Replyer vnderstandeth those words of S. Peter that Christ shall be the Iudge of the quicke and the dead 1. Pet. 4. 5. of those which are now dead but shall be aliue at the comming of Christ he thus friuolously obiecteth that then we must correct an article of the Creede and say that Christ shall come to iudge the quicke and not the dead 3. b. p. 71. And yet afterward within two lines he saith as the dead shall be liuing then so the liuing now shall be then dead where beside his absurditie and contradiction to Scripture that the liuing now shall be dead at Christs comming whereas the Apostle saith that the liuing shall not preuent them that sleepe c. and the dead in Christ shall rise first he crosseth himselfe in altering and chaunging the article after his owne fancie that Christ shall be Iudge of the dead and quicke 16. He saith that these words of Origene doe they not read what is written of their hope that perished in the flood 1. Pet. 3. can not conuince him of that most grosse heresie recorded by Augustine that some thought by Christs descending to hell the incredulous persons beleeued and all were deliuered thence 2. b. p. 76. And yet he himselfe chargeth Origene in the next page following with a more grosse heresie that he thought the very damned in the ende should be saued themselues ibid. p. 77. 17. He would confute the Replyer for defending that the true ioyes of heauen may be perceiued in this life 2. b. p. 207. and yet he saith that Paul beeing rapt into the third heauen beheld the very essence of God 2. b. p. 205. I hope then he saw the true ioyes of heauen and S. Paul at that time had not resigned this life 18. The Saints shall not see God so perfectly as he is visible in himselfe 2. b. p. 204. And yet afterward he saith they shall see him in plaine manner and in perfect measure ibid. p. 205. thus they shall see him perfectly and yet not perfectly 19. None of his elect are with him during their aboad in this life otherwise what meant S. Paul to say I desire to be dissolued and to be with Christ if he were with him without dissolution c. 3. b. p. 4. yet in an other place he misliketh that saying of the Replyer that Christ is saide to be with vs in respect of his Godhead c. but we are said to be with him as our Messiah as S. Paul saith I desire to be dissolued and be with Christ he calleth this assertion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. b. p. 198. and yet in the other place approoueth the same himselfe 20. What shall the simple and vnlearned doe when they heare those Bibles which haue beene allowed by publike authoritie of this Realme and openly read in our Churches these 46. yeares to be condemned by some Ministers and Preachers among vs for false erroneous and iniurious to the word of God c. 3. b. p. 46. And yet he himselfe chargeth the same Bibles with errors in the text and with blasphemie in some of the annotations 3. b. p. 49. 21. He saith that Noe was no preacher at all in any other sense then all other godly men are namely in doing the works of righteousnes 3. b. p. 109. and yet a little after it followeth with this construction the Latine word praeco vsed by all translatours in that place doth most fitly agree which doth properly signifie him that maketh open proclamation of a thing as an Herauld or trumpetter as Alexander called Homer the trumpetter or sounder out of Achilles prowes ibid. p. 110. If Noe were in this sense a proclaymer of righteousnes as Homer was of Achilles valure it was not a mute and dumbe but a vocall proclayming and preaching thereof which he denied before 22. You will neuer prooue that there was any other descension but this he meaneth the descension into hell whereof he spake immediatly before 3. b. p. 155. And yet afterward he confesseth two descensions descensions of Christ in the new Testament are none mentioned sauing these two onely ibid. p. 157. he meaneth the descension from heauen to earth and from thence to hell 23. Those wordes of the Prophet in thy presence is fulnes of ioy Psal. 16. 11. are not meant of the Godhead of Christ but of the glorie which his manhood was to receiue at his resurrection 3. b. p. 165. here he confesseth there was glorie due vnto Christ as God and glorie which he receiued as man but els where he denieth that there was one kingdome that is glorie due vnto Christ as God an other as he was the Messiah 2. b. p. 201. 24. He saith that there is a plaine distinction between the holy Ghost c. and Christ not in person onely c. but in nature also I meane his diuine nature 3. b. p. 95. but afterward he better remembring himselfe saith I distinguish onely the person of Christ from the holy Ghost ibid. p. 96. 25. He saith mans perfect redemption was purchased by his precious death vpon the crosse 3. b. p. 155. And yet in an other place he thus writeth our whole and
swanne to sing out his owne shame and confusion in all others parts bewraying his anserine follie for as he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if one should gather 30. thousand foxes together he shall finde the same nature and disposition in them all so one goose differeth not from another in gagling and creaking 5. Augustine pretended to to be falsified The accusation 1. Augustine much misvsed corrupted for he saith si quid aliter sapio c. Limbom readeth si quid erraueris 2. The place of Augustine mis-quoted the third book for the second some of his words are cut off some mistranslated 3. To translate trophaeum a deuise or policy is but your owne politike deuiseithe crosse of Christ is rather called trophaeum because it was the ensigne and monument of his victory 4. S. Augustines words falsely translated and corrupted for triduo illo corporeae mortis is not three daies by his bodily death but the three daies of his bodily death 5. You corrupt Augustines words turning blasphemy into error 6. These words of Augustine which are the two waies whereby the soule can be said to die you cut off 7. S. Augustines words you alleadge corruptly by leauing out halfe of the sentence 8. His other words to the same purpose whereof as your manner is you take but a piece are these c. 9. S. Augustines words vntruly alleadged for you leaue out the word forte 10. S. Augustine clearely against Limbom in the place alleadged by him 11. And because the Replyer saith Why may wee not as well expounde Christs descending into hell with Ambrose of the presence of his diuine power as with Augustine his ascending vp to heauen The disgracefull Confuter thus insulteth Where doth Augustine expound Christs ascending vp to heauen of his diuine power dare you vpon your owne bare worde without any proofe or shewe of reason so contumeliously traduce so holy a man as an ouerthrower of an article of our Creede for you quote no place neither will any Christian man beleeue that euer he dreamed of any such exposition The iustification 1. For further and full satisfaction herein I referre the Reader to the 3. Imputation of vntruths Iustificat 5. 2. The mis-quoting of the figure of 3. for the figure of 2. is no such ouersight which might escape the Printer as wel as the Author seeing there is as wel the 3. as 2. booke de doctrin Christian. But that is a more grosse ouersight in this blinde Confuter in quoting the 28. homilie of Origen vpon Iosua whereas hee wrote but 26. in all those words omitted spem atque charitatem c. hope and charity which we handled in the former booke were impertinent to the matter in hand and therefore it was not necessary to alleadge them for the translation the Replyer englisheth in ijs quae aperte posita sunt c. in those places c. the Confuter englisheth among those things which are plainely set downe in Scripture all those things which containe faith and manners are found Now I pray you Sir Grammarian is not in ijs better translated in those then among those retaining then the proper signification of the preposition whether is better supplied in those places or in those things for to say in those things all those things are found c. beside the vaine tautologie it includeth absurditie that the same things should be both the continent and the things contained wherefore his meaning is that matters concerning faith and manners are handled in the plaine and perspicuous places of Scripture 3. Augustines words are these trophaeo suo diabolus victus est The diuell was ouercome by his owne deuise the word is not referred to Christ for then hee would haue said trophaeo eius not suo hath hee professing himselfe a Grammarian forgotten his Grammer rule â—â—ui suus reciproca sunt And in another place Augustine sheweth more plainely that he referreth this word to the diuell diabolus trophaeo suo victus est exultauit quando mortuus est Christus The diuell was ouercome by his owne policie he reioyced when Christ died c. and was ouercome by Christs death He calleth the death and crosse of Christ the diuels trophaeum because hee supposed to haue vanquished Christ by putting him to death if now trophaeum be taken in the vsuall sense for a monument or ensigne of victory obtained as hee would haue it his translation will containe blasphemie that the crosse of Christ was the monument of the diuels victorie therefore how could it be more fitly translated then deuise or policy the diuell supposed or intended to set vp Christs crosse as a triumphant pillar but hee was ouer-wrought in his owne deuise 4. The words of Augustine triduo illo corporeae mortis apud inferos custodiae mancipari the Replyer translateth thus to be kept in hell three daies by his bodily death the Confuter thus to be kept in bondage in hell the three daies of his bodily death Who seeth not that the sentence hauing no distinction comming betweene will beare both these translations if corporeae mortis bee ioyned with triduo illo the latter if it be put to custodiae the former but it is an harsh speech that Christs soule should be said to bee kept in bondage three daies in hell for it was not there in bondage at all but in the graue his body might be said to be in bondage during that time because it was vnder the bands of death which Christ loosed as Saint Peter saith Act. 2. 24. And Dauid saith in the person of Christ The sorrowes or coards of the graue for the word â—heblee signifieth both tooke hold vpon me therefore the former reading yeildeth the safer sense See more hereof 5. imput iustificat 1. 5. The Replyer there citeth no testimonie out of Augustine but onely conformeth and applyeth his sentence with the qualifying of one word to his purpose This captious controller taketh greater liberty himselfe in the next page following for citing a place out of Augustine to make it serue his turne he inserteth these names Arrius Eunomius Apollinaris and Athanasius Epiphanius Fulgentius making Augustine to bring them in whereas Fulgentius was after Augustines time what reason had hee to finde fault with another for strayning a gnat wheras himselfe swalloweth a Camel 6. The addition of that clause was not necessary and therefore the Replyer for breuities sake omitted it hee vseth not with long and impertinent periods to weary his Reader as this palfrey-man posteth often out of the way till he hath lost both it and himselfe That which is alleadged out of Augustine sufficeth to shewe his iudgement that the soule cannot be said to bee quickened because it cannot die but what reason had he to translate quibus duabus de causis c. which are the two waies he that translateth causae waies sheweth
that he was neuer well wayed himselfe 7. The point there handled is how Christ is said to be quickened in the spirit therefore the Replyer omitteth the former part of the sentence Mortificatus carne c. Hee is said to be mortified in the flesh because hee died in the flesh onely for the question is not how hee was put to death in the flesh and then he beginneth the sentence at viuificatus spiritu but he was quickened in the spirit c. But wheras the Replyer here by flesh vnderstandeth Christs humane nature how can this sophisticating Sophister infer that he meaneth his soule and body for is there no difference between his humane nature and his whole humane nature as is your logike such are your conclusions 8. What an absurd fellow is this that will not allowe a sentence to be taken out of a Father but one must hale in that which goeth before and commeth after beeing not to the purpose pertinent the question beeing about the varietie of copies Augustine giueth two rules that the more must bee preferred before the fewer the Elder before the nower and thus much was sufficient to be cited out of that place But what meaneth himselfe to corrupt Augustine by a false translation whose words rightly translated are these hoc modo quaerunt c. by this means they search which would find out in the holy Scriptures confirmed with so great authority what moueth them hee translateth thus this course they take who doubt of any thing in holy Scriptures confirmed with so great authoritie 9. As before he quarrelled about the omission of fere in a place of Origen loc 3. so now for leauing out forte It seemeth he wanted matter when thus he hunteth after words Hee is a furious man that will begin a fray vpon a word and it is a quicke fire that wil flame out straight vpon a sparke if he had read that sentence of Hierome Difficile est alienas lineas insequentem non alicubi excidere it is an hard matter for one that followeth anothers lines not sometime to misse hee would not haue stumbled at a strawe But forte is a particle of doubting and â—â—certaintie saith he sheweth he did not resolutely pronounce c. And will you speake this of your Grammer skill that forte is alwaies vsed as a particle of doubting I much doubt of that for sometime if you will giue credit to a good Latinist it is vsed for exornation sometimes it is a word of attention deep consideration as Ionathan saith si forte if perhaps the Lord will worke with vs 1. Sam. 14. 6. he doubted not of it but with an earnest desire and attention waited vpon God And so is it here vsed by Augustine as a note of more deepe consideration so that the omission of it doth most disaduantagâ— the Replyer 10. And how proue you that Augustine is against the Replyer in the place alleadged his words are these Haec terrena vita c. This earthly life where flesh and blood is if it be compared to that is the lower part or hell c. Augustine is alleadged to shew that the earth is called the lower part in respect of heauen let him shew now how Augustine maketh against him in this very place forsooth because he maketh mention afterward of Christs descension to hell as though the Replyer were ignorant of that for doth he not directly confesse that Augustine in the words following seemeth to incline to the opinion of Christs descension to deliuer the Patriarchs 3. b. p. 186. But this Trifler was to giue instance of this place here alleadged therfore he doth but palter and still beateth the bush where the bird is not and so as Hierom well saith Manum peteris pedem porrigis You are asked your hand and you stretch out your foote 11. 1. As the godhead in Scripture is said to descend Iohn 3. 13. None hath ascended into heauen but he that descended c. So God is said to ascend Gen. 17. 22. God ascended vp to Abraham where the same word ghalah is vsed which is applyed to Christs ascension Psal. 68. 18. 2. And so Augustine expoundeth that place also Iohn 3. 13. of Christs ascension and descension according to his godhead for these are his words in the same epistle 57. which is cited by the Confuter vpon that place none hath ascended c. secuÌ„dum hominem c. According to man he was in earth not in heauen where he now is when he said none hath ascended c. although according to that hee was the sonne of God hee was yet on the earth and was not ascended into heauen Here he vnderstandeth Christs ascension and descension as he was God 3. Neither is this to denie his ascension as hee was man and so to ouerthrowe an article of the Creede for then he hath made a good argument against himselfe that because Christ is there said to descend from heauen in his deitie therefore it followeth he descended not in his humanitie 4. Nay then hee himselfe ouerthroweth an article of the Creed that confesseth the ascension and descension there spoken of to be diuers from that mentioned by S. Paul Ephes. 4. 9. and to be meant of the deitie of Christ. 3. b. p. 172. 173. Now sir to returne your owne words though it belongeth not to a Christian mans beliefe what Augustine writ or thought to or fro yet I hold him no reasonable man that hearing Augustines owne words will not thinke he spake of one kind of ascension and descension of Christ in his godhead though properly the godhead neither ascendeth nor descendeth But he is no good Christian that the Scripture so speaking that God ascended will not beleeue it and so in effect hee prooueth himselfe no good Christian if hee deny that Christ is said in Scripture to ascend as hee is God 6. Other Authors pretended to be falsified The accusation 1. These nine words of Bernards sentence are left out by you and so we shall alwaies be with the Lord. 2. Bellarmine he vnmannerly saith you haue belied now the second time for leauing out this clause for the enlightning of the Fathers with the vision of God The iustification 1. Bernard is produced by the Replyer to shewe the difference of Christs beeing with vs and of our beeing with Christ the sentence is this Christ is with vs at all times to the ende of the world but when shall we be with him when we shall be taken vp and meete Christ in the ayer thus farre Bernard is alleadged then follow those words which hee crieth out are omitted and so we shall alwaies be with the Lord. And why might not these words be spared seeing sufficient was alleadged before for proofe of that difference and if these words be supplyed they make more fully to the Replyers purpose and therefore this exception of omission is friuolous But it is strange that hee date
died in bodie yet his soule perished not vt vita perderet vitam that our life should loosâ— life c. 4. in init by occasion of which question he falleth also into that other point concerning the death of Christs soule 2. He saith that Augustine taketh this for graunted that the promise made to the theefe was the voice of Christs Godhead whereas Augustine onely propoundeth it by way of obiection sed dicet aliquis c. but some one will say we beleeue this was the voice of the deitie not of the soule of Christ c. and afterward he rather reasoneth against that obiection then yeildeth to it quid in eo cui promittebat accipimus c. and what doe we take in him to whome the promise was made and so he frameth his argument from the soule of the theefe to the soule of Christ reasoning from the lesse to the greater 3. He denieth that any such collection can be made out of Augustine that if the soule of the theefe went to Paradise Christ much more but that this is Augustines meaning rather that because the theefes soule was presently made blessed c. in Paradise and so freed from the feare of death and hell much more was the soule of Christ exempted Contra. Augustines words are these If the soule of the theefe was straightway the bodieâ—beeing dead called to Paradise shall we thinke any to be so impious to thinke that the soule of our Sauiour was three daies kept in hell c. here is no mention of the feare of death or hell but of calling the soule to Paradise his wordes are plaine that Christs soule could not be in hell all those three daies that his bodie was in the graue nay it can not be prooued out of this treatise of Augustine that Christs soule was in hell for it is euident that he taketh inferi for the place of the dead As c. 14. he saith erat vno eodemque tempore totus in inferno totus in coelo illic patiens iniuriam carnis c. he was at one and the same time whole in hell or below whole in heauen there suffering the iniurie of his flesh here not leauing the glorie of his deitie Againe c. 17. iacebat quantum ad corpus c. he lay touching his bodie dead in the graue raising the dead in hel or in the low parts but Christs flesh was in the graue not in hell and from the graue not from hell he raised the dead 6. An other place of Augustine is corruptly alleadged epist. 57. ad Dardan lib. 3. p. 14. first he inuerteth the order of the wordes for that sentence beginning as it might rightly be said and ending because he is alwaies euery where c. is at least 40. lines after that sentence if this to day thou shalt c. which he confusedly placeth immediatly after as though it were all one sentence Againe in the next sentence beginning if this to day thou shalt c. and ending humane soule he clippeth off at the least 20. lines and leapeth them all ouer to those words but the sense is much more readie c. which he ioyneth as immediatly following beeing 20. lines after thirdly he fraudulently omitteth many sentences which come betweene making directly against his opinion of Christs descent to hell 1. Augustine saith Vnde quaeri solet c. whence it vseth to be questioned if the infernall places are vnderstood onely to be penall how can we beleeue godly that the soule of Christ was in hell but it is well answeared that therefore he descended to succour whome he could Here Augustine maketh no other ende of Christs descending into the penall place of hell but to giue succour and releefe 2. If both the region of those which were in griefe and those which were at rest c. is to be beleeued to haue beene in hell who dare say that Christ went onely to the penall places of hell and not to haue beene with them which were at rest in Abrahams bosome where if he were that was the Paradise which he vouchsafed to promise the thiefe here he resolueth that the soule of Christ went to the Paradise promised to the thiefe 7. So Augustine is erroneously cited for twice he quoteth tract 91. in Ioh. 17. 3. b. p. 8. and 16. whereas the place is taken out of the 111. tract in Ioh. 17. Beside he would make the Reader beleeue that Augustine expoundeth this glorie which Christ speaketh of Ioh. 17. onely of the glorie of his Godhead and that other speach where I am c. to be vnderstood of the presence of his Godhead Cont. In the very same tractat 111. Augustine thus expoundeth those words I will that where I am they may be with me Quantum attinet ad creaturam c. Concerning that creature wherein he was made of the seede of David after the flesh he was not yet himselfe where he was to be but in that sense he might say where I am as we might vnderstand that he should quickly ascend into heauen that he said he was there alreadie where he was presently to be In the same tractate he also thus expoundeth the glorie etiamsi eam dici hoc loco intelligamus c. Though we vnderstand that glorie to be here spoken of not which the father gaue vnto his sonne beeing equall in begetting him but which he gaue vnto him beeing made the sonne of man after the death of the crosse he vnderstandeth it as well of the glorie giuen vnto him as man as that due vnto him as God But more euidently Augustine sheweth his minde touching these points in the former tractates vpon this chapter As tract 104. Haec est glorificatio c. This is the glorifying of our Lord Iesus Christ which tooke beginning from his resurrection Tract 105. That the sonne was glorified of the father according to the forme of a seruant whome the father raised vp beeing dead and placed at his right hand the thing it selfe sheweth and no Christian doubteth And if the Confuter doubt hereof in Augustins opinion he is no Christian. And vpon those words Glorifie me with the glory c. which I had c. he writeth thus sicut tunc praedestinatione c. as then in predestination so now in perfection doe in the world what was with thee before the world doe in time that which thou appointedst before all time Thus Augustine apparantly vnderstandeth the glory which was giuen vnto Christ as man And how Christ our blessed Sauiour prayed vnto his Father he thus also sheweth tract 104. Poterat Dominus noster c. Our Lord the onely begotten and coeternall to the father might in the forme and by the forme of a seruant if it had beene needfull haue praied in silence but hee would so exhibite himselfe to his father a praier for vs as that hee remembreth himselfe to be our teacher And againe in another place Orauit
Caluin receiuing the article of the descension yet insisteth vpon the right interpretation 2. Hee also peruerteth the order of Calvins words for that clause This certaine is out of all question c. he putteth last wheras in Calvin it goeth before the precedent part this clause hath so great force c. 3. He alleadgeth Caluin for the locall descent contrary to Caluins iudgement who vnderstandeth it of the spirituall agony and perplexitie of Christs soule ibid. sect 10. 2. Caluin also is cited 2. lib. Institut c. 16. sect 9. as though he should hold that the faithfull of the olde Testament were in that prison mentioned by Saint Peter that is in hell c. where they carefully expected the promised redemption where diuers vntruths are vttered 1. Caluine saith Concludere in carcere mortuorum animas puerile est To shut vp the soules of the dead in prison is a childish thing He denieth then that they were in prison 2. Hee speaketh not of redēption which they expected but saith that piae animae eius visitationis quam sollicite expectauerant praesenti aspectu sunt potitae The godly soules did enioy the sight of that visitation which they carefully expected His meaning is that euen the godly soules departed had a sense of Christs death and were affected with a lightsome ioy the time of visitation beeing now exhibited vnto the Church which they while they liued in faith beleeued and in hope expected 3. Yet is hee not ashamed to alleadge Caluin as a maintainer of the locall descension and not content therewith hee addeth one vntruth vnto another that the Replyer himselfe saith that Caluin holdeth Christs descension into hel euen in that place of Peter whereas he affirmeth the contrary that Caluine and Beza hold not the descension as he doth in that very place which he hath reference to in the margin Limbom p. 58. And indeede Caluines opinion is Vim mortis Christi vsque ad mortuos penetrasse that the force of Christs death did pierce vnto the dead that the power and effect of his death not the presence of his soule was there 9. Beza falsified 1. Beza is here diuers waies wronged 1. His words are falsly translated de priuatis iniurijs of priuate wrongs he englisheth of priuate offences a priuate wrong that is done to a priuate person may yet be committed publikely but so cannot a priuate offence 2. He curtalleth the sentence repeating onely the first clause they are deceiued who thinke that Christ in this place speaketh of priuate offences all the rest that followeth is omitted quum Christus c. seeing Christ intendeth nothing else in these words then to distinguish secret sinnes from manifest therefore he is said to sinne against one not onely which hurteth him priuately but which with his priuitie only sinneth against God or any other 3. By this sentence it appeareth his meaning is that Christ speaketh of secret sinnes whether committed against God or any priuate man What immodest dealing then is this to alleadge Beza as expounding this place not of sinnes secretly but openly done 2. Beza thus expoundeth in te id est te tantum conscio against thee thou onely knowing of it but hee thus corrupteth that place against another thou knowing of it where he addeth these words against another and leaueth out only for the secret trespasser may as well sin me against him whom he offendeth as against another as appeareth in the former testimony 3. I omit certaine places out of Beza clipped by him as in that testimony cited vpon Act. 5. 17. Beza his words are qui à recepta sana doctrina c. and Dei Ecclesiae ipsius where these words inclosed are omitted by the Confuter So vpon Iohn 15. 26. he leaueth out more then foure lines in the middes of the sentence but because the sense is not much hindred by these omissions I will not take that aduantage which he is ready to catch at vpon euery occasion He further abuseth Beza in deprauing his words and detorting his sense as though he should thinke it a forced and violent thing by spirits to vnderstand liuing men 1. Pet. 3. 19. whereas he meaneth onely that men yet liuing cannot be called spirits but those which are now spirits may by a certaine figure called prolepsis be vnderstood to haue beene sometime liuing men as Peter calleth them spirits in respect of that time present wherein hee wrote not of that whereof he writeth This then is a meere cauil à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter because Beza in some sense counteth it a coact thing to vnderstand by spirits liuing men that simply and absolutely hee denieth it 4. Beza is imagined to vnderstand that place 2. Cor. 13. 4. crucified concerning his infirmitie not of the naturall substance of Christs flesh and humanity but of the quality onely thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qualitatem declarat infirmity declareth the quality of the substance where he leaueth out the former part of the sentence where Beza directly applyeth it ad infirmam formam serui to the weake forme of a seruant that is to the humane nature which Christ tooke and saith further idem hoc declarat c. this sheweth the same thing which according to the flesh 1. Rom. 3. So Beza his meaning is that though infirmitie in the natiue vse of the word signifieth the qualitie onely yet thereby in this place the very substance of the humane nature is insinuated 10. The Geneva translators abused This vnconscionable Confuter would fasten vpon thē to hold Limbus patrum and to fauour the opinion of the Fathers that the Patriarchs went not to heauen but were deliuered by the descension of Christ and to this ende hee bringeth in that annotation Hebr. 9. 8. which is thus set downe whole in that place So long as the high Priest offered once a yeare for his owne sinnes and for the peoples also while this earthly tabernacle stood the way to the heauenly Tabernacle which is made open by Christs blood could not be entred into Here first all the first words inclosed are cut off secondly hee forgeth a sense contrary to their owne iudgement for that those godly learned men that penned those annotations did beleeue all the holy Fathers of the olde Testament to be in heauen appeareth by that their interpretation of Abrahams bosome Luke 16. 22. whereby is signified say they the most blessed life which they that die in the faith of Abraham shall inioy after this world Therefore they could not bee so forgetfull or contrary to themselues in that other place so to conceiue as though the way in the olde Testament was not opened for the Fathers to enter into heauen before the comming of Christ wherefore they either speake comparatiuely that the way was not so opened and made plaine before the comming of Christ as since as they giue the like sense of those
say that Paul died the death of the soule whereas contrariwise that which you call inward afflictions was thorough inward ioy and consolation in the holy Ghost c. p. 65. The iustification 1. THe whole sentence is this if thou hast heard a word let it die with thee and be sure it will not burst thee the Replyer abridging this sentence keeping the sense did not take himselfe tied to repeate euery word seeing he bringeth it not in as a testimonie specially out of Scripture but hath reference vnto it by way of allusion quoting no place But it is a greater fault in him to adde vnto the text if thou hast a word against thy neighbour which words enclosed though retained in the English translation yet are not in the originall Beside he himselfe clippeth off many words citing the beginning onely of the 13. and 17. v. reprooue thy friend reprooue thy neighbour leauing out all the rest 2. b. p. 71. in marg 2. Those words moreouer Ruben said were not materiall or pertinent to the Replyers purpose and therefore he omitted them 3. The Syrian Translator I meane he which translated the Syrian text readeth thus quod non sit derelictus in sepulchro that he was not left in graue is here any mistranslation And the Latine translator is not alleadged for the word infernus but because in stead of his soule as it is in the originall he readeth neque derelictus est he was not left the Replyer then is here no Corrupter but the Confuter is a Trifler 4. These words which had seazed of him the Replyer alleadgeth not as the words of the text but onely these he loosed the sorrowes Act. 2. 24. Here then he is charged with a plaine vntruth 5. Then the Latine interpreter Montanus Pagnine Vatablus all these falsifie the word of God which translate there not vitam life but animam soule and the Septuag also which read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall giue soule for soule 6. The Replyers words are these as in like sense it is said Gen. 46. 26. the soules that went with Iakob into Egypt is he not ashamed therefore so notoriously to charge him with an vntruth But he himselfe corrupteth the text in that place reading the soules that went downe c. whereas the word is habiah which signifieth onely comming or going 7. Beza so readeth following Origenes reading hom 4. in Exod. hom 17. in Numer and hom 9. in Iosua 8. Call you this patching to put two verses of Scripture together what thinke you of S. Paul which doth the same Rom. 3. 10 11. ioyning together a part of the 1. and a part of the 2. v. Psal. 14. as the Reader may see by comparing the places together you had best count him a patcher of Scripture 9. Say also that the Latine translator and Beza which in that place readeth tenetis you hold and the Syrian interpreter retinetis you hold fast Montanus that readeth prehenditis you lay hold c. that all these doe falsifie Scripture and is he indeed so ignorant as he maketh himselfe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie to hold fast how else will he interpret that place Heb. 4. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let vs hold fast the profession as both our English translations read 10. The Replyer inuerteth not the text but the Confuter peruerteth his wordes for he alleadgeth the text right Act. 2. 31. He spake of the resurrection of Christ that his soule should not be left in hell or the graue whereupon the Replyer reasoneth thus the Prophet speaketh here of Christs resurrection but the descending of Christs soule to hell belongeth not to his resurrection but the not leauing of his soule in graue implieth the resurrection Ergo vnto this the pitifull Confuter maketh this answer your reason should haue beene this Dauid spake of the resurrection of Christ c. but not leauing of Christs soule in hell doth no way belong to his resurrection c. therefore c. here the minor is apparantly false c. Contra. This poore Logician is much to be pitied 1. doth he not see that the conclusion of his argument must be this therefore Dauid speaketh not of the not leauing c. which is cleane contrarie to the text 2. If he in deede might make the Replyers argument for him he would make him as sensles and absurd as himselfe 3. He grossely mistaketh the Replyers argument which was this the descending of Christs soule to hell belongeth not to his resurrection but the not leauing of his soule belongeth ergo the not leauing c. prooueth not the descension This argument though he inuert and peruert at his pleasure he is not able to euert with all the skill he hath 11. The Replyer confoundeth not hell and the graue which is more heathenish in him so to imagine then in the other so to write but ioyneth together two vsuall acceptions of the word sheol neither doth he burie his soule but his life thereby signified in the graue And yet to take infernum for the temporall death and graue is neither heathenish nor absurd vnlesse you will count Augustine heathenish who expoundeth that place Psalm 88. 3. My life draweth neare to hell by those words of our Sauiour My soule is heauie vnto death Quod enim aijt tristis est anima c. For that he saith my soule is heauie vnto death this is the same that is said my soule is filled with euill and that which followeth vnto death the same is said my life draweth neare to hell c. 12. These words in hell are not expressed because the Replyer groundeth no argument vpon them but onely by setting downe the first words hath reference to the whole prophesie there contained for in other places where there was cause he omitteth them not as Limbom p. 74. 13. Though the Hebrew word sheol is indifferently taken sometime for hell sometime for the graue yet in this place Act. 2. 27. the Replyer contendeth thoroughout that whole discourse that it signifieth the graue and therefore to say he translateth it hell is according to his vsuall manner to fitten and forge of him 14. The Replyer citeth not the words of the text Rom. 1. 3. but onely sheweth that there is an opposition betweene the flesh and the spirit and therefore there was no cause to adde those words of sanctification no more then other words of the text 15. As though it be not an vsuall phrase in Scripture to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in spiritu when it must be vnderstood by or through the spirit as Eph. 2. 22. In whome ye also are built together to be the habitation of God by the spirit so road not Beza onely but Vatablus the Syrian interpreter the Geneva and the authorized English translation let him accuse these also of violent intrusion 16. But the Apostle also saith in an other place that Christ once suffered for sinnes 1. Pet. 3.
18. the figure 2. might easily be mistaken for 3. 17. Christ by Noah preached the one as the author the other as the Minister so both may wel stand together S. Peters text that speaketh of Christ and the interpretation that applieth it to Noah If any make the Apostle a lyar it is himselfe that corrupteth his sense by a false interpretation and maketh him to speake that which he neuer intended 18. Though the preaching of the word vnto vnbeleeuers is thorough the hardnes of their heart the sauour of death vnto death yet the principall and onely ende in respect of God is the comfort and conuersion of men the hardening of the heart is effected accidentally by the word and is not the proper ende thereof This is euident by that prophesie of Isai of Christ The spirit of God is vpon me c. he hath sent me to preach good tidings to the poore And this is Augustines reason that if there be preaching in hell some may be conuerted and beleeue in hell to say therefore to what purpose should Christ be thought to preach to the spirits in hell c. then for their comfort and deliuerance is no contradicting of the Scriptures but a manifesting of his ignorance that knoweth it not 19. And is it not sufficient if one Euangelist haue those words and is it not lawfull what is wanting in one to supplie out of an other But it can haue no excuse to clippe the Euangelists words as he doth whatsoeuer is giuen vnto you at the same time that speake saith Saint Marke but he citeth the place thus that which shall be giuen you that speake 20. And is he so captious that he could not or would not see that the omission of this word were was a meere ouersight in the setter and therefore the Replyer hath amended it among the Errata before Limbomastix And this poore-blinde pryer might haue obserued the like scape in his owne blotted lines where he thus writeth where the soules of sinners wont to be tortured for were wont c. 21. This is a small exception to the Geneva translation to take the present tence for the preterperfect especially seeing the Apostle so readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ascending Eph. 4. 8. and the same tence with the Hebrewes serueth both for the present and time past as Psal. 68. 19. from whence S. Paul borroweth that testimony 22. These words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are englished in the translation but the words in Greeke it was not pertinent to repeate because all the force lieth in the other words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 23. 1. The Replyer citing those words of the Apostle to prooue the inward afflictions had no cause to repeat the rest which speake of his glorying and reioycing in Christ but onely so much as was to the purpose 2. Hee refuseth not Chrysostoms exposition though by him much mis-alleadged neither doth it make against him for that inward resolution and preparation of the minde daily beeing in expectation of death was it not an inward affliction and temptation to suffer death I hope hee will not deny to be an affliction then the daiely expectation of death being inward must be an inward affliction 3. Neither are those words cited to prooue that Saint Paul died the death of the soule but for the similitude of the phrase Hee might else-where haue further seene the Replyers meaning expressed in this manner As the body is not said onely to die when the soule departeth from it but when it is pressed with deepe and dangerous afflictions which threaten death as Paul saith I die daily so the soule may be said after a sort to die not only when it is finally separated frō God but perplexed with the horror and feeling of Gods wrath 4. It followeth not because Paul had inward ioy and consolation therefore he had not inward afflictions for speaking of terrors within he addeth God which comforted the abiect comforted vs c. His inward afflictions and terrors were tempered with inward ioy and comfort also here is neither dishonour done to Paul nor contumely to the spirit vnlesse it bee by his contumelious and slaunderous mouth Such are this Cauillers exceptions to the Replyers allegations of Scripture as we haue seene wherein I doubt not but that hee hath rather shewed himselfe a wrangler then the other a corrupter for although in the citing of other forraine testimonies greater liberty may bee vsed as Hierom saith hee did in interpreting of Greeke Authors Non verbū de verbo sed sensum exprimere de sensu not to expresse euery word but the sense by the sense yet in alleadging Scripture we must hold vs to the very words where as he againe saith Verberum or do mysterium est there both order and mysterie is in the words But had hee beene sincere himselfe in alleadging of Scripture hee would not haue beene so suspicious of another according to that saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A wit free from euill is slowest to suspect euill Now then it followeth to shew what a pregnant wit and ready facility he himselfe hath in corrupting of Scripture The Recrimination 1. That place 2. Timoth. 2. 5. he citeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no man is crowned vnlesse he striue lawfully whereas these are the Apostles words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If any man striue hee is not crowned except he striue lawfully where for any man he putteth no man 2. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perrils among false brethren he readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 false brotherhood beside he quoteth 2. Cor. 12. 26. for 11. 26. 3. Hee thus vnreuerently speaketh of the Scripture which shewes your state wholly dependeth vpon shifting first from the newe Testament to the olde from the olde to the newe and from the new to the olde againe thus he profanely calleth the comparing of the newe Testament with the old shifting 4. He corrupteth the sense of the Apostle vnderstanding his words of beeing partakers of the diuine nature of participating with his godhead which is onely meant of a similitude and likenesse vnto God not in substance but in qualitie in flying the corruption of the world as the words following shew which thing was well expressed by Iustinus Philosophus that the end which a Philosopher propoundeth to himselfe is to be like vnto God as neere as may be 5. Christ saith Where I am there shall also my seruant be Iohn 12. 26. he thus addeth vnto it where I am now there shall my seruant be hereafter 6. I goe to prepare a place for you and though I goe to prepare a place for you I will come againe Iohn 14. 2. 3. all this inclosed he leaueth out and here he ioyneth himselfe two verses together which he before called patching Accusat 8. 7. Ye shall lie downe in sorrow Isay 50. 11. hee readeth ye shall sleepe
words Heb. 11. 39. They receiued not the promise they had no such cleare light say they of Christ as we haue Or els their meaning is that by the sacrifices and rites of the Tabernacle that way was not opened but by the blood of Christ so that the times are not compared together but the things as they thus note Hebr. 10. 19. By the blood of Iesus wee may be bold to enter into the holy place we by Christ say they haue that liberty which the auncient Fathers could not haue by the lawe Thus this Surmisers supposed falsifications are returned vpon his owne head and hee himselfe is found to bee the clipper and deprauer and corrupter of the Fathers testimonies fewe whereof are recited by him which hee doth not mangle and wrest at his pleasure These places out of the old and newe writers about thirty in all giuen before in instance are an euident proofe hereof the like might haue beene shewed in the rest but that it is not worth the labour to spend time to hunt after so meane a game and to haue such a silly bird in chace which hath according to the saying defiled the owne neast When he first entred into this challenge and aduentured to lay load vpoÌ„ the Replyer with this cauillous charge of falsifications he should first haue himselfe considered whether one might not rubbe vpon his owne galled backe And he herein playeth an euill fensers part that lyeth open himselfe where he thought to giue an other a venie That wise sentence should haue come into his head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein thou purposest to smite an other therein expect a greater blow thy selfe It is an euident argument either of a bad cause or weake defense that is bolstered out with such indirect meanes The truth as the prouerbe is will not seeke corners nor yet will the veritie be defended with a lie nor simplicitie by falsifications and forgerie In the sixt Synode of Constantinop Act. 6. when as Macarius and Petrus with other Monothelites had mangled the testimonies of the Fathers as well in sense as words the Catholikes said Non congruit orthodoxis ita circumtruncatas patrum sententias deflorare c. It is not agreeable to the orthodoxall men so to deflowre and deface the gelded sentences of the fathers this is more proper for heretikes If he would therefore haue beene taken for an orthodoxall and Euangelicall writer as I wish with my heart he may hereafter prooue and that the amendment of his heart may reforme the error of his penne then should he not haue trode in the pathway of Heretikes and followed their guise in corrupting of his witnesses Therefore concerning his omissions alterations additions and other corruptions in the allegations of the fathers I say as Augustin did to Iulian concerning Chrysostome whome he corruptly alleadged Si totum legisses invenire potuisti aut si legisti miror quemadmodum te potuit praeterire aut si praeterire non potuit miror quomodo te non correxerit If you had read the whole you might haue found it or if you read it I maruaile how it could escape you or if it did not escape you I wonder how it did not correct you The 12. Imputation of the pretended corruption of Scriptures The accusation 1. Because Ecclesiastic 19. 10. the Replyer leaueth out these words confidens esto and be sure 2. In the place Gen. 37. 31. these words are omitted Ruben moreouer said vnto them 3. In that place Act. 2. v. 31. you falsifie the Syrian Translators words in mistranslating them the Latine Translator you abuse in like manner 4. These words which had seased vpon him are not in that place Act. 2. 24. as you pretend them 5. You falsifie the word of God it selfe for in that place of Exodus c. 22. 23. the word nephesh is and ought to be translated life not soule 6. For the soules that went downe with Iaakob into Egypt you make the Scripture to say their soules went downe into Egypt 7. The place to the Coloss. 2. 15. triumphing ouer them in the same is falsly translated our authorised translatour readeth in himselfe 8. So Psal. 88. 10 11. is mangled and corrupted patching two distinct verses in one see afterward recriminat 6. 9. You falsifie the Scripture it selfe in translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to hold fast Mark 7. 8. whereas our Church Bibles read yee obserue the traditions 3. b. p. 31. 10. Limbom inverteth the text Act. 2. 31. to serue his turne 3. b. p. 37. 11. You coÌ„mit a double fault in your translation of S. Peters words the one in confounding hell with the graue which is heathenish the other in burying the soule of Christ in it which is impious 12. You falsifie the prophesie in leauing out the words in hell wherein the maine of the controuersie consisteth Act. 2. 31. 13. This is your dalying with the word of God in this place where hauing translated it thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell you interpret it cleane contrarie thou wilt not leaue my life in graue 3. b. p. 44. 14. You cut off the wordes of sanctification which are annexed to the word spirit c. 15. The word by is violently intruded by you 1. Pet. 3. 19. by which spirit 16. The words are not as you cite them 1. Pet. 2. 18. he hath suffered for our sinnes but Christ hath also suffered for vs. 17. Where Peter saith it was Christ that preached you say it was Noe and so make him a lyar 18. When you say you know no ende of Christs preaching to the disobedient in hell but for their comfort and deliuerance you contradict the Scriptures which teach that the ministerie of the word consisteth as well in denouncing retention in sinne to the obstinate as in pronouncing remission of sinnes to the penitent 19. Those words that speaketh in you though they be added in S. Matthew are not here expressed by S. Marke 3. b. p. 104. 20. The wordes of the Euangelist are not as you report them when the doores shut vp but when the doores were shut 21. Neither is the text no man ascendeth but no man hath ascended 22. Psal. 139. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is ignorantly left out by you 23. Because the Replyer alleadgeth those words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 15. 31. I die daily vnderstanding them of inward afflictions the Confuter taketh a double exception both that some of the words are omitted As by our reioycing which I haue in Christ Iesus our Lord and that the Scripture is misinterpreted which Chrysostome expoundeth of the readines and prompâ—â— of minde that he was euery day more and more readie to suffer death c. 3. b. p. 64. And therefore he crieth out that dishonour is offered to the Apostle and contumelie to the spirit of God to