desideramus or volumus for so must the Apostle be interpreted as appeareth vers 2 We grone earnestly desiring to be clothed upon Tertullian saith * Quiâ—uon desiderat adhuc in carne superinduere immortalitatem continuare vitam lucrifactam mortis vicariâ denuntiatione De Resur carnis Who desireth not being yet in the flesh to be clothed upon with immortalitie and to continue his life gained by a substituted denunciation of death Can so blessed a change be painfull or can we naturally desire pain shall we grone and grone earnestly that we may have pain Hierome in his Epistle to Minerius and Alexander saith thus of the word Rapiemur * Hoc verbo estendi puto subitum ad meliora transcensum ideirco raptum se voluisse dicere vt velocitas transcuntis sensum cogitantis excederet I think that this word sheweth a sudden passage to a better place and that he said he was caught up to signifie that his passing was swifter then his thinking not as if it were painfull to be taken as I imagine S. Paul speaketh of this translation and change as a matter worthie of thanks unto God 1. Corinth 15.51 c. Onely death of all other wayes by which God useth to call mankinde to glorie death onely is painfull Psal 116.3 The sorrows of death compassed me God loosed the pains of death Act. 2.24 and Hebr. 2.15 Some through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage And indeed this pain of death is part of the curse denounced But of this point more hereafter And thus do I make my approach towards it 2. * Aug. De. peccat Merit Remis 1.16 Augustine saith When disobedient Adam sinned then did his body lose the grace of being obedient to his soul Then arose that bestiall motion to be ashamed of by men which he blusht at in his nakednes Then also by a certain sicknes taken by a sudden and contagious corruption it came to passe that the stabilitie of age being lost in which they were created by the changes of ages they made a progresse to death For though they lived many yeares after yet they began to die the same day when they received the law of death by which they were to grow old For whatsoever by a continuall change and degrees runneth unto an end not perfecting or consummating stands not a moment but decayes without intermission Thus was fulfilled what God said Genes 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die So he Let me adde my conjecture First if God had not called Adam and Eve so sensibly to an account yet had they died by vertue of the former sentence For the later sentence inflicts not death which was then entred on them but labour and pain In sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the dayes of thy life Genes 3.17 And though it be said vers 19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return unto the ground for out of it wast thou taken for dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return Yet this is but an explication of the former sentence shewing that the manner of the death shall be by incineration which was not so exactly speciallized before Secondly the same instant that Adam had eaten I make no doubt but both their eyes were opened and they knew their nakednes which was the first sensible degree towards death and corruption For though the Scripture doth not say expressely Immediately their eyes were opened yet it implieth so much as may appeare by the implicative particle and Genes 3.6 c. Eve did eat and gave also unto her husband with her and he did eat and the eyes of them both were opened c. S. Augustine thus * Quomodo corpus nostrum dicit Apostolus mortuum Rom 8.10 cùm adhuc de viventibus loqueretur nisi quia jam ipsa conditio moriendi ex peccato parentum haesit in prole De Gen. ad lit 6.26 How doth the Apostle say that our body is dead Rom. 8.10 when he speaks of the living but because the condition of dying arising from the sinne of the parents sticks to the posteritie So we also die or are dying the first houre of our being And again * Corpus mortuum est propter peccatum Nec ibi ait Mortale sed Mortuum quamvis vtique mortale quia moriturum mox vbi praeceptum transgressi sunt ecrum membris velut aliqua aegritudo lethalis mors ipsa concepta est Quid enimaliud non dicam nati sed omnino concepti nisi aegritudinem quandam inchoavimus quâ sumus sine dubis morituri Ibid. 9 10 The body is dead because of sinne He saith not there It is mortall but dead albeit it is truely mortall because it shall die So soon as they transgressed the commandment death like some deadly disease was conceived in their members For as soon as we were I will not say born but even conceived what did weels but begin a certain sicknes by which we shall undoubtedly die IN THE MIDST OF LIFE WE ARE IN DEATH and now non vitam vivimus sed mortem which was toucht at before and must be handled again God who drew light out of darknes yea all things out of the unformed TOHV-BOHV and that masse or rude lump out of nothing is so good a God and so divine a goodnes that he would never have suffered sinne in this world but that he knew how to extract good out of evill and to turn mans sinne to his benefit Neither would he have permitted death to enter upon man but that he knew how to use the sting of death to mans greater happines and how to bring forth meat out of the eater and sweetnes out of the strong Judg. 14.14 As of the vipers flesh is made a preservative against the poison of the viper so from this bitter cup of death ariseth health joy and salvation to mankinde * Aug. De Civit. Dei 9.10 Augustine hath a witty collection from Plato and his follower Plotinus Plato in Timaeo writeth * Hominum animos mortalibus vinculis esse à dâ—is minoribus illigatos that the spirits of men are tied with mortall bands by the lesser gods So Vives on the place citeth Plato but Plotinus in lib. de dubijs Animae as he is also cited by Vives on that place of Augustine thus * Jupiter Pater laborantaâ— animas misâ—ratus earum vincula quibus laborant solubilia fabriâ—avit Father Jupiter having compassion of the afflicted souls hath made their bands soluble wherewith they are wearied These quotations at large give light to S. Augustines meaning which is subobscure for he saith * Plotinus Platenem prae caeteris intellexisse laudatur Is cùm de humanis animis ageret Pater in â—uit misericors mortalia illis vincula saciebat Plotinus is commended for having understood Plato above the rest He treating
representative is imputed to us 85 CHAP. VI. 1. ORiginall sinne is propagated unto us Originall sinne properly is not in the flesh before the union with the soul 90 2. Bishop Bilson Mollerus Kemnitius and Luther in an errour Bishop Bilsons arguments answered Conception taken strictly by Physicians c. We are not conceived in originall sinne if we respect this conception Conception taken largely by Divines Thus we were conceived in sinne 92 3. A Physicall Tractate of conception clearing the point 97 4. A Discourse touching aborsives and abortives Balthasar Bambach answered The Hebrew vowels not written at first when the consonants were Never any wrote till God had written the Two Tables 98 5. The manner how the soul contracteth originall sinne pointed at Bodily things may work upon the soul 103 6. Righteous men have unrighteous children The contagion of originall sinne is quickly spread 106 7. No sinne or sinnes of any of our parents immediate or mediate do hurt the souls of their children but onely one and that the first sinne of Adam 109 CHAP. VII 1. A Review of the last point Zanchius not against it Bucer and Martyr are but faint and rather negative then positive 112 2. Bucer and Martyr make the state of the question to be voluble not fixt and setled Their objections answered The place of Exodus 20.5 examined 113 3. S. Augustine appealed unto and defended 116 4. God justly may and doth punish with any temperall punishment any children like or unlike unto their parents for their parents personall sinnes 118 5. God doth and may justly punish some children eternally and all temporally for originall sinne whether they be like their parents in actuall aversion yea or no. 121 6. God justly punisheth even eternally wicked children if they resemble wicked parents ibid. 7. God oftentimes punisheth one sinne with another ibid. 8. The personall holinesse of the parent never conveyed grace or salvation to the sonne ibid. 9. God never punished eternally the reall iniquities of the fathers upon their children if the children were holy ibid. 10. No personall sinnes can be communicated The point handled at large against the errour of Bucer and Martyr 123 11. The arguments or authorities for my opinion The new Writers not to be overvalued Zanchius himself is against Bucer and Martyr 133 CHAP. VIII 1. ORiginall sinne came not by the law of Moses but was before it in the world 138 2. God hath good reason and justice to punish us for our originall sinne in Adam Gods actions defended by the like actions of men 139 3. Husbands represent their wives The men of Israel represented the women Concerning the first-born of men and beasts The primogeniture and redemption of the first-born 140 4. The whole bodie is punished for the murder committed by one hand Corporations represent whole cities and towns and Parliaments the bodie of the Realm Their acts binde the whole Kingdome Battelling champions and duellists ingage posteritie 144 5. S. Peter represented the Apostles The Apostles represent sometimes the Bishops sometimes the whole Clergie The Ministers of the Convocation represent the whole Church of England The authoritie of Generall Councels Nationall Synods must be obeyed 147 6. Private spirits censured Interpretation of Scripture not promiscuously permitted An Anabaptisticall woman displayed 149 7. Another woman reproved for her new-fangled book in print Scriptures not to be expounded by anagrams in Hebrew much lesse in English but with reverence How farre the people are to beleeve their Pastours 152 8. Saul represented an entire armie Joshua and the Princes binde the Kingdome of Israel for long time after 183 9. Christ represented us Christ and Adam like in some things in others unlike Christ did and doth more good for us then Adam did harm 184 The Contents of the second book CHAPTER I. Sect. 1. THe question propounded and explained Fol. 1. 2. Armenius or rather his sonne Zoroaster dead and revived ibid. 3. Antillus dead and living again because the messenger of death mistook him in stead of Nicandas Nicandas died in his stead 2 4. A carelesse Christian died and recovered life lived an Anchorite twelve yeares died religiously ibid. CHAP. II. 1. A Division of such as have been raised They all died 3 2. The widow of Zarephath her sonne raised yet died again supposed to be Jonas the Prophet The Shunammites sonne raised not to an eternall but to a temporary resurrection A good and a better resurrection 4 3. Christ the first who rose not to die again 5 4. The man raised in the sepulchre of Elisha arose not to immortalitie ibid. CHAP. III. 1. WHilest Christ lived none raised any dead save himself onely 6 2. The rulers daughter raised by Christ died again ibid. 3. So did the young man whom Christ recalled to life 7 4. Many miracles in that miracle of Lazarus his resurrection ibid. 5. Christ gave perfect health to those whom he healed or raised 8 6. Lazarus his holy life and his second death 9 CHAP. IIII. 1. TAbitha died again 9 2. So did Eutychus 10 3. They who were raised about the Passion of Christ died not again as many ancient and late Writers do imagine Mr. Montague is more reserved ibid. CHAP. V. 1. VVHo were supposed to be the Saints which were raised by such as maintain that they accompanied Christ into heaven 12 2. A strange storie out of the Gospel of the Nazarens ibid. 3. Adams soul was saved Adams bodie was raised about Christs Passion saith Pineda out of diverse Fathers Thus farre Pineda hath truth by him That the sepulchre of Adam was on mount Calvarie so say Athanasius Origen Cyprian Ambrose Basil Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustine Euthymius Anastasius Sinaita Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople ibid. 4. It was applauded in the Church in Hieromes time 13 5. Theophylact thought Adam buried in Calvarie Drusius unadvisedly taxeth the Fathers Tertullian consenteth with other Fathers and Nonnus who is defended against Heinsius 14 6. At Jerusalem they now shew the place where Adams head was found Moses Barcepha saith that Sem after the floud buried the head of Adam 17 7. The Romane storie of Tolus and Capitolium much resembling the storie of Adam ibid. CHAP. VI. 1. HIerom saith Adam was not buried on mount Calvarie Both Hierom Adrichomius and Zimenes say he was buried in Hebron Hierom censured for doubling in this point by Bellarmine 19 2. Hieroms arguments answered 20 3. The Originall defended against Hierom in Josh 14.15 ADAM there is not a proper name but an appellative Arba is there is a proper name of a man Adrichomius erreth in Kiriath-Arbee and the words signifie not Civitas quatuor virorum The citie of foure men New expositions of Kiriath-Arbee ibid. 4. It may signifie as well Civitas quatuor rerum The citie of foure things as Quatuor hominum Of foure men The memorable monuments about Hebron 22 5. It may be interpreted Civitas quadrata quadrilatera quadrimembris quadricollis A citie fouresquare of foure sides
of which hereafter and yet for all this dispensation it is truely said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not It Was appointed as having reference to what onely was past but It Is appointed It is a yoke that neither our fathers did nor we shall ever shake off and not onely labour and travell is an * Ecclus 40. ◠heavy yoke upon the sonnes of Adam but much more death Neither hath the worlds redeemer freed us from the stroke but from the curse of death for even hitherto * Pallida morsaequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas Regúmque turres Horat. Carm. l. 1. O◠4. Pale death doth knock with equall power At th' poore mans doore and kingly tower The grave yet gapeth and though myriads of myriads have died before though Paracelsus promised immortality in this life and perhaps therefore was cut off in the prime of his yeares yet death is * Job 30.23 and 21.33 the house appointed for all living and every man shall draw after him as there are innumerable before him Of the longest liver hath been said in the end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His life is past or as the Romanes when they were loth to say one was dead spake significantly to the sense yet mildly by this word Vixit Ecclus 14.17 He had his time he did sometimes live And it is the condition of all times THOU SHALT DIE THE DEATH 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The universall note or particle is not added It is not said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet sure it is included and so meant Not Christ himself the destroyer of death is exempted nor his thrice-blessed Mother nor fair Absalom nor strong Sampson nor wise Solomon nor craftie Achitophel It is appointed to all men and women no sex is freed no nation priviledged no age excepted If some few have been dispensed withall I will say with S. Augustine * Alii sunt humanarum limites rerum alia divinarum signa virtutum alià naturaliter alia miral iliter siunt Aug lib. de Cura pro mortuls gerenda cap. 16 Other are the bounds of humane things other the signes of divine power some things are done naturally and some miraculously We speak of the ordinarie course It is appointed for all men TO DIE 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Death is a name of sundry significations and it is taken diversly for there is The last death by the losse of glory The death of the soul by the losse of grace The death of the body by the losse of the soul * Aug. De Civit. Dei lib. 13. cap. 12. If it be demanded saith S. Augustine what death God meaneth to our first parents Whether the death of the body or of the soul or of the whole man or that which is called THE SECOND DEATH we must Consitle si placet ingeniosum ejus Tractatum cap. 15. ejusdem libri saith he answer He threatneth all The death of the soul began immediately upon their eating and is evidenced by their hiding themselves and shame to be seen The death of the body presently seconded it Theod. in Gen. quaest 38. it suddenly becomes mortall saith Theodoret The sentence of mortality GOD called death in Symmachus his exposition For after the divine sentence every day that I may so speak he looked for death as it is in the same Theodoret. As we now expect the resurrection and life eternall every moment so Adam every minute looked for death I am sure he deserved it Peter Martyr on 1. Cor. 13.12 Our first parents perished * Primi parentes quum transgressi sunt illico periêre quoniam mors nequaquam alia censenda quà m recessus à vita nec vitam habemus citra Deum Quare mortui sunt quia à Deo recesserunt eorum anima non fuit à corpore avulsa sed in eo quodammodo sepulta in praesentia non vitam sed mortem vivimus so soon as they transgressed because no other death is to be imagined but a departure from life and we have no life out of God Therefore they died because they departed from God and their soul was not snatcht away from their bodie but in a manner buried in it For the present our life is not a life but a death Of the bodily death onely are the words of my Text to be understood being a prime commentarie on Genes 3.19 Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return It is appointed for men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Once to die * Quod casus in diabolo id in homine mors What fall is in the devil that death is in man They fell but once we die but once We must needs die and are as water spilt on the ground which cannot be gathered up again 2. Sam. 14.14 Waters once spilt embrace the dust and are not gathered up again nor can be spilt again Christ tasted death for every man Hebr. 2.9 As Christ being once dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion over him Rom. 6.9 so is it regularly and ordinarily with all other one corporall death sufficeth It is appointed unto men ONCE to die 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But after this the judgement Let me speak of the words severally and then in a lump or masse together That these articles Post tum mox modò After then anon presently and the like are taken at large for some yeares before or after you may see it proved in * Alb. Gent. disput ad 1. lib. Maccab. cap. 3. Al bericus Gentilis The Scripture thus Genes 38.1 At that time But it was ten yeares saith Tremellius Exod. 2.11 It came to passe in those dayes and he meaneth fourty yeares Matt. 3.1 In those dayes that is twenty and five yeares after Luke 23.43 To day is taken for presently Aretius hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vpon that or presently after that And questionles that is the meaning for though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After may be interpreted long-after as the word proximus contrarilie doth not enforce necessarily a nearenes Proximus huic longo sed proximus intervallo said Virgil excellently He was next but a great distance between yet in the holy Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after that doth most times rather intimate the procedure and order of things done then intend a large intercedencie of time John 19.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After that Jesus saith I thirst you must not understand it long after not yeares moneths weeks dayes or houres after that for our Saviour hung upon the crosse not above foure houres and many things were said and done before this So in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not evidently inferre a spacious distance of time but by the words after that we may say is meant not long after but presently or thereupon judgement cometh after death Which I the more confidently do so interpret because I know no place in the divine Writ where
its death and also to his future and more happie life which should never have end I summe up all with Augustines words * Cibus aderat nè Adam esuriret potus nè sitiret lignum vitae nè illum senecta dissolveret nullus intrinsecus morbus nullus ictus metucbatur extrinsecus De Civit. 14.20 There was meat lest Adam should hunger drink lest he should thirst a tree of life lest old age should dissolve him no inward disease no outward blow was feared A new Quaere may be made Whether if Adam after his sin had eaten of the tree life his posteritie as well as himself had lived for ever My answer setleth on the negative because Adams action had been personall not representative or ideall and his posteritie was neither to answer for his second sinne or after-offences nor to have received any benefit by his good deeds succeeding his fall but he stood alone for us and we were in him onely as he had power to keep or break the first commandement And now am I come to the second Topick place by which I undertook to prove that Adams body had been immortall if he had not sinned and that is Authoritie 5. Not S. Augustine alone but a whole Councell where he was present to wit the Milevitan Councell is strong on our side * Quicunque dixerit Adam primum hominem mortalem factum it à ut sive peccaret sive non peccaret moreretur in corpore hoe est de corpore exiret non peccati merito sed necessitate naturae Anathema sit Whosoever shall say that the first man Adam was made mortall so that whether he had sinned or no he should have died in body that is gone out of the body not for the desert of sinne but by the necessitie of nature let him be accursed And this curse fell heavy upon the Pelagians who did think that Adam should have died though he had not sinned for so they held saith * Lib. de Haeresibus cap. 88. Augustine Cajetan thus * In 1. Cor. 15.53 In the state of innocencie Adam had a corruptible body in regard of the flux of naturall moisture but not mortall Richeomus a Jesuit saith * In statu innocentiae Adam corpus habebat corruptibile quantum ad fluxum humidi naturalis sed non mortale If man was created mortall those threatnings where by God did denounce death unto him were unprofitable for Adam might have answered I know well enough that I shall die although I neither taste nor touch the tree of knowledge of good evill And again God in the production of every one of his works kept an exact and most beautifull symmetry between the matter and the form the body and the soul and such a symmetrie as was most fit and accommodate to * Si komo mortalis creatus fuit inutiles crant illae minae quibus ' Deus mortem illi intendebat poterat namque respondere c. In Valedictione animae devotae Colloq 32. obtain the end of everie creature furnishing the matter with qualities and instruments most apt and pliable to serve the vertues and faculties of the form Therefore the soul of man being immortall and the faculties and operations proportioned to the essence the body also then must needs be immortall Item In every good marriage two things are observed at least the qualities of the parties and their age Therefore unto the soul which is free from the tyranny of death God married the body which was free also from the grave-clothes and bands of death Death is the brood of sinne saith Julianus Pomerius Adam was so created * Colloq 34. that having discharged his duty of obedience without the intervention of death he should have been followed of Angelicall immortality and blessed eternity He had immortalitie * Etiam ipsam nobis corporis mortem non lege naturae sed merito inflictam esse peccati De Civit. Dei 13.15 yet changeable not Angelicall and eternall As I began with S. Augustine so with him will I end It is a constat among Christians holding the Catholick Faith * Adâ—ujusque creaturae finem consequendum that even the death of the body hath been inflicted upon us not by the law of nature but by the desert of sinne * Peccatum est pater mertis Otherwhere he saith * Colloq 35. Sinne is the father of death Again * Vt perfunctus obedientiae munere sine interventu mortis Angelica eum immortalitas aeteinitas sequeretur beata If Adam had not sinned he was not to be stripped of his body but clothed upon with immortalitie that mortalitie might be swallowed up of life that is that he might passe from a naturall to a spiritual estate from an earthly to an heavenly from a mortal to an immortall as I truly interpret his meaning For he taketh not Mortall for that which must die And Again * Si non peccâsset Adam non erat expoliandus corpore sed supervestiendus immertalitate ut absorberetur mortale à vita id est ab animali ad spirituale transiret à terreuo ad coeleste à mortali ad immortale De peccat Merit Remis l. 1. cap. 2. It was not to be feared if Adam had lived longer that he should have been troubled with age or death For if God was so gracious to the Israëlites that for fourty yeares their clothes waxed not old upon them nor their shoes waxed old upon their feet Deutero 29.5 what marvell were it if God granted to obedient Adam * Ibid. cap. 3. that having a naturall and mortall body he should have in it some state and condition that he might be old without imperfection and at what time it pleased God he should come from mortalitie to immortalitie * Vt animale ac mortale habens corpus haberet in eo quendam statum without passing through death Where though S. Augustine seemes to say Adam had a mortall body and should have passed from mortalitie yet he taketh Mortale for all one with Animale and opposeth it to Spirituale So that I confesse Adam in Paradise had not a spirituall body not such a bodie as he and we shall have after the Resurrection And thus the body which he had may be called Animale or Mortale and yet S. Augustine with us and we with him acknowledge this truth that the body of Adam could not have died if he had not sinned and in that regard Adams body may be justly termed immortall not with reference to that heavenly and spirituall bodie which he shall have hereafter but immortall therefore because except for sinne his body as it was was free from death And the same Augustine hath a whole Chapter intituled thus * Sine media morte Against the doctrines of those that beleeve not that the first men had been immortall if they had not sinned Among such a
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here whereas in the place of Exodus it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also in the Septuagint the first place is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Leviticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may well be expounded one manner of pleading their causes as there was one law This I am sure of the verb is so used Micah 7.9 I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 untill he plead my cause Why may not then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the pleading of ones cause And why may not the meaning of our Apostle be That as Adam was ostium mortis The doore of death so Christ is clavis resurrectionis The key of the resurrection as Tertullian sweetly calleth him And as by Adam all and every one was guilty of death and damnation so by Christs merit every one shall arise to free himself from it if he can and to plead wherefore he should not be condemned to defend himself and answer for himself as Paul did Acts 26.2 to apologize And herein Adam and Christ to be like That as every one was made guilty by one of condemnation so every one for Christs all-sufficient condignity shall be permitted yea enabled to speak for himself why the sentence shall not be executed But these things I leave to the Professours of the Greek tongue and suo quisque judicio abundet So much for the second exposition of the words and for the similitudes and dissimilitudes between Adam and Christ from which resulteth That Adam representing us did not so much hurt us as Christ representing us did do good unto us And therefore since we are acquitted from sinne from all sinnes originall and actuall since we are acquitted from eternall death and have grace and abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse and shall have life eternall and shall reigne in life by ones obedience by one onely Jesus Christ who in his life and on the altar of the crosse merited all these things for us it is no hard measure no iniquity of God if for Adams sinne and disobedience when he sustained our persons both himself and his posterity in his loyns implicitly consenting with him be appointed to die And thus much shall suffice for the first generall Question upon the words of the Text. The second followeth Drusius towards the end of his Preface before his book called Enoch thus * Haec alia quae hoc libro continentur ut in aliis omnibus à me unquam editis aut edendis subjicio libens Ecclesiae Catholicae judicio à cujus recto sensu si dissentio non er◠pertinax These and other things which are contained in this book as also in all other books which have been or shall be set forth by me I willingly submit to the censure of the Catholick Church from whose right judgement if I dissent I will not be pertinacious O Deity incomprehensible and Trinity in Unity in all respects superexcellent and most admirable with all the faculties of my soul and body I humbly beg of thee to shew thy mercy upon me for Jesus Christ his sake and O blessed Redeemer accept my prayer and present it with favour to the throne of grace where thou canst not be denied If thou O gracious Jesu art not able to help me and to save my sinfull soul let me die comfortlesse and let my soul perish but since thy power is infinite I beseech thee to make me one of those whom thou bringest to more happinesse then all our enemies could bring to miserie Heare me for thy tender mercies sake and for thy glorious name O great Mediatour Jesu Christ AMEN AMEN MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe question propounded and explained 2. Armenius or rather his sonne Zoroaster dead and revived 3. Antillus dead and living again because the messenger of death mistook him in stead of Nicandas Nicandas died in his stead 4. A carelesse Christian died and recovered life lived an Anchorite twelve yeares died religiously SECT 1. THe second Question which from the words of my Text I propounded is this Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time yea or no because it is said It is appointed for men once to die I speak not of those who have been thought to be dead and have been stretch't out and yet their soul hath been within them though divers for divers daies and upon severall sicknesses have had neither heat nor breathing discernable but onely of such who have suffered a true separation of their souls from their bodies Whether these have again delivered up the ghost and died I make my question 2. Before I come to mention those whom the Scripture recordeth to be truly raised I hold it not amisse to propound to your view a few stories out of other authours Theodoret lib. 10. de fine judicio hath two strange relations The first is out of Plato of one Armenius but Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat 5. relateth from Zoroaster himself that it was Zoroaster the sonne of Armenius He who onely of all the world laughed so soon as he was born saith Plin. 7.16 and was so famous a Magician One of these two either father or sonne the twelfth day after he and others fell in the battell and was to be buried ante pyram constitutus revixit and being come to himself told what he had seen apud inferos namely that his soul being divided from his bodie came with many others who died with him to an admirable and incredible place in which there were two gulfs opes or ruptures of the earth and two open places of heaven right over them In the midst of these hiatus or gulfs judges did fit who when judgement was ended bade the just souls ascend by the heavenly opennes and gaps the judges sowing on their breasts the notes of their judgement But the souls of the wicked men were commanded to go on the left hand and to be hurried to hell carrying with them on their backs the memoriall of their passed life But as for himself being now come in fight the judges bade him diligently heare and see all things and tell all those things which were done when he revived These are sayings worthy of Philosophy saith Theodoret. 3 A second storie is cited in the same place by Theodoret from Plutarch among those things which he wrote De anima Sositiles Heracleon and I saith Plutarch were present when Antillus told us this of himself The Physicians thought Antillus to be dead but he came to himself as one out of a deep sleep and neither said nor did any other thing * Quod emetae mentis signum possit censeri which might argue him to be crazy or light-headed but he told us that he was dead and that he was again revived and that his death upon that sicknesse
some think that Joseph lived after Christs resurrection and yet others say he died the twelfth yeare of Christs age to whom Baronius rather inclineth a Ad annum Christi 12. Joseph being very aged about 80 yeares old when he was espoused to the holiest Virgin as Epiphanius and others do guesse For my part I embrace the mean and tread in the middle path Neither thinking that Joseph died the 12 yeare for when Christ was twelve yeares old Joseph went up to Jerusalem Luk 2.42 and after Christs descent to Nazareth Christ was obedient to Joseph and the all-garacious Virgin vers 51. therefore Joseph could not be dead in the twelfth yeare of Christ which the learned Baronius did supinely and sluggishly passe over and not observe Nor yet do I imagine on the other side that he lived beyond Christs resurrection or till his death since there is frequent mention of Christs Apostles of his holy mother and of his cousins and friends men and women yea of strangers and no mention nor intimation at all See Salianus in his Annals in annum mundi 4065 at large on this point that Joseph lived till Christ began publickly to preach and do miracles much lesse after his death So upon my supposall that he died between the thirteenth yeare of Christ and the twentie ninth Joseph might very well be one of those who were raised at that time and with him perhaps divers whom Christ had healed or to whom he had preached if they died before and many others with whom Christ conversed till he was thirty yeares old 4. And all these did prove and confirm unto the incredulous or wavering Saints their friends or kindred yea and to the very beleevers also the truth of Christs doctrine of his death of his resurrection appearing not promiscuously to Grecians or to Romans not to all no not to all the Jews but to many but to fit persons saith the Interlinearie Glosse whether Jews Grecians or Romans then residing at Jerusalem to such as knew them in their lives and at their deaths This conjecture may passe the more plausibly if we consider that Christ himself appeared not to all indifferently but onely to some and to some oftner times then to others yet no where is said to have shewed himself to any but onely to his followers and Disciples And as the Apostles were confirmed by Christs holy conference so might many other then living beleeve or the rather beleeve the Gospel of Christ upon proof made by the new raised in many particulars strengthning their faith They arose b Vt Dominum ostenderent resurgentem To shew that Christ was raised saith S. Hierom on Matth. 27. c Cum eo debebant resurgere ut ipsum ostenderent resurrexisse They ought to rise with Christ that they might shew he was risen saith Ludolphus the Carthusian That d Debebant they ought savoureth of presumption Dionysius the Carthusian hath more moderate terms he on the place saith They did testifie that Jesus was the Christ that he was truely risen and had destroyed hell Hierom Tom. 3. fol. 50. in his answer to the eighth question of Hedibia thus e Non omnibus apparuerunt sed multis qui resurgentem Dominum susceperunt They appeared not to all but to many who received our Lord risen from the dead And yet let me superadde by his leave If they had appeared to the Disciples and Apostles of Christ who received Christ I cannot think they would have concealed it 5. Among my other diversions and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or winde-abouts let this be one occasionally arising from the odde position which Estius hath in 1. Cor. 7.39 f Rectè ex Apostoli verbis inferunt Aquinas carthusianus Non teneri mulierem ad recipiendum virum de morte resuscitatum Aquin and Carthusian conclude rightly saith he from the Apostle that a woman is not bound to receive her husband newly raised nor may she enjoy him without a new contract What if I answer That a woman is tied to her husband as long as he liveth but he liveth afterward though he had been dead and when the Apostle speaketh of death he speaketh of a compleat death not susceptible in this world of another life For he opposeth the dead man to the living as if one could not be dead and then living but first living and then dead for ever till the generall resurrection Suppose we Lazarus was married had not his wife been his lawfull wife bound to him by their first agreement even after his resurrection I doubt it not Yet this might be the case of some of the many who were raised especially if they died but a while before But I confesse the case differeth and is more perplexed if the partie were dead and the dayes of mourning past and the woman married to another Yet even here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Father most gracious O Saviour most mercifull O holy Spirit most comfortable I humbly begge thy grace mercie and comfort to be shed forth upon me in this life that I may please thee in my vocation and do thy will and fulfill the businesse which thou hast appointed for me And leave not off I beseech thee to guide me by thine enabling counsel here till thou art readie to crown me with thy glorie in the life to come Amen Lord Jesu Amen CHAP. XV. 1. The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ as is proved by Scripture and Reason Suarez his shallow answer Epiphanius strengthening my former positive conjectures 2. If the raised ascended bodily into heaven the Patriarchs should not be left behinde 3. The ascending bodily of the Saints into heaven not necessarie or behooffull 4. Onely Christs bodie was seen ascending 5. In likelihood Christ would have shewed the Patriarchs unto some of his Apostles THat these raised Saints who bare witnesse of Christ setling many pendulous and doubting souls strengthening many followers and Disciples of our Saviour and perhaps converting some unbeleevers by teaching them that their expected Messiah was now come that he did live among them and had died for their sinnes and risen again for their justification That they I say after this office performed again deposited their bodies in the earth and ascended not corporally into heaven you may behold proved by this first reason drawn from Scripture For Christ is compared to the high Priest who alone entred the SANCTUM SANCTORUM Hebr. 9.7 It is true indeed that we enter into the Holiest by the bloud of Jesus Heb. 10.19 but he onely * Hebr. 10.10 by a new and living way through the vail that is to say his flesh * Hebr. 9.12 entred in once into the holy place His entring differing from others entring and differing in this That with his bodie he entred others ascended not into heaven with him bodily Secondly if they had ascended into heaven following Christ their bodies must have been
pec 4.15 The decree is performed if all the posterity of Adam be obnoxious to death Or as S. Augustine answered the Pelagians concerning those which shall be alive at Christs coming x Satìs est illos fuisse morti destinatos 〈◊〉 quae subsecuta esset si seculum processisset Quòd eximantur à morte erit casus neque privilegium paucorum universali causae derogat It sufficeth that they were appointed to die and die they should if the world had endured By casualty they are freed from death nor doth the dispensation with some particular ones infringe the universall cause as I vouched in the second book And as S. Augustine goeth on when they have lived a life full of miserie and calamitie who can say they have not tasted death especially since thirst hunger cold heat infirmities crosses sicknesses are nothing else but a daily dying In which regard the wise woman of Tekoa in her subtile oration saith not We shall all and every one die but 2. Sam. 14.14 We die MORIENDO MORIMUR so runneth the Hebrew and are as water spilt on the ground when immediately both before and after she had spoken of outward crosses y Etiam dum crescimus vita decrescit Even whilest we are growing our life decreaseth saith Seneca Which S. Augustine in libro Soliloq cap. 2. thus enlargeth z Vita mea quantò magìs crescit tantò magìs decrescit quantò magìs procedit tantò magìs ad mortem accedit My life in going forward groweth backward and by how much it advanceth forward by so much it maketh a nearer approach to death As the fire it self consumes its fuell and is nourished by the consumption of it so mans age is fed and nourished by the consumption of his life and of the age he liveth in Man at the same time begins to live and die for LIFE is but the way tending to DEATH a Nascendo morimur imò longè ante nativitatem morimur In our birth we die yea long before it From the instant of the souls infusion we begin to die Lastly I say in that Christ died for all Although some be extraordinarily dispensed withall every one may be said to die Christ by the grace of God tasted death for every man Hebr. 2.9 Thus much shall serve for the first part of the answer O Blessed Saviour who art life in thy self and the fountain of life unto others Grant I humbly beseech thee that when I shall passe from this present world from this dying life or living death I may evermore live by Thee in Thee and with Thee Amen Amen CHAP. II. 1. The third question resumed Whether every one must die The second part of the answer unto it That some have been excepted as Enoch and Elias The controversie hath been exquisitely handled by King James and Bishop Andrews 2. Bellarmines third demonstration that Antichrist is not yet come propounded The place of Malachi 4.5 expounded by Bishop Andrews and enlarged by my additions The Papists objection answered 3. The place of Ecclesiasticus 48.10 concerning Elias examined 4. Another place of Ecclesiasticus 44.16 concerning Enoch handled at large against Bellarmine Enoch was never any notorious sinner in some mens opinions Others otherwise Their arguments for both opinions are onely probable and answered My opinion and it confirmed Some think E. noch died Strange and various opinions concerning S. John the Evangelist his living death and miraculous grave More miracles or else mistakings in the Temples of Christs Sepulchre and of his Assumption about Jerusalem S. John did die Enoch did not die but is living Mine own opinion of the place Genes 5.24 Et non ipse and it confirmed A comparison between Enochs Elijahs and Christs ascension The posture and circumstances of Christs ascending 5. Bellarmine and others say Paradise is now extant In the earth or in the aire saith Lapide the Jesuit The old translation censured The heaven into which Enoch and Elias were carried was not Aërium nor Coeleste but Supercoeleste The earthly Paradise is not extant as it was Salianus with others say truly The materiall remaineth not the formal Superest quoad Essentiam non quoad Ornatum The Place is not removed but the Pleasure and Amenitie Salianus his grosse errour That Enoch and Elias are kept by Angels within the bounds of old Paradise on earth 6. Enoch shall never die as is proved from Hebr. 11.5 Three evasions in answer to that place confuted Melchizedech and strange things of him The East-Indian language hath great affinitie with the Hebrew An errour of moment in Guilielmus Postellus Barentonius Elias was not burnt by that fire which rapted him Soul and bodie concur to make a man saith Augustine from the great Marcus Varro Vives taxed Moses at the transsiguration appeared in his own bodie An idle conceit of Bellarmine concerning Moses his face and good observations of Origen upon that point It is probable that Elias was changed at his rapture and had then a glorified bodie An humane soul may possibly be in a mortall bodie in the third heaven Corah Dathan and Abiram are in their bodies in hell properly so called and alive in the hell of the damned Ribera and Viegas confuted Our Doctour Raynolds was not in the right in this matter Some kinde of proofs That Enoch and Elias are in glorified bodies in heaven The place of Revel 11.7 concerning the two Witnesses winnowed by Bishop Andrews Enoch and Elias are not those two witnesses THe main third question being Whether all men and every one must of necessitie die the first part of the answer was That there was no absolute necessitie but there might be an exception The second part of the answer touched at was this That some have been excepted who never did die nor shall die If I be further demanded Who they be I will onely insist in Enoch and Elias The controversie concerning which two men is so exquisitely handled by the most learned Monarch our late Soveraigne King James in his monitory Preface and by his Second the reverend Bishop Andrews in his answer to Bellarmine his Apologie cap. 11. that the most scrupulous inquisitour may be satisfied After I have selected some matters of moment from that unanswerable Prelate I will take leave to glean after the gathering of their of their full sheaves and to discover a few clusters after their plentifull vintage and to bring to your taste some remarkable passages concerning Enoch and Elias which perhaps they thought fit to omit as affecting brevitie or tying themselves most strictly to the question whilest the nature of my Miscellanies give me licence to travel farre and neare 2. Bellarmine Tom. 1 de Romano Pontifice 3.6 makes it his third Demonstration as he calleth it that Antichrist is not yet come Because Enoch and Elias are not come who yet do live and must oppose Antichrist Bellarmines first place is from Malach. 4.5 and sixth
Tim. 6.16 GOD onely hath immortalitie Neither was the body of Adam immortall as the Angelicall spirits and souls of men which had a beginning but shall have no end Nor immortall as the counsels of GOD which had no beginning but shall have an end His bodie was not eternal but eviternal or immortall not absolutely immortall but conditionally it should never have tasted death if he had not first tasted of the forbidden fruit Immortall not as if it could not die but because it might and could have lived ever He had not non posse mori and so he was mortall he had posse non mori and so was immortall As mortall is taken for earthly animall and contra-distinct to spirituall so his bodie was mortall and terrene not spirituall or celestiall As he could not possibly die unlesse he had sinned his very bodie was immortall In the Schoole-phrase thus both mortall and immortall are taken two waies Mortall for one who must needs die thus Adam was not mortall in innocency but by sinne was made mortall who can die thus was he mortall yet onely in sensu diviso because he could sinne therefore could die Immortall for one who cannot die so Adam in innocency was not immortall save onely in sensu conjuncto * Adam in natura sua habuit mortalitatem quandam scilicet aptitudinem moriendi it à aliquam immortalitatem in natura sua habuit id est aptitudinem quâ poterat non mori he was immortall and could not die unlesse he sinned upon whom there is no necessity laid that he should die thus was he simply immortall Lumbard thus Adam had in his nature some mortalitie an aptnes to die so he had in his nature some immortality that is * Pet. Diac. de Gratia Christ lib. 1. cap. 6. Fulg. lib. 2. cap. 13. Max. Profess Fidei snae cap. 8. to wit an aptnes by which he might not die 2. Sent. dist 19. lit F. Further as some have said Adam was neither mortall nor immortall for thus wrote Petrus Diaconus and Fulgentius * Corpus Adae ante peccatum mortale secundum aliam immortale secundum aliam causam dici poterat De Genesi ad literam lib. 6. cap. 25. and Maxentius so others have written that Adam was made both mortall and â—â—mortall and all and every one of these in some sense is most true Augustine saith that Adams body before sinne may be said to be mortall in one respect and immortall in another as he there proveth at large Hierome hath a different strain and an unusuall phrase in one of his * Epist ad Paulum Concordiensem epistles wherein he maketh the body to be eternall till the serpent by his sinne prevailed against Adam and ascribeth a second kinde of immortality to the body because some of the first ages lived so long a time as about or above 900 yeares Even they who say Adams body was mortall agree in sense with me They distinguish thus It is one thing to be mortall and another thing to be subject to death If they grant to us that he was not obnoxious to death and could not die without finne I will not be offended much though they say he was mortall As this our flesh which now we have is not therefore not to be wounded because there is no necessitie that it should be wounded so the flesh of Adam in paradise was not therefore not mortall because there was no necessitie that it should die De peccat Meritis Remis l. 1. c. 3. saith Augustine So that this is but a meer logomachy They who call him mortall expound themselves that he could not mori unlesse he had sinned and I mean no more when I say he was immortall that is he could not have died in the state of innocencie without a precedent transgression he could not have been subject or obnoxius to death They say though he should not have died yet he was mortall I say he was therefore onely immortall because in that blessed estate he could not die Whether of these two contraries Mortall or Immortall do best fit Adam before he sinned let the reader judge As bodies are compounded of contrarieties they are subject to dissolution to the evidencing whereof let me recount what Holcot saith on Wisedome 12.22 upon these words We should look for mercy 2 Aristotle saith Holcot spake these his last words IREIOYCE THAT I GO OUT OF THE WORLD WHICH IS COMPOUNDED OF CONTRARIES BECAUSE BACH OF THE FOURE ELEMENTS IS CONTRARY TO OTHER AND THEREFORE HOW CAN THIS BODY COMPOUNDED OF THEM LONG ENDURE Then he dyed and the Philosophers prayed for him saith Holcot And because he did scorn to be behinde the Philosophers in love to Aristotle Holcot himself secondeth their prayers thus * Ille qui suscipit auimas philosophorum suscipiat animam tuam He that receiveth the souls of Philosophers let him receive thy soul This he speaketh to Aristotle by a part of that little Rhetorick that Holcot had or was used in his dayes or otherwise it might be the prayer of the Philosophers related by Holcot for the words are doubtfull No marvell therefore if after this our Christian Peripateticks the Divines of Culleyn have made Aristotle a Saint as they did if we beleeve * Corn. Agr. De Vanit Scient Cornelius Agrippa and perhaps prayed to him as devoutly as others prayed for him * Dinis annumerant They count him among the Gods saith Agrippa in his 45 Chapter though Agrippa himself be of a contrarie opinion for he saith * Ipsis Daemouibus dignum factus sacrificium Aristotle killed himself being made a sacrifice worthy of the Devils Sure I am I have read in a book Of the life and death of Aristotle in the beginning whereof the Poët prayeth to GOD from heaven to help him to write concerning Aristotle acceptable things and to speak in his words De sapiente viro cujus cor lumine miro Lustrâsti Divae super omnes Philosophiae Quem si non fractum lethi per flebilis actum Adventus prolis Divae veri quoque Solis Post se liquisset fidei qui vi micuisset Creditur à multis doctoribus artis adultis Quòd fidei lumen illustrans mentis acumen Defensatorem vix scivisset meliorem From whence the commenting questionist examineth Whether Aristotle would have been in an high degree the great champion of the Christian faith if he had lived after Christs time And he resolveth affirmatively because Aristotle had the best intellect among all the creatures under the sunne for supernaturals saith he are given according to the disposition of naturals * Cum conatu hominum with mens endeavour grace distilling on man according as he well useth the talent of nature But at the end of that book the Expositor strikes all dead in these words * Concludendo finaliter cum veritate dico c. Concluding
finally and with truth I say that Aristotle who heartily implored the mercy of GOD praying * ENS ENTIUM MISEREREMEI O BEING OF BEINGS HAVE MERCY ON ME by an holy and bodily death is translated * Ad solium aeternae beatitudinis to the Chair of Estate the Seat-royall and Throne of everlasting blisse Yea he holds the man mad who doubts hereof because Aristotle had the knowledge of the Almighty because he loved GOD as the fountain of all goodnesse because Aristotle was as necessary before the incarnation of Christ as the giving of grace necessarily presupposeth nature Whereupon he presumeth that Aristotle was * Praecursor Christi in uaturalibus sicut Joannes Baptista fuit praecursor ad praeparandam ipsiplebem perfectam in gratuitis fuit unus ex iis in Lege Veteri qui per gratiam personalem fuerunt de Lege Nova the forerunner of Christ in naturals as John the Baptist in supernaturals and that he was one of them in the Old Law who by a personall grace were of the New Law Just as the Fathers say David was a man in the Old not of the old Testament If Aristotle had grace if he be the fore-runner of Christ if he be placed in eternall happinesse it is a question not unworthy these curious times Whether they sinned most who prayed unto him or Holcot or the Philosophers cited by Holcot who prayed for him And without just offence to Aristotles Lycaeum I hope I may say though Jofrancus Offusius that great Mathematician in his preface to Maximilian which is before his book Of the divine power of starres saith that Aristotle was the High-priest of Philosophers yea * Vir coelestis Hens Prolegom in Nonnum an heavenly man saith Heinsius others have deified him Yet there were divers Philosophers from Aristotles death till some hundreds of yeares after Christs time who were in greater estimate among all the learned of those times then ever Aristotle was and perhaps there may be a farre perfecter body of Philosophie compiled from the dispersed tenents of other ancienter Philosophers and more accordant to truth and Scriptures then ever could be gathered from Peripatericall principles Theodoret in his fift book De curandis Graecorum affectibus as some have it or De Graecarum affectionum curatione lib. 4. which some do intitle De Naturâ hath these words * Aristoteles animam corruptibilem esse impudenter asseruit aequè ac Democritus Epicurus Aristotle hath impudently affirmed that the soul was corruptible as much as Democritus and Epicurus Again Who be now the Presidents of the Stoicall sect and who are the defenders of the doctrine of Aristotle the Stagiritan c. And as for Plato who made many speeches of the immortalitie of the soul he could never perswade that assertion no not to Aristotle his own hearer Concerning Plato Augustine saith he was most eagerly studious and Vives there addeth that Justin Martyr Eusebius and Theodoret report that Plato translated many things out of Hebrew books into his own And Numenius a Philosopher said * Quiuam hodie inveniuntur Stoicae sectae praesidentes quive etiam sunt qui Aristotelis Stagiritae doctrinam corroborant c. Aâ— Plato quidem qui complures sermones de animae immortalitate disseruit nè Aristoteli quidene auditori suo persuasit eam positionem Aug. de Civit. Dei lib. 8. cap. 11. What is Plato but Moses atticizing Moses the Athenian Hierome Dialog adversus Pelagianos lib. 1. bringeth in the Orthodoxal though personated Atticus against the feigned hereticall Critobulus saying thus * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I care not what Aristotle but what Paul teacheth And on Ecclesiastes 10.15 The labour of the foolish wearieth every one of them * Neque enim mihi curae est quid Aristoteles sed quid Paulus doceat Reade saith he Plato peruse the subtilties of Aristotle * Lege Platonem Aristotelis revolve versutias and That text is fulfilled upon them Though there he nibble at Plato aswell as he biteth Aristotle yet others have stiled him The divine Plato And when Plato so often in his works saith thus * Antiqui perhibent In priscis habetur Oraculis The ancients do affirm It is in the old Oracles and the like he points not at his master Socrates or the preceding Pythagoras but to those learned Sages and ancient Magi who delivered these depths to the Egyptians as they did to him Augustine thus Therefore I was willing to treat of this point with the Platonicks because their books are better known For both the Greeks whose tongue excelleth among the Gentiles have highly extolled them and also the Latines being moved hereunto either by their excellency or by their glory and renown or by their sweetnesse c. So much for the great esteem of Plato hath Augustine Ludovicus Vives on this place addeth that from the dayes of Plato and Aristotle till the reigne of Severus the Emperour Aristotle was rather named then read or understood Then arose Alexander Aphrodisaeus to expound Aristotle yet Plato was more in request * Ideo cum Platonicis placuit hanc causam agere quia eorum sunt literae uotiores Nam Graeci quorum lingua in Gentibus praeeminet eos magnâ praedicatione celebrârunt Latini permoti earum vel excellentiâ vel gloriâ vel gratiâ c. Aug. De Civit. 8.10 untill Schools were publikely erected in France and Italy that is so long as the Greek and Latine tongue flourished Then falleth an heavy censure * Crebrior in manibus hominum notior usque ad Scholas in Gallia Italia publicè constitutas id est quamdiu Graeca Latina lingua viguerunt After that sciences began to be theatricall * Postquam theatricae coeperunt esse disciplinae omnisque earum fructus existimatus est posse disputando fucum faâ—ere os obturare pulvereÌ„ ante oculos jacere idque imperitissim â peritiâ nominibus ad libitum confictis accommodatiores ad rem visi sunt libri Logici Physici Aristotelis and all their profit was thought to be able to deceive in disputing and throw dust before the eyes by a most ignorant dexteritie and with words coyned at pleasure the Logick and Physick books of Aristotle seemed to be more fit And now was Plato not named and though Vives confesseth he thinketh Aristotle no lesse learned then Plato yet he calleth Plato the most holy Philosopher nor can endure to have him neglected And when Scaliger saith * Mancipia paucae lectionis qui in rebus divinis an eferunt Platonem Aristoteli Jul. Scal. Exercit. 365. sect 3. They be slaves of small reading who in divine things preferre Plato before Aristotle he speaketh partially neglecting diviner words of Plato then those cited out of Aristotle and straining the words cited to a more celestiall sense then ever they were intended as if Aristotle
may seem probable certain it is Christ wanted no comelines nor beautie though he had no womanish or effeminate shape Tom 4. Disput 1. quaest 14. punct 2. but such as was most befitting a man saith Gregorie de Valentia Thou art beautifull O my love as Tirzah comely as Jerusalem Cant. 6.4 and Thou art all fair there is no spot in thee Cant 4.7 In which regard perhaps it was that though the humors of Christs body did increase with the increase of his bodie and grew up from infancie to puerilitie from it to juvenilitie thence to virilitie yet there was so harmonious a proportion if not of weight yet of justice that we read not any one part of Christs bodie to have been out of tune excepting in his Agonie and Passion when his very bones were out of joint nor is he recorded to have been sick at any time nor so much as inclining to sicknes all his life Non suscepit infirmitates individui sed speciei He took not upon him the infirmities of particular men but of mankinde as to be weary to mourn to weep to be hungry thirstie to suffer to die As for sinne and diseases flowing from sinne he was subject to none nor to personall defects but onely to the generall defects of humane bodies Indeed it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas in Reguâ—is breviorâ—â—us quaest 177. Esai 53.4 Surely he took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses but Basil expounds it thus He bare our sicknesses not that he did transferre them upon himself but because he healed those that were sick Where he semes to remove all sicknes from Christ Besides Adam his excellent temper consider his food he had all the trees of the garden for meat except the forbidden one The healthie waters about Paradise he had for drink Wholsome things he knew from hurtfull if any hurtfull things were His giving them names doth prove that he was acquainted with their natures As for taking too much or too little it could not be whilest his soul was innocent and spotlesse For he had originall justice which in the use of lawfull meats should subject his senses and his appetite unto reason As for clothing he needed it not Innocency apparelled him till he put off the robe of righteousnes and so it should have continued Lastly as Adam in Paradise had a deep sleep which fell upon him Genes 2.21 which I confesse was extraordinarie so Augustine Aug. De Civ t. 14.16 Tertul. De Anima cap. 24. Tertullian and the School after them do yeeld that ordinarie sleep was not excluded out of Paradise but in the night he was allowed sleep So that Adam enjoying all things necessarie delightfull or convenient which concerned his bodie we may safely conclude the first reason That since neither outward force nor inward distemper could befall Adams body if he had continued in innocencie his body should never have tasted of death and so was and so should have been immortall And this will yet more plainly appeare if we will weigh the reasons following 4. Among the trees of the garden there was the tree of life which Adam had libertie freely to eat of Some think it was appointed as a means to translate Adam to immortalitie without sicknes or death Others say it would hinder the losse of naturall heat and radicall moisture whereby though yeares or age yet weaknes or de crepitnes should not come nigh him Others say that it being once tasted should bring perfect immortalitie even such immortalitie as we should have after the Resur rection See Bellarmine de Gratia primi hominis cap. 28. and Mr. Salkeld in his Treatise of Paradise where in some whole Chapters he hath laboriously collected and copiously explained the various opinions concerning the tree of life Take my gleanings after their full vintage and taste what I have gathered Though Lumbard Sent. 2. Dist 29. Lit. F. questioneth Whether Adam before his sinne did eat of the tree of life and out of Augustine concludeth there That they did eat as it was commanded that they should eat of every tree fave one yet I can no way agree with him This his errour is grounded on an other which he hath cited Distinct 9. of the same book in the letters B and C That Adam was commanded to eat of the tree of life and that he should have sinned if he had not used it For first It was not a command but a permission God gave the use of the tree no otherwise to man Genes 1.29 then to the beasts and fowls the green herbs verse 21 but this was by way of indulgence not of command Secondly Genes 2.16 Of every tree of the garden thou may'st freely eat And though it be in the Hebrew Eating thou shalt eat yet it implieth no absolute precept Thirdly Genes 3.2 the woman saith We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden she saith not We musteat or We are charged much lesse presently so soon as we see them or before we do other things Fourthly Genes 9.3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things Are we commanded to eat every beast and every herb then whosoever forbeareth any one sinneth Or was there in this a difference between the grant unto Adam and the grant unto Noah and their posterities The second errour is of Lumbard That Adam did eat of the tree of life His proof out of Augustine falleth short even as it is cited though the place is mistaken by him and the words maym'd Indeed Augustine thus * Rectè profectò intelliguntur primi homines ante malignam persuasionem abstinuisse à cibo vetito atque usi fuisse concessis ac per hoc caeteris praecipuè ligno vitae De peccat Meritis Remis 2.21 Certainly it is well thought that our first parents before that malicious persuasion did abstain from the forbidden food and used such things as were granted them and consequently the rest specially the tree of life * Note first He saith granted not commanded as Noah ate not of every thing granted to him yet Noah spent many hundred yeares more time after the Floud then Adam did in Paradise Neither can I think Adam in that estate so addicted to his belly that he in so short a time would cat of so many of all and every tree Secondly Rupertus saith The eating of the tree of life but once Rup in Genes l. 3. cap. 30. had made them live for ever Augustine moreover addeth It is no where read in Genesis Aug. Cont. Adversar Legis Prophet 1.15 that Adam in Paradise did not eat of the fruit of the tree of life of which place by and by Now as Augustine is directly against me in the second point he is as directly against them in the first point * Vtendi ad escam omni ligno quod in Paradiso erat
the branches being saved the root also should not be saved But in his book De praescript advers Haereticos as it is cited by Bellarmine there is no mention of Tatian in Rhenanus his Edition Augustine saith of the Tatians and Encratites * Quòd contradicunt primorum hominum saluti Aug. De Haeresib cap. 25. That they gainsay the salvation of the first men Where Bellarmine used another Edition then Erasmus his or was mistaken in the collation He who will see more into this point let him consult with Bellarmine in the place above cited and Salianus ad Annum Mundi 930. where he justly taxeth Rupert for saying in this third book on Genes chap. 31. * Salvationem Adami à multit liberè negari à nullo satìs firmiter defendi That the salvation of Adam is freely denied by many and by none strongly enough defended And he bringeth many authorities and proofs to the contrary From Irenaeus he bids them blush for saying Adam was not saved and more vehemently That by saying so they make themselves Hereticks and Apostates from the truth and Advocates for the Serpent and Death God cursed not Adam and Eve but the earth and the Serpent Yea before God pronounced any punishment against Eve or Adam even in the midst of his cursing of the Serpent with the same breath he both menaced Satan and comforted Adam and Eve with the gracious promise of the Messiah Genes 3.15 Now there was never any unto whom God vouchsafed a speciall promise of Christ but they were saved Indeed the Apostle reckoneth not Adam among the faithfull ones Hebr. 11. but one reason of this omission is because he entreateth of such faithfull ones onely as were much persecuted which Adam was not so farre as is recorded If it be further objected That God is called THE GOD OF ABRAHAM ISAAC AND JACOB Exod. 3.6 Matth. 22.32 and is no where called THE GOD OF ADAM let it be answered That Adam is called THE SONNE OF GOD Luke 3.38 And I think he is too severe a judge who saith a sonne of God is damned The Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase set forth by Rivius on the Canticles chap. 1. vers 1. saith * Et veuit dies Sabbati protexit eum aperuit os suum dixit Psalmum Cantici diei Sabbati That the first song that ever was made was indited by Adam in the time when his sinne was forgiven him Damianus à Goes De Moribus Aethiopum makes this the belief of Zagazabo and the Ethiopians for whom he negotiated That Christs soul descended into Hell for Adams soul pag. 93. and that Adam was redeemed by Christ from Hell pag. 55. How glorious was it for Christ to save his first sheep and how would the Devil glorie if it were otherwise Adams fig-leaves may be thought to be sharp afflictive and penitentiall Epiphanius Haeres 46. calleth Adam Holy and saith We beleeve he is among those Fathers whom Christ reckoneth alive not dead God is not the God of the dead but of the living Irenaeus saith Adam humbly bare the punishment laid upon him Can humility be damned then may pride be saved Josephus 1.2 recordeth That Adam foretold the universall destruction of the World one by the floud the other by fire And can the first of Mankinde the first King Priest and Prophet of the World be condemned Others probably conjecture that before his death he called the chief of his children grand-children and their descendants and gave them holy and ghostly counsel as Abraham did Genes 18.19 and Jacob Genes 49.1 c. and Moses Deuteron 31.1 c. Salianus fits him a particular speech at his death and a witty Epitaph Feuardentius on Irenaeus thus relateth Nicodemus Christs Disciple in the History ascribed to him OF THE PASSION AND RESVRRECTION OF THE LORD reporteth That our Lord Jesus Christ when he descended into Hell in his soul spake thus to Adam and held his hand PEACE BE VNTO THEE VVITH ALL THY SONNES MY IVST ONES But Adam falling on his knees such spirituall knees as before his spirituall hand which Christ held while both their bodies were in the grave weeping-ripe thus prayed with a loud voice * Exaltabo te Domine quoniam suscepisti me nec delectâsti inimicos meos super me Domine Deus clamavi ad te sanâsti me eduxisti ab inferis animam meam salvâstime à descendentibus in lacum I will magnifie thee Lord because thou hast received me and hast not made glad mine enemies over me Lord God I have cried unto thee and thou hast healed me Thou hast brought up my soul from Hell thou hast saved me from those that go down to the pit Thus Salianus in his Scholia ad Annum 930. Another ancient Apocryphal book affirmeth that Adam repented Didacus Vega in his second Sermon on the fifth penitentiall Psalme pag. 443. thus Leonardus de Vtino in his Book De Legibus Sermon de Poenitentia saith That Adam repented not of his sinne but remained obstinate till the death of Abel but when he saw him lye dead at his feet wallowed in his bloud and yet pale and as in a glasse saw the deformity of death he began to repent Strabo saith He was so sorrowfull that he vowed chastity for ever and would have performed it if an Angel had not injoyned him the contrary And from the authority of Josephus he saith Adam was so sorry for Abel that he wept an whole hundred yeares But I beleeve saith Vega He rather wept for the cause which was sinne then for the very death of Abel Ludovicus Vertomannus in his sixth Book fourth Chapter of his journey to India hath recorded that a Mahumetan Merchant told him that at the top of an high mountain in the Iland of Zaylon subject to the King of Narsinga there is a den in which Adam after his fall lived and continued very penitently And though their tradition rests on an idle conjecture because there is yet seen the print of the steps of his feet almost two spannes long for how should they know they were his feet rather then some giants and because how Adam should come to this Iland and why cannot be shewed yet so farre as is probable we will joyn issue with their beleef to wit That he was penitent and so saved Thus much be spoken concerning the salvation of Adams soul Concerning Adams actuall sinne though I said truly before That as it was private and personall it was not imputed to us yet I must needs say as it was ideall and representative it was and is imputed to us He who denieth this let him also deny that Christs active and passive Merits are imputed to us Neither can the Divine providence be taxed with rigour much lesse with injustice for imputing Adams sinne unto us For first he imputeth not our own actuall and personall iniquities but forgiveth us both this sinne of Adam and all manner of
tree and now they all perish that never were acquainted with Paradise and let me adde They are most justly punished Neither let man cavill or cast aspersion of unrighteousnes upon God For though men be but of yesterday yea though the childe be born but this minute yet by reason of their originall sinne in Adam and with him they were justly sentenced in Adam unto death almost six thousand yeares ago For though God needeth no defence from the actions and behaviour of men yet from their usances and customes generally received from their right and equitie daily practised let us ascend to behold the blamelesse course in the like of the Almightie Do we finde a young snake viper or other venemous or hurtfull beasts birds or the egges of a cocatrice we destroy them not for the harm which they have done but for the kinde sake and for the spoil which they may do Do not prodigall great heirs waste and scatter abroad estates ensured to posteritie Do they not cut off intailes annihilate and void perpetuities draw inheritances drie in smoke and consume them wholly on gut or groin to the everlasting prejudice of their issues Did not the disobedience of Queen Vashti unto her husband do a wrong not to the King Ahasuerus onely but to all the princes and all the people Esther 1.16 and as being exemplarie was punished accordingly If the whordome of the High-priests daughter be a profanation of her father Levit. 21.9 and therefore she was to be burnt alive though other whores were put to milder deaths if an evil done to a brother striketh up to the abuse of the father as it doth for God rendered the wickednesse of Abimelech which he did unto his father in flaying his seventie brethren Judges 9.56 then why might not the wickednesse of a father descend in some sort upon the children in a storm of wrath and punishment 3. The husband representeth the wife what bargain he maketh she maketh they are one flesh The great commandment to keep the sabbath was given to sonne and daughter to servants and to strangers but not to the wife She was forbidden in her husband which the rest were not but dividedly so was Eve forbid in Adam not inhibited her self but in him who represented her The men of Israel represented the women and the women had good by the actions or passions of the men The females were redeemed in the males every male gave a ransome for his soul unto the Lord all and every one rich and poore alike even half a shekel and they gave this offering unto the Lord to make an atonement for their souls Exod. 30.15 Women were partakers of this benefit and in the mens atonement was the womans comprized Neither were the females presented to the Lord but the males the males onely and the women in them and by them but not in their own persons In Gods due claim to the beasts these three conditions were to be observed First that the beasts should be clean and so not swine not horses camels dromedaries elephants or the like but onely these three kindes sheep ruther-beasts and goats were the Lords unlesse you will make up the number foure with an asse which was to be redeemed with a lambe or his neck to be broken Exod. 13.13 For though it be said Exod. 13.2 Sanctifie unto me all the first-born whatsoever openeth the wombe among the children of Israel both of man and beast it is mine Yet you must not extend the words to dogs or cats or things unclean but onely to such clean beasts as God hath appointed for sacrifices Yea though it be said Numb 18.15 The firstling of unclean beasts thou shalt redeem You must know there is a double uncleannesse First that which is unclean throughout all its species as swine and horses and the like Secondly that which is unclean by accident and is contra-opposed to perfect and unblemished Levit. 22.22 23. as blinde or broken or maimed or having a wen or scurvie or scabbed or which hath any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts such beasts even of clean beasts as sheep goats c. the Lord counted unclean and claimed them not Those that were thus unclean by accident were to be redeemed and so that place of Numb is to be understood and not to be wire-drawn as if God did claim the unclean beasts to be his The second condition That those clean beasts should be first-born Thou shalt set apart unto the Lord all that openeth the matrix and every firstling that cometh of a beast Exod. 13.12 Thirdly these clean first-born or sirstlings must not be the females though they first open the matrix but the males 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuagints have it Exod. 13.12 The males shall be the Lords Semblably in the case of mankinde women were not the Lords claim but the men onely and the women included in the men For though it be said in generall terms Exod. 13.13 All the first-born among thy children thou shalt redeem yet the women were not redeemed but in the men and the men onely were offered Luke 2.23 Every male that openeth the wombe shall be holy Openeth the wombe by extramission and ejection not by intromission and injection as the Hebrew phrase importeth the Greek is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnis masculus primogenitus as Beza reads it Omne masculinum as the Vulgat hath it according to that Exod. 22.29 The first-born of thy sonnes thou shalt give unto me From whence let me inferre this conclusion That the first-born had his denomination from the mothers first birth or parturition as well as from the fathers first generation Exod. 11.5 From the first-born of Pharaoh to the first-born of the maid-servant that is behinde the mill The Septuagints stile the first-born not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with reference to the fathers act but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the mother and Christ is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a carnall father for he had none or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 John 1.18 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 2.7 her first-born sonne Which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is ill interpreted by the old Bishops bibles Mat. 1.25 first-begotten and by the Genevean translation as ill rendered Luke 2.7 forsaking their good rendering of it Mat. 1.25 But our late translation in both places aptly hath it the first-born and not first-begotten Though Jacob saith Genes 49.3 Reuben thou art my first-born yet Leah might have said the same words as well for he was the first-born of both Yea I dare say if a man had more wives at once as Jacob had or successively as many others the first male childe of each of these women by the same man may justly be called his first-born and every one of these first-born children if they had lived under the Leviticall law had been consecrated to God And therefore Reuben having lost his birth-right the double
7.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Totum hominem sanum feci I made a man every whit whole Healed a man wholly say the Rhemists Perhaps I may adde that Christ never healed the body of any but he healed his soul likewise at least for the instant time I am sure Chrysostom Augustine and Beda to this purpose say The same man was healed by Christ Joh. 5.14 Qui foris ab infirmitate ipse etiam intus salvavit à scelere He saved the man from outward infirmitie and inward sinne He healed as I may comment on the words his body at the pool of Bethesda his soul in the Temple Christ himself said Totum hominem sanum feci I have healed the whole man and Beza on Joh. 7.23 saith He was healed both soul and body Corporaliter spiritualiter Both bodily and ghostly saith Hugo Cardinalis Even he who was impotent and had an infirmity thirty eight yeares upon Christs command immediately was made whole and took up his bed and walked Joh. 5.9 and immediately upon Christs word the blinde received his sight Mark 10.52 the deaf and ill-speaking man after Christ had said EPHPHATHA his eares were straightway opened and the string of his tongue was loosed and he spake plain Mark 7.35 The fever immediately left Simons wives mother after Christ took her by the hand and lift her up and she ministred unto them Mark 1.31 Christ left no relique of any old disease and whom he healed of any one infirmitie we never read that he complained of any other So though Lazarus before his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Languens longâ infirmitate fractus actu aegrotus Pining feeble sick saith Salmeron yet was he immediately and perfectly cured and as I imagine he was upon his resuscitation not onely in latitudine sanitatis Void of all weaknesse so that no part was sick or mis-affected by any dyscrasie but in perfectione salutis In full compleat health and had obtained by Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The height and fulnesse of health a constant setled habituall soundnesse in each part of his body For as art is but the ape of nature and naturall things are farre more absolute and perfect then artificiall so things miraculous as much exceed things naturall in perfection So that no naturall crasis no temper or temperature no health is so pure and exact as that which is wrought immediately by a divine finger In the vigour and strength whereof Lazarus might have lived as Adam and Eve did a long time 6. What do I speak of likelihoods or possibilities when we have good Authours which give us more light concerning Lazarus his life and concerning his death There is a manuscript of the English historie in the Vatican at Rome testifying That about the 35 yeare of Christ saith Baronius on the same yeare Lazarus Marie Magdalene and Martha with Marcella their waiting-woman with Maximinus their disciple with Joseph of Arimathea their companion e Imponebantur navi absque remigio were put into a little sciph or great boat without oares or fit tackling and so were in great danger at the sea but by Gods providence f Massiliam appulerunt they arrived at Marsillis a citie of Provance in France Tostatus upon 1. King 17. saith Lazarus was a Bishop and an holy Martyr Epiphanius in the catalogue of Manichaeus his assertions saith he hath it by tradition that Lazarus was thirty yeares old when he was raised up and that he lived afterward other thirty yeares See the same Epiphanius Haeres 66. Gregory the great Dialog lib. 4.28 addeth that Lazarus never laught after he was raised and he did so tame himself with fastings watchings and labours that his very conversation did seem to speak though he held his tongue that he had seen the infernall torments So farre Gregorie Yet under his correction he might as well and as much bring his bodie under and flee from the verie inclination to sinne because he had tasted of the joyes celestiall and peace unconceiveable Thus have you the life and death of Lazarus O Thou who art the Resurrection and the Life quicken me with thy Spirit lead me by thy grace and crown me with thy glory for thy tender mercy O my sweet Saviour my joy and delight the life of my soul my Mediatour and Advocate Jesu Christ Amen CHAP. IIII. 1. Tabitha died again 2. So did Eutychus 3. They who were raised about the Passion of Christ died not again as many ancient and late Writers do imagine Mr. Montague is more reserved 1. NOw am I come to speak of those who after Christs ascension were raised For though in his life time none of Christs inwardest disciples or friends raised any as Elisha's servant could not raise the Shunammites sonne but Elisha himself must do it and did it 2. King 4.31 c. And Elisha himself raised none while his master Elijah lived but Elijah himself did it 1. King 17.22 yet after Christs ascension by his power communicated to them the beleever shall do the works that I do and greater works then these shall he do saith Christ Joh. 14.12 One was raised by S. Peter an other by S. Paul You shall finde the first Act. 9.40 When Peter had kneeled and prayed and turned him to Tabitha her body and said Tabitha arise she opened her eyes and when she saw Peter she sat up Yet was she dead before and washt and laid in an upper chamber vers 37. 2. And for the other the storie is this Act. 20.9 As Paul was long preaching Eutychus sunk down with sleep and fell down from the third loft and was taken up dead perchance broken in some parts of his bodie bruised certainly him S. Paul raised and they brought the young man alive and were not a little comforted vers 12. Of these two as well as of the rest there is no doubt but that they lived again again to die So thinks Aquinas 3. part Summ. Quaest 53. Artic. 3. and the whole School following him agree with us in this So Suarez Lorinus who not Take one of the ancients for all Cyprian reckoneth up those who were raised in the Old Testament and others raised by Christs command and saith of these h Aliquo tempore beneficio vitae usi iterum ad funera rediêre Pag. 523. de Resur Christi paragr 8. They lived a while and died again and a little before of them in the Old Testament i Ad mortem quam gustaverunt iterum redierunt They tasted of death the second time And therefore it needs the lesse proof because none denieth it and the contrary needeth the lesse disproof because none hath averred it 3. Now it is time to come to the third and last part of my main first division and to speak of them who arose about the time that Christ died for of them there is a deep and intricate question and the historie of them is set down at large
Therefore he arose not at all as yet Lastly should we grant that Adam did bodily arise with Christ yet hath Pineda neither Authour nor reason that Adam ascended with Christ into heaven as I said before which is the main point now in question Thus much if not too much touching Adam 3. Eve also arose saith Dionysius Carthusianus on Matth. 27. but voucheth no authoritie nor produceth any reason or probabilitie and therefore I passe it over the more slightly adding onely this that in the Original it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be understood either no women arose or more then one or two though Pineda mentioneth not one woman and Carthusian but onely and soly Eve But why Eve should rather arise then Sarah or the mother of Moses who were singled out for famous Heroinae Hebr. 11. or other Prophetisses in the Old and New Testament as old Anna and the like I see no reason or that Eve in her raised bodie should be translated into heaven and not Adam her husband nor Abraham nor David is both foolish and fabulous This have I said as supposing the words to be understood of women alone as indeed they are not nor probably can they be applied to women mixt with men so far as any likelihood could present it self to the great conjecturer Pineda who would have balked none of them 4. Abraham arose saith Pineda on Job 19. and annexeth this colour because Abraham rejoyced to see Christs day and saw it and was glad John 8.56 I answer Whatsoever is meant by these words of the Text My day either Christs Godhead which Abraham saw a Quia mysterium Trinitatis agnovit Because he acknowledged the mysterie of the Trinitie saith S. Augustine Or the day of Christs nativitie which Abraham might have notice of in his life time by supernaturall inspirations and then did remember being dead and desired that day for separated souls have both remembrance and appetite intellectuall as I shall evidence hereafter Or it may be Abraham being in blisse might first know it by divine illumination so soon as the day came and thereupon rejoyced as the Angel did and the heavenly host Luke 2.13 of which host Abraham might be one for even the souls of men are also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revel 19.14 saith Gregory Moral 31.12 In the foresaid place of Luke mention is made of an Angel and the heavenly host whereas if onely Angels were the heavenly host it might have been onely said The Angels or onely The heavenly host but The Angel and the heavenly host may give us cause to think that there were some of the heavenly host which were not Angels though Angels onely be mentioned If so humane souls were part of that quire and then Abraham in likelihood was one of them Now as the chief Angel like a chaunter began the Evangelisme of Christs birth so might it be answered by the heavenly host viz. as is probable partly by the Angels singing Glory to God in the highest partly by Abraham and the souls of men concluding the Anthem On earth peace good will toward men I say Whatsoever is meant by the words My day they cannot be expounded of Christs resurrection Some there are who interpret My day of the time of Christs passion whom Maldonate justly misliketh because saith he it is added ABRAHAM SAW IT AND REJOYCED but then when Christ said these words Abraham could not see Christs passion because it was not yet come I may say the same or more against Pineda who will have it expounded of the day of Christs resurrection for Christ speaketh of the day that was past he did see it he was glad and rejoyced so that day was ended when Christ said this but Christs resurrection was not accomplished when he uttered these words therefore they cannot be understood of Christs resurrection And if they were so to be interpreted yet it is not written Abraham arose or Abraham was partaker with Christ or Abraham ascended bodily into heaven this being the issue which we joyned in this controversie but Abraham rejoyced he saw it and was glad which words differ farre from Pineda his ridiculous interpretation 5. An other which rose at the same time was Isaac saith Pineda ibid. for he was a parable of the resurrection and this was done to recompense the fear which possessed Isaac of being slain when he represented Christ To this puncto I answer Pineda himself will not say that every one who was a parable or pledge of the resurrection or who figured it was raised as Samson from his sleep arising in strength and carrying away the gates of Azzah in type of Christ who brought away the gates both of death and hell or those who were raised by the Prophets or by Christ himself or the like for he mentioneth none of these Secondly what proof what consequence what shadow of truth is there that Isaac his fear which was past he being dead one thousand seven hundred yeares before should just now be recompensed and recompensed by being raised to a temporall life which was a poore reward if he ascended not into heaven which Pineda proveth not nor can prove Lastly though it be truth it self that Jacob sware by the fear of his father Isaac Genes 31.53 yet it is not meant as Pineda fancieth the fear that Isaac was in when he was to be offered For I suppose he knew by Abraham that it was Gods especiall appointment and that he also willingly offered himself and might think as Abraham did that God was able to raise him up even from the dead Hebr. 11.19 that in his voluntarie condescent and free-will-offering he might be a type of Christ who layed down his life John 10.17 But the fear of Isaac was either the filial fear by which Isaac reverenced worshipped God as Aben Ezra and Cajetan say or the pious and humane fear wherewith Jacob revered his father Isaac or rathest of all Fear is here taken for the object of fear Metonymically for God himself as it is also taken Esa 8.13 Let God be your fear let God be your dread as Cornelius Cornelii à lapide hath observed after Augustine and divers others for not Isaac his fright or Jacob his pietie is to be sworn by but God Deuter. 6.13 O God the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob the God of the living and not of the dead I beseech thee make me to die to my self and live to thee through him whom the Fathers looked for and whose day Abraham rejoyced to see even Jesus Christ thy onely Sonne my alone Saviour Amen CHAP. VIII 1. Pineda his fancie that Jacob then was raised 2. The reason why the Patriarchs desired the Translation of their bones was not to rise with Christ as Pineda opineth but upon other grounds and to other ends 3. Where Joseph was first buried where secondly 4. The great difficultie
in a long narration especially if it be sudden he hath mingled and confounded some things a In quibusdam etiam memoriâ lapsus fuerit And forgot himself in some things to wit in such things as belonged little or nothing to the purpose for he was busily musing and intent upon the main matter But saith he S. Luke writing the historie changed not one jot but writ as Steven spoke Now we need not defend Steven from all errour and fault saith he but we must quit the Evangelist For onely the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists did never labi memoriâ or erre in any matter great or small other men did His proofs are these Jephthah in Judges 11.26 pretendeth 300 yeares possession when they were not so many and the divine Pen-man or Historiographer writeth as Jephthah pretended and established not the truth of the thing it self I answer that Salianus in his Annales Anno Mundi 2849 maketh one account wherein the time of the Israelites coming out of Egypt to the instant of Jephthahs arguing is 377 yeares and from the death of Sihon king of the Amorites 337 yeares But the truth is if we will hit the exact number both Salianus and Tremellius and many others say That from the coming out of Egypt and from the giving of the Law unto this present controversie of Jephthah with the King of the Amorites there were 305 or 306 yeares expired And Tremellius well observeth that Jephthah began his narration from their coming forth of Egypt vers 16. Therefore thence beginneth the number and the reckoning Now the shortning of an account is an usuall Ellipsis both in Scripture and in other Authours The 70 Interpreters are cited for 72. Among the Romanes the Centum-viri consisted of one hundred and five men Judges 20.46 all which fell of Benjamin that day were 25000. yet there fell that day 100 more vers 35. So 2. Sam. 5.5 the account is shortened by six moneths lesse then was set down in the precedent verse it being b Synecdoche frequent ad rotunditatem numeri A frequent Synecdoche to make a round and smooth reckoning saith Tremellius If any shall yet contend that Jephthah saith expresly v. 26. Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her towns and in Aroer and her towns and in all the cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon 300 yeares Peter Martyr on the place answereth That the Scripture-account often followeth the greater number Now because the yeares from Sihons death were nearer 300. then 200. Jephthah reckoneth not the refract but the whole number and accounteth them 300 yeares as inclining to the greater number For Sihon was overcome and slain the last yeare of Moses his life being to the present debate 266 yeares saith Abulensis 267 saith Lyranus 270 yeares saith Peter Martyr If Peter Martyrs answer be sleighted I adde that the perfection of Scriptures stands not so strictly on exactnesse of number but that it puts a certain number for an uncertain Instances are obvious So while we plead too much for number we shall as S. Augustine saith forget or neglect both weight and measure Lastly grant that Jephthah either mistook or mispleaded the yeares in a braving fashion and say that the holy Ghost hath penned not what was truth in it self but what Jephthah alledged erroneously or covetously for his prescription for Jephthah had more then one errour yet it followeth not that S. Steven was deceived for he was full of the holy Ghost when he spake this Act. 7.55 and before he spake this he was full of faith and of the holy Ghost Act. 6.5 Full of faith and power vers 8. and they that disputed with Steven were not able to resist the wisdome and the Spirit by which he spake v. 10. Therefore he spake wisely truely and by the Spirit as well as S. Luke wrote by the Spirit and neither of them could in this passage erre though Jephthah be held a man of imperfections 2. Secondly saith Canus the Evangelist hath it Matth. 2.6 That IT IS WRITTEN BY THE PROPHET AND THOU BETHLEHEM IN THE LAND OF JUDAH ART NOT THE LEAST AMONG THE PRINCES OF JUDAH when it is not so written by the prophet who saith Micah 5.2 BUT THOU BETHLEHEM EUPHRATA THOUGH THOU BE LITTLE AMONG THE THOUSANDS OF JUDAH the sense being very different almost contrary In which place S. Matthew reports the words not as they are in Micah but as the chief Priests and Scribes recited them to Herod c Quod testimonium nec Hebraico textui nec 70 Interpretibus convenire me quoque tacente perspicuum est Which testimonie saith Hierome on Micah 5.2 agreeth neither with the Hebrew nor the Seventie as is plain though I say nothing Then followeth his opinion d Arbitror Matthaeum volentem arguere Scribarum Sacerdotum erga divinae Scripturae lectionem negligentiam sic etiam posuisse ut ab iis dictum est I think that S. Matthew being willing to reprove the negligence of the Scribes and Priests toward the reading of holy Scriptures related the words as they were cited by them So that though the Scribes and Pharisees were blinde and seeing the Prophet through a vail took one thing for an other and though the Evangelist purposely reciteth their mistaking that we might discern the fault of these ill guides and ignorant teachers yet it no way followeth that S. Steven did erre or was mistaken or that S. Luke misreported the words of S. Steven But enough of this to testifie my dislike of the second opinion and of such who excusing the Greek Text from corruption wherein I wonderfully applaud them do impute an errour and slip unto the holy powerfull gracefull truth-speaking and dying Protomartyr S. Steven which I cannot endure in them And certes both these former rejected opinions are built on a false ground and idlely do presuppose that there is no reall historicall truth in the words as they are in the Greek and in the Latine Text. But truth there is and though truth lie deep hid as in a well said he of old yet by Gods help we shall winde her up and draw her above ground that every eye may see her though we have many turnings 3. Which that I may the better accomplish I must straggle awhile after two most learned men Cardinall Cusanus and Daniel Heinsius especially Heinsius whom when I have overtaken and wrung and wonne from him some holds which are offensive to the majestie of sacred Scripture then shall I return and descend to the most difficult place of Acts 7.16 c. The learned worthie Heinsius whom I name not without honour though I dissent from him in his Exercitations upon Nonnus and in the Prolegomena beats out certain paths which never any on the earth trode upon before him pag. 27. making the Hellenisticall language to be the best interpreter of the Hebrew and Chaldee and the Hebrew and Chaldee interchangeably the best interpreters of it Before all his
dead So that we may shut up this point with this perclose and with a distinction out of Peter Martyr from S. Augustine Death is so termed either properly or improperly compleatly or incompleatly If you take death properly and compleatly for that separation of the soul which cannot admit an other conjunction or union with the bodie till the generall resurrection then no man ever died but once or was come ad plenam mortem to that prefixed period and last houre of life but their former death was onely improper preparatorie and abortive Now if you take death improperly and incompleatly for any manner of true separation which indeed is the commonest acception a man may die twice and divers have died twice yea all they that ever were raised in the Old and New Testament except our Saviour onely who cooperated to his own resurrection all they and every of them died the second time 6. f Paucorum praerogativa non officit legi Naturae ut aliquoties monet Origines The priviledge of a few checketh not offendeth not the law of nature as Origen observeth more then once saith Erasmus on the 1. Thessal 4. or in Hieroms phrase g Singulorum privilegia legem efficere non possunt The prerogatives of singular men establish not a law or in the way of Augustine h Privilegium paucorum universali legi non derogat The priviledge of a few doth not derogate from the generall law Though it be ordinarily appointed for all men once to die yet extraordinarily some may not die at all and some must die twice For i Potens est Deus cum statuto communi dispensare God may and can dispense with a common statute of his own saith Holcot on Wisdome the 2. His hands are free who hath manicled the whole world by his laws he is not tied by Stoicall fatall necessitie who is Agens liberrimum a most voluntarie free agent HOly holy holy Lord God of Hosts I humbly implore thy favourable protection strengthen me O gracious God against all mine enemies bodily and ghostly and when I have by thy power fought a good fight when I have finished my course take me I beseech thee from being a member of thy Church militant in this Jerusalem below to be partaker of blessednesse with thy Church triumphant in Jerusalem above the Mother of us all which petition I earnestly present unto thy Sacred Majestie in the name and mediation of my onely Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. XIX 1. Strange conceits concerning Nero from Suetonius Tacitus Hierom Augustine Nero supposed to be Antichrist 2. An other incredible relation of the Armenian who is said to have lived at Christs passion The Armenians have their holy frauds AS I began with two or three strange histories having some relation to the propounded question so I hold it not amisse to end with two or three which shall give some light to some other parts of this question or at least by their strangenesse shall afford delight though I end in a fable Suetonius in Nerone cap. 27. toward the end thus historifieth a Non defuerunt quì per longum tempus vernis aestivÃsque floribus tumulum Neronis ornarent ac modò imagines praetextatas in rostris proferrent modò edicta quasi viventis magno inimicorum malo reversuri Denique cùm post viginti annos adolescente me extitisset conditionis incertae qui se Neronem esse jactaret tam favorabile nomen ejus apud Parthos fuit ut vebementer adjutus vix redditus sit There were some who for a long time did deck the tombe of Nero with flowers both of the spring and summer and sometimes did bring his statues and resemblances adorned with long purple imbroydered robes into the pleading places now and then they would proclaim his Edicts as if he had been alive and would shortly return to the damage of his enemies To conclude After twentie yeares when I was but a youth when there appeared on the stage an odde fellow who bragged that he was Nero so great respect was shewed to his name and credit that he had great helps and aids and with much ado was delivered up So farre Suetonius Tacitus also Histor 2. reports that many did beleeve Nero did live long after he was dead S. Hierom to Algasia de undecim quaest quaest ultimâ makes Nero a fore-runner of Antichrist and he gives this sense to these words 2. Thess 2.7 b Jâ—m mysterium operatur miquitatis Multis malit peccatis quibus Nero impurissimus Caesarum mundum premit Antichristi parturitur adventus c. NOW THE MYSTERIE OF INIQUITIE WORKETH By those many harms and sinnes saith he by which Nero the worst of all the Cesars oppresseth the world Antichrists coming is breeding and readie to come to light and what Antichrist shall do hereafter Nero now in part accomplisheth S. Augustine his relation goeth one step further c Nonnulli illum resurrecturum futurum Antichristum suspicantur c. de Civit. 20.19 Some do suspect and imagine saith he that Nero shall rise again and be Antichrist Others think that Nero was not slain but was withdrawn when they thought he was murdered and that he lieth hid living in the vigour of that age wherein he was when they thought he was slain Which storie when I read it recalled to my minde a more uncouth relation of an other dive-dopper And this it is 2. In Matthew Paris on the eleventh yeare of Henry the third anno Christi 1228. in his greater historie printed at London pag. 470. it is said That an Arch-bishop of Armenia came into England in pilgrimage was entertained at S. Albans Abby Being there asked touching that Joseph of whom there was a common speech that he was present when Christ suffered and spake with him and that he yet liveth as a firm proof of the Christian faith the Arch-bishop answered That he knew Joseph well and the Antiochian who was the interpreter to the Arch-bishop told the whole storie thus to Henry Spigurnel his acquaintance and the Abbots servant That before the Arch-bishop came out of Armenia Joseph used to be at his table that at the Passion when Christ was haled from before Pilate to the crosse the said Joseph then called Cartaphilus being usher of the Court did most scornfully punch Christ on the back as he went out of the doore and mocking said Go faster Jesus Go Why stayest thou But Christ looking back with a stern eye and countenance on him said I go indeed but thou shalt expect or stay till I come As if he had said The Sonne of Man goeth indeed as it is written of him and must be crucified and die and shall live again but thou shalt abide and not die till my second coming It is further added that this Cartaphilus was at the time of Christs death about thirty yeares old and so often as he cometh to
Solomo Procopius Gazaeus Sophista in his Commentarie on the place thus o Si tum demum postquam genuit Methusalem placuit Deo Enoch certè antequam gigneret ut Scriptura docet non gratus acceptus erat Deo Quòd igitur amore complexus est eum Deus poenitentiae quam egit imputari debet If then at last Enoch pleased God after he had begot Methusalem certainly before he begat him as the Scripture saith God did not like him nor accept of him Therefore it is to be ascribed to Enochs repentance which he performed that God made so much of him and loved him Though Salianus saith of this testimonie that p Nescio quomodo animus aversatur his minde was against it yet there is no impossibilitie no nor improbabilitie in it and howsoever it be not apodicticall yet it is not inepta foolish as Salianus censureth it He addeth Perhaps Philo the Jew was of that opinion for in his book de Abrahamo speaking of repentance c. he bringeth Enoch in as an example And it seemeth saith he that he followed Jesus the sonne of Sirach in the words cited viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclefiastic 44.16 And though he slubbereth over the words and matter which are to him Canonicall and saith that The minde of the Scripture in that place is that Enoch shall be an exemplarie penitent not as David and Manasses Peter or Mary Magdalene but as John Baptist yet I answer First no Ancient ever said John Baptist was an example of repentance and did repent of any enormous sinnes but was alwayes holy and most austere preventing great sinnes rather then repenting and not so much bemoaning his own offences as dehorting other men and crying out against their iniquities with a charge almost inforcing them to repentance whilest himself shewed a signe of his being sanctified and illuminated even in his mothers wombe Secondly there is as much joy over a repentant and God is as much glorified for point of mercie in a Marie Magdalene or a Peter as in a Baptist or just man that needeth no repentance if not more Procopius Gazaeus who imagined the worst of Enochs former part of life till he begot Methuselah yet speaketh very good things before of Enoch thus God rested on the seventh day when he had made the world q Et nunc ille idem Deus generatione septimâ accipit ceu symbolum consummationis seculi Enochum ut primitias rationalis creaturae c. and now the same God in the seventh generation of the world assumeth as a signe of the ending of an age I say assumed Enoch as the first fruits of the reasonable creature He was out of Gods favour for a while but when he pleased God he was extraordinarily assumed Thus in effect Procopius which the Jesuit had not much cause to finde fault withall Let this suffice for the first question Whether Enoch were at any time a very wicked man The second question is Whether Enoch did ever die Divers Rabbins maintain that he did die So Rabbi Solomon on the fifth of Genesis Aben Ezra saith His death was sweet and he felt no pain which opinion the Jesuit Cornelius à Lapide ascribeth also to Calvin whether truely or falsely I enquire not but the matter giveth me the hint of an excursion Moses said from God Genes 6.3 Mans dayes shall be an hundred and twentie yeares and Moses himself died when he was 120 yeares old Deut. 34.7 David said The dayes of our yeares are threescore yeares and ten Psal 90.10 and he himself who prayed to God to teach him to number his dayes died the same yeare being the first lesser climactericall yeare after that great one of nine times seven that dangerous threescore and third yeare for He was thirtie yeares old when he began to reigne and he reigned fourty yeares 2. Sam. 5.4 Both these were most certain Prophets of their own deaths and perhaps had more especiall reference to their own times designing those yeares out in the more generall which were more appropriate to their own persons in particular Let me adde two heathen examples by way of imperfect parallels That most exquisite work of nature her glory pride and master-piece Julius Cesar preferred a swift and sudden death in his choice before any other kinde Suetonius in vita Julii Caesaris in fine thus of him r Quondam cùm apud Xenophontem legisset Cyrum ultimâ valetudine mandâsse quaedam de funere suo aspernatus tam lentum mortis genus subitam sibi celerémque optavit mortem pridie quà m occideretur in sermone nato super coenam apud M. Lepidum Quisnam esset vitae sinis commodissimus repentinum inopinatúmque praetulerat When Julius Cesar had sometime read in Xenophon that Cyrus in his last sicknesse ordered some things concerning his funerals he hating so lingring a death wished that himself might have a sudden and quick end Again the day before he was slain as he was at supper with Marcus Lepidus a question arising Which death was most commodious and to be wished for Cesar preferred a sudden unlooked for and unthought of end And sutable to his choice and desire in that respect did a sudden and unlooked for end befall him Likewise that wonder of Fortune that darling of terrene happinesse Augustus the successour unto the Dictatour ſ Fere quoties audîsset citò nullo cruciatu defunctum quempiam sibi suis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similem precabatur Almost as often as he had heard saith Suetonius in Augusto in fine that any one had died speedily without long pain or great torment he would pray that the like easie departure might befall himself and his friends And saith he t Sortitus est exitum similem qualem semper optaverat c. He died according as he alwayes desired parting as in a complement with his most familiar friends u Et repentè in osculis Liviae defecit and gave up the ghost amidst the kisses of Livia This storie hath brought my Miscellanie home to that point which the Rabbin said of Enoch That he died without pain The New Testament also is thought to afford us such an other example x De Joanne Evangelista dicitur quòd dolorem in moriendo non sensit It is said of John the Evangelist that he died without any pain saith Holcot on Wisd 2.5 and by that instance saith concerning those who rose about Christs resurrection y Non sequitur quòd si iterum moriehantur moriebantur cum poena vel sentirent etiam poenam It followeth not that if they died again they had or felt any painfull death But because of the strange opinions which are held concerning S. John the Apostle let me enlarge my discourse a little concerning him Melchior Canus Locor Theolog. 7.2 saith We may hold or deny z Salvâ fide without prejudice to our belief either that he
death and therefore he is exempted out of the compasse of that word All by speciall dispensation and onely Abel Noah Abraham are the All there meant Secondly saith Drusius in his Preface It may be said the Apostle spake m De morte calamitatum agritudinum ut sententia sit Nè videret mortem hoc est ea incommoda quae mortâ—m comitari solent of calamities crosses and sicknesses which may be accounted as a death as if he had said Lest he might see death that is THE DISCOMMODITIES AND INCONVENIENCIES WHICH ACCOMPANY DEATH For who are continually sick are accounted as dead First I say this is a forced interpretation Enoch was translated lest he should see death that is lest he should be continually sick and that he might not feel the discommodities which accompany death Secondly that opinion leadeth Enoch to death but not the dolorous way to it which indeed rather beggeth the question then proveth any thing against me Lastly there is no circumstance inducing us to think that the Apostle by the word death aimed at the large and extended signification of it for calamities or sicknes Sure about Enoch his time there were no such notable calamities upon the Saints and the generations of the world were then strong and healthfull Thirdly saith Drusius in the same place It may be said Enoch died not because the Scripture when it mentioneth his rapture mentioneth not his death so the Jews say Jacob is not dead because the Scripture useth the word of EXPIRING not of DYING This is ridiculous for what is expiring but dying Genes 49.33 Jacob yeelded up the ghost and was gathered unto his people doth not either of these phrases do not both evince that he died Oh but the Jews say Jacob non est mortuus I am sure the Apostle Hebr. 11.21 speaking of Jacob saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he was dying he blessed his children or when he was a dying as it is in our last translation It evinceth he died within a while after And I am sure again that Christ Luke 20.37 from the testimonie of Moses proveth that Jacob died I am also sure that S. Stephen saith Act. 7.15 Jacob went down into Egypt and died Surely these crotchets of misbeleeving Jews should not have the least countenance against pregnant proofs both of the Old and New Testament Drusius yet inforceth this third answer thus The same Apostle saith of Melchisedech Heb. 7.3 HE WAS WITHOVT FATHER WITHOVT MOTHER WITHOVT DESCENT HAVING NEITHER BEGINNING OF DAYES NOR END OF LIFE Wherefore without doubt because in Scripture there is no mention of his parents and kindred of his birth or of his death I answer First If it be said of all whose progenitours issues kindreds birth and death are unrevealed in Scripture that they were without father mother descent having neither beginning of dayes nor end of life we should have many very many more Melchisedechs in those respects Demetrius the silversmith and Alexander the coppersmith and troups of the wicked Daniel Sidrach Misach and Abednego Nathanael and Joseph of Arimathea S. Mark and S. Luke and divers others For what mention is there of their parents their children their genealogies their birth-dayes or of their death-dayes in the sacred Writ Therefore these words may be said of Melchisedech without any reference at all to that reason and the words may not be said of others though the divine Scripture omitteth as much as it did of Melchisedech Secondly if we grant that it is in part the reason why he is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a father c. yet it may be said also because no other record before S. Pauls time no sacred or profane Authour no tradition no book Apocryphall historified his parents or issue so farre as yet appeareth And because S. Paul who knew the names of Jannes and Jambres some such way or by revelation immediate and by no such way knew Melchisedechs pedegree he might say as he did Thirdly Erasmus saith Melchisedech came of obscure parents not worthy to be named Before him Eustatius Antiochenus said the same and perhaps it may be a reason why David called his Nephews Joab and Abishai the sonnes of Zeruiah 2. Samuel 19.22 for Zeruiah was Davids own sister 1. Chron. 2.16 and omitted their father for his unworthinesse yea the Divine historie where David is silent often mentioneth Joab and Abishai with the addition of their mothers name but alwayes omitteth the fathers name This I cannot think to be Melchisedechs case for being a King and so glorious a Priest both in one it is most unlikely that he had obscure and poore parents yet he might descend from cursed Cham as well as Christ from Moabitish Ruth or from Rahab the harlot of Canaan Fourthly the Jews say He was a bastard But it is sooner said then proved for never bastard attained as called by God to those two highest conjoyned titles of King and Priest Many men have thought him to be Noah and more to be Sem Noahs sonne as some Jews Lyra and Abulensis when indeed he can be neither n Quidam admodum stultè opinantur Sem esse Melchisedechum Vâ—rùm id impossibile est suprà enim cùm ejus genealogiam explicaremus patuit quòd nec Tharrae tempora assequi potuit Some very foolishly think that Sem was Melchisedech saith Procopius But that is impossible for when I set down his genealogie it appeareth that he lived not to the time of Terah or Thara Genesis 11.24 So he who hitteth the truth that Melchisedech was not Sem but is out in the genealogie for both Noah and Sem lived in Abrahams time See Cornelius à Lapide on the Hebrews and the learned Helvicus Noah saith Helvicus died the 57 yeare of Abraham and Sem out-lived Abraham That neither Noah nor Sem could be Melchisedech is demonstrable from Hebr. 7.6 Melchisedechs descent or pedegree is not counted saith the Apostle Hebr. 7. from Levi or Abraham or their Progenitours who came from Arphaxad the sonne of Sem the sonne of Noah Secondly both Noah and Sem and their genealogie and generations are perfectly and exactly set down but Melchisedech is without descent or pedegree or genealogie Hebr. 7.3 as undescribed say they Thirdly we know Sems father was Noah Noahs father was Lamech but Melchisedechs father is not known Fourthly Noah died Genes 9.29 and Sem lived not 603 yeares as it is apparent Genes 11.10 c. Helvicus maketh his death fall on his six hundredth yeare but there is no end known of Melchisedechs dayes Origen in likelihood fore-seeing the inconveniences accompanying the fore-recited and commonly received opinion inventeth a new trick That Melchisedech was an Angel After him ran Didymus But no Angel was ever a temporall earthly King no Angel was ever a Priest offering up bread and wine and receiving tithes or had an order of Priesthood annexed to any of them no Angel had ever pedigree from
〈◊〉 is taken Ezechiel 24.16 t Ecce ego aufero 〈◊〉 te desiderium oculorum tuorum Behold I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes Salmanticensis Judaeus in lib. Johasin 98.2 saith u Mortuus est Rabbi Emmi quia rapuit eum mors Rabbi Emmi died for death snatched him away And so it is in the Latine phrases Rapio and Aufero what in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quis Deus Octavi te nobis abstulit te Raptum Romanam flebimus historiam What God Octavius Took the away from us We will bemoan the death of thee And of our Romane historie So farre Drusius in the preface to his book called Henoch But this is no good exposition since God took away by death all the rest of the Patriarchs as well as Enoch and yet it is most singularly spoken of Enoch He was not found for God took him By death saith the shallow Jew but our divine Apostle saith He was translated that he might not see death What Christian or rationall man will doubt but we are to incline to the Apostle Again the third answer brought by Drusius against his own opinion as himself professeth to prove that VIDERE MORTEM To see death doth not signifie to die a naturall death where there is a true separation of the soul from the bodie and that NON VIDERE MORTEM Not to see death on the contrary doth not signifie To be kept alive from death which I with Drusius do say was the true intent of the Apostle draweth to this head Enoch saw not death that is died not because the holy Scriptures where they make mention of his rapture mention not his death I answer If all were true yet it followeth not that Enoch is dead or shall die which is the point questioned Moreover if Enoch were dead or to die the wisdome of the Divine Inspirer would never have singled out such a phrase among so many other thousand as should leade men to think the clean contrary He was translated that he should not see death For there resteth the period If it had been meant he should die it would have been added He should not see death for a long time or He should not see death till toward the end of the world or the like But He was translated that he should not see death Therefore he shall never see death Suarez in tertiam partem summae quaest 59. artic 6. sect 1. saith directly S. Paul meaned that Enoch should not die in that place into which he was translated True But why should he die in any other place or indeed why should he die at all who above other men was rapted purposely That he might not see death Surely the deferring of death for a time is not so great a favour The exempting one wholly from death is a blessing above ordinary Again it is said of Enoch Genes 5.23 All his dayes were 365. where dayes are taken for yeares as otherwhere in Scripture But these are not all his dayes if either he remove from one place of the earth into an other which Salianus fondly imagined or live now in a mortall corruptible bodie It is said of our blessed Saviour Hebr. 5.7 He poured out prayers in the dayes of his flesh that is whilest he lived on earth the life of nature in an elementary terrene humane passive bodie And of some other Patriarchs All the dayes of them were such and such Genes 5.17 20 c. that is all the dayes while they breathed on the earth the breath of life in mortall bodies Therefore even from the very phrase concerning Enoch All his dayes were 365. we may inferre He lived not in a mortall bodie any longer on the earth He liveth not now any where in a mortall bodie Somewhat must I say also of Elias severally Rabbi Solomon on the 5 of Genes saith When Elijah was hurried up in a fiery chariot his bodie was burnt up of that fire and Other Jews agree with him saith x De Romano Pontifice 3 6. Bellarmine For my part I say I will not embrace an unlikelihood though it runne toward my opinion I think the cloke might have been burnt as well as his bodie and Elishah could not have escaped scorching when the fire parted them Again the ashes might have fallen as well as his mantle And the Jew would account it no great favour to be burnt alive That fire certainly was rather conservative then destructive not penal and consuming as the fire from heaven drawn down by Elias 2. Kings 1.12 not punitive and conserving as the fire of hell Everlasting Matth. 25.41 Vnquenchable Mark 9.43 but like the fierie furnace in which the three children sang Daniel 3.25 or the fire in the bush Exod. 3.3 harmlesse yea gracious or the fire at the consummation of the world which one calleth Ignem rationalem The phrase then 2. Kings 2.11 importeth no lesse Elijah went up by a whirlwinde into heaven Elijah All Elijah Whole Elijah Soul and bodie His soul had no need of a whirlwinde Elijah went up It is varied 1. Maccab. 2.58 He was taken up into heaven His rapture excluded not his willingnes his willingnes had been insufficient without his rapture his ascension being grounded on assumption the power being Gods not his or his passively and Gods actively If it be true what Bellarmine avoucheth That some other Jews agree with Rabbi Solomon in this that Elijah was burned Yet I am sure y Bibliotheâ—â— Sanctae lib. 2. pag. 65. Sixtus Senensis citeth the opinion of other Jews to the contrarie For they said that the length of time from the beginning of man till the end of the world hath been and shall be measured by the severall lives of seven men and that there was never houre from mans creation to the generall resurrection but some one of these seven men did or shall live in it Adam lived to see Methuselah Methuselah was alive in Sems time Sem died not till Jacob was born Jacob lived till Amram Moses his father was born Amram expired not till Ahijah the Shilonite lived Ahijah lived with Elijah Elijah shall live till the end of the world Therefore they thought Elijah was not burnt is not dead But first the Papists themselves say that Elijah shall be slain by Antichrist before the end of world Therefore this maketh not for them Secondly the Jews might have tucked up the time shorter on this fashion Adam lived in the dayes of Enoch and Enoch to the end of the world And so their number of seven might be reduced unto two But let us leave these Rabbinicall speculations concerning Elijah and say somewhat of him not as he was in a Paradise of phansie but as he was with our blessed Saviour on the mount at that glorious transfiguration And this I set down for certain No passage in the Gospels proveth demonstratively that his bodie was immortall It is true it is said of