THE RESULT OF A DIALOGVE concerning the MIDLE-STATE of SOULS Wherein is asserted The Ancient Doctrine of their Relief obtainable by Prayers Alms c. before the Day of Judgment By F. D. Professor of Divinity Printed at PARIS Permissu Superiorum For the Right Honorable and Learned Henry Lord Arundel of Warder c. The Mecoenas of all Learning and Vertue May it please your Lordship SOme Aristophanes removing the controversy of the Midle-state of Soules out of the Schools and improvid ently thrusting it in English into the hands of Ladies whose curiosity is not alwayes proportioned to their capacity hath been instrumentall of great Scandall Hence upon intreaty of such who may command I interposed endeavouring to clear the state of the Question as I thought without violence it might import this occasioned a reciprocation of Epistles wherein I would gladly prevent all misunderstandings as also in the Synopsis of our Tenets which I formerly gave in such matters which were esteemed proper for the times The Result I present to your Lordships most judicious view also to your noble Patronage If it conduce to any good I shall be sure of the guerdon I hope for Your Lordships hereditary goodnesse will pardon my boldnesse encouraged by your known Vertue and great love of Truth who ambitiously subscribe what by many titles my duty obligeth me to be My Lord Your Lordship 's most devoted servant in all duty F. D. A Table of the Chapters CHap. 1. Relief in Purgatory is the Doctrine of holy Church 1 Chap. 2. It is not matter of Opinion 11 Chap. 3. Why the Resurrection is inculcated 15 Chap. 4. The senses of Greek and Latine Liturgies and Fathers 24 Cha. 5. Traditions alone cannot prove faith in all Articles 45 Chap. 6. Charity consists with Purgatory The various operations of Charity Wherein consists the chiefe penalty of Purgatory 48 Chap. 7. How a soul according to others can change Of the horror of Doomsday Whether it is to be prayed for 67 Chap. 8. Whether a soul can be changed by God and how in Purgatory The true state of the controversie explicated 89 Chap. 9. The state of the Question further explicated The difference betwixt an instant of time and aeviternity declared The resolution of the Question fully given as to change of souls 99 Chap. 10. Scriptures and Traditions must be obeyed How one can satisfie for another Whether and how other vertues besides charity avail towards Heaven 117 Chap. 11. How corporal afflictions can satisfie for sins Whether a probable Opinion may be followed 127 Chap. 12. The designe of the Treatise 140 The Result of a DIALOGVE concerning the MIDLE-STATE of SOULES CHAP. I. Relief in Purgatory is the Doctrine of holy Church IN our last Epistolary Conference concerning the sense of the General Councel of Florence and of Pope Benedict the eleventh his Bul against those who hold that none went to Heaven till the day of Judgement you much insisted that neither of them defined a Redemption out of Purgatory before the great day The Greeks there called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must be confess'd that their principall design was the condemnation of Joh. 22. his error which though he recanted yet to prevent any resuscitation of it it was judged necessary conciliarly to condemn it In discussing or rather explicating the latitude of this they descended to particulars Who and When each sort went to Heaven either at or after their deaths according to their several conditions and therein delivered their sence of this as being in part involved in the former So that it was a Conciliary Declaration of the Churches Doctrine as to this that is of the whole Christian World as all prior or posterior Doctors not violented for it is easie to mis-apply and even elude the Fathers with voluntary glosses out of Chamier and other such like blasted Authors and the universal tradition orally delivered and the constant practice of all Catholiques declare See in S. John Damascen almost all the Greek Fathers even inclusively from great Dyonisius to himselfe and some of the Latines also are recorded in him who all assert this and say that from our Lords Disciples it descended obtained in and through the whole Church of God with great profit to the dead And that you may clearly by one understand the received interpretation of the rest see there the story of great Macarius who had from God this Answer Quo tempore inquit mortuorum causa preces offers tum sane nonnullius solatii sensu afficimur Thus a dead man's skull answered him We must not then expect Dooms-day for an answer of our Prayers Nay S. Damascen saith it is a new absurd doctrine suggested by the Devil Pia omnia opera quae mortem sequuntur nullam omnino defunctis utilitatem afferre truly his ingenuous sense is that to deny any profit by them before the day of Judgment to the dead descends from the Devil I refer you to all the Fathers in him whence you will see how they are violented for the contrary by others It is a most unquestionable rule in this matter as to the affirmative though a posteriori as we speak amongst all probable Doctors who have the honour to have their memories celebrated in the Fasts of the Schools That whatsoever is declared in a Generall Councel which is received or not impunè resisted by Catholique Doctors of the age wherein it is celebrated is by all Christians to he admitted in the same degree in which it is there declared Which Rule comes home to all points by Sectaries now controverted as I have particularized in my System and especially compels us to an acceptance of this present Article according to the same place it obtained in the Councel of Florence and the age wherein it was celebrated The first I have specified as far as this place permits The later is evident by all Writers then and ever since in the Church though Marcus Ephesius an eminent Greek Schismatique if not rather an Heretique who was present in the Councel recalcitrated in vain against it in some particulars but not against this at all which still confirmes us in it Gennadius the Patriarch saith this Councel was ubique promulgatum ab omnibus gentibus receptum only vulgares quidam homines indocti did contradict He adds if any capable of reason resisted it was pravity of mind not learning but foolish presumption and vain glory which moved it Here he glances at Marck and others deceived by him All this faithfully applied irrefragably declares our obligation to accept this truth accordingly And moreover as to us in particular the general resistance made against this new Purgatory by all at the very first dawning of it in our insulary Hemisphere as being a novilty opposite to what all from their infancies had learned convinces the same Nay Mr. Whites Sonus Buccinae will inferre so much and alone suffice according to him to prove matters even
of Faith But let us go further if every person from hence to Cades in Spain and from thence to Rome and from thence to Constantinople and from thence to Jerusalem through both Churches were asked whether in their prayers for the dead they do not hope to help them to Heaven before the last day every one would assert it CHAP. II. It is not matter of Opinion THerefore most certainly the hope of present easing them was not grounded on matter of Opinion which intrinsically involves actuall fear or doubt of the truth else they would have praied faintly but it is a traditionary doctrine and under that notion by all understood Hence we never read in Scriptures Councels or Fathers any one clear assertion as sufficiently appears in those which are most urged That all those that go to Purgatory must be necessarily detained there without any relief till the day of judgement which sure were impossible if there had been any fluctuation in it or if they had been of that opinion as some gently perswade us That some things have been delivered to posterity in the Church which could never obtain more authority then opinion I have made evident in my System even in grave Subjects of which number this was not but how to distinguish such from doctrines of a higher nature in case Holy Church did not conveigh clearly their qualifications with them as in some cases evidently it did and in others it did not as there I give instances then the onely way is to return to general Councels that they according to their office may conquisitione facta after the example of the Apostles juridically appoint to each their seats where all must acquiesce as here was done conformable to all antiquity as I have declared and shall more CHAP. III. Why the resurrection is inculcated THe Holy Scriptures indeed our B. Lord and especially B. St. Paul and since them holy Church and Fathers most pressingly inculcates the truth of the general resurrection as being the basis of our hope the motive of piety and good works all which would be adjudged fruitless by the generality of men if it were not for this though even Aristotle who with the rest of his friends of Athens would have laughed to have heard Saint Paul Preach and assert it yet they would judge vertue to carry and bring with it a present reward for which it should be embraced but our expectations are infinitely higher by our believed and hoped for resurrection and therefore it alwaies produced proportionate effects in Gods holy Martyrs and Saints especially in those first times as the course of Gods providence required and therefore there was a necessity effectually to settle this radical doctrine as also of the last judgement to inculcate a just fear as S. Paul did This other of relief of souls in and out of Purgatory being of far less concernment as to the generality of mankind and being as it were a particular of it or subalternate to it needed not so strong frequent inculcation though holy Church did not take it up upon vulgar and light hear-sayes but with and by the Apostles Praedications which according to S. Augustines Rule are sufficiently proved by the Churches Doctrine and practice The holy Scriptures themselves as interpreted by antiquity also declare it which are obviously knowne Neither do the Texts though brought with violence touch the contrary nor were ever so interpreted Some mistake also ariseth in this business from not observing that holy Scriptures and from thence holy Church and the Fathers frequently understand by Resurrection even the assumption of souls to Heaven without the bodies and therefore S. Aug. calleth the later of soul and body the perfect resurrection as condistinct from the former in his care of the dead c. 6. But here we treat of the Churches practice and doctrine which are cleare even amongst the Greekes as well as Latines You know that according to Mr. Rushworth and Mr. White whose authority cannot be denied by you the publique practice or oral conveyance demonstrates universal Tradition and consequently Christian Truths Therefore when I look upon the anxious solicitude with which now and in all former ages good Christians Greeks and Latines have prosecuted their friends deceased with their Prayers Alms-deeds which all Christian Monuments declare methinkes it were strange now at length to have all resolved into a cold Oblation or Prayer for Doomsday wherin their particular Allies are no more concerned than all others so all the pious indeavours of friends are of no effect as relating to what they intended in order to particular persons but might as well be contracted into a general Prayer for all the dead against not onely orall tradition but the manifest writings of the most ancient and learned in the bulke of the Fathers as S. Aug. is sufficient testimony for all the rest in his Treatise of this subject stiled by him A care of the dead where he supposeth it to be the common sense of the whole Catholique Church that particular persons dead who have acquired merit in their life time by which such things may be rendred profitable after death do receive benefit by what is done for them religiously after their decease and he speaks cleane through the whole Book of actual benefit profit help advantage availment and rest to be procured for the souls And lest we should glosse it for the soules in their reunion with their bodies he frequently speakes condistinctively of the soule as separated from the body or as it is when the body is dead and he saith that then it receiveth succour which as he shews and I have said was the practice of all Churches in their publique Liturgies I do not esteem it constancy but obstinacy to intort antiquity to our sense gainst their own CHAP. IV. The sences of Greek and Latine Lyturgies and Fathers AMongst the Greeks I observe in their Liturgies that sometimes they pray with Tertullian de Monogamia that the dead may have refrigerium that is some ease as S. Greg. Nazian his Liturgie p. 34 in the Rubrick Other times they pray that they may be put into a place of light sommess where sorrow is banisht and groaning c. as in S. Basils Liturgie Sometimes that they may rest in Abrahams bosome as in S. James his Liturgie All these intimate a change a present relief though not alwayes a release as the stile evidently imports which destroyes your very ground for you teach that no prayers can relieve or change them till Doomes-day S. James in his Lyturgie prayes that God would cause the souls to rest with the Saints You say he meanes that they may not rest or have ease or lightsomness c. till after the day of judgment Besides they constantly pray for the remission of their sins as in S. Basils and the rest this is not for the resurrection and finally they pray for all who died in communion of the faithful and for
particular persons recommended to the Priest in each particular exactly agreeing with the Roman Church Hieremias their Patriarch followes them and the sense of both Churches frequently appears to be that by their prayers they may obtain present ease ut a poenis releventur saith the Councel of Florence in the decree in Gennadius There was a question amongst some of the ancient whether souls except of Martyrs had a facial sight of God before the last day the progresse of it I have examined in my System Hence some spoke warily touching the full release out of Purgatory which involves a going to Heaven but all agreed as to our present ease and relief by Prayers Alms-deeds c. The not observing this hath made a misunderstanding of som of the Fathers in this matter Truly sometimes they pray expresly that they may enter Heaven before the last day as St. Ambrose upon the death of Theodosius Dilexi ideo prosequar eum usque ad regionem vivorum nec deseram donec fletu precibus inducam eum quo sua merita vocant in montem Domini sanctum c. he will never leave praying till by his prayers and teares he hath brought him out of Purgatory to Heaven We need no more for both Churches he a great Latine Bishop well acquainted with the sense of both Churches promiseth this for the Greek and Latine Emperor in presence of the Emperor also a Grecian born and of the Court where were present as well Greeke as Latine Prelats and Doctors If this had not been the publick sense of all Churches in their obsequies for the dead there wanted not Zelots then and after who would have reprehended this publique attempt which you call Novelty by them adjudged Piety St. Chrysostome Homil. 41. in 1. ad Cor. after a long discourse saith thus Si Jobi illius liberos patris victima purgavit Job 1.5 quid dubites e nobis quoque si pro dormientibus offeramus solatium quiddam ill is accessurum This some comfort concludes a present change upon our Prayers this cannot signifie Heaven where is no such diminutive as quiddam solatium this surely cannot be Doomsday which agrees with Saint Augustines Neque negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viventium relevari cum pro illis sacrificium Mediatoris offertur vel eleemosynae in Ecclesia fiunt c. 9.2 ad Dulcitium and in his Enchyridion to Lawrence c. 110. as elsewhere he distinguishes three sorts of the dead whereof the midle are only capable of this help and in his Care of the dead c. 4. he tels us that Christians in their Prayers recommend the third 〈…〉 by the 〈…〉 Saints 〈…〉 take them 〈…〉 â—â—mpany when 〈…〉 rise according 〈◊〉 you but S. Aug. dreâ—â—nd not of that good-fellowship but present ease for surely S. Aug. his easing them is a present change I could render it fastidious to the Reader if I should bring in particular the sense of Greek and Latine Fathers which in reading them I have noted And though some Criticks do not give a due esteem of S. Gregory the great and Venerable Bede their Histories which Baronius elegantly defends yet no man of reason can doubt much lesse deny but that their loud approbation of the particular releases of souls and the worlds not resisting their truth abundantly declare the sense of the whole Christian world to have been That by Prayers soules might be delivered out of Purgatory before the last day Nay they did not only not resist them but both Greeks and Latines positively approved of them For Pope Zachary had his bookes of Dialogues without any restriction in so high esteem that he himselfe with his approbation translated and recomended them to the Greeks And S. John Damaseen and other Greeks with much reverence received and often cited them as I have frequently noted and therfore no wonder that Venerable Bede following our first Christian Master St. Gregory though he himselfe sharp-sighted gives more examples of the like as also S. John Damascen These two considering the eminency of their virtue and learning and both great Searchers of antiquity and both received as Assertors of truth in their respective East and West Churches may alone suffice to witness the Churches Doctrine Now as S. Aug. c. 10. in his Care of the Dead saith if we should say that these things were false we might be thought to use more boldnesse than became us both in regard of the writings of some faithfull Christians who report it as also in regard of the testimony and sensible experience of those to whom such visions have hapned May not this justly be applied here Also consider who St. Gregory Pope Zachary and St. Chriso stom were and 〈…〉 carry on their backs both the Latine and Greek Churches And hence the Councel of Florence in the very Decree as I have noted in another Book speaking for and in the name of both Churches sayes We define c. that those souls who after they have contracted the blemish of sin are purged either in their bodies or being uncloathed of their bodies are presently received into Heaven and Pope Benedict saith Before the resumption of their bodies We can require no more as to the Doctrine of both Churches since as you see the Decree is consonant to both It 's true that the Roman Lyturgie in the Sequentia doth wonderfully inculcate the horror of Doomsday partly to move us living to a right apprehension of our concernment in it partly that the dead may receive comfort before the last terrible day Neither can the words have any other sense for certainly the souls in Purgatory are not ambiguous of their judgement in that day as all Christians agree and therefore the Church concluding prays to God to give all the Faithfull rest from henceforward to prevent the rigour of that fearfull day It 's truly a mistake to say the Greek Church did not admit this Doctrine before the Councel of Florence since it is most evident that their Doctrine was not at all changed or disliked even upon examination as to this of easing and delivering souls out of Purgatory or translating them into Abraham's bosom by Prayers c. but only in the beginning was examined how far they agreed with Pope John's errour against the facial sight of God and this was amended by common consent Nay their practice was never questioned or doubted of which was and is the same with the Latines as hath been shewed and therefore Cyril repeating and expounding the manner of their Lyturgies saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is We believe that it will be a wonderfull help to the souls for whom supplication is offered of this holy and terrible sacrifice Can any man refer this wonderfull help to a cold expectation of Doomsday And hence we see in the third action of the General Councel of Calcedon how the process was admitted of Ischyrion against Dioscorus for not having distributed
you onely into a Prayer for Doomsday which will be terrible whensoever it cometh as holy Church intimates in the Sequentia Cùm vix justus sit securus and quantus tremor est futurus I am sure S. Hierom had a formidable apprehension of it when he saith He heard perpetually the fearfull sound of the trumpet and you hear how holy Church describes it even in order to the just in respect of whom S. Paul in the 10. of the Hebrews cals it Terribilis quaedam expectatio judicii a terrible expectation of judgment and hence S. Hillarius in Psal 113. Quomodo desiderabile potest esse judicium in quo nobis est indefessus ille ignis obeundus c. How can that day be an object of our Prayers c. The very Saints themselves must passe through that last fire but as silver and gold which can stand against the severe test this being done they must be Judges of us sinners The Apostle saith both Out of which if we weigh the inexplicable severity of that day Desiderare quis audebit who with S. Hilary dare pray for it and yet your main position is that this is only prayed for and that till that great day the Saints though in an indigent condition are not capable to receive any refrigerium or ease as the Fathers speak and expresly prayed for in all the Churches Liturgies Which is indeed a comfortlesse tenet to all Christians and it toucheth too near upon the Church and her doctrine though most Sectaries will applaud it Shall I tell you how near it presseth upon this Article Truly besides what I said in the former Chapters I know not possibly how to render the prayers of holy Church for the dead of any considerable use at all as applied to and for them either in particular or in general as they are condistinct from the faithful living I spoke before that this tenet renders prayers for particular dead persons useless as not at all corresponding with the design of their friends which evidently was and is intended by all in order to obtaining of ease and relief of such souls for which they pray But now by further weighing the necessary consequences of this tenet it seems evidently to conclude all prayers for the dead in effect useless even as offered in general or for all in general as well as for particular persons The reason is first because if we pray only for the general Resurrection as you say this concerns them not any more nay less as being dead than if they were living because they are already sure of a happy resurrection in some degree though yet in a state of punishment as it were already possest of it or at least upon entring into it Secondly the concernment of the general resurrection in order to Heaven is so urgent in respect of the faithfull living and being yet wholly in the clouds in respect of our knowledg or any certainty of it that our Prayers in true charity ought to be far more fervent constant for all the faithful living as being in more necessity than for the dead or at least for them both together if this be all we are to pray for by the Churches definition Whence methinks it concludes that the Article of praying for the dead either for particulars or generals is upon very slight grounds pressed and observed by holy Church in your principles surely they convince that the same prayers which are offred for the dead ought to be offred either for the living and dead together or else principally for the living Whence follows that there is no need at all of this article referring to the dead as I said condistinct from the living if there be no hope of present reliefe or release till the general resurrection I do but give you a hint that you may further reflect upon it This done I proceed to the ground it self of your assertion Indeed the great Masters of the World and of the Schools S. Augustine Alexander Hales S. Bonaventure Scotus in his book de anima and many other eminent persons not esteeming themselves to desert Aristotle teach us the souls have a natural capacity of som change without the body One ground is they conceive the impossibility of change to be derived originally from the negation of matter which Aristotle asserts principium corruptionis which is supposed to accompany all spirituall things but if materiality be consistent with the limited simplicity of our souls as they endeavour to prove in Aristotles principles since they have individuation and some composition in their separated state from the bodies as they conceive to be clear in Metaphisical speculations which if true their consequence is easie for what relates to the nature of the soule Do you examine this it wants not great weight even the force of Demonstration in their judgements Again S. Bonaventure holds Aeviternity to have a sort of divisibility which I shall explicate in due place his reason is because otherwise it will argue souls and Angels to have actually infinite durance being their durance continues in infinitum as all suppose which he esteems a great absurdity to assert of any finite thing as arguing infinite vertue to require infinite durance together which will conclude them to be infinite in essence which is against all our suppositions In the same manner will as easily be concluded that a separate soul hath actually an infinite knowledge of things since the instant of aeviternity which is immutable and altogether continues in infinitum and consequently hath infinite objects present of all which the soul actually and by its connatural power produceth knowledge together which argues infinite vigor St. Bonavent and the rest esteem both these repugnant to a creature though you should say that each is derived from God for still it stands that the soul from its own nature though derived from God is infiniti vigoris which Aristotle justly appropriates to God Examine this and weigh well whether it doth not imply contradiction I assure you that these prest home will sooner be heightned to a demonstration than most of those which are urged for the contrary with loud intonations of demonstrations But if in Mathematicks which are rendred pervious to our sences we cannot reach to demonstrations but upon swallowing many suppositions without proof what can we vain-gloriously boast of in these remote objects It s true that a soul separate cannot produce new habits in it self by acts as now we do by reason it hath all possible disposition already as being determined by nature to it yet it is consistent with its aeviternity that the soul have some new acts at least in order to supernatural objects Thus far S. Thomas Scotus and all agree as Angels in holy Scriptures are recorded to have had in divers occurrences St. Thomas Henricus and others to make this good invent a sort of time which they call tempus discretum though Aristotle never heard of it
reason that the length or shortnesse of duration doth not at all change the measure in it self provided that it be altogether It is therefore a great disproportion rather a collusion to argue from the consideration of an instant of our time to aeviternity they both agree in this that they are indivisible that is they are not capable of succession of parts but the reason of this in each is wholly different The instant of time is therfore so because Physically speaking it is nothing else but a â—egation or termination of some thing and hath therefore no duration at all Aâ—vum or aeviternity is not capable of succession as being as the former is indivisible and altogether but yet hath infinite durance according to the way expressed vertually including infinite instances according to which it is conceivable to have mutation without contradiction because its durance or existence now though altogether or not by parts is not by vertue of the same conservation or influx it hath from God as applied before but it hath in a manner a new dependancy of him else both it and its measure would cease to be this is both Scotus and S. Bonaventures solid way of explication of this abstruse difficulty And truly I believe St. Thomas and Henricus their tempus discretum well weighed will fall into it And verily Aeviternity seems in this to differ from aeternity that it doth not necessarily involve an impossibility of ceasing to be or of requiring a continuated or as it were a new dependance of the divine influence without which it would cease Whereas whatsoever is essentially aeternal is repugnant to any imaginable change and therefore it can onely be asserted of God I could answer secondly that in the operations of Angels or souls considered as to the simple notion of their aeviternity there may be succession or mutation without contradiction which Scotus grants without restriction My reason is because the assertion or negation of any operation is in respect of divers instances or aeviternal measures For example the existance of a soul is its own measure as not being distinct from it the operations have or are each theirs as being indivisible as well as the soul Hence although the soul as to essence and existence is immutable as naturally its measure is and so each operation is whilst it is or its aevum is yet the soul as to operation or under operation may without contradiction admit some change as lying under other aeviternities or measures which accompany the Acts as I have said Whence follows that the soul is not rightly said to be not knowing and knowing in the same or in order to the same instant or aevum but it is not knowing as measured by the soul 's own aevum and it is knowing considered as to the measures of the Acts which as I declared must be distinct from that of the Soul and hence it may have new Acts. Thirdly I answer that rightly putting with Scotus that Aevum or how you will call the measure of Angelical or Animastick Natures is not distinct from the things measured You know in bodies the measures are extrinsecall as being from the motions of the bodies of the Heavens but here is no such extrinsecal Gnomon in respect of spiritual substances We need not therefore seek whether they may have succession of Acts in one instant to avoid contradiction which so much affrights us but we onely are to look upon the nature of the Acts themselves whether there is no implicacy in them to co-exist with one another or to succeed each other Which sure there is none imaginable Neither do you alledge any here It is not hard then to conceive that a Soul hath many Acts since also as I said above an aevum can co-exist to an infinity of instances namely as long as an Angel continues I hope out of all this I may safely conclude that a separated soul may have mutation in its Acts especially as S. Thomas speaks 2.2.9.58 a. 11. Quantum ad ea quae eis divinitus revelantur nihil prohibet intellectus Angelorum esse in potentia My solution therefore is that the Angels or Souls without contradiction are capable of revelations or whatsoever motions from God that is in any supernatural way in order whereunto nothing hinders them to be changeable and this as I said is sufficient for our principal assertion of the souls capacity of change in Purgatory To this may be objected that the soul is a pure act as admitting no composition and therefore the acts are not different from the essence and therefore not mutable It is as easie replyed that it is repugnant to the nature of a creature to be that which Divines call a pure act first as having a potentiality to a not being and having a dependance upon composition or having some actual composition or componibility Also to have been produced out of nothing carries with it a defect of that simplicity which is a pure act as having necessarily a quo and quod And truly in this very thing an Angel which is the noblest of creatures differs from God that it is not its own act and therefore in a potentiality to acts which can not be said of any but God This is as to the general Besides the considerations of a soul render it far inferior as being compounded Metaphysically which is real Besides as cannot be denied it is ordinable to a Physical composition as to be a part of the compositum or whole man which excludes the being a pure act for matter and forme are therefore not simple enough as to this though otherwise simpliciter simplices as Scotus speaks because they are componible betwixt themselves Being advanced thus far you will give me leave to tell you that I do not conceive it to be out of ignorance of the nature of a soul though it is thought so that all Divines grant this sort of mutability which is consonant to holy Scriptures Councels Fathers all Schoolmen and Christian reason but it is rather out of a non advertence of the inconsistency of holy Churches doctrine confirmed by universal practice of relief of souls out of Purgatory before the great day that now the contrary is so much pressed by some as not considering their subjection to Gods powerful mercy A modest man would rather say with St. Augustine treating almost of this matter for it is in his treatise of the Divination of Divels cap. 6. Rem dixi occultissimam audaciore asseveratione quam debui I have been more bold than wise to speak confidently in these remote subjects Let us therefore return to the souls proceeding in Purgatory For as to the other objections which ordinarily are alledged they have more Water than Salt In order indeed to increase of Charity the soul hath in Purgatory some disposition as being already invested with it but by reason first that it is extra viam by reason also of the dregs which cause and
sin so of goodnesse Whence they rationally teach that a man who doth not onely intend but effectually giveth Alms or the like doth add a degree of goodnesse and consequently may hope for a greater reward than if he had contained himselfe within the bounds of his Will Whence will further follow that corporal afflictions even in themselves may properly serve as emanations from a soule afflicted for sin or as exercises of which the body is only capable flowing from the love of God as surely they are in a true contrite spirit And in this kinde in holy Writ they are by true Penitents sometimes voluntarily undertaken other times by Gods orders inflicted and accepted in order to remission of sins and this not alwayes miraculous as the Texts of holy Scriptures shew If it were miraculous as sometimes it is and you have well pondered it is so far from enervating that it demonstratively confirms Gods acceptance of the Churches Doctrine and practice as to corporal afflictions to the end assigned as is also clearly shewed in the place quoted of the Councel of Trent as also Sess 6. c. 14. And hence holy Church by Gods orders injoyns Sacramental pennances these I know you do not reject which are deletory of the dregs of sin that is they may exercise the soule in intending Charity infused by God upon sorrow and the efficacy of the Sacrament By which means is often wrought an absolute extinction of sin that is even of those veleities which frequently trouble us after the height of our former mortal malice by help of the Sacraments derived from our blessed Saviours Passion was extinguished and pardoned As concerning some seeming excrescencies which you and some others carped at and the like Sir Thomas More also jested at I believe no judicious Catholique wil pretend that they have strict acquaintance with Church Orders but are onely a sort of begottery into which Devotion not well regulated easily degenerates But you must not under this pretence laugh at all inferiour sorts of Piety and Devotion which are to be proportioned to each capacity I conclude as to this with St. Augustine l. 12. de Civit. c. 15. treating of Angels Vereor ne facilius judicer affirmare quod nescio quam docere quod scio I had rather be not knowing with submission to holy Churches orders than swell in a vain opinion of my knowledge in prejudice of the least of them And this must be except we would hear from the spirit of God ivistis in adinventionibus vestris ye have left me and walked in your own inventions Christian Religion doth not receiv estrength by the weaknesse of our reason but our reason is elevated by the strength of Christian Religion And therefore how apparent soever it is it must vail bonet if a contest be interjected And therefore Master White in his Controversie-Logick and his fourteenth reflection teacheth thus consonant to Vincentius Lirinensis speaking of Origen and Apollinarius their failings and falls How mean pittiful a change it is to fall from the splendid authority of the whole Church to the obscure authority of a private Doctor be he what he will Surely it deserves an Aegyptian Pyramid to perpetuate it against all innovations and particularly against this which we have rejected Yet there are a sort of Opiniators as Cicero calls them who fancy each strong fancy of theirs to be demonstrations to which all who will not incurre the note of ignorance must subscribe as well in Morals as in questions touching faith Whereas St. Augustine l. 1. Retract c. 21. disputing learnedly and largely of the sence of our Lords words to Saint Peter super hanc Petram c. concludes thus Harum duarum sententiarum quaesit probabilis eligat lector Antiquity then did not disalow probable opinions nor presently fancy their own conceits to be demonstrations much lesse forbid others to follow such which they judged probable Which is now too much cryed down and truly as to Morals I conceive I have demonstrated in my Enchyridion Dial. that probability is enough CHAP. XII The designe of this Treatise WHereas you say I dare not assert the contrary opinion of the souls continuing in Purgatory till the day of judgement to be Heresie It is easily replyed first with Bellarmine that to prescribe any term to particular persons and much more to the general that is to determine months or yeares non nisi temerè definiri potest it is a great temerity because as he saith solidly it is resincertissima there is nothing more uncertain in all Christian principles For indeed here is neither reason nor revelation to conduct us He spoke upon occasion of Scotus his opinion who thought according to the measures he made of Gods mercies that none would stay in Purgatory above ten years Which weak ground brought Origen into his error of promising a period to the pains of Hell Thus great wits still produce by strength of fancy new grounds and thence often new errors into the Church but to assert a detayning all soules in Purgatory till doomesday notwithstanding the Churches Suffrages Alms and pious helps is for ought I can see a novelty and if so it is easily proved to be a falsehood for amongst the ancient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were almost equal crimes as accompanying each other To what you demand further it is easily rejoyned from our blessed Saviours example Quis constituit me Judicem I am no Judge of Controversies That is referr'd to S. Peters chair Therefore I dare not indeed presumptuously censure other Catholike Doctors opinions whose persons and learning I justly reverence Keeping my self therefore within the bounds of the Schooles my design is onely to vindicate the Churches Doctrine and constant practise as I am able to understand it from ignorance and Novelty In this none can justly blame me Neither ought any to conceive themselves to be particularly concerned in it the rather because I do not believe when they speak clearly of their long Purgatory that they intend any further than in order to natural causes in respect of which as the Souls are not capable to be changed as you learnedly and truly teach after and with Mr. White so by force of such or by order of Nature they cannot change their posture from Purgatory to Heaven which is a great truth If any will go further I say with St Paul Non sic didici Christum I must leave them yet with St. Hieroms Proviso in his Dialogue against Pelagius l. 3. In dogmatibus disserendis non persona sed causa quaerenda est I touch no mans person Scotus teacheth his followers treating St. Cyprians case to be modest in their tenets conceiving there may be venial sin in being too forward or heady even before Canonical declarations or determinations and St. Hierome Apol. l. 2. saith Si quaestiones de animaestatu in Vrbe commotae sunt quae est ista qucrimonia vel querela quae utrùm recipi debeat Episcoporum judicio derelinquitur This must be decided by Bishops chiefly by the Bishop of Rome as he teacheth against Ruffinus in the same Apology and in his 67 Epistle to Theophilus he saith notably Scito nihil nobis esse antiquius quà m Christi jura servare nec patrum transferre terminos semperque meminisse Romanam fidem Apostolico ore laudatam cujus se esse participem Alexandrina Ecclesia gloriatur We must all glory to submit to the decisions of Rome when Patriarckes themselves are taught to do it According therefore to our friends desire I onely let him know for prevention of mistakes what I have learned in Scotus and St. Thomas their Schooles and what was the substance of our amicable Collation in nothing as I hope violating the lawes of true Christian friendship which I hold sacred as being consistent with that well measured Gradation Amicus Plato amicus Aristoteles magis amica VERITAS Which method as you know was religiously observed by learned Sir Thomas More in his sharp congresses with Tindal when he objected his great friend Erasmus his version reduplicating in vain the notion of a friend against the sense of Holy Church FINIS