of such an origin is to be suspected and dangerous You say the Sequence of the Mass for the dead inculcates the horror of dooms-day to move good people to help the souls out of Purgatory before it come As if you conceiv'd that day would be worse to them were they not help'd before which Position I confess I understand not Since it is the generall Doctrin that the same doom is given in the particular judgement and there is nothing then to be decided but Eternity You bid me consider that these three alone Saint Gregory Zacharias and Saint Chrysostom carry the Greek and Latin Churches on their backs but give me leave to say that the Fathers and Authorities I have cited of which you take no notice are so far more numerous and strong then they that to use your own phrase they carry both their Churches and them and all on their backs You come at last to the Council of Chalcedon and Ischyrions action against Dioscorus for mispending a Ladies monys bestowed at her death for the good of her soul so the text hath it if I remember right and not for the souls of the deceased as you write it though if it were so written it were conformable to the use of the Church and true Doctrine and so I must put this also amongst your other proofs which want a little of that pious affection to stretch them home to the purpose For your argument hence seems to stand thus almes given for the dead are to be distributed faithfully therefore souls are delivered before the day of Judgement After this severe consequence of your own you entertain'd the confidence to censure my explication of the offertory for a sophisme because I think the punishment exprest there signifies that of Hell not Purgatory But certainly it is a spice of great weakness to believe the contrary without a stronger proof then your bare word since the expressions are so horrid that greater or more significant can scarce be found as the jaws of a Lion or Devil the deep dungeon that Tartarus or the deepest sink of Hell should not swallow them up And in the Office of the dead where no order dwels but everlasting horror and other such dreadfull phrases And the Greeks use to call it in their rituals Gehennam But why sedes refrigerii should speak your purgatory I am not capable of the consequence It may be said by Writers that refreshment is given there but sure none before you ever call'd that suffering state the seat of refreshment Notes on the fifth Chapter AS your Chapter is short so shall my Notes You say tradition alone cannot prove faith in all Articles but you prove it not for neither the Council of Trent nor Saint Irenaeus though the one say Catholike Faith is contained in both and the other that both are necessary for the Church say that Tradition alone is not sufficient Rather Saint Irenaeus saith it is as all those Fathers must needs be understood to do who in case of difficulty send us to the Apostolicall Churches But to be short I make you this argument If Scripture teach somewhat that is not in Tradition either Scripture in such passages needs an Interpreter or no If none can any sensible man perswade himself it hath not been the perpetuall doctrin of the Church so it be in a point necessary to be known And if Scripture do need an Interpreter that interpreter binds the Church and is the immediate Revealer and he must have the Authority of such a Proposer to oblige the Church to his interpretation It is therefore a sophism to put the Scripture for a self-sufficient authority to bind the Church in what is not known by tradition But Scripture is necessary for condemnation of Heretiques in such points as they pretend to deduce from it and so the Council of Trent declares it self when it speaks upon what ground it would proceed What consequents follow of this doctrin we must expect your leisure to declare as yet I know none Notes upon the sixth Chapter IN the beginning of the sixth Chapter I find little difference betwixt your doctrin and mine For though you explicate Aristotles Nunc otherwise then I should do yet not being necessary to our purpose it is not fit for me to take notice of it Only I understand not how after you have very learnedly declared that the soul by its aeviternity hath the succession of the parts of pain all together afterwards you put that a soul by twenty years duration in pain hath suffered so long the hard consequents of that duration For if the extension of time as far as concerns the intrinsecal existence of the soul was all resumed in aeviternity and aeviternity was all together by the very initiating of it I cannot apprehend the running of time by it can add any intrinsecall consequent which was not in it by the very making You seem to add yet a greater Paradox telling us notwithstanding the being of aeviternity all together yet there is a priority of nature in it which though I can conceive in causes and effects as being different things yet in a pure indivisible it passes my understanding specially when the priority must be in succession where when one part is the other is not Neither doth Aristotle help you in whose doctrin the decreeing of the will is a successive action as depending on a corporall motion in the body But this being the subtilty of a Scotist I pray do not perswade your self that in our doctrin which makes the duration of the acts of the soul the very duration of the soul a change of act can be connaturally admitted You insinuate something of a Metaphysicall charity and that our doctrin is suspected to account voluntarily assumed penance to be superfluous if not superstitious Sir I desire you by the freedom you see in my writing to speak meaning loud not to mince any sinister conceits fram'd of my Tenets Truth loves light and in this particular point I will openly declare you my sentiment All austerities or extern actions which either conduce to the breeding of charity in our selves and neighbours or to the conserving and increasing it in those that have it and to the extending of it by diffusion into divers subjects all this though there be no obligation for the actions in common which is meant by their being voluntary I esteem holy and sanctified But if any one should think God takes pleasure that we should weaken or afflict our bodies without intending profit to our souls but meerly because it pleases God by and for it self I am of opinion that he makes God a tyrant and that his action is both superfluous and superstitious After this point I find no disagreement between us in any thing that concerns our question some words at the very â—nd of the souls being exercised in a passive compliance seem improper in our naturall and vulgar apprehensions but not false and therefore not
explication of this both contain the same difficulty and therefore both require the same method to answer and as whatever belongs to man in the quality of a living creature belongs to a horse or lion by the same title so every attribute incident to Angels purely as they are spirits may justly be claim'd by any to whom that notion of spirit is truly appliable Now souls departed have in my opinion so large a knowledge given them immediatly upon their first separation that they assuredly know all the good that they have done for them both by occasion of what themselves procur'd and by the voluntary charity of others as also what shall be their portion at the day of Judgment compounded of all these concurrent causes and so are now from the first moment of their unclothing in that degree of hope and joy which those foresights produce which yet ought not in the least to cool our devotions towards them since they never should foreknow that our prayers obtain for them those advantages if indeed we did not really pray for them Thus far I am drawn in defence of truth and my self both beyond my intention and against my inclination but still it sometimes happens that what is not enough for some is too much for others To conclude then As prayers for the dead with hope of procuring them relief is a traditionary doctrine and practice so prayers to Saints and Angels and even to God himself with perswasion of advancing their glory is a traditionary doctrine and practise but whether any reall intrinsick change among those spirits be wrought successively and occasionally after our sublunary fashion is meerly a Theological inquiry and no traditionary either doctrine or practise In the third Chapter you touch upon the Reasons of praying for the dead in particular but because you handle it afterwards on set purpose I may lawfully defer the answer till I meet with it again in the mean time I freely subscribe to every word of the testimony you bring from Saint Austin Notes on the fourth Chapter Here you pretend to deliver the sense of the Liturgies both of the Greek and Latin Church My first note is that where Saint James prayes God to cause the souls to rest with the Saints You seek to perswade the Reader that we explicate it to pray that they may not rest till nay more till after the day of Judgment which I confess to be a jeer fit enough perhaps for the merry trifling Vindicator but you much undervalue your self to use scoffing in stead of Reason You tell us too the Fathers pray constantly for a present help but when you cite words nothing appears but the common effect in which both sides agree One place you have out of Saint Ambrose which hath some shew I loved him saith Saint Ambrose and therefore I will accompany him to the kingdom of heaven nor will I forsake him till by tears and prayers I bring him whither his own deserts call him These words you interpret to signifie materiall time that he wil pray so long till he hath brought him out of Purgatory into Heaven I on the other side conceive it onely an expression of the fervency of the prayer which he would make for him Let us weigh whether explication be the more rationall To undertake what I say was in Saint Ambrose's power being no more then to promise the assistance which was in the Churches power The other sense which you make requires that Saint Ambrose should expect a revelation to know when his soul went to heaven else he must never give over praying for him that he should enter into the counsels of God and understand both what punishment was due to Theodosius and what quantity of prayer was enough to release him Add to this the doctrin of both Fathers and Schoolmen that there is no promise of God that a good mans prayers shall be heard for others and therefore as to us 't is wholy incertain Wherein then are the prayers of those who think with me less fruitfull to their departed friends then theirs who call to God for a determinate or immediate delivery If the release be granted when it suits with the justice and mercy of God as doubtless it is then both their prayers are equall and this onely difference is between them as to the time one prays with more importunity the other with more submission but as to the desire of benefiting both with the same affection Next you urge Saint Chrysostom saying the dead receive some comfort if offerings be made for them and conclude from that word some as if it could not signifie heaven But as you prettily press quiddam so will I begg leave to press the future Participle accessurum which quite spoils your pretence of present change upon our prayers and being indeterminately future may signifie indifferently the day of judgement and that solatium quiddam as you put it let it mean what it will is given them Now the word some being abstractive sutes very well with the intention of him who would evince that prayers did assuredly benefit the dead as is the method of all wary men to use the commonest and surest terms without ingaging into particular degrees unless those degrees were the very question And do you think there are not degrees too of rewards in heaven is there not the reward of a Prophet and that of a Disciple that which is proportion'd to the giving a cup of cold water and all this in the essentiall part of beatitude every act of charity increasing it to its worth and degree Besides will you deny accidentall rewards in heaven Then you insist upon revelations of Saint Gregory and Venerable Bede and make an advantage of their not being contradicted which consequence I do not understand For how many things are there written in divers Authors both ancient and modern neither believed nor contradicted or if contradicted both themselves and contradictions generally neglected you add that both Greeks and Latines positively approved to them True it is Gregory the third according to Photius who could not well be ignorant of it being so learned a person especially in Books and Authors was the Writer of those Dialogues a Syrian born and for his piety exalted to the Popedome and Zacharias by birth a Grecian and for his goodness promoted also to the same dignity thought them fit to be communicated to Greece but with what success I cannot give you any account Yet I dare say no grave Divine now living will undertake to justifie those Revelations as having ever some smack that agrees not with Catholique Doctrin Venerable Bede's Revelations likewise have certain twangs of strangeness in them which shew that they cannot bear the touch of a Theologicall examination and so in a fair word I answer you the Revelations both of the one and the other are generally contradicted by Divines and you can make no argument from them but rather I may infer the effect
especially should my Vindicator proceed close and pertinently like a serious man and an ingenious Schollar for so I should have more time to attend on the weightier matters And most of all if he would enlarge himself a little upon the same Question in his next Vindication for I shall be glad to be directed and assisted by any one But if any be so unexperienc'd as to imagin all that is deliver'd or decreed is absolutely of Faith let him satisfie the instances commonly urg'd by Divines of the Assumption of our Blessed Lady of the souls being the Form of our body and many other such truths universally assented to but not admitted into the Catalogue of Articles In fine if this last be your opinion you will find very few wise men of your mind if the former you are equally concern'd with me to separate Catholike from Theologicall Faith or any other Proposition of inferiour qualification The Conclusion THus have you my Opinion on your Result as full and particular as can be expected from a weak understanding subject to negligence and oversight yet to my power sincere and captive to the love of truth I hope you cannot be offended at my oppositions for I have that esteem of you that you are a lover of truth and not sway'd by passion or interest but only prejudiced by the force of custom and the reverence of School-opinions Censures though I think they belong to the duty of a Divine fit to shew his works to the Sun yet in this piece I have used none And though the unwary compliance of this age with Error makes me esteem'd censorious yet my heart told me I was oblig'd to do so when ever I engag'd my Pen into it and that I spared far more Opinions justly blameable then I censured because I deemed them not so pernicious as to force me to it The style I have not much regarded holding that both the matter and my age warn me not to be sollicitous of it but rather to speak quinque verba in meo sensu quam decem millia verborum in lingua In a word if I gain your Opinion of my sincerity let the Controversy it self speak for the truth and the reasons which are on both sides I must acknowledge my self ever obliged to you that you have shewn our Catholiques how to demean themselves with moderation towards one another in litigious disputes and with these thanks make way to your credulity that I am Your cordiall Friend and Servant THOMAS WHITE Postscript BEing inform'd that some few scrupulous and I fear unsatisfiable persons object against my Religion and Reason that it takes no notice of those words even before the Resumption of their bodies c. on which they chiefly ground I could not I confess at first but wonder at their prejudice which had so imprinted those words in their fancyes in Capitall that they could not see or know them in a lesser Character For I not onely took notice of them in my 34 and 35 pages and put them down at large as in the Bull cited by themselves but addrest my self purposely there to show them as impossible to favour their Cause as 't is that the Subject of a Proposition should be the Predicate which every smatterer knows to be in Logick the highest absurdity imaginable Besides in divers other places of my Book where any thing was attempted or urg'd from those words I offer'd my satisfaction to their difficulties with what success the Books must shew In the mean time I crave the favour upon occasion of their miscarriage in this that none would lend too easie credit to objections whispered in corners which are afraid to appear and justifie themselves in writing under their hands If any such be offer'd I shall both take it as a favour and acknowledge it my duty to satisfie them If not 't is so like the way of clamour and detraction that all persons meanly prudent will I hope neglect them and so shall I. INDEX AEviternal things not changable by Time p. 37.38 S. Ambrose's Testimony not prejudiciall p. 29.30 The opinion of Ante judiciary Delivery by occasioning the multitude of unworthy Priests harmfull to the Church p. 5.6 impairing solid Devotion p. 6.7 injuring civill Duties if follow'd p. 7. Fraudulently practis'd by many ibid. The Effects of it is true uncertain p. 9.10 The Church not chargeable with these Abuses p. 10. Censures allowable among Divines p. 67. S. Chrysostom's Testimony not prejudiciall p 31 32. Charity to be used in managing Opinions and why p. 12 13. Composition how found in Spirits p. 51 52. Delivery in the day of Judgment not singular in being universally held yet but an Opinion p. 12.16 18.19.26.61 not prejudic'd by Priviledg'd Altars and Indulgences rightly understood and sincerely practis'd p. 65 66. Delivery from Hell pray'd for in the offertory p. 34 35. Devotions not warrantable glanc't at p. 63 64 65. Identity of Time why necessary to Contradiction p. 57. Iudgment-day desirable p. 43 44 45. Language concerning Spirits how verifiable p 21 22 23 c. Penance how held by the Authour p. 38 39. Prayer when perfectest p. 50 51. Prayer for the dead manifoldly beneficiall p. 45. to p. 50. of equall efficacy in the deniers as the holders of Ante judiciary Delivery p 30 31. Priority of Nature not found in a pure Indivisible p. 38. Relief in Purgatory in the Authors Doctrin from p. 20 to p. 28. Reuelations even of great Saints how errable p. 69. Those of Gregory and Bede generally contradicted p. 32 33.72 This later unconsonant to Faith p. 70.71 That of the dead Skull examin'd p. 14 15 16.72 Sins remoining in Purgatory granted p. 39. Seuls separate why unchangeable in true Peripatetick Doctrin p. 40 41. This Incapacity of change the Result of their nature p 55 56. In what sence supernaturally deliverable before Iudgment p. 73 74. Tradition alone sufficient for Faith p. 35 36. Translating the Middle State not criminally scandalous p. 4 5. but judiciously pious p. 10. occasioned by others p. 11. Not this but the Adversaries carriage forbid by the Council of Trent p. 42 43. FINIS