answered by the prodigious Legend of Christina who died twice No hurt is to man if God will send his soul from an heavenly place to live a while on earth again 5. No harm to die twice The difference between death compleat and incompleat 6. God can dispense with his own Laws THus having beaten down the opposite authorities if they were fully on that side with weight and number the third and last point which I propounded to handle was the answering of all their reasons and arguments Some are so weak that I need not to answer For Suarez himself who alledgeth them confesseth their weaknesse and answereth them These three proofs following he alledgeth but answereth not First It was decent and behovefull DECUIT saith Suarez that Christ who had both bodie and soul should have companions of his glory in their bodies as well as in their souls For his delight is to be with the children of men Proverb 8.31 Which Suarez it may be took as an hint from Cajetan for he on Aquin. parte primâ quaest 53. art 3. hath it thus a Rationale videtur quòd sucrexerint perfectè ad vitam penitus immortalem ut beatitudo corporis in Christo haberet socios minus enim corporalis felicitas aliquid habere videretur it desit corporalis societas est enim homo secundùm vitam corporcam animal sociale c. It standeth with reason that they arose perfectly to a life fully immortall that the bodily blessednesse of Christ might have some fellows For the bodily happinesse seems not perfect and compleat if bodily societie and company be wanting for man is according to the corporeall life a sociable creature or good fellow not onely for want of necessaries unto life as happeneth in this world but for naturall delight consisting in bodily conversation saith Cajetan dissenting in this from the great Summist his master I answer that Cajetans argument is ridiculous for it holdeth chiefly in children or babies in fools and in striplings who love play-mates or in worldly factours whom businesse forceth into societie and commerce But that the Saints in heaven yea Christ himself the all blessed Saviour of the world both God and Man should not have the full of delight or have too little of bodily felicity if other humane bodies be not present savoureth rather of the Turkish Coran and the Arabian school then of the sacred Text and that Christ in heaven is animal sociale naturally delighting in bodily conversation for so much the application of that Axiom importeth or els he saith nothing to the purpose doth imply his brutish conceit of our most holy Redeemer The sweet singer of Israel saith Psal 16.11 In thy presence is fulnesse of joy at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore If this befall other holy Saints much more it belongeth to Christ from whose fulnesse all the whole bodie of his Church receiveth comfortable influences But grant we that such bodily companie might be desired by Christ yet he needed not these Many but he might have had Enoch and Elias or Moses and Elias with whom he conferred at his transfiguration Secondly unto Suarez his words Barradas his fellow-Jesuite answereth Christ needeth not men indued with bodies now in heaven As for the place of the Proverbs the precedent words give light unto them I rejoyced in the habitable parts of the earth saith the Text So his delights were with the sonnes of men in and upon the earth but of his delight in them with their humane bodies in heaven Before the last resurrection there is no inkling or intimation given Suarez argueth thus secondly b Animae gloriosae connaturale est c. It is very naturall for a glorified soul to be united unto an immortall and glorious bodie But their souls were glorious Therefore their bodies also And the glorie of a blessed soul of its own nature redounds upon the bodie I answer It doth so naturally if it be not hindered But the blessed souls of these Many Saints were in bodies not immortall not blessed not glorious for a few dayes or houres and that by miracle saith Barradius Besides whilest Christ lived on earth unlesse at his Transfiguration or some such especiall occasion the glorie of his most happie soul which was then beatified as much as any of the souls of the Saints are now and more did not impart visible glorie to his bodie but it was passible and mortall for it died Then why may not these Saints have the glorious light of their souls eclipsed from their bodies Again the assumed bodies of blessed Angels ever did resolve into their first principles when the ends why they assumed them were fulfilled the like might be in the Saints whose souls were hindered from communicating incorruptible and glorious qualities to their bodies and so they were partakers not of the perfection of the last eternall resurrection but of the imperfections incident to the temporarie and mortall resurrection Thirdly saith Suarez Corah Dathan and Abiram are in hell with their bodies therefore some to shew Gods mercie must now be in heaven with their bodies and therefore these Many I answer that both the sequences are lame though we should grant the ground or antecedent of the Argument For first was not Gods mercie seen in heaven from the houre of Corah and his companies descent into hell till these Many ascended Then why may it not still be seen though these ascended not especially since that Christ is there in a most blessed incorruptible bodie as they are in hell in cursed bodies which would take corruption for a favour Lastly why must these Many Saints be the counter-pattern in heaven rather then Enoch or Elias or Moses being the Magistrate against whom Corah and his complices combined themselves 2. Others there are who object It is said THEY ENTRED INTO THE HOLY CITIE But the holy citie is the new Jerusalem Jerusalem above Revel 21.2 Therefore they died not but went into heaven I answer Jerusalem below the materiall Jerusalem the seat of the kings of Judah because of Gods worship there especially to be performed in that glorious Temple was also called the holy citie GLORIOUS THINGS ARE SPOKEN OF THEE THOU CITIE OF GOD Psal 87.3 Amongst others thou art styled holy Rev. 11.2 The holy citie shall the Gentiles tread under foot but the Gentiles shall never trample on the new Jerusalem above On the one side of a shekel of the Sanctuarie which once I saw was stamped in Hebrew characters Holy Jerusalem Again Tobit 13.9 O Jerusalem the holy citie he will scourge thee but he will never scourge Jerusalem above which is the Mother of us all therefore Jerusalem below must needs be this holy Citie Bellarmine himself de Pontifice Romano 3.13 accordeth with us and interpreteth the strife of the two Witnesses against Antichrist in Jerusalem below And before him Hierom in his answer to the eighth question of Hedibia Tom. 3. fol. 50. saith Of these words
nobilitie richly clad do wait on Kings Tertullian adversus Marcionem cap. 22. saith Moses and Elias were seen p In consortio claritatis equally bright and glorious Luke 9.29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As he prayed the fashion of his countenance was altered q Nemo putet Salvatorem veritatem corporis amisisse externam tantùm speciem permutavit splendore Let no man imagine saith Hierom that our Saviour lost the nature of a true bodie onely he converted the outward form and fashion all into brightnes The like may I say of Moses and Elias if they had their glorie by redundance from Christs glorie as Suarez maintaineth and then there is no necessitie nor indeed great likelihood that Christs glorious transfiguration should leave to himself a mortall bodie and they should be by him then invested in eternall tabernacles of incorruptible flesh Now as I have clearely declared my judgement that it holdeth not demonstratively from any puncto that Elias at the transfiguration had an unchangeably glorious estate of bodie so I hold it very probable that Elias did never die properly but was changed at his rapture and at his ingresse into heaven enjoyed a truly glorified bodie and both unto the time of Christs transfiguration and then and ever since enjoyeth and liveth in flesh incorruptible not Animall but Spirituall as the blessed Saints shall have after the end of the world If any one think to choke me with my former words That Christs glorie was greater then the glorie of his servants And therefore if Elias had an immortall bodie Christ must have one also which he had not I answer That the hypostaticall union of the Divine Nature to the Humane in Christ was at all times of greater glorie then the glorified estate of the Saints shall be after the resurrection Secondly as intensively Christs glorie was greater then Elijahs though it was eclipsed by Christs voluntarie condescent that he might accomplish the work of our redemption so extensively at the instant of the transfiguration I doubt not but the bodily glorie of Christ was as farre above his servants glorie as the light of the sunne surpasseth the light of lesser starres Therefore all things considered Christs bodily glorie was greater then Elijahs though Elijahs was immortall and Christs then changeable and mortall Bellarmine in his Apologie against the judicious Monitorie preface of King James esteemeth it as p Valde admirandum much to be admired at that the learned King said Enoch and Elias are now glorified in heaven Many things indeed might Bellarmine learn by his Majestie which are laudanda valde admiranda both to be praised and wondred at but taking valde admirandum in the worser sense I say his wonder is full of ignorance and malice Wherefore omitting much of what that really-unanswerable Bishop hath copiously alledged I say It is no such strange matter to say or beleeve that Enoch and Elias have glorified bodies And yet here first of all I will ingenuously confesse that a man both in soul and in a corruptible bodie may be in the third heaven because S. Paul else might have known that himself was not in the third heaven in his bodie but his doubting and nesciencie 2. Cor. 12.2 c. Whether in the bodie I cannot tell or whether out of the bodie I cannot tell God knoweth proveth that either might have been The disjunctive might else have been spared if it could have been done onely one way Therefore it is possible unto the Almightie that Elias might or may have a passive mortall bodie though he were rapt into heaven and there be at this present But A posse ad esse non valet consequentia and the reasons and authoritie which place Elias in heaven in an unpassible bodie are more ponderous and numerous then theirs which embrace the contrarie If it be objected that Elias went not up into the third heaven because he was carried up in a whirlwinde and whirlwindes reach not to the third heaven I answer By the same cavill they may say Our Saviour ascended not into heaven when a cloud received him out of their sight Act. 1.9 because clouds pierce not to the highest heaven But we must distinguish between things ordinarie and extraordinarie Both the whirlwinde and the cloud had somewhat in them above the common leuell of nature and were not meerly elementarie but adapted to higher and diviner uses then common clouds or whirlwindes I remove this passant tabernacle of discourse from an objection unto the standing mansion of our great Adversaries confessions Suarez in tertiam partem Summ. quaest 53. artic 3. confesseth in this manner q Sunt in inserno aliqui homines corpore animâ ante generalem resurrectionem ut Dathan Abiram similes Some men are in hell both soul and bodie before the generall resurrection as Dathan and Abiram and the like He is seconded by Peter Morales another Jesuit in his fifth book on the first chapter of S. Matthew Tract 11. This opinion is somewhat minced by Ribera upon the words Revel 19.20 These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone who hath his second also viz. Blasius Viegas for they say Korah Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up alive but then the earth closed and they died and their souls onely were carried into hell The like they say of Antichrist and his fore-runner But this nicetie is contradicted by the Vulgat which to them is authenticall Num. 16.33 Descenderunt vivi in infernum so also in the thirtieth verse and so the Interlinearie rightly readeth it according to the Hebrew And if infernus did signifie the grave in the case of Korah and his complices as it doth not for then it had been no such extraordinarie miracle for people alive to be swallowed up by the earths rupture since many people yea whole cities have often been so punished and came to destruction but they were for a signe Numb 26.10 that is for an example that others should not murmure and rebell against Gods Ministers as the Genevean Note on the place soundly and pertinently and deeply interpreteth yet concerning Antichrist and his false-prophet mentioned by them it cannot be so for it is said most punctually Revel 19.20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vivi missi sunt hi duo in stagnum ignis ardentis sulphuris These both were cast alive into a lake of burning fire and brimstone as it is in their Vulgat Montanus varieth it thus In stagnum ardens in sulphure Into a lake burning in brimstone They did not descend r Ad sepulchrum ad infernum ad stagnum ignis exclusivé to the grave to hell to the lake of fire exclusively coming onely to the brink but ſ Descenderunt in infernum in stagnū ignis they descended into hell into the lake of fire they were plunged into it Therefore they did not die by the way or at the gates of hell but actually
raised incorruptible and we shall be changed For this corruptible must put on incorruption c. What coherence subsequent then shall you make unto these words None at all The coherence must be with the antecedent words But say I take the antecedent words as the Vulgat hath them and reade as you must the connexion in this sort We shall indeed all arise but shall not all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump For the trumpet shall sound c. I say even in this reading there is little sense also yea much untruth Is it not certain that we shall be changed in a moment Or how long shall the time of change be There is no way to avoid this foul absurditie which cometh by the Vulgat edition unlesse it be by a greater that is by saying that you will make an Hyperbaton and include these words We shall not all be changed in a Parenthesis and then the sense will be We shall arise in a moment c. For though it be true that we shall arise in a moment yet there is no ground that we shall not be changed in a moment In all likelihood a change may rather be more speedie which is without death then that change which is made through death and resurrection If they may be and shall be raised and changed in a moment they may in a moment be changed and not raised Secondly no authoritie that I know runneth for such a needlesse Parenthesis and I deem it as a violence offered to the Text so to strain it when the sense will runne fairly otherwise according to the best Greek copies We shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump Let this also serve to have been spoken against the Latin Vulgat edition and its bad reading Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur In momento in ictu oculi in novissima tuba canet enim tuba mortui resurgent incorrupti c. By how much the lesse sense is in this by so much the more are we bound to adhere to the Originall and the most common and best copies of it This I may be bold to averre That if some shall not die and yet be changed there shall be an infallible yea demonstrative proof unto sense That the very self same bodie which man had shall inherit eternall glorie For if they die not they must needs keep and have the same bodies from which they are not parted by immutation Yea the identicall resurrection of the same very bodies which were dead may thus farre be proved That if the changed bodies shall be still the same in substance though differing in qualities the raised bodies also shall be no otherwise nor any way different and Pythagoras will then disprove his * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transmigration of souls into diverse bodies and his heathenish * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regeneration to which Nicodemus seemed to have an eye Joh. 3.4 when every soul cometh arayed with its own bodie and when they who by change put not off their bodies shall come alive to judgement 5. The Pelagians were wont thus to argue If sinne came in by Adam then all must needs die But some shall not die namely those y Qui reperientur vivi who shall be found remaining alive Therefore sinne came not into the world by Adam S. Augustine answereth this argument very sufficiently otherwise and it may easily and briefly be answered All shall die reatu though not actu Yet that holy Father and that great just enemie of the accursed Pelagians z In majorem cautelam for the greater and better securitie and safetie would seem to rest doubtfull of their assumption which he needed not Whereupon de Civitat 20.20 he saith a Dormitio praecedit quamvìs brevissima non tamen nulla Death goeth before a most short and speedie one yet a death And in the same place b Per mortem ad immortalitatem mirâ celeritate transibunt They shall slip sail or passe over by death to immortalitie with wonderfull speed Again de peccat merit remiss 2.31 c Hoc quibusdam in sine largietur Deus ut mortem istam repentiuâ commutatione non sentient God at the end of the world shall grant this priviledge unto some That by reason of their sudden change they shall not feel death And Retract 2.33 d Aut non morientur aut de vita ista in mortem de morte in aeternam vitam celerrimâ commutatione tanquam in ictu oculi transeundo mortem non sentient Either they die not or otherwise they glide from this life into death and from death into eternall life as it were in the twinkling of an eye by a most speedie alteration taking no notice or sense of death He leaves it doubtfull as you see in these his last books though sometimes before he thought That all should die and otherwhere as ad Dulcitium quaest 3. That they should not die The Master of the Sentences saith concerning the question Whether the change be by death or without it e Horum quid sit verius non est humani judicii definire Man cannot determine certainly which of these is truest Rabanus lib. 4. de sermon proprietat having alledged the consent of divers Fathers to establish his own opinion That all must die yet annexeth this Because there are others alike Catholick and learned men who beleeve That the soul remaining in the bodie those shall be changed to immortalitie who shall be found alive at the coming of our Lord f Et hoc eis reputari pro resurrectione ex mortuis quòd mortalitatem immutatione deponant non morte c. and that it stands them in stead of rising from the dead that they cast away mortalitie by change not by death Let any man rest on which opinion he pleaseth c. Which very words also you shall finde in the book de Ecclesiast Dogmat. cap. 7. Now though S. Augustine was dubious and some with him and though some also have imbraced the contrary opinion yet equally Catholick and learned men have been constant to maintain That some shall not die but be changed as you have heard confessed If you please you may take a view of some more particularly The afore named Theodorus Heracleotes cited by Hierom in his epistle to Minerius and Alexander hath it thus i Sancti qui in die judicii in corporibus reperiendi sunt non gustabunt mortem erúnt que cum Domino gravissimâ mortis necessitate calcatâ The Saints who in the day of the last judgement shall be found to be alive and remain in their earthly bodies shall not see death or taste of it and shall be with the Lord kicking and spurning at death and the greatest inforcing necessitie thereof Apollinaris cited in
punishment to be a favour and blessing of God 3. Not many or more sinnes but one caused death One onely David begotten in lawfull wedlock That this one sinne is not lesse in the godly nor greater in the wicked Death was appointed for one sinne onely of one person onely 4. This one person onely was Man this Man that sinned that one sinne was Adam Strange and curious speculations that Eve sinned not that sinne for which man-kinde was appointed to death 5. Two Schoole-speculations propounded The second handled at large as expounding the former and determined against the Schoolmen themselves viz. That the children of innocent Adam had been born confirm'd in grace The censure of Vives upon these and the like points A part of his censure censured 1. COncerning Death I mean in this place to touch onely the strange medly that is mixed in it of Sower Sweet The sowernes or bitternes of death is discerned because that manner of secession or departure is onely painfull whereas all other approaches unto glorie all other stairs steps and means inducing to blessednes are void of pain Let us see it exemplified in Enoch He walked with God and was not for God took him Genes 5.24 His manner of not-being as he was before whatsoever it were or howsoever was never held painfull Secondly the chariot of fire and the horses of fire which parted Eliah and Elisha both asunder 2. Kings 2.11 hurt neither of them Elijah saith the place went up by a whirlwinde into heaven the very form of words implying a willing-easie ascent nor did the whirlwinde molest him or pain him though Ecclesiasticus 48.9 it is said it was a whirlwinde of fire Christs Transfiguration comes next to be considered It was a true representation of that bodilie glorie which at the recollection retribution of all Saints God will adorn and cloth the faithfull withall Christ shewing them the mark at which they ought to shoot for we also are to be fashioned or configured to his transfiguration Philip. 3.21 * Qualis futurus est tempore judicandi talis Apostolis apparuit As he is to be at the time of judging such did he appeare to the Apostles saith Hierom on Matth. 17. And let not man think he lost his old form and face saith he or took a body spirituall or aëriall the splendor of his face was seen and the whitenes of his vestments described * Non substantia tollitur sed gloria commutatur The substance is not taken away but the glory is changed Or that I may utter it in Theophylacts words on Mark 9.2 By the transfiguration so Oecolampadius should translate it understand not the change of character and lineaments but the character remaining such as it was before an increase was made of unspeakable light This admirable light not coming from without to him as it did to Moses but flowing from his divinitie into his humane soul from it into his body and from it into his very clothes will you say his clothes were changed saith S. Hierom His raiment became shining exceeding white as snow so as no fuller on earth can white them Mark 9.3 And his face did shine as the Sunne Matth. 17.2 What S. Chrysostom saith of the spirituall bodies of the Saints I will much more rather say of Christs body transfigured for if starre differeth from starre in glorie man from man much more shall Christ shine above all other men by infinite degrees They shall shine as the Sunne not because they shall not exceed the splendor of the sunne Aquin part 3. q. 45. art 2. but because we see nothing more bright then the sunne he took the comparison thence And this shining saith Aquinas * Fuit gloriae claritas essentialiter licèt non secundum modum cùm suerit per modum transeuntis passionis was essentially a claritie of glory though not in the manner seeing it was by way of a transient passion as the aire is inlightned of the sunne whereas * Ad corpus glorificatum redundat claritas ab anima sicut qualitas quaedam permanens to a glorified body claritie from the soul doth accrue as some permanent qualitie Which essentiall claritie Christ had from his nativitie yea from his first conception yet by dispensation he ecclipsed it ever till he had accomplished our redemption except at this time when appeared a brightnes of glory though not a brightnes of a glorious body not imaginary unlesse you take imaginary as synonymall with representative but reall though transitorie Can any one think that herein was any pain or rather not infinite pleasure The beholders rejoyced they could not do so at the pain of Christ If there were any pain or grief it would rather have been so at the withdrawing of his unusuall claritie which not being likely the manifestation of this claritie at this transfiguration was lesse likely to be painfull The fourth and last kinde of degree to happines is translation not onely as Enoch was translated from one life to an other kinde of life but such a translation as should have been of Adam if he had not sinned and shall be of such as shall be alive at Christs coming Adams translation had been sine media morte Nor was his slumber painfull nor solutio continui at the drawing out of his rib nor the closing of the flesh again nor is it likely there was in Adams side any scar the badge of pain and sorrow much lesse should he have had pain at his translation Pain is the grand-child of sinne the daughter of punishment from both which the estate of innocency was priviledged Every thing in the Creation was very good Genes 1.31 Every tree was pleasant to the sight and good for food Genes 2.9 and could the tree of life cause pain By tasting the fruit thereof Adam and his ofspring had come to an higher and more unchangeable happines The middesse was then proportionate to the beginning and to the end Sorrow was part of the curse innocency could not feel pain much lesse shall eternall happines and should the tree of life have caused pain Then were there little difference between it and the tree of knowledge of good and evill Or what difference in that point would there be between Adams death which was painfull and his translation if it should have been painfull As concerning the translation of them that shall be found alive at the last day I am thus conceited That there shall be no true and reall separation of their souls from their bodies at least so much as concerneth the righteous That they shall be changed That they shall put on immortalitie If it be delightfull now to our bodies to receive ease shall it be painfull to be clothed with incorruptibility It shall be done in a moment in the twinkling of an eye 2. Cor. 5.4 Nolumus expoliari saith the Apostle shewing the unwillingnes of men to die sed supervestiri
minde In the state of integritie it was farre otherwise Adam was new in his minde and holy and righteous as was proved before in which regard * Chrys Hom. 16. in Gen. Chrysostom saith Adam was a terrestriall Angel * Bas Homil. Quòd Deus non sit author malorum Basil reckoneth up as Adams chief good in Paradise His sitting with God and conjunction by love As all things els so Adams will was good and tended unto good there is the object his love in innocencie was entire and united to God there was his perfection Thirdly the object of his and our part concupiscible is moderate delight the perfection and felicitie of it was contentment As now this part is gauled with insatiable itchings and given over to lasciviousnesse to work all uncleannesse with greedines Ephes 4.19 But at the first Adam was free Augustine saith * Gratia Dei ibi magna erâ—t vbi terrenum animale corpus besâ—ialem libidinem non habebat There the grace of God was great where an earthy and sensuall body had no beastly lust The place he was in was a Paradise of pleasure a garden of delight nothing was wanting which might give true content Fourthly the object of his and our irascible part may in a sort be called Difficulty or rather Constancy whose glory of endeavours end and felicitie was Victorie This part now is much weakned with infirmitie In the best of us the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and alas we are often vanquished as being weak by nature But Adam was strong and could have overcome any temptation Augustine saith * Felices erant primi homines nullis agitabantur perturbatio ibus animorum nullis corporis laedebantur incommodis De Civit. 14.10 Our first parents were happy being neither shaken with any trouble of minde nor hurt with any infirmitie of body * Adam non opus habebat eo adjutorio quod implorant isti cùm dicunt Video aliam legem in membris meis c. Lib. De Corrept Gratia Adam had no need of that help which these crave when they say I see another law in my members c. Yea he is more bold there saying * Adam in illis bonis in quibus creatus est Christ morte non â—guit Ibid. Adam in those good things wherein he was created had no need of Christs death He had with libertie and will grace sufficient whereby he might have triumphed over all difficulties and temptations Augustine thus * In Paradiso etiamsi omnia non poterat Adam ante peccatum quicquid tum non poterat non volebat ideo poterat omnia quae volebat De Civit. 14.15 In Paradise before sinne although Adam could not do all things yet he then would not do whatsoever he could not and therefore could do all that he would Adam having these excellent endowments of nature and grace had also necessarily certain objects about which they should be conversant These objects were all the parts and branches of the Law of nature whereby he fully knew his dutie And all and every one of these he did for a while or at the least not break and he and his posteritie should and ought to fulfill as they were private persons and for the performance and non-performance thereof both he and we should and shall answer unto God at the high Throne and Tribunall of the just and righteous Judge 2. But there was one precept and onely one given to Eve perhaps to all Adams posteritie as private persons who if they had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evill can not be imagined that they could have ruinated all mankinde but commanded to Adam onely as the publick person as the Idea of humane nature as the stock and root by whose obedience or disobedience all mankinde was to be happie or unhappie as the figure of Christ to come And this sin was not to be a sin of thought onely as the sin of the Angels who each of them sinned by his own expressed will but such a sinne as might bring a deserved blot and punishment upon all his posteritie who were in him which could not be unles it had been committed both by his soul and his body and thereby had power to infect all the parts and faculties both of souls and bodies Again the body of Adam could not sinne without the soul neither could this be a sinne of the soul alone without some concurrents of the bodily parts for then Adams sinning soul should have been damned and his innocent bodie saved but it was to be a sinne compounded of inward aversion and outward transgression So that if Adam had seen Eve eat and had himself lusted after the fruit and yet before the orall manducation had disliked his liking had feared the punishment and not proceeded to eat of it or touch it I do not think his posteritie had been engaged as they are Augustine citeth this out of S. Ambrose and approveth it * Si anima Adami appetentiam corporis refranâsset in ipso ortu extincta esset origo peccati Cont. Julian Pelag. lib. 2. If Adams soul had bridled the bodily appetite in the very beginning the originall of sinne had been quenched Catharinus thinketh there was an expresse covenant between God and Adam that Adam and his posteritie should be blessed or cursed according to the breaking or keeping of that one law What Catharinus saith is probable and may be most true though it be not so written For first if the prohibition had concerned Adams person onely since the precept was given before Eve was created Adam onely should have tasted of death and not Eve Secondly questionlesse that law and covenant included posteritie as is verified in the event When Morte Morieris was threatned unto Adam he was then Rectus in Curia and stood as a publique person representing all his branches If it concerned him as a private person he onely should personally have died and we escaped but our dying in him evinceth that he was reputed if I may so say a generall universall feoffee or person to whose freewill the happie or unhappie future estate of all his descendants was intrusted conditionally to live for ever upon the observance of one law or to die the death for the breach of it Life and death was propounded †Non uni sed universitati Not to one man but to all mankinde 3. And this law is registred and recorded Genes 2.17 Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill thou shalt not eat for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Which words I verily beleeve that Adam understood either by his naturall wisedome which was very great or by divine conference or revelation which to him was not unfrequent to involve his posteritie as well as himself For if immediatly upon the creation of woman Adam could foresee and prophesie Genes 2.24 That a man shall leave
that is sought out and drawn into judgement and answereth as he ought to do truly without mentall reservation modestly and as befitteth him to answer unto his superiours if he receive no satisfaction in his conscience and his Judges doom him worthy to die what shall he now do Shall he be over-ruled by his superiours both spirituall and temporall doing as they do and thinking as they think shall he go against the dictates of his own conscience or shall he adventure his bloud and life What my self would do by Gods grace I will prescribe unto another First before I would sacrifice my life I would once more recollect my former thoughts for humblenesse and diligently consider whether the matters for which I am to suffer death be abstruse depths beyond my reach or capacity If they be very intricate I have cause to think that I am an unfit man to judge of things which I know not and cannot comprehend 2. Cor. 10 13 c. Secondly I would in this case before expense of bloud bring my intentions to the touchstone call to minde that good intentions alone cannot excuse me before God but good intentions well grounded and regulated S. Paul with good intentions persecuted the Church and was injurious but he did it ignorantly in unbelief 1. Tim. 1.13 where an ill belief though meaning well is counted unbelief In a good intention S. Peter would have disswaded our Saviour from death but he was called Satan for it Matth. 16.23 though Christ had blessed him before and promised him excellent gifts vers 17 c. I cannot think but they who offered their children unto Moloch did think they served God rightly though indeed they served the Devil yet God saith Levit. 20.3 I will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people The priests of Baal who cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancers till the bloud gushed out upon them 1. King 18.28 did they not follow the ill guide of a misled conscience did they not think they were in the right do not millions of Turks Jews and of Pagans go to the Devil though they perswade themselves they be in the onely true way do not many think that to be constancie which in truth is obstinacie and that to be knowledge which is ignorant self-love There is great resemblance and manifold likely hood between some truth and some errour and the mistake is easie and there is a great difference between opinion and sound belief Thirdly I would endeavour to think humbly of my self and as the Apostle adviseth to preferre others before me I would ruminate on that which the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 13.3 Though I give my bodie to be burned and have not charity it profiteth me nothing And shewing what he meaneth by charity addeth Charity suffereth long and is kinde charity envieth not charity is not rash or vaunteth not it self is not puffed up doth not behave it self unseemly So that he who behaveth himself unseemly who is puffed up who vaunteth himself or is rash who envieth and is unkinde and hasty hath not charity And though he give his bodie to be burned his death profiteth him nothing saith the Apostle Examine therefore and again I say examine thine own heart if thou finde any one of these sinnes beforenamed reigning in thee then know there is a spot in the sacrifice And till that be washed away rased out or reformed thou must suspect thy self and mayest well be dubious Self-conceit is a branch of pride pride never agreed with charity and no death profiteth a man any thing who hath not charity Oh but this enfeebleth the resolution of confessours and stoopeth down the constancy of martyrs to pendulousnesse it maketh them draw their hands back from the plough and to look backward to Sodom with lots wife No no my discourse intends onely to dull the edge of singularity to stop the mouths of pridie undertakers and ignorant praters to put a bridle into the teeth of such as revile Magistracie to reduce people to humblenesse and such thoughts as these If many may be deceived how much easier may I If the more learned be awrie how shall I be sure I am right They have souls to answer as well as I and charity bids me think they would not damn their own souls by damning mine have I alone a sound rectified conscience Self-deniall is a better schoolmaster to true knowledge then presumption An acceptable martyr is a reasonable sacrifice and an acceptable sacrifice is a reasonable martyr A conscience not founded on good causes not strengthened with understanding is like a fair house built on the sands a very apple of Sodom a painted sepulchre which appeares beautifull outward but is within full of dead mens bones and of all uncleannesse Matth. 23.27 My cautions are not remoraes of staying or withdrawing any man so farre as his knowledge can or doth aspire unto for so farre I allow them a judgement of discretion but necessary preparatives to the true perfect and glorious martyrdome He shall be no martyr in my estimate who without great motives runneth to death and posteth rashly to destruction But when pride with all her children singularity self-love vaunting rashnesse unseemly behaviour is cast out of the soul and the contrary graces the children of charitie possesse it then if thy conscience can no way be convicted if thou knowest thy cause to be good and the contrary to be apparently amisse follow not the multitude conform not thy self to the world keep thy conscience untainted poure out thy bloud unto death offer thy life and body as a reasonable sacrifice die and be a martyr be a martyr and be crowned crowned I say not onely with glory and immortality but with those gifts and aureolae which are prepared above others for true martyrs In this sort Whosoever shall confesse Christ before men him will Christ confesse also before his Father which is in heaven Matth. 10.32 The judgement of jurisdiction which is in superiours having authoritie and the judgement of direction which is in Pastours by way of eminency forbid not in this case the judgement of discretion which is and ought to be in every private man so farre as he hath discretion and knowledge or immediate inspirations of all which I would not have a man too presumptuous That which our Divines do term the judgement of discretion is in the words of z Contra Marcionem 4. post medium pag. 269. Tertullian Clavis Agnitionis He must never contrary this for this must he die What he knoweth let him as a good witnesse seal with his bloud if need be But in things beyond a simple mans capacitie I will say once more with a Serm. 20. de verbis Apostoli Augustine b Melior est fidelis ignorantia quà m temeraria scientia A faithfull ignorance is better then a rash knowledge In such things is he to be guided by his Pastours
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
not to have bought that but an other piece of ground at an other time in an other place for * Genes 23.16 c. foure hundred shekels of silver of Ephron the Hittite neare Hebron which was farre distant from Sychem Which sale of Ephron and purchase of Abraham is ratified by the witnesse of truth in the mouth of Jacob himself and dying Jacob Genes 49.29 c. Therefore though the name of Abraham be read it may be it must be a patronymick and Jacob is called by his grandfathers name and Jacob did what is ascribed to Abraham for other passages of Scripture do force us to expound it of Jacob. Thus have I digressed to satisfie the great doubt which hath tortured the wits both of old and late Writers O Lord God God of Abraham of Isaac and of Jacob God of our fathers Father of Jesus Christ our God and Saviour be pleased I beseech thee that these my poore weak labours in points obscure may receive strength from thy strength light from thy light that thy most blessed holy and all-wise Word may be a lanthorn and light not onely to my paths but to my understanding that so I may know thee love thee and alway cleaving to thee may be glorified by thee through Jesus Christ my Redeemer and Advocate Amen CHAP. XI 1. Pineda makes Moses to be one of the raised at Christs Passion if once he died Pineda censured for his assertion or rather his hypothesis 2. David then arose in Pineda his judgement 3. His Argument answered Bishop Bilson wavering and rejected as he rejecteth S. Augustine 4. A demonstration upon S. Augustine his ground and Act. 2.24 that David was not raised nor ascended bodily into heaven 5. Davids sepulchre now kept by the Turk I Return to my old task against Pineda and of him I demand Who else are said to arise about the time of Christs Passion besides Abraham Isaac and Jacob He hath alreadie answered a At fuerit quoque redivivus Moses stolim diem suum obiit Moses also lived again if long since he died once I answer Why doth he make a needlesse If The Scripture saith expressely he died Deut. 34.5 and he was an hundred and twentie yeares old when he died vers 7. and he was buried vers 6. If he died not yet then first was he partaker of celestiall blessednesse saith Pineda after Christ was risen But in Christs life say I Moses and Elias appeared in glory and spake of his decease Luk. 9.30 31. They were not onely glorified but they did appeare gloriously to Christ and his Apostles before his resurrection And if S. Ambrose hath such words as Pineda citeth we may trulier reply b Mosen nunquam in caelesti gloria legimus postquam sed antequam Christus resurrexit We never read that Moses was or was seen in heavenly glorie after Christ arose but before 2. From this his pendulousnesse concerning Moses he descendeth to others c Neque abfuerit omnino David David was one of them and was not excluded I confesse with the divine S. Augustine that if any did arise to the eternall glory both of their souls and bodies David may be thought to be one neither then will I exclude Adam Abraham Isaac and Jacob and other Patriarchs under the law of Nature but Augustine in the same 99 Epistle ad Euod cited by Pineda proveth by divers reasons that they who arose out of their graves arose not then to an eternall happinesse 3. Yea but Sophronius in his Sermon of the most blessed Virgins Assumption evinceth saith Pineda that David did then arise because S. Peter speaking of the death of David Act. 2.20 saith not His bodie was at Jerusalem but His sepulchre is with us Cajetan on Aquin. part 1. quaest 53. artic 3. addeth ascribing it to Hierom that S. Peter said d Cujus sepulchrum apud nos est quasi non ausus fuerit dicere cujus corpus apud nos est Whose SEPVLCHRE is with us as if he durst not say Whose BODIE is with us Bishop Bilson in the place afore-cited is either for us or dubious in the rere or end although he be peremptorie and adverse to us in the front and beginning for he holdeth That it would somewhat impeach the power of Christs resurrection if it were able to raise the Saints to life but not to preserve them in life I answer The question is not of what Christ could do or can do but what he did do and what was done A Posse ad Esse non valet argumentum And if he imagineth that it impeacheth the power of Christs resurrection unlesse de facto the raised Saints be now alive in their bodies which is his intent any indifferent reader will say he is amisse and ought not to square the power of Christs resurrection to his own fancie Yea but saith he The whole fact will seem rather an apparition then a true resurrection I answer If he take apparition for a phantasticall vision and meer imagination or a delusion of the senses his meaning is not to be suffered yet in a good sense and at large it may be called an apparition for they appeared unto many Matth. 27.53 A true apparition and as true a resurrection A true resurrection is of two sorts the first and the last a good and a better resurrection of which I spake before One eternall Such was Christs Christ dieth no more death hath no more dominion over him Rom. 6.9 and He hath the keyes of death Revel 1.18 yea he alone was blessed with this resurrection hereafter we shall Every man in his own order Christ the first-fruits afterward they that are Christs at his coming saith the Apostle 1. Cor. 15.23 The very time is expressed S. Paul wrote this after Christs first coming yea after his resurrection many yeares and therefore you must needs interpret it of his second coming as is most evident by the context Therefore either those Saints are not Christs or they shall arise at his last coming and therefore have not risen to an eternall resurrection The other true resurrection is temporarie Thus some were raised in the Old Testament and some in the New and though they died again I dare not say their resurrection was an apparition And as out of doubt some of them who were raised by the Prophets or by Christ in his life time died sooner then other so if any of them had died within three or foure dayes yea within an houre or two after that their resurrection yet had it not been an apparition onely but a true temporary resurrection As if a childe should die the third instant after the souls infusion there were a true union and a true death so if one should die again presently after a resurrection there must needs be both a true reunion resurrection and a second death God reuniting the soul and again separating it and disposing of the creature without its wrong to the
me qui fecit coelum terram fluctuans converto me ad Christum quia ipsum quaero hîc invenio quomodo sine impietate adoretur terra I am in a doubt I am afraid to adore earth lest he damn me who made both heaven and earth In this hesitancie or pendulousnesse I turn my self to Christ and here I seek and finde how without impietie earth may be worshipped As if no earthly thing should be adored but his bodie onely I would not say or think that any relique or reliques have in themselves or from themselves power to expell devils or to work wonders for a spirituall power as Thyraeus well observeth though it wound himself is not within a thing corporeall and a bodily power cannot drive away devils or work miracles say I. The great works of healing c. which have been done at the tombes of Martyrs reade S. Augustine de civitat Dei 22.8 might in those dayes extraordinarily be done by the Martyrs or by the Angels l Suscipientes personam Martyrum in assumed bodies like to the Martyrs as Augustine phraseth it in lib. de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 16. The reliques have no vertue in themselves to effectuate or actuate such miracles yea the very Angels or Martyrs themselves were but the agents instruments and the right hand of the Almighty who onely worketh great wonders by his power independent I would put no trust no confidence in the relique of any Saint or Martyr whosoever or whatsoever for help either of soul or bodie For this also is a wrong offered unto him in whose name our help standeth Our help cometh from the Lord which made heaven and earth Psal 121.2 And my God shall supply all our need according to his riches in glorie by Christ Jesus Philip. 4.19 9. What would I then do or how would I behave my self toward a true unquestioned choice relique I would which is the positive part by me promised with Chrysostom Hom. 5. in Job tom 1. honourably esteem of it kisse it and reverently both touch it and behold it and think of it and charily lay it up I would shew it to others not mercenarily but with joyfull and comfortable remembrance of him whose relique it was I would esteem of it above silver gold or precious stones I would make it my remembrancer of things past as a motive stirring me up to the imitation of that Saints vertues and actions which is their best relique I would use it as a bridle to curb evil in me and as a spur to goodnesse If any instrument of Satan should debase it and say that it is vilissimus pulvis I would scorn his scorn and esteem it as a most especiall instrument of the most High and would say to the caviller or rather to his master Lucifer the Father of lies and detraction m Saepe hoc vilissimo tortus es pulvere Even this which thou callest most vile dust hath often tormented thee as S. Hierom said of old Lastly till of it self it decayed and by its imperfection or rottennesse called for interment I would not bury it but commend it to be kept even in Churches and other holy places except idolatrie were committed with it or people in their profane religion adored it And then would I also burie it 10. Much more might be said but I must take manum de tabula or make a quick end and returning to Pineda say That if Ananias Azarias and Misael have no relique now remaining which Lorinus reports from report if they did arise or intend to arise with Christ they having a farre longer journey from the place of their captivitie to the sepulchre of Christ then Jacob had to the land of Goshen would or should have had as great a care as Jacob of translating their bones if Jacob translated his in hope to arise with Christ as Pineda intimateth O Gracious God who art to be loved by me for thine own self onely Grant I beseech thee that no worldly thought may nestle and breed in me nor that I may fasten any respect on any creature which may be derogatorie to the devotion due to thee my Creatour for Jesus Christ his sake in whom onely thou art well pleased Amen CHAP. XIII 1. Pineda saith Jonas arose then and Noah His reasons very shallow 2. Daniel arose saith Pineda from Nicetas If Daniel arose he arose but with one leg the other leg is yet shewed at Vercellis 3. Job arose now saith Pineda His proof lame Jobs Epitaph poeticall His sepulchrall pyramis made of imagination 4. Job shall arise at the generall judgement Pineda wrincheth the Scripture 5. The end of Jobs book according to some Greek copies a double exposition of the words 6. Jobs bodie supposed to be translated to Constantinople 7. Bartholomaeus Sibylla saith S. Hierom is expresse that the holy mother of our Lord and John the Evangelist are bodily ascended The like cited from Aquinas And Holcot saith That the glorious virgins bodie was not to be incinerated Her supposed day of Assumption most honoured among the Papists and yet there is monstrous disagreeing among them who favour her Assumption The last instances concern not our question 8. Pineda presumed too farre upon uncertainties Lorinus dareth not name any particularly that were raised It cannot be known certainly NOw also arose Jonah saith Pineda That Jonas was a lively type of Christs resurrection appeareth Matth. 27.40 But if every lively type of Christ arose then Samson Samuel Joshuah Gedeon Melchizedech Aaron Solomon then hundreds of others arose whom Pineda mentioneth not a Tandem resurrexit Noah At last Noah arose saith Pineda Why AT LAST since he was living before other and great in Gods favour who was saved and delivered from the common destruction of all mortall men This last reason as well holdeth That every one that was in the Ark arose also For they were delivered as well as Noah from the inundation of waters and especially Sem who was an holy man and was great in Gods favour 2. And Daniel arose who was brought out of the lions den saith Pineda and he proves it by Nicetas But neither he nor Nicetas proves it by any reason He might as well argue that Jeremie arose with Christ Because he being cast into the dungeon where he sunk in the mire was afterwards drawn out of the dungeon Jerem. 38.6 and 13. And if Daniel arose he arose but with one leg for b Crus Danielis asservatur Vercellis c. A leg of Daniel is kept at Vercellis a citie of Liguria saith Lorinus on Act. 2.29 Daniel died in Babylon saith Sixtus Senensis concerning him Of reliques he makes no mention nor of his rising again with Christ but alledgeth the last of Daniel the last verse Which words may prove that he arose not with Christ or if he did that he died again For the Spirit saith to him Go thou thy way till the end be for thou
raised the tombe-stone was first removed and Lazarus arose tied with the grave-clothes and his face bound with a napkin yea came forth bound hand and foot with grave-clothes Joh. 11.44 by a new miracle walking being bound and bound with grave-clothes to shew that though he did live he did live to die again In which respect also perhaps the graves were opened at Christs passion when he yeelded up the ghost and continued open till his resurrection yea till the ends of their rising were fulfilled and after his resurrection many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves Matth. 27.52 53. O Blessed Lord God who hast commanded that we shall not adde to thy Word nor yet take from it Grant I beseech thee that I may neither think thy certain true Scriptures to be doubtfull nor the uncertain to be Canonicall but possesse me with awfull and reverent thoughts concerning thy holy writ that I adoring the fulnesse thereof may avoid all hastie supine forced and uncharitable expositions and fetch my little light and candle of knowledge from that first shine and prime rayes of thee the onely Light my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. XVII 1. The place of Matth. 27.53 is diversly pointed and according to the pointing is the diversitie of meaning The first implieth that the Saints arose with Christ though their graves were opened before This interpretation is not so likely though received generally 2. The second inferreth that they arose before Christ though they went not into the citie till after his resurrection This is favoured by the Syriack and is more agreeable to reason 3. That the raised Saints died again proved by reasons and Hebr. 11.40 4. Christ the first-fruits of the dead and of the raised Angelicall assumed bodies were seen and heard much rather should mens bodies ascending with Christ 5. S. Augustine Aquinas Hierom Chrysostom Theophylact Euthymius Prosper Soto Salmeron Barradius Pererius Valentian affirm that the raised Saints died again Franciscus Lucas Brugensis holds it likely THose last cited words of Matth. 27.53 being differently pointed will bear a double and different interpretation Our late Translation hath it thus The Saints came out of the graves after his resurrection there is one pause and went into the holy citie there is another pause so is it in the Vulgat and in most Greek copies This sense in those words is involved That the Saints arose not till Christ arose and that their resurrection was a little after or almost contemporary with Christs which also is evidently foretold Isaiah 26.19 if the prophet prophesieth there of Christ or speaketh in Christs person Thy dead men shall live together with my dead bodie shall they arise c. For Christs bodie ariseth not from the earth at the generall resurrection and therefore they punctually signe out the resurrection of other Saints with Christ and with his dead bodie But if Isaiah speaketh of his own resurrection and not of Christs nor in Christs person but in his own by these words and the words following he pointeth out the generall resurrection and so Vatablus Hierom and Lyra expound the place Now if he point at the last day of the world the argument is demonstrative that either Isaiah arose not with Christ though he was the most Evangelicall Prophet and in no likelihood to be secluded from those benefits which other Prophets are said to enjoy or if he arose that he died again to rise with others at the day of judgement which they who ascended bodily into heaven did not Therefore Isaiah is not bodily ascended into heaven and if not he why others 2. The second way of pointing that place of S. Matthew is this Many bodies of the Saints arose there is one Colon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and coming out of the graves after his resurrection went into the holy citie there is the full period and no other pointing of the words And thus it is read in the edition printed at Geneva by John Vignon 1615. and illustrated with Casaubon his notes but I take it that a pause should be immediately after the word Graves and then they might arise before Christ but not enter into the holy citie till after his resurrection I am sure the Syriack translated by Tremellius thus readeth and pointeth it and Lucas Brugensis disliketh it not a Et egressi sunt post resurrectionem ejus ingressi sunt in urbem sanctam And they came forth and after his resurrection went into the holy citie In the Syriack you have these steps Obdormierant surrexerunt egressi sunt post resurrectionem ejus ingressi sunt in urbem From which second reading the resultance is That those Saints arose before Christ arose Neither is it against reason for at Christs passion the graves were opened vers 52. Shall the graves be opened and nothing be raised No for it is added immediately Many bodies of Saints were raised Shall the bodies be raised and either lie down or sit still in the graves To what end Many bodies arose of the Saints which HAD SLEPT 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is in the preterperfect tense Now were they waked now were they raised now went they forth out of their monuments and between the time of Christs passion and his resurrection perhaps the raised conferred with themselves perchance they communed with others without the citie or being rapt with divine speculations might either on mount Olivet or rather on mount Calvarie spend that time in solitary devotions expecting the triumphant return of their captain Jesus Christ from hell and the grave and after his resurrection they came into the holy citie 3. The summe is These reliving Saints arose at Christs passion and before him but none ever arose before him unto an eternall resurrection for in that regard Christ was the first fruits of them that slept 1. Corin. 15.20 and it is Christs priviledge which the Apostle toucheth at Rom. 6.9 That Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion over him of which hereafter though I have spoken of it also before Death had power over others who were raised before him Therefore they ascended not into heaven with their bodies nor were partakers of the eternall incorruption and immortalitie Let me adde That as the sepulchres were opened that they might come forth and continued open till the resurrection and perhaps after so in that they were opened to their hand and did not shut again I take it as a figure that they did as it were expect the return of their bodies and as a probable argument that they did lie down again in their old repositories or dormitories And that you may the sooner give credit unto this in the next place consider the generall law That all of us shall have glorie and immortalitie together for Hebr. 11.40 God hath prepared a better thing for us that they without us should not be made perfect If
things but if he turned it to the back side of his hand he was as conspicuous as an other man So Cicero in the third book of his offices out of Plato 4. The same Maldonat presseth us sore with an other argument What should they do here living again in mortall bodies who had a taste of Gods glory surely they had been in worse condition then if they never had been raised out of the bosome of Abraham where they were quiet to come to a turbulent life again Because this Maldonat is an importunate snarler at our religion I give him this bone to gnaw upon and for my first answer I will call to minde the prodigious Legend which divers eminent men of their own side have recorded of one Christina called by them by way of eminency e Mirabilis Wonderfull To omit what Surius and others relate I will speak in the words of Dionysius the Carthusian f Cùm defuncta esset in pueritia ducta erat in paradisum ad Thronum Majestatis Divina Domino congraiulante ineffabiliter gavisa est Dixitque Dominus Revera hac charissima filia est Christina died young and was carried into paradise to the throne of the Divine majesty and she was ineffably glad God congratulating with her And the Lord said Truly this is my deerest daughter And then he telleth That God gave her choice either to stay with him or to return unto her bodie and by penitentiall works to satisfie for all the souls in purgatorie and to edifie those who lived and to return to God b Cum meritorum augmentis with increase of her merits She answered the Lord presently that for that cause she would return to her bodie And so she did and because sinnefull men by their stench did too much afflict her O tender-nosed virgin she did flie or the Papists did lie and sit on the top-boughes of trees pinacles or turrets since noisome smells ascend it had been her farre better course to have crept into some dennes and caverns of the earth or vaults and tombes as he said she did sometimes and when her neighbours or kindred thought her mad and kept her from meat she prayed once to God and milk came out of her breasts was not she an intemerate rare virgin and so she refreshed herself This and a great deal more hath that Carthusian holy and learned above many of their side de quatuor novissimis part 3. Artic. 16. Let censorious and maledicent Maldonat ponder these things well and it will stop his mouth for ever from barking at the belief of us whom they style Hugonets Calvinists Hereticks though none of us think or say otherwise then the good Pacianus did of old in his first epistle to Sempronius CHRISTIAN is my name and CATHOLICK is my surname The Turks indeed have some strange figments of this nature but though the Mahumetan priests have devised and feigned many superstitious miracles concerning their great Saintesse Nafissa as is confessed by Joannes Leo in his African historie lib. 8. yet the Papists have surmounted both this and other their impostures with this their mirabilarie Christina Secondly concerning these Many raised I answer unto Maldonat They continued not long in this life but as I guesse shortly after Christs ascension laid their bodies down to sleep again in the earth Thirdly what thinks Maldonat of Lazarus Was not his soul in Abrahams bosome as well as the other poore Lazarus his soul who was so tenderly beloved of Christ and his Apostles and yet he lived long after and whatsoever can be objected against these Saints holds stronger against Lazarus Fourthly I denie that they by their return into the flesh were in worse condition Lorinus on Acts 9.41 saith c Non affert molestiam ut Deo vocanti mortuus obtemperet reviviscendo It is no trouble to a man if being dead he obey Gods call and live again And Salmeron saith No reason but holy men at Gods command may put on and put off their own bodies as well and as contentedly as the Angels do their assumed bodies which I do the rather beleeve because I do say with Tostatus on the 2. King 4. Quaest 56 Though it cannot be certainly proved yet it is probable That none of those that ever were raised did perish everlastingly nor that any reprobate had the favour of an extraordinary resurrection for a separated soul that hath been partaker of these unspeakable joyes will esteem worse then dung or salt that hath lost its savour all the pleasures and profits of this life though their severall excellencies were distilled into one quintessence of perfection So that as Lorinus saith well in the place above cited Whosoever hath once escaped the perill of damnation he shall not come into the same danger again 5. The last objection that I have met withall is this That to die the second time is no favour but a punishment and a punishment iterated I answer If a righteous man should die thrice or oftner death is no punishment unto him yea to passe seven times through hell to come once and everlastingly to heaven a despairing soul would hold to be a cheap blessednesse Secondly Suarez himself saith It is no punishment to die the second time no more then it was to Moses to die twice as saith Augustine de Mirabilib Scripturae 3.10 though others dissent from Augustine Nay saith Suarez To lay down their bodies the second time is more acceptable and pleasing to God To this doth Peter Martyr agree in 1. King 4.22 If by mans hurt or losse God be glorified it is no injurie to man But in truth it is no hurt or losse to man for saith Barradius Perchance without any pains they might redeliver their carcases to the earth And if the pains be any the pains both of the latter and former death may be so tempered and diminished that they both shall not exceed the pains of one death saith Peter Martyr ibid. Which learned Peter Martyr out of S. Augustine de Mirabilib Scripturae 3. ult hath an excellent observation or two First That to every man is setled and appointed a prefixed time of death Secondly That before the last prefixed time some do die that they that raise them up to life may be more famous and God more glorified And this is proved by the very phrase which Christ used concerning Lazarus John 11.4 This sicknesse is not unto death Yet did he die and besides the time intercedent between his death and his buriall he was foure dayes buried But his sicknesse was not d Ad mortem plenam in qua Lazarus maneret to an intire death in which estate he should remain Neither is that so properly called death e Quando praeoccupat ultimum terminum when it is abortive and cometh before its time So Luke 8.52 She is not dead but sleepeth and yet verse 55. her spirit came again Therefore it was gone and she was
〈◊〉 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
Elijah and of Moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they appeared in glory which apparition I hold to be true and reall though temporarie They were z Visi in gloria seen in glorie saith Montanus I adde that the glorie of their souls could not be seen by the bodily eyes of the Apostles and that the Apostles could not know them by their souls but by their bodies And questionlesse the bodily glory was meant and aimed at Yet none of this can extort a necessarie argument that the bodies of Moses or Elijah were immortall or impassible First concerning Moses Del Rio Magicarum Disquisitionum 2. Quaest 26. Sect. 2. saith It is not improbable but that Moses appeared in an aeriall bodie Indeed Tertullian cometh somewhat neare to Del Rio though the Jesuite cite him not a Moses apparuit in imagine carnis nondum receptae nam à parte potiore facieuda est denominatio Moses appeared in the similitude of flesh which he had not received for the denomination is taken from the better part But He is called Moses from his soul which being the better part and present gives the denomination saith Del Rio. True say I where both matter and form are joyned in one where there is a COMPOSITVM An unitie framed of a dualitie A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All the souls which came into Egypt c. Genes 46.27 is spoken of such as then consisted both of souls and bodies Secondly I confesse Abraham Dives and Lazarus are so called though their bodies were separated then from them Yet let Del Rio give me a Scripture instance where ever any one man or humane soul in an aeriall bodie is called that partie whose soul it is The triviall objection of Samuel I purposely balk because I am so farre flown out alreadie standing upon this that either true Samuel appeared not or if he did he appeared in his own bodie The question which Alexander asked of the first man of the Gymnosophists was Whether the dead or the living made the greater number He answered The living For the dead said he are no more men The reason of his answer is grounded on these Aphorismes That the soul is not man That the bodie is not man That both soul and bodie do concurre to make a man Neither doth Christs divine reason contradict any part of this when he avoucheth That God is not the God of the dead but of the living For Christ spake of the souls onely or of souls which should have bodies at the resurrection and the Gymnosophist of men consisting of souls and bodies who are properly to be termed living men whereas separated souls though living are not truly living men Augustine de Civit. Dei 19.3 hath it thus out of the great Marcus Varro In the nature of man are two things soul and bodie That the soul is farre better and more excellent then the bodie he doubteth not but whether the soul onely be the man so that the bodie is but as the horse is to the rider he enquireth For the horseman is not the man and the horse but the man onely yet he is called an horseman in reference to the riding of his horse Ludovicus Vives cometh in like a busie bodie and he from Gellius Marcellus and Servius and they from Ennius and Virgil will maintain that an horseman is taken for an horse and an horse called an horseman I answer Virgil followed Ennius his antique phrase and both of them Poeticall licence But Varro used proper Philosophicall terms whilest their language is improper and in it self both absurd and untrue S. Augustine out of Varro still proceedeth Or whether the bodie onely be the man being semblable to the soul as the cup is to the potion For the cup and the potion contained in the cup are not together called the cup but the cup onely is called a cup because it is fit to hold the potion Vives here again cometh in with his over-nice exception and criticism b Est etiam poculum id quod potatur praesertine apud poctas That which men drink saith he is termed a cup especially by the Poets Poculáque inventis Acheloia miscuit uvis his meaning being that he did mingle wine in the cups of Acheloius his framing I answer that the cups in that place are exactly distinguished from the wine in them and are not taken quatenus pocula for the liquor in them Secondly if any one hath at any time so used the word it is Metaphorically and not in proprietie of language For he could not mingle wine with but in the cups nor did he properly mingle the cups with the wine I passe from the second interruption of Vives to S. Augustine out of Varro still Or whether neither soul alone nor bodie alone but both togeher be man of which man one part is either the soul or the bodie but he wholly consisteth of both to be a man as we call two horses joyned together BIG AS whereof either is part of the pair or couple but neither is the pair or couple but both harnessed together In the end Varro resolveth saith S. Augustine That neither the soul nor the bodie but both soul and bodie together is the man And so the chief blessednesse of man consisteth in the good both of soul and bodie Which opinion is a divine truth and S. Augustine approveth it as may be gathered by his whole discourse and by the beginning of the fifth chap. of that book So it was not the true Moses unlesse the very soul and the very bodie of Moses were present Yet Aquinas 3. part quaest 45. thinketh that Moses appeared not in his own bodie which Suarez confuteth by these authorities S. Hierom on Matth. 17. S. Augustine de Mirab. sacrae Scripturae 3.10 which is followed by Sotus in 4. senten distinct 43. Hieronymus Natalis the Jesuit thinks he strikes all sure for amongst his curious costly pictures upon the foure Gospels he picturing out the transfiguration of our Saviour bringeth in Moses with horns on his head to designe that it was the same Moses and the same bodie which Moses had on the mount according to the Vulgat Exod. 34.29 Ignorabat Moses quòd cornuta esset facies sua that is according to Natalis his opinion Moses knew not that he had horns and vers 30. Viderunt filii Israel cornutam faciem Mosis that is according to the same mans phansie The Israelites saw Moses his horns though intruth the words may be farre better translated And so vers 35. Was not the Jesuits face made of horn or rather of brasse who published in so seeing and cleare-sighted an age such an ignorant conceit with such boldnesse when indeed the words in the Originall as they are translated by their own interlinearie are onely thus Promicuisset cutis facierum ejus The skin of his face was sleek and in the margin is Resplendebat did shine which is also used in the Translation of Vatablus
Likewise in the two other before-recited places the same phrase is used The Septuagint have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Ignorabat Moses quòd glorificatus esset aspectus faciei ejus Moses knew not that the splendour of his face and countenance was glorified as Vatablus translateth the Seventy Which he saith more fully expresseth the Hebrew and is accordingly followed by the Apostle 2. Cor. 3.7 for the glorie of his countenance Indeed the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie an horn from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is splendere radiare fulgere to shine Because saith Vatablus from a learned Jew when man beholdeth earnestly and intentively the Sunne or any luminous bodie the rayes seem to be sent forth of it like horns in some sort But saith Vatablus out of the false or ill-understood version of the Vulgat they who were no linguists made the people falsly beleeve that Moses had two horns on his head which is most false So farre Vatablus though a man of their own against the brain-sick faction of the Jesuit who will maintain the people in any errour if it be old rather then suffer reformation The Caldee hath it Multiplicatus est splendor gloriae vultûs Mosis The brightnesse of Moses his face increased in glory more and more Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit though he strive for the truth of the Vulgat yet saith Moses had no horns in his forehead d Vtì affingunt ei pictores as painters place on him Little perhaps did he think that his fellow-Jesuit Hieronymus Natalis was one of these painters yea and that in one of the costlyest editions of the storie of the Gospels that ever was set forth But the wiser and more succinct Sa hath it HORNY e Cornuta id est radios emittens Hebraicè radians that is glistering in the Hebrew resplendent And Cajetan better then he f Nihil cornutum ad literam signâ—ficatur c. In the litterall signification we have nothing to do with horn though perchance there is some allusion to it by a Metaphor Concerning which Moses his face I will end with two observations The first is a very idle one out of Bellarmine De Sanctorum reliquiis 2.4 g Valde credibile est Mosis corpus licèt mortuum conservâssâ— adhuâ— splendorem vultû◠decorem quem antea habebat siâ—ut multis Sanctorum accidit It is very credible that the dead bodie of Moses preserved the radiant comelinesse and beauty of his face which he had in life as it hath happened to many of the Saints But he nameth no Saint And if he did we should hardly beleeve him And Moses himself died privately and was buried secretly no man saw him dying or dead I acknowledge that some of the Ancients have inclined to this viz that Moses his face did shine all his life time when he spake to the people So Ambrose in Psal 118. h Quamdiu vixit Moses alloquebatur populum velamen habuit iâ— facie So long as Moses lived and spake to the people he had a vail before his face not after death as Bellarmine thinks probable Besides the Apostle 2. Corinth 3.7 termeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the glorie of his countenance which was to be done away Therefore it continued not after death if it did till then whensoever he spake to the people And our late translation seemeth in part to accord Exod. 34.33 Till Moses had done speaking with them he put a vail on his face Yet the word Till is not in the originall but it may be probably expounded That when Moses had done speaking he put a vail on his face for so the Hebrew Greek and Latine runne And though Moses ordinarily put off the vail when he went to speak with God and put it on when he returned yet once and at the first of all he might speak unto the people with face open for more reverence and majestie The second observation is from Origen Homil. 12. in Exod. circa medium and it is a good one In the Law saith he Moses his face was glorified though vailed but his hand put into his bosome WAS LEAPROVS AS SNOW Exod. 4.6 i In vulâ—u ejus sermo legis in manu opera designantur In his shining countenance was a figure of the Law by his hands are works signified Now because no man can be justified by the works of the Law his hand was leprous His face was glorified but vailed therefore his words were full of knowledge yet secret and hidden Yea in the Law Moses had onely a glorified face hands and feet were unglorified for Moses also put off his shoes that an other in after times might have the bride k Et illa vocarâ—tâ—r domus discalceati usque in hodiernum diem and she be called to this day the house of the unshod l In Evanâ—eliis autem Moses totus glorificatur ex integro Gaudere â—tiam mihi pro hoc videtur Moses quia ipse quodammodo nunc dâ—â— ponit velamen conversus ad Dominum cùm evidenter quae praedixit implentur But in the Gospels all Moses is wholly glorified It seemeth also to mee that Moses rejoiceth in this point because himself in a sort now layeth aside his vail being converted to Christ when those things are plainly fulfilled which he foretold By which glorification you cannot necessarily interpret such a glorification as the Saints shall have after judgement which never shall have end where m 1. Cor. 15.53 corruptible shall put on incorruption immutable but onely of a temporarie glorification for Moses layd down his bodie again as is held most probably The authour of that book which is intituled Altercatio Synagogae Ecclesiae cap. 21. S. Paul and Gamaliel being interlocutours thus Jesus Christ after his transfiguration n Mosis corpus sepulturae commendavit buried Moses A strange honour if true that the same who was buried by God himself in the Old Testament should be thus glorified for a while and after buried by Christ himself in the New Testament Furthermore that there is no absolute necessitie that either Moses or Elias though they were seen in glorie had immortall and impassible bodies by the transfiguration appeareth by this That our blessed Saviour himself after that his transfiguration had a mortall bodie and did die especially if we consider that his glorie was greater then theirs as the Masters is above the Servants and the Lords above the Attendants Barradas on the transfiguration saith o Transfigurationi suae transfiguratos gloriâque ae singulari majestate ornatos voluit Christus adesse servos suos sic solent in nuptiis festisque aliis diebus nobiles viri pretiosis ornati vestibus Regibus adesse Christ would have his servants present transfigured as well as himself and adorned with singular glorie and majestie as at marriages and other festivall dayes the
justly suspected saith the worthy Estius the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being so easily turned into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a little dash And he findeth just fault with Acacius in Hierom for saying it was so read in most Greek copies when as certainly it was read so but in verie few copies whereof there is scarce one now extant and not many proofs that ever there were many copies of that extant Neither indeed doth the reading stand with sense For the Apostle solemnly premizeth Behold I shew you a mysterie and then subjoyneth immediately according to this new-fangled mis-writing We shall all therefore sleep or die Is this a mysterie that all shall sleep or all die Doth he promise mountains and bring forth a molehill Every Heathen knows that we shall die every Christian Turk and Jew that we shall be raised again But when God justly for sinne sentenced man to death with a morte morieris That some sinfull men should be excepted is a mysterie deserving such a watchword as Behold Behold I shew you a mysterie we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed Secondly from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I thus argue That death if such a death there be any which is so speedily begun by separation of the soul from the bodie and ended as I may so say by the swift and momentanie reuniting of the same soul to the same bodie cannot handsomely be called a sleep Doth he sleep who in the twinkling of an eye is changed from mortalitie to immortalitie yea from being alive is made dead and from being dead is made alive and that incorruptibly Was ever sleep confined to an instant till now or may one be said to sleep in the midst of these great works It is not so much as Analogicall sleep The greatest sleepers have more then an instant ere they can begin to sleep Sleep creepeth or falleth on men by degrees heavinesse and dulnesse usher it and the spirits have a time to retire to their forts and cittadels the senses are not locked up nor do they deposite the use of their faculties in a moment And may that be called properly rest or sleep which resteth not above an instant and is as quick as thought Rest and sleep do couch upon the bed of time likewise it is as much as possibly can be done if so much can be done to awake one in an instant The Scripture useth the phrase of sleeping towards them who rest as it were in death in the earth in the grave Our friend Lazarus sleepeth saith Christ John 11.11 when indeed he was buried Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake Dan. 12.2 Let one place of holy Writ be produced where one and the same instant beginneth sleep and endeth awaking and then I may say there may be some shadow for that reading But here is no pause no rest no quiet therefore no sleep therefore the word sleep in this place is applied to such as died before and not to such as are alive and shall die as the second lection implieth Thirdly it wanteth force to say in the whole conjoyned sentence We shall therefore all sleep or die but we shall all be changed If the Apostle had intended any such thing he would not have used the adversative particle But but the implicative word And We shall all therefore sleep AND we shall all be changed This had been sense if thus it had been but not being so we may the more confidently shake off the second lection of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as abhorrent from reason and cleave to the first of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnes quidem non dormiemus c. All we shall not die but all we shall be changed And so from the varietie of Greek copies I come to the Vulgat the Translation in Latine Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur Truely we shall all of us arise but we shall not all of us be changed First I say this differeth from all Greek copies whereas if it had been according to any sort of them it might have swayed us much that way Secondly the same argument toucht at before may also give a side-blow to this translation The Apostle raiseth up their considerations by promising to tell them a mysterie But it was no mysterie to tell them that they should all be raised when he had told it so pithily so divinely and so often beat upon it before by so many kindes of arguments as he did Thirdly where the Vulgat saith Non omnes immutabimur it is not true for Omnes immutabimur We shall all be changed from mortalitie to immortalitie from naturall bodies to spirituall If you say We shall not be all changed to glorie I say so with you I adde That is no mysterie all know that Therefore the Apostle speaketh not of a change to glorie eternall in the heavens whereunto some onely shall be changed but he speaketh of a change from mortalitie to immortalitie from corruptible bodies to incorruptible which even the wickedest men shall have And perhaps he meaneth that this generall immutation shall be made sine media morte without intercurrent or intercedent death even in the wicked that shall be then alive yet in the change you must alwaies make this diversitie The wicked shall be singled out to shame to losse to punishment eternall with their raised or changed bodies for even in their raising also there is a change from corruption to incorruption but in the change of the godly there is glorious incorruption joyfull immortalitie pleasurable eternitie The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a change of a thing from place to place as when we take a piece of wood from the earth and cast it into the water Thus the wicked shall be hurried from their graves to the judgement seat and shall be placed on the left hand of our Saviour and after sentence shall be haled and cast from earth into hell On the other side the righteous in their change shall be mounted up from their graves or from the earth into the aire to meet Christ and shall be at his right hand and after sentence be carried or ascend up into heaven in most glorious manner to live with Christ eternally Fourthly if we reade it with the Vulgat We shall all arise but we shall not all be changed we must also immediately annex the words In a moment in the twinkling of an eie at the last trump for there is the pause and stay to be made there is the full sentence The Vulgat hath done very ill to make the stay and full point at immutabimur for then the words following bear no construction at all if they be considered by themselves In a moment in the twinkling of an eie at the last trump For then cometh in new matter For the trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be