A most Heavenly Prayer this being incomparably the best Shield Buckler the best Antidote and Preservative against the loss of Friends or the Consideration of our own approaching Mortality with respect both to our selves and others to bouy up our Spirits amidst the Melancholy Apprehensions of the Rottentenness and Miseries of the Grave and exalts us above the Worms and Corruption of it directing us assuredly to know and believe that there is a time coming when there will be an happy meeting of both though they are now with Grief and Rluctancy divided when the happiness of both shall be complete And this is an Authority undeniably Authentick and must for any thing I can see to the contrary strongly and irrefragably establish the Doctrine contended for viz. That our Bodies are capable of Cewards and Punishments hereafter of doing Well or Evil here CHAP. XI THE Learned Author having laid aside the Opinions of Tertullian as not serviceable to his purpose not affording him a Satisfactory Reason of this Decree of Almighty God concerning the Resurrection To give a true Accounr of it thinks it necessary to mount a little higher and to look a little farther and passing by many conjectures which he finds in the Schools and in some of our Ancient Writers and among the Jewish Masters p. 217. lays before you his own Thoughts and here he assigns three Reasons why God has been pleased to decree that the Soul in the Day of Judgment shall be again united to a Humane Body In discussing of which I shall beg leave to invert the order of them as more suitable to the method of my Discourse and for the advantage of my present Argument which if I mistake not will gain one of those Reasons over to our side and party as falling over to it and therefore ought to go together The last Reason which I here place first why God will restore us to our Humane Nature and why he will raise up the very same Body is p. 219. HE WILL BECAUSE HE WILL a very bad Reason for the Actions of Man but a very good one for God's he will because he hath Promised Which the Learned Author irrefragably confirms from what follows p. 222. which I conceive my self obliged to transcribe and is as follows I am the Lord I have said it and who can say What dost thou There is nothing that God does but he does for a very good reason And who are we that we should call him to an Account for what he does His Ways and his Counsels are many of them unsearchable to us and as Job tells us Chap. 33 13. He gives not Account of any of his Matterâ— 'T is his part to Act ours to Admire and Submit and as long as our Reason and our Senses are not plainly contradicted we are only to enquire WHAT not How or WHY I would fain know of those who deny the Resurrection of the same Humane Body because they do not know what use we can make of the particular parts in the Life to come whether they deny or doubt the existence of all other things the Reason of which they cannot comprehend I would undertake to quiet the Scruples of these Men and to satisfie all their Queries if they would be pleased to answer a few Questions of mine I could ask them the reason of an Hundred things in Nature and Divinity Which he there supposes unaccconntable and particularly in the case about the Resurrection p. 221. He acknowledges a multitude of difficulties altogether inextricable i. e. for which there is no reason to be given and therefore must of necessity be resolved into this viz. the Will and Pleasure of God I willingly concur with the Learned Author here and presume there is no one that will oppose him For this without paradventure is the highest and most supream Reason which must put to silence all Objections remove all Difficulties whatsoever and make things which seem to us impossible easie Though with Mary we do not know how this can be Luke 1. 34 Though our reason cannot fathom cannot comprehend it yet our Faith must give us an assurance that it will be and teach us with the Mother of the Holy Jesus with submission to conclude Behold the Handmaid of the Lord be it unto me according to thy Word This is a Reason above all Reasons allowed and approved of by all and to which all others however Philosophical and plausible must submit This I gladly and readily note because I expect to receive some advantage from it in the subsequent part of this Discourse for I am in hopes to prove the Doctrine I have attempted to defend to be the express determination of God's revealed Will and Word and then all the most powerful Arguments of the Profoundest Philosophers must truckle under and fall to the Ground But if I mistake not this Reason of Gods Word or Decree of the Resurrection of the Body was not in the least the Subject of the Dispute The Question only arose from the Reason of this Decree There can be no doubt but that the Resurrection will be because God hath said and ordained it The Subject of the enquiry can be no other than the Reason of God's Will and Pleasure here Namely why God has Decreed the Resurrection of the same Body and this obliges the Learned Author to look farther and therefore Secondly In the the next place he tells us p. 219. That another Reason why God has been pleased to ordain that the same Humane Body that Died shall Rise again and be reconjoined to the Soul I take to be this and that indeed I take to be the first and chief reason of that Decree we had all been immortal Men if Adam had not sinned 't was God's design that we should never Die but that our Souls should remain for ever united to their Bodies this Gracious design being frustrated by Adam's Transgression he was Graciously pleased to ordain that as in Adam all Die so in Christ the second Adam we should all at last Triumph over Death and be restored to those Bodies and that Humane Nature which he first designed should be immortal by the Death and Resurrection of Christ our losses are to be repaired which Adam's sin occasioned but our losses cannot be repaired unless we are restored to those Bodies which by his sinning we lost To this Second Reason I say First I have no mind to implunge my self or Reader in the Decrees of Almighty God which is an Abyss or Ocean never to be fathomed Nor am I disposed to concern my self about the examination of that Question Whether Adam and his Posterity had Died if they had not Sinned Only I shall briefly and freely deliver my Opinion in this matter That it seems to me very probable that allowing the supposition of his and their continuance in their spotless purity He and his Race after some time like Enoch or Elias or some other way with Analogy and resemblance to
divided into three Ranks First He asserts the Sensibility of the separate * Omnes ergo animae penes inferos inquis Velis ac nolis supplicia jam illic refrigeria Cur enim non putes animam puniri foveri in inferis interim sub expectatione utriusque judicii Novit anima apud inferos dolere fovere sine carne De Anim. cap. 58. Again Simplicior quisquis fautor sententiae nostrae putabit carnem etiam idcirco repraesentandam esse in judicio quia aliter anima non capiat passionem tormenti seu refrigerii utpote incorporalis Hoc enim vulgus existimat Nos autem animam corporalem hic profitemur in suo volumine probamus habentem proprium genus substantiae soliditatis per quam quid sontire pati possit Nam nunc animas torqueri foverique penes inferos licet nudas licet adhuc exules carnis probavit Lazari exemplum De Resurr c. 17. Soul That it is of its self capable of Rewards and Punishments is actually in some measure comforted or tormented before the Resurrection There are a multitude of other Passages of the same Father which testifie the same †De Anima cap. 7. 9. 55 56 58. alibi And no doubt but that this great Father is Orthodox here Secondly Notwithstanding in other places he seems to set up a quite opposite Doctrine viz. That the Soul is not capable of suffering without the Body and this he makes the Reason of the Resurrection a Apol. cap. 48. Certè quia ratio restitutionis destinatio judicii est necessario idem ipse qui fuerit exhibebitur ut boni seu contrarii meriti judicium a Deo referat Ideoque repraesentabuntur corpora Quia neqne pati quicquam potest anima sola fine materiâ stabili id est carne c. 48. And elsewhere he asserts the Necessity of the Resurrection because the Soul without the Body is not capable of feeling either Pleasure or Pain b Testim Anim. c.ult. Affirmamus te manere post vitae dispunctionem expectare diem judicii próque meritis aut cruciatui destinari aut refrigerio utroque sempiterno Quibus sustinendis necessario tibi substantiam pristinam ejudsdémque hominis materiam memoriam reversuram quod nihil mali ac boni sentire possis fine carnis passionalis facultate I shall reserve what I have to say to This to the last place and take leave to invert the Order and consider the other Opinion before it conceiving it more suitable and methodical to the Argument in hand And that is Thirdly He owns That separate Souls are actually c De Resurr carn cap. 17. Porrò si haec cogitatus concupiscentia voluntas satis essent ad plenitudinem meritorum ut non requirentur facta sufficeret in totum anima ad perfectionem judicii de his judicanda in quae agenda sola suffecerat Quum verò etiam facta devincta sint meritis facta autem per carnem administrantur jam non sufficit animam sine carne foveri sive cruciari pro operibus etiam carnis etsi habet corpus etsi habet membra quae proinde illi non sufficiant ad sentiendum plenè quemadmodum nec ad agendum perfecte Denique haec erit ratio in ultimum finem destinati judicii ut exhibitione carnis omnis divina censura perfici possit rewarded or punished before the Resurrection and he says 't is for those good or bad things it did without the Concurrence of the Body He farther says That tho' the Soul be in its own Nature capable of Rewards or Punishments yet it is not so fully capable as when united to the Body It is capable of greater Pleasure or Torment when united to the Body than in a State of Separation and therefore for those things which the Soul did in Concurrence with the Body must be punished and rewarded in the Body that the Pleasure or Torment may be perfect The Learned Author's Animadversion on this is p. 217. But this is very precarious and if once it be granted that the Soul is in its own Nature without an organized Body capable of Rewards and Punishments it cannot be denied but that it is of it self capable of being fully Rewarded and Punished I answer Not to take any notice of the Tertullianicum as his Learned Commentators call it of the gross Naevus here etsi habet corpus etsi habet membra which the Father applies to the Soul in a separate State and is by no means justifiable Nor to undertake a Defence of him here or elsewhere in an exact strict and rigid sense for 't is well known that this African Father is the most dark abstruse and intricate of the Latin Fathers makes use of uncouth obsolete Words which will no way bear a full and exact but require a moderate and sober Interpretation Premising this I cannot see how he is in the main here precarious to my Understanding there is no begging at all in the Case The Doctrine seems found and approvable supported and maintained by the Ancients who accordingly have placed the departed Souls in Abraham's Bosom in Paradise in outer Porches in Receptacles under the Altar the Promptuary of Saints the Earnest of the Kingdom with a multitude of other such Expressions to the same purpose 'T were easie here to fill up a great deal of Paper with the Names and Authorities of the most considerable Pillars of the Church who have espoused this Opinion but I industriously avoid the Vanity of it and think it altogether needless in the present Dispute because the Learned Author speaking of the Opinion of Pope John XXII tells us That he only held that the Soul does not at all enjoy the Beatisick Vision before the Resurrection and for Confirmation of it adds pag. 212. This indeed was the Opinion of the Primitive Fathers And albeit this Doctrine was Censur'd and Condemn'd in the Council of Florence yet this can have no Influence on us who know too well what this Council was and the Age of it And though it prevail with those of the Church of Rome yet 't is observable how that even the Learned Men that are Bigotted to that way do not stick to give us their Approbation of it Meminerint hunc errorem non efficere pietati eruditioni tam illustrium scriptorum saith Pamelius i.e. This Opinion is no prejudice to the Piety and Learning of those Great Men And another Eminent Writer of that Church calls it Pia beata opinio veritati facile reconciliabilis per duplicem beatitudinem perfectam imperfectam An holy and blessed Opinion easily reconcileable to the Truth by the distinction of a perfect and imperfect Happiness So that the difference between the Opinion and Council seems to be only about the Place in the Condition both agree About the Capacity of Separate Souls I
24. I know not how to make it consistent with some other places of Scripture here lies the difficulty the Scripture is plainly against it I confess it does not well accord with it as it is here represented and I cannot for my Heart imagine how he came to interpret the Father so grosly Erroneous here who has produced so many places wherein he loudly proclaims the contrary and plainly and fully expresses himself in which if we take him as by all means we are obliged to do viz. Of the imperfect state of the Soul in its separation that it is not capable of being fully rewarded or punished without the Body I see nothing amiss here this Opinion must be allowed consistent with the Doctrine of the Resurrection and the General Judgment which is to follow after it harmoniously correspondent with the Analogie of Faith and the holy Scriptures even those very places which are alledged by the Learned Author pag. 215. Thus in that of our Saviour to the Penitent Thief This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise in which Words there is a Promise of an happy injoyment to his dislodging Soul but an imperfect one for we can Understand Paradise in no other sence but what imports either the Place or Condition of the happy separate Souls a place undeniably different from Heaven a Condition of happiness in hand but far short and inferiour to that hereafter The Soul of the Celebrated Penitent was immediately upon its departure invested with a state of Bliss but the full measure of it cannot be expected before the Resurrection Thus also in the second Scripture Phil 1. 23. where St. Peter wishes To depart and to be with Christ which is far better The Expression clearly intimates an happiness which would accrue to his Soul by his dissolution far above any thing that this World could afford as is Emphatically expressed in the Original by the double comparative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Soul of the great Apostle where-ever he be is without dispute gloriously happy yet this is certain that it cannot arrive to the fulness of it before it be united to that Body which was his Faithful Companion and Partner in all his Perils Dangers Hardships Sufferings Conflicts Labours here And so in the third place Rev. 6. 10. in which the Souls of the Martyrs are represented from under the Altar loudly crying for Judgment This Text to me is one of the most undeniable and adaequate proofs of both the Doctrines under present consideration for as on the one hand it strongly establishes the blessed injoyment of the separate Souls so on the other it will not suffer us to doubt of their imperfect state The completion and height of happiness is put off to the great Day of Recompense The Text is full and deserves to be considered I saw under the Altar the Souls of them that were slain for the Word of God and for the Testimony which they held and they cryed with a loud Voice saying How long O Lord Holy and True dost thou not judge and avengé our Blood on them that dwell on the Earth And White Robes were given to every one of them and it was said unto them that they should rest yet for a little Season until their fellow Servants also and their Brethren that should be killed as they were should be fulfilled Where every Word and Clause makes for our purpose Whether we understand it as some of their Bodies by a Prosopopeia speaking from their Graves or of their Souls which are said to be under the Altar i.e. Vnder the Protection of Christ as a Learned Critick does comment it And they cryed with a loud voice which in my apprehension imports not so much the multitude of them an interpretation much esteemed by some as the vehemency and intention of their desire which is for justice and that chiefly in reference to themselves Namely that God would translate and advance them to that Happiness which he has promised and they desiringly do desire This exactly suits with all that follows after They had at present the Character the Livery the Priviledge of Saintship the earnest of it But the full of their Reward they were not to receive until the time of Harvest the last Day when both Parts were to meet again and when the Noble Army of Martyrs all Conflicts and Fighting being for ever done away should in one Body assembled be Crown'd and Triumph together Excellent is the animadversion of Gregory the Great on this place Praef. in Job Singulae stolae quia adhuc solâ mentis beatitudine perfruuntur binas vero accepturi sunt quando cum gaudio perfecto animarum etiam incorruptione corporum restituuntur i. e. The Souls under the Altar have single Robes now their Souls are admitted to an incohate imperfect Happiness but double Robes hereafter at what time their Bodies made incorruptible shall be restor'd to their Souls the glory and joy of both shall be complete In short that the injoyment of those Blessed Souls here at present is imperfect is plainly intimated by their cries both the matter and manner of them they are represented crying with a loud Voice and that for vengeance and is formally expressed in the answer made them they were to rest yet for a little Season until their fellow Servants also and their Brethren that should be killed as they were should be fulfilled For farther confirmation of this Doctrine which is of no small moment in our present Argument I cannot but recommend that most full and excellent passage of the Learned * In Mat. 22. 32. Naturalis amor corporis quem in animo omnes deprehendimus oftendit animam humanam esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae corpus perficiendo ipsa simul perficitur finis sui adeptione Aequitas non patitur ut corpus quod animi imperio multa molesta sustinet non etiam partem ferat premii Adde quod humanae Naturae a Deo condita necesse sit finem aliquem propositum qui ne fingi quidem potest alius quam Beata vita totius hominis nam finis partis alterius non est finis totius at totum hominem Deus condidit Grotius in that place above cited The Natural love which we all by experience find our Souls to have toward the Body is an undeniable evidence that the Soul is in it self an IMPERFECT SUBSTANCE which by perfecting the Body is it self also perfected by obtaining its end Besides JUSTICE will not allow that the Body which by the conduct and command of the Soul has endured much born the greatest part of all difficulties and conflicts here should have no share in the Reward Add to this That it is not to be imagined but that the Supream Creator should propound some great end in erecting HUMANE NATURE and that can be conceived to be no less than the Happiness of the WHOLE MAN Now the Happiness of a part cannot be the Happiness of
the Doctrines of our Religion yet this more especially The ingenious though Atheistical Dialogist makes himself merry more than once upon this subject It would be too tedious to recount the like behaviour of Porphiry and Celsus and other the professed adversaries of Christianity in this matter I shall therefore give it you in a lump and whole-sale from the known Testimonies of Tertullian and St. Austin The first tells us there was not one sect of Philosophers whatsoever but oppos'd it The last assures us There was no one point of our Religion so vehemently so pertinaciousty so stifly so contentiously rejected they entertain'd some other Doctrines with respect and favour but for this of the Resurrection they are not meal-mouth'd they no sooner hear it but it raises their indignation they instantly reject censure condemn it and with open mouth boldly proclaim it impossible in Psal 88. CHAP. III. NOtwithstanding all those Sarchasms and Contradictions of Sinners this Heavenly Doctrine is fixt on immovable Foundations and will and must stand impregnable amidst all the shocks and assaults made against it 'T is built on a Rock against which the Gates of Hell shall not prevail We are as strongly secur'd here as of any one Article of our Faith and that without being beholden to the Ludicrous stories of the Jews or the Idle and Fabulous Reports of Pinto and the Heathens which do the Doctrine no kindness but disservice rather 'T is supported on the unanimous Testimonies of the Fathers of the Councils of the Creeds The plain and undeniable Authorities of the Old and more especially the New Testament The word and Promise of an Alknowing Infallible Omnipotent God So that all or at least the most considerable Objections that have been brought against it are dash'd in pieces and laid even with the Dust from the consideration of the Veracity and Alsufficiency of that God who has bound himself and his Attributes for the performance I am not ignorant how many learned and ingenious Men have taken much pains to solve from the principle of Philosophy the Arguments brought against it I honour and admire them for their preformances but I must freely say I much question whether the attempts of this kind come up to the point whether they are not too low and inferiour to give it satisfaction My Reason is this The Resurrection is confessed by all to be a work above Nature and how it can be made out by Natural Philosophy I cannot understand Our Reason must be beholding to Revelation in this matter and call in the assistance of Faith without which there can be no Assurance In short if we believe the Creation I cannot see any stumbling block here that Power who made the World and Man at first out of nothing must be readily acknowledged able to raise him from the Grave and to joyn together the scattered Particles of his dissolved Body The one seems more easie than the other This is the great the Common Argument of the Ancients and has without doubt been more effectual to the purpose than a Cart-load of Chimical Experiments than all the notions of the most subtile Philosophers But this I have said to make way to my Design which is to enquire into the strength of the Argument for the Resurrection from a principle of Justice In which I shall take this Method 1. I shall briefly lay down the State of the Argument 2. I shall shew how it has been the Great the Principal the most Topping and Chiefest Argument of all Ages 3. I shall offer to answer the Objections which are levied against it 4. I shall Examine his Reasons of the Resurrection Vlt. I shall endeavour to establish the Doctrine by such considerations as I hope will secure it CHAP. IV. THE State of the Argument in short is The Body and the Soul are here joyned together as sharers in all the Concerns and Actions of this Life which is a state of Probation and therefore they are to stand or fall together in the next which is a state of Remuneration The Body of the Saint and Good Man concurs with his Soul in the exercise of Vertue and Piety in this World and can there be any thing more equitable than that they should be joyned together in that which is to come On the the other hand the Body of the Sinner must be allowed a Partner with the Soul in Evil and is there not all the reason in the World that it should stand forth at the Bar and be joyned with it in the punishment The contrary must be pronounced downright Injustice Can we have such hard thoughts of the most Righteous Judge that he should admit the Soul of the Martyr upon his dissolution to that Glorious Crown which he has promised in the highest Heavens and mean while have no regard to the Crucified Tortured Body that has born the heat and burthen of the Day been the saddest Patient in all the Tragedy but suffer it to lie neglected in the Grave Vlt. How can we imagine that the Soul of the Reprobate should be condemned to the Torments of Tophet for those sins it committed in conjunction with the Body and that the Body it self should escape scot-free sleep undisturbed in the Grave and neither know nor feel any thing of those Flames In this case have we not reason to cry out with the Prophet Malachy 2. 17. Where is the God of Judgment For Justice carries in the very Nature of it a due and impartial distribution of Rewards and Punishments If two work together both have a right to the Wages 't is downright injustice to give all to One and nothing to the Other This is the substance of the Argument of which I must take leave further to acquaint the Reader that it has been the great the standing Argument of all perswasions of Men in all Ages In the first place I affirm this was the great reason which the Jews still used and applyed to the same purpose I would not boast of what I have not I cannot pretend to Rabbinical Learning yet I am sure of what I assert because many learned Men have told me so and I have seen Maimonides their second Solomon their Renowned Epitomizer in Latin and many times met with the famous Fable of the Rabbins which because it comes home and pat to the purpose I here insert There was a great Lord who planted a delicious Garden wherein he placed two Keepers a Blind Man and a Lame Man that he might be secure of his Fruit on all hands but so it was that after some time he found himself Robb'd He charges the Keepers with the Theft they both offer very plausible excuses the Blind Man pleads he could not see the Fruit and therefore could not Steal it The Lame Man alledges the Infirmity of his Feet he could not reach it and so could not take it away At last the fallacy was found out viz. 'T was done by the mutual combination of
of Confession that the Body properly speaking is not capable of Sinning or of doing well considered in its own Nature abstractively in its self 't is a passive principle and can pretend to no Life Energy Sense or Motion in a single state 'T is likewise granted that the Body without the Soul is a Dull Stupid Senseless Clod of Earth a Stinking Carcass a Sink of Rottenness and Corruption uncapable of Acting Doing Suffering Injoying all whatsoever or more than the Doctor can suggest but in a state of Conjunction with the Soul 't is far otherwise so that it injoys Life Sense and Motion shares and ingages with it in all its concerns So that in the two first Reasons there is a manifest Fallacy of Division which runs through every part visible to every common Eye and is no sooner deâ—â—rted but the whole Fabrick of his subtile Argumentation sinks and falls even with the dust Though the Body alone cannot yet in conjunction with the Soul it may When a Noble Lord takes to Wife one of the meanest Extraction who has no pretensions of her own to any thing that is great yet upon her Marriage she is Dignified and Indowed with all the Privileges of her Right Honourable Spouse This as near as I can represent it is the Case of the Soul and Body The Heaven-born Bridegroom stoops to the Earth for a Partner Advances Exalts the Beggar confers Life Sense Motion on her admits her to Bed and Board allows her a share in all his Dignities and Injoyments The Body without the Soul can neither Sin nor do Well But the happy wedlock has ennobled this piece of Clay and empowered it in conjunction to act with it So that I fancy the Doctor to be under a mistake when he calls the Body only the Instrument of the Soul Certainly 't is more 't is an essential Part and the Man can as well be without the Soul as without the Body to call the Body therefore an Instrument is too low a Term when 't is manifestly the Collegue and Companion of the Soul and together with it constitutes the Great Prince and Lord of the Creation I shall challenge the most Acute of Philosophers to give me the definition of a Man without a Body Nec caro sine anima Homo quae post exilium Cadaver est saith Tertullian The Soul without the Body is no more the Man than the Body without the Soul If then it must be acknowledged a Physical Indispensible Principle of his constitution the one half of the Man What a disparagement is it to call it an Instrument only Now that it is so the Learned Doctor himself expresly tells us Pag. 218. 'T is a great mistake to imagine that the Identity or Sameness of Man consists wholy in the Sameness of the Soul if Euphorbus Homer and Ennius had had one and the same Soul yet they would not have been one and the same but three distinct Men. It seems then it is the constituting the essential and most distinguishing Principle it can make three Men of one Soul and so by consequence threescore And how worthily 't is called an Instrument only let the World judge I confess 't is often by Philosophers and Divines set out by this Expression The Instrument of the Soul to denote as I suppose the transcendent excellency of the Soul above it and all that Life Sense and Activity it can pretend to as derived from the Soul and dependent on it yet That it is more than an Instrument is acknowledged by the Learned Author who calls it pag. 198. The Collegue and Companion of the Soul and pag 204. Her old Acquaintance and is undeniably proved from 1 Cor. 6. 18. He that comitteth Fornication Sinneth against his own Body Here it is manifestly a Party and so interpreted and understood by Commentators on the place The like might be observed of other sins as of Gluttony Drunkenness c. which are properly called the Lusts or Sins of the Flesh But 't is farther Objected That the Arm that stabs sins no more than the Sword Here then is a good plea for Criminals at the Bar and 't is much it has never been made use of but I believe the Homicide suspects that it would do him no kindness it would be received by the Court with Laughter and rejected with Scorn and Indignation and reason good for the Sword is a Tool in its self Innocent and Harmless 't is the Arm that weilds it that impresses it that ' gives it Force and Vigour to destroy so that if to gratifie the Objection we allow the Arm to be an Instrument yet that it is no more concerned in the Matter than the Sword is notoriously false because the one is a dead the other a living Instrument and there must be a vast difference between these The Arm considered a-part is no more able to kill than the Sword nay less able because that has not so fit a disposition to pierce thro' the Bowels as the other being made acute for that purpose But the Arm united to the Body has Strength Vigour Motion in every part and must be allowed the true efficient Cause of the Murther whereas the other is the Means the Weapon to effect it And here also the Fallacy of Division is very plain and visible CHAP. VI. BUT the Objector adds 'T is the Soul only that is the Murtherer If it be so I wonder then what the Judge Jury and Executioner the Gaol or Gallows have to say or do to the Body if it be so there is an horrible Scene of Injustice all the World over if so Delirant Reges plectuntur Achivi was not the single Case of the poor Grecians who went to pot for the Miscarriages of their Generals but the common and deplorable Fate of all Mankind Certainly if the Soul only be the Murtherer the Body is free ought not to be touch'd is by all Laws whatsoever discharg'd both from the Guilt and Punishment of that Crime in which it had no hand For as 't is Injustice on one side not to punish the Guilty so 't is no less on the other to punish the Innocent If this quaint Notion of the Philosopher could be made good before the Bench it would bring him in more Gain than all the Preferments beside But alas this nail will never drive He will never be able to perswade the World of the truth of it And indeed it does exceedingly labour For 't is not the Soul but 't is the Man that is the Murderer And here also is a manifest Tang of the old Sophism True indeed the Soul is the first chief and principal Actor in the Tragedy but we can by no means excuse the outward Part. 'T is the Soul that bestows on the Body Life and sense without which it could not possibly lay claim to either and even here 't is Ridiculous to imagine that the more Spiritual and noble Part uses the Terrestrial and earthy as a
Tool and Machine an Instrument only i. e. barely agitates and moves it as the Snail does his Shell the Waterman his Boat the Rider his Horse the Fencing-Master his Weapon the Man his Cloaths No this has been sufficiently exploded by the Philosophers and Schoolmen in the colebrated Question on the present Subject being by Both constantly maintained in the Negative The Soul during its Residence with its beloved Bride is liberal in his Endowments towards her as in the foregoing Comparison furnishes and sets her up with great Accomplishments bestows Sense Vigour Activity Perception on on her so that derivatively she has the Benefit Use and Enjoyment of all these This is a Doctrine disputable and I believe will not go down with all but for the Truth of it I appeal to the Sense of Mankind and for its Support I briefly offer these Considerations 1. The Soul diffuses it self through every Part of the Body according to the known Maxim of the great Peripatetick and certainly to no other purpose but to bestow its Largesses The Vegetable Soul gives Life to every Particle of the Plant or Tree and the Rational Soul cannot be supposed to be less liberal 2. 'T is undeniable that there is a mutual and reciprocal Influence of each toward other The Soul impresses the Body on t'other hand That impresses the Soul The loving Pair mutually give and receive from each other the noble Spouse makes his Bride the generous Presents so often mentioned She on the other hand guides and directs the Soul in his Behaviour according to the known Axiome Mores animae sequuntur temper amentum corporis which I confess I do not understand unless it come home to the purpose The different Constitutions and Complexions of our Bodies have a powerful influence on our Souls and do in a great measure over-rule and command them This is allowed by all and manifestly appears in the Behaviour of Children suitable to their Progenitors They do for the most part follow their Way and tread in their Steps The Body is the perpetual Dictator and prescribes to the Soul the Manner and Method of its Government Thus according to the peculiar Composure of the outward we find the Dispositions of the inward Man He in whom the sanguine Complexion is predominant proclaims his Constitution by his Port and Actions is Bold Couragious Magnanimous and Heroick whereas the Cholerick Man tells the World what he is made of by his Peevishness and Petulancy And so in all other Cases as all here agree And least the Suspicion of Traduction which prevails with some should enervate the force of the Argument To put it altogether without dispute I lay down this as an undeniable Position That the Manners of Children are not only influenced by their Parents but Nurses too The Concessions of Philosophers Physicians and confirmed Experience of all do give me a Supersedeas here and pronounce the Proof of it altogether needless There is a Curious Dissertation in Aulus Gellius lib. 12. cap. 1. of Favorinus the Philosopher on this Subject to a Noble Woman perswading her to give suck to her own Child and not endanger the corrupting of his Manners by a strange Milk The Discourse is so full excellent and nervous that I can hardly forbear to transcribe it and whereunto for full Satisfaction I refer the Reader 3. That the Body is endowed with Life and Sensation is undeniable from the common and daily Experience of it in every part Even the Extream Parts are endued with a ready and most exquisite Sensation And 4. the Truth of it is abundantly confirmed from this usual Experiment That if at any time there happens a Sphacelus a Mortification in any extreme part instantly there is recourse to the Surgeon and his Saw to take off the dead part for the Preservation of the whole which to me is little less than a Demonstration That the other Parts are truly and actually alive The Body even of Adam if the Supposition may be allow'd before its Union with its Heavenly Partner was a senseless Clod of Earth but when God breathed into him the Breath of Life then Man became a living Soul a living Man though we allow it a Carkass upon its Separation CHAP. VII THE Objector goes on Neither is the Body capable of any Rewards or Punishments 't is the Soul only that is sensible and nothing but what is sensible can be capable of Rewards and Punishments Here again we are assaulted with the old Paralogism and therefore must dismiss it with the same Answer The Body without the Soul is capable of neither Rewards nor Punishments but in Conjunction with it is exquisitely sensible and enjoys either What have we to do to consider the Body in a separate state This is foreign impertinent and beside the Argument in all respects Our Dispute lies about the Good or Evil that Men do in this Life and that Remunaration which according to their Deserts shall attend them at the Resurrection In both which the whole Man is concerned and not one part neither the Body without the Soul nor the Soul without the Body but both in Conjunction And though I will not deny That the Soul while in the Body may and does sometimes act Abstractively without the Concurrence of the Body in a Spiritual and Intellectual Manner in good or bad Desires Cogitations and Contrivances which are by the Philosophers call'd Immanent Acts and so by consequence has a separate distinct Enjoyment of Pleasure or Pain according to the Result and Nature of them wholly peculiar to its self and altogether independent from the Body yet all other Rewards and Punishments here are conferred on the Soul by the Mediation of the Body so far is the Objection from being true as that the contrary is undeniable As the Body is beholden to the Soul for the Capacity of Rewards and Punishments so all the Rewards or Punishments that are or can be placed on the Soul in this Life are owing to the Body without which 't is altogether impossible it should be invested with either How is the Soul of the most deserving Courtier preferr'd but by the Body How is the Soul of the Valiant Soldier advanc'd to higher Dignity of Command but by the Body How is the Soul of the Learned Doctor bless'd with Plurality of Preferments in the Church and Vniversity but by the Body And so in all other Cases whatsoever On the other hand the same is no less visible in the Distribution of Punishments How is the Soul of the Malefactor brought to suffer but by the Body Ask the Prisoner in the Dungeon with his heavy Load of Fetters on how the Place and Irons come to affect his Soul he will readily tell thee 'T is by the Body Ask the petty Thief at the the Cart's Tayl how his Spiritual Part does rue for his Transgression and he 'll tell thee 't is by the painful Stripes inflicted on his Back Ask the Man that has undergone the
in keeping it clean swept and garnished a fit Receptacle and Mansion for the Holy Spirit in a ready Compliance and Conjunction with the Soul in all the Offices of Religion This most evidently appears to be the Doctrine of our Church when we are admitted to the highest and nearest Communion with God in the Eucharist by that Clause which is inserted and repeated in both Forms of Administration when the Priest delivers the Bread He prays That it may preserve thy Body and Soul unto Everlasting Life and again he uses the same Form when he gives the Cup The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for thee preserve thy Body and Soul unto Everlasting Life Now to reason fairly Unless our Bodies are capable of Everlasting Life I know not what sense we can make of the Prayer And if our Bodies are capable of Everlasting Life as must be allow'd they are necessarily imply'd subject to Everlasting Death and by unavoidable Consequence must be allow'd capable of doing good or evil To conclude this St. Paul was so throughly convinced of Both as that he rallies together a multitude of Arguments to prevent the one and engage us in the other First In 1 Cor. 6. 13. The Body is for the Lord i.e. 'T was made by him and therefore ordain'd and devoted to his Service Secondly The Lord for the Body i.e. He redeemed and sanctified it and so has a farther and improved Right to it Thirdly God will raise our Bodies v. 14. i.e. The Resurrection lays a farther Obligation upon us Fourthly Our Bodies are the Members of Christ and therefore they ought not to be the Members of an Harlot We ought to keep them clean and pure for his sake as Parts of that Society whereof he is the Head Fifthly He that committeth Fornication sinneth against his own body i.e. Though there are some Sins without the Body yet the Sins of Vncleanness are properly Sins of the Body Sixthly Our Bodies are the Temples of the Holy Ghost ver 19. The Sins of our Bodies turn this Holy Guâ—st out of doors and admit another Master making them the Devil's Brothel-Houses and Styes Lastly Our Bodies are bought with a price ver 20. Therefore not to glorifie God in own Bodies as well as Souls since by a manifold Right they are both his is not simply Sin but Sin of an high Degree and deep Dye no less than the Sin of Sacrilege After all this to corroborate the Argument I might here expatiate upon the great Cost and Expence which the Primitive Christians bestowed in Embalming their dead Bodies of which Tertullian St. Augustine and others give us a large Account which comes home fully to the Point in hand and can be apply'd to no other purpose By this Practice of theirs 'tis plain they look'd upon their Bodies as perfumed with their Graces here smelling sweet in their Dormitories deposited as in a Bed of Spices and resting in full Hope of a Glorious Retribution But I conceive I have no need of it and therefore it may suffice only to have noted it CHAP. IX I Pass to the Examination of the Third and last Objection which as a Bar lies in our way and ought to be removed If it be Injustice in God to punish the Soul alone without the Body in Conjunction with which she committed the Sin then all the Matter which constitued the Body when the several Sins were committed must be raised again and reunited to the Soul for if some why not all But what Monsters of Men should we be in the Resurrection if all the Substance of which our Bodies consisted from our Childhood to our Deaths should be gathered together and formed into a Body Without taking notice of the Severity of the Objection I shall endeavour to give satisfaction to it And First I Answer That the Resurrection depends upon an All-sufficient and Omnipotent Power and though I cannot tell with what Matter the Bodies shall arise yet every good Man ought to rest satisfy'd in this That a God of infinite Abilities will take care to make good his Word For there are an hundred things as the Learned Author has asserted p. 221. both in NATURE and DIVINITY the Existence of which we cannot doubt and yet the Reason of them we cannot comprehend Of which he there gives us a multitude of Instances whereunto I refer the Reader and at last resolves the Resurrection into God's good Pleasure as the Highest Reason 'T is altogether surprizing how he came to be so positive here and in this difficult point impossible to be understood or resolved by the wisest of Men to be so magisterial especially considering that unlucky Passage which drops from his Pen in the Words immediately following p. 222. I fansie my self Philalethes talking to a bold Refiner on the Promises and Decrees of Almighty God and one of those little Nothings that call themselves Philosophers that form to themselves Notions and Idaea's then deal with Revelation as the Tyrant did with the poor Innocents on his Bed either violently stretch it beyond its natural Reach or chop off a part to make it commensurate to their Intentions I will make no Animadversions here though I have a fair Opportunity but I cannot forbear to say that the Learned Author has made Monsters of all Men at the Resurrection if it be founded on Justice contrary to his own Reasoning in the places foregoing where he professes his Ignorance and challenges the World to give an account of as supposing it impossible And yet boldly asserts here That all the Matter which was of the Body of the Man from his Childhood to his Grave must be rallied together at the Resurrection or else there can be nothing of Justice in the Case But Secondly I answer This Assertion runs Counter to the Doctrine of the Schoolmen and Ancients who have with one Mouth determin'd That the Child shall not arise a Child nor the Corpulent Man with his great Bulk nor he who sunk under a Marasmus peep out of his Grave a Skeleton Nor the Old Man appear at the Resurrection with his Grey Hairs or any Symptomes of Age but all shall arise inter Incrementum Decrementum humanae naturae about the Age of 33 in a perfect State staturaÌ„ quam habuit vel habiturus est as Lombard Sent. 4. Dis 44. Aug. Civ Dei Lib. 22. Cap. 14. Thirdly I answer That this is altogether beside the Question We are to consider the Body fallen and to prove the Resurrection of that same Body to be joined to the same Soul in order to a Judgment And this is all that in Reason can be expected We are no ways concerned to look back to its various and different States from his Childhood to his Death if we can produce the same Prisoners before the Supreme Tribunal there can be no Injustice in the Thing for the Learned Author has granted and proved that our Bodies from our Childhood to our Graves notwithstanding
am not willing to dispute 't is too sublime a Subject and above our mortal Reach Nor will I eagerly contend for the Place where upon their dislodging here they are dispos'd of But this Opinion I readily embrace That before our Saviour's Ascension they were not admitted into Heaven whatsoever they are since Nor will I presume to determine for what Things the happy Soul is rewarded nor on the other hand for what the Soul of the Reprobate is punished but so far I conceive it to be plain and allowed by the Concurrence of all That Both at present have their different Enjoyments though imperfect So that in my Apprehension the Consequence of the Learned Author does Claudicare stand in need of a Crutch it is and always will be a Cripple The Soul of the Saint is at present admitted to Happiness I see nothing in Reason from hence to infer Therefore 't is capable of being fully rewarded On the other side the Soul of the Sinner is in its Separate State capable of Punishment Ergo 't is capable of being fully punished I must freely say I cannot see the least colour for the Inference Where-ever the Soul of Lazarus now is it must be without doubt allowed by all to be happy but that it is as happy as it will be after the Resurrection I utterly deny On the other side That the Soul of the Rich Glutton is now in a State of Punishment must be readily assented to but that it is in a full compleat State will can must never be granted This Assertion runs against the stream and current of Reason Scripture and Antiquity as will most manifestly appear in the Examination of the other Opinion of Tertullian which I now come to consider Thirdly He seems to affirm in the Passage above-cited That the Soul is not capable without the Body of Pleasure or Pain of Punishments or Rewards and therefore concludes for a Resurrection 'T is beside my intent to attempt the Defence of this Doctrine tho' the Centuriators have undertaken it And if the Fire of Hell be real as I believe no one will deny because constantly so represented in the Scriptures it would gravel the most accomplish'd of Philosophers from the Principles of Natural Philosophy only to resolve how this Fire can affect and reach the Soul how a Material can act upon an Immaterial Beside there are no mean Authorities and not a few neither to be produc'd who have asserted much the same thing Thus Maldonate as Learned a Man as most and incomparably well read assures us in Matt. 8. 29. Mirum quanto consensu plerique veteres Authores docuerint daemones ante diem judicii non torqueri It was it seems the general Doctrine That the Damned were not punished before the Day of Judgment which how it is to be understood he there tells you Notwithstanding all this I think the foresaid Passage in a strict literal gross Sense by no means defensible we must give some Grains of Allowance to the Writings of this Father or else we shall make mad Work We must consider the Drift and Carriage of the Discourse expound one Passage by another and judge charitably of all and then the Meaning will be plain One while he allows the departed Souls according to their different Deserts a present Portion of Pain or Weal Other while he says That the separate Souls are rewarded or punished at present for the good or bad things they did without the concurrence of the Body and that tho' they are capable without the Body of Pleasure or Pain yet they are not so fully capable as when united to it In other places he seems to affirm the quite contrary viz. That the Soul is not capable of suffering at all without the Body that in a divided State it can feel neither Pleasure nor Pain and upon this account concludes the Necessity of a Resurrection Now to a favourable Reader who shall govern himself as in reason he is obliged suitable to the method but now laid down here will upon mature deliberation appear no Contradiction no Inconsistency in all this the one leads us to the understanding of the other The separate Souls tho' in some measure they do now partake of Rewards and Punishments yet they are in a manner nothing in comparison to what they shall be the Height and Accomplishment of both awaits the Resurrection when Body and Soul shall be again united then and then only the Condition of all shall be compleat And that this is the Meaning of this Ancient Writer is abundantly evident not only from the whole Thread of the Discourse but also from some plain Passages in it As ad perfectionem judicii the Body is required to make the Judgment compleat And again Quae proinde illi non sufficiunt ad sentiendum plaenè quemadmodum neque ad agendum perfecté i. e. The Members of the Soul as he expresses it are not of themselves sufficient to enjoy or suffer fully Nay there are many other Passages frequently occurring which as a Key open the door to the Sense here as the places above noted where he again and again allows the separate Souls capable of Pleasure or Grief without the Body That they can feel or suffer any thing licèt exules carnis without the Body I shall neither trouble my self nor the Reader but with two places more and they are both in one Chapter Resur Carn cap. 17. non quâ sentire quid sine carne non possit sed quâ necesse est illum cum carne sentire And again Ad perficiendam autem operam carnis expectat sic itaque ad patiendam societatem carnis postulat ut tam PLAENE per eam pati possit quà m sine eâ PLAENE agere non potuit The blessed Soul to make up its Happiness full requires the Society of the Body and on the other hand the condemned Soul in its Torments calls for the Fellowship of the Body that the Punishment might be compleated in both parts in conjunction of which their Sins were committed This then being allowed to be the Sense of the Father as I do not see how it can well be denied viz. That the Soul is not capable of Rewards and Punishments without the Body but by no means as the learned Dr reports it p. 214 That the Soul is not capable in its own nature without an organized Body of any Perception how that it is not capable without ar humane Body of either Rewards or Punishments This seems to be a too rigid extream and unreasonable Construction of those passages and woud unavoidably involve the Father in the other Errors of the Death of the Soul or the slumber of it But though the Learned Author does represent the Opinion of Tertullian in this matter thus severely yet he confesses this notion very consistent with the Doctrine of the Resurrection and the General Judgment that is to follow after it but he has this to object against it pag.
it did here and ea quae corpori debentur as another of the Learned has Paraphrased it The Body shall receive the things which are due which of right belong unto it Sicut Justitia dicitur suum cuique dare as another of the Criticks comments it and this is the very nature of Justice that every Body shall have the proper Reward which is exactly suitable to his work And congruenter ad id quod gessit as another of no small Repuration has given us the sense of it The Judgment of every Body shall be tongruous and correspondent to his actions We see the main indictment is against the Body and all the deeds done in the former Life are applied to it and according to these it is we are either to stand or fall Fourthly 'T is farther to be noted how that St. Paul expresses himself by a Trope a Metonymie of the Cause for the Effect the Works for the Wages the things Done in the Body for what is Due unto them And if this be not plainly enough exprest to remove all scruples cavils doubts and gain-sayings we have here Lastly The Reason of all this assigned by the infallible Spirit THAT EVERY MAN MAY RECEIVE THE THINGS DONE IN HIS BODY ACCORDING TO WHAT HE HAS DONE WHETHER IT BE GOOD OR BAD … Which sounds to me as if the Apostle had said To this very end to this very intent for this very purpose for this very reason The Process of the Day of Judgment requires the appearance of our Bodies as well as Souls that Justice may be done to both I can make no other construction of it That every Man may receive the things done in the Body according to what he has done whether it be Good or Bad. Upon the whole I declare that ever since I met with the Objections of the learned Author against it I have been scarcely able to put the thoughts of it out of my Head and the more I considered it the more I am in love with the more I am established in it And whereas the Learned Author would enervate throw it aside and make it no reason at all I on the contrary must confess beside the will and pleasure of God that I look on it as the first and great Reason of the Resurrection I do give it the supremacy and precedency to all others I must freely acknowledge that I cannot after my utmost search and inquisition possibly find out any Reason that can pretend to equal or rival it that can stand in competition with it The Resurrection is in order to Judgment and Judgment and Justice here are all one I cannot for my heart Divine upon what other Account but this the Resurrection of the same Body should be so constantly by all the Ancients contended for and expresly asserted Resurrectionis vocabulum non aliam rem vindicat quam quae recidit Tertullian lib. 5. cap. 9. ad Mart. and the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the learned Doctor has also noted clearly implies the Rising again of that which Fell according to the vulgar saying Resurrectio est ejus qui recidit Suitable to this the Creed of Aquileia has expressed this Article by the Resurrection of this Flesh and accordingly their Bodies were particularly pointed at by those of that Communion as Ruffinus tells us when they made Publick Confession of their Faith I will not dwell upon this nor light a Candle to the Sun but refer you to the Elaborate Treatise of Dr. Beaumont on the present subject who has proved it to have been the constant Doctrine of the Fathers beyond a possibility of denial Now I desire the Philosopher to give me a reason of this Doctrine of which the Ancients have been so tenaâ—eâ—us Why this Body why this Flesh must arise for 't is but equal that I should give him a question to answer who in his Objections has made a precedent and done the like if the Body be no other ways concerned than an instrument only if it be not sensible if it be not capable of doing Good or Evil Rewards or Punishments as he has in down right words affirmed If this be so I earnestly request him to tell me Why it must be the SAME BODY that must arise Why not another Body Why not an Aereal Body Why any Body at all Dic Sodes dic aliquem Dic Quintiliane colorem I do verily believe he will have an hard Task of it and however he may be himself persuaded it will I presume be a a difficult matter for him to persuade or convince others For my part I look on the Doctrine as a most Divine Truth and am immoveably fixt in the belief of it notwithstanding all the Arguments the Learned Author has brought against it and I presume the greatest part of Mankind are and will be of my Opinion 'T is most certain that this Doctrine has a most natural tendency to the advancement of Piety and suppression of Vice There can be no Antidote or Cordial no Shield or Buckler more Sovereign than this to defend and support the devout Christian amidst all the difficulties and hardships with which he is engaged in his present Pilgrimage they are all silenced mastered disappointed and overcome by one word Resurgam There can be no more powerful motive to engage us in the pursuit of Holiness than this viz. The consideration of that plenteous recompense which shall be conferred on the whole Man hereafter with respect to his labours here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith St. Cyrill The hope of the Resurrection is the Root of well-doing This must carry us on with Courage and Resolution thro all the difficult rugged and uneven passages we meet withal in our present Race this must reconcile soften and sweeten all the assurance that we serve so good a Master who will not fail fully to reward all his faithful Labourers in the next World with respect to their deservings in this Lastly There can be no more effectual dissuasive against Sin than the Argument before us If Men have any sense of their State any love for themselves any kindness or regard for their Bodies as well as Souls they are carefully to avoid those ways which will inevitably implunge Both in everlasting Torments in the great and terrible Day when they shall be again united to the intent that they may be sharers in the Wages who have been Confederates in the Work FINIS