merit he will here needs make an act of Charity not begun in the Man's life but in the first instant of his great knowledg of the next World enough to make such a weak one as I am worse then an Origenist For I know not why by his Argument any body should be damn'd or rather could be damn'd for questionless every Soul whatsoever it be hath at her separation so clear an understanding of the goodness of God and the variety of all corporal goods that if there were then place of Repentance and making of new an act of Charity she could not chuse but cancel all her idle desires and turn to God For if there be Repentance it may be as well in the choice of her chief good as of the ways to it But whence shall we know the good Thief was violently set upon his evil courses For my good Nature inclined me to think he had been for want or ill company brought into inconvenience But seeing it is fitting for the Divine's Argument let it pass what will follow That if he repented in this life there is place of Repentance in the next for all that have a perfecter knowledg of God's Goodness and their own Folly 12. His ninth Number sheweth a great fear that some in Purgatory may be honoured for Saints But what if they were Are not they God's Friends Are they not truly Saints Why then should the Church erre in declaring them so But that he may not be afraid I would desire him to believe until he gains knowledg that it is the Habits gotten in this life and not the acts which make Saints For the Acts pass but the Habits remain and budd into Affections of their own Nature in the next life So that if his Saints have no evil Habits the obreption of an act will do them no harm besides that the anguishes of Death have vertue in such men to purge sleight sins As for his Stories he will understand that I am more a Lover of good ones then a Creditour of unlikely ones as of that out of St. Peter Damian concerning Saint Severinus for I cannot judge his act to have been irrational as far as you recount it The Story also of Paschasius I beleve is of no better credit then of Baronius who was as I take it the last Correctour of the Roman Martyrologe and gave more credit to the Dialogues called St. Gregories then I do 13. Now are we arrived to the tenth Number in which he puts a Second Principle of mine though you will find in effect it is the same with the former or at least so joyn'd with it that he hath already impugn'd it Yet that is nothing to me so he brings new matter That which most terrifies me is that he threatens after he has done with it here he will make a new Chapter of it So desirous are People of making great Books though it be with the tedious repetition of the same thing ten times over But says he this Point is attended with so long a train of absurdities that one Chapter will not serve and so one must be largely prosecuted in this Chapter The Principle is that what affections the Soul embraces at her separation she persists in the same the whole time of her separation His inconvenience he finds in this Doctrin is that he must find some present asswagement of the pains in Purgatory when the Prayers are made for the Dead And repeats over the Authours he cited before to that purpose whereof the Devil in the Scul and Metaphrastes a Tale-finder are to his purpose All the rest speak but what we will hold as well as he yet must be plain for him Onely I must note that he changes the former Text he cited out of St. Isidore into paying part of the pain I must desire him to look well into his Books and see whether his own Fellows teach the Doctrin which here he presseth to wit that at that very time when a Mass is sayd or an Alms is given there be some relaxation of pain given as his fine Stories relate For I know the ordinary way is of delivering Souls or at least of the shortning the time of the Souls punishments whereas present Refreshments would rather make the pains longer and the delay of Heaven greater which would be worse to the Souls in Purgatory then to be without such relief and so by the greatness of the pain to make the time shorter therefore if there be not a perfect release the comfort should stay until the end may come with or by it Another quaint conceit is that all the above-used Authorities makes relief flow from the pious acts effectively Truly this is to be a great Divine The Authorities all that are esteemable say that good Prayers and Works help the Dead and we agree with this saying But it is necessary for him that it be presently done and immediatly these very words no whit changed signify that it is presently done 14. This is not enough for him but he requires that the Prayers should do them effectively and upon his least beck the words ply themselves to signify an effective causality Is not this strong Divinity to make the words of Councils and Fathers so plyable to his Will that without any change they signify what he pleases What would not Simon Magus have given to have had the Holy Ghost so in a string He objects that the relief of Souls is certain and must not be made depend of the probable opinion that Souls know future things Where should I have learned this Divinity if I had not met with it here I might have read all Suarez and Vasquez over and have found all the Mysteries of our Faith explicated by probable Opinions of which they dissent among themselves without ever understanding that therefore the mysteries depend of those Opinions But hereafter I must be waryer and know that probable Opinions are not to be employed in that kind and therefore I pray let him think I hold it for certain that separated Souls know future things as we have an example of Samuel Moses and of Onias and Hieremias He cites next the Authour of the Supplement at the end of Saint Thomas his Sum which Work hath not the Authority of Saint Thomas no not when the Authour uses the very words of St. Thomas For St. Thomas having in his Sum much change of his Doctrin in his other Works the Sum is the absolute Work which beareth the authority of St. Thomas the other Works as far as they disagree not with the Sum are confirmations of it or consequent to it Which I mark because this Divine freely useth the name of St. Thomas when he cites this Work whereas in truth what is in the Supplement must first be proved to be St. Thomas his Doctrin at least in other Books before it can be father'd upon him For the very name of Supplement shews the credit of the Doctrin to depend
will to make any doubt of it and should easiler hold it for a History not to be mentioned then to write my opinion of it For considering the story wiâ—h abstraction from the Authour who wrote it no man could judge it worth the degree of a Romance but rather a pure Fable of Garagantua invented for to please Children or rather to disgrace the Catholick opinion concerning Purgatory It hath no respect to nature making this supernatural Ghost to be now a Bird now a Fish now a kind of an Insect to live in fire And for acts of Christian life and to increase in vertuous actions and examples little or nothing All miraculous all hideous sufferings a life not imitable wholly corporeal little spirituality that setting aside the imagin'd good of freeing souls out of Purgatory would not be fit to mention before a prudent Auditory What necessity can be thought of in the soule of Purgatory for those forty years of her life that was neither before not since All St. Odiloe's and the Cluny Monastery's prayers were begun before I hear no body of opinion that there go fewer souls to Purgatory since then in her days What extraordinary zeal of God Almighty was it to raise such a great assistance to the souls for one Age Let us think a little farther Could so strange a miraculousness endure forty years and not all Christian People from all parts of Christendom resort to it Would not all Princes specially neighbouring ones cause it to be examin'd and have authentical relations brought to them Would not innumerable foundations for the dead have been made out of the Astonishment of the world at such rare miracles Would not all Histories all Chronicles have made mention of it Would not the Popes themselves have sent to have examin'd it Where are â—ll these Testimonies Cantipratanus was a worthy man and has at large written the story true it is But if you confer him with Gregory the Authour of the Dialogues you may think he may as well be decieved as he was and was no less given to collect pious stories then the Pope He affirms he could bring innumerable witnesses then living for what he wroâ—e This is a sign it was much talked on and a popular story in every mans mouth but how many of this great number would have proved eye-witnesses is not let down though when a famous story is in vogue every one who hath been in the Country will be ashamed to say he had not seen it The Church hath done wisely and worthily in later Ages to command Miracles should not be published without first being examin'd which if it had been done by Cantipratanus I doubt this story would have fallen very short Yes but it hath the authentication of two Cardinalls to wit of Jacobus a Vitriaco and Bellarmin As for the former he is accounted an able man but the quality of his approbation being not set down by your Authour I may easily conjecture it is but some memory of fame and hearsay which gives no great confirmation And as for Bellarmin this story puts me in mind how that good Cardinal was newly dead when I went first into Rome and the report of his worth in every mans mouth and amongst other commendations one was of his Christian simplicity and that he was according as we phrase it in English a meer Scholler and understood not the ways of the world but was subject to be deluded by fraudulent Persons And some Learned men have extended the same Censure to his works full of great reading but without any great choice and judgment in his Arguments 7. There wanted yet a piece of canting Rhetorick to set forth these goodly Merchandizes You shall have it in the fifth Number There he tells you that without holding your self wiser then St. Gregory and the rest you have heard of all this while you cannot hold the contrary Who would have expected so absurd a proposition from a Divine In a manner their whole study and pains is to impugn one the other and dissent from great and little and must we be bound to think they think themselves wiser or better then all from whom they dissent He himself confessedly will dissent from two of the chief of these he cites St. Bernard and St. Thomas about our Ladies Conception peradventure also from Snarez and Vasquez in other points shall we therefore think he esteems himself wiser then they As to the particulars we have already answer'd and many of those he cites they are not the men themselves but the writers of their lives whose information how good it was we cannot tell though it be but too evident that the writers of Saints lives are for the most part desirous to speak the most good of their subject which they admire and therefore a slight information is sufficient to make them give credit to what is spoken in their favour specially in miraculous things To end his Chapter he hath another pretty subject to wit to perswade his Reader that I think that anciently there were no Visions and so cites St. Austin testifying there were many who had seen the pains of Hell the which as it is nothing to the purpose so is it a cunning slaunder to suggest to people that we utterly deny such Miracles SEVENTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to the eleventh and twelfth Chapter His weak Attempts from Liturgies Rituals and Offices With what folly he charges Heresy and Excommunication upon the Doctrin of the Middle State How the Pope truly applies the merits of the Saints to the assistance of souls in Purgatory The Pope's Bull corruptedly alledged The Bull of Leo the tenth against Luther not touching the Authours Doctrin What Authority the Council of Trent gave the Pope No Authentick Testimony of the Antiquity of Indulgences for the dead 1. HIS eleventh Chapter pretends to shew out of the Liturgies and Rituals the Testimony of the Church against the delivery at the day of Judgment But to fill this new head he repeats first divers of those he brought before as that from St. Ambrose's prayer before Mass The Churches prayer that the dying person may never come in Purgaiory He mingles the prayers for the dying with the prayers for the dead as if they must needs signify the same specially because the Church so lately prayed for her not going to Purgatory therefore she must needs after death pray for it again as if in different cases the time ought to make the request the same Otherwise all he brings after death is common to both opinions and still he presses that to be going out of the body and being in Purgatory be the self-same occasions The like is his confirmation out of a prayer common to the living and dead as if we had not the wit to know their necessities were different but that we must pray that God should give both the same gifts I am ashamed to spend time and paper on so gross mistakes not without admiration
this which himself is â—ain to confess and I think against his own opinion who puts if I am not mistaken no stain or blemish in the souls of Purgatory and therefore no purging nor Purgatory and so all the Fathers he repeats anew be plainly against himself 5 In his fifth Number he imposes a new falsity upon me to wit that I say the souls at the day of Judgment pittifully burn in their Bodies but that that fire purgeth nothing that can be called sin I wonder where he found this imagination For my Doctrin is that the fire of Judgment is ministerial to the Angels framing the Bodies to Resurrection and by this precedent service is instrumental cause of what is done in the instant of Reunion and Resurrection in that instant all the Action of fire ceases and is turned into the Purgatum esse which Purgatum esse is the sight of Christ and God in the very first instant of Reunion And this Doctrin may he find in my second tome of Institutiones sacrae pag. 244. and in my book De medio statu by pieces here and there So that all this good mans discourse is built upon a fancy of his own and touches not my Doctrin 6. In his sixth Number he argues from the difference betwixt Baptism and Penance that the one takes away all the punishment due to sin the other leaves some punishment to be expiated by satisfaction And puts the case of an old man who comes to Baptism after a wicked long life with an imperfect sorrow and disposition yet says he all the punishment is remitted to him though there remains many vitious inclinations in him Now if this man dyes soon after with some small Venial sin he shall ly in great torments untill the day of Judgment according to my Doctrin This is his Argument which he repeats now the second time and therefore it requires an answer I tell him therefore that it is very true that Baptism being taken with a fitting disposition to the nature of the Sacrament remits all pains and the Sacrament of Penance does not as is plain seeing Satisfaction is one part of this Sacrament But I would gladly know by what Authority your Divine changeth the Councils Definition and that which the Council speaks of men coming to Baptism with a disposition conformable and proportionable to the nature of the Sacrament he enlarges it to them who come with an imperfect and unproportionable disposition All men know Baptism is a Regeneration in which we are made nova creatura in which our Vetus Homo is buried And therefore the connatural disposition is that a man come with a resolution of a perfect change of life such an one as we see in St. Austin at his conversion which made him feel no more tentations of his former imperfections such as we acknowledge in people perfectly contrite such as is supposed to be in men who relinquish the world to be Carthusians Eremites Anachorites c. in all which we acknowledge that their repentance cancels all pains but likewise we acknowledg it takes away all inclination to former Vices at least out of the spiritual part of men and so leaves no matter for the fire of Purgatory to work upon which burneth onely ill affections 7. In his seventh Number he cryes out against this Principle that the Soul now become a pure Spirit should retain her Affections to Bodily Objects and thinks this misbeseems a Philosopher to say therefore I think my best play is to say I speak as a Divine For I hope so to have the protection of all those who say that in Hell the Souls are unrepentant and obstinate in their sins and sinful desires Nevertheless if he will needs appeal to Philosophy let him consider what Plato 10. de Rep. What Cebes what the Pythagoreans teach and Virgil out of Philosophers Conjux ubi pristinus illi Respondet curis aequatque Sichaeus amorem And again Quae gratia currum Armorumque fuit vivis quae cura nitentes Pascere equos eadem sequitur tellure repostos But let us see what he objects against this received Doctrine of Divines and Philosophers Is saith he such a Soul purging her self I answer Yes forsooth I pray if you ever looked into the strife betwixt the Spirit and the Flesh either how a man purgeth himself in his whole life or in some great Battail and Pitch'd-Field see whether both are not compounded of vicissitudinary Victories now of the Spirit now of the Flesh. Reflecting now that the eminency of the separated Soul contains in it self at once more then the whole life-time of an incorporated Soul what must or can we think but that all this contradiction of Wills must be at once in an imperfect separated Soul which is in our life in parts and separated in time 8. He says again Philosophy teaches him that no body loves evil clearly apprehended to be evil that no disguise of good can cheat a separated Soul I must confess both these Propositions to be true and therefore I am forced to say that in Purgatory their love is not about evil objects but truly good and conformable to Nature and their fault consists onely in excess of love which makes them apt to follow their objects where and when they should not 9. His third Objection is How we know the Soul will embrace this wilfulness since it is voluntary and therefore in her liberty not to accept of it or chuse it This Objection hath two faults the one that it doth not distinguish betwixt Voluntary and Free their own Philosophy teaching them that the love of our last End or good in common is a voluntary act but not free The like they teach of the accepting of a medium when there is but one to gain the fore-embraced End The other is that he thinks that this wilfulness begins at Death whereas it doth but continue and began in the Body As the very words of remaining and being conserved do signifie 10. His last Objection is that there is in Purgatory an efficacious repentance and therefore no will to do the like again I answer this word repentance doth stick in my stomack for if it means onely an act of a contrary affection I easily accord it to him for in this consists the torment of a Soul that is vitious either in this World or in the next that she has contrary Affections in her self one fighting against the other for the general inclination to her last Good can never be rooted out and no Vice can be but contrary to this inclination But if Repentance be taken for the revoking cancelling or blotting out of the unlawful desire I doubt it would prove an Heresie to put that and that the Soul shall remain in Purgatory for then she would have no blemish in her 11. In his eighth Number he prosecutes the same but against all Divinity and himself For whereas he puts that after this life there is no place for
the poor man who gives but a shilling or has but the hearty will to do what were fitting for the Church of God towards the good of his Soul shall find as much relief as the rich man who distributes an hundred pound in all hast for four thousand Masses Yet do I not say the like to rich men For in a Rich man a small thing is no Charity The Charity which dilates not his heart towards his Neighbour is no Charity to give that which he would not stoop to take up is no Charity If what he gives be not sensible to him if it doth not diminish his love to Money if greediness doth not miss it it is no Charity Therefore the Richer man must give more then the less Rich or poorer that it may do him first good in this life and thereby to his Soul in the next 15. He objects that if the Opinion which hath prevailed for five hundred years be true it cannot be but solid prudence to procure the Souls delivery as soon as may be But he mistakes the question which is not nâ—… Whither the Soul be deliverable before the Day of Judgment but by what means she comes to gain the good she may receive Whether by the pure execution of the External action or by the internal Charity which is where it can be the necessary and unfailing cause of the exteriour act And as for the opinion that the external act gains the remission I am afraid it is subject to that curse Pecunia tua sit tecum in perditionem For who can doubt but the remission of sin or pain and the coming to Heaven are Dona Dei and cannot pecunia possideri I abhor to hear that where there is no difference of Charity and internal goodness there should be a difference in remission of sins and purchasing of Heaven Now in this hudling of Masses regularly there is less internal vertue then when they are dispensed with choice and commodity of the Church 16. By what is sayd his second and third Arguments are annulled for the value of the gift and the good of the Soul is the same whether the Masses be sayd a hundred years hence or upon the obit day or even not at all so there be no fault in the Donour And if you object that then the Prayers are not sayd I answer that is an harm to those who should have sayd them and peradventure to the Church if God's Providence doth not supply it other ways but no hurt to the Donour whose work that is the Prudence and Charity by which he ordered it shall follow him and procure by their own sâ—rength what is due to him What then Do the prayers no good or impetrate nothing to him We know that impetration fâ—r others is uncertain depending from God's Providence no ways due to the prayers but as much and how and when they agree to God's Providence and therefore not to be rely'd upon for any effect but every one must look to bear his own burthen and to receive according to his deserts He tells us in the end of his fourth Paragraph that if he had ten thousand pounds at his death to leave for his Souls good he would expresly order that none should be touch'd by them who think it indifferent whether they pray for him this year or next c. I answer that I am of that mind also For who will take Alms must follow the Donour's conditions not his own knowledg But if I had but five shillings to leave for Masses I would rather seek out the Priest on whom I thought it best employ'd though he should say never a Mass for it then another who had a priviledge to say two Masses that very morning but who was not so prudently relieved by my Alms. It was my fortune to have recommended to me by a Gentlewoman upon her Death-bed about 4â— for the good of her Soul She dy'd in poverty in a strange Countrey yet had saved this to be prayed for according to the course of Piety she had been instructed in She had a Child to be put to Nurse without means to pay for the nursing I openly confess I procur'd her not one Mass in vertue of her money but caused it all to be bestow'd on the keeping of the Child out of opinion that in this I did supply the imprudence of the Mother and that to do so was to employ the money best for the Soul of the Mother And such a mind I pray God I may have for my self at my death if I have any thing to leave to make my last Act of the greatest Charity to my Neighbour that I can and I hope I shall do mine own Soul the greatest good that lyes in my power to do by disposing of Temporal Goods 17. In his fifth and sixth Paragraphs he takes that Souls are chiefly to be helped by the Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Council of Trent But if one can help saith he many much more What says he can be here deny'd by any Catholick I answer easily that nothing is to be deny'd but something to be understood And first because that out of the Principle lay'd Charity is the ground of all impetration therefore to understand how it is true that the Mass is the greatest help for souls inPurgatory we ought to understand how the Mass is the greatest act of Charity Which to do we must remember the Mass to have these two relations The one that it is the Christian Sacrifice The other that it is the Commemoration of the Passion of our Saviour The first Consideration stirs up our Intellectual power towards the Admiration and Adoration of his Essence and Thanksgiving for all the benefits which we have received and are to receive from his Almighty hand and to vow all our love and affection to him upon that score The later stirs up the man the Compound of Reason and Passion to the apprehension and esteem of the Mystery of our Redemption of the good received by it and of the penal course Christ took to do us this good Both these considerations are help'd by an awful reverence to the Action we do of handling Christ's own real Body and of presenting to God not our temporall goods as in Alms nor our own bodies as in Penal Exercises but the true and real Body of Jesus Christ accompany'd with his Soul and Divinity If all this raises not Charity to the heighth that Charity can have in this life it is not the fault of the Work but of the Person Wherefore clearly if Souls can be helped by nothing but Prayers and that Alms-deeds and Satisfactions can have no place but as they are Suffrages or impetrations who can require greater evidence that of all exteriour actions the Mass of its nature is the most impetrative and helpful to the deceased faithful But presently you see that Masses are to be weighed not numbred to increase the power of prevailing I might add
necessary to put you in mind to reflect how in all this Chapter he hath sayd nothing to the purpose Neither Scriptures nor the Council any way touching the Controversy but brought out to cover a silly Argument which I expect will be often repeated over But chiefly that the Fathers he cites are for the most part besides the game speaking of what was done at our Saviour's resurrection wherein we and he all agree very friendly as far as concerns our present task that is that our Saviour set them all free that were then in Purgatory but I say withall that he bestow'd their Bodies on them in which they should rise and accompany him to Heaven The which I think he would not mislike if it sprung in his own Garden Now I know not how circumstances may blast it in his opinion SECOND DIVISION Containing an Answer to the fifth Chapter Three Heresies club'd together to prove Ante-judiciary Delivery Nothing evinc'd from th Testimonies of the Greek Fathers 1. IN the fifth Chapter he gives very great words as if he would do wonders out of the Greek Fathers To judge of the effect let us put some Notes which I believe will be common to us both The first is that Origen otherwise a great Doctor and Father held how at the day of Judgment wicked men should begin to be punished every one should be tormented by fire some more some shorter according to the quantity of their crimes but in fine all at last set free and received into Bliss And it is well known that he had many followers but at last was condemned and it setled in the Church that the damned were damned for all eternity 2. My second Note is that though this Errour of Origen was quelled in the Church yet the Venome of it remained in the hearts of many under other words and this question whether it be lawfull to pray for the damned I say the malice of the former Errour remained in this For the Article of our Faith is that the wicked deserve and have at death eternal damnation Now he that saith that they may be pray'd for says that by Prayers this sentence is revocable and by consequence that whosoever is damned eternally it is for want of Prayers and so evacuates the main Article of our Faith engages all good men to have charity towards the damned and wish to them the good which they are taught is possible and makes the communion of the faithfull to reach into Hell No wonder then that St. Gregory the Great judged the opinion that Christ at his resurrection had freed some out of Hell to be Heretical and would much more have condemned this opinion that it is lawfull to pray for damned souls which gives every man though he live and dye never so wickedly hope of salvation if he has but mony to get Masses enough 3. My third Note is that there was amongst the Ancient Christians an Heresy called of Chiliasts or Millenaries which our Fifth-Monarchy-men pretend to resuscitate in England They sayd that there were two resurrections the first of the Just who were to live and reign with Christ here upon Earth for a thousand years in all corporal prosperity before the generall resurrection And there wanted not great and otherwise Holy men who were deluded into this opinion by the apparency of some Texts of Scripture 4. These be my Notes Now the Conclusion for which I drew them is to let you understand that this great Divine makes a Gallimawfry of these three Heresies to present his unwary Reader with a dish of Purgatory and taking away these and the speeches of some Fathers concerning the delivery of souls at Christs resurrection his Chapter will be both very thin and lean his testimonies few and of no efficacity if not contrary to his designe 5. As for Origenism he cites Origen himself and Saint Gregory Nyssen and would fain pull in St. Basil by the way of Brotherhood As for the Errour it self it hath two points in it which makes it nothing to the Purpose the first is that whereas Purgatory ends amongst Catholicks at the day of Judgment Origen's Purgatory begins then So that Origen's Testimonies are very unskilfully apply'd to Purgatory The second is that this Divine ayming mainly to prove that a soul separated from the Body can receive change can make no use of Origenism otherwise then to cosen his auditory seeing Origen puts the souls to have resum'd their Bodies before any change be made in them As for the Person of Origen it is so famous for this Errour that our Divine cannot chuse but be asham'd to say he knew not this was his Errour As for Saint Gregory Nyssen it is a confessed thing both by Ancient and Modern Authours that his works have been corrupted by the Origenists and particularly the Book our Divine cites as I perswade my self he had read in my answers to the Vindicatour and Result though it was not to his purpose to take notice that his Arguments were already answer'd But I for not being too troublesome to my Readers with repeating over the same things must refer them to the second Part of Religion and Reason Divis. 〈◊〉 in the answer to the 22 th Section Out of which it will clearly appear that we are not to seek Saint Basil's opinion out of Saint Gregory's which we cannot know perfectly but rather Saint Gregory's out of Saint Basil's 6. His Testimonies from Authours of the second Heresy begin as he would have it from the great Saint Macarius that is to say is father'd upon him as this Divine cites it by Rufinus Aquileiensis but it imports not by whom for the story carryes discredit enough in its own bowels so that there is no need to look into the Authours credit Yet something I have sayd to this in my Notes upon the first Chapter of the Result So that here I have need onely to note that Gloss of Saint Thomas which he mentions That the comfort which the damned Oracle speaks of is no other then such Joy as the Devil hath when he makes men sin Which signifies that the damned souls are glad that men sin in praying for them which seems to be quite against the Intention of your Heretical citers of this story and in a manner a rejection of the effect of it 7. His next citation of this rank is out of the Oration of the Dead attributed to St. John Damascen and is so shamefull an one that I wonder any man who esteems St. John Damascen for a grave Doctor and one who holds not that the damned are to be prayed for should attribute that Oration to him For besides that it is directly against Saint Damascen's Doctrin who teaches expresly that souls cannot be changed what an unexcusable impudent assertion was it to say that in his time both the whole East and West did testify the delivery of Trajan's soul. Wherefore either this Writer lived after Joannes Diaconus that is some
The one that he telis the story to have passed in Cyprus whereas St. John lived in Alexandria Secondly that whereas other stories of the same nature in Pope Gregory and Venerable Bede make the Bands remain loose this story makes them to be supernaturally bound again which seems to be against the nature of Gods gifts which are given without repentance but much favours the Doctrin of Relief in Hell Wherefore it is vehemently to be suspected that those words then and when come from his Paraphrase and that the Saint's words reached no farther then what we read in others that this story argued that prayers relieved the dead As truly no more can be gather'd out of such Histories which are Parabolical and it were very absurd to parallel small circumstances betwixt corporeal Allegories spiritual things signify'd by them Howsoever the Authority can be no greater then of Metaphrastes who is held in a Rhetorical way to fain many things and it is to be noted that he lived after Gregory the Third's dâ—ys and peradventure after the time of the Oration De dormientibus was written 13. Being freed from these sleight stories we may see what Testimonies of solid Fathers he brings for his opinion He cites St. Denys but never a word which brings the Testimony home to our Controversy he speaking but in common of the remission of the sin His second Authour is St. Athanasius The words that The souls of sinners feel some benefit when good works and offerings are performed for them This Testimony has three faults First the Authour is not St. Athanasius as is so manifest by the work it self that it is a gross mistake to cite it as his though this Divine be not the first who objected it to me and farther it is clear the Authour wrote since the Turks were Masters of Greece by the phrase of calling the Romans French-men His second fault is that he distinguishes not dead but pronounces of all dead mens souls which argues the opinion of those who hold relief in Hell Thirdly these words When good works c. are equivocal and may be as well interpreted that good works are the causes of relief as they do the time unless other words force them to be taken emphatically which do not appear here St. Ephrem is also cited but not in what work nor of what certainty for his works are very ambiguous Besides that he is cited out of another Authour named Severus Alexandrinus who what he was I know not One I read of but an Arch-heretick The Testimony it self smells of the intervalls which the comforters of Hell invent and the works attributed to St. Ephrem are so uncertain that no guess can be made of what value this Authority is 14. The Testimonies he cites out of St. Epiphanius and St. Chrysostom are more certain but they favour my opinion not his For to help and not cancel the sin and that some comfort accrues to the dead by the sacrifice of the Mass are the very expressions which we use But the other words to wit that it may happen that a total pardon may be obtained for them by our prayers comes out of a false Translation The true Translation is that it is possible to gather pardon from all sides by prayer that is that abundance of prayers may be gotten either from all sorts of persons or all sorts of actions towards getting of pardon for St. Chrysostom makes mention of both And these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies motion from the circumference to the centre His last place of St. Chrys. out of the 21 Homily upon the Acts I must tell him if he had not another Text then I he hath much abused the good Saint The words as I read them are est enim si voluerimus leve ipsi supplicium facere If we will it is possible to make his punishment light Which he translates lighter to which he adds as his own descant to make out the Testimony then it was at first Much from the Saints mind who though he be earnest to perswade to prayers and good works yet never descends to more particulars then that they will do some good or else that the Living shall get good by them nobis Deus placatior erit which St. Austin also glances at to wit when the soul is damned Now if the torment of the dead be sooner ended your Divine will not doubt but that it is lighter 15. But I must not forget his citation of St. Greg. Nazianzen of which he seems to make great esteem and it is least of all to the purpose For as it is true St. Gregory speaks of a Purging before Resurrection so is it clearly to be understood of that which is made by death as is evident by that expression either purged or lay'd aside For nothing can be understood to be layd aside but the body and what is layd aside with it So that all his expression is of the effect of death and nothing touching what is to be done in the pure spirit And so I am quit of this troublesome Chapter without any mention of delivering souls out of Purgatory in the Greek Fathers 16. As for the Greek Church he brings me a Letter from some Town wherein there lived many Catholick and Learned Grecians from whom his friend received this Character that all the Grecian Catholick Church approves and admits priviledged Altars and Indulgences for the souls in Purgatory the which they believe go streight to Heaven as soon as they have satisfyed And I am so far from discrediting this Letter as that I sincerely believe it and yet think what I sayd to be true For this word Catholick Greek Church is not exempt from the Law of other words to wit that it may be understood in divers senses by divers speakers so that if this City he speaks of signifies either Rome or Venice which are the likeliest Cities of Christendome to have Grecians of that quality living in them and the Greeks in those two Cities communicate with none but such as either live under Latin Governours and so do easily follow their customs or otherwise are instructed by such Missionaries as go from the Greek Colledg in Rome I do not wonder that they should answer that the Catholick Grecians hold Indulgences as they do in Italy Nay peradventure may think the rest no Catholicks even upon this score But when I spake of the Greek Church I spake of the descendents from the Greeks which made the Union in the Council of Florence without receiving any new Doctrin since THIRD DIVISION Containing an Answer to his sixth Chapter Testimonies from Latin Fathers before St. Austin either savouring of Millenarism or opposit to the Alledger or not found but fram'd to his purpose by Additions of his own and lastly his onely express Testimony uncertain 1. IN the sixth Chapter he pretends to shew that the Latin Church before St. Austin held the delivery of
souls out of Purgatory before the day of Judgment His two first Testimonies according to the custom of those whose chief end is to make a shew hang in the position which is common to both sides being but pure prayers that deceased souls should go to Heaven without specifying when But because his devotion was so hot that it could not expect God's pleasure and determination he would have us believe it was meant presently 2. His next two Testimonies are drawn from the Heresy of the Millenaries praying to God that the soul may rise in the first resurrection For the former Testimony being Tertullians of whom it is known that he was of that Sect and the words being proper to that Sect it cannot be doubted of his meaning The second Testimony is from the Gothick Liturgy the which of what authority it is I know not We well know the Goths were Arrians for the most part of their Flourish in Italy and a great while in Spain we know that this Millenary Errour was greatly dispersed even amongst Catholicks but more amongst Hereticks who have not the rule of Unity and Tradition which keep Catholicks from easy changing The words of the prayer are the proper words of the Millenarians The glosses he seeks to make as they may be good to the Text of the Apocalyps so is their sence too far fetcht to be the sence of a prayer for common People Wherefore either it is a pure piece of Millenarism or at least he must first vindicate it from being so before it can serve him for a Testimony Now the Chiliasts Errour was that Christ was to reign upon Earth corporally with his Saints for a thousand years before the general resurrection then to give the hundredfold of what his Saints had forsaken for his sake in this world according to his promise in the Gospel But because this was a corporal resurrection therefore though there had been no Heresy in the position it could serve your Divine to no purpose Now it serves onely to shew how short his performance falls from his bragging promises 3. His next authority comes truly after St. Austins time being a story out of St. Gregory of Tours contemporary to the Great yet because it is of St. Martin it must speak for St. Martin's age The story as he relates it is of a Holy Virgin to whom St. Martin after her death procured bliss His first Note is that Saints whose Sepulchers are visited for Saints Sepulchers may yet stay some while in Purgatory I easily grant him that without the Authority of this story For the fallibility of Peoples Judgments in such things is very well known And I should not boggle at it though it were untill the day of Judgment His second Note is that St. Martin in the primitive Church believed as we do But for this I know not that the name of the Primitive Church reaches after Constantin's time and St. Martin was but a young man in Julian's time when being but a Catechumen he gave half his Cloak to our Saviour Farther to think he believ'd as we do is a hard matter For I must first believe the story to be true which may be doubted since St. Gregory gives testimony of it onely as a report he had heard from some old men who lived where this Tombe was and none of them could have had been witness of the fact which was passed 1â—0 years before So that it has no better Authority then of a Country tale Nor does St. Gregory's Vote which is his third Note much mend it as he may easily see if he reads Baronius his Opinion of St. Gregory's History T. 2. An. 109. Sect. 49. And in the true History which he sets down but by halves there are divers inconvenient circumstances One he makes mention of to wit that the Holy Maid was kept from Heaven by reason of a no very great fault but in the History you cannot perceive there was any fault at all His fourth Note is that St. Gregory the great was not the first that began to write such stories but St. Gregory of Tours before him Those that will be accurate say seventeen yeares before him if that in such a question as this is not to be together But truly I believe it was one hundred at least For the Pope Gregory tells so many of like stories that a popular Errour can hardly be thought to grow so fast as that the first should have been but seventeen years before it could grow so common 2. Then he comes to St. Hierom out of whom he recounts what words a soul delivered out of Purgatory may say And if you ask what this is to the purpose he answers by adding to the words of St. Hierom that the soul speaks this before the resumption of her body and proves it because the Saint passing to other things saith they shall be done in the consummation of the world Is not this goodly stuff for a Divine to fill a Book withall 3. Next in rank is brought in St. Ambrose with the Elogy of the Father in Christ to St. Austin Out of him he cites two places The first out of the Preparatories to Mass assign'd for Friday His words to intreat that the Mass may this very day in great Letters be a great and full banquet of thee Jesus Christ the living Bread which came from Heaven I would he had taken the pains to apply his Text to our question for I find a great difficulty Yet I think I can find two pretty good constructions The one is to understand it objectively the other efficiently For the proposition being that the Mass should be this banquet either it must be meant that the dead should rejoyce of his saying of Mass by way of the devotion that is used to be called communicating spiritually or else that the Mass should be cause of their seeing of God Whether way soever it be taken the effect of the prayer is that he may this day say Mass with that Charity and Devotion as that it may be profitable to the souls of the dead But both these may be done without any change in the souls For if his Mass prove so good the souls knew of it at their first going out of the body and were to have the effect of it in its due time meerly by the position of the Action this very day without any great Letters But to understand it as it must be understood to serve for his purpose that this very day the souls should receive bliss was a very uncivil request to expect Purgatory should be emptied for the saying of one Mass and surely takes away all excuse from the Pope why he likewise doth not give such Indulgences as at least once in the year to make a Goal-delivery of Purgatory that Christians might have as much priviledge as the Jews to lye but one twelve month in that place But specially this request befitted not St. Ambrose whom we shall have our
of the Abbot I confess I understand it not For had he had the apprehension that the torments of Purgatory be so great as Divinity tells us he could never methinks have with a Christian heart spoken those words It is now a good while since our brother who is departed remains in torments of fire and therefore we must shew him some charity As who should say I am content he hath suffer'd the pains of Purgatory for one month nay two for so long it was before he designed him to be released Imagine he had caused him to be rack'd or impal'd so long would not all the Christian World have abominated the cruelty What conceit then had he of Purgatory that would let his Brother burn in that cruel fire so long without shewing him any Charity I would to God your Divine had told us where we might find that Vindication o◠the Book he speaks of For the more I consider it the more unworthy it seems to me to be our great Doctour and savour more of the Monk then of the Pope Though besides he tells us that this story hapned three years before his writing and Baronius tells that the Book was written in the fourth year of St. Gregory's Popedome at which time St. Gregory could not be in his Monastery Nor do I think Baronius can rattle Canus for this opinion then since he held it himself in his eighth Tome and revoked it in his ninth Therefore he may have patience with one who falls into the Errour into which himself fell before 9. Let us omit that ridiculous opinion of excommunicating souls in Purgatory and answer the question he puts what any Judicious Catholick can say to the story Which is that the Authour of this Book sheweth no such exact inspection into every circumstance as that any man should be bound to believe that he could not be deceived either in his Judgment or in his narration as that truly Copiosus knew not of the saying of the Masses And I wish you to note your Divine's advice he gives that when the Authour makes this Argument that concordante visione cum Sacrificio res apertè claruit he speaks like a Doctour Is this Tradition or Scripture or Councils upon the which Doctour's proceed or a common and ordinary prudence by which every man conducts his private business 10. There follow two stories out of Venerable Bede written as an Historian should write and as it was worthy of his Learning and Wisdome The first is nothing to the Alledger's Purpose being but of the profiting of the Mass to the dead which is the position common to us both That which he chiefly takes notice of is this word delivery or loosing as if we held the souls were never to be deliver'd or that their delivery came not to pass by prayers and other good works So that this being agreed on and that there is no specification of time there is nothing particular in this story but that many who heard this story were devoutly inflamed in faith to wit to pray for the dead by which we understand that this story was the occasion of their apprehension of suddain delivery which hath no other ground then the parallelling of the loosing of his fetters to the help in Purgatory which every man would guess of according to the principles he was before imbued with So that both the effect is common to both opinions and the ground every ones application of the Miracle to a spiritual effect which they saw no otherwise then in a corporeal allegory But your Divine explicates inflamed in faith which as it lyes signifies no more then that they grew fervent towards good life to signifie that they had recieved this faith from the beginning which seeing there is no ground for it in the Authour is but a kind of a corruption of the Text by the Divines addition to it 11 The later story of Drithelmus hath one circumstance that favours your Divines opinion but the very same words have a blot to mar it that is what you◠Divine I doubt will acknowledg to be a flat Heresy I mean that these words all shall come to Heaven in the day of Judgment include some who have no Obstacle of Sin to wit those in the fourth place So that he affirms them not to go to Heaven as soon as purged against the Council of Florence and Benedictus his Bull. Whence by the Rule that no Revelations are to be admitted which contain any thing inconsonant to Faith this Revelation is to be rejected not so far as concerns venerable Bede who truly relates what Drithelmus not onely reported but truly thought But that he Drithelmus was some way deluded either because the Vision was a natural effect of forgoing thoughts or that he mistook himself in the rehearsal or some such like cause whereof the contingency of sublunary causes furnish us with store I pray take notice also that the works of the living help many to be freed before the day of Judgment be the words of the Angel not of Venerable Bede narrative not doctrinal Whence you may see this Divine continues still his practice of proving earnestly that which is not in controversy and saying little or nothing of that which is the true difficulty SIXTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his tenth Chapter Of the Nature and Certainty of private Revelations The rare Spright in the Jesuits House at Vienna His Relations for what in them concerns the Alledger's purpose found to be in likelihood what himself intitles them Stories 1. IN his tenth Chapter we must launch into the Ocean of Revelations for after once by the foregoing Relations they grew into fashion every Spiritual body had of them either truly or at least put upon him Nay this very day there want not spiritual directours which profess a kind of skill in such a space of time to bring their Ghostly Children to Extasies and Revelations And who doubts but that if a Devout soul of her self subject to those passions which Galen and other Physicians call Extases or Enthusiasms light into the Government of a Ghostly Father delighted with admirable accidents both their thoughts being continually busied upon spiritual matters the Ghostly Father having such a pitch of Divinity as to correct in his Ghostly Child's apprehensions what is plainly naught and contrary to Faith and Christian life both being constantly conceited that God uses to discover extraordinary verities to those who much converse with them who I say can doubt but many relations of wonderfull sights must needs proceed from them nay many times of things which verily fall out as they see them as all Heathen Histories recount some which hapned so as Philosophers teach us by a secret combination of the soul with outward causes amongst which the Divine Providence mingles it self to work its proper ends 2. But your Divine and I frame about these two propositions seeming contrary yet so well agreeing that one good conclusion
alone knows but it seems rational to think that a very private good cannot exact them but onely such which either singly or in multitude concur to a Publick Good Other circumstances which prayers made by Faith may require to be heard may be supply'd by the subtle twisting of causes by the Divine providence unpenetrable by us which fulfill the desires of weak Persons who with great Faith demand the help of God Howsoever this is the main Principle that God never does such actions but when they are to be known and to govern men by perswasion Out of which it follows That whensoever such Actions have not connatural ways to be known and manifested they ought not to be supposed to be done but that God proceeds according to the course of natural second causes Nor must it be omitted that even in these miraculous Actions God proceeds more according to Nature in general then in the others For this being the main point of Nature to bring Man to Bliss conformably to his nature that is by the way of Perswasion what is most conformable to Perswasion is most conformable to the chief part of Nature that is to Mankind in the greatest effect which is in ordering him immediately to Bliss 7. Hitherto my Principles have been somewhat abstracted yet necessary to be known and taken purely either out of faith or out of evident and confessed natural Truths concerning man's nature The following Principles will be more close to our subject 8. The sixth therefore is that a Sin is an action against Reason that is against the Nature of Man and therefore hurtfull to him first in soul the which it most principally corrupts next in Body both according to his internal faculties and many times also in his external and vegetative qualities Thirdly if it be an external act it prejudices Man-kind that is his Neighbours either in their souls by Scandal and evil Example or also in their Bodies or Fortunes and out of these Considerations the Sinner remains subject to Satisfaction towards himself which consisteth in the reparation of the damages done to himself towards the Church and towards the civil Government As for the damages of his Soul if he repairs them not with penance and good works he goeth thorough the violence of his affection sinfull into the next world and there suffers the sorrows and contradictions which follow distracted affections As for the damages of his inward Bodily powers those breed in him or increase in him either more sinfull actions or at lâ—ast greater strife betwixt the rational and the material part and if they be not remedied in this world cause the disposition of the parting soul to be worse and imperfecter then it should be and so subject to ill effects in the next world As for the other damages to himself or his Neighbours unless he hath the will to repair them he doth not quit the sin as is manifest in the case of Restitution But if he do what lyes in his power and truly is not negligent they hurt him not in the next world But all Negligence and Tepidity is carry'd into the next World in quality of a sinfull disposition and so accrues to the punishment due to the sin 9. The seventh Principle is that by Gods order all the evils which follow sin either by its proper nature or by the orders of Ecclesiastical and Civil Government are ordained by God to be punishments of that sin and therefore whosoever by way of penance doth prevent the punishments which other ways would fall upon him by this order of God doth plainly extinguish the dueness of the pains as St. Zacchaeus when he payd four double of all that he had wronged any man quitted the score of what he had offended human nature civilly He that did willingly undergo the Penitential Canons or like a Holy Mary Magdalene or Mary the Aegyptian did retire to a voluntary penance did satisfy the Church And those who have perfect Contrition satisfy for all the defects of the soul and her interiour powers in the body I find it is a clear case that he who leaveth nothing due to any of these parties hath satisfy'd for all the pains they can exact of him 10. The eighth Principle is that Gods Justice may be taken either for the vertue of Justice in himself or for the effect it hath in its creatures If it be taken for this later it consists in this that every creature hath that which is fitting to him in respect of its proportion to the rest of the world and its situation and order in it Therefore it is clear that he who satisfies for his sins as it is explicated in the former Principle doth absolutely satisfy Gods Justice in this sence But if you take Gods Justice as Justice signifies a vertue in him then to satisfy Gods Justice adds to the former explication that the satisfaction the man does is that which God by the vertue of Justicâ— exacts to have done the which because it is that which the repentant sinner has done it is clear that the sinner hath satisfy'd God also in that sence 11. The ninth Principle is that all and every good act done in state of Grace and proceeding from Charity is meritorious that is deserves a reward And the Reward may be the extrinsecal or intrinsecal good of the actour that is either a good to his own Person or to his Friends For who does an act of Charity increases Charity in himself and becometh more Holy then he was before and therefore a greater and better member of Gods Church And because we know that all things as the Apostle teaches be made for the Elect and do cooperate to their good we know that they are more made and do more cooperate to the good of them who are more just and more Saints Hence it comes that God orders by his ordinary Providence for it is not an infallible rule that the friends of the just man fare better because he is Just and and so the just man by being just merits not onely for his own Person hut also for others Again because God doth this in respect of the desire of the just Person whether that desire be actual or onely in preparation of heart this which we call meriting is also obtaining or impetrating And because what is merited or impetrated may be either addition of good or diminution of evils when it is diminution of evils it is called Satisfaction Wherefore the same Action by the same vertue is meritorious impetratory and satisfactory I know some scruple at saying one man can deserve for another taking that to be the property of Christ but I see the Fathers use the word merit freely in this sence and therefore I do not scruple to do the same Wherefore I do not put these three Words to signify three Qualities of the Action but one quality according as it is related to divers Causes or Effects 12. Hitherto you have read
the explication and deduction of my opinion and I do not think my Adversary will quarrel at much of this not that I think them to be his opinions but because partly he knows them to be the opinions of other Divines and partly they are so rational that any sensible man will condemn him at first sight Now therefore it is time to lay down the Adversary's opinion as I apprehend it leaving him all liberty to explicate himself in what I shall miss in at his own pleasure 13. You must know therefore that the Scriptures preach the Doctrin I have lay'd down minutely and Philosophically in few and Metaphorical terms They represent you God like a Man-Law-giver tell you that he hath lay'd up fire for those who will not obey in the next world My Adversaries take this as a word and a blow and conceive that Sin is an Action to which punishment is due of its own nature and that God should not be just if he did not bestow it on the sinner so that they put the relation between sin and punishment and both them to God nor will they hear that this follows out of the Order of Causes which are set for the carrying of Man-kind to Heaven that there may be a proportion natural of the sin and punishment but that God appoints what punishment he thinks best After this they put that the three conditions or names of the Vertue of every Action be three divers Vertues or Qualities whereof one concerns not the other or at least may be separable So that the Action may be meritorious and yet neither impetrate nor satisfy likewise may be impetrative but not satisfactory and may be satisfactory without impetration or merit And hence they say some Saints have had Actions both meritorious and impetrative that satisfy'd for nothing or little because they ow'd little or little pains were due to their offences Whence it comes that there be great heaps of Actions as they are satisfactory lay'd up in the Treasure of the Church and that the Pope hath the power to take what quantity seems to him fitting and to pâ—eâ—ent it to God foâ— the sâ—ns of living or dead and that he is bound to accept of it for the debts or pains of such men or souls whereas my saying is that the abundance of the merits of Christ and the Saints give the Church and the Pope all power and vertue to relaxe sins and punishments alwaies that are for the Churches good This I understand to be the substance of their opinion And now the Reader may be prepared to understand what shall be sayd on both sides SECOND DIVISION Containing an Answer to his seventeenth Chapter That we agree with others in the Torment and disagree onely in the Instrument Ours more connatural and â—it His self-contradiction and false imposing of unheld Doctrin When Baptism remits all pains and how a soul in Purgatory purgeth her self Several petty mistakes No place for merit in the next world That souls in Purgatory are Saints and may be pray'd to The effect of those Prayers which accelerate the day of Judgment Divers intolerable errours and weaknesses in Divinity 1. IN his seventeenth Chapter he professes to shew my Principles to be ill grounded and that there are bad sequels following from them And if that shâ—wing signify no more then saying so I beleeve fully he will do what he promises but if it be taken for proving I doubt he will fall very short of his Title The reason of my suspicion is because I find it so as far as I have hitherto look'd For example the first Principle of mine he makes that the venial affections which mens souls carry into the next world are cause to them of great griefs and torments of mind he farther says I put no other torments in Purgatory but the grief of this affection being joyned to the soul and the privation of bliss And I tell him on the other side that he puts no torments in Purgatory but that I put the very same I confess this proposition is a very bold one for I know not how absurdly he may talk of those pains but in hope he speaks as commonly his fellows do I venture upon this affirmation 2. To make which good I distinguish between the Torment and the Instrument of the torment as to say Burning is the torment Fire the instrument by which the torment is inflicted And then I make this discourse Let him look into the ordinary explication of Divines and see whether they put in Purgatory any other torments then Acts of the will which they call griefs Now the question being of souls in Purgatory that is holy Souls I cannot imagin they will put them to be of other objects then such as deserve grief as of their sins of the want of â—lory and such like Now all these I put in the souls of Purgatory It is clear then then that I put the same torments in Purgatory that he doth not one excepted The difference then is onely that I do not put the same Instruments of torment which he does but I put connatural Instruments he strange and forced Instruments I the nature and eminency of a spirit he a dead body which cannot be imagin'd how it can hurt a soul. Ask which is the stronger Agent and fitter to torment the soul it is clear that her own nature is infinitely more strong infinitely more fit Why then doth not my way satisfy him Because he does not understand that the words of the Scripture are Metaphorical because he understands not what signifies Gods Justice because the Bells ring in his ears that the Councils signify other punishments then their words express He vaunts the Councils be against us but when he declares them he cannot find one word beyond what is common to both opinions 3. In his third and fourth Number he would perswade his Reader that we fall into his own Errour of denying Purgatory because we say these purging torments end not until the day of Judgment and hath not so much reflexion as to remember that there is no place for Purgatory when purging is done As long as we profess Purgatory we must profess not purged This is the Doctrin perpetually before his eyes in the Council of Florence and Pope Benedict and he looks so a squint that he cannot see what is plainly before him that as soon as purging is turned to purged the soul is in bliss About what then doth he quarrel with me because I say the ill affection is in Purgatory all the while the soul is there and yet he says the same Let him reflect upon these his own words N. 4. Whereas Purging cleansing c. signifies the taking away of something which contains the nature of a stain or blemish If this be so then clearly something containing the nature of a stain or blemish is in the soul as long as the soul is in Purgatory Then he unjustly accuses me of saying
and pains which he suffer'd Out of which Doctrin depends a very ill consequence that not onely Christ's fancy but even his concupiscible part was subject to tentation and passion Now if your Divine doth not hold this why doth he apply it here to shew that the constancy of the Souls in Purgatory cannot abate their sufferings from extern causes and turn them to pleasures Another pitiful answer he adds that 〈◊〉 Torments of Purgatory do not cause the entrance to Heaven but onely remove what hinders it As if he that destreth Heaven were not glad to have the hinderances taken away 3. In his third Number he pâ—etends to answer the improportion betwixt corporeal pains and spiritual offences but by his great skil in missing of the question his first Answeâ— returns the question upon us as if we held that some are burned more grievously or longer then others at the Day of Judgment The which is a pure mistake of our Doctrin as I have often repeated His second Objection is of the bodies of the blessed and damned the which he mistakes also thinking those pains and glories to be immediatly proportioned to the Acts of Vertue or Vice which they are not But the immediate proportions are of the Acts of the blessed or damned Souls in their lives and in their ending states Now as these Acts are stronger so do they diffuse into their bodies different qualities and hence it followeth that the bodies are proportionably rewarded not that the good or ill of the body hath any proportion to the merits or demirits but because the dispositions of the bodies follow 〈◊〉 of the final acts and dispositions of the souls which have proportion 4. He presses Scripture First out of the Apoâ—alyps where there is no mention of corporeal and spiritual but meerly of demerits and punishments Secondly from Job Chap. 〈◊〉 desiring that his offences and punishments â—…ight be weighed in a pair of Sâ—ales What shall I say If your Divine were asked whether the least venial sin be not worse then all the Torments Job suffered he would say questionless Yes What then doth he mean to make of this saying of Job That Job was a Fool to make such a proposition Surely in his way no less can be understood But that we may not onely confute simplicity but deliver true Doctrin we must tell him that Job cast his eyes upon the Providence God useth over the good and bad in this World to shew to his unpitiful friends that those harms were not come upon him for his excess of misbehaviour beyond others but out of God's special pleasure So that this example is nothing at all to our question since it speaks nothing but of God's external Providence in this World 5. Like to this is his next out of Levititus where to several sins several offerings were parallel'd the which it seems he would have to be understood as if the gifts were the true worth of the offence which I believe our Casuists and Ghostly Fathers will not allow of Another Objection is from the Proposition made by our Divines to the Greeks and by them not admitted which in great words he vents saying All the Latinâ— Church stands accused of folly Here the force of the Objection lyes in the word folly a worthy Objection as the most of his are For no man doubts but every speculative proposition which is false may be in rigour called folly but civility gives this name onely to such falsities as are avoided by the most of that Art or Science to which the discovery of such follies appertain Now to make an Argument this Proposition must be termed folly though in the same breath he professes few do avoid it He repeats divers other Authorities which as far as we got the books we examin'd in the places in which they were first urged He adds the practice of Indulgences But every man knows they are proportioned to the Poenitential Canons not the Laws of Purgatory when it is sayd so many days or years pardon and for the plenary delivery it hath been heretofore discussed At last he comes to reason and there he tells us that God looks not on the Physical Nature of the Acts but upon the Moral But what this Moral signifies he declares not Now according to my skill I must profess that I take it to be a meer nonsensical expression when it is apply'd to spiritual acts For an act of the will is Morality it self and how much it is physically harmful to the soul so much is it morally naught and how far profitable so much is it morally good so that to distinguish moral and physical in intrinsecal acts of the will is but to give a bob instead of a bit a name instead of a thing a covered mess without any meat in it 6. In his fourth Number your Divine as it seems feels himself in some streights for he crys for room and not without effect for he hath found a matter of twenty Leaves to examin one discourse yet I fear he has not made room in his brain for truth which is so elevated that a fancy stuft with corporeal imaginations and the sounds of unexamin'd words can afford it no place Nevertheless I must try to break in if not into his yet into our common Auditours apprehension Si qua fata aspera rumpam 7. In his fourth and fifth Number he explicates my Arguments for the most part truly whether sufficiently or no our encounter must declare Number sixth he begiâ—â— his hattery with telling us that he hath shew'd it to be contrary to the Doctrin both of the Church and of our own profession Ch. 17. N. 12. and 13. Where our answer also is given as far as depends not from this place The substance of it is that a present relief of the dead by prayers is neither the expectation of the Church or understanding Persons of their own opinion who all teach we must remit circumstances and substance also to Gods high Counsels and will And besides it is declared how the unchangeableness of spirits hinders not that the souls have relief in Purgatory and that Relief at the very time of prayers is contrary to the very sence of their own Divines 8. After this your Divine is equivocated something strangely not distinguishing between the duration of a Spirit and our measuring of that duration For no man disputes this with him whether we apprehend the duration of Angels or Souls as we do the durations of Bodies and so say that such a thing or action endured so many days weeks moneths or years But whether their proper duration be conformable to our apprehensions or that our apprehensions be as to the truth a weak babling fit for us but far below the truth of the thing and no more like it then a Body is to a Spirit So he need not trouble himself whether our expressions be by true time for they are by that same time by which we measure our
the Angels were not created in Beatifical Vision and in the eleventh that it is against Scripture to say the Devils were not once in state of Grace and not bad but seeing he cites nothing for it but the Authority of St. Thomas sure he does not mean to make it undenyable seeing St. Thomas's authority is so professedly deny'd by 〈◊〉 own Divines And as for the places of Scripture seeing they are Allegorical to build so nice a Verity as of the duration of one instant upon corporal similitudes and comparisons is a weak Argument and as freely deny'd as affirmed For the opinion it self St. Austin and Scotus justify it from being erroneous or impossible though where there are no other Arguments brought against it it is superfluous to bring in Auxiliary forces 5. In the thirteenth Number he urges the Illumination of Angels and in the twelfth their speaking to one another which both are explicated in my sacred Institutions To. 2. l. 2. Lectione 8. and are too subtle questions to divulge in vulgar Languages He presses farther that the souls in Limbo just upon good Friday began their Beatifical Vision though the Bodies rose not untill Sunday and that it was not true upon Maundy-Thursday that St. Baptist's soul was in Paradice but on good Friday it was If you are perswaded he hath some special Revelations you may beleeve him I must know some better proof before I be of his mind 6. In his sixteenth Number he tells you that Moyses soul spake with our Saviour Mat. 27. Luke 9. but the Scripture speaks of Moses not of his soul And St. Thomasâ—ill â—ill tell you that a soul can govern no body but its own and so will make you think it was an Angel in the â—â—keness of Moyses that spake to Christ. In his seventeenth he tells us that the Devil did contend wâ—â—h St. Michael about Moyses his Body He should have said scolded for otherwise contention may be some outward action about the Body it self and so nothing to us Likewise he tells us that Dives spake to Abraham by a new Act. Indeed there is mention that Dives had a tongue for otherwise we should have thought that story to be parabolical and that there needed no new words to veâ—fâ—y it Again he tells us the Devil had a new act by which he heard the â—…itth of Enâ—… call for Samuels soul. This it is to be well acquainted with the Devil so that he can tell what passes in his very breast Whereas simple Divines like my self should have thought that it was not the Devil but a good Angel which represented Samuel in that passage Yet this will not serve me for he knows likewise what passes in the breasts of Angels and so he tells us how Raphael by a new act did offer Tobâ—as his prayers to God But he should have expressed whether it was in a dish or a censer that he offered them and likewise with what kind of rope or â—â—ain he tyed up the Devil Also what bustling there was for one and twenty days between the two Angels of Persia and Israel For I that think all these expressions to be allegorical and some of them at least done by outward and corporal actions find no necessity of new acts in the Angels to any of these effects no more then we are bound to put new acts in God Almighty when he is said to do so many new things of which the Scripture is full As the the Son of God to be incarnated to create every day souls of new to speak to our Saviour out of a cloud and many such other things 7. His Tediousness in multiplying divers particulars of the same kind to which the same solution that all the same things or the like are verify'd of God without any novelty in his acts has quite wearied me yet I cannot omit his last Argument because it hath something particular He says then that the Devils sin did at first please them but now these affections be their torturers therefore he thinks they are repented and have changed their acts and adds Mark how you contradict your selves Mainly without doubt seeing we say that the Devils were damned in the veâ—… instant of their creation that is had all the same sorrows even during that complacence and that they have still the same complacence with which they sinned and that the very sinning is continued untill this very day which is a Doctrin often repeated By this you see how sleevelesly he puts me to trouble and to so much loss of time His most solid Arguments are the Testimony of St. Thomas in verity a great Doctour yet such an one that it was never taken for a fault with modesty to refuse his sayings Other Arguments are taken out of Tenets for which are pleaded no more then some criticisms of the word solus or some supposed Antonomasia excluding if they be not well looked to and helped out by additions known truths as when the knowledg of chances to come or the secrets of our hearts is so verify'd of God as to exclude Prophets unless you put in that they or Devils and Angels do not this by their natural power which is not in the Text Other Arguments rely upon the applying of Allegories to Angels as if they were proper speeches And whereas to a reasonable Divine this cannot be unknown that we misapprehend Angels and their Actions by our usual conceits and words as we do likewise God yet our Divine presseth the same things which are to be solved in God Almighty as rigorously to prove a true change as if he saw with his eyes all that past in their breasts And then cryes out he hath super abundantly demonstrated that in which the main difficulty lyes when as he has not brought one word fit to come out of a Divines mouth in way of being a proof Which revâ—…eless I do not impute unto him as a fault for it is not his fault but of that pitifull Topical counterfeiting of Divinity used by them amongst whom he was instructed 8. Now would it pity any Scholler to see him when he has caught the word time by the end as apply'd to that which hath no other reason to be called time but because we have no other names then of corporal things to design out spiritual qualities whereof though we want the true notions yet we are forced to speak so to play with the words and insist upon the words of true time shewing plainly he understands neither what time is nor what a word to be true means For as for time he will tell us that the motion of the Heavens are not true time N. 3. but that our time is measured by those motions which is most unlearnedly spoken Again he puts that there is an extrinsecal measure of Angels intellections in one part of which a proposition is true and in another false Again he tells us that Angels are not above time by their acts as if the
Yet I may deliver one Doctrin which I know not whether he has reflected on or no which is that before Christ Miracles belonged to the Ordinary Government of the Church by God Almighty since Christ and his Apostles time these are become parts of Extraordinary Providence This I speak by reason of his great insisting upon pains in the Old Testament which followed not connatural to the sins For no small part of the motives proposed to the Jews were temporal Commodities which are propounded unto Christians meerly as accidents not to be sought for according to that saying Quâ—rite primum regnum Dei caetera adjicientur vobis And St. James tells us Siquis indiget sapientia postâ—let a Deo dabitur ei but for any thing else he does not tell us so but we know they are sometimes granted and sometimes denyed But in the Old Law the Prophets fore-told both punishments and rewards and they failed not Now that sort of Government is turned into a better and we have order to govern our selves by Reason and Faith is given us to help and strengthen our Reason that it may reach the motives propounded to us out of the state of the next World and to expect rewards and punishments there which spring out of our lives here according to the words of the Apostle that Afflictions here do work glory in Heaven and the other that their works follow them And this to those who use understanding Divinity is signified by the word meritorious After this he makes a repetition of some Arguments many times told over and at last Number 12. he tells us that he never sayd that after that God is in part pacified there still remains in him a boyling of his fury not quite allayed But says he we speak of a most just and rational proceeding in God c. What mood the good man was in when he wrote this I know not For the words express as if he meaned that before God is in part pacified there were in God a boyling of fury and not a just and rational proceeding 6. I told you somewhat of the signification of this word Meritorious but I fear I must eat it again For in his 24. Chapter Number second he tells us that when Nature by Death hath put a man out of this World she hath put his soul out of her reach c. So that now in this state the nature of a meritorious cause occurs to be consider'd by Divinity and Aristotle his Philosophy must stand in great part out of doors Farewel then poor Aristotle and his Philosophy Yet because he is a Philosopher he will ask a cause why he should be turn'd out of doors Let us then look into this Mystery If that a Work-man hath bestow'd a days work upon another man's ground he receives at night what according to the manner of living in that Countrey and the quality of the work is esteemed equal to his labour If a Souldier in a Battle or Siege did eminent service towards the winning of the â—attle or Town his General consults what is fitting to stir up others to dare the like and the Souldier receives it And both the Work-man and the Souldier are sayd to have deserved their rewards Another Work-man for example a Watch-maker makes a Watch and hath it and the fruit of it to know the hour of the day but is not sayd to deserve the Watch. And another Souldier goes out upon his enemies and getteth a good booty and is not sayd to have deserved it What is the reason of this variety of language Why the later used the natural causes of the effect which by their own force produc'd it The other got not this particular reward by a natural but by a rational means that is by pleasing one in whose power it was to bestow it upon him If this be well discoursed then also concerning Souls rewards if they be such as follow not out of the force of the disposition which their works have made the Soul to have in the next world but God by his arbitrary will determins to give them what he thinks best out of the General Principles by which he governs the World these rewards will be sayd properly to be deserved On the other side if the rewards are necessarily consequent to the disposition on which the Soul departs out of her body they will be properly called Effect improperly to be deserved 7. Applying this to our case that is to the pains of Purgatory let us see what is to be said And first I ask what pains doth the fire of Purgatory inflict upon the Souls I suppose your Divine will answer Griefs and Sorrows The next question are the griefs of Objects that deserve to be grieved for as it is fit for Holy Souls to have I suppose he will again say Yes The third question Would not she of her self have all those griefs I think he cannot chuse but say Yes and not put a new fault in the Souls not to have a grief which they ought to have The fourth Question is If she have this grief is it not a punishment layd upon her by God notwithstanding that it proceeds from their natural inclination which God gave them amongst other Reasons to punish their faults I know not what he can deny The fifth Question What then does the fire do make the same over again or increase it The former answer is absur'd To the later we ask the sixth Question Is not the grief of a holy and separate Soul proportionable to the offence or ill it did in this World If it be God's Justice requires no greater If it be not a probable cause must be rendred why a less sorrow would have quitted the sin in life and now such an excess will not Or else for any thing that I see Aristotle will claim a share for his Reasons in the next VVorld as well as in this which if your Divine will grant us we will in silence pass over his two first N. N. 8. In his third Number he cuts out a new piece of work to his friends which is that an act of contrition which they put in the first instant of it's nature taketh away pain as well as guilt therefore say we it must take away the pâ—ins of Purgatory if it hath there power to take away the guilt as in this World it usually does and would do if that act were here done seeing it springs out of the whole Heart and power of the Soul His first answer is that Bellarmin hath say'd much to this difficulty which your Divine passes over with a Besides and upon so good an authority I cannot doubt but that it deserves to be lay'd aside His second Solution is out of Saint Thomas which neither your Divine does stand to nor as it seem Saint Thomas himself making no mention of it in a later work where he handleth the question largely Wherefore omitting it let â—…me to the third
which he says to be â—…isfactory Which I believe if he takes 〈◊〉 comparatively for of the three it is the least faulty but if he means truly satisfactory he must first clear me a doubt or two before I can be of his mind First in it is supposed that we must necessarily say that Venial Sins are remitted after this life Which is true but unless the time be specify'd it may be at the Day of Judgment and so nothing to our present question What he adds that the remission of sin doth take away all impediment of going to Heaven but abateth nothing of their pains I do not understand for three Reasons First because it is onely sayd and no other cause rendred but because the state of merit ceaseth after this life But why to take away the guilt of sin and the impediment of going to Heaven is not the effect of merit is not declared and seems that it cannot be deny'd Secondly there is no reason given why it abates nothing of the Souls pain For why should this be accompted a merit more then the other Seeing it increaseth not Charity nor the reward of Charity and is but a removâ—ns prohibens as well as the other Why then is one admitted the other rejected Thirdly since the Council of Florence it is not to be tolerated to say that to a Soulâ—…ins â—…ins any impediment of going to Heaven And this answer puts the Soul to be pure 9. Another difficulty I have about that Proposition We must hold that in the life to come there is no essential change in the will to wit for that which belongs to the increase of Charity First about the Truth of it For I doubt not but by the Beatifical Vision whensoever it begins Charity is increased and likewise that at the re-union of our Bodies Charity and the reward of it shall both increase Neither do I take it to be spoken consequenter to put many acts of Charity and not put them to increase the habit though you put the acts to be of the same degree of intension For we cannot deny but one and one makes two and that two are more then one and ad hominem if the same pain put in a new time makes the pain greater much more two acts of Charity are more Charity If it be answered the time of merit is pass'd I reply then you must put no more merit But with one breath to put merit and cry the time of merit is passed is to oblige us to believe Opposites 10. A third difficulty I have how it is prov'd that in Purgatory there is an act of Charity with detestation of a Venial sin inconsistent with the affection of Venial sin For onely to say it is so is not to answer the Argument but to repeat your conclusion or ask the question It is confess'd by both parties that Charity not onely in habit but also in act stands with venial sin for otherwise every time we make an act of Charity we should revoke our affection to Veâ—ial Objects St. Thomas's known Doctrine is that a will once taken resolutely in the next World is unchangeable and truly that one act remains until a contrary be put out We must therefore either say that the Soul hath a new deliberation at her going out of the body or that she keeps the same she had in the body until she return to it If we put a new deliberation it may be as well of the End as of Venial Objects and so the Soul shall change her state of Salvation after Death and all place of merit will not be deny'd It follows then that there can be no act in the Soul incompossible to the affection of venial sin until Resurrection Wherefore I doubt not but to a man of a not-preoccupated Judgment this Answer will be so far from being satisfactory that it will manifestly appear that the holders of your Divine's Opinion as much as they cry up that there is no room for merit with one breath so much they pull it down by their inconsequent positions on the other side Besides another thing which in a Divine is a manifest defect that they render no rational cause of the impotency to merit which in our opinion is most manifest 11. In his sixth number he falls upon another question not properly against us but amongst his own Divines which I must a little rip up because it so clearly shews the huge weakness of their Doctrin and Doctours The Question arises out of this difficulty that it seems inconsequent that if the Souls in Purgatory may be helped by others they cannot be helped by themselves And it is as true an absurdity as it seems to be and rises out of the denying of our Opinion He seems to give an answer by saying that they have deserved in this life time to be helped in the next World But this doth rather aggravate the difficulty then solve it For it shews they are helpable and then the difficulty is greater why they cannot help themselves For to say it is precisely because God will not give them leave to help themselves is to call God unreasonable and wilful and cruel instead of playing the Divine and giving an accomâ—t why to do so is conformable to God's Goodness and Government But to fall to the Question Some of their Doctours seem to deny to the Souls of Purgatory power to pray which how it can fall into a Christian's head much less a Divine's I am not capable Are not the Acts of Faith Hope and Charity prayers Will any body deny them these Are not the acknowledgment of their sins and the desire of forgiveness prayers Do they doubt of this Can they wish the relaxation of torments from men and not from God How absurd a Position is this that God whose whole endeavour is to bring mens hearts to him should send abstracted Souls from himself to men The very absurdity of this saying to an impartial man would condemn the whole Opinion And yet more that they can impetrate that the Living may pray for them nay impetrate Graces for the Living but none for themselves whereas we are taught that God grants us easilier for our selves then for other men These sayings are so empty of all Divinity and Solidity that depending as they do meerly from this uncertain and unlikely ground of the Souls present delivery from Purgatory they make it like to themselves uncertain and unlikely also 12. In his seventh Number he tells us that perhaps God was mov'd by his Justice to ordain that the pains due in the other life be not ordinarily remitted but by satisfaction made either by themselves or others An excellent piece of Divinity to ground so substantial a point as whether the Souls in Purgatory pray for themselves or no which every man of any Judgment cannot doubt but that they can no more cease from doing then they can cease from loving themselves from hoping and desiring Beatitude and from
to all this that the very procuring of Masses is the greatest Act of Charity that a Lay-man can do speaking of exteriour acts and regularly For the procuring of Masses discreetly performed and of its own nature works not onely that Priests be maintain'd but also makes them devout and good The goodness of the Priest is the very health and happiness of the Parish The Spiritual good of the Parish is the greatest good that speaking of regular and not extraordinary heroical Works is found in Man's life therefore the procuring of Masses is the greatest extern Charity that any private Lay-man can do when it is done with prudence and discretion 18. I believe the rest of his Chapter is already answered For we scoff not at the multitude of Masses but at the indiscretion of using them and procuring them Nor do your Arguments perswade us that Rich-men are in any thing in better state then the Poor not onely for accidental considerations but for the very substance The Rich may do greater-acts of Charity but not acts of greater Charity they may relieve other Bodies and Souls more then poor men but poor men have as much power to help their own as the richest The Rich may procure more to pray for them but the Poor can pray for themselves as well as the Rich which is the certain and essential good And if you ask me whether these be not great enticements of Avarice I answer no Avarice but keeps its goods until death these men for the most part do their Alms while they live which makes no Avarice though they should procure Riches for such an end the which I believe is rare Our Wise-men have a saying I will make my own Hands my Executours and my Eyes my Overseers Whose Estates permit them this is their way for this perfects the heart extirpates or moderates the love of Temporalities in them which is the main good But the hope of good by what Nature takes away from them leaves the desires as great as ever to the last gasp St. Austin advances an Opinion that he who fears God and behaves himself like a Christian onely upon the fear of Torments in the next World is no good Christian and shall not reach to Heaven He says it is the love of Heaven and not the fear of Hell makes a good Christian. I will not interpose my verdict in this Controversie but will not he say the like of those who onely for fear of the pains of Purgatory part with their Goods to the Church when they cannot keep them when by Nature they are their Heirs Goods not theirs Will he not say it is no act done out of Charity and therefore doth them no good And as for the prayers of them who pray for the Donour besides the uncertainty of whether how and when they shall have effect let us but reflect that we cannot doubt but that if prayers can do the effect they cannot want the prayers of all Saints and Angels which must needs be more acceptable then ours But the difference is that they pray for nothing but what they know shall take effect by their prayers because they see what God's Providence and determination bears We pray blindly and many times for that which is not decreed by the Eternal Providence and so cannot be granted And this many times thorough concupiscence like to St. James's phrase Petitis non accipitis quia petitis ut in concupisâ—…s vestris insumatis So do we through natural desires or love without sufficient resignation and so give cause on our own parts to be deny'd 19. In his eleventh Number he answers the abuse of multiplying Priests to ferve in dead Masses to the devotion of the people by saying that if the Decrees of the Council of Trent were observed notwithstanding these Opinions Priests would not be over multiplyed The which as I will not contest so I may well say your Divine doth not consider that the maintaining of these Opinions is the cause why the Orders of the Councils cannot be observ'd thorough the importunity of credulous People which leaves not Bishops free to look to the observation of the Holily instituted Canons chiefly to thiâ— Incerta etiam quâ— speciâ— falsi laborant evulgari ac tractari non permittant The Council forbids uncertain opinions to be handled before the People your Divine teaches the People to leave the Ancient and Apostolical devotion to pray for a happy Day of Resurrection to fix their thoughts upon the uncertainty of being freed from imaginary pains which the Holy St. Catharine of Genua commended by my Adverâ—aries for one of the most illuminate Saints of our Age says they would not be freed from but by satisfying God's Justice Towards the end he cites us a speech of Gâ—nadius to say that it whatsoever that relates for the doth not declare iâ— but I think t is praying for the Dead was not decreed that the Priests might thereby gain their maintenance but for the good of the Dead which is to be understood with discretion as not to deny the one but to prefer the other For seeing St. Paul and God himself tells us that the Priests are to live by the service of the Altar it would be a very unadvised speech to deny the maintenance of Priests to be a secondary intention of the Church though the first and chiefest were the good of the Dead 20. He begins his last Chapter with telling us how inviâ—cible Arguments he has brought out the practice of the Church which makes me think the good man means honestly and verily perswades himself he hath done wonders His Arguments and my Answer may be compared together and the Reader thereupon give judgment As to what is particular in this Chapter in his second Number he not content with the translation made before him of those words Donum fac Remissionis himself mends it so Thy Pardons grant not to delay until the last accompting day Where he puts in the word last and in stead of saying Give Pardon he puts not to delay the Pardon The which though they leave the true sense yet they change the face of the speech and make shew as if until the very last day there were place for remission of which in the Latin there is no appearance but onely a desire of pardon while time is to wit in this life insinuating nothing whither after death there is place for Pardon until the Day of Judgment or no which his words make shew of such craft there is in dawbing 21. He seeks many ways of solving the plain prayers of the Church as saying the Church imagins this to be yet before the Soul is departed or that they are not spoken by the Dead but by him who prays And I cannot deny that if such explications be admitted to be the explications of men who proceed sincerely to understand the mind of the Church and not who seek to draw the words of the Church to their
own Errour any words may be so coloured As I remember my Master of Philosophy taught all to explicate Aristotle when he was against us by saying Aristoteles loquitur cum vulgo But if this be an unworthy practise let us see what his fourth Number offers us To wit that whereas we object to them how the whole face of the Churches prayers is directed to the Day of Judgment and not one word insinuated of remission of pains before that day which is an irrefragable testimony of the Churches meaning he seeks to retort the same Argument by saying Why does not the Church pray for the acceleration of the Day of Judgment To which we answer she does it perpetually For he that prays for good at the Day of Judgment prays for the Day of Judgment and he that prays for the Day of Judgments coming prays it may come as soon as possibly So that the Church prays perpetually for it when she prays for the Dead but their fixedness on their Opinion permits them not to see it 22. In his fifth Number he answers our Argument from Foundations for prayers until the Day of Judgment because those who made them were notoriously of their Opinion opposite to ours But we must expect more ground to believe that For such Foundations are sayd to be in France ever since the Children of Charles the Great 's time who were instructed by Alcuinus And therefore were of his and our English Saxon Opinion And later Foundations were made by the imitation of the former and though since the University of Paris got a great Vogue this new Opinion hath been amongst the Doctours yet it cannot be doubted but for a great while the Churches governed themselves by their anâ—ient Customs and by little and little admitted the Opinions of learned men Wherefore it is not to be admitted without proof that the Authours of perpetual Foundations proceeded out of an Opinion contrary to their practice He wonders how the Church should prefix a time to praying for the same soul. I answer by Revelation if she did accept of Opinions by private Revelations for why might not some Saint have a Revelation that no Soul lay in Purgatory more then 100 years as well as that such a Soul layd but three days What discretion of Prelates can provide that particular souls may have proportionable prayers I understand not for where there is not knowledg enough to found a ghess there discretion has no place 22. Here we might have made an End had not a saying of our Holy Bishop of Rochester stuck in his stomach I do not remember where I have made uâ—â— of that place But I less find to what purpose he brings it more then to frame an irreverent Interpretation of his own and impose it upon me and to take occasion to leave the Reader 's mouth season'd with a scandalous â—alumny againstâ— me as if that I favour'd Luther Whereas it is one of the greatest signs of Truth to be betwixt two opposite Errours Luther's and his and therefore no wonder if he cryes it sâ—ells of Luther's Doctrin as ever the middle Truth is wont to be calumniated by the extream Errours He repeats here that I deny the three Propositions he mention'd in his proof against me because I understand them like a Divine and not in his gross Market-way He tells us that supposing the Pope's Definitions be not infallible yet it is rashness not to admit such determinations and for so much he cites Veron But this â—olly to think Propositions and the like is of actions to be temerarious in common I have spoken of before In particular an Action is rash when it is not done upon good grounds But to say there cannot be good grounds to oppoâ—… a Proposition supposed to be false is beyond Logick As likewise it is against my Divinity to say that a true Proposition may have opposition to Principles solidly deduced from Fâ—… Which if it be not directly condemned in the Later an Council under Leo the tenth it is by consequence The words are these Sâ—…g that one truth is not contrary to another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all Propositions contrary to a truth known by Faith to be wholly false and do strictly coâ—… it not to be lawful to teach any otherwise And decree that all such as adhere to such Propositions are to be avoided and punished as Hereticks And so leaving him and the Divulgers of his Book this Bit to chaw upon I remit what is sayd on both sides to yours and all judicious Readers Judgments POSTSCRIPT SIR I have teceived the second part of Mr. M's remembrance to pray for the dead but to what purpose you sent it I do not know I cast my view over it and find it divided into two parts The one contains the Motives of praying for the dead the second â—…e Practise As to the first saving that he supposes his falsity for truth and the Divines imagination of the separable vertues of Satisfaction and Merit and Impetration in every charitable act which hath been sufficiently discoursed of his whole Doctrin is common to both opinions The proper Motives are contained in the three first Chapters in which there is no difference more then some applications of the same words diversly The seven following Chapters comprehend Motives common to all charitable actions and so unless it be in some considerable passages are common to all good books that exhort to any good work The five last Chapters lay forth a petty manner of devotion fit enough for weak souls and therefore not to be hindered What he says of Indulgences hath been twice answered in the book Some things there are in these last Chapters which deserve to be excepted against but because they require the declaration of some Principles of Devotion which I have not as yet explicated I hold it better to speak nothing then to speak without profit Those who understand any thing of devotion and perfection know that Charity is the end of it all and therefore know that those good acts whatsoever they be that increase Charity in our own souls are the best and that Charity is the love of God or of Bliss for so St. Thomas out of St. Austin defines Charity that it is motus Animi ad Deum ut fruendum The minds moving it self to the enjoyment of God Who then will understand what acts are best let him consider how much they advance this Love of God and whether he be onely a Christian or also a Directour let him select to his charge such actions as have the greatest power to make the soul he looks to more solid and fervent in the Love of God as of his last end For the substance of actions the nobler actions fit the nobler souls and fo are to be proposed unto them and as no body can doubt but it is better to hinder a soul from going to Purgatory and much more from going to Hell then to free it out of Purgatory so