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
that on their side can have no ground but Revelation this ungrounded Innovation is in matter of Revelation and we know onely Faith is the proper matter of Revelation Their opinion then is a piece of Faith as to the matter and should therefore have but hath no ground of Revelation 5. Your Divine replyes that he groundedly challenges also six hundred years before It is a folly to dispute this Question He speaks in supposition that he has layd solid grounds My answers are since made The two being compared men of wisdom and learning are to judge how solid his grounds are to make such a challenge upon He challenges us to shew one Authour who doth so much as by one Word insinuate that our opinion did grow to be more Universally received in the Church these last five hundred years then before it was A strange and shameless confidence Did not Odilo make it Universal in the Order of Cluny Did not the Pope command the Feast Did these make no more Universality See how many Revelations were before those days and how many since do all these signify no more Universality And this may serve untill his fourth Number all before being but the supposition of what he hath not done 4. In the fourth Number he tells us it cannot be deny'd but for these five hundred year all who have pray'd for the dead were instructed by their Ancestours to pray for the present either ease or delivery of the Dead Yet it is deny'd him that their Ancestours taught it them as likewise it is impossible to prove and improbable to beleeve that all were so taught We know Doctrins that are new first infect one part and then another and so by little and little get a popularity The reason why it easily attain'd to this is because the Corporality of those substances which we hold to be spiritual was long held in the Church nor is yet perfectly out I have heard men learned as they are generally called that is of much reading affirm that there were no simple substances but God and declare that this was the common opinion of the Fathers You see this opinion is very conformable to the apprehension of all who are not Metaphysicians And our opinion depends wholly of the Spirituality of Angels and Souls the which even those who follow follow but imperfectly For the nature of Science is to be attained by pieces and degrees so that we must not expect that all who hold the Soul and Angels to be Spirits should discourse of them as pure Spirits ought to be discoursed on St. Thomas took away proper Locality from them but is weakly followâ—d not onely by other Schools which are filled with Ubications but even in his own Now Immutability which Aristotle demoristrated of Spirits is not as yet accepted any thing commonly But if once it come to be thoroughly looked into it will be as well as Illocality and your Divines opinion of Purgatory as much rejected as the Corporality of Spirits is 7. To return to our purpose This apprehension of Corporal Torments and succession and parts in them being so natural to mans understanding also the ending of them was naturally apprehended as a thing conformable to the rest and so all this Doctrin when it began to be superadded to Tradition was received as conformable to it men not penetrating the consequences that followed out of the souls being a Spirit And otherwise seeing nothing contrary to Christian Piety before the excess came to be so great that it grew but a sport to deliver souls out of Purgatory This began to make men reflect and abhorring the excess to look into the causes of the mistake and to find it proceeded hence that some who ventur'd to meddle with Divinity without sufficiency in Philosophy in liew of explicating the Metaphorical words in which Scriptures and Fathers deliver Christian Doctrin that it may be common to learned and unlearned the which is the proper duty of a Scholastical Divine undertake to justify that the Metaphors and Allegories are to be understood according to the very bark of the Letter and to force the learned to have no other apprehensions then the unlearned have and so to understand Spiritual things corporeally and to cry out against them who seek to apply Incorporeal modifications to Incorporeal Substances So that the reason of the vulgarity of this opinion is because Animale is before Spirituale For what was deliver'd by the Apostles was onely that Prayers should be made for the dead You may note specially in St. Austin and St. Chrysostom that having much occasion to speak of Prayer for the dead they are earnest to report that this could not be unless some good arrived to the dead thereby but are as carefull not to tell any good in particular for fear of missing in what they had not found sufficient ground in Scripture 〈◊〉 declare Weaker men finding the question started resolved by the proportion to what they saw in human actions without reflecting upon what the Conditions of Incorporeal natures required and upon this apprehension follow'd the multitude of Visions and Revelations to confirm this position the which being coloured with two gratefull sightfullnesses Piety and Wonder easily got a great strength amongst the meaner sort of learned men and the multitude of the unlearned 8. In his fifth Number he presses that the Apostles taught the faithfull why they should pray for the dead and therefore he argues that motive must still remain in the Church I answer the Apostles taught them to pray for the dead to receive their reward at the day of Judgment as is beyond exception plain in St. Pauls prayer for Onesiphorus and abundance of Scripture and Fathers as may be read in my Treatise of Purgatory and is still conserved in the Church Offices 9. In his sixth Number he repeats the pressing of the Bulls so fully answered and of the cause of the keeping the Holy Commemoration of the dead and this holds to the end of the Chapter Onely I must note himself confesses Number the sixth that the Popes Decrees are not of the point it self but of others necessarily connexed with the point So that if his discourse do fail him there is no prohibition even by his own words of our tenet and out of what we have said it is easy to see it doth fail him And by consequence that all the ground they have is but a pious credulity 10. In his 16 Chapter and the last of his proving discourse for afterwards follow the answers to my Grounds he professes to deliver the fundamental reason of his opinion And I suppose in his first Paragraph he would say if he did dare speak out that he had none Yet not to scandalize his party he must make a shew and so in the midst of his third Number he saith our opinion is Paradoxical which is all the reason I can find And as for that I must remit him untill we explicate our
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
an unknown Authour 1. WE are now come to the so often promised two and twentieth Chapter and hope to have the happiness to see the Mysteries worthy of so great expectation but they ly not in the first four Numbers whereof the first contains no more then a weak explication of my Tenets the which I will take notice of as occasion and his Errours themselves shall present In the second Number your Divine wonders to see all School-men taxed of Ignorance So should I to see his wonderment if I did not know the cause of it For every School-man who thinks himself sure of his conclusion cannot chuse but tax all that be against him of ignorance in that point But those Divines who think nothing to be certain or which is all one true for what is not certain is not true to him to whom it is uncertain have no reason to tax others of Ignorance knowing themselves to be ignorant in verity thinking there is no Science upon this Argument which to them seems evident We have as much knowledg as any body but we have no Science therefore no body has any The Major Pride and Vanity makes evident to them The minor experience demonstrates to them and others And the conclusion is not onely the Condemnation of all School-men but of human Nature it self But this must be born withall because they say it who call themselves All the world the whole Church c. though never so impudently I that do nothing but what every good Divine doth and is obliged to do that is to say who apprehend that all who hold not that which I conceive to be true are amiss in this point am unsufferable and to be condemned upon the score of many being against me Again your Divine wonders to see St. Thomas stand accused to have mistaken somewhat that followed out of a former Verity acknowledged by him And because it was apparent that this bore no blame but is a thing necessarily befalling to any Divine who writes very much and arises from the weakness of our nature your Divine adds out of his own Treasure that he is accused of missing grosly the which all who know my respect to that great Doctour know I would not say even if I thought it true His third and fourth Numbers are but a repeating of the same Doctrin and Testimony of St. Thomas 2. In his fifth Number he proposeth to shew that Angels and Spirits have change of Intellections and Affections And first he tells us how Angels and Souls come to know to wit by Gods infusing of certain Entities called Specieses of the which he bestows upon every one what is conformable to their natures and this in his first Number he takes for my Doctrin Which because it is not so I am constrained to lay forth a short declaration of my Doctrin in this point Which is that in an Angel out of the force of his creation his Essence is actually in his intellective Power that is is actually underderstood Now to understand a thing connected to his Essence the Essence it self is cause enough as the hollow of a bowl seen is sufficient to make us understand what globosity is necessary to the filling of that vacuity So out of the Essence of an Angel is to be understood both the quality of the cause which is to make it and the quality of such matters upon which the Angel can or is made to act that is God above him and Bodies below him as far as they have connexion with him And these two parts we think to be connected with all other Creatures whatsoever Whence the extent of his knowledg we conceive to be all existeâ—t substances and all their actions which follow the substances As for the manner of his knowledg instead of syâ—â—ogistical discourse we conceive to be such an intuition as sometimes we have after we have found a truth by discourse and for the most part have in the assenting to those Verities which we call per se nota So that an Angel sees in his Essence that there is a God as clearly as we see the verity of this truth that the whole is greater then its part And in the same manner he sees in God that God hath made the world and so every other verity as it hangs to these by a connexion in vertue of which we might draw the same consequences if we had Science time which he draws without time by force of pure intuition and intuitive strength He cannot then know the farther conclusion without knowing the nearer nor any other without knowing his Essence 3. You will easily see by this that an Angel cannot have the knowledg of a particular thing or accident without having the actual knowledg of all the causes on which it doth depend and therefore that his actual knowledg is extreamly large To which if we joyn that whatsoever is foreknown strengthneth and prepareth the understanding towards the succeeding knowledg you wil not fear the understanding's being clogged with too many objects And out of that you will see a necessity that the Angel must see all things at once unless there be some that have no connexion with those which are linked to his Essence and that such he can never see unless by some unnatural means And so you have my thoughts of the manner and extent of Angelical knowledg And the like apprehension I frame of separated Souls though there be some differences which concern not our present quarrel In his sixth seventh eighth and ninth Numbers he pretends that this our Doctrin is against many verities which we know by Faith Whether these that Angels know not future things depending of hazard or the present secrets of mens Hearts or the number of elect or damned be any of these which he thinks to be of Faith I know not but I well know that I know no ground why they should by any understanding Divine be so accounted and since there is nothing for them but some places of Scripture enlarged beyond the intention of Scripture and one prayer of the Church and all these in common without any special mention of Angels attributed to God alone in which kind of speeches God is commonly understood to include his Ministers and to be contradistinguished onely against the knowledg of Men without entring into the nature of Spirits unknown to us and not concerning our government in way of Christian life to be curious of The like is of the souls knowing what their posterity do in the Earth taken out of the 14. of Job Which out of the Hebrew Text we understand to be that the dead man takes no notice of his posterity non advertit eis to wit he meddles not with it or them which is also a legitimate sence of the word ignoravit when it is said Esay 6â— Abraham nescivit nos Israel ignoravit nos See Muscariâ—m Ventilatio 7. 4. In his tenth Paragraph he cites out of St. Thomas that
duration of every Angelical â—…ellection did not hold up more parts of our time and therefore must needs be higher then our time But he will say they have a time of their own and so cast us upon the other question what it signifies Time to be true which he understands as little not knowing that in Analogical Terms or such as are by design equivocal no secondary sence but onely the primary is the true sence of the word 9. Out of this he proceeds N. 21. to exemplify in the Locality of Angels in which he tells us that we know they are truly in a place in St. Thomas his Doctrin Whereas St. Thomas tells us it is per se notum sapientibus in corporalia non esse in loco That to wise men it is known of it self or without need of proof that spirits are not in place He concludes that men should content themselves to know that St. Michael was ever in Heaven as properly as Christ descended in-Hell I must answer so they do but that is to know that neither is properly spoken no more then it is properly spoken that the Sâ—n of God descended out of Heaven at his Incarnation And because they know that both are improperly spoken therefore they endeavour to know in what sence they are spoken that they may not chatter words without understanding like Magpyes as is the use amongst his Divines He adds it is no hard matter for a Scholler of ordinary capacity to conceive the succession of Acts in Angels Which is very true but peradventure it is a hard matter to overcome that apprehension and to see that Angels cannot be governed like Bodies nor are to be apprehended to have such a succession To the like purpose is it that he says that our absurdities will be infinitely increased by putting that the acts of a spirit are her very substance For the good man understands not that the playstering and mason-like Philosophy he has been bred unto is the most prostituted absurdity that can be taught 10. Pag. 378. He begins to answer objections and first this that if there be no inâ—rinsecal change the torment cannot be greater for the passing of time And he doth ingenuously confess it cannot But when he comes to apply his Doctrin he first advances this â—bsurdity that in our corporal torments there are no parts but the same part of the torment is put in more parts of time I do not wonder that an oversight might escape him whom peradventure weariness had dulled but that he had never a friend or overseer of his Book that could tell him corporal torments were motions and had their divers parts proportion'd to the parts of time I can hardly beleeve mine own eyes when I see it in his Book I pray consider to what absurdities their positions leads them it The next absurdity is nothing less though peradventure more cover'd He grants that if there be no real change there is no greater pain and he puts that time purely makes no real change but what it puts the same pain in a new time Be it so Where is the real change in the pain No for you say it is the same To be the same signifies not change Where then in the tiâ—… you say that adds nothing Where then in the putting of the pain to the time He says not so And it is plain that signifies but permaâ—…e or that the pain is the same in a 〈◊〉 time Where all novelty or change is in the time and onely in the time So that he puts both parts of the contradiction the pain without change is no greater and the pain without change is greater and in matching of these lyes his solution 11. After this he hopes it will not be hard to answer another objection he will put and he has reason For such solutions which admit both parts of a contradiction to be true are most easy to be made and impossible to be reply'd well against But let us hear the objection Saith the objectour if two acts be indivisible they cannot succeed one the other but they will be together This your Divine makes to be the objection and answers No they will not be together but succeed one the other And then says St. Thomas well observes this and that Aristotle for want of knowledg in Scripture knew not this and that he has proved it by above a dozen better demonstrations then this so often miscalled by that â—ame What can I say to this great Doctour Whence your Divine hath taken this Argument I cannot remember though my fancy gives that some where I have used Letters in this or some like subject but I cannot find the place I find the substance of the Argument is in my twelfth Account of the Treatise of the Middle State But there it is put in this Tenour that seeing the act of a Spirit hath no parts nor is capable of them either it will dure but for onely one moment of our time or else by by its nature it will dure for ever To dure for one moment of our time is not to dure at all for there are no instants in time or motion for they signify nothing but the not-being of motion Now if you assign a part of time in which this indivisible act continues you give it a duration essentially above the nature of time and therefore by its nature to endure all time if not longer then time There is added to this Argument this confirmation suppose of two acts which begin together in divers Angels one be put to dure longer then the other without any real addition of duration wherein can this consist that is it consists in nothing and therefore is impossible and Chimerical Of this Argument he brings no more then that of two acts succeeding one must needs be together with the other without any proof why which makes me think he aym'd not to bring this Argument though he professed to answer all he had ever heard of By the form of the Argument as he relates it the Authour of it seems to aym at this Conclusion that two acts of the same Spirit cannot be disjoynted by an intermission or Cessation from all act because there would be no medium but this your Divine seems not to â—ym at So that I can see nothing into this Argument but that it is imperfectly related Unless peradventure the Arguer takes the duration of Angelical acts to be purely Instantaneous as are the instants of time and your Divine speaks so ambiguously that a man cannot understand by his words whether he ever lookd into that point or desir'd to meddle with it For Aristotle hath demonstrated that two such instants cannot be together and that St. Thomas made no scruple to admit though your Divine seems to contradict Aristotle in his Doctrin which may easily be for not understanding either St. Thomas or the question or the force of a Demonstration As he plainly shews by bringing in Zeno's Errour in
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
Divine to know of him some points in particular As why the children who could be but young when they dyed should be â—â—x and thirty years in Purgatory longer then the Mother since that there is no mention of such enormous sins of theirs as that of their â—other â—or of any extraordinary penance the Mother had don Secondly Why they should stay in Purgatory or at least out of Heaven untill their Mother was released For First one appeared all in white the other in black afterwards they both in white and the Mother partly white partly black as if some sins were forgiven and oâ—hers not Why Souls are sent to straggle with People Why they stand not to their bargains but after having been contented return again to molest the Party Why they afflict their Benefactours How if a seperated Soul offered violence a man could resist it Why they forbid him to speak Whereas in other Visions they can not speak untill they be spoken to Why the Spirits vanish if the man spake or cry'd out Why he must fast just 34. houres and keep silence so long and you may add what your self shall think good to enlarge the Science of the stâ—… of souls in Purgatory For as to my self I câ—… consider such fine stories without a great suspicion of folly and superstition in those who tell and believe them And if you ask me what I can guess to be the very truth I think some body of the House for he notes it was a Colledge had a mind to abuse the poor Brother and when they had begun and saw it take well they â—ought how to bring it unto such an end as might hinder it to be sought into Therefore they had a great care he should not make any noise and as soon as he did got themselves away therefore the one came once with a cudgel in his hand that if any one should come they might not lay hands on him Therefore when there was company with him they came not into the Chamber And therefore when they would give the upshot to the whole story they caused him to fast and â—…under upon his own thoughts untill his brain was so weak that he might believe he saw whatsoever they would have him say As for the Jesuits of Vienna I concieve they went innocently to work further then what much talking and verdicting upon the business did unawares to them after the story You may object that the Book is licens'd by the 〈◊〉 â—nquisition I do not deny it and that as for one of the qualificators as they call them I knew him and bear him very willingly this witness that he was a very pious man of a sweet condition a clear wit and according to the course of the Jesuits chools a great Divine But all this makes no authority that cannot be deceived in a matter of fact as the Divines speak as all Apparitions and Revelations be 5. But per adventure your Divine will reply he brings Testimonies which were evident Here saith he in his 3 N. is no secret Vision no private Revelation cujus nox conscia solâ— est The words of this dead man professing that he should soon be freed from Purgatory and his refâ—sing life upon the score were spoken before thousands and therefore it has the very first degree of Historical certitude His story is the famous and known relation of St. Stanislaus how he raised one Peter that had souâ—d him a piece of ground and brought him into the Court to bear witness that he had pay'd him for his ground which being done the man retired to his grave again Thus far the History hath the grounds he makes such a noise with But your Divine adds that St. Stanislaus offer'd Peter to continue in this life if he would which Peter refused because of the uncertainty of salvation in it and that now his Purgatory was almost at an end yet pray'd the St. to make it shorter by his prayers By which story we may learn many things which heretofore we were ignorant of As that it doth not affright a man so much to be in Purgatory as to see Purgatory since Drithelmus onely by seeing it lived so secure a life that there was no danger of loosing Eternity Secondly that Peter had not got the Charity which some Saints profess'd in this life that it was more pleasing to God to live in this world with hazard to do good for our neighbours then to go to Heaven immediately Much less had he learn'd the Charity of St. Christina mirabilis to live in torments to save others out of Purgatory Nor also did he consider of this world are lesser then those of Purgatory Nor had he got the skill that souls have learned since to know how many Masses or Alms will set them free Neither that one Mass of so great a Saint at a priviledged Altar would free him instantly Nor it seems not so much as that St. Stanislaus was not deaf Seeing your Divine testifies that he spake so loud that thousands might be witnesses of them Nevertheless this Argument of your Divine has that advantage over the rest that it hath the Authority of being a History and deserves the Credit which we give to Livy or Plutarch or Diâ— when they tell us of prodigious events For Longinus the Canon of Cracovia out of whom the other Authors have this History is esteemed of good Judgment and although he lived long after the fact and had it ex antiquioribus â—onâ—mentis as Baronius testifies and so the story be not of the first degree of Historical certitude yet because he is a grave man an ordinary Historical faith is not to be deny'd him But since your Divine charges me amongst other Readers to take notice that this History is contained in Cromerus his Books of Lessons approved by the Sea Apostolick Surely he imagined this Approbation to be a Definition ex Cathedra or would have his Reader think so For he could not be ignorant how many times 〈◊〉 Lessons of the Roman Breviary have been corrected old ones put out and new ones pâ—t in The like in Missals Rituals c. he could not be ignorant that such an Appâ—obaâ—ion breeds no more Authority then of a grave History which Cromerus hath of himself though he be taxed to be the first Brocher of that sweet History of Pope Joan and therefore no rest of truth 6. At least we cannot doubt but the ensuing History is in the first degree of Historical credit For it was performed in the sight of the whole two Countries of Liege and Brabant The recounter of the story â—choolfellow to St. Thomas of Aquin and writes he could bring innumerable witnesses to testify the truth of all he did write Jacobus also de Vitriaco a famous Cardinal is an irrefragable witness of the same story And Cardinal Bellarmin holds it to be undenyable Who then dare doubt of such a History so throughly authenticated 〈◊〉 confess it is against my
they had performed their charge But because it was time to end the Council referred the execution of the Decree to the Pope as also of the setting forth the Catechism and reforming the 〈◊〉 and the Breviary and ordered the Popes determination in 〈◊〉 question that rose aboâ—… these Books should be held for deciâ—… 17. If I had been left to mine own Judgment I should have thought this no great honour to the Pope further then as it was a good Action in him to concuâ— to the good of the Church For if the Pope had refused it they must have appointed some Congregation to have done the same as we see the Inquisition and Provincial Councils to have done the like in divers Countries Now your great Divine finds in this great Mysteries that the Council gave the Pope Authority to determine the Verity of all propositions Was there ever such a pâ—ece oâ— Mountebankery Or is not the Pope well seâ— up to have got such Champions to proclaim his Power and Authority And what again hâ—… Divinity made that now we have so many Articles of faith confirmed by the Definition a General Council that must be received as there be sentences either put out or allow'd in the Books censured in the Index Expurgatorius I must not conceal his Demonstration for this Learned Conclusion Could saith he the Council give him Authority to do that after the sitting of the Council which by his own Authority he could not 〈◊〉 by himself before the Council And out of this infers that the Pope does it by his own Authority As for his question I will not meddle with it but hold it at present for one of those doubtfull Articles which God will not have known though he may find many Divines who would answer him that the Council could but what I am certain of is that the Council could not give him that which he had before and therefore your Divine contradicts himself in alleadging the Council for giving the power and saying he had it before 18. The following Numbers untill the twelfth are but Repetitions of the same Onely one Argument of his tenth number is worth the nothing where he asks Who can say the Council of Trent approved not the the Pope's proceeding in this point It is answer'd onely they that read the Council or otherwise have understood that the Council never took notice neither to nor fro what the Popes had done in this kind But he urges that the Council left to the Pope the ordering of the faults and abuses in the matter of Indulgences And who knows not who knows any thing of those times that the Pope promised to reform what belonged to the Court of Rome by himself So that the Council had no need to meddle in such points in which it is expected the Pope would do well of himself Now whether the Pope reformed all that deserved reformation or no is a thing impertinent to our question in which there is all agreement to the Popes decrees and t is a thing not fitting to be made publick table-talk as our Books are like to be 19. In the twelfth Number he seeks the Antiquity of the use of Indulgences for the dead And no wonder he cannot find any great Antiquity for them seeing Caietan and our Holy Bishop of Rochester had looked before him and could find none Caietan's words be Opusc. 16º 〈◊〉 No Holy Scripture no written Authority of Ancient Doctours either Greek or Latin hath brought this the beginning of Indulgences to our knowledg But this onely concerning Ancient Fathers is written some three hundred years since that St. Gregory began the Indulgences of the Stations These Indulgences were as I remember of seven years penances remission for visiting certain Churches no mention of any for the dead granted by St. Gregory But what says the great Bishop It perswades says he â—er adventure â—any not to trust very much to these Indulgences that the use of them seems to be too new and very late invented amongst Christians I â—â—swer sayth he That it is not certain who first began them and some say that amongst the most Ancient Romans there was some kind of use of them Nor doth any man doubt but that later wits have both better examin'd and clearly understood many things both out of the Gospels and other Scriptures then their Predecessours So that you see this great man thought that the Scriptures explicated onely by hâ—man wit were the solid Foundation upon which Indulgences were to be grounded for want of Ancient Testimony Not so your Divine but he can prove it out of Ancient Records and first of Paschal the first some eight hundred or more years since which is a very long time as he well notes for the Church to be in Errour This Paschal is sayd to have given an Indulgence to the Church of St. Praxedes in Rome for the freeing of one soul out of Purgatory But the ill â—â—ch is that this Monument is accounted to be Apocryphal in Rome it self and not esteemed of by men accurate in History of that nature And so neither Caietan who was very inquisitive nor Baroâ—… ever alledged it And Fabers story of its being approved by eleven Popes if properly understood must needs declare as much seeing it is impossible any writer living in Rome could be ignorant of so notorious a thing But I pray take notice by the way of the spirit of these men to abhor it See how they keep the souls of those who will believe them in an Egyptiaâ—al slavery perswading them that if this Pope had committed a private fault the Church had been in an Errour 〈◊〉 years even though no more know of the Popes mistake then have heard of this peece of Paper lying in a private Sacriâ—ty As to Bellâ—râ—ine's approbation we answer he is to be thanked for his pains of gathering so many things together not to be proposed for an Authority for the reasons I alledged above in the like occasion 20. The next instance is out of Baronius or Spondanus in the year 878 how Pope John the eighth gave an Indulgence to all whose hâ—p it had bâ—en to dye in the war for the defence of the Church or whose hap it should be hereafter Before we look into this Testimony I must not omit to note that this very Spondanus was bred a Minister was very conversant with Bellarmins works and after his conversion with his Person and as it is reported had Baronius his approbation to the compendium of his History which he made and clear it is such a man must needs â—e zealous to put in his work whatsoever was to help the Catholick cause and this if it were not in Baronius in notes of his own as he doth divers times This I note to let you understand that this man could not be ignorant of the former Testimony of Paschalis and living in Rome when I first went thither after Bellarmin's death could want no commodity to search
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
which we see amongst even our Moderns many profess not to understand and many of those who profess to understand it by their gross explications shew they do not penetrate it But you may ask what then is the force of our Saviours Argument I answer that we have it from our Saviour himself who told his Apostles that Lazarus was asleep not dead and the like he spake of the Prince of the Synagogues daughter and the phrase amongst Christians is used of all the Faithfull and so we sing Regem cui omnia vivunt venite adoremus and St. Paul expresses it in the words then says he those who have fallen asleep in Christ are perished When then our Saviour says God is not God of the dead this word dead must be taken for perished according to what St. Paul comforteth the Christians and tells them they must not be sorrowful at their friends deaths as Gentils were and giveth the reason qui spem non habent that is who expect no Resurrection but think their dead for ever perished and not to be as it were in a sleep untill the last Trumpet awakes them There is yet a deeper Mystery in our Saviours words which neither pleased Bellarmin nor his admirer to wit that because all things are present to God in eternity therefore no future thing is absent to God so that Abraham Isaac and Jacob did live to God and as to God were really living 6. He presses also that St. Paul urgeth the like Argument saying that if there be no Resurrection let us eat and drink for tomorrow we shall dye But this Argument sheweth plainly that his former solution was naught For St. Paul speaks not to Sadduces but rather to Pharisees to whom belongeth the custom of often Baptisms which he there urges therefore it depends not out of the connexion of the Immortality of the soul and Resurrection but rather it supposes the Immortality of the soul to be a thing not known to the vulgar For according to that saying of his sapientiam loquimur inter perfectâ—s he apply'd his Doctrin to his Auditory To the multitude he preached what they were capable of 〈◊〉 is he proposed the Goods proper to the whole man and as it were an excellency and heighth of those goods whereof they had experience reserving the declaration of goods purely spiritual to the special audieâ—ce of the more understanding part Wherefore all his publick preaching being of the rewards 〈◊〉 be received in the Resurrection be mâ—keâ— this Argument if there be no Resurrection we are the most miserable of men for in this world we enjoy no pleasure and in the next we have no reward So you see this solid resolution of Bellarmin to be compounded of pure mistakes and improbabilities And yet if his worship had been so curious he might have found it confuted in the third account of the Book whence he read the objection made though Bellarmin is not by name cited not every petty confirmation impugned the which I should have done if I had taken it out of Bellarmin 7. He yet presseâ— That those who were seduced by the Geâ—â—ils would not esteem of 〈◊〉 Authority of Judas Maccabâ—â—â— in which he shews either little experience or much cunning For as an Ordinary Protestant such as depend from the Authority of their Preacher if he see it prov'd that all Antiquity is against what his Preacher teaches is presently strucken with a horrour and begins to waver because it is natural to men to love and adhere to their Ancestours so those who were wavering amongst the Jews upon the perswasions of the Gentils when they saw the publick profession of their Country in the fact of Judas Maccabaeus would be much sollicited to forgo the apparent reasons of the Gentiles and prefer their Countries belief before them Either therefore your Divine did not understand this or else under the colour of some obstinate Persons he would cunningly make his Reader believe that no body would take good by this example of Judas Maccabaeus 8. His opposition to my second Text is already answer'd for St. Paul did not speak to the Sadduces but to such as received the custom of Baptisms or praying for the dead and his Argument is as strong as that when we out of praying for the dead prove a Purgatory and remission of sins in the next world so does St. Paul prove the Resurrection Whence it is manifest that he taught the Christians to pray for that good to the dead which they were to receive at the Resurrection and by consequence that all the good the dead can receive before that day is already received before they are pray'd for 9. The third Text he dissembles to understand and for that reason with his Paraphrase corrupts the Text The Text it self says that his spirit or soul may be saved in the day of our Lord. He paraphrases Saved to signify to appear with great honour and glory But every one who understands the word knowâ— it signifies to be freed from some danger or harm and all Catholicks by admitting a particular judgment know all danger is past therefore the meaning must be that in that day he shall be freed from punishment and misery At length he turns off this Text with a jeer telling us St. Paul was not so uncharitable as to wish no good to Onesiphorus beforâ— the day of Judgment As if it were not charity mistaken to wish him what St. Paul knew was not to be had St. Paul therfore in this expression wisheth Onesiphorus all good that could happen to him which as yet he possessed not and so shews there was no good to be expected for the dead but either what they have before prayers or else are to receive 〈◊〉 the day of Judgment 10. In his eighth Number he goes over this Text anew and says or rather grants that indeed it is the common phrase of Christians to speak so but that as it cannot be inferred thence that the wicked go not to Hell before that day no more can it be inâ—…ed that the just commonly receive not their reward before that day But the difference of the two 〈◊〉 is very manifest For the damning of the wicked is not proposed to us as a thing to be desir'd and effected by our prayers and therefore concerns not us when it is done But the Reward of our Benefactours is propos'd to be gain'd by our prayers and therefore we ought to know what to pray for and he confesses that Universally the phrase which is the witness oâ— our thoughts and of what we are taught runs so as to wish good in the day of Judgment The consequence therefore is most infallible and in a manner belonging to Tradition that all our prayer for the dead must be that they may receive their reward at the day of Judgment For although Tradition doth not expressly teach the Negative yet because it Universally teaches the positive to pray for good at the last
the best deeds are in Heaven the worst in Hell neither rewarded His answer is that the time of merit and demerit is passed which is true but nothing to the purpose For nevertheless it quelleth that Principle in common that to every act a proportionable payment is due Therefore the ground of their Doctrin is false and they must make pains due to sins for some farther end that is by rational Revenge not for pure Revenge 8. Number sixth he treats an objection which he mistakes For because in explicating corporal torments we sayd that by diversion they were alleviated or hinder'd as it is written in the life of St. Tâ—… that when his Lâ—â— was to be â—ear'd â—etting himself to study hard he 〈◊〉 not the burning he imagin'd the same to be meant of abstracted spirits and that they could also divert themselves whereas before he acknowledges for my Doctrin that acts are unchangeable in pure Spirits and our of this apprehension he teaches us that some actions are voluntary but not free a Doctrin true but not to the purpose My Argument then is out of the Doctrin of St. Thomas taken by most Divines for an Axiom that the will cannot be forced And the demonstration of it is plain and set down in St. Thomas Because force is against the inclination of the Person or nature forced the Will is the inclination of the person said to be forced therefore the act of the will is still according to the inclination and by consequence never forced This is so plain that every common Divine knows it and yet so mistaken by him that he distinguishes not between doing an outward action at which a Spirit wilfully grieves and the making by force an Action of the will and upon this score sets in array a squadron of places of Scripture to fight against a shadow 9. Number seventh he advances another question to wit why the omnipoteâ—t aâ—… should not haâ—e power by himself or other iâ—strument to make in the soul an afflictive Qâ—â—lity I gave you three answers One for want of a subject for in the Will there can be nothing but voluntary since voluntary signifies no more then the act of mans inclination The second Answer is because there are no such Entities as you call Species or qualities makeable as every one who knows more then trivial Philosophy can tell you And thirdly because God is no hangman but has all nature to serve him when he pleases to punish a creature and defiles not his own hands with such actions He steps on to fire and asks why that cannot torment a soul by some unknown way to us I answer because it cannot burn us for all that put fire put burning but burming seeing it is the dissolution of a thing that has parts cannot by all the Invention he can give to God be in a thing that has no parts therefore fire cannot torment but Metaphorically He says our Arguments have a thousand times been solved but because he takes not the pains to repeat either the Arguments or Solutions I also may pass them in silence Mine be in the eleventh account of my book of the Middle State of souls He may assign the solutions where he pleases Onely to his saying They are solved I must oppose my word that they neither are nor can be to sensible men that have not speculated beyond all reason He objects St. Austin I answer St. Austin affirms nothing of this point but onely presses an Argument of the Unity of the body and soul. I answer Philosophers affirm that Union to be of Actus and Potentia and that such an one cannot be betwixt a Spirit and Fire The meaning of those words and the reason why the same cannot be said of fire here is no place to declare It is enough they are Terms common in the School 10. He proceeds to prove that at least there is corporal fire in Hell because our Saviour shall say to the damned Depart from me you accursed into eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels Another man would have proved out of this place that there was no corporeal fire in Hell For what can be more incongruously taken then to say that one had prepared corporeal fire to punish Spirits withall Wherefore this qualification of prepared for the Devil doth clearly manifest the fire to be spiritual If one who found his Garden dry'd with the hot Sun should send to Londen to buy a Pen-knife to water it withall would not any man that heard it judge him to be mad This sport he makes with God Almighty telling us that when he would punish pure Spirits he took corporeal fire which is far less fit for such an effect then a Pen-knife to water a Gurden And yet Christ expresses that the fire into which the damned were sent was fit to punish Angels that is nothing less then corporeal fire As for his Testimony from the Authour of the Dialogues I hope to have a time to answer it more largely then is here fitting 11. He presses farther St Julian's words that no wise man denies the souls of Reprobates to be detain'd in fire But to have made an Argument he should have added the word corporeal For truly the Scripture so frequently using the word of fire it is not for a good Christian to deny the word which were to affront both the Scriptures and all such as â—se without examination the same words But yet 't is the part of a Divine to admit of the literal word and understand the sense so that it may stand with God's Wisdom As for Bellarmin and Maldonatus's censures of temerity for resisting the consent of School-men I have answered it fully in my MUSCARIUM Ventilatione deciâ—â— to which I remit my Reader For such questions amongst ignorant people are â—ot to be much handled He presses farther how our explication of Torments is not convenient As to that of loss of past pleasures he says their state sets them above it In the which he shews himself ignorant of the nature of material sin for it doth subject the soul to things under its worth and therefore is sin and this subjection is far greater in Hell then in this World As to the delay of future glory he says we forget our selves to make that grieve the Souls since it is but one moment though it were of Millions of Ages Nor can I deny that I forget my self sometimes in speaking truths to them who are not capable of them Therefore I intreat him for the present to put instead of delay the not having of glory and if he pleases he may add while so much time ran for all this he knows to be my constant Doctrin that the Soul knows and grieves for And as for farther explication he himself hath remitted us to his 22. Chapter As for disordinaâ—â— affections remaining he says there are none as he hath proved but we reply'd It was Heresie to put Purgatory without them 12. In
actions and all corporeal motions Therefore all his examples are easily I will not say answer'd but assented to as not speaking of the question that is what the duration is in it self but of how it appears to us or how we apprehend and express it But not to leave him thus in the dark I will exemplify a little When we apprehend God is is Wise is Just is Good St. Thomas his School will tell you that Being Wisdome Justice Goodness doth not signify the same that they do when they are spoken of St. Peter or St. Paul But that God is of a notion unknown to us yet of such an one as we are sure in our low Language and conformably to our incomparably-undervaluing-God apprehensions is to be not so much explicated as vestigiated by the notions which are signified by these words of Being Wisdome Justice Goodness c. So likewise true it is that Christ was three days in the heart of the Earth but in such a manner that wise men understand that these words have not an Univocal signification in the duration of his Soul and the duration of his Body but in this in a signification known to us in that in a signification so above our knowledg that nevertheless we know it is to be so explicated or expressed to a human apprehension in the weakness of this life 9. In his seventh Number he attempts the explication of the necessity of existence of divers creatures and tells us that all that can be requir'd is most briefly and accurately expressed by St. Thomas 1. P. Qu. 10. A. 5. Where another man would have told him that every man doth not follow St. Thomas his explication I onely enquire of him whence he hath certainty of this his saying that St. Thomas hath in this place declared all that is necessary For having treated it more largely in other places it is to be suspected he thought somewhat necessary in other occasions which had been superfluous to his Theme in the place cited His ninth Number he begins with Whence you see the Eviternity of souls c. Whence I see he takes all which he hath cited out of St. Thomas for coyned mony so that I may conclude that the certainty of his Doctrin is no more then that it is St. Thomas his opinion which is a poor payment for him who seeks the contentment of his understanding I reverence St. Thomas his Doctrin because I find many and great truths in him but to give him the priviledg of Scripture that things are so because he says it that I am tanght by himself not to do And in our own present case I am forced to specify one particular which is that some things are removed from permanency in being because their Essence neither consists in Mutability nor is the subject of Transmutation yet those things have Transmutation joyned unto them This St. Thomas exemplifies in the Heavens But later Phoenomena's have shown that the Essence of the Heavens is subject to Transmutation Wherefore that example fails him The other example is of Angels which truly St. Thomas says but proves not here so that until that be proved we know no substance that is not the subject of Transmutation and yet hath Transmutation joyn'd to it and he who is acquainted with St. Thomas his Principles will expect that there can be no such since St. Thomas teaches that Accidents have no existences of their own and are but modifications of the Substances to which they belong and consequently their existence must be of the same nature of which is the existence of the Substance seeing it is the very same He tells us also that St. Thomas saith that Angelical intellections are measured truly by time or as he says afterwards by true time But I remember not that word true in him nor do I think it stands with the exact Logick of that Prince of Divines For Time signifying a common measure how can there be true time where there is not a common measure but every act must be its one measure and one be longer another shorter without any common rule Besides St. Thomas knew the motion of the Heavens had appropriated to it self the name of Time before any Spiritual actions of Angels were talked of Wherefore the name of time could not be attributed to Angels but in respect of the motion of the Heavens because the duration of the acts measures the acts as the duration of time measures our actions and corporeal motions which is plainly to take time as applyed to Angels and their actions in an improper sence and one derived from the former 10. After this to the end of the Chapter he doth nothing but lay forth his own conceits without any likeness of Proof or Argument In so much that all he saith for himself is nothing but the acceptance of St. Thomas his words without any proof Only Inote that he lets us understand by the way that he knows not what signifies the Necessity of Existence upon which is built the nature and notion of Eviternity To declare which you are to look into the Metaphysical Principles of nature as Aristâ—tle does in his two first Books of Physicks There you shall find that a corporeal substance is divisible into two parts the one which makes it be what it is the other a pure possibility to be any of many and how it is clear out of this that the former part is it by which Existence is had and which hath nothing betwixt it self and existence and therefore is inseparably connected with existence The later part because of its indifferency to divers forms is separable from any particular existence and so is cause of the corruptibility of the whole the existence of the whole perishing in the separation of the Form from the Matter in all things but in man Hence it follows that if such a thing as we call a form be capable of existence without the support of matter it can never perish because it is of it self and without mediation bound to existence Therefore such a substance is called Eviternal and is so because it is such a form and so annexed to existence The cause then of Eviternity is nothing changed whether the form be to be reunited or no to the matter nor depends it of having no contrary but the having of no contrary flowes from this for contraries are onely found where there is a common subject nor from I know not what obligation in God which are the principles he seems to conceit to be the grounds of Eviternity SEVENTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his two and twentieth Chapter How Angels understand and why necessarily all at once His Ignorance of what is meant by true Time and mistake of St. Thomas His unskilfulness in applying allegorical places of Scripture like the Anthropomâ—rpbites to Spirits literally The fruit of his superabundant Demonstrations His self-contradictions and Absurdities and how weakly he refuâ—es a pretended Demonstration of