end you ad that the Apostle doth shewe vs how he was dead and how he was aliue by adding dead flesh and quickened spirit The verie text as I take it will denie you this for it hath not that the spirit was quickened and the fleshe killed but that Christ was killed in the fleshe and quickened in the spirit which is all one as if he had said that the suffered death as he was man and ouercame death as he was God And this Paull doeth speake in other wordes that he was crucified in his infirmities yet liveth he through the power of God Fourthlie you say that the Scripture doeth joine this his going and preaching close to his passion As if it had said As soon as he had suffered he went and preached This as if includeth no necessarie matter We expect demonstration and wil not be caried with as and if Fiftlie you argue out of the 6. of Genesis that the preaching of Noah is attributed to the third person of the Deitie and not to the second The wordes be these My Spirit shall not alwaies striue with man because he is but flesh Which wordes fewe or rather no interpreters that euer I saw expound as you doe of the third person of the Deitie Tremelius and Iunins whose great panies learning and judgement all sinceare hearts do reuerence expound them thus I will not long dispute with my self saieth the Lorde what to doe with these men for my sentence shall stand that except they spedelie repent I wil destroy them Neither maketh it much against vs though it were as you would haue it For seeing the actions of the Deitie are cōmon to all the three persons he erreth not that giueth thē to any of the three So doth the scripturs in many places attribute the resurrectiō of Christ sometimes to the Father somtimes to the sonne and sometimes to the Spirit of sanctification And Christ himselfe telleth vs that whatsoeuer the Father doth the same he doeth also After this you object that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is disobedient some-time doth separate the time of their disobedience and his preaching But heere I must put you in minde that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is went disobedient preached be all of one tense in the Greeke and must needes be referred to one time so that hee went and preached to them euen then when they were disobedient And this the word disobedient doth confirme For to whome I pray you were they disobedient but to the spirit that preached to them As for the adverbe sometime it is not set heere to separate words of one time but to distinguish the time of their inprisonment which was present from the daies of their rebellion which was past in the dayes of Noah when the long patiēce of the Lord exspected their amendement Whereas you argue that this cannot bee spoken of Noah his preaching because he preached to men and not to Spirits I am perswaded that no man can preache to men and not to their Spirites because hee that teacheth a man instructeth his Spirit which is his reasonable soule And yet heere you may marke if it please you that there be two things heere spoken of preching prison the on pertayning to these spirits when they were men with spirits the other now that they are onelie spirits and that therfore the Apostle did discreetlie choose the name spirit which is common to both these tymes Lastlie you charge this construction with violēce for that we take the word spirit in one place for the Deitie of Christ and streight way againe for the spirits of men in prison I hope you will not denie but that the word is vsuall in both significations that it is no wrong to giue words their own significations when the drifts and circumstances of the place doth requyre them Hitherto I haue dealt with your objections against Beza Nowe I will proue with vnfallible reasons that your sense cannot stand with this text You take the word flesh onlie for the bodie of Christ which died and was buried and the word spirit for his humane soule which you beare vs in hand did descend into hell and did preach there to the soules that had ben disobedient and rebellious in the dayes of Noab If this your conceit shall go for current that which the Apostle speaketh heere of Christ may be verified as well of anie other man For when we die our soules die no more then his did But let vs look a little nearer the matter The spirit heere as it appeareth by the text doeth signifie that which gaue life to that that was dead That I trust was not his humane soule but his deuine and heauenlie spirit Thirdlie in this Participle mortified is comprised death which giuen to Christ is neuer taken in al the Scriptures for the temporal death of his bodie onlie but whatsoeuer Christ suffered either in soule or bodie for the redemption of our soules and our bodies doth compryse his whole passion Which if it bee true then the word flesh must be the whole subject of all this passion that is both his soule and body or the whole man Christ For hee suffered as well in soule for our soules as in bodie for our bodies or else he had beene but half a Redeemer Fourthlie seeing his bodie was quickned that is restored from the graue as well as his soule from hell If you take spirit heer for his humane soule then shal you confound those things that the Apostle doth distinguish attributing that to the soule alone which is commō both to the soule and the bodie Fiftlie seing quikned is to receaue life either which it neuer had or els had lost the soule cannot be said to be quickned because it neuer lost life after that it once liued with the bodie Heere you tell vs that quickened is to be deliuered from miseries and sorrowes Howe the English word may be taken I leaue it to the discretion of the discreete and indifferent reader But sure I am it will proue a hard thing to finde that signification either in the Latine word viuificari or the greeke word Zoopoteisthas which bee so mixed with life that if they signifie deliuerie from miseries then life it self must signifie miseries and sorrowes which though they follow on it are neuer signified by it If this deuise may stand you wil ouerthrow the Antithesis betweene dead and quickened For if quickned doth not signifie a restitution to life what contrariety hath it with mortefied or dead which signifieth the extinguishing of life Sixtlie spirit doeth heere signifie that which was free from death and the violence of his enemies This I hope you will not say was his humane soule wherein hee suffered the death of the soule that is the torments of Hell as well as in bodie the death of the bodie Seuinthlie the soule of Christ could not
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is spirits also is not as you take it for you say it signifieth the men in Noahs time but you can not bring one scripture to proue it Therfore I say as I said before it signifieth soules seperated from the body That my exposition is true I haue prooued by three Scriptures Ecles 12. 7. Heb. 12. 23 Act. 7 59. Now as mine is true so will I proue yours to be false impossible by Christs owne words Luke 24 59. where our Sauiour to proue himselfe to bee noe ghoste but to haue a true body after his resurrection thus reasoneth Behold my hands my feet that I am the same handle me for a spirit hath no flesh and bones as yee see me haue This was Christs argument I haue a body therefore I am not a spirit and so I reason against you and your teachers The men in Noahs time had bodies ergo they could not be called spirits Euery boy can tel you in Oxford that substantia is deuided into corpus and spiritum and that one of these opposite species can not be affirmed of another And therfore to be short when you can proue out of the new Testament that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is iournying is spoken figuratiuely of the deity or Pneuma that is spirit signifieth a man y â— hath a body I will giue you the goale but if you will runne on this course vntill you haue proued these 2. points which you must doo if you will haue me to recant then take heede least you run your selfe out of breath Lastly the word Phylake that is prison doth signify hel as it is to be sene Apoc. 20. 7. When a thousand yeeres shall be fulfilled Satan shall be losed out of his prison Thus thou seest good reader how I haue proued my interpretatioÌ„ out of the word of God for euery word which our aduersaries can not doo for their interpretation therfore thou maist safely assure thy self ours to be good and theirs to be false And that this word prison doth signify hell you may see Epiphanius Athanasius Fulgentins centuria 1. lib. 2. cap. 14. Peter Martyr on the Crede Nowell in his Catechisme Beacon in the sick mans salue Crowlev in his answer to the reasons of Pound the Papist All these old and new writers haue alleadged this Scripture as I haue done with good warrant and conscience Now that I haue proued this my owne interpretation I will by Gods grace proue your answere to be friuolous First you confesse that killed and quickned are Participles of one tense and yet you say they are not referred to Christ at one time this is meerlye false as I thus proue Christ was after his passion dead aliue or neuer if he were neuer dead and aliue at one time then Peter saith not truly if he were dead and aliue at on time then you speak falsely Now you your selfe confessed that he was dead and aliue at on time alittle before and proued it out of the 2. Cor. 13. 4. He was crucified concerning his infirmity yet liueth hee by the power of God Heere by your own woords Christ was aliue when he was crucified so may I say w t Pet. he was aliue when he was dead at one time Then you say the flesh signifieth the manhode and spirite the deitye this also is vntrue for the body may be killed but the soule can not Again shew me any Scripture where on and the sam word in on sentence and period is taken for diuers things for in this sentence In which spirite hee went and preached to the spirits that ar in prison Heer the word spirit in the beginning of the sentence signifieth the deity in the latter end the same woord signifieth the men that liued in Noahs time by your interpretation but by my interpretation it signifieth the soule seperate from the body in both places For as Cirill saith as Christ was with the liuing in body and soule so to shew himselfe a true man his body was among the dead bodies and his soule among the soules Then you auouch the preching of Noah is attributed to the whole Trinity be it so but can you proue that Christ after he was killed did prech in Noah for this preaching was after Chriâ—â—s death which is mentioned in the 18. verse and before his resurrection which is spoken of in the 21. verse You goe forward and tell mee that pote doth not determine the Participle apeithesasi that is disobedient but ekeryxen that is preached I must tell you plaine you speak neither like a Deuine nor a Gramarian For an Aduerb is some time put to a Participle as Math. 2. 7. Tote erodes lathra kalesas tous magous Then Herod calling priuilye the wise men Sometime to a Noune as homo egregie impudens Somtime to an Aduerb as parum honeste se gerit Therfore the Aduerb pote comming after apeithesasi next immediatly and being distinguished from ekeryxen by a Comma cannot by any example in diuinitye or by any rule of Grammer be coupled with the verb ekeryxen Now to answer your infallible reasons First your reason against me that if my construction bee true then nothing did happen to Christ which might not be verified of any man And did you not blush wheÌ„ you wrote these things Can any mans soule goe to hell and returne againe For his going downe to hell I proue in the 19. verse and his returning from hell in the 21. verse Secondly you say the word spirit doth signifie that which gaue life what then as God giueth life to the body effectually so the soule giueth life to the body formally Your Geueua translation which you follow saith hee was quickned in the spirite not of the spirit And this I note against your side en in the 18. verse you translate In But in the next verse as though you had not done well in the former you translate it by Now you know the preposition dia signifieth by and not en as it appereth in the 21. verse and in many places mo dia anastaseos that is by the resurrection Moreouer if you had said quickned of the spirite then had you made a probable answer but no diuine is able to proue this exposition that Christ was quickned in the spirit that is in the deity for the deity is life it selfe Your third pregnant reason is that thanatotheis signifieth not only the death of the body but also the whole passion of Christ This can not be for the suffrings of Christ are set downe before in the same verse then in this word thanatotheis is shewed the maner of the death that Christ suffered that is hee was killed and
10. reasons and put other 10. to the other scale to counter-weigh them You neither defend your owne nor answere mine in order as they ly But like a mad Dog snatch heere one and there another and let them goe that you cannot bite I cannot follow your steppes they be so crooked Wherefore I will walke on my first steppes and seeke your answeres where I can finde them That which I say of the vse of the words you confesse and diuers of my reasons you slip without an answere The first of my reasons was from these wordes mortified in the flesh and quickened in the Spirit Thus If flesh heere doth signifie the body and spirit the humane soule then nothing in these words is spokeÌ„ of Christ that may not be verified of other men But in these words some singular matter is attributed to Christ that other men are not capable of For we cannot say that Augustine Ierome or Cyprian are mortified in the flesh and quickened in the spirit in that sense as it is heere spoken of Christ Ergo flesh is not the bodie and spirit the humane soule of Christ That which you answere of his desceÌ„ding into Hell and returning thence is not comprised in these words wheron my argument is builded though you gaue them your owne liverie and cloathed them in your owne cullours The second was this The Spirit heer doth signifie that which gaue life to that which was dead But the humane soul gaue not life to that that was dead Ergo the spirit doth not signifie the humane soule Heere you denie the maior and alleadge against the 〈…〉 which you call ours and should bee yours as well as ours if you and others of 〈…〉 highlie 〈…〉 in the flesh and 〈…〉 mortified as hee was man and quickened as hee was God by himselfe According to that of Iohn I haue power to lay downe my life and I haue power to take it vp againe Take your note of in and by and make a wheele-barrow of it But you moue me heere another question of some importance and craue an instance if I can in all the Scripture Howe one word in one period can carie two significations You are not I hope so verie an novice in Gods booke as you make your selfe Haue you not read Let the dead burie their dead Or labour not for the meat that perisheth but the meate that lasteth c. Or Who so will saue his life shall lose it Or Abraham rejoiced to see my day and saw it Or God is a spirit and will be worshipped in spirit wher you haue the same word in both significations O howe you would be-slouen mee if you could finde such a hole in my hose Now I feare nothing but that you craued an instance out of the olde Testament The third was If death whensoeuer it is attributed to Christ in the Scriptures compriseth the whole passion the fleshe in this text must be the subject of the whole passion that is the whole manhoode of Christ But deth is neuer attributed to christ but for the whol passioÌ„ Ergo flesh must be the subject of the passion that is the whole manhood of Christ Heer you denie the minor and like a skilfull Logician giue instance in the questioÌ„ If you haue not forgot your olde logicke the argument and the thing argued should not be one You supplie the imperfection of this answere with two arguments 〈…〉 that death in this place cannot signifie the passion 〈…〉 Your first reson is that the passion is mentioned before in the word suffred Be it so Yet it may bee repeated in more speciall tearmes By your reason in the beleef where a repetition is lesse tollerable crucified and died belong not to the passion because they are expressed before in the word suffered Suffering which may be in torturing whipping and imprisonment is too slacke a tearme to expresse the hellish tormentes of Christs passion The other is if mortified pertaine to the soule and bodie it will followe that the soule is also mortall You tell mee out of Athanasius in the reply to my fift section that by the double punishment inflicted on Adam the soule should die the death And I heard you preach in our Ladie Church at Sarum That when it was saide to Adam thou shalt die the death the meaning was he should die the death of soule and bodie Now if you wil apply these two significations of death to Christ the one to the bodie and the other to the soule I hope this objection wil neither scratch nor byte My fourth reason was this In this Antithesis mortified in the flesh and quickened in the spirite morfied belongeth not to the spirit nor quickened to the fleshe but mortified belongs to the soule for it died the death of the soule and quickened to the 〈◊〉 for it receaued life againe Ergo flesh is not the bodie onlie and spirit the humane soule To this you answere that Christ was raised from the dead and that was signified in the word resurrection vers 21. and therefore you do not confound these distinguished things antitheticallie opposed But wee that make mortâ—â—ed suffered quickned resurrection all one How this may answere mee I leaue it to the â—ead that bred it to explane But you do vs wroÌ„g we make not mortified suffered one c. Suffered and quickned ar tearms more general mortified raised againe more speciall expressing things more plainlie and particularie which were touched before more covertâ—â— and generallie My fift reason was To be quickened is to receaue life which the thing that is quickened either neuer had or els had loste But the soule had life in the bodie and neuer 〈◊〉 after Ergo the soule cannot bee quickened To this you answere nothing but tell vs by the same reason it can much lesse pertaine to the Deitie Thus thinking to wound vs with our owne weapon you strike short and with the back drawe blood at your owne brow I told you in my answere to your second objection that quickened is not heer attributed to the Deitie but to the whole Christ by the participatioÌ„ of proprieties How can you excuse your self heere of wilfull falsification But you mend the matter with a more sufficieÌ„t answere out of Ioh. That the soule of the beleeuer liueth though hee were dead What then Iohn telleth not your tale that the soule of the beleeuer is quickened when hee is dead That it liueth is not the question The burden of the bodie which you alledge out of the book of Wisd loadeth the soule but killeth it not And therfore when it is deliuered of that load it is not quickened but releeued And the renewing of the inward man which you alleadge from Paule quickneth not the soule being dead but addeth courage and comfort to the living and languishing soule by Gods promises Heere I see you are quite thrust froÌ„ your hold at Chippenham that
bee in Latine Thus much for the aunswere that you deale with You left another answere which I will heere set against your argument in his best liuery If the man is said to be say you wher the soule is then where the man is not the soule is not But the man is saide to bee where the soule is Ergo where the man is not the soule is not First say I the maior is not true For though the man may bee said to bee where the soule is by a Synecdoche yet it will not follow that where the man is not the soule is not Because this speach is simple and that is figuratiue In a good argument the wordes must carie one face not heere one and there another To examplifie this with your owne examples out of Math 8. Manie shall rest with Abraham Isaac and Iacob in the kingdome of heauen Abraham Isaac and Iacob are said to be in heauen by a figure becaus their soules are there But if you will take the words simplie and conclude because Abraham that is the whole man is not in heauen therefore his soule is not there euerie carter will finde the absurditie of your fallacie This for my first reply Now I add that you flee from the wordes of the text For Christ said not to Marie I haue not beene with my Father but I am not yet ascended to my Father which wordes will admit no forme to carie your conclusion turne them and winde them as you list For the Scripture denieth in plaine words that the name of ascension can be giuen to the soule I hope you will grant that Dauids soule is in heauen and yet of him it is saide Act. 2. 34. David is not ascended This wypeth also away your other objection of two ascensions For that name was neuer yet giuen to a man in respect of the soule And therefore I will haue the goale though you stand in it You wring out of my examples of the whole race of mankind Campions bodie two absurdities The one that I hold no greater vnion betweene Christs soule and his bodie then al the men in the world The other that I holde the soule of Christ to bee mortall because I compare it to an integral part of Campions body Why M. Doctor haue you now you are Doctored forgot the olde speach of the Schooles when you were a generall Quae comparantur in vno non comparantur in omnibus Things cōpared in one thing are not like in all things You may bee like your Father and yet perhappes your Father coulde not wrangle in this matter like your selfe And the Cuckow singeth onelie in the spring like the Nightingall though in melodie and variety of notes there bee no likelie-hood at all An argument taken indefinitly from the manhood of Christ to his soule and his bodie parts thereof is no better then from the race of mankinde to euerie particular man or from the bodie of the traitour Campion to the parts thereof And yet if you regarde the vnion of the soule body or the immortality of the soule there is no more comparison then betweene your spirit and your Fathers if it was righter or the Cuckowes song and the Nightingals beeing far sweeter Lastlie you tel mee that I vtter a great error in these wordes the whole man Christ Indeede if I had said man the whole Christ I had perchance opened my head to this venew But now I am faster locked then that you can fasten anie blowes vpon mee with the best weapons in your armorie For seeing the worde of truth doeth call Christ a man so manie times I am perswaded it wil not proue so foule an errour to cal the whole man Christ except you can proue that some part of him was Christ and not the whole The testimonie of Athanasius to confute this errour toucheth not mee The conclusion out of Irenaeus though it might haue a favourable construction I leaue it amongst the judgements of men which you haue promised not to trust sect 3. HVME Sect. 12. NOwe let vs come to the great bulwark of your defense which you made choise of to raze the whole worke vpon I meane to bee the text of your sermon It is written in the first of Pet 3. That Christ was put to death in the flesh and was quickened in the spirit By the which spirit he went and preached to the spirites that are in prison and were disobedients in the dayes of Noah c Heere Beza whome we follow because he commeth nearest to the true sense of the Apostle by this word Spirit doth giue vs to vnderstand the Deity of Christ following Iohn who called God a Spirit and by this word flesh his māhood containing both his body and soule as hee findeth it vsed of Paule God was made manifest in the fleshe Which Antithesis of the divine and humane nature Paule doeth also expresse in the same wordes which was made of the seede of Dauid according to the fleshe and declared mightelie to bee the sonne of God according to the Spirit Where you see that he vseth the words no otherwise then he findeth them vsed in the Scriptures Now that this cānot be the sense of them you reason thus First say you this Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie some motion from some place can by no meanes agree with the diuine essence which beeing at one time in all places cānot at anie time leaue any place To this I answere that it is spoken of the same spirit in the 18. of Gen. I will go downe and see whether the Sodomites haue done according to the crie that is come vnto mee And in Exod. 3. I am come to deliuer them out of the hands of the Aegyptians You can not bee ignorant M. Hill that the spirit of God speketh so manie times of the Deity by a figure called Anthropopatheia when God doth declare his presence in one place more thē in another by some notable effect Which in this place was most necessary to note vnto vs the cōtinual presence of Christ in his church departing as it were from all other places which indeede hee cannot and sitting in it as it were a continual ruler and moderator therof Next you alledge the other participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is quickened that because it is a passiue it can not stand with the Deitie which cannot suffer at al. This we denie not For we attribute not this participle to the Deitie but to the whole Christ God and man Neither doth the text say that the spirit was quickned but that Christ was quickened in the Spirit Thirdlie you tel mee that mortified and quickened are contraries both attributed to Christ at once to note vnto vs that he was both dead and aliue at one instant Heere we confesse that they be attributed to one Christ but why they shold be referred to one time wee see no reason to induce vs to think it To this
preach beeing destitute of a tongue mouth and other organes of necessitie required in that action Eightlie to what end shuld Christ preach to those damned soules who were past the frute of his preaching that which you say that he went to reproue them is not liklie For meÌ„ are reproued either for amendement or to take away excuses which to these was needlesse beeing past all remedie and excuse Ninthlie this preaching was then when their dis-obedience was reform-able which was in the dayes of Noah and neuer since Add to these if it please you that moste infallible reason of Bezaes taken from the drift and scope of the text to whose notes I referre you being not able to handle it so well as hee hath done it himself HIL his Reply HEere you play the Captaine and will beate down bulwarks and therefore you should haue these 4. properties in you vertue knowledge authority and felicity for the first two they are in you God grant you vse theÌ„ to his glory but what authority you haue to interpret the word I know not therefore in this case I hope you shall haue no felicitie Where you say that this word spirit doth signifie the deity and this word flesh the humanity of Christ and that there is an antithesis betwene the diuine humane nature I confesse y â— spirit some time doeth signifie the Godhead and fleshe the humanity of Christ But they doo not so signifie in this place as I proue by the circumstances of the text and the woords them selues For where you say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 killed or put to death doth signifie the whole passion of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the resurrection of Christ that can note be for of the passion of Christ is mention made before in the same 18. verse Christ suffered for vs the just for the vnjust to bring vs to God Now after his sufferings ended as Peter saith he was both killed and made aliue Now of his resurrection is mention made in the 21. verse as of his ascention in the 22. verse Therfore seeing the sufferings of Christ are mentioned before and his resurrection is namelye set downe after whereof can these words he vnderstood but of the seperation of the body and the soule and of the state of them during their seperation for an antithesis as you know is of contrary or diuers things as in this place you see in killed and quickned now how both these were true at on time S. Peter doth shew for at the same time he was dead as concerning his body he was aliue in spirit that is in soule for the soule seperate from the body is aptly called a spirite Eccle. 12. 7. And dust returne to earth as it was and the spirite returne to God that gaue it So is it taken Heb. 12. 23. Act. 7. 49. and so doth this woord signifie in this place for Christ was not killed both in body and soule but only in body and in flesh for if the soule of Christ had bene killed then had it bene mortall Therefore Athanasius Epiphanius and all the Fathers which did confute the Heretiques called Damoerite and Appolinaris which denyed Christ to haue a soule do coÌ„fute them by this place prouing that his spirite was among the spirits that his soule seperate from his body was among the soules seperate from their bodies This interpretation you see is gathered out of Gods woord is made more manifest by the wordes following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate In which sprite he went and preached to the spirits in prison First you translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the which But in the 1. pet 16 you do not so translate it nor in the 2. Chap. and 12. ver the same woorde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Eph. 1. 13. 2. 22. 5. 18. and so could I cite at the least an hundreth texts in the new Testament where if you translat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the which or by whome you shall ouerthrow the meaning of the holy ghost The next word construing is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wâ—ich as I haue saide before so I auouche still is spoken noâ— of the deity neuer in all the Scriptures and therefore must needes be spoken of the soul of Christ To conâ—ute this you alleadg Gen. 18. 21. Exod. 3. 8. First I must tell you these bookes were written in the Hebrewe tong and not in the Ereâ—ke I craued an instant out of the new Testament Secondly in those places that you haue named y â— interpreters do traÌ„slate Iarad by y â— greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this I proue Iohn 16. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if I shall not depart the comforter wil not come vnto you but if I shal depart I will send him vnto you Heere you see when he speketh of the descending of the deity he vseth y â— word 368 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but when he speaketh of the humanitie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the same chapter verse the 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I came out from the Father and cam into the world againe I leaue the world and goe to my father And this proprietie of speach which the holy ghost vseth ought to be obserued I confesse the scriptures vseth the figure Anthropopatheia but when God is said to come downe there is vsed the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or some one of the forenamed and when mention is made of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is alwaies spoken of the humanitie as it is to be seen Luk. 4. 30. 9. 51. 52. 56. 57. Luk. 13. 22. Ioh. 8. 1. And in this place of Peter the last verse is vsed the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He went vp into heauen Therfore if you can quote but one text in the new Testament that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is figuratiuely applied to the deitie your interpretation may seeme tolerable but if yon can not as I knowe it is impossible then can you neuer proue your interpretation to be agreaeble to faith because it is not agreable to y â— word Out of the next word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this I note he that was killed and quickned did preach but Christ was killed and quickned ergo Christ not the deitie preched He preched not vocally for he was killed ergo he preached really in soule for here is noted First who preached Christ To whom to the spirits Where in hell When after his death and before his resurrection This is the order of Peter and of our Creede which cannot bee by man ouerthrowen The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
to bee quickned is to bee deliuered from miseries Ingenuitie woulde haue confessed a fault You conclude with a confutatioÌ„ of the Antithesis between the divinity humanity but my reason is froÌ„ an Antithesis between mortified quickned flesh spirit which you by a corrupted glose taking quickned for a deliuerie froÌ„ miries did ouerthrow Yet because I said that Paul maketh that antithesis Rom. 1. It shal not be impertineÌ„t to view your reasons An Antithesis must be say you of things opposite and contrarie I add the Diuinitie and humanitie bee thinges opposite Ergo there may be an Antithesis of the Diuinity and the humanitie But they are vnited say you What then So be the flesh and the spirit and yet Christ saieth the Spirit is readie but the fleshe is weake A common Logician much more a Doctor should know that no vniting of thinges betweene which a difference may be obserued can let an Antithesis if occasion serue Notwithstanding the vniting a man may wel say Christ as hee was man was passible as hee was God he was impassible To these reasons I added more in my latine which I sent you The spirit heere doth signifie that which his enemies hell death could not touch according to the text he was quickened in the spirit But his humane soule escaped not the violence of his enemies Ergo the word spirit heere doth not signifie his humane soule To this you make no answere The seaventh was This spirit of which he speaketh heere did preach But the humane soule cannot preach Ergo the spirit heere is not the humane soule To this you answere that he preached not vocallie but reallie that is not in words but in deeds A dumb man may preach so as well as D. Hill If you stand 7. dayes in the pulpit of the great Church at Sarum and say nothing there bee not 7. men within 700. myles that wil commend your sermon The eight was Whosoeuer doth preach he doth it either to amend the enormities of the hearers or to instruct them in the waye of saluation But this was not to be hoped for in damned spirits Ergo hee preached not in Hell to damned spirits Heere you answere that he preached to reproue them of their infidelitie but you fall still in one ditch He that reproueth infidelitie doeth it either to mend it or to take away excuses But there was no such hope in these that were past all remedie and excuse The ninth was This preaching was when the disobedience of the hearers was reforme-able But this was onelie reforme-able in the dayes of Noah Ergo this preaching was not but in the daies of Noah This hath no answere The tenth was from the circumstances of the text and necessarie Analysis thereof Which I remitted to Beza who hath done that better then I can and whose notes it is not likelie that you want hauing such a Librarie as you speake of sect 7. You in the margent will mee to read Aretius and Alesius The one I haue read and the other cannot moue mee though hee be my countrie-man I haue learned to preferre truth before men what euer they be These were my reasons which I joined to the lawfull vse of the words proved by Iohn Paul and Peter In them so ouer-smoked is your sense you smell no reason at all But tell your reader that we cannot proue ouâ— interpretations by the Scriptures as you do yours and yet you bring nothing for your owne but that the words may bee so taken and a fewe sillie conjectures answered before by mee Nowe having set downe mine let mee see howe stoutlie you haue defended yours THe first was Poreutheis that is went doth signifie motion from one place to another But the Deitie cannot moue from anie place being at al times in all places Ergo poreutheis is not attributed to the Deitie To the minor of this argument I aunswered out of the 18. of Genesis and 3. of Exodus That the God-head is saide to mooue from place to place by a figure called Anthropopatheia You reply that the bookes that I cite are written in Hebrewe And that the interpreters doe translate that hebrew word by katabainein or erchesthai and not porâ—uesthaâ— As if the Hebrewe tongue which is called lingua sancta were fitter to speak improperly of God then the Greeke or that poreuesthai had gotten some speciall licence more then anie other verbs of motion to be free from that figure Yet if it will please you to read Exod. 13. 2. Nomb. 14. 14. Deut. 1. 33. Exod. 33. 3. Psal 132. 8. Deut. 31. 3. Psal 71. 12. Psal 88. 7. and infinite such places more you shall find that plakket deere of a naked q. without a cap. But suppose that I could not finde it attributed to the Deitie in all these Scriptures yet you were not the nearer your marke For if you bee remembred your reason was in Chippenham that poreuesthai cannot bee giuen to the Deitie because it is a verb of motion Now the maior of your syllogism must be that no verb of motion can bee attributed to the Deitie Which maior being crased by my first answere and the examples there alledged There is no reason left you why poreuesthai cannot be attributed to the Deitie as wel as erchesthai or katabainein and no reason you knowe is too weake against ten such stout reasons as I haue sent you forcing this sense vpon this place Your next argument was from the participle quickned thus No passiue can agree with the Deitie Quickned is a passiue Ergo it cannot agree with the Deitie This syllogism I granted to be good and told you withall that wee doe not attribute this Participle to the Deitie but to the whole Christ by participation of proprieties following the text which saith not that the flesh was mortified and the spirit quickned but that Christ was mortified in the flesh and quickened in the spirite This answere you stroke off your skore Your third argument was from the tense or time 〈…〉 bee attributed to Christ at one time they note that hee was deade and aliue at one time But the first is true Ergo the last is true To this I answere denying the maior That participles or verbs of one time attributed to one thing muste needes pertaine to one time In the beleef wee say that Christ was crucified dead and buried where crucified dead buried be all of one tense or time yet agree not all to Christ at one instance of time To this you reply that they muste pertaine to one time and proue your maior thus Christ was after his passion dead or aliue at on time or else neuer If he were neuer dead and aliue at one time S. Peter speaketh not trulie If hee were dead and aliue at one time then I speake falselie In this Syllogisme is neither mood nor
figure and besides that it standeth on a begging of the question That Peter saieth hee was at one time deade and aliue is the question and you take that as if it were granted Your fourth reason was If Peter saith that the flesh was dead and the Spirit quickened then doeth hee shew that he was both dead and aliue at one time But the first is true Ergo the last is not false The minor of this Syllogisme I did denie shewing that it is flat against the text which saieth not that the fleshe was dead and the spirit quickened But that Christ was dead in the flesh and quickned in the spirit This reason it pleaseth you of your courtesie to send away in secrete without a God be with you Your fifth reason was The Scripture doth join this going preaching cloase to his passion as if it wold say As soone as hee had suffered hee went and preached I answered you that as and if did carie too weake a consequence in so waightie a matter This asse sadled with an if 〈…〉 Your sixt reason was out of the 6. of Genes That the preaching of Noah is there attributed to the third person of the Deitie and not to the second The words of that text bee The Lord said My spirit shall not alwaies striue with man because hee is but fleshe Which wordes I answered you in the Latine that I sent you that I neuer sawe anie interpreters that doe consent with you in this exposition and interprete these words of the third person of the Deitie Tremelius and Iunius their judgement I set down as that I liked best who take these words to be a Hebraisme sounding as if he had said I wil not alwaies stand disputing with my selfe what to do with these men which yeeld no frutes but of flesh blood for nowe I am determined except they repent to destroy them at the day appointed Notwithstanding granting you that it were as you would haue it I tolde you seeing the actions of euery person of the Deitie are common to all three hee erreth not that giueth them to anie of the three This you confesse to be true But you ask me if I can proue that Christ preached in Noah after his passion affirming confidentlie that this was attributed to him of Peter after the passion It were requisite that you had good proof according to the waight of this case and your confidence in speaking it But I will ease you of that burden Proue it out of the text with anie reasonable shew of truth and you shall haue my hart and hand The order of the wordes which you stand so stoutlie vpon is not so strict as you would haue it For the purpose and drift of the Apostle heere is to perswade vs to patience by the example of our Saviour and not to set out his death descending and resurrection in order as they were done but obiter as they fall in hand and followe the matter that heere he driveth to perswade Your seauenth reason was if Christ was raised from the dead by the first person of the Deitie and not by the second then the word spirit heere cānot be construed of the Deitie but Christ was raised by the first person and not by the second Ergo c. I might well haue tolde you that this minor is absurde and flat against the plaine text Ioh. 5. 21. Whatsoeuer thing the Father doth the same the sonne doeth also with him And Ioh. 10. 18. which wordes I did quote not farre before in the defence of my second reason I haue power to lay downe my life and I haue power to take it vp again But then sparing you and refraining all hard speeches how euer they were due I onelie tolde you that I sawe not howe that could stand with the trueth of the Scriptures which telleth mee that the second person did put on man and did not forsake him in all his distresses You reply in the margent of your written copy see contrarie to this Act 4. 40 Act. 13. 30. 1. Cor. 15. 15. Which places I haue marked obserued to make nothing against my assertion In them the raising vp of christ is attributed to the God-head which worketh not as I haue noted alreadie one person without another Which thing if it bee an errour it was Iohn that seduced mee cap. 5. 7. The Father worketh and I work As the Father doth raise vp the deade so the sonne likewise doth raise vp whome he will And in the 17. verse quoted a little aboue The same is agreable to other infinite places of Scripture and the somme of our Faith called the beleef which saieth the third day hee rose againe and not that hee was raised againe Your eight reason was If the time that they were preached to and of their disobedience was not one then this preaching is not to bee vnderstood of Noah his preaching in the time of their disobedience But the adverbe pote doth distinguish those times Ergo c. To this I answere that the Adverb pote doth not determine the participle apeithesasi but the principall verbe ekeryxen You replie that I speak neither like a Divine nor like a Grammarian To proue me no divine which indeede I am not and no Grammarian which I am but little you alledge no Diuinitie and little grammer It will not followe that because it may stand with a Participle therefore it is so heere or that because it is distinguished from the verb with a comma therefore it cannot determine it at all You are not ouer-loden with Grammar if you knowe not that diuerse and manie reasons may part wordes depending one on the other by a comma And as for this place pote if it did depend as you would haue it vpon apeithesasi it cannot bee distinguished from ekeryxen with a comma seing apeithesasi it self is gouerned of ekeryxen without commixture of anie interjected member to parte them What euer your book hath take heed that it be not a stain to your skill in grammar to credite a book in such a case Your ninth argument was Noah preched to men These were spirits not men Ergo Noah preached not to these I answered that whosoeuer preacheth to men preacheth to spirites because no men want spirits that is reasonable soules And now I ad that they are heer called Spirits in respect of their imprisonment not in respect of his preaching If hee had called them men then the name of prison wherein they are now datained had beene improper The Apostle wiselie choosed that worde which might best agree with both those times Bezaes opinion also whereto Andradius the Papist agreeth is most probable that pote doth determine the same Participle apeithesasi and doeth distinguish it from tois en phylake pneumasi which must needs be vnderstood in the present time by vertue of the
participle ousi in that kind of phrase in Greek most necessarily alwaies implyed You reply not one worde to the purpose but charging vs with that we neuer spake nor thought that we take these spirits for the men in Noahs time you alleadge Christs words against vs Luk. 24. 39. But if you were a man that coulde marke the wordes of them that dispute against you take them as they are spoken you should finde that wee say not that hee preached to the spirites in the dayes of Noah But to the spirites that nowe are in prison and were disobedient in the dayes of Noah If you can anie waies turne Christs wordes in Luke to confute this you neede not to care what thinges you take vpon you to proue If you can proue that Noah preaching to the men of his time did not preach to their Spirites or that these spirits in prison which Peter speaketh heer of were not the same that rebelled in the dayes of Noah you may driue vs from this holde otherwise you may throw your cap at vs. Last of all you charge our construction with violence I answered that you do vs wrong charging vs with things that none of vs do speak Which answer you passe by with silence and so allow it for currant To these you haue added two new ones which to take away all scruple I will answere also First say you if the word phylake doth signifie hel then Christ did descend into hell But phylake doeth signifie Hell Ergo c. I denie the maior it will not follow though phylake doeth signifie hell as heere it doth indeed Metaphoricallie that therefore Christ descended into Hell neither doth the place that you quote of Math. proue that you would haue except you can proue also that phylake hath no other signification then the prison of vtter darknesse c. Your other reason is He that was killed dead and quickened did preach But it was Christ that was killed dead and quickned Ergo it was Christ that preached and not his Deitie Christ and not his Deitie M. Doctor Can Christ preach and not his Deitie You may say what you will If I had let fall such a word you would haue cried Crucifige But to answere you I denie the maior It is against the text He was mortified that is killed and dead in the fleshe and that preached not Hee was quickned in the spirite and in that hee went and preached That which preached was neither killed nor dead neither was it self quickened but Christ was quickened in it These are all your objections In my answere to your sermon I answered 10. of them You haue replyed to 6. of them and to the other 4. you haue giuen a pardon at large neuer to be troubled by you Your six replyes I haue heere rejoyned too and haue met your newe supplies at the encounter and haue sent them home to you for new help All your forces thus defeated and so mightie and resolute an armie against you if there bee anie conformitie in you if your neck be not so stiffe that no bridle can turn it I hope you will get you to Chippenhames pulpit and performe your promise HVME Sect. 13. THese things being thus I pray you good M. D. seeing you woulde haue vs vndoubtedly to beleeue that Christ descended into Hell Tel vs vndoutedly to what ende he should descend thither I trust you will not teach vs neither Augustine neither Ieromes lesson that he went thither to deliuer prisoners As for that new lesson that he went thither to triumph it standeth not with the maner of conquerours to shew the glorie of their conquest amongst the conquered but amongst them to whom the ioy of the victorie doth appertaine and for mine owne part I haue oftentimes read the name of Hell ioyned with shame and ignomie but to this day I neuer hard it ioyned with triumph and glorie Neither seemeth it probable that if Christ had purposed to shewe the pompe of his conquest he woulde haue done it before his resurrection lest being yet in the handes of his enemie he had meâ—t him with the proverbe Ante victoriam c. To these reasons may be added that seeing his triumph was celebrated at one instance in Heauen Earth and Hell if the presence of his soule was required as you beare in hand it will followe that his soule was at one instant in these three places which is contrary to the nature of a soule You adde two other causes to binde the deuill and deliuer vs from hel You bring vs many places of Scripture to confirme this geare Gen. 3. 15. The seed of the woman shal break the Serpents head Ose 13 15. O death I will be thy death O hell I wil be thy destructioÌ„ 1. Cor. 15. 55. O death where is thy sting O hell where iâ— thy victorie In all which places there is not a sillable sounding that Christ descended into hell As for his triumphing ouer Hell we neuer denied it and do avouch that he performed that moste gloriouslie by the power of his God-head which did present his victorie ouer his enemies hell and death both to heven earth and Hel without the presence of his soule HIL his Reply YOu aske me why Christ descended into hell and yet you coÌ„fes I noted three ends of Christs descending into hell the one to triumph ouer the Diuels the other to binde the Diuels and to take away their power ouer mankind the 3. to deliuer vs from hell There was also set downe a fourth end that is to manifest his death vnto those in hel and to reproue them of their incredulity and heer labouring to catch me in a snare you are fallen into it your selfe for firste you say Christ conquered hell on the Crosse then as hauing forgotten your selfe you aske this question with admiration Howe could he conquer being in the graue Is it likly that hee would triumph before his victory First you stoutly affirme that he had conquered then you boldly deny it CoÌ„neniet nnlli qui secuÌ„ dissidet ipse Next you say you haue not read the name of hell but ioyned with shame and infamie why do you write then that the Godhead did triumph ouer hel Did you not read your owne writing I am sure in this place 1. Cor. 15. 55. O death where is thy sting O hell where is thy victory The nam of hel is ioined with triumph But you answere these places with a flat negatiue heere is not a sillable to proue the descending of Christ into hell I am sure Paule proueth heer the resurrection of Christ and of our soules and how can he proue the resurrection vnlesse hee proue the knitting together of the body and soule for as death is the parting of body soule so resurrection is the reuniting of them togither againe and heer Paule
demum reddidit animatum quo purius inde ferretur ad coelum Here this man maketh the place where Christ was buried the mouth of hell meaning thereby the place of death our Doctor denies that and yet this is one of his Authors Aretius in the ninth of his common places fol. 31. Sed de illâ— non satis constat quamdiu apud inferos sit commoratus non diu vt apparet vt eadem die secundum animam ab inferis reversus gloriose Paradisum ingressus sit cum latrone Heere this man saith that Christ was not one day in hell M. Doctor saith that hee was there al the three daies that he lay in the graue and yet this is his chefest Authour Maister Nowell in his greater Catechisme saith Christum vt coâ—pore in terrae viscera Ita anima à corpore sepâ—rata ad inferos descendisse simulque etiam virtutis suae virtutem atque efficacitatem ad moâ—tuos atque inferos adeo ipsos ita penetrasse vt incredulorum animae acerbissimâ—m justissimamque infidelitatis suae daÌ„nationem â—pseque Satanas iâ—ferorum princeps tyrannidis suae tenebrarum potestatem omnem debâ—â—itatam fractam aâ—que ruina collapsâ—m â—ssâ— persentiret Contra vero mortui Christo dum vixerunt fidentes redemptionis suae â—pus jam peractum esse ejusq vim atque virtutem cum suavissima cerâ—â—ssimaque consolatione intelligeâ—ent atque perciperent Heere gentle Reader because Maister Doctor wrongeth this good man then whome the earth beareth not many and as I am perswaded 〈◊〉 any better I pray thee mark this place well for these are the onely wordes that M. Doctor challengeth in all his workes First thâ—u maâ—est obserue that he vseth the name inferi not for the damned onely but for al the dead because he saith that by Christs descending ad inferos both the wicked felt the justnes of their damnation and the godly the sweetnes of their salvation and so Christus descendit ad inferos is but Christ descended to the dead Secondly that he saith not that Christs soule descended into the hell of the damned as our Doctor doth but that his soul being severed from his body that is beeing departed this life he discended ad inferos that is was laid vp amongst them whose life was blotted out of the memory of the living Thirdly hee saith not that those to whome he descended saw him there personally but they felt and vnderstood the one their jâ—st damnation the other their sweet salvation together with his descending to the dead that is presently vpon the dissolution of his soule and body Wherefore great wrong hath our D. done this man to wâ—ing hiâ— words being somewhat obscure to a sense that he never meant and to brag of him as being the father of an opinion that I dare hope for he is yet aliue he doth disallow His opinion is amongst all the godly allowed to be true thâ—ugh not so wel fitting the article of the Creed but our D. opinion no man accepteth yet for trueth except it be himself and his favorities Thus I haue set down what jarring there is betweene this man and his authors Now I will shewe thee how he hath pulled some into this braul that never dealt in the matter to make his muster booke long ynough to feare mâ—n with naked names Robert Samuell in the boâ—ke of Martyrs making a confession of his faith when he comes to this point saith no more thaÌ„ the words of the beleefe which be meant as wel with vs as with him and him he quotes for one Lambeâ—t in the same book handling the question of the real presence quotes a place out of Aug. ad Dardanum to proue that Christ being corporally in heaven is not corporally in the Sacrament in which place being long Aug. amongst those things that Lambert quotes him for saith that Christ according to his soule was in the bottome of hel which if it be wel taken may be was devoured and swallowed vp of death but Lambert himselfe neither alloweth nor dissalloweth it as being a thing beside his question and yet hee is alleadged for one M. Fox writeth a litle Pamphlet intituled Christ triumphing be cause in it is displaied the greatnes of the battell the worthines of the victory the joye of the conquest The Printer for I think M. Fox neuer cared greatly what signe they hanged at his shop dore or if it was M. Fox himselfe all is one devised a picture to expresse the matter within the book A man with foure wound in his hands fect invested in a bright cloud with a glistering flame as it were of fame glory glimmering about his face standing with the one foot on the head of a Dragon and the other on the heart of death This picture M. Doctor tooke to be so sure an argument of Christs descending into hell that he not onely causeth to set it before his owne bâ—â—k likewise but also repeateth the name of M. Fox 4. times if not oftner as favouring his opinion hauing to my knowledge not one word in al his works and I am sure not one syllable in the book which he quotes of Christ triumphing saving that picture Thus gentle Reader I haue giuâ—n thee a vewe of 23. of M. Doctors Authors of whome some speake against him some differ from him some say nothing for him wherefore thou maiest conclude that it is but a painted cause that alleadgeth pictures for arguments there is not one of al the Authours that he masters so often that agreeth with him in all things concerning this opinion Cajetane a Cardinall of Rome writing vpon the place of Peter Iâ— he had not scarred at his popish name commeth neeâ—er him than any of these Vt ipse Christus mortificatus carne nam vere mortuus est secundum carnem viuificatus autem spiritu nam tunc cum mortuus erat viuificatus erat spiritu vt pote beatus secundum spiritum triumphans de daemonibus Here he hath his descending into hell his triumphing over the Deuils his being aliue when he was dead and his flesh for the body spirit for the humane soule Therefore good Reader let him follow Cajetan and follow thou the trueth FINIS The second consideration is better than the first The admitting of a man to a degree of schoole in Oxford is called a grace Synod Ed. Quemadmodum Christus pro nobis mortuus est sepultus ita est etiam credendus ad inferos descendisse Nam corpus vsque ad resurrectioneÌ„ in sepulchro iacuit spiritus ab illo emissus cum spiritibus qui in carcere siue in inferno detinebantur fuit illisque predicauit queadmodum testatur Petri locus Synod Eliz. principium tantum retinuit Quemadmodum Christus pro nobis mortuus est sepultus ita est etiam credendus ad inferos descendisse A true and godly opinion The Paralogismes in the D. reply 1 My argumeÌ„ts