you meane not thus 〈◊〉 The. 5.23 then you againe vse sophistry deceaving vs with the worde Soule For wee meane thereby in this Question onely the Spirit or Minde as it is also called in exact and distinct speach Howbeit speaking vulgarly and ordinarily we calle it the Soule Which yet sometime is vnderstood onely for the Sensitive parts quickning the body and depending thereon But this indeede is not it which we haue heere in quaestion If you meane in Soule to be properly and immediatly in his immortall Spirit as the ordinary phrase intendeth and that so he suffered directly punishment for sin in his Soule not Devotion Piety zealous Care only as I doubt e you meane then you differ not frō vs 〈◊〉 observe 〈◊〉 18. but we al agree And thus my wordes shal be true Christ suffered a sense of Gods wrath f equall to Hell it selfe and all the torments thereof For as touching Gods wrath punishing his Spirite Which you 〈◊〉 s o blame 〈◊〉 244.247 who can say but that this was as hoat and skorching as Hell fire it selfe Who can limit or measure the fury of Gods severe Iustice when he cometh in iudgment against sinne as now he did vnto Christ This therefore being well pondered we may preceave that Christs sorrow anguish which he indured for sinne might very well be and was no doubt infinit yea even in those bodily stripes woundes and bloudshed whose paines otherwise were finite His soule not only discerning sensitively the bodily paine smart but chiefly in the vnderstanding he conceaved and in his faculty of immediat suffering he felt the fury of that hand which principally strooke those blowes vpon his Humane nature not Pilats nor the Iewes who were but instruments but the originall and chiefe imploying them which was Gods Justice armed with vengeance for his sinne His I may call it for he paid for it Now this could not but make an vnspeakeable impression of paine sorrowes which stacke in the depth of his soule Who then can say how litle or how small this was Nay who can declare or comprehend the infinit greatnes of it Finally your self doth grant expresly that a Pag. 2. the Wrath of God is Hell indeed only it b Isa 30 causeth Hell to be cruell Yea you grant it to be sharper then Hell So that we see heereby how vainly you say c Pag. 2◠Out of this proposition Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God for sinne I shall never conclude Ergo he suffered the true paines of Hell I have heere shewed you I trust that this followeth well seeing the wrath of God which Christ felt in his Spirit was his right and proper wrath albeit he suffered not all nor the wholl wrath of God nor Hell locally nor every part thereof iust as the Damned do Which you without all colour of reason or likelyhood would make men imagine to be the question betweene vs. You d Pag. 24 would make a Contradition in my wordes for saying e Treat 1. Christ suffered in his wholl manhood and afterward f Treat 1. Christ suffered Gods wrath properly and immediatly in his Soule Where I say not as you vntruly charge me that He suffered all that he suffered in his whole manhood Wherefore this is a niew contrariety Againe granting him to suffer all that he suffered in his wholl manhood yet he must suffer Gods wrath as God wrath properly and immediatly in his Soule in his Body mediatly and by coniunction only with his Soule And thus my reason g Treat 1. there framed is yet still wholly good and sound Then I am charged with absurdityes I know not how many nor how great 1. h Pag. 34◠Because I say i Treat ◠pag. 17. Christ assumed not our nature nor any part of it but only to suffer in it properly and immediatly As if I had meant heere that he became man not to reveale to vs by his owne mouth his Fathers will not to worke righteousnes for vs not to quicken and sanctify vs but only to suffer for vs and nothing els Wherein who would have shewed himselfe so vniust an Adversary so vnreasonable Were it not reason and iust dealing to consider whereof we dispute and so weighing the whole matter of our talke not to stretch and racke my words further then that All men may see it to be manefest that k Treat ◠pag. 16. heere I speake only of Christs suffering for our redemptiō having not one word about his other benefits which he wrought for vs. Pag. 17. a And after speaking of Christs Soules suffering I shew that although there were 2 sortes thereof one immediat and proper an other by Sympathy from and with the flesh yet Christ tooke our Humane Soule only to suffer in it properly immediatly that is his maine end was not that he should suffer in it by Sympathy from and with the body and onely so which you very strangely affirme So that my meaning is no more but to exclude that which you affirme That Christ tooke his Humane Soule to suffer in it only from and by his Body This heere I denyed and nothing els For I grant that Christ intended that his Humane Soule should suffer by Sympathy but yet also this he intended not directly nor primarily in taking the 2 distinct partes of our Humane nature our Soule and our Body He intended it by consequence because Natures right state was such in vs therefore determining to be in nature like vs he would also that his Soule should feele the Bodyes outward harmes as it doth with vs. Howbeit in comparison of the Soules most principall disposition of that which is proper to Reasonable Creatures he did not respect the inferiour part that which is common to vs with Beastes even this sensitive suffering by Sympathy with and from the Body I say in comparison of the other Christ respected not this yet he did respect this also as I said secondarily consequently that is because he intended to have our nature in whole and full perfection as we have it only except sinne Now I beseech you would any vpright adversary obiect against me that in this speach I exclude Christes doing righteousnes in his Soule for vs c. I appeale to all indifferent Readers Rather hence we are to gather to conclude that each part in Christ ought to have the proper and immediat vse as is incident to the nature thereof aswell in suffering as it is cleere that it hath in working righteousnes In Christes working of righteousnes and obedience to God his Soule had a proper and immediat part to do which it executed without the Body as to conceave meditate on the will of God revealed to him to love and wholly to imbrace it and to purpose the full performing of it c. His Body also had a proper and externall vse not onely to follow
But neither shame nor Death to the holy Martyrs are d accounted by God nor by his servauntes as proper and true Curses Before pag. 9. 50. but the holy men are in trueth most glorious and blessed in them Againe the Saints and Martyrs can not bee properly Cursed and properly Blessed too in any measure Neither their Soules blessed vnles their bodyes be blessed also free from the true Curse although you seeme to denie this point Which strange and vncouth assertioÌ„ both heere and in many places mo you doe at least insinuat that is that the godly in their Soules are blessed but in their bodyes they still retaine Gods true proper Curse till the resurrection Which I leave to the consideration of the godly You say We must call things by those Names which God first allotted them That I deny If God since evidently have altered them and disposed of them otherwise But he hath so don in this case The afflictions and death which originally and naturally were punishments for sinne and are so still to the wicked the same to the godly as I have often said are since changed now are properly Chastisements of sinne and not Punishmentes nor Curses Only Christ hath suffered the whole proper punishment and true Curse or Vengeance of our sinnes and therefore on vs it is not it can not be laid againe in any part thereof You a Pag. 96. avouch some that denie Christ to have bene made a Curse or sinne But you must remember b Pag. 92. your owne place of Austin Maledictum est omne peccatum sive ipsum quod fit sive ipsum supplicium The Curse is all sinne which is twofold either that which we commit against Gods law or els the very Punishment of that sinne Nowe c Pag. 96. your testimonies do meane Christ was not made a Curse or sin the first way that is he was not in him selfe sinfull nor hated they deny not the second that he was made the proper punishment or Sacrifice for our sinne And thus though you lust not to see it yet my d Treâ—â— pag. 45. speach was sound and true If Christ dyed simply but as the Godly dye it might in no sort e Gal. 3. heere be called a Curse The reason is evident because the text heere doeth speak treat of the Curse of the Law against sinne such therefore was Christes Curse which he suâ—layned To conclude then his afflictions and death was neither Wages nor Chastisement nor Curse nor Consequent of any sinne in him Yet as God made him sinne for vs so he truely properly and in very deed laid the paine of his Curse vpon his body and Soule Which Curse of God vpon Christ as you f Pag 26 say truly was not in words but in deedes Wherefore my wordes g Pag. 2â— you openly pervert affirming that I say Death heere that is Christes death noted Galat. 3.13 â—ay in no sorte be called a Curse when I expresly even there and every where doe say the contrary Pag. 263. But a your greatest exception is that this Curse laid on Christ cannot be vnderstood of the whole Curse of God or of the Law Pag. 264. and therefore b you spare me not for c saying that Paul heere in his application out of Moses nameth a part of the iust Curse of the Law for sinne Treat 1. pag. 40. thereby meaning and inferring to his purpose the whole Where you must be so good as to vnderstand me by mine own words in other places Pag 290. For thus d you know e I limited my speach els where As touching the vehemency of paine Christ was as sharply touched as the very reprobats Treat 1. pag 81. And Christes sufferings were equall to the very Hellish torments in vehemency of paine and sharpnes Againe f This price equally in Justice must be kept so far as it is possible Pag. 26. And g Pag. 37. Because there was no impossibility no necessitie no reason but he might feele the full smart of our sinnes as there was that he should not feele the full continuance thereof and seeing Gods strict iustice requireth it to be so therefore it was so he suffered all the smart but not all the continuance of our punishment â— Also Pa. 23. Heeâ—e Pa. 13 Thus then plainly h I signified i those 3 Limitations which now are expressed that Christ suffered our whole Curse only so far as the possibilitie of thinges could admit wherein nothing was dispensed nor pardoned to him for there was no cause as I have often said Which doctrine how vnworthy it is of your strang contempt and outcryes against me I leave it to the godly Wise to consider Nowell Catechis Only marke if our k publike doctrine be not the same Vltima omnia pati voluir pro nobis qui vltima omnia commeriti sumus Diram execrationeÌ„ suscepit coÌ„tumelias etiaÌ„ omnes omnia probra atque supplicia c. But you will say thus we make it not the whole Curse of the Law Yes we cal it rightly the whole Curse for as much as Christ suffered it in his whole manhood See before pag 8. 1. The. 5.28 â— pa. 48. 52 even in l All the powers of his m Spirit Soule Body where that Curse in Deutero being a part was suffered only in the Body quickned by the Soul Also in other respectes this suffering of Christ may bee well called the whole Curse or PunishmeÌ„t of sin Pag. 11 12. â—nâ— 16.17 Pa. 27â— 280 as n before is declared After this o you thinke it strange that I say Christ suffered dyed iustly and was hanged on the tree by the iust sentence of the Law that so hee was by imputation of our state and condition vnto him sinfull 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 51.11 defiled hatefull and accursed All the which I avouch because he vndertooke by Gods ordinance as our Surety to receave our whole condemnation vpon himselfe so far as his owne nature and condicion could possibly admit Christ suffeâ— iustly to the ende that hee might wholly acquit vs. In regard whereof I aske Is it wrong for the Law to lay the penalty on the surety when the debtour can not discharge it Against this my assertion you say a Pag. 27â— By no sentence of the Law he hanged on a tree And a reason you give b Pag. 273 because to be hanged on a tree was no necessary part of the generall Curse of God vpon all sinners I answer to Dy for sinne was a necessary part of the generall Curse vpon all sinners What say you then to his Death Did he dy iustly Sure if Christ dyed by the rule of Gods iustice then he dyed iustly If he dyed not by Gods iustice then Wo and thrice Wo to vs. For it cannot be but Gods Iustice * Luc. 16.1 Deut. 10.1 Rom. 8.32 See before pag. 66. must
lâ—sse to make his Sonne or his Sonne to make him selfe any such Suretie or Redeemer of Rebells as Christ was made and might be made of God for vs. So that also where you would have it to serve that we might perceave by this how Christ was not defiled nor hatefull nor guilty by imputation of our treason it is evidently to weak For you have not shewed neither can shew that this Kings Sonne was or ought to have bene such a Suretie Redeemer as Christ was that is vnto bodily death Therefore this Similitude cannot bee good We have other maner of warrant that Christ was by imputation made Sinne for vs and the Curse for vs and that this ordinance was holy and right and above all reproofe Which you can not bring for your Kings SoÌ„nes Suretiship nor for the Kings fact who kept not the order of iustice when he spared abominable Rebells without their bloudshed or when he slew his guiltles Sonne for them that they might be spared After this c he impugneth another reason of myne with marveylous skorne and detestation Pa. 183.284 That seeing Christ d on the Crosse spoyled principalities and powers Col. 2.15 and made a shew of them openly triumphing over them Therfore I collected that Christ there discerned and felt the Powers of darknes Sathan and his Complices as very instrumentes working the effectes of Gods wrath vpon him selfe Which as I conceave is no such foolish nor impious reason as he vainly pretendeth For doth not the very phrase and maner of speach import some such mightie contention and violent opposition where yet at length an absolut glorious triumphant victorie was obtayned Surely it doeth This then must be conceaved and felt by Christ neither could these be other effectes but onely of Gods proper wrath severitie and indignation against the sinne of the world which was matter of a Of som paine a tormenâ— opposition against Christ at that season it could not be the revealing of anie glorie or comfort which such instruments procured vnto him wrought vpon him Against this you bring not a word Nevertheles your high disdaine towards me breaketh out touching the maner how this might be But what is that to the purpose What if no toung can expresse the maner as neither have I once indeavoured to expresse it shall not therefore the testimonie of the H. Ghost be true that on the Crosse Christ obtayned such a victorie against the Divells which implyeth also such a Conflict first as I have observed Yet because you will needes examine the maner howe possibly this might be let vs see what you make of it The Divells saye you have nothing to doe with the Soules of men but eyther to tempt them or torment them First before I answer you directly this wee may consider Christ might and no doubt he did in his Soule discerne conceave and applie to him selfe all the rage malice How Châ—â—â— might be faulted by than on Crosse and violence of the Iewes tormenting him to death as set on fire by Sathan him selfe and by all the powers of Hell and these also as set on worke by the Iustice and severe Wrath of God now purposely laying punishment on his Sonne thereby to take satisfaction and recompence for all our sinnes Now this feeling and suffering in the Soule of Christ made an other kinde of impression in him and was infinitly more greevous and dolefull as touching the present sense then otherwise the meere outward stripes and woundes of men were or could be These conflictes of Christ on the crosse with Satans rage malice laboring if he could possibly by these meanes to have queÌ„ched the light of our Salvatio may wel be vnderstood by the Apostle in this place yet none of your exceptions do touch this argument Elswhere in your book you speak directly against the maine grouÌ„d of it affirming that God himself did nothing to Christ that is he did not pperly punish him Thus you say b Pag. 3â— God did not any thing vnto him And c Pag. 32. who did Crucifie him I pray you God or the Jewes And d Pag. 7â— He was indeed coÌ„demned by man that gave wrongful sentence of death against him but he was acquitâ—ed of God And e Pag. Christ was no more a Curse then he was Sin who indeed and with God was neither â—roperâ—â—â—hed â—â—st â—â—or 5 21 but with men he was reputed both wicked and accursed Notwithstanding the very trueth and Gods word it selfe is flat contrary to you For it is written a Hes made him Sinne for vs which knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him Yea b he made his Soule sinne Which is nothing els but that c the Lord layd vpon him or inflicted vpon him the iniquitie of vs all 〈◊〉 53 10. 〈◊〉 6.5.10 â—rem in 〈◊〉 8. 〈◊〉 4 28. â—â—m 8.3 Yea d the Lord delighted to bruise him and afflicted him or slew him And the Apostles doe acknowledge that e both the counsell and the Hand of God was in Christs punishment Finally f God sending his Sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh and for sinne â—â—iac condemned sinne in * his flesh His CoÌ„demning of sinne in Christ was in deeds and not in words Gods own hand then did smite Christ and inflicted on him whatsoever he suffered as the condemnation of sinne Where yet we imagine not that God was moved with any affection or perturbation â—â—g 245. but as f you acknowledge the punishment or dayned for sin by the Iustice of God and inflicted by the hand of God whatsoever meane it pleased him to vse is called the wrath of God And then howe may we thinke Gods infinite Iustice power punished Christ Surely in all such respectes as he was capable of paines and punishments as from God Wherefore in his spirit certainly he suffered spirituall and incomprehensible punishmentes being no sinnes such as Mens soules are subiect vnto as from God In his Body also he felt bodily afflictions wch our bodyes can apprehend Some God himselfe immediatlie inflicted some hee inflicted by meanes and instrumentes but still it was his Hand principally which did what soever was done vnto him Neither can you say that Christs punishment was Gods meere and bare permission only Nay his punishment was his revealed and written will his expresse and publike ordinance and most holy appointment from the beginning of the world and now at last effected by his owne hand and by other meanes when the fulnes of time was come Wherefore the whole suffering of Christ was Gods owne and most proper action The wicked Iewes and Divells were only his instruments to doe that which he set them on worke to doe though they thought not so Now we come to answer you more directlie touching the text in hand Where you would intimate that Christ on the Crosse was not tempted by the powers of Hell because
experience of them This same also sundry of the Fathers avouch with vs most fully and even those which your selfe brings for a your selfe Pag. 25. Cyrills wordes before touched are most large Cyrill Theâ—â—ur 10.3 Omnia Christus perpessus est vt nos ab omnibus liberaret Christ throughly suffered all such passions which men doe suffer that he might deliver vs from all Humane â—ature All the passions of †fleshe were stirred in Christ yet without sinne and so that vnles he had dyed we had not bene delivered from death vnles he had feared and sorrowed we had not ben quitt from feare and sorrowe Heere he saith all our passions were stirred in Christes humane nature even so farre as we are cured and so farre as might bee without sinne in him Then I hope by Cyrills iudgement the sense of the true curse and proper wrath of God for sinne was in Christes Soule so faire as it might be painfull and not sinfull seeing Men are subiect to this suffering as the most sharpest among others Lastly by Cyrill here we see that vnles Christ had felt the same suffrings which we feele and are cured of we had not bene delivered of them This also I am sure fitteth not your opinion That one drop of Christes bloud was sufficient for our whole redemption Which was one of your principles in your preaching but in your book you skip it cleane I know not how â—ag 25. 26. Next we may see that c your place of d Ambrosâ— is also fully to the same effect Luc. de â—â—tic dol â—â— A litle after his e former words he saith The ioy of the eternall Godhead being parted away from him Christ was affected with the redioâ—snes of my infirmity â—â—fore pa. 48 He tooke vpon him my sorrow that he might give mee his ioy and he abased himselfe to the sorrow of death in our manner that by the same meanes in him he might bring vs to life He ought therfore to take sorrow that he might overcome sorrow and not exempt himselfe from it that we might learne in Christ to ouercom the sorrow of death approching Wherefore Christ exempted himselfe from nothing in his Passion that we haue experience of as touching Paines and sorrowes And by the same sufferings in him selfe for vs he healeth vs wherevnto we are subiect by reason of sinne So that thus in his agonie hee wrought with a deepe effect that because in his flesh hee killed our sinnes he might also with the sorrow of his Soul extinguish the sorrow of our Soules To this very purpose also a Pag. 47 4â— Naâ—â—anz Fulgent Barnard Tertull. Ierom. many others before rehearsed do affirme most fully Neither is this taking of their sentences any whit to abuse the Fathers which you b Pag. 86. are afraid of You greatly abuse them which take them otherwise namely as if they meant that by the flesh and bloudshed of Christ meerely alone without the merit of his Soules and Mindes proper suffering our whole Ransom were paid As for our comparing the paines of Christs suffering with the paines even of the Reprobats in this life I see not that you nor any man living can finde fault therewith onely set aside their sinfull suffering which alwayes I testifie that Christ was most free from Yea I doubt not but we may compare Christes sufferings in his Agonies touching vehemency of paines even with those of the Damned in hell What the oâ— is betweenâ— Christes Suâ—fering 〈◊〉 Damned Only I conceave betweene Christs and theirs this odds 1 They suffer sinfully 2 Perpetually 3 Locally in Hell All which being excepted otherwise Christ suffered altogither as bitterly as sharpely yea I may say in nature the very same as the Damned doe which therefore may well be called the paines of Hell although yet Hell indeed doeth differ in some great and waighty circumstances as is aforesaid If you say the extreamest paines of punishment caÌ„not be where sinne is not That is true neither in deed can the least paines be where there is no sinne and that no more in the Body then in the Soule though this please not you Marke what I say The extreamest paines of al may as possibly be inflicted where no sinne is as the very least that as well in the Spirit as in the Body But in trueth neither the one nor the other is possible Neither the greatest nor the least paines of Gods proper vengeance for sinne can be inflicted or suffered at all in Soule or in Body but only where sinne is That is to say either imputed or inhaerent Ordinarily the Reprobat are thus punished where sinne is inhaerent Extraordinarily and singularly by Gods owne speciall ordinance Christ was even thus punished yet where sin was but imputed And thus therefore Christes Soule for meere paine might suffer the extreamest spiritual punishments altogeather as well as his body might suffer any at all without inhaerent sinne But you graunt his body suffered truely punishments for sinne Therefore his soule might suffer also even those of the extreamest degree Your “ See beâ—â—â— pag. 14. selfe also granteth that Christ both might and did suffer the extreamest paines that might bee without his owne sinne But it was possible for him to conceave and feele in his a minde farre greater sorrowes and paines for our sinne from Gods wrath â—at ◠〈◊〉 26. then hee could feele meerely in his body outwardly And the greatest was no more sinne then the least though both were properly for sin Therefore by your own grant Christ might and did feele and indure the greatest sorrowes of the minde and soule as well as the lesser in the body being all the very effectes of the wrath of God against sinne â—ag 102. b You bring a reason against this that God spiritually punisheth no man but for his own vncleannes which is a thing meerely vntrue For though no other man was ever punished without his owne vncleannes neither spiritually nor corporally yet Christ our Saviour was who in this case was not in the ordinarie state of men But I pray shewe me this mysterie how it is that God caÌ„not punish Spiritually where there is no inhaerent sinne but can and may Corporally where there is none All the rest of your assertions c heere are altogeather of this sute â—a 101 102 â—03 105. â—66 94. By this one reason I weakened all yours but you could passe that by To this efâ—â—ct Treat 1 â—ag 41 43. answering vnto it not a word Viz d If Christes body hanging on the Crosse and held by Death in the grave was punished by God where yet he found no sinne and which he still intierly loved and was never separated froÌ„ then so hee might did punish properly his Soule also yet never divide his Godhead nor his love from it But thus he did to his body therefore even so hee might doe and did to his
same Hee was crucified touching his infirmitie but liveth by the power of God His infirmitie the text heere nameth Metonimically vnderstanding in Christ that in which his infirmities were Now his Soule had infirmities of suffering in it as well as his body Therefore his Soule also is vnderstood heere that it was Crucifyed and dyed that is according to the condicion thereof as likewise his body according to the condicion thereof And thus that which Paul calleth infirmitie Peter calleth Flesh and that which Paul calleth the power of God Peter calleth the Spirit That is his Deitie is set oppositly in both these places to his whole Humanitie even to body and soule Aug. de 4.13 To which purpose that place also to the “ Rom. Romanes doth serve where the like opposition is found as I have shewed betwene the Flesh and the Spirit in Christ that is his Manhood and Godhead Other reasons also * Treat 137 1â— I haue noted serving well heerevnto as the 4 5 and 6. but I omit to rehearse them againe For it seemeth your selfe agreeth with vs in them â—â—g 324. holding a expresly that the Spirit heere in Peter is the Deitie of Christ according to Austins iudgement Now this being granted and acknowledged that the Spirit heere signifieth Christes Godhead how can it be likely but that the other opposit part the Flesh must needes import his whole and intire Manhood Verily thus it seemeth most plaine that Peter heere distributeth the whole and absolute person both God and Man into these Natures the Flesh and the Spirit Wherfore I can not thinke but that the Apostle heere vnderstandeth by Flesh the whole and intire Manhood of Christ even his Soule and his body Now this being so then it followeth by the text that Christ in his Passion was don to death both in Soule Pag. 320. body Heere you obiect that thus I make all the attributes of the body common to the Soule Nay forsooth that I doe not Nor yet this attribute of Dying vnderstood in such sort and maner as the Body properly dyeth that is to become without life and sense I ascribe Death to both but yet according to the divers condicion and state of both â—reat 1. Pâ—g 78. And thus you might vnderstand my b meaning to be where I say it is absurd false that Christ was made aliue in his Humane Soule that is it neither lost nor recovered life and sense so as his body did â—â—â—e before 〈◊〉 135 136 Howbeit as Death is oftentymes attributed to mens soules in the c Scripture that is the feeling of the extreame wrath of God and the punishment for sinne so d I make Death commoÌ„ both to Christes Soule and body â—â—eat 1. â—â—g 79. even to his whole and intire humane Nature Which if you do not acknowledge the shame of ab surditirie and coÌ„trarietie which in your fancy e you accuse me of that Christes Soule dyed and dyed not â—â—g 322. â—â—3 will sit neerer to you theÌ„ to me Also in such a sense I deny not but Christ may be said that he was quickened in the Spirit that is refreshed and comforted againe in his Soule and restored from that bottomles gulfe of sorrowes to the lively feeling of heavenly ioyes and glory which for a season he had no sense of at all Howbeit though this sense bee a true quickening in his Soule yet I deny that heere in this place of Peter it can be translated quickened in the Spirit meaning the Soule because Spirit heere in this opposition is set indeed for the Deitie of Christ â—â—â—d you with â—â—â—stin doe â—â—sent * as before I have shewed Thus the matter I hope is cleere to reasonable men that Christes Soule even according to the Scripture phrase may be said in some sorte to have tasted and suffered Death that is the extreamest feelings of Gods wrath for sinne and the most vehement paines of the damned though not as the damned doe in respect of the Accidents and concomitants of their ordinary damnation but in a singular maner and extraordinarie way as became the sonne of God and a sinles man yet a very maÌ„ being our Redeemer Now besides the matter you “ Pag. 3 gird at me in divers places as where I say The Death of the Soule is such Paines and sufferings of Gods wrath as allwayes accompanie them that are separated from the grace and love of God Forfooth it is true they are alwayes wicked whom these Paines doe accompanie ordinarily They came vpon Christ extraordinarilie as in a Treat â— pag. 77. this place I expresly noted That was therfore my meaning here if you would haue seene it In another place also b Pag. 33. you know that I say Hell as I take it that is such paines of Gods wrath is * Treat 1 pag. 80. sometime found in this life Thus then you might haue vnderstood my former wordes and not that the tormentes of Hell doe alwayes accompanie the wicked in this life I pray conceave not my meaning against my expresse wordes Againe c Pag 31â— you pretende to haue much against me where I say The feeling of the sorrowes of Gods wrath due to sinne in a broken and contrite heart is indeed the only true and perfitly accepted sacrifice to God True so I said and againe I say it What see you amisse in it Then vnhappy men are the godly which are at any time free from the paines of the damned To what purpose is this I speake of Christs Sacrifice I pray is any other Sacrifice perfitly accepted or a Sacrifice at all but Secondarily that is in and by Christes Sacrifice They are not His Sacrifice then is the onely true Sacrifice and perfitly accepted to God All others are imperfit and accepted not in them selues but only in and by Christ Thus your triumphes before the victorie come to nothing but blastes of vanitie But Augustin †Pag. 32 doth flatly deny that this text can be thus vnderstood or that Christes Soule might dy Austin d Epist 9â— denyeth that Christ suffied any paines of damnation locally in Hell after his death as it seemeth some helde about his time whoÌ„ here he laboureth to confute So that he meaneth to reprove onely the e See besâ—â—â— pag 139 1st sense of the Death of the Soule in him viz. that he suffred it not Ordinarily after the maner of other men nor any way locally Hâ— hath no nâ—cessarie cause to speak of the 2. sense thereof how the Soule may be said to suffer death Extraordinarily for sinne imputed only neither doeth he speake against that in Christ Nay according to Austins owne Definition of the Soules Dying it will easily appeare that Christes Soule may be said to have suffered some kinde of Death de verh 〈◊〉 Ser â—0 〈◊〉 Trin. 4. Saith he a Moritur anima si recedit Deus and b Mors est spiritûs deseri Ã
now in Hell seeing you seeme to belieue no torments for Damned soules save only at the Resurrection For thus you reason b Pag. 25 As the Body hath ben the instrument of the Soules pleasure in sinne so it shal be of hir paine c Pag. 20â— But all provocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from her body all acts of sinne she committeth by her body Therefore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the Soule only by the Body Or Therefore all the Soules paine for sinne both temporally eternally is by the Body This is your owne reason which being true why should you care for corporall fire in Hell before the last iudgment Your striving to a Pag. 34â— confute my allegations of Fathers I hope I have refuted sufficiently before And then b Pag. 35 Sir Refuter endeth as be began with egregious lyes What lyes began he with and with what doth he end In the begining our lyes have proved tales of truth and in the end your wordes will prove iniurious at least I said that not som or the most or best but even all every one both Churches Writers in the world who are Protestants teach as we do except only your selfe or happily som after you since the year 1597. What ly is there in al this Why name you not in al the world one man of those whom we call Protestants of your minde that it may appeare who deserveth such rebukes Nay in this being the very point of the matter you are silent in revilings outcryes and accusations you exceed Where I avouch that c Treat â— pag 8â— only the hoatest and cunningest Papists Iesuits Priests Fryars have alwayes vntill this day had this controversie with all Protestants and all Protestants against them namely Bellarmin Campian English Rhemists c. To al this scanalous suspicious argument you reply not a syllable What shall we thinke of such doctrine which in this learned age hath none but such defenders And yet among the Papists I noted 2 Cusanus and Ferus as liking of the Protestants doctrine heerein which also they do in some other matters Now these 2. and only these though more there are c you cite at large 〈◊〉 140.141 whose wordes indeede especially the Fryars seeme excessive But our owne most worthy and learned Teachers d M. Fulke â—rea 1. p. 88 M. Deering M. Whitakers which against you I alleaged you vouchsafe not a looke towards them Nor to M. Nowels Catechisme nor to the Synod authorising it â—efore pag. 42. nor to the Archb great * approbation thereof Not to our Common Bibles note authorised publikly to be read thorough out England Only against my alleaging of our Homilyes e you take exception Pag 355. but I trust I have before fully and cleerely defended them to bee for vs and against you Neither doeth any such matter appeare in them as f you avouch Pag. 136. Thus then I end our 1. Question being sorry that I have ben so long But I trust the friendly Reader will pardon me considering how I have ben occasioned therevnto A brief Collection containing the whole effect of our Doctrine before delivered brought into 4. Assertions God himselfe in his Iustice properly punished Christ for our sinnes See pag. 8. 9. 75. 82. Christ even as other men consisted of a perfit Humane immortall Spirit and a mortall living Body and so was by nature capable of suffering sorrows for sinne from Gods hand aswell in his Spirit peculiarly and properly as also in his Soule and Body togeather sith other men do thus suffer for sinne pag. 8. 48 52. 61. 74. Gods exact and immutable Iustice spared his Sonne in nothing but did punish him in all severity as he punisheth sinners I meane Hee punished him in All his partes of nature apt to suffer that is in his Spirit peculiarly and properly and in his Soule and Body togeather also Againe God punished him with all the Whole Generall Curse not with all the particular Curses and punishments with the Generall Curse in all the whole Nature and substance of it not with all the Circumstances with all the meere Paine and Sorrow thereof not with the sinfull Adherents and concomitants in it pag. 8 13 74 86. Gods exact immutable Iustice spared not Christe in these Circumstances of Punishment with he suffered not For either in exact Iustice he could not or necessarily hee needed not to punish him so In exact Iustice he could not punish Christ in such respects as were simply and absolutly impossible It was simply impossible that any touch of Sinne should once come neere his person or Eternall suffering or all the Particular punishments in the world All which come not to any one man though Damned neither can come Finally that Christ should necessarily have suffered after this life or locally in Hell there was no cause seeing these are but meerâ— Circumstances of Gods Iust PunishmeÌ„t of sinne whether now or then whether heere or there These alter not the nature of Gods wrath which is the strength of Hell The whole substance nature of that Punishment he might feele in this life aswell as any parte God is able to inflict it aswel heere as heereafter The rather seeing Christ came and was sent of God Extraordinarily of purpose to suffer for sin all that he might suffer Thus then only in this life Christ might and did suffer all For so was Gods ordinance and will as it is plainly expressed vnto vs in his word Therefore so we professe and so we believe by the certaine rule of Gods word and the proportion of faith Christ shunned for our sake nothing which the Damned suffer except only Circumstances and Accidents impossible or vnnecessary not any Substantiall point of Gods Punishment decreed against sinue pag 13. 14. 16. 43. 66. 75. 87. 134. 135. That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule THe 2. part of our Controversie is this That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule Where note first Notes that we vnderstand Hell properly and locally as our common speach in English doth vsually take it for the very place of the Damned after this life Now against them that belieue Christes Soule did go down locally into Hell thus I reason Reasons gainst Châ—â— Descendiâ—â— locally is Hell First If there be a good and sound generall reason in Christian faith that Christes Soule leaving his Body ascended vp to Heaven and there remained till his Resurrection and if there be no speciall reason of authority to the contrary that his Soul now descended downward then surely every good Christian ought to believe that his Soule ascended to Heaven and descended not locally into Hell Two maâ—â— points to noted But both those former pointes are most true First There is a good sound generall reason in Christian
his Soule And e De incaâ—â— Sacr. cap. 〈◊〉 Hoc in se obtulit Christus quod induit c. Christ offered in sacrifice all that which he assumed that is all every whit that was in him besides his Godhead f Fulgent 〈◊〉 Thrasym 〈◊〉 lib. 3. Fulgentius He shewed in himselfe the sufferinges of a whole man in verity truth quicquid fuit infirmitatis animae sine peccato suscepit pertulit Hee tooke vpon him and suffered whatsoever infirmity may be in the soule without sinne It is not possible that wee our selues should speake a more effectuall sentence for our purpose then this is Say as Fulgentius heere saith and we aske no more All that g Pag. 86. you except that by these Fathers Christe dyed only the death of the flesh is lesse then heere they affirme And we shall answer to that in due place Now marke well how these Fathers do not say that Christ gave his life for a ransom onely as h Pag. 70. â—â— you would construe it but even his very Soule to for our Soules They strive to expresse an exact proportion so far as was possible betwene Christ and vs. First in the parts of Christ who suffered of vs who were saved So that as we are saved not in our bodies only nor only in the externall sensitiue parte of our soules wherein standeth that suffering with and by our bodies but wee are saved redeemed and sanctified in our whole Spirite and Vnderstanding also even so by their verdict Christ suffered for vs not the bodily and outward sufferinges by Sympathy onely but hee suffered for vs even in his Minde also Now this is directly against your present a Assertion which we have in hand 〈◊〉 132.240 â—eere p. 14 Also heere they observe an exact proportion in the Obiects so far as was possible viz in that which he suffered for vs that which we are saved froÌ„ thereby Thus that sorrow of the immortall parte of the Soule not of body only which we are saved from the same he suffered Yea I say all and every whit of those passions sorrowes wherevnto mans nature is b subiect and capable of 〈◊〉 nature we â—â—e subject to â—â—fer in the â—â—nde proâ—erly for sin â—nd not only â—y Sympathy â—rom the Body Cyrill Thesâ—â—ur 10 3 Barnard de â—ass Dom. â—ap 41. Pag. 7. Terâ—ul cout Prax. Amb in Luc. 2. De trist â—olor c. and from which we are saved all the same he tasted and suffered for vs. Thus it is also that Cyrill elswhere saith c Omnia perpessus est vt nos ab omnibus liberaret He suffered all things throughly that hee might acquit vs from all which els we should have suffered And thus I take Barnards meaning to be d He spared not him selfe who knoweth how to spare his Wherevpon you collect well if you meane so e He suffered and indured All to the vttermost with exact obedience and patience To which end Tertullian also f Sic reliquit dum non parcit This was Gods forsaking of him in his passion that in nothing he spared him And thus Ambrose g Minus contulerat mihi nisi meum suscepisset affectum He had don lesse for me if he had not ben altogeather affected as I should haue ben And thus Ierom h â—erom in â—sa 53. h Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere ille pro nobis passus est pacificans c That wich we should have borne for our sinnes the same hee suffered for vs. Wherefore by the Fathers Christ suffered exactly i All whatsoever sorrowes paines which we should have suffered All kindes 〈◊〉 both in â—â—irit Body â—ot all partiâ—â—lars in theÌ„ as well Spirituall as Corporall as well in all the powers of the Soule subiect to suffering as in that which suffered allwayes with and from the body Only they except 2. pointes which of simple necessity indeed must be excepted in the Sonne of God Pag. 10. 12. â—3 which before k I have also acknowledged 1. Sinne Pag. 87. and all sinfull concomitantes and consequentes as l you speake And that is it which Cyprian exactly noteth That in him there was m Similitudo paenae non Culpae Cypr. de pass the very like punishmeÌ„t as should have ben in vs only there was no sinne nor fault in him as is in vs. The 2. point excepted is that he suffered not eternally but for a while for he that was life it selfe could not but live againe saith n Cyrill In the place above cited Where he seemeth to acknowledge a kind of death even of the soule from which Christ revived againe But of that in due place heereafter Nowe heere it is manifest that even the Fathers of whom you doe so exceedingly boast are cleane against you and for vs in the 1. and chiefest point of this question shewing that Christ suffered not only bodly or in the soule by Symphaty only but in the Minde also distinctly even as we may suffer in minde distinctly froÌ„ our bodily suffering that is when we suffer somwhat a As I 〈◊〉 Treat 〈◊〉 pag. 4. imediatly from God Yea he suffered say these Fathers all the paines which els we should haue suffered no materiall thing excepted but only sinne otherwise he was spared by dispensation in nothing Against this cleere and plaine sense of the Fathers b Pa. 35â— you take no exception neither can you Thus having hitherto manefestly defended my selfe that I have not abused any way the Fathers nor yet your selfe as you vniustly charge me in c Pa. 22â— your entrance Now I am to doe the like against d Pag. 2â—â— your vnsufficient refusing of my Reasons Where by I hope it shall appeare that you have not weakened any one of them And First you begin with rehearsing my wordes wherein I briefly noted the very Question betweene vs e Treat 〈◊〉 pag. 4. That Christ suffered for vs the Wrath of God Which you f Pag. 24 exclame at without measure as being not the point which you preached against Howbeit I suppose these wordes do rightly and fitly set out the matter both which then you preached which now you write I have g Pag. 8 heere before truly fully declared the whole state of this controversy I trust Yet because we can never opeÌ„ this point to much for many good vses that it hath I will not thinke it tedious nor labour lost ne to rip vp this question a litle againe in this place that so we may proceede with more ease Your generall cariage in your booke declareth that you abuse the Reader exceedingly by the ambiguous and equivocall taking of this terme Gods Wrath as before in the entrance I have shewed It is not I that abuse them as you h Namâ— 243 24â— every where very bitterly and vnreasonably do charge me For according to the most vsuall and
Christ could not bâ—â— tempted by Satans inward suggestion but onely by the care receaving an outward voyce This I suppose also is a singular conceit of your owne without any title of Scripture to proove it by Yea what reason can you give that where the minde conceaveth any temptation there of necessitie must be Concupiscence Originall sinne a Pag. 1 Corruption of the flesh c. In vs men it is so you say I grant in vs it is so But that of necessitie in nature it must be so or that Adam was tempted by voyce of necessitie and not accidentally I see no reason in the world or that Christ might not be sometime inwardly assaulted tempted also without heaving any voyce Nay I suppose you have no reason to affirme as b Pag 1 you doe that Christ in the Wildernes was tempted by Sathan by outward voyce only It seemeth rather to be manifest that his temptation was meerely in cogitation and in the thoughts of his heart so mooved by the * Or els bâ— such outâ— obiects tâ—ther with 〈◊〉 work thaâ—rituall câ—â—tion in Câ—â— As SataÌ„ 〈◊〉 well knoâ— how spirituall suggestion of the Divell First because the text saith that Satan c Mat. â— set him vpon a pinnacle of the temple in Ierusalem and mooved him to cast him selfe downe Which was within the time of his fasting and hee fasted but fourty dayes and fourty nights and so long continually hee was d Marc. in the wildernes Seeing then Christ was in the Wildernes all the while that hee was thus tempted Howe could that bee really and actuallie done This was therefore in a spirituall Cogitation But chieflie when the e Mat. 4. Divell shewed him all the kingdomes of the worlde and the glorie of them and f Luc. 4. that in the twinkling of an eye how could that †Yea sibly it 〈◊〉 be don â—â—â—ally c ficellâ— aâ— you But onles it 〈◊〉 be Ergoâ— possibly be done really actually and externally Wherefore I must needs think that as Satan was a subtil Spirit so he could did sometime spiritually suggest temptations into Christes heart and Christ could in Soule conceave them and yet vtterly without all sin which we at no hand now can doe because we are all naturally apt and inclining to evill as Christ was not Yea the text to the Hebr. seemeth to prove it also Christ was tempted in all things like vs without sinne Then he was tempted both outwardly and also meerely within for so are we and this was meerely by conceaving and considering of Satans wicked spirituall motion in his Spirit which it was possible that he might doe without any yeelding to it though we by reason of our inborne corruptioÌ„ can not possibly doe it Thus then it was possible and most likely it is also that Christ was assaulted and wrastled withall by the Divels spirituall suggestions now when in most bitter Agonic he hanged on the Crosse Howbeit to goe further such grievous and bitter assaultes of the Divel he might receave outwardly also by his senses other wayes though not by Satans own voyce yet by Satans members meanes And so a â—ag 283. you say he was tempted of Satan all the tyme of his abode on earth Then so you denie not but now even on the Crosse Christ might be and was tempted and assaulted by Satan that is by Satans instrumentes moved and inraged by him And this is none other indeed but that which in the entraÌ„ce of †Pag. 77. this question heere I observed which as I have before shewed sufficeth to prove Christes Combating as it were and wrastling with the powers of Hell on the Crosse But b Pag. 284. you obiect against this that Outward temptation by the mouthes and handes of the wicked is no effect of Gods wrath No is Here you are cleane contrary to your self and the truth Elswhere c Pag. 243. â—63 275 you truly acknowdge that all outward crosses and afflictions small or great are in their nature punishments of sin and effects of Gods wrath Now those doubtles are temptations Then sure these outward temptations by the mouths and hands of the wicked such as Christ indured are effects of Gods wrath viz. his revilings his shame his poverty his stripes his woundes and death it selfe c. You say outward temptation is rather a try all of Gods gifts and graces bestowed vpon vs. And is not inward temptation in the Godly so to I pray what oddes is this that you make betweene the inward and outward temptations It is true this is one good vse of both these fortes in the godly in whom Christ hath sanctified all afflictions death it selfe Yet in their very nature they all are none other but partes of Gods Curse for sin very punishments of sinne and true effects of Gods wrath as in Christ they were all Further Satan might spiritually and extraordinarily worke togeather with these his instruments outwardly afflicting his body I say by these bodily occasions thus the rather working an impression of his malice and spirituall fury mixed with subtilty against Christ and Christ likewise extraordinarily might apprehend the same that is the rather by the concurrence and cooperation of those outward occasions with these spirituall incursions And thus might Christ suffer most strange temptations and incomprehensible sorrowes as very punishmentes of sinne from the furious rage of Satan and malice of wicked men whatsoever other vses they might have besides in him Heere now we may seed row vniustly you conclude that Satan could no other way assault Christ as an instrument of Gods wrath but a The veâ—â— wrastlings assaults of â—â—tan may bâ— ritual â—ornâ—â— though 〈◊〉 such as arâ—â— ecuted in locall He only by executing tormentes on his Soule even in such wise as he tormenth damned soules in Hell and that caÌ„ be say you no other way then by Satans very possessing of those soules Which grosse and infernall speculations of yours for truthes you can not make them I vtterly leave to your owne discussing For my parte I have spoken no word of them in all my treatise Notwithstanding this heere I avouch that howsoever the meanes or maner was of Satans and his furious bandes assaulting of Christ on the Crosse it made certainly an impression of most doleful sorrow and torment in his Soule as feeling discerning by that meanes the very stroke of Gods owne hand vpon him and receaving the sting of his wrath and indignation therein which then wrought and was revealed chiefty then vpoÌ„ him for all our sinnes Neither say you any thing whereby you doe or can overthrow this assertion Our authorised doctrine in England agreeth with me saying b Noweâ— Catech. He fought and wrastled as it were hand to hand with the whole army of Hell Finally heere where you skornfully reiect and detest this my sense of the Apostle in this place yet you give no inkling of any
determine the measure and depth of sorrowes which Christ in his Passion suffered as also it is not possible to define that glorie which hee tasted of for the time in the mount Only graunt this plainly that Christ suffered in his soule the true effects of Gods proper Iustice or wrath and we seeke no more Graunt this I say and then we will see further if you will make it a question whether the sense of payne in Christ was lesser for the time then that which is eternall in the damned and whether the true and proper wrath of God taking full vengeance of sinne heere in this world might not be as sharpe and violent as the sharpest torment in Hell yea the very shame which is in Hell the sharpest Truely though Christ suffered all which hee did suffer heere in this world yet for any thing I can see there is cause why Christ should be an Extraordinarie person in the case of Suffering for sinne in this life and that therfore as touching sorrow and paine he might feele more then ever any els hath or could feele for the time You seeme to graunt vnto Christ b Pag. 2 all naturall sorrowe and feare Neither doe wee seeke any more But you trust the payne of the Damned is more then a naturall oppressing and afflicting of the heart with humane feare sorrow Forsooth it is not It is no more then a very natural humane sorrow feare It proceedeth immediatly and principally from God him selfe who is the Nature of natures Also Humane nature is apt to receyue such sorrow fear from him Thus the very paynes of the Damnedare meerely naturall Yet supernaturall I graunt they are if we meane this that they are aboue our natures state to beare or to coÌ„prehend them This therefore hitherto is a very slight exception against our doctrine before delivered The next is as vaine Pag. 296. where a you thinke it not tolerable that I say Treat 1. â—ag 59. Christ b in playne words prayed contrary to Gods knowen will I pray haue patience I saye no harme nor meane no ill Did not Christ in plaine wordes pray â—â—aek 14.35 c That if it were possible this Hower might passe from him Ioh. 1â— 27 and before d Father save me froÌ„ this hower By this Hower he meaneth this his paine punishment appointed him by God for to suffer at that time And this Christe knew well seeing he saith presently But therfore I came into this hower Doeth he not then pray in plaine words coÌ„trary to Gods knowne will Therefore never skoffe at it nor reproch it nor wrest it We ought not to bee ashamed to acknowledge that weaknes of Humane nature in Christ which Christ was not ashamed of for our sakes to vndergo If this could not be possibly in Christes Manhood without sin then I were a wretch to affirme so much of him especially stil to affirm it But if it be possible by any means thorow the meere instinct of mans Nature as it is Gods creature and free from all sinne thus to speake and to wish suddainly and suddainly to controll it againe as Christ did then what minde beare you and how may we iudge of this your striving which is not to cleare Christ from all sinne in his Agonie For that we doe all and Nature it selfe witnesseth with vs that in such a case as he now was in this was nothing strang to be thus perplexed moved But your striving seemeth to be altogither to exempt Christ-man from our meere naturall affections and infirmities and to give him Humane flesh indeed but not such as ours is in all and every point except onely sinne You will say If hee knew it to be Gods will and prayed against it how could he want sinne I answer He knew it but at this instaÌ„t he coÌ„sidered it not he thought not on it and so his suddaine desire may bee cleere from sinne But why thought hee not on it or how could hee choose but think on that which he well knew and did so greatly concerne him I answer His Paines and sorrowes being so great and so infinit as they were not in his Body onely but chiefly in his very Spirit and Minde and these more extreamely revealed vpon him now at these instant times then they were otherwise or continually as by the effects of them in him we may perceave I say these things acknowledged wel wayghed as they ought to be then it is easy to shew why how Christ came thus affected yet without sin First he was now a Ekthamb isthaâ— is to astonished vâ—â—eare Maâ— 1â— 33 astonished as the text saith and you b Pag 124. acknowledge that he might be Sec these incoÌ„prehensible sorrowes incomparable paines astonished him yea impossible it was but his meere humane nature must be astonished with them And it is vtterly vntrue which you say c Pag. 196. Many things might astonish our Saviour for the time besides such paines In these instant times of his Passion nothing could astonish him but Paines and Sorrowes which before d Pa. 115 1â— I have proved or at least that Paines Sorrowes now did chiefly that nothing could possibly without such Sorrowes and Paines as these which I speake of even spirituall and infinit and incomprehensible paines proceeding from Gods Iustice vpon him for our sinnes Thirdly Adde heerevnto that which you rightly grant c Pag. 12â— It is true that a mighty feare may so affect a man for the time that it shall hinder the senses from recovering themselves and stop the faculties from informing one the other But this must be some suddain obiect astonishing the heart and so terrible that it suffereth vs not presently to gather our wits togither and to consider of it Likewise very fully afterward f Pag. 29â— Astonishment draweth the minde so wholy to think on some speciall thing above our reach that during the time we turne not our selves to any other cogitation Even as the eye if it be bent intentively to behold any thing for that present it discerneth nothing els So fareth it with the Soule if she wholy addict her selfe to think on any matter she is amused if it be more them she conceaveth or more fearfull then she well indureth she is amazed or astonished but not of necessity so that she looseth either sense or memorie only for that time she converteth neither to any other obiect Now thus Christ being astonished with sorrows and feare lost not either sense memory or vnderstanding much lesse his vertues and graces being cast into an infernall confusion as you vntruly g Pag. 289. charg me that I say But I say as you say He now on the suddaine might turne neither sense nor memory to any other obiect and so not think on any thing ells but only on this terrible and mighty sorrow feare which now smote him bruized him to pieces And thus
his meere bodily Death which he so wofully and impotently feared as I haue before sufficiently coÌ„firmed Therefore it was the death of the soule the 2. Death which heere is vnderstood to have thus mightily afflicted Christ Which also your own selfe do d Pag. â—â— fully grant and affirme with me Yea you affirme further then we doe or then the truth is or possibly can be You say Christ heere thus feared Eternall death and Everlasting damnation What a speach is this Christ could not possibly feare in such wofull maner that which he perfitly knew should never come neere him But he perfitly knew that eternall Death and the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction should never touch him He knew and saw that this by Gods almighty and vnchangeable Decree was set further from him then the East is from the West yea then Hell is from HeaveÌ„ Therefore he could not by any meanes possibly feare eternall death nor pray in such sort against it Againe that which he feared and so pitifully prayed against was that which he knew was by God e Iohn 12 ordayned for him Yea Feare alwayes is of that which is to come But Eternall death was not by God ordayned for him that was “ Which Christ 〈◊〉 right wâ— not to come vnto him Therfore it was not Eternall death which he so feared Finally when in the Garden he prayed against that Cup which he feared that it might passe from him there he yeeldeth and submitteth himselfe presently to the vndergoing of it But it were I know not what to say that Christ did ever yeeld and submit himselfe to vndergo Eternall death or to tast the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction Therefore it was not this that he feared heere prayed against And yet it was I grant the Death of the Soule or the 2. Death that is simply the essense thereof Gods withdrawing himselfe from him in the Paines and torments thereof This onely it was He suffer that deatâ— which he feared not the eternity thereof nor sinfull concomitants which he thus feared And this for the infinitnes of it naturally he could not but feare yea and that so extreamely also he feared f â—ôzein for him selfe as knowing it to be ordayned for him So that hence it followeth invincibly that Christ in deed suffered sith he thus feared more then the meere bodily Death even the Death of the soule For he could not I say thus * Much yeeld to iâ— he did sâ—â—ing Thy â—â—â—don feare but he must needs know that it was to come or might com vnto him â—wed furâ—â— before 131.132 if he but knew that it might come then it * certainly did come vnto him at one time or other in his Passion before heâ— left the world See to the Hebr. g Christ abolished through death him that had the power of death that is the Divell and so delivered all them which for feare of death were all their life time subiect to bondage â—â—b 2.14 Heere I see no reason in the world but that the Apostle by â—his often repeating of death and by mutuall referring of it in one place as it were to the other doth vnderstand signifie one and the same death altogeather But it is the death of the Soule which the Divell hath the power and execution of also the death of the soule chiefly sinful men were held in feare of all their life long It followeth then I suppose that even through this death of the Soule Christ abolished the Divell and deliveted his children Specially seeing there is no enormity nor impossibilitie heerein Against this you haue no reason at all but wordes and wrestings and vaine ostentation of Fathers none of them all denying our sense Third it seemeth also that Peter teacheth this same Pet. 3.18 saying k Christ in his suffering was don to death in the Flesh but made alive by the Spirit Where Death may be very well referred both to the Soule and Body of Christ Because the text heere speaketh as I iudge of the whole and entire sufferings of Christ And it is manifest by that before that Christ did suffer not in his body only but properly and immediatly also in his Soule we haue seene also that the * phrase of Death 〈◊〉 135.136 or Dying may in a good sense be applyed even to Christes Soule Againe this word Flesh it seemeth can not heere in this place be vnderstood to signifie onely the Body of Christ but even both partes of his Humane nature thar is the reasonable Soule and the body My reason is because wheresoever in scripture the Flesh and the Spirit are noted oppositly togeather in Christ â—â—m 1.3 4. â—im 3.16 â—oh 4.2 〈◊〉 1.14 â—or 5.7 â—4 1.4.1 â—â—g 320. there the i Flesh signifieth alwayes his whole Humanity even both partes thereof the Soule also not the Body only the Spirit signifieth his Deity or Divine power Now what have you against this Nothing of waight but floutes and mockes that k this observation is made out of the hinder partâ— of my head c. But what pretend you against it Some Scripture palpably abused First Mathew where Christ speaketh of his Disciples that their Spirit their inward regenerat man was ready to watch â—ath 26. but their Flesh their corrupt nature was weak sluggish What is this to Christes Flesh and Spirit Thinke you that Christs Soule was willing to suffer as God had appointed but that his Flesh resisted Verily so you seeme heere to vnderstand An vntrâ—â— conceit and it is as likely as your applying of Flesh and Spirit to Christ in your pag. 104. Then a Luk. 2. Luke where both Spirit and Flesh are not intended of Christ as our observation before requireth but only the Flesh Then the Romanes where I affirme that b Rom. Flesh signifieth the whole Manhood of Christ according to the which he came from David even as well as SalomoÌ„ or Nathan did who were Davids sonnes in their entire and perfit nature So likewise Christe was kinne to the Iewes according to his c Rom. 9 whole Humanitie aswel as d ver 3. Paul was And heere Paul meaneth him selfe to be kinne to them according to Nature wholly that only by Regeneration in the Gospell he was differing from them Now Nature opposed to Grace and regeneration hath reference both to Soule and Body in a man Howsoever the Soule cometh in Generation that is not heere considered neither is it necessarily to the purpose Which difficulty also your selfe haue vtterly * Pag. 2â— renouÌ„ced before to make it any argument for you in this matter Thus yet the Flesh and the Spirit thus opposed heere in Christ shall signifie the whole Manhood and Godhead in him Further that which e Pa. 32 you bring out of the f 2. Corâ— Corinthians compared with this in Peter doeth most fitlie and clearely open and confirme the
the now L. Bishop of Winchester to begin among vs a new matter of faith neuer heard of before in England but only in the dayes of Popery touching the All sufficiency of the meere Bodily Sufferings of Christ and to maintaine an other which was neere worne out of his going downe to Hell in Soule In both which because my conscience assured mee that hee was much mistaken and laboured that others should mistake also I thought it not besides my duty the Lord offering me opportunity to maintaine the truth and that in all plainenes and evidence of the Scripture as God inabled me with This now a while since being published wherein my trust is I caryed my selfe no otherwise then J ought the Author and maintayner of the contrary hath so of late intertayned it as seemeth to mee and to many others wonderfull Wonderfull not for strength of reasons nor for exquisit matter such as neuer before was delivered though his learning J acknowledge and will not but reverence his gifts but wonderfull his answer is and altogeather extraordinary considering that such incomparable bitternes disdaine skoffing reproch and furious rage doth so abundantly com from him therein against my poore selfe being yet by the mercy of God a true Christian a Minister of the Gospel and one I praise the Lorde which euer haue bin carefull to bee free from the scandalls of the World Though heerein J boast not but rather with the Apostle will boast of mine infirmities Verily this now J haue learned by his writing better then euer I conceaued before namely what great oddes he maketh and desireth to be made betweene himselfe a Lord Bishop and an other being but a Preacher of Gods most holy word Well this is the Rhetorike and the ornaments of his Conclusion against my treatise But all this is besides his Matter which nevertheles may haue peradventure som weight in it It may peradventure Wherefore J see a double necessity vrging me to reply therevnto First to the end that his exceptions and reasons that is to say his wholl matter may appeare yet better to be so weake and vnsufficient as indeed they are See that those vncivill reproches I will not say vnchristian revilings being the bewty and forme of his booke may appeare to be but the froth of a distempered stomacke the colour of reason and iust cause which he casteth on it being taken away As touching the matter therefore thus I purpose to deale I will begin with his later writing which he calleth a Conclusion because he mainly directeth it against mee taking in by the way also all such places points in the former Treatise as do rightly concerne our matter in hand Finally as touching his reproches and cruell words I intend wholy to passe ouer them seeing for them neither is he any whit the better nor my selfe the worse The Defence of the Treatise of Christes sufferings against Maister Bilsons Conclusion HIs Conclusion for so he thinketh good to call it beginneth against me in his page 225. Wherein first he doeth change me in generall termes that I flee from the state of the Chiefe question and overskip his Authorities The like saith in Eâ— pag. 9. in his reasons I forget and dissemble what pleaseth my self in the defence of my holy cause as it pleaseth him to mocke I roue as I list neither keeping any order nor bringing any matter of moment coÌ„fusedly powring out the hasty resolutions of mine own braines spiced euery where with ignorant absurd positions proudly despising all authority antiquitie c. Al which words are but wind as I shal make it evident God willing wheÌ„ we com to view his particulars heerafter insuing Among which he * Pag. â— beginneh to iustifie that he mistooke not his Text when hee preached this doctrine But I wil speak thereof anon so that first I satisfie him in the most principal point of his challeÌ„ge against me Which is this “ Episâ— that I haue changed the first questioÌ„ that I set not down the state therof fully nor truly so I offer to prove that which he never denied I coÌ„fute that which he never affirmed Let vs ther fore coÌ„sider advisedly this questioÌ„ which I wil set downe again as exactly as plainly as I can that we may see how far I erred froÌ„ it before We affirme That Christ in his Soul suffered all Gods proper Wrath and vengeance being paines and punishment for sinne no sinne also as touching the essence or nature thereof The suâ— whole out 1. â— and so farre as was due Generally for all mankinde to suffer His contrary opinion we conceaue thus That Christ suffered for our sinnes nothing ells but simply and “ or 〈◊〉 his Hoâ— fectioÌ„s â—â—tio and meerely a Bodily death altogither like as the godlie and holy men do often suffer at the handes of persecutors saving only that God accepted this death of his Sonne as a ransom for sinne but the death of his servants be doth not The Opening of the whole staâ—e of this Question For the better vnderstanding whereof we must note these principall things taine spe I things to â—oted First that All suffering of Paines in man is froÌ„ God either properly from his Iustice or from his Holy Love either froÌ„ him alone or also from his Instruments and inferior meanes Againe Al suffering of Paines is for Sinne either inherent or imputed either as Correction or as Punishment either immediatly or mediatly as anon we shall further see Sec By the Lawe of our Creation as we are men having a Soule besides our Body so our Soule hath in it a 3. fold faculty of Suffering Paines First that which is Proper and immediat iustly so called â—ee kindes 〈◊〉 Soâ—â—es â—â—â—ing of 〈◊〉 Proper because it is proper only to reasonable and immortall Spirites although in men if it grow vehement it affecteth coÌ„sequently the Body also Immediat 2. wayes 1. because it can doth receave an impression of sorrow and Paines made from God only by and in it selfe without any outward bodily meanes therevnto 2. It is also an Immediat Punishment or els Correction of sinne it cometh not for any other cause at all So that thus we meane when we speake of the Soules Proper and Immediat Suffering The Soules second faculty of Suffering paines is not Proper but Common to vs with Beasts namely that which is by Sympathy Communion with and from the Body For which cause also it is not Immediat sith it commeth not to the Soule but by externall bodily meanes A third kind of painful Suffering the Soule hath namely her vehemeÌ„t strong AffectioÌ„s are Painful whether they be good or evill As Zeale Love CoÌ„passion Pity Care c. Neither are these immediatly for Sinne whether Punishmentes or Corrections but they com for and by other immediat causes â—â—tions no â—â—at â—or 〈◊〉 Punish 〈◊〉 5. neither are they Punishments or Corrections at all
acknowledge mine errour Adde heerevnto that experience sheweth as Physitians say how som diseases in the Body bring Death presently after most strong and violent crying namely in som excessiue torments as of the Stone c. Where in through extreeme paines and torments the vitall Spirits being dissipated will bee vtterly extinct somtimes before they can recover and gather againe togeather Thus a man having good strength and force in his Body when such a disease resteth not neere the principall partes of nature originally it seemeth hee may notwithstanding by violence of paine onely giue vp the Ghost at a suddaine yet not miraculously but by the course of nature only Pag 7. Ad Hedib quaest 8. But * Ierom saith this was a great wonder and that therevpon the Centurion confessed truly this man was the Sonne of God I deny not but Christ might shew som strang vnusuall thing apparantlie to the beholders in vttering his last voice when he cryed Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit Which might also very much move the beholders and hearers And yet it shall not follow that Death seazed vpon him not naturally or not by the fayling of natures strength in him I say this may be acknowledged and yet verily there is no necessitie at all to yeeld even this for any thing that the text noteth Yet Ierom sayeth the Centurion was moved with this great wonder It is strange that you should persist to vrge Jerom heerein against the plaine text in another place Mat. 27.54 which saith When the Centurion saw the Earth quake and the thinges that were don he said Truly this was the Sonne of God â—er 51. Heere it is expresly noted that the * Earthquake chiefly with other apparant miracles there mentioned or els the Earthquake with the the iniuries of the Persecutours and the innocency and partience of Christ persecuted compared togeather did move the Centurion to confesse and say Truly this was the Sonne of God Heere it is plaine then that not Christes crying in those tormentes was such a wonder or that the Centurion was by reason thereof moved to acknowledge Christ to be the Sonne of God as Ierom collecteth I know not from what ground but those other sights before said Last of all Austin is brought to prove this matter Pag 8. but with no more strength of reason by the Scripture then the former Neither can his words indeed being granted necessarily conclude any thing for your purpose which as sâ—emeth do shew nothing but Christes voluntary dying and that at his death he â—hewâ—d great power and not infirmity only Who denyeth thâ—se things Thâ—n he proceedeth to shew my disdaine to the Fathers further namâ—ly for such “ pag 2â— insolent reiecting all their opinions touching the causes of Christs Agonie in the Garden and of his complaint on the Crosse These supposed causes are alleaged and amplifiâ—d in the †pag 1â— former parte For answere first I dâ—siâ—e to know whether you allow of all these causes or not you sâ—â—me to â—â—fuse them * pag 13â— heere for heerein you shewed not your owne opinion but â—he iudgments of the Fathers Elswhere “ pag 29 yourselfe are resolute for som of these causes and against other som And yet before * pag 37 All these interpretations you say are sound and stand well with the rules of Christian piety Thus variable you are in that wherein you seeme most resolut Howbâ—it in my minde where you deny these to bee your opinions there you are in the best opinion Neither indeede to tell you plaine can I be of opinion that those their iudgements are true pag â—â— The reasons of my dissenting were touched in †my former Treatise and are maintayned further heereafter as very sufficient and iust How then I pray you do I insolently reiect the Fathers if heerein I dissent from them iustly which even your selfe also doth in sundry of them But my maner of speach is insolent perhaps because I say such collections are absurd and vnlikely I answer these my words are purposely meant of those in these dayes that delight to vaunt of the Fathers and chiefly in their errours For seeing these opinions themselues are vntrue though some of the Fathers inclined after them yet such in our time as vrge them cannot but bee absurd and strang teachers Who having so many helpes and meanes to discerne where the Fathers mistookâ— which they vtterly wanted and we abound with all yet do so littlâ— profit by them that even great Doctours as they desire to bee thought see not so much in the truth of the Gospel as many younger men now peâ—câ—ave and in the Fathers they make themselves so cunning that commonly their sound doctrine they little regard their faults only they admire Such I meant and tooke for absurd gatherers from this Scripture Whom heere I noted by the namâ— of our Contraryes The Fathers I call not so Now that this indâ—ed may be also seene even in your expounding heere Consider first how you wavered and spake coÌ„trarily in these supposed Causes Christs subâ—â—ssion â—â—e lewes reâ—ction â—â—e Churches â—â—spersion 〈◊〉 pa 17 â— â—2 37. Treat 1. â—ag 68. as I noted a litle before Again these agree not with any Ciâ—cumstances of the Passion and so are meerely of Humane coniecture without all Scripture also they agree not togeather among themselves One of them crosseth another one overthroweth another Will you then avouch them as you do to be * all sound and to stand well with the rules of Christian piety Howbeit absolutely I dâ—ny not but that thâ—se or some of these reasons were in Christ at his Passion as namely his Care for his Church his love of his enemies c. For these holy affections hee never wanted all his life long But this rather confuteth then proveth these to bee the very cause or causes that †in the hower of his dreadfull Passion wrought in him such Agonies and consternation of minde â—ag 6. But these things heere I omit beeing heereafter more fully discussed Lastly you cast a needles rebuke vpon me for confounding the Causes of the Agonie and of the Complaint togeather 〈◊〉 230.231 Forsooth that was done not without reason I thinke Every reasonable man I beleeve will say that the same cause was of them both in Christ His Agonie and his Complaint are not so contrary nor so divers but that they might yea verily did proceed from the same cause and ground Yea Ambrose 〈◊〉 20. one of your Authours doeth * plainly ioine theÌ„ both togeather 〈◊〉 231. Yea your selfe doth also as by comparing †your cause of the Agonie 〈◊〉 34. with your 1. or 2. of the ‡ Complaint will appeare You have much cause then have you not to make such outâ—â—yes vpon me that I am strangely amazed confounded and forgetfull in my writing Good wordes I pray you I did but ioyne them togeather whom your selfe
common sense of Gods wrath so in my wholl Treatise I take it for Gods perfit Holynes Iustice Power i Ioh. 3â— Psal 2â— 2. Cor 9. properly executing vengeance punishment whether little or great due to them on whom sinne lyeth But you generally do so cary this phrase as signifying any punishment of sinne whatsoever and namely the Afflictions which the very Godly do suffer which is altogeather an vnproper speach This I observe most specially in one place of your booke above others Where you say l Pag. 1â— All kindes of troubles paines and griefes in our states bodyes and mindes which shorten or sower this present life are degrees of Gods wrath and chasticements of out transgression corruption Which presently you prove by many needeles Scriptures And from this sense of his Fathers wrath you do not exempt the Lord Christ. You meane that this he suffered indeed and that this is all in your opinion It is true All troubles paines griefes in their first Ordinance a were the effects of Gods proper wrath â—â—ou doe 〈◊〉 rightâ—â—â— 275. But in their state and condition now they are b not namely as the Godly do suffer them Which we must heere note and consider well â—â—at 1.14 â— 132 You say right also This †because it seemeth grievous for the present and not ioyous is called somtymes in the Scriptures the rodde and wrath of God True it seemeth But indeed it is not so or it ought not so to be For c it seemeth otherwise to the iudgment of faith and knowledg 〈◊〉 1.2 â— 2.28 〈◊〉 2 Cor. â—0 â—efore pa. â—â— 19. Then Gods wrath in this sense is very vnproperly taken as I have often said Wherfore speaking properly exactly as in this CoÌ„troversy we ought according to the revealed minde of the Holy Ghost it is Chasticement correction it is not in any wise Wrath or punishment properly meant Neyther may it be said properly that his Iustice leadeth him to inflict it on vs as e you affirme but it is his Holynes and Love towards his children which chasteneth them 〈◊〉 132. According to the Scripture which saith 〈◊〉 12.10 f God chasteneth vs for our profit that we might be partakers of his Holynes And g whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth 〈◊〉 6.7 〈◊〉 11.32 he scourgeth every Soune that he receaveth If we indure chastening God offereth himselfe vnto vs as vnto sonnes for what sonne is it whom the Father chasteneth not Therefore to speake properly not Gods Iustice but his Holynes and Fatherly Love doth move him to lay whatsoever Crosses and troubles vpon his children He is not vnto them a Iudge or Revenger but a Father Neyther is it Wrath that cometh from him or Vengeance for sinne properly â—â—r 11. but h amendment in Love towards the godly Now the case with Christ was cleane otherwise He needed no Amendement but that which he suffered was right Punishment He was neyther in case as the wicked nor yet simply as the godly He differed from them both and yet in som pointes did partake of both their conditions He was like the godly in that he was highly beloved of God and had no maner of sinne of his own laid to his charge He was like the wicked and differed from the case of the godly greatly because he was laden charged with sinnes yea with all maner of sinnes sustayned their due punishment there being also none other at all to indure the vengeance of God for them but himselfe As we haue largely shewed before in opening the state of our Question Thus then whatsoever Christ suffered and specially at his death was very wrath and vengeance from God properly taken true punishment and iustice executed against sinne for sinne to the which he was in som sort condemned and appointed also this was the true Curse of the Law which thus he sustayned for vs. Nevertheles in all this his Case was extraordinary his condition in the like punishments vtterly vnlike to the wicked For his owne nature was still for all this most holy faithfull stedfast loving the Lord and beloved of him albeit in his office of Redeeming vs and suretyship for vs he did sustaine truly and not vnproperly as the Godly do the Lordes very wrath against sinne which he tooke vpon him Heere is now the Power of God to be deepely considered togeather with his vnspeakeable Iustice and Love and Holines Even one of the greatest mysteries of Christian Religion which to vnfolde what toung is able yea what heart can conceave it And yet most necessary most comfortable to be vnderstood of all men Namely how the Lord hath assigned to his sonne in the worke of RedemptioÌ„ 2. personnes as it were or countenances or coÌ„ditions His owne naturally which God ever deerely loved our countenance or person or coÌ„dition which he sustayned by his office which condition the Lord truly a As yoâ—â— Gods Câ—â— pag. 26â— in deeds in wordâ— accursed and punished Only the sense of the paine of Gods Vengeance came indeede vnto his most holy nature the Curse the Hatred the wrath and iudgment of God being quenched therewith His owne nature felt the sorrow and paine of the Curse and Hatred But the Hatred Curse was bent against the load of our sinne wherein he stood forth as guilty before God and appeared as it were clothed therewith This was Love and mercy to vs this was Iustice vpon Christ having vndertaken for vs this was infinit power and wisdom both wayes in God to bring it to passe which no creature can comprehend his Holynes and Love still chastening his Redeemed ones but laying no part of true Punishment or proper Vengeance for sinne vpon them which Christ only did for them wholly sustayne Thus also seeing Christ indeed had no sinne in him as the godly have to be corrected neyther could be correctted chasticed for nothing therefore properly he was not chastised nor corrected at all but his Afflictions every one both small and great were true and proper punishments and the effects of Gods very wrath for our sinne lying vpoÌ„ him 〈◊〉 245. Som where a you say Christ might suffer the wrath of God in his body yea in his soule he might suffer it and yet not the paines of the Damned or of Hell We grant you say true Christ suffered not the paines of the damned nor of Hell vnderstanding this for the very same condition state alltogeather b as the Damned are in 〈◊〉 you deâ—â—â—e it pag. â—0 49.50 We abhorre such blasphemy as much as you that Christ so suffered Hell paines Yea albeit I know you are far from thinking so yet I say your words do com neerer vnto it then ours do â—â—g 15.16 as is c before noted But I aske do you graunt that Christ suffered Gods wrath in Spirit as the Apostle d somwhere distinguisheth the Spirit Soul If
other sense at all which these wordes might seeme rather to admit Wherefore this is more then halfe a conclusion against you that my interpretation and application of it is vniustly by you reproved Then a Pag. 2â— you come to confute my fourth Reason but the mainest points thereof you have not so much as touched 1 I b Treatâ— pa. 45. shewed that the Godly sometimes in this life doe feele a tast of Gods infinit Wrath and even of Hellish sorrowes 2. That Christ our Redeemer suffered for vs as deeply yea deeper then ever any of vs heere do suffer or can suffer But all this you can heere cleanly passe over without any worde to it Wherevpon it followeth soundly that Christ indeed suffered in Spirit the true effects of Gods wrath and even the sense of Hellish sorrowes Howbeit in an other reason of mine not vnlike to that you thinke you can picke more advantage against some wordes I shewed out of the Hebrues that Christ succoureth vs not but wherein he had experience of our temptations and infirmities Now he succoureth vs even in the feeling of the terrours of God and sorrowes of Hell in our Soules Therfore he himselfe had experience of the same pa 66. I meaue c alwayes so far as was possible that is in the extremitie of the sorrow paine thereof no further Where note that the wordes of this Proposition are not any whit more generall neither include they any thing lesse tolerable then the text it selfe doth â—eb 2.17 thus d Wherefore in all things it behooved him or he ought to be made like vnto his brethren â—ebr 4.15 â—om 8.19 â—â—ch 20 2â— e like in temptations infirmities and f afflictions only except sinne that he might be a mercifull and faithfull Highpriest in things concerning God For in that which himselfe suffered and was tempted in he is able to succour them which are tempted First en hó in that which himselfe suffered signifieth either the matter wherein Christ is able to succour vs or the meanes whereby he becommeth able that is to say ready and sit to succour vs or els the occasion and reason why hee is the readier to succour vs even in that himself suffered and was tempted he is able to succour them who are tempted As if hee should say were it not that himselfe by his owne feeling knew the misery of our sufferings and temptations he had not ben so ready to succour vs in all ours not with such compassion as now he is Which way soever of these 3 we take these words yet they plainly inferre that Christ himselfe felt all the misery and smart of our sufferings and temptations which we at any time do feele wherein we are succoured Thus as I have shewed neither do you gainsay The godly sometimes feeling an infinit paine of Gods * wrath and of Hellish sorrows in this life â—o their â—â—e it seeâ—â—h â—â—well â—â—ch Christ therfore felt the same indeed to succour vs thereby Wherevnto serveth our publike doctrine g Diram execrationem quâ scelera nos nostra de vinxerat in se suscepit vt eâ nos hoc pacto exolveret Albeit heere the first way seemeth to mee not the vnlikelyest that the Apostle should signifie All the matter namely that kind of paine wherin he succoureth vs even that which himselfe also had experience of And this also those wordes kata panta in all things doe fully import But indeed all are but one the same in effect as I said Sec we must note that in these words Christ was like vs in All temptations and afflictions we are to vnderstand h All that are incident to Mankind generally 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 48. c not which happen to any man particularly All the particular Crosses in the world neither could nor can possibly come to any man Also that he suffered not only in one or in some partes of our nature but in All and every parte even in Spirit and Soule and Body like as we are apt able to suffer Againe all the particulars which by Gods providence he suffered not were farre lesse in paine terrour then the generall paines were which he did suffer And thus right well is Christ said to be like vs in all our temptations and sufferinges that is at least like vs indeed beyonde vs in all the extremity and violence of them and exceeding much more deepely plunged therein As well therefore you might have given a good sense of my wordes if you had had any minde thereto as of these generall and large wordes of the Scripture wherevpon I ground my selfe But very chariritably you can inferre vpoÌ„ my reason Then Christ had his eyes put out for so had Sampson he was swallowed vp by a Whall for so was Ionas he was cast into a burning furnace for so were Sidrac Mishac Abednego he was stoned to death for so were Naboth and Steven In deed I had bene as foolish and as doltish as you doe make me if I had treamed so Care vs therfore I pray that indifferencie which all reason and vse of speach permitteth namely that general termes be vnderstood according to the possibilitie and propabilitie of the matter That is that the Apostle and I both doe speake of All the sufferinges of Mankinde in generall and of each parte of Humane Nature apt to suffer but not of every particular in each of them or which each maÌ„ meeteth with all Then where * Pag 287 you examine me what I mâ—ane whether Christ be not able or not willing to succour vs in other thinges then hee him selfe did suffer Mine answer is Aske the Apostle what hee meaneth in saying kata panta in all things it behoued him to be like his brethren that he might be a mercifull and faith full Highpriest and dynaâ— as he is thus able to succour vs as if he should say Hee was not any otherway able then in that him selfe hath also suffered being tempted in all things kata homotótet a like vnto vs. How be it I vnderstand him not to speake heere of Christs absolu Omnipotency what he could have done as God if he would But of his ability by dispensation receaved in his Manhood by the Ordinance and appointment of God As if he should saye Thus hath God appointed him inabled him to succour vs and not otherwise Where we will not sticke to grant you your sense that hee might be the better able to have compassion on vs. In effect these expositions differ not much And thus this Scriptured trust is cleered and my Reason iustified Christ succoureth vs not in any extreamer kinde of paine them him selfe had experience of Which also â—ough All geâ—â—rally feele â—t yet geneâ—â—lly it is due 〈◊〉 All in reâ—â—ect of sinne But he succoureth vs in the â— feeling of the terrours of God hee releaseth vs of the paines and sorrowes vnmeasurable that rise thereof Therefore him selfe had
â—â—bâ— 5.7 Againe if you meane that all this was voluntary in him and not felt indeede according to the outwarde semblance and as men beholding him would iudgâ— Luc. 22.43 then belike you make him to have counterfayted Which thought God for bid should ever come into any Christians heart For no cause you say f I iest and iybe with the Apostles wordes Pag. 302. but I feare this is to iest and iybe in deed with the most dreadfull and bitter sorrowes of our Saviour in working for vs our Salvation And heere why say you not aswell that his Death and bloudshed on the Crosse shewed in him no paines nor infirmitie but only that voluntarily he made him selfe there the true Priest and pe formed the prefigured bloudy and deadly Sacrifice for the sins of the world As good reason altogeather you have to say so as to affirme it of his Agonie â—ag 29. As for the Scriptures which g you cite they prove in deed that Christ nowe executed his office of Priesthoode but will you divide exempt his Death on the Crosse froÌ„ his Priesthood Or his â—ines and fit mity froÌ„ ther The sanctifying of him self doeth it not as well intend and comprehende that Sacrifice on the Crosse as that of his Prayers in the Garden To thinke otherwife is without all shewe of trueth or reason yet I see not why you should cite these textes vnles you meant so neither can I see what els you meane where you conclude saying Christs Agonie being alleaged by the Apostle to demonstrat Christs Priesthood must not rise froÌ„ the terror of his own death â—ag 27. And yet h a little before you openly doe confesse and grant that his Agonie did rise from the feare of his death and that Christ had farre greater cause then any of his members to feare it Also it is contrary to your citing of Cyrill pag. 25. And heere why should i Hilary deny that Christes bloudy sweat came of infirmitie â—ag 28. Or k Austin that his feare and perturbatioÌ„ was of infirmitie â—ag 25. Surely there is no cause For though it be against the coÌ„mon course of our Nature for any paines or feare to sweat bloud yet the Divine power with and through paines and feares might wring out of his body that trickling bloudy sweat As it is plaine that it did by the wordes next before in the text a Luk. 2 44. An Angell came to give him some comfort that is least hee should have bene overwhelmed quite in his sorrow and discomfort but still he was in his Agonie and swet like droppes of bloud trickling to the ground and presently saieth My Soule is full of sorrowes even to death and thrice he prayed that this Cup and this Hower might passe from him It cannot be therefore but that by Sorrowes and Paines this sweat came though also Gods power caused it by laying vpon his Soule and body invisible supernaturall vnspeakeable sorrowes and horrors and by making his fleshe visibly to expresse in some sort this spirituall and extraordinary torment of paine and feare which he suffered And in deed where they say 1 Not Infirâ—â—ty but Poâ—â—â— did this Nec infirmitas quod potestas gessit that proveth the cleane coÌ„trary For Jdeo infirmitas quia potestas gessit 2 Therforâ— there waâ— firmity â—â—cause thâ—â—â— was Powâ—â— For the working of his Power in him argueth the suffering of his Infirmitie The power of God is peâ—fited in infirmÃtie And because it was aboue the course of nature therefore nature was herein oppressed not exempted from paines Thus these speak fully for vs and against you that heere appeared not Christes infirmity only in suffering but his Divine power also in punishing And this I iudge in deed to bee their very meaning But those other mysticall and figuratiue sayings of Austin Pag 28. â— Bede Bernard howe shall we admit them without better warrant That Christes bloudshead was to signifie that Martyrs should shead their bloud what reason have we so to thinke Or that his bloud head should signifie the purging of his Disciples hearts froÌ„ sinne yea or of all his Church in the whole world It did not signifie this but it did it in deed Lastly if it had thâ—se significations in it yet withall his Agonie might rise from his very Paines Feare comming from the present sense of Gods iustice and wrath nowe revealâ—d and working vpon him Hitherto we have made it manifest that in trueth you have nothing in all these wordes against our doctrine that Paines and sorrowes were the true and proper cause of Christes dreadfull Agonie nor to prove that his meere bodily paines or death was the whole Cause Now we are to shew the like in his most we full Complaint on the Crosse where he saith My God my God Math 27. why hast thou forsaken me You will aske me heere what kinde of Forsaking may this be I shewed you plainly * Treat 1 â— 6â— 65 6â— before if you had regardâ—d it Namely that Christ being also now yea specially in the feeling of infinit Paines inflicted on him sundry wayes â—â—w Christ on 〈◊〉 Crosse was â—â—â—saken of â—â—â—d See also â—â—â—g 112.113 and that directly froÌ„ Gods proper Wrath for our sinnes he felt his whole Humane nature for the time left all comfortles and alone without any ioyous assistance of his Deitie I say not that he wanted now all assistanc of his Deitie for it surely would then have quite overwhelmed him with this intollerable burdeÌ„ But his Godhead as it were withdrawing and hiding it selfe from him for that season of his Passion gave him no sense nor feeling of ease comfort or ioy but all the sense of sorrowes and paines as well in spirit as in soule and body that might bee all the sense of his ioy and comfort for the while being cleane gone and wholy swallowed vp in that huge bottomles gulfe of sorrowes and paynes issuing vpon him out from the fierce Wrath of God Howbeit yet even nowe he wanted not sufficient assistance of the Deitie to sustayne him in life heerein as I said Phil. 2.7 Rom. 8.32 â—eut 10 17. â—â—c 16.17 This was that extreeme humiliation and exinanition of nature wherein †God spared not his Sonne and wherein also Christ spared not him selfe For hee vndertooke all this most willingly and yet being in it naturally grieved and sorrowed for it at some moments being astonished with it suddenly and naturally desired ease and release from it This forsaking or dereliction beseemeth the time place person and case of Christ our Ransom-payer and Purchaser of salvation with the price of his owne most direfull paines Pag. 24. c â—â—â—r 6. Expoâ—â—â—ions of â—hristes CoÌ„â—â—aint are all â—â—â—isse Not any other farre fet or hardly applyed or strangely devised by the braynes of men As in trueth all those other senses heereof are which you rather imbrace
manhood also after so low humiliation Finally it was his own most free and fore determined will Would hee then so mournfully grieve and complaine thereat It hath no reason nor likelyhood in it Iohn 1â—â— Lazarus when he was returned from the ioyes of heaven to take againe his rotten carcase ofter it stanke having lyen 4. dayes dead in the grave yet he grieved not at it neither ought he so to have don Much lesse ought Christ so to grieve and mourne for a lesser want and for a shorter season as we may thinke then that was to Lazarus But this matter is not worth the speaking of “ See bâ— to this puâ— pag. 10â— any further Neither doe your Fathers prove any such improbable yea vnlawfull mourning complayning in Christ If they prove any thing towardes your meaning it is this that he complayned because of his bodily dying Howbeit they say not that he thus complayned only and meerely for that neither I thinke will you plainly hold this neither doe wee deny the other The truth is they meane he suffered in his whole Humane nature How the â—â—thers are 〈◊〉 taken namely that he suffered not as God They strove heere with Haeretikes whose controversies were far from this our question f Hilar. 〈◊〉 Trin li. 〈◊〉 Hilary and g Epiph. 〈◊〉 Arioma 〈◊〉 Epiphanius wrot against Arius to prove that Christ in this complaint shewed rightly a humane infirmity and that this was not the voice of a Deity inferiour to the Father as Arius blasphemed These Fathers then had no purpose heere to exclude the sufferings of Christes Soule but only to deny that his Godhead suffered complayned as being left to punishment by his Father when the sorrowes of death began to prevayle against him The very same doth †In Maâ—â— can 33. 〈◊〉 Hilary also where he saith that this in Christ was Corporis vox the outcry of his body He plainly meaneth it of his whole manhood the opposition being betweene it and his Godhead â—reat 1. â—â—g 9. as the Scripture †often doth And where he saith he was morte peragendus to be coÌ„summated by death he meaneth that death ended all his suffering not that hee suffered nothing els but meerely death And if their words do any where come neere to our question â—ertul cont â—â—ax â—â—ila in Mat. â—â—au 33. as it is very likely that h Tertulian and the one place of i Hilary doth then surely they are plainly for vs and against you Tertullian pointeth in this place at certaine Haeresies maintained in his time wherwth it seemeth Praxeas was infected 1 That the Father suffered aswell as the Sonne when Christ suffered 2 That the Deity suffered 3 That Christ was no true nor perfit man All these pointes Tertullian overthroweth heere Quid de isto quaeris c. What inquire you of Christ You heere him crying out in his Passion My God my God why hast thou forsaken me The Sonne therefore suffered being forsaken of his Father but this is meant of the Flesh and of the Soule that is of the Man not of the Word nor of the Spirit Heere it is plaine that Tertullian sheweth besides the rest this point exactly that Christ was a very man in that he had a proper Body and a Soule and that this his suffering on the Crosse was in both these partes and so in his whole intire manhood Also that he suffered in both these parts even froÌ„ his Father â—eere pag. 63. â—at 1. pa 4 But he could not suffer in his Soule froÌ„ †God if he felt only and meerely but a bodily death as you hold And to suffer the stroke of Gods hand in his Soule as the proper vengeance of sin is farre more then to feele in Soule by sympathy only the bodies smart Neither had Tertull. overthroweÌ„ but confirmed that Haeresie of Christs being no true natural man if he had said that in this case he suffered in Soule only by symphathy with and from the Body But this is absurd to thinke in Tertullian Therefore in this place he is flatly against you And this DerelictioÌ„ of his Father which he speaketh of is Death indeed to the Sonne But what death Forsooth more then the separation of the Soule and Body â—at Death â—â—e Soule in â—ist wee â—â—ne Even the seperation of the Deity from the whole manhood which is the death of the Soule I speake heere nothing but the Fathers words yea the Scriptures Your owne place of Epiphanius saith that nowe his Deity departed from his manhood So saith your owne Hilary also Corporis vox contestata recedentis a se Dei dissidium So saith Ambrose Clamavit Homo Divinitatis separatione moriturus The man Christ did cry being about to dy by the separation of his Godhead Againe Sequestrata delectatione Divinitatis aternae taedio meae infirmitatis afficitur The ioy of his eternall Godhead being parted away hee was afflicted with the tediousnis of my infirmitie Heere the Fathers doe shewe in deed that Christ dyed but more then a meere bodily death even the death of the Soule also For what is the Separation of the Deitie from his Soule els but the death of the Soule Howbeit note I pray that neither the Fathers nor I do meane any Separating 1 of the vnion of a The Dâ—â— Humâ—â— both natures in Christ nor the Separating 2 of any Holynes or habituall grace of God from his Soule 3 nor the Separating of Gods love from him See befoâ—â— pag. 10â— but the SeparatioÌ„ of all comfortable feeling assistance of the Godhead in that he felt not any supporting of his Soule and Body now pierced thorow with the Paines which he felt inflicted by God This SeparatioÌ„ is meant and it b Thougâ— haps thâ— ther 's dâ— this phâ—â— rarely may be called the Death of the Soule For as it is c Psal â—â— life to the Soule to feele and to enioy the glorie of God So it is death to feele the want and absence thereof vtterly and the rather being also then overwhelmed with incomparable paines That heavenly life Christ tasted a litle while in his TransfiguratioÌ„ this Hellish Death he felt besides his bodily death vpon the Crosse And thus Tertull. meaneth heere that not Christs bodily death only made him now thus to cry out but that death also which was the Separation of his Godhead from both his body Soule which is the death of the Soule And so he saith true the Dereliction of the Father is Death to the Sonne Your d Pag. â—â—â— 4. Exposition for any thing I see may be granted for it seemeth to bee the same in effect that wee holde Your place of Cyrill seemeth also to concurre that Christes words of complaint were the removing of the dereliction which had fallen on vs. Was it removed from vs then surely it was laid vpon some body els Now that must needes be vpon
turne them to ioy gladnes though not properly to be glad of them Nay we ought most instantly to pray against them No affliction at all is good in it owne nature and the greatest of all is good to Gods children by his grace So that touching this vse of them therein wee are to reioyce even when we are most bruized and pearced in our soules with the terrours of God Lastlie 〈◊〉 134. l you frame an obiection against your selfe which you neither doe nor can answer Christs soule might feele the tormentes of Hell for the time without any distrust or doubting of his salvation or our redemption You pretend thïs answer The essentiall tormentes of Hell are the absolute losse of Gods kingdom everlastingly and that m Eternall continuance is of the nature and substance of Hell But we shew you â— 53 although the damned are in Hell torments everlastingly and of necessitie so must bee yet eternall continuance in them and to feele them but for a time are indeed but Circumstances not of the essence or nature of Hell tormentes Gods proper and extreame wrath only and his sharpest vengeance for sinne is the essence or nature of Hell paines Which against the Damned indeed is eternall and vnsatisfyable but lighting on Christ it was not eternall because it was satisfyable Wherefore it is plaine that you have answered in effect nothing to your owne obiectioÌ„ Thus far we have gone shewing that we a Pag. 2 neither extende the cause of Christes Agonie to far in affirming it to have com of most bitter extreame Paines which he suffred properly for our sinns neither that we coÌ„tinue it to long in affirming that he felt the same most extreamely on the Crosse Contrariwise that you curtaile it to short when you say it was no more but b Pag. 1 290. Devotion to God and Compassion to men also that Christes Agonie touched him c Pa. 11â— not at all on the Crosse So that d Before 90.91.116 our Maine argument which you would haue frustrated standeth firme and good still that seeing his Agonies Paines and Feares were such so great as the Scripture by the effects signes sheweth that they were both before his death and at his death therefore they were more then meere bodily paines and more then meere bodily death much lesse were his Holy and Religious affections the proper and speciall Cause thereof But of necessity they were the Paines proceeding from the infinit and sharpe Iustice of God which Christ truly suffered in his Spirit and Soule and Body After this a Pag 3â— Touchiâ—â— Death oâ—â—â— Soule you set vehemently against my last argument That Christ suffered in some sorte the death of the Soule First if wee should speake strictly after the maner of Death in the Body then no man is so mad or foolish as to say that any mans Soul can dye at all that is want life and sense as a dead body doth Thus the very damned soules in Hell suffer not death But such a death as immortall soules are subiect subiect vnto is Gods separation froÌ„ them And this is 2. folde The 1. death and the 2. death as the Scripture speaketh The 1. is the separation of them from Gods grace which is in this life by sinne raigning in them The 2. death is Gods leaving them in the feeling of the most sharpe and most vehemeÌ„t paines inflicted by Gods iustice for sinne This last kind of death is so called and named in many places of b Ezek. Gen. 2â— Rom. 6â— 2. Cor. 3.7.5.20 aâ— 1. Ioh. 17. Scripture It hath also a double consideration First ordinarily and commonly it belongeth only to the Damned for their owne inherent sinne where withall are the ordinary Accidents and coÌ„comitants togeather Desperation induration blaspheming vtter darkenes c. with Perpetuitie of punishment and that locally in Hell In this sense the Fathers generally do take it where they deny that Christ suffered the death of the Soule and so likewise do we Secondly The death of the soule or the 2. death may be extraordinarily and singularly considered namely to imply no more but simply the very nature and essense of it 〈◊〉 Death the Soule â—â—rist tasted That is the feeling of most deadly infinit paines inflicted by God himselfe in his proper iustice for sinne all sense also of his comfortable presense being taken away This is a Death to the Soul â—â—g 113. â—ag 135. 6. â—ag 112. 3. as * before we have shewed according to this sense the Scriptures †Fathers before noted may rightly be vnderstood not to deny it in Christ so that this kind of Death in the soule but none other we may safely say Christ did suffer for our sinne imputed to him Moreover let it be observed that if wee had no proofes at all in Scripture for this point yet our Question is fully proved coÌ„firmed notwithstanding by those other sufficient pregnant proofes alleaged iustified before For it is be to noted that no man setteth the questioÌ„ in these termes That Christ dyed in his soule neither doe we at all vse them very much in speaking of this matter We do only when some speciall occasion draweth it from vs neither then do we vtter it in those termes but with vsing some further declaration of our minde The reason of this warynes is because we are not ignorant how ambiguous the phrase is and how apt to be mistaken specially where men list to cavill Also people vntaught and vnsetled in construing the scriptures sense do quickly take offense at thinges which they ought better to digest So that you doe very iniuriously to grate still one this phrase of speach and to straine it to the worst as you do as if by no meanes it could beare any good sense and as if we built our maine Assertion onely heerevpon Which in truth is nothing so The same also doe we affirme touching our vsing in this matter the phrase of Christs suffering Hell paines Both these phrases are but seldome and respectively vsed by vs. Howbeit we deny not but that both these phrases may be well and rightly applyed vnto Christ on occasion â—â—g 16. 52. â—â— 113. as * before is observed may both serve truly and most emphatically to expresse the infinitnes of the paines and sorrowes of his suffering for vs. Yea this very phrase of death extended in Christ further then to his meere bodily dying hath I doubt not expresse ground in the Scripture and therefore may the better be vsed soberly admitted charitably You will aske where is there any scripture Proofes that Christe suffered any other death then that meerely of his body I answer First consider well that to the c Hebr. â—ebr 5.7 Hee offered vp prayers and supplications with strong crying teares to him that was able to save him from death It is not possible that this Death heere should be
Deo The Death of the Soule is Gods Forsaking of it â—â—fore pag. â— 113. â— 108. 113 â— 134. But the Scripture saith God did leave him or forsake him for a season yea the Fathers also c agree fully therevnto the maner how d I have shewed before Therefore by Austins definition largly and rightly taken Christ may be said in some sense to haue dyed in Soule Howbeit though the Fathers doe graunt the thing in effect as I have shewed yet I acknowledge they doe deny this phrase generally and so doeth Austin in this place But thereabout we never made question this is no parte of our matter It may bee even for the same cause they shunned it for which we also doe vse it very rarely and warily as before I observed Pag 136. And let this be the Answere touching all your Fathers and Councells which you bring aboundantlie heere and there about this point of the Soules death Though peradventure some of them may seeme to insinuat even this very phrase touching Christ sometyme as in some I touched before Where you say â—â—g 317. †Aske the simplest child that is Catechized in my charge if I have any what death Christ dyed for vs and hee will answer me out of his Creed Christ was Crucified Dead Buried It is true But our authorized Catechisme published by M. Nowel and the Homily i sheweth the meaning heereof to be 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 67 117.â— that Christ suffered far more sharply theÌ„ meere bodily Death even the infinit paines of Gods wrath in his soul which I pointed you vnto k before but you fairly leape it over â—â—eat 1. pa. â— as also the Archb. speciall allowance with others of M. Now. Catechisme as being fully grounded on the word of God contayning the very doctrine of the Church of England Now to this effect the youths in my charge being asked would have answered surely For indeed such a charge in London I had I thank God wherin I hope I was faithfull according to my power might have coÌ„tinued had not your il seasoned teaching so contrary to the established doctrine in Englande burst foorth a You say â—ag 325. â—â—a 53.12 â—r hee powâ—â—◠〈◊〉 I should have don well to have laid that downe for a shew which is written in Esay b He c laid downe his Soule vnto death verily if I had it would have made som shew Considering that d Pa. â—6 you earnestly affirme that this word signifieth Soule or Spirit in a proper sense Also how resolute you are forbidding to e Pag. 1â— divert from the native proper significations of words but when the letter impugneth the groundes of Christian faith and charity This considered surely that in Esay maketh some shew indeede that Christ submitted and humbled and afflicted even his Soule to Death The rather if we note that which followeth He was counted with the sinners and bare the sinne of many That is he was punished by God as the sinners are f See besâ—â— pag. 76. punished and was not by the Iewes onely counted among Theeves But chiefly considering withall that also before g Isa 53. â— He made his soule a sinne offering Heere you must remember †Your pa. â— we shall leave nothing sound sure in Gods word if we may avoid all thinges by figures that please not our humours Therefore you must needes grant that Gods worde heere maketh Christs Soule to be †sacrificed for our sinne And we desire no other death of the Soule We deny not but this phrase AnimaÌ„ pâ—nere is to lay downe the life and in divers places signifieth no more then simply to Dy both concerning Christ and other men as you observe pag. 70. Yet this is no necessary reason that heere in J say the Soule should be taken figuratively for the Life onely the rather seeing heere the text precisely setteth down the great perfit worke of our RedemptioÌ„ And to take it as we do literally impugneth no ground at all of faith or Charity The like peradventure may bee affirmed also of that in Mathew h Mar 2â—â— The sonne of man came not to be served but to serve and to give his soule a ransom for many although the translatours commonly turne it his life But I wil not strive about these phrases Aust hath not a word against vs in that great place which i Pag. 32â— you cite his whole argumeÌ„t there being to another purpose The Iewes slew only the flesh of Christ and yet it is true that they slew Christ Who doubteth this Also where you thinke those words to be so k Pag. 327â— plaine and expresse as may be spoken so effectuall as Pauls heart could invent or his toung vtter that Christ reconciled vs to God in the body of his flesh through death we have answered you †Pag. 45. â— before As for al your other discourse heere against me it is as every where almost nothing but revilings and reproches and bitter skoffes Yet you say l Pag 108. â— you have not learned nor vsed to give reviling speaches Have you not learned it Is it then naturall vnto you Nay you meane m Pag. 264â— these are Fatherly Warnings and admonitions If your Fatherly admonitions are such what are your Lordly rebukes If these bee your Bishoply blessinges what are your Cursings But I am to blame heerein standeth not the tryall of our quaestion As for all thâ—se hogepots as n 〈◊〉 3â—8 you call them which you make of my wordes they are nothing but your owne either wilfull writhings or vncharitable surmises as by every particular in then places may be seene Finally that is not true where you say o 〈◊〉 330. Flesh doth often signifie the soule in vs. It signifieth often the whole Manhood togither in vs and so it may and doth in Christ aswell Also it signifieth in vs many times our whole and intire corrupt nature both in body and soule so it never signifieth in Christ And heere I desire the reader to change a word or two in my former Treatise Note â—reat 1. pa. â—6 lin 2. â—â—d lin 7. â— Cor. 7.1 for p allwayes to set vsually and for q a man to set Christ. Because since I find that Flesh and Spirit togeather applyed vnto men doe r once signifie meerely the Body and Soule which then I thought every where did signifie in vs our corrupt and regenerat man Which oversight the Bishop spyeth not but in this place coÌ„firmeth indeed Finally to make an ende with your Fathers and Councels it is strang that you thus vainly boast of them 〈◊〉 135.327 saying they are a all wholy for you for this 1400. yeares space I have shewed before that your large claime proveth a very short gaine For in substance and full effect they are evideÌ„tly and generally against you and for vs. As for their denying that Christ Dyed in his Soule I
b have answered to that before â—ag 135. â—6 142. Further where you bring them in many places saying by his bloud only he redeemed vs and he suffered only in his Body Fathers 〈◊〉 handled they are abused by you wonderfully Not in their words but in their meaning For they striving against Arians and such other Haeretikes who would have Christs Deity to take part in his sufferings for our redemption â—ee before 〈◊〉 111.113 â—4 c. so consequently would prove it inferior to the Father the godly Ancient Writers do heerevpon say he suffered satisfyed for vs only in his body in his flesh c not excluding the proper immediat sufferinges of his Spirit nor any passible part of his Manhood but onely his Godhead against those Haeretikes shewing thus also that no other Creatuâ—e besides him or with him satisfyed any way for vs altogeather after the Apostles like phrase in many places Let the Authors themselves be viewed if you thinke I affirme of them falsly Tertullian and Cyrill will give a tast heereof for all the rest Tertullians c Pag. 3 â— wordes d Contr. â— id est carnem thas is to say Christs flesh are expresly opposed to his Deity not to his Soul so that evidently he meaneth thereby his whole and intire passible Manhood If hee had meant to exclude any parte or faculty of his Soule from suffering as he doth his Godhead he had confirmed that Haeresy against which he striveth as f before I noted e Pag. 1â— Also it seemes he yeeldeth the name of Death to this suffering of Christes whole Manhood in saying Quod vnctum est mortuum ostendit that Dyed which receaved the Annoynting For I hope his spirit was Annointed with the Holy Ghost aswell as his Flesh And he saith thus as indefinitly so also by way of oppositioÌ„ to his Deity as I said therefore he meaneth the whole Manhood dyed Howbeit in what sort this might be I shewed * pag. 113â— 135. 136â— before My false traÌ„slating of him which you note is not worth the noting But you doe worse in false placing those his last rehearsed words for advantage in Tertull. they are vsed more generally in their owne place coming long before those words after which you set them As for that Denique posuit spirituÌ„ c. it sheweth that Christs bodily death also but not only came by reason of Gods forsaking and separating from him For before we saw how Tertull. expresly attributeth Gods DerelectioÌ„ both to his * Haec vâ—â—â— animae poris soule body on the Crosse though you grudg thereat Thus I say he excepteth only his Godhead from Dereliction and Suffering c. Cyrill also even in that book which you cite for you sheweth that he excludeth but Christs Deity though he mention only his suffering in Flesh †Ad Reg lib. 1. Carne passum dicit docens patiendi ineffabilem naturam a passionibus alienam Deus igitur Christus Divinè quidem impassibilis passibilis secundum carnem He excludeth only the Deity from suffering when he saith hee suffered in his Flesh In a word so do all the rest as h Pag. 1â— before is partly noted Against Nestorius i Pag. 33â— they affirme the vnion of Christes Natures with preserving the properties of each They therefore hold not his only bodily sufferings Is this then your great boast of all the Fathers and Councells Nay are they well vsed at your hands to be thus drawn cleane from their purpose to an opinion which they never thought of Is this good dealing towards Gods people to tell them that the Fathers generally teach the only bodily sufferings of Christ and deny our Assertion of his Soules peculiar suffering â—â—efore 47.48.66.71.88.112 which * they iustifie confirme indeed Yea this 〈◊〉 the profit that comes by ordinary slanting with Fathers which vse many do frequent in these dayes Think they if the scriptures alone suffice not for all thinges in Religion that the Fathers will suffice Or if the Fathers make a sense vpon some text that therefore this must be the right meaning alwayes Or if the Scriptures may be wrested by subtile heades that yet the Fathers cannot Or that Gods people may sooner see and finde when the Fathers are abused then when the Scriptures are It is great pity that men are yea wil be so deceaved with vaine shews Let vs in Gods name content our selves in handling matters of Religion onely with Gods al sufficient worde vnles where the importunity of an Adversary forceth vs. Otherwise let vs spare the Authority of men in Gods matters to them that make an Idoll of it Finally if in this case we were to looke after any man surely we have more cause to regard our later faithfull Teachers rather then those of old Who being equall with the best of them in any of the excellent graces of Gods spirit which hee vseth to bestow on his servants for the edifying of the Church yet heerein these have advantage of the former that they were directly provoked occasioned to study and sift out this question against the Papists which the Ancients were not occasioned to do After â—ag 341. a you set your self to prove that in Hell there is materiall fire But it seemeth you are now almost afraid so to call it yet b you call it true fire â—ag 343. Which also we vtterly deny All your proofes such as they are runne to prove corporall and materiall fire yet eternall Except your Scriptures which vtterly prove nothing at all for they shew no more any corporall or materiall or true fire to be now in Hell then a corporall worme materiall brimston and much wood true chaines Which you say is a sleeveles obiection but neither your selfe nor Austin whom you cite against it doth any where answer it Yea Austin thinketh that incorporall spirits shal be fastened to corporall fire But he saith not that now they are which only is our question or els nothing For my parte I see no reason to believe that now there is corporall fire in Hell whatsoever there shal be heereafter when Bodies also shal be there vnited and tormented with the Soules Againe Austin heere doth not prove that there shal be such fire hee only sheweth the maner how it may be so heereafter if God will Now if all your reason be the power of God only then aswel you may prove that the sky is fallen For as touching Gods will heerein you name it indeed but you shew it no where nor seeme to shew it All the rest say nothing further nor indeed so far as Austin Yet you thinke it may be called a Pag. â—â— a true created fire That no Christian ever doubted of if you meane that it is a true creature If you meane simply that it is true fire that still we deny And me thinks you should not care for corporall fire