yeeld vs an easier passage thorough the rest behind To com then to that which hee first * Pag. 2â— beginneth with where he laboureth very much to shew that hee mistooke not his Text wherevpon first he grounded his doctrine This I say that “ Gal. â— pag. 1. this Text whereon he * Pag. 3 groundeth and setteth downe the doctrine of the wholl meritorious contents of Christes Crosse as likewise of †Pag. 42 those effectes therof which he in his Treatise handleth I am perswaded is mistaken and that this place of Scripture intendeth not these things Gal. 6.12 It is manefest that the Apostle * heere reproveth the false teachers for mingling the pure doctrine of the Gospell because they were loth to taâ—t persecution which then followed the true and sincere professors thereof And so incourageth the godly to beare all Afflictions for this persecuted truth and for Christes sake Thus the Crosse of Christ here signifieth I grant Christ crucified Christ afflicted Christ persecuted not in his owne person only but also in his members Hee doth heere iointly togeather vnderstand by Christs Crosse the afflictions of the whole mysticall Body of Christ both Head and members which they commonly have in the world Which many shunned euen with Shipwracke of sincere Religion but Paul reioyced therein so much as in no worldly ioy like to it For so he meaneth when he saith God forbid that I should reioyce but in the Crosse of Christ not that hee makes it a thing detestable to reioyce in any thing ells Pag 227 as you imagine him to do It is lawfull to reioyce in other things besides the Crosse of Christ but it is not lawfull to reioyce in any worldly ioy so much or we are not to reioyce in comparison of our ioy which we ought to haue in this our shame and afflictions sustained for Christ for his Servants and for the purity of the Gospell Paul had very great cause thus exceedingly to reioyce heerein For 1. this was a token to men that he walked in the perfit way and a meanes also to himselfe so to doe 2. Because this his doing rebuked the corrupters and minglers of the Religion who would sustaine in the world no disgrace which followed the sincere course he thus incouraged also the weake professors to suffer willingly for the same 3. This indeed Crucified the world vnto him and him vnto the world as still it doth vs also These causes are both evident in the text and sufficient for Paul so exceedingly to reioyce in suffering for the pure Gospell Now hee cannot heere respect the meritorious and propitiatory Contents of Christs Crosse and so make it detestable to reioyce in any thing ells as propitiatory besides this suffering heere expressed which is the sense that you give vnto it I say this Paul cannot respect in this Word if hee include his own the Godlies afflictions But it appeareth by that before that indeed he doth include them all the circumstances imediatly following do also declare it 1. That which I touched before By suffering in the world for Christ for his simple truth Church sake the * Which your pâ—â— Text v â— world was Câ—ucified to him and he indeed vnto the world Also an other reason sheweth it †v 15. For in Christ Iesus neither circumcision nor vncircumcision avayle any thing but a new Creature That is a sincere vpright conversation being the fruit of a sincere and pure faith and profession which matter hee nameth a little before “ Gal. 5. Faith working by loue So by this Fruit he incourageth men as I said though there com shame and trouble therewith Also in the next place thus * v 16. And as many as walke according to this rule both of pure profession and conversation peace shal be vpon them c. howsoever in the world they have shame and trouble Lastly †v 17. hee willeth that no good Christian heerafter should put him to busines by seeking resolution of him whether for the pretended peace of the Church vnprofitable Caeremonies should be retayned with the Gospel for lo saith he my example sheweth you all my minde J beare about me the markes of the L. Jesus that is Afflictions for the sincere truths sake which I could by policy and wisdom avoyd aswell as those corrupters of Religion if I had no more care of the sincerity of the Gospell then they have This being thus it cannot be possibly that the Apostle should heere minde to name the particular kindes and all the meritorious partes or Contents of Christs suffering in this place but only hee incourageth men as I said to indure all afflictions for Christ and his truth sake Thus you are answered also in that * Pag. 22 you deny the Crosse of Christ in Scriptures to be taken for the Afflictions of the godly You see the Apostle “ ver 17 heere calleth the Afflictions of the godly the markes of the Lord Iesus also the afflictions of Christ in * Coll. 1. â— another place And in another “ 2 Cor. â— the dying of the Lord Iesus What are these in truth but the Crosse of Christ vnlesse you imagin some mysterie in the divers wordes when apparantly the matter is all one Also the very worde Crosse * Gal. 5.1 a litle before signifieth the Shame and hatred of Christ slaine on the Crosse togâ—ather with the shame of his ServaÌ„ts And thus also “ Pag. 22 your maine obiection is answered where you argue that Paul cannot be vnderstood * ver 12. to say that those false teachers would not suffer persecution for the Afflictions of the godly He may be vnderstood to say that he would not suffer persecution for commending the Afflictions and shame of good Christians for Christes sake which they ought to have done Then what sense or reason wanteth this exposition I knowe the roote and originall of their Hatred and disdaine was against Christ himselfe namely for his ignominious death on the Crosse But this excludeth not indeed it includeth in the Crosse of Christ Christs members the faithfull which are his owne Body and so consequently all their Afflictions for Christes sake Which the wicked and corrupt professors I say wil not commend as Paul did by suffering persecution in their own persons they will not by Suffering win credit and reverence to that way in the world Pa. 229 The Fathers which you bring hereabout overthrow not this sense but iustifie it rather Wherefore you cannot avoyd it yet but that it is still an oversight in you to vnderstand heere by the Crosse of Christ the Contents of his sufferings and to note his wholl and intire Passion in every part thereof as he merited thereby for vs which evidently the Apostle intendeth not neither is he about that in this place You say * Pa. 226 you drew no reason from these words of
thereof Which in trueth these our wordes in question doe well performe He came vnder the Dominion of Death or Went to the societie of the Dead following presently after these wordes Dead Buried And thus your 2. Rule alse Consequence of order is rightly kept For euen in respect of time it is certaine that Christs whole person perishing froÌ„ hence was wholy ioyned to the Dead after the precise separation of his Soule and body which was his Death And his Buriall being the visible part thereof in good reason may be set before that which signifieth the whole contayning also his Soules invisible going vnto the Dead Lastly if there be no more in this but a stronger emphasis meerely a more full-signifying phrase it might well come after termes of lesse emphasis Your 3. and last Rule Proprietie of Wordes is plainly for vs and against your selfe For that which we strive for is the a Pa. 157 169 17â— native and proper sense of Hades even according to the etymologie of it and according to common vse You if you vrge it to signifie Hel do indeed make a †Pa. 171. Figure in it viz. Synecdoche a part for the whole as before we haue shewed As for the other word heere in the Creed katébe or katélthe Hee descended or came vnder it is not necessarie to take it alwayes to signifie a locall going downe specially thus ioyned with Hades For thus it may aptly lively shew the fall or whole casting down of a mans person from the state of life to death and vtter destruction out of this world as also men are said to stand vp and spring vp when they live Or it may serue to expresse the Force and Dominion of Death which Christ came vnder when he dyed Or the abasement and humiliation of Christ yeelding submitting him selfe so farre that is not onely to Dy but also to come vnder the strength and force of death by lying held subdued as it were for so long time in it All this the very property of the word katebe admitteth very easilie and Ruffinus liketh it where he interpreteth this phrase â—uffin in â—â—mb Descendit in mortem He descended vnto Death If any thinke this to be somewhat figurative yet it is verily so familiar and easie to all people as that other word in this Creed is He sitteth at the right hand of God yea it is farie easier indeed And heerein all the later famous learned and godly Restorers of Religion in a maner doe ioyne with vs as Mat. Bucer P. Martyr Bulinger â—â—slitut Olevia c. Yea M. Calvin liked this also wel enough though yet he seemeth to leane more to another sense viz. Christes Hellish sufferings which indeed is a true doctrine as before is declared though to this place of the Creed I thinke not so fit Now these men your L. ought not to skorne nor reproch though you have leave to deale so with me Their pietie learning and authoritie is such with all that love the Gospell as will overwaigh your big wordes and high lookes and whatsoever els you are lifted vp withal aboue our mediocritie Hitherto we haue answered admitting the authoritie of these wordes He descended to Hades But wee are in truth to know â—ere that as you cite them and vige them they have no such authoritie credit as hitherto we have yeelded vnto them And that for 3. causes First for that your TraÌ„slating and terming them He descended into Hel is corrupt partiall and vntrue Which I trust is manifest by that which I have shewed before touching the true property natural vse of Hades If you say among vs all men do so speak heere and translate hades Hel. I pray you coÌ„sider that this article as also I think this whole Creed was at first written in Greek and not in English Wherefore the English terme how comon so ever must not preiudice vs nor the truth in this matter as very vnreasonably a you indeavour to make it to do â—â—g 420. Convince vs evidently and soundly by Greek authoritie that Hades is alwayes Hell or that Hades is never applyed to the condicion and state of the godly deceased and then I will yeeld or els my sufficient proofes before to the contrary will convince the vntrue and partiall translation Another reason to deny vtterly the authority and credit of these wordes He descended to hades so to hold them vnable to make any argument as from our Creed is because this speciall clause of Christs descending to Hades or to Infernum is new and lately put into our vulgar Creed called the Apostles Creed b Ruffin Symb. Ruffinus witnesseth who lived about 500. yeeres after Christ that it was not at all in the Creed in his time I say not at allâ— neither in the Romane Creed nor yet in the Creed of the Easterne Churches His words are these Sciendum sanè est quod in Ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur additum Deseendit ad inferna sed nee in Orientis Ecclesiis habetur hic sermo Will you say Ruffinus lyeth Or can you bring to the contrarie any proofe I think not yea I am sure you can not Then if there were no such Article as this nor anie such wordes any where in the Creed for the space of 500. yeres after Christ I mervaile what authoritie they haue now to be taken necessarily for a distinct article in our Creed and as differing materially from Dead and Buried Sure it is a Namely Desâ—â—â—le Hades to new to be receaved for doctrine which b Pag. 13â— sprang vp so late Yea thus c Erasm 〈◊〉 Symb. Caâ—â— 4. Erasmus may seeme to haue some colour for his coniecture that about Thomas Aquinas time they might peradventure be put into this Creed Third we can not see but that whensoever whosoever put it first into this place they signified heereby it seemeth that Christ went to Limbus a place vnder the earth where they imagined the blessed Patriarkes rested For this was indeed the opinion generally of the ancient Christians even for “ Limbus inter tayâ— before Châ—â— descendinâ— bades waâ— our set â—câ— oâ— the Crâ—â— a long time and stil is retayned among the Papistes though now growen much worse theÌ„ it was of old But this you iustly coÌ„demne as an error as wel as we how generall and how ancient soever it be Now also though this were the 1st meaning of this Article whensoever it fiâ—fte tooke place in the common Creed yet this was not Hell this giveth no furtherance to your assertion that Christ went into the place of the Damned in tormentes But Thaddaeus Jgnatius Athanasius haue these very words Yet they say not any where that they were in that set forme of the Apostles Creed * Which â—â—deed they 〈◊〉 had not which we now have Also they are cleane against your opinion heere as presently wee shall see You will say yet
for sinne in such maner as he doth on the Reprobat though not in such measure and that such likewise were Christs sufferings But then I deny that therein yow have the truth or have rightly expressed the sufferinges of Christ or of his Saintes Because the sufferings of the Saintes are properly not punishmeÌ„ts for sinnes nor effects of Gods wrath properly but are indeed fatherly profitable chastisements purposely inflicted by God for their good as before is said But Christes were altogeather of another nature and condition they were the only true and proper punishment price Satisfaction and Ransom for sinnes as hath ben also noted before after shal be further shewed If you vnderstand Christes suffering Gods Wrath to be such as the godly feele viz improperly and largely as the Scriptures †In your 13â— there do meane and not as the very price and punishment for sinne but only as Chastisements then that is likewise manefestly vntrue Also then againe for your words you are ambiguous and deceiptfull in this issue which kinde of vanity you commonly vse in all other your handling of controversies since you left writing against the Papistes as who so looketh shall see For wee affirming that Christ felt the wrath of God doe meane it properly as it inflicteth properly the punishment and Wages of sinne Your Equâ—cation in terme Gâ—â— Wrath. and you tell vs that he suffered Gods wrath as the Saints and Godly men doe suffer it That is altogeather vnproperly beeing sometime so called for a certain seeming that it hath to bee so as you acknowledge in the sense of flesh and bloud Then what is this to our purpose What ells do you worke heerein but deceipt mistaking to the Reader through the ambiguity of this word the Wrath of God Which palpable fallacy of yours is so plaine that I need not stand to open it any further and yet I assure my selfe that this is the very ground and refuge of the errour in this Question Which if a man marke well distinguish as he ought and may easily do he shall quickly drive you either to shift into this corner Your Equiocation or ells to deny much of that which you affirme in your booke elswhere Therefore lett the wise consider it Neverthelesse if happily you meane otherwise that is Pas you seeme 〈◊〉 meâ—â—â— paâ—â—â—01 105 that Christes very * outward sufferings and bodily death were in a peculiar sort the effects of Gods proper wrath thus truly punishing our sinnes on him then in effect you come to vs againe of yow will sticke but to this For there is no reason in the worlde to make Christes flesh subiect to Gods Curse for sinne and not his Minde and soule likewise Also wee must note that such outward bodily sufferings beeing indeede punishments and not chastisements for sinne that is proper effects of Gods very wrath and iustice comming to take vengeance for sinne they cannot be meere bodily sufferings nor meerly felt by sympathy in the Soule which is the proper effect of the outward sensitive facultie only but they must of necessity be conceaved discerned applyed in the inward feeling of the Minde of Christ â—â—d 〈◊〉 deny at â—â—â—nce that Mens â—â—â—ules haue â—â—â—ny sense in yeâ—â—he â—inde beâ—â—â—des the Comâ—â—â—â— sense deâ—â—nding on â—â—â—e Body and will make a singular and secret impression of sorrow in the Soule far above all meere bodily griefes beyond all measure and proportion of things in ordinary experience so exceedingly differing from all other sufferings in this life Which therefore may iustly bee termed the proper and immediat sufferings of his Soule And this sense the Lord doubtles revealeth vpon men somtime more somtime lesse in this life even as it pleaseth him Which also befell vnto Christ Againe Pag. 257. if the Agonie and sorrow which you grant Christ suffered simply in his minde be meant by you to have ben as it were a foretast of such sufferings and a feare or dread of them as very iustly it may be considering the weake disability of a Creature to stand vp against the Creator Propathia namely now shooting or preparing to shoote presently the sharpe arrowes of his wrath vpon him for our sinnes in which case and condition Christ now stood for that while then I say also I see in effect no difference betwene vs then againe this Question is as it were at an end For doubtles he suffered at one time or other the same thing which he so feared Yea such a kind of fearing cannot be but a mighty suffering thereof Neither doe wee contend to expresse what iust measure of Gods wrath nor precisely in what manner it was revealed and executed on Christ Onely wee know that whatsoever it were Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinnes though outwardly executed on the Body yet it could not but sinke in deeper even into the deapth of the Soule and be discerned by Christ and conceaved to be such and so sustayned as proceeding from God and so wound the Soule properly yea chiefly though the anguish thereof bruized his body iointly also Againe whatsoever you wil call it All or * Such 〈◊〉 as waâ— nothinâ— whol 〈◊〉 sinfull 〈◊〉 rents oâ—â— part of Gods proper Wrath and vengeance as it proceeded from him was incomprehensible vnspeakeable infinit and vntolerable to any creature therefore so it was vnto the very Manhood of Christ namely when the Godhead for a season concealed it self of purpose and with held his wonted supportation and comfort from him to the end that his bitter Passion ordayned of God and most voluntarily vndertaken by himselfe might bee in suffering the “ The 〈◊〉 Paines rowes 〈◊〉 sin werâ—â—â— Christ foâ—â— time no qualifye◠〈◊〉 lessened sorrows and paines which were due to vs nothing qualified but in all severity accomplished As indeed when his Hower was come and gon it was As touching that terme The death of his Soule which you stumble at we shall speake thereof heereafter in due place Thus far I have proceeded in opening the true state of this Quaestion which whether you who have begon to avouch the contrary will now acknowledge and approve or not I know not Overthrow it I trust you shall never with all the cunning and strength you have For vndoubtedly it is and so will appeare by the word to be a manefest truth and therefore “ Act. 5â— will prevaile besides that it is expresly the doctrine taught and established by authority in England as heereafter God willing I shall plainly shew notwithstanding all your strange coÌ„tradicting traducing thereof Lastly whether I did set down this very state of the quaestion in full effect in my former Treatise or whether I changed it though indeed I graunt I was there much shorter then I am heere I pray you looke consider againe in that my †Pag. 5 33. and first booke This being well considered and marked will
nevertheles being vsed as God hath appointed them to be are sufficiently easy and lightsom in them selues I thinke the H. Ghost much commendeth those “ Act. 17 12. men of Beraea who hearing the Apostle Paul teach though they were not ill affected towards him yet they would not believe that he spake touching Religion till they had examined by the Scriptures seene whether the truth were so as he vttered I trust then no advised Christian will chalenge more authority to the Fathers then was heere given to the Apostle nor deny indeede to any privat men much lesse to a minister to * Phil. 1. psal 119 1 Cor 2 1 Cor. 1â— iudge and discerne in themselves not only of the words of men but euen of the sense meaning of the Scripture by the Scripture it selfe which thing heere the Beraeans did and are commended by the H. Ghosh for it How vniustly then do you charge me that “ Pag. 34 I refuse the Fathers to testify in any cause against my liking I hope you will not deny me to iudge of theÌ„ by the Scripture according to that measure of knowledge and diligence which the Lord inableth me with It is every Christians duety as we haue seene and you take it vnto your selfe as we shall see afterwards Wherefore let others partake with you I pray in this common right and Christian liberty Vnles you thinke so well of your selfe as to imagine that other men will not be so modest and humble minded in vsing this their freedom or not so wise and circumspect as your selfe are Which conceit if you haue you ought to correct it Neither yet are the Fathers refused as you complaine to testifie in any cause of Religion whatsoever By vttering their opinions they may witnesse what was held and esteemed as true or probable by som godly and wise men in those times but not by all Mr Bilson himselfe “ In his booke aâ— the Iesuâ— part 2. elswhere saith well heereof If all the ancient Bishops such were the Fathers or most of them which we haue extant should hold an opinion yet it followeth not that all Preachers then were of that minde nor if the Preachers generally thought so that all the Christians were so perswaded Thus it is true they can witnesse what was held by som good men then as I said yea perhaps what was commonly thought in the Churches of those places where they lived But in no wise what was the iudgment of all no not among themselues much lesse every where and in all ages Now if you should meane yet further that they may testifie in causes of Religion as witnesses do with vs in Civill matters that what they affirme and testifie must obtaine a verdict and so haue sentence and iudgment with it which in effect you seeme to insinuat by calling their Opinions Authorities so vsually as you do then indeede for my part I can not agree that they or any men should be such Witnesses nor their words nor shew of reasons in any matters of Religion to be taken as Authorities If you or any think otherwise wee may lawfully deny it Gods worde only with vs hath indeede Authoritie The Fathers all or som haue none any further then that their Conclusions expositions and reasons if after examination made by the liuely word they be found currant with the Text then they are the more ioyfully to be embraced If otherwise in our conscience they seeme to vary from the text or from some certaine evident Circumstance thereof then is it not indifferent for vs but our Christian duty in the presence of God to leaue them and not to follow them therein yet still with reverence and loving regard towards their names for the manifold graces of God otherwise in them More then this whosoever ascribeth vnto them they verily abuse the Fathers and not we For as the Papists do abuse the Saints deceased by Worshipping and praying vnto them not we who loue them and thinke reverently of them as the blessed Servants of God So in this case we who vse the writings of godly Men as good helpes to our knowledge do not despise them but you who make them Authorities in Religion by your to much imbracing them do indeede notably abuse them Nevertheles I well perceave that all this great shew of cleaving to the Fathers iudgments is but coloured in you you vrge them in som cases so whotly but for advantage For in other points againe we see when they speak not to your liking the case is altered It is worth the paines to looke a little further in to this your practise because you pursue me with such cruelty for leaving the Fathers in som things First your generall speeches somwhere of the Scripture and of the expositions of men are very good Touching the Scriptures Ep. pa. 9. â—ag 41. Booke 1.2 aâ—â—inst the Ieâ—â—s part 4. â—â—g 360. â—ag 301. Jn Gods causes let Gods booke teach vs what to beleeve and what to professe * What J read in the word of God that I believe what I read not that I do not believe Touching men If you want the foundation of true faith and religion the Scripture in vaine do you seeke to make a shew of Catholicisme c. * One man with truth is a warrant against all the world Againe “ In this 3 book Full â—edâ—tion c 122. By their patience their expositions must not looke to bee Canonicall in the church of God If they say any thing well we take it with their praise if otherwise as men they misse their marke we refuse it with their leaves * Gal. 5. God hath called us vnto liberty “ 1. Cor. not to be servants of men and to serve erroneous constructions is worse then to beare tyrannous exactions These are very worthy speaches but haue a care and conscience Sir I pray you in this that you leave this freedom vnto vs which you take to your selfe Binde no heavyer burdens on the Church of God then your selfe professeth to like of And because I would haue this sound profession of yours to be wel noted of all men in as much as I know how wauering and slippery you are for the most part heerein therefore it is good also that we observe how your owne practise concurreth heerewith and ratifieth your profession when and where you list though when you will you check and taunt vs for the like Christian liberty I see in this booke where you forsake the ancient and learned Fathers that is as you speake in my case where you contemne and despise them First * Pag. 21 you reiect Austens opinion that those who rose to life at Christs Resurrection dyed againe Sec You reiect his exposition of those words of Christ to the Theefe This day shalt thou bee with mee in Paradise Austen vnderstandeth Christ as speaking of the Theeves soule and his owne “ Also Eâ—â— He is reâ—â— in
soule properly also For the one standeth with Gods iustice and with the Nature of man in Christ aswell as the other So farre for this Then e you addresse your selfe against another â—ag 289. even one of the chiefest reasons of mine which I make from the straunge and incomparable Agoâ—ies of Christ in the tyme of his Passion These invaded him as we read principally at 3. times 1. in the foretast of his Passion shewed vs in the 12. of Iohn 2. In the Garden a little before his apprehension 3. In his very extreame Passion it selfe on the Crosse The Scriptures f heeretofore I rehearsed at full Treat â— â—ag 49. 50. â—oh 12.27 Mat. 26.39 and 44. Mark 14.33 â—uk 22.44 and 43. Mat. 27.46 â—ebâ—â— 5.7 whence these piteous and vnspeakeable Agonies of his are notified vnto vs. Whereby to all that duely consider it appeareth so cleare as the Sunne at noone day that The paines of his Passionâ— which plainly now he felt and feared because he knew he was to feele them further vnto death were the proper and direct cause of those Agonies But we assume that such straunge and lamentable things and behaviour in Christ were not the effectes only and meerelie of his bodily paines and death or of the feare of them Therefore Christ felt and indured more then his meere bodily paine and death by the testimonie of the Scriptures which thing a Before 14.25.5 you deny In your whole discourse you gainsay * Pag. 17 22. 23. 2â— 34. c. the Proposition that the paines of Christes Passion or the naturall feare of them was the proper and direct cause of those Agonies or that these Scriptures doe imply so much The Assumption you graunt and acknowledge that the meere bodily paines and death of Christ or the feare thereof were not the only nor the proper and direct Cause of these Agonies in him For b Pag. 29â— you are resolved that the cause of Christes Agonie could not proceede but from his Submission to God or Compassion to men or froÌ„ both These you name elswhere a c Pag. 23. â— religious Feare d Pag. 124. 20 21. Devotion and Pietie to God pitie to men c. And thus you resolutely denie my Proposition For you meane it seemeth that Christ suffered paines in his Soule by reason of the strength and zeale of these his Holy Affections and that these were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie Complaint Therfore not any extraordinarie Paines inflicted vpon him by way of proper punishment as my Proposition intendeth But this your Assertion I simply denie that Christes Holy Affections his Piety and his Pity were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie Complaint And then my Proposition standeth firme that his Paines inflicted on him by way of proper Punishment and Vengeance for sinne were the proper and maine Cause thereof Wherefore let vs try your proofes for it and then mine against it But before we com to them you must know that this your Resolution as you call it is first most vaine also directly contrary to your selfe and then altogeather vntrue and presumed by wide coniecture as God willing presently I shall shew For the first I hartily intreat the Christian Reader to marke wel to consider how your L. doth contrive 3. notable Equivocations in these few wordes Christ suffered in his Soule the wrath of God Notable Sâ—â— phistrie which you e Pa 243 24â— 245. 248. seeme to grant but in truth you do not and if we ad also the paines of Hell then hee opposeth a fourth fallacie against vs. And these 3. or 4. are the only Pillars of his Doctrine For the 3. former your first Equivocation is in this word Christ Suffered and about it wee deale in this place now The common and ordinary phrase of men vnderstandeth heerein His feeling of paines inflicted on him by way of proper punishment and satisfaction for sinne â—t Christes â—fering or â—â—lion is proâ—â—ly which he vndertooke for vs. Only this in the ordinarie and vsuall maner of speach is signified by Christes suffering or his Passion and so doe we alwayes vnderstand by it But you cunninglie take another rare sense of this word as it signifieth the Affections of the Minde in Christ wholly bent to Holines Righteousnes Obedience of God that so he might exactly perfitly keep his iust Law Which 2. partes of Christes Mediation are greatly differing â—â—e before pa. 18. 52. 64. and ought not both in trueth to be called His Passion or Satisfaction for sinne Therefore speake plainly I beseech you and deceave vs not call not this His Soules suffering but his Soules Holines Righteousnes And seeing you meane This was the proper maine cause of Christs Passion Suffering wheÌ„ he wrought his satisfactioÌ„ for sin now at the last end of his life chiefly I simply denie it 〈◊〉 Treat 1. pag. 68. 69. all Reason reclaimeth against it and to that which I alleaged for further reproofe thereof you answere nothing Your next Equivocation is in this See before pag 52. Hee suffered †in Soule your next in Gods wrath Both which I have plainly shewed before As also your 4. Before pa. 49. 19. * Fallacy which may be called Fallacia Accidentis But Sit I hope you will not thinke to beare downe all afore you with nothing but with cunning Before pag. 16. 53. yet vaine deceipt countenanced out with cruell and hatefull wordes Further you are in this your Resolution directly contrary to your owne selfe Before pa. 36. 64. as before I have briefly yet sufficiently shewed Againe where you censure your selfe very sharply for your resolutnes in this cause Pag. 17. * It is curiosity to examine presumption to determine impossibility to conclude certainly what was the true cause therof Thirdly “ Pag. 290. where you make but 2. causes submission to God Compassion to men elswhere but one * Pag. 23. Religious feare But †Pa. 17. c. before you very precisely made 6. If you agree no better w th your self I have small hope that you will agree with vs. Last of al this your resolution making Christs Piety Pity to be the only proper maine Cause of all his wofull Passion is vtterly false and vntrue having no grouÌ„d but meere coniectures But before I vnâ—â— my reasons against your Assertion Your 6. Causes of Chr. Agonie vntrue let vs view all your particulâ—â— Causes see if any one of the can be good †Pag. 18. Your 1. Cause is Sâ—â—mission to the Maiesty of God sitting in iudgemeÌ„t Against whom 〈◊〉 in what cause sate he now in iudgment when Christ was thus astonished Agonized therewith Of necessity it must be one of these three wayes 1. Gods Maiesty great iustice now at this time might sit in iudgement
him selfe Where you obiect Athanasius Cont. Aâ— Serm. that He could not be forsaken of his Father who was alwayes in his Father It is meerely wrested Athanasius speaketh against Arius also that Christes Deitie could not be forsaken of his Father seeing it is alwayes in his Father and so was not inferior to the Father which was Arius haeresy Touching his humanity he denyeth not but God might forsake it For the Scripture saith so And in deed he forsooke it by causing in it the feeling of all Paines for sinne and by leaving it therin for a while all comfortles Your 5. Exposition is Leos conceit without warrant far fetcht hardly applyed thaâ— heere Christ putteth vs in minde why God doth often not heare our prayers but provideth better for vs then if our wils were satisfied that this is a mysticall sense â—â—g 37. a Origen also is heere as weake that Christ meaneth nothing ells but that hee was abased lower then his divine maiesty Also these senses be contrary to all the rest heere observed Your 6. and last also is likewise as contrary to the rest and as improbable in it self or more then the former That Christ heere should cite the beginning of that b Psalme â—â—al 22. only to shew the Iewes that their wrongs towardes him were Prophesied of before This c Treat 1. â—â—g 66. already I fully answered which you refute not Likewise where you say â—â—g 65. 66. He sung the whole Psalme it is d answered Wheâ—in moreover this is to be noted that surely hee now vttered no more of this Psalme but the 1. verse Eli Eli Lamma sabachtham For heereby the standers by imagined that he called for Elias Therefore he sung not the Psalme Your authorities are bare arguments Ierom bringeth no reason but his own word Chrysostom I see not what he saith to your purpose at all Finally those kindes of Dereliction which you mention c besides â—â—g 32. 33. c are nothing fitter then the former Thus far I have waded in examing your sundry and variable expositions of one poore little plaine sentence of Scripture At least 6. or 7. divers yea contrary senses you have brought of a few wordes 〈◊〉 14. of them all you say They are f all godly expositions and †All these interpretations are sound â—â—g 37. and stand well with the rules of Christian pietie How sound and fit they are it hath ben seene But verily you have a good head if you can reconcile all these and make them stand togeather and a very bad opinion of the holy Scriptures you seeme to have if you thinke they may be handled by interpretations and expositions thus that a man may take them in 6. or 7. divers senses and all iustifiable Your saying therefore â—â—g 113. that g you have spoken before asmuch to this matter as may content any man that is not fastened to his fancies more then to to the truth I omit as vaine and frivolous Now it resteth that I gather some reasons from the expresse Scripture â—â—s for vs to shew you that indeed very paines and the vehemency of sorrowes namely which hee now sustayned by way of yeelding Satisfaction and Sacrifice for sinne were the principall and onely proper Cause of his most dreadfull Agonies Complaint Which truly though it neede no reason for proofe of it the matter being so cleere in it selfe yet your vnreasonablenes is such that it draweth somewhat from me about it First No Christian doubteth I suppose much lesse denyeth that Christs most wofull Agonies Complaining belonged properly and directly to his Passion and Sacrifice and that they expressed a parte thereof yea as I thinke not the least parte But his whole Sacrifice consisted in Afflictions The Prince of our Salvation was consecrated through Afflictions Therefore Afflictions Sorrowes and Paines were the Cause of his Agonies and Complaint not his religious feare not his Piety or Pity If you say These were Afflictions vnto him I answer they properly belonged to his Holynes as partes thereof and were not a Before pâ—â— See alâ—o 〈◊〉 91 9â— immediatly directly nor properly in him as the Wages Price of sinne as his whole Passion was and every part thereof Againe that these should or could afflict Christe so much above his strength and patience it is more then strange Yea also it were no vertuâ— but sinne in any to give way to our Affections though about good thinges immoderatly beyond our patience strength of nature Lastly though they somwhat molest the minde yet in truth they are most pleasing and delightfull to good men not tedious much lesse painfull vnto death Therefore you do very ill to make these partes of Christs Holines to be proper partes of his satisfaction and the maine Causes of his Agonie and Complaint And worse you doe if you ascribe them b Pag. 27â— 115. not to any Paines in him at all Secondly The summe of these c Pag 90. forenoted Texts must be considered namely that Christe expresly wished sundry times in his dreadfull astonishment suddainly even against Gods knowen will in one respect though allwayes after his knowen will in another respect as afterward wee shall see And heere are expressed with his strange Astonishment his mighty Sorrowes and Feare of them partly felt and partly further to come You d Pag. 9 â— skip this Feare when you reckon but 4. kindes For this was neither a religious care nor doubtfull feare nor desperat nor damned feare but a right Naturall feare in Christ Which was as I said for the infinitnes of his sorrowes partly now revealed and partly further to bee laid vpon him afterward Whence also his sweating drops of bloud trickling downe from him and his intolerable Agonie and his comfort receaved by an Angell from heaven that now in this his wofull discomfort ministred vnto him and his complaying on the Crosse that his Father had forsaken him finally all his prayers and supplications with teares and strong cryes against that death which he feared Now all these things we see in Christ came because of his sorrowes and Paines in his Passion not for his zealous Holines and Sanctification â—â—â—l 51.11.2.8 David waÌ„ted somtime the present feeling of Gods comfortable spirit and mourned dolefully for the want of it albeit yet hee were not destitute of his spirit indeed which also himselfe knew well enough And thus did Christ even in his greatest plunge of wo for then he called God his God resolutly Nevertheles he being infinitly more punished then David nature could not but suddainly cast out that affection which yet was meerely naturall in him to wish ease and release of his vnmeasurable and intollerable paines Third Adde heere vnto Christs own expresse words Ioh. 12.27 â—ark 14.35 when in this season he prayeth that a this Hower and This Cup may passe from him That which This Hower and This Cup do signifie the same
is the proper principall cause of his Agonie But what can bee meant by This Hower vnles the Paines of his suffering set and appointed by God for him to beare at this determined time from Gods Iustice for sinne What is this Cup but the bitter tast of the same Paines aforesaid This I hope was not his Holines and sanctification which so troubled and molested him not his Piety nor his Pity Nay finally he himselfe expresseth the true Cause even his excessive Paines his overabounding Sorrowes and anguish saying My Soule is full of paines or full of sorrowes even vnto death Heere hee nameth the Cause For which Cause also even of intolerable and vnsupportable sorrowes and paines it must needes be that he cryed at his end My God my God why hast thou for saken me This then manefestly was the only proper and principall cause of Christes most dreadfull Agonies and perplexity in his Passion even excessive Paines and the intire want of feeling of Gods comfort Pag. 17. and nothing els How hard soever b you make it I c know not why to shew the proper principall cause thereof Treat 1. Pag. 72. And heere wee will remember againe what is taught by Authority in England The rather for that you take on as a man impatient because I doe affirme that our doctrine not yours hath the publike Authorie for it Pag. 334. You d call it an egregiously an insolent and impudent speach well becomming an alehouse c. And yet in the verie next b Pag. â—â— page in plaine termes you graunt the same to bee taught in our Homily of Christes Passion for you say thus the Hom teacheth The Justice of God pursued Christe with most paynefull smart and anguish even vnto death and forced the weaknes of his humane flesh to cry My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Heere I am sure you think not that our Homelie maketh Christs Pietie or Pitie nor yet his meere Bodily paine to force him thus farre Nor in those wordes next following there c Hom â— Pass 2. O that Mankinde should put the everlasting Sonne of God in such paines for the grievousnes of our sinnes And in trueth that the Homily is farre from both these your meanings I have plainly shewed d Pag. 6 before Adde heerevnto the full and large declaration heereof in the authorised Catechisme e Nowe techisâ—â— Christ suffered not only a common death in sight of men but à lso was thoroughly touched with the horror of eternall death he fought and wrastled as it were hand to hand with the whole army of Hell before Gods iudgement seat he put him selfe vnder the heavy and grievous severitie of Gods punishment he was driven to most hard straights hee suffered for vs and went through horrible feares and moct bitter sorrowes of the minde that he might in all things satisfye the iust iudgement of God appease his wrath For to sinners whose person Christ did heere beare not only the sorrowes and tormentes of present death are due but also of death to come and everlasting So when hee did take vpon him and beare both the guiltines and iust paine of Mankinde damned and lost he was affected with so grievous feare trouble and sorrowe of the minde or soule that he cryed out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Finally the Annotation of our great f Bibl. 1591. â— Bible authorized and appointed to be read in our Churches iustifyeth all this saying g Annoâ— Luk. 2â— Christ here felt the horror of Gods wrath and iudgement against sinne I pray who is that Egregious lyar now I hope for my part I have spoken the truth in avouching my doctrine that forenoted Proposition Assumption also by you denyed to be our publike doctrine and fully authorized in England Wherefore you may meane some other to be h Pag. â—â— a giddy Spirit lately buzzing in the peoples eares the coÌ„trary I hope I am clear from it And thus it remayneth that we conclude even our whole Reason to be firme true which is i Pag. 9â— before delivered The paines of Christes Passion which now he felt and feared were the principall and proper cause of those his Agonies But his meere Bodily Paines and death or the feare of them caused no such things and lamentable effectes in Christ much lesse did his Pietie and Pitie Therefore Christ felt and feared Paines more and infinitly greater then meere Bodily paine and death which were the principall and proper Cause of this strange plight in him Which consequently can be none other by necessary reason then the Paines and sense of Gods wrath in his spirite properly Therefore Christ suffered that also and not only in Body as you hold Howbeit you have yet heere and there some exceptions against this our doctrine which are not to be cleane neglected First you say â—ag 290. a I extend Châ—istes Agonie too farre because I will have it proceed from b the intollerable sorrowes and horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell Treat 1. â—â—g 80. I shew not there the Cause of Christes Agonie and Feare I shewed it of purpose in the c beginning Why did you not refuse that Treat 1. â—ag 6 7 You ought to have dealt directly against that which I expresly mention to have ben the cause Thus I said His Sorrowes and sufferings for the redemptioÌ„ of sinnes The Cup of Affliction and sorrowe which now he felt and was to feele yet further Caused him to mourne and feare Say then plainly that this Cause is mistaken and too farre extended or els you say nothing to vs but by indirect and pâ—aeposterous collectioÌ„ Now if this Cause which we gave and doe give be true and right as I hope it is before proved more then sufficiently then I doubt not it is as true also by invincible reason that Christ suffered the intollerable sorrowes horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell Which I hope also is as fully proved â—â—g 91. 117 being the effect of our d Assumption before Seeing it could not be his meere Bodily paines much lesse his Holy Affections as you hold that brought him to this miraculous miserie and distresse wherein wee see by the Text hee was Therefore they were the intollerable and incomprehensible dolours of his Spirit questionles which wrought the same There is no other sorrow in the world to be found which can be imagined to be the Cause possibly â—ag 290. And then my other wordes also which e heere you cruelly coÌ„demne shall stand well enough * That Christ as touching the vehemency of paine was as sharply touched as the Reprobats themselves â—reat 1. â—â—g 81. yea if it may be more extraordinarily Though you labour with might and maine to make them amount to Haeresie open blasphemie But why do you not bend your odious outcryes and accusations against that Authority before truly cited
for the very suddaine he might not think at all vpon Gods will and his owne certaine purpose to suffer this very same or that he was to suffer it longer but only on the intolerablenes of the paines and wo which instantly he felt Now Natures very instinct is in such dolours to wish and desire ease and the more vehemently it is pinched the more earnestly it desireth and this is Gods owne gift and workmanship in nature and simply thus to desire is in this respect truly to be reckoned Gods owne expresse will And thus for the suddaine not remembring nor thinking on Gods particular will otherwise but feeling the instinct of nature in such a case only wishing ease to it self he prayeth rightly That this Hower This Cup might passe froÌ„ him Wherein yet I say he prayeth in one respect against Gods known wil but in an other respect even according to his will According to his wil which now he had sense of even to wish release ease froÌ„ such deadly sorrows and feare contrary to his particular wil being this that he must yet further suffer them Which as I said suddenly being astonished he remeÌ„bred not he thought not vpon it Lastly it was contrary in the outward words in the particular affection of his minde now wanting this remembrance but it was fully and wholy according to Gods will in the generall disposition of his minde and whole man As appeared by his present applying himselfe with all readines even to this most dolorous obedience of Gods will foorthwith so soone as hee recollected himself saying Not my will but thy will be don Where even this also sheweth that before Gods will and his in some respect were contrary but absolutly now they agree If you abhorre this in me yet see what Chrisostom taught a These wordes Not as I will but as thou wilt do signifie 2. Wills saith he one of the Father another of the Sonne Ioan Constantinop in Theodoret. Dial. 3. contrary the one to the other Igraunt M. Beza vseth som termes differing from ours yet his sense is the selfsame with ours Bez. Annot. 〈◊〉 mat 26. He said b Christ corrected not his speach as if he had before spoken amisse I say He did correct his speach not mending it as being any whit amisse but making it being good to be better That is by shewing his generall conformitie to Gods will now more particularly and distinctly Which sentenses in effect and indeed do not differ and this latter I think may well be called a correcting no lesse then the former Also he saith The Humane and Divine will are not Contrary but Divers I vnderstand even Differing from Gods will to be Contrary Namely in that particular respect wherin the difference is For otherwise now there may be a general perfit conformitie to Gods will as is before said Neither is this particular contrariety to Gods will any sinne namely when by Gods own ordinance we know not what Gods special will is so that we alwayes remaine apt ready therevnto when we know it So did David * 2 Sam. 1 16. desire the life of his Child It was contrary to Gods wil one way as the event shewed for the Child dyed Yet he prayed well and rightly according to God will in natures affection seeing hee knew not Gods secret will to the contrary neither was to have knowne it before the event And thus likewise stood the case with Christe at this season His suddaine Not remembring Gods particular will by reason of his fearfull astonishment was all one as if he had not known it at all yea thus also he ought not to haue knowen it for that instant Namely seeing this Not remeÌ„bring and not thinking thereon came not of any negligence or default in him but only and meerely by Natures infirmitie Gods own ordinance which could not possibly but faile vnder such infinit violence of paines This M. Beza calleth Divers rather then Contrarie to Gods will but in effect it is the same and he plainly meaneth even there all one with vs. You say “ Pag. â—â— I am captious against Christ in not supplying one Evangelist with another For so Christes desire wil appeare to be but Conditionall therefore not Contrary to Gods will Yes nevertheles as touching the desire it selfe and his particular present inclination coÌ„pared to Gods particular determination heerein And so was also Davids forenoted desire for his childs life yea Balaams * Numbâ—â— 19. bad desire was such in this point These were all Conditionall yet contrarie to Gods particular will Heerein stood the difference Balaam then knewe Gods will was otherwise at that tyme when he inclined after his owne minde David simply knew not Christ also knew not that is he remembred not at that instant the contrary Therefore Balaams desire though Conditionall and with reservation as it seemed of God will was nevertheles wicked and against God his conditionall words excused not the opposition of his Will against Gods Wil. Yea in this case when we perfitly know and remember Gods certaine will every light affection and suddaine wishing to the contrary howsoever conditionally is no lesse then manefest sinne against God But in David and Christ heere the case is not so as before I noted Their desires indeed were ought to haue ben conditionall for who knoweth not that all good prayers and desires for temporall things must bee conditionall that is with reservation of Gods will alwayes implyed though not alwayes expressed And albeit they were conditionall yet they might be and were contrary as also I have shewed Yea the very nature of all CoÌ„ditional desires is such that it includeth evermore a possibility at least of being coÌ„trary to his wil whom we desire And therefore we vse somtime expresly to qualifie our desire saying Jf thou wilt and Jf it please thee c. Now thus was Davids and Christs yea not only possible to be contrary but contrary indeede as the sequele shewed Howbeit both their desires were nevertheles holy â—ag 298. †made in faith assured to receaue as coÌ„dicional desires may be directed aright prepared sufficiently yet onely for this cause seeing David simply knew not Gods contrary wil Christ knew it not at that instant Howbeit the truth is Christ could not but now know and remember it very well if hee were not at this instant grievously astonished Neither could he be so astonished and wofully distressed in his Soule without that intolerable and infinit waight of sorrowes before spoken of Therefore briefly so it was doubtlesse with him at that season All in vaine then you charge mee that I streth the Scriptures beyond their wordes and the trueth â—â—g 289. when in my discourse I shew that Christ in the garden was astonished grievously perplexed the text having onely He began to be astonished and grievously perplexed I graunt the text is so But thinke you that phrase in Scripture signifieth a
haue another age “ Dâ—r◠〈◊〉 age my coâ—â—nuance or during oâ— my maÌ„sioÌ„ or induring or Mansion and be remoued to another place This can not be vnderstood of his Carcase rotting and wasting away to nothing in the graue and therefore indureth not as the word signifieth therfore he meaneth it of his Soules removing and abiding elswhere Also he expresly opposeth the land of the living to Sheol therfore Sheol is the land of the dead not the graue only nor Hell only * Which alâ— to be collecâ— of that in Prophet toâ—â—ing Christ scinditurâ— râ viventiâ— Isai 53.8 but as large and as generall to the dead and as fit to receaue both the partes of men yea both good and bad men but separated and dissolved as the land of the living is to receave both those partes vnited and knit togeather Againe Hezekiah was a godly man therefore hell was not for him also though hee should not see the Lord in the land of the living which was the thing he desired yet thereby hee seemeth to insinuate that in the land of the dead hee might see him whither he was about to go and that must needes be the place of blessed Soules even that which heere is noted by the word Sheol â—â—g 150. It is a most vaine reason that you give that sheol heere is to be taken for Hell and so to be translated because death to the wicked is the passage to Hel which death Hezekiah was now neere vnto It is vntrue that Hezekiah was neere vnto that death which the wicked dy or that he feared that kind of death or that there is no sound differeÌ„ce betwene the death of the godly the death of the wicked or that by any meanes according to sound divinity the death of the godly may be named or taken for Hell This is so vaine that I will not stand any longer to answere it Another obiection of yours a is as weake Pag. 400. where you say Sheol heere must be the Grave because it is said b afterward ver 18. Sheol doth not confesse the death cannot praise thee c. Though I grant that the Grave is not heere excluded especially in the words next after They that go down to the pit cannot hope for thy truth yet I affirme that Sheol namely in the former place vers 10. cannot exclude the mansion of good mens soules departed hence that for the reasons aboue noted Neither heere doth this circumstance limite it to the Grave onely because it is said Sheol confesseth not thee For it is evident that He Zekiah meaneth not absolutly that there is no praising of God in Sheol but onely hee vnderstandeth that which c hee so greatly desired â—hich was ytâ—â—inary great â—re of the â—lly geneâ—y psal 42. 84.1 the outward frequenting of the Temple the holy Ceremonies and Sacrifices ioyning to the visible congregation and publishing of Gods goodnes to others Which hee expresseth immediatly to be that praising of God that he meaneth cannot be in Sheol by knitting close to the former these words d The living â—sa 38.19 the living he shall confesse thee as I do this day the Father to the Children shall declare the truth This is that which he denieth of sheol that none there doe praise God to the example and edifying of others He denyeth not simply nor absolutly that there is none in sheol at all in any respect that praise God The very same David expresseth also very plainly Psal 116.9 saing e I shall walke before the Lord in the land of the living Psal 118.17 and f I shall not dye but live and declare the workes of the Lord. Where vnlesse they meant only this visible praysing of God to others edifying otherwise these holy men had no cause so greatly to desire to praise God heere for they knew very wel how that for their own parts they should prayse him much better and more perfitly in the next world The Seâ—â—â—â—gint vse 〈◊〉 in the fanâ—â—â—â—â— To the very same purpose the Septuagint vse hades in other places also besides in their translating of these aforesaid For it is truly and well acknowledged by you g Pag 4â— that both these wordes Sheol and Hades are iust all one Now the Septuagint I say in other places do shew thus much also h Psal 9 〈◊〉 after the â—â—â—tuagint Jf the Lord had not holpen me my soule had almost dwelt in Hados in Hebrue it is in silence Which is not meant of hell for there is weeping and wayling and gnashing of teeth but of the state of death Nor yet of the Grave onely because heere it is named to bee the Habitation of the Prophets soule whither it was almost come when he was like to have dyed Againe i Psal 7â— My soule was filled with sorrowes and my life drew neere to hades How my soule and my lift heere are taken for the selfe same I have shewed before As also in that of Iob k Iob. 3â— his life or soule is in hades in the world of the Dead Againe it suffiseth for our purpose that Hades and Sheol are often vsed even indifferently for “ Sheoll 〈◊〉 Hades aâ—â—â—sed often 〈◊〉 only Deaâ—â— effect Thanaâ—â—â—mors Death and as being in effect the same or for the state and Condicion of Death or the Power of Death Which also sometime we may likewise conceave of the Latin Inferi which is by the Translatours and other writers vsed for Sheol and Hades though I deny not very daungerously and corruptly in deed First for a Pro. 2â— misheol the Greeke hath ek thanátou from death reckoning Death and Sheol to be all one So in Ecclesiastes b Eccle. Sheol and c veâ—s Hammethim the dead are in effect all one And the very same doeth Esai call d Isa 3â— Shagnare Sheol the gates of sheol which the e Psa 9. â— 107.18 Psalmes and f Iob. 3â— Iob doe call Shagnare maueth the gates of Death In the * Pâ—o. 3â— and 27â— Proverbes he meaneth Death not Hell nor the Grave strictly taken where by an excellencie the greedines of it is noted for being Neuer satisfied For Death generally craâ—eth more then either Hell or the Grave strictly taken do So likewise Abakuk coupleth them togeather as being in effect alone “ Abaâ— Like sheoll and Death it will not be satisfied Thus also it will appeare that that which g Psal â— David reioyseth for the very same in effect h Psal â— Christ heere reioyseth for Only with this difference David reioyseth that God had delivered his soule from death theÌ„ when he was likely to have dyed Christ reioyseth because God would deliuer his soule from the Condicion of Death sheol after he was in it speedily even before his flesh should corrupt This might be evideÌ„tly shewed in infinit places mo but that it is vtterly needles In this
is to be considered who right according to all the rest saith e Soules departed from their Bodyes did go to Hades that is to an invisible place which in Latin we call Infernum And Ierome f Infernus is a place where the Soules are included either in rest or paines And Ruffinus vpoÌ„ g Descendit ad inferna giveth this sense Descendit in Mortem He submitted vnto Death All the rest which h you cite or can cite haue nothing contrary but rather consenting heerewith So that it is certaine by all the Fathers generally 1. That Hades and Sheol are taken for Death Noâ—â— the CoÌ„mon state of Death or the invisible world of the dead common to the Souls both of good and bad though their particular places were far separat and distinct 2. That Christ went not into Hell the place of the Damned as you holde but to the Habitation of the blessed deceased called also by them Abrahams bosome which we knowe and you also was indeed Heaven according to that worde of Christ “ Ioh. 16 16. I leave the Worlde and goe to the Father Which I have prooued further before pag. 149. 150. I doubt not but they erred generally as “ Pag. 21 your selfe also holdeth in thinking that this Habitation of the blessed Souls was beneath in the earth or that it was not heaven nevertheles this is the point wherein we agree and wherein they erred not and which I cite them for and which is directly against you that hades which also is sheol belonged to the Blessed soules deceased aswell as to the Damned and namely that Christes going to Hades was to go to be Blessed deceased Which in Latin also they called JnfernuÌ„ but so vnproperly and so vnaptly in respect of the truth that even this ill terme surely both sprang from error and began in them their error or confirmed and spread farther this error Now thus your vaine boasting of a Pag. 41 all the Fathers is but a bubble and that All the Fathers without exception do touch and teach Christes locall Descent to hell So that if you bee content as “ Pag. 41 you say to be tryed by all the Fathers Greeke and Latin they quite overthrow you notwithstanding your great words For the truth is they are all against you and with vs in such sort as I said Only Austin doubtingly and waveringly differeth from all the rest who somwhere seemeth to think that Inferi cannot be attributed to iust mens Soules departed For thus doubtingly he speaketh c Aug de 〈◊〉 ad liter ca. Illud me nondum invenisse confiteor c. I confesse I haue not yet found that Inferi are named where the iust mens Souls are at peace Yes surely the Ancientes named the places for all the deceased both good bad Inferos like as they named where both wicked and good do live in the world d Arnob. Psal 137. Superos And Austin if hee had marked it well might have founde even this which he saith hee found not in the Latin translation of the Scripture “ Psa 88. Lat. edit Quis est homo qui vivet c. What man is there that ever shall live and shall not see death Shall he deliver his Soule from the hande of Inferi that is Death For he can not heere vnderstand Inferi to bee the Grave because then the Soule must signifie the dead body which a you say is more then absurd â—â—g 168. Wherefore the Soule heere being taken properly for the Soule then Inferi is found applyed to iust mens Soules deceased as well as to the wicked which Augustin might have observed â—pist 57. 〈◊〉 civit Dei â— 15 Yea he him selfe b elswhere graunteth also that the iust in peace might be in inferis after death And heere he denyeth it but coldly waveringly Proinde vt dixi nondum inveni adhuc quaero nec mihi occurrit inferos alicubi in bono posuisse Scripturam Now this is Austins difference heerein let the Reader iudge Pag. 363. Before pa. 56. Pag. 175. if you say truely that c Austin iudicially and resolutely affirmeth it Or is it not rather as I call it his †CoÌ„iecturall inclination yea his only For d Fulgentius denyeth not inferos to the godly deceased nor that Christ was locally with them onely in inferis So that in saying He was where the wicked are tormented he meaneth that in respect of the CoÌ„mon place which in whole hee calleth infernum Thus then we may see that Austins differing heerein is to little purpose 1. Because it is contrary to all the auncient Fathers before him with him and since him 2. Because we must not esteeme his saying by the Latin Inferi but by the originall Sheol and Hades which are more against him as before I have shewed 3. Because it is waveringly delivered with doubt in him selfe yea contrary to him selfe as I have shewed 4. Because he secketh to maintaine it erroneously For he giveth this reason and end of Christes going to Hell the place of the Damned that he might deliver some of the damned sinners out of Hell torments quos esse solvendos occultâ suá iusticiâ iudicabat Which most strange conceit of his your selfe e doe confute rightly Pag. 199. But either graunt this end and reason to be true or els say his maine opinion is false also that Christ went thither feeing he maketh that the reason of this And why may not Austin erre as well in saying that he went to Hell after death as in saying that he went thither to loose out of paines such and such It seemeth Austin was carried into this conceit Vt neque frutrà illâ—c decendisse existimetur nulli â—orum prosuâ—urus qui ibi erant Epist 99. because hee could not imagine what f els Christ should doe in Hell and that he was there in deed he thought because he ghessed contrary to all antiquity besides that the meaning of inferi and hades could not be applyed to the estate of blessed soules after this life Which mistaking of his as also yours with him is plentifully convinced I hope before Wherein I desire the learned to iudge As for Austins opposing against this our sense of Hades saying In graecà linguâ origo nominis quo appellaÌ„tur inferi ex eo quòd nihil suave habeant resonare perhibetur It sheweth his mistaking more yea the very grounde of all his mistaking as I thinke First it appeareth by this that Austin had very litle knowledge in the Greek seeing hee thinketh that Hades should originally signify nihil suave nothing sweet I coniecture that he thinketh Hades is made of hedys sweet and α the Privative Wherein then he misseth much for hades in Greeke hath alwayes iôta written vnder The natur Hades which sheweth that in the true originall whence hades cometh there is the letter iôta expressed But in hedys sweet there is none The trueth is it cometh
before the Apostles time extended to good and bad pag. 371. And within Plutoes kingdom vnder the earth which they call Hades as well the places and pleasures for the Good â—ag 379. â—â—â—d in Hoâ—â—r Virgil â—istophanes â—â—pides and â—â—ers you shal the World â—he Dead â—he world of â—â—es be they 〈◊〉 or bad to â—â—in Plutoes â—â—gdo which Greekâ—â—â—ts call â—â—les as the prisons and punishmentes for the bad are in their conceit prepared and setled Againe b Hades with them was the Ruler or place of Soules were they in rest or paine Where you make a strange answer that Christian Religion will assure that this place must needes be Hell What That place where some good mens soules deceased are in rest Is this Hell Yea is it Hell in Christian Religion Who then henceforth will care for Hell if some soules haue rest and pleasures in Hell But you say also that those Heathen Greekes did thinke that this place of Soules was c vnder the Earth It is true they thought so indeed and it was their error as also the very same was the Christian Fathers errour likewise Which they drew certainly from their acquaintance with those Heathens 〈◊〉 379.381 〈◊〉 Hades it â—â—â—fe imporâ—â—â—g no such â—â—â—ng but no where at all from the Scriptures Yet none of these thought this place to be very Hell where soules were in rest There is small rest and few pleasures in Hell But these Heathens d vnderstood Hades chiefly for Pluto the Ruler of this place vnder the earth 〈◊〉 371.374 So that though the place were also called Hades yet this was but secondarily I answer This is questionles vtterly vntrue For rather the Place or the Estate of the Dead was first originally called Hades The God thereof whom afterward they idolatrously imagined they did conceave secondarily in respect of the place or thing Which beside the evidence of the matter I am perswaded that Plato Plutarch do shew also plaine enough even heere where you cite them Howsoever this is not maternal nor to any purpose whether the place and state were with theÌ„ first and chieflie called Hades or whether the fayned Power of death and Ruler of the Dead as they imagined were first and principally so called This is certaine that this Power or Ruler which they conceaved to be over the Dead as they like Idolators made it a God so their meaning was to esteeme him as the God of the Dead in Generall and his state and kingdome to be the c Which â—â—ing a priâ—â—â—pall pomâ—â—â— our quaâ—â—â— is fully gâ—â—â—ted by yâ—â—â— before HabitatioÌ„ of the Dead in generall not of the wicked only in Hel but of the good also in their Elysian happines which was to them in their estimation and reckoning that which Heaven indeede is to vs. But “ Pag. 39 you say there is no one place in truth common to all soules departed this life but som are in Hel and som in Heaven I doubt not but the blessed in Heaven the Damned in Hell are both in coÌ„dition situation seperated a funder exceeding far Yet nevertheles as they are somwhere w th in the coÌ„passe of the created world so they are in a coÌ„mon place opposiâ— indeed to this visible earth world of the living but coÌ„mon to al the Dead namely in this only respect as they are Dead departed hence are vnseene vtterly exempted froÌ„ all mutual medling togither with vs that do live Moreover we stande not so much on this that by Hades must be vnderstood any one place coÌ„mon to all the Dead but the State and condition of death among the Dead or the Power and Dominion of Death which very aptly also it serveth for and fitteth our purpose aswell as to vnderstand there by a common place But indeed all this I doubt not Hades very well may signifie when it is referred to men according to the circumstances of the authour where it is read But this Hades you say in those Heathen authors “ Pag. 3â—â— 378 41â— is the very Divell himselfe Therefore his Kingdome must bee needes nothing but Hell I answer The Heathen in their conceit thought him not to be a Divell but a * Vâ—z that 〈◊〉 or of dâ—â—â— which by 〈◊〉 is somâ— signifieâ— God even the God and Ruler over all the Dead and so they worshipped this foule Idoll Therefore his whole kingdome region they reckoned to be the World of the Dead or Dominion of Death which also they called Hades It may be f Pag. 37â— Porphyrie meaneth that they held him to bee Lorde and Ruler over Hell and all the wicked Spirits and Divells therein yet he saith not but that Hades or Pluto was thought by them to have power over all the Dead his rage against men and the feare that men had of him signified the vnmercifulnes of Death sparing none and how it is to the nature of all men a thing most terrible So that they esteemed a part indeed of his Dominion to be Hell peculiarly but a part also to be the Region of the Happy which was their Heaven But you say this was the Divell Yea even as the rest of their Gods were also very Divells indeed nothing els So was their Highest Jupiter and so was Apollo and so was Mercury and all the rest of the Goddes and Goddesses which their impiety adored They were indeede none other then very Divels illuding the vanity of men And thus I grant was their Hades or Pluto likewise Howbeit in their estimation he was not properly the Divell but a Power or Ruler over the Dead both good and bad and his Kingdom the Dominion and world of the Dead both good and bad Pag. 171. But a you remit Poets and Pagans vsing this word to the alleagers Yet Poets Pagans are the authentike maisters for Grammar both Greek Latin Yea they were yours I doubt not in time past Before pag. â—70 Austin as we saw alloweth the Etymologie and naturall propertie of hades to be regarded Yea all learned men in all ages condemne this your reiecting of Pagans and Poets for the Grammaticall vse of wordes whom still they do regard and follow in this respect But heere let vs observe how the holy Apostles doe teach the truths of the Gospell with the very wordes and language of the Heathens â—bservations There are in this point 3. or 4. thinges that must bee well observed and remembred 1. The Apostles doe speake of the mysteries of true Religion with the Heathens words as I said yet so as that when the Heathens wordes do imply some errour with truth then in other expresse places they plentifully refute al their errours implyed in their wordes Whereby it comes to passe that all the proportion of truth which the Heathen signified by them is yet fully and rightly signified still in the Apostles vse of them but nothing further that is none of the
other fancyes fictions of the Heathen As for example Zeus Iupiter was among the Heathens their great God he only was their highest of whom besides they held a 1000. fables and indeed he was none other but a Divell as is before noted Nevertheles the Apostle vseth the same for the only true God the author and governour of Heaven and Earth passing by all their Fables when he applyeth the Poets verse a Act. 2â— His generation also we are Tartarus which b Pag. 3â— you obiect though rarely sometime perhaps a Philosopher will note thereby the Ayer yet indeed vsually and in a maner alwayes they meant Hell by it with a thousand of dreames thereto belonging Yet Peter not canonizing nor commending their dreames and fictions of Hell notwithstanding signifyeth Hell indeed by that worde of theirs according to their common vse thereof and according to the proportion of truth which therein they held So Daimonion which also c Pag. ibâ—â— you obiect they vsed to signifie by it both good and bad Spirits following and conversing with them and the good they honoured as Gods But indeede and in truth seeing these same were all Divels therefore the Scripture holdeth not the Heathens erroneous meaning in this word yet it doth retayne that which they vnderstood by it truly that is to signifie Divells and bad spirits Againe Theos the Heathen vsed for to expresse the Nature of God but so as that they thought it coÌ„mon to many severall Gods The Apostles vse the word also for the true God yet not vnderstanding therein a nature common to many which error they otherwise cleerely and often refute And thus we might speake of infinit mo the like wordes as Feare the power and strength whereof they also fained to be a God and of Hope and of Revenge Goddesses c. Like wherevnto is Hades even that which presently we have in hande The diveâ—â— applicatâ—â— of Hadeâ— With the HeatheÌ„ it commonly and most vsually signified the state of Dead men somtime rarely the Destruction of other things which perish out of this visible world haue no more being heere Whereof anon we shall see further Howbeit now to consider it as it respecteth men only thus the Heathens chiefly and commonly by Hades vnderstoode the state I say and Condition of men both good and bad deceased and gone out of this world And they meant it commonly for the Destruction of their persons from out of this world generally and indifferently Againe oftentimes particularly touching their Bodyes buriall also particularly many things touching their Soules state being parted from the Body Some of which they believed were in Blessednes some in Tormentes although they signified neither of these in the word Hades but onely as I said their state after their departure hence Also they thought some of the Blessed Soules to be in the a chiefest Blessednes â—Vhich you â—â—iect pag. â—â—4 376. that was in presense with the Gods Yet they were in Hades also that is in an other world after they were wiped out from hence Hither they admitted onlie Philosophers Treat 1 pa. â— Heroês such like Thus hither it is that b Plato assigneth Socrates and thus Socrates him selfe hopeth to goe to Hades to the wise and good God Other Soules of good men they gave Blessednes vnto in the Elysian fieldes vnder the earth as they fancied or where els I know not And these were also in Hades So that both these estates and condicions of blessed Soules deceased which was their Heaven though differing very much in places they yeeldâ—d to be in Hades Whence I thinke some of the Fathers and after them some Papistes haue fayned divers places of rest and ioy to the Dead Heaven presently to the Martyrs but to other good Christians an other place of rest ioy which they called Abrahams bosome either in the earth or where they also knew not Howbeit into the glory of Heauen and the presence of God and of Christ they admit none save only the Martyrs before the last day But this errour and all other errors about Hades the Apostles sufficiently confute in their writings so that we are not now to respect the same in the vse of Hades Onely we are therefore to note how much and what besides all errours may bee truly retayned and meant by the Apostles in applying this worde Hades as the Heathen did to both sortes of Soules of Dead men They might truely vnderstand that both have one common condicion and state as touching their being in another world as they were dissolved departed from and wiped out of this visible world aâ— they were now in the world of the Dead an opposite estate condicion to the living This also the very Natural Etymologie of the word according to Grammar doeth properly yeeld in that it signifieth c Vnseene Hades The â—â—ke may be â—â—â—id of Sheol or Not seene any more in this world or an estate not seene heere with vs topos aîdes an Vnseene place as Plato calleth it Where note it cannot be referred to the estate of Angels because Hades is the vnseene state of them that once had a visible and ordinary being and conversation heere in this world So that in very deed it hath properly but a Privative sense not any thing positive in it though this d you can not brooke All this then the Apostles might well vnderstand allow in the word Hades Pag. 396. without any taint of Heathenisme And therfore also doubtles so they did But the heathens further made Hades a Divine power whom also they called Pluto as it were the God of Death or of the Dead because as before is shewed they dreamed that he held all that were Dead vnder his power both blessed damned soules And because no man that dyeth whether good or bad doeth ever live heere againe and because all whosoever without exception must dy therefore they call him Hades améilichos kai adámastos implaâ—able and vnmastered and Nélees êtor echôn having a mercilesso bea rt In which sense in Latin also they vsed Parca Destiny the ende of all because it spareth none Certainly this Deifying of such a Power or to make a God of it the Apostles abhorred and every where in their writinges they shew what Idolatry and extreame impiety it is But yet they may and do acknowledg such a power of Death which worketh this Destruction of all men froÌ„ the world detayneth them in Death afterward Wherefore they have in sundry places Prosopopoeas thereof as in the Revelation the Keyes of Death and Hades Death riding on a pale horse and Hades following after him Death and Hades yeelded vp their dead and both were cast into Hell Likewise that O Death where is thy sting O Power of death where is thy victory But of these more anon Hitherto the 1. observation is manefest that the Apostles vsing the Heathens words yet need not nor
do nor vnderstand in them any of their fancyes and errors which by their doctrine otherwise they refute nevertheles they may and do vnderstand the generall truth signified in them whatsoever the Heathens vsed by them to signifie and imply And thus is our worde in controversy Hades cleered But to cleere the rest also of those which b Pag. 36â— you obiect Sec we are to observe that the Apostles transfer the Heathens Civill words many times to their Ecclesiasticall vse namely keeping yet still the proportion of their former sense As in these Apostle Bishop Deacon Gospell Law Sinne Repenâ—ance Hope Conscience Concupisence c. Which change is small and easy sith the words have a iust proportion still togeather both in Civill and Ecclesiasticall vse Onely if any difference or oddes be it is expresly vttered in some part of the Apostles doctrine besides There is no such cause nor matter of difference to be found in Hades Third The Apostles do vse some wordes kat ' éxochen by an excellencie yet in no point altering the native vse or property of them â—â—â—a all the 〈◊〉 before â—â—â—med or â—â—â—t oâ— them 〈◊〉 â—e conâ—â—â—ed also â—â—â—er this â—â—â—e â—ag 403. a Thus Scripture is vsed commonly for the Word of God only Diábolos for the Divell although sometimes other writings are called also Scripture and other Accusers and slanderers Diaboloi But neither hath this consideration any place in Hades that in Scripture it should signifie chiefly Hell much lesse only Which thing b you avouch Lastly Som think the Apostles altered the worde Faith from the Passive sense of it importing Faithfulnes and honestie as the Heathens commonly vsed it to the Active sense which is True beliefe or Trust vsed in the Scriptures which you also obiect But I suppose the Apostles tooke this Active sense of the word Faith froÌ„ the Old Testament meerely translating the Hebrue into Greeke For I see not what difference at all there is betweene c Pistis â—â—â—om 1.17 â—â—â—bac 2.4 and d Emunah whereby the Iewes signified Faith to salvation Which is reason enough for this vse thereof in Greeke by the Apostles namely if it bee a Hebraisme though it bee not very suteable to the Heathens vse thereof The like I iudge of Elder Law Sinne c. But Hadès for Hell hath no like reason Further I think even the Heathens have vsed this word Faith sometime Actively as the Gospell vsually hath it likewise the Gospel abhorreth not altogeather the Passive vse of it for Faithfulnes Lastly if it were so that the Apostles did follow no other reason but meerely transferred that word from the Civill passive to the Ecclesiasticall active vse we say on necessity they might do it For having some Spirituall doctrine to deliver and the ordinary speach wanting some fit word for the same then they might yea of necessity they were forced to take some word neerest in nature and sense to their purpose so they might give to that word a peculiar Ecclesiasticall vse further then anciently it had But Hades for Hell hath no help by this reason they tooke the word Gehenna from the Hebrewes and vsed it properly for Hell Therefore they need not alter hades for that purpose for which they had another proper word It is manefest then that the Apostles stil kept the proportion of the sense in all their words translated from the common and vsuall speach of the Heathen so far as any reason of truth might be alike in both so they spake indeed still the tounge and language of the Nations and therefore Hades with the Apostles can not be properly Hell as even with Heathens also properly it was never I suppose yet you will say The Fathers take Hades for Hell I answered a Pa. 1 before how they sometime take it determinatly and strictly so they signifie Hell by it Somtime they take it largely generally according to the Ancient Heathens vse and so they signifie by it nothing but the generall state of Death pertayning alike both to good and bad deceased as I have declared Thus you get nothing by them albeit sometime theâ— restraine the worde Hades more then they ought to restraine it Heere also were place to have added somwhat for iustifying that I said The Fathers do alter the ancient true vse of som words both Greeke and Latin from whom in controversies we ought to appeale to their authentike vse in Scripture and Classicall authors But because b Pag. 3â— you send me about ChirotonÃa to another place I am content to examine what you have there to the contrary Which seeing it draweth me into further matter therevnto appertaining I will differre for this time Hitherto we have tryed the nature and vse of Hades and have found it to be not properly Hell as c Pag. 1â— 171. 40 you avouch No not when it is applyed to soules of men deceased And therefore also that it can not be so vnderstood in Act. 2.27 where it is applyed to Christs Soule after he was dead Which yet is the only place that you have to pretend How thâ—â— in Act. â— may siâ—â—â— and trâ—â—â— vndersâ—â—â— Now something more you bring for your purpose from the Circumstances of this Text which we must consider But first let vs simply and plainly vnderstaÌ„d the same according to our former true declaration of the nature and vse of Hades Where the text is Thou wilt not leaue my Soule in Hades or to Hades we may simply take Hades for the invisible state or place of the deceased And so supplying the defect of a word which must be vnderstood thus we may say eis ton topon or chôran hadou in the place or region of the invisible state or b Aithér dou Or before pâ—â—â— 173.17 World of the Deceased Otherwise we may take it simply for Deaths force strength and power supplying also the same words eis ton topon or ten chôran hadou in that place where the power and strength of Death prevaileth and holdeth the deceased Soules from their Bodyes This is the World of the Dead implying nothing ells but ap estate opposit to our Visible estate in this world Thus may hades be fuly taken sith I have largely proved before how Hades Thanatoâ— Death are in effect all one and may both be applyed even to iust mens Soules deceased but hades more easily naturally Last of all we may take hades heere by a Prosopopoea conceaving it to be as it were som Person of vnresistable power taking away withholding from hence al mens Souls departed Howbeit this power was controlled and loosed by God in Christes Resurrection And then we may construe it thus eis ten chóran topon or oikian Hadou in the place region or habitation of this mighty power Or eis to kratos exousian dynamin or epikratian tou Hadou to the strength power or dominion of this Destroyer of life Thus howsoever we take it though
that is the DominioÌ„ or power of Death were cast into Hell â—â—v 20.14 I said it was absurd to say Hell was cast into Hell You answer it is more absurd to say the world of Soules was cast into Hell Where you doe but dally and play with words â—t â— e woâ—â—â—e â—e Deaâ— Aâ—â—ally For I vse not that terme * the world of soules though it may be named sometime in a good sense Which you will by no meanes conceave only you delight much to sport your sâ—lfe with it Our answer theÌ„ is this There is no absurditie to say that at the last day when the * last enemy shal be destroyed then Death â—â—â—ore pag. 2. and the power of Death or the Kingdome and Dominion of Death shal be cast into Hel that is eternally dâ—stâ—oyâ—d abâ—â—ished shall râ—turn to the Divell whâ—â—â— they came To say many soâ—t that theÌ„ Hell phalbe cast into Hell souÌ„deth sensâ—les in my â—atâ—s Although you meane the Contayning to bâ— put for the Contayned Hâ—ll for the Divels of Hel and that the Divels shalbâ— theÌ„ cast into hâ—l fire Yea although one Andreas â—eda vnderstand it so likewise For neither you nor they it â—â—â—meth do cosidâ—r that this place assigneth them to Hell then at the last day who yet are not in Hell but shal be then cast into Hell â—nd destroyed But the Divels are a 2 Pet. 2. Iâ—d 6. in Hell already reserved in eâ—â—rlasting châ—mes of darknes Therefore the Divels cannot be vndâ—â—stood heere by Hadâ—s that they shal be then cast into Hel seeing â—hey are already cast in to Hell for ever Death and the Power thereof being the last enemie that shal be dâ—stroyed is not yet but shal be indeed at the last day aboliâ—hed swallowed vp of Hell Lastly â—eere is shewed the most general vniversall rendring vp of all the â—ead whatsoever to iudgment But Hel plainly hath not all the Dead Death the world of the Dead or thâ— Dominion of Death have all Therefore Dâ—ath Hades heere do not signifie properly the Divâ—ll Hell but this only that Death and the vniversall Dominion or power of Death yeelded vp to iudgment al the Dead both great smal both good and bad to be iudged according to their workes Thus it is evident and cleere that Hades no where in the â—ew Testament doth signifie properly Hel as you say it doth Thus also that is concluded fully and perfitly which my 2. Reason †Pag. 15 before affirmed that you have not one place at all in the Scripture to prove that Christs Soule was in Hell b Act. â— 2 One place only you have stood vpon that Christs Soule was in Hades but that helpeth you nothing at all as we have seene You must prove indeed that Chriâ—ts Soule was in Gehenna if you would perswade any man of knowledg which you shal never do Gehenna in the New Testament is properly Hell but Hades is never properly so taken as I hope it is sufficiently before proved Therefore the Concluâ—ion is good To thinke that Christes Soule was ever in Hell is a thing that ought to be vâ—terly denyed Yet heere we must consider a maine obiection of yours â—ven those words of our common Creed Touching Câ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 which vsually in English wâ— vtter thus He descended into Hell originally 〈◊〉 is He descended into Hades And in truth this is all that you have to allâ—age for your opinion â—swere But I answer 2. wayes First Admitting then Denying the authority of thâ—se words in our Comon Creâ—d 1. Admitting the authority of these words yet Not as sufficient not as Aposâ—â—hâ—all but such as may be fâ—oÌ„ godly and sound Christians wâ— affirme that we can well vnderstand them according to the Scriptures vse of Hades rightly viz that Christes whole humane Person came vnder the power and Dominion of Death or that he dâ—caying in this world * falling down from that state of life wherein a while he flourished went absolâ—tly from hence into the world of the Dead 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 153. according to the law of nature which all other men follow likewise when they dâ— How this sense doth fully agree also with the mindes of the ancient Fathers generally we have at large dâ—clared c before Pag. 166. Pag. 1â—4 But this serveth not your turne therefore you will needes inioyne vs d 3. Rules to be exactly and prâ—câ—sâ—ly kept in the expounding of these words namely 1. Distinction of matter 2. Consequence of order 3. Propriety of words You must know that we can be no more strict Note nor more religious in observing the Ciâ—cuÌ„stances of matter order even in the holy Scriptures themselves then you inioyne heere to be observed in these words of men Might not these godly men think you misse in som such Circumstance or light point although the Scripture can not Or if they might why impose you such strictnes on our consciences about mens words as if heere were no possibility of any the least missing or imperfection How beit we admit your 3. Rules also 3. Rules and will observe them sufficiently First these words He descended to Hades may very well expresse a Distinction of matter differing from all the words heere besides They naturally and properly signifie as before we shewed that Christ came to vtter decay in this world and being taken hence was gathered in both partes of his Manhood dissolved wholy intirely to those who were departed before him into another world Or ells thus that he came vnder the full power e before Pag. 192. Dominion of Death Now either of these differeth verily from meere and simple Death â—vian â—â—â—â—â—â—ce â—eaâ—h For to Dy propeâ—ly is nothing els but the going a sunder of the Soule from the Body That other is to be wholy razed out from the presence and sight of this world also a remayning vnder the possession and strength of Death and a going to the society of them in another world g. 192. These indeed are f differing points and degrees in Death albeit in effect generally they bee all one with Death that is they be necessaâ—ily consequent alwayes conioyned vnto Death Againe if those wordes in the Creed were only but a more emphaticall phrase of through and perfit Dying and Departing hence if there were in them no further DistinctioÌ„ of matter then so yet this were enough to distinguish them froÌ„ the other words Dead and Buryed This is cause enough especially in the Ancient times when men suppose this Creed was framed when Christs Humanity and naturall Death was by al meanes subtilly and violently oppugned after a short worde signifying his Death and Buriall yet for more emphasis sake and for further Viging the same to addâ— this other short familiar phrase importing no other maine matter then was before noted but only a more effectuall and more absolut signification