TO declare faithfully the suf­ferings of Christ our Sauior which for vs he endured, & how he cōquered the pow­er of Hell & Sathan to free vs theref [...]ō, is a matter for all Christians (if any other) most worthy of handling, and necessarie to be known: Especially now seing of late great iniury hath bene done by no meane Prelate, to this poinct of christ [...]ā veritie, in such wise as no Protestant hath euer done the like heretofore, neither hath brought more offence to the godly, or disquietnes to the Churches in England. Therefore I could not forbeare, though all other, who are meeter then my self, keepe silēce, but im­ploye my poore talent in this profitable seruice for the church of Christ, commit­ting the whole successe vnto God, whose holy cause I labour to cleare from all the corrupt fancies & vaine imaginations of men in this behalfe.

The whole cōtrouersie hath in it 2. points 1. That Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God. 2. That after his death on the crosse, he went n [...]t into Hell in his soule.

The former of these is proued most soundly & euidently diuers wayes. First by a generall reason takē from the suffrings of the soule of Christ, then by other sp [...]l and more immediat arguments, as afterward by Gods grace shall well appeare.

Now then for the former thus we say & constantlie auowe: Christ Iesus did suffer in his whole manhoode for the red [...]mption and a [...] ­faction of our sinnes: A generall reason that Christ suffe­red the wrath of God. yea hee suffered proper [...]e and immediat [...]e in his soule, and not in his fl [...]he onely.

Therefore he suffered for vs the wrath of [...]OD. This consequent heere is manifest and can not bee denied. For what could tou [...]he the soule of Christe immediatlie and prope [...]ly as he suffered and satisfied for our sinnes, but the displeasure and [...]ust anger of God alone? What els can Christs soule bee sub­iect vnto properly and immediatly in regard of sorrowe and affliction, and that [...]r sinne? But this sequele is not doubted of, or if it be, we shal haue occasiō afterward to declare it further, The antecedent, or firste part of the former generall rea [...]on is denied & confidently reiected: yet [...]ve falsly by Gods helpe, by that whiche fol­loweth, shall easilie appeare.

Wherein it behoueth, that first we con­sider, how we meane and holde this asser­tion, [Page 5]which is namely thus: That Christ suffered in his soule not onely by Sympathy or ioint feeling with his body and arising from his body.Howe wee meane that Christ suffe­red in his soule. It is true in deede that so he suffered in his soule, as also mutuallie in his body by Sympathy from his soule, for his body els had bene sensele. & dull, and without all feeling. But heere we meane that his soule had further some sufferings that were proper and immediatlie risinge in and from the soule: Such as the flesh of Christ no vvayes caused, neither coulde fully apprehend. As feare, sorrow, temptatiō, anguish of minde, a bitter sense of Gods [...]ust and seuere wrath, & all these directly for sinne which he vndertooke on him self for vs.

The antece­dent o [...] the generall rea­son proued. 1 And this first God willing, shalbe pro­ued. Then after, the contrarie reasons re­futed. This then is proued in Mat. 26.28. My soule is euery way sorrowfull perilypos vnto death, or compassed with so [...]wes vnto death. None will denie but my Soule heere is pro­perlie the very humane soule of Christ. Also it is plaine, this grieuous passion was in his soule immediatlie and properly, not gro­wing by any hurt of his flesh, seeing then his bodye was not touched with anie smart. And lastly that this was for the bit­ter punishment of our sinnes which hee nowe directlie susteined in his soule, and yet was further to susteyne, we ought not by anie reason to doubt. For lette vs mark: the whole text here, and in all the [Page 6]Euangelists doth shew that the only mat­ter he was nowe going about, and especi­allie troubled withall, was the verie suffe­rings of him selfe as man for vs, the full sa­crifice & sinne offring of our redemption. Nothing els nowe appeareth in the text to haue disquieted him. Wherfore also he saith, Father, saue me from this hower. Lett this cuppe passe from me: if it be possible lett this cuppe passe from me. What if hee also had care and compassion for his countreymen the Iewes? What, if he forgot not his Apostles and poore Church, now to be left behinde as sheepe amongst Wolfes? Doeth that hinder or diminishe this his passion for sinne? Or doe not these wordes and other circūstances of the text declare, that now chiefly, yea only, he was troubled about his suffering for our sinne. His care of his Apostles and Church he vnburthe­ned him selfe of, Iohn 17 a little before he entred into this conflict of his passion Iohn 18.1. That for Ierusalem and the Iewes he was particularlie touched withall not longe before, Mat. 23 37. & cap. 24. So that those affections do seme there to haue their pro­per place. And the time after appeareth, namely in the garden & on the crosse to be lest chieflie, yea only, for his sorrowes & suf­ferings for the redemptiō of sinnes. Thus then let no man thinke it presumption to say expresly what did nowe in this sort greeue the Lorde, and cause in him this heauines. Him selfe we see telleth vs ex­preslie, [Page 7]therefore we may expreslie say it: This his hower of suffring for sinne, This cuppe of affliction and sorrowe which nowe he felt and was to feele yet further, caused him so to mourne and feare. Obiection. If you say, It was a passion in deede of the soule, it was sorrow, it was feare, and much heauines, & that for our sins, but yet it was direct­lie because of his bodilie death & torments which were nowe neere at hand. Or els he feared in deede Gods wrath towards him for sins, but he felt it not. I answer, 1. That former is not so:Aunswere. It is no lesse then impi­ous to affirme that only his bodilie death and outward paines should so terrifie and dismay him: as in the next more speciall arguments we shall further declare.2. A­gaine, he both feared and felt Gods anger for the sinne of the worlde: as also in the said speciall argumentes we shall see fur­ther. But his obserue nowe: yet this first general reason is graunted. If this in deed were feare of Gods wrath, then Christ suffe­red for our sinnes properlie and immediatlie in his soule, not in his fleshe onely. I [...]p [...], per [...] ­p [...]s, [...]etaracta [...], [...]ambe [...] ­ [...]tha [...], ade­mone [...], &c. He feared, he had sorrow, astonishment, miserie, and much anguishe of minde, & that for our sinnes. Nowe whether this were onely Feare or what so euer more, this is cleare and cer­ten, Christ had these sufferinges in his soule properly, and from his soule immediat­lie, as being the sufferings for our sinnes.

But for all this there is doubt hereof [Page 8]in some, because it is written,1. Pet. 2.24. Hee bare our sinnes in his body on the tree. Col. 1.20. He reconciled vs by the bl [...]d of his crosse. verse 22. He reconciled vs in the body of his flesh through death. Rom 7.4. We are dead to the law by the body of Christ. Reuel 5.9. He redemed vs to God by his blood. 1. Iohn 1.7. The bloud of Christ cleans [...]th vs from all our sinnes. This is a cōstant phrase through­out the scriptures, attributing our whole remission of sinnes to the bodily sufferinges of Christ only and to his bloodshed, and not to anie thing of the soule. If all these pla [...]es of scripture should bee figuratiue, noting but the parte for the while, Christes body, when therein meant his soule too, they are strange figures that runne alwayes so, Gods worde neuer yeelding anye one such proper speech thoroughout the scripture, that Christ suffred for vs in his soule.Answere. I answer: First, the meaning of those places is to a­scribe our whole remission of sinne, only to Christ & his sufferings: and to exclude all other means without or besides Christ, but not to exclude any parte of Christe, though only some parte be mentioned. 2. Therfore vve say further: These places of scripture are not proper and literal, but fi­guratiue in deede: they doe note but the parte for the whole, sometimes Christes body, sometimes his flesh, sometimes his blood, when the whole man Christ is plainlie vnder­stoode consisting both of a body hauinge flesh and blood, and also of a soule. Other­wise we must saye, These very scriptures before mētioned, are at open iarre in thē ­selues, if we take them literally. Some say [Page 9] his body, some his blood cleanseth vs from all sin. Againe, his body on the tree only did beare our sinnes, and his sufferings of all his life before were not meritorious nor helpfull at all for vs, not his pouertie, not his shame, not his being rayled vppon, nor any his persecutions before his very death on the tree. For so these places found be­ing literally & strictly vnderstood: which how false it is. I need not, I hope to de [...]lare. In like sort it is said, The figure that saueth vs is Baptisme. What? Therfore doth baptisme saue v [...] only? Doth not the [...]rd [...]per▪ Doth not the word prea [...]hed also▪ Th [...] [...]d was made flesh: was it onely made flesh and not a hu­mane soule to? In the dayes of his fl [...]sh [...] [...]ffr [...] [...]p prayers and supplicationes with st [...]nge cryes. Was it not in the dayes when he had both flesh & soule also? He too [...]e not the [...]le of Angels b [...]t he tooke the s [...] of Abiah▪ He tooke humane flesh & soule to, [...] he n [...] ▪ I [...] sinne ra [...]gne in your mor [...]all b [...]yes. I hope he me [...]neth [...] ­ther in our soule [...] nor bodyes [...] o [...]fering thou woul [...]est not h [...]ue▪ but a b [...]d, thou [...]dayned me: yea both a bo [...] and a soule too. The s [...]r­n [...]ator [...]ed [...] our body, & no lesse su [...]ely against his soule also. It were infinit to [...]hew you the phrases of scripture, whi­che in speaking of the outward parte onely, yet alwayes they signifie the [...]re & whole m [...] ̄. The reasō wherof, especially in Christs suff [...]ng, doth seeme to be this▪ because the woūds of his b [...]dy & sheading forth of his blood, are most aparant & euident to sense: [Page 10]and therefore are they so commonly na­med in stead of the whole sufferinges, the rest whereof were not open to our senses. Againe, because his bodily death on the crosse, and his sheading of bloud there, was the finall accomplishment of all his sufferings what soeuer. Therefore this in stead of all the rest is vsuallie named, and yet the rest ne­uer excluded. Howbeit for all this, note further, that we read the verie phrase literal­lie further, that we read the verie phrase literal­lie and expreslie Isa [...] 53.10. He made his soule sinne, or a sacrifice for sinne: The full mea­ning whereof shalbe more declared by & by in the next proofe of this general rea­son. Also where it is said, He was Moducea. broken for our sinnes: it can not be properlie meant of Christes body, his flesh and bones. For it is written, not a bone of his was broken: Wherfore the meaning is, The sorrowes & torments of his soule did bruse and breake him to pieces, as the truth sheweth he was, and became for vs in deede. If any reply, The nayles and speares did breake him: Nay, they pearced him. But in no sort can that be called breaking or brusing to pieces, as the former word doth plainlie signifie.

Further it is obiected,Obiection. The old sacrifices of the Iewes were figures of our whole & absolute redemption by Christ. But they signified no more but his bodily suffrings onely. Therefore Christes sufferinges for our redemption were only bodily.

I answere,Aunswere. First the proposition is false, ta­king [Page 11]it generallie. The carnall sacrifices of the Iewes signified that which they were apt to teach and signifie: but not any fur­ther. Therefore they signified that the re­demption of men should haue a true bo­dily sacrifice with the sheading of blood: yea what soeuer was carnall & sensible in it might be signified by them. But not the inward and invisible thinges that did ne­cessarily concurre in and with this bodily sacrifice: for the which those carnal types were altogither vnfit, neither had they a­nie resemblance together. As first the me­ritorious sacrifice must haue of necessitie the Deitie comoyned in person with it. This sacrifice must bee the body & blood of God: or els it could neuer satisfie, nor de­serue the fauour of God for the worlde. But the sacrifices of beasts could not pre­figure this personall vnion of God and man in the true sacrifice together. There­fore they signified not all the necessarie pointes in the meritorious sacrifice. A­gaine those beasts sacrifices could not pre­figure the immortall & reasonable soule of Christ: whiche it was necessarie hee should haue to be our redeemer. Thirdly it was necessarie that this sacrifice of our full redemption, should not only dye, but also reuiue again: euen the victorious re­surrection of his flesh from death was ne­cessarie. As it is written, He died for our sinns, and rose againe for our iustification. But the sa­crificed [Page 12]beastes neither could nor did signifie any such thing. Therfore the propositiō be­fore is false, The olde sacrifices of the lewes were not resemblances & figures of our whole and abso­lute redemption by Christ. They serued only to represent such partes therof as they were apt and fit to teach and signifie. Secondly, I deny the assumption before going also. The Iewes sacrifices, that is certaine of them, did signifie more then the bodily sufferings onely, they set forth the sufferinges of the soule of Christ also. In the 16. chapt. [...] [...] uit. verse 5. we haue a sinne offering consisting of Two Goates, the one slayne, the other the scape goate: yet both of them a [...] for sinne, as the text speaketh. What doeth the slayne Goate figure but the body of Christ slayne, the scape goate the soule which also bare our sinnes, and was a sinne offeringe, but yet suruiued and dyed not as the body of Christ did. The scape-Goate heere surelie muste of necessiue signifie the Soule or the Deitie of Christ. The Deitie it can not sig­nifie, because that can not bee a sinne offe­ring. Therefore it signifieth that the im­mortall Soule of Christ was a sinne offersage: and being a sinne offering, or a sacrifice for sinne, it did properlie beare our sinns, and suffer for our sinnes.

If any saye, This scape-goate suffered not as the slayne goate did, but was sent away free and vntouched. Thus then the Soule of [Page 13]Christ must scape and not suffer when his body suffered.

I aunswere. The scaping of this Goate may signifie the Soules immortalitie, whiche died not when the body dyed. But that it suffered in that kinde which the soule can suffer, it is manifest by this, that it was an offering or sacrifice for sinne, and bare our sinnes as well as the body, which is like the slain Goate, whiche sensibly and apparauntlie died. Againe, the sacrifice in Leuit. chap. 6 called the Holocaust, or whole burnt offeringe, doeth liuelie prefigure the sufferinge of the whole Manhood of Christ for our sinnes, that is both in his soule and bodye. For in other sacrifices certen partes of the sacri­fices were reserued and not burnt. But in this the whole, and euery whit being chopt and cut into pieces, it was altogither put into the fire, and burnt: and so it was by a speciall name called The whole burnt offe­ring. Euen so, not the body onely, but also the Soule of Christ, euen euery whitt, of his humanitie, was burnt and consumed in the fier of affliction, as a perfect Holo­caust and a whole burnt offeringe for our sinnes.

By this we may easely see the answere to a like obiection of the Sacramentes of the newe Testament: Obiection. When they saye, In them, like as in the Iewes sacrifices, nothing else is represented and signified, [Page 14]but the bodily sufferinges of Christ: Wee are to answere as we did before. These are giuen of God to the Church to teach and represent that which they are apte and fit by their nature for, They are bodily and earthlie elementes: and therefore fit to set forth bodilie and aparant effectes in Christ: they can not set out the spirituall and inuisible effectes in him. And yet the ceremonie of breaking the bread. which is to shewe forth how Christes body was bro [...] ­sor vs, it can not belong properlie to the bo­dy, but to the soule, and to the body by sym­pathy with the soule, as is before declared.

2 I proceed further to the second proofe of this generall reason: Isay 53.10. The Lord will breake him and make him subiect to infirmi­ties, when he shall make his soule sinne, that is to say, a sacrifice for sinne. Here first we may note a plaine expresse phrase, the verie letter sounding that his soule was made sinne, or a sacrifice for sinne: Neither is there anie vrgent reason why soule heere should be so figured or disfigured rather, that the hu­mane soule should bee wholy excluded. I denie not but his soule heere doeth signifie him selfe, that is his humane nature intier­lie and wholy. And that may bee notably shewed by comparinge the phrase in the Apostle to the very same purpose, 2. Cor. 5.21. He hath made him sinne for vs whiche knewe no sinne, that we might bee made the righteousnes of God in him. Heere that whiche the Pro­phet [Page 15]meaneth saying, He made his soule sinne, the same the Apostle meaneth sayinge, God made Him sinne for vs. That is to say, him selfe wholy as man, not any one parte of him onelie. And this is literall. If any yet doubt, howe Christ was made sinne for vs in his soule, you may plainlie see heere in Paule. For he compareth Christes being sinne for vs who knewe no sinne, and our being the righ­teousnes of God in him, No iustifying righteousnes. who haue * no righte­ousnes in our selues. As if he should say In like manner, He hath borne our sinnes, as we haue receyued his righteousnes. But wee attaine the righteousnes of GOD by him both in our soules and bodyes: So likewise then, He was made sinne for vs, both in his soule & body. Otherwise this similitude or comparison were vneuen, and namely short on his parte, whiche ought not to be. Therefore surely, he was made sinne for vs (here in Paule) and his soule was made sinne (in Esaie,) signifieth Hee him­selfe was, that is intirelie in both partes he was a sacrifice for sinne, euen his soule and body. 3 As also the other phrase here in Esay, He was broken, doeth likewise prooue, as I haue enough declared thereof before.

Thirdlie, I proue this generall reason from14. Because the children tooke parte of flesh & blood, he also himself likewise tooke part with thē, that he might destroy through death him that had the power of death, that is the Diuell. 15. And that he might deliuer all them, which for feate of death were all their life time subiect to bondage. 16. I or he in no forte tooke on him the Angels, but he tooke the seed of Abraham. 17 Wherfore it behoued him in all things to be made like his brethren, &c. Heb. 2. where the ende & reason why [Page 16]Christ tooke on him the nature of man, i [...] plainlie opened. He is said verse 16. not [...] haue taken the Angels nature, but mans: euen for this very cause & purpose, that he might suffer in that nature which he assumed. & by suffring in it he might saue it. Now he assumed (all men know) our humane soule aswell as our flesh, and he saued our soule aswell as our flesh, ergo he suffered both in soule and in flesh: and the Angels nature hee would not assume nor suffer in it, be­cause he would not saue it. This reason is better concluded thus: If he assumed our whole humane nature to this very end & purpose that he might suffer in it, and by suffering in it, saue it: then he also suffred both in body and in soule. But this is true, Hee assumed our whole humane nature to this verie end and purpose, that he might suffer in it, and by suffering in it, saue it. Ergo this is true also, that hee suffered both in soule and fleshe. Heere onely the assumption can be doubted. It conteyneth in it three points.

• 1. He assumed our whole humane nature.
• 2. That which he assumed he did assume to this very end & purpose▪ that he might suffer in it.
• 3. That by suffring in it, he might saue it.

These three pointes being proued, the whole Assumption before is euident and firme. But they are all prooued in these verses of Heb. 2. as the First, verse, 14, 16; 17. [Page 17]Neither doeth this let, that he speaketh, namely but of fleshe and blood, vers. 14. and of the seede of Abraham verse 16. It can not be doubted but these phrases are set downe synecdochicos, the part for the whole: and so the Author meaneth here, he affir­med the whole humane nature. The seconde is proued verse 14, 15, 17, 18. The thirde is proued verse 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.

Obiection. If anie reply here, it is true no man euer doubted, but Christ suffered in his soule: that is by sympathy or ioint feeling frō his body, according to the course of nature in him: but not as properly making to mans redemption, & so this to the Hebrewes here is to be vnderstoode.

Nay: that hath no reason in it.Answere. Christ assumed not our nature, nor any parte of it, but onely to suffer in it properly and immediatlie, euen for the very purchasing of our redemption thereby. Otherwise hee had no neede to assume both, but either the one parte or the other. I say as the pro­per and immediate suffering in one part of our nature onely, had bene sufficient to saue vs wholy, then there was no simple neces­sitie that Christ should assume both parts. For if God so would, and nothing but na­tures perfection and sufficiencie had bin respected, then the assuming of one parte onely and the suffering in it, by this pre­tended reason, might haue bene able to haue saued vs wholy thorough the infinite [Page 18]excellencie of that person hauing the Di­uine nature conioyned with it to supplie the vnsufficiencie of the Humane single parte, either in doing or suffring. Thus A­pollinaris heresie will enter at this gap.Apollinaris Heresie. Hee held that Christ assumed humane fleshe in deed, but not any humane soule. For it nee­ded not, said he: His Deitie being sufficient to be in steed of a soule in supplyinge vnto it all efficacie for naturall operations, and consequentlie so farre to giue assistance to the Flesh that it might be able to doe all things for our redemptiō without the soule, only through the helpe of the God­lie power ioyned therewith: As namely it could quicken it, and make it mooue, and liue, and haue knowledge, and feeling, &c. There­fore his flesh onely thorough the quicke­ning and mouing of his Godhead might do the workes of righteousnes, & suffer fee­linglie the paynes sufficient for our iusti­fying and sauinge: and all this without a humane soule. So that the soule should bee superfluous & needles, which should pro­perlie doe nothing in the worke of our re­demption. And if it were superfluous and needles in Christ, how shall we hold that he had anie at all. Whiche blasphemie God forbid. Therefore it is vaine to replie, and very false,Heb. 2.14 &c. that here * is meant, that Christ suffered in soule by sympathie only, or a na­turall suffering, when as this suffering pro­perlie did not make to our redemptiō, nor [Page 19]was absolutely necessarie to make Christs Flesh to haue life and sense: the Soules immediat and proper suffring was necessarie to make it a ransome for sinne, and there­fore we conclude that here this is special­lie signified.

Moreouer they obiect:Obiect. That wherby A­dam propagated sin into vs, by the same hath Christ procured satisfaction for vs. But Adam propagated sinne into vs not by our soules but only by our flesh which only wee deriue frō him: Therfore Christ only by his flesh and not by his soule hath procured satis­faction for vs.Ans. To this we answere sim­ply by denying the proposition. By the same instrumēt Adam did not propagate sinne into vs by whiche Christ satisfied for vs. For Adam propagated and deriued sinne into vs, only by the flesh (supposing now that our soules are immediatly infused by God, & come not from our parents.) But Christ satisfied for vs both in his soule & flesh. Wherfore in this sense we denie the ꝓpositiō as being vtterly false. And in steed of this false argument I returne against it this reason better grounded and of certen trueth. That whereby Adam firste and wee euer since doe most properly commit sinne, by the same hath Christ our second Adam made satisfaction for our sinne. But Adam first & we euer since m [...]st properly commit sinne in our soules, our bodyes be­inge but the instrumentes of our Soules, and folowing the soules direction and will.

Therefore Christ in his soule chiefly and most pro­perly made satisfaction for vs. Against this cō ­clusion there can not by any reason, be a­nie deniall All which as in it self it is most certen, so also it may wel be gathered and groūded on the Apostle:Rom. 5.19. Like as by one man [...] disobedience many were made sinners: so by the o­bedience of one shall many also be made righteous. Where though chieflie the Apostle com­pareth Adams disodedience with Christs obedience as both doe reach vnto vs: yet it is plaine he doeth jointlie signifie the Subiect also of their disobeying and obey­ing, that is their soule, wherein they pro­perlie wrought these thinges whiche did reach euen vnto vs. So that hence werea­son thus: Wherein Adam disobeyed and Christ obeyed, by the same hee satisfied for vs and made vs righteous. But Adam disobeyed God and Christ o­beyed principally in the soule. Therefore principal­lie and chieflie in his soule Christ satisfied for vs, & made vs righteous. The proposition onely is in question, which here is plainlie gathered from the Apostle: and so both our Asser­tion is proued, and their proposition before confuted. Now all this we answere graū ­ting that mens soules are not deriued by propagation from their parentes. Which yet if any affirmed, there could follow no impietie nor absurditie: neither reason nor religion can well ouerthrowe it. And thus also their assumption before is flatlie denied. Howbeit for my parte I will not [Page 21]fall into this questiō here, being very dif­ficult and not simply necessarie, Whether our soules come by generation, as the body d [...]eth, or no. Because I content my selfe with the o­piniō of the most at this present, who be­ing excellent learned and godly men de­nie this point, and yet notwithstandinge for all that the former assumption may bee denied also. For who knoweth not that the soule is the proper and perperual Sub­iect of sinne? So that where there is no li­uing soule, there neuer was nor cā be any sinne or disobedience at all. The fleshe therefore being not capable of sinne and disobedience, but by the soule and frō the soule (in the which alwayes it is properlie inhaeren [...], if it be at all:) And sinne beeing properly a spirituall qualitie alwayes, and no corporall pollution: it wil follow that Adam propagated sin into vs † by our soules and not by our flesh onely,Zanchius de Oper. D [...]. whether our soules come by propagation, or infusion, or howe so euer. Yet if any sticke at this, howe sinne can be deriued in propagatiō by and in the soule, if the soule be not de­riued also. Lett vs not bee curious in this harde point, which needeth more Philoso­phie then Diuinitie to declare it: holdinge fast this most euident trueth, that sinne is a proper and vnseparable qualitie of the soule, and can not be found being in anie thing where a reasonable soule is wāting. And therefore it is not deriued from our [Page 22]parents in Flesh onely but in a Soule al­so, the Soule beeing euer vnited to the flesh when so euer it is sinfull. As for the fleshes sinne, wee denie that it sinneth pro­perlie: but onely it partaketh of sinne frō the soule by ioyning with it and depen­ding on it.

Further it is sayed,Obiect. If Christes bodilie death satisfie not for the sinne of our soules, then we haue no good by Christes bodily death. For our bodyes, saye some, haue no good at all by Christes death, no more then the bodyes of Infidels: seeing we dye still as well as they. But wee haue much good no doubt by Christes bloodshed and meere bodilie death. Therefore the sinne of our Soules is purged thereby. And if so, then that his soule should also suffer for vs, is superflu­ous.

The answere is:Answer. First that is presumed which is most false, That we precisely say that Christes body satisfied for our bodyes and his soule for our soules, yea each of thē in a seuerall and distinct kinde of satisfy­ing: so that the sufferings of the one pro­fited not at all for the other, but his body for our bodyes and his soule for our soules. Whiche thing we neuer meant: but acknowledge the sufferinges of the whole man Christ doe satisfie for vs wholy, without any such pre­cise partition. Neuertheles we knowe by Gods worde, and doe affirme, that God in his iustice regarded this proportion, that [Page 23]as we haue sinned both in our Bodyes & Soules, so he that was made our propitia­tion did purposelie and aunswerably suf­fer both in his Body and Soule. I say an­swerablie to theYea so farre forth a propor­tion was held in all respectes as the possibi­litie of thinges could admit: as anon after i [...] further shewed pag. 26. 27. proportion of our sinning. Now if anie with respect to this proportion do say, Christs Body suffered for our bodyes, his Soule for our soules, then is it a godlie and wholesome saying, neither giueth it anie euill sequele at all. But further then so, we meane not, we allowe not. Secondly the proofe of the firste proposition what Paradoxe is it, yea what impietie? Haue our Bodyes no good at all by Christes death, no more then the bodyes of Infidells, because wee Dye still as well as they? What good our very Bodyes haue by Christs death. Lett vs consider this poinct: our Bodyes haue manifolde benefites by Christes death. 1. Sinne is not imputed against vs at all, yea wee are clothed with Christes righteousnesse both in our bodyes and soules, when we are once iustified by faith in his death. 2. Sinne is abated and mortified in vs day lie, and righteousnesse is begunne and increased euen in our bo­dyes, by the vertue of his Death and resur­rection apprehended & applyed by faith. 3 Our bodyes now haue assurance of a glo­rious resurrection through his death and resurrection. 4. Our bodyes are made the true owners of our bodily food, clothing, ritches, and other comforts, whereof the Wicked are but vsurpers. Yet you will say, Wee dye still, as well as the Infidels. [Page 24]The scripture saieth Nay: if you meane Death the curse of the lawe and the punishment of sinne. He was made sinne for vs, that is, Hee tooke the punishmēt of sinne for vs. And Christ redeemed vs from the curse of the Lawe, be­ing made a Curse for vs. 5. Therefore death, yea bodily death, as it is the stipend of sinne, as the punishment of sinne. SoThe proper punishmēt for sinne is not layd vpō two: not vpon Christ, and vs also. Hee hath taken it from vs, and vs from it, and we are freed by his death: yea vnto vs it is nowe cleane changed, & not the same in it own nature as it was. It is to vs the passinge to heauen, and a thinge to bee prayed for. whiche the punishment of sinne can not be. I desire to be dissolued and to bee with Christe, sayeth the Apostle. And therefore the scripture taketh the name of death from this departure of the godly: He that belee­ueth in me shall not see death: and hee hath nowe passed from death to life. Thus then, haue not our bodyes any good at all, any more thē the bodyes of infidels? God forbid: This is a moste vnchristian speech. 3 Lastly to an­swere to the former reason directlie. It is said, If Christes bodily death satisfie not for the sinne of our soules, then haue we no good by it. First let vs know distinctlie what is meant here by Christes bodily death. Wee meane his meere bodily death, and that say we, beeing but a parte of his moste meritorious passion satisfied not for our sinnes. The whole a­boūdantlie satisfied, no one parte or piece thereof doeth satisfie: because what GOD [Page 25]hath ioyned togither, let no man so wickedlie se­parate.

But you will replie, his onely bloodshed, his bodily death meerely was sufficient, yea one drop of his blood, beeing the blood of the sonne of God, was sufficiēt to redeeme a thousande worldes.

That we denie: howbeit we reason not what it might haue bene, if GOD had so appointed: we speake not thereof. We say onely what it was, and is. That only is suf­ficient in deed, which God hath appointed to suffice for the satisfaction of our sinns. God hath appointed both the sufferings of his soule and also of his body. Likewise all those sufferinges in his life, aswell as at his death. Therefore all these ioinetlie are sufficient, but no parte of them seuerallie. So thatOne onely drop of Christ bloud in deed not sufficient for the re­demption of the world. to saye one drop only of Christes bloud was simply suf­ficient for all our sinnes: I holde it a pre­sumptuous & vngodly speech, whiche so mainlie crosseth the appointmēt of God, and his reuealed will. As is partlie before declared, and shalbe hereafter more fully. Further it doeth flatlie crosse the moste perfect iustice and the loue of God: both which together, that is, iustice with loue, and loue with iustice must needes stand intire & sounde, and not a whitt impayred in the mysterie of our redemption. 1. Iustice re­quireth that the same nature shoulde sa­tisfie for sinne. whiche properly commit­ted the sin. But our soule properlie, chief­lie [Page 26]and immediatlie sinned. Therefore Christes Soule should properlie, chieflie, and immediatlie paye the price thereof.2. note. It is not proportionable with Iustice, that an easier punishment should satisfie for a greater sinne, where it is possible that it may bee had. But the Soule of Christ possibly might haue suffered properlie and immediatlie. Therefore in iustice it must and did suffer, and not his bodye onely.

If anie saye, Obiect. Christes verie bod [...]lie suffe­ringes were so grieuous and vehement, as that they were comparable to the Soules sufferinges, if it had properlie indured any. Answer. Nay, that hath no reason: the flesh is not capable, neither of like righteousnes nor sinne, neither of such ioyes nor punishe­ments according to the capacitie of the soule: there is no equall measure betweene these. Nowe this prise equally in iu [...]tice must be kept so farre as it is possible in all satisfactions. Therfore here in this it was kept: and how in this it was kept in deed, we shall more cleerely perceiue in the o­ther more speciall arguments hereafter follo­wing. Therfore it behoued Christes soule to suffer for vs properlie, aswell as his body. If any say,Obiect. It was Gods singular loue to his most deare sōne to quit him of those ex­tremest torments the suffrings of his soule, and to admit a Dispēsation in steed of Cōpensation, that is to be satisfied with lesse then God might haue exacted of Christ, & lesse then [Page 27]he could haue yeelded. Answere. 1. This belonges properly to the sifting of our more special ar­guments hereafter, where we shall see into it further.2. Gods loue must not impaire his iustice, but both must stande intire and perfect togither in our redemption, as is aboue said, or els we destroy the nature of God. But by this deuise gods iustice which might be executed by Christs suffering in his soule, shrinketh, and is shortned not a litle, by reason of his loue to Christ which inflicteth not al the punishmēt (say they) which being due to our sins, Christ also as man might feele, & his Father might laye vpon him. Nay this, in this case is no loue but partialitie. ButGods loue in ordeyninge Christes suffe­rings, what it is in trueth. this is the loue of God in this mysterie, euē that which he sheweth vnto vs, his iustice being layd vpon Christ. I say his loue is to vs: in that he hath trans­lated our guiltines frō vs vpon Christ his own sonnes person, & beaten our fault vpō his back. This is the most gracious & hea­uenly loue of God to be blessed & magnifi­ed for euer: & not that he spared his sonn in paying our ransome more thē the possibilitie of iustice would that he should. For so a lesse and a farre lighter humiliatiō of Christ then his bodily death also, might as well haue satisfied God for vs. I say, what nee­ded those moste pitiefull and wofull bo­dily woundes, & smarting stripes, so much bloodshed being so precious, yea that vn­deserued sundring of body & soule by cruell death? Nay more then this, what neded al [Page 28]those penuries, ignominies, persecutions and other miseries in his life time, which he plenteouslie susteined? When as some one or fewe such as Christ suffred, yea hi [...] incarnation only might haue bin enough & enough meritorious in that diuine per­son to appease his fathers wrath, if in his fatherlie loue he meant to dispense and laye lesse then the ful waight & burden of our sinnes on him. All thoseYea: Neither the Loue nor Iustice of God could lay more [...]n Christe then was sufficient. But God laide more on him then the shea­ding of one drop of bloud: Ther­fore one drop was not suffi­cient. superfluities of sufferinges which Christ did most pain­fullie endure, howe stande they with this infinite loue of God towardes his moste deare and tenderly beloued sonne, if they needed not at all, if this his loue might di­spense with his iustice? We can neuer auoyd this absurde and irreligious consequent.

Now then will you reply and say. Obiection. Thus wee doe make the meere bodily death and bloodshead of Christ not profitable, nor meritorious, if we will not yeeld them to satisfie for sinne.Answere. That is vntrue: We know and professe they are most profitable and me­ritorious, yea lesser sufferings then those, as his pouertie, his hatred, his shame, and ignomi­nie, &c. these were all most profitable and me­ritorious and satisfactorie also to our saluatiō. But as an Armie of souldiours doe all toge­ther gette the victorie and not any one of them asunder, and yet for all that each one singly is profitable in fight for the attain­ment of victorie: euen so these Suffrings of Christ both of his body and of his soule [Page 29] all togeather do sufficientlie merite, but [...]ach one in seuerall is profitable and helpeth therevnto.

4 To these proofes before handled, let vs adde one or two more briefly in this wise. If Christ were emptyed & abased to the vttermost that might be, then he was afflicted in his soule pro­perlie and immediatlie as well as in h [...] bodye. But he was in deed emptied and abased, ex [...]anited, to the vtmost that might be. Therefore he was affl [...]c­ted properly and immediatlie, yea most bitterly in his soule. Where this worde in the Apostle, heHe [...] on c [...]e [...]. P [...]l. [...]. [...]. empt [...]ed him selfe, doth testifie, he was so farre cast downe in his humiliation, that he was cleane voyde of all comfort and dig­nitie, before his exaltation to ioy & glo­rie: Which by no meanes can be possiblie true in plaines of speech, (that he was emp­tyed) if the soule were vntouched, and felte not such humiliatiō at Gods hand wher­of it was properlie capable. And as for an hyperb [...]de or phrase larger thē the meaning is in this place, ther is no cause for any to dreame thereof.

5 Againe thus I reason: He Offered him selfe thorough the Eternali Spirit. Hebt. 9.15. What signifieth Him selfe here but his whole Humanitie, euen his body and soule, to bee the Sacrifice of redemption which hee offered to GOD through the vertue of his De [...]tie? Therefore seing his soule also was the sacrifi [...]e, his soule suffered also as w [...]ll as his body.

6 Lastly, If both the body & soule of Christ were [Page 30]the Tabernacle of his Deitie wherein hee perfor­med his sacrifice for sinne, Then hee suffered pro­perly as well in his soule as in his body.

But the Tabernacle of Christes Deitie wherein hee performed his sacrifice, was both Heb. 8. & 9. Col. 2.9. his soule and body. Therefore hee suffered properly both in soule and in body.

Where we haue to cōsider these points: 1. Touchinge the Iewish Tabernacle, Moses sheweth that the typicall Priestes offered vp therin their sacrifices for recō [...]l [...]ation to God. 2. Christes manhood isHeb. 8.2. and 9.11. called by the holy ghost the Tabernacle of his god­head: that is, he maketh it answerable in Christ in trueth to the typicall Taberna­cle, wherin the Iewish priesthood sacrifi­ced. 3. His manhood here is meant his whole & intire manhood, not any one part ther­of, but both his soule and body iointly, & the same to beHeb. 9.11. this Tabernacle of his Deitie,Col. 2.9. wherin the Godhead dwelt bodily. 4. That Christ offred vp his sacrifice of redemptiō in this Tabernacle, y^t is, in his whol & intire māhood

So that hence our reason is good: If all these poincts be true, & if Christ thus of­fred his sacrifice for sin both in his soule and body, then he suffered properly both in his soule & body, & not in one part only. But al these points are true, as our assump­tion importeth, and are manifestly proued by Cōparing Moses institution of that Iew­ish Tabernacle with this spirituall appli­cation thereof, not to the flesh onelie [Page 31]but to theHeb. 8. & 9. whole humanitie of Christ.

Therfore the Conclusion is firme: Nei­ther can any thing be stood at vnles some will saye, Christes flesh onely and not his Soule also is the true Tabernacle of the God­head. Which amongst all wise Christians is to absurde.

Yet that of the Apostle is alleadged & obiected earnestly:Obiection. Gal. 6, 1 [...] God forbid that I should reioyce but in the Crosse of Christ Iesus. Here euē all and the whole Sufferings of Christ are signified, for in nothing els would Paule reioice, but euē herein. Howbeit the Crosse conteyneth not any sufferings of Christs Soule, his Soule was not crucified but his body onely. Therefore his Body onely suffered, and not his Soule. I answere,Answer. It is true, this is not only an obiection, but euen a foundation and principall ground of this errour: but so mistaken & forced, as nothing may be more. So that by ouer­throwing this, the whole Conclusion will fail. 1. If Paul had here meant the very per­sonall sufferinges of Christ, why might not the Crosse conteyne his Soules sufferinges, yea al the Suffrings of Christs whole life? What letteth but his Soule might be sayd to be Crucified, & not the Flesh only? Any bitter anguish & sharp affliction is com­monly called, a Crosse. And though Christs Crosse properly & strictly taken was sensi­ble & outward in deed, yet who seeth not but it is most familiarly & often vsed in a [Page 32]larger meaning, to conteyne all Christes grieuous Sufferinges what so euer, when so euer, & how so euer: euen like as is ob­serued beforepag. 8. 9. against the first obiection against vs in the beginninge.2. Neuer­theles I take it to be cleare, that this Text is further mistaken. The Apostle heere speaketh not of the personall sufferinges of Christ, but of the godly, Christs members which they suffer for Christs trueth sake, which are also calledCol. 1.24. the afflictions of Christ. For hauing a litleGal. 6.12. before noted the Falie teachers, whiche mingled and corrupted Gods trueth, because so they might bet­ter scape persecution, which they were loth to suffer for the Crosse of Christe, that is, for the sincere doctrine whiche commonlieCrux comos E [...]angely. bringeth the Crosse with it: NowGal. 6.14. here he presentlie Opposeth his owne vpright and faithfull affection, sayinge, Nay, God forbid, that we who are the true Ministers of God, should ioy in anie thing but in this that these men doe abhorre, that is, euen [...]n af­flictions for Christ and for his sincere trueth, when God calleth vs therevnto: Whiche in deed is a singularAct. 3.41. note of the true Mi­nisters of God. Also that which follow­eth doeth shew it further: for here by no­thing but theGal. 6.15, 16. The world is crucified, &c old man is Crucified in him, & dyeth more & more, and he groweth and increaseth forward in being a new creature, which verely is all in all. Here then is no occasion to speake preciselie of the perso­nall [Page 33]suffrings of Christ. but he speaketh of Christs sufferings in his Members. Wher­fore this is cleane mistaken.

Thus we see hitherto nothing letteth, but our Generall Reason is euident by the Scripture, That Christ suffered properly & im­mediatly in his soule: and consequentlie the Wrath of God for sinne. Nowe it remayneh that we proceede to the rest of our Argu­mentes for this point.

More Speciall reasons, that Christ suffered the wrath of God.The more Speciall Reasons proouing that Christ suffered for vs the Wrath of God, and euen so the paynes of Hell or Hellish sorrowes, are nowe here to be next considered.

But first it is good to mark these names Hell & Hellish sorrowes. Because all the aduā ­tage is picked against this most christian & cōfortable doctrine by them that loue cōtention, only through the ambiguity & doubtfulnes of this word Hell. We meane not that Christ suffred Hell properlie,What [...]mea [...] by Christes suf­fering of Hell, or H [...]llish sor­rowes. that is hell torments in the verie place & con­dition of the damned. God fordid. This grosse cogitation neuer came into our mindes, but only he suffred for our-sinnes Gods seuere Wrath and [...]st vengeance, or ra­ther the very Effects of his iust wrath & ven­geance: which we affirme is equal to Hell it selfe and all the tormentes thereof in sharpnes and vehemen [...]ic of payne. And thus we say Christ suffered Hell or Hellish sor­rowes for vs, and no otherwise. Which vve proue by many reasons.

1 First thu [...]: We should haue suffred such paine [...] are the effectes of the intollerable wrath of God [...] our sinne. But Christ suffred the sorrowes & pay [...] for sinne which we should. Therfore Christ suffer [...] for vs such sorrowes & paynes, as are the effecte [...] the intollerable wrath of God for sin. The assump­tion only can be doubted. But the prophet Esay affirmeth it in playn words: He ba [...]e [...] iniquities, and susteyned our sorrowes. He sayeth not only, He susteyned sorrowes, but he susteyned Our sorrowes: yea the text hath it more significantlie.Macobhenu sebhalam. He susteyned f [...]ur very sorrowes, or our soroowes theselues, that i [...], those which els we should haue borne. This cō ­clusion can no wayes be auoyded.

The like to this is proued2. Tim. 2.6. He gaue him­selfe Antilytron hyper panton. a price of redemption for vs, which wee els should haue payed. For note that antily­tron is the price which whē a Captiue can not him self pay, then his Prince o [...] some other friend payes it for him, to redeeme him withall. Now the custome and vse is, we know, that the enimy taketh the same price for his Captiue of an other, which he would take els of the Captiue him self, if he were able to pay it. Euen so the scri­pture here speaking after the commō vse and custome of re seeming Captiues takē in warre, doeth meane that Christes price of redemptiō which he payed for vs, was the same which els we should haue payed.

2 Secondly I proue it thus:Gal. 3.13. Christ redeemed vs frō the curse of the Lawe, when he was made a [Page 35]Curse for vs. What curse was he made for vs? It is opened ver. 10. That curse which is cō ­prised inDeut. 27.26. Moses: Cursed is euery man that con­tinueth not in all things written in the Law to doe them. And more particularly in this verieGal. 3.13. verse it is called the Curse of the Lawe. What is that? Surely the feeling of Gods wrath for the trāsgression of the Law. This curse therfore saith Paule Christ was made for vs: y^t is, he susteyned for vs euen the feeling of Gods wrath for our trāsgressions imputed to him. Obiection. If any thinke, this curse here which Christ was made, is not the same curse whi­che is here called the curse of the law, and is described in the wordes of Deut: Cursed is euery one, &c: But this to be another curse, a lesser & lighter, which Christ is here af­firmed to be made for vs.Answere. It is vaine and senseles to think the Apostle here speakes of two seuerall kinds of curses: the cohae­rēce sheweth that he speaketh & treateth all of one maner of curse. And if Christ su­steyned any curse for vs, what curse could it be? Not the curse of the law? or what was it? Not the curse of God? If it were, then that is it which wee speake of, and vvhich els vve should haue borne.

Obiection. If it be said, It cānot be that Christ bare our curse, or paid the price y^t we els should haue paid, or susteined the very sorrowes that we should haue susteined: for thē he must haue suffred perpetually as the dāned do, & as we should to, had we not bin redee­med by Christ.

I answere.Answere. 1. The scripture it selfe affir­meth, Hee did all that for vs: Therefore who dareth den [...]e it? Who either man or Angel shall presume to say, Nay?2. This followeth not (if wee no [...]e well) this ma­keth not at all, that therefore Christ suf­fered perpetually. if he suffered our punish­ment and had the iust sentence of our cō ­demnation (I meane the full sha [...]p [...]e [...] and ve­hemencie of it) translated & executed vpon him.In sha [...]pnesse Christ suffered as the Dam­ned doe, but not in continuance of sorrow. That which he suffered might be for y^e time incomparably sharpe and terrible, though induring but a while and not perpetuall. Wherefore this must be noted, we cō [...]are not the sufferinges of Christ for vs with the paynes of the Damned in regarde of continuance: therein we neuer doubted n [...]r any Christian, but that Christ suffered les­ser, that is shorter time then we should, & the damned doe.Obiection. If anie aske howe maye this be, if Gods iustice must stande? We an­swere. Yes: it may bee, because his perpe­tuall sufferinges needed not.Answer. The infinite excellēcie of his person that suffered, be­ing the Sonne of God, countervayleth in merit and worthines the infinit continu­ance of punishmēt, which els he should, but now needed not to in lure. 2 Because this abridgment & shortning of the time needes must be.It was simply impossible that Christ should suffer perpetu­ally: for 2. rea­sons. I say it must needes haue bene so: because simply it was impossible to be otherwise. Which is most certen for 1 two causes: 1. No flesh els could possiblie [Page 37]haue bene saued, vnlesse the Sauiour and redeemer had ended his payment for vs. But God had decreed to saue some, whom he gaue his sonne to suffer for. Therefore it was impossible absolutly, but our Saui­ours payment must end.2. He was verie God himself that suffered: therfore it was simply impossible, but he must ouercome, and finish, and obteine his purchase. Thus then in this one point of continuance in pu­nishment our Sauiour satisfied Gods iu­stice, not by suffering strictlie and exactlie that which wee should, but by suffering y^t which in his person was fully worth [...] an­swerable to y^e perpetual cōtinuance ther­of, which in vs els should haue ben done. And al because of the simple necessity for which it must be so. If any ask,Obiect. why were not Christs paines also lessened as well as y^e perpetuitie abridged, by the infinit me­rit of his person. Answer. I answere, Because there was no impossibilitie, no necessitie, no neede, but he might feele the full smart of our sinnes, as there was, for him not to feele the full continuance thereof. Seeing therefore it was possible for him to feele all our smart, and seeing Gods strict iustice requireth it so, therefore it was so, and it must be so. He suffered for vs the full smart of our sinnes, which els wee should haue suffered both in soule and body.Christ sols the Curse of God vpon for him vs.

I vrge then, Let it be here noted. Christ is said to be made a curse for vs: then he felt [Page 36] [...] [Page 37] [...] [Page 38]this curse. And before I shewed this curse was Gods curse: and what is that, but Gods wrath for sinne. So then Christ is heere proued to haue felt Gods wrath for sinne.

If you replie:Obiection. This curse is not Gods curse, nor his vvrath for sinne: but only a shame and ignominy amongest men for his bo­dilie hanging on the tree: it vvas an igno­minious death, and that was all which is here meant, because euery one els is not cur­sed by God, that is opēly executed: as here the Apostle expresly hath it.Answere. I answere, 1. It is more then absurd to saye, The curse heere which Christ bare for vs, was only & meerely but the opinion of the people, holding it a sham to be executed to death openly. Will any man of common reason say, that this is all the curse that Christ bare for vs, or that here is meant? Nothing but y^e shame of the world? and no other thing between God & him? To name this opi­nion is cōfutatiō enough.Obiection. Further where your reason is, Because euery one is saide to be cursed which hangeth on the tree. Answere. Knovve you that the meaning is, Euery one that so hangeth by the iust sentence of the Lawe: wherefore it is heere called the curse of the lawe. Nowe then not euery one that is hanged is cursed: for many innocentes & martyrs are hanged, who are most blessed. But euerie▪ one that is iustly hanged, is cursed. And so vvas Christ heere. You [Page 39]will aske: What, vvas Christ iustly hanged on the tree? Yea verily,Howe Christ was in our per­son iustly cur­sed of God and executed for vs. by the iust sentence of the Law vvas he put to death: neither let this be strange to any Christian. Is not the Suretie by the iust sentence of the Lavve condemned to pay his debt, for whom he hath vvillingly & aduisedly vndertaken? Is it wronge, is it violence for the Lawe to lay the penaltie on the Suretie, when the debtor can not discharge it? But if it bee meere and true Iustice, and no vvronge, then was Christ by the iust sentence of the Law hanged on the tree, & so he bare in deed the true Curse of the Lawe. Not in respect that he was an innocent man, nor as the Iewes Magistrates had to doe with him, for so they did him most foule wronge that Crucified him: but as he took on him our person as he was made sinne for vs, and as he stood forth in our name to aunsvvere Gods iustice, So was the iust sentence of our condemnation according to the iu­stice of the Lavve inflicted on him, albeit the Ievves savve it not.

Some vvill saye,Obiection. This Curse heere vvas only bodily: For so it is proued byHe that han­geth on a tree. those vvordes of the Lawe, that speake only of a bodily executiō. So it may aswell be cō ­cluded,Answere. That thePsal. 40.6. Psal. proueth not Chri­stes taking of a perfect body, but only of a Mans eares, because there is mention of no more; Eares thou hast prepared me. [Page 40]Yet the * holy Ghost sheweth therby that he had a perfect body, Heb. 10.5. A body thou hast or day­ned me: yea in deed both a body and a soule. Therfore both here and there & in many other such like places the Scripture no­teth a part for the whole: and so heere in out text a parte of the iust curse of the Lawe, thereby meaning the whole: that is, hanging on the tree for the whole executiō of the Lawes sentence against sin. For this bodily Han­ging was a part of the Lawes Curse: & the Soules suff [...]ing is also by the Curse of the Lawe as well as this of the body, and con­teyneth the feeling of Gods wrath too, as well as the simple Dying, the dissolution of the soule from the body: and is it selfeRom. 5.12. & 6.23. Gen. 3.3. the wages of sinne no lesse, yea more in deed, then the bodily death, though the bodily death be also. The which meaning is here easie & necessarie to be gathered, seeing such a terme is giuen to this haging on the tree which cōpriseth the whole effect of al that I say, which also the holy Ghost sayeth, He was Cursed by it, yea made a curse. What doeth this els but signifie the wrath of God, the curse of God felt by him that was so hāged, as is aboue shewed: yea felt in his soule, seeinge this alwayes lighteth more properly on the Soule then on the Body. Therefore this hanging is here set as a part for the whole execution of Gods iust Curse. & argueth the whole to be on him that was executed, that is on Christ.

If it bee obiected, It is not possible that Christ the most holy and obedient sonne, the most perfectly beloued of God, yea personally one with God him selfe, that he in his Soule could feele Gods wrath. It is not possible, but God must hate him on whom his wrath lighted▪ and in him must be found a conscience of sinne, but Christ knew no sinne, neither in his mouth was found anie guile. And speciallie he, whō God is wroth withall, can not be one person with God him­selfe. Seeing then a twofolde separation followeth, 1 of the Deitie from the Hu­manitie, 2 of Gods loue and protection from Christ, and nothing remayneth but hatred, horrour of conscience, and vtter darknes vpon him, if he felt Gods wrath & hellish tormentes: Therefore it is absurd, impi­ous, haereticall and blasphemous so to holde and maintaine.

God defend: This curse causeles shall not come. Answer. But rather the contrarie saying wil proue such: For they digge a pit for others and fall into it them selues. But I answer, howe couldThe wages of sinne. Death possesse the body of Christe three dayes yea howe could his body here be ac­cursed and made a Curse, which is a thing confessed? And yet I hope all this whyle his body was not separated from his God­head personally: euen so neither was his soule, neither need it to be disioyned from the Godhead, when it was accursed for vs, and susteyned Gods wrath. And as the very [Page 42] body of Christ was then not hated of God neither out of his protection for all that extreame humiliation: Euen so neithe [...] was his soule. Therfore God alwayes loue [...] Christ, he alwayes imbraced him, hee al­ways was knit to him in regard of his ow [...] innocent person: and yet wee may say [...] another regard, that is of our person which he susteyned being all sinfull and rebelli­ous, God cursed him, God hated him God punished him iustly, or rather ou [...] sinne vpon him, til by his sacrifice accomplished, he tooke it all away. So then [...] must well note, in Christ were two person [...] or conditions. 1. his own, wherin he w [...] most holy,In Christ were a estates or conditions, or he sustayned [...] persons: ours, and his owne. most innocent, most beloued most blessed.2. Hee tooke our person on him, and presented himselfe therein be­fore his Father, and so he became by ou [...] sinnes, sinfull, defiled, hatefull, and ac­cursed. The Surety though he bee vtterly cleere and obnoxious to none, yet by his suretyship hee is a debtor and obnoxious to the Creditour & the Law. If a tender ladye [...] only child should by some casualtie be all tombled in blood, or mire, & most stine-king filth: The child so berayed and loth-some would breed greate abhorring and lothing in the delicate eyes of the dain­ty lady: yet the childs own person should be neuer the lesse beloued of the mother, but rather the more if it may bee. So [Page 43]such two persons or conditions are found in Christ: according to one hee was alwayes beloued, according to the other which he tooke vpon him (whilst hee had not fini­shed that office) hee was iustly accursed. And if we see not how this may be in his soule, consider howe it was in his body, (which neither is nor can be denyed) and then it will appeare howe his soule also might susteyne for vs the curse of God, and yet no separation to follow.

But some will say:Obiect. this curse here is no­thing els but simply to dye, the dissoluti­on of the body and soule: which theGen. 3.3. scri­pture saith is a curse in deed: [In the day that thow shall cate of the forbidden fruite thou shalt dye the death.] Nowe this death be fal­leth to the decrest children of God still: that is, to dye. Therefore they also beare this curse though they bee cleere from the vengance and wrath of God. Euen so and no otherwise is Christ heere saide to be accursed, only because he dyed.

Heere wee deny that the death of the righteous is properly a curse or a punish­ment for sinne.Answer. For so the Godly are for­giuen the fault but not the punishment of sinne.Note. Which is one of the Popish here­sies.See also pag. 24. Therefore death in the Godly is not properly a punishement of sin, nor pro­perlie a curse of the Lawe. Indeed in it selfe and of it owne nature it is so, as it was first inflicted by the reuenger of [Page 44]finne for sinne: but in the godly & faith­full childe of God it is not [...]o: the na [...]u [...] and propertie of it is cleane changed [...] plainly a good thing and to be desired, 2. Paule sayeth, Death is to me a gaine [...] de [...]reto [...] dissolued & to be with Christ. Which he ought not to saye if death were properly a cu [...] to him. And Christ sayeth such men sha [...] not dye but passe from death to life. Where he [...] denyeth flat he the name of Death vnto i [...] euen because the nature of it is change [...] to the godly. Neither cā it be strange th [...] the selfe same thing may be cleane chan­ged & of a diuers nature in diuers persō [...]. To kil a mans self, in Achitophel, was a foul: and monstruous sinne: but in Sampson [...] was a most glorious vertue, when he pul­led the house vpon his owne and the Phi­listims heades. Here the selfe same act To kill ones selfe is of a diuers nature in diuers men, good in Sampson, but most wicked in Achitophell. And euen as some Physike in a [...] sound mans stomach is poyson, which in a sicke man is medicinable: and riches to the wicked are vniust possessions increa­sing their iudgement, but to the godly they are true blessings. So the selfe same thing in diuers persons may be cleane of diuers and contrary natures. And euen so death is to the wicked a curse for sin: yet to the godly it is not death, but a passage to l [...]fe: no Curse properly, nor punishment of sinne, but a benefit and aduantage. Therefore [Page 45]Christes dying simply as the godly dye, may in no sorte heere be called a curse, or cursed. But seeing the text sayeth, Hee was made a Curse for vs, or accursed in his death: Therefore he dyed not simply as the godly dye, He indured the Curse and wrath of God truely.

3 I proceed nowe to another profe Col. 2. [...]. Christ on the crosse spoyled principalities and powers, and made a shewe of them openly, trium­phing ouer them. These principalities are the Diuells and powers of darknes: the instru­ments of Gods iustice & wrath, the temp­ters which assault & * wrastle with al good men.Eph. [...].1 [...].16. Euen so heere they assault and con­flict with Christ whom they did chief­lie desire to ouerthrow, being the head of all the rest: but here is shewed his glorious victory and conquest vpon them. Ther­fore it is certaine they on the Crosse moste furiously attempted him, & he felt them. that is to say, the very instrumentes that wrought the very effectes of Gods seueri­tie and wrath vpon him: but he at the last most gloriously conquered them & trode them vnderHeero some say, that Christ payed the pric [...] and did satis­faction to the Diuill proper­lie, and not to God. But it cā not want both absurdity and impietie so to say. Hoe payed it to Gods iu­stice, to his holy seuerity, wherof the Diuell was but executio­ner. feete in that place. If any doubt that these wordes are not to be re­ferred to the crosse of Christ, it shalbe made most manifest that they are, and vndeny­able (God willing) in the next question.

4 The Godly somtime taste of Hellish sorrows in this life.Further this reason will prooue the same, taken from the lesse to the more. The members of Christ doeEph. 6.12, 16 wrastle with the [Page 46]powers of darknes, and indure the fyrie dartes of i [...] Diuell. And Iob cryeth outIob. 6.4. The arrowes [...] the Almightie are in me, the venome whereof d [...] drinke vp my spirit, and the terrours of God sig [...] against me. The like terrours doethIon. 2.2. Ion. seme to feele in the fishes b [...]lly. Wh [...] hee cryed to the Lorde out of the bottome of he [...] And Dauid wanted not the like in h [...] manifolde and fearefull agonies man [...] times. Thus doe the member [...] of Chri [...] suffer. Therefore of necessitie Christ o [...] Heade suffered the like: yea much rather, and fa [...]re greater terrours of GOD and assaultes of the Diuell. For therer haue weRom. 8.29. conformitie with him, euen in a [...] kindes of sufferinges. Therefore in suffe­ringes Christ Iesus hath matched vs [...] least, yea surelie hath gonne beyonde vs This is theMath. 20.23 Cuppe and the Baptisme which: Christ affirmed should be common with his Disciples and him selfe, though hee dronke this Cup deeper then any cls. And it is saide,Heb. 4.15. and 2.17. He was like vs in all pointes, the [...] he was like vs in sufferings, and specially in the mainest sufferings, which are the terrours and the wrath of God, which as is proued, the godly are not exempted from in this life, and yet neuer are, not can be touched deeper, then was Christ. Yea further, in thes [...] places to the He­brewes hee sheweth a reason which can neuer be refuted by the witt of man. Hee [Page 47]succoured vs not, but wherein he hath had experi­ence of our temptations and infirmities. But hee succoureth vs euen in these our temptations of fee­ling the terrours of God and the sorrowes of Hell. Therefore he him selfe had experience of the same. This heere the very Scripture sayeth. Wherefore in all thinges it behooued him, Heb. 2.17, 18. or he ought to be made like vnto his Brethren, that hee might bee mercifull and a faithfull high priest in thinges concerning God. Loe, he was made like vs, that he might be mercifull and faithfull towardes vs.

Againe hothen ôphile. Wherfore he ought, it be­houed him so to be. Therefore hee could not haue bene mercifull and faithfull to vs, vnlesse hee had bene like vs. Which also more fully appeareth in the wordes most significant followinge, En ho gar pepon hen autos petrast he [...]s, dynatas te [...] peiraz omenois boethesai: For in that which him selfe suffered and vvas tempted in, hee is able to succour them that are tempted: Or that are (so) tempted. Here he giueth the rea­son why hee succoureth vs beeing tempted, be­cause him selfe also hath likewise suffered. Also he sayeth, thereby Christ is able to succour vs: as if els hee had not bene able to bee rightlie mercifull. And heere me thinkes [...]n ho hath a singular force more then is commonlie obserued: Euen to note the particular matter wherein Christ is able to succour, namely in that which him selfe hath suffered before.

So that if Christ haue not suffered it, o [...] the like, then he is not able to succour [...] in such suffering [...]s and temptations. Fo [...] surely otherwise he can not say heere if he doth, that Christ was made like his brethren in temptations and sufferings. An [...] all this he sheweth further Cha 4 14, 15, [...] Let vs hold fast our profession, for wee haue not [...] high priest that can not bee touched with our infir­mities, but was in all thinges tempted in like sorte yet without sinne. He closely meeteth heere with an obiection. Some might think Chri [...] being so high & heauenly could not hau [...] sufficient compassion towardes our mis [...] ­ries. Nay sayth he We haue not an high prie [...]t which cānot be touched with the feeling of our in­firmities, but hee was in all things tempted in li [...]e sorte, Therefore let vs hold faste our profession: and therefore let vs goe boldlie to the throne of grace, that we may receyue mercy and finde grace in due time, or in time of need. Which is as much as to say, If he were not like vs in all temptati­ons and sufferings, hee could not minister helpe to vs in time of need: but now he is one that hath felt all our feelings, or the like in euery point. Therfore he can help vs in all need, and wee are not to doubt. And thus by all these Scriptures it is pro­ued that Christ suffered the wrath of God and the sorrowes of Hell, which the godlie in this life sometimes doe taste also. Adde here­vnto, that of all Absurdities,Absurdity. this is the greatest, y^t meere Men should suffer more [Page 49]deepely & more bitterly then Christ did. And yet they doe so, if Christ suffred not at all any sense of Gods wrath nor y^e sor­ [...]owes of hell: which many meere men haue & doe suffer many times, as is aboue declared, and shall further appeare here­after.

5 Nowe an other reason, from Heb. 5.7. where thus it is written of Christ: In the dayes of his flesh he offered vp prayer, and supplica­tions with stronge crying and teares vnto him that was able to saue him from death, and was heard in that which he feared, or, being deliuered from his feare. Here first it may be asked, What prayers and supplications with stronge crying and teares for feare of death, were these which he poured foorth to God in the dayes of his flesh? And where may vve learne them? Wee may learne what these were in the storie of Christes life and death expressed in the Euangelistes in three places. First,Ioh. 12.27. where he lifteth vp his voyce, sayinge: Nowe is my soule troubled: And what shall I saye? Father, saue me frō this hower. But therefore came I into this hower. The seconde place: where after he had mourned in the garden, say­ing, My soule isMath. 26.32. euery way compassed with sorrowes to death. He goeth a little further & falling on his face, he prayeth saying: O my Father if it be possible let this cuppe passe from me. Neuerthelesse not as I will, but as thou wilt. which hee prayeth three seuerall times,ver. 44. with such feare & terror of minde [Page 50]that his body, as yet without all harmeLuke 22.44 trickled downe with clots of blood in steede o [...] sweate: andver. 43. an Angell appeared to him com­forting him. His sorrowe also and troub [...] of minde most terrible beeing expressed where he is said toekthambeīs­that kas aac­monein. Mar. 14.33, 34. be affrighted, as it were, and miserably distressed because of this bitter cuppe. The third place, where now ha [...] ­ging on the crosse before he dyed the cr [...]es with a loude voyce, My God, my God, why hast th [...] forsaken me. To these places doubtles th [...]s text in Heb. 5.7. hath relation, saying. That in the dayes of his flesh hee did offer vp prayers and supplications, with stronge crying and teares vnto him that was able to saue him from death, & was heard in that which hee feared. Nowe these things being thus considered, I make this argument: In all these places it is mo [...]t certaine Christ suffered in his soule the wrath of God due [...] our sinnes. Therefore he suffered the wrath of God, and not his bodily stripes only. The An­tecedent I proue by 3. reasons, gathered from these Scriptures. First because hee nowe suffered in his soule properly and immedi­atlie: My soule is euery way compassed with sor­rowes. Therefore this was the wrath of GOD for our sinnes which he now suffered: as I haue plainlie shewed in the †Mat. 27.46. beginning of this treatise.Pag. 4. 5. 6. 2. Because he so feared & shunned this conflict, which yet he knew he deserued not, and was also accordinge to the will of God for him to suffer. It is not possible but hee suffred more then [Page 51]the bodily death only, it must needs be the vnspeakeable & intollerable wrath of God in that he so feareth it & desireth to shunne it. His Disciples he hadMath. 10.28 taught careful­lie of that point before, sayinge: Feare not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the the soule: but feare him that can kill both soule & body in Hell Which generally also he1 Pet. 3.14, 15 & 4.13, 16. com­maundeth all the Godly euermore. How can this be that him self should doe con­trarie to that, that he commādeth others? Such folly in the Son of God, far be it frō vs once to imagine, as that he shold stag­ger, & shrink, & fayle in that w^c he so ear­nestlie warned others of, and so straight­lie commaunded: viz. not to feare the bo­dily, giltles, vndeserued death, & allotted thē of God: but therfore rather to be glad & reioyce. And accordingly haue infinite ma­nie Martyrs, as their expresse stories doe witnesse:The Theeues Cru [...]ified with Christ suffered as great bodilie violence as hee did, Luk 23.40 They were all togither in one and the same condemnation Ex [...]ept they suffered more then he did, be­cause they con­tinued longer. Ioh. 19.32, 3 [...]. yea wicked and vngodly men, indured with boldnes and great ioy farre more exquisite and barbarous tormentes & sharper tortures, as touching the body, then Christ could endure? or then can with reason be affirmed and attributed to that which Christ endured, if we view his passion? Haue infinit many meere men don this? And shal this I yō of the tribe of Iuda, & Lābe of God, that is the prince of patience and of all fortitude be so heauy, so fearfull, so miserably afflicted & dismayed afore hand, as the storie declareth, only for feare of his bo­dily [Page 52]death? Which also he foreknewe a [...] could not be ignorant of, that he vvas o [...] ­dained of God to suffer it, and that by [...] hands of most malicious and furious en [...] ­mies? Cā it be thought that Christ wou [...] through feare pray against this meere [...] ­dily death, and his soule be so troubled, [...] ­frighted, distracted therwith, that the [...] ­rie anguish and torment of mind shou [...] vvring out of his body sweat of cl [...]tted blou [...] which neuer vvas heard of in any oth [...] man beside, & that he should desire so ear­nestly and so often to auoid it cleane, and being in it, to cry out with much weping that he was forsaken of God? It can not be, I sa [...] it can not be, but Christ should sinne in so praying against the knowne will of God, & against his owne most willing purp [...]s [...] except vve saye it vvas a greater horro [...] of punishment that lighted on his ve [...]se soule, which partlie by the feeling & part­lie by the feare thereof did expresse su [...]h tokens, and did so stonish and amaze and ouervvhelme his humane weakenes ( [...] in very nature such cases doe & will bring to passe) especiallie novve the Diuine assi­staunce of purpose withdrawing it selfe. For a man in such amazednes, doeth easi­lie on a suddaine become forgetfull of him­selfe. And being forgetfull and astonished (which an infinit payne present, and feare of more cominge, will quicklie driue vs [Page 53]into) no maruell if Christ, as a very man, let fall in this case words nowe and then, vvhich in his good remembraunce hee knevve well enough were as contrarie to Gods will, as they were suteable with na­tures instinst in him. Now then, it was sure­lie the horrour of Gods wrath that oppressed him, seeing it is vaine and senselesse to think his meere bodily torments, yea the stare of them did it, or that meere bodilie he sufferedSee the con­trarie pag. [...]1. more sharpe and vehement things then anie man euer did. All the deuices and amplifications of some men are but shiftes and trifles to prooue that. Note. And here a fine fable is offered vs withal: that vve should beleeue Christes bodilye paynes though so violēt, yet hastened they no whit his death at all, neither vvas hee the neerer it at the last, then at the firste for all his payne. Which is a paradox in na­ture, and contrarie to Scripture, whiche saith, He was like vs in all thinges, sinne only ex­cepted. But some will saye, He desired this thing three tymes in the Garden,Obiection. and onceIoh. 12.97. before. If this were to the ende that he might escape the feeling of Gods wrath assigned vnto him as the speciall parte of his passion, howe could he be so forget­ful so oft of that which he knew full wel, and regarded diligentlie. How could he?Answere. Nay how could he not, but be affrighted, a­stonished, forgetfull, & all confoūded in his wholl humanity, both in all y^t powers of his soule, [Page 54]and senses of his bodye, not three tymes only, but three skore tymes three tymes, yea cō ­tinuallie and without interchāgeable re­spiration, if Gods wrath for sinne had bit still, and continually reuealed vpon him For as it pleased God to open to his man­hood the touche and sense of his wrath sometymes more, sometymes lesse, and sometymes staying it, So hee was agayn [...] and againe sometymes more, sometymes lesse confounded therewith, and somety­mes a whyle refreshed. And if this had re­turned 300. tymes vpon him, verelie hee could not but haue sunke vnder the same 300. tymes also. Alas, we litle thinke what the bitternes of Gods wrath is, and what the waight of his indignation is to the fee­ling of mans soule & body. The want of due knowledge and cōsideration where­of, I feare, is one chiefe cause of broching this moste shamefull quaestion. Rather vvee may beeholde and see heere as in a glasse, the vnsupportable heauines and intollerable smart of Gods anger for our sinnes, which Christ put vpon him selfe for our deliuerance: And agayne, that Christ became in deed a man for vs, when as againe and againe hee could not but shrinke and be confounded vnder that burden. If the waight of Paules Churche were layed on the backe of anie Gyant in the worlde many and sundry tymes, were it anie maruell if euery time it crushed [Page 55]him still to pieces? Much lesse is it, if the burthen of Gods wrath, farre heauier thē the whole earth oftentymes touchinge a man, he be confounded with it continu­allie. Thus then it can not be straunge if often tymes Christ fell amazed, confoun­ded, and forgetfull of him selfe for feare and griefe, when the agonie was on him, it being euen the sense of Gods wrath, & of the curse of the Lawe for vs.

If anie say,Obiection Christ as man being a finite creature could not feele infinite wrath.

I answere, Answere. The wrath of God due to sinne, as it commeth from God, is infinite, as his iustice, and as hee him selfe is infinite. And though Christ as a Creature, could not comprehende the infinitnesse of it, yet he could, being not capable of it, nor able to susteyne it, bee ouerwhelmed and con­founded, and astonished withit.

If you saye,Obiect. this were to make Christ to sinne if he were so disturbed and so di­stracted, and so confounded with feare & horrour. Where was his faith, where vvas his patience, vvhere vvas his obedience to God, where was his loue to his church, if nowe he desired not to drinke this Cup for them? I aunsvvere: Answere. All this might bee in Christ, and in deede so it was, with­out anie touch of sinne or defect of grace at all. Nay, vnlesse this had bene in him, he had sinned in deede, which blasphemy God forbid.

Touching the firste, Notwithstanding all this amazednes and feare in Christ,Christ though amazed and cōfounded with sorrowes and feares, yet re­mained still sinnelesse. he sinned not. I graunt wee could not but haue sinned in the like, but he did not. Because, euen as if you set two glasses fil­led, the one with muddy water, and the other with cleere Christall water, and firste lett them stande till all the muddi­nes in the one be settled at the bottome, then shake both these glasses, in the one the mudde ariseth straightway, and defi­leth all the water there: in the other, al­though you shake it neuer so much, yet the cleere water, though troubled like­wise, remayneth still all cleere as christal: Euen so if anie of vs bee shaken and dis­quieted with anie trouble, our Muddy af­fections arisinge doe presentlie defile vs all ouer: but Christ (in whom was Mans true Nature, but not anie the least defile­ment of Nature) being likewise shaken, hee remayned still cleere from anie the least spott of sinne at all. For to shunne griefe is natural in what we may: and be­ing amazed & forgetfull, Then to shunne that which els we should and would suf­fer, is no sinne neither, but Natures in­stinct. And on occasion to bee forgetfull, (euen as someMarc. 13.32. ignorance, is not sinne) it is Natures infirmitie, but no sinne. If a man indistresse fall a sleepe, and then lift not vp his heart to God, he sinneth not, [Page 57]nor be that being amazed with some vio­lent blowe on the head, calleth not vpon God: because nature is oppressed, and can not doe that whiche hee would and should doe. Also in this man so astoni­shed, or in him a sleepe, we can not saye, there is any lesse grace: There is no de­cay of faith, nor of obedience, nor of pati­ence, nor of loue. Euen so in Christ nowe in this case, there was no defect of grace, but an infirmitie of nature, which euen by creatiō can not indure the displeasure of God, but by it owns confusion withall.

Nowe touching the next poinct, That vnlesse Christ were so, that is, so a [...]toni­shed, and forgetfull by reason of the intol­lerable sorrowe and horrour which con­founded his humane Nature, he had sin­ned by these requestes: whiche blasphe­mie God forbid. That is most true: and first I proue it: and then will answere the exceptions against it. It is proued mani­festlie, because if Christ had prayed adui­sedlie, and with good memorie against the knowne will of God, hee had sinned. As to pray against the tasting of his bit­ter passion, was against Gods will known vnto him. Howe appeareth that, euen his knowing thereof? First him selfe expreslyIoh. 12.17. saieth it: Therefore I came into this hower. Secondlie, hee could not els haue corre­cted and reprooued (as he did) his owne wordes presentlie goinge before.

What shall I say? Father saue me from this howe but therefore I came into this hower. And,Math. 26.39 O [...] Father if it be possible let this Cup passe from [...] neuerthelesse not as I will, but as thow wilt. A [...] ver. 42. O my Father if this Cup cannot passe away [...] me, but that I must drinke it: thy will be d [...] Marke hath it thus:Cha. 14.36. Father, all thinge [...] possible vnto thee: take away this Cup from me Neuerthelesse not as I will, but as thou wilt Therefore Christ prayed and desired, a [...] plainly corrected his will by Gods w [...] And in correcting it, it was contrary, y [...] and he knew it so to be. This place ha [...] bin chiefly vsed of the Ancients, & it is [...] singuler, against the heresie of the Mo [...] ­thelits, Monothelites. who held that Christe had in hi [...] but one will. This now hurteth not the [...] heretiks, if it serue not vs also in this que­stion. This place therefore sheweth he had a naturall humane will at this time con­trary to his diuine will, desiring to shunt: paine which he knew hee was to suffer while through astonishment he be though, not himselfe. Through astonishment I say for els this contrarines of his humane w [...] to his diuine, could not haue wanted sinne because remembring himselfe suddain [...] he knew and acknowledged Gods will to be that he should suffer, which immedi­atly before he had spoken against. Third­lie, this proueth that he knew it was Gods determinate will, in that hee termeth itIoh. 12.27. Mat. 14.42 an hower, that is a time set of God for this [Page 59]his suffering, which he desired to escape. Fourthly, because hee so mightely feared it, therefore doubtlesse he knew that he was appointed to suffer it. Thus it is ma­nifest in plaine words he prayed contrary to Gods knowne will: which vnlesse it were in astomishment, and nature beeing opressed with the horror of his paine and feare, hee could not haue wanted sinne, which God forbid.

Obiection. As for the exceptiones against this 1. They say all these prayers and requestes of his may be that his bodily death might not haue dominion ouer him. And so hee might pray and not against the knowne will of God.Answere. This is absurd to say that he prayed in such feare and horror and terror of minde against that which heeMat. 10.34. perfectly knew should neuer come to him: namely, that the dominion of death should hold him. Therefore this could not trouble him. Obiection. Secondly some say, this inIoh. 12.27. Iohn, concernes not his passion, but his appea­rance in Gods presence onely to receiue sentence against Satan the Prince of this world: as it semeth ver. 31. I answer,Answer. Who euer doubted but Christe receiued sen­tence against Satan by his passion accom­plished, the houre wherof now neere ap­proched, & wherof now presently he had, it seemeth, a strong foretast: hee heere cleered his people from the power of the Deuill, & Satan himselfe he vtterly ouer­threw; [Page 60]which was done so absolutly at hi [...] death that not only him selfe cryed out it is finished, but also the Apostle sayeth, e­uen then he triumphed ouer Sathan: Col. 2.15. which [...] the next question we shall shewe f [...] the [...] It is true then, Christ now received [...] against Satan: but therefore had he now no feeling of his passion? Would hee [...] out, that his soule was so troubled, that he w [...] not what to say? And yet said then, [...]ath [...] saue me from this hower? Would he bee th [...] greeued, afflicted, and distracted to recei [...] sentence against his enemy? What sence is then in this? Doe men vse to be terrified or to reioyce and triumph when before a [...] iudge they haue sentence giuen with the [...] against their enemy. If you say, only the presence of Gods Maiestie terrified and astonished Christes humane infirm [...] though he receiued a benefit. If it we [...] so with him in receiuing an honor and dignity from God, would it not bee so with him much rather in bearing hi [...] curse for our sinnes? interpret this [...] how you will. When hee bare it as from GOD, would not Gods presence then much more terrefie and affright him? But the trueth is, the presence of Gods Maiestie neuer did so grieue, amaze, and astonish Christes manhood in such cases: who not onely was his decrest Sonne but also personally knit and ioyned with God himself, whereby it could not be that the [Page 61]Maiestie so amazed him, which was so v­nited to him, and alwayes susteyned him. As also examples most frequent in the Gospel doe declare. How often did Christ pray vnto his Father: he always then pre­sented himself before Gods Maiesty. And doe we read that euer he was vexed, terre­fied, and amazed in so doing? namely in Ioh: 17. appeareth there any such passion in all that longe, most earnest, and effectu­all prayer? Nothingh lesse verely, nor any where els, where he appeareth before Gods maiesty for this end to receaue Loue and Honor from GOD. Onely in case of his passion, when hee appeared to receiue iustice and seueritie at his hand, then in deed his Maiesty and the sense of his seuere iu­stice proceeding from him might well a­stonish & cōfound any creature, specially a guilty creature, as Christ man was, namely in the person and contenance wherin now he appeared. Therefore hee spake these wordes,Ioh. 1 [...]. [...]. in respect of his passion now dra­wing neere: which also the ver. 33. plainly declareth: Nowe this he sayed, signifi [...]ng what death he should dye. For it hangeth with the ver. 32. next before, And I, if I were lift vp frō the earth would draw all men vnto me. And this most plainly hath reference to this verse 27. whereof it is in parte an opening or exposition. Thirdly,Obiection. Some except fur­ther against thisMath. 26.3 [...] 44. threefolde prayer, If it bee possible lett this Cuppe passe from me: that [Page 62]this was for feare indeed of feeling the wrath of God, but hee felt it not. For a [...] theHeb. 5.7. Apostle sheweth, He prayed vehe­mently against it, and was heard and so de­uered from it. Christ both feared and felt Gods wrath for sinne. Answer. I answere, indeed this were a poinct of high wisedome and singular wit to shew that Christ in this sort as the Scripture telleth feared Gods wrath, & ye [...] felt it neuer a whit. Firste it is well yow graunt that Christ came so neere it that he feared it, yea hee so feared it that with strong cryes and teares he prayed against it, yea and with the agony thereof he swea [...] bloud which must proceed of such grief of the minde, (seing the body was not tou­ched) as was neuer heard of in any man els: & was thus affrighted and distressed ther­with out of measure. If he were thus neere it, then I hope it is neither impious, hereticall, nor blasphemous, for a man to say hee felt it. For in good sooth, if to feare it bee not to feele it any whit at all, specially such a feare as this is described in the Scripture to be, I know not what feeling is. Besides Luke sayeth,Cha. 22.44. † He was now in the agony: then he felt, yea most bitterly, that which he so stroue withall. What is that but the Cuppe there mentioned, euen of Gods wrath, that hee prayed might passe from him. Againe howe could he so deeply feare it, but knowing it was ordayned for him? Shewe me this how he could possibly so feare it but that, he knew Gods will was that hee should [Page 63]drinke of it. And indeed that it was so, I haue proued before already. If then hee was ordayned to it, most certenly he tasted it, he felt it, he indured it. Obiection. Some will say how could he feare it if he felt it? For feare is an expectation of euill to come: and it is written, He was heard in that which he feared and was deliuered from it. I answer,Answer. indeede he both felt and feared it. Hee felt it intol­lerably: but yet feared it more: in the distresfull agony and the very confusion of the powers of his nature he considered not how long it might hold him, and how infinitly more it might yet increase vpon him, seeing he was not come to the grea­test of his passion. This he might feare, and yet presently feele sorrow vnspeakable to. Herevpon after the instinct of nature ab­horring frō paine, he desired to be relea­sed, yet suddenly reproueth his nature herein: Not as I will Father, but thy will be done. Howbeit his Father heard him and deli­uered him out of that which hee feared. Apo [...]t [...] [...] be [...]. Not from feeling it, but from beeing forsaken in it. For the very word semeth to say▪ He was in it: eisakoustheis, Hee was heard being in it. Obiection. You will reply, Christ feared not to bee forsaken in Gods wrath: he could not feare that. Therfore it was not [...] which in this place God deliuered him from. Answer. I answere two things: Though Christ feared not to be forsaken finally in the feeling of Gods wrath, though he could not feare that, [Page 64]neither directly prayed against y^t poinct yet Gods wrath may be it which here he [...] felt & feared, and was deliuered from. Fo [...] he may be truely saide to bee heard in h [...] prayer vvhen the Lorde letteth him tal [...] of the Cup for all that, & susteyneth hi [...] in tasting it, and in due season deliuere [...] him out of it. As Paule vvas heard in th [...] he prayed for, vvhen2. Cor. 12.8. he besought the Lord Christ to take away from him the messenger of Sa [...] than buffitting him. He vvas hearde, I saye herein, not that this prick in the flesh was ta­ken away cleane from him.vers 9. But in that h [...] receyued grace sufficient to beare it, and in due season to be eased of it. But further I affirme Christs nature in y^t most dreadfull agonie and distemper of al the powers of his soule and body might feare a kinde of forsaking, [...]l [...]we Christ [...] forsaken in his passion. that is, least his humane nature should for a time be left alone and naked from al comfortable feeling of assistance of the Godhead. This kinde of forsaking he might and did feare, yea heMath. 24.46. felt it after­vvard to most certainly, vvhen he cryed, My God my God, why hast thou forsaken me. I say a kinde of forsaking this is: for there is an­other kinde of forsaking, which in deede it were blasphemie to sav that Christ either felt or feared it. Namely, to be cast away and forsaken vtterly vvith hatred of his Father. This were in deed desperation in Christ, if he had but feared it, which God forbid we should once dreame of. His ex­presse [Page 65]wordes euen then confute that, in calling him Father, and in crying earnestly to him my God, my God. This he could not doe but that he was farre from desperati­on, or feare of a finall forsaking. Yet this letteth nothing at all but he might feare the other forsaking, that is touching the payne and sorrow to be left al comfortles and alone some while, the Godhead as it were withdrawing and hyding it selfe frō him for the season of his passion, he be­ing in the sense & feeling thereof: which thing he perceyued his meere manhood was not possibly able to endure. And ther­fore a little before he felt the extremitie of it, he prayed that it might passe from him, yet presentlie submitted him selfe to it: and after in this very extremitie, when he did not feare it, but felt it, hee cryed vnder the burthen pitiouslie, & complayned to his Father of it, why hast thou forsakē me. Thus he might feare it, and feele it, and crying to be comforted he might be heard in it, & de­liuered out from it, according to theHeb. 5.7. scrip­ture. I knowe our Contraries doe fancy other senses of thisMath. 27.46. text, My God my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Obiect. Sometime they speake as if Christ did then but singe the Psalme 22. whiche beginneth with those wordes, My God my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Did he singe? Wherefore?Answere. To shewe his patience, his ioye, and triumphe there on the crosse, ouer all the malice of his eni­mies? [Page 66]Naye these wordes are contrai [...] to such ioye, and triumph: why hast [...] forsaken me. It is a token of great deiection of minde & of rare miserie to complay [...] to be forsaken of God: Therefore he sung n [...] then to triumph ouer his enimies. Wher­fore then? Did he singe a mournefull and dolorous lamētation to be so abandone [...] and left to the despite and rage of the Iewes all helplesse? God forbid we shou [...] thinke he did so pitiouslie complayne [...] that, wherevnto he knewe well he was or­dayned of God, & of his owne most willing purpose he offered him selfe: yea that he should be so deiected in mind only for his bodily stripes inflicted by the Iewes, God forbid we should think him so faint har­ted, as before I haue proued. Neither did he amplifie or paint out his suffrings poeti­cally: Pag. 51. this were vanity in him, & madnes in vs to think. Therfore it is certē, he nether sung nor said these words to any such me [...] ning at all.Obiection. Sometime they think, he here meant to answer the Iewes most disdain­full mockes & skornes, in telling thē that all this their indignity towards him, vvas prophesied of before, namely in y^e psal. 22. whose beginning he repeated to them, as it were to sende them thither, where they should see thē selues & their doings pain­ted out long before.Answere. Which sense is most absurd. As if when they had mocked and reuiled him at noone, or before, he would [Page 67]then 3. whole houres after tell them of such an answer in y^e prophet. This is to fond to be spoken. But itMar. 15.33.34. appeareth to be euē so; three whole hours, if not more, after their mocks it was, that he cryed my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me. Obiection. Sometime againe they thinke he spake not this of his owne person, but of his mysticall body the Church, complayning that nowe his Apo­stles and the rest should be forsaken, as it were, being bereft of him. This is no lesse absurde then the former.Answere. There is no ne­cessitie, nay no cause, nor likelihoode in the world, that [mee] here should be taken figuratiuelie for his Church. Therefore it mustSignifying the person of himselfe. be literal Againe, he can not com­plaine so dolefullie that his church should be now forsaken, viz. for his bodily want, seing he had armed them for that before, & told them that it should beIoh. 16.7. better for them that he went, then to tarrie. Where­by they should receyue a greater comfort then his bodilie presence could yeelde them. And lastlie, hee had thoroughlieIoh. 17.1. &c. commended them to the protection of his Father, that it may seeme altogeather vnseasonable novve, in an other more waightie busines to bee thus disquieted with this care. There is no reason or like­lyhood for it. Obiection. Sometyme they thinke, it maye signifie compassion for his Countrie-men the Iewes: who did now to him, they knew not vvhat, and vvere shortlie after [Page 68]to be all vtterly rooted out and destroy for slaying the Lord of glory. Answere. This is no l [...] but rather more fond & absurd, then [...] other. For though hee had no doubt; wayes a moste tender compassion euen [...] ­wards his enemies, and specially towa [...] his whole natiō, yet that [me] here thou [...] signifie my whole nation there is no sense reason in it. Neither had hee forgotten that care perticularly inMath. 23 37 another place as it were wholy appointed for it, when hee most tenderly wept about it: but nei­ther there, nor any where complayned [...] God why hee would now cast of his pe [...] ­ple, seeing he knewe perfectly Gods w [...] in this poinct, that it should be so.

Lastly they thinke those words are [...] expresse Christes sorrow for our sinning Let vs see:Obiection. how could Christ conceiue due sorrow for our sinning but by measuring it by the wrath of God against sinne?Answere. If he thus measured his sorrowe, then hee mu [...] know exactly Gods wrath due to sinne, [...] due to sinne, then due to himselfe, for h [...] was made sinne for vs. And so hee could no [...] conceaue due sorrowe for our sinnes, but he must knowe, and feele it, proceeding from the wrath of God for sinne vpon him. And such a sorrow indeed of a bro­ken and contrarie hart is the onely true and perfectly accepted sacrifice to God: and in effect it is nothing but what wee affirme. If they meane nothing els but a religious [Page 69]and voluntary griefe in Christ arising at the cogitation of our secure and wanton sinning, without any feeling in himselfe of Gods iust wrath due to the same, which might bee as it were a zeale in Christ and nothing els, then certenly this pertaineth nothing to the sacrifice of Christs passion, which he hath heere in hand, but only to the other parte his morall obedience and ful­filling the righteousnes of the lawe in af­fection of minde, aswel as in action of bo­die. So that this ought not to haue any place heere: seeing questionlesse these wordes my God my God, why hast thou forsaken me, doe directly and immediatly expresse some notable parte of his passion and not of his righteousnes and holy minde. Againe how could these words hange togeather, when he meaneth to tell his Father howe zealous he is for his glory to say my God my God, why hast thou forsaken me. Surely there is no fashion in them, thus signifying.

Therefore it resteth they must needs sig­nifie simply and plainly (as they doe) that nowe Christ felt him selfe forsaken in the bearing of his intollerable sorrowes for sinne: that is not succored at this instant by the comfortable assistance of his God­head, which of purpose withheld it selfe for a season in his passion, that hee might: throughly accomplish this perfit sacrifice answerable to the seuere iustice of God, which thereby he turned away from vs.

Obiection. Neither let anie saye, This forsaking [...] not be without Gods hatred, and separa [...] from God.Answere. It may verie easilie: As a te [...] ­der and most louing Father will someti­mes sharpelie punish his childe, and sh [...] nothing but a bitter countenance to h [...] and so hide his loue that there shall ap­peare to the child no token of fauor, n [...] good wil, and yet in deede he neuer me [...] ­neth to cast away his childe, but in d [...] time wil cherish him againe. Euen so w [...] it betweene Christ and his Father. Which his Manhood was not able to endure, [...] therefore euen by a meere naturall desi [...] prayed that it might cease; and p [...]tious [...]: complained when it ceased not. I say [...] a meere naturall desire, not sinfull: Because when his minde was astonished at the fu [...] ­ous violence of this vnspeakeable ho [...] ­rour, then in the instant he leaned to na­tures instinst, desiring (without sinne) rest, and being to it selfe, and not destruction. The like also was his feare before in the Garden, and in theIoh. 12.27. foretast of his passion. This was, I saye, a naturall feare, not a reli­gious feare, nor a mistrustfull feare, no [...] damned feare, but properly a very natural feare, which well may be vvithout sinne, as is aforesaid.Obiection. Nay the scripture denieth thisAct. 2.25. out of Psal. 16 18. feare in Christ, as some thinke. I be­helde the Lorde alwayes before mee, for he is at my right hande that I should not stagger, or be shaken. Heere it is expressie saide, Christ did not [Page 71]so much as shake or stagger, no not at anie time. Therefore he had no such doubtfull feare, or fearfull doubting when his pas­sion appo [...]hed: neither in deede could it be without some diminution of faith, pa­tience, and obedience in Christ, whiche God forbid. In deede God forbid that: Farre be it from vs to think any the least diminution in Christ of his faith, pati­ence or obedience to God. Answer. But I saye a­gaine, there are two kindes of shakinge and wauering: either in trust and confidence of Gods loue and protection towardes him: Herein we affirme Christ was not touched. Another shaking there is meere naturall, a confounding of the powers of the minde and the senses of the body: with a naturall effect following thereon, that is, abhorring of payne, speciallie be­ing furious and extreame. This was in Christ in asmuch as he had true nature, & was passible like vs. I say, thus the powers of nature in him might bee confounded, when an infinite burthen of sorrowe lay vpon him, and his memorie might be di­sturbed, and then nature desiring and wi­shing suddenlie ease and rest, hee might suddenlie vtter somewhat, which els rea­son in him would haue controuled: whi­che quicklie it did agayne, we see in say­ing: Yet not my will, but thine bee done, as it were, suddenlie comming to him selfe a­gayne. If yet anie stande vppon this, [Page 72] Obiection. That he behold the Lorde alwayes, not sometime only or for the most parte, but always before him, and therefore could neuer be so asto­nished. It is ridiculous to stretch that al­wayes so farre:Answer. it being meant, that Christ neuer lost his confidence in God. Whi [...] they doe not, who by some violence are striken into astonishement, or naturally fall on sleepe. Their faith, patience, loue obedience, decreaseth not in them for a [...] that. Euen so, neither in Christ, his assu­rance in God, could neuer decay: albeit his sinlesse nature might and did feare the paine, & being astonished with excessive paine might and did suddēly desire case. Obiection. But this is great curiositie, yea presump­tion to affirme what Christ nowe feared, and what he felt: as if one should take v­pon him to tell what Moses and Elias said to Christ in his transsiguration.Answer. Surely, yea, it is curiositie alike in deed. For when Luke telleth vs, we may presume to tell it againe,Luk. 9.31. and affirme what it was. * They spake of his departure which he should accomplishe at Ie­rusalem. Elegon ten ex­od [...]n autou hen emelle pleroun en Hierusalem Euen so when all the Euangelistes tell vs by Christes owne wordes what hee feared, and what he felt, we may well pre­sume to assirme it. Mathewe and Luke tell vs, that it was to drinke of his Fathers Cuppe, which he feared, & in fearing felt: yea fur­ther it isMath 27.46 expressed that God forsooke him. Marke and Iohn doe call it an hower. What is that hower, but this hisAnd there­fore knowen to himselfe. appointed suffe­ring [Page 73]for sinne? This was it then, without all question, that draue him into these his most wonderfull and pitious agonies, feares, sorrowes, miseries, outcryes, teares, astonishment, forgetfulnes, and confusion of the powers of nature, as before is declared out of the verie Scripture. Therefore this Cuppe, and this hower, this forsaking of God, can not bee only a bodily death, but a more intollerable suffering that so afflicted him, euen the verie sense of the wrath of GOD due to our sinnes which he susteyned. And this we neede not feare to say. And so much for theSee pag. 4 [...]. second argument, out of these wor­des, des, touching his fearing and shunning his passion in such sorte, as we see he did.

An other Argument is taken hence also: Because he was heard in his suffering, whi­che 3 he feared, and was deliuered from it. But he was not deliuered from his bodilye death, but he felt it indeed: Neither was it the dominion of death which he feared: for he knew perfectly that he should rise againe. Therfore it was none of all these that heere is meant which hee fearing and feeling was deliuered from. But needes it was the sence of Gods curse for sinne and his wrath when he forsooke him, wherin he was heard, and deliuered out, as before is declared.

I know the contrarie is vrged euen from this place thus.Obiection. That wherin he was heard and deliuered from by prayer, he seared, but [Page 74]felt not. But Christ was heard and deliue­red by prayer from the wrath which he feared.Answer. Therfore he felt it not. Nay euen therefore he felt it. We denie therefore the first proposition. For he was in some sen [...] of it, when he prayed against it and wa [...] heard: he had thē some foretastes, but th [...] extremitie came after, which he before feared. And finally he being in al this, wa [...] heard (as theEisakoustheis Also Luk. 22.44. very worde seemeth to im­port) and deliuered from it, that is at least not before he had felt it. Againe the very fearing of Gods wrath is a true feeling, To feare Gods [...]ath is indeed to feele it in parte. I saye not a full feeling, but a true feeling. But it is graunted that nowe in this Agome he [...] feared the wrath of God: Therefore he [...] truelie felt it. Therefore the quaestion [...] graunted.

Obiection. Here theRhem. Test. Annot at. in Hebr. 5.7. Papists doe denie our trans­lation, not yeelding that we should readeApo tes eu­laheias. from [his] feara. Answer. But let them also consider that this verie worde not only in other Authours, but in theAct. 23.10. Scripture, is vsed for aSulahetheis. perplexed feare. Also the Greeke Praeposition apo signified naturally from o [...] Out of, as we turne it. Finallie the circum­staunces of this text are most sutable to this meaning, viz. to set out Christes sor­rowes and feares in his passion. Therfore our translation is true and sounde. But as I sayde, this is not nowe called in questi­on among our selues.

Other Obiections are lett fall, as this: Obiection. The sufferinge of Hell tormentes, is not meritorious:Ezec. 33.11. † neither is GOD pleased with any mans death. Answer. Therefore Christ suffred no such torments. This is as good against his bodily paines. Bodily paynes simplie merit not, neither doeth God sim­plie delite in his creatures bodily death. But God is delighted with the execution of iustice both on our bodyes and soules. And further, Christs sufferings are not as the sufferings of other creatures. All that he suffered was truely and properlie me­ritorious, yea his sufferinge of Hellish tor­ments proceeding from the wrath of his iust Father. No other creatures such suf­fering can be, but his was infinitelie me­ritorious, because of the infinite excellency of his Godhead, being one person with his manhood. Thus farre hereof.

6 Now to goe on: I proue these suffrings of Christ further in these wordes:Heb. 2.14. Tho­rough death he abolished him that had the power of death, that is the Diuell. I say, If this death here spoken of bee speciallie the death of the soule, then Christ suffered the death of his soule, whereby hee destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the Diuell. But death heere is speciallie taken for the death of the soule: Therefore Christ suffered the death of his soule, that is the wrath of God. This reason will seeme altogeather vnreasonable, and harshe in the eares [Page 76]of some, to say the least of it. But let then soberly consider it, and it is most true a [...] euident. First we meane not that his so [...] was mortall and perished, or came to no­thing, as the soules of beastes doe, such▪ death is not meant, when wee spe [...]ke [...] the soules death: But the death which so [...] ­les immortall can suffer. Note therefo [...] the bodily death is taken two wayes, [...] accordinglie theThe Soules death of a furles. soules death is take [...] wayes also. First, death strictlie, and pro­perlie taken, is the verie separation of the soule from the body: and so the soules death is the separation of Gods fauour [...] grace from it. Thus Christes soule [...] not: it were impious in deede, and [...] phemous so to say, yea it was imp [...]stice so to be. But besides this sense, death is of­ten vsed otherwise, as when we saye, lie [...] suffered a bitter death, a painfull death, wee meane not now the verie separation wh [...] ­che is death in deed. For death in deede [...]s sensselesse, quiet, and without paine: the body beeing dead in deede hath no more griefe: What then is this bitter death payne­full death? Surelie it is the feelinge of the paines and pangs of death, which do pro­cure and bring on, and foreshewe death insuing. Yea men liuing being surprised with grieuous sorrowes and paynes, vvill fayeTerent: Occi­di: porij: inte­ [...]ij. they dye, they perish, &c. And further, that is called death sometymes whiche is such a suffering of hurt and payne, as ma­keth [Page 77]a body seemeAct. 20.9.10 quite dead, and yet is not. So likewise the death of the soule sometimes may be vnderstood, and that most fitlie for the paynes and sufferinges of Gods wrath whiche alwayes accom­panie them that are separated from the grace and loue of God.Alwayes ordi­narily. Now this death of the soule we affirmeExtraordi­narily. Christ suffered, that is, the wrath of God, and the horrour of his seuere iustice, like them who be separa­ted in deede from the grace and loue of God, yet him selfe neuer separated, but alwayes most intirelie beloued, as is be­fore declared.

Obiection. Some will say, death heere in this text may signifie Christes bodily death, wher­by he abolished the Diuell & all his power ouer vs.Answer. That can not be here seeing death being twice heere named, the latter with a referēce to the former, surelie this word death hath the same meaning in both pla­ces: verie fonde it were to take it here o­therwise. Nowe it is questionlesse in this latter place death signifieth the death of the soule, the tormentes and sorrowes of the damned, whiche are separated from the life of God: of which death the Diuell is saide to haue the power and execution, and we (in the next verse) to be in the feare of this death before our deliuerance. Ver. 15. There­fore in the former place death signifieth so too, euen the death of the soule, that is,What death of the soule Christ suffered. the tormentes and sorrowes due to the [Page 78]damned proceeding from the iustice are wrath of God: by which death Christ [...] deed abolished him that had the powe [...] of the same death, that is the Diuell.

7 Lastely in 1. Pet. 3.18. That Christ his suffering for vs wasThanat otheis [...]en sark [...] s [...]ôo­poietheis de tô pneumati. done to death vain flesh, but made aliue by the Spirite. In this pla [...] the Spirite signifieth the almighty Spirite God whereby, hee that was done to death w [...] made aliue againe, according to these Scr­pturs:2. Cor. 13.4. He was crucified concerning his infirmitie but liueth through the power of God, Act. 2.24. and When God raysed vp loosing the sorrowes of death, Rom. 1.3.4. and According to the sleshe hee was made of the seed [...] Dauid, but according to the Spirite by the re [...] ­rection from the dead hee was mightely made [...] nifest to bee the Sonne of God. And thus the Spirite heere in Peter also signifieth the Godhead, whereby Christ putt to death, was raised to life againe. Yet for al this some take Spirit heere to be Christes humane Soule, which certainly can not bee: seeing then Peter must say, He was made a liue either [...] his soule, or els by his soule. But both these are absurd, and most false, that Christ was made aliue either in his humane Soule, or by the same. Therefore the Spirite heere is his Deity, by the which after his death hee was made a liue indeede. Againe, when so­euer in Scripture the Fleshe and the Spi­rite are opposed togeather, the Spirite is neuer for a Humane Soule: and in Christ it is alwayes his Deitie. And then the [Page 79]Flesh also is alwayes Christes whole Hu­manitie: I say not his Body only, but his Soule also, euen his intire and whole hu­manitie. As also that word2. Cor. 13.4. Infirmitie be­fore noted, doth likewise signifie. From hence now it followeth, that Christs Soule also dyed and was crucified according to the death and crucifying. Which soules are subiect vnto and capable of, that is the feeling of Gods wrath, as I shewed a little before. I say the reason is, because not one parte of Christes manhood but both parts euen his whole and intire manhood is heere manifestly meant, where it is said, He was done to death, or made to dy in the Flesh. If yet there be any doubt against this sense, we shal haue fitter place afterward, in our next question to confirme it better.Obiection. Some o­ther friuolous obiections are made as Hell is not in this life, Therefore Christ suffe­red not Hell. Hell is the burning of Mate­rial sire, Christ suffered no materiall fire. Therefore Christ suffered not the paines of Hell. If Christ were in Hell, then holines, faith, patience, and all goodnes may be in Hell: But only the contrary is there. There­fore Christ suffered not the paines of Hell.

Answer. I answer firstPag. 33. as in the entrance I no­ted. If we speake of Hell in the vsuall and proper sense as it is the very sett place for the tormenting of the damned, or the verie estate and condition of the damned: So none of vs euer meant that Christ was [Page 80]there, or felt any thing therein. But vn [...]derstanding thereby the seuere wrath of G [...]due to sinne, which may well bee calle [...] Hell by comparison, seeing the sorrow [...] and horrors of Gods firie wrath are equ [...] to Hell: So wee affirme, Christ was in He [...] euen in this life, he suffered Hell for vs, [...] rather Hellish sorrows. Otherwise then [...] we neuer thought. Therefore it is grea [...] iniquitie, yea plaine sophistry to amplifie a [...]gainst vs, & to make this most holy tru [...] odious with the people, onely by the an [...] biguitie of the word Hell. Know therfor [...] Hell as we take it, (that is the sense of God [...] wrath) is euen in this life, found some­tyme. As Heauen is likewise, that is, some vnspeakeable foretaste of the insin [...] [...] prepared for the Godly hereafter: as1 Cor. 2.9.10 ap [...]peareth: The thinges which eye hath not seene, not eare hath heard, neither came into mans har [...], which God hath prepared for them that loue him, the same hath God reuealed vnto vs by his Spirit [...], for the Spirite teacheth all thinges, yea the deept things of God. Thus you see, as there is Hea­uen euen in this life in some measure: e­uen so there may bee Hell. Yea wee haue shewed itPag. 4.5. before in Iob and Ionah & Da­uid, &c. And as for the wicked, they many tymes finde it farre more intollerable, as only Cain for the rest, will serue to testi­fie. Oh saieth he,Gen. 4. my sinnes, that is my hor­ror for my sinnes, is heauier then I can beare.

Now, Christ I doubt not, as touching the [Page 81]vehemency of paine, was as sharply tou­ched euen as the reprobates themselues, yea if it may bee more extraordinarily, seing herevnto he was ordayned of God, and the Godhead as it were layed it vpon him, euen to the satisfactiō of his seuere iustice. Further as touching materiall sire in Hell what a toyish fable is that: then say aswell there is a materiall worme in the conscience that dyeth not, materiall b [...]m­slone and much wood which the fire burneth vpon: All which the Scripture affirmeth like as it doeth the sire. But who seeth not that the scriptures, as their vse is, do here vnder materiall and known things, teach vs inuisible and spirituall matters, which [...] their effects are like to them, euen as horrible and intollerable as they, and so most fitly resembled by them. And [...]ls I pray how may the Soules of the damned suffer by materiall sire seing they are Spirits, and therefore with them and sire materiall there can be no communion. But let it b [...] as it may be. The locall Hell of the dam­ned we speake not of, neither I trust shall we euer knowe it. And therefore conse­quentlie here is no preiuctice to the hea­uenlie vertues of Christ.

And thus there is nothing worth naming against the sufferings of Christ to be equall to the verie Hellish torments in vehemen­cie of paine and sharpenes. The excellen­cie of which most Christian doctrine may be [Page 82]further noted by these consequences.

1 First it were a mightie terrifying of and a strong pulbacke from suffering martyrdome for Christes trueth.Christian rea­sons according to Godlynesse, which require also that Christ should suffer the wrath of God. See [...] by the storie of his passion in the Gosp [...] there appeareth no such barbarous a [...] exquisite tormentes ins [...]icted on Chri [...] bodye when hee suffered for me, as no [...] my furious and beastlie aduersaties, a [...] like to inuent and inslict on me for h [...] Also if he, feeling nothing but body smart, yet was so dismayed and so [...] full, yea so confounded as it were [...]ing howe shall I, most weake wretch, hope [...] susteyne and suffer victoriouslie the [...] dreadfull torments inuented for me, yea [...] know not whether Sathan peraduentu [...] withal will conflict with my cos [...]ien [...] the middest of myne intollerable paine [...] which if Christ tasted not of, how shall wretch, be so venturous, as to put my [...] into them, and hope to out stande them And so by this meanes what couragious Christian, entering into these thoughts, would not vtterlie shrink, & cease to suf­fer for Christ. 2 Further, we could not so well haue knowne howe extreamelie the Lord hateth and punisheth sin, as now he sheweth vs. Seeing his own Sonne could not scape, but in that hee would deriue our sinns from vs to him self, euen there­fore he should smart for it in the highest degree: and the Fathers iustice should be [Page 83]as seuere on him, as on anie reprobate. But if it were not so, then it might come into our mindes, the Lorde can and will qualifie his iustice where he loues: & then he may pittie mee, and so manie insinite thousandes mo, who all of vs euen of na­ture cōmit sins, yet are his own creatures.

3 Againe, hereby his victorie & triumph ouer sinne & death, is infinitely the more glorious, in hauing suffered first, such ex­treame humiliation, rather then if he [...]ad had but a light & easie combat. 4 Also the exceeding loue of God towardes vs is the notablier set out. For the more he deba­sed & punished his owne most deare Sōne for vs, the more wonderfully & vnspeak­ablie he loued vs. 5 Lastlie, heerein a farre greater comfort and assurance remaineth for vs, considering what great thinges he hath done and suffered for our sakes, ra­ther then if he had endured none such. For thus we neede not feare that any [...]o [...]t can nowe remavne vnpayd by Christ, but we are assured that all is finished, and that no whit shall henceforth be layed to our charge, being by his grace acquired from such extremities.

Nowe whereas some saye,Obiection. The little­nes of Christes suffering doeth more sett out the power and vertue thereof, when as onlie by his bodye, both our Soules and Bodyes are fullie ransomed: that is so much with so little. [Page 84]I answere, it is nothing so: for then th [...] might more haue appeared, if only he [...] had shed a drop or two of his blood, a [...] not so much, and had felt a stripe or tw [...] and not so many woundes, and but so [...] one crosse and that for a short while, bu [...] not a lise of miseries, & a death of inco [...] parable sorrows, as the wisedome of Go [...] appointed that he should and he did su [...]fer. Therefore this reason is but vanitie, and all such like against our assertion.

And hitherto it sufficeth to haue taught from the Scriptures That Christ suffered s [...] vs both in his soule and hody the wrath of God a Hellish torments, to ransome vs from the same.

Obiection. Now because it is stoutly said that the contrarie hath alwayes bene beleeued in the Church, and our opinion neuer known this 1400. yeares, It shall not be amisse to confute this notorious vntruth by the testimony of Godly men in sundry ages since. Answere. First taking this by the way, that if they they somewhere seeme variable herein,Note. they doe but shew what they are, that is indeed no [...] fit to be brought as the vmpieres of causes in controuersie, no [...] iudges of the Scriptures sense, howsoeuer yet they are proffitable to helpe vs in the way, if we leane not to them wholy, no [...] yet despise them wholy. Note. Noting this withall, that it is no meruayle if this do­ctrine were not so plainly vttered nor so fully set downe in former times, as nowe [Page 85]of late it hath bin, because we neuer sinde it to haue bin directly in questiō, as lately we haue seene it to bee. And therefore in these later times doubtles it hath bin bet­ter sifted, and more persitlie taught, then euer heeretofore since the Apostles age.

Testimonies of the Anciens Writers.Howe so euer it be, thus saiethCom. in Is [...]. cap. 53. Ierom: Quod (maledictum) nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere, ille pro nobis passus est, pacifi­cans, &c. The same (Curse) he suffered for vs, which we should haue borne for our owne sinnes.

Do Pastio [...] Cyprian: Dicendo. Quare derelictus sum indi­eat anxietates illius quarimonie verba esse deli­ctorum suorum, quorum personam & causam assumpsit. Per Mosen & Apostolum sustinuit vo­cari Peccatum & Maledictum, pro similitudi­ne poenae, non culpae: quod pro eis voluit intelli­gi, qui deseri à Deo propter peccata meruerant. In saying, Why hast thou forsaken me, hee sheweth the sorrowes of that his complayning to be the wordes of his sinnes, whose person and cate he tooke vpon him. He was content to be called by Moses and the Apostle, Sinne and a Curse, because of the likenes of the punishment, not of the fault. And this he would haue vs to knowe that it was for them, or in their steede, who by reason of their sinnes, de­ferued to be forsaken of God.

Com. in Lu [...]. [...]. D [...] tristi [...]. dolor. &c. Ambrose: Ego autem non solum excusandum non puto, sed etiam nusquam magis p [...]etatem e [...]tis maiestatem (que) demiror. Minus enim cotulerat mi­hi, nisimeum susceyisset assectum. Ergo pro me do­lui [...] qui pro se nihil habuit quod doleret: Et seque­strata [...] delectatione Diusnitatis aternae, taedio meae infimitatis afficitur. Moerorem animae nostrae, suae animae maeroie aboleuit. I doe esteeme Christ (in this his suffering) not only not to be excused, but also in deed I doe no where more admire his gracious loue and his Maie­stie. [Page 86]For he had done lesse for me, if he had notOr, taken on him my affe­ctions. b [...] affected as I should haue bene. Therefore he sorrowed me, as hauing nothing to be grieued at for him selfe. A the love of his eternall Godhead being sett a side, hee [...]o [...]bled with the tediousnes of my infirmitie. Hee [...] shed the sorrowe of our soule by the sorrowe of his so [...]

AndIn Cap 23. de cōmendatione Spiritûs, &c. againe, Deus, Deus meus quare [...] liquisti me? Clamanuit hoxio Diuinitatis sep [...] ratione moriturus. O God, my God, why hast [...] forsaken me? The Man Christ did crye, his Go [...]thea [...] departed away, & he about to dye. He meaneth [...] Godhead was departed frō him, not vuerly indeed, [...] touching any comfort or strength that he selt of it the, when he was left in his most gricuous sorroves.

AgaineDe incarna­tionis Sacramento. Cap. 6. he saieth, Hoc in se obtulit Chr [...] ­stus, quodinduit: Et induit quod ante non habu [...] Christ offered that in sacrifice which he assumed & he [...] med all that, which before he had not. That is to sa [...] his Soule was offered as a sacrifice, and not his body only.

Tertullian likewise saith,Contra Prax­cam. Quid de esto qua­ris? Habes ipsum exclamantem in passione, De [...]meus, Deus m [...]us, vt quid me dereliquisti? Em Filius pat [...]ebatur à Patre derelistus: haec vox ca [...] ­nis & animae, id est Hominis, non Sermonis n [...] Spiritûs est. What inquire you of him? You hearch [...] crying out in his passion, My God, my God, why hast th [...] forsaken me? The Sonne therfore suffered, being forsake [...] of his Father: but this is meant of the Flesh and of the Soul, that is, of the Manhood, not of the Godhead. If any bo­iect, that which followeth, Relinqui à Patre, morisail Filio. This forsaking of the Father, is but that the Sonr [...] dyed. Hee meaneth heere that death which was awarded for sinn: that is, both of the Soule and Flesh.

Derectifid. ad Theodos. Cyrill also, Carnem quidem suam in redem­ptionis precium pro carne omnium impendens, & animam suam similiter ꝓ omnium animâ redem­ptionis precium constituens. He bestowed his Flesh as a ransome for our flesh: likewise he made his Soule a price of redemption for our Soules.

Thus much haue we of the ancient Wri­ters, and much more no doubt, as they know who are better conuersant in them [...]hen my selfe. Howbeit this sufficeth to [...]hewe that they held, Christ to haue suffered properly in his Soule for our sinnes, and that his Soule was made an Offering and price of redempti­on, & not his flesh only. Yea that his Soule [...]elt the separatio of the Godhead in his person, and that he withdrew at that time all com­fort from the same, and so susteyned the same Curse, the like punishmēt, which we should haue done. Wherfore surelie the ancient times since the Apostles haue also known and taught and beleeued euen that which we teache, and beleeue in this behalfe. There are also some of the modestestCusanus in Ps. 30. Perus in Ma [...]. [...]6. Pa­pistes that here doe ioine with vs likewise. But to come to the Protestant Writers, lett this be chieflic noted: Note. I doe not say some of them, or the most, or the best, but all & euery one both Churches and Waters in the world, who are Protestantes, teache as we do. Neuer was there any voyce heard any where openly to the cōtrarie, before nowe in Lōdon ofAnno 1597. late. Except only the whotest and cunningest Papistes, Iesuists, Priestes, and Fryars, who in deed alwayes vntil this day, haue had this controuersie with all Protestantes, & all Protestants against them. AsTom. 1. Con. 2. L [...]b. 4. cap. 8 Bellarmine, &Rat. 8. Campian, prin­cipall Iesuites, doe testifie,De Christo Patient. Dia­log. 5. Feuardentu [...] the Fryar, and ourAnnotat. in Mat. 27.46. Heb. [...].7. Rhemish Seminarie Priestes [Page 88]In whom, and specially in Bellarmine and Feu ardentius we finde the very argument and reasons, or rather the silly sophismes which it hath pleased some among vs to gather togither, & to paint thē with faire colours, and to scatter them in England as precious stuffe. Now lastly if we look: to our selues in England, al our worthy Prea­chers & Writers hitherto haue bin cleare contrary always MrAnswere to the Rhem. Te­stam. in Mat. 27 46. and Heb. 5.7. Fulk in his answer to y^e Rhemists: Lectur. in Hebr. Mr Deering, whose name is stil reuerend in London: Mr Whitakers, a noble light in our Churches of late,Contr. Durae. pag. 558. saith thus: Erat Deus nobis propter peccatū [...]ratisumus, Chri­stus se interposuit, cius (que)irae vim omnem in se vnum effusam sustinuit. Qui ergo Christam nihil huius­modi) sensisse putat, & peccati magnitudinem & Dei iustitiam, & Christi meritum [...]lli [...]. Quod non fuerit absorptus. Deitati tribuendum est God was most wrathfull with vs for sinne: Christ put him [...]-tweene, and susteyned all alone the whole vehemēcie of his wrath poured vpon him. He therefore that thinketh Christ felt not (any such thine) doeth take away the grieuousnes of sinne, the iustice of God, & the merit of Christ. It was be­cause of his Godheads assistance, that he was not ouerwhel­med and swallowed vp quite.

And besides these, many other most ex­cellent men, and namely Mr Nowell in hisOn the arti­cle of the Creed He descended into Hell. Catechisme is so pregnant in this point, as no mā liuing is more. This Catechisme is authorised in a wholeSyn. Lond. Anno 1578. Synode, and com­manded to be taught to all our youth in England. Also our greatAnnotat. in Luke 22.44. Bible appointed by Authority to be read in publike Chur­ches expreslie saieth as much. Is not this [Page 89]now our English Churches expresse & cōstant doctrine, it beeing neuer repealed since? Yes verily. Cōsidering also that the nowIn the Ad­monit. to the people of Engl. pag. 66. Archishop of Canterbury with 3. other great Bb. haue expresly giuen it this allowance. Howsoeuer of late he hath by his lettersAs it is cor­tainly reported allowed Mr Bilsons cōtrary doctrine that it might be printed, albeit yet it proceded not. To conclude, I will adde now finallie the consent not of one or two, nor of our Churches in England simply, but of our publike Lawes of the Realme, that it may throughly appeare our doctrine to be the publike authorized doctrine of England. The booke of Homilies, established byEliz. An. 13 cap. 12. Act of Parliament hath thus:Homil. 1. of the Passion. In the begin­ning of the Homil, of the Passion, or pre­sently after, setting down certaine partes & degrees of Christs passion, first how he deli­uered him self of his heauēly glorie, and de­based him self to the condition of a man, yea of such a man as was subiect to many infirmities & disgraces, by & by he cōmeth to his death on the Crosse, as the last and greatest part of his suffring The which he expresseth thus, He put him self betweene Gods deserued wrath & our sinne. Where thisEuen as also M. Whitak: vseth this phrase pag. 11. putting him self betweene Gods deserued wrath & our sinn being expresly made a part and degree of Christs suffring for vs, it followeth that the Homelie expresly teacheth Christ suffered the wrath of God for vs as a parte of his Passion & price of redemption. Againe it saith,Homil. 2. of the Passion. He [Page 90]tooke vpon him the iust reward of sinne. Then reward is that which Gods law appo [...] against sinne: which is theGen. 2.17. death of [...] Soule (as it is called) in deede the fee of the fierce wrath of God, & not the [...] dily death only. Thus seeing also by Hom, sentence, Christ tooke vpon him th [...] reward of sinne: Surely the doctrine of [...] Churches publiklie allowed by Law [...] England, doth plainly auouch that Ch [...] suffred the wrath of God for vs. And [...] soeuer saith nay, he resisteth, yea h [...] prauethIn saying it is hereticall, im­pious, and blas­phemous. the doctrine of Christ authou [...] in Englande.

And here is it likely (Christian broth [...] that all the late holy men of God sho [...] hitherto vniversally erre, and only these pistes, their Iesuites, their. Fryars, & tra [...] ­terous Priestes, haue the trueth herein: gainst vs? In this so greate a light of the Gospel, as lately hath shined out of da [...] ­nes, and in this so waightie, & religious [...] cause? I say, is this likely by anie mean. Neither hath this point ben couered in [...] ­lence, but namely and particularly siste [...] and tried to the quick, and alwayes nou­bly approued & determined euery when against the Papistes. What iniurie then this to Gods Church, for one that profe­seth himself a friend, to agree with non: in such a case, but with the enimies there of? But let it be possible that all Protestant [...] hitherto haue herein erred, & now some [Page 91]one or two of them beginne to spy the trueth out of Bellarmine: I will not simply denie, but this is possible to be, although nothing more vnlikelie. Yet is this likely that only the authour of this cōceit with vs, a man of wealth, plenty, and worldlie honour, should haue this singular trueth reuealed vnto him, before all the rest of our most worthy laborers in Gods church this many yeares, who were certainlie, in all mens reason, farre likelier for diuers respects to discerne of the feelings of cō ­science, & of the wrath of God for sinne: & so consequentlie might he or they see better, how needful it was that the Sonne of God should tast thereof, or not, to free vs therfrom? Surely I must needes saye, to think him the likeliest of all other which haue gone before, and yet are, most singu­lar lightes, to finde out this doctrine for vs, that point verily I can neuer admit, al­beit I iudge him not, nor any man. Only I hope, I haue sufficientlie cleered this our first quaestion, and proued it by the Scrip­tures, that Christ hath suffered for vs the wrath of God to redeeme vs from it. The which I wholy submit to the iudgement of the Godly, desiring them only to consider, what I haue before written: which also most gladlie I doe in all other thinges, whatsoeuer hereafter I do, or shall write.

THis wee ought also in Christian fa [...] to beleeue, that Christ after his dea [...] on the crosse, went not into Hell in his sou [...] And heere because that article [...] our cōmon Creed wilbe obiected straigh [...] against vs, He descended into Hell, we will be Gods helpe firste make plaine this article according to Christian verity & the Sc [...] ­pturs sence: Secondly we will proue our assertion by the Worde, that Christ we [...] not into Hell after his death on the crosse. And first to say somewhat in generall of our common Creed vsually called the Apo­stles Creed: Tou [...]bing the common Creed called the A­postles Creede what we are to acknowledge. we acknowledge it to be an ex­cellent short summe of Christian faith: wherein are all the necessarie and chiefe heades of saluation comprised, and no­thing but is consonant to the Apostles doctrine, beeing taken aright. Also wee acknowledge it so ancient, as if the God­lie Christiaus gathered it not in the Apo­stles times, yet certenly, it was very soone after them. ForAd Trall: Ignatius runneth vpon the very articles of this Creede: Irenaus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, doe shewe like­wise that such a rule of faith was ancientlie [Page 93]knowne before their times. So that wee knowe it could not be mane very longe after the Apostles times: I meane if not this whole Creed as now it is, yet surely a great parte of it, and namely this article, He descended to Hades, whereof Ignatius in the foresaid place doth speake, & others most [...]uncient likewise. For we must know as the trueth is,The common Creede not made all at once. This Creede was made not all at once, but sundry articles were made and added, some after other as occasion required, til it came to this whole summe and fulnsse, which now it is at. For when by occasion of Heretikes arising and cal­ling in question anie maine poincte of faith, open error beganne to assaile the Church, then the Godly & carefull Chri­stians resisted and armed the people as they could against the danger, then they contriued some short article of faith to be learned and held generally and of the simplest, whereby as it were by one fami­liar word they might be prepared against the infection then spreading, & so might bee sufficiently grounded in the trueth. This appeareth to be so, not only by the practice of theIn Nie: C [...] ­stant: Sph [...]s: [...]. ancient Councels, who added to their Creeds words and article: directly against the Heretikes who then troubled thē, but euen in this also, called the Apostles Creed it must needs be so: Seing in the moste ancient recordes thereof, all the articles are not found full and whole, [Page 94]which after were added, but those onely whereof the Churches had need in thou former times.The Creede was not made by the Apostles And this is one sure proof [...] that this common Creede was not made indeed by the Apostles thē selues, because it appeareth (as I said) to haue ben gathe­red & made parte by part as the after oc­casiōs in y^e Church required. And though it were called the Apostles Creede, yet tha [...] verely was only because it agreeth with the Apostles doctrine. Neither could a [...] the Apostles cōmunicate togither in ma­king it: Some being presently dead after Christes ascension, and manie scattere [...] farre and wide in the world. And if some of them only made it, their names would haue bene recorded. Finally if it had but made by the Apostles in deede, then i [...] had bene Canonicall Scripture, as well as the newe Testament. But the Creed was neuer so iudged nor beleeued to be Ca­nonicall scripture. Therefore it was neu [...] beleeued of old, neither ought it nowe, to be the Apostles very making. And yet as I said, we knowe it to be most ancient, and very neere to the Apostles tymes: yea this very article of Christes descending to Hades. Because Ignatius speaketh of it, & others, as I haue aboue rehearsed.

Here then, let all men knowe, we denie not this Article of our Creede, but wee embrace it vnfainedly, and doe hold it to [Page 95]haue bene profitably added, when it was firste put into the Creede, when and by whom soeuer it was, so that the reason and meaninge thereof bee wiselie and rightly regarded.

no darke no obsewe nor dif­fioulte worde in the oulgare Creede.And further wee affirme, it hath no darke nor figuratiue meaning nor farre remoued from the vsuall phrase of the Greeke language wherin it was written, but it hath a plaine easie & vulgare sense familiar to the vnderstanding of all, that spake Greeke after the true language. note. Wherfore it is great iniury now to count vs Heretikes, as if wee denied an Article of our faith, for teaching thus much: as some more hastily then wisely haue pro­nounced.

But you will saye, What phrase, what meaning,For the right vnderstanding of this Arti­cle, it is neces­sarie to know what Hades in Greeke doeth properly signifie and what vse of speach is this that I speake of? Surely it is the proper & vsuall meaning of Hades in Greeke that I speake of: that I speciallie require to bee well knowne and regarded: that which in deed openeth the whole present contro­uersie of Christes descending. For this I affirme, it is only the Fathers abusiue spea king, and altering the vsuall and auncient sense of Hades, that hath bred this errour of Christes descending into Hell: their vnapt & perilous translating it into Latin Insers, & our naughty and corrupt translation in English Hell, hath cōfirmed the same.note. And note here this first: It is a thing too rife [Page 96]with the Fathers, yea with some of th [...] ancientest of them to alter and chaung [...] the authentike vse of words, whereby cō ­sequently it is easie for errours and gros [...] mistakings to creepe in. As Chirotonia [...] signifie Ordination of Ministers, when [...] signifieth authenticallie the Peoples g [...] ­uing of voyces in Election: Kleros to sig­nifie only the Clergie, whē 1. Pet. 5.3. it signifieth [...] the Flocke: Ecclesia to signifie a Diocese o [...] Prouince of Christians, whē it is alwayes i [...] Scripture a particular Church, or els in dee [...] the Vniuersall Church. So the Latines vse Mi­ritum to signifie good workes, which authen­tically signifieth merit or desert: Claues the Keyes, to signifie only Church-gouernement, when in Scripture it signifieth always the whole Ministeriall power and function, the worde, sacramentes, and prayer, as well a discipline. Euen so truely the Greeke Fa­thers vse Hades and the Latin Inferi, to sig­nifie Hell properly & patticularly, that is, the place of the Damned: or els an other particular place vnder the earth a part of Hell, and not farre from Hell it selfe, when Soules remayned if not in paynes yet in prison, and farre frō the place of eternall blessednes and ioye: which theThe dreame of Limbus Pa­trum. later Wri­ters haue since fondlie named Limbus Pa­trum. Thus I say haue the Fathers written and spoken, applying Hades and Inferos so particularlie to the place for Soules vn­der the earth, farre frō eternal blessednes. [Page 97]But this is a meere and a plaine abusiō of these wordes, and specially of our worde most in quaestion, that is Hades. They haue much altered and chāged the authentike and true vse thereof. The Classicall Wri­ters the Maisters of the Greeke tounge do vse Hades in proper sense only in generall for the state of the dead, The true and authentike and familiar sense of Hades. the world of the dead, the world of soules departed, indifferentlie and in­definitelie meaning as well those in eter­nall ioyes as those in paines. So that they signifie herein a generall opposition be­tweene the Liuing & the Dead, not a par­ticular opposition betwene the Damned and the Blessed. Examples hereof in the authentike greeke Authors are frequent. Plato the wise MaisterPlato in Phadons. saieth thus, spea­king in the person of Socrates, a litle before his death: He psyche arà, to aides, to eis toroūton topon heteron otchómeaon, gennaion, kai katharon, kai aidé, eis Hadou, hos alethós, parà ton agathō kaì phronimon Theon: h [...]t, an Theos ethele, antika kaì te heme psyche iteón. The soule being an inuisible thing goeth (hence) to another place like (to it selfe, that is to) a noble place, & pure, and inuisible, eueneis Hadon. vnto the Would of the dead, that is in trueth, to the good and wise God: whither if God will my soule must presentlie goe. This moste singular place sheweth that Hades with them is not properly for Hell, but for the World of the dead, & sometime, as name­lie here, euen for Heauen: and that so it is namedVVhy Hades doth naturally betoken the World of the Dead. Hades because it is a [...]les inuisible, or hidden frō our eye & sense in this world. We must note then, Socrates hopeth not [Page 98]heere to goe to Hell, but to Heauen present­ly after his death: and that is it that he calleth Hades. As againe hee affirmeth [...] onti esontai en hadou hai psychas hemón Our [...] after this life shalbee in Hades truely or in very [...] Again he saith of Heauē, that it is aides [...] hades, hósper légetas: an vnseene Estate, euen HadeNote, as it is commonly cal­led. as it is (cōmonly) called. Lastly he speaketh [...] ta en Hadou agatha, of the good thinges in Hade [...] there is little good in Hell. Wherefore it [...] plaine by Plato, Hades sometime may bee vnderstood of Heauen: yea and with the Grecians it was a common phrase. Like­wise Plutarch sheweth of Leonidas the Spar­tan King that most noble defendor of h [...]s Countrey,In Parall. when with a handfull of men he would resist the huge hostes of Persi [...] though he knewe well that himselfe and his were all like to be slaine, as they were in deed, yet hee cheered vppe his m [...]n not to feare such a blessed death, saying, we shall so breake our faste, that wee shall suppe i [...] Hades not in Hell, that were a colde com­fort, but amongst the blessed departed. So H [...] ­mer saith,Iliad. 1. many noble soules were sent aidi to Hades, not to Hell, but to the societie of the happy deceased. And Stephan Steph. The­saur. in Hades. citeth Plu­tarch peri tón eusebeón en Hadou. Concerning the Godlie departed, and beeing in Hades, that is in Hea­uen hee meant, I thinke, not in Hell. Therefore the authentike Authours of the Greeke tounge did vse Hades for the [Page 99]place of the blessed soules also, not pro­perlie for Hell, the place of the damned, although no man denyeth butAnd that al­so euen as well as it is taken for Heauen. For both wayes it is restrayned by a fi [...]u [...]e: viz. Sy [...]e [...]doche, the whole for the parte. some­time it serueth euen for Hell it selfe in deede.

This were enough to learned and rea­sonable men for the cleering of the true and proper sence of Hades in Greeke. But because I feare this question will not so quickelie ende, it shall serue very well for the better openinge of the sense of this Greeke worde, if wee compare the Latine worde Inferi therewith, which with them was vsed to signifie the same thinge as Hades in Greeke did, albeit in­deed Inferi was not so fit to expresse gene­rally both the blessed and damned dead indifferentlie, as anon God willing wee shall further see.

Nowe firste therefore lett vs compare and consider likewise the authentike and proper vse of Inferi the Latine as we haue done of Hades the Greeke worde.The authentike sense of Inferi. Inferi with the Latines is vsed authentically as we haue seene Hades is in Greeke, not for the damned only, but also for the blessed departed this life: indeed generally for the world of the dead, which by death are not cleane extinct but do liue somwhere els in another life. So; did Cicero meane,Tuscul. qu [...]st. 1. wher he sheweth in latin that incourag­ment of Leonidas before touched to his [Page 100]associates, that they should not feare to dye for their Countrey, Forti animo estu [...], nam coenabimus fortè apud inscros, Be of goo [...] cheere (saide he) for it is likely wee shal suppe, where? in Hell? Nay verily: Nei­ther Leonidas nor Tully thought so, but [...] ­ther in a place of eternall blessednesse, where they beleeued the most worthy de­fendours of their Countrey were recey­ued, as Socrates before saide of him selfe a­bout to dye, parà ton agathon kai phronima Theon, with the good and wise God. Yet this place he nameth here Inferos. Hence also it is that Cicero sayeth,In [...]rut [...]. It is an Oratours part, sometime Locupletassimos tefles ab in Inferis ex­citare, to rayse vp witnesses from the dead, not from H [...]. For he meaneth that which him selfe he did forIn Orat. pro Milon. Miloes defence, bringing the exāples of the worthy and blessed olde defendors of the common wealth, Hala Seruilius, Na­sica, Opimius, C. Marius, andEpist. ad Octa [...]. Olde Africanus, Maximus, Paulus, Scipto, and the twoo Dec [...] whiche woulde greeue at the Common Wealthes calamitie, whē any going vnto them in illam aeternam domum, should tel them of it. This eternall habitation of these most no­ble dead men called thus to witnesse, was notPhilip. 14. Hell in his iudgement, yet generailie he reckoned them to bee apud Inferos. For so thought and so spake these Heathens: as also Virgill doeth,Aeneid. 6. Deuenere locos laetos, &c. Where hee describeth Elysios campos their Heauen, the goodlie Elysian fieldes, the e­ternall [Page 101]habitation of the blessed to be apud Inferos, but not in Hell, whiche in our En­glishe tounge is properly the place of the damned only. Who surely though being a Poet, and fayned manie thinges, yet spake he familiarlie and after the vulgar vse, also for the substaunce of his matter, he vttered touchinge Heauen and Hell the opinion of the worlde then. Which also Hortentius commenting on the same place doeth shewe, saying: Veteres Elysium puta­runt in medio inferorum situm in quo piorum ani­mae quiescerēt. Philosophi in Insulis Fortunatis, &c. The auncient Heathen beleeued their Heauen to bee be­neath in the worlde of the dead, where the soules of the godly had rest. The Philosophers thought it to bee in the Fortunat Ilandes, &c. Heerevnto let vs adde, that the latter learned Writers, euen Chri­stians, haue also espyed and graunted this propertie of the Latine worde Infernum or inferi, as also of the Greeke Hades. In Ose. 13.1 [...]. Ierome saith, Infernus is a place where the soules are inclu­ded either in rest or paynes. The old Latin Trās­lator vseth infernū not only for Hades but also forActes 2.24. Thanatos death, also1. Cor. 15.55. Mors for Hades: So he esteemeth Hades and Infernum (both theis words) for very Death.In Mat. 2 [...] 50. Bucer, Nō al [...] ­ter vspiam Scriptura de inferno loquitur quā vt sit communis omnibus tam sanctis quam impijs. Ge­henna autem solis impijs tribuitur. The scripture no where speaketh of Hades or Infernum but as beeing com­mon as well to the blessed as to the damned. But Gehenna is proper only for the damned.In Ezec. 3 [...].1 [...]. Lauater saith, Hades apud Greces generale vocabulū est. Hades in Greeke [Page 102]is a generall worde for the condition of the dead both i [...] tormentes and in peace.D [...]ad. 1.7 Bullinger, To goe ad infe­ros, is To goe into Abrahams bosome: that is into He [...] ­uen, not into Hell.In Esa. 33. Zwinglius, Port a inferorum es [...] periphrasis mortendi. The gates of Death is nothing els but a phrase signifying Death.In Psal. 16.10. Moller touching Sheol, Hades, and Infernum, sayeth, they doe but signifie that Christ dyed. As if hee should say, Ideo latatus sum quia futurums [...]n, vt quanquam mortēdum mibi sit, tamen in vuan redeam. Therefore I reioyce because I knowe, that al­though I dye, yet I shall ryse to life agayue.In Symb. Pe. Mart. Christum descendere ad inferos nibil aliud indicat, nisi quod cundem subijt statum quem reliqua ani­mae à corpore sejunctae experjuntur. That Christ desc [...] ­ded to the dead signifieth nothing els, but that de did u­dergoe the same state as other soules doe y^t depart this life. Thus comparing the Latine Inferos, & the Greek Hades togither, we see that the an­cient and late Authours doe signifie by them both the generall state of the dead, the world of the dead, conteyning Heauen for the blessed, as well as Hell for the wicked in­differentlie.Obiection. Nowe if any maruell at this, and thinke it straunge that Hades signi­fying a darke place, and Inferi a place be­neath the earth or in the earth, that these wordes I say should any way signifie Hea­uen, and the blessed soules there. Seeinge all wise men would rather think that this is rather Hell, where is vtter darknesse: as for Heauen it is certainly a place of glori­ous brightnes, & that on high, not down­wards. [Page 103]I aunswere:Answere. Here in deede is the verie occasion of all this error and of all the controuersie at this day about Christs going downe into Hell. I say the very mi­taking of these wordes is, and hath bene the cause of all this. As touching Hades al men graunt, it commeth of à the Greeke priuatiue, and eidò to see. But here is the er­rour: some men take it so as betokeninge impossibilitie for vt to see being there, by rea­son of darknes and ougly blacknes in that place: and thē this is likely to be nothing but Hell. Nay, they are deceyued that giue this reason of the Etymologie of Hades, if they giue it for the full, perfect, and generall Etymology, & as being euen with the naturall vse of the worde. Plato In Phaedon [...]. in the place aboue cited, who knew it better thē any of our Contraries, doth giue another and a better meaning of this Deriuation: Where alluding to hades he saith it is topos aides a place inuisible, a place which here in this worlde none can see, an inuisible world. And so the Worlde of the dead generally and not only Hell, is thereby properly and naturally noted. Which Tertullian Ap [...]l. [...].1 [...]. expresseth thus, à noti­tia orbis communis segregatum, remoued from the worldes knowledge. This is certainly the true Deriuation of Hades: and so it may right­lie, truelie, and by a natural emphasis sig­nifie Heauen sometime, if other Circum­stances there doe so require, and not [Page 104] Hell, as in the former authentike Greeke Testimonies by the very circumstances of the places I haue proued, and euen so also out of question it is taken inActes 2.27. the ground of our controuersie, and in the A. postles Creede, where it is said that Christ be [...] dead went to Hades, he went to the World of the dead, that is namelie to the blessed soules in Heauen: I say in Heauen, not that Hades [...] selfe doth so importe, but because he that dyed was a Blessed man. But some will say,Obiection. The reason of the deriuation of Hades from á priuatiue and eido, to see hath bene iudged otherwise, that is for a place wher in we can not see, and then it will followe that it should signifie a darke place. Answere. I denie not but sometime Hades may admit that rea­son of the Etymologie, and so the Poet allu­deth to it sine luce domus, a place without light. And thē it signifieth, first the Graue where is no light: and by a Metaphore frō hence it may be vsed for Hell, wher in reason we iudge also that there is ougly darknes, & no light. Thus I say no man doubteth but Hades sometime signifieth: but this is ne­uer vnles,Synecdoche. by a figure synecdoche the whole for the parte, the ful and iust sense there­of by some manifest circumstance be re­strayned. The full and iust sense is the generall state of the dead, the world of the dead, as before I haue shewed: so that it right­lie and properly noteth a difference be­twene the dead and the liuing, not betwene [Page 105]the damned & the blessed. And yet it is true this is somtime restrayned as I haue said, by the circumstances in the place where we find it: and then it is sometime for the place of the body being dead, sometime of the soule departed being in Hell: and sometime also for the place of soules in Heauen, as I haue declared before also. Note. So that aboue all things this is to be no­ted and to bee taken heede of, that wee restraine not this generall worde Hades, where it neede not to be restrayned: and moste of all that wee take it not for Hell, where it may, nay where it must signifie Heauen, as in the places of this our maine controuersie aforesaid.

It is easie to slip into errour by the vse of y^e Latin Inferi or Infernum in the Creede, vn­les we careful­lie consider the ancient vse thereof.Howbeit notwithstāding all this, com­pare the Latin Inferi with the Greek Hades, and then I graunt Inferi is proner to bring vs into errour then Hades. For it is true In­feri commeth of Infra which is beneath: and therfore it seemeth there is no other way but to take it for a place beneath the earth, or in the earth, and not on high, where it is to be thought that Heauen is & the bles­sed soules doe dwell. Note. All this is true in deed: yet let vs heedfullie note notwith­standing, that this worde Inferi in Latin vse doeth comprehend all that Hades in Greeke doeth: euen the whole state or World of the dead generally, makingBulling Dec. 1.7. opposition properlie betwene Superstites and Defunctos, the Liuing and the Dead (as before was saide of [Page 106] Hades) without difference of the bless [...] and damned, vnlesse also some other re [...] ­son and circumstance doe restrayne the words ancient & proper generalitie. The plaine reason of this, we may learne from Cicero him self, Saith heTuscul. g [...]ast. 1. That Inferi sh [...] signifie the state of al the dead both good and bad generallie, it grew of an error of the Auncients, in terram cadentibus corpu [...] bus his (que) humo tectis, sub terra consebant reliqu [...] vitam agi mortuorum. The old simple igno­rant Latines thought when the bodyes of m [...] were layed in the earth, their soules also liued the rest of their life vnder the earth. This they thought of all the dead, both the Blessed and the Damned. And this, sayeth hee they thought because they knewe not [...] deede of the soules of the dead qua in sede manerent, in what place they were after death: Cu [...] ignoratio saith he further, sinx [...]t Inseros, eas (que) formidines, &c. The ignorance of trueth herein, begin this opinion that the state and Worlde of the Dead was v [...] ­der the earth; vid particularly the terrours of Hell also. And so in deed not the opinion only, but the phrase also whereby they signified this general state and World of the Dead, was iustly & most fitlie, as they thought, from Infra beneath, viz. inferi and infernus And so they spake also excitare ab inferis, to rayse vp, not from Hell, but generally and in­differentlie from the Dead: migrare ad inferos to goe to the dead, common as well to those whom they beleeued to bee Blessed, as to the Damned. Also thus they beleeued E­lysios [Page 107]campos esse apud inferos, the Elysian fields [...] namely the Gentils Heauen) to bee be­ [...]eath amongst the dead: as alreadie I haue [...]hewed out of Virgil, Cicero, &c. Now Tully [...]urther sayth of this opinion, Quam corum [...]pinionem magni errores consecuts sunt: This opini­ [...]n gaue occasion of many and great errours.Touching In­feri in Cicero [...] things to bee noted. In all which wordes of Cicero I note 3. things. 1. That he vtterly misliked this opiniō of y^e [...]old Latines or whom soeuer, that thought [...] World of the dead was vnder the earth, and therfore gaue this terme Inferi to sig­nifie the same. This he openly misliketh, yea that the damned Soules were beneath in the earth, or at least such kinde of tor­ments for thē as consequently the former errour did cause many to imagine. Howe much more did hee condemne them that thought al y^e deceased soules were beneath, vnder, or in y^e earth? The blessed he thought rather, as Plato did, to ascēd vp to the hea­uens. Here we must note that the Heathē held diuersly of their Heauen, the place for the blessed soules.As Tertull. sheweth: in lib. de Anima. Some thought it in the Heauens aboue, some in the ayer, some in the Sphere of the moone, and others as be­fore we heard in the fortunate Ilandes, and many, specially the common sort, & most speciallie in the olde times long before, that it was an other Region vnder the earth, as Hell it selfe also was one, but this cleane distinct & remoued frō that which they calledTheir Heau [...]. Elysium, as before I obserued [Page 108]out of Virgill. This last opinion that the soules deceased were vnder the earth Ci [...] heere flatly reiecteth.2. I note in hi [...] that although he reiected this olde fab [...] ­lous opinion of the Latines, yet he [...]eray­ned the Latine phrase as being now cōmo [...] and familiar euery where, ad inferos, [...] inferos generally for the worlde of the de [...]. Which phrase arose of old from that opi­nion, as namely, thinking all the dead af­ter this life to be infra beneath. He had lear­ned to thinke wiselyer, but yet hee spake so as the vulgar phrase had preuailed. Ac­cording toTopic. Aristotles rule, Loquend [...] vt vulgut, sapiendum vt sapientes, we must speake as [...] custome is, but beleeue as the wise doe. So then yet this phrase of speech remayned cōmon, though the ground of it euen then was held fabulous of diuers.3. Tully saith, of this opinion followed manie errours. Nowe as hee saith from this opinion amongst the Heathen, Note. So I say, from this phrase of speech Inferi receaued amongst Christians, but first groūded on the heathnish opini­on, there hath followed many errors in the Church.The Fathers not duely consi­dering the right vse of Inferi & Hades, gaue occasion of the errours at this day about Hell and Death. For this worde Inferi beeing vsed amonst the Christians vulgarly and familiarly, but taken from the Heathen, and the reason thereof not duely consi­dered whence it first arose, namely that it was an error to thinke the soules of the dead were vnder the earth: likewise also the Greeke worde Hades, when men mi­stooke [Page 109]the Etymologie of it as meaning a [...]ark [...] place, whē rather it betokeneth a place [...]nuisible to vs heere, as before I haue shewed: [...] say both these mistakeings amongst the Fathers preuailing, haue geuen occasion both to them and vs since of greate and grieuous errors, & of all this contention [...]n the Church heere bout at this day. To remedy the which, doubtles the best way is well and throughly to consider the au­thentike vse of these words Hades & Inferi, in such sorte as before I haue declared. And then this will appeare that our En­glish word Hell which we commonly vse for the former Greeke and Latine,Hell in English no fit worde to expresse the Greeke Hades. it fit­teth not, it differeth greatly, it is much a­misse. And specially it serueth not for Hades, as before I haue shewed. For Hades signifieth an inuisible place, and is vsed au­thentically for the Worlde of the dead in ge­nerall, the inuisible World vnknowne to vs heere, So that it makes difference not betwene the damned and blessed, as some suppose, but betwene the dead and the liuing: but Hell in English is properly and onely the place of eternal torments for the wicked.

Thus hitherto by comparing also the Latine Inferi and the Greeke Hades togea­ther, we see now cleerly what the authen­tike vse of Hades is. And seeing we see it. I inferre & affirme boldly, Euen so doubt­lesse doe the Scripture, speake, so write the Apostles, yea the Septuagint Trans­lators, [Page 110]& allGood Gram­marians. good Grecians: they varie [...] not their language frō the vsual, know [...], currant speech which was spoken in ar [...] before their times. And if so they doe, then it remayneth concluded and firml [...] proued that the Scripturs by Hades mea [...] not Hell properly: but the World of the De [...] indifferently, or the general state of dea [...], or the Power of death, vnlesse sometime where special circumstāces do restraine [...] proper & natiue generality of that word. Obiection. But yet this is doubted stil by some, that denie flatlie the newe Testament to haue vsed Hades anie other way then only for Hell. Answere. These men, what should I saye to them? You haue heard that the naturall propertie of the word Hades, according to the vse of the authentike Authours, (by whom euen the Apostles wordes must be Grammaticallie construed, I suppose [...] plainlie refuteth them. Wherefore I con­stantlie affirme as before, the Scripture vseth Hades neuer properly for Hell. And this I affirme not onely because of the former authentike consent with mee a­bout the worde, but also because all the seuerall places, eight in number, where Hades is vsed in Scripture,The Scripture hath Hades in 8. places. beeing well considered, they shewe the same mani­festlie: also for that the Seauentie Inter­pretours doe vse it so too, and finally be­cause Sheol in Hebrewe, whiche all men [Page 111]know to be the same that the Greeke Ha­des is, signifieth likewise so too.

Mat. 16.18. 1 And firste that we may viewe the seue­rall places of Scripture, and so not be de­ceiued: Thus we read The gates of Hades [...]hall not preuayle against the Church. Hee spea­keth heere of persecution and suffering death for the faith of Christ. But sayeth [...]hee, This shall not preuayle against you: What? Death and Destrustion shall not. So that the gates of Hades heere are nothing [...]els but the gates of Death, the power of Death, shall neuer preuayle, though they assayle you. And this phrase seemes to bee ta­ken from the vse of the Iewes, who exe­cuted their seuere iudgementes of life and death in the gates of their Cities. Hence the phrase seemeth to come,Ny a. Meto­nymie. The gates of Death, for the power of those Ru­lers whiche shouldExcept wee esteeme it but as a simple He­braisme, as Isa. 38.10. VVhere the gates of Sheol is no­thing els but Death, or the power and strength of Death. condemne to death the godlie for their faith and a good con­science, and yet not preuayle. That wee should translate heere, the gates of Hell, meaning directlie vices, and sinnes, and er­roures, as some of the ancient Writers doe, the circumstances of the Text doe seeme not to beare it. For by occasion, as see­meth of thever. 21. former incouragmēt to his faithfull and godly ones, he falleth to tell them of his owne suffering at Ierusalem soone after, where though hee should be betrayed and slayne, yet shoulde hee [Page 112]rise againe the third day, as it were giuing them an example and that first of all in himselfe of that combate and victor [...] whichverse 18. before he promiseth them, & in­courageth them vnto. So then he doth not heere directlie and speciallie arme them, nor promiseth cōquest against the temptations of sinne, though by propor­tion that also followeth from this plac [...] but he encorageth his to stande to the [...] faith manfully against all persecutours, seeing all their rage should not preuaile, nor death it selfe which should bee ad [...]i­ged vnto them in the gates, albeit it afflict them. Againe the gates of Hades shall not pre­uaill, these words doe manifestly pretend force and violence against them, which yet should not get the victory ouer them. But errours and sinnes though by them Sathan set vpon vs, yet they alwayes pre­tend contentment and quiet case toward vs, not force and violence, as the rage of persecutors doth, & as heere in this text is plainly signified. Wherfore heere sure­lyZwing. in Isa. 38. & o­thers pag. 102. the gates of Hades meaneth the power of death and destruction & nothing els pro­perly. Neither also that the power of these Tyrantes should be called the gates of Hell doe I see any reason: their Power is from God, and not from Hell. Their malice moueth not Gods children, but only as it threatneth Death. Therfore to call it heere the gates of death it is good rea­son, [Page 113]& not the gates of Hell,That is, re­garding it as is in [...]eeds tou­cheth vs. as is aboue said. Howbeit if anie will vrge the com­mon translation, and say the gates of Hell, let him know this interpretation is receiued among the learned not for the proprietie of the word Hades, but forNamely, be­cause this ma­lice and [...]age of perse [...]tors pro­ceedeth from Hell, and is stirred up by all the power and might of Satan a circumstāce of the text heere requiring, it to be so trā ­slated, as they conceaue. And I confesse that so here it may be, and doe shew that thus this Hades is sometyme vsed: and namely in the last example following out of Luke Chap. 16.23. Yet properlie Hades is nothing els but the Vnseene Worlde of the Dead, not Hell. 2. Our present place cheif­lie in quaestion is to be noted.Act. 2.27. taken out of Psa. 16.10. Thou wilt not leaue my soule (in Hades) with the dead, or in the vnseene worlde of the dead: nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption. Our common translati­on hath it, Thou wilt not leaue my soule in the graue, &c which is not much amisse, consi­dering the scope of the Apostle and the maner of phrase both in Hebrue and in Greeke sometime, that is by a figure Synec­doche, the whole for the parte: as before I noted sometime it may bee. But seeing a figure heere needs not, the most plaine, & moste naturall, and familiar translation shuld be thus, as I haue no [...]ed: Thou wilt not leaue my soule amongst the dead, nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption. 1. That this is the natural and proper sense of Ha­des, we haue seene enough alreadie by the authentike Greeke writers.2. That the [Page 114] Seauentie vse it so to, after whose translati­on & phrase Peeter heere speaketh: and; that the Hebrue word Sheol which is [...] ori­ginall of this phrase hath the same sense likewise anon herafter we shall make ma­nifest, God willing. But to translate this Hell as some now wil haue it, that is open­lie wrong and iniurious to the text. And thus I proue it: FirstPsal. 16.10. Dauid speaketh it [...] some sorte as true ofBulling. De­cad. 1.7. him selfe, being a type and figure of Christ, whom in deede in more speciall wise it concerned. Again Peter in this point for the which he citeth this verse of the Psalme, Act. 2.39. doeth plainlie graunt all this of Dauid aswell as of Chr [...], sauing that Dauid was left therin euen t [...]l this day, which Christ was not. But this is only the state of death, and the graue whiche Dauid is yet left in, not Hell in any wise, yea he was neuer in Hell. Therefore Hades and Sheol here can not be for Hell. Second­lie, if it bee altogeather heere from the purpose of Peter to speake to the Iewes of Christes soule being in Hell, then there is no reason to take these wordes Hades and Sheol heere for Hell. But by theActes 2. whole text it is euident, Peter had no reason nor purpose to speake to these Iewes of Chri­stes Soule being in Hell. His vvhole direct purpose was to shewe them of his Soule being amongest the dead, and his body in the graue, like as other men are when they dy, [Page 115]and was from thence mightily raysed vp agayne, more then other men were or could bee. Therefore Hades and Sheol heere doe signifie the state of death, and not Hell. The firste proposition standeth on plaine and manifeste reason, speciallie seeing these are the very wordes that heeverse 31. presseth and standeth on, to shew them howe Christ beeing truely dead, was yet risen agayne. And as touching the assum­ption, that is most apparaunt, Peter had no reason in the worlde, and therefore no purpose to speake to these Iewes of Chri­stes Soule being in Hell. 1. They being in­credulous and vnbeleeuing.2. The thing beeing inuisible and straunge, and vncouth, not subiect to the sense, and without all example of the like.3. Hee intending nothing els in all this speech to them, but to teache that this IESVS whom they had slayne, was not nowe dead, but risen agayne, why should hee nowe speake of Hell: What reson had hee? If Christ had bene in Hell, it made not ne­cessarilie neither for his death, nor resurrec­tion, whiche was the onely scope of his speech (verse 31.) but being an vncouth and inuisible thing, it might rather hin­der their faith, then further it. There­fore verilie the state of death is all that Hades and Sheol doe heere signifie: and it is the whole and onely purpose of Peter heere so to testifie.

3 Rev. 6.8.3. One sitteth on a pale horse whose name [...] death, and Hades followed after him. That is, the worlde of the dead, Regnum mortucrum. If you referre it only to our bodyes, then it may be the graue. But rather I take it ge­nerally for the state of the dead after this life. It can not be Hell certēly: because the text addeth Power was giuen them to slaye with its sword, and with famine, and death, and with wilde beastes. Hell slayeth none in that sort. Again it is said, they had power, on the fourth parte of the worlde. But to say preciselie that the fourth parte of the worlde at any time should goe to Hell, I take it to be a strange phrase in the Scripture. In a worde this place is nothing els but a prophesie of great mortalitie that at a certen time should come vpon the world for the con­tempt of the Gospell, & that they should dye by such meanes as are there specifi­ed. Wherein Hell dealeth not, neither sheweth any power. Therefore Hades heere can not be Hell.

4 Rev. 20.14.4. Death and Hades, (that is the place or world of the dead, or the kingdome and power of death) were cast into Hell. It were absurde to saye, Death and Hell were cast into Hell: and therefore so we saye also in the verse be­fore, Death and the World of the Dead, rendred vp their dead to iudgment. 1. Cor. 15.55 5 5. O Death, where is thy victorie? O Hades, where is thy stinge? Nei­ther can this be meant of Helli because al his speech heere is of the resurrection from [Page 117] [...]he dead, and this very speech is anDeath [...] swallowed vp in victory. ver. [...]4. insul­ting & triumph, as it were, ouer Death & the power of Death: seeing they shall not be able to holde them, whom they shall gett into their power. As for Hell. that would not bee aduersarie to the resurrection, but would desire it rather, as being greedie of the bodyes also of the damned which th [...] ̄ it should haue togither with their soules, and not before. He speaketh not then of the damnation of the wicked, but of the Resurrection of the dead. Note also, hee doeth plainlie allude to that of the Pro­phetOse. 13.14. Ose Sheol, O graue, or O worlde of the dead, I wilbe thy destruction. Not o Hell: for the Prophet speaketh to comforte Israell in their captiuitie, where though they were for their rebellion against God de­stroyed grieuouslie a longe time, yet at length hee promiseth to staye his iudge­ments, & Death should not deuoure them anie more, it should not haue her former power vpon Gods people, but they shuld liue and florishe againe, if they repented. And this the Apostle might very fitlie al­lude vnto, when he spake of the resurresti­on, which might be notably compared to Israels returne out of theLacus. Zech. 9.11. pitt of miserie in Babilons Captiuitie. But of hell there could be no direct nor proper moaning, neither in th'one nor th'other.6 6. Rev. 1. [...]. I haue the Keyes of Hades and of Death: That is no­thing els but Christ, who was dead, hath [Page 116] [...] [Page 117] [...] [Page 118]nowe ouercome death, and hath power to dye no more. He hath ouercome death & hol­deth the power thereof for him selfe and others. For him selfe, in that hee can and will dye no more. For others, in that hee can giue to death whom he will, & whom he will he saueth. This therfore is a plain opposition to his former state when hee was in death, but nowe shalbe so no men: and nothing els, as the beginning of the verse hanging togither with this, doeth expresse. I liue, but was dead, and (nowe) be­holde I liue for euer, and I haue the Keyes of Hades and of Death. As if hee should saye: I am hencefoorth no more subiect, but superior therevnto. Heere is nothing of Hell.

7 7.Mat. 11.23. And thou Capernaum which art lift vp to the Heauen, shalt be brought downe to destruction, to Hades. He speaketh heere of the destru­ction of the Citie and people thereof, which he calleth Hades. And this is mani­fest: 1. By the notable Oppositiō of their lifting lifting vp to the heauen, and their brin­ging down to Hades. In the 1. he meaneth not that they were lift vp to eternall blessed­nes, but only that they were lift vp in re­nowne, in pompe, & in flourishing state, according as y^e Latins speak also ad sydera tolls, To be exalted to the skye. Wherefore in the later he meaneth they shalbe brought downe to destruction, to haue no being ingloriouslie: that is Hades heere in this place, but not Hell.2. This is also manifest in y^t he saieth [Page 119]presētly of Sodom, whervnto here he cōpa­reth Capernaū, if they had had the meanes of repētāce in such maner as Capernaū had, Sodom had remayned to this day. This sheweth he spake but of Capernaums destruction, & of her not being on the earth: and not of their damnation in hell by the word Hades.

8 8. This remayneth only,Luke 16.23. The rich man in Hades. in the state of Death, or in the world of the Dead, lif­ted vp his eyes being in torments: Thus I say we may trāslate it, in the world of the dead, or being amongst the dead, he lift vp his eyes, &c. And thē there is no text in all y^e Bible where Hades signifieth Hel necessarily. But if we graunt to say Hell in this place for Hades, yet we af­firme, this sense is giuē it for other circū ­stances, not for y^e nature of the word. Be­cause he was such a man, and because it is straight expressed he was in tormentes beeing dead. Therefore to be in Hades, to be in th [...] the World of the Dead, that was to him in deed to be in Hell As for Hell in the Scripture it hath another word Gehenna which proper­lie signifieth it. AsIust. Mart. Apol. 2. Iust. Martyr obserueth, he de Gehenna est i topos entha kolazesthai mellou si hoi adikos biosantes, Gehenna Hell is a place where the wicked shalbe [...]ormented. Wherby is insinua­ted that Hades is not properly Hell, which Gehenna is properly for. And thus M^r Bu­cer excellently obserueth not only in thatPag. 101. before cited, but also on Luk, in Luke. 16.26. Hades and Ge­hēna which in the Scripture is only for Hell, are not all one. Diues nō sim­pliciter scribitur esse en hade, sed & in Gehēnâ, quia in tormentis & slamma. The riche man is not saide to be simply in Hades, but also in Hell: because he is said to be in syry torments. [Page 120]Therefore Hades and Gehenna are not pro­perly all one: and whersoeuer Hades is for Hell, there it is taken by a figure synecdoche the whole for the parte, the inuisible state of the dead for that where the damned are in torments. Thus then Hades in scri­pture is no where properly for Hell.

The Septua­gints doe vse Hades after the sense of the authentike Greekes.Which also is further to be declared by the 70. Translatours. Whose wordes and phrases the Apostles themselues vsed and chiefly followed in all their allegationes from the old Testament. So that their v­sing of Greeke wordes and phrases must needs bee of greate authority. These put Hades generally after the authentike vse for Death, the state of the dead: asIob. 33.22. His soule draw­eth neere to the graue, and he zôe autou en hade. hs life is amonge the dead, or in the world of the dead. And parokese to Hade he psyke mou. Ps. 94. or af­ter the Greeke 93. ver. 17. My soule had dwelt in the world of the dead. In Hebrue it is Dumah i [...] scilence, that is in the estate of death. AgainePsal. 88.49. ouk hoi nekros amésous [...] se, oude hoi pantes kata­bainontes eis Hadou. The dead praise thee not, o Lord, nor any that goe doune to the state of the dead. Here also in Hebrue it is dumah to the place of silence. FurtherPsa. 111. or 113. ver. 17. what man liueth, and shall not see death, rusetai ten psychen autou ek chiros Hadou? shall he deliuer his Soule from the power of the Vnseene world, that is from death? Andpsa 78.3. My soule was filled with sorrowes, kai he zôe mou tô Hade engise, And my life drew neere vnto the Dead, or to the worlde of the Dead. And Iob saith,Iob. 17.13. Hades mou ho oskes: The World of the Dead shalbe my habitation. In all these places and in many other such like [Page 121]of the 70. Hades can not be hell: but the state or world of the dead. Finallie consider the Hebrue word Sheol: The Hebrue Sheol signifi­eth the Estate of death, or the World of death likewise, as hath bone se [...] in Hades. Al men will graūt that Sheol in Hebrue and Hades in Greeke, asPs. 1 [...].10. here they are vsed for the same thing, so in deed euery where els they are all one. That is out of question. But it is manifest in the Scripture that Sheol is generally v­sed for the state of the death, the worlde of the dead, and speciallie sometime for the soule, sometime for the body, sometime for the good, sometime for the bad, according as the circumstances doe imply: but alwayes for their state in death, and no further pro­perlie. And because it commeth of Shaal, Shaal. to craue or aske, it signifieth that this Worlde or state of the dead, though it takes infinite, yet itAbae. [...]. [...]. Kishol veea [...] ­maueth, velo i [...]shbahh. Also Pro. 30.16.27.20. still taketh, and is neuer satisfied. Nei­ther ought any man to doubt that Sheol hath this familiar, ordinarie, and natural signification, to note as I saide generallie the state of death. There are innumerable places of Scripture that doe euince it, and chieflie that it is not properlie Hell. Firste that where Iacob sayeth of Ioseph whom he thought to be dead,Sheol not for Hell properly, but for the ge­nerall estate of Death. Gen. 37.35. Ered el beni abel Sheolah, I will goe downe mourning vnto my sonne to the place of the dead. Questionles hee meant not into Hell, but into the place of the dead that were dead in the Lorde. Also Ezechia thought he should haue goneIsa. 38.1 [...] beshagnare Sheol, to the gates of death. He thought not that he should haue gone to Hell, but to the [Page 122] state of Death. Andverse 18. Lo sheol todhecha, The w [...] of the Dead doeth not consesse thee, Death can not pray [...] thee, They that goe downe to the pitt can not hope for up trueth. All this is meant not of the damned in Hell, but of them in the state of death. SoEcclesiastes 9 10. Bisheol is in the World of the dead, or in the state of Death: which the coherēce doth proue, which is betweneverse. 3. bammet him the dead, and this here. Againe,Iob 14.13. O that thou wouldest h [...] me in the World of the dead, hisheol: Iob would not desire to be in Hell: and he sayeth, the like shall come to him selfeChap. 17.13. Sheol beths My house shalbe the place of the, dead: and all my hopes of recouery in this world, shall goe downe with meverse 16. badde sheol to the [...] els, on the Beere to the graue. strong place of the world of the Dead. Howbeit Iob was not so faithlesse as to thinke he should goe to Hell. AgainHose 13.14. I will redeeme them m [...]d Sheol, from the power of Death: Sheol o Death, or o king­dome of Death I will bee thy destruction. This hath bin shewedPag. 117. before to be spokē directly & ꝓperly of the state of Death, or y^e power of Death, not of Hell. Which the olde Latin trāslator doth also welHose 13.14 obserue, who tur­neth [...]ijad Sheol. it à Morte frō Death: againHos. 13.14. both inserne &1. Cor. 15.55. o Mors, that is, o Death. Further let it be noted y^t in Dauid, whose phrasewe are now a skāning of, ther is no word almost more cōmon thenPsal. 89.49. and 88.4. and 18.6. and 16.10. &c. Sheol in this sense: and spe­cially there it is seene, where he expreslie referreth it to the Soule. The same alsoIob. 30.23. Iob meaneth, where he speaketh ofHe meaneth Sheol. Beth mogned lecol chai, the House appointed for al the liuing. Thus therefore it is manifest that Sheol in Hebrue is not properly Hell, but it is the [Page 123]Worl of the Dead, or the state of Death simply and indifferently. Whiche sense the Sea­ [...]uentie doe plainlie confirme also: who sometime translate Sheol, Death:Prov. 13.14 Mishcol [...]k thanatou from Death, not from Hell, and somtime where they turne Sheol Hades, yet it is moste euident and vndenyable that very Death, or the estate of Death, or the power of Death is there meant: as in all those places wherin we spake of Sheol im­mediarly before. Therfore the 70. vnder­stand sheol and hades also for the state of death simply & generally, not for Hell properly. Euen altogether after y^e natural propertie of the word with the authē take Grecians, as reason is that they should. Note. Thus there is no question then, but hades & sheol being all one, & namely with the 70. who do al­most alwayes vse y^e one for the other, that therfore Hades & Sheol both do not fignifie Hell properly, but the state of Death, the World or place of the dead, such as are g [...]n out of this vi­sible World into another. Also where hades and sheol are more specially taken for y^e Gen 42.3 [...]. 1. King. 2.9. Isa. 14.10. cō ­pared with 11 E [...]e. 32.21.27 Ion. 2.2. &c. Graue or the state of dead Bodyes, euen heere in effect it is all one as before, they signifie the state of Death: it is not possible y^t they should be for Hell properly & primarily in any of these and infinite more such like places. Which besides all the former,Omnino she­ol id quod Gra­ci t [...]n Haden, Latini infernis reddere solent. in Scripturis sepulchrum at­que inde statum mortuorum sig­nificat qualis­cunque sit vel soelix vel insoe­lix. In Luk. 16.26. M. Bucer sheweth excellently: Sheol Hades & Insernum in Scripture do alwayes signifie the Graue, & so the state of y^e Dead what­soeuer it bee either happy or cursed. AndSheol v [...]x Hebraea statio­nem quamlibet mortuorum in vniuersum n [...] ­ [...]at. In Psal. 49.15. Tremell. This Hebrue word Sheol doth signifie any station or state of the dead in generall: and Hell it may sometime signifie but by a figure synecdoche.

Now then seeing the authentike Gra­cians do vse Hades for the inuisible World af­ter this life, that is for the World of the dead, yea Infer [...] in Latine is taken so to as wee haue seene, and seing the new Testament hath Hades sundry times in like sence, and the 70. interpreters before them, & seing the Hebrue Sheol whiche they make to be and is indeed al one with Hades, VVhich is so infinitly wide and large, that it is neuer full. may and doth signifie also the vnseene worlde, that it the World of the dead generally. Therefore it followeth that in our Creed also Hades is lyable to this sense, and for the force of the worde there is no cause to translate it Hell, and the Fathers by meere mistaking the proper & true vse of this worde haue fancyed such diuers and vaine thinges, which foolish childien haue since ampli­fied, of Christs going downe to Hell in his Scul [...] after death, as neither themselues knewe, neither can they declare to others.

Obiection. But now it will be obiected, how then should wee translate the Hebrue and the Greeke Sheol & Hades, to fit those words in our language.Answere. It is true indeede, through the scarcitie of our toung it is most hard to fitte a translation in English to those words ofPsa. 1 [...].10. Act. 2.27. and in other places. Scripture. But this is euident, that which is commonly vsed & namely in our vulgare Creedes,The English word Hell is not good in the Creede. Hell, is a word to partiall, to vnfitt, yea corrupt, and starke nought. It is suteable to the largenes of the Hebrue and Greeke meaning, though [Page 125]not so iuste with the Nature of our worde, to say in English, the Dead. As in the Creede,Or if you wil, say thus: Hee went into the vnseene world &c. He went vnto the Dead: or, Hee descended among the Dead. AlsoAct. 2.17. Psa. 10.10. Thou wilt not leaue my soule with the Dead, nor thy holye one to see corruption. Which as I haue shewed be­fore, is the true, plaine, easie, familiar, and cōmon sense of Hades among the authen­tike Greekes: as also of Sheol in Hebrue.

Obiection. But to translate thus, is to depart from the Fathers sense of Hades: they vse it al­wayes or most commonly for Hell. Answer. They vse it indeed commonly, eyther for Hell it selfe, or for a place of darkenesse, a parte of Hell, far from the place of Blessednesse. And yet they graunt also, that it may bee (yea and Insert to) vsed for Abrahams bosom, where Lazarus had ioy, and where was a great distance & contrariety betweene Hell and it. What may this be, but the place of blessednes, I thinke, euen in their iudge­ments? How soeuer it be, we stand not v­pon the Fathers language to translate the Scriptures, or this Article of our Creede. The Apostles and Apostolike men as also the Septuagint to, did write and speake as the authentike Grecians did, as they learned to speake of the Maisters of that tounge, and as the people then might. best vnderstand, not making phrases, nor fitting their wordes to the latter writers that spake and wrote long since them. Therefore according to the authentike [Page 126]vseof Hades, so ought we indeede to tran­slate this both in Englishe and Latine: Descendit ad mortuos, He descended among the Dead.

Obiection. Why, in effect this is nothing els but to Dye: and that was expressed of Christ before, he was Dead, Buryed, &c. But in this short summe of Religion to repeate one point twise were needles, and against the nature of a shorte summe. And to vses darke and hard phrase after a plaine and easie, is vnreasonable & absurd. Answere. It is true, I hold it vnreasonable altogeather in the short and vulgar Creede appointed euen for the common Christians, to vse words darke and difficulte. And when the same thing is by diuers wordes expressed, the later ought to bee the lighter and clee­rer, for to open the meaning the better which in the former is not so euident. Therefore I fully graunte in the Creede speciallie, the phrase must bee familiar, triuiall, easie, and plaine. Which heere in this taking of Hades is so: it is moste easie (I saye) andNot if it bee taken for Hell, for so it is takē but sometime. It is very easie and samiliar if wee take it ge­nerally for the world of the Dead. plaine to euery Gre­cian, and moste naturall and proper in it selfe, as I haue sufficiently shewedBy many good authors. pag. 97. &c. be­fore. For we must remember our Creed was not written in Englishe, and there­fore our abusiue worde Hell ought not to trouble vs. But looke wee to the Greeke Hades wherein it was written, and to the Hebrue, Sheol wherevnto also the Greeke [Page 127]fitteth: and them it is as cleere as the Sonne at noone day,The Hebrue and Greeke phrases [...]eere­in all one. Re­deth Sheolah: Kataben [...]j [...]in Haden. that katabena [...] c [...]s Ha­den and redeth Sheolah are the common and familiar phrases to goe to the Worlde of the Dead, or among the Dead. As for the repea­ting of the same thing, it is not idle nor vnsignificant, but moste Emphaticall. For euen presentlie after the Apostles there arose HaeretikesIgnat. a [...] Trall. denyinge that Christ was a true Man but only in shew, and therefore also suffered and dyed but in shewe and appearance onely. Such also continued a long tyme, and such are at this daye. Now to establish all Chri­stians against such diuelish opinions, the Primitiue Churche added heere diuers effectuall wordes, it seemeth. Whereas els it had bene enough to haue saide, Hee suffered vnder Pontius Pilate: But to expresse and the signifie this pointe of Christian faith euen for the simple more fullie, there is added further, firste Hee was Cru­cified: and yet further, Hee was Dead; yea more, He was Buryed; and finally to speake to the full, Hee went to the Worlde of the Dead, or among the Dead. notes And this laste verelie is meant of the Soule of Christ, to shewe what it did, being nowe parted from the body: as the other wordes before are tou­ching the visible parte his Bodye, Crucified, Dead, and Buryed. Which Bucer sawe verie well,Buc. in Ma [...] 27.50. Ex eo quod consitemur Dominum discen­disse ad inferna intelligendum est, Dominum Spi­ritis [Page 128]suo [...]ta se iunxisse spiritibus mortuorum san­ctorum, vtt corpore iunctus suit illorum corporibus per sepulturam. In that we beleeue that the Lorde were vnto the Dead, we vnderstande that in his Soule he ioyned to the societie of the Soules of the dead Saintes, euē as in his body he was ioyned to their bodyes by Buriall. So that all these wordes in the Creed haue a very profitable vse and stronge Emphasis for to shewe that Christ truely Dyed in deed, and had euery way the verie same condition as other mē had as touching Humane na­ture, that so all Christians might bee the better established against those Haeresies denying the same, as is aforesaid. If any say, but in this short summe there should be no repetitions at all. I haue shewed, that this his going among the Dead, or vnto the dead, or into the Vnseene World, is most fithe to bee referred to the Soule of Christ par­ting from his body, shewing whither it went, euen whither all other Good mens Soules went, to the place appointed for the Sain­ctes: thither went Christes soule too, like other mens, being parted from his body: [...]is Hadou. Whereof if any doe aske parti­cularlie, Whither is this? I aunswere, na­melie intoWhich is the true Gramma­ticall sense of this word, viz. with respect had to the qualitie of Christes per­son. heauē: For whither should the Saintes goe els? And thus it is no repetition of anie thing that particularlie went be­fore. Howbeit in the Creed there are in deede repetitions, as short a summe as it is, and yet not vnprofitable. As thus, hauing saide, He suffered, it is added, Crucified▪ and after that Dead, yea Buryed is but an addi­tion [Page 129]also to signifie that he was truely dead. Therefore it is possible that there might be repetitions profitable in the Creede, and namely when they be specially emphati­call. Obiection. But further you will say, this word He descended to the Dead, doeth shewe, it see­meth, that the place was downeward, whi­ther he went, and not vpwarde to Heauen. Answere. I aunswere, That is nothing: So IacobGen. 37.35. spake Eredel beni abel Sheolah: I shall goe downe mourning to my Sonne among the Dead. Yet Iacob thought not to goe to Hell to his Sonne, but among the soules of the godly dead, that is to say into Heauen, where he knewe he should be after death, & his Sonne he doubted not (being dead as he thought) wasIt seemeth not that the Graue properly can be bee [...]e meant, seeing Iacob hoped not to b [...] togeather with his Sonne as touching [...] bodye. there alreadie. So then this worde Descending or Going downe, is nothing els in this matter, but a Bulling. Dec. 1.7. decaying, a falling downe, or a cōming to an ende in this life: because they [...] and flourish heere, are said to a­ [...] [...] [...]ande vp, and spring vp. Only this further emphasis seemeth to be in it: kate­ben may import that He came vnder the power and dominiō, as it were, of Death, although but for a while: for heAct. 1.14. could not be held thereof. Which is it, I thinke, thatOleuian i [...] Symbol. Oleuian vnderstandeth in this place. Wherefore this phrase in the Creede, a­greeth with y^e Hebrue very fitly, whēce it seemeth also to be takē. And thus mē may see, it is euery way a most easie, a famili­ar, and vsuall phrase, not with the Greeke [Page 130]only, but in proportō with the Hebrues also, I say euen that in the Creede batch [...] cis Hadou to signifie Hee went vnto the Dead, which we in English too corruptly vse to say, He went into Hell: when as indeed heere concerning Christ, it was into Heauen.

Obiection. Lastly it may be you will say, if Christs Soule after his death went immediatly into Heauen, then he Ascended twise in­to Heauen: once before his resurrection, and againe 40. dayes after it. In the Creede also then there are two articles touching this one matter of h [...]s Ascension. But this seemeth very vntrue: specially seeing himself saith after his rising from death,Ioh. 20.17. I haue not yet ascended. Therefore immediatly after death hee went not into Heauen: and if not to Heauen, then to Hell. Answere. I answere, notwithstanding all this, his soule might and did immediatly goe to Heauen. And what if in this wise he Ascen­ded twise? what reason is against it? That is, once in his Soule alone, in the time of his death, as the soules of all the Godly besides doe: and once againe afterward when both Soule & Body togeather as­cended, euen as we also shall heereafter. Of this his later perfite intyre and appa­rant Ascension, he saith,Ioh. 20.17. I haue not yet As­cended. Whereby he denyeth not his other maner of ascending, that is in his soule only. Euen asAct. 2.34. Peter denyeth that Dauid is yet ascended. Hee meaneth as touching his [Page 131]body and all: for his soule was then, and long before that (no doubt) ascēded into Heauen. And thus in our Creed there may well be 2. articles, for 2. so diuers and distinct kindes of Christs going to Heauen.

Hitherto we haue waded in our firste point, about the opening of the word of this Article of the Creede, he descended to Hades. Wherein it is as cleere as the light at noone, that the natural, simple, proper, and true meaning therof may be, He went vnto the Dead. Now followeth ourSee pag. 9 [...]. second generall point, to proue that this is the very meaning therof, and nothing els in­deede. Which thus I conclude.

If this Article meane not that Christ went to Lim­bus, nor went into the Graue, nor his Hellish suffe­ringes on the Crosse, nor afterward locally in Hell, nor any going down locally into Hell at all: the [...] heere is certainly meant that his soule separat frō his body did go, as other mens do, into the World of the Dead, or among the dead and nothing els.

But all those former opinions are vntrue heere, and not meant in the Creede.

Therefore this our last relearsed is true & is there in the Creed truly & plainly intended, & meant.

1. No Limbus sig­nifyed in our Creede.Christ went not to any Limbus s [...]ing y^e faithful before Christs time, had the same benifit of grace in effect which wee since haue had. Because Christ was the same ye­sterday, & the same to day, & the same for euer: and Faith, w^e they had as well as we, was the euidence of things not seene, and [Page 132]the ground of things hoped for: and A­braham saw the day of Christ, and reioy­ced: and the Fathers before did eate the same spirituall meate, & dranke the same spirituall drink which we doe: and Christ was the Sacrifice of redemption slaine before the beginning of the world. Ther­fore by the vertue and efficacie of Chri­stes death, Heauen was opened to them before his Incarnation, as well as vnto vs since. And therefore there was no Limbus, neyther could Christ goe to anie such place.2. The Graue pro­perly not ment by going to Ha­des in y^• Creed. This Article can not be meant of the Graue, because that was most plain­lie and familiarlie noted before in these wordes, He was buried: which to repeate a­gaine in a darker & more doubtfull word as Hades is, without difference added, can not be likely. For Hades, as I said, is refer­red generallie to the state of the Dead: that is, to the Soules as well as to the Bodyes of the dead.3. Christes Hel­lish sorrowes which he suf­fred, not meant by his going to Hades. Heere are not meant Chri­stes Hellish sorrowes and sufferings, which in deed he on the Crosse indured, as wee haue shewed in the former quaestiō. Although Maister Caluin thus thought, yet surely this Article seemeth to meane another thing:Sauing the reuerence of so worthy a man. (quod pace tanti viri dixerim) because 1. the word Hades signifieth not Hel peculiarly, as I haue shewed, but whē y^e place doth ne­cessarilyAs this place in the Creede [...]th not. require it. 2. If it were so, it must be here by a Figure not altogither so fami­liar, namely a Metaphoricall speech, which [Page 133]hardly may be admitted into this vulgar [...]nd familiar Creed. And generally it vvas meant and comprised in those former wordes, He suffered vnder Pontius Pilat. Last­ [...]ie, it ought not then to followe after so manie Articles put in betweene, as Cruci­fied, Dead, Buryed. 4. Christes going to Hades in the Creede, signi­fieth not [...]y suffring locally in Hell after his death. This Article mea­neth not anie sufferings of Christ locally in Hell after his death on the Crosse, as Il­liricus thought: because y^e Scripture saith, by the bloud of his Crosse hee reconciled all things in heauen and in earth, and through death he destroyed him that had the pow­er of death, and on his Crosse he razed out all things that were against vs, and spoy­led Principalities and powers, and trium­phed openlie ouer them, and on the Crosse he cryed, It is finished. All this sheweth that on the Crosse was the last act and finall ac­complishment of all his sufferinges. There­fore he suffred nothing after his death.

The last errour that heere I am to con­fute, is this,5. Lastly, Christ went not local­lie into the ve­rie Hell of the damned at any time, nor ma­nie occasion. (which nowe chieflie I bende against) that which chieflie troubleth the Churches in England at this day, by rea­son that some men, I knowe not whom, haue thought so. It is this, That Christ af­ter his death went downe into Hell, not to suffer, but he went to triumph, or to insult ouer the damned reprobat, or what to doe, it is not well knowen, nor yet determined. Nowe we affirme, this also is a meere fic­tion, and as false as the rest. And that by [Page 134]diuers reasons.

A generall ar­gumit y^t Christ went not into Hell.First, If no Scripture proue it, then God forbid we should put this opinion among the Articles of our faith. But no Scripture proueth it: Therefore i [...] ought in no wise to be beleeued of Vs.

Allegations against us.They alleadge for the Denyall of the As­sumption chieflie soure textes of Scripture. But none to any purpose at all, as easilie we may see. 1 First,Actes 2.27. and Psal. 16.1 [...]. Thou wilt not leaue my Soule in Hell, (saye they) but falslie and in­iuriouslie to the text, asPag. 113. before we haue declared. Our common translation hath, Thou wilt not leaue my Soule in the Graue: which is not much amisse, consi­dering the scope of the Apostle there, and the manner of Scripture-phrase some­time. But the most playne, the most na­turall, and familiar translation should be this (as alsoPag. 126. I haue plainly noted be­fore) Thou wilt not leaue my Soule among the Dead, nor thy Holy one to see corruption▪ This is certaine, it can not bee meant of Hell, as also I haue prouedPag. 114. before suffici­entlie. Thus therefore their firste and chiefest place doeth saye nothing at all for them.

2 Their second is:1. Pet. 3.18, 19, 20. Christ suffering for vs was thanatotheis men sarks zoopotetheis do Pneumati, en ho kas tois en phylake pneuman poreutheis ekeryxen Apeithésais pote, hote hapax exedécheto he tou Theou makrothumta en hemé­rais Noe: Don to Death in the Flesh, but made aliue by the Spirit, wherein hee went (or, had gone) and [Page 135]preached to the spirites in prison Hauing bene (or, whiche were disobedient in tyme, past when once the longe suffe­ring of God did wayte in the dayes of Noe.The true sense of Peter in this place. This place is as playne as may be cleane to an other purpose: that is Christ in his Passion dyed as touching his Manhood but was raysed to life again by his Diuine Spirit, in which in the dayes of Noe he went and preached to th [...]se who were nowe (in Peters tyme) damned soules in Hell, and had bene in tyme past (in Noes tyme) disobedient, when as the long suffering of GOD wayted for their repen­tance but all in vayne. Thus heere is no one word of his Soules going after death to the soules in Hell, and of his then preaching to them: as some would frō hence willinglie gather. First I will proue our former translatiō & sense to be true: then, I will confute such of their chiefest reasons as they vse to make frō this place for them selues.Reasons for iu­stifying our in­terpretation of Peter in this place. And first, If to Pneumati by y^e Spirit be here the Di­uine Spirit the Godhead of Christ and not his Humane Soule, thē our translation & sense is true, & theirs false. But here to Pneumati sig­nifieth by the Diuine Spirit, that is by the God­head of Christ, and not by his Humane Soule. Therfore our translation & sense is true, & theirs is false. The assumptiō only is here doubted of. But it hath many most cer­tain proofs. First, it is most familiar & cō ­mon in Scripture by Flesh to vnderstand y^e whole 1. Ioh. 4. [...]. Ioh. 1.14. Heb. 5.7. & 2.14. & 1. Pet. 4.1. Humane nature, & by Spirit theReu. 2.7. &c. Actes 16.7. Diuine nature. But where both are mētioned togi­ther oppositely, there they always & euer­more [Page 136]signifie so inRom. 1.3, 4. 1 Tim. 3.16. Christ, and inGal. 5.17. Rom. 8.5. other men Flesh alwayes signifieth the corrupt na­ture wholy, the Spirit, all the regenerate parte in them. I say, these wordes Flesh and Spirit mentioned thus togeather oppositely, do neuer in Scripture signifie the Body and Soule of a man. Therefore in this place also agreeably to the perpetuall vse of the Scripture besides, these wordes Flesh and Spirit ought to signifie the Humane and the Diuine natures of Christ, not the 2. partes of his Humanitie, his Soule and his Bodye: specially seeing no Circumstance heere ouerthroweth this sense, as both before, and likewise presentlie after we shall fur­ther see. Againe, the very same thing is spoken by2. Cor. 13.4 Paul, but more expreslie: Hee was crueified touching his infirmitie, but liueth by the power of God. A place most excellent to be cōpared with this heere in Peter. That which Peter calleth Flesh, Paul calleth infir­mitie, and that whiche Peter called Spirit, Paule calleth the power of God. That is, the one signifieth his whole Humanitie, both bo­dye and Soule, the other his verie Deitie. And so by comparing these two most like textes, our sense is cleerly iustified. Third­lie, if Spirit heere signifie his humane Soule, then of necessitie you must say, Hee was made aliue in his Soule, or by his Soule: zôopoietheis tô pnéumati. But both these are wicked and false to say: First, not in his Soule, for then his soule was once dead or [Page 137] [...]all at least, because the word is zôopoiethe­is, He was made aliue in his Soule, beeing don to death in his body.2. Neither can it be by his Soule, for then he liued againe by the power of his Soule, and not of God, whi­che is absurd and contrarie to many Scri­ptures before noted. Therefore Spirit here must needes be the Godhead & Diuine po­wer of Christ, by the which he was in deede made aliue after his death in his Manhood.4. If these wordes Flesh and Spirit doe signi­fie heere in Christ his Body and Soule, then they can not beare any sense but such as agreeth with all other men when they dye: to be dead in their bodies, but to liue in their soules. But this text in these wordes sheweth surelye some singular thing happening to Christ, wherein hee differed from other men: as who so vew­eth the place, may easilie see. Therefore these words here do not signifie in Christ his body and soule, but his Manhoode and Godhead.5. All preaching is to amende the hearers, or to take away from them all ex­cuse. This is the very nature and perpe­tuall vse of Preaching. But thus hee coulde not preach to the Spirites in Hell. On the earth he could by his eternal Spirit in the mouth of Noe to those liuing then in those dayes, though careles and disobedient. There­fore this preaching is heere meant to haue bene on earth in those former tymes, and not then in Hel. And so cōsequently in his [Page 138] Diuine Spirit, That Christ should be saide being dead, to goe and preach horrour and cō ­fusion to the Damned of Noes time now in Hell, not mentioning any other of them beside, is absurd & vaine. & not in his Humane Soule. 6. [...] it be absurd to saye, He preached to the damned in Hell who liued in Noes time, more then to the other damned: and i [...] there be good reason to saye this of his preaching on earth in Noahs time, th [...] this is meant of his Diuine Spirite prea­ching then in the mouth of Noe, and no [...] of his humane soule preaching after his death in Hell. But it is absurd to say, Hee preached in Hell to those of Noes tyme, more thē to the other damned there. And if you aske what reason there is to men­tion his preaching on earth to them of Noes time more then to all other disobe­dient before & since. I answer, it meaneth not but y^t Christ preached by his diuine spirit to all the rest likewise, euē frō Adam to Iohn Baptist: but this speciall instance is firly named, as being one of the most sin­gular tymes of convicting the prophane rebellious worlde. Nowe this reason can not be yeelded for his preaching to thē in Hell which were of Noes time, more thē to the rest: as all men of any reason doe see. Therfore this place is meant of Christes Diuine Spirit, not of his Humane Soule.

Now cōtrarie wise for their reasons that this is meant of Christs Soule preaching in Hel, the most & the best that I finde are in Mr Hill, noted & confuted by Mr Humes verie effectually.Phil. 2.7, 8, 9. I wil now touch but 2. of thē: because if I should deale further, I might [Page 139]seeme to do y^t which he hath don already.

Obiection. First thus they say, No Passiue can agree to the Deitie. But made to liue is heere a Pas­siue. Therfore it can not be that the Deitie is here the Spirit, in which he is said to be made aliue. Answer. We saye not, He was made a­liue in y^e spirit, but by the spirit, & so ought it to be translated. Therfore this Passiue is attributed to the Deitie, but is the effect not of Christes Deitie in his Manhood.

Obiection. An other obiection is, that pote in time past doth distinguishe apeithesasi to the disobedient with which it goeth, frō poreutheis ekeryxen he had gon and preached.Answere. Which is most vntrue: for though pote follow apeithesasi, yet it is to euident and vndenyable that this Ad­uerbe pote may haue reference (and by all reason it must) to this whole clause poreu­theis ekéryxen apeithésasi pote, and so distingui­sheth all this from all y^t clause next before tois en phylake pneunisi (where vnderstand ousi) and that is, to the Spirits that are in prison. And so pote plainly distinguisheth apeithésa­si frō tois en phylake (ousi) but not frō ekéryxen. As Mr. Beza heereon doth well declare.

The other reasons, though 9. or 10. in number, are not worth the naming: yet whatsoeuer force is in them, Mr. Humes hath so defeated it, that I will sursease to speake any more thereof. But thus it re­mayneth that this place of Peter is no­thing at all for them, who moste errone­ously thinke that Christ in his Soule went down after death, and preached in Hell.

Nowe the third Scripture is,Ephe. 4.9. Christ in that he ascended, what is it but that he [...] descended first into the lowest partes of the earth? Heere first note the true meaning, and then the mistaking of this place. I say then these words are a reason takē frō Christs Ascen­ding into Heauen to proue his Descending from Heauen first. As if he should say, in asmuch as wee see Christ our Lordes As­cending vp into Heauē, it followeth that he the very same Lord Descended thence firste: that wee may learne by him howe humiliation goeth before glory, and submission before exaltation. Nowe this beeing all, as indeed it is in this place, there is no need to take this Descending of any locall going downe into Hell. But you will say, whe­ther doe the words close following cista katôtera mere tês gês, to the lower partes of the earth, adde any thinge in the sense further, or no? And if they doe adde more in the sense, how far do they signifie? I answer, I see not but they may be taken most fit­lie to adde something in the sense of that sentence before of his Descending, and yet nothing for his going to Hell. Euen this (as I take it) to shewe more particu­larly howe base a Descending and com­ming into the world Christ had, in hum­bling himselfe euen to the Graue. And so it may bee very like that other place of this Apostle:Phil. 2.7, 8, 9. He made himselfe of no reputation, and tooke on him the forme of a seruant and was [Page 141]made like vnto men, and was found in shape as a man. He humbled himselfe and became obedient vnto death, euen the death of the Crosse. Where­fore God hath highly exalted him, &c. Thus I say in both these places this degree of the basenesse of Christs humiliation is no­tablie expressed: heere in the Philip▪ in that hee humbled himselfe vnto death, and be­fore in the Ephes. in that bee descended euen to the Graue, that is to say also vnto Death.

Obiection. But some will say, the Graue is not in the lower partes of the Earth, but alwayes a little vnder the earth, that is in y^t higher part of it. Rather Hell may be thought to be in theAs Mat. 12.40. midst of y^t earth. Answere. I answere: Takatoter a mere tés gés the lower partes of the earth, seems to me a very plaine Hebraisme, expressing Tachtijoth erets: which wordes are no where found for Hell, forPsal. 63.9. the Graue they are found: also where in a similitude w^t the Graue (not with Hell) aPsal. 139.15 womans wombe is called tachtijoth [...]rets. Like to this also isEzech [...].14 16, 18. erets tachtith the Earth beneath. Now albeit Maister Hill a­uoucheth eagerlie that these places are for Hell, yet the very seuerall circumstan­ces in them doe plainly teach that the Graue only is there meant, and the condition of Death: asSect. 9. Mr. Humes doeth plainly de­clare against him. If a man aske, how the Graue may be called the lower part of the earth I answer, it may very well, and is in com­parision of this Earth where wee liue, which is theWhence the liuing are cal­led Superslit [...] and sometime Superi; the Dead some­time Ius [...]ri. higher parts of the earth: the [Page 142]oppositiō thus stāding betwene y^e Liuing & the Dead & betwene their proper habita­tions, not betweene the Liuing & Hell. The same sēse manifestly hath another Hebru phrase very like to this:Psal. 86.13. Isa. 14.10. Sheel tachtijah or tachah, where thogh many think Hel is sig­nified, yet surely y^e circumstances do con­uince that the Graue only is there meant, the Graue beneath: as Mr. Fulke against Gr. Martin doth cleerlie proue. Which also we shall further declare & make manifest by y^t phraseMat. 12.40 in the heart of the earth, as we shall see presently in the answere to the next Scripture obiected afterward. But if any yet say touchingEph. 4.9, 10 this, y^t heere is opposed Christs lowest debasing to his highe [...]l ascen­ding. Now Hell is the lowest debasing of Christ, not y^e Graue. Therfore Hell is heere vnderstoode, & not the Graue. Surely thus by this reason it must follow y^t Christ not only was in Hell, but y^t he suffered also in Hell. For indeed it was a far greater humiliatiō of Christ to suffer the paines of Hel (which we haue proued before that he might &Not after his death, but be­fore his death. did suffer indeed) thē to be locally in Hell with triumph without suffering. But it is most false & injurious to Christes death to say, he suffered in the lower parts of the Earth, taking the same for Hell. Therfore his de­basemēt here we take in the estimatiō of the world, y^t is so far as they might sensi­bly cōceiue of his miserable & base cōdi­tion. Now that could be no lower thē the Graue. As for Hel, both his going thither, & his suffering of it, whether in y^• very place, [Page 143]or out of the place, all this was insensible to the world, & not cōming within their estimation: & so not heere spoken of nor intended, where only the apparant basenes of Christ is compared with the apparant going vp of Christ aboue the sensible Hea­uens. Thus do I iudge that the descēding of Christ to the lower parts of the earth may be taken truly, plainly, and as is agreeable to the Hebrue phrase whence surely this Greek phrase ariseth, namely for Christs humiliation euen vnto the Graue, that is to becom vnder the power of Death Howbeit some do thinke, it may be takē as direct­lie alluding to thatPsal. 139.19 metaphoricall Hebrue phrase tachtijotherets, the lower partes of the earth, where Dauid meaneth his mothers wombe, where he tooke flesh & so came into this worlde of men. And then likewise Paul In Ephe. 4. here meaneth only Christes taking our flesh, & his cōming into this our world, in that he saith hee descended to the lower partes of the earth. So also y^t sense of these scrip may be fitly cōpared withit.Ioh. 3.13. No man ascendeth up to Heauen but he that descended from Heauen, the Sonne of man which is in Heauen. AndIoh. 16.28. I came out from the Father and came into the world: againe I leaue the world, and go to the Father. Euen so these wordes, He descended to the lower partes of the Earth with opposition to his Ascending into Heauē, in this sense may signifie generally his abasement, in ta­king flesh in his mothers wombe, and so his comming into this our world, before hee was exalted in his Ascension. Last­ly others doe thinke, that this Greeke [Page 142] [...] [Page 143] [...] [Page 126]phrase eis katotera mere tes ges, to the lower part [...] of the earth, is no Hebraisme, but onely a fi­gure of speach in the Greeke, a kinde of Hypallage: Hypallage. the lower partes of the earth, for the Earth which is the lower partes of the world. And so both these later senses do adde nothing in signification touching Christes Descen­ding or his comming from Heauen into this world: but they meane onlie and ge­nerally, He first descended before he ascen­ded. And this last sense amplifyeth it (as it were) by a kinde of description, shewing what this world, or this earth is where we liue, and whither Christ descended; euen the lower partes of the world in compa­rison of the Heauens whence he descen­ded, and whither afterwarde from the earth he went vp againe.

Either of these two later senses might heere very well serue: but I iudge rather the first to be likeliest. Howsoeuer it bee, to dreame heere of Hel there is no reason. And this wee shall make further to ap­peare by confuting the next and last obie­ction of Mat. 12.40.

InMat. 12.40. this place therefore Christ is saide to haue bene three dayes and three nights in the heart of the Earth. What is that, but in the middest of the earth? And how was Christ there, vnles he were there in Hell? I aun­swere, this also is a manifest Hebraisme, like toErech. 27.25, 26. that: Tyrus was very glorious in the heart of the Seas: beleb iammim. Tyrus was not in the [Page 145] deepe of the sea, nor in the middest of the sea, for it stood close by the continent land, as Geography teacheth vs: but the Prophets meaning by that phrase is, that Tyrus wasor in a man [...]r compassed. compassed about with the Sea, though standing neere to the Sea shore. Euen so Christ in his Graue may well bee said to bee in the heart of the earth after that phrase: that is compassed about with the earth though far from the middest of the earth, euen a little beneath the vpmost parte of the same, as Graues are wont to bee made. Further this cannot possibly be meant of Christes Soule going into Hell, because the Iewes heere asked Christ for a visible signe, & he said he would giue them a signe: that is to say a visible miracle. Now this mira­cle was, how Christ should be 3. dayes & 3. nights buryed in the earth, and then rise againe to life: like Ionahs comming againe into the world after hee had bene 3. dayes and 3. nights in the Fishes belly. In this only hee would condescend vnto them, and giue them only this visible sig­ne, like as they craued, but not any more. Therefore this cannot bee any going to Hell and comming thence againe: for that had ben vtterly no visible signe, neither had he answered any whit to their desire at al, as the text saith he did, namely to giue them this one signe only so as they desired, and as might bee cōparable in their sense to that of Ionah. Againe if heere the heart [Page 146]of the earth be Hell, then was Christ all the time of his death in Hell euen till the mo­ment of his resurrection, which thing the chiefe defendors of this dreame dare not auouch: and that ofLuke 23.43. Luke refuteth it, This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise: as anon God willing, we shall further see. There­fore the heart of the earth Mat. 12.40. heere must not in any wise be takē for Hell. Which also that speech of Christ nowe a dying, Father into thy handes I commend my Spirit, doth euident­lie proue. Where Christ sheweth (accor­ding to the vsuall phrase of men in such a case) that hee hoped presently to goe to Heauen. No man thinketh to go to Hell, whē he saith, Lord into thy handes I cōmend my Soule: no more therfore now did Christ, as is further shewedPag. 151. afterward. Lastly, both against this andEphe. 4.9. that last before, thus I reason: If these Textes speake of Hell, then certainlie Hell is in the lowest partes of the earth, in the middest of the earth. But it could neuer bee affirmed directlie and preciselie that Hell is in the middest or deepest of the earth. Nay it is most false: For the Diuells are2. Pet. 2.4. holden in Hell. But the Diuells are locallieMath. 8.28 Ephe. 2.2. on the earth, and in the ayre. Obiection. Therefore Hell is not preciselie in the middost of the Earth. Some will say, Hell is beneath, as theProu. 15.24 Scripture teacheth. Answere. I aunswere, if you translate that so, yet it sayeth not Hell beneath vs, but Hell beneath. That is in comparison of Heauen, whiche [Page 147]is on Highe: so Hell maye bee downewarde from Heauen, but hee sayeth not in re­spect of vs here on earth. Secondly, They who take this for the Graue, and the Bodi­lie destruction (as the worde in deede ve­rie often, and familiarlie doeth also signi­fie) doe easilie auoyde this Obiection. Thirdlie, it is not the vnlikeliest to hold, that She [...]l heere signifying the state of death or destruction in this world, Mattah, declining or downeward: Considering also and compa­ring the former parte of this verse with this later, & the next following likewise: It seemeth the wise man sayeth: The way of life to the wise tendeth after thinges on high, whereby hee escapeth destruction, the way whereof is groueling on the earth, and seeketh not the thinges that are aboue, which bring life, but the thinges that are beneath, which are snares of death. And thus heere may be some affinitie with the ExhortationCol. 3.1, 2. to seeke the thinges aboue, and not the things that be earthly beneath. But heere is no locall assignation for Hell. Obiection. You will saye, Where then is Hell, is there no certaine locall place of tormentes to the reprobates nowe?Answer. We doubt not but the wicked and the DiuelsLuke 16.23. are now locally tormented in som certain place, & shalbe after this world ended: but where this is the Scripture teacheth not, neither ought we to inquire after it, but to learne howe by all meanes to auoyde it.

[Page 148] Nothing in all the Scripture for Christes go­ing to Hell: therefore it is a fable.Thus farre the Scriptures haue bene ex­amined, and nothing in them is found to proue Christs Soules going to Hell. Wich aboue all things ought to be; I saye somewhat ought to be in Scripture for it, if we vvill haue such an Article of our faith. And I demaund, are not they Haretikes that will needes holde an Article of Faith meerely without Scripture, as well as they that will not receaue something expressed in Scripture? Well: to beleeue therefore a­nie article of our faith, it is requisit that we haue the Scriptures warrant. Yea fur­ther, It ought not onely to be in the Scri­pture, but it ought to be very plaine, ex­presse, and most easie to be proued out of Scripture: or els in no wise to make it a maine Article of our common Faith. But all men know, and our Aduersaries here­in confesse y^t it is a hard, a doubtfull, and a very intricat point, and with much diffi­cultie to be proued in scripture, that Chri­stes Soule went downe into Hell. There­fore them selues graunt in effect that this doctrine ought not to be any part of our common Creede.

The Scriptures are cleerely a­gainst Christes going into Hel.Nay further I vrge, if wee consider the Scriptures vnpartiallie, we do find diuers singular places in them against this do­ctrine, prouing y^t his soule after his death was not in Hell. I. First,Luke. 23.43. This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise. This is spoken of the Humanitie of Christ. But not of his Body which lay [Page 149]in the Graue: Therefore of his Soule, that it wente the same day presentlie into Paradise and then not into Hell. If you denie that this is meant of his Humanitie, I proue it most plainlie. 1. This Participle Meta, is more pregnant then Sun, to signifie a mutuall participation of somewhat. So that if we note the empha­sis of this phrase well, met' emou ese is as much as to say This day I shall haue parte with thee, and thou with me of a blessed chaunge, that is, from this miserable Crosse which now we both suffer, to Paradise, whither wee shall both goe hence presentlie. But this is true of his Humane Soule, not of his Deitie, to participate with the Theefe, and the Theefe with him both in sorrow & ioye. Therefore he meaneth heere his Soule shal be presently to day in Paradise. Againe, this speach is directlie and purposelie a Con­solation to the Holy Theefe, certifying him that he should see quickly an altera­tion in the things that nowe he sorrowed for. But he sorrowed grieuously both for his owne miserie and for Christes most vnworthy torments, as may be seenever. 41. pre­sentlie before y^t he receaued this cōsolati­on. Therefore this Consolation sheweth him, that Christ should be translated also as wel as him selfe very quickly from the Crosse into glorie. Lastly, the good Theef saith to Christ as Man being yet in misery, but beleeuing he should shortlie bee in glorie, Lord remember me when thou comest into [Page 150]thy kingdome. As if he should say, Lord, I se [...] well thy wofull miserie nowe, but I know thou shalt hence goe into thy glorious kingdome: remember me therfore when thou comest thither. This is nowe allto­geather of Christes Manhood. Must not Christes aunswere bee iust to his sense, Speciallie seeing he aunswereth to Com­fort him in his forenoted griefe? Yes ve­relie. He aunswereth therefore to this effect. Be of good cheere, this day I shall in deed come into my kingdome, and thy selfe with me. That is Me, whom nowe thou grieuest to see thus afflicted, & whō thou belieuest to goe hence to a king­dome, euen me, though nowe in deede an afflicted man, yet to day thou shalt see in my kingdome in Paradise. And therefore this worde semeron to day seemeth also to haue a cōtrarie reference to this his state nowe, and this nowe, contrarie to that to daye insuing quicklie afterwarde. As if he should saye, Nowe afflicted, but presently anon in glorie. All this must needes be of his Humane Soule verily without all quaestion: There is none can consider heerein his Deitie. If anie thinke his Soule might goe to Hell first, and yet presentlie goe thence to Heauē yer night also. That is ridiculous and toyish: it needeth maruelous plaine scripture to describe that, or els we ought to hold it as a singular fable. It was nowe within 2. or 3. houres of the dayes ende, [Page 151]when Christ spake this: so that hee had neede to goe quicke, & come quicke, and tarie but a little there. Well this place thē I doubt not, is very plaine against Christs Soules descending into Hell.

2 Likewiseverse 4 [...] Father into thy handes I commend my Soule. What if Gods hand sometime doth signifie his generall protection onely and gouernement? But consider the present circumstance here: Christ was now on the Crosse so pitifully oppressed with sorro­wes, as that he seemed a forlorne man, & forsakē not of men onely, but of God to: yet he euen nowe being about to yeelde vp his life to death, lifting vp his harte to God in peace and great assurance, saieth, Father into thy handes I commende my soule. Tell me, doe men vse thus to saye when they thinke to goe to Hell, or doe they not hope presentlie to inioye Heauen? And what els did Stephan, Act. 7.59. saying, Lord, re­ceaue my Spirit. Men in such case when they speak thus, declare a certaine hope in thē that they shall speedilie be released from their sorrowes, and receaued into ioyes with God in Heauen. Thus is Gods hande taken heere agreeablie to this common phrase of men. As also the Scripture hath itPsal. 16.12. In thy presence is fulnes of ioye, and at thy right hande are pleasures for euermore. Wherefore Christ now hanging heere on the Crosse, and readie to dye, vnderstandeth Gods hande surelie in this manner.

There is no man of sense cōsidering these circumstances that can iudge otherwise. Gods handes thetfore we say in this case sig­nifieth the meanes wherby he taketh his seruauntes to him self,Gods Handes. and holdeth them with him selfe as his owne possessions, cō ­ming out of tribulation, wherein while they were, they seemed far of from God, and as it were out of his hand and possessi­on, & subiect to their enimies power: but nowe commending their Soules into Gods hande, they declare their desire and hope to be rid from these separations, and to be there where they desire, that is receaued by Gods hande into his ioyfull presence and heauenly possession.

Obiection. But they will saye, Dauid from whom these wordes are taken, did not presentlie after he spake thus, goe to Heauen. No more then may we think that Christ did. Answere. If Dauid thē presentlie went not to Hea­uen, What then? I hope he went not to Hell, neither thought he of Hell when he spake so. Howsoeuer it was, this I saye, if Dauid were nowe a giuing vp the ghost, as Christ was when he thus spake, doubt­les then he meant thereby that presentlie he hoped for Heauen. I graunt men som­time though not a dying, but beeing in grieuous anguishe and daungerous trou­bles whiche often tymes bringe euen death with them, then also they will commend their Soule into the hands of God. [Page 153]And so might Dauid in thisPsal. 3 [...] place whence Christ taketh this sentence: and yet ne­uerthelesse he desired and hoped for pre­sent release, and insteed of his sorrowe, present inioying of the Lordes comfort and ioyfull fauour. Which in a measure and proportion is answereable to the at­tayning of Heauē, which they haue who depart hence. If any say, the Greeke word in the text parathesomas is I will commend: noting that he look't not for present and immediat entring into Heauen, but in time heerafter. That is a most vaine and ignorant cauillation, proceeding from not considering the Hebraisme there in. For Dauid in like maner hath aphkid, a worde Future in forme, but of the prasent time in sense, as is most frequent with the Hebrues, and as the very circumstances heere doe require it to be.

3 Third: InLuke 16.26. Luke we see a generall and eternall Lawe set estérsktai between Hell and Heauen, that none in Hell can come to Hea­uen, nor out of Heauen into Hell. This Law I say is confirmed more surely then that of the Medes & Persians which also might not be broken. Dan. 6. Therefore Christ brake it not, neither went he down into Hell at all. Obiection. If any say, true it is, this a generall and eternall Law for all other Creatures, that they can ne­uer passe to and fro beeing once in Hell. But Christ being the Son of God heerin was priuileged aboue all other men, this [Page 154]was a thing peculiar to him. Answere. Is that a pri­uilege for Christ to goe into Hell, and to come thence againe? A worthy priuilege surely, and very honorable. All men woulde thinke it a greater honor neuer to haue come in Hell at all. But seeing it is so flatly contrarie to so generall a Lawe, it behoueth you to haue most cleere e­uidence and plaine proofe in the worde to affirme it, or els wee haue great cause to abhorre it and to holde it no preroga­tiue, but a thing verie iniurious and de­rogatory to the Man whiche was also the Sonne of God. Now what euidence and proofe you haue for it which defend it, wee haue seene and tryed to bee more then vaine, if wee note them with any indifferency. Seeing therefore he which was like vs in all thinges (sinne onely excepted) hath left him selfe no witnesse of this most strange and wondrous difference in him, why should wee dreame of such an extraordinary case so presumptuously?Other reasons that Christe went not into Hell. 1 Fur­ther I reason thus: If he triumphed not in Hell, hee went not into Hell. But hee triumphed not in Hell. Therefore he went not into Hell at all. The Assumption is proued: first, Seing Triumph is a word taken from the custom of men of warre, who hauing in battaile conquered their enemies doe vse to triumph ouer them. And this their Triumph men vse to make in the presense of such, as to whom the glory thereof doeth in parte apper­taine. [Page 155]But in Hell there were none with Christ in whose presence he should tri­umph, and to whom some parte of his glo­rie might belong. There were none be­sides, but the Diuells and damned soules. 2 Therfore it is absurd to say Christe triumphed in Hell. A againe, where Christ actually & meer­lie triumphed there began his glorification. But is it not absurd, vea of all absurdities the grea­test to say Hell was the beginninge of Christes glorification. Therefore certainly Christe did not triumph in Hell. Obiection. Some will say hee might aswell triumph in Hell, as on the Crosse. Howe could Christ triumphe on the Crosse, as we interpret that he did:Col. 2.15. He tri­umphed on thesame Crosse. Hee was there in sore torments, and in most pitious plight. Call ye that a triumph? Answere. I answere, wee ne­uer saide, nor the Apostle meante that Christ triumphed actually on the Crosse,How Christ is said to triumph on the Crosse. but virtually as I may say. That is the vir­tue and efficacie of that death did not bring destruction to the sufferer but to the Doer and to the executioner, that is to the Diuell: with whom hee spiritu­allie combated there euen vntill death, and by death was not vanquished, but did vanquish him that had the power of death, that is the Diuell: and him selfe trium­phed. Which effect is contrarie in all o­ther battaills and conflictes. For with vs they who are slaine in fighte, are con­quered, and the suruiuer triumpheth.

But the Holy Ghost giueth vs to know [...] the contrarie touching Christ and his suf­ferings. For his suffering was his victorie, & his dying his triumph. But he meaneth not actually: for while hee suffered, and while he dyed, this was a miserable triumph: and still he suffered, euen till he gaue vp the Ghost. Therefore the meaning heere is not of any actuall triumph: but onely by virtue of that which there he suffered, hee triumphed indeed, and the Crosse whereon he was lifted vp was like a triumphing Cha­riot. All this is thus named because the effect of those sufferinges simplie was the moste perfite treading vnder feet of Sa­than and of all infernall powers. But nowe his triumphing in Hell can be nothing so.Dilemma. Either in Hell it was actuall, which is monstruous absurd: for then Hell was the entrance of his Glor [...]fying, which all the worlde knoweth is the moste inglo­rious and vilest debasinge. Or at least his verie presense was meritorious, and vir­tually triumphant: and this is flatly blas­phemous against the all sufficient merit of the Crosse of Christ.

Heere some will aske, howe doth this derogate from the Crosse of Christe, if hee triumphed in Hell? Because hee trium­phed on his Crosse, yea perfitlie: therefore hee did not in Hell. Obiection. But it is doubted, yea denyed that Christ triūphed at all on the Crosse.Answere. Let the Scripture then speake: [Page 157] [...]o en hypenantion hemin what soeuer was any way against vs he tooke it out of the way, and fastened it to the Crosse, hauing spoyled Principalities and powers, made a shewe of them openly, and hath triumphed ouer them in the same Crosse. They except heere against this translation, namely of the last words, as if the true reading were not en auto in the same with reference to Crosse, but en hautò in himselfe. We aunswer: First, Howsoeuer the reading bee, this doctrine cannot bee impeached notwithstanding, that Christ o [...] the Crosse did all those meritorious and tri­umphant actions ouer sinne and Sathan which are heere in the Colossians specified. I say this doctrine is manifest still, euen by the expresse wordes which are there found: If you translate he triumphed in him­selfe, the meaning is by himselfe there on the Crosse. For all those words & phrases they haue apparant & vndenyable cohaerence and certaine reference to that tyme and place: He put out the hand writing of ordinances that was any way against vs, he euen tooke it out of the way fastening it to the Crosse Apekdus [...] ­menos. hauing (then also) spoyled Principalityes and powers, hee made a shew of thē openly Thriar [...]bou­sa [...]. hauing triumphed ouer them by himselfe. By himselfe? where? euen there on the Crosse most apparantly. For where he took away all things that made any way against vs, there he spoyled the Diuells & triumphed ouer thē: all the words heere beeing iointly of one and thesame tyme, and that also not the future but the tyme now past. But he tooke away all things any [Page 156] [...] [Page 157] [...] [Page 158]way against vs on the Crosse, and fastened the hande writing of our inditement is the Crosse, the text sayeth. Therefore all the reste was there don also. Wherevnto other Scriptures also beeinge compared doe giue further light.Heb. 2.24. Through death hee destroyed, not simply conquered, but destroy­ed and abolished him that had the power of death, that is the Diuell. And this is the true sense also of that finall speach of his, beeing about to strike the laste blowe at his ad­uersary,Ioh. 19.30. It is finished. What is finished? surely all that hee had to doe with any ad­uersary, or any contrary thing to our freedom, euen there and then hee finished it. And heereof is that vehementeIoh. 12.31. speach of Christ though spoken before he was ap­prehēded: Now is the iudgement of this worlde: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out. Hee saith cast out, as if hee neuer appeared any more in his sight after that most absolute victory on the Crosse: Hee spake of the death that be should dye: ver. 33. for thereof he spea­keth in this place, asPag. 61. before wee haue seene. Thus then appeareth plainly this doctrine, that Christ on the Crosse did all and euery one of his victorious actiōs against Sathā, & wrought meritoriously our full deliuerance frō him, so that no [...]ot of his right nor power against vs remayned af­ter that, but there hee spoyled him, there hee confidently triumphed, and made a shew openly of him, and trode him vnder foote for euer: he so beate him & so destroyed his power [Page 159]that there was no feare y^t any thing shuld once stirre against him or vs afterward. This is meant by Christes triumphing on the Crosse. For els indeed a pitions triumph it was, where himselfe remayned in such wofull tormēts, where appeared no shew of conquest, but rather of being conque­red. Therefore this is spoken in regard of the effect which came of this action,His triumph on the Crosse was in regard of the effect whiche it wrought. not of the simple action (or rather passion) it self. What effect? An effect rare and strange, nothing like, yea contrarie to that which happeneth in like case amongst men. When they in fight are beaten, & woun­ded, and slaine, they are conquered: but Christ euen in beeing beaten, and woun­ded, and slaine, therein hee conquered, and triumphed, and led openlie his ene­mies in captiuitie. Nowe hee saith openly, not that Christe did this openly and eui­dently to our senses, but alluding to the maner of conquerours in their trium­phes, who lead in open shew those enemyes which henceforth cannot once strirre a­gainst them any more: so hee signifieth that the effect of Christes very death was such and so forcible indeede, and fully to bee compared with these doings of perfect con­querours: and therefore most emphatically he setteth it out in these termes.

Thus farre this doctrine is iustifyed of Christes triumphing on the Crosse, howsoeuer the reading be in those last words of that [Page 160] Col. 2.15.text. Howbeit the trueth is, this reading en auto in the same Crosse, which wee in our common translations vse after Beza, is no forgerie of Beza. But that noble instru­ment of God doeth shewe,Beza. as many other things most worthie and profitable to the Church of God, so this to bee no new, but a most ancient, and in all likelihood, the common reading in old time, or at least to that very effect. Oecumenius the Greeke Scholiast doeth both read and interprete this place plainly thus: who commonly sheweth what the Greeke Churches vse was Origen who was farre elder, if heHomil. in Exod. 4. read not en auto in the same Crosse, yet he read e [...] xylo in ligno on the tree, which in effect is all one. And thus not onely Origen, but alsoCypri. d [...] Passione. Cyprian, Ierom. Al­gas. quast. [...]. Ierome, with many others. So that if a Romish Priest had traduced M^r Beza for leauing heere their vulgar Latin translation, it had bene shamefull wrong to that faithfull seruaunt of God: Howe much more when brethrē, as they seeme, doe so disgrace him, or rather the trueth of God in him? Thus then it is manifest that Christ triumphed ouer Sathan on the Crosse. And then to doe it againe in Hell, were su­perfluous and vaine: nay it were iniuri­ous to the Crosse of Christ, as if it were not sufficiently nor perfitely there done.

Obiection. If any say, That parable in the Gospel signifieth as much, that Christ bound the Diuel in Hell.Luk. 11.21.22. When a strong man armed kee­peth [Page 161]his pallace, the things that he possesseth are in peace. But when a stronger then he commeth vpon him, and ouercommeth him, hee taketh from him, all his armour, and deuideth his spoyles. This strong mans Palace is Hell, where Christ, which is the stronger man comming vpon Sa­than, spoyleth him, &c. Answer. A fine toy, or rather a shamefull gloze, by vnsauoury Allego­rizing so to corrupt the text. Is this a good way to proue articles of Faith, viz. by allegories? A better sense heereof may be giuen, and more to Christes purpose. That is, Christ really dispossessed Satā out of some in those times that were once real­lie possessed, but afterward by him, a stronger then Sathan, cleerely freed. Also conse­quentlie it may be meant of the Spirituall casting out of Sathā out of Gods elect, who by Nature through sinne hath possession ofEphe. 2. [...]. all men: but by Gods grace and the Ministerie of his worde, he is cast out when Christ calleth vs and sanctifyeth vs vnto him­selfe. Wherefore in a worde there is no holde for you in the Scriptures, but they are vtterlie against all going downe of Christ into Hell.

3 Which we may gather likewise by the Historie of the Euangelistes, who write the doeings of Christ exactlie, all thatIoh. 20.3 [...].31. wee ought to beleeue: and of all other, his Death and Resurrection most specially. But in all of them there is not a worde of any going downe to Hell. Therefore there is no [Page 162]such thing to bee beleeued.

4 Which also may further appeare by that singular recapitulatiō in the Apostle of cer­taine precise Articles of our faith, and namelie of these wherein Christes full victo­rie for our perfite deliuerance is orderlie and sufficiently set downe,The very A­postolike Creed found in Scrip­ture wanteth this art [...]le of Christs going to Hell after Death. as the Church it seemeth generally held in those tymes.1. Cor. 15.2, 3, 4. I haue chieflie deliuered vnto you, that which I haue receaued, that Christ The very same in effect seemeth to haue ben deliuered to this same pur­pose by Christ himselfe Luk. 24 46, 47. dyed for our sinnes ac­cording to the Scripture, and that hee was buryed, and that he arose the thirde day according to the Scriptures. This was the full foundation of Faith in those dayes, by whiche if a man beleeued he might be saued, and which if he beleeued not, hee beleeuedver. [...]. in vaine. Whence it ariseth that Paul had heere great and iust occasion to haue specified this seuerall and waightie Article, that Christ went also into Hell, if anie such thing were then beleeued. Hee nameth the Articles both before and after this. His Dying, Buriall, and Resurrection: hee ought not to haue skipped his Going into Hell, to saue vs from Hell, if those wordes in our common Creede had anie such mea­ning, if it had any diuers meaning from all those mētioned articles, and so waigh­tie a sense as some suppose. It will not be excused to say. The Apostle meant heere to prooue our Resurrection onely: and therefore would speake of purpose, but onely of Christes Death and Resurrec­tion, [Page 163]from whence he might argue ours likewise. I graunt that this is his maine purpose in deede: but when hee sayeth, Except you haue beleeued in vayne, he meaneth that wee bleeeue in vayne, not onely if wee holde not the Resurrection, but also if we holde not those speciall Articles of Faith touching Christes sufferinges and vic­torie for vs, which there presentlie hee na­meth: and consequentlie if wee holde them, then that we beleeue not in vaine, but euen those to be sufficient. Whence it fol­loweth, and it is most certaine, that their fancie of Christes going downe into Hell, is su­perfluous, and excluded out of this vn­doubted Apostles Creed, and out of the Ho­lie Scriptures.

No end nor vse vs Christes go­ing locally into Hell after his death Therfore he went not.Thus farre wee haue seene the Scrip­tures against this deuice: Nowe it were good to see if there bee any vse at all or Ende, that his Descendinge into Hell may haue.5 If there can bee no ende nor vse at all, no benefite to the Godlie there­by, then it is idle, and vaine, and a very dreame, and nothinge els. But there can be no certaine vse at all, and especial­lie no commoditie nor benefite to the Godly by it. Therefore it is a dreame. For what good is there so much as pre­tended? The generall Redemption of all Gods elect & chosen people was wrought and fullie finished on the Crosse, euen to the Cancelling of the very writinges, [Page 164]and taking away of whatsoeuer was anie way against vs: as hath bene shewed be­fore. What could his going downe into Hell adde more? Neither was it any peculiar good to the godlie then deceased before: for they were all in Heauen immediatlie euen then, as well as we that dye since: as we haue proued already. If then it be no way profitable to any of Gods children, what if it were so that the Diuells and repro­bate in Hel might be more cōfounded by such his locall descending? yet see I not, ney­ther can I beleeue howe it may be amonge the Articles of our Creede, all which in trueth a­uayle singularly to Gods owne childrens speciall good. It can not be I say in the Articles of our faith, if it directly profit not the Godly. Yea and touching the further daunting and confounding of the dam­ned; that is a sillie shift God knoweth, & y^e vaynest reason of all, that Christ should goe to triumph and insule vpō the thrise mi­serable and wofull wretches in their pre­sent vnspeakeable Damnation infinitlie confounded alreadie. Sure a very sorie triumph this were for the Sonne of GOD, which euen among mē were nothing but dishonorable. Yea a beast, the Lyon, they say, hauing but the instinct of Nature, yet he refuseth to insult and pray vppon the pitiefull & helples creatures. And would the Lion of the Tribe of Iudah take pleasure to goe thither only to insult farther vppon [Page 165]the miserable damned? I deny not but the wicked in torments might conceaue fur­ther horror, and the blessed in heauē fur­ther ioyes by the actuall death of Christ: but that might full easilie bee by the ver­tue and efficacie of the power of the God­head deriuing some fence thereof to all, howe and when it pleaseth him. There needed no locall Descending into Hell, nor As­cending to Heauen for that matter. 5 Neyther in deed did hee Descende, because it is cer­taine he did not Ascende for any such pur­pose, for ought that we any where reade. 6 Neither surely should the Damned haue bene visited firste, and the Blessed last, yea so long after, that is 40. dayes after his death was past. But contrariwise the God­lie in all reason should first haue had his presence to certifie them, and then the wicked afterward, if any such locall cōming and going for giuing notice had bene re­quired. Wherefore this remayneth that there was no vse, no good at all by Christes Soules descending into Hell. And M^r Hill in sayingHill Sect. 14 He thereby personally redeemed vs frō Hell, andSect. 5. If Christs Soule had not, A bad asser­tion. Dauids Soule must, and his, & ours haue gone to Hell, doth no lesse then derogate frō the Crosse of Christ, and blaspheme his all sufficient death. 7 Al­so if his Soule must goe thither of necessitie to saue our soules thence, why went not his Body too, for to saue our bodyes thence? But of these presumptuous & grosse va­nities [Page 166]we haue sayd enough, & to much alreadie, but that necessitie hath infor­ced vs.

Howbeit yet let vs goe a little further. The Creede it selfe being viewed and mar­ked, will plainly yeelde another meaning of these words, through a right distributing of the Articles thereof: viz. those that concerne Christes Office in being our Sa­uiour and Redeemer. 9 These are all of 2. sortes: some touching his Humiliation, and some his Glorificatiō. The Articles of Chri­stes Humiliation I suppose euery sensible man will confesse to be these, Hee suffered, was Crucifyed, Dead, Buryed, Descended to the Dead, or to Hell: and those of his Glorification to be only these: The third day he rose againe, he Ascended into Heauen, he sitteth at the right hande of God, and thence he shall come to iudge­ment. Which if it be the very naturall and necessarie Diuision of these Articles of the Creede, as it is in deede, thē this ouerthro­weth wholy their opiniō, and stablisheth ours, that Christ went not downe into Hell:By the very or­der of our Creed Christ went not into Hell. namely not to triumph, for then this was not the lowest point of his Humiliatiō, but the first of his Glorification. Which can stand with no sense in this place: & there­fore he descended not by our very Creeds into Hell at all.

10 By other suffi­cient Creedes Christ went not into Hell.Moreouer we finde almost all the Creeds and Rules of Christian faith, certainlie the most & the ancientest & the best (be­side [Page 167]this called the Apostoli [...]e Creed) to want these wordes of Christes descending altogi­ther. These Creedes or summes of our faith we finde i [...] Ad Magnet. Ignatius, Lib 1 cap 1. Irenaeus, Apol 2 Iust. Mart. De preser. aduers. ha [...]. & cou [...] Prax. Tertull. De princip. Origen, Ad Epictet. Athanas A [...] Pet. Diac. Augustin Sym­bol: Nic. Constantinop: 1. Toletan. 1. andCap. 13. Ephe­sin: 1. &c. Which whosoeuer did hold, they were euer acknowledged true and sound Christians. And God forbid that such pre­cise and exact Summaries of Christianitie should be thought defectine in any need­full point. Therefore all these neuer thought that Christes going downe into Hell as some nowe vrge it) was any distinct and certaine Article of Christiā faith. But how then is it possible that these perfit and fa­mous Creede should want that whiche our common Creede hath? SurelyIn Symbol. Ruffinus shew­eth, Vis verbi eadem videtur esse, in co quod se­pultus dicitur. Note Ruffinus. The effect of this Article He descended to Infernum seemeth (sayeth he) to bee the same with this, Hee was baryed Whereby euen the Ancients do appeare to cōsent with vs here in effect, that these wordes of Christs go­ing to Hades or Insernum in our Creede doe signifie no more in deed, then the former wordes there signified, and that this was added but for Emphasis sake to shewe more plainly that he was truely dead in deede, as wePag. 127.128. before obserued. And certainly vn­les this were so, all those moste excellent Creedes before mentioned, ought not in any wise so vtterly to want it, as they doe. [Page 168]Also howe generallie this was wantinge, Ruffinus sheweth heerewithall, Sciēdum sanè est quod in Ecclesiae Romana Symbolo non habetur additum, Descendit ad inserna, sed nec in Orientis Lcelesus habetur hic Sermo: Wee must knowe verilie, that the Church of Romes Creed hath not this added, Hee went vnto the Dead, neyther is this clause in the East Chur­ches. But so generally, and so farr and wide in the Cristian worlde, a necessarie Article, distinct from the rest, neyther was, nor could be wanting: specially seeing they al found it in the Apostolike Creed expresly put in. Therefore it must needes be, I thinke, they all tooke it but to signifie in effect the same as Dead and Buryed: yea euen in the common Creede called Apostolike. And therefore theyAthanas. Symb. &c. sometime vsed those ex­presse wordes, & somtime they vsed them not: and yet they neuer differed, they nei­ther aboūded nor wanted in their maine sense. And so it could not meane with them, that Christ went to Hell.

Obiection. Now it remaineth vt res ad Triarios rede­at, that this matter may bee holpen with the last, the best, & the only succour: that is some of the particular Fathers. What say they? Doe they teach that Christ after death, went downe into Hell. Answere. I denye that also: the Fathers teach not so. Taking Hell as in English properly we always meane, for the very place of the damned. I graūt many of them thought that he went to Limbus patrum: though this name bee not found in them, but was framed by the [Page 169] Schoolmen since. Howbeit such a place they dreamed of, as was out of Hoauen, they thought in y^t deep of the earth, whēce he fetch'd the soules of y^t Patriarks out, & ca­ried thē vp with him to Heauen. Which o­pinion the Papistes haue laid fast hold on since euē till this day, hauing also increa­sed it with other fables. And thus in deed som of y^t Auncients imagined & ghessed by reason of their mistaking of the Greeke Hades in the cōmon Creed, and in the Scrip­tures, and somwhat also by mistaking the old vse of the Latin Insert, wherwith they commonly vsed to translate Hades, as be­fore I haue largely declared. When they once mistooke these words, and specially Hades, to signifie Hell properly, then they could not but deuise some likely matter of it, & some purpose for it, which els had bene ridiculous. And yet euen heerein they spake waueringlie & ambiguouslie: a token indeed that they spake they knew not what, as inAugust. Eph. 99. Augustin we may see. But I hope with vs euery where esthaec tampri­dem explosa sententia est, This old rotten er­rour is abhorred: which I also haue refu­ted brieflie before. How be it in a worde,The Fathers are not for Christs descen­ding into the Hell of the Damned. the Fathers knewe not this our present o­pinion in Controuersie now, that he went locallie into the Hell of the damned, and not to any Limbus. Herein they that hold against vs haue no helpe at the Fathers handes, whatsoeuer they pretend. It begā [Page 170]not I suppose till about Ma [...] Luhers time, when they sawe somewhat of the Popish errours heerein, but could not presentlie bee purged from all their filth. Nowe since that tyme diuers of our Protestants, though they l [...]s in deed the olde Popish Lambo, yet not discerning but that surelie Christ went into Hell after death (because I thinke sundrie of the Fathers in wordes make shewe of some such vncouth thing) therefore they deuised a fresh howe this might be,The contrarie­tie about Chri­stes descending unto Hell. and wherefore. Some thought to suffer torments there, some not to suf­fer in anie wise, but to triumph forsooth in Hell, and some knewe not why he went to Hell, but thither he went they thought. And some, that hee went and came a­gayne from thence presently, not staying two houres in Hell: others that he stayed there all the while till his Resurrection. In the ende of Maister Humes against. D. Hill, we may see how diuerslie they thou­ght herein who were the defendours, yea the beginners of this opinion. Scarce any of them agree with an other, it seemeth: & with those of vs in England that leane this way, not one of thē all that are stran­gers, doe seeme fully to consent. But whe­ther they doe or no, whether any of the olde or newe Writers say of or on, it ma­keth no great matter. Wee haue learned Christ Iesus otherwise, thē to stay our ho­ly faith on the credit of any man, or men. [Page 171]Our treatise I hope before groūded who­ly on Gods word, hath sufficiently cleered this point to be but a deuise of mē, a meer forgery, & no truth in Religion at al: yea & so much the more hatefull, as that it is vrged to be taken as one of the Articles of faith. In which our deniall neither want we the cōsent of mē. The Ancients we haue noted before: the late Godly Christians are many & most famous that giue their ioint consent with vs heerin. The beste reformed Churches, the French, Dutch, Hel­uetian, and Scottish, with all their most wor­thy and learned Pastors in them are with vs. And to speake of our selues in England: first all our most famous & learned Tea­chers in her Maiest▪ time haue so taught, Mr Fulk, Mr. Whitakers, Mr Rainolds, Mr Deering, The consent of many Godlie learned in this that Christe went not pro­perly into Hell. &c. Mr Nowel some think holdeth contra­rie. The good old Father liueth, and ther­fore himself can shew his own mind ther­in best. As for hisIn Catech. words that bee extant, they proue it not: Christs soule beeing se­parate frō his body descendit ad inferos: whi­che we may well interpret thus, it went vn­to the Dead. or amonge the Dead, as wee haue shewed before that Inferi or Infernum may signifie. And speciallie we may thinke his meaning in those wordes was not against the manifest meaning of our wholeAnno. 1562. Sy­nod: whose doctrine was well knowen to him, and is our publike doctrine, and e­stablished by Lawe in Englande.

This Synod apparātly renounceth this do­ctrine of Christes going downe to the Hell of the damned.The Doctrine receaued and established in England is a­gainst Christes going into Hell properly. But howe appeareth it? Euen thus: The Synod before holden in K. Edwardes time affirmed this doctrine di­rectly and expresly. This Synod comming after doth correct and amend this very article of the former. It repeateth and ra­tifieth parte thereof in expresse wordes: but parte of it, euen all and euery whit that contayneth this doctrine expresly of Christs going down to the Hell of the damned, all this I say,Anno 1562. our Synod cutteth of, it putteth out, it casteth away. There­fore our Synod renounceth apparantly this sense of the Creede, that Christ defended to the Hell of the damned. The words are these of the former Synod: Quemadmodum Christus pro nobis mortuus est & sepultus, ita est etiam credendus ad inferos descendisse. Nam Cor­pus vsque ad resuriectionem in sepulchro iacuit, spiritus ab illo emissus cum spiritibus qui in carcere siue in inferno detine hantur suit, illis (que) praedicauit, quemadmodum testatur Petri locus. In whiche last wordes they in deede expreslie deter­mine that Christ went in his soule after death into the Hell of the damned: and no maruaile in them, who did but newlie peepe out of Poperie. But our Synode since correcteth it heerein, and saieth but thus only, Quemadmodum Christus pro nobis mortuus est & sepultus, ita est etiam credendus ad inferos descēdisse: As Christ dyed for vs and was buried, [Page 173]so wee are to beleeue also that he went vnto the Dead. That he went into the Hell of the dam­ned, which followed expreslie in all the next wordes, this they wholy corrected, suppressed, and refused. This therefore in them is seene manifestlie (as I saide) to renounce and abrogate this particular sense of Christs descending, that he went after death into Hell. If any say,Obiection. Our Synod leaueth it free to any conuenient sense, it denyeth none. Answere. First, then it is graunted, as in deede it is true, they would haue none punished for holding any probable sense heerein, though he thinke not that Christ went into Hell. Secondly, I say this is true also and manifest by the praemisses, that they leaue in deede this Article of our Creed to any conuenient sense, they denie none, sauing onely this which before in K. Edwardes tyme was expreslie comman­ded, and is here with vs specially put out. By putting it out, they denye this appa­rantlie. Therefore I conclude,The Lawe in England is a­gainst Christes going into Hell properly. if we note this well, it can not be denyed but the pu­blike sentence of our Churches, yea theAct of Par [...]. anno Eliz. 1 [...]. Cap. 12. Lawe of our Land confirming the same, as wel as the Holy Scripture which is the Lawe of God, is against this opinion of Christes descending into Hell.

All which being duely considered, I maruaile that a man of learning and wis­dome as he is thought, who hath openlie impugned this doctrine of late, would so [Page 172] [...] [Page 173] [...] [Page 174]rashlie runne into these errours, and so vainly defend them afterwardes, that hee would rather Gods Church should bee pitiously disturbed about them, as now it is, then that his ill conceites should bee kept to himselfe. And for my parte, my trust is, that in resisting these sansies and notable errours of Christes suffering for vs only in Flesh, and of his Soule descending into Hell, sauouring so strongly of Popery, and vanitie, I haue done according to my power without respect of persons, but what in conscience I owe both to God, and to his Church, & to our whole state. And thus the Lorde in mercy will yet (I doubt not) beate downe errour, and ad­uance his trueth still, yea euen by ma­king thinges that are not to bring to nought thinges that are, that his own Name may haue all the glorie. Amen.