The Contents whereof may be seene in certaine Resolutions before the Booke, in the Titles ouer the Pages, and in a Table made to that end.

ROM. 6. v. 10. In that (Christ) died, he died to sinne ONCE.
ROM. 10. v. 6. & 7. Say not in thine heart, Who shall descend to the bottomlesse deepe? That is to bring Christ backe from the dead.
AVGVST. Epist. 99.

Quod fuerit anima mortificatus Iesus, quis audeat dicere?

That Iesus was dead in soule, who dare auouch?

Quis nisi Infidelis negauerit fuisse apud Inferos Christum?

Who but an Infidell will denie Christ was in Hell?

Perused and allowed by publike Authoritie.

LONDON, Printed by Melchisedech Bradwood for Iohn Bill. M. DC. IIII.

TO THE HIGH AND MIGHTY, VVISE, AND RELIGIOVS PRINCE, IAMES by the grace of God King of Great Brittaine, France, and Ireland, Defender of the true and Chri­stian Faith &c.

MOst religious and renowned Prince, if the Heathen, reaching no farther than the light of Nature could leade them, sawe those Common-weales would soone flourish, whose Gouernors were giuen to the study of Philosophy; how much rather must Christians ascribe that to heauenlie Wisdome, which they did to earthly, and confesse those Realms to be blessed indeed, where the chiefe Rulers are carefull to seeke first the Kingdome of God, & to prefer the loue of true pietie before all respect of humane policie? For since Gods purpose and promise is to honour them 1. Sam. 2. that honour him; and no good thing can be wanting to those that rightly worship him according to his will; how liberall benedictions & mercifull protections may those Princes hope for at Gods hands, who set their hearts wholly to seeke him, and make all their wayes straight in his sight? This fauour from heauen, to be guided by good and godly Princes, the Realme of England hath tasted a long time, to their no small comfort; whiles for these 45 yeeres by the Christian care of a most milde and gratious Queene, (now with God) they haue beene directed to the trueth of the Gospell of Christ; and de­fended in peace from the violence of all impeachers and im­pugners of either. And after her decease, though our vnthank­fulnesse had prouoked the wrath of God, and our vnfruitful­nesse well deserued, the Kingdome of God should be taken [Page] from vs; yet he that is rich in mercie towards all that call on him, respecting more the glory of his name, lest his enemies should blaspheme, than any worthinesse of ours, not onely continued, but increased his accustomed goodnesse to vs; and gaue your Maiestie, being the lineall and rightfull heire to the Crowne of this Realme, a present and peaceable entrance with the greatest applause of all states, sorts, and sides, that hath beene seene these many ages; and specially of the godlie, who saw the happinesse of the former gouernment would be doubled by the manifolde gifts and graces of your Christian and Princely integrity, clemency, bounty, wisdome, and piety. And surely their hope hath not deceiued them: for who so hath rightly discerned, and duely considered your be [...]ignesse of nature, your ripenesse of iudgement, your deepnesse of wis­dome, your vprightnesse of iustice, your readinesse to mercie, your bounteousnesse to the best, your euennesse to all, your desire of peace, your care of your people, your fauour to your Cleargie, and respect to your Church; your promptnesse in professing, and stedfastnesse in establishing the true seruice of God amongst vs, which your Highnesse hath constantly shew­ed since you came to the Crowne, can not but acknowledge that to be iustly applied to your Maiestie, which was first sayd of Salomon: Blessed be the Lord your God, which loued you to set you on the Throne (of all Britaine) because the Lord loued this land, & made you King to doe equitie and iustice: happie are those your seruants, which stand euer before you, and heare your wisdome. Whereof, because it pleased God and your Maiestie, I should attend you aswell at your Table in your first Progresse into these Countries of Sur­rey and Hampshire, as at your conference for matters of Reli­gion, and assemblie of States for the welfare of this Realme, I can beare certaine and assured witnesse; as likewise can the rest of your Nobles and Bishops then present; who all, with no lesse admiration than contentation, heard, with what sharp­nesse of vnderstanding, maturenesse of knowledge, soundnesse of reason, firmnesse of memorie, and aptnesse of speech, your Highnesse entred, debated and resolued the greatest and har­dest points of diuine and humane wisdome; shewing in euery of them such dexteritie, perspicuitie, and sufficiencie, as I pro­fesse [Page] before God without flattery, I haue not obserued the like in any man liuing. As therefore I iudge the whole Realme blessed and beloued of God for giuing them a Prince of such rare prudence, intelligence, and experience; so doe I after the example of the Apostle thinke my selfe happy, that I shall this dayActs 26. bring these matters in question before so learned, religious, and iudicious a King, no lesse skilfull in the sacred Scriptures, than carefull to continue the true Christian faith thorowout his Dominions, without dissenting from the will of God re­uealed in his Word, or departing from the primitiue Church of Christ in her best and purest times.

May it then please your excellent Maiestie to be enformed, that vpon some mens too much forwardnesse to innouate as well the doctrine as the discipline of the Church of England, (they thinking those deuices alwayes best, which are newest) it was rife in Pulpits, and vsuall in Catechismes, that the death of Christ Iesus on the Crosse, and his bloudshed for the remis­sion of our sinnes, were the least cause and meane of our re­demption; but he did, and must suffer the death of the soule, and the very same paines which the damned doe in hell, before we could be ransomed from the wrath of God; and this was that descent of Christ to hell, which we are taught by the Creed to beleeue. This opinion began to preuaile so fast, that children were trai­ned to it, and the people led to controle the Scriptures, as not rightly deliuering the true cause of our redemption by Christ, in that they mention no meane to ransome vs from death and hell, but the bloud of his crosse, and death admitted in the bodie of his flesh; and therefore in all such places we must (as they say) by a kinde of Synecdoche conceiue the death of the damned to haue beene suffered for a season in the soule of Christ, and that to be the full and perfect price of our redemp­tion. I was much grieued, I confesse to your sacred Maiestie, to finde this so often in Catechismes, and frequent in Pulpits, and without iust ground in the Word of God to be so confi­dently blazed, whiles the doctrine of this Realme, proposed by publike authoritie to the people in the Booke of Homilies, was neglected and loathed: And vpon conference with the most reuerend Father the late Archbishop (now with God) [Page] was aduised in open audience to deliuer, what the Scriptures teach touching our redemption by the death and bloudshed­ding of Iesus Christ the Sonne of God. Which accordingly I did, declaring by occasion of the Apostles words, Be it far from me to reioyce, but in the Crosse of Christ, first the Contents, and then the Effects of Christes crosse. In the Contents of Christes crosse IThe sermons shewed what Christ suffered by the witnes of holy Scripture, and what he suffered not; and there ioyned this issue; That no Scripture doth teach the death of Christs soule, or the paines of the damned, to be requisite in the person of Christ, before he could be the Ransomer of our sinnes, and Sauiour of the world. And because the proofs, pretended for this point, might be three; Praedictions, that Christ should suffer those paines; Causes, why he must suffer them; and Signes, that he did suffer them: I likewise insisted on all three, and shewed there were no such Praedictions, Causes, nor Signes of the true paines of hell to be suffered in the soule of Christ, before he could saue vs. Where­in, his Agonie in the Garden, and Complaint on the Crosse were examined, as well by the rules of holy Scripture, as by the maine consent of all the Fathers. And lest the death of Christ suffered in the bodie of his flesh on the altar of the Crosse, as it is described in the Scriptures, and the shedding of his precious bloud should be disabled or distrusted of any, as no sufficient meanes or price of our redemption; in the Effects of Christs crosse, I prooued the merits of Christes suffering to be infinite in respect of his person, who was God, and of the perfection of his obedience vnto the death of the Crosse; the maner of his offering to be bloudie foreshewed by the Sacrifices of the Law, and sealed by the Sacraments of the Gospell; the power of his death to be mightie as able to conquer Sinne, Hell, and Satan; the comfort of his Crosse to be necessarie to which we must all be conformed to suffer with him, before we can raigne with him; the victorie thereof to be heauenly, in that he rose the third day into a celestiall and eternall life, hauing all his enemies vnder his feet. Yet for peace sake I yeelded, the name of hell-paines might in some sort be tolerated in the suf­ferings of Christ, if we meant thereby great and intolerable paines, as the word is sometimes metaphorically taken in the [Page] Scriptures, at the least by our vulgar translation: for the word indeed was Sheôl, which is vsed aswell for the graue, as for hell; and so those speeches of Dauid, That the paines of Sheol found him out or compassed him, might import the paines of death, which brought men to their graues.

And concerning that Article of our Faith, Christ descended to Hell; I taught, it might not by the course of the Creed be re­ferred to Christ liuing, but to Christ dead, and safely note the conquest which Christs manhood after death had ouer all the powers of darkenesse, declared by his resurrection, when he rose Lord ouer all his enemies in his owne person; Death, Hell, and Satan not excepted; and had the Keyes (that is, all power) of death and hell deliuered him by God, that those in hea­uen, earth, and hell should stoope vnto him, and be subiect to the strength and glorie of his Kingdome. These things were first vttered by speech, and after committed to writing, that aswell the parts as proofes of euery point might more plainly ap­peare to all that would examine them. My care was in either of these to ioyne with the doctrine prescribed by the booke of Homilies to be taught in the Church of God to the people; That there is none other thing, that can be named vnder heauen, to The first and second Ser­mon of the Passion. saue our soules, but this only worke of Christes precious offering his bodie vpon the Altar of the Crosse. For so great was Gods wrath and displea­sure towards sinne, that he could be pacified by no other meanes, but only by the sweet and precious bloud of his deere Sonne. And so pleasant was this sacrifice and oblation of his Sonnes death, which he so obediently and inno­cently suffered, that God would take it for the onely and full amends for all the sinnes of the world. As for Christs descent to hell, I deliuered the same ends and intents, which the booke of Homilies doth, where it saith; Christes death destroyed death, and ouercame the Diuell. The Sermon of the Resur­rection. His death destroyed hell with all the damnation thereof. Christ passed thorow death and hell, to the intent to put vs in good hope, that by his strength we shall do the same. He destroyed the Diuell, and all his tyran­nie, and openly triumphed ouer him, and tooke away from him all his Cap­tiues (meaning all the Elect) and hath raised, and set them with him­selfe amongst the heauenly Citizens aboue.

These things thus preached and printed by me, it may please your excellent Maiestie to vnderstand, were first im­pugned [Page] by an hastie and humorous Treatise, whiles my Ser­mons were yet vnder the Presse; and after by a larger and wa­rier Defence, which is this that I now refute. The Treatiser sli­dingThe Trea­ [...]ise. from the things proposed by me, (wherein he could not open his mouth but with as many vntrueths as words) did beare men in hand the question was, Whether Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God, or no; whereas I mooued no such doubt, but rather acknowledged, That all which Christ suffe­red in soule or in bodie, was the wrath of God against our sinnes; if we speake as the Scriptures doe of punishments pro­uided [...]or this life, where Christ did suffer, and not of the wrath to come, which is the vengeance prepared for the Diuell and the damned in another world. And because in this Trea­tise I found moe distempered pangs of erroneous follie, than aduised steppes of learning or religion, I refelled the chiefe reasons thereof in a Conclusion added to my Sermons, as theyThe Conclu­sion of the Sermons. were in printing; not thinking it worth my time or paines to make any longer resutation of him, that remembred so little of that I had vttered, and reasoned so loosely for that which he would establish.

No sooner were those Sermons and that Conclusion pub­lished, but the curious Brethren, seeing their kingdome of conceits impugned, made their obseruations on both, and sent their collections and reasons to the Treatiser, that he might make a fresh Defence; correcting in many things hisThe De­fence. former rashnesse, and now leading him rather cunningly to cauill with the Fathers speeches, than so proudly to disdaine their testimonies: which maketh him not only to change his minde in many matters from that he sayd before, but often to crosse himsel [...]e in the selfe same leafe, whiles he doth not marke what he sayth out of his owne heart, and what he brin­geth out of other mens supplies and papers. In this Defence (for so they call it) they labour more to impeach my proofes, than to iustifie his former reasons; and as it were slipping their owne necks out of the coller, they inuade my Sermons with their whole might, making the world beleeue, I haue not only proued nothing, but vttered such strange positions, as no Di­uinitie will endure. Howbeit in their hoatest onsets I might [Page] soone perceiue, they still wrested my words from their right sense, as they did both Scriptures and Fathers; and shrouded themselues vnder certaine generall and ambiguous phrases, as, That Christ suffered the proper wrath and meere iustice of God, and full punishment of sinne, in substance, though not in circumstance; with which they seeke to blinde the Reader and intangle the Op­ponent, that he should neuer finde their exact and particular Assertion, but they would alwayes be sure to haue a refuge to their large and vnknowen couerts; from which they step not an inch, and without which they say nothing, for feare to be taken tardie with heresie or open impietie.

To waste time, and enter brabbles about words, my mani­folde businesses and publike seruices did not suffer me; and had not my late Soueraigne (now with God) at her last being at the Castle of Farnham taken knowledge of the things que­stioned betwixt me and them, and directly commanded mee neither to desert the doctrine, nor to let the calling, which I beare in the Church of God, to be trampled vnder foot by such vnquiet Refusers of trueth and authoritie, I confesse to your excellent Maiestie, I had made farre shorter worke with them, and not spent a quarter of the paper which now is be­stowed on the cause. Vpon her appointment, which was sa­cred to me (notwithstanding my sicknesse, which detained me two yeeres from studie, whiles I was forced to seeke the reco­uerie of my health, and many other affaires and attendances, which continually called me away) I beganne to reuiew the whole; and since there was neither order nor method in their writing, to trace them in their confusion, which hath beene most tedious; and in the end to let them see, That neither for themselues, nor against me, in that whole Defence they haue vttered one true sentence; though the waightiest and most of their matters, besides their darke and deceitfull generalities, be proposed with as it were, in a sense, it seemeth, after a sort, and such like wauering and perplexed speech. I haue open [...]d to your most sacred Maiestie, most prudent Prince, the cause and course of this large Suruey, which it hath pleased God to re­serue to your Princely view, my late Soueraigne being taken out of this life the beginning of that Summer, wherein I meant [Page] to commit it to the Presse; and so had I done the first yeere of your Maiesties entring into this Realme, had not the infection of your principall citie, and my attendance on your Maiestie (as my duetie bound me) here in this countrey stayed me.

The points handled in the former Sermons, and iustified in this later Suruey, are many, and those very materiall; the chiefe heads whereof, though they appeare aswell in the Titles ouer [...]ch Page, as in the Table prepared of purpose to helpe the confusion of their Defence, yet I will summarily contract and annex to these presents, that your Princely wisdome may with more ease perceiue in euery of these things controuersed, what I defend; and censure the same, when it hath pleased your Highnesse at your leasure to view the particular parts and proofs, as it seemeth best to your learned and religious iudge­ment. My only desire, and humble petition to your most sa­cred Maiestic, as becommeth a Christian Bishop, is, That in the foundations of our faith, I meane the worke and meane of our Redemption and Reconciliation to God by Iesus Christ, men be not suffered, vnder your godly gouernment, to preach or publish their vnwritten fansies, and by their continuall Sy­necdoches, which are manifest additions to the Word of God, to alter and inuert the Trueth, so plainly, fully, and frequently deliuered by the Apostles of Christ in the sacred Scriptures: lest if they get this liberty, with vnnecessary figures where they list to interlace the Word of God in these maine points of Sal­uation, they leaue neither doctrine nor discipline sound in the end.

And as in the first question they adde to Christes sufferings the death of the soule and of the damned, though there be no such thing warranted or witnessed in the Scriptures; so in the second they outface Christes Descent to Hell with phrases and figures, when it is plainly professed in the Creed, (where not phrases of speech, but Articles of faith are deliuered) and ex­pressed in the Scriptures, That Christes soule was not left (or for­saken) in hell; and that very place alleaged by Peter, as properly pertaining to Christ, and no way common to him with Da­uid, who being a Prophet, knew that God had sworne with an oath to raise vp Christ, to set him vpon his Throne, & to make him Lord (of all) [Page] and Christ, that is, the anointed Sauiour of his people from Sinne, Death, and Hell. And though all the Fathers Greeke and Latine from the Apostles times, haue receiued, beleeued, and deliuered that to be the sense of Peters words; as likewise of Pauls: That Christ, who ascended on high, descended first to the lower parts of the earth; yet they sticke neither at Scriptures, Creeds, nor Fathers, but wrench and wrangle with them all, subiecting euery thing to their sleights and shifts, that they may raigne as they will in the Word of God. Where like­wise they shame not to condemne all the Fathers Greeke and Latine, as conspiring against the Trueth, and peruerting the Scriptures, by altering the authentike vse of words; for which they appeale to Plato and prophane Poets. This the Treati­ser blusheth not to write: This Iaffirme; It is only the Fathers abu­siue Treat. pag. 95. speaking, and altering the ancient sense of Hades, that hath bred this [...]rrour of Christes descending into Hell; their vnapt and perilous transla­ting it into Latine, Inferi; and our naughtie and corrupt translating in English, Hell, hath confirmed the same. And note heere this first; It is a thing too rife with the Fathers, yea with some of the ancientest of them, to alter and change the authentike vse of words, whereby consequently it is easie for errours and grosse mistakings to creepe in. This lowd and lewd Proclamation he maketh against all Christian Writers, Greeke, Latine, and English, since the first foundation of the Church, and yet therein erreth most absurdly and shamefully. For the Greeke Fathers vse the word Hades, as the Apostles and Euangelists did; for the place where torments after this life are prepared for the wicked; and the prophane Graecians (one conceit of Socrates excepted) did alwayes take it for a place of darkenesse vnder the earth, whither they thought good and bad descended; the wicked to punishment, the better sort to such delights, as carnall men dreampt of after death in their Elysian fields. In both these questions I haue not spared (most religious Prince) aswell to examine the Scrip­tures with all diligence, as to shew the confession and resoluti­on of Christs Church long before our times, that all the world may see, I maintaine none other grounds of Faith, nor sense of Scripture, than haue beene anciently, constantly and continu­ally professed, and beleeued in the Church of Christ for these [Page] fifteene hundred yeeres, till this our present Age; and the same allowed and ratified by the publike lawes of this Realme, which your Maiestie in your most Princely wisdome and cou­rage professe to vpholde and continue.

God for his holy Names sake blesse your most sacred Ma­iestie, and prosper all your vertuous and Christian cares, that as in learning and wisdome, in clemencie and pietie, he hath made you the Mirrour of this Age; so in peace and prosperi­tie, in concord and vnitie, in all happinesse and felicitie, he may exalt you aboue all your neighbour Princes; and ha­uing vnited the two Realmes of England and Scotland in one subiection vnder your Princely right and regiment, he will knit the hearts and hands of both to honour and serue you, loue and obey you, and your royall issue after you, to the worlds end.

Your Maiesties most humble subiect and seruant THO. WINTON.


THe cleerenes and fulnes of the Scriptures in the worke of our Redemption is exactly to be reuerenced; so as no man ought to teach or beleeue any thing touching our redemp­tion by Christ, which is not expresly witnessed in the sa­cred Scriptures: much lesse may we distrust the manifest words of the holy Ghost to be impertinent or vnsufficient in declaring the true price and meane of our redemption.

The maine ground of the Gospell, which the Apostles preached, the faith­full receiued, wherein they continued, and whereby they were saued, was this; That Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures, and was buried, and rose the third day; according to the Scriptures. Since then we are reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne, we must acknowledge none o­ther death of Christ then that which he suffered in the bodie of his flesh, after which he was buried, and from which he rose the third day, which death the Scriptures most apparently describe to be the death of Christs bodie.

If we were redeemed by the bloud of Christ, and God proposed him (to be) a Reconciliation through faith in his bloud, which was shed for the remission of sinnes; we may not presume to appoint a new price of our redemp­tion, or new meane of our reconciliation; since by the bloud of his crosse Christ hath pacified both the things in earth, and things in heauen; and the bloud of Iesus Christ cleanseth vs from all sinne.

The Scriptures doe no where teach, nor mention the death of Christs Joule, or the death of the damned, which is the second death, to be needfull for our re­demption. We must not therefore intrude our selues into Gods seat to ord [...]ne a new course for mans redemption.

If the Spirit doe quicken, and the iust liue by faith, and he that abideth in loue, abideth in God, who is life; it was vtterlie impossible, but the soule of Christ in that abundance of Spirit, euidence of Faith, assurance of Hope, and perfection of Loue, which he alwayes retained, should alwayes liue to God.

Life and death being opposed as priuatiues, and so not to be found in one and the same subiect at one and the same time; the soule of Christ alwayes liuing, could neuer be dead. Neither could a dead soule be pleasing to God, (who is whole life, and therefore hateth death as contrarie to his nature;) when yet he was alwayes well pleased with Christ.

Where some imagine extreame paine in Christs soule may be called the death of his soule; that position is repugnant to the Scriptures: for the greater the paine which the soule feeleth, and endureth with innocencie, confidence, obe­dience, and patience, (such as were all Christes sufferings) the more the soule liueth and cleaueth to God, for whose glorie it suffereth so much smart; as ap­peareth in Martyrs, whose soules do most liue in their greatest torments.

The late deuice of hell-paines in Christes passion is not only false, but also su­perfluous: for the true paines of hell neither are, nor can be suffered in this life, where, by Gods ordinance extreame paine driueth the soule from the bodie: much lesse can man or Angell endure them with obedience and patience, as Christ did all his paines. And what need was there of hell-paines in the crosse of Christ, since God can by euery meanes, or without meanes raise more paines in bodie or soule, than any creature can endure.

Christs soule could not be strooken with any horrour of Gods displeasure a­gainst him, since in his greatest anguish he professed God to be his God, and his Father, and by prayer preuailed for his persecutors (as appeared after by their conuersion) and gaue eternall life to the soule of the Thiefe hanging by him, and beleeuing on him. Now to giue life is more than to haue life; and restore others to fauour he can not, that himselfe is in displeasure.

Hell-fire, which the damned and diuels do and shall suffer, is a true and eter­nall fire prepared by the mightie hand of God to punish aswell spirits as bodies; and this errour, That the fire of hell was only an internall or spirituall fire in the soules and consciences of men, was long since condemned in Origen by the Church of Christ.

Reiection therefore, desperation, confusion, horrour of damnation, exter­nall and eternall fire, which are the torments of the damned, and true paines of hell, can not without blasphemie be ascribed to Christ. Christ therefore suffe­red neither the death of the soule, nor the paines nor horrors os the damned, or of hell.

Euery sinne is common to the whole man, who is defiled euen with thoughts that be euill; not only because the bodie is the Seat, wherein, and the instru­ment, whereby the soule worketh; but also for that the first infection of sinne commeth to the soule by the bodie, and the first information and prouocation to sinne riseth from the senses and affections, which are mooued with corporall spirits; and all the parts and powers of the bodie attend the will with most rea­die subiection to haue each sinne (which the soule conceiueth) impressed on them, and executed by them. And therefore the suffering for sinne in the per­son of the Mediatour, must be common both to bodie and soule in such sort, that as in transgressing, our soules are the principall Agents, so in the suffering for sinne, his soule was the principall Patient.

Christ would vse no power to assuage the force and violence of his paines, (though he wanted none, as appeareth by his ouerthrowing them with a word, that came to apprehend him;) but submitted himselfe to his Fathers will with greater obedience and patience, than any man liuing could. We may therefore safely beleeue, That the iustice of God condemning sinne in (Christes) flesh, proportioned the paines of his bodie, in which hee bare our sinnes, to the strength of his patience; and so both his paines and his patience farre exceeded all mens. The rather for that Christes sense did not faile him by degrees, as ours doth, when the paines of death are extreamest, which driue our soules from our bodies; but hee did in most perfect sense feele the sting and bitter­nesse of paine to the last breath; by reason he was of his owne accord, at an in­stant appointed by his Father, to breathe out his owne soule, and so did, to the great admiration of the Centurion that obserued it; and consequently hee re­tained [Page] firmnesse of voice, and exactnesse of sense, all the while his paines were at sharpest.

The soule is punished in this life by her vnderstanding, will, affections, and senses, according as their obiects, directed and strengthened by God, make vio­lent and vehement impressions; the torment of hell-fire being the iudgement of another world. Neither is God the tormenter of soules in hell with his imme­diate hand, but by his wisdome and power hath ordained euerlasting fire, as an externall Agent aboue nature, to take vengeance of damned men and diuels according to their deserts.

No Scripture doth teach, That God with his immediate hand tormented the soule of his Sonne on the Crosse, or in the Garden; notwithstanding Christes soule was full of feare and sorow in the Garden, and of griefe and paine on the Crosse: all which outward and inward passions ne did, ne could peruert Christs will, nor oppresse his power; but they must all be voluntarie, that they might all be meritorious; and the more Christs power was to admit them, when he would, as he would, and because he would; the more his obedience was to the will and hand of God, who forced nothing on Christ against his will, but by that which was offered and suffered, tried the obedience of his Sonne, and accepted all from him as a most willing Sacrifice.

The wrath of God punishing our sinnes in the person of Christ, was neither such as the Damned in hell, nor as the Reprobate in earth doe suffer; but ra­ther common to the members of Christ, who must drinke of this Cuppe, haue fellowship with his afflictions, and be conformed to his death, though they ne­uer feele the true paines of hell, nor haue their soules tormented by Gods im­mediate hand. Neither was it any other wrath, than such as might stand with Gods loue towards his Sonne, (who did not hate him for our sakes, but loued vs for his) and was Fatherly tempered to the strength of Christes manhood, and graciously ouerruled and quenched by the fauour that God bare to the per­son of his Sonne. And therefore the termes of meere and proper wrath (if they meane proper to the damned) are false and impious in Christes sufferings, which neither in maner, measure, nor purpose, did agree with the torments of the damned.

The true and full satisfaction for our sinnes, must not be deriued from the singularitie and infinitie of Christes paines, longer and greater than which the damned and diuels doe euery one suffer; but from the dignitie of the person, who being the only and eternall Sonne of God that made vs, humbled himselfe in our stead, and in our nature to restore vs, and offered recompense for our sinnes, which was his submission and obedience vnto the death of the Crosse, more pleasing to God than our condemnation to hell could haue beene: for in this ballance betweene the wrath of God against our sinnes, and the loue of God towards his Sonne, neither was his iustice neglected, nor his loue ouer sway­ed; but a sweet and wise temper of both was prouided for the manhood of his Sonne, first to suffer with patience, and then to raigne with glorie; that all the sonnes of God might be the more willing and readie by his example to obey the will, and abide the hand of God, before they did enter into his Kingdome.

The Scriptures witnessing, that the Sacrifices of God are a troubled spirit, this might not want in Christes Sacrifice for sinne; but he approching the pre­sence [Page] of God with and for our offences, lawfully might, and exceedingly did feare the greatnesse and iustnesse of Gods anger against our iniquities; and as deeply sorrowed, that Gods holinesse was so carelesly despised, and highly dis­pleased with our manifolde iniquities. Which inward sacrifices of feare and sorrow for vs, and our sinnes, in the person of the Mediatour, were no lesse ac­ceptable to God than the simple suffering of paine.

Since Gods power is despised, where it is not duely feared, and sinne is iusti­fied, where the displeasing of God is not thorowly sorrowed; in presenting vs and our cause to God, Christ was to yeeld for vs, and in our behalfe that infi­nite submission and feare to the power of God prouoked, and contrition and sor­row to the holinesse of God offended, which we could neuer haue done. And without these to offer to beare the burden of our sinnes, was to make light ac­count of our sinne against God, and of Gods wrath against our sinne, which was farre from the Sonne of God.

There might therefore in Christes sacrifice for sinne not without iust cause appeare exceeding feare and sorrow, yet both religious, and measured by the rules of obedience and humilitie, though passing grieuous to the soule of Christ. Neither were these submissions and afflictions of Christs soule answerable to his perfection, and our transgression, if they did not reach to the highest degree of feare and sorrow, that mans nature in Christ was capable of, without distrust of Gods fauour, or dislike of his iustice.

Christ did not pray in the Garden contrarie to his Fathers knowen will, but made an expresse and speciall reseruation thereof euen in the first part of his prayer. Neither was he amazed and confounded in all the powers of his soule and senses of his bodie, as these Presumers teach, but he prayed with faith, and suffered with obedience; both which require perfect vnderstanding, will, and memorie.

Manie things might concurre to increase Christes sorrow in the Garden, as the reiection of the Iewes for spilling his bloud, the dispersion of his Church, all flying and forsaking him; the continuall rage of Satan against his weake and fearefull members; Christ now in his temptations and afflictions beholding theirs with great compassion and griefe of heart: which is it that Hilarie saith; Et tristitia de nobis est, & oratio pro nobis est. Christ sorrowed for vs, andDe Trinitate li. 10.prayed for vs.

An Agonie is properly a vehement contention of minde to preuaile in that we vndertake, rightly weighing and striuing to remoue the difficulties and im­pediments obiected to hinder the euent.

Christes bloudie sweat, if it were naturall, must proceed rather from zeale and intention of minde, than from feare and sorow; which coole the bloud, and quench the spirits; whereas the spirits must be mightilie kindled, and the bloud much heated and thinned, before it can issue forth by sweat. And since by the words of Saint Luke, Christ fell into an Agonie after an Angell appea­red from heauen, and comforted or strengthened him (with a message from God) it seemeth rather an effect of Christes intentiue prayer which the Scrip­ture there mentioneth; than a consequent to any other passion or paine.

Christes intentiue prayer, after comfort receiued by an Angell from heauen, might proceed from his ardent desire, care, and zeale of our redemption from [Page] the wrath of God, and protection from the rage of Satan. And therefore, as the Prophet foreshewed he should not onely beare the sinnes of many, but pray for the Trespassers, Christ might spend all the spirits and powers of bodie and soule in most vehement and feruent prayer, euen vnto a bloudie sweat, to haue all his members pardoned their sinnes, and reconciled to God by the sacrifice of his bo­die, which he would offer for them; and also to haue Satan cast out from accu­sing them, and in the end trodden vnder their feet.

If Christes bloudie sweat were supernaturall; we must aske no cause there­of, but leaue it to his sacred will, who could aboue nature doe what he would. That it was no proofe of hell paines, appeareth plainly, because Christ after in greater paines on the Crosse did not sweat bloud; and of all those, whom these men imagine suffered hell paines in the Scriptures, no one can be produced, that euer sweat bloud.

The word (forsaking) vsed by Christ in his Complaint on the Crosse, doth not in all the Scriptures inferre the paines of the damned; but in the wicked it noteth reiection, desperation, and feare of damnation; and in the godly it ar­gueth want of protection, or decrease of consolation in their troubles. In Christ it might shew the time, the cause, the maner, or the griefe of his being so long forsaken, and left to the rage and reproch of his persecutors, without any sensible signe of Gods loue towards him, care for him, helpe in his troubles, or exse in his paines; but it doth not prooue, that Christ thought himselfe forsa­ken of Gods fauour, grace, or spirit; which feare or doubt could not be in him without a manifest touch of error, and want of faith.

Christ neuer feared nor doubted, that he should or could perish vnder the hand of God persuing our sinnes in the bodie of his flesh; but for the ioy set be­fore him, endured the Crosse, and despised the shame; and as S. Peter sayth of him at the time of his suffering, he alwayes beheld God at his right hand, that he should not be shaken; and therefore his heart reioyced, and his tongue was glad, and his flesh rested in hope, because his soule should not be forsaken in hell, nor his flesh see corruption.

Christ was made a curse for vs, in that he suffered the temporall and corpo­rall curses of the Law threatned vnto sinners, as all sorts of afflictions belong­ing to this life, and in the end, a painfull and shamefull death, by which he abo­lished the spirituall and eternall curse of God due to vs for sinne; but he was ne­uer inwardly, truely, nor eternally accursed of God, since by tasting of our ex­ternall curse for a time, he made vs partakers of his spirituall and celestiall bles­sednesse for euer.

Christ who knew no sinne, was made sinne for vs, that is, either the punish­ment of, our sinnes, or the sacrifice for our sinnes: for we were healed by his stripes, and he gaue himselfe for vs a sacrifice of a sweet smell to God. Be­ing then an holy and acceptable sacrifice to God for sinne, he was neither defiled nor hatefull to God with our sinnes: but suffered, the iust for the vniust; that is, he tooke vpon him the punishment of our sinnes, though he were most inno­cent; and by the holinesse of his person, submitting himselfe to the death of the crosse, purged our vncleannesse; by his innocencie, couered our guiltinesse; and by his fauour with God, reconciled vs that were enemies.

Christ bare the full punishment of our sinnes; that is, not all which we should [Page] haue borne; for then he must haue beene euer lastingly reiected, confounded and condemned to hell fire, which are most horrible blasphemies; but he bare so much of the punishments of this life, where he suffered, as in his person by the iust iudgement of God was most sufficient for all our sinnes.

TOuching Christs descent to hell, the words are plainly cited by Peter out of Dauid, that Christes soule (after death) should not be left in Hades, which Saint Luke in his Gospell vseth for the place where torments are prepared for the wicked af­ter this life. And in that sense is the word vsed thorowout the New Testament; as likewise the Greeke Fathers tooke it for the place vnder the earth, whither the soules of all men were condemned for sinne, and where the Diuels detaine and torment the wicked. That Christ likewise descended to the lower parts of the earth, and to the (bottomlesse) deepe after death, is vouched by Saint Paul; whereupon the whole Church of Christ from the beginning hath confessed his descent to hel to be a point of Chri­stian pietie.

Peters Sermon (in the second of the Acts) intended not simply to proue that Christ was risen from the dead, as Lazarus and others were; but affirmed far­der of him, That God raised him vp, to set him on Dauids Throne; that is, to make him King of Glorie. This he prooueth, In that Christes flesh could not see corruption, nor his soule be forsaken in hell; which was verified in none, no not in Dauid (who were all dead, and saw corruption) but only in the Mes­sias. It was therefore impossible, that either death or hell should detaine Christ, but he was to rise Lord of death and hell, and the Sauiour of all his from both; as appeared by his ascending to heauen, and sitting at the right hand of God. Neither was this strange to the Iewes, who were taught to expect that to be performed by the Messias, which God promised by his Prophet; O Death, I will be thy death: O Hell, I will be thy destruction.

Sheol in the Olde Testament signifieth the Graue, and Hell; that is, the pla­ces whither the dead bodies of all men went, and whither the soules of the wic­ked dead in sinne descended after death. And therefore where it is distingui­shed from the death of the bodie, or referred to the soule after death, as it is in Dauids words applied by Peter to Christ, it apparently signifieth Hell.

The ends of Christes descent are likewise deriued from the Scriptures, as the destroying of the Diuels kingdome, and triumphing ouer powers and principa­lities, and making an open shew of them, spoiling them by deliuering all his E­lect, dead, liuing, and yet vnborne, from the right, power, and feare of eter­nall death; taking into his hands the Keyes of Death and Hell, that he might be Lord of all, in Heauen, Earth, and Hell.

The Creed is not a Collection of Greeke or Hebrew phrases vnknowen to the people, but a short summe of the Christian faith prouided for the simpler sort of men to learne by heart. And therefore, as nothing is superfluously repeated, so nothing is obscurely couered in it. And though this Article, He descended to [Page] hell, wanted for a time in some Churches, euen as some part of Scripture did, yet was it retained by all Christian Writers, as a ground of true religion from the Apostles time; and professed in some Churches very anciently in their Creed, and at last generally receiued in all places.

All the Fathers of Christes Church with one consent teach this as a point of the Christian faith, That Christ after death descended to hell; insomuch that Austen resolutely sayth, Who but an Infidell will denie, that Christ was inEpistola. 99.hell?

Where Abrahams bosome was, neither was, nor is agreed amongst the learned: only Austen rightly inferreth out of Christes words, That being a place of comfort, and farre off aboue Hades (where the rich man was tormen­ted) with a great Gulfe setled betwixt those two places, it could be no part, norEpistola. 99.member of hell.

The rest, which are very many, appeare by the seuerall Titles ouer ech Page, or by the Table prouided to finde the same with more facilitie.


IT may seeme somewhat strange to thee (Christian Reader) as it doth likewise to me, that one and the selfe same cause, being twice now debated and discus­sed in writing on either side; we should at the last be farther from agreeing on the true state of the contro­uersie than we were at the first entring into the mat­ter. If the fault be either in the doubtfulnesse of my words proposing it; or in the diuersnesse of my mind defending it; I refuse no reproch of follie, and incon­stancie; but if I keeping close to the points which I first propounded, and calling vpon the aduerse part, with as great vehemencie and importunitie as I could, to goe directly to the issue, and no way to digresse from the things in question; the Impugner trusting more to the couert of his words, than to the soundnesse of his proofs, will of purpose shunne the marke prefixed, and roue at pleasure with doubtfull and deceitfull termes, to hide the nakednesse of his side, and to make the Reader beleeue he hath matter of moment, when indeed he doth not so much as vnderstand himselfe, or take any knowledge of the chiefest things which I obiect or alledge; then is he woorthie to beare the blame who best deserueth it, and thou (Christian Reader) mayest soone perceiue, and assoone pronounce both for thine owne ease, and for an end to be had in this strife; (for to thee the Confuter referreth himselfe, and so doe I) whether of vs flieth the touchstone of trueth, and faileth in the due proofe of his doctrine, as neere as God shall giue thee wisdome to discerne light from darknesse, and grace to preferre trueth before falshood.

In the Preface of my Sermons published, I much misliked, and openly charged the ouer hastie Discourser, that called himselfe H. I. for Praefat pag. 9. lin. 2. cleane changing the state of the first Question: and to the maine diuision of his Treatise, where he sayth, The whole controuersie hath in it two points; the first, That Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God, &c, I replied in my conclusion, [...] Conclu. pa. 243. l. 5. It was too much boldnesse to outface the world in print, that this was the position which I impugned. There were too many witnesses there, for me to denie, or for him to belie the Question, he knew it well enough, but he could not tell how to proue that which I then reproued, and therefore he shranke from it, and dallied with generall and doubtfull termes. And lest either the patient Reader, or strict Examiner, should be forced farre to seeke for the chiefe points by me denied or affirmed in those Sermons; I purposely and plainly numbred and deliuered them in such sort, as none could mistake them, but he that would wilfully ouerleape them. My words thou wilt pardon me to repeat (good Christian Reader) that thereby thou mayest see whether I alter or new frame my first questions and resolutions, as this Prater [Page 2] pretendeth, by his euery where complaining of my manifolde ambiguities, fallacies, and contr [...]rieties; or he rather dissembleth the weaknesse, and couereth the badnesse of his cause vnder certeine perplexed and confused phrases, as anon thou shalt heare more at large. These are my words in the foresayd Pag. 2. l. 10. Preface.

I laboured (in these my Sermons) to prooue these foure points: First, That it was no where recorded in holy Scriptures, nor iustly to be concluded by the Scriptures, that Christ suffered the true paines of Hell. Secondly, That as the Scriptures describe to vs the paines of the Damned and of hell; there are manie terrors and torments, which without euident impietie can not be ascribed to the Sonne of God. Thirdly, That the death and bloud of Christ Iesus were euidently, frequently, constantly set downe in the writings of the Apostles, as the sufficient price of our Redemption, and true meane of our Reconciliation to God, and the verie same proposed in the figures resembled in the sacrifices of the Law, and sealed with the Sacraments of the New testament, as the verie ground-worke of our saluation by Christ; and so haue beene receiued, and beleeued in the Church of God, foureteene hundred yeeres, before any man euer made mention of hell-paines to be suffered in the soule of Christ. Last­ly, where the Scriptures are plaine and pregnant, That Christ died for our sinnes, and by his death destroyed him that had power of death, euen the diuell, and reconciled vs when we were strangers and enemies in the body of his flesh through death: besides, That the Holie ghost in these places by expresse words nameth the bodily death of Christ, as the meane of our Redemption & Reconciliation to God; no considerate Diuine might affirme or imagine Christ suffered the death of the soule; for somuch as the death of the soule must exclude Christ from the grace, spirit, and life of God, and leaue in him neither faith, hope, nor loue, sanctitie, nor innocencie, which God forbid any Christian man should so much as dreame. And if any man to mainteine his deuice, would inuent a new hell, and another death of the soule, then either Scriptures or Fathers euer heard, or spake of, they should keepe their inuentions to them­selues: it sufficed me to beleeue what I read, and consequently, not to beleeue what I did not reade in the Word of God, which is and ought to be the foundation of our faith. Whether there be any darkenesse or doubling in my speech, I leaue it to thy censure, good Christian Reader. I affirme touching our redemption and reconciliation to God, what the Scriptures affirme, and as neere as I could in the selfe-same words: I denied the late additions of some men in matters of so great weight, which the Scriptures by their perpetuall silence denie, and by their open and euident consequents disprooue and impugne. If any man thinke my Sermons in these points lesse euident, or perti­nent to the purpose than my Preface; let him looke to the places where these things are hand [...]ed, and iudge in Gods name, as he findeth cause; remembring that he which withstandeth or neglecteth the trueth, withstandeth and neglecteth his owne saluation.

First that no Scripture doth witnesse or warrant Christs suffering the true paines of hell in his soule; see either the Sermons. p. 8. lin. 22. proposing of their opinions that so thinke; or the examining of their Serm. p. 11. l. 24. proofes which are brought for that conceit; or the shutting vp of that part, which sheweth the summe of all aforesayd, which I close in this wise: Serm. pa. 41. l. 14. Then are there in the sacred Scriptures neither any praedictions that Christ should suffer the paines of hell in his soule heere on earth; nor causes why he must suffer them; nor signes that he did suffer them; and consequently, what soeuer is pretended, no proofe, that these suf­ferings must be added to the Crosse of Christ, before the worke of our saluation can be per­fect. Secondly, that such paines of hell, as the Scriptures expresse and auouch, may not be applied to Christ, without apparent impietie, reade what I Serm. pa. 48. l. 34. write concerning the particulars, and settle thy iudgement (gentle Reader) as thou likest best. I desire not to preuaile, where I bring not sufficient proofe: emptie words on either side, are slender meanes to quiet thy conscience, or settle thy faith, if thou seeke to be religi­ous. Thirdly, where the whole course and tenor of the sacred Scriptures do plainly and fully ascribe our Redemption and the remission of our sinnes to the death and bloud of Christ Iesus; I dare not delude the words of the Holy ghost, as if they were euery where improper or imperfect, but by the foure first Serm p. 42. l. 2. effects of Christs crosse, I [Page 3] make it appeare how sufficient our saluation is by the bloud of Christ, without anie supplie of hell paines to be suffered in the soule of Christ. Lastly, since no Christian man may doubt, but we are redeemed and saued by the death of Christ, how Serm. p. 73. li. 13. farre it is from all sense and shew of holy Scripture to subiect Christ to the death of the soule, and how repugnant to the mouthes and mindes of the ancient and catholike fathers, I insert a speciall discourse, and thence obserue, that where & whensoeuer the Holie ghost speaketh of the death of Christ, he meaneth the death of Christs body suffered on the altar of the Crosse, and by no meanes the death of Christs soule.

These things being thus sensibly and plainly set downe to the view and reach of all men, were they neuer so simple, if they were Christians; what reason had you, Sir Refuter in your Treatise to slide from all this, and to delude your Reader by telling him that the whole controuersie had in it two points:

  • 1 That Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God:
  • 2 That after his death on the Crosse, he went not into hell in his soule:

as if I proposed or proued nothing in the first part of my Sermons, but that Christ did not suffer for vs the wrath of God? did I, or could I make or mooue anie such question, that in preci [...]e words taught the Serm. p. 133. li. 13. wrath of God against our sinnes was verie great in the Crosse of Christ? did I not in plaine termes ascribe to Christ Ibidem. li. 30. a double sense of Gods wrath: the first l. 14. pursuing our suretie being innocent and obedient, and euen his owne and onelie sonne with all maner of corporall and temporall scourges vnto death, before it could be pacified? the next a l. 34. serious contemplation of that eternall and intolerable v [...]ngeance, which the Iustice of God had in store for vs, by reason of our manifolde sinnes, whose danger and destruction touched him as neere, through the tendernesse of his loue and pitie, as if it had beene imminent ouer his owne head? But this you will say is not the wrath which you meane. Sir whatsoeuer your meaning be, which is scant knowen to your selfe, as anon we shal better perceiue, the words of your Treatise setting the very question, to which your Reader must looke, ouerlashed with two palpable vntrueths, vnfit for a man of that care and conscience which you would seeme to haue. For first this could be no question with me, whether Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God, who exactly affirmed that Gods wrath was great in the Crosse of Christ, and admitted in the soule of Christ a sight and sense of Gods temporall wrath inflicted on his bodie, and of Gods eternall wrath prepared for our sinnes. Againe, had I moued that question, which I neuer meant, doth the first part of the controuersie containe no more but Whether Christ suffered the wrath of God or no? are your hell paines so soone vanished into smoake? is the death of Christs soule no question with you? whether the death of Christs bodie, and the shedding of his bloud be the full price of our Redemption, and cause of our reconciliation to God, is it not worth the asking, nor worth the an­swering? but you ranne from the rest not able to iustifie that which I disproued; and then, as your maner is, you catch a large and licentious word, and currie that till you confound both your selfe and your Reader. For who but you would haue proposed such a question, Whether Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God, knowing that in the Scriptures themselues, according to which we must frame our speech in matters of faith, there are many degrees and differences of Gods wrath, whereof some may be attributed to Christs sufferings without offence; others can not without plaine im­pietie? and therefore the question which you proposed in your Treatise was but a very stale to make your Reader gaze at, whiles you shifted aside from the matter which I moued.

[The one (you will say) is a proofe of the other; for he which suffereth Gods wrath, must needs suffer the paines of hell.] That was and must be the whole strength of your Treatise, vnlesse you will confesse that you meant to waste your paper, and mocke your Reader with a number of emptie and idle fansies. But how faint and feeble that foundation was to beare so great a building, the fo. 243. conclusion of my Sermons doth sufficiently shew. In which I tolde you, that either your argument must be vitious, if your antecedent were particular; or if to make your argument good, you enlarged [Page 4] your antecedent to be generall, your first proposition would be both iniurious and blasphemous. For though Christ might and did suffer some parts of Gods wrath, as the Scripture vseth that word, which is all that your indefinite proposition will im­plie; yet it would no way follow that he therefore suffered the paines of hell. And if, to amend your consequent, you did affirme that Christ suffered the whole wrath of God, and euery part thereof, and so by consequent the paines of hell also; the forme of your argument was bettered, but your antecedent, on which the conclusion must depend, was a most false and wicked assertion: for then must Christ haue suffered re­probation, desperation, eternall damnation, and what not. Whether this exception were sound and good, I leaue to the iudgement of the Reader; verily, I haue either forgotten the first principles of Logicke; or els it was a full and plaine subuersion of your misshaped reason.

But you now amend the matter in your last defence, and where your chiefe positi­onTheir foure restraints of hell paines. was before indefinite, Christ suffered for vs the wratb of God; and so did neither good nor harme to the maine question of Christs suffering the paines of hell; vpon better aduice, you make it generall and say; Christ suffered all Gods wrath, but with foure restraints to saue your opinion from apparent falsitie and heresie. For first you adde, Defence p. 7. l. 32. all Gods PROPER wrath; next, if it be a punishment for sinne, and no sinne; third­ly, as touching the essence and nature thereof; fourthly, so farre as was due generally for all mankinde to suffer. But Sir Defender, this is not to maintaine your first argument, but to confesse, and recant your former follie, when you see your position impugned as friuolous and childish, if it be particular; or as erroneous and impious, if it be gene­rall; to come in with foure fresh limitations in a new pamphlet before you can saue your generall assertion from sensible impietie and infidelitie. Howbeit take your fourth, to returne to trueth is neuer too late: Let your generall proposition stand fettered & restrained with these foure brakes: I must aske you now, not onely how you proue this generall Collection, Christ suffered for vs all Gods wrath in the same na­ture and maner that we should haue suffered it, sauing your foure exceptions; but also, what parts of Gods wrath you leaue inclosed in your generall affirmatiue, when all these are excluded. Which two demands I wish thee (good Reader) to haue in speciall remembrance against we come to debate the Defenders question, that thou mayest see both what cause leadeth him so to collect, and what trueth is in the gene­rall, when these particulars are excepted.

That Christ tooke our infimities and bare our sorrowes is confirmed by the Prophet Esaie, and alleaged and expounded as well by Saint Mathew in his Gospell, as by Saint Peter in his first Epistle; in either of which senses we may safely graunt the mea­ning of the Prophet to be generall, though his words haue no speciall adscription of all, or some. Saint Mathew declaring how Christ cured with his very word such as were possessed by diuels, and healed all that were sicke, affirmeth that to be Math. 8. vers. 17. fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the Prophet, he tooke our infirmities and bare our sicknesses, meaning he tooke from vs our infirmities and recouered our diseases. And in this sense the generall is most true, that Christ tooke away all our infirmities, and recouered all our sicknesses, were they corporall or spirituall, temporall or eternall, that we should feele the full burden of none of them. Neither did our Sauiour only take our sorrows from vs, but he also tooke them vpon himselfe, which Peter obserueth when he saith (Christ) 1. Pet 2. himselfe bare our sinnes (that is, the burden and punishment of our sinnes) in his body on the tree. And in this sense likewise, it is very true that Christ bare the burden of all our sinnes without exception, but not all, and the selfe same burdens of our sinnes which we should haue borne. For he that so enlargeth Saint Peters words, which this Discourser so much laboureth, extendeth them to reprobation, pollution, desperation, damnation, and to all the punishments prepared for the wicked in this life and the next, which is the depth and height of all impiety. I wish the Defender therefore to get him some better ground to erect his frame vpon, he will else prooue himselfe an euill Disputer, and a woorse beleeuer. Saint Paule hath a third sense ga­thered [Page 5] out of this place, when he saith, Heb. 4. We haue not an high Priest that can not be tou­ched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in ALL THINGS (tried or) tempted in like sort,yetwithout sinne. That Christ was tried and pressed with all our infirmities may hence be collected, but with these two additions like to his brethren, and still WITHOVT SINNE. for he must be like (not to the reprobate, much lesse to the damned, but) to his Heb. 2. brethren in all things, that is by partaking as well flesh and blood with them, as sufferings and tentations like them, yet alwaies without sinne. Then as the godly neither doe nor can suffer the true paines of hell in this life, which are the iudgements and torments of the damned in another world; no more did Christ suf­fer them in this life. And where conscience of sinne, ignorance of Gods counsaile, and weakenesse of faith sometimes draw the godly to doubt of Gods fauour, and af­fright them with the horror of hell; from these, and all like inward tentations and motions of sinne, Christ must be most free, in whose soule was no lacke of grace, nor touch of sinne; but the fulnesse of Gods spirit, assured knowledge of Gods will, and perfection of all humane integritie and innocencie, besides the personall vnion and communion of his Godhead, which kept him both from doubting of Gods loue to­wards himselfe, and from fearing damnation as due to him or possible to be laide on him.

[Your limitations you will say, serue to exclude those punishments which Christ neither did nor might suffer. For Christ suffered onely in this life, and but for a time, and without sinne; and yet suffered all, and the very same punishments so limited, as you limite them, which the damned doe, and those were the paines of hell.] If you begin (Sir Defender) to limite the words of the holy Ghost to your liking, I thinke it a safer and surer course to heare and receiue S. Peters and S. Pauls limitations annexed to their owne words, and other defence against all your attempts I desire none. Christ himselfe (saith Peter) bare our sinnes in his bodie on the tree. Heere see we not onely the person who, euen the sonne of God; and the place where, and time when; on the tree, not after; but also the part in which he bare the punishment of all our sinnes, to wit, in his body. He must (saith Paul) be like his brethren in all things; that is, infirmities, tentations, and sufferings, but still without sinne. What is this to the paines of hell, which are the destruction of bodie and soule excluded after this life from the ioy and blisse of Gods kingdome, and tormented among diuels with euer­lasting fire?

[That (you thinke) is my grosse imagination of hell, the fire there is a toyish fable; the greatest paine in hell is the sense of Gods fierie wrath, which he inflicteth with his immediate hand vpon the soule lyable to sinne without any meanes or instruments; the substance where­of because Christ suffered (as you say) for a time in this life, though not in hell nor for euer, he suffered the verie same paines of hell as touching the essence and nature thereof, which the damned doe; though in circumstances of time and place his sufferings somewhat differed from theirs.] Your quintessencing and new framing of another hell, which the Scriptures neuer speake of; your quenching hell-fire with a fansie; your appointing God to be the tormentor in hell with his immediate hand; your nice diuiding be­tweene the substance and circumstance of Gods eternall iudgements; your placing the substance thereof in the apprehension of the soule, and that as well in this life as in the next, with a number of like audacious and desperate deuises to vphold the name or the shade of hell-paines in the sufferings of Christ, wee shall anon discusse, when we come to your opening of the question; in the meane while the Reader must marke, The question is not whether Christ bare the burden of all our sinnes on the tree, or whether he were touched and tempted in all things like to his brethren, yet still without sinne, but whether it can be prooued by the Scriptures that Christ must beare all and the selfe same burdens of our sinnes which wee should haue borne in this life, and the next, and which the damned doe and shall beare. Your distincti­on of the substance and circumstance of Gods endlesse and mercilesse vengeance of sinne in hell, we shall quickly let the Reader see how vainely you presume it with­out [Page 6] all warrant of holy Scripture, and how falsely you applie it to the person of Christ against the manifest Scripture, if first we obserue how handsomely you set downe the doctrine which I defend in the next words to your owne hieroglyphicall question, of purpose that if you cannot by trueth ouerbeare it, you may at least by falshood disgrace it.

HisDefence. p. 7. contrary [opinion (say you) we conceaue thus, that Christ suffered for our sinnes nothing else, but simply and meerely a bodily death altogether like as the godly doe often suffer at the hands of persecutors, sauing onely that God accepted the death of his sonne, as a ran­some for sin, but the death of his seruants he doth not.] Had you not seene and read my sermons printed before you made this late defence, you might haue excused your selfe (Sir defender) by forgetting or mistaking my wordes; but after so often and open repeating them in Print, what cause can be imagined why you should thus ap­parently peruert my words, and purposely forsake the points which I proposed, saue onely that finding the foile, and doubting a fall, you would gladly slippe your necke out of the collar; and seeing no better meanes, you thinke it more sk [...]ll to stand wrangling about the Question, then to be taken tardie with saying iust nothing in a matter of the greatest weight, and chiefest regard in Christian religion. My words are euery where plaine enough as well in deliuering as debating the question, that Christ suffered no death saue on [...]ly the death of the bodie, by the verdit of holy Scripture; and therefore whatsoeuer the Scripture speaketh of Christs death, it is intended and referred to the death of Christs bodie on the Crosse, and by no meanes to the death of his soule. The words of my preface are these:Pr [...]. p. 3. l. 8. Where the Scriptures are plaine and pregnant, that Christ died for our sinnes, and by his death destroyed him that had power ouer death, euen the Deuill, and reconciled vs when we were strangers, and enemies in the body of his flesh: besides, that the holy Ghost in these places by expresse words nameth the bodily death of Christ, as the meane of our redemption and reconciliation to God: no considerate Diuine may affirme or imagine Christ suffered the death of the soule. When I come in my Ser­mons to handle that point I thus beginne it.Serm p. 73. l. 13. That Christ did or could suffer the death of the soule, is a position farre from the words, but farther from the groundes of sacred Scrip­tures. When I shew the Fathers doe ioyne in the same resolution with the Scriptures, I say,Serm. p. 78. l. 32. Rightly therefore doe the Ancient Fat [...]ers teach, that Christ dying for our sinnes suffered ONELY THE DEATH OF THE BODIE, BVT NOT OF THE SOVL [...]. Concluding their testimonies I capitulate in this wise;Serm. p. 83. l. 28. I hope to all men learned or well aduised it will seeme no Iesuiticall phrenzie, but rather Christian and Ca­tholike doctrine, that the Sonne of God dying for our sinnes suffered NOT THE DEATH OF THE SOVLE, BVT ONELY OF THE BODIE. If you vnderstand not these words (Sir Defender) your Reader will iudge you fitter to learne your abc, then to dispute questions in Diuinitie; if you doe conceaue them, and will peruert them, let him likewise pronounce whether it be sinceritie or impudencie in you, thus to outface the matter against my plaine speach, and to make Proclamation that I de­fend Christ suffe [...]ed nothing else for our sinnes but simply and meerely a bodyly death altogether like as the godly often doe at the hands of persecutors. Had you said, I maintaine Christ suffered no death, but onely a bodily death, I would haue asked you by what Scriptures you or all your adherents can disproue it; but charg­ing me as you doe with this opinion, that Christ suffered nothing else but simply and meerely a bodily death altogether like the godly; I must tell you this is one of your trueths, which many men will call a malitious leasing, since my wordes are publikely extant to the contrarie. My first resolution was; ChristSerm. p. 4. l. 4. saw before hand that going to his Crosse he should tast all kindes of calamities, and so it came to passe. For betweene his last Supper and his death, he was betrayed of Iudas, abiu­red of Peter, forsaken of all his followers; he was wrongfully imprisoned, falsly ac­cused, uniustly condemned, he was buffe [...]ed, whipped, skorned, reuiled; he en­dured cold, nakednesse, thirst, wounding, hanging, shame, reproach, and all sorts of deadly paines; besides heauinesse of hart and agonie of mind, which oppressed [Page 7] him in the Garden. All this I affirme Christ suffered before his death, and therefore all this besides his meere bodily death; to which I addedSerm. p. 87. l. 23. all those afflictions and passions of the Soule, which naturally and necessarily follow paine and accompany death. You perchance would annex the paines of hell, and the death of the Soule, but those are the very points in question which I then did, and yet doe vtterly ex­clude from the sufferings of Christ.

Where you say, I hold, Christs death was altogether like as the godly doe suffer at the hands of Persecutors, I know not what you meane by your altogether; in some things his death was like theirs, in many things vnlike. A wrongfull and painefull death of the body he suffered at the hands of the Iewes, as the godly doe often at the hands of their persecutors; and a full perswasion he alwaies had of Gods excee­ding and assured loue and fauour towards him, in the middest of all his anguishes, as the godly haue in theirs, though in farre lesse perfection then his was; but as touching the cause, the manner, the force of his death, I make it altogether vnlike theirs. They inherite both sinne, and death, from their Parents, and so of necessity must die, and putrifie in the graue; he did inherite neither, but being free from both, yeelded himselfe to die, that he might purge and abolish sinne. Death wres­teth our soules from our bodies, be we neuer so patient, whiles sence doth last; he breathed out his soule powerfully, and willingly, which none could take from him, except he would lay it downe of his owne accord. Our bodies doe rot in the graue, and lye in corruption, which is the dominion of death, till the time, they shall be re­stored; his body could not be dissolued to ashes, because neither part of his hu­mane nature might perish, after it was once vnited to his Diuine; but lay in the graue without corruption resisting death, and rose with speede in glory ouerthrow­ing death, first in him selfe, and after in all his members at their appointed time. So that death is now a necessarie consequent to our sinfull nature, his voluntary death was the satisfaction for our sins, and pacification of Gods wrath, restoring vs againe to Gods fauour, which through sin we had lost. Thus haue you both swarued very far Sir Desender from your owne question, which your selfe put in your first Treatise though wide from our purpose, and wholy misreported the doctrine which I for­merly auouched by Scriptures, and Fathers; giuing small hope you will deale more sincerely in the rest, that enter so corruptly at the first, but you will now open the whole state of the Question, which we are content to heare.

[The opening of the whole state of the Question. For the better vnderstanding whereof [...] Defenc. p. 8. we must note these principall things.] What you cal [...] the opening of the Question, I may better call the darkning and obscuring of the Question with many trifling and tedious obseruations, with many new found, farre fet, and ill applyed phrases, with many bold and false assertions powred out of your owne braines, without any shew or so much as pretence of holy Scripture. And if you may be suffered thus to raigne and reuele in matters of Religion at your pleasure; it is an easie way for you to conclude any thing without any great paines or proofes. For you bring vs a world of wordes warranted by no mans authoritie, but by your owne, and out of them you frame false positions fitte for your fancie, and vtter them as vndoubted principles of Christian Religion; which indeede haue in them neither truth, nor sence, when they come to be examined. As is your matter, so is your method, tumb­ling and tossing too and fro, like the vnsettlednesse of your head, and spending twen­tie pages in meere confusion and contradiction, for which cause I must be driuen to recall your conceits to some speciall heads, least in pursuing your steps I loose both my selfe and the Reader.

The things which you disorderly shuffle, and I shall be forced more largely to handle, concerne either the offender, which is man, or the offence, which is sinne, or the Iudge, which is God; or the punishment which is death, or the ransommer and re­deemer, which is Christ. I meane to meddle with no more in any of these, but what directly pertaineth to this question, and serueth aptly to exclude your conceits, and [Page 8] truely to establish the collections which I make. First then, 1 touching MAN who 1 consisteth of body and soule, the doubt will be whether the whole man sinned in Adam, that the whole might suffer in Christ; or whether the soule onely sinned, that the soule of Christ onely must suffer. Secondly in 2 SINNE must be remembred how 2 it commeth, and what it bringeth. Sinne is either COMMITTED, as by Adam, or IN­HERITED, as by vs all; or ASSVMED, as by Christ, who tooke vpon him the pu­nishment of our sinnes though neither committed nor inherited by him. And of it selfe sinne breedeth in the offendor, where it is not remitted, clensed, and remooued by the blood of Christ; POLLVTION of the whole man, STING of conscience, and REVENGE of Gods wrath in this life and the next. Thirdly, for the 3 IVDGE 3 which is God, we must learne, from what ground, within him the punishments of his elect in this life doe proceede, whether from his Iustice, or from his loue, or from both mixed together, by whom he executeth his iustice in earth and in hell, whether by his immediate hand, or by inferiour ministers and meanes, with what measure he pro­portioneth it, as well to the faithfull in this life, as to the faithlesse, till the number of their sinnes be full; and lastly, to what purpose he directeth it, either to reuenge sinne, as in the wicked and damned; or to represse sinne as in the godly, or to declare his iustice, as in Infants baptized; or to perfit his graces, as in the best of his Saints here on earth; or to purge and abolish sinne, and to prooue obedience as in the person of Christ Iesus.4 Fourthly, 4 DEATH which is the wages of sinne, and includeth all the punishments prouided here, and elsewhere for sinners, is either corporall parting the soule from the bodie; or spirituall separating the soule from the life, and grace of God; or eternall, excluding both bodie and soule, from the ioy, and blisse of Gods heauenly king­dome, and wrapping them both in the darkenesse, fire, and horrour of hell for euer. That all the paynes and griefes of this life, are the seedes of death, and wayes to death, and so come vnder the name of death, which driueth the soule from the bodie, is now presumed, and shall be prooued in place conuenient. Fiftly, concerning the 5 REDEEMER, which is Christ; to whose sufferings all that is aforesaid must in some 5 sort be referred, the question is, in what part, and how farre he suffered, feared, or ap­prehended the wrath of God against our sinnes: but without question we must know and beleeue that his person was naturally and infinitely beloued of God, (all the elect being imbraced and accepted onely for him, and in him) and that the dignitie of his person and depth of his fauour with God, (when hee submitted himselfe to shew his obedience, and maintaine Gods iustice, by the shame and sharpenesse of the Crosse, receiued in his humaine nature) was the right ground, and true cause of our Redemption and Reconciliation to God; whose patience vnto death was a greater and acceptabler sacrifice to God for sinne, then all the world; yea then all earthly and heauenly creatures were worth. And to increase or strengthen this voluntary sacrifice for sinne, the paines of hell were no way needfull since Christ was to shew his obedi­ence in this life onely, and after death to rise and raigne with glory, and by that which he suffered on the Crosse, he was to learne the obedience of a Sonne, and not the ven­geance due to deuils. In all these issues, if I would take the Discoursers trade, to af­firme what I list, without any further proofe, I could end the whole cause in as fewe wordes as I haue expressed it; but since that will neither content the Reader, nor conclude the gaine-sayer, I must haue leaue in larger maner as occasion serueth, both to repell the Defenders bold presumptions, and to confirme those things which I take to be safer Resolutions in Christian Religion.

The principall things which you would haue noted (Sir Discourser) are either de­fectiue in their diuisions, or coincident in their partes, or repugnant to your purpose.Defence p. 8. l. 6. All suffering of paines in man (you say) is from God, either properly from his Iustice, or from his holy loue; either from himselfe alone, or also from his instruments and inferiour meanes: and that for sinne either inherent, or imputed; either as Correction or as punishment; either immediatly or mediatly as anon we shall further see. Not one of these foure parti­tions, which you make the fortresse of your cause, is sound and sufficient; and the [Page 9] fift is the selfe-same with the second, it onely varieth in words. In these two diuisi­ons (all suffering of paines in man is from Gods Iustice, or from his holy loue; either as correction or as punishment) you roue obscurely, but absurdly, at the ground, the measure, the purpose of all paines and punishments, as they come from God on all men, be they wicked or godly, Christ himselfe not excepted; either in this world, or the next. For the GROVND of them, you say they proceed from Gods iustice proper­ly, or from his holy loue. The MEASVRE and PVRPOSE of them you confound in saying either as correction, or as punishment, which you should distinguish.

From Gods iustice properly on men infected with sinne commeth nothing but pu­nishment, that is their due, which the iust Iudge awardeth them. From Gods loue, of it selfe commeth nothing but grace and blisse; for which cause he is the fountaine of Grace, and father of Mercy to such as he loueth. In the reprobate God hateth their sinnes, and so their persons, being the committers or inheriters of sinne still abiding. In the elect, Gods holinesse disliketh their sinnes as much as the others; but their persons he loueth and fauoureth for Christ his sonne, in whom they are chosen. And though the full and due punishment of their sinne, which is spirituall and eternall death, be translated from them, and abolished in Christ; yet when men redeemed and freed from the heauie burden of their sinnes doe not earnestly repent them, or eftsoones frequent them, God for the conseruation of his holinesle, and demonstration of his righteous iudgement to all the world, doth sooner and sharper visit and punish with the corporall and temporall scourges of this life his owne children, neglecting or resuming their sinnes, than his enemies; whom with longer patience he suffereth to heape vp wrath against the day of wrath. AIames 2. ver. 13. iudgement mercilesse therfore, as S. Iames calleth it, is and shall be to the wicked, whereas in the godly mercy reioyceth against iudgement, but not without iustice. For1. Pet. 4. iudgement (which in God can neuer be with­out iustice, since he is the righteous Iudge of the world) must begin at the house of God, 1. Cor. 11. and when we are iudged, we are chastened, (with a mercifull iudgement) that we should not be condemned with the world. And though in the afflictions of the godly, there be many things added of fauour; as the measure, which is tolerable, not ouerwhelming their patience; the purpose which is holy, to recall them from the delight and cu­stome of sinne, and to perfit the graces of God in them; the comfort which is great, that God loueth their persons, when he pursueth their sinnes; the promise which is sure, that if they suffer with Christ, they shall reigne with Christ, and such like; yet the smart of Gods rod, and sharpnesse of his whip, wherewith he awaketh the negligent, and tameth the vnruly, proceed from his iust iudgement, and commend his holinesse which hateth all sinne in whomsoeuer; and declare his iustice to the whole world, that he wincketh not either at the waiwardnesse, or at the carelesnesse of his owne children. The places in Scripture witnessing thus much are infinite, and easie for euery childe to obserue; and therefore one shall suffice for all. To his Church God sayth by the mouth of Ieremie,Ierem. 30. Though I vtterly destroy all the Nations, where I haue scattred thee, yet will I not vtterly destroy thee; but I will correct thee by iudgement, and not vtterly cut thee off. I haue stricken thee with the wound of an enemie, and with a cruell chastisement for the multitude of thine iniquities, thy sinnes were increased. Thy sorrow is incurable for the number of thine offences, ‖because‖ thy sinnes were increased, I haue done these things vnto thee: ‖But‖ I will restore health to thee, and heale thee of thy wounds.

Defen. p. 10. l. 29. [The godly in this world doe suffer paines for their sinnes; but these whatsoeuer they be, (yea though death it selfe) are improperly called punishments, they are chasticements of sinne.] This new Grammer doth best become your newe doctrine. All paines for sinnes whatsoeuer, suffered by any of the elect in this life, are chasticements, but in no wise you may indure to haue them called punishments, except very improperly. What is a chasticement properly, but a punishment moderated with loue and mercy? And since you be so precise that no paine suffered by any of Gods children may properly be called a punishment; whence I pray you is the word punishment deri­ued? not from the Latine word punire to punish? and punio from Poena, which our [Page 10] English tongue resembling the Latine, calleth paine? so that paine and punishment are wordes of one deriuation, and so properly of one signification, and by force of the wordes properly, all paine for sinne is punishment for sinne. And therefore in all mens iudgements sauing yours, chasticement is a punishment tempered with fauor, and not a paine excluding all punishment as you make it in your dissolute diuision. Read either the text, or notes of the Geneuian Translation of the Bible, which you would seeme so much to follow; or whose translation you will, and see whether they doe not contradict your childish conceite, that the Chasticement of Gods chil­dren is no punishment. Psal. 106. Moses was punished for their sakes; and againe, God Lament. 3. doth not punish with the hart; & the Wiseman speaking vnto God, Sapient. 12. with how great circum­spection (saith he) wilt thou punish thine owne children. And vpon those words of Iere­mie, Ierem. 10. O Lord correct me, but with iudgement, not in thine anger; they of Geneua note, Ibid. lit. q. He onely prayeth that God would PVNISH THEM with mercie, which Esay calleth in measure ca. 27. for here by iudgement is ment, not onely the PVNISHMENT, but also the MERCIFVLL MODERATION of the same. So that Chastisement no­teth the measure of the punishment, which God fauourably inflicteth on his children, not according to their sinnes, nor exceding their strength. Psal. 103. He hath not dealt with us (saith Dauid) after our sinnes, nor rewarded vs according to our iniquities. 1. Cor. 10. There hath no tentation taken you (saith Paul) but such as belongeth to men; and God is faithfull which will not suffer you to be tempted, aboue that you be able, but will giue the issue with the tentation, that you may be able to beare it. Yea, to his enimies God miti­gateth the heauinesse of his hand at first, and giueth them time and place to amend before he destroyeth them. Reuelat. 2. I gaue her space to repent (saith Christ) but she repented not; and therefore when the measure of their sinnes waxeth full, God repaieth them the fulnes of vengeance, which is puuishment proportioned to their sinnes; and this is the due and proper punishments of those that are wilfull, and doe not repent their wickednesse.

Defenc. p. 10. l. 29. [The paines of the godly are partly remembrances to cause repentance, partly Chastice­ments to humble vs and mortifie sinne in vs; but these whatsoeuer they be (yea though death it selfe) are improperly called punishments. Here you touch after your loose ma­ner the purpose of God in afflicting his seruants, which you say is to reforme them, but in no wise to punish them. If God had none other meaning in afflicting the faithfull, but to reforme their sins, nor none other meanes to doe that, but by paines, your speech had some truth; but because God hath diuers purposes in so doing, and diuers waies without paines to amend his children, this that here you bring, as the rest else-where, is a blind groping besides the truth, and a bold presuming that you are in the truth. God many times lodeth the best and chiefest of his Saintes with oftner and greater troubles, then he doth the meaner sort; not because their sinnes are more then others, or they neede more amendment then the rest; but to TRIE their faith, as in Heb. 11. Abraham, and Iob. 1. Iob; or to shew the 2. Cor. 12. perfection of his grace, as in Paul; or to prepare them to glory, as in Luk. 16. Lazarus; or to Rom. 8. conforme them to Christ, whose steps they must follow; and often to declare his iustice, as he did in striking Dauids child, when the sinne was both repented and pardoned in the Father. In the 2. Sam 12. sicknesse and death of which child, as of all other infants rege­nerate by Baptisme, there neither was, nor can be any vse of Repentance, humilia­tion, or mortification for themselues; and consequently by your owne diuision, since to them it can be NO CORRECTION, it must in them be a punishment of sinne, not actually committed by them, but naturally deriued to them by the guilt and cor­ruption of their Parents. Yea, the generall paine laid on Adam and all mankinde, as dissolution by death, priuation of originall light and grace, corruption of sinne, in­fection of soule, which declare vs all to be the children of wrath by nature; were they corrections or punishments of Adams sinne, since after death there is no repen­tance nor amendment of life, and the rest are neither barres to sinne, nor retraits from sinne, but either parts, effects, or causes of sinne? which sticke so fast, and beare such [Page 11] rule in many euen of the elect, that no gentle or fatherly admonitions, reprehen­sions, or comminations, will preuaile with them, but they must be ouerruled and wearied with sharp and pearcing scourges, before they will see or forsake the loath­somnesse of their sinne. Wherein though it be a great fauour of God, rather to persue them with all temporall plagues vnto their conuersion, then to let them run headlong to euerlasting perdition; yet the meanes which he vseth are mixed with iustice and mercie, and are rightly beleeued to be punishments fully deserued by their sinnes, though not fully proportioned to their sinnes, the iust and full wages whereof in sinfull men can be none other but death corporall, spirituall, and eter­nall. So that your diuision, all paine from God is either correction, or punishment; and your position no paine in the godly is punishment, are not onely friuolous and false, but repugnant each to the other: for so much as paine commeth from God for probation of faith, perfection of grace, assurance of saluation, encouraging of others by example, as well as for correction; and death and correction in Infants, where correction hath no place, must by your owne partition be a punishment of sinne inflicted on the first Man and all his posteritie. The which because we all inherite from our Parents, and had it in vs at our birth, when there was no vse of correction for vs, it was then in vs all, and so still remaineth a punishment of our first Parents sinne; though by the grace, and price of Christs death, we are and shall be freed from it.

But come to your purpose, and apply this to Christ, for thither you bend andChrists bodily death, part of the punishment of our sinnes. thereat you shoote; is your diuision true in the sufferings of Christ? then since by your owne assertion Defenc. pa. 11. l. 12. chastisements and remembrances, (which are the branches that you make of Correction) belonged nothing at all to Christ, and indeede there could be no cause to correct any sinfull corruption or affection in him, where no sinne was; it is a plaine confession that the bodily death and paines which Christ suffered on the Crosse, were the punishment of our sinnes in his body; and conse­quently a part of that curse which was imposed on the first mans sinne; which you so stifly denied in your Treatise, where you said; Treatise. pa. 45. l. 1. Therefore Christs dying simply as the godly die (that is a bodily death) may in no sort be called a curse or cursed. And if to shift of this contradiction, and confession of the truth of my answere to the place of S. Paule, Christ was made a curse for vs, you referre these words (as the godly doe) not to the same kinde of death which is bodily in both, but to the same cause of death, which was different, in Christ and his members; Remember good Sir, the words are not mine, but your owne; I put many differences betwixt the death of Christ, and his Saints; as namely the cause, the manner, and force of his death, which I haue touched Supra pa. 7. before; but the kind of death which was bodily, and not Ghostly, is all one in Christ and the godly. For Christ died not the death of the Soule, no more doe the godly, when they depart this life, albeit they may oftentimes whiles here they liue, draw neere to the death of the Soule by sinning, which Christ could not. And if you begin now to be better aduised, I am not displeased with it; it shall suffice that mine answere did, and doth stand true, that Christ in suffering bodyly paines and death for vs, suffered a part of the same punishment and curse which was laid on all mankind for the sinne of Adam.

Defen. pa. 9. l. 34. [We must note especially that to suffer (as the godly doe) Chasticements and correcti­ons, is not to suffer or feele Gods wrath, nor the punishment of sinne: except it be in a very improper speech. To suffer the true punishment, satisfaction, proper payment and wages of sinne, onely that is to suffer properly and truely the wrath of God: now then seeing the paines which Christ for vs did feele, were indeede properly the punishment, and payment and vengeance for sinne, such as the godly doe in no wise suffer, Christ onely hauing wholy suffe­red that for vs all: Therefore indeede his sufferings proceded from Gods proper wrath, and were the true effects of Gods meere Iustice, bent to take recompence on him for our offences.] Thou hast in these words (Christian Reader) the bulwarke of this mans cause, con­cluding that Christ suffered the MEERE IVSTICE, PROPER VVRATH, and [Page 12] very CVRSE of God for sinne. The frame of his reason, if I vnderstand it, (as who vnderstandeth his mysteries but himselfe?) is this. All paine in man is from God, ei­ther as correction of sinne or as punishment for sinne. In Christ there was no (‖ cause and so no neede of ‖) correction: his sufferings therefore were the punishments of sinne. They were punishments for sinne; Ergo, they were the true punishment, proper payment, wages and vengeance of sinne, which proceeded from Gods proper wrath, and were the true effects of Gods m [...]ere iustice, bent to take recompence on him for our offences. His termes of TRVE, PROPER, and MEERE, ioyned to the PVNISHMENT, VVRATH and IVSTICE of God, are not warranted by any Scripture, much lesse referred to the sufferings of Christ, nor so much as prooued by any testimony, defined with any certaintie, di­rected by any part, or expounded by any meanes; but onely proiected as Ridles, and laberinthes to weary the wise, to angle the simple, and to refuge himselfe, when he shall be pressed with the falsitie and impietie of his assertions. Least therefore we wrangle about words in vaine, which is his desire and deuise, that he may seeme to say somewhat, and carry the Reader into a forest of strange and vnknowen phrases, where he shall hardly discerne what either side saith; I th [...]nke it needefull first to de­clare what the Scriptures meane by the wages of sinne and wrath of God, and so to trie in what sense, and with what truth his termes may be added to them, and ap­plyed to the sufferings of Christ.

Rom. 6. [The wages of sinne is death, saith S. Paul. God himselfe foretold Adam it should be so. Whensoeuer thou catest (of the forbidden tree) thou shalt Genes 2. die the death. Then how many kinds of death, are by God threatned and inflicted on sinners; so many parts must the wages of sinne containe. Now those are three, the death of the Soule in this life, which I call spirituall; the death of the body leauing this life, which I call corporall; and the death of both in the next world, which I call eternall. For as man had two parts by which he did liue, Soule and body; and two places wherein he might liue if he obeyed God, earth for a time, and heauen for euer; so disobe­dience depriued either part of man in either place, of the life which he should haue enioyed, and subiected him to the feares, griefes, and paines of death, both here, and in hell for euer.

The life of the body is the vnion of the Soule with the body; the effects whereof are sense, and motion, to discerne, obtaine, and performe that which is needfull or healthfull for the body. And as the presence of the Soule bringeth life to the body, so the departing of the Soule taketh life from the body, and leaueth it dead, that is, voide of all action, motion and sense, as to euery mans eyes is apparent in dead bo­dies. The Soule therefore in the Scriptures is vsually taken for the life of the body, which proceedeth from the Soule, and is maintained by the Soule; And these phrases to Math. 2. Rom. 11. seeke a mans Soule, tolay Ioh. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. downe his owne Soule, or to giue it for another, to powre out his Soule vnto death, with such like, doe properly expresse the death of the body, quickned by the Soule, because men loose or leaue this life, when they loose or leaue their Soules. And where God threatned death to Adam, euen the very same day in which he should transgresse, we must not thinke that God either delayed the punishment longer, or extended it farder, then his words at first im­ported. When therefore the very same day that they sinned, God said to the woman, Genes. 3. increasing I will increase thy sorrow, and to the man, In sorrow shalt thou eate all the daies of thy life, we must acknowledge, that from that time forward, death began to take hold, and worke on both their bodies, though not by present separation of the Soule from the body, (for Adam liued after that 930. yeeres) yet by mortalitie, mutabilitie, miserie, and namely by sorrow and paine as the instruments and agents of death. 2. Cor. 7. Worldly sorrow causeth death, as Paul witnesseth; and a Prou [...]rb. 17. broken hart (saith Salomon) drieth the bones; yea, Eccles. 30. sorrow hath slaine maxy. And were it not so written, yet experience and nature teacheth vs, that griefe of mind, and paine of body, where they continue or increase, consume the flesh and hasten death; so that when God. the same day that they sinned, subiected them to sorrow and paine, which before they [Page 13] felt not. He made way for death, that it might continually worke in them, and [...]ken them till they returned to dust. De ci [...]itate Dei. li. 13. cap. 10. The ti [...]e of this life (saith Aust [...]n) is nothing els [...] but a race to death, and truely after a m [...]n begi [...]th to be in this b [...]dy, he is in death.

The life of the soule is not her vnderstanding and will, which she can neuer lose, no not in hell; but onely the trueth and gra [...]e of God, by whose spirit she receiueth the light of faith to direct her, and the strength of loue, to stirre and i [...]cite her in t [...]is life to beholde, desire, and embrace the holinesse and goodnesse of Gods blessed will and promise, for her euerlasting happinesse; which with patience and comfort of the Holy ghost, she expecteth till Gods appointed time do come. The lacke or losse of this inward sense, and motion of Gods spirit, which only can quicken the soule, is the death of the soule, depriued of her life, which is God, and left to herselfe in blind­nesse and hardnesse of heart, and giuen ouer vnto a reproba [...]e minde, and vile affecti­ons, to worke wickednesse euen with greedinesse; till contempt of Gods will, and desperation of his mercy doe fearefully end her miserable time in this life, and vio­lently draw her from hence to see, and suffer the terrible iudgements of God proui­ded for sinne in another world.

Life euerlasting, is the perfect and perpetuall vision and fruition of Gods glorious presence in the heauens, where vnspeakable light, and honour, ioy, and bli [...]e, shall compasse, and replenish bodie and soule in the fellowship of Christ, and his elect an­gels for euer. The exclusion and reiection of the wicked from this heauenly f [...]licity, together with the shame and confusion of sinne wounding and stinging the consci­ence without ease or rest; and the dreadfull horror of hell, the place of darknesse and diuels, hauing in it continuall flames of intolerable and vnquenchable fire eternallie tormenting the soules and bodies of the damned; the Scriptures call the s [...]cond death, because it is neuer inflicted but after the first death; and likewise wrath to come, for that the state of this present life is not capable of th [...]se extreame torments, which are reserued for another world. And least I should seeme to make degrees and parts of eternall death out of mine owne head; let vs briefly view, whether the word of God do not witnesse the same. Luc. 13. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (sayth Christ) when you shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and a [...] the Prophets in the kingdome of God, and your selues thrust out at doores. Daniel 12. Many of those that sleepe in the dust of the earth shall awake (sayth Daniel) to perpetuall shame and reproch; Esa. 66. Their worme shall neuer die, sayth Esay. The Lord that willed his good and faithfull seruants to enter into their masters ioy, when he came to the slouthfull and vnprofitable seruant, commanded to be Matth. 25. taken from him euen that he had, and to cast him into vtter darkenesse. The Iudge himselfe forwarneth he will giue this sentence on the wicked in the last day, Ibidem. Depart from [...]e, ye cursed, into euerlasting [...]ire, prepared for the diuell and his angels. They shall be Reuel. 14. tormented in fire and brimstone (sayth Iohn) and the smoke of their torments shall asc [...]nd euermore, and they shall haue no rest night nor day.

This is that 2. Thess. 1. euerlasting perdition and Iude ver. 7. vengeance of eternall fire, which the wicked shall suffer in hell, and this is the full and complete punishment and wages of sinne, repaying the reprobate according to their deserts, when their sinnes come once to that ripenesse and fulnesse, that they may no longer be endured by Gods iustice; the two former kinds of deaths in this world being such as are either despised, or desired, by the wicked. For nothing is more acceptable to them, than without all feare, or care of God, to follow their willes, and pursue their lusts; which i [...] the death of the soule; and the death of the bodie which they can not decline, they labour to neg­lect; and though they murmu [...] at God for it, as if man had beene framed at first mor­tall, yet finde they no great hurt in it, because they know not the sequel of it; and per­ceiue it to be common to good and badde, and to leaue no sense of paine behinde it. And indeed the outward punishments of this life are by Gods bountie, and patience so tempered, not only with comfort to the godly, but with moderation to the wicked, that they warne all men to feare and flie the wrath to come, and giue time and place for amendment. Sapien. 12. The old inhabitants of the holy land, thou (Lord) diddest h [...]te (sayth [Page 14] the Wiseman) for they committed abominable works, as sorceries, and wicked sacrifices; neuerthelesse thou sparedst them also, as men, and didst send the forerunners of thine host, euen hornets to root them out; not that thou couldest not destroy them with one rough word, but in punishing them by little and little, thou gauest them space to repent. The Apostle sayth the same,Rom. 2. Despisest thou the riches of Gods bountie, and patience, and long suffe­ring, not knowing that the bountie of God leadeth thee to repentance? but thou after thine hardnesse, and heart that can not repent, heapest vnto thy selfe wrath against the day of wrath, and of the declaration of the iust iudgement of God, who will reward euery man ac­cording to his works.

The wrath of God is also diuersly taken in the Scriptures; sometimes for the in­ward dislike, and hatred that God in his holinesse hath of all iniquitie; sometimes for his iudgements threatned, or executed against sinne, whether they be tempered with loue or patience, to worke or expect repentance, as in his owne, and in this life; or proporti­oned to the deserts of wicked and impenitent sinners, for substraction of grace, as to the reprobate in this world, or infliction of vengeance, as to the danmed in hell. Such is the holinesse of God, that he can loue no wickednesse, but by nature and of necessity doth and must hate all vnrighteousnesse in whomsoeuer. Psal. 5. Thou art not a God, that loueth wickednesse (sayth Dauid) neither shall euill dwell with thee. 2. Cor. 6. What fellowship hath righteousnesse with vnrighteousnesse? or what communion hath light and darknesse; What fauour then and allowance should iniquitie finde with God, that is the very fountaine and flaming fire of all holinesse? To declare Gods perfect hatred against all sinne as well of the faithfull as faithlesse, the Scripture witnesseth not only that his soule abhor­reth the outrages of the wicked, which are an abomination vnto him, but also that he is displeased and grieued with the sinnes euen of his elect. Prouerb. 6. These things the Lord hateth (sayth Salomon) yea his soule abhorreth them. Zacharie 8. All these are the things that I hate saith the Lord, by the Prophet Zacharie. Psal. 5. The foolish shall not stand in thy sight, thou hatest all them that worke i [...]iquitie, sayth Dauid to God. The Lord will abhorre the cruell and deceitfull man. Yea God is displeased and grieued with his owne, when they sinne a­gainst him. Deuter. 32. The Lord saw it (sayth Moses) and was stirred to anger, with the prouoca­tion of his sonnes and his daughters. When Dauid had slaine Vriah, and taken home his wife; the 2. Sam. 11. thing displeased the eies of the Lord, sayth the Scripture. Likewise when he numbred the people, 1. Paral. 21. God was displeased with that deed. Esay remembring the mercies of the Lord towards the house of Israel, sayth; Esa. 63. hee was their Sauiour in all their troubles, he was troubled, and the angell of his presence saned them: but they rebelled and grieued the spirit of his holinesse. The Apostle confirmeth the same: Ephes. 4. Grieue not the Holy spirit, by whom ye are sealed vnto the day of Redemption. Then as the loue of all righteousnesse is a naturall and necessarie consequent to Gods holinesse; so the dis­like and hatred of all sinne is rightly and properly appertinent to his diuine puritie; neither must the godly take it for an improper kinde of speech, but fully beleeue and plainely confesse, that God is truely and greatly displeased with their sinnes, lest in their hearts they bring him within compasse of liking or allowing their vncleannesse: and when they repent, they must not onely tremble at the prouoking of so righteous and fearefull a Iudge, but chiefly sorrow for the displeasing and offending the holi­nesse of so gratious and louing a father. This dislike and detestation of disobedience euen in his owne children, which God of his holinesse hath, the Scripture often ex­presseth by the name of Anger, though no punishment follow. Exod. 4. ver. 14. The Lord was very angrie with Moses (sayth the Scripture) when he so long refused to goe at Gods ap­pointment to deliuer the children of Israel out of Aegypt. God was likewise Numb. 12. vers. 9. verie angrie with Aaron and Miriam his sister, for speaking against Moses, though Aaron was not punished for it, and Miriam quickely healed of her leprosie. So God him­selfe professed to Eliphaz the Temanite, saying; Iob. 42. vers. 7. My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends, though he willed them to sacrifice for their offence, and promised to accept Iobs prayer for them. The same may often be obserued in other places of the Scriptures.

The wrath of God is likewise taken for the threates, whereby God denounceth what he will inflict on the wickednesse of men; or for the sharpe reproofe, which hee vseth against sinne committed. Psal. 95. I sware in my wrath, they shall not enter into my rest, saith God of the disobedient Israelites in the wildernesse. Ezech. 38. In mi [...]e indignation, [...]d in the fire of my wrath haue I spoken it (saith God by Ezechiel) surely at that time there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel. So Dauid, Psal. 2. Then shallGodspeake to them in his wrath, and terrifie them in his sore displeasure. Wherefore Dauid prayeth for himselfe, Psal. 6. O Lord reprooue me not in thine anger; knowing that Gods rebukes and threates ought to be as much regarded and feared of the faithfull, as his plagues.

Lastly, all the Iudgements of God, awaking the negligent, scourging the disobedient, obdurating the impenitent in this life, or renenging the Reprobate, here and in hell, are in the Scriptures called the wrath of God; of which speech there can be no question, because the word of God giueth plaine & plentifull euidence in euery of those parts: onely the Discourser auoucheth, that the two first, are no degrees nor effects of Gods proper wrath; though the Scripture call them wrath, but are so termed by a very im­proper speech. These are his words: Defen. pa. 9. l. 35. To suffer chastisements and corrections as the godly doe, is not to suffer, or feele Gods wrath, except it be in a very improper speech. And this is one of the maine points, on which he putteth theissue of the question. Defen. p. 13. l. 2. I affirme (saith he) Christ suffered Gods proper wrath and vengeance: You thinke, all afflictions what­soeuer, small or great, and towards whomsoeuer, are the effects of Gods wrath: but that is not so, except in a most improper speech. To the godly their afflictions both small and great, are Gods fatherly and gracious chastisements, and no effects of his properwrath.

Thou must not forget (Christian Reader) from what beginning we come to this issue. This Rouer taking vpon him to prooue, that Christ suffered the true paines of hell, and of the damned, made this his foundation, Treatis. pa. 33. That Christ suffered the wrath of God for vs; which he affirmed to be equall to hell it selfe, and all the torments thereof. Mine answere shortly was, I did not see what this proposition, Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God, if it were granted, could helpe his cause, or hinder mine. Conclus. pa. 243. l. 27. For the wrath of God extended to all paines and punishments, aswell corporall as spirituall, in this life and the next, were they temporall or eternall. So that no paine or punishment, small or great, could befall the bodie or soule of Christ, but it must needs proceed from the wrath of God. To this he now replieth, To Defen. p. 9. l. 35. suffer (as the godly do) chastisements and corrections, is not to suffer or feele Gods wrath, nor indeed the punishment of sinne; except it be in a very impro­per speech. Where first obserue that these words (as the godly do) are not conteined in mine answer, but intended by him in his replie. The ground on which I stood, was that all the miseries of mans life what soeuer they be, came first from the wrath of God reuen­ging the sinne of our first Father; and so are degrees and parts of that wrath wherewith God punished the transgression of Adam. I named no miseries peculiar to the godly, but common to them with the wicked; neither did I touch any speciall ma­ner of suffering as the godly do suffer; but prooued that the Scriptures, which must teach vs all how to speake in Gods causes, called them wrath euen in the godly. And consequently, since Christ suffered sorrow, paine, and death, which came for sinne, and are common to all, he might and did suffer the wrath of God for vs, and yet not the paines of the damned.

[You cast about afresh (Sir Discourser) in your defence, and tell vs the ScripturesPhrases of Gods wrath in Scrip­ture against the wicked are im­proper. speake verie improperlie, when they call the miseries of this life the wrath of God; and therefore you bring vs a new phrase of your owne framing, and say the godly in no wise doe suffer Gods proper wrath, that is, properly taken, or properly so called, which Christ did suffer as you affirme.] Is your learning so good (Sir Defender) that you will applie to God wrath, indignation, and furie properly so called, which are the high­est degrees of Gods anger against the wicked? Haue you forgotten, who tooke vpon you such knowledge in the Hebrue tongue, that the vsuall words whereby the Scrip­ture expresseth the wrath of God against the wicked, do import the aph. nose, the chemal [...]. heat, the k [...]tseph. boiling, the char [...]n. kindling, the [...]. excesse a [...]d rage of God against the wicked? which [Page 16] words if you referre to God by way of proper speech, you make of euery one of them a barbarous and blasphemous heresie. So that your late coined distinction of Gods wrath by improper speech towards his children, and his wrath properly so called a­gainst his enemies, is vaine and foolish: the words in Scripture that note Gods wrath against his enemies are most improper, and are translated from the behauiou [...] of an­grie men to God, of purpose to strike a terrour into the wicked, of that great and grie­uous iudgement which they shall receiue. But whatsoeuer the words designe in their naturall signification, which the Christian faith forbiddeth vs to attribute properly vnto God, because they expresse humane affections and corporall passions, which are not in God: by the anger which is in God against sinne, the Scripture meaneth nothing els, but his most holy dislike of sinne in whomsoeuer, and his most iust and constant will and decree, in some to reward sinne according to desert, which is venge­ance in this life, and the next; in others so to temper the punishment of sinne with loue and mercie, that whatsoeuer he inflict on bodie or soule, shall tend to the praise of his iustice and mercie, and end with the consolation and saluation of their soules. And by the anger which proceedeth from God, are in the Scriptures intended either his threats against sinne, or his punishments of sinne, be they corporall or spirituall, temporall or eternall, mixed with mercie, or proportioned only to iustice.

If you relinquish your holdfast of improper speech, and rase that vnaduised shift out of your booke; (for God hath in him no wrath properly so called, but his holi­nesse displeased, and iustice prouoked by sinne, are improperly named his wrath in the Scriptures;) Let vs come to the proprieties of the things themselues, and see whe­ther chasticements for sinne doe properly proceede from Gods loue onely, or from his iustice tempered with loue and mercy. Of the wicked I shall not neede to speake much, we make no great question of them; howbeit euen their externall punish­ments in this life are not voide of Gods bountie and patience diuersly blessing them with earthly things, often warning and sparing them, by giuing them time and place to mislike and leaue their sinnes; and length-fully expecting their submission and amendment, which the Apostle calleth Rom. 2. the riches of Gods bountie, patience, and long sufferance, leading (euen the obstinate and hard harted) to repentance: The doubt is of the godly; whether their afflictions which are corrections and chasticements for sinne, rise only from Gods loue, or rather from his iustice mixed with loue. I affirme the Scriptures doe directly and distinctly propose in the chasticements of the elect as well iudgement and wrath, as mercy and loue; and that not by abusing the words, but by reseruing to either their naturall proprieties, and seuerall consequents; the one for the commendation of Gods iustice, the other for the demonstration of his mercy, and consolation of the afflicted.

Esay 57. 17. For his wicked couetousnesse I was angry, (saith God) and did smite him,butI will heale him, and restore comfort vnto him. He must be more then absurd; that will ima­gine, God would or could say, for his wicked couetousnesse I loued him; that were to make God the abettour and embracer of wickednesse, which is wholy repugnant to his Diuine sanctitie and glory; the words therefore must stand as they doe without any euasion of improper speech, and Gods anger in this place must plainely differ from his loue, which cannot be added to these words without euident impietie. Since then the cause was sinne which God doth perfectly hate in whomsoeuer, euen in his owne, and the smiting came for sinne and from anger, it is not possible this chasticement should spring onely from loue, but ioyntly both must worke together, I meane Gods anger against sinne, and his loue towards the person, to make the punishment tolerable, and comfortable to the bearer. The like rule God giueth for all that belong to the true seed, and sonne of Dauid, which is Christ. If Psal. 89. 31. 32. his children forsake my law, and walke not in my iudgements; I will visue their transgressions with the Rod, and their iniquitie with s [...]ripes; but my mercy will I not take from him. God threatneth no loue to sinne, he threatneth anger; the stripes here mentioned are not the loue of a father, but mitigated by loue; the mercy here promised, is not adioy­ned [Page 17] as the onely cause of this correction, which is ascribed to the transgressions and iniquities of the children; but it serueth for a salue, to heale the wound, which Gods iustice prouoked by their sinnes should formerly make. For he is the God that Deut. 32. woundeth and healeth; killeth, and quickneth; 1. Sam. 2. casteth downe to hell, and rayseth vp againe; not working contraries by one and the selfe same loue, but when he hath iustly done the one for our offences, he gratiously doth the other for his mercies sake; in Habacuk. 3. wrath remembring mercy, least we should be consumed. He then despouseth the Church vnto himselfe in Ose. 2. iudgement and mercy, not in iudgement forgetting mer­cy, nor by mercy excluding iudgement, for 1. Petri. 4. iudgement beginneth at the house of God; but retaining both that the whole Church may Psal. 101. sing mercy and iudgement vnto him as Dauid did; yet with this difference that he doth not Lament. 3. punish with the hart, as the Prophet testifieth, but his Miche. 7. delight is in mercie. Which plainly prooueth the Rod is not all one with loue, as the Apostle noteth, when he opposeth the one against the other; saying, 1. Cor. 4. Shall I come to you with a rodde or in loue? but is guided by loue, lest in displeasure God should Psal. 77. shut vp his mercies. These two therefore in God, iust anger against the sinnes, and tender loue towards the persons of his children, together with their effects, which are iudgement and mercy, may not be confounded the one with the other, but as they haue different causes and proprieties in God, so haue they dif­ferent effects and consequents in vs; the Scriptures bearing witnesse, that Gods an­ger riseth for our sinnes, his loue for his owne names sake; his anger he threatneth, his loue he promiseth; he hath no pleasure in punishing, he delighteth in mercie; he repenteth him often of the euill which he denounceth, his gifts and calling are without repentance; when we call vpon him he deliuereth vs out of all our troubles, his mercy will he neuer take from his, nor frustrate his truth. Yea, the godly haue a diffe­rent feeling of his anger towards them from his loue; they feare, they faint, they grieue, and grone vnder the burden of affliction, they waxe weary of it, they pray against it; they giue him thankes when they are freed from it; none of which affecti­ons may with any sense of godlinesse agree to his loue.

[But these are Defen. p. 13. no effects of Gods proper wrath, (you thinke) Et pa. 10. Christ onely hauing wholy suffered that for vs all.] What you meane by Gods proper wrath, is knowen onely to your selfe, you neuer expresse nor expound the word, but with more ob­scure and doubtfull termes then the former. At first, you affirme Gods wrath to­wards his children was a most improper speech. I haue now shewed, that if you looke to the words vsed in the sacred Scriptures, Gods wrath towards his enemies is as improper a speech as the other. Your second wrench was, that all chastisements for sinne are inflicted on Gods children properly by his loue. I haue prooued, that they proceede properly from Gods iustice tempered with mercie, and not from his onely loue. Your third shift is now, they are no effects of Gods proper wrath, which Christ did wholy suffer for vs all. If you vnderstand by Gods proper wrath that which is on­ly wrath, and hath no admixture of his loue, fauour or mercie, then is your position ridiculous in your first maine point, and blasphemous in the second. For who euer auouched that God punished his children, and his enemies with the same degrees and effects of wrath? or who euer dreamed that God chastising the sinnes of his elect, in wrath remembred not his mercie? you doe indeede affirme of Christ, that he suffered all Gods proper wrath, which if you now interpret to be without all re­spect of loue or fauour towards him, you light on a greater blasphemie, then you are ware of. Wherefore looke well to your new found phrases of Gods meere iustice, and proper wrath, with which you thinke to colour your conceits; they will else proue you a weake Scholer, and a worse Christian.

The word (proper) applyed to Gods wrath may signifie either that which is not figuratiue; or that which is not common to others; or that which hath no mixture of loue, or mercie to mitigate wrath, but is wholy and onely wrath. In God nothing is figuratiue; he is naturally, and wholy truth itselfe. The words applyed to him are often improper and figuratiue, because we can hardly speake, or vnderstand many [Page 18] things that are in him, but by such words as are knowen and familiar to vs. In this sense all that the Scripture intendeth by wrath in God, is most proper, and naturall to God; namely his holinesse abhorring sinne; his iustice proportioning punish­ment to it, and his power performing whatsoeuer his will and councell decreeth for the repressing, or reuenging of sinne. For which respect Zanchius, a very moderate and considerate writer of our time, and one whom amongst others, the DiscourserDefen. p. 26. iudgeth no way inferior to the best of the Auncients, setteth downe this for one of his Resolutions, which he calleth a Thesis: De tribus Elo­him lib. 4. ca 6. quaest. 1. Ira, eo sensu, quo scripturae dant illam deo, veré, & proprié, ei attribuitur: Anger, in that sense in which the Scriptures giue it to God, is truely and properly ascribed vnto him. And his resolutions ensuing vpon the former are not onely, that God is Ibid. quaest. 2. angry, (he meaneth truely and properly as his first Thesis affirmeth,) with all sinners as well elect, as reprobate; but that,Ibid. quaest. 4. maior & grauior est ira dei aduersus homines etiam electos, propter peccata, quam existimari possit ab ipsis ho­minibus. The anger of God against his elect for sinne, is greater and greeuouser, then they can conceiue.

A second signification of proper may be, that this wrath which the Scriptures attri­bute to God, is proper to him, and common to no creature els. Men, and deuils haue wrath, but that is tumultuous, or vitious; and hath no communion with Gods wrath, which is righteous and holy. The Saints and Angels in heauen no doubt de­test all iniquitie, but they are no fit discerners, esteemers, nor rewarders of sinne. The secrets of the heart they know not, whose vncleannesse is open onely to the eies of God. The waight of sinne they cannot truely balance; he onely that is offended, and cannot be deceiued, rightly knoweth how farre euery sinne should displease, and what euery sinne deserueth. As they cannot fully ponder offences, no more can they iustly proportion punishment to the demerits of euery sinner, and least of all or­daine, and arme meanes temporally to afflict, or eternally to reuenge the bodies and soules of transgressors: he onely that is all-wise, all-holy, all-iust and allmightie, can throughly discerne, perfectly dislike, euenly reward, and powerfully represse sinne by repentance or vengeance, as seemeth best to him; and therefote he onely is the righteous Iudge of the world, and capable of that wrath, which is proper to God.

A third meaning of Gods proper wrath may be this, that as euery thing most right­ly deserueth his name, when it hath in [...] permixtion of the contrary to alter his nature; so Gods proper wrath may be that which is wholy and onely wrath without any temper of mercie or loue, to diminish the heate and hight of wrath. That is most properly light, that hath no darkenesse; trueth, that hath no falshood; good, that hath no euill in it. And since Gods iustice against the wicked admitteth neither loue to their persons, nor mercie to their miseries; that is also Gods proper wrath, which is fully and wholy wrath without any fauour or pitie towards them that are the vessels of wrath appointed to destruction. Of their damnation S. Iohn writeth: The [...]euel. 14. smoke of their torment shall ascend for euer, and they shal haue no rest day nor night. Wher­by it is euident, their [...]ames. 2. iudgement shall be mercilesse, their Mark. 9. worme neuer dying, and the fire neuer quenching. And how can it be otherwise, since they are both haters and ha­ted of God. [...] 1. Iacob haue I loued (saith God) and Esau haue I hated. Thou Psal. 5. hatest (saith Dauid to God) all those that worke wickednesse. YeaRom. 1. the wrath of God (saith Paul) is reuealed from heauen against all vngodlinesse and vnrighteousnesse of men. For as they re­garded not to know God, so God deliuered them vp into a reprobate minde to doe vnseemely things. Neither is there any greater wrath in this life, then for men to be left to the lustes of their owne hearts, that they may be full of all vnrighteousnesse, wickednesse, ma­liciousnesse, haters of God, inuenters of euill, voyde of all loue, fidelitie, and mercie, and here receiue in themselues a meete reward of their errour, to prepare them for eternall ven­geance, with diuels in the world to come. This wrath of God against the wicked, hath in it neither loue, nor mercie, but is wholy wrath proportioned to their desires which are sinnefull, and their deserts which are hatefull before God, and so they feele the iust, and full recompence of their affected ignorance, and wilfull disobedience. [Page 19] Of this wrath the elect doe not taste, they are freed from it in Christ their Redeemer and Sauiour, by whose spirit their mindes are lightned and renued, and their hearts perswaded to the obedience of faith, and by whose death they are wholy deliuered from the wrath to come. Of the two former they often taste, specially when they neglect continuall and serious repentance, to which free remission of sinnes is offered in the blood of Christ Iesus; or when through the rebellion of the flesh against the spirit, they are caried backe to the desires of their former corruption. In which cases the Lord with sundry and sore afflictions letteth them sharpely feele what it is to pro­uoke the holinesse, or abuse the goodnesse of so gracious a Father, and neuer leaueth scourging them, till they see and acknowledge their vnrulinesse, and lament and leaue their vncleannesse, taking hope and hold through faith of his mercies promised them in Christ Iesus.

If it can not be truely sayd of the elect, that in this third sense, which you vrge, they taste of Gods proper wrath, because of the loue which God beareth, and sheweth them in Christ his sonne; how much lesse may it be auouched of Christ himselfe, that he suffered all Gods proper wrath; on whom nothing was layed for our sinnes, but with so great loue, fauour, and honour (considering the cause which he vndertooke) that God in each and all Christs sufferings declared him to be the best pleasing sacrifice, and most sufficient recompense for sinne, that heauen could yeeld, or God would haue. For whether wee looke to the choise of the person, to the measure of his cha­stisement, or to the reward of his labour, wee shall see the exceeding and admirable loue, and fauour of God towards him, albeit the iustice of God kindled against our sinnes, did not quit him from all paine: yea that very chastisement, by which he yeel­ded, and learned obedience, did not onely witnesse, but also increase Gods loue to­wards him. And where you (Sir Discourser) cast your eyes onely vpon Gods seuere and implacable iustice against sinne, when you speake of Christes sufferings, to serue your owne turne, and to tole in hell-paines with some pretence of piety; all the god­ly may perceiue, and must confesse, that God in satisfaction for sinne had greater re­gard of his holinesse despised by mans disobedience, and of his glorie defaced by Sa­tans triumph for our fall, than of the rigor of his iustice prouoked by contempt of his commandement. For had God chiefly respected the execution of his iustice against sinne, his owne sonne was most vnfit to be subiected to that vengeance which was prepared for deuils: but God in the recompense which he required for sinne, chose rather to haue his holinesse contented, and his glory aduanced, than to haue his iu­stice inflicted to the vttermost. And therefore he selected the person of his owne sonne, that might fully satisfie his holinesse, and maruellously exalt his glorie, but on whom of all others his iustice could take least holde; not that his iustice should be neglected, but that a moderate punishment in his person, for the worthinesse thereof would weigh more euen in the balance of Gods exact iustice, than the depth of Gods wrath executed on all the transgressours.

The chastisement of our peace layd vpon him will proue the same. For where theWhat death Christ died. wages of sinne is death, and death due to sinne is threefold, spirituall, corporall, and eternall, as I haue formerly shewed; such was the person of our Sauiour, that two parts of death due to sinne, could by no rule of Gods iustice fasten on Christes hu­mane nature. The gifts of Gods spirit and grace could not be quenched nor dimi­nished in him; he wasIohn 1. full of grace and trueth; he had not the spirit Iohn 3. by measure, as we haue; but Iohn 1. of his fulnesse we all haue receiued. Iohn 8. It is my father (saith he) that honoureth me, whom ye say to be your God; yet haue ye not knowen him, but I know him; and if I should say I know him not, I should be a liar like vnto you: but I know him, and keepe his word, and do alwayes the things that please him. The cleerenesse of trueth knowing Gods will, and fulnesse of grace keeping his word, beeing continually present with the humane soule of Christ; most apparently the death of the soule, which excludeth all inward sense and motion of Gods spirit, could haue no place in him, by reason the death of the soule is the want of all grace, and height of all sinne, from which he was free: [Page 20] much lesse could any part of Christs manhood by Gods iustice be condemned to euerlasting death, or to hell fire; since there could nothing befall the humanitie of Christ, which was vnfit for his Diuinitie, they both being inseparably ioyned toge­ther; or repugnant to that loue which God so often professed, and proclamed from heauen; or iniurious to the innocencie and obedience, which God so highly accep­ted, and rewarded; or preiudiciall to mans saluation, which God so long before pur­posed and promised. No weight of sinne, no heat of wrath, no rigour of iustice could preuaile against the least of these, to cast Christ out of heauen, and combine him with diuels in the second death, which is the Reuel. 21. lake burning with fire and brimstone. There is onely left the third kinde of death, which is corporall, to which Christ yeelded him­selfe willingly for the conseruation of Gods iustice, who inflicted that paine on all men as the generall punishment of sinne; for the demonstration of his power, who by death ouercame death, together with the cause and consequents thereof, and for the consolation of the godly, that they should not faint vnder the crosse, nor feare what sinne and Satan could do against them.

It was loue then in God towards vs, to giue his sonne for vs;Iohn 3. So God loued the world, that he gaue his only begotten sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish, but haue life euerlasting: but farre greater loue to his sonne, than to vs, though the burden of our sinnes, which we could not beare, were layd vpon him. For since God hath.Ephes. 1. adopted vs through Christ Iesus vnto himselfe, and made vs accepted in his beloued; of force he must be much better beloued, for whose sake we all are beloued. And if toHebr. 1. make the world by his sonne, were an excellent demonstration of Gods euerlasting and exceeding loue towards his sonne; to Iohn 3. send him into the world, that the world through him might be saued, doth as farre in honour and loue exceed the former, as our Redemption, by which heauen is inherited, doth passe our creation, whereby the earth was first inhabited. Neither was it possible that God should remit the rigor of iustice against sinne, for the loue of any, but onely of his owne sonne; whom because he loued as deerely as himselfe, and had made Hebr. 1. heire of all things; worthily and right­ly did the wrath of God against man asswage, and yeeld to the loue of God towards his owne sonne; against whom no punishment could proceed, but such as was fa­therly, and serued rather to witnesse obedience, than to execute vengeance. For though you (Sir Discourser) in the height of your vnlearned skill resolue, that Christ could suffer no chastisement, butDefenc. pa. 11. l. 11. all his sufferings were the true and proper punishment, or iust vengeance of God for sinne; yet the Prophet Esay telleth vs, the chastisment of our peace was vpon him; and the word Musar, which the Prophet there vseth, deriued from Iasar, is the proper word that in the Scripture signifieth the correction of a father to­wards his sonne; and of God likewise towards his Church.Prouerb. 19. Chastise thy sonne (saith Salomon) while there is hope. Deutr. 8. As a father chasteneth his sonne,sothe Lord chasteneth thee, sayth Moses to Israel.Prouerb. 3. My Sonne refuse not the chastening of the Lord. Psal. 94. Blessed is the man whom thou Lord doest chasten. The like may be seene by those that will looke, Deutr. 21. vers. 18. Ierem. 2. vers. 30. Ierem. 31. vers. 18. Psal. 118. vers. 18. The Apostle concurreth with the Prophet Esay touching Christes sufferings, and sayth,Hebr. 5. Though he were the sonne, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. He learned obedience, which is the subiection of a sonne to his fathers chastisement, he tasted not vengeance, which is the indignation of an enemie requiting.

Yea the very death which Christ suffered in the body of his flesh, was so farre from being an effect of Gods proper wrath, that it was an increase of Gods loue towards him, and as well the price of our Redemption, as the cause of all his honor following.Iohn 10. Therefore the Father loueth me (sayth our Sauiour) because I lay downe my soule (or life) to take it againe. And so much the Prophet foretolde,Esa. 53. Therefore will I giue him (sayth God) a part in many things, and he shall diuide the spoile of (or with) the mightie, because he poured out his soule (or life) vnto death. Which the Apostle sheweth to be thus verified in Christ.Philip. 2. He humbled himselfe, being obedient, vnto the death, euen the death of the Crosse. Wherefore God also highly exalted him, and gaue him a name aboue [Page 21] euery name, that in the name of Iesu euery knee should bow; of things celestiall, terrestrial, and infernall, & euery tongue confesse, that Iesus Christ is the Lord, to the glory of God the father. All power, honour and iudgement, in heauen, earth, and hell, are therefore deliuered ouer to Christ by God, and all things subiected vnder his feet, because he h [...]bled himselfe, and was obedient to his father vnto death, euen the death of the Crosse. Was it then wrath in God without loue, that brought Christ to his death; or rather vnspeak­able loue in God towards his sonne, which ouerruled his iustice prouoked by our sinnes, and so highly accepted, and plentifully rewarded the death of Christ, that he made him LORD ouer all things and persons in heauen, earth, and hell? to giue grace and peace, mercie and glory to Gods elect by his meanes and merites; and to inflict excecation, destruction, and damnation on the wicked both men and di­uels by his iudgement and sentence? If it were admirable loue and fauour in God towards Christs humane nature to ioyne mans flesh and spirit into the vnitie and so­cietie of his Sonnes Diuine maiestie, what inestimable honor and glory was it to put the whole gouernment of Gods kingdome in heauen and earth into Christs hands, which is the reward that God hath allotted to Christs obedience & patience shewed on the Altar of the Crosse? So that the learned may soone perceiue, I worke no Defenc. pa. 19. deceit nor mistaking to the Reader through the ambiguitie of this word, THE VVRATH OF GOD, as you pretend; but you wandring in the desart of your owne deuises, haue fa­shioned to your selfe a fardle of phrases, as Gods proper, and improper wrath, [...] meere iustice, and such like, and vnder the generalitie and vncertaintie of these words you hide your head; and when you are required to make some proofe, and shew some parts of Gods wrath out of the Scripture, which Christ suffered, besides the death of the Crosse, and paines thereof, you answere; to Defenc. pa. 17. l. 15. particularize or to specifie the parts of Gods wrath, which Christ felt, as I will you to doe, what madnesse were it in men to at­tempt, and what folly is it in any to require. Indeede it would be madnesse in you to attempt it, for thereby you should plainly disclose that absurditie and impietie which now is cloaked vnder generall and doubtfull termes; but those that be godly will ne­uer suffer their faith to be framed by your phrases, except you shew warrant of Gods word, both whence you collect them, and what you meane by them; neither of which you doe, nor can doe with any truth in these points now in question.

For first by what Scripture proue you that Christ did or must suffer the properThe Scriptures neuer mention that Christ suf­fered Gods wrath. wrath of God or the punishment and vengeance of sinne? I following the sense and words of the Scriptures, and of Diuines both olde & new, which make shame, sorrow, paine and death in this life the effects of Gods wrath punishing sinne in Adam, and his of-spring at his fall, did by consequent (a specie ad genus affirmatiue) gather, and in that respect confesse, that Christ suffering those things on the Crosse, suffered the wrath of God, and due punishment of sinne in this life: but you tell vs now, the Scriptures in that point speake most improperly, you haue found out that Gods wrath signifieth properly the paines of the damned, and those Christ suffered for our sinnes. True it is, and long since by meSerm. pa. 131. conclus. pa. 243. auouched, that Gods wrath against sinne extendeth to all the paines and punishments of Soule and body, as well in hell as on earth; and in comparison of the terrible torments of hell fier, the paines and pu­nishments of the faithfull in this life may be called, and accounted rather the Serm. p. 133. chas­tisements of a Father, then the rigour of a Iudge; but since you refuse that sense of Gods wrath, which I collected from the Scriptures as very improper, take no aduantage of my confession, and let Gods wrath stand in your sense either for Gods displeasure against the person offending, or for the vengeance of sinne executed on the wicked and damned; I aske you now by what authoritie of holy Scripture can you prooue, that Christ suffered Gods proper wrath, or his wrath at all? I recall not my former Resolution, which I take to be sober and sound; but you reiecting it as improper and deceitfull, let vs see how you prooue by the Scriptures that Christ suffered Gods wrath, which you so much presume, and make the chiefe pillour of all your proce­dings. In your late defence with shame enough, you yeeld at last, that this Defenc. pa. 16. l. 12. word [Page 22] HELL is not literally and expresly applyed to Christs sufferings in the Scriptures; you must likewise yeeld, by your leaue, that this speech, the wrath of God, is not literally nor expresly affirmed of Christs sufferings in all the Scriptures.

That Esay. 53. he was wounded for our transgressions, and torne (or trodden vnder feete) for our iniquities, and we healed by his stripes; as also that he was afflicted and oppressed, and bare our iniquities, and poured out his soule vnto death, the Prophet Esay witnesseth; that he Math. 20. Ioh 18. dranke of the Cup, which his Father gaue him, the Euangelists mention; and the Apostle saith, he was Rom. 4. deliuered, and 1. Cor. 15. died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures; but none of these expresse or inferre that he suffered the proper wrath of God, or full punishment and vengeance of sinne; which are the phrases placed for the ground­worke of all your discourse, though no way prooued by any shew of Scripture. The words vsed generally by the holy Ghost to expresse Christs sufferings (besides the former) import that he gaue himselfe for vs to be the Ephes. 5. sacrifice, the 1. Cor. 6. price, and the 1. Timoth 6. ransome of our deliuerance. All which wordes note no wrath conceiued against him, nor vengeance executed on him; but rather the exceeding loue and fauour of God towards him, as the onely Sacrifice that God would accept; the onely price that God did esteeme, the onely ransome that God would receaue for the sinne of the world. This Sacrifice was his body, this price was his bloud, this ransome was his death. Hebr. 10. We are sanctified by the offering of the body of Iesus once ‖made‖. 1. Cor. 6. Ye are bought with a price [...]th Paule, that is, 1. Petri. 1. yee were redcemed with the precious blood of Christ, saith Pe­ter. For Ephes. 1. we haue redemption in him by his blood; And Hebr. 9. he is the mediatour of the new testament, through death, for the ransome of the transgressions in the former testament, So that by the sacrifice of his bodie, price of his blood, and ransome of his death, he hath made a most full recompence, satisfaction, and redemption for the sinnes of the world: and consequently the punishment which he sustained, 1. Petri 2. when he bare our sinnes in his body on the tree, was the full & perfect Hebr. 1. purgation, and 1. Ioh. 2. propitiation of our sinnes; full not in the degrees and parts of condemnation and vengeance due to sinne, which the damned doe suffer, as you falsely and absurdly insinuate, but full in price and force of Redemption and deliuerance from sinne; for somuch, as Gods holi­nesse is highly pleased with the obedience, Gods glory greatly aduanced by the hu­militie, and Gods iustice fully satisfied with the submission and patience of his Sonne on the Crosse.

More then this if you will vrge on the person of Christ, as needefull for our Re­demption, first proue it, and then professe it at your pleasure; otherwise if you boldly and vainely presume it, your addle and idle wordes can not preiudice the setled and vndoubted principles of the Christian faith warranted by the word of God, and fully receaued by the Church of Christ euen from the beginning. To your maimed and ruinous foundation that Christ must suffer all and the very same punishment, wages, and vengeance of sinne, which the damned doe suffer, and we should haue suffered, had we not beene excused by his suffering it for vs; I haue plainly and sadly answered I know not how often, it is a false and lewd imagination; and so impious, that your selfe dare not in your late Defence offer it to vew, without many bridles to holde it from horrible blasphemie. But (Sir discourser) why coyne you conclusi­ons in christian Religion, that must haue three or foure exceptions to saue them from open impietie? and why see you not that your speciall reseruations ouerthrow the truth of your owne assertion? for where the true and proper punishment, wages and vengeance of sinne in all the wicked is spirituall, corporall, and eternall death; in your limitations at last, which you forgate at first, you except Christ from spirituall death, which is sinne, and from eternall death which is damnation of body and soule to hell fier; & yet you still affirme, that Christ suffered the full & proper punishment, wages, and vengeance of sinne, as though these two, spirituall and eternall death, were no parts of the punishment & vengeance due to sin; or these being excepted as vnfit for Christ to suffer; you could truely say Christ suffered the full and proper punish­ment, and vengeance of sinne, which consisteth of these three kinds of death.

And who but you would send vs such headlesse and senselesse resolutions in Di­uinitie as these are; I Defenc. pa. 13. l. 22. affirme that Christ suffered all gods proper wrath, and vengeance for sinne, I say all that the very damned do suffer, namely so described and limited as is aboue said. And againe, Defenc. pa. 12. l. 1. He suffered from Gods hand euen as the damned doe; namely in these points which are both possible and reasonable. Were you some new Euangelist, or vpstart A­postle, it were euen enough for you to referre Christs sufferings to your description and your limitation without any farther authority; but when you take vpon you with your bare word to broch so many nouelties in Christian religion, without one line or letter of holy writ to vpholde your dreames and deuices, who can chuse but deride your follie? You pinne mens faiths for the ground of their saluation to your descrip­tions and your limitations, to possibilitie and reason measured by your rule without any text or title of Scripture to warrant your words; and then you thinke the maine question is profoundly and fully handled; but your sober and wise Reader will pre­sently finde the lamenesse or leudnesse of your grand conclusion. For if Christs per­son not only by your possibilitie and reason, but by the soundnesse of trueth, and sin­cerenesse of faith must be exempted from sinne which is the death of the soule, and from damnation which is euerlasting death; why write you so boldly that Christ must suffer all Gods proper wrath, euen all that the damned do suffer; whereas apparently those two being excepted, Christ could suffer no kinde of death but only a corporall? And if by your so describing and so limiting the matter, you draw Christ within the staine or guilt of sinne, or within the compasse or danger of damnation; hope you to finde any Christian eares so patient that will endure that monstrous and sacrilegious in­dignitie?

[But you will inuent a new hell for Christ, which shall haue the Defenc. pa. 13. l. 14. substance, but not the circumstance of damnation, and shalbe inflicted Ibid. pa. 12. l. 32. by Gods immediate hand properly, ye a only in the verie soule of Christ, l. 27. God can doe more than he will. which Gods owne infinite wrathfull power and iustice can inflict for satisfaction, where and how it pleaseth him.] The question (good Sir) is not of Gods power what he can do, but of his will reuealed in his Word, and of his pro­mise performed in the person of his sonne for our saluation, and testified by the mouthes and pennes of the Prophets and Apostles, that were guided by his holy spi­rit to speake and write the trueth. I make no doubt, but God can create another hea­uen, another earth, and another hell, as quickly and as easily as he did these that now are; yet if any man affirme that God will so do, or hath so done, I must holde him for an Infidell, because he gainsayth Gods trueth, and belieth Gods will by pretending Gods power. Talke not therefore what God can doe; shew rather by the word and witnesse of trueth what God hath done; to that must we trust, to that are you bound, and from that are you slipt. You haue not so much as any colour of Scripture, for these desperate nouelties and vanities, I will giue them no woorse words, lest you complaine of my bitternesse; and if any man be but so wise, as to let your proue these things before he beleeue them, he is safe enough for euer admitting them, I may spare my paines in refuting them; yet because destitute of all other helpe, you ap­peale to possibilitie and reason, to fourbish your new inuention of another hell, let vs see how handsomely you hale it onward.

Defenc. pa. 8. l. 12. [By the law of our creation as we are men, hauing a soule besides our bodie, so our soule hath in it a threefolde facultie of suffering paines. First that which is proper and immediate iustly so called: proper, because it is proper only to reasonable and immortall spirits. Immedi­ate two wayes; First, because it can and doth receiue an impression of sorrow and paines made from God only by and in it selfe, without any outward bodily meanes thereunto. Secondly, it is also an immediate punishment or els correction of sinne: it commeth not for any other cause at all. So that thus we meane, when we speake of the soules proper and immediate suffering. The soules second facultie of suffering paines, is not proper, but common to vs with beasts: namely, that which is by sympathie and communion with and from the body. A third kinde of painfull suffering the soule hath: namely, her vehement and strong affections are painfull, whether they be good or euill, as zeale, loue, compassion, pitie, care, &c. neither are these im­mediatly [Page 24] for sinne, whether punishments or corrections: neither are they punishments, or cor­rections at all properly in themselues: accidentally they may be, when they grow so strong that they paine and grieue the soule.]

If the walles and roofe of your new hell rise no fairer, nor stand no faster then your foundation doth; a weake puffe of winde will blow all away. If a man should shortly answer you, That the soule of man hath but one facultie of suffering, though the meanes be diuers from which and by which she suffereth paines, and that the meanes be farre moe than you number (as namely she may suffer paine from her owne vnder­standing and will, yea from diuels and from the fire of hell, besides the meanes which you recken, to wit, her sympathie with the bodie, her vehement affections, and the immediate hand of God when and where pleaseth him) your building is at an end; you can go no farder; you haue neither Diuinitie, nor Philosophie, possibilitie, nor reason to support that which you would so faine inferre. But let vs view your speci­alties.

[The soule (you say) by the law of our creation hath in it a threefold facultie of suffering paine.] The soule indeed by her creation hath a triple reference to good and euill; to wit, her apprehension and distinction of either; her inclination and motion to ei­ther; and her impression and passion from both; and for the performance of these she hath sundrie and seuerall parts and faculties. For as man was made to know God, and loue God, and after a time of obedience perfectly to enioy God, who is onely and wholly good; so had he three speciall powers and faculties in his soule answerable to these three purposes of the Creator; and yet capable of the contrarie, which was the want of all good, if he fell [...]rom God. And therefore by the power of his vnderstan­ding man might discerne good and euill; by the libertie of his will [...]e might elect and embrace either, and by the passibilitie of his soule he might feele and suffer the impression and sequele of both by ioy or paine, which God in his iustice alotted to be the end and wages of liking and doing good or euill. And because for the seruice and safetie of his bodie, and for the dueties and actions of this life, man was to vse earthly things, and also to need outward meanes for hearing the word, and viewing the works of God, there were giuen him senses to perceiue, and sensitiue motions to desire things needfull and delightfull for him, as also to dislike the euill of penurie, paine, and sorrow that should be occurrent to his senses. In which the wisdome of God ordained, that what seemed good to mans imagination should prouoke his de­sire with loue and delight, and what seemed euill, should offend him with some touch of griese; the superiour and spirituall powers of the soule being giuen as Iudges to censure, restraine and oue [...]rule the sensitiue delights and motions, where they swar­ued from the true rule of good and euill, which was only Gods will reuealed, or writ­ten in the heart of man. The respects and diuersities of good and euill offered in generall to the sense and vnderstanding of man, were sanctitie, sufficiencie, and felici­tie with their contraries, and likewise the generall passions and impressions of good and euill receiued in the soule, were hope and ioy for good approching or posfessed; and feare and paine for the imminence or presence of euill, as also for the departure or losse of good, in whose place euill, which is the priuation of good, necessarily suc­ceeded. The passions then of euill (for true ioy and hope thereof, are rather perfe­ctions than passions of the soule) are feare and griefe; and the meanes by which they are wrought in the soule, and brought to the soule, are naturally the senses and affecti­ons, vnderstanding and will; and supernaturally the hand of God, or such externall meanes as God hath prouided to punish the soule.

So that first your making a threefolde facultie in the soule of suffering paines, is an ignorant conceit in you, as if the facultie of suffering paines were multiplied, because the meanes inflicting paines are many. If I should say, The soule hath in it a thre [...] ­fold facultie of vnderstanding, for that it perceiueth many things by the senses of her bodie; many things by her owne light and remembrance; and many things by the immediate reuelation of Gods spirit; might not wise men instly deride me, knowing [Page 25] the power and facultie of vnderstanding to be but one and the selfe-same in man, though the means be diuers by which that facultie is informed? Likewise the will of man is caried sometimes by the eie, sometimes by the eare at the persuasion of others, sometimes by her owne affections, sometimes by feare, sometimes by reason, some­times by grace; shall we therefore say the soule hath in it a sixfold facultie of liking and electing that which is offered her? or rather it is one and the same power of will, which is moued and often times ruled by these sixe meanes; partly from the bodie, partly from her selfe, partly from others, and partly from God. Euen so the passibi­lity of the soule, or the faculty of suffering paine, is but simple and single in the soule, how many soeuer the meanes be, by which she receiueth the impression of paine: otherwise you might as well say, The soule hath contrary faculties of suffering, be­cause she feeleth contrary impressions of ioy and paine sometimes striuing together, sometimes succeeding ech the other; but the soule as she is furnished with her facul­ties to discerne, and elect good and euill, so is she framed to receiue the impressions of either which are contrary; and in that respect capable of ioy and paine in this life, howsoeuer in the next life, the soule shall be perpetually fastned to the one or to the other without alteration or change.

As you confound the facultie of suffering paine with the causes offering, and theThe agents and means by which the soule suffe­reth paine. meanes bringing the impression of paine to the soule; so doe you neither fully num­ber the agents from which, nor the meanes by which paine is inflicted on the soule, on which you ground your three kinds of the soules suffering of paines. If the soule were not passible, that is, capable of ioy and paine, she could neither be rewarded for well doing, nor punished for euill. But God hath created her receiuable of both, that as she should doe good or euill in his sight, so she might suffer and feele that which should be good or euill, to wit, ioyous or grieuous euen in her owne sense and iudgement. Of both, (I meane ioy and paine as they are rewards of well and euill doing) God alone is in this life, and the next, the supreame ordainer, appointer, effe­cter, worker, and distributer, all other agents and meanes whatsoeuer seruing only his will, expressing his power, and obeying his commandement; yet that doth not hin­der, but in the punishing of his owne heere, or of his enemies in this world and the next, God may and doth vse instruments and meanes, whom and what pleaseth him to performe his will. For example in this life, besides Gods agents to punish, which are Angels, men, diuels, and all other creatures; the meanes which he hath ordained to impresse paine in the soule, are as many as there be intellectiue or sensitiue powers and abilities in the soule to foresee, discerne, or remember whatsoeuer euill past, pre­sent, or to come, on vs, or on others whom we loue; or to perceiue, or desire any good which is lost, lacking, or likely to be taken from vs, or from others whom we re­gard. So that not only sympathie with and from the bodie, and vehement and strong affe­ctions, of zeale, loue, compassion, pitie, and care, which you recken, do paine the soule; but the eyes, and eares, vpon a thousand occasions, when the bodie is not touched, bring feare and griefe to the heart; yea the vnderstanding, remembrance, conscience, and will (which you vtterly forget) doe oftener offend and afflict the soule euen of the gody, than either the bodie, or the affections do. And in the world to come (which you purposely skip to make way for your new hell) besides the losse of glory, sting of con­science, and shame of sinne, the Scriptures assure vs that vtter darkenesse, ruthfullwailing, horror of diuels, torment of fire, despaire of case shal [...] afflict the bodies and soules of the damned with intolerable and eternall anguish, as when we come to speake thereof, we shall more largely proue.

A third errour in you is, that you make your second kinde of the soules suffering paine, which is by sympathie and communion with and from the bodie, not to be proper to man, butDefenc. p. 8. l. 23. common to vs with beasts; wherein you bewray either your vnderstanding not to be great, or your intent to be vilde. For though beasts haue bodies and sen­ses, as men haue, and the paine of their bodies pierceth and affecteth the sensitiue parts & powers of life in them; yet haue they no soules I trust, which can be affected [Page 26] the paine of their bodies, as men haue. I hope you be not so deepe in your distillati­on of hell, that you will bestow soules on beasts to make them liable to your new­found paines of hell; but in men their immortall spirits are and shall be afflicted by their bodies and senses both heere, and in hell, when the full punishment of their sinnes commeth to be layed vpon them. Iob. 19. How long will you vexe my soule, saith Iob. Psal. 105. The [...]on entred into his soule, sayth the Psalmist of Iosephs fetters. Eccles. 1. All is vanitie, and affliction of the spirit, sayth the Preacher. Luc. 2. A sword shall pierce thy soule, sayth Si­meon to Marie. Then for the soule or spirit of man to be vexed, afflicted, pierced, and pained by and from the bodie, is proper to man, and no way common to vs with beasts, which haue no soules: and that kinde of suffering paine which is without the bodie, is not proper to the soule, by reason it is common to men with diuels, who haue no bodies, and yet suffer paine aswell by their vnderstanding and will, as by ex­ternall meanes appointed of God to punish the damned both soules and diuels. Wherefore your termes of the soules proper and immediate suffering, which before I called vnsalted and vnsetled, and you say are Defenc. p. 9. l. 6. easie to be vnderstood and necessarily to be vsed in this question, as you now haue declared and deliuered them, are false and ab­surd. For no kinde of suffering paine is proper to the soule of man, but onely that which is with the bodie, or by the bodie; the other kinde of suffering paine by vn­derstanding and will, and by hell-fire, being common to men with diuels; which haue no bodies, and are no soules, no more than soules in heauen are Angels. S. Au­sten truely sayth, August. 're­tracta. l. 1. cap. 11. Angelos habere animas, nusquam me legisse in diuinis eloquijs canoni­cis (que) recolo. That Angels haue soules I do not remember I haue any where read in the diuine and canonicall Scriptures. Since then diuels haue neither bodies nor soules, though they be spirits; and beasts though they haue bodies, yet haue they no soules to be pained by their bodies; it is euident that the piercing and afflicting of the spirit and soule of man by the bodie, and from the bodie, is the onely kinde of suffering which is proper to the soule of man; the spirituall affliction of the soule by her vnderstan­ding and will, and by the torment of perpetuall and eternall fire, being common to men with the reprobate Angels.

To the immediate suffering of the soule in hell, which is another of your new­foundGood affections of loue & zeale are not painful. fancies, I will immediatly come, if first I touch an errour or two in your former words; to let the Reader see, that you are vnlike to lay sure grounds in faith, when you know not the plaine rules of Nature. A third kinde of painfull suffering (you say) the soule hath: namely her vehe [...]ent and strong affections are painfull, whether they be good or euill, as zeale, loue, &c. I pray you Sir, how come zeale, and specially loue, when they be good, to be painfull affections in your Calender? S. Iohn sayth, 1. Iohn 4. There is no feare in loue; and giueth this reason; for feare hath painfulnesse, presupposing it for a prin­ple, that loue hath no paine: which is most true; because we delight in that which we loue; and so loue hauing no paine in it, but delight, it hath consequently no feare, by reason feare hath paine, which loue hath not. But if it be strong (you will say) it pain­eth the soule. If loue bring delight, the stronger the loue that is good, the greater the delight; and so the strength of loue doth not increase, but exclude all paine. Which is also S. Iohns rule, 1. Iohn 4. Perfect loue casteth out feare, which is the least impres­sion of paine that may be. And where loue that is good, is strongest and most fer­uent, as namely in heauen, there is no place for paine; and in earth when we are com­manded to Luc. 10. loue the LordourGod, with allourheart, with alloursoule, with allourstrength, andourneighbour asourselues, must we be whollie delighted, or partlie grieued with God, and our neighbour. The like is to be sayd for zeale, which is nothing but the heat or feruencie of loue. Accidentally they may turne vs to paine, when our godly zeale and loue are hindred, or crossed by the wicked. But the thing that grieueth vs in those cases is not our loue, but the leaudnesse of the wicked, despising or wronging that which we zealously loue. And so may all vertues paine vs. What iust man is not displeased with iniustice? What liberall minde is not mo­ued at auarice? What valiant heart is not grieued with cowardice? The like we shall [Page 27] finde in all other vertues; euen an inward offence at their contraries, and yet no wise man will say that vertues are paines and punishments of the soule.

[Of Dèfenc. p. 8. l 33. compassion, and pitie, among the rest you say accidentally they may be punish­ments when they grow so strong that they grieue the soule.] As though there could be any compassion or pitie which doth not grieue the soule. What is pity but sorow at the sight of another mans miserie? and what is compassion but a vehement passion or griefe of the heart for his miserie whom we deerely loue? so that there can be neither com­passion nor pitie, without sorow and griefe of heart; neither are they at any time pu­nishments if they be good, but rather Christian dueties and vertues. The miseries of those whom we loue, may be punishments vnto vs; and our compassion on them, if they be wicked, may turne to be vicious, and so be a punishment because it is immo­derate, where it should be temperate; as we reade of Dauids excessiue compassion on Absalon his leud and rebellious sonne. These be errours enow in so few words, but these are nothing to those that follow in fauour of the soules immediate suffering from the hand of God himselfe without any instruments or inferiour meanes. I might resume your former words of the soules immediate suffering from God alone; but because you heape vp a great deale of rubbish to the same purpose much like the other, or rather much worse than the other; I thinke it best to rid all together.

Defenc p. 9. l. 9. Thirdly, we must also note, that God himselfe is alwayes and euermore the principall and proper punisher when the soule suffereth paines after the first maner, that is in her proper and What suffering is immediate from God. immediate facultie of suffering. And that is alwayes immediatly for sinne also, not for anie other cause at all. Fourthly, God himselfe therefore was thus the principall, and only proper punisher of Christ, as he sustained the punishment of our sinnes. The diuels and wicked men his persecuters did their parts also indeed for other ends, but yet they were all as instruments onely, and vsed by God vnto his owne end, namely that Christ might pay heereby a iust price and full satisfaction for our sinnes. It was then the Almightie and most iust God himselfe in his seuere wrath against our sinne, that principally and properly inflicted on Christ the paines and punishments, which he as our suretie suffered for the paying of our ransome. As it is writ­ten, Esa. 53. The Lord LAYD VPON HIM THE PVNISHMENT OF VS ALL.

Your phrases be so fresh and new, that your selfe can scant tell what to make of them, or how to expound them. In these words, and those which goe but the next side before, you set vs downe three interpretations of the soules immediate suffering not agreeing the one with the other. Defenc. p. 8. l. 8. All suffering of paine, is (you say) from God, ei­ther from him alone, or also from his instruments and inferiour meanes. This presently you call immediatly or mediatly; and this commeth neerest to the sense of the word, if it came as neere to the trueth of the matter. For what is immediate, but without all meanes? The soules first maner of suffering paine then (as you say) is immediate, that is Defenc. p. 8. l. 8. from God only; you must implie without all instruments or inferiour meanes whatso­euer. For that kinde of suffering which hath any meanes or instruments, is mediate, not immediate from God alone. Why then in your second interpretation of imme­diat, do you not exclude all instruments and meanes, but only outward bodily meanes? For thus you say in the second place, It is iustly called Defenc. p. 8. l. 18. immediate, because it can and doth receiue an impression of sorrow and paine made from God, only by and in it selfe without any outward bodily meanes thereunto. Heere you exclude not all meanes, but outward bodilie meanes. And when Satan led Saul for feare, and Achitophel for anger, and Iudas for sorrow to despaire, and in fine to dispatch themselues; this desperation wrought in them by Satan, was by your doctrine immediate from God, because the diuell was the doer thereof, without any outward bodily meanes. And likewise, when by hatred, rage, feare, and furie Satan afflicteth the children of disobedience, in whom he worketh; this you will call the immedia [...]e hand of God, because he vseth a spirit, and not a bodie for his instrument. And yet doubting how this can be maintained, for that God vseth men aswell as diuels to prooue and punish both his owne and his enemies, you fall to a third sense of immediate, where you make God alone the prin­cipall; the rest to be only instruments; and so that is immediatly from God, which is [Page 28] principally from God, what meanes or instruments soeuer he vse, bodily, or ghostly, men or diuels. And in this sense all paines and punishments whatsoeuer, wheresoe­uer, by whomsoeuer, are immediatly, that is, principally from God, and by conse­quent all three kinds of suffering paine in the soule which you put, and what meanes soeuer els can be named of inflicting and impressing paine in the soule are immediate from God, that is, they come chiefly from him, whose power, will, and iudgement the rest demonstrate or execute. And thus for want of trueth and lacke of vnderstan­ding, whiles you labour to expound the soules immediate suffering of paine from God, you vtterly subuert and ouerthrow all that you would say.

[Againe, God himselfe (you say) is alwayes and euermore the principall and proper pu­nisher, when the soule suffereth paines after the first maner, that is in her proper and immedi­ate facultie of suffering.] Keepe your manifold faculties to procure you more wit; the soule hath but one facultie to suffer and feele paine, how manie soeuer the meanes be from which or by which she may receiue paine; it shall suffice to call it the first ma­ner of the soules suffering paine. When you say God is the principall and proper punisher, what meane you by punisher? Amongst men the Iudge determineth and pronounceth what shall be done, the hangman executeth the sentence vpon the con­demned, and both in their kinds are punishers. The like appeareth in Gods iudge­ments. God alone is the decreer, appointer and commander; though he v [...]e angels, men, diuels, and all other creatures to execute his will for the punishing of sinne; or deliuering of his seruants from the hands of the wicked. This is the difference be­twixt an earthly & the heauenly Iudge; that men giue to men right, and not strength to execute their iudgements, but God as he gaue to all his creatures all the strength which by nature they haue, when he first made them; so hee vseth their naturall strength which he gaue, and giueth them farther power and force, where need is, ful­ly to accomplish his will and commandement: yea farther, he vseth the willes and forces of men and diuels for ends and effects to them vnknowen, and in them vn­righteous, but to him most iust and holy. So that God is the only punisher as a Iudge to decree, appoint, and command what shall befall euerie man for sinne; he is also the onli [...] giuer and supporter of all power and force, when anie punishment is execu­ted either by the naturall strength of any creature, or by strength and might aboue na­ture; but that God is alwaies and euermore the executioner, when the soule suffereth otherwise than by her bodie, or by her affections, or that he was the principall and onelie proper executioner of Christ as he suffered for our sinnes; or that in hell (which is your vpshot) God is the immediate executioner and tormentor of soules and diuels, those are rather sicke mens dreames or madde mens fits, than sober and Christian verities.

And in plaine reason how agreeth this word principall, either with proper or with immediate, both which are ioyned by you with it? Where God is principall, there vseth he other meanes and instruments besides himselfe, and his owne hand. Princi­pall hath alwayes accessaries and instruments, and where they intermeddle, they vse not Gods immediate hand, but such meanes as they are able and apt to guide. So that when God is principall punisher, he is neither proper nor immediate punisher, but vseth the seruice and force of his creatures to perfourme his appointment; and when he is either the proper, or immediate executour of his owne will, he neither nee­deth, nor vseth his creatures. And here the third time you play with the word pro­per, but very improperly, as you did twice before; first with Gods proper wrath, then with the soules proper facultie of suffering, now with the proper punisher, which can no way be matched with principall and applyed to God without a palpable absurdi­tie. For referre principall whether you will, to the determination or to the execution of Gods wil and iudgement; to say that God is the principall determiner of his owne will, is a wicked speech. For who is Gods counseller to aduise him, or associate to as­sist him; that God should be principall and others concurrent with him to promote his will with their consents; or restraine it with their dislikes? God is not only a Iudge [Page 29] of the world, but the sole Iudge thereof; to make him principall and not sole therein, is to impart his right, and glorie vnto others, which he will not endure. Wee shall see, honour, and admire, and with heart and voice magnifie the righteousnesse of Gods Iudgement that shall be giuen by his Sonne; [...]n which sense it is said,1. Cor. 6. The Saints shall iudge the worlde; yea, we shall iudge the Angels, but that is by submitting our wils to his, and by glorifying his iudgement, as in heauen his Saints alwaies doe, not by clayming voices with him. There is then no Iudge of the soule but onely God, and to say he is principall Iudge thereof, is apparantly to dishonour him. Will you re­ferre principall to the execution of Gods iudgements? then he must haue some others to conioyne with him in common; and they must vse such meanes as lie in their power; and so God is neither the proper nor immediate punisher of the soule, where he is the principall. And when it pleaseth him to take vpon him the chiefe execution of his owne iudgement, what cause is there he should call assistants vnto him? Doth he lacke wisedome, or power, that his creatures must aide and helpe him? I wish you to weigh your words better, before you wade in things aboue your height.

Your words are absurd, your matter is more absurd, and the proofes you bring for it are most absurd of all. To bring Christs soule within the compasse of hell paines, you flash out the fire of hell as a fable, and turne out of seruice the rest of the torments there, namely reiection from the kingdome of heauen, the sting of Conscience, con­fusion of Sinne, horrour of darkenesse and diuels, despaire of ease and such like, as no paines, or at least as no substantiall paines of hell: you suppose a paine which you imagine commeth from the immediate power of God, vpon the soules of the wicked as well in earth, as in hell, and so not onely you make God the tormentor of soules and diuels in hell with his owne immediate hande, but you so aggrauate the paine thereof, with fierie words, that the reprobate may fully feele it in this world, and yet it neither doth end their liues, nor waste their bodies, which a pange of the stone, or a fit of an Ague will doe. The best proofe you bring for all this, is a bold face, and bigge words, wherewith you bid all the world NOTE it is so. But Sir, if charitie did not stay me, I should NOTE you rather for an idle talker, then for a booke-ma­ker, which thinke it lawfull for you to allegorize all that the Scripture mentioneth or threatneth of hell; and in the end broach out of the heate of your owne head a Chy­mysticall hell, as well in this world as in the next; and so little regard either the truth of Gods speech, or the faith of the whole Church, or the consciences of all good men; that without any further trouble or triall WE MVST NOTE, you say so. Such archers, such arrowes; such cheapmen, such chaffe; a man of your pitch will hardly be brought to any other passe.

The bottome of your building (for it deserueth not the name of a foundation, it is so weake and rotten) is this, which I wish the Reader to NOTE, it is so notable stuffe; That where there are but three sorts of the soules suffering paine, as you con­ceiue; the first by the immediate hand of God, the second by sympathie with the bo­die, and the third by her vehement and strong affections; The affections (you say) are neither Defen. p. 8. l. 29. immediatly for sinne, nor punishments at all properly in themselues: the soules second facultie of suffering by sympathie with the bodie, you affirme, is Defen. pa 8. l. 23. not proper, but common to vs with beasts: the first therefore in your conceit is the Ibid. l. 37. proper and prin­cipall humane suffering for sinne; which Christ must needs feele being a Ibid. l. 38. man made of God to suffer for all our sinnes. Of this wandring and halting diuision I haue spoken be­fore. It is euident the soule may suffer paine from and with the bodie; and from and by her owne powers and faculties of vnderstanding, will, sense, and affections, and from the hand of God immediate or mediate, that is vsing other meanes than are be­forenamed to punish the soule.

That the paine of the bodie paineth the soule of man there can be no question, na­turall 1 euidence and dailie experience sufficientlie confirme it: and this is that which you call sympathie, when both doe suffer paine together, the one from and with the other. Touching the eies and eares how often impressions they make of feare and 2 [Page 30] sorrow for our selues and others, when the bodie is not touched nor pained, euerie woman and childe can giue testimonie. Threats, rebukes, euill reports taken in at the eares; dangers, distresses, and losses foreseene or seene in our selues and others, which must needs trouble and grieue the soule, are no newes in any condition or person. The affections which are both vngodlie and vnrulie, are so manie blasts and 3 stormes tossing the soule to and fro, with anger and feare, with desire and dislike, with pensiue care of earthlie things and foolish pitie, with hope and despaire, with vnlaw­full loue and hatred, with vaine ioy and vnprofitable sorrow, and with a number like headie and hastie passions, insomuch that they often driue the soule to rage and furie, or end this life with griefe and disdaine. As for the vnderstanding and will; the soule 4 conceiuing Gods iust and heauie displeasure against sinne, and knowing the wages thereof to be finall depriuation of all grace and glorie, and eternall damnation of bo­die and soule to hell-fire; how can she but quake and tremble at the very cogitation and remembrance of her owne guiltinesse, and of the greatnesse of his power and iustnesse of his anger? And therefore the godlie presently fall vpon the considerati­on 5 hereof to condemne and detest all their sinnes, and with broken and contrite harts to lament their vnrighteousnesse, and to afflict their spirits with earnest and inward sorrow till by faith and repentance they find comfort in the mercies of God through Christ Iesus. For want of which, the wicked often in this life, and speciallie at the houre of death, sincke vnder the burden of their sinnes; and plunged into the depth of desperation are possessed with an horrible fright, and terror of the torments prepa­red for them in another world; they feeling here on earth in their soules the remorse of sinne, and sting of conscience, but not able to rise vnto true repentance and hope of saluation by reason of their continuall contempt of grace, whiles it was offered them, which then is taken from them. After this life appeare the terrible iudgements 6 of God against sinne, which the wicked so much feare, and the faithful so much shun: the speciall maner and meanes whereof as farre as the Scriptures deliuer them, I will deferre till I come to the particular handling of them; though I haue often proposed them, and in part proued them; but whether the words of the Scripture expressing them be allegories, that is figuratiue shadowes, or plaine speeches, that question is not yet debated; which I reserue till I haue ended the immediate suffering of the soule, as this Discourser calleth it.

Of these sixe meanes, besides the immediate hand of God to inflict paine on the soule for the punishment of sinne; it pleaseth you (Sir Discourser) to skip foure; and the other two in effect to denie. Affections (you say) are neither punishments nor cor­rections at all properly in themselues; and suffering by sympathie from and with the bo­die, is common (as you auouch) to vs with beasts, and is no proper humane suffering; because in your iudgement your first kinde of suffering from the immediate hand of God alone is the proper humane suffering, which for that cause your selfe call the soules Defenc. p. 8. l. 22. proper and immediate suffering. But what if in all this you speake not one true word? what if the affections that be euill be properlie punishments of sinne? what if the soules suffering, from and with the bodie, be the true and proper humane suffering? what if God vse not his immediate hand in tormenting soules; but hauing ordained and appointed meanes by his wisedome and power, committeth sinfull soules to be punished by those instruments and meanes which he with his hand hath prepared, and in his word expressed? Do you not shew your selfe a deepe Diuine, that prooue points of faith by open falsities; and heape vp errours by the dozens, binding them with your bare word, and obtruding them to the world as oracles lately slipt from heauen? but go to the parts, and first to the affections, which you affirme are no pu­nishments, whether they be good or euill.

The affections of the soule that be good, as the loue of God, the zeale of his glo­rie, and hope of his mercie and trueth, are the speciall gifts and graces of Gods spirit, and so farre from paining the soule, that they breed exceeding comfort and ioy in the Holieghost. The affections that are e [...]ill are not onely the rage and reward of sinne, [Page 31] but inflict as great anguish as may be felt in this life. Concupiscence which is the root and nurse of all euill affections in vs, be they sensitiue or intellectiue; what is it, but the inordinate and intemperate desire and loue of our owne willes and pleasures, despising and hating whatsoeuer resisteth or hindereth our deuices or delights, yea though it be the will and hand of God himselfe? this corruption of the soule by sinne, which is now naturall in vs all, whence came it, but from and for the pu­nishment of the first mans sinne? what is it but the verie poison of sinne? and whe­ther tendeth it, but to withstand and refuse all grace, that men reiecting God, and reiected of God, may runne headlong to the finall and eternall vengeance of their sinne? It is no small punishment of sinne for men to be left to the Rom. 1. desires of their owne hearts, and to be giuen ouer to vile affections; which the Apostle calleth the re­ward of their error, and euen the fulnesse of all vnrighteousnesse: which make men the ser­uants of sinne, whiles they Tit 3. wait on lusts, and diuers pleasures, which 1. Pet. 2. fight against the soule, by Rom. 7. leading it captiue vnto the law of sinne, which is in the members. And if you doubt whether they paine the soule or no, looke but on their names or their effects, and you shall soone be out of doubt. Anger, disdaine, despaire, dislike, detestation, feare, sorrow, rag [...], furie for earthly things, can these be so much as conceiued or named without euident impression or mention of paine? yea the fairest of our affections, and those which at first flarter vs most, as loue, desire, and pleasure. (I speake still of euill and vnlawfull) do they not quicklie faile, sowerlie leaue, and sharplie vexe with their remembrance and repentance the greatest seekers and owners of them? In all these worldlie desires and delights S. Austens rule is generallie true. August. deci­uitat. Dei. l. 21. cap. 26. Quod sine illi­ciente amore non habuit, sine vrente dolore non perdet. He that kept them not without allu­ring loue, loseth them with afflicting griefe. As for the intellectiue passions of the soule, which are the trembling at Gods wrath, the feare of his power, and despaire of his fa­uour, besides the shame of sinne, griefe of heart, and horror of hell; what torments they breed in the condemned consciences of the wicked, the godly may partly iudge, by that which they sometimes taste, notwithstanding their present recourse to the mercies and promises of God in Christ. So that euill affections, aswell intellectiue as sensitiue, be punishments of sinne, and painfull to the soule; howsoeuer your co­gitations (Sir Discourser) be otherwise humored.

Concerning the soules suffering from and with the bodie, which you say is com­monThe soules suf­fering from and with the bodie is not common to beasts. to vs with beasts: if the soule do not consider for what cause, at whose hand, and to what end she suffereth; as also how she may be freed, and what thanks is due to her deliuerer, she may be well likened to the Horse and Mule in whom is no vnderstan­ding: but the brutish dulnesse of some earthly minded men, doth not make this kind of suffering not to be properly humane, which God from the beginning did, and doth vse to all his seruants and saints (his owne sonne not excepted); and whereby God worketh in all his children correction, probation, perfection, preparation to glorie, which are things most proper to men, and no way communicable vnto beasts. Heb. 12. God scourgeth euerie sonne whom he receiueth, and yet he vseth him not like a beast. 2. Tim. 3. All that will liue godlie in Christ Iesus shall suffer persecution, not common to them with beasts. Iam. 1. Count it an exceeding ioy (saith Iames) when you fall into diuers tentations, knowing that the triall of your faith bringeth foorth patience. Now to impart any of these things to beasts, were very strange Diuinity. Math. 5. Blessed are they (saith our Sauiour) that suffer persecution for righteousnesse sake, for theirs is the kingdome of heauen. Shall men be bles­sed, and enioy Gods kingdome for suffering as the beasts doe? 1. Pet. 4. If any suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed. He that putteth no difference betwixt the sufferings of beasts and Christians, is vnwoorthie to be a Christian. 1. Pet. 5. The same afflictions (saith Peter) are accomplished in your brethren, which are in the world. If you list (Sir Discour­ser) to take beasts for your brethren, you may make your sufferings like to theirs, or common to them; otherwise they that are men, and speciallie Christian men, must acknowledge that this kinde of paining the soule by the bodie, is proper to men, and common neither to beasts, nor to diuels. 1. Cor. 10. There hath no tentation taken you (saith [Page 32] Paul) but such as is humane. What is humane, but common to all men, and onely to men; and so common neither to beasts, nor to any other creature, but proper to men? Take backe therefore your vaine imagination, and more foolish collection, that the suffering of the soule by her bodie is not properly humane, because it is com­mon to men with beasts, and learne hereafter that beasts hauing no soule, much lesse anie graces or promises of God in this life or the next, can not communicate with men in that kinde of suffering, which the soule feeleth from her bodie, and whereby she is chastised, prooued, perfected in this life, and prepared for the glorie of the life to come.

[At least yet you thinke the soules immediate suffering from the hand of God a­lone, is the Defenc. p 8. l. 37. proper and principall humane suffering.] If there be any such suffering of paine, as you imagine, from the immediate hand of God alone, it is the proper and principall suffering of deuils, and not of men. For humane properly it can not be, vnlesse it touch the whole man, that is as well bodie as soule, whereof man consisteth. And therefore the r [...]ll punishment of mans sinne in earth and in hell, conteineth the torments of both parts; without either of which, there is no proper, nor principall humane suffering; though the soule after death be aff [...]icted for a season till the bodie be raysed and punished with he [...]; which is the true humane suffering for sinne after this life, because it is euerlastingly allotted to the wicked for sinne, by the most righ­teous iudgement of God. But how proo [...]e you (Sir Discourser) that the soule of man suffereth sensible and absolute paine. I meane not depending on her owne cogi­tations or actions, from the immediate hand of God? what Scripture, what example haue you for it? It is the maine morter of your new erected hell; but tempered onely with the water of your owne wit; nor Scriptures, nor Fathers doe acknowledge anyNo proofe that God punish [...]th immediatly. such kind of suffering in hell from the immediat hand of God as you affirme; yea they expressely auouch the contrary.

From the hand of God without question is all power, and so all punishment, whe­ther it be here, or in hell; he alone giueth force to each creature to pierce and pu­nish; and he alone made the soule capable of paine from her bodie, from her selfe, and from whatsoeuer creature should please him to vse for the punishment of the soule. Of this I make no doubt; the hand of God, which is the power of God, orde­reth▪ strengtheneth, sharpeneth, continueth, and worketh, all paine and punishment both here and elsewhere, for the time and for euer; but whether he doeth this by meanes likewise ordeined and appointed by the same power, either within or without the soule, or by his immediate hand without all meanes, this is the question; and rea­ding the Scriptures for this with as good attention as I could, I find no such thing af­firmed in them, or prooued by you in all your Discourse. Touching hell, I sinde the contrarie confi [...]med and auouched by the manifest and expresse words of the holy Ghost; and in the greatest plagues and punishments of this life, the meanes that God vseth are likewise mentioned in the Scriptures: the immediate hand of God inflicting paine on the soule no where, that I read, or that you prooue, which in so weightie a cause euery wise man will expect at your hands, before he admit your metaphoricall flames of a new found fire, deuised by you for the Soule of Christ, to make it subiect to the paines of hell.

That God is the onely giuer of all grace, by the working of his holy Spirit in our hearts, without the assistance of any creature to further that action, may not be doub­ted of any Christian. Iohn 3. A man can receiue nothing except it be giuen him from heauen; euen from the Father of lights. (whence) Iam. 1. commeth euery good and perfect gift. For which cause the Scriptures call him, the 1. Pet. 5. God of all grace, working all in all; and his Spirit, the Spirit of grace, 1. Cor. 12. distributing to euery man, as pleaseth him; and yet this diuision and o­peration of grace, which proceedeth most powerfully from God alone, is not alwaies immediate, but dependeth on the hearing of the word, partaking of the Sacraments, and imposing of hands, which God vseth as meanes not to helpe his power, but to direct and guide our weakenesse. Otherwise neither man nor Angel hath, or can haue [Page 33] any power to touch and turne the heart, or to inspire it with grace, but onely God, who made it and can alter and change it at his pleasure.

As the giuing, so the taking away of all good gifts pertaining either to the vse of this life, as prudence, courage, magnanimitie, and such like; or to the furtherance of the li [...]e to come, as faith, hope, loue, and other fruits of Gods Spirit; depend wholely on Gods will and worke: and yet that is no let, but when God hath most iustly de­priued men of his grace, which should preserue them from euill, he may and doeth leaue the neglecters and abusers of his grace to be possessed and ruled by the spirit of 1. Iohn. 4. errour, Zacl. ar. 13. vncleannesse, and Esai. 19. giddinesse, that Ephes. 2. worketh in the children of disobedience, and carieth them headlong into all kind of mischiefe. Not that God performeth any of these things with his immediate hand, which are wicked and impious; but that by his iust iudgement he giueth them ouer, which despise and forsake him, to be a pray to the roaring Lion, that deuoureth them. Neither is Satan to seeke howe to leade men destitute of grace, to all villanie both against themselues and others; since he can 2. Cor. 4. blind the mindes of vnbeleeuers, distract their Marke 5. wits, and inflame their hearts with all sorts of raging lustes, and vntamed affections, as he did in Cain, Saul, Achitophel, Iudas; and dayly doth in all the wicked.

In the outward punishments of this life, where God turneth the furie and violence of his creatures to reuenge sinne; and the seruice of men, Angels, and deuils, to pur­sue the wicked to their destruction, and to chastise his owne to their conuersion; the hand of God doth euery where appeare by the Scriptures, but that is nothing to your immediate suffering of the soule. For first in them God vseth his creatures, as his agents and instruments; and where his immediate hand may happily be conceaued to worke without meanes, there he punisheth the soule by the bodie, which by your owne position is not the proper and immediate suffering of the soule.

In the feare, shame, and griefe, which the soule here conceaueth vpon the denoun­cing, conuicting, or beholding of her owne vncleannesse, and the terrible iudge­ments of God against sinne; the power, trueth and iustice of God are euident, but not that immediate hand of God, which you imagine. For in this case God punish­eth the soule by her selfe, that is, by her intellectiue or sensitiue faculties, letting her plainely perceiue, what ioy is lost, and what vengeance is prouided for all the workers of wickednesse. The losse of which blisse, and terrour of which vengeance apprehen­ded by outward sense, or inward intelligence, cannot but mightily grieue and afflict the soule. And the greater the losse, that is irreuocable; as also the soarer the mischiefe that is ineuitable, the deeper is the wound, that either of them make in the heart of man. But this feare and griefe, whiles here men liue, proceede from the cogitation and perswasion of the minde and conscience, and not from the immediate hand of God. And in the world to come the horrour of hell and rage of fire, which God hath ordained to punish the soule, shall inflict an intollerable torment not rising from the minds and wils of the wicked, as in this world it doth, but impressed by an exter­nall and violent agent, which is the meanes that God hath prepared to execute ven­geance on men and deuils.

How beit in none of all these appeareth that immediate suffering of the soule from the hand of God alone, which you so much talke of, and to which you would so faine subiect the soule of Christ to make him suffer the substance of that, which the damned (according to your dreame) doe feele in hell. For in your conceit of the soules im­mediate suffering from the hand of God, the soule must onely be a patient, and no agent; and God must inflict the paine on the soule with his owne hand, and not by any meanes without or within the soule; onely the soule must feele and discerne the present and inherent paine by her passiue power and facultie, by which she is capable of all paine, whence soeuer or howsoeuer it commeth. This kind of suffering you e­uery where affirme, you no where prooue; and that which is most absurd, you pre­sume against the cleare words of the holy Ghost continually naming the fire of hell, and threatning the wicked with it, to allegorize the Scriptures at your pleasure, and [Page 34] in stead of fire which God hath ordained and armed as a most dreadfull meanes to take vengeance of sinne, you suppose a certaine paine, which God with his imme­diate hand will inflict on the soules of the damned, and that you make the substance of hell paines, and fasten it to the soule of Christ for the time, before he could worke our redemption, or suffer the punishment of our sinnes. But sir Discourser this is rather dreaming then debating of matters of faith, to allegorize whatsoeuer standeth in your way, and in stead thereof to imagine what you please without either proofe or pretence out of the word of God; as if your mouth were the rule of Religion, or the trueth of God would vanish by your fantasticall figures and shadowes. Where­fore leaue your deuising and auouching what best liketh your vnquiet humour in so weightie matters of mans Redemption, and tye your tongue if not your heart, to the wordes of the holy Ghost, that at least you may beare the shew, if not the sense, of a Christian man. For I vtterly denie that God is either the immediate tormentour of soules in hell, which is your idle and absurd imagination; or that with his immediate hand God did torment the soule of his Sonne at any time here on earth, as the soules of the damned are tormented in hell, which is your witlesse and wicked assertion.

For proofe you produce the words of [...]say affirming of Christ, that the Lord layed vpon him the punishment of vs all; but in this, as your maner is, you hit neither the words, nor the meaning of the Prophet. The word is HAAVAH to be crooked or to go a [...]rie, and so by translation signifieth the crookednesse o [...] wickednesse of mans life; which the Prophet testifieth was layd vpon Christ in saying, Esa. 53. the Lord layd vpon him the iniquitie of vs all. But grant it may sometimes by the ioyning of other words im­port anie punishment allotted to wickednesse; doth the Prophet say that God layed all the punishment due to sinne vpon Christ, or that God layed it vpon the soule of Christ; both which you inferre out of the Prophets words, though neither be there expressed, or thence to be concluded? S. Peter will tell you on what part of Christ God layd our sinnes, euen on his bodie. 1. Pet. 2. Himselfe bare our sinnes (saith Peter) in his bodie on the tree. Now where Christ did beare them, there God did lay them. Christ bare them in his bodie, as Peter affirmeth; God therefore layd our sinnes on his bo­die, that by suffering death on the Crosse, which was the wages of sinne, Christ might make the purgation of our sinnes in his owne person. Againe, the sense which you would sowe to the Prophets words, that God layd vpon him all our punishment, that is as you would haue it, all the punishment which we should haue suffered, is false and wicked. For so Christ must haue suffered, reiection, desperation, and eternall damnation which the damned doe suffer, and we should haue suffered, had we not beene redee­med. If you meane no more than the Scripture intendeth, that what Christ suffered for vs in the bodie of his flesh on the Crosse, was the full redemption and satisfaction for all our sinnes; then are you wide from concluding out of these words, that Christ suffered the paines of hell or the full vengeance due to our sinne by the immediate hand of God, which is the chiefe point that you aime at. This is all the proofe you offer out of the Scriptures for the immediate suffering of the soule of Christ from the hand of God; and what sturdie stuffe this is, the rudest reader that lighteth on your pamphlet of Defence will soone conceiue. If you keepe this course in the rest of your positions, the world will soone be wearie of your new-found fansies, if you be not of your manifest follies.

[But Christ suffered (you say) the substance of hell-paines, though not the circum­stances of place and time, which the damned do suffer; for they are not of the nature and essence of hell.] To make God the tormentor of Christs soule heere on earth with his immediate hand, and so of all the damned soules in hell, you brought vs the words of the Prophet Esay, the Lord [...]ayd vpon him the iniquitie of vs all: for this seraphicall se­questration of the substance from the circumstances of hell, which mysterie of ini­quitie you begin now to broach, what Prophet or Apostle can you produce? Dare you, Sir Discourser, out of the hazard of your owne head, pull in pieces Gods setled, reuealed, and eternall iudgement against sinne; and with the worme of your owne [Page 35] wit wrest in sunder the substance of hell from the circumstance thereof? What will you not aduenture in earth, that attempt this in hell? or what shall be free from your forge, that offer to make vs a new essence and nature of hell, and heauen? If you can de [...]se or intend to mingle your toyes with Gods truth, and with sillie sleights of So­phistrie, which you thinke Philosophie, sub [...]ert maine points of Diuinitie, your leasure is great, but your labour is leaud. In the secrets of the next world, none of the godlie euer presumed to debate or determine any thing, speciallie touching hell or heauen, without the manifest precedence or sequence of holie Scripture. You had need therefore (Sir Deuiser) to be well aduised; it is no small presumption and in­trusion against Gods wisedome, power, and counsell, to eleuate and frustrate the paines which he hath appointed for the wicked in hell, and to co [...]e fresh and new in stead thereof, which God hath not ordained. I professe to all the world, I dare not depart from so often and earnest words of Christ himselfe, nor allegorize the sentence of the Iudge, which shall be pronounced on the reprobate both men and angels, and executed in the sight of all the elect, not by any figures and metaphors, but by the terror of the things themsel [...]es matching the trueth of the words, which Christ shall vtter. And he [...] I assure thee Christian Reader I [...]warue not either from the conti­nuall tenor of the Scriptures, nor from the full consent of Christs church; howsoeuer this Deuiser flatte himselfe in his new inuention. But let vs trace him in his owne path, and controll him with the le [...]ell of Gods trueth.

What can be more substantiall to any iudgement or punishment than the sentence of the Iudge, and specially of such a Iudge, as with his will, word, and power de­creeth, pronounceth, and setl [...]th all things in heauen, earth, and hell? If then this Iudge in his sentence of condemnation appoint the PLACE and TIME to be parts of the punishmen [...]s inflicted on the damned; tell vs I pray you, why some parts of the sentence be mo [...]e essentiall to the punishment than others? or why all being parts alike, they should not all be equally of the substance of the iudgement? Matth. 25. De­part from me ye cursed unto euerlasting fire, prepared FOR THE DIVELL AND HIS ANGELS, is the sentence to be pronounced on all the wicked, that shall be damned. Of the continuance there can be no question, but here it is expresly mentioned, that it shalbe EVERLASTING. For the place, it is as plaine by the witnesse of the Scrip­ture, which maketh no fire euerlasting but onely hell-fire. Our Sauiour Marke 9. vers. 43. 45. twice in one chapter ioyneth the one as an exposition to the other; and thrice almost with one breath affirmeth euerlasting fire to be the fire of hell. vers. 44. 46. 48. It is better to enter into life m [...]imed than hauing two hands (or two feet) to be cast INTO HELI, INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QVENCHED; VVHERE their worme neuer dieth, AND THE FIRE NEVER GOETH OVT. No fire is euerlasting, but onely hell­fire. Christ therefore in his sentence including the one, implieth the other as part of his iudgement against the reprobate, and maketh both time and place essentiall parts in the punishment of the damned. And when he sayth, DEPART from me ye cursed, forsomuch as there shalbe then no places left, but heauen for the blessed, and hell for the cursed, he doth not exclude them from the one, but by appointing them to the other. Besides, that fire which is prepared for the diuell and his angels, is no where but in hell; and therefore adiudging them to that fire, he doth euidentlie ad­iudge them to hell fire. Since then no man is or shall be damned but only to hell, and that for euer; the place and continuance are expresse, and so essentiall parts of the iudgement; and consequently of the punishment that is and shall be inflicted on all the damned. For the iudgement which then shall be openly pronounced, is immu­tablie decreed, and alreadie reuealed by the Iudge himselfe; and therefore vn­changeable to all that a [...]e or shalbe damned, and executed on that part of the wicked which is extant, I meane their soules assoone as they depart this life, though their bo­dies be yet in the dust, as afterward shalbe shewed. Most vainly then and falsely doe you slide betweene the substance and circumstance of hell-paines; since the name of hell-paines doth necessarilie and naturallie import the place of torment where those [Page 36] paines are, which is hell; and out of which place they are not: els might they be cal­led aswell aëriall or terrest [...]iall paines, as hell paines, if they were found aswell in the aire or on the earth, as in hell. But the Scripture hath resolued vs there is a [...] place of Luc. 16. torment after this life, which is called hell, and the torments there so farre exceed all the paines of this life, not only for perpetuitie, but also for intolerable acerbitie and grauitie, that they are iustly called hell-paines, as proper to the place where diuels and damned persons shalbe punished with euerlasting fire.

And where you would seeme out of the dregs of Philosophie to borrow the dif­ference of the substance and circumstance of hell-paines, you vnderstand not what you say. For euen by the rules of Philosophie there are no circumstances in things per­petuall and immutable. Circumstances must often varie, els are they no circumstan­ces, if they be eternall and necessarie consequents. Since then time and place do not alter in anie of the damned; for all that are damned are cast into hell for euer, though all suffer not like paines; if there be any circumstances in hell, they are rather in the degrees and differences of paine, which you make the substance of hell, than in the place or perpetuitie of the torment, which neuer varie in any of the damned. And since you will needs be medling with Philosophie, I pray you Sir Discourser, if Christ suffered the substance of damnation as you auouch, doth not your doctrine plainlie conclude the Sauiour of the world to be damned? for, which shall truely at­tribute the name of anie thing to anie person, the substance or the circumstance of the thing? By all the rules of Art and reason, to whom the definition doth agree, the thing defined must likewise agree. Now ech definition importeth the substance, not the circumstance of the thing defined. And so if Christ suffered the substance or dam­nation, it is euident by your doctrine he was damned; which is a corollar [...]e in Chri­stian religion fit for such a considerate Colonell as you are; I will say no woorse. Yea such is your deepe insight in these matters, that with turning and winding as a worme doth in wood, to make Ch [...]st suffer the substance of those paines which the damned do suffer; you exclude him, against your owne intention and assertion, from all both substance and ci [...]cumstance of that, which the Iudge pronounceth and inflicteth on the damned. For where the sentence of the Iudge, Depart from me ye cursed into euer­lasting fire, conteineth in it reiection from Gods kingdome, malediction and tor­ment of eternall fire, with their necessarie consequents; Reiection and malediction Christ Defen. p. 10. l. 29. neuer tasted by your owne confession. Continuance of time and place are as you say Ibid. p. 12. l. 22. meere circumstances onely, and not agreeable to Christ; there remaineth then the fire of hell; which you allegorize, by no meanes acknowledging any TRVE sire in hell, for that you vtterly denie. Now allegories are by no meanes the substance or essence of an [...]e creature; and so you teach, Christ suffered the substance of all that the damned doe suffer, saue that he suffered as your selfe confesse, no part of that which Christ by his iudiciall sentence inflicteth on the damned; which is the sub­stance of all that the damned do or shall suffer. Thus what Christ pronounceth on the damned you make circumstantiall and allegoricall; and what is no way comp [...]ised in his sentence of condemnation, you make that only to be substantiall and essentiall in hell-paines; let the Reader now iudge whether this hel be not of your owne framing, and not of Gods ordaining.

This is follie sufficient by a vaine distinction of substance and circumstance to ex­clude all that Christ pronunceth on the damned, from the substance of hell paines; but because it maketh an open gap to Atheisme, to allegorize the greatest torments that God hath ordained for the wicked in hell, and to admit nothing for the sub­stance thereof, saue that which was common to Christ with the damned; which can be neither reiection, malediction, nor eternall torment of fire, since Christ suffered none of these, and yet (as you affirme) he suffered the substance of all that the damned doe suffer; let vs more largelie consider what paines are essentiall to damnation, and to hell, not that hell which your running head hath latelie hatched, but that which the word and will of God hath for euer established; as also whether there be true fire in [Page 37] hell or no; that we may the more plainly perceiue what vanitie and impietie you haue aduentured to make hell and so heauen to be euerie where as touching their substance; and the chiefest torments of hell to be imaginarie paines deuised and con­ceiued by your selfe and a few of your sect, without all warrant of holie Scripture, or witnesse of ancient and Christian beleeuers. Wherein when I speake of substance and essence, thou must not thinke (gentle Reader) that I meane precisely matter and forme, as Philosophers do, which bodies only haue; I speake as a Diuine, of rewards and pu­nishments; in which that is most essentiall and substantiall, which God hath ordained shalbe generall and perpetuall in either kinde. Then that is essentiall to damnation or to the paines of hell reserued for the damned, which God by his word and will re­uealed, hath prouided and established for all that shalbe damned, excepting or spa­ring none, but including them all in one and the same iudgement. And if thou finde by the word of God, that the place of hell and perpetuall torment there, be necessa­rily and generally decreed and appointed for all the reprobate that shall be damned, make sure account that is essentiall to the punishment and paines of hell, which the will and word of God hath ordained and expressed shall ineuitably and eternally pursue and punish the wicked. For Gods will and ordinance is most essentiall and substantiall in all these things; and what he hath determined, and setled generallie and eternallie, without ceasing or changing to take holde on the wicked, that is the substance and essence of their punishment, and of hell-paines, which is their portion.

In my Sermons I deliuered manie parts of hell-paines, which by no meanes could with any sense of religion be applied to Christ. The Discourser neither doth nor can denie them, but shifteth them off as either allegoricall or not essentiall to the paines of hell. I shall therefore need but to examine whether they be figuratiue or proper speeches, as also whether they be essentiall or accidentall to the condition and pu­nishment of the damned; which I am content in order to do. Out of the sentence of the Iudge to be pronounced against all the reprobate, I obserued foure parts of hell­paines inflicted on all the damned; to wit, Sermons. [...]. 50. Reiection, malediction, vengeance of fire, and continuance therein for euer. Touching reiection and malediction, the Discourser plainly confesseth, that Defenc. p. 11 l 27. in Christ there could vtterly be none of these, as also neither Ibid. desperation, dereliction, nor sting of conscience. This confession I take to be ver [...]e true, though it be neither agreeable to himselfe in other places, nor conformable to his generall positions otherwise. But of that afterward. In the meane while, if reiection from all grace and glorie, and extreame malediction of bodie and soule, be essentiall paines in hell, and punishments for sinnes; and Christ neuer tasted these; then Christ neuer suffered all that the damned doe suffer, as touching the essence and substance thereof.

And first of reiection from the kingdome of God, what say you, Sir Deuiser, (for IReiection from the kingdome of God: essentiall to hell paines. may rightly so call you, that take vpon you to deuise vs a new hell not heard of in the Scriptures) is it either no paine to the damned, or is it no essentiall part of their pu­nishment, to be thrust out of the kingdome of heauen? The losse of good things, when they be perceiued and desired, doth by nature no lesse grieue and asflict the soule of man, than the presence of euill doth offend him. All earthly creatures, as well as man, affect that which is good for them; and from the desire of good which is naturall to all, it is not possible that man should be exempted: but as by sense and vnderstanding he discerneth higher and better things than the rest, so this affection and inclination after he truely perceiueth or fully beholdeth them, is exceedingly inflamed with them; and when he findeth himselfe disappointed and depriued of them, his griefe increaseth according to the goodnesse of the things, and greatnesse of his desire. The ioy and honour then of the saints in the kingdome of God when the wicked shall presently beholde, and see themselues reiected thence, they shall in­wardly grieue with vnspeakable sorrow, and outwardly mourne with gnashing their teeth for very anguish of heart, as perceiuing themselues excluded from that inesti­mable blisse for euer. This collection our Sauiour confirmeth in expresse words:

Luc. 13. There shal be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and all the Prophets in the kingdome of God, and your selues thrust out at doores. Yea where there are two sorts of paines in hell; Losse of heauen, and sense of euill; the learned and ancient Fathers haue professed the former, to be a greater and grieuouser paine than the latter. Ad Theodoru lapsum epist. 5. There are some (saith Chrysostome) of an absurd iudgement, who only de­sire to escape hell: contra ego, multo durius esse tormentum quoddam assero, quàm gehenna est: hoc est, non assecutum esse tantam gloriam, & illinc elapsum esse. But I on the contrarie a [...]firme there is a farre worse torment than hell it selfe is, to wit, the losse of so great glory, and the falling there-from. Neither doe I thinke that we ought so much to grieue at the euils in hell, as at the losse whereby we fall from heauen, qui nimirum est cruciatus omnium durissi­mus, which doubtlesse is the bitterest anguish of all the rest. S. Austen in like sort: [...] [...]. ad [...]. cap. 112. To perish from the kingdome of God, to be banished from the citie of God, to want so plentifull a­bundance of the sweetnesse of God, as he hath layd vp in store for those that feare him, tam grandis est p [...]a, vt ei nulla possint tormenta quae nouimus comparari, is so grieuous a pu­nishment, or paine, that no torments which we know may be compared vnto it. NAZIAN­ZENE. De plaga gran [...]inis. Those (that rise to iudgement) this amongst other, or rather ABOVE other punishments shall torment them, that they are reiected of God. And Basil. De regulis fu [...] disputat. interroga [...] 2. The estranging and reiecting from God, is an euill more intolerable, than all that is (feared or) expected in hell. If the griefe shall be so great to be excluded from the kindome of God, and the same be comprised in the sentence of the Iudge, where he saith, Depart from me ye cur­sed; then is there no doubt but it is an essentiall part of the paines of hell: since it is not only generall and perpetuall to all the damned; but a necessarie precedent to the rest of their torments, which can neither take full hold of them, nor afllict them in the highest degree, till they be wholly depriued of all consolation and expectation of any fauour from God, and vtterly confounded with the griefe and shame of that re­ [...]ection which they shall suffer at the hands of Christ before men and Angels.

Malediction, the second part of the Iudiciall sentence against the wicked, notethMalediction [...] to [...] pain [...]s. as well the cause of their condemnation to be sinne, for which onely, both men and Angels are accursed; as the sequels of sinne in the condemned, whom this curse ex­cludeth from all sense and hope of Gods blessings, eternall and temporall for euer; and wrappeth in the fearefull remembring and feeling the number and horrour of their offences, that before flattered, delighted, and encouraged themselues in their wickednesse. For where shame, sorrow, and fe [...]re are by Gods wisedome and trueth appointed as waiting mates on sinne, and offered to the consciences of all men, to stay them from sinne, or leade them to repentance when they haue sinned, if they doe not harden their hearts; the wicked to take their full foorth in their vncleannesse, cast these behind them, and not onely conceale and excuse their sinnes, but quench all re­uerence and remembrance of God, least any thing should hold or hinder them from their pleasures. And therefore the Iustice of God arising to take finall vengeance of their rebellion against him, causeth extreame and inward shame, remorse and feare, which they so much shunned, when they might haue repented, and desisted from their euill wayes, most dreadfully to inuade them, and as mightie streames to ouer­whelme them, till they sinke to the bottome of all confusion, compunction and de­speration. Which is a most iust reward of their dalliance with God, and yet a most painefull torment to the damned, who in their life time wilfully renounced God, to enioy their delights; but there and for euer after shall without remedie or mercie be­hold the lothsomenesse of their sinnes, and grieue at the follie and furie of their diso­bedience; God punishing the soule of euery such transgressour with the remembrance and remorse of his madnesse, with the euidence and conscience of his vncleannesse, and with the sight and assurance of his perpetuall wretchednesse.

[...]. Quae p [...]na grauior quàm interioris vulnus conscientiae? What paine more grieuous, (sayth Ambrose) then the wound of the conscience within? [...]. Amongst all the afflictions of mans soule, there is none greater, (saith Austen) then the conscience of sinne. [...]. Howe thinkest thou (saith Chrysostome) shall our consciences be bitten? and is not this worse then [Page 39] any torment what soeuer? Basil. in Psal­mum. 33. The most grieuous torment of all (saith Basil) shall be that re­proch and eternall shame. Cyprian de Ascens. Do­mini. Omni tormento atrociùs desperatio condemnatos affliget. Worse then all other torments shall desperation afflict the condemned. Lamentat. 3. Giue them griefe of heart, euen thy curse vpon them, saith Ieremie to God. No doubt then the sting of conscience and shame of sinne, which so extreamely shall grieue the heart, is a part of that eternall curse, which shall light on the wicked; and so painefull and grieuous shall it bee vnto them, that they shall curse the day of their birth, time of their life, and all the workes of their hands, that occasioned or leasured them to come within the compasse of this fearefull and euerlasting curse. Hier [...]. lib. 6. in Esa. cap. 13. Torments and sorrowes shall take holde on them (in the day of iudgement or of death) and they shall be pained as a woman in labour with child. By which it appeareth (saith Ierome) they are tormented with their owne conscience. Pamphil [...] apolog. pro Origene. Tunc & ipsa conscientia proprijs stimulis agitatur atque compungitur. Then the very conscience (of the wicked) is pricked and pierced with her owne goades and stinges. August. in Psal. 53. Magna paena est impiorum conscientia. The conscience of the wicked, is a great paine or punishment vn­to them.

You did well vtterly to exempt the Sauiour of the world from both these, I meane from reiection and malediction; you must otherwise haue depriued him of all grace and glorie; and plunged him into the shame of sinne, and remorse of conscience; nei­ther of which without open impietie, can be ascribed to the soule of Christ: and yet both these are essentiall paincs to the damned, and not circumstances, as you pretend of time and place. How painefull they are, I leaue the Reader to consider by that which is already said; essentiall they cannot chuse but be to damnation and hell, not onely because they are comprised in the sentence of the Iudge, which is the substance of condemnation, but also for that the rest of hell paines are not inflicted till both these take hold on the soules of men. For so long as men haue any part or hope of heauen, they are not condemned to hell, neither shall the finall iudgement of God proceede against any, till their owne consciences doe first conuict them and con­demne them. And therefore as in Christs sentence, reiection, and malediction stand before the rest, so in perfourmance they must take place before eternall torment of fire shall follow. Gods iudgement being certainely iust, shall be without all contradicti­on euen in the consciences of the condemned, who then shal be their owne accusers: and as hell hath no communion with heauen, no more can a man bee adiudged to hell, but he must first be excluded from the possession and expectation of all heauen­ly ioy and blisse. I speake of the order and coherence of the punishments, not of any long distance of time betweene them; forsomuch as that iudgement shalbe as quick­ly executed, as pronounced.

The torment of fire is the third part of this iudgemen [...], which I make no question, but you will acknowledge to be an essentiall paine of hell, whatsoeuer you intend by the name of fire. For if this also be accidentall to damnation, I maruaile much what is substantiall. But you are content to admit this for the substance of hell paines, so you may allegorize it, and make thereof what best fitteth your fansie. Then if Christ suffered not the torment of hell fire so much threatned to the wicked in the Scrip­tures, and inflicted on the damned by Christs sentence; it is very plaine he suffered no part of the substance of hell paines; vnlesse your learning serue you to say, that when Christ commeth to giue Iudgement against all the damned, he shall vtterly for­get and mistake himselfe, and in stead of the substance of hell paines, pronounce one­ly the circumstances thereof against the reprobate both men and Angels. Here ther­fore is the place to examine whether the fire of hell be allegoricall, or no; for that it is essentiall to the paines of hell, can be (no doubt) with any but with Atheists, and Infidels, which know not God, since it is named by Christ as a chiefe punishment, prepared for the diuell and his Angels. Wherein I wish thee (gentle Reader) aduisedly to marke what is said on either side, it is a matter of no small moment both to Chri­stian religion and true godlinesse, whether it shall be lawfull for euery vnstable wit, at his pleasure to allegorize whatsoeuer liketh not his humour in the sacred Scrip­tures. [Page 40] For if the small and eternall Iudgement of God against the wicked be allegori­call; then surely the reward of the faithfull from the same Iudge at the same time must likewise be allegoricall. And if we once bring all that is threatned and promised in the world to come to be figures and allegories, we endanger the power, and iustice of God, which must openly appeare to all the world in the punishment of sinne, (if he be a God: and displeased and offended with sinne) as also his mercy, bountie and glo­rie, in crowning his elect, to be nothing but types and figures. The end of all things, which is the time of iudgement must openly and fully performe whatsoeuer God in this life threatneth or promiseth: and if that day doe not plainly distinguish betweene righteousnesse and vnrighteousnesse, the elect and the reprobate, and shewe a most sensible difference betwixt the kingdome of heauen and the torments of hell; to the view of men and Angels without figures or allegories, no time after is, or euer shalbe appointed for that purpose.

The first reason which leadeth me to beleeue the fire of hell to to be a true, sub­stantiall, and externall fire, and no allegorie, is that, which is and must be the ground of all Religion, to wit, the proper signification of the word threatned in the Scriptures to the wicked, and by Christ inflicted on the damned. Otherwise if we hold not fast this rule, not to runne to figures in expounding the Scriptures, except the proper signification of the words in any place be August. de d [...]ct. Christia. lib. 3. cap. 10. against the trueth of faith, or honestie of manners, we shall leaue nothing sound or assured in the word of God. For August. ibid. when the mind is possessed with any errour, whatsoeuer the Scriptures auouch to the contrarie, men thinke it to be figuratiue; as S. Austen rightly obserueth. Your selfe approue this rule, when it maketh any thing for you: your words are: Defenc. pa. 109. l. 8. I like well that no figure is to be admitted in Scripture, where there is no ill or hurtfull sense following litterally. Now that externall and substantiall fire is denounced to the wicked in the Scriptures, and shall accordingly torment the damned in hell, what iniurie is it to the Christian faith, or what repugnance hath it with the rest of the Scriptures? We doe and must beleeue that Christ shall come to iudge the quicke and dead; and with his owne mouth shall openly adiudge the reprobate to Matth. 25. euerlasting fire, prepared for the deuill and his angels. What necessitie then is there to allegorize this fire? It is impossible, you thinke, for soules and deuils, which are spirits, to be punished with externall and corporall fire; and therefore the fire in your conceit must be figuratiue. Shall it be impossible to God, when he speaketh the word, to performe the deede; or is it too hard for you to conceaue the manner how it shall be done? I trust you take not vpon you to restraine the maruailes of Gods workes to the reach of your wits, or to measure the greatnesse of his arme by the weaknesse of your hand. How many thousand things are there in the creation, conseruation, and alteration of the world; in the aire, in the earth, and euery part thereof, which are daily before our eyes, and yet farre passe our vnderstan­ding? To tie Gods trueth and glorie to your capacitie, were madde deuinitie; to make any thing vnpossible for him, which his mouth hath spoken, were meere infide­litie. He that created spirits of nothing can as easily make them capable of paine and punishment from fire, or whatsoeuer meane pleaseth him to vse. But fire hee hath threatned vnto men and deuils. By fire therefore shall they be tormented, which his hand that is Almightie, and his mouth that is all true, shall perfourme in the sight of all the world.

A second reason is, that Christ shall pronounce these words in Iudgement, where the guiltie must perceiue, what is their doome; the ministers must know, what they shall execute; and the elect must discerne what they are to approoue. Now allego­ries are exactly knowen onely to the speaker; the hearers, except they can search the heart, can not certainely knowe the meaning of figures and parables till they be ex­pounded. Christs iudgement therefore shall be plaine and proper, and containe no­thing in it that any way may hinder the present and euident conception, execution, or approbation of it. The end and vse of parables, which are allegoricall similitudes, ou [...] Sauiour confessed when his disciples asked him, Matth. 13. Why speakest thou to them in [Page 41] parables. Who answered: because it is giuen to you to know the secrets of the kingdome of heauen, but to them it is not giuen. Mark. 4. To them that are without, all things are done in para­bles, that seeing they may see and not discerne, and hearing they may heare and not vnder­stand. Then serue parables and allegories, which are both one, to hide the meaning of the speaker; and to darken the vnderstanding of the hearer. But the Iudgement of Christ hath cleane contrarie purposes; and must haue plaine and proper speech, that the whole world may heare it with their eares, vnderstand it with their hearts, and see it executed with their eyes. For how should allegories or metaphores be execu­ted by Gods Angels, who shall be the ministers in that iudgement? or how shall all the elect concurre with Christ in iudgement, if he vse metaphores and allegories knowen onely to himselfe? It is euident therefore the generall and finall sentence by which the wicked shall be adiudged to euerlasting fire, must haue in it no figures nor allegories, but onely plaine and proper speech, which must be heard and vnderstood of all good and bad, and be presently put in execution by the ministers that attend that Iudgement.

A third is, that where parables by reason of their darknesse must be expounded before they can be conceiued; when Christ doth declare the meaning of them, his exposition of necessitie must be in plaine and proper words, lest a darke and doubt­full exposition breed a further confusion in the mindes of the hearers, than the para­ble it selfe. The parable of the good seed sowed by the owner of the ground; and of tares sowed by the enemie; as also of the haruest and reapers; when the Disciples of Christ prayed him to declare vnto them; he expounded it in these words: Matth. 13. vers. 37. The so­wer of the good seed is the sonne of man, the field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdome; the tares are the children of the wicked; the enemie that soweth them, is the diuell; the haruest is the end of the world; and the Reapers be the Angels. As then the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be in the end of the world. The Sonne of man shall send forth his Angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdome all offences and the wor­kers of iniquitie, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire, there shalbe wailing and gnashing of teeth. And vpon occasion of the parable of the draw-net cast into the sea, and gathe­ring all kinds of men, and after seuering the good from the bad; our Sauiour repeat­ing the same exposition in the same words (So shall it be in the end of the world; the an­gels shall go forth, and seuer the bad from among the iust, and shall cast them into a fornace of fire) sayd to his Disciples,Ibid. ver. 51. Vnderstand ye all these things? and they sayd to him, Yea Lord. The parable they vnderstood not, but this they vnderstood. The fire therefore in­to which the wicked shall be cast, is no parabolicall, but a plaine and proper speech. Againe, Christ expoundeth the parable by it: it is therefore no allegorie, but a true and proper speech by which Christ opened the obscuritie of the parable; and his Disciples presently conceiued his meaning by the proprietie and perspicuitie of his words. Then, that Matth. 13. the Angels of God in the end of the world shall seuer the wicked; and cast them into a furnace of fire, is an euident, plaine, and proper speech, easie to be vn­derstood of euerie Christian by the verie hearing of the words vttered, without re­course to you Sir Deuiser to helpe allegorize them; or to bring in stead of them the immediat soules suffering, which you still auouch, but neuer take the paines to proue, or vse the meanes to vnfold.

Fourthly, your new conceit hath no coherence with the sense or words of the Ho­ly ghost; but either he must correct his speech, wheresoeuer he mentioneth the fire of hell, or you must recall your fansie, who suppose an inward paine in the soule from the immediat hand of God to be hell fire. For if that which you call hell fire be only within the soules of the wicked, how can they DEPART, GO, or BE CAST IN­TO HELL FIRE, which by your imagination is cast into them, & not they into it? And therefore when our Sauiour so often affirmeth, that the wicked shall be cast into hell fire, and iudicially willeth them to depart from him into euerlasting fire; you must set him to schoole, and teach him to speake righter, and according to your opinion, to say, that hell fire shalbe cast into them. But if these be fooleries most vnfit for any [Page 42] Christian man, to controll the sonne of God in his speech, and to condemne him of open and childish ignorance, as not knowing the difference betwixt an externall and internall fire; then learne to reuerence the veritie and grauitie of the word of God, and to confesse that he which seeth and setleth all things in heauen, earth, and hell, cannot so forget himselfe as to mistake the one for the other. For if the fire be a vio­lent, externall, and locall agent into which the wicked shalbe cast; then are the words of our Sauiour and of the Prophets and Apostles most proper and pertinent to the matter: but if that fire which shall torment the damned, be nothing but an internall paine rising within the soule by the immediat hand of God; then are all the speeches of the Holy ghost, expressing their punishment, wide from the sense, and dissonant from the truth of that which you suppose they would deliuer. Dauid describing the vengeance that God at the last will execute on the wicked, sayth, Psal. 11. Vpon the wicked God will raine snares, fire, and brimstone. This raining vpon them, sheweth that the meanes and matter of their torment shall be without them; and not an anguish onely rising within them, as you imagine of hell fire. Reuel. 20. The diuell that deceiued them, was cast (sayth S. Iohn) into a lake of fire and brimstone; and whosoeuer was not found written in the booke of life, was cast into the lake of fire. The Holy ghost by your direction must haue sayd, the lake of fire was cast into the diuell, and into euery one that was not found written in the booke of life. Mark 9. It is better (sayth our Sauiour) to enter into life maimed, than hauing two hands to goe into hell, into the fire that neuer shall be quenched. Our Sauiour by your doctrine is not well aduised so to speake, when he should haue sayd, It is better to enter into life maymed, than hell fire to goe into you. And when Christ foretelleth that the Angels shall seuer the badde, and cast them into a furnace of fire; he committeth two great ouersights by your new Diuinity: the first in saying, the Angels shall cast the badde into a furnace of fire; where indeed by your deuice the furnace of fire shalbe cast into the badde: the next in that he sayth, the Angels shall cast them into the fire; which hath no trueth in it, if the soules of the wicked inwardly suffer from the imme­diate hand of God alone, as you teach. For how do the Angels cast the wicked into the fire, when the immediate hand of God inflicteth that, which you call hell fire, on the soule without any instruments or inferiour meanes? These mockeries you must make of the Scriptures, before they will serue your new conceit, that hell fire is an al­legorie, and importeth nothing but a paine raised within the soule by the immediate hand of God alone; which what agreement it hath with the doctrine and descripti­ons of the Holy ghost, I leaue the Christian Reader to consider.

Fiftly, the word Gehenna, which Christ authorized in the new testament to signifie hell, hath no iust representation of hell, if there be no substantiall and externall fire in hel. For where anciently the children of Iudah Ierem. 7. built the place of Topheth in the valley of the sonne of Hinnom to burne their sonnes & daughters in the fire 2. Reg. 23. vnto Molech; which valley the eighteenth of Iosue placethIosue. 18. vers. 16. neere to Iebusi (that was afterward Ierusalem) and calleth Gehinnom: and the chiefe councel of Ierusalem, whiles their power lasted, vsed to punish certaine offences with fire in the same valley lying neere to their citie: Our Lord and Master either taking the word that was vsuall among the people in his time to import hell, and establishing it with his authoritie; or resembling hell to the place of tormenting & burning malefactors with fire so wel knowen to the Iewes, na­meth it Gihanna in Syriack; which the Hebrues call Gehinnam, the Euangelists [...], and the Latines Gehenna. In this application of the word, that the one might fitly re­semble the other, three things were chiefly respected, as Peter Martyr rightly obser­ueth vpon the second chapter of the second booke of Kings. First that being a Pet. Martyr. in 2. cap. 2. lib. Regum. val­ley, to wit, a lowe bottome, it resembled hell, which is beleeued to be beneath the earth. Se­condly, for the fire, wherewith the wicked are tormented (in hell) euen as the children were in that valley burnt with fire. Lastly, the place was vncleane and detestable, whither all vile and lothsome things were cast out of the citie of Ierusalem, euen as defiled and wicked soules are cast out of the kingdome of heauen into hell. And howsoeuer you may quarrell with the first and last respects, because you thinke them not Canonicall, though I finde [Page 43] them grounded on the Scriptures, if that were to this present purpose: the second is without contradiction the maine reason why our Sauiour tooke the word Gehenna to represent hell, and is expressed by himselfe when so often in the Gospell he addeth fire to the word Gehenna, and expoundeth the one by the other, that is, Gehenna by vnquenchable fire. Matth. 5. Whosoeuer shall say foole (to his brother) shalbe worthy of the Ge­henne of fire, that is, of the vale of fire, or of hell. And againe,Matth. 18. It is better for thee to en­ter into life with one eye, than hauing two eyes to be cast into the Gehenne of fire, which is the vale or lake of fire, and hell fire. In the Gospel written by S. Marke Christ ioyneth the one as an explication to the other. It Mark. 9. is better to goe halting into life than hauing two feet to be cast into GEHENNA, into the fire that neuer shalbe quenched. So that the re­semblance of true fire in either place, painfull to the sufferer and dreadfull to the be­holder, was the chiefe respect, why our Sauiour allowed GEHENNA in the new Te­stament to signifie hell, and consequently doth assure vs there is true fire in hell. For if hell haue no fi e in it besides an inward and inherent paine of bodie or soule, as we see in all violent and burning diseases, Christ might more fitly haue resembled hell to any sharpe and sore sicknes [...]e, than to an externall and sensible fire, which can haue no reference to hell, if the torments there be only spirituall and internall.

These reasons lead me to r [...]solue and beleeue, that the fire of hell so much threat­ned to [...]he wicked in the Scriptures and inflicted on the damned, shall be a true, vi­sible, and externall fire; wherein lest thou shouldest thinke, Christian Reader, I rest too much on mine owne opinion, as this D [...]scourser doth in all things on his; I am content to let thee see, that the Ancient and Catholike Fathers of Christes Church haue constantly professed as much before me, and condemned the Discoursers con­ceit as an open errour repugnant to the Scriptures, and hurtfull to the Christian faith. I haue alreadie produced the testimonies of so many Fathers in the Pag. 342. conclusion of my Sermons touching this point (the writers being of the greatest learning and ac­count in the Church of Christ) as may satisfie the [...]ober, and stumble the froward; thei [...] iudgement concurring with the manifest words of holy Scripture: yet because this Discou [...]ser lightly regardeth their concents, & vainely shifteth off their proofes, let vs heare and examine his answere to their assertions.

The Fathers by me cited, were Austen, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Eusebius, Tertulli­an, Lact [...]ntius, Cyprian, Minutius, Pacianus, and Gregorie, besides the wordes of Si­bylla, which many of those Fathe [...]s accept and alleage as proceeding from God to witnesse the trueth and terrour of his generall iudgement to all the world, and agree­ing with the tenour of holy Scripture. His answere beginneth and endeth in this wise; Defenc. pag. 146. l. 25. You set your s [...]lfe to prooue that in hell there is materiall fire. But it seemeth you are now almost afraid so to call it: yet you call it true fire, which also wee vtterly denie. All your proofes, (such as they ar [...]) runne to prooue corporall and materiall fire yet eternall, ex­cept your Scriptures, which vtterly prooue nothing at all. Defenc. pag. 147. l. 8. And me thinkes you should not care for corpor [...]ll fire now in hell, seeing you seeme to beleeue no torments for damned soules, saue on ly at the resurr [...]ction. For thus you reason, as the bodie hath beene the instrument of the soules pleasure in sinne, so it shall be of her paine. But all prouocations and pleasures of sinne, the soule taketh from her bodie, all actes of sinne she committeth by her bodie. There­fore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the soule (ONELY) by the bodie: Or therefore all the soules paine for sinne, both temporally and eternally is by the body. This is your owne reason: which being true, why should you care for corporall fire in hell, be­fore the last iudgem [...]nt?

You begin and end with two notorious vntrueths and falsifications of my words; that at least you may make others beleeue, there is some likelihood in yours, when I dare not stand by mine, but am either afraid of them, or conclude directly against them. Doe I set my selfe to prooue, that in hell there is materiall fire; and yet am I now al­most afraid so to call it? It is your wont (Sir Discourser) not mine, to take vp termes that may be turned euery way, and to plant your chiefe strength vpon the doubt­fulnesse of their Signification. Doe I any where apply the word materiall to hell fire? [Page 44] or doe any of the places which I cite, so call it? If they doe, name them; if not, how set I my selfe to prooue materiall fire in hell, without any words or proofes sounding that way? Know you my meaning without my words? or doe you boldly presume of my meaning against my words? If by materiall fire, you meane that which is maintained by wood or by such like matter as nourisheth fire, and without the which fire will quench; (for that is one of your chiefest obiections which you say is vnanswered:) then doe the places which I bring plainely prooue that hell fire is not materiall. For Lactantius sayth of it; Conclus. pa. 346. It burneth of it selfe without any nourishment. And Gregorie; Ibid. pag. 345. It is neither kindled with mans industrie, nor nourished with wood; but contrary to the nature of our fire, it consumeth not what it burneth, but rather repaireth what it eateth, as Tertullian sayth of it. So that neither my positions nor probations gaue you any cause to coniecture I meant your materiall fire. The places produced by me ex­presse the contrary: and mine owne words are; Ibid. pag. 343. S. Austen long since hath plainly re­solued, the fire of hell is not only a true fire, which were my words, but a corporall fire, that shall punish both men and diuels. And closing I make it Ibid. pag. 348. a point of Christian doctrine deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles, and receiued by the Fathers of all ages in Christs church, that the fire of hell shall be visible and sensible to the bodies of the wicked, and shall eternally and corporally punish the damned according to their deserts. It was therefore your foolish ob­iection, that hell fire must be materiall, if it be not allegoricall according as you dreame; it was no resolution of mine, nor so much as mentioned by me. I saw the ambiguity of the word well enough, and for that cause did refraine it from the begin­ning For though materiall may be that which consisteth of matter and forme, and so all things that are corporall, as the wind, the aire, the heauens are likewise materiall; yet in our vulgar speech and vnderstanding, to which I framed my selfe, that is mate­riall fire which is nourished with some MATTER apt to burne and consume; and in that sense hell fire is no materiall fire.

The end of your answer in this place is farre woorse than your entrance: for thereThe Defender grosly peruer­teth my words. you wittingly and wilfully peruert my words by adding ONLY and ALL vnto them, directly against my meaning; yea when I openly admonish the Reader to the contrary. I inferred by occasion of former proofs; therefore the iustice of God both tem­porally and eternally punisheth the soule by the bodie: which words are most euidentlie true, since in this life without all question the soule is punished by the bodie; and af­ter iudgement the bodie being cast into hell fire, shall eternally afflict the soule. My words then bearing in them a manifest trueth, you take the paines, by interlacing them, to wrest them to an open falsehood: for you make me say: Therefore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the soule ONLY by the bodie. Now this is as false, as the former was true: for God in this life doth often punish the soule by her selfe; and vntill the last day it is as certeine the soules of the wicked departed hence are punished without their bodies; which so long lie dead in the dust of the earth. What conscience this is (for nothing in you must be impudence, though it be neuer so shamelesse) of an euident trueth to make a palpable errour, by adding (ONLY) to my wordes, which I carefully and purposely did auoide, let the Reader iudge.

But the proposition inducing this conclusion you will say is generall; to wit, all prouocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from her bodie, all acts of sinne she com­mitteth by her bodie; the conclusion thereof you thinke should be likewise generall: therefore ALL the soules paines for sinne both temporally and eternally is by the bodie. Your thoughts (Sir Discourser) bewray your owne follie, they must not marshall my reasons; I can expresse mine intent without your helpe. Out of a generall assumpti­on what Art hindreth me to auouch an indefinite and particular conclusion; especi­ally when I meddle with Gods matters, whose power and will in iudgement no rules of reason can binde or limit? And if I would needs expresse the forme of a syllogisme (as you vainly imagine I meant to doe in these words) I neuer learned out of a nega­tiue for the maior, to draw an affirmatiue for the conclusion: but had not your eyes [Page 45] stood in your light, it was easie for you to haue seene both what the conclusion must be by force of the premisses; and how in respect of him that is all-iust and yet all­mighty, I thought not good to restraine him to my conclusions, but to inferre in sted thereof, that which sufficiently depended on the conclusion, and could haue no que­stion either in holy writ, or dayly vse. Both the premisses are orderly and plainly set downe in my writing, and not loosely and ignorantly misplaced, as yours are, by put­ting the cart before the horse, and taking that for the maior which with me is a part or appendix of the conclusion. My words stand thus: Conclus. pa. 254. l. 29. Nothing is more proportionable to Gods iustice, than to ioyne them in paine that were ioyned in sinne; and to retaine the same order in punishing, which they kept in offending. But all prouocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from the bodie, all acts of sinne shee committeth by the bodie. What boy now knowing the first principles of Logicke doth not presently perceiue the conclu­sion must be; therefore nothing is more proportionable to Gods iustice than both temporal­ly and eternally to ioyne bodie and soule in paine which were ioyned in sinne; and to make the bodie the instrument of her paine, as it hath beene of her pleasure. This conclusion is an vniuersall negatiue; and yet doth not exclude all paine of the soule without the bo­die to be vnagreeable to Gods iustice, as you pretend I meane; but auoucheth no paine to be more agreeable, than where bodie and soule are both ioyned in suffering, as they were in offending. And because no punishment is more agreeable to Gods iustice, than where both soule and bodie are coupled in paine, as they were in sinne; though it be no way against Gods iustice to punish the soule for a season without the bodie: Ibidem. Therefore (which is the inference that I vse) the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the soule by the bodie, that as it hath beene the instrument of her plea­sure, so it shalbe of her paine. You affirme, not only my meaning, but my reason to be this; that God temporally and eternally punisheth the soule (ONLY) by the bodie. I vtterly denie that I haue any such reason, words, or sense; but that you purposely haue inser­ted the word (ONLY) of your owne, to make my reason seeme false and foolish; which otherwise is sound and sure.

You mistooke (you will say) my meaning; you did it not of malice. Your mista­kings (Sir Discourser) are indeed very grosse, as shall well appeare, when we come to your fairest forts; but in this (by your leaue) you could not mistake me, except you were bereaued of your wits and senses. I not onely prouided that my words should import no such thing, as you dreame of; but to cleere all cauils, when I had made some proofe out of Cyprian, Ierom, and Tertullian, for the second proposition of my reason, I moued the question my selfe, and answered it, with as plaine and precise a deniall as I could deuise to vtter. These are my words: Conclus. pa. 257. l. 12. Do I then denie that the soule hath any sufferings in this life & the next, which come not by the body? BY NO MEANES. For though those conioyned sufferings be most answerable to sinnes committed; yet the soule hath some proper punishments in this life, as sorrow, and feare, when the bodie hath no hurt: from which Christ was not free, as appeareth by his agonie: and so in the next, the soules of the wicked haue griefe and remorse, besides the paine of fire. These punishments in this world and the next, the soule suffereth, not by her body, nor from her body: how then should I meane that God temporally and eternally punisheth the soule (ONLY) by the bo­die, or that (ALL) the soules paine for sinne is from the bodie, as you make me to speake, both without and against mine owne words? Whether this dealing sauour of vn­shamefastnesse, or no, iudge thou Christian Reader, as thou seest cause. The maner of the Discoursers carriage in the entring and ending of his answer, I might not omit. Now to his matter.

The midst of his answer is a medley meet for a man of his learning and iudgement; the summe of it is this: Defene. pag. 146. l. 25. All my proofs (out of the Fathers) runne to prooue corporall and materiall fire, except the Scriptures (by me alleaged) which vtterly prooue nothing at all. For his part he seeth no reason to beleeue, that now there is corporall fire in hell (which is only our question or els nothing) whatsoeuer shalbe heereafter, when the bodies shalbe tormented with their soules. Lastly, Austen here doth not proue there shalbe such sire (after [Page 46] the resurrection) be only sheweth the maner how it may be so heereafter, if God will. Now if the power of God only be all our reason, we may as well proue the skie is fallen. All the rest of the Fathers say nothing further, nor indeed, so farre as Austen. Whether ten ancient writers, all Christian and Catholike fathers, relying themselues on the manifest words of holy Scripture, and ioyning in one confession of the trueth, be not more to be trusted and better beleeued than H. I. of Paules Chaine, let the poorest prentise in London iudge. As for the Scriptures; if you Sir Deuiser and such other busie heads may allegorize them, when they contradict your humors, from Genesis to the Apo­calypsis, they shall vtterly proue nothing at all against you: for what is there in them which you may not peruert with your fansies and figures, if nothing shall be plaine and proper that any way seemeth vnsauourie to your reason? The Fathers haue for that which they affirme, the exact and euident words of holy Scripture, and not so few as Twenty Places of the New Testament witnessing, without any parables or alle­gories, fire to be threatened and performed to the wicked in the world to come. Whereupon with one consent they haue all resolued and professed it as a setled ground of Christian religion; that hell fire, to which Christ shall adiudge the wicked at the last day, shalbe a true, externall, and sensible fire; I meane seene and felt of all the reprobate in their soules and bodies. To this our new Patriarck of Pater-noster Rew answereth:Defenc. pa. 146. l. 37. Austen doth not proue there shalbe such a fire; he only sheweth the maner how it may be so heereafter, if God will. Now if Gods power onely be all our reason, we may prooue aswell the skie is fallen. Gentle Sir, if so many vouchers from Christes owne mouth and from his Apostles following their masters steps, be no proofe with you, nor sufficient witnesse of Gods will, you haue some aduantage against S. Austen and all the rest of the Fathers for presuming vpon Gods power without the knowledge of his will: but if those proofs be more then pregnant, then looke to your allegories, lest they prooue you to be a proud presumer against the Scriptures, and an arrogant despiser of the Fathers, where they accord with the word and will of God. It is not enough for you (Sir Deuiser) to rowze your selfe, and say YOV SEE NO REA­SON; you must take the paines to yeeld good reason why you depart from the lite­rall and proper signification of the words vttered by the sonne of God. And since you can pretend none but want of power in God to performe the words which he hath spoken in their proper sense; all the godly will see great reason to refuse your fansies and figures, as idle shifts to decline the cleerenesse of the sacred Scriptures.

The Scriptures you sayDefenc pa. 146. shew no more any corporall, or materiall, or true fire to be now in hell, than a corporall worme, materiall brimstone, much wood, and true chaines: which IWhat is meant by the worme that neuer di­eth.called a sleeuelesse obiection; but neither I, nor Austen whom I cite against it, doth any where answere it.] Of the worme mentioned in Christes words (their worme neuer dieth) I shewed you S. Austens iudgement, which might content a farre greater Clerke than you. Neither is he alone in that opinion. Gregorie Nyssene sayth,Nyssenus de resurrectione Christs. I heare the Scrip­ture affirme, that the damned shalbe punished with a fire, darknesse, and worme; quae omnia compositorum ac materialium corporum, poenae cruciatús (que) sunt; all which are the punish­ments and torments of materiall and compounded bodies. Basil deliuering what terrours shall be presented to the eyes of the damned in the day of iudgement; amongst other things nameth a Basil in Psal. 33. darkish fire, that hath lost his brightnesse, but kept his burning; [...], and a venimous kinde of worme feeding on flesh, and raising intolerable torments with his biting. Iosephus a Iew liuing in the Apostles times, and no stranger to the Christian faith, in his oration to the Greeks, (which Dama­scene doth mention, and Zonaras doth cite) speaking of the finall iudgement of God to be executed by the person of the Messias, sayth,Zonaras na [...]um [...]om. 1. fol. 191. There remaineth for the lo­uers of wickednesse an vnquenchable and neuer ending fire, [...], and a firy worme not dy­ing, nor destroying the bodie, but breaking forth of the bodie with vnceasing anguish. How­beit, becauseAugust. de ciuit. Dei. l. 21. ca. 9. S. Austen leaueth it indifferent for euery man to refer the WORME properly to the bodie, or figuratiuely to the minde, as he liketh best; so that by no [Page 47] meanes he thinke the bodies in hell shall not be touched with the paine of fire; I left it like­wise free for euery man to make his choise, and saw no need of farther answer.* Tou­ching brimstone, you may iest at S. Iohn if you list, who saith of the wicked, they shall beReuel. 14. tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angels, and before the Lambe; and likewise of the diuell, that heReuel. 20. was cast into a lake of fire and brimstone: or if you please, you may oppose God himselfe, and aske whether materiall brimstone were mixed with the fire which hee rained from heauen on Sodom and Gomorre, and why hee powred them both on the heads of those wicked ones, as if fire alone were not suffici­ent to destroy them, who Iude epist. are set forth for an ensample, (by) suffering the vengeance of e­ternall fire. But howsoeuer you presume to alter or new frame the iudgements of God after your fansies, when I reade that God hathGenes. 19. rained brimstone and fire out of heauen on Sodom and the cities adioyning, and will Psal. 11. raine fire and brimstone vpon the wicked, as Dauid testifieth; I dare not allegorize either of them, because I reuerence the word of God, which is his will; and by no meanes distrust his power. For if God will haue brimstone mixed with hell fire to make it burne not onely the darker and sharper, but also the lothsommer, and so to grieue the sight, smell and taste of the wic­ked, which haue heere surfeited with so many vaine pleasures; what haue you or any man liuing to say against it? yea rather, why teach you not men to tremble at the ter­ror of Gods iudgements, who can and will so fully punish all the powers and parts of bodie and soule, with one and the same fire in hell?

Your obiection of true chaines and much wood, I called sleeuelesse; in deed I shouldChaines there are in [...]ll though not of iron. haue called it witlesse; for but you, no man that would seeme wise, euer did account it worth the obiecting or answering. Who knoweth not that the names of artificiall things applied to Gods iudgement or gouernement, must not import with him as they doe with vs, things made or prouided with mens handes; but the woonderfull works and powerfull acts of God, tending to the same end, for which these artifici­all things do serue with vs? As when we read in the Scriptures, of Gods sword, cup, bow, booke, sootestoole, furnace, and such like: Is any man so foolish as to aske after the Cutler, Goldsmith, Fl [...]tcher, Stationer, Carpenter, Mason that made those things for God; and not rather to looke to the vse of these things amongst men, and thence to collect the marueilous and manifest effects of Gods power, iustice, counsell, and prouidence determining and perfourming in this world and the next, what pleaseth him against men and Angels? The chaines wherewith the deuils are bound, Peter calleth the 2. Pet. 2. chaines of darkenesse, not of mettall which man can frame; and they note the ineuitable subiection, and immutable condition of deuils plunged in outwarde and inward darkenesse, malediction, and horror, whereby they are nowPet. Ibid. kept vnto damnation, without any power to resist or decline the iudgement, which shall be pro­nounced on them. That God hath a Smith to make Iron chaines to bind the deuill, or a fueller to cut and fetch wood for hell fire, lest it should faile; these were such me­riments to be concluded out of Scripture, that if you find no vanitie nor absurditie in them against the trueth and glorie of God, you may take the Legend or the Alco­ran into your Creede, without any scruple of conscience: but if these things be more then sottish, then deserue your obiections a worse name then I gaue them.

The Scriptures, you say, shew no more any true fire in hell, then true chaines and much wood. To suppose those things to be needefull for hell, which are prepared by the hands of men; is a very wicked and wilfull impietie. For so should hell fire quickly cease, which Christ hath said shall be euerlasting. And that the Scriptures prooue no more the trueth of fire there then they doe of wood, is an open, and arrogant vntruth. For first all the Fathers of Christs Church, and the soberest Diuines of our time, are condemned by this insolent assertion, as ignorant and absurd teachers, who confesse the trueth of hell fire to be established by the Scriptures, which of wood they do not. Secondly, the words of Christ and his Apostles, are chalenged to be false. For they in plaine speech affirme fire to be in hell, which of wood they doe not. Thirdly, the reason, whereupon the Defenders obiection is grounded, ouerthroweth all religion [Page 48] in this life, and all reward in the life to come. For this is and must be the pillar where­to his obiection leaneth. The Scripture nameth fire, and so it nameth wood; and therefore it sheweth the trueth of the one no more then it doth of the other; but if the wood be figuratiue, so must the fire be. Applie this reason to the Church of Christ on earth, or to the kingdome of heauen, or to Christ himselfe, and see whether it will not vtterly subuert them all, and make all Gods promises and graces here and in hea­uen to be allegoricall, and not literally true. Of Christ God saith; Esa. 28. Behold I will lay in Sion a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone. And of himselfe Christ saith, Iohn 15. I am the true Vine. Were it not braue blasphemie to say, the Scriptures shewe Christ to be no more a true God, then a true Stone, or a true Vine, because they affirme of him all three? To his Church God saith, Esai. 54. I will lay thy foundation with Saphires, and will make thy windowes of Emeraudes, and thy gates shining stones. All thy children shall bee taught of God, and much peace shall be to thy children: in righteousnesse shalt thou be esta­blished. Shall we say that wisedome, peace, and righteousnesse here promised to the Church are figuratiue, because Emeraudes and Saphires mentioned in the very same place must be figuratiuely taken? Christ saith to his disciples; Luc. 22. I appoint you a king­dome as my Father hath appointed to mee, that you may eate and drinke at my table in my kingdome. Are all the rewards of the faithfull in the kingdome of heauen allegori­call, because this most apparantly is so? Proude and false therefore is that surly reso­lution of yours, Sir Discourser, who auouch the Scriptures shewe no more true fire in hell, then much wood, because the Prophet in one place nameth them both; and if your obiections be no better, let the Christian reader iudge whether there be any cause you should so earnestly call for an answere.

But let vs view the place whence you fetch your wood to nourish hell fire; and see whether it make no more for the one then for the other. Against Senacherib that proud and blasphemous king of Assyria, the capitall and cruell enemie of Gods peo­ple and Church, the Prophet denounceth vengeance in this wise. Esa. 30. The Lord shall cause the glorie of his voice to be heard, and shall shew the stroke of his arme with the anger of his countenance, and flame of deuouring fire, with scattering and tempest. For Tophet is prouided of olde, it is euen readie for the King: (God) hath made it deepe and wide, the burning thereof is fire and much wood: the breath of the Lord doth kindle it as a current (or riuer) of brimstone. Tophet was a place built by hand in the valley of Hinnom nere to Ierusalem, made deepe and wide to containe whole Pyles of woode which the Priests of Molech with their deuices and prouisions could readily kindle, and raize to huge and mightie flames, to inclose and consume the children that were pre­sented to their Idole. To this place and vse the Prophet alludeth, when he threatneth the King of Asshur; and to comfort the Iowes that God had care ouer them, he assu­reth them, that Gods Tophet was prouided of olde, and readie for the King (of Asshur,) that it was deepe and wide (to receiue him and all his retinue;) and the burning there­of (as) the fire (of) much wood, the breath of the Lord kindling it as a flood of brimstone. That Tophet was a place in the valley of Hinnom, & a part of Gehinnom Ierem. [...]. ve [...]. 31. BVILT HIE of purpose to burne children in the fire, appeareth by Ieremie. The store of wood heaped there, and the rage of fire kindled there is euident by Esays com­parison, when he sayth. The burning thereof is fire and much wood, the breath of the Lord as a Riuer of brimstone kindling it: fire and much wood is the fire of much wood, to which he compareth the burning of hell, for wood without kindling maketh no fire. And so the Chaldaie paraphrast expresseth it. Chalda [...]a pa­raphras. in Esa. 30. A flame of sire is there (in hell) kindled LIKE AS in much wood. And to euery man meanely seene in the Hebrew tongue, it is a knowen Rule, that Caph the note of similitude is often vnderstood in the Scriptures; and then specially when it is added to one part of the Periode, for example; Psal. 11. v. 1. Flie to your mountaine a bird, that is LIKE a bird. Miche. 3 v 9. Zion shall be plowed a field that is LIKE a field. Gen. 49. v 9. A Lyons whelpe Iudah from the pray shalt thou ascend; that is LIKE a Lyons whelpe. Esa. 4 [...]. v. 6. All flesh is grasse, and the glory thereof is as the flower of the field that is, all flesh is LIKE grasse. And in this place of Esaie it is so the ra­ther, [Page 49] because the aduerbe of similitude is expressed in the next member, where it is said, the breath of the Lord, LIKE a streame of brimstone, doth kindle it: which ar­gueth that the former part must likewise be vnderstood the burning thereof is A s a fire of much wood which in effect is a mightie flame. This then being a comparison, what reason haue you, Sir Discourser, to pronounce, that the Scriptures shew no more true fire in hell then much wood; since fire was the maine respect why hell was likened to Tophet; wood was not, and without fire, hell is no more like to Tophet then it is to a bodkin; which if it be thrust into a mans body will raize paine enough. And therefore these amplifications must either vtterly be voyde, and import nothing knowen to the Iewes, or else there must be fire in hell as there was in Tophet, and that like the fire of much wood, which is violent and raging; and as a torrent of brim­stone, which flameth all with fire, if it be once kindled. And since Christ called hell Gehinnam for the resemblance it had to the flames of Gehinnom as is before proo­ued; what maruaile if the Prophet speaking by the same spirite, compared hell to To­phet, which was the place in Gehinnom where the mightiest fires to burne men were made in his time?

Or if we follow not the Chaldaie paraphrase to make wood a comparison, but leane to the later writers who make it a metaphore, and referre it either to the continuance of hell fire, or to the sinnes, soules, and bodies of the wicked feeding and nourishing the fire of hell, as wood doth our common fire; what gaine you by that? If one word in the sentence be figuratiue, will you conclude all the rest to be figuratiue? so may you as well anouch all the Articles of our faith to be allegoricall, because sit­ting at the right hand of God is a plaine allegorie. And are there no moe places in the Scriptures mentioning hell fire besides this of Esaie? Or if there be, as there be ex­ceeding many, which haue no similitudes nor metaphores in them, will you alle­gorize them all, because this place of Esaie hath one similitude or metaphore in it? whether this haue any learning, reason, or sense in it let the Reader iudge.

And because I haue mentioned the opinion of the latter writers, making wood aLater Diuines profess true fire to be in hell. metaphore in this place of Esaie, and yet confessing the fire of hell to be a true, sub­stantiall, aud externall fire; I thinke it not amisse to let the Reader see, what diuerse of them, in true religion and learning not inferior to any of our time, haue profes­sed touching either of these points. Peter Martyrs iudgement of GEHENNA we heard before, who maketh Pet. Martyr in 2. cap. 2. lib. Reg. Tophet all one with GEHENNA and saith of Tophet: Esaie in his 30. Chapter calleth that place (of Gehenna) Tophet, and fire vnquench­able, as hauing much wood and brimstone to nourish it. The Prophet also setteth downe the breath wherewith the fire is blowne, that it may flame the more siercely. Munster in his Annotations vpon the 30. of Esaie saith Ma [...]ster. An­notat. in 30. Esa. Gehenna is here called Tophet. Dicit habi­taculum illud esse ig [...]eum; That (place or) habitacle the Prophet saith is all fierie, to let thee vnderstand, that the torment there is euerlasting. For the vncleane lustes of the mind, which here are not purged by faith, shall be the nourishment of that eternall flame IN STEEDE of wood and coales. And also the conscience (within) shall afflict the wicked as a kind of fire. Hell is perpetuall because the Spirite and will of the Lord giue euerlasting force of fire to it. Bullinger in his 90. homilie vpon the same Chapter. Bullinger ho­mil. 90. in Esa. 30. Our Pro­phet calleth hell Tophet, as our Sauiour called it Gehenna. And indeede Tophet or Gehenna did burne and flame with perpetuall fires deuouring their children, which seduced with a diuelish error, thought they offered them vnto God, when they offered them vnto the diuell. As then in Tophet wretched men were skorched with fire, so in hell all the wicked are tormented with euerlasting fire. Therefore hell is rightly called Tophet and Gehenna whose inside or burning is fire; that is, if thou aske what is in hell, there is fire and burning, or, whatsoeuer is within hell is nothing but fire. God perfourmeth that hell shall flame with perpetuall fire, euen as in many places and hilles of the earth an unwasted store of brim­stone is found that euen thence we may gather there may be Riuers and lakes of brimstone in hell. All these things the Almightie knoweth how to prepare, that these torments may [Page 50] [...]itte both Soules and bodies, so that we haue no neede to dispute whether this fire and brim­stone be corporall, and if it be corporall, how it worketh vpon spirituall substances. The Lord as I now said, can fit all these to either part (of man,) that in truth they may be inflicted as well on the bodies, as on the spirits of the damned, which here the Prophet foretelleth. If thou hadst rather dispute against them, and wilt not now beleeue these things, doubtles thou shalt one day trie them by experience. Gualter vpon the same place. Esaie Gualther. ho­mil. 163. in Esa. 30. teacheth what heil is. The inside thereof is fire; that is how deepe and wide soeuer hell is, it is all fire and burneth euerlastingly. For so he describeth the sharpnes of the punishment, which the wicked shall there suffer. And lest any should aske, what matter can suffice to maintaine such a fire, the Prophet saith, there is great store of wood. He that made hell hath plenti­fully prouided, that the fire there shall neuer goe out. For filthie lustes and lewd actes not purged by [...]aith, and guiltie mindes yeeld perpetuall matter and maintenance to those flames. Yea and the bodies also of the wicked shall be incorruptible that they may suffer continuall fire and flame, and dure therein. He mentioneth also a streame of brimstone, whereof the Apocalypse speaketh, that we should remember and consider those things which are in nature; For so many ages hath the fire of Aetna continued and still doth, casting vp flames of brimstone. He then that kindleth these things (in nature) without the helpe or assis­tance of men, he also can kindle and maintaine the fire of hell, that it shall neuer faile. Musculus commenting vpon the 25. of Mathew sayth.Muscul. in Mat. cap. 25. Those who measure all things by the rule of reason, and thinke nothing firme that cannot be comprehended by mans witte, dispute how it is possible, that the body should alwaies burne (in hell) and not con­sume, which is repugnant to the nature of the body. They likewise dispute how fire can burne not onely bodies, but also wicked spirits which haue no bodies. These curious men thinke that to be against nature, which is done by Gods will, neither doe they consider, the nature of all creatures to haue and be that, which they haue and are by Gods commandement. Others quarrell with the qualitie of the fire, and thinke it no corporall but a metaphoricall fire, which they take [...]or an exceeding paine and sorrow of minde. This they gather out of the 9. of Marke, where Christ saith, their worme dieth not, and the sire quencheth not. Here as by the name of worme no corporall worme is to be vnderstood, but a great and continuall remorse of mind; so they thinke by the word fire no corporall fire, but a metaphoricall must be conceaued. I take it to be rashnes and not the part of a christian man (thus) to dispute of the qualitie of this fire, but rather leauing the certaine knowledge thereof to the Iudge, to prouide that we trie it not one day, what manner of sire it is. Zanchius very soberly and learnedly examining this question resolueth in this sort. Zanchius de operibus dei part. 1. lib. 4. cap. 19. It is certaine the diuels toge­ther with all the wicked shall be in euerlasting fire, and therein tormented. Christ plainely professeth he will say to the wicked depart into euerlasting fire prepared for the diuell and his Angels. What manner of fire it shall be I dispute not because the Scripture doth not expresse it; but this is without question, that not onely the soules of the wicked, but also their bodies shall suffer torment FROM THIS FIRE, and therefore the fire such as may worke vpon their bodies, and inflict on them a farre greater paine, then our materiall fire doth impresse on vs. What qualitie soeuer it shall be of, it seemeth it shall be altogether a corporall creature, which may worke vpon bodies and torment them. Which being so; IT IS MANIFEST the diuell shall suffer paine and torment from a corporall thing, I meane from this sire, and that euerlastingly; therefore it is called eternall and vnquenchable fire. And asking your question Idem in 1 cap. 2 epist. ad Thes. part. 3. Thesi. 4. How is it possible, that spirituall substances should suffer from corporall, he an­swereth. We haue an example in our selues in whom the soule suffereth many things from the body by her coniunction with it. Againe, what can resist the power and will of God? Let this doubt therefore depart from the minds of the faithfull. I produce these later writers of great learning and good religion, as I might many moe, to let thee vnderstand gentle Reader, that I neither presse the Scriptures, nor cite the Fathers to any other purpose, but to that, which by all their iudgements is Christian and catholike; and howsoeuer some men otherwise learned, but carried with this new conceite of Christs suffering the essentiall paines of the damned, to colour their deuise, call these things in questi­on, [Page 51] yet the most aduised and sufficient Diuines of our age haue clearely confes­sed that which I teach, to accord with the holy Scriptures, and to be held of the godly without contradiction.

The ancient Fathers of Christs Church vphold the same doctrine, and teach the fire of hell to be an externall, visible, and true fire, and not a spirituall and internall paine onely, as this Discourser intendeth. Chrysost. ad Theodor. laps. epist. 5. With no speech (sayth Chrysostome) can any man expresse it here, but els where we shal see it most plainely. Set now before thine eyes that horrible way, which shal carrie (thee) headlong to the fire, and the (deuils) readie with torments, and the persons deliuered to such cruel tormentors. These things shalbe in that day. August. li. 50. homiliarum. hom. 16. Let vs alwayes thinke on these things (sayth Austen) lest it repent vs too late, when we come to the sight of eternal fire. For the burning pit of hell shalbe laid open, there shalbe a descent, but no ascent. Basil. in psal. 33. Call to minde (saith Basil) that terrible tribunal of Christ, which no creature may indure; there must euery one of vs be presented to render an account of his life. About those that haue liued wickedly shal stand fearefull and grisly angels beholding the sire and kindling it. Then shall they see a deepe gulfe, and darkenes that no eyes can pierce through, and an obscure fire that with blackenesse hath lost his shining, but kept his burning. Cyril. de exi [...] an. & de se­cund. aduentu. Alas (saith Cyril) what a place is that where is weeping and gnashing of teeth, which is called hell, which the deuil himselfe abhorreth? Alas what a Gehenne of vnquenched sire is that, which burneth and shineth not? how venemous is that worme, which neuer resteth? how terrible is that deepe and euerduring darkenesse? how cruel in their torments are those mer­cilesse Angels? woe to the guiltie; when the innocent shalbe rewarded with honour, and they with shame. The innocent shal goe to Paradise, the nocent into fire vnquenchable. The sight of God shal cherish the innocent, the sight of fire shal torment the wicked. If the fire of hell be visible, it must needs be an externall and true fire: for internall and spirituall paines are inuisible. And therefore the Church of Christ hath alwayes confessed the fire of hell to be an externall and violent force of true fire tormenting the wicked; and con­demned as an error in Origen, the conceit of an inward and spirituall fire in stead of hell fire, which this Defender is so much in loue withall.

Ierom directing Auitus what he should beware in the reading of Origens bookcs, sayth, Hiero. ad A­uitum quid sit cauendum in li­bris [...]. Scias detestanda tibi in cis esse quàm plurima, & iuxta sermonem Domini, inter scorpiones & colubros incedendum. This know, that there are very many things in them to be detested by thee; and as God speaketh, Thou must walke amongst Scorpions and Serpents. Where repeating diuers errours of Origen, hee layeth this downe for one of those that must be detested. Hiero. ibid. Ignes quoque Gehennae & tormenta quae scriptura sancta pecca­toribus comminatur, non ponit in supplicijs, sed in conscientia peccatorum, quando Dei vir­tute & potentia omnis memoria delictorum ante oculos nostros ponitur, ac praeteritas volup­tates mens intuens conscientiae punitur ardore, & poenitudinis stimulis confoditur. The fire of hell also and the torments, which the sacred Scripture threatneth vnto sinners, (Origen) PLACETH NOT AMONGST (externall) PVNISHMENTS, BVT VVITHIN THE CONSCIENCE of sinners; when as by the vertue and power of God the remem­brance of all our sinnes is set before our eyes, and the minde beholding her pleasures past, is punished with the fire of conscience, and pierced with the stings of (griefe and) repentance. This error Ierom more plainly expresseth, and sharply taxeth in his larger Commen­taries vpon the Epistle to the Ephesians; whose words to preuent all cauils I thinke best to set downe in Latine as they lie, though they be large; for that they giue light to the former testimonie. Hier. in 5. cap. epist. ad Ephes. Quia sunt plerique, qui dicunt non futura pro peccatis esse supplicia nec extrinsecus adhibenda tormenta, sed ipsum peccatum & conscientiam delicti esse pro poena, dum vermis in corde non moritur, & in animo ignis accenditur in similitudinem febris, quae non torquet extrinsecus aegrotantem, sed corpus ipsa corripiens punit sine crucia­tuum forinsecus adhibitione: has it aque persuasiones & decipulas fraudulentas verba inania appellauit & vacua, quae videntur blandiri peccantibus, sed magis eos ferunt ad aeterna sup­plicia. Because there are many which say that there shall be no (externall) punishments for sinne, nor TORMENTS OVTVVARDLY INFLICTED, but that sinne it selfe, and the conscience thereof is punishment, whiles the worme doth not die in the heart, and a fire is [Page 52] kindled in the soule after the fashion of a feuer, which doth not outwardly torment the sicke, but possessing the bodie ve [...]th [...]t without any forr [...]gne inflicting of paine: these perswasions and deceitfull deuices, the Apostle calleth void and emptie words, which seeme to flatter sin­ners, but indeed hasten them to eternall punishment. Hell fire by this resolution is a pu­nishment OVTVVARDLY inflicted on the damned, and not an inward fire or paine kindled in the minde, and possessing the soule or bodie as an ague doth, which is an inward grieuance, but no externall violence; and the contrarie conceit of your spiri­tuall fire in the minde to be hell fire, is heere condemned in Origen as a deceitfull and detestable error, hastning men to eternall torments.

The same confession stil continued, in the Church of Christ, Gregory: Gregor. mo­ral [...]. lib. 9. cap. 38. Quos flam­ma Gehennae deuor at, à visione veri luminis coecat, vt for is eos dolor combustionis cruciet, & intus poena caecitatis obscuret, quatenus qui authori suo corde & corpore deliquerunt, simul corde & corpore p [...]iantur. Whom the flame of hell deuoureth, it blindeth from sceing the true light; that paine of burning may outwardly torment them, and punishment of blindnesse inwardly obscure them, that as they sinned against their maker with heart and body, so they may be punished both in soule and body. Isidore:Isidor. de sum­me [...]. lib. 1. cap. 31. Duplex damnatorum poena est in Ge­henna, quorum & mentem vrit tristitia, & corpus flamma. There is a double punishment of the damned in hell, whose minds burne with sorow, and their bodies with flame; by a iust rc­ward, that as they debated with their mindes what they might performe with their bodies, so they should be punished both in soule and bodie. Bede: By the Beda lib. 3. cap. in cap. 9. Marci. worme (Christ) noteth the rottennesse, as by fire the burning of hell; or cls the worme signifieth the ouer-late repentance of sinne, which shall neuer cease to bite the conscience of the damned in their torments; vt ignis sit poena extrinsecus s [...]iens, vermis dolor interi [...]s accusans; that the fire (of hell) should be a torment OVTVVARDLY raging, and the worme a griefe inwardly accusing. Bernard: Bernard de interiori dom [...] cap. 38. Timor co [...]turbabit te, cùm terra aperietur cor am te, & iurues & caedes in stagnum sulfu­ris ardent is & foetentis. Ignis exteriùs carnem tuam comburet, vermis interiùs conscienti­am corrodet. Feare shall amaze thee, when the earth shall open before thee, and thou fall and light in the lake of brimstone burning and st [...]king. Fire shall OVTVVARDLY BVRNE thy flesh, and a worme shall inwardly gnaw thy conscience. So Tertullian before them: Tertul. in A­pologetico. Gehenna est ignis arcani subterraneus ad poenam the saurus. Hell is a treasure of secret fire kept vnder the earth to punish withall. And Iustine the Martyr: The diuels Iustinus Apo­logia prima pro Christianis shall suffer punishment and vengeance, [...], inclosed in euerlasting fire. Arno­bius likewise: (The Gentiles) are Arnobius ad­uersus gent [...]s. lib. 8. admonished by the books of (their) best learned men, and verses of (their) Poets, of that firie flood and infernall lake of flames often compassing (the place) which being prepared for eternall torments, they deliuered as knowen, both by the demonstration of diuels, and by the oracles of the Prophets. As the flashes of lightning touch mens bodies, but consume them not, and as the fires of Aetna and Vesuuius and of other pla­ces of the earth doe burne, and not spend; so that flame appointed to punish (the wicked) is not fed with the decayes of those that burne, but nourished with parching their bodies that waste not. And Prosper: To Prospr de vita contem­platina. lib. 3. cap. 12. heare and reade these things, and to beleeue they shall come to passe; to thinke how great an euill it is to be excluded from the ioy of beholding God; to be banished from heauen, and cast into euerlasting fire with the diuell and his angels; to see no light in that fire, but to feele that it burneth; to suffer the terrible cracks of that flaming fire; to haue their eyes blinded with the bitter smoke of that fuming gulfe; to be drowned in the deepe lake of Gehenna, and to be torne eternally with most greedie wormes; to thinke on these things and many such like, is a sure way to renounce all vice, and refraine all allurements of the flesh. Apparently then the fire of hell by the confession of all these ancient aud Christian writers is locall, as kept vnder the earth; externall, as inclosing the damned both men and diuels; and sensible to the eyes with obscure flames tormenting all the parts of the body with an horrible paine of burning, but not consuming them.

And that the fire of hell shalbe an externall and true fire, what proofe can be fairer or fuller than that Scriptures and Fathers with one voice professe that Christ shall come to iudge the world in flaming fire, which shall2. Pet 3. melt the elements with heat, and dissolue the heauens; and threfore without question must needs be a true, substantiall, & [Page 53] externall fire; and that the same fire, with which he shall come to iudge, shall deuoure his aduersaries. Esa. 66. Behold (sayth Esay) the Lord will come with fire, that he may render his indignation with the flame of fire: for the Lord will iudge with fire. Psal. 96. There shall goe a fire before him, (when he commeth to iudge, sayth Dauid) and burne vp his enemies ro [...]nd about. The Lord Iesus (sayth Paul) 2. Thess. 1. shall shew himselfe from heauen in flaming fire, ren­dring vengeance to them that know not God, and obey not the Gospel. For (to such) Hebr. 10. remai­neth no sacrifice for sin, but a fearefull expectation of iudgement, and a violence of fire which shall deuoure the aduersaries. Fire (sayth Arnobius) shall go before Christ comming to iudgement,Arnobius in Psal 96. euen fire which shall performe two offices: with one and the same aspect it shall lighten the friends, and inflame the enemies of God: for the fire which shall burne the sinfull, shalbe made brightnesse to the iust. The end of this present world (saith Iustine Martyr) is the Iust. in resp. ad quaest. 74. iudgement of the wicked by fire as the scriptures of the Prophets & Apostlesdeclare, and likewise th [...] writings of Sibylle: so blessed Clemens (that liued with the Apostles) in his Epistle to the Corinths affirmeth. Christ shall come (sayth Ambrose) Ambros. in 2. Thess. cap. 1. with his heauenly army, and with fire as his minister to giue vengeance. [...]or the sire of iudgement shall serue him to reuenge the reprobate, sayth Gregorie. Paul Theodoret. in 2. Thess. cap. 1. sheweth (sayth Theodoret) that u Gregor. in E­zech. hom. 2. iudgement shalbe full of terror, noting first the Iudge comming from heauen; then their pow­er which minister vnto him, who are the angels; lastly, th [...] kinde of punishment: for (the wicked) shall be deliuered to the flame of fire. There are Idem in Psal. 96. two properties in fire; to burne, and to shine: the shining propertie the assembly of Saints shall enioy; by the other shall wicked men be punished. So Basil: Basil. in Psal. 28. There are two forces in fire; one to burne, the other to shine: the sharpnesse of [...]ire which punisheth, is layed vp for those that deserue burning; the light and shining thereof is allotted to the ioy of the blessed. And Athanasius: Athan. in­terp. parabol. quaest. 79. Fire hath two forces; the one of shining, which shall be giuen to the iust. the other of burning, which shall be diuided to sinners. Ierom likewise: Fire shalbe Hieron. in E­zech. li. 1. cap. 1. light to the faithfull, and punish the vn­beleeuers. And Theophylact: (Christs) comming shall be in flaming fire, as Dauid pro­fesseth (of him): A fire shall goe before him, and shall burne his enemies round about. ForTheophylact. in 2. Thess. cap. 1. this fire shall offer burning to sinners, and no shining; but to the iust it shall giue light and shi­ning and no heat or burning. The fire, I trust, which hath these two properties, to ligh­ten the iust, and torment the wicked, is an externall and sensible fire; and with that fire Christ shall come to dissolue the heauens, melt the elements, and punish the wic­ked; neither shall the spirituall and internall paine of the soule, which the Discour­ser maketh his hell fire, come neere the Saints, or be ioyous and comfortable to any, as the fire of iudgement shalbe to the saints of God.

Then all sorts of writers, Prophets, Euangelists. Apostles, and Diuines of all ages: Yea Philosophers, Poets, and Sibyls haue taught, the wicked shall [...]e punished with true fire, and not with metaphores; and the Sonne of God in person hath confirmed the same; and all sectes, Iewes, Pagans, and Christians haue beleeued it; God taking speciall care as well by deeds as words that the truth and terror of his vengeance vp­on sinne should not be vnknowen to all the world. For which cause he hath not on­ly made the earth in many places as Aetna, Vesuuis, and else where to burne with perpetuall fire; but hath often destroyed sinfull persons and places with fire from heauen; to let all men see and know that the vengeance decreed. threatned, and ex­ecuted on the wicked is sensible and true fire from God; which he hath made of all senseles creatures the most violent, potent and fearefull meanes to punish. Therefore did he Genes. 19. raine fire and brimstone vpon Sodome and Gomorre when their sinnes were at full; & punished the people, that murmured at him, with fire; calling the name of the place Number 11 THABHERAH, because the fire of the Lord burnt amongst them; as likewise he sent Number. 21. Firie serpents to bite them, when they spake against him. So Number. 16. Fire came out from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fiftie men of Corahs company, that presumed to offer incence vnto the Lord; as before it had destroyed Leuit 10. Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire before the Lord. And at Eliahs word 2. Kings. 1. Fire came downe from heauen twice and deuoured two Captaines with their two bands of an hun­dred men. Insomuch that when Satan would haue Iob beleeue, he was punished by [Page 54] Gods owne hand, he gate fire to fall from heauen vpon Iobs sheepe and seruants; the messenger making this report; Iob. 1. The fire of God is fallen from heauen, and hath burnt vp (thy) sheepe and seruants and deuoured them. Which kind of vengeance Luke 9. Iames and Iohn the Disciples of Christ desired, when their master was repelled by the Samari­tans and denyed lodging, as willing to haue that inhumanitie punished to the exam­ple of all others, but that they were repressed by him who came to saue, and not to destroy. Thus hath God often by true and sensible fire from heauen, declared and ve­rified the certaintie of his generall and finall iudgement, when his Sonne shall ap­peare in flaming fire to render vengeance to all that know not God and obey not the Gospell; and that fire of Iudgement, which shall burne heauen and earth, shall shine to the Saints with ioy and comfort, and punish the wicked by tormenting them for euer.

This you thinke is not against you: for you deny that Defenc. pa. 146. l. 35. Now there is corporall fire in hell, whatsoeuer there shall be hereafter, when bodies also shal be there vnited and tormented with the soules, and this only is your question, or nothing. Many shifts you haue sent vs inWhether there be true fire in hell before iudg­ment is not the question. your late defence, which sauour neither of learning nor religion; but a slenderer then this you haue sent vs none. For first this is not the chiefe doubt, whether there be now in hell any true fire or no; which you say is your ONLY QVESTION or nothing: but what is the substance of damnation due to sinne, and what vengeance for sinne all the wicked must suffer in hell, not for a time but for euer; and we should haue suffered, had we not been redeemed; this is the right & maine point in question. For this is the full waight and burden of our sinnes, which you See the con­clusion of my sermons fol. 339 say must be laid vpon Christ before we could be freed from it; and this is the proper payment and wages of sinne, which we should haue payed, had we not beene ransommed by the death of Christ; and therefore by your owne conclusions Christ must and did pay the same, which else we should haue payed. That which the damned doe presently suffer in hell, is not the full burden, nor iust vages of their sinnes; else the terror of Iudgement, as well as the taking of their bodies were wholy superfluous; if the true payment and full vengeance of their sinnes were executed on them before Iudgement. But the reprobat as well men as Angels are Epist Iud. vers. 6. Reserued vnder darknes vnto the iudgement of the great day; and 2. Pet. 2. Vnto DAMNATION (which) sleepeth not; though it be not already to the full performed on either. Againe, a great number of the wicked shall neuer trie the torments of the soule seuered from the body, because the day of Christ shall find them liuing, as the Apostle 1. Cor. 15. testifieth, and not part their soules from their bodies, but cast both ioyntly into hell fire, so that the vengeance of sinne before Iudgement which you would so faine fasten on, and make YOVR ONLY QVESTION, commeth too short of all your owne conclusions, and is excluded by the expresse words of your limitations in your late defence. For you subiect Christ to all Gods proper wrath and vengeance, so farre as was due generally for all mankinde to suffer. But the fire of hell before Iudge­ment, except it be the selfe same that also remaineth after iudgement, belongeth not by Gods iustice to all men in generall, by reason manie shall not suffer it but after iudgement. It is euident therefore that the fire of hell before iudgement is not your maine question, because it neither is the full wages nor vengeance of sinne, nor gene­rally due to all mankinde; but the right and true question is touching hell fire after iudgement, wherein body and soule shall burne, feeling the torment and violence of euerlasting fire, according to the measure of ech mans sinnes.

Howbeit, if we marke well the words of holy Scripture, this which you would so gladly make your question, is no question at all. For by the sentence of the Iudge it manifestly appeareth, that there is but one aud the same fire prouided for all the damned both men and diuels; and that fire not onely is euerlasting without end or change, but prepared and made ready before the day of iudgement, as the words of our Sauiour doe plainly import; who will say to all the wicked without exception: Matth. 25. Depart from me ye cursed, [...], into (that) euerlasting fire, which is (alreadie) prepared for the diuell and his [Page 55] angels. The article so often repeated suffereth the fire whereinto the wicked shall be cast, to be none other fire but the selfe-same that is euerlasting, and prepared for the di­uels. The Participle of the Preterperfect tence argueth the time when that fire was prepared for the diuell and his angels, to be perfectly past before iudgement. Of the first there can be no question; August. de ci­uitate Dei lib. 21. cap. 10. Idem quippe ignis crit supplicio scilicet hominum attri­butus & Daemonum, dicente Christo, Discedite à me maledicti in ignem aeternum, qui para­tus est Diabolo & Angelis eius. Vnus quippe ignis vtrisque erit, sicut veritas dixit. The same fire (sayth Austen) shall serue for the punishing of men and Diuels, Christ saying, De­part from me ye cursed into the fire euerlasting, which is prepared for the Diuell and his An­gels. One fire shalbe to both, as the trueth hath spoken. The second, that hell fire is pre­pared before the day of iudgement, and abideth euerlasting from the time of the pre­paration without any new creating or altering at the day of iudgement, is as euident by the sacred Scriptures. Esay who liued and prophesied more than eight hundred yeeres before our Sauiour reuealed this doctrine, sayth of it, as we heard before: Esa. 30. Tophet is prepared of old (or long since) the burning thereofis (as the) fire (of) much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a riuer of brimstone, doth kindle it. Our Lord and Ma­ster almost one thousand six hundred yeeres since, made the soule of the rich man in the sixteenth of Luke to say of hell fire, Luke 16. I am tormented in this flame. And S. Iude proposing the destruction of Sodome and Gomorrhe, sayth; They Epist. Iude. vers. 7. are set foorth for an example, [...], (in or by) suffering the punishment of euerlasting fire. Where we see the fire which God rained from heauen on Sodome and Go­morrhe, is called euerlasting; and the inhabitants of those cities are affirmed by the Apostle (euen then when he wrate) to suffer euerlasting sire, for an example of the iust iudgement of God. It is therefore one and the same fire of hell that punisheth the wicked before and after iudgement, which was prepared long since, as Esay sayth, and is euerlasting, that is, not ending or changing into another fire, but increasing and kin­dling with greater fiercenesse at the day of iudgement, that all the wicked both men and angels may receiue a damnation answerable to their deserts, which in part they now feele, but then expect a sharper and sorer torment than yet is executed on them; which is the terrour of iudgement and fulnesse of damnation reserued for them.

Then notwithstanding your sleights and shifts, Sir Discourser, that Christ suffered the substance and essence of hell paines, and that happily there shall be corporall fire after Iudgement, yet now there is no true fire in hell: we find it resolued by the Scrip­tures, and auouched by all the ancient Fathers, and the best learned Diuines of our time; that the fire of hell so much threatned in the Scriptures to the reprobate, is a true, substantiall, and externall fire, and the same that was prepared for the deuils e­uen from their fall, and doth and shal dure as well before, as after Iudgement for euer; into which the soules are, and at the generall resurrection the bodies of all the wic­ked shall be cast, there to burne with vnspeakeable and vnceaseable torments. And though I thinke it not fit for any man to take vpon him to deliuer the quality or force of that fire further then the Scriptures haue reuealed it; yet that is no iust cause to doubt the trueth thereof, or to preiudice the power of God, who hath spoken the word, as if he could not, or would not performe it; but rather for certaine to know, and confesse that God can punish the mightiest of his Angels by the weakest of his creatures; and as in sinning they haue exalted themselues by pride farre aboue their degree; so in punishing them for their sinne, God can and will depresse them as farre beneath their originall condition; to teach them that all their strength depended on his will and pleasure. So that we haue no neede to runne to the immediate hande of God alone, to make him the sole tormentor of spirits, (as this Discourser doeth) for extracting a new Quintessence of hell fire: the will and word of God, as it gaue to men and Angels all their power and force, so may it take the same from them swel­ling against him when he will; and subiect them to the force of any his creatures, which he can endue with might to performe his commandement against all the trans­gressours and despisers of his righteousnesse and holinesse.

In summe we see that Christ suffered no part of that, which the Scriptures make substantiall and essentiall to the paines of hell and damnation of the wicked, I meane of that which is included in the sentence of the Iudge pronounced against them: but this Discourser, as he hath deuised a new kind of redemption neuer mentioned in the Scriptures, nor deriued from the blood of Christ; so hath he framed vs another hell, then the word of God reuealeth; and changed the whole course of the sacred Scrip­tures with his dreames and deuises, that though the text of holy writ doe no way fa­uour his sansies, yet by flying to allegories, and heaping vp a number of metaphores, he might entertaine some talke, when his proofes did faile. To vphold that Christ suffered the true paines of hell, before we could be redeemed by his death & blood­shed; he minced hell paines into substance and accidence, and least this geare should seeme grosse, he shadowed the substance of hell fire with figures and allegories; and sent vs at last to the immediate hand of God, for all punishment of sinne in the life to come; not vpon any iust ground or proofe out of Scripture, but because his Master­ship knew not otherwise how to carrie his conceites cleanly, he vnloaded them all by tropes and metaphores vpon Gods immediate hand; from which onely (as he saith, though very vntruely) the Soule hath her proper and principall suffering. But exa­mining the parts, we find no such metaphysicall substance of hell, as he pretendeth; no such metaphoricall fire, as he affirmeth; no such immediate hand of God, vex­ing Soules and deuils in hell, as he imagineth; we rather find the cleane contrarie; to wit, his circumstances to be of the substance of the Iudgement pronounced vpon the wicked; the fire in hell to be a true and substantiall fire; and by that, as by a peculiar meanes decreed by the will, strengthened by the power and reuealed by the word of God, the damned both soules and diuels to be perpetually punished and tormented, each of them according to their demerits; though the inward powers and faculties of the minde, shall not cease most grieuously also to afflict the damned and despay­ring spirits. And touching Christs sufferings, to which all this must be referred, and for which all this is discussed, we finde him most free from darkenes [...], destruction, con­fusion, remorse of sinne from malediction, dereaction, and desperation with their consequents; and from the torment of hell [...]ire, either in soule or bodie which is the second death; that is in deede from all the parts of damnation noted in the Scriptures to be prouided for the reprobate, which are the true paines o [...] hell; and so this deuisers dreames to bee as farre from trueth, as they are from all testimonies of holy Scripture, which men­tion no such things suffered by Christ, nor make any of them needefull for Christ to suffer before he might pay the price of our redemption.

Defenc. pag. 2 [...] l. 26. We doe not contend to expresse what iust measure of Gods wrath. nor precisely in what manner it was reuealed, and executed on Christ. Onely we knowe that whatsoeuer it were, [...]. Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinnes, though outwardly executed on the bodie, yet it could not but sinke in deeper, euen into the depth of the soule a [...]d be discerned by Christ, and conceaued to be such, and so sustained as proceeding from God, and so wound the Soule properly. yea chiefly, though the anguish thereof bruised his bodie ioyntly also. You haue la­bored (Sir Discourser) in twentie pages of your Defence by many lame distinctions and false positions to shew vs the MANNER & MEASVRE of Christs suffering the paines of hell for the sin of man. The manner you made to be, Christs suffering them properly, yea onely in his very soule, from the immediat hand of God, euen as the damned do. The measure you tooke to be all Gods proper wrath and vengeance for sinne, yea the selfe same paines for their nature which are in hell. and which are extreamest and sharpest in hell. Your twelfth page told vs in plaine words,Defenc. pa. 12. l. 28. These paines then in this very manner in­flicted Christ felt; indeede not being in the locall hell; yet those being the selfe same paines for their nature which are in hell, yea which are SHARPEST in hell. And he discerned and receaued them properly, yea ONLY in his very soule. You beginne now to tell vs ano­ther tale, that you doc not contend to expresse what iust measure of Gods wrath, nor pre­cisely in what manner it was reuealed and executed on Christ. Onely you know that what soe­uer it was, Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinnes, though outwardly executed on [Page 57] the bodie, could not but sinke in deeper, and so wound the soule properly yea chiefly. By a long processe you made vs beleeue the soules proper and immediat suffering must be from the hand of God alone, without inferiour meanes and instruments, and not from the bodie, because that kind of suffering is common to vs with beastes, and Treatis. pa. 18. li. vltima. maketh not properly to our redemption. And so by your refined diuinitie, the stripes, wounds, blood and death of Christ, could not properly pertaine to the price of our redemption, by reason those sufferings which come by the body were common to Christ with beasts. Thus reuerently and religiously, to prooue your selfe a pure Christian, you resolued touching the bloodshed and death of Christ, sustained on the Crosse. Now as almost tyred with that blasphemous toy, and perceiuing how hard it would be to please the learned with this leauen, or to seduce the simple with these vnsauerie shifts, which haue neither foundation nor mention in the sacred Scriptures; you beginne to turne an other leafe, and to tell vs you doe not contend for the iust measure, nor precise ma­ner of Christs suffering the wrath of God. Only you know that whatsoeuer it were (though you can neither prooue nor expresse what it was) Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinne, though outwardly executed on the body, could not but sinke deeper into the Soule, and wound the soule properly yea chiefly, though the anguish thereof bruised the bodie ioynt­ly also.

It is well yet at last that you find your selfe ignorant of some things, and that you will not take vpon you to expresse in what precise manner, or iust measure the wrath of God was reuealed and executed on Christ. For whiles you broched those secrets more boldly then wisely or truely, you ranne your selfe out of breath, and brought neither substance nor shadow of holy Scripture to warrant your vanities, but daunced vp and downe with certaine licentious and ambiguous phrases of GODS PROPER VVRATH, MEERE IVSTICE, VERY VENGEANCE and such like flowers, neither confirmed by the Scriptures, nor so much as expounded by your selfe, but because you checke your owne presumption, I will spare it, and come to that which you professe your selfe so resolutely to know; that Gods very wrath and proper ven­geance for sinne, though outwardly executed on the body (of Christ) could not but sinke deeper into the soule, and wound the soule properly, yea chiefly, though the anguish thereof bruized his bodie also. Wherein notwithstanding you keepe your accustomed phra­ses of Gods very wrath and proper vengeance, which you neither doe, nor dare describe by the parts thereof, that we may discerne the trueth of your speech; yet for their sakes that are simple, I am content shortly to examine what wrath from God, Christ suffered, as farre as the Scriptures direct vs, at whose hands he suffered it, and what he did, and must conceaue of those his sufferings.

There is no question but power to feele, conceaue, and discerne by sense, reason,What wrath of God Christ suf­fered. or faith in man belongeth properly yea onely to the soule of man. Life, sense, and motion appeare in the body, and haue their actions perfourmed by the instruments of the body: but euen in them the power and force that quickneth and mooueth the body, and discerneth by the senses of the body, commeth from the soule, and so de­pendeth on the soule, that the soule departing from the body leaueth it voyd of all motion, sense and life. Then in all Christs sufferings, when any violence lighted on his body, the paine pearced into his soule, and his soule not onely fully felt the an­guish thereof, but rightly discerned the fountaine whence, the cause why, and the meanes by which it came. Christ likewise knew himselfe to be endewed with such might and strength, that of him selfe he could not onely resist the whole world, if he would; but euen commaund and represse men and diuels. His ouerruling of seas, windes, and wicked spirits, and giuing his Disciples power ouer them is so euident and often in the Scriptures, that no Christian may be ignorant of it. After his agony in the Garden, with the word of his mouth he threw to the Iohn. 18. ground the whole band of men, that came with Iudas to take him; and when by this meanes he had shewed him selfe not destitute of his wonted force and vertue, he voluntarily submitted him selfe, not onely to be bound and brought whether they would, but euen to be whip­ped, [Page 58] mocked, wounded, hanged, and euery way vsed at their pleasure. Which he did not to satisfie their wicked rage, but to obey the will of his heauenly Father; who when he would punish the sinnes of men in the person of his owne Sonne, Matth. 26. Deliue­red him into the hands of sinners, from them to suffer Acts. 4. whatsoeuer the hand and counsell (of God) had determined before to be done. For Acts. 3. those things which God before had shewed by the mouthes of all his Prophets that Christ should suffer, he thus fulfilled, by the malice of some, and ignorance of others, whom Satan incited, with the greatest contume­ly and crueltie they could deuise, to take Christs life from him. In all which Christ suffered nothing but what the Acts. 2. determinate counsell and foreknowledge of God purposed and appointed should be done. For this was Iohn. 18. the Cup which (his) father gaue (him) to drinke; and this was the Luke 22. houre, and power of darknes, when the Prince of the world came against him, howbeit neither man nor deuill Iohn 19. could haue any power at all against him, but what was giuen (them) from aboue. So that in all those wronges, reproches and paines which were offered and inflicted on him by the rage of Satan and the wic­ked, he saw the secret counsell and hand of God punishing our sinnes in his bodie, and by that meanes satisfiyng the diuine iustice that was prouoked by our transgres­sions.

But no where doe the Scriptures deliuer that God with his immediate hand tor­mentedThe paines of hell were not the cause of agonie. the soule or body of his Sonne, much lesse that he impressed the very paines of hell and of the damned on the soule of Christ; which is your new found Redemp­tion and satisfaction for the sinnes of men. By his agonie in the garden you boldly and rashly presume it; but by what logick you conclude it, neither doe I conceaue, nor can you declare. Christ was SORROVVFVLL and AFRAID in the garden, and began to be AMAZED; ergo, you thinke, he felt, or foresaw he should suffer the paines of the damned from the immediate hand of God. Well these may be your hastie thoughts, but this hath no ground in Arte, reason, nature, or Scripture. For many other things Christ might feare; and this of all other things he could not feare. How many things are there in God, when we approach his presence; how many things proceede there from God, when we aduisedly marke his counsels and iudge­ments, which may iustly ouerwhelme the weakenes of mans flesh with admiration and feare euen to astonishment? The brightnes of Gods glory, the greatnes of his power, the deepenes of his counsels, the sound of his voice, the presence of his Angels, the sight of his vengeance prepared, or executed on others how many good and per­fect men haue these things strooken into feares and mazes? When Saint Iohn in the spirite sawe the shape of the sonne of man and heard his voice, he Reuel. 1. fell downe as dead for feare. When Daniel had seene the vision of the goat and the Ram, he was Daniel. 8. afraid and fell vpon his face, yea he was stricken and sicke certaine daies being astonished at the vision. When the parents of Sampson saw the Angell ascend toward heauen in the flame of the Altar, they Iudic. 13. fell on their faces to the ground; and one of them said, we shall surely die, because we haue seene the Lord. When a light from heauen suddainly shined round about Paul, as he was trauayling to Damascus, he Acts 9. fell to the earth trembling and amazed. When Isaac perceaued that he had ignorantly blessed Iacob in steede of Esau, he was Genes. 27. stricken with an exceeding great (feare and) trembling. When the people saw the Creeple walking, that was dayly layd at the gate of the Temple to aske almes, and knew him to be the same man that before was lame from his mothers wombe, they were Acts 3. amazed and sore astonished at it. Ieremie lamenting the miserie of the Iewes, sayth; I am sore Ierem. 8. vexed for the hurt of the daughter of my people, I am heauie, and asto­nishment hath taken me. Euen as the Apostle also witnesseth of himselfe; Rom. 9. I speake the trueth in Christ, and lie not; I haue great heauinesse and continuall sorow in mine heart, for my brethren that are my kinsmen according to the flesh. If visions and Angels from God, if the works and iudgements of God executed on others haue driuen the best men to frights and agonies, what maruell then if the humane nature of Christ presenting himselfe in the garden vnto the Maiestie of his Father to be the Ransommer of man­kinde, and with his owne smart to satisfie the iustice of God for the sinne of the world, [Page 59] and no way ignorant how weighty that burden, and how mighty the hand of God was, to whose will he must and did wholly submit himselfe; what maruell I say if the weak­nesse of our flesh in Christ beganne to be afrayed and astonished at the iudiciall presence and power of God, at the perill of man if he were deserted, and price to be payd for him before he could be redeemed? not that damnation or destruction were prepared or purposed for him that should saue vs; but for that the hand of God was infinitely able without hell and the paines thereof to presse and ouerpresse the manhood of Christ by whatsoeuer meanes he would.

This, you will say, is the paines of hell, and the very same, yea all that which the damned do suffer.] In deed Sir Discourser? doth your skill serue you to make a reli­gious submission to the Maiesty of God, and an holy confession of his most mighty power euen with feare and trembling, to be all that the damned now suffer, or the selfe same paine which is sharpest in hell? Doe not the godly at all times when they enter into the iust consideration of themselues, presently see their owne infirmity and in­dignitie, and thereby fall with feare and trembling to confesse all sanctitie, glorie, might, and maiesty to be Gods, and themselues to be not only earth and ashes, but euen sinfull and hatefull vnto God, if he be not gracious and mercifull vnto them? And will you call these faithfull meditations of Gods children giuing vnto God his due, the paines of hell and state of the damned, because the sense of their weaknesse and vnwoorthinesse breedeth in them feare and trembling? Then make heauen as touching the essence thereof all one with hell, and saluation in substance to be the same that damnation is, because the best learned Fathers confesse, that the Angels in heauen doe and shall tremble at the voice and iudgements of God. Hilarius de trinitat. li. 2. Ad [...]uius vocem Archangeli & Angeli tremunt: At whose voice the Angels and Archangels doe tremble; sayth Hilarie speaking of the Godhead in Christ. Which words Leo the Great doth allow and alleage in his Leo epist. 97. ad Leonem August. Epistle to Leo the Emperour; and they grew to be of that credit, that the effect of them was inserted in the Church seruice by Gelasius, as Alcui­nus doth witnesse. Albinus Flac­cus de diuinis offi [...]ijs. Maiestatem tuam tremunt potestates: The powers of heauen do trem­ble at thy Maiesty. Christ Basil. in hex­amer. homil. 11. comming from the heauens (to iudgement) euery creature shall tremble, saith Basil: the Angels themselues shall not be without feare. for they also shall be present, though they shall giue no account to God. At that day (sayth Chrysostome) Chrysost. ep. 5. ad Theodorum lapsum. all things shall be full of astonishment, horror and feare. A great feare shall then possesse euen the Angels, and not the Angels only, but the Archangels, and Thrones, and powers of heauen, be­cause their fellow seruants must vndergoe iudgement for their liues led in this world. Will you hence conclude that the Angels and Archangels are or shalbe then in the paines of hell, because they do and shall tremble at the sound of Gods voice, and sight of Gods wrath to be executed on the world? No more may you inferre that Christ did or should suffer the paines of hell and of the damned, for that his manhood began to feare and tremble either at the maiestie of God sitting in iudgement; or at the power of his iustice able to punish by what meanes, and in what measure pleased him; or at the weight of our sinnes, for which he did vndertake; or at the sharpnesse of vengeance layd vp in store aswell for the Iewes as all other vnbeleeuers, that should neglect the saluation then to be purchased by his death and passion; since the person of Christ being God and man was farre more assured and secured from hell and damnation, than either the Saints or Angels of God are, or can be.

At least then, you thinke, Christ feared and felt the wrath of God due to our sinnes, though outwardly executed on his bodie.] From Christes Agonie, which might haue diuers causes, and whereof the true cause is not reuealed vnto vs by the Scriptures, as I haue alwayes sayd, so I now repeat it againe; you can conclude no­thing for your paines of hell to be suffered in the soule of Christ through the imme­diate hand of God. They are your blind and bold deuises, (I must not say lewd and wicked, because you are so tender, you may not be touched) to bring the true paines of hell, yea the sharpest and extreamest of them into this life; and to make the sub­stance of hell nothing but a certaine paine inflicted onely on the soule by the imme­diate [Page 60] hand of God: which you thinke Christ suffered in the garden, where you say, he Defenc. pa. 17. l. 1. felt as extreame sharpnes of paine, as may by any possibilitie be endured yea though in hell it selfe; and yet this Ibidem. pa. 21. l. 7. incomprehensible, vnspeakeable, infinite and intolerable fierie wrath and paines of hell did neither part his soule from his mortall body, nor so much as breake his patience. So terrible you make the torments of hell in words, and so easie in deeds, that the wicked here suffer and endure them without ending their liues, breaking their sleepes, or refusing their foode. But the true paines of hell are of an other manner of force, th [...]n you dreame of. They leaue no place for meate, nor sleepe; the body must be immortall and not able to die, that shall endure them; they passe all patience of m [...]n and Angels. So that howsoeuer you aggrauate your fansie with fierie words, you eleuate in truth the dreadfull iudgements of God against sin, when you make the sha [...]pest and extreamest of them to be tolerated of our Sauiour in this life with patience and si [...]ence, as appeared in his sufferings; and the reprobate in the midst of your hell paines to liue, eate, and sleepe; which in the tr [...]e paines of hell were not possible. Austen saith rightly: August. de ciuita. dei. li. 21. cap. 3. So is the soule conioyned with this body, that to th [...] paines which are exceeding great, it yeeldeth and departeth: because the very frame of the members and vitall parts is so weake, that they are not able to sustaine the force which bringeth great or most sharpe paine. Which Chrysostome also confi [...]meth: Chrysost. ad populum A [...]i­ochen. hom. 49. Name fi [...]e if thou wilt, the sword, or wilde beasts, and if any thing be more grieuous than these: yet are these scant a shadow to the torments of hell. And these when they grow vehement, are ea­siest, and soonest dispatch men, the body not sufficing to suffer a sharpe paine any long while. Your hell paines then are not very sharpe, which the wicked may suffer so many yeres in this life, and not forsake either food or sleepe.

Yet Christ did feele, you say, Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinne, and that only you know, though you c [...]n not expresse the maner or measure of his feeling it. And it was discerned and concei [...]ed by Christ to be such, and so did wound the soule properly, yea chiefly; though it were outwardly executed on his bodic.] The wrath and vengeance of God dueWhat is Gods wrath due to si [...]ne. to sinne, and generally to all mankinde for sinne, is spirituall corporall, and eternall death with all the seeds and fruits of death; that is, the losse of all earthly and heauenly blessings in this life and the next, and the depth of perpetuall mi [...]ery in body and soule here and in hell. This is the true wages and full payment of sinne; and though God of his bountie and patience do often remit to the wicked in this life, a great part of this [...] in things tempo all, yet when he inflicteth on them the miseries and cala [...]ities of this life, he giueth them their due. And as for spirituall and eternall death now and hereafter, it is so proper and certaine to the reprobate, that not one of them shall e [...]cape e [...]ther. Spirituall death is Ephes 4. blindnesse and hardnesse of heart working all vncle [...]nnesse euen with greedinesse; which sheweth men to be [...]. strangers from the life of God, and [...] [...], as past all sense and feeling of God. Eternall death the Scrip­ture calleth WRATH TO COME, because no man suffereth the full force and wa [...]ght thereof in this life, but as it is the Reue [...]. 2 [...]. & 21. second death, so it followeth in men after the first death, which [...]euereth the soule from the bod [...]e. Yee vipers bro [...]d (sayd Iohn Baptist to the Pharises and Saddu [...]s) [...]. who hath taught you (thus) to fl [...]e from the wrath to come? Iesus (sayth Paul) 1. I h [...]ss. 1. deliuereth vs from the wrath to come. In this life the wicked may haue a Heb. 0. fearefull expectation, but no present execution, of this iudgement; there is a Ro [...]. 2. day of [...]rath, euen the reuelation of the [...]st iudgement of God, when euery man shall be rewarded according to his works, and a violent fire shall d [...]uoure the aduersaries. This wrath by the Scriptures is reserued for the vessels of wrath for euer, and shall be exe­cuted on them with indignation, furie and fire; not onely because the wrath of God against the wicked burneth l [...]ke fire, but for that it shall be powred on them with fla­ming and euerlasting fire. The effects whereof are reiection, malediction, confusi­on, desperation and such l [...]ke, which neuer accompanie saluation.

To say that Christ suffered this kinde of wrath, which is the true and proper wages of sinne, is horrible and hellish blasphemie, which I hope no Christian man will ad­uenture. From the spirituall death of the soule, which is the Rom. 1. wrath of God reuealed [Page 61] from heauen against all vngodlinesse and vnrighteousnesse of men, and bringeth with it the losse of all grace and goodnesse in this life, and consequently leaueth the polluti­on and dominion of sinne in the soule of man, our Lord and master must be as free as from damnation; the one being alwayes a necessary consequent to the other. Dis­pleasure and wrath against Christes person God neuer had, nor could haue any; Christ being his owne and only sonne, and so deerely beloued, that for his sake Gods most iust and most heauie wrath against the sinnes of all his elect did calme and as­swage: for Gods inward loue doth not admit contrarieties or changes as mans doth; all Gods counsels, wayes, and wo kes being absolutely perfect and constant, chiefly towards his owne sonne, whom he naturally, infinitly, and euerlastingly loueth in the same degree that he doth himselfe; and therefore no more possible there should be in god any displeasure or dislike conceiued of his sonne for bearing the sinnes of the world, or for what cause soeuer, than of himselfe. And since the humane nature of Christ was by Gods owne wisdome, will, and worke, ioyned into the vnitie of the person of his sonne, and made one and the same Christ with his Godhead; no cause, nor course whatsoeuer could alter or diminish the exceeding loue and fauour of God to­wards the very manhood of Christ; but as God did inseparably knit it to the person of his sonne, so did he make it fully partaker of that infinite loue wherewith he em­braced his sonne. To confirme this to all the world: God did often from heauen pronounce with his owne voice, Matth. 3. Matth. 17. This is my beloued sonne in whom I am well pleased; as he forespake by his Prophet, Esa. 42. Beholde m [...]e elect (in whom) my soule delighteth. This vnspeakable loue of God towards the person of his Sonne now being God and man, is the chiefe ground of our election and redemption. For wee were Ephes. 1. adopted through Iesus Christ, and made accepted in (his) beloued; by whom wee haue redemption through his blood, euen the forgiuenesse of sinnes, according to the riches of his grace. So that we were neither elected nor redeemed, but by the infinite loue of God towards his sonne; for whose [...]ake we were adopted to be the sonnes of God, and to whose loue the fierce wrath of God prouoked by our sinnes did yeeld and giue place; nei­ther may he beare the name of a Christian man, that otherwise teacheth or beleeueth of our election and redemption. Now iudge thou Christian Reader, whether it were wrath or loue in God towards his sonne, that pardoned all our sinnes for his [...]ake, and accepted the voluntarie sacrifice of his bodie and blood for the redemption of the world, through who [...]e death we are reconciled to God, and cleansed by his blood from all our sinnes.

Then as in God there neither was, nor could be any displeasure against the personChrist did not conceaue that God was in­wardly displea­sed with him. of his Sonne; nor against any part thereof for what cause soeuer; nor any chaunge or decrease of the loue which God with his own mouth professed from heauen towards Christ incarnate; so could not Christ without plaine infidelitie conceaue or beleeue that God was inwardly displeased or angrie with [...]im, no not when he presented him [...]elfe to God his Father vnder the burden of all our [...]innes; knowing that neither sin, from which he was [...]ee, being the innocent and [...]mmaculate [...]amb of God; no [...] Gods most holy dislike, or iust pursuite of sinne could diminish Gods fatherly affection and most constant loue to him. For though he were not ignorant, that God in his holi­nesse did hate and abhorre the vncleanesse of our sinne; and in his iustice would pursue it, to witnesse his v [...]ter dislike and detestation thereof; ye [...] for so much as Christ himselfe was holy and vndefiled euen in his humane nature; and did not thrust himselfe into this action, but was called and annointed by God to this honor, which God would yeelde to none but to his onely Sonne; and this readines of the Sonne to l [...]ke and obey his fathers counsell and decree, and to pitie our miserie by laying our burden on his owne shoulders; was in it selfe so glorious to God, and gratious to­wards man, that it could not b [...] but most meritorious and acceptable to God, the Author, and accomplisher of mans Redemption by this meanes; what cause could Christ haue to doubt of his fathers loue towards him, or of his fathers approuing and [Page 62] accepting his office and seruice tending wholy to the perfourming of Gods will, and aduauncing of Gods glorie?

But God was angrie with our sinnes, though not with his sonne; and that Anger Christ must beare, before we could be freed from it.] The more Angrie God was with our sinnes, the more contented he was with the person of his Sonne and euery part thereof, that submitted himselfe to the purpose and pleasure of God to appease his wrath kindled against our offences. And that Anger Christ did vndertake to quench, by satisfiyng the iustice of God in such sort as seemed best to God himselfe, and not by frustrating or declining it, nor by suffering the substance of the same destructi­on and damnation which was due to vs. Yea this very point of Christs obedience and patience, enduring and so vpholding Gods iustice according to Gods owne will, (re­specting who he was that in this wise submitted and emptied him selfe) was farre more contenting and pleasing to God, then if the whole world had beene condemned for sinne to hell fire. For God delighteth not in the destruction of the wicked, but in the obedience of his Sonne he tooke infinite delight; not reuenging him with rage as an enemie, but imposing a fatherly correction on him for our sinnes; which in his per­son could extend no farder, that is, to none other kinde of death; and in ours would haue beene the eternall destruction of body and soule. Wherefore the wisedome and goodnesse of God chose out the person of his owne Sonne purposely; that neither our sinnes might be remitted as trifles skant prouoking his Anger, nor his Iustice meete with such as no way deserued to be respected or spared; but that the burden of our sinnes might be translated from vs, who were vnworthy of all fauour, and lye vpon the shoulders of his owne Sonne, whom in all iustice he must and did most high­ly loue and tender; and therefore could award no farder or other punishment against him for our sinnes, then might stand with the moderation and affection of a father, and try the obedience and submission of a sonne. Sharpe was the chasticement of our peace on that part of our Sauiour which was capable of paine and smart, least God should seeme to dally with our sinnes; but not such as either exceeded his strength, or any way chaunged or called in question Gods fauour towards him. And so our Sauiour conceaued and resolued of all his sufferings, that by Gods iustice they must haue in them griefe and anguish very painfull and offensiue to his humane nature, because our sinnes were very lothsome and displeasing to Gods diuine nature: yet so that nothing should be laid on him, which might ouerwhelme or endanger his obe­dience or patience; and that Gods purpose in so doing was to abolish sinne, and abate his wrath, his iustice being thus satisfied in the person of Christ Iesus: and not to ex­ecute on his owne Sonne the fulnes of that vengeance which was prepared for sinne in men and Angels.

And where the Discourser prateth so much of Gods VERY wrath, and PROPER vengeance for sinne, to be executed on the bodie and soule of Christ; if he meane the very same wrath and vengeance which is prepared for deuils, and shall be executed on all the damned; he openly blasphemeth. For then must the Sonne of God be e­uerlastingly adiudged to hell fire as they are. If hee flie to the substance and essence thereof; he foolishly cau [...]lleth, or vainely seeketh to shift his hands of open impietie. For if by substance and essence of hell fire prouided for sinne, he meane only a sharpe and extreame paine; then by this childish sophistrie, an headach, or toothach, a fit of an ague, or pang of the stone, if the paine be sharpe, are in substance and essence all one and the very same, which the damned now suffer in hell; since he is no way able to prooue that God is the immediate tormentor of soules in hell. But thus to mocke and delude the dreadfull Iudgements of God against sinne, and to play with the per­son of Christ in so waightie matters of our saluation, is fitter for Pagans then Christi­ans; and well this Discourser may multiply the miste of his words, but he shall neuer be able thence to der [...]e any light of trueth. If he meane the very same paine in soule or bodie which the damned suffer; he runneth headlong into that impietie, which [Page 63] he would seeme to shun. For the bodies of the damned suffer hell fire, which Christs did not; and their Soules apprehend that God is their enemie, and not onely hateth them, but hath reiected, accursed, and condemned them for euer; which to imagine of Christs soule, is to charge him with plaine Infidelitie and Apostasie. Christ there­fo [...]e rightly conceaued of his sufferings; and knew God to be a gracious and lo­uing father, euen to his manhood; though such was the constant course of Gods iustice, to which Christ submitted himselfe, that the price of our sinnes might not [...]e easie in the person of our Sauiour; to make vs the more warie, how to prouoke Gods iustice hereafter, and to acknowledge our selues the more bound to him, who with his no small smart redeemed vs; and withall to ratifie the fearefull vengeance of God powred on the wicked to be most iust, when as the exchange of our sinnes was so grieuous to the vndefiled and welbeloued manhood of the Sonne of God. Since then God could no way be displeased with the nature, office, or action of Christ in of­fering himselfe a ransome for man, which God himselfe first decreed before all worlds, promised by his Prophers, published by his Angels, testified by signes and wonders, and confirmed with his owne voyce from heauen; and the sufferings of Christ were tempered with Gods loue, proportioned to Christs strength, supported with [...]oy, accepted with fauour, and reward [...]d with all honor in him and in vs for his sake; what wound could this chastisement make in the depth of Christs soule, when it was executed on his body? or what could the soule of Christ conceaue more, then that God was in de [...]de angrie w [...]th our sinnes, and therefore would not accept our persons being in ourselues vnr [...]ghteous and odious vnto him. And yet in mercy to­wa [...]ds [...]s, and honor [...]wards his Sonne, God would make him the Redeemer and Sauiour of the world, not neglecting his Iustice, nor forgetting his loue, but so mix­ing them both together, that his dislike of our sinnes might appeare in the punish­ment of them, and his relenting from the rigor of his Iustice in fauour of his onely Sonne might magnifi [...] his mercy, satisfie his wrath, and enlarge his glory; and declare in most ample manner the submission, compassion, and pe [...]fection of his Sonne, as only worthy to performe that worke, which procured, and receaue that honor, which followed mans Redemption?

Christ then suffered from the hand of God, but mediate, that is, GOD DELIVE­RED [...] him into the hands of sinners, who were Satans instruments, with all eproach and wr [...]nge to put him to a contumelious and grieuous death: God by his [...]ecret wisdome and iustice dec [...]eeing, appointing, and ordering what he should suffer at thei [...] hands. Our sinnes [...]e bare in his body on the tree, not that his soule was free from feare sorrow, [...], derision, and temptation, but that the wicked and malitious [...]ewes practised all kind of shamefull violence and cruell tortu [...]es on him by Whipping, Racking, pric­ [...]ing, and wounding the tenderest parts of his body, whereby his soule [...]elt extreame and intole [...]able paines. In all which he saw the determinate counsell of God, and re­ceaued in the garden from his father this Iudgement for our sinnes, that he should be [...] d [...]liuered into the hands of sinners. For had he not humbly submitted himselfe [...] to obey his fathe [...]s will, no power in earth could haue preuailed against him; but as he [...] had often fortold his Disciples what the [...]. Priestes, Scribes, and Gentils should doe vnto him so when the [...] hower was come, which was foreappointed of God, to obey [...] his fathers will, he yeelded himselfe into their hands; they persuing him to death, of enuie and malice, but God thus [...]. perfourming euen by their wicked hands what he had [...]oreshewed by his [...]. Prophets, that Christ should suffer. For they not knowing him, [...]or the word [...] of the Prophets, fulfilled them in condemning him; yea they fulfilled all things which were written of him. So that no man shall need to runne to the immediate hand of God, nor to the paines of hell for the punishment of our sinnes in the person of Christ: the Iewes FVLFILLED ALL THINGS that were written of him touching his sufferings, and therewith Gods anger against our sinnes was appeased, and God himselfe reconciled vnto vs. Esay speaking of the violence done by the Iewes to Christ, sayeth, he was [...] wounded for our transgressions and broken for our iniquities, and [Page 64] with his stripes we are healed. (Thus) the Lord layed vpon him the iniquitie of all vs, and he 1. Pet. 2. bare our sinnes in his body on the tree; by those sufferings before and on the Crosse which the Scriptures expresly declare and describe. And as for the immediate hand of God tormenting the soule of Christ with the selfe same paines which the damned now suffer in hell, which is this deuisers maine drift; when he maketh or offereth a­ny proofe thereof out of the word of God, I shall be ready to receiue it, if I can not refute it: till then I see no cause why euery wandring witte should imagine what mon­sters please him in mans redemption, and obtrude them to the faithfull without any sentence or syllable of holy Scripture. I haue no doubt but all the godly will be so wise, as to suffer no man to raigne so much ouer their faith with fancies and figures, vnwar­ranted by the Scriptures, vnknowen to all the learned and ancient councels and Fa­thers, vnheard of in the Church of Christ till our age, wherein some men applaude more their owne inuentions then all humane or diuine instructions.

The feare of bodily sufferings you thinke could not be the cause that thereDefenc. pag. 12. l. 35. strai­ned out from Christ much sweat of clotted blood.] You straine the text of the Euangelist to draw it to your bent. Saint Luke hath no such words, that there strained out from Christ much sweat of clotted blood: he sayth, ChristesLuc. 22. sweat was like drops of blood trick­ling downe to the ground. Theophylact a Greeke borne, and no way ignorant of his mother tongue, expresseth Christes sweat in the garden by these words, [...], Christes body or face DISTILLED with plentifull drops of sweat. And albeit [...] sometimes signifie the congealed parts of that which is otherwise liquid, and compacted pieces of that which els is poudered; yet often it noteth that which is thick [...] in comparison with thinner, or eminent in respect of plainer. Now Christes sweat might be thicke by reason it issued from the inmost parts of his bodie, and was permixed with blood, or els it might breake out with great and eminent drops, as comming from him violently and abundantly, and being coloured with blood and congealed with colde, might trickle downe like DROPS or strings of blood vpon the ground. Howsoeuer, the Scripture saith not his sweate was clotted blood, but like to congealed or cooled blood, neither that such clots were strained out from him, but that his sweate being thicked and cooled on his face, fell from him like strings of blood. But grant there could be no reason giuen of Christs bloodie sweat in the garden, no more then there can be of the issuing first of blood, and then of water out of his side when he was dead; which S. Iohn doth exactly note as strange but yet true; will you conclude what please you, because many things in Christ both liuing and dying we [...]e miraculous? I bind no mans conscience to any probabilities for the cause of this sweate, but onely to the expresse wordes and necessarie consequents of holy Scripture, and yet I wish all men either to be sober and leaue that to God which he hath concealed from vs, or if they will needes be gessing at the reason thereof (for certaine knowledge they can haue none) by no meanes to relinquish the plaine words or knowen groundes of holy Scripture, to embrace a fansie of their owne be­getting.

The learned and ancient Fathers haue deliuered diuers opinions of this sweate, which thou mayest see (Christian Reader) in my Sermons, and which we shall haue occasion anon to reexamine: euery one of them being (as I thinke) more probable and more agreeable to Christian pietie, then this Discoursers dreame of hell paines, or Gods immediate hand at that present tormenting of the soule of Christ. And if we looke to the order and sequence of the Gospell, we shall finde that feruent zeale extreamely heating the whole bodie, melting the spirits, thinning the blood, ope­ning the pores, and so colouring and thicking the sweate of Christ, might in most likelihood be the cause of that bloodie sweate. Which S. Luke seemeth to insinuate when he saith, that after Christ was Luc. 22. comforted by an Angell from heauen, (and so reco­uered from his former feare, and freed from suffering hell paines, wherein there is no comfort) he prayed more earnestly, (or ardently) and his sweate was (in colour and consistence) like drops (or strings) of blood trickling downe to the ground. So that feruen­cie [Page 65] in prayer is set downe next before that sweate in the Gospell, as a precedent or cause thereof. Howbeit I onely barre the boldnesse of this deuiser, who presumeth what pleaseth him of Christs bloodie sweate in the garden, because the Scriptures doe not exactly mention the cause; and thinke it no reason to let him build on a blinde coniecture, a false conceit of his owne without any warrant of holy Scripture.

But I am repugnant to my selfe, and some whereDefenc. pag. 13. l. 27. I hold that Christ suffered no more but meere bodily paines, that is in his soule from and by his bodie. Pag. 14. l. 18. Neuerthelesse contr [...] ­riwise I seeme somewhere to yeelde wholely so much as you affirme.] I leaue that grace to you Sir Discourser, to roule to and fro, and when you haue [...]aid a thing after a sense and in a sort, then in another kind to vnsay it againe; and laying the whole foundati­on of your cause vpon Christes suffering the wrath of God, neither to bring any proofes, or to shew any parts thereof by the word of God; but to play with the termes of very, proper, and meere; and to call that the opening of the whole question. Indeed I euery where defend that Christ suffered no death expressed or mentioned in the Scriptures, saue onely the death of the bodie; from other passions or sufferings of the soule, as feare, sorrow, shame, and such like, I doe not exempt the soule of Christ, when he sustered for our sinnes; though I leaue no place in him for the feare of dam­nation, sting of conscience, despaire or doubt of Gods fauour, and such other ship­wrackes of all faith, hope, patience, and pietie. The Crosse, death and blood of Christ when I name, I vse those words as the Scripture doth, to declare the whole maner and order of his passion from the garden to the graue, as it is described in the Euangelists; not excluding either the feare or agonie, which befell him before he was apprehen­ded, but comprising within his death his obedience and patience in all those as [...]icti­ons, which he suffered till he died. And this is no wauering in mee, to retaine the words of the holy Ghost in their right sense and vse; but it is rather a childish dalli­ance in you, Sir Discourser, to suppose that the death of Christ doth import no more but the very act of giuing vp the ghost; or els if I by that worde designe the rest of Christs sufferings endured at the time of his death by the witnesse of holy Scripture, you will also hemme in your hell paines within the list of the same wordes, though the Euangelists name or note no such thing in all the historie of Christs pass [...]on.

So likewise in speaking of Gods wrath against the wicked I wrap in no Ridles, nor enuiron the Reader with a windlace of words; but plainely and fairely distinguish it either by the naturall vertues and properties that are in God mis [...]iking and repre [...]sing sinne, or by the effects and punishments proceeding from God to reuenge the works and reward the workers of iniquitie. In the wicked, Gods holinesse hateth the euill deede, and the doer; that is, both the sinne, and the sinner; and by his iustice without all loue or fauour towardes them awardeth a punishment against them according to their deserts; which the power of God doth execute on them, not respecting their strength, but rather inabling them to continue in perpetuall torments of bodie and soule in hell fire for euer: Gods purpose being onely to reuenge sinne in them, and to destroy them for their sinnes; which is most holy and righteous in him, though it be neuer so grieuous and intollerable to them. Gods iust and full iudgement against sinne, where and when it pleaseth him to inflict it, is the depriuing bodie and soule of all outward and inward peace and grace in this life for the time, and the reiecting of both from all blis [...]e and rest in the world to come for euer; which is the los [...]e of God and of all his blessings prouided in this life, and the next for his elect. These causes and parts Gods anger hath against the wicked for their sinnes, and to euery of these the Scripture beareth witnesse.

In Christ Gods holinesse infinitely imbraced the humilitie, obedience, and charitie of his Sonne offering himselfe to be the ransommer of man, and perfectly loued the integritie, innocencie, and puritie of his manhood created, called, and anointed of God to this intent and end, that his death and bloodshedding should be the redemption of the world, though God vtterly hated the sinnes of men, which his sonne then assu­med into the bodie of his flesh to beare the burden of them, when wee could not. [Page 66] Wherefore Gods iustice finding the loue of the Father towards his Sonne, farre to exceede the hatred of the Creator against the vncleannesse of his sinfull, but sedu­sed creature, did relent from the rigour of that iudgement, which was prouided for sinne in Angels, and with a fatherly regard and respect to the meanest part of the pe [...]son of his sonne, decreed a punishment for our sinnes in the manhood of Christ, which was a corporall death, accompanied with the sharpest paines, that Christ might endure with obedience and pacience: whose voluntarie submission and sacrifice for sinne the iustice of God did accept as a most sufficient price and payment for all our sinnes, which in themselues deserued euerlasting destruction of bodie and soule in hell fire with deuils. This correction though very sharpe yet not ouerpressing the patience of Christs manhood, Gods iustice would not release to his owne Sonne, least he should seeme to make light account of our sinne, (if it were remitted onely for prayer and intreatie) and without iust cause so terribly to punish the sinnes of the re­probate with all kinds of death, I meane corporall, spirituall, and eternall. And grea­ter or other death, then the death of the bodie, God by no iustice could impose on the person of his Sonne, since Christ could not be subiected to sinne, which he must cleanse and abolish in vs; much lesse be reiected from euerlasting [...]lisse and ioy, to which hee must bring vs; least of all linked and chained with deuils in perpetuall flames of hell fire, for so much as hee was the true and onely Sonne of God, for whose sake we all were adopted and made heires of eternall saluation. And for this cause the power of God, which is otherwise most dreadfull to men and Angels, and so was then to the manhood of Christ, restrained it selfe, and tempered the smart of Christes paines to the st [...]ength of Christes humane nature, not meaning to o­uerwhelme his patience, but to trie his obedience to the vttermost. In all which suf [...]erings Gods counsell and purpose was most fauourable and honourable euen to the manhood of Christ, the perfection of whose confidence and patience hee would demonstrate to Angels and men and propose him a paterne to all the Sonnes of God, how to humble thems [...]lues vnder the mightie hand of God; and accept his obedience vnto death as a most prec [...]ous and pleasing satisfaction and sacrifice for the sinnes of his elect; and reward his humilitie with vnspeakeable honour in making him Lord and Iudge of all, both men and Angels, not onely to confound the pride, and supp [...]esse the power of Satan, but to adiudge him to euerlasting torments with all the wicked and accursed.

Against the tenor and effect of this Christian confession, which I referre to the iudgements of all that be learned & rightly instructed in the sacred Scriptures, I ne­uer speake any one word to my knowledge; I cannot in euery sentence repeate euery circumstance, nor of euery page make a paire of Indentures, much lesse may I forsake the forme of holsome words deliuered in the Scriptures. But the maine summe and scope of this doctrine being so fully declared and so often repeated by me, I had no reason to feare the capacity, or doubt the memorie of any heedfull Reader. And howsoeuer some shallow trifler may picke out a word heere and there to carpe at, yet are there so many cleere places to direct all doubts, that no man needeth to stumble, but he that will not or can not stand vpright. For let the Christian Reader looke but to the marke at which I aime in euery place, and remember these two rules; that of three sorts of death, which onely are mentioned in the Scriptures, as the wages of sinne, to wit, corporall, spirituall and eternall death; I alwayes remoue the two last from the person of Christ by describing or naming the first, which was his corporall death? and in that I conteine the whole course and maner of his death, that is, the feares, for­row [...]s shames, temptations, derisions, smarts, and paines, which the Scriptures record in the history of his death: and all my words will prooue plaine and easie, which this ma [...] thinketh so false in themselues & so contrary to themselues. Examine my words which he hath brought for examples of contradiction and falsity, and see whether his labour be any more than meere nugation and vanitie.

A [...]ouching and prouing that Christ could not suffer eternall damnation, which is [Page 67] the full wages of sinne, nor the death of the soule, which by the Scriptures must ex­clude Christ from the fauour and grace, trueth and spirit of God: and giuing the rea­sons why sinne could not preuaile vpon his person as it did vpon others, I conclude; What maruell then if sinne, which should haue wrought in vs an eternal destruction both of bo­die and soule, could not farther preuaile in him (that is, to none other kinde of death) but to the wounding of his flesh and shedding of his blood, for the iust and full satisfaction of all our sinnes, euen in the righteous and sincere iudgement of God? In this I free Christ from eter­nall destruction or death of bodie and soule, which was the wages of sinne in our persons, but could not take holde on his, as the difference there betwixt him and vs declareth. I exempted him by proofs in the page precedent from the death of the soule, which was the maine scope of that section, and so le [...]t him subiect onely to the third kindeSermons pa. 15. l. 4. ad marg. of death, which was corporall, and might be suffered not onely without all taint of sinne, losse of grace, and change of Gods fauour, but euen with great manifestation of Gods power and wisdome in his death; and commendation of Christs obedience and pa­tience vnto death. That third kinde of death I doe not name, but describe by the wounding of Christes flesh and shedding of his blood; Sermons pa. 4. l. 34. the rest (of his paines and griefes) that went b [...]fore, not being excluded as superfluous, but continued and increased by that sharpe and [...]xtreame martyrdome, which he endured on the cross [...], as my caueat touch­ing Christs Crosse did plainly admonish. And since the whole maner of Christes d [...]ath and shedding his blood expressed in the Scriptures, is the thing that I alwayes intend, and the word doth import; when I name or touch the death of Christ▪ all that he voluntarily or violently suffered when he yeelded himselfe to be put to death, [...]s comprised in the mention of his death. Besides that Christ by his bloody sweat in the garden beganne of his owne accord in some sort to effuse his blood for our sakes and safeties, and the efore it could haue no iust reason to imagine that my words exclude his agonie and other passions of the soule mentioned in the Scriptures, specially my very next words affirming, thatSermons pa. 17. l. the same part might and did suffer in Christ which sin­ned in man (to wit) the soule, (though) by no meanes it could receiue the same wages which we should haue receiued.

But I professe by the generall title of my Sermons theDefenc. pag. 14 full redemption of mankinde by the death and blood of Christ; and commend the j [...]ce and fruit of his bodily death as most sufficient] That indeed is very dangerous to your fansie, who hold the ioynt suf­feringsRedemption by Christes blood most suffici­ent. of Christes soule from and by his body not properly to pertaine to mans re­demption, for that they are common to men with beasts, and therefore labour to frustrate all the words of the Holy Ghost deliuered in the Scriptures as improper, and impertinent to our saluation; but to me there can be no danger in the trueth, nor doubt of the fruit or force of those things which the spirit of God so often and eui­dently commendeth vnto vs in the [...]acred Scriptures as the price of our redemption and meanes of our reconciliation to God. In Christ (sayth Paul) we haue Ephes. 1. redemption by his blood euen the remission of our sinnes. Redemption by Christs blood you will and must g [...]ant; the Holy ghost doth directly auouch it: but whether that redemption be full and most sufficient, which is purchased by the blood of Christ, you doe make some doubt, or els you need not sticke at my words, which import so much. Of that if you doubt, you must beare the name of some other sect, and not of a Christian, for no Christian may doubt whether the redemption which we haue by the blood of Christ be f [...]ll and suff [...]cient or no. To make Christ in part a Sauiour, is to make him in part no Sauiour, contrary to S Peter, who sayth,Acts 4. There is no saluation in any other. If you will de [...]iue our whole redemption from him, but not from his blood shed for vs, then giue you S. Iohn the lie, who sayth, The 1. Iohn 1. blood of Iesus Christ clenseth vs from all sinne. Clensing from all sinne is full and perfect redemption from sinne; and sinne be­ing fully remitted and purged, there is no cause of breach betweene God and vs, that should hinder our saluation. Christ by his owne Hebr. 9. blood (sayth Paul) entred once into the holy place hauing purchased eternall red [...]mption. Fuller or more sufficient than eternall redemption we neither expect, nor euer shall haue any; since that which is eternall, [Page 68] admitteth no change nor increase. Then that redemption which Christ hath pur­chased by his blood, is most full and sufficient by the Apostles testimony; and sooner shal you proue your selfe to be no sound Teacher, than that to be no sound dóctrine, which hath so manifest witnesse in holy Scripture.

I teach that the Defenc. pa. 14 ioynt sufferings of Christ (the soule feeling what the body suffered) are most auailable for our saluation; and that (besides the sacrifice of Christes body) there is no The ioint suffe­rings of Christ most available for our salua­tion. other sacrifice of his soule, which can be neither bodily nor bloody.] If I alone did teach thus, and not the whole Church of Christ with me; or if the sacred Scriptures which must guide vs all what to affirme and beleeue in the worke of our saluation, did not teach the same; I w [...]re worthy to be challenged: but if I say no more than the Scrip­tures do warrant me to speake, looke you Sir Discourser to your late created Creed that can not admit nor endure the words of the Holy Ghost. That the true sacrifice for sinne was but ONE and ONCE made, and that it required the BODIE, BLOOD, and DEATH of the Offerer, is not my addition, but the Apostles asser­tion. Christ Heb. 9. vers. 26. appeared (sayth Paul) in the end of the world once to put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe; and by reason he was an high Hebr. 7. vers 17. Priest after the order of Melchisedech, and a Heb. 8. vers. 2. Minister of the true Tabernacle and Sanctuarie, it was of necessitie he should haue somewhat also to offer, Heb. 10. 5. Wherefore when he commeth into the world, he saith (to God) Sa­crifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a bodie hast thou ordained me. vers. 7. It is written of me that I should doe thy will O God; vers. 10. by the which will we are sanctified (sayth the Apostle) euen by the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once. Who after he had offered (this) vers. 2 one sacrifice for sinne sitteth for euer at the right hand of God. For with (this) vers. 14. one offering hath he (consecrated or) made perfect for euer them that are sanctified. That likewise without Heb. 9. 22. effusion of blood there is no remission, and therefore Christ with his vers. 12. owne blood entred in once vnto the holy place, and obtained eternall redemption; as also that the vers. 16. death of the te­stator must be, where a testament is; in either of these the Apostle is euident and vehe­ment. Now if you (Sir Discourser) can conuey these things to the soules proper and immediate suffering the paines of hell from the hand of God, and shew how these re­solutions of the Apostle perteine properly yea only to the soule of Christ; we shal great­ly woonder at your wisdome. For thereby shall you prooue, that the soule hath not only a body, but blood also that may be shed, which are miracles, I will not say mon­sters, both in Scripture and nature. Luk. 24. A spirit (sayth Christ) hath no flesh and bones, as ye see me haue. If you can teach Christ that he neuer knew before, by my consent you shalbe allowed for more than a Creed-maker. Howbeit, you will marre your owne market in so doing. For if the soule consist of bodie and of blood, what shall become of her proper and immediate facultie, of suffering without and besides the bodie, which you so highly aduanced in the beginning, as to make it the proper and principall hu­mane suffering? If you shrinke from these follies or rather frensies, as I hope you will, then must you grant the ioynt sufferings of Christ, I meane the wounding of his body and shedding of his blood euen vnto death, as the Scriptures describe it, to be the true sacrifice for sinne, and consequently most auaileable for our saluation. If you thinke I exclude the soule of Christ from her part in this bodily and bloody sacri­fice of Christ; I haue so often said and shewed the contrarie in my former reply that I am weary of iterating one and the same thing, though you be neuer weary of mista­king it. My former words I repeat againe, that the Reader may see, I haue no cause to recant or controle them. Conclus. pa. 352. l. 19. The true sacrifice for sinne which Christ offered, must haue the body, the blood, and the death of the offerer; none of which agree to the soule of Christ, though the body without a soule could be no reasonable sacrifice; and therefore I exclude not the soule, whose obedience, innocence, and patience concurred to sanctifie this sacrifice, but I note the parts of the sacrifice for sinne by the Apostles doctrine were those, which I named, the blood and death of the Sacrificer, both which must needs be found in his bodie, and not in his soule. These words you quote in the margent, but you take not the paines to refute them, much lesse to establish your vnbloody and vnbodily sacrifice of Christs soule suffering hell paines from the immediate hand of God. Which kind of [Page 69] offering for sinne is as strange to the Scriptures, and to all the learned and auncient fathers as the rest of your vnknowne doctrine. And therefore you doe well to straine still on the same string by censuring what you mislike, and neuer proouing what you affirme, least you should marre your musicke, if you should proceede to the parts or proofes of your new found Redemption by the paines of hell.

Yet Defenc. pa. 14 somewhere I seeme to yeeld wholy as much as you affirme; as where I say, the same part indeede might suffer in Christ which sinned in man, I meane the soule.] Somewhat it is you find so many writers new and old on your side; you here no sooner the suf­feringChrist might suffer in s [...]le and yet not hell paines. of the soule, or the anger of God against sinne in any man, but you presently count him vnder your coulours. Euen as I make for you, when I write against you, so doe the Auncient fathers, and later Diuines, whose names you abuse. [But if Defenc. pa. 14. l. 21. I meane as I ought, then at least I follow your meaning.] It is a peece of your skill, when I speake directly against your fancies, to make men beleeue I meane as you doe, or at least I ought so to meane. Indeed if you may be vmpeere what I ought to meane, I shall be sure to iump with your meaning; but looke to my words good Sir and mea­sure my meaning by that which I speake, and not by that which you would haue me speake. I said Christs soule might suffer for sinne: what collect you thence? I did not adde without or with the body, so that all the sufferings of Christ inflicted on his body might be and were impressed in his soule, and you nothing the nearer to your purpose of hell paines suffered in the Soule of Christ. But graunt the soule of Christ did suffer for sinne without concurrence of the body; must it needs follow, he there­fore suffered the paines of hell? how many griefes and paines of the soule are there, not proceeding from the body, which are nothing like nor neare the paines of hell? For example in harty and true repentance how great is the griefe and paine of euery part and facultie of the soule detesting and abhorring sinne, and fearing and feeling the power of Gods wrath? and yet I trust ech penitent person doth not suffer the paines of hell. Feare, griefe, and sorrow then, the soule of Christ might deepely tast when he suffered for sinne, and yet be farre from the paines of hell. But your collection from my words is more absurd; for where I say, the soule of Christ might suffer for sinne, yet by no meanes could it receiue the same wages (of sinne) which we should haue receiued; you inferre not only without any words of mine, but directlv against my words; ergo I meane, or I ought to meane, that the soule and mind of Christ suffered the paines of hell from the immediate hand of God: and so where I auouch Christ by no meanes could suffer the same wages (of sin) which we should haue suffered; you paraphrase, Imeane, or I ought to meane, Christ suffered the selfe same which we should haue suffered, and of my negatiues you make affirmatiues, and then tell the Reader I contradict my selfe.

But in plaine termes I Defenc. pa. 14. l. 27. allow in Christ all those afflictions and passions of the Soule which naturally and necessarily follow paine; and this ALL reacheth vnto moe then meere bodily paines; it includeth the soules proper and immediate paines also.] Where you lear­ned to reason I doe not know, but you haue the best grace to disgrace your selfe that euer I saw; and if this be all the learning you haue, you may clout shoes with this Al. Doe the torments of hell naturally and necessarily follow paine? then whosoeuer in any part, or for any cause is payned, suffereth the paines of hell, or at least the soules proper and immediate paines, which you make extreamest and sharpest in hell. Babes and boyes may thus bable; it is a shame for men to talke so much out of square. Let my words stand simplely as you bring them, and allow in Christ all those afflictions and passions of the soule, which naturally and necessarily follow paine, what conclude you out of them? your sight is very sharpe, if you see any absurditie in them. Howbeit you draw my words from their right course and sense, by leauing out what pleaseth you: My words are Sermons pa. 87. When the auncient fathers affirme that Christ dyed for vs the death of the body only, we must not like children imagine, they exclude the vnion, operation, or passion of the soule: but in the death of his body and shedding of his blood, they include all those afflictions and passions of the soule which naturally and necessarily follow paine, and accompany death. Christ suffering for vs a painefull death how could it be otherwise, [Page 70] but such afflictions [...]nd passions of the soule as naturally and necessarily follow paine and accomp [...]ny de [...]th, should be found in the soule of Christ, vnlesse we giue him an in­sensible flesh or impassiole soule, both which are errors in the nature of Christ? His flesh wa [...] sensible, and his soule passible as ours is, because they both were humane. Pai [...] then and death in my words are plainly referred to the body of Christ, whose [...]lesh could not be wounded and blood shed as his was, but naturally and nec [...]ssari­ly his [...]le must feele the paine thereof. And yet if my words w [...]e not limited to the paine of Ch [...]sts body, as indeed they are; I see no inconuenienc [...] growing from them, nor helpe for your fansie cōtained in them. Def [...] 14. l. 29 Yet plai [...]er (as fauo [...]g your error) I say, [...], paine, & griefe of body or mind be it neuer so great, will commend Christs obedie [...]ce & patience; And the punishment of sinne, which proceedeth from the ius [...]ice of God, and [...] [...] that Christ might and did beare. Yea he suffered death, with all painf [...] [...]ut no sinfull [...] or [...]onsequents. How good a sempste [...] you are, doth well appea [...] by your short cu [...]ing and [...]ide [...] [...]hing my words together. The first sentence you take our of a Section of my [...] wherein I purposely shew, that not only the paines of hell, but euen the feare o [...] [...] must [...]e farre from the soule of Christ. The suffering of hell paines in the soule of Christ, I there refuse as [...]not cons [...]t to the Christian [...], but [...] [...] to the [...] [...]ertaintie, sanct [...]ie of Christs person, [...]: [...] and [...] with God. Immediatly after the words which you bring I say, [...] Christ there could be [...] [...] no apprehension of h [...]ll paines as due to him or determi [...] for him, but [...]e m [...]st [...] [...] [...]are that God would be inconstant or v [...]st, which are more then [...] [...] Yea to these very words which you [...] I [...]oyne this exception in the same [...] but the [...]. sense of damnation or separat [...]n from God, or the feare or doubt thereof in Chr [...]t as they quench faith and abolish grace, so they dissolue the vnion and commu [...]on of [...]ath [...] natures, or else breed a false persuasion and sinfull temptation in the soule of Christ. Who can be so sottish as not to see, that my former words import Smart, [...] and g [...]fe of body and mind which haue in them neither sen [...]e nor seare of hell paines that is of damnation or separation from God; since no man is damned but vnto the p [...]ines and place of hell, and is first separated from God?

W [...]th as great discretion you fasten on an other sentence of mine; where though [...] [...]position be not generall but indefinite, and hath two restraints euen from your [...] [...]; to wit, in this li [...]e, where Christ suffe [...]ed; in [...] like to vs, who a [...] his [...] [...]; you throw off all, forgetting what your sel [...]e obiected, and whereto I [...] [...] [...]nswere, and suppose that here I fully concurre with your con [...]ites. But [...] [...] your owne obiection, and that will rightly guide my solution. Your reason, which you proudly boasted could not be refu [...]ed by the wi [...] of man, [...]as (as you call [...] [...] from the les [...]e to the more. [...] Thus doe the members of Chri [...] [...] the terrors [...] God and sorrowes of h [...]ll.) therefore of necessitie Christ suffered the lik [...]. P [...]ooue you by this A [...]gument that Christ a [...]ter this life suffered the terrors of God and sorrowes of hell? I doe you wrong to [...]pect it, for it is open impietie so to thinke or say. Then do you more wrong to imagine that I extended my words farther then to refell your reason. As you spake of this life, though you expressed it not; so I replied that the pu [...]shment [...] s [...]nne, which proceedeth from the iustice of God (in this life) and is no sinne, Christ might and did beare; but in no wi [...]e those terrors and feares of consci [...]nce, which pro­c [...] from sinne, and a [...]gment sinne. Now I pray you what allowance finde you here for your new erected hell, or how force you my words to fit your deuises? Terror of con­science, and feare of hell could haue no place in Christ, by reason they proceede in [...] from r [...]morle of sinne, weaknesse of faith, and doubt for the time of Gods fauour, which we cannot ascribe to Christ without drawing him into the dregges of our sinne. And therefore when we compare his suffering with ours, we must alwayes except the rootes and branches of our corruption, for that they be taintes of sinne, and wants of g [...]ace neither of which may be admitted in the soule of Christ. Now if I exclude the [...] [...], and terrour of conscience from the person of Christ in the same sentence, which you quote▪ how should my words sound in your eares, as if I admitted the true [Page 71] paines of hell to be suffered in the soule of Christ, which I haue often said the wicked doe not suffer in this life; muchlesse Christs members, whence you fet your pat [...]e for Christs sufferings; least of all Christ himselfe, on whom that vengeance by no iu­stice could be inflicted? The mortall bodies of men and their fraile life, are by no meanes capable of those terrible iudgements of God against sinne reserued for ano­ther world: and howsoeuer your errour leadeth you to aduenture the making of a new hell, my resolution is euery where occurrent in my Sermons, that no iustice of God could award against his owne Sonne the same paines, which the damned in hell doe suffer; if we measure their paines by the Scriptures and not by your fansies: be­sides that the members of Christ are not subiected in this life to those torments of hell, which the reprobate in an other place doe and shall endure. Rom. 8. There is no con­demnation to them that are in Christ Iesus. How then should the Lord Iesus himselfe not onely feare, which I there denie, but also suffer the same condemnation to hell paines, which the wicked and accursed doe and shall suffer?

Defenc. pa. 15. li. 6. We say not Christ suffered simply all the paines of the damned; he felt not such as are by their very nature sinnes, as well as paines; as indeede desperation is. [...] When God offe­rethDesperation in hell is no sinne. grace and mercie, as in this world he doth to many; to renounce or refuse is a damnable sinne; but in hell where there is no promise nor possibilitie of either; there to despaire is no sinne: yea rather there to hope, that Gods irreuocable iudgement shal be altered, and his setled counsell changed, were to hope that God will be false of his word, and wauering in his will, which indeede is a mightie sinne. And therefore neither reiection, confusion, destruction, desperation, nor damnation, are sinnes in hell, but the iust and fearefull punishments of sinne, ordained by Gods iustice, and inflicted by Gods power; who there requireth no obedience, but onely executeth vengeance; the suffering whereof is not sinnefull, though it be neuer so painefull to the damned, abiding for euer in the pollution and confusion of their sinnes here com­mitted. So that if my Lordship as you call it, doe stand to my words, and not clippe them nor renounce them, your Patriark ship gaineth little by them for your purpose. For I by no meanes acknowledge that the true paines of hell are inflicted on any in this life; and by no iustice could the Sonne of God be damned to suffer hell paines, either in substance or in circumstance, as the Scriptures describe them. And there­fore your vaunting before the victorie. depending onely on the foolish mistaking, or peeuish peruerting of my words is as [...]idieulous, as it is vaine-glorious All you can get is this, that if you can be suffered to wrest my wordes from their coherence and sense, without respecting what goeth in the same Section before them, or what is ioy­ned in the same sentence with them; and then interlace them with other wordes of your owne, seruing your turne when mine doe not; you can picke out two or three lines in the whole booke, that thus abused and corrupted shall sound somewhat to­wards the secrets of your phantasticall hell. By which arte of yours you make me say in one section, that the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the soule (ON­LY) by the bodie; and in the next section, you say I grant, that Christ did beare punish­ment of sinne, (AS GREAT AS ANY IS) proceeding from the iustice of God, yet be­ing no sinne; and so with adding (ONLY) to my wordes in the first place, and as (GREAT AS ANY IS) in the second, you haue made some shew of contradiction in my positions, or at least in your additions.

Thus much for the examination and refutation of those maine diuisions and posi­tions which the Discourser hath laid for the foundation of his cause in his generall o­pening of the Question; and likewise for the clearing of those contradictions which he falsely supposed to be in my writings. Wherein if I would haue taken the trade which he doth, I could with farre more breuitie and facilitie haue denied all that he affirmeth, and ballanced my no to be euery way as good as his yea: but for their sakes that cannot discusse those things themselues, I haue not refused more largely and fully to expresse and proue the trueth in ech of those points, which he catcheth hold of in defence of his errour, and thereby haue giuen the Reader to vnderstand that this [Page 72] Discoursers new doctrine is as wide from the veritie, as from the authoritie of holy Scripture. There remain the particular challenges such as they are, which this impug­ner maketh to many parts & points of my Sermons, and of my conclusion annexed to them; as also his defence of those speciall reasons published in his first Treatise, which I refuted as farre as needed in the conclusion afore mentioned. In which I meane to spend no more time then necessitie forceth me, but to referre the Reader to the pla­ces where the things are purposely handled, except some new matter not fully deba­ted be offered vnto me, by reason whereof I may sometimes be drawen to make larger proofe of some things, shortly but truely before vttered by me; and ignorantly, if not peruersely mistaken by him.

To the Discoursers chalenge that I forced my Text by mistaking the crosse of Christ for Christs personall sufferings on the Crosse, where Paul meaneth the afflictions of Christes members in this world; I made in the conclusion of my Sermons a tripartite answere, 1. That the Crosse of Christ did alwayes in the Scriptures import the per­sonall sufferings of Christ on the Crosse; and neuer the afflictions of the godly. 2. That the circumstances of the Text conuinced no lesse; which were Pauls earnest renouncing of all ioy saue in the Crosse of Christ, and his vehement opposing himselfe to those that ioyned circumcision to the Crosse of Christ, least they should suffer persecuti­on for it at the hands of the Iewes. 3 That the best and most ancient Fathers, Ierom, Chrysostome, Austen and others, expounded these words precisely of Christs death on the Crosse.

To this what replieth our Controuller? The Defenc. pag. 22. crosse of Christ here signifieth I grant Christ crucified, not in his owne person onely, but also in his members.] Then first you be slipt from your former resolutio deliuered in your Treatise, which is no strange thing in your writings. There your words were, Treatis. pag. 32. I take it to be cleare, the Apostle HERE SPEAKETH NOT of the personall sufferings of Christ, but of the godly: You there de­nie that Paul speaketh of Christs personall sufferings, but of the godly. Here you af­firme hee speaketh of both, and least you should seeme to diuide them, you adde; Paul doth here Defenc. pag. 22. l. 9. ioyntly together vnderstand by Christs crosse, the afflictions of the whole my­sticall bodie, both head and members. A large and long Crosse of Christ, that conteineth not onely his owne death and passion, and whatsoeuer persecution he suffered in his life time, but ioyntly together all the asflictions of the godly from the beginning of the world to the end. I will not aske you where you find, or how you proue Christs crosse to be so vsed in the Scriptures; you that take vpon you to frame new Redemptions, new hels, and new heauens to your fansie; will not sticke to frame a new Crosse of Christ, without any Scripture: howbeit know this, all wise will beware of such expositions as haue neither example nor ground in the word of God. For though our Sauiour sometimes said, If any will come after me, let him denie himselfe, and take vp his Matth. [...]6. Marke 8. Luke 9. Crosse and follow me; yet he neuer said, let him take vp my Crosse and follow mee; and Paul who often vseth the word Crosse without addition, & many times the Crosse of Christ, neuer taketh it in all his Epistles for the afflictions of the godly, but onely for the spitefull and shamefull death which Christ in his owne person suffered on the Crosse. So that howsoeuer euery Christian may be said to take or beare his Crosse; the Scrip­tures no where apply the Crosse of Christ, but only to the force and fruit of Christes death suffered on the Crosse for vs and our saluation: which is the sense that I affirme Saint Paul here intended.

But the markes, afflictions, and DYING OF THE LORD IESVS, are vsed in this and other places of the Scripture, to signifie the afflictions of the godly.] Those places haue speciall wordes adioyned, which can not bee referred to the person of Christ, but must of force belong to the speaker or sufferer. As Galat. 6. I beare IN MY BODY the markes of the Lord Iesus, saith Paul: and againe, Coloss. 1. I fulfill the rest of the af­flictions of Christ IN MY FLESH. And so, 2. Corinth. 4. we beare about IN OUR BODIE the dying of the Lord Iesus. Where these words, in my bodie, and in my flesh are proper to the speaker, and no way deriueable to the person of Christ. Wherefore the markes, [Page 73] afflictions, and dying of the Lord, must either import a resemblance to the personall suffe­rings of Christ, or demonstrate the cause for which the Apostle suffered, which was for Christs sake: and in this is no difficultie, to suffer affliction, in like manner as Christ did, or to suffer it for Christs cause. But the Crosse of Christ, whereof the Apo­stle speaketh in my Text was that, at which the Iewes were so greatly offended, for which the true preachers were so sharpely persecuted, to which the false teachers ioy­ned circumcision for the better attayning of saluation, in which the godly most reioy­ced, and by which the faithfull were crucified to the world, and the world to them; and all these are proper to the personall death and crosse of Christ as he was the Saui­our of the world, and not common to the afflictions of the Saints. It was a question of doctrine, not of manners, for which the Apostle so much striued; and the highest point of mans redemption, not of mans perfection, in which he so much gloried. For touching other mens miseries, how should Paul reioyce in them; or how should he by them be crucified to the world; and the world to him? He had good cause to re­ioyce in the death of Christ though it were neuer so much maligned and pursued by the Iewes, because it was the wisedome and power of God to saue all that beleeued; and in his owne troubles for Christes quarrell hee might reioyce as hauing thereby Philip. 3. fellowship with Christs afflictions and made conformable to his death: but to reioyce at o­ther mens troubles, that hath no warrant in the word of God. Rom. 12. Reioyce, saith Paul, with them that reioyce, and weepe with them that weepe. Wee may take comfort, and giue God thankes that the faithfull haue grace to endure persecution with patience and courage; but that affliction befalleth them, we may not be glad. For that is to reioyce at other mens harmes, which is repugnant to the rule of charitie. Neither could Paul be crucified to the world, by other mens troubles long before dead, or then vnborne; examples might encourage the weake, but Paul was strong and pro­posed himselfe as a paterne of patience, suffering persecution. And therefore this haling into the Crosse of Christ the afflictions of all the godly that euer were or shall be, as if the Apostle so highly reioyced in them, and were crucified to the world by them, is wholy against the haire, and hath neither dependence nor coherence with the Apostles words.

Besides you doe not, or will not vnderstand the maine point here in question be­twixt the Apostle and those false teachers of the Iewes, whom he reprooueth and re­futeth in this Epistle. You say indeede, Defenc. pa. 22. l. 2. It is manifest the Apostle here (Gala. 6. v. 12.) reprooueth the false teachers for mingling the pure doctrine, because they were loth to taste persecution; but you neither tell vs what the Gospell was which they thus mingled with circumcision, nor why they feared persecution, nor from whom; which things if you would haue specified as the Scriptures deliuer them, you should soone haue per­ceiued how properly the Apostle addeth for the Crosse of Christ, and how rightly I re­ferred these words to the force and fruite of Christs death, which is the summe and sub­stance of the Gospell. What the Gospel was which Paul preached, appeareth plain­ly by his owne words. 1. Corin. 1. vers. 23. We preach (saith he) Christ crucified, vnto the Iewes a scandall (or offence) and vnto the Grecians foolishnesse: 24. but vnto them which are called both of the Iewes and Greekes, Christ the power of God, and wisedome of God, to saue all that be­leeue. For Christ is 30. made of God to vs righteousnesse, redemption, and sanctification; to the end, 31. That he which reioyceth might reioyce in the Lord. In so much that 1. Cor. 2. vers. 2. I esteemed not to know any thing among you (sayth Paul) saue Iesus Christ, and him cruci­fied. So that, Christ crucified, the Crosse of Christ, the preaching of the Crosse, and the Go­spell of Iesu Christ are phrases of like force vsed by Paul for one and the selfe same word of trueth, which is the doctrine of our saluation by the death and blood of Christ. 1. Cor. 1. vers. 17. Christ sent me (saith he) to preach THE GOSPEL not with wisedome of words, least THE CROSSE OF CHRIST should be frustrate. For the 18. PREACHING OF THE CROSSE is to them that perish foolishnesse, but to vs that are saued, it is the power of God. Christ crucified then being the very ground of our saluation, and the Gospel decla­ring him to be the power of God to saue all that beleeue; euidently the crosse of Christ [Page 74] was the maine doctrine of the Gospell which Paul preached to the Galathians; and which the false Apostles mixed with circumcision and the righteousnesse of the law, as well for the aduancing themselues being Iewes, as for feare of their countrey­men, who vtterly disdained, and egerly pursued all that taught, a man hanged on a tree as a malefactor, (for so the vnbeleeuing Iewes conceiued of Christ) to be the Sauiour of the world, and complement of all Gods promises made to the seede of Abraham for their euerlasting blisse.

The rage of the vnbeleeuing Iewes against Paul for preaching the death and blood of Christ to be the Redemption of all the faithfull is manifest in many Acts 14. 17. 18. 21. places of the Actes and of his owne 2. Cor. 11. 1. Thes. 2. Epistles; which furie whiles the false Apostles sought to decline, and somewhat to please and pacifie the Iewes, they added circumcision and the obseruation of the law vnto the Crosse of Christ as necessary for iustification and saluation, without which the death of Christ could doe vs no good. This error then newly sowen among the Galathians (to whom Paul before had preached Christ crucified as the sole and sufficient meane of their Redemption, and Iustification, through faith in his blood) the Apostle throughout that large Epistle of his written Gal. 6. 11. vnto them with his owne hand, doth purposely and mightily confute; and is so farre from coupling any thing with Christ as requisite for righteousnesse or blessednesse, and chiefly the law, that he opposeth himselfe against men and Angels for the truth of his doctrine; and resolueth cleane contrary to those false teachers and flatterers of the Iewish nation, in most vehement manner; Gal. 5. Behold I Paul say vnto you, that if yee be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Ye are abandoned from Christ, whosoe­uer are iustified by the law: ye are fallen from grace. His reasons are vrgent and euident. Gal. 2. If righteousnesse (could be) by the law, then Christ died in vaine. Gal. 3. And that no man is iustified by the law in the sight of God, it is plaine; for the iust shall liue by faith; now the law is not of faith. For all haue sinned, and are iustified freely by (Gods) grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Iesus, Rom. 3. whom God hath set foorth, to be a Reconciliation THROVGH FAITH in his blood, to declare his righteousnesse by the forgiuenes of sinnes. Gal. 3. As many (then) as are of the works of the law, are vnder the curse; but Christ hath re­deemed vs from the curse of the law being made a curse for vs; (as it is written, cursed is euery one that hangeth on a tree) that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentils through Iesus Christ. And that made the Apostle enter this disputation with so sharpe a rebuke to the Galathians, for sliding from this Gospel or glad tidings of their saluati­on in the Crosse of Christ, to circumcision and the works of the law. Gal. 3. O foolish Gala­thians, (saith he) who hath bewitched you not to obey the truth; to whom Iesus Christ was before your eyes described crucified among you? And in this confident course he goeth on with plentifull and substantiall proofes; that the Redemption, righteousnesse, blessed­nesse, adoption, freedome and sanctification of Gods children, proceede from the grace of God and of Christ, who Gal. 1. gaue himselfe for our sinnes that he might Heb. 2. tast death for all, and are receiued by faith in the blood of Christ, which confesseth him to be the Sonne of God and the only Sauiour of the world.

What marueile then, if in the close of this example, when Paul had shewed his care to haue the Galathians persist in this truth, in that he wrote so Gal. 6. v. 11. long a letter vnto them with his owne hand, which otherwise he did not vse; he did also traduce the pride and pollicie of the false Apostles, who partly to aduance themselues because they were Iewes, partly to shunne the enuie of their countrimen, frustrated the Crosse of Christ, by adding circumcision and the obseruation of the law vnto it, Vers. 13. not that they themselues kept the law but 12. only because they would not suffer persecution for preaching the Crosse of Christ, which the vnbeleeuing Iewes so egerly resisted and impugned; and withall professed of himselfe, that howsoeuer they Vers. 13. reioyced in the flesh, that is, in the circumcision of the Gentils; yet Vers. 14. God forbid that he should reioyce but in the crosse of Christ, as the most sufficient meane of mans Redemption, by which he was crucified to the world, and the world to him, what persecution soeuer he suffered for it? And the verses following, which you pe [...]uishly pull to patience in persecution, pertaine di­rectly [Page 75] to establish the truth and force of Christs Crosse. For Vers. 15. in Christ Iesus (saith he, that is, to attaine saluation by Christ crucified) neither circum [...]sion an [...]leth any thing, nor vncircumcision, but a new creature; that is, Regeneration in Christ, when the inward man of the hart is renued by faith through the operation of the spirit. And Vers. 16. as many as walke according to this Rule of doctrine by preaching and beleeuing the crosse of Christ, (for many Philip. 3. walke (after an other rule) of whom I haue often told you, that they are the enimies of the crosse of Christ) peace be vpon them and mercy, and vpon the Israell of God, that is vpon as many as be Iewes within and not without, and haue the circum­cision of the hart in the spirit not in the flesh, whose Rom. 2. praise is not of men but of God. And therefore Gal. 6. v 17. from hence forth let no man put me to businesse as if I liked or allowed circum­cision when and where pleased me. For if I yet Gal. 5. v. 11. preach circumcision, why doe I yet suffer persecution? the sl [...]inder of the Crosse is abolished, and the Iewes haue no cause of offence against me. But 2. Cor. 11. of the Iewes fiue times receiued I fortie lashes, sane one; I was thrise beaten with rods, I was once stoned, I haue beene in stripes aboue measure, in prison fre­quent, in death often. I Gal. 6. v. 17. beare in my body the markes of the Lord Iesus, that is, the signes of these persecutions suffered for his cause, which prooue that in preaching the crosse of Christ I goe not about to please men but God. For Gal. 1. v. 10. if I would please [...]en, I were not the seruant of Christ.

There is no miscoherence with the Text, nor dissidence from the truth in this ex­position which not my selfe alone but the auncient Fathers and best Diuines both olde and new haue imbraced: yea it fully agreeth with the maine intent of Paul in this Epistle, with the perpetuall vse of his words, and with the cleare light of other places where like persons and cause were vndertaken by the Apostle. You only are found, Sir Discourser, that to shew neither learning nor reading, but a presumptious ouerweening of your owne witte will needs make the Reader beleeue I vnderstand not the Text. But let vs heare your pure conceit, how currantly it carrieth with it the words and circumstances of the Text. They vrge you to be circumcised, onely least they should suffer persecution for the crosse of Christ, saith Paul of those false teachers, which peruerted the truth of the Gospell among the Galathians by teaching cir­cumcision and the righteousnesse of the Law to be necessarie to saluation. How ex­pound you these words of the Apostle? Def. pag. 23. li. 36. he may (say you) be vnderstood to say, that he would not suffer persecution for commending the afflictions and shame of good Christians for Christs sake. You should say, THEY would not suffer persecution, vnlesse you put Paul into the number of false teachers, but that might be the scape of your Printer. Come to your owne ouersights. First then Christs personall sufferings are here quite excluded; for Christ I trust shall haue an other title with you then the name of a good Christian among the many; and so the crosse of Christ in this place by your exposi­tion doth both exclude and include the proper sufferings of Christ. For afore you said, here Paul doth ioyntly together vnderstand by Christs crosse, the afflictions of the whole mysticall body of Christ both head and members. Secondly where euer read you in the Scriptures, that the Iewes raized persecutions against any, for commending the afflicti­ons of the godly? If it be a truth, name vs the place and the persons; if it be a dreame of yours, keepe it to your selfe: the Scriptures can expound themselues without your [...]ansies. That the Iewes had a furious disdaine and hatred against the person of Christ, and specially against the shame and reproch of his crosse, and for his sake against all that preached or beleeued him to be the Messias so long before promised, and his death to be the Redemption of t [...]e world, the Euangelistes and Apostles euery where in their writings giue full testimony. Paul himselfe first persecuting the Christians vn­to death, and afterward as sharply pursued by the Iewes for the very same cause, best knew what offence the Iewes tooke at the infamous death of Christ on the crosse, and how egerly they were bent against all that durst professe the name of Christ; and therefore could speake in this case out of his owne experience; that not the commen­ding of the afflictions of the godly, but the preaching of Christs death on the crosse to be the saluation of the world, was the point that so much irritated the Iewes to lay [Page 76] violent hands on the Christians. Thirdly did circumcision hinder the commending of the afflictions of the godly? the Apostles and first spreaders of the Gospell, as also Paul himselfe were circumcised, and yet the chiefest fauourers and encouragers of the afflicted Christians, so that circumcision was no impediment to like and allow the afl ictions of the godly. But as Paul saw himselfe to be most odious to the Iewes, because they held opinion of him, that he Acts 21. taught all men euery where against the peo­ple, the Law and the Temple; (and indeed he boldly professed that in Christ Iesus nei­ther Gal. 5. & 6. circumcision auayled any thing nor vncircumcision, and that they were no longer vnder the Law, since Christ had redeemed both Iew and Gentile from the curse and bondage of the Law) so he could not but discerne the drift of those false teachers, who to flatter the Iewes and to claw fauour with the enimies of Christs crosse taught circumcision and the righteousnesse of the law, to be necessary vnto saluation, as if the death of Christ without them could profit vs nothing. You doe therefore not ex­pound, but peruert the words of Paul, which I tooke for my text; when as he repro­uing those false teachers, (whom he before confuted) for adding circumcision and the iustification of the law to the death of Christ, thereby to mitigate the malice of the Iewes conceaued against the crosse of Christ; you turne the Apostles words from doctrine to manners, from preaching to not commending, from the death of Christ to the afflictions of Christians; and so of the highest point of our Redemption, and Saluation by the crosse of Christ, you haue found out a cold kind of scant allowing the troubles of the Saints.

But the Fathers (which I brought) ouerthrow not your sense, they rather iustifie it.] Whether Augustine, Chrysostome, Ierome, and Bede, whom I cited for the sense of this place, do take the word Crosse in this very sentence for the personall suffe [...]ings of Christ on the crosse, which was my assertion; I referre it to the censure of the Reader vpon the sight of their sayings, which he may finde in the Conclu. pa. 229. conclusion of my Ser­mons. I must confesse mine eyes be not matches, if they speake not directly to that purpose. Howbeit, you haue a speciall gift to make a short returne of all the Fathers with a nihil dicit, when they speake against you. Indeed you are out of your element when you talke of Fathers, for you neither like their credits, nor allow their iudge­ments, as in processe we shall more fully shew. For the present, to satisfie those that be soberly minded, and to let all men see to your shame, that I tooke my text right, though you fondly seeke by your silly conceits to impeach it; marke I pray thee, Christian Reader, whether both elder and later Diuines doe not concurre with me in that sense of Christes crosse, which I auouched to be in Pauls words. Christ was cru­cified vnder Pontius Pilate. Aust. de sym­bolo a [...] Cate­chum. li. 3. This (sayth Augustine) we beleeue, and we so beleeue it, that we reioyce in it. Be it farre from me (sayth Paul) to reioyce but in the crosse of Christ. Athana. in p [...]ssionem & crucem dom [...]n. Happily some man (sayth Athanasius) beholding the Lord and Sauiour to be condemned of Pilate and crucified of the Iewes, will cast downe his head for shame. But if we learne the cause why the Lord suffered, wee shall cease to blush, and rather reioyce as Paul did in the Lords crosse. Ignatius in his Epistle to those at Tarsus where Paul was borne, sayth, mindfull of Paul; Ignatius epist. 4. ad Tarsenses. Holde it for most certaine, that the Lord Iesus was truely crucified, (for Paul sayth, Be it farre from me to reioyce but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus) and truly suffered and died. Cyril: Cyrill. de recta fide ad Reginas. Be it farre from me to reioyce but in the crosse of the Lord Iesus. Paul sayth, he reioyceth in the death of Christ: he knew Christ therefore to be God, and to haue suffered for vs in the flesh. Theodoret thus expresseth Pauls meaning; Theodoret in galat. ca. 6. Ego au­tem propter solam salutarem crucem me iacto & mihi placeo. I onely boast my selfe on that crosse (of Christ) which bringeth saluation, and therewith I content my selfe. Theophy­lact vpon the same words of Paul; Theophylact. in Galat. ca. 6. Illi (inquit) circumcisionem hanc gloriae ducunt, à me vero procul sit caeterarum rerum iactantia. Licet in vna Christi cruce & morte admo­dum gloriars. They (sayth Paul) count circumcision a glorie, farre be it from me to boast in other things. It is lawfull for me thorowly to reioyce only in the crosse and d [...]ath of Christ Ie­sus. Some will aske, How or why doest thou reioyce in the Lords crosse? For that he was crucified for my sake, which a [...] no bodie, and loued me so deerely, that he offered himselfe to [Page 77] death (for me.) Oecumenius; O [...]menius in Gala. ca. 6. What is this reioycing (in Christs crosse which Paul speaketh of?) That for vs who were vnworthy (Christ) would be crucified; for that is the cause we haue to glorie. Haymo vpon the same place in the person of Paul sayth; Haym [...] in Gala. ca. 6. I will not reioyce in the riches and dignities of this world, but in the crosse of Christ; that is, I will reioyce in his passion which was celebrated on the crosse, whence is my redemption and sal­uation. Moe I might easily bring, but these for antiquitie may suffice.

The grauest and exactest of the new writers agree with the Fathers. Bullinger: Whereas Bullinger [...] in Gala. ca. 6. Paul might haue vsed a simple kinde of affirmation, ONLY THE DEATH OF CHRIST is sufficient for me to saluation, he chose rather to expresse it by the way of detestation, and to say; Farre be it from me to reioyce, but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ. Where againe the second time, by the crosse he meaneth the death, sacrifice, and ex­piation of the Lord Christ and the whole worke of our redemption. Gualter in his 59. ho­milie vpon that Epistle sayth: Now Gualterus in Epist. ad Gala. homil. 59. Paul opposeth himselfe to those false teachers decla­ring how he himselfe is affected, and vpon that occasion repeateth the Summe of his doctrine, touching the redemption and saluation of mankind?, in these words; Be it farre from me to reioyce, but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ. He might haue sayd simply; I reioyce only in Christ crucified, in whose crosse I know there is reposed for me life and saluation. But he vseth such a kind of speech as teacheth vs their insolencie was an abominable and capitall of­fence. Caluin, a man for his great paines in the Church of God worthy of great praise, where he steppeth not too much aside from the ancient Fathers, expounding these words of Paul, sayth: Caluinus in Gala. ca. 6. To reioyce in Christs crosse, is as much as in Christ crucified, but that it expresseth more: for it signifieth that death of Christs which was full of reproch and shame, and was accursed of God. That death then which men abhorre, and whereof they are ashamed, in that death Paul sayth he reioyceth, because he hath perfect blessednesse therein. Piscator in his Scholies vpon Pauls Epistle to the Galathians, noting what crosse of Christ it was for which the false teachers would not suffer persecution, sayth; Piscator in schol. super Epistolam ad Gala. ca. 6. Ob crucem Christs, id est, ob doctrinam Euangelij de salute part a per solam Christi crucem; they would not suffer persecution for the crosse of Christ, that is, for the doctrine of the Gospell teaching saluation to be purchased by the crosse of Christ only.

There is not a new writer of any iudgement or diligence which ioyneth not with these; and howsoeuer some of them withall auouch, that Paul meant to shew by this opposing himselfe to these false teachers, that hee shunned not persecution for the crosse of Christ as they did, but reioyced in the doctrine of the crosse by which the e­lect are saued, what affliction soeuer befell him therefore; yet they deriue that part of Pauls meaning, not from the confused signification of Christs crosse, as you doe; but either from the EFFICACIE thereof by which Paul was crucified to the world, and the world to him, in neglecting the flattery and enduring the fury of such as oppo­sed themselues against Christ: or from the CONFORMITIE to it, that as he desi­red to reigne, so he was willing to suffer with Christ, and therefore reioyced as well in the fellowship as in the force and effects of Christes sufferings on the crosse: or lastly, from the CONTRARIETIE to the false teachers, that though they adulterated the true doctrine of Christes crosse, because they would decline persecution; it was Paul [...] ioy to teach sincerely the power of Christ crucified, whosoeuer pursued him for so doing. This sinceritie and duetie of the Apostle I am farre from denying, but the crosse of Christ I constantly referre to the doctrine of mans redemption and saluati­on by the crosse of Christ, that is, by his personall sufferings on the crosse, as all those old and new writers do, and not to the troubles and afflictions of the godly, to which if this Discourser dare ascribe the meane or merit of mans redemption or saluation, he falleth from puritie to poperie, and from the Christian faith to open heresie. Thou seest then, gentle Reader, how sure ground and iust reason I had to propose that sense of my text which I did; as also how vntruely, vnwisely, and headily, this fellow ranne first to the challenging of my text, and still vpholdeth his humour with his priuate dreame of Christs crosse conteining ioyntly together all the afflictions of Christ and his members from the beginning of the world to the ending thereof; and maketh the [Page 78] false teachers, as fearing persecution for the commending of his conceit, to ioyne cir­cumcision to the doctrine of the Gospell, and so by altering and interlacing Pauls words after his owne fansie, hee hath hatched at last an exposition without head or heele, which no man vnderstandeth besides himselfe, and the Diuines of all ages both new and olde do contradict.

But I committed another great ouersight in handling my text, which was to Defenc pa. 24. take occasion from the text to speake of any thing, for you count them the faithfullest and wisest handlers of Scripture which conclude euen from their text firmly and first of all what soeuer they afterwards teach thereupon.] Indeed I thinke your maner be to conclude all that you afterward say, euen from your text without the helpe of any other places of Scrip­ture. You be so fast in your conceits, and so loose in your conclusions, that you can inferre any thing of euery thing. Euery word you speake, you tie to your text as firm­ly as flax to fire: but if you would take the paines once to proue that you say, and not only to say that which you should prooue, you would finde great difference betwixt the firmnesse of a fansie in which you be so resolute, and of an argument which for ought I yet see in your writings, you scant make not vnderstand. And where you quarrell with such handling of texts as is vsuall in these dayes, but no good nor commend­able vse, your reading must be greater and iudgement better, before you take vpon you to controle the Preachers of England for mishandling their texts. Many hun­dreds there are of whom you may learne both how to diuide and how to pursue your theme; your skill is not such, that you should professe your selfe a Method-master to this Realme. When I tooke occasion from my text to lay downe first the contents, then the effects of Christs crosse, as the Scriptures did deliuer them; that is, what Christ suffered on his crosse for vs, and what he performed by his crosse to vs; say good Sir out of your new found art, what fault you finde either with the matter or with the method. [Christes crosse, you say, signifieth here no such thing, but the afflictions of Christ and his members.] That is the vanitie of your errour; that is not the trueth of my text. Christ crucified in his owne person for mans redemption, is the full purport of Christs crosse in my text; as in my Sermons I shortly declared; in my conclusion I more amplie proued; and now I trust I haue therein fully satisfied the Reader. That standing good, I note what Christ suffered; which I call the contents of his crosse; and to what end he suffered, which are the effects of his crosse; both these are aptly and fairely clo­sed in my text, and by other places of Scripture iustly proued to be comprised in my text. This forsooth your mastership liketh not, but I must make syllogismes out of euery word conteined in my text, or els I make the Scriptures such an instrument as they ought not to be. Silly Sir you vnderstand not what you say: first learne, and after teach, lest you teach that you neuer learned. When it is sayd, Matth. 22. Giue vnto God the things which are Gods, can you out of these words without the aid of other Scriptures, firmely conclude what things are Gods, and how they must be giuen vnto him; or must you proue that by other places of holy Scripture? Euen so when I had shewed what was iustly inclosed within the words of my theme, I made direct & ful proofe thereof by other places of holy writ; which I take to be a sound and sure way of well vsing the Scriptures, to that very purpose they should be applied, notwithstanding your palterie prouisoes, that no man must after speake any thing that can not firmely be concluded by the sole and single words of his text; which is a rule fit for such a Ro­uer as you are, that neuer soundly proue any thing; but not for him that will fully di­uide and rightly deliuer, as well the sense as the sound of any sentence of holy Scrip­ture which he taketh in hand to vnfold.

To shew your selfe a firme and fine concluder vpon texts, you exemplifie your skill, and inferre that in three speciall points, I my selfe Defenc. pag. 25. by my very text ouerthrow my selfe, in the first entrance as all men may see: First, in that I expresly grant, the proper sufferings of Christes minde may rightly be in the contents of his crosse, contrary to my maine opinion, that Christs bodily sufferings ALONE were the full price of our redemption. Se­condly, that Christs soule in a large sense may be sayd to be crucified, if I suppose my text to [Page 79] signifie the whole contents of Christs crosse, which I reproued in you with great con­tempt. Thirdly, in that I quite ouerthrow my second question: for if it be a detesta­ble thing to reioyce but in the crosse of Christ, then Christes descent to hell after death must either be a part of the contents of his crosse, and so he must suffer among the di­uels and damned spirits, or els he did vs no good there, if we may not reioyce in his descending thither. These iarres in my selfe, you say, I must reconcile, els men will thinke, I haue not handled my text indeed very rightly.] These iarres good Sir, for so much as concerneth me, are soone reconciled. Your first obiection is a plaine falsitie, your se­cond an open follie, your third a meere mockerie. The contents of Christs crosse I ex­tended to those griefs, wrongs, and paines, which Christ suffered in his passage to his crosse, as namely his submission in the garden, his apprehension, accusation, illusion, fla­gellation, condemnation and such like, all which he felt before he was fastened to the tree; and though indeed they were precedents to his crosse, yet because the griefe and smart of them continued and increased with his hanging on the tree, the Scrip­ture doth not exclude them from the crosse of Christ, which often meaneth by that word, the whole course and maner of Christes death and passion, as well in comming to his crosse, as in hanging on his crosse. As for the proper sufferings of the minde, those be none of my words; yet if you thereby meane care and feare, shame and sorrow, not repugnant to the condition and perfection of Christes person; let them in Gods name come within the contents of Christes crosse as antecedents or consequents to the paines which he suffered. But if vnder the proper sufferings of the soule you conuey the suffering of hell paines, or the death of the soule from the immediate hand of God, which is your dreame; keepe your errours for your owne accounts, my words haue no such matter nor meaning.

How then Defen. pa. 25. li. 6. can my maine opinion be true that Christs bodily sufferings ALONE were the full price of our Redemption, which I would also ground on all the Fathers though ve­ry vntruely?] How can your obiections be waightie that speake neuer a true word? By Christs bodily sufferings I no where exclude either the sense, consideration, or af­fection of the Soule, discerning the paines which, and the cause why the body suffered, as you falsely imagine; I only except the death of the Soule and paines of hell in Christs sufferings; and to barre that, I shew by many sufficient testimonies of the auncient Fathers, (which you shall neuer ouerbeare for all your bragges,) that Christ dyed for vs the death of the bodie onely, and not the death of the soule. In this case I vse the word ONLY, as hath beene often told you; otherwise to exclude the vnion, operation, or passion of the soule from Christs sufferings, I neuer vse it. And where I so often and instantly vrge that Christs death, and blood-shedding are specified in the Scrip­tures as the full price of our Redemption, and true meanes of our reconciliation to God; You foolishly by their fulnesse would turne out all the rest of Christs sufferings as superfluous; but my words throughout my sermons are expresse to the contrarie. Sermons. pa. 63. The crosse, blood, and death of Christ are euery where mentioned in the Scriptures, as the very ground-worke, and pillars of our Redemption. And the things which are named in the Scriptures as they were the last, so are they the chiefest parts of Christs sufferings; the rest being vnderstood as antecedent to them, and not eminent aboue them. So that by the death and blood of Christ I neither did nor doe exclude the rest of his sufferings before he came to his crosse; only I make them Antecedent to that, not eminent aboue that which he suffered on the crosse. For as the end of euery thing presupposeth a beginning and a middle, and the highest staire doth orderly confirme there are lower greeces; so the fulnesse of Christs obedience and our Redemption performed by his death and bloodshed on the crosse, doth not exclude the rest of his antecedent suf­ferings from the communion of his merits, or cause of our saluation, but onely no­teth that his obedience, and patience on the crosse euen vnto death as it was the last, and the sharpest, so it was the chiefest and acceptablest part of the sacrifice which he offered for the sinnes of the world. Though then as you haue vsed the matter by adding PROPER (to the) sufferings of the mind, and ONLY to the sufferings of the body, [Page 80] you make some shew of repugnancie in my positions; yet when your miscoloured and misconstrued patches are returned to their owner, my opinions stand sound in themselues and consonant ech to other, and haue that reference to my Text which I first expressed.

But Christs soule in a Defenc. pa. 25. large sense may be said to be crucified if we suppose this text to signifie the whole contents of Christs crosse; which I reprooue in you with (such) contempt.] It is an Idle skill and dangerous trade in you and your assistants, when the necessarie parts of Christs satisfaction, and essentiall points of our Redemption come to be questioned; for you to bring your inuentions, besides the Scriptures and without, if not against the faith, and then to vouch it may be said in a large sense; that is by a me­taphoricall, hyperbolicall, or metonymicall vnderstanding. In exhortations we per­mit many things to Diuines, which in positions of faith are vtterly vnlawfull. So long as the words of a perswader may receaue any true construction, be it proper or figuratiue, we beare with his vehement and suddaine affections; but in determinati­ons of doctrine, and conclusions of faith, all men require plaine and proper speech, that the truth may appeare and not be shadowed and obscured with darke and doubt­full riddles. If your hell paines in Christs soule and the death of Christs soule, be but phrases of speech first deuised by you, you should not so much striue for them be­ing no where mentioned, nor applyed to Christ in the sacred Scriptures; but if they be matters of faith, and sufferings requisite by Gods iustice for mans saluation, as you beare the world in hand; why now when you see the falsitie and absurditie of them iustly reprooued, come you in with a large sense, a kind of speach, which in re­solutions of faith is not tolerable? I haue no doubt but figuratiuely the soule of man and the Sonne of God may be said to be crucisied euery day. For not only the1 Cor. 2. Lord of glory was once crucified by the Iewes; but there are that Hebr. 6. crucifie againe to themselues the Sonne of God, euen such as willingly fall from the truth. And that the desires and delights of the soule may and must be continually crucified, the word of God is eui­dent.Gal. 5. They which are Christs, haue crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts; not by fastning their bodies to the tree, but byColoss. 3. mortifying their earthly members, as inor­dinate affection, euill concupiscence, couetousnes, and such like which haue their seate prin­cipally in the soule.Gal. 6. The world is crucified to me, and I to the world, (saith Paul) when he meaneth that his hart despiseth for Christ all the baites and threats of the world. In a large and figuratiue sense therefore, Christs soule may be said to be dead and cruci­sied, and so may the diuell be said to be God, for the Scripture calleth him the2. Cor. 4. God of this world; but I hope these may not goe for positions of faith, nor for Articles of Christian Religion, without beleeuing of which we can not be saued.

From the word Crosse to crucified is an argument, you thinke à Coniugatis, as from words of the same force and inflection; and therefore if Christs soule were partaker of the crosse, it was also crucified.] From being fastened or nayled to the Crosse vn­to crucified is indeede a good consequent in the proper signification of the word; for so much doth Crucifigi import, whence Crucifixus commeth: but from the Patients, instruments, or the precedent or consequent circumstances of the Crosse, which yet are in­closed in the contents of the Crosse, to being crucified, is such an Argument as none but you would make. The disciples flying, Peter forswearing, Pilats wife dreaming, the Mari [...]s sorrowing, the women of Ierusalem weeping, Simon of Cyrene bearing the Crosse, are all within the contents or precedent circumstances of Christs Crosse, and yet it were stra [...]ge Logicke to say they were all dead and crucified. The swordes and staues that were brought to take him, the cordes that bound him, the whippes that were made to scourge him, the thornes that crowned him, the nayles that fastned him, the wood that bare him, the lots cast on his garments, the sponge that was filled with vineger to giue him drinke, the speare that pearced his side, are all within the contents of his Crosse: Shall we thence reason, and say they were also crucified? on­ly his bodie was fastned to the Crosse, in which respect the whole person is saide to haue bene crucified; and the paines which he suffered before in his bodie & brought [Page 81] with him to the crosse, are properly contayned in his crucifixion, by reason they con­tinued in his bodie when it was nayled to the Crosse. The rest of the wrongs & paines which he suffered, are figuratiuely comprised in the name of Christs Crosse, because they were antecedents to his Crosse, or els the name of Crosse is largely taken for all maner of affliction, which befell him after his last Supper, when once he yeelded himselfe to be prepared as a sacrifice for the Crosse. But what is this to the death of Christs soule, or how doth it any way prooue that in soule he must suffer the paines of hell before he could redeeme vs?

At least yet; I quite ouerthrow my second question, that Christ after this went downe into Hell. For either Christ got vs no purchase in hell, for which we should reioyce; or else I must extend the crosse of Christ, and his bitter sufferings, euen vnto his being in hell, among the deuils and damned spirits, before we may reioyce therein] A conclusion fit for such a Clerke as you are, that can neither distinguish things different from things per­tinent to the crosse of Christ, nor see the coherence betwixt the cause and effects of Christs sufferings. In that I obserued, the Apostle made it a thing detestable to re­ioyce in any thing els but in the crosse of Christ; I followed therein, Chrysostome, O [...]cumenius, Theophylact, Bullinger, Gualter and others, whose litle fingers I take had more learning and iudgement then your whole head; neither do I see what you bring against it, but the opening of your owne follie. For first there be things coherent to the crosse of Christ, and things different from it. Hee that reioyceth in the crosse of Christ, doth also reioyce in euery thing that is necessarily by Gods power and ordi­nance adioyned vnto it. For no man can reioyce in the cause, but he must likewise reioyce in the effects; and where the Antecedent is expressed, the consequent is therewithall intended. Now the crosse of Christ in it selfe without the effects, was and is most odious and scandalous to men, as appeareth by the Iewes and Gentiles ignorant thereof, and offended therewith. So that when the godly professe they reioyce in the crosse of Christ, they meane in the loue of Christ, who willinglie endured the paine and shame of the crosse, to purchase them euerlasting blisse, and therewith procured and established all the meanes and parts of their Redemp­tion, iustification, and sanctification in this li [...]e, and saluation in the life to come: and, but in respect of Christs loue submitting himselfe to the crosse, and of those effects merited and obtained by the crosse of Christ, they take no pleasure, much lesse ioy in his griefes and torments, as the wicked did that put him to death. Wherefore it was an easie thing for euery childe to see, that when the Apostle reioyced in the death of Christ suffered for vs and for our saluation, he also reioyced in the conse­quents of Christs death, as his Resurrection, ascension, sitting at the right hand of God, and promised returne to Iudgement, by which as by certaine degrees and steps, our iustification, mortification, sanctification, and saluation, are assured and performed. Now a consequent to Christs death, if not a part or preamble to his Resurrection from the dead, is the destruction of the diuell, and of hell, which is the chiefe place of Satans power as I thinke, and as the Church of Christ before me hath thought, notwith­standing all that you haue said, or can say to the contrarie. Thus standeth my Text neither forced, nor misapplied, as by your ioynt mysticall imagination of a new crosse you supposed, but rightly both conceiued and referred to the painfull suffe­rings and powerfull effects of Christ on the crosse; in which the Apostle so reioyced, that he detested all things different from it, or derogatorie to it: and the iarres which so much offended your eares, were but your owne iests andFollies. iefallies not truely repor­ting, but grosly mistaking the sense and sequels of my positions.

Defenc. pag. 25. l. vlt. Proceeding forward, I still shew a badde minde towards you, seeking foorthwith euen in the entrance to draw you without cause into hatred for disdaining the Fathers. What then is your contempt and disdaine of the Fathers, which I so often report in sundry places, and as o­diously as is possible? Surely you beleeue I can not tell, happily it is because you follow not their authorities in some opinions of religion, nor in diuers expositions of Scripture.] What need you seeke so busily for that which I so plainly haue exemplified vnto you? you af­fourd [Page 82] the Fathers when pleaseth you, neither true knowledge of the first principles of their faith, nor the right vnderstanding of words familiar in their natiue tongue, nor so much as reasonable or likely expositions of the Scriptures, but fond and absurd as you terme them; and yet you aske What is your insolent dealing against the Fathers? With one consent they teach that for our redemption Christ died the death of the body only, and by no meanes the death of the soule: You teach that Christ must die the death of the soule before he could redeeme vs, and that his bodily sufferings Treat. pa. 18. l. vltim. properly did not make to our redemption. And though Austen aske, Austen. Epist. 99. Who dare auouch that Christ died in soule, or in his humane spirit? you not only dare and doe it, but you make it the maine ground of our redemption: wherein you condemne him and the rest of the an­cient and learned Fathers as ignorant of the very way and meane of our redemption. So likewise, that Christ receiued vpon him the punishment, but not the guilt of our sinne; that the second death in the Scriptures is the eternall punishment of bodie and soule; and that the death of the bodie was inflicted on Adam and all his posteritie as a punishment of sinne; in these and many such, which are deliuered as sound conclusions of Christian religion, you oppose your selfe against S. Austen and the rest, and reiect their iudgements as false and erroneous. And for the sense and signification of words vsed in the Scriptures, you lustily controle them in their natiue speech, and leaue them not so much as the true vnderstanding of the Greeke or Latine tongue. This Trea. pa. 95. I affirme, say you, it is only the Fathers abusiue speaking and altering the vsuall and ancient sense of Hades that bredde this error of Christs descending into hell: their vnapt and perillous translating into Latine Inferi. Ibid. pag. 96. And note heere first, it is a thing too rife with the Fathers, yea with some of the ancientest of them, to alter and change the authentike vse of words; whereby consequently it is easie for errours and grosse mistakings to creepe in.] This challenge of yours against the credits and consciences of so many learned and worthy Fathers as haue vsed the word hades to signifie the place of hell, how insolent it is, I leaue to the wise Reader to iudge, when he shall see that indeed they concurre with the writers of the new Testament, and with the ancient and vulgar vnderstanding of their owne tongue. How you entertaine their expositions of the Scripture, your owne words doe witnesse, when you replie to interpretations alledged out of them; Trea. pa. 66. this sense is most absurd; 67. this is no lesse absurd than the former, there is no reason, nor likelihood for it. 68. This is more fond and absurd than the other. This is the reuerence and louing regard you beare towards their opinions and iudgements for the manifolde graces of God that were otherwise in them; and this you thinke is no contempt, nor disdaine of the Fathers.

I call the Fathers iudgements many times AVTHORITIES, that Defenc. pag. 26. the world might conceiue their words to be warrants vnto vs, and good authorities to rest on in matters of Re­ligion. If I had not this drift in my minde, why giue I them such a title, which to you seemeth somewhat insolent indeed. What difference there is betwixt the authoritie of God and man in matters of religion, I need not to learne, nor you to teach; there is no such thing in question betwixt vs: S. Austen hath long since in Austen. con­tra Fausi. Ma­ [...]ich. li. 11. ca. 5. & de Baptis. contra Dona­tist li. 2. ca. 3. & E [...]ist. 19. & in prooem. 3. li. de Tri­ [...]tate. sundrie places of his works, humbly, truely, and fully confessed and professed the eminence of the Canonicall Scriptures aboue and against all the writings of others, whosoeuer they be: with him I wholly ioyne in iudgement. This therefore is an idle shift of yours, to guesse what drifts I haue in my minde, and that I goe about to impaire the soueraigntie and cer­taintie of the Scriptures, by giuing such a title to the expositions and opinions of the Fathers, as to call them Authorities. As though the best learned Diuines both new and olde, did not vse the same word in the same sense and case that I do. Peruse the labours of that learned Father, Bishop Iewel, and see how often in his Replie to Har­ding, and his Defence of the Apologie, he calleth the testimonies of the ancient Fa­thers and Councels Authorities. We R [...]plie. pag. 95. rest (sayth he) vpon the Scriptures of God, vpon the Authoritie of the ancient Doctours and Councels. And againe, to Ibid. pag. 149. reckon vp the au­thorities of ANTIQVITIE it would be infinite. The halfe communion by the authoritie of Gelasuis may well be called open sacriledge. In the conclusion of the same booke, In the answer to Hardings conclusion. I [Page 83] grant you haue alledged authorities sundrie and many such as I knew long before. Verely I neuer denied but you were able to bring vs the names and shadowes of m [...]ny Fathers. You haue defended the open abomination of your stewes by the name and AVTHORITIE of S. Augustine. You haue sought vp a companie of new petite Doctors Authors void of Authori­tie, full of vanities. In the conclusion of his defence of the Apologie, The conclu [...] to H [...]ding. my Authori­ties of Doctors and Councels as you haue vsed them, are few enough. What meant you in fauour of open Stewes to shew vs the name and AVTHORITIE of S. Augustine? Peter Martyr against Smithes bookes of the singlenesse of Priests, sayeth. Peter Martyr de votis & c [...] ­libat. fol. 474. In iudging of things obscure, we must haue two waies or meanes to direct vs; one i [...]ward which is the Spirit, the other outward which is the word of God. Tum si ad haec patrum etiam authori­tas accesserit, valebit plurimum; to these if the authoritie of Fathers be ioyned, it is of great force. So Chemnitius in his examination of the Tridentine Councell. Chemn. in 1. parte exami. concilij trident. cap. 6. genus tra­ditionum. Quod de patrum authoritate sentimus, etiam ab ipsis Patribus didicimus. That which we hold touching the authoritie of the Fathers, we learned of the Fathers themselues. Where also he teacheth you this Rule worth the noting for your new found Redemption and the rest of your nouelties. Ibid [...]. Sentimus etiam nullum dogma in ecclesia no [...]m, & cum t [...]ta an­tiquitate pugnans recipiendum. We also confesse that no point of Doctrine which is new to the Church, and repugnant to all antiquitie, is to be receiued.

If the Fathers themselues will better please you, I want not their example for the vse of that word which so much offendeth you. Ierome in his Epistle to Damasus in very earnest manner maketh this petition, Hiero ad Da­mas. Epist. 57. Vt [...]ihi epistolis tuis siue tacendarum, siue dicendarū hypostase [...]n detur authoritas; That AVTHORITIF may be giuen me, saith he, by your letters to vse or refuse the word hypostases. Vincentius in his book against heresies mooueth this question. Vincentius ad­uers. Haereses. Here some perchaunce will aske, where as the Canon of the Scrip­ture is perfect, and abundantly sufficient in it selfe for all things, quid opus est vt ei eccle­siasticae intelligentiae iungatur authoritas; what neede is there that the authoritie of the ec­clesiasticall interpretation should be ioyned with it? The effect of his answere (which is good for you to obserue, that claime such libertie for your selfe to expound the Scriptures at your pleasure) is this, least euery man should wrest the Scriptures to his fansie, and sucke thence not the truth, but the patronage of his error. Saint Augu­stine that is euery where carefull to yeeld the Scriptures their due reuerence, yet gi­ueth the word Authoritie, to the decrees of Councels and writings of godly Fathers before his time. Speaking of generall Councels he saith, August epist. 118. Quorum est in ecclesia salu­berrima authoritas, Whose authoritie is most wholsome in the Church. And alleaging the testimonies of Irenaeus, Cyprian, Hilarius, Ambrose, Gregorie, Chrysostome, Basil, and others against Iulian the Pelagian he concludeth; Idem contra Iulianum P [...] ­lagianum li. 2. cap. 9. Hoc probauimus Catholicorum authoritate sanctorum; this haue we prooued by the authoritie of Godly Catholike men; vt vestra fragilis & quasi argutula nouitas sola authoritate conteratur illorum; that your weake and sleigh noueltie might be ouerwhelmed with their onely authoritie. For your con­tumacie is first to be repressed by their authoritie. Ibid. cap. 10 With these testimonies and so great au­thoritie of holy men, thou must either by Gods mercy be healed, or else thou must accuse the egregious and holy Doctors of the Catholike truth; against which miserable madnes I must so answere, that their faith may be defended against thee, euen as the Gospell it selfe is de­fended against the wicked and professed enimies of Christ. If then this word seeme inso­lent to you which is so frequent with the best Diuines of former and latter times, let your Reader iudge whether it be ignorance or insolence in you to stumble at so plaine a word, as if the religious and auncient Fathers, and lights of Christs Church were not worthy with you to be counted learned Authors, nor their testimonies to be named Authorities fit to guide and lead others to the knowledge of the truth.

Defenc. pa. 27. I trust no aduised Christian will challenge more authoritie to the Fathers then was giuen, (by those of Beraea) to the Apostle, nor deny indeede to any priuate man, much lesse to a Minister to iudge and discerne in themselues not onely the words of men, but euen of the sense and meaning of the Scripture by the Scripture it selfe, which thing the Beraeans did, and are commended by the holy Ghost for it.] I trust you claime no power to iudge of [Page 84] the Scriptures; you may discerne the truth there written, but with necessitie to beleeue, not with libertie to iudge. And if by your freedome you fasten on falsehood, it is no excuse for you, but a condemnation vnto you. Saint Austen speaking of the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles saith, August contra Cr [...]um gra [...]aticum li. 2. cap. 31. quos omnino indicare non audeamus, which we may not dare at all to iudge. And where you say the Ber [...]ans are commended by the holy Ghost for not beleeuing that Paul spake touching Religion, till they had examined by the Scriptures and seene whether the truth were so as he vttered; You speake not one [...]y vnwisely and vntruely, but if you would haue Christians to follow that course, you shew intolera­ble pride against the word of God: for the Beraeans were commended (when as yet they neither beleeued in Christ, nor acknowledged Pauls Apostleship) for their rea­dinesse to heare, and care to search whether Paul spake trueth or no. This if you now assume to your selfe ouer Pauls words or writings, you incurre the crime of flat impi­etie. Pauls words to vs that beleeue, without further search or other credit, are of e­quall authoritie with the rest of the Scriptures; and not to beleeue him, till we exa­mine and see the trueth of his doctrine, is meere infidelitie. Galat. 5. Behold, I paul say vnto you, must suffice all Christians, and if Galat. 1. an Angel from heauen preach otherwise than he preached, we must hold him accursed. For our comfort that beleeue, and to perswade them which as yet beleeue not, we may search and see the consent betwixt the Pro­phets and Apostles; yea the sonne of God sent men to the writings of Moses and the Prophets, not as wanting soueraigntie and sufficiencie in himselfe aboue all Pro­phets, but leading them that knew him not, to consider better of those Scriptures which they knew. It is as true of Pauls writings, as of the rest of the Apostles and Prophets, which S. Augustine affirmeth; Aug. epist. 19. De quorum scriptis, quòd omni errore care­ant, dubitare nefarium est. Of whose writings to doubt whether they be free from all error, is plaine wickednesse.

Defenc. pa. 28. Neuerthelesse I well perceiue that all this great shew of cleauing to the Fathers iudge­ments is but coloured in you. For in other points againe we see when they speake not to yoúr liking, the case is altered. Ibid. pag. 29. The Fathers may be left in some priuate opinions. I see in this booke where you forsake the ancient and learned Fa­thers, that is, as you speake in my case, you con [...]mne & despise them. The more vniust then and iniurious was your slander, that I went about by the vse of one word, which olde and new Diuines vsed in like sort before me, to make the Fathers of equall authoritie with the Scriptures: since now you can both obserue and obiect, that euen in this booke which you impugne, I say and do the contrarie. And though I be farre from repenting or misliking any thing that I sayd touching the prerogatiue of the sacred Scriptures and their irrefragable authoritie against all the words and wits of men; yet can I not chuse but note your negligence, that marke neither what, nor of whom I speake. Had I brought Fathers in matters of faith against or without the Scriptures, you had some colour to choake me with mine owne words; but taking care as I did, that in cases of faith the Scriptures should be plaine and perspicuous for my purpose before I cited them; and the testimonies of the Fathers euident and concurrent with the Scriptures; how doe I crosse any of those places which you quote out of my wri­tings touching the authoritie and sufficiencie of the Scriptures in points of faith? or what agreement hath your dissenting from the Scriptures and Fathers in the chiefest keyes of Christian religion, with my leauing them in some expositions and positions not pertinent to the faith nor generally receiued of them all? It is vanitie enough to dreame of contradictions where none are; and as great infirmitie not to see that which lieth before your eyes: but to pronounce, that you know how Defenc. pa. 20. li. 12. wauering and slipperie I am for the most part therein, when you neither consider nor conceiue what I say, that is more than childish temeritie. As I sayd, so I say againe; In Gods causes Gods booke must teach vs what to beleeue, and what to professe; and therefore what I reade in the word of God, that I beleeue; what I reade not, that I doe not beleeue. Yea, I adde thereto S. Basils conclusion: [...]asil. [...]oral. Su [...] [...]0. ca. 21. If all that is not of faith, be sinne, as the Apostle sayth; and faith commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word of God; all that is without the Scripture inspi­red from God, as not being of faith, is sinne. This confession I constantly holde, and as in [Page 85] the first booke which you quote, I directly and expresly defend, that no point of faith should be beleeued without Scripture, so in my Sermons I no where varie from it, how slipperie soeuer your tongue be to tell a tale in stead of a trueth.

I doe Defenc. pa. 29. reiect Austens opinion in three speciall points, and diuers Fathers in two other ca­ses, and some of those things I affirme against all the Fathers, and almost against all the Church; and yet I bitterly reproue you for vsing the like libertie. Doe I any where reiect S. Augustine or all the Fathers in any point of doctrine necessarie to our salua­tion, as you do in the chiefest grounds of our redemption? And when I let the Rea­der vnderstand, that the reasons which some Fathers bring to fortifie their priuate o­pinions, are not sufficient for to force consent to be giuen vnto them, doe I call them fond absurd without reason or likelihood, and paradoxes in nature, as you do? These two things I iustly reproue in you, which I my selfe doe not fall into for all your fitning. In the maine principles of Christian religion and our redemption, you make the best learned Fathers ignorant of their Creed and Catechisme; and when their expositi­ons of the Scripture crosse your imaginations, you Reuell against their Iudgements as void of sense and reason. This do [...] I not; In the rule of faith I renounce not their maine consent nor vndoubted maximes, least I conclude them or my selfe to erre in faith: In other questions of les [...]e importance wherein they differ sometimes from ech other, sometimes euen from themselues, I let the Reader see their reasons, and leaue him free to follow what he liketh, or to suspend his iudgement, if he find cause there­fore. This libertie I neuer take from you, nor mislike it in you; but when you pro­nounce all to be absurd, fond, and foolish, that yeeld not to your fansie: wherein you doe not onely proudly aduance your owne dreames as necessary Doctrines, but re­prochfully preiudice the freedome of others. This difference is not my deuise: the Vincentius aduersus Hae­res [...]s. auncient consent of Godly Fathers (saith Vincentius) is with great care to be searched and followed of vs, not in all the questions of the Diuine Law, but onely or chiefly in the Rule of Faith. Whether therefore the bodies of such as arose and came out of their graues after Christs resurrection returned againe to corruption, or still kept the honor of immortalitie, which was bestowed on them; as also when Christ said to the theefe on the Crosse, this day shalt thou be with me in Paradise, whether Christ ment the presence of his humane soule or of his Diuine glory should be that day in Paradise, and so whether the soules of the faithfull d [...]parting this life, goe straight to heauen, or stay in a place appointed them of God till the day of iudgement: and likewise whether Abrahams bosome were a receptacle for soules within the earth, and neere to hell; or far aboue the earth: and lastly whether the loosing of Adam from hell, by Christs descent thither, which the whole Church almost seemed to hold by tradition, freed onely the person of Adam from the place of hell; or both him and his posteritie from all feare and danger of hell: These be things that may be liked, disliked, or sus­pended without any manifest breach of faith, and wherein Saint Austen probablely disputeth, but determineth nothing for certaintie to be beleeued; alwaies tempering his words in these cases with August. [...]pist. 99. Ego quidem non video, explicent qui possunt, nondum intel­ligo, nulla causa occurrit, nondum mu [...]. I see not how, let them declare it that can, as yet I vnderstand it not, I conceaue presently no cause, as yet I find it not cleere. If I then labou­red with respectiue words, and other places of the same Fathers, to shew wherein they doubted, or dissented; who but a light head and slipper tongue would call this contemning or despising of the Fathers? But you will proceede to the speciall examples wherein I charge you with despising the Fathers; and I will not be long after you.

First Defenc. pa. 30. where you say out of certaine Fathers, that Christ in his dying gaue vp his spirit miraculously, no violence of death wresting it from him, as it doth ours, but when he saw his time, he euen at an instant laid it downe of himselfe; Contrarie to this I alleaged the Scrip­ture, HE VVAS LIKE VS IN ALL THINGS, sinne onely excepted. To answere this you reply, was he like vs in his birth? Can we lie in the graue without corruption as he lay? Or raise our selues from death as he did? Which poore answere I wonder to see comming from you. As well you might shew farder, he was not like vs in that he walked on the water, [Page 86] nor in that he fasted fortie d [...]s, nor in that he knew the secrets of mens harts, nor in that he turned water into wine, and with a word healed all diseases. These things done by his man­hood, yet were they the proper effects of his Godhead: they were no naturall but spirituall things.] You may wonder at what you will, and though your proofes and replies be not worth the paper you wast, yet you so powder them with figures and fansies, that you thinke them very pretious. Where I obserued out of Augustine, Ierome, and Bernard, that the manner of Christs death was not like ours, (though his death were the same that ours is, I meane the separation of the soule from the body,) by reason he had perfect sense and strong speech euen to the very instant that of his owne ac­cord (when he saw his time) he breathed out his soule; whereas both speech, and sense doe faile in vs before we die, and our soules are taken from vs, we can not breath them out when we will; to impeach this obseruation you cast out first reprochfull words, and then vntidy proofes, such as your store could best affourd. Treatis. pa. 53. Here a fine fable is offered vs, say you, a Paradoxe in nature, and contrary to the Scripture which saith, HE VVAS LIKE VS IN ALL THINGS sinne onely excepted. This scorne­full speech and bare pretence of Scripture misapplied to your peeuish conceite, is all the answere you vouchsafe to those auncient and reuerend Fathers, I meane Saint Austen, and Saint Ierome. To repell this pride of yours, and to make you perceaue the misconstering of the Scriptures, I shortly replyed; Was Christ like vs in his birth? in his graue or in his resurrection? If he were vnlike vs in these, and yet those words must stand true, then might he also be vnlike vs in his death, and no proofe out of those words could be made to the contrarie. At this poore answere you wonder; but you and your adherents lay your wits together, as you haue done your heads, you shal neuer refell this answere, as poore as it is, without confessing the weaknesse of your owne proofe. For if you restraine the text (which you brought) to naturall humane properties, and infirmities, as now you doe, then most apparantly his birth and his graue must in all things be like to ours, for they are in vs naturall humane properties or infirmities. To be borne of a Virgin, not to rotte in graue and to rise from the dead, Defenc. pa. 30. Those Diuine effects (you say) are iustly beleeued to haue beene in Christ because of the expresse Scripture that witnesseth the same.] But then the text which you vrged, he was like vs in all things, must haue an other meaning then you made shew of. And so it well may, for euen in his birth, in his graue, and in his resurrection, he was like to vs though not in euery circumstance thereof. His body was made of the seede and substance of his mother as ours is, though she a Virgin, and we were begotten by our Fathers. It also lay senselesse and dead in the graue as ours doth, though it could not returne to dust as ours shall. He rose from the dead to a celestiall and immortall life; and so shall we, but not when we will, nor of our owne power, as he did: So that he was like vs in all things▪ that is in euery part of our nature, and in euery kind of humane in­firmities, but not like vs in euery action, circumstance or consequent of all humane properties and infirmities. For so we should depriue him of that fulnesse of wisdome, grace and power, wherewith his humane soule was indued farre vnlike to ours not on­ly if we respect naturall properties, and infirmities in vs, which are vtterly voide of these gifts; but if we compare our measure of knowledge, grace, and strength with the abundance of his spirit. Then might he be like vs euen in death also which par­ted his soule from his body, as it doth ours; though he were vnlike vs in power to dye when he would, which we can not, and retained full force of sense and speech to the very moment of giuing vp his Ghost, which we doe not.

Againe the words following in the Text He was like vs in all things, SINNE EX­CEPTED, are a sufficient exemption of Christ from our manner of death, as well as from our kind of birth, and rotting in the graue. For we are borne in sinne, which he might not be, & therefore was to be borne of a Virgin to auoid all concupiscence, as well of a Father as in his Mother, without whom he could not be made our flesh. So rotte we in the graue by reason of sinne dwelling in our bodies; which must be changed into dust, whence we were taken, in reward of our first fathers sinne, from [Page 87] whose loynes we come with like infection of sinne. This Christs body might by no possibilitie admit, though you in the margin of your booke make a false note to the contrarie. First, for that no part of his person might vtterly be dissolued or corrup­ted after it was once vnited to his Godhead, but must remaine for euer inseparable from his Diuine nature, and so incorruptible: because God was vnited not to dust or ashes, but to humane flesh which so must still continue. Secondly, for that all Christs sufferings for sinne must haue in them exact and perfect obedience, and so precisely sense and will in euery passion, to submit himselfe to the hand of God: which in death he might doe and did; but in rotting i [...] the graue where sense and will wanted he could not doe. Lastly, the Apostle extendeth Christs obedience in suffering, no farder then to the death of the Crosse; after which could follow no fat­der humiliation, and so no corruption to dust; but a sure confirmation of his death by lying three daies in the graue, and a plaine pledge of his resurrection, because he could not see corruption. The same words exempt Christ from our manner of death. For where death entred not but by sinne, and the soule of ech man to this day, by a naturall instinct sheweth her secret abhorring of death and open strugling with death before she depart her body, from which she doth not yeeld but by force of death ta­king from her first speech and sense, and so by degrees the whole possession of hir bo­die; violently thrusting hir out of her seate; Neither this violence of death, nor this resistance of the soule may be admitted, or were perceaued in the person of Christ. He might suffer nothing but willingly; because the misliking of the hart is disobe­dience though the fact be endured. Wherefore if we meane with the Apostle to confesse Christ to haue beene obedient to his death, we must leaue in him both sense and will to obey euen to the last gasp, and also power to breath out his soule into his Fathers hand, when the time was come appointed by God for him to depart this life. Againe, what force created could wrest his soule from him being God, and man, but at his liking? His owne words are, none taketh my soule from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe. Whereon Chrysostome rightly groundeth this consequent. Chrysost. de feria 5. passio­ni [...] sermo 6. Si nemo, vtique nec mors. If none then surely neither death.

But you would see Defenc. pa. 30. expresse words in the Text that Christ died, as I say, not naturally, but miraculously, and then you will beleeue it.] Would you haue so plaine words in the text, that you can not, or that you should not quarrell with? If you delude, as your maner is, the plaine words of the Scripture with kinds of speeches and large senses, I see no words that can hold you, but you may defend after your fashion any kind of fansie or heresie, with Synecdoches, Allegories, and Hyperboles. And though the iudgement of so great and godly fathers ioyning with the very words of the Scripture, carie with it sufficient weight to a sober and religious Reader; yet for your pleasure, that you may see your follie, I am content to cast about againe. What is ponere animam in the Scrip­ture, Sir, I pray? is it willingly or vnwillingly to lay downe a mans soule or life? You know Peters words to his Master, Iohn. 13. Animam meam pro te ponam. I will lay downe my life for thy sake. And S. Iohns, 1. Iohn 3. Nos debemus profratribus animas ponere. We ought to lay downe our liues for our brethren. And Christes, Iohn. 10. Propter hoc Pater me diligit, quoni­am ego pono animam meam, vt iterum sumam eam. Therefore the Father loueth me, because I lay downe my soule to take it againe. In all these places ponere animam must needs be to lay downe life or soule willingly; except you be so wise as to thinke that Peter in loue telleth his Master he was vnwilling to die for him; and S. Iohn forwarneth vs, we must not be willing to die for our brethren; yea, and that the Father loued the Sonne because hee was vnwilling to die for his sheepe, which were Diuinitie fit for such a Doctor as you are. Then tollere animam is for another to take our (life or) soule fromvs, whether we be willing or vnwilling it should be done, as appeareth by Eliahs prayer vnto God, in saying 1. King. 19. take away my soule, when he desired to die. Resort now to the words of our Sauiour, where he sayd, Iohn. 10. None taketh (my soule) from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe, and see whether they inferre a peculiar maner of dying, not common to others. Had he meant to say no more, but I die willingly, as you imagine he in­tended; [Page 88] pono animam, I lay downe my soule, had been words enow to expresse that mean­ing: but he maketh an addition, which must needs haue some force; and not be an idle repetition of the same thing; and likewise an opposition, the contrarie whereof must be found in his death. For where other mens soules are taken from them, though they be neuer so willing to die, as appeareth by the witnesse of Scripture, I lay it downe OF MY SELFE, sayth our Sauiour; that is, not onely of mine owne accord, but by mine owne power. To shew that so he doth, he sayth, None taketh (my soule) from me, (which they do from others) I lay it downe of my selfe. And lest any man should doubt as you doe, whether [...]e spake of his willingnesse to die, which is common to o­thers; or of his power, which was proper to himselfe; in full, expresse, and direct words, to stoppe such cauilling mouthes as yours is, hee addeth as a proofe of his speech,Iohn. 10. I haue power to lay it downe (he meaneth of himselfe, as the former words con­uince) and haue power to take it againe: this commandement haue I receiued of my Father. That he was willing to lay down his soule I do not denie, the word pono (I lay it down) proueth so much; but he professeth that hee had receiued power and commandement from his Father to lay it downe of himselfe, and to take it againe of himselfe. This com­maundement was peculiar to his person; no man liuing euer had or shall haue the like; & this power to lay downe his soule of himselfe was as MIRACVLOVS, as his power to raise himselfe from the dead, since they are both compared and ioyned together. These things did those ancient and learned Fathers see, when they made their col­lections: and so plaine and perspicuous are they euen in the Text it selfe, that none of meane capacitie or any modestie can mistake, or will outface them.

As for Defenc. pa. 31. Chrysostom whom you cite hereupon, he hath nothing for this point.] He that hath once hardned his hart and mouth against the truth, will neuer stay nor sticke at any thing. When you would needs out of those words, He was like vs in all things inferre, therefore Christ must be like vs in the manner of his death; I let you see that Chrysostom auoucheth the contrary. The death of Christ, and his rising from the dead,Chrysost. in Iohan. [...]omil. 59. both these (saith Chrysostom) were strong, and besides the common (that is, the naturall) course of men. And expounding Christs words I haue power to lay downe my soule, that is. (saith Chrysostom)Ibidem. I alone haue this power, which you haue not. In this power which he had and we haue not, I trust he was vnlike vs; and so Chrysostom di­rectly refelleth your vnskilfull application of the Scripture that Christ was like vs in all things, euen in the manner of his death. ButDefenc. pa. 31. If it were new and not ordinarie that Christ should haue power to lay downe his life, yet why may not his manhood dye naturally notwithstanding?] Forsooth because he vsed that power at the time of his death, as he himselfe witnesseth, which no man euer did, or can doe. As he had power which was aboue nature to lay downe his life when he himselfe would; so his owne mouth testi­fieth that none tooke his soule from him, but he layed it downe of himselfe, that is, of his owne accord and power, when he saw his time. And so Chrysostom telleth you;C [...]st in I [...]han. [...]omil. 59. Ita mori vires humanas excedit; So to dye (as Christ did) passeth the power (or nature) of man and, solus erat vitam ponendi dominus, Christ alone was the (Ruler or) master of laying downe his life. Howbeit in your mocking vaine you goe on, and say, that I will conclude this better. You must remember what God himselfe saith; O foole this night they shall fetch away thy soule from thee. Whereto you adde. I remember it well, what then? ergo, Christ saying none taketh my life from me, ment he would dye miraculously, and not by the fayling of nature in him? If this be the reason, verely I graunt it is marueylous subtill and past my reach. If you ouer-reach no more then this reason doth, you will come short of all your new conceits. If your memory be not too much moistened, you may call to mind that this place was brought to prooue, Christ was vnlike vs in the laying downe of this soule; and if I be not as grosse as you are gamesome, it proueth it very directly. God by those words expresseth the rich man should that night die, and thereby teacheth vs that when we dye, our soules are taken from vs. So that it is not in our power to keepe our soules in our bodies as long as we will, nor to leaue them when we list: but when God sendeth, will we, nill we, they are taken from vs. This Christ deni­eth [Page 89] to be verified in him; none tooke his soule from him, but he laid is downe of himselfe, which we cannot doe. Hence if it please you to frame but this reason which is in open sight: All mens soules are taken from them when they dye: Christs soule was not taken from him when he dyed: ergo, Christ dyed not in the same manner that we doe; and so was vn­like vs in his death, by the manifest wordes of the Scripture; you shall see a plaine truth, not past your reach, though repugnant to your purpose.

But I should proue Christ diedDefene. pa. 31. miraculously not naturally. That at last after long and sore anguish of mind, & bodily torments his natural strength failed him, & therfore he bowed his head and gaue vp the ghost; what miracle is there in this?] Men may well maruaile at your folly, who turne & wind euery way rather then you will acknowledge that which the Scriptures expresly witnesse was in Christ aboue mans nature, which they that saw it marueiled at, & which the best Diuines of all ages haue confessed to be miraculous in the death of Christ: To haue perfect sense, speach, and mo [...]on at the very instant of giuing vp the ghost is a thing not possible to our nature. Our speach and sense & lunta [...] motion doe first euidently faile before our soules depart from our bodies: But Christ had all three by the full report of the Euangelists, euen to the very act of breathing out of his soule. Saint Iohn writeth thatIohn. 19. Iesus knowing all things were ful­filled said, I thirst: and when he had tasted the vineger he said, it is finished: and inclining his head gaue vp the ghost. Hee noteth in Christ exact memorie of all things written in the Scripture touching him, Plaine speach, and voluntarie motion in laying downe his head at the very moment that he yeelded vp the ghost. S. Luke witnesseth thatLuke 23. cry­ing with a lowde voyce (Christ said.) Father into thine hands I will commend (or lay down) my Spirit. [...]. And speaking these words hee breathed out his soule. The lowdnesse of his voyce, and effect of his prayer professing hee would now die, and at the same instant performing it by giuing vp his spirit, conclude that neither sense, memorie, speach, nor prayer failed him to the last breath, as they doe vs when wee draw towards death; and therefore the maner of his death to bee farre distant from ours.

Defene. pa. 31. li. 37. Anone after (you say) he might die, and in the meane while both sense and speach faile him before he died.] Your libertie to iudge of the sense of the Scripture doeth lead you, and hold you to this errour. You imagine what please you of the words of the Euangelists, and auerting them from their true coherence by interposing your fansies, you maintaine it as your right to iudge of the meaning of the holy Ghost. But consult your conscience, that you [...]st not with the truth; and compare the Euange­lists words and purpose together, and you shall soone see the course, and force of them. To what end doe the Euangelists so carefully note in Christ these circumstan­ces, not vsuall with vs, no [...] possible for vs at the departure of our soules, but onely to shew the trueth of his owne words, that none tooke his soule from him, but hee laied it downe of himselfe, which he had power to doe and accordingly did? and therefore they describe him remembring all things, calling euen for drinke because hee was exceeding drie through paine, warning the people standing about him, with a lowde prayer, that he would (now) lay downe his soule into his Fathers hands. And so bowing his head of his owne accord he forthwith breathed out his soule. Anone after, say you, but nature first de­caying in him; Presently say I, when there was in him no decay of nature, nor any want of memorie, sense, or speach. In vaine else were all those things, both performed by our Sauiour, and testified by the Euangelists, if this were not the scope thereof, that Christ with actuall and perfect obedience, deuotion, and submission to the will of God, and therefore also with full and perfect memorie, sense, and speach, did aboue the strength and vse of men, willingly and powerfully with one breath render his soule into the hands of his Father; who had decreed hee should die, but gaue him leaue and power to lay downe his soule of his owne accord when hee would, without constraint or stroke of death wresting or taking his soule from him. And that the maner of Christs death was miraculous euen in his owne Person, and draue the stan­ders by to confesse hee was more then a man, that so could die; if you could but open [Page 90] your partial eares, you should heare the Euangelists cofirme, though you very course­ly intreate S. Ierom as bending himselfe therein against the plaine text, where indeed he rightly pursueth the words of the holy Ghost, and you would saucily controle one text by an other, and not seeke to reconcile them together. Saint Markes words are these. And Marke 15. Iesus crying with a lowde voyce, gaue vp the ghost, and the Centurion that stoode ouerright him, seeing, [...], that crying in such sort hee breathed out his soule, said; Surely this man was the Sonne of God. This crying so lowde which Saint Marke speaketh of, was that prayer whereby Christ commended his soule into his Fathers hands, as S. Luke testifieth; for those were the last words hee spake at the time when he gaue vp the ghost. The breathing out of his soule so presently vpon so strong a voyce, and [...]o lowde a prayer was so strange, that it forthwith mooued the Centurion, who stoode ouerright him, and well obserued him, to pronounce that he was the Sonne of God. What now hath Ierom offended, I pray you, in noting that which S. Marke writeth, that the Hieronymus ad Hedibia [...] quaesti [...]. 8. Centurion hearing Christ say to his Father, Into thy hands I commend my spirit, ET STATIM SPONTE, and foorthwith of his owne accord to haue giuen vp the ghost, mooued with the greatnesse of this wonder, said, truely this man was the Sonne of God?

I Defenc. pa. 32. vrge Ierom, you say, against the plaine text in an other place: which saith; When the Centurion s [...]w the Earthquake & the things which were done, he said, truly this man was the Sonne of God.] If Ierom should haue falsified one text, as you haue done, to out-face an other, he were worthy to be blamed; but your libertie to iudge of the Scriptures at your pleasure must excuse you. What hath Ierom said in those words; which Saint Marke, and S. Luke in effect did not before him? That the lowde voyce which Christ vsed presently before his yeelding vp the ghost, was that prayer which Ierom mentio­neth, S. Luke witnesseth. And speaking those words (saith S. Luke) Christ gaue vp the ghost. That was a very strange, and marueilous thing to the Centurion to heare him so speake, and see him so die. Saint Marke obserueth; The Centurion seeing, that cry­ing in such sort, Christ gaue vp the ghost, said, Surely this man was the Sonne of God. Could it mooue the Centurion (that had the charge to see Christ executed) to this confessi­on, and not seeme strange vnto him? Pilate that gaue sentence of death vpon him, Marueiled he was so soone dead; and doe you thinke it much S. Ierom should say it was a wonder? But in S. Matthew it is Defenc. pa. 32. expresly noted that the Earthquake chi [...]ly did mooue the Centurion so to thinke, and speake.] Saint Marke saith, The Centurion that stoode ouer-right Christ, and beheld him; when hee saw in what sort hee cried, and died, said, Truely this was the Sonne of God. After his death, the Earthquake and other things that followed the death of Christ, caused the Centurion and his Souldiers, as they were keeping Iesus now dead, greatly to feare, and with one voyce now to con­fesse that surely he was the Sonne of God. Both which reports stand true together; the one not ouerthrowing the other. For the Centurio alone at the hearing of Christs voyce, and sight of his death did first affirme it: Afterward when Christ was dead, as the Centurion and his souldiers kept his body on the Crosse, till Pilates pleasure were knowen, the wonders which followed Christs death, as the shaking of the earth, the cleauing of the rockes, and opening of the graues, made the Centurion and those that were with him watching Iesus greatly to feare, and (with one mind) to say, Truely this was the Sonne of God. So that your words Pag. 32. li. 45.HE SAID, meaning thereby the Centurion, are not in S. Matthew, but the Centurion and those that were with him SEEING (the won­ders that followed Christs death) greatly feared, saying, Truely this man was the Sonne of God. And had the Centurion seene nothing wonderfull in Christs person before he di­ed; how should hee and the rest haue gathered certainely, that these things declared Christ and none other, to be the Sonne of God? But Christ suffering all things with si­lence and patience till the instant of his death, he then shewed himselfe to die with a strange and diuine power aboue mans nature, which the Centurion first marked, and therefore confes [...]ed him to be the Sonne of God; & when the rest of the wonders that followed the death of Christ, were perceiued; they confirmed him and all his souldi­ers [Page 91] in the same opinion: yea Luk 23. all the people that came to that sight, beholding the things which were done, smote their brests and returned. Where S. Luke also putteth a manifest difference betwixt the Centurion and the rest of the people. Of the Centurion hee saith,Vers. 47. [...] seeing what was done, in that Christ praying gaue vp the ghost, hee glorified God and said, truely this man was iust. Of the rest Saint Luke saith, [...], Beholding the sundry things that were done (after Christs death)Vers. 48. they stroke their brests and returned.

This miraculous and diuine power, which appeared in the person of our Sauiour breathing out his soule at an instant, when he would and as he would, besides and be­yond the nature of man, at which the Centurion so much wondered; the best Diuines of all ages haue likewise obserued, and acknowledged. So that you haue small cause to conceiue, you can take Bernard tardie in a tale in such sort as you doe; as if his age were too young, or his wits too weake to encounter your worth. He sayth indeede: to die was a great infirmitie, but so to die, (as Christ did) was a great (or an infinite) power. Where shewing your selfe to be sharpe sighted in toyes, and heauie headed in trueth, you aske, which is this infinite power? Christs tasting the vineger, or his saying it is fini­shed, or his bowing the head, or his giuing vp the ghost? Had you not tasted so much the vineger of your owne conceits, that you can scant lift vp your head to looke on any thing but lees, you might easily haue seene what Bernard sayth, and that he sayth no more then the best learned Fathers in Christes Church said before him. Bernard seria 4. [...]ebdo. paenos [...]. Solus pote­statem habuit ponendi animam suam, nemo [...]am abstulit ab eo & inc [...]to capite (factus obediens vsque admortem) tradidit spiritum. Quis tam facile quando vult dormit? magna quidem infirmit as mori, sed planè sic mori virtus immensa. Solus potestatem habuit ponendi, qui solus facultatem aeqne habuit liberam resumendi; imperium habens vitae & mort is. Christ alone had power to lay downe his soule, none tooke it from him. Bowing his head, (being obe­dient vnto death) he gaue vp the ghost. Who can so easily sleepe, when he will? To dic was a great infirmitie, but so to die was plainely an exceeding power. H [...]e onely had power to lay downe his soule, who onely had like free power to take it againe; hauing the rule of life and death.

Long before Bernard S. Austen sayd as much, whose words you say, being Defenc. pag. 33. l. 1. granted, necessarily conclude nothing for my purpose. They shew nothing but Christs voluntarie dying, and that at his death he sh [...]ed great power, which you denie not.] Were it infirmitie in you that you could not vnderstand S. Austens words, it were the lesse to be misliked; but being an insolent conc [...] of your selfe, that will quarrell with Scriptures and Fa­thers, least you should be conuinced of a manifest errour, this hath neither trueth nor touch of any Religion. That Christ died VOLVNTARIE, and shewed GREAT POVVER AT HIS DEATH, S. Austen you grant auoucheth; and you because you can wind those wordes at your will, do [...] not denie them: but were you as carefull to take Saint Austens words in their right sense, as you be readie for a shewe to admit them, this matter were ended. S. Austen speaketh indeede of Christs voluntarie, and powerfull dying, but he doth not meane, as you doe, that Christ was onely willing to die, as religious and godly men are, which desire to depart this life; but that he died S [...]rmo. pa. 3. quia voluit, quando voluit, quomodo voluit; because he would, when he would, as hee would. And giuing the reason of his speech out of the Scripture, (though you proud­ly and falsely say he hath no strength of reason by the Scripture) he learnedly and true­ly pursueth it in this sort. Austen. de Tri [...]tated. l. 4. cap. 13. Where the spirit is farre better then the bodie, and it is the death of the spirit to be forsaken of God; as it is the death of the bodie to be forsaken of the spirit: and this is the punishment in the death of the bodie, that the spirit because it willingly for­sooke God, shall vnwillingly leaue the bodie; neither can the spirit leaue the bodie when it will, vnlesse it offer some violent death to the bodie; the (Soule or) Spirit of (Christ) the me­diatour did plainely prooue that he came to the death of his flesh by no punishment of sinne, in that he forsooke not his flesh by any meanes against his wil, but BECAVSE HE VVOVLD, VVHEN H [...] VVOVLD, AND AS HE VVOVLD. Therefore he said, I haue power to lay downe my soule, and haue power to take it againe. None taketh it from me, but I lay [Page 92] it downe of my selfe. And this those that were present GREATLY MARVAILED AT, as the Gospell obserueth, when after that (loud) voyce he presently gaue vp the ghost. For they that were fastned to the tree were tormented with a long death. Wherefore the (two) theeues had their legs broken, that they might die. But Christ was WONDRED AT, because he was found dead; which thing we read Pilate marueiled at, when Christs bodie was asked of him to be buried. There is more sound Diuinitie in this one Chapter of S. Austens then in both your Pamphlets; though you pretend S. Austens wordes conclude no­thing, nor against you, nor for me. Where you may learne, (for it is fitter for you to be a scholler then a writer, till you haue learned to leaue your wilfull humours, and to giue [...]are vnto the sage and wise Fathers that were pillars of Christes Church many hundred yeeres before you;) first that for the punishment of sinne, the death of the body was inflicted on all mankinde, in which the soule should depart from her bodie against her will, and not when she would, nor as she would. Secondly that the man­ner of Christs death was cleane contrary to ours; he gaue vp his spirit of his owne ac­cord, and power, when he would and as he would. Thirdly his giuing vp the ghost so presently vpon his loude prayer, was wondered at by the standers by, and by Pi­late himselfe when he heard of it. Whether this conclude my purpose I leaue to the iudgement of the discreete Reader: your no, as it lightly commeth without cause, so with me it goeth as lightly without regard.

But Austens words, which I first Se [...]mons pagina. 8. quoted, prooue not so much.] You take vpon you to refute first and last; why skip you then that which is cited in the midst? Grant Austens words to be true, as indeede they are most true, which are alleaged in the first place, and my purpose is fully concluded. The [...] prooue that no man can August. in Iohan. tractat. 119. SO SLEEPE when he will, as Christ died when he would; that no man can so put off his ve­sture when he will, as Christ put off his flesh, when he would; that no man can so leaue the place where he standeth, at his will, as Christ left his life when he would. And if so great power appeared in him dying, with what power shall we thinke he will come to iudge? Where voluntary dying in Christ doth not onely import that he was con­tent and willing to die; as Paul was when he desired to be dissolued, but that he left this life by separating his soule from his bodie when he would; hauing at that present when he parted his soule from his bodie; perfect memori [...], sense, and speech, and brea­thing out his soule of his owne accord, with more facilitie and celeritie then we can lay off our garments, or change the place in which we stand. And from this admira­ble power, by which he layd downe his soule, and tooke it againe at his pl [...]asure, Au­sten draweth a comparison to the exceeding greatne [...] of that power with which he shall come to iudge the world.

With Austen ioyne all the Fathers of Christs Church that eaer spake of this mat­ter, and the best Diuines of latter ages confesse the same. Athanasius. Athana. cont. Ar [...]. orat. 4. [...]. To haue power to lay downe his soule when he would, and to take it againe; this is not the proper­tie of men, but it is the power of the Sonne of God. For man dieth not by his owne power, but by necessiti [...] of nature and that against his will: but Christ being God [...]ad it in his own power to separate himselfe from his bodie, and to resume the same againe, when he would. Origen. Origenes in Iohan. Euang. [...] 19. An non Dominus singulare quiddam prae omnibus, qui in corpus aduenerint, de seipso dicit? doth not the Lord affirme a thing that was (peculiar or) singular to him aboue all that euer were in the flesh; when he saith, None taketh my soule from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe, and haue power to lay it downe and power to take it againe? Let vs consider what he meaneth, who left his bodie, and departed from it without any way leading to death. This neither Moses, nor any of the Patriarkes, Prophets, or Apostles did say besides Iesus. For if Christ had died as the theeues did that were crucified with him; we could not haue said, that he layd downe his soule of himselfe, but after the maner of such as die. But now Iesus crying with a strong voyce, gaue vp the ghost, and as a King left his bodie. His power greatly appeared in this, that at his owne free power and will leauing his bodie he died. Gregorie Nyssene. [Page 93] Gregor. N [...]s­senus de resur­rectione Christi Oratio 1. Memento Dominici dicti, quid de seipso pronunciet is, a quo pendet rerum omnium vis & potentia; quomodo ex plena summáque potestate, ac non ex naturae necessitate animam à cor­pore seiungit. Remember the Lords words, what he pronounceth of himselfe, of whom de­pendeth all power; how with full and soueraigne power, and not by necessitie of nature he seue­red his soule from his bodie; as he sayd, None taketh my soule from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe. I haue power to lay it downe, and power to take it againe. Gregorie Nazianzene maketh the mother of Christ thus to speake vnto him after his death. Nazianzen. in Christo pa­tiente. Comming I heard thy voice vnto thy father, [...], and thou suddenly departedst (this life) as leauing it willingly. Ierome: Hierom. 15. cap. Marci. With a faint voice, or rather speechlesse we die, that are of the earth; but he which came from heauen breathed out his soule with a loud voice. Idem ad Hedi­biam qu [...]. 8. We must say it was a shew of his diuine power to lay downe his soule when he would, and to take it againe. Yea, the Centurio hearing him say to hi [...] Father, Into thine hands I commend my spi­rit, & statim sponte spiritum dimisisse, and straightway of his own accord to send forth his spi­rit, mooued with the GREATNES of this WOONDER said, Truly this was the Sonne of God. Chrysostome vpon these words of Matthew, Iesus crying with a loud voice gaue vp the ghost, sayth, Chrysostom in Matth. cap. 27. hom. 89. Idcirco magna voce clamauit, vt ostendat haec sua potestate fieri. Therefore Christ cried with a loud voice, that he might shew this to be done by his owne power. Marke sayth, Pilate maru [...]lled if he were alreadie dead. And the Centurion also THER [...]FORE CHIEFLY beleeued, because he saw Christ die of his owne accord and power. Victor of Antioch vpon the like words of Marke, sayth, Victor Antio­ [...] in cap. 5. Marci. By so doing the Lord Iesus doth plainly declare, that he had his whole life and death in his owne free power. Wherefore Marke writeth, that Pilate not without admiration asked if Christ were yet dead; addidit item ea potissimum de causa Centurionem credidisse; he added likewise that the Centurion chiefly for that reason beleeued, because he saw Christ giue vp the ghost with a loud crie, and signifi­cation of great power. Leo noting that Christ died not for lacke of helpe, but of deter­minat [...] purpose sayth, Leo Serm. 17. de Passione Do­mini. Quae illic vitae intercessio sentienda est, vbi anima & potestate est emissa & potestate reuocata? What intreatie for life shall we thinke there was, where the soule was both sent out with power, and recalled with power. Fulgentius: Fulgentius ad Trasimundum lib. 3. Cum ergo ho­mo Christus tantam accep [...]rit potestatem, vt cum vellet animam poneret, & cum vellet de­nuò resumeret, quantam potuit habere Christi diuinitas potestatem? Ideo autem ille homo potestatem animae habuit, quia cum diuina potestas in vnitatem personae suscepit. Where then the man Christ receiued so much power; that he might lay downe his soule when he would, and take it againe when he would, how great power might the Godhead of Christ haue? and therefore the manhood of Christ had power to lay downe his soule, because the diuine power admitted him into the vinitie of person. Sedul. operis Paschalis lib. 5. cap. 17. Sedulius: Animam protinus suam sancto de cor­pore volens ipse depos [...]it. Christ himselfe forthwith (vpon his prayer) willingly layd off his sacred soule from his bodie. Nonnius in his Paraphrase vpon S. Iohns Gospell, expres­seth the saying of Christ, None taketh my soule from me; in these words, Nonnius Pa­raphras. in Jo­an. ca. 10. ver. 18. No birth­law taketh my soule from me, no incroching time that tameth all things; nor Necessitie which is vnchangeable counsell; [...]; but ruler of my selfe, I of mine owne accord yeeld vp my willing soule. Beda vpon that place of Matthew, And Iesus crying with a loud voice, sent out (or gaue vp) his spirit; writeth thus: Bed [...] in Matt. cap. 27. Quod au­tem dicit, emisit spiritum, ostendit diuinae potestatis esse emittere spiritum, vt ipse quo (que) dixe­rat, nemo potest tollere animam; in that the Euangelist saith, Christ sent out his (soule or) spirit, he sheweth it is a point of Diuine power to send out the soule, as Christ himselfe sayd, None can take my soule from me. Ibid. in Marci cap. 15. Nullus enim habet potestatem emittendi spiritum nisi qui animarum conditor est. For none hath power to send out the soule, but he that is Creator of soules. Which Bede buildeth vpon the words of S. Matthew, who saith that Christ crying with a loud voice [...], dismissed or sent his soule from him. Theophy­lact: Theophylact. in Matth. cap. 27. Iesus crieth with a loud voice, that we should know it was true which he sayd, I haue power to lay downe my soule: for not constrained but of his own accord he dismissed his soule. And Idem Marci cap. 15. the Centurion seeing that he breathed out his soule so like a Commander of death, WONDERED, and confessed him: Idem Marci cap. 23. [...] for he died not like other men, but as the Master of death. Lyra vpon these words of Mat­thew, [Page 94] Lyra in Mat­ [...] cap. 27. Iesus againe crying with a loude voice, sent forth his soule. Whereby it appeareth that voice was not naturall, but MIRACVLOVS, because a man afflicted with great and long torment, and through such affliction neere to death could not so cry by any strength of nature.

The latter writers concurre with the older in this obseruation. Erasmus in his Pa­raphrase vpon Saint Luke.Erasmus pa­ [...]. in Lu. ca. 23. Iesus when with a mighty cry he had said, Father into thy hands I commend my spirit, breathed out his soule: to make it manifest to all, that he did not faint as others doe, the strengh of the body by little and little decaying, but straightway vp­on a strong cry, and words distinctly pronounced, laid downe his life as of his owne accord. And the Idem in Mar­ci. cap. 15. Centurion who stood ouerright as a Minister and witnesse of his death, and had seene many dye with punishment, when he saw Iesus besides the manner of other men, after a strong cry presently to breath out his soule said; truely this man was the Sonne of God. Musculus,Musculus in Matth. cap. 27. That Christ sent foorth hi [...] soule with aloude voice is a proofe of greater power, then may be found in a man dying. Whereby he shewed that he layed of his soule of his owne accord; answerable to that, I haue power to lay downe my soule and to take it againe. To which end Iohn saith, that bowing his head he gaue vp the Ghost. Others first dye, and then their heads fall; but he first layeth downe his head, and then of his owne accord deliue­reth his soule vp to his Father. GualterGualter in Ioh. hom. 169. But let vs see the manner of Christs death, who as Iohn writeth with bowing downe his head yelded his Spirit. Luke saith, he cryed with a loude voice, Father into thy hands I commend my Spirite. Concurrunt h [...]c non obscura Diuinitatis argumenta; Here find we manifest arguments of his Diuinitie, which the Cen­turion and others obserued as some of the Euangelists witnesse. First this cry and distinct pronouncing of his last words sheweth a power and vertue MORE THEN HVMANE. For we know that men dying so faint, that the most of them cannot speake be it neuer so softly. Againe, he dyeth when he will himselfe, yea and layeth of his soule with authoritie, to shew himselfe Lord of life and death, which is an euident proofe of his Diuine power. It is pro­fitable for vs diligently to marke the Diuine power of Christ, which shewed it selfe so plainly in his death. Marlorat vpon the words of Mathew, and Iesus crying againe with a loud voyce sent foorth his spirit, saith; Marlor. in Matth. ca. 27. Declarat hic Christus maiestatem suam, Christ declareth here his Maiestie, that he layeth downe his soule, not when men constraine him, but when he himselfe will. Whereupon Pilat maruailed that Christ was so soone dead. And the Lord himselfe said, None taketh my soule from me but I lay it downe of my selfe. I haue power to lay it downe, and power to take it againe. To which it pertaineth that is written, he bowing downe his head gaue vp his spirit; for other men first dye, and then their heads hang; but Christ first laid downe his head, and then voluntarily rendered his soule to his Father. Many moe might be brought of all ages and places confessing the same; but if these suffice not, what may be enough I doe not know.

To decline the Scriptures and Fathers that make against him, the Discourser hath deuised two shifts very like the rest of of his tenents, that is void of all truth and iudge­ment.Defenc. pa. 32. I deny not, saith he, but Christ might shew some strange vnusuall thing apparantly to the beholders in vttering his last voice, which might very much mooue the beholders and The Defender deuiseth shifts to decline Scrip­tures and Fa­thers against [...]im. h [...]arers. Adde hereunto that experience sheweth, (as Phisitians say,) how some diseases in the body bring death presently after most strong and violent crying: Namely in some excessiue torments, as of the stone.] Things reported and expressed in the Scriptures touching the strange and wonderfull manner of Christs death you deny; and dreame of things there no way mentioned, to coulour your matter and cosin your Reader. That Christ did render his soule into his Fathers hands, when as yet neither speech, sense, memory, nor motion began to faile, is diligently obserued by the Euangelists, and was greatly mar­ueyled at by the Centurion, which saw the manner of his death: As also that he brea­thed out his soule of his owne accord when he had spoken those words without any former or other degrees or pangs of death appearing in him, is likewise witnessed by the Scriptures, and constantly auouched by all the Fathers. Saint Luke saith, and speaking these words he breat hed out his soule: Saint Mathew, and crying with a loud voice he dismissed his spirit: Saint Marke, and sending a strong voice from him he blew out his [Page 95] Soule. This did he of his owne accord and power, None taking his soule from him, as in death they doe ours; but declaring himselfe by laying of his soule when he would, and as he would, to be Lord and master of life and death. This is fit for all Christians to confesse, least they dishonor the death of Christ by depriuing his person of that power and glory, which he openly shewed in the eyes & eares of all his persecutors. This you shift of, and instced thereof imagine some strange and VNVSVALI acci­dent in the manner of Christs death, which neither the Scriptures report, nor you can expresse: wherein you shew your selfe forward to inuent what is not written, and backward to beleeue what is written, which is the trade of such men as meane to make a shipwracke of their faith.

That a man may dye crying, as Christ did, you haue found at length if not from Diuines, at least from Phisitians; for I perccaue you haue sought all sorts of helps both farre and neere to vphold your fansies.] P [...]rchaunce Phisitians may tell you, when a painefull disease possesseth the parts which are no fountaines of life or sense, a man may cry, till sense and strength begin to faile, and so hasten his death by the violent spending of his spirits; but that a man may by any course of nature retaine perfect memorie, sense, motion, and speach to the very act of breathing out his soule, I assure my selfe no wise Phisitian will affirme. And if any more humorous then lear­ned will wade so farre without his Art, he must vnderstand that his word may not ouersway the Rules of Diuinitie and Principles of nature. For what are the powers and faculties whereby the soule is conioyned with the body, but life, sense, and mo­tion? so long then as they last, the soule by nature neither doth, nor can forsake the body. But when sense and motion first outward and then inward are oppressed and ouerwhelmed, then life also perisheth and the soule may no longer abide in her body; the vnion by which she was fastened vnto it, being wholy dissolued Wherefore death which is the priuation of life, by Gods ordinance for the punishment of sinne by de­grees surpriseth and in the end quencheth all sense and motion, and so forceth the soule to forsake her seate; which by Gods appointment is violently parted from hir body whether she will or no: but neuer till the effects oflife, which are sense and mo­tion, be first decayed and abolished. A sowne is the suddainest ouerwhelming of the powers of life, which any natural experience doth teach vs; and yet therewith though outward sense and motion doe faile at an instant, and the inward be very weake and almost insensible, the soule doth not presently depart, but stayeth a time till all sense and motion without and within, (except the partie be recouered) be vtterly extin­guished. Wherefore in all men by necessitie of nature the powers and parts of life decav in some sooner in some later before they die; and therefore in Christ on the Crosse it was MIRACVLOVS and aboue nature, that hauing full & perfect outward and inward sense speech and motion, he did in a moment, when he would, and as he would, render his soule into the hands of his Father without any farder decayes, or other degrees of death precedent then the very act of breathing out his soule, which left his body presently and perfectly dead.

Thou hast gentle Reader the causes and prooses that mooued me to obserue the man [...]r of Christes death to bee different from ours; which whether they be conso­nant to the Scriptures, and rightly conceiued by those learned and ancient Fathers, which I haue named vnto thee, I leaue to thy discrecte iudgement; assuring thee there is nothing to hinder the maine consent of so many old and new writers in a mat­ter of so great consequence, but onely the headdinesse of this discourser; who vpon a bare pretence of one peece of Scripture not well vnderstood and worse applied, thin­keth he may worke wonders; and conclude all these graue and sound Expositours to be so ignorant of the sense of that place, and so vnable to reach to the depth of those words, Christ was LIKE VS IN ALL things; that with one accord they would af­firmeTrea. pag. 53. a sine fable, a Paradoxe in Nature, and contrarie to Scripture. Howbeit it is no newes with this man to defend that Christ was Ibidem. distempered, ouerwhelmed, and all con­founded both in all the powers of his soule and senses of his body. He boldly auoucheth it was [Page 96] so with Christ before his death in the Garden and on the Crosse, and therefore hee presumeth it might much more befall him at his death. But let him keepe these se­crets to himselfe. I doubt not Christian Reader but thou wilt be well aduised before thou put the Sauiour of the world and the Sonne of God out of his wits or senses, to make way for such witlesse and senselesse fansies.

He Defenc. pa. 33. proceedeth to shew my disdaine to the Fathers for insolent reiecting all their opinions touching the causes of Christs Agonie in the Garden, and of his complaint on the Crosse. For answere, first I desire to know whether you allow of all these causes, or no; you seeme to refuse thē here: for herein you shewed not your own opinion, but the Iudgement of the Fathers. Else­where your selfe are resolute for some of those causes, and against other some. And yet before; all these interpretations you say are sound, & stand well with the rules of Christian pietie; thus variable you are in that wherin you seeme most resolute.] When you know what it is to be constant, you shall doe well to talke of inconstancie; till that time your owne doctrine will most disgrace your owne doings. You catch oft at contrarieties in my writings; make good but one, and then prate at your pleasure. Otherwise men will thinke it to be the weaknesse of your witte, or stifnesse of your stomacke, that can not or will not rightly conceiue that which is truely spoken.

Touching the cause of Christs Agonie in the Garden; since the Scriptures doe notI did not resolue what was the cause of Christs agonie. expresse it, I said it was curiositie to search it, presumption to determine it, impossible certainely to conclude it: yet for that you made this your chiefe aduantage, that there could be coniectured none other cause of Christes exceeding sorrow in the Garden, besides the present suffering of H [...]ll paines in his soule; I gaue the Reader to vnder­stand how many there might be besides your de [...]ce, which of all others was least tol­lerable or probable. Now you would know whether I ALLOVV of ALL these causes, or no. I haue answered you that already, if you had but eares to heare it. I did not ac­knowledge any of these to be precisely or particula [...]ly mentioned in the Scriptures as the right cause of that Agonie, but if you would needes goe to coniecturing, I said, there might be conceiued so many, and euery one of them more LIKLIE, and godly, then your supposing of Hell paines at that instant in Christs soule. I persist still in the same minde, what change finde you in me? Else where I am Defenc. pa. 33. li. 12. resolute (you say) for some of these causes, and against other some. And yet before I said, all th [...]se interpretations are sound and stand well with the rules of Christian pictie.] It is more then a penance to be troubled with a trifler, that hath neither eyes to see, nor head to apprehend what is said. When I came to consider of the generall respects in Christ, whence that A­gonie might arise; as the persons were two, God with whom, and Man for whom Christ delt in that worke of our redemption; so I resolued the cause of Christes Agonie could not proceede, but either from his submission to God, to whose will and hand he must subiect himselfe, if he would ransome man; or from comp [...]ssion of mans miserie, for whom he was willing to lay downe his life. A thi [...]d ground of Christs feare I grant I see none. For that Diuels should torment Christes soule, I leaue that inuention to your deuotion. But doe I determine any particular cause contrarie to my first profes­sion, when I stand resolute, that from one or both of these fountaines the cause of Christs feare and sorrow must be deriued? If I doe not, then piper-like doe you play with [...]y variablenesse, when you doe not so much as attend that I am resolute in the generall dueties of pietie and charitie, which I ascribe to our Sauiour; though I bee not resolute in any particular cause of his feare at that present, as I at first professed I neither could, nor would be, by reason the Scriptures do not expressely mention any. Againe, what dulnesse is this to say I am resolute against s [...]me of these causes, for that I make two principall heads, whereon the rest depend? Can not your wisedome see, that Christes SVBMISSION to the Maiestie of God sitting in iudgement, and his DEPRICATION of Gods wrath proceede from his religious and humble subiec­tion to the will and hand of God? As also that his sorrow for the REIECTION of the Iewes, and DISPERSION of his Church, and his LAMENTATION of mans sinne grow from his compassion on mans miserie? And lastly that the VOLVNTA­RIF [Page 97] DEDICATION of his blood to bee shed for the sinnes of the world, and the SANCTIFICATION OF HIS PERSON to offer the true and eternall sacrifice, partake with both the former respects? Is it a contradiction with you to see many branches on one stemme, many Springs in one well, many members in one bodie? And so childish you are, that you take [...]-meale for egges, and interpretations for [...] ­ses, and then you crake of my contrarieties, how much I ouer shot my selfe: For where I bring diuers Expositions of Christs words on the Crosse, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken mee; and say in the end, Serm. pag. 37. li. 33. All these interpretations are so [...]d an [...] stand with the rules of Christian pietie: you in a dreame or drow sinesse (choose which you will) imagine I say, ALL THESE CAVSES of Christes Agonie are sound, an [...] stand well with the rules of Christian pietie; and so contradict my former resolution, as if onely two were sound, and not the rest; where in trueth I neither auo [...]ch the one, nor the other: such conflicts you make with your owne follies, and get the conquest not on my Assertions, but on your owne most foolish ouer-sights.

Yet these Defenc. pa. 34. li. 3. & 6. agree not with any circumstance of the Passion, and on [...] of them crosseth and ouerthroweth an other.] Take first the paines to prooue somewhat, and then challenge your priuiledge to prate at your pleasure; otherwise your word i [...] no warrant for any wise man to depend on. The Scriptures testifie first Christs sorow in the Garden, and then his sweat like blood. His sorow where he saith, Matth. 26. [...], my s [...]le is euery way (grieued or) afflicted with sorrow euen vnto death. His sweate, after he was comforted by an Angel from heauen, and fell to feruent prayer. So saith Saint Luke; An Angel appeared to him from heauen comforting him. And being in an Agonie he prayed Luk. 22. more earnestly, and his sweate fell on the earth like drops of blood. Now an Agonie doth not properly or necessarily inferre either fainting feare or deadly paine, as you mis­conceiue; but noteth a contention or intention of bodie or minde whereby wee labour to per­forme our desire, and striue against the danger which may defeate vs, as in place con­uenient shall more fully appeare. Where also you shall see that not feare but feruen­cie in all likelihood was the cause of that bloodie sweate. In the meane time it is plaine that Christ professed he had sundrie causes of his sorrow in the Garden; for hee sayth my soule is [...] on euery side oppressed with sorow. And what vrged him to that a­gonie or vehemencie of prayer, which S. Luke speaketh of, after he was comforted by an Angell, wherein his sweat ran from him l [...]ke drops of blood, is not yet agreed on, nor any way confirmed by you: But note any of these sixe causes, which I conceiued might induce our Sauiour to this sorrow or sweat; and see whether they haue not di­rect reference to his passion, and a full coherence ech with other. Howbeit, you re­ser [...]e that for a fitter place, and so do I.

Why then doe I seeme to Defenc. pa. 33. li. 10. refuse them as none of mine, by saying, I shewed not mine owne opinion but the iudgements of the Fathers?] Nay why seeme you so void of all vn­derstanding, that you apprehend not so much as vsuall English? Iohn 7. MY doctrine is not MINE (sayth our Sauiour) but his that sent me: will you hence conclude a mani­fest contradiction in Christ, because he sayth, mine is not mine, but his that sent me. In possessions, that is mine, which is wholly mine and no mans els; and in opinions, that is properly mine, whereof I am the first inuenter and author; howbeit by a larger ex­tension of the word, that is mine also, wherein I communicate with others, though it be not properly or only mine. Out of this distinction of proper & common, knowen to the very children in Grammar schooles, our Sauiour sayth most truly; My doctrine (that is, the doctrine which I preach, and in that respect is mine) is not mine, is not only mine, nor of my deuising, but his that sent me. This were enough to warrant my words; and yet my speech is somewhat plainer: for I added, not MINE OVVNE opinion, but the iudgements of the Fathers. Now mine owne is that which is properly mine, and wherein no man partaketh with me; and although you might stumble at Mine, yet MINE OVVNE would put you out of doubt. So that here, as elswhere, you bewray the sharpnesse of your quarrelling humor; but if neither you nor your friends could spie any greater faults, than these absurd and ignorant cauils; the Reader will scant [Page 98] trust you hereafter, when you talke of my contrarieties and inconstancies. But how doth this excuse the foulenesse of your mouth in reiecting the Fathers iudgements with irreuerent and disdainfull termes; which was the thing I then reproued in you? If the opinions were onely theirs and not mine, would you the rather reuile them as fond and absurd, because they were wholly theirs, and no way mine?

Defenc. pag. 33. l. vlt. The Fathers you say, I call not so. Such I meant and tooke for absurd gatherers, as com­monly [...]le regard the sound doctrine of the Fathers, but onely admire their faults: whome here I noted by the name of our Contraries.] Are you so set on shifting and shufling, that you can not forbeare seuen lines but you must needs contradict your selfe, and that so grosly, that euery Carter may controle you? In the seuenteenth line of your three and thirtieth page, you tell me, Pa. 33. li. 17. I am in the best opinion, when I denie these to be mine o­pinions: and being charged, that insolently you called those iudgements of the Fa­thers fond and absurd, you answer (that) these your words are Ibid. li. 24. purposely meant of those in these dayes, that delight to vaunt of the Fathers, and chiefly in their errors. Your vnciuill and vnseemely liueries of fond and absurd opinions and senses, must needs belong ei­ther to the Fathers that vttered them, or to me that cited them. To catch me in a kind of contradiction, as you thought, your selfe acquit me from holding them: For I de­nie them, you say, and r [...]fuse them as none of mine. On whom then light your fond and absurd speeches, but on the Fathers that first conceiued, and first deliuered those opinions and senses, which you so much d [...]ke and reproch? You meant it not of the Fathers.] You flutter in vaine, to free your selfe from that lime-twig: against your plaine speech no man will admit your secret meaning cleane contrary to your words. You say indeed, Trea. pa. 65. li 25. I know our contraries do fansie other senses of this Text, My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me; but the senses of that text alledged out of the Fathers word for word, & the places of the Authors named, when you come after your proud and peremptorie maner to examine and censure; you say, to that which was produced out of Ierome and Chrysostome, Trea. pa. 66. li. 31. which sense is most absurd; and this is too fond to be spoken. To the sense noted out of Athanasius, Austen, and Leo, your answer is; Trea. pa. 67. li. 11. this is no lesse absurd than the former; there is no cause nor likelihood in the world for it. So when the te­stimonies of Ambrose, Austen, Ierom and Bede were produced, that the reiection of the Iewes might be some cause of Christes sorrow in the Garden; you grosly mistake their words, as if they had expounded Christes complaint on the crosse, and pertly reioyne, Trea pa. 68. li. 3. & 8. this is more fond and absurd than the other; there is no sense nor reason in it. How thinke you Sir? speake you of the men, or of the matter, when you say, this sense is most absurd, this is too fond to be spoken? Could you wrench your words from the mat­ter to the reporter, which you can not; what gaine you by that? If to alledge these opinions of Fathers, be so fond and absurd, as you say, though I refuse them, as you a­ [...]ch I did; what was it in the Fathers themselues to profes [...]e and publish those most fond and absurd senses (as you call them) to all ages and Churches, but meere and in­excusable madnesse? But tie your tongue shorter, lest men thinke you mad, thus to raue at eueriething, be it neuer so learned or aduised, that rangeth not with your er­roneous fansie. They haue spoken wisely and grauely, and your kicking and win [...]ing at their religious and sober expositions with such scornfull phrases, may discouer your coltish conceits, it can neuer decrea [...]e or craze their credits.

I Defenc. pag. 3 [...]. cast a needlesse rebuke vpon you for confounding the causes of the agonie and the com­plaint together.] Though all your exceptions to the Fathers expositions of that text,The Defender doth grosly mis­take the reiecti­on of the Iewes to be the mea­ning of Christs complaint on the crosse. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me, be most friuolous and foolish; yet none is more babish than when you mistake the reiection of the Iewes (which I shewed out of Ambrose, Ierom, Austen and Bede might be some cause of Christes sorrow after his last supper) to be the meaning of his complaint on the Crosse: and would needs in a flaunt affirme that ME in those words of Christ (why hast thou forsaken me) doth not signifie my whole Nation; which of my certaine knowledge neuer came into my head, nor euer out of my mouth. For I tooke care to wade no further in expounding them than the Scriptures and Fathers went before me; and howsoeuer his sorrow for them [Page 99] might happily not cease before his death; yet there was no cause why hauing for­merly prayed his Father to forgiue them, that knew not what they did, he should now call the rest of the perfidious and obstinate Iewes by the name of himselfe. If you stand to vphold this ouersight, you shew your selfe to haue lesse iudgement in main­teining it, than you had in mistaking it; but you haue stood too long on these irifles, which I thinke to be true: for you trifle indeed, and neither in defence of your selfe, nor disaduantage of me, bring any thing that is materiall. You come therefore to peruse how you haue ignorantly and purposely peruerted my reasons.

That the Defenc. pag. 35. true sacrifice for sinne must be indeed BODILY, BLOODY and DEAD, we doubt not; we vnfainedly and heartily embrace it. The Patriarks beleeued it, the Iewes sacrifices of beasts figured it, the New Testament confirmeth it. But what will follow then? ergo Christes bodilie death only and meerely was the whole ransome and price of our sinne? for we must note that this is the very question indeed; this is the point of our controuersie.]The Defender not able to sup­port his errours, doth quarrell with the que­stion. When you can say nothing to support your errours, you beginne to quarrell with the question; as if you had or could prescribe me what I should preach of. What I by warrant of holie Scripture receiued into the contents of Christs crosse, and what I ex­cluded from the same, is euident by my words; you may not come after and alter the question to your liking. Into the Crosse of Christ I admitted whatsoeuer the Holie ghost witnesseth the Sonne of God suffered either on his crosse, or going to his crosse. My words are plaine, Serm. pag. 8. li. 35. the rest which went b [...]fore, not being excluded as superfluous, but continued and increased by that sharpe and extreme martyrdome which he endured on the crosse. And good reason had I so to doe: for all the paines and griefes of bodie or minde which befell him betweene his last supper and his fastning to the crosse, endu­red and augmented on the crosse; and so by no meanes might be excluded from his crosse. What things I then excluded from the crosse of Christ, is as manifest by mine owne words; which neither I can hide, nor you may change. These they are: Serm. pag. 8. li. 23. Some men in our dayes stretch (the crosse of Christ) a great deale farther, to the death both of bodie and soule, and vnto the whole paines of the damned in hell: but vpon how iust grounds, when you heare, you m [...]y iudge as you see cause. Then shewing what might be tolerated, if men could therewith be contented, and that I neither refuted those which tooke hell paines hyperbolically for Ibid. li. 29. li 36. great and intolerable paines; nor those that by hell paines vnderstood either Pag 9. li. 1. & 3. a wrestling with the very powers of hell, or trembling at the terrour of Gods vengeance prouoked by our sinnes, so they put no distrust nor doubt in Christes soule of his owne saluation or our redemption, but leaue him firme faith alwayes fixed on God: I repeated againe, what it was I impugned; to wit, that Serm. pag. 9. li. 14. some men in our dayes will no nay, but that Christ on the crosse suffered the selfe same paines in soule, which the damned do in hell, and endured euen the death of the soule. Heere Sir is the question as I first proposed it, I no where alter it, no [...] varie from it: both these, I meane the death of the soule, and the selfe same paines which the damned in hell do suffer, I excluded from the crosse of Christ, and consequently from the worke of our redemption; which I auou­ched to be perfect and full without either of those additions. To this are all my proofs directed, and from this by your leaue I may not suffer you to wander: Defenc. pa. 35. li. 32. Your meere bodily sufferings without any proper sufferings of the soule take backe to your selfe; I haue no such words, nor make no such doubts; the death of the soule and the selfe same paines which the damned doe suffer, and we should haue suffered, had we not beene re­deemed, which is the second death or the death of the damned, are the things brought by me in question. Wherefore howsoeuer you will vnderstand my meaning contrarie to my words, because you would shroud your selfe vnder the couert of these wordes MEERE AND PROPER, I must recall all my reasons to those two points to which I first intended them: and whether I speake ambiguously or deceitfully, or change my question, or charge you vniustly that you slip from the question to certaine gene­rall and doubtfull termes, let the Reader in Gods name iudge.

My proofes to my purpose stand sound and good. The true sacrifice for sinne by the Apostles Doctrine hath these three properties in it; it must be BODILY, [Page 100] BLOODY, and DEADLIE; that is, it must haue the bodily and bloody death of the mediator, who must be the Sonne of God. This the Patriarkes belee [...]ed, the Iewish sacrifices prefigured, the new Testament confirmeth. What followeth you aske. Erg [...] Christs bodily death onely and meerely was the whole ransome and price of sinne? Without your termes of proper and meere you are no body. My reason is in sight. The death which the Mediator must dye for the sinnes of the world must be bodily and bloody. The death of the soule, in this life, and the death of the damned after this life (which are the paines of hell) could not be bodily and bloody. Therefore neither of them was the death which the Mediator must or did die for the sinnes of the world. If he dyed neither of those, then he died the death of the body onely, for so much as the Scriptures mention no kinds of death but onely these three, except it be by way of figuratiue speech. Doe you now see what followeth? then what is your answere? Defenc. pa. 35. li. 32. If I meane that the MEERE bodily sufferings of Christ without any proper sufferings of his soule are the intire and whole Ransome for sinne, then you affirme expreslie, there is no peece of reason in these words.] You are a PROPER and MEERE Gentleman to spott out matters of this importance. I conclude by the Apostles assertion that Christ for the sinnes of the world died nei­ther the death of the soule, nor the death of the da [...]ed, which is the paines of hell and second death; but ONELY a BODILY death. You reele too and fro, and stum­ble first at bodily, and then at onely, and in the end say you know not what. If I meane that Christes MEERE BODILY sufferings without any proper su [...]ings of the soule were the whole ransom for sin, then you see no reason in my words.] Thus much reason you may heare in my words, that Christ died neither the death of the Soule, nor the death of the damned, but ONLY a BODILY death, that is the death of the body and none other kind of death. What say you to this? Pag 8. & 14. This is not your Contro­ [...]ersie, you say; the very question indeede is as you haue set it.] Haue you a Commis­sion, when I haue proposed questions which I mind to impugne; to come after me and new set my questions? Acknowledge the death of the soule, and the death of the dam [...]d, which are the true paines of hell, to be no part of Christs sufferings, and we shall soone conclude that Christ died onely a bodily death for the sinnes of the world. But you after your slight and slippery manner, though euen here you deny it very stifly, when you be pressed with reasons or authorities, conuey your selfe pre­sently to your ambiguous and deceitfull termes of meere bodily sufferings, and the pro­per sufferings of the soule, and from thence you make your aduantage. But what are meere bodily sufferings? such as haue no communion neither with the sense nor grace of the soule? can a liuing body die a shamefull and cruell death as Christ did and the soule neither like or mislike it, nor so much as feele it? This you inferre vpon the word onely, when I conclude that Christ died a bodily death onely.

Defenc. pa. [...]5. li 36. If the sacrifice (say you) As it is onely bodily and bloudy doe wholy purge sinneit fol­loweth that no action or passion of the soule, neither by Sympathie nor any other, I say none at all As being in the soule, was regarded as propitiatorie and meritorious.] Graunt first [...] Ft pa. 36. l. 2. What is contai­ned in Christes bodily death. your owne termes to be true, (which are neither my words nor my meaning) that Christs MEERE bodily sufferings without any proper sufferings of the soule were the whole Ransom for sinne; how exclude you the sense, affections, and actions of Christs soule not to be meritorious? Had Christ any sufferings in his body which his soule felt not? and when his soule felt them, did he not patiently, obediently, and willingly en­dure them for our sakes? Or was not the patience, obedience, and loue of Christ me­ritorious? How then will it follow, that if Christs sufferings were MEERE BODI­LY without any proper sufferings of the soule, no affection nor action of Christs soule was meritorious? But you adde [...]f the Sacrifice, As it is onely bodily bloudy and deadly doth wholy purge sinne, th [...]n no action nor passion of the soule was propitiatorie and meritori­ous.] If you meane that Christs body as it was onely dead (for that is your word) did without soule or life wholy purge sinne, then indeed your consequent is good, that neither action nor passion of the soule could be propitiatorie, because the soule was not present when the body was dead. But who maketh that blockish Antecedent be­sides [Page 101] your selfe? Or who euer excluded Christs innocence, obedience, patience, charitie, and digni [...]e from his bodily and bloody sacrifice before you? will you seuer the man­ner of offering from the thing offered, and call it a perfect and propitiatorie sacrifice?

As it was only bodily and bloudy, it had no communion with any action or passion of Christs soule, As being in the soule.] Why entangle you the Reader with an As and an As of your owne adding, which no where are found in my words? What sense can any wise man pike out of this? The sacrifice, As it is only bodily, excludeth all actions and passions of the soule, As being in the soule.] Is it so strange a kind of speech to say that Christ died only a bodily death, which so many learned and auncient Fathers haue so frequently v [...]ed before me, that you should bring in your As and your As thus to kicke at it? In death as in death, if thereby you meane the priuation and want of soule and life, there is neither paine, nor sense; and in the body As in the body, if you take the body for a dead corps there is no absolute necessitie of a soule; other­wise no body could be dead. What then? Had therefore Christs body no soule, nor his death no paine, when he suffered for our sinnes? Or are you of late so souced in Sophistrie, that when you heare of a body you will inferre, there is neither action nor pa [...]sion of the soule in that body, as in a body? or wh [...]n you are told of a man tormen­ted to death, you will assure vs that in his death, as death, he had neither paine nor sense? All men besides you, conceaue in the sufferings of the body, the soule as the soule must haue the sense and feeling thereof, and is thereby vrged by Gods ordi­nance to seeke for the cause and ease thereof. Hose. [...]. In their affliction (saith God by his Prophet) they will seeke me. And Dauid, Psal. 82. sill their faces with shame, that the may seeke thy name. And likewise by the suffering of death they vnderstand the paine and sting of death approching, and lastly separating the soule from the body. And therefore Christs sacrifice for sinne though it were only bodily; because no part of Christ died but only the body, yet the soule endured the paine and discerned the cause thereof. And though it were deadly, because it ended in death and was finished by death; yet the actions and affections of Christs soule, as well from her selfe as from his body, at the time of his passion impressed, or stirred, either by the cause, smart, author, or manner of his sufferings were meritorious, and made way for the satisfaction of sinne, which was not accomplished but by that death of Christs body, that God had deter­mined. Let therefore the Reader iudge how well you impugne my conclusion, that Christ died for our sinnes the death of the body only, and not the death of the soule nor of the damned; and how vainly you vouch, Christs death and sacrifice as they were bodily, had neither paines nor patience, obedience nor charitie, nor any other acti­on or passion of his soule in them.

Defenc. pa. 36. Else-where I see in you manifest contrarietie hereunto; for sundry times you teach that Christ did suffer peculiarly and seuerally some proper punishments, (which I hope were pro­pitiatorie and meritorious) in his soule, besides his bodily suffering; yea that this was a part of his crosse and an effect of God wrath on his soule, as well as the suffering in his body. I pray thee Christian Reader obserue, that this Discourser plainly and fully here confes [...]eth that I SVNDRY times teach, that Christ BESIDES his bodely sufferings did suffer pe­culiarly and seuerally some PROPER punishments in his soule; and that this was a part of his Crosse, as well as the sufferings of his bodie. Now iudge whether it be not a meere shift for him to beare thee in hand, that the question betwixt vs is, whether Christs meere bodily sufferings without anie proper sufferings of the soule be all that Christ suffered for our sinnes, and the whole ransom for sinne; or whether that be or can be my mea­ning as he outfaced thee the next Pag. 35. li. 3 [...]. Page before; the contrary whereof I sundry times teach as he now confesseth. But I crosse my selfe, he thinketh, & write I know not what. Sir Trifler if I contradict my selfe, shew me my words, my writing is extant. If you will be priuie to my meaning against my words, you are a strange if not a sturdie Prophet. But indeede I haue neither meaning nor words sounding that way. I auouch that Christ for our sinnes suffered the death of the body only, and not of the soule; or no death but only the death of the body. Vpon these words, the death of the bodie onlie, if [Page 102] it may be inferred by any reason or learning, ergo, Christs dead bodie depriued of soule and sense was the whole Ransom for our sinnes, for that he meaneth by Christs death: or, ergo no action, nor passion of Christs soule before or on his crosse was meritorious: If I say these conclusions doe necessarily follow out of those words or out of the meaning of them; then I must confes [...]e I am fowly ouershot in my speach. But if these be most ig­norant and absurd collections from my words, and from theirs that vsed that spe [...]ch before me; then mayest thou see, Christian Reader, what meaning this man hath throughout this booke, purposely to peruert and misconster all that I say, to make thee beleeue I broch some strange and wonderous Doctrine. But shifts l [...] hid but a while, the shame in the end will be his.

Defenc. pa. 36. li. 13. How then can that which I sundrie times teach of Christs sufferings in his soule be true if our whole ran [...]om and propitiation be bodily bloudy and deadly, only which is the point [...]here stand on? What contradiction finde you in my words, that Christ might haue and had sufferings in his soule, as feare, sorrow, and affliction of minde and yet died no death, but only a bodilie? Only a bodily death doth not exclude all paines which are not bo­dily, but all deaths, saue the death of the bodie. Wherefore my conclusion is wh [...]re it was, That the death which the Mediator must suffer for sinne, by the Apostles do­ctrine must onely be bodily and bloodie; and therefore by no meanes the death of the soule, or of the damned. [Yet this [...]as not our whole r [...]some you say, nor the whole sacrifice for sinne, the sufferings of his soule must be added vnto it. When I speake of Christes death, I vnderstand that maner and order of his death which the Euangelists describe; for so the Scriptures meane when they speake of Christes death; and from that death I doe not seuer those sufferings of his soule which the Scriptur [...]s mention, because the sharpnesse of that death which his body was to suffer, draue him to the deepe consideration of the cause, why; of the Iudge from whom; and the captiue, for whom he suffered. Christ otherwise had not suffered death as a Redeemer, if he had been ignorant of any of these; or compelled by force to endure the furie of the Iewes: he had power enough to stay their rage, & decline their bloudie hands; yea, to auert or decrease the paines, as he thought good; but because he was to offer himselfe as a willing sacrifice to suffer death to saue vs from the wrath of his Father; he layed aside his owne power, and submitted himselfe wholly to be disposed at his Fathers will, which the Scriptures call his obedience vnto death. When therefore he foresaw and felt how sharpe and painfull that death would be, and was, which he must and did suf­fer for our sinnes; was it possible he should not fully cast the eyes of his [...]inde vpon the horror of our sinnes, which did so sting him? vpon the fiercenesse of Gods wrath, which did so pursue him though he were his innocent and only sonne? and vpon the terrible vengeance that rested for vs, if he should mislike or ref [...]se to beare the bur­den of our offences? If any man learned thinke it possible for Christ to suffer the one, and not in spirit most cleerely to see the other, I am content he shall se [...]er the suf­ferings of Christs soule from the griefe and anguish of his bodily death: but if it be more than absurd so to conceiue; then finde we that the sight and sense of Christes extreame torments in bodie caused and vrged his soule thorowly to beholde these things with feare and sorrow, which in themselues were most fearefull, and could not ch [...] but affect Christes soule deeply and diuersly. As for the whole ransome of our sinne, we shall haue occasion in the next reason more largely to treate of.

Defenc. pa. 36. But you haue reasons, you say, to confirme your maine matter; among manie, these two: the first, the Iewish sacrifices shadowing and foreshewing; the second, the sacraments of Chri­stians testifying and confirming, that the true sacrifice for sinne was bodily and bloudy. Still what trifling is this? doth any in the world denie, that the true sacrifice for sinne was the bo­die, bloud, and death of the Redeemer? Wherefore the proposition must be, as I did set it in your behalfe: the Iewish sacrifices were shadowes or figures, and our sacraments were signes of our whole and absolute redemption by Christ, I say of the whole and entire propitiatorie sa­crifice, or els you shrinke and leaue the question.] When I lacke one to set propositions in my behalfe, I will send to you for helpe: till then spare your paines, except you might [Page 103] reape more thanks. But you must learne to get you plainer termes, or at least more plainly to expound them, if you will needs be a setter of propositions: for what is the WHOLE sacri [...]ice propitiatorie? and what is our WHOLE redemption? By the whole sacrifice meane you the whole person of Christ, that gaue himselfe for vs? or intend you the whole action, whereby he sanctified, submitted, and presented himselfe as a sacrifice of a sweet smell vnto God? or by the whole, vnderstand you all that in Christ was deuoted and deliuered vnto death for the satisfaction of Gods iustice? And so our whole redemption, doe you referre it only to remission of sinnes, as the Apostle doth when he sayth, We haue redemption through Christes bloud, euen the forgiuenesse of sinnes? or also to deliuerance from the dominion and infection of sinne, and to the abolishing of all corruption in soule and bodie; which is our whole and absolute redemption? When the powers of heauen shall be shaken, and the Sonne of man come in a cloud with power and great glorie, then Luc. 21. lift vp your heads (sayth Christ) for your redemption draweth neere. Ephes. 4. You are sealed (by the holy Spirit) vnto the day of redemption, sayeth Paul. And Dauid: God shall Psal. 72. redeeme their soules from deceit and violence; that is, he shall deliuer their soul [...]s. The Saints, as the Apo [...]e speaketh, Hebr. 11. were racked, and would admit no redemption to obtaine a better resurrection; where, by redemption he meaneth deliuerance. As Zacharias sayd, God hath Luc. 1. visited and sent redemption to his people; that is, saluation (or deliuerance) from our enemies, and from the hands of all that hate vs, to serue him in holinesse and righteousnesse all the dayes of our life. So that our whole and absolute redemption compriseth all the degrees and steps of our saluation, as iustifica­tion, sanctification, and glorification; and these though they were merited and ob­tained for vs by Christes obedience vnto d [...]ath, yet are they performed and accom­plished by diuers other meanes therewith concurring and thereon depending, as by the grace of his spirit, the working of his power, and glory of his comming. And therefore the words which you haue set in my behalfe, are like their authour; that is, they are ambiguous and quarrellous.

The whole propitiatorie sacrifice are words as doubtfull as the other: for since Christ was the Priest, who Heb. 9. by his eternall spirit offered himselfe vnspotted to God, and Eph. 5. gaue him­selfe for vs to be an offering and sacrifice of a sweet smel vnto God; his innocence and obe­dience chiefly rested in his soule, & thence sanctified his bodie, which suffered death for the ransome of our sinnes. Though then all things in Christ were holie and ac­ceptable vnto God, and so sacrifices most meritorious; yet nothing did fully satisfie the iustice of God for sinne, nor make a perfect reconciliation for vs with God, but his obedience vnto death. For that which must satisfie for sinne, must be death; o­ther ransome for sinne God neither in his wisdome and counsell would, nor in his trueth and iustice could accept, after his will once determined and declared. It was the first wages appointed and denounced by God to sinne: Gene. 2. In the day that thou eat­est thereof thou shalt die the death; (or certainly thou shalt die;) the doubling of the word noting the inflexibilit [...]e of Gods counsell and iustice. The Apostle witnesseth the same, when he sayth, Rom. 6. The wages of sinne is death. Then as sinne was irreuocab [...]e rewarded with death, so must it necessarily be redeemed by death. Which rule stood so sure, that when the Sonne of God would giue himselfe for vs to redeeme vs, he could not do it (by reason of Gods immutable counsell and decree) but by death. Where­fore the Apostle calleth him the Hebr. 9. Mediator of the New testament through death for the redemption of transgressions. And where a testament is, there MVST BE (sayth he) the death of the testator. He contenteth not himselfe to say there was, but there must be the death of the testator, before we could be redeemed. A necessitie not simplie binding Gods power, but plainly declaring his counsell to be fixed, and his will reuealed.

Since then Christ was to Hebr. 2. taste death for all men, that through death he might destroy him which had power of death, euen the diuell; and deliuer vs who were Rom. 5. reconciled to God by the death of his sonne; the point (which indeed wee both must stand on) is; what death Christ suffered to redeeme vs from sinne, and to reconcile vs vnto God; whether it were the death of the damned, which is the second death; or the death of the [Page 104] soule; or (as I auouch) the death of the bodie only. Other parts of Christes person, and beames of his vertues, and kinds of his sufferings are not to this qu [...]stion, [...]arther than they commended and presented to God Christes death which must ransome our sinnes; but the scope to which all the rest was referred, and the [...]lose which consumma­ted all the rest, was death; and therefore no sufferings of Christ were parts of the pro­pitiatorie sacrifice which ransomed sinne, but such as ended in death, or tended to that sorrowfull, shamefull and painfull death of Christ, which by order of Gods iustice was appointed to satisfie for sinne. The fulnesse of which satisfaction consisted in death, and therefore the death and bloud of Christ though they were not the whole sa­crifice, yet were they the full and perfect ransome and price for sinne; because without them the rest could not preuaile, and to them all the rest was directed. If then you will deale plainly as you pretend, or not forget your duetie to God and his trueth, you must leaue cauilling with the words of the Holy Ghost, and go soberly to consi­der, not whether any other sufferings, but whether any other death of Christes be mentioned in the Scriptures to ransome our sinnes, besides the death of his bodie. If you finde any other there, professe [...]t in Gods name; if you finde none but only that described or mentioned in the Scriptures, leaue snarling at the depth and bredth of those words which the Spirit of God hath authorized, and learne rather to vnder­stand them truely, than vainly to oppose against them.

In sense and substance there is no difference betwixt these words, the death, bloud, and crosse of Christ; the crosse noting the tree, whereon Christ died a reprochfull and cruell death for vs; and his bloud expressing the maner of his death by sundrie sorts of shedding the same, as by whipping, piercing his head with thornes, boaring his hands and feet to fasten him to the crosse, and hanging him thereon three houres by the sorenesse of his wounds, till his soule departed from his bodie. To make these iarre one with the other, which the holy Ghost had knit together, is the signe of a busie, but not of godly wit; and howsoeuer you and your adherents can flourish with figures of Grammar, you were best take heede that you turne not your eares from the trueth of God. The bodily death which Christ died to ransome our sinnes, the holy Ghost doth note sometimes by his Flesh, sometimes by his Body, sometimes by his Blood and sometimes by his Crosse, and these either ioyned or seuered; and sometimes also by his soule or life laide downe or powred out vnto death for vs. We finde them ioy­ned, when Paul saith, Coloss 1. It pleased (God) by Christ to reconcile all things to himselfe and to pacifie by the BLOOD of his Crosse through him, both things in earth and things in hea­uen. And you which in times past were strangers and enemies, hath he now reconciled in the BODY OF HIS FLESH through death. Seuered are they when Peter saith; 1. Pet. 1. You were redeemed by the precious blood of Christ as a Lambe vndefiled; Who Hebr. 9. by his owne blood (saith the Apostle) entered in once into the holyplace, and obtained eternall Redemp­tion. And so when Iohn saith, 1. Iohn 1. The blood of Iesus Christ clenseth vs from all sinne. As likewife Paul; Ephe. 1. We haue Redemption through his blood, euen the Remission of sinnes. Of his body himselfe saith; Luke 22. This is my body, which is giuen for you; and Iohn 6. my flesh will I giue for the life of the world: so are Hebr. 10. we sanctified by the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once. Likewise of his soule by which the Scripture meaneth his life for that life wholy dependeth vpon the presence of the soule in the body; Iohn 10. My Father loueth me (sayth Christ) because I lay downe my soule (or life.) Matt. 20. The sonne of man came to giue his soule (or life) as a ransome for many. And Esay foreshewed that Christ should diuide the spoyle of (or with) the mightie, Because he Esa. 53. powred out his soule vnto death, which se­uereth the soule from the body; and so made it an offering for sinne by laying it downe of himselfe, that death might seaze on his body. This then being the maine founda­tion of the Gospel, which the Apostle receiued, that 1. Co [...]in. 15. Christ died for our sinnes accor­ding to the Scriptures, the Question still standeth as I first set it, What death Christ died for our sinnes by the witnesse of holy Scriptures, and not what sufferings went before, or what other things ioyned with his death, which is the hole that you would faine hide your selfe in. To that intent, which I set downe, my reasons drawen from the [Page 105] Iewish sacrifices and Christians sacraments did, and doe still stand effectuall. For the olde sacrifices must figure, and the new Sacraments must seale whatsoeuer death in Christ was the full and perfect ransome of our sinnes. But they foreshew and confirme the bodily death of Christ onely; they neither shew not signifie the death of the soule, nor the death of the damned. Therefore the bodily death of Christ onely is the full and perfect ransome of our sinnes: the death of the soule, and the death of the damned, as they serued nothing to our Redemption, so were they not suffered in the soule of Christ.

Two cauils you offer against the first part of this reason touching the sacrifices of the fathers before and vnder the law. One that they figured not the whole sacrifice, as neither Christes Deitie, his soule, nor his resurrection: the next that all the sacrifices of the Iewes did not signifie his bodily death, because the Scape goate, which was a sinne offering, was not slaine. Of trifling you talke much, this is more then trifling, it is plaine shifting. Christes deitie could be no part of that sacrifice which suffered for sinne; the diuine Maiestie can not suffer either paine or sorrow. To what ende then come you in with Christes Godhead, when you talke of his suffering for sinne? His soule, you say, was not figured by those sacrifices.] The suffering death in his soule was indeed no way figured by them; but that the mediatour should haue an humane soule to bee separated from his body by death, before hee could make purgation of our sinnes; that was more then figured by those sacrifices. For since not the blood of beasts, but of man, and euen of the Sonne of God made man, was by Gods promise to be shed for our sinnes; It is euident that from life to death he could not come, but by seuering his soule from his body. And consequently he must haue a soule being a man, which must be powred out vnto death, before he could die, euen as the powers of life in bloody sacrifices were parted from their flesh, before they could be offered as sacrifices vnto God.

But I Defenc. pa. 36. li. 31. charge you vntruely when I say, you expound your whole and absolute Redempti­on to be of all the fruites and causes of our Redemption: you haue no such word nor meaning as fruites.] Your words are our whole and absolute Redemption, and those I say containe the whole course of our saluation euen vnto the last step, which is our glorification, as I haue formerly prooued by Christes owne speech. Againe if the Treati pa. 11. li 30. resurrection of Christ, which is your owne instance, bee a part of that propitiatorie sacrifice, because it was a necessarie consequent, then all the benefites that Christ obtained for vs, or bestowed on vs, must be comprised in that his oblation for sinne. For they are all ne­cessarie consequents and effects of our Redemption, and depend on these two bran­ches; his death to free vs from sinne, and his resurrection to raise vs into a new and heauenly life now & for euer. He was Rom. 4. deliuered (to death) for our sinnes, and rose againe for our iustification. From these two heads the Scriptures deriue not onely forgiuenes of sinnes, but newnesse of life on earth, and happinesse of life in heauen. Yet you did not call them fruits. Effects you called them, and what is a ioyfull effect, such as was Christs resurrection, but a fruit? and that as well in Christ as in vs? When the Prophet saith of Christ Esay. 53. he shall see the trauaile of his soule, and be satisfied, what meaneth he but the fruits and effects of Christs labour? when for his obedience to death, God highly exalted him, and gaue him a name aboue euery name, that euery knee should bow vnto him, what is this but a fruite and reward of his humiliation, first, in his owne person, then proportionably in all that be his?

Defenc. pa. 37. li. 5. Many of the Iewes sacrifices, yea most of them, did represent and signifie Christs bodily sufferings onely, yet not all. Therefore you may well deny mine assumption, as you did before; and affirme that certaine Iewish Sacrifices set forth the sufferings euen of the soule of Christ, and not of his body only.] Did I any where say that all the Iewish sacrifices were bloudy? or that all of them did represent Christs death and blood shedding? Could I be ig­norant, that the Iewes had oblations made onely by fier, as of flower, wine, and incense? and also offerings of the first fruits, and other things dedicated or presented to the Lord for the vse of his tabernacle and Temple? Doth not the Apostle say; Heb. 5. Euery [Page 106] high Priest is ordayned for men to offer GIFTES and SACRIFICES for sinne? Where gifts shew, that things without life were offered as well as liuing beasts and birds which were slaine. As then there was no cause, nor neede I should, so I neuer vsed the word ALL in that case, vnlesse I added liuing or BLOODY Sacrifices. For they by their life lost and blood shed figured the death of Christ Iesus. But this ALL is your adding to my wordes, that you may take occasion to pike some quarrell at them.

But you may well deny my assumption, that no sacrifices of the Iewes did figure the suf­ferings of Christs soule.] I assumed no such thing, neither did I meddle with the suf­ferings of Christs soule, vnlesse they were the death of the soule, or the paines of hell, which the Scripture calleth the second death; and I the death of the damned; because none besides the damned die that second death: but you plainly giue me the slip; and conuey your selfe from speaking of the death of the soule or of the death of the dam­ned, which are the things in Question, to the sufferings of the soule in generall, of which I make no Question. And though your meaning be, vnder the sufferings of the soule to comprise the tormenting of Christs soule by the immediate hand of God with the selfe same paines which the damned do feele in hell; Yet such is your cariage, that eue­ry where you suppresse your maine intent, and make a faire shew with the sufferings of Christs soule, as if you ment no more, but that Christs soule must needs haue some sufferings proper to it selfe; which you confesse I sundry times teach; and yet you make your Reader beleeue, I euer impugne. You shall doe well to awake out of this slumber and call to minde, that there are no sufferings of Christs soule now in question, but the DEATH of the SOVLE, or of the DAMNED; which you dare not openly auouch, and therefore you plaster them ouer with smoother termes of the sufferings of the soule; to hide your secret mysteries till you meete with itching eares, that will listen more to fansies then to faith. Another peece of skill you shew in this place, to ease your selfe of all proofe, and thinke it enough if you once denie it. For where you affirme that certaine Sacrifices of the Iewes set foorth (those) sufferings of Christs soule, which you meane; and I vtterly denied that any sacrifices of the Iewes did shew the suffering of hell paines in Christs soule, or any other kind of death be­sides the death of the body only: you take not the paines to make any proofe of that you a [...]rme, but stand in your state, and say you deny my assumption. As if the nega­tiue being mine, and the affirmatiue yours, you were not by all rules of R [...]ason to prooue your a [...]atiue; and it sufficed me to stand on the negatiue, till you made iust proofe of the contrary. [Here you will say you doe bring proofe for your asser­tion.] Here indeed you spend three leaues in talking of it as your manner is; how­beit your word is here, as throughout your writings, the best warrant you offer vs for this cause. But let vs heare your examples and proofes.

First, that Defenc. pa. [...]7 li. 10. sacrifice consisting of two goats, a slaine and a scape-goat. You obiect heere a­gainst; first, that I abuse the Text. That were a great fault; but let vs view the Text.] Against your instance of the Scape-goat figuring as you would haue it, the suffe [...]ingsMy Exceptions to the Defen­ders instance of the Scape-goat. of Christs soule; I made three exceptions: First, that the Scripture did not call the Scape-goat a Sacrifice for sinne: Secondly, that no proofe was or could be made, that the Scapegoat signified the soule of Christ: Thirdly, that if both those were granted, which were no way proued, the Scape-goat suffering nothing, but being let loose into the wildernesse, did rather inferre that Christes soule was freed from all such sufferings as you would force vpon it. To the last, which is the chiefest, you take the paines to say little; and so giue the Reader to vnderstand, that your bolde as­sertion is the best foundation of your proofe: for if you can not shew, as you neither doe nor can, that the Scape-goat by the Scriptures suffered any thing; how will you bring it about, that the Scape-goat figured the sufferings of Christes soule? shall no suffering be a figure of suffering? such may your figures be; but the wisdome of God maketh figures for similitude and resemblance to the trueth; and not for contrarie­tie to it, as you do. The chiefest point then you cleane slide from, and take holde on [Page 107] some words in Moses text, about which you thinke you may wrangle with some more likelihood.

The verie expresse w [...]rds of the text, you say, are these: Aaron shall take of the people two goats for a sinne offering. And verie good reason must I bring to frustrate so pl [...] a speech.] I am farre from bringing any thing to frustrate the Scriptures; but if the Scripture expresse it selfe, I preferre that before your misapplying the words to your will. (Aaron) shal take of the congregation of the children of Israel two goats (for sinne.) So stand the words, if you will needs appeale precisely to the text. Here is a taking (of two goats) and an intent for sinne declared in generall, but the particular maner of v­sing and ordering either of them according to Gods appointment followeth in di­stinct and direct w [...]ds. AaronLeuitic. 16. vers 7. shall take the two goats and make them stand before the Lord at the doore of the Tabernacle. And Aaron shall giue lots vpon both goats, one lot for the Lord and another for the Scape-goat. And Aaron shall make the goat on which the l [...] fell for the Lord to draw neere, and shall make him reddie (or) sacrifice him for sinne. For here is AASA'HV added, which in the Scriptures vsually signifieth to make readie a Sacrifice. And he shall kill the goat that is for sinne, for the people, and bring his bloud with­in the vai [...]e. In as plaine words as the former be, or any can be, that goat on which the lot fell for the Lord, must be made readie, that is, sacrificed for sinne, of which he spake at first; and that which was the peoples sinne-offering must be slaine, and his blood brought within the vaile. But neither of these agree to the Scape-goat: therefore the Scape­goat was not the sinne offering for the people, which the Scripture in that place men­tioneth.Defenc. pa. 37. li. 21. These words (you say) proue not that the Scape-goat was no sinne-offering at all.] These particular circumstances doe plainly proue, which of the two goats was made the peoples sinne-offering, and so conuince that you inlargc the words of Moses without any iust ground to serue your owne conceit. Two sinne-offerings were not taken from the people, but two goats were taken for sinne, and one of them sacrificed for the people, as was after prescribed and performed; and Aaron commanded for him and his houseLeuitic 16. vers. 6. to offer a bullocke for his sinne-offering. So that where the Scrip­ture mentioneth no moe sinne-offerings for the people but one, neither vseth the word AASA but to one of them; that one was prepared and slaine by Gods com­mandement as a sinne-offering for the people, where the Scape-goat was preserued aliue, and sent away into the wildernesse, to shew the force of the former sacrifice by carying with it the sinnes of the people.

Defenc pag. 37. li. 28. I take a sacrifice and offering in the largest sense, as signifying any consecrated thing gi­uen to God to appease him for sinne. And such vnbloudie sinne-offerings very manie we shall finde in Moses Law. Wherefore the Scape-goat may be a sinne-offering, though it were not slaine or bloudie.] That the word Sacrifice may be diuersly taken, and applied to things vnbloudie and ghostly, I haue no doubt: but that one and the same word, in one and the same place, should import both a bloudie and vnbloudie sacrifice for sinne, is a shift of yours without all sense, it hath no shew in the sacred Scriptures. Againe, the sacrifices for sinne, were they bloudie or vnbloudie, which are mentioned in Moses law, and namely in all those places which you quote in your margin; they were all without exception OFFERED to God by FIRE; the things liuing suffered first death by effusion of bloud; the things without life, as flowre, oyle, wine, and such like, were cast into the fire where the bloudie sacrifices were burned; and so without bloud or fire no sacrifice for sinne is appointed in Moses law. Since then the Scape­goat was neither slaine nor touched with fire, but sent forth aliue into the wildernesse; what do those examples of things vnbloudie, yet offered by fire, helpe you to proue, that the Scape-goat liuing was such a sinne offering as many are found in Moses law?

Defenc. pa. 38. li. 13. Can there be any thing in the world more full and strong to prooue that the Scape-goat also was a true sinne-offering, or rather a true part of this whole and entire sinne-offering con­sisting and being compleat in both these goats, the slaine and the Scape-goat? For as the slaine so the Scape-goat, we see, was CONSECRATED to the Lord, and here OFFERED (to make reconciliation by him) and separated from men, and bar [...] vpon him all the sinnes of the [Page 108] people.] You be come now from a sinne-offering to a part of a sinne offering; and that you proue, because the Scape-goat was Pag vt supra li. 5. CONSECRATED and OFFERED to make reconciliation by him. All these words are your owne adding to the text; and if you keepe that course, you may proue what you list, if not by the Scriptures, at least by your commentaries vpon the Scriptures. The words of Moses in that verse, which you quote, are those: And the goat (on which the lot fell to be the Scape goa [...]) shal be Leuitic. 16. vers. 10. brought aliue before the Lord, LECAPPER, to pray ouer him (o [...] to carie away sinne by him) and to send him for the Scape-goat into the desert. You aske whose translation this is. The [...]s that had better skill in the Hebrue tongue than you or I. The ancient translation of the Latine Church hath, vt funda [...] preces super [...]um; to make prayers o­uer him; which Isychius, Nicolaus de Lyra, and Arias Montanus [...]o follow. Pagnin [...] sayth, ad emundandum per illum, to clense, or cary away sinne by him, which Vatablus in his notes varieth by adrogandum, to pray ouer him. That the Scape-goat was consecra­ted or offered, there are no such wordes in Moses text; except you meane, that the bringing of the goat before God was the offering of it, and the praying ouer it was the consecrating of it; but these be sillie coniectures to proue the consecration and oblation of a Sacrifice. The Scape-goat therefore was not the halfe sinne-offering of the peo­ple as you pretend; it was a sensible figure of the acceptance of the former Sacrifice, whose bloud was carried within the vaile, and made a full propitiation for all their sinnes; as much as those Sacrifices could effect. And in token thereof the Priest was willed before their faces by imposing his hands and confessing their iniquities, to let them see, that the Lord remoued all their sinnes out of his sight, as that goat was cari­ed away from the sight of men into the wildernesse. So that the Scape-goat was no­thing giuen to God for sinne as you would haue it, but shewed rather a reiection and detestation of sinne by his departure into the desert, and was no sanctified and accep­ted sacrifice for sinne, as the other was who [...]e bloud did make the purgation of their sinnes, and reconcile them to God by his figuring and their beleeuing in the true and eternall sacrifice for sinne.

Was not the Scape-goat then a figure of Christ as well as the slaine goat?] Though cer­taineThe Scape-goat might in some sort be a figure of Christ. Fathers doe sometimes resemble the Scape-goat to the wicked and reprobate, which is not so wide a wandering from the trueth, as your wresting it to signifie the sufferings of Christes soule; yet neither did I, nor doe I gainsay, but the Scape-goat might in some sort be a figure of Christ, notwithstanding all things in it can not be proportioned to Christ, for so no figure can match him: yet that doth not proue it to be sacrifice for sinne, much lesse to foreshew the sufferings of Christes soule. There were many figures of Christ, yea of Christes death, as the Brasen Serpent, the Rocke in the desert; Sampson, Ionas, and many such, which were no sacirfices; and so might the Scape-goat prefigure either the cause or shame of his death or both, as the slaine goat did the maner and power of his death, and yet be no sinne-offering. Iustine Martyr sayth, The two goats Iustinus in Dial [...]go cum Try [...]one. designed the two commings of Christ; the first when the Elders of the people and Priests laying their hands on him and putting him to death, SENT HIM AVVAY AS THE SCAPEGOAT. The second, when they shall acknowledge him, whom they dishonoured, to be the sacrifice for all repentant sinners. Te [...]ullian is of the same minde: One of the goats Tertul. contra Marcio. li. 3. & aduers. Iudaeos de 2. Christi a [...]uentu. arayed in redde scarlet, aecurfed and spet on, beaten and punched by the people, was cast out of the city into a place of perdition, (thus) marked with ma­nifest signes of the Lords passion. The other offered for sinne, and giuen for food to the Priests of the Temple, secundae repraesentationis argumenta sign bat, sealed the effects of his second appearing. Theodoret referreth the two goats to the two natures of Christ; the Theodoreti quaesti. in Le­ [...]it. & si [...]il. Dialogo 3. [...]laine goat to represent the passible nature of his flesh; the Scape-goat to shew the impassible nature of his Diuinitie. Isychius li. 5. in Leuit. 16. Isychius doth the like. Caluine a man of sharpe iudgement, and in some sense a mainteiner of the sufferings of Christes soule, yet doth not applie the Scape-goat as you doe; but either to witnesse the resurrection of Christ, as the slaine goat did dcclare his death; or to shew that Christ was a man deuoted to beare the shame and punishment of sinne for others. There is heere set downe (sayth he) a Caluinus Har­ [...]o. in 4. li. Mo­sis in 2 praec [...]pto ex cap. 16 Le­uitici. doubble way [Page 109] of cleansing sinne. For of the two goats, one was offered for a sacrifice after the maner of the Law, the other was sent forth (aliue) to be [...] vel [...], as a thing deuoted to destruction for others, or an of-scouring of the people. The truth of either of these figures was exhibited in Christ, because he was the lambe of God, whose slaying abolished the sinnes of the world; and that he might be [...], (one deuoted or appointed to beare the plague for others;) all beautie was quenched in him, and he reiected of men. There may be brought a more curious speculation, that the sending away of the (Scape-goat) was a figure of Christes resurrection; but I embrace that which is more simple and certaine, that the goat sent away aliue and free was VICE PIACVLI (as a thing deuoted to beare the brunt for others) that by his departure and leading away, the people might be assured their sinnes did vanish, and were caried farre out of sight. So that though the Priest brought one goat aliue for a reconciliation, yet God was not pacified without bloud, quia vis expiationis a sacrificio alterius Hirci pendebat, because the force of cleansing sinne depended on the sacrifice of the other (slaine) goat. Thus haue we manie significations of the Scape-goat referred euen to Christ by old and new writers, and euen by some whom you would seeme most to follow; and yet none of them applieth it to the sufferings of Christes soule. So that your assertion in that behalfe is but your meere imagination, farther from the words of Moses, than their coniectures which you count widest off. But you will proue it by maine might, that shall remoue mountaines before it.

It Defenc. pa. 39. li. 4. must needs be then that the (Scape-goate) signified Christ, yea doubtlesse Christ man. For the godhead could be no sinne-offering neither did it make reconciliation for sinne, neither did the Deitie beare our sinnes vpon him properly; all which the Scape-goate did. If it were Christ man, it could not be his body, for his body was slaine bloudily, the Scape-goate was not slaine. It must then be of necessitie (I thinke) the humane MORTALL Soule, which the Scape-goate signified.] I know not whether you make the Soule of Christ mortall as your words here stand, because he suffered the death of the soule as you imagine, or whether this were the scape of your Printer; but by such demonstrati­ons as these are, supported with figures and fansies of your owne making, you may prooue what you will. That the Brasen Serpent was a figure of Christs death, Christ himselfe witnesseth. Whence you may inferre after your manner, that Christ had no true flesh nor felt death. For the Brasen Serpent had neither flesh to feele, nor life to loose. So the Lord expresseth, that Matth. 12. Ionas was a figure of his lying in the graue; and yet was Ionas aliue in the Whales belly. May it therefore be concluded that Christ was neuer dead, nor buried, because Ionas indeede was neither? Figures haue a re­semblance to some things in Christ, not to all; as the brasen Serpent to his fastning on the Crosse, and sauing all that beheld him in faith; Ionas to the time that he lay in his graue, and to the impossibilitie conceaued of his resurrection. So the Scape-goate notwithstanding your must needs be, and could not be, migh [...] signifie the impassible godhead of Christ, as Theodoret, and Isychius affirme, since power to take away sin and to cleanse it, without any suffering for it, is proper to God. It might likewise re­semble the detestation and hatred the Iewes had of Christ when they cryed, Iohn. 19. away with him, away with him, if the vsage of the people towards the Scape-goate were such as Tertullian describeth; which was to spit at him, punch him, and curse him, as he was caried out of the Citie. And where he went away aliue for all their spites and wrongs, that might declare either his resurrection into life eternall which they could not touch, or else the disposition of his life here not left in the peoples hands, but reserued to his owne power, till he did willingly offer it as a sacrifice vnto God. Am­brose saith of him. Ambro. de in­carn dom. Sa­cramento. ca. 5. Quasi arbiter exuendi suscipiendique corporis, emisit spiritum non amisit. As hauing power in himselfe to lay aside and to take againe his body, he sent foorth his soule, he lost it not. And likewise Eusebius. When Eusebius de­monst. Euangel. li. 1. ca. 8. no man had power ouer Christs soule he himselfe of his owne accord laid it downe for man. Ibidem li 3. cap. 6. [...]. So (loosed from all force) and resting free, him selfe of him selfe made the departure from his body. This the Scape-goate I say might fi­gure, as some ancient Fathers auouch, & your reasons to the contrary are but rushes, [Page 110] vnfit to conclude such a cause; considering that no figure agreeth in all things with the truth, for then it should be no figure but the truth, and you collect some small disagreements betweene the figure and the truth..

Againe as you suppose for some petite difference the Scape-goat could not figure the deity, nor body of Christ: so I vpon stronger grounds collect, it could not signi­fie the proper sufferings of Christs soule, & if your word were of any waight, your selfe auouch that which I entend. Those Trea. pa. 11. li. 24. b [...]asts sacrifices (say you) could not prefigure the immortall and reasonable soule of Christ.] If that be true which is your owne auerment, how could the Scape-goat which I troe was a beast, as you say a sacrifice, figure the sufferings of Christs soule, which were inward and invisible, as was his soule? Can you so closely conuey contradictions, as in your treatise to tell vs the sacrifices of beasts could not prefigure the immortall soule of Christ, and in your defence to assure vs it must be ofne­cessitie that the Scape-goat signified the humane soule of Christ? Besides if the Scape­goat signified Christs soule sent away from his body, for the other goat was first slain; it must of force import Christs death; for without death, his soule was not separated from his body. And so by your vrging that it could not signifie Christs death, you plainly confirme it did signifie Christes death. Thirdly the place whither the Scape­goat was sent, was the Leuit. 16. vers. 22. Wildernes and a land vnhabitabie. Now the soule of Christ se­uered from his body, went to heauen as you hold or to Paradise. Is heauen or Para­dise with you become a wildernes & a land not inhabited? Fourthly the Scape-goat af­ter he was sent away, did Ibidem. beare vpon him all the sinnes of the people. Dare you say that Christs soule departed from his body did beare or suffer the punishment of the peoples sinnes? Your meaning is but to Defenc. pa 40. li. 2. shew what you thinke to be indeed most probable and likely, knowing that yet some such matter, as you ayme at, they doe signifie without Que­stion.] After it must be of necessitie, come you now with probabilitie? and is your doubtles so soone turned into likelihood? The Reader is well holpen vp to rest on your word, and to beleeue SOME SVCH MATTER AS YOV AYME AT. But backe to the matter indeed, and then your Reader shall finde euen by your owne confession, be­sides my proofes, that you do but ayme at these things vpon the bare surmise of your own braine; and that you can shew no sacrifices of the Iewes which did figure the pro­per sufferings of Christs foule; much lesse the death of his soule which is the matter that we differ about, howsoeuer you would now loose your necke out of the coller.

We Defenc. pa. 38 li. 21. reade of other sacrifices consisting of sacrifices of sundry and diuers sorts. The bloody sacrifice had conioyned together with it, the vnbloody sacrifice of the meate offering, and an What salt, flow­er, [...]le, & wine, added to the Iewes sacrifices [...]ight signifie. other of the drinke offering. Which may very likely represent vnto vs the sundry and diuers kinds of Christs meritorious sufferings in his life time and at his death.] You coniecture still so farre from truth, that few men will regard your coniecturall likelihoods. Why Salt, Flower, Oyle and Wine, were added to the carnall sacrifices of the Iewes; much may be ghessed, litle can be prooued. They might well serue to make the sacrifice the sweeter, and the fuller, and so resemble the fragrancie and sufficiencie of Christs death; but what reason you haue to make Christes life to be thought his death; and his merits all one with his sufferings; and things without sense or life to figure the sufferings of his soule, and you know not what besides; I doe not see, but onely that your will is your best weapon, when you be put to the push of any proofe. Yea in the same side where you reiect the iudgement of Cyrill, Ambrose, and Bede, as Pag. 38. wide coniectures and palpable mistakings, you come in with your foolish supposals, and offer them to all the godly as matters of good moment, onely because you fansie them. But mocke not your Reader with may, and must as you thinke; your thoughts must be wiser and neerer the truth before a meane man will regard them.

Pag. 38. li. vl. Who but I (you say) would defend these palpable mistakings of the auncients, and not see the Pag. 39. li. 1. expresse text against them?] Nay who but you would so peremptorily trample vpon the credits of such men, with a proud presumption of the text before you did better examine it? Is it so repugnant to the Scriptures as you pretend, to say the wic­ked are a Redemption or propitiation for the godly, which in Moses the Scape-goate [Page 111] is said to be for the people? Salomon saith, Pro. 21. v. 1 [...]. COPHER LAZADDIC RASHAA a Redemption for the iust (shall) the wicked (be,) and the transgressour for the righteous. Where not onely the same sense, but the same word is found which Moses vseth, when he saith, the Scape-goate shall be Leuit. 16. presented aliue before the Lord LECAPPE [...] vers. [...]0. AALAV, to make (Redemption or reconciliation) by him. So God by Esay said, Esa 43. v. 30. I gaue Egypt CAPHRECA to be thy Redemption; that is to be plagued for thee, that thou mightest scape. And so God often layeth the burden on the wicked, that should fall on the righteous, and excuseth the one by the punishment of the other, as he did ty­pically on the Scape-goate & truely on Christ for all the sinnes of the people. Where­fore it was no such ouersight in Cyrill, Ambroses and B [...]de to resemble the Scape­goate to the wicked, when they are punished to spa [...] the godly as you would make it, their coniectures are farre more considerate then yours; the Sauiour of the world was Mark. 15. counted among the wicked, and vsed in shew as the wicked are, when he bare our sinnes in his body, and tooke our burden on him. That which M [...]nster reporteth out of all the Rabines, and especially out of Rabi Salom: Kimchi, and Aben Ezra, that the Scape-goate was Munst. An­notat. in Leui­tic. ca. 16. sent to a strong hill in the desert, and there torne in peeces before he could touch the middle of the hill; I leaue to each mans liking, because the Scripture noteth no such thing; Howbeit Tertullian saith, Tertull. contra Marcio. li. 3. extra ciuitatem abijciebatur in per­ditionem, the Scape-goate was cast out of the Citie into perdition; And Iustine Martyr in his Dialogue with Triphon the Iew, saith, the Priests and Elders sent Christ away as the Scape-goate, laying their hands on him, and doing him to death.

The Defenc. pa. 40. li. 8. very like are your three reasons brought to shew that the Holocaust can not signifie the sufferings of whole Christ, and therefore not of his soule any way.] Whether the Holo­caust What the Holo­caust did sig­nifie. were a figure of Christes sacrifice, or did represent the ioynt sufferings of the whole manhood of Christ, neither of these is in question betwixt vs. You tooke vp­on you to shew, that the Iewes by their sacrifices were directed to beleeue the suffe­ring of that which you call hell paines in the soule of Christ, when he offered him­selfe for our sinnes. That was the point which I denied. The shedding of Christes bloud vnto death, the Apostle in the ninth and tenth Chapters to the Hebrewes, doeth plainely deduce from those bloudie sacrifices of the Iewes; other sufferings of Christ from their sacrifices he doth not deriue. The Holocaust, you replied, was Trea. pa. 13. li. 18. eue­ry whit chopt in peeces, and altogether put into the fire and burnt. I answered this was done after the death of the sacrifice, whose dead body was wholly consumed to ashes with one and the selfe same sire; and therefore this could not be referred to the proper sufferings of Christs soule; which could not suffer any thing after the death of the body, much lesse be wholly consumed with any sufferings common to the body, since the body of Christ it selfe neither was, nor could be consumed with any corruption or affliction. Besides that you your self in the leafe before made a plaine resolution, that those Trea. pa. 11. li. 24. Sa­crifices of beasts, could not prefigure the immortall and reasonable soule of Christ. How then could the dead bodies of those beasts cut in peeces and quite consumed with fire, represent the inward and proper sufferings of the soule?

Is there Defen. pa. 40. li. 13. any Similitude concurring in all points and circumstances with the thing signi­fied?] If it did, it were the trueth it selfe, and not a figure thereof. And therefore all your illations that the Scape-goate, which in some things disagreed from the Deitie and body of Christ, could signifie neither, were vaine and idle. It sufficeth in figures warranted by the word of God, that one principall action or circumstance bee com­mon to both, in how many things so euer they bee otherwise different. But where is your warrant in the Scriptures, that the burning of sacrifices when they were dead, sig­nified the sufferings of Christes soule? Shew that, and then wee will soone dispence with the rest of your rules and my reasons also. Figures expressed in the word of God had no doubt their similitude to the trueth, though we perhaps see it not; and if any one point of resemblance be ratified by Gods authoritie, that may and must content vs. But will you of your owne head make figures to fit your fansies, and then claime the same prerogatiue, which God himselfe hath? What if many figures in the Law had [Page 112] as great disparagement as you call it, To the things signified, as the burning of the Holo­caust to the sufferings of Christes soule? Is that a president for you to deuise and esta­blish what figures please you, and thence to raise platformes for strange and newe doctrine?

The Defenc pa. 40. li. 20. bodies of beastes first sl [...]ine were after caried out of the host. Now these signified Christs going out of Ierusalem to be slaine, but being yet aliue. The burning of the beasts af­ter they were dead, was a sacrifice of a sweete sauour vnto God, which in trueth is Christs very death, and nothing done by him afterward, whereby Gods anger is fully pacified toward vs.] In figuratiue and bloudie sacrifices could you distinguish the suffering, which was proper to the liuing creature that was offered, from the offering which was peculiar to the Priest, and from the accepting which belonged onely vnto God, you would not thus iumble them together both in the figures signifying, and in the thing signi­fied. That the bloud of the carnall sacrifices slaine vnder the Lawe, did foreshew the bloudshedding and death of Christ Iesus for the sinnes of the world, the Apostle to the Hebrewes is very plaine, not onely calling him amongst other things [...],y Hebr. 10. The shadow of good things to come, and Heb. 9. [...], a similitude for the time present, but also making diuers comparisons betwixt them and the bloud of Christ, and proouing by the first testament that the second must be ratified with bloud and death. By which as by figures were sufficiently testified, the ioynt sufferings of the whole manhood of Christ euen vnto death. For the powers of [...]ife and sense in those creatures that had their bloud shed vntodeath, naturally fee­ling and shewing in their kinde the paines and terrour of death, were fi [...]test to witnesse to all the beholders that the violent and bloudie death of the Messias, which hee would vndertake for the ransome of their sinnes, should bee grieuous and painefull euen to his soule. And that being made so manifest to all mens eyes by the death of the liuing sacrifices, what needed the burning of the same after it was dead and sense­lesse, obscurely to intimate if not falsely, that the fire of affliction as you would haue it, should consume the Messias? God had therefore another meaning, as I take it, in commanding ech sacrifice after it was slaine, to be offered to him by fire. Forwhere of all creatures subiect to mans sight and sense, fire was the fittest for the light, heate, force, and motion thereof to designe vnto the people, the brightnesse of Gods glorie, the zeale of his holinesse the grace of his Spirit, and seate of his habitation in the heauens; God gaue the Iewes fire from heauen to burne perpetually on his Altar; which did teach them with what cleannesse of hands and feruentnesse of heart, the things which hee re­quired, should bee offered vnto him; and did separate the sacrifices dedicated vnto God from all prophane abuse and humane vse; and made them ascend towardes the place of his glorious presence, that he might accept them with fauour, and be pleased with them. All which significations of heauenly fire were most perfectly accompli­shed in the sacrifice of Christ Iesus. For neuer man nor Angel offered vnto God any seruice with like puritie and charitie, as the Lord Iesus offered himselfe to his Fathers will; and that his oblation did not onely clense his body from all corruption of mor­talitie and infirmitie, as appeared by his resurrection; but pearced the heauens with admirable celeritie and efficacie, and preuailed in the presence of God to bee a sweete smelling sauour for all the sonnes of God.

Some of these things you seeme to acknowledge, As fire to signifie the Defen. pa. 42. li. 8. Acceptation of Christs death, in that it was a sacrifice of a sweete sauour ascending vp to God. WhatWhat fire did signifie in sa­crifices. reason then haue you that fire should note the wrath of God powred out on Christes soule and body before he died? Shall one and the same fire in one and the same sacri­fice import both gracious acceptance with God, and terrible vengeance from God? These be contraries in mine eyes, whatsoeuer they be in yours. That fire in sa­crifices did shew Gods fauour and not his anger, the sacrifices of Iudges 6. Gedeon, 2. Chron. 7. Salomon, and 2. Kings 18. Elias, doe plainly prooue, which God with fire from heauen consumed, not in token of any displeasure against them, or dislike of their offerings, but in signe of ve­ry fauorable acceptations both of their persons and sacrifices. Euen so at the first of­ferings [Page 113] of Aaron Leuit. 9. the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people and there came a fire from the Lord, and consumed the burnt offering vpon the Altar; which when all the people saw, they gaue a shout for ioy and fell on their faces. This fire descending from God and con­suming that sacrifice, God commaunded to keepe Leuit. 6. vers. 12. 13. burning for euer on his Altar, and none might approch to him with any other fire in incense or offering: in so much that when Nadab and Abihu the sonnes of Aaron tooke strange [...]ire to offer before the Lord, and not of that which alwaies burned on the Altar, God Leuit. 10. destroyed them with fire. The fire then which consumed the sacrifices of the Iewes was miraculously deli­uered them by God, and ioyfully receaued of all the people, and therefore did not argue to them any wrath or vengeance on their sacrifices, but rather the fauour and good liking of God, which the Scripture noteth by the sweete odour of the sacrifice. As when Noah made his Genes. 8. burnt offerings to ascend (by fire) the Scripture saith, the Lord smelled a sauour of rest, that is, he shewed himselfe to be appeased, and his anger to rest. So when Aaron and his sonnes were to be consecrated Priests, God said to Moses, Exod 29. Thou shalt make to smell, (by fier) (that is, thou shalt burne) the whole Ram, as a burnt offering; it shall be to the Lord a sauour of rest: that is a pleasing sacrifice. And for that cause God willed the Iewes in their peace offerings, whereby they gaue thanks for their safetie and prosperitie, to vse fire; and saith of it, Leuit. 3. v. 5. ISSHE, this burning by fire, (or this sacrifice made by fire) is a sauour of rest vnto the Lord. And so in incense, which Saint Iohn resembleth to the Reuel. 8. prayers of the Saints, fire was likewise required, to teach them, that their prayers went vp before God as the smoke of sweete odours, and were ac­cepted of him. Then not affliction or indignation on the Sacrifice was declared by the fire which God commaunded to be vsed in all kinds of sacrifices, but rather an ascending vp to the presence of God, and an accepting thereof in the sight of God, which is farre from your suffering of hell paines in the soule of Christ, for which you bable so much in both your bookes.

But the Apostle sayth, as the bodies of beasts were burnt without the campe, so Christ Christs suffe­ring without the gate of the Citie. suffered without the gate.] Were it granted, that fire in Sacrifices did signifie probation or affliction, which is no way proued; you are no whit the neerer to your suffering of hell paines in the soule of Christ. For the bodies of beasts, sayth the Apostle, were burnt, which can by no pretense of these wordes be stretched farder than the afflictions of Christes bodie, when he was carried to be crucified without the gate. And the chop­ping of the holocaust in pieces, that it might the more conueniently be layed on the wood to burne, maketh as slender proofe, that Christes soule suffered the paines of hell, notwithstanding your graue deuice, that Christes soule was chopt in pieces, and not his bodie; which conceits of yours, declare your follie, but helpe not your cause. Those Sacrifices whereof part was burnt by fire, and the rest reserued for the Priest, and sometimes for the owner that brought them to feast before the Lord, had their bloud shed at the doore of the Tabernacle as well as the other, and so resembled the death of Christ no lesse than the other, though God would haue no part of the one to be eaten by the Priests or people, as the other were, but to be wholly consumed by fire, because they were wholly reserued or dedicated vnto him. And this the A­postle respecteth in that comparison which he maketh of the bodies of beasts burnt without the campe, whereof the Priests that serued in the Tabernacle could not be par­takers. They were consumed by fire, because the Priests should not eat thereof; to foreshew, as the Apostle noteth, that such as were addicted to the seruice and cere­monies of the Law and the outward Temple, could not be partakers of the trueth, which is in Christ, except they did leaue those elements of the Law, which seemed so glorious in their eyes; and followed Christ out of the gate, bearing his reproch; whose bloud was most holy and most sufficient to sanctifie the people, though hee were cast out of the citie to suffer as a malefactour and wicked person. Neither were the dead bodies of those beasts consumed by fire out of the campe, to make them sa­crifices vnto God; for then must they haue beene burnt on the Altar, which was at the doore of the Tabernacle of the Congregation within the citie, as the holocausts [Page 114] were; but after they were slaine before the doore of that Tabernacle, and their bloud brought and sprinckled on the hornes of the Altar of incense, and before the vaile of the Sanctuarie, and their fat burned on the Altar of burnt offerings in the Court; then was the rest caried out of the campe to be consumed with fire, that no man might eat thereof. The place whither, and the purpose why the dead bodies of those beasts were carried forth from the vse of the Priests, are touched by the Apostle in the thir­teenth to the Hebrues; but the maner of burning them after their bloud was sprinc­kled, and their fat offered vnto God vpon his Altar by sacred fire, he no way compa­reth with the sufferings of Christes bodie, much lesse of his soule, neither of which was consumed in Christes passion without the gate as their bodies were by fire with­out the campe. For the fire of probation and affliction by the witnesse of holy Scrip­ture, consumeth only the wicked; which are as drosse andEsa. 5. v. 24. Nah. 1. v. 10. 1. Co [...]inth. 3. stubble before it; it con­sumeth not the godly, but clenseth them, and maketh them pure asPro. 17. v. 3. Sap. 6. v. 3. Eccles. 2. v. 5. golde tried in the fornace, yea1. Pet. 1. much more precious than gold tried with fire.

So that my first and second exceptions stand good for ought you haue proued to the contrarie. No Scripture doth warrant, that fire in Sacrifices did signifie the tor­ments of Christs bodie, much lesse the proper sufferings of Christes soule, least of all the paines of the damned; but rather, as I haue shewed, the perfection and puritie of Christs sacrifice before God, and the acceptation thereof with God; which are things farre distant from your deuice. As also that Christes bodie or soule were wholly con­sumed by any affliction when he suffered for our sinnes; this hath neither ground in the word of God, nor trueth in it selfe. Which reason you cunningly skip, and say, my Def. pag. 41. second exception is also nothing. What mine exceptions were, my words are plaine.Conclus. pa. 236. li 30. Why the burning of the holocaust should signifie Christs affliction on the crosse either in body or in soule, I see no proofe made by this Confuter; and why they should not resemble Christs afflictions before death, these two reasons moue me: First it was burnt after it was dead; next it was wholly consumed by fire: neither of which can accord with Christes sufferings on the crosse. This was, as all men may see, my second exception, and not that which you subiect in place thereof. That indeed sheweth how carelesly you concluded against your selfe. For where you make such a stirre for the PROPER sufferings of the soule of Christ, when you come to exemplifie them but in a figure, you bring the burning of the bodie of the holocaust, which either wholly excludeth the sufferings of the soule, or admitteth none but those that were also common to the bodie of Christ, and so your PROPER sufferings of Christes soule are cleane without your owne exam­ple. But now you amend the matter, and plainly affirme, that Defenc. pag. 40. li. 37. one and the same tor­ment afflicted Christes whole manhood by sympathie.] Looke better to your words, Sir Trifler, another time. If it were common to the bodie, how was it proper to the soule? If it were proper to the soule, how was it common to the bodie?

You haue shifts enow to saue all this: forDefenc. pa. 42. li. 1. according to the proportion of the holocaust, so WHOLE Christ, you say, and then his verie soule CHIEFLY was AS IT VVERE chopt into pieces, and AS IT VVERE quite consumed in his firie sorrowes.] A learned &The Defenders [...]aine shifts. wittie answere very like, as it were, to your selfe. To proue the proper sufferings of the soule, you proportion out the sufferings of the whole man, which are common to bodie and soule; and these because they are chiefly in the soule, you make proper vnto the soule. By that reason all the sufferings of the bodie are proper likewise to the soule; because the sense of them is chiefly, if not onely in the soule. But what will you not say, that speaking both monstrously and falsely in your firie humor, salue it all with as it were? The soule of Christ, you say, was AS IT VVERE chopt in pieces, and as it were quite consumed; and so in effect, when your words, which should be proper and positiue in points of faith, are absurd and senselesse, you imagine they may be as it were like to be true. Did you professe to speake figuratiuely and not properly, as in positi­ons of Religion you ought to do, many phrases might be borne withall which other­wise are intolerable: but when your assertions are out of all square and trueth; then to qualifie them with as it were (which is a shift, though verie shamefull, thorowout [Page 115] your booke in the greatest matters in question) and still to defend them as principles of Christian religion; this is fit for no man but for him that maketh a Maygame of p [...]etie to support the madnesse of his fansie.

With like learning you cure the contrarietie that you readily ranne into, whiles ouer egerly you pursued your owne purposes forgetting what fell from you in other places. For where in your Treatise for an aduantage you sayd,Trea. pa. 11. those sacrifices (of beasts) could not prefigure the immortall and reasonable soule of Christ; and in your De­fence you resolutely inferre,Defenc. pa. 39. li. 11. It must then be of necessitie (I thinke) the humane soule of Christ, which the Scape-goat signified, which was a true sinne-offering: This you can FVL EASILY reconcile, and that without trifling. In the former place you meant generally and for the most part, but not alwayes, nor altogether: Againe, the Scape-goat and the holocaust do not, in respect as they are bodily things, represent the soule of Christ or any matter pertain­ing to it; but the particular vsage and maner of action about them, doth liuely represent the sufferings of Christes soule.] This indeed is not trifling, but plaine tumbling in the mire. Your words were: those sacrifices (of beasts) could not prefigure the immortall and reasonable soule of Christ. Your new correction is now, you meant they did not AL­VV AIHS nor ALTOGETHER represent meere bodily sufferings. What is your new addition but a cleere confession, that your former words were false? For if those sacrificcs did not alwayes nor altogether represent Christs bodily sufferings, then some­times they prefigured the sufferings of his soule. But you sayd, they wereTrea. pa. 11. li. 9. & 12. ALTO­GETHER VNFIT for those inward and inuisible things, NEITHER HAD THEY ANIE RESEMBLANCE TOGETHER. Altogether vnfit, and not altogether vnfit to represent the sufferings of the soules; as also not any resemblance and some resemblance are contradictions in our countrey, whatsoeuer they be in yours.

But since you can not alwayes nor altogether hit the trueth, you will now goe to it with respects. The Scape-goat and the holocaust, you say, doe not in that respect as they are bodily things, represent the soule of Christ, or any matter pertaining to it.] In that re­spect as they are bodily things without any sacred action or passion, they figure nei­ther bodie nor soule of Christ, nor are indeed any figures at all. But you speake of sa­crifices of beasts, which can not beare that name in the Scriptures without some sacred action and passion ordeined by God to praefigure the sacrifice of his Sonne. And where euery thing which was appointed of God to foreshew the comming and dy­ing of his Sonne, was a figure of him, not in respect of any bodily matter or forme, (for so all things of that kinde should naturally haue beene figures of Christ, and not by gods appointment, which is most absurd and false:) but in regard of some holie, rare, or beneficiall action, passion, or propertie authorized by God to represent the power and vertue of Christ appearing in our flesh; you like a deepe Diuine seuer from those sacrifices all sacred actions and passions ordained by God, to make them both sa­crifices and figures, and then tell vs that in respect of their earthly and bodily sub­stance they were no figures of Christes soule. When you sayd Sacrifices, you inclu­ded those sacred actions and passions, which made them sacrifices and figures of Christes sacrifice; and therefore to exclude them againe with an idle respect, is a silly and emptie refuge. If vnder bodily things you comprise externall and sensible acti­ons and passions; then is it euident, that by sensible signes in those Sacrifices God did alwayes and altogether declare the ioynt sufferings of Christ for the sinnes of the world, but not the paines of hell nor the death of the soule, from which you alwayes and altogether slide, vnder pretence of my grosse vttering it, though I vtter it in the selfe-same words and parts which the Scripture doth. But how considerate are you, when you vouch, that theTrea. pa. 41. Scape-goat representeth not Christes soule, vnlesse onely in re­spect of the escaping of it, when the other goat died; & yet not the body of the holocaust, but the vtter consuming by sire of the whole, signifieth the sufferings of whole Christ? What agree­ment hath ESCAPING with VTTER CONSVMING? and yet you make both these actions to be figures of the sufferings of Christes soule. So that Christes soule by your refined figures did escape free from death, and not escape free from death (for [Page 116] you defend that Christ died the death of the soule) and was vtterly consumed, and could not be consumed; but as it were escaped, and yet escaped not, and was at it were vtterly consumed, and yet could no way be consumed, but escaped free and vntou­ched as the Scape-goat did. Such is your settlednesse, that yea and no, with you, are as it were all one.

That fire did signifie the Defenc. pag. 42. li 9. incorruption of Christes flesh after death, is very hard and farre fetcht. Sacrifices had their respect to Christes death, not to any thing further or after­wards.] All things are farre fetcht with you, that come not from the whirlepoole of your owne head. It is the iudgement of S. Austen and other learned Fathers, which you so lightly esteeme. Aug. contra [...]aust. Man [...]. li. 22. ca. 17. The same substance of the bodie shall be changed into an heauenly qualitie; quod ignis in sacrificio significabat, velut absorbens mortem in victoriam; which fire in sacrifice signified, as it were swallowing vp death in victorie. Whom Bede disdaineth not to follow. [...]eda. qu [...]st. super Leuit. cap. 3. Ignis in sacrificio id significabat, velut absorbens mortem in victoriam. Fire in sacrifice did signifie victorie euen swallowing vp death. Cyril is of the same minde. Cyrillin Le­uit. li. 1. Agreeably (to the sacrifices) did heauenly fire consume all things that were done by our Sauiour in the bodie, and restored them all neerer to the nature of his Diuinitie: for rising from the dead, he ascended to heauen: his passage to which place the nature of fire doth shew. To farder sufferings after Christes death no sacrifice had respect, because there nei­ther were any, nor needed any; but to the efficacie and glorie consequent to Christes death, the fire in sacrifices had respect, as these Fathers affirme. Against whom though you euery where oppose the worm-eaten warrant of your owne words, I trust you will somewhat relent to the Apostles authoritie; who telleth you, that the Hebr. 9. v. 7. high Priests going int [...] the most holy place with the blood of the sacrifice once euery yeere, signi­fied Christes Vers. 8. 12. 24. entring the heauens with his owne blood; which I hope was after both his death and his resurrection.

As for an Defenc. pag. 42. li. 12. other sense out of Austen, that it should signifie our perfection and burning cha­ritie, it can not be true: for the holocaust-sacrifice out of question primarily signified the per­son of Christ, not ours. Also you both here do seeme to double, vnderstanding by the holocaust both incorruption after death, and a perfect burning loue in vs now in this life; which things are farre distant, and can not stand together.] You are so giddie, that you dislike euerie thing; and so hastie, that you conceiue nothing right. S. Austen sayth indeed that fire in the holocaust may note the feruent [...]esse of charitie, and brightnesse of immorta­litie, which are all one with perfection and incorruption. What fault finde you with this? The holocaust, you say, signified primarily the person of Christ, not ours. Doth S. Austen denie that? It suff [...]ceth for the trueth of his wordes, that those sacrifices did principally point out Christes sufferings, grace, and glorie; and consequently ours. For as we haue Phil. 3. fellowship with his afflictions, and are conformed vnto his death; so shall we be partakers of his perfection and incorruption, and be Rom. 8. fashioned to (his) image. Rom. 8. [...]; If we suffer as he did (sayth Paul) that we may be glorified as he was; not presuming an equalitie with him, but promising a conformitie to him. The Sacrifices then which (as you grant) primarily signified the person, passi­on and perfection of Christ, did secondly note and teach our dying to sinne, our ri­sing againe in glorie and appearing before him in perfect holinesse; which in this life we endeuour but can not attaine to the full, till by death we be freed from sinne. The bearing of Christs Image is enough to iustifie Saint Austens speech. For he neither saith, that the holocaust did primarily signifie the members of Christ, nor that men could haue perfection of charitie in this life: but when Christ shall present vs righte­ous and glorious vnto his Father, then shall he offer vs as holocausts vnto God. And yet in the meane while what hindereth Saint Austen to exhort vs, that the Diuine fire of Gods wisedome and grace may wholy inflame vs, and euen consume vs? Who but a moth of your mould would giue Saint Austen the l [...]e twice in two lines for so speaking, and in the third line after charge him with doubling, as if Christs puritie in this life and glorie after this life could not stand together? or the perfection of Gods Saints here (such as it is, which the Scripture so Mat. 5. v. 48. Col 4. v 12. I [...]m. 1. v. 4. calleth) were not coherent with [Page 117] that incorruption, which they shall haue there? The one is not the other, but the one is so consequent to the other, that without holines in earth no man shall euer enioy happinesse in heauen. And to both doth the imitation of Christ, and signification of fire in the holocaust direct vs.

Comming to the next reason you Defenc. pag. 42. reprooued me for saying, Sacraments are earthly Elements, they can not set out the spirituall and [...]uisible effects in Christ.] There was iust cause I should tell you, that this your asse [...]tion did mainly crosse the very nature and definition of a Sacrament. For Sacraments are visible signes of inuisible graces; that is, of the spirituall effects of Christs power and grace abiding in him, and yet working in vs. Wherein did I wrong you? you ment they Defenc. pag. 43. li. 1. vsually represent not spi­rituall and in [...]sible effects or acts in Christ him selfe, but onely the externall and visible parts of his passion.] The two Sacraments of the new Testament, Baptisme and the Lords Supper; doe they represent onely the externall and visible parts of Christs passion? Doth Baptisme shew no more in Christ, but that actuall and substantiall water ranne out of his side after he was dead? Is this the whole signification and rep [...]esentation that bap­tisme offereth vnto vs? Surely you must leaue Catechising and learne to be catechi­sed; if this be all your skill in Sacraments. The bread and wine on the Lords table, besides the reference which they haue to the body of Christ broken and his blood shed, doe they not plainly shew the flesh of Christ is meate, and his blood drinke nourishing our soules to euerlasting life, as the elements support and maintaine the life of the body? Water in Baptisme doth it not declare the power of Christs death washing our soules, and of his spirit renuing our minds? These you say are Defenc. pag. 42. li. 37. spirituall effects wrought in vs not in Christ. Power to clense, quicken, nourish, and strengthen to eternall life, is that Christs or ours? We indeede are the persons that are clensed, quickened, nourished and strengthened; but the force and grace working these things in vs, is Christs and not ours. We receiue it as flowing from the fountaine, but it na­turally springeth in him, and from thence is deriued to vs. The Sacraments then teach vs, that the fulnesse of power and grace dwelleth in Christ really and truely; which he is content shall worke in vs, but neuer leaue him. The water washing, the bread nourishing, the wine comforting, note no power in vs to do any of these things; it is euident impietie so to thinke or say; onely they assure vs, that as Christ the true owner of all these things, by his obedience vnto death, was made the onely disposer of them; so he will performe the couenant with vs, which the Sacraments doe seale vnto vs; and that is the couenant of mercie and grace in this life, and of glorie in the next; which the Sacraments could not seale, except they did signifie those gifts and effects to be actiuely and originally in the giuer; as they are passiuely in the Re­ceiuers.

Defenc. pag. 42. li. 38. VSVALLY Sacraments doe not represent spirituall effects or actes in Christ.] When text and trueth faile you, your fashion is to flie to phrases; and so still to saySacraments doe constantly and continually sig­nifie and repre­sent the same. somewhat, though it want both learning and vnderstanding. For example, Sacra­ments (you say) doe not VSVALLY represent spirituall effects or acts in Christ. Did you speake of nature, which often faileth; or of men, who change their minds, vsuall and vnusuall might serue for some purpose; but what is this to Sacraments? they con­stantly and continually keepe the same order in their significations and representati­ons; so that vsuall and vnusuall in them are all one. The nature of the Element is still the same; the action prescribed may not be varied; the promise annexed neuer faileth on Gods part. So that what any Sacrament once resembleth or signifieth, it alwayes expresseth and obserueth the same. Will you diuert your wordes to diuers Sacra­ments, and make that vsuall to one, which is vnusuall to another? This which you vsually exclude from Sacraments, is common to both the Sacraments of the New Te­stament of which we reason; and being common to them both, as I haue shewed, to signifie spirituall effects or acts in Christ himselfe, with what trueth say you now, THEY do it not vsually, speaking of both; whereas both do it apparently and perpetually?

It is Defenc. pa. 42. li. 29. your selfe indeede that denieth the very definition of a Sacrament: for your maine [Page 118] assertion is that neither the Iewish sacrifices, nor Christian Sacraments, doe signifie any more then the bodily and blo [...]dy death of Christ, which I hope was a visible, and no [...]uisible thing.] Your Reader will shortly take you so often tardie with foule-lies, that hee will skant beleeue you, when you speake a trueth. Is it any position of mine that the Iewish sa­crifices, and Christian Sacraments doe not signifie any more then the bodily and bloudie death of Christ? Indeede I af [...]irmed they signified none other death of Christ, but on­ly that which was bodily and bloudie, which I g [...]ant was visible; but as for other ef­fects of Christs power & grace, by which we are Serm. pa. 63. li. 22. grafted into Christ, and quick [...]ed and nourished vnto life euerlasting, Ireferred them to the Sacraments of the new Testament as vnto Seales confirming the couenant of mercie, grace, and glorie made to vs by the death of Christ, in the same words that I now speake it. And so conclude of them, as I doe now; Ibid. li. 23. These propose vnto vs no inuisible paines of hell, but the body of Christ woun­ded, and his bloud shed for the remitting of our sinnes, and vniting vs vnto Christ. There­fore your turning no inuisible paines of hell, which are my words, into no more then a bo­dily death, which are yours; and vnder pretence of those words, excluding from the Sacraments all other significations and representations of Christs inuisible power and grace proposed by them, sheweth your accustomed vain of misconstering and alter­ing my words, when you cannot otherwise impugne them.

You Defenc. pa. 43. li. 3. make me to crosse the institution of the Lords table, because I said the Ceremonie of breaking the bread, cannot properly belong to Christs body. But euen here doe I not expresse­ly say, that it sheweth forth how Christs body was broken for vs?] Where by Christs insti­tution the bread was BROKEN, to note vnto vs the breaking of his body for our sinnes; and Paul expresseth that similitude of the bread broken to Christes body, in saying,s 1. Cor. 10. The bread, which wee breake, is it not the communion of the body of Christ; and to verifie that resemblance, reporteth the words of Christs institution in effect to be these, This is my body which is broken for you: you to make a siely shew that the Sacraments declaret 1. Cor. 11. Christs suffering of Hell paines, auouch that the. Trea pa. 14. li. 12. breaking of the bread cannot properly belong to the body, but to the soule, and to the body by Sympathie with the soule. Wherein you first denie the Similitude betwixt the bread and the body of Christ, to be true in deedes but onely in words; because you doe not acknowledge the violence offered to Christs body by his persecutors, to bee any kind of breaking properly and truely. For howsoeuer with bigge words you talke of the anguish of Christes soule bruising his x Defenc. pa. 21. li. 4. body ioyntly also; yet when you come to expresse your selse plainely, you say, Trea. pa. 5. li. 27. This grieuous passion was in his soule immediatly and properly, seeing then his body was not touched with any smart. And since all sense of paine is in the soule; if by breaking you vnder­stand not the violence offered to Christes body, in vaine come you in with your Sympathie, which may shew itselfe in the body, but not bee felt of the body, by rea­son the powers of sense are in the soule; and so you controle the Apostles words as voide of all trueth, whiles you referre them truely and properly to the soule, and not to the body but onely by Sympathie.

The grounds, whereon you denie this Analogie betwixt the bread and the body of Christ, are as absurd and false, as the Conclusion, which you build on them; and are in number foure. 1. That Klômenon (in Greeke) is BROKEN TO PEECES pro­perly. z Defenc. pa. 43. 2. That MEDVCCA in the Prophet (Esay) is also broken to peeces, properly, or crushed and beaten to POVVDER. 3. That Christes body was not properly broken. 4. That the breaking of the bread into many peeces, doeth first and immediatly set out the breaking of his soule. In all which you violently follow your owne fansies, as your ma­ner is, against all diuine and humane testimonie. For first [...] doth not by his proper signification import that only, which is broken in peeces, as you meane peeces wholly parted the one from the other. Looke backe to your Lexicons, to which you appeale, and namely to that of Budaeus, Tusanus, and Constantinus which Crispine Printed, Anno Domini 1562. or to that which was a fresh Corrected and enlarged by G [...]snerus, Iunius, Xylander, Cellarius, Honygerus and others, and Printed at Basill 1584. and see whether Klân whence Klômenon commeth, bee not there expressed by [Page 119] frango, flecto and luxo, and [...] by [...]; which are to breake, bow, vnioynt, bruise, or cut. And though Robert Steuen in his Thesaurus, set downe none other signification to the verbe Klân, but frango to breake; yet hee doth not thereby meane onely breaking of bones, or making of peeces as you ful wisely intend; but to breake generally, what­soeuer or howsoeuer. And so Klân is to breake the straitnesse of any thing by wrying or bowing it, and the coherence of any thing by straining, tearing or cutting it, and the roundnesse or fulnesse of any thing by bruising it. Aristotle in his Problemes sayth, that as we clime vp the hill Arist proble. sectio. 5. nume­ro. 19. [...], the knees are bent (or strained) backward; as we goe downe the hill, [...], the thighes are bent (or strained) forward: as also [...] with Hippocrates is the straining of a ioynt, where he saith; that in holding the hand forth right, Hippocr. li. 1. [...]. [...], the bowing of the ioynt (at elbowe) is strained. For so doth Galen expound him; [...]. The offer to stretch out the Galenus in [...]undem librum. arme directly straineth the ioynt at elbow, [...], to the out side. And Lucian describing the iesture of a Tragicall person, sayth; [...], Bowing and straining himselfe. In all which Klàn doeth not import any breaking of bones nor making of any pe [...]ces, but the straining of the ioynts, by which the body or the parts thereof may be bowed.

He [...]ychius saith klân is likewise to cut, expressing it by Hesychij I e­xicon in [...]. [...], to cut vines, which Theophrastus calleth Theophrasius de causis [...]lan­tarun. lib. 3. cap. 19. [...], the cutting of vines, with whom Suidas, Phauorinus, & the Greek In verbo [...]. Scholiast vpon Aristophanes agree, deriuing the metapho­ricall signification of [...], from cutting the tender bran­ches (of vines, and other trees) which are properly called [...], because they wil turne and bowe euery way; and the hooke that serueth to cut them, is named [...]. Yea the very breaking of bread in Christes institution, (to which the Apostle resembleth the violence offered to Christes bodie) the Greeke church neuer so vnderstood, thatAristopha. [...]. it was not or might not be done with kniues. For besides that the ancient leiturgie vnder the name of Chrysostome, mentioneth a sacred knife in forme of a lance, where­with the bread was cut, which is there expressed by Chrysostomi Leirurgia Graecè. [...], and [...]; Germanus Bishop of Constantinople reporting the vse of the Greeke Church in his time continued fro former ages, saith, the Lords bodyGermani hi­storis Ecclesi­astica. [...], is cut with a knife, which they call a launce, out of the bread; and though that be diuided, yet Christ remaineth whole and vnparted [...], in euery piece of the bread so cut.

That klân is also vsed to signifie the tearing or bruising of fleshie parts, where no bones at all are broken, Hippocrates the father of all learned Physicke, speaking in his owne Art most skilfully and truly, doth cleerely witnesse: [...]:Hippocrates [...]. li. 3. ad finem. Lesse dangerous are any of the bones broken, than where the bones are not broken, but the vaines and sinewes adioyning are on euerie side bruized. If the vaines and sinewes of mans bodie are properly sayd [...], when they are bruized or torne with any vio­lence; the flesh of man, which is full of vaines and sinew [...]s to bring bloud and sense to euery part of the bodie, can not be bruized with staues, or torne with whippes and thornes as Christes was, but those vaines and sinewes spreading themselues thorow­out the flesh, must likewise be bruized and broken, which Hippocrates calleth [...], though the danger be the lesse, because the veines and sinewes seruing to that vse, the more outward they come, the smaller they are. And lest you should still dreame as you doe, that there is no breaking of any thing in mans bodie but of bones, and that when the pieces be wholly seuered one from the other; Galen, a man past excepti­on in his facultie, telleth you, that in violent hurts of the hands or feet, by leaping, fal­ling or straming, [...], the knitting of the bones l Galenus in 2. lib. Hippocra. [...]. rather breaketh than the bones themselues. Where the word [...] is put to signifie the losing and tearing of the ioynts when the bones are not broken, which Ga­lene auoucheth is the properest word that the Greeke tongue hath for breaking of [Page 120] bones, and vsed almost of euerie man that is acquainted with the Greeke tongue. Of brea­kingGalenu [...] de [...]eth. medendi lib. 6. he likewise saith: Galenus in 2. lib. Hippocra. [...]. [...] a part (may be) bro­ken, the rest being yet coherent. Euen as Hippocrates sayd before him: Hippocrates in 2 lib. [...]. [...]: when the lower iaw is broken, if it be not cleane forced a sunder, but that the bone is in some part coherent. By which it is euident that as well ioynts as bones may be BROKEN, and that either in part or in whole.

Klan then, whence klômenon is deriued, importeth not necessarily the breaking of bones in mans body, as by your new Diuinitie you haue lately deuised, to make way for your hell paines in the soule of Christ; but it signifieth generally to breake, as our English word doth, and frango with the Latines likewise; whether it be by bowing or straining that which is straight; by losing that which is fast; by bruizing that which is sound; or by cutting and seuering in part or in whole that which is coherent. And so much our English word BROKEN expresseth. We say the necke or backe is broken, when neither bone nor skinne is broken, but the fastning of the ioynts is lo­sed. Likewise the head the face, the shinnes are broken, when the skin or flesh of these parts is by some violence razed or torne. Yea the veynes are broken with a rupture, and children are broken out when their flesh doth exulcerate. And since the diuiding of that which was coherent, (which the Phisitians call Galenus de Methodo me­dendi li. 6. [...], the solu­tion of vnitie or continuitie,) whether it be strayning, cutting, razing, tearing, or bruizing the bones or flesh of mans body in part or in whole, is contained in the English word breaking, and in the Greeke word Klômenon; the Apostle spake properly enough when he said that Christs body was broken, for so much as all the ioynts of it were losed in sunder, the vaines and sinewes tornc with piercing and grating of Iron spikes,q Psal. 22. vers. 15. the flesh and the skinne cut and rent with thornes, whips, and speare, and bruized with staues; though the bones were not broken, which is your ignorant exception against the Apostles words.

But MEDVCCA in the Prophet is broken in peeces properly, or crushed and broken to Defenc. pa. 43 li. 15. powder; as these Scriptures doe vse the word likewise, and all Lexicons doe confirme.] Your resolutions are so rash, that no man will trust your report for the proper signification of words. DACHA indeede is properly to bruize whether it be with hand or foote, but not to peeces nor to powder, without some other word added to expresse so much. For your Lexicons, to which you so confidently appeale, consult that of Pagnine per­used and augmented by Mercere, Ceuattere, and Bertrame, and Printed at Lyons in Fraunce Anno 1575. or Forsters Printed at Basile Anno 1564. and see whether they do not plainly reproue your folly. Forsteri Dic­tionarium H [...] ­braicum in the­mate Dacha. 2 [...]8. Forstere expresseth the theme, whence ME­DVCCA commeth, by oppressione seu depressione contusus est, to be bruized by oppression or depression; neither doth he so much as mention the signification of frangere to breake in all the examples of that theme. Pagnini the­saurus linguae sanctae. Pagnine declareth the force of that theme by conterere, frangere, contundere, to beate, breake, or bruize, but Mercere addeth as Forstere did, oppressione vel depressione, by oppressing and depressing. And against your beating to powder, Pagnine taketh speciall exception out of the Rabbins in the very same place of Numbers, whence you would inferre it. For vpon the words Numbers 11. verse 8. the people gathered Manna, and BEATE IT in morters, and made cakes Num. 11. v 8. of it. He saith, differt a SHACHAK secundum Hebreorum Doctores, quod SHACHAK Pag [...]. in themate Doc. pag. 457. est minutatim contundere & terere. The word here vsed differreth from SHACHAK according to the opinion of the Hebrew Doctors, because SHACHAK signifieth to beat a thing small or to powder, which cosequently this doth not. And though they had dissembled so much, yet the Scripture it selfe doth conuince, that your obseruation out of that place, as out of all the rest which you quote for that word is starke false. For Manna by the description of Moses, was a small round thing, E [...]od. 16. ve [...]. [...]4. small as the hore frost on the earth, and Num. 11. vers. 9. fell in the night with the dew, and Exod. 16. vers. 21. melted (away) when the heate of the sonne came. Now Manna being so moist, that it would melt with the heate of the Sunne, was not beaten in morters to bring it to powder, as you boldly suppose, since it would [Page 121] rather cleaue together then come to powder; but by bruizing it betweene two stones, which was their kind of Mill in the Wildernes, or in a morter with some water they did worke it to batter or dough, thereof to make wafers or cakes. But were it so, that Manna would come to powder, which yet the text doth not infe [...]re; will you con­clude, because beating in a morter bringeth dry things to powder, that therefore bea­ting doth generally and necessarily signifie beating to powder?

And as that place is mistaken by you, which only seemed to make for you; so not one of the rest, which you quote in your ma [...]gin doth conuince either beating to powder, or breaking in peeces properly, to which you so violently wrest the words of [...]say. For where the Prophet saith, the Esa. 19. v. 10. Nettes of Egypt shall be torne, that is farre from beating to powder, except you haue lately deuised the powder of Nettes to make a plaister of. And if we should say they were torne to pieces, what necessitie is there, that either this tearing should be properly breaking, which you admit not but in things that be stiffe and hard as bones and such like; or that those pieces should be diuided from the whole, and not rather be ruptures in the whole, as we see in torne nettes, which are not alwaies rent cleane a sunder? The next and last place which you quote for the proper vse of this word, it as wide from your purpose, as West from East. Deu. 23. v. 1. None wounded (sayth Moses) with any contusion [...]r abscission of his secret parts, shall en­ter into the congregation of the Lord. Can thos [...] parts of man be properly broken in pie­ces, or beaten to powder? They may be bruized or wounded, as other fleshy parts may be, but breaking to pieces properly, or beating to powder, were very strange in that case. That bruizing was vsed as well as cutting, to make men Eunuches, appeareth by Paulus Aegineta; where he sayth: Paulus Ae­gineta. lib. 6. cap. 68. Hu [...]us re [...] modus duplex est, vnus collisione, alter ex­cisione absoluitur: The way to do this is double, one by bruising, the other by cutting. And since Moses compriseth both these wayes in his words, it is euident that DACCA is a bruize, and consequently the word may be properly applied to Christes bodie, which was sorely bruized as well with the beating of s [...]aues and whips, as with piercing and grating of iron spikes.

These are the grounds on which you gather, the Prophet could not by that word meane the wounding and bruizing of Christes bodie; but because powder and pieces, as you dreame, are properly comprised in that theme, therefore it must be referred to the soule of Christ. As if pieces and powder came neerer in soules to the right signifi­cation of bruizing, than the mangling, tearing, and contusing of Christs body, which he suffered from the violent rage of the Iewes. Your other word of the very same na­ture, keepe to your selfe. When your proofs faile you in this, you may not be suffered to roue at your pleasure, and to reach after other words, & out of your own vnlearned skill to vouch, they are of the very same nature. Wherefore there is no cause why the coherence of Esaies wordes should be cut in sunder by your vnhandsome deuice of the peeces and powder of soules; but as the first words in that sentence, Esa. 53. v. 5. he was wounded for our transgressions, and the last, with his stripes we are healed, are plainly referred to the punishments of Christes bodie; so the middest, he was bruized for our iniquities, should haue the same relation and intention, especially the Prophet foretelling the people, what they should see in their Messias, and how they should misiudge of him. Ibid. v. 4. We (sayth Esay) did iudge him as plagued and smitt [...]n of God, but he was wounded for our transgressions, and bruized for our iniquities, and with his stripes are we healed.

Neither is it any strange thing in the Scriptures to ioyne this very word which you talke so much of with wounding as with a word of the same nature and force. For be­sides that Moses sayth, Deut. 23. None wounded with any bruizing or [...]utting of his secret parts, shall enter into the Lords congregation; Dauid saith to God, Thou hast bruized Rahab, as one that is wounded. Where wounding & bruizing are more properly lincked together as words of like force and effect, than your breaking of soules into pieces, or beating them to powder. The verie same word is also vsed in the Scriptures, to note the brui­zing of mans bodie by sicknesse, or of his estate by wrong and oppression. Dauid in a grieuous sicknesse complaining that he felt nothing sound in his flesh, nor any rest in his [Page 122] bones; addeth: Psal. 38. v. 8. I am weakned and bruized very much. Bruize not the poore in the gate, sayth Salomon; that is, oppresse not the poore in iudgement. The children of the foolish shall be Iob. 5. v. 4. bruized (that is, oppressed) in the gate, and none shall deliuer them. And when it is applied to the soule, it may note that to be either wounded with sorrow, oppressed with wrong, or humbled with obedience; but as for powder and pieces, from which you would pull a iust proportion, which nothing can answere but the paines of hell, it is a sicke conceit of your owne braine; it hath no deriuation either from the Prophets or Apostles words.

You did not meane, that Defenc. pa. 44. li. 18. & 29. the soule might be properly broken in pieces, but that thus it is neerer and better applied to the soule than to the bodie; which was only pierced and boared thorow.] Then was your former opposition out of the Scripture very licentious, and your conclusion as friuolous. In that a bone of Christes was not broken, you inferred that Esaies words, He was broken for our sinnes, Trea. pa. 10. li. 16. could not be properly meant of Christes bodie, flesh, and bones: as if there were no breaking of ioynts, veines, sinewes, flesh, or skinne; but only of bones. And yet as if the soule of Christ, which is by nature alto­gether indiuisible, might properly be broken in pieces, you conclude the breaking of the bread can not properly belong to the bodie of Christ, BVT TO THE SOVLE. Had you denied the breaking of the bread properly to belong to either, your words must haue beene; It can belong properly neither to the bodie, nor to the soule; but you denie the one, and auouch the other; It can not belong properly to the body, but to the soule. Whether those words of yours doe not expresly import, that the breaking of bread doth properly belong to the soule of Christ, as to the trueth wherein they must be verified, I leaue it to the iudgement of the discreet Reader. [Howbeit, you denie not, but Defenc. pa. 44. li. 26. broken applied to the soule (of Christ) is figuratiue.] And so you grant there was no cause you should take such exceptions as you did to the Apostles wordes, This is my bodie which is broken for you. For since it can not be verified of the soule, but figura­tiuely as you now confesse; it may so be most iustly verified of Christes bodie, with­out any sense of hell paines suffered in the soule of Christ. And if the consent of the English, Latine, and Greeke tongues may be trusted for the vse of a word; breaking may properly be affirmed of Christes bodie, which can not be of his soule; for so much as his ioynts, veines, sinewes, flesh and skinne were broken and torne in sunder,Christs body truely broken by the iudge­ment of new and old wri­ters. though his bones were not.

And but that your fashion is to follow no man farder than your fansie leadeth you, you might haue seene with what reuerence and conscience Master Beza, that other­wise vpholdeth the sufferings of Christes soule, referreth this word KLOMENON to the tearings and torments of Christes bodie, being hereto led by the Apostles asser­tion. By the word Beze Annot. in epist. ad Cor. 1. ca. 11. v. 24. broken (in Pauls wordes) is designed the kind [...] of (Christes) death; because, besides that the Lords bodie was torne, bruized, and euen broken with most bitter tor­ments, though his legges were not broken as the theeues were, Christ breathing out his soule with a most violent death, was as it were rent in two parts according to his humane Nature. This word then hath a MARVELLOVS EXPRESSE SIGNIFICATION, that the figure should fullie agree with the thing it selfe; to wit, that the breaking of the bread should represent to our minds the verie death of Christ. Peter Martyr hauing made your obiection, that a bone of Christ was not broken, resolueth: But Petr. Martyr i [...] 1. epist. ad Corint. ca. 11. heereof I will not greatly contend for somuch as this breaking is by many Fathers referred to the body of Christ. With whom the wordes following doe make, (broken) for you; which indeed leadeth me to consent vnto them, and to acknowledge a double breaking, (one in the bread, another in theHaymo in 1. [...]pist ad Corint. ca. 11. bodie of Christ.) Bullinger sayth, Bulling. in 1. epist. ad Corint. cap. 11. The bread is properlie sayd to be broken, the bodie of man to be slaine; howbeit, in the Hebrue tongue to breake, is to waste, to kill and destroy. And so the visible bread, which in our sight is broken with our hands, doth certeinly set before our eyes that bodie (of Christ) which was broken or done to death by vs or for vs. So Haymo: q Christ himselfe brake the bread, which he deliuered to his Disciples, to shew that the brea­king and suffering of his bodie came not but of his owne accord. Which wordes he tooke out of Beda vpon the Gospels of Marke and Beda in Marci cap 14. & in Iucae ca. 22. Luke. Before whom, Prosper: De consecra­tione dist. 2. Et cum [...]ostia. When [Page 123] the host is broken, and the bloud is powred out into the mouthes of the faithfull, what other thing is designed than the doing to death of the Lords bodie on the crosse, and the shedding of the bloud out of his side? And likewise Austen: August. de feria. 4. ca. 6. [...]m. 9. The table of thy spouse (sayth he to the Church) hath bread that is whole, quem fractum & comminutum vidimus in Passione, which wee saw broken and bruized in his Passion. Of this bread the Lord himselfe sayd; The bread which I will giue, is my flesh. And indeed whosoeuer shall duely consider the violence done to euerie part of Christes bodie before and on the crosse, shall find a farre sharper and so [...]er kind of breaking, than if his legges had beene knapt in sunder as the theeues were; and see iust cause why Paul compared the breaking of Christes bodie to the breaking of the bread, though you idlely or falsely say it was ONELIE PIERCED or boared thorow. For if by piercing you meane all kinde of violence, that impressed any paine in the bodie; then is piercing farre larger and grieuouser than your kinde of breaking, which is of bones; and more than such piercing, Christes bo­die needed not, to answer the similitude of breaking the bread. But if by piercing you meane boaring thorow, as you seeme to expound it; then did Christes bodie suffer ma­nie violences, as buffeting, striking, whipping, piercing with thornes, and such like, which were no borings thorow. And so there is either no weight or no truth in your words, that Christes bodie was only pierced and boared thorow.

Defenc. pa. 43. li. 37. Vainly you charge me, I know not how often, against my expresse words, that I call hell, heauen, and descending, ascending; but here it is no wrong to charge you with such an absur­ditie Proper opposed to metaphori­call. indeed, who expresly do make that, which you say is FIGVRATIVE, to be a proper denomination.] If I charge you falslie, when you come to the place conceale it not; in the meanetime, if there were any inconuenience in this, as there is none, it was the tracing of you in your owne termes. For you argued, that Christes bodie could not be sayd properly to be broken, because no bone of his was broken; and consequent­lie it is your collection, that if a bone (which is but a part of Christes bodie) had beene broken, the bodie of Christ (which is the whole) might be sayd to haue beene properly broken. Mine answer was, that since Christs bodie had other parts besides his bones, which by his owne words are conteined vnder the name of his flesh, if any parts of his flesh were truelie broken, the whole body might be sayd to be properlie broken, as well in respect of his flesh, as of his bones. What absurditie find you in this, that first proceeded not from your selfe? But, were the words mine owne, when I speake as a Diuine of the proprietie of signification, calling that proper which is not metapho­ricall; and affirme, that as the sense of the word BROKEN was proper in a part of Christes bodie, so must it likewise be proper and not metaphoricall in the whole, be­cause the whole, which taketh his denomination from a part, must retaine the same signification of the word, which was verified in that part; what boyes play is it in you to come from metaphors to other kinds of figures, and to trifle with termes of proper and siguratiue (when I opposed proper to metaphoricall) and child [...]shlie to charge me, that I speake contraries with a breath? As if one and the same speech might not be figuratiue in expressing the whole for a part, which is Synecdoche, and yet reteine his proper signification, and be no metaphor. Except therefore your Grammar be so great, that euerie Synecdoche must needs be a metaphor; and your Logicke so little, that you can not distinguish a subiect from a predicate; I see no cause but one and the same speech or proposition may be figuratiue in the subiect, by vnderstanding the whole for a part; and yet proper in the predicate, by reason the sense thereof is not metaphoricall. For these be figurae dictionum, not orationum; figures of words, not of sen­tences. As in our case whether Christes bodie were properly broken, or no: if the bodie, which is the subiect in that proposition, by Synecdoche be taken for a part; then broken, which is the predicate, must the rather be properlie and not metaphoricallie affirmed of that part, which was truelie broken: how beit, as I thinke, since the proper sense of breaking was verified of all or the most parts of Christes bodie, it must like­wise be verified of the whole bodie.

But omit these Grammaticall and Logicall points, wherewith manie Readers are [Page 124] not acquainted, and come to the verie pitch of my words. I doe not affirme, that the whole for a part is a proper speech, as you conceiue me; but that the whole from a part may properly (and not metaphorically) take his denomination. That a man speak­eth, writeth, heareth; seeth, tasteth, smelleth, and such like, are they proper or figuratiue speeches in your censure? Proper I thinke; and yet no part in mans bodie is the in­strument of speech besides the tongue, of writing besides the hand, of hearing be­sides the care, of seeing besides the eye, of tasting besides the mouth, of smelling be­sides the nose. Infinite are the actions of the bodie naturallie executed by certaine parts, as eating, drinking, sleeping, spetting, coughing, weeping, and other such, which no man in his right wits will affirme to be figuratiue actions or speeches in man; and yet in them all, a part doth denominate the whole. In the vertues and vices of the mind, as for men to be wise, sober, diligent, patient, liberall, learned, mindfull, watchfull, and such like, or the contrarie; shall we say, that men be figuratiuely and not properly and truely such, because these are gifts of the minde, and not of the bodie? The verie es­sentiall parts of man, as vnderstanding, will, reason, sense, and appetite; shall they like­wise make figuratiue speeches in men, because none of them are common to all the parts and powers of bodie and soule, but in euerie of them a part doth denominate the whole? It may be you will not greatlie sticke to turne Porphyries predicables and Aristotles predicaments into Mosellanes tropes, and make figures of them all; what say you then to the branches of Christian faith and trueth? are they also figuratiue and improper speeches? That Christ is the sonne of God, and the sonne of Dauid; that he was borne of a virgine, and circumcised in the eight day; that he fasted, hungred, and was tempted; that he eat and slept, wept, and waxed weary; that he was buffeted, whip­ped, and crucified; that he died for our sinnes, and rose for our righteousnesse; that he ascended into heauen, and thence shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead; and an infinite number of the like: are all these figuratiue speeches in your conceit? I hope you be not so fastened to figures, that you will make vs a figuratiue faith, and a figu­ratiue Sauiour; and yet in all these, a part doth denominate the whole. Your eyes therefore were somewhat close, or your wits wandering, when you could not see the difference betwixt taking the whole for a part, and denominating the whole by a part; which is so common and constant both in Diuinitie and Philosophie, that in all naturall and necessarie actions, passions, and proprieties, the whole receiueth his attribute from a part. And so my words rest sound and true, both in humane reason and in holie Scripture, notwithstanding your vaine proclamation of so cleere and ex­presse an absurditie in them. But you must be borne with, your humor is so sharpe, and your head so shallow, that your left hand knoweth not what your right s [...]ibleth.

Your despising the Ecclesiasticall historie as a fable, is a sparke of your pride, from which few ancient writers are free; howbeit the Scriptures are plaine enough for my purpose, to proue that Christs body was truely broken. They witnesse that the Iewes Mark. 14. vers. 16. buffeted him with their sistes, and smote him with their S [...]rieants staues; thar Pilate Ma [...]th. 27. vers. 26. scourged him, that the souldiers 29. platted a crowne of thornes on his head, and then did 3 [...]. beate him on the head with reedes and Ioh. 19. v. 3. roddes; that his crucifiers P [...]al. 22. vers. 16. digged his hands and seete, and pulled Vers. 14. all his bones out of ioynt; and that in this plight the waight of his body hung on the crosse three houres by the wounds of his hands & feete; and when he was dead, his Iohn 19. vers. 34. side was pearced with a speare, besides the mockes, wrongs and taunts that were offered him on euery side: and yet all this you say is Defenc. pa 44. li. 21. not in any sense pro­portionable to the proprietie of the word KLO'MENON and MEDVCCA. You prate of PROPRIETIES and proportions to no end, but to colour your absurdities and presumptions. What Christian Reader will endure you to say, that the Apostle in applying the word KLO'MENON to the body of Christ, had neither proprietie nor proportion to the right sense of the word? If he did not speake properly in those words, (which is broken for you) as I thinke he did, yet at least he must speake meta­phorically and figuratiuely, and so keepe a resemblance and proportion to the origi­nall sense of the word; except your wisedome will auouch that the holy Ghost igno­rantly [Page 125] and vnaduisedly abuseth the word. Which if you confesse of your selfe, I will easily beleeue, because you neither know what you affirme, nor what you deny. For where afore you said in plaine words, Trea. pa. 14. the breaking of the bread CAN NOT PRO­PERLY BELONG BVT TO THE SOVLE (of Christ,) Now you graunt it pro­perly belongeth neither to body nor to soule; onely from powder and peeces you take a iust and full proportion in the soule to the proper sense of those words. You haue me in iealousie that Defenc. pa. 44. li. 16. I thinke you to be a senslesse foole; indeed I thinke you to be more conceited then learned, and a great deale more shifting then sound, though in this booke you haue sought the helpe of all your friends to maintaine the most of your matters with as it were; but if you reiect the Apostles words as wanting both pro­prietie and proportion, except your hell paines be admitted; and make out iust and full proportions from powder and peeces vnto the soule of Christ, I doubt your Reader will thinke these be senslesse and foolish Toyes.

If I would play with proportions as you doe, I neede not depart from the words of the holy Ghost to find a fairer resemblance to the proper sense of those words in the body of Christ crucified, then you make any. Psal. 22. v. 14. All my bones are sundered, saith Da­uid in the person of Christ, and & 15. thou hast brought me into the dust of death. Of which and all that went before, Eusebius saith, Eusebius de­monstr [...]. Euan­gel. li. 10. [...]a. 8. what else doe all these signifie but the conditi­on of (Christs) dead body? Wherefore he presently addeth, and into the dust of death thou hast brought me. Here in expresse words is the dust of death to which Christs body was brought, and besides, all his bones were sundered. Now to be sundered is euidently to be diuided, and that must be with parts or peeces; the naturall coherence where­with the bones were formerly ioyned, being losed and dissolued, though one part be not seuered from the other. Whether therefore the word broken be properly or figuratiuely taken, I see no cause why the Apostles words may not in either sense be fully true. For if the Ioynts, vaines, sinewes, flesh, and skinne of Christs body from head to foote were properly straeined, rent and torne, besides the seuering of his soule from his body; then was his body truely broken. If by breaking we figuratiuely meane, as others doe, the affliction and anguish of Christs body; then as no part was free from it, so no increase of bodily paine in this life could be added to his suffe­rings: and so in either respect your hell paines haue their pasport, till you find some fitter place and better proofe for them then either KLO'MENON or MEDVCCA.

The next point you vndertake is whether the blood of Christ be the full Redemp­tionThe Defender aludeth the Scriptures with his termes of single & meere. as well of our bodies, as of our Soules in this life. Wherein, because the word Redemption is diuersly taken in the Scriptures, as for deliuerance sometimes from sinne, sometimes from death, sometimes from the power and feare of either; and all the promises of God we haue now in hope, though not some of them indeed till the generall resurrection: you shew your selfe cunning in carping at words, which you labour to turne and wind euery way. But before you come to it, you make a short and swift answere to all the places of Scripture, which I produce touching the force and effects of Christs blood; least you should haue Defenc. pa. 45. li. 12. any neede to trouble your selfe here­after about any of them. Where, as your manner is throughout your booke, you first chaunge the question with adding your witlesse and senslesse termes of meere, single, and simple to my words, and then without any more adoe, Ibidem li. 7. Your aduised and resolute answere to all is this; & 11. there is not one text any where that hath any meaning of my strange conceite. It were reason, a man would thinke, you tooke the paines to impugne my words, and not to presume you know my meaning against my words, and so to frame it after your fashion with your new found phrases, which I abhor as much as I doe your new found faith.

Defenc. pa. 44. li. 32. You will prooue the blood of our Sauiour is the true price of our Redemption, and that as well of our soules as of our bodies. Who denieth this as your words runne?] It is happie yet that my words runne well, whatsoeuer my conceite be. Now if I meane no more then I speake, and the sacred Scriptures fully concurre with that which I speake; then haue I both the word of God to warrant that I teach, and besides your owne confession [Page 126] that as I speake it, it is truth. Defenc. pa. 44. li. 35. But you know I meane, that no more but the shedding of Christs blood ONLY AND MEERELY, is the iust and full satisfaction of all our sinnes.] What my meaning is you cannot be ignorant, I haue often declared it, not here only, but in my Sermons and conclusion also, as I haue formerly shewed, and you haue plainely confessed. I will once more repeate your owne words and hereafter by your leaue tell you it is a plaine lye and a meere shift, if you father your termes of Christs meere blood, and single bodie vpon me, as any part of the Question which I mooued, or Doctrine which I defend. Wherefore I pray thee Christian Reader once more to take notice, that I be not driuen in euery page to proue one and the same thing against the Discoursers vnsauery, childish, and Idle phrases, with which he would faine elude the Scriptures, and delude the world. Your confession both of my Sermons and con­clusion (Sir Descourser) is this; Defenc. pa. 36. li. 9. Sundry times you teach, that Christ did suffer pecu­liarly and seuerally some proper punishments in his soule, besides his bodily sufferings: yea that this was a part of his crosse, and the effect of Gods wrath on his soule, as well as the suf­fering in his body. Against my words so often witnessed in my writings, and so open­ly confessed by your selfe, you take vpon you (by some secret reuelation belike) to know my meaning, that Defenc. pa. 45. li. 3. no more but the shedding of Christs blood MEERELY is the full satisfaction of all our sinnes; which MEERE BLOOD of Christ the Scriptures meane not, nor onely his body SINGLY and SIMPLY considered.] The MEERE blood, and SINGLE and SIMPLE body of Christ, with such like couerts of your cause, are termes fit for such a teacher as you are, to which if you could once conuert the Question, we must haue as many Lexicons to bring vs out of these Laberinthes, as there be leaues in your booke. Keepe them therefore as whelps of your owne lit­ture, the faith of Christ and the word of God hath stood without them these sixteene hundered yeeres.

What I meane by the body and blood of Christ, giuen, and shed for our Redemp­tion, and the remission of our sinne; I haue meetly well expressed; I must not in eue­ry section fall to fresh repetitions. When I speake as the Scripture speaketh, I meane as the Scripture meaneth. They know not your new termes of the MEERE blood, nor of the single and simple body of Christ; but by his blood and death they meane that manner of shedding his blood, and that kind and course of death suffered in the body of his flesh, which the Gospell describeth; no way excluding from Christ, when he presented himselfe before God to vndertake mans cause the due conside­ration of mans infirmitie and iniquitie abounding, or of Gods iustice therewith dis­pleased; nor his humble and voluntary submission to the mightie hand and righte­ous will of his heauenly Father, to excuse vs from the heauie iudgement that other­wise did hang ouer our heads. So much as the Scriptures mention in declaring the manner of his death and bloodshedding, so much they containe in the name of his Crosse, blood and death. For as the description, which the holy Ghost maketh, is in no point idle; so the comprehension of all vnder one word excludeth nothing for­merly described. This I take to be a sound and sure way to expound the Scriptures by their owne direction and intention. For since the manner and order of Christs death was so carefully regestred by the spirite of God, that we should not be igno­rant of it; whensoeuer the Scriptures speake of Christs Crosse, blood, and death, they referre vs to all that, which either by the Prophets was foretold, or in the Gospell is expressed touching the order and manner of his death. And so Christ 1. Cor. 15. vers. 3. died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures (as Paul addeth.) Then to take any thing from it, which is mentioned in the Scriptures; or to adde any thing to it, which is not there expresly recorded; is to depart from the word of trueth, and to dishonor and deface the death and bloud of Christ with our inuentions.

This being my meaning euen from the beginning, as my words declare, I moued these two generall questions: The first, Whether in the crosse and death of Christ de­scribed in the Scriptures, the death of the soule, or the death of the damned, were by any good warrant of the sayd Scriptures comprised: Secondly, Whether the [Page 127] crosse and death of Christ, as the Scriptures describe them, be not the full and perfect price of our redemption from sinne, and reconciliation to God by the testimonie of the same Scriptures, without the death of the soule, or paines of the damned. The Discourser finding himselfe inclosed with these questions, speaketh directlie to nei­ther, and prooueth nothing in either; but declining the enuie of these speeches, the death of the soule, and the paines of the damned, which indeed are the points misliked and reiected, he changeth the first question into the generall termes of suffering Gods wrath, and the soules proper suffering, which may import manie things besides those two; and in the second, he euery where beareth the Reader in hand, that by the death and bloud of Christ, I meane the MEERE bodily sufferings of Christ, without anie sense or sorrow of the soule in her spirituall powers. And lest the Scripture should stand in his way, he casteth them all behinde him, that any way witnesse the force and merit of Christes death and bloudshedding, as figuratiue speeches; because they name not the MEERE bloud of Christ, nor only his body SINGLY considered. But Sir, all this while you forget, that you haue proued nothing, but onely supposed and a­uouched what pleased you; and that in matters of faith you may not adde to the word of God without manifest apostasie. The things questioned by me, were the Sermo. pa. 8. li 23. & pa. 9. li. 14. death of the soule, and the verie paines of the damned, as appeareth euidently by my words, when I first mooued the question. Of these you say nothing all this while; which yet you must soundly & fully proue before you may adde them to the words of the Holy ghost testifying the power & vertue of Christes bloud and death. There­fore howsoeuer you seeme to shift off the Scriptures as figuratiue speeches with your MEERE and SINGLE termes, they will sticke faster by you than so. For as thereThe Scriptures teach no redēption, but by the bloud and death of Christ. can be no doubt of my meaning, comprising all in the death and bloud of Christ, which the Scriptures report of the order and maner of his sufferings, when he yeel­ded himselfe to die for the sinnes of the world according to the counsell of his Fa­thers wil; so you may not presume any thing to be conteined in the death or crosse of Christ, as requisite for our redemption, which is not cleerely witnessed by the Scrip­tures. Proue therefore by the Scriptures, that Christ died the death of the soule, or the death of the damned, which are the true paines of hell; and then adde it to the crosse of Christ when you will. Till so you do, the Scriptures which I haue produced, stand in their full strength against you. For as they bind all Christian men stedfastly to beleeue that which is written touching their redemption by the death and bloud of Christ; so do they straitly prohibit all and euery, be they men or Angels, to adde any other deuice to the doctrine of our saluation, than what is euidently reuealed, and directly witnessed in the Scriptures.

August. con­tra literas Pe­til. li. 3. & ca. 6. Whether it be of Christ (sayth Austen) or of any other thing what soeuer touching the faith; I say not, if we, who are no way comparable to him that so spake, but that which follow­eth, if an Angell from heauen teach you BESIDES that which you haue receiued in the Scriptures, of the Law and the Gospell, holde him accursed. Basil. in serm. de fide. It is a manifest fall from the faith (sayth Basil) either to abrogate any thing that is written, or to bring in any thing that is not written. For Tertul. ad­uers. [...]aeretices. cap. 8. when once we beleeue (the Gospel, sayth Tertullian) this we first be­leeue, that there is nothing besides, which we ought to beleeue. So that the meere bloud and single bodie of Christ are but sleights of yours, with vnknowen phrases to draw your Reader from asking or eying your proofes for the death of Christes soule, and the paines of the damned to be suffered by him, before wee could be redeemed. The Scriptures are maine and manifest for that which I beleeue and teach, and which the whole Church of Christ before mee, taught and beleeued these fifteene hundred yeeres, afore your conceit of hell paines in the soule of Christ was either hatcht or heard of. The sufferings of the soule and the wrath of God, which things you now catch holde on to make some introduction to your secret and priuate fansies, are too generall to inferre either the death of the soule or the paines of the damned, except to the rest of your absurdities you will adde these, that the soule neuer suffereth but [Page 128] it dieth the death of spirits; and that Gods anger in this life hath none other effects, but damnation.

Defenc. pa. 45. li. 13. Here you vrge a reason against vs: if then our soules be not redeemed by the blood of Christ, our bodies haue no benefite of Redemption from death.] You hunt so headily after aduantages of words by some ambiguitie in them, that you neither remember what the Scriptures teach, nor what your selfe defend, nor when I vse a word in the same sense that the Apostle doth. It is not my deuise, but the Apostles doing, to take RE­DEMPTION of the body for the incorruption of the same. Rom. 8. 23. We sigh in our selues, saith Paul, wayting for the Redemption of our body. And againe, you are Ephes. 4. 30. sealed by the ho­ly spirit of God vnto the day of Redemption. When that day shall be, our Sauiour tel­leth vs in these words. When the Luk. 21. 28. powers of heauen shall be shaken, and you see the sonne of man come in a cloud with power and great glory, then lift vp your heads; for your Redemp­tion draweth neere; In all which places Redemption is taken for none of those mercies or graces, which are bestowed on Gods children in this life, but for that glorie and immortalitie, which shall be reueiled on them, when Christ shall come to iudge the world; and namely the Redemption of the body for that incorruption, wherewith Philip 3. 21. our vile bodies shall bee changed and made like to his glorious body. Take then the Re­demption of the body for the incorruption of the same, as the Apostle plainely doth and I did; and see what absurditie or obscuritie there is in my reason, which you so much wrangle with, and wonder at, as though it passed all vnderstanding. The Re­demption, which we haue in this life by the bloud of Christ, must needes bee either of body or of soule; we haue no more parts to be redeemed by Christ. But the Redemption of our bodies we haue not in this world, we must waite for it, till 1. Cor. 15. 53, 54. this corruptible put on incorruption. The Redemption therefore which we haue in this life, or shal haue before the last day, is the Redemption of our soules. And so the words of Peter, 1. Pet. 1. 19. You were Redeemed with the precious bloud of Christ, and of the Saints in heauen, saying to the Lambe, Reue. 5. 9. Thou hast redeemed vs to God by thy bloud, pertaine expresly to the Redemp­tion of their soules, because their bodies then did, and yet do lie in corruption. What so strange monsters or marueiles, doeth your Logicall head finde in this reason, that you should make such wonderizations at it, and protestations against it? Is it not open and easie to all, that be meanely witted or soberly minded?

But you haue Defenc. pag. 45. li. 17. three things to note (in my words which you alleage:) 1. The Propo­sition is vaine and Illogicall, hauing no consequence in it at all.] It is a speciall point of Art memoratiue in you to note three things, and vtterly to forget two of them. For in this whole Section, you doe not so much as mention any second or third thing to bee noted in those words which you cite. The first and al, which you note, is that my pro­position is vaine, Illogicall, and vncoherent.] Your idle and vntheologicall head hath ouer busied it selfe with many mad multiplications, and what ifs vpon this propositi­on; and yet you come nothing neere the sense or coherence of it. The Proposition hath two parts, whereof the second is either an illation out of the Apostles words, vp­on the first being a supposition of yours, if we limit it to the time of this life; or if wee speake without restraint of time as you doe, it is a necessarie consequent to the for­mer, being the condition and cause of the latter. That our soules are not redeemed by the bloud of Christ, but by his soule, is a resolution of yours; wherewith you giue a fresh on-set in the next Section, as the Reader shall there perceiue, though here in shew you somwhat relent after your inconstant maner. That being a position of yours; I added by the Apostles warrant, that our bodies haue not their Redemption in this life, but must stay for it till the day of Redemption, or generall resurrection. And so the rea­son standeth: Conclu. pa. 240 l. 24. If our soules be not (here) redeemed by the bloud of Christ, (which is your Assertion) our bodies (by the Apostles doctrine) haue no Redemption in this life. But this, That wee should Ibidem 241. li. 6. et m 8. presently haue no Redemption (in body or soule) by the bloud of Christ is quite m contrarie to the words of Peter, who sayth, Yee are redeemed by the bloud of Christ, (not yee shall be;) and of the soules in heauen that say to Christ, thou hast [Page 129] redeemed vs by thy bloud, when their bodies were rotten in the earth. Since therefore ei­ther body or soule must haue Redemption in this life, and the body as Paul assureth vs, hath not Redemption in this life; Vt supra. pa. 240. li. 31. Ergo the Redemption which we haue in this life by the bloud of Christ, must bee referred to our soules; and our bodies must expect the generall day of Redemption in the end of the world, before they shall haue it. If the sober and wise Reader vnderstand not this reason, or can dislike the sequence of it, I am content he shall condemne it as darke and obscure; but if it be open to all mens eyes saue yours; then is your dull conceite or eger stomacke rather betrayed by your foolish rolling to so many what ifs, then my reason any way refuted. [I alter, you will say, the order of it.] Though I spake then more shortly then now I doe, because I had no lea­sure to stand so long thereon, yet he that will Reade but the third part of that Section whence you take this, shall finde the very same parts and words, that now I vse, there contained and expressed.

But I afterward defend the proposition with the condition annexed to bee simplie true.] When I saw your humour was so franticke, that not vnderstanding my words, you would presently pronounce them in the view of the whole Realme to be a noto­rious Paradoxe and impietie, I bid you take your vttermost aduantage of my words; and as they stoode, though that were not my first intent, they were sound and good, and your impugning them was prophane and false. I yet auouch the same. For where the Scriptures teach no Redemption but by the death and bloud of Christ, your o­ther deu [...]sed Redemptions by the death of the soule, and paines of Hell, I account no better then false and prophane. And therefore if our soules be not that way redeemed, which the Scriptures reueile, which is by the death and bloud of Christ; they are not redeemed at all. And being not at all redeemed, I would faine know by the best of your skill, what benefit of Redemption our bodies shall or can haue, more then the bodies of Infidels. Yea set that redemption aside, which the Scriptures attribute to the death and bloud of Christ, and neither bodie nor soule can be saued, but infideli­ty and the wages therof, I meane damnation both of soule and bodie, preuaile in all men. So that you were not well in your wits, when with such an heat and huffe you cried out Trea. pa. 23. li. 13. What a Pradoxe is it, yea what impietie? But I must chuse whether I will speake this sophistically or absurdly, you say.] Is it any sophistrie or absurditie to speake as the Spirit of God speaketh in the Scriptures? Your MEERE bloud of Christ is indeed absurd Sophistrie: for you imagine by that word, that Christ shed his bloud for our sinnes without any meritorious action or passion of the soule concurring, which in the Redeemer of the world was so impossible, as nothing more. If I speake otherwise than the Scriptures speake, take your pleasure at it, so you bring reason for it; but whe I keepe my selfe within the compasse of their speech, your a [...]ouching that I speake Sophisticallie or absurdlie, reprocheth the Scriptures, whom I follow. In either of those points which you impugne, as that our soules are redeemed by the bloud of Christ, and that our bodies haue not redemption in this life, I haue the Scriptures plainly prece­dent before me, and therefore except they speake sophistically or absurdly, I in retai­ning their speech and sense can do neither.

The difference betwixt the deaths of the faithfull and infidels, is a thing wellThe [...]oly hath not his redemp­tion before the last day. known to me, and approoued by me; yet must the Apostles words stand true, that in this life we haue not the Redemption of our bodies, but we must waite for it Acts 3. 21. till the time that all things be restored. That Christ hath already purchased and obtained it for vs by his death and passion, I make no doubt, as also that we rest in hope assured of it; but Rom. 8. 24. hope which is seene, is not hope: and though the soules of the Saints retaine a firme faith and full expectance of Gods promise for the raising and Redee­ming of their bodies from corruption, and in the meane time discerne and feele as well the comfort that is in the death of Gods elect, as the great blessings and bene­fites that follow their death; yet their bodies lying in dust haue no shew nor sense thereof, much lesse haue they that which Paul calleth the Rom. 8. v. 23. Redemption of the body. From which words Saint Austen collecteth very truely, Aug. de nup­tijs & concupi­scentia li. 1. c. 1 [...] Si Redemptio corporis nostri [Page 130] secundum Apostolum expectatur, profecto quod expectatur adhuc speratur, nondum tene­tur. If the Redemption of our body by the Apostles doctrine must be wayted for, that which is expected is still hoped for, but not yet obtained. Take then the Redemption of the body for the incorruption of the same, as Paul doth, whom in that point I followed, and tell me what benefite of incorruption (which is the word you so much storme at) the bo­dies of the faithfull haue more then the bodies of infidels. You range aside as your manner is, to the ceasing of sinne in the godly, and their resting from labours, as also the entrance of their soules into heauen; as if the bodies of the wicked did sinne in their graues, or were tossed with troubles when they were dead and rotten, or in the Saints your sight did not serue you to distinguish their soules from their bodies. For when I say as Paul sayth, their bodies haue not yet redemption; you replie, their soules af­ter death haue an entrance into heauen. Euen so, when I say, that the death of the bo­die to the saints is a part of that wrath, curse, and punishment which God inflicted on all mankinde for their sinne in Adam, as shall after (God willing) more largely appeare; you oppose the benefits which God of his peculiar goodnesse towards his children, hath reserued for them, after they haue obediently and patiently submitted them­selues to his diuine pleasure, in bringing their bodies to corruption for the sinne that dwelleth in them. And thus by your mangling of matters you confound in the god­lie their soules with their bodies, and in God himselfe his iustice against sinne with his mercy towards his owne. You might haue learned of S. Austen rightly to seuer them as he doth, though you crosse him in this, as in most of the things that are in question betwixt vs. Aug. contra dua [...] epistolas Pelagianor. li. 4. ca4. Quamuis bonis conferatur per mortem plurimum boni (vnde nonnulli etiam de bono mortis congruenter disputaverunt) tamen & hinc quae praedicanda est nisi misericor­dia Dei, quòd in bonos vsus conuertitur poena peccati? Though much good come to the god­lie by death; (whereupon some haue accordingly written of the benefits of death) yet what els in this must we acknowledge but the mercie of God, that the punishment of sinne is turned to good vses? And so that ancient writer of the booke Hypognosticôn amongst S. Austens works: Hypognosti. li. 1. ca. 3. Vt moriantur homines poena peccati est, vt reuertantur ad vitam Domini mise­rantis est: That men die is the punishment of (their) sinne, that they returne to life againe is the Lords mercie.

Defenc. pag. 47. li. 1. Before you depart from this point, that not the bloud of Christ nor his flesh without respect to the merit of his whole soule, was the full price of redemption, you will shew how sundrie of Both body and soule must suf­fer in Christ. the ancient Fathers doe agree with you sufficiently in this matter, though afterwards in my booke I seeme to bring them against you.] If you had Fathers to witnesse your fansies of Christes suffering the death of the soule and paines of hell, you would soone recken them and more regard them, than now you doe, when they directly gainsay your late deuice of a new kinde of redemption, which the Scriptures neuer specifie. These Fa­thers I brought not against you, as you imagine, not perceiuing what maketh with you nor what against you. In shew these places seemed to make against me, and to disclaime that assertion which I concluded out of the Scriptures, that the bloud of Christ redeemed and sanctified both our bodies and soules. Lest therefore the sim­ple should stumble at any such sayings of the Fathers, not knowing their meanings, I brought them to expound them, and to let the Reader see that indeed I dissented not from them: but confessed, as they intended, that in Christes suffering for sinne the whole man, that is, bodie and soule, must be ioyned together. And if any part of Christs humane nature were wholy freed and exempted from suffering, that part in vs was not fully ransomed. By which they neuer ment that Christs soule must haue se­uerall sufferings for our soules, and his body likewise for our bodies; but as Adam sinned in both ioyntly, so the punishment of sinne, which Christ vndertooke for vs, must be felt ioyntly in both, and if either part in Christes sufferings were vntouched, some part in vs was vnrestored. This to be the true meaning of those Fathers, and all that their words must inferre, if they will speake trueth, and agree with themselues, as no doubt they doe, your selfe is a witnesse sufficient against your selfe. In defence of your doctrine you say: Treat. pag. 22. li. 21. It is most false, that we precisely say, that Christs body satisfied for [Page 131] our bodies, and his soule for our soules, yea ech of them in a seuerall and distinct kinde of sa­tisfying: which thing we neuer meant, but acknowledge the sufferings of the whole man Christ do satisfie for vs wholly, without any such precise partition.] What you dare not affirme, because it is false and repugnant to the Scriptures, I hope you will not impose on the Fathers, so long as their words conclude no such thing. They say precisely Christ Irenaeu [...]. li. 5. cap. 1. gaue his flesh (to be a redemption) for our flesh, and his soule likewise (to be a redemption) for our soules, Whereby they meane no distinct sufferings of Christes soule for our soule, nor of his bodie for our bodies; but a ioynt suffering of both for both, which you call the sufferings of the whole man Christ for vs wholly. So farre we agree; you ac­knowledgingCyril. de fide ad Theodosium. mine exposition of the Fathers to be such as you doe not, nor dare not impugne: for otherwise you must make them contradict both the Scriptures, and themselues which they neuer ment, if they should say that our soules are not clensed, redeemed, and sanctified by the bloud of Christ: What now inferre you farder out of their wordes?

Defenc pag. 47. li. 27. Marke well how these Fathers do not say that Christ gaue his life for a ransome only (as you would construe it) but euen his verie soule for our soules.] You are a worthie Clerke if you vnderstand not, that nothing but the very soule of man is the life of his bodie, and therefore Christ in giuing his life for vs, must needs giue his verie soule for vs. The one of them doth not exclude the other, as you vainly collect, but implieth the other, as by the vsuall speeches of the Scriptures, and generall consent of all Interpre­ters olde and new may soone appeare. Matt. 2. v 20 They are dead (sayth the Angell to Ioseph) that sought the childes soule; meaning Herod that went about to destroy Christ in his cradle. Matt. 6. v. 25 Be not pensiue for your soule (sayth our Sauiour) what ye shall eat or what ye shall drinke. Is not your soule of more value then meate? Meate and drinke maintaine life, and so continue the soule in the body, otherwise they are no way needfull for the soule. Matth. 10. vers. 39. He that loseth his soule for my sake, (saith Christ) shall saue it. How can a man lose his soule for Christ, but by laying downe his life for Christ? There shall be no losse Acts 27. vers. 22. of any mans soule among you, but of the ship, said Paul to them that sayled with him; which was performed in that they Ibidem v 44. Philip. 2 30. came all safe to land. So of Epaphroditus Paul saith; for the worke of Christ he was neere vnto death, not regarding his Soule. Nothing is more often in the Scriptures then for life to vse the name of Soule, which is the cause of life; and by the soule to expresse life, which is a necessary consequent of the Soule remaining in the body, as death is of the Soule departing from the body. This kind of speech so familiar with the Hebrewes, and so frequent in the olde and new Testa­ment, our Sauiour keepeth, when he speaketh of his owne death. [...]ohn. 10. vers. 11. The good sheepe­heard (saith Christ) layeth downe his soule for his sheepe. I am the good sheepeheard, and Vers. 15. lay downe my soule for (the) sheepe. Vers. 17. Therefore the Father loueth me, because I lay downe my Soule to take it againe. Vers. 18. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it downe of my selfe. As also when he said; Matth. 20. the Sonne of man came to serue, and to giue his soule for the ransom of ma­ny; he intended no more then when he said, I lay downe my soule for the sheepe, which must needs be for the ransome of the sheepe. So the Prophet foretold that Christ should Esay. 53. power out his soule vnto death, and make it an offering for sinne; which 1. Ioh. 3. loue of God we know by this, (saith Iohn) that he layed downe his soule for vs.

If auncient Fathers and learned expositors may be heard concurring with the Scrip­tures, and obseruing this in the Scriptures, we want neither old nor new, all confes­sing it to be a case most cleere, that by dying for vs Christ laid downe his Soule, and gaue it for vs. Christ Athanas. de incarnat. Christi contra Apo [...]i­narium. bowing his head (saith Athanasius) and yeelding vp the spirite which was within his body, that is his soule, declared whereof he spake (this,) I lay downe (my soule) for my sheepe. Austen; August. de sermone Domi­ni in monte. li. 1. cap. 15. the Soule is put for the life, as where it is said, he that hateth not his soule, can not be my Disciple. And likewise is not the soule more worth then meate? that is, this life, for which meate is needfull. And (so) that which Christ saith, he will lay downe his soule for his sheepe, by which he meaneth his life, when he pronounceth that he will die for vs, Ambrose; Ambros. in Psal. 118. ser­mo. 20. Christ tooke vpon him the person of a sheepeheard, and said; a good sheepeheard layeth downe his soule for his sheepe. Ideóque pro rationali grege seipsum [Page 132] passioni corporis non negauit, and therefore for his reasonable flocke he yeelded himselfe to the passion, (or death) of his body. Cyrill. When Christ Cyril. in Ioh. li. 9. ca. 2. might haue declined the rage of the Iewes, and the gibbet of the crosse, he so loued his, that he refused not to die for the life of all. And that this is most perfect charitie, Idem in Io­hannem li. 10. ca. 22. I will cite our Sauiour himselfe for a witnesse (where he saith;) greater loue hath no man, then to lay downe his soule for his friends. By all this Christ teacheth his Disciples to be so farre from shunning daungers and troubles for the saluation of men, that the death of the flesh must not be refused; for euen to that doth charitie stretch. Fulgentius an other of the Fathers, on whom you would faine fasten your error of Christs redeeming our soules by the death of his soule, and our bodies by the death of his body; not only noteth when and how Christ laid downe his soule for vs, but why that phrase is applyed to Christs death, and to all theirs, that die wil­lingly for loue, not necessarily vpon constraint. Fulgent. ad Thrasimundum li. 3. The whole man (Christ) laid downe his soule, when his soule departed, his flesh dying on the crosse. And so againe, Ibidem. Christ dying in the flesh, laid downe his Soule; and shewing the difference betwixt deliuering the body to death and giuing or laying downe the soule, He saith Ibidem. Where loue is not, the body is said to be deliuered, but not the soule to be laid downe; as the vessell of election plainly testifieth, If I giue my body to be burnt, and haue no loue, it auayleth me nothing. (Here Paule) declareth, that without loue the body may be yeelded, but not the soule laid downe. For where he pur­poseth to signifie the purenesse of his loue, he thus writeth to the Thessalonians. Our goodwill was to bestow on you not onely the Gospell of God, but euen our owne soules; and to proue this an effect of his loue he addeth, because yee were deare vnto vs. So that it is proued by ma­nifest witnesse of Scripture, that there wanteth loue, where the body onely is layed downe to death, but there is charitie, where the soule is laid downe together with the body. Beda. Beda in Euan­gelium Iohan. cap. 10. Ponere ergo animam, mori est. Sic & Apostolus Petrus Domino dixit, animam pro te po­nam, id est, pro te moriar carne. To lay downe the Soule is to die. So the Apostle Peter said to Christ, I will lay downe my Soule for thee, that is, I will die in the flesh for thee. Ibidem. A good sheepeheard (saith Christ) layeth downe his soule for his sheepe. He did, that he taught; he performed, that he commaunded, he laid downe his Soule for his sheepe; and shewed vs a way to contemne death, which we must follow, and a paterne after which we must be Printed, which is first to extend our outward works of mercie towards his sheepe; then if neede be to offer our death for them.

The later writers are all of the same mind, and expound those words of our Saui­our, the Sonne of man came to serue, and to giue his soule a ransome for many; and I lay downe my soule for my sheepe; to haue none other sense, then that he would die for vs, as the Fathers before them did expound the same. Erasmus in his paraphrase expres­sing our Sauiours meaning in both places saith in the person of Christ; Eras. para­phra. in Matth. cap. 20. Therefore I came euen to serue the welfare of all, in so much that I thinke it no burden to giue my life; by the losse of one soule to redeeme many. And againe; Idem in Ioh. hannis. cap. 10. Therefore my Father loueth me singularly as his Sonne, because of mine owne accord I bestowed my life for the safetie of my Fathers flocke. Bullinger likewise in the person of our Sauiour; Bullingerus in Mat. ca. 20. I came to serue the good of all, and that which is farre greater, I came into this world to giue my life for sinners. And so, Idem in Ioh. cap. 10. I yeeld my selfe to death, and euen to the death of the crosse, that my sheepe belee­uing in me, may liue by my death. And alleadging and relying on Saint Austens words on the same place, he addeth out of Austen. To lay downe the soule is to die. So Peter the Apostle said to his Master; I will lay downe my soule for thee, that is I will die for thee. Attribute this to the flesh, for when the soule goeth out of the flesh, and the flesh remaineth without a soule, then is a man said to lay downe his soule. What saith the Euangelist? Christ bowing his head gaue vp the Ghost; this is, to lay downe the soule. Musculus; Christ de­clareth what his Muscul. in Matth. ca. 20. ministerie is; euen to redeeme mortall men, and the chiefest degree of this ministerie is; that he would giue his soule (for them.) Then are we redeemed by the onely be­gotten Sonne of God, and that dearely, euen with his owne death. For the Lord of heauen and earth humbled himselfe vnto death, and that vnto a most shamefull death. What was more vile or more abiect in the world, then the death of the crosse? And in the person of Christ; Idem in Ioh. cap. 10. Therefore my Father loueth me because I lay downe my soule; that is, because I die for [Page 133] (my) sheepe. Caluine vpon those words of Christ, I came to giue my soule a Redemption for many: Caluin. in Matth. ca. 20. Therefore Christ mentioneth his death, that he might withdraw his Disciples from a peruerse imagination of an earthly kingdome. In the meane time the force and fruite of his death is aptly and rightly expressed, whiles he affirmeth his life to be the price of our Redemption. Whence it followeth that the price of our reconciliation with God, is no where found but in the death of Christ; and so; It is no maruaile that Christ Idem in Ioh. cap. 10. affirmeth him­selfe to be therefore loued (of his Father,) because he esteemeth our saluation dearer then his owne life. Ibid. He would by this arme his Disciples, least seeing him soone after to be caried to death, they should faint in hart, as if he were oppressed by his enimies, but rather acknow­ledge it to be the wonderfull prouidence of God, that he should die to redeeme the flocke. Gualter; Gualtherus in Matth. cap. 20. Christ (saith he) came to giue his soule to be the price of Redemption for many. This passeth all offices, that men may yeeld one to another. For as him selfe saith, no man hath greater loue then this, to giue his soule for his friends. But he vouchsafeth to die for his eni­mies. And dying for vs he bestowed life on vs, because his death was a ransome sufficient for the sinnes of the world. And so; A good sheepeheard (saith Christ) layeth downe his soule for his sheepe.b As if he should haue said, who can deny him to be a good sheepeheard that so Idem in Ioh. cap. 10. homi­lia. 97. much loueth his sheepe, as not to refuse to redeeme their safetie with the losse of his owne life? Ibidem. And because the Sonne of God hath exposed (or yeelded) his life for vs, who can doubt, but he hath satisfied abundantly for vs? Vitus Theodorus. Vitus Theo­dorus in Mat. cap. 20. Christ saith the sonne of man came to minister, and to giue his life for the Redemption of all. That surely is the chiefest and truest loue and seruice, when a man serueth his enimies with body and life. And likewise in the person of Christ. Idem in Ioh. cap. 10. I alone am the good sheepeheard and lay downe my soule for my sheepe; that is, by my death men are deliuered from eternall death.

I aske now the Christian Reader whether he thinke it a shift of mine, when ChristChrists Soule suffered, but died not for vs. gaue his soule for vs, or our soules, for me to say, that he gaue it by the losse of his life, in such sort as the Euangelists describe; or whether the Scriptures and Fathers toge­ther with the later writers doe not consent with me in the same exposition of Christs words. This conclusion then that Christ gaue his soule for our soules, doth not inferre that he had distinct times, places, or manners, of suffering or dying for our soules and then for our bodies; (that is erroneous & iniurious to the death of Christ and open­ly disclaimed euen by the Discourser himselfe) but that in suffering death on the crosse, by which his soule was separated from his body after long and sharpe torments first endured in his body; his soule was the chiefe or rather the onely patient, that dis­cerned and sustained the bitternesse of the paines, and perceiued the cause for which, and the counsell of God from whence, all that affliction was ordained and decreed. For as we sinned in body and soule, but chiefly in soule, so Christs death for our Re­demption must grieue both body and soule, but chiefly the soule, which was ioyned with the body in suffering death; that both soule and body might be redeemed: and the paine thereof proportioned to the soule, as the pleasure of sinne chiefly deligh­ted the soule. More then this, no Father euer ment, and this is no way denied by me. You would faine wring in a conceite of your owne into their words, which is mainly & directly against their words and resolutions in all other places, and therefore which of vs two deserueth best the name of a shifter, let the Reader iudge.

The Fathers Defenc. pa. 47. li. 30. striue to expresse an exact proportion, so farre as was possible betweene Christ and vs; first in the parts that suffered in Christ, and are saued in vs: Ibid pa. 48. li. 3. Next in that which Christ suffered for vs, and which we are saued from thereby.] They iustly conclude, that no parts of our nature are saued in vs, but such as Christ assumed into the vnitie of his person; and therefore in Christs sufferings there must be body and soule, before they could be humane sufferings or auailable for vs. As 1. Cor. 15. by man came death, so by man came the resurrection of the dead. But that they doe or would affirme, that we are saued from no more then Christ suffered for vs, or that we are wholy freed from all those kinds of paines, which he suffered for our sakes, this is a false and fantasticall propor­tion of your owne inuenting, it is no part of their meaning. Sundry things should we haue suffered for sinne, as the death of the soule, and the death of the damned, besides [Page 134] reiection from all grace and blisse, confusion, malediction, and many other terrors and torments of conscience, which by no meanes these Fathers apply to Christ; but in euident and vehement words auouch the contrarie. Christ likewise suffered wrong, reproch, shame, paine, and death of the body, from which we are not freed; yea ra­ther we must haue fellowship with his afflictions, and be Philip. 3. 10. conformed vnto his death, before we shall be partakers of the comforts that are in him, or of his resurrection. So that your running to proportions of your owne compounding, when you should bring sound probations for that you defend, is mad Musicke, though best becom­ming the discords of your doctrine.

Defenc. pag. 47. l. 32. As we are saued not in our bodies onely, nor onely in the externall sensitiue part of our soules (wherein standeth that suffering with and by our bodies) but we are saued, redeemed, and sanctified in our whole spirit and vnderstanding also; euen so (by their verdict) Christ suffered for vs not the bodily and outward sufferings by Sympathie onely, but he suffered for vs euen in his minde also. Now this is directly against your present assertion.] A man can not readily tell, whether your assertion in this place be more false, absurd, or idle. The Scripture teacheth vs, that a man hath but two substances, of which he consisteth, a mortall and visible, which is his bodie; an immortall and inuisible, which is his soule. Our Sauiour, who best knew what man had, saith as much: Matt. 10. Feare not them, which kill the bodie, but can not kill the soule; feare him rather, that can destroy soule and bodie in hell. The names of these parts are sometimes varied, and sometimes diuided into sundrie powers and faculties, but the partes themselues cannot be increased. Salomon spea­king of mans death, sayth: Eccles. 12. Dust goeth to the earth as it was, (meaning the bodie) and the Spirit returneth to God that gaue it, (meaning the Soule.) Of a Virgin Paul sayth, 1. Corin. 7. she careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in bodie and spirit; that is, in bodie and soule. And writing to the Thessalonians the same Apostle saith that their 1. Thess. 5. vers. 23. whole Spirit, and Soule, and Bodie may be kept blamelesse vnto the comming of the Lord Iesus Christ. Of this place diuerse haue diuersly thought. In 1. Thess. 5. vers. 23. Chrysostome, Theodoret, Ambrose, Ierome, Oecumenius, and Theophylact, commenting on these words, take the spirit for the grace of Gods spirit, wherewith our mindes are lightned and renewed; and indeede sometimes Paul vseth the word spirit, for the gifts of the spirit, as where he saith, 1. Thess. 5. Quench not the spirit; and calleth them our spirits, as the 1. Cor. 14. Spirits of the Prophets are subiect to the Prophets. Howbeit Athanasius de commune essentia patru filij & spir. san [...]ts. Athanasius, Tertullian de resurrectione ca [...]. Tertullian, Epiphan in Anchorato. Epipha­nius, Nyssenu [...]de de opificio homin [...]. cap. 8. Gregorie Nyssene, August de origine animae ad Vincentium. l. [...]. cap. 22. Augustine, In 1. Thess. c 5 v 23. Bede, and others, take here the spirit for the vnderstanding and minde of man; as also In 1. Thess. c 5 v 23. Caluine, In 1. Thess. c 5 v 23. Zanchius and In 1. Thess. c 5 v 23. Beza doe; who referre the soule here spoken of, to the will and affections of man; not that any of them maketh two soules in man, which were most absurd, but that by those names they note two different faculties or functions in one and the same substance of mans soule.

Come now to your words and see how handsomely you proportion them, either to your Authors, or to the trueth, or to your purpose. Not one of the Fathers which you cite, nameth the minde of Christ, but onely his soule and his bodie, saue Nazian­zene; who speaketh not of Christs suffering in the minde, but of his sanctifying the same, by assuming it in his incarnation. Let himselfe explane his owne wordes in the very same place. Nazianzepi­stoia. 1. ad Ciedonium. Our mind (some say) is condemned. And what our flesh? is not that also condemned? then either cast away mans flesh (from Christ) for sinne, or admit mans mind, that it may be saued. For if Christ take the worse part (of man) to sanctific it by his incarnation, shall he not take the better part, that it may be sanctified, [...], by his assuming of mans nature? I speake not this, as if it might not safely be granted, that Christs soule suffered as well by his minde, as by his sense, and you nothing the neerer to your purpose of his suffering hell paines in mind from the immediate hand of God; but to let the Reader see how you catch at Fathers for an aduantage with­out any shew of their words, and when they make against you, you reiect with disdaine the whole aray of them.

Your diuiding of man into his parts, and your resolutions thereupon, are more ab­surd, [Page 135] and haue neither trueth, learning, nor common vnderstanding in them. Of man (to shew your exactnesse) you make these partes, [...]e bodie, the externall sensitiue part of the soule, the whole spirit, and vnderstanding also. You name here the bodie, the soule, and the spirit, but so vntowardly, that neither your selfe, nor any man els can tell how to make them agree. Hath the soule, if you will needes distinguish it from the spirit, no moe parts or powers to suffer or to be saued, but the externall sensitiue part? will you take the soule to be all one with the spirit, and so make the whole spirit, as much as the whole soule? But the Apostle reckoneth the 1. Thess. 5. whole spirit, the soule and the bodie, (whose words you would seeme to follow) and so seuereth the soule from the spirit. But not by the externall sensitiue part as you doe. Againe, why adde you the vnder­standing also after the whole spirit? As if it were no part thereof, but a different thing from the spirit? But this is your skill, when you come to any matter of importance, to wrap it in ambiguous and confused termes, that it shall be more masterie to vnder­stand you, then to refute you. And how commeth it about by your Philosophie, that the sufferings of the soule by and from the body pierce no farder, then into the ex­ternall senses of the soule? Doe the sufferings of the body offend and afflict the pow­ers onely, or the substance also of the soule? Is not the very substance of the Soule passible and punishable as well by the powers of sense, as by the affections, and vn­derstanding? The actions, passions, powers, and faculties of the soule, are they not all grounded on and seated in the substance of the soule, so that from thence all the actions thereof must proceed, therein all the passions thereof must be receiued, and thereon all the faculties thereof depend? Are you so learned in logick, that you will bring vs passions without a subiect, or powers and faculties without a substance? Whether it be therefore by the vnderstanding, will, affections, or sense, that the soule suffereth; the substance thereof suffereth by those powers and meanes, and not any part thereof; for so much as the substance of the soule is not diuisible into parts as be­ing a spirit, though the powers and faculties thereof may be distinguished, and cal­led parts. Then is it a strange position of yours that the sensitiue part suffereth, or that the vnderstanding suffereth, and not the soule by either of them, when indeed the substance of the soule suffereth by or from her power or faculties of sense, vnder­standing, and will, which are the meanes that God hath made to impresse paine on the soule. For the vnderstanding, which you call the mind, is no more a seuerall substance in the soule, then the power of sense is: and the soule not onely discerneth particular things by her facultie of sense, as she doth consequent and generall things by hir fa­cultie of reason, but by the eares and eyes she heareth the word, and beholdeth the works of God, whence commeth information of faith and truth.

Of the vnderstanding Epiphanius saith. Epiphanius contra Here­ [...]im. 77. [...] &c. I thinke not our mind to be any substance of it selfe, neither hath any of the children ofthe Church so thought; but to be an effectuall power or operation giuen of God, and abiding in vs. Of the sense Tertullian saith. Tertullian de anima. cap. 8. Anima perinde per corpus corporalia sentit, quemadmodum per animam incorporalia intelligit. The soule perceiueth corporall things by the sense, euen as she doth vnderstand incorporall things by the mind. And shewing how both those powers depend on the soule, he addeth. Sit nunc & potior sensu intellectus, dummodo & ipse propria vis animae quod & sensus. Let the vnderstanding excell the sense, so that it be a proper facultie of the Soule, as the sense is. Of the passions of Christs Soule Fulgentius writeth; Fulgentius ad Trasimundum cap. 3. Nunc ostendendum nobis est pas­sionem tristitiae, maeroris, taedij & timoris, ad animae substantiam propriè pertinere. Now must we shew that the passion of sorrow, heauinesse, and loathing of hart, and feare (which our Sauiour felt) pertaine properly to the substance of the soule. And at the length con­cluding that Ibidem. the flesh of it selfe can neither haue life, nor sense, nor sorrow, nor desire, nor feare, nor mourning, he saith; Ibidem. Haec ergo cuncta in anima, quam susceperat, pertulit Christus, vt veram totam (que) in se cum suis infirmitatibus hominis demonstraret accepti substantiam. All these (passions) Christ endured in his soule which he tooke, that he might shew in him­selfe THE TRVE AND VVHOLE SVBSTANCE of a man with his infirmities.

The purpose for which you pretend so many Fathers is as idle, as all the rest: forChrists Soule suffered by all her powers but not the death of the Soule. the Soule of Christ might suffer by her senses, by her affections, by her vnder­standing and will, and yet not suffer the paines of hell, nor the death of the soule, which is your doctrine. Though therefore the Fathers doe say that the soule of Christ suffered in his death and passion, which is a thing I neuer doubted of, much lesse called in question; yet neither auouch they, it suffered your hell paines, neither from the immediate hand of God, as your deuice leadeth; which things are as strange to them, as those they neuer heard of.

Defenc. pa. 48. li. 23. By the Fathers, Christ suffered exactly all and whatsoeuer sorrowes and paines, which we should haue suffered, as well spirituall as corporall, as well in all the powers of the soule sub­iect to suffering, as in that which suffered alwaies with and from the body. This if you would prooue by the Fathers themselues, and not by your false translating and mis­applying their words, which otherwise haue no such thing, you said somewhat. You haue raked together some places alleaged Sermo. pa. 25. formerly by me, or formerly refuted by me, and out of them you would make fresh shewes, if you could tell how. There is onely one place of Cyrill, taken out of my Sermons by you, (as you doe the rest of your authorities) which hath generall termes apt to be wrested by you, and forced against the Authors minde, which you forget not to straine to the vttermost: the rest are miserably racked, without cause or colour, from the Fathers mindes and wordes. Cyrill saith, Cyrillus The­saur. li. 10. cap. 3. Omnia Christus perpessus est, vt nos ab omnibus liberaret. Christ suffered all things, that he might free vs from all; where the word ALL is found, which you make the ground of all your descant: but thereby it plainly appeareth you take not the paines to reade the Fathers words in the places where they are written, but rashly catch at them to serue your turne, without all respect to the antecedents or conse­quents, which would declare the writers meaning. In that Chapter whence these words are taken, Cyrill treateth not of the punishments which Christ suffered for our sinnes, but of the passions and infirmities of our nature; ALL VVHICH Christ re­ceaued, and suffered to rise in himselfe, that they might be repressed by him, and our nature reformed. And therefore in those words, Christ suffered all to free vs from all; Cyrill euidently meaneth all the naturall infirmities and passions of our flesh. And those are his expresse words twice or thrice in that Chapter. Cyrill. The­saur [...]. li. 10. cap. 3. When thou hearest, (saith he) that Christ wept, feared, and sorrowed, acknowledge him to be a true man, and ascribe these things to the nature of man. For Christ tooke a mortall bodie subiect to all the passions of our nature, sinne alwaies excepted. And againe. Cyrillus ibid. How commeth it to passe, that these men know not, that all these things must be applied to mans nature (in Christ) which he truely tooke vnto him with all the passions thereof, but still without sinne. And the very recol­lection of the words which you stand on, conuinceth Cyrill spake of the naturall pas­sions and infirmities of our flesh. For when he had exemplified his generall wordes, Christ suffered all to free vs from all, by death, feare, and sorrow, which are naturall to our corrupt condition; he concludeth, Ibidem. & it a singulas passiones carnis fuisse in Christo absque peccato commotas inuenies, vt commotae vincerentur, & natura nostra reformaretur ad melius. AND LIKEVVISE ALL THE PASSIONS (or affections) of our flesh shalt thou finde mooued in Christ, but without sinne, that being mooued they might be re­pressed, and our nature reformed to the better. What is this to hell paines, which I trow are no naturall infirmities or affections in man, or to the proper sufferings of the soule, which you would hence establish; since heere is no mention but of the naturall infirmities and affections of the flesh, which Cyrill calleth the passions therof, as both Diuines and Philosophers doe?

'Thus I take Bernards meaning to be (when he saith) Christ spared not himselfe, who Defenc. pa. 48. li. 12. knoweth how to spare his.] Your taking may soone shew you to be a wilfull mistaker, but it concludeth nothing for your cause. Doth Bernard say that Christ suffered hell paines, and therein spared not himselfe? you would faine haue him say so, but he is as farre from it, as you are neere it. Bernard in that Chapter which you cite, but neuer saw; (for you went no farder for all your authorities, then my sermons,) speaketh of [Page 137] the sixt and seuenth time Christ shedde his blood for vs; and when he commeth to the piercing of Christs hands and his feete with spikes of iron to fasten him to the crosse; wondering at Christes patience and loue towards vs, that endured such things for vs, he saith; God which either Bernard. de passione Domini. cap. 41. shortneth, lightneth, or taketh from his seruants the force of their torments, did in nothing ease vnto himselfe the wine-presse of his passion: he spared not himselfe, that knoweth how to spare his. Doth this conclude that Christ suffe­red the paines of hell? or that he shedde his blood vnto death for vs, not sparing him­selfe, (from that, or, in that, which he suffered) though it were painfull and greeuous to him? But, I my selfe confesse that Christ S [...]rm. pa. 7. suffered and endured all to the vttermost with exact obedience and patience.] Euen as Bernard fauoured your vntoward fansies, and said nothing for them, so doe I: but doe either Bernards words or mine import, that Christ suffered all, which else we should haue suffered, as you enterlace Cyrils words to make them sound somewhat to your purpose? are you so seely that you can not, or so slie that you will not see the plaine seames of humane speech? If a man should saie you affirme all things boldly, you prooue all things weakely, you translate al thinges corruptly: Doe his words imply, that you translate Euclide and Aristotle? that you prooue the roundnesse of the earth, and the bignesse of the Sunne? or that you af­firme the sea burneth, and the Moone melteth? Is it not the vsuall course of al speech and speakers, when they expresse how things are done, to restraine the word all with a relation to the same person and action, whereof they spake? as you affirme all things (which you affirme) boldly, you prooue all, (that you prooue) weakely; and you translate all (whatsoeuer you translate) corruptly. Doth not the Scripture obserue the like? The people said of Christ, Mark. 7. he hath done all things well. Will you inferre, that Christ made ships, built Towers, cast Lead, and did whatsoeuer, because he did all things well? or did they intend, that whatsoeuer he did, he did it well? Iohn. 1. The true light saith Saint Iohn lightneth euerie man, that commeth into the world. Where if you take all men without exception, you plant a palpable error vpon Saint Iohns words; if you restraine them to all (that are lightned) his speech is a manifest trueth in Christ, and an excellent honour to Christ. So said I of Christ, that he suffered all, (that he suffered) with exact obedience and patience; not expressing there what he suffered, but how he suffered, to wit obediently and patiently. Which wordes of mine giue you no great cause of aduantage, if you looke well vnto them, and abuse them not after your idle maner. But such poore shifts you are forced to seeke to set some colour on your cause; which otherwise would bewray it selfe to want all good groundes and proofes.

As you deale with me, so you doe with Tertullian, Ambrose, Ierom, Cyprian, and Cyrill, whose words partly you mistranslate, partly you misconster, and build vpon them what best pleaseth your selfe without any precedence or sequence of their text. Tertullian saith; Tertul. ad­uers. Praxeam cap. 30. sic reliquit, dum non parcit. So God left his Sonne, whiles he spared him not. If this make for you, why quote you not the Apostle Paul as one of your partners, who spake the word before Tertullian, and whom Tertullian citeth by name for that word? God Rom. 8. spared not his owne Sonne, saith Paul, but deliuered him for vs all. This place you baulked; because it expoundeth Gods not sparing his Sonne by deliuering him; (for God spared not his Sonne, but deliuered him; that is, God did not spare him from deliuering;) and also for that it excludeth your imagination of Gods immediate hand tormenting the soule of his Sonne, with the substance of hell paines. For if God deliuered his Sonne for vs all, he deliuered him to others, and not to himselfe; and consequently your dreame of Gods immediate hand inflicting hell paines on the soule of his Sonne, is against the Apostles words, God deliuered his Sonne. Which Christ himselfe expoundeth very often in the Gospel, saying; Matth. 17. The Sonne of man shalbe deliuered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him. And againe, Matth. 26. vers. 2. The Sonne of man shall be deliuered to be crucified; and immediately before his appre­hension; Matth. 26. vers. 45. Behold the houre is come, the Sonne of man is deliuered into the hands of sinners. This deliuering of Christ into the hands of men to be crucified, was the not sparing him, [Page 138] which the Apostle meant; and was that for saking, which Christ testified on the Crosse, as Tertullian thinketh. Tertul. ad­uers. Praxeam. cap. 30. Filium dereliquit, dum hominem eius tradit in mortem. Hoc & Apostolus sensit, scribens, si pater Filio non pepercit. Sic reliquit, dum non parcit; sic re­liquit, dum tradit. Ceterum non reliquit pater filium, in cuius manibus Filius spiritum suum posuit. Deni (que) posuit, & statim obijt. Spiritu enim manente in carne, caro omnino mori non potest. Ita relinqui á patre, mori fuit filio. God left (or forsooke his Sonne (as Christ com­plained on the Crosse) whiles he deliuered his humane nature vnto death. This the Apo­stle meant when he wrote, if God spared not his Sonne. So God left him, whiles he spared him not; so God left him, whiles he deliuered him. Otherwise the Father forsooke not the Sonne, into whose hands the Sonne commended his spirit. He laide it downe and presently died. For while the spirit abideth in the flesh, the flesh can not die at all. Then to bee left of the Father, was as much in the Sonne, as to die. Here are Tertullians words in order as they stand. Where first he maketh the Sonne to die, when hee laide downe his soule into his Fa­thers hands. This death, by which the soule of Christ departed from his body, was that deliuering, that not sparing, which Paul meant; and that forsaking which Christ spake of on the crosse. What finde you here for the paines of Hell, or for the proper sufferings of the soule? You may peruert any mans words, if you will, but of them selues these are very coherent and euident.

In Ambrose you finde more hold. He saith: Minus contulerat mihi, nisimeum sus­cepisset f Defenc. pag. 48. li. 17. affectum. Christ had done lesse for me if hee had not beene (altogether) affected, as I should haue beene.] Though you be no good concluder, yet are you a notable transla­tour. For you can turne the English not onely cleane from, but quite against the La­tine. Where Ambrose saith, Christ had done lesse for mee, (if taking my nature vnto him) hee had not also taken my (naturall) affection vnto him) as feare, sorrow, and such like; you misconster affection for punishment, and mine, that is naturally mine, for that which I should haue suffered in hell; and adding the word (altogether) of your owne, you make Ambrose say; that Christ was altogether affected (that is punished in soule) as I should haue beene, (in hell) if I had not bene redeemed. But by what Gram­mar doth affectus signifie hell paines? Feare, griefe, and sorrow, are naturall affections in all men, and passions of the soule; they signifie not in their owne nature the tor­ments of the damned. How shall we know this to bee Ambrose meaning? Hee that hath but halfe an eye, may see by that whole Chapter the roote of this sorrow, to bee the infirmitie of our nature in Christ, and the cause thereof to be his compassion and pitie had of vs, and for vs. The next words to those which you bring, are. Ambros. in Luc. li. 10. de tristitia & do­lere Christs. Ergo pro me doluit, qui pro se nihil habuit quod doleret. And presently, taedio meae infirmitatis affi­citur. Christ therefore sorrowed for me, who had nothing in him selfe for which he should sor­row; he is affected with the tediousnesse of my infirmitie. The tediousnesse of our infirmitie af­fected him, not the torments of hell suffered in his owne soule. Ibidem. Ne (que) speciem incarna­tionis suscepit, sed veritatem. Debuit ergo & dolorem suscipere, vt vinceret tristitiam, non excluderet. Christ tooke vpon him not the shew, but the trueth of our flesh. Hee was there­fore to feele griefe, (as a consequent to our nature) that he might ouercome sorrow, and not exclude it. Ibidem. Tristis est non ipse, sed anima. Suscepit enim animam meam, suscepit cor­pus meum. Anima obnoxia passionibus. Christ was sorrowfull not in person, but in soule. For he tooke vnto him my soule, and my body. Now the soule it is, that is subiect to passions. Is hell with you of late become a naturall infirmitie and affection, that wheresoeuer you reade either of these words, you streight inferre the paines of hell? The causes of Christes sorrow will put all out of doubt, and are plainely recited by Ambrose in the ende of this Chapter, though stifly reiected by you, because they sort not with your conceits. Ibid. Tristis videbatur, & tristis erat, non pro sua passione, sed pro nostra disper­sione. Christ seemed sorrowfull, and indeede was sorrowfull, not for his owne suffering, but for our dispersing. You say Christs sorrow was for the suffering of hell paines in his soule; Ambrose saith in expresse words; Christ sorrowed not for his owne suffering: which of you twaine shall wee thinke best vnderstoode Ambrose meaning? him selfe, or you? Christ, sorowed, saith Ambrose, Ambros. ibid. for our dispersion; he sorrowed because he left vs orphanes, [Page 139] he sorrowed for his persecutors. All these occasions of sorrow in Christ at the time of his passion mentioned by Ambrose you vtterly disauerre, and in spite of Ambrose teeth, you will haue the infirmitie and affection of mans nature in Christ to signifie hell.

Yet Ierom shall helpe at a neede, who saith; Defenc. pa. 44. li. 20. That which we should haue borne for our sinnes, the same (Christ) suffered for vs.] You might haue done well to haue put quic­quid for quod, as one of your fellowes hath done alleaging this place, that where Ie­rom would not say, Christ suffered for vs, whatsoeuer we should haue suffered, your selues may speake it in his name. Neither is it so strange a thing with you to translate all for some. In the very next Page before, citing Ambrose words, hoc in se obtulit Christus, quod induit; Christ offered that in him selfe, which he tooke (of vs;) you render it, Christ offered in sacrifice Defenc. pa. 47. li. 17. ALL that which he assumed; which translation is euidently false, whatsoeuer the illation be. This place of Ierom I haue already answered in the Pag. 350. con­clusion of my Sermons; and but that the booke happely will not alwaies be at hand, I would spend no moe words therein. The particular can not hurt me, if it be simply graunted; and the generall is not affirmed by Ierom. Howbeit Ierom in plaine speech presently expresseth what he ment Christ suffered for vs. By this (saith he) Hiero. in Esa. cap. 53. it is ma­nifest, that as Christs body whipt and torne bare the printes of the stripes and wrongs, so his soule truely sorrowed for vs. What neede we any other exposition then his owne, that Christ suffered for vs smart of body and griefe of minde, which were due to vs in this world where Christ suffered for vs, besides the torments of the next world, where Christ neither did, nor could suffer any thing?

Cyprians words are far weaker for your purpose, & wider fro your matter. He saith, Christ was called sinne, and a curse; Cypria. de passione Christi. pro similitudine poenae, non culpae; for the likenesse of punishment, not of fault: LIKE is farre lesse then the same. If therefore Christs pu­nishment were but like, there is no necessitie it should be the same. Againe, when Cyprian nameth the likenesse of our punishment suffered by Christ on the crosse; he meaneth the punishment of sinne, that God inflicted on Adam, and all his of-spring in this life, where Christ suffered for vs, as sorrow, shame, reproch, paine, and death which were the punishments that God laid on Adams transgression in this life. The death of the Soule Adam pulled on him selfe by sinning; that Christ suffered not: the other God inflicted with his owne mouth, and by them accursed and punished sinne in this world, reseruing his terrible and eternall iudgements, which are the paines of hell, to an other time and place, when the bodies of the wicked should be altered and abled to endure those intolerable and euerlasting torments, threatned, but not executed in this world. The first kind of punishment due to all men in this life for sinne, Cyprian saw and knew full well, and by the Scriptures found that to be in Christ on the Crosse; the paines of hell Cyprian knew not, much lesse could he be sure that Christ suffered them, since no such thing is mentioned in the Scriptures. Let then the Reader iudge, whether Cyprian were likely to speake of that, which he knew and read, or rashly to pronounce that to be like, which he neither knew nor read. But if Cyprian bee the fittest man to declare his owne meaning, Cyprian euen in that place speaketh directly against your supposed paines of hell, suffered in the soule of Christ on the Crosse. Admiror te cruci inter damnatos affixum, iam nec tristem, nec paui­dum, Cypria. ibid. sed suppliciorum victorem eleuatis manibus triumphantem de Amelec. I admire thee, ô Lord, being once fastned to the Crosse amidst the condemned (theeues) to bee now neither sorrowfull, nor fearefull, but despising the punishments (laid on thee) with thine hands lifted vp to triumph ouer Amelec, (the enemies of Gods people.) If Christ once fastned to the Crosse had neither sorrow nor feare, but a neglect of his paines, and a ioyfull tri­umph ouer all his foes, I trust hee felt not the paines of hell; which were very easie, if they brought with them neither sorrow, nor feare, but rather contempt and triumph.

Christ feared before in the garden, you will say, and for feare or paine did sweate bloud.] That Cyprian remembreth and explaineth, wherein you shall see the diffe­rence betwixt his iudgement and yours of Christs sufferings. Cypria. ibid. Thou diddest Lord (saith he) professe before thine Apostles thy selfe to be sorrowfull vnto death, and for exceeding [Page 140] griefe didst power foorth a bloudie sweate. Hearing this (in the gospel) I was vtterly abashed. For who will not feare, if be feare whom all things feare? His answere I wil set downe in La­tine, though it will be the longer, as well to let the Reader heare Cyprians resolution in his owne words, which many will desire, and to discharge my selfe from all quarels of mistranslating, whiles I sometimes seeke to make that plaine to the simple, which in the text is more darke and obscure; as for diuers other respects, which I will after mention, when Cyprians minde is fully knowen. His words are,Cypria. de pas­sione in initio. Sed metus ille infir­mitatis humanae communem exprimebat affectum, & generalitatem omnium in carne viuen­tium hoc dolore vrgeri, & dissolutionem corporeae spiritualis (que) naturae hac molestia non posse carere, & hanc poenam vniuersae successioni Adam sine exceptione impositam, vt difficultas extremi transit us timeretur. Hanc nemo anxietatem euasit, & nemo egrediente anima sine amaritudine expirauit. But that feare (of thine o Lord) did expresse the common affecti­on of mans infirmitie, and the generall state of all liuing in the flesh to be pressed with this sor­row; and that the separation of body and soule can not be free from this griefe, but this punish­ment is laide on all Adams posteritie without exception, that the difficultie of departing this life should be feared: this wofulnesse no man euer escaped, neither did euer any man breath out his soule without bitternesse.

Here you may learne; first, whence Ambrose, who was a great follower of Cypri­an, tooke his words of humane infirmitie and affection, and what hee meant by them. Secondly, that this is a punishment (which you denie) laide by God himselfe on all mankinde, to feare and feele death separating the soule from the body. Thirdly, from this was no man euer exempted, but euen Christ himselfe, though he were free from that necessitie, yet would hee be partaker of this our infirmitie. Fourthly, that where on the crosse Christ neither feared nor sorrowed, but shewed him selfe terrible to his persecutors, and a conquerour of all their malice, and a triumpher ouer all their iniuries, yet to his Disciples in the garden hee opened his affection incident to our nature, thereby to confirme himselfe to bee a true man by his taking as well our infir­mities, as our flesh. Lastly out of Cyprian in that Sermon you may learne, that to Christ the Cypria. ibid. sight of (God) his Father could not bee formidable, that it was his Fathers will the sacrifice of his flesh should begin with feare and sorrow, that hee sorrowed to heale our weaknesse, and feared to make vs secure, by repressing those infirmities in his owne per­son, to cure them in vs for euer after. All these and many moe good lessons you cleane ouerslip in Cyprian, and broching a new doctrine quite contrarie to his, you lay violent hands on one poore word in that whole treatie, which yet maketh nothing for you; and as though you had performed a worthy worke, grossely to mistake the like for the same, you muster Cyprian as a maintainer of your new made hell.

Defenc pag. 47. li. 24. Say as Fulgentius saith, and wee aske no more. Quicquid fuit infirmitatis animae, sine peccato suscepit & pertulit. Christ tooke vpon him and suffered whatsoeuer infirmitie may bee in the soule without sinne.] I hope you will your selfe accept the condition, which you offer to others, and I require no more. But what is there in these words on which you so stoutly stand, and so confidently crake, that helpeth your deuice forward? Grant them absolutely, and what conclude you? The griefe of hell paines suffered from the immediate hand of God, is an infirmitie of the soule, you must say; if you will say any thing towards the matter you haue in hand. But who euer said so, that knew his left hand from his right? What passing dulnesse and surpassing drowsinesse is this, to make the suffering of hell paines from the immediate hand of God an infirmitie of the soule? As if it were weaknesse in man, not to be stronger then God; or imbecilitie, not to be able to resist his power? [Feare and sorrow are infirmities; and Fulgentius sayth whatsoeuer infirmitie, that is whatsoeuer feare, or sorow may be in the soule, the same Christ tooke and suffered.] These must be your collections, if you open your mouth to make any; and these bee so grosse, that no boy would engage himselfe with them. For the name of Infirmitie doth naturally note the speciall kindes thereof, by which they dif­fer from other things that are not infirmities; it doth not import either degrees, to which they may grow; or the causes, from whence they may rise. Is it then any conse­quent, [Page 141] that if Christ tooke vpon him all kinds of infirmities, and passions of the soule, he must therefore vndergoe all degrees, and all the causes of feare and sorrow, that may be in the soule? Christ did feare, and Christ did sorow; for those without que­stion were infirmities of his humane soule. Will it thence follow that Christ suffered all those dangers, losses, harmes, which men in this life doe, and may feare? If these will no way follow vpon Fulgentius words, how will the paines of hell be thence de­riued, which I vtterly denie to be any infirmitie in mans soule, since no creature is so strong, though he were an Angell, as to decline, or resist the hand of God in punish­ing? Fulgentius wordes therefore, that Christ tooke vnto him euery infirmitie of the soule, doe not inferre that Christ suffered euery degree, or euery obiect of feare and sorrow, but onely that he feared and sorowed, which maketh as much for your hell paines, as feathers doe to reare a fortresse.

The wordes of Fulgentius at your best aduantage doe you little good; his true meaning doth you farre lesse. For going onward to debate this matter more at large, he addeth two conditions to the infirmities and affections of Christs soule: the one that they were naturall, that is necessarily consequent to the nature of man; the other that they were voluntarie in Christ, though in vs they be necessarie. These limitations are very often in that Booke expressed, whence your words are taken. Fulgentius de passione Domini ad Trasimundū lib. 3. Animae tristi­tiam & perturbationem, quam voluntariam in anima Dei filius habuit sic habuisse credatur, vt etiam ipsas humanae animae passiones, & voluntate veras, & in veritate voluntarias non n [...]gemus. The sorrow and trouble of soule which the Sonne of God had voluntarily in his soule, he must be beleeued so to haue had, that we done them not to be true, because they were voluntarie; nor to be voluntarie, because they were true. This hee maketh common to bodie and soule. Ibidem. Quia verum hominem suscepit, ideo cunctas humanae naturae infirmi­tates veras quidem, sed voluntarias in eadem veritate naturae duntaxat humanae sustinuit. Because Christ tooke vpon him to be a true man, therefore he sustained ALL the true infir­mities of mans nature, but yet voluntarie in the trueth of the same nature onely. If you know not what naturall and voluntarie passions in Christes manhood doe meane, you may learne of Damascene, whom an adherent of yours much esteemeth, and often alleageth, though Damascene make nothing for his or your purposes. Wee confesse, sayth Damascene, that Christ tooke vnto him Damascenus orthodox. fides lib. 3. cap. 20. ALL NATVRALL AND BLAME­LESSE passions. For he assumed the whole man, and all that pertained to man, saue sinne. Naturall and blamelesse passions are those, which are not in our power, and whatsoeuer entred into mans life, through the condemnation of (Adams) sinne, as hunger, thirst, weakenesse, labour, weeping, corruption, shunning of death, feare, agonie, whence (came) sweat and drops of blood. These things are in all men by nature. Christ therefore tooke all these vnto him, that he might sanctifie them all. Howbeit our naturall passions were in Christ according to nature, and aboue nature. According to nature they were stirred vp in Christ, when he permitted his flesh to endure that which was proper vnto it. Aboue nature (they were in Christ) be­cause nature in him did neuer go [...] before his will. For there was nothing forced in him, but all things voluntarie. When he would he hungred, when he would he thirsted, when he would he feared; when he would he died. The naturall infirmities and passions then, which Christ tooke vnto him, as Damascene teacheth, were common to all men by nature, and so are not the paines of hell; they were in this life, so a [...] not the other; they were sanctified, so cannot the torments of hell be; they were voluntarie, that is, they moo­ued not in Christ, but at his owne will. Wherefore by Damascenes iudgement, Christ did not suffer your hellish torture from the immediate hand of God, by which he was wholy amazed and ouerwhelmed, as you say, with the waight and anguish of them, which could not be with his will.

I haue stood to Fulgentius words, more then which you did not aske; will you now likewise be tried by Fulgentius testimonie, whether you teach an errour exiled from all Christian hearts in his age? Or if you will not, your Reader will soone per­ceaue, that what was then reiected for an absurditie and falsitie, (I will spare heauier termes till I come to fuller proofes) can not now be professed as pietie. Touching [Page 142] Christs death by which wee are redeemed, that it had in it neither the death of the soule, nor the paines of hell, Fulgentius is very plaine euen in the same booke, where you would haue him so much forget himselfe, as to speake the contrary. Fulgentius ad Trasimundum lib. 3. Quis igno­ret Christum nec diuinitate, sed in solo corpore mortuum & sepultum? Who can be ignorant (if he be a Christian) that Christ died and was buried not in his diuinitie, but onely in bodie? and againe, Ibidem. In morte solius carnis immortalis fuit. Christ was immortall, nothing dying in him but his flesh. And so Ibidem. Cum sola caro moreretur & resuscitaretur in Christo, filius Dei dicitur mortuus. When onely the flesh died and was raised againe in Christ, yet the Sonne of God is said to haue died. And as though no repeating were susficient; Ibidem. In tota (huma­nitate) traditus idem Christus, secundum solam carnem mortuus, secundum solam carnem de sepulcho surrexit. The same Christ deliuered in his whole (humanitie) died in his flesh onely, and rose againe onely in his flesh. And least you should wrench aside, as you after­ward doe, that the name of Christs flesh containeth soule and bodie; besides that the word bodie directly excludeth the soule, which can not be the bodie; and so doeth the buriall and resurrection of Christ, for so much as the soule of Christ neither was, neither could be buried nor raised from the graue; Fulgentius in full and faire words exempteth not only the deitie, but the soule of Christ as well as the deitie from death. Fulgentius eo­dem libro. Moriente carne non solum deitas, sed nec anima Christi potest ostendi commortua. When Christ died in the flesh, neither can the godhead, nor the soule of Christ be shewed to haue bene also dead. And of hell paines he saith, Ibidem. Dignum fuit, vt animam dolor non contigisset in­ferni, quam seruitus nequiuit tenere peccati. It was a meete (and right) thing that the paines of hell should not touch that soule, whom the seruitude of sinne could not fasten on.

Yet Cyrill in the place aboue cited Defenc. pag. 48. li. 35. SEEMETH to acknowledge A KIND OF DEATH EVEN OF THE SOVLE, from which Christ reuiued againe. But of that in due place hereafter.] Is the death of Christs soule so slender a matter, that you may collect it by a seeming, and a kind of death, without any mention, or occasion of any such thing comprised in Cyrils words? The Reader may there obserue what your maine intent is, and whereon you fasten your eyes all this while, euen on the death of Christs soule to be requisite for our Redemption, though you finde no such thing in Scripture or Father; but miserably and childishly slide it in at last with a seeming. Now if there be no such thing in Cyrils words, nor any such seeming, how wel deserue you to be hissed out with hands, if not to be hurled out by the heeles, for a seeming sleeper, if not for a waking dreamer? what are those words of Cyrill, that seeme to acknowledge the death of Christs soule? Christ bestowed his flesh as a ransome for our flesh, and made his soule likewise the price of redemption for our soules, although he liued againe, being by nature life it selfe. It is lawfull for you to further euery place you bring, with a mayned and forced translation. Cyrils true words stand thus: Cyril. ad The­odosium de re­ctafide. [...]. Without constraint of any, Christ of himselfe laide downe his owne soule for vs, that he might be Lord of dead and quicke: yeel­ding his flesh in recompence, as a gift fully worth it, for the flesh of all, and making his soule (or life) a ransome for the soule (or life) of all, though he reuiued againe, being life by nature, in that he was God. The words which you would cite, are heere no perfect sentence, as hauing no principall verbe in them, and therefore must be ioyned with the former and depend vpon the verbe [...] (Christ layd downe his soule) which gouerneth the whole; as appeareth also by the two participles [...], yeelding in recompence, and [...], making, which must be directed by the same nominatiue case that [...] is, and likewise by the opposition of the verbe [...], he reuiued. Of what death Cyrill here speaketh, is more then manifest by the words of our Sauiour here vsed and deriued from the Gospell, where he said, Iohn 10. None taketh my soule from me, or constraineth me to die, I lay it downe of my selfe; and likewise, Matth. 20. the Sonne of man came to giue his soule (or life) a ransome for many. What kind of death those words of Christ imported, I made it appeare but a little before by the full consent of Scriptures and [Page 143] interpreters old and new, and of Cyrill himselfe, who all with one accord referre both those sayings to the death of Christs bodie, and the losse of his life on the Crosse, when his soule departed from him. Set that downe in Cyrils first words for the death which Christ died by the constant assertion of Scriptures, Fathers, New writers, and of Cyrill himselfe; and then the words which you alleage shew plainely the force of his corpo­rall death to be auaileable for the bodies and soules of all men, in that his flesh yeel­ded to death was a recompence or exchange for all mens flesh; and his soule laide downe without constraint of any, was the ransome of all mens soules; and he notwith­standing rose againe the third day to life by his owne power, as being God and life it selfe, against whom death could preuaile no farder, nor longer, then hee him selfe would.

Where are the words that acknowledge the death of Christs Soule, or that so much as seeme to acknowledge a kind of death in the soule of Christ? Here are the cleane contrarie. For if the death of Christs bodie, by which he laid aside his soule for vs, be sufficient to redeeme the bodies and soules of all men, then superfluous and needlesse euen by these words was the death of Christs soule, the whole being fully perfourmed without it. But he gaue his flesh to be a ransome for our flesh, and his soule for our soules, you say, and yet liued againe.] Cyrill doth not say by seuerall deaths, but by one and the same death, which was the laying down of his soule or life for vs, as Christ himselfe in the Gospel said he would. If those wordes inferre the death of Christes soule, why bring you not the words of Christ himselfe, saying; Matth. 20. The Sonne of man came to giue his soule a ransome for many. You saw the Scriptures themselues and the whole Church of Christ, first and last, I meane all old and new writers, translators and expositors would condemne your folly therin, in most exact words taking soule there for life, which must needes import the death of Christs bodie. And therefore you thought it more safetie to catch at the same words in some Father, for whose meaning there could not be brought so many, and so sound deponents. But all in vaine. For if Christ had no meaning in those wordes to point out the death of his owne soule, then Cyrill alleaging and obseruing the words of Christ, can haue no such purpose as to crosse the Scriptures, himselfe, and all the Fathers of Christs Church in a matter so dangerous and desperate, as the death of Christs soule amounteth vnto. In the meane while his words conclude no such thing, neither in saying nor in seeming; and so your embracing them to that end, argueth your good will to seeke, but your euill lucke to finde any such thing as the death of Christs soule in all the Fathers.

Cyrill doth not say Christ rose againe, which properly belongeth to the body, but he reui­ued or liued againe which seemeth to be spoken of the Soule.] Then Saint Paul maketh more for you, then Cyrill doth: for he affirmeth both os Christ; to this end (saith he) Christ died, and rose againe, and reuiued, that he might be Lord of dead and liuing. And in­deed resurrection properly noteth from whence Christ arose, to wit from the graue; Reuiuing expresseth the blessed and glorious life which he enioyed, after he was risen from the dead. Christ himselfe saith of his, they shall come forth (of their graues) Ioh. 5. v. 29. vn­to the resurrection of life, to separate them from the wicked who shall come likewise forth vnto the resurrection, but of iudgement and condemnation. Notwithstanding in Christ there is either no difference betwixt them, the one euer implying the other; or if we make any, Christs reuiuing alwaies presupposeth his Resurrection as antece­dent, since he possessed not that immortall and heauenly life, which now he hath, but vpon his arising from the dead. And so the Apostle placeth them, Christ died, and rose againe, and reuiued (into such power and glory, that he was) made Lord ouer dead and quicke. And Cyrill who often times vseth this word (he reuiued) of Christ, meaneth the third day after Christs death, when the Scriptures affirme he rose from the graue. So Cyrill and the Synode of Alexandria that ioyned with him in writing vnto Nesto­rius say of Christ. Epist. Cyrilli & Synode A­lex. ad Nesto­rium. [...], he reuiued the third day hauing spoyled hell; and so in his second confession of the true faith to the religious Queenes, Cyrill de fide ad Reginas li. 2. [...]. Christ spoyling death reuiued the third day. [Page 144] And in his Epistle to those of Egypt. Christ is said (in the Scriptures) first to haue died as a man, Cyrill epist. ad Presbyt. & mo [...]ch Aegypt. [...], and after that to haue returned to life, by that which he was by Nature. If then he died not in the flesh according to the Scriptures, he was not quickned by the Spirit, [...], that is he reuiued not againe. So that Cyrill hath not any see­ming words for the death of Christs Soule; but saith as Christ said in effect before, that the Sonne of man gaue his (soule or) life to be a ransome for the life of all, and not for the Soule of all, which in the singular number is neither good English, nor good Diuinitie, though to smooth it, you put the plurall and say, for our soules, which is not in Cyrill.

The words of Ambrose will prooue that Christ offered his Soule for vs; Defenc. pa. 47. li. 17. hoc in se obtulit Christus quod induit. Christ offered in Sacrifice all that which he assumed.] Be­sides that you falsifie Ambrose by adding ALL to his words, which haue no such thing in them, you [...]est Ambroses words against Ambroses meaning. For though it may well be graunted, that Christ offered body and soule as a Sacrifice of holinesse and obedience vnto God; and that Christs Soule likewise was laid downe vnto the death of his body to feele the smart thereof, and to be seuered by the force thereof; in which respect Esay saith, that Christ powred forth his Soule vnto death: Yet Ambrose spea­king of Christs sacrifice for the sinnes of the people, meaneth (as the rest of the Fa­thers doe) that part of the Sacrifice, which was slaine; which was by his and their confession, Christs body, and not Christs Soule. Heare Ambrose him selfe Ambros. de fide. li. 3. ca. 5. In quo nisi in corpore, expiauit populi peceata? In quo passus est nisi in corpore? Wherein did Christ sacrifice for the sinnes of the people, but in his body? wherein did he suffer (death) but in his body? And so Theodoret: Christ was Theodoret. Dialogo. 1. called a Priest in his humane nature, [...], and offered none other Sacrifice but his owne body. Athanasius nameth what Christ put on, and what he offered. Athanasius contra Ar [...]anos [...]ratio. 3. The word of God that made all things, was afterward made an hie Priest, [...]. Putting on a body that was borne and made, which he might offer for vs. Nazianzene saith to Christ. Nazianzen. in illud Euan­gelis, Cum con­summasset Iesus hos sermones. Thou art a sheepe, because thouwast a Sacrifice; thou art an hie Priest, because thou offeredst thy body. Augustine also, Sacerdos propter victi­mam, quam pro nobis offerret, a nobis acceptam. Christ [...] a Priest, for the Sacrifice, he tooke of vs, that he might offer it for vs. What that Sacrifice was he sheweth saying: Idem in Psal. 64. Assump­sit a nobis, quod offerret Domino; ipsas diximus sanctas primitias carnis ex vtero virginis: Christ tooke of vs that he might offer to the Lord, we meane the holy first fruits of his flesh y August. in Psal. 109. (taken) from the wombe of the Virgine. Theophylact; Theophylact in cap. 8 e [...]st. ad Hebraeos. A Priest may by no meanes be without a Sacrifice. It was then necessarie that (Christ) should haue somewhat to offer. Quod autem offerretur praeter eius corpus nil quidpiam erat; necessariò ergo & mortuus est. Now there was vtterly nothing that he might offer, besides his body; it was needfull then he should die.

This that Christ tooke a body to offer, is most agreeable to Ambroses mind as well in the booke which you cite, as in other parts of his writings. Ambros. de incarnat. Do­man. sacra­mento. ca. 6. Ex segenerauit Ma­ria, Marie conceiued of her selfe, (to wit, of her owne body) that what was conceiued of her, might be the true nature of a body. And alleadging Saint Pauls words; that Christ was made of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh, Rom. 1. and made of a woman, Galat. 4. He concludeth; Ibidem. Ergo ex nobis accepit, quod proprium offerret pro nobis, vt nos redime­ret ex nostro. Then Christ tooke of vs, that which hee might offer as his owne for vs, to the ende he might redeeme vs by that which was ours. And declaring what he meant euen by the words, which you bring, Christ offered that in himselfe which hee put on; Ambrose addeth: Ibid. Non igitur diuinitatem induit, sed carnem assumpsit, vt spolium carnis exueret, Christ put not on the nature of his Diuinitie, but he tooke flesh that he might put off the spoyle of his flesh (when he should die.) Now if the flesh of Christ were subiect to all iniuries, how say you, that Christs flesh is of the same substance with his Godhead? What else doe you in so saying, but compare Adams slime and our earth to the Diuine substance? Here Ambrose plainely confesseth, what hee meant, Christ tooke vnto him, and offered for vs; euen Adams slime and our earth, whereof his body was made. Which elsewhere hee pre­cisely [Page 145] auoucheth, saying. Ambros in Epist. ad Heb. cap. 10. Corpus suscepit nostrae mortalitatis, vt pro nobis haberet quid offerret. Christ assumed our mortall body, that he might haue what to offer for vs.

And least you should after your trifling maner, aske whether we exclude an humane soule from the body, which Christ tooke of the substance of his mother, and which hee offered for vs to death on the Crosse, I answere with Ambrose. Ambros. de incarnat. Do­man. Sacram. cap. 7. Cum susceperit carnem hominis, consequens est vt perfectionem incarnationis plenitudinem (que) susceperit. Nihil enim in Christo imperfectum. Where as Christ tooke vnto him the flesh of a man, it is consequent that hee tooke vnto him the perfection and fulnesse of incarnation; for there is no­thing imperfect in Christ. And what neede was there, hee should take flesh without a Soule, when as an insensible flesh, and an vnreasonable soule was neither subiect to sinne, nor capable of reward? An humane soule was a necessarie sequell to Christs body, which he tooke of the seede of Dauid and substance of his mother, as it is to all ours before we can be men: but the soule is not comprised in the name of the body, much lesse doeth it re­ceiue the same conditions and properties which the body doth. Though then I make no doubt, but Christ at his birth and at his death, as all his life long, had both a body and a perfect reasonable and humane soule, indued with all the powers, affections and infirmities of mans nature, saue sinne and the corruption of sinne; yet is it no con­sequent with Ambrose, that Christs soule was made of a woman as his flesh was, nor that Christ died the death of the soule, when his body died on the Crosse. Let them doubt (saith Ambrose) Ambros. de incarnat. Do­min. Sacram. cap. 7. of that which the Prophet saith (my soule hateth your new Moones and Sabboths;) This that is testified in the Gospel (therefore the Father loueth me because I lay downe my soule to take it againe) they can not refute to bee spoken of the proprietie of the soule, when as it is spoken of the Lords death and resurrection. The bo­die of Christ could not die, but by laying downe his soule, as also it could not rise to life, but by taking it againe. So that both Christes death and his resurrection doe cleerely prooue, that he had a true soule as Ambrose noteth, which by his death was seuered from his body, and by his resurrection was assumed againe into his body. And yet that death was proper to Christs body and not to his soule; though the soule felt the smart and sting thereof as well before, as when it departed from his body. Tertull. contra Marcionem. li. 5. cap. 9. Corpus est quod amit tit animam, & amittendo fit mortuum; it a mortui vocabulum corpori competit. Porro si resurrectio mortui est, mortuum autem non aliud est quàm corpus, corpo­ris erit resurrectio. It is the body (saith Tertullian) that looseth the soule, and by loosing it dieth, so that the word, dead, agreeth to the body. Now if the resurrection be of that which was dead, and nothing can be dead besides the body, Resurrection must likewise pertaine to the body. This death and this resurrection, I meane of the body, was found in Christ, yours is very strange to Ambrose and to all the Fathers. Ambro. de fide li. 3. cap. 5. Per quam nisiper corporis mor­tem, mortis vincula dissoluit? By what other death (saith Ambrose) then by the death of the body, did Christ breake the bands of death?

Thus haue you spent your great store of Fathers with small successe; and though you dissemble where you borrowed them, yet you dissemble not your excessiue brag­ging of them, as if they were Defenc. pag 49. l. 1. cleane against me, and for you in the chiefest point of this question: where indeede you doe but reach after a word in them here and there, and that not rightly conceaued, or not rightly translated; from whence you would faine inferre your fansies, saue that neither the grounds of trueth nor learning, will beare you out in your conclusions. That Christs sufferings did belong to bodie and soule the Fathers affirme, whether by Sympathie or without Sympathie they say nothing; much lesse that Christ suffered in minde distinctly from soule or bodie. Nazianzene saith he assumed mans mind at his incarnation, that thereby he might sanctifie it; be­sides him not one of your places so much as nameth the minde. As for Gods imme­diate hand punishing the soule of Christ, in his passion, if you should fast till you find that in these or any other Fathers, you should fast, not fourtie dayes but yeares. And as though these were not falsities enough to loade the Fathers with, you hoyse vp the top sayle of vntrueth, and flant it out, that Defenc. pag. 49. li. 6. these Fathers say, Christ suffered all these paines, which els we should haue suffered, and was spared in nothing: plainely [Page 146] belying your Authors, which say no such thing, and out-facing your Reader, as if his sight did not serue him to seuer your shamefull additions from the texts of those anci­ent writers. Cyrill sayth, Christ suffered all things (that is, all naturall and innocent in­firmities and passions of bodie and soule, as Cyrill explaineth himselfe in the same Chapter, yea in the close of the very same sentence) to whose words you adde of your owne, WHICH els we should haue suffered. Only, you ioyned them at first so cunning­ly to Cyrils sentence hauing two parts, that a man could not readily tell to which you referred this addition, saue that now in the recapitulation of your proofes, you ap­parantly tie them to the former. For if you made Cyrill to say, Christ suffered to free vs from all, which els we should haue suffered, that assertion is verie true; onely, these last words are yours and not Cyrils. If you make him to say, Christ suffered all, which els we should haue suffered, this hath neither trueth in it, nor any colour in Cyrils text. Ie­rome indeede saith, Christ suffered that which we ought to haue suffered, meaning, what Christ suffered, was due to vs, and not to him; but Ierome is farre from your all, which els we should haue suffered.

Your sleight then in collecting your conceits from the Fathers sayings, is woorth the obseruing. Nazianzene sayth, Christ in his incarnation assumed mans mind to sancti­sie it. Cyrill saith, Christ SVFFERED ALL the infirmities and passions of mans na­ture. Ierome sayth: That which was due to vs for our sinnes, Christ suffered for vs. And Tertullian saith, God spared not his owne Sonne, but deliuered him for vs, that is, God spa­red him not from deliuering. Out of these foure places, hauing different causes, ends, and respects, for which, to which, & in which they were written, you clout this conclusion, as common to them all, which is repugnant to euery one of them; that Christ IN MIND (so saieth Nazianzene) SVFFERED ALL, (so saith Cyrill) WHICH VVAS DVE TO VS, (so saith Ierome) WITHOVT SPARING, (so saith Ter­tullian.) By this order and manner of hudling and hampering different things and di­uerse places together, you may collect what you will, when you will, and out of whom you will; and this is your Defenc. pa. 49. l. 8. cleare and plaine sense of the Fathers against the which you say I can take no exception.

After this you fal againe to your first trench more of termes, and wandering a while about the phrases of Gods proper wrath, the true and right punishment of sinne, two counte­nances in Christ, and the coincidence of his soule and spirit; you would faine conclude if you could, that if Christ suffered the wrath of God for vs, he suffered the true paines of hell; which I auouched you neuer should be able to doe. Whether I or you abuse the Reader with ambiguous and doubtfull words I leaue to his iudgement, that ta­keth the paines to peruse what is past, and what followeth: truely I disaduantage my selfe very much so precisely to diuide, distinguish and prooue euery thing as I doe, if I ment to slide away with generalities. But you that neither can, nor will specifie any parts, nor bring any proofes of your chiefest assertions, but keepe your selfe safe vn­der the shelter of certaine phrases deuised by your selfe without any warrant of Scrip­tures or Fathers, and neuer expounded nor defined in all your writing, saue onely with AS IT VVERE, and after a sort; what meaning you can haue to handle so great matters as mans redemption and saluation after so sleight a manner, besides a vaine ostentation of your contentious and curious humour, I leaue it to the Readers censure. Now to the returne of your termes.

Defenc. pag. 49. l. 31. According to the most vsuall and common sense of Gods wrath, so in my whole Treatise I take it for Gods perfect holinesse, iustice, and power properly executing vengeance and pu­nishment Iohn 3. (whether little or great) due to them on whom sinne lieth.] Take from you yourPsal. 20. termes no where found in the Scriptures, but inuented and authorized onely by your2. Corin. 3. selfe, and you can not steppe one foote further in this question. You haue named, I know not how often, Gods PROPER VVRATH in the premises, though you neuer tooke the care nor paines to describe or define it. Now you come to the most vsuall & common sense of Gods wrath, which you say is Gods PROPER wrath. Except that old starting hole of yours, which here you call the proper executing of punishment; and [Page 147] there is nothing more repugnant to your owne assertion, then your owne description. For all the afflictions of this life, whatsoeuer they be, come from Gods perfect holi­nesse, iustice, and power, and are due to the children of Adam for sinne abiding or dwelling in them, though God of his secret counsell may haue other purposes in sif­ting his Saints for their good and his glorie. Your sense of Gods wrath you say is most vsuall, but you shew not where, nor with whom. If you meane with your selues, I can easily yeeld that; if you meane in the Scriptures, I greatly doubt whether the wrath of God in the Scriptures doe more vsually signifie his euerlasting iudgements against sinne after this life, or his temporall plagues vpon sinners in this life. How­beit it is not greatly materiall, which is most vsuall, since either is vsuall in the word of God. You quote but foure places for that purpose in your Margin, and misse two of them. For in the 2. Cor. 3. vers. 17. and 9. I finde not the name of Gods wrath at all expressed in either of them. But I so vse the phrase as signifying any punishment of sinne whatsoeuer.] The Scriptures so vse it before me, and you can giue no reason, why I should not so vse it after them. It is altogether an improper speech, you say.] So say you, but the Scriptures say not so. They make degrees and differences betwixt the wrath of God in this world and in the next, and his displeasure against the sinnes of his own, and his enemies; but they take not wrath for fauour as you doe, though Gods wrath against the wickednesse of his children be neuer executed without fauor to their per­sons, which in the faithlesse is farre otherwise.

Defenc. pa. 50. li. 5. It is true, all troubles, paines and griefs in their first ordinance were the effects of Gods proper wrath: but in their state and condition now, they are not, namely as the godly doe suf­fer them.] You are full of shifts, but they are so slender, that they doe but shame you. After much wrangling you grant it to be true, that all troubles, paines and griefs in their first ordinance were the effects of Gods wrath; you say of Gods PROPER VVRATH. Which last I thinke to be vntrue, though the former be verie true. If by their first or­dinance you meane the iudgement of God pronounced against Adam and all his of­spring for sinne, and the punishment irreuocably inflicted on mankinde therefore, it is in effect the same which I auouched against you, and so true, that you your selfe dare not contradict it. For if you should, you should openly gainsay the Scriptures, which witnesse that man was created in all integritie of nature, felicitie of state, and perpetuitie of life; and that by sinne, this impuritie, miserie, and mortalitie, which now we all feele, entred into the world as the wages of Adams sinne, and namely, that Gen. 3. v. 16. paine, 17. sorrow, and 19. death were imposed on Adam (and so on all his) by Gods owne mouth, as effects or degrees of his most iust displeasure against the sinne of our first parents. If you start from this with any shift of words, you start from a maine principle of the Christian faith: but I suppose, that you confesle it by this that you say, they were effects of Gods wrath in their first ordinance, that is, when they were first inflicted on Adam and all his posteritie.

But NOVV you say, they are NOT so, specially to the godlie.] Since what time be­ganThe first man punished for his sinne, after Christ was pro­mised. your Now? or when was their state or condition changed? These things were generally and irreuocablely inflicted on all men, as the punishment of sinne in the first man, when as yet they were signes and tastes of Gods wrath not in words, but in deeds; notwithstanding we were then, and long before, euen before Eph. 1. v. 4. the foundation of the world, elected and adopted in Christ Iesu to be heires of eternall saluation. Where­fore2. Tim. 1. v. 9. God euen at the first, when by your confession they were the effects of his wrath, layd them on all, euen on his owne children, whom he meant euerlastingly to saue; and so doth continue them to this day, as monuments of his iust displeasure against sinne euen in his owne seruants and saints. Yea, before God would inflict them, he made open promise of the womans seed, that it should Gen. 3. v. 15. bruize the serpents head; and then to teach his owne, and not onlie the wicked, for whom he reserued euerlasting destruction, what it was by sinne to prouoke him; he loaded the life of all the godlie with sorow, paine and death; to make them for euer by that grieuous but righteous pu­nishment of sinne in themselues, the more mindfull how offensiue sinne was vnto [Page 148] God; and the more warie how to giue eare to the Serpent against the voice of God. And therefore at the verie first inflicting of them, if wee cast our eyes either on our owne deserts, or on the lot of the wicked, we shall find the wonderfull fauor of God, not onlie in opening his purpose vnto vs, for our euerlasting saluation in Christ, but euen in so tempering the smart of his rod, that by the punishment we did feele in our selues the weight of sinne in some sort, yet by his mercie we should be strengthened, eased, and comforted vnder that burden in this life; and after be receiued into euer­lasting blisse. Notwithstanding, when we compare this mortall & miserable conditi­on here with our creation, and with the abundance of Gods blessings richly powred on vs, when he first made vs; we should beholde what sinne had depriued vs of, and subiected vs vnto, though it did not exclude vs from Christ, who loued vs so dearely, that he would and did giue himselfe for vs, rather than we should euerlastingly pe­rish. So that the sorow, paine, and death which the godly feele, were euen at the first layd on them by the same mixture of Gods iustice and mercie, with which they now con­tinue; neither did Christ die for vs, presently to free vs from that sentence of bodilie death, which God had irreuocably pronounced and executed on Adam and his of­spring, by returning him and them to the earth for manie thousand yeeres before Christ came: but rather in that to partake with vs, that he might saue vs from the rest, which in all the wicked did accompany this death; and in the end to raise vs againe to a better life, lest we should faint vnder the hand of God, who fastneth vs to the affli­ctions of this life by the example and fellowship of Christs sufferings. For if we suf­fer with him, we shall raigne with him; and we must first die in Adam, before we can be quickned againe in Christ.

They are now profitable for vs, you will say; and so rather helpe vs than hurt vs in this corruption of sinne, with which we are compassed.] I doubt not thereof, and so were they from the first instant that they were imposed on Adam: but how came this corruption of our nature, if not as a punishment of sinne in Adam? and consequently the remedies thereof do also witnesse Gods displeasure against sinne, though they be farre more holesome for vs, than to rot in the sores of our inward corruption. Can any man doubt, but God was and is able to cleere vs, though neuer so corrupt, from the infection and dominion of sinne, by the working of his Spirit more mightilie and casilie than by troubles and griefs, if it had so seemed good to his wisdome and iu­stice? And had he determined to shew vs onlie loue without all regard to his iustice, how readie was it for him in Christ to haue released as well all corporall and tempo­rall affliction to his elect, as he did spirituall and eternall? But he resolued otherwise in his most wise counsell for the conseruation of his iustice; and so now healeth our corruption with the salue of affliction, to let vs haue continually presented before our eyes, and impressed in our bodies, what our sinne at first did, and still doth de­serue, though he neuer withdrew his mercie from vs, which in the end shall most a­bundantly recompense all. Wherefore it is no reason, that because troubles are pro­fitable or necessarie for our corrupt state, therefore they are not effects of Gods dis­pleasure against sinne: yea rather because God could haue otherwise cured sinne in vs, and would not but by perpetuall affliction; it is an argument, that God so hated sinne in our first parents, that he would haue the verie remembring & curing thereof to be alwayes in this life painfull and grieuous to our outward man, though he would also comfort vs in Christ, whiles heere we liue; and heereafter crowne vs with glorie for Christes sake.

Neither is this a question of words, whether they be proper or improper in the Scriptures, but a point of doctrine necessarie to be receiued of all men, that the cor­ruption and dissolution of our nature and life in this world, doth manifest the excee­ding hatred that naturallie God hath of sinne, who rewarded it in all mankinde so se­uerely, that he spared neither the bodies, soules, states, nor liues of his elect, from sen­sible signes of his detesting sinne in them: though for his sonnes sake, in whom they were beloued and adopted, he would by his wonderfull power rather further than [Page 149] indanger their saluation euen by those maladies and corrosiues of sinne. This shew­eth the greatnesse of Gods power, and goodnesse of his mercie towards vs, but this altereth not the iudgement which God pronounced, and punishment which he in­flicted on Adam and all his ofspring for sinne. The corruption and infection of sinne, which naturally and continually dwelleth in all the godly, called by Diuines concupiscence, is it no punishment of sinne, because the guilt thereof is remitted in Baptisme, and now it is left in vs to humble vs, and awake vs to call for grace, and to resist sinne, that striuing with it, we see not only the danger of sinne assaulting vs, but the Spirit of God assisting vs, and bountie of God rewarding vs? The actuall sinnes of the faithfull, shall we thinke them no sinnes but fauors from God, because by them God worketh repentance, submission, conuersion, yea faith, zeale, ioy and thanksgi­uing in his elect? August. de corrept. & gra­tia. cap. 9. God worketh (sayth Austen) all things for the good of those that loue him, and so farre forth vtterly all things, that if any of them stray, and for sake the right way, euen that God turneth to their good, because they returne more humble and better taught. The like I say of death, and other miseries of mans life, pronounced first by Gods mouth, and still inflicted by Gods hand. They are, as they were, degrees or effects of Gods anger against sinne in Adam; pursuing him and all his posteritie for the confirmation of his iustice, though by Gods mercie towards his, they now serue as they did euen at the first in Gods children, to represse sinne, to worke repentance, to raise confidence in God, and contempt of all earthly things, and to exercise the gra­ces of Gods Spirit giuen them, as patience, obedience, and such like, and to giue them assurance of a better life.

The Church of Christ euer was, and is of the same minde with me, that the death of the bodie with her seeds and fruits in this life, first entred, and still remaineth as a PVNISHMENT of sin. August. de Trinitate. li. 4. cap. 12. Men shunned (saith Austen) the death of the flesh, rather than the death of the spirit, that is, the punishment rather than the cause of the punishment. We came vnto death by sinne, Christ by righteousnesse, & ideo, cum sit mors nostra poena peccati, mors illius facta est hostia pro peccato; and therefore, where our death is the punishment of sinne, his death was the sacrifice for sinne. Theodoret speaking of the separation of bodie and soule, wherby that which is mort all sustaineth death, the soule remaining free from death as being immortall, asketh his aduersarie, Theodor. dia­logo. 3. cap. 2. [...]? Doest thou not thinke death to be a punishment? Who answering; The Diuine Scripture teach­eth so much; Theodoret inferreth; Is death then the punishment of sinners? The other yeelding that this is granted of all men, Theodoret concludeth: Why then, since both the soule and bodie sinned, doth the bodie alone sustaine the punishment of death? Fulgentius: Fulgen. de in­carnat. & gra­tia Christs. cap. 12. Nisi praecessisset in peccato mors animae, nunquam corporis mors in supplicio sequeretur. Except the death of the soule had gone before by sinne, the death of the bodie had neuer follow­ed after as a punishment. And therefore of our flesh he sayth: Ibid. cap. 13. Nascitur cum poena mortis, & pollutione peccati: It is borne with the punishment of death, and pollution of sinne. And of yoong children: By what iustice is an infant subiected to the wages of sinne, if there be no vncleannesse of sinne in him? or how do we see him strooken with death, if he felt not the sting thereof (which is sinne?) Maxentius in the confession of his faith; Maxentius in libello fidei cap. 3. We beleeue (sayth he) that not only the death of the bodie, which is the punishment of sinne, but also the sting of death, which is sinne, entred into the world; because we consent not to these men (who say the contrarie) but to the Apostle, who testifieth that sinne and death went ouer all men. Prosper: Prosperde promissio. & praedict. parte 1. cap. 5. The punishment of sinne, which Adam the root of mankinde receiued by (Gods) sentence, (saying, Earth thou art, and to earth thou shalt returne) and transmitted to his posteritie as to his branches, the Apostle sayth, entred into the world by one mans sinne, and so ranged ouer all men. Beda: Beda in Psal. 34. The death as well of vs men, as of Christ, is called sinne, be­cause it is the effect and punishment of that sinne which Adam committed. The second councell of Arrange about 450 yeres after Christ confesseth no lesse; Concilium A­rausic anum 2. cap. 2. If any man af­firme, that only the death of the bodie, which is the punishment of sinne, and not sinne also, which is the death of the soule, passed by one man to all mankinde, he ascribeth iniustice to God, and [Page 150] contradicteth the Apostle, who sayth; By one man sinne entred into the world, and by sinne death passed ouer all men.

Our later writers, though they fully defend that God doth not punish his either to destruction, as he doth the wicked; nor for satisfaction of sinne, as he did his owne Sonne for the sinnes of all his Saints; and to comfort the afflicted, they set before them the presence of Gods power assisting them in their miseries, or deliuering them from their troubles, the purpose of God respecting wholy their good, and the promise of God exceedingly recompencing their patience; yet when they come to the cau­ses prouoking God to this seueritie, they acknowledge that to be sinne, and teach euery man to descend into himselfe, and to giue God the glorie, in that his righte­ous iudgement beginneth at his owne house. Of the euils, (which we suffer in this life) Bullingerus decadis 3. sermo. 3. there be many and sundry causes, saith Bullinger, but sinne it selfe is counted to be the generall cause. For by disobedience sinne entred into the world, and by sinne death, diseases, and all the mischiefes in the world. Ibidem. The persecutions and cruell tortures inflicted on the Church of God, or on particular Martyrs, as they were offered them for the confession and testimony of the faith and truth of the Gospell, so for the most part they had for their causes the offences and sinnes of the godly, which the iustice of God did visite in his seruants, though for the good and welfare of his Saints. Ibidem. The people of Israell sinned against the Lord in the desert vnder the Iudges and Kings very often, and very enormously, and were grieuously punished by the Lord; but againe they were speedily deliuered as often as they acknowledged their sinnes, and turned vnto the Lord. Ibidem. If therefore any man suffer any euill for sinne com­mitted, let him acknowledge the iust iudgement of God vpon himselfe, and humble himselfe vnder the mightie hand of God, confessing it vnto God; and asking pardon with lowly praier, let him patiently beare that which he hath so well deserued to suffer. Zanchij tra­ctat. Theolog. lib. 1. cap 2. thes. 8. It is certaine, saith Zanchius, that all the punishments and miseries, which we feele in this world, are from sin, and inflicted for sinne. In which place he resolueth by a plaine thesis, that death is the punishment of sinne, and (so are) all those things which are the fruits of death, as well in Soule, as in body, and in (our) externall state. Gualther. homil. 118. in 12. cap. Joh. It is an argument (saith Gualther) of a mind skant religious wholy to despise death, quam per peccatum ingressam, & peccati poenam esse omnes Scripturae testantur, which all the Scriptures witnesse came in by sinne, and is the pu­nishment of sinne. In the Philosophers commendations (of the death of the bodie) Petri Martyris loci com­munes, class. 3. lo. 14. & sect. 5. there are some things (saith Peter Martyr) not agreeable to the Christian faith, and to the sacred Scriptures. For we say, that death must not be accounted any good, but an euill thing. Quandoquidem Deus illam vti poenam inflixit nostro generi; For so much as God inflicted it as a punishment on mankind. And so else where: Idem class. 2. loc. 1. sect. 51. Omnes pij statuunt in morte [...]rae diuinae sensum esse, ideo (que) sua natura dolorem & horrorem incutit. All the godly resolue, that in death there is a sense of Gods wrath, and therefore of his owne nature it impresseth a griefe and terror. And if there be any to whom it is contenting and acceptable to die, they haue that from some other fountaine, and not from the nature of death. Musculus in locis communi­bus theologicis de Ira Dei. There might be assigned (saith Musculus) many kinds of the wrath of God, but for this present we content our selues with a triple diuision thereof, whereby we diuide it into generall, temporall, and eternall. The generall (wrath of God) is that wherewith the whole posteritie of Adam is enwrapped for originall sinne. Hence come all the miseries of mankind, which equally follow the condition of men, and cleaue as well to our minds, as to our flesh. The temporall wrath of God is that (Qua peccat is non impiorum modò, sed & piorum irascitur, ac paenas de illis su­mit in hac vita,) whereby God is angry with the sinnes not of the wicked onely, but of the godly also, and taketh punishment of them in this life. Whether I speake or thinke other­wise, then these new and old Diuines haue spoken and taught, let the Reader iudge.

But mine owne Authors in the very places, which I alleadge, doe say that the na­ture of death is changed, and that God is angry with his elect, as a Father with his beloued children, to chasten and amend them.] Peter Martyr saith indeede the na­ture of death is chaunged by Gods goodnes making that profitable to vs, which of it selfe is very harmefull: but with what condition doth he say it is changed? Pet. Mart. loc. com. classe 3. lo. 14. sect. 7. Puta, [Page 151] si quis obediente animo eam sube at, néque poenam illam reijciat, quam diuina iustitia nos omnes voluerit exoluere: If a man submit himselfe vnto it with an obedient hart, and re­iect not that punishment, which the iustice of God would haue vs all to suffer. And so it was chaunged, euen when it was inflicted on the elect in Adams loynes. For Christ was first promised to be the bruizer of the Serpents head. Now if death afterward tooke full and euerlasting hold on Christs members, then the serpent preuailed a­gainst Christ and his chosen, and not Christ against the Serpent. Wherefore God so moderated his sentence, that he adiudged Christes members in Adam no farder then to the earth, whence Christ should raise them, and vtterly abolish from them all the Serpents poyson, that is, sinne, death, and corruption: but this prooueth not death to be good in Gods Children, or to be no punishment of sinne in them, be­cause God conuerteth it to their aduantage in the ende; no more then their sinnes are good, because God turneth them also to the benefite of his elect. For, as you heard before, Saint Austen saith of their sinnes as he doth of their death, that God turneth them, and all things else to the good of those that loue him. Touching Gods fatherly Anger against the sinnes of the faithfull for their amendment, which Mus­culus mentioneth; He doth not say as you doe, it is no Anger; neither doe I defend any other kinde of Anger in God then such, as a Religious and wise Father in some sort resembleth, when he persueth the wickednes of his vnruly sonne. Whose per­son though he fauour as being his Sonne, and by chastisement seeke to reforme; yet is he or ought he to be, not in words or lookes onely, but inwardly and truely displeased and offended with the lewdnesse of his Sonne. And though loue doe tem­per the correction, that he meane not to kill or ouerthrow his owne flesh and blood; yet the zealous Father spareth not to make his Sonne throughly smart, till he con­fesse, mislike, and leaue his former loosenesse, and frame himselfe obediently to his Fathers will. Doth not this Father as much hate the vices, as he loueth the person, and seeketh the welfare of his Sonne? And since his Sonne will not be otherwise recalled, may not the sharp correction, which the Father vseth to represse the vnbridled and vntamed appetites of his licentious child, be called punishment? The Scriptures so speake, and so doe the Fathers, as also the later writers; onely this fabler hath found out a new faith, and new phrases of Gods improper wrath, and vntrue punishment of sinne, which God vseth toward his children, that prouoke him with their impuritie and iniquitie.

Defenc. pa. 50. li. 26. It may not be said properly, that (Gods) Iustice leadeth him to inflict these things on vs, (as you affirme) but his holinesse and loue.] Your mouth belike is the measure of pro­per speeches. If you intend that not onely Iustice, but also Loue did and doth leadGod is iust in punishing his Saints. God to inflict these things on vs, you say the same that I affirme; but if you meane, (as you must, if you will crosse my position,) that Loue without Iustice did and doth lead God to inflict these things on vs, then speake you both absurdly and wickedly. For the Scriptures ascribe Iustice and Iudgement to God in chastening his Church, and punishing the sinnes of his seruants, as well as they doe Loue and holinesse. When the Prophet told Roboham and the Princes of Iuda, that 2. Chro. 12. vers. 5. they had left God, and therefore God would leaue them in the hands of Shishak the King of Egypt: the King and Princes Vers. 6. humbled themselues, and said, the Lord is iust. When Ierusalem was burnt and her people caried captiue to Babilon, the Prophet lamenting her miserie saith, the Lord hath Lament. 1. vers. 5. afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions: and teacheth her to say; Vers. 1 [...]. Iust is the Lord, for I haue rebelled against his mouth. Daniel at the time, when God would deliuer his people from that Captiuitie, maketh confession of his and their sinnes, and saith; Dan. 9. v. 11. All Israell haue transgressed thy law, and departed from hearkning to thy voice. Therefore the curse is powred vpon vs, because we haue sinned against him. Vers. 14. And the Lord hath watched ouer this euill, and brought it vpon vs, because the Lord our God is iust in all that he doth; for we would not heare his voice. The Leuites after their returne making confession of their sinnes vnto God, & mentioning their afflictions, [Page 152] doe adde; N [...]hem. ca. 9. 33. And thou (Lord) are iust in all that is come vpon vs; because thou hast kept (thy) truth, and we haue done wickedly.

The Apostles confesse the like after Christs comming. Rom. 3. If our iniquitie (saith Paul,) commend the Iustice of God, what shall we say? Is God vniust in punishing? God forbid. Very plainly the same Apostle denounceth Gods iustice and vengeance to all Christians that wrong their brethren; 1. Thess 4. vers. 6. You know (saith he) what Commandements we gaue you by the Lord Iesus, that no man oppresse or defraud his brother: for the Lord is the Auenger of all such things, as we foretold and protested vnto you. And to the Colossians; Coloss. 3. He that doth wrong shall receaue (at Gods hand) for the wrong, which he hath done, and there is no respect of persons. Prou. 12. The recompence of a mans hands (that is works) shall (God) giue vnto him, either in this life if he repent, or in the next if he persist. Prou. 11. Lo (saith Salo­mon) the righteous are repayed on earth (he meaneth the euill which they haue done to others) how then the wicked and the sinner? For here in this life is the 1. Pet. 4. time, that iudgement beginneth at the house of God. If it first (begin) with vs (saith Peter) what shall be the end of them, who obey not the Gospell of God? Howsoeuer you tattle that God vt­terly forgetteth his Iustice in afflicting his Church; the Scriptures teach vs, that Iudgement beginneth here at the house of God, for an example of the iust iudgement of God against the wicked, and that the very righteous are repayed on earth the wrongs which they do to others, God by his Apostle openly professing himselfe to be the Auenger of such beleeuers, as wrong or defraud their brethren. Now whether there may be Iudge­ment, Requitall, and Reuenge in this life from God against euill, without some admix­ture of his iustice, though he purpose not to destroy the penitent, I leaue it to the Christian Reader to consider.

Hath not Christ then borne the burden of our sinnes to free vs from all punish­ment?How we are freed from sinne by Christ. Christ hath not presently and generally freed vs and euery part of vs from all corruption and affliction of sinne; he will doe it at his appointed time, when the day of our redemption commeth. In the meane time our inward man is freed, though our 2. Cor. 4. outward man dayly perish. For Christ 1. Cor. 15. must raigne till he haue put all his (and our) enemies vnder his feete. The last enemie, that shall be destroyed is death. Then shall be the end of sinne, death, and corruption in all his; and not before: though we be alreadie redeemed by Christ from it, in Gods purpose and promise (which shall then bee fully performed) and in part, whereof we presently haue an assurance in that our soules are renewed in this life by grace, and receiued in the next to a blessed rest and comfort, till that day rise, when Christ will set a crowne of righteousnesse on them all, that loue his comming. Againe we are presently freed from all that, which is solely the punish­ment of sinne, and hath no farder or other profit or vse in it, then onely to punish and reuenge sinne. And such are none of these things, whereof wee speake. For God in them all hath so tempered a taste of his iustice with his manifold and great mercies, that it is not expedient for vs as yet to be wholly freed from them. This respect pre­uaileth so farre with God, that whiles the world must dure, hee hath subiected his children to the capitall and penall lawes not of Christian Magistrates onely, but euen of infidels also, for that without discipline of the sword, mans state and life on earth can not be maintained. And therefore the politicke and penall lawes of Princes bee not derogatorie to Christes death, nor iniuries to Christian men, as the Libertines would haue them; not because men haue more right to punish then God hath, or their interest to punish could continue, when Gods doth cease; but for that it is ex­pedient and needfull for vs so to bee gouerned in outward and earthly things, till the time come, when Christ will 1 Cor. 15. Vers. 24. put downe all rule and all authoritie and power, that God may be all in all. Now if Christs death repeale not mans lawes, how much lesse Gods irreuocable iudgements fastned to our nature, and not hindering our saluation, but renuing the memoriall of our sinne, lest we should forget it, or neglect it; and teach­ing vs by tollerable and temporall paines, what intollerable torments wee haue esca­ped by Gods mercies towards vs? Wherefore Christ by his obedience vnto death [Page 153] hath shewed vs an example what to follow, and thereby rather confirmed then reuer­sed his Fathers sentence for the time, till he come to wipe all teares from our eyes, and to restore vs to the glorious libertie of the sonnes of God, which he hath presently purchased for vs, though he will not presently execute it.

Lastly the death of Christ doeth not belong, nor any benefite thereof, but to such as repent and beleeue. After his death Christ commanded Luk. 24. repentance and remission of sinnes to be preached in his name among all nations; and with all denounced, Mark. 16. He which will not beleeue, shall be damned. So that neither the incredulous, nor the impenitent haue any part or pardon in Christes death and sufferings. If then all the children of God would fully repent and perfectly beleeue: surely all which they should suffer in this life (I still except the naturall, and as yet vnchangeable corruption of body and soule, which abideth in them from their birth) were onely trials of the graces, and signes of their blessednesse. Matth. 5. Blessed are they (saith our Sauiour) that suffer persecution for righ­teousnesse sake: for theirs is the kingdome of heauen. When you doe well and suffer, taking it 1. Pet. 2. patiently, this (saith Peter) is acceptable vnto God. But what praise is it, if when yee be buf­feted for your faults, you take it patiently? Now how many thousands are there in Christs flocke, which defect in faith and specially in true repentance? Yea how rare are they, that repent when, and as they ought? Then hath Gods iustice cause enough, and enough to punish all, that either shrinke in faith, neglect his will, or slacke repentance; notwithstanding the generall freedome obtained and proclaimed by the death of Christ; and out of this number very few Christians are exempted. Wherefore to make men beleeue, that God hath no iustice, or regardeth not his iustice, to punish them in this life, after hee hath once engraffed them into Christ, because Christ hath suffered all the punishment of their sinnes for them; is but to deceiue them. God is most faithfull in his promises, if we could take assured hold of them; but if wee fall from them by diffidence or disobedience, God wanteth no iustice to aggrauate his hand according to our deserts, though in mercie he spare vs, euen when he striketh vs, and intendeth our conuersion and not our destruction, how sharpe soeuer his plagues be, which would be farre sharper, if his loue towardes vs in Christ Iesu, did not ouer-rule his iust displeasure against our sinnes.

Defenc. pag. 50. l. 31. The case with Christ was cleane otherwise. He needed no amendment, but that which he suffered was right punishment.] Right and proper, if you may be moderator, shall beThe Defenders partition of pu­nishment, appli­ed to Christ, is insufficient and impious. what please you. What is RIGHT AND TRVE PVNISHMENT you neuer de­fine; but pretending sinceritie, when you come to the issue, you enclose your con­ceites with verie, proper, right, and such like phrases, and so take your leaue. But de­clare, if you can, or will vouchsafe to make others partakers of your mysteries, what is proper and right, verie and true punishment. You must define punishment either by the paine, which is suffered; or by the purpose of the punisher, that is, by the cause, for which it is inflicted. You stand not in this place on the paine imposed, but rather on the purpose of the punisher, or cause of the punishment. For if you measure punish­ment by the same paines, then tell vs why the miseries of this life, as penurie, sicknesse, and death, be punishments in the wicked, and not in the godly; since they be the same in both, setting aside the purpose of the punisher, which is different in both. They are, you say, for correction and amendment in the godly, not for destruction and ven­geance, as they are in the wicked. Then the purpose of the punisher, by your intenti­on, maketh the paine to be punishment; which being referred to another end, as in o­ther patients, is no punishment, though it be the selfe same paine in both. And thence you draw your conclusion, that since the sufferings of Christ could not be for corre­ction and amendment in him, therefore Defenc. pag. 52. l. 1. his afflictions euery one, SMALL AND GREAT, were true and proper punishments, and the effects of Gods very wrath for sinne ly­ing vpon him. Otherwise the bodily afflictions which Christ suffered were the selfe same which the godly often suffer; and yet you auouch them in the faithfull to be no punishments, because they serue for correction and amendment in them; which [Page 154] hauing no place in Christ, you conclude his sufferings great and small to be true, right and proper punishments. But Sir how prooue you this diuision, that all the punish­ments, (you call them paines) which God inflicteth in this life, are either for cor­rection or for vengeance properly so called? there is neither sufficiencie, nor pietie in this partition of yours thus applied to Christ. For in the wicked Gods purpose is onely to reuenge sinne, and therefore in the end God allotteth them the iust and full punishment of sinne, which is euerlasting damnation. And in the meane season du­ring the time of his patience, he mitigateth his hand in respect of that which shall follow, but giueth them no inward grace to repent, whereby they are in all their af­flictions hardned and ripened for sorer vengeance, as still repining and murmuring at the hand of God but neuer misliking or leauing their sinnes. In the elect when they are disobedient and impenitent, God persueth their sinnes with corporall and tem­porall plagues, that they may returne and flie vnto him for mercie; to which ende he giueth them grace in the midst of their miseries to acknowledge their offences, and by faith to take hold of his promises made to them in Christ Iesus; and so vpon their submission and conuersion he receiueth them to fauour; whose persons he alwayes loued in his onely Sonne, though he hated and scourged their vncleannesse. In Christ Iesus the case was cleane different from the one and the other. You confesse there was nothing in him to be corrected or amended; then was he not punished for cor­rection. On the other side, much lesse did God purpose to destroy Christs person being his owne and onely Sonne; as he doth the wicked, whose bodies and soules he will destroy in hell: and consequently Christ was not punished to destruction. That is proper to the reprobate, whose persons God hateth, and leaueth in their sinnes, that they may prouoke his iust wrath to their vtter destruction. Then was Christ neither punished as the godly are for amendment, nor as the wicked are for vengeance; and so your partition is false, and defectiue; and all your collections grounded thereon are like the foundation, that is voide of all strength and trueth.

What then was Gods purpose in punishing Christ for our sinnes? euen that whichGods purpose in the death and Crosse of Christ. you alwayes passe by with deafe and dull eares, though it be often repeated and vr­ged vnto you, because you will not be turned from the trade of your hellish paines. Why God would not haue man redeemed, but by the death and passion (that I call the punishment) of Christ Iesus, the Scriptures yeeld many causes, (though of Gods will no cause may be required;) some respecting God himselfe, some concerning Christ, and some regarding vs. Touching God, the crosse of Christ doth commend his wisdome, shew his power, manifest his loue, content his holines, & preserue his iustice. 1. Corin. 1. Christ crucisied (as Paul sayth) is the power of God, and the wisdome of God to them that are saued, howsoeuer the crosse of Christ seeme foolishnesse and weakenesse to them that perish. Then to controle the carnall wisdome of the world, and to confound the pride and strength of Satan and his members, God would vse the basenesse and fee­blenesse of the Crosse in sauing his elect. Also, to witnesse his loue towards vs, he de­creed the same: Iohn 3. So God loued the world, that he gaue his onely begotten Sonne, Ephes. 5. to be an offering and a sacrifice of a sweet smelling sauour vnto God. With which Sacrifice the ho­linesse of God resteth so 2. Pet. 1. well pleased, that he accepteth vs as holy, and Hebr. 10. sanctified by the oblation of the bodie of Iesus Christ once made. The vpholding of Gods Iustice by the death of Christ is often specified in the Scriptures. 1. Corin. 15. By a man (came) death, and by a man the resurrection from the dead. 2. Corin. 5. Him that knew no sinne, God made sinne for vs (to wit, a sacrifice for sinne) that wee should be made the righteousnesse of God in him. Therefore it was Iohn 11. expedient, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole Nation perished not. Esa. 53. He was wounded for our transgressions; and by his stripes are wee healed. The Lord layed vpon him the iniquitie of vs all. Hebr. 9. And where a Testament is, there must be the death of the Testator: for a Testament is confirmed, when men are dead. So that by the Scriptures themselues God decreed the Crosse of Christ in mans redemp­tion, to reueale his wisdome, power, and loue to the world, and wholly to satisfie his ho­linesse [Page 155] and iustice, which were thorowly displeased and prouoked with mans disobedi­ence, but as thorowly recompensed and appeased by the submission and obedience of Christ.

As for Christ himselfe, it is euident by the Scriptures, that his enduring the crosse declared his obedience, patience, humilitie, charitie, perfection and power, in more effe­ctuall maner, than without it he could haue done. For therein he Phil. 2. emptied and hum­bled himselfe, and became obedient vnto death, euen to the death of the crosse. 1. Pet. 2. When hee was reuiled, he reuiled not againe; when he suffered, he threatned not. He Esa. 53. was oppressed and afflicted, yet did he not open his mouth. For so Galat. 2. he loued (vs) that he gaue himselfe (for vs;) Iohn 15. and greater loue than this hath no man, to bestow his life for his friends. But Rom. 5. God setteth out his loue towards vs, that whiles we were yet sinners Christ died for vs. Once (then) 1. Pet. 3. he suffered, the iust for the vniust, that he might bring vs to God; and being Hebr. 2. consummate through affliction, was made the Prince of (our) Saluation. For in that he suffered and was tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted, and became a merci­full and faithfull high Priest, to make reconciliation for the sinnes of the people. And Rom. 14. there­fore he died and rose againe, that he might be Lord of the dead and the liuing, and Hebr. 2. through death destroy him that had power of death, euen the diuell.

On our behalfe it was not needlesse, that Christ should die the death of the crosse. For besides that we are 1 Cor. 6. bought with a price, lest we should be our owne, euen with the 1. Pet. 1. precious bloud of Christ, as of a Lambe vnspotted and vndefiled, and Rom. 5. reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne, which couenant is irreuocable, being sealed with his bloud: by his crosse Christ 1. Pet. 2. left vs an example how we should follow his steps, and be 1. Pet. 4. par­takers of his sufferings; that when his glorie shall appeare, we may be glad and reioyce. For it is a 2. Tim. 2. true saying, if we be dead with him, we shall liue with him; if we suffer (with him) we shall raigne with him. Rom. 6. We are buried then by Baptisme into his death, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorie of his Father; so we should also walke in newnesse of life: knowing this, that our olde man is crucified with him, that the bodie of sinne might be de­stroyed, that hencefoorth we should not serue sinne. 2. Cor. 5. He died for all, that they which liue should not hencefoorth liue vnto themselues, but to him, which died for them, and rose againe.

Infinite are the places of Scripture witnessing the causes, effects, and fruits of Christs death on the Crosse; all which this Dreamer must denie or delude, before he can de­fend, that Gods purpose in Christes sufferings was only to punish our sinne lying on him. For if Gods purposes in appointing Christes Crosse, were so acceptable to the Father, so honourable to the Sonne, and so profitable for man, as the Scriptures men­tion; with what face can it be said, that God punished his Sonne only for vengeance? or that whatsoeuer Christ suffered (all his life long) specially at his death, was Defenc. pag. 51. l. 4. verie wrath and vengeance from God properly taken? Christ suffered the same things here on earth, which the godly likewise do in this life, as appeareth by the history of his death and passion; and other paines or deaths in Christ the Scriptures doe not specifie. Gods counsell in decreeing the Crosse of Christ for mans redemption, considering the true desert of our sinne and terrible vengeance prouided for others, was varie fa­uourable and fatherly, not ouerpressing the patience of Christes humane nature, nor wearying his obedience; and had in it farre more gracious and glorious intents and euents, than our afflictions can or ought any way to match or approch. If then Gods fauour to his elect make their sufferings in this life no wrath, nor vengeance, nor so much as punishments; why should the exceeding loue and admirable honor where­with God accepted and aduanced the death of his Sonne for mans saluation, seeme to any sober man verie wrath, true vengeance, or the proper punishment of sinne pro­uided and reserued for reprobate men and angels?

It was not for correction, you say.] What then? ergo for vengeance? Who be­ing in his right wits would so reason? God afflicteth his Saints often times for pro­bation, for perfection, for coronation, as the Scriptures auouch, and not for correction. May a man thence conclude by your Logick, that these afflictions of the Godly are [Page 156] true punishment and proper vengeance? Your selfe most withstand it. Why then since Christes afflictions had in them a cleere illustration of Gods wisdome, power, and loue towards man, somewhat blemished and obscured in mans fall by Satans craft, and a full recompence to his holinesse and iustice, neglected and irritated by mans vnrigh­teousnesse, besides the obedience, sufficience, and preualence of his Sonne thereby de­clared; why should, I say, those afflictions of Christ great and small, during his life and at his death, seeme to any man that is well aduised, the true wrath, proper vengeance and right punishment that was prepared for sinners? Yea since the proper vengeance and right punishment of sinne must be common to sinfull men with the sinfull An­gels, in as much as they both sinned, and shall both receaue the due wages of sinne; how can the corporall afflictions of this life, wherein the diuels can not partake with men, be called the proper vengeance and right punishment of sinne? And who but you, hearing our Sauiour pronounce that euerlasting fire is the full payment and pro­per punishment of wicked and accursed men and Angels, would labour with such loose and lewd collections to bring Christ Iesus within the compasse of the full punishment and proper vengeance due to sinne? Wherefore take backe your riotous and irreli­gious termes: As they are not prooued by any Scripture, so are they not to be suffered in Christian Religion, because they are but cloudes to cloke the fantasticall frame of your new hell. In the sharpnesse of the punishment exacted by God on the manhood of his owne Sonne for our sinnes, though farre different from that which the wicked doe and shall feele, and which the Scriptures call the wrath to come; (wherein the di­uels shall haue their portion, euen in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone,) God would haue vs learne, how much he detesteth our sinnes; how easie all the plagues, which we suffer in this life, are in respect of that we deserue; how infinite the loue and mercy of God was towards vs, to lay the burden, which we could not haue borne, on the shoulders of his onely Sonne, who for his dignitie, innocencie, and euery way sufficiencie was able to quench that wrath, that euerlastingly and into­lerably would haue burnt against vs to our finall and perpetuall destruction of bo­dy and soule. For if Gods owne Sonne, though he did recompence our sinnes with his infinite humilitie, obedience, and sanctitie, was yet pursued vnto death in most painefull and reprochfull manner for our sakes, before we could be quited from the guilt and load of our sinnes; had we appeared in the iust iudgement of God to re­ceaue the reward of our manifold iniquities, what could haue beene the end thereof but a most dreadfull damnation of body and soule to hell fire for euer with the de­sperate and damned spirits? This God would haue vs obserue in the death of his Sonne, though there be many other points of Gods wisedome, power, and loue to­wards Christ himselfe, which the Scriptures inclose in the Crosse of Christ.

That then Gods wrath and displeasure against our sinnes appeared in the Crossev [...]ngeance pro­per to the wic­ked appeared not in the Cr [...]sse of Christ. of Christ, I doe not deny, speaking of wrath after the manner of the Sacred Scrip­tures. But that any wrath or vengeance proper to the wicked was therein offered or executed on Christ, or that he suffered the iust and full punishment allotted to others for sinne, (Saue that his sufferings were in his person the full price of our Redemp­tion, I meane a most sufficient satisfaction and recompence for all the sinnes of the world) I find no mention made thereof in all the Scriptures, nor see any iust cause or proofe thereof alleaged by you in all your writings. For since you will not endure, that any thing executed on the godly shall be truely called wrath; it is euident that the wrath which you imagine Christ suffered, must be proper to the wicked, before it can be rightly called wrath; because the godly feele no part of Gods wrath, litle nor great, as you suppose. Now that Christ suffered the wrath of God prouided for the sinnes of the wicked only; and no way common to the godly; this is both a false, and a wicked proposition of yours, & though you euery where vrge it, you no where prooue it, but boldly, as your fashion is, affirming it, you thinke the world bound to embrace it.

I find by the Scriptures that the wrath which Christ suffered in Soule and Body, [Page 157] differed from that which is proper to the wicked as well in the Nature and measure of the paines, as in the purpose of the punisher, and inward peace of the sufferer, and in all the consequents of the paines themselues. In this world the wicked find subtraction of all grace and fauour, confusion and desperation; in the world to come exclusion from glorie, Malediction, and damnation wholy and euerlastingly light on them; none of which may be transferred to Christ without intolerable blasphemie. Yet paine you thinke Christ suffered, and more then paine the wicked and damned doe not suffer.] Were that true which is most false, that the damned suffer no more then pain, though indeed in hell cuery thing doth paine them, yet all paines are not of the same nature and kind; and no paines felt in this life come neere the paines of hell whereof this mortall life and flesh is not capable. The paine of fire we see doth presently cut of this life, and some diseases so much heate the body, that they doe the like; and yet the paine and force of this naturall fire, or of any sicknesse is nothing comparable to the fury of hell fire, for which the bodies of the wicked must be made immortall, be­fore they can endure it. All aches and agues doe paine the body, all feares and sor­rowes afflict the soule and spirit of man. Shall we thence conclude, that all men at all times, when they are pained or grieued, suffer the paines of hell, because it is paine which the damned doe suffer? It is more then prophane abusing and deluding the terrible iudgements of God against sinne to suppose, that all paines of body and soule are hell paines in nature and kind, which you wrap vnder the fold of proper wrath and right punishment of sinne, because they are paines. Wherefore they must either be the selfe same paines, that God in his iust and fierce wrath inflicted on the damned; or you shall neuer inferre by phrases of your owne making, which only serue to hide your owne meaning, that Christ suffered the paines of hell.

As for Gods wrath against sinne, it hath many degrees and parts by the verdict ofGods wrath a­gainst sinne hath many de­grees and parts. holy Scripture, though you will not heare thereof. For as Gods blessings & benefits, when he first made man, were of his heauenly goodnes richly prouided for man, and plentifully powred on the body and soule of man; as well for the leading of this life in plenty, safety, and delight, as for the surer attaining of euerlasting ioy and blisse in an other place: so when man by sinne fell from God, by iustice God depriued him and his of all those earthly and bodily fauours and comforts no lesse then of the spi­rituall and inward gifts and graces of the mind; by that meanes making way to his euerlasting and dreadfull Iudgements against sinne. Now if these externall things bestowed on man in his first creation, were iustly called, and must be confessed in their kind, to be the blessings and fauours of God afforded to all mankind, when he made man and the whole world for his vse; then out of question the taking them away from man, and subiecting him by iustice to the contrary for sinne committed, may as tru­ly be named, and must be beleeued, to be the signes and effects of Gods displeasure against sinne, which the Scripture nameth wrath. And so God calleth either of them when heDeut. 28. promiseth the one to the obseruers of his Law, andDeut. 28. threatneth the other to the breakers thereof; who vseth not to promise or threaten words but deeds. Nei­ther hath it any reason because the reiecting of man from the greater and higher bles­sings of inward grace and eternall blisse was farre the sorer and sharper punishment of mans sinne, that therefore the withdrawing of these should be no degree nor effect of Gods wrath against sinne; no more then the losse of a legge or an arme should be counted no mayme, because a man hath an head and an hart, which are more prin­cipall parts of his body. Wherefore though in comparison they may be iustly di­minished, and abased farre beneath the worthinesse of the rest of Gods blessings, which are reserued for his Children in an other life; yet can they not be denyed to be Gods blessings euen in this life: and if to giue them to man, when he was first made, were the fauour and bountie of God towards man, which no Christian may deny; to take them from man for sinne, must truely argue Gods displeasure against sinne, not in improper speech, as you gloze, but in a lesse degree then those, which bring with them perpetuall subuersion of Body and Soule.

And when the Scriptures meane to expresse the spirituall and eternall wrath of God, they doe it not by proprietie of words as you pretend; but by different circum­stances: either of the TIME after this life, when no wrath is executed but that which is euerlasting; as Christ 1. Thess. 1. deliuereth vs from the wrath to come; and thou Rom. 2. heapest vp wrath against the day of wrath, which is the day of iudgement; or of the PERSONS, who are wicked, and the Rom. 9. vessels of wrath prepared to destruction, and for whom is re­serued the mist of darknesse for euer; as, Ephes. 5. for such things commeth the wrath of God on the Children of vnbeliefe; or of the CONTINVANCE which neuer ceaseth, as Iohn 3. the wrath of God abideth on him that beleeueth not; or of the HIGTH thereof when it is full, as 1. Thess. 2. the wrath of God is come vpon them to the vttermost: or of the CON­TRARY when it is eternall life; as, 1. Thess. 5. God hath not appointed vs vnto wrath, but to ob­taine Saluation by Iesus Christ: or of the CONSEQVENTS which are suddaine de­struction and such like; as, Psal. 2. kisse the Sonne, least he be angry, and ye perish in the way; when his wrath shall suddenly burne, blessed are they that trust in him. By these and such like particulars we may perceiue, when the Scriptures speake of the one wrath, and when of the other; but otherwise the wordes are common to both, as also the cause which is sinne. O Lord, saith Moses, Exod. 32. why doth thy wrath waxe hote against thy people? turne from thy fierce wrath and desist from this euill towards thy People. And againe, Deut. 9. I fell downe (saith he) fortie daies and fortie nights before the Lord, because of all your sinnes, which yee had sinned, doing wickedly in the sight of the Lord and prouoking him. For I was afraid of the wrath and indignation, wherewith the Lord was kindled against you to destroy you, and the Lord heard me at that time also. Exceeding many are the places, which teach vs, that our iniquities auert the outward blessing, of this life, and that our sinnes Iere. 5. hinder good things from vs; Though God after that, comfort his people, when their Esa. 40. warrefare is accomplished, and they haue receaued sufficient Correction at the hands of God for all their sinnes. Surely these warnings of the holy Ghost are not empty words or improper speeches; but effectuall and faithfull instructions for the Church of God; to learne them, that God doth visite their sinnes, when they forget to repent and obey; though he spare them in comparison of that wrath, which is effunded on the wicked. And therefore the name of wrath is rightly and truely applyed in the Scriptures, euen to those afflictions wherewith God scourgeth his owne Children for their negligence and impenitence, though God haue an other and greater, which is eternall wrath, laid vp in store for the Reprobate, who die without Repentance and Remission of their sinnes.

Howsoeuer the strife for words standeth, wherein I confesse I may not be brought to disalow the tongue and pen of the holy Ghost; it is most certaine, that the Gos­pel reporteth of Christs sufferings nothing, but what was common to him with his members, euen in this life where he suffered. The Apostles plainely prooue as much, to wit that we haue Philip. 3. fellowship and 2. Co [...]in. 1. communion with Christs afflictions, and are 1. Pet. 4. con­formed to his death. Now there is no communion, but where the same things are com­mon to both, though the degrees may differ. And you your selfe, when it maketh for you, can vrge, that the Apostle speaking of Christs sufferings, saith; Hebr. 4. He was temp­ted in all things like (to vs) yet without sinne. So that in my iudgement it is a most cleere case, as well by the witnesse of Scripture, as by your owne confession; that all Christes sufferings were LIKE, yea the SAME that ours are, as being common to both; and consequently if you any way vnderstand what belongeth to trueth or reason, the suf­ferings of the godly must either bee wrath as well as Christes, or if their bee not, his were not, since they were the same. And so the godly must either in all their afflicti­ons, small and great, suffer as Christ did the proper wrath of God, and true paines of hell, which you make equiualent: or if the godly doe not so suffer, then Christ did not so suffer. If you flie to the purpose of the punisher, which was different in Christ and his members, and thinke there to succour your selfe, you come to short: the pur­pose of God in Christes afflictions, as I haue shewed by the Scriptures, was farre more fauourable and honourable in Christ, then it can bee to any of the elect. And there­fore [Page 159] Gods purpose in Christes punishment will far der free him from hell paines, then it will any of the faithfull.

The proportion of the pain which Christ suffered, & the inward peace of the suffe­rer, will proue the same. For where the paines of hell exceed the patience of men and Angels, and are no way possible to bee suffered in the weaknesse of our mortall bo­dies; the measure of Christes paine was so proportioned to the strength of his flesh, that it neither ouerwhelmed his life, nor his patience. And though his sweate were like bloud in his earnest prayer and Agonie, yet no Scripture decideth, whether that were for paine, feare, or zeale; and that dured but a while in the Garden, where as af­ter, when his afflictions and paines were at sorest, he shewed no signe of shrinking ei­ther at the torments of his body, or at the affliction of his minde; but as the Apostle saith, Hebr. 12. For the ioy set before him, endured the Crosse, and despised the shame; not wearied nor fainting in minde, but with most perfect obedience, and quiet patience persisting to the ende. This conflict betweene paine and patience, to serue Gods glorie and obey Gods will, Christ proposeth to all his members on the same condition that it was offered to his humane nature. Reuel. 3. To him that ouercommeth (saith he) will I giue to sit with me in my throne, euen as I ouercame, and [...]it with my Father in his throne.

As for the consequents of hell paines, it is so brutish blasphemie to affirme them of Christ, that I forbeare to obiect them. I haue often named them, and you say, you Defenc. pag. 52. li. 8. abhorre such blasphemies as well as [...] doe, that Christ so suffered hell paines.] But Sir, you & your friends must shew by the Scriptures that God hath seuered these consequents I meane, reiection, reprobation, confusion, malediction diction, desperation, and such like, from the true paines of hell. The Scripture proposeth them as necessarie and infallible conse­quents to the true paines of hell: You will seuer them, because otherwise Christ must either not suffer the true paines of hell, which euerteth all your new Doctrine; or he must also suffer these, which the Scriptures annexe to the true paines of hell. If you confesse the first, that Christ did not suffer the true paines of hell; the Question is well ended: If you seuer these consequents from the true paines of hell, shew by what authoritie of sacred Scriptures you doe it; and then you may be excused from lewd and wicked presumption. For if God by his word reuealed hath ioyned them toge­ther, you doe or should know what sacriledge it is for your pleasure to pull them in sunder. Let your Reader therefore iudge, whether you can be quited from the one, except you shew good warrant for the other; which as yet you neither haue done, nor offered to doe.

Defenc. pag. 53. l. 6. Your selfe graunt expresly, that the wrath of God is hell; indeede onely it causeth hell to be cruell; yea you grant it to be sharper then hell. So that we see hereby how vainely you say; out of this proposition, Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God for sinne, I shall neuer conclude, ergo he suffered the true paines of hell. I haue here shewed you I trust that this followeth well, seeing the wrath of God, which Christ fel [...] in his spirit, was his right and proper wrath, albeit he suffered not all, nor the whole wrath of God, nor euery part thereof, iust as the damned doe.] Here you see your full purpose is to conclude, that Christ suffred for vs the true paines of hell, though it hath beene your policie to conceale so much from the Reader all this while. And indeede howsoeuer you dissemble it, because you can no way prooueit, The death of Christes soule, and the true paines of hell or of the Damned are the maine markes which you shoote at; though you closely carie it in other termes, which are more generall and ambiguous, as the wrath of God, and the punishment of sinne, to keepe your Reader from discouering your foolish reasons, and reiecting your wicked deui­ces. But cough vp your conceites freely, and wander not thus about a wood of words, to shew your contentious spirit, or at least to hide your hatefull mysteries. Here you haue shewed, you trust, that it followeth well, seeing the wrath, that Christ felt in his spirit, was right and proper wrath.] You haue shewed vs what you intend; but neither here, nor else where doe you shew by what grounds of reason, and trueth you can inferre it. Christ suffered proper wrath and that in spirit, you say.] You neuer went about to define or describe what proper wrath is; much lesse haue you any way prooued that, which [Page 160] Christ suffered, to be proper wrath. And now on the sudden you bend vp your bri­stles, and boast you haue shewed, that Christ suffered the true paines of hell. But by what Scriptures I pray you haue you shewed it, or by what Fathers? Or if you haue neither of those to deriue your doctrine from; what groundes of reason haue you produced for it? You haue roued ignorantly, confusedly, and absurdly at the suffe­rings of mans soule; you haue filled our eares with certaine new phrases of proper, ve­rie, and right wrath and vengeance for sinne; but first and last you haue proued no­thing; nay I see not so much as any offer of proofe, but a bolde proiect of trifles and termes to support your errors.

But I grant expresly, that the wrath of God is hell.] Hauing shewed by sundrie Fathers the verie page before, that the wrath of God is often taken for the effects thereof, and so for any punishment which God inflicteth for sinne; I granted that hell and Conclus. pa. 247. li. 20. & 21. all the [...]orments there, mightiustly be called the wrath of God, because they aret the sharpest effects of Gods wrath against sinne. What conclude you thence? ergo euerie effect or degree of Gods wrath is hell. If you clamper vs such conclusions, you are fitter to ring a bell, than to write a booke. What shew of reason hath this illa­tion of yours? The wrath of God is applied to all the paines and punishments of sinne, and so by consequent to hell, as to the greatest vengeance that God taketh of men or diuels for sinne. Will you hence inferre, hell is the greatest punishment of sinne, ergo hell is all the punishment that God inflicteth for sinne, or whatsoeuer God inflicteth for sinne, is hell? By this Logike, a rotten tooth, a gowtie toe, a broken head, or a lame legge, are the true paines of hell, and all men liuing and dying are in the paines of hell. But you will create vs a new compasse of hell, that shall containe all that the wicked doe suffer in this life or elsewhere, be it neuer so little.] If you will fall to creating of new helles, shew your commission; otherwise you may create your selfe a woorse condition than you are ware of. Thinke you that any wise or godlie Reader will rest himselfe vpon such inuentions or such conclusions as these be?

Defenc. pa. 53. li 4. Who can say how little or how small the paine was which Christ suffered?] You onely can tell how great it was; for you say, Christ Ibidem pag. 52 li. 26. suffered a sense of Gods wrath equall to hell it selfe, and to all the tor [...]ents thereof. For this, if you would spare vs as well proofes as words, we might at length perhaps beleeue you meant some trueth. Why presume you to determine a iust equalitie in Christes sufferings to the very paines of hell vp­on your owne head? What Scripture teacheth you so to say?Defenc. pag. 53. li. 5. Nay, who can (say you) decla [...] or comprehend the infinite greatnesse of it?] You haue comprehended and de­clared the iust measure of it; for you make it equall with hell. And yet, as constant in this as in all other things, you presently adde, that [Christs Defenc. pag. 52. li. 32. anguish might very well be, and was no doubt infinite, euen in those bodily stripes and wounds, whose paines otherwise were Christ a [...]d not suffer paines truely infinite. finite.] Where if you take infinite for great, or aboue mens reach and knowledge, as sometimes the word is vsed, then speake you nothing to the purpose. For Christes paines may be great and intolerable to vs, though nothing neere the paines of hell. But if you take infinite, as contrarie to finite, which you do in this place by opposing it to finite, then infinite indeed is more than hell: for the paines of hell are finite in de­gree, though infinite in hauing no end. Howbeit, in the meane while you wrong the Godhead of Christ, in whom nothing is infinite, besides his Diuine Nature, and the force thereof. So that if Christ did suffer paines truely infinite, his Godhead must suffer, which is infinite blasphemie; by reason his manhood being a creature could not, nor might not suffer but that which was finite, both in waight and end. Such spe­culations you broach out of your owne brest, without any likelihood of trueth or concurrence with the sacred Scriptures; and then you aske Who can limit or measure [...] Defenc. pag. 52. li. 28. the furie of Gods seuere iustice against sinne?] As if God who is truely infinite as well in power, as in all other points, did his vttermost against Christ; and the creature in Christ were able to beare the brunt of the most that Gods iustice and power could in­flict vpon him. Such desperate vntrueths well become your sobrietie, who will say any thing, so you may haue some shift of words to shrowd your selfe vnder: but the [Page 161] Scriptures will teach you, that Christes sufferings were of infinite price in respect of the person who was God and man, not of infinite paine which exceedeth the power and strength of all creatures.

I aske, do you grant, that Christ suffered Gods wrath in spirit, as the Apostle (1. Thess. 5.) distinguisheth the spirit and the soule?] I answere, do you heare, that you grosly mistake the Apostle, if you make the soule and the spirit two seuerall substances in man? other­wise if they be but one, your question is very childish. For the immortall substance of mans soule suffereth, whether it be by her sense, affections, vnderstanding, or will. And this is no Sophistrie deceiuing you with the word soule; but it is the recalling you to conceiue rightly of the soule of man, which is an immortall and spirituall sub­stance, subiect to paine as well by her vnderstanding and sense, as by her affections and will; and by what other meanes soeuer it pleaseth God to punish her. As for the wrath, which you would haue suffered in Christs spirit, when you tell vs what you meane by wrath, whether the apprehension of Gods wrath against our sinne, or the absolute impression of paine from the immediate hand of God; or the due conside­ration of the case wherein Christ stood, when he suffered for our sinnes, which might iustly breed feare, care and sorrow in his soule, besides the affliction of bodily paines and anguish, which his immortall and humane spirit must needs discerne and feele; you shall receiue a fuller answere. Till then holde vs excused, if we spend not time to guesse & grope after your blinde and hid fansies. Howbeit, whatsoeuer Christ suffe­red in his soule, it was religious and meritorious in him, I meane euen the feare, sorow and smart, which hee humbly, obediently, and patiently suffered, as from the hand of God, whosoeuer were the meanes: and other wrath than that, you shall neuer be able to proue was inflicted on Christs spirit or soule.

Defenc. pag. 52. li. 28. Who can say, but that this was as hot and scorching as hell fire it selfe?] We see then your forwardnesse to haue it so; but withall your foolishnesse, that daunting all others as vnpriuie to Gods secrets, and Christes sufferings, you only take vpon you to tell vs out of your casting boxe, how great and how hot the paine was, which Christ suffered in soule; euen as great and as hot as hell fire it selfe. What dreames be these to mocke men withall, and to fraight the Christian faith with? As if you had of late receiued some Reuelation from heauen, that Christes paine was full as hot as hell fire. I will not diminish the paines which the Sonne of God suffered for our sakes; but am well content to aggrauate them to the highest, so farre as the Scriptures giue me any light or leading; but you that extenuate his paines described in the Scriptures, and deuise other paines for him as hot as hell fire, no where testified by the Holy Ghost, what defence can you bring for your doings? (Who can say no?) Nay who can say yea, that doth not rush headlong into Gods secret counsels, as you doe? Be these the proofes whereon you pinne the paines of hell suffered in Christes soule? Who can say they were not as hot and scorching as hell fire it selfe?] Frie in your follie, I wish you no worse fire; if I knew not your vaine, I should thinke you sicker than you are.

I haue no doubt but Christes paine on the Crosse was proportioned to his pati­ence; which God meant to proue, though not to ouerpresse: otherwise the measure of his paine, saue that it exceeded not the strength of his manhood, as I do not know, no more doeth any man liuing, except hee will deceiue himselfe with his owne dreames, as this Discourser doth. For though we may by nature, in some sort, conie­cture how grieuous it was for Christ to hang three houres by the woundes of his hands and feet, all his bones being vnioynted; yet know we not how farre the power and iustice of God made way to that paine, who can by any meanes, as well as without all meanes, increase paine to what degree he will. For my part therefore I will not meddle with any certaine measure of Christes paines felt in his bodie or soule, by which his soule might easily be afflicted as farre as his humane strength could stretch: but the matching and euening of it with hell fire, I take to be a presumptuous and ir­religious deuice of this Dreamer, for the reasons which I haue formerly shewed; to wit, that hell paines are not executed in this life, where Christ suffered; nor sufferable [Page 162] to the bodie, which is mortall; nor tolerable to the strength of men or angels. Now though the gifts and graces of Gods Spirit in the soule of Christ exceeded the mea­sure of angels, as well for himselfe who is Lord and Iudge ouer all, as for vs that re­ceiue of his fulnesse; yet in his crucifying, the Scriptures note his infirmitie, not his infinitie, and auouch him by the suffering of death, to be inferiour to the angels, and not in strength of flesh to be superiour vnto them, who are not able to endure hell paines with patience, as we finde by triall in diuels. Wherefore assure thy sel