The suruey of popery vvherein the reader may cleerely behold, not onely the originall and daily incrementes of papistrie, with an euident confutation of the same; but also a succinct and profitable enarration of the state of Gods Church from Adam vntill Christs ascension, contained in the first and second part thereof: and throughout the third part poperie is turned vp-side downe.

The answere.

I say first, that all the fathers as well old as latter writers, confesse that S. Paules discourse is altogither metaphoricall; & [ 1] consequently y^t no doctrine of faith can be grounded thereupon.

I say secondly, that the old writers dissent one from another, in the exposition of his text. For S. Chrysostome vnderstandeth [ 2] it of hell fire;* 1.1 S. Hierome of Gods examination in the day of general iudgment; S. Gregorie of the fire of tribulation in this life; S. Ambrose and S. Theodoret, of the fire of Gods iudge∣mēt, & others otherwise. Gregorius Magnus hath these expresse words;* 1.2 Quamuis hoc de igne tribulationis in hac vita nobis ad∣hibito possit intelligi; albeit this place may be vnderstood, of the fire of tribulation which we suffer in this life. Out of which words I note, that although this Gregory thought there was a purgatory of small sins after this life, yet did he confesse, y^t this place could proue no such thing. Hereunto I adde, that if either this text, or any other had been a sufficient warrantize for pur∣gatory; aswel the Greekes as the ancient fathers, would haue receiued it; both which their own Roffensis denieth,* 1.3 as is alrea∣dy proued. I say thirdly, that it cānot possibly be vnderstood of purgatory: and I proue it effectually. First, because al martyrs [ 3] go straight to heauen, as al papists confesse. Secondly, because al such as haue plenary pardons frō the pope, escape purgatory, & go the ready way to heauē. Thirdly because, Ieremy, Iob. Ioh. Baptist, the blessed virgine,* 1.4 & sundry others (in whose passions of supererogation, they build the treasure of the church and popish pardons) could neuer come in purgatory; and yet doth the text say, that all aswel good as bad, must be tried by that fire, whereof the apostle speaketh in this place.

I say fourthly, y^t the apostle here speaketh of y^e fire of proba∣tion, but not of purgation, as y^e papists would haue him to doe.* 1.5 These are y^e words; vniuscuius{que} opus quale sit, ignis probabit.

the fire shal trie euery ones worke, of what sorte it is. Which S. Austen well obserued, when he wrote in this maner; Ignis de quo locutus est eo loco apostolus Paulus, talis debet intelligi, vt ambo per eum transeant;* 1.6 id est & qui aedificat supra hoc fun∣damentum, aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos; & qui aedificat ligna, foenum, stipulam. The fire whereof the apostle Paul spea∣keth in that place, must be vnderstood to be such an one, that both sorts may passe through it; that is, aswel he that buildeth vpon this foundation, gold, siluer, or pretious stones, as he that buildeth wood, hay, or stubble.

I say fiftly, that all thinges spoken of in this text, are taken [ 5] metaphorically, gold, siluer, and pretious stones, doe signifie sound doctrine; timber, hay, and stubble, signifie, false doctrine; the builders are such as teach that doctrine; the day signifieth time, the daughter of trueth; and the fire signifieth Gods spirit, which reuealeth all trueths,* 1.7 & maketh false doctrine knowen. This exposition is gathered out of the circumstances of the text it selfe, out of S. Ambrose, and S. Austen, and out of late popish writers. For their owne Hofmeisterus (if my memory faile me not) and their Gagnaeius also, haue this interpretation in flat and expresse termes. It is long since I read them, and I haue not now their bookes at hand; otherwise, I would haue alledged their wordes.

I say sixtly, that al such as would ground popish purgatory [ 6] vpon this text, are enforced to confesse and admit manifold ab∣surdities. And for triall hereof, togither with that which is al∣ready said; these wordes of our Iesuite Bellarmine may suffice. Respondeo, nos cogi ab ipso textu ad aequiuocationem non vnam, sed duas admittendas.* 1.8 I answere, that the very text doth com∣pell vs, to admit more then one equiuocation.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Vide istos patres in hunc locum.
• * 1.2

  Gregor. li••. 4 dialog. cap. 39.
• * 1.3

  Roff. contra Lu∣ther. ar. 18.
• * 1.4

  This third illa∣tion is prooued in my Motiues,
• * 1.5

  1. Cor. 3. v. 13.
• * 1.6

  Aug. in Euchirid. cap. 68. tom. 3.
• * 1.7

  Popish purgatory is built vpon rot∣ten foundations.
• * 1.8

  Bellar. in lib. 1. de purg. c. 4. p, 1387