The effect of certaine sermons touching the full redemption of mankind by the death and bloud of Christ Iesus wherein besides the merite of Christs suffering, the manner of his offering, the power of his death, the comfort of his crosse, the glorie of his resurrection, are handled, what paines Christ suffered in his soule on the crosse: together, with the place and purpose of his descent to hel after death: preached at Paules Crosse and else where in London, by the right Reuerend Father Thomas Bilson Bishop of Winchester. With a conclusion to the reader for the cleering of certaine obiections made against said doctrine.

The Conclusion to the Reader, for the cleering of certaine obiections made against the doctrine before handled.

I Promised thee (Christian reader) in y^e preface of this booke, to giue thée a ta•••• in the conclusion how rashly & weak∣ly the doctrine, which thou hast now read, was confuted, before it was printed, by one that professeth a 1.1

He could not forbeare but imploy his talent to cleare the holy cause (as he calleth it) from all the corrupt fansies and vaine imaginations of men:

which, God willing, I meane now to performe. Thou must not looke that I will wast time and paper to settle a giddie head, or stoppe a running rounge; but when by some particu∣lars I haue made it appeare how vnfit he is to bée refuted, or so much as regarded by mée; I will leaue him to the depth of his follies. For though he point plainlie to my sermons, in directing his treatise:b 1.2 contrary to certaine errors publikly preached in London, and sticketh not to c 1.3 name me; yet because he flyeth from the state of the chiefe Question which I im∣pugned, and taketh the paines to ouer skip all my authori∣ties with silence, if not with contempt, and in reporting my reasons forgetteth and dissembleth what pleaseth himselfe, as also in the defence of his holie cause he roueth as he li∣steth, neither kéeping himself to any order, nor bringing any matter of moment, but confusedlie powring out the hastie resolutions of his owne braines, spiced euerie where with ignorant & absurd positions: neither my leasure nor my li∣king suffer me to seeke him out, that hath so farre lost him∣selfe, nor to vouchsafe him an answere, that so proudlie despi∣seth all authoritie and antiquitie, which sorteth not with his fansie. I will therefore shew thée (good Reader) some exam∣ples

of his insolent reiecting the Fathers, of his forgetfull or wilfull altering my reasons, of his impertinent proouing that which is not questioned, and skipping that which should bée prooued, of his erroneous and dangerous assertions, of his intolerable ignorance in the tongue, whereof he so much vaunteth, and then leaue thée to God, if thou loath not the rea∣ding, as I did the writing before thou come to the end.

Where I tooke for my text, these words of S. Paule, a 1.4 God forbid that I should reioice but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified to me and I to the world. This cōfuter would beare men in hand, that I mistooke my text, & forced a false conclusion from it. b 1.5

This (saith hée) is not onely an obiection, but euen a foundation and principall ground of this errour, but so mistaken and forced as nothing may be more. My reasō hée maketh to be this; Christs soule was not crucified but only his bodie; therefore Christs bodie onlie suffe∣red, and not his soule.

By this (gentle reader) it may plainlie be perceiued, how well this gainsaier obserued my proofs. I drewe no reason from these words, but proposing them for my theme, tooke occasion from them to laie downe; first the contents of Christs crosse, how far it extended; and then the effects of Christs crosse, how much it performed, which is the generall methode of the whole treatise. In the contents of Christs crosse my words are these. Rightly then maie the Crosse note all manner of miseries, forsomuch as our Sauiour going from the garden to the graue suffered all sorts of afflicti∣ons;* 1.6 which I before specifying amongst others named these, shame, reproch, and all sorts of deadlie paines, besides heauines of hart, and agonie of mind, which oppressed him in the garden; and this I made no different signification, but rather a partici∣pation of the crosse of Christ. When I came to Christs suffe∣rings on the Tree, as Peter speaketh, I vsed these plaine words: the rest (of his torments) which went before, not being excluded as superfluous, but continued and increased by that ••harp &. extreme martirdome which he suffered on the Crosse.

Did I then make any such conclusion out of these words of Paul as you imagine, Sir confuter? or did rather your wit & memorie so slenderlie serue you, that you could not conceiue or carry away the maine methode of my sermons, distinctly laid downe at my first entrance into this matter? But as you begin with my Theme, so you continue with the whole discourse, mistaking, forgetting, peruerting and maiming all that I alledged or concluded.

Neuerthelesse you take it to bee cleare,d 1.7 that this text was mistaken by me, for the Apostle here speaketh not of the personall sufferings of Christ, but of the godlie, which they suffer for Christs truth sake. To dimme ties twy light is clearer then Sunne shine; and to a man of your vnderstanding falsehood may bee clearer then truth; but knowe you Sir H. I. that I mis∣tooke not my text. For albeit the CROSSE bee some times taken for the afflictions of the godlie; yet THE CROSSE OF CHRIST is no where in the scriptures so taken. Again though we be e 1.8 permitted and f 1.9 commanded to reioice in our afflictions, yet to make it a thing detestable to reioice in anie thing else, as the Apostle here doth, by saying, God for∣bid that I should reioice but in the Crosse of Christ; hath no ground in diuinitie. Himselfe saieth else where; g 1.10 Of such a man (as was taken vp into Paradise) will I reioice; of my selfe I will not reioyce, except it bee of mine infir∣mities. Our Sauiour saieth to his Disciples, h 1.11 Reioice rather because your names are written in heauen. But of Christ crucified, it is pietie and dutie to saie, God forbid that wee should reioice but in the Crosse of Christ. For as to the Co∣rinths the Apostle refuseth i 1.12 all knowledge saue of Christ, and him crucified: so here hee renounceth all reioycing saue in the Crosse of Christ, that is in Christ crucified. This to bee the full and plaine meaning of the Apostle in this place is to me as cleare as daie light, and I hope will so seeme to thee (Christian Reader) if thou marke the words of Saint Paul in the 12. verse of this verie Chapter, where hee chargeth

the false Apostles with vrging Circumcision, because they would auoid persecution for the crosse of Christ:* 1.13 They con∣straine you (saith hee) to be circumcised, onely because they would not suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ; protesting the contrarie for himselfe in these wordes, but God forbid that I should reioice but in the Crosse of Christ, VVHER BY THE VVORLD IS CRVCIFIED TO ME, AND •••• TO THE VVORLD: Meaning he doth not onely refuse the fa∣uours, but despise the terrors of the worlde for the crosse of Christ. In the first part of this comparison betwixt himselfe and those that flattered the Iewes with teaching circumci∣sion for feare of affliction, put your interpretation to y^t words of the Apostle, and sée how absurdly it matcheth with them. They constraine you to bee circumcised, onely because they would not suffer persecution for the crosse of Christ, that is as you expound it, because they would not suffer persecution for "the afflictions of the godlie. Hath this exposition either sense or reason in it? Or else is it euident that the Apostle here mea∣neth by the crosse of Christ, the slander & shame of Christs suf∣fering on the Crosse, which the Iewes so abhorred, that they pursued all that preached or beléeued it? Then consequentlie Paules reioycing in nothing but in the crosse of Christ contra∣rie to their course must needs import, that he reioiced in no∣thing so much as in that shamefull death which the Sauiour of the world endured on the crosse; and to that and he saieth in the former Chapter, where hee more largelie h••ndleth this matter; * 1.14 If I yet preach circumcision, why doe I yet suffer persecution? Then is the slaunder of the crosse abolished; meaning there was none other cause why the Iewes hated and persecuted him, but for preaching Christ crucified, to bee the true and onlie meane of our saluation, without circum∣cision or whatsoeuer ceremonies of the law.

As the text is cleere with the sense ••hich I followed, so the fathers concurre with the same. Christ (saieth Austen) * 1.15 chose that kind of death to hang on the crosse, that a Christian might

saie, ••ar be it from me to reioice but in the crosse of Christ. Chry∣sostome vpon this place, a 1.16 what is the reason (saith hee) that Paul so reioyceth in Christes crosse? because Christ for my sake ••••oke the shape of a seruant, and for my sake endured that hee suffered. Adding far••her. a 1.17 Annon est gloriandum, quum ille dominus, quiverus est deus, non erubescit pro nobis crucem subi∣re? Haue we not good cause to reioice when that Lord, which is true God, was not ashamed to endure the crosse for vs? Paul doth b 1.18 not reioice (saith Ierom) in his owne righteousnesse or knowledge, but in the faith of the crosse, by which all my sinnes are pardoned me. Christ c 1.19 bearing his crosse on his shoulders, (saith Bede) commendeth it, that Paul might saie, be it far from me to reioice but in the crosse of Christ. He was despised in the eyes of the wicked for that, wherein the heartes of the Saintes should reioice. I sta••e somewhat longer (gentle Reader) on this point; for that, as it had bin a childish ouersight in me at the verie first entrance to mistake the meaning of my text; so it is more then a malepart tricke in him vniustlie to cha∣lenge me for it; but I ma••e the better content my selfe with it, since this Refuter s••icketh not to vse all the Fathers with like disdaine, whereof I will giue th••e an example or two, that thou maiest see the headinesse of this hasty writer.

In the contents of Christs crosse, I obserued out of, d 1.20 Au∣gustine, d 1.21 Ierom, and d 1.22 Bernard that no violence of death wrested Christes soule from him, as it doth ours; but when he sawe his time, hee euen at an instant laide it downe of himselfe, no paines hastening his death.

e 1.23This is a p••ra∣doxe in Nature (saieth this Controller) and contrary to scrip∣ture which saith, he was like vs in all things sinne only excepted.

You might giue the learned and auncient Fathers better wordes Sir trister, what soeuer you do me; your wits are too weake to refute their resolution. For where like a P••ncée, you praie you know not what, they ground them••••lues on the plaine and expresse wordee of the scriptures. * 1.24 No man (saith our Sauiour) taketh (my soule) from mee, but I la••e it

downe of my selfe: I haue power to laie it downe, and haue power to take it againe. Howe thinke you Sir; coulde anie violence or paines of death take Christes soule from him; or had hee power to laie it downe when and as he woulde, which no man else euer had or shall haue? you replie, he was "like vs in all things, sinne only excepted. Such proofes became well your person. Was he like vs in his birth? can we lie in the graue without corruption, as he laie? or raise our selues from death as he did? Reade more for shame and write lesse, till you bee better aduised, or better instructed. Upon these words of Christ, I haue power to laie down my soule, and haue power to take it again, Chrysostom writeth thus; g 1.25 vtrum{que} nouum fuit & praeter communem consuetudinem. Potestatem ha∣beo ponendi eam: hoc est, ego solus potestatem habeo, quae vobis non est. Both these (powers) were strange and aboue the common course of men. I haue power to laie down my soule, that is, I A∣LONE haue this power, which you haue not. If you denie this that Chrysostom saith, remember what God himselfe saith: h 1.26 ô foole this night shal they fetch away thy soule frō thee, which Christ saith none could do from him, because he had power by his fathers appointment to laie it down of himselfe.

In like sort, when I shewed not mine own opinion, but the iudgments of the ancient fathers as well for the causes that might be of Christes i 1.27 agonie in the garden, as for the mea∣ning of his k 1.28 complaint on the crosse, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me; obserue (gentle Reader) I praie thee, how absurdly he roleth from the one to the other, & how inso∣lentlie he reiecteth al the fathers, for that they vphold not his humour of hell paines to be the ground of both. I alleaged Ierom and Chrysostom, that Christ on the crosse cited the be∣ginning of the 22. Psalme, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me, that the Iewes might knowe they had fulfilled the words of the prophet Dauid in that psalme foreshewing "the passiō of Christ. His answere is, l 1.29 this sence is most absurd. To Athanasius, Augustine, and Leo, that Christ spake those

words in the person of his church, which then suffered in him and with him, he saith,m 1.30 This is no lesse absurd then the former, there is no reason or likelihood for it. When I brought Ierom," Ambrose, Austen, and Bede, that in the garden Christ might sorrow for the reiection of the Iewes, who would pul the ven∣geance of God on their owne heads, to the vtter destruction of their whole nation by putting him to death, this Confu∣ter foolishly and forgetf••lly maketh this an interpretation of Christes complaint on the crosse, and addeth; n 1.31 This is more fond and absurd then the other. So when among other causes" of Christs agony in the garden that might ••e, (for I tooke vp∣on me to determine none) being sixe in number, I brought this for one out of Ambrose, that Christ sorrowed for vs, was SAD for vs, and GRIEVED for vs, he LAMENTED OVR VVOVNDES, not his, OVR VVEAKENES, not his owne death, o 1.32

This in effect (saith hee) is nothing but what wee affirme, howbeit this ought not to haue anie place heere; p 1.33 how could these wordes hang together, when hee meaneth to tell his father howe zealous hee is for his glorie, to saie; My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? There is no fashion in them thus signifying. What you speake boldlie but errone∣ouslie of the sonne of God; q 1.34 It cannot bee strange if often times Christ fell amazed, confounded and forgetfull of him∣selfe for feare and griefe,

I maie trulie and iustlie say of you; it is not strange to see you amazed, confounded and forget∣full in your writing. What I spake of Christes agonie in the garden, you applie to his complaint on the crosse, and sale, the words will not hang together. Góod Sir awake out,, of your sleepe, and learne at least to vnderstand before you aunswere.

As this presumer euerie where with disdaine casteth away the iudgements of the fathers which I produce, & preferreth his owne peeuish conceite before them all; so when he repor∣teth my reasons, he either ignorātlie mistaketh them, or pur∣poselie peruerteth them, y^• they may the lesse encumber him.

In the effectes of Christes crosse I noted out of the Apostle to the Hebrues three properties of the true propitiatorie sacri∣fice which tooke awaie the sinne of the world;* 1.35 It was a bodi∣lie, a bloudie, and a deadlie sacrifice, and amongst manie reasons to confirme the same, I brought these two, which the conf••ter after his forgetfull maner roueth at. The first in ef∣fect was this. The true sacrifice for sinne, which the Redee∣mer should offer, was shadowed and foreshewed by the sa∣crifices which God commanded and accepted in the old testa∣ment: but the sacrifices of the Patriarches and of the faith∣full appointed by Moses foreshewed and figured a bodilie, bloudie, and deadlie sacrifice, and no paines of hell; therfore the true sacrifice for sinne was made by the bodie, bloud and death of the Redéemer, and not by the paines of hell suffe∣red in his soule. The second this; As the sacrifices of the law prefigured what the Sauiour of the world should do for the abolishing of sinne; so the sacraments of the newe testa∣ment confirme and scale that performed in the person of Christ Iesus, which was the true propitiation for our sinnes, and price of our redemption: but the sacraments of the new testament, and speciallie the Lordes supper, declare and con∣firme vnto vs the bodie of Christ giuen for vs vnto death, and his bloud shed for the remission of our sinnes; therefore this was the true propitiation for our sinnes, and price of our redemption, and not the paines of hell suffered in the soule of Christ, as some imagine. To the first the Confuter answereth; r 1.36

The proposition is false taking it generally. The carnall sacrifices of the Iewes signified that which they were apt to signifie, but not anie further. The sacrifices of beastes coulde not prefigure the personall vnion of God and man, nor the rea∣sonable and immortall soule of Christ, nor his resurrection, all which were necessarie pointes in the meritorious sacrifice. Se∣condlie he denieth the assumption. s 1.37 For certaine of the Iewes sacrifices set foorth the sufferinges of the soule of Christ also.

As the scape Gote in the 16. of Leuiticus, which was a sin offe∣ring,

though it were sent awaie free and vntouched. To the reason drawne from the Sacraments, hee saieth, s 1.38 Wee are to answere as we did before.

These are bodilie and earthlie Ele∣ments, and therefore fitte to set soorth bodilie and apparant ef∣fects in Christ; they can not set out the spirituall and inuisible effects in him. And yet the ceremonie of breaking the bread, which is to shewe that Christes bodie was broken for vs, can not belong properlie to the bodie, but to the soule.

These I trust are your words; now heare my replie. I had no such proposition as you frame to your selfe, that either the sacrifices of the lawe, or Sacraments of the Gospel, were figures of our whole and absolute redemption, which is (as you expound it) of all the fruits and causes of our redemption. This is your eua∣sion, not my proposition; I tolde you that as God had pro∣mised, so the faithfull beléeued, that his owne sonne should be the Seede of the woman, and by his death and bloud should purge their sinnes. To continue this promise and con∣firme the faith of all before and vnder the lawe, God ap∣pointed bloudie sacrifices, as continuall remembrances and figures, not of the person, nor of the function of Christ; but of the Sacrifice, by which hee shoulde abolish sinne; to wi••te, by his bodie slaine, and his bloud shedde, which the carnall sacrifices were fittest to resemble, since God would not haue the bloud of anie man, but of his owne sonne shedde for remission of sinnes. My propo∣sition then speaketh of the true sacrifice for sinne, and a∣uoucheth that to bee the true sacrifice for sinne, which was shadowed and figured by the death and bloud of those beasts, that God comma••••ded to bee offered vnto him. This pro∣position you doe not denie, for you graunt, t 1.39 The Iewes sacrifices signified what they were apt to teach, and signifie: but they were apt and ordained of GOD to teach the Iewes, that, by the death and bloud of the Messias, they shoulde bee redeemed and saued from their sinnes; ergo they were apt and ordained of God to figure and shadowe

the true propitiatorie sacrifice. And so the patriarkes and Prophetes beléeued and expected, whose faith and hope could neither be vaine nor frustrate, since they were thereto directed by Gods owne appointment.

This proposition, be you Christian or Iewe, you may not denie; and therefore you doe well to denie the assumption, and to affirme that certaine sacrifices of the Iewes, as namelie the scape Goate in the 16. of Leuiticus did signi∣fie the immortall soule of Christ, which was

f 1.40 a sacrifice for sinne, and did properlie beare our sinnes, and suffer for our sinnes.

But Sir, if a man aske you howe you proue that the scape Goate signified the soule of Christ, what haue you to saie?

Because both Goates (saie you) are a sacrifice for sinne, as the Text speaketh.

You abuse the Text, and de∣ceiue your selfe. The wordes are. Aaron g 1.41 shall take of the assemblie of the children of Israel two hee Goates f••r a sinne offering, that is to make a sinne offering of one of them, on which the Lordes lotte shall fall; So followe the wordes in the 8. verse of that chapter. Aaron shall cast lottes ouer the two hee Goates, one lotte for the Lorde▪ and another lotte for the scape Goate. And Aaron shall offer the Goate on which the Lords lot shall fall, and MAKE HIM A SINNE OFFERING. The taking of the Goates from the people doth not make them sacrifices for sinne, but the of∣fering them vnto the Lord by the Priest: so that though two were taken, yet lots were cast which of them should hee the sinne offering, and which of them the scape Goat, which con∣sequentlie was no sinne offering, because that was made a sinne offering, on which the Lords lot fell. And so if the scape Goate did signifie the soule of Christ, as you affirme more boldlie then wiselie, then was not the soule of Christ a sinne offering, neither did it suffer for sinne, if your owne ex∣ample maie bee trusted. Howbeit what the scape Goate signified, I am not so forwarde to pronounce as you bee, though I haue better warrant so to doe then you haue.

For Cyrill, or as some thinke, Origen writing vpon that place of Leuiticus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 h 1.42 If all the people of God were ho∣lie, there shoulde not bee two lottes cast vpon the Goates, one to bee offered to the Lorde, the other to bee sent to the desart; but there should bee one lotte, and one offering to the Lord alone. But nowe where in the number of them that come to the Lord, some belong to the Lord, some deserue to bee cast awaie, and seuered from the Lordes offering; therefore part of the sacrifice which the people bring, to wit one of the Goates, is offered to the Lorde, the other is cast off, and sent into the Desart. Ambrose in the like sense. i 1.43 As of two founde in the fielde one istaken, the other forsaken; so are there two Goates, one fitte for sacrifice, the other to bee sent awaie into the Desart. Hee serued for no vse, neither might hee bee eaten or tasted of by the children of the Priestes▪ Beda ioyneth with them. k 1.44 If all the people were holie, there shoulde not bee two lottes vpon the Goates, but one lotte, and one offering; nowe when manie are called and fewe chosen, part of the peoples sacrifice is offered to the Lord, the other parte is cast awaie. Or else this maie bee vnder∣stoode of Iesus and Barrabas, that one of them, which was the Lordes lotte, euen Iesus was slaine; the other accursed caitife was sent into the Iewes Desart, bearing the sinnes of the people that cried, Crucifie him. So that the scape Goate by the iudgement of these fathers signified the reprobate a∣mong the people; and not the soule of Christ; as you bold∣lie auouch. But did it signifie the soule of Christ; what gaine you by that? The scape Goate was neither done to death, nor made anie sinne offering, as you falslie suppose, but was separated from the Lords offering, and let go free and vntou∣ched. Then by your owne similitude the soule of Christ neither died anie death, as you after falselie and absurd∣lie conclude, that the soule of Christ died, and was cru∣cified; neither was it anie part of the offering for sinne to GOD, which you so much endeuour to proue. Such is

your vnderstanding, that by your owne examples, you ouer∣throw your owne positions, whiles you labour to establish them with faint conceits of your owne deuising.

[But in the burnt offering or holocaust prescribed, Leui. 6 you find more helpe then in the scape Goate, to proue that Christ soule suffered for our sins as wel as his body.] If you meane that Christs soule suffered the paines of hel, I would faine sée how you proue that out of the holocaust or burnt of∣fering. If you thinke the name of fire doth somewhat relieue you, remember, Sir, besides the sundrie references that fire hath in the scripture, the l 1.45 holocaust was first slaine, and after burnt; and therefore vnlesse you will fasten the fire of afflictiō as you call it, to Christs body or soule after his death, the bur∣ning of the dead sacrifice by fire will little further your pur∣pose. Again, in one and the same fire was the holocaust con∣sumed. If this therefore touch the death and passion of Christ, his bodie and soule must iointly suffer one and the same kind of affliction; which is the thing you so much impugne. And since by your owne position the bodies of beasts m 1.46 could not "prefigure the immortall and reasonable soule of Christ, how com∣meth it now to passe that y^e body of the holocaust after death shall signifie as well the soule as the bodie of Christ? Can you thus plant and plucke vp with a touch? It is no waie denied or doubted by mee, that the soule of Christ was af∣flicted and tormented with sorrow and paine all the time of his passion; which this Trister so much laboureth to proue; and therefore if the holocaust did signifie the whole manhood of Christ suffering for our sinnes, it could not preiudice anie thing, that I did or doe teach, as anon thou shalt (gentle Reader) more plainlie perceiue; but yet whie the burning of the holocaust should signifie Christes affliction on the Crosse, either in bodie or soule, I see no proofe made by this Confuter; ••nd why it should not resemble Christes af∣flictions before death, these two reasons mooue me. First it was burnt after it was dead; next it was wholie consumed

by fire; neither of which can accord with Christes sufferings or the crosse: but by the burning of that sacrifice, I take ra∣ther the acceptation of Christs death, or his incorruption af∣ter death to be signified. For that part of each sacrifice which God reserued for himselfe, and receiued to himselfe, was al∣wayes burnt with fyre; and the Hebrue word, HOLAH, which the Scripture vseth for the holocaust, signifieth n 1.47 that which ascendeth vp to God (by fire;) whence God is often saide in the scriptures, when hee accepteth an holocaust, to smel a swéete sauour. Which words saint Paul applieth to the death of Christ in saying, Christ gaue himselfe for vs to be a sacrifice vnto God of a sweet smelling sauour, that is well pleasing and acceptable vnto God. So likewise because the fire consu∣med in the holocaust all that was subiect to corruption, the holocaust may signifie Christs incorruption after death. This sense S. Austen approoueth, when he saith. o 1.48 Sic leuetur holocau∣stum vt absorbeatur mors in victoriam; Let the holocaust so as∣cend that death bee swallowed vp in victorie. And againe, p 1.49Quando totum consumitur igne diuino, holocaustum dicitur. Totum moùm consumat ignis tuus, nihil inde remaneat mihi, totum sit tibi. Hoc erit in resurrectione mortuorum, quando mortale hoc induerit immortalitem. Cum absorbet ignis diui∣nus mortem nostram, holocaustum est. When the whole sacri∣fice is consumed with heauenlie sire, it is called an holocaust. Let thy fire (ò Lord) consume me wholie, let nothing therof remaine mine, let the whole be thine: this shall bee in the resurrection of the dead, when this mortalitie putteth on immortalitie. When Gods fire consumeth our Death, then is it an holocaust. And other kinde of holocaust is mentioned by Saint Austen, which I mislike not. q 1.50 Holocaustum est totum igne consump¦tum. Est quidam ignis flagrantissimae charitatis; totus exardes∣cat igne diuini amoris, qui vult offerre Deo holocaustum. An holocaust is when the whole is consumed with fire. There is a fire of most feruent charitie, hee must wholie burne with the fire of the loue of God, which will offer to God an holocaust.

No man euer burned with this fire comparable to Christ Iesus; whose loue towardes God and man flamed, as vnto death, so after death, most feruentlie. So that touching the holocaust the Confuter presumeth but proueth nothing; and yet if his supposall were granted, it weakeneth not the force of my reason, since by the bodily and bloudie sacrifice shado∣wed in the law, I do not exclude the torments on the crosse imparted to the soule, or rather wholy discerned by the soule of Christ, but onelie the paines of hell which were neuer fi∣gured by anie sacrifice, nor scaled by anie Sacrament of the old or new testament, though now they bee made the princi∣pall part of our redemption, which indéede was purchased by the death and bloud of Christ Iesus.

In auoiding the reason which I drewe from the Sacra∣ments of the new testament, and namelie from the Lordes Supper, in the length of six lines (Sir refuter) you contradict the definition and institution of that Sacrament, as also the plaine resolution of S. Paul, and the principles of naturall reason.

The Sacraments (you saie) are earthlie elements, they cannot set out spirituall and inuisible effects in Christ.

I had thought Sacraments by their nature had beene visible signes of inuisible graces, which definition is so common in the schooles, that no smatterer in diuinitie besides you is igno∣rant of it. q 1.51 Si tu incorporeus esses, nudè dona ipsa incorporea tibi tradidisset, quoniam vero corpori coniuncta est anima, in sensibili∣bus intelligibilia tibi traduntur. If thou hadst been without a bo∣die, God would haue giuen thee his spirituall gifts vncouered; but because thy soule is ioined with thy bodie, in sensible thinges are deliuered thee spirituall (or inuisible) graces. r 1.52 Where all the Sa∣craments were common, (saith Augustine) Grace which is the vertue of the Sacraments, was not common to all. s 1.53In the Lords Supper, that there should be no horror of bloud, & yet the grace of Redemption might remaine, for a resemblance thou receiuest the Sacrament, but thou obtainest the grace & vertue of (Christs) true nature. So that if those earthly elements of water, bread

and wine, did not set out and exhibite the spiritual and invisi∣ble effects in Christ, they were no Sacraments.

[But the t 1.54 Ce∣remonie of breaking bread (say you) cannot properly belong to the body, but to the soule.]

In the first institution of his Supper did not Christ breake the bread, and deliuer it saying, Take eate, this is my bodie? If breaking belong to the bread, then breaking belongeth properlie to the body of Christ; for the bread was ordained to shew forth the body of Christ, & that S. Paul noteth in expresse words. t 1.55 The bread which we break, is it not the Cōmunion of the body of Christ? But Christs body (you say) was not properly broken; because y^e scripture saith u 1.56 not a bone of him shalbe broken. A speculation fit for such a diuine as you are; had Christs body nothing in it but bones? Had he not as well flesh as bones?x 1.57 A spirit, saith our sauiour, hath not flesh & bones, as you see me haue. Then if Christs flesh were rent & torne with whips, with nailes, with a speare, as it cer∣tainly was, though his bones were whole, his body was pro∣perly & truly broken. For the cutting or tearing of the flesh, is the breaking of the flesh, and from a part the whole maie and doth properly take his denomination. And therfore Paul spake truly and properlie when he thus expresseth the words of Christs institution,y 1.58This is my body, which is brokē for you. Neither doth he in that word varie from Christs institution, but he rather teacheth vs, that as the bread is broken, and the wine powred out in the Lords supper; so was the flesh of the Lords body giuen to be broken & torne on the crosse for vs, & his bloud likewise shed for the remission of our sinnes. z 1.59

The nailes & spear, (you grant) did pearce him, but in no sort can that be called breaking or bruising in peeces, as the worde in Esay doth plainlie signifie. Wherefore the meaning is the torments of his soule did bruize and breake him in peeces.

Your Hebrue, your Greeke, & your Philosophie, came all out of one forge, they are so like. You can not finde that Christes flesh was broken and bruised on the Crosse by grieuous stripes and wounds, but you haue spied, that his soule was broken in

peeces and that properlie. If one of the Prentices before whome you were wont to talke, should aske you into howe manie péeces it was broken, your heade would ake to shape him a wise answere. [But the word DACHA which Esay v∣seth doth plainly (you say) signifie to breake in peeces.] Doth it alwaies and euer signifie properlie to breake into péeces? How can it then be applied to the soule, but improperlie and by a figuratiue kinde of speech? A Moole hill with you is a Mountaine. The worde doth signifie to treade vnder foote, to bruise, to oppresse, to humble. When Dauid saith the enemie a 1.60 hath cast my life downe to the ground; Will you saie he hath broken my life in péeces? When Iob saith, b 1.61 How long will yee vexe my soule, and afflict mee with your wordes, will you adde, and breake mee in peeces with your wordes? When Ie∣remie saith of the men of Iudah. c 1.62 They are not humbled vnto this day; Will you phrase it, and say, They are not broken in peeces to this day?

In the power of Christs death to proue the bloud of our sa∣uiour to be the true price of our redemption, and that as wel of our soules as of our bodies; I alledged the words of Peter d 1.63 You were redeemed with the precious bloud of Christ; and of the souls in heauen saying vnto Christ, e 1.64 Thou wast killed, & hast redeemed vs to God by thy bloud; when their bodies were rotten in y^e earth. Hence I reasoned, if our soules be not re∣deemed frō death by the blood of christ, our bodies haue in this life no benefite of redemption, I meane from death; for wee die as doe infidels, and our bodies rot in the graue as theirs doe till the daie of resurrection. But S. Peter saieth, wee are redeemed, not we shall bee; and the saints say to Christ when their bodies lie in the dust, Thou hast redeemed vs by thy bloud; ergo that redemption which we haue in this life, must be referred to our soules; and our bodies must expect the ge∣nerall daie of redemption in the ende of the world. To this our Confuter replieth, f 1.65

What a paradox, yea what impietie is this? Haue our bodies no good at all by Christes death,

no more then the bodyes of infidels; because wee die stil as wel as they?

Good Sir remember, Redemption from death is the point which I vrged; y^t our bodies in this life haue not, no more then the bodies of Infidels haue, but must expect it. And therefore if our Soules be not redeemed by the blood of Christ from Sinne & death, we haue presentlie no redempti∣on by the bloud of Christ, but must staie for the time of our resurrection before we shall haue it. Which is contrarie to the words both of Peter and of the Soules in heauen, that saie to Christ when their bodies bee rotten in earth, Thou hast re∣deemed vs by thy blood. Here y^u tell vs of the iustification, mortification, and sanctification of our bodies, as also of the expectation of glorie, which our bodies shall haue, and thinke to make a great conquest of the words, NO GOOD AT ALL; but pull in your hornes. Besides that my meaning is verie plaine, whatsoeuer the wordes were, which I might vse, which I do not acknowledge to be these that you bring, but that our bodies haue no benefitte of Redemption from death; marke well the condition annexed to the proposition, If our soules bee not redeemed by the death and bloud of Christ; and then all these absurdities which you thought to fasten on mee, ••all full on your owne head. For if our soules be not redeemed by the bloud of Christ, our bodies haue vt∣terlie no good, euen no good at all by the death of Christ.

[They haue you saie Iustification, mortification, sanctifi••••ti∣on, & hope of resurrection; besides the lawfull possession of earth¦ly things.]

Haue our bodies these things of themselues, or from our soules first iustified, mortified; sanctified and as∣sured of life? I trust you dare not saie that our bodies haue anie of these, but for and from the Soule. Then if the soule be not redéemed by the death of Christ, the bodie can haue none of these, and consequentlie my words are sound and good; & yours, if you stand to them against the condition an∣nexed to mine, are prophane and false. [But I alter my words, you will saie, to my best aduantage, when I sée your obiections to preuent that danger.] It had bene fittest for

you to haue staied the printing of mine owne wordes, and then you might haue charged me with them, and not bee repelled as a forgette•• or misconstruer of them, or to haue gotten you a copie of that which I deliueerd out that verie summer to men of great honour and learning, a yeere and more before I euer heard or thought of your pamphlet, be∣cause I founde so manie humorous heades misconcea∣ning and misreporting my wordes. But your hast•• was such; you coulde not; or your skill, you woulde not staie the sight of mine owne wordes, least they shoulde trouble you more then you were ware: and therefore out of your owne ill con••eaued, and worse digested Rapso∣dies, you fram•• obiections as pleaseth your selfe, which either were not mine, or not so proposed by me. And that maketh me pursue no more of your aunsweres, by reason I spende more time in recalling you to the trueth of my wordes, then in refelling your exceptions, which haue neither waight nor witnesse, more then the buzzing of your owne braine. Let vs therefore view howe well you behaue your selfe in your owne proofes, which you cannot forget or mistake.

In proposing the question, and pursuing the proofes; there is some hope (christian Reader) the holines of the confuters cause wil lead him to go plainly & soūdlie to work. Thus ther∣fore he beginneth.g 1.66

The whole controuersy hath 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 hel in his soule.

Now then for the former, thus we saie and constantly auow: Christ Iesus did suffer in his whole manhoode for the redemption and sa∣tisfaction of our sinnes: yea he suffered properly and immediatelie in his soule and not in his flesh only. Therefore he suffered for vs the wrath of God. This consequent is manifest and cannot be de∣nied. The antecedent or first part of the former generall reason is denied and confidentlie reiected yet how falselie by Gods helpe shal

easily appeare.

Touching the first part of this controuersie; were you awaked or a sléepe (Sir refuter) when I preached of these thinges, that you so constantlie auowe this was the question, whether Christ suffered for vs th•• wrath of God or no? if you were present and not a sleepe, it is too much bold∣nes to outface the world in print, that this was the position which I impugned. There were too manie witnesses there, for mee to denie, or you to belie, the question; you knowe it well enough, but you cannot tell how to proue that which I then reproued, and therefore you shrink from that, and dallie with generall and doubtfull termes, which according as they are expounded, may either make with you, or against you. The question proposed by me, was, whether it could be pro∣ued by the scriptures, or by necessary consequent from them, that Christ in his soule suffered the true paines of hell such as the damned doe suffer, and wee shoulde haue suffered, had we not beene redeemed by him? I added, if we tooke the paines of hell metaphoricallie for great and extreame sorrowes and paines, as Dauid and Ionas did, she speach might be to∣lerated; but if wee tooke them properlie for the verie same which the damned doe and shall suffer in hell, as there is no proofe for it, so there is no truth in it. To this you saie no∣thing, and so to all wise men make a confession that you cannot iustifie that, which I then disallowed. Ye bee come since to tell vs that certainelie Christ suffered the wrath of God for vs; which if it be granted you, I doe not see what it canne helpe your cause, or hurt mine. For the wrath of God extendeth to all paines and punishmentes as well cor∣porall as spirituall, in this life and the next, be they tem∣porall or eternall. So that no paine or punishment small or great coulde befall the bodie or soule of Christ, but it must néedes procéed from the wrath of God. Wherefore your idle discourse of 32. leaues, in which you labor to proue that Christ suffered the wrath of God for sinne, might wel haue bin spa∣red. Thrée lines directlie to the purpose had bin more worth

then so many leaues thus wastfullie spent. But in the ende you conclude like a Clark, Christ suffered the wrath of God,

h 1.67 which we affirme is equall to hell it selfe, and all the tormentes thereof.

What you affirme I little regarde; what you can proue is that I intend. And out of this proposition Christ suf∣fered for vs the wrath of God for sinne, you shall neuer con∣clude; Ergo hee suffered the true paines of hel. Were your proposition generall shal Christ suffered all the wrath of God for sinne, that is the whole wrath of God and euery part thereof due to sinne, you might well conclude; Ergo he suffe∣red the true paines of hell; for hell indéede as it is the last, so is it the greatest effect of Gods wrath against sin; but from an indefinite proposition as yours is, which maie signifie the VVHOLE or SOME PART of GODS VVRATH due to sinne, you shall neuer inferre what part you list, as here you doe.

Will you, to make your consequent good, amend your an∣tecedent and make it generall; that Christ suffered the whole wrath of God, & euery part thereof due to sinne? Then heare good Sir, mine answere. That proposition, besides that it no waie followeth vpon your first antecedēt; Christ suffered properlie and immediatlie in his soule, therefore he suffered the whole wrath of God and euery part thereof due to sinne: besides I saie that there is no coherence, no consequence be∣twixt these two propositions; the later of them, that Christ suffered the whole wrath of God due to sinne, and euery part thereof, is most impious and blasphemous. For so neither vtter desperation, nor finall reiection, nor eternal damnation are ex∣cepted, but Christ did and must suffer them all; since they are partes, yea the chiefest partes and effectes of Gods wrath against sinne. This is far from your meaning, as you often protest. Trulie I beléeue it; charitie leades me to thinke, though you be somewhat foolish in this cause, that yet you are not so diuelish as to fasten these things on the sonne of God. But you must also be so wise as to sée, that if your antecedent

be general these wil follow, whether you mean them or no: if your antecedent be not general, but indefinite, as, Christ suf∣fered the wrath of God due to sinne, that is some partes and effectes of Gods wrath due to sinne, you shall neuer make choise in your conclusion which parts he suffered, as namelie the true paines of hel & of the damned. Now choose which you will, either the inualiditie of your argument, or the impietie of your antecedent; the one will proue you to lack learning, that you sée not the difference; the other that you want chri∣stianity, if you should not with mouth disclaim, and with hart detest that horrible blasphemie.

You wil pretend I know, your conclusion is not general: no more indeed is it; your words are,

therfore Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God;

but this conclusion beeing indefinite, and verie doubtfull, will do you no good in the fortifieng of your cause. For Christ may suffer the wrath of God in his bodie, yea in his soule hee maie suffer it, and yet not the paines of the damned, or of hell: but because you make this the maine foundation of your whole matter, let vs looke somewhat better into it. You labour to proue by a long pro∣cesse that Christ suffered the wrath of God for sinne. First then what meane you by the wrath of God? I hope you doe not meane anie inwarde affection or perturbation in God, but as you expo••nde your selfe i 1.68 the verie effectes of his iust wrath; you shoulde saie, of his iustice and power punishing" sinne. And this warning (gentle Reader) if thou bee simple I must giue thee, (for the learned knowe it of themselues,) that when thou readest in the scriptures, or hearest me rea∣son of the wrath of God, thou doe not imagine that God is mooued with anie inwarde mutation, but the punishment ordained for sinne by the iustice of God, or inflicted on vs when we haue sinned by the hand of God, (whatsoeuer mean it please him to vse) is called the wrath God. Ambrose saieth well; k 1.69 Ira est non ei qui iudicat, sed illi qui iudica∣tur; It is no wrath to God that iudgeth, but to him that is

is iudged. l 1.70 Quia culpas percutit irasci dicitur, saieth Grego∣rie; God is saide to be angrie, because he punisheth our sinnes. And so Austen. m 1.71 Ira de••non perturbatio animi eius est, sed iudicium quo irrogatur pana peccato. The wrath of God is no affection of mind in him, but his iudgment whereby punish∣ment is inflicted for sinne. The conclusion is; n 1.72 nomine irae intelligitur vindicta iniquitatis, by the name of (Gods) wrath is vnderstoode the punishment of iniquitie. It is then eui∣dent that by the name of (Gods) wrath, throughout the scrip∣tures, is vnderstoode the vengeance or punishment prepa∣red or inflicted for the sinnes of men. Nowe what particu∣lar punishmentes God hath prouided for sinne as well in this life, as the next, to chastise and reuenge both the bo∣dies and soules of sinners, woulde aske long time to re∣hearse. The greatest and foarest are these iudgementes, which are executed on the wicked, in the worlde to come; to witte, reiection from the kingdome of God, and condem∣nation to hell fire, where not onelie darkenesse amazeth the eies, and remembrance of sinne committed afflicteth the conscience, but an intolerable flame of fire tormenteth both soule and bodie for euer. These terrible iudgementes of GOD against sinne the Scriptures publish and de∣nounce to men in this life, that if the loue of heauen doe not winne them to obedience, the feare of hell shoulde hold them from resisting and contemning God. The greatest torment that in this life canne befall a sinner is desperati∣on; when the soule of man, conuinced in her selfe by the number of her hainous ofsences, loseth all hope of life to come, and casteth her eies wholie on the fearefull tormentes of hell prepared for her; the continuall thought and fright whereof doe so amaze and afflict the comfortlesse soule, that shee sinking vnder the burden feeleth in her selfe the horrour of hell before shee come to it. So that the losse of heauen, and feare of hell maie torment wicked and desperate persons in this life; but the execution thereof,

after this life, shall breede an other manner of astonishment and torment, then they canne yet conceaue. If the thought of these iudgementes and punishmentes, ordayned by Gods power and iustice for sinners, so afflict men, what shall the sight doe? If the feare of hell bee so intolerable, what shall the flame bee? when therefore you saie (Sir Re∣futer) Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God; wee must not content our selues with that generall worde, you must tell vs in particular what partes and effectes of GODS wrath Christ endured, before you canne auouch that which hee suffered, to bee equall to hell and all the tormentes thereof. Did hee suffer hell fire either in soule, or in bodie? the damned shall suffer it in both. Did hee finde or feare himselfe to be excluded from the kingdome of God? the dam∣ned doe see themselues shut out for euer. If hee neither felt nor feared the MYST, the VVORME, the FIRE of hell, nor so much as DOVBTED the LOSSE of Gods kingdome, what tormentes equall to hell canne you name vs? [The wrath of God you will saie, is equall to hell and all the tor∣ments thereof]. The wrath of God is hell, and so are all the tormentes of hell; yea they are the sharpest effectes of Gods wrath against sinne. And therefore neuer plaie with gene∣ralities and ambiguities, but expresse plainly what other ef∣fectes of Gods wrath you meane. For since the losse of hea∣uen, the darkenesse, worme, and fire of hell, and the feare of both bee the greatest and sorest iudgementes of God a∣gainst sinne, that are decreed by his iustice, reuealed by his word, and executed by his power, in this life or the nexte: wee plainelie and truelie saie you can name vs none other effectes of Gods wrath equall to these. If then it be hay∣nous impietie to saie, Christ suffered these, and none other are equall to these, take backe your lauishing vntruth, that Christ suffered the effects of Gods wrath,

equal to hel and all the tormentes thereof;

for my part I see neither sense nor rea∣son in it.

[But it shalbe soundlie and euidently prooued.]

Will you prooue you know not what? Tell first what effects of gods wrath you meane, and then on with your proofes. Your mea∣ning may be such as you shall neuer prooue. It may be such as we wil easely graunt. For touching your words which you take for the castel of your cause,

Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God;

know you good Syr, Christ suffered nothing at his Passion either in bodie or soule, were it little or great, but it was an effect of Gods wrath punishing Sinne, or as you delighte to speake, it was the wrath of God. Well, if you bée so loath to expresse your mind, for feare you bewra••e your cause, let vs heare your proofes;

o 1.73 Thus wee saie and constantlie auow: Christ Iesus did suffer in his whole manhood for the Re∣demption and satisfaction of our Sinnes; yea he suffered properlie and immediatlie in his soule and not in his flesh onlie:

As you haue begonne so you will goe on; talking is your profession, you did your selfe wrong when you came to writing. This Antecedent as you vtter it, (your meaning is secret to your selfe) doth neither good nor hurt to the Question. That christ suffered in his whole manhood for the Redemption of our Sinnes is a thing by mee neuer doubted, nor denied; the doubt is, what he suffered in his whole manhood; and what in ech part of his manhood; for that he suffered all that he suffe∣red in his whole manhood your selfe doe disclaime in the next page, when you saie, p 1.74

This greeuous Passion was in his soule properlie and immediatlie, seeing then his bodie was not touched with anie smart.

And when I gaue sixe causes that might bee of Christs agonie in y^e garden, did I so much as pretend that anie of them then touched his bodie, when he was affected with this passion of mind? And except this be your meaning, that Christ suffered some things for our Redemption in his whole manhood, and some things properlie and immediatlie in his Soule, your Antecedent hath a flatte contradiction in it selfe. For if he suffered all, that he suffered, in his whole manhood, how could hée suffer anie thing properlie and

immediatelie in his soule? which is the second part of your owne Antecedent. And if that bee the drift of your generall reason, about which you spende 32. leaues, you maie sit downe and begin againe a newe pamphlet, that shall haue some more certaintie then this hath. For heere you roue, neither expressing, nor indéede knowing what you woulde haue; onlie you hide your selfe in this generall phrase, that Christ suffered the wrath of God for sinne; but vnlesse you speci∣fie" what he suffered, I do not meane to brabble with you, or with anie other, about generall and vncertaine speaches. What hee suffered more then the scriptures expresse, (for I faithfullie beléeue all that is there written) I doe not easilie admit you, or anie other such presumer, to deliuer vpon your credits; when you declare what you meane, and prooue that you saie, you shall soone haue an answere.

[Christ (you saie) i 1.75 assumed not our nature, nor any part of it, but ONLY to suffer in it properly and immediately, euen for the very purchasing of our redemption thereby. Otherwise he had no neede to assume both, but either the one part or the other.]

See what it is (good Reader) for a man to loose himselfe in the wildernesse of his owne wit. To proue that Christ suffered both in bodie and soule, which is a thing by no man denied (for the question is, what he suffered, and not whether soule and bodie were ioined in Christes sufferings?) this Refuter lea∣peth ouer head and eares into absurdities, not onely against diuinitie, but euen against nature, and the verie law of our first creation.* 1.76 That the sonne of God had no END nor PVR∣POSE" in taking our nature vnto his in the vnitie of person, but ONLY to suffer for our sinnes,* 1.77 is a bolde and lewd ouer∣sight;" his ende and purpose in taking our nature was not onlie to suffer for vs, but to doe all that for vs, which in his life time, and after his death, by his resurrection, ascension, and mediation he did, doth, and will do for vs. By his owne mouth he reuealed to vs his fathers will from heauen; by his example of life he taught vs all perfection of holinesse;

by his rising he swallowed vp our death; by his intercession wee receaue all the giftes and graces of God, which wee haue or shall haue; by his sitting in heauen with our flesh, he giueth vs assurance that our mortall bodies shall bee chan∣ged, like to his glorious bodie; yea the verie vnion of our nature to his is an effectuall meane to make vs one with him, as he is one with God. Had Christ not béene man, we could haue had no interest in the fulnes of his obedience, in the riches of his graces, in the Communion of his spirit, in the fellowship of his glorie, which are the helpes, supportes, and meanes of our saluation, as well as his suffering for vs: and man hee coulde not bee without a soule and a bodie; neither part ioyned with his diuine nature was sufficient to make him a man. By the lawe of our first cre∣ation we are men consisting of bodies and soules; and there∣fore Christ as our heade must haue both, NOT ONELIE TO SVFFER FOR SINNE, but also to quic∣ken, sanctifie, and glorifie both our soules and bodyes that hee may perfite our saluation, and bring vs to GOD, without reiecting or excluding either parte of our nature. Yea so aduised you are, Sir Refuter, in your reasons, that by your owne assertion you conclude Christes flesh to bee needelesse for our Redemption: for thus you saie;

q 1.78 This suffering (of the soule by her bodie which is na∣turall and by sympathie onelie) PROPERLIE DID NOT MAKE TO OVR REDEMPTION.

What is suffe∣ring, good Sir, in your learning? The receauing of the blowes, or the feeling of the paine? If you beate or cut a deade carkas, that hath neither life nor sense, will you saie it suffereth? I thinke not. There must then bee life and sense in the bodie, before it canne suffer or feele a∣nie paine. Nowe, life and sense, pertaine they to the bo∣die or else to the soule? If you knewe not before, as by the vnlearned discourse it seemeth you did not, Saint Au∣sten shall teach you; except you will skorne him in this

point, as you do in others. m 1.79 Si diligentius consideremus, dolor, qui dicitur corporis, magis ad animā pertinet. Animae enim est do∣lère, non corporis, etiam quando ei dolendi causa existit a cor∣pore, cum in eo loco dolet, vbi laeditur corpus. Sicut ergo dici∣mus corpora sentientia & corpora viuentia cum ab anima fit cor∣poris sensus & vita; it•• et corpora dicimus dolentia, cum dolor corporis nisi ab anima esse non possit. If wee well consider, the paine which is called bodilie paine, belongeth rather to the soule. The soule feeleth the paine, not the bodie euen when the cause of paine commeth from the bodie, and the soule greeueth in the place where the bodie is hurte; As then wee saie bodies are liuing and feeling, when the life and sense of the bodie is by the soule; so saie wee bodies full of paine, when the paine of the bodie cannot bee felte but by the soule. And so againe; s 1.80 Dolores qui dicuntur car∣nis animae sunt in carne & ex carne; dolor carnis tantummo∣do offensio est animae ex carne. The paines which are called bodilie paines, are the paines of the soule in the bodie and by the bodie. For bodilie paine is nothing else but the griefe of the soule by the bodie. Whereof Diuines maie not doubte, since naturall reason and experience teacheth, that as the soule seeth by the eies, and heareth by the eares of the bodie; so the soule feeleth paine and offence by euerie part of the bodie, when it is wounded or wronged. If this suffering of Christes soule, by communion with his bodie, did not properlie make to our Redemption, which are your" own words; then neither the stripes, woundes, nor death of Christ did any way make to our redemption; since of all these violences offered to Christes bodie, the flesh it selfe had not the féeling but onlie the soule of Christ by communion with her bodie, or as you terme it, by Sympathie. Yea farther, by your owne rule, the flesh of Christ was néedelesse in the worke of our Redemption, for so much as his flesh could not properly and immediatlie féele any paine; but of force

must leaue the féeling of all that was suffered to the soule; and so whiles you talke so much of the proper and immediate suffering of Christes soule, you haue cleane excluded all the sufferings of Christ, which the scripture expresseth, as not making properlie to our redemption.

[But t 1.81 insteede of a false argument of mine, you will returne a reason better grounded, and of certaine truth; which is this; Whereby Adam first, and we euer since doe most properlie commit sinne, by the same hath Christ our second Adam made satisfac∣tion for our sinne. But Adam first, and we euer since most proper∣lie commit sinne in our soules, our bodies beeing but the instru∣ments of our soules, and following the soules direction and will. Therefore Christ in his soule chieflie and most properly made satis∣faction for vs.]

Thou shalt perceiue (christian reader) by the answere to this argument, howe ill I spend the time in pur∣suing this Trifler, which neither can tel what he would haue, nor what he should proue, nor whether his own reasōs make with him or against him. I made no such argument as here he pretendeth; the effect of my reason was this.* 1.82 The flesh of Christ must be as able to redéeme vs as Adams was to con∣demne vs: but we inherit pollution and condemnation from Adams flesh; wherefore the flesh of Christ must both quicken and clense vs. The Maior is euident, vnlesse we make the di∣uell more able to destroie vs by an other, then God is able to saue vs by himselfe. The Minor is cléere, without intermed∣ling with the question, whence soules be deriued. I vtterlie refused to ground anie reason vpon that difficultie; I vsed Dauids words, in sinne my mother conceiued me, and as Am∣brose saith, u 1.83 prius incipit in homine macula quam vita; pollu∣tion (which is originall) beginneth in man before hee hath life. Now the soule is the life of the bodie. Then if pollution cleaue to the flesh before life come, and consequentlie before the soule come, whence soeuer it commeth; it is euident that A∣dams flesh defileth and so condemneth vs. As for my conclu∣sion that Christes flesh must quicken and clense vs, if the

premisses would not support it, which they fully doe; the Scriptures will maintaine it.x 1.84 He that eateth my flesh (saith our Sauiour) and drinketh my bloud, hath eternall life, and I will raise him vp at the last daie. I am that bread of life. If anie man eate of this bread, he shall liue for euer, and the bread that I will giue, is my flesh, which I will giue for the life of the world. My reeason standing good, Sir Refuter, let vs looke a little to yours, that you saie is so well grounded, and of certaine truth. How prooue you your first proposition,

In which part Adam did first Sinne, by that part Christ must satisfy for sinne?

Satisfaction for Sinne the Scripture acknowledgeth none but by death; because y^• Iudge in prohibiting Adam to trans∣gresse threatned death:y 1.85 In the day that thou eatest therof thou shalt die the death: and the Apostle saith plainlie; z 1.86 Christ is the mediator of the new testament, that THROVGH DEATH, which was for the REDEMPTION of the transgressions in the former Testament, they which were called might receiue the promise of eternall inheritance. If nothing might satisfie for sinne but death; then consequently the Soule of Christ which could not die, could not paie the satisfaction for our Sinnes, howsoeuer Adam did, and we still doe sinne, most properlie with our Soules. This is but a straw in your waie; for you stiflie, but absurdly, if not impiously defend, that Christ died the death of the Soule;* 1.87 yet because the Scriptures and Fa∣thers with one consent auouch the contrarie, yea S. Austen is so peremptorie therein that he asketh, QVIS AVDEAT DICERE, VVHO DARE AFFIRME IT? you shall giue mee leaue to tell you that the Apostle denieth your Maior, till you can make it good, not by your own vnlearned frensie, but by good testimonie of Scripture, that Christ did die the death of the Soule. Now by your assumption, that Adam

most proper∣lie committed sinne in his soule;

If you mean that Adams soule was the agent, his body the Instrument which the soule vsed as in all sins, so in this; that indéed is most true, but directly repugnant to your conclusion. Put that for your Minor, that

Adams soule transgressed the commaundement with hir bodie and by hir bodie; the conclusion then followeth in spite of your hart; ergo in satisfying for sinne the Soule of Christ must be punished with hir bodie & by hir bodie; which is the thing you labour to ouerthrowe with all the wits you haue. Meane you otherwise that Adam brake the Commaunde∣ment of God, not by his bodie properlie, but by his soule? Then is your assumption a manifest contradiction to the fact of Adam. For with his eares he heard the perswasion of the woman, with his eies he liked the forbidden fruit, with his hand he tooke it, with his mouth he did eat it, which was the fact that God preciselie did prohibit. God did not saie to A∣dam thou shalt not like it, or desire it, which the soule of Adam did, but THOV SHALT NOT EATE THEREOF, which could not bee performed but by the hand and mouth of A∣dam: and therefore Adam transgressed the commandement not by his soule, but by his bodie, euen as in murder, theft, & adulterie, these facts men commit by their bodies and not by their soules.

[But in that and all other sinnes brought to effect, the soule, you will saie, is the principall agent, the bodie is but the Instrument.] I grant it willinglie; and thence I conclude, ergo in the satisfaction for sinne, the soule must be the principall patient and dolent, and the bodie by Gods iustice must be the instrument of her paine. And here marke I praie thée (Christian Reader) whether this one ar∣gument doe not vtterlie ouerthrow all that this idle discour∣ser hath doone, and would doe in this whole pamphlet. For nothing is more proportionable to Gods iustice, then to ioine them in paine, that were ioyned in sinne; and to re∣taine the same order in punishing, which they kept in offen∣ding. But all prouocations and pleasures of sinnes the soule ••aketh from her bodie, all acts of sinne she committeth by her bod••e: therefore the iustice of God both temporallie and

eternallie punisheth the soule by the bodie; that as it hath beene the Instrument of her pleasure, so it shall bee of her paine. And if GOD obserue this course as well in his temporall as eternall vengeance on the sinnes of men, whie then shoulde not the sufferinges of Christes soule by his bodie bee truelie and properlie a satisfaction for sinne, which this great Doctor a little before said,

* 1.88 made not properlie to our Redemption?

For thy better instruction, gentle Reader, and my dis∣charge, that the soule taketh her occasions to sinne, vseth her delightes in sinne, and perfourmeth her attemptes of sinne, with and by the bodie, giue mee leaue in this point to bee somewhat the longer. z 1.89 Caro est officina spi∣ritus, qui in ea et per eam, quaecunque affectauerit, peragit & consummat. The flesh (saith Cyprian) is the forge of the soule, which in that and by that acteth and performeth, what∣soeuer it affecteth. a 1.90 Per quinque sensus, quasi per quasdam fenestras vitiorum ad animam est introitus. By the fiue senses of the bodie (saieth Ierome) as it were by certaine windowes, vices (or sinnes) haue their entrance into the soule. b 1.91 Nus∣quam animasine carne est quamdiuest in carne; NIHIL NON CVM ILLA AGIT, sine qua non est; siquidem in carne, & cum carne, & per carnem agitur ab anima, quod agitur in corde. The soule (saieth Tertullian) is no where without the flesh, as long as it is in the flesh. SHEE DOTH NOTHING VVITHOVT THAT, without which shee is not. Euen that which is done in the heart, the soule doth in her flesh, with her flesh, and by her flesh: Yea hee presseth it farther and saieth; c 1.92 A deó non sola anima tran∣sigit vitam, vt nec cogitatus licet solos, licet non ad effectum per carnem deductos, auferamus a collegio carnis. Et sine opere et sine effectu cogitatus, carnis est actus. Negent factorum societa∣tem, cui negare non possunt cogitatorum. Et si anima est, quae a∣git & impellit in omnia, carnis obsequium est. So farre it is that

the soule alone doth perfourme this life, that the VERIE THOVGHTS IN THEM SELVES, neuer brought to effect, we take not frō the fellowship of the flesh. Yea the very thought VVITHOVT ACT, VVITHOVT EFFECT, IS A DEEDE of the flesh. Let them now denie that to be the soules companion in works, which they cannot denie to bee her companion in thoughts. For though it be the soule, that mooueth and leadeth to all things, yet the flesh addeth her seruice. And least it should seeme strange that he affirmeth, he pointeth to the words of our Sauiour, d 1.93 out of the hart come. euill thoughts. How trew this is that Tertullian here voucheth thou shalt soone perceiue (gentle Reader) if thou behould men in SLEEPE, in FRENSIES, in LETHARGIES, in APOPLEXIES; where the substance of the soule is no waie touched or decaied; but onelie the Instruments of her bodie, which she vseth in per∣ceiuing, remembring, vnderstanding anie thing, are distem∣pered, or obstructed. The experience hereof, is so easie and eui∣dent euen to the simplest among men, that I shall néede to spend no more words to the learned. Tertullians conclusion is this.* 1.94 deum non licet aut iniustum iudicē credi, aut inertem; in∣iustū, si sociam bonorum operum a praemiis arceat; inertem, si sociā malorū a suppliciis secernat. Non sit particeps in sententia caro, si non fuerit & in causa. Non possunt ergo separari in mercede, quas opera coniung it. We maie not thinke God to bee an iniurious, or a negligent Iudge: iniurious, if he exclude the (soules) compa∣nion in good works from (the soules) reward; negligent, if he ex∣cuse the (soules) partner in euill, from the (soules) punishments. Let the flesh haue no part in the sentence, if it had no part in the cause. They cannot be seuered in wages, that were ioyned in worke. If Tertullians assumption be true, that in this life the soule can neither work, speake, perceiue, desire, nor think good or euill without the Instruments of her bodie; (excepting alwaies Gods power to inspire what pleaseth him; for hee that framed the soule can alter and chaunge it at his liking, by the immediate working of his spirit;) if Tertullians con∣clusion

be true, that God the righteous iudge of the world in his euerlasting reward of obedience, & likewise in his eter∣nall vengeance for sinne will ioine and couple both bodie and soule togither; then apparentlie NO SVFFERINGS ARE SO FIT in THE PERSON OF THE REDEEMER FOR THE SATISFACTION of sinne, as those VVHICH ARE COMMON TO DOTH PARTS OF MAN, & namely which the soule suffereth from her bodie & by her bodie; which ouerthroweth all the Confuters vnsalted and vnsettled dis∣course of the soules proper and immediate suffering in the person of Christ Iesus.

Doe I then denie that the soule hath anie sufferings in this life and the next, which come not by the bodie? By no meanes. For though those conioined sufferings be most an∣swerable to sinnes committed; yet the soule hath some pro∣per punishments in this life, as sorrow and feare, when the bodie hath no hurt, from which Christ was not frée as ap∣peereth by his Agonie: and so in the next the soules of the wicked haue griefe and remorse besides the paine of fier. The remembrance of sinne shall not a little torment the wicked, but perpetuallie afflict and gnaw their consciences as a worme that neuer dieth. The losse of Gods fauour and kingdome shall not a little greeue them, when they sée others receiued into that eternall ioye and blisse, and them∣selues excluded. f 1.95 Gehenna grauius est a dei beneuolentia exci∣dere; to fall from Gods fauour (saith Chrysostome) is more grieuous then hell it selfe; and againe, g 1.96 Ego illius gloriae amissionem multo amarius quam ipsius gehennae supplicium esse dico. Intoler abilis quidem res est gehenna: quis nesciat & suppli∣cium illud horribile? tamen si mille quis ponat gehennas, nihil tale dicturus est quale est a beatae illius gloriae honore repelli. The losse of that (euerlasting) glorie I saie is farre bitterer then the torments of hell it selfe. Hell is an intolerable thing, and an horrible punishment: who knoweth it not? Yet if a man

would put a thousand hels hee shall saie no such thing as this is, to bee repelled from the honour of that blessed glo∣rie. Neither of these two could be in the person of our Saui∣our, much lesse the paine of hell fier; no nor so much as the feare or doubt, that anie of these should or could light vppon him; which amazeth and driueth the wic∣ked to desperation in this life, and often afrighteth the godlie, when they behold and consider the horror of their owne sinnes, and the dreadfull power of the Iudge. But this feare could not possesse the soule of our Sauiour, be∣ing alwaies most assured of Gods fauour, and certaine∣lie knowing, not onlie the counsell and decree of his father, that annointed and sent him to saue his people from their sinnes; but chieflie the coniunction of his hu∣mane nature with his diuine, in the vnitie of his per∣son, which neither sinne, nor death, nor diuell, nor hell could infringe or frustrate: And touching the feare of hell torments, which this discourser would faine hide vn∣der the name of Gods wrath, heare (Christian Reader) what an ancient father or two saie. Cyrill examining the cause of Christs teares and praiers in the garden, and of his words, my soule is sorrowfull vnto death; repelleth the feare of hell to be the cause therof with some indignation.* 1.97 Sed infernum tim••it, inquiunt: mirum est quod haec audeant dicere. But he feared hell, they saie: It is a marueilous thing that they dare so saie. And when others affirmed,m 1.98 congruit ipsi mortem formidare, periculum suspicari, flere in tētationibus, et opus habere alterius manu vt seruetur, & ad haec discere obe∣dientiam ex iis quae tētādo passus est; It was fit for Christ to feare death, to suspect danger, to weepe in temptations, to haue neede of another to saue him, and to learne obedience by those temptations which he suffered, Cyrill replieth; hoc est ab∣surdè & loqui & sentire, this is an ABSVRD BOTH SPEECH AND THOVGHT. His owne opinion is this. n 1.99 Igitur nos eramus in illo, tanquam in secundo generis principio, cum clamo∣re

valido, & non sine lachrym••s adorantes, & aboleri mortis imperium, roborarique vitam olim naturae donatam precantes. Therefore wee were in Christ, as in the second roote of our nature, worshipping with strong cries & teares, & praying the imperie of death might bee abolished, and the life which was giuen to man at the first strengthned.o 1.100 Athanasius in like manner.o 1.101 Quî (quaeso) non absurdum impiumque, hunc dicere mortem aut infernum exhor••uisse, ad cuius conspectum Iani∣tores inferorum metu se contraxerunt? How I praie you can it be but ABSVRD and IMPIOVS to saie that (Christ) feared death or hell, at the sight of whom the keepers of hell for feare shruncke awaie? Hilarie hauing cited Christs praier in the garden, and his complaint on the Crosse, and his com∣mending his soule into his fathers handes, as proofes brought by others of Christs feare at the tyme of his pas∣sion, saith;p 1.102 hoc legens, & non intelligens, aut piè tacuisses, aut etiam religio se intelligentiam eius orasses: non magis per impudentem assertionem stulto furore veritatis incapax vaga∣ueris. Anne tibi metuere infernum chaos, & torrentes flam∣mas, & omnem paenarum vltricium abyssum credendus est, di∣cens latroni in cruce, Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in Paradiso? Reading this and not vnderstanding it, thou shoul∣dest either with pietie hould thy peace, or religiouslie praie for the right vnderstanding thereof, and not with an impu∣dent assertion wander in a foolish madnesse, as vncapable of the trueth. Wilt thou beleeue Christ feared hell gulfe, and those burning flames and depth of penall vengeance, when as hee told the thiefe on the Crosse, verelie I saie to thee, this daie shalt thou bee with mee in Paradice? What would these fathers haue saied to these that defend Christ suffered the verie same torments of hell which the damned doe, when they are soe earnest a∣gainst such as imagined Christ might haue some feare of hell?

In that which is past I haue giuen thee a view (Christi∣an

an Reader) how scornfully this Confuter reiecteth the iudg∣ments of the auncient fathers by mee alleaged tou••••ing the causes of Christs agonie in the garden, and his com∣plainte on the Crosse; as likewise how forgetfullie hee changeth, or purposelie maimeth my reasons, that hee maie the better auoyde them: and thirdlie how vncer∣tayne his propositions, and how lame his conclusions are, that hee maketh for his owne side, yea often such as ouerthrowe his owne assertion; Thou shalt heare now some of his speciall reasons, as hee calleth them; but as the trueth is, some of his speciall absurdities, and impie∣ties: wherein I will be no longer then of force I must bee; I take little pleasure in raking such an vncleane sinke.

The first is:

k 1.103 Christ suffered the paines and sorrowes for sinne which we should.

This proposition (Sir confuter) if you take it indefinitlie as it lieth; prooueth nothing for you: you maie do well to goe to the Uniuersitie againe, whence you came afore you were wise, and there learne to put quantitie to your propositions, that wee maie know when you speake of any thing, whether you meane ALL or SOME: for if you meane here, that Christ suffered ALL that wee should, this proposition is an horrible blasphemie: then Christ suffered the LOSSE of Gods GRACE, SPIRITE, FAVOVR, LIFE, and KINGDOME, for so should wee; then hee was plunged into finall desperation, irreuocable malediction, and eternall condemnation; for so should wee. [You are farre from that frensie, you will saie.] I hope so too; neither doe I charge you with it; but if your propo∣sition bee generall you cannot auoide it; and therefore, after your loose and trifling manner, you sette downe a doubtfull assertion, that maie serue for all, or for part of y^• which wee should haue suffered. If you meane but part, then your proposition prooueth no such thing, as you intend. For you would faine from hence inferre, that Christ suffered the paines of hell, which were due to vs; & if hee suffered but

part of that which wee should, a wise Christian will suppose anie part, rather then the paines of hell; howbeit the Apostle teacheth mee to saie that l 1.104 Christ died for our Sinnes according to the Scriptures, and that death was the death of the Crosse, m 1.105 He humbled himself & became obedient vnto death, euen to the death of the crosse. [That is no sufficiēt answere, you wil saie; because on the Crosse n 1.106 He sustained our sorrowes, as Esaie said he should.] The wordes of Esaie are not, as you would faine haue them, he bare ALL our sorrowes, for then he must haue sorrowed for the losse of gods grace, fauour & king∣dome, as I said before; but the prophet saith, he bare our sor∣rowes, which maie receiue a double construction, and either of them verie religious and christian. The first, whatsoeuer hee felt or suffered it was ours, not his owne, that is for our sakes, and for our Sinnes. This the Prophet in the words following confirmeth, He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruized for our iniquities. The next is, he sustained our sorrowes that is such weaknes, faintnes, & wearines, as are incident to our nature; and that the Prophet confesseth in the words before, He is a man full of sorrowes, and hath experi∣ence of infirmities, euen of such as naturallie offend & afflict vs. But when the scripture faileth you, you flie to similitudes of your owne making, and where Paule saith, o 1.107

Christ gaue himselfe a ransome for all;

you saie,

p 1.108 the Scripture speaking heere after the common vse, and custome of redeeming cap∣tiues taken in warre doth meane that Christ paid for vs THE SAME PRICE which else wee should haue paid.

First whoe told you that the Scripture speaketh here after the common vse of Enimies, since in our Saluation the sonne of God interposed himselfe as a mediator with his father, to an∣swere what the iustice of God would require at the hands of his sonne, for the pardoning of a seruant, that had offen∣ded? You and your friends cannot abide to heare, that the enimie who had vs in captiuitie should haue any price for our deliuerance; you condemne that as a Manicheisme;

and doe you nowe for an aduantage vrge that the ene∣mie must haue a price for his captiue? Secondlie the price that wee shoulde haue paide was eternall condemnation of bodie and soule into hell fire. If Christ paide the same, looke wel least with séeking helpe from an enemie, you light not on open blasphemie. Lastlie to ioyne with you in your owne similitude, is it not the common vse in warres to redeeme captiuitie with monie? The Captiue himselfe is tyed to perpetuall imprisonment or seruitude; hee that will ransome a prisoner is not bounde to bee a Prisoner himselfe, but to yéelde such recompence in money or other∣wise, as the conquerour shall demaunde. So that e∣uen by your owne comparison, it is euident, the sonne of GOD in redeeming vs was not tied to our captiui∣tie, but might yeelde his Father a greater recompence for our absolution, then our condemnation woulde haue a∣mounted vnto.

Your seconde speciall follie (Sir Confuter) is groun∣ded vpon the wordes of Saint Paule.

* 1.109 Christ redeemed vs from the curse of the Lawe beeing made a curse for vs. Whence you reason; It is vaine and senselesse to thinke that the A∣postle speaketh here of two seueral kindes of curses. And if Christ sustained anie curse for vs, what curse could it be? not the curse of the lawe? or what was it? not the curse of God?

If you aske to learne, you may bee soone taught. If you aske to brag, you maie be soone cooled. The curse of God vpon the sinne of man proceedeth from the wrath of God against the sinne of man; howbeit God curseth not onelie sinners, but other his creatures, with whom he is not angrie, but only because they shoulde not serue the pride and lustes of the wicked. When Adam transgressed▪ God cursed the earth for his sinne in saying, p 1.110 Cursed is the earth for thy sake, thornes and thistles shall it bring thee. For not onelie the soules and bo∣dies of the wicked are cursed and consumed with plagues resting in them, and on them; but all that they take in hand,

and all that belongth to them is accursed like wise. q 1.111 If thou wilt not (saieth Moses) obey the voice of the Lorde thy God to doe all his commaundementes, then all these curses shall come vpon thee and ouertake thee. Cursed shall thy basket bee, and thy store. Cursed shall bee the fruite of thy bodie, and the fruite of thy lande, the increase of thy kine, and the flockes of thy sheepe. The Lorde will sende vpon thee cur∣sing in all that which thou settest thine hande to doe, vntill thou bee destroyed and perish, because of the wickednesse of thy workes. The rest of GODS curses there numbred vnto the ende of that Chapter, and laide vpon bodie and soule, wife and children, goods and landes, life and death of such as transgresse; peruse (gentle Reader) at thy le••••ure, and thou shalt easilie see, how farre the curse of GOD in this life pursueth sinners; besides the horri∣ble tormentes of the nexte life kept in store for them. So that as I did in the wrath of God, I must in the curse of God aske you (Sir Confuter) whether you meane that Christ suffered for vs the whole curse of the lawe, or parte thereof? if you aunswere the whole; looke in that place which I now cited, how manie kinds of curses there be reck∣ned, which neuer touched our Sauiour; besides the graunde curse which closeth vp all, and continueth for euer; r 1.112 Depart from me ye CVRSED into euerlasting fire. If you saie a parte; then proue you nothing with your hot and sharpe spurres as you thinke, when you saie;

what curse could it be? not the curse of the law? or what else? not the curse of God?

Christ suffered a parte of that curse, which God by his owne mouth laid on Adam and all his posteritie for sinne. s 1.113 By one man sinne entred into the worlde (saieth Paul) and by sinne death. hee also suffered other partes of the curse, which GOD by his t 1.114 lawe threatned vnto sinners, to wit u 1.115 shame and TROVBLE, x 1.116 VVRONG and VIOLENCE, y 1.117 CAPTIVITY and MISERY, y 1.118 THIRST and NAKEDNES, z 1.119 GRIEFE and PAYNE of bodie and minde. Besides, the verie kinde of death, to

which he submitted himselfe was accursed by speciall words in the law, a 1.120 accursed is euery one that hangeth on the Tree. Now to verifie the words of S. Paul, that Christ redeemed vs from the curse of the law due to our sinnes, being made a curse for vs; it sufficeth that the sonne of God, being equall with his Father in glorie and maiestie, vouchsafed to vnder∣goe not all the partes of our curse, but some partes there∣of. Gods euerlasting curse which is most due to sinne, I hope you will free him from. Gods spirituall curse, by which he depriueth the wicked of his trueth, of his grace and other giftes of his spirite, you must likewise cleare the sonne of GOD from. Hee cannot be subiected to that parte of Gods curse without apparant impietie. Take from him trueth, you make him a lyar; take from him grace you charge him with a reprobate minde; take from him the Spirit of GOD, you giue place to Satan to worke in him as in the children of vnbeliefe. I trust (Sir Refuter) you bee neither so wicked as to thinke, neither so desperate as to defend, that the sonne of God might suffer any of these curses. Then haue you boldelie, but falsely and lewdly con∣cluded out of S. Paul, that he putteth

b 1.121 a part of the iust curse of the lawe, thereby meaning the whole.

Are you so well ac∣quainted with Saint Paules minde, that of your owne heade, to vphold your humorous fansie, you will vrge his meaning without his wordes, to support a manifest falsitie? The whole curse of the law containeth infatuation of minde, obduration of heart, desperation, damnation; and what not? did Paul meane, that Christ was made these thinges for vs? or could hee haue redéemed vs, if in these things he had beene yoked with vs? But that I thinke (Sir Refuter,) you sinne of ignorance, not meaning to maintaine these blasphemies, and yet including them within the largenesse of your words, through the weaknesse of your wit, I must by the duty which I owe to God, and his truth, haue giuen you other termes, then now I do; but I had rather fatherly warne you to take

heede of these ••••ies in time, least they bring the whole curse of God vpon your owne sou••e, which you would so ••ame fa∣sten on Christs.

Notwithstanding your follie thus to presume without all proofe vpon the Apostles meaning besides his wordes, you haue a good conceit of your self, & like a proper man you say,

I vrge then,c 1.122 let it be noted▪ Christ is said to be made a curse for vs; and before I shewed this curse was Gods curse And againe.d 1.123 The Scripture it selfe affirmeth, hee did all that for vs: therefore who dareth denie it? Who either man or Angel shall presume to say nay?

You haue vrged it, I haue noted it, and so haue ma∣nie wise and good men more; and will you heare what I conceiue? Trulie this; you haue more néede of Phisicke to cure your braines, then of labour to rebate your argu∣ments. So many, and those speciall reasons, so proudlie propo∣sed, so weaklie performed, so ••alselie concluded, did I neuer reade as long as I haue liued. Thou wilt thinke perchance (christian Reader) I speake this to disgrace the encounterer, and so to preiudice his cause with thee; mine heart God knoweth; but if thou bee not of the same minde with mee be∣fore I ende with his speciall reasons, as hee calleth them, I much deceiue my selfe; speciallie if thou thy selfe bee intelli∣gent and indifferent.

I hope, though I vaunt not, as he doth, there can bee no doubt, but the curse of God for sinne containeth these partes which I propose; to wit, the externall, corporall, spirituall, & eter∣nall plagues and punishments, wherewith God pursueth the wicked that rebell against him. I count it as cleare, that nei∣ther the eternall, nor the true spirituall curse of God cou••d take hold on the soule of our Sauiour. For as the greatest bles∣sings that God giueth vs in this life, after he hath by mercie pardoned our sinnes, are the faith of his truth, to direct vs, the strength of his grace, to assist vs, the earnest of his spirite to perswade our hearts of his fatherlie clemencie to vs, and to inflame vs againe with the loue of his name, hope

of his promises, and desire of his kingdome; so the greatest curse for sinne, that in this life maie befall men, is to haue his holie spirite taken from them, with all his gra∣ces and gifts, that anie waie tende to saluation, and to bee giuen ouer into a reprobate sense, that with blindnesse and hardnesse of heart, they may runne headlong to their owne destruction. With these impieties and blasphemies, I trust no Christian will burthen the soule of our Sauiour; and yet these are the true spirituall curses of God against sinne. If then the soule of Christ were alwayes e 1.124 full of grace and truth, and the abundance of his spirite such, that e 1.125 wee all receiue of his fulnesse; If in the perfection of his holinesse, innocen∣cie and obedience there coulde bee no defect; nor anie feare or doubt in that stedfast assurance of faith, hope and loue, which our Sauiour alwayes retained; howe could hee bee∣ing so fullie and perpetuallie blessed of God, b••e also trulie accursed of him? The curse of God is not in wordes, but in déedes. Then euidentlie saint Paules meaning is and must be, that Christ, voluntarilie vndertaking some part of the curse due to our sinnes, (for the whole hee could not vn∣dertake without reprobation and damnation;) not onlie dis∣charged vs of the whole, but gaue vs the blessing of God pro∣mised to Abraham. And to this ende I brought the testimo∣nies of saint Austen, Chrysostome, and others, fullie confir∣ming that I said: to which you replie, as your custome is; f 1.126

It is vaine and senselesse to thinke that the Apostle here speaketh of two seuerall kinds of curses.

Indeede it is vaine and fruitlesse to reason with him, that preferreth his ignorant imagina∣tion, before the iudgements of all the learned, and auncient fathers in Christs church; but Sir, your follies will sticke fast by you, when their expositions shall passe with all wise men for currant and good.

You quarrell as your manner is, with those parts of the curse, which I say Christ indured. For where I proposed a SHAMEFVL, VVRONGFVL & PAINFVL death to be that

part of the curse, which Christ suffered for vs; you skirre at euerie one of these; And of the first you say: g 1.127

Will any man of common reason affirme that (to be openly hanged on a tree) was all the curse that Christ bore for vs? Nothing but the shame of the world, because it was an ignominious death?

Whether you account saint Austen, and saint Chrysostome, men of com∣mon reason I know not; The Church this 1200. yeeres hath taken them for reuerend and learned fathers. You adde,

It is more then absurd so to say.

Iudge thou (Christian reader) whether this Prater be well in his wits, that in his ••renzie thus reprocheth, not onelie the fathers of Christes church, but euen the Prophets and Apostles themselues, as men more then absurd, and not of common reason. Moses from Gods mouth threatneth such as transgresse the lawe, that God will send themh 1.128 trouble and shame, and will make them a i 1.129 wonder, a prouerbe, and a common talke among all people. Esay foreshewing Christs sufferings, reckoneth this not for one of the least: k 1.130 He was despised, reiected & numbred among sinners; we did iudge him plagued and smitten of God, and tur∣ned our faces from him. Dauid in the person of Christ, com∣plaining of the wrongs receiued at the time of his passion; putteth this as the first and the chiefest, l 1.131 I am (as) a worme and not a man; a shame of men, and the contempt of the peo∣ple. All they that see mee haue mee in derision; they make a mowe, and nod the heade, saying, he trusted in God, let him deliuer him, let him saue him. They gape vpon mee with their mouthes. Saint Paule himselfe vrgeth as much the shame, as the paine of the crosse; m 1.132 Looke to Iesus the authour and finisher of your faith, who for the ioy set before him endured the crosse and despised the SHAME. He endured such contra∣diction of sinners least you should faint in your mindes. How of∣ten doth God threaten shame and confusion of face to those that fall from him? How earnestly doth Dauid euery where pray against it? Howe truly doth Daniel make this confes∣sion to god?n 1.133 O Lord to vs belongeth OPEN SHAME because

we haue sinned against thee; the CVRSE is powred vpon vs written in the law of Moses; because of our sinnes, Ierusalem and thy people are a REPROCH to all about vs. If the scriptures were not cleare, that shame and reproch is a chiefe part of Gods curse against sinne, howe manie wise men and good men choose death before shame? What generous nature doth not more decline slandering then wounding? In common reason to which you appeale, howe can it bee lesse wrong or griefe, to whippe the soule with reproches, then the bodie with scourges? Uerily our Sauiour who best knoweth the waight of both, giueth like reward to both: o 1.134 Blessed are you when men reuile you, and speake all maner of euill against you for my sake, falselie; reioice and be glad, for great is your reward in heauen.

As you shuffle with the shame, which our Sauiour suffe∣red on the Crosse, so you doe with his death; affirming that

Death may p 1.135 in no sort heere be called a curse, because death to the godlie is no q 1.136 curse properlie, nor punishment of sinne, but a benefite and aduantage.

You are too yoong a Doc∣tor to controll Saint Austen, whose wordes I haue alled∣ged in the Treatise at large. His resolution is, that when Paule saieth, Christ was made a curse for vs, he meant Christ died for vs. Idem est mortuus quod maledictus, quoniam mors ipsa ex maledicto est. It is all one to saie, Christ died for vs, and hee was accursed for vs; because death came from the curse. This you denie; for that the godlie after death goe to heauen, which is rather a benefite then a curse to them. Good Sir, it is no benefite of death it selfe, but Christes blessing after death, that departing this life, wee goe to heauen. Did you incourage men to die, since of force for sinne dwelling in their bodies they must die; it were well said, that death is rest from their labours, and an en∣trance into blisse, for so Christ hath prouided for his, when they goe hence: but if you will reason what death is in it selfe, you must resolue it to be a part of Gods curse inflicted on

Adam for sinne, and from him naturallie deriued to all his posterity; from which though our soules be exempted, and our bodies shall be restored▪ yet it remaineth to this day a part of Adams punishment, which can not bee auoided, though it must not bee feared, because Christ hath ouerthrowne the force and feare therof with his death.r 1.137 By one man (saith Paul meaning Adam) sinne entred into the world, and by sin death. I hope it entered not as a blessing; God do••h not vse to blesse sinne: but it entered as a part of the wages of sinne, or curse for sinne, and so it doth and shall continue, to the ende. s 1.138 The last enemie that shall be destroied (saith Paul) is death; when this mortall hath put on immortalitie, then is death swallowed vp in victorie; till then the sting of death is sinne. If the death of the bodie be an enemie and must be destroied by Christs second comming, then is it no blessing; for those shall increase, when hee appeareth in glorie.t 1.139 If Christ be in you (saith Paul) the spi∣rit is life for righteousnes sake, the bodie is deade because of sinne. If sinne bee the cause of death yet seazing on our bo∣dies, it can bee no blessing, that riseth from so badde a cause; neither could the resurrection of our bodies, which Christ hath promised, and we expect at the last day, bee so great a ioy as it is; if the corruption of our bodies in the meane time were a blessing. Gods blessings be not contrarie one to the o∣ther. S. Austen learnedlie resolueth this question in this sort. u 1.140 Boni benè moriuntur, quamuis mors sit malum. The godlie die well, though death be euill. * 1.141 Mors hominis ex poena peccati est, quia ex peccato factum est vt moriatur. The death of mans body commeth from the punishment of sinne, because sinne brought it to passe, that man dieth. This conclusion in exact wordes Prosper collecteth out of saint Austen. y 1.142 Mors etiam p••orum poe∣na peccati est. The corporall death euen of the godlie is the pu∣nishment of sinne. This collection to bee true, S. Austen him∣selfe confirmeth. z 1.143 Si vero quom mouet, cur velipsam patiantur, si & ipsa poenapeccati est, quorum per gratiam reatus aboletur tam ista quaestio in alio nostro opere, quod inscripsimus de Bap∣tismo

paruulorum tractata ac soluta est. If it moue any man, why they, whose sinne is abolished by grace, doe yet suffer the death of the bodie, if that death bee a punishment of sinne, that Question I haue handled and resolued in another worke of mine, intituled of the baptisme of infants. The effect of his reso∣lution here is this. * 1.144 Per ineffabilem dei misericordiam & ipsa poena vitiorum transit in arma virt••tis, & sit meritū iusti, etiam suppliciū peccatoris, NON QVIA MORS BONVM ALIQVOD FACTA EST, QVAE ANTEA MALVM FVIT, sed tantam deus fidei praestitit gratiam vt mors instrumentum fieret, per quod transiretur in vitam. By the vnspeakeable mercie of God, the verie wages of vice becommeth an instrument of vertue, and the punishment of a sinner is made the merite of the righteous: not that death, VVHICH BEFORE VVAS EVILL, IS NOVV BECOME ANIE GOOD THING, but God hath shewed so great fauour to our faith, that death is the waie or meane by which wee shall passe to life. And so concludeth, that y 1.145Pie fideliterque tolerando auget meritum patientiae, non au∣fert vocabulum poenae; By induring (the death of the bodie) religiouslie and faithfullie the merite of patience is increased, but the name of the punishment is not altered. And if death were nowe no part of the punishment of our sinnes, but a gaine to the godlie as you woulde haue it, by what meanes I praie you came it so to bee? Not by the resur∣rection of Christ conquering death, and changing the na∣ture of it? Then till Christ was risen, death was a pu∣nishment to the faithfull themselues; and consequentlie when Christ died for our sinnes, hee tooke vpon him a part of our curse, which after he turned, as you saie, into a blessing.z 1.146Pri∣mus parens propter transgressionem mortis poenam intulit, verum superceniens Christus haec omnia abstulit. Neque enim mors, vltra mors est, sed nomen tantum habet mortis. Our first pa∣rent by his transgression brought in the punishment of death: But Christ comming after tooke all away. For death is no longer death, but hath onelie the name of death,a 1.147 Ipsam mor∣tem,

quamuis esset poena peccati, pro nobis tamen sine peccato Chri∣stus per soluit. Death it selfe, (saieth Austen) though it were the punishment of sinne, yet Christ that was without sinne vnder∣tooke it for our sakes▪ And so for anie thing you haue yet said, or shall euer be able to say, Saint Austens assertion, which I cited before, standeth good; that because the death of the bodie was a part of the curse inflicted vpon Adams sinne, Christ vndertaking that part of the curse for vs, that is, dying in his bodie, loosed vs from the whole curse of the lawe.

Against Chrysostomes iudgement, that not onelie death, but the very kind of death which Christ died, was accursed by the very words of the lawe, saying, accursed is hee that han∣geth on a tree▪ you replie:b 1.148

Not euery one that is hanged is cur∣sed: for manie innocents and martyrs are hanged, who are most blessed; but euerie one that is iustlie hanged is accursed, and so was Christ here c 1.149condenmed by the iust sentence of the lawe to paie his debts, for whome hee had willinglie and aduisedlie vn∣dertaken. And so indeede he bare the true curse of the lawe.

Chry∣sostoms iudgement is as I reported it. d 1.150 Crux signum erat mortis maledictae, mortis omnium diffamatissimae. Hoc enim solū mortis genus maledictioni erat obnoxium. The crosse was a signe of a cursed death, of a death most infamous. This onelie kinde of death was subiected to the curse. And againe. e 1.151Non quaeuis mors isti similis est, ista nam{que} omnium videbatur esse probrosissi∣ma, ista plena dedecore, ista maledicta. Propterea Iudaei satagebant eum ista morte interimere, vt sinemo abstineret ab eo quod esset occisus, abstineret tamen vel ideo, quod hoc pacto esset occisus. Not euerie death was like to this. This seemed most reproch∣full, most shamefull and accursed. Therefore the Iewes laboured to put him to this kind of death, that if no man would refuse him because he was killed, at least yet they should forsake him, for that he died this vild kinde of death. The kinde of death which christ submitted himself vnto was a shameful, & a cursed kind of death; as for the cause of christs death, Chrysostom was far

from thinking Christ was iustlie hanged; he saith Christ thus honoured his father,f 1.152Non coactus, nec inuitus sed & hoc ex suae ipsius virtute; not cōstrained, nor vnwilling, but of his own virtue or humilitie. And the Apostle warranteth Chrysostoms speech, for he saith:g 1.153 Christ humbled himselfe, and was obedient to the death, euen to the death of the crosse. But what warranteth your spéech that

h 1.154 Christ was hanged on the tree by the iust sen∣tence of the lawe?

I had thought he had suffered the i 1.155 iust for the vniust; and hauing no sinne had beene willinglie, and by no sentence of the law, hanged on a tree.k 1.156

Is it wrong (you aske) for the law to lay the penaltie on the suretie, when the debtor cannot discharge it? But if it be meere and true iustice, and no wrong, then was Christ by the iust sentence of the lawe hanged on the tree, and so he bare indeed the true curse of the law. l 1.157 For though God alwayes loued and imbraced Christ in regard of his owne in∣nocent person, yet in another regard of our person, which he sustai∣ned, we may say God HATED him, God CVRSED him. m 1.158 Yea he tooke our person on him, and so became by our sins, SINFVLL, DEFI∣LED, HATEFVL, & ACCVRSED.

Is this the holines of your cause you haue in hand, Sir refuter▪ with a simple similitude against the scriptures, against the faith, against the fathers, against the consciences of gods people, openly to pronounce the eternall and euerlasting sonne of God SINFVL, DEFI∣LED, HATEFVL, & accursed of his father, for that he took vpon him the punishment of our sinnes? Your similitude had néed be sound, that shall beare the waight of these wordes; if you faile, can you tell howe déeply you come within the iust sentence of gods law, for opening your irreligious mouth a∣gainst God, and his sonne? but thereof anon.

In the meane while, because with scorning Chrysostom, you make way to your vnholy cōceit, that Christ being truly ac∣cursed in soule for the guilt of mans sinne

n 1.159 was iustlie hanged by the sentence of the lawe, and say it is VAINE and SENCE∣LESSE to thinke the Apostle speaketh there of two kinds of cur∣ses (as Chrysostom affirmeth) but rather that o 1.160hanging on a tree

is set downe as a part for the whole execution of Gods iust curse, and argueth the whole to be on Christ,

let vs see whether you, or Chrysostom, hee deceiued. p 1.161 As many as are of the workes of Gods lawe, are vnder the curse, (saith Paul;) for it is written, Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the lawe, to do them. We shall agree I hope that this is Gods curse, both temporall and eternall, laid on the bodies and soules of sinners, for transgressing a∣nie part of Gods commandementes, proposed in his lawe; and to this all that haue sinned are subiected, because it is the GENERALL curse, EXECVTED by God himself vpon ALL sinne committed, either in deede, word, or thought. q 1.162 From this curse (saith Paul) Christ hath redeemed vs, beeing made a curse for vs, as it is written, Cursed is euerie one, that hangeth on a tree. If this be all one with the other, then euerie man that transgressed Gods law in thought, word, or deede, was by the sentence of the lawe to bee hanged on a f••ée. Shewe that sentence in the lawe, and Chrysostom shall yeelde vnto you; if you cānot, then hāging on a trée is no necessarie part of the generall curse of God vpon all sinners, and conse∣quentlie being no part of it, it is not all one with it, neither can it argue the whole to haue béen in Christ.

[How standeth the Apostles reason then that Christ was made a curse?]

where in sinne there are two thinges, the committing of it, and the reuenging of it by God or man in this life or the next; and magistrates had vnder Moses, as they haue vnder Christ, power giuen them from aboue r 1.163 as Gods ministers to take vengeance (in this life) on him that doth euill; the Apostle knowing that Christ, though he committed no sinne, was yet content to beare the punishment due to sinne in his bodie on the trée; and by his smart to abolish our fault; citeth a place out of Moses, where the Iudiciall and corporall punishment of a man by death is not onelie called a curse, but counted a satisfaction for sinne, which being suffered the law had ended his forme vpon the sufferer. And so concludeth that Christ

receauing a Iudiciall, and corporall punishment of death for our sinne, not onlie therein suffered the curse, but satisfied the force of the law, & by that curse of his suffering redéemed vs from the curse of our transgressing. The place cited out of Moses is this; * 1.164 if a man haue committed an offence worthy of death, and is (by the lawe) to die, and thou hang him on a tree: his body shall not remaine all night on the tree, but thou shalt bury him the same day; for the curse of God is (alreadie laid or executed) on him that is hanged. This most apparantly was a publike punishment executed by the magistrate vpon the body of the offender; and because by his open and shamefull death, which Moses rightlie calleth the curse of God, hee had satisfied the sentence of the Iudiciall lawe, God commandeth no far∣ther reproch to be offered his bodie, in suffering it to hang in all mens eies any longer, but to bee buried the same daie; For that by his death the curse of God ceased. The difference betwéene these two curses is soone perceiued. Euerie sinne receaued the first curse, whereof Paul spake before; fewe crimes receaued the iudgement of this seconde kinde of curse which was to bee hanged. The first was inflicted by God himselfe: the second was executed by the magistrate. The first touched bodie and soule, in this life and the next; the second ended with the death of the bodie. The first was committing of sinne, the seconde was suffering for sinne. And therefore Chrysostomes exposition is verie true, when hee saieth; * 1.165 The people were obnoxious to another curse, which was this; Cursed is euerie one, that continueth not in that which is written in the booke of the lawe, for there was not one of them that had fulfilled the whole Lawe; but Christ in∣steede of that, tooke vpon him another curse, which said, cursed is euery one that hangeth on the tree. He that should take away the first curse, must not bee subiect to the same, but vndertake an other in place thereof, and by that dissolue the first. As if one be∣ing adiudged to die (for some crime) an other, no way guilty of the same, but willing to die for him, should deliuer him from the

punishment: So did Christ; not being subiect to the curse of trās∣gression, insteede thereof he tooke an other curse, and dissolued the curse that laie on them.

[Before a man can be accursed by his death, hee must, you saie, be iustlie hanged; for manie Innocents and martyrs are hanged who are most blessed.]

Innocentes and martyrs, bee their soules neuer so blessed, maie beare in their bodies a shamefull death, as Christ did in his▪ and that is a kinde of corporall curse, though by men vniustlie inflicted, e∣uen as death in the godlie is a remnant of Gods curse vp∣on sinne, though their soules bee blessed before and after death. Yea the worde KALAL whence the Hebrewes de∣riue that which with them signifieth a curse, noteth also to make vilde and contemptible, as if shame, reproch, and contempt were the greatest outwarde curse, that coulde befall anie man in this life. The cause why wee suffer it, shall make it iust or vniust; but wee must call thinges by those names, which GOD first allotted them. Nowe death, shame, wrong, reproch, and such like, God orday∣ned at first to bee punishmentes of sinne, and so partes of the curse due to sinne. If wee suffer at mens handes for piety, that which God appointed to be the wages of iniquity, so wee bee patient and willing to abide the triall, which is righteous with God, though iniurious from men, the name is not altered, but the reward increased. Yea God it is, that causeth iudgement to beginne at his own house oftentimes, by the handes of persecutors; hee doth vs right, when men doe vs wrong; and dealeth not with vs according to our sinnes in the greatest wrongs that can be done vs. Therfore martyrs and innocents may do well to remember, that God hath cause enough, though man haue none; and so submit themselues as worthie of worse from Gods handes. But none of these thinges may be saide of our Sauiour, who a∣lone among all the children of men wanted sinne, and suf∣fered wrong; and therefore his punishments with God were

iust, not by his deseruing, but by his desiring to suffer for man. How then commeth it to passe, that martyrs, which are sin∣ners before God, are vniustlie hanged, because they deserue no such thing at mens handes; and Christ who was most in∣nocent before men, and most righteous before God, you wil needs haue to be iustly hanged?

[The suerty (you say) by his suertiship is a debtor to the creditor and to the law; and so Christ, though most innocent in himself, yet was hee iustlie hanged, as our suretie, by the iust sen∣tence of the law.]

You mistake, Sir Confuter, as well the sentence of the lawe, as the suertiship of Christ. For though mans lawe permit, which is the rule of charitie, that men should beare each others burdens, and vndertake one for an other in money matters, and such like things which God lea∣ueth in each mans will and power; yet tell me I praie, what lawe, Gods or mans, permitteth a murderer or like offen∣der to be spared, and an other, that is willing, to bee hanged in his steede? I thinke mans law will allow you no such su∣ertiship, I am sure Gods lawe will not. u 1.166 As I liue, saith the Lord, the soule that sinneth, that soule shall die. The wickednes of the wicked shall bee vpon himselfe. Hee shall haue then no suerties to die for him, much lesse shall his suertie be compel∣led to die by the sentence of the law. Their monie men may giue awaie; but their liues they may not, till God call for them; and if not their liues, much lesse their soules by anie sentence of the law. The sonne of God did not by LAVV, but by LOVE interpose himselfe to beare our sinnes; x 1.167 So God loued the worlde, that hee gaue his onely begotten sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish, but haue euerla∣sting life. Yea y 1.168 the sonne of God loued vs, and gaue himselfe for vs, not by anie obligation to the lawe, for hee was aboue the lawe, and could not be bound by the lawe; and we were condemned by the sentence of the law, and not put to finde suerties. The eternall wisedome and counsell of God then out of his inestimable loue towardes vs, without the lawe,

and before the law decréed, as to create vs, so to redéeme vs, by Christ his sonne. And the sonne not as debtour to anie, nor for anie, but of his good will and fauour toward vs, offe∣red himselfe to suffer for vs whatsoeuer the iustice of his fa∣ther would impose. Wherein he became not a Suertie bound to the law; but a Mediatour to God, and a Redeemer of man. Suerties that stand bounde and must paie the debt, may not looke to be Mediators; and he that redeemeth a prisoner from the enemie is not bound, but content so to doe. And that the death of Christ should be paide as a debt to the lawe whereto Christ was bounde, is to mee a strange position. I tooke Christes sufferings all this while for a voluntarie oblation to God, and not for a due obligation to the lawe, and himselfe to be a mediatour, not a debtour; his death I reckned to bee a richer offer, then man coulde owe, and a greater price then the lawe could exact. And therefore the newe testament of mercie, grace, and glorie was made by his bloud, which are other manner of purchases, then the due paiment of mans debt. Howe coulde that bee due vnto the lawe, which ouer∣threw the law? Sinners, such as we are, were to die by the lawe; but that the sonne of God should die for vs, what lawe did or coulde require that at his handes? you shall doe well therefore to leaue these ••angerous discourses, and learne to saie with the scripture and fathers, that loue, not lawe; de∣sire, not debt; mercy, not necessity brought the sonne of God from his throne in heauen, to his crosse on earth.

[Such was the sentence of the lawe, you will saie, that without death he could not redeeme vs.] Naie such was his loue, you should saie, that euen with his death hee would re∣deeme vs. z 1.169 Cum posset nobis etiam non moriendo succurrere, subuenire tamen moriendo hominibus voluit: quia nos videlicet minus amasset nisi & vulnera nostra susciperet, nec vim suae di∣lectionis nobis ostenderet, nisi hoc quod a nobis tolleret, ad tempus ipse sustineret. Passibiles quippe mortalesque nos reperit, & qui nos existere fecit ex nihilo, reuocare etiam sine sua morte potuit

à passione. Sed vt quanta esset virtus Compassionis ostenderet, fieri pro nobis dignatus est, quod esse nos voluit, vt in semet∣ipso temporaliter mortem susciperet, quam á nobis in perpe∣tuum fugaret. Christ when he might haue succoured vs with∣out dying, woulde rather helpe man by dying (saieth Gre∣gorie:) because he had loued vs lesse, if he had not taken to himselfe our woundes, neither had hee shewed vs the strength of his loue, vnlesse hee had for a tyme sustayned that, from which he deliuered vs. Hee founde vs miserable and mor∣tall; yet hee that made vs of nothing might haue recalled vs from our miserie without his owne death. But that hee might declare howe greate the vertue of Compassion is, hee vouch∣safed to bee that, which hee appointed vs to bee, that re∣ceauing a temporall death in himselfe, hee might chase it from vs for euer. a 1.170 Those (saieth Austen) that aske, did GOD so want meanes to deliuer men from the miserie of this mortalitie, that hee woulde haue his onelie begotten sonne to bee made a mortall man, and to suffer death; It is not e∣nough so to refute that wee shewe this waie to be good and a∣greeable to the diuine excellencie, whereby God vouchsafed to deliuer vs by the Mediatour of God and man Christ Iesus, verum etiam vt ostendamus NON ALIVM MODVM POS∣SIBILEM DEO DEFVISSE, cuius potestati cuncta aequa∣liter sub iacent, sed sanandae nostrae miseriae conuenientio∣rem alium modum non fuisse, nec esse oportuisse; but also that wee shewe God VVANTED NOT OTHER MEANES, to whose power all thinges are subiect, but that neither there was, nor coulde bee a more conuenient way to heale our misery. For what was so needefull to raise vp our hope, and to free mens mindes from despairing immortalitie, being alreadie deiected by the condition of their mortalitie, as to make euident shewe vnto vs, how much God esteemed vs, and how much hee loued vs? whereof what plainer or perfiter proofe could be made, then that the sonne of God, remaining that he was, would take from vs & for vs that which he was not, and vouchsafe to be amongst

vs: and first without anie deserte of his to beare our miseries, and vpon vs, then beleeuing how greatly God loued vs, and ho∣ping where afore wee despaired, to bestowe without all merit of ours, yea when wee deserued euill at his handes, the giftes of his grace, with bounty no way prouoked by vs. And so Ambrose. b 1.171 By one mans death the world was redeemed. Christ might, if hee woulde, haue refrained from death; but hee neither refused death as vnprofitable, neither could he haue saued vs any better waie then by dying. So that no legall necessitie, much lesse Iudiciall seueritie, brought Christ to his Crosse, but to teach vs obedience to God by his example, to demonstrato his loue to vs by refusing nothing for our sakes, and to de∣clare his owne power, whose weakenesse was stronger then all his and our enemies, and to strengthen our patience, and giue vs comfort in all the troubles of this life, he chose the paynefull and shamefull death of the Crosse, and there shewed so perfitte a patterne of obedience, in∣nocence, patience, that the Angels themselues did ad∣mire it.

So farre you make Christ suertie for vs that in taking

c 1.172 our person on him, hee became by our sinne sinnefull, defiled, hatefull and accoursed.

Similitudes, if you sucke nothing from them but that which is agreeable to y^e truth, in teaching may be tolerated; in concluding they wil halt. That Christ is d 1.173 a su∣erty, we find it once mentioned in the scriptures; but not to y^e law to pay our debtes, but d 1.174 of a better testament, euen of the new couenant of grace established in his bloud, wherof he is also the mediator & priest. Now he died for vs, not as a suerty bound to y^e law, but as a mediator to God for vs, he interpo∣sed himself of his own accord, to yeeld such recompence vnto his father, as hee should be pleased to accept for vs. If you wil needs vse similitudes, vse rather the similitude of a medi∣ator, and Redeemer, which the scriptures often call him, then of a suerty; therby to bind him not onely to suffer the paines of hell in our stéede, but also to defile him with our sinnes

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

and make him hatefull to God by our curse. No similitudes can prooue Christ in

taking our person on him to be SINNE∣FVLL, DEFILED, HATEFVL, and ACCVRSED;

and ther∣fore your vncleane mouth, and vncleaner heart, that thus speake, and thinke of the sonne of God, are worthier of ca∣stigation, then of refutation. I know you will pretend the Apostles wordes, * 1.175 God made him sinne for vs that knewe no sinne; but howsoeuer some late writers turne sinne into sinner, and thence giue cause of these and the like speaches, the church of God from the beginning hath warilie declined such irreuerent wordes, and yet plainelie confesse the truth. That God MADE HIM SINNE, hath two good and approo∣ued senses; one that he made him a sacrifice for sinne, and so the clenser of sinne, and no waie defiled by our sinne: the o∣ther, that he punished our sinnes in him, and vsed him as hee doth sinners. f 1.176 They that know (saith Austen) the scriptures of the olde testament, acknowledge this that I saie. Not once, but often and verie often it is found; Sacrifices for sinnes, are called sinnes. Then him that knewe no sinne God made sinne for vs, that is a sacrifice for sinne. Christ was made sinne in that he was offered to abolish sinne. And againe, g 1.177 peccatum vocabatur in lege sacrificium pro peccato, assidue lex hoc commemorat, non semel, non iterum, sed saepissime. Tale peccatum erat Christus. Peccatum non habebat, & peccatum erat; peccatum erat, quia sacrificium pro peccato. The sacrifice for sinne is in the law cal∣led sinne. The lawe still so vseth the word, not once, nor twice, but verie often. Such a sinne was Christ, he had no sinne, and yet he was sinne. He was sinne, because he was the sacrifice for sinne. So Ambrose. h 1.178 Because Christ was offered for sinne, worthilie is he said to be made sinne, because in the lawe the sa∣crifice that is offered for sinne is called sinne. This waie if you conster S. Paules words, they conclude directlie against your irreligious supposition. For if Christ when hee tooke vs into his bodie, did clense our sinnes by the offering of himselfe; hee became not defiled by our sinnes. Hee did not clense vs

that was defiled by vs. Howsoeuer you take those wordes; i 1.179 Such an high priest it became vs to haue (saieth the Apostle) as was holy, harmlesse, VNDEFILED, SEPARATE from sinners. If the Priest were defiled, the sacrifice could not be accepted. If Christ were separate from sinners, then was hee not pol∣luted by sinners. He tooke our sinnes vnto him, not to drawe anie pollution from them, but to make y^e purgation of them. He that coulde clense vs from our sinnes, howe much more coulde hee kéepe himselfe from beeing defiled with our sinnes? If we follow the other sense of S. Pauls wordes, that Christ was made sinne for vs, that is the punishment of our sinne, wee must take héede that wee bring him not with∣in the guiltinesse of our sinnes, as we doe within the punish∣ment of our sinnes. k 1.180 Suscepit Christus sine rea••u supplicium nostrum, vt inde solueret reatum nostrum, & siuiret etiam sup∣plicium nostrum. Christ vndertooke (saith Austen) our pu∣nishment without our guilt, that so hee might remit our guilt, and ende our paine. l 1.181 Christ (saieth Cyprian) endured by Mo∣ses and his owne Apostle to bee called a curse, and sinne, pro si∣militudine poenae, non culpae, for the likenesse of the paine, not of the fault. m 1.182 Dilexit (nos Christus) dulciter, sapienter, fortiter. Dulce nempe dixerim, quod carnem induit; cautum, quod culpam cauit: forte, quod mortem sustinuit. Christ (saith Bernard, loued vs sweetelie, wiselie, stronglie. Sweetelie in that he tooke our flesh; wiselie, in that hee shunned our guiltinesse; strong••ie, in that he suffered death for vs. If Christ tooke the paine, but not the guilt of our sinnes, howe came hee to bee defiled by our sinnes? It must needes be either in ioining and vniting him∣selfe vnto vs, or in answering and suffering for vs. Our v∣nion with Christ doth sanctifie vs, it defileth not him. We are as neere ioyned to Christ nowe raigning in heauen, as wee were to Christ suffering on the Crosse. As wee died with him then in the bodie of his flesh, n 1.183 so wee sitte togither with him in heauenlie thinges. But our vni∣on and communion nowe, though wee bee sinfull and

mortall, doth no waie defile him, no more did it then, when hee suffered for vs. If you saie our sinnes were imputed vnto him, when he was crucified for them; that increaseth the perfection of his loue, it argueth not anie pollution of his soule. To die for wicked men, did not touche him with anie taint of our sinnes, but o 1.184 GOD (saieth the Apostle) setteth out his loue towardes vs in this, that whiles wee were yet sinners Christ died for vs. The iust therefore did die for the vniust, and was no partner of our iniustice; hee that saued vs from our sinnes, did not defile himselfe with them. And where all this is grounded vppon a simple similitude, that a suertie by vndertaking for a debtour, maketh the debt his owne, though hee neuer borrowed the money; it is easilie and trulie aunswered, that Christ did not vndertake wee shoulde not sinne, nor that wee should paie the debt which wee did owe; but when wee had sinned, and were able no waie to aunswere the iustice of GOD, but by our euer∣lasting destruction of bodie and soule; it pleased the sonne of God to interpose himselfe, and no waie bound to vs, or for vs, to intreate his father ^f that in his owne per∣son hee might make recompence for our sinnes; and so as a Mediatour allowed of God, hee tooke our nature: and freelie, not indebted; willinglie, not constrained; * 1.185 Hee gaue himselfe for vs a sacrifice of a sweete sauour vn∣to God. As if the whole people of anie lande rebelling against their King, and beeing subdued and readie to be destroied, the Kinges sonne (loath to see his fathers king∣dome dispeopled, and so manie wretched men, women, and children put to fire and sworde) shoulde importune his father at his request to bee gratious vnto them, and to laie on him, though hee bee his onelie sonne, what chasticement the father in his wisedome and iustice shall thinke fitte for the repressing of the like outrage hereaf∣ter: maie anie of those subiectes without extreame ingra∣titude,

and intolerable contumelie reproch the Kings sonne, when hee suffereth for their sakes, that hee is guiltie of their treason, and both DEFILED with it, and HATEFVLL for it? I will not applie, because it will presse you too farre; but as mine owne perswasion is, that no such sinfull and hatefull wordes haue, or should be vsed in the Church of God to the dishonour of his sonne; so my counsell to the sober and wise reader, is, to stop his eares, and shut his eies against such defiled and accursed speeches.

You proceede to another proofe, and where the Apostle saith, Christ spoiled Principalities & powers, and made a shew of them openlie, triumphing ouer them; vpon these words you inferre. q 1.186

These principalities are the diuels; therefore it is cer∣taine Christ FELT THEM to bee the verie instruments that VVROVGHT THE VERIE EFFECTS of Gods wrath VPON HIM.

This is the first place where you specifie anie effect of Gods wrath against Christs soule (for you will haue the soule of Christ properlie and immediatelie to suffer the effectes of Gods wrath;) and that you prooue learnedlie and wiselie like your selfe. The diuels haue nothing to do with the soules of men, but either to tempt them to worke in them, or to tor∣ment them. To tempt is to trie how fast y^e saints stand in the feare and loue of God. And for that cause the wisdome of god hath from the beginning suffered all his saints, his owne sonne not excepted to be tempted of satan. For Christ coulde not be tempted by the corruption of his heart as we are, but by Satans voice, or by Satans members. Of vs Iames saith r 1.187 Euerie man is tempted, when he is entised and drawne away by his owne concupiscence. Concupiscence there was none in Christ. He had no law in his flesh rebelling against the lawe of his minde, as wee haue; It is in vs the rage of originall sinne from which he was frée, and therefore he coulde not bee tempted but by the eare, as he was in y^e desart by satan him∣self, & by Satans members al the time of his abode on earth. In the harts of men when y^e diuel preuaileth with temptation

there he worketh, leading such as consent and yéeld vnto him into all wickednesse, euen with greedinesse: So s 1.188 he worketh in the children of disobedience, as the Apostle testifieth. This can haue no place in Christ•• because t 1.189 he did no sinne, neither was there anie guile found in his mouth. u 1.190 He that committeth sinne (saith saint Iohn) is of the diuel, and for this purpose appea∣red the sonne of God, that hee might dissolue the workes of the diuell. Then since inward temptation by the hart Christ could haue none, and outward temptation by the mouthes & hands of the wicked is no effect of Gods wrath, but rather a triall of Gods gifts and graces bestowed on vs; It remaineth that if Christ felt the diuels as the very instruments that wrong he the verie effects of Gods wrath vpon him, that is vpon his soule, (for that part of Christ you say must properly and immediateli•• feele the wrath of God) it resteth I saie by your owne wordes ye Christ FELT the DIVELS TORMENTING HIS SOVLE. And indeede for so much as in executing the true paines of hell, and of the damned, God hath none other instruments but diuels, you cannot defend that Christ suffered the paines of hell, but you must graunt that Christ felt the diuels, as instruments executing those paines on his soule. Nowe the bodie of man they may torment with touching, as they did Iobs; the soule they can not, but by possessing it. For they can not woorke but where they are, and therefore they must possesse the soule which they torment. Is not here (Christian Reader) an wholesome clearke, and an holie cause, that conclude•• Christes soule was possessed and tormented of diuels on the Crosse? And the proofe is as ridiculous, as the position is impious. Christ x 1.191 spoiled principalities and powers, and openlie triumphed ouer them, ergo (say you) hee "felt them the instruments of Gods wrath, by tormenting his soule. If your learning and Logicke serue you so well, you may procéede Doctor in do••age when you will. For my part (christian Reader) I will giue none other answere to these lewd and wicked absurdities, but that which Iacob said to Si∣meon

and Le••i; y 1.192 Into their secret my soule shall not come. To strengthen thee, thou maiest remember, what Peter saide of Christ.z 1.193 God anointed Iesus of Nazareth with the holy ghost, & with power to heale all that were oppressed of the diuell; for God was with him; or else what Christ said of himselfe,a 1.194The prince of this world commeth, and hath naught in me; or at least what the diuels themselues said to Christ; b 1.195 Iesus the sonne of God VVHAT HAVE VVE TO DO VVITH THEE? Art thou come to torment vs before the time? And so in the Gospell of saint Luke, the c 1.196 soule spirit when he saw Iesus cried out, what haue I to doe with thee, Iesus the sonne of God most high? I beseech thee torment me not.

[But perchance I mistake him.] would God there were so much grace in him, as to reuoke it, or refuse it; I woulde gladlie confesse mine errour in mistaking his wordes: but what if he go on from bad to worse? What if he heapeth vp reasons as he thinketh, but indeede trifles void of sense and reason to confirme the same? c 1.197

This reason will proue the same (saith hee) taken from the lesse to the more. d 1.198 Thus do the members of Christ suffer. Therefore of necessitie Christ our head suffered the like. Yea to the Hebrues hee sheweth a reason which can neuer be refuted by the witte of man. e 1.199 Christ succoured vs not, but wherein hee had experience of our temptations and infiri∣mities: but he succoureth vs euen in these our temptations of fee∣ling the terrours of God and the sorrowes of hell. Therefore hee himselfe had experience of the same. f 1.200 Adde hereunto that of all absurdities, this is the greatest, that meere men should suffer more deepely and bitterly then Christ did.

You haue more words then witte (Sir Confuter) that propose these childish argu∣ments for inuincible reasons. Your selfe shall sée the weake∣nes of them.g 1.201

What soeuer the members of Christ, say you, did or shall suffer, of necessitie Christ our head suffered the like.

Meane you in bodie? or in soule? or in both? If in bodie, th••n Christ had his eies put out, for so had Sampson; he was swalowed vp by a whale, for so was Ionas; hee was cast into a burning

furnace, for so were Sidrac, Mishac, and Abednego; he was stoned to death, for so were Naboth, Steuen, and others. You meane not in bodie; meane you then in soule? Inwarde as∣saults of error, lust and sinne Christ neuer had. He was ••ree from all conflicts of heart, that rise in vs from the roote or remorse of sinne; that increase with weakenesse of faith, want of grace, and quenching of Gods spirite. The terrors of minde which wee feele through conscience of our vnwor∣thinesse, ignorance of Gods counsell, and distrust of Gods fauour hee neuer felt: his faith admitted no doubting, his loue excluded all fearing, his hope reiected all de∣spairing. So that howe you shoulde make a falser pro∣position, and more repugnant to the Apostles wordes which you alledge then this which you haue made, I by no meanes can conceiue. Hee was tempted in all thinges a like except sinne. Then neither the rootes, partes, nor fruites of sinne must bee in him. But the Apostle that ex∣cepteth sinne, excepteth all sinnefull adherentes. The punishment of sinne which proceedeth from the iustice of GOD, and is no sinne, that Christ might and did beare; but in no wise those terrours and feares of con∣science which proceede from sinne, and augment sinne, as doubting, distrusting, despairing, in which GOD re∣uengeth sinne with sinne; these muste bee farre from Christ, vnlesse wee will wrappe him within the snares of our sinnes. The feare of Gods Maiestie armed with mightie power to reuenge sinne, is profitable to keepe vs from sinne; therein Christ may communicate with vs, though not to that ende, ••or he could not sinne; but fearing, doubting, or distrusting that God wil for our manifold sinnes cast vs from his presence, and condemne vs to hell, commeth in vs from the guiltinesse of conscience and weakenesse of faith and hope, which in Christ neither had, nor coulde haue anie place.

[But i 1.202 the Apostle (you saie) sheweth a reason, which can neuer bee refuted by the witte of man. Christ succoured vs not, but wherein he had experience of our temptations.]

Are those wordes in the Apostle? No (you will saie) but collected from the Apostles wordes, where hee saith k 1.203 In that Christ suffered being tempted he can helpe those that are tempted. Hence you conclude vpon your owne warrant, that Christ can succour vs in no temptation but whereof himselfe had first experi∣ence; and this you proclaime to be irrefutable. Such lips such lettice; such doctors such diuinitie. Your collection, Sir Refu∣ter, is not onelie farre different from the Apostles wordes, but euidentlie repugnant to the christian faith and truth. The Apostle giueth not here the cause why Christ is able to helpe vs in our miseries and necessities, for he is able in that he is God to do what he will; but hee sheweth that our high Priest is l 1.204 faithfull and mercifull, that is willing and readie to heare vs, and helpe vs in all our afflictions and troubles, for so much as in his owne person hee woulde feele our temptati∣ons and infirmities, that he might be the better able to helpe vs in hauing more compassion on vs. And this is that the Apostle saith in the fourth chapter of this Epistle: m 1.205 Wee haue not an high Priest, which can not bee touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all things (or through∣lie) tempted alike except sinne. So that his sufferinges made him the more mercifull and faithfull; because he know∣eth best as well our naturall infirmities, as our manifolde miseries.

This for the sense of the Apostle, nowe to the truth of your collection.

CHRIST SVCCOVRETH VS NOT, but wherein he hath felt the same.

Meane you Christ is not able or not willing? For you saie, hee succoureth vs not. To saie hee is not able, is blasphemie; because he is God, and God I hope can succour vs in all our miseries, without suf∣fering those things which we doe. To say he will not (though the Apostles word bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hee is able) is as false in

it selfe, and as iniurious to Christ. For then Christ will neuer helpe anie man that is sicke, because hee neuer felt anie disease of bodie, nor anie whose bones are broken, be∣cause his were whole: nor anie Martyr that burneth in fire, because hee died on the crosse;•• the blinde, deafe, dumbe, lame, and a thousand such like Christ will neuer heare, nor helpe, because he suffered not the same. [You speake of ghostlie temptations, you will saie, not of bodily afflictions.] Saint Paule speaketh of both, and Christ had experience of both; and therefore if your collection be false and absurde in the one, it will neuer bee sound and assured in the other. But come to your owne pitch. Will Christ deliuer no man from blindnesse and hardnesse of heart, because hee neuer endured either? Will he not aide vs to represse the lusts of our ••lesh, because he neuer was tempted with them? Will he not helpe our vnbeliefe, because his faith was al∣wayes strong? Will he not saue anie from desperation, be∣cause he neuer despaired? Will hee not cure frenzie, and furie, because hee was neuer out of his wittes? Nei∣ther did hee, nor will hee cast out Diuels, because him∣selfe was not possessed? Is this the reason that cannot bee refuted by mans witte which euerie childe maie pre∣sentlie controlle? In deede you speake truer then you are ware of, if your deuise maie bee receiued. For you doe not sticke to defile Christ with our sinnes, to asto∣nish and amaze all the partes and powers of his minde, to torment him with Diuels, and in the ende to adiudge him to the death of the soule, which hath in it blindnesse and hardnesse of heart, infidelitie, and what not?

Yea it is with you: n 1.206 of all absurdities the greatest, that meere men, although they bee reprobates, shoulde suffer more deepely then Christ did, o 1.207 For Gods iustice, saie you, shoulde bee as seuere on Christ, as on anie reprobate, and yet they suffer reprobation, despera∣tion, damnation.

From hence you go to another of your holie mysteries;

and as if you had not done the Lord of glorie wrong enough with these irreuerent and irreligious speaches, you take from him in his passion at your pleasure, not only his ver∣tues & graces, but euen his sense, memorie & vnderstanding, & leaue him often times when you list your selues,

p 1.208 amazed, astonished, and forgetfull of himselfe for feare, yea so distempered, disturbed, distracted, q 1.209 ouerwhelmed & ALL CONFOVNDED in his whole humanity, both in all the powers of his soule and sen∣ses of his body, that he knew not what he said or did.

God grant, (Sir Refuter) you be wel in your wits, that depriue the Sa∣uiour of the world when you will, of all sense, memorie, & vn∣derstanding. [The euangelists, you wil say, in expresse words affirme that Christ in the garden was r 1.210 astonished s 1.211 & grie∣uously perplexed.] Haue you the skill, when the scriptures saie, that Christ beganne to bee astonished and perplexed, to stretch y^e beginning to the highest degree of all astonishment that maie light on the Reprobate in this life, or the damned in the next? when the holie ghost toucheth a naturall infirmity common to Christ with all the godlie in the like cases, doth your cōscience serue you to make of that not onlie a general and total distemper, but an Infernall confusion of all the pow∣ers of his soule, and senses of his bodie? had you consulted S. Ierom, hee would haue taught you an other lesson. t 1.212 Do∣minus vt veritatem probaret assumpti hominis, veré quidem con∣tristatus est; sed ne passio in animo eius dominaretur per propassi∣onem caepit contristari. Aliud est enim contristari, aliud incipere contristari, & The Lorde to shew himselfe a true man, was sorrowfull in verie deede, not that any passion ouerswaied his minde, but he began to be touched with the affection of sorrow. It is one thing to be sorrowfull, and an other to begin to be sor∣rowfull; his sorrow was not for any feare to suffer, since he came of purpose to suffer, and reproued Peter as too feareful, but for that most wretched Iudas, and the weakenes of all his Apostles, and the reiection of the whole nation of the Iewes, and the mi∣serable destruction of Ierusalem. And if heretickes doe interpret

this sorrowe of heart, not for our Sauiours affection towardes them that shoulde perish, but for a perturbation of minde, let them answere me, howe they expounde that which Ezechiel speaketh in the person of God, and in all these thinges thou didst make me sorrowfull. Saint Ierome saieth, the wordes enforce no more, then that Christ began to bee sorrowfull and perplexed, and if anie man stretch them farther hee giueth him the note of an hereticke; and though I re∣fraine that worde because I hope you doe it of ignorance and not of malice, yet I cannot excuse you from a dange∣rous errour, and that in foure speciall pointes. First you mistake the cause whence this feare arose; secondlie you extende it farther then in trueth you shoulde; thirdlie you continue it longer then with anie warrant you may; and fourthlie by pretence thereof you chalenge Christes prayers in the garden not onelie with want of good memorie, but with flat repugnancie to the knowne will of God; which is euident sinne,

Concerning the first I am resolued, as in the treatise be∣fore I haue specified,* 1.213 that the cause of Christes agonie, could not procéed, but from his submission to the maiestie of God sitting in iudgement, or from his compassion on mans mi∣serie, or from both. You will haue it procéede from

u 1.214 the intolerable horrors of Gods fiery wrath equall to hell; And where Cain saide, The horror of my sinne is heauier then I can beare, you doubt not but x 1.215 Christ as touching the vehemencie of the paine, was as sharpelie touched euen as the Reprobates themselues, yea if it may be, more extraordinarilie.

You that are so well acquainted with the horrors of the Reprobate for their sinnes, that you dare attribute them to Christ, can you tell what they are? is it speculation that you speake of, or experience; that you dare thus subiect the sonne of God to the same terrors and horrors of conscience, which namelie Cain as you saie, and other reprobates haue felt? I praie you, Sir, in so waightie matters as maie amounte to

heresie and open blasphemy, plaie not with generall termes, so as neither you vnderstande your selfe, nor anie man else can conceiue your meaning. The terrors of ••he wicked in this life wee can coniecture, you canne perhaps liuelie describe them, but for ought that wee learne by the scrip∣tures they are such, as without horrible impietie you cannot ascribe vnto the Sauiour of the worlde. Remorse of sinne committed, vexing and gnawing the conscience, is the first of their paines, which suffereth them night nor daie to take anie test. Secondlie, the feare that God, whome they haue despised, hath likewise reiected them and is become their enemie, and therefore from him they looke for nothing, but the iust vengeance of their sinnes both in this life and the nexte, so pursueth them, that they tremble and slie when no man followeth them. Thirdlie the griefe to forsee themselues excluded from the fellowship of that ioie and blisse, which is prouided for the saintes of GOD, which Chrysostom saieth is far more bitter then the paine of hel, doth make them sinke for sorrowe. Lastlie the continuall terrour of that dreadfull iudgement which shall be pronounced, of that horrible confusion which then shall o∣uerwhelme them; and of those eternall and intollerable flames of fire in which they shall burne; the verie terrour I saie and horrour thereof doeth so afflict and torment them, as if they presentlie felt it. More wordes may bee vsed, and perhaps more vehement to amplifie their paine; but these are the partes and causes of that feare and horrour, which pursueth the wicked for their haynous offences. Can anie of these, (Sir Refuter,) bee applied to Christ? Dare you but offer so much as the mention of the least of them to bee founde in the sonne of GOD? I thinke you bare not; I hope you will not. What meaneth then this matching of Christ with Cain? yea this touching of Christ deeper then anie of the Reprobate? In horrour and paine you saie, y 1.216

Christ was like them who be separated in deede

from the grace and loue of God, yet himselfe neuer separated, but alwaies most intirely beloued.

The horrour and paine, which the Reprobate heere feele, riseth from the remorse of their owne conscience, and from the distrust and feare of their owne hearts; which pursueth them euen in this life before iudge∣ment. The execution of his terrible vengeance indéede God hath reserued to the next life. The greatest terror that the A∣postle noteth in the wicked here in this world is, z 1.217 a feareful expectation of iudgment and of burning fire which shall deuour t••e aduersaries. What horror then like the reprobate coulde the conscience of Christ féele, that had no remorse, distrust, or feare of anie such thing as they haue, but was assured and secured of Gods euerlasting fauour, and loue in the highest degree? was there paine without horrour and feare in the soule of Christ? if you meane the paine that is consequent to our naturall affections, as to sorrowe and feare, you saie nothing to the purpose. Saint Iohn saith a 1.218 timor habet poenam; Feare hath in it paine, and so hath sorrowe, euen as hope hath ioye; b 1.219 Reioice in hope; but this is not the paine which the Reprobate feele, much lesse which the damned suffer; I trust their paine is more then a naturall oppressing and af∣flicting of the heart with humane feare and sorrowe. And therefore if I conceaue anie thing, you misse the truth verie much, Sir Confuter, when you saie that Christ was touched in horrour and paine as déepelie as the Reprobates are; and yet your conceite reacheth farther. For you defende that he suffered as much as the damned in hell, which is more then the reprobates doe in earth, howsoeuer to shewe your lear∣ning you make hell and heauen heere on earth. For my selfe (Christian Reader) whence I thinke, the astonishment of Christ in the garden might rise, thou hast it in the treatise before, I shall not néed to repeat it againe.

In like maner you extend Christes agonie too farre; for where it was an agonie of minde, which did not bereaue him neither of sense, memorie, nor vnderstanding, you haue

brought vs a fardell of phrases, to expresse that

all the senses of his bodie, and al the powers of his soule were amazed, astonished, distempered, disturbed, distracted, forgetfull, ouerwhelmed, and all confounded;

and you thinke you neuer haue words enough to expresse your follie, in dreaming of the greatest astonish∣ment that maie be, because the scripture saieth, he began to beastonished. But Sir, how proue you this you saie? as in feares and sorrowes there bee di••ers degrées; so are there likewise in astonishmēts. To be astonished is to ioine feare with admiration, which draweth the minde so wholie to think on some speciall thing aboue our reach, that during the time we turne not our selues to anie other cogitation. Euen as the eie, if it be bent intentiuelie to behold anie thing, for that present it discerneth nothing else: So fareth it with y^e soule, if she wholie addict her selfe to thinke on anie matter, she is a∣mused; if it bee more then she conceaueth, or more fearefull then she well indureth, she is amazed, or astonished; but not of necessitie so, that she looseth either sense or memorie; one∣lie for that time she conuerteth neither to anie other obiect. The present beholding of the diuine maiestie sitting in iudgement; and of his iustice armed with infinite power to reuenge the sinnes of men, might iustlie astonish the hu∣mane soule of Christ; seeing the rewithal how mightilie God was prouoked by the manifold and wilfull transgressions of men; but this religious astonishment, though it might for a season suspend all other thoughtes in our Sauiour, yet is there no neede it shoulde depriue him of vnderstanding, sense or memorie. When Paul saieth c 1.220 worke your saluation with feare and trembling, doth hee meane they should want memorie or vnderstanding? When Moses receaued the law from God, d 1.221 so terrible was the sight that hee saide, I tremble and quake. Was Moses 〈◊〉〈◊〉 voide of sense or reason at that present? e 1.222 An horrible terror (saith Dauid) hath taken mee for the vngodlie that forsake thy lawe. Was Dauid for their sakes besides himselfe, and all confounded in bodie and

soule, as you speake here of Christ? Our whole conuersation shoulde bee as Paule professeth of himselfe, when hee saieth, I f 1.223 was among you with much trembling and feare. Should therefore Christians bee alwayes besides themselues?

[g 1.224 Christ often praied vnto his Father, you saie, and then pre∣sented himselfe before the Maiestie of God; and yet wee do not reade that euer hee was vexed, terrified, and amazed in so do∣ing.]

Sir Refuter, if your vnderstanding and memorie be not lost, I tolde you that the humane nature of Christ pre∣sented it selfe before the maiestie of God in iudgement, there to suffer man euerlastinglie to perish, whome hee deerelie loued, or to vndertake in his owne person that burthen, which the iustice of God, displeased with our sinnes, should laie vpon him. And if you doe not thinke this a cause sufficient for the manhoode of Christ to feare and tremble, yea for the time to bee astonished at the number of our sinnes, and terrour of Gods vengeance, prouided for our eternall destruction both of bodie and soule, you bee so déepe in your hellish paines, that your wits and senses are con∣founded. Absurdities and contrarieties are so rife with you, that you thinke other men can hardlie auoide them; but first vnderstand your owne, and then you shall the bet∣ter charge others.

After you haue spent the whole strength of your small elo∣quence and lesse intelligence, to infer and amplifie the most

h 1.225 wonderfull and piteous agonies, feares, sorrowes, miseries, out∣cries, teares, astonishment, forgetfulnesse, and confusion of the powers of nature with which the sense of Gods wrath afflicted, dis∣tracted, amazed, ouerwhelmed, and all confounded our Sauiour in his whole humanity;

You suddainlie, euen in the twinkling of an eie free him from all, and set him cleare, as if all this had béene but a dreame. For vppon Christes speaking of these wordes, i 1.226 Father, if it bee possible let this cuppe passe from mee; you inferre,

k 1.227 if Christ had thus praied aduisedly and with good memorie, against the knowne will of God hee had

sinned.

And in the words presentlie following without staie or pause betweene, yet not my will, but thine bee doone, you imagine that Christ,

l 1.228 as it were comming suddainly to himselfe quickly controled his former words. And thus when it pleaseth you, you put the sonne of God into m 1.229 a wonderfull and piteous confusion and forgetfulnesse of all the powers and partes of his bodie and soule;

and least you shoulde be conuin∣ced of a manifest, and irreligious vntrueth, in the verie nicke of the nexte worde, which Christ spake with the same breath, you restore him to his perfect senses, and dis∣charge him from your hellish confusion and paynes. But good Sir, if it were so

vnsupportable and intolerable a bur∣den, and confusion

as you dreame of, howe came our Sauiour to bee so lightlie and quicklie ridde of it, as if there had béene no such thing? was that heauie and fierie wrath of GOD against our sinnes equall to hell so soone quenched? or was the sonne of God no longer able to en∣dure it? n 1.230

Of all absurdities (your selfe beeing iudge, for it is your position) this is the greatest, that meere men should suffer more deepelie then Christ.

Then if Cain endured this all his life long, if Saul and Iudas had no intermission of their payne, if the damned in hell, (from whome you fetch your patterne) doe euerlastinglie suffer it, howe commeth it to passe, that after you haue so hotlie stirred for it, you are so soone wearie of it? will you make vs beleeue, that Christes obedience and patience was tried with a touch of this hellish paine, and so an ende? or will you returne it as often as please you? and if this cuppe did so quicklie passe from our Sauiour, howe did hee then praie against the knowne will of God; which is an o∣ther of your foundations, when as, in the vttering of these words, the cup did passe from him, by your owne confession? In like sorte to excuse Christ from sinne, o 1.231 in praying a∣gainst the will of his Father, you cast him into a wonderfull

confusion and forgetfulnesse of all the powers of his soule, and sen∣ses of his body: and in the same page, for an other aduantage, you auouch that in that praier, Christ p 1.232 PERFECTLIE KNEVV the dominion of death shoulde not holde him. Were all the powers of his soule ouerwhelmed and all confounded, and yet did he euen in that whole confusion of sense, memo∣rie, and vnderstanding PERFECTLY KNOVV the domini∣on of death should not holde him? can a man haue his know∣ledge and memorie all confounded and ouerwhelmed, and yet retaine PERFECT KNOVVLEDGE? coulde Christ for∣get his fathers will in that praier through astonishment, and in the speaking of the words remember he praied amisse, and in the nexte worde quicklie correct himselfe? Surelie these be conceites answerable to your cause; and deuices fit for your diuinitie; But (Sir Refuter,) let passe your dreames, and shewe vs your proofes, that Christ praied against the knowne will of his father, which you make the groundwork of this confusion: and when you haue so done, then prooue that your hellish paine was the cause of this astonishment. Manie thinges might astonish our Sauiour for the time, besides the paines of hell; and in that astonishment, if Christ had spokē he knew not what (which I beléeue not) as q 1.233 Peter did when he sawe his glorie in the mountaine, it had béene a de∣fect in nature, and no contempt of Gods counsell, much lesse such an infernall confusion as you describe.

[It is manifest (you saie) that Christ r 1.234 in plaine words praied contrarie to Gods known will:]

It is more manifest that you knowe not what you saie. How coulde he praie against his Fathers will that praied e••preslie with this condition, s 1.235 ô Father IF THOV VVILT take awaie this cup from me. [That is a correction after the praier (you will saie) and no conditi∣on in the praier.] Are you so captious against Christ, that you will not supplie one Euangelist with an other? t 1.236 Luke and t 1.237 Matthew put a plaine condition vnto the praier of Christ; the one saying, father if thou wilt; the other, father if

it be possible, that is to stand with thy will, and mans sal∣ua••ion. And though Marke omit the condition in the tenor of the praier, yet doth he fu••••ie expresse his meaning to bee al one with the rest. For t••us he saieth of our Sauiour, u 1.238 hee fell downe on the grounde, and praied that IF IT VVERE POSSIBLE, that houre might passe from him. So that all thrée Euangelistes concurre, that Christ praied not onelie with a reseruation of his fathers will, but annexed that con∣dition vnto his praier; and therefore in all mens eies saue yours, hee praied not in plaine wordes contrarie to Gods knowne will. And this erroneous and contumelious positi∣on you set downe to the worlde, as the chiefest fortresse of your hellish paines, wherein you plainly wrest the scriptures from their expresse words. [But S. Iohn, you will saie, repor∣teth Christes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to bee simplie made, x 1.239 Father, saue mee from this houre.] Saint Iohn speaketh of an other time and place; and his wordes import a deliberation of two partes proposed by our Sauiour, with his resolution in the ende; what shall I saie? Father deliuer me from this hower; that is, shall I saie deliuer me from this hower? but therefore came I into this hower. Father glorifie thy name. Chrysostom thus expoundeth Christes wordes: y 1.240 NON DICO libera me ex hac hora, sed pater glorifica nomen tuum. I SAIE NOT, de∣liuer me from this hower, but father glorifie thy name. And so doth Epiphanius.* 1.241 Quid dicam pater? serua me ex hac hora, hoc inquit dicam? at propterea veni in hanc horam. What shall I saie? Father saue mee from this hower? shall I saie so? but therefore came I into this hower. But what better exposi∣tor canne wee haue then Saint Paul, who plainely saith that Christ in making this praier was heard, & z 1.242 deliuered from that he feared. Hee praied not against the knowne will of God, whose praiers God heard and performed. And where you flie to this hellish confusion to saue Christ from sinne; by pretending to cléere him from sinne, you charge him ra∣ther with sinne. For the praier which is not made in faith

is sinne. Nowe can the heart be assured it shall receaue that it asketh at Gods hands, if it bee neither directed to aske ac∣cording to the will of God, nor prepared to aske with that de∣uotion which is fit for God? So that when you make Christ to triple his praiers with vehement teares and cries, & still repugnant to the will of God, you chalenge the sonne of God with open sinne, from which you would seeme to excuse him. And as for your double relapse into the same astonish∣ment still, when Christ was twice cléere from it, it is a foolish deuice of your idle braines, as if the Lorde no sooner retur∣ned to his praiers, but your hellish confusion did waite at his heeles, to interrupt and ouerwhelm him; and within sixe wordes againe to leaue him. If your cause be holie, iest not thus prophanelie with the sonne of God, nor bereaue him of his wits, when you thinke good. If it were a ne∣cessarie effect of Gods wrath, then after it lighted on our Sauiour in the garden, it must continue till man was re∣déemed, and Gods wrath appeased, which was not done but by the death of Christ. And therefore make your choise: ei∣ther let the wrath of God cease in the garden, when Christ ended his praiers; or if that still continued to ••he death, let also this astonishment still continue, or at least bee no ne∣cessarie effect of Gods wrath. One of these you must take, take which you wil; the rest will serue to subuert your tower of Babell.

[I doe you wrong, you will saie, to call your opinion the tower of Confusion;] you do your selfe wrong (Sir Re∣futer) in the chiefest point of Christian religion to leaue the faith confessed by the whole Church of Christ for these 1500. yeares, and to walke in such ambiguities, and ab∣surdities as your selfe doe not vnderstande. For I praie you, Sir, this

wonderfull confusion and astonishment in all powers of the soule, and senses of the bodie,

is it a ne∣cessarie consequent to the wrath of GOD, or no? If it bee,* 1.243 (for you saie,

Christ coulde not but sinke, and bee confounded vnder that burden

) howe commeth it to passe,

that the reprobate and desperate, feeling the sense of GODS wrath vpon them, doe not loose their wits, and senses as Christ by your assertion did? will you affirme they are astonished and all confounded as Christ was? then if you excuse Christ from sinne, in dis••iking and declining his Fathers knowne will, because hee was astonished; you must likewise excuse all the wicked and Reprobate from their sinnes, after they once feele the sense of Gods wrath, because they cannot but bee astonished and con∣founded vnder that burden? Againe, coulde Christ not sinne, whiles hee felte the wrath of God vppon him, be∣cause he was astonished? Ergo neither coulde hee merite all that while, and so neither his obedience, patience, hu∣militie, nor charitie coulde haue anie place, or vse, so long as the sense of GODS wrath dured. Haue you not deuised vs a goodlie sense of Gods wrath, that shall exclude Christ Iesus from the exercise of all his graces, vertues. and merites? This palpable absurditie you thinke to skippe, (Sir Refuter,) but your wit is too weake, or your cause not good; it will not bee.

[a 1.244 If a man in distresse fall a sleepe, saie you, or be astonished with some violent blowe on the heade, in such an one there is no decaie of faith, nor of obedience, nor of patience, nor of loue; euen so in Christ there was no defect of grace, but an infirmitie of nature.]

Was Christ a sléepe or in a swoune? astonished you thinke, he was. Was hee so astonished that his senses were taken from him? did hee not walke? did he not speake? did hee not pray? whie then compare you this to a sléep or a swoune; wheras in Christ was neither? and though you plainelie faile in your comparison; yet, were it so, as you would haue it, for your life you cannot auoide my conclusion. For a man in a sleepe or a swoune, though he loose not the habite of faith and pati∣ence, obedience and loue, yet hath hee no vse of them for that time; much lesse doth hee serue God with them. But Christ Iesus by all his sufferinges must merite, which a

man a sleepe or amazed cannot doe, And therefore remem∣ber, (Sir Refuter) this reason amongst the rest is yet vn∣answerd; and I thinke wil somwhat trouble your braines before it bee answered. All that Christ suffered for our Re∣demption was, and must bee, meritorious with God. But the suffering of hell paynes, which astonish and confounde all the powers of the soule, and senses of the bodie, neither was, nor coulde bee meritorious with God; Christ therefore did not suffer such hellish paynes as did confounde and astonish all the powers of his soule and senses of his bodie. And thus, by your amazed position, you haue wholie confounded your owne opinion.

Thou hast heard (good Reader) a number of the Refu∣ters speciall follies; I haue some fewe more to trouble thee with, and so I will leaue him to his holie cause, and thee to the mercies of God. To shewe himselfe learned as well in the Gréeke tongue, as in philosophie, hee vndertaketh an o∣ther reason that I made, and sporteth himselfe somewhat handsomlie with it. Out of the fift to the Hebrewes where the Apostle saieth, b 1.245 Christ in the daies of his flesh did offer vp prayers and supplications with strong cryes and teares vnto him that was able to saue him from death, and was heard in that he feared, or deliuered from his feare; I collected two things. First that Christ in his praiers made in y^e garden (for to those the Apostle pointeth) did but feare, and not as then suffer that he feared. The nexte, he was deliuered from his feare; and consequentlie neuer came to suffer that from which hee was deliuered. This Confuter replieth, as hee thinketh, verie soundlie, and verie sufficientlie. Thou shalt heare the whole. My reason hee maketh to bee this. c 1.246

That wherein Christ was hearde and deliuered from by praier, he feared but felt not. But Christ was heard and deliuered by prayer from the wrath which he feared, therefore he felt it not. His answere is. d 1.247 Nay euen therefore he felt it. Wee deny therefore the first proposition. For hee was in some sense of it, when hee praied against it, and was

heard. He had then some foretast but the extremity came after, which hee before feared. And finallie hee being in all this was heard (as the verie word (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) seemeth to im∣port) and delyuered from it, that is at least, not before hee had felt it. Againe very the fearing of Gods wrath is a true feeling, I saie not a ful feeling, but a true feeling: but it is gran∣ted that now in this Agonie hee feared the wrath of God: Therefore hee truelie felt it. Therefore the Question is gran∣ted.

You wrote this in the morning, Sir Refuter, when you were fresh and fasting, it is so short and sharpe; but be like it was darke, or your eies were dull you could not sée neither what I said, nor what your selfe saie.* 1.248 The force of my reason consisted in this, that where feare goeth before suffering, and is no longer called feare when suffering com∣meth; if Christ at the time of his praiers in the garden were deliuered from his feare, much more from anie suffe∣ring of that hee feared. And since by your owne positions you affirme hee feared in his agonie the paines of hell; I concluded hee suffered them not. Let vs now sée howe you impugne this reason. You first change suffering into sée∣ling, and because the soule in all hir affections hath a kind of feeling, you inferre, naie therefore Christ felt it. Your manner is too shrowde your selfe with generall and am∣biguous words that maie signifie anie thing, and then you shew your learning in speaking you knowe not what. But vse the word suffering which I did, or take feeling for suffe∣ring, in which sence it maie stand; and then sée how absurd∣lie and falslie you take my reason at this rebound. For then you must saie. Fearing is a kind of feeling, Christ fea∣red the paines of hell, ergo Christ suffered them; and so by your logicke whosoeuer feareth captiuitie or death, is a captiue, and dead; and hee that feareth to loose his purse, hath lost it; yea hee that feareth to offend God, doth offend him; and hee that feareth to bee an hereticke, is an here∣ticke. I thought though your diuinitie had not, yet your

Philosophie coulde haue serued you to vnderstand; that e 1.249 metus est mali impendentis, aegritudo praesentis; feare is of an euill approching; griefe or paine, of an euill present. If you scorne philosophers, whom for the proprietie of words, you preferre before all the diuines in the world, as anon shall appear••; Lactantius telleth you, that of f 1.250 Desire, ioy, feare and sorrow, the two first (desire and ioy) are for good things ap∣proching or present: the two last (feare and sorrow) for euill likewise approching or present. S. Ambrose will teach you that, g 1.251 ante dolorem est. timor, post dolorem tristitia: feare is before griefe or paine; after paine followeth heauines. And like∣wise Gregorie, h 1.252 In his vitae tormentis, timor dolorem habet, do∣lor timorem non habet, quia nequa quam mentem metus cruciat, cum pati iam caeperit, quod metuebat. In the torments in this life feare hath some griefe, but griefe hath no feare; because feare doth not afflict the mind, when a man once suffereth that, which he feared. This were enough to make my argument good, but it hath yet more strengh from the Apostles words: Christ praying in the garden was heard from his feare; that is was deliuered from his feare. Now is a man deliuered from his feare by suffering that he feared? So wee iest with men, when we will giue them their deserts, and let them stand no longer in suspence; but God so iested not with his sonne, as to rid him from his feare, by present punishment. God there∣fore heard Christs prayer and deliuered him from his feare, when as yet he did not suffer it; and being deliuered from it in the garden, how came he to suffer it more extremely on the Crosse? For you saie,

i 1.253 Christ was in some sense of it, when hee praied against it, he had then some fortaste of it, but the extre∣mitie came after, which he before feared.

Syr confuter, if you can iest & gybe thus with the Apostles words, I must leaue you as lacking both conscience & commō sense; & so will all y^t be godly. Christ praying in the garden was deliuered from his feare, saith Paul; that is say you, after he had suffered on the "Crosse, the extremitie of that which he before feared. So thē for

Christ to be deliuered, from that he feared, was (by your con∣struction) to suffer the extremitie of that he feared. Will you that God send you such deliuerance in the time of néed, that so prophanely play with the deliuerance of his sonne? [Hée was deliuered you will say, from the continuance of it?] No (good Syr) Christ neuer feared the paines of hell should con∣tinue on him after death; it is horrible blasphemy so to think; & vnto death you say they continued. How was he then deli∣uered from his feare? or haue you so soone forgotten your owne words, if you regard not myne? k 1.254

It is absurd to saie he praied in feare against that which he perfectly knew should neuer come vnto him, namely that the Dominion of Death should hold him.

If the dominion of death should not hold his bodie, much lesse should hell hold his soule.

[But the Greeke word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you saie, séemeth to import a deliuerance after Christ was in that he feared: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, l 1.255 Hee was heard being in it.] As is your diui∣nitie, Syr confuter, so is your Greeke. For if Christ were heard; then God did heare him; & so if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ioyned to the pas∣siue of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifie that Christ was heard being in the paines of hell; then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ioyned to the Actiue, and referred to God, must likewise import that God being in y^e same paines did heare him. Haue you not brought vs a learned obserua∣tion out of your Greeke store, that God which heard, and Christ that was heard, were both in the paines of hell? But indéed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to hearken vnto, as wee do when we bend our eare to anothers spéech; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is hark∣ned vnto or heard. The word is fiue times vsed in the new tes∣tament, but in the Septuagint nothing more frequent to sig∣nifie that we harken to Gods voice when we obey him, and God harkneth to our voice, when hee graunteth our praiers. Feare not saith the Angell to Zacharie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, thy praier is heard,m 1.256 thy wise Elizabeth shall bring thee a sonne,n 1.257 Soe the Angell to Cornelius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 thy praier is hearde o 1.258 with

strange toonges will I speake to this people, saith the Lord, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and neither so will they har∣ken vnto mee. The wise man in like manner, p 1.259 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hee that harkeneth vnto the Lord, giueth rest to his mother. And the Septuagint, Whē thou praiest, saith Eliphas in the booke of Iob, q 1.260 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God will heare thee,r 1.261 Earlie, saith Dauid to God, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, shalt thou heare my voice. So in Esaie,s 1.262 the eare of the Lord is not shutte, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not to heare. Infinite exam∣ples might bee brought to the same end, but these are suffici∣ent to conuince your ignorant mistaking of the Gréeke tongue; yet the Question you saie is granted. t 1.263

For fearing is a true feeling, and if Christ feared the wrath of God, ergo he felt it.

You recken a pace when you recken alone, but when you come for allowance you will lacke a faire deale of your reckning. If fearing wore suffering, which is most ab∣surd; if there were no kind of feare, but your amazed and all confounded feare, as there be more other kinds of feares; if there were noe more parts of the wrath of God, but hell paines, as there be sundrie more; if no man might feare but for himselfe, as in charitie wee may, and in duty we ought to feare for others, and Christ in loue might and did for vs; then had you some hope, that he which granteth the one, would admit the other: but if this be all you can saie, that feare is a kind of feeling, I am as farre from granting the Question, as I was in the first beginning. For though you dallie with doubtfull words, and thinke it enough to catch here and there at a likelihood, my course is not so. In∣déede out of these words I reasoned vppon your owne prin∣ciples: and supposing it for the time to be true which on this place some auouch, that Christ feared the paines of hell, I concluded, if Christ were deliuered from fearing, he was certainlie deliuered from suffering the paines of hell. And before you answere the argument, you triumph as if the Question were granted. But Syr remember it

is the suffering of hell paines that we talke of, and not of a Metaphoricall kinde of féeling; which you substitute in stéed thereof. Againe all the effects of Gods wrath Christ did not feele, nor feare, as namelie, neither reprobation, nor desperation, nor eternall damnation, which is the chiefest and sharpest effect of Gods iust wrath against sinne. Some partes thereof if hee did feare, and so in affection feele, howe doth it followe hee felt or feared hell paines? Thirdlie, hee did sustaine as well our person, as our cause; hee had not onelie compassion on vs, but coniunction with vs; and in that respect as our head hee might worthilie feare the euerlasting destruction of his bodie, if he did not interpose himselfe, and auert Gods wrath from them, by healing them with his owne stripes, and bearing their sinnes in his owne bodie. Fourthlie he might feare the power of Gods wrath, able to punish euen the bodie of Christ with farre more smart, then his humane flesh was able to endure. Last∣lie, hee might carefullie shunne and decline both our sinne and the wages of our sinne, which is eternall death with a re∣ligious feare, as content to redeeme vs, but not to destroie both himselfe and vs.

And this commeth néerest the signification of the Gréek worde there vsed, which is no confused or amazed feare, such as you woulde cunninglie conuey vnder the name of a u 1.264 perplexed feare, but a carefull and diligent regarde to be∣ware and decline that, which wee mislike or doubt. And therefore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not onelie one that feareth God by taking good care not to displease him, but a circumspect and warie man in other thinges; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is circum∣spection and warinesse in priuate or publique affaires, as well as Religion to GOD. Nowe because the bol∣der men are, the sooner they aduenture on anie thing, and the more fearefull, the more héede they take what they do; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by consequent signifieth an inclination rather to feare, then presumption; but it is lesse then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which

is the vsuall worde in Greeke for feare, as maie plainelie be prooued by Plutarch in his Treatise of Morall vertue; where, noting howe men couer vitious affections vnder the names of vertues, he saieth, * 1.265 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; They call blushing reuerence; mirth gladnesse, and feare wa∣rinesse, Euripides in the person of Eteocles king of Thebes, saieth,y 1.266 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Circumspect care is the most profitable Goddesse. And where you quote the 23. of the Acts for proofe of your conseit, the place is rather a∣gainst you then with you. For when the Councell dissen∣ted about Paule, and some tumult began to arise, the * 1.267 Tri∣bune doubting least some hurt might happen vnto Paule then his prisoner, preuented it, and sent his souldiers to take him a waie from the midst of the throng. This feare of the tri∣bune was for another man, not for himselfe, neither was a perplexed or amazed feare, but a doubt forecasting the worst, and preuenting it. So is it written of Noah, that being ad∣monished by God of the floud which should come vpon the world, by saith a 1.268 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, fearing, declining and preuenting (what God had threatned to others) he made ready the Arke, for the sauing of his housholde. This could be no distrust full feare, what should befall him and his house; for his faith is commended by the Apostle in preparing the Arke, for the safetie of himself and his children; but he shunned that which he saw would light on others; and that the scripture there cal∣leth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The rest that maie concerne Christs praier in the garden, or might occasion that agonie which there hee shewed, thou hast (gentle Reader) in the a 1.269 treatise before; which I will not here resume, least I wearie thee with ouer much tediousnesse.

For a farewell to his speciall reasons, the Confuter hath reserued matters of most speciall moment to the last: and because they are weightie and neede good proofe, hee hath searched the bottome of his studie, and sheweth vs here

the depth as well of his reading, as vnderstanding. Out of the Epistle to the Hebrues he citeth these wordes; b 1.270 Christ through death abolished him that had the power of death, that is the Diuell. From hence hee reasoneth thus.

c 1.271 Surelie the worde DEATH hath the same meaning in both places: ve∣rie fonde it were to take it here otherwise. Nowe it is questi∣onlesse, in this latter place, death signifieth the death of the soule, the tormentes and sorrowes of the damned, which are sepa∣rated from the life of God: of which death the Diuell is sayde to haue the power and execution. Therefore in the former place death signifieth so to, euen the death of the soule, that is the tor∣ments and sorrowes due to the damned, and d 1.272 consequently Christ suffered the death of the soule. And because this reason will seeme altogether vnreasonable and harsh in the eares of some, to saie the least of it, let them soberlie consider it, and it is most true and euident: Or if this will not perswade men to be∣leeue that Christ died the death of the soule, e 1.273 men liuing be∣ing surprised with grieuous sorrowes and paines, will saie (as Terence witnesseth, occidi, perij, interij) they die, they perish. So likewise the death of the soule sometimes maie bee vnderstoode and that most sitlie for the paines and sufferinges of Gods wrath,f 1.274 which alwayes accompanie them that are separated from the grace and loue of God. And if Terence bee not au∣thoritie sufficient, Saint Peter against whome lieth no ex∣ception, g 1.275 saith, that Christ in his suffering for vs was done to death in the flesh, but made aliue by the spirite. And in the Scripture whensoeuer the fleshe and the spirite are opposed to∣gither, h 1.276 the flesh is alwayes Christes whole humanitie, I saie not his bodie onelie, but his soule also. From hence nowe it fol∣loweth, that Christes soule also died, and was crucified accor∣ding to the death and crucifying, which soules are subiect vnto, and capable of.

I haue (Christian Reader) neither per∣uerted the reasons, nor pared the authorities, on which this Confuter groundeth his conclusion, that Christ died

the death of the soule, and that Christs soule was also cruci∣fied as well as his bodie; I haue onelie sette them togither, that thou maiest with one view behold both the deepnes and soundnesse of this vpstart writer; and in thy secrete and vp∣right iudgement, is it not patience enough to heare and en∣dure a two legged creature to talke in this sort without all learning, religion or discretion, controlling all the fathers as fooles, for thinking otherwise then hee doth, commaun∣ding the Scriptures pretor-like, to serue his ignorant and lewd assertions, and estéeming none to be sober or conside∣rate, except they confesse his shamefull absurdities to bee most true and euident? But I haue not learned nor vsed to giue reuiling spéeches, the Lorde reprooue his follie. Though it bee not worth the answering, yet for their sakes that bee simple, I will not refuse to speake to it, and to let them see what difference there is betwixt truth and errour.

Your maine reason (Sir Refuter) is this, in these wordes of the Apostle,

Christ through death abolished the diuell that had power of death. This worde DEATH (say you) hath the same meaning in both places, the proofe you make for it is this, verie fond it were to take it here otherwise. Your assumption is, but death in the latter place questionlesse signifieth the death of the soule; Therefore Christ died the death of the soule.

It were as easie for mee to saie, it is not so; as for you to saie, it is so; but that course which you holde is but prating of euerie thing, it is no proouing of anie thing. Howe manie kinds of death there are, wee shall better learne by the graue father Saint Austen, then by the young louers in Terence: i 1.277 Dicitur mors prima, dicitur & secunda. Primae mortis duae sunt partes, vna qua peccatrix anima per culpam discessit a creatore suo: altera qua indicante Deo exclusa est per poenam à corpore suo. Mors autem secunda ipsa est cor∣poris & animae punitio sempiterna. There is a first death and a second Death. Of the first death there be two parts: one, when

the sinfull soule by offending departed from her Creator; the o∣ther whereby the soule for her punishment was excluded from her bodie by Gods iustice. The second death is the euerlasting torment of bodie and soule. The same partes and kindes of death are often repeated by him in his 13. booke de ciuitate Dei; as namelie,k 1.278 Mors animae fit cum eam deserit Deus, sicut corporis cum id deserit anima. Ergo vtrius{que} rei, id est totius ho∣minis mors est, cum anima à Deo deserta deserit corpus. Ita enim nec ipsa vixit ex deo, nec corpus ex ipsa. Huiusmodi autem totius hominis mortem illa sequitur quam secundam mortem diuino∣rum eloquiorum appellat authoritas. Nam illa poena vltima & sempiterna recte mors animae dicitur. The death of the soule is, when God forsaketh her, as the death of the bodie is, when the soule forsaketh the bodie. So y^e death of both, that is of the whole man is when the soule forsaken of God forsaketh her bodie. For so neither she liueth by God, nor the bodie by her. This death of the whole man, that other death followeth; which the diuine scriptures call the second death, for that last and euerlasting pu∣nishment is rightlie called the death of the soule. Here are thrée kinds of death; sinne which separateth vs from God, bodilie death, which separateth the soule from the body, and eternall damnation which tormenteth body and soule for euer. In the Apostles words to the Hebrues, that Christ through death abo¦lished y^e diuell that had power of death; you wil by no meanes haue the death of the bodie intended; that is a benefite and gaine to the godlie. Then of sinne and eternall damnation the diuell must be said to haue power, and indeede so he hath. For hee is the perswader and leader to sinne, and the ex∣ecutioner and tormentor in damnation. And so by your di∣uinitie Christ must sinne, and be euerlastinglie condemned to hell fire, before he can abolish the Diuell that hath power of both these. For he must abolish him, by the same kind of death, whereof hee hath power. Looke, Sir Refu∣ter, what an wholsome exposition of the Apostles words you haue made vs, which the diuell himselfe durst not aduenture,

it is so blasphemous. God forbid you will say, this should be anie part of your meaning. But if such bee your ignorant rashnesse, that you will so expound scriptures, as these con∣sequents shall necessarie followe, you must leaue writing, and fall to learning an other while, till you be able to foresée what may iustly be inferred vpon your positions. Deaths of the soule there are none mentioned in anie Scripture, or father, but sinne and eternall damnation. Leaue the pa∣theticall, hyperbolicall & metaphoricall phrases of Terence, to boies in the Grammer schoole, speake at least like a di∣uine, though you bee none. If your cause bee so holie a truth as you talke of, it hath both foundation and approba∣tion in the Scriptures. You shall not neede to runne to heathen Poets to prooue that the Sauiour of the worlde died the death of the soule. What the death of the soule is, what consequentes it hath, and what maine and moste sufficient reasons there are, why Christ neither did, nor might die the death of the soule, thou hast (good Rea∣der) before in the Treatise it selfe: if this fumbler either will skippe them, or can not answere them, I must not repeate them as often as hee will neglect them.* 1.279 Yet to ease thee of going backe, I will here giue thee the effect thereof.

The life and death of the soule is in manie hundred places learnedlie and trulie vouched and prooued by Saint Austen,l 1.280 Mori carni tuae est amittere vitam suam; mori animae tuae est amittere vitam suam. Vita carnis tuae anima tua, vitae animae tuae Deus tuus. Quomodo moritur caro amissa anima, quae vita eius est; sic moritur anima amisso Deo, qui vita est eius. For thy bodie to die, is to loose his life; and for thy soule to die, is to loose her life. The life of thy bodie is thy soule. The life of thy soule is thy God. As the bodie dieth when the soule is departed, which is his life; so the soule dieth when God is departed which is her life. And againe. m 1.281 Quomodo ergo mortua est anima de qua viuit corpus? Audi ergo &

disce▪ corpus hominis creatura Dei est, & anima hominis creatu∣ra dei est. De anima deus viuificat carnem, ipsam autem animam viuificat de seipso, non de seipsa. Vita ergo corporis anima est, vita animae Deus est: moritur corpus cum recedit anima, moritur ergo anima si recedit Deus. Carnem iacentem sine anima vides; ani∣mam miseram sine Deo videre non potes? Crede ergo, adhibe o∣culos fidei. How dieth the soule then by which the bodie li∣ueth? Hearken and learne. The bodie of man is the creature of God, & so is the soule. By the soule God giueth life to the flesh, but the soule her selfe God quickeneth by himselfe, and not by herselfe. The life of the bodie then is the soule, the life of the soule is God. The bodie dieth when the soule departeth, ergo the soule dieth if God depart from her. Thou seest the flesh lying dead without a soule, and canst thou not see the soule wretched without God? Beleeue then, and open the eies of faith. And speaking of the particular consequents to the life and death of the soule, the same father saith: n 1.282 Quomodo cum anima est in corpore, praestat illi vigorem, decorem, mobilitatem; Sic cum vita eius Deus est in ipsa, praestat illi sapientiam, pietatem, iustitiam, charitatem; veniente ita{que} verbo & audientibus infu∣so resurgit anima à morte sua ad vitam suam, hoc est ab iniqui∣tate, ab insipientia, ab impietate, ad Deum suum qui est illi sapi∣entia, iustitia, charitas. As when the soule is in the bodie, shee giueth vigour, comelinesse and motion to the bodie; so when God her life is in the soule, he giueth her wisedome, pietie, righteousnesse and charitie. The worde (of God) then sounding and infused to the hearers, the soule riseth from her death to her life, that is from iniquitie, follie, and impietie, to her God, who is to her wisedome, righteousnesse, and charitie. If this were not plaine inough; the Scriptures themselues are so euident, that no man can mistake the life of the soule, except hee will purposelie blinde himselfe, least hee shoulde come to the knowledge of the truth. For the sonne of God is o 1.283 life, and comming down from heauen,p 1.284gaue life to the world, q 1.285 quickning whom hee would r 1.286 with the waters of life, that is

by the s 1.287 spirite of life, yea t 1.288 whosoeuer beleeueth, and u 1.289 abideth in him, hath life and beareth fruite in him. For the iust shall x 1.290 liue by faith, and he that dwelleth in y 1.291 loue, dwelleth in God, and God in him, for God is loue. So that not onely Christ is our life,z 1.292 and he that hath the sonne hath life, but a 1.293 with him, and in him, alwaies was, and alwaies will bee, the b 1.294 fountaine of life, which neuer did nor can drie vp; how then could Christ die the death of the soule, whose soule was personallie vni∣ted, vnto the worde that was life in it selfe? And if the grace and spirite of God in vs, make vs liue by God, and in God; if faith and loue knitte men to the life of God; howe coulde the soule of Christ alwaies full of grace and truth, alwaies full of faith and loue, and of the holie Ghost, bee deade?

[But this Refuter meaneth another death of the soule.] What his meaning is, is not materiall, but whether hee meane truth or no. If he wil frame vs a monster in christian religion, what haue I to do with that, but to detest it? There is another death after this life, mentioned both in scriptures and fathers, which is the second death. But I hope this Con∣futer will eate and sléepe vpon the cause before hee wrappe our Sauiour within euerlasting damnation. That is, a death in déed from which God blesse and saue vs all. They must néedes bee good Christians that labour to bring Christes soule within the compasse of the second death.c 1.295 Haec mortali∣tas est vmbra mortis; vera mors est damnatio cum Diabolo. Our death is here but a shadow of death; the true death indeede is damnation with the diuell, saith Austen. And againe d 1.296 Quid est istamors? Est relictio corporis, depositio sarcinae grauis: mors secunda, mors aeterna, mors gehennarum, mors damnatio∣nis cum Diabolo, ipsa est vera mors: What is this death? It is the leauing of the bodie, and the laying downe of an heauier burthen; for the second death, the death that is eternall, the death of hell, the death of condemnation with the Diuell, that is the true death. Which of these two deathes of the

soules, you will haue the soule of Christ subiected vnto, you must tell vs, (Sir Refuter,) if you will néedes haue him die the death of the soule; and the choise is so good, that take which you will, you in••ur hainous and horrible blasphemie. I wish you to bee better aduised, then to procéede to the de∣fence of so wilfull a frensie. As for new deaths of the soule▪, you haue no commission to inuent anie; shewe what scrip∣ture or Father spake it before you, or you must giue the godlie leaue to thinke you no fit founder of a newe faith. S. Austen was of opinion that no Christian durst auouch that Christ died the death of the soule, e 1.297 Nam quod Iesus anima mortificatus fuerat, quis audcat dicere, cum mors animae non sit nisi peccatum, a quo ille omnino immunis fuit? That Christ was dead in soule VVHO DARES AFFIRME IT, whereas the death of the soule (in this life) is nothing but sinne, from which hee was altogether free? you not onelie auouch it, but you thinke no man sober that will not consent to it. But you did well to prophesie of this conceite of yours, that it woulde seeme harsh and altogether vnreasonable in the eares of some, to•• saie the least of it; In the eares of all that bee wise and lear∣ned it will sound worse, for it is a flat repugnancie not only to all the Fathere, but euen to the christian faith, that Christ died as well in soule as in bodie; and as meane a man as I am, I thinke I shall bee able to make that good which I saie. For if the soule of Christ were alwaies perfectlie vni∣ted vnto life, fullie possessed of life, and aboundantly able to giue life, tell me I praie you howe it maie stande with the trueth of the scriptures, that the same soule was for anie time deade? you may euen as well defende that Christ sin∣ned, as that his soule died, for the death of the soule is sinne in this life, and damnation in the next. f 1.298 Certe anima Christi nulla mortificata peccato vel damnatione punita est, quibus dua∣bus causis mors animae intelligi potest: Surelie the soule of Christ was deade with no sinne, nor punished with any damnation, which are the two waies that the death of the soule may bee

possibly conceaued.

[The death of the soule, say you,g 1.299 may be vnderstood, & that most fitly, for the paines and sufferings of Gods wrath, which al∣waies as company them that are separated from the grace and loue of God. This death of the soule yee affirme Christ suffered; yet hee himselfe neuer separated, but most intirely beloued, yea most h 1.300 holie, most innocent, and most blessed.]

You contradict, (Sir Refuter,) not onlie the scriptures and fathers, but euen your selfe in one and the same sentence, and reele like a man whose braines are not steadie. i 1.301 Secundum scripturas triplicem esse mortem accepimus. Vna est cum morimur peccato, deo viuimus. Beata mors quae a mortali nos separat, immortali conseruat. Alia mors est vitae excessus cum anima nexu corporis liberatur. Tertia mors est de qua dictum est, anima quae pecca∣uerit, ipsa morietur. Ea morte non solum caro sed etiam anima moritur; haec mors non est perfunctio huius vitae, sed lapsus erro∣ris. By the scriptures (saith Ambrose) we learne there is a tri∣ple death. One when we die to sinne and liue to God. This is a blessed death, which seuereth vs from that which is mortall, and ioineth vs to that which is immortall. The second is the de∣parture out of this life, when the soule is deliuered from the bandes of her bodie. The thirde death is that of which it is written; the soule that sinneth, shall die; this death dieth not onelie the flesh, but the soule also; for it is not the ending of this life, but the running into errour. k 1.302 The first is the life of the soule, and the death of sinne; which is SPIRITV∣ALL. The second is the ceasing of this life which is NA∣TVRALL; the thirde is not onelie sinne but destruction, which is PENALL. Which of these agreeth to Christ, Ambrose himselfe will tell you. l 1.303 Quid est Christus nisi mors corporis, spiritus vitae? What is Christ but the death of the bodie, and the Spirit of life? Then Christ died not the death of the soule, for the spirit of life cannot die, vnlesse you will make life it selfe to bee death. Yea, they which in this worlde die the death of the soule are separated from

Christ, for did they abide in him, they shoulde abide in life; he is m 1.304 the waie, the truth, and (not onelie liuing, but) life it selfe; This testimonie our Sauiour giueth of him∣selfe, n 1.305 Verilie, verilie I saie vnto you, hee that beleeueth in mee hath eternall life. If they cannot die the death of the soule, which beleeue in Christ, howe mush lesse can Christ himselfe die that death? And heere, (Sir Refuter) you broch so grosse and palpable an errour, that women and children will deride you. For if the tormentes of hell and paines of the damned

do alwayes accompany them that are se∣parated from the grace and loue of God,

howe manie hun∣dred thousand thousandes of all sortes, sexes, and ages in all kingdomes and countries shoulde bee disturbed, dis∣tracted, and confounded in all the powers of their soules and senses of their bodie? where are the o 1.306 riches of Gods bounteousnesse, patience and long suffering which the Apo∣stle so highlie commendeth, as leading vnto repentance? How could Abraham with anie truth saie to the rich man in hell; p 1.307 Sonne remember thou in thy life time receauedst thy good thinges and Lazarus paines; where if your position be true, the paines of Lazarus coulde not bee comparable to the tor∣mentes and paines that ALVVAIES ACCOMPANIE the wicked? I assure thee (christian Reader) a man could not with fewer and foolisher wordes then these, more crosse the whole tenor of the scriptures. For the wicked here in this life abound with all wealth, ease, and prosperitie, insomuch that manie of the godlie haue beene and still are offended with it. Reade the 72. Psalme, and see whether these intolerable and horrible feares, sorrowes, paines, and tormentes of hell and the damned, do alwaies accompanie them heere in this life. q 1.308 My feete were almost gone (saith Dauid) when I sawe the peace of the wicked. There are no bands in their death, they are Iustie and strong, they are not in trouble, nor plagued with other men, their eies stand out for fastnesse, they haue more then their heart can wish. Lo these are the wicked, yet PROSPER

THEY ALVVAIE, and increase in riches. This was too hard for me till I went into the sanctuarie of God, then I vnderstood their ende. So that God r 1.309 with much patience suffereth the vessels of wrath prepared vnto destruction, who according to their harde and impenitent hearts, s 1.310 heape vp wrath vpon them∣selues against the daie of the declaration of the iust iudgement of God, whose suddaine destruction is then nearest, when they shal say t 1.311 peace and safety.

And what maruell you crosse the scriptures in confoun∣ding the wrath of God to come with the wrath of God pre∣sent in this life; when you doe not see your owne wordes to be contrarie one to the other? For if Christ died the death of the soule, which is u 1.312 an alienation from the life of God, howe was he neuer separated, but alwaies intirely beloued and most blessed? If hee were neuer separated from the life of God, howe came he to die the death of the soule, which must néeds be a separatiō for the time from God, vnlesse you can match light and darkenesse, death and life together, and make the one to be the other, and both to cleaue to God himselfe? But what cannot you do, that can make the paines of the dam∣ned, and torments of hell the onlie true and perfectlie accep∣ted sacrifice to God? These are your words.

x 1.313 Such a sorrow indeed of a broken and contrite heart is the only true and perfectly accepted sacrifice to God, and is in effect nothing but what we af∣firme. You affirme that Christ died the death of the soule, which you interpret to bee such y 1.314 paines and sufferings of Gods wrath, as alwaies accompany them that are separated from the grace and loue of God: You affirme that Christ suffered z 1.315 won∣derfull and piteous astonishment, forgetfulnesse and confusion of the powers of nature, euen of a 1.316 all the powers of his soule and sen∣ses of his bodie, yea he b 1.317 felt the verie diuels as the instruments, that wrought the verie effectes of Gods wrath vppon him; and though the c 1.318 wicked oftentimes find farre more intolerable hor∣ror of their sinnes then any other, yet you doubt not, but d 1.319 Christ as touching the vehemencie of paine, was as sharply tou∣ched

euen as the Reprobate themselues, yea, if it may be, more ex∣traordinarily. All this you affirme, and by your owne words, all this is the ONLY TRVE, and perfectly accepted sacrifice to God.

So then whosoeuer feeleth not all this, hath no broken nor contrite heart, nor anie longer then hee feeleth these hel∣lish torments in his soule. And if this be the ONLY TRVE sacrifice to God, I will not aske what shall become of the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiuing, but howe vnhappie are the godlie that at anie time are free from the paines of the damned, and from the tormentes of hell, since the suf∣fering thereof is the ONLY TRVE and perfectlie accepted sacrifice to God? e 1.320 Godly sorrow, saieth the Apostle, causeth repentance vnto saluation; those wordes please you not;

such f 1.321 hellish sorrowes, and intolerable horrors as the Reprobate themselues feele, yea as the damned doe suffer, this saie you is the ONIY TRVE and accepted sacrifice to God.

You must haue other sacrifices, and those accepted, before you come to heauen; or else the Reprobate and damned will bee there as soone as you: God send you his grace, and grant your wits and senses bee not distempered and distracted; you talke so much of hellish paines, and torments executed by diuels, as the only true sacrifice of a broken and contrite hart.

The Apostles wordes, whereon you first grounded this o∣dious" assertion, haue no such intention, as you imagine. By death Christ conquered him that had power of death that is the Diuel. Aske the simplest childe y^t is catechised in your charge, if you haue anie, what death Christ died for vs, and hee will answere you out of his Créede, Christ was crucified, deade, and buried; and that is the death which the Scriptures de∣scribe and deliuer. g 1.322 I deliuered vnto you (saieth Paul) that which I receiued, how that Christ died for our sinnes, according to the scriptutes; what death if wee aske the Apostle, he will answere the death of the Crosse. For h 1.323 we preach (saieth he) Christ crucified; and I esteemed not to know any thing among you but Christ Iesus and him crucified. Christ crucified then,

that is by his death on the crosse, destroied him that had pow∣er of death. [Of what death, you aske, hath the diuell pow∣er?] as well of the second death which Christ coulde not suffer; as of the first which hee did suffer. [Christ, you will saie, coulde deliuer vs from no death, but from the verie same which he suffered himselfe.] If so you saie, i 1.324 or so would saie, it is no lesse then heresie, or blasphemie. Hee deliuered vs from euerlasting death, which hee neither did, nor coulde suffer. If you saie hee deliuered vs not from euerlasting death, it is open heresie; if you saie Christ suffered euerla∣sting death, it is blasphemie. Yet hath the diuell power of both deaths, as well temporal as eternall. What power, you aske, hath the diuel of this death which our bodies die? k 1.325 God made not that death, but by the l 1.326 enuy of the Diuell it came in∣to the world. He was the first procurer of it by perswading sinne, and still reioiceth in it as the verie gate to hel. m 1.327 I shal goe (said Ezechiah) to the gate of hell, which was the death of his bodie; that waie the wicked passe to hell. Yea the Apostle calleth the corruption of our bodies the sting of sinne, where∣with the diuell pearced vs; n 1.328 when this corruption hath put on incorruption, ô death where is thy sting?

For the exposition of the Apostles words, I may either say with o 1.329 S, Austen▪ Ipse Dominus mori voluit, vt, quemadmodū de illo scriptum est, per mortem euacuaret eum qui ptoestatē habebat mortis, id est Diabolum, & liberaret eos qui timore mortis per t••∣tam vitam rei erant seruitutis. Hoc Testimonio satis illud mon∣stratur, & mortem istam corporis principe atque authore Diabolo, hoc est ex peccato accidisse, quod ille persuasit. Ne{que} enim ob aliud potestatem habere mortis verissime diceretur. The Lord himselfe would die, that as it is written of him, by death he might destroie him that had power of death, euen the diuell, and deliuer them which for feare of death were all their life long subiect to serui∣tude. By this testimonie it is sufficientlie prooued that this ve∣rie death of our bodies came from the Diuell as the Authour and chiefe dooer thereof; that is from the sinne which hee per∣swaded.

He cannot for any other cause be said to haue power of death, which here is most truly spoken. Ambrose, Chrysostom, and Cyril referre death throughout that sentence to the death of the bodie: In these wordes (saie they) the Apostle p 1.330 noteth an admirable thing, that whereby the diuel had power, thereby was he ouerthrown. The weapons which were his strength a∣gainst the world, that is death, by y^t Christ strooke him. Why trē∣ble ye? why feare ye death? now death is not terrible, but accep∣table as the end of labor and the beginning of rest. q 1.331 Chrysostom hath almost the same wordes. Cyrill verie often expoundeth death in that place for the death of Christs bodie. r 1.332 The sonne of God was partaker of flesh and bloud, that yeelding his BODY to death, he by nature as God being life it selfe, might quicken it againe: otherwise how had hee abolished the imperie of death, vnlesse he had raised againe his dead BODY. And againe; s 1.333 Be∣cause it was aboue mans nature to abolish death, yea rather it was subdued of death, the son of God, that is life, took vnto him mans nature subiect to death, y^t death as a cruell beast inuading his flesh should cease frō his tyranny ouer vs, that should there∣by be abolished. If by death in the second place we vnder∣stand the death of body and soule with Fulgentius, I am not a∣gainst it, this being alwaies remembred, that Christ died no death but the death of the bodie.t 1.334 Mors filij Dei, quam SOLA CARNE suscepit vtram{que} in nobis mortē, animae scilicet carnis{que} destruxit. The death which the sonne of God suffered ONLY in his flesh, destroied BOTH DEATHS in vs, as well that of the soule, as that of the body.

The Confu••er hauing be stirred himselfe in his special and choise arguments, as thou hast heard (christiā reader) & now drawing to an ende, purposeth like a politicke captaine so to entrench himself, that no force shal fetch him out of his hold. And because wordes are the weapons that can endanger him; he taketh the readie waie with them, to turne & wind them at his wil, and so maketh anie thing to be euerie thing, that nothing should hurt him. The scriptures affirme•• that

Christ crucified is the wisedome and power of God to all that be called, and that we are * 1.335 reconciled to God by the death of his sonne, and our sinnes redeemed, and the y 1.336 diuel destroied by the death of Christ Iesus; as also that hee y 1.337 suffered for vs in the flesh, yea he z 1.338 suffered for our sinnes being put to death in the flesh. And least it should hence bee collected, that Christ died not y^e death of the soule; but rather the death of his bodie was a sufficient price for the life of the worlde; the Refuter vndertaketh this place of Saint Peter, that Christ was a 1.339 done to death in the flesh, and thence will proue, that the flesh com∣prehendeth bodie and soule, and that the soule of Christ b 1.340 DI∣ED "and was crucified as well as the bodie. Reason or authori∣tie besides his owne he bringeth none, but out of the hinder part of his head he giueth an obseruation, which, if he saie the worde, must needes prooue sounde and good; and this it is.

c 1.341 Whensoeuer in scripture the flesh and the spirit are opposed to∣gether, the d 1.342 flesh is alwaies Christes whole humanitie, as well his soule as his bodie. From whence it followeth that Christs soule also died and was crucified.

How proue you this note, (Sir Refuter?) had you saide that wheresoeuer the flesh of Christ liuing is spoken of, there the flesh of a man endued with a humane soule is intended; you had saide well: for Christ was perfect man and perfect God, in one and the same person: but when you will stretch all the attributes of the bodie, and make them common to the soule, because Christ had a soule as well as a bodie, it is no true obseruation de∣riued from the scripture, but a partiall supposition intended to further your hellish sorrowes. In the 26. of Matthew, when Christ telleth his disciples e 1.343 that the spirit is readie, but the flesh weake, doth hee take spirit there for the godheade, as if that were readie to suffer anie thing, or for the soule which was willing, but that the flesh was weake? In the 24. of Luke when Christ saieth, f 1.344 a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me haue, had his soule flesh and bones, and those to be seene as his bodie had? To the Romanes when Paul saith,

g 1.345 Christ our Lord was made o the seede of Dauid according to the flesh, and declared to be the sonne of God, touching the spi∣rit of sanctification, by the resurrection from the deade; will you conclude that Christes soule was made of the seede of Dauid and came from Dauids loines as Christes flesh did? The like he repeateth in the same Epistle: h 1.346 of the Israelites came Christ according to the flesh, which is God ouer all to be blessed for euer; where••f your obseruation faile not, Christes soule must be kinne to the Iewes as well as his flesh. Whie then•• when Peter saith, i 1.347 Christ was put to death according to the flesh, but quickned by the spirit, doe you make it so cleere a case that the worde flesh there compriseth both bodie and soule; and therefore by Peters confession, Christ died in soule as well as in bodie? so when Paul saith; k 1.348 Christ was crucifi∣ed through infirmitie, yet liueth through the power of God, what leadeth you to imagine, that his soule was crucified as well as his bodie? who did crucifie him I praie you, God or the Iewes? Peter saieth to the Iewes, l 1.349 Iesus of Nazareth, a man approoued of God, after you had taken with wicked hands, you haue CRVCIFIED and slaine. So againe, m 1.350 the holy and iust one ye denied, and killed the Lord of life. And like∣wise. n 1.351 By the name of Iesus, whom ye haue crucified, whom God raised againe from the deade, doth this man heere stande whole, who before was a creeple. If the Iewes then cru∣cified and killed the Lorde Iesus, coulde they crucifie and kill his soule? Are you so simple that you remember not the wordes of our Sauiour, o 1.352 Feare not them which kill the bo∣die, but are not able to kill the soule? And you make it not an ouersight; but a positiue point of your holie truth, as you call it, that Christes soule was crucified and died; and con∣sequentlie that the Iewes directlie against the wordes of Christ were able to kill and crucifie the soule of Christ. Will you saie that God crucified the soule of Christ, for what will you not saie, that say Christs soule was crucified & died? in what scripture shall wee reade that God crucified

the soule, as the Iewes did the bodie of Christ? you woulde seeme to conclude it out of the scriptures, which whensoeuer they speake of Christ crucified, they note the shamefull and cruel death which the Iewes executed on him, not anie thing that God did vnto him. And out of that word, euerie where in the scriptures referred to the Iewes, to inferre that God al∣so crucified his soule, is as much madnesse as the former. If you feare not the paines of hell, because you are so well ac∣quainted with them, feare at least the shame of the worlde, least they deride you to skorne, as lacking that common vn∣derstanding which boies in the streetes, and prentices in the shoppes haue. But what if your selfe, being be like ama∣zed, and (as you saie of Christ) all confounded in all the pow∣ers of your soule, and senses of your bodie, when you wrate in defence of your holie cause, do contradict your selfe, and call your owne assertion ABSVRD and MOST FALSE, and that not ten or twelue leaues off, but in the verie same place where you labour to iustifie this position, and prouing and pronouncing it to be absurd and most false, you presently conclude it as a principle of your newe faith? well, if it bee not so, then I must confesse I was a sléepe when I thought you did so. But if it fall out to be true which I saie, I hope (christian Reader) thou wilt thinke my time anie waie better imploied then longer to reason with such a brain∣sicke babler.

The words of Peter are; o 1.353 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes, the iust for the vniust, and was put to death in the flesh, but quickned by the spirit. Saint Austen writing vpon this place obserueth this for a sure rule to expounde the whole. p 1.354 In eare quippe viuificatus est, in qua fuerat mortificatus. Christ was quickned in that verie part, wherein hee suffered death, or was put to death. This rule hath in it a mightie truth that maie not be resisted. For if any part of Christ di∣ed, which was not againe quickned, but still left dead, then that parte suffered perpetuall death; which is not onelie

plainelie false but openlie blasphemous. Then must this stande for an vndoubted grounde; that whatsoeuer part of Christ was dead, the same must be quickned againe, to auoid the eternall death of anie part. And if anie part of Christ née∣ded not quickning or restoring to life, it neuer died; for quickning is heere the restoring of life to that which was dead, and not the giuing of life to that which had none be∣fore. Then if Christs soule died, of force it must either be quick∣ned againe, or kept vnder eternal death; but to saie that Christs soule was quickned or made aliue IS ABSVRD AND MOST FALSE: Ergo to saie that Christes soule died IS ABSVRD AND MOST FALSE. You will aske me howe I proue the Minor or second parte of this Argument? if Saint Austen did not helpe me to proue it, the Confuter will. Loe (Sir Refuter,) your own words in the very same place, take care I praie you, that I misrepeat them not, for if I hit thē right, you wil proue your selfe as verie a baby as euer suckt a bot∣tle. q 1.355

BOTH THESE, saie you, ARE ABSVRD AND MOST FALSE, that Christ was made alïue either in his HVMANE SOVLE, OR BY THE SAME.

Sée and shame, if there be anie grace, or sense in you, that going about purposelie to prooue that Christs soule died and was crucified, you set this for a pre∣face vnto it,

it is ABSVRD and most FALSE that Christ was made aliue in his humane soule;

which without any shift or colour, you do saie & must saie, before your conclusion can be true; except you wil flie to this, that Christes soule died in deede, but was neuer restored to life, or made aliue a∣gaine; which if wee come to, I must proclaime you no longer foolish but blasphemous. Howbeit I hope you will rather see your follie, then fall to this frensie; for my part, I wish you better counsell and more reading; and although you tell me of

r 1.356 errors, s 1.357 corrupt fansies and vayne imaginations, t 1.358 shameful questiōs, u 1.359 toyish fables,x 1.360 fond, absurd, without sense or reason,

when I doe but repeat the iudgementes of the ancient and learned Fathers; yet I will beare them at

your hand, and from my heart doe pittie your ignorance, for I hope it bee but ignorance; howsoeuer you take vpon you to controle all as fond and absurde, that yeelde not to your humour.

For the cleering of this place of Peter, wherein the Con∣futer hath so much ouerseene himselfe, I stand not vpon the aduantage of his wordes, but vpon the sounde and learned exposition of Saint Austen, whose antiquitie and authoritie concurring with the truth of the scriptures doth please me, & I trust (christian reader) wil content thee. y 1.361 Christus spiritu vi∣uificatus est, cū in passione esset c••rne mortificatus. Quid est enim, quod viuificatus est sp••ritu, nisi quod eadem Caro, qua sola fuerat mortificatus viuificante spiritu resurrexit? Nam quod anima fuerat mortificatus Iesus, hoc est eo spiritu qui hominis est, quis audeat dicere, cum mors animae non sit nisi peccatum, a quo ille om∣nino immunis fuit? Certe anima Christi non solum immortalis, secundum naturam caeterarum, sed etiam nullo mortificata pec∣cato, vel damnatione punita est, quibus duabus causis mors ani∣mae intelligi p••test; & ideo non secundum ipsam dici potuit Chri∣stus viuificatus spiritu. In ea re quippe viuificatus est, in qua fuerat mortificatus; ergo de carne dictum est. Ipsa euim reuixit anima redeunte, quia ipsa erat mortua anima recedente. M••r∣tificatus ergo carne dictus est, quia secundū solam carnē mortuus est, viuificatus autem spiritu quia spiritu operante, etiā ipsa caro viuificata surrexit. Christ was quickned by the spirit, when in his Passion he was put to death in his flesh. What meaneth it, that he was quickned by the spirit, but that the same flesh, in VVHICH ONLY HE DIED, rose againe by the quickning of the spirit? For that Iesus DIED IN SOVLE, I meane in his humane spirit, VVHO DARE AFFIRME IT, where as the death of the soule is nothing (in this life) but sinne, from which he was wholie free? Surelie the soule of Christ was not onlie immortal by nature, as others are, but neither died by sinne nor was punished by any damnation, which are the two waies

how the soule maie possiblie die. And therefore Christ could not bee said to bee quickned in soule by the spirite: for in that part was hee quickned, in which hee died. Therefore it was spoken (by Peter) of Christs flesh. That reuiued when the soule retur∣ned, because that died, when the soule departed. Christ then is sayd to bee done to death in his flesh, for that hee died ONLY IN HIS FLESH, and to be quickned by the spirite, because that verie flesh rose againe being quickned by the working of the spirite. These learned and sound conclusions of S. Austen, are derectlie repugnant to your weake and false obseruati∣ons, Syr Refuter. Christ died in the flesh (saith Peter) that is saith Austen, in THE FLESH ONLY; for the soule of Christ died not, since the death of the soule is either sinne in this life, or damnation in the next, both which were farre from Christ. You tell vs that Christs soule not onlie died, but was also crucified; and all the proofe you bring for it, besides Terence, is that Peter saith Christ died in the flesh. Now the flesh saie you, signifieth as well the soule as the bodie, and so Christ died in both: but such proofes, if you vse them often, will prooue you to haue a great deale lesse religion and learning, then you would seeme to haue.

What death the Scriptures affirme Christ died for vs, if you bee now to séeke at these yeares, it is pittie your shoul∣ders haue beene so long troubled with your head. Can there bee fuller, or plainer words then those which the foure Euangelists vse in describing the death, buriall, and re∣surrection of the bodie of our Sauiour? Shew but one such word in Scripture or father, that Christs soule died at the time of his Passion, and take the cause. [* 1.362 He layd downe his soule vnto death, you will saie;] You should haue done well in your pamphlette at least to haue laid that downe for a shewe, and not vpon your single word to haue vouched so weightie a matter as the death of Christs soule is; but you must be borne with, your wits are often not at home. What is ment by this that Christ laid downe or yéelded his Soule

vnto death, S. Austen largelie disputeth in his 47 treatise vppon S. Iohns Gospell. The effect is, when Christ laid downe his soule vnto death, his bodie died, and not his soule. a 1.363 Quid fecit Passio, quid fecit mors, nisi corpus ab anima separauit? S•• enim mortuus est dominus, immo quia mortuus est Dominus (mortuus est enim pro nobis in cruce) sine dubio caro ipsius expirauit animam. Hoc est ergo ponere animam, quod est mori. Cum ergo exit anima a carne, et remanet caro sine ani∣ma, tunc homo poner•• animam dicitur. Carni hoc tribue, caro ponit animam suam, & caro iterum sumit eam. Caro ponit a∣nimam suam expirando. Ipse Dominus Christus dictus est sola caro. Audeo dicere, et sola caro Christi dictus est Christus. Con∣fiteris illud quod habet fides, in eum Christum te credere, qui cru∣cifixus est & sepul••ns. Ergo sepultum Christum esse non negas, & tamen sola caro sepulta est. Ergo Christus erat etiam caro sine anima, quia non est sepulta nisi caro. Disce hoc etiam in Apostolicis verbis, Humiliauit scmetipsum factus obediens vsque ad mortem. Iam in morte SOLA CARO a Iudaeis est occisa, & tamen carne occisa Christus occisus est. Ita cum caro animam posuit, Christus animam posuit, & cum caro vt resur∣geret animam sumpsit, Christus animam sumpsit. What did the Passion, what did the death of Christ, but separate his bodie from his soule? If the Lord died for vs, yea rather because in∣deede the Lord did die for vs: (for hee died for vs on the crosse,) doubtlesse his flesh did breath out his soule. Soe that to laie downe his soule and to die is all one. When the soule departeth from the flesh, & the flesh remaineth any soule, then a man is said to lay downe his soule. Vnderstād this of the flesh. for the flesh laieth down her soule, & taketh it againe•• the flesh laieth down her soule by breathing it forth. The Lord Iesus is called his flesh alone. I dare be bold to auouch it, THE ON∣LY FLESH of Christ is called Christ. Thou confessest, as it is in thy Creede, that thou beleeuest in that Christ, which was cru∣cified & buried. Then thou acknowledgest Christ to be buried, & yet only his flesh was buried. Therefore flesh without a soule

was Christ, because nothing of him but his flesh was buried. Learne the selfe same in the Apostles words, Christ humbled himselfe & was obedient vnto Death. Now in his death ONLY HIS flesh was killed of the Iewes, and yet the flesh being slaine, Christ was slaine. So when the flesh laid downe her soule, Christ laid downe his soule, and when the flesh tooke her soule againe to rise, Christ tooke his soule againe. To men that do not wilfullie blind themselues these words are cleare e∣nough, and they haue for their warrant the full consent of Scriptures, Councels, & Fathers, for 1400 yeares, without dissenting from it. b 1.364 Christ suffered for you, (saith Peter) lea∣uing you an ensample that you should follow his steppes, who himselfe bare our sinnes in his bodie on the Tree, that we being: dead to sinne, should liue in righteousnes. Then when Christ died to sin, his body died on the tree, his soul liued in righteous∣nes: So must we do, for so did he, when he left vs an example how to follow his steppes. Our soules must not die before we can resemble his death; they must liue in righteousnes as he did. c 1.365Euery where (saith Paul) we beare about in our bo∣die the dying of the Lord Iesus, that the life of Iesus might also be made manifest in our bodies; which he thus expoundeth af∣terward. Therefore we faint not, but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is daily renewed.d 1.366 Then in our bodies we carrie about the death of Christ, who for our ex∣ample died in his bodie vnto sinne, that we should follow his steppes. And why doubt we hereof, since the same apostle doth in as plain & expresse words, as might be spoken, testi∣fie, that Christ, when e 1.367we were enimies, reconciled VS IN THE BODY OF HIS FLESH THROVGH DEATH; to make vs holy, and without fault in his sight, grounded and stablished in faith, and not mooued awaie from the hope of the Gospell? What could the hart of Paul inuent, or his toong vtter more effectuall then this, that Christ THROVGH DEATH IN THE BODIE OF HIS FLESH reconcileth vs to God and maketh vs

holie, and without fault in his sight? If you can quarrell with these words (Sir Refuter) you maie do what you will with the Scriptures. No words will bind you, that take bodie for soule, life for death, faith for amazed feare, hope for into∣lerable horror, descending for ascending, and hell for heauen. What is this els but to make a confusion of all Religion, and giue open defiance to the trueth by taking one contra∣rie for the other? You do not so, you will saie. Leaue so do∣ing and these Questions will soone be determined. I prooue there was alwaies in Christ euidence of faith, assurance of hope, Ioy of loue euen in the midst of his paines on the crosse: and you graunt there was

f 1.368 not anie the least dimi∣nution in Christ of his faith, patience or obedience to God, neither was Christ so much as touched with anie wauering, much lesse fearing in his trust and confidence of Gods loue and protection towards him. How then can the g 1.369 horrour of Gods seuere iustice and wrath, like them that indeed be separated from the grace and loue of God, bee in Christ?

Or how can the sorrowes of the damned which are separated from the life of God bee found in Christ? how could Christ suffer

h 1.370 the same terrours of Gods wrath and assaults of the Deuill, yea far grea∣ter then the godlie féele in their consciences, for want of faith, and feare of Gods displeasure?

What are these but plaine contrarieties? Againe in Christ, you saie,

i 1.371 was no defect of grace;

how then could the soule of Christ replenished with the spirite of life, and liuing in all fulnes of grace and trueth, bee dead? can you make one and the same part of Christ both aliue and dead?

Soe likewise if Christ had but k 1.372 feared to bee vtterly forsaken with the hatred of his Father, that indéed you saie were desperation, which God forbid. And yet you doe not doubt but Christ was as l 1.373 deepelie touched with the m 1.374 vn∣speakeable horror of Gods n 1.375 seuere wrath due to sinne as the o 1.376 Reprobates themselues.

A number of these hogepots you haue made vs; speaking of things which your selfe cannot, or dare not expresse. Sometimes you would faine affirme

it in generall words, and when you come to particulars, you renounce it againe. In the verie case that gaue vs occasion of this rehearsall, when the Apostle saith, we are p 1.377 reconci∣led to God by the death of his sonne, and explaining him∣selfe, saith the death that reconciled vs to God, was the death which Christ suffered q 1.378 in the bodie of his flesh; Is it not as cleare as daie light, that the bodilie death of Christ, which he suffered on the crosse, is by the scriptures resolued to bee the sufficient price of our redemption, and meane of our reconciliation to God, except you take the bodie of Christ for the soule of Christ, and the stripes and woundes of his ••lesh for the paines of hell? r 1.379 Yee were redeemed with the precious bloud of Christ, saieth Peter. Can there bee plainer wordes, that Christes s 1.380 bloud shedde for the re∣mission of our sinnes is the perfect price of our redemption, without the dea••h of the soule, or paines of hell, which you interpose? So likewise, when Peter saieth t 1.381 Christ bare our sinnes in his bodie on the Tree, in that hee u 1.382 suffered once ••or sinners when hee was put to death in his flesh; are you not forced to peruer•• these woordes for defence of your fancie, and to take the flesh for bodie and soule, that you maie make the death of Christe to bee common to both? [It is one thing, you will saie, to take the fleshe for the whole man, and another to take the bodie for the soule.] I knowe it right well, but the one will not serue your turne without the other. By a part to name or note the whole man, is no newes in the Scriptures; but to ascribe the attributes of one part to the other, because the name of either part is sometimes ta∣ken for the whole, that is a generall subuerting of all the trueth of the Scriptures. Saint Austen tolde you euen nowe, that Christes dead flesh is called Christ; will you therefore referre the properties of Christes dead flesh vnto his soule, and not thinke you take the waie to dissolue as well the vnion as communion of two natures in Christ,

and of the distinction of two parts in his manhood? The body indeede is more distinguished from the soule, then the name of flesh is, because the vnregenerate part of the soule is in the Scriptures euerie where called flesh; but this hath no place in Christ, by reason no corruption of sinne cleaned vnto his soule, and therefore the name of fleshe doeth no where signifie the soule in Christ, as it doeth often in vs; onelie by naming flesh in Christ, the scripture sometimes intendeth, that he disdained not the weakest and basest part of our nature, when he came to redéeme vs. And so Saint Iohn saith, x 1.383 The worde was made flesh, meaning the true and eternall sonne of God, vouchsafed to take not onelie our reasonable and humane soule vnto him, but euen our vilde and mortall flesh into the vnitie of his person, and so became man, that hee might restore man nowe fallen from God, and perished in his sinnes, to the fauour and life of God againe. But when the Scriptures saie, that Christ died for our sinnes, the auncient fathers and Councels with one consent applie that to the death of Christes bodie on the Crosse, and not to the death of the soule, or to anie paines of hell. And though in the Treatise before I haue cited such as sufficientlie witnesse that doctrine to be sounde and Catholike, yet will I not bee greeued to let thee see (Christian Reader) that there was nothing more commonlie, nor constantlie professed in the Primitiue Church, then the doctrine which I am now for∣ced to defende against the rage and reproch of this slaunde∣rous impugner.

z 1.384Post edita per facta diuinitatis suae monumenta, reliquum iam erat, vt pro omnibus sacrificium offerret, pro omnibus tem∣plum suum morti tradens, quo omnes innoxios & liberos à veteri praeuaricatione efficeret, seque declararet mortis victorem. Cor∣pus igitur quod communem cum omnibus habebat naturam (cor∣pus enim humanum & mortale erat) ad similitudi••em sui generis mortem excepit; verbum enim quoniam mori non potuit, vtpote

immortale, corpus sibi sumpsit, quod mori poterat; illudque vt suū pro omnibus obtulit, vt ita pro omnibus, omnibus ipse corpore coniunctus•• mortem patiens, compesceret eum, qui mortis habe∣bat imperium, hoc est Diabolum, & liberaret eos quotquot for∣midine mortis per omnem vitam obnoxiy erant seruituti. Af∣ter Christ by his deedes had declared his diuinitie, it remai∣ned that hee shoulde OFFER A SACRIFICE FOR ALL, yeelding vnto death the temple (of his bodie) for all, there∣by to deliuer and discharge all from the olde transgression, and to declare himselfe the conquerour of death. His bodie there∣fore, which in nature was like all ours (for it was an humane and mortall bodie) died in like maner as bodies doe. For the sonne of God, because he could not die being immortall, tooke a bo∣die vnto him that might die, and offered that as his owne for all men, that so being ioined in bodie to all, and suffering death for all, he might represse him that had power of death, euen the Diuell, and free those, that for feare of death were all their life long subiected to seruitude. Epiphanius treadeth in the same steppes.z 1.385 When the sonne of God (saith he) would suffer of his owne good will for mankinde, because his diuinitie coulde not suffer, beeing of it selfe impassible, hee tooke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, OVR BODIE THAT MIGHT SVFFER, that therein hee might yeelde to suffer, and admitted our suffe∣rings, his Godhead being present in his flesh, the godhead suf∣freth not. For he that saith I am life, how can he die? But God remaining impassible 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, suffer••th by his flesh, that his passion may be accounted to his deitie, though it suffered not to the ende our saluation shoulde bee from God. In his flesh was the suffering, least wee should haue a passible God. Which indeede is impassible, imputing that suffering vn∣to himselfe, according to his free choise, and not of anie neces∣sitie. Ambrose in like sort. a 1.386 Laqueus contritus est, & nos libe∣rati sumus. Non potuit melius conteri laqueus nisi praedam ali∣quam diabolo demōstrasset, vt dum ille festinaret ad praedam, suis laqueis ligaretur. Quae potuit esse praeda nisi corpus? Oportuit igi∣tur

hoc fraudem Diabolo fieri, vt s••sciperet corpus dominus Iesus & corpus hoc corruptibile corpus infirmum, vt crufigeretur ex infirmitate Sien••m fuisset corpus spirituale, non dixisset, spiritus promptus est, caro autem infirma. The snare is broken, and we are deliuered. The snare could not bee better broken, then by shewing the diuel some pray, that whiles he hastned to the pray, he might be wrapped in his owne snares. What pray could there be beside the bodie (of man?) It was therefore requisite the di∣uell should bee thus deceiued, that the Lord Iesus should take a body vnto him, euen this corruptible & weake body of ours, that he might be crucified through infirmitie. Had it beene a spiritual bodie that he tooke, he would neuer haue said, the spirite is rea∣die, but the flesh is weake.a 1.387 The same Christ suffered, and suffe∣red not; died and died not, rose againe and did not rise; because hee raised vp his owne bodie. For that which fell, that rose a∣gaine; that which fell not needed not rise. Hee rose then accor∣ding to the flesh, which being dead did rise againe. Ergo also he died in our nature which he tooke vnto him, and suffered in the body which he tooke, that we might beleeue he tooke a true bo∣die. To the vnbeleeuer asking, Shall I beleeue God in flesh, God borne of a woman, God crucified, whipped, dead, woun∣ded, buried? b 1.388 Austen answereth, thy God remaineth vnchange¦able; feare not, he perisheth not. Christ was borne of a woman, but in his fl••sh. Hee was an infant, but in his flesh. Hee suc∣ked, increased, was nourished, and grewe in age, but in his flesh. Wearied he slept but in his flesh. Hee hungred and thirsted▪ but in his flesh. He was taken, bound, whipped & mocked: yea he was CRVCIFIED AND KILLED, BVT IN HIS FLESH. Why art thou afraid? The word which was God remaineth for euer. He that despiseth this humblenes of God wil neuer be cured from the deadly swelling of pride. The Lord Ie∣sus therefore by his flesh gaue hope to our flesh. To be borne, and to die were here on earth common, to liue for euer was not here. Christ found here our earthlie wares, which were vilde, and brought with him his heauenlie, which were strange. If

thou feare (his) death, loue (his) resurrection. c 1.389 He came to the place of our pilgrimage to take that which aboundeth here, euē mocks, whippes, blowes, spittings in his face, reproches, hanging, the crosse and death. These things abound in our region, to this entertainment hee came. What hath he giuen thee here? Instruc∣tion, exhortation, and remission of sinnes. What hath he promi∣sed thee O mortall man? that thou shalt liue for euer. Doest thou not beleeue it? Beleeue it, I say, beleeue it. It is more that he hath alreadie done, then that hee hath promised. It is more incredible, that the eternall died, then that the mortall shall liue for euer. If God died for man, shall not man liue with God? But can God die? Hee tooke from thee wherein to die for thee. THERE COVLD NOT DIE BVT FLESH, THERE COVLD NOT DIE BVT A MORTALL BODIE. Hee clothed himselfe with that wherein hee might die for thee; hee will clothe thee, wherin thou shalt liue with him.d 1.390 In that (part) Christ died, in which thou shalt die: in that (part) Christ rose in which thou shalt rise. Thou wilt pardon mee (Christian Reader) if among so much lothsome stuffe of reprobate hor∣rors, damned paines, and hellish torments, as this Confu∣ter hath heaped together, I solace my selfe sometimes with the longer comfort of sounde and sweete doctrine, so sincerelie and sensiblie deliuered by the learned and auncient Fathers. I will alledge one place more where∣in thou shalt see the full consent of prouinciall and ge∣nerall Councels, not to bee gainesaide by anie man that will beare the name of a Christian, and so shutte vp this point.

Cyrill writing to Nestorius, to stay and suppresse that false doctrine which hee beganne then to spreade; teacheth vs verie plainelie howe the sonne of God is saide in the Scriptures to SVFFER, DIE, AND RISE AGAINE for vs, and our saluation. e 1.391 So wee saie (the sonne of God) suf∣fered and rose againe; not that the sonne of GOD suffe∣red in his owne nature, either the stripes, or the boaring of

the nailes, or the rest of the woundes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Deitie coulde not suffer by reason it is no bodilie substance; but because THAT BODIE, which hee made his owne, suffered these things, himselfe is saide to suffer these things for vs. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He that coulde not suffer was then in his bodie which suffe∣red. After the same manner wee thinke of his dying. The sonne of God is by nature immortall, incorruptible, life and the giuer of life; but because the bodie, which was his owne, ta∣sted death for all by the fauour of God, as Paule speaketh, hee himselfe is saide to haue suffered death for vs, not that hee had experience of death as touching his owne nature, (it were a madnesse so to thinke, or say) but for that as I saide e∣uen nowe, his flesh tasted death: So his flesh rising againe, it is called his Resurrection, not that hee fell to corruption, God forbidde; but that his bodie rose againe. When this stayed not the frenzie of Nestorius the heretike, but that hee replied in swelling woordes, Cyrill called a Coun∣cell at Alexandria, and there with one consent, they ap∣prooued the trueth, and sent it vnto Nestorius to bee con∣fessed in these woordes amongst others; f 1.392 If anie man doe not confesse that the Sonne of GOD suffered in his fleshe, was crucified in his flesh, and tasted death in his flesh, let him bee accursed. Dilating this and the rest of their Ar∣ticles in their Synodall Epistle sent to Nestorius, they saie, g 1.393 Wee confesse that the onelie begotten God, euen the sonne borne of God his father, though hee were impassible in his owne nature, yet suffered hee in his flesh for vs accor∣ding to the Scriptures; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and was in his bodie that was crucified, accounting the sufferings of his owne flesh as proper vnto him, though he were without suffering; and by the grace of God tasted death for all, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when he gaue his owne bodie vnto death. This doctrine came to bee scanned in the third generall Councell helde at

h 1.394Ephesus, and being there deliberatelie read, was wo••de for worde allowed of the whole Councell, as agréeable to the Scriptures and the Nicene fathers. The like approbation it had, not onelie in the Councell of Constantinople vnder Flu∣uianus, but in the great councell of i 1.395 Chalcedon, where the pro∣ceedings of both these Councels were a fresh examined, and the former woordes of Cyrill repea••ed and confirmed, with the ful consent of that general Councel, as most ••ound and catholike.

So that he shall ill deserue the name of a christian▪ that after so manie fathers, and Councels, both Prouinciall and Generall, will begin to teach vs a new faith, and tell vs that the Scriptures meane Christ was crucified and died, as wel in his soule, as in his bodie; since the whole Church with one assent hath euer so conceiued and expounded the Scrip∣tures, that Christes crucifying and dying must bee refer∣red to his bodie; and consequentlie that the ioynt sufferings of Christ (the soule feeling what the bodie suffered) were most auailable for our redemption. For when they a∣scribe the crucifying and death of Christ to his bodie; they doe not exclude the soule from the sense and feeling of the paine, which is a naturall consequent to the con∣iunction with her bodie, but they shew what part of Christs manhoode suffered the crosse and death, that the Scrip∣tures so much speake of, and whereby wee are redee∣med and reconciled vnto GOD. One place repeated in the Councell of Ephesus, maie serue in steede of manie, to declare their meaning. k 1.396 Howe can the Creator of all thnges, who is neither visible, palpable, nor mutable, sustaine the Crosse and death? Wee saie the sonne of God sustained the Crosse and death in his owne flesh, that hee might deli∣uer vs from death and corruption. Hee laide downe his soule for vs, not as an alien and straunger to the sonne of God, but vnspeakeablie vnited vnto him, as himselfe saith; I haue power to lay downe my soule, and I haue power to take it againe.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is proper to the soule to bee pensiue, to feele paine and griefe, to depart from the bodie; as it is proper to the flesh to be wearied, to be crucified, to be raised againe. So the violence was offered to the bodie, the sense whereof reached vnto the soule; and these are the sufferings of the crosse, and of death, which the Scriptures attribute to the sonne of God for our saluation; Insomuch that your long discourse of the proper and immediate suffering of Christes soule for sinne with∣out and besides the bodie, maie be hanged on the hedge, as discording both from the scriptures, and all the Catholike fa∣thers, that either haue priuatelie testified the truth by their writings, or publiklie confirmed it by their assemblies. And as for your hellish paines, when your selfe can tell what they are, and make some better proofe, then yet you haue done, that they were, or might be in the soule of Christ, you shal re∣ceiue further answere.

These are the Refuters exquisite arguments, which he cal∣leth his speciall reasons, being indeede rather so manie mon∣sters in Christian Religion, then matters to perswade a∣nie man were he neuer so simple, and but that a straunge faith muste needes haue such straunge groundes as these bee, I shoulde thinke hee did rather expose this con∣ceyte of Hell paines, to bee derided of the worlde, then to bee beleeued, hee euerie where so secondeth his badde cause with woorse proofes; but where better foode wanteth, Akornes are good meate, and blacke Moores maie bee beautifull, when others bee awaie. I woulde heere make an ende of his first parte, but that as his manner is, when hee hath stumbled absurdlie a long while at hell hee steppeth on the suddaine as vnhand∣somelie to heauen.

l 1.397 Knowe therefore (saieth hee) hell, as we take it is euen in this life founde sometime, as heauen is like∣wise; for as m 1.398 touching materiall fire in hell, what a toyish

fable is that? else I praie you how may the soules of the damned suf∣fer by materiall fier, seeing they are spirits, and therefore with them and fier materiall there can be no communi••n. But let it bee as it may be; the locall hell of the damned we speake not of.

You slacke your hell paines (Sir Resuter) towardes the ende, as if all this while you had beene too hot in them; and heere you giue thrée qualifications to them; or rather contradicti∣ons to your former spéeches.

Hell as you take it is SOME∣TIMES found in this life.

But two leaues before you tolde vs the n 1.399

paines and sufferings of Gods wrath, which are the hell that you saie Christ suffered, ALVVAIES accompanie them that are separated from the grace & loue of God;

how commeth ALVVAIES to bee so quicklie changed into SOMTIMES? were there fewer wicked when you spake the last wordes, then when you spake the first? or are you better aduised; re∣membring what a grosse absurditie it woulde bee to cast all infidels and hypocrits, wicked and disobedient persons into hel torments all the time of this life before the iudgment of God taketh hold of them?

Secondlie, o 1.400 as there is heauen euen in this life in some measure, euen so, saie you, there may be hell.

You doe not meane that here on earth are the verie same ioies and blisse that are in heauen, nor anie way equall to them; if you did, it were a lewder absurditie then the for∣mer. For here p 1.401 we reioice, that our names are written in hea∣uen; (as the Apostle teacheth vs to doe) q 1.402 wee reioice vnder the hope of the glorie of God. r 1.403 Now hope that is seene, is not hope. For howe can a man hope for that which hee seeth (or possesseth?) but when we hope for that we see not, we doe with patience abide for it. In this life s 1.404 wee walke by faith, not by sight; and whiles we dwell in the bodie, we are absent from the Lord. For though t 1.405 we be now the sonnes of God, it appeareth not as yet what we shal be; u 1.406 our life is hid with Christ in God; when Christ, who is our life shall appeare, then shall wee also appeare with him in glorie. If you therefore affirme of hea∣uen as you do of hell, that the VERIE SAME ioies which are

in heauen, or EQVALL with them are here sometime found on earth, it is a wicked errour flatlie repugning to the trueth of Gods promises, and to the verie nature of our Christian faith and hope. (For * 1.407 faith is the grounde of thinges hoped for, and the euidence of thinges not yet appea∣ring,) but if you meane that as wee conceaue HOPE of heauenlie blisse, so wee must néedes REIOYCE in it; this position is verie true, but plainelie opposite to your imagi∣nation of hell paines. For then must there in this life bee no more felte of hell, but the FEARE thereof, and the griefe arising from that feare; euen as the HOPE of hea∣uen maintaineth our ioye. Nowe in Christ coulde nei∣ther the feare of hell possiblie bee founde, nor anie griefe, or sorrowe arising from anie such feare, since there was in his soule no wante of faith nor hope,

no y 1.408 not anie the least diminution of either,

as your selfe confesse; but as the Apostle saieth,* 1.409

FOR THE IOY THAT VVAS SET BEFORE HIM he endured the (paine of the) crosse, and de∣spised the shame.

And here you may see by your owne com∣parison the follie of your owne assertion. For if your hellish "sorrow a 1.410 be the only true and perfectly accepted sacrifice to God, (as you saie) and b 1.411 without faith it is impossible to please God; which alwaies hath hope, and consequentlie, c 1.412 the ioie of sal∣uation annexed vnto it, which you call heauen; then can no man please God, or offer anie sacrifice to God, till hee bee both in hell and heauen at one and the same time; and the ioyes of heauen are so coupled with the paines of hell, that none of the faithfull can be in the one without the other, but in both togither. And thus haue you brought heauen and hell not onelie to bee euerie where, but by your corrupt con∣ceites to bee alwaies linked together. Lastlie, ••he fire of hell doeth somewhat trouble you, and therefore you labour "vtterly to quench it; and aske, d 1.413 what a toyish fable is that? but good Sir, if you would bring no more fables then I doe, you might haue spared not euerie leafe, but euerie line in

this your vnaduised pamphlet. I spake not in my sermon one word either of materiall, or corporall fire in hell, but I vrged the fire of hel to be a true created fire, and not any me∣taphoricall flame, as you here dreame: from which since the bodie and soule of Christ were both free, he did not suffer the true paines of hell, nor the same torments which the damned do in hell; and which wee should haue suffered, had wee not béene redéemed.

c 1.414

This (you saie) is great iniquity, yea plaine sophistry to am∣plifie against you, and to make your most holie truth odious with the people onely by the ambiguitie of the worde hell.

Begin you nowe to finde the sensible absurditie of your mishapen fancie? if you woulde haue taken the name of hell metapho∣ricallie for great and excéeding paines, this question had béene sooner calmed, and our Creede freed from your newe found exposition. But to father your opinion vpon the créed with more likelihood, where the word hell is properlie taken, (though you now hatch vs a new signification of hell out of Socrates,) you then vrged as your selfe in this present confu∣tation do still vrge, that Christ must haue the

f 1.415 FVL VVAIGHT AND BVRDEN of our sinnes laid vpon him, and g 1.416 suffer those sorrowes and paines for sinne, VVHICH ELSE VVE SHOVLDE; that his price VVAS THE SAME which else wee shoulde haue payde; that seeing it h 1.417 was possible for him to feele THE FVLL SMART of our sinnes, yea ALL OVR SMART, and Gods strict iustice so required, IT VVAS SO, AND MVST BE SO; as also, that i 1.418 it is not proportionable with iustice, that an easier punishment should satisfie for a greater sinne, and k 1.419 of al absurdi∣ties the greatest, that meere men shoulde suffer more deepelie then Christ did; and therefore, l 1.420 Christ sustained euen the sense of Gods wrath DVE to our sinnes, and had the m 1.421 VVHOLE CVRSE of God for sinne executed on him, that is the n 1.422 DEATH OF THE SOVLE and the n 1.423 TORMENTES and sor∣rowes DVE TO THE DAMNED.

Without anie

Sophistrie Sir, what is the FVLL BVRDEN of our sinnes, and THE SAME PRICE which we should haue paide, what is OVR FVLL SMART yea ALL OVR SMART, and the VVHOLE CVRSE OF GOD; what is the DEATH of the soule, and the TORMENTS DVE TO THE DAMNED, but those verie things which I by the warrant of Gods word told the people were prepared and threatned to the wicked, and shall bee executed on them in hell, as they shoulde haue bin on vs, if we had not bin redéemed by the bloud of Christ? you must recall all your reasons, and vnsaie all these positi∣ons before you can auoid that which I obiect. If Christ did, and must by Gods iustice suffer the VVHOLE, the SAME, and ALL that was due to vs for our sinnes; shewe me, good Sir, I praie you (for I confesse it passeth my reach) how you can free him from the darknes, destruction, reprobation, male∣diction, worme or fire of hel? yea those words, if you looke not well to them, and rebate them in time with some fresh write, they wil carrie with them both the PLACE and PERPETV∣ITY of hell; for both these were DVE to our sinnes, and are parts of Gods CVRSE, and should haue béene executed on vs, as they shall bee on the damned; and out of ALL, the VVHOLE, and the SAME, how can you except anie, but by an open Vray dire of dotage?

[o 1.424 The local hel of the damned you speake not of.]

Speake of what you will; so long as your as∣sertions, in full and plaine termes inferre and conclude so much; well your words may runne without your wits; but I tell you trulie what is the consequent of them, and leaue those wordes, and then your most holie trueth is left naked without shew or shadow of proofe. For these generals, the VVHOLE, the SAME, and ALL giue life, such as it is, to your childish reasons. Without them you cannot open your mouthe to make one conclusion.

But because hell fire so much crosseth your cause, that you would faine be rid of it, and burneth your fingers so fast, (Sir Refuter,) that you striue to cast water on it; giue mee

leaue a little to let you vnderstand, it flameth more fiercelie, then that you can quench it with the licour of your mouth. And the rather for that in the eares of all men it is a most sensible reproofe of your vnsauorie position. For if Christ suffered not the fire of hell in bodie nor soule, then most appa∣rantlie he suffered not the FVLL burden of our sinnes, nor paid the SAME price which wee should haue paide, nor endu∣red ALL our smart, nor felt the VVHOLE curse of God, nor sustained the tormentes DVE to the DAMNED; and there∣fore the true kindeling of this fire, is the vtter quenching of your new deuised hell paines. Knowe you therefore (Sir Refuter) that your metaphoricall fire in hell is a phantasti∣call errour of yours; and you shall doe well to tremble at the terrible iudgement of God threatned in his worde with more religion, then to cast off that fire as a toyish fable. I" shall not néede to rehearse, how often it is denounced in the Scriptures, and in what vehement and constant manner; let vs learne rather carefullie to shunne the place, then cun∣ninglie to shift the word, which they shall finde to bee no fi∣gure, that feele it. p 1.425 A fire (saith God himselfe) is kindled in my wrath, and shall burne to the bottome of hell, it shall eate through the earth, and the depth thereof, and shal inflame the foundations of the hils. q 1.426 Behold, (saith Esay) the Lord wil come with fire, that he may recompence his anger with wrath, and his indignation with the flame of fire, for the Lorde shall iudge with fire. The slaine of the Lorde shall bee manie, their Worme shall not die, neither shal their fire be quenched. Which wordes our Sauiour directlie reffereth to hell. r 1.427 It is better to enter into life haulting, then hauing two legs to bee cast into hell, into the fire that neuer shall bee quenched, where their Worme dieth not, and the fire neuer goeth out. s 1.428 If wee sinne willinglie (saieth the Apostle to the Hebrues,) there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinnes, but a fearefull ex∣pectation of iudgement, and raging fire, which shal deuoure the aduersaries. t 1.429 As Sodome and Gomorra and the cities about

them are set forth for an ensample, and suffer the vengeance of eternall fire. u 1.430 The fearefull and vnbeleeuing, the abhominable and murtherers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and Ido∣laters and all lyars shal haue their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death; To whome the Iudge shall saie, when they shall see the truth thereof be∣fore their eies, x 1.431 Depart from mee ye cursed into euerlasting fire, prepared for the Diuell and his angels. y 1.432 For the Lord Ie∣sus shall shewe himselfe from heauen with the Angels of his power in flaming fire rendering vengeāce to them which know not God, and obey not the Gospell. That the fire with which Christ shall appeare to iudge, shall bee corporall and visible to all mens sights can bee no question, it * 1.433 shall dissolue the heauens, melt the elements, and burne vp the earth with the workes that are therein, as Peter affirmeth: and that the wic∣ked shall euerlastinglie burne therein, all the Fathers with one consent acknowledge. * 1.434 Ignorance (saith Austen) of such as are not willfully, but simplie ignorant, shall excuse no man from burning in euerlasting fire. For it is not saide without cause: Christ shall come in flaming fire to render vengeance to those y^t know not God. b 1.435 Inflaming fire rendering vengeance; this (saieth Ierome) Paul speaketh against them because they dreampt of the paine of conscience, and thought this impossible. If the flame by Gods commandement did not so much as touch the three men (that were cast into it,) * 1.436 why by the same power shoulde not fire be beleeued to bee sharper to some, and easier to others? Christ shal come (saith Ambrose) with his heauenlie armie, and with fire as his mini∣ster to giue vengeance on the Pagans which knewe not God, and the Iewes which beleeued not the gospell of Christ, all which the fire shall burne, that they may bee punished with e∣uerlasting destruction, alwaies feeling it, and neuer failing in it, that the verie paine which confumeth them, may euer renewe them. And so Chrysostome. d 1.437 Thinke on this fire, and thou wilt count the pleasure of sinne to bee no pleasure. If

the onely sight of a deade man so quaile our hearts, howe much more hell, and the fire which cannot be quenched? because the very remembrance of it is able to drawe vs to do well, therefore God hath appointed the very threatning of it, as an wholesome medicine for our soules.

Your sléeuelesse obiections against these and the like pla∣ces, that if there be true fire in hell, why not a true worme as well, and much wood? And if this fire were prepared for Di∣uels that are spirits, what communion hath fire with spirits? these trifles of yours I saie, S. Austen hath long since fullie considered, and learnedlie refuted, and plainlie resolued, that all these toyes notwithstanding, the fire of hell is not onelie a TRVE fire, which were my words, but a CORPORAL fire that shall punish both men and diuels; at which you so much wonder. e 1.438 Mitti in gehennam ignis, vbi vermis eorum non moritur, & ignis non extinguitur, non piguit vno loco eadem verbater dicere. Quem non terreat ista repetitio, & illius paenae comminatio tam vehemens ore diuino? To be cast into hell fire, where their worme dieth not, and the fire quencheth not, Christ did not loath in one place, to repeate the same wordes thrice. Whome woulde not this repetition terrifie, and the threat∣ning of that paine so earnest by Christes owne mouth? Both these, the fire and the worme, such as woulde haue them to be∣long to the paines of the soule, and not of the body, saie; that fire may be here fitlie taken for burning griefe; as the Apostle spea∣keth, f 1.439 who is offended, and I burne not? the same kinde of griefe they thinke, may be vnderstood by the worme; for so it is written, g 1.440 As the worme wasteth woode, so doeth griefe the heart of man. On the other side those that doubt not, but in hell the bodie and soule shall be both punished, they affirme the body shall bee afflicted with fire, the soule with a kinde of sorrowe, as it were with a worme. The which though it bee MORE LIKELIE, because it IS ABSVRD, that in hel should want either paine of bodie or of soule; I rather beleeue that both PERTAINE TO THE BODY, then that neither; and that the

scripture in these wordes suppresseth the griefe of the soule, because it followeth as a consequent, though it be not expressed, that the bodie beeing so tormented, the soule must likewise bee afflicted with an vnfruitfull repentance. For it is written in the bookes of the olde Testament, * 1.441 the vengeance on the flesh of the wicked is fire and worme. Let euerie man choose what best pleaseth him, to attribute fire to the bodie, the worme to the soule, the one properly, the other figuratiuely; or both to the bodie properly. For I haue afore sufficientlie shewed, that certaine creatures liue euen in the fire in burning without con∣suming, in payne without death, by the marueilous power of the Almightie Creator; which to be possible whosoeuer de∣nieth, knoweth not by whome all wonders are wrought. Let therefore euerie man choose of the twaine, which he liketh best, whether he will referre the worme properlie to the bodie, or to the soule, by a kinde of translation of thinges corporall to spiri∣tuall, so that BY NO MEANES HEE THINKE the bodies in hell shall bee such, that they shall not be touched with the paine of fire. i 1.442 Heere riseth another question, if the fire that shall afflict (in hell) bee not incorporall, as the griefe of the soule is, but CORPORALL AND HVRTING VVHERE IT TOVCHETH, that bodies may therein bee tormented, howe the wicked spirits shall bee punished by the same? For the same fire is prouided to punish both men and Diuels as Christ saieth, k 1.443 Depart from me yee cursed into euerlasting fire prepared for the Diuel and his Angels. Why should we not say that incorporall spirits may be afflicted by the paine of corporall fire, after a true but a maruailous manner, when as the spirits of men beeing also incorporall, may nowe bee inclosed in the members of their bodies, and shall then bee tied to the bandes of th••ir bodies without dissolution? therefore the spirits of Di∣uels, or rather the spirits that are Diuels, though they bee in∣corporall, shall be FASTENED TO CORPORALL FIRE, thereby to be tormented after a strange and vnspeakeable ma∣ner: Fastened I saie, to receiue torment from the fire, not to

giue life to the fier. And hell it selfe which is called the lake bur∣ning with fire and brimstone, SHALL BE A CORPORAL FIER, and shall torment the bodies of men with their soules, and the diuels that are spirits without bodies feeling paine, but not giuing life to those CORPORALL FIERS. The steps of Austen doth Gregorie followe: l 1.444 Corporall fier to continue needeth corporal nourishment: but contrariwise the fier of hell (which is incorporal) and SHAL CORPORALLY BVRNE the wicked cast into it, is neither kindled with mans industrie, nor fed with wood, but once created remaineth vnquenchable, and needeth no kindling, and wanteth no burning. Therefore the Scriptures, to shew that the reprobate burne within & with∣out, say, they are deuoured with fier, and made as an ouen, that by fier they may bee tormented in their bodies, and by griefe burne in their mindes. And though the word incorporeus bée crept here into Gregories text in stead of Corporeus, as ap∣peareth by the comparison and words adioyning, (for it were no straunge thing that a metaphoricall fier should neede no kindling of man, nor nourishing of wood; & how can an incorporall fier CORPORALLY burne the repro∣bate, which are the words presently following?) yet to put that out of doubt, his opinion is cléere to the contrarie in his Dialogues, where hee saith: m 1.445 That the FIER OF HELL IS CORPORALL, I haue no doubt, in which it is certain bodies shall be tormented. And if the diuell and his an∣gels being incorporall shal be tormented with CORPORALL FIER, what maruell if the soules before they receiue their bo∣dies feele corporall torments?

Neither were they the first that made this resolutiō; that an actuall and sensible fier shal torment the bodies & soules of the damned; the Church of Christ from the beginning be∣léeued y^e same. n 1.446 The prophane Philosophers (saith Tertullian) know the difference of this common and that hid fier; so far di∣stant is this which serueth mans vse, frō y^t which in Gods iudge∣ment appeareth, whether it flash with thunder from heauen, or break through the earth by the tops of hils. For that consumeth not, what it burneth; but rather repayreth what it eateth, as the

mountaines euer burning doe still continue, and he that is bla∣sted from heauen liueth and turneth not to ashes. This is a te∣stimonie of that eternall fier, this is an example of that perpe∣tuall iudgement, which maintaineth punishmēt. The hils burne and dure; how then shall the wicked and the enemies of God? Lactantius in like sort: o 1.447 The holy Scriptures teach vs how the wicked shall be punished. Because they sinned in their bo∣dies, they shall take their flesh again, that they may be punished in their bodies; yet that flesh which God will clothe man with, shall not bee like this earthly ••lesh, but indissoluble and remai∣ning for euer, that it may suffice for torment, and for euerlasting fier. The nature of which fier is diuerse from this which wee vse about the necessaries of this life. For that fier alwaies liueth and burneth of it selfe without any nourishment. The same diuine fier therefore with one and the same strength and power shall burne and continue the wicked, and shall yeeld it selfe euerla∣sting maintenance, so as it shall only burne and torment with∣out any decay to the bodie. Cyprian is often and earnest in this cause: p 1.448 Cremabit addictos ardens semper gehenna, & vi∣uacibus flammis vorax poena, nec erit vnde habere torment a vel requiem possint aliquando, vel finem: Hell alwaies burning shall broyle them that are adiudged to it, and paine shall deuoure them, with continuall flames; neither shall their torments haue ease or end. And againe, q 1.449 Saeuiens locus cui gehenna nomen est, eructantibus flammis per horrendam spissae caliginis noctem, saeua semper incendia camini fumantis expirat; globus ignium atratus obstruitur, & in varios poenae exitus relaxatur: The cruell place, which is called hell, casteth vp fearfull fiers, like a burning chim∣ney, the flames breaking through the horrible darknes of y^• thick mist; a whole globe of blackish fier standing and resoluing into diuers sorts of torments. r 1.450 Stridorem illum Dentiū flammae inex∣tinguibiles agitabunt, immortales miseri viuēt inter incendia, & inconsumptibiles flammae nudū corpus allambent: Vnquenchable flames shall force that gnashing of teeth, immortall wretches shall liue in the midst of fier, and flames neuer consuming shall wrap their naked bodies. Hell as Chrysostome writeth, hath fier and darknes, but far worse then these which we are ac∣quainted

with. s 1.451 For if there be fier (saith he) how is there dark∣nesse? thou seest that fier is more grieuous then this our fier, for it hath no light: if it bee fier, how doth it burne for euer? thou seest it is worse then ours, for that is not to be quenched, and therfore is called vnquenchable. Let vs then thinke with our selues how great a miserie it is, to burne for euer, to be in darknes, to make continuall lamentation, and to gnash the teeth and not to be re∣garded? if darknes alone doe so terrifie, and trouble our hearts, what shall it do when such griefes & flames of fier come with it?

Minutius Felix in his dialogue betwixt an Ethnicke and a Christian, cited by Lactantius in his first booke De falsa reli∣gione cap. 11. saith: t 1.452 As the lightnings touch mens bodies, but consume them not; and the flames of the hils Aetna & Vesuuius, and of other parts of the earth do burne & not waste; so that pu∣nishing fier (in hell) feedeth not vpon the decayes of their bodies that burne, but continueth without eating or wasting their bo∣dies. The same comparison doth Pacianus, y^t died vnder Theo∣dosius, make in his exhortation vnto repentance against the Nouatians: u 1.453 Post animarum tēpestiua supplicia rediuiuis quoque perpetua corporibus poena seruatur: After the due punishment of the soules, (of the wicked) a perpetuall torment is prepared for their bodies that shall be restored to life. The force whereof you may coniecture by the things which are in this world. AEtna, Lisaniculus, and Vesuuius in Campania doe cast out vnceasing, flames of fier, and to manifest to vs the perpetuitie of that (ter∣rible) iudgement, they still breake & waste, and yet neuer end. Sibylla whom x 1.454 Lactantius, x 1.455 Eusebius, and x 1.456 Austen alledge and allow as inspired by God, describeth the last iudgemēt with these words: The earth cleauing shall lay open the dun∣geon of hell; all kings shall come before the Tribunall of God, and a flood of fire and brimstone shall fall from heauen (vpon the wicked.) y 1.457 Christus in suo tunc terrore videbitur, eíque ignis iudicij in reproborum vindicta famulabitur, quia videli∣cet Ignis ille Iudicij, qui coelum, aerem, & terram concremat, peccatores inuoluit; quos proculdubio in poena suae damnationis confringit: Christ then shall be seene in his terror, and the fier of iudgement shall serue him to reuenge the Reprobate, by rea∣son

the very fier of iudgement, which melteth the heauens, the ayre and the earth, wrappeth in sinners, whom doubtlesse it crusheth in the torment of their damnation. z 1.458 Yea, the flame of hell shineth not to the Reprobate for their comfort, and yet giueth light for their punishment; that to the eyes of the dam∣ned though the fier of their torment shine with no brightnes, yet it sheweth for their further griefe in what sort they are pu∣nished. How thinke you Sir Refuter, is it a TOYISH FABLE worthy of such contempt as you make it, or a point of Christian doctrine deliuered by the Prophets and Apo∣stles, and receiued by the Fathers in all ages in Christs Church, that the FIRE of hell shalbe VISIBLE and SEN∣SIBLE to the bodies of the wicked, and shall ETERNAL∣LY and CORPORALLY punish the damned according to their deserts without quenching it selfe, or consuming thē? And your foolish Philosophie that things corporall cannot worke vpon things spiritual, must giue place to the power and will of the Almightie; by whose appointment wee see in this life nothing more common, thē that the soule which is spirituall, suffereth from her bodie all kindes of paines; and therefore it is as easie for God to make the soule feele fier in the next life without the bodie, as with the bodie; whose power if it please you to impugne, you must leaue the name of a Christian, and get you some other profession. So then the paines which the damned feele, besides the griefe of heauen lost, is FLAMING FIER intolerably for∣menting both bodie and soule; and as a 1.459 Cyprian obserueth; Omni tormento atrocius desperatio condemnatos affliget: Des∣peration, which shall afflict the condemned worse then al their torments. To these if you subiect the Sonne of God, you know what will follow; from these if you frée him, as you needes must, then is the Question at an end: for in euery mans sight, Christ did not suffer the paines of hell, nor the torments of the damned, which the scripture maketh to be these, & not those which you can neither expresse nor proue.

Frō slender reasons you come (Sir Refuter) to slenderer authorities; and though you quote but few, and not one of

them speaking one word to your purpose, yet before you produce them, you chalenge them as vnsufficient to testifie in this, or any cause against your liking. For where they may not be iudges, nor with you so much as witnesses of the Scriptures sense, (you so reie••t their expositions euerie where with pride & disdaine) yet you in your wisedome take vpon you to build vpon the words of the holy Ghost, what absurdities and follies you list; and your best reason is,

it were fond to thinke otherwise:

but be more sober, if you will be ruled by me; it is the way to hazard your own wits, & not their credits to entertaine thē in this maner. [They speake not plainly, nor fully you say, because it was neuer in que∣stion in their time.] Touching the redemption of man by the death & blood of Christ Iesus, they speake as plainly and fully as it is possible for men to speake; and kéepe exactly the forme of wholesome doctrine deliuered in the Scriptures; touching your hell paines they say nothing in déed, because it was neuer heard of in y^e Church of Christ in their times; but that Christ died NOT THE DEATH OF THE SOVLE; and by the ONLY DEATH OF HIS BODY, and shedding of his blood sufficiently ransomed & redéemed vs, this cannot be spoken in plainer and exacter terms, then they haue pro∣posed it and proued it. And therfore you and others shal doe well not to make al the ancient & learned lights of Christs Church so ignorant in their Créed & Catechisme, as not to know, how they were saued by y^e Crosse & death of Christ, before your hellish paines of the damned were of late deui∣sed. Your better sifting of this matter, is the open wresting and forcing of the scriptures against their true, proper and perpetual sense, to serue your strange conceits. And as you do with the scriptures, you must be suffered to do with the Fathers which you produce, that is; to put thē quite from their own meaning, & frame their words to your fancies, before any man can tell to what end you cite them.

The first word you quote out of Ierom, you falsifie by putting maledictum to it, where Ierom doth not so, but sim∣ply saith, VVHAT VVE should haue suffered for our sinnes,

that he suffered for vs. The very next words that are his owne, (for he interposeth a place of Scripture, that in his f••esh Christ dissolued our enmitie with God, and healed vs with his stripes) are these. a 1.460 Ex quo perspicuum est, sicut cor∣pus flagellatum & laceratum, ita animam verè doluisse pro nobis. Whereby it is euident, that as his bodie was whipped and torne, so his soule truely sorrowed for vs. Here you must be permit∣ted to adde of your owne, besides Ieroms meaning, that this sorrow was your hellish sorrow, or else I cannot sée why you cited Ierom, except it were to falsifie him. But how, and why Christ sorrowed for vs, when Ieroms own words were alleaged by me, your answer was; this

b 1.461 is more fond and absurd than the other.

Cyprians words you neither vn∣derstand, nor like; he saith that Christ c 1.462 taking our person and cause vpon him sayd in our names, that he was forsaken: Quod pro eis voluisti intelligi qui deseri à Deo propter peccata meruerant, quorum reconciliationis causam agebas, which he would haue to be vnderstoode of vs (or for vs) who deserued by our sinnes to be forsaken of God, whose reconciliation he then vndertooke. So S. Austen expounded those words of Christ, My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?d 1.463 Illa vox membrorum ipsius vox erat, non capitis, that voyce was the voice of his members, and not of the head; but you could not en∣dure either Austen or my other father so to say, without controlement. [But Cyprian saith Christ endured like pu∣nishment to those that be sinners & accursed.] In part, not in all; otherwise he must haue suffered eternall death of bo∣die and soule: and therefore expounding himselfe in the next sentence, he saith, e 1.464 In tantum infirmis compateris, vt nec cru∣cifigi, nec mori, dum illi viuant & non pereant, nec erubescas nec formides. So far didst thou suffer with the weake, that thou didst neither shame to be crucified, nor feare to dye, so they might liue and not perish. Ambrose saith; With the sorrow of his soule Christ abolished the sorrow of our soules; Here you must haue leaue to bring in your hellish sorrowes against Am∣broses minde, or else this is but lost labour: the causes of Christs heauines and sorrow when I repeated out of this

very place of Ambrose, you reiected them asf 1.465 fond and false, and now with the bare name of sorrow you think Ambrose dreamt of your hell paines. For shame reade out the chap∣ter, and leaue these mistakings.

[But * 1.466 Ambrose saith, the man (in Christ) now readie to die, by the separation of the Diuinite, cried, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me.] A man dieth when his soule lea∣ueth his body. Christ therefore ready to die the death of the body, which was left of y^e deitie vnto death, by withdraw∣ing it selfe for a time, vttered these words. Death of the soule, or dereliction vnto hell paines, there are none to be found in Ambrose, nor any words sounding that way, vn∣lesse you peruert them at your pleasure. The words next going before are these: g 1.467 Gloriosa Dei professio, vsque ad mor∣tem se pro nostris descendisse peccatis, vel euidens manifestatio contestantis Dei secessionem Diuinitatis & CORPORIS. It was a glorious profession of God, that he descended euen vnto death for our sins; or an euident manifestation of God witnessing the departure of his Diuinitie from HIS BODIE, (when it dyed.) The next words of Ambrose why you alleage I doe not sée, but to make vp the number, which is very smale, and lesse forcible. Who doubteth but Christ offered that, which he put on? He put on his body, & his body he offered. S. Paul will tell what Christ offered. h 1.468 We are sanctified by the offering of the bodie of Iesus Christ once made. Your own author Saint Ambrose writing vpon these words alleaged by Paul,i 1.469 thou hast fitted me a bodie, saith; Hoc ex persona dicitur eius, qui CORPVS SVSCEPIT nostrae mortalitatis, vt pro nobis habe∣ret quod offerret. This is spoken in his person, who put on our MORTALL BODIE, that he might haue what to offer for vs. k 1.470 Vna quippe oblatio corporis Christi perfectos facit sanctificatos quae remissionem integram facit peccatorum. The one OBLATI∣ON OF THE BODIE OF CHRIST maketh perfect, such as be sanctified, and giueth full remission of sinnes. If you thinke Ambrose mistooke the matter; heare Athanasius. l 1.471 A nobis si∣mili corpore mutuato, eo quod omnes mortis corruptioni obnoxij essemus, pro omnibus IDIPSVM in mortem deditum patri suo

SACRIFICAVIT, vt homines à morte ad vitam CORPORE suo, quod proprium sibi fecit, reuocaret. IMMOLATIONE enim SVI CORPORIS & legi nobis in festa sinem posuit, & primor∣dium vitae no••is renouauit spe resurrectionis nobis data. The son of God BORROVVING FROM VS a ••ODIE LIKE OVRS, because we all were subiect to the corruption of Death did SA∣CRIFICE THE SAME to his father by yeelding it vp vnto Death, that BY THE BODY which he made his own he might recall men from Death to life. For by the OFFERING OF HIS BODIE, he ended the lawe that oppressed vs, and renewed the beginning of life vnto vs, giuing vs hope of Resurrection. Cyrill with the whole Synode of Alexandria, which I mentioned before, wrote thus to Nestorius. m 1.472 Christ is made the mediator of God and man, and a reconciler of peace, offering himselfe to God, & to his father as a sweet smelling sacrifice, for he OFFE∣RED HIS OVVN BODIE FOR VS, to bee a sweete sauour. But of the true sacrifice for sinne, which Christ offered, I haue spoken enough before, as well in this conclusion, as in the Treatise. It must haue the BODIE, the BLOOD, and the DEATH of the offerer: none of which agrée to the soule of Christ, though the bodie without a soule could be no rea∣sonable sacrifice; & therefore I exclude not the soule whose obedience, innocence, & patience concurred to sanctifie this sacrifice; but I note the parts of the sacrifice for sin by the Apostles doctrine were those, which I named, the blood and death of the Sacrificer; both which must néeds be found in his body and not in his soule.

From Ambrose you roue to Tertulliā, & there you find that which I neuer doubted of. n 1.473 The Son suffered, forsakē of his fa∣ther. Haec vox est animae & corporis, id est hominis. This was the voice of soule & bodie, that is of man. Did you think the body could speak without the soule, before you read in Tertullian that this was the voice of both? If you did, you were deeply learned; if you did not, why doe you bring it as a matter worth the hearing, that bodie and soule ioyned in speaking? But you help it ouer y^• stile with a false translatiō, & where Tertullian saith, this was the voice of soule & flesh, you english

it, ^o this is meant of the flesh and of the soule, to wit, as you ex∣pounde" it, that both soule and bodie died forsaken of God. Take back, Sir Refuter, your false and vnsauerie glozes that corrupt the text, Tertullian neuer heard, nor thought of the death of Christs soule, nor of anie such forsaking, as you imagine; hee expoundeth himselfe without your additions, in the verie same place, plaine enough. p 1.474 Denique posuit spiritum, & statim obijt. Spiritu enim manente in carne, caro om∣nino mori non potest. Ita relinqui a patre fuit mori filio; silius i∣gitur & moritur, & resuscitatur. Dicendo denique Christus mortuus est, id quod vnctum est mortuum ostendit, id est, carnem, Christ laid aside his spirit, and PRESENTLY DIED. For his spirit remaining in his flesh, the FLESH by no meanes coulde DIE. So to be forsaken of the father, was for the sonne TO DIE. The sonne therefore died and was raised againe. Then in saying Christ died, (Paul) shewed that died which was annointed, euen the flesh of Christ. Of the death of Christes flesh Tertullian speaketh; which hee saith, could not possiblie bee, so long as Christes soule remained in his bodie. Christ then died no death of the soule whiles he liued, and breathed on the crosse; but the death which hee died was the laying aside of his soule, and leauing his bodie vnto death. You ende with Cyril that q 1.475 Christ made his fl••sh a Redemption for our flesh, and his soule a Redemption for our soules. Cyril meaneth no∣thing lesse then that, which you would implie, that wi••h the death of either part in himselfe, Christ redeemed ••ach part in vs; But Cyril knowing that Christ in his sufferings on the crosse ioyned both partes together, the one to receaue the violence and rage of the wicked, which was his bodie; & other to féele & endure the smart thereof with all obedience patiēce, which was his soule; saith truly that Christ ioyning both soule and bodie in suffering for vs, redéemed both soule and bodie in sauing vs; which wee acknowledge to bee true without exception. For had not the soule of Christ béene partner, yea chiefe patient in those bodilie sufferinges of

Christ, they could not haue profited vs; neither doe we at anie time otherwise speake or thinke of Christs sufferings, but that the bodie was the instrument whereby the soule of Christ did admit and feele all those paines, wrongs, shames, wounds and whatsoeuer he endured on the crosse, or before at their hands, which put him to death. But these paines and sorrowes of Christs soule, you saie; MAKE NOT TO OVR REDEMPTION, and vnlesse the soule properlie and imme∣diatlie (not from, or by her bodie) féele hellish paines and sorrowes, such as the damned doe, you make no reckning of all that Christ otherwise suffered. And this is your error which you shrowde vnder the name of a most holie trueth, where indéede, if it be vrged & followed, as you beginne, it will fall out to be a most hainous contemning of all that Christ suffered for vs; and a dangerous substituting of other deuises, which Christ neither did nor could suffer, as you propose them.

You end, Sir Refuter, as you beganne with egregi∣ous lyes, that

r 1.476 not the most or the best, BVT ALL AND EVE∣RY ONE, both churches and writers in the world, that are pro∣testants, teach as you doe, and that your s 1.477 doctrine is publiklie au∣thorized by the lawes of this Realme, as appeareth by the booke of Homilies, where it is said, that Christ put himselfe betweene Gods deserued wrath and our sinne.

But (Syr confuter) if you haue this propertie of Mydas y^t you can turne all Fathers, Churches, writers, and lawes with touching them, to be of your opinion, you must haue Mydas eares too; vnlesse you looke better about you. Such an insolēt and impudent speach would well become an ale-house, where no mā should heare you; but in the face of the world to bray after this sort is to∣lerable in no man, but in you, that neither know what you say, nor see what you should prooue, nor vnderstād what ma∣keth with you or against you. You no sooner reade in any mā new or olde mention of Gods wrath, or of death; but you straight fansy that he meaneth your hel paines, & the death of

the soule; and so you play with the homilies allowed by the lawes of this Realme. Where because you find that Christ interposed himselfe betweene the wrath of God & vs, to auert it from vs, you forthwith resolue, the Homilies teach your doctrine. But awake, Sir Refuter, and you shall sée great difference betwixt the doctrine taught in the booke of Homi∣lies, and publikely approoued by the lawes of this Realme, your frenzies; that Christ DIED the DEATH of the SOVLE; that the VVHOLE CVRSE of God was executed on Christ; that he was by our sins

defiled, sinful, hateful, & accursed; that al the powers of his soule & senses of his body were ouerwhelmed, distrac∣ted, and all confounded, that he felt the verie Diuels to be instru∣ments, executing the wrath of God vpon him, that the sufferings of Christs soule, by Sympathie as you call it, (that is from and by the body) make not to our redemption; that Christs soule died and was crucified, where it is absurd and most false to say Christ was made aliue ether in his humane soule, or by the same;

these and an hundred such absurdities and impieties haue no al∣lowance in the bookes of Homilies, nor any thing sounding towards your hellish paines of the damned. The doctrine there taught is sound, true and plaine, that we are redeemed by the death and bloud of Christ Iesus; that such was the iust displeasure of God against our sinnes, that though he were his owne son, that vndertooke the cause for vs, the iustice of God pursued him with most painfull smart and anguish e∣uen vnto death; and forced the weaknesse of his humane flesh to crie, my God, my God why hast thou forsaken mee. But you content not your selfe with this; you must haue him suffer the verie paines of the damned in Hell, or nothing. His bodilie death were it neuer soe paynefull and sharpe, you make light ac∣count of;

s 1.478 the theeues crucified with Christ suffered, you say, as great bodily violence as he did; yea wicked & vngodly men indure with boldnes & great ioy far more exquisite & barbarous tor∣mēts & sharper tortures, as touching the body, then Christ could

endure, and therefore in plaine words you saie, t 1.479 such follie in the sonne of God, bee it farre from y••u once to imagine, as that he should stagger, shrink or faile for any corporal tormentes whatsoe∣uer,

forgetting what Ambrose writeth; u 1.480 Neque enim habent fortitu linis laudem, qui stuporem magis vulnerum tulerunt, quā dolorem: it can haue no praise of fortitude to be desperately con∣firmed, rather then patientlie subiected vnto paine of torments. And what Austē confesseth, x 1.481 Nihil erat tunc IN CARNE IN∣TOLERABILIVS, there was nothing more intolerable in the fl••sh then the crosse of Christ▪ as likewise what Bernarde re∣solueth y 1.482 Nec aliquo modo dubitandum, quin infirmitatem & exterminationem corporis incomparabilem sustinuerit; it must not be doubted, but Christ suffered incomparable weakenes and torment of body. For this if you did striue, it were to be to∣lerated; for that which no father euer testified, nor scripture e∣uer affirmed, when you shew your selfe so eager; you bewray your humor, you benefit not your cause.

Thou hast heard christian Reader, what things I haue mis∣liked in the first part of this opponents pamphlet; but no∣thing more then this, that he wasteth so manie wordes, and neither expresseth what hee meaneth, nor proueth what hee pretendeth. All that he hath saide is this in effect; Christ suf∣fered in soule the wrath and curse of God fo•• our sinne, or due to sinne; but these are so generall termes that in parte they bee true, in parte they bee false, and therefore hee that walketh in these cloudes, and descendeth not to particulars, meaneth to hide his heade vnder the Couert of these ge∣neralities when neede is; and out of these to fashion to himselfe such assertions as please best his humour. The wa••e to come by a trueth, is to specifie the partes of Gods wrath and curse, which they suppose Christ suffered, and then shall wee in fewe wordes trie whether those suffe∣rings accord with the rules and groundes of the scriptures, or no. And this I foretell, because if hee or anie other for him bee disposed to reuiue his cause, hee must not

bring a sacke full of words for so waightie matters; but plainlie and particularlie declaring what he holdeth, and proouing what he affirmeth, go directly to the point, and then by Gods grace we shall soone trie where trueth standeth. But if anie man will draw the grounde of our redempti∣on to generall and ambiguous termes, which shall still increase contention to noe purpose; I meane not to repell words with words; till they answere these proofes, I will not trouble my selfe with their emptie phrases.

In the second Question of Christs descent to hell, I shall not hold thee long (gentle reader) because this babler forgetting what I sayd, concerning the proofe and purpose of Christs descent to hell, runneth a new course to Pagans and Poets for help, to expound that article of our Creede; and there presumeth▪ himselfe to be so strong, that of the rest he doth prate without reason or remembrance. The end of Christs descent to hell, I noted out of Athanasius, Fulgen∣tius and others, and prooued their speach conformable to the Scriptures; the places thou hast in the latter part of the trea∣tise, I meane not to increase this close with néedlesse repeti∣tions. The Cōfuter, belike distracted and distempered with the cogitation and confusion of his hell paines, vtterly mis∣taketh or forgetteth the whole. He supposeth Christs descent to hell had none other purpose, but

z 1.483 to triumph and insult vp∣on the thrice miserable and wofull wretches in their present vn∣speakeable damnation, infinitely confounded alreadie, & inferreth; Sure a verie sorie triumph this were for the sonne of God which e∣uen among men were nothing but dishonorable;

but if his braines be so bri••kle, that he can neither conceaue, nor carrie a∣waie what I sayd; I must not beate it into his head: that I then preached, is here now printed, let him refell it if hee can. Soe when I made the subduing of hell and treading on Satan with all the power of darknesse, a chiefe part of the glorie of Chrits resurrection, this scor∣ner in his foolish conceite mocketh at it, and saith

a 1.484 a worthie

priuiledge surelie, and verie honorable. All men would thinke it a greater honour neuer to haue come in hell at all. For his actuall triumphing in hell all the world knoweth,* 1.485 is the most inglorious and vilest debasing.

In sadnes (Syr refuter) if these be your best exceptions against Christs triumphing ouer hell, all the world will know, that you are a worthie man, to weare a woodden dagger. The Apostle made it a part of Christs high exaltation, b 1.486 that euerie knee, as well of things vnder the earth, as of things in heauen, should bow vnto him, and euerie toong confesse that Iesus Christ is the Lord; and do you thinke it a méete matter to be mocked and derided? Paul saith; Christ spoyled principalities and powers (of hell & darknes) and made a shew of them openlie,* 1.487 and triumphed ouer them in his owne person, (for so I must reade till you shew me better authoritie against it, then I haue brought for it;) & your selfe both sée and sate, that

c 1.488 whyles Christ suffered and whyles he died, it was a mi∣serable triumph, yea d 1.489 a piteous triumph it was indeede, where himselfe remayned in such woful tormēts, where appeared no shew of conquest, but rather of being conquered; & e 1.490 stil he suffered til he gaue vp the ghost.

What letteth them I praie you, since these words were not verified on the Crosse, but they did take place in his resurrection, as I teach; and therein as by the effects it was most euident and apparant to the eies of all men, he did spoyle powers and principalities, & made a shew of them openly, and triumphed ouer them in his owne per∣son? Doth the holy ghost attribute this as a great honour to the humane nature of Christ, that f 1.491 ascending on high he led captiuitie captiue, and doe you make a merriment of it, appealing to the whole world for their censure on your side?

Your strongest sort is this;

g 1.492 There can bee no commoditie nor benefit to the godlie by it. For what good is there so much as pretended? The generall redemption of all Gods elect and chosen people was wrought and fullie finished on the Crosse, h 1.493 what could his going downe to hell adde more?

Is the subduing of

hell powers, and the treading on all their force, and the re∣straining of all their furie, so small a matter with you, that it doth no good to the godlie? Hee hath triumphed and spoy∣led them to frée vs from feare; and hath taken the i 1.494 keyes of death and of hell, into his owne hands; to shew that all power is giuen him in heauen, earth, & hell, and that he can re∣strayne and k 1.495 bind Satan at his will and pleasure. Is the per∣formance and assurance of these things no cōmodity nor be∣nefit to the godlie?

[The redemption of Gods elect, was (you say) fully finished on the Crosse.]

Deserued and obtained it was on the Crosse, and by the crosse, but not there executed. There were our sinnes pardoned, and our selues reconciled to God; but as Christ died for our sinnes, so he rose for our ius••ification. His resurrectiō in that glorious manner, which I haue mentioned in the treatise, & his ascension are necessa∣ry parts of our Saluation; and therefore vse not the force of Christs crosse to exclude, but to induce the rest. For so doth the Apostle when he saith. l 1.496 Christ humbled himselfe, & became obedient vnto y^e death of the crosse. Wherfore (that is euen for that his humility & obedience) God hath highly exalted him & giuen him a name aboue euerie name; that at the name of Ie∣sus should euery knee bow of things in heauen, in earth, & vnder the earth. So that his descending, rising, and ascending added nothing to the force of his death, but shewed the fruite there∣of; and tend all to our good, since wee are presentlie secured from the power of hell and Satan, and shall be certainelie raysed and receaued to glorie. Christes death without his resurrection and ascension had beene our confusion▪ and no redemption; for if sinne had slaine him with∣out rising, it must needes haue damned vs without hoping: now in his Resurrection as euery Enemie was most mighty, so was there most néed he should be subdued. But hereof I haue spoken so largelie before that I shall not néede to rehearse it againe; with turning the

page it maie soone bee seene.

[But m 1.497 The Scriptures (you tell vs,) are cleare∣ly against Christs going to Hell. For this daie (sayd Christ to the theefe) thou sh••lt bee with mee in Paradise. n 1.498 All this must needes be of his humane soule verelie without all questi∣on. There is none can consider herein his Deitie. If anie thinke his soule might goe to hell first, and presentlie goe thence to hea∣uen yer night also, that is ridiculous and toyish.]

You haue so manie toyes in your head, Syr Refuter, that a coloured cap would well become it: when you come to a non plus in your proofes, then you crie, this is ridiculous and toyifh. Go like your selfe, and looke to the ridiculous toyes that you bring vs in euery page almost. You would prooue, forsooth, that the SCRIPTVRES ARE CLEARE against Christs being in hell at anie time betwéene his death, and his Resurrection; & for your warrant you bring his words to the theefe on the crosse; this daie thou shalt bee with mee in Paradise; and at his death when he sayd; Father into thy hands I commend my spi∣rite: And when the places conclude no such thing as you would haue them, nor anie thing néere it; then you helpe it with outcries, and saie;

o 1.499 There is no man of sense considering these circumstances that can iudge otherwise.

But will your wisdome remember that S. Austen in his 57. Epistle dis∣cussing this place of purpose, to day thou shalt bee with mee in Paradise; saith the word MEE maie verie readily and easily bee referred to Christs Godhead, promising the thiefe Paradise that present daie; and all the childish amplificati∣ons that you haue brought vs to the contrarie, are not worth a nut-shell to conteruaile S. Austens iudgement. But graunt it were ment of Christs soule; are you so per∣fect in the length of the waie from hell to Paradise, and the wearines of Christs soule in going to both, that you be sure he could not do both that daie? You thinke belike Christ would not goe thither, but to view the deuils one by one, and call their names to sée who were absent. You haue for∣gotten

that p 1.500 with his presence, or with his word whiles hee liued here on earth, hee could torment the diuels, and there∣fore if it pleased him but to shewe himselfe, who hee was, whom they had so despitefullie pursued by the handes and tongues of the wicked on the Crosse; all hell must not one∣lie bende and bowe vnto him, but feare and fall before him. Againe, what coulde hinder though he did not descende that daie which hee died, but hee might so doe the daie that hee rose; and euen when hee was to rise to loose all the strength of hell before him, and to let Satan see that his kingdome was ouerthrowne by that death, at which hee so much insulted and reioyced? The time I doe not determine, though I thinke it pertained rather to the glorie of his resurrection, then otherwise; as I haue in the trea∣tise more at large expressed.

[Was not his soule, you will aske IN HIS Fathers handes, till the time of his Resurrection?] Who doub∣teth that? As if to subdue hell with the glorie of his presence did not prooue the hande of GOD to bee ra∣ther mightilie with him, then anie waie to leaue him, and that to bee true, which was forespoken by Dauid in his person, q 1.501 Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell? [The handes of God, you thinke, signifie heere his ioyfull pre∣sence, and the possession of heauen.] Who tolde you so? Was Dauid dying when hee saide; r 1.502 Into thine handes I commende my spirite, thou hast redeemed mee Lord God of truth? Was Sion not on earth but in heauen, when the Prophet saith of her; s 1.503 Thou shalt bee a crowne of glo∣rie in the hand of the Lord, and a royall Diademe in the hande of thy God, it shall no more bee saide to thy land, Desolate, for thy land shall haue an husbande? Was the king of Iu∣dah then in heauen, when God saide of him, t 1.504 Though Coniah the sonne of Iehoiakim king of Iudah were the Sig∣net of my right hand, yet would I plucke thee thence? Gods hand signifieth his power, and protection; and could there

greater fauour, power, or protection bee shewed to the soule of Christ, then for God in raising him from the dead, not onelie to treade death, but euen hell and Satan vnder his feete? Call you this a most inglorious and vile debasing▪ for the humane nature of Christ, to haue all power in hea∣uen, and earth, (in which Hell also must bee comprised,) to bee deliuered vnto him; and to bee made Lorde o∣uer all, not onelie men, and Angels, but euen enemies and diuels? From this honour and power, whereof it is said; u 1.505 Thou hast subiected all things vnder his feete; maie no creature in heauen, nor in hell be excepted? And therefore if this bee a vile debasement, I knowe not what glorie mea∣neth, The purpose then of Christes descent to hell, giueth honour to him ouer all his enemies, and comfort to vs against the power and terrour of hell, which wee see dissolued and spoyled by our heade in our names, and for our sakes; for so much as beeing ioyned to him as x 1.506 mem∣bers of his bodie, of his flesh, and of his bones, hell hath nowe no more right to vs then to him; since it is not possible but the heade muste bee where the members are: And Christ himselfe y 1.507 hungreth, and thirsteth, and is naked, and sicke, imprisoned, and persecuted, in euerie one of his members, euen in the basest and lowest of them; and this no more impeacheth the all sufficient merite of Christes Crosse, then his resurrection from the dead doeth the third daie after his death, and all things finished on the Crosse, needefull to bee suffered for our redemption; which in your ••ranticke humour you seeme to detest as a 1.508 BLAS∣PHEMOVS.

[The proofe that hee went thither, you will saie, is all; if that were once cleered, the rest woulde soone bee accorded.] I maie not for your pleasure (Sir Refuter) stande to rippe vppe and repeate the thinges which were then deliuered, and are now published; there you may looke; If you like them not, giue mee some reason besides your

owne rouing conceit, and it shall bee soone answered. [It is no where written in the Scriptures you, will saie.] Saint y 1.509 Austen iudiciallie and resolutelie telleth you, it is written in the Prophet Dauid, and so expounded by Saint Peter; and of that iudgement were all the Fathers of Christes Church without exception. z 1.510 Athanasius saith it is a parte of the Catholike faith, without beleeuing the which we can not be saued. And s••re the words be plaine e∣nough, if you leaue wresting them from their right and true signification to serue your affections. What can be plainer, a 1.511 Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell, besides the Article of our Créede, He descended into hell? Your answer is: b 1.512 This is euident that the worde hell in our vulgar Creede is vn∣fit, corrupt and starke naught.

For this I affirme, it is onelie the Fathers abusiue speaking, and altering the vsuall and auūcient sense of Hades, that hath bredde this errour of Christes descen∣ding into hell. Their vnapt and perilous translating into La∣tine, Inferi, and our naughtie and corrupt translation in Eng∣lish, hell, hath confirmed the same. d 1.513 And note here first it is a thing too rife with the Fathers, yea with some of the aunci∣e••test of them to alter and chaunge the authenticke vse of words, whereby consequentlie it is easie for errours and grosse mis∣takings to creepe in. As Chirotonia to signifie ordination of Ministers, when it signifyeth authenticallie the peoples giuing of voices in election: Kleros, to signifie onelie the Cleargie, when it signifieth all the flocke. Euen so trulie the Greeke fathers vse Ha∣des and the Latine Inferi, to signifie hell properlie and particu∣larlie, that is, the place of the damned e 1.514 But this is a meere and plaine abusion of these wordes, and speciallie of our worde most in question, that is Hades. They haue much altered and changed the authenticke and true vse thereof.

You begin nowe to shewe your selfe in your right hue. All the Greeke and Latin fa∣thers that euer were in the Church of Christ; all the English teachers that haue béene since this nation receiued the faith, neuer vnderstood the signification of the word Hades, til you

came of late to bring vs newes of Socrates fansie, and Ciceros diuinitie to correct the Creede; Ignatius, Clemens, Origen, Athanasius, Eusebius, Basil, Nazianzene, Epi∣phanius, Chrysostome, Cyril, Eustathius, Theodotete, with a thousand more naturallie borne Greekes; and manie of them nothing inferiour to Plato, or whom you can name, euen for their eloquence in the Greeke tongue, were they all ignorant of the worde Hades, which boies in Gram∣mar schoole doe well vnderstande? Or did they all conspire one after another to falsifie the faith? Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, Ierome, Ambrose, Au∣sten, Hillarie, Prudentius, Prosper, Fulgentius, with in∣finite others great Schollers and pillars in the Church of GOD, had none of them the skill to knowe what Infernum or Inferi meant, till you sprang vp to restore the Latine tongue to his originall integritie? Or did they all concurre purposelie to corrupt the Creede? Which will you take from all these fathers religion, or learning? If you leaue them so much vnderstanding as the boies haue nowe in Paules Schoole, they coulde not mistake either Hades, or Inferi. And therefore you may talke thus long enough before you shall gette anie sober Rea∣der to beleeue you. He must bee as farre infected with this frenzie as you your selfe are, before this will anie way sinke into his head, that none of these vnderstoode their owne na∣turall language. [But they haue mistaken other wordes, you saie, as well as these; namelie, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] In deede you, or they haue grosselie mistaken the one; the other is not, that I knowe in question, vn∣lesse you take vppon you so greate a commaunde in the Church of GOD, that no worde maie bee vsed by anie man without your consent. Doeth anie Father in ex∣pounding the Scriptures, put the Cleargie for the peo∣ple; as if the rest had no part in the Kingdome of

Christ? but if they wanted a word to note them, that were called to the publike seruice of Christes church; and thought best to name them clerici, clerkes; what haue you to do with it? or what reason to speake against it; so long as the rest of Gods people are not thereby depriued of their parte in Gods heauenlie inheritance? And what if they tooke this tearme from the scripture and deriued the verie word from the Apostles mouthes? are you not well occupied to quarrel with them? Peter doth twice vse that worde for a parte, or place in the publike ministerie and seruice of the church, with which the people did not meddle. a 1.515 Iudas (saieth Peter) was numbred with vs, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and had his place in this ministerie. So againe to Simon Ma∣gus; b 1.516 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Thou hast no part nor lot in this businesse or function. Where Peter in both places calleth the charge of an Apostle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not that Iudas, or the rest of the twelue were chosen by lots, but that he had a part with them in that function.

As for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I thinke there bee more saide, then you will be able to answere; you know where to finde it. Could you proue that the Apostles did make elders with the peo∣ples voices, which you shall neuer bee able to doe, you had some reason to thinke the worde might importe some such thing; but where the worde in his owne nature is but to stretch out the hande, and it is certaine by the scriptures the Apostles in ordaining elders did vse imposition of handes, which is plainelie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; (electing by voices they did not vse for ought that can bee prooued;) what a malepart guest are you to saie,

It was a rife thing with the fathers, yea with the ancientest of them to alter & change the authentick vse of words;

because the Athenians in Demosthenes time had a course in their publike assemblies to giue their consentes to make lawes and decrées with holding vp their hands, which he cal∣leth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? But you bite on the bridle I perceiue, and so you must, till you learne to be more sober then to condemne

so manie learned and religious fathers of ignorance and cor∣ruption; which in such a companion as you are, might well be beléeued, in men of their religion and iudgement can by no reason be mistrusted •••• is by the way, because you glance at 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, though the rein you accuse not me that alleage them, but the fathers themselues as corrupters of church dis∣cipline, and peruerters of their own language; howbeit ha∣des is now in question and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and there∣fore saie for hades what you can, or rather for your selfe; since all wise men will hold you more then rash and presumptuous, if you condemne so many without great cause.

* 1.517[The classical writers, you say, the maisters of the Greek tongue do vse HADES in proper sense only in generall for the STATE OF THE DEADE, the VVORLD OF THE DEADE, the VVORLD OF SOVLES DEPARTED, indifferently, and in∣definitely, meaning as wel those in eternal ioies, as those in paines.]

Labour you (Sir Refuter,) to bring into the créede the mari∣bones of a gréeke phrase, or an article of the christian faith? if you be so idle headed, that you striue to haue a new phrase into the Creede,* 1.518 remember the kingdome of God is not in speach but in power. If you intende an article of the faith, pa∣gans and Poets are no such classicall masters, to be cited or followed in the mysteries of christian religion. What if it were true, which here as your maner is, you auouch with a brazen face, y^• Homer, Plato, & Plutarch did so vse the word; is it therfore a consequent the scripture must so speak? how ma∣ny hundred Gréeke words haue with Pagans their general significations, which the holie ghost restraineth to expresse Gods truth, and serue Gods will? The gréeke wordes for Apostle, elder, Bishop, Deacon, Gospell, Scripture, faith, hope, repentance, sinne•• the law, conscience, concupisence, and infi∣nite such like, doe they not with Pagans import one thing, with Christians an other thing, and that by the warrant of Gods worde? touching hell it selfe; with your classicall wri∣ters,

and maisters of the Gréeke tongue, (I meane euen Homer, Plato, and Plutarch) are not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, taken for good and blessed spirits, yea for Gods, which the scriptures vse on∣lie for diuels? Plutarchs booke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; of Socrates spirit; which thing also Plato mentioneth in his Apo∣logie and dialogue De sapientia, meaneth not Socrates Di∣uell; neither doth Isocrates prescribe vnto Demonicus by this rule, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that hee shoulde worship the diuell, but rather God; and yet by that word the new testamēt and the Septuagint in the olde intend onelie diuels. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the masters of the Greeke tongue is but a carper or re∣prehender, insomuch that most of Platoes schollers were cal∣led 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.519 and yet in the newe testament this is the pro∣per name for the diuell. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Plutarch doth take for the ayre, and deriueth that word from colde;* 1.520 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Tartarus is so termed from colde, whence Hesiode calleth it the ayrie tar∣tare; and he that shaketh and trembleth for cold, is sayd tarta∣rizein. Yet your instructor maketh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the tayle and prison in hell, and saith, S. Peter when hee telleth howe God condemned the Angels, taketh all the words from Homer and HIS PROSE COMMENTARIE. If he meane Eustathius the Christian Bishop, it is a foule ouersigat; if hee meane a∣nie other, he shall do well to proue, and not to presume that Peter read Homer and his prose commentarie to expresse the punishment of Diuels. Nowe if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 haue other significations and acceptions with the masters (as you make them) of the gréeke tongue, & yet in the new testament are wholy & onlie referred to note hell and the diuels thither adiudged; whie may not the word HA∣DES in like sort be taken from his prophane vse among the heathen writers, and bee applied by the Euangelistes and Apostles to signifie hell? yea if the opinion which the pagan

Poets, and prophane Philosophers helde of HADES were false and repugnant to the christian faith, howe could the ca∣nonicall writers of the new testament vse the word, and not change the sense? dare you so much as dreame, that the holy Ghost woulde canonize, the Poets fables and the Philoso∣phers fansies of the world to come? or if you be so foolish, as to forget the difference betwéene light and da••kenes, truth & falshood, wil any wise man entertaine your poetical furies?

[The Gentiles, (you will sate,) tooke HADES for the worlds of the deade, the worlde of soules departed: generallie and inde∣finitelie, were they in hell or in heauen, and this is no error, (you think,) against the faith.]

But this is an open falshood cōmit∣ted against your owne classicall writers; and if your cun∣ning in the greeke Poets bee no profounder, the boies in Grammer schooles will deride it. I praie you sir by your Greeke Poets, Homer, Hesiode, and others what is HA∣DES originallie, the name of a person, or of a place? I aske you none other question, but that which euerie childe acquainted with your Poets canne readilie tell, which your maisters of the Gréeke tongue, Plutarch, and Plato confesse; which euerie speech that you, or your Instruc∣tor bringeth out of his Poets doth confirme. And here (chri∣stian Reader) I must praie thy patience and pardon, if I turne from the scriptures and fathers to the Poets and their fables; I haue no desire to it, nor delight in it; but such is the insolence of these men grounded vpon ignorāce, that it may not bee endured, and without some entering into these mat∣ters, it will not bee displaied. I will saie no more then I must néedes, and omit what is not materiall.

Homer the first and eldest of your classicall writers imagi∣neth that the thrée sonnes of Saturnus, whom hee supposeth to bee Gods, deuided the gouernement of the whole worlde be∣twéene them; Iupiter taking the skie and the aire; Neptune the water, with her déepes and riuers: and Pluto the heart of the earth with all the dead of what sort soeuer. This thirde

sonne of Saturne, and owner of the deade, is hee that Homer and all the Poets call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 HADES; his name being diuers∣lie declined and inflected to serue their verse, but still the same person. Homer in the 15. of his Iliades maketh Nep∣tune thus to speake.* 1.521 We are three brethren, the sonnes of Sa∣turne by Rhea; Iupiter and I, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; the third is HADES the ruler of those y^t lie (dead) in the earth. The whole was deuided into three parts; my lot was to dwell alwaies in the sea, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and HADES lot was to haue the darke mist; and to Iupiter fell by lot the large heauen with the skie and clowdes. This HADES or God of the deade Homer calleth b 1.522 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the god vnder the earth, and giueth him in the same booke these properties, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; HADES im∣placable & fierce; & for that cause of all y^e gods the most odious to men. Hesiode agréeth with Homer, that Rhea company∣ing with Saturne brought him notable children.

c 1.523〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, euen mightie HADES that dwelleth in housen vnder the earth and hath a cruell and mercilesse heart. The same Hades he maketh the gouernour of the deade, as Homer doth.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:* 1.524

HADES was afraid that is ruler of the deade vnder the earth. This is that hades which you so much talke of, to whose house your Poets make all the dead iust & vniust, good and bad to come; and therefore the most of your authorities out of the Greeke Poets and others haue 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, vnderstanding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to shewe that the deade go or come to HADES HOVSE or dwelling.

The rest of your classicall writers and masters of the Gréeke tongue, both Plato and Plutarch alleadge and ap∣proue this fable of Homer. Plato in his dialogue of rhetorick called Gorgias, maketh Socrates thus to saie; d 1.525 Heare then a

very excellent tale which you will thinke a fable, but I a good lesson. That which I will saie, I will speake to you for a trueth. As Homer reporteth, Iupiter, Neptune, and Pluto deuided the gouernement, after they receaued it of their father. There was a lawe touching men vnder Saturnus, and euer was and still is with the gods, that such men as led a iust and holie life, when they departed hence shoulde goe to the Iles of the blessed, and there liue in all happinesse without any euill; and they that had beene wicked and vngodlie should goe to the prison of punish∣ment and vengeance which is called Tartarus. The iudges of these matters, in Saturnes time, and in the beginning of Iupiters raigne were the liuing of such as yet liued, and gaue iudgement the same daie that each man should die, wherefore their iudge∣ment was corrupt. PLVTO thē and the Gardians of the blessed Ilands going to Iupiter tolde him, that there came vnto them men to either place vnmeete for that condition. To whome Iu∣piter aunswered, I will see it redressed. The iudgementes are therefore now amisse, because they that are iudged are couered round, for they are iudged aliue, and so many that haue wicked soules are compassed with beauty, nobility, & riches, and manie come to the place of iudgement, & depose they liued honestlie, and so the iudges are astonished; as also the iudges thēselues are clogged, hauing their soules wrapped with their eies, and eares, and the rest of their bodie. First therfore men must be kept from foreseeing the time of their death. Thē they must be iudged whē they are naked from all these thinges, that is after death, and the Iudge likewise must be deade also, that he may be free frō these lets, and wi••h his soule he must view the soule of euery man new∣ly dead, forsaken of all his kind, & stripped of al worldly pompe, that the iudgement may be sincere. And I foreseeing this before you, haue appointed Iudges, two of my sons Minos & Rhada∣manthus out of Asia, and a third which is Aeacus out of Europe. These when they are dead shall iudge in an open meade in the meeting of three waies, whereof two shall leade, one to the Iles of the blessed, another to Tartarus. The soules of Asia shall be

iudged by Rhadamāthus, & those of Europe by Aeacus, to Mi∣nos will I giue the prerogatiue to decide y^e doubts that shall arise in either place: y^t the iudgmēt may be very euē which shal send soules to their places. This is that wich I haue heard, & beleeue to be true, & by their speeches am perswaded there is some such thing.e 1.526 Thus far Plutarch citeth out of Plato y^e iudges & places for the dead, & al this within Plutoes kingdom vnder y^e earth, which they call HADES: where as well the places, & pleasures for the good, as the prisons & punishmentes for the bad are in their conceit prepared & sètled. And this if you doubt, read ei∣ther Vlisses descent to HADES described by Homer in the 11. book of his Odisseas, or Aeneas iourney to hel, set forth by Vir∣gil in the sixt booke of his Aeneidos, or Dyonisius voiage to see Euripides, expressed by Aristophanes,f 1.527 as also the like aduen∣tures of Hercules & Theseus mentioned by Euripides,g 1.528 & others, & you shall see THE VVORLD OF THE DEAD, or THE VVORLD OF SOVLES, be they good or bad, to be in Plutoes kingdom, which the gréek Poets cal HADES: & therfore vnlesse the distemper of your braines make you weary of Christian religion, and incline you to Paganisme, I doe not see what reason moueth you to bring Homers HADES to expounde the Creede. And were you permitted so to doe, what gaine you by it? For Homers HADES is y^e region vnder the earth, where the good are kept in pleasant fields, and the wicked in places of punishment, and this is euidentlie the hell of the Poets and Pagans, to which by your own classical & authen∣tical exposition Christ did descend, if their HADES be receaued into the creede.

[But Plato the wise Maister taketh it sometime for hea∣uen, as namelie in his Phaedone, where speaking in the person of Socrates a little before his death he saith. The soule beeing an inuisible thing goeth hence to another place like to it selfe, that is, to a noble, pure, and inuisible, in HADES; in truth to a good and wise God, whither if God will my soule shall present∣lie goe.]

Did you not propose Plato to bee an expounder of the Creede, and preferre him as a wise maister be∣fore

all the fathers, because you thinke hee fitteth your hu∣mour right. I coulde suffer him to haue his praise; but in this case I must saie of him as Tertullian doeth, f 1.529 Do∣leo bona fide Platonem omnium haereticorum condimentorium factum; Illius est enim & in Phaedone, quod animae hinc euntes sint illinc, & inde hinc; I am sorie in good sadnesse that Plato is becom the Apothecary of al heresies. For it is his opinion euen in his Thaedone, that soules go hence thither, and thence hither. Your wise Masters report of HADES and PLVTO, was the priuate opinion of Socrates against the common consent of Homer and all the poets, and against the receiued perswa∣sion of the people. The conceite it selfe is full of pride, er∣rour, and paganish infidelitie, absurditie, and blasphemie. And yet all this being verie true, Platoes wordes importe no such thing, as you imagine, that HADES is that hea∣uen where God and his saintes remaine. And therefore, Sir Confuter, if you be wearie as well of the Apostles, as of the fathers, and insteed of Christ will haue Plato to teach men the mysteries of the kingdome of heauen; Englande (where God be thanked there is a religious, vertuous and wise prince, ruling with christian lawes, and a number of learned and graue both Counsellors, Bishops, Iudges, and others that will endure no such prophanenes) is no fit place for you to bring in Platoes heauen. If I proue not these ex∣ceptions which I take to your wise maisters imagination, let me beare the shame; if I do, look you & your fellowes how well you deserue of Christian religion to make the saintes to rest, and Christ to raigne either in Platoes heauen, or in Homers hades.

For the first it is euident; the Poets all wi••h one con∣sent placed HADES BELOVVE VNDER THE EARTH, and not aboue in the skies, nor in heauen. Homer and Hesiod you haue hearde. g 1.530 Aristophanes maketh Dio∣nysius desirous to see Euripides nowe deade, and there∣fore sendeth him to Hercules to learne the waie, to whome professing that no man shall perswade him not to goe

to Euripides, Hercules replieth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; wilt thou goe TO HADES BELOVVE, to see him? where Plutoes kingdome is described aunswerable to the rest of the Poets. In Euripides the ghost of Polydor begin∣neth the first tragedie thus. h 1.531Here am I come leauing the dennes of the dead, and the gates of darkenesse 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, where HADES hath his seate seuered from the gods. Pindarus speaking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of the godlie that are in HADES, saith, i 1.532〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; to them the strength of the sonne doth lighten the NIGHT that is there BELOVV. k 1.533 Eu∣ripides maketh Hercules after the murther of his wife, and children to saie, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Dying I will go vnder the earth whence I came; Nowe whence Hercules came is expressed before l 1.534 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 returning from the darke chambers of the queene of HADES BELOVV. In like sort Sophocles maketh Aiax to saie. m 1.535 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the rest I will speake to the spirites BELOVV IN HADES. So Hercu∣les remembring his workes, saith, with these armes I drew by force, that inexpugnable Monster n 1.536 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the three headed whelpe of HADES VN∣DER EARTH. Simonides shewing how manie waies men end their liues, some by sickenesse, some by warre, some by sea, saith; such as are tamed or conquered in warre o 1.537 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, HADES sendeth vnder the blacke earth. p 1.538 Orpheus one of the eldest Maisters of the Greeke tongue without comparison, that liued in the time of the Iudges of Israel, as Suidas testifieth, and not so farre infected with fables, as those Philosophers and Poets that came after him, describing the true God, that, as he saith, Moses wrote of, calleth him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; the king of the heauēs, of the earth, of the sea, AND OF HADES, before whom Diuels do tremble, and the whole companie of

gods (or Angels) doe feare. Where in olde Greeke and good diuinitie HADES is seuered from heauen, sea, and earth, and consequentlie must be properlie HELL. And so if you runne ouer all the Poets, you shall finde that with one ge∣nerall consent they placed Hades not onelie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 below, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, vnder the earth. This was the opinion of the peo∣ple. k 1.539 The common people (saith Lucian) perswaded by Ho∣mer, Hesiodus, and the rest of the poets, and taking their poems for a law 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, beleeue HADES to be a deepe place vnder the earth; and that Pluto Iupiters brother raigneth ouer that gulph, the kingdome of the deade falling to him by lotte, and hee ordering howe they shall liue there belowe. The place was so called from the name of the person whome they supposed to bee gouer∣nour of it; otherwise HADES was the proper name of Pluto, as Plato himselfe confesseth in Cratylo, l 1.540〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. As for HADES the most part of men seeme to me to conceiue by the name that which is darke, or which can not bee seene, and fearing the name they call him PLVTO. And howsoeuer Socrates in that place, with a very false and ••ond reason goeth about to proue, that the name of HADES, as hee thinketh was not thence deriued but rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from knowing al good things; which in déede is but a iest, and by no possibilitie can come within the compasse of that word; yet both Plutarch, and the prose com∣mentator vpon Homer, neglect this vtterly, and vphold that which Socrates refused. m 1.541〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Hades and Acheron (saith Plu∣tarch) haue their names from (the aire) that is not seene, nor hath any colour. And in his discourse, whether a secrete and silent life be best, or no, Plutarch proposeth this etymologie as truer & elder thē So••rates fancie. n 1.542〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Men ACCORDING TO THE AVNCIENT TRADI∣TIONS OF THEIR FATHERS, thinking the sunne to be A∣pollo, named him Delius, and Pythius. And the RVLER of the contrarie destinie (to life and light) whether he bee a God, or a DIVEL, they termed HADES, being the MASTER of dark night, and dead sleepe; for that when wee depart hence, wee go into an vnknowne and vnseene place. So that Socrates deri∣uation of Hades was both false and newe, euen as his opini∣on of HADES to be an eloquent and bountifull God; and his reason is woorst of all, that because men returne not backe againe after death, therefore o 1.543 HADES doeth detaine them with eloquent perswasions, and great rewards, which maketh him to be called Pluto. For the scripture assureth vs, that men dead can not returne againe, though they were neuer so willing; and though God of his goodnes bestoweth euer∣lasting blisse on his Saints; yet the rest would faine bee rid of their eternall miserie, and can not; neither are they held in their state with faire promises, or large benefites, but by the vnalterable rigor of Gods iustice. Eustathius vpon Ho∣mers wordes, that Achilles sent many a worthie soule to HA∣DES, saith; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is a darke place vnder the earth, not to be seene, appointed for soules, and is deriued from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the priua∣tiue, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to see, and is called also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and by con∣traction HADES. So when Homer bringeth in Hectors wife complaining of her miserie and saying,

p 1.544〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,Thou husband art gone to HADES house vnder the dennes of the earth. Eustathius addeth; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. This is a place vnder the earth, and so hidde from vs. Therefore it is called Hades, that is an inuisible aire, which wee

can not see. And howsoeuer Socrates pleased himselfe in framing this heauen, as you call it, for himselfe, and a fewe others (for hee admitteth none but Philosophers into it) o 1.545 Lucian in his Dialogues of the dead, bitterlie mocketh him, as being in Hell with all the rest; howso∣euer he dreamed of an heauen for himselfe after his de∣parture hence.

How Paganish, and not onelie ridiculous but blasphe∣mous Platoes heauen is, appeareth by this, that Socrates maketh SVVANNES his fellow seruants to Phoebus,p 1.546 & imagi∣neth they sing that day they die, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, FORESEEING THE GOOD THINGS THEY SHALL HAVE IN HADES. And further saith that whē they perceiue they must die, then chiefly and most of al they sing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; reioycing that they SHALL GO TO GOD whose seruants they are. And those wordes which Socrates spake of Swannes, fore∣séeing THE GOOD THINGS IN HADES,* 1.547 you, Sir Con∣futer, in the abundance of your wit, note to proue HADES to be heauen. And to this heauen though Socrates admitte Swannes, yet he accepteth no men, but such as haue béene Philosophers, & those of the purest sort. As for such as vse po∣pular and ciuil vertues, as iustice and temperance, gotten by care and continuance without Philosophie, his words are expressely these; q 1.548 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is fit that such (soules) should returne againe into some such politicall and tame kinde either of BEES, VVASPES, or EMMETS, & after that into men again. But into the kinred of the Gods it is not lawful for anie to come that hath not beene a Philosopher, and verie pure at his departing hence. Others that were slouthfull and filled their bellies, hee saith must be turned into Asses, and such other

beasts; and oppressours and wrong doers into Wolues, Kites and Hawkes. Of these his plaine resolution is r 1.549 that such soules wander, vntill by the earnest loue of their bodilie na∣ture, which followeth them, they PVT ON BODIES againe. And such bodies (of birds and beasts) they put on as resemble the manners of their former life. Here is a goodly world of soules to be brought out of Plato into the Créede; and Socra∣tes heauen, why you should fansie, I cannot gesse, except it be, that none but very pure and precise persons shall come thither, to whom you would faine be the ringleader. But this is not all. In making HADES AND PLVTO, by which the Poets meane the diuell, to bée a wise and bountifull God, hath not your wise Master fitted his new heauen with an excellent head? Plutarch moueth the doubt whe∣ther HADES be a God or a DIVELL, that hath power ouer darknes and death: Homer & Hesiode affirme, he dwelleth vnder the earth, and is implacable, cruell, and hated of men. Porphyrie, no meane follower of Plato, concludeth PLVTO (which is all one with HADES as * 1.550 Plato confesseth) to be the chiefe of all wicked spirits. Porphyries words are, s 1.551 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. We doe not without cause coniecture that all wicked spirites are vnder Serapis; being led so to thinke not onely by his cere∣monies, but because offerings to pacifie, and sacrifices auer∣ting rage are done to PLVTO, as we haue shewed in our first booke. Now Serapis is all one god with Pluto, and therefore he is the greatest prince of Diuels, and one that giueth charmes to driue away spirits. Loe, here is Socrates wise and bounti∣full god, HADES AND PLVTO, concluded by a great Platonicke, to be the chiefe diuell; whose iudgement Euse∣bius followeth. And in déede considering his place where he dwelleth, his rage that he vseth against men, for which

hee is so feared and hated of them, and his sacrifices in which hee delighteth, as also his power ouer death and darkenesse, it is a cléere case that Platoes HADES OR PLVTO is the great diuell in hell; whose craftes and sleigh••s, because hée knew not as a Pagan, he hath pro∣moted him to bee a wise and liberall god; and you haue learnedly cited this wise deuise to make him ruler of your heauen, whither you send Christ and his Saints to liue there for euer.

Now were it graunted vnto you, that Pluto and HADES (which by the description of all your classicall Poets is in déede the diuell) were one of Platoes gods; are you so little acquainted either with Plato or with Paganisme, that you presently conclude hee is the true God of Hea∣uen? Or that this inuisible place must néedes bee the kingdome of God? Looke but in the latter end of this booke, which you alleage for this very purpose: and there you shall sée what pretie fansies Socrates hath of another inuisible earth farre aboue this, and waters likewise, and trees, and flowers, and fruites, and beastes, and men that liue longer than we doe here below, and without sicknes; where also there are temples & woods, in which the gods dwell fa∣miliarly; t 1.552 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That to see that earth is the sight of the blessed. But what be these wicked fancies either to the Créede or to Christian Religion? Séeing therefore your Gréeke Poets with one consent make HADES to be a god below vnder the earth; and put vnder his power as well the Elisian fields and seates for the iust soules, as the prisons and dungeons for the vn∣iust; and this fantasticall conceite of Socrates touching a speciall place for himselfe and such Philosophers as hee was, together with Swannes, beasts, trees, flowers, fruites, as it was singular and secret to himselfe, so it was most absurd and wicked; you may by no meanes bring your Classicall writers that were Pagans to expounde the

Créede; much lesse must you binde the holy Ghost in the new Testament, to vse the word HADES, as the infidels did; since the holy Ghost onely knoweth and speaketh trueth; and their imaginations of the dead, or as you speake of the world of soules, was not onely false and foo∣lish, but impious and blasphemous. And yet if you doe admit them to bée interpreters of the Créede; which I vt∣terlie refuse for the causes I haue tolde you; they make di∣rectly against you. For HADES with them was the Ru∣ler or place of soules that were beneath vnder the earth, were they in rest or in paine; and that Christian Religi∣on will assure you must néedes be hell, howsoeuer to beare out your broken matter you beginne halfe to doubt where hell is.

[The authenticke authors of the Greeke tongue vsed hades for the place of the blessed soules (you say) and not properlie for hell. So Leonidas cheered vp his men not to feare such a blessed death; to suppe in hell had beene a colde comfort vnto them.]

You reade nothing your selfe belike, that you hit nothing right. In Plutarch whome you alleage, this is no comfort giuen by Leonidas; but hée séeing the Per∣sians now in sight, as his men were dining; and in num∣ber so infinite aboue his, who were but an handfull, willeth them to make short, and saith; So dine, as men that must suppe in HADES; that is, care not for meate since death is so neere; but prepare to fight for your Coun∣trey. It sheweth a resolution to dye, but no consolation after death more than they knew before; which was, that in HADES were places as well for the good to rest, as for the bad to bée punished; but both were below vn∣der earth, and in Plutoes kingdome, as the Gentiles sup∣posed. Neither did Homer meane to make a new heauen, for such as Achilles slue, but to send them to the place where hée thought all soules did abide; and therefore hée put Achilles soule in Plutoes region vnder the earth, as

well as the rest of the Grecians and Troians, that died in that Battaile. And because your Proctor will néedes haue the words that Achilles spirite spake to Vlisses at his descent to hell, to bee a dictionarie for hades, what place it is, against which if the Creede had gone, it had been a skoffe to all Hellas, and had hindered all the proceeding of the Gos∣pell: Let vs sée whether his owne dictionarie will not returne all his allegations vppon his owne head. If HADES in the Créede must bee the same place, where A∣chilles spirite was, whither Vlisses descended, and where he saw and spake with so many Ghostes, then apparant∣ly HADES must bée the Poets HELL. At Vlisses entrance Homer telling how the soules came about him saith,

a 1.553 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:

The soules flocked together out of Erebus; now 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the very place where the Poets place Cerberus, and whence the same Poet saith, Hercules

b 1.554 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:

Was sent to fetch from Erebus the dogge of HATEFVLL HADES. Againe Vlisses mother asking him how hee came to that place, saith

c 1.555 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

My sonne how camest thou vnder this darke mist? Of A∣iax Ghost, who would not for anger speake to Vlisses, Homer saith,

d 1.556 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:

Hee went away to other soules in Erebus. There Vlisses saith hée saw Sisyphus

e 1.557 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

Suffering grieuous torments, as also Titius and Tantalus to en∣dure the like. There he saw f 1.558 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Hercules strength a Ghost: for hee himselfe was in ioye with the immortall Gods. There Achilles spirite tooke so small comfort, that when Vlisses said, g 1.559 There is

none happier then thou Achilles; before, whiles thou li∣uedst, wee honoured thee as a God, and now art thou a great commaunder among the Dead; bee not therefore so fadde; hée replied, Praise not death to mee Vlisses, I had rather serue any poore man (on earth) as his drudge, though hee were scant able to liue, then to raigne here ouer all the dead. If the place bee darke and déepe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: If Cerberus bée there which the * 1.560 Poets make the very kéeper of hell; if there bée grieuous and cruell punishmentes for such as deserue them,* 1.561 if the best haue there so little ioye of the place, as Homer maketh Achilles ghost here to confesse, what place can this bée but that hell, which all the Poets acknowledge; though in some part there∣of there hée worse punishmentes then in other?

[This is not that Tartarus, you will saye, which the Poets make the ••ayle and Prison for the wicked.] What is that to the purpose, if some punishmentes in hell bée worse than other? Looke to those whome the Poets place without the dungeon, and sée whether they bée in heauen or no? And because you and your friends talke so much of the worlde of Soules, and of heauen to bée found in HADES, and INFERI; and your selfe bring Virgill as one of your Classicall authors to proue this matter, h 1.562 Who though hee were a Poet, and fayned many things, yet hee spake (you say)

familiarlie, and after the vulgar vse, and for the substance of the matter vttered touching heauen and hell, the opinion of the worlde then:

I must pray the Readers leaue and patience, whiles I follow you in your owne fantasticall deuise, though a∣gainst mine owne liking, to let the simple sée what your world of soules, and your heauen is, euen in those very writers, which you produce for this purpose; and whe∣ther they bée fitte things to bée Presidents for the Créede or no. In Plutoes kingdome vnder earth, whether Aene∣as

went to sée his Father Anchises, i 1.563 Virgil your authen∣ticke author maketh besides Tartarus,

k 1.564 and your goodly Elisi∣an fields the eternall habitation (as you call it) of the blessed, many lodgings.

As first for l 1.565 sicknes, care, weeping, pouertie, labour, warres, discord, dreames, and death, besides for Cen∣taures, Briareus, Hidra, Chimera, Gorgon, Harpies, and Gerion, and sundrie other monsters. There wander the Ghosts whose bodies are not buried a hundred yeare before they can get ouer the foule and silthie riuer of Styx. The other side of Styx, is kept by Cerberus the Dogge with thrée heads; where first are placed the soules of infants weeping and crying; then such as were vniustly condemned to death, next, such as being wearie of their liues killed themselues, now willing to suffer pouertie, or any paine on earth, so they might returne to life againe. In the fourth place are Lugentes Campi, the wo∣full fields of such as died for loue; in the fift, Warriers and such as pursued each other with the sword, where Aeneas saw all the Grecians and Troians that dyed at the siege of Troy. Of all these places, where yet are no punishments, the Poet maketh Deiphobus to say to Aeneas, what cause driueth thée,

Vt tristes sine fole domos, loca turbida adires,

To come to the wofull housen without sunne, and lothsome places••? Then leadeth the left hand to Tartarus, which these men so much harpe at, compassed with fierie Phlege∣ton, and there are the punishments of the wicked; then Plutoes palace, and on the right hand, Amaena vireta fortunatorum nemorum sedésque beatae, The sweete springs of the fortunate woods, and the blessed seats. Here is the hea∣uen which this confuter alleageth out of Virgil, and here Aeneas found his father Anchises, in a greene vale, viewing the soules that dranke of the water of obliuion, and were t•• take new bodies on earth againe. His words are,

* 1.566 Animae quibus altera fato,

Corpora debentur, Lethei ad ••luminis vndam Securos latices & long a obliuia potant.

The soules who by destinie are to take bodies the second time, doe here at the Riuer of Lethe drinke the waters of vtter for∣getfulnes, no way remembring whatsoeuer they saw or knew, either whiles they first liued, or during the time of their abode vnder earth. And because it séemed strange to Aeneas, that soules should come to take other bodies, though this be right Platoes fansie in his Phaedone, Anchises telleth his sonne the secrets of Platoes Purgatorie, heauen, and re∣surrection, as Virgil conceiued them, who was a great Pla∣tonist. When men die (saith he) all the infections of their bo∣dies cannot presently be taken from their soules.* 1.567

Ergo exercentur poenis, veterúm{que} malorū supplicia expendunt, Therefore the soules (of such as are curable, for the despe∣rate and insanable, are cast into Tartarus, and neuer come thence by Platoes owne words) are purged with paines▪ and abide the punishment of their former infection, some are han∣ged vp to the winde, some are plunged vnder water, some are clensed by fier:

Quisque suos patimur manes,* 1.568 exinde per amplum Mittimur Elysium, & pauci laeta aruatenemus, Donec longa dies perfecto temporis orbe Concretam exemit labem, purúmque reliquit, Aethereum sensum, atque auraï simplicis ignem, Has omnes vbi mille rotam voluêre per annos, Letheum ad fluuium Deus euocat agmine longo, Scilicet immemores supera vt conuexa reuisant, Rursus & incipiant in corpora velle reuerti.

Wee euery one of vs suffer our clensing, and after that wee are sent out into the large Elysian fieldes, where but a fewe of vs inhabite these pleasant places, vntill long time hath taken awaye the bodilie infection, and leaueth the aethereall sense pure, and the vigour of the fierie and

simple ayre. Then after a thousand yeares God calleth all these soules (thus purged and placed in the fortunate seates) to the flood of Lethe, that they may goe to the earth againe, with vtter forgetfulnesse of all things, and beginne to desire to returne to new bodies. To these Elysian fields when Aeneas should come, the Poet maketh Sybilla say,

* 1.569Ad genitorem imas Erebi descendit ad vmbras;

Aeneas descendeth to his father, euen to the soules below in Erebus: And that Erebus is one of the infernall Gods, as the Poets call them, can bee no question. For when Dido minding to kill her selfe prepared Sacra Ioui stygio, Sacrifices to the infernall Iupiter, the Poet maketh her Priest to inuocate,* 1.570 Tercentum tonat ore deos Erebúmque Chaósque, Three hundred gods, and Erebus and Chaos.

This is the worlde of Soules that Virgil deliuered in his time; which hée collected out of Plato; this is the hea∣uen, that is contayned in HADES and INFERI. Iudge thou Christian Reader, whether this be not the high way to Paganisme, to tell vs that this is the heauen, where the Saints of God are in rest, and whether Christ as∣cended. For my part, but that I thinke this confuter talketh of that hée knoweth not, I must haue proclaymed him for a Pagan; and therefore after hée séeth it, if hée persist to say that heauen is either Homers HADES, or Virgils INFERI, I may not spare to discharge the dutie of a Christian man, to let the whole realme vnderstand, that this is open infidelitie, cloaked vnder the name of Pu∣ritie. Platoes world of Soules where it altereth from this, is rather worse than better. For hée saith, the soules of euill men are clogged with their bodilie vncleanenes, and wander, n 1.571 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, about tombes and graues, as it is said, and then put on the bodies of beastes, birds, or wormes. And y••u, Sir Confuter, lighting on the first part of those wordes, openly falsifie them, and

lewdly misapply them. For in stéede of (as it is said) you translate, (* 1.572 as it is commonly said) and by that worde" COMMONLY of your owne adding, and referred to the former words, where there is a manifest distinction or pause betwixt them, you bid the reader note that HADES is commonly called heauen. For thus you write:

Againe, Plato saith of heauen, that it is an vnseene estate, euen HADES, as it is commonly called, which you will by the side to be noted; where Plato in that place speaketh not one word of hea∣uen.

But such is the miserie of your cause, you must belie your authors, or else you will lacke proofes for your hu∣mours. And touching the soules of all men that are borne, Plato holdeth their soules had bodies before, and staye in HADES, vntill the time come that they must haue bodies againe, and therefore all our knowledge heere is but the remembring of that wée knew before, when our soules were in other bodies; which is the opinion that Tertullian chargeth him with: His owne wordes are, p 1.573 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. There is an auncient assertion which wee remember, that soules departing hence are there, and come hither againe, and are new borne from the dead. And least you should thinke hée did not consent to it; hée saith somewhat after, q 1.574 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Wee are not deceiued confessing all this; but there is in very trueth a re∣turning of soules to liue againe on earth; and of the dead spring the liuing. Consult you and your Instructor whether you will bring this HADES or world of soules into the Créede; or whether the thiefe from the Crosse ascended to this hea∣uen, together with the soule of our Sauiour. But if these bee intolerable and abominable heresies to haue soules passe from bodie to bodie; and Platoes HADES be nothing

else but a continuall chopping and changing of soules from life to death, and from death to life againe, hale backe your HADES from the Créede, howsoeuer your Hellas will take pepper in the nose to sée her follies refused.

Cicero is your last authenticke writer that you bring to proue Inferi to bée heauen, out of whom you note thrée things.

r 1.575 First, that he vtterlie misliked the opinion of the olde Latines, that thought the world of the dead was vnder the earth, and therefore gaue this terme INFERI, to signifie the same: this hee openly misliketh, that the damned soules were beneath in the earth, or at least in such kinde of torments as many did imagine. How much more did he condemne them, that thought all the deceased soules were beneath, vnder, or in the earth? The blessed hee thought rather, as Plato did, to ascend vp to heauen. s 1.576 Secondly, you note, That although hee reiected the opinion of the former Latines, yet hee retayned the La∣tine phrase, as being now common and familiar euery where; which rose of olde from that opinion, thinking all the dead af∣ter this life to be infra, beneath. He had learned to thinke wise∣lier, but yet he spake so, as the vulgar phrase had preuailed, ac∣cording to Aristotles rule; we must thinke as the wise doe, but speake as the people doe. Thirdly, Tullie saith of this opinion followed great errors.

If a man would hire you to speake against your selfe, you cannot doe it in playner manner than here you doe. You confesse that Cicero was the first (for before him you bring none) that misliked the opi∣nion of the olde Latines (whose seate and tongue in Ita∣lie was then 1200. yeares olde) that the world of the dead was vnder the earth, and to signifie so much, they vsed the worde Inferi; which had continued in the mouthes of all men learned and vnlearned, till Ciceroes time, to expresse the state of the dead. Secondly, you say the phrase was so

common and familiar euery where for the worlde of the dead, that Cicero himselfe, though hee thought

otherwise durst not depart from the vulgare phrase which had so generally preuayled.

Then by your owne confessi∣on wée haue thus much, that Inferi for twelue hun∣dred yeares in the mouthes of all men ignorant, and learned among the Latines and Romanes did signifie the state of such soules as were vnder the earth. Now let Ci∣cero say what he can to the contrarie; his authoritie is no waie so great that it should ouerwaigh so long and setled a consent. Great errors followed hereof Tullie saith. And you affirme the like, but not so great as Tullie himselfe mayn∣tayned in reiecting that opinion. For he in some pride of his tongue and conceite of his wit brought▪ heauen and hell to be vtterly nothing.

That the old Latines thought all men after death to go vnder the earth I sée no proofe; I find rather the contra∣rie confessed by your owne author. He alleageth out of Ennius, t 1.577 Romulus in caelo cum dijs agit aeuum, vt fama assentiens dixit Ennius. Romulus leadeth his life in heauen with the Gods, as Ennius approuing the fame writeth. And againe; Abijt ad Deos Hercules. Vetera iam ista, & religione omnium consecrata. Hercules is gone to the Gods. These things are ancient and sea∣led with the religious consent of all men. So that Ciceroes words which you alleage, cannot import that they thought so of all men, for then they must so haue thought of Romu∣lus and Hercules, which Cicero confesseth all men acknow∣ledge to be in heauen; but they supposed so of most men; which amongst Pagans, as they were, was no such great error, as you would make it, nor any way so great as that which Cicero laboured to establish in place thereof. For he through the insolencie of his opinion of himselfe, or incon∣stancie of his disposition, or both, would somtimes haue an Inferi, or hell below; and sometimes he would haue none. Examples whereof are euident in his writings. In his spleene against Antonie, he saith; u 1.578 Illi igitur impij, quos occi∣distis,

distis etiam ad Inferos poenas parricidij luent: vos autom qui ex∣tremum spiritum in victoria effudistis, piorum estis locum et se∣dem consequuti. Those wicked, whom ye slew, shall IN HELL suffer the punishment of their parricide: you that lost your liues in obtayning the victorie haue obtayned the place and seate of the blessed. In his brauerie defending Cluentius, he cast it all off as a foolish fable. x 1.579 Quid tandem illi mali mors attulit? nisi forte ineptijs ac fabulis ducimur, vt existimemus illum a∣pud Inferos impiorum supplicia perferre, et actum esse praecipitem in sceleratorum sedem at{que} regionem: quae si falsa sunt, id quod ••mnes intelligunt, quid ei tandem aliud mors eripuit praeter do∣loris sensum? What harme could (Cluentius) do vnto (Oppi∣anicus condemned and banished for his lewdnes) by killing him? vnlesse wee beleeue toyes and fables to thinke he endured the punishment of the wicked in hell, and that he was cast head∣long into the region and prison of the vngodly? which (con∣ceits) if they bee false, as all men may easily vnderstand, what hurt could death doe him, but take from him all sense of griefe? To make a reason for his Client, that by killing his ad∣uersarie, afflicted with penury and miserie, he should rather doe him a good turne, then a spite, he vtterly reiecteth, as a fable, that the wicked haue any punishments after this life; which in the former place against Antonius souldiers he vrged as vehemently for a truth.

And though in this place he taxe, as you say, the ignorance of the olde Latines, yet in an other place, hée commendeth their wisedome, for the self same position. y 1.580 Ita{que} vt aliqua in vita formido improbis esset posita, apud Inferos eiusmodi quaedam illi Antiqui supplicia impijs cōstituta esse voluerūi, quod videlice•• intelligebant his remetis non esse mortem ipsam pertime scendam. Therfore to terrifie the wicked in this life, THOSE AVNCIENT Fathers held there were some such punishments appointed IN HELL for the wicked, because they saw without thē death was no way to be feared. And, Sir Refuter, are you a Christian, that thinke it worth the noting out of a prophane Orator,

that it is a foolish fable to thinke, the wicked are punished after this life in hell? Uphold you the proude and lewd con∣ceite of a Pagā against the setled and reuealed iudgements of God by his word? dare you adde of your owne head (for your author hath no such word)

z 1.581 that the ignorance OF THE TRVTH beganne this opinion, that Inferiwere vnder the earth, and the terrors of hell also?

I see your deuise; you would haue hell euerie where; and TORMENTS OF HELL you would haue none, but such as Christ by your assertion suffered in his soule here on earth; and because you want good autho∣ritie to countenance this matter, you reade vs a Lecture out of Cicero, that he thought so before you, and that he is a verie authenticke and Classicall writer. But keepe this lesson till you get none but Atheists and Infidels to bee your hearers; they will thanke you for it; Christian cares doe abhorre it; and will detest your prophanes as much as they doe Ciceroes. For if there bee no punishment in hell, fure there is no hell, and he that decreaseth the terror, de∣creaseth the truth of it: therefore the olde Latines did not erre. But your New Orator thinketh hee may buyld and ouerturne hell and heauen at his pleasure.

As he dealeth with hell, so doth he with heauen; som∣tymes he will haue one, and somtimes he cannot tell whe∣ther there bee any such habitation for soules or no. And the heauen which he would haue, is a Mansion of his owne making. Such authors you bring vs to expound the Creede, and to outface all the Fathers, that they them∣selues cannot tell what they say. Where he purposely dis∣puteth of the seate and sanctuarie for the soule after death, he concludeth the whole discour••e, as doubtfully as he be∣ganne. a 1.582 Si supremus ille dies non extinctionem, sed commutati∣onem affert loci, quid optabilius? sin autem perimit ac delet omni∣nò; quid melius quàm in medijs vitae laboribus obdormiscere, et ita conniuc••tē somno sepeliri sempiterno? If the daie of our death bring not a perishing but changing of places, what can be more

to be wished for? But if it vtterly quench and extinguish (bodie and soule) what can be more acceptable amidst the troubles of this life, then as it were wincking to slumber, and shutting our eies to fall into an euerlasting sleepe?* 1.583 Habes somnum ima∣ginem mortis, eam{que}, quotidie induis, & dubitas quin sensus in morte nullus sit, quum in eius simulachro videas esse nullum sen∣sum? Thou hast sleepe which thou daylie triest, for an image of death; and doubtest thou but there is no sense in death, when thou findest no sense in sleepe, which is the patterne of death? Now on the other side for Ciceroes heauen, which you will needs bring into the Creede vnder the name of Inferi, hee maketh it no reward of vertue, nor gift of grace to be be∣stowed where it pleaseth God; but he affirmeth there is a fierie aire aboue, of which soules are made; and therefore as soone as the soule is loosed from the bodie, it flieth vpward as fier doth, by a naturall motion, vnto the place, which is like to it selfe, and there stayeth, and is nourished with the selfe same things, with which the starres are nou∣rished.

* 1.584Quae quum constēt, perspicuum debet esse, animos quum é cor∣pore excesserint, siue illi sint spirabiles, siue igne••, sublime ferri: accedit vt eo facilius animus euadat ex hoc aere, quem saepe iam crassum appello, eum{que} perrumpat, quod nihil est animo velocius. Qui si permanet incorruptus, sui{que} similis, necesse est ita feratur, vt penetret & diuidat omne coelum hoc, in quo nubes, imbres, ven∣ti{que} coguntur. Quam regionem quum superau••t animus, natu∣ram{que} sui similem contigit, & agnouit, vinctus ex anima tenui, & ex ardore solis temperato ignibus insistit, et finem altius se efferendi facit. Quum enim sui similem & leuitatem & calorem adeptus est, tanquam paribus examinatis ponderibus, nullā in par∣tem mouetur. Eá{que} ei demum naturalis est sedes, quum ad sui simi∣lem penetrauit, in quo, nulla re egens, alitur & sustentatur, ijsdem rebus quibus astra sustentantur & aluntur. It is long and te∣dious (good reader) to be troubled with these prophane follies; but because the confuter laboureth so much to haue

Ciceroes world of soules and his heauen into the Creede, and in respect of him disgraceth all other writers as igno∣rant of the latine tongue, these words will playnly shew thée, what an audacious, irreligious, and heathenish at∣tempt that is; and how absurdly and lewdly he saith, Cicero had learned to thinke wiselyer then they, that said hell was below in the earth. For they deliuered a trueth, and this of Ciceroes is a false, foolish and wicked fansie. The English of his words is in effect this. These things being certain, it ought to be a cleare case, that our soules when they leaue the bodie, whether they be of an aerie or fierie nature, do mooue vpward. A good helpe for the soule with more ease to passe and breake through this grosse ayre heere below is this, y^t nothing is swifter than the soule. Which remayning vncorrupt, and alwaies like it selfe, OF NECESSITIE MVST ASCEND, and pearce, and deuide all THIS HEAVEN (or ayre) in which the cloudes, windes, and rayne engender. Which region when the soule hath once passed, and touched, and perceiued a nature like to it selfe, mixed of a subtile ayre, and the temperate heate of the sunne; in that fierie region, IT STAYETH, and maketh an ende OF AS∣CENDING ANY HIGHER. For when it hath gotten like both heate and purenes (of the ayre) balanced as it were with equall waights, it moueth no way. AND THIS IS THE NATVRAL SEATE OF THE SOVLE, when it commeth to a like ayre to it selfe; in which needing nothing, IT IS NOVRISHED and fed with THE SELFESAME THINGS, VVITH VVHICH THE STARRES ARE NOVRISHED and sustayned. Ciceroes heauē is nothing but an heap of heathenish impieties. The first, that the substance of the soule consisteth of fier or ayre; the second, that of necessitie it ascendeth vpward as fier doth. The third, that when it commeth to a pure ayre and tem∣perate heate of the sunne, it stayeth there, and ascendeth no higher. The fourth, that this is the naturall seat for the soule, and thence it moueth no way. The fift, that it is there nourished and sustayned with the selfe same things,

with which the starres are. The consequents to this hea∣uen are most horrible. First that all soules by necessitie of their nature being in this place, there are consequently none in HELL, nor none in heauen, and so both those places are vtterly emptied by your eloquent Master. Next that, when the starres & skies shall be melted and dissolued with fier, then must the soules of all men be likewise dissolued, consisting of the same matter, which they doe, and so vtter∣ly extinguish. Lastly, Gods promises, and threats are all frustrate, if he can doe his enemies no more hurt, nor his seruants more good, then this heauen affoordeth. And ther∣fore if you bring the world of soules, or this heauen into the Créede, I must refuse the Article for open and euident points of Infidelitie, which I suppose, the Apostles, nor A∣postolicke men neuer meant, when they made the Créede.

Yet this place such as it is, Cicero, you say, called it In∣feri. Syr if you leaue lying, you must leaue writing. For you can skant write a true word. Cicero doth no where call this place Inferi; but howsoeuer he had his priuate conceits as a Philosopher, yet when he spake before the senate, or the people, he was forced to yéeld to such opiniōs, and to vse such words as were commonly receiued with all men, and that is the direction which Aristotle giueth by the rule which you alleage, that though we must learne to think as wise men do; yet we must be content to speake as the people doe, not that by so speaking we must alter the nature and proprietie of the words, which wee vse; but mynding to aduise or perswade the multitude, we must con∣discend as well to their vulgar phrases, as to their generall and receiued opinions. And therefore as the people thought all men dying to descend vnder the earth to Inferi, so Ci∣cero speaking in open place vseth this same phrase, whatsoe∣uer he priuately thought of the place where the dead were.

From Pagans (Syr Refuter) you returne to Christiās, & whom before you accused for altering & changing the authē∣ticke

vse of words, you now alleadge as obseruing the true pro∣prietie of the same word, for which you did chalenge them before. b 1.585

Hereunto let vs adde (saie you) that the latter learned writers euen Christians haue also espied and graunted this pro∣prietie of the latin word Infernum or Inferi, as also of the Greeke HADES. Ierom saith,* 1.586 Infernus is a place where the soules are in∣cluded either in rest or in paines.

The farder you go, the more you shew, you vnderstand neither Pagans nor Christians. The fault you found with the latin Fathers was, that they c 1.587 vse the word Inferi to signifie hell properlie and particularlie,

that is the place of the Damned: or else an other particular place vnder the earth a part of hell and not farre from hell it self, where soules remayned if not in paines, yet in prison, & far from the place of eternall blessednes & ioy but this you affirme is a meere and plaine abusion of the word.

And within two leaues, when Ierom saith the verie same thing, which you misliked before, and cal∣led a meere and plaine abusion of the word; you confesse hee espied the true proprietie of the word Infernus. This is banding" of Balles in a tennis Court, and not anie searching after a truth in the church of God. But when your learning reacheth no furder, you must needes breath out your ignorance, or bri∣dle your toong, which hath runne so long on a voluntarie, that you cannot tell when you bee out, nor when you bée in. Ierom indéede was of opinion that before Christs death the soules of all, as well good as bad, were shut vp in a place within the earth; the good in rest and expectance of Christs comming thither, by him to bee deliuered; the badde in paines and torments. This place common to both sorts, but wich different effects, Ierom calleth Infernus, which in our English toong is hell. Of this place he saith. d 1.588 Infernus locus est in quo animaerecluduntur siue in refrigerio siue in poenis. Hell is a place in which soules are included, either in rest or in paine. Here you saie Ierom espied the proprietie of the latine word Infernum or Inferi. Bee it so since you will needes haue it so. But Infernum in this place doth

no waie signifie the kingdome of heauen; Ergo the true pro∣prietie of the worde Infernum doeth not signifie the king∣dome of heauen. The Maior is your owne. The Minor by Gods grace I will prooue euen out of Ierom. Marke well his wordes.

* 1.589Quid simile Infern•••• & regna caelorum? What likenes haue Infernus and the kingdome of heauen? you saie Infernus is taken by Ierome for the kingdome of heauen; Ierome him∣selfe telleth you the one hath no likenesse to the other. Are you not caught like a long beaked thing in your owne grin? and because you shall perceiue it is not a tricke, but a truth that I presse you wi••h out of Ierom, that INFERNVS by no meanes is the kingdome of God, and consequentlie must be properlie hell, (except you will builde newe receptacles for soules after Christs ascension where they may bee, neither in hel nor in heauen,) you shal haue more out of Ierom touching the true proprieties of these words. e 1.590 CERNE PROPRIE∣TATES; AD INFERNVM DESCENDITVR, AD COE∣LVM CONSCENDITVR. MARKE THE PROPRIE∣TIES (of these two words:) TO HELL MEN DESCEND, TO HEAVEN MEN ASCENDE. And againe, f 1.591 No∣ta ante aduentum Christi, quamuis sanctos, omnes Inferni lege detentos. Porro quod sancti post resurrectionē domini nequa∣quam teneantur inferno testatur Apostolus dicens; melius est dis∣solui & esse cum Christo; Qut autem cum christo est, vtique non tenetur in Inferno. Note that before Christs comming all, euen the saints thēselues, were detained vnder the lawe of hel: but that after the resurrection of our Sauior they are not helde in hel, the Apostle witnesseth when he saith; It is better to be dissolued and to bee with Christ. And he that is with Christ certainely is not detained in hell. There is no shifting from the force of these words. Afore Christs comming the saints were in Inferno, af∣ter his ascension they were not. For hee that is with Christ is not in Inferno. Saie if you dare that Infernus here is the kingdom of God. For then these absurdities will pursue

you: That after Christes ascension the saintes are not in the kingdome of heauen, and he that is with Christ is not in the kingdome of Christ: wherefore maugre your bearde, if you haue anie, Infernus with Ierom is trulie and properlie hell, and in no wise the kingdome of heauen, as you imagine. Thus thriue you by your own authors, whom you produce to make the world beleeue that formerlie HADES & INFERI did signifie heauen: such heauens if you be wise, keepe your selfe from, neither professe to expound the Créed by the Clas∣sicall masters of the gréeke tongue, being Poets & Pagans. What is to be thought of that opinion of the Fathers that the saints before Christs comming were in Inferno, in hel, but frée from feare or torment, though in some darknes, as also whence they tooke the ground of that assertion, I haue shew∣ed in the end of the * 1.592 treatise before as much as néeded to this question; there with ease it may be perused,

[They mistooke, you will saie, the word Infernum in the old testament, and thence grew their opiniō, that the Patriarks and prophets before Christes comming went to hell; but the scriptures had no such meaning; for neither the worde Sheol with the Hebrues, nor the worde Hades with the Septuagint had any such sense, to signifie hell. And this a notable argu∣ment, y^t Hades signifieth the world of soules, or generall state of the dead, were they in hel or in heauen.] Wee are all this while out of our proper element to sift heathen philosophers & Poets for the meaning of the créede, & a little smattering in the Greeke tongue made the Refuter so arrogant, that hee bid defiance to all the fathers both gréeke and Latin, as vn∣able to vnderstande one poore word in the Créede, which the church of Christ proposed to euerie childe to learne, and to e∣uerie catechist to knowe. But nowe wee are returned to the scriptures againe, (for Fathers they leaue as corrupters of the olde both faith and phrase) wee shall goe through with more ease, and ende with more speede. That Sheol or Ha∣des doe signifie heauen, either in the Scriptures of the

olde or newe Testament, or with the Septuagint which are the translators of the Hebrue into Gréek, I vtterlie denie; and no man liuing shall euer bee able to make anie proofe thereof; on which issue I am content to ioyne with any man that is learned and sober, for the hazard of either of our cre∣dits. If Sheol, and Hades in the scriptures neuer signifie hea∣uen, then can they not signifie THE VVORLD OF SOVLES: for so much as there is no one place common to all soules de∣parted this life, but some are in hell, and some in heauen; and for one word to signifie both hell and heauen so farre dis∣tant one from the other, and so much repugnant one to the o∣ther, is somwhat strange, except it could be strongly proued. Chaos did import the whole masse of heauen and earth be∣fore they were distinguished, but since they were seuered, and setled by the wonderful wisedome and mighty power of God so far apart one from the other, and so much vnlike one to the other, there are wordes in the scripture which note all that God made, but none that comprise heauen and hell, ex∣cluding the rest. S. Paul vseth g 1.593 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the creature, and h 1.594 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the making of the world, and our saui∣our vseth i 1.595 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for this world and the next, where nothing is excepted; but that heauen and hel should come to be included in one word & the rest excluded, I see neither whie, nor howe it should be. For where wordes are common, some thinges must also be common, as néedefull to bee expressed by those wordes; but to soules in heauen and hell no positiue thing is common; all things are rather contrarie. Their bodies they want in both places, because they are soules; otherwise their states be as repugnant in all points, as light and darknesse, Christ and Belial, yea as heauen and hell in which they are; & therefore as light and darknes, faith and infidelitie, truth and errour haue no common worde to comp••ise them being contraries each to other; no more haue heauen and hell as they are she rewardes of the iust and vniust; for so much as all things in either are directlie repugnant each to other.

Again that SHEOL or HADES may possiblie signifie heauen I vtterly deny, because in heauen besides the soules of men, there are the elect angels of God, to whom if anie man dare applie SHEOL or HADES, he must giue me leaue to thinke his iudgement to be weake, and his faith vnsound.

[Sheol and Hades, you will saie signifie all that are deade in either place.] But you must remember, that both these wordes in the Scriptures doe properlie signifie places and not pe••sons. For though the ancient Gréekes vsed the word HADES, first for a person, and then for the place which that person gouerned; yet the holie ghost (knowing that the per∣son which the Pagans meant was in déede the Diuell) v∣seth the worde for the place, and not for the person, except the texte bee figuratiue. In Sheol it was neuer doubted but that it alwaies signified a place, and neuer anie per∣son. Nowe if neither Sheol nor Hades canne signifie both places, I meane heauen and hell, then canne they not sig∣nifie the worlde of soules; for they bee dispersed in both those places.

[It cannot be denied, you wil saie, but the olde testament referreth Sheôl, as the Septuagint doe Hades, both to the godlie and to the wicked after death.] It is most true that Sheôl in Hebrew, and Hades in Greeke are applied in the olde Testament both to the good and bad; The Question is not to what men, but to which parts of men, good or bad, Sheol and Hades are referred. To the bodies of men, good and bad, lying deade in the graue they are sometimes applied; to the soules of the godlie, as detained in either, they are neuer applied. Sheol and consequentlie HADES with the Septuagint, importeth the whole death that is due to sinne, and euerie part thereof; but by no meanes heauen, where the soules of the saintes are, nor anie part of that blisse, which they possesse. Since then as well the death of the bodie in this worlde, as the death of the soule in the next worlde were the wages of sinne; Sheol and Hades

doe sometimes signifie the generall state of deade bodies, as when the Scripture describeth rottennesse, silence, for∣getfulnesse, senselessenesse, contempt, dishonour, and such like to bee in Sheol. And the same worde when it is referred to the soules of the wicked as there detained, or of the god∣lie as thence deliuered; for so much as the soule cannot be inclosed in the graue; of necessitie the pit prepared for the soules of sinners must bee, by all such textes of Scrip∣tures, intended. But that Sheol or Hades shoulde sig∣nifie the worlde of Soules, as well in heauen as in Hell, neither hath this Refuter brought anie Texte or reason for it, neither will hee euer bee able to prooue it. And howsoeuer one of late hath taken vppon him to talke of those thinges, like one of the Titanes with bigge and bombasted tearmes; I, seeing nothing in that fardell of his but Riddles and raylinges, meane not to al∣ter my course.

Then touching the sense of Sheol in the olde Testa∣ment, I take it to bee cleare, that it sometimes signifieth the graue or the state of deade bodies; but neuer the world of soules, which phrase the Refuter hath caught by the ende, hoping at length to conueie it into the Creede. But hee must first shewe vs where hee findeth anie such thing in the Scriptures, before wee maie suffer him to make it an Article of our faith. Against it euerie place is a proofe; but for it none that I reade, or they haue yet alleaged. They shifte handes, and in steede of the worlde of soules they bring in the graue, or the state of deade bodies; which is but a vaine flourish, to propose one thing, and to prooue an other. And though you (Sir Refuter) goe to varying of phrases which I thinke is your best skill; as,

k 1.596 The state of the deade, the worlde of the deade, the worlde of soules departed;

yet I must let you vnderstande there is great difference be∣twixt these speeches. Sheol may extend to their bodies whose soules doe liue in heauen: to their soules it cannot; and

therefore you must not chop in the one for the other, as your instructor doth, who when he would proue the world of soules, falleth vp aboue head and eares into the graue. The one you shall euerie where light on, of the other there is no mention. As when Iacob said to his sonnes, l 1.597 you will make my hoare haires descend to Sheol with sorrow; and likewise when Dauid said to Salomon, m 1.598 thou shalt make (Shemeis) hoare haires de∣scende to Sheol with bloud: are there white haires or bloud in the worlde of soules, as there are in the graue? this is the state of deade bodies, but not of soules departed. In the de∣struction of Core, Dathan and Abiran, the Scripture saieth; n 1.599 the earth opened her mouth & swallowed them vp, and their howsen, and they descended, and all that were with them aliue to Sheol. Aliue is both bodie and soule in euerie mans eie. For had those two beene seuered, they had béene dead. Doe the bodies of men descende to your world of soules? or is it plaine that in this place must be meant by Sheol either hell which receiued both their bodies and soules that were in that rebellion against God; or at least the heart of the earth, which receaued them liuing, whereas other men die before they are committed to the earth? o 1.600 like sheepe (saieth Dauid) shall they bee laide in Sheol. Are there shéepe, or anie resem∣blance of sheepe in your worlde of soules; or doth Dauid ra∣ther meane, that, as shéepe are bounde, and then slaine, and cast on heapes, so shall the wicked bee handled? nowe as ma∣nie places in the scriptures as note Sheol to be below, cānot be referred to your worlde of soules; for they are as well on high in heauen, as below in hell. And therefore of force Sheol must in all those places either importe hell which is belowe, or the graue which is lower then the earth whereon men doe liue.p 1.601 Thou hast deliuered my soule (saith Dauid) from the low∣er Sheol. And Esaie of the King of Babell: q 1.602 Sheol belowe was afraide at thy comming, and raised vp her mightie men to meete thee, and to saie vnto thee, art thou also weakened, as well as wee? is thy pride depressed to Sheol? This cannot

bee meant of the generall and indefinite state of the deade nor of the worlde of soules, for manie of them were on high in strength and ioie; not in feare and weakenesse, as here they are described in Sheol. And therefore ruf••••le you and your a∣bettour as long as you list with tauntes and tearmes; fell crakes fray not such as bee priuie to your lame legs. Again, heauen is namelie expressed, and opposed to Sheol; how can heauen be included in Sheol? r 1.603 To the high heauens what wilt thou do? it is lower then Sheol, how wilt thou know it? Will your learning serue you to make the high heauens a part of the lowe Sheol? s 1.604 If I ascend to heauen, thou art there, (saieth Dauid to God,) if I lie downe in Sheol, there art thou also. So God himselfe by Amos: t 1.605 If they dig to Sheol there shall my hande fetch them; if they ascend to heauen thence will I bring them downe. And to the king of Babilon. u 1.606 Thou saiedst in thine heart I will ascende to heauen, and climbe aboue the highth of the cloudes: but thou shalt be pluckt down to Sheol, euen to the sides of the pit.

To men of anie meane capacitie I thinke it be manifest, that ascending here cannot be descending; & consequentlie that heauen is no part of Sheol, but a place rather opposed a∣gainst it; albeit your impudencie be such y^t in the Creed you expound, he descended into hell, by the cleane contrarie, that is, he ascended into heauen. But what will not men of your face and fansie doe? I hope all good men will beware of such expositians. We deride the Glosse of the Canon law•• for saying Statuimus, id est, abrogamus, wee establish, that is, we abrogate. How ridiculous and audacious then is this pre∣sumption, to saie Christ descended into hel, that is he ascended vp to heauen; but hereof in the close when we haue first clea∣red your fonde conceites of SHEOL AND HADES. x 1.607 The dead praise thee not (saith Dauid to God) nor all that descende into silence. If the scriptures affirme as much of Sheol, how can Sheol be the world of soules? yea how can Sheol bee hea∣uen, where the soules night and daie, that is euerlastinglie,

do nothing but praise God, and confesse vnto him the honor of his name? y 1.608 Sheol (saieth Esay) cannot confesse vnto thee, neither can such as descende vnto the pit trust in thy truth. Yea (saieth Salomon,) z 1.609 There is no worke, thought, knowledge, nor wisedome in Sheol, whither thou goest. If Sheol bee the world of soules, they be all a sleepe, that neither doe speake, nor thinke anie thing. Small are their ioyes, and lesse are their paines, which they neuer so much as thinke of. So that neither hell, nor heauen, nor any part of your world of soules can bee heere vnderstoode by Sheol in Salomons wordes; but of meere force it must be the Graue where the bodie ly∣eth voide of sense, speach, action, or cogitation. The rest of the places of the olde Testament where Sheol is named, con∣curre with these; and import either the graue, which is common to the godlie with the wicked; or else that pit which is prepared for the soules of the wicked, which can bee none other place, but preciselie and properlie HELL. What textes they are of the lawe and the prophets,* 1.610 where Sheol is named, that cannot bee reffered to the graue, I haue in the treatise before specified and handled such of them, as I thought sufficient, especiallie receauing no answere to my reasons, but the Sphingicall perplexities of an high minded Maister; whose wordes with mee, though they bee of the largest size, are but winde. And therefore I rest vpon the same groundes and proofes, which I make before, and stande to iustifie, that in no place of the olde or newe te∣stament, where SHEOL or HADES are named, their world of soules is, or canne bee vnderstoode; let them name mee the places, I will presentlie send them by Gods grace an answere.

As for HADES (good Reader) by which worde the Sep∣tuagint expresse the Hebrue SHEOL; in all these textes, where thou seest the worde SHEOL, thou maiest assure thy selfe the Septuagint vse HADES in stéede thereof, and the verie same reasons that serue for Sheol, serue for HADES in

euerie point without exception: And that maketh me who∣lie to skippe the handling of HADES in the Septuagint; and to referre the discussing thereof till I come to the pla∣ces of the newe Testament. Now the consequent of that I haue alleaged either heere or before, is this; that by SHEOL and HADES in the olde Testament must néedes be meante either HELL, the GRAVE, or their VVORLDE OF SOVLES, which they so much talke of; if no place in the olde Testament doe necessarilie enforce their worlde of soules to bee vnderstoode by either of these wordes, then it remaineth, that in what textes the graue maie not bee endured to bee the meaning of either of these wordes, there wee conceaue the place of the damned must bee in∣tended in either of them. Peruse both the obseruations and allegations before,* 1.611 and thou shalt see both the textes and the proofes, whie the place of the damned must often bee vn∣derstoode by Sheôl in the bookes of the law and the prophets. I hope thou wilt thinke it supersfluous for mee to defende it, or enlarge it, before anie man doe particularlie impugne it. So that whatsoeuer you prate (Sir Refuter) without waight or warrant touching Sheol, I count it lip labor; when you or your helpers bring anie thing worth the regarding, you shal find me readie to receaue it, or refute it; as the mat∣ter deserueth.

Sheol then in the olde Testament, and Hades in the Sep∣tuagint signifiyng somtimes the state of deade bodies which is the graue; sometimes the place of deade soules, which is hell; but neuer the world of soules, whereof some are in hea∣uen; let vs see what force HADES hath in the new testament; or whether it can thence be proued, that HADES importeth the world of soules. As y^e mysteries of God were more fully de∣clared by the gospel, then by the law; so the kingdom of hea∣uen was more preciselie seuered from the kingdome of Sa∣tan by Christ, then by Moses. What Moses darkelie sha∣dowed vnder figures, that Christ reuealed in plaine wordes;

and therefore hell fire, which is obscurelie mentioned in the law and prophets, is often and openlie named by the mouth of our Sauiour; and HADES, which before extended to good and bad, is nowe by the writers of the newe testament re∣strained to the place of the damned. So that Hades with thē signifieth hell, and the powers thereof, and not the death of the bodie, much lesse the world of soules. Examples hereof I haue giuen thée (gentle Reader) in the u 1.612 Treatise before; saue that I then reasoned the death of the bodie was not sig∣nified by HADES, which now those deuisers haue changed into the VVORLD OF SOVLES. I must therefore nowe ouerrun all those places againe, and shewe that the VVORLD OF SOVLES cannot bee expressed by anie of those places. Which I will with as much brenitie as I canne, considering the wise Reader will soone bee able to discerne this newe Camisa∣doe latelie offered with the VVORLD OF SOVLES. The first place is, x 1.613 Woe to thee Chorazin, and woe to thee Beth∣saida, saith our Sauiour: y 1.614 And thou Capernaum exalted to heauen, shalt bee brought downe euen to hell; it shall bee easier for Sodome in the day of iudgement then for thee. What is Gods curse and threates to impenitent sinners? HELL, or the VVORLD OF SOVLES? and in the daie of iudgement, when their punishment shall bee greater then the Sodomites, shall they go to hell fire, or to the VVORLD OF SOVLES? I praie you (Sir Refuter,) were are the Sodomites at this houre? in hell or in your VVORLD OF SOVLES? In hell I thinke. Saint Iude saith, z 1.615 They do sustaine the punish∣ments of euerlasting fire. Is that your VVORLDE OF SOVLES? if it be not, they shal certainlie be where the Sodo∣mites are, yea in worse case shall they bee, and that I suppose must bee in hell, and not in heauen. The second place is in the wordes of Christ to Peter, a 1.616 Vpon this rocke will I builde my church, and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it, and I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen. The VVORLD OF SOVLES doth not impugne y^e church, therfore it is no signe

of Gods fauour, for that not to preuaile against the church. Againe, whatsoeuer preuaile not, yet if hell preuaile, what safetie hath the church? Heresie and iniquitie are the gates of hell fighting against the church, as well as crueltie. b 1.617 Ego portas Inferni reor vitta atque peccata, vel certé haereticorū doc∣trinas, per quas illecti homines ducuntur ad Tartarum. Nemo itaque putet de morte dici, quòd apostoliconditioni mortis sub∣iecti non fuerint, quorum martyria vides coruscare. I thinke (saith Ierom,) the gates of hell to be vices and sinnes, or else he∣resies, by which men being enticed are led to hell. Let no man therefore imagine it is spoken of death, as if the Apostles were not subiect thereto, whose martyrdoms thou findest so famous. c 1.618 Digna aedificatione illius Petra, quae infernas leges, & Tartari portas, & omnia mortis claustra dissolueret. It was a Rocke (saith Hilarie) worthy of Christs building, which should dissolue the lawes of hell, the gates of Tartare, and all the Cloisters of death. So Origen, d 1.619 Portae inferorum dicentur etiam principa∣tus ac potestates, aduersus quas nobis est colluctatio. The gates of hell may the powers and principalities bee called, against the which we haue to striue. e 1.620 Portas inferni haereticam prauitatem nominat, siue vitia & peccata, vnde mors ad animam venit. The gates of hel Christ calleth Haeresies, (saith Bede) or else vices and sinnes, by which the soule dieth. So Ambrose, f 1.621 Quae autē sunt portae Inferni, nisi singula quaeque peccata? What are the gates of hell, but all kind of sinnes And Gregorie; g 1.622 Portae Inferni haere∣ses sunt, quae quasi inferorum aditum pandunt. The gates of hell are heresies, which open as it were the passage to hell. The fifte generall councell of Constantinople with one full consent alloweth the same. h 1.623 Portae inferni non praeualebunt aduersus e∣am, id est haereticorum linguae mortiferae. The gates of hell that is the deadlie tongues of heretickes, shal not preuaile against the church. You might haue more, but these are enough. Here (Sir Refuter) you tell a long and a foolish tale of death out of your owne heade, as if Christ did promise his Apostles protection against the violence of Tyrants, but not against

the rage of Satan; i 1.624

To vnderstande sinnes and errours as some of the ancient writers doe, the circumstances of the texte, you saie, doe seeme not to beare it.

Your ignorant humour is loth to haue it so; otherwise the wordes of Christ, respect the trueth of Peters confession, that himselfe was Christ the sonne of the liuing God; against the which faith no policie, nor tyrannie of Satan shoulde preuaile, and so by your leaue the Fathers goe directlie to the meaning of the texte; and you woulde wrest it to your priuate fansie, least HADES shoulde signifie HELL; and yet at length vpon aduisement you

k 1.625 confesse it may bee heere the GATES OF HELL, and that HADES is thus vsed sometimes, and namelie in the last example out of the 16. of Luke.

It is well then that in the 16. of Luke you yeelde HADES doeth signifie HELL, where the wicked are tormented, and did you denie it, the Scripture auoucheth it; the wordes are plaine, l 1.626 I am tor∣mented in this flame: & againe, least they come into this place of torment. Then HADES without anie other addition no∣teth HELL, and when Christ saith, the rich man IN HADES LIFT vp his eyes; he addeth this as a necessarie consequent being in tormēts, to shew that HADES is the place of torment, and not the VVORLD OF SOVLES.

From thence you leape to the Reuelation; and there, when Saint Iohn sawe m 1.627 one sitting on a pale horse whose name was death, and HADES followed after him, that is, saie you, the world of the dead. n 1.628 It cannot be hell certainely, because hel slai∣eth none in that sort. Againe, to saie preciselie that the fourth part of the world should go to hell, I take it to bee a strange phrase in scripture.

Here first is a plaine proofe, that death and HADES are two seuerall things, the one following after the other.

For nothing doth follow it selfe. The doubt is now what HADES importeth. The world of the dead, saie you. The worlde of the" dead, if thereby you mean dead bodies, is al one with death; if you vnderstand the world of soules, that hath two partes heauen and hell, which of these two did follow after death to

destroy the fourth part of the earth? the kingdome of hea∣uen is neuer proposed in the scriptures as a destroyer, but the diuell hath his proper name in this booke, m 1.629 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the destroyer. Againe, this vision S. Iohn saw at the opening of the fourth Seale, but the world of soules in hea∣uen was shewed him in the opening of the fift Seale, which presentlie followeth in the next verse in these words. And when (the lambe) had opened the fift Seale, I saw (saith Iohn) vnder the altar the soules of men slayne for the word of God,* 1.630 and for the testimonie of the Lambe. The world of soules in heauen was séene in the opening of the fift seale; therefore that world of soules was not séene in the opening of the fourth Seale; but of force, if by HADES you will vnder∣stand anie world of soules, it must be of those that were in HELL. Howbeit because hee did accompanie death that was sent to destroy, I take it rather to bee the power of the deuill, that is there described; then anie world of soules, as you dreame. And that the diuell destroyeth as well the bodie as the soule; if it be strange to you, you are a greater stranger in the Scriptures then you would seeme to bee. Who threw the house vpon the heads of n 1.631 Iobs Children can you tell? or who smote Iob himselfe with that loathsome disease? [But the fourth part of the earth, you saie, could not go to hell;] God graunt no more then the fourth part go thither. Neuer reade you, o 1.632 many called and few chosen? and p 1.633 though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the Sea, yet but a remnant shall be saued. And why might not the dragon as well de∣uoure the fourth part of y^e earth, as q 1.634 draw downe from heauē with his tayle the third part of the starres? Or if there you take a certayne number for an vncertain, which is S. Iohns man∣ner of writing in this booke, why not as well here as else where? these therefore are a couple of idle quarrels; if these be your best, you are more willing, then able to do harme. But by y^e same words in the same booke, we shall better vn∣derstand

what is ment by HADES, then by your wandring and weake gloze. Death and HADES,* 1.635 saith S. Iohn were cast into the lake of fier. r 1.636

It were absurd (you adde) to saie death and hell were cast into hell.

True; but more absurd, and more blasphemous to saie, that death and the world of soules shall bee cast into the lake of fier. For then not onlie the Saints of God, but heauen it selfe should bee cast into hell fier. Yet if we take the containing for the contained, which is the most vsuall phrase of the Scripture, as s 1.637 wo be to thee Chorazin, wo to thee Bethsaida, & thou Capernaum: as like∣wise t 1.638Ierusalem, Ierusalem which killest the prophets; & it shal be easier for Tyrus & Sydon, with a thousand such euery wher occurrent; then is it an easie & true speach, that hel, to witte the powers of hell; euen the diuels themselues shall be cast into the lake of fier. And so doth Andreas Bishop of Cesaria expound it, v 1.639 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the wicked spirits the possessours of HADES, shall be cast into hel fier. And so Bede x 1.640 Mors & Infernus missi sunt in stagnum ignis. Diabolum dicit et suos, quem supra in equo pallido seden∣tem Infernus sequebatur. Death & hel shall be cast into the lake of fier. He meaneth the diuel & his, whō before sitting on a pale horse hell followed. As yet then HADES in the new Testa∣ment is not onlie a thing different from death, but euen hell it selfe; and your world of soules in none of these texts can find any hold or help. Let vs sée the rest.

That Christ triumphed ouer hell and Satan, & not ouer death onely; the Apostle fully affirmeth when he saith; Christ y 1.641 spoyled principalities & powers, made an open shew of them, and triumphed ouer them in his owne person; that likewise hee hath the keyes of hell and not of death onlie, S. Iohn plainlie sheweth when z 1.642 he saw an angell come down from hea¦uen, hauing the key of the bottomeles pit, and there binding & shutting vp the diuell. The same key of the bottomeles pit was, in the 9 Chapter of the Reuelation, giuen to the Star that slidde from heauen. This keye must Christ haue, for hee

saith of himselfe that he a 1.643 hath the key of Dauid, which ope∣neth and no man shutteth, which shutteth and no man ope∣neth. Since then there are b 1.644 keyes not of heauen onlie which Christ committed to Peter and his fellow labourers; but of the c 1.645 bottomles pitte, where Satan lyeth bound; which of force must bee HELL; when Christ professeth in the first of the Reuelation that he d 1.646 hath the keyes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of death and of HADES; who séeth not that HADES there must signifie hell it selfe, the key whereof is so expreslie mentio∣ned in that booke? And so when the Apostle maketh two parts of Christs conquest against death and hell, e 1.647 ô death where is thy sting? ô HADES where is thy victorie? what reason is there to exclude out of these words, Christs victorie ouer HELL, since the same Apostle witnesseth, that Christ had a glorious triumph against hell, and the word HADES in all the places of the new Testament, which we haue yet view∣ed, inferreth hell? [The Apostle (you saie) f 1.648 speaketh not of the Damnation of the wicked; but of the resurrectiō of the dead.] And so do I; and therefore inferre, that when the bodies of the saints shall be raised from death, whose soules be already saued from hell; then shall these words be openlie verified, ô death where is thy sting? ô hell where is thy victorie? For since by sinne hell gate possession of both parts of man as well of his bodie as of his soule; the full deliuerance of man must free both parts, and the full conquest ouer hell is the losse of both parts, which in the resurrection of the dead shall be per∣formed and not afore; and therefore then is the time for all the faithfull to thanke God, for their full victorie ouer DEATH AND HELL, and to saie with the Apostle ô death where is thy sting? ô HELL where is thy victorie? But what hath your world of soules to do with these words, or with anie other; where HADES is named in the new testament? All these places serue fitlie for hell, and the most of them neces∣sarilie; since either is expressed as a diuerse thing from HADES, or not to bee comprised in the name of HADES.

But your world of soules is most absurd and false in euery one of these, and can not stand with the circumstance of the text, the first of the Reuelation onelie excepted, where though there be no wordes to impugne it, yet are there none to approue it. For is it anie curse for Capernaum, to bee brought to the worlde of soules, except you meane hell? Doth your world of soules im∣pugne the Church of Christ? or destroy the fourth part of the earth? or shall it be cast into the lake of fire? And what victo∣rie shal the iust haue against the world of soules in the last day; since their owne soules reioice to receiue their bodies; and a∣gainst the soules of the wicked they neither may nor will in∣sult? It therefore remaineth that though HADES with the Septuagint signifie either BODILIE DEATH or HELL; yet in the new Testament where HADES is described as a diffe∣rent thing from DEATH, and following AFTER DEATH, HADES of necessitie, being NOT DEATH, must needes im∣port HELL. Of the place in question, Thou wilt not leaue my soule in HADES, I will yet saie nothing, but will come to the words of the Creede, Christ descended to HADES, and search what must be the meaning of HADES in that article.

What I take to be the meaning of Hades in the Creede, where it is said, Christ descended to HADES, as also what rea∣sons lead me thereunto, thou hast, Christan Reader, in the for∣mer a 1.649 treatise, thou shalt with more ease finde it there, then I repeat it here; howe much this Confuter confesseth or resisteth, that must I now examine. When I obiect that in a short sum of the Christian faith made for the simple and common people, to repeate one thing twice were néedlesse, and against the nature of the Creede: and to vse a darke and hard phrase after a plaine and easie, is vnreasonable and absurde; he answereth, g 1.650

It is true. I hold it vnreasonable altogither in the short and vulgar Creed, appointed euen for the common Christians, to vse words darke and difficult. And when the same thing is by diuers words expres∣sed, the later ought to be the lighter and cleerer. Therefore I fullie grant, in the Creede speciallie, the phrase must be familiar, triuiall, easie and plaine.

I vrged thrée things to be obserued in the ex∣pounding

the Creede, the words to be proper and euident with∣out figuratiue obscuritie, the things to be different without idle repetition, and the order to be consequent without anie confu∣sion. The Confuter agreeth with me in all these; and he doub∣teth not but his exposition is such. Since then there be three expositions of that article, Christ descended to HADES; that is either to the GRAVE, or to HELL, or to the VVORLDE OF SOVLES, which in Christes case (you saie) was HEAVEN; which of these thrée, Sir Refuter, commeth neerest to the na∣ture of a short, easie, and orderlie summe of a Creede? The first you like not, because it expresseth that in darke and hard cir∣cumloquution, which was familiarly and plainely said before, he was dead and buried. The question then resteth betweene the two last, which of the twaine best expresseth the proper sense,* 1.651 and vulgar vse of the worde HADES.

For the Apostles and Apostolike men (you confesse) did so write and speake, as the people then might best vnderstand.

If it bee so, then your expo∣sition, (Sir Refuter) is cleane thrust out of doores. For nei∣ther with the auncient Maisters of the Gréeke tongue, which were the Poets, nor with the Septuagint, nor with the writers of the newe Testament, nor with the people of that time, in their vnderstanding, did HADES euer signifie the worlde of soules without anie limitation of state, or place. Againe that generall and indefinite worlde of soules, without respect of hell or heauen, is no point nor part of the Christian faith. For faith touching Christ must not be generall or am∣biguous, but particular and certaine. It is no faith, much lesse an article of the faith, to saie, Christes soule after death went some whither; the Creede muste specifie the place whither it went before it can bee a matter of faith, that must bee beleeued. And therefore HADES doeth point out the particular place, as hell or heauen whither Christes soule went after death, before any man may chalenge it to be the true meaning of that article.

If anie doe aske particularlie whither is this? You aun∣swer,

i 1.652namely into heauen: for whither should the Saints go else?

This in déede is a familiar, triuiall, easie, and plaine exposition, Christs soule DESCENDED DOVVNE TO HADES; that is, it ASCENDED VP TO HEAVEN. And so by taking heauen for hell, and ascending vppe for descending downe, you haue quickelie made an ende of this matter. Whie then goe on with your wise Maister, and make HADES, which is the chiefe Diuell, to bee God, and you haue made a per∣fect exposition of the Creede, fitte for such as attribute to Diuels, what they shoulde attribute vnto GOD. Was this the plainest and easiest waie for the Apostolike men 〈◊〉〈◊〉 teach the people, Christes soule ascended vppe to heauen, by saying hee DESCENDED TO HADES? And did the people so best vnderstande them? You that expounde this by the cleane contrarie, and saie they be best so vnderstoode, no mar∣uaile if you arrogate so much vnto your selfe in framing the Scriptures to your fansies; you maie with little studie prooue a speedie expositour of the Scriptures. But, Sir, wise men that regarde their faith more then your follyes will aske; where you finde descending for ascending, and Hades for heauen? If you pretende Plato, they will tell you, that to embrace a priuate conceite of Socrates against all the former Greekes, against the Septuagint, against the E∣uangelists, and Apostles, and euidentlie against all the fathers is not to expounde an Article of the faith, but the next waie to bring Paganisme into the Creede; and that by so licenti∣ous and lewde a trade of open peruerting the wordes of the Creede, and taking sowre for sweete, colde for heate, euill for good, that nothing shall stande sounde if this bee admit∣ted.

[^a It is, you saie, an Hebrewe phrase. k 1.653 So Iacob spake, I will goe downe mourning to my Sonne vnto Sheol, yet Iacob thought not to goe to hell to his sonne, but among the soules of the godlie deade, that is to saie, into heauen.]

It hath beene meetelie well tolde you, that Sheol neuer signifyeth Hea∣uen in all the Scriptures, but that Iacob meant hee would goe mourning vnto Sheol, that is to his Graue, refusing to take anie comfort whiles he liued, since his sonne

was dead. You like a tyrant ouer the Scriptures, will haue what sense pleaseth you in euerie place; and then you saie it is plaine and common. In déede your ignorance and insolencie is verie plaine and common; but the interpretations which you make of Scripture, be absurde and more then foolish. A man liuing maie well be said to descend into his graue; liuing hee standeth, dying he lieth downe; and the face of the earth on which we are, is higher then the bowels of the earth where wee lie buried; but of a soule ascending vp to heauen, to say it de∣scendeth to hell, is a phrase of your making, and fit for your faith; which is guided more by will then by truth. When you proue these two points, that HADES is HEAVEN in the Scrip∣tures, and that DESCENDING IS ASCENDING, we will hearken to your exposition; till then wee will leaue it as a dis∣temper of your vnsetled braine.

For the last exposition of the three which remaineth, I haue shewed thée (Christian reader) by the particular circumstances of the Scriptures,* 1.654 that in the continuall vse of the new Testa∣ment HADES signifieth HELL, which is the place where the wicked after this life are in torments. I haue also in the ser∣mons before examined the words of Dauid,l 1.655 alledged and ap∣plied by m 1.656 Peter to Christ, Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell, whence Peter concludeth Christs soule was not left in hel; as like∣wise the words of Paul importing that Christ descended 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the bottomlesse deepe, which worde throughout the new testament doth signifie nothing but HEL; I haue noted how anciently Christs local descent to hel was preached in the church, euen by one of the * 1.657 seuentie disciples (that were conuer∣sant with Christ) & continued to this daie with the full consent of the fathers, both Greeke & Latin without exception, and by the whole church of Christ receiued; I must not iterate that which there is so latelie written. The words are faire and plain, there is no danger nor difficultie in them, the end of Christes descending thither being both honourable to him, and comfor∣table to vs, as I haue before deliuered it. Lastly, I see no cause either in this Confuters ridiculous pamphlet, or in his abet∣tors

tempestuous and furious libell, why anie man should dislike or distrust this exposition, as vnfit for the wordes, or vnsound for the faith of the Creede. To load thee with authorities were to make an other volume; thou shalt onelie see I haue not deuised it of mine owne heade, but that it hath both antiquitie for it, and authoritie with it, and so I will make an ende. Cyprian in his Sermon of Christs passion; o 1.658. Ipse dicit ad pa∣trē, non derelinques animā meam in inferno, nec sines corrumpi car∣nem meam in sepulchro, quia vbi in praesentia illius, effractis inferis est captiuata captiuitas, praesentata victrice anima in praesentia pa∣tris ad corpus suum siue dilatione reuersus est, Christ saieth to his Father, Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell, nor suffer my flesh to rotte in the graue, because as soone as captiuitie was subdued, hell being broken vppe in his presence, and his trium∣phing soule presented to the sight of his Father, hee without delay returned to his bodie. Arnobius writing vppon the hundreth thirtie and seuenth Psalme;p 1.659 Postea vidit Inferos, & longè factus est non solum à coelis, sed & ab ipsa terra: Abyssi pro∣funda descendens scidit, & quia indereuerteretur ad superos, & quia a superis remearet ad coelos. Afterward Christ went to hell, and was farre not onelie from heauen, but from the earth: descending hee brake the bottomlesse deepe, that hee might thence returne to life; and from thence to heauen. Lactantius in his verses of the resurrection, saith.

q 1.660Tristia cessarunt infernae vincula legis, Expau••t{que} Chaos luminis ore premi. Depereunt tenebrae, Christi f••elgore fugatae, Aeternae noctis pallia crassa cadunt.

The fearefull bands of the infernall power ceased, and Chaos was afraid to be oppressed with the light of his presence. The dark∣nesse of hell was chased away with the brightnes of Christ, and the grosse couerings of eternall night vanished. Athanasius, r 1.661 Ipse est dei virtus, qui infernum expugnauit, & imperium Diaboli demolitus est, qui Deus in descendēdo, deus in ascendendo, corpus suum à morte excitatum patri repraesentauit, ac vindicauit à morte sub ••uius im∣perio tenebatur. Christ is the power of God, which surprised hell,

and ouerthrewe the kingdome of the diuell, who beeing God in descending, and God in ascending, presented his body raised from death to his father, and tooke it from death, vnder whose power it was helde. Hilarius. s 1.662 Hic ergo vnus est mortem in inferno perimens, spei nostrae fidem resurrectione confirmans, corruptionem carnis hu∣manae gloria sui corporis perimens. Christ alone is hee that in hell killed death, confirmed our hope with his resurrection, and de∣stroied the corruption of mans flesh, with the glorie of his owne bodie. Basil:* 1.663 Habes ergo myrrham ob sepulturam, guttam ob de∣scensionem ad infernum, quod non inefficax in sepulchro permanse∣rit, sed ad infernum descenderit, gratia dispensationis circa resur∣rectionem absoluendae, vt quae de seipso erant oracula Prophetarum, vniuersa expleret: Thou hast (in this Psalme) myrrhe for his buri∣all, dropping for his descent to hell, because hee lay not in his graue without force, but descended into hell to dispatch thinges need∣full for his resurrection, that hee might fulfill all that the Prophets forespake of him. Nazianzene maketh Christes mother to say of him, u 1.664 At vbi veneris in atram nocte Plutonis domum, In∣fernum acerbo iaculo defixeris. But when thou wentest to the house of Pluto, where darke night is; thou diddest thrust thorow hell with a wounding speare. Fulgentius: * 1.665 Dauid spake of Christes resurrection, that his soule was not left in hell, nor his flesh saw corruption. In this then the Godheade of Christ shewed the power of his impassibilitie, that being euery where, alwaies, and vnspeakeablie present, it wanted not to his flesh, when it suffered not his soule to feele any paine in hell, neither forsooke his soule in hell, whiles it kept his flesh from rotting in the graue. Beda our countriman shall be the last, y 1.666 My flesh (saith Dauid of Christ) shal rest in hope, expounding in what hope; to wit in this hope, that though my soule descend to hell, yet thou wilt not leaue it to be possessed of hel. The rest go all cléer that way, applying y^e words of Dauid cited by Peter, Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell, to Christs descent thither after death. And howsoeuer the fathers incline to thinke, as Ierom did, that the saints before Christes comming were inclosed in a place vnder the earth, expecting Christs comming to bee carried vp to heauen (of which I haue

spoken as much as is néedfull in the * 1.667 treatise before;) yet they absolutelie acknowledge that Christ descending destroyed the kingdome of Satan, and fréed all the faithfull from euer comming thither.

The rest of the Confuters talke is like y^e froth of the sea, which wind & waues roll to and fro; sometimes he runneth this way, and then backe againe another way; saying and vnsaying hee knoweth not how, nor what. Sometimes he saith the Creede, and namely this article Christ descended to Hades could not bee made long after the Apostles time;* 1.668 whereof Ignatius and others most ancient do speake.* 1.669 In another place he saith;

We find almost all the Creedes, certainlie the most ancientest, and the best of them to want these wordes of Christs descending into hell. In one place he saith, The Creedes which we find in Ignatius,b 1.670 Irenaeus, Iustinus Martyr, Tertulliā, Origen, Athanasius, Augustinus, the Nicene, Cōstantino∣politan, Toletan, Ephesine, al these neuer thought that Christs going downe to hell, was anie distinct or certaine Article of the Christian faith.* 1.671 And yet before he confessed y^• Ignatius and others most aun∣cient doe speake namelie of this Article.

But, Sir, haue these Creedes which here you cite, all the rest of the Articles that are in the Apostles Creede? I hope there want in some of them a good manie. For these rehearsals in the eldest Fathers doe but touche some of the Articles of the Creede, and shewe that there was such a compendious briefe of the Faith receiued amongst Christians from the beginning. The Councels of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus, and others, want euerie one of them sundrie Articles that are in the Apo∣stles Creede, and adde other that are not there; so as in deede they are rather expositions then recitals of the Apostles Créed. And yet I hope Athanasius creede hath this Article in precise wordes, and rehearseth it as a part of the Catholike faith, that Christ descended into Hell. Neither is there anie one of these Fathers whome heere you haue named, as a 1.672 Ignatius, b 1.673 Irenaeus, c 1.674 Iustinus Martyr, d 1.675 Tertullian, e 1.676 Origene, f 1.677 Au∣gustine, but they expresselie touche and teache Christes lo∣call descent to Hell, as all the rest doe without exception.

And if Councels will content you, you shall not goe farre for both Prouinciall and Generall. The Councell of Alexan∣dria that wrote to represse the heresie of Nestorius, maketh the spoiling of hell a part of Christes resurrection, and saieth; d 1.678 Tertia Die reuixit, expolians infernum, Christ rose againe the thirde daie, hauing spoyled hell. This confession was read and allowed as Catholike in the first generall Councell of e 1.679 Ephesus, in the great Councell of Chalcedon, and in the e 1.680fifth generall Councell of Constantinople. So that fathers and Councels both decumenicall and prouinciall, haue recei∣ued and approoued this article euen from the foundation of Christs church; as a part of Christes resurrection, howsoeuer they did not alwayes annexe it to their Creedes.

With like follie and inconstancie, he saith it is

f 1.681 the natu∣rall and necessarie deuision of the articles of the Creede, that these, Christ suffered, was crucified, dead, buried, descended into hell, should concerne Christs humiliation,

and hee supposeth euerie sensible man will confesse so much whereas he himselfe expoundeth the last of them to haue this meaning, that Christes soule as∣cended to heauen. Now to ascend to heauen euery boy know∣eth is a part of Christes exaltation, and not of his humiliation. Howe his note booke deuideth the Creede, I know not, but Saint Paule whence this diuision hath his ground, saieth this is g 1.682 Christs exaltation, that at the name of Iesus euerie knee should bow of things in heauen, earth, and vnder the earth, which is hell. His humiliation stretcheth no farther then the death of the Crosse, then beginneth his exaltation. With like discretion when I alledged the Parable from Christes owne mouth, that his triumph ouer Satan must haue thrée parts, the h 1.683ouerrunning, the binding, the spoyling of Satan, and his kingdome; and further from that Parable I deriued nothing;

This wisdome to shew himselfe learned, crieth out, i 1.684 a fine toy or rather a shamefull gloze by vnsauorie allegorizing to corrupt the Text. Is this a good waie to prooue Articles of the fayth, vi∣delicet by Allegories?

As if the moste parte of Christes doc∣trine were not deliuered by Parables and Allegories?

The parables of the Sower, of the labourers in the vineyard, & the husbandmen killing the heire, of good trees & straight gates, of the lost sheepe, vniust Steward, and vnrighteous Iudge; of Tares sowed by the enemie, and haruest at the end of the world, of the great Supper, and wedding garment, of the wounded Sa∣maritane, and wise virgins, of the prodigall sonne, and euill seruants, one y^t neglected his masters talent, the other that im∣prisoned his fellow, of the rich man & Lazarus; to be short the allegories of light, of salt, of leauen, of chaf••e, of the vyne and branches, of the good shepheard, and a thousand such in the pro∣phets, Euangelists and Apostles, do they teach no matters of faith? What Buzzard was euer so blind as so to saie, no points of faith maie be prooued by allegories? Had I extended the Parable farder then Christ himselfe did, or applied it to anie other purpose then he did; there might haue beene some cause of quarrell, but kéeping my selfe preciselie both to the Scope and words of our Sauiour, I could not tread awrie. But in a brauerie to chalenge all the Parables and allegories in the Scriptures, as vnfitte to teach points of faith, neuer came in anie sober mans head.

As you vse the Scriptures, so you vse the Synode of this Realme, that is you arrogantlie and absurdlie falsifie it. k 1.685

The manifest meaning of the whole Synode (of this Realme,) which is our publik doctrine and established by law in England. APPARENTLY RENOVNCETH, (saie you) this doctrine of Christs going downe to the hell of the damned.

If you prooue that you saie, I must confesse it is verie materiall; & by Gods grace I my selfe will reuoke all that I haue said in this point; but if you brag not onlie without cause, but against the verie trueth and tenor of their proceedings, are you not worthie in steede of H. I. to be named W. F? but let vs heare how this appea∣reth?* 1.686

Euen thus; the Synode before holden in king Edwards time affirmed this doctrine directly and expresly (in their article of Christs descent to hell.) This Synode comming after repeateth and ratisieth apart (of that article) in expresse words; but part of it euen all and euerie whit that containeth this doctrine expreslie of Christs going downe to the hell of the damned, all this I saie our Synode, (anno 1562) cutteth off, it putteth out, it casteth awaie. The words are these of the former Synode. Quemadmodum

Christus pro nobis mortuus est & sepultus,* 1.687 ita est etiam credendus ad Inferos descendisse.

Nam corpus vsque adresurrectionem in̄ se∣pulchoro iacuit, spiritus ab illo emissus cū spiritibus qui in carcere siue in inferno detinebantur fuit, illis{que} praedicauit, quemadmodum testatur Petri locus. As Christ died for vs and was buried: so also it is to be beleeued, that he went down to hel. For his body lay in the graue vntil the resurrection; his spirit which he breathed out was with the spirits that were in prison or in hel, and prea∣ched vnto them, as the place of Peter vvitnesseth. * 1.688 But our Sy∣node since correcteth it herein & saith but thus only,

Quemadmo dū Christus pro nobis mortuus est & sepultus, ita est etiā credē dus ad inferos descendisse. As Christ died for vs and was buried, so we are to beleeue also, that he went vnto the dead. This therfore in thē is seene manifestly (as I said) to renounce and abrogate this particular sense of Christs descēding, y^t HE VVENT AFTER DEATH TO HELL.

Is this all you haue to saie (Sir Refuter,) then when pro∣uender is deuided you shall haue a part for your good collectiō. You collect that y^e later Synode by leauing out certain words of the former renounceth that CHRIST AFTER DEATH VVENT TO HELL; and that which it retaineth of the former Synode in expresse wordes is this; IT I TO BE BELEE∣VED THAT CHRIST VVENT DOVVN INTO HELL. So in your iudgement by beleeuing that Christ wente downe into Hell, they renounce, that Christ went to hell. If it were a matter of sight I shoulde aske whether you had anie eies or no; nowe it is a matter of reason I must more doubte whe∣ther you haue your fiue wittes or no. Set your inference to the viewe of all men. The Synode in her Maiesties time a∣greeth, It is to be beleeued that Christ vvent downe into hell. Ergo they apparātly renounce that Christ went to hel. This is your conclusion; shew it to any tapster or tinker in Englande and sée whether he will reward you with a mocke or no.

[But they leaue out the latter part of the Article which the former Synode concluded.] So they leaue out that Christs bodie vvas in his graue vntill his resurrection, which are the wordes of the former Synode. Is the omitting of this a ma∣nifest renouncing and abrogating of it? God forbid [But the first Synode in king Edwardes time added farther, you saie, that Christs spirit vvas vvith the spirits detained in Prison or in

hel; and preached vnto them.] First then tell your abettor, that al the Realme wil take him not only for a Railor against al ho∣nesty, but for a lier against al duty, that voucheth so confidently king Edward the sixt and his subiects held that Christ his soule neuer vvent to Gehenna; & the realme knoweth the Q. othe; as also the Q. aduentureth her eternal state. These be no states to come within the compasse of his vncleane mouth: He may doe well to remember who they be, of whom it is written:* 1.689 They despise gouernment, & speak euil of those that are in authori∣tie, as raging vvaues of the Sea, foming out their owne shame; And to take héed, that he proue not too true a prophet against himselfe in paying the price of misusing his liege and Soue∣raigne Ladie, and her whole Realme. But I wish him re∣pentance and so I leaue him. Secondlie, (Sir Refuter) you maie see three thinges in the latter wordes of that Article in king Edwardes Synode, which are verie wiselie with si∣lence ouerskipped by the Synode in her Maiesties time; and wherein for my part I thinke they did verie well not to adde to this Article, anie time, purpose, or prisoners, when, why, or to whome Christ descended. But therein to imitate the wisedome of the best ages, who kept this Article as they founde it without enterlacing it with anie newe additions. For in the later wordes of that former Synode nowe left out are three thinges that cannot bee iustified by the Scriptures. 1. that the Spirits of the iust vvere in hell. 2. that Christ there preached vnto them. 3. that he staied there till his resurrecti∣on. These three pointes contained in the Article of that Sy∣node; were aduisedlie and profitablie suppressed by the Synode kept in her maiesties time; and these are the pointes which I my selfe impugne in this Treatise, as hauing no iust nor tolerable grounde in the Scriptures. But these thinges be∣ing drowned by omission, what is that to the rest of the article, which the later Synode imbraceth as a matter necessarie to be beleeued? for thus they resolue;* 1.690 As Christ died for vs & vvas bu∣ried; so also it is to be beleeued y^t HE VVENT DOVVN INTO HELL, And though you woulde weaken their resolution with a false translation, as your maner is, by making them saie, vve are to beleeeue that Christ vvent vnto the dead, yet may you gain no thing by that, for we haue publike assurance & allowance that

their words were and are IT IS TO BE BELEEVED THAT CHRIST VVENT DOVVNE INTO HELL. Their words in Latin were, you will say, Cre∣dendus est ad inferos descendisse? But the same Bishops & the same Clergie that were at the first Synode in the 5 of her Ma∣iesty, assembling again in the 13 yeare of her highnes raign, did themselues english it as I report it, and offered it to the Prince & Parliament in those words to be cōfirmed, which according∣ly that high Court did. So y^t now not these words, Christ de∣scended into HADES, though they be true as being the originall words, much lesse yours Christ went to the dead, but preciselie these, Christ went downe into hell, are the faith & doctrine which the Church & Realme of England professeth, or which the lawe establisheth; and what they meane, were it not for your addle quirckes, is soone perceaued euen of the simplest.

You conclude that the

* 1.691 publike sentence of our Church, yea the publike law of our land is against this opiniō of Christs descen∣ding into hell.

And I conclude likewise that which is in the bone will neuer out of the fl••sh; with arrogance and ignorance you began, and so you will end. If HELL in english be HELL, & GOING DOVVNE be DESCENDING, thē both the Church & the law of Eng∣land directly, expressely, precisely mayntayneth CHRISTS DE∣••CENDING INTO HELL, If HELL in english be HEAVEN; & GOING DOVVN be GOING VP, then the Church and lawe of England fauoureth your fansie. And hereof I am wel content thou shalt be Iudge (Christian Reader) that vnderstandest best thine owne toong. For the latine INFE••NVM and the Gréeke HADES I am content to be tried by all Fathers, Greeke & Latine that euer wrate in the Church of Christ. If these men cānot keepe their quarter cléere nor vpholde their conceite, but they must exclude all Greeke, Latine, and English diuines since Christs time from vnderstanding euerie man his owne naturall toong; I will see their braines better settled, and their mouthes b••tter tem∣pred, before their philosophicall follies and Rabbinicall fancies the one sorte being strangers, the other enimies to the faith of Christ, shall draw mee from my Creede. And so I wish thee (Christian Reader) as my selfe, mercie and grace from the Lord Iesus, and commit thee to God.

FINIS.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Pag ••••
• b 1.2

  pag ••8••
• c 1.3

  Pag. 89.
• a 1.4

  Galat 6.
• b 1.5

  Pag 31.
• * 1.6

  Vide pag. 4.
• d 1.7

  Pag. ••••.
• e 1.8

  2. Cor. 17. vers 30.
• f 1.9

  Iacob. 1. ver. 2.
• g 1.10

  2. Cor. 11.
• h 1.11

  Luke. 10.
• i 1.12

  1. Cor.
• * 1.13

  Gala. 6. v••. 12
• * 1.14

  Gal. 5. ver. ••1.
• * 1.15

  T••act in Io∣••••. ••••.
• a 1.16

  Chry••o••••. •••• Galat•• ••
• a 1.17

  Chry••o••••. •••• Galat•• ••
• b 1.18

  Ierom in Galat. 6
• c 1.19

  Beda. in Galat. 6
• d 1.20

  Vide pag ••
• d 1.21

  Vide pag ••
• d 1.22

  Vide pag ••
• e 1.23

  Page ••••
• * 1.24

  〈…〉〈…〉
• g 1.25

  Homili. 69 In Iohannem.
• h 1.26

  Luke. 12.
• i 1.27

  Vide pag. 19
• k 1.28

  Vide pag. 34
• l 1.29

  Pag 66
• m 1.30

  Pag. 67
• n 1.31

  Pag 68.
• o 1.32

  Pag. 68.
• p 1.33

  Pag. 69.
• q 1.34

  Pag. 55.
• * 1.35

  Vide page. 18
• r 1.36

  Page. 11.
• s 1.37

  Page. 12.
• s 1.38

  Pag. 14.
• t 1.39

  pag. ••1.52
• f 1.40

  Page. 12:
• g 1.41

  Leuit. 16 vers. 5.
• h 1.42

  In Leuit. lib. ••
• i 1.43

  Lib. 1. epist▪ 4.
• k 1.44

  In Leuit. ca. 1▪
• l 1.45

  Leuit. 7. ver. 2.
• m 1.46

  pag. 11
• n 1.47

  Gen. 8. Exod. 29. Leuit. ••.
• o 1.48

  August. in. psal. 50.
• p 1.49

  August. in psal. 65.
• q 1.50

  Idem. in psal. 49.
• q 1.51

  Chysost. in Mat. homil. 83.
• r 1.52

  In Psal. 77.
• s 1.53

  Ambros. de sacramentis. lib. 6. cap 1.
• t 1.54

  Pag. 14.
• t 1.55

  1. Cor. 10.
• u 1.56

  Iohn. 19.
• x 1.57

  Luke. 24.
• y 1.58

  1. Cor. 11.
• z 1.59

  Pag. 10.
• a 1.60

  Psal. 143. ve. 3.
• b 1.61

  Iob. 19. ver. 2.
• c 1.62

  Ier. 44. ver. 10.
• d 1.63

  1. Pet. 1.
• e 1.64

  Reuel. 5.
• f 1.65

  Pag. 23.
• g 1.66

  Pag. 1.
• h 1.67

  Pag. 33.
• i 1.68

  Pag. 37.
• k 1.69

  In cap. ••. •••• Rom.
• l 1.70

  Greg. moral. lib. 20. cap. 24
• m 1.71

  August. de ciuitate dei. li•••• 15. cap. 25
• n 1.72

  August. in Psal. 78.
• o 1.73

  Pag: 4
• p 1.74

  Pag: 5.
• i 1.75

  Pag. ••••
• * 1.76

  Pag. 16.
• * 1.77

  Pag. 17.
• q 1.78

  Pag. 18.
• m 1.79

  August. d•• ciuitate dei. lib. 21. cap. 3••
• s 1.80

  Idem de ciui∣tate dei. lib. 14. cap. 15
• t 1.81

  Pag. 19.
• * 1.82

  Vide page. 104
• u 1.83

  In Apologia Dauid. ca. 11.
• x 1.84

  Iohn 6.
• y 1.85

  Gene. 2.
• z 1.86

  Hebrue•• 9.
• * 1.87

  Vide page 79.
• * 1.88

  Pag. 18.
• z 1.89

  Cyprian in prolog de na∣tiuitate Christi
• a 1.90

  Hier. contra Iouin. lib. 2
• b 1.91

  Tertullian. de resurrect. car••nis••
• c 1.92

  Ibidem.
• d 1.93

  Matth. 15.
• * 1.94

  Ibidem de re∣••urrect. carnis.
• f 1.95

  Chrysost. in Genes. homil. 33.
• g 1.96

  Chrysost. i•• Mat. homil. 24
• * 1.97

  Cyrill. the∣sauri. lib. 10. ca. 3.
• m 1.98

  Idem de rec∣ta side ad regi∣nas lib 2 de sacerdotio Christi.
• n 1.99

  Ibidem
• o 1.100

  Athanas. con∣tra Arrianos. serm•• 4.
• o 1.101

  Athanas. con∣tra Arrianos. serm•• 4.
• p 1.102

  Hilarius de Trinitate lib: 10:
• k 1.103

  Pag. 34.
• l 1.104

  1 Cor. 15.
• m 1.105

  Phil. 2.
• n 1.106

  Esai. 53.
• o 1.107

  1 Timot ••
• p 1.108

  Pag. 3••
• * 1.109

  Page .35.
• p 1.110

  Genes, 3
• q 1.111

  Deutero. 2••
• r 1.112

  Matth. 25
• s 1.113

  Rom. 5▪
• t 1.114

  Deut. 28
• u 1.115

  verse 20.3••▪
• x 1.116

  33.
• y 1.117

  48.
• y 1.118

  48.
• z 1.119

  65▪
• a 1.120

  Galat. 3
• b 1.121

  Pag. 40.
• c 1.122

  Pag 37.
• d 1.123

  Pag. 36.
• e 1.124

  Iohn. ••.
• e 1.125

  Iohn. ••.
• f 1.126

  Pag: 35:
• g 1.127

  Pag. 38.
• h 1.128

  Deut. 28. vers 20.
• i 1.129

  & ver. 37.
• k 1.130

  Esay. 53.
• l 1.131

  Psal. 22▪
• m 1.132

  Heb. ••2.
• n 1.133

  Daniel. ••▪
• o 1.134

  Matt. 5.
• p 1.135

  Pag. 45.
• q 1.136

  Pag 44 Vide pag. 92
• r 1.137

  Rom 5.
• s 1.138

  1. Cor. 15
• t 1.139

  Rom 8.
• u 1.140

  August. de ciuitate dei. lib. 13. cap. 5.
• * 1.141

  August. contra Faustum. lib. 14. cap 3.
• y 1.142

  Prosper in sentent. ex August. 〈…〉〈…〉
• z 1.143

  August. de ciuitate dei lib. 13. cap. 4▪
• * 1.144

  Ibidem.
• y 1.145

  Ibidem cap. 5
• z 1.146

  Chrysost. in gen. Homil. 29.
• a 1.147

  August. de ciuitate dei. lib. 10. cap. 24.
• b 1.148

  Pag. 38.
• c 1.149

  Pag. 39.
• d 1.150

  Chrysost. in demonstrat. quod Christus sit deu••. tom. 5.
• e 1.151

  Idem in epist. ad philip. ••er. 7▪
• f 1.152

  Ibidem.
• g 1.153

  Phil. 2.
• h 1.154

  Pag. 39.
• i 1.155

  1. Pet. 3.
• k 1.156

  Pag▪ 39
• l 1.157

  Pag. 42.
• m 1.158

  Ibidem.
• n 1.159

  Pag. 35.
• o 1.160

  Pag. 40
• p 1.161

  Galat ••
• q 1.162

  Galat. 3
• r 1.163

  Rom. 13.
• * 1.164

  Deuter. 21
• * 1.165

  Chrysost. in ca. 3. ad Galat.
• u 1.166

  Ezech. 18
• x 1.167

  Iohn 3.
• y 1.168

  Galat. 2
• z 1.169

  Greg. mora•• lib. 20. cap. 2••▪
• a 1.170

  August. de Trinitate lib. 13. cap. 10
• b 1.171

  Ambros. de fide resurrec••.
• c 1.172

  Pag. 4••.
• d 1.173

  Hebre. 7
• d 1.174

  Hebre. 7
• * 1.175

  2. Cor. 5
• f 1.176

  Aug. de ver∣bis do. secund. Iohan. serm. 48
• g 1.177

  Idem de ver∣bis Apostoli. serm. 7.
• h 1.178

  Ambros in 2. Corinth. ca. 5
• i 1.179

  Heb. ••
• k 1.180

  August. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Faus••um. lib. 1•• cap. 4
• l 1.181

  Cyprian d•• passion•• Chri∣sti.
• m 1.182

  Bernard in canti••. serm 2••
• n 1.183

  Ephe••••
• o 1.184

  Rom. 5.
• * 1.185

  Ephes. 5.
• q 1.186

  Pag 45.
• r 1.187

  Iames. ••
• s 1.188

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2.
• t 1.189

  P••••. 2.
• u 1.190

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 3.
• x 1.191

  Philip ••.
• y 1.192

  Gen 49.
• z 1.193

  Acts. 10.
• a 1.194

  Iohn. 14
• b 1.195

  Matt. 8.
• c 1.196

  Luke 8
• c 1.197

  Pag. 45
• d 1.198

  Pag. 46.
• e 1.199

  Pag. 47
• f 1.200

  Pa. 48. & 49
• g 1.201

  Pag. 46.
• i 1.202

  Pag. 47.
• k 1.203

  Heb. ••.
• l 1.204

  Heb. 2. ver•• ••7
• m 1.205

  Heb. ••.
• n 1.206

  Pag. 48.
• o 1.207

  Pag. 83
• p 1.208

  Pag. 45.
• q 1.209

  Pag. 53.
• r 1.210

  Mark. 14.
• s 1.211

  Math. 26.
• t 1.212

  Ierom. i•• Matth. ca. 26••
• * 1.213

  Vide pag. 17
• u 1.214

  Pag. 80
• x 1.215

  Pag. 81.
• y 1.216

  Pag. 77.
• z 1.217

  Hebre. 10
• a 1.218

  1. Iohn. 4
• b 1.219

  Rom. 12.
• c 1.220

  Philip. 2
• d 1.221

  Hebre. 1••
• e 1.222

  Psal. 119.
• f 1.223

  1 Cor. 2
• g 1.224

  Page 61.
• h 1.225

  Pag. 73.
• i 1.226

  Matth. 26.
• k 1.227

  Page .57
• l 1.228

  Pag. 71.
• m 1.229

  Pag. 73
• n 1.230

  Pag 48.
• o 1.231

  Pag. 50
• p 1.232

  Pag. 59.
• q 1.233

  Lucae. 9
• r 1.234

  Pag. 59
• s 1.235

  Lucae. 22.
• t 1.236

  Mat. 26.
• t 1.237

  Mat. 26.
• u 1.238

  Mark. 14.
• x 1.239

  Iohn. 1••
• y 1.240

  Chrysost. in Ioan. Homil. 66
• * 1.241

  Epiphan. lib. 2 Haerel 69.
• z 1.242

  Hebre. 5.
• * 1.243

  Pag. 54.
• a 1.244

  Page .57.
• b 1.245

  Hebre. 5
• c 1.246

  Pag. 74.
• d 1.247

  Ibidem.
• * 1.248

  Vide Pag. 29.
• e 1.249

  Cicero•• Tus∣cul. qu••est. lib. 4
• f 1.250

  Lactant•• de vero cultu. li. 6. ca. 14
• g 1.251

  Ambros. de Iacob et beata vita li 1. ca 2.
• h 1.252

  Gregor. mo∣ral. li. 9. cap. 39.
• i 1.253

  Pag. 74.
• k 1.254

  Pag. 5••.
• l 1.255

  Pag. 63.
• m 1.256

  Lucae. ••••••
• n 1.257

  Act: 10••
• o 1.258

  1 Cor: 14
• p 1.259

  Eccles•• 3••
• q 1.260

  Iob•• 22:
• r 1.261

  Psal. 55
• s 1.262

  Esa. 59.
• t 1.263

  Pag. 74.
• u 1.264

  Pag 74.
• * 1.265

  Plutarch. de virtute moral.
• y 1.266

  Euripid. in Phaeniss.
• * 1.267

  Acts. 23.
• a 1.268

  Heb. 11.
• a 1.269

  Vide pag. 17
• b 1.270

  Heb. 2.
• c 1.271

  Pag. 77
• d 1.272

  Pag. 75.
• e 1.273

  Pag. 7••
• f 1.274

  Pag. 77.
• g 1.275

  Pag. 78.
• h 1.276

  Pag. 75.
• i 1.277

  August. serm. ••29.
• k 1.278

  August. de ciuitate dei. lib. 13. cap. ••.
• * 1.279

  Vide pag. 73.
• l 1.280

  August. in Io∣han. tract. 47.
• m 1.281

  August. de verbis Apost. serm. 30.
• n 1.282

  August. in Io∣han. tract. 19.
• o 1.283

  Iohn. 1.
• p 1.284

  Iohn. 6.
• q 1.285

  Iohn. 5.
• r 1.286

  Iohn. 7.
• s 1.287

  Rom. ••.
• t 1.288

  Iohn 6.
• u 1.289

  Iohn 15
• x 1.290

  Galat. 3.
• y 1.291

  1. Iohn 4.
• z 1.292

  1. Iohn. 5.
• a 1.293

  Colos. 3.
• b 1.294

  Reuel. 22.
• c 1.295

  August in psa. 43.
• d 1.296

  Idem in Io∣han. tract. 43
• e 1.297

  Idē epist. 99
• f 1.298

  Aug. epist. 99
• g 1.299

  Pag. 77.
• h 1.300

  Pag. 42
• i 1.301

  Ambros. de fide resurrect.
• k 1.302

  Ibidem.
• l 1.303

  Ibidem▪
• m 1.304

  Iohn. 14
• n 1.305

  Iohn. ••••
• o 1.306

  Rom. ••••
• p 1.307

  Lucae. 16.
• q 1.308

  Psal. 7••
• r 1.309

  Rom. 9
• s 1.310

  Rom. 2
• t 1.311

  1. Thessa. 5
• u 1.312

  Ephes. 2
• x 1.313

  ••age .68.
• y 1.314

  Pag. 77.
• z 1.315

  Pag. 73.
• a 1.316

  Pag. 53.
• b 1.317

  Pag. 45.
• c 1.318

  Pag. 80.
• d 1.319

  Pag. 81.
• e 1.320

  2. Corin. 7
• f 1.321

  Pag. 45 in margine.
• g 1.322

  1 Corin, 15.
• h 1.323

  1. Cor. 1
• i 1.324

  1. Cor. ••.
• k 1.325

  Sapient. 1.
• l 1.326

  Sapi. 2.
• m 1.327

  Esa. 38
• n 1.328

  1. Corin. 15.
• o 1.329

  August. de pec••. merit. & remiss. li 2•• c. 32
• p 1.330

  Ambros. in, Hebre. ca. ••
• q 1.331

  Chrysost. in Hebre. ca. ••
• r 1.332

  Cyril de recta fide. lib. 1. ex Hebr. ca. 2
• s 1.333

  Idem de recta fide lib. 2.
• t 1.334

  Fulgent de incarnat. & gra••. christi. c. ••
• * 1.335

  Rom. 5.
• y 1.336

  Hebre. 2.
• y 1.337

  1. Peter. 4
• z 1.338

  1. Peter. 3.
• a 1.339

  1. Peter. 3.
• b 1.340

  Pag. 79
• c 1.341

  Pag. 78
• d 1.342

  Pag. 79
• e 1.343

  Matth. 26.
• f 1.344

  Lucae. 24
• g 1.345

  Rom. 1.
• h 1.346

  Rom. ••
• i 1.347

  1. Pet. 3
• k 1.348

  2. Corin•• 13
• l 1.349

  Actes. 2.
• m 1.350

  Acts, 3.
• n 1.351

  Acts ••
• o 1.352

  Matt. 10
• o 1.353

  1. Pet. 3. ver. 18.
• p 1.354

  Aug. epist. 99
• q 1.355

  Page. 78 linea. 25.
• r 1.356

  Pag. 1.
• s 1.357

  Pag. 3
• t 1.358

  Pag. 54.
• u 1.359

  Pag. 81.
• x 1.360

  Pag. 68
• y 1.361

  Aug. epist. 99
• * 1.362

  Esai. 53.
• a 1.363

  August. tract. 47. in Iohan.
• b 1.364

  1 Pet. 2••
• c 1.365

  2 Cor. 4
• d 1.366

  Ibid. vers. 16
• e 1.367

  Colos. ••.
• f 1.368

  Pag. 7.
• g 1.369

  Pag. 77
• h 1.370

  pag. 46.
• i 1.371

  pag 57
• k 1.372

  pag 64
• l 1.373

  Pag. 49.
• m 1.374

  Pag. 70
• n 1.375

  Pag 80.
• o 1.376

  Pag. 81
• p 1.377

  Rom. 5••
• q 1.378

  Col. 5••
• r 1.379

  1. Pet. ••.
• s 1.380

  Mat. 26.
• t 1.381

  1. Pet 2.
• u 1.382

  1. Pet. 3.
• x 1.383

  Iohn. 1.
• z 1.384

  Athanasius de incarnat. verbi dei.
• z 1.385

  Epipha. hae∣res. 69.
• a 1.386

  Ambros. in Lucam. lib. 4 de duct. Chri∣sti in deseru••m
• a 1.387

  ••dé de incarn. sacrament. ca. 5
• b 1.388

  August. de verbis domini secundum lo∣han ••erm 42.
• c 1.389

  August. in psal 148.
• d 1.390

  Idem in ps. 70
• e 1.391

  Cyril epist. 8 ad Nestorium.
• f 1.392

  Synodi. Alex∣and. anathe∣matismus. 12.
• g 1.393

  Epistola Sy∣nodi Alex∣andrinae ad Nestorium in∣ter Cyril. epist. 10.
• h 1.394

  Ephesin. con∣cil 11. Se••l. 1.
• i 1.395

  Concil. Chal∣cedon. act. 1.
• k 1.396

  Interrogatio & respō. in cō∣cil. Ephesino propositae.
• l 1.397

  Pag. 80.
• m 1.398

  Pag. 81
• n 1.399

  Page .77.
• o 1.400

  Pag. 8••.
• p 1.401

  Luke 10
• q 1.402

  Rom. 5
• r 1.403

  Rom 8.
• s 1.404

  2. Cor. 5
• t 1.405

  1. Iohn. 5
• u 1.406

  Colos 5
• * 1.407

  Hebre. 11.
• y 1.408

  Pag. 71.
• * 1.409

  Hebre. 12.
• a 1.410

  Pag: 68.
• b 1.411

  Hebre. 11.
• c 1.412

  Psal. 51.
• d 1.413

  Pag. 81.
• c 1.414

  Pag. 80.
• f 1.415

  Pag. 28.
• g 1.416

  Pag. 34
• h 1.417

  pag. 37.
• i 1.418

  pag. 2
• k 1.419

  pag. 48
• l 1.420

  Pag. 73.
• m 1.421

  Pag. 40.
• n 1.422

  Pag 77.
• n 1.423

  Pag 77.
• o 1.424

  Pag 81.
• p 1.425

  Deutero. 32
• q 1.426

  Esa. 66
• r 1.427

  Mark. 9.
• s 1.428

  Hebre. ••0
• t 1.429

  Iudae. epist.
• u 1.430

  Apoc. 21.
• x 1.431

  Matt. 25
• y 1.432

  2. Thessa. 1
• * 1.433

  2. Pet. 3
• * 1.434

  August. de grat. & lib. ar∣bitr. cap. 3
• b 1.435

  Hierony. in 2 Thessa. ca. 1
• * 1.436

  Ambros. in, 2. Thessa. ca. 1
• d 1.437

  Chrysost. in 2. Thessa. ca 1
• e 1.438

  August. de ciuitate dei. lib. 21. cap. 9
• f 1.439

  2. Corin ••1.
• g 1.440

  Prouerb. 25
• * 1.441

  Ecc••esiast. 7
• i 1.442

  Idem de ci∣uitate dei lib. 21. cap. 10
• k 1.443

  Matth. 25.
• l 1.444

  Greg moral li. 15 cap. 17.
• m 1.445

  Idem. dia∣log. lib. 4.
• n 1.446

  Tertul. in apologetico versus sinem.
• o 1.447

  Lactant de diuino p••ae∣•••••••• li. 7. ca. 21.
• p 1.448

  Cyprian. ad Demetrianū.
• q 1.449

  Idem de lau∣••e martyrij.
• r 1.450

  Idem de as¦censione ch••••∣sti.
• s 1.451

  Chrysost. in hebre ca. 1. homilia. 1.
• t 1.452

  Minutius Felix in Octa¦uio.
• u 1.453

  Pacianus in paraenesi ad poenitentiam.
• x 1.454

  Lactantius lib. 7. ca. 20.
• x 1.455

  Eusebius de vita Constant.
• x 1.456

  August. de ciuitate Dei li. 18. ca. 23.
• y 1.457

  Greg. in E∣zechiel ho∣mil. 2.
• z 1.458

  Idem moral. li. 9 ca. 39.
• a 1.459

  De ascensi∣one Christi.
• a 1.460

  Hierony in Esa. ca. 53.
• b 1.461

  Pag 68.
• c 1.462

  Cyprian de passione chri∣sti.
• d 1.463

  August. in Psal. 21.
• e 1.464

  Cyprian. Ibidem.
• f 1.465

  Pag. 67.
• * 1.466

  In Lucae. ca. 23. de com∣mendatione spiritus.
• g 1.467

  Ambros. ibidem.
• h 1.468

  Hebre. 10.
• i 1.469

  Ambros. in Hebre. ca. 10.
• k 1.470

  Ibidem.
• l 1.471

  Athanas. de incarnatione verbi Dei.
• m 1.472

  Epistola Sy∣nodi Alexan∣drinae ad Ne∣storium.
• n 1.473

  Tertullian contra Praxe∣am.
• p 1.474

  Tertullian aduersus Praxeam in eodem loco.
• q 1.475

  Cyril de reo∣ta fide ad The∣odo••ium.
• r 1.476

  Pag. 87.
• s 1.477

  Pag. 89.
• s 1.478

  Pag. 58
• t 1.479

  Pag 51
• u 1.480

  Ambros in Lucae ca, 22 de Tristitia Christi.
• x 1.481

  Aug. tractat. in Iohan. 36.
• y 1.482

  Bernard. de passione Chri∣sti. cap. 5
• z 1.483

  Pag. 64.
• a 1.484

  Pag. 54.
• * 1.485

  Pag. 156.
• b 1.486

  Philip. 2.
• * 1.487

  Coloss. 2.
• c 1.488

  Pag. 156.
• d 1.489

  Pag. 159.
• e 1.490

  pag. 156.
• f 1.491

  Ephes. 4.
• g 1.492

  Pag. 163
• h 1.493

  Pag. 164.
• i 1.494

  Reuel. 1.
• k 1.495

  Reuel. 20.
• l 1.496

  Philip. 2.
• m 1.497

  Pag 148.
• n 1.498

  Page .150.
• o 1.499

  Pag. 152.
• p 1.500

  Luke 8
• q 1.501

  Psal. ••6.
• r 1.502

  Psal. 31.
• s 1.503

  Esai. 6••.
• t 1.504

  Iere. 22.
• u 1.505

  1. Cor. 15.
• x 1.506

  Ephes. 5.
• y 1.507

  Mat. 25. Acts 9.
• a 1.508

  Pag. 156.
• y 1.509

  Epist. 9••.
• z 1.510

  Athanas. in Symbolo.
• a 1.511

  Psal. 16.
• b 1.512

  Act. 2.
• d 1.513

  Pag. 96.
• e 1.514

  Pag. 97.
• a 1.515

  Acts. 1,
• b 1.516

  Acts, 8.
• * 1.517

  Pag 97.
• * 1.518

  1. Corinth. 4
• * 1.519

  Apud Athen.
• * 1.520

  Plutarch. de primo frigido.
• * 1.521

  Homer Iliad. 15.
• b 1.522

  Iliad. 5.
• c 1.523

  Hesiod. in Theogonia,
• * 1.524

  Ibidem.
• d 1.525

  Plato in Gorgia.
• e 1.526

  Plutarch. de consolatione ad Appolloni∣um ad finem.
• f 1.527

  Aristophanes, in ranis
• g 1.528

  Euripides in Hercule fu∣rente.
• f 1.529

  Tertul•• de anima.
• g 1.530

  Aristopha in Ranis.
• h 1.531

  Eurip. in Hecuba.
• i 1.532

  Apud Plu∣tarch de con∣solatione ad Apollonium.
• k 1.533

  Euripid: in Hercule furēte
• l 1.534

  Ibidem.
• m 1.535

  Sophocles in Aiace flagel∣lifero.
• n 1.536

  Sophocles in Trachin••••s.
• o 1.537

  Simonides in vitā humanam
• p 1.538

  Orpheus de•• deo.
• k 1.539

  Lucianus de luctu
• l 1.540

  Plato in Cratylo.
• m 1.541

  Plutarch de primo ••rigido.
• n 1.542

  Plutarch de occulte viuēdo
• o 1.543

  Plato in Cratylo.
• p 1.544

  Iliad. 22
• o 1.545

  In dialog. Acaci & Me••nippi.
• p 1.546

  Plato in Phe∣done.
• * 1.547

  Pag. 9••.
• q 1.548

  Plato in Phae¦done.
• r 1.549

  Ibidem.
• * 1.550

  In Cratylo.
• s 1.551

  Citatur ab Eusebio de preparat. e∣uangelica lib. 4. cap. 12.
• t 1.552

  Plato in Phaedone cir∣ca finem.
• a 1.553

  Odiss. 11.
• b 1.554

  Iliad. 8.
• c 1.555

  Odiss. 11.
• d 1.556

  Ibid.
• e 1.557

  Ibid.
• f 1.558

  Ibid.
• g 1.559

  Odiss 11.
• * 1.560

  Hesiod. in theogonia.
• * 1.561

  Virgil. li 6.
• h 1.562

  Pag. 67.
• i 1.563

  Aeneidos 6.
• k 1.564

  Pag. 101.
• l 1.565

  Aeneidos 6.
• * 1.566

  Aeneidos 6.
• * 1.567

  Aeneidos ••.
• * 1.568

  Aeneidos 6:
• * 1.569

  Aeneidos 16.
• * 1.570

  Aeneidos 4.
• n 1.571

  Plato in Phaedone.
• * 1.572

  Pag. 9••.
• p 1.573

  Plato in Phaedone.
• q 1.574

  Ibid.
• r 1.575

  Pag. 107.
• s 1.576

  Pag. 108.
• t 1.577

  Tuscula. quaest li. 1.
• u 1.578

  Philippica. 14
• x 1.579

  Pro Clu∣entio.
• y 1.580

  Oratio in Caulin 4.
• z 1.581

  Pag. 106.
• a 1.582

  Tuscula. quaest. lib. 1. ad sinem.
• * 1.583

  Ibidem.
• * 1.584

  Ibidem.
• b 1.585

  Pag. 101.
• * 1.586

  in Ose: ca. 13.
• c 1.587

  Pag. 96.
• d 1.588

  in Ose•• ca: 13
• * 1.589

  Hiero. in epi∣taph Nepot. ad Heliodorum.
• e 1.590

  In Amos. ca. 9
• f 1.591

  In Ecclesiast. cap. 9.
• * 1.592

  Vide pag. 189 et sequent.
• g 1.593

  Rom. 8.
• h 1.594

  Ephes. 1
• i 1.595

  Matth. 12.
• k 1.596

  Pag. 97.
• l 1.597

  Genes. 42.
• m 1.598

  3. Reg. 2
• n 1.599

  Numb. 16
• o 1.600

  Psal. 49.
• p 1.601

  Psal. 86.
• q 1.602

  Esa. 14.
• r 1.603

  Iob. 11.
• s 1.604

  Psal. 139
• t 1.605

  Amos. 9
• u 1.606

  Esa. 14.
• x 1.607

  Psal. 115.
• y 1.608

  Esa. 38.
• z 1.609

  Ecclesiast. 9
• * 1.610

  Vide pag. 147.
• * 1.611

  Vide pag. 147
• u 1.612

  Vide pag. 171
• x 1.613

  Matt. 1••
• y 1.614

  Lucae. 10
• z 1.615

  Iudae. epist.
• a 1.616

  Matth. 16
• b 1.617

  Hiero. in Matth. 16
• c 1.618

  Hilarius. in Mat. cano▪ 16
• d 1.619

  Origenes in Matth. ca. 16.
• e 1.620

  Beda in Mat. 16.
• f 1.621

  Ambros lib 6. in Lucae ca 8.
• g 1.622

  Greg. in. Psal. 5 paenitentialē
• h 1.623

  Synod. 5. con∣stantinop. Ses∣sione. 8.
• i 1.624

  Pag. 111.
• k 1.625

  Pag. 113.
• l 1.626

  Lucae. 16.
• m 1.627

  Reuelat. 6
• n 1.628

  Pag. 116
• m 1.629

  Apoca. 9.
• * 1.630

  Apoca. 6. vers 9.
• n 1.631

  Iob. 1 Iob. 2
• o 1.632

  Math. 22.
• p 1.633

  Rom: 9.
• q 1.634

  Apoca. 12
• * 1.635

  Apoca. 20.
• r 1.636

  Pag. 116.
• s 1.637

  Math. 11.
• t 1.638

  Math. 23.
• v 1.639

  Andreas. Caes. in Apoca. ca. 20.
• x 1.640

  Beda in apoca. ca 20.
• y 1.641

  Colos. 2.
• z 1.642

  Reuelat. 3.
• a 1.643

  Reuelat: 3.
• b 1.644

  Math. 16
• c 1.645

  Reuelat: 20.
• d 1.646

  Reuelat: 1
• e 1.647

  1 Corinth 15
• f 1.648

  Pag. 117.
• a 1.649

  Vide Pa. 171.
• g 1.650

  Pag. 126.
• * 1.651

  Pag. 125.
• i 1.652

  Pag: 128:
• k 1.653

  Pag: 126
• * 1.654

  Vide pag. 170 & sequent.
• l 1.655

  Psal. 16.
• m 1.656

  Act. 2.
• * 1.657

  Luke. 10.
• o 1.658

  Cyprian. de passio Christ.
• p 1.659

  Arnobius in psal. 1••7.
• q 1.660

  Lactan. phoe¦nix de resur∣rect.
• r 1.661

  Athanas. ad Liberium.
• s 1.662

  Hilarius de trinitat. lib. 4.
• * 1.663

  Basil•• in psa. 44
• u 1.664

  Nazianzen. in christo pa∣tiente.
• * 1.665

  Fulgentius ad Thrasimun∣dum. lib. 3.
• y 1.666

  Beda in Psal. 15.
• * 1.667

  Vide pag. ••89. & sequent.
• * 1.668

  Pag. 93.
• * 1.669

  Pag. 166.
• b 1.670

  Pag. 167.
• * 1.671

  Pag. 93.
• a 1.672

  Igna••ad Trall••
• b 1.673

  Iren. li 5. c. 31
• c 1.674

  Iustin. in dia∣lo. cum tryph.
• d 1.675

  Tertul. de anima••
• e 1.676

  Orig•• in cap. 5•• ep. ad Rom
• f 1.677

  Aug. epi. 99.
• d 1.678

  Epist. Cyril. & Synod. Alex∣an. ad Nestor:
• e 1.679

  Vide acta cō∣cilii Ephesini &. 5. Synod. Constan. Ses. 7.
• e 1.680

  Vide acta cō∣cilii Ephesini &. 5. Synod. Constan. Ses. 7.
• f 1.681

  Pag. 166.
• g 1.682

  Philip. 2,
• h 1.683

  Mat. 12. Luke. 11.
• i 1.684

  Pag. 161.
• k 1.685

  Pag. 171
• * 1.686

  Pag. 172
• * 1.687

  Articlu. 3
• * 1.688

  Pag. 172.
• * 1.689

  Iudae epistola••
• * 1.690

  Articul. 3
• * 1.691

  Page 173