Defense of a Treatise Touching the Suffering and Victory of Christ, Part 1 (1 of 4)

Defense of a Treatise Touching the Suffering and Victory of Christ · Part 1 (1 of 4)

p. 7The Defence of the Treatiſe of Chriſtes ſufferings againſt Maiſter Bilſons Concluſion.

HIs Concluſion (for ſo he thinketh good to call it) beginneth againſt me in his page 225. Wherein firſt he doeth change me in generall termes that I flee from the ſtate of the Chiefe question, and overskip his Authorities, The like ſaith in E… pag. 9.in his reaſons I forget and diſſemble what pleaſeth my ſelf, in the defence of my holy cauſe (as it pleaſeth him to mocke) I roue as I liſt neither keeping any order, nor bringing any matter of moment, cōfuſedly powring out the haſty reſolutions of mine own braines ſpiced eueryevery where with ignorant & abſurd poſitions, proudly deſpiſing all authority & antiquitie, &c. Al which words are but wind, as I ſhal make it evident (God willing) whē we com to view his particulars heerafter inſuing. Among w^ch he**Pag. … beginneh to iuſtifie that he miſtooke not his Text when hee preached this doctrine. But I wil ſpeak thereof anon, ſo that firſt I ſatisfie him in the moſt principal point of his challēge againſt me. Which is this,““Epiſ…. that I hauehave changed the firſt queſtiō, that I ſet not down the ſtate therof fully nor truly: & ſo, I offer to prove that w^ch he never denied, I cōfute that which he never affirmed. Let vsus ther fore cōſider adviſedly this queſtiō: which I wil ſet downe again as exactly & as plainly as I can, that we may ſee how far I erred frō it before. We affirme That Chriſt in his Soul ſuffered all Gods proper Wrath and vengeance being paines and puniſhment for ſinne & no ſinne, alſo as touching the eſſence or nature thereof, The ſu… whole out 1.….and ſo farre as was due Generally for all mankinde to ſuffer. His contrary opinion we conceaue thus, That Christ ſuffered for our ſinnes nothing ells but ſimply and ““or … his Ho… fectiōs … tio andmeerely a Bodily death: altogither like as the godlie p. 8and holy men do often ſuffer at the handes of perſecutors, ſaving only that God accepted this death of his Sonne as a ranſom for ſinne, but the death of his ſervants be doth not.

The Opening of the whole ſta…e of this Question.

For the better vnderſtanding whereof, we muſt note theſe principall things.taine ſpe. I things to …oted. Firſt that All ſuffering of Paines in man is frō God: either properly from his Iuſtice, or from his Holy Love: either frō 1him alone, or alſo from his Inſtruments and inferior meanes. Againe, Al ſuffering of Paines is for Sinne either inherent, or imputed: either as Correction, or as Puniſhment: either immediatly, or 2mediatly: as anon we ſhall further ſee. Sec: By the Lawe of our Creation as we are men having a Soule beſides our Body, ſo our Soule hath in it a 3. fold faculty of Suffering Paines. Firſt, that which is Proper and immediat iuſtly ſo called:…ee kindes … So…es …ing of …. Proper, becauſe it is proper only to reaſonable and immortall Spirites: although in 1men (if it grow vehement) it affecteth cōſequently the Body alſo. Immediat 2. wayes: 1. becauſe it can & doth receave an impreſſion of ſorrow and Paines made from God only by and in it ſelfe, without any outward bodily meanes therevnto. 2. It is alſo an Immediat Puniſhment, or els Correction of ſinne: it cometh not for any other cauſe at all. So that thus we meane, when we ſpeake 2of the Soules Proper and Immediat Suffering. The Soules ſecond faculty of Suffering paines is not Proper, but Common to vsus with Beaſts: namely that which is by Sympathy & Communion with and from the Body. For which cauſe alſo it is not Immediat: ſith it commeth not to the Soule but by externall bodily meanes. A 3third kind of painful Suffering the Soule hath: namely, her vehemēt & ſtrong Affectiōs are Painful, whether they be good or evill. As Zeale, Love, Cōpaſſion, Pity, Care, &c. Neither are theſe immediatly for Sinne, whether Puniſhmentes or Corrections: but they com for and by other immediat cauſes,…tions no …at …or … Puniſh … 5. neither are they Puniſhments or Corrections at all Properly in them ſelves: Accidentally they may be, when they growe ſo ſtrong that they paine and grieve the Soule. Theſe 2. later kinds of the Soules Suffering you acknowledg to have ben in Chriſt: the 1. kinde " you vtterly deny.…g. 5. 6. 16 …. 253. … 255. 335 Now I affirme that Chriſt taſted alſo the 1^ſt kinde. For how could the Proper and principall Humane Suffering be not in him,…br. 2.10. a Man made of God to * Suffer for all our Sinnes? So this (in a maner) is y^e point of our Cōtroverſie. And verily how you can p. 9deny the ſame by the Scripture, yet acknowledging withall a true and perfit Humaine Soule in Chriſt, I cannot ſee. Namely ſeeing iuſt occaſion heereof was giuen him from God, as afterward ſhall further appeare. You**pa. 248. ſeeme to ſticke at thoſe termes which I vſe The Soules proper and immediat ſuffering, & you call them““pa. 257. 336. vnſalted and vnſetled. But any may ſee how eaſy they are to bee vnderſtood, and alſo that wee muſt in this quaeſtion neceſſarily thus diſtinguiſh the ſame from that which is by ſympathy, & is comon to vsus with other creatures. Thirdly wee muſt alſo note that God 3himſelfe is alwayes and evermore the principall and proper puniſher then when the Soule ſuffereth paines after the firſt maner, that is in her proper and immediat faculty of ſuffering. And that is alwayes immediatly for ſinne alſo, not for any other cauſe at all. Gods owne almighty power armed with iuſtice in burning wrath thus puniſheth ſinne ſomtime more ſomtime leſſe, when and how it pleaſeth him. Fourthly, God himſelf therfore was thus the principall 4and only proper Puniſher of Chriſt as hee ſuſtayned the puniſhment of our ſinnes. The Divells and wicked men his Perſecutours did their parts alſo indeed for other ends, but yet they were all as Inſtruments only, & vſed by God vntounto his owne end: namely that Chriſt might pay heereby a iuſt price and full ſatisfaction for our ſinnes. It was then the Almighty and moſt iuſt God himſelfe in his ſevere wrath againſt our ſin that principally & properly inflicted on Chriſt the paines and puniſhments which he as our Surety ſuffered for the paying of our Ranſom. As it is written,““Iſa 53.…Isa 53 The Lord laid vponupon him the puniſhment of vsus all. Whatſoever you have againſt this afterward, we ſhall conſider it in due place. Fiftly we meane not that in God was, is, or can be any††As you… ſerve w… pag. 24… perturbatiō 5at all, and therefore conſequently no Wrath nor Hatred as is in vsus. But becauſe Wee painfully afflict others with whom commonly wee are Angry, and we diſcerne ſomtime and ſee paines inflicted on men by God, therefore we ſay he ſheweth his anger and wrath vponupon them whom hee puniſheth. Nevertheles wee muſt note eſpecially that to ſuffer (as the Godly doe) Chaſtiſements and corrections, is not to ſuffer or feele Gods Wrath nor indeed the pumiſhment of ſinne: except it bee in a very vnproper ſpeach. To ſuffer the true puniſhment, ſatisfaction, proper payment, & wages of ſinne, only that is to ſuffer properly and truly the Wrath and p. 10Curſe of God. Now then ſeeing the paines which Chriſt for vsus did feele, were indeed properly the Puniſhment and Paiment and vengeance for ſinn, ſuch as the Godly do in no wiſe ſuffer, Chriſt only having wholly ſuffered that for vsus all: Therefore indeed his ſufferings proceeded from Gods proper wrath, and were the true effects of Gods meere Iuſtice bent to take recompence on him for out offences: the Godly never ſuffering any thing at all in ſuch reſpect. 6Sixt: Theſe paines which Chriſt ſuffered as the proper Puniſhment and Price of ſinne, and inflicted on him even by Gods own hand, did not make ſmart and anguiſh only in his fleſh, or onelyonly in the ſenſitive part of the Soule by mutuall coniuction & ſympathy with the body, but of neceſſity muſt alſo be deepely conceaved & felt in the vnderſtanding and Mind of Chriſt. Now how deepe this was, as we neither do nor can preciſely affirme, ſo we are well aſſured that the ſenſe of paine was not leſſened nor abated in Chriſt needleſly: Hee ſuffered doubtles according as ſinne deſerved in every point, except only in ſuch reſpects as were flatly impoſſible. 7For the better vnderſtanding whereof wee are heere to note another principalll diſtinction:…fering of …aines for ſin … fold. …or ſinne in…e…ent and …puted. that there are 3. divers and ſeverall ſortes of ſuffering paines directly for ſinne.

1. As the wicked and damned do: that is by ſuffering the proper wrath of God truly puniſhing in them (that is properly in their Soules aſwell as in their Bodies) their ſinnes, in whom togeather with their paines there is alſo inherent ſinne abiding and imputed, (the cauſe of all their puniſhments) with the the adiuncts and conſequents thereof, deſperation, induration, blaſpheming, reiection, malediction, hatred, and finall dereliction, with ſuch like. Theſe are certain proper and right conditions of the reprobat heere, & of the damned in Hell,…r ſinne in…ent but … imputed. which Chriſt never taſted.

2. The godly in this world do ſuffer paines for their ſinnes. But theſe whatſoever they be (yea though death it ſelfe) are improperly called Puniſhments, as was before noted,…ch. 12.5, … 7, 8, 9, 10, … they are * Chastiſements of ſinne. Yea they are partly remembrances to cauſe repentance of ſinne paſt & preſently inherent, partly Chastiſements to humble vsus, and to mortifie ſinne in vsus more and more hereafter. And thus they are in no ſort inflicted on vsus as very Curſes by Gods Wrath and Iuſtice (properly ſo called) but properly by Gods Holynes and Love: as after wee ſhall further ſee. Theſe are the ordinary wayes of ſuffering for p. 11ſinne, but nothing appertayning to Chriſt neither.

3.3 Suffering ſinne not haerent, yet impu… There is another peculiar and extraordinary way belonging onelyonly to Chriſt, according to which Chriſt ſuffered for ſinne: diſtinct and greatly differing from both the former, and yet in ſome ſpeciall points agreeing with both. 1. Chriſt ſuffered for ſinne being ſinles indeed,How Ch…ſt ſufferings thoſe of th… Godly d… gree. Ho… they diffe… as the Godly alſo are ſinles““Rom. 4.Rom 4 by imputation. Againe their ſufferings are temporary, and in this life only: ſuch alſo were his. But Chriſtes ſufferings were exceeding much differing from ours, 1 in that his ſufferings were for our ſinnes now made his by Gods accoumpt, and ours are for our owne. Alſo, his were the true and proper Puniſhment or iuſt vengeance of God for ſinne, ours onelyonly Chastiſements and remembrances, which belonged nothing at all to him. His, the true effects of Gods ſevere and iuſt Wrath properly taken, ours are from his iuſtice & wrath improperly ſo called.

Touching the Reprobats and damned,How the ſuf… rings of Ch… and of th… Damned … differ.

1. their ſufferings are for ſinnes inhaerent, Chriſtes were for ſinnes only imputed: So that Gods Anger was not againſt Chriſtes owne perſon, but againſt the ſinnes which by his office in his own perſon he ſuſtayned, the ſorrow and paines whereof touched his very perſon.

2. Their puniſhments are partly in this life, and partly eternall in the life to come: but Chriſtes were temporary and only in this life.

3. Their ſinne being inherent not forgiuen and iuſtly puniſhed, they hauehave all the properties and Concomitants of ſinne inherent, never forgiuen, but in wrapped in eternall puniſhments: as theſe, Deſperation, the ſtinge of Conſcience, Induration, Reiection, Malediction, Dereliction, &c. But in Chriſt, where no ſinne was inhaerent nor eternally puniſhed, there could vtterly be none of theſe.

4. They are pumiſhed heere, & chiefly in Hell the proper place of the damned heereafter:: but Chriſt ſuffered onelyonly heere in this life.

Laſtly their tormēts though euerlaſting deſerue nothing at Gods hands. but Chriſt though ſuffering but for a while, deſerued infinitly favour and grace for them for whom he ſuffered. Howbeit as I ſaid the ſufferings of the damned are all one with Chriſtes,How the ſu… rings of Ch… and of th… Damned … the ſame as touching the Nature of the puniſhments and as touching the chiefeſt cauſes thereof. Firſt God himſelfe was the proper and principall Ordayner, Author and Executor of his puniſhment, Gods owne hand did it to Chriſt: no leſſe then to the damned. Sec: Chriſt having moſt horrible ſinnes imputed to him as the damned hauehave p. 12alſo, therefore he ſuffered for them from Gods hand euen as the damned do: namely in theſe points, which are both poſſible and reaſonable, that is, paines inflicted immediatly and properly in the Soule, and not only by outward meanes in the Body. For it is moſt reaſonable and poſſible that the Soule of Chriſt ſhould hauehave our ſinne imputed to it, yea principally to it, and not to the Body only, even as wee commit ſinne in our wholl manhood, but yet principally in & by our Soule. Which being true that Chriſtes reaſonable Soule had ſinne imputed principally to it according to that of the Prophet " He made his Soule ſinne, Iſa. 53.10.Isa 53:10therefore his Soule principally & peculiarly did ſuffer for it. Alſo his Soule by nature being capable of ſuffering from Gods very hand, & an occaſion now ſerving therevnto, becauſe of all our ſinnes wholly imputed to him, laſtly God himſelfe ſtanding now diſpoſed to puniſh and revenge ſinne in him ſo far as he was capable thereof, therefore his puniſhment for that ſinne was a true, proper, & full puniſhment as theirs is, namely as touching meere paines, and was the effect of Gods proper Wrath, iuſtice, and vengeance as well on his Soule, as on his Body: & thus for the time, it was even like as the ſufferings of the damned are.…a. 53.134. For * continuance of time in paines is not of the nature of Hel paines or of Gods Wrath,Pag. 341. nor yet to be in Hell " locally, as you wrongly imagin, but meere circūſtances ther of only. Thus the very nature of puniſhment for ſinne being but the feeling of extreameſt paines from Gods hand, whether for a time or for ever, whether locally in Hell or ells where, that neither altereth nor leſſeneth the preſent paines, which Gods owne infinit wrathfull power & iuſtice can inflict for ſatisfaction where and how it pleaſeth him. Theſe paines then to this end, and in this very manner inflicted Chriſt felt: Indeed not being in the locall Hell, yet thoſe being as wee ſee the ſelf ſame paines for their nature which are in Hell,…ag. 247. yea which are * ſharpeſt in Hell. And he diſcerned and receaved them properly, yea only in his very Soule; as then was manefeſt when his body was ſo bruſed with ſorrowes and ſufferings (yet none at all then touching him without) that there ſtrayned out from him much ſweat of clotted blood, &c.

Theſe things being thus, now let vsus ſee wherein you agree with vsus,…. 248. and wherein you diſagree. We all agree (in termes) That Chriſt p. 13ſuffered in ſoule Gods Wrath: howbeit touching the ſenſe we diſagree in 2. maine pointes.The i… the q… I affirme that Chriſt ſuffered Gods Proper Wrath and vengeance: you meane hee ſuffered only ſuch 1afflictions as other godly men do ſuffer at the handes of the wicked and cruell world. For““Pa. 1… you thinke all Afflictions whatſoever, ſmall or great, & towards whomſoever are the effects of Gods Wrath. But that is not ſo: except in a moſt vnproper ſpeach. To the godly their Afflictions both ſmall and great are Gods Fatherly and gracious Chaſtiſements and no effects of his proper Wrath, as ſhall appeare further heereafter.

Howbeit you muſt obſerve heere my 3. limitations which I ſet down in the**Befor… Quaeſtion.

1. I meane he ſuffered only that proper Wrath of God which was meerely Puniſhment for ſinne, and no ſinne.

2. This alſo hee ſuffered as touching the Subſtance and Nature of the Paines, not as touching the Circumſtances, either of of Place, or Continuance, &c.

3. I meane hee ſuffered not every particular Puniſhment of ſinne, nor that which every particular ſinner meeteth with all: but the Generall Curſe and Puniſhment of God for ſinne, namely that which belongeth in Gods Iuſtice to All men in Common and Generally, who abide in ſinne.

Now after theſe neceſſary limitations, the maine point wherein 2we further diſagree is this; I affirme that Chriſt Suffered All Gods proper Wrath and vengeance for ſinne, namely ſo deſcribed and limited as is above ſaid. I ſay All that which the very Damned doe ſuffer, Chriſt thus did ſuffer for vsus: and therefore even a Proper and immediat ſenſe in his Soule of Gods Proper & moſt painfull Wrath, his infinit, and vntolerable burning Wrath. Which what toung is it that can expreſſe, or hearte conceaue. Yet Chriſts Humane Soule was apt and able to feele it, though not to ſuſtaine 1it. A iuſt occaſion in him was offered therevnto: for then he ſtood foorth as the only and abſolute Ranſompayer of all our debt.

And Gods vnpartiall Iuſtice diſpenſeth not without neceſſitie: Yea where he cometh to Puniſh, he layeth it on finding ſinne vnſatisfied, as he doth inhaerent in the wicked, and as he did imputed in Chriſt our ſurety, till he had by††Heb … Sufferings accompliſhed & finiſhed perfitly his Redemptiō for vsus.Your A… on w… … gain ſa… Chriſt … red i… only … frō hi… But this is far greater then as you hold, that He ſuffered no more but meere Bodily paines, that is, in his Soule by & frō his Body. This is your drift every where, p. 14but I note theſe expreſſe places:…g. 16. * Sin which ſhould have wrought in vsus an eternall destruction both of Body and Soule could not farther prevaile in him but to the wounding of his fleſh and ſheding of his bloud for the iuſt & full ſatisfactiō of all our ſinnes, even in the righteous and ſyncere iudgment of God. Likewiſe your generall Title is, The Full redemtion of mankind by the death and bloud of Christ. So you commend " the force and frute of his bodily death as most ſufficient. …ag. 84. …g. 88.And * the bodily death of Christ payeth the price of our Redemption,…ag 335. it removeth all the impediments of our ſalvation " The ioynt ſufferings of Christ (the Soule feeling what the Body ſuffered) were most avaylable for our ſalvation. …g. 336.† The violence was offered to the Body, the ſenſe whereof reached vntounto the Soule, and theſe are the ſufferings of the Croſſe and of death which the Scriptures attribute to the Sonne of God for our ſalvation. …g. 60. 58." There is no other ſacrifice of Chriſts Soule, which can be neither bodily nor bloudy. * The iuſtice of God both temporally and eternally puniſheth the Soule only by the Body.… 254. 255

Nevertheles contrariwiſe you ſeeme ſome where to yeeld wholly ſo much as we affirme.…g. 17. As where you ſay " The ſame part might indeed ſuffer in Christ which ſinned in man, J meane the Soule. If you meane as you ſeeme and as you ought, that as every part and faculty of the Soule is in vsus ſinfull, ſo in Chriſt it ſuffered for our ſinne, then in his Soule he ſuffered for ſinne properly and immediatly, that is, in his very Mind from the immediat hand of God, & not only from and by his Body.… 87. 4. Againe you allow in Chriſt * All thoſe afflictions and paſſions of the Soule which naturally and neceſſarily follow paine. This All reacheth vntounto mo, and more grievous paines then the meere bodily are: it includeth the Soules porper & immediat paines alſo.… 138. And yet playner: " Smart, paine and grief of body or mind (bee it never ſo great) will commend his obedience and patience. … 286.And * the puniſhment of ſinne which proceedeth from the iuſtice of God, and is no ſinne, that Chriſt might and did beare: Yea he ſuffered death " with all painfull, … 87.but no ſinfull concomitants and conſequents. … 76.And * nothing might befall the humane nature of Chriſt which was vnfitting for his Diuine. Whence we gather (vnderſtanding you in the beſt ſence) that whatſoeuer was fitting for his Divine nature to admit of in his Humanity, that his humane nature did feele. Conſequently then he felt all the paines of the damned p. 15which were no ſinnes, neither indeed perpetuall: ſeeing his Divine nature could admitt this in his Manhood aſwell as any ſuffering at all for ſinne. You will ſay, If hee felt not alſo deſperation as the damned do, then hee felt not all the paines which the damned do feele: For desperation augmenteth their very paines. I anſwere, we ſay not that Chriſt ſuffered ſimply All the paines of the damned; that is, He felt not ſuch as are by their very nature ſinnes aſwell as paines: as indeed desperation is. But I ſay Chriſt ſuffered none of thoſe paines. All other which are by their nature meere paines and onelyonly painfull Chriſt did ſuffer them as ſharply for the time, we doubt not, as the very damned do. So that if your L. will ſtand to that which before we obſerued in you, and not clip it, not renounce it, we profeſſe this is all that ever we did or do craue, wee neede no longer to ſtriue, it is the wholl queſtion which you grant vsus: viz: That Chriſt did beare puniſhment of ſinne as great as any is proceeding from the Justice of God, yet being no ſinne. Whence it muſt needes follow that the paines of Chriſtes ſuffering were the ſame in nature and altogeather as ſharpe and as painfull as they are in Hell it ſelf. And this is the whol ſumme of the matter about Chriſtes Helliſh ſorrowes and paines, & thus ſtandeth our quaeſtion with theſe differences, according to which we hold and profeſſe that Chriſt ſuffered the Wrath of God, or Hell paines.

If you ſet the queſtion otherwiſe, you go back from that which you found fault withall in your Sermons, & you fully ioyne with the Preachers and Catechiſmes of England, yea withall other Proteſtants in the world; and namely with all them, whom at firſt you reproued and traduced openly for this cauſe. There is none of them I aſſure you that euer ſpake or meant any more then this iſſue delivereth. If you agree to this, I beſeech you what wiſedom ſhewed you in your whot confutations & exclamations, ſo vehemently to condemne you knewe not what and to reprove you knew not whom. Further, if any do teach that Chriſt ſuffered the paines of Hell in a groſſe and locall maner, though you moſt iniuriouſly do invey at vsus for ſuch a matter, yet verily it is neerer your owne aſſertion then ours, if you be well obſerved. For ſeeing you determine ſimply, that Chriſt might & did ſuffer ſuch puniſhment of ſinne which proceeds from the iuſtice of God and is no ſinne, it ſeemeth by your ſpeech that Chriſt did ſuffer Torments p. 16even locally in Hell it ſelfe: for that had ben a puniſhment, & that is no ſinne,…icus: …ſt. Lati…er. Act. …on. & that in deed ſome learned and godly men did hold, but erroneouſlie. As for vsus ſomway we avouch your ſentence alſo, that Chriſt ſuffered whatſoeuer puniſhment of ſinne which proceeded from the iuſtice of God, & is no ſinne, but yet with expreſſe limitation frō Scripture namely in Circūſtances, as I ſhewed, viz. in this world only & not after his croſſe at all, nor locally among the damned. So that thus we ſay, it is not true that Christ ſuffered the paines of Hell, … hold not … at Chriſt …fered ſim…y the par…s of Hell.which yet thoſe your fore-noted indefinit wordes doe import. Nay, ſpeaking exactly, wee vſe not this terme of Hell, neither delight we to vſe it oftē in any regard about our maine Quaeſtion: becauſe we finde not this word literally and expreſlie applied to Chriſtes ſufferinges in the Scripture. Howbeit ſometimes we ſpeake ſo, I graunt, and I thinke that wee may well doe ſo,As alſo … …ny other …nts of Re…on are …yme af…ned & vt…ed. when we vnderſtand it (by " plaine Conſequence frō Scripture) for the extreame paines of Gods proper wrath & vengeance for ſinne, from which euen Hell it ſelfe is not ſeparated; yea Gods very wrath is a parte, and the greateſt parte of Hell paines. Or els Metaphorically, when we hauehave to ſet out with an emphaſis, the moſt dolefull and incomparable paines of Chriſtes ſufferinges, as they appeared onelyonly to the ſenſe of men, & not otherwiſe: Which it ſeemeth " your ſelfe alſo liketh well enough.… 8.…34.…9. But howe badly then doe you vrge vponupon vsus and perſwade men that we doe & muſt ſay in maintenance of this our Queſtion,…imious …tation. … 1.8.244.…7.264.…0.34…. * that Chriſt ſuffered All the ſorrowes of Hell, the whole Curſe of God, his whole wrath, and All the very Torments of the damned, and that in ſuch ſenſe as you make of thoſe wordes, that is including in them, the Locall Hell, eternall puniſhment, Diminution of faith, Holines, &c. with Desperation, …reat. 1.….40.Reiection, vtter darknes, &c? As for " my wordes which you wreſt that way, they are cleared by my Opening this Queſtion both before and after. Wherefore wee plainly tell you, that we defie and deteſt in our heartes (as well as you) all theſe blaſphemous & wicked thoughtes of the Sonne of God, our moſt glorious and gratious Redeemer. And yet if you had vnderſtoode thoſe Phraſes, the whole C…rſe of God, His whole Wrath, All the ſorrowes of Hell onelyonly to…ching the ſenſe of Meere paines, that Chriſt feeling the proper wrath and Iuſtice of God puniſhing him for our ſinnes, felt as extreeme ſharpnes of paines which had no p. 17mixture of ſinne, as may in any poſſibilitie be endured yea though in Hell it ſelfe; and ſo a kinde alſo of““As in … place I … …hew. forſaking in them, a kinde of**Such as … ſelf explai… pag. 245 And as … Curſe is n… words, b… deeds. pa. Curſing, and hatred, and condemnation, and a ſenſe of burning wrath, which he being our high Prieſt and Sacrifice was appointed vntounto, and which payment of ours was by God layed vponupon him being our Redeemer, and Ranſompayer, & Surety; and that all this he ſuſtayned and ſuffered for a time in this life ſo deeply & wofully as was poſſible for a man any where to ſuffer which was alſo wery God. I ſay if this had ben your meaning, we would not then hold it blaſphemous nor erronious, as““Epi…p: you obiect it vntounto vsus, but the very truth indeed, to ſay Hee ſuffered the true paines of Hell, and the wholl wrath of God. Which verily your own words alſo in ſome places do imply, yea at leaſt ſo much, and that manifeſtly enough, it ſeemeth, as before I hauehave obſerved. But to wade further then this, and to particularize, or to ſpecifie the parts of Gods wrath which Chriſt felt, as**Pa. …47. you will vsus to do; or to ſhew the manner how, or the certaine meaſure how deepely he ſuffered it, what madnes were it in men to attempt, and what folly is it in any to requier. This ſufficeth, that we know God is able (aſwell out of the locall Hell as in it) to reveale and inflict ſpiritually this wrath where he findeth ſinne vnſatisfied, and in Chriſt the vnion of his Godhead might admit it in his Manhood, & his Soule was capeable & apt to diſcerne and feele immediatly the impreſſion thereof in it ſelfe. Now becauſe alſo God was heere bent to puniſh all our moſt horrible ſinnes in Chriſt, and he was ordained to receave the ſame vponupon himſelfe, and God was never to puniſh them truly any more, nor any where ells, and becauſe of the proportion of Gods exact Iuſtice which diſpenſeth not where there is no neceſſitie for diſpenſation, becauſe alſo of Chriſtes taking our wholl nature for no needfull purpoſe at all without this, and laſtly by reaſon of many pregnant texts of Scripture proving by infallible arguments that thus ſurely it was in this myſtery of Chriſts purchaſing our redemption (which you in all your writing have no whit defeated) therefore we are vndoubtedly perſwaded that this is the very truth of God: Namely as““Treat. 80.81.7 before I taught, as touching the ſenſe of paine and vehemency of ſorrow that Chriſt ſuffered for vsus All and wholly the wrath of God and his bitter Curſe: That is, as I ſaid ſo far as **Pa. 37.poſſibillity would admit, ſo far as he being alſo very p. 18God and a man not poſſible to ſinne, could ſuffer. Neither is there any peece of reaſon on your parte for the contrary. And this is much more I truſt then to ſuffer in Soule by Sympathy only from and by and with the Body,Pag. 13.14 which as " before I ſhewed, you plainly do make the only & wholl ſuffering of Chriſt for our Redemption: which kind… of ſuffering all Godly men doe ſuffer alſo when the wicked in the world do afflict and perſecute them. But touching ſuffering of Marti…s and godly men,Pag. 8.11 it is not intruth, (as † before is ſhewed) of that kinde as Chriſtes ſuffering was, and therefore this ſuffering of the Soule onelyonly by Sympathy commeth nothing neere to the ſorrowes of the ſuffering of Chriſt: which hee ſuffered from the hand of Gods offended Iuſtice, and pure Holines, and Wrathfull power, infinitly ſatisfying it ſelfe on him for our ſinnes which by his office he receaved vponupon himſelfe, to acquite vsus from the ſame. This no Martir nor godly man doth, who ſuffer only as from the malice and rage of men,…d therefore …ey are ſo …eerefull at …eir Death, …hen Chriſte is extreme… ſorrowfull. from God there proceedeth nothing but fatherly chaſtenings to them, his very wrath indeed for their ſinnes appeareth not at all againſt them, which they know Chriſt hath once borne and for ever diſſolved. You hauehave wordes in ſome places, as if you h…ld this difference with vsus of Chriſtes ſufferinges compared with the ſuffering of Martirs: Namely where you ſay,Pag. 248 " Christ ſuffered the wrath of God puniſhing ſinne, …ag. 257not * in his Body only, but in his Soule alſo by ſome proper puniſhments of the Soule, as by ſorrow, and feare in his Agony, &c. Howbeit, though theſe wordes ſeeme plaine, yet I perceave ambiguity and fallacy in them, yea alſo I thinke a great errour. Firſt your fallacy is in that you meane ſorrow and feare indeed properly in his Soule, but not any proper Puniſhment of ſinne nor comming for any paine or ſmart that he felt inflicted for ſinne, but it was meere " Devotion to God, 2.1…4.23.9 144 290& Love, pity, & compaſſion towards men: Which ſay you, could not be without ſome feare, and zeale, and griefe. That is true: but this is a notable fallacy. For many thinke that you meane, Chriſt ſuffered ſuch ſorrow and paine as was both proper to the Soule, and was the proper puniſhment of ſinne alſo. But then had you heerein fully agreed with vsus. Nowe that Religious Devotion, godly and …t…ous A… …tions.and Pity are properly partes of Chriſtes Holines and righteouſnes, not of his Sufferings for ſinne. For theſe 2. parts of Chriſtes Mediation I truſt, you will diſtinguiſh. And p. 19ſurely Chriſts Agonie, was properly a part of his moſt bitter Paſſion, not of his Obedience and Righteouſnes: albeit even in ſuffering alſo he was perfitly obedient. Thus then you are never the neerer to the truth in this point for all your ſeeming. Againe conſidering what you write of the wrath““Pa. 130 132.246. of God which the Godly generally do ſuffer, you ſeeme to me to thinke that every Marti…s death and all the croſſes and griefes both of body and minde in the godly are very**For yo… make G… Wrath … ferent to men who afflicted. puniſhments of ſinne, and right effects of Gods Iuſtice and wrath taking properly vengeance on them for ſinne in ſuch maner as he doth on the Reprobat, though not in ſuch meaſure: and that ſuch likewiſe were Chriſts ſufferings. But then I deny that therein yow have the truth, or have rightly expreſſed the ſufferinges of Chriſt, or of his Saintes. Becauſe the ſufferings of the Saintes are properly not puniſhmēts for ſinnes, nor effects of Gods wrath properly, but are indeed fatherly & profitable chaſtiſements purpoſely inflicted by God for their good, as before is ſaid. But Chriſtes were altogeather of another nature and condition, they were the only true and proper puniſhment, price, Satisfaction, and Ranſom for ſinnes, as hath ben alſo noted before, & after ſhalbe further ſhewed. If you vnderſtand Chriſtes ſuffering Gods Wrath to be ſuch as the godly feele, viz: improperly and largely (as the Scriptures††In your 13…. there do meane) and not as the very price and puniſhment for ſinne, but only as Chaſtiſements, then that is likewiſe manefeſtly vntrue. Alſo then againe for your words you are ambiguous and deceiptfull in this iſſue: which kinde of vanity you commonly vſe in all other your handling of controverſies ſince you left writing againſt the Papistes, as who ſo looketh ſhall ſee. For wee affirming that Chriſt felt the wrath of God doe meane it properly, as it inflicteth properly the puniſhment and Wages of ſinne;Your Equ… cation in terme G… Wrath. and you tell vsus that he ſuffered Gods wrath as the Saints and Godly men doe ſuffer it: That is, altogeather vnproperly, beeing ſometime ſo called for a certain ſeeming that it hath to bee ſo (as you acknowledge) in the ſenſe of fleſh and bloud. Then what is this to our purpoſe? What ells do you worke heerein but deceipt & miſtaking to the Reader through the ambiguity of this word the Wrath of God. Which palpable fallacy of yours is ſo plaine, that I need not ſtand to open it any further: and yet I aſſure my ſelfe that this is the very ground and refuge of the errour in this Queſtion. Which if a man marke p. 20well & diſtinguiſh as he ought and may eaſily do, he ſhall quickly drive you either to ſhift into this " corner,Your Equiocation. or ells to deny much of that which you affirme in your booke elſwhere, Therefore lett the wiſe conſider it. Nevertheleſſe if happily you meane otherwiſe, that is,Pas you ſeeme … me… pa… …01.105 that Chriſtes very * outward ſufferings and bodily death were in a peculiar ſort the effects of Gods proper wrath thus truly puniſhing our ſinnes on him, then in effect you come to vsus againe, of yow will ſticke but to this. For there is no reaſon in the worlde to make Chriſtes fleſh ſubiect to Gods Curſe for ſinne, and not his Minde and ſoule likewiſe. Alſo wee muſt note that ſuch outward bodily ſufferings beeing indeede puniſhments and not chaſtiſements for ſinne, that is proper effects of Gods very wrath and iuſtice comming to take vengeance for ſinne, they cannot be meere bodily ſufferings, nor meerly felt by ſympathy in the Soule, which is the proper effect of the outward ſenſitive facultie only, but they muſt of neceſſity be conceaved, diſcerned, & applyed in the inward feeling of the Minde of Chriſt,…d … deny at …nce. y^t Mens …ules hauehave …ny ſenſe in y^e …he …inde, be…des y^e Com… ſenſe de…nding on …e Body. and will make a ſingular and ſecret impreſſion of ſorrow in the Soule far above all meere bodily griefes, beyond all meaſure and proportion of things in ordinary experience, & ſo exceedingly differing from all other ſufferings in this life. Which therefore may iuſtly bee termed the proper and immediat ſufferings of his Soule. And this ſenſe the Lord doubtles revealeth vponupon men ſomtime more ſomtime leſſe in this life, even as it pleaſeth him. Which alſo befell vntounto Chriſt. Againe,Pag. 257. if the Agonie and ſorrow which " you grant Chriſt ſuffered ſimply in his minde, be meant by you to have ben as it were a " foretaſt of ſuch ſufferings and a feare or dread of them (as very iuſtly it may be) conſidering the weake diſability of a Creature to ſtand vp againſt the Creator,Propathia. namely now ſhooting or preparing to ſhoote preſently the ſharpe arrowes of his wrath vponupon him for our ſinnes, in which caſe and condition Chriſt now ſtood for that while: then I ſay alſo I ſee in effect no difference betwene vsus, then againe this Queſtion is (as it were) at an end. For doubtles he ſuffered at one time or other the ſame thing which he ſo feared. Yea ſuch a kind of fearing cannot be but a mighty ſuffering thereof. Neither doe wee contend to expreſſe what iuſt meaſure of Gods wrath, nor preciſely in what manner it was revealed and executed on Chriſt. OnelyOnly wee know that whatſoever it were, Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for ſinnes though outwardly executed p. 21on the Body, yet it could not but ſinke in deeper, even into the deapth of the Soule, and be diſcerned by Chriſt and conceaved to be ſuch, and ſo ſuſtayned as proceeding from God, and ſo wound the Soule properly, yea chiefly, though the anguiſh thereof bruized his body iointly alſo. Againe whatſoever you wil call it; All or**Such … as wa… nothin… whol. … ſinfull … rents o… part of Gods proper Wrath and vengeance (as it proceeded from him) was incomprehenſible, vnſpeakeable, infinit, and vntolerable to any creature, & therefore ſo it was vntounto the very Manhood of Chriſt, namely when the Godhead for a ſeaſon concealed it ſelf of purpoſe and with held his wonted ſupportation and comfort from him, to the end that his bitter Paſſion ordayned of God and moſt voluntarily vndertaken by himſelfe, might bee in ſuffering the““The … Paines rowes … ſin wer… Chriſt fo… time no qualifye… … leſſened ſorrows and paines which were due to vsus, nothing qualified, but in all ſeverity accompliſhed. As indeed when his Hower was come and gon it was. As touching that terme The death of his Soule, which you ſtumble at, we ſhall ſpeake thereof heereafter in due place.

Thus far I have proceeded in opening the true ſtate of this Quaeſtion: which whether you (who have begon to avouch the contrary) will now acknowledge and approve, or not, I know not. Overthrow it, I truſt you ſhall never with all the cunning and ſtrength you have. For vndoubtedly it is, and ſo will appeare by the word to be a manefeſt truth, and therefore““Act. 5…Acts 5 will prevaile: beſides that it is expreſly the doctrine taught and eſtabliſhed by authority in England as heereafter God willing I ſhall plainly ſhew, notwithſtanding all your ſtrange cōtradicting & traducing thereof. Laſtly whether I did ſet down this very ſtate of the quaeſtion in full effect in my former Treatiſe, or whether I changed it (though indeed I graunt I was there much ſhorter then I am heere) I pray you looke & conſider againe in that my††Pag. 5 33. and firſt booke. This being well conſidered and marked, will yeeld vsus an eaſier paſſage thorough the reſt behind.

To com then to that which hee firſt**Pag. 2… beginneth with: where he laboureth very much to ſhew that hee miſtooke not his Text wherevpon firſt he grounded his doctrine. This I ſay, that““Gal. … pag. 1. this Text, whereon he**Pag. 3 groundeth and ſetteth downe the doctrine of the wholl meritorious contents of Christes Croſſe, as likewiſe of††Pag. 42 thoſe effectes therof which he in his Treatiſe handleth, I am perſwaded p. 22is miſtaken, and that this place of Scripture intendeth not theſe things.Gal. 6.12.Gal 6:12 It is manefeſt that the Apoſtle * heere reproveth the falſe teachers for mingling the pure doctrine of the Goſpell becauſe they were loth to ta…t perſecution, which then followed the true and ſincere profeſſors thereof: And ſo incourageth the godly to beare all Afflictions for this perſecuted truth and for Chriſtes ſake. Thus the Croſſe of Chriſt here ſignifieth I grant Christ crucified, Christ afflicted, Christ perſecuted: not in his owne perſon only, but alſo in his members. Hee doth heere iointly togeather vnderſtand by Chriſts Croſſe, the afflictions of the whole myſticall Body of Chriſt both Head and members, which they commonly have in the world. Which many ſhunned euen with Shipwracke of ſincere Religion, but Paul reioyced therein ſo much, as in no worldly ioy like to it. For ſo he meaneth when he ſaith, God forbid that I ſhould reioyce but in the Croſſe of Chriſt: not that hee makes it a thing detestable to reioyce in any thing ells, Pag 227as " you imagine him to do. It is lawfull to reioyce in other things beſides the Croſſe of Christ: but it is not lawfull to reioyce in any worldly ioy ſo much, or we are not to reioyce in compariſon of our ioy which we ought to hauehave in this our ſhame and afflictions ſuſtained for Chriſt, for his Servants, and for the purity of the Goſpell. Paul had very great cauſe thus exceedingly to reioyce heerein. For

1. this was a token to men that he walked in the perfit way, and a meanes alſo to himſelfe ſo to doe.

2. Becauſe this his doing rebuked the corrupters and minglers of the Religion who would ſuſtaine in the world no diſgrace which followed the ſincere courſe: & he thus incouraged alſo the weake profeſſors to ſuffer willingly for the ſame.

3. This indeed Crucified the world vntounto him and him vntounto the world, as ſtill it doth vsus alſo.

Theſe cauſes are both evident in the text and ſufficient for Paul ſo exceedingly to reioyce in ſuffering for the pure Goſpell. Now hee cannot heere reſpect the meritorious and propitiatory Contents of Chriſts Croſſe, and ſo make it deteſtable to reioyce in any thing ells as propitiatory beſides this ſuffering heere expreſſed (which is the ſenſe that you give vntounto it) I ſay, this Paul cannot reſpect in this Word, if hee include his own & the Godlies afflictions. But it appeareth by that before, that indeed he doth include them: & all the circumſtances imediatly following do alſo declare it. 1. That which I touched p. 23before, By ſuffering in the world for Chriſt, for his ſimple truth, & Church ſake, the**Which your p… Text v: … world was C…ucified to him, and he indeed vntounto the world. Alſo an other reaſon ſheweth it:††v: 15. For in Chriſt Ieſus neither circumciſion nor vncircumciſion avayle any thing but a new Creature. That is a ſincere & vpright converſation being the fruit of a ſincere and pure faith and profeſſion: which matter hee nameth a little before““Gal. 5.Gal 5 Faith working by louelove. So by this Fruit he incourageth men (as I ſaid) though there com ſhame and trouble therewith. Alſo in the next place thus,**v: 16. And as many as walke according to this rule (both of pure profeſſion and converſation) peace ſhalbe vponupon them &c. howſoever in the world they have ſhame and trouble. Laſtly††v: 17. hee willeth that no good Chriſtian heerafter ſhould put him to buſines by ſeeking reſolution of him, whether (for the pretended peace of the Church) vnprofitable Caeremonies ſhould be retayned with the Goſpel: for lo ſaith he my example ſheweth you all my minde, J beare about me the markes of the L. Jeſus, that is Afflictions for the ſincere truths ſake, which I could by policy and wiſdom avoyd aſwell as thoſe corrupters of Religion, if I had no more care of the ſincerity of the Goſpell then they have. This being thus, it cannot be poſſibly that the Apoſtle ſhould heere minde to name the particular kindes and all the meritorious partes or Contents of Chriſts ſuffering in this place: but only hee incourageth men (as I ſaid) to indure all afflictions for Chriſt and his truth ſake. Thus you are anſwered alſo in that**Pag. 22 you deny the Croſſe of Chriſt in Scriptures to be taken for the Afflictions of the godly. You ſee the Apoſtle““ver. 17 heere calleth the Afflictions of the godly the markes of the Lord Ieſus: alſo the afflictions of Christ in**Coll. 1. … another place. And in another““2 Cor. …. the dying of the Lord Ieſus. What are theſe in truth but the Croſſe of Chriſt, vnleſſe you imagin ſome myſterie in the divers wordes, when apparantly the matter is all one. Alſo the very worde Croſſe **Gal. 5.1Gal 5:1a litle before ſignifieth the Shame and hatred of Chriſt ſlaine on the Croſſe tog…ather with the ſhame of his Servāts. And thus alſo““Pag. 22 your maine obiection is anſwered, where you argue that Paul cannot be vnderſtood**ver. 12. to ſay that thoſe falſe teachers would not ſuffer perſecution for the Afflictions of the godly. He may be vnderſtood to ſay, that he would not ſuffer perſecution for commending the Afflictions and ſhame of good Chriſtians for Chriſtes ſake, which they p. 24ought to have done. Then what ſenſe or reaſon wanteth this expoſition? I knowe the roote and originall of their Hatred and diſdaine was againſt Chriſt himſelfe, & namely for his ignominious death on the Croſſe. But this excludeth not, indeed it includeth in the Croſſe of Christ Chriſts members the faithfull which are his owne Body, and ſo conſequently all their Afflictions for Chriſtes ſake. Which the wicked and corrupt profeſſors, I ſay, wil not commend (as Paul did) by ſuffering perſecution in their own perſons, they will not by Suffering win credit and reverence to that way in the world.Pa. 229 The Fathers which " you bring hereabout overthrow not this ſenſe but iuſtifie it rather. Wherefore you cannot avoyd it yet, but that it is ſtill an overſight in you to vnderſtand heere, by the Croſſe of Christ, the Contents of his ſufferings and to note his wholl and intire Paſſion in every part thereof as he merited thereby for vsus, which evidently the Apoſtle intendeth not, neither is he about that in this place. You ſay,**Pa. 226 you drew no reaſon from theſe words of your Text, but propoſing them for your theme tooke occaſion frō them to lay down, firſt the Contents, then the Effects of Christs Croſſe. Indeede ſuch handling of Texts is to vſuall in theſe dayes, but no good nor commendable vſe: that is, to take occaſion from any text to ſpeake of any thing. Which practiſe in you ſo great a man as you are, and ſeeme among vsus to be, is ſo much the worſe, as there are many younger Divines who are led by example more then reaſon, that will thinke it a point of learning and wiſedome even to do like you. But I for my part do ſuppoſe that they are the faithfulleſt and wiſeſt handlers of Scripture, which make their Text the ground of all they ſpeake, and doe conclude even from their text firmly and firſt of all, whatſoever they teach afterwardes further therevpon. Els wherevnto ſerveth the taking of Texts in Sermons? If choice Texts may be vſed only to take occaſion by them to ſpeak of things evidently of an other ſute, and to another purpoſe then in the Text is meant, ſure it may then bee iuſtly charged againſt vsus that we do much wrong to the Scriptures, and do make of them ſuch an inſtrument as they ought not to be. Laſtly it is a ſtrong preſumption that you have never a good place in al the Scripture for your opinion, ſeeing even your choice Text affordeth not any the leaſt reaſon to helpe it with all; which your ſelfe heere confeſſeth, or els why drew you not this reaſon p. 25(ſuch as it is) from your text to your purpoſe. But to gratifie you a little, ſuppoſe if you will that your Text is not miſtaken by you, but that the Apoſtle intended heere to note the Cōtents of Chriſts Croſſe. We are to remember then how you““Pag. 4. expreſly grant, that alſo the proper Sufferings of the minde may rightly be in the Contents of his Croſſe. But thus can**Pa. 5. 16 60. 253. … bove pa… your maine opinion bee good, that Chriſts Bodily Sufferings alone were the full price of our Redemtion▪ Which alſo††Pag. 33 you would ground generally on all the Fathers: though very vntruly as afterward God willing we ſhall ſee. And to ſhew the abſolut fulnes of this only, you ſay““Pag. 6… More wee can not aske or expect; and what more can be required, I verily cannot coniecture. Howbeit your ſelfe admitteth more, even the ſufferings of the minde ſimply as I noted: and thus your own ſelfe by your very Text overthroweth your ſelfe in the firſt entrance, as all men may ſee. And heere mee thinkes alſo you ſhould not ſo reprove with contempt as**Pa. 335. you do, that which††In my Treat. pa… I noted, that Chriſts Soule in a large ſenſe might be ſaid to be Crucified, & not his Body only; namely if we ſuppoſe this your text to ſignify the Contents of Chriſts Croſſe. For you know that the““Pa. 4 … 257. 248 wholl Contents muſt bee then ſignified, not any part of them excluded. Finally where you ſay,**Pag 22 the Apostle heere maketh it a detestable thing to reioyce in any things els but in the Contents of Chriſtes Croſſe, in ſaying God forbid that I ſhould reioyce but in the Croſſe of Christ, either this your ſpeach is to laviſh, or els you quite overthrow your 2. Queſtion, That Chriſt after this went down into Hell. For either in Hell Chriſt hath got vsus no purchaſe, nor wrought vsus any further riddance from Sathan then hee had don before, which thing you with great and mighty words**Pa. 35… do proclaime that he did, but altogeather without ſhew of reaſon or likelyhood. For if he did, were it a detestable thing for vsus (thinke you) to reioyce therein? Or els of neceſſity you muſt extend the Contents of Chriſtes Croſſe that is his bitter ſufferings beyond his death, even vntounto his being in Hell alſo among the Divells and Damned ſpirits, whither hee went as you ſay. But this ſequele I thinke you will not defend. Theſe iarres in your ſelfe therefore you muſt reconcile: in the meane time men will thinke that you have not handled your Text indeede very rightly.

Then proceeding foreward you ſtill ſhew a bad minde in you p. 26towards me, ſeeking foorthwith even in the entrance to draw me without cauſe into hatred for " diſdayning the Fathers,Pag. 229. as you ſuppoſe. The direct and expreſſe occaſion to ſpeake of this matter commeth not in place till * long after:Pa. 349. but you cannot forbeare to procure me ill will ſo long, as it ſeemeth. What then is my contempt and diſdaine of the Fathers, which you often report in ſundry places, and as odiouſly as is poſſible? What is my inſolent dealing againſt them? Surely I beleeve you can not tell. Happily it is, becauſe I follow not their Authorities in ſom opinions of Religion, nor in divers expoſitions of Scripture.Pag. 225.48 …piſt. 12.6 9. Indeed ſo " you call the Fathers iudgements many times namely Authorities; that the world might conceave their words to be warrants vntounto vsus, & good Authorities to reſt on in matters of Religion. If you had not this drift in your minde, why give you them ſuch a title, which to mee ſeemeth ſomwhat inſolent indeed? And why do you ſo har…fully blame me for leaving their opinions ſomtimes: which ſo far as I know is never, but when ſtrong reaſon out of the very Scipture doth lead me from them. And that which I ſay of the old, I vnderſtand alſo of the new Writers. Whom indeed I do equally eſteeme, and do iudge them (I meane * many of them) except only in Antiquitie, Calvin, …cer, Mar… Beza, …emellius, …chius, &cotherwiſe no way inferiour to the beſt of the Ancients, yea happily in true learning, ſoundnes of Religion, cleere interpretations on the text, many times before them. Which I hope is no ſingularity in me ſo to thinke; but I know it to be that, wherein very many learned and godly Chriſtians do concurre. Of all therefore that are learned men whether new or old thus I eſteeme, thus I profeſſe,only true of reading …ed men …aſes of re…on. that they are to bee reade and reverenced as very good helpes to ſhew vsus ſom light, and to ſharpen our iudgments in the vnderſtanding of Scripture, but no further. Their opinions either in opening of Texts or in concluſions of Religion wee ought not to receave without examining. And wherewith muſt wee examine them, but only with the written word. Gods moſt holy word is Allſufficient in it ſelfe for all true Religion, or for any part thereof for ever. Thus it was before the writings of men were publiſhed, and thus it is now ſince they are publiſhed, and ſo ſhalbe for ever. Even for matter, Abundant, and for giving light to the right conceaving & vnderſtanding thereof, Allſufficient. So that mens writings do nothing els but helpe to give a greater meaſure of eaſines p. 27to their vnderſtanding, which yet nevertheles being vſed as God hath appointed them to be, are ſufficiently eaſy and lightſom in them ſelues. I thinke the H. Ghoſt much commendeth thoſe““Act. 17 12.Acts 17:12 men of Beraea, who hearing the Apoſtle Paul teach, though they were not ill affected towards him, yet they would not believe that he ſpake touching Religion, till they had examined by the Scriptures & ſeene, whether the truth were ſo as he vttered. I truſt then no adviſed Chriſtian will chalenge more authority to the Fathers then was heere given to the Apoſtle, nor deny indeede to any privat men, much leſſe to a miniſter, to**Phil. 1. pſal. 119 1 Cor 2 1 Cor. 1…Phil 11 Cor 21 Cor 1 iudge and diſcerne in themſelves not only of the words of men, but euen of the ſenſe & meaning of the Scripture by the Scripture it ſelfe, which thing heere the Beraeans did, and are commended by the H. Ghoſh for it. How vniuſtly then do you charge me that““Pag. 34 I refuſe the Fathers to teſtify in any cauſe against my liking. I hope you will not deny me to iudge of thē by the Scripture according to that meaſure of knowledge and diligence which the Lord inableth me with. It is every Chriſtians duety as we hauehave ſeene, and you take it vntounto your ſelfe, as we ſhall ſee afterwards. Wherefore let others partake with you, I pray, in this common right and Chriſtian liberty. Vnles you thinke ſo well of your ſelfe, as to imagine that other men will not be ſo modeſt and humble minded in vſing this their freedom, or not ſo wiſe, and circumſpect as your ſelfe are. Which conceit if you hauehave you ought to correct it. Neither yet are the Fathers refuſed, as you complaine, to testifie in any cauſe of Religion whatſoever. By vttering their opinions they may witneſſe what was held and eſteemed as true or probable by ſom godly and wiſe men in thoſe times, but not by all. M^r Bilſon himſelfe““In his booke a… the Ieſu… part 2. elſwhere ſaith well heereof; If all the ancient Biſhops (ſuch were the Fathers, or moſt of them which we hauehave extant) ſhould hold an opinion, yet it followeth not that all Preachers then were of that minde, nor if the Preachers generally thought ſo, that all the Christians were ſo perſwaded. Thus it is true, they can witneſſe what was held by ſom good men then, as I ſaid, yea perhaps what was commonly thought in the Churches of thoſe places where they lived. But in no wiſe what was the iudgment of all no not among themſelues, much leſſe every where and in all ages. Now if you ſhould meane yet further, that they may teſtifie in cauſes of Religion, as witneſſes p. 28do with vsus in Civill matters, that what they affirme and teſtifie muſt obtaine a verdict, and ſo hauehave ſentence and iudgment with it, which in effect you ſeeme to inſinuat by calling their Opinions Authorities, ſo vſually as you do; then indeede for my part I can not agree that they or any men ſhould be ſuch Witneſſes, nor their words (nor ſhew of reaſons) in any matters of Religion to be taken as Authorities. If you or any think otherwiſe, wee may lawfully deny it. Gods worde only with vsus hath indeede Authoritie. The Fathers, all, or ſom hauehave none any further, then that their Concluſions, expoſitions, and reaſons, if after examination made by the liuely word they be found currant with the Text, then they are the more ioyfully to be embraced. If otherwiſe in our conſcience they ſeeme to vary from the text, or from ſome certaine evident Circumſtance thereof, then is it not indifferent for vsus, but our Chriſtian duty in the preſence of God, to leaue them and not to follow them therein: yet ſtill with reverence and loving regard towards their names for the manifold graces of God otherwiſe in them. More then this whoſoever aſcribeth vntounto them, they verily abuſe the Fathers, and not we. For as the Papiſts do abuſe the Saints deceaſed by Worſhipping and praying vntounto them, not we who louelove them and thinke reverently of them as the bleſſed Servants of God: So in this caſe, we who vſe the writings of godly Men as good helpes to our knowledge do not deſpiſe them, but you who make them Authorities in Religion, by your to much imbracing them do indeede notably abuſe them.

Nevertheles I well perceave that all this great ſhew of cleaving to the Fathers iudgments is but coloured in you; you vrge them in ſom caſes ſo whotly but for advantage. For in other points againe we ſee when they ſpeak not to your liking, the caſe is altered. It is worth the paines to looke a little further in to this your practiſe, becauſe you purſue me with ſuch cruelty for leaving the Fathers in ſom things. Firſt your generall ſpeeches ſomwhere of the Scripture and of the expoſitions of men, are very good. Touching the Scriptures,Ep. pa. 9. …ag 41. Booke 1.2 a…inſt the Ie…s part. 4. …g. 360. …ag. 301. " Jn Gods cauſes let Gods booke teach vsus what to beleeve and what to profeſſe. * What J read in the word of God that I believe, what I read not that I do not believe. Touching men, " If you want the foundation of true faith and religion (the Scripture) in vaine do you ſeeke to make a ſhew of Catholiciſme &c. * One man p. 29with truth is a warrant against all the world. Againe,““In this 3 book Full …ed… tion &c 122. By their patience their expoſitions must not looke to bee Canonicall in the church of God. If they ſay any thing well, we take it with their praiſe, if otherwiſe as men they miſſe their marke, we refuſe it with their leaves. **Gal. 5.Gal 5God hath called us vntounto liberty, ““1. Cor.not to be ſervants of men: and to ſerve erroneous constructions is worſe then to beare tyrannous exactions. Theſe are very worthy ſpeaches; but hauehave a care and conſcience (Sir) I pray you in this, that you leave this freedom vntounto vsus, which you take to your ſelfe. Binde no heavyer burdens on the Church of God, then your ſelfe profeſſeth to like of. And becauſe I would hauehave this ſound profeſſion of yours to be wel noted of all men, in as much as I know how wauering and ſlippery you are for the moſt part heerein, therefore it is good alſo that we obſerve how your owne practiſe concurreth heerewith, and ratifieth your profeſſion when and where you liſt, though when you will, you check and taunt vsus for the like Chriſtian liberty. I ſee in this booke where you forſake the ancient and learned Fathers, that is as you ſpeake in my caſe, where you contemne and deſpiſe them.

Firſt**Pag. 21 you reiect Auſtens opinion, that thoſe who roſe to life at Chriſts 1Reſurrection, dyed againe. Sec: You reiect his expoſition of thoſe 2words of Chriſt to the Theefe This day ſhalt thou bee with mee in Paradiſe. Auſten vnderſtandeth Chriſt as ſpeaking of the Theeves ſoule, and his owne““Alſo E… He is re… in it, N… nim ipſ… in celo … rus crat … mo Chr… Ieſus. Divine preſenſe in Paradice. But you refuſe that, becauſe**Pag. 21 wee have no warrant in the word of God to fasten Christs Soule vntounto Hell for the time of his Death, that it might not be in Paradiſe before he deſcended to Hell. Third: You““Pa. 196 renounce Auſten and (as he ſaith) almost all the Church thinking that Chriſt looſed Adam and ſom others whom he thought good out of the paines of Hell, wherein till his going thither they were held.

Fourth: Againſt all the Fathers**Pa. 188 200. you affirme it to bee more then manefest that Chriſt did not fetch the Patriarches out of Limbo 4Patrum, a certaine region of reſt vnderunder the earth, as they generally thought. Fift:““Pa. 18… You renounce divers Fathers opinion that**None e… Martyrs. tull. none do go into Heaven till after the laſt Judgment.

Thus we obſerve your liberty in leaving the Fathers when you ſee cauſe. Why deny you vntounto vsus the like? If we bring not as good reaſon to diſſent as you do, whenſoever we vary from them, let vsus heare of it, and beare the blame iuſtly. This only we deſire that in p. 30any caſe of Religion the bare cuſtom of times, the opiniō of men, and authority meerely Humane ſhould never barre vsus from receaving the ſimplicity and evidence of the truth concerning vsus which appeareth in the Scripture. But now, that we may proceede, let vsus ſee your ſpeciall examples, pag. 229.wherein you will make it manefeſt that " J have despiſed the Fathers

Firſt,pag. 229. * where you ſay out of certaine Fathers, That Chriſt in his dying gaue vp his Spirite " miraculouſly, pag. 7.* no violence of Death wresting it from him as it doth ours, pag. 229.but when hee ſaw his time hee even at an instant laid it downe of himſelfe, no paines hastening his death. Heb. 4.15.Heb 4:15Contrary to this I alleaged the Scripture, " He was like vsus in all things ſinne only excepted. To anſwer this * you reply, Was he like vsus in his birth? Pag. 230.Can we lye in the Grave without corruption, as " he lay? Neither yet his fleſh ly he Grave hoat poſſi…y to cot…t, otherwiſe …n as his …es poſſibly …d not be …en.Or raiſe our ſelves from death as he did? Which poore anſwere I wonder to ſee comming from you. Aſwell you might ſhew further, He was not like vsus in that he walked vponupon the water, nor in that he fasted 40. dayes, nor in that he knew the ſecrets of mens hearts, nor in that he turned water into wine, and with a word healed all diſeaſes &c. Theſe things don by his Manhood yet were they the proper effects of his Godhead: they were no naturall but ſupernaturall thinges. But this text to the Hebrues ſaith onelyonly of naturall Humane properties and infirmities, that Chriſt in them was altogeather like vsus, ſinne excepted. Alſo this maner of Dying whereof we ſpeake, that is, by ſore wounds and blowes, by ſharpe outrages, and deadly paines to draw neerer and neerer to Death, is a meere natural infirmity, and incident to all men. Therefore ſurely in this very maner did Chriſt dy alſo, like as all men vſe to do in ſuch caſe. Againe thoſe Divine effectes which you mention are iuſtly beleeved to hauehave bene in Chriſt. Why? Becauſe of the expreſſe Scripture that * witneſſeth the ſame.… 1.23, 25.1.2.27. …n. 1.3, 4.….1.10.18. Let mee ſee expreſſe words in the text that he Dyed as you ſay, not naturally, but Miraculouſly, and then will I beleeue it alſo. You cite certain places, by which you would prove it,…h. 10.18. As " No man taketh my ſoule from me, but J lay it down of my ſelfe, &c. Hee meaneth heere that his Death was meere voluntary, freely vndertaken, and willingly of his owne accord perfourmed with ſuch naturall and ordinary infirmities as belong to a man. As you confeſſe ſomwhere, *So that to dy even in Christ, …g. 161.was infirmity, though voluntary. Heere then p. 31Chriſt denyeth that hee ſuffered any thing as forced on him by conſtraint & violence, but he ſheweth that himſelfe was altogeather willing even to Dy for his people: which alſo““pag. 11… you plainly ſee. How will you hence conclude, Ergo He dyed miraculouſly, & not by any fayling of the ſtrength of nature in him notwithſtanding all his moſt intolerable ſorrowes and paines? This is truly a miraculous argument. As for Chriſostom whom**pag. …3… you cite heerevpon, he hath nothing for this point. Though it were new & not ordinary that Chriſt a man ſhould hauehave power to lay down his life and power to take it againe, yet why may not his manhood dy naturally notwithſtanding. But you will conclude this better. If I deny (you ſay) this that Chriſoſtom ſaith, I muſt remember what God himſelf ſaith, ““Luc. 12.Luke 12O foole this night ſhall they fetch away thy ſoule from thee. I remēber it well. What then? Ergo Chriſt ſaying, None taketh my life from me, &c. meant that he would dy miraculouſly, and not by the fayling of nature in him. If this be the reaſon, as I take it to bee, verily I grant it is marveylous ſubtile and paſt my reach. Further**pag. 7. you cite, that““Ion. 19. When Jeſus had tasted the vineger, he ſaid, All is finiſhed, and bowed the head, and gave vp the Ghost. What proveth this? Surely that at laſt after long and ſore anguiſh of minde and bodily torments his naturall ſtrength fayled him, & therefore he bowed his head and gaue vp the Ghoſt. What miracle is there in this? But Barnard ſaith, this proveth plainly an infinit power. Which doth? His tasting the vineger, or his ſaying, it is finiſhed, or his bowing the head, or his giving vp the Ghost. For my part I can not yet ſee any infinit power in any of theſe. Wherefore I can not reſt on Barnard heere, except you for him do finde out ſom other point in the text to prove plainly an infinit power ſhewed openly in the maner of the Death of Chriſt, which yet I ſee not. GiueGive me leaue to refuſe the Fathers in ſuch a caſe, which your ſelfe doth, as we ſaw before. Then you alleage that**Luke 23.Luke 23 Ieſus cryed with a lowd voyce, a little while before he dyed: to ſhew himſelf ““pag 7.ſay you, to be free from any touch of death. How are you ſure of that? What Scripture ſaith ſo? Or is there abſolut neceſſitie in reaſon that it muſt be ſo? Queſtionles none at all. Is it a thing not poſſible that Chriſt ſhould cry alowd, ſaying Father into thy hands J commend my Spirit, and even anon after dy; and yet nature to hauehave ben weaker in him, and ſo himſelf neerer to death now at laſt, then he was p. 32before in the beginning of his Paſſion. Let all wiſe men iudge. If this be not poſſible I will acknowledge mine errour. Adde heerevnto that experience ſheweth (as Phyſitians ſay) how ſom diſeaſes in the Body bring Death preſently after moſt ſtrong and violent crying: namely in ſom exceſſiue torments, as of the Stone, &c. Where in through extreeme paines and torments the vitall Spirits being diſſipated will bee vtterly extinct ſomtimes, before they can recover and gather againe togeather. Thus a man having good ſtrength and force in his Body, when ſuch a diſeaſe reſteth not neere the principall partes of nature originally, it ſeemeth hee may notwithſtanding by violence of paine onelyonly giuegive vp the Ghoſt at a ſuddaine, yet not miraculouſly, but by the courſe of nature only.Pag 7. Ad Hedib. quaeſt. 8. But * Ierom ſaith, " this was a great wonder, and that therevpon the Centurion confeſſed, truly this man was the Sonne of God. I deny not but Chriſt might ſhew ſom ſtrang & vnuſuall thing apparantlie to the beholders in vttering his laſt voice, when he cryed Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit. Which might alſo very much move the beholders and hearers. And yet it ſhall not follow that Death ſeazed vponupon him not naturally, or not by the fayling of natures ſtrength in him. I ſay, this may be acknowledged: and yet verily there is no neceſſitie at all to yeeld even this, for any thing that the text noteth. Yet Ierom ſayeth the Centurion was moved with this great wonder. It is ſtrange that you ſhould perſiſt to vrge Jerom heerein againſt the plaine text in another place:Mat. 27.54.Matt 27:54 which ſaith " When the Centurion ſaw the Earth quake and the thinges that were don, he ſaid, Truly this was the Sonne of God. …er. 51.Heere it is expreſly noted, that the * Earthquake chiefly with other apparant miracles there mentioned, or els the Earthquake with the the iniuries of the Perſecutours and the innocency and partience of Chriſt perſecuted, compared togeather, did move the Centurion to confeſſe and ſay, Truly this was the Sonne of God. Heere it is plaine then that not Chriſtes crying in thoſe tormentes was ſuch a wonder, or that the Centurion was by reaſon thereof moved to acknowledge Chriſt to be the Sonne of God, as Ierom collecteth I know not from what ground, but thoſe other ſights before ſaid. Laſt of all Austin is " brought to prove this matter,Pag 8. but with no more ſtrength of reaſon by the Scripture then the former. Neither can his words indeed being granted, neceſſarily p. 33conclude any thing for your purpoſe; which as ſ…emeth do ſhew nothing but Chriſtes voluntary dying, and that at his death he …hew…d great power and not infirmity only. Who denyeth th…ſe things.

Th…n he proceedeth to ſhew my diſdaine to the Fathers further: nam…ly for ſuch““pag 2… inſolent reiecting all their opinions touching the cauſes of Christs Agonie in the Garden, and of his complaint on the Croſſe. Theſe ſuppoſed cauſes are alleaged and amplifi…d in the††pag 1… former parte. For anſwere, firſt I d…ſi…e to know whether you allow of all theſe cauſes, or not, you ſ…me to …fuſe them**pag 13… heere: for heerein you ſhewed not your owne opinion, but …he iudgments of the Fathers. Elſwhere,““pag 29 yourſelfe are reſolute for ſom of theſe cauſes, and againſt other ſom. And yet before,**pag 37 All theſe interpretations (you ſay) are ſound, and ſtand well with the rules of Christian piety. Thus variable you are, in that wherein you ſeeme moſt reſolut. Howb…it in my minde, where you deny theſe to bee your opinions, there you are in the beſt opinion. Neither indeede to tell you plaine can I be of opinion that thoſe their iudgements are true." pag … The reaſons of my diſſenting were touched in † my former Treatiſe, and are maintayned further heereafter, as very ſufficient and iuſt. How then I pray you do I inſolently reiect the Fathers if heerein I diſſent from them iuſtly, which even your ſelfe alſo doth in ſundry of them? But my maner of ſpeach is inſolent perhaps, becauſe I ſay ſuch collections are abſurd and vnlikely. I anſwer, theſe my words are purpoſely meant of thoſe in theſe dayes that delight to vaunt of the Fathers, and chiefly in their errours. For ſeeing theſe opinions themſelues are vntrue, though ſome of the Fathers inclined after them, yet ſuch in our time as vrge them cannot but bee abſurd and ſtrang teachers. Who having ſo many helpes and meanes to diſcerne where the Fathers miſtook…, which they vtterly wanted and we abound with all, yet do ſo littl… profit by them, that even great Doctours as they deſire to bee thought, ſee not ſo much in the truth of the Goſpel as many younger men now pe…c…ave: and in the Fathers they make themſelves ſo cunning that commonly their ſound doctrine they little regard, their faults only they admire. Such I meant and tooke for abſurd gatherers from this Scripture. Whom heere I noted by the nam… of our Contraryes: The Fathers I call not ſo. Now that this ind…ed p. 34may be alſo ſeene even in your expounding heere. Conſider firſt, how you wavered and ſpake cōtrarily in theſe " ſuppoſed Cauſes, Chriſts ſub…ſſion …e lewes re…ction. …e Churches …ſperſion … pa 17 & …. …2. 37. Treat 1. …ag 68.as I noted a litle before. Again, theſe agree not with any Ci…cumſtances of the Paſſion, and ſo are meerely of Humane coniecture without all Scripture: alſo they agree not togeather among themſelves. One of them croſſeth another; one overthroweth another. Will you then avouch them, as you do, to be * all ſound and to ſtand well with the rules of Christian piety? Howbeit abſolutely " I d…ny not, but that th…ſe or ſome of theſe reaſons were in Chriſt at his Paſſion, as namely his Care for his Church; his love of his enemies, &c. For theſe holy affections hee never wanted all his life long. But this rather confuteth then proveth theſe to bee the very cauſe or cauſes that † in the hower of his dreadfull Paſſion wrought in him ſuch Agonies and conſternation of minde.…ag. 6. But theſe things heere I omit, beeing heereafter more fully diſcuſſed. Laſtly you caſt a needles rebuke vponupon me for " confounding the Cauſes of the Agonie and of the Complaint togeather.… 230.231. Forſooth that was done not without reaſon, I thinke: Every reaſonable man, I beleeve, will ſay, that the ſame cauſe was of them both in Chriſt. His Agonie and his Complaint are not ſo contrary nor ſo divers, but that they might, yea verily did proceed from the ſame cauſe and ground. Yea Ambroſe, … 20.one of your Authours doeth * plainly ioine thē both togeather.… 231. Yea your ſelfe doth alſo, as by comparing † your cauſe of the Agonie,… 34. with your 1. or 2. of the ‡ Complaint, will appeare. You have much cauſe then, have you not, to make ſuch out…yes vponupon me, that I am ſtrangely amazed, confounded, and forgetfull in my writing? Good wordes I pray you. I did but ioyne them togeather whom your ſelfe & others do make all one. But I have ſtood too long on theſe tryfles.

Now you will ſhew ſome examples of my mistaking or perverting your owne reaſons. … 31.For theſe hitherto were not his, but the Fathers opinions, as before I noted. I marveyle then why he troubleth him ſelfe and vsus with them, if they be not his; ſpecially if he propound them not to be receaved? Why laboureth hee ſo to diſtract vsus with ſuch varieties? And then to tell vsus they are not his, but other mens. Yet ſuch mens he telleth vsus they are, as that it muſt not be for our Credit to refuſe them. Thus the poore people are ſtrangely taught: thus the world ſhalbe filled full of ambiguities, p. 35doubtfulnes, variety of opinion in matters of Religion: and withall forbidden to reſt vponupon any certaine and particular reaſon, as alſo he dealeth in other caſes. But I omit to proſecute this any further. For we ſhall now ſee ſome of his owne matters, which I have ignorantly or purpoſely perverted.

Firſt““pag. 2… he telleth vsus, that In the Effectes of Christes Croſſe he noted out of the Apostle to the Hebrues, three properties of the true propitiatorie Sacrifice which tooke away the ſinne of the worlde. It was a Bodily, a Bloudy, and a Deadly Sacrifice, for ſo you ſpeake. This is one of your reaſons, yea almoſt the greateſt, to proove the Quaeſtion againſt vsus: becauſe Christes Bodily Sufferings & bloudſhed were the true propitiatiō of our ſinnes. But what a reaſon is this? How diffreth it frō our Aſſertion? That the true Sacrifice for ſinne, muſt be indeed bodily, bloudy, & dead we doubt not: we vnfaynedly & heartily doe imbrace it The Patriarkes beleeved it, the Iewes ſacrifices of beastes figured it, the new Testament confirmeth it. But how will it follow then, Ergo Chriſtes Bodily death onelyonly & meerlie was the wholl ranſom and price of ſinne. For we muſt note that this is the very Queſtion in deed; this is the point of our Controverſy, as**Pag. 8. I have ſhewed, if you will deale plainly. If you ſpeake not to this point, your words are Ambiguous and deceitfull: and that notable fault is in your ſelfe moſt true, which““Pag. 2.301. you wrongully charge me with: you dally with generall and doubtful termes, which according as they are expounded, may eyther make with you or against you. And moſt rightly of your wholl booke being indeed a huge volume for ſo litle matter, I may ſay that which you obiect moſt vnaptly againſt my ſmal pamphlet**Pa. 24… Three lines directly to the purpoſe had ben more worth thē ſo many leves thus wastfully ſpent. Wherefore, if you meane theſe wordes directly to the purpoſe in deed, and doe intend to conclude that which we plainly deny, and as now at this time we will vnderſtand your meaning to bee, that the meere Bodily Sufferings of Christ, without any proper ſufferings of his Soule, are the intier and whole ranſom for ſinne: then I affirme expreſly there is no piece of reaſon, nor likenes of any argument in th…ſe wordes. This will not follow by any meanes from your††Heere … the Heb… Your me… is and m… in this Q… That Ch… meere bo… & bloud … ferings a… whole … texte. Againe, if the Sacrifice, as it is onelyonly Bodily, Bloudy, and Deadly, doth wholly purge ſinne, then although Chriſts Bodily p. 36death and bloudſhed wanted not the ſympathy of the Soule, yet it followeth that no action or paſſion of his Soule, neither this by ſympathy nor any other, I ſay none at all as being in the Soule, was regarded as propiciatory and meritorious. Which if you once affirme plainly, then we will ſeeke no further for your drift, wee may know your meaning well enough. Chriſts Soule ſhall hauehave no place, no merit, no reſpect at all in the matter of Propitiation. Howbeit elſwhere I ſee in you manifeſt Contrariety heerevnto. For ſundry times you teach that Chriſt did ſuffer peculiarly and ſeverally ſom * proper puniſhments (which I hope were propitiatory & meritorious) in his Soule, …g 4. 257. …8 2…3. …8. 245.beſides his Bodily ſuffering: Yea that this was a part of his Croſſe & the effect of Gods wrath on his Soule as wel as the ſuffering in his Body. Now how can this be true, if our wholl Ranſom & propitiation be only Bodily, bloudy, and deadly: which is the point that heere * you ſtand on.ſo pa. 253 But you have reaſons " you ſay to cōfirm your maine matter,…ag. 232. 3. among many theſe 2: The Jewiſh Sacrifices, and the Sacramentes of Christians. The 1^ſt. ſhaddowing and foreſhewing, the 2. testifying and confirming that the true ſacrifice for ſinne was Bodily and bloudy. Still what trifling is this? Doth any in the World deny it, that the true Sacrifice for ſin was the Body, bloud, and death of the Redeemer? Wherefore the * Propoſition muſt be as I " did ſet it in your behalfe:**…ereof … ſpeake …: 233. …at. 1.10. …31. …. 8. &c. 44. &c. The Iewiſh Sacrifices were ſhaddowes or Figures, and our * Sacramentes were ſignes of our wholl and abſolute redemption by Chriſt. I ſay of the wholl and intire propitiatory Sacrifice, or els you ſhrinke and leave the Queſtion. As for your paines of Hell in ſuch ſenſe as " you vnderſtand them, that is including the locall puniſhment among the Damned, Desperation, finall retection, and ſuch like, ſo there was never any that thought Chriſte Suffered Hell paines, as before is declared.… 6 Where you ſay, that I expound theſe Figures of our wholl and abſolut redemption to bee of all the fruits and cauſes of our redemption, why do you vntruly charge me with that which I have not. I hauehave no ſuch word nor meaning as fruits. Indeed I named thē Figures of * Effects in Christ, … 14.I meane Acts don by Chriſt: but I never thought them any where fruits of our redemption, but either cauſes or meanes or other neceſſary adioints. This therefore which indeed is the true Propoſition, & being ſet as it ought to be I grant not, as you alſo vntruly charge me; I do ſtill deny it in ſuch maner, p. 37as I did before:““Pag. 1 Generally All the Iewes Sacrifices did not**I mean the propo… of their … ward app…rance, the… not expre… the whole Figure and ſhaddow our wholl redemption in Chriſt. The inward and inviſible things they all did not ſignifie. And yet I grant indeed, that they ſignified what they were apt to teach and ſignifie: namely the outward and Bodily ſufferings only. This I ſay, many of the Iewes Sacrifices did repreſent and ſignifie, yea moſt of them, but not All. Therefore the““Pag. 23 Aſſumption alſo I may well deny, as**Treat. 1 pag. 12. I did before: affirming that certaine Jewiſh Sacrifices ſet foorth the ſufferings even of the Soule of Chriſt, and not of his Body onelyonly. As 1. that ““Lev. 1…Lev 1Sacrifice conſiſting of 2. Goates, a ſlaine & a Scapegoat. **Pag. 23.You obiect heere againſt: 1. that I abuſe the Text. That were a great fault: but let vsus view the text. Thus are the very expreſſe wordes which you alſo recite:**ver. 5: Aaron ſhall take of the people 2. Goats for a Sinne-offering. Surely you muſt bring very good reaſon to fruſtrat ſo plaine a ſpeach: That is, you ſay, to make a Sinne-offering of one of them. Nay, the very words are, take 2. Goats for a Sinne-offering: it ſaith not, take 2. Goats that one of them may be a Sinne-offering. But this ſheweth ſo much, you thinke, where the text ſaith, Lottes were cast over the 2: Goates one lot for the Lorde, the other for the Scapegoat. And Aaron ſhall offer the Goat on which the Lordes lot ſhall fall, and make him a Sinne-offering. Theſe wordes prove not that the Scapegoat was no Sinne-offering at all: Vnleſſe this were true, that no Sinne offering can poſſibly bee but by killing and ſlaying and ſheadding of bloud. Although the““Heb. 9.Heb 9 Scripture ſay, Without ſheadding of bloud is no remiſſion, yet it meaneth that Allmost all things are in the Law purged with bloud. That is, many Offerings and ſacrifices are bloudy, but not all. I take now ſacrifice and offering in the largeſt ſenſe, as ſignifying any conſecrated thing given to God to appeaſe him for ſinne. And ſuch vnbloudy Sinne-offerings very many we ſhall finde in**Lev. 2.11, 13, 8 13. Nomb. 1… & 18, 11 & 28, 12 14.Lev 2:11Lev 2:13Lev 2:8 Moſes Law. Wherefore the Scapegoat may we yet a Sinne-offering, though it were not ſlaine nor bloudy. And his vtter ſending away into the vnknown Deſerts, may anſwer to the conſuming of ſom other Sacrifices by fire. Thus then theſe wordes of the text which you bring doe not proue the Scapegoate to be no Sinne-offering at all: they proue it to be no bloudy Offering, and therefore not ſuch, but of another kind then the ſlaine Goat was. It might be conſecrated and offered to the Lord, and vtterly ſequeſtred from men, and beare and p. 38take away ſinne no leſſe then the ſlaine Goat: wherein verily conſiſteth the nature and being of a Sacrifice or true Sinne-offering. And in very deede all this the text following expreſly avoucheth of the Scape goate.ver. 10. " The Scapegoat ſhalbe preſented alive before the Lord to make reconciliation by him, & to let him go for a Scapegoat. Heere is his Conſecrating vntounto the Lord, yea reconciliation alſo is made by him, though he dyed not as the other did. Againe more plainly,ver. 21, 22. * And Aaron ſhall put both his handes vpō the head of the live Goat and confeſſe vponupon him all the iniquities of the Children of Iſraell & all their treſpaſſes and all their ſinnes putting them vponupon the head of the Goat, and ſhall ſend him away (alive) into the Wildernes. So the Goat ſhall beare vponupon him all their iniquities into the Wildernes, being let go thither. Can there be any thing in the world more full and ſtrong to prove that the Scapegoat alſo was a true Sinne-offering, or rather a true parte of this wholl and intire Sinne-offering conſiſting and being compleat in both theſe Goats the ſlaine and the Scapegoat togeather. For as the ſlaine Goate ſo this Scapegoat, wee ſee, was aſwell " Conſecrated to the Lord, and * heere Offered (though not by killing) and ſeparated from men, ver. 10. ver. 21, 22.& have vponupon him all the ſinnes of the people and caryed them cleane away. So wee may reade of other Sacrifices conſiſting and being compleat wholly " of Sacrifices of ſundry divers kindes.Nomb. 28.3, &c. The bloudy Sacrifice had conioyned togeather with it, the vnbloudy Sacrifice of the Meat offering, and another of the Drinke offering &c. Which may very likely repreſent vntounto vsus the ſundry and divers kindes of Christes meritorious Sufferings in his life time & at his Death, ſom bloudy, ſome vnbloudy: but all concurring togeather & making the full and perſit propitiation for al our ſinnes. And even ſuch a Sacrifice or Sinne-offering it ſeemeth ſurely theſe 2. Goats were. Heere then your adviſednes may bee noted by all men, which doe reprove me for this aſſertion, and that with ſuch violent and vncomly termes. Now if it be a Figurative Sinne-offering, what ſignified this Figure? Certainly it ſignified Christ, and his taking away of our ſinnes by his death. Have you any colour of reaſon to maintaine thoſe wide coniectures of the * Ancients,…yrill, Am…oſe, Beda. that the Scapegoat ſignified the Reprobat and castaway people: or ells curſed Barrabas that ſcaped death when Ieſus was ſlaine. Who but you would defend theſe palpable miſtakinges of thoſe men? And p. 39why? Becauſe they are Ancient. Yet ſee you not the expreſſe text againſt thē? Do damned men, or did Barrabas reconcile vsus to God, & take away our ſinnes, as the Scapegoat did typically? Nay ſurely: It muſt needs be then, that it ſignified Christ, yea doubtles Christ man. For the Godhead could bee no Sinne-offering neither did it make reconciliation for ſinne, neither did the Deity beare our ſinnes vponupon himſelfe properly: all which the Scapegoat **Tipically.did. Further, if it were Christ man, it could not be his Body: for his body was ſlaine bloudily, the Scapegoat was not ſlaine. For the other Goat (a Sacrifice to) being ſlaine, this ſurvived and went away into the land of ſeparation. It muſt then be of neceſſity (I thinke) the Humane mortall Soule of Christ which the Scapegoate ſignified: which was a true Sinne-offering and made propitiation for vsus, aſwell as the ſlaine Goat, and bare vponupon him our ſinnes: though his Soule dyed not bloudily nor by looſing life and ſenſe, as his body and the typicall ſlaine Goat did. You ſay,““Pap. 235. If this Scapegoat do ſignifie Chriſts Soule, then it cannot be that Chriſtes Soule Suffered, much leſſe dyed any death. This obiection truly you might hauehave ſpared: ſeeing my ſelf**Treat. 1.1… before brought it & fully anſwered it: where againſt you have ſaid never a word. The effect whereof is this: The eſcaping of the Goat may lively ſhew vntounto vsus that Chriſts Soule dyed not as the Body dyed by looſing life and ſenſe, but ſurviving went hence into Hades, the land of ſeparation, the inviſible world of the Dead. But in that the Scapegoat did beare and ſuſtaine our ſinnes, and was indeede a Sinne-offering to aſwell as the ſlaine Goat, ſo it may well ſignifie that Chriſtes Soule properly ſuffered and ſuſtayned the burden of our ſinnes in ſatisfying for them, no leſſe then his body which was bloudily ſlaine therefore. As for the Dying of Christs Soule we ſhall anſwer you for that in due place heereafter. So that, Now where you ſay,““Pag. 234. I am more bold then wiſe in affirming the Scapegoat to ſignifie the Soule of Chriſt. Surely then I were like you, who affirme as boldly, that among the Iewes no Sacrifice at all foreſhewed any Suffering of the Soule of Chriſt: which you can never prove. Howbeit this I acknowledge indeed that the Iewiſh Figures, though they be applyable vntounto Chriſt the ſubſtance of thoſe ſhaddowes, yet wee ought to apply them in the particulars ſoberly and warily, and not without ſome plaine proportion of the Figure with the thing Figured. Wherefore my meaning p. 38is none other in theſe Iewiſh figures, which the Scripture doth not any where expreſly interpret, but to ſhew what I thinke to be indeed moſt probable and likely, knowing that yet ſom ſuch matter, as we aime at, they do ſignifie without queſtion. And this is ſufficient to deny your Aſſertion, which againſt our ſaying that the ſufferings of Christes Soule may be ſignified by the Scapegoat, is but meerely coniecturall and preſumed.

The very like are * your 3. reaſons brought to ſhew that the " Holocaust cannot ſignifie the ſuffering…s of whole Chriſte,Pag. 236. and therefore not of his Soule any way.Lev. 1. & 6.Lev 1 Your former reaſon is, becauſe the Holocaust was 1. ſlaine and after burnt: for then if the burning ſignifieth Chriſts paines and ſufferings, Chriſt muſt ſeeme to ſuffer after his death. But this is a weake inference. Is there any Figure or ſimilitude concurring in all points and circumſtances with the thing ſignified? Sure there is no man of knowledge ſo vnexpert or ſo vnreaſonable as to require it. Many times where they agree only but in one principall reſpect, that ſufficeth to make the ſimilitude. Againe many ſimilitudes and Figures there are in the olde Law having as great diſparagemēt to the things ſignified by them as this in the Holocauſt which you talke of. The Bodies of beaſts firſt " ſlaine,Lev. 4.11, 2. & 16, 27 Heb 13.11.12. ver. 13. Lev. 1.9.Lev 4:11Lev 4:2Lev 16:27Heb 13:11Heb 13:12Lev 1:9 were after caryed out of the Hoſt. Now theſe ſignified Christs going out of Jeruſalem * to be ſlaine, but being yet alive. Againe the beaſts carying out by others after they were ſlaine "is likened to our voluntary and free leaving of the world in this life. Laſtly the * burning of the beaſtes after they were dead, was a ſacrifice of a ſweet favour vntounto God. Which in truth is Chriſts very " death, Fphe. 5.2.and nothing don by him afterward, whereby Gods anger is fully pacified towarde vsus. Wherefore your firſt exception is very vaine. The 2. is like to it. The Holocaust was conſumed in one & the ſame ſire. But Christ was tormented wholly not with one kind of ſuffering (as we maintaine) but with 2. kindes, that is with bodyly & ſpirituall ſorrowes. Firſt I ſay, this alſo, if it were true, is as weake an exception as the former, and altogeather like it. See: Though Chriſt indeed ſuffered divers and ſundry kindes of ſorrowes yea even of thoſe which were meerely outward and bodily,Even that meerely in the Soule viz. when it grew vehement. as alſo of thoſe that were meerely Spirituall and inward, yet we plainely affirme that one & " the ſame torment afflicted his whole manhood by ſympathy. For his Soule alſo was ſore grieved I doubt not even p. 41with his proper Bodily torments: likewiſe his Body, when his trickling ſweat was clots of bloud, was cruſhed and broken vnſpekeably with his inward and ſpirituall ſorrowes, though his fleſh then felt outwardly no paine. So your 2. exception is alſo nothing. The 3. is no better: where you argue fromaaTrea… pag. 1… my words, that the Bodyes of beastes could not prefigure the immortall & reaſonable Soule of Christ. And it is like to that whichbbpag. … afterward you cite from my words about the Sacraments, Earthly Elements cannot ſet out ſpirituall and inviſible effectes in Christ. Hence you thinke that I cannot defend that the firy conſuming of the Holocaust may ſignifie the ſorrows both of the Soule and Body of Chriſt. You ſhall ſee that I can full eaſily, and without any triſling. It is evident that I meane in thoſe former places, that bodily thinges generally and for the moſt part doe-repreſent the meere bodily & externall parts of Chriſtes ſufferings: but not alwayes and altogeather. Which you might hauehave eaſily ſeene by my anſwere to theccTrea… pag. … Aſſumption and by the inſtances which there I give to this purpoſe. Againe the very inſtances which I give, viz: the Scapegoat, the Holocaust, & afterward the bread broken in the communion, theſe I ſay doe not in that reſpect as they are Bodily things repreſent the Soule of Chriſt or any matter pertayning to it. But the peculiar vſage and maner of action about them doth lively repreſent the ſuffering of his ſoule and not of his body only. As, not the Goat repreſenteth Chriſtes ſoule, vnles only in reſpect of the eſcaping of it whē the other Goat dyed, & alſo in reſpect of the ſuſtayning and bearing vponupon himſelf of our ſinnes. And not the body of the Holocaust, but the vtter conſuming by fire of the whole, ſignifieth the ſufferings of whole Chriſt. Laſtly the bread may ſignifie the whole Chriſt who is the intire and perfit bread of life: but the Breaking thereof into pieces repreſenteth more lively the breaking & cruſhing in pieces (as it were) of the ſoul rather thē of the body. Which was pierced through, but was not in caſe of being broken in pieces, ſo likely as the Soul was. Yet you will ſay) the Hol: may ſignifie that whole Chriſte ſuffered but ſome bodily afflictions, the Soul feeling the griefs & paines of the Body. For how wil it follow that the proper and immediat ſufferings of Chriſts Soule might be ſignified by the Holocauſt? Surely according to the proportion of the Holocaust ſo whole Chriſt, & then his very Soule chiefly, was p. 42as it were chopt or broken into pieces, and as it were quite conſumed and ſwallowed vp in his firy ſorrowes: onelyonly the aſſiſtance of his Godhead ſuſtained his Soule and withall his body, or els he could not have borne it,…reat 1. …ag. …8. as a I noted M. Whitakers to have truly taught. This can not bee but the Soules peculiar ſuffering of Gods very wrath, far beyond all bodily ſufferings: and yet not thoſe paines of Hell, …ag 8. &c.as b you groſly vtter it. Your other ſenſes that you give heereof, the 1. hindreth not mine,…ag. 237. that is c the Acceptation of Christes death. The 2. that is Christs fleſhes incorruption after death is very hard and far fetcht. And Sacrifices had their reſpect to Chriſtes death, not to any thing further or afterwards. As for another ſenſe out of Austin that it ſhould ſignifie our perfection and burning charity, it cannot be true: for the Holocaust-ſacrifice out of queſtion primarily ſignified the perſon of Chriſt, not ours. See: it is vntrue that any man beſides Chriſt alone is or can bee perfect in this life, that he ſhould bee wholly conſumed with Heavenly love, according to the proportion of the conſuming of the Holocaust. Alſo you both heere do ſeeme double, vnderſtanding by the Holocauſt both incorruption after death, & a perfect burning Love in vsus now in this life. Which things are farre diſtant aſonder and cannot ſtand togeather. But all th…ſe are ſo vnlikely, that I will leave them to the conſideration of the godly wiſe.