Works of Joseph Hall, Section 10 – Section 11
SECTION X. Concerning Satisfaction.
SATISFACTION hath neere affinitie with merit; and indeed, is but as another twig ariſing from the ſame root: Than which, no opinion could bee deuiſed more iniurious, and reproachfull to the merits of CHRIST. The word was not diſpleaſing to the ancient Fathers, nor in their ſenſe, to vsus; OnelyOnly this let mee touch in paſſing by;Tert. de praeſcrip. Fides …inum ſalus proprietatum. Conſult. c. de ſatisfact. that the heedleſſe abuſe of words, to the great wrong of the Church, hath bred confuſion of things; as contrarily, that of Tertullian is approued, The aſſured ſenſe of words is the ſafetie of proprieties: Wee hauehave nothing to doe here with ciuill Satisfaction, nothing with Eccleſiaſticall; whereof Luther not vnfitly ſaid, (euen in Caſſanders owne iudgement) Our mother the Church, out of her good affection deſiring to preuent the hand of GOD,Satisfactio penitentialis nihil aliud eſt quàm conatus infectum reddendiquod factum eſt, Alphonſ. Virueſius aduerſ. Luth. chaſtiſes her children with certaine Satisfactions, leſt they ſhould fall vnderunder the ſcourges of GOD. This Canonicall Satisfaction, as many call it, hath bin too long out of vſe, on both ſides: Yea, more than this, in all our Sermons to our people, we beat importunatly vponupon the neceſſity of penitence, & all the wholſome exerciſes thereof, as fruits worthy of Repentance. Not (as Caſſander wel interprets it) as if we deſired they ſhould offer vntounto God a ranſom worthy, & ſufficient for the clearing of the ſcore of their ſins; but that we teach thē, thoſe offices muſt be performed by them, which God requires of thoſe ſinners, on whom he will beſtow the ſatisfaction of his Sonne: Let them call theſe ſatisfactions, if they will, we giuegive them leaue: But that after the moſt abſolute paſſion of Chriſt, there ſhould be yet behinde, certaine remainders of puniſhment to be diſcharged by vsus, either here, or in Purgatory, with a purpoſe thereby to ſatisfie the diuine Iuſtice, whether they be impoſed by God or by the Prieſt, or by our ſelues (as the Tridentine diſtinction runnes) we neither may, nor can indure.
For (how nicely ſoeuer theſe men diſtinguiſh) it cannot be, but this ſacrilegious opinion muſt needes accuſe the truly propitiatory ſacrifice of Chriſt, of ſome imperfection. I know, they ſay, that both ſatisfactions may well ſtand together; that of the Mediator; and this, of man: whereof Bonauenture cals the one Perfect,Cit. Caſſ. ibid. the other Semiperfect. But theſe are words. Let the Sophiſters tell me, Doth not the ful… …eſſell containe in it ſelfe the halfe? or what need the one halfe a part, when we hauehave the whole? And laſtly, can any thing be added to that which is perfect? But ſome of their heed fuller. Diuines wil neither hauehave theſe two oppoſite, nor ſubordinate to each other: For it is a ſhame to ſpeake, what Suarez, what Durand, and other groſſer Papiſts hauehave diſcourſed of this point: Let them rather if they will, hold (which opinion yet hath beene controlled, not by the Cardinall onelyonly, but by three Popes before him) that mens ſatisfactions ſerue onelyonly to apply vntounto vsus, that which the ſatisfactions of Chriſt hauehave promerited for vsus. Yet, euen this ſhift will not ſerue:Bellermine de Indulg. l. 1. c. 4. Pi… 5. Greg. l. 3. clem. 6. For Chriſts ſatisfaction (as they teach) reſpects eternall puniſhment, and not temporall; How then can it once be imagined, that we by our ſatisfaction ſhould procure that his ſuffering, which was deſtinated to the expiation of an eternall puniſhment, ſhould ſerue to the diſcharge of a temporall? And why ſhould we doe this, rather than Chriſt himſelfe? Beſides, how abſurdly doth this ſound, That he whoſe bounty hath paid our pounds for vsus, hath yet left vsus, out of our poore ſtocke, to pay ſome few farthings for our ſelues? Let me demand then; whether could not Chriſt vndertake theſe temporall puniſhments for vsus, or would he not? That he could not, is impious; that he would not, is bold to ſay, and illiberall to doe: For where is there any reſtraint? or what are the limits of his mercy? The fault is remitted (ſaith the conuenticle of Trent) the puniſhment is not pardoned: The Eaſterne Church would neuer hauehave ſaid ſo, which alwayes ſtoutly oppoſed her ſelfe to this error: And indeed, what a ſhamefull reproach is this to the infinite mercy of the forgiuer? what a wrong to his iuſtice? whereto is the puniſhment due but to the fault? Did euer God inflict puniſhments that were not due? Many a time hath he forgiuen to ſinners thoſe plagues which both they had deſerued, and he threatned; but neuer did hee call backe for thoſe arrerages which hee had forgiuen: God puniſhes vsus indeed, (or chaſtens vsus rather) and that ſometimes well and ſharply after the remiſſion of our offence. Not that hee may giuegive himſelfe ſatisfaction of vsus (for how can it be ſo pleaſing to him that it ſhould bee ill with vsus?) but that he may confirme vsus to himſelfe that he may amend vsus: Hee layes no ſtroke vponupon vsus with a reuenging hand, but with a fatherly. Wee ſuffer therefore now, but wee ſatisfie not; This is proper onelyonly to that eternall Prieſt, and to his eternall Prieſthood, and is no more communicable to Saints and Angels, than his owne perſon; And certainly that which was his part, hee hath performed; hee hath redeemed vsus from the curſe of the Law; and part of the Legall puniſhment, is this temporall reuenge: For vsus therefore, to giuegive hands to them in this, it were no better than perfidious and ſhamefully traiterous. And if it be more than manifeſt, that this cannot be done, either by our owne torments inflicted, or good workes performed (how penall ſoeuer) how much leſſe ſhall it bee effected by others? There is none of the Saints which will not iuſtly take vp that anſwere of the wiſer Virgins, There will not be enough for you, and for vsus.Matth. 25.9. H…aer. aduer. Ceſiphon…. Non neceſſe habet conuinci quod ſua ſtatim profeſſion blaſphemum eſt. But as Hierome ſaid well. There is no need of any great conuiction, where the opinion carries blaſphemy in the face.
SECTION XI. Concerning Purgatory.
VPonUpon this conceit of Satisfactions, depend thoſe other fables of Purgatory, and Indulgences; pleaſant ones both, and not vnworthy of a Satyre: whereof, ſo oft as I thinke, I cannot but remember the ſcornefull frumpe of Luther, alluding to that of the Prophet, Domine non poſſum veſci ſtercore humano: yet if they had onelyonly doubtfully and problematically commended their Purgatory to the Church, we might eaſily hauehave fauoured them with a conniuence; although you cannot ſay, whether it would hauehave beene more worthy to ſet the ſpleene on worke for laughter, or the bowels for commiſeration: But now when Bellarmine teaches vsus, that it pertaines to the Catholike faith, and our Fiſher of Rocheſter will hauehave it altogether neceſſary to bee knowne and beleeued; we cannot entertaine this preſumptuous folly, without indignation. How miſerably the Scriptures are wreſted to this purpoſe, if any Schoole-boy could not eaſily ſee,Hier. Paulin. Plato in Phaedone. Itaque quicunque in vita quodammodo medium tenuiſſeiter co… periuntur, ad Acherontem profecti vehiculit, quae vnicuique adſunt, in paludem per…eniunt Acheruſiam; ibique habitant, purgantur que poenas dantes iniuriarum, & cum purificati, &c. Euſeb. de praepar. Euang. l. 1. c. vlt. Aug. de Ciuit. Dei, l. 21. c. 13. qui & Virgil. ibid. citat. 2 Cor. 5.1. Apoc. 14.13. Wiſd. 3.1. he were worthy of whipping. As Hierome ſaid of the Heretikes of his time, They frame ſome vnfitting teſtimonies to their owne ſenſe; as if it were a worthy, and not rather an abhominable kinde of teaching, to depraue ſentences, and to dragge the Scriptures perforce, to their owne bent: Neither are the ancient Fathers better vſed in their citation; of which, Origen, Ambroſe, Hilary, Lactantius, Niſſen, Ierome, gaue intimation of a quite other Purgatory, from the Romiſh. Auguſtine ſpeakes of it, at peraduenture, waueringly, vncertainly; The reſt neuer dreamed of any at all: But yet, I miſtake it; Now I remember S. Plato is cited by Auſten and Euſebius, for the Patron of this opinion: and who knowes not, that S. Homer and S. Virgil are flat for it: yet this fire neuer began to burne out, but in Gregories time and ſince that, the authority of the Altoran hath not a little mended it: this is it that their Rocheſter ingenuouſly confeſſed of old, that this Purgatory flame came but lately to the knowledge of the Church: but for vsus, that of S. Paul ſhall neuer be wrung from our hands: (foreign,) If, or when this earthly houſe ſhall be diſſolued, we hauehave a building, not made with hands, eternall, in the heauens: And when is this Saint Pauls (foreign)? Saint Iohn ſhall interpret it; (foreign) Thoſe that dye Amodo, from henceforth: and when is this Amodo? To day thou ſhalt be with me, ſaith Chriſt; euen inſtantly vponupon the egreſſe of the ſoule. Let them commend their ſoules to God, ſaith S. Peter: But what of that? That which doth vtterly quench out this fabulous fire, the counterfeit Salomon, (though true to the Papiſts) addes, The ſoules of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment ſhall touch them: Behold then, either the ſoules without a Purgatory or, a Purgatory without paine: But what ſticke we at this? Let the Popiſh Doctors together agree among themſelues, of the fire of their Purgatory, of the torments of the Subiect, of the duration, of the executioners, of the condition of the ſoules there detained; and then afterwards let them looke for our aſſent: In the meane time, why is it not as free for vsus as for Suarez, Tam. 4. in Th. d. 46.not to beleeue the walking Ghoſts of the dead, but metaphorically? or why may not we as well deny the ordinary common Purgatory, as Bellarmine may deuiſe a new one, more noble and eaſe-full than the firſt.