The 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 , confusedly powring out the hasty resolutions of mine own braines spiced euery 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 ) when we com to view his particulars heerafter insuing . Among which 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 challenge against me . Which is this , “ “ Epis● . that I haue changed the first question , that I set not down the state therof fully nor truly : & so , I offer to prove that which he never denied , I confute that which he never affirmed . Let vs ther fore consider advisedly this question : which I wil set downe again as exactly & as plainly as I can , that we may see how far I erred from 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● fections ●●tio and meerely a Bodily death : altogither like as the godlie and 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 from God : either properly from his Iustice , or from his Holy Love : either from him 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 mediatly : 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 men ( if it grow vehement ) it affecteth consequently 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 of the Soules Proper and Immediat Suffering . The Soules second faculty of Suffering paines is not Proper , but Common to vs 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 third kind of painful Suffering the Soule hath : namely , her vehement & strong Affections are Painful , whether they be good or evill . As Zeale , Love , Compassion , 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 1st 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 the point of our Controversie . And verily how you can deny 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 vs with other creatures . Thirdly wee must also note that God himselfe 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 and 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 vnto 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. ● The Lord laid vpon him the punishment of vs 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● perturbation at all , and therefore consequently no Wrath nor Hatred as is in vs . 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 vpon 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 Curse of God . Now then seeing the paines which Christ for vs 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 vs 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 . Sixt : 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 onely 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 . For 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 vs , and to mortifie sinne in vs more and more hereafter . And thus they are in no sort inflicted on vs 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 sinne , but nothing appertayning to Christ neither . 3. 3 Suffering sinne not haerent , yet impu●●● There is another peculiar and extraordinary way belonging onely 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. 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 onely 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 haue 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 onely heere in this life . Lastly their torments 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 haue also , 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 haue 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 . therefore 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 circumstances 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 vs see wherein you agree with vs , 〈◊〉 . 248. and wherein you disagree . We all agree ( in termes ) That Christ suffered 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 afflictions 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 we 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 vs : 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 it . 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 Redemption for vs . Your A●● on w●●●●gain sa●● Christ ●●red i●●● only 〈◊〉 from 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 & from his Body . This is your drift every where , but I note these expresse places : ●●g . 16. * Sin which should have wrought in vs 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 satisfaction 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 vnto the Soule , and these are the sufferings of the Crosse and of death which the Scriptures attribute to the Sonne of God for our 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 vs 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 vnto 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 which 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 onely 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 vs : 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 vs 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 even 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 vs 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 from Scripture namely in Circumstances , 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 often 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 from 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 haue to set out with an emphasis , the most dolefull and incomparable paines of Christes sufferinges , as they appeared onely 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 vpon vs 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 onely 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 mixture 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 vnto , and which payment of ours was by God layed vpon 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 vnto vs , 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 haue 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 vs 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 vpon 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 vs 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 God 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 in truth , ( as † before is shewed ) of that kinde as Christes suffering was , and therefore this suffering of the Soule onely 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 vpon himselfe , to acquite vs 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 haue wordes in some places , as if you h●ld this difference with vs of Christes sufferinges compared with the suffering of Martirs : Namely where you say , Pag. 248 " Christ suffered the wrath of God punishing sinne , ●ag . 257 not * 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 vs . 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 surely 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 punishments 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 shal be 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 vs 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 well & 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 vs 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 . that Mens ●●●ules haue ●●●ny sense in ye●●he ●inde , be●●●des the 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 vpon men somtime more somtime lesse in this life , even as it pleaseth him . Which also befell vnto 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 vpon 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 vs , 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 . Onely wee know that whatsoever it were , Gods very wrath and proper vengeance for sinnes though outwardly executed on 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 vnto 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 vs , 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● 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 contradicting & 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 vs 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 is mistaken , and that this place of Scripture intendeth not these things . 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 227 as " 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 haue 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 vnto him and him vnto the world , as still it doth vs 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 vnto 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 before , 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 vnto 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. Faith working by loue . 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 shal be vpon 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. 5.1 a litle before signifieth the Shame and hatred of Christ slaine on the Crosse tog●ather with the shame of his Servants . 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 ought 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 vs , 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 from 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 vs 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 vs 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 ( 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 Contents 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 vs no purchase , nor wrought vs 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 vs ( 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 vnto 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 towards 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 vnto vs , & 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 , &c otherwise 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 vs 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 shal be 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 to 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. 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● 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 them by the Scripture according to that measure of knowledge and diligence which the Lord inableth me with . It is every Christians duety as we haue seene , and you take it vnto 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 haue 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 . Mr 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 haue 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 do with vs in Civill matters , that what they affirme and testifie must obtaine a verdict , and so haue 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 vs hath indeede Authoritie . The Fathers , all , or som haue 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 vs , 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 vnto them , they verily abuse the Fathers , and not we . For as the Papists do abuse the Saints deceased by Worshipping and praying vnto them , not we who loue 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 vs 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 with 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. God hath called us vnto 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 haue a care and conscience ( Sir ) I pray you in this , that you leave this freedom vnto vs , 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 haue 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 vs 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 Resurrection , dyed againe . Sec : You reiect his exposition of those words 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 vnto 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 Patrum , a certaine region of rest vnder 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 vnto vs the like ? If we bring not as good reason to dissent as you do , whensoever we vary from them , let vs heare of it , and beare the blame iustly . This only we desire that in any case of Religion the bare custom of times , the opinion of men , and authority meerely Humane should never barre vs from receaving the simplicity and evidence of the truth concerning vs which appeareth in the Scripture . But now , that we may proceede , let vs 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 . Contrary to this I alleaged the Scripture , " He was like vs in all things sinne only excepted . To answer this * you reply , Was he like vs 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 vs in that he walked vpon 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 onely of naturall Humane properties and infirmities , that Christ in them was altogeather like vs , 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 haue 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 Christ 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 haue 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. O foole this night shall they fetch away thy soule from thee . I remember 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 . Giue me leaue to refuse the Fathers in such a case , which your selfe doth , as we saw before . Then you alleage that * * 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 haue ben weaker in him , and so himself neerer to death now at last , then he was before 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 onely giue 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 vpon 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 . 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 conclude 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 may be also seene even in your expounding heere . Consider first , how you wavered and spake contrarily 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 vpon 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 them 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 vpon 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 vs with them , if they be not his ; specially if he propound them not to be receaved ? Why laboureth hee so to distract vs with such varieties ? And then to tell vs they are not his , but other mens . Yet such mens he telleth vs they are , as that it must not be for our Credit to refuse them . Thus the poore people are strangely taught : thus the world shal be filled full of ambiguities , doubtfulnes , variety of opinion in matters of Religion : and withall forbidden to rest vpon 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 vs , 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 vs : because Christes Bodily Sufferings & bloudshed were the true propitiation of our sinnes . But what a reason is this ? How diffreth it from 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 onely & 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 than 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 onely Bodily , Bloudy , and Deadly , doth wholly purge sinne , then although Christs Bodily death 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 haue 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 confirm your maine matter , ●ag. 232. 3. among many these 2 : The Jewish Sacrifices , and the Sacramentes of Christians . The 1st . 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 haue no such word nor meaning as fruits . Indeed I named them 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 , as 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 onely . As 1. that “ “ Lev. 1● Sacrifice 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 vs 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. 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. 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 take 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 shal be presented alive before the Lord to make reconciliation by him , & to let him go for a Scape-goat . Heere is his Consecrating vnto 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 vpon the head of the live Goat and confesse vpon him all the iniquities of the Children of Israell & all their trespasses and all their sinnes putting them vpon the head of the Goat , and shall send him away ( alive ) into the Wildernes . So the Goat shall beare vpon 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 vpon 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 vnto vs 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 why ? Because they are Ancient . Yet see you not the expresse text against them ? Do damned men , or did Barrabas reconcile vs 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 vpon 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 vs , aswell as the slaine Goat , and bare vpon 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 haue 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 vnto vs 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 vnto 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 is 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. 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 disparagement 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 . 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 vnto God . Which in truth is Christs very " death , Fphe . 5.2 . and nothing don by him afterward , whereby Gods anger is fully pacified towarde vs . 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 with 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 from a a Trea● pag. 1● my words , that the Bodyes of beastes could not prefigure the immortall & reasonable Soule of Christ . And it is like to that which b b pag. ● 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 haue easily seene by my answere to the c c Trea● 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 when the other Goat dyed , & also in respect of the sustayning and bearing vpon 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 than 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 as it were chopt or broken into pieces , and as it were quite consumed and swallowed vp in his firy sorrowes : onely 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 vs 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 .

Then d you come to your next reason about the Sacramentes , ●●g . 238. wherein you thinke to touch me . First you reprove mee for saying , ●●at . 1. 〈◊〉 . 14. e Sacraments are Earthly elementes , they cannot set out the spirituall and invisible effects in Christ . This say you is against the definition of a Sacrament , which is , Avisible signe of invisible grace . I answer , first you rather overthrow your self in vrging this against me : for your owne main assertion is that neither the Iewish Sacrifices nor Christian Sacraments do signifie any more then the bodily and bloudy death of Christ . Then it is your selfe Sir indeed that denyeth the very definition of Sacraments , that they are visible signes of invisible graces . For I hope the Bodily and bloudy death of Christ , and the renting of his flesh with whips , nayles , and speares were visible and not invisible things . As for me I can easily defend my self although you fayle in this . For I holde that Sacraments are indeede visible signes of invisible graces wrought in vs by Christ : and yet vsually they represent not spirituall and invisible Effects or Acts in Christ himselfe , but a a Albei●● conseq●● & imp●● I deny● but al● Passion be vn●●stood it only the externall and visible partes of his Passion . Can you not reconcile these two ? Any b●ginner in Christianitie will easily do it . Next b b Pag. 2● you make me to crosse the Justitution of the Lords Table , because c c Treat . ● pag. 14 I said the Ceremony of breaking the bread cannot properly belong to Christes body . But even heere doe not I say expresly , that it sheweth foorth how Christes body was broken for vs ? Which you say is the Institution and this I plainly acknowledge : where then is mine errour , and what is it ? Indeed I meane that the breaking of the bread into many pieces doth not set out primarily the breaking of his body , but of his soule first and immediatly , and then of his Body iointly and consequentlie . Againe , that it doth not set out properly the pearcing or boring through of Christs body with the spear or nayles nor his lashing with the whip : because d d 1 Cor. 1● Klòmenon is broken to pieces properly , and e e Isa. 53● Meducca in the Prophet is also Broken to pieces properlie , or crushed and broken to powder . As these f f Nom. ● Isa 19. Deut. 2● Likewise ther wor● very same ●●ture . 2 C●● 34.7 2 〈◊〉 23.6 , 15.16.12 . Isa 21 , and 2 and 41.1 Mic 4. ● Scripture do vse this word likewise , and also all Lexicons do confirme . Your g g Psal. 14 Ior. 44. ● Except Io●● 2. wher the portion ma● kept of that per sense 〈◊〉 breake m●● pieces with words A●● Psal. 34 51.17 . allegations therfore about the vse of Dacha otherwise , shew not the proper , but the vse thereof altered . Thus then still I say our former places are not to be meant principallie of Christs Body , for it was not properly broken : which also my other place sheweth suffficientlie where it is said , h h Ioh 1● Not a bone of him was broken . Seeing it is manefest that none of his flesh was separated from his bones . But of necessitie it must have ben so , if his flesh had ben properlie broken into pieces , and yet his bones not broken . i i Pag. 23 You say , From a part the whole may and doth properly take denomination . First you must shew that some parte of him was properly broken into pieces : which hitherto is proved to the contrary . That fable which k k Pag. 6● you bring of the Nayles being so great that Constantine of them made him a Bridle and a Helmet , will not helpe to prove that his Body was properly broken . Neither is cutting or tearing , or pearching through which onely indeed the Scripture warranteth , that Breaking properly which l l Dach● . that word in the Prophet b●fore noted doth properly signifie . And I pray is that true , that from a part the whole may and doth properly take denomination . Doth it properly ? From a part to the whole is a Figure of speach . Is a Figurative speach a proper speach with you ? Vainly you charge me I know not how often against my expresse words , that I call Hell Heaven , and Descending Ascending . But heere it is no wrong to charge you with such an absurdity indeed , who expresly do make that whiche you say is Figurative to bee a proper denomination . I am sure your Grammar was better , before you were as you are . But to proceede if you aske mee , Cor. 11.24 〈◊〉 53 10. whether doe I thinke that a those places , of the Apostle and the Prophet doe signifie at all the pearcing of his body . I aunswere they may by a generall and vnproper speach , as piercing may be an vnproper kind of breaking . For seeing the H. Ghost by those wordes intendeth to shew the whole outward violence and destruction of his flesh also , and not onely the breaking & bruizing of his Soule , therefore I deny not but heerein so much may be signified , yet in no wise not that alone , nor by a proper signification , as I have said . Nowe where you catch at an advantage in me as you thinke , Treat 1. ●●g . 14. in that I said , b The Caeremony of breaking the bread ( or that breaking to pieces in I say ) cannot belong properly to Christes body , but to his soule . I grant taking my wordes at the worst , and thinking me to be a senseles foole ( as indeed you do in your whole writing ) so you may construe them as if I had said , The Soule might be properly broken to pieces . But other men ( not inferior to your L. in learning , none dispraysed ) who have read this Treatise , have conceaved me thus . This breaking to pieces cannot be properly said of Christs body , nor in any sense proportionable to the property of the c words . But his Soule may rather & more truly be said to have ben broken and bruized to pieces in such wise as souls may be broken with sorrows & extraordinary anguish , ●omenon ●educca . and so was his Body likewise by sympathy with his Soule . Where I deny not but Broken applyed to the Soule is Figurative : yet keeping a iust and full proportion with the proper sense of Breaking to pieces , which we cannot keepe referring it to his Body . So that thus it is neerer and better applyed to the Soule then to the Body of Christ , which was only pierced or bored through .

Then you rehearse another of your reasons tending to the very same effect as that last before . ●●g . 240. You will prove ( d you say ) that the bloud of our Saviour is the true price of our redemption , and that aswel of our Soules as of our Bodyes . Still you deale fraudulently : for who denyeth this as your wordes runne . But wee know you meane , ●●s heere ●●g. 16. e that no more but the shedding of his bloud onely and meerely is the iust and full satisfaction of all our sinnes even in the righteous and sincere iudgment of God . Then we absolutly deny your Assertion , as before we haue don the like . As for your a a 1 Pet. 1 Rev. 5. ● alleaged Scriptures we answer them as we did generally b b Treat . pag. 8.9 before : that they meane not the meere bloud of Christ nor only the body singly and simply considered but , that togeather with the proper sufferings of his Soule also they were the iust and full satisfaction , and redemption . Against which you have nothing any where . And likewise our advised and resolut answere is to c c pag. 58 , 60 , 61 , 7● . &c. all the rest of your scriptures which most tediously and vainly you heape vp & scatter every wherein your former treatise to this effect , as if they contayned somwhat for your purpose , when as indeed there is not one text any where that hath any meaning of your strange conceit . So that wee shall have no need to trouble our selves any more heereafter about any of them . Yet d d pag. 24● heere you vrge a reason against vs : Jf our Soules be not redeemed by the bloud of Christ our bodyes have no benefit of redemption ( you meane ) from death . But we e e 1. Pet. 1 Rev. 5.9 . are redeemed , not we shal be . Ergo it is our Soules which are redeemed , our bodyes are not redeemed as yet in this life . Wherein we have to note 3. things . 1. Your Proposition is vaine and illogicall having no consequence in it at all . Which maketh mee to thinke that I hit your meaning right and mistooke you not in my former booke . Howbeit to try this your sentence heere , what if our Soules were not at all redeemed by Christes bloud but some other way , or not by his bloud meerely and onely ( which indeede is our quaestion ) will it follow that therefore our bodyes are still mortall , and therefore not redeemed from death ? Or what if our Soules be redeemed by his bloud , as indeed they are , though not wholly nor only thereby . What followeth then from this ? Nay what if our Soules and Bodyes were redeemed wholly and only by Christs bloud ? Is these any consequence that therefore our bodyes should now be redeemed from death , and never dy . Truly I cannot discerne , but that your proposition meaneth some such consequence as this , which is to me a vey strang reason . Yet that which you ad f f Pag. 2● afterward is more strang : Jf our Soules be not redeemed ( wholly ) by the ( meere ) bloud of Christ , ( For thus still I say you must make your wordes , or ells you aske the very Quaestion ) then our bodyes have vtterly no good , even no good at all by the death of Christ . In which sequele verily I can see neither head nor taile . Chose you now , whether you will that you speake this sophistically , or absurdly . For I cannot discerne it : I leave it therefore to your self to determine . But perhaps you will yet againe go backe to that you excused your selfe withall before . You will meane that our bodies in this life have no benefit of redemption from death , even no more then the bodies of Infidels . And this plainly you avouch for truth . Is this true , Are not our bodies now already freed from the curse & the sting of death , from all the hurt & harme that properly and naturally is in death ? Is it not made vnto vs a quiet sleepe and a peaceable rest , an entrance for our Soules into Heaven , a putting off of sin to our bodies , in such wise that Christ taketh from it the a name of Death and calleth it but b a passage ? ●oh. 8.51 . Or have the Jnfidels also thus much benefit in death , ●oh. 5 . 2● . as wee have in it by our redemption in Christe ? I know not therefore how to terme this your assertion , I forbeare to name it as it deserveth : it is more then strange that Infidels bodies should have as much benefit of nedemption from death , as our bodies have by Christ . Dy I grant , or cease to breath we must and do still even as they do . And this death by the naturall property of it is a part of Gods Curse : but to the faithful there are great benefits ioyned even in death by the gracious dealing of God peculiarly towardes his children , which also their bodies are partakers of thorough the death of Christ . The naturall sting is taken out of it for the godly , yet it remayneth to the Infidells and hurteth them by retayning even their bodies ( though dead ) in & vnder Gods dreadfull Curse . Wherefore it makes many to thinke that indeed you vttered this matter somewhat otherwise in your Sermons , then heere you doe now publish it : and it perswadeth mee still that c I mistooke you not , ●●eat . 1. ●●g . 11. seeing this your turning & setting of it is so vnhansom . For every one may see by this your handling of it , that then you said more then heere you expresse : and heere you would faine fashion it to somwhat , but you cannot . Yea your own words bewray som alteration from that which so confidently you preached , where you say , Whatsoever the wordes were that you might vse , which you do not acknowledge to be these that I bring . ●ag. 240. Lastly , d you grant that you vsed this reason in handling the power of Christes death : that is , when you preached it . For now in this Treatise you have cleane left it out , for ought that e I can see . which bewrayeth that it was such , 〈◊〉 . 88.113 as your selfe saw was not to be maintayned , howsoever heere you strive to set some colour vpon it , though yet still in vaine .

Before we depart from this point , That not the bloud of Christ nor his flesh meerely and only without respect to the merit of his whole Soule was the full price of Redemption , heere is fit place to shew how sundry of the Ancient Fathers do agree with vs sufficiently in this matter : although afterward in your booke you seeme to bring them against vs . But indeed so they seeme onely : for in truth they are with vs as by these following we may see . First a a Ire● . 5. Irenaeus , The Lord bought vs with his owne bloud , and gave his soule for our soules , & his flesh for our flesh . b b Cyr. de 〈◊〉 fid. ad T●● Cyrill , He bestowed his flesh as a ransome for our flesh , and made his Soule likewise a price of redemption for our Soules , although he lived againe , being by nature life it selfe . c c Naz. in tr●● 49. ad Cl●● Nazianzen maketh every part of man to be sanctified by the like in Christ , our condemned flesh by his flesh , our soule by his soule , our vnderstanding by his vnderstanding . d d Ambr. 〈◊〉 Luc. 22. 〈◊〉 trist. dolo●● &c. Ambrose saith Maerorem animae nostrae suae animae maerore abolevit : He abolished the sorrow of our Soule by the sorrow of his Soule . And e e De inca●● Sacr. cap. 〈◊〉 Hoc in se obtulit Christus quod induit &c. Christ offered in sacrifice all that which he assumed : that is all & every whit that was in him besides his Godhead . f f Fulgent . 〈◊〉 Thrasym 〈◊〉 lib. 3. Fulgentius , He shewed in himselfe the sufferinges of a whole man in verity & truth , quicquid fuit infirmitatis animae sine peccato suscepit & pertulit : Hee tooke vpon him and suffered whatsoever infirmity may be in the soule without sinne . It is not possible that wee our selues should speake a more effectuall sentence for our purpose then this is . Say as Fulgentius heere saith , and we aske no more . All that g g Pag. 86. you except , that by these Fathers Christe dyed only the death of the flesh , is lesse then heere they affirme . And we shall answer to that in due place . Now marke well , how these Fathers do not say that Christ gave his life for a ransom onely , ( as h h Pag. 70. ●● you would construe it ) but even his very Soule to for our Soules . They strive to expresse an exact proportion so far as was possible betwene Christ and vs . First in the parts of Christ who suffered , & of vs who were saved . So that as we are saved not in our bodies only , nor only in the externall sensitiue parte of our soules ( wherein standeth that suffering with and by our bodies ) but wee are saved redeemed and sanctified in our whole Spirite and Vnderstanding also : even so ( by their verdict ) Christ suffered for vs not the bodily and outward sufferinges by Sympathy onely , but hee suffered for vs even in his Minde also . Now this is directly against your present a Assertion which we have in hand . 〈◊〉 132.240 ●eere p. 14 Also heere they observe an exact proportion in the Obiects so far as was possible , viz: in that which he suffered for vs , & that which we are saved from thereby . Thus that sorrow of the immortall parte of the Soule & not of body only , which we are saved from , the same he suffered . Yea I say all and every whit of those passions & sorrowes wherevnto mans nature is b subiect and capable of , 〈◊〉 nature we ●●e subject to ●●fer in the ●●nde pro●erly for sin : ●nd not only ●y Sympathy from the Body Cyrill . Thes●●ur . 10 3 Barnard . de ●ass . Dom. ●ap . 41. Pag. 7. Ter●ul . cout . Prax. Amb in Luc. 2. De trist. ●olor . &c. and from which we are saved , all the same he tasted and suffered for vs . Thus it is also that Cyrill elswhere saith , c Omnia perpessus est vt nos ab omnibus liberaret : He suffered all things throughly , that hee might acquit vs from all , which els we should have suffered . And thus I take Barnards meaning to be , d He spared not him selfe who knoweth how to spare his . Wherevpon you collect well , if you meane so e He suffered and indured All to the vttermost with exact obedience and patience . To which end Tertullian also , f Sic reliquit , dum non parcit . This was Gods forsaking of him in his passion , that in nothing he spared him . And thus Ambrose g Minus contulerat mihi nisi meum suscepisset affectum . He had don lesse for me ▪ if he had not ben ( altogeather ) affected as I should haue ben . And thus Ierom , h h ●erom . in ●sa. 53. h Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere , ille pro nobis passus est , pacificans &c , That wich we should have borne for our sinnes , the same hee suffered for vs . Wherefore by the Fathers Christ suffered exactly i All & whatsoever sorrowes & paines which we should have suffered , All kindes : 〈◊〉 : both in ●●irit & Body . ●ot all parti●●lars in them . as well Spirituall as Corporall as well in all the powers of the Soule subiect to suffering , as in that which suffered allwayes with and from the body . Only they except 2. pointes which of simple necessity indeed must be excepted in the Sonne of God , Pag. 10. 12. ●3 . which before k I have also acknowledged : 1. Sinne , Pag. 87. and all sinfull concomitantes and consequentes as l you speake . And that is it which Cyprian exactly noteth , That in him there was m Similitudo paenae non Culpae , Cypr. de pass. the very like punishment as should have ben in vs : only there was no sinne nor fault in him as is in vs . The 2. point excepted is , that he suffered not eternally , but for a while : for he that was life it selfe could not but live againe , saith n Cyrill . In the place above cited . Where he seemeth to acknowledge a kind of death even of the soule , from which Christ revived againe . But of that in due place heereafter . Nowe heere it is manifest that even the Fathers , of whom you doe so exceedingly boast , are cleane against you and for vs in the 1. and chiefest point of this question : shewing that Christ suffered not only bodly , or in the soule by Symphaty only , but in the Minde also distinctly , even as we may suffer in minde distinctly from our bodily suffering , that is when we suffer somwhat a a As I 〈◊〉 Treat . 〈◊〉 pag. 4. imediatly from God . Yea he suffered ( say these Fathers ) all the paines which els we should haue suffered : no materiall thing excepted but only sinne , otherwise he was spared by dispensation in nothing . Against this cleere and plaine sense of the Fathers b b Pa. 35● . you take no exception , neither can you .

Thus having hitherto manefestly defended my selfe , that I have not abused any way the Fathers nor yet your selfe , as you vniustly charge me in c c Pa. 22● your entrance : Now I am to doe the like against d d Pag. 2●● your vnsufficient refusing of my Reasons . Where by , I hope , it shall appeare that you have not weakened any one of them . And First you begin with rehearsing my wordes , wherein I briefly noted the very Question betweene vs , e e Treat . 〈◊〉 pag. 4. That Christ suffered for vs the Wrath of God . Which you f f Pag. 24 exclame at without measure , as being not the point which you preached against . Howbeit I suppose these wordes do rightly and fitly set out the matter , both which then you preached , & which now you write . I have g g Pag. 8 heere before truly & fully declared the whole state of this controversy , I trust . Yet because we can never open this point to much for many good vses that it hath , I will not thinke it tedious nor labour lost ne to rip vp this question a litle againe in this place , that so we may proceede with more ease .

Your generall cariage in your booke declareth , that you abuse the Reader exceedingly by the ambiguous and equivocall taking of this terme Gods Wrath , as before in the entrance I have shewed . It is not I that abuse them , as you h h Nam● 243 . 24● every where very bitterly and vnreasonably do charge me . For according to the most vsuall and common sense of Gods wrath , so in my wholl Treatise I take it for Gods perfit Holynes , Iustice , & Power i i Ioh. 3● Psal. 2● 2. Cor ▪ 9. properly executing vengeance & punishment ( whether little or great ) due to them on whom sinne lyeth . But you generally do so cary this phrase , as signifying any punishment of sinne whatsoever : and namely the Afflictions which the very Godly do suffer , which is altogeather an vnproper speach . This I observe most specially in one place of your booke above others . Where you say , l l Pag. 1● All kindes of troubles , paines , and griefes in our states , bodyes , and mindes , which shorten or sower this present life are degrees of Gods wrath , and chasticements of out transgression & corruption . Which presently you prove by many needeles Scriptures . And from this sense of his Fathers wrath you do not exempt the Lord Christ . You meane that this he suffered indeed , and that this is all in your opinion . It is true All troubles paines & griefes in their first Ordinance a were the effects of Gods proper wrath . ●●ou doe 〈◊〉 right●●● 275. & But in their state and condition now , they are b not : namely , as the Godly do suffer them . Which we must heere note and consider well . ●●at . 1.14 . ● . 132 . You say right also : This , † because it seemeth grievous for the present and not ioyous is called ( somtymes ) in the Scriptures the rodde and wrath of God . True ; it seemeth . But indeed it is not so , or it ought not so to be . For c it seemeth otherwise to the iudgment of faith and knowledg . 〈◊〉 1.2 . ● . 2.28 , 〈◊〉 & 2 Cor. ●0 . ●efore pa. ●● . 19. Then Gods wrath in this sense is very vnproperly taken : as I have often said . Wherfore speaking properly & exactly as in this Controversy we ought according to the revealed minde of the Holy Ghost , it is Chasticement & correction : it is not in any wise Wrath , or punishment properly meant . Neyther may it be said properly that his Iustice leadeth him to inflict it on vs ( as e you affirme ) but it is his Holynes and Love towards his children which chasteneth them . 〈◊〉 . 132. According to the Scripture which saith , 〈◊〉 12.10 . f God chasteneth vs for our profit , that we might be partakers of his Holynes . And g whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth : 〈◊〉 6.7 . 〈◊〉 11.32 he scourgeth every Soune that he receaveth . If we indure chastening , God offereth himselfe vnto vs as vnto sonnes : for what sonne is it whom the Father chasteneth not . Therefore to speake properly not Gods Iustice , but his Holynes and Fatherly Love doth move him to lay whatsoever Crosses and troubles vpon his children . He is not vnto them a Iudge or Revenger , but a Father : Neyther is it Wrath that cometh from him or Vengeance for sinne properly , ●●r. 11. but h amendment in Love towards the godly . Now the case with Christ was cleane otherwise . He needed no Amendement , but that which he suffered was right Punishment . He was neyther in case as the wicked , nor yet simply as the godly . He differed from them both , and yet in som pointes did partake of both their conditions . He was like the godly , in that he was highly beloved of God , and had no maner of sinne of his own laid to his charge . He was like the wicked and differed from the case of the godly greatly , because he was laden & charged with sinnes , yea with all maner of sinnes , & sustayned their due punishment , there being also none other at all to indure the vengeance of God for them but himselfe . As we haue largely shewed before in opening the state of our Question . Thus then whatsoever Christ suffered ( and specially at his death ) was very wrath and vengeance from God properly taken , true punishment and iustice executed against sinne & for sinne , to the which he was in som sort condemned and appointed , also this was the true Curse of the Law which thus he sustayned for vs . Nevertheles in all this his Case was extraordinary , his condition in the like punishments vtterly vnlike to the wicked . For his owne nature was still for all this most holy , faithfull , stedfast , loving the Lord , and beloved of him , albeit in his office of Redeeming vs and suretyship for vs he did sustaine truly , and not vnproperly , ( as the Godly do ) the Lordes very wrath against sinne which he tooke vpon him . Heere is now the Power of God to be deepely considered , togeather with his vnspeakeable Iustice , and Love and Holines . Even one of the greatest mysteries of Christian Religion : which to vnfolde what toung is able , yea what heart can conceave it ? And yet most necessary & most comfortable to be vnderstood of all men . Namely how the Lord hath assigned to his sonne in the worke of Redemption 2. personnes as it were , or countenances , or conditions . His owne naturally , which God ever deerely loved : & our countenance , or person , or condition which he sustayned by his office , which condition the Lord truly a a As yo●● Gods C●● pag. 26● in deeds in word● accursed and punished . Only the sense of the paine of Gods Vengeance came indeede vnto his most holy nature : the Curse the Hatred , the wrath , and iudgment of God being quenched therewith . His owne nature felt the sorrow and paine of the Curse and Hatred . But the Hatred & Curse was bent against the load of our sinne wherein he stood forth as guilty before God , and appeared as it were clothed therewith . This was Love and mercy to vs , this was Iustice vpon Christ having vndertaken for vs , this was infinit power and wisdom both wayes in God to bring it to passe , which no creature can comprehend : his Holynes and Love still chastening his Redeemed ones , but laying no part of true Punishment or proper Vengeance for sinne vpon them , which Christ only did for them wholly sustayne . Thus also seeing Christ indeed had no sinne in him ( as the godly have ) to be corrected : neyther could be correctted & chasticed for nothing : therefore properly he was not chastised nor corrected at all , but his Afflictions every one both small and great were true and proper punishments , and the effects of Gods very wrath for our sinne lying vpon him . 〈◊〉 . 245. Som where a you say , Christ might suffer the wrath of God in his body , yea in his soule he might suffer it , and yet not the paines of the Damned , or of Hell . We grant you say true , Christ suffered not the paines of the damned nor of Hell vnderstanding this for the very same condition & state alltogeather b as the Damned are in . 〈◊〉 you de●●●e it pag. ●0 . 49.50 . We abhorre such blasphemy as much as you that Christ so suffered Hell paines . Yea albeit I know you are far from thinking so , yet I say your words do com neerer vnto it then ours do , ●●g. 15.16 . as is c before noted . But I aske , do you graunt that Christ suffered Gods wrath in Spirit , as the Apostle d somwhere distinguisheth the Spirit & Soul ? If you meane not thus , 〈◊〉 . The. 5.23 then you againe vse sophistry deceaving vs with the worde Soule . For wee meane thereby in this Question onely the Spirit or Minde , as it is also called in exact and distinct speach . Howbeit speaking vulgarly and ordinarily we calle it the Soule : Which yet sometime is vnderstood onely for the Sensitive parts quickning the body and depending thereon . But this indeede is not it which we haue heere in quaestion . If you meane in Soule , to be properly and immediatly in his immortall Spirit , as the ordinary phrase intendeth : and that so he suffered directly punishment for sin in his Soule , & not Devotion & Piety & zealous Care only ( as I doubt e you meane ) then you differ not from vs , 〈◊〉 observe 〈◊〉 . 18. but we al agree . And thus my wordes shal be true , Christ suffered a sense of Gods wrath f equall to Hell it selfe , and all the torments thereof . For as touching Gods wrath punishing his Spirite , Which you 〈◊〉 s ; o blame : 〈◊〉 . 244.247 . who can say but that this was as hoat and skorching as Hell fire it selfe ? Who can limit or measure the fury of Gods severe Iustice when he cometh in iudgment against sinne , as now he did vnto Christ ? This therefore being well pondered , we may preceave that Christs sorrow & anguish which he indured for sinne , might very well be and was no doubt infinit : yea even in those bodily stripes , woundes , and bloudshed , whose paines otherwise were finite . His soule not only discerning sensitively the bodily paine & smart , but chiefly in the vnderstanding he conceaved , and in his faculty of immediat suffering he felt the fury of that hand which principally strooke those blowes vpon his Humane nature : not Pilats , nor the Iewes , who were but instruments , but the originall and chiefe imploying them , which was Gods Justice armed with vengeance for his sinne ( His I may call it , for he paid for it . ) Now this could not but make an vnspeakeable impression of paine & sorrowes , which stacke in the depth of his soule . Who then can say how litle or how small this was ? Nay , who can declare or comprehend the infinit greatnes of it ? Finally your self doth grant expresly that a a Pag. 2. the Wrath of God is Hell : indeed only it b b Isa. 30 causeth Hell to be cruell . Yea you grant it to be sharper then Hell . So that we see heereby how vainly you say , c c Pag. 2● . Out of this proposition , Christ suffered for vs the wrath of God for sinne , I shall never conclude : Ergo he suffered the true paines of Hell . I have heere shewed you I trust that this followeth well , seeing the wrath of God which Christ felt in his Spirit was his right and proper wrath , albeit he suffered not all nor the wholl wrath of God , nor Hell locally , nor every part thereof iust as the Damned do . Which you without all colour of reason or likelyhood , would make men imagine to be the question betweene vs .

You d d Pag. 24 would make a Contradition in my wordes for saying e e Treat. 1. Christ suffered in his wholl manhood , and afterward f f Treat. 1. Christ suffered Gods wrath properly and immediatly in his Soule . Where I say not as you vntruly charge me , that , He suffered all that he suffered in his whole manhood . Wherefore this is a niew contrariety . Againe , granting him to suffer all that he suffered in his wholl manhood , yet he must suffer Gods wrath ( as God wrath ) properly and immediatly in his Soule , in his Body mediatly and by coniunction only with his Soule . And thus my reason g g Treat. 1. there framed is yet still wholly good and sound .

Then I am charged with absurdityes , I know not how many , nor how great . 1. h h Pag. 34● Because I say , i i Treat . ● . pag. 17. Christ assumed not our nature , nor any part of it but only to suffer in it properly and immediatly . As if I had meant heere , that he became man not to reveale to vs by his owne mouth his Fathers will , not to worke righteousnes for vs , not to quicken and sanctify vs , but only to suffer for vs , and nothing els . Wherein who would have shewed himselfe so vniust an Adversary , & so vnreasonable ? Were it not reason and iust dealing to consider whereof we dispute , and so weighing the whole matter of our talke not to stretch and racke my words further then that . All men may see it to be manefest , that k k Treat . ● pag. 16. heere I speake only of Christs suffering for our redemption , having not one word about his other benefits which he wrought for vs . Pag. 17. a And after speaking of Christs Soules suffering , I shew that although there were 2 sortes thereof , one immediat and proper , an other by Sympathy from and with the flesh , yet Christ tooke our Humane Soule only to suffer in it properly & immediatly : that is , his maine end was not that he should suffer in it by Sympathy from and with the body , and onely so , which you very strangely affirme . So that my meaning is no more but to exclude that which you affirme , That Christ tooke his Humane Soule to suffer in it only from and by his Body . This heere I denyed , and nothing els . For I grant that Christ intended that his Humane Soule should suffer by Sympathy : but yet also this he intended not directly nor primarily in taking the 2 distinct partes of our Humane nature our Soule and our Body . He intended it by consequence , because Natures right state was such in vs : therefore determining to be in nature like vs , he would also that his Soule should feele the Bodyes outward harmes , as it doth with vs . Howbeit in comparison of the Soules most principall disposition , & of that which is proper to Reasonable Creatures , he did not respect the inferiour part , that which is common to vs with Beastes , even this sensitive suffering by Sympathy with and from the Body . I say in comparison of the other Christ respected not this , yet he did respect this also , as I said , secondarily & consequently : that is because he intended to have our nature in whole and full perfection , as we have it , only except sinne . Now I beseech you would any vpright adversary obiect against me , that in this speach I exclude Christes doing righteousnes in his Soule for vs &c. I appeale to all indifferent Readers . Rather hence we are to gather & to conclude , that each part in Christ ought to have the proper and immediat vse as is incident to the nature thereof , aswell in suffering , as it is cleere that it hath in working righteousnes . In Christes working of righteousnes and obedience to God , his Soule had a proper and immediat part to do which it executed without the Body : as to conceave & meditate on the will of God revealed to him , to love and wholly to imbrace it , and to purpose the full performing of it , &c. His Body also had a proper and externall vse , not onely to follow the holy thoughts and purposes of his minde , but also to minister many outward occasions , & to derive them to the minde , whereby Christ wrought righteousnes compleatly , and in his whole man . That which was by cooperation and mutuall cohaerence only of one part with the other , as it was a distinct kinde of working in the Soule and in the body also , so it was respected secondarily , and only because the true constitution of our nature requireth so : which Christ meant wholly and perfitly to take vpon him . Whence now we may well argue , As it was with him touching his faculty of doing righteousnes and Obedience , so it was and ought to bee touching his suffering Gods punishments for vs . There is no reason in the world , nor likelyhood , that the natural faculty in Christs Soule of proper and immediat suffering for our sinnes should have no vse , and a Suffering of paines onely by and from the body should be sufficient , when in his doing of righteousnes for vs his Soules ioint Obedience and mutually knit togeather in & with his Body was not alone sufficient . But there was further obedience found in the Soule of Christ , even that which was proper and immediat in it , as before I said . Seeing then such a kind of Obedience was necessary for vs in Christs Soule , therefore such a Suffering also even in the same kinde was necessary likewise . This must needs be a perfit reason for vs against you , except you could by expresse Scripture disprove this proportion of like necessity betweene the operation of the proper faculties of Christes Humane Soule , that is betweene his Doing & Suffering for vs : which you shall never be able to do . And thus it appeareth I hope , that you had no cause so cruelly to rage at me for this as you do .

Nor yet for the next : where your charge me that a a Pag. 250. I conclude Christs flesh to be needles for our redemption . A horrible Haeresie . But how do I say so much ? Because I say , His Soules suffering by Sympathy did not make properly to our redemption . Ergo his Flesh was needles . I deny this sequele : how can that follow ? Touching the sense of my speach , you may remember how I have largly declared b b Pag. 8. before that the Soules proper suffering is greatly and iustly distinguished from the Common suffering that is by sympathy : And that the Soules suffering by Sympathy in Christ was intended by God , by reason that our naturall constitution doth require it so to be in every true and perfit man , which Christ also was . And thus it did make to our redemption , even as likewise his Infirmities , and Affections : as his Wearines , Hunger , Sleepe , Feare , Love , Ioy , &c. These doe make to our redemption , not as intended in Christs incarnation principally and primarily , but secondarily and by consequent ; because that Humane nature which God ordayned vnto him , and intended to be perfit in him , could not otherwise be throughly perfit as it is in vs ; but with these common Affections & infirmities which other mortall Creatures have to , & not Man only . Also in Christ these Infirmities and Affections wrought not immediatly for sinne : but vsually for other particular causes and occasions immediatly . Nevertheles they were all even for sin in him consequently , that is because the perfection of Humane nature , which he assumed for sinne , and was in every point in him , as before I noted , required so . Even thus likewise in Christ : I say his Soules suffering by sympathy wrought in him immediatly & properly for some other particular cause stirring that faculty , that is by reason of the Bodily paine & smart , which this sensitive power of the Soule apprehended & felt and caused the flesh also to feele . This suffering then of his Soule only by sympathy was immediatly and properly not for our redemption from sin , but for the sensitive apprehending of the smart , woundes , and blowes , which the Iewes gave his body : & yet as before I said consequently even this was for our sinne also , namely because these woundes were given him for our sinne . And thus , though it made for our redemption in such maner as it wrought in Christ because of our sinne , and as it was intended by Christ in taking both partes of our Nature , the Soule & the Body , yet this was not in a direct or immediat respect , and so not properly but by consequent as I have shewed .

After a you charge me sorely , Pag. 252. that I falsifie your Argument about receaving pollution from Adam . For where b I frame your reason as grounded on that opinion that onely our flesh is derived from Adam and not our soule , Treat. 1. pag. 19. Pag. 252. c you renounce it vtterly and say , you grounded no reason vpon that difficulty : & so you made no such argument as heere I pretend . Which whether it be true or no , I report me to them that heard you . But then , what is your reason now ? is it any otherwise grounded ? No certainly , if you make any reason at all . Who trifleth then ? and why doe you vpbraid me so much with trifling ? Let vs see what is your reason now : Christes flesh is as able to redeeme vs , as Adams to condemne vs . But we inherit pollution from Adams flesh . Ergo. Doe we inherit pollution from Adams flesh , and is it not by Generation ? How ells do we inherit pollution & condemnation from him . If there be no otherway , why doe you then seeme to refuse the difficult question of our Generation , and yet vrge the sequele thoreof ? For if our soules arise in Generation from Adam as well as our flesh , how can your reason be good by any possiblity ? It is best therefore vtterly to omit this reason , which you grant hath no ground but a great difficulty & doubtfull question . I a a Treatis● pag. 21. have shewed herefore at large that your argument ( which heere is your Minor ) is nothing true : For pollution , that is , sin & reall iniquity is not in our flesh without a Soule . But Ambrose saith , We are defiled before we haue life , I pray , omit mens Authorities in this case , & prove by sound reason that which you would . Neither is it cleere , as you say it is , that we ●●heri●● pollution from Adams flesh only . ( This word only you must add , or els you say nothing against vs . ) Our parents Soules are in cause as wel as their flesh , that sin is derived vnto vs . But you draw me to talke of these intricat things , which I would in no wise meddle with . I pray , kepe b b pag. 10. your promise better , not to medle with this difficultie , neither to make it any ground of your reason : which yet you do here notwithstanding . Again you with one breath overthrow your self . For you say , we have pollution before the Soule commeth whence soever it commeth . Yea , whence soever ? What if the Soule doe come in & by generation ? You see how you crosse your self , who do so taunt me for this fault , I hope , altogither vniustly . Then c c Pag. 25 you will disprove d d Treat . ●● pag. 19. my Proposition : which is , whereby Adam first sinned by the same Christ satisfied for sinne . You deny this , because the Scripture acknowledgeth no satisfaction but by death : where still we must note that you meane only by the Bodily death . Now how proove you that ? Because the iudge in prohibiting Adam to transgresse , threatned death : e e Ocn. 2. Jn the day that thou catest thereof , thou shalt dye the death . Which it seemeth f f Pa. 100. 64. you avouch againe and againe . And are you sure that Death heere is but the bodily death only , & no more ? Then surely the wicked should satisfie easilie for their sinnes . Far be it from me to vtter such a sentence . Neverthelesse , you must give me leave to shew you also your contradiction in this point . First in that where you acknowledge , g g Pag. 42. the Iudges revenge for sinne is Death both of body and soule . Againe where you h h Pag. 18. agree with Athanasius shewing expresly that this text intendeth even both these : Anima dixit , Morte morieris , He saide to the Soule , Thou shalt dy the death . But you would prove your matter againe by this ; Hebr. 9.15 . a Through death , which was for our redemption , we receaue the promise : Yet he saith not , Through his bodily death meerely and alone , and by nothing els togeather therewith , which is your intent . He excludeth not the Soules proper sufferings , as b I have often said : Treat. 1. the contrarie heereof you never come neere to proove . And it must not be forgotten , Pag. 8 , 9. that c heere ●ou renounce all satisfaction for sinne in respect of merit as from Christes soule vtterly . Pag. 253. Therefore that absurd speech and worse which you d vniustly cast on me , Pa. 250. &c. proveth in very deed to be your owne : that Christes suffering in Soule by Sympathy makes not to our redemption . Your own place in Barnard maketh Christes whole Soule that is the Minde , and the part depending on the Body also , to have place and part in the meritorious sacrifice , Pag. 84. as well as the Body . e Vt totum hominem salvum fecit , sic de Toto se hostiam fecit salutarem . Which suteth not with your wordes , The Soule of Christ which could not dye , could not pay the satisfaction : and nothing might satisfie for sinne , but death . Pag. 85 , 86 , 8. &c. Yea all your f other places of Contradiction herevnto must be taken in good part . As for your reason , That nothing may satisfie for sinne but death , it is not sound . The Scriptures doe shew in deed that Christ should not satisfie without Death : but they deny not that there are other partes of Christes Satisfaction , which differ from Death : As his bloudshed , and besides that Christs Povertie , his hunger , his wearines , his shame , his reproches , his apprehension , his buffeting , &c. These doubtles , yea all other suffringes of Christ whatsoever , small or great , are satisfactorie & meritorious . You will say , you vnderstand all these and such like in the Death of Christ . You may vnderstand what you list : but who will grant in proper speech that these are his Death , or that his death is any or all these . And if you take Christes death by the Figure Synecdoche , a part of Christes sufferings for the whole , Pag. 41. &c. then why doe g you so much abhorre that Figure heere , and why may not the Soules proper sufferings be admitted also into the worke of Christes Satisfaction , although it can not properly dye ? Where you nippe me also for saying that the Soule of Christ in some kinde of sense dyed : I hope in due place you shall have a reasonable answer to that matter . Till then have patience , I pray . And thus h you come to skan my Assumption also , Pag. 253. that Adam committed sinne most properly in his Soule . Which you graunt in one sense is true , but directly repugnant to my Conclusion . How I pray ? b b Pag. 25 If I meane that Adams Soule transgressed the Commandement with her body and by her body , that is , the Soule as agent , the Body as the Instrument , them the conclusion will follow in spite of my heart , Ergo in satisfiing for sinne Christs Soule must be punished with her body and by her body : which is the thing I labour to overthrow with all the wits I have . Nay , then the Conclusion will follow that the immortall part the Minde was punished peculiarly , and not by and from the Body onely : seeing in all even outward sinnes the Soule sinneth , both principally , and also in a proper and peculiar maner by it selfe , yea before the body sinneth . Albeit the Body sinneth also secondarily , and in a maner proper to it selfe : even as the Instrument , as you say . Yea further I meane that some sinnes the Soule acteth in and by it selfe meerely : and therefore it suffereth likewise some punishments meerely in it selfe , which touch not the Body at all , vnlesse by Sympathy only , and that only when they grow vehement . But all this you heere deny : Very stran● doctrine . teaching that the Soule properly committeth no sinne but by and with the body : that is , the Soule in it self & by it selfe alone sinneth not . And so consequently that God temporally and eternally punnisheth the Soule only by the Body . This is the true effect of your discourse heere . For proofe of the first you say , c c Pag. 25 God did not say to Adam , thou shalt not like d d The so●●den frui●● it , or desire it which the Soule of Adam did , but thou shalt not eat thereof , which could not be performed but by the hand and mouth of Adam . And therefore Adam transgressed the Commandment not by his Soule , but by his Body , even as in murder , theft , and adultery : these factes men commit by their Bodies and not by their Soules . And after , All provocations and pleasures of sinnes the Soule taketh from her ' Body : all actes of sinne she committeth by her body . Both which speeches are exceeding vntrue and hurtfull . For even in these sinnes the Soule as I said sinneth principally and peculiarly before that the Body sinneth at all . Yea the Desiring and Liking of evell is sinne , before the outward Act is consummat and finished . This Paul e e Rom. 〈◊〉 vnderstood at length when he became a Christian , though a long while being a Pharisee , he knew it not . And it seemeth , this was in Christs time the Haeresie of the Pharisees : against whom he sheweth , that not only the outward fact of Bodily sinne was sinne , but also a a ●at . 5.22.28 even the very thoughts and liking towards sinne . Wherefore Adam was as well forbidden to desire or like that fruit , as to eat it , which you deny . The Commandement was naturally ingraven in Adams hearte in his Creation . Which since , Moses maketh distinct and diverse from all the rest , which concerne the outward acte . Therefore distinctly he saith , Thou shalt not desire or covet . So that to desire the forbidden fruit was sinne , even without and before the acte of eating . Moreover other foule sinnes , Haeresies , Turcisme , and Atheisme are committed and determined simply in the minde , without any necessary imployment of any partes of the Body . As touching Haeresies , to hold Two first causes of thinges a Good and a Bad , God and the Divell with Manichee : also that Christ the Redeemer was not God with Arrius : that the Holy Ghost is not God with Eunomius &c: that Christ had no Soul with Apollinaris : that Christes Manhood was confounded and changed into his Godhead with Eutyches , or divided from his Godhead with Nestorius : or the opinion of Vbiquity or of Transubstantiation . Finally that there never was nor shal be any Christ a Redeemer as the Turkes hold , that there is no God as the Atheists . Nowe are there not many provocations to hatch and to conclude these opinions meerely in the minde & soule of man ? Are there not many pleasures even in these impieties meerely in the minde ? Yea it is evident to all that the meere Thoughts , the Vnderstanding & determination of the only Soule of man doth act them & resolveth on them in it self , without any concurrence or cooperation of the body therein . Happily you will say , The Soule takes occasion so to thinke by some outward bodily thinges before seene or heard . I deny not but the Soule taketh occasion to thinke many things by the bodily senses . How be it not all thinges simply . And so are the Fathers b b ●prian and 〈◊〉 10. in your ●●g. 255. heere to be vnderstood . If any will stumble on that of Aristotle , Nihil est in intellectû quod non fuit prius in sensu , it is not absolutly nor vniversally true . My reason is , because Philosophers thought the minde to be as it were Tabula abrasa when we come into the world first . They knew not the naturall Pride , the impietie , and perversity of mans soule , which may yeeld many and sundry Thoughts and Determinations to sinne , yea provocations and pleasures in sin which the Body ministreth not , neither could the Heathen vnderstand them . And to say that this pride , impiety , and perversitie was taken by contagion from the meere flesh originally in Generation , is not to be proved . Bud yet were that so , notwithstanding the Soule afterward can acte many sinnes meerely in it selfe and without the cooperation of the body . Further , as the Angells sinned in the beginning by their meere spirituall conceit against God , so nothing letteth but that man in his Angell-like nature ( the reasonable Soule ) may sinne likewise without any Bodily meanes therevnto . Also , as we can thinke well without vsing our body , God so inspiring vs : so may we thinke ill ( which is sinne ) our owne inborne corrupt vnderstanding and reason and will moving vs only . Moreover if I grant you this point of Heathen Philosophy , that the Soule taketh occasion to thinke all thinges which she thinketh vniversally from the body & bodily obiectes : yet it followeth not that she taketh occasion to misthinke from thence alwayes . The proper provocations and pleasures of sinne are oftentimes not outward at all : but the meere perversitie and malignity of our evill minde is vsually the very cause of ill thoughts & ill determinations . I grant also that the occasion is often taken from the outward senses . But it is meerely taken , not given : taken by the corrupt and perverse minde , not given by the senses . Which though they be also otherwise corrupt , yet simply in seeing naturall things they sinne not , nor yet in hearing , nor in tasting , save as the minde which is properly , and principally , and first sinfull , abuseth their operation . And as touching those wretched a a Haeret● Turkes theists . men & opinions before rehearsed , doubtles their presumptuous and perverse wit only so reasoning and concluding falsly without any other proper inducementes from without , was the very cause of those spirituall impieties in many impes of Sathan . Wherefore for you to affirme that the Soule committeth all acts of sinne by the body , & that God did not forbid Adam to like or desire that fruit , is more then strange doctrine . Somewhere most iniuriously b b Pag. 3● you reproch purity : I dare say heere you have no colour of purity in this point . Notwithstanding c c Pag. 2● you resolutly set your self to prove your opinion , not by Scripture , but by Fathers : who are answered before , saving Tertullian , who d d Pag. 2● you say pointeth to a place of Scripture for it : e e Mat. 〈◊〉 out of the heart come evill thoughts . But this place being considered will rather prove the contrary . For Christ heere meaneth not by Heart any parte of the Body , but meerely the Minde or Soule of man , and that with opposition to the body in this case of sinning . For thus in effect hee saith , Not the Body sinneth by taking in , but the Soule by sending out . That is to say , The Soule only sinneth properly , & not the body at all no not in grosse facts , except as the body is the Instrument , the Soule being the Agent , as your selfe doe speake . Otherwise the body sinneth not at all , much lesse in such thoughts as are meere spirituall , vnles wee meane by society , & for coniunctions sake in one person with the Soule , which indeed is it that sinneth . And thus some have thought , those places of Tertullian which a a ●ag. 255. you cite may be vnderstood . But indeed Tertullian you vse not well , and bring these his wordes against his own meaning , as anon we shall further see . That which you ad of Bodily infirmities letting the operation of the Soule ( for so I thinke you meane ) as in Lethargies , 〈◊〉 256. Apoplexies , Sleepe , Phrensy , &c. Peradventure , then it thinketh and considereth more freely in it selfe and by it selfe , then when the body setteth it on worke otherwise at other times . Howsoever , it can never be proved that the Soule then vtterly ceaseth operation , and can do nothing : for it seemeth that only our memory and sensitive faculties are stopped , whereby it commeth to passe that we know nothing afterwards what the minde contemplateth and thinketh in such cases . It is very rare when we remember something , and by some extraordinary loosing of those obstructions it is , which commonly doe possesse our senses wholy in such occasions . Yet even those small remnants of such operations of our Soule beeing in such state , doe evidently convince that the Soules operations hang not necessarily on the body , neither is it idle when the body is hindred , though commonly and for the most part we remember litle thereof . Lastly , if the Soules operations were so necessarily tyed to the faculties and instrumentes of the body as you doe avouch , I greatly doubt howe the Soules immortalitie will bee defended against the effect of your assertion . ●●●oul hath ●●●●ion nor meere●●●●mply in 〈◊〉 without ●●●dy . 54.255 Surely it bringeth in with it the Haeresie of Pope Iohn the 22. and of certaine Anabaptistes , that the Soule hath no being till when it shall resume hir body at the last day . And hence also it is that you say , Gods iustice punisheth the soule ( only ) by the body , that is , not till the Resurrection . This ( only ) the effect of you speach contayneth plainly and fully . Yea in truth thus you must needs affirme and hold : you can not avoid it , if you will hold your maine Question . Only except you deny that Christe had a Humane Soule perfit in all the powers and facultyes thereof , like ours : or els that God did not properly punish Christ for our sinnes . Of necessitie you must fall into one of these dangerous evills , for ought that I yet see . Wherefore this point is not a a Pag ● so easie nor so evident to the simple as you pretend : and I thinke you had neede of better reasons then hitherto I see any you have , before the Godly and Learned will beleeve you . The rather for that in deed heere you committ further 2. grievous faultes . 1. Tertullian your owne authour , & the principall ground which you have for your opinion heere , is wonderfully ill vsed . 2. You are strangely contrary to your selfe in your very winding vp of the matter . As for Tertullian , he resolveth directly contrary to the wordes which b b De R●●● carn. c●●● Animas 〈◊〉 torquers 〈◊〉 rique pe●●●●●ros &c you cite from him . Saith he , The example of Lazarus in the Gospell proveth that Mens Soules though alone and without their bodyes , are punished , and comforted , in the world of the dead . The Soule shall lacke the revniting of the flesh with it , not for that it can not feele any thing without the flesh , but for that it must needes heereafter feele also with the flesh . For as much as it sufficeth by it selfe to doe somewhat , so much , or so farre also it sufficeth to suffer . It sufficeth indeed to doe lesse by it selfe . For it is able of it selfe only , to Thinke , to Will , to Desire , to Dispose : but to accomplish , it looketh for the vse of the body . So therefore it also looketh for the societie of the body , that by it the Soule may aswell suffer absolutely , as without it she could not doe things compleatly . And therefore for what actions it sufficed by it selfe , the iudgement of the same it receaveth ( now ) that is , Of the Desire , of the Thoughtes , of the Will , that it had . Thus Tertullian directly answereth to that c c Pag. ● Conclusion and d d Pag. 2●● reasons which you gather out of him , proving contrarie to the same that the Soule now without the flesh receaveth iudgement for such actions as of it selfe it was sufficient to doe : and it is sufficient to doe certaine actions of it selfe , as To thinke , to Will , to Desire , to Order , and dispose things ; but to accomplish , it is not able ( namely outward actions ) the iudgment of which actions indeed the Soule shall tary for till the revniting againe of the flesh therewith . It seemeth that Tertullian cited before the reasons of the e e Such afore not 〈◊〉 Pope L●● Heret●kes , holding that the Soules slept till the last iudgement , and receaved no reward at all in the meane time , for want of the societie of their flesh , which till then lieth rotten in the Grave : but heere Tertullian answereth and renounceth all this same . ●●s after●ard . & the ●nhapilies , 〈◊〉 now 〈◊〉 . And so those were the Heretikes wordes against Tertullian , which you alleage out of him in steed of Catholike . Which dealing what it is , I leave to be considered . Next your owne contradictorie dealing in this place , is also not to be forgotten . For your selfe shutteth vp with an excellent reason against your self , almost the same that I observed presently before in Tertullian against your collection . Thus you say , a a Pag. 257. Doe I denie then that the Soule hath any sufferings in this life and the next , which come not by the body ? By no meanes . The Soule hath some proper punishments in this life , as sorrowe and feare when the body hath no hurt , from which Christ was not free , as appeareth by his Agonie : and so in the next the Soules of the wicked have griefe & remorse , besides the paine of fire , &c. Yes surely : I suppose you denied before the Soules punishment without the Body . But now you seeme to graunt it . And seeing you graunt also , that b b Pag. 25● . nothing is more proportionable to Gods iustice , than to retayne the same order in punishing which they kept in offending . Therefore it foloweth by your owne words , that the wicked somtimes sinned meerely in and by their Soules , and not onely togeather with and by their Bodies : seeing they are punished simply in and by their soules , and not onely with and by their bodyes . Also , how sound this is , I wot not c c Pag. 257. where you yeeld some punishment now to the Damned : how be it none other reall and positive punishment but remorse and remembrance of sinne onely , as it seemeth , Againe in saying that Christ was not free from some proper punishments to the soule , as Sorrow and Feare in his agonie : if you meane as you speak , that these were proper punishmentes inflicted on him by Gods very Wrath , ( and not to be onely his holy affections Devotion to God , and compassion to men , which yet d d ●es●o●e ●●g. 18. I feare is your meaning ) then it foloweth evidently from your own words , that Christ suffered proper punishment in his Soule from the verie wrath of God , more then the Bodily sufferings only on by Sympathy in the Soule which in a word is the graunting of our whol question . All the rest that you adde out of the Fathers , touching Hell and Hell paines , is to no purpose . If e e 〈◊〉 . 258.259 you cite them to proove that Christ had no naturall feare of Death and Hell , you f f ●●g . 22● gainsay that your selfe further then we doe , or then the trueth is .

Then a a Pag. you come to my other Reasons which I called Speciall , not for more excellency in them then in the other , except onely that I take these to bee not so Generall as the former , but more neerely to touch our Quaestion . Which you might perceave well enough to have ben my meaning , by the expresse Opposition that b b Treat pag. 3. I make of Generall and Speciall . But it appeareth you had rather take my wordes so as that you may make them to serve your vnseemely iesting and better inveying humour : which yet in the end will helpe your cause but little .

Against b my 1. Reason out of I say , that Christ suffered those paines and sorrowes for sinne which els we should have borne : you except that I expresse not whether I meane All or Some . I answer , All and every whit I meane so far as possibllity will admit : and namely as touching the very sorrowes and paine . Nothing was abated in the nature and vehemency of the paine which hee suffered , any more then is abated in the paine and sorrows of the Damned . This the very text heere expresseth with great c c Which faint int●tations 〈◊〉 261. do●● fully 〈◊〉 vnto . emphasis , d d Isa. 53 Hee susteyned our very sorrows , or our sorrowes themselves . And this we conclude the rather , because the sense of paines and sorrows e e Heb. 2● only was the Ransom ordayned and consecrated by God in Christ , that by them his sufferings should be accomplished , & our sinnes satisfied . Whatsoever therefore in this life might be painfull & was due to mankind generally for sin , & in it owne nature was no sin , that Christ suffered wholly and alltogeather for vs , even the same which els we should . Which is your own f f pa. 28● plaine confession also . I grant indeed it vtterly impossible that he who was vncapable of sinne , yea God himselfe , should be really separated from God , or Hated , or weakened in faith , or punished externally . Yet it was possible that even he on whom our sinne was laid should feele both properly in Soule , and also in Body all the whole vehemency of our due paine , and the sharpenes of our smart . Paine , affliction , & sorrow is not sinne be it small or great : it is indeed properly and originally the Punishment of sinne either in vs or in others . Christe suffered Punishment for sinne not in himselfe , as others do , but by Gods ordinance he suffered punishment extraordinarily for sinne in vs . When God smot him , it was possible for him to feele it , yea vnpossible it was that he should not feele it , and of necessitie his Soule peculiarly , properly , & infinitly did feele the stroke of Gods wrathful iustice . The vehemency whereof may wound and pierce no lesse even in this life where God will , then in the locall Hell it selfe . All these our due sorrowes therefore , and all this our sharpest deserved paine , even Gods owne immediat hand smiting the Soule for sinne , ( which far exceedeth and comprehendeth as it were all other paine ) Christ without any dispensation or qualification whatsoever , indured for vs . This is that which we say : and thus Ierom also expoundeth this very text : ●trom . in 〈◊〉 53. Saith hee a Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere ille pro nobis ' passus est . Turne nowe your vaine and frivolous insultation against Ierom for his indefinit speech , to whom it pertayneth in this case aswell as to me , Pag. 26● . if you be not a respecter of persons . Say to him , b You may do well ( St Ierom ) to go to the Vniversitie againe , whence you came afore you were wise , and there learne to put quantity to your propositions , that we may know when you speak of any thing whether you meane All or Some . But Jerom would be wise enough to answer you ( if he were alive ) that ( whersoever he studied ) he knew so much , that in learning and reason an indefinit proposition is to be taken as Vniversall in a necessary matter , 〈◊〉 special●● Satisfying Gods vn●●all Iustice 〈◊〉 . * as the vndertaking of a Surety is in his stead whom he is surety for : and yet namely but so far as knowen possibility admitteth , and indeed no further . Now this is apparant in this case of Christes suretyship and suffering in our steed : Hee suffered all the whole punishent of sinne due to mankinde , whatsoever was possible for him being a sinles man , & also very God , to suffer . And further then this none will imagin or thinke that any ( vnles mad men ) do affirme . You charge me● c heereafter that I falsify this place of Ierom , 〈◊〉 . 350. ●●reat . 1. 〈◊〉 . 85. Curse . 〈◊〉 I put it ●●●hus ( Ma●●ctum ) 〈◊〉 a pa●●●nthesis . ●●nod enim . ●●al . 3.13 . because d I did put in e maledictum with his wordes . Which is a silly devise to turne of Jerom without answer . For by it I expresse Ieroms meaning : f his words have plaine reference to Maledictum in the g Apostle , whom he cited immediatly before . This is then none other but an honest falsifying of mine Authour . Now that this place of Isay , and the whole doctrine which I avovch touching these sufferinges of Christ for vs , may the better be receaved , let vs note that the publike doctrine appointed by h Authority to be taught through our England expresseth the very same . Which Au●●●tie I have ●●●ged & ex●●sed Treat . 〈◊〉 88.89 . ●he answereth to i● a word . Namely Nowells Catechisme , where it is thus taught . He paid and suffered the paine due to vs , and by this meanes delivered vs from the same . Neither is it vnvsed among men , ●ne to promise , and to be surety , yea sometime to suffer for an other . But with Christe as our Surety so suffering for vs , God dealt as it were with extremity of law : but to vs whose sinnes , deserved punishments , & due paines he laid on Christ , he vsed singular lenity , gentlenes , clemency , and mercy . Christ therefore suffered , and in suffering overcame death , the paine appointed by the everliving God for mens offense . Againe , His will was to suffer All extremitie for vs , who had deserved all extremitie . All these things being taken vpon himselfe he destroyed them all . Where marke also what doctrine the Law of this Realme consonantly publisheth and commandeth in the Homilies of Christs Passion . See whether it misliketh yours , or no. The b b Hom. ● . Hom: maketh Christs putting himselfe betweene Gods deserved Wrath and our sinne the extreamest part of his Passion . If this were the extreamest part of his Passion , then it was a further feeling then the sense of Bodily paine only , it cannot be any other then his feeling of Gods proper Wrath spiritually , which our sinne deserved . Therefore by the Homily hee felt Gods proper Wrath spiritually which our sinne deserved . Againe , he bare All our sinnes , sores and infirmities vpon his owne backe . No paine did he refuse to suffer in his owne body . But as he felt All this in his Body , so hee must feele the greatest part primarily and much more deeply in his Soule . Ergo hee refused not to suffer All the paines of the Wrath of God both in Body and Soule . c c Hom. ●● Hee tooke vpon him the reward of our sinnes , the iust reward of sinne . But this same Homily saith , The reward of our sin was the iust wrath and indignation of God , the death both of Body and Soule . Therefore by the Homily , Christ tooke on him for vs the iust wrath & indignation of God , the death both of body & soule . And thus also * * 1. Treat . pag. 34. my text of Scripture is iustified , That d d 2. Tim. ●● Christ gave himselfe the price of redemption for vs , which we els should have paid . Where e e Pa. 261. you except against this text in Timoth: that I say , The Scripture speaketh heere after the common vse & custom of redeeming captives taken in warre : when a captive being not able , som other friend payeth Antilytron the same price for the captive which els he should . You aske , who told me that the Scripture speaketh after the common vse of enemies ? I answer , The nature of the word Antilytron a Ransom importeth so much , which is properly vsed in such cases . Where also you f f Pa. 261. ●● seeme to inferre , that I forsooth doe hold with your opinion that a Christ paid the price of our Redemption ( properly ) to the Divell , Pag. 261 , ●62 . and not to God . For this is it that heere you meane : & this , though now in print you deliver it nothing so largly and emphatically as you preached it , yet this still in effect you maintaine in certain b words out of Ambrose , which is passing strange to heare : But how do I ioyne to your opinion heerein ? Pag. 68. 69. because I vrge that the enemy must haue a price for his Captive . I pray , who is that ennemy which must bee satisfied ? The Divell ? GOD forbid . Though I see that c you over earnestly do thus professe : Pag. 68. Treat. 1. ●ag. 45. ●●●at . 5.25 . yet God knoweth it is far from d my heart so to thinke . Gods Iustice only is that e offended enemy , to whom our Ransom was paid : it was not paid to the Divell who was but Gods slave & executioner . Against which what reason have you ? Surely not the shaddow of any . As for the names of Ambrose or Austin they are of no waight to warrant such a doctrine as those words pretend . And I am out of doubt that the Fathers in following an Allegory , do but play with the Figure , as there vse is oftentimes : they speak not exactly heere as meaning indeed to teach such a doctrine . Or if they did , then we are to learne by their good leaves how to speake and thinke more wholesomly ( then they do ) out of the Scripture . If they or an Angell from Heaven should teach so in earnest as they pretend , we ought to forsake them . As for the point whether it draw any thing neere to Manichisme or no , let other iudge . Then f you would shew that this similitude of a Captives paying his Ransom by his friend , ●ag. 262. is not like to Christes Redeeming vs : because Captives themselves are appointed to perpetuall imprisonment or servitude vnles a sufficient Ransom be paid for them , and then the Ransomer is not bound to be prisoner himselfe for them , but satisfieth the enemy in money or otherwise . Wherein verily you fit this similitude to my desire further then my selfe at first did expresse . For thus wee may now plainly see how it is possible that Christ our Ransomer might pay that whole price for vs which we els should have paid but could never discharge : and yet that hee neede not in such Redeeming of vs enter into our whole condition absolutly & to become a perpetuall prisonner in our steed , seeing we see that this is not exacted by enemies for their Captives at the Ransomers hand . Wherein on●y this simili●ude may , & ●oth stand . Only that * price of money which the Captive should but cannot pay , the very same is paid by the Ransomer : and it obtayneth .

Then you let drive at my a Reason out of the Apostle : a a Gal. 3. Christ redeemed vs from the Curse of the Lawe , being made a Curse for vs . Because I say , What Curse can this be meant but the Curse of the Law , that is even Gods Curse against sinne , whereof the Apostle hath altogeather spoken heere before . Yea therefore indeed I demand againe , what reason or likelyhoood is there by the text to take this Curse to be in nature an other from the former , both being so closely and ioyntly mentioned togeather ? b b Pag. 26● . 263. You make a very maine difference betweene them , by comparing this Curse laid on Christ with those Curses wherewith God somtimes is said to Curse his senseles Creatures for wicked mens sake . But this is verily far fetcht , it is altogeather another thing , very incomparable to the Curse which Christ suffered . This is a most improper curse , not felt at all by the things accursed : yet called a Curse by similitude only , as the image of a man is called a man . There is no colour to make the Curse which Christe suffered for our sinnes like to the Curse which senseles creatures doe sometimes beare for mans cause . But you make a reason c c Pag. 27. to prove Moses particular Curse in d d Deut. 2. Deuteron : Cursed is he that is hanged , ( which Paul also applyeth to his purpose saying , Christ was made a Curse for vs to redeeme vs from the Curse of the Law , ) to be not all one with this Curse of the Law in Paul . Neither yet did I , neither do I say , that it was all one . This I said and say still , that they are both of one & the same nature : that is true and proper Curses of God , not any improper Curse , nor onely esteemed a Curse by men . One was the whole , the other a part : but both of them the true & proper Curses of God . To vnderstand this more plainly , Paul saith not as you affirme , that Christ was made that Curse , only , that Iudiciall Curse whereof only Moses speaketh : Paul doth not vnderstand it in the same measure that Moses mentioneth and no further . But this hee doeth ; handling before generally Gods Curse and the punishment of the Law against sinne , and shewing that we are redeemed from it by Christs being made the same for vs , he confirmeth it by applying Moses Iudiciall punishment against certaine transgressours ( e e As o●● who v●● execu●●● other ●●ments 〈◊〉 Law , 〈◊〉 not . beeing it seemeth a Figure of Christ heerein , ) That all they were accursed , which were hanged : that is they which were hanged by the iust sentence of the law , they were heerein Accursed , that is they heerein sustayned the Lawes true and deserved punishment . Now by applying this text of Moses in this sense , & in this respect , to Christes being made the Curse of God for vs , it is well confirmed to be in nature and veritie the true and proper Curse of the Lawe which Christ was made for vs : for such also indeed was the nature of that Iudiciall Curse of Moses , though but a part of the whole . And so as before I said the Apostle applying that which was but a parte , he may soundly and well shew what was the nature of that Curse in Christ , though in him it were the whole . For a parte and the whole of any thing differ not in nature , but in quantitie . Now vnderstand a Chrysostome thus , ●a . 94. 274. ●ag. 11. &c. as b before we have distinguished the punishment of Christ and of the Damned , and then we differ not . Where he saieth they were divers Curses in Christ & in the Damned , take him to signifie divers maners of one and the same Curse in Nature , or Christes Death and Moses Iudiciall hanging on the tree , to be only divers degrees , or measures of one & the same Curse in nature , & so he saith the same altogeather that we do . For these in their proper nature be all one , that is proper Punishments from God for sin , yet either in the measure & degree , or in the maner & condition of their suffering , they are very divers & exceeding far a sunder . ●●g . 268. Austin on whom d you triumph , is stretched beyond his meaning . He dealeth against a Manichee who denyed that Christ had true Humane flesh : 〈◊〉 likewise ●●l the rest ●●ur Fathers ●●ken for ●ost part . 〈◊〉 sayings ●●ther a●● the Ma●●es , or the ●●s , &c. 〈◊〉 strove ●bout our ●●●ion . which yet notwithstanding is manefest , because Christ truly dyed . Now he proveth that Christ truly dyed , because the Apostle saith , He was made a Curse for vs in that he hanged on the tree . And where it is said Cursed is every one that hangeth on the tree , this was saith he to shew that Christ was not exempted , but was like other men truly accursed and truly dead . So that his meaning is not to shew that Christes whole Curse and his bodily death were iust all one without any difference , which you vrge him for : nay he hath no such meaning . Only he proveth by this that he being made truly a Curse , did also truly Dy , which the Manichee denyed . For in saying , Christ was dead , & accursed for vs , is the same , he meaneth it is the same for his purpose , the one very well proveth the other : but not that they were simply all one . The rest of e your Fathers are alltogeather idly cited : 〈◊〉 . 95. no man denyeth that which they say .

Where f you mislike me for saying , 〈◊〉 . 26● . ●●●at . 1. 〈◊〉 . 38. g The Curse laid vpon Christ was not onely the ignominie of his death , & the shame of the world : you have nothing against it , but much for it . Austin whom you boast of is against you in this , saying : a a Pag. ●● Christ heere tooke on him our punishment without sinne . But our punishment , which is without sinne , doubtles was a great deale more then only the dishonour and shame of the world . Austin therefore is manifestly against you in this : yea also b b Pag. 2 your owne selfe is in saying likewise . Austin and Chrysostome , and c c Pag. 9 other doe say that Christ suffered this ignominie : but that this was all or the whole Curse which hee suffered , I see none that affirmeth . Your many Scriptures in d d Pag. 2 this place , what doe they ? Forsooth they prove that it is light at Mid-day . For who ever made quaestion , but that shame and reproch in their simple Nature , were a parte of the true Curse of God ? Yet all this sheweth not that Shame was the whole Curse which Christ indured . e e Pag. 2● You mislike that f f Treat . pag. 45. I said Christes dying simply , g g That is Christ ha●ed simply which in 〈◊〉 he did no● as the godly dy , may in no sort be called a Curse or Accursed : Because as I affirme also , h h Pag. 44. Death to the godly is no Curse properly nor punishment of sinne , but a benefit and advantage . Nay , therefore Christes Death was properly a Curse , because his Death was i i As befo●● Pag. 11. 49 , 59 , 5 not like theirs . You say , I am too young a Doctor to controll St Austin herein . And I say , you are a Doctor not old enough to prove Austin k k Your self teth him 〈◊〉 me herein 49. Corp mors b●● bona , m●● mala . contrary to me in this point . Death in it owne nature and in the originall propertie of it , is a part of the Curse , and so Christ suffered it : but in the Godly it is not properly a Curse , nor the proper punishment or revenge of sinne , which Christ once & alone hath wholely sustayned and cleane freed vs of for ever . This l l Pag. 90. your selfe ( as well as m m Pag. 43 I ) can tell , saying : The vengeance of the Lawe once executed on our Surety , can no more in Gods iustice be executed on vs . And this our n n Nowell techis . H●● suffered ●●der , &c. publike doctrine in England set forth by Masster Nowell confirmeth : By Christes death it is come to passe that to the faith full Death is now not a Destruction , but as it were a removing and changing of life , and a very short and sure passage to heaven . Who also in o o His she Catechis●● An. 157 another place expresseth it thus , Death of the body , which without Christ was the gate to Hell , is nowe by Christ made to all that beleeve in him the gate and passage to Heaven : So that death which before was a Punishment , is now by Christ become a vantage . Wherein you are notably contradicted , who doe call p p Pag. 15● 216. Death in the godly , the gate of Hell : a strange and most vntrue translation . Againe , you are q q Pag. 268 269. gainsaide in this place , where you reprove me for affirming , that Death to the godly and faithfull is a benefitt and advantage . Then you say , If I will reason what death is in it selfe , I must resolve it to be a part of Gods Curse . Which is no answer . For our quaestion is not , what death is in it selfe . Who ever denied it to be in it selfe , as you say , a part of Gods Curse for sinne : but my expresse wordes are , Death to the godly is no Curse properly , but a vantage . Pag. 270. Where a you adde , If Death were a gaine to the godly , as I would have it , by what meanes , I pray you , came it so to be ? If you know not , why did you not marke better the publike Catechisme before rehearsed , where all England is taught that it came by meanes of the death and resurrection of Christ . You say , Jf by the resurrection of Christ conquering Death and changing the nature of it , then till Christ was rison , Death was a punishment to the faithfull themselves . I wonder what meaning there is in this argument . As well you may say , There were none saved til Christ was risen . For salvation also and forgivenes of sinnes to all men , came only by the death and resurrection of Iesus Christ . So that thus , till Christ came in the flesh , none of the holy Patriarkes , Abraham , David , and the rest , obtayned eternall life . And what became of them then ? But I am perswaded , that Abraham , David , and all the Prophetes dying before Christ was exhibited in the flesh , yet by their faith in Gods sure ordinance and promise , they had and enioyed Christ truely incarnat , slaine , and risen againe : and this to them was as effectuall then , as it is now to vs since the actual performance of these things . Whereby even as we by faith , so they by the same faith ( differing onely in the circumstance of time ) were truely and throughly saved . Likewise to the faithfull then , by the efficacie of their holy faith , Death was properly no punishment but a gaine , even as to vs nowe it is . Further , b you except against me touching innocentes and Martyrs executions , Pag. 175. who c I say , are most blessed . Treat . 1. Pag. 38. You reply , Their Martyrdomes are shamefull deaths , and that is a kinde of Corporall Curse . A kinde of Curse ? Who denyeth that ? We know all shame & affliction to all men is a kinde of Curse . But neither shame nor Death to the holy Martyrs are d accounted by God nor by his servauntes as proper and true Curses , Before pag. 9. 50. but the holy men are in trueth most glorious and blessed in them . Againe , the Saints and Martyrs can not bee properly Cursed and properly Blessed too , in any measure . Neither their Soules blessed , vnles their bodyes be blessed also , & free from the true Curse : although you seeme to denie this point . Which strange and vncouth assertion , both heere and in many places mo , you doe at least insinuat : that is , that the godly in their Soules are blessed , but in their bodyes they still retaine Gods true & proper Curse , till the resurrection . Which I leave to the consideration of the godly . You say , We must call things by those Names which God first allotted them . That I deny , If God since evidently have altered them , and disposed of them otherwise . But he hath so don in this case . The afflictions and death which originally and naturally were punishments for sinne , and are so still to the wicked , the same to the godly ( as I have often said ) are since changed , & now are properly Chastisements of sinne , and not Punishmentes nor Curses . Only Christ hath suffered the whole proper punishment , and true Curse or Vengeance of our sinnes : and therefore on vs it is not , it can not be laid againe in any part thereof . You a a Pag. 96. avouch some that denie Christ to have bene made a Curse or sinne . But you must remember b b Pag. 92. your owne place of Austin Maledictum est omne peccatum , sive ipsum quod fit , sive ipsum supplicium : The Curse is all sinne , which is twofold , either that which we commit against Gods law , or els the very Punishment of that sinne . Nowe c c Pag. 96. your testimonies do meane , Christ was not made a Curse , or sin the first way , that is , he was not in him selfe sinfull nor hated : they deny not the second , that he was made the proper punishment or Sacrifice for our sinne .

And thus though you lust not to see it , yet my d d Tre●● . pag. 45. speach was sound and true , If Christ dyed simply but as the Godly dye , it might in no sort e e Gal. 3. heere be called a Curse . The reason is evident ; because the text heere doeth speak & treat of the Curse of the Law against sinne : such therefore was Christes Curse which he su●layned . To conclude then , his afflictions and death was neither Wages nor Chastisement , nor Curse nor Consequent of any sinne in him . Yet as God made him sinne for vs , so he truely , properly , and in very deed , laid the paine of his Curse vpon his body and Soule . Which Curse of God vpon Christ ( as you f f Pag 26 say truly ) was not in words but in deedes . Wherefore my wordes g g Pag. 2● you openly pervert , affirming that I say , Death heere ( that is Christes death , noted Galat. 3.13 . ) ●ay in no sorte be called a Curse , when I expresly even there , and every where doe say the contrary . Pag. 263. But a your greatest exception is , that this Curse laid on Christ cannot be vnderstood of the whole Curse of God or of the Law : Pag. 264. and therefore b you spare me not for c saying that Paul heere in his application out of Moses nameth a part of the iust Curse of the Law for sinne , Treat. 1. pag. 40. thereby meaning ( and inferring to his purpose ) the whole . Where you must be so good as to vnderstand me by mine own words in other places . Pag 290. For thus d you know e I limited my speach els where , As touching the vehemency of paine Christ was as sharply touched as the very reprobats . Treat. 1. pag 81. And , Christes sufferings were equall to the very Hellish torments in vehemency of paine and sharpnes . Againe , f This price equally in Justice must be kept so far as it is possible . Pag. 26. And , g g Pag. 37. Because there was no impossibility , no necessitie , no reason , but he might feele the full smart of our sinnes , ( as there was that he should not feele the full continuance thereof ) and seeing Gods strict iustice requireth it to be so , therefore it was so , he suffered all the smart , but not all the continuance of our punishment . ● Also Pa. 23. Hee●e Pa. 13 Thus then plainly h I signified i those 3 Limitations which now are expressed , that Christ suffered our whole Curse only so far as the possibilitie of thinges could admit , wherein nothing was dispensed nor pardoned to him ( for there was no cause ) as I have often said . Which doctrine how vnworthy it is of your strang contempt and outcryes against me , I leave it to the godly Wise to consider . Nowell . Catechis . Only marke if our k publike doctrine be not the same . Vltima omnia pati voluir pro nobis , qui vltima omnia commeriti sumus . Diram execrationem suscepit : contumelias etiam omnes , omnia probra , atque supplicia : &c. But you will say , thus we make it not the whole Curse of the Law . Yes : we cal it rightly the whole Curse , for as much as Christ suffered it in his whole manhood , See before pag 8. 1. The. 5.28 . ● pa. 48. 52 even in l All the powers of his m Spirit , & Soule , & Body . where that Curse in Deutero. being a part , was suffered only in the Body quickned by the Soul . Also in other respectes this suffering of Christ may bee well called the whole Curse or Punishment of sin , Pag. 11 , 12. ●n● 16.17 . Pa. 27● . 280 as n before is declared . After this o you thinke it strange that I say , Christ suffered & dyed iustly , and was hanged on the tree by the iust sentence of the Law : & that so hee was by imputation of our state and condition vnto him , sinfull , 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 . 51.11 . defiled , hatefull , and accursed . All the which I avouch , because he vndertooke by Gods ordinance as our Surety to receave our whole condemnation vpon himselfe so far as his owne nature and condicion could possibly admit , Christ suffe● iustly . to the ende that hee might wholly acquit vs . In regard whereof I aske , Is it wrong for the Law to lay the penalty on the surety , when the debtour can not discharge it ? Against this my assertion you say , a a Pag. 27● By no sentence of the Law he hanged on a tree . And a reason you give , b b Pag. 273 because to be hanged on a tree was no necessary part of the generall Curse of God vpon all sinners . I answer , to Dy for sinne was a necessary part of the generall Curse vpon all sinners . What say you then to his Death ? Did he dy iustly ? Sure if Christ dyed by the rule of Gods iustice , then he dyed iustly . If he dyed not by Gods iustice , then Wo , and thrice Wo to vs . For it cannot be but Gods Iustice * * Luc. 16.1 Deut. 10.1 Rom. 8.32 See before pag. 66. must be executed : it cannot be made voyd . So that if Christ in Gods proper iustice dyed not for vs , then in his Iustice without mercy we must , and shall dy . Which God forbid . But Christ therefore indeed suffered & dyed most iustly , according to the rule of Gods strict Iustice in all points possible . Yet you say , His hanging on a tree was no necessary part of the generall Curse of God vpon all sinners . What if that were no necessary part of the generall Curse ? It was nevertheles iust from God vpon him , aswell as his Death . No particular Punishments are necessary , but accidentall in their own nature . The generall Curse c c Gen. 2 . 1● Thou shalt dy the Death , comprehending them all not as necessary , but as accidentall parts . Yet wheresoever by Gods providence they happen , they are iust Punishmentes , no lesse then the Generall Curse . And thus Christ answering for sinne not only Dyed generally , but also was hanged on the tree particularly by the iust sentence of the Law . Still I meane iustly in respect of God alone : for men vsed meere violence , wrong , and no Law towards him . For they persecuted him as a malefactour ( as they said ) yet indeed hee being in himselfe altogeather faultles and without blame . You seeme to mislike that Christ should suffer iustly , because he suffered willingly for vs . Which hindereth not at all : for the voluntary surety beareth his penaltie iustly , when he sustayneth that which the debtour by Law should sustaine . You say d d Pag. 27● . No Lawe , you are sure not Gods Law , alloweth that when a murderer or such like offendour transgresseth he should be spared , and an other that is willing hanged in his steed . And therefore you mislike the similitude of a Surety in the worke of Christes Redemption . I answere in Gods Law that is not true , which you say . Vnderstanding heere by Gods revealed Will and his most holy and gracious Ordinance for vs . Though indeed this is not his Law properly , but his Gospel , & the most blessed glad tydings of peace and health to our Soules . Now by this Law of God I am sure , that Murderers , Adulterers , Theeves ( and worse then these ) are spared in Gods presense , and an other that is their most willing surety executed by the iustice of God in their steed . Pag. 280. But a no similitude can prove Christ in taking ou● person on him to be sinfull , defiled , hatefull , and accursed . I deny this saying vtterly . b How could he be by God properly and truly punished and Cursed for sinne , F●ee 18.20 Gen. 18.25 . but that he was sinfull and hatefull . And it is written , c God sent his Sonne in the likenes and forme of sinfull flesh for sinne , Rom 8.3 . Synac . beb●sich . and condemned sinne in d ( his ) flesh . In which likenes he stood before God indeed : before the world he was reputed so , 2. Cor. 5.21 . but falsly . And e God made him sinne for vs that we might be made the righteousnes of God in him . As also he was made f a Curse for vs . Gal 3.13 . Though you ●y nay : p 280 Calv in Gal. ● . 13 . Heb. 9. vlt. Pag. 11 , 12. ●●d 50.51 . Wherevpon Mr Calvin g warily enough saith , h Vt personam nostram suscepit , peccator erat & maledictionis reus . And the i Apostle saith , Ek deutérou The second time he shall appeare without sinne : meaning that the first time he appeared with sin . Yet this is k not inhaerently , but by imputation : the Lorde translating by his ordinance the sinne of men vpon him , & reckoning them vnto him . Even as by Gods true and reall imputation , not by any inhaesion we now in this life are iust holy and blameles before God : so was he sinnefull and defiled by imputation , not inhraenetly . Thus by this reckoning he suffered at Gods hands iustly : yet in his own nature , & in respect meerely thereof , he suffered both at the Iewes handes and before God the iust for the vniust . Pag. 280. l You say , where the Apostle saith m he was made sin for vs , 2. Cor. 5.21 the Fathers have 2 good and approved senses differing from ours . 1 That God made him a sacrifice for sinne : 2 that he vsed him as he doth sinners . What is there in both these that wee acknowledge not ? Yea what is this later but the very same point which we vrge ? It is nothing els in all this quaestion that we hold , but that God vsed Christ our Redeemer and Surety as he doth sinners , so far as possibilitie admitteth that he could and might be so vsed . And for this the Fathers are not silent , if I were so ambitious as you in producing multitudes of men . Cypr. de Pas● . Only Cyprian , and Athanasius , and Austin shall content me in this . The first , n He sustayned & suffered himself to be called Sinne and a Curse by Moses and the Apostle , because he had the like punishment as we should have had , but not the like fault . a a Pag. Your slight answere that it was like in part , not in all , salveth not the matter . For Cyprian meaneth Christs punishment for vs was so like ours , as was possible : and that sufficeth vs . Also by this your weake answer you are contrary to your selfe heere , in that you acknowledge that God in punishing Christ making him sinne for vs , hee vsed him as he doth sinners . Athanasius saith , * * Pag. ●● De ●nea Ipse per se sententiam solvit sub specie condemnati : Hee himselfe satis fied and abrogated the sentence of the Law vnder the appearance of a Damned man . Did not God then vse him as he doth sinners in all extremity of punishment so far as was possible ? And that it was altogeather possible to inflict the sense of his wrath immediatly and properly in his Soul , aswel as in his Body , no reasonable man cādeny . Aust. we saw a little b b Before 71.73 . before . Thus also your former good sense of this that Christ was made sinne , that is a sacrifice or punishment for sinne : how differeth it from your second , as you seeme to make them to differ ? Or how differ they both from our maine Assertion , that Christ in himselfe sinlesse , was by God reputed sinfull in our steed . Nay this directly and necessarily proveth thesame . For as I said , how could he be truly punished for sinne by God , but that he must be indeede sinfull by imputation ? The Iewes Sacrifices the expresse figures of Christe doe also most lively set out this thing . When they were c c Lev. ●● brought vnto God , the people must lay on their hands vpon the heads of the Beastes : shewing thereby that their d d Lev. ●● sinnes were put vpon the sacrifice , & that God so accounted them indeed to be . Wherefore what cause have you so to exclame as you do , against this comparison of Christ our Redeemer with a Surety : Christe truely Surety who among men by the ordinance of Lawe and iustice must and doth pay the debt when the debtour cannot . It is neither a simple similitude as e e Pag. 2● you simply call it : neither is it f f Pag. 2● vncleane , nor irreverent , nor irreligious , but a holy & most fit representation of Christs paying our debt for vs , and of our acquitting from the iustice of God by him . The very word is vsed in Scripture it selfe , g g Heb. ●● Hee was made a Surety of a better covenant . Which also expresly you grant : h h Pag. ●● That Christe is made a Surety wee finde it once mentioned in the Scripture . Is not that sufficient then to warrant the goodnesse and aptnes of the similitude against your vndutyfull reproofes of it ? But you say he was not as a Surety bound to the Law , but of a better Covenant , even of grace . Verily a Surety to vs , of both . Yea this latter implyeth necessarily the former , vnles you imagine Gods Iustice needed not exact satisfaction so far as was possible : or that there might be 2 Sureties to bring vs into grace and favour with God . For he could not assure vs of remission of sinnes , but by assuring vs that he had exactly paid all our debts . Yea none could pay them for vs throughly & acquit himself also , but only he . Therefore by being a Surety to vs of grace , it must needes bee also that he , and none other , was our Surety to the Law and to the iustice of God . 〈◊〉 . 4.4 . Thus also it is written that a He was made hyponomon subiect to the Law , 〈◊〉 . 277. or vnder the Law . Which b you mightily deny against expresse Scripture . But by what reason ? Because he was a Mediatour to God for vs . ●●ns hone●vtia ●st . con●● . 14.6 . Now Sureties that stand bound & must pay the debt , may not looke to be Mediatours . Yes forsooth , such a Surety as he was might worthily be a gracious Mediatour also . Though he were a Surety , and stood bound , yet he was no ordinary Surety . Though the debt were infinit , yet hee was more infinit in grace and power both to pay it , and to overcome it : and by his obedience and righteousnes to merit for vs , yea even in his suffering . What letteth then that such a person as he , might be a Mediatour to purchase also grace and favour , even in and besides his satisfaction for vs . c You say , he could not be bound to the Law , because he was above the Law . 〈◊〉 276. He was above the Lawe in his Godhead , but in his Manhood hee became for vs d vnder the Law . Againe , 〈◊〉 4 4. he was not of him self in his Manhood bound to the Law for us , but freely and voluntarily vndertaking , and by Gods gracious eternall Decree appointing him , so he became bound to the Law . Wherefore , though e he , who ordinarily redeemeth a prisoner from the enemie , 〈◊〉 ●77 . be not bound , but content so to doe : yet a Suretie being content , 〈◊〉 became the Law , ●unde to ●●w for vs ●●ds De●●d Ordi●● and by ●ne free will . becommeth bound . And so Christ our Redeemer became bound as a Surety to pay our debt for vs by the most stedfast and immutable Decree of God , and yet also by his owne most free good will . Yea Gods Decree , and his owne good will was , that he should satisfie and pay none otherwise for vs , then so as hee did : Therefore those Sentences of f your Authours Gregorie , Augustin and Ambrose , if they bee spoken simply , 〈◊〉 277. seeme very harsh , where they saye , That Christ could have saved vs otherwayes , then by suffering and dying for vs . For heerein they oppose Gods absolut Omnipotencie against his expresse and revealed will . Which how it may be liked in Divinitie , I know not . Wherefore still all these similitudes of Mediator , Redeemer , and Suretie , may stand very well togeather in the Office of Christ , though a a Pag. you would perswade vs the contrary , yea rather they confirme each other . Certainly , these Similitudes of a Suertie and a Mediatour , are very approved & excellent to set out most heavenly his great Grace and Iustice , by earthly things . Our publike Churches doctrine also avoncheth that hee was b b Now● techis . fore pa● our Suretie . With Christ , as our Suretie , so suffering , God dealt as it were in extremitie of Law , &c. Also Cyprian , c c Cypri● passio● In saying , why hast thou for saken me , he sheweth the sorrowes of that his complayning to be the wordes , Delictorum suorum , or Dilectorum suorum , of his sinnes : or if you so thinke rather , of his beloved ones , whose person & case he tooke vpon him . And this he would have vs to know that it was for them , or in their steed , who by reason of their sinnes deserved to be for saken of God . You d d Pag. 3● answer that these wordes of Cyprian I neyther vnderstand nor like . I pray why so ? Because Augustin saieth , Illa vox membrorumerat non capitis , That Cry was of his Members , not of the Head . Whatsoever Austins meaning is herein , yet Cyprians wordes are plaine and can not beare any other sense then as I make of them , that Christ was a very Surety for his people , and suffered such a forsaking of God touching sense of paine and want of present feeling of comfort in the paines , as the damned doe . And touching Austin also , I suppose you mis-vnderstand him : but of his minde touching this speach of Christ on the Crosse , we shall see further heereafter . I adde vnto all this last of all your owne grant , where you fully yeeld and acknowledge that Christ was our very Suertie to the Law , and that he did suffer iustly , or in Gods iustice . The vengeance of the Law ( say e e Pag. 9●● you ) once executed on our Suretie , can no more in Gods iustice be exacted on vs . * * Pag. 13● Elswhere also you allow of this Similitude : which yet f f Pag. 27● 276. 279. manie times you reiect most disdainfully . Yea in that your sentence you overthrow g g Pag. 27● your owne chiefe exception which you make against it , that he was not our Surety to the Law to pay our debtes . If the vengeance of the Lawe lighted on him as on a Suretie , then he was our Suretie to the Law : and if this vengeance of the Law can not now in Gods iustice be exacted on vs , then he as our Suretie to the Law by suffering it hath cleered vs from it . And to conclude , that which he suffered as being our Suertie , the same before God he suffered in iustice , as is before proved . And in vaine you exclaime , that this is a against the Scriptures , Pag. 272. against the faith , against the Fathers , against the Consciences of Gods people : seeing it appeareth not to be against , Pag. 182. but with all these . b Your Similitude of a Kings sonne intreating for his Fathers Rebells , is very weake , and overthroweth ( if it were good ) a confessed point of Christes Redemption . For by this similitude Christ should not have suffered bodily death for vs : seeing no King hath lawfull power by anie meanes to lay bodily death on any such Surety , much l●sse to make his Sonne , or his Sonne to make him selfe any such Suretie or Redeemer of Rebells : as Christ was made and might be made of God for vs . So that also where you would have it to serve , that we might perceave by this how Christ was not defiled , nor hatefull , nor guilty by imputation of our treason , it is evidently to weak . For you have not shewed , neither can shew , that this Kings Sonne was or ought to have bene such a Suretie & Redeemer as Christ was , that is vnto bodily death . Therefore this Similitude cannot bee good . We have other maner of warrant that Christ was by imputation made Sinne for vs , and the Curse for vs : and that this ordinance was holy and right , and above all reproofe . Which you can not bring for your Kings Sonnes Suretiship , nor for the Kings fact : who kept not the order of iustice when he spared abominable Rebells without their bloudshed ; or when he slew his guiltles Sonne for them , that they might be spared .

After this c he impugneth another reason of myne with marveylous skorne and detestation . Pa. 183.284 . That seeing Christ d on the Crosse spoyled principalities and powers , Col. 2.15 . and made a shew of them openly triumphing over them . Therfore I collected , that Christ there discerned and felt the Powers of darknes ( Sathan and his Complices ) as very instrumentes working the effectes of Gods wrath vpon him selfe . Which as I conceave , is no such foolish nor impious reason as he vainly pretendeth . For doth not the very phrase and maner of speach import some such mightie contention and violent opposition , where yet at length an absolut & glorious triumphant victorie was obtayned ? Surely it doeth . This then must be conceaved and felt by Christ : neither could these be other effectes but onely of Gods proper wrath , severitie , and indignation against the sinne of the world , which was matter of a a Of som paine a tormen● opposition against Christ at that season ; it could not be the revealing of anie glorie or comfort , which such instruments procured vnto him & wrought vpon him . Against this you bring not a word . Nevertheles your high disdaine towards me , breaketh out touching the maner how this might be . But what is that to the purpose ? What if no toung can expresse the maner , as neither have I once indeavoured to expresse it : shall not therefore the testimonie of the H. Ghost be true , that on the Crosse Christ obtayned such a victorie against the Divells , which implyeth also such a Conflict first , as I have observed ?

Yet because you will needes examine the maner howe possibly this might be , let vs see what you make of it . The Divells ( saye you ) have nothing to doe with the Soules of men , but eyther to tempt them or torment them . First , before I answer you directly , this wee may consider : Christ might and no doubt he did in his Soule discerne , conceave , and applie to him selfe all the rage , malice , How Ch●●● might be faulted by than on Crosse . and violence of the Iewes tormenting him to death , as set on fire by Sathan him selfe , and by all the powers of Hell : and these also as set on worke by the Iustice and severe Wrath of God now purposely laying punishment on his Sonne , thereby to take satisfaction and recompence for all our sinnes . Now this feeling and suffering in the Soule of Christ , made an other kinde of impression in him , and was infinitly more greevous and dolefull as touching the present sense then otherwise the meere outward stripes and woundes of men were or could be . These conflictes of Christ on the crosse with Satans rage & malice , laboring if he could possibly by these meanes to have quenched the light of our Salvatio , may wel be vnderstood by the Apostle in this place : & yet none of your exceptions do touch this argument . Elswhere in your book you speak directly against the maine ground of it : affirming that God himself did nothing to Christ , that is , he did not pperly punish him . Thus you say , b b Pag. 3● God did not any thing vnto him . And , c c Pag. 32. who did Crucifie him , I pray you , God , or the Jewes ? And , d d Pag. 7● He was indeed condemned by man that gave wrongful sentence of death against him : but he was acquit●ed of God . And e e Pag. Christ was no more a Curse then he was Sin : who indeed and with God was neither : ●roper●●●hed ●●st . ●●or 5 21 but with men he was reputed both wicked and accursed . Notwithstanding the very trueth and Gods word it selfe is flat contrary to you . For it is written : a Hes made him Sinne for vs which knew no sinne , that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him . Yea , b he made his Soule sinne . Which is nothing els but that c the Lord layd vpon him or inflicted vpon him the iniquitie of vs all . 〈◊〉 53 10. 〈◊〉 . 6.5.10 . ●rem . in 〈◊〉 . 8. 〈◊〉 . 4 28. ●●m. 8.3 . Yea , d the Lord delighted to bruise him , and afflicted him or slew him . And the Apostles doe acknowledge that e both the counsell and the Hand of God was in Christs punishment . Finally , f God sending his Sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh and for sinne , ●●iac . condemned sinne in ( * his ) flesh . His Condemning of sinne in Christ was in deeds , and not in words . Gods own hand then did smite Christ , and inflicted on him whatsoever he suffered as the condemnation of sinne . Where yet we imagine not that God was moved with any affection or perturbation , ●●g. 245. but ( as f you acknowledge ) the punishment or dayned for sin by the Iustice of God , and inflicted by the hand of God ( whatsoever meane it pleased him to vse ) is called the wrath of God . And then howe may we thinke Gods infinite Iustice & power punished Christ ? Surely in all such respectes as he was capable of paines and punishments as from God . Wherefore in his spirit certainly he suffered spirituall and incomprehensible punishmentes being no sinnes , such as Mens soules are subiect vnto as from God . In his Body also he felt bodily afflictions , wch our bodyes can apprehend . Some God himselfe immediatlie inflicted , some hee inflicted by meanes and instrumentes : but still it was his Hand principally which did what soever was done vnto him . Neither can you say that Christs punishment was Gods meere and bare permission only . Nay his punishment was his revealed and written will , his expresse and publike ordinance , and most holy appointment from the beginning of the world : and now at last effected by his owne hand , and by other meanes , when the fulnes of time was come . Wherefore the whole suffering of Christ was Gods owne and most proper action : The wicked Iewes and Divells were only his instruments to doe that which he set them on worke to doe , though they thought not so . Now we come to answer you more directlie touching the text in hand . Where you would intimate that Christ on the Crosse was not tempted by the powers of Hell , because Christ could not b●● tempted by Satans inward suggestion , but onely by the care receaving an outward voyce : This I suppose also is a singular conceit of your owne without any title of Scripture to proove it by . Yea what reason can you give that where the minde conceaveth any temptation , there of necessitie must be Concupiscence , Originall sinne , a a Pag. 1 Corruption of the flesh , &c. In vs men it is so , you say . I grant in vs it is so . But that of necessitie in nature it must be so , or that Adam was tempted by voyce of necessitie , and not accidentally ; I see no reason in the world : or that Christ might not be sometime inwardly assaulted & tempted also without heaving any voyce . Nay I suppose you have no reason to affirme ( as b b Pag ▪ 1 you doe ) that Christ in the Wildernes was tempted by Sathan by outward voyce only . It seemeth rather to be manifest that his temptation was meerely in cogitation and in the thoughts of his heart so mooved by the * * Or els b● such out● obiects t●ther , with 〈◊〉 work tha●rituall c●●tion in C●● As Satan 〈◊〉 well kno● how . spirituall suggestion of the Divell . First , because the text saith , that Satan c c Mat. ● . set him vpon a pinnacle of the temple in Ierusalem , and mooved him to cast him selfe downe . Which was within the time of his fasting , and hee fasted but fourty dayes and fourty nights : and so long continually hee was d d Marc. in the wildernes . Seeing then Christ was in the Wildernes all the while that hee was thus tempted , Howe could that bee really and actuallie done ? This was therefore in a spirituall Cogitation . But chieflie , when the e e Mat. 4. Divell shewed him all the kingdomes of the worlde and the glorie of them , and f f Luc. 4. that in the twinkling of an eye , how could that † † Yea , sibly it 〈◊〉 be don ●●●ally &c ficell● a● you . But onles it 〈◊〉 be . Ergo● possibly be done really , actually , and externally ? Wherefore I must needs think that as Satan was a subtil Spirit , so he could & did sometime spiritually suggest temptations into Christes heart , and Christ could in Soule conceave them , and yet vtterly without all sin : which we at no hand now can doe , because we are all naturally apt and inclining to evill , as Christ was not . Yea the text to the Hebr. seemeth to prove it also , Christ was tempted in all things like vs , without sinne . Then he was tempted both outwardly and also meerely within : ( for so are we ) and this was meerely by conceaving and considering of Satans wicked spirituall motion in his Spirit , which it was possible that he might doe without any yeelding to it , though we by reason of our inborne corruption can not possibly doe it . Thus then it was possible , and most likely it is also that Christ was assaulted , and wrastled withall by the Divels spirituall suggestions now when in most bitter Agonic he hanged on the Crosse . Howbeit to goe further , such grievous and bitter assaultes of the Divel he might receave outwardly also by his senses other wayes : though not by Satans own voyce , yet by Satans members meanes . And so a a ●ag. 283. you say he was tempted of Satan all the tyme of his abode on earth . Then so you denie not , but now even on the Crosse Christ might be and was tempted and assaulted by Satan , that is by Satans instrumentes , moved and inraged by him . And this is none other indeed , but that which in the entrance of † † Pag. 77. this question heere I observed : which as I have before shewed sufficeth to prove Christes Combating , as it were , and wrastling with the powers of Hell on the Crosse . But b b Pag. 284. you obiect against this , that Outward temptation by the mouthes and handes of the wicked , is no effect of Gods wrath . No is ? Here you are cleane contrary to your self and the truth . Elswhere c c Pag. 243. ●63 . 275 . you truly acknowdge that all outward crosses and afflictions small or great are in their nature punishments of sin and effects of Gods wrath . Now those doubtles are temptations . Then sure these outward temptations by the mouths and hands of the wicked such as Christ indured , are effects of Gods wrath , viz. his revilings , his shame , his poverty , his stripes , his woundes , and death it selfe , &c. You say outward temptation is rather a try all of Gods gifts and graces bestowed vpon vs . And is not inward temptation in the Godly so to ? I pray what oddes is this , that you make betweene the inward and outward temptations ? It is true , this is one good vse of both these fortes in the godly , in whom Christ hath sanctified all afflictions , & death it selfe . Yet in their very nature they all are none other but partes of Gods Curse for sin , very punishments of sinne , and true effects of Gods wrath : as in Christ they were all . Further Satan might spiritually and extraordinarily worke togeather with these his instruments outwardly afflicting his body , I say , by these bodily occasions thus the rather working an impression of his malice and spirituall fury mixed with subtilty against Christ : and Christ likewise extraordinarily might apprehend the same , that is the rather by the concurrence and cooperation of those outward occasions with these spirituall incursions . And thus might Christ suffer most strange temptations , and incomprehensible sorrowes , as very punishmentes of sinne from the furious rage of Satan and malice of wicked men , whatsoever other vses they might have besides in him . Heere now we may seed row vniustly you conclude that Satan could no other way assault Christ as an instrument of Gods wrath , but a a The ve●● wrastlings assaults of ●●tan may b● ritual ●orn●● though 〈◊〉 such as ar●● ecuted in locall He only by executing tormentes on his Soule even in such wise as he tormenth damned soules in Hell : and that can be , say you , no other way then by Satans very possessing of those soules . Which grosse and infernall speculations of yours ( for truthes you can not make them ) I vtterly leave to your owne discussing . For my parte I have spoken no word of them in all my treatise . Notwithstanding this heere I avouch , that howsoever the meanes or maner was of Satans and his furious bandes assaulting of Christ on the Crosse , it made certainly an impression of most doleful sorrow and torment in his Soule , as feeling & discerning by that meanes the very stroke of Gods owne hand vpon him , and receaving the sting of his wrath and indignation therein , which then wrought , and was revealed chiefly then vpon him for all our sinnes . Neither say you any thing whereby you doe or can overthrow this assertion . Our authorised doctrine in England agreeth with me , saying , b b Nowe● Catech. He fought and wrastled as it were hand to hand with the whole army of Hell . Finally heere where you skornfully reiect and detest this my sense of the Apostle in this place , yet you give no inkling of any other sense at all which these wordes might seeme rather to admit . Wherefore this is more then halfe a conclusion against you , that my interpretation and application of it is vniustly by you reproved .

Then a a Pag. 2● you come to confute my fourth Reason : but the mainest points thereof you have not so much as touched . 1 I b b Treat● pa. 45. shewed that the Godly sometimes in this life doe feele a tast of Gods infinit Wrath , and even of Hellish sorrowes . 2. That Christ our Redeemer suffered for vs as deeply , yea deeper then ever any of vs heere do suffer or can suffer . But all this you can heere cleanly passe over without any worde to it . Wherevpon it followeth soundly , that Christ indeed suffered in Spirit the true effects of Gods wrath , and even the sense of Hellish sorrowes . Howbeit in an other reason of mine not vnlike to that , you thinke you can picke more advantage against some wordes . I shewed out of the Hebrues that Christ succoureth vs not but wherein he had experience of our temptations and infirmities . Now he succoureth vs even in the feeling of the terrours of God and sorrowes of Hell in our Soules . Therfore he himselfe had experience of the same : pa 66. & I meaue c alwayes so far as was possible : that is in the extremitie of the sorrow & paine thereof , no further : Where note that the wordes of this Proposition are not any whit more generall , neither include they any thing lesse tolerable then the text it selfe doth , ●eb . 2.17 . thus : d Wherefore in all things it behooved him ( or he ought ) to be made like vnto his brethren , ●ebr. 4.15 . ●om. 8.19 . ●●ch . 20 . 2● e like in temptations , infirmities , and f afflictions , only except sinne : that he might be a mercifull and faithfull Highpriest in things concerning God . For in that which himselfe suffered and was tempted ( in ) he is able to succour them which are tempted . First , en hó in that which himselfe suffered , signifieth either the matter wherein Christ is able to succour vs , or the meanes whereby he becommeth able , that is to say , ready and sit to succour vs , or els the occasion and reason why hee is the readier to succour vs : even in that himself suffered and was tempted , he is able to succour them who are tempted . As if hee should say , were it not that himselfe by his owne feeling knew the misery of our sufferings and temptations , he had not ben so ready to succour vs in all ours , not with such compassion , as now he is . Which way soever of these 3 we take these words , yet they plainly inferre that Christ himselfe felt all the misery and smart of our sufferings and temptations which we at any time do feele , & wherein we are succoured . Thus as I have shewed ( neither do you gainsay ) The godly sometimes feeling an infinit paine of Gods * wrath and of Hellish sorrows in this life : ●o their ●●e it see●●h ●●well . ●●ch . Christ therfore felt the same indeed to succour vs thereby . Wherevnto serveth our publike doctrine , g Diram execrationem quâ scelera nos nostra de vinxerat in se suscepit , vt eâ nos hoc pacto exolveret . Albeit heere the first way seemeth to mee not the vnlikelyest , that the Apostle should signifie All the matter namely that kind of paine wherin he succoureth vs , even that which himselfe also had experience of . And this also those wordes kata panta in all things doe fully import . But indeed all ; are but one & the same in effect as I said . Sec : we must note that in these words Christ was like vs in All temptations and afflictions , we are to vnderstand h All that are incident to Mankind generally : 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 . 48. &c not which happen to any man particularly . All the particular Crosses in the world , neither could nor can possibly come to any man . Also , that he suffered not only in one or in some partes of our nature , but in All and every parte , even in Spirit , and Soule and Body , like as we are apt & able to suffer . Againe , all the particulars which by Gods providence he suffered not , were farre lesse in paine & terrour then the generall paines were , which he did suffer . And thus right well is Christ said to be like vs in all our temptations and sufferinges : that is , at least like vs , indeed beyonde vs in all the extremity and violence of them , and exceeding much more deepely plunged therein . As well therefore you might have given a good sense of my wordes ( if you had had any minde thereto ) as of these generall and large wordes of the Scripture wherevpon I ground my selfe . But very chariritably you can inferre vpon my reason , Then Christ had his eyes put out for so had Sampson he was swallowed vp by a Whall , for so was Ionas : he was cast into a burning furnace , for so were Sidrac , Mishac , & Abednego he was stoned to death , for so were Naboth and Steven . In deed I had bene as foolish and as doltish as you doe make me , if I had treamed so . Care vs therfore I pray that indifferencie which all reason and vse of speach permitteth : namely that general termes be vnderstood according to the possibilitie and propabilitie of the matter . That is , that the Apostle and I both doe speake of All the sufferinges of Mankinde in generall , and of each parte of Humane Nature apt to suffer but not of every particular in each of them , or which each man meeteth with all . Then where * * Pag 287 you examine me , what I m●ane whether Christ be not able or not willing to succour vs in other thinges then hee him selfe did suffer . Mine answer is ; Aske the Apostle what hee meaneth in saying kata panta , in all things it behoued him to be like his brethren , that he might be a mercifull and faith full Highpriest : and dyna● as he is ( thus ) able to succour vs , as if he should say ; Hee was not any otherway able , then in that him selfe hath also suffered being tempted in all things kata , homotótet a like vnto vs . How be it I vnderstand him not to speake heere of Christs absolu : Omnipotency ; what he could have done ( as God ) if he would : But of his ability by dispensation receaved in his Manhood by the Ordinance and appointment of God . As if he should saye , Thus hath God appointed him & inabled him to succour vs , and not otherwise . Where we will not sticke to grant you your sense , that hee might be the better able to have compassion on vs . In effect these expositions differ not much . And thus this Scriptured trust is cleered , and my Reason iustified , Christ succoureth vs not in any extreamer kinde of paine them him selfe had experience of . Which also ●ough All ge●●rally feele ●t , yet gene●●lly it is due 〈◊〉 All in re●●ect of sinne . But he succoureth vs in the ● feeling of the terrours of God , hee releaseth vs of the paines and sorrowes vnmeasurable that rise thereof . Therefore him selfe had experience of them . This same also sundry of the Fathers avouch with vs most fully : and even those which your selfe brings for a your selfe . Pag. 25. Cyrills wordes before touched are most large , Cyrill . The●●ur . 10.3 . Omnia Christus perpessus est , vt nos ab omnibus liberaret : Christ throughly suffered all such passions ( which men doe suffer ) that he might deliver vs from all . Humane ●ature . All the passions of † fleshe were stirred in Christ yet without sinne , and so that vnles he had dyed we had not bene delivered from death , vnles he had feared and sorrowed we had not ben quitt from feare and sorrowe . Heere he saith , all our passions were stirred in Christes humane nature , even so farre as we are cured , and so farre as might bee without sinne in him . Then I hope by Cyrills iudgement the sense of the true curse and proper wrath of God for sinne was in Christes Soule ; so faire as it might be painfull and not sinfull : seeing Men are subiect to this suffering as the most sharpest among others . Lastly by Cyrill here we see that vnles Christ had felt the same suffrings which we feele and are cured of , we had not bene delivered of them . This also I am sure fitteth not your opinion , That one drop of Christes bloud was sufficient for our whole redemption . Which was one of your principles in your preaching , but in your book you skip it cleane , I know not how . ●ag. 25. 26. Next we may see that c your place of d Ambros● is also fully to the same effect . Luc. de ●●tic . dol. ●● . A litle after his e former words he saith The ioy of the eternall Godhead being parted away from him , Christ was affected with the redio●snes of my infirmity . ●●fore pa. 48 He tooke vpon him my sorrow , that he might give mee his ioy , and he abased himselfe to the sorrow of death in our manner , that by the same meanes in him he might bring vs to life . He ought therfore to take sorrow that he might overcome sorrow , and not exempt himselfe from it , & that we might learne in Christ to ouercom the sorrow of death approching . Wherefore Christ exempted himselfe from nothing in his Passion that we haue experience of as touching Paines and sorrowes . And by the same sufferings in him selfe for vs , he healeth vs , wherevnto we are subiect by reason of sinne . So that thus ( in his agonie ) hee wrought with a deepe effect , that because in his flesh hee killed our sinnes , he might also with the sorrow of his Soul extinguish the sorrow of our Soules . To this very purpose also a a Pag. 47 . 4● Na●●anz . Fulgent . Barnard . Tertull. Ierom. many others before rehearsed do affirme most fully . Neither is this taking of their sentences any whit to abuse the Fathers , which you b b Pag. 86. are afraid of . You greatly abuse them which take them otherwise : namely as if they meant that by the flesh and bloudshed of Christ meerely & alone without the merit of his Soules and Mindes proper suffering , our whole Ransom were paid . As for our comparing the paines of Christs suffering with the paines even of the Reprobats in this life , I see not that you nor any man living can finde fault therewith : onely set aside their sinfull suffering , which alwayes I testifie that Christ was most free from . Yea I doubt not but we may compare Christes sufferings in his Agonies touching vehemency of paines even with those of the Damned in hell . What the o● is between● Christes Su●fering & 〈◊〉 Damned . Only I conceave betweene Christs , and theirs this odds : 1 They suffer sinfully , 2 Perpetually , 3 Locally in Hell . All which being excepted ▪ otherwise Christ suffered altogither as bitterly & as sharpely ( yea I may say in nature the very same ) as the Damned doe : which therefore may well be called the paines of Hell , although yet Hell indeed doeth differ in some great and waighty circumstances , as is aforesaid . If you say , the extreamest paines of punishment cannot be where sinne is not . That is true : neither in deed can the least paines be where there is no sinne : and that no more in the Body then in the Soule , though this please not you . Marke what I say , The extreamest paines of al may as possibly be inflicted where no sinne is , as the very least , & that as well in the Spirit as in the Body . But in trueth neither the one nor the other is possible . Neither the greatest nor the least paines of Gods proper vengeance for sinne can be inflicted or suffered at all in Soule or in Body , but only where sinne is . That is to say , either imputed or inhaerent . Ordinarily the Reprobat are thus punished , where sinne is inhaerent . Extraordinarily and singularly by Gods owne speciall ordinance Christ was even thus punished , yet where sin was but imputed . And thus therefore Christes Soule for meere paine might suffer the extreamest spiritual punishments ( altogeather as well as his body might suffer any at all ) without inhaerent sinne . But you graunt his body suffered truely punishments for sinne . Therefore his soule might suffer also , even those of the extreamest degree . Your “ “ See be●●● pag. 14. selfe also granteth that Christ both might and did suffer the extreamest paines that might bee , without his owne sinne . But it was possible for him to conceave and feele in his a minde farre greater sorrowes and paines for our sinne from Gods wrath , ●at . ● . 〈◊〉 26. then hee could feele meerely in his body outwardly . And the greatest was no more sinne then the least , though both were properly for sin . Therefore by your own grant , Christ might and did feele and indure the greatest sorrowes of the minde and soule as well as the lesser in the body , being all the very effectes of the wrath of God against sinne . ●ag . 102. b You bring a reason against this , that God spiritually punisheth no man but for his own vncleannes : which is a thing meerely vntrue . For though no other man was ever punished without his owne vncleannes , neither spiritually nor corporally , yet Christ our Saviour was : who in this case was not in the ordinarie state of men . But I pray shewe me this mysterie how it is that God cannot punish Spiritually where there is no inhaerent sinne , but can and may Corporally where there is none : All the rest of your assertions c heere are altogeather of this sute . ●a 101 , 102 ●03 , 105. ●66 . 94. By this one reason I weakened all yours , but you could passe that by , To this ef●●ct . Treat. 1 ●ag. 41 , 43. answering vnto it not a word . Viz: d If Christes body hanging on the Crosse , and held by Death in the grave , was punished by God where yet he found no sinne , and which he still intierly loved and was never separated from , then so hee might & did punish properly his Soule also , & yet never divide his Godhead nor his love from it . But thus he did to his body : therefore even so hee might doe , and did to his soule properly also . For the one standeth with Gods iustice , and with the Nature of man in Christ , aswell as the other . So farre for this .

Then e you addresse your selfe against another , ●ag. 289. even one of the chiefest reasons of mine : which I make from the straunge and incomparable Ago●ies of Christ in the tyme of his Passion . These invaded him , as we read , principally at 3. times : 1. in the foretast of his Passion , shewed vs in the 12. of Iohn . 2. In the Garden a little before his apprehension . 3. In his very extreame Passion it selfe on the Crosse . The Scriptures f heeretofore I rehearsed at full , Treat . ● . ●ag. 49. 50. ●oh. 12.27 . Mat. 26.39 . and 44. Mark . 14.33 ●uk. 22.44 . and 43. Mat. 27.46 . ●eb●● 5.7 . & whence these piteous and vnspeakeable Agonies of his are notified vnto vs . Whereby to all ( that duely consider ) it appeareth so cleare as the Sunne at noone day , that The paines of his Passion● which plainly now he felt , and feared , ( because he knew he was to feele them further vnto death ) were the proper and direct cause of those Agonies . But we assume , that such straunge and lamentable things and behaviour in Christ were not the effectes only and meerelie of his bodily paines and death , or of the feare of them . Therefore Christ felt and indured more then his meere bodily paine and death , by the testimonie of the Scriptures , which thing a a Before 14.25.5 you deny . In your whole discourse you gainsay * * Pag. 17 22. 23. 2● 34. &c. the Proposition , that the paines of Christes Passion , or the naturall feare of them , was the proper and direct cause of those Agonies : or that these Scriptures doe imply so much . The Assumption you graunt and acknowledge , that the meere bodily paines and death of Christ or the feare thereof , were not the only , nor the proper and direct Cause of these Agonies in him . For b b Pag. 29● you are resolved that the cause of Christes Agonie could not proceede but from his Submission to God or Compassion to men , or from both . These you name elswhere a c c Pag. 23. ● religious Feare , d d Pag. 124. 20 , 21. Devotion and Pietie to God , pitie to men , &c. And thus you resolutely denie my Proposition . For you meane it seemeth that Christ suffered paines in his Soule by reason of the strength and zeale of these his Holy Affections : and that these were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie & Complaint . Therfore not any extraordinarie Paines inflicted vpon him by way of proper punishment , as my Proposition intendeth . But this your Assertion I simply denie , that Christes Holy Affections , his Piety and his Pity were the proper and maine Causes of that his most wofull and miraculous Agonie & Complaint . And then my Proposition standeth firme , that his Paines inflicted on him by way of proper Punishment and Vengeance for sinne were the proper and maine Cause thereof . Wherefore let vs try your proofes for it , and then mine against it . But before we com to them , you must know that this your Resolution , as you call it , is first most vaine , also directly contrary to your selfe , and then altogeather vntrue and presumed by wide coniecture ; as God willing presently I shall shew . For the first ; I hartily intreat the Christian Reader to marke wel & to consider , how your L. doth contrive 3. notable Equivocations in these few wordes , Christ suffered in his Soule the wrath of God : Notable S●● phistrie . which you e e Pa 243 , 24● 245. 248. seeme to grant , but in truth you do not : and if we ad also the paines of Hell , then hee opposeth a fourth fallacie against vs . And these 3. or 4. are the only Pillars of his Doctrine . For the 3. former , your first Equivocation is in this word Christ Suffered : and about it wee deale in this place now . The common and ordinary phrase of men vnderstandeth heerein , His feeling of paines inflicted on him by way of proper punishment and satisfaction for sinne , ●t Christes ●fering or ●●lion is pro●●ly . which he vndertooke for vs . Only this in the ordinarie and vsuall maner of speach is signified by Christes suffering or his Passion : and so doe we alwayes vnderstand by it . But you cunninglie take another rare sense of this word , as it signifieth the Affections of the Minde in Christ wholly bent to Holines , Righteousnes , & Obedience of God , that so he might exactly & perfitly keep his iust Law . Which 2. partes of Christes Mediation , are greatly differing , ●●e before pa. 18. 52. 64. and ought not both in trueth to be called His Passion or Satisfaction for sinne . Therefore speake plainly I beseech you , and deceave vs not ? call not this His Soules suffering , but his Soules Holines & Righteousnes . And seeing you meane , This was the proper & maine cause of Christs Passion & Suffering when he wrought his satisfaction for sin now at the last end of his life chiefly , I simply denie it : 〈◊〉 Treat. 1. pag. 68. 69. all Reason reclaimeth against it : and to that which " I alleaged for further reproofe thereof , you answere nothing . Your next Equivocation is in this , See before pag 52. Hee suffered † in Soule : your next in " Gods wrath . Both which I have plainly shewed before . As also your 4. Before pa. 49. 19. * Fallacy , which may be called Fallacia Accidentis . But Sit I hope you will not thinke to beare downe all afore you with nothing but with cunning , Before pag. 16. 53. yet vaine deceipt , countenanced out with cruell and hatefull wordes . Further , you are in this your Resolution directly contrary to your owne selfe : Before pa. 36. 64. as " before I have briefly , yet sufficiently shewed . Againe , where you censure your selfe very sharply for your resolutnes in this cause , Pag. 17. * It is curiosity to examine , presumption to determine , impossibility to conclude certainly what was the true cause therof . Thirdly , “ “ Pag. 290. where you make but 2. causes submission to God , Compassion to men : elswhere but one * * Pag. 23. Religious feare . But † † Pa. 17. &c. before you very precisely made 6. If you agree no better with your self , I have small hope that you will agree with vs . Last of al , this your resolution , making Christs Piety & Pity to be the only proper & maine Cause of all his wofull Passion , is vtterly false and vntrue , having no ground but meere coniectures . But before I vn●● my reasons against your Assertion , Your . 6. Causes of Chr. Agonie vntrue . let vs view all your particul●● Causes , & see if any one of the can be good , † † Pag. 18. Your 1. Cause is S●●mission to the Maiesty of God sitting in iudgement . Against whom 〈◊〉 in what cause sate he now in iudgment , when Christ was thus astonished & Agonized therewith ? Of necessity it must be one of these three wayes . 1. Gods Maiesty & great iustice now at this time might sit in iudgement against vs , & so consequently yea chiefly against Christ him selfe as our Ransom-payer and Surety in our steed . If you meane , that thus Christ with Submission beholding his Father in iudgement at this time was cast into this Agonie , it is the verie trueth , and the same that we maintayne . For this denyeth not , but that he had real paines inflicted from the Father as from a iust iudge against vs in him , who were thus acquitted by him . And thus if Aust. and others a a Pag. 3● sentences be vnderstood , that the Compaint on the Crosse was not Christs in respect of him selfe but in respect of his Church for whom then & there he answered before God comming now to execute iudgement for their sinne , so they are wel & rightly vnderstood : otherwise there is no trueth in them , namely as you seeme to vse them . Second : God might be considered now as iudging Satan the prince of this world , and overcomming him for vs by the victorie of Christes sufferings which he was nowe about to vndergoe : that thus the Divell ( as b b Pag. you note out of c c Aug. Austin ) might be vanquished in our Cause not by Gods absolut and meere power , but also by doeing iustice , & so we deliuered . Thus where d d Pag. you apply , e e Ioh. 32. Now ( even at hand ) is the iudgement of this world : Now ( even shortly ) shall the prince of this world be cast out . and I , if I were lift vp from the earth , will draw all men vnto me . If you meane it in this sense ( as you seeme to doe ) it serveth well . But that in this respect , as God proceeded against Satan , and for this cause Christ should bee cast into these dreadfull scates , sorrowes , and bloudy Agonies , what man of iudgement would imagine ? What colour of likelihood is there in it ? Rather this were properly cause of great ioy and triumph indeed : as sufficiently I have shewed in my f f Ph. 5. former treatise , wherevnto you answere not . Your testimonies touching g g Ioel Heb. Psal. men sinfull , wherevnto may be adioyned h h Luc● an other of the like , somewhat opening those places , make nothing to the purpose at al. For these could not by reason of their Sinnes induce the very presence of Gods Maiesty , beeing in anie measure revealed vnto them : but Christ in him selfe being free from all sinne , could be in no such case . No better also is i i Isa. ● that of the Angells ( meere Creatures ) vayling their faces at the glorious presence of God the Creatour of all : but Christ the Mediator was not a meere Creature , but alwayes personally vnited with a greater power then the Angells were , and alwayes sustayned by it : vnles only in case of his Iudgement and Passion proceeding vpon him from God , as is before noted , when purposely the Godhead hid him selfe as it were , and withdrew his wonted Comfort , that the manhood might be subiect ●o full Punishment for vs , as was appointed by God . Although even nowe also the Godhead did sustaine his manhood thus being overloaden with paines : otherwise it could not a a ●efore ● . 42 . but have ben quite overwhelmed . Third : Gods Maiestie and iustice may be considered sitting in iudgement meerely against sinfull men . If you meane heere against the sinnes of the Elect , Christ knew the eternall and sure decree of God which had turned the Cup of vengeance alreadie from them vpon himselfe , as being their Suretie : so that this commeth to our Assertion , as is aforesaid . Or touching the Reprobates doe you think that Christ heere so vehemently wished them better , whom he knew God hated : or that for pity of them he fell into this Agonie and sorrowful prayers ? First Christ saith a little b b 〈◊〉 17. ● . before , He would not so much as pray for them . Yea it is certaine Christ rather would have greatly reioyced to see the due execution of Gods most holy and deserved iustice , which is a speciall part of his high glory . According to that which is written : c c 〈◊〉 58.10 , The righteous shall reioyce when he seeth the vengeance , he shal wash his feet in the bloud of the wicked : And men shall say , verily there is fruit for the righteous , doubtles there is a God that iudgeth the earth . Againe if Christes mournfull prayers were to wish better to the Reprobat , how can that stand where he saith , Let this Cup passe from me : he should have saide from them . Neither this also might he say , from them : as knowing perfectly his Fathers and his owne will directly to the contrary .

Your next supposed Cause d d 290. Compassion towards men contayneth 3. severall causes e e 18.19 heere : 1. for the Reiection of the Iewes : 2. for the Dispersion of his Church : 3. His zealous griefe generally for the sins of the world . All these I grant were alwayes in Christ , and caused no doubt alwayes heavines in him : yet no more then a godly and heavenly minde could and would cheerefully digest and beare . Wherefore you strangely deceave your selfe if you thinke that these , any , or all of them , did so far exceede in him as to procure his most dreadfull and bloudy Agonie . For the Reiection of the Iewes what reasons bring you . a a Luke 〈◊〉 Christ wept over their City : Ergo Now at his Passion he was driven into his dreadfull Agonie for this cause : and that rather now , then when hee so wept expresly for them . I deny this argument : how will you doe to prove it ? I b b Treat . 〈◊〉 pa. 6. ●7 . have shewed from hence the contrary : wherevnto nothing is answered : that seeing when a little before hee throughly intended & expressed his affection about that matter , yet therby he fell into no such Agonie , but only wept and mourned for them , therefore now in his Passion where he speaketh not a worde of them , it is strange to say , that his Pity of his Country men the Iewes should drive him to sweat bloud , and thrice to pray with teares and strong cryes , that this Cup of grief might passe from him , and thrice to yeeld him selfe againe to Gods will , saying : Not my will , but thy will be done . This verily cannot stand with any reason . Again , that his expresse Compassion towardes the Iewes a little c c Luk. 19. Mat. 24. before he prepared him to his Passion , plainly sheweth , that now in the Garden and so still forward , he gave him selfe wholy to other thoughtes & matters , Namely such as concerned his great work in hand : that is , to be are the Paines which now chiefly he was to suffer for mans redemption at Gods hands . Wherefore this work of Christ at this time performed and wrought by him , Note . is by a proper and peculiar Name iustly called his Passion , not not his Compassion . Againe you say , For their sakes Moses desired to be wiped out of Gods booke , and Paul could have wished him selfe to bee separated from Christ for his brethren the Israelites . Ergo Christ at his Passion was cast into that strange Agonie for the griefe of their reiection . This also hath no shape of any reason in it . It proveth that Christ surely had very great pity and commiseration of them , but nothing els in the worlde . Besides Christ might have far greater pity of them , then Moses or Paul had , and yet hee was able to cary his affection far more patiently and quietly then they were able : which would rather keepe him from such an outwarde distemper as was even in them . Also Christ knew exactly Gods Counsell and purpose for their reiection , which those holy men were not so particularly sure of . Wherfore Christ might better stay the vehemency & breaking out of this affection , which in such a case must needs tend against the knowen will of God . In those holy men it might better break foorth very strongly , as it did , seeing they knewe not particularly Gods decree heerein , so as Christ knew . Lastly those holy men ( it seemeth ) having their thoughtes wholly defixed on their vehement pity towardes the Iewes earnestly and " constantly wished , that the Cup of Gods eternall wrath might come vpon them selves that the Iewes who deserved it , ●pecially ●ul ; who ●●v●edly ●proveth ye●●th . Rom. 1. might scape . But Christ in his Passion contrariwise desired that the Cup which hee tasted to be too bitter and too violent for him , might passe away from him selfe . Thus here is no semblance of reason in this for your purpose . But against you heere are 4. worthie things to be noted . If we consider this first , that these most servent desires of these rare men , were holy and not sinful . Because their thoughts being wholly & altogeather for the time defixed on their love to their Brethren in the flesh that they might be saved , and that Gods glory might be infinitly more ample , if he saved so many hundred thousands ( which now almost seemed to them as lost ) then it would be in their own particular salvation onely : and thus for the tyme not thinking ( it seemeth ) vpon their own immutable Election and Salvation not any thing els , saving only that they could desire their brethrens salvation yea though it were with their owne damnation for their sakes , if so it might stand with Gods will , which no doubt alwayes they implyed , though expressed nor : thus I take it plaine enough that these sinned not in this their desire , and I suppose you take it so too , in that you alleage them & ground your reason of Comparison vpon them . Nowe from hence I observe these 4. notable pointes . ●●●e . 1. That , if God Omuipotent and only Soveraigne Lord will , he may inflict Damnation and the paines of Hel vpon meere men , not for them selves but for others , not for their own sins but for the imputed Sinnes of other men : much rather then may hee doe thus to Christ , whom God sent indeed and ordayned for that purpose . ●●g . ●76 . Flatly contrary to " your Assertion . That which there you mention is the ordinary & common rule , The Soule that sinneth it shall Dy. But in Christ this was eatraordinary and singular that The iust dyed for the vniust . 2. Wee see heere that there may be possibly a Death of the Soule , a Curse and Separation from God which is in it selfe neither Sinne , nor conioyned with sinne necessarily : but meerely a Suffering of Punishment from God for the sinnes of others imputed . 〈◊〉 73.310 . Contrarie to you also : yea generally every where . Third : That extraordinarily there is greater love even among meere men , then only to dy bodily one for another , though vsually and ordinarily a greater can not be found among men : which is it , that a a Ioh. 13 . 1● Christ meaneth . But how much more the may the love of Christ towards his Elect be farre greater . Contrary to b b Pa. 107 . 1● your assertion . Fourth : Wee see here that these holy men without feeling any paines inflicted by Gods wrath , but onely through an earnest and mighty Compassion of love c c Pag. 293. have their mindes drawen so wholly to thinke on this speciall thing above their reach , that during the time they turne not themselves to any other cogitation . Even as the eye , being bent intentively to behold any thing , for that present discerneth nothing els . Whereby it commeth to passe that these wishes of these holy men ravished with Pity and Zeale , are not reckoned sinfull in them , though they were directly against their owne Salvation , which otherwise they knew was immutable with God and certainly reserved for them in Heaven . This you d d Pag. 293. acknowledge may be in men , & yet you will not skoffe at them as e e Pag. 144. cast into a traunce by it , nor reproch them with f f Pag. 299. infernall confusion . How much lesse ought you so to deale with Christ : but specially to acknowledge that his marveylous perplexity may well be a meanes that his suddainwishes against his own constant purpose & Gods will , were yet no sinnes . And that much rather even for this , because Christ had infinitly more cause by his Paines ( then felt and feared to be in his minde both more amuzed and also amazed , then those men had by their affections . Thus far of this . As for the g g Ambro●●● le●om A● & B●de . Fathers which h h Pag. 19. you cite , if they meane as they seeme to do that now at his Passion among other causes of sorrow there wanted not this , even his great Pity towards his forlorn Coūtrymen , them we ioyne with them . If they meane ( as you would have them ) that this was the maine and chiefe cause of his extreame sorrows and amazednes , therein I vtterly leave them . Howbeit this heere note in them , that these Fathers avouch Christ feared not his ( bodily ) Death and Passion : for thereof only they speake heere questionles . You contrariwise say that Christ feared ( bodily ) death , for thereof also i i Pag. 26 , 〈◊〉 you discourse , and had more cause ( as you thinke ) so to do , then any of his members haue .

Third : touching k k Pag. 19 , 〈◊〉 his regard of his Church , generally the same answer serveth , as is given to the last point before . If you vrge that these Fathers are so resolute for these Causes as their wordes heere pretend , then your self abuseth them more than ever I did or meane to do , ●ag. 17. where you say , a it is curiosity to examine , presumption to determine , impossibility to conclude ( as these doe ) what was the true cause of Christs Agonie .

Fourth : Pag. 20. b you alleage his inward sorrow and zealous grief for the sinnes of the world , to be the maine and chiefe cause of his Agonie . Surely even to rehearse these your arguments is refutation of them enough . All these are proper parts of his Holines & Righteousnes , as I have said , but no proper partes or causes of his bloudy & most dreadfull Agonie , that is of his Sacrifice satisfying for sinne . Only his * * Heb. 2.10 . Paines were , which then he felt and feared . Neither in respect of these your supposed causes could he say , Save me from this hower , nor Let this Cup passe from me : as in respect of his infinit paines he might . Mar. 14.35 . c This hower can not be referred to his Holy and Righteous affections , which were at all howers and seasons in him without measure Holy , yet now at his death did not so expresly break out & shew themselves , Nor as his ●aines did ●●peare . " as they did at divers times before . Therefore this Hower can not be these his Holy affections : his Paines & afflictions they d may be and must bee . ●oh. 12.27 . ●●mpar . with 〈◊〉 33. Neither thus standeth it with his piety to wish that his strong and vehement affections of Holynes should passe from him , or bee weakened in him . For my part I can see no sense nor sap in these assertions . Even so likewise in that , ●ag. 21. where you ascribe to this his c deepe sorrow of zeale for mens sinnes his sweating bloud in his agonie aboue nature after a strange and marvelous maner . I dare say , you deliver strange mervayles in Divinity .

The Fift Cause f you say , ●ag. 21. might be the Cup of Gods wrath tempered & made ready for the sinnes of men : which you interpret to be g Eternall Malediction . Pag. 22. Touching which you say , Christ knowing what our sinnes deserved might intentively pray to have that Cup passe from him , which was prepared for vs . For vs , whom meane you ? The Elect , or the Reprobat ? What malediction ? The whole & absolut Paines thereof only , or the Eternity of the continuance thereof also ? For so the Reprobats do suffer it . If you meane the Elect , As you af●●me most ●●angely , pa. ●●2 . 133. 144 ●93 . 294. Christ knew , that he must not only h see & contemplat , but feele & suffer all the whole Paines of that Punishment which our sinnes deserved : and this was prepared for himselfe our Ransom-payer and not for vs . Wherefore the truth is he could not by any meanes pray against that nor decline that , onely vnles he were for the time in some astonishment & perturbation of his senses , which by the infinitnes of that Paine he might well bee in , yea he could not but be ( in his Humane weake nature ) and yet still remayning vtterly sinlesse , as is afore shewed to have happened in Moses and Paul in a far lesse perturbation then this was in Christ . Now this is the very point of our Defense : affirme this , and you affirme with vs all that we hold & professe . Otherwise if you meane that Christ prayed intentively to have the whole and intire Cup of eternall Malediction and death passe from him , which both the Elect deserve , and the Reprobats sustaine , that , as it is passing strange doctrine , so it is also simply impossible . For he could not intentively pray against that , not feare that , which hee most perfitly knew concerned him not at all , and by no meanes could ever possibly come neere him . But indeed all this is nothing els in effect then your 1 Cause , His submission to Gods maiesty sitting in iudgment . Wherefore you might have lessened your number , and so your answer to this might have ben thesame which is made to your formost . But heere furthermore you knit in with this a a As you● kon the● geathe● 27. 4 other severall causes of Christs Agony . 1. His taking of our infirmities in his flesh to cure them : 2. His breaking the knot betwixt ( bodily ) death and Hell , which none but hee was able to do : 3. Gods anger which might be executed on his body , but was mitigated by him : 4. The desire he had to continue the seeling & inioying of Gods presense with his body . The of these maketh in my minde much for vs . For vnderstanding that Christ tooke all the infirmities and passions wherevnto mens nature is subiect to the ende that hee might cure all and every kinde of them in vs ; then it followeth that he wanted not the proper & immediat sufferings of paines inflicted by Gods own hand in his Soule . For these are our Soules subiect vnto and capeable of , yea and tormented with , & finally we are by this apt and proportionable medicine of Christ throughly cured of them . And this is the very same matter which our 4 Argument * * Pag 8● 87. before concluded : that Christe had experince of thesame infirmities & passions generally whatsoever , wherof he hath cured vs . And this your owne Authours here doe fully affirme , Cyrill Ambrose , and others , as a a Pag. 88 before we have observed . It is then most vnreasonable which heere c you doe ( if you doe as you seeme ) to vnderstand them of meere Bodily death , ●a . 25 , 26 , 27 & of the infirmities meerly of his Flesh . Before pag ●1. Wherein then you deny our d Assumption also , & are againe Contrarie to your selfe and to f your owne Authours . Cyrill nameth flesh heere , Pag. 10. 〈◊〉 Ie●om . Pde . meaning not Christes Deitie , but his whole Humane nature , as the Scripture doeth in a multitude of places : and so not his Body onely . Thus then it is that he saith , as you obserue , Pag. 25. that g Christ as a man abhorred and feared death : not the bodily death only , but as it was conioyned with the sorrowes of the 2. death . He would not , he could not so feare and be afrighted , yea and pitiously astonished with such sorrowe oppressing him , as to sweat droppes of bloud only for feare of his bodily death : neyther would he pray at all , much lesse so vehemently and so oftenty mes as he did against that which he perfectly knew was Gods will and his own most willing purpose to vndergoe . Or els Cyrill meaneth no more but that he naturally misliked & shunned ( even as all flesh doth ) all bodily paine & death . This we alwayes yeeld , and it maketh nothing against vs . For nevertheles he constantly imbraced & suffered with ioy whatsoever bodily grief he knew did come vnto him by his owne most free wil , and by the holy ordinance of God : yea he could & would beare it with ioy far beyond all the ioy and constancie of h men in their sufferings . Who yet ●rink not at 〈◊〉 neither for ●●dily paines ●●r for Reli●●ous fear of ●●ll . Only he might faile of the outward appearance and vse of this constancie and ioyfull patience ( as now he did ) without taint of sinne , if his Humane nature were overwhelmed with other infinit paynes , and his minde and senses disturbed with more horrour then naturally it could beare . Therfore I conclude he thus feared not his meere bodily death , but it was the Paines of the 2. death which he felt and so feared . But you say i The sorrow and feare of death which it pleased our Saviour to feele in our nature , ●ag . 26. came not for want of strength , but of purpose to quench and abolish those affections in vs . I say it came from both : as your selfe also doe avouch cleane contrarily in an other place : k To dy even in Christ was infirmitie , ●ag . 161. though voluntary . And generally in another place ; ●ag. 289. l Naturall infirmitie was common to Christ with all the godly in like cases . Wherfore Austins sentence will not helpe you heere , Pag. 25. m that Christ was troubled not by infirmitie , but by ( his owne ) power . For he meaneth , not only by infirmitie , but also by his owne will and power : or els you confute him yourselfe . Neither ther is this any reproch to Christ , as n n Pag. ● you most iniustly insinuat . But as it was glorious to him so to debase his Maiestie for our sakes to take our true and perfit Nature , yea to bee humbled therein to the most shamefull death of the Crosse , so was it also glorious to him to take all the true weaknesses of our nature togeather : and so it was his singular good-will towards vs to become throughly like vs , and feelingly subiect to all our Calamities , paines and miseries , to heale vs of them . Only in him the guilt and corruption of sinne it selfe was excepted . Faine you would o o Pag. 2● wipe away that Argument of ours which sticketh neerer to you the you will seeme . In Malefactors there is a quiet and contented suffering of most exquisit and extraordinary torments oftentimes , The cou●● and st●●● of Ma●●ctours ●●●ments . which they indure only by a naturall strength and courage of minde . Howe much more likely is it then that Christ the very rock of all strength and fountaine of patience , would not thus seeme affrighted and astonished and so wofully behaving him selfe for his meere bodily death , and that before it came vnto him . All your answer is , that this is no fit comparison for the Sonne of God : for they are desperate , not having any feare or care of God till they feele the force of his wrath in Hell fyre . What an answer is this ? They have no feare nor care of God . What then ? Yet naturally they have feare and care of most bitter paines , and namely then when they feele them . If you say , before they feele them they are so desperate and so hardened by Satan , that they care not for any tormentes : that in deed is commonly true . But what will you or can you alleage to hinder their full and most dreadfull sense of them , when they are in them ? Satan wisheth them not so much good as to benumme them now in their senses , so that the cruell paines of death should not trouble them in the time of their death , which hee would rather make more fearfull and intollerable vnto them . Let them be then in their life time as desperat as they will , yet in death and in the middest of most horrible tortures which oftentimes very quietly they indure , surely they cannot choose but feele as liuely and as perfitely as other men doe . Only it is a naturall boldnes and strength of minde ( in it selfe no discommendable propertie ) that sustayneth them in such extreme paines : One instance for all may serve in this kinde , even that wretched Murderer of the Prince of Orange in Netherland . What strange quietnes did he shew in suffering most wonderfull and rare tormentes vntill death . Nowe to make our Saviour Christ lesse able or willing to suffer quietly outward tormentes no greater then that wretch and many other such have suffered , I suppose is a bad indeavour . And it is no vnfit matter for you to thinke more vpon , before you skip it over with silence . We compare not the Sonne of God with them , but are sure that his Humane nature had beyond all comparison more commendable courage , boldnes , strength of minde , patience , and contentment even in the middest of his extreamest paines ( were they but meere bodily ) then such caytifs had , or possibly could seeme to have . This that I say , pertaineth alike to the Theeves that were Crucified with Christ . Of whom the H. Ghost saith , a They were togeather in one and the same Condemnation with Christ . 〈◊〉 . 23.40 . That is they suffered from men all one and the like tormentes of death adiudged them by the Magistrate : except happily Christ suffered lesse then they , because they indured them longer then hee did . Yet we finde in none of them any such piteous and strange Complaintes and Cryes and Teares , as we finde in Christ . But to leave these , and to come to the patience of Martyrs in their sufferings . That also is admirable , what ioy , what peace , what triumph they shew , yea how they sing in the middest of frying flames , in their rosting on gridirons , in their fleaing off their skinnes , and tearing of their fleshe by piece-meales , with a thousande other of most strange and butcherly torments , no lesse , if no greater in outward shewe , then the sufferings of our Saviour Christ . To this you answer : If death be not fearfull to the Servants of Christ , they are the more bound to their Lord and Maister . Who knoweth not that ? But what answer is this to our argument ? And you will also give a reason of your saying : Because he was the first that by death disarmed death , and severed Death and Hell . He was surely both the first and the last : both α and ω. For he ●●ly , and none with him , nor before nor since him conquered Death and Hell . Yet what is this to our Reason ? The effect that Christ wrought is not our quaestion , ●he matter 〈◊〉 or Ob●●● , and the ●●iect of his ●●ffering are 〈◊〉 question . but " the maner and kinde of suffering whereby hee wrought it . You tell vs of the effect which he perfourmed which we gladly acknowledge : viz. that Christ did this in deed by his death , he made our death since to be no Cursed death , but a blessed death . But how did he this , by suffering nothing but his meere bodily death only , or also a Religious feare of Hell ? All which other godly men doe also suffer and feele , which they take passing ioyfully and quietly . But thus Christ did not seeme to doe , neyther indeed did he in his Agonie . Or did Christ suffer some greater sorrow ? You say , The death which Christ suffered when it approched came fast clasped with Hell . What meane you by that ? meane you , that Death and Hell both alike came iointly vpon Christ , and that both iointly were ordayned of God to seaze vpon him ? Then it is thesame that wee affirme . Otherwise how came they clasped togeather against him ? By breaking the knot betwixt Death and Hell , he could not be so wofully affected and afflicted above measure as he was , if he did not suffer by them somewhat extraordinarily . Vnto this you have nothing to answer . Only you say , he severed them , and none ells but only the Sonne of God could dissolve them . Which we deny not . Neither can we see how Death by Gods ordinance might seaze vpon Christ , and not the paines of Hel : seeing neither of them is in themselves sin , but both alike are the due vengeance of sinne which he was ordayned to suffer so far as was possible . Why then did he suffer the one , and not touch the other . Neither yet do you shew that which you take in hand heere , how bodily death is contemptible to the Godly which was not contemptible to God himselfe by your assertion . It was not therefore that onely , but some other death farre more dreadful and intollerable , which made Christ man ( being also God ) in such wise to tremble and quake . In deed Christ had farre greater cause ( as you say ) to feare even his bodily death , then any of his Members have . For it was therefore because death approched vnto him clasped fast with Hell , so that he could not by the ordinance of God meddle with one but he must feele the other . And thus he did not contemplate and looke on them a farre of , nor had to doe with one more then the other , but by suffering one , he felt both : and by induring one , he indured both . And thus in deed Christ was left by God to the full naturall sense of his bodily torments . But the Godly and the Martyrs deale only with bodily Death ; the paines of Hell , or of Gods wrath they feare not , because they know by Christes suffering the same they are abolished , & removed farre from them . Sin standeth not threatning them in the prefence of God , as it stood now at this time against Christ our Suertie and Ransom-payer . Nay , they deale not with Bodily death wholely and naturally : for they have Gods comfort with them to mitigate it , which Christ nowe felt not . Yea they mind not their paines very much for their great hope and ioy presenly following : but this was all overclowded in Christ at this instant . Therefore he had exceeding great cause to be affrighted and terrifyed & to cry out with bitter teares , though the godly have cause to triumph & sing in Death . Thus also you forget * my argument : 〈◊〉 . 1.51 . that Christ alwayes charged his Disciples not to take their bodily Death heavily for righteousnes sake : Ergo , He him selfe would never be so dismayed with the feare of it . Heere you have a notable sayinge in the margen , whiche must not be forgotten : we must preferre Christes suffering before all Martyrs * not for his paines , 〈◊〉 . 26. but for his patience . Not for his paines , but for his patience ? A rare distinction : If you could make vs believe that the greatest patience is tryed and discerned where the smallest paines are , then you said somewhat . I know Christes patience was perfit in all his paines both small & great : and so is not the patience of his servants in their paines neither small nor great . But what is this to our purpose ? We speake not of his inward habit of patience which our faith beleeveth to be in him : but of the outward triall and discerning thereof by naturall meanes & signes wherevnto it pleased him now to submit his patience after the verie course and operation of Nature . Wherefore as Christ had in him indeed farre more patience then we have , so it is out of doubt when he came to the chiefest trial thereof in his Passion he would not in any wise ( as he did ) shewe lesse in vse then many men doe , vnles the trial & encountring thereof in him were infinitly greater .

By this also we may see how vaine your next coniecture is , that he feared in his Agonie " Corporall castigation above his strength . 〈◊〉 . 22.24 . For why may not Martyrs and others feare as much cruelty & extraordinarie torments at the handes of men , as Christ had cause to doe ? Againe , why should the feare of any whatsoever meere bodily paines so overcome his patience , as outwardly it seemed at this time ? Why should he not be able to beare it quietly ? And principally seeing he knew well enough before what his death should be , and that God had vnchangeably appointed it for him . Wherefore in no wise ought he so to shunne and shrinke from his meere bodily paines , if they were no greater , which hee suffered . If a a Pag. 2 you meane that he felt greater concurring in and with his bodily punishment inflicted by the wrathfull hand of God , b b Pag. 2 armed with infinit vengeance , then you say well , and we acknowledge it .

Your other c c Pag. 2. 27. Cause is , for that by death his body should want a while the feeling of Gods presence . But did not Christ perfitly know that this was Gods decree and certaine appointment ; yea his owne most free will & purpose ? And shall we imagine that Christ would expreslie pray against that knowen will of his Father , yea against his owne ? Call you this d d Pag. 2● greater perfection in him then was in other men ? Againe , could this thing in any reason be such a horrible griefe vnto him , to have his flesh ly dead without paine for a day and a few howers , yet his Soule continually living and inioying the confort of God : and that for such an occasion as to procure thereby the Salvation of mankinde , would the thought of this make him sweat bloud for grief , and to need an Angell from , heaven to comfort him , and to pray 3. times vehemently that this Cup might passe from him ? verily it is vnreasonable to thinke so . Which Cause also , if it were true , is flatly contrary to your e e Pag. 29● owne resolution . But of all these I wonder where you have found anie inkling , that any of these may be beleeved to bee the true and effectuall cause of Christes most dreadfull Agonie . You say excellent f f As be 〈◊〉 have n●● pag. 28. well , but by your practise in all matters so farre as I see , you never meane to observe it : g g Epist pa● in Gods cause let Gods booke teach vs what to beleeve and what to professe : h h Pag. 91 I love to followe and not to lead the holy Ghost . In matters of so great depth I dare not wade without or before my guide . Againe i i Pag. 41. what I reade in Gods worde , that I beleeve : what J read not , that I doe not beleeve . Shewe mee then where you read in Gods word any or all these to be effectuall Causes of this strange Agonie , or some sure grounde whence evidently we may gather so much : or els for my part I shall never bever beleeve you .

Your Sixt and k k Pag. 27. &c. last maine Cause is , that Christ by this his bloudy sweat and vehement prayers did nothing but voluntarily performe that true bloudy Offering and Priesthood prefigured in the Law . This we simply grant : it hindreth not our Assertion . Except you meane voluntarily in such sense that hee was not also vrged therevnto by any violence of paines or feare procuring it in him naturally . Wherein you seeme to labour by bringing some Fathers , and misapplying some Scriptures , ●ag 29. and doe say that a you are content to admit also ( this ) exposition , and of this , with all the rest you pronounce that b they are sound and well agreeing with Christian pietie . ●ag 37. Yet is it contrary to c your resolution also : yea it is contrary to the Scripture , ●ag 290. expressing his d feare and vehement sorrowes and e discomfort to have caused his Agonie . ●●●h 14. 〈◊〉 . ●4 . ●●b● 5.7 . Againe if you meane that all this was voluntary in him and not felt indeede according to the outwarde semblance and as men beholding him would iudg● , Luc. 22.43 then belike you make him to have counterfayted . Which thought God for bid should ever come into any Christians heart . For no cause you say f I iest and iybe with the Apostles wordes : Pag. 302. but I feare this is to iest and iybe in deed with the most dreadfull and bitter sorrowes of our Saviour in working for vs our Salvation . And heere why say you not aswell that his Death and bloudshed on the Crosse shewed in him no paines nor infirmitie , but only that voluntarily he made him selfe there the true Priest , and performed the prefigured bloudy and deadly Sacrifice for the sins of the world . As good reason altogeather you have to say so , as to affirme it of his Agonie . ●ag. 29. As for the Scriptures which g you cite , they prove in deed that Christ nowe executed his office of Priesthoode : but will you " divide & exempt his Death on the Crosse from his Priesthood ? Or his ●ines and fit mity from ther ? The sanctifying of him self doeth it not as well intend and comprehende that Sacrifice on the Crosse , as that of his Prayers in the Garden ? To thinke otherwife is without all shewe of trueth or reason , yet I see not why you should cite these textes , vnles you meant so : neither can I see what els you meane , where you conclude , saying , Christs Agonie being alleaged by the Apostle to demonstrat Christs Priesthood , must not rise from the terror of his own death . ●ag . 27. And yet h a little before you openly doe confesse and grant , that his Agonie did rise from the feare of his death , and that Christ had farre greater cause then any of his members to feare it . Also it is contrary to your citing of Cyrill pag. 25. And heere why should i Hilary deny that Christes bloudy sweat came of infirmitie ? ●ag . 28. Or k Austin , that his feare and perturbation was of infirmitie ? ●ag. 25. Surely there is no cause . For though it be against the common course of our Nature , for any paines or feare to sweat bloud : yet the Divine power with and through paines and feares might wring out of his body that trickling bloudy sweat . As it is plaine that it did by the wordes next before in the text , a a Luk. 2 44. An Angell came to give him some comfort , that is , least hee should have bene overwhelmed quite in his sorrow and discomfort : but still he was in his Agonie , and swet like droppes of bloud trickling to the ground : and presently saieth , My Soule is full of sorrowes even to death , and thrice he prayed that this Cup , and this Hower might passe from him . It cannot be therefore but that by Sorrowes and Paines this sweat came : though also Gods power caused it by laying vpon his Soule and body invisible , supernaturall , & vnspeakeable sorrowes and horrors , and by making his fleshe visibly to expresse in some sort this spirituall and extraordinary torment of paine and feare which he suffered . And in deed where they say , 1 1 Not Infir●●ty but Po●●● did this . Nec infirmitas , quod potestas gessit , that proveth the cleane contrary : For Jdeo & infirmitas , quia potestas gessit . 2 Therfor● there wa● firmity , ●●cause th●●● was Pow●● For the working of his Power in him argueth the suffering of his Infirmitie : The power of God is pe●fited in infirmítie . And because it was aboue the course of nature , therefore nature was herein oppressed , not exempted from paines . Thus these speak fully for vs and against you , that heere appeared , not Christes infirmity only in suffering , but his Divine power also in punishing . And this I iudge in deed to bee their very meaning . But those other mysticall and figuratiue sayings of Austin , Pag 28. ● Bede , & Bernard , howe shall we admit them without better warrant ? That Christes bloudshead was to signifie that Martyrs should shead their bloud , what reason have we so to thinke ? Or that his bloud head should signifie the purging of his Disciples hearts from sinne , yea or of all his Church in the whole world ? It did not signifie this , but it did it in deed . Lastly , if it had th●se significations in it , yet withall his Agonie might rise from his very Paines & Feare comming from the present sense of Gods iustice and wrath nowe reveal●d and working vpon him .

Hitherto we have made it manifest that in trueth you have nothing in all these wordes against our doctrine , that Paines and sorrowes were the true and proper cause of Christes dreadfull Agonie : nor to prove that his meere bodily paines or death was the whole Cause . Now we are to shew the like in his most we full Complaint on the Crosse : where he saith My God , my God , Math 27. why hast thou forsaken me ? You will aske me heere , what kinde of Forsaking may this be ? I shewed you plainly * * Treat 1 . ● 6● , 65 , 6● before , if you had regard●d it . Namely , that Christ being also now ( yea specially ) in the feeling of infinit Paines inflicted on him sundry wayes , ●●w Christ on 〈◊〉 Crosse was ●●●saken of ●●●d . See also ●●●g . 112.113 and that directly from Gods proper Wrath for our sinnes , he felt his whole Humane nature for the time left all comfortles and alone without any ioyous assistance of his Deitie . I say not , that he wanted now all assistanc of his Deitie : for it surely would then have quite overwhelmed him with this intollerable burden . But his Godhead , as it were withdrawing and hiding it selfe from him for that season of his Passion , gave him no sense nor feeling of ease , comfort , or ioy , but all the sense of sorrowes and paines as well in spirit , as in soule and body , that might bee : all the sense of his ioy and comfort for the while being cleane gone and wholy swallowed vp in that huge & bottomles gulfe of sorrowes and paynes issuing vpon him out from the fierce Wrath of God . Howbeit yet even nowe he wanted not sufficient assistance of the Deitie to sustayne him in life heerein , as I said . Phil. 2.7 . Rom. 8.32 . ●eut . 10 17. ●●c . 16.17 . This was that extreeme humiliation and " exinanition of nature , wherein † God spared not his Sonne , and wherein also Christ spared not him selfe . For hee vndertooke all this most willingly : and yet being in it naturally grieved and sorrowed for it , & at some moments being astonished with it , suddenly and naturally desired ease and release from it . This forsaking or dereliction beseemeth the time , place , person , and case of Christ our Ransom-payer , and Purchaser of salvation with the price of his owne most direfull paines . Pag. 24. &c ●●●r 6. Expo●●●ions of ●hristes Cō●●aint , are all ●●●isse . Not any other farre fet , or hardly applyed , or strangely devised by the braynes of men . As in trueth all those other senses heereof are , which " you rather imbrace . They are 6. in number . The 1. is , that when Christ on the Crosse cryed out , My God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me , by this word me , he should meane His Church . For the which you have no reason in the world , but the bare names of Austin , Leo , Athanasius . Shew me their reasons , See before ●ag. 28.29 . presse not their authorities . Which " your selfe also reiecteth , when you list : though when you list againe they must be your best , yea your only reason . But even these Fathers if they be vnderstood , Pag 79. as * before I have shewed Cyprians meaning to be : that Christ spake these wordes , as doing now the part of the Suretie of his Church , and as standing in the case of his Children whom now by his suffering paines he saved : then they agree iust with our minde herein . For then doubtles it was for the infinite paines which now he felt in our steed , that he so cryed out , My God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me ? Otherwise if you thinke they meant that Christ spake this by some strange Metonimy , naming him selfe but meaning his Church : that can have no good sense . For how can it be that we were forsaken of God when Christ was on the Crosse . Nay , even there and then were we “ “ Act. 20 purchased vnto God , not forsaken by God . Againe your owne rule is , which I like well , that no Figure is to bee admitted in Scripture where there is no ill nor hurtfull sense following literally . But I have shewed a little before a plaine , easie , and Christian sense heereof , taking it literally : that me signifieth Christes owne person namely his Manhood bearing nowe , as our Suretie , intollerable paines inflicted by Gods wrath vpon him : and so he may mourne & sorrowe that he was forsaken , that is left in vnmeasurable paines with out feeling of any comfort or succour for the tyme . Wherefore neither you nor any of the Fathers ought to conceave that me heere should signifie not Christ properly , but the Church Figurativelie . What other construction you can make heereof , I can not discerne . Finally , this 1. sense is contrary to your 2. and 3. following : also to your 5. and 6. senses . If eyther of these be taken as the true meaning of this place , it cannot possibly stande with the rest : although you allow them all , as by and by we shall manifestly see . Now then your sense , what is it ? Even this , that Christs humane nature was left helples to the rage of the Iewes ; which is a kinde of forsaking . This seemeth to come neerest indeed to your liking , by that which I observe in a a Pag. 13 you . But as I said , this is directly contrary to your 1. sense , & to the rest following . Also b b Heere 11.50 . before we saw how greatly Christes sufferinges specially on the Crosse differed from such , as the godly doe also suffer . Yea there is surely no reason nor shew of reason , that Christ heere should so mournfully and so vncomfortably complaine that God had forsaken him , if it were only but for such distresses as the godly also doe equally suffer at the hands of evill men . Seeing most of them at the hower of their martyrdoms doe never vtter any such shew ( as Christ heere did ) of a minde vncomforted . Where also note this well , that no godly man not Martyr did ever ascribe this forsaking of themselves to God in the time of their martyrdomes . For though then they are oppressed with greater violence of bodily enemies , yet they are assisted with far greater abundance of heavenly comfort , even in the middest of the paines of death . So that they never mourne nor complaine at such extreme dealing , as Christ now did , when hee said my God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me . Wherefore it is a great shame to imagine that Christ was lesse able to indure such a dereliction , or that he would thus complaine and mourne for it only . Pag. 35. The bare names againe of c Austin , Ambrose , Hierom doe heere likewise no good . This is but a weake kind of reasoning for so learned a Divine as you are . Although also these very sentences of the Fathers I can easily admit , if they import no more then they seeme : namely that these outward afflictions on the Crosse were some cause ( and that not small ) of his complaint , alwayes remembring that some greater cause also did concurre & was conioyned with them . Your 3. sense if I conceave it a right is , that his being l●ft to bodily death caused him thus to mourne which is but as the last before . And yet you seeme to meane not onely that , but also because his d flesh now should want all feeling of his heavenly comfort for that while , ●n that you 〈◊〉 , His God●●ad depar●● nowe from 〈◊〉 body , &c. that it should remaine dead . A marvelous exquisit & far fet cause . Yet me thinks , as this crosseth your other expositions heere , so it is flat contrary to the Scripture also : which giveth after a sort to Christs dead Flesh this lively affection , 〈◊〉 . 2.26.27 e my flesh shall rest in hope , because thou wilt not leave my soule to remaine as all other flesh dying doth , in the vnseene worlde of the dead , neither wilt suffer thy holy one to see corruption . Is it likely is it possible that he should so dolefully mourne that either he should bodily dy , or that his body should want the sense of his divine presence so little a while , when as in his mind hee speaketh so triumphantly of his constant and continuall ioy in God : yea not excluding even his body though dead from participating in some sort therein : as we read in the former place at large . I beheld the Lord always before me , for he is at my right hand that I should not be shaken . Therefore did my heart reioyce & my toung was glad , & moreover my Flesh shallrest in hope , &c. Now can a man in this exceeding generall and constant ioy so vncomfortably mourne , in that sense as you vrge , My God my God , why forsakest thou my flesh ? It cannot be . Many thinges more may be strongly alleaged against this opinion . As first : seeing he perfitly knew thath as his flesh now should quietly rest , and have a present ende of all his most bitter sorrowes , so even all that while & continually after , his soul ( which was his best part ) should inioy perfit glory and comfort more then before it did : Also seeing this senseles rest of his flesh was to be but for a very little while , & then presently to receave a most glorious and eternall felicity iointly with his Soul and with his Deity , who can imagine that Christ would ( now ready to dy ) so extreamely mourne and complaine only for this cause , as your fancy importeth ? Further he knew perfitly that this was the very appointment of God , and for the fulfilling of Prophesies , for the obtayning of his most desired purchase of our health , for the more advancing of Gods glory , yea and for the more advancing of his very manhood also after so low humiliation . Finally it was his own most free and fore determined will . Would hee then so mournfully grieve and complaine thereat ? It hath no reason , nor likelyhood in it . Iohn 1●● Lazarus when he was returned from the ioyes of heaven to take againe his rotten carcase ofter it stanke having lyen 4. dayes dead in the grave , yet he grieved not at it , neither ought he so to have don . Much lesse ought Christ so to grieve and mourne , for a lesser want and for a shorter season ( as we may thinke ) then that was to Lazarus . But this matter is not worth the speaking of “ “ See b● to this pu● pag. 10● any further . Neither doe your Fathers prove any such improbable , yea vnlawfull mourning & complayning in Christ . If they prove any thing towardes your meaning , it is this , that he complayned because of his bodily dying . Howbeit they say not that he thus complayned only and meerely for that : neither I thinke will you plainly hold this , neither doe wee deny the other . The truth is they meane he suffered in his whole Humane nature : How the ●●thers are 〈◊〉 taken . & namely that he suffered not as God . They strove heere with Haeretikes , whose controversies were far from this our question f f Hilar. 〈◊〉 Trin ▪ li. 〈◊〉 Hilary and g g Epiph. 〈◊〉 Arioma 〈◊〉 Epiphanius wrot against Arius , to prove that Christ in this complaint shewed rightly a humane infirmity , and that this was not the voice of a Deity inferiour to the Father , as Arius blasphemed . These Fathers then had no purpose heere to exclude the sufferings of Christes Soule , but only to deny that his Godhead suffered & complayned as being left to punishment by his Father , when the sorrowes of death began to prevayle against him . The very same doth † † In Ma●● can. 33. 〈◊〉 Hilary also where he saith that this in Christ was Corporis vox , the outcry of his body . He plainly meaneth it of his whole manhood , the opposition being betweene it and his Godhead : ●reat . 1. ●●g 9. as the Scripture † often doth . And where he saith , he was morte peragendus , to be consummated by death : he meaneth that death ended all his suffering , not that hee suffered nothing els but meerely death . And if their words do any where come neere to our question , ●ertul . cont. ●●ax . ●●ila in Mat. ●●au . 33. as it is very likely that h Tertulian and the one place of i Hilary doth , then surely they are plainly for vs and against you . Tertullian pointeth in this place at certaine Haeresies maintained in his time wherwth it seemeth Praxeas was infected . 1 That the Father suffered aswell as the Sonne when Christ suffered : 2 That the Deity suffered : 3 That Christ was no true nor perfit man . All these pointes Tertullian overthroweth heere , Quid de isto quaeris , &c. What inquire you of Christ ? You heere him crying out in his Passion , My God my God why hast thou forsaken me ? The Sonne therefore suffered , being forsaken of his Father : but this is meant of the Flesh and of the Soule , that is of the Man , not of the Word nor of the Spirit . Heere it is plaine that Tertullian sheweth besides the rest , this point exactly , that Christ was a very man , in that he had a proper Body and a Soule , and that this his suffering on the Crosse was in both these partes , and so in his whole & intire manhood . Also that he suffered in both these parts even from his Father . ●eere pag. 63. ●at 1. pa 4 But he could not suffer in his Soule from † God , if he felt only and meerely but a bodily death , as you hold . And to suffer the stroke of Gods hand in his Soule as the proper vengeance of sin , is farre more then to feele in Soule by sympathy only the bodies smart . Neither had Tertull. overthrowen but confirmed that Haeresie of Christs being no true natural man , if he had said , that in this case he suffered in Soule only by symphathy with and from the Body . But this is absurd to thinke in Tertullian . Therefore in this place he is flatly against you . And this Dereliction of his Father which he speaketh of , is Death indeed to the Sonne . But what death ? Forsooth more then the separation of the Soule and Body . ●at Death ●●e Soule in ●ist wee ●●ne . Even the seperation of the Deity from the whole manhood : which is the death of the Soule . I speake heere nothing but the Fathers words , yea the Scriptures . Your owne place of Epiphanius saith that nowe his Deity departed from his manhood . So saith your owne Hilary also , Corporis vox contestata recedentis a se Dei dissidium . So saith Ambrose , Clamavit Homo Divinitatis separatione moriturus : The man Christ did cry being about to dy by the separation of his Godhead . Againe Sequestrata delectatione Divinitatis aternae taedio meae infirmitatis afficitur . The ioy of his eternall Godhead being parted away , hee was afflicted with the tediousnis of my infirmitie . Heere the Fathers doe shewe in deed that Christ dyed , but more then a meere bodily death : even the death of the Soule also . For what is the Separation of the Deitie from his Soule els , but the death of the Soule . Howbeit note , I pray , that neither the Fathers , nor I do meane any Separating 1 of the vnion of a a The D●● & Hum●● both natures in Christ , nor the Separating 2 of any Holynes or habituall grace of God from his Soule , 3 nor the Separating of Gods love from him , See befo●● pag. 10● but the Separation of all comfortable feeling & assistance of the Godhead , in that he felt not any supporting of his Soule and Body now pierced thorow with the Paines which he felt inflicted by God . This Separation is meant , and it b b Thoug● haps th● thers d● this ph●● rarely . may be called the Death of the Soule . For as it is c c Psal ●● life to the Soule to feele and to enioy the glorie of God : So it is death to feele the want and absence thereof vtterly , and the rather being also then overwhelmed with incomparable paines . That heavenly life Christ tasted a litle while in his Transfiguration : this Hellish Death he felt besides his bodily death vpon the Crosse . And thus Tertull. meaneth heere that not Christs bodily death only made him now thus to cry out , but that death also which was the Separation of his Godhead from both his body & Soule ; which is the death of the Soule . And so he saith true : the Dereliction of the Father , is Death to the Sonne . Your d d Pag. ●●● 4. Exposition for any thing I see may be granted : for it seemeth to bee the same in effect that wee holde . Your place of Cyrill seemeth also to concurre : that Christes words of complaint were the removing of the dereliction which had fallen on vs . Was it removed from vs ? then surely it was laid vpon some body els . Now that must needes be vpon him selfe . Where you obiect Athanasius , Cont. A● Serm. that He could not be forsaken of his Father , who was alwayes in his Father . It is meerely wrested : Athanasius speaketh against Arius also , that Christes Deitie could not be forsaken of his Father , seeing it is alwayes in his Father : and so was not inferior to the Father , which was Arius haeresy . Touching his humanity he denyeth not but God might forsake it : For the Scripture saith so . And in deed he forsooke it by causing in it the feeling of all Paines for sinne , and by leaving it therin for a while all comfortles . Your 5. Exposition is Leos conceit without warrant , far fetcht , hardly applyed : tha● heere Christ putteth vs in minde why God doth often not heare our prayers , but provideth better for vs then if our wils were satisfied : & that this is a mysticall sense . ●●g . 37. a Origen also is heere as weake : that Christ meaneth nothing ells but that hee was abased lower then his divine maiesty . Also these senses be contrary to all the rest heere observed . Your 6. and last also is likewise as contrary to the rest , and as improbable in it self ( or more ) then the former . That Christ heere should cite the beginning of that b Psalme , ●●al . 22. only to shew the Iewes that their wrongs towardes him were Prophesied of before . This c c Treat. 1. ●●g 66. already I fully answered , which you refute not . Likewise where you say , ●●g. 65. 66. He sung the whole Psalme : it is d answered . Whe●in moreover this is to be noted , that surely hee now vttered no more of this Psalme but the 1. verse , Eli , Eli , Lamma sabachtham , For heereby the standers by imagined that he called for Elias . Therefore he sung not the Psalme . Your authorities are bare arguments . Ierom bringeth no reason but his own word . Chrysostom , I see not what he saith to your purpose at all . Finally those kindes of Dereliction which you mention c besides , ●●g 32. 33. &c are nothing fitter then the former . Thus far I have waded in examing your sundry and variable expositions of one poore little plaine sentence of Scripture . At least 6. or 7. divers , yea contrary senses you have brought of a few wordes : 〈◊〉 14. & of them all you say , They are f all godly expositions , and † All these interpretations are sound , ●●g 37. and stand well with the rules of Christian pietie . How sound and fit they are , it hath ben seene . But verily you have a good head if you can reconcile all these : and make them stand togeather : and a very bad opinion of the holy Scriptures you seeme to have , if you thinke they may be handled by interpretations and expositions thus , that a man may take them in 6. or 7. divers senses and all iustifiable . Your saying therefore , ●●g. 113. that g you have spoken before asmuch ( to this matter ) as may content any man that is not fastened to his fancies more then to to the truth , I omit as vaine and frivolous .

Now it resteth that I gather some reasons from the expresse Scripture , ●●s for vs to shew you that indeed very paines and the vehemency of sorrowes , namely which hee now sustayned by way of yeelding . Satisfaction and Sacrifice for sinne , were the principall and onely proper Cause of his most dreadfull Agonies & Complaint . Which truly though it neede no reason for proofe of it , ( the matter being so cleere in it selfe ) yet your vnreasonablenes is such that it draweth somewhat from me about it . First , No Christian doubteth ( I suppose ) much lesse denyeth that Christs most wofull Agonies & Complaining belonged properly and directly to his Passion and Sacrifice : and that they expressed a parte thereof , yea as I thinke not the least parte . But his whole Sacrifice consisted in Afflictions , The Prince of our Salvation was consecrated through Afflictions . Therefore Afflictions Sorrowes and Paines were the Cause of his Agonies and Complaint : not his religious feare , not his Piety or Pity . If you say , These were Afflictions vnto him . I answer , they properly belonged to his Holynes as partes thereof , and were not a a Before p●● See also 〈◊〉 91 . 9● . immediatly directly nor properly in him as the Wages & Price of sinne : as his whole Passion was , and every part thereof . Againe that these should , or could afflict Christe so much above his strength and patience , it is more then strange . Yea also it were no vertu● but sinne in any , to give way to our Affections ( though about good thinges ) immoderatly beyond our patience & strength of nature . Lastly though they somwhat molest the minde , yet in truth they are most pleasing and delightfull to good men , not tedious , much lesse painfull vnto death . Therefore you do very ill to make these partes of Christs Holines to be proper partes of his satisfaction , and the maine Causes of his Agonie and Complaint . And worse you doe if you ascribe them b b Pag. 27● & 115. not to any Paines in him at all . Secondly , The summe of these c c Pag 90. forenoted Texts must be considered : namely that Christe expresly wished sundry times in his dreadfull astonishment suddainly even against Gods knowen will in one respect , though allwayes after his knowen will in another respect , as afterward wee shall see . And heere are expressed ( with his strange Astonishment ) his mighty Sorrowes , and Feare of them , partly felt and partly further to come . You d d Pag. 9 . ● skip this Feare when you reckon but 4. kindes : For this was neither a religious care , nor doubtfull feare , nor desperat nor damned feare , but a right Naturall feare in Christ . Which was as I said for the infinitnes of his sorrowes partly now revealed , and partly further to bee laid vpon him afterward . Whence also his sweating drops of bloud trickling downe from him , and his intolerable Agonie , and his comfort receaved by an Angell from heaven that now in this his wofull discomfort ministred vnto him : and his complaying on the Crosse that his Father had forsaken him : finally all his prayers and supplications with teares and strong cryes against that death which he feared . Now all these things we see in Christ , came because of his sorrowes and Paines in his Passion , not for his zealous Holines and Sanctification . ●●●l 51.11.2.8 . David wanted somtime the present feeling of Gods comfortable spirit , and mourned dolefully for the want of it , albeit yet hee were not destitute of his spirit indeed : which also himselfe knew well enough . And thus did Christ even in his greatest plunge of wo : for then he called God his God resolutly . Nevertheles , he being infinitly more punished then David , nature could not but suddainly cast out that affection ( which yet was meerely naturall in him ) to wish ease , and release of his vnmeasurable and intollerable paines . Third : Adde heere vnto , Christs own expresse words , Ioh. 12.27 . ●ark 14.35 when in this season he prayeth , that a this Hower and This Cup may passe from him . That which This Hower and This Cup do signifie , the same is the proper & principall cause of his Agonie . But what can bee meant by This Hower , vnles the Paines of his suffering set and appointed by God for him to beare at this determined time from Gods Iustice for sinne ? What is this Cup , but the bitter tast of the same Paines aforesaid ? This I hope was not his Holines and sanctification which so troubled and molested him : not his Piety nor his Pity . Nay , finally he himselfe expresseth the true Cause , even his excessive Paines , his overabounding Sorrowes and anguish : saying , My Soule is full of paines or full of sorrowes even vnto death . Heere hee nameth the Cause . For which Cause also , even of intolerable and vnsupportable sorrowes and paines it must needes be that he cryed at his end , My God , my God , why hast thou for saken me ? This then manefestly was the only proper and principall cause of Christes most dreadfull Agonies and perplexity in his Passion , even excessive Paines , and the intire want of feeling of Gods comfort , Pag. 17. and nothing els . How hard soever b you make it ( I c know not why ) to shew the proper & principall cause thereof . Treat . 1. Pag. 72. And heere wee will remember againe what is taught by Authority in England . The rather for that you take on as a man impatient , because I doe affirme that our doctrine , ( not yours ) hath the publike Authorie for it . Pag. 334. You d call it an egregiously , an insolent and impudent speach , well becomming an alehouse . &c. And yet in the verie next b b Pag. ●● page in plaine termes you graunt the same to bee taught in our Homily of Christes Passion : for you say thus the Hom: teacheth , The Justice of God pursued Christe with most paynefull smart and anguish even vnto death : and forced the weaknes of his humane flesh to cry , My God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me . Heere I am sure you think not that our Homelie maketh Christs Pietie or Pitie , nor yet his meere Bodily paine to force him thus farre . Nor in those wordes next following there , c c Hom ● Pass . 2. O that Mankinde should put the everlasting Sonne of God in such paines for the grievousnes of our sinnes . And in trueth that the Homily is farre from both these your meanings , I have plainly shewed d d Pag. 6 before . Adde heerevnto the full and large declaration heereof in the authorised Catechisme : e e Nowe techis●● Christ suffered not only a common death in sight of men , but àlso was thoroughly touched with the horror of eternall death : he fought and wrastled as it were hand to hand with the whole army of Hell : before Gods iudgement seat he put him selfe vnder the heavy and grievous severitie of Gods punishment : he was driven to most hard straights : hee suffered for vs and went through horrible feares , and moct bitter sorrowes of the minde that he might in all things satisfye the iust iudgement of God & appease his wrath . For to sinners whose person Christ did heere beare , not only the sorrowes and tormentes of present death are due , but also of death to come and everlasting : So when hee did take vpon him and beare both the guiltines and iust paine of Mankinde damned and lost , he was affected with so grievous feare , trouble and sorrowe of the minde or soule , that he cryed out , My God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me . Finally the Annotation of our great f f Bibl. 1591. & ● Bible authorized and appointed to be read in our Churches , iustifyeth all this saying , g g Anno● Luk. 2● Christ here felt the horror of Gods wrath and iudgement against sinne . I pray , who is that Egregious lyar now ? I hope for my part I have spoken the truth in avouching my doctrine & that forenoted Proposition & Assumption also , by you denyed , to be our publike doctrine and fully authorized in England . Wherefore you may meane some other to be h h Pag. ●● a giddy Spirit lately buzzing in the peoples eares the contrary : I hope I am clear from it . And thus it remayneth that we conclude even our whole Reason to be firme & true , which is i i Pag. 9● before delivered . The paines of Christes Passion which now he felt and feared , were the principall and proper cause of those his Agonies . But his meere Bodily Paines and death , or the feare of them , caused no such things and lamentable effectes in Christ : much lesse did his Pietie and Pitie . Therefore Christ felt and feared Paines more , and infinitly greater , then meere Bodily paine and death : which were the principall and proper Cause of this strange plight in him . Which consequently can be none other by necessary reason , then the Paines and sense of Gods wrath in his spirite properly . Therefore Christ suffered that also : and not only in Body , as you hold .

Howbeit you have yet heere and there some exceptions against this our doctrine which are not to be cleane neglected . First , you say , ●ag. 290. a I extend Ch●istes Agonie too farre : because I will have it proceed from b the intollerable sorrowes and horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell . Treat. 1. ●●g 80. I shew not there the Cause of Christes Agonie and Feare : I shewed it of purpose in the c beginning . Why did you not refuse that ? Treat. 1. ●ag 6 7 You ought to have dealt directly against that which I expresly mention to have ben the cause . Thus I said , His Sorrowes and sufferings for the redemption of sinnes , The Cup of Affliction and sorrowe which now he felt and was to feele yet further , Caused him to mourne and feare . Say then plainly , that this Cause is mistaken , and too farre extended : or els you say nothing to vs , but by indirect and p●aeposterous collection . Now if this Cause which we gave and doe give , be true and right , ( as I hope it is before proved more then sufficiently ) then I doubt not it is as true also by invincible reason , that Christ suffered the intollerable sorrowes & horrors of Gods fyrie wrath equall to Hell . Which I hope also is as fully proved : ●●g. 91. 117 being the effect of our d Assumption before . Seeing it could not be his meere Bodily paines ( much lesse his Holy Affections , as you hold ) that brought him to this miraculous miserie and distresse , wherein wee see by the Text hee was . Therefore they were the intollerable and incomprehensible dolours of his Spirit ( questionles ) which wrought the same . There is no other sorrow in the world to be found which can be imagined to be the Cause possibly . ●ag . 290. And then my other wordes also which e heere you cruelly condemne , shall stand well enough , * That Christ as touching the vehemency of paine was as sharply touched as the Reprobats themselves , ●reat . 1. ●●g. 81. yea if it may be more extraordinarily . Though you labour with might and maine to make them amount to Haeresie & open blasphemie . But why do you not bend your odious outcryes and accusations against that Authority before truly cited , whiche maintayneth the same so fully and amply as I deliver it ? You doe wisely to dissemble your enmitie to all them , and yet nevertheles by me to smite and wounde them . Howbeit what reason have you against our Assertion ? Verily onely this you oppose , because a a Pag. 29 292. all the sorrowes of the Reprobat are but sinfull guiltines of conscience or feares of iudgement for seene , which is executed b b Pag. 14 only in the next life : you meane onely in the definit and locall Hell . Which yet is no refutation of my assertion , that Christ was as sharply touched with paine as the very Reprobats . For though the wicked in this world did never suffer any reall effect of God burning wrath working actuall vengeance on their Soules for sinne , but only some guilty remorse or feare and nothing els , yet this letteth not but that Christ whom God ordayned extraordinarily , & alone , to be in this life a whole and absolut burnt Sacrifice for all sin , did feele and suffer the same truly , properly , and perfitly . Sec : How I have alwayes expresly excluded from c c As being Extraoro●●●●ry sufferer●●● Christ † † Likewise 〈◊〉 those your 〈◊〉 thinges 〈◊〉 Hell pag. 49. The Rept●●● bats doe so●●time here 〈◊〉 a reall tast 〈◊〉 Hell paines all sinful adherents or consequents in paines and feares , which are in the wicked : and doe resemble his to theirs only and meerely in sharpnes and vehemency of paine , I have often declared before . Thirdly , the case is cleere enough that the Reprobat many times in this life doe not only feare the iudgment to come , but also do feele some reall and actuall impression of Gods burning wrath , and even of Hell torments , though not being yet in the locall Hell . For proofe whereof , that which before d d Treat 1. pag 46. I alleaged out of e e Iob 6.4 . Iob , and f f Eph. e. 6. ●● 16. Ion. 2. others , that even the godly heere want not experience of the sorrowes of Hell sometimes , you passe over answering nothing therevnto . Which yet being so in the godly , it must needes be in Cain , Iudas , and the Reprobats , far more direful & intollerable somtimes . As also their own confession , and behaviour do sundry times testifie in this life : Againe the Divels are many times g g Mat. 8 2● 32. Eph. 2. & 6.12 . out of the locall Hell , as when they are in this world . But the Divells are h h 2 Pet. 2 . 4● never released of Hell sorrows . Therefore the true sorrows of Hell are even in this world : and then possibly may be inflicted on wicked men as they are on the Divells which are sometime out of the locall Hell . Lastly the true ioyes of Heaven may be out of the local Heaven : as when the glorious Angells have ben and taryed some while heere on earth with men . Yet did they never for a moment want the ioyes and glory of Heaven . And if Angells may inioy Heaven really beeing in this world , ●●●e Godly ●ay have a ●●t heere som ●●nes of Hea●●nly ioyes . then is it possible by Gods goodnes to communicat some reall foretast thereof even vnto some blessed men also . Further that God doth thus indeed i reveale som reall tast of his Heavenly ioyes to his chirdren even in this life , I have k shewed already , but am not answered . Cor. 2.9.10 . Treat. 1. pag. 80 Yea the Transfiguration of Christ on the Mount declareth that some reall part of Heavenly glory may bee heere on earth , Pag. 115. which your selfe l somewhere confesseth cleane m against your self . Pag. 337. 338. Only this n you have to obiect touching men , that we heere doe but hope and ioyfully beleeve . Pag 338. Nowe faith and hope is the o evidence of thinges not seene : Hebr. 11.1 . neither are our greatest ioyes the same nor equal to them which we shal possesse in the next world . I answere , our Reasons before doe prove more then onely Hope in the faithfull somtimes . Sec : It is true the Apostle saith that heere wee walke by faith and live by hope . Cor. 5.7 . This is the general state of the godly in this life : also it is spoken in Comparison of the life to come , which in truth infinitly exceedeth , & lasteth . Yet some rare exceptions doe not overthrow the generall course : and heere may be notwithstanding some particular instant times when some reall sense may be revealed to the godly . ●esame in ●ature , not in ●easure , wt●albe heere●ter . As there was vnto Christ in the mount , which was to him not onely a ioyfull hope , but a reall tast of his very Heavenly ioyes . Likewise the godly somtime may tast of it in their measure , & yet they may generally in the course of their whole life walke by faith , without that actual sense which I speak of , saving still a most ioyfull remembrance of it . Again , though we are not to doubt but that the reall sense of Heavenly ioyes heere and heerafter are the very same in nature ( as in the examples before we have seene ) yet I say heereafter we● shall receave vnspeakeable increase farther and above this that we tast heere . 1. When we shall have all darknes & corruption taken from vs , wherwith now we are compassed and clogged all this life long . 2 When the fullnes of Gods appointed time shall come for it , then will he of purpose reveale himselfe and his glory vnto vs as it were with open face , which heere is don but vnder a vayle : and specally then when our bodies also in the Resurrection shal be conioyned with our soules in glorie . 3 When we shall eternally inioy and possesse the same , which heere in this life is but now and then revealed vnto vs , in such persons , times , maner , and measure as the Lord shall thinke good . Thus we graunt the ioyes of Heauen heere , are nothing equall to those heereafter : only we say the very same in nature may be and are by the effectuall working of Gods gracious spirit in his elect revealed in some measure , & somtime , even in this world . Neither is this ( as your charitie speaketh ) any lewd or wicked error . Now then if more then Hope only , even Heavenly ioyes may be on earth , surely it followeth ; that like wise more then Feare , even Hellish paynes them selues may be in men on earth also , and not in the locall Hell onely . And if Hell paynes in this world may be in any , much rather may they haue bene in Christ : whom God purposely sent a a Hebr. 2. through paynes and afflictions ( the extreamest that might be ) to be consecrated the Prince of our salvation . If you saye , yet thus it will followe that the extreamest paines of Hell are not to be found in this world , as the highest ioyes of Heaven are not likewise , by my confession . Wherefore Christ could not bee so extreamely punished ( any thing neare ) as the damned be in Hell , no not for any moment : which yet my , conceit ( as you call it ) doeth reach vnto . I aunswer , I knowe not , neither meane I to determine the measure and depth of sorrowes which Christ in his Passion suffered : as also it is not possible to define that glorie which hee tasted of ( for the time ) in the mount . Only graunt this plainly , that Christ suffered in his soule the true effects of Gods proper Iustice or wrath : and we seeke no more . Graunt this I say , and then we will see further ( if you will make it a question ) whether the sense of payne in Christ was lesser for the time , then that which is eternall in the damned : and whether the true and proper wrath of God taking full vengeance of sinne heere in this world , might not be as sharpe and violent as the sharpest torment in Hell , yea the very shame which is in Hell the sharpest . Truely , though Christ suffered all ( which hee did suffer ) heere in this world , yet for any thing I can see , there is cause why Christ should be an Extraordinarie person in the case of Suffering for sinne in this life : and that therfore , as touching sorrow and paine , he might feele more then ever any els hath or could feele for the time . You seeme to graunt vnto Christ b b Pag. 2 all naturall sorrowe and feare . Neither doe wee seeke any more . But you trust the payne of the Damned is more then a naturall oppressing and afflicting of the heart with humane feare & sorrow . Forsooth it is not . It is no more then a very natural humane sorrow & feare . It proceedeth immediatly and principally from God him selfe : who is the Nature of natures . Also Humane nature is apt to receyue such sorrow & fear from him . Thus the very paynes of the Damnedare meerely naturall . Yet supernaturall I graunt they are , if we meane this , that they are aboue our natures state to beare or to comprehend them . This therefore hitherto is a very slight exception against our doctrine before delivered .

The next is as vaine , Pag. 296. where a you thinke it not tolerable that I say , Treat 1. ●ag 59. Christ b in playne words prayed contrary to Gods knowen will . I pray haue patience : I saye no harme , nor meane no ill . Did not Christ in plaine wordes pray , ●●aek . 14.35 c That , if it were possible this Hower might passe from him : Ioh. 1● . 27 . and before , d Father ; save me from this hower . By this Hower he meaneth this his paine & punishment appointed him by God for to suffer at that time . And this Christe knew well , seeing he saith presently , But therfore I came into this hower . Doeth he not then pray in plaine words contrary to Gods knowne will ? Therefore never skoffe at it , nor reproch it , nor wrest it . We ought not to bee ashamed to acknowledge that weaknes of Humane nature in Christ , which Christ was not ashamed of for our sakes to vndergo . If this could not be possibly in Christes Manhood without sin , then I were a wretch to affirme so much of him ; especially stil to affirm it . But if it be possible by any means , thorow the meere instinct of mans Nature , ( as it is Gods creature and free from all sinne ) thus to speake and to wish suddainly , and suddainly to controll it againe , as Christ did : then what minde beare you , and how may we iudge of this your striving , which is not to cleare Christ from all sinne in his Agonie . For that we doe all , and Nature it selfe witnesseth with vs that in such a case as he now was in , this was nothing strang to be thus perplexed , & moved . But your striving seemeth to be altogither to exempt Christ-man from our meere naturall affections and infirmities : and to give him Humane flesh indeed , but not such as ours is in all and every point , except onely sinne . You will say , If hee knew it to be Gods will and prayed against it , how could he want sinne ? I answer , He knew it ; but at this instant he considered it not , he thought not on it : and so his suddaine desire may bee cleere from sinne . But why thought hee not on it ? or how could hee choose but think on that which he well knew , and did so greatly concerne him ? I answer , His Paines and sorrowes being so great and so infinit as they were , not in his Body onely but chiefly in his very Spirit and Minde , and these more extreamely revealed vpon him now at these instant times , then they were otherwise or continually , as by the effects of them in him we may perceave . I say , these things acknowledged & wel wayghed as they ought to be , then it is easy to shew why , & how Christ came thus affected , & yet without sin . First , he was now a a Ekthamb istha● , is to astonished v●●eare . Ma●. 1● . 33 . astonished as the text saith : and you b b Pag 124. acknowledge that he might be . Sec : these incomprehensible sorrowes & incomparable paines astonished him : yea impossible it was but his meere humane nature must be astonished with them . And it is vtterly vntrue which you say , c c Pag. 196. Many things might astonish our Saviour for the time besides such paines . In these instant times of his Passion , nothing could astonish him but Paines and Sorrowes . which before d d Pa. 115 . 1● I have proved , or at least that Paines & Sorrowes now did chiefly : & that nothing could possibly without such Sorrowes and Paines as these , which I speake of : even spirituall , and infinit , and incomprehensible paines , proceeding from Gods Iustice vpon him for our sinnes . Thirdly , Adde heerevnto that which you rightly grant , c c Pag. 12● . It is true that a mighty feare may so affect a man for the time , that it shall hinder the senses from recovering themselves , and stop the faculties from informing one the other . But this must be some suddain obiect astonishing the heart , and so terrible , that it suffereth vs not presently to gather our wits togither , and to consider of it . Likewise very fully afterward , f f Pag. 29● . Astonishment draweth the minde so wholy to think on some speciall thing above our reach , that during the time we turne not our selves to any other cogitation . Even as the eye , if it be bent intentively to behold any thing , for that present it discerneth nothing els : So fareth it with the Soule , if she wholy addict her selfe to think on any matter , she is amused ; if it be more them she conceaveth , or more fearfull then she well indureth , she is amazed or astonished : but not of necessity so , that she looseth either sense or memorie : only for that time she converteth neither to any other obiect . Now thus Christ being astonished with sorrows and feare lost not either sense , memory , or vnderstanding , much lesse his vertues and graces , being cast into an infernall confusion , as you vntruly g g Pag. 289. charg me that I say . But I say , as you say , He now on the suddaine might turne neither sense nor memory to any other obiect , and so not think on any thing ells , but only on this terrible and mighty sorrow & feare , which now smote him & bruized him to pieces . And thus for the very suddaine he might not think at all vpon Gods will , and his owne certaine purpose to suffer this very same , or that he was to suffer it longer : but only on the intolerablenes of the paines and wo , which instantly he felt . Now Natures very instinct is , in such dolours to wish and desire ease , and the more vehemently it is pinched , the more earnestly it desireth : and this is Gods owne gift and workmanship in nature , and simply thus to desire , is in this respect truly to be reckoned Gods owne expresse will . And thus for the suddaine not remembring , nor thinking on Gods particular will otherwise , but feeling the instinct of nature in such a case only wishing ease to it self , he prayeth rightly That this Hower & This Cup might passe from him . Wherein yet I say he prayeth in one respect against Gods known wil , but in an other respect even according to his will . According to his wil which now he had sense of , even to wish release & ease from such deadly sorrows and feare : contrary to his particular wil being this that he must yet further suffer them . Which ( as I said ) suddenly being astonished he remembred not , he thought not vpon it . Lastly it was contrary in the outward words , & in the particular affection of his minde now wanting this remembrance : but it was fully and wholy according to Gods will in the generall disposition of his minde and whole man . As appeared by his present applying himselfe with all readines even to this most dolorous obedience of Gods will , foorthwith so soone as hee recollected himself : saying Not my will , but thy will be don . Where even this also sheweth , that before Gods will and his in some respect were contrary , but absolutly now they agree . If you abhorre this in me , yet see what Chrisostom taught , a These wordes ( Not as I will , but as thou wilt ) do signifie 2. Wills , ( saith he ) one of the Father another of the Sonne , Ioan Constantinop in Theodoret. Dial. 3. contrary the one to the other . Igraunt M. Beza vseth som termes differing from ours , yet his sense is the selfsame with ours . Bez. Annot. 〈◊〉 mat. 26. He said b Christ corrected not his speach as if he had before spoken amisse . I say , He did correct his speach : not mending it as being any whit amisse , but making it being good to be better . That is by shewing his generall conformitie to Gods will now more particularly , and distinctly . Which sentenses in effect and indeed do not differ : and this latter , I think , may well be called a correcting , no lesse then the former . Also he saith , The Humane and Divine will are not Contrary , but Divers . I vnderstand even Differing from Gods will , to be Contrary . Namely in that particular respect wherin the difference is . For otherwise now there may be a general perfit conformitie to Gods will , as is before said . Neither is this particular contrariety to Gods will any sinne , namely when by Gods own ordinance we know not what Gods special will is , so that we alwayes remaine apt & ready therevnto when we know it . So did David * * 2 Sam. 1 16. desire the life of his Child . It was contrary to Gods wil one way : as the event shewed , for the Child dyed . Yet he prayed well and rightly according to God will in natures affection , seeing hee knew not Gods secret will to the contrary , neither was to have knowne it before the event . And thus likewise stood the case with Christe at this season . His suddaine Not remembring Gods particular will ( by reason of his fearfull astonishment ) was all one as if he had not known it at all ( yea thus also he ought not to haue knowen it ) for that instant . Namely , seeing this Not remembring and not thinking thereon came not of any negligence or default in him , but only and meerely by Natures infirmitie ( Gods own ordinance ) which could not possibly but faile vnder such infinit violence of paines . This M. Beza calleth Divers rather then Contrarie to Gods will : but in effect it is the same , and he plainly meaneth even there all one with vs . You say “ “ Pag. ●● I am captious against Christ in not supplying one Evangelist with another . For so Christes desire wil appeare to be but Conditionall , therefore not Contrary to Gods will . Yes , nevertheles ; as touching the desire it selfe and his particular present inclination compared to Gods particular determination heerein . And so was also Davids forenoted desire for his childs life : yea Balaams * * Numb●● 19. bad desire was such in this point . These were all Conditionall , yet contrarie to Gods particular will . Heerein stood the difference : Balaam then knewe Gods will was otherwise , at that tyme when he inclined after his owne minde . David simply knew not , Christ also knew not ( that is , he remembred not ) at that instant the contrary . Therefore Balaams desire though Conditionall and with reservation ( as it seemed ) of God will , was nevertheles wicked and against God : his conditionall words excused not the opposition of his Will against Gods Wil. Yea , in this case when we perfitly know and remember Gods certaine will , every light affection and suddaine wishing to the contrary , ( howsoever conditionally ) is no lesse then manefest sinne against God . But in David and Christ heere the case is not so , as before I noted . Their desires indeed were , & ought to haue ben conditionall : for who knoweth not , that all good prayers and desires for temporall things must bee conditionall , that is with reservation of Gods will alwayes implyed , though not alwayes expressed ? And albeit they were conditionall yet they might be and were contrary , as also I have shewed . Yea the very nature of all Conditional desires is such , that it includeth evermore a possibility ( at least ) of being contrary to his wil , whom we desire . And therefore we vse somtime expresly to qualifie our desire , saying , Jf thou wilt , and Jf it please thee , &c. Now thus was Davids and Christs : yea not only possible to be contrary , but contrary indeede , as the sequele shewed . Howbeit both their desires were nevertheles holy , ●ag . 298. † made in faith , assured to receaue , ( as condicional desires may be ) directed aright , prepared sufficiently : yet onely for this cause , seeing David simply knew not Gods contrary wil : Christ knew it not at that instant . Howbeit the truth is , Christ could not but now know and remember it very well , if hee were not at this instant grievously astonished . Neither could he be so astonished and wofully distressed in his Soule , without that intolerable and infinit waight of sorrowes before spoken of . Therefore briefly , so it was doubtlesse with him at that season . All in vaine then you charge mee that I " streth the Scriptures beyond their wordes and the trueth , ●●g . 289. when in my discourse I shew that Christ in the garden was astonished & grievously perplexed : the text having onely , He began to be astonished and grievously perplexed . I graunt the text is so . But thinke you , that phrase in Scripture signifieth a begging only , & no further proceeding at all ? It is written , ●●rk . 6.34 . a He began to teach them many things . Also , b And Iesus aunswered them and began to say , 〈◊〉 . 13.5 . Take heede least any man deceave you , 〈◊〉 . 10.45 . &c. And c He began to cast out them that solde in the Temple , 〈◊〉 1.1 . &c. And d All that which Iesus began to doe and teach . 〈◊〉 . 24.2 And , e Tertullus began to accuse Paul , saying , &c. It were very simple to say that the Scripture meaneth these things were only begun , and no more . Nay verily , they were heere don to the full . Againe , as Christ was indeed astonished & grievouslie perplexed , so he did at the first but begin to be thus , and then afterwards grew to the full . Now these degrees and proceedings of Christ in his sorrorwes , & that they were not at the highest at once , this worde heere he began may very well signifie . For the text following doth invincibly shew that he did fully come to the extreamity of astonishment , & began not only . For did he but begin when hee swet clotted bloud trickling from his body to the ground ? Also when an Angell was sent from Heaven to refresh and comfort him : did he then but begin to be heavy ? Againe when most moornfully he complained that his Soule abounded with sorrowes even vnto death : Finally when he 3. severall tymes prayed to his Father with strong crying , teares , and feare , that the Cup of Gods punishments now given him to drinke , might passe from him if it were possible , which at other tymes he most perfectly knew that it neyther could nor should escape him : wherevnto may be added that at last when he so dolefully complayned that his God had forsaken him ; was hee now all this while but begining to be troubled and sad ? You would have mademe ashamed of it , if I had had any such thought in my minde . Wherfore the text is no way abused as you pretend in that after he began , I shew from these places that he grew to be mightily astonished & grievously perplexed . As for Ierom , if he deny this , I must crave leaue to dissent from him . I bring ( you say ) “ “ Pag. 29● a fardell of phrases to expresse his Agonie , he was amazed , astonished , forgetfull , distempered , overwhelmed , and all confounded in the powers of his soule , and senses of his body ? Yea , and I thinke all to little sufficiently to expresse our Lords sufferings for vs . All those words which I vsed and many mo cannot shew all that vnspekeable vehemency of Sorrow , which now cast him into such a plight . So far of it is , that * * Pag. 28● I do the Lord of glory wrong : when I labour but to shew how he loved vs , and to what basenes of our nature he submitted him self for our sake . For al these are but meere effects of natures infirmitie , if it be oppressed with any infinit sorrow & feare . Seeing then Christ might be and was nowe thus infinitly afflicted ( as we have shewed ) why should we feare to acknowledge extreame Effectes in him , where we have extreame Causes . Nay , God forbid that we should reioyce in any thing so much , neither can wee praise & magnify him for any thing so highly , as we may & ought for this extreame " abasing of Christe for vs . 〈◊〉 Pilip . 2. ● . Remember your owne wordes out of Austin : that there is in som men Insipiens honorisicentia , a fond intent of honoring Christ . If there be any such , surely this is one point thereof which you maintaine . Mr Calvin , a worthy Minister of Christ , ●alvin ●ath . ●6 . and a pillar of the Church , is bolde and saith : Fatemur certe hanc esse crucis stultitiam quae scandaloest superbis hominibus . We consesse indeed such is the basenes and folly of Christes Crosse , that proud men cannot away with it . In another place where I shewed from the more to the lesse , ●eat . ● . pa. 57 howe Christe might have ( for the suddain ) the powers of his minde astonished , and yet no decay in him of faith , nor of obedience , nor of patience , nor of loue ; like as there is not in a man benummed & bound in his senses more then Christ was ; namely in a man a sleepe or amazed with a violent blow on the head . For thus any reasonable man would haue conceaved me : seeing who would imagine that I thought Christ now to be altogeather so without sense as one that sleepeth or that lyeth in a swoune ? Heerevpon you aske me skoffingly , Pag. 299. a was Christ a sleepe , or in a swoune ? b cast into a traunce , Pag. 120. or c in a fit of a Lethargie . But what I doe thinke of Christs Agonie I haue said before . Pag. 121. Indeed , as d you grant that Amazednes and Astonishment commeth naturally from sorrowes and feares : and that , Pag. 293. both in these causes and effects there be divers degrees : so I thinke in Christ both the one and the other was in the extreamest and most violent degree that might be . And therefore no marvaile though his Astonishment were far greater , then is to be seene in any man ells that ever was or shal bee . The Lorde made Solomon to excell all others in e wisedome , 1. Chro. 1.12 . and riches , and treasures , and honour , so , that there hath not ben the like among the Kings which were before him , neither after him shall there bee the like . Of Christ ( I iudge ) we may altogither as truly and as fully say , that the Lord made him so subiect to infirmities & to suffering of sorrows that there hath not ben the like among men which were before him , neither after him shall there be the like . And yet none of those your former imputations are true . Pag. 300. But f for my life I cannot answer this that followeth , All that Christ suffered was and must be meritorious with God . The suffering of Hell paines which astonish and confound all the powers of the Soule and senses of the Body , neither was , nor could be meritorious with God . Therefore Christ suffered not such paines as did astonish and confound his bodily senses , and powers of his Soule . I deny your Assumption . Not only all Christs paines were meritorious , but even all his very infirmities also : his wearines , his hunger , his sleepe , and so his astonishment & amazednes ( being in him but a meere natural weaknes and infirmity ) was exceeding meritorious in him and highly accepted with God . Man hath his meere infirmities all agreeable to Gods will : but Christ directly and properly glorified God in and by them more then can bee vttered , I say , in every point whatsoever of his Humane infirmity and basenes , wherevnto hee humbled himselfe . If it seeme a hard phrase which in my former Treatise I vsed , saying Christ at this instant became forgetfull of that which before he knew : my meaning is ( and so still I speake now ) he remembred not , he considered not . Which many times wee vse to name forgetting : but indeed strictly and properly it is rather not remembring . Where you would h h Pag. 296. wring out a contrariety in my wordes , as if I had said : That Christ being in the depth of his astonishment did then perfitly know that the dominion of death should not hold him : you doe mee wrong , I say not so . In that place I argue from your supposition , that if Christ were now not astonished , but in his perfit memory and full considering of such thinges ( as you seeme to affirme , but I deny ) which otherwise hee knew well , then it could not be the Dominion of death that hee thus feared , sith in his firme estate he knew perfitly that it should not prevaile over him . To conclude this matter : thus we may see how without colour of reason i i Pag. 297. you wrest a plaine text , which otherwise taken ( as it lyeth ) maketh strongly against you . They are our Saviours Christs owne words , k k Ioh. 12. Now is my soule troubled : & what shall I say ? Father save me from this hower : but therfore came J vnto this hower . You say these words do import a Deliberation of 2. partes . But you speak against all reason , considering the nature and frame of the very words . A Deliberation must needes bee set interrogatively in both clauses , thus : What shall I say ? Father , save me from this hower ? Now the text is not so : it pretendeth a plaine resolution , or at least a great inclining toward resolution , thus : Father , save me from this hower . It can not be a Deliberation . Chrysostom and Epiphanius do descant about it , trying how the text may beare such a meaning : but it cannot stand being so evidently against the course of the text . Chrysost. ●●b ; Lacet turbatio d●●e●e 〈◊〉 serva●●●● contrari●●● tamen ●●●o . You say , S. Iohn beere speaketh of another time and place . What then ? Yet he may speake of the same matter , namely of his Passion , or of a Foretast thereof . Which indeed the text it selfe m sheweth that he did speake of . Wherefore neither can we deny , ●oh. 12.31 . ● . 33 . & all titers heer●pon . but this place of Scripture ( even as the other about his Praying in the Garden ) doth surely confirme that his Passion was more then meere bodily , which did so miraculously terrifie him . It could be no lesse then the paines of the infinit wrath of God vpon his Soule . Hence also I reasoned effectually n before , Treat. 1. pa. 1. 63. but no where you answer it ; If Christs such sufferinges in his Soule were ordayned of God for him , then most certainly indeede he did suffer the same . Nowe we see such sufferings were ordained for him : seeing he saith , but therefore came I vnto this hower . Therefore most certainly indeed hee did suffer them , at one time or other .

Yet further you except , Pa. 22 23. ●oo , &c where you avouch that this was a Feare of Eternall death and Euerlasting damnation which caused in Christ this Agonie : and from his feare he was deliuered . Ergo , hee suffered not that which he feared . First I graunt indeed this was the 2. Death , the death of the soule , or Hell tormentes which Christ heere b feared : neither can this by any meanes be denied , as anon we shall see . Howbeit to say ( as you do ) that it was Eternall death and Euerlasting malediction which heere Christ thus woefully & distresfully feared , is the strangest speach in Divinitie that ever I heard . See : you can not helpe youe selfe in making Christes feare of this Death to be onely a c religious feare , Pag. 23. & d a feare for others . These imaginations I haue removed e before . Pag 304. Every Reader will easily see in his owne iudgement that these affections so vehement were not likely at this season , Pag 93 94. &c. nor likely in him at all , much lesse likely to be Causes of such Effectes . Againe these are not Feare properly : they ought rather to bee called ( as they are ) a religious Care , Commiseraetion and pitie . Which differ greatly from the nature of Feare properly taken , such as we ought to conceave in this place . Pag. 305. You thinke the f nature of eulabia will not admit any proper Feare , & namely no perplexed Feare , as I take it heere to signifie : but a carefull & diligent regard to beware and decline that which we mislike or doubt . What say you ? Did Christ doubt Eternall Damnation , and therefore Feared it ? you speak so darklie , that I know not how to take you . But it may be you meane hee him selfe misliked it only , and was sorry for others who ran headlong into it . But all this still is nothing els save Piety in him properlie : yea and so you say this cometh nearest to the signification of the Greek word . I graunt it doeth touching Eulabia : but in Mark the a a l●ktham● ber●tha● . word doth import properly Feare , and that in extreamitie . Againe touching Eulabia ; my reason that heere it signifieth Feare properly , yea a perplexed feare , and not not only a religious devotion as you say , is grounded not so much on the nature of the word , as on the Circumstances and the other words of this Text : * * Heb. 5.7 Christ in the dayes of his flesh offered vp prayers and supplications with strong crying and teares vnto him that was able to save him from Death , and was heard in that which he feared . Heere these other words doe shewe that this Feare was more then a carefull regard to beware that which he misliked : it was no lesse in deed then a perplexed and troubled feare wofully dreading that which he was to suffer . Which also the strange and wonderfull signes thereof in the Garden do more then confirme : as I haue shewed b b Pag. 11● 116. 127 often . Thus my meaning is that the nature of eulabia admitting the sense som time of Feare properly , admitteth heere this sense , yea of necessitie it must admit it for the reason noted aboue . Howbeit I grant the Apostle may intend this also by the nature of this worde , that Christ notwitstanding all this dreadfull feare , yet ( being meerely naturall in him ) it declined not a jot from Piety nor from a most reverend regard of obedience to God , which still in all this his perplexitie he kept firme and safe . This he may withall ( I grant ) insinuat : yet the other proper feare & grievous dread must needs be admitted . To like effect this worde signifieth in that place of the c c Act. 23. Actes : as the Circumstances there also will confirme . Now then this being in Christ a proper and most vehement feare : where you argue Christ was delivered from his feare of Hell torments or the Death of the Soule . Ergo he suffered them not . I deny your sequele . This proveth directly the contrary . He feared the Death of the Soule ; specially he thus feared it . Ergo hee did suffer it . For Feare being of that which is to come , as d d Pag. 30● you well observe . Ergo seeing Christ feared ( yea in such maner ) the Death of the Soule , it surely came vnto him : namely either now , or before he dyed in the flesh , or both now & then also . For he might well suffer it even now , and yet feare it more ensuing . Yea such a maner & measure of Feare , as this manifestly was , could not be but a very Suffering of these spirituall sorrowes . Which also that sheweth where hee saith , My Soule is full of ( actuall ) sorrowes even vnto death , &c. Neither is there in this any a doubt full word , Pag. 304. which is your maner of writing : Pag. 296. nor b device vnfit for Divinity , but your Comparisons of c fearing Captivitie , Pag. 301. loosing a purse , &c. are very vnfit to be matched with this feare in Christ . Pag. 302. You thinke this was but a d iest , if God be said to have heard Christ and deliuered him from that he feared , and yet to let him suffer it . Forsooth no iest : for he doubtles suffered it as before we haue seene . Nowe nevertheles GOD might well heare him 2. wayes : 1. by sufficient sustayning him in it : 2. by delivering him out of it in due time : In one place you seeme to observe a point both strange , and very contrary to your selfe , Pa. 118. 119 in saying , e Feare is more intollerable in Christ than doubting . Is feare so intollerable a thing for him , when as you haue so often and so earnestly affirmed that he feared , Pa. 22. 124. and for f feare became thus astonished ? Pag. 303. Where * you seeke a weake advantage in that I said eisakoustheis may seeme to shew that Christ was heard being in that which he was saved from : you see I challenge no certaine but a seeming reason from that worde . But your selfe maketh a stranger conclusion . Ergo the Active referred to God importeth that God being in the same Paines did heare him . Lastly you say , g Indeed but in the Garden Christ never prayed with strong cryes & teares to be saved from Death , Pag. 22 : that we read in the Scriptures . I hope neither doe you read expreslie in the Scriptures at all , that thus he prayed in the Garden . You may soundly gather it from the Scriptures , I graunt , Ioh. 12.27 . and so you may , that his praying h before was of the self same nature and maner , also after in that most dolefull complaint on the Crosse , when he cryed My God , my God , why hast thou forsaken me . Where the very like request is plainlie implyed , as he made in the Garden when he saide ; Let this Cup passe from . Ieb . 5.7 . So that the i Apostle in all reason may bee vnderstoode to have respect to all these tymes and wofull cryes of our Saviour Christ . Pag. 30. And thus it is without all reason that you say k his Agonie ended in the Garden : Pa. 115. 116 and that on the Crosse hee had l alwayes persistance in ioy without obscuration or intermission . Likewise also that otherwise his astonishment must a a Pag. ●● continue 18. howers from his entering into the Garden after supper to the ending of his life the next day at 3. of the clocke after noone . Howe vaine is this consequence ? how false are these sayings , and contrary to Scripture in all the circumstances . But you say , b b Pa. 30. the cause continuing , the effect could not cease . The Cause was , Gods leaving his weake nature in these sorrowes at somtimes more , at sometimes lesse : also he is to be thought to reveale and inflict the very sorrowes not alwayes in one tenor , but sometime more sometime lesse : finally his Manhood apprehended these arrowes of Gods wrath sometime more suddainly , then at other times . These were the true causes of his Astonishment : but these continued not 18. howers togeather , therefore the effect was not to continue still in that maner on him . Then you c c Pag. 29 say , in the vttering of these wordes the Cup did passe from him , by my owne confession . I confesse it not . But I confesse his extreame astonishment did even quickly passe from him : yet the sense and tast of that Cup might continue longer , in such a maner and measure , as he was better inabled by his Deitie to sustaine it . Now what ill is there in these conceites , I pray you . What folly is there in them ? Against vs heerein you doe nothing els almoste in your large Treatise , Iniuriou● s●eache● but heape vp many and most false imputarions : That we thinke Christ was in d d Pag. ●●● 116. 1●● doubt and feare of Gods favour , e e Pag. 1●● destitute of faith , hope , love , ioy , forsaken of Gods favour , grace , Spirit : that f f Pag. ●●● he continued 18. howres togeather amazed as it were in a trance : that he g g Pag. ●●● vehemently and often strugled and strived in his prayers against the knowen will of God , & sought by all meanes to decline the worke for which he came into the world : His flesh feared death , though his Spirit submitted it self to the will of his heavenly Father : h h Pag. ●● We put Christ besides him selfe when it pleaseth vs , that he knew not what he prayed , nor prayed in faith . Your L. if you had reasons but any thing probable , wanteth not outward meanes enough to commend your cause : you neede not to devise against vs such grosse and base vntruths . But it bewrayeth how desperat your matter is , which can not come foorth nor make any shew to the world , without such proppes to leane on . Besides that which heere in severall places wee haue declared to the contrary , in our i i Pag. 5● 70. 71. former Treatise we shewed our minde though briefly , yet sufficientlie against these iniurious speaches . How you seeme to avouch that Christ was by God forsaken in a Body , 〈◊〉 114.116 . ●●2 . 103 . ●●ore 〈◊〉 . but not in b Soule , let them declare that can . For my part I know not your secret therein . I am sure no man can in trueth maintaine it . As for c Ambros● , 114. ●●●e pag. 113. 128. 1●0 〈◊〉 . 1. of ye●●●ion See ●●●re pag. you wrest him as you did Hilary , &c d before . After this you are bold , and aske if e any dare doubt of your doctrine ? Yea surely , I dare not but doubt of it . Also we have seene that the publike f authorised doctrine in England dareth to doubt of it . Which maketh Christes putting him selfe betweene Gods Wrath and our sinnes a parte divers from his bodily death on the Crosse , ●●●ore pag. ● . yet the extreamest part of his Passion . See also other g authorised testimonies heereof . But why may not any dare doubt of your doctrine ? Pet. 2. Because the Scripture saith , h Christ suffered for vs . leaving vs an example that we should followe his steppes , &c. And this is very true also : the godly doe followe his steppes heerein ( many times ) as I i shewed you before . ●at. 1. pa. & heere 120.129 . Some are conformable in some measure with Christe even in these his sufferings . Then k you say , we ought to be glad and reioyce thereof . I answer , we ought to turne them to ioy & gladnes , though not properly to be glad of them . Nay we ought most instantly to pray against them . No affliction at all is good in it owne nature : and the greatest of all is good to Gods children by his grace . So that touching this vse of them , therein wee are to reioyce : even when we are most bruized and pearced in our soules with the terrours of God . Lastlie , 〈◊〉 134. l you frame an obiection against your selfe , which you neither doe nor can answer : Christs soule might feele the tormentes of Hell for the time without any distrust or doubting of his salvation , or our redemption . You pretend thïs answer : The essentiall tormentes of Hell are the absolute losse of Gods kingdom everlastingly , and that m Eternall continuance is of the nature and substance of Hell . But we shew you , ● . 53 . although the damned are in Hell torments everlastingly , and of necessitie so must bee : yet eternall continuance in them , and to feele them but for a time , are indeed but Circumstances , not of the essence or nature of Hell tormentes . Gods proper and extreame wrath only and his sharpest vengeance for sinne is the essence or nature of Hell paines . Which ( against the Damned indeed is eternall , and vnsatisfyable : but lighting on Christ it was not eternall , because it was satisfyable . Wherefore it is plaine that you have answered in effect nothing to your owne obiection .

Thus far we have gone , shewing that we a a Pag. 2 neither extende the cause of Christes Agonie to far in affirming it to have com of most bitter & extreame Paines which he suffred properly for our sinns : neither that we continue it to long in affirming that he felt the same most extreamely on the Crosse . Contrariwise that you curtaile it to short , when you say it was no more but b b Pag. 1 290. Devotion to God and Compassion to men : also that Christes Agonie touched him c c Pa. 11● not at all on the Crosse . So that d d Before 90.91.116 . our Maine argument which you would haue frustrated , standeth firme and good still : that seeing his Agonies , Paines , and Feares were such & so great ( as the Scripture by the effects & signes sheweth that they were ) both before his death and at his death , therefore they were more then meere bodily paines and more then meere bodily death : much lesse were his Holy and Religious affections the proper and speciall Cause thereof . But ( of necessity ) they were the Paines proceeding from the infinit and sharpe Iustice of God which Christ truly suffered in his Spirit , and Soule and Body .

After this a a Pag 3● Touchi●● Death o●●● Soule . you set vehemently against my last argument , That Christ suffered in some sorte the death of the Soule . First if wee should speake strictly after the maner of Death in the Body , then no man is so mad or foolish as to say that any mans Soul can dye at all : that is , want life and sense , as a dead body doth . Thus the very damned soules in Hell suffer not death . But such a death as immortall soules are subiect subiect vnto , is Gods separation from them . And this is 2. folde . The 1. death and the 2. death , as the Scripture speaketh . The 1. is the separation of them from Gods grace , which is in this life by sinne raigning in them . The 2. death is Gods leaving them in the feeling of the most sharpe and most vehement paines inflicted by Gods iustice for sinne . This last kind of death is so called and named in many places of b b Ezek. Gen. 2● Rom. 6● 2. Cor. & 3.7.5.20 . a● 1. Ioh. 17. Scripture . It hath also a double consideration . First , ordinarily and commonly it belongeth only to the Damned for their owne inherent sinne , where withall are the ordinary Accidents and concomitants togeather , Desperation , induration , blaspheming , vtter darkenes , &c. with Perpetuitie of punishment , and that locally in Hell . In this sense the Fathers generally do take it , where they deny that Christ suffered the death of the Soule : and so likewise do we . Secondly , The death of the soule , or the 2. death may be extraordinarily and singularly considered , namely to imply no more but simply the very nature and essense of it . 〈◊〉 Death the Soule ●●rist tasted That is , the feeling of most deadly infinit paines inflicted by God himselfe in his proper iustice for sinne , all sense also of his comfortable presense being taken away . This is a Death to the Soul , ●●g. 113. ●ag. 135. 6. ●ag. 112. 3. as * before we have shewed : according to this sense the " Scriptures & † Fathers before noted may rightly be vnderstood not to deny it in Christ : so that this kind of Death in the soule ( but none other ) we may safely say , Christ did suffer for our sinne imputed to him . Moreover , let it be observed : that if wee had no proofes at all in Scripture for this point , yet our Question is fully proved & confirmed notwithstanding by those other sufficient & pregnant proofes alleaged & iustified before . For it is be to noted , that no man setteth the question in these termes , That Christ dyed in his soule , neither doe we at all vse them very much in speaking of this matter . We do , only when some speciall occasion draweth it from vs : neither then do we vtter it in those termes but with vsing some further declaration of our minde . The reason of this warynes is , because we are not ignorant how ambiguous the phrase is , and how apt to be mistaken , specially where men list to cavill . Also people vntaught and vnsetled in construing the scriptures sense do quickly take offense at thinges , which they ought better to digest . So that you doe very iniuriously to grate still one this phrase of speach and to straine it to the worst , as you do : as if by no meanes it could beare any good sense , and as if we built our maine Assertion onely heerevpon . Which in truth is nothing so . The same also doe we affirme touching our vsing ( in this matter ) the phrase of Christs suffering Hell paines . Both these phrases are but seldome and respectively vsed by vs . Howbeit we deny not , but that both these phrases may be well and rightly applyed vnto Christ on occasion , ●●g 16. 52. ●● . & 113. as * before is observed : & may both serve truly and most emphatically to expresse the infinitnes of the paines and sorrowes of his suffering for vs . Yea this very phrase of death extended in Christ further then to his meere bodily dying , hath ( I doubt not ) expresse ground in the Scripture : and therefore may the better be vsed soberly , & admitted charitably . You will aske where is there any scripture , Proofes . that Christe suffered any other death then that meerely of his body ? I answer , First , consider well that to the c Hebr. ●ebr. 5.7 . Hee offered vp prayers and supplications with strong crying & teares to him that was able to save him from death . It is not possible that this Death heere should be his meere bodily Death , which he so wofully and impotently feared : as I haue before sufficiently confirmed . Therefore it was the death of the soule , the 2. Death which heere is vnderstood to have thus mightily afflicted Christ . Which also your own selfe do d d Pag. ●● fully grant and affirme with me . Yea you affirme further then we doe , or then the truth is , or possibly can be . You say Christ heere thus feared Eternall death and Everlasting damnation . What a speach is this ? Christ could not possibly feare in such wofull maner that , which he perfitly knew should never come neere him . But he perfitly knew that eternall Death , and the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction should never touch him . He knew and saw that this by Gods almighty and vnchangeable Decree was set further from him then the East is from the West , yea then Hell is from Heaven . Therefore he could not by any meanes possibly feare eternall death , nor pray in such sort against it . Againe , that which he feared , and so pitifully prayed against was that , which he knew was by God e e Iohn 12 ordayned for him . Yea Feare alwayes is of that which is to come . But Eternall death was not by God ordayned for him : that was “ “ Which Christ 〈◊〉 right w● not to come vnto him . Therfore it was not Eternall death which he so feared . Finally when in the Garden he prayed against that Cup which he feared , that it might passe from him , there he yeeldeth and submitteth himselfe presently to the vndergoing of it . But it were , I know not what , to say , that Christ did ever yeeld and submit himselfe to vndergo Eternall death , or to tast the Cup of Gods everlasting malediction . Therefore it was not this , that he feared & heere prayed against . And yet it was I grant the Death of the Soule , or the 2. Death : that is simply the essense thereof , Gods withdrawing himselfe from him in the Paines and torments thereof . This onely it was , He suffer that deat● which he feared . not the eternity thereof nor sinfull concomitants , which he thus feared . And this ( for the infinitnes of it ) naturally he could not but feare , yea and that so extreamely : also he feared f f ●ôzein for him selfe , as knowing it to be ordayned for him . So that hence it followeth invincibly , that Christ in deed suffered ( sith he thus feared ) more then the meere bodily Death , even the Death of the soule . For he could not ( I say ) thus * * Much yeeld to i● he did : s●●ing , Thy ●●●don . feare , but he must needs know that it was to come or might com vnto him : ●wed fur●● before 131.132 if he but knew that it might come , then it * certainly did come vnto him , at one time or other in his Passion before he● left the world . See : to the Hebr. g Christ abolished through death him that had the power of death that is the Divell , and so delivered all them which for feare of death were all their life time subiect to bondage . ●●b . 2.14 . Heere I see no reason in the world but that the Apostle by ●his often repeating of death , and by mutuall referring of it in one place ( as it were ) to the other , doth vnderstand & signifie one and the same death altogeather . But it is the death of the Soule which the Divell hath the power and execution of , also the death of the soule chiefly sinful men were held in feare of all their life long . It followeth then ( I suppose ) that even through this death of the Soule Christ abolished the Divell , and deliveted his children . Specially seeing there is no enormity nor impossibilitie heerein . Against this you haue no reason at all but wordes and wrestings , and vaine ostentation of Fathers ; none of them all denying our sense . Third : it seemeth also , that Peter teacheth this same , Pet. 3.18 . saying , k Christ in his suffering was don to death in the Flesh , but made alive by the Spirit . Where Death may be very well referred both to the Soule and Body of Christ . Because the text heere speaketh ( as I iudge ) of the whole and entire sufferings of Christ . And it is manifest by that before , that Christ did suffer not in his body only but properly and immediatly also in his Soule : we haue seene also that the * phrase of Death , 〈◊〉 135.136 or Dying , may in a good sense be applyed even to Christes Soule . Againe , this word Flesh ( it seemeth ) can not heere in this place be vnderstood to signifie onely the Body of Christ , but even both partes of his Humane nature , that is the reasonable Soule and the body . My reason is , because wheresoever in scripture the Flesh and the Spirit are noted oppositly togeather in Christ , ●●m. 1.3 , 4. ●im. 3.16 ●oh 4.2 . 〈◊〉 1.14 . ●or. 5.7 . & ●4 & 1.4.1 . ●●g . 320. there the i Flesh signifieth alwayes his whole Humanity , even both partes thereof , the Soule also & not the Body only : the Spirit signifieth his Deity , or Divine power . Now what have you against this ? Nothing of waight but floutes and mockes , that k this observation is made out of the hinder part● of my head , &c. But what pretend you against it ? Some Scripture palpably abused . First " Mathew , where Christ speaketh of his Disciples that their Spirit ( their inward regenerat man ) was ready to watch , ●ath . 26. but their Flesh ( their corrupt nature ) was weak & sluggish . What is this to Christes Flesh and Spirit . Thinke you that Christs Soule was willing to suffer as God had appointed , but that his Flesh resisted ? Verily so you seeme heere to vnderstand : An vntr●● conceit and it is as likely , as your applying of Flesh and Spirit to Christ in your pag. 104. Then a a Luk. 2. Luke ; where both Spirit and Flesh are not intended of Christ ( as our observation before requireth ) but only the Flesh . Then the Romanes : where I affirme that b b Rom. Flesh signifieth the whole Manhood of Christ according to the which he came from David even as well as Salomon or Nathan did , who were Davids sonnes in their entire and perfit nature . So likewise Christe was kinne to the Iewes according to his c c Rom. 9 whole Humanitie , aswel as d d ver. 3. Paul was . And heere Paul meaneth him selfe to be kinne to them according to Nature wholly , & that only by Regeneration in the Gospell he was differing from them . Now Nature opposed to Grace and regeneration , hath reference both to Soule and Body in a man . Howsoever the Soule cometh in Generation , that is not heere considered ; neither is it necessarily to the purpose . Which difficulty also your selfe haue vtterly * * Pag. 2● renounced before , to make it any argument for you in this matter . Thus yet the Flesh and the Spirit thus opposed heere in Christ , shall signifie the whole Manhood and Godhead in him . Further , that which e e Pa. 32 you bring out of the f f 2. Cor● Corinthians compared with this in Peter , doeth most fitlie and clearely open and confirme the same : Hee was crucified touching his infirmitie , but liveth by the power of God . His infirmitie the text heere nameth Metonimically vnderstanding in Christ that , in which his infirmities were . Now his Soule had infirmities of suffering in it , as well as his body . Therefore his Soule also is vnderstood heere that it was Crucifyed and dyed , that is according to the condicion thereof , as likewise his body according to the condicion thereof . And thus that which Paul calleth infirmitie , Peter calleth Flesh ; and that which Paul calleth the power of God , Peter calleth the Spirit . That is , his Deitie is set oppositly in both these places to his whole Humanitie , even to body and soule . Aug. de 4.13 . To which purpose that place also to the “ “ Rom. Romanes doth serve , where the like opposition is found ( as I have shewed ) betwene the Flesh and the Spirit in Christ , that is his Manhood and Godhead . Other reasons also * * Treat 137 . 1● I haue noted serving well heerevnto ( as the 4 , 5 , and 6. ) but I omit to rehearse them againe . For it seemeth your selfe agreeth with vs in them : ●●g. 324. holding a expresly that the Spirit heere in Peter is the Deitie of Christ according to Austins iudgement . Now this being granted and acknowledged , that the Spirit heere signifieth Christes Godhead , how can it be likely but that the other opposit part the Flesh , must needes import his whole and intire Manhood . Verily thus it seemeth most plaine that Peter heere distributeth the whole and absolute person ( both God and Man ) into these Natures , the Flesh and the Spirit . Wherfore I can not thinke , but that the Apostle heere vnderstandeth by Flesh the whole and intire Manhood of Christ , even his Soule and his body . Now this being so , then it followeth by the text that Christ in his Passion was don to death both in Soule , Pag. 320. & body . Heere " you obiect , that thus I make all the attributes of the body common to the Soule . Nay forsooth , that I doe not . Nor yet this attribute of Dying vnderstood in such sort and maner , as the Body properly dyeth : that is to become without life and sense . I ascribe Death to both , but yet according to the divers condicion and state of both . ●reat . 1. P●g . 78. And thus you might vnderstand my b meaning to be , where I say it is absurd & false that Christ was made aliue in his Humane Soule : that is , it neither lost nor recovered life and sense , so as his body did . ●●●e before 〈◊〉 135 , 136 Howbeit as Death is oftentymes attributed to mens soules in the c Scripture , that is the feeling of the extreame wrath of God and the punishment for sinne , so d I make Death common both to Christes Soule and body , ●●eat . 1. ●●g . 79. even to his whole and intire humane Nature . Which if you do not acknowledge , the shame of ab surditirie and contrarietie which in your fancy e you accuse me of , that Christes Soule dyed and dyed not , ●●g. 322. ●●3 . will sit neerer to you than to me . Also in such a sense I deny not but Christ may be said , that he was quickened in the Spirit , that is refreshed and comforted againe in his Soule , and restored from that bottomles gulfe of sorrowes to the lively feeling of heavenly ioyes and glory , which for a season he had no sense of at all . Howbeit though this sense bee a true quickening in his Soule , yet I deny that heere in this place of Peter it can be translated quickened in the Spirit meaning the Soule , because Spirit heere in this opposition is set indeed for the Deitie of Christ , ●●●d you with ●●●stin doe ●●sent . * as before I have shewed . Thus the matter I hope is cleere to reasonable men , that Christes Soule even according to the Scripture phrase may be said in some sorte to have tasted and suffered Death , that is the extreamest feelings of Gods wrath for sinne , and the most vehement paines of the damned , though not as the damned doe in respect of the Accidents and concomitants of their ordinary damnation , but in a singular maner and extraordinarie way as became the sonne of God and a sinles man ( yet a very man being our Redeemer . Now besides the matter you “ “ Pag. 3 gird at me in divers places : as where I say , The Death of the Soule is such Paines and sufferings of Gods wrath , as allwayes accompanie them that are separated from the grace and love of God . Forfooth it is true , they are alwayes wicked whom these Paines doe accompanie ordinarily . They came vpon Christ extraordinarilie : as in a a Treat . ● pag. 77. this place I expresly noted . That was therfore my meaning here , if you would haue seene it . In another place also b b Pag. 33. you know that I say , Hell as I take it ( that is such paines of Gods wrath ) is * * Treat. 1 pag. 80. sometime found in this life . Thus then you might haue vnderstood my former wordes : and not that the tormentes of Hell doe alwayes accompanie the wicked in this life . I pray conceave not my meaning , against my expresse wordes . Againe c c Pag 31● you pretende to haue much against me where I say , The feeling of the sorrowes of Gods wrath due to sinne in a broken and contrite heart , is indeed the only true and perfitly accepted sacrifice to God . True , so I said , and againe I say it . What see you amisse in it ? Then vnhappy men are the godly which are at any time free from the paines of the damned . To what purpose is this ? I speake of Christs Sacrifice . I pray , is any other Sacrifice perfitly accepted ? or a Sacrifice at all , but Secondarily , that is in and by Christes Sacrifice ? They are not . His Sacrifice then is the onely true Sacrifice , and perfitly accepted to God . All others are imperfit , and accepted not in them selues but only in and by Christ . Thus your triumphes before the victorie , come to nothing but blastes of vanitie . But Augustin † † Pag. 32 doth flatly deny that this text can be thus vnderstood , or that Christes Soule might dy . Austin d d Epist. 9● denyeth that Christ suffied any paines of damnation locally in Hell after his death , as it seemeth some helde about his time whom here he laboureth to confute . So that he meaneth to reprove onely the e e See bes●●● pag 139 1st sense of the Death of the Soule in him , viz. that he suffred it not Ordinarily after the maner of other men , nor any way locally . H● hath no n●cessarie cause to speak of the 2. sense thereof how the Soule may be said to suffer death Extraordinarily for sinne imputed only , neither doeth he speake against that in Christ . Nay according to Austins owne Definition of the Soules Dying it will easily appeare that Christes Soule may be said to have suffered some kinde of Death . de verh 〈◊〉 . Ser ●0 . 〈◊〉 Trin. 4. Saith he a Moritur anima si recedit Deus : and b Mors est spiritûs deseri à Deo . The Death of the Soule is Gods Forsaking of it . ●●fore pag. ● . 113. ● . 108. 113 ● . 134. But the Scripture saith God did leave him , or forsake him for a season : yea the Fathers also c agree fully therevnto : the maner how d I have shewed before . Therefore by Austins definition largly and rightly taken , Christ may be said in some sense to haue dyed in Soule . Howbeit though the Fathers doe graunt the thing in effect ( as I have shewed ) yet I acknowledge they doe deny this phrase generally , and so doeth Austin in this place . But thereabout we never made question : this is no parte of our matter . It may bee even for the same cause they shunned it , for which we also doe vse it very rarely and warily , as " before I observed . Pag 136. And let this be the Answere touching all your Fathers and Councells , which you bring aboundantlie ( heere and there ) about this point of the Soules death . Though peradventure some of them may seeme to insinuat even this very phrase touching Christ sometyme , as in some I touched before .

Where you say , ●●g . 317. † Aske the simplest child that is Catechized in my charge if I have any , what death Christ dyed for vs , and hee will answer me out of his Creed , Christ was Crucified , Dead , & Buried . It is true : But our authorized Catechisme published by M. Nowel , and the Homily i sheweth the meaning heereof to be , 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 . 67 . 117.● that Christ suffered far more sharply than meere bodily Death , even the infinit paines of Gods wrath in his soul . which I pointed you vnto k before , but you fairly leape it over , ●●eat . 1. pa. ● . as also the Archb. speciall allowance ( with others ) of M. Now. Catechisme as being fully grounded on the word of God & contayning the very doctrine of the Church of England . Now to this effect the youths in my charge being asked would have answered surely . For indeed such a charge in London I had I thank God , wherin I hope I was faithfull according to my power , & might have continued , had not your il seasoned teaching so contrary to the established doctrine in Englande burst foorth .

a You say , ●ag. 325. ●●a . 53.12 . ●r hee pow●●● 〈◊〉 . I should have don well to have laid that downe for a shew , which is written in Esay , b He c laid downe his Soule vnto death ; verily if I had , it would have made som shew . Considering that d d Pa. ●6 you earnestly affirme that this word signifieth Soule ( or Spirit ) in a proper sense . Also how resolute you are forbidding to e e Pag. 1● divert from the native & proper significations of words , but when the letter impugneth the groundes of Christian faith and charity . This considered , surely that in Esay maketh some shew indeede , that Christ submitted , and humbled , and afflicted , even his Soule to Death . The rather if we note that which followeth : He was counted with the sinners , and bare the sinne of many . That is , he was punished by God as the sinners are f f See bes●● pag. 76. punished , and was not by the Iewes onely counted among Theeves . But chiefly considering withall that also before , g g Isa. 53. ● He made his soule a sinne offering . Heere you must remember , † † Your pa. ● we shall leave nothing sound & sure in Gods word , if we may avoid all thinges by figures , that please not our humours . Therefore you must needes grant that Gods worde heere maketh Christs Soule to be † sacrificed for our sinne . And we desire no other death of the Soule . We deny not but this phrase Animam p●nere is to lay downe the life , and in divers places signifieth no more then simply to Dy , both concerning Christ and other men : as you observe pag. 70. Yet this is no necessary reason , that heere in J say the Soule should be taken figuratively , for the Life onely : the rather seeing heere the text precisely setteth down the great & perfit worke of our Redemption . And to take it as we do literally , impugneth no ground at all of faith or Charity . The like peradventure may bee affirmed also of that in Mathew , h h Mar 2●● The sonne of man came not to be served but to serve , and to give his soule a ransom for many : although the translatours commonly turne it , his life . But I wil not strive about these phrases . Aust. hath not a word against vs in that great place which i i Pag. 32● you cite : his whole argument there being to another purpose . The Iewes slew only the flesh of Christ : and yet it is true that they slew Christ . Who doubteth this ? Also , where you thinke those words to be so k k Pag. 327● plaine and expresse as may be spoken , so effectuall as Pauls heart could invent or his toung vtter , that Christ reconciled vs to God in the body of his flesh through death , we have answered you † † Pag. 45. ● before . As for al your other discourse heere against me , it is as every where almost nothing but revilings , and reproches , and bitter skoffes . Yet you say , l l Pag 108. ● you have not learned , nor vsed to give reviling speaches . Have you not learned it ? Is it then naturall vnto you ? Nay you meane m m Pag. 264● these are Fatherly Warnings and admonitions . If your Fatherly admonitions are such , what are your Lordly rebukes ? If these bee your Bishoply blessinges , what are your Cursings ? But I am to blame , heerein standeth not the tryall of our quaestion . As for all th●se hogepots ( as n 〈◊〉 3●8 . you call them ) which you make of my wordes , they are nothing but your owne either wilfull writhings , or vncharitable surmises : as by every particular in then places may be seene . Finally that is not true where you say , o o 〈◊〉 . 330. Flesh doth often signifie the soule in vs . It signifieth often the whole Manhood togither in vs , and so it may and doth in Christ aswell . Also it signifieth in vs many times our whole and intire corrupt nature both in body and soule : so it never signifieth in Christ . And heere I desire the reader to change a word or two in my former Treatise : Note . ●reat . 1. pa. ●6 lin. 2. ●●d . lin 7. ● Cor. 7.1 . for p allwayes to set vsually , and for q a man to set Christ . Because since I find that Flesh and Spirit togeather applyed vnto men doe r once signifie meerely the Body and Soule : which then I thought every where did signifie in vs our corrupt and regenerat man . Which oversight the Bishop spyeth not , but in this place confirmeth indeed .

Finally to make an ende with your Fathers and Councels : it is strang that you thus vainly boast of them , 〈◊〉 . 135.327 saying they are a all wholy for you for this 1400. yeares space . I have shewed before that your large claime proveth a very short gaine . For in substance and full effect they are evidently and generally against you , and for vs . As for their denying that Christ Dyed in his Soule , I b have answered to that before . ●ag. 135. ●6 . 142. Further where you bring them in many places saying , by his bloud only he redeemed vs , and he suffered only in his Body : Fathers 〈◊〉 handled . they are abused by you wonderfully . Not in their words , but in their meaning . For they striving against Arians and such other Haeretikes who would have Christs Deity to take part in his sufferings for our redemption , ●ee before 〈◊〉 . 111.113 ●4 &c. & so consequently would prove it inferior to the Father , " the godly Ancient Writers do heerevpon say , he suffered & satisfyed for vs only in his body , in his flesh , &c: not excluding the proper & immediat sufferinges of his Spirit , nor any passible part of his Manhood , but onely his Godhead against those Haeretikes : shewing thus also , that no other Creatu●e besides him or with him satisfyed any way for vs : altogeather after the Apostles like phrase in many places . Let the Authors themselves be viewed , if you thinke I affirme of them falsly . Tertullian and Cyrill will give a tast heereof for all the rest . Tertullians c c Pag. 3 ● wordes d d Contr. ● id est carnem , that is to say Christs flesh , are expresly opposed to his Deity , not to his Soul : so that evidently he meaneth thereby his whole and intire passible Manhood . If hee had meant to exclude any parte or faculty of his Soule from suffering , as he doth his Godhead , he had confirmed that Haeresy against which he striveth , as f before I noted . e e Pag. 1● Also it seemes he yeeldeth the name of Death to this suffering of Christes whole Manhood , in saying Quod vnctum est mortuum ostendit : that Dyed which receaved the Annoynting . For I hope his spirit was Annointed with the Holy Ghost , aswell as his Flesh . And he saith thus , as indefinitly , so also by way of opposition to his Deity , as I said : therefore he meaneth the whole Manhood dyed . Howbeit in what sort this might be , I shewed * * pag. 113● 135. 136● before . My false translating of him which you note , is not worth the noting . But you doe worse in false placing those his last rehearsed words for advantage : in Tertull. they are vsed more generally in their owne place coming long before those words , after which you set them . As for that Denique posuit spiritum , &c. it sheweth that Christs bodily death also ( but not only ) came by reason of Gods forsaking and separating from him . For before we saw how Tertull. expresly attributeth Gods Derelection both to his * * Haec v●●● animae & poris . soule & body on the Crosse : though you grudg thereat . Thus ( I say ) he excepteth only his Godhead from Dereliction and Suffering &c. Cyrill also even in that book which you cite for you , sheweth that he excludeth but Christs Deity , though he mention only his suffering in Flesh : † † Ad Reg lib. 1. Carne passum dicit , docens patiendi ineffabilem naturam a passionibus alienam . Deus igitur Christus Divinè quidem impassibilis , passibilis secundum carnem . He excludeth only the Deity from suffering , when he saith , hee suffered in his Flesh . In a word , so do all the rest , as h h Pag. 1● before is partly noted . Against Nestorius i i Pag. 33● they affirme the vnion of Christes Natures , with preserving the properties of each . They therefore hold not his only bodily sufferings . Is this then your great boast of all the Fathers and Councells ? Nay , are they well vsed at your hands , to be thus drawn cleane from their purpose to an opinion which they never thought of ? Is this good dealing towards Gods people , to tell them that the Fathers generally teach the only bodily sufferings of Christ , and deny our Assertion of his Soules peculiar suffering , ●●efore 47.48.66.71.88.112 . which * they iustifie & confirme indeed ? Yea , this 〈◊〉 the profit that comes by ordinary slanting with Fathers , which vse many do frequent in these dayes . Think they , if the scriptures alone suffice not for all thinges in Religion , that the Fathers will suffice ? Or if the Fathers make a sense vpon some text , that therefore this must be the right meaning alwayes ? Or if the Scriptures may be wrested by subtile heades , that yet the Fathers cannot ? Or that Gods people may sooner see and finde when the Fathers are abused , then when the Scriptures are ? It is great pity that men are , yea wil be so deceaved with vaine shews . Let vs in Gods name content our selves ( in handling matters of Religion ) onely with Gods al sufficient worde : vnles where the importunity of an Adversary forceth vs . Otherwise let vs spare the Authority of men in Gods matters , to them that make an Idoll of it . Finally if in this case we were to looke after any man , surely we have more cause to regard our later faithfull Teachers , rather then those of old . Who being equall with the best of them in any of the excellent graces of Gods spirit which hee vseth to bestow on his servants for the edifying of the Church , yet heerein these have advantage of the former , that they were directly provoked & occasioned to study and sift out this question against the Papists , which the Ancients were not occasioned to do .

After , ●ag 341. a you set your self to prove that in Hell there is materiall fire . But it seemeth you are now almost afraid so to call it : yet b you call it true fire . ●ag. 343. Which also we vtterly deny . All your proofes ( such as they are ) runne to prove corporall and materiall fire : yet eternall . Except your Scriptures , which vtterly prove nothing at all : for they shew no more any corporall , or materiall , or true fire to be now in Hell , then a corporall worme , materiall brimston , and much wood , & true chaines . Which you say is a sleeveles obiection , but neither your selfe , nor Austin whom you cite against it , doth any where answer it . Yea Austin thinketh that incorporall spirits shal be fastened to corporall fire . But he saith not that now they are : which only is our question or , els nothing . For my parte I see no reason to believe that now there is corporall fire in Hell , whatsoever there shal be heereafter when Bodies also shal be there vnited and tormented with the Soules . Againe Austin heere doth not prove that there shal be such fire : hee only sheweth the maner how it may be so heereafter , if God will . Now if all your reason be the power of God only , then aswel you may prove that the sky is fallen . For as touching Gods will heerein , you name it indeed , but you shew it no where , nor seeme to shew it . All the rest say nothing further , nor indeed so far as Austin . Yet you thinke it may be called a a Pag. ●● a true created fire . That no Christian ever doubted of , if you meane that it is a true creature . If you meane simply , that it is true fire , that still we deny . And me thinks you should not care for corporall fire now in Hell , seeing you seeme to belieue no torments for Damned soules save only at the Resurrection . For thus you reason , b b Pag. 25 As the Body hath ben the instrument of the Soules pleasure ( in sinne ) so it shal be of hir paine . c c Pag. 20● But all provocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from her body , all acts of sinne she committeth by her body . Therefore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the Soule ( only ) by the Body . Or Therefore all the Soules paine for sinne both temporally & eternally is by the Body . This is your owne reason : which being true , why should you care for corporall fire in Hell , before the last iudgment ?

Your striving to a a Pag. 34● confute my allegations of Fathers , I hope I have refuted sufficiently before . And then b b Pag. 35 Sir Refuter endeth as be began with egregious lyes . What lyes began he with , and with what doth he end ? In the begining our lyes have proved tales of truth , and in the end your wordes will prove iniurious at least . I said , that not som , or the most , or best , but even all & every one both Churches & Writers in the world who are Protestants , teach as we do : except only your selfe , or happily som after you , since the year 1597. What ly is there in al this ? Why name you not in al the world one man ( of those whom we call Protestants ) of your minde ? that it may appeare who deserveth such rebukes . Nay in this , being the very point of the matter you are silent : in revilings , outcryes , and accusations you exceed .

Where I avouch that c c Treat . ● . pag 8● . only the hoatest and cunningest Papists , Iesuits , Priests , & Fryars have alwayes vntill this day had this controversie with all Protestants , and all Protestants against them : & namely Bellarmin , Campian , English Rhemists , &c. To al this scanalous & suspicious argument you reply not a syllable . What shall we thinke of such doctrine , which in this learned age hath none but such defenders . And yet among the Papists I noted 2 , Cusanus and Ferus as liking of the Protestants doctrine heerein , which also they do in some other matters . Now these 2. and only these ( though more there are ) c you cite at large : 〈◊〉 . 140.141 whose wordes indeede ( especially the Fryars ) seeme excessive . But our owne most worthy and learned Teachers d M. Fulke , ●rea . 1. p. 88 M. Deering , M. Whitakers which against you I alleaged , you vouchsafe not a looke towards them . Nor to M. Nowels Catechisme , nor to the Synod authorising it , ●efore pag. 42. nor to the Archb: great * approbation thereof : Not to our Common Bibles note authorised publikly to be read thorough out England . Only against my alleaging of our Homilyes e you take exception : Pag 355. but I trust I have before fully and cleerely defended them to bee for vs , and against you . Neither doeth any such matter appeare in them as f you avouch . Pag. 136. Thus then I end our 1. Question : being sorry that I have ben so long . But I trust the friendly Reader will pardon me , considering how I have ben occasioned therevnto .

A brief Collection containing the whole effect of our Doctrine before delivered : brought into 4. Assertions .

God himselfe in his Iustice properly punished Christ for our sinnes . See pag. 8. 9. 75. 82.

Christ ( even as other men ) consisted of a perfit Humane immortall Spirit , and a mortall living Body : and so was by nature capable of suffering sorrows for sinne from Gods hand aswell in his Spirit peculiarly and properly , as also in his Soule and Body togeather : sith other men do thus suffer for sinne . pag. 8. 48 52. 61. 74.

Gods exact and immutable Iustice spared his Sonne in nothing : but did punish him in all severity as he punisheth sinners . I meane , Hee punished him in All his partes of nature apt to suffer : that is , in his Spirit peculiarly and properly , and in his Soule and Body togeather also . Againe God punished him with all the Whole Generall Curse not with all the particular Curses and punishments : with the Generall Curse in all the whole Nature and substance of it , not with all the Circumstances : with all the meere Paine and Sorrow thereof , not with the sinfull Adherents and concomitants in it . pag. 8 13 74 86.

Gods exact & immutable Iustice spared not Christe in these Circumstances of Punishment with he suffered not . For either in exact Iustice he could not , or necessarily hee needed not to punish him so . In exact Iustice he could not punish Christ in such respects as were simply and absolutly impossible . It was simply impossible that any touch of Sinne should once come neere his person , or Eternall suffering , or all the Particular punishments in the world : All which come not to any one man ( though Damned , ) neither can come . Finally that Christ should necessarily have suffered after this life , or locally in Hell , there was no cause : seeing these are but meer● Circumstances of Gods Iust Punishment of sinne , whether now , or then , whether heere or there . These alter not the nature of Gods wrath , which is the strength of Hell . The whole substance & nature of that Punishment he might feele in this life aswell as any parte : God is able to inflict it aswel heere , as heereafter . The rather seeing Christ came and was sent of God Extraordinarily of purpose to suffer for sin all that he might suffer . Thus then only in this life Christ might , and did suffer all . For so was Gods ordinance and will , as it is plainly expressed vnto vs in his word . Therefore so we professe , and so we believe by the certaine rule of Gods word and the proportion of faith : Christ shunned for our sake nothing ( which the Damned suffer ) except only Circumstances and Accidents , impossible or vnnecessary , not any Substantiall point of Gods Punishment decreed against sinue . pag 13. 14. 16. 43. 66. 75. 87. 134. 135.