thing else but water, but that they had faced down the king, that they were serpents that looked like rods, and that it was blood that seemed water? That had been both enchantment, and lying. And yet in this daily act of the priest, they do the very same, by turning the holy words into the manner of a charm, which produceth nothing new to the sense; but they face us down, that it hath turned the bread into a man; nay more, into a God; and require men to worship it, as if it were our Saviour himself present God and man, and thereby to commit most gross idolatry.
For if it be enough to excuse it of idolatry, to say it is no more bread, but God; why should not the same excuse serve the Egyptians, in case they had the faces to say, the leeks and onions they worshipped, were not very leeks and onions, but a divinity under their _species_, or likeness. The words, _This is my body_, are equivalent to these, _this signifies_, or _represents my body_; and it is an ordinary figure of speech: but to take it literally, is an abuse; nor though so taken, can it extend any further, than to the bread which Christ himself with his own hands consecrated. For he never said, that of what bread soever, any priest whatsoever, should say, _This is my body_, or, _this is Christ’s body_, the same should presently be transubstantiated. Nor did the Church of Rome ever establish this transubstantiation, till the time of Innocent the Third; which was not above 500 years ago, when the power of popes was at the highest, and the darkness of the time grown so great, as men discerned not the bread that was given them to eat, especially when it was stamped with the figure of Christ upon the cross, as if they would have men believe it were transubstantiated, not only into the body of Christ, but also into the wood of his cross, and that they did eat both together in the sacrament.
[Sidenote: Incantation in the ceremonies of baptism:] The like incantation, instead of consecration, is used also in the sacrament of baptism: where the abuse of God’s name in each several person, and in the whole Trinity, with the sign of the cross at each name, maketh up the charm. As first, when they make the holy water, the priest saith, _I conjure thee, thou creature of water, in the name of God the Father Almighty, and in the name of Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, and in virtue of the Holy Ghost, that thou become conjured water, to drive away all the powers of the enemy, and to eradicate, and supplant the enemy, &c._ And the same in the benediction of the salt to be mingled with it: _That thou become conjured salt, that all phantasms, and knavery of the devil’s fraud may fly and depart from the place wherein thou art sprinkled; and every unclean spirit be conjured by Him that shall come to judge the quick and the dead_. The same in the benediction of the oil; _That all the power of the enemy, all the host of the devil, all assaults and phantasms of Satan, may be driven away by this creature of oil_. And for the infant that is to be baptized, he is subject to many charms: first, at the church door the priest blows thrice in the child’s face, and says: _Go out of him unclean spirit, and give place to the Holy Ghost the comforter_. As if all children, till blown on by the priest, were demoniacs. Again, before his entrance into the church, he saith as before, _I conjure thee, &c. to go out, and depart from this servant of God_. And again the same exorcism is repeated once more before he be baptized. These, and some other incantations, are those that are used instead of benedictions, and consecrations, in administration of the sacraments of baptism, and the Lord’s supper; wherein every thing that serveth to those holy uses, except the unhallowed spittle of the priest, hath some set form of exorcism.
[Sidenote: And in marriage, in visitation of the sick, and in consecration of places.]
Nor are the other rites, as of marriage, of extreme unction, of visitation of the sick, of consecrating churches and churchyards, and the like, exempt from charms; inasmuch as there is in them the use of enchanted oil and water, with the abuse of the cross, and of the holy word of David, _asperges me Domine hyssopo_, as things of efficacy to drive away phantasms, and imaginary spirits.
[Sidenote: Errors from mistaking eternal life, and everlasting death:] Another general error, is from the misinterpretation of the words we read plainly in Holy Scripture, that God created Adam in an estate of living for ever, which was conditional, that is to say, if he disobeyed not his commandment; which was not essential to human nature, but consequent to the virtue of the tree of life; whereof he had liberty to eat, as long as he had not sinned; and that he was thrust out of Paradise after he had sinned, lest he should eat thereof, and live for ever; and that Christ’s Passion is a discharge of sin to all that believe on him; and by consequence, a restitution of eternal life to all the faithful, and to them only: yet the doctrine is now, and hath been a long time far otherwise; namely, that every man hath eternity of life by nature, inasmuch as his soul is immortal. So that the flaming sword at the entrance of Paradise, though it hinder a man from coming to the tree of life, hinders him not from the immortality which God took from him for his sin; nor makes him to need the sacrificing of Christ, for the recovering of the same; and consequently, not only the faithful and righteous, but also the wicked and the heathen, shall enjoy eternal life, without any death at all; much less a second, and everlasting death. To salve this, it is said, that by second, and everlasting death, is meant a second, and everlasting life, but in torments; a figure never used but in this very case.
All which doctrine is founded only on some of the obscurer places of the New Testament; which nevertheless, the whole scope of the Scripture considered, are clear enough in a different sense, and unnecessary to the Christian faith. For supposing that when a man dies, there remaineth nothing of him but his carcass; cannot God, that raised inanimated dust and clay into a living creature by his word, as easily raise a dead carcass to life again, and continue him alive for ever, or make him die again, by another word? The _soul_ in Scripture, signifieth always, either the life, or the living creature; and the body and soul jointly, the _body alive_. In the fifth day of the creation, God said: Let the waters produce _reptile animæ viventis_, the creeping thing that hath in it a living soul; the English translate it, _that hath life_. And again, God created whales, _et omnem animam viventem_; which in the English is, _every living creature_. And likewise of man, God made him of the dust of the earth, and breathed in his face the breath of life, _et factus est homo in animam viventem_, that is, _and man was made a living creature_. And after Noah came out of the ark, God saith, he will no more smite _omnem animam viventem_, that is, _every living creature_.
And (_Deut._ xii. 23), _Eat not the blood, for the blood is the soul_; that is, _the life_. From which places, if by _soul_ were meant a _substance incorporeal_, with an existence separated from the body, it might as well be inferred of any other living creature as of man. But that the souls of the faithful, are not of their own nature, but by God’s special grace, to remain in their bodies, from the resurrection to all eternity, I have already, I think, sufficiently proved out of the Scriptures, in chapter XXXVIII. And for the places of the New Testament, where it is said that any man shall be cast body and soul into hell fire, it is no more than body and life; that is to say, they shall be cast alive into the perpetual fire of Gehenna.
[Sidenote: As the doctrine of purgatory, and exorcisms, and invocation of saints.]
This window it is, that gives entrance to the dark doctrine, first, of eternal torments; and afterwards of purgatory, and consequently of the walking abroad, especially in places consecrated, solitary, or dark, of the ghosts of men deceased; and thereby to the pretences of exorcism and conjuration of phantasms; as also of invocation of men dead; and to the doctrine of indulgences, that is to say, of exemption for a time, or for ever, from the fire of purgatory, wherein these incorporeal substances are pretended by burning to be cleansed, and made fit for heaven. For men being generally possessed before the time of our Saviour, by contagion of the demonology of the Greeks, of an opinion, that the souls of men were substances distinct from their bodies, and therefore that when the body was dead, the soul of every man, whether godly or wicked, must subsist somewhere by virtue of its own nature, without acknowledging therein any supernatural gift of God; the doctors of the Church doubted a long time, what was the place, which they were to abide in, till they should be reunited to their bodies in the resurrection; supposing for a while, they lay under the altars; but afterward the Church of Rome found it more profitable to build for them this place of purgatory; which by some other Churches in this latter age has been demolished.
[Sidenote: The texts alleged for the doctrines aforementioned have been answered before.]
Let us now consider what texts of Scripture seem most to confirm these three general errors, I have here touched. As for those which Cardinal Bellarmine hath alleged, for the present kingdom of God administered by the Pope, than which there are none that make a better show of proof; I have already answered them; and made it evident, that the kingdom of God, instituted by Moses, ended in the election of Saul; after which time the priest of his own authority never deposed any king. That which the high-priest did to Athaliah, was not done in his own right, but in the right of the young king Joash her son: but Solomon in his own right deposed the high-priest Abiathar, and set up another in his place. The most difficult place to answer, of all those that can be brought to prove the kingdom of God by Christ is already in this world, is alleged, not by Bellarmine, nor any other of the Church of Rome; but by Beza, that will have it to begin from the resurrection of Christ. But whether he intend thereby, to entitle the Presbytery to the supreme power ecclesiastical in the commonwealth of Geneva, and consequently to every presbytery in every other commonwealth, or to princes, and other civil sovereigns, I do not know. For the presbytery hath challenged the power to excommunicate their own kings, and to be the supreme moderators in religion, in the places where they have that form of Church-government, no less than the Pope challengeth it universally.
[Sidenote: Answer to the text on which Beza inferreth that the kingdom of Christ began at the resurrection.]
The words are (_Mark_ ix. 1), _Verily I say unto you, that there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power_. Which words if taken grammatically, make it certain, that either some of those men that stood by Christ at that time, are yet alive; or else, that the kingdom of God must be now in this present world. And then there is another place more difficult. For when the apostles, after our Saviour’s resurrection, and immediately before his ascension, asked our Saviour, saying, (_Acts_ i.
6), _Wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?_ he answered them, _It is not for you to know the times and the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power; but ye shall receive power by the coming of the Holy Ghost upon you, and ye shall be my (martyrs) witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth_. Which is as much as to say, My kingdom is not yet come, nor shall you foreknow when it shall come; for it shall come as a thief in the night; but I will send you the Holy Ghost, and by him you shall have power to bear witness to all the world, by your preaching, of my resurrection, and the works I have done, and the doctrine I have taught, that they may believe in me, and expect eternal life, at my coming again. How does this agree with the coming of Christ’s kingdom at the resurrection? And that which St. Paul says (_1 Thess._ i. 9, 10), _That they turned from idols, to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven_; where to wait for his Son from heaven, is to wait for his coming to be king in power; which were not necessary, if his kingdom had been then present. Again, if the kingdom of God began, as Beza on that place (_Mark_ ix. 1) would have it, at the resurrection; what reason is there for Christians ever since the resurrection to say in their prayers, _Let thy kingdom come_? It is therefore manifest, that the words of St. Mark are not so to be interpreted. There be some of them that stand here, saith our Saviour, that shall not taste of death till they have seen the kingdom of God come in power. If then this kingdom were to come at the resurrection of Christ, why is it said, _some of them_, rather than _all_? For they all lived till after Christ was risen.
[Sidenote: Explication of the place in Mark ix. 1.]
But they that require an exact interpretation of this text, let them interpret first the like words of our Saviour to St. Peter, concerning St. John, (chap. xxi. 22), _If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?_ upon which was grounded a report that he should not die.
Nevertheless the truth of that report was neither confirmed, as well grounded; nor refuted, as ill grounded on those words; but left as a saying not understood. The same difficulty is also in the place of _St.
Mark_. And if it be lawful to conjecture at their meaning, by that which immediately follows, both here, and in _St. Luke_, where the same is again repeated, it is not improbable, to say they have relation to the Transfiguration, which is described in the verses immediately following: where it is said, that _after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John_ (not all, but some of his disciples), _and leadeth them up into a high mountain apart by themselves, and was transfigured before them: and his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them: and there appeared unto them, Elias with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus, &c._ So that they saw Christ in glory and majesty, as he is to come; insomuch as _they were sore afraid_. And thus the promise of our Saviour was accomplished by way of _vision_. For it was a vision, as may probably be inferred out of _St.
Luke_, that reciteth the same story (chap. ix. 28, &c.), and saith, that Peter and they that were with him, were heavy with sleep: but most certainly out of _Matth._ xvii. 9, where the same is again related; for our Saviour charged them, saying, _Tell no man the vision until the Son of Man be risen from the dead_. Howsoever it be, yet there can from thence be taken no argument, to prove that the kingdom of God taketh beginning till the day of judgment.
[Sidenote: Abuse of some other texts in defence of the power of the Pope.]
As for some other texts, to prove the Pope’s power over civil sovereigns, (besides those of Bellarmine,) as that the two swords that Christ and his apostles had amongst them, were the spiritual and the temporal sword, which they say St. Peter had given him by Christ: and, that of the two luminaries, the greater signifies the Pope, and the lesser the King; one might as well infer out of the first verse of the Bible, that by heaven is meant the Pope, and by earth the King. Which is not arguing from Scripture, but a wanton insulting over princes, that came in fashion after the time the Popes were grown so secure of their greatness, as to contemn all Christian kings; and treading on the necks of emperors, to mock both them and the Scripture, in the words of Psalm XCI. 13, _Thou shalt tread upon the lion and the adder; the young lion and the dragon thou shalt trample under thy feet_.
[Sidenote: The manner of consecrations in the Scripture, was without exorcisms.]
As for the rights of consecration, though they depend for the most part upon the discretion and judgment of the governors of the Church, and not upon the Scriptures; yet those governors are obliged to such direction, as the nature of the action itself requireth; as that the ceremonies, words, and gestures, be both decent and significant, or at least conformable to the action. When Moses consecrated the tabernacle, the altar, and the vessels belonging to them, (_Exod._ xl. 9), he anointed them with the oil which God had commanded to be made for that purpose: and they were holy: there was nothing exorcised, to drive away phantasms. The same Moses, the civil sovereign of Israel, when he consecrated Aaron, the high-priest, and his sons, did wash them with water, not exorcised water, put their garments upon them, and anointed them with oil; and they were sanctified, to minister unto the Lord in the priest’s office; which was a simple and decent cleansing, and adorning them, before he presented them to God, to be his servants. When king Solomon, the civil sovereign of Israel, consecrated the temple he had built, (_1 Kings_ viii.), he stood before all the congregation of Israel; and having blessed them, he gave thanks to God, for putting into the heart of his father to build it; and for giving to himself the grace to accomplish the same; and then prayed unto him, first, to accept that house, though it were not suitable to his infinite greatness; and to hear the prayers of his servants that should pray therein, or, if they were absent, towards it; and lastly, he offered a sacrifice of peace-offering, and the house was dedicated. Here was no procession; the king stood still in his first place; no exorcised water; no _Asperges me_, nor other impertinent application of words spoken upon another occasion; but a decent and rational speech, and such as in making to God a present of his new-built house, was most conformable to the occasion.
We read not that St. John did exorcise the water of Jordan; nor Philip the water of the river wherein he baptized the Eunuch; nor that any pastor in the time of the apostles, did take his spittle, and put it to the nose of the person to be baptized, and say, _in odorem suavitatis_, that is, _for a sweet savour unto the Lord_; wherein neither the ceremony of spittle, for the uncleanness; nor the application of that Scripture for the levity, can by any authority of man be justified.
[Sidenote: The immortality of man’s soul, not proved by Scripture to be of nature, but of grace.]
To prove that the soul separated from the body, liveth eternally, not only the souls of the elect, by especial grace, and restoration of the eternal life which Adam lost by sin, and our Saviour restored by the sacrifice of himself, to the faithful; but also the souls of reprobates, as a property naturally consequent to the essence of mankind, without other grace of God, but that which is universally given to all mankind; there are divers places, which at the first sight seem sufficiently to serve the turn: but such, as when I compare them with that which I have before (chapter XXXVIII.) alleged out of the 14th of _Job_, seem to me much more subject to a diverse interpretation, than the words of Job.
And first there are the words of Solomon (_Eccles._ xii. 7), _Then shall the dust return to dust, as it was, and the spirit shall return to God that gave it_. Which may bear well enough, if there be no other text directly against it, this interpretation, that God only knows, but man not, what becomes of a man’s spirit, when he expireth; and the same Solomon, in the same book, (chapter iii. 20, 21) delivereth the same sentence in the same sense I have given it. His words are: _All go_, (man and beast), _to the same place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again; who knoweth that the spirit of man goeth upward, and that the spirit of the beast goeth downward to the earth?_ That is, none knows but God; nor is it an unusual phrase to say of things we understand not, _God knows what_, and, _God knows where_. That of (_Gen._ v. 24) _Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God took him_; which is expounded, (_Heb._ xi. 5), _He was translated, that he should not die; and was not found, because God had translated him. For before his translation, he had this testimony, that he pleased God_; making as much for the immortality of the body, as of the soul, proveth, that this his translation was peculiar to them that please God; not common to them with the wicked, and depending on grace, not on nature.
But on the contrary, what interpretation shall we give besides the literal sense, of the words of Solomon (_Eccles._ iii. 19), _That which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so doth the other; yea, they have all one breath_, (one spirit); _so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast, for all is vanity_. By the literal sense, here is no natural immortality of the soul; nor yet any repugnancy with the life eternal, which the elect shall enjoy by grace. And (_Eccles._ chap. iv. 3) _Better is he that hath not yet been, than both they_; that is, than they that live, or have lived; which, if the soul of all them that have lived, were immortal, were a hard saying; for then to have an immortal soul, were worse than to have no soul at all. And again, (chapter ix.
5), _The living know they shall die, but the dead know not any thing_; that is, naturally, and before the resurrection of the body.
Another place which seems to make for a natural immortality of the soul, is that, where our Saviour saith, that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are living: but this is spoken of the promise of God, and of their certitude to rise again, not of a life then actual; and in the same sense that God said to Adam, that on the day he should eat of the forbidden fruit, he should certainly die; from that time forward he was a dead man by sentence; but not by execution, till almost a thousand years after. So Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were alive by promise, then, when Christ spake; but are not actually till the resurrection. And the history of Dives and Lazarus, makes nothing against this, if we take it, as it is, for a parable.
But there be other places of the New Testament, where an immortality seemeth to be directly attributed to the wicked. For it is evident that they shall all rise to judgment. And it is said besides in many places, that they shall go into _everlasting fire, everlasting torments, everlasting punishments; and that the worm of conscience never dieth_; and all this is comprehended in the word _everlasting death_, which is ordinarily interpreted _everlasting life in torments_. And yet I can find no where that any man shall live in torments everlastingly. Also, it seemeth hard, to say, that God who is the father of mercies; that doth in heaven and earth all that he will; that hath the hearts of all men in his disposing; that worketh in men both to do, and to will; and without whose free gift a man hath neither inclination to good, nor repentance of evil, should punish men’s transgressions without any end of time, and with all the extremity of torture, that men can imagine, and more. We are therefore to consider, what the meaning is, of _everlasting fire_, and other the like phrases of Scripture.
I have showed already, that the kingdom of God by Christ beginneth at the day of judgment: that in that day the faithful shall rise again, with glorious and spiritual bodies, and be his subjects in that his kingdom, which shall be eternal: that they shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, nor eat and drink, as they did in their natural bodies; but live for ever in their individual persons, without the specifical eternity of generation: and that the reprobates also shall rise again, to receive punishments for their sins: as also, that those of the elect, which shall be alive in their earthly bodies at that day, shall have their bodies suddenly changed, and made spiritual and immortal. But that the bodies of the reprobate, who make the kingdom of Satan, shall also be glorious, or spiritual bodies, or that they shall be as the angels of God, neither eating, nor drinking, nor engendering; or that their life shall be eternal in their individual persons, as the life of every faithful man is, or as the life of Adam had been if he had not sinned, there is no place of Scripture to prove it; save only these places concerning eternal torments; which may otherwise be interpreted.
From whence may be inferred, that as the elect after the resurrection shall be restored to the estate, wherein Adam was before he had sinned; so the reprobate shall be in the estate, that Adam and his posterity were in after the sin committed; saving that God promised a Redeemer to Adam, and such of his seed as should trust in him, and repent; but not to them that should die in their sins, as do the reprobate.
[Sidenote: Eternal torments, what.]
These things considered, the texts that mention _eternal fire, eternal torments, or the worm that never dieth_, contradict not the doctrine of a second, and everlasting death, in the proper and natural sense of the word _death_. The fire, or torments prepared for the wicked in Gehenna, Tophet, or in what place soever, may continue for ever; and there may never want wicked men to be tormented in them; though not every, nor any one eternally. For the wicked being left in the estate they were in after Adam’s sin, may at the resurrection live as they did, marry, and give in marriage, and have gross and corruptible bodies, as all mankind now have; and consequently may engender perpetually, after the resurrection, as they did before: for there is no place in Scripture to the contrary. For St. Paul, speaking of the resurrection (_1 Cor._ xv.)
understandeth it only of the resurrection to life eternal; and not the resurrection to punishment. And of the first, he saith, that the body is _sown in corruption, raised in incorruption; sown in dishonour, raised in honour; sown in weakness, raised in power; sown a natural body, raised a spiritual body_. There is no such thing can be said of the bodies of them that rise to punishment. So also our Saviour, when he speaketh of the nature of man after the resurrection, meaneth the resurrection to life eternal, not to punishment. The text is, _Luke_ xx.
verses 34, 35, 36, a fertile text: _The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage; but they that shall be counted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more; for they are equal to the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection_. The children of this world, that are in the estate which Adam left them in, shall marry, and be given in marriage; that is, corrupt, and generate successively; which is an immortality of the kind, but not of the persons of men: they are not worthy to be counted amongst them that shall obtain the next world, and an absolute resurrection from the dead; but only a short time, as inmates of that world; and to the end only to receive condign punishment for their contumacy. The elect are the only children of the resurrection; that is to say, the sole heirs of eternal life: they only can die no more, it is they that are equal to the angels, and that are the children of God; and not the reprobate. To the reprobate there remaineth after the resurrection, a _second_ and _eternal_ death: between which resurrection, and their second and eternal death, is but a time of punishment and torment; and to last by succession of sinners thereunto, as long as the kind of man by propagation shall endure; which is eternally.
[Sidenote: Answer of the texts alleged for purgatory.]
Upon this doctrine of the natural eternity of separated souls, is founded, as I said, the doctrine of purgatory. For supposing eternal life by grace only, there is no life but the life of the body; and no immortality till the resurrection. The texts for purgatory alleged by Bellarmine out of the canonical Scripture of the Old Testament, are, first, the fasting of David for Saul and Jonathan, mentioned _2 Sam._ i.
12, and again, _2 Sam._ iii. 35, for the death of Abner. This fasting of David, he saith, was for the obtaining of something for them at God’s hands, after their death: because after he had fasted to procure the recovery of his own child, as soon as he knew it was dead, he called for meat. Seeing then the soul hath an existence separate from the body, and nothing can be obtained by men’s fasting for the souls that are already either in heaven, or hell, it followeth that there be some souls of dead men, that are neither in heaven, nor in hell; and therefore they must be in some third place, which must be purgatory. And thus with hard straining, he has wrested those places to the proof of a purgatory: whereas it is manifest, that the ceremonies of mourning, and fasting, when they are used for the death of men, whose life was not profitable to the mourners, they are used for honour’s sake to their persons; and when it is done for the death of them by whose life the mourners had benefit, it proceeds from their particular damage. And so David honoured Saul and Abner, with his fasting; and in the death of his own child, recomforted himself, by receiving his ordinary food.
In the other places, which he allegeth out of the Old Testament, there is not so much as any show, or colour of proof. He brings in every text wherein there is the word _anger_, or _fire_, or _burning_, or _purging_, or _cleansing_, in case any of the fathers have but in a sermon rhetorically applied it to the doctrine of purgatory, already believed. The first verse of _Psalm_ xxxvii; _O Lord, rebuke me not in thy wrath, nor chasten me in thy hot displeasure_: what were this to purgatory, if Augustine had not applied the _wrath_ to the fire of hell, and the _displeasure_ to that of purgatory? And what is it to purgatory, that of _Psalm_ lxvi. 12, _We went through fire and water, and thou broughtest us to a moist place_; and other the like texts, with which the doctors of those times intended to adorn, or extend their sermons, or commentaries, haled to their purposes by force of wit?
[Sidenote: Places of the New Testament for purgatory answered.]
But he allegeth other places of the New Testament, that are not so easy to be answered. And first that of _Matth._ xii. 32: _Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come_: where he will have purgatory to be the world to come, wherein some sins may be forgiven, which in this world were not forgiven: notwithstanding that it is manifest, there are but three worlds; one from the creation to the flood, which was destroyed by water, and is called in Scripture _the old world_; another from the flood, to the day of judgment, which is _the present world_, and shall be destroyed by fire; and the third, which shall be from the day of judgment forward, everlasting, which is called _the world to come_; and in which it is agreed by all, there shall be no purgatory: and therefore the world to come, and purgatory, are inconsistent. But what then can be the meaning of those our Saviour’s words? I confess they are very hardly to be reconciled with all the doctrines now unanimously received: nor is it any shame, to confess the profoundness of the Scripture to be too great to be sounded by the shortness of human understanding. Nevertheless, I may propound such things to the consideration of more learned divines, as the text itself suggesteth.
And first, seeing to speak against the Holy Ghost, as being the third person of the Trinity, is to speak against the Church, in which the Holy Ghost resideth; it seemeth the comparison is made, between the easiness of our Saviour, in bearing with offences done to him while he himself taught the world, that is, when he was on earth, and the severity of the pastors after him, against those which should deny their authority, which was from the Holy Ghost. As if he should say, you that deny my power; nay you that shall crucify me, shall be pardoned by me, as often as you turn unto me by repentance: but if you deny the power of them that teach you hereafter, by virtue of the Holy Ghost, they shall be inexorable, and shall not forgive you, but persecute you in this world, and leave you without absolution, (though you turn to me, unless you turn also to them), to the punishments, as much as lies in them, of the world to come. And so the words may be taken as a prophecy, or prediction concerning the times, as they have along been in the Christian Church. Or if this be not the meaning, (for I am not peremptory in such difficult places), perhaps there may be places left after the resurrection, for the repentance of some sinners. And there is also another place, that seemeth to agree therewith. For considering the words of St. Paul (_1 Cor._ xv. 29), _What shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?_ why also are they baptized for the dead? a man may probably infer, as some have done, that in St. Paul’s time, there was a custom, by receiving baptism for the dead, (as men that now believe, are sureties and undertakers for the faith of infants, that are not capable of believing), to undertake for the persons of their deceased friends, that they should be ready to obey, and receive our Saviour for their king, at his coming again; and then the forgiveness of sins in the world to come, has no need of a purgatory. But in both these interpretations, there is so much of paradox, that I trust not to them; but propound them to those that are thoroughly versed in the Scripture, to inquire if there be no clearer place that contradicts them. Only of thus much, I see evident Scripture, to persuade me, that there is neither the word, nor the thing of purgatory, neither in this, nor any other text; nor any thing that can prove a necessity of a place for the soul without the body; neither for the soul of Lazarus during the four days he was dead; nor for the souls of them which the Roman Church pretend to be tormented now in purgatory.
For God, that could give a life to a piece of clay, hath the same power to give life again to a dead man, and renew his inanimate, and rotten carcase, into a glorious, spiritual, and immortal body.
Another place is that of _1 Cor._ iii., where it is said, that they which build stubble, hay, &c. on the true foundation, their work shall perish; but _they themselves shall be saved, but as through fire_: this