A53665:322
Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…
Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion, between papist and Protestant, Presbyterian and independent by a Protestant.Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion, between papist and Protestant, Presbyterian and independent by a Protestant.
London: printed by E. Cotes for Henry Cripps, 1662
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Purgatory, it seems, is the doctrine of the Soul's Immortality, and detention in some place citra coelum: Who would ever have once dreamed of this, had not our Author informed him? This it is to be learned in the Roman Mystery; the doctrine of Purgatory, is the doctrine of the Soul's Immortality; never was doctrine so foully mistaken as that hath been; but if it be not, yet it is of the detention of the souls in some place citra coelum: It is indeed; but yet our Author knows, that in these words, as bad, if not a worse fraud than under the other is couched. It was the opinion of many of the Ancients, that the souls of the ⟨p. 408⟩Saints that departed under the old Testament, enjoyed not the blessed presence of God, but were kept in a place of rest until the Ascension of Christ. And this our Author would have us to think, is the doctrine of Purgatory; he himself, I hope, enjoys the contentment of believing the contrary. But he tells us, that our blessed Saviour and his Apostles were not the first that taught this Doctrine, that is, of Purgatory. As though they had taught it at all, or had not taught that which is inconsistent with it, and destructive of it, which is notorious that they have! And for the Traditions of the Hebrew Church; as that was none of them, so I believe, our Author knows but little what were. But he takes a great deal of pains to prove, though very unsuccessfully, that the Jews did believe, that the souls of those that departed before the resurrection of the Messiah, did not enter heaven; as though that was any thing to his purpose in hand; but he is, as I said, marvellous unsuccessful in that attempt also. The Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, prove only that Lazarus's soul was in Abraham's bosom; that Abraham's bosom ⟨p. 409⟩was not in Heaven, it doth not prove. Peter, in the second of the Acts, proves no more, than that the whole person of David, body and soul, was not ascended into Heaven; the not ascending of his soul alone, being nothing to his purpose. But what he cannot evince by Testimonies, we will win by dint of Arguments. The Jews, saith he, could not believe what God had never promised; but heavenly bliss was none of the promises of Moses's Law nor were they ever put in hope of it, for any good work that they should do.
Purgatory, it seems, is the doctrine of the Soul's Immortality, and detention in some place citra coelum: Who would ever have once dreamed of this, had not our Author informed him? This it is to be learned in the Roman Mysterie; the doctrine of Purgatory, is the doctrine of the Soul's Immortality; never was doctrine so foully mistaken as that hath been; but if it be not, yet it is of the detention of the souls in some place citra coelum: It is indeed; but yet our Author knows, that in these words, as bad, if not a worse fraud than under the other is couched. It was the opinion of many of the Antients, that the souls of the