IN your Notes on my tenth Chapter you take a civil con­fidence to tell me, that I know St. Austin testifies in his time, as yet the question (of the souls deli­very before the last day) was not agwated, and that each part may [...]ove either true, or false. I pas­ [...]ed this over as a simple assertion, [Page 2]not strengthned with any proofs, either from my writings (whence should be grounded, your assu­rance of my knowledge) or from any Text in St. Austin, which should force me to such an ac­knowledgment: yet finding these words redoubled in your Religi­on, and Reason, p. 105. where you say that St. Austin professes ex­presly (ad Dulcitium Q. 1.) the question had not yet been handled before this time, but might here­after, but that he knew not whe­ther side would prove true. Hence I gave you as to that place a short Declaration of his sense, and of your mistake, in my Answer to your notes. But by reason you tell the world, that I know this to be St. Augustines mind, some perswade me, that for truth, St. Austins, and my own sake, I am obliged to examine my manu­scripts [Page 3](for my present condition give me not opportunity to look into his Works) since my memo­ry may fail in laying up every passage of his numerous Volums touching this matter. Hence I of­fer to you the Texts, which after long persistance in him my for­mer diligence placed in my pe­nuary with my faithful observa­tions upon them, that you, & I, may be secure of I is mind. He hath this happy priviledge, that all sides of Christians pretend a non plus ultra to his definitive sen­tence in matter of controversies of Religion, and surely you, and I, may well be excused to referre our selves to him, since even Cal­vin himself desires all to make him the Generall Umpire in all such occurrences. To the better teaching his mind in his African stile, I presume to give these pre­monitories.

First in writing so many Vo­lums, wherein various occurren­ces have occasioned sometimes only an enquiring (as he notes upon his seaven books upon que­stions on the seaven first books of Holy Scripture, and upon Geue­sis ad literam he acknowledges, that there he sought more then he found, and found more then he confirmed;) sometimes only a touching as it were incidently, of a question, which is frequent, we cannot in justice say any such passage to speak his deliberate sense, as he himself asserts in his 111 Epistle, but we must referre our selves to those places where he concluds upon a full Examina­tion, or Immoration, as he calls it De Praed. Sanctor. C. 14. if we will faithfully know his mind.

Secondly even among those places, where he treats, and con­cludes [Page 5]examinately, there is res­pect to be had to the times of his treating: for as he justly de­mands in his retractations, of his reader, they must give him leave to advance in Learning, and ther­fore we shall best know his mind in his later writings, when as he asserts L. 2. de bapt. C. 3. even of Councels, experience hath con­firmed former results.

Thirdly, This (as I conceive) will hold universally, except where he himself interposeth a restriction: as when in later Writings he referres the reader, and himself to his former deci­sions: as in the question we now determine to treat of; in his se­cond question to Dulcitius he re­mits us to himself, treating the same subject to Paulinus in his Care of the dead, as also to Lau­rentius, in his Enchyridion, there­fore [Page 6]assuredly we shall find there his full Iudgement, as he calls it, in the Epistle cited, especially since in his retractations he par­ticularly owneth these three books, as his own without any correction.

Lastly, It is very observable for the clearer and surer under­standing of his sence in some points, collateral to our present question that he much served himself of platoes principles; es­pecially touching abstracted sub­stances, as Angels and separate souls, in consequence whereof he formeth many resolutions, which may sometimes refer to our pre­sent purpose. I give impregna­ble instances in my Systeme, C. 45. I could profusely prosecute it, if it were necessary. But as to Pla­toes doctrine touching only tem­poral punishments after this life, [Page 7]he excellently refutes de Civit, L. 21. and else where.

As to the first question of Dul­citius, whereon you ground your certainty, he referres him to two former books, the one of Faith, and VVorks; the other of Faith, Hope and Charity, which he o­therwise calls his Euchyridion to Laurentius. His question was whe­ther such who committed any sins after Baptisme, should ever come out of Hell: that is whether dy­ing in sin they shall be saved; which doth not touch our present difficulty: yet so for as it doth relate to us I gave you St. Austins answer, which was out of a pro­bable interpretation of the Apo­stlr, 1 Cor. 13. Namely, that such who committed levicra peccata, smaller sins which he interprets by wood, hay, and stubble, should suffer punishments eitheir in this [Page 8]world, or in the next; and so be saved, but not those greater trans­gressions without repentance: where you see all that he says, re­lates to St. pauls text, and not at all to a delivery out of Purgatory before the last day, or an easing them by help of the Church, &c. which is one question he treats the same matter de civ. l. 21. c. 16 & elswhere, & expounds the Apostle, as here that it may import tempo­rary punishment, sive ibi tantum, sive hic & ibi, sive ideo hic, ut non ibi. Where you see he asserts a punishment but he conceives St. Pauls words my a signifie each sort of temporary purgation.

I see you lookd on this place with o [...]her e [...]es, or else [...]ou read them not in irely, otherwise you would not urge Dulcitius his first que­stion, which either not at all, or else very remotely toucheth your design.

The second question indeed which you touch not, hath more apparence, for there he asketh down right, Ʋtrum oblatio quae fit pro quiescentibus, &c. Whether oblations for the dead, avail any thing for their soul [...]. Whereunto he first brings the opinion of o­thers who hold that if any help could be procured for the dead, they thought it might be more effectual for themselves; but as for his own judgement he referres him to his two books which I named before, where he is very positive, and clear for the souls relief by prayers, Almes-deeds, Divine Sacrifices, &c. In case they died with true repentance, which upon all occasions he in­culcates constantly by reason of some, who would have faith in Christ to suffice alone.

Its true that in his Enchyridion [Page 10]c. 69. he useth these words: Tale etiam aliquid post hanc vitam fieri inrcedibile non est: & utrum ita sit, quaeri potest: & aut inveniri, aut latere, non nullos fideles per ignem quendam purgatorium, quan­to magis minusve bona pereuntia dilexerunt, tanto tardius, citiusve salvari, &c. Here he speaks the Churches doctrine, and our an­swer accurately to each particu­lar, and surely tells us what was the sense of Christians of his time in our controversie; but seems not so certain, as to the manner of punishment, whether by fire, &c.

It is evident indeed, that first he relates to the Apostles obscure words, as he calls them, out of which he conceives it may not incredibly be inferred, that after this life there are such fiery Pur­gations, out of which some soon­er, others later, arrive to salva­tion. [Page 11]He puts his assertion in that weak modality of not being incre­dible, not upon the sooner, and later being saved, which is our question, but upon their passage by fire, which to this day hath not the same certainty with the former. This is plain, for that, Tale aliquid immediately applies to those words of the Apostle.

Again he speaks not at all of the Tenet, as it is a parterei, but as it is deducible out of St. Paul by reason of the obscurity of the context. He saith further, that there may be excusable ignorance in respect of this, or any other determinate manner of punish­ment in Purgatory, for as much as can be evidently gathered from that Text, which is a great Truth.

But as to the thing it self, that he did not call in question at all [Page 12]the certainty of present relief by prayers, and almes, in case they merited in their life time to be so helped, is most evident by what he solemnly and finally teacheth in his Ch. 110. which is perfectly contrary to what you would have him teach here, neither could he so grosly forget, what so soon be­fore he had taught his words are: Neque negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viventiam relevari; cum pro illis sacrificium mediatoris effertur, vel eleemosynae in Ecclesia fiunt, seu eis haec pro­sunt, qui cum viverent, ut haee sibi po tea prodesse possent meruerunt, &c.

Its not lawful to deny, that the souls of the dead are cased by the piety of the living, when the sa­crifice of our Mediator is offer'd or Almes in the Church are done but these things profit such, who [Page 13]they lived, merited to have them afterward to profit them.

This is his resolution of our question: to which he refer'd Dulcitius, and this clearly ex­pounds the former words, where you must observe (to prevent your cavit) that he sayd, they receive their helps cum pro illis, &c. even then when the Holy sacrifice is offer'd for them, it is not there­fore at Dooms-day, nor at the first separation of their souls, &c. Both which, and only which you assert, contrary to him.

As to that other excellent work of the care of the dead, which is to be prefer'd before all his o­ther works, as to this matter, by reason it is designed for it, and ex professo there handled; I gave you the marrow of it in my re­sult, and nothing can be more home, for clean thorough the [Page 14]book he teaches that actual benefit profit, help, advantage, availement, and rest, is procured for the souls, and he speakes condistin­ctively of the soul, as separated from the body, as when the body is dead, and he saies, that then it receives succour which is the full resolution of our controversie; and he refer'd Dulcitius to these two places for it.

Against this some peradventure would bring him in his twentith book of the City of God, where Ch. 15. comparing the saints of the old Law, with those of the New, he says non absurde credi videtur, hos in locis quidem a tor­mentis impiorum remotissimis, sed tamen apud inferos fuisse, donec eos inde sanguis Christi, & ad ea loca descensus erueret: profecto de­inceps boni fideles effuso illo pretio jam redempti, prorsus inferos ne­sciunt, [Page 15]&c. This would seem to deny all stay in Purgatory since Christs passion for good Christi­ans, who he says know not Hell, under which Notion he explaines himself to comprehend any such place of detention.

But it is evident, that he speaks only of Saints under the Gospell, who are not detained in any In­fernall place, as the Saints in the time of the Law, but go presently to Heaven, which is consequent to all other places, where he puts only a middle sort of Christians, not the Saints in Purgatory.

Others may bring him L. 20. De Civit. c. 25. where speaking of certain Purgatory punishments, and the Day of Judgement out of the Prophets, Malachy and Isaiah, he concludes; Verum ista Quaestio de paenis Purgateriis, ut diligen­tius pertractetur, in aliud tempus [Page 16]differend a est; where he seems not to assert with confidence: but it is evident he speaks in relation to a harder Question, of the manner of purgation at the last Day, be­fore the eternal separation of the Just from the Wicked in the day of Judgement. For those Chapters wholy treat of that, where every where he asserts temporary puni­shments after this life to Some, and to Others eternal, against the Platonists, who will have none e­ternall, but all emendatory, as they, and he speaks; sometimes indeed he inclines to their Tenet of the manner of punishment, and out of that ground he speaks du­biously, which others not well ac­quainted with him, have misinter­preted, as if he had doubted of the punishment itself which he, & they assert, as an undoubted Principle.

Neither doth he assert, as you [Page 17]would have him, only temporary punishments in ipso judicio; for if yougo to the next book, which is 21. cap, 13. when he gives you his answer to that difficulty, which he propounded here, and differ'd his answer to that place, he sayes, that Temporarias poenas alii in hac vita tantum, alii post mortem, alii & nunc, & tunc, verum tamen ante Judicium illud severissimum, novis­simumque, patiuntur; so that the main suffering of purgatory is be­fore the day of Judgement, which wholy destroys you, though he denies not, that some suffer in ipso Judicio.

In further process of this matter c. 14. he gives his full Solution of the Churches prayers for them and of their release upon their prayers in these words: Pro de­functis quibusdam, vel ipsius Eccle­siae, vel quorundam piorum exaudi­tur [Page 18]oratio, &c. he treats largely of the effects of Church prayers and (as you see) he evidently asserts, that upon the Churches, & good peoples prayers, such Dead per­sons are released; for he saies, that their prayers are granted, exau­ditur Oratio. Now all know, that the prayers are tendred to relese them presently: in conformity to this, he teaches c. 16. Purgatorias autem paenas nullas futuras opine­tur, nisi aute ultimum Judicium. Here can be no reply, as to his judgement. And indeed this book De Civitatc added to the former book, we mentioned before, speak clearly, and of set purpose, of our matter, and therefore give us his full judgement.

Some may object, l. 22. c. 25. de Civitate: Si in regni dei possessione nunquam erunt, aeterno supplicio tenebuntur, quia non est locus me­dius, [Page 19]&c. As if he did not admit any middle place of Purgatory: but it is evident, that he will not have any eternal middle place, as you know the Pelagians would have for some; to the same tenor he speaks in other places. For a further assurance of his mind, I must needs adde the ninth book of his confessions, which he never retracted, but alwaies confirmed: in this place, he tells the practise of the whole Church in his Mo­ther. Tantum illud vos rogo, ut ad domini altare memineritis mei, vbi fueritis, &c. Where she beggs assistance at our Lords Altar. Where after he hath told the manner of her Christian burial, answerable to the present pra­ctice of Holy Church, he falls a praying for his Mother. Nunc pro peccatis matris meae deprecor te, exaudi me per Christum, &c. [Page 20] Credo quod jam feceris, quod te rogo: sed voluntaria oris mei pro­ba Domine, &c.

Here we see, what St. Augustine prayed for, and in this what St. Monica begd of him, that her sins might presently be forgiven her, and consequently her soul receiv­ed to Heaven. Inspira domine servis tuis fratribus meis, quibus & voluntate, & corde, & literis, ser­vie, ut quotquot haec legerint, me­minerint ad altare tuum Monicae famulae tuae, cum Patricio quondam ejus conjuge, &c.

He hoped, that what he begged was already graunted, yet he prayed on and beg'd others to do the same for her, and all was to bring her to Heaven: and he beggs, that it may be granted him for Christs sake; that is a present forgiveness of her sins, therefore he says, his Mother knew upon the Alter, dispensarii victimam sanctam, qua deletum est Chyrographum, quod erat contra nos. This was there­fore her, and his prayer, that by applica­tion [Page 21]of Christs Holy Sacrifice, her sins night be blotted out upon their prayers. Doth not this evidently witnesse their hopes of a present release? for he belie­red, that God had already granted what he prayed for, that is, he believed that she was already in Heaven, and yet he prayed for it. His prayers were then to get her to heaven presently, which he believed was all ready graunted. He did not then pray for her going to Heaven, at Dooms-day. This admits no reply as to his mind, and truely of the whole Church: for he speaks no singularity; & hence desires all men to joyn with him: Here we also see that they all believed [...]th the present Church, Christ himself to be offer'd upon the altar for our sins.

Read him upon the 48 Psalme, where he shews the sense and practise of those [...]mes, read him also upon the 80 Psal. to the same purpose, only & alwaies re­quiring, that the faithful dye in true Re­pentance.

In his 64 Epistle he tels, and examines [...] custome of the faithful, to make offe­ [...]ings up at the graves of the dead, where he speaks thus: Oblationes pro spiritibus [Page 22]dormientium, quas vere aliquid adjuvare credendum est, super ipsas memorias non sint sumptuosa, &c. He would have them to savour of Charity, not Vanity, and the Money which was offered there, was presently to be given to the poor. Cer­tainly he never dreamed of your specu­lation of the preventiall helps at their deaths, by those future Almes, much less of an expectation till the last day, when he simply speaks, that the souls have some help by them, surely not before the Almes were distributed.

In fine, that no rationall person may hereafter doubt of St. Austins mind as to plesent release upon prayers, &c. Let him read him L. 1. De anima & ejus o [...]i­gine, c. 10. Which he acknowledgeth in his Retractione. De fratre autem S. Perpetuae Dinocrate, pro quo illa immi­nente Martyrio creditur exaudita. ut à poenis transferretur ad requiem: quis scit utrum puer ille post Baptismum, persecu­tionis tempore, à patre impio per idolatri­am fuerit alienatus à Christo, propter quod in damnationem mortis ierit, nec inde nisi pro Christo moriturae sororis pre­cibus donatus exierit, &c.

Here is first evident, that it was belie­ved, that upon St. Perpetua the Martys, prayers, just before her death, offer'd for her brother, he was transferr'd from his pains to rest. Here is the full Solution of our whole Controversie, conformable to his own and the Churches Doctrine, for the Souls delivery before the last day.

Secondly, here is another passage which in my Answer to your Notes I said he would not deny, evidently op­gosite to your undervaluing St. Grego­ries, St. Bedes and St. Damascens Relati­ons of some souls relieved out of Hell by Saints prayers; which (as you see) he holds it possible to be obtained, though he teaches every where, that according to Gods ordinary Laws, there is no hope of any sort of Heaven without Baptism, against the Pelagians; and particularly against Vincentius, who would, jugiter offerri Sacrificia: that continually Sa­crifices should be offered for Children dead without Baptisme, that is, for Souls in Hell.

I purposely omit other passages in many places, as being not so full, as I have omitted other Objections lesse urgent.

[...]the degrees of acceptance of future prayers, for the soul is purely ground­less. Lastly whatsoever this relief is in reality (though in apprehension you put it sooner) it is not to be had till Dooms day. I propound it to your fur­ther reflection, whether the whole machine be not insignificative as to the real sense of the Church & of all Christians in their prayers.