A FURTHER REFLECTION touching St. Austin's Mind for the releasement of Souls in Purgatory.  
SIR,  
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, not strengthened 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 acknowledgement: yet finding these words redoubled in your Religion, and Reason, p. 105. where you say that St. Austin professes expressly (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. Augustine's mind, some persuade me, that for truth, St. Augustine's, and my own sake, I am obliged to examine my manuscripts (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 Volumes 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 privilege, 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 refer ourselves to him, since even Calvin himself desires all to make him the General 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 Volumes, wherein various occurrences have occasioned sometimes only an enquiring (as he notes upon his seven books upon questions on the seven first books of Holy Scripture, and upon Gevesis ad literam he acknowledges, that there he sought more than he found, and found more than 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 refer ourselves to those places where he concludes 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 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 therefore we shall best know his mind in his later writings, when as he asserts L. 2. the bapt. C. 3. even of Counsels, 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 refers 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 assuredly we shall find there his full judgement, 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 sense 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 Plato's doctrine touching only temporal punishments after this life, he excellently refutes the Civit, L. 21. and else where.  
As to the first question of Dulcitius, whereon you ground your certainty, he refers him to two former books, the one of Faith, and Works; 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 Baptism, 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. Augustine's 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 either in this 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. paul text, and not at all to a delivery out of Purgatory before the last day, or an easing them by help of the Church, etc. which is one question he treats the same matter de civ. l. 21. c. 16 & elsewhere, & 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. Paul's words my a signify each sort of temporary purgation.  
I see you looked 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 appearance, for there he asketh down right, Vtrum oblatio quae fit pro quiescentibus, etc. 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 refers him to his two books which I named before, where he is very positive, and clear for the souls relief by prayers, Almsdeeds, Divine Sacrifices, etc. 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.  
It's true that in his Enchyridion 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, etc. Here he speaks the Church's doctrine, and our answer accurately to each particular, and surely tells us what was the sense of Christians of his time in our controversy; but seems not so certain, as to the manner of punishment, whether by fire, etc.  
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. 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 itself, that he did not call in question at all the certainty of present relief by prayers, and alms, 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 grossly 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 haec sibi po ten prodesse possent meruerunt, etc.  
It's 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 offered or Alms in the Church are done but these things profit such, who they lived, merited to have them afterward to profit them.  
This is his resolution of our question: to which he referred Dulcitius, and this clearly expounds the former words, where you must observe (to prevent your cavit) that he said, they receive their helps cum pro illis, etc. even then when the Holy sacrifice is offered for them, it is not therefore at Doomsday, nor at the first separation of their souls, etc. 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 preferred 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 through the book he teaches that actual benefit profit, help, advantage, availement, and rest, is procured for the souls, and he speaks condistinctively of the soul, as separated from the body, as when the body is dead, and he says, that then it receives secure which is the full resolution of our controversy; and he referred 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 none absurd 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, etc. This would seem to deny all stay in Purgatory since Christ's passion for good Christians, who he says know not Hell, under which Notion he explains himself to comprehend any such place of detention.  
But it is evident, that he speaks only of Saints under the Gospel, who are not detained in any Infernal 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 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 wholly 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 eternal, 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 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 differed his answer to that place, he says, 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 wholly 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 Church's prayers for them and of their release upon their prayers in these words: Pro defunctis quibusdam, vel ipsius Ecclesiae, vel quorundam piorum exauditur oratio, etc. he treats largely of the effects of Church prayers and (as you see) he evidently asserts, that upon the Churches, & good people's prayers, such Dead persons are released; for he says, that their prayers are granted, exauditur Oratio. Now all know, that the prayers are tendered to release 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, etc. 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 add the ninth book of his confessions, which he never retracted, but always confirmed: in this place, he tells the practice of the whole Church in his Mother. Tantum illud vos rogo, ut ad domini altare memineritis mei, ubi fueritis, etc. Where she begs assistance at our Lord's 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, etc. Credo quod jam feceris, quod te rogo: sed voluntaria oris mei proba Domine, etc.  
Here we see, what St. Augustine prayed for, and in this what St. Monica begged 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, & cord, & literis, servie, ut quotquot haec legerint, meminerint ad altare tuum Monicae famulae tuae, cum Patricio quondam ejus conjuge, etc.  
He hoped, that what he begged was already granted, yet he prayed on and begged others to do the same for her, and all was to bring her to Heaven: and he begs, that it may be granted him for Christ's sake; that is a present forgiveness of her sins, therefore he says, his Mother knew upon the Altar, dispensarii victimam sanctam, qua deletum est Chyrographum, quod erat contra nos. This was therefore her, and his prayer, that by application of Christ's Holy Sacrifice, her sins night be blotted out upon their prayers. Doth not this evidently witness 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 granted. He did not then pray for her going to Heaven, at Doomsday. This admits no reply as to his mind, and truly of the whole Church: for he speaks no singularity; & hence desires all men to join with him: Here we also see that they all believed ●●th the present Church, Christ himself to be offered upon the altar for our sins.  
Read him upon the 48 Psalm, where he shows the sense and practise of those ●●mes, read him also upon the 80 Psal. to the same purpose, only & always requiring, that the faithful dye in true Repentance.  
In his 64 Epistle he tells, and examines 〈◊〉 custom of the faithful, to make offerings up at the graves of the dead, where he speaks thus: Oblationes pro spiritibus dormientium, quas vere aliquid adjuvare credendum est, super ipsas memorias non sint sumptuosa, etc. 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 dreamt of your speculation of the preventiall helps at their deaths, by those future Alms, 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 Alms were distributed.  
In fine, that no rational person may hereafter doubt of St. Augustine's mind as to plesent release upon prayers, etc. 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, etc.  
Here is first evident, that it was believed, that upon St. Perpetua the Martyrs, prayers, just before her death, offered for her brother, he was transferred from his pains to rest. Here is the full Solution of our whole Controversy, conformable to his own and the Church's 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. Gregory's, 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 God's 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 Baptism, 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 less 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.  
Sir, Your faithful Servant, F. D. March, 26.   
FINIS.