A Golden Chain

and whom he hath decreed to hate, them being once created, he hates in Adam with actual hatred. Thirdly it is objected, that by this doctrine God shall be the author of sin, for he which ordains to the end ordains to the means of the end: but God ordains men to the end, that is, damnation: therefore he ordains them to the means thereof, that is, sin. Ans. The proposition being thus understood, he which ordains a man to an end, in the same order and manner ordains him to the means, is false. For one may be ordained to the end simply, the end being simply good; and yet not be simply ordained to the means, because they may be evil in themselves, and only good in part, namely so far forth as they have respect of goodness in the mind of the ordainer. Secondly, the assumption is false: for the supreme end of Gods counsel is not damnation, but the declaration of his justice in the just destruction of the creature: neither doth God decree mans damnation as it is damnation, that is, the ruin of man and the putting of him forth to perishment, but as it is a real execution ⟨image 256⟩of justice. Thirdly we must make distinction between sin it self and the permission thereof, and between the decree of rejection, and actual damnation: now the permission of sin, and not sin it self properly is the subordinate means of the decree of rejection. For when God had decreed to pass by some men, he withal decreed the permission of sin, to which permission men were ordained: and sin it self is no effect, but only the consequent of the decree: yet so, as it is not only the antecedent, but also the efficient and meritorious cause of actual damnation.

and whome hee hath decreed to hate, them being once created, he hates in Adam with actuall hatred. Thirdly it is obiected, that by this doctrine God shall be the author of sinne, for he which ordaines to the ende ordaines to the meanes of the end: but God ordaines men to the ende, that is, damnation: therefore he ordaines them to the meanes thereof, that is, sinne. Ans. The proposition beeing thus vnderstood, he which ordaines a man to an ende, in the same order and manner ordaines him to the meanes, is false. For one may be ordained to the end simply, the ende beeing simply good; and yet not be simply ordained to the meanes, because they may be euill in themselues, and onely good in part, namely so far forth as they haue respect of goodnesse in the minde of the ordainer. Secondly, the assumption is false: for the supreame ende of Gods counsell is not damnation, but the declaration of his iustice in the iust destruction of the creature: neither doth God decree mans damnation as it is damnation, that is, the ruine of man and the putting of him forth to perishment, but as it is a reall execution