A26864:217
Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…
Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl.
London: printed by A.M. for Thomas Underhill, 1654
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.
§. 19.
Mr Bl. SO that the Gospel, in it self considered, is wanting in that honour assigned to an instrument, to have influx to the producing of the effect of the principal cause, by a proper causality. If none dare say, that faith hath such an influx, they may much less say that the Word hath such an influx.
Mr Bl. SO that the Gospel, in it self considered, is wanting in that honour assigned to an instrument, to have influx to the producing of the effect of the principall cause, by a proper causality. If none dare say, that faith hath such an influx, they may much less say that the Word hath such an influx.
§. 19.
R. B. The Gospel in it self considered, without the coordinate or subordinate, or superior causality of faith, hath this honour so fully, clearly, beyond all doubt, that no man that is a preacher of this Gospel should question it: Much less should prefer the causality of faith, in saying, that [we may much less give this honour to the Word,] or say this of the Word, then of our own faith. Yet ⟨p. 32⟩the Gospel without the concomitancy of faith, doth not actually justify: else faith were no condition or causa sine qua non: But that is no dishonour to the Gospel; nor defect of power which faith must supply. But the force of the instrument being merely from the Donors will, he willeth that it shall then (and not till then) efficere, when the condition is performed. I appeal to all the Divines, Lawyers and Logicians in the world; when the thing to be conveyed is but Debitum vel jus ad rem, and the effect is but a Transcendental relation (as debitum is,) Is not the Voluntas constituentis vel Donantis the only principal proper efficient? And is not the sigum voluntatis constituens, the properest instrument that the wit of man can imagine. Is not the Testament of a man the most strict and proper instrument of conveying right of the Legacy to the Legatary? Is not a Covenant, Contract, Deed of gift, the most proper instrumental efficient cause of the duness of the thing given or conveyed? It is not only a Law term, but a term of the strictest Logic, to call these a mans instrument for conveyance. Is not a praemiant or privileging law, in the most strict and proper sense the Legislators instrument, effecting the debitum praemii vel privelegii? It is evident that the fullest definition of an instrumental efficient cause doth agree to these: as far as the nature of the effect (Relatio debiti vel juris) will admit of full or proper efficiency. For these instruments are the very fundamenta proxima of these relations. Can you prove the like, (yea and more) of faith, and will not? But I pray once more remember that it is not the effecting of a Physical change, but a relative, the conveying of Right that we are speaking of: so full an instrument is each of thse that the very name of the effect is oft given to them. So a pardoning instrument is called A pardon: the instrument of donation is called A deed of gift.