R. B. Mr Pemble speaks of the Word effecting, or as the instrument of sanctification. We speak of it as conveying right to Christ, and as justifying. Whats that to this? 2. When did Mr Pemble prove that the Word or other objects are passive instruments? You know he goes against the stream of Philosophers: and then his reasons must sway more then his authority: And his reason, which you say he gives, is but this, It cannot be declared what operative force there should be in the bare declaration of Gods will, &c.] But I will undertake to declare that an operation there is by the agency of this declaration; though not punctually how it operates: I have read many that say that objectum operatur in genere causae finalis: and others that say it worketh in genere causae efficientis, some saying it effecteth Physically, others that it effecteth morally, others that objectum ⟨p. 33⟩operatur naturaliter, at pr•ponens objectum est tantum causa moralis; others that it is causa efficiens objectiva protatarcti•a respectu earum operationum qua ab illa immediate exercentur; sed causa finalis respectu aliorum operationum quae ab illa sunt priorum interventu, as Burgers•is speaks: But I remember none that call it Instrumentum passivum: yea not only the object, but declaration and all, Instrumentum passivum. For my part I am of Scotu• mind, that Objectum operatur efficienter & per m•dum naturae in intellectum; sed moraliter tantum in voluntatem; irresistibly and necessitatingly on the intellect (considering it as an intellect, and not so far as it is sub imperio voluntatis & ita ejus operationes sunt participativè voluntariae;) but on the will not so. And I am sure this passive instrumentality of the Word in sanctifying, doth very ill agree with the language of Scripture; which makes the Word to be mighty, powerful, pulling down strong holds, sharp, dividing, &c. The seed of God by which we are begotten, lively, the Word of life, saving mens souls, quickening, sanctifying, cleansing, &c. But what's all this to Justification?
R. B. Mr Pemble speaks of the Word effecting, or as the instrument of sanctification. We speak of it as conveying right to Christ, and as justifying. Whats that to this? 2. When did Mr Pemble prove that the Word or other objects are passive instruments? You know he goes against the stream of Philosophers: and then his reasons must sway more then his authority: And his reason, which you say he gives, is but this, It cannot be declared what operative force there should be in the bare declaration of Gods will, &c.] But I will undertake to declare that an operation there is by the agency of this declaration; though not punctually how it operates: I have read many that say that objectum operatur in genere causae finalis: and others that say it worketh in genere causae efficientis, some saying it effecteth Physically, others that it effecteth morally, others that objectum ⟨p. 33⟩operatur naturaliter, at pr•ponens objectum est tantum causa moralis; others that it is causa efficiens objectiva protatarcti•a respectu earum operationum qua ab illa immediate exercentur; sed causa finalis respectu aliorum operationum quae ab illa sunt priorum interventu, as Burgers•is speaks: But I remember none that call it Instrumentum passivum: yea not only the object, but declaration and all, Instrumentum passivum. For my part I am of Scotu• minde, that Objectum operatur efficienter & per m•dum naturae in intellectum; sed moraliter tantum in voluntatem; irresistibly and necessitatingly on the intellect (considering it as an intellect, and not so far as it is sub imperio voluntatis & ita ejus operationes sunt participativè voluntariae;) but on the will not so. And I am sure this passive instrumentality of the Word in sanctifying, doth very ill agree with the language of Scripture; which makes the Word to be mighty, powerfull, pulling down strong holds, sharp, dividing, &c. The seed of God by which we are begotten, lively, the Word of life, saving mens souls, quickning, sanctifying, cleansing, &c. But what's all this to Justification?
