A26882:118
Catholic communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state…Catholick communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state…
Catholic communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state of that communion opened, and the questions discussed, whether there be any displeasure at sin, or repentance for it in Heaven : with a parallel of the case of using a faulty translation of Scripture, and a faulty liturgy.Catholick communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state of that communion opened, and the questions discussed, whether there be any displeasure at sin, or repentance for it in Heaven : with a parallel of the case of using a faulty translation of Scripture, and a faulty lyturgy.
London: printed for Thomas Parkhurst, 1684
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.
But methinks I should not need to suppose you to object that it is not God, but Man that you speak of: No, I will not abuse you so much as to suppose that you take man to be more perfect, and less Passive then God. Indeed Displicence, and Complacence in God, are Active ad extra, and signify but the perfection of his will, and exeuntèr, the expressions and effects, and no Passivity: But all Creatures are Passive as well as Active, and they are receptive ab objectis, both in their Ideal Conceptions, and their Appetites: And therefore Displeasure in a far grosser Passive sense, must be ascribed to the Creature, then to the Creator: and yet without any diminution of felicity.
And 2. It is certain that Christ himself was much displeased with sin on Earth, Mark 10. 14 & 3. 5. And surely he is not any less perfect, nor more reconciled to sin in Heaven. He was displeased with it, when he died for it: and is his will changed since to favour it? Yea, if you should say that [sin is nothing, and therefore no object of a Divine Act] of Nolition, or hatred, but God is said to will or hate it, only because he doth not will or love it, but punish it; yet the Church hath long ago Condemned the Monothelites as Heretics, and determined that Christ hath two Wills and Operations: And therefore as Man, his knowledge and will must have somewhat of Passivity, though not of Pain.
And 2. It is certain that Christ himself was much displeased with sin on Earth, Mark 10. 14 & 3. 5. And surely he is not any less perfect, nor more reconciled to sin in Heaven. He was displeased with it, when he died for it: and is his will changed since to favour it? Yea, if you should say that [sin is nothing, and therefore no object of a Divine Act] of Nolition, or hatred, but God is said to will or hate it, only because he doth not will or love it, but punish it; yet the Church hath long ago Condemned the Monothelites as Hereticks, and determined that Christ hath two Wills and Operations: And therefore as Man, his knowledge and will must have somewhat of Passivity, though not of Pain.