A26882:83
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.
II. My second supposed Error is, that the Saints in Heaven have any displeasure: And this is said to be [a Contradiction to the generally received Opinion of all that you have met with.] I doubt not but your Acquaintance is large, but I perceive it is not with all sorts of men. I am sorry they should generally deny so great and clear a truth.
II. My second supposed Errour is, that the Saints in Heaven have any displeasure: And this is said to be [a Contradiction to the generally received Opinion of all that you have met with.] I doubt not but your Acquaintance is large, but I perceive it is not with all sorts of men. I am sorry they should generally deny so great and clear a truth.
1. Let us examine the Controversy, as of the Matter, and 2. As of the Name [Displeasure.] 1. Complacence is the first act of the will upon Good as Good, before it come to Election of Compared Goods, (which is usually de Mediis:) Displicence is its contrary, and its object is Evil as Evil. One is called Volition, or Willing, the other Nolition, or Nilling. As Pleasedness, and Displeasedness are in the Passions, and signify Joy and Trouble, we have nothing here to do with them, (having expressly excluded sorrow) but as they are in the Will. I thought till ⟨p. 17⟩now, that all sober Divines had been agreed (Protestants and Papists) that not only in Saints and Angels, and Christ as Man, but in God himself (who is most remote from imperfection) there is Complacence, and Displicence, Willing, and Nilling, which though in Creatures that have Accidents, they really differ as Acts, yet in God who is most simple, they are (say the subtler part of the School Doctors) but the Essence of God by extrinsic denomination from relation of the effects, differenced from the Essence simply considered, and from each other; or as the Scotists formaliter, or as the Thomists ratione ratiocinata; but none deny these to be in God. I suppose that Volition or Complacence you deny not: As to Displicence or Nolition, answering the Judgments dislike, I prove that it is in Heaven, in God and Creatures.