A26883:543
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,
London: printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons, 1675
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.
283. Even the Acts of Gods free-will or Decrees, have no Cause even in God himself; no more than those called Necessary. For we must not say that any thing in God is an effect.
284. Yet as Gods Acts are oft denominated by Connotation from the object, (which in man is a constitutive Cause of the Act, loco materiae,) so extrinsic objects may be called The Causes (but rather the Objects) of God Will, Love or Knowledge, not as his Essence, but only as so denominated by that Connotation of the object.
284. Yet as Gods Acts are oft denominated by Connotation from the object, (which in man is a constitutive Cause of the Act, loco materiae,) so extrinsick objects may be called The Causes (but rather the Objects) of God Will, Love or Knowledge, not as his Essence, but only as so denominated by that Connotation of the object.
285. These distributions of Gods Volitions in Number, and by specifying objects, and individuating objects, which are called material constitutive causes of the act, are all according to humane weakness; in us who know God but enigmatically, and in a glass: But yet if any man use such words in a broader manner than we think fit, before we censure and condemn him we must hear his sense explained. For all that ever we can say of God is improper, analogical, yea metaphorical; And it is but in degrees of impropriety that all words about Gods attributes ⟨p. 47⟩and actions differ; For (as is oft said) no man hath formal proper conceptions of any thing in God. If God should not speak to us in this improper language of our own, he must not speak intelligibly to us, unless he create another understanding in us. And he himself in Scripture using such language of himself, alloweth us to use it, while we profess to disclaim ascribing to God any of the imperfection which it seemeth to import.