A26883:993
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.
652. Pag. 386. he saith, that [Directa & expressa & efficax Dei V•litio, qua Vult ut sit seu fiat actus Dei odii, non facit Deum Malitia q•• 1per accidens sequitur actum, authorem.] Resp. But that per accidens is no reason of the denial, if God cause that accident also, as the first cause. If he make a Law, and make the forbidden act, the relation of sinfulness is an Accident indeed, but ariseth from the said fundamentum so necessarily that it cannot be otherwise. But it should have made a holy Divine to tremble to have said, that God directly, expressly and effectually willeth mens Act of hating God, viz. that it exist or be.
652. Pag. 386. he saith, that [Directa & expressa & efficax Dei V•litio, qua Vult ut sit seu fiat actus Dei odii, non facit Deum Malitia q•• 1per accidens sequitur actum, authorem.] Resp. But that per accidens is no reason of the denyal, if God cause that accident also, as the first cause. If he make a Law, and make the forbidden act, the relation of sinfulness is an Accident indeed, but ariseth from the said fundamentum so necessarily that it cannot be otherwise. But it should have made a holy Divine to tremble to have said, that God directly, expresly and effectually willeth mens Act of hating God, viz. that it exist or be.
- 1I confess Gab. Biel in 2. d. 37. speaketh too like these several atheological assertions: as do many others.
653. And it is false that he saith, that God is equally the Cause that men hate him, if he will the Act hypothetically, ineffectually and determiably by another's will, as if he willed it efficaciously. And so when he maketh the Doctrine of Universal Concurse and Causation, as guilty as is predetermining pre-motion. As if God could not make man a free-iller and agent, and as the spring of Nature, enable him and concur o his Act as an Act, in genere, without causing it to terminate on the forbidden object in specie. As if it were impossible for the Sun to be n universal cause of the stinking of a Dunghill and Weed, without being he special: or as if God must be made the cause of every blasphemy, unless e will make the blasphemer speechless, and of every villainy, unless he will strike men dead to prevent it. This is not reverent and holy judging of the most holy God the Judge of all.