Speculum theologiæ in Christo, or, A view of some divine truths which are either…

5. This objection is solved in Jesus Christ: His human will was free, or else his active and passive obedience was not meritorious or satisfactory; and yet his human will was infallibly guided by his Divine, or else his Merit and Satisfaction were not certainly determined. It's true, some have been so hardy as to say, That Christ might have sinned, or not have obeyed his Fathers will. Thus Arius said, Filium Dei fuisse [Greek or Hebrew], that the Son of God was capable of Vice and Virtue. Thus some others have affirmed, That Christ as man might not have obeyed. But the Council of Nice pronounced an Anathema against Arius for that opinion,¹ as being one of his blasphemies. It's very miserable that men should have no higher thoughts of Christ than so. To say, That Christ might have sinned, or, which is all one, to say, That he might not have obeyed, is to say, That there might have been a discord between the Father and the Son, a repugnancy between the Divine and Human ⟨p. 186⟩wills in Christ: That the admirable Hypostatical union of the two natures in him, might have been broken and dissolved: That his human nature might have lost and forfeited the rich anointings and over-measures of the Spirit which were upon it: That the great work of Redemption and Salvation in his hands, might have failed and come to nothing: Nay, and that our glorious Redeemer and Saviour might by his sin have stood in need of one to save and redeem him. All which show the black blasphemies which are couched in that opinion. To say no more of it, I conclude, That Providence rules over the free acts of men, and that without any violence put upon their liberty: Men act freely, and yet dependently upon God the primordial Cause.

5. This objection is solved in Jesus Christ: His human will was free, or else his active and passive obedience was not meritorious or satisfactory; and yet his human will was infallibly guided by his Divine, or else his Merit and Satisfaction were not certainly determined. It's true, some have been so hardy as to say, That Christ might have sinned, or not have obeyed his Fathers will. Thus Arius said, Filium Dei fuisse 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, that the Son of God was capable of Vice and Virtue. Thus some others have affirmed, That Christ as man might not have obeyed. But the Council of Nice pronounced an Anathema against Arius for that opinion,