The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute…The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute…

But this is written in English for the indoctrinating of the people, as I remember what was said of M. Hoard's discourse; namely, that it was fit to be copied out, and communicated unto the Country. He saith these distinctions are, delusions of the simple; when he proves it, then it will be time enough to believe it. But whereas, he saith, they give no true satisfaction to the understanding, this is rightly to be understood, to wit, in reference to an Arminian understanding corrupted with the leaven of Pelagianism. Yet is he not privy to the understanding of all, so much as of all that are of his own Tenet. But suppose they do not. The distinctions used by School-Divines to accommodate God's predestination with man's free will, are many and learned, but Caietan professeth of them all that they do not, quietare intellectum, satisfy the understanding; but what follows; Therefore saith he, Ego captivo meum in obsequium fidei; I captivate mine unto the obedience of faith to wit, because Scripture is evident for both: And why should it seem strange that God's providence in governing the world should be of a mysterious nature. And however this Author may censure Caietane in this, yet Alvarez professeth that herein, doctissimè, & piissimè loquitur; he speaks most learnedly and most piously. Yet permission, in the judgment of Suarez, is not merely a negation of prohibition, but conjunct with a positive operation in concurring to the act of sin; which Aquinas hath proved to be à Deo, from God, though the obliquity of the act be not. And the truth is, man himself is not operative in sin, otherwise then as touching the substance of the act. For sin, as sin hath no cause efficient, but deficient only, as Austin hath long ago delivered; neither hath he been opposed herein by any that I know. Observe how with him to hinder, and absolutely to hinder is made all one; yet to will, and absolutely to will in God, is not all one in his opinion. I do not find that God left Adam in the hand of his counsel. For he forbade him to eat of the forbidden fruit, which is somewhat more then to dissuade from it. And yet to persuade or dissuade another, is not to leave him in the hands of his own counsels. For it is to impart unto him another counsel. Yet though we dissuade a brother, and so not leave him in the hand of his own counsel;

But this is written in English for the indoctrinating of the people, as I remember what was said of M. Hoord's discourse; namely, that it was fit to be coppied out, and communicated unto the Country. He saith these distinctions are, delusions of the simple; when he proves it, then it will be time enough to believe it. But whereas, he saith, they give noe true satisfaction to the understanding, this is rightly to be understood, to wit, in reference to an Arminian understanding corrupted with the leaven of Pelagidnisme. Yet is he not privy to the understanding of all, so much as of all that are of his own Tenet. But suppose they doe not. The distinctions used by School-Divines to accommodate God's predestination with man's free will, are many and learned, but Caietan professeth of them all that they doe not, quietare intellectum, satisfie the understanding; but what followes; Therefore saith he, Ego captivo meum in obsequium fidei; I captivate mine unto the obedience of faith to wit, because Scripture is evident for both: And why should it seeme strange that God's providence in governing the world should be of a mysterious nature. And however this Authour may censure Caietane in this, yet Alvarez professeth that herein, doctissimè, & piissimè loquitur; he speakes most learnedly and most piously. Yet permission, in the judgment of Suarez, is not merely a negation of prohibition, but conjunct with a positive operation in concurring to the act of sinne; which Aquinas hath proved to be à Deo, from God, though the obliquity of the act be not. And the truth is, man himselfe is not operative in sinne, otherwise then as touching the substance of the act. For sinne, as sinne hath noe cause efficient, but deficient only, as Austin hath long agoe delivered; neither hath he been opposed herein by any that I know. Observe how with him to hinder, and absolutely to hinder is made all one; yet to will, and absolutely to will in God, is not all one in his opinion. I doe not find that God left Adam in the hand of his counsell. For he forbade him to eate of the forbidden fruit, which is somewhat more then to disswade from it. And yet to perswade or disswade another, is not to leave him in the hands of his own counsells. For it is to impart unto him another counsell. Yet though we disswade a brother, and so not leave him in the hand of his own counsell;