A64002:1709
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…
The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessels of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entitled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two books, the first being a refutation of the said book, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hord's discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceals his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twice ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twice from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeans ...The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entituled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two bookes, the first being a refutation of the said booke, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hords discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceales his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twisse ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twisse from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeanes ...
Oxford: printed by L.L. and H.H. for Tho. Robinson, 1653
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.
Section 9.
Sin may be considered as sin, or as a means of declaring God's justice in mens punishments. God 1doth not predestinate men to sin, as it is sin, but as a means of their punishment. He is not therefore, say they, the Author of sin. 1. A good end cannot moralize a bad action; it remaineth evil though the end be never so good Bonum oritur ex integris. •end, manner, yea matter too must be good, or else the action is naught. He that shall steal that he may give an alms; or commit adultery, that he may beget Children for the Church; Or oppress the poor to teach them patience, Or kill a wicked man that he may do no more hurt with his example; or do any forbidden thing, though his end be never so good, he sinneth notwithstanding. And the reason is because the evil of sin is greater then any good that can come by sin; forasmuch as it is laesio divinae majestatis, a wronging of God's majesty; and to Divino bono opposita, directly prejudicial to the good of Almighty God as much as any thing can be. This Saint Paul knew very well, and therefore he tells us plainly that we must not do evil that good may come thereof. Whosoever therefore willeth sin, though for never so good an end, he willeth that which is truly and formally a sin, and consequently God, though he will sin for never so good ends, yet willing it with such a powerful, and effectual will, as giveth a necessary being to it, he becometh Author of that which is formally sin. 2. The members of this distinction are not opposite, for sin as sin, and in no other consideration is means of punishment. If God therefore willeth it as a means of punishment, he willeth it as a sin; his decree it determinated at the the very formality of it. 3 This distinction fasteneth upon God a further aspersion, and loadeth him with three special indignities more. 1. Want of wisdom and providence. His counsels must needs be weak if he can find out no means to glorify justice, but by the bringing in of sin, which his soul hateth, into the world and appointing men to commit it, that so he may manifest justice in the punishment of it. 2. Want of sincerity and plain dealing with men.