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…

3. It is untrue, that the former decree is a decree of an event, and the latter of doing something by occasion of this event. For what? is Gods permission, the event you mean? If so; then Gods working grace may be accounted an event also, and so Gods decree of salvation upon his working grace shall follow upon his decree of working grace, which is manifestly Arminianism. Is the sin permitted the event? First, why should you call it an event? is it because you conceive it to fall out besides Gods intention? Arminius himself professeth the contrary. The articles of Ireland profess, that God from eternity did by his unchangeable counsel ordain whatsoever in time should come to pass, your self acknowledge, that Gods decree of permitting sin, is a decree de eventu: your self acknowledge, that God did foresee that man would sin in case he did permit him to sin; which is as much as to say stice: food did intend that sin should come to pass by his permission: which is […] and express profession of Austin where he saith, Non ergo aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit, vel sinendo ut fiat, vel ipse faciendo: so that whether things come to passe Deo faciente ⟨p. 184⟩as good things, or Deo sinente, as evil things; still they came to passe Deo volente as Austin professeth. Now this sin is apparently the cause of the damnation of many thousands; for as much as many thousand infants are damned only for sin original; And therefore like as upon this sin existent, God doth not take an occasion only, but a cause of damning many thousands; so if the decree of permitting this, be presupposed before the decree of damnation, you may say as well, that God upon the foresight of this sin, doth not only take occasion, but a cause also, of decreeing their damnation. And this may be applied to the reprobation, not only of infants, but of all that are damned, forasmuch as all that are damned, are damned for original sin, only here is the difference, such reprobates as dye in their infancy, are damned only for original sin, but others are damned not only for original sin, but for their actual sins also.

3. It is untrue, that the former decree is a decree of an event, and the latter of doing something by occasion of this event. For what? is Gods permission, the event you meane? If so; then Gods working grace may be accounted an event also, and so Gods decree of salvation upon his working grace shall follow upon his decree of working grace, which is manifestly Arminianisme. Is the sinne permitted the event? First, why should you call it an event? is it because you conceive it to fall out besides Gods intention? Arminius himselfe professeth the contrary. The articles of Ireland professe, that God from eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe, your selfe acknowledge, that Gods decree of permitting sinne, is a decree de eventu: your selfe acknowledge, that God did foresee that man would sinne in case he did permit him to sinne; which is as much as to say stice: food did intend that sinne should come to passe by his permission: which is and expresse profession of Austin where he saith, Non ergo aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit, vel sinendo ut fiat, vel ipse faciendo: so that whether things come to passe Deo faciente