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…

And to be freed from the trouble of answering this argument, is the only thing that I know we gain, by leaving the first and second way, and embarking our selves in the third. But how freed? surely only so far, as that the doctrine of election and reprobation, supposing Adams fall, doth not engage us to inquire into divine providence concerning Adams fall. But nevertheless it cannot be denied, but that had not God permitted Adam to fall, he had never fallen. And we that take the first way, acknowledge no other Providence divine concerning the ingress of sin, as sin, into the world, but in the way of permission. Sin as sin admitting no cause efficient, but deficient only. And it is utterly impossible, that God, either in doing what he doth, or in forbearing to do what he doth not, should in any culpable, or justly blameable manner be deficient. And if it be farther demanded, whether upon Gods permission it followeth, ¹that sin shall be committed by the creature; We readily profess it doth. This Vorstius acknowledgeth a favourite of the Arminians. Nay doth not Arminius himself deliver it expressly, where he saith, That when God permitteth the willing of ought, Necesse est ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum? This he delivers without all qualification of the necessity mentioned, which we do not. And this also Navarettus a Papist professeth, and though he be a Dominican, yet I know no Jesuit that opposeth him in this. And if any man infer herehence, that then God determining to permit sin, did determine that sin should enter into the World. We willingly grant that God did so ordain namely, that sin should come to pass by his permission. Non aliquid fit (saith Austin) nisi Omnipotens fieri velit, vel sinendo ut fiat, vel ipse ²faciendo. And Bellarmine professeth, that, Bonum est mala fieri Deo permittente: so that herein God doth not will evil, but that which is good in the acknowledgement of Bellarmine; and that in the heat of his opposition against our Divines in this particular. And Arminius is express in saying, Voluit Deus Achabum mensuram scelerum implere. And what is this but, Peccata peccatis cumulare?

And to be freed from the trouble of answering this argument, is the only thing that I know we gain, by leaving the first and second way, and embarking our selves in the third. But how freed? surely only so farre, as that the doctrine of election and reprobation, supposing Adams fall, doth not engage us to inquire into divine providence concerning Adams fall. But neverthelesse it cannot be denied, but that had not God permitted Adam to fall, he had never fallen. And we that take the first way, acknowledge no other Providence divine concerning the ingresse of sinne, as sinne, into the world, but in the way of permission. Sinne as sinne admitting no cause efficient, but deficient only. And it is utterly impossible, that God, either in doing what he doth, or in forbearing to doe what he doth not, should in any culpable, or justly blameable manner be deficient. And if it be farther demanded, whether upon Gods permission it followeth,