A64002:2230
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.
But now the latter do include no imperfection, or repugnancy with, or opposition unto any greater, or equal perfection. And these perfections are ascribed unto God Formally, as you may see proved by Suarez Met. Disp: 30. Sect. 1. num. 8. 9. De perfectionibus ergo simpliciter dicendum est, omnes esse in Deo formaliter, quia in suo formally conceptu nullam imperfectionem, sed puram perfectionem involvunt, neque inter se repugnantiam includunt, unde sic illas habere, id est, formaliter, melius est, quam aliquà earum carere, & ideo de ratione Entis summe perfecti in totâ latitudine Entis est, ut has omnes perfectiones formaliter includat. Add in his perfectionibus non posse cogitari altiorem modum continendi illas, quam formaliter, quia intra suam formalem rationem, nec limitationem, nec imperfectionem includunt, neque altior gradus Entis excogitari potest, quam ille, ad quem hae formals perfections pertinent, qualia sunt vivere, sapere & alia hujusmodi.
But now the latter doe include no imperfection, or repugnancy with, or opposition unto any greater, or equall perfection. And these perfections are ascribed unto God Formally, as you may see proved by Suarez Met. Disp: 30. Sect. 1. num. 8. 9. De perfectionibus ergo simpliciter dicendum est, omnes esse in Deo formaliter, quia in suo formali conceptu nullam imperfectionem, sed puram perfectionem involvunt, neque inter se repugnantiam includunt, unde sic illas habere, id est, formaliter, melius est, quam aliquà earum carere, & ideo de ratione Entis summe perfecti in totâ latitudine Entis est, ut has omnes perfectiones formaliter includat. Adde in his perfectionibus non posse cogitari altiorem modum continendi illas, quam formaliter, quia intra suam formalem rationem, nec limitationem, nec imperfectionem includunt, neque altior gradus Entis excogitari potest, quam ille, ad quem hae formales perfectiones pertinent, qualia sunt vivere, sapere & alia hujusmodi.
Now foreknowledge is to be ranked amongst the perfections of this latter sort; because it may be sequestered or abstracted from all those imperfections, as it is found in Men or Angels. You think indeed that it will necessarily infer mutability, but that is an imputation from which I will anon easily free it. Besides, a perfection simply such, is defined by Anselm in Monolog. cap. 14. Quae in unoquoque est melior ipsa quam non ipsa; that is, as Scotus expounds it in 1. dist. 8. q. 1. Ad. 1. quolibet suo incompossibili. Now the light of nature evidenceth that the knowledge of things to come is better, and a more noble attribution then any thing whatsoever is repugnant unto such foreknowledge, and therefore this foreknowledge (in such an abstract notion as we speak of) may formally be ascribed unto God.