A64002:2388
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.
JEANS.
IEANES.
First, you cannot deny but that in these words of Christ, Father if it be possible, or if it be thy will, let this cup pass from me, Christ prayed not as a Mediator for his elect, for so he was engaged to drink off this Cup; but as a man naturally declining, and abhorring death, and the ignominy of the Cross, as they are in themselves evil: and yet all your arguments, mutatis mutandis, with due change may be applied unto this interpretation, as well as unto D. Twice his notion (as you call it) upon Luke 23. 34.
FIrst, you cannot deny but that in these words of Christ, Father if it be possible, or if it be thy will, let this cup passe from me, Christ prayed not as a Mediator for his elect, for so he was ingaged to drinke off this Cup; but as a man naturally declining, and abhorring death, and the ignominy of the Crosse, as they are in themselves evill: and yet all your arguments, mutatis mutandis, with due change may be applied unto this interpretation, as well as unto D. Twisse his notion (as you call it) upon Luke 23. 34.
Secondly, in answer unto your objections, we may make use of a distinction of prayer, brought by Suarez in tertiam partem Sum. Aquin. q. 21. Art. 4. Prayer is nothing else but an unfolding of the will unto God. Now in Christs manhood there was a twofold will, one absolute and effectual, another conditional and uneffectuall, which may otherwise be termed, a velleity, a will of simple complacency, a will of a thing only secundum quid, in some particular respect, according to some particular consideration: of such a will of his we read.