A64002:311
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.
2. This seems to be related by Prosper, not so much out of his own opinion, as by way of an objection proposed by the Massilienses, desiring Austin to show how it is to be answered. Illud etiam (saith he) qualiter dilucitur quaesumus demonstres quod retractatis Priorum hac de re opinionibus, penè omnium invenitur par & una sententia, &c. And this is farther evidenced by these words of Prosper. Obstinationem suam vetustate defendunt ut ea quae de Epistolâ Pauli Romanis scribentis, ad manifestationem divinae gratiae praevenientis Electorum merita proferuntur, a nullo unquam Ecclesiasticorum ita esse intellecta ut nunc sentiuntur, affirment.
2. This seems to be related by Prosper, not so much out of his own opinion, as by way of an objection proposed by the Massilienses, desiring Austin to shew how it is to be answered. Illud etiam (saith he) qualiter dilucitur quaesumus demonstres quod retractatis Priorum hac de re opinionibus, penè omnium invenitur par & una sententia, &c. And this is farther evidenced by these words of Prosper. Obstinationem suam vetustate defendunt ut ea quae de Epistolâ Pauli Romanis scribentis, ad manifestationem divinae gratiae praevenientis Electorum merita proferuntur, a nullo unquam Ecclesiasticorum ita esse intellecta ut nunc sentiuntur, affirment.
3. Observe, When Prosper urged them to expound those passages in St Paul, after what meaning they thought best, they forthwith professed ingeniously that they found nothing in the Fathers that gave them content: their words related by Prosper are these, Nihil se invenisse quod placeret.
4. Bellarmine, De Grat. & liber. Arbit. lib. 2. cap. 14. takes notice of this objection drawn out of Prosper and answereth it, according unto Austin in this manner, Augustinus ipse in libr. de Bono Persev. cap. 20. dicit Veteres Patres, qui ante Pelagium floruerunt, quaestionem istam nunquam acuratè tractasse sed incidenter solùm & quasi per transitum illam attigisse. Addit verò in fundamento hujus sententiae quod est, Gratiam Dei non praeveniri ab ullo opere nostro; sed contrà, ab illo omnia opera nostra praeveniri, ita ut nihil omninò boni quod attinet ad salutem, sit in nobis quod non sit nobis ex Deo, convenire Catholicos omnes; & ibidem citat Cyprianum, Ambrosium, Nazianzenum. So that it appears hereby, that Austin did not acknowledge the former Writers to have embraced this opinion, though the Massilienses pretended so much. And herewithall he openeth unto us, a way how to conceive aright of their opinion in predestination; namely, that as many as acknowledge Gods grace preventing us in every good work, they all are to be accounted to agree with him in the doctrine of predestination. For it is apparent, that in the contrary doctrine Pelagius grounded his opinion concerning predestination. And Austin himself sometime thought that God, quem sibi crediturum esse praescivit, ipsum elegit, cui spiritum sanctum daret, ut bona operando vitam aeternam consequeretur: and why so? because forsooth he at that time conceived it to be mans work to believe, which saith he, I had never said, had I known faith it self to have been amongst the gifts of the holy Ghost. Retract. lib. 1. cap. 25. and therefore De Praedesti. Sanct. cap. 1. in his answer to the Letter of Hilarius, mark what course Austin takes for the justifying of his own doctrine concerning predestination. Prius fidem quâ Christiani sumus donum Dei esse debemus ostendere. And Bellarmine in the place above cited professeth, that Austin did herehence rightly collect out of the Fathers, Gratuitae praedestinationis sententiam & fidem in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ semper fuisse. Neque olim (saith he) defendi potest praedestinatio ex operibus praevisis, nisi aliquid boni ponatur in homine justo, quo discernatur ab impio quod non sit illi à Deo; quod sanè (saith he) Patres omnes cum summâ consensione rejiciunt.