· the groffej..self-litHrder~ 7~ con-tradiCtion to imagin to couple ~them, for )ht!y_cannot poffibly be coupled. .f\nd there· .· for this fame copulative will is nothing but amockery, and the truth Hi~~ is. this,thou wilt I • • not? . .· Thirdly, May be thou haft a woulding will, this is ,rto will,- but onely,avelleity ;· fo thou hafl: awoulding will. , I would do as well as a- , nyother, but I cannot; c'o fpeak properly,this , · is no will ', for its onely ·that will wherewith fools will things impoffible; I would I were at 'London, withawifh faies he ; I would I could flyas well as an E~tgle. Thefe things are im– poffible, and theretore its no will, but meer -. folly; thus may be thou willefr grace, f would _ witp all my heart I could do as Godfaies,God knowes my heart, mywill is good, I would be better than I am ;And yet thy Confcience can c~ll for fomething or other to be mended, and thou wilt not. This is an impofi1bilitv, and therefore no will ;\ like the Foo1 that"would fit in his Chair, I and would I'were at London, I -.he would fain be at London and fit fiill. So thou fittefi at the fame paffe; I would I were in Chrifi ; .thou wouldeH: fain be in Chrift, and yet thou art loth to fiir out of that bafe tem– per·thou arc in. , This i.s an impoffibility, a folly and no will; woulding and 1;10 willing. I grant the Saints ofGod have their wouldings, and their would does go futher than their will , their will is abfoltuely fet to be holy, and they _would be,holy.Their will is deeply to be hum!"' bled,and they would pe deepe~ ; their would is groundedon awil,theywill in fo.me meafure&: , · 1 G · 3 they / I
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=