Of 2'redésCtinátion. C. " I confeyr I amconvinced thatit is a.fhame tomakea quarrel ofthis : " becaufe it is about .q word, and really there is no dirence. But why " make theyvarious Objeóts in one man ofthefe Decrees ? . . B. What is it but diverfity of Objefts that doth diverfifie them ? In the execution the cafe is plain. Pauluntreated and creandus wasnóthing, or no man. 2. Paul beforehe heard the Gofpel, was a Pharifee that had notheard it. 3. Paul before Converfion and convertendus, wasa per fecuting Infidel. 4. Pauljamjuiifzcandus was aBeliever. s. Paul jam vacandus adfacram Minillerium was a Chriftian. 6. Paul perfevering, and ready to overcomefinally, wasa faithful holy Chriftian and Apoftle. y. Paul jamjuflificandus perjudicemfinaliter & glorificandus, was a per- fevering over-coming Chriftian, Saint and Apoftle. The ninth Crimindtion. C. * "But that's my next offence : that they order Gods Decrees ac- " cording to the order of Execution, andnot accordingto theorderof Inten- " tion : when as Quod prius eftintentione, pofterius eft executione. B. Dr.Twiffe hath that word, I think, many fcore, if not hundred times But it is no fit matter for contention. Do you believethat in God himfelf there is Priority andPofleriority ofDecrees ? C. "Not in time : but inorder ofNature or Intention. B. How can there be difference of Order, where there is no diver- fity ? C. "Though in God there be nodiverfity, yet you eonfefs there is the Re- " latisseconnotation anddenominationfrom the Objei^ls ? B. True : Therefore the Order alfo mutt not be denominated from any feigned diverfity inGod, butfrom the Orderof the divers Objet s, asone is firft or Taft, in time, or nature,or ufe. That which is firft, God decreedIhould befirft: That which is propter aliad, God decreed Ihould bepropteraliad And thatwhich is the endof another thing, God de- creed Ihould be its end. . C. "But even in God himfelf we muff, as men, conceive, that hisvelle finem, and velle media are not all one, but mull diflinguifh them. B. As men, we mutt not judge falflyof God, when we know that it is falfe. If velle finem&r media be certainly one without any diverfity in God, faving what is in the connotedÓbjefs, and the relation or de- nomination; how can wewithout fin deftinguifhwhere there is nodiffe- rence? But I pray you tell me, what mean you by Gods intendere Sam ? C. " Imean that as everywifeman dothfull W ill án end; and then doall "for it, fodothGod. B. We call nothing toman an end, but fomething which hewanteth, or at leaft is without : But God wanteth nothing, nor is ever without his end, or the pccomplifhment ofhis Will. But of thisI crave leave to re- fer you to the firft Book, whereI havefully Ihewed that God willeth an end improperly, and not asman doth. But tell me, what take you tobe ítri&ly Gods end? C. "His Glory. B. What meanyouby his Glory? C. " Oar Knowledge, Admirationand Praifeof his Perfellion. B. * Thefe are Aets of men; and can mans Alts be Gods chief End ?. G C. *Bannes in s.q. a33. a. a. pino- z6¢. Jaceendum no bis rit fundamentum neeef- fariaa, viz. quadin di- vins amnia Just fanal em nibel prima autpo/terites in aliquogenerecaufs,nibilq; realitte ab alioditinilum, abi non obviai relations oppafatio. el: quia nonfim- pliti concept, fed muftis e'r imperfette nos cogna¡ci- mus, 'tree eß diftinguere, you may feeamultitude of Authors and Reafons to prove that GodsWill to all Objets is but one molt Pimple Volition, in Rui>,. de Valant. Dei diIf. S. feit. 6. P. ;ç. * eonliat toìial effettua predefinationis non effe casfam per madam finie iliquid ex parte pr,ede¡li- nati,eum Gloria quapafer effe finis inter ef¡etïrta ameretar , V.afqu. in s. difp. g t. e. ¢.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=