Of rPredeflination. The tenth Crimination. 45 C. " They feem toerr much, in that they deny the eternal Cafe of eter- Vale. ainly faith.] yu . " nalfuturition ; (awhile they make fin that is eternally future, yet not to ;"t; vainrfam eß objetanm be eternally willedor decreed by God to befuture.) How can things paf: inttle r d nos mfturueI preteritum & poffrbtle dr " without acaufe enumero poffibilium, in numerum futurorum? p B. Alas! what men, and what Engines mutt the poor Church fuller conrfryrat, ¿fomránn and be tortured by ? forePaul fore -faw there things, when he feared left reafon : For chafe areall dr the serpent beguiledEve, (with a promife of being as God inKnow- termini dimThee s as to ledge) fo he fhoulddraw us from the fimplicity that is in chrift. And only etas or will ;be, Is when he warned us to beware left any beguile us withvain Philofophy, ac- °n a mans mind dh t.t do, cording to the rudiments ofthe world : And when he tallithus ofaLPifdom in do pretence is tome- which is foolifhnef with God; and of fome whoprofe ng themf Ives wife, thing. s. And fn s the Propofition, Hocflit, va became Fools. aria And hence men YourDo&rine foundeth fo unlike toChrift's and hisApoftles, that I falffy fay, thatfauns is mutt craveyour Interpretation of it, that we may underttand before áñiquii i uhen it isronly we wrangle. I pray you what is it thatyoucall Futurition ? erit. C. " The name tells youwhat it is., Tonknowwhat wemean by it. Sodalfo8 Apia: devil*. B. Iknow that it is Grammatically a Noun Subttantive, but doth it g r.afa rna4c'gnænon fuhr lignifie fomething or nothing-? alit., aloque modofont, in potencia Del vel creature C. " Itfgnifeththat fomethingwill behereafter. font, vel font in potentia it. Now you turn it toaVerb : But isfuturity any thing ornothing ? opinandi vel ¡muginánti, C. "Su o e Ifa It is bmethiee ? va quocunq; modo fsgnsfi- pp f , y> f $ candi : which is but to B. If it was eternallyfomething,. it is God : For nothing elfe was eter- abufe men with words, nel. & play with the equivo- cation of [funt].Poffenel C. " Srippofe, Ifay, It isnothing ? potentia, aprnro imaging- B. If it benothing, it is no fel, and therefore hath no caufe, and tit, &c. are fomething : But mutt nothing there- therefore noeternal caufe. fore be fomething? His C. " suppofe, Ifay,that it is neither fomething nor nothing: Ton know queftionjs,utrum jaentia cc there arefiveforts that Burgerfdiciusplaceth betweenRes and Nihil, and nei fit iu And tf he hanonentd o better m: way "futuritymay be one oflbw'. to prove the-affirmative, B. Five forts of what ? You cannot tell. If you take Ens or Res thangbysr¡yingcñhat, no- limitedly for lefr univerfal thanAliquid, or a Species of it, you may equal to filence. that Datur medium inter Rem&Nihil. But lure efe and non eft arecon vafqu. ibid. icvoi tradiElories. And taking Aliquid, Ears or Resin the molt univerfal no- Zeal fe lnunquam resobji- tion, it is a contradi&ion, and a denial of the firft principle of Know- Cilia' nrftmutt eft: undo ledge, to feign a medium :. Burgerfdiciur'es five Non-entia gore non fient Co l efrer t, non objicitnr - nihil, are Privatio, Denominatio externa, ens Rationis, Relatio, modus en- wed here the Sc ool- tis. And all this cometh from the pittiful narrownefs, of mans mind, Cogno ¡tat attainfinita po¡- that can know, nothing at all by onePimple Conception, but byparts ; fibula drfutura : Again. And then it frameth feveral names, according toall its inadequate Con- ujet..tnad . Bingt.sic ceptions, as if they all fignified feveral fomethings. I. Privatio i$ it affirm it.Dnrand,Almain. felf a compoundnotion, including, r. The abfence of the form. ä. The and many y later deny v r debitum ineffé. 3. Thematters capacity of it. The firft is Nothing: the deceit r. o.g8.wetl noted fecond is a Relation (of which after) : the third is thenatureor mode thatfuturitymaybewith of thematter, which is an inadequate Conception of Ens. out a Decree to prede- termine the Agent: For finis fo,e.g. hating God, blafphemy.And that Dr. retiFe ill makethGods Decreethe foie caufe of futurity. M to the preftimptuous queftion,howGod knowerh future things, betides that there is no time to meafureGodsA8s by, thereneed noother anfwer than thatGods in- finite Underftanding knoweth all that is intelligible. But futures as filch are intelligible. -- $+Juia divines indicated infinita virtutrapß: pimid i>rtelligibile tineceffarie debetamplecfi & intelliyere:At futura contingentia intelltgtbilia funt,eo quod font deter- minatæwritatis,Vafq. a.Tho.q.14.d.65.cap.4. Butwhereas he himfelf alfodefendeth that futuresarelinown ill decretis divine, he is forced to fay that Yin is known in Gods Decree of the materiale peccati : where yet in his Dotrine.of Simultaneous, Concurfe, hemaketh Gods concurfe to he bat part of the determining caufe, which would not without mans free cooped: tion do it. Therefore the Decreeof ahalfcanfatión isnot enoughto infer the effeft. 2. Deno-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=