OfSufficient and EffeEhual Grace. 183 2. Whence is it that Nero is an Vnbeliever ?] 5. You faythat Nero is an Unbeliever through his own wilfulnef , and illdifpoftion refilling Grace (Satan temptations concurring.) And that PaulisaBeliever from many conjun& caufes : I. Gods Grace by his Spirit. 2. Chrifts Merits. 3. Chrifls donation of that Spirit. 4. The means bywhich he worketh. 5. The concurfeof Pauls will. Towhich efficients you add in moft a compe- tent Receptive difpofrtion in genere caufee materialis , both paffive and aâive. 6. You fay that inall this Gods Grace is incomparably the grea- ter caufe than man'swill. 7. But yet not the foie caufe, and that fome free - not-neceffitated concurfeof mans will, in theufe of fuchPower as he hath, is a condition finequa non ut difpofdo Grati e receptiva, ordinari- ly. 8. But thatGod is not tied to this,but may extraordinarily do other- * Ruiz. de rædtP. wife. 9. But tharthis *pre-requifite difpofition , and the concurfe of tr 3. a. ts. p =:_. mans will is only the ufe of a power freely before given of God, with xlp, dt¡po¡rtone: proxt- all neceffary helps toufe it. r o. And therefore that God is from firft to mas=& piooptoboe a :d lait the firft caufeof all that's good inman,though not theonly caufe5and dirari gratiæ, gnoña9n ex that of himfelf man cando nothing. Have I not taken your meaning prima a di a 2næ ur ex right. etadifpotione quafitree- B. Yes, fo far as you have recited it? to eft a Deo fine materia. C. ` But methinks yetyou anfwer not the great queflion , which Camero to a gááæ quælibet de/pe- " baffled Tilenus with. it is not whyPaul believeth ? Nor why Nero be- füio edam remora,/i ab el- " lieveth not ? asTinglyconf dered : But comparatively, why Paul belie- 1afumtt inittum gratta tta ut prima gratta deter en -: " veth rather thanNero ? speak to that. tuito talis dtpo;ttonts. as B. Camero andTilenuswere great and excellent wits. But if you can not this enough ?4 forgive the Truth, I mutt add that which they Paid nothing to, which will prove that a few degrees more ofacutenefs, might havefhortned or better ended their difpute. It isthe Comparatio perfonarum that is now the fubje&ofthat Contro- verGe : why this man rather than that as compared ? Here then we are to confider, r. The Comparabilitas. 2. Thefifer Comparatio. s. The queftíon as to the firft is, either a. Whether there was ante- cedently any fuch ratio comparandi in them, as might be a reafonor mo- tiveto God himfelf, quoad alum ex parte agentis , why he flaould de- cree to give, or aftually give Faith toone man rather than to another? 2. Or elfe whether there were any fuch difference antecedent as might be Ratio difcriminis ineffetJis, the reafon why one received or hadFaith, and theother not. II. And thenquoad aúnmcomparandi, the queflion is, whether God inhis Decree or mind did truly compare the perlons antecedently, and fay (not only [Iwill caufe this man to believe] and fay [I will not caufe that man to believe] or, not fay [I will.]) But alto laid [I will caufe this man tobelieve rather than that.] To there feveral queftions then I anfwer. r. Negatively to the firft : For Gods acts ex parteagentis arehis effence ; and as he hath no caufe, but is thecaufe of all things, fo thus far nothing in the world isa caufal reafon or motive to God. He willeth becaufe he willeth, or rather without caufe. II. To thefecond, There are in theCreatures dierent capacities, for terminating Gods will anda/lion objeílively , and accordingly denomina- ting his volitions and Anions varioufly : And fo this queftion mull be di- vided into three. I. Whether always. 2. Whether ordinarily. 3. Whe- ther fometimes there be an objetlive ratiocomparabilitatis and of prefer- ring one before another, as to the eft of believing? or why Gods ope- ration fhouldeffect Faith rather in this man than in that ? Towhich I an- fiver.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=