with mens fánnes. 175'. both, and this motion abftraéiveiy confd dered be the materiali part of everyaduall finne , andhath God for the primecaufe in whom we live, move, and have ourbeing; then no finne can be afligned wherein this materiali part may not be found. In eating the forbidden fruit the materiali part of the finne in regardof the foul was the Appeti- tion thereof; in regardofthe body, theMa- flication and Manducation and other bodily ads : Separate thefe from theformali parr, which is Modus appetendi, and conteineth a repugnancy to Gods command, and God was the prime authour thereof. The Atof defiring and of eating muff of neceflîty be reduced to God, without whom there nei- ther is nor can be any motion of body or foul: but the diforderly Manner of defiring and eating contrary to the lawofGod,this is reducible (as being a defeet) onely to the de- fedive will of man. This is well obferved by Ruiz; r modifehabendi in valuntate mevot.s'i[. non reducurltur in Deum tanquam in caufam, 39' 53 priefertimquando culpahilisefl moduefehaben- di. And more fully; fPotefl volunta.c Diving amando quamlibet ac`hionemfb ratione aélionis non amaredifercntiammonfirofitatisper quam yofztiverepugnat Divine legi. He proceedeth inoppofing this difrindi- on, and faith that the defenders of abfoiute Elation andNon-elationmake God an au- thour
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=