2. Reconciliatio hic dicitur vocatio, quæ " motus est a Deo, quo Christi receptionem electis ingenerat." Quid audio? "Reconciliatio generat receptionem, quæ receptio est reconciliatione prior, seu quid ei prærequisitum ?" Annon hæc sunt valde operosum nihil ? Capiat qui potest. Fallor? An hæc sibi contradicunt? Certe Robertus Parkerus pater tuus fuit, non idem tuus filius. THESIS VII. Motio hominis est: ideo movens requiritur, et mobile quod movetur, et motus moventis actus, et res motu fucta: De quibus ordine. ANNOTATIONES. "Motio hominis est," inquis. Cave dixeris. Quid? An hominem affirmas actus hujus dispensatorem, quod modo Thesi Quintâ negasti? Rursus hæreo, nisi "motio" pure pute passive intelligatur. Pergo. THESIS VIII. Movens est, qui intendit finem: principium et finis Deus. Movens autem est, ut consilio agens; proinde decreto, quod pariter secundum proportionem decreti circa TRANSLATION. 2. Reconciliation is here said to be "vocation, that is a motion from God, by which he produces the reception of Christ in the Elect." What do I hear? Does reconciliation produce reception, which reception is prior to reconciliation and is " something that is a pre-requisite to it?" Are not these very operose nullities? Let him comprehend them who is capable. Am I deceived? Is each of these expressions contradictory to the other? Undoubtedly ROBERT PARKER was your father, but your production is not of the same lineage. THESIS VII. "Moving is the duty of man: A Mover therefore is required, as well as something movable that may be moved, a motion as the act of moving, and a thing produced by motion: Of each of which [we will treat] in its order.”. ANNOTATIONS. "Motion," you say," is the part of man." Beware of what you assert. What! do you affirm "man to be the dispenser of this act," which, in the Fifth Thesis, you just now denied?-I hesitate again, unless " moving" be understood purely in a passive sense. But I proceed. THESIS VIII. "The Mover is he who intends the end, God is both the beginning and the end. But a Mover is one who acts by counsel, and therefore by a decree, which is absolute at the same time according to the proportion of the finem, absolutum est. Nec enim finis absolute ab ipso intenti, ex fallibili conditione suspendi eventus potest. ANNOTATIONES. Define," qui ipse Deus dicitur et est, litem non moveo. Sed an "eodem modo Deus intendat SE ut finem suum, et hominis finem, seu mercedem magnam, consilio, proinde decreto," merito ambigo. Intendit quippe SE finem suum, opinor, naturâ ; SE autem hominis finem, consilio. Nec satis assequar, nisi statuendum sit "Dei decreta esse ipsum Deum," et "posse SEIPSUM non velle sicut DECRETA potuisset facere non voluisse; et Deum seipsum, sicut decreta, secundum voluntatis suæ consilium facere," arbitremur. Non tamen negaverim hominis finem DEUM (si media ad eum assequendum connotet,) a Deo homini absolute intendi. Neque hinc metuendum est, si Dei intentio finis humani sic explicetur, ne ex fallibili (Deus nam falli nequit,) conditione (non dico necessitata) eventus suspendatur, quam conditionem supra, Thesi Quinta, statuisti esse "Christi receptionem." Hanc nam secundum Evangelii vocem, dicentis Qui credit salvabitur, in decreto hoc circa hominem includi affirmo. Adeo ut certo certius et infallibiliter, finis hujusmodi eventus ex fallibili conditione NON suspendatur." THESIS IX. Et sicut in comparatione ad finem, sic qua id quod de TRANSLATION. decree concerning the end. For the event of the end which has been absolutely intended by him, cannot be suspended on a fallible condition." ANNOTATIONS. I enter into no controversy respecting the end, which is stated to be God himself, and is so in reality. But I entertain some just doubts, whether in one and the same manner God, by his counsel and therefore by his decree, intends himself as his own end, and as the end of man, or [his] "exceeding great reward." Because, I think, he intends himself as his own end, by [his] NATURE; but as the end of man, by COUNSEL. Nor can I properly comprehend [his assertion], unless it be stated, that the decrees of God are Himself, and that it is possible for him not to will Himself, as it might be possible not to will to make decrees; and unless we suppose that God makes Himself, as he does his decrees," according to the counsel of his own will." Yet I have not denied, that God absolutely intends himself to man as man's end, if he points out the means to obtain it. Nor is there any cause to fear, when the intention of man's end is thus explained, lest "the event should be suspended on a condition that is fallible," (for God is not fallible,)—I do not say on one that is necessitated,-which condition you have stated in the Fifth Thesis to be the reception of Christ. For I affirm, that this condition ["the reception of Christ"] is included in this decree concerning man, according to the expression of the Gospel which says, He that believeth shall be saved. It is therefore most certain and infallible, that "the end of an event of this description is NOT suspended on a fallible condition. "And a THESIS IX. in comparison to the end, so in reference to what is decreed cernitur est effectus entis primi; a quo sicut omnium entium dependent essentia, virtutes, actiones, (Rom. xi, 36,) sic præcipue supernaturalis boni. (Jac. i, 17.) Hinc vocati onem independente consilio producens, tum per sapientiam de forma deliberat, tum per voluntatem intendit secundum illam formam ex suppositione potentia. Forma illa exemplar est et mensura veritatis in re, ut prout ipsa fuerit, sic rem fore necesse sit dependenter ab ea. Hinc ex conditione in re non vult conversionem Deus, sed secundum deliberationem sapientia sua, voluntas intendit, et potentia exequitur immutabilis. Et quia secundum sapientiam et bonitatem vult et potest, proinde futuram prævidet virtualiter a voluntate pendentem. ANNOTATIONES. Sicut decretum circa finem, seu "decretum secundum proportionem decreti circa finem," (stylo et phrasi horridis, hactenus inauditis, et mortalium captum pere superantibus,) statim dixerat, "sic" (quod hoc "sic" sibi vult?) " id quod decernitur" (quid tibi est "id" istud? An neque motio, nec movens, nec mobile, nec motus, nec res motu-facta? Quanta hic confusio, quantus tumultus !,) "sic id quod decernitur," inquis, "est effectus Entis Primi; a quo dependere omnium essentias, TRANSLATION. being the effect of the First Being, on whom (Rom. xi, 36,) the essences, virtues, and actions of all beings depend, and principally those of supernatural good. (Jamesi, 17.) Hence producing vocation by [his] independent counsel, he deliberates concerning the form by his wisdom, and he intends [purposes] by his will according to that form on the supposition of power: That form is the exemplar and measure of truth in the thing; that as it [the form] was, so the thing itself must of necessity be, dependently on it. Hence from the condition in the thing God wills not conversion; but according to the deliberation of his own wisdom his will intends, and his immutable power executes [it] And, because according to his wisdom and goodness he employs his will and his power, therefore he foresees that it [conversion] will afterwards occur, being virtually dependent on [his] will. : ANNOTATIONS. After having said, that "as the decree concerning the end," or " the decree according to the proportion of the decree concerning the end," he immediately adds, (in a style and phraseology that are most barbarous, that have never before been heard, and that nearly transcend the comprehension of mortals,) so in reference to that which is decreed being the effect of the First Being," &c. What meaning has this particle "so?" And what do you do with the phrase," that which is decreed?" Is it neither something inoving, a Mover, something that is movable, motion, nor the thing produced by motion? [See page 182.] What confusion and tumult are here! You state, that "what is decreed is an effect of the First Being ;" and I do virtutes, actiones præcipue boni supernaturalis," nullus dubito. Quid ergo? "Hinc," inquis, "vocationem" (reconciliationem supra dixeras) "independente consilio producens," (in fieri intelligis dum producturus est, an in facto esse quando produxit? ambigua nam est oratio,) "tum per sapientiam," inquis, "de forma deliberat, tum per voluntatem intendit secundum illam formam ex suppositione potentiæ." Quid audis, lector? Evangelium an scholam? Apostolos an Sorbonnam? Transeat hoc omne. Sapientia Divina de reconciliationis formâ deliberat, Voluntas secundum formam illam intendit, Potentia exequitur:" Concedo. Perge. Forma, inquis, illa exemplar est, et mensura veritatis in re, ut prout ipsa fuerit, sic rem fore necesse sit dependenter ab ea. Audio, sed cave me mox μεταβάσει εις αλλο γεν@, te fallas et incauto lectori scandalum objicias. Jam metaphysica veritas seu rei, quasi thematis incomplexi auditur, postea (ut mihi etiam liceat griphos loqui) logicam axiomatis affectionem, veritatem thematis complexi, quasi formæ dictæ exemplaris exemplatum, veritas rei, esset veritatis axiomaticæ exemplar, deducere satages. Frustrà. Reconciliatio seu vocatio (quando visum est sic confundere) sit sanè res a forma ista dependens. † † Thes. vi. + Hanc rem motufactam, vocationem seu reconciliationem non esse, sed receptionem Christi prærequisitam.-Thes. 6. TRANSLATION. not doubt, that "on Him depend the essences, virtues, and actions of all beings, and particularly those of supernatural good." What is the inference? "Heuce;" you say, "producing vocation by his independent counsel," &c. But, in the Sixth Thesis, you had called this vocation" RECONCILIATION." And when you mention the term "producing," do you understand it as in a course of making, while he is about to produce it, or as being actually done, when he has produced it?-for that phrase is ambiguous. You proceed, "Producing vocation by his independent counsel, he deliberates concerning the form by his wisdom, and he purposes by his will according to that form on the supposition of power." Reader, what expressions are these which you hear? Is it the language of the Gospel or of the Schools, of the Apostles or of the Doctors of the Sorbonne ? But suffer all this to pass." Divine Wisdom deliberates concerning the form of reconciliation, the Divine Will purposes according to that form, and it is executed by the Divine Power This I readily grant, proceed therefore. You say, "That form is the exemplar and measure of truth in the thing; that as it [the form] was, so the thing itself must of necessity be dependently on it." I hear all this; but take care lest you soon" migrate into another region," deceive yourself, and place a stumbling-block in the way of the incautious reader. The metaphysical truth, or the truth of the thing, as of a simple proposition, is already heard: If I also may be permitted to speak in enigmas, you will now endeavour to deduce the logical affection of the axiom, the truth of the complex proposition,-as though "the truth of the thing" (which is a copy from "the form" called "the exemplar or pattern,") were the pattern of the axiomatic truth. But vain will be your attempt. Let reconciliation or vocatim be the thing dependent on this form," since it is your pleasure thus to confound the two terms. † But no Yet this thing produced by motion, is stated, in the Sixth Thesis, to be neither vocation nor reconciliation, but "the pre-required reception of Christ." N Non quæritur verum de modo et ordine, quem satius est erudite ignorare, quàm in abscondita Dei Baon te ingerere. Hinc, inquis: Unde, inquam? "Ex conditione in re non vult conversionem Deus;" (reconciliatio, vocatio, conversio, Christi receptio, idem tibi sunt; verùm quo Doctore præeunte?) Ex? Absit. Quid si secundum? Non affirmo: Sine conditione non vult. Quid si asseram? Certe bonâ tuâ cum veniâ fecero, utpote qui "receptionem Christi esse quid reconciliationi prærequisitum," modo bis app, affirmaveras. Sed de his, post opportuniorem dicendi locum inveniam. Quomodo igitur vult Deus conversionem? "Secundum deliberationem sapientiæ suæ, voluntas," inquis, "intendit, et potentia exequitur immutabilis." Recte, si dictio "immutabilis" pro non mutanda postquam eventum sortita est, vel actu superaverit humanam resistentiam, intelligatur. Quid balbutis? Eloquere: Potentiam intelligis "irresistibilem;" et "hanc Deum exerere," clare fatebor," in rebus, actibusque ab IPSO SOLO, nullo mediante, productis." Sed an conversio, &c., sint hujusmodi, suo loco. 2. An satis has voces "secundum sapientiam et veritatem vult et potest” ad exactam dicendi rationem et obrussam exegerit, lector judicet. "Proinde futuram," pergis, " prævidet et vir. tualiter a voluntate pendentem." Futuram scilicet rem. Quam? "Conversionem, Christi receptionem, prævidet futuram." Recte, TRANSLATION. enquiry is instituted into the mode and order, of which it is much better for you to observe a learned ignorance, than to obtrude yourself into the hidden depths of the Deity. Hence," you say; and I ask, "Whence?" "Hence from the condition in the thing, God wills not conversion." Reconciliation, vocation, conversion, and the reception of Christ, are all one and the same thing to you; but what Divine is your precursor in this mode of speaking? Do you say, "FROM the condition?" "Let not such an expression escape! What, if you were to say, "ACCORDING to the condition?" I do not affirm: "God wills it not without a condition." What if I should make such an assertion! With your good leave, 1 certainly will do it, because you are the man who has twice affirmed, that "the reception of Christ is a certain pre-requisite" (Thesis 5 and 6.) But I shall find a more suitable opportunity to treat on these topics. In what manner then does God will conversion? You reply, "According to the deliberation of his own wisdom his will intends, and his immutable power executes it." This is correct, if the epithet "immutable" be understood to mean "something that cannot be changed after it has appointed the event, or has actually overcome human resistance." Why do you stammer or hesitate? Speak out plainly: By this expression you understand irresistible power. Such a power, I will frankly confess, God exerts in things and actions produced by himself alone, without any means: we will enquire, in the proper place, whether conversion, reconciliation, &c., be actions of this description. But 2. The reader must judge, whether this phrase," According to his wisdom and goodness he employs his will and his power," will bear examination by the method and test of exact speaking.-You proceed to say, "Therefore he foresees that it will afterwards occur," and that "it is virtually dependent on the will." What is this which will occur? "Conversion, the reception of Christ :" You state very correctly, "He foresees that it |
